The Southeast Building, the Twin Basilicas, the Mosaic House (Corinth vol. 1.5)

CORINTH RESULTS OF EXCAVATIONS CONDUCTED

THE AMERICAN

BY

SCHOOL OF CLASSICAL STUDIES

AT ATHENS

VOLUME I, PART V SOUTHEAST BUILDING

THE THE

THE

BASILICAS

TWIN

MOSAIC

HOUSE

BY

SAUL S. WEINBERG

I

THE AMERICAN SCHOOL OF CLASSICAL STUDIES AT ATHENS PRINCETON, NEW JERSEY 1960

ALL RIGHTS RESERVED

PRINTED BY OFFSET IN GREAT BRITAIN BY WILLIAM CLOWES & SONS, LIMITED LONDON, BECCLES AND COLCHESTER REPRINTED

1971

PREFACE The buildings which enclosed the great Roman market-place at Corinth,and which divided it into a northern Lower Agora and a southern Upper Agora, were all (except for the still unexcavated southwest corner)relieved of their superincumbent debris by 1988, more than forty years after the start of the American School's excavations. The first group of these buildings was definitively published in 1932, in Volume I, Part i of Corinth,Results of the Excavations conducted by the American School of Classical Studies at Athens; the appearance of three more volumes, Volume I, Paits ii, iii and iv, in 1941, 1951 and 1954, has almost completed the publication of the Roman Agora, while the post-Roman architecture was published in 1957, in Volume XVI of this series. The three structures presented here are the last to be published except for the West Shops, which delimit the West Terrace slightly above the Agora. Two of these buildings, the Julian Basilica and the Southeast Building, formed the eastern border of the Lower and Upper Agora respectively; the South Basilica was not immediately contiguous to the Agora, but stood behind the South Stoa and was entered through it from the Agora. These three buildings form a logical unit for publication in that two are identical and the history of the third was directly affected by the erection of one of the others. The Julian Basilica and the Southeast Building were excavated at the same time, in 1914 and 1915, small sections of each having been uncovered in 1896, in Trench VII. Professors Carl W. Blegen and Emerson H. Swift supervised the excavation over this whole area, and from their accuraterecords comes much information

incorporatedin the presentaccount.TheSouth Basilicawas excavatedin the years 1934-36, largely under the supervisionof Professor CharlesH. Morgan,but with ProfessorsOscar Broneer,RichardH. HowlandandD. A. Amyx undertakingpart of the work. The later portico of this building,erectedover a partof the South Stoa, was excavatedby ProfessorBroneer in 1934. To these excavators,in turn, is due much of the informationon which the reportconcerningthe SouthBasilicais based. In 1931 the Southeast Building and the Julian Basilica were furtherinvestigatedby Julian H. Whittlesey, then SpecialFellow in Architectureat Corinth.Throughsupplementary excavationswithin the SoutheastBuilding, he discoveredsome remainsof an earlier phaseof the structure.At thistimeWhittlesey drewplansandsectionsof boththesebuildings, and made drawingsof some of the important blocks as well. A lengthy written accountof his observationsin the East Area has been availableto me and has provedmost valuable in my investigationsof bothbuildings.In 1931, too, A.T. Squiremadedrawingsof the marble architravesin the Julian Basilica,and in the followingyear Joseph M. Shelley made a reconstructeddrawingof the Ionicporticoof the SoutheastBuildingand did a renderingof the Corinthianorderof the Julian Basilica.Shelley was architectat Corinthduringthe excavation of the South Basilicaand was responsible for the first plans and sections of that building. The presentstudy of these buildingsbegan in the fall of 1946when ProfessorBroneer,in chargeof the excavationsat Corinth,askedme to completethe investigationof the Southeast Buildingand to preparethe publication.These

vi

PREFACE

investigations were conducted from November, 1946 to March, 1947; rather extensive soundings were made within the building, and the results incorporated in new plans and sections drawn by the architect, Elias Skroubelos. A whole new set of photographswas taken by me at that time. In the spring of 1948 I turned to the study of the two basilicas, both of which were re-cleaned and investigated anew by means of limited soundings then and in the summer of 1950. In 1948 G. V. von Peschke drew completely new plans for both structures, and both were entirely re-photographed by me during the two periods of investigation. Much of the summer of 1950 was devoted to the study of the reconstruction of the twin basilicas; Edward B. Reed, as architect, prepared the drawings of the reconstruction as well as the large number of drawings of individual blocks important for the reconstruction. Questions that arose in preparing the manuscript were checked on the site both in 1955 and in 1959. Once the complete similarity of the Julian and South Basilicas had been established, it was logical to present, as Part II, a separate description of the remains in situ of each, but to combine the information gained from these remains as well as from all the other remains of both buildings, in attempting a reconstruction of them. This is the plan which has been followed here; the building type, too, has been studied as representative of both. The archaeologists and architects who have actively participated in the excavation and study of these remains, and to whom so much of the material presented here is due, have been joined by others who have given equally valuable assistance from their large fund of knowledge. The late Dr. B. H. Hill, director of the Corinth excavations at the time when the Julian Basilica and the Southeast Building were excavated, gave generously of his inti-

al, and made many valuable suggestions during numerous discussions at Corinth. It was especially fortunate for me that the late Dr. Leicester B. Holland was also in Corinth while this study was in progress, for great profit was derived from discussions with him. Professor GorhamP. Stevens was most helpful with architectural problems. The architectural experience of Mr. John Travlos, School Architect, which he has most generously shared, has been of great value to me. But it is to Professor Oscar Broneer especially that I wish to express my gratitude for the large part he has played in furthering this work. He has read the section on the Southeast Building in manuscript, and has himself contributed to that section the report on the inscriptions. In connection with his publication of the South Stoa (Corinth,I, iv), we have discussed many problems common to that building and to the adjacent South Basilica. In many other connections, his advice and criticism have been sought, always with profit. To Professor Robert L. Scranton, too, I owe a debt for his recent reading at Corinth of the text on the Southeast Building, for checking many points, and for valuable interpretations and suggestions based on his wide experience with the architecture of Corinth, especially in connection with his latest work on its mediaeval remains. To anyone delving into the records of the early years of the Corinth excavations, the fabulous memory of GeorgeKachros, former Head Guard of the Corinth Museum, is a mine of valuable information, and to him I am indebted for much help both in this respect and in many others. Professor John H. Kent, who is preparinga supplementary volume on inscriptions from Corinth,has generously advised me on the epigraphical material from the twin basilicas, while in connection with his publication of sculpture from Corinth,ProfessorEdward Capps, Jr. has con-

mate knowledgeof these particularbuildings, tributed descriptionsand discussionsof the as well as of Corinthianarchitecturein gener- statues found in the South Basilica.To Miss

PREFACE

E. Dare Taylor (now Mrs.T. G. Mikos)I am indebtedfor the stylistic study of the mosaics in the MosaicHouse. The investigationsin 1946-47 were carried on as James Rignall WheelerFellow of the American School of Classical Studies at Athens; in the followingyear as Assistantto the Director of the School. The American School also providedthe funds for the summer of 1950at Corinth.Duringthe summerof 1949the study of the twin basilicasat Corinth in relationto other basilicaswas undertaken with the financialaid of a SummerResearch Fellowshipfrom the University of Missouri, and the Universityhas also most generously providedsecretarialassistancefor typing the finalscriptof the book. The entiremanuscript UNIVERSITY OF MISSOURI

vii

has benefitedgreatlyfromcarefulreadingand criticismby my wife, to whomI alsoowemany valuable suggestions.To successivedirectors of the AmericanSchoolof ClassicalStudies GorhamP. Stevens, OscarBroneerand John L. Caskey -

I am indebted for much practi-

cal help in carryingout the study of the buildings.To the School'sPublicationsCommittee, and especiallyto the Editor,Dr. Lucy T. Shoe,the finalformof the bookowesmuch. The finishedproduct,then, is in manyrespects a cooperativeeffortto whichmanyindividuals and institutionshave contributed.While the responsibilityfor its faults rests with me, the credit for much of its value must go to my collaborators.

SAUL S. WEINBERG

TABLE OF CONTENTS PREFACE ...................................

V

ABBREVIATIONS ...............

xi

......................

LIST OF ILLUSTRATIONS.................................. PART PART

I THE SOUTHEAST BUILDING

.

I THE JULIAN BASILICA

..................5......

85

.........................

58

CHAPTER II

THE SOUTH BASILICA

CHAPTER III

COMPARISON AND RECONSTRUCTION OF THE TWIN BASILICAS

PART III THE MOSAICHOUSE ...................

PLATES

1

83

CHAPTER IV TYPE AND USE OF THE TWIN BASILICAS

INDEX

.

............................

II THE TWIN BASILICAS ................................ CHAPTER

......................................

xiii

.

.............

.............

........

78 .

103

111 .123

ABBREVIATIONS A.A. -

ArchdologischerAnzeiger.

A.J.A. - AmericanJournalof Archaeology. Ant. cl. -

L'Antiquite'classique. - 'ApXactokoylKv AEX-riov. AeX-r. 'Apx.

Bull. Comm.- Bulletinodellacommissionearcheologica communaledi Roma. C.J. -

Classical Journal.

Corinth- Corinth,Resultsof ExcavationsConductedby theAmericanSchoolof ClassicalStudiesat Athens. I,i Richard Stillwellet al., Introduction,Topography,Architecture, Cambridge,Mass.,1932 I,ii Richard Stillwell et al., Architecture,Cambridge, Mass., 1941.

I,iii Robert L. Scranton,Monumentsin theLowerAgoraand Northof theArchaicTemple,Princeton, 1951. I,iv OscarBroneer,The SouthStoa and its RomanSuccessors,Princeton,1954. IV,ii OscarBroneer,TerracottaLamps,Cambridge,Mass.,1930. V VI VII,i VIII,i VIII,ii IX XVI 'E

ApApX.

TheodoreLeslie Shear, The RomanVilla, Cambridge,Mass., 1930. KatherineM. Edwards,Coins,1896-1929, Cambridge,Mass.,1933. Saul S. Weinberg,TheGeometricand OrientalizingPottery,Cambridge,Mass., 1943. BenjaminD. Meritt,GreekInscriptions,1896-1927, Cambridge,Mass., 1931. Allen B. West, Latin Inscriptions,1896-1926, Cambridge,Mass., 1931. FranklinP. Johnson,Sculpture,1896-1923, Cambridge,Mass.,1931. Robert L. Scranton,MediaevalArchitecture in the CentralArea of Corinth,Princeton,1957. piS 'ApXatoAoyK,'il. 'Eqnprl

Fasti - Fasti Archaeologici.

Hesperia- Hesperia,Journalof the AmericanSchool of ClassicalStudies at Athens. J.I.A.N. - Journalinternationald'archeologie numismatique. Jahrb.- Jahrbuchdes deutschenarchdologischen Instituts. M.A.A.R. - Memoirsof theAmericanAcademyin Rome. Mon. Ant. - Monumentiantichipubblicatiper cura della RealeAccademiadei Lincei. Mon. Piot lettres.

Fondation Eugene Piot, Monuments et memoires publics par l'academie des inscriptions et belles-

Notizie- Atti della R. Accademianazionaledei Lincei, Notizie degliscavi di antichitd. P.B.S.R. - Papers of the British Schoolat Rome. PTlpKTlKaX HnpcaKTKaTrfS Iv 'AicvaCs appXalooeoylKfsc'ETaipsias. Rev. arch. - Revue archeologique.

Rom. Mitt. - Mitteilungendes deutschenarchdologischen Instituts,RomischeAbteilung.

LIST OF ILLUSTRATIONS FIGURES IN THE TEXT Fig.

1. SchematicPlan of Foundationsof First SoutheastBuilding ................ 2. Drawingof Voussoirsfrom the Arches ...................... 3. Detail of CorniceBlock with Setting for Pedestal ...................... 4. ReconstructedPlan of Second SoutheastBuilding ...................... 5. Drawingof Entablatureof MonumentalFacade of Entrance Court,South Basilica ....... 6. Drawingof Block with Beam Cuttingsand WindowCuttingfrom Julian Basilica ........ 7. Drawingof Block with WindowCuttingfrom Julian Basilica ................. 8. Drawingof CymaReversa CrownMouldingfound in Julian Basilica .............. 9. Reconstructionof Poros ColumnBase in Julian Basilica ................... 10. Drawingof Anta Base Block from Julian Basilica ..................... 11. Drawingof Poros Anta CapitalBlock from Julian Basilica ..................

. ....

.

5 19 25 25 71 80 81 85 88 89 90

12. Drawingof Poros Architrave-friezeBlock from Julian Basilica ................ 91 13. Drawingof Poros CorniceBlock I from South Basilica .................... 92 14. Profilesof Poros CorniceBlocks with Dentils (F and L) from South Basilica .......... 92 15. Drawingof Poros CornerCorniceBlock L from South Basilica ................ 93 16. Drawingof Poros CorniceBlock H from South Basilica ................... 93 17. Profilesof Poros CorniceBlocks without Dentils (J, H, I and U) from South Basilica ....... 94 18. Drawingof Poros CorniceBlock G from South Basilica ................... 95 19. Drawingof Poros Arch SpringerBlocks from Julian Basilica ................. 96 20. Drawingof Poros Arch SpringerBlock 100 from Julian Basilica ............... 96 21. Drawingof Poros Block with Engaged Columnfrom Julian Basilica .............. 97 22. Reconstructionof ClerestoryArcadeof the Basilicas ..................... 97 23. Profilesof Poros CorniceBlocks, (Q,E, B, R, A and P) from the Clerestoryof the Julian Basilica . 98 24. Profileof Poros CorniceBlock D, with Dentils, from Julian Basilica .............. 98 25. Drawingof Top of MarblePlinth from Julian Basilica .................... 99 26. Drawingof MarbleColumnBase from Julian Basilica .................... 99 27. Drawingof MarbleCornerCorniceBlock from the South Basilica ............... 101 28. Drawingof MarbleCornerCorniceBlock in the Julian Basilica ................ 102 29. Sketch Plans of Buildings Comparedwith the Julian and South Basilicas at Corinth.1. Julian and South Basilicas at Corinth,2. North Basilica at Corinth,3. Basilica at Pompeii, 4. Basilica at Leptis Magna,5. Basilicaat Vetera,6. Basilicaat Khamissa,7. Vitruvius'Basilicaat Fano, 8. Edificeof Eumachiaat Pompeii, 9. Basilica at Kempten, 10. So-calledPrytaneion at Magnesia-on-the-Maeander 104

PLATES Plate SOUTHEAST BUILDING

1 1 View from West

2 View from North 2 1 NorthernHalf of West Wall. House Floor of Fourth CenturyB.C.at bottom left 2 SouthernHalf of West Wall 3 1 View showingEast Wall of First Building (at center)and Later East Wall (at right), from South. ObliqueWallsin lowerhalf are Hellenistic 2 Southwest Cornerof First Building, from South, showingRubble Backing of West Wall and Beginningof CrossWall 3 MonumentBase set against East Wall of First Building and Painted Stucco preservedon Wall behind Base 4 SouthernEnd of early East Wall 4 WesternPart of Early South Wall 2 Early South Wall of Portico with Later Wall behind 3 View showing Trenchesfor two parallelCrossWalls of First Building,from East 5 iView of Interior,from South 2 Deep FoundationTrench,showingManholeand Steps at Eastern End 3 WesternEnd of North Wall of First Building 6 1 Steps at Eastern End of deep FoundationTrench 2 NorthwestCornerof Building, showingBeginningof CrossWall 3 NorthernEnd of Building, from East. Early FoundationWall acrosscenter 7 1 NorthernEnd of Portico 2 Foundationsfor Early Colonnade,SouthernEnd 3 View of SouthernEnd of Portico, from Northeast.At lower right, Wheel Ruts in an Early Retaining Wall; at lower left, Successionof Road Beds 8 1 Orthostatesin situ in East Wall of First Building 2 Painted Stucco in situ on East Wall behind MonumentBase 3 Lamps found in Fill below Floor of First Building 4 Coinof GaiusPubliliusfound in Manhole 5 Junctureof CrossWall and West Wall of SecondBuilding 9 1 NortheastCornerof SecondBuilding, showingRepair of Foundations 2 Deep Foundationsof South Wall of Portico 3 East Side of Later West Wall, showingBack of FoundationCourse 4 Junctureof West and North Walls of SecondBuilding 5 North End Pier of WesternArcade 10 i View from Northeast 2 Early Block remainingin CentralPier of WesternArcade 3 First Pier from North End of WesternArcade 11 1 SouthernRoom of SecondBuilding from East, showingtwo Late CrossWalls 2 Southeast Cornerof NorthernRoom, showing Superstructure 3 Thresholdof Doorwaybetween two Sections of SecondBuilding 12 1 View of Thresholdfrom above 2 View of WesternPart of Building from South

PLATES

xv

Plate 131 Thresholdof Doorwayat NorthernEnd of West Wall 2 Late Doorwaycut into West Wall 3 Southwest Cornerof Main NorthernSection of SecondBuilding 14 i Later Doorwaybuilt over Threshold 2 Bedding for Mosaicat NorthernEnd of CentralAisle, showingCementLayer over Tile Base 3 SouthwesternMosaicPanel 15 1 South-centralMosaicPanel 2 Fragmentof North-centralMosaicPanel 3 SouthernEnd of MarbleStylobate and Step 16 1 Top of Stylobate showingHoles for Grilles 2 Detail of SouthernEnd of Stylobate with ColumnBase 3 MarbleIonic Capital 4 Fragmentsof MarbleColumnswith Holes for Grilles 17 i InscribedArchitrave-friezeBlocks from MarbleColonnade 2 Fragmentsof an Inscription 3 Fragmentsof Type XXVII Lamps from SecondBuilding 4 Fragmentof Type XXVIII Lamp from Bedding for Tile Pavement JULIANBASILICA

18 i View of East End of LowerAgora,from West 2 Basilica from West 19 i Second StartingLine and West Wall of Basilica, from South. Part of Earlier StartingLine near top to left of later Line 2 Basilica from East 20 i Basilica from North 2 Basilica from South 21 i Area back of East Wall, from North 2 East Aisle of Cryptoporticus,from North 22 Cryptoporticus 1 South Aisle, from West 2 South Aisle, from East 23 1 West Wall and Porch, from South 2 West Aisle of Cryptoporticus, from North 24 CentralExedra 1 From West 2 From Northwest 25 1 CloseView of CentralExedra, from South, showingonly Block possibly still in situ (at lowerleft) 2 Angle ToichobateBlock in Northeast Corner 3 East Wall of South Exedra and its Rubble Foundations 4 North OuterWall, from East 26 i Two Apse Foundationsin Area of CentralExedra 2 Remains of Paved Roman Road to East of Basilica, cut by Foundationsfor Late Apse 3 Section of East Outer Wall of Cryptoporticus 4 Cuttingsin Fifth Courseof East Outer Wall of Cryptoporticus;Beam Cuttings and Windowin

Sixth Course

5

Cutting in Fifth Courseof East Outer Wall of Cryptoporticus;Block with Beam Cuttings and Windowin Sixth Course

271 WindowBlockof Cryptoporticus 2 WindowBlockwithoutBeamCuttings, fromCryptoporticus 3 NorthOuterWallandRoadoutside 4 DraftedBlocksat SouthEnd of WestOuterWall

PLATES

xvi

Plate 28 Cryptoporticus 1 East CoreWall, showingMarksof Toothedand Straight Chisel 2 Anathyrosison Block in Fifth OuterWall Courseof East Wall 3 Heavy Anathyrosison North End of NorthernmostBlock in Place in Lowest Course of West CoreWall 4 NarrowAnathyrosison Block in Second Courseof East CoreWall 29 Cryptoporticus 1 North Face of Double Wall acrossEast Aisle 2 NarrowVaulted Section at West End of South Aisle 3 South Side of Vaulted Chamber,from West, showing Break between Main Vault and Narrower Western Section 4 Painted Stucco preservedon South OuterWall 5 North Side of Vault in Section acrossEast Aisle 30 1 and 2 Fragmentsof Poros Entablaturebuilt into Late Wall to East of Building 3 Late Apse built into Area of CentralExedra 4 CurvedMarbleEntablaturefrom Late Apse in Area of CentralExedra 31 1 Ends of two Apses in Area of CentralExedra, the Earlierat center, the Later at right; Concrete Fill between,and to left of EarlierApse 2 Very Late RectangularStructurebuilt over Area of CentralExedra 3 Successionof Roads, One paved with MarbleSlabs, to East of CentralExedra 4 Drafted Block in North Wall of South Exedra 32 1 Statue of Augustus,from West Aisle 2 Head of Statue of Augustus 33 1 Statue of GaiusCaesar,from East Aisle 2 Statue of Lucius Caesar,from East Aisle 34 1 Statue of Lucius Caesaras found in East Aisle of Cryptoporticus 2 HadrianicArmoredStatue, from East Aisle 3 Head of Nero, from East Aisle 35 1 Semi-nudeMale Statue, from East Aisle 2 ColossalSemi-nudeMale Statue, from West Aisle 3 ArmoredStatue found near South Side of SoutheastBuilding BASILICA SOUTH 36 1 Basilica from Southwest 2 Basilica from Southeast 37 1 Basilica from West 2 North Aisle of Cryptoporticus,from West 38 1 Fragmentsof GreekPebble Mosaicsfrom Area of South Basilica 2 Foundationsof North OuterWall to West of Porch 3 Detail of Toichobateand FoundationCoursesof North Wall to West of Porch 4 Foundationsof North Wall to East of Porch 39 i Detail of Foundationsat East End of North Wall 2 South Face of South OuterWall and Foundationsat CentralExedra 3 Porch on North Side from West 4 Stuccoed OuterFace of North Wall to East of Porch and Door 40 1 CentralPart of South CoreWall from South 2 CentralPart of Inner Face of South OuterWall, showingInscriptions 3 Inscriptionson CentralPart of South CoreWall 4 Windowin East OuterWall 5 West Half of Stylobate of MonumentalFagade

PLATES Plate 41 EntranceCourt 1 From North. Elements of MonumentalFa9adein foreground 2 CloserView from North 42 MonumentalFacade 1 Anta and CorniceBlocks of West Half 2 East Half of Stylobate 3 Fragmentof ColumnDrum 4 Anta Block from East Anta 5 Anta, Columnand Architrave-friezeBlocks of East Half 43 MonumentalFacade 1 and 2 Anta Capitalfrom East Side 3 Fragmentof Anta Capitalfrom West Side Cryptoporticus 4 South Aisle of Cryptoporticus,from East 44 Cryptoporticus 1 West Aisle, from South 2 East Aisle, from South 45 Cryptoporticus 1 Tracesof Pilaster on OuterWall of West Aisle 2 SouthernPilaster in West Aisle 3 Pilaster Base against West OuterWall 46 1 Statue of Nike, from North Aisle of Cryptoporticus 2 Statue of a Nude Youth, found on Coreof Cryptoporticus 3 Late Mosaicfound over SoutheastPart of Basilica THE TWINBASILICAS

47 Julian Basilica 1 CrownMouldingBlock, possibly for CryptoporticusWalls 2 Poros Anta Base 3 DraftedWall Block found West of Julian Basilica 4 Poros ColumnDrums 5 DraftedWall Blocks re-usedin a Late Wall in the South Stoa 6 Poros CorinthianCapital 48 1 and 2 Poros Anta Capitalfrom Julian Basilica 3 and 4 Details of Side and End of Poros Anta Capitalfrom Julian Basilica 5 Poros Architrave-friezeBlock from Julian Basilica 6 Poros CorniceBlock I from South Basilica 49 1 Poros CorniceBlock F from South Basilica 2 Poros CenterCorniceBlock L from South Basilica 3 Poros CorniceBlock H from South Basilica 4 Poros Arch SpringerBlock 101 from Julian Basilica 5 Poros Arch SpringerBlock 102 from Julian Basilica 6 Poros Arch SpringerBlock 100 from Julian Basilica 50 Julian Basilica 1 Poros Block with Engaged Column 2 MarbleStylobate Block 3

Marble Plinth

4 Top of MarbleColumn 5 Bottom View of MarbleColumnBase 6 MarbleColumnBase 51 1 and 2 MarbleCorinthianCapitalsfrom Julian Basilica 3, 4, 5, 6 Marble Corinthian Capitals from South Basilica

xvii

xviii

PLATES Plate 52 1 MarbleCornerCorniceBlock in EntranceCourtof South Basilica 2 MarbleCornerCorniceBlock in Julian Basilica 3 Two Fragmentsof MarbleCorinthianCapitalsfrom South Basilica MOSAIC HOUSE

53 View of House and East End of South Basilica, from East 54 Mosaicin NorthernRoom 55 Mosaicin MiddleRoom 56 i Eros Panel from SouthwestCornerof Mosaicin NorthernRoom 2 Eros Panel from West Side of Mosaicin MiddleRoom 3 Eros Panel from South Side of Mosaicin MiddleRoom 4 Eros Panel from East Side of Mosaicin MiddleRoom 57 1 DionysosPanel fromMosaicin NorthernRoom 2 Nereidand Triton Panel from Mosaicin MiddleRoom

PLANS I SoutheastBuilding, Plan of Existing Remains II SoutheastBuilding 1. Sections 2. Restorationof MarbleColonnadeof SecondPeriod III 1. Julian Basilica, Sections 2. South Basilica, Section IV Julian Basilica, Plan of Existing Remains V South Basilica, Plan of Existing Remains VI South Basilica, Reconstructionof MonumentalFacade to Court VII RestoredPlans of the Basilicas 1. The Cryptoporticus 2. The Beaming System over the Cryptoporticus 3. The Main Floor 4. The Clerestory VIII Restored Section of the Basilicas IX ReconstructedDrawings 1. South Basilica, Anta of MonumentalFa9adeof Court 2. South Basilica, MarbleCorinthianCapital 3. Julian Basilica, MarbleCorinthianColumn X Plan of the CentralArea of Corinth

PART I THE SOUTHEAST BUILDING

THE SOUTHEAST BUILDING INTRODUCTION In 1896 the excavations at Corinth began with the digging of a series of twenty-one trenches, one of which, Trench VII, was dug eastward from a large circular monument base, discovered in 1892 by Skias.1 In the western part of this trench was found "the corner of a building (B) with a wall 0.70 m. thick, and a good mosaic floor."2 A cross trench laid bare the entire length of the east wall of this building. These remains we now know to be part of the building presentedhere, the Southeast Building. In this same trench was found a piece of an inscribed architravefrieze block which later proved to be part of the Ionic colonnade that was on the west side of the building.3 It was not until 1914-1915 that the area around the old Trench VII was investigated further; at that time excavations, supervised by Carl W. Blegen and Emerson H. Swift, uncovered two large buildings which formed the eastern border of the CorinthianAgora of the Roman period. The northern building was named the Julian Basilica because of the fine series of portrait sculptures of the Julian family found in it. The smaller building to the south was called by the excavators a Roman house, probably because it contained remains of mosaics.4At that time the post-Roman debris was cleared from the area and the excavations were leveled off at approximately the height of the late Roman tile floor in the main section of the building, but in the portico to the west and in the small room in the southwest cornerByzantine and later intrusions had 1 2

TpaKTtKi, 1892, p. 122.

Richardson, A.J.A., I, 1897, p. 470. Loc. cit. 4 'Apx. p. 55. AE;T.,II, 1916, TTapapT., 3

reached greater depths and in these areas the fill was removed almost to hardpan.5 The investigationsby JulianH. Whittlesey in 1931 went below the late Roman floor in part of the buildingandrevealedthe earlierbuildingbeneath. This was more completely investigated as part of the new study begun by the author in November, 1946, and continued for about five months. The area to be considered is roughly twenty-fivemeterssquare,boundedon the north by the Julian Basilica, on the east and south by the high embankment for the modern road to the Panaghia church, and on the west by the open area of the southern half of the Roman Agora (Plans I, X). It was possible to clear all but part of the south wall and the exterior of the east wall of the southern part of the main Roman building on the site, but the road is so close here as to renderfurther clearing impossible. The whole east wall had been exposed in 1896 and 1915, but most of it was later covered and after the investigations of 1931 a retaining wall was built on the east wall of the southern section of the building in order to support a bridge across its southeastern corner. A large section of the southern wall has never been uncovered, nor can it be without cutting the modern road above it. The area occupies a natural slope rising towards the southeast (P1. I , 2), for hardpan is roughly 1.40 m. higher along the east side of the east wall than it is along the west side of the portico, and the rise from the north side of the building to its southern end is about one meter.6 5A short account of this excavation in the Southeast Building appeared in Art and Archaeology,XIV, 1922, p. 209. 6 For the purpose of description, the long axis of the building will be considered as north-south; it actually lies twenty degrees west of north.

CORINTH

4

PRE-ROMANREMAINS IN THE AREA No large structure occupied the site of the Southeast Building before the destruction of Corinth by Mummius in 146 B.c. There are, however, traces of occupation of the site as early as the seventh century B.C.,in the form of small deposits of pottery found on hardpan in the southern part of the area. One Protogeometric sherd is the only object that can be dated earlier than this. The oldest large deposit in the area, dating roughly to the third quarter of the sixth century B.C., was found in a well located just west of the eastern line of inner supports of the later Roman buildings. The well yielded a fine series of late Corinthianorientalizing and conventionalizing pottery as well as much Attic pottery.7 A somewhat later deposit, dating about 500-490 B.C., was found in a circularpit duig in hardpan for a depth of 2.25 m. at a point just east of the center of the east wall of the later Roman building; the shaft had a diameter of 0.94 m. The pit was full of pottery, both Attic and Corinthian,and contained quantities of bones and other kitchen debris. In the early part of the fourth century B.C. the slope seems to have been well settled, for within the area there are two wells, one circular and one rectangular, which belong to this period, and also the remains of a paved floor which probably was in the court of a house; it is located at the northern end of the later portico (P. 2 1). To the south and west of the floor are cuttings for walls, the orientation of which is oblique to that of the later Roman buildings, but approximately the same as that of the earlier starting line in front of the Julian Basilica (Plan IV), possibly also of the

probably remains of houses or other small buildings. They too run diagonally to the line of the Roman buildings, but are also oriented quite differently from the fourth century walls and run about north-south and east-west. In the eastern part of the area are an oval manhole and a round one which open into a system of undergroundchannels with the same orientation as these walls and probably of the same date. Another oval manhole, found in the deep foundation trench of the earliest Roman building, contained remains that must be as late as the year of the destruction.The small buildings apparently also continued to be used until the destruction of Corinth in 146 B.C., for associated with them are a coin of Argos, 228-146 B.C., a Type X lamp which belongs to the late third or early second century B.C.,9 and a large deposit of coarse amphorasamong which was a Knidian jar with stamped handles that can be dated to the first half of the second century B.C.10 Early in the second century B.C., if not al-

ready in the third century, a road was laid out running northwest to southeast across the western side of the area. It is probably to be connected with the road running up the ramp to the east of the curved retaining wall found to the west of the Julian Basilica and associated with the starting line of late fourth century date." To the south the road seems to have continued along the east side of the South Stoa.12 It appears unlikely that the section of road found in this area was used before the latter part of the third century, for in the pavement of cobblestones lying directly on hardpan was found a silver coin of Histiaia fourth century B.C.8 dated 197-146 B.C.At about 0.65 m. from the To the Hellenistic period belong several top of the preserved road fill, in another sections of walls in the eastern part of the cobble roadbed, was an Athenian Kleruchy area (P1. 3 1). They are of light construction, 9 Broneer, Corinth, IV, ii, p. 51. 7 Broneer, Hesperia, XVI, 1947, pp. 237-238, pl. LV. 8 Morgan, A.J.A., XLI, 1937, p. 550.

10Grace, Hesperia, III, 1934, p. 254, No. 143. 11 Morgan, loc. cit. 12

Broneer, Corinth, I, iv, p. 129.

5

THE SOUTHEAST BUILDING

coin of Delos, which must date after 166 B.C. In the same stratum was a Knidian stamped amphora handle which is probably of the second century B.C.13 However, the road seems to have continued in use throughout the century between the destruction of Corinth and

the founding of the Roman colony in 44 B.C. There is a succession of hard roadbeds 1.25 m. high (P1. 7 3); the topmost one preservedis at ca. 0.50 m. below the stylobate of the later portico and it is possible that higher levels were cut away when the portico was built.

THE FIRST ROMANBUILDING When the Romans began the rebuilding of Corinth, after the founding of the colony in 44 B.C., they must first have turned their attention to the cleaning of the Agora and the reconstruction of the larger buildings which had to some extent survived the ravages of Mummius' army and a century of disuse. The south side of the Agora had been bounded on its entire length by the great South Stoa, and this again took shape.14 Very early in the Roman period, a terrace wall was built extending about two-thirds the length of the Agora from east to west and dividing it into a lower terrace to the north and an upper one to the south.15The eastern and western ends of these terraces were subsequently closed off by various edifices. The one at the eastern end of the southern terrace is the subject of this report. It was probably in the last quarter of the first century B.C. that the Southeast Building was erected. It took its orientation and position from the existing South Stoa; its southwest corner was contiguous with the Stoa's northeast corner (Fig. 1). The level of the stylobate of its portico was the same as that of the Stoa stylobate, and probably its fagade, though different in design from that of the Stoa, was designed to harmonize with it. Its length was just sufficient to fill the distance between the front of the Stoa and the retaining wall to the north (Plan X). 13 Grace, op. 14 Corinth, I,

cit., p. 263, No. 178. iv, p. 100. 15 Scranton, Corinth,I, iii, pp. 77-79, 125. A stoa occupying the area of the eastern section of the Central Shops had served the same purpose over a more restricted area already in the late 5th or 4th century B.C.(ibid., pp. 76-77, 124-125).

FOUNDATIONS

Since this early building was replaced about a half century later by another one, which used in part the foundations of the earlier structure, very little remains but foundations, or the trenches for them, to give an idea of the plan of the earlier building (Fig. 1). The

MT PA 1.CHE-

O

'

FIG. 1. SCHEMATIC PLAN OF FOUNDATIONS OF FIRST BUILDING

foundation of the west wall of the first Roman building, the back wall of the portico, is preserved for its entire length of 26.70 m. (P1.2 1,2) since it was used later as the lower part of the foundation of the west wall of the later edifice. The two periods are clearly distinguishable through the difference of technique and of materials employed. In the earlierpart, the foundation was built of re-used Greek poros blocks laid in fairly regular courses. Many of the blocks were prepared for use in this foundation by being bevelled with a toothed chisel on the top and usually on the right side

6

CORINTH

as well, a technique typical of the first Roman buildings at Corinth, appearing in the fountain Peirene, the Basilica on the west side of the Lechaion Road and the market north of the Basilica. Only the uppermost preserved course of this earlier foundation runs the entire length of the wall, for it rests on hardpan in a few places, and it was repaired at the northern end for about 3.30 m. when the second foundation was laid. The top of this course is approximately level and its western face is fairly even. There was probably one more foundation courseabove this one, for the present top of the early foundation is level with the bottom of the toichobate course of the east wall (Plan II, 1, Section B-B). This highest preserved course varies considerably in height and individual blocks are anywhere from 0.26 m. to 0.50 m. high. Below this course there are from one to five courses in various sections, and sometimes none, depending on the depth of earlier cuttings in hardpan that had to be filled. For about three meters at the northern end, where the Greek house floor mentioned above had cut back into hardpan, there are five more courses, giving a total height of 2.14 m. (P1. 2 1). These courses are less regular than the top one and extend a little beyond it to the west. For the length of the southern two-thirds of the foundation, the faces of the lower courses recede slightly from that of the upper course (P1.2 2), probably the result of rough building inside a foundation trench. The foundation seems to have averaged about 0.70 m. in thickness, but it was backed by a heavy mass of rubble which gave a total thickness of ca. 1.50-1.60 m. (P1. 3 2; Plan II, 1, Section B-B). The rubble too is leveled off even with the top of the upper foundation course. This rubble backing is present only behind the west foundation and was probably added because the depth of the fill required by the slope of hardpan up towards the

The rear foundation, on the east side, is not a continuous line, but breaks at the center for a distance of ca. 1.50 m. (PI. 3 i), where hardpan remains at a slightly higher level with no trace of a foundation trench. Of the two sections, the northern is preservedfor a length of 10.23 m. and then cut off at its northern end by the north wall of the later building. The foundation consists of two courses, except at the northern end where a course of a Hellenistic building underlying the foundation is used as its third course (P1. 9 i). The foundation is built of re-used Greek poros blocks, many of those in the lower full course being L-shaped. Of the top foundation course, two blocks are missing at the southern end as well as those cut away at the north. The others form a fairly level surface and their east face is a straight line. However, they are uneven in width and those that extend somewhat to the west have been cut down ca. 0.06 m. along a line ca. 0.59 m. from the east face, to give clearancefor the floor of the building. At the southern end, the lower foundation course shows a return towards the west. About 2.30 m. along the foundation fromits preserved northern end there is set in front of it, about 0.05 m. distant, a large rectangular block (P1. 3 3), the lower part of which is 1.00 m. X 0.95 m. and the upper part, above the level of the floor, 0.86 m. x 0.80 m. This was probably the foundation for a monument base. The southern section of this eastern foundation is less well preservedto the north of the cross wall of the later building. There is a gap in the lower course where only the cutting in hardpan gives the line, but over the rest the lower course, made of small, irregular blocks laid in a trench, is preserved (P1. 3 i). At the northern end the upper course exists as well, and gives the return of the wall to the west. The upper course is also preserved at the southern end of this part and it extends

east necessitateddeeperfoundations on this throughthe later foundation,whichwas built side. aroundit (Plan II, 1, Section B-B). To the

THE SOUTHEASTBUILDING south of the later cross wall there is but one foundation course, similar to the upper one in the northern section. Some of its blocks, too, are cut back for the floor, here along a line ca. 0.52 m. from the east face. At the southern end of this section, the last block is cut down to the floor level for about 0.50 m. to 0.55 m. from the south end (P1.3 4). At 0.23 m. to the north of the line along which this last block was cut down, and 0.12 m. from the east face, there is a roughly circular hole ca. 0.15 m. in diameter cut to a depth of 0.25 m. from the top of the foundation; this was probably a post-hole. Connectingthe eastern and western foundations just described are four cross walls, parts of the foundations or foundation trenches of all of which are preserved. Beginning at the south, the foundation of the south wall of the building can be traced in spots, but much of this section is still undug or is buried in the retaining walls for the modernroad that passes above. The extreme eastern end is visible for about 0.80 m., where the top of a block ca. 0.65 m. wide can be seen, level with the bottom of the south end of the foundation course of the east wall. Another small bit of this south foundation occurs some 5.50 m. to the west, whereit is two blocks in width, ca. 0.70 m. The western part of the foundation is visible for 3.70 m., and at the eastern end of this section there is a block of the second course in place (P1. 4 i). This upper course is 0.51 m. wide at this point. The southern foundation does not stop, however, at the west wall, but extends beyond it to the west 4.07 n. until it is cut off by the foundation of the colonnade of the building. The lower course is preserved throughout and there is also one block 0.55 m. wide (P1. 4 2) of a second course extending slightly to the west of the west wall. At 0.89 m. east of the west end of this foundation, its upper surface is cut down ca. 0.13 m. and leveled off.

7

tions with a distance of 1.50 m. between them. It has also been shown that on either side of this gap the foundations returned to the west (P1. 4 3). They can be followed for 0.90 m. to the west before they are interrupted by the eastern line of inner supports of the later building. On the west side of this later construction the foundations were not picked up, but trenches for both of them were found cut in hardpan. The southern trench averages 0.70 m. in width and 0.30-0.45 nm.in depth; it could be followed to a point 6.90 m. from the west wall. At 3.05 m. it is crossed by a similar trench for another north-south foundation (P1. 5 1). The northern trench is much deeper, averaging 0.75 m. on its southern face, and it averages 0.85 m. in width (P1. 5 2; Plan II, 1, Section A-A). It was not cut very straight and it narrows slightly on both sides at ca. 0.30 m. from the top. It was possible to clear this trench for a distance of 6.55 m., or to a point 3.80 m. from the west face of the west wall. At its eastern end the floor of the trench rises in three low steps, ca. 0.12 m. high and averaging 0.80 nm.in width (P. 5 2), up to the point where it is covered by the later wall. These steps are somewhat oblique to the trench and they continue to the north beyond its limits, for on the north side at this point hardpanis much lower. In the south face of the trench these steps end in wedge-shaped cuttings (P1. 6 1), which in plan give the face a saw-tooth outline. The lower level of hardpan on the north side of the trench here and at a few other places seems the only explanation for the difference in depth of the trenches. This northernfoundation covered an oval manhole, the upper 1.40 m. of which was filled with bits of poros which probably were debris from the construction of the building. The evidence for the north wall of the earlier building was almost completely obliterated when the Julian Basilica was built and the

In the descriptionof the east foundation,it north wall of the later buildingwas erected has been stated that the wall was in two sec- slightly to the south. Thereare, however,two

8

CORINTH

stones of the lowest foundation course at the west end (P1. 5 3), giving the line of the wall, which can be restored on the analogy of the south wall. The westward extension of the north wall is marked by an irregular foundation of which only the bottom two or three courses are preserved, made up of a variety of Greek poros blocks (P1. 7 1). The top of the preserved foundation is 0.95 m. below the preserved top of the west wall foundation. Inside the building there was another wall running north-south, parallel to the east wall and ca. 3.10 m. to the west of it (Fig. 1). The remains of this wall consist of a piece of its foundation in the northern part of the building and a shallow wall trench to the south. The foundation is heavy (P1. 6 3), being made of a lower course of large blocks ca. 0.40 m. high, laid as headers ca. 0.80-0.90 m. long, and a shallow second course ca. 0.25 m. high, also laid as headers ca. 0.70-0.80 m. long. Where this foundation ends at the south, its line is marked by a low step cut in the hardpan, which, when followed to the south, becomes the same as the first step describedin the deep wall trench. At the south side of the deep trench the line of this north-south wall is continued in a very shallow cutting, the bottom of which is 0.72 m. higher than that of the northern section. This shallow trench, ca. 0.85 m. wide, continues between the two parallel foundation trenches, crosses the southern one and extends to the south for another two meters before it becomes impossible to follow it under the later mosaic floor (P1. 5 i). One other pair of foundations exists within the building, running east-west between the foundation just described and the west wall foundation (Fig. 1). The first of these is found at 3.80 m. to the north of the south wall, parallel to it. At the very western end, there remains one block of each of two courses (P1. 3 2), partly imbedded in the rubble back-

level with the top of the preserved early foundation of the west wall. The bottom course is 0.35 m. high and the upper one 0.48 m. high and 0.66 m. wide. The rest of the foundation was ripped out, but the trench cut in hardpan can be followed to the east up to the late Roman north-south cross wall. The trench varies in width from 0.80-0.90 m. In a correspondingposition in the northern part of the building there are remains of a similar foundation (P1.6 2). Again at the western end, blocks of two courses remain, partly imbedded in the rubble backing of the west wall foundation, but in this case they are one courselower, for the top of the upper preserved course is 0.44 m. lower than the top of the rubble backing. The lower preserved course is 0.39 m. high and the upper one 0.34 m. high and 0.70 m. wide. To the east, the foundation trench can be followed across the western aisle of the later building and picked up again just east of the line of the later piers, where it fades out when the level of hardpan rises. There is no clear indication of a juncture of this foundation with the inner north-south foundation, unless perhaps it is indicated by one block of the latter foundation which projects 0.17 m. to the west of the general west face of that foundation, just in line with the south side of the east-west foundation. To the early Roman period also belongs a large part of the preserved foundation of the colonnade of the portico on the west side of the building. The foundations are built of reused poros blocks and the lower courses are not carefully laid (P1. 7 2). The coursing corresponds to that of the uppermost preserved courses of the early west wall foundation. Three courses ran the full length of the colonnade; these are preserved only at the southern end and in one small section about at the center of the portico. Below this there was another course which was not continuous, but

ing of the west foundation,the upperonelevel filled in irregularitiesin hardpan;it is made with the top of the rubble,which,in turn, is of smallerstoneslaid closetogetherin a trench.

THE SOUTHEASTBUILDING The southern part of the early colonnade foundation incorporatesin its lowest course the east end of the terrace wall that ran parallel to and ca. 7.65 m. in front of the South Stoa. Some of the blocks of the upper course of this terrace wall were removed to make room for the foundation course below the first step of the colonnade (P1.7 3). The upper surface of the terrace wall was exposed during the hundred years of abandonment of the site and carries the clear marks of heavy wheeled traffic that cut across its corner as it went out on the road past the east end of the South Stoa.l6 As in the west wall foundation, there are extra courses at the northern end because of the steep drop in the level of hardpan in this section. The earlier east retaining wall for the ramp joining the two levels of the Agora, which was built here at the very beginning of the Roman period,17 was partly incorporated in the foundation for the colonnade. To the north of this retaining wall the colonnade foundation has been completely ripped out. That this poros foundation belongs to the first Roman period is shown clearly by the fact that on the third preserved course from the top there is a setting line for the course above (P1. 7 2), which was the first poros step of the early colonnade and which remains in situ in the southern and central sections. On it rested the marble step of the later colonnade, and later the upper part of the west face of this course was hacked back roughly to receive the marble Agorapavement, which lay under the marble step. At this time the setting line and the first poros step were completely covered and the line of the marble step was 0.11 m. to the east of the face of the poros step, making the setting line entirely meaningless for this later period. That this setting line might have been made for the euthynteria course of the marble stylobate seems precluded by the careless nature of all of the workmanship in the foundations, and 16Corinth, I, iv, pp. 88-91. 17 Corinth, I, iii, pp. 78-79.

9

even in the walls of the second Roman period. A setting line for the marble step itself would have been more normal, but if there was one it was cut away when the porosstep was hacked back for the laying of the Agora pavement. SUPERSTRUCTURE

While the lines of the foundations of this early Roman building are in general clear, the remains of the superstructure are very scant. Only three blocks are still in situ, aside from the poros steps of the portico just mentioned. These blocks are the orthostates of the east wall in the southern section of the early building and they are to be found just to the south of the east-west cross wall of the later building (P1.8 i). The courseis 0.54 m. high, 0.41-0.43 m. thick with its west face in a straight line, and the blocks are respectively 1.13 m., 0.73 m. and 1.30 m. long from north to south. At the base of the blocks are slight traces of stucco. Better evidence for the stucco coating of the west face of the east wall exists just behind the large base that was set against the northern section of that wall. Here is a section of stucco in situ, about 0.75 m. long (P1. 8 2) (early photographs show it to have been twice as long when excavated in 1931-P1. 3 3), and as much as 0.20 m. high. The coating is made of a base layer of coarse plaster from 0.04-0.06 m. thick, depending on irregularities in the reused blocks, and over this is a second coat of finer plaster 0.02 m. thick. A top layer of fine, hard stucco is 0.003 m. thick and on this the color was applied. The piece preserved in situ is colored red. Numerous fragments of similar stucco, found in the filling of the early foundation trenches and in other fill below the floor of the later building, apparently come from the earlier building, where the interior of other walls besides the east wall was probably also so decorated.The fragments are coloredchiefly

red or yellow,with a few pieces showingboth colorsadjacentalonga straightline. Thereare

10

CORINTH

many fragments colored white or black, others light blue or gray, but they are not nearly so numerous as the red or yellow ones. The system of decoration was probably a simple one with panels in solid colors separated by narrow dark bands; the dado, or at least a band at the floor, was red. There are many fragments which show clear signs of overpainting, especially on the yellow. This later decoration seems to consist largely of geometricpatterns,but amongthe pieces found in 1931 Whittlesey mentions one section which showed a pediment painted in white on the yellow ground and had shadows indicated with purple paint. At the same time there was found a fragment with the letters BRIApainted in black on a light blue ground. The approximate height of the floor of the early building is indicated by the cuttings in the top course of the foundations for its east wall. It was probably about level with the top of this course and would thus have been about 0.20 m. higher than the floor of the portico, which is taken to be at the level of the later portico and of the South Stoa stylobate. In the discussion of the foundations it has already been shown that at least the first poros step of the early colonnade is in situ at the southern end and in one small section at the center of the portico. This step block is ca. 0.36 m. high (P1. 7 2), but the step itself was shallower, since the Agora pavement would have extended over the foundation and up to the step, probably reducing its height to ca. 0.30 m. The poros stylobate was probably at the same height as the later one of marble, which is exactly level with the stylobate of the South Stoa. The distance between the top of the stylobate and the top of the first step, 0.62 m., was divided into two steps 0.31 m. high, such as exist in the later krepidoma.With two treads 0.30 m. wide, there would remain about 0.75 m. for the width of the poros stylobate.

likely of poros, since the steps were of that material. It is also probable that, like the later marble colonnade, the earlierportico had fourteen columns with an interaxial distance of ca. 2.00 m., for this scheme just fits the length of the early west wall and was retained in the later portico, despite the fact that the north wall of the building itself had to be moved 1.69 m. to the south to clear the newly erected Julian Basilica. PLAN AND USE

With so little of the superstructure of the building preserved, it is difficult to obtain a clear idea of the function of the various divisions within it, or of the purpose of the building itself; but the foundations do furnish the general scheme of the plan and the over-all dimensions of the edifice (Fig. 1). The full length of the building was 26.70 m. and its maximum width 18.20 m. to the edge of the stylobate. On the west side the portico extended the full length of the building, having a depth of 5.20 m. The main body of the structure seems to have been divided into two symmetrical halves on either side of an east-west passage ca. 1.70 m. wide. Since the erection of this building cut communicationsto the southeast that had existed for centuries by way of the road that ran along the line of the portico and beside the east end of the South Stoa, it is possible that such a passageway was felt necessary to continue the old line of communication and led up to a road to the east of the building. The large rooms to the north and south are nearly square. The arrangement within these rooms is not at all clear, though the existing foundations or trenches for them show them to be symmetrical about the eastwest axis. Since the foundations or trenches that have been found are continuous, they suggest inner walls rather than rows of iso-

No remains of the early order have been lated supports,in whichcase eachwing would recognizedthus far. However, it was most be dividedinto three separatesections, most

THE SOUTHEAST BUILDING

11

likely with connecting doorways at points identify the two wings as separate Greek and which cannot be determined. Another possible Latin libraries, such as were being built in line of interior supports is suggested by the Rome at about the time this structure was fact that the north-south axis of the building, erected at Corinth. The first library built in and probably the line of the roof ridge, falls Rome, by C. Asinius Pollio in the Atrium exactly the same distance from the west wall Libertatis, is dated to 40 or 39 B.c.;19 it was as is the preserved north-south inner founda- followed early in the Empire by the Palatine tion from the east wall. However, there is no Library in the Apollo sanctuary, which was sign of a continuous foundation along this believed to have had two separate rooms for median line, which should appear at the junc- the Greek and Latin libraries,20as perhaps ture with the existing east-west trenches, but did also the librarybuilt in the Porticus Octaisolated supports are not precluded,since there viae, erected by Augustus in 33 B.C. in honor was much later disturbance in this western of his sister.21Of these, something of the plan part of the building and traces of them could of only the Palatine Library is known, but have been obliterated. the libraries built in Rome in the Empire are This plan is an unusual one, for which no better known and often show two distinct secgood parallels have been found, but the divi- tions, or even two separate buildings as in the sion into two exactly similar parts should be Ulpian Library.22Characteristic,too, of most some clue to the purpose for which the origi- libraries,both Hellenistic and Roman, is the asnal building was erected. The only other evi- sociation with a stoa or portico.23There seems dence from the building remains might possi- to have been a clear distinction between the bly lie in the painted inscription BRIA.Al- simple Hellenistic Greek type of library, best though the building had to be destroyed to known in the Pergamonlibrary,24but still used allow for the construction of the Julian Ba- in Greece in the library at Philippi of the 2nd silica, it was followed immediately by a suc- century afterChrist,25andthe muchmoremonucessor occupying much the same site and with mental type of Imperial Rome with its great a colonnade of the same length, so that any vaulted halls containingniches for armariaand use determined for the later structure might often an apse for a statue of a deity. The sections reasonably be applied to its predecessor. It of the Southeast Building conform rather well will be seen (p. 28) that on the basis of an to the Greek type of library with a stoa, a inscription with the probable word [SCR]!PTA, large reading room and smaller storeroomsfor Professor Broneer has conjectured that the books. At both Pergamon and Philippi the later building "was used to house some kind storerooms are placed in a row to one side of of writings and was either a library or, more the reading room, all of them opening onto the probably, the Tabularium." stoa; at Corinth the two storerooms are arDoes the bipartite plan of the earlier South- ranged along two sides of the reading room. east Building perhapsindicate that it was used 19Langie, op. cit., p. 41; Gotze, op. cit., p. 243. 20 C. for both these purposes, one side for library, Callmer, "Antike Bibliotheken," Opuscula Archaethe other for archives? Such a combination ologica, III (Skrifterutgivna av Svenska Institutet i Rom, X), 1944, p. 159, fig. 7. was apparently not infrequent in Roman 21 Langie, op. cit., pp. 52-54; Callmer,op. cit., pp. 159-160; Middleton, Remains of Ancient Rome, II, London, 1892, times.18On the other hand, it is tempting to J. H. p. 205. 18 A. Langie, Les bibliothequespubliques dans l'ancienne Rome et dans l'empire Romain, preceded'un coup d'oeil retrospectif sur les bibliothequespubliques anterieures, Fribourg (Suisse), 1908, pp. 61, 97; M. A. Sisson, "The Stoa of Hadrian at Athens," P.B.S.R., XI, 1929, pp. 64-66; B. Gotze, "Antike Bibliotheken," Jahrb., LII, 1937, p. 240.

22

Callmer, op. cit., pp. 160-164; G6tze, op. cit., p. 240. Callmer, op. cit., p. 186; Langie, op. cit., p. 100; Gotze, op. cit., p. 243. 24 R. Bohn, Alterthimer von Pergamon, II, Berlin, 1885, pp. 56-75. 25 Callmer, op. cit., pp. 179-181, 186, fig. 21. 23

CORINTH

12

That there was a library at Corinth in the early 2nd century after Christ is confirmedby literary evidence, for it is mentioned in the 37th Discourse of Dio Chrysostom:"However, in my own case, upon my second visit to Corinth you were so glad to see me that you did your best to get me to stay with you, but seeing that to be impossible, you did have a likeness made of me, and you took this and set it up in your library, a front row seat as it were, where you felt it would most effectively stimulate the youth to persevere in the same pursuits as myself."26While Crosby takes the expression Eis TrpoESpiavto referto the privilegeof TrpoESpia, and translates it as "a front row seat as it were," Langie27 takes it to mean that the library was in the Proedria, or City Hall. The South Stoa must have served as the administrative center of both Corinth and the Province of Achaia at the time of Dio's visit.28 From Langie's interpretation of ElSrrpoESpiav,

the location of the Southeast Building adjacent to the South Stoa would make possible its identification as the library. This, of course, would concern the later rebuilding, and Broneer suggests below (p. 28) that its position close to the other civic buildings makes suitable its identification as the Tabularium.That these were not mutually exclusive has been suggested, for the combination was not unusual in Roman times. Nor are any of the arguments conclusively in favor of the building being either a library or archives. It does seem likely, however, that both the first Southeast Building and its successor served as library and/or archives. CHRONOLOGY

There are several indications that this early Roman building was one of those erected shortly after the foundingof the colony in 44 B.C. 26Dio Chrysostom, XXXVII, 8, Loeb Edition, Vol. IV, Translated by H. Lamar Crosby, p. 11. 27 Op. cit., p. 85. 28Corinth, I, iv, p. 159.

The first of these is the fact that practically all the material is re-used and much of it is obviously from Greekbuildings. This is characteristic of the first Roman period at Corinth. Other typical examples are the first Roman rebuilding of the fountain of Peirene, the adjacent early Peribolos of Apollo, the Basilica on the opposite side of the Lechaion Road and the market to the north of the Basilica. Another characteristicwhich our building shares with all those just mentioned is the bevelling of many of the re-used blocks by means of a toothed chisel, usually on the upper edge and on one side. Besides these marks of Corinthian work of the first century B.C., the fill found behind the rubble backing of the early west wall foundation would also suggest a date early in the Roman period. The objects in this fill are almost exclusively Hellenistic, or even earlier,but they have the aspect of debris from the destruction of the city, for included among them are several fragments of the architectural terracottas of the Greek South Stoa. However,there are a few small fragments of Arretine and so-called Pergamene pottery in this fill, and some pieces of the Italian ware were found in the foundation trench at the south end of the east wall. The fill in the manhole in the deep foundation trench is even more revealing, for in it was found a coin issued by GaiusPublilius who was Quaestor in Macedoniafrom 148-146 B.C. (P1. 8 4).29 It cannot have been brought to Corinthmuch beforethe destruction-indeed, it was probably introduced by the conquerors-and it would seem to indicate that the manhole was filled either duringthehundredyears of non-occupation or, more likely, after the colony was founded. It was probably after the fill settled that the upper1.40 m. of the shaft was filled with poros chips accumulated during the construction of the building. It seems obvious that not much Roman debris was yet available in Corinth 29H. Gaebler, Die antiken Miunzen von Makedonia und Paionia, Berlin, 1906-1935, p. 66, No. 203, pl. II, 8.

THE SOUTHEASTBUILDING when this fill was deposited, and therefore a date not long after the founding of the colony is indicated for the laying of these foundations. The date of the demolition of the building, most likely to make room for the Julian Basilica, is better substantiated. Most of the interior foundations were ripped out at this time, probably in order to re-use the blocks, and the trenches were filled in, as was also the area in general, up to the level of the first floor of the later building. In the deepest east-west trench was found a Corinth duoviri coin of the

13

time of Tiberius, with the names of the magistrates L. Arrius Peregrinus and L. Furius Labeo, who probably held office before A.D. 22/23.30 In the same trench was found a fragment of a Corinth Type xxI lamp, while in identical fill at the level of the top of the deep trench were found lamps of Types xxi, xxII, and xxiv (P1. 8 3), together with fragments of two vessels of mouldedglass. The combined evidence points to the second quarter of the first century after Christ as the date of the razing of the first Roman building on the site.

THE SECONDROMANBUILDING It has already been postulated that the plan to erect the Julian Basilica at the east end of the lower terrace of the Agora necessitated the removal of the north wall, at least, of the early Southeast Building and was, therefore, responsible for the complete rebuilding of the latter structure. As will be seen below (pp. 56, 76), the date of construction of both the the Julian Basilica and its twin, the South Basilica, can be placed with a considerable degree of certainty early in the reign of Claudius, if not still in that of Caligula. The evidence already cited for the demolition of the first Southeast Building points to a date during the reign of Tiberius as that of the plan for rebuilding the east side of the Agora. No considerabletime can have elapsed between the demolition of the old Southeast Building and the constructionof the new one, since both have a commonfoundation for their west wall and colonnade, and the fill used to level the area for the floor of the later building is full of debrisof the earlierstructure, chiefly in the form of fragments of its wall plaster. Like the Julian Basilica, then, the second Southeast Building must have been built during the second quarter of the first century after Christ. This second Roman building on the site endured a long time in essentially the same

form, although it underwent several repairs or alterations during the course of centuries. The building consisted always of three parts: a long portico facing west onto the Agora, and behind it a large room on the north and a smaller one to the south (Fig. 4). After the various extant remains are described in the sections on foundations and superstructure, the different phases of this building will be treated separately and dated in so far as this is possible. FoUNDATIONS

On the foundations for the west wall of the early Roman building was built the west wall of the later building and the foundation for the colonnade of the earlier building was also used again, but to the east the new building was made shorter and wider, necessitating the laying of new foundations. Those for the eastern wall are completely preserved (P1.3 i); the wall jogs back to the west 1.50 m. at the east-west inner cross wall that separated the building into two sections. The foundations of the northern section consist of a single course ca.0.66m. high and averaging0.90m. in width, made of two rows of large blocks, mostly re30

p. 7.

Fox, J.I.A.N., II, 1899, p. 104; Edwards, Corinth, VI,

14

CORINTH

used, laid on their edges or ends. Thereis a earlier foundation; it is 0.52 m. high and its small amountof tile chinkingin this stretch. top is 0.18 m. lower than the top of the poros The northernend of the foundation,at the foundation course of the cross wall. This interjuncturewith the northwall, was relaid,prob- rupted coursing at the west end of the cross ably when the north wall foundationswere wall continues throughout the height of its orrepaired(P1.9 1). To the south of the cross thostate courseand the next higherone, the top wall, the east wall foundationalso consistsof of which is level with the top of the third course a single course,here ca. 0.40 m. high, its top above the foundation of the west wall; above level with the northern section. Because a this the coursing of the two walls was apparmodernretainingwall is built on this wall, its ently the same. This later foundation course easternface cannotnow be seen, but measure- of the west wall had its west face even with the ments taken in 1931,beforethe retainingwall face of the wall itself, for its upper part was wasbuilt, show the width of the foundationin above the level of the porticofloor,but the blocks this sectionto be ca. 0.80 m. were of very uneven length, extending beyond Bondedin with these east wall foundations, the east face of the wall as much as 0.35 m. in and of similar construction,are the founda- some places, and were often cut in irregular tions of the innercrosswall. At the very east- angles at the back (P1. 9 3). The foundation to ern end thereis a singlefoundationcourseca. the north of the inner cross wall is wider than 0.60 m. high, but a little to the west the foun- the part to the south and with a corresponding dation is built so as to incorporatethe foun- differencein the thickness of the wall. At the dationsof the earlyeast wallthat runsthrough northern end, the top course of the older founit (P1.11 2). Here the blocks are smallerand dation was repairedfor a length of about three there are two, or even three,coursesfor about meters (see p. 6) with blocks similar to those a meteron eitherside of the earlyfoundation. of the courses above and, like the later founWhereasthe eastern half of this foundation dation and wall, they were chinked with pieces rests on hardpan directly under the single of tile. The foundation for the south wall was laid course, the westernhalf neededdeeperfoundationsbecauseof the dropin level and these just to the south of the earliersouth wall founareprovidedby a foundationof rubblemadeof dation, immediately adjacent to it or actually small, roughlysquaredblocksof porosand of overlapping it slightly (P1. 4 l, 2). Some of it tiles laid in mortarand levelledoff to receive is still unexcavated or is covered by modern the courseof heavy porosblocksthat ran the retaining walls, but under the bridge at the full length of the foundation (Pls. 3 2, 12

2).

southeast cornerof the building there is visible a stretch of this foundation 1.70 m. long (P1. 3 4). The upper preserved course is made of heavy blocks 0.50 m. high and 0.86 m. wide, their tops level with the foundation course of the east wall, with which the south wall seems to bond. The course below is shallower and is made of smaller blocks. About halfway to the west wall, the south wall again emerges from under the modern retaining wall and is visible for the rest of the distance to the west wall and

Thewidthof this foundationalsois ca. 0.80 m. The foundationsfor the east wall and the cross wall just describedare clearly contemporaneousand are part of the originalfoundations of the second Roman building.Their junctureswith the west, north and south wall foundationsare, however,in the nature of a repairand the latter walls are certainlylater in their present form. This is shown most clearlyat the junctureof the inner crosswall and the west wall (P1.8 5). The latter has one beyond to the colonnade.In its westernpart foundationcourselaid on the remainsof the this southernfoundationshowsthree courses,

THE SOUTHEASTBUILDING the lowest course being level with the old west wall foundation and the middle course being even with the later foundation course of the west wall, some 0.12 m. lower than the foundation course of the inner cross wall. The upper course has its top level with the first course of the superstructure of the west wall and with about the nliddle of the orthostates of the cross wall, showing that when this wall was built the floor level had already risen. The coursing of the south wall agrees with that of the west wall rather than with that of the east and cross walls, except at the east end where we have already seen that the south and east foundations have the same coursing. The transition made at the time of the repair of the south wall must occur also in the part of the wall not accessible for study. The south foundation continues beyond the west wall as far as the western end of the marble stylobate, which it flanks. It overlaps slightly the early south foundation (P1. 4 2) and the south end of the early colonnade foundation has been cut away to make room for it. The end of the south wall fitted against the corner column of the South Stoa. This western extension of the south wall has the same two foundation courses as the part to the east of the west wall, but the courses are about 1.00 m. wide. The course above, which would have been visible in the portico, is rough on the southern side and was hidden by a road which led upward to the east from the east end of the South Stoa.31 Below these foundation courses, at the south end of the portico, there is a deep foundation filling in a V-shaped cutting in hardpan that goes down ca. 2.00. m. below the bottom of the continuous foundation (P1. 9 2). There are five courses of large poros blocks, each course longer than the one below and with the end blocks fitted into cuttings in the hardpan. A small hole near the top of the east side of the cutting leads into an underground channel

15

portico of the Southeast Building, but has not yet been explored. The foundations let down into this deep cutting are ca. 1.30 m. wide. The foundations of the north wall are less well preserved than the others and are completely lacking for a short stretch at the eastern end. They consisted of three courses of poros blocks, the lowest one of which rests on hardpan for about five meters at the eastern end and then has a rubblebase which increases in depth as hardpan drops, until it is 1.05 m. deep at the western end (P1. 10 i). The north face of the foundation blocks is irregular, indicating that the space between the Southeast Building and the Julian Basilica was filled to the height of the top of the foundations of the former building. The width of the foundation averages 0.80 m. The coursing of the north foundation and wall follows that of the west wall rather than the coursing in the east wall. The rubble backing behind the early west foundation was partly cut away when the north foundation was laid and when the northern end of the topmost course of the old west wall foundation was repaired (P1. 9 4). The north wall foundations are rather more generously chinked with tiles than are the others. The north wall of the portico in the second period apparently had the same foundations as that of the earlier period, for there are no traces of other foundations. The north end block of the repaired section of the upper foundation course of the earlier west wall, as well as the course below, shows traces of this later north portico wall, which bonded in here (PI. 2 1). The existing foundations for inner supports are from a late alteration of the building, except for one block which remains from the original phase of the second Roman building. The system of interior supports seems to have remained essentially the same throughout, but for some reason almost all the foundationswere

which connects with the system under the removedand new ones laid in the early fifth 31 Corinth, I, iv, century after Christ. The late system,which p. 129.

16

CORINTH

is well preserved, consisted of two rows of piers running north-south and dividing the larger northern section of the building into three aisles (Fig. 4). For each row of piers there was a square pier against the wall at either end (P1. 9 5) not bonded into the wall in any way as far as can now be seen, and between these end piers three oblong piers equally spaced. It is the bottom block of the central pier foundation of the western row which belongs to the earliest phase of the second building (P1. 10 2). The top of the block measures 1.32 m. x 0.73 m. and it is 0.46 m. high; it rests in a cutting in hardpan, its south side even with the northern edge of the deep east-west foundation trench of the early building. The fill of this trench, put in after the foundations were removed,was packed tightly against the pier block and over the top of this fill was a continuous film of lime that extended right up to the block, apparently deposited during the construction of the second building and associated with a lime pit found close by. Thus it is proved conclusively that this pier block is contemporary with the filling of the trench and must belong to the first phase of the second Roman building. Above this block there were probably other courses used in the late period and ripped out when some of the other late pier foundations were destroyed, for the rectangular cutting was filled with soft black earth which contained late Byzantine pottery. The other pier foundations were all laid in pits cut down to hardpan through earlier strata. The foundations vary in height from two courses at the south to four courses at the north side of the building (P1. 10 3). The end piers are roughly 0.63 m. square, while the oblong piers average 1.10 m. x 0.70m. and usually have two blocks in each course, except for the top course which extended slightly above the level of the contemporary tile floor.

Apparentlyeven later than the late piers are two walls which dividedthe southernsec-

tion of the building into three small rooms (P1. 11 1).32 The eastern wall rests on earth at about the level of the middle of the orthostates of the east-west cross wall. The western wall has the foundation of its northern part resting on a row of geison blocks, apparently Greek, with their tops only 0.10 m. below the top of the poros blocks (Plan II, 1, Section A-A). Both walls have central openings for wide doorways, but the foundations do not extend under these openings and there are no thresholds now in place. SUPERSTRUCTURE

In severalparts of the secondRomanbuilding the walls of the superstructure are still preserved to a height of three courses, while elsewhere fewer courses remain. In the east wall, except for a stretch of ca. 11.00 m. at the northern end (P1. 3 i), as well as for most of the length of the inner cross wall excluding the central doorway and the very western end, the orthostate blocks are still in situ (P1.11 2). Those in the northern section of the east wall are ca. 0.63 m. high and they rest on a layer of tiles bedded in cement mortar laid over the top of the foundations. The blocks are laid as a double row of stretchersalternatingwith one or two headers and forming a wall ca. 0.80 m. thick. The orthostates in the southern section of the east wall and in the cross wall are of approximately the same height, also rest on tile bedding, and have their tops level with those already described.However, in these two sections the wall is only ca. 0.63 m. thick and is apparently built of a single row of blocks varying considerably in length. The orthostates at the south end of the east wall have been cut down ca. 0.12 m. (P1. 3 4), probably to fit the repaired south wall, which has no orthostate course. At the west end of the cross wall the last orthostate was cut back 0.88 m. 32

Scranton (Corinth,XVI, p. 41) says this had been done by the tenth century after Christ.

THE SOUTHEASTBUILDING

fromthe west wall and then cut down0.30 m. for a distance of 0.20 m. where new courses were laid that agreewith the coursingof the west wall (P1.8 5). It is only at the top of the courseabove the orthostatesthat the courses of all the walls range.For most of the length of the southernsection of the east wall and of the crosswall, the courseabove the orthostates is in place, ca. 0.48 m. high and of the samethicknessas the orthostates;on the cross wall there are five blocksof anothercourseof the same height also in situ (P1.11 2). The cross wall was broken by a doorway that connectedthe two sectionsof the building. Apparentlybecausethe southernsection was narrowerthan the northernone and a doorway on the north-south axis of the latter would be far off the axis of the former, a compromisearrangementwas madeby placing the center of the doorwayabout halfwaybetween the two axes of the differentsections (Fig. 4; Plan I). The doorwayhad a large marble thresholdwith a length of 2.69 m., made of two pieces of marble (Pls. 11 3, 12 1).

The largereastern block is 2.21 m. long and the other0.48 m. long; the widthof the blocks is 0.735 m. The top of the thresholdis ca. 0.05 m. higherthan the mosaicfloorlevel; for 0.033 m. back from the north face it is cut down to the floorlevel, but the rest of the top is level and there is no rabbet. There is no cuttingbackof the southface, whichis rough, so the floor on that side must have been at least as high as the threshold.At the west end of the threshold, directly against the wall, there are two cuttings ca. 0.015 m. deep at either edge of the block (P1.12 i); that on the northis ca. 0.14 m. squarewhile the southern oneis ca. 0.20 m. x 0.13 m. Startingat 0.59m. fromthe east end of the southerncutting,and at 0.15 m. from the south edge of the block, thereis a long,narrowcutting,0.07m.X0.025m. and 0.015 m. deep, runningalong the block and anothersimilarcutting,0.08 m. x 0.02 m. and 0.02 m. deep, is at 0.58 m. fromthe east-

17

em end of the thresholdand 0.125 m. from the southernedge. Just to the north of the last cutting, 0.045 m. from it, is a circular cutting, roughly 0.055 m. in diameter and 0.02 m. deep.33Thus this thresholdprovides for a singledoorca.1.20m. wide,pivotedon its east side, withstationarypanelson eitherside. The cuttings at the western end are for the jamb; the one on the east side apparentlywas set in a smallblockwhichis now missing. Along the north side of this thresholdwas set a marbleslab,its top level with the mosaic floor (P1.11 3). The slab is 1.39 m. long and 0.335 m. wide and its easternend is 0.21 m. backfromthe easternend of the threshold.It is approximatelycenteredon the mosaicwhich enclosesit on three sides, but both the slab and the mosaicpanel,which areon the axis of the northernroom,are well off the centerof the thresholdbecausethe latter was set to the west of the axis of the room. At the time of the laying of the third floor of the building,the tile floor,the thresholdwas raised by placing a low poros block over its eastern part; the doorwaywas made much narrowerby blockingup the westernpartwith rather crude poros masonry (P1. 14 i). The width of the doorwayand jambs at this time was not morethan 1.50 m. Still later the doorway was again changedwhen one of the pier blockswas moved over onto the later threshold to serve as the easternside of a doorway at a much higherlevel and somewhatto the west. Thewest wallproperbeginsat a level0.14m. lower than the bottom of the orthostatesof the cross wall (Pls. 8 5, 12 2), and even its top

foundation course has a smooth west face, sincethis was visibleon the porticoside where the floorwas 0.57 m. lower than the floor of the buildingproper,at the time whenthe west wall was repaired.The west wall coursesare 0.50 m., 0.43 m. and 0.44 m. high counting 83Scranton thought, on examination, that this was a later modification.

18

CORINTH

from the bottom, while there are a few blocks of a fourth course 0.58 m. high in place in the southern section (P1.2 1, 2). The section of the west wall to the north of the inner cross wall is 0.86 m. thick and is built of headers and double rows of stretchers alternating somewhat irregularly (PI. 12 2). The technique is similarto that employedin the east wall (P1.5 ), but the blocks are much less regular, are smaller and are less carefully fitted together. The southern section of the west wall is 0.75 m. thick and all the blocks have the full thickness of the wall (P1. 11 i). At the very northern end of the west wall a doorway was opened. In a cutting 1.17 m. wide and 0.25 m. deep in the top foundation course of the wall (PIs. 1 1, 2 1, 7 1, 9 4), a large marble block 1.07 m. long was set with its northern end only 0.20 m. from the inner face of the north wall (P1. 13 1). The block is a re-used base moulding block with a very slight curve which has been set with its moulding inward; it is 0.33 m. high, but along a line ca. 0.13 m. back from its exposed face the inner part of the top surface has been cut down ca. 0.04 m. to form a rabbet. For ca. 0.10 m. from either end there are cuttings 0.035 m. wide and 0.055 m. deep at 0.07 m. in from the west face; the distance between them, the width of the doorway, is 0.86 m. A round pivot hole 0.063 m. in diameter and 0.025 m. deep is cut down into the lower part of the top surface just at its western edge and 0.057 m. from the southern end of the block. A somewhat later doorway, 0.82 m. wide, was cut into the upper three wall coursesof the southern section of the west wall (Pls. 1 i, 2 2, 11 ), just on the axis of the southern room; it most likely belongs to the alteration of the early fifth century, when the floor level was about even with the top of the lowest west wall course. This doorway was later blocked up with rubble. Of still later date is the opening ca. 1.25 m. wide cut into the west wall,

into the lowest wall course and for a threshold there are three irregular poros blocks, one of which has a post-hole cutting roughly 0.16 m. square that was just at the southern end of the opening and at about the midpoint of the wall's thickness. The top of the threshold is about 0.10 m. higher than the tile floor of the fifth century. Along the north side of the doorway a drain ran through the wall; it consisted of an open channel cut in small poros blocks laid together (Pls. 12 2, 13 2), either through the late tile floor or, more probably, after the tile floor was destroyed. In the western half of the south wall there are two or three courses in place above the foundations; they form a wall ca. 0.64 m. thick (P1. 11 1). In this wall is a doorway 1.46 m. wide with its western side 2.03 m. to the east of the west wall. In the opening, and extending under the wall on either side, are two large marble blocks laid as a threshold. They have a total length of 1.80 m., but they are very unequal in size. The eastern one is ca. 0.29 m. high and rests on a fill of earth and small stones ca. 0.08 m. thick that is above the foundation course of the south wall. The western block, on the other hand, is 0.41 m. high, has had the foundation course hacked down ca. 0.10 m. to receive it, and its top is roughly 0.07 m. lower than that of the other block. There are no cuttings in either block, but on the eastern one there are light traces of marks from the swinging of a door. There was probably a double door here, of which only the eastern side swung open. The thresholdis about level with the foundation for the western one of the two late walls that divided this southern section of the building into three parts and, like them, the doorway must belong to the latest phase of the building. Its height indicates that by this late period the road along the south side of the building had risen considerably.

with its south side at 3.70 m. north of the Of the northern wall, one course of the crosswall (P1.13 2).It is very crudelycut down superstructure remainsin placein the western

THE SOUTHEASTBUILDING third of the wall and there is one block of the second course still in situ (PI. 10 i). The thickness of the wall is shown to be ca. 0.75 m. Unfortunately, with none of the rest of the wall preserved, it is impossible to learn anything definite about entrances on this side of the building, except perhaps the negative evidence of the western third which indicates that there were no side entrances, even if there was a central one. Exactly on the axis of the building there is a large post-hole cut into the top foundation course; it is roughly circular,ca. 0.16 m. in diameter, and is cut to a depth of ca. 0.25 m. It may have been used for a centering post during construction. Blocks of the superstructure of a few of the late piers still remain in place and a few others have been moved only slightly from their original position. In all of these piers the top foundation block extended ca. 0.08 m. above the contemporary tile floor and these blocks are in place on the south end pier (P1. 11 2) and the middle pier (P1.4 3) of the eastern row and in the first pier from the north in the western row (PI. 10 3); on the latter pier the block above is also in situ. These blocks show the oblong piers to have measured 0.93 m. X 0.63 m. and the end piers ca. 0.63 m. square. The oblong piers were apparently built up of a series of blocks ca. 0.47 m. high, but the end piers, at least on the south side, seem rather to have consisted of a few large square blocks, about 1.20 m. high, two of which probably reached to the springing of the arch. One such block, probably the lower one in the south end pier of the eastern row, was moved over to form the eastern jamb of a late doorway in the inner cross wall (P1.14 1). The block that stood on it may be one now in the southeasternroom, where it probably fell when the cross wall collapsed. The lower block of the south end pier of the western row was moved only ca. 0.70 m. to the west (P1. 13 3); its back was somewhat

19

wall which cut throughthe building.Two of the voussoirsof the archeswere also foundin the southeasterncornerof the building(Fig.2).

""1

,

-,-cr.

/.

/,

//,//./

//II///i/

, /.:.

/

r,

.^ ......

////IJIl/

/

/

/

laidafterthe tile floorwas at least partlygone, FIG. 2. DRAWING OF VOUsSOIRS FROM THE ARCHES

Both lines of archways were later filled in, to

what height is not known, by rubble walls 0.60 m. thick (Pls. 4 3,5 , 6

3, 10 3)

which were

ca. 0.58 m. thick. In the center of the eastern

for they rest principallyon the beddingfor that floorand only in a few placeson the tile itself. Of the two late crosswalls in the southern section of the building(P1.11 i), the western its southernhalf. A laterwall a. 0.45 in thick has but one coursepreservedabove the foundations,its top even with the courseabovethe orthostatesin in the the cross cross wall, orthostates wall. At At its its center center is an opening there 1.60 The wall the doorway is in which wasm. bywide. then would blocked up. .60 here Theweste wall have m. thick. bcaen 0.58 blocked when thetwo of the pieastern lacenter wall thereis an opening1.30m. wide.Thewall had aa thickness itself of ca. thicknessof ca. 0.60 0.60 m., as shown m., as shown itself had by a few blocks of the superstructurein place in its southern half. A later wall ca. 0.45 m. thick

was built along the westernside of this wall,

hackedaway, and it was againset againstthe The doorwayin the westernwall wouldhave crosswall to formthe end of a late Byzantine beenblockedwhenthe two largestoragepits in

20

CORINTH

the central room were built, if not before. These pits probably go with the wall flanking the eastern cross wall and must be of the Byzantine period, for their level is very high. There are remains of three separate floors, at successively higher levels, belonging to the three majorphases of the second Roman building. The remains of the earliest of these are scant, but clear. When the building was first built it had a floor of smooth white stucco at the level of the bottom of the orthostate blocks; the walls seem also to have been covered with stucco, but little remains.The floor was laid on a very heavy fill of poros chips which contained quantities of fragments of the wall stucco of the earlier bulding. Whether or not there was any kind of harder surfacing on top of the plaster floor is not known, for the latter was largely destroyed when the next floor was laid and only bits of it remain in a few places along the wall and in a stretch under the later marble threshold of the doorway between the two sections of the building. This would indicate that there was a doorway here in the earliest phase of the building, as would be expected, but its width cannot be determined. This earliest floor of the second building, clearly associated with the walls having orthostates, was at 0.43 m. above the portico stylobate. Some time after the west wall was rebuilt a new floorwas laid, consisting in part, if not entirely, of mosaics (P1. 13 3) and with its level ca. 0.57 m. above that of the portico stylobate. Remains of mosaic pavements are preserved at both the northern and southern ends of the main room of the building, though the fragment at the northern end (P1. 15 2) is very small. All the mosaics are composed of geometric patterns built with small, irregular cubes of marble of many colors which vary in size from 0.006 m. to 0.015 m. and average ca. 0.01 m. These cubes are laid in a bedding of cement, varying in thickness from 0.04 m. to

together. To judge from the mosaics in the southern part of the room, and from what is known of the northern ones, there were three panels at either end, carrying out the same three-aisle scheme as existed in the later period. The best preserved panel is that in the southwest corner of the larger room (P1. 14 3), and its dimensions can be ascertained. Its width as preservedis 3.10 m., but it is probable that the borderon the northernside was slightly wider. The length of the panel, from the marble revetment on the west wall to the guilloche borderof the central section (P1.133), is 5.10 m. A Turkish pit has destroyed the southwest corner of the panel, while much of the eastern part was apparently ruined when the late Roman tile floor was laid. This piece of mosaic has an all-over pattern with a border around it (P1. 14 3); the latter consists of a broad band, varying in width from 0.30 m. to 0.33 m., edged by a blue line made of a double row of tesserae, and decorated with alternating blue circles and red diamonds on a white field, with circles at the corners. The circles and diamonds are further ornamented with simple geometric designs in white, usually crosses or squares. Outside of this band, the border has two or three rows of white tesserae on the south side, five rows of white and then six rows of red on the west, five rows of white and an unknown number of rows of red cubes to the north, while on the east five rows of white tesserae separate the border of this panel from the guilloche border on the central panel. Within the border, the area is covered by a design consisting of interlacing dodecagons built on hexagonal centers surrounded by a series of alternating rectangles and triangles, all outlined by a double row of blue tesserae. Almost all of these geometric figures are then largely filled by a colored field of the same shape, leaving a small white border; the filling

0.08 m., whichrests in turn on a layer of frag- is red exceptin the rectanglesto the northand ments of tiles spreadout flat and placedclose south of the hexagons,whereit is blue, and in

THE SOUTHEASTBUILDING one hexagon where the filling about a swastika is red and blue in opposite corners.In the hexagons these colored fields are further decorated, usually by white swastikas, but in a few instances along the western side the hexagons contain a square divided into four squares which are colored either lavender and blue or lavender and white in opposite corners. Of the central panel on the south side only scattered fragments of the western half are preserved (P1. 15 i). Its width would seem to have been the same as that of the adjacent panel to the west, ca. 3.10 m., for there is a slight drop in the cement bedding along a line at the northern edge of the west and central panels which probably marks the end of the pavement. It is possible to compute the length of the panel as well on the assumption that the center of the shield motive is at the center of the panel. The distance from the center of the shield to the outside of the guilloche border is 1.80 m.; thus the length of the panel would be 3.60 m. Despite the poor state of preservation of this mosaic, it is possible to reconstruct most of its pattern from the existing fragments. The rectangle was broken on the south side around the marble slab which was laid in the floor in front of the threshold of the doorway connecting the two sections of the building. The simple guilloche border of this panel, done in red, white and blue, apparently went along the wall on the south side and then followed the contour of the marble slab, along which it is preserved. Here there are five rows of white and six rows of red tesserae between the guilloche border and the marble slab, and this same border may have existed along the south wall, as it did along the west wall, and on the north side as well, where it would continue the border of the western panel. The shield at the center of this panel is composed of ten concentric circles made up

21

blue on a white field. At the center is a small circlefilledwith greenishblue tesserae. The diameter of the shield is 0.90 m. The pattern in the area about the shield consists of octagons alternating with crosses which are elaborated into eight-pointed stars by having two lozenges project from each angle of the cross. On the sides of the octagons which are not continuous with the stars there are rectangles. Octagons, crosses and rectangles are filled, except for a narrow border, with rows of small squares in red, white, orange, green, blue, greenish blue and grayish blue, with identical colors in diagonal rows. The lozenges forming the points of the stars are filled, except for a narrow border, by smaller lozenges in red or blue-green colors. While this pattern seems to have been the main one about the shield, there are traces of others, especially in the narrow strip south of the shield. Here is first a simple guilloche band like the one which borders the entire panel, then a wide band filled by an interlace pattern, and between this and the guillocheborder a rectangle like those adjacent to the octagons. Anothersection with an interlace pattern occurs adjacent to the northwestern part of the shield. In all of this panel, as in the southwesternone, the variouslargergeometricfigures are outlined with a double row of blue tesserae. The small fragment preserved of the central panel of the north side shows an all-over pattern of intersecting circles with a white ground in which is a red or blue field with its four sides concave in the arc of the adjacent circles (P1. 15 2). The color of this field is alternately red and blue, forming diagonal lines of either color. Inside each field is a crenelated diamond in white. The white circles are 0.205 m. in diameter. Besides these extant remains of mosaics within the Southeast Building were others which are no longer preserved. Mosaics were first uncovered along the north side of the

of triangleswith curved sides which increase buildingin TrenchVII in 189634and at least in size in each largercircle. The trianglesare 34Richardson, A.J.A., I, 1897, p. 470.

22

CORINTH

part of what was found then was still visible in 1915. The following information regarding this piece of mosaic is extracted from the excavation notebook of 1915, kept by Dr. B.H. Hill: The mosaic has borders 0.235 m. wide, the center line of which lies ca. 3.95 m. from the north wall of the building and ca. 5.83 m. from the east wall. The mosaic extends 1.17 m. east and 2.40 m. west of the center line of the border and north to ca. 0.75 m. from the north wall. To the south it extends only to the edge of the border. We know also that a bit of the southeast panel was found by Whittlesey in 1931 since it is shown on a sketch plan in his excavation notebook; it was located just north of the southern end pier of the eastern row. From these accounts, and by comparison with the mosaics recently found at the south side of the room, we know that there were three panels on the north side as well, the center one being narrowerthan the side ones, as on the south side; the extant fragment on the north side is part of the central panel. All the rest of it and of the eastern panel has disappeared; the western panel was clearly destroyed when the large Byzantine pits were dug at the north end of the western aisle. However, the northernpanels differedin width from the southern ones, for the former were evidently ca. 4.10 m. wide and would thus have filled exactly the distance from the north wall to the north face of the first piers at this end, while the southern mosaics are only ca. 3.10 m. wide and thus stopped well short of the pier. It is clear from both the extant remains and the account of Dr. Hill that remains of mosaics were not found outside of the rows of panels at either end. The fact that the border on the north side of the southwestern panel ended with a series of rows of red tesserae beyond the white border also indicates that there were no mosaics contiguous on this side,

southwestern and south central panels. What the rest of the floor was covered with is not known, for in the remainderof the area it was completely destroyed, either by the tile pavement bedding or by later disturbances. In a small section dug in the central aisle, beside the first pier from the north in the western row and a little south of it, a bedding of tiles was found similar to that under the mosaic just to the north, but there were no traces of mosaic above it and the same type of bedding could have been used for a floor of tiles or for one of marble slabs. The southwestern panel of the mosaic does not abut directly against the west wall and the inner cross wall, but rather against slabs of white marble revetment which decorated the walls (P1. 14 3). The marble slabs average 0.015 m. in thickness and they are set against a backing of cement mortar which has a thickness of from 0.05 m. to 0.08 m. The bottom of the slabs went down ca. 0.06 m. below the top of the mosaics and the bits preserved do not reach higher than 0.045 m. above the mosaic floor. However, large numbers of fragments of both green and white marble slabs were found in the bedding for the later tile pavement, as chinking in the late pier foundations and in the fill about these foundations, as well as in late fill under the tile pavement bedding along the north wall. It seems certain that the walls above the mosaic floor were revetted with at least a dado of marble, probably of green marbleslabswith a base borderof white marble. The third floor and the latest of the building, laid during the alteration of the early fifth century, was made of large tiles, ca. 0.63 m. square and 0.05 m. thick, set on a bedding made of large cobbles, tiles and poros bits laid in cement mortar and with ca. 0.05 m. of mortar on top as the immediate bedding for the tiles. This hard bedding was preserved in large sections of the northernpart of the build-

for this is a definite terminatingmotive in- ing, and much of it had to be removed to stead of the simplewhite borderthat joins the exposelowerlevels, but of the tiles themselves

THE SOUTHEASTBUILDING only two adjacent large pieces are in situ just to the north of the southern end pier of the western row (Pls. 13 3, 15 1) and one piece is under the late rubble wall just south of the central pier of the eastern row (P1. 4 3). This floor was ca. 0.76 m. above the top of the stylobate of the portico. COLONNADE

When the portico of the Southeast Building was excavated in 1915, part of the southernend of the stylobate of the colonnade was found in situ and a few pieces had been moved ca. 0.70 m. to the west. Of the four pieces of the stylobate preserved at this end, the northernmost one was in situ and the other three were moved back into place (P1. 15 3). The three southernmost step blocks, a stretch of ca. 4.35 m., were all in place, but of these the last one to the south had sagged into a collapsed drain and has subsequently been raised to be shored up and then replaced. Both the stylobate and the steps are made of a dark blue-gray limestone. The top of the stylobate is exactly level with that of the South Stoa; its west face forms a riser 0.31 m. high, the same as the riser of the step, which has a tread of 0.30 m. The Agora pavement was laid with its edge underneath the step, giving a base of only two steps to the colonnade in this second period. The stylobate was ca. 0.90 m. wide and the eastern face was irregularly cut (PI. 16 1). For a distance of 0.18 m. from its southern end the south stylobate block was cut back slightly where it was fitted against the South Stoa stylobate (P1. 16 2). The step beneath is rough on its face for ca. 0.28 m. farther to the north, the area of juncture with the South Stoa step. The stylobate in its present form shows clear signs of having been re-set. When Dr. Hill studied the three southernmost blocks before putting them back in place, he noted

that the third block from the south end had been cut down from a largerone. The south-

23

ernmost block has anathyrosis on its southern end, where it does not now make contact with another block but rather is flanked by the south wall of the portico. The two blocks at the south end have approximately the same length, ca. 1.45 m., but the third one is 0.67 m. long; the step blocks are all of differentlengths. Similar anomalies appear in the cornice. On this stylobate was set a series of Ionic columns made of white marble. The setting marks for two of the column bases are visible in the preserved stylobate; there is a circle ca. 0.75 m. in diameterwithin which are two dowel holes with pour channels leading to them from outside the circle (P1. 16 i). The dowel holes are set along a diameter parallel to the face of the stylobate and are ca. 0.17 m. from the edge of the circle. The interaxial distance is just 2.00 m. Between the circular setting marks for the bases, at least in the first two intercolumniations to the south, and along the center of the stylobate there are six small square holes (P1. 16 1) cut ca. 0.20 m. apart, which were the setting holes for grilles that filled at least the end intercolumniations and were set into the columns as well. Numerous fragments of the white marble Ionic columns and entablature were found in and aroundthe portico of the Southeast Building. These fragments were studied and a reconstructed drawing of the order of the colonnade (Plan II, 2) was made in 1932 by Joseph M. Shelley, then Special Fellow in Architecture at Corinth.The few fragmentsfound since, and the recent study of the remains, have caused no change in this reconstruction. The column base (P1. 16 2), fragments of three of which are preserved, is 0.223 m. high; it had a low circularplinth 0.74 m. in diameter and 0.048 m. high as its lower part and then the usual torus-scotia-torus moulding with fillets between. Cut in the top of the base were two dowel holes at ca. 0.10 m. from the edge with pour channels. The columns were monolithic, with a lower diameter of 0,52 m. and

24

CORINTH

the interaxial distance is again shown to be very close to two meters. The architraveis divided into three fasciae which increase in height towards the top. They do not, however, project one over the other, but rather have their bottom edges in a vertical line and their faces slopinginward.The crowning mouldingof the architraveis a straight-sided ovolo reducedto a vertical and a diagonal. The face of the frieze also slants inwardfor most of its height and then curves sharply outwardandendsin a narrowfilletsurmounted by an ovolo. None of these mouldingsis decorated,except for the inscriptionon the frieze, and the workmanshipis ratherpoor. As can be seenon the left handblockonPlate17 , the fasciae of the architravehave only their bottom and side edges dressedsmooth and the rest of the surface is left somewhat rough. Similarroughnessis to be seen on the crowning mouldingof the architraveas well as on the upperand loweredgesof the frieze. Fourteen fragmentsof the cornice of the colonnadeare preserved,but only two have both ends, and of these one is brokenin two. Oneotherpieceis almostcompletebut has one end chipped away. The corniceblocks vary greatly in workmanshipand also in material, for at least two kindsof marblewereused, one a finewhite stone, like that usedfor the architrave-frieze,and the other a coarse-grained marbleof grayish tone. Some of the cornice blocksaresmoothlydressed,whileothershave ratherroughsurfaces;many of the latter are cut from re-usedblocks and probablybelong to the repairalreadypostulatedbecauseof the re-set and re-cut stylobate blocks.Theirsize, too, is very uneven, for of the two complete blocks one is 0.70 m. long and the other, the brokenone, is 0.882m. long; the one with the chippedend was at least 1.03 m. long. Three corniceblocks have their smooth inner face preservedat least in part and the width of all but the crackis a few millimeterswide and so of them is approximately0.55 m. from the 35 West, Corinth, VIII, ii, p. 96, No. 122. fillet above the coronato the back face. The an upper diameter of 0.42 m., and were fluted for the upper two-thirds of their height and plain for the lower third (P1.16 4). Some of the fragments of the columns preserve the setting holes for the grilles, the lower one of which was at 0.64 m. above the top of the stylobate and the next one 0.628 m. above that; while no piece shows exactly the distance to the third cutting, it is assumed to be the same as the distance between the first and second, 0.628m., and this fits well the reconstruction of the column. There are no pieces preserved showing any holes farther up the column and it is possible that the grilles did not have a height of more than about two meters. The shaft of the column has been reconstructed with a height of 3.68 m. Only one Ionic capital (P1. 16 3) which had the proper dimensionsfor this order was found in the vicinity of the portico; its material and workmanshipagree with the other membersand it has been assumed to belong to these columns. The only unusual feature of the capital is the reef knot sculptured in low relief at the center of the otherwise plain bolster. The total height of the column with base and capital is 4.10 m., or eight diameters. Parts of at least four of the combination architrave and frieze blocks (P1. 17 i) are preserved and one is complete, though broken in two. Three of these blocks bear inscriptions on the frieze; two of them have long been known and the inscription has been published35and the third, giving the end of the inscription, was found recently. While the front, or west, face of these blocks is usually fairly well preserved, it is peculiarthat the east side has been almost completely defaced on all the preserved blocks, perhaps by fire. This face, exposed on the inside of the portico, has been reconstructed similar to the west face (Plan II, 2), as is usual, and the few bits of the east face that remain show that this is correct. The length of the complete architrave-friezeblockis 2.008 m.,

THE SOUTHEASTBUILDING carving of the cornices is no better than that of the architrave-frieze,and the blocks of grayish marble are somewhat cruder and seem certainly to have been added later. The mouldings seem to be only blocked out and unfinished and the surfaces are not well smoothed. Along the top of the straight-sided ovolo crown of the corona the marble has been very roughly hacked back for ca. 0.10 m. to 0.12 m., giving an uneven surface sloping upwardstowards the back (Fig. 3). There may originally have been a sima along the top, but if so it has been completely effaced.

.....

L

.

PLAN

L'LJ

JLJ I l'_-M ~

rectangle ca. 0.45 m. long and 0.84 m. wide (Fig. 8). It seems evident that there stood on this cornice block, as well as on the others with similar dowel holes, some kind of a rectangular plinth or base on which stood in turn sculptures or some other ornamental device. Such ornaments probably stood above each column, for with a colonnade of fourteen columns it would be difficult to make any other symmetrical arrangement.

From the description of the remains of the Southeast Building of the secondRoman period it is evident that, while the building underwent various repairs over the course of several centuries, its plan remained essentially the same. The building consisted always of three main elements (Fig. 4): 1) a portico along the

. . . . 2~~~.

\.~ ~~-ll~~ |JLJ-II

25

_0o

0

lo

20

30

|Mcm .

FIG. 3. DETAIL OF CORNICE BLOCK WITH SETTING FOR PEDESTAL

The cornicesare all flat on top except for the cut fore-edgejust described and so give no indication of the slope of the roof. On the tops of three of the preserved blocks there are dowel holes, ca. 0.04 m. square and cut to the same depth, two of which show a pour channel leading to the dowel holes, while the third one is only half preserved and the pour channel was probably on the missing fragment. One

FISTrU

FIG. 4. RECONSTRUCTED PLAN OF SECOND BUILDING

whole west side, and in the rear 2) a large room on the north and 3) a small chamber on the south. The portico had a marble Ionic colonnade along its west side, consisting of fourteen columns spaced with an interaxial distance of two meters, giving a total length of ca. 26.70m. The back wall of the portico, or the west wall

of theseblockshas anuppersurfacesufficiently of the othertwo divisionsof the building,had smoothto showlight markingsthat enclosea at least three differentdoorwayscut through

26

CORINTH

foundationblock in situ was used in a later pierandit, togetherwith the calculationsmade from the descriptionof the mosaicsfound in the northernpart of the room,indicatesthat the system of interior supports was always muchthe same,that is, two rowsof pierssupportingfour arches. It is interestingto note that the westernline of archesfalls exactly on the north-southaxis of the buildingand would thus have beenthe supportfor the ridgeof the roof. Besidesthe doorwaysalreadymentioned which connectedthis room with the portico, there was a wide doorwayopeninginto the southernroomandit is possiblethat therewas also a doorwayin the centerof the northwall which would have communicatedwith the main floor of the Julian Basilica.A doorway in the east wall is not precluded,for over much of its length only the foundationsare preserved. The southernroom is cut back 1.50 m. to the west at its easternend, giving the room interiordimensionsof 13.20 m. X 6.10 m. It has been so disturbedin Byzantinetimes that thereis little indicationof its interiorarrangement. The large doorwayconnectingit with the northernroom has been described;the doorwayconnectingit with the porticoseems to date fromthe periodof the tile floorand the doorwayin the south wall is still later and probablybelongsto the time when the room was divided into three small chamberswith wide doorwaysjoiningthem. Whilethe floorlevel of the porticoremained fixed at the level of the stylobate-in turn set by the height of the South Stoa stylobate-, the floorlevel inside the buildingrosein each successivephase.The firstfloor,level with the bottomof the orthostates,was 0.43 m. above the porticostylobate; the mosaicfloorof the second phase was 0.57 m. above the portico andthe tile floorof the thirdphasewas0.19m. higherthan the mosaicfloor.Thustherewould aisle was 4.00 m. wide and the western one alwayshave been steps in the porticoleading averagedca. 4.20 m. wide. The one earlierpier up to the rooms of the building.

it at various times to connect the portico with the rest of the building. This wall in its present form is believed to be a repair belonging to the second phase of the building, when the mosaic floor was laid, but one or more doorways must have existed in the first phase of this second Roman building. Of the extant doorways, the one at the northern end would seem to be the earliest and may belong with the period of the mosaic floor, though it seems to post-date the construction of the wall; that at the southern end probably belongs to the period of the tile floor, and the crude one at the center to an even later period. The south side of the portico seems always to have been closed off entirely by a wall that flanked the south end column and abutted on the east end column of the South Stoa. Along the south side of this wall, at a level higher than the floor of the portico, ran a road which led out of the South Stoa and rose to the east. The arrangementat the north end of the portico is not clear, but the existing foundations suggest a different arrangement from that at the south end. It seems that on the north side a wall behind the end column, ending in an anta, was in use in the second period as well as during the first. Such an arrangement, while not the best architectural practice even in the Roman period, would not have detracted from the effectiveness of the colonnade as a facade closing off the eastern end of the upper terrace of the Roman Agora. The north wall of the large northern room of the building was set back 1.60 m. from the north end of the portico. This was necessary to clear the south wall of the Julian Basilica at its eastern end. The interior dimensions of the room were 17.80 m. X 14.50 m. and it was divided by interior supports into three aisles running north-south the length of the room. In the latest phase of the building, the central aisle was ca. 5.10 m. wide, the eastern side

THE SOUTHEAST BUILDING

27

The name of the building probably preceded ET preserved on the large piece. If the con(by Oscar Broneer) jecture presented below concerning the purTwo Latin inscriptionsfound in and near the pose of the building is correct, the missing Southeast Building are significantfor the study word should be restored as TABULARIUM. The of the architectural remains. One of these (P1. first of the would then read: part inscription 17 1), the fragments of which came to light in BabbiusPhilinusliv] !r pont [ifex tabularium] the earlier campaigns, was published by A. B. [Gn. et porticumcoloni--. West36in 1931. It is cut on the frieze37of the This would occupy three and a half blocks colonnade in letters 0.10 m. high, which may out of the total thirteen, eleven of which were have been colored originally. A small fragment inscribed. The rest of the text is from the end of the inscription, discovered probably uncertain. within the building in 1947, preserves the let- quite The second inscription (P1. 17 2) is on a thin ters NIA probably from the word COLONIA. marble slab, several fragments of which were To the right of the last letter is an uninscribed found in the Southeast Building, in the Julspace of 0.31 m. The right end of the block has ian Basilica and in the surrounding area.38 a right angle joint with anathyrosis, and conThe slab is 0.013-0.017 m. thick, of white sequently would not have come at the corner. marble with bluish horizontal veins, highly We may thus assume that there was at least which the slab breaks easily. one whole architrave-friezeblock with no let- micaceous, along Several faults of a different kind run almost ters adjoining the preserved end of the new the stone. The break leaves block. Another block, 0.82 m. long, shown at vertically through an obtuse angle at the right edge of the fragthe left side on Plate 171 is also uninscribed. ments and a correspondingacute angle at the Its right end is preserved, and it probably beleft edge as seen from the front. Thus the slab longs to the first intercolumniationat the north tends to break up into roughly rectangular end. Apparently there was an uninscribed pieces, but, of course, there are other breaks length at either end of 2.30 m. or more, making not following the faults in the marble. The the inscribed section in the middle of the faslab was cut by a saw leaving an even surface Cadenot more than about twenty-two meters on the back, smooth in spots and slightly long. The combined length of the inscribed rough in most places. pieces is 3.15 m., less than one-eighth the total The upper edge, which is preserved on four length of the architrave-frieze and about one- of the fragments, is straight and smoothly seventh of the possible inscribed length acfinished. One small fragment is from the left cording to the above calculation. of the slab and one from the right. Both West's conjectured text would have to be edge these edges show traces of red color applied on modified to fit the new fragment which is from the roughly tooled block before it was sawn the end of the inscription. The important coninto slabs, and some of the letters retain red clusion which West drew from the fragments is that Gn. Babbius Philinus, who held the coloring. There are also faint traces of mortar the edges, which may be from the orititles both of duumvir and pontifex, was the along donor of the building together with its portico. ginal setting of the slab on the wall, but some of the mortar adhering to the joints must be 36Corinth,VIII, ii, p. 96, No. 122. Inventory Nos. 677 + from later uses. 932 + 36 + 2245. INSCRIPTIONS

37 The fragments as seen on Plate 171 are not in their proper order. The second fragment from the right end, preserving the letters R. PONT, should come before any of the other inscribed blocks, as shown in West's restoration,

38Inv. Nos.: a = 2225c + 690 + 581; b = 2225a and b + 579; c = 626 + 587 + 588; d = 2225d and e; e = 2225f; f = 1200 + 1202a-e; g = 2229; h = 2058; i = 636.

28

CORINTH

If the inscriptionwas cut on a singleslab it must have been more than a meter long, and probablywell over 0.50 m. high. Theremight have been two slabs with a verticaljoint, but this is less likely sinceno suchjoints appearon any of the fragments.Therewereat leastthree, probablyfour or morelines in the inscription. In the firstline the letters are 0.08 m. high, in

Oneimportantpiece of informationmay be derivedfrom one of the smallerpieces of the slab. In the lowerright comer of Plate17 2has been placedfragmenti containingthe letters IPTA,probablyfromthe wordscripta.From this

evidencewe may conjecturethat the building was used to house some kind of writingsand was thus either a library or, more probably, Its position in the upper the second (preserved) 0.065 m., in the third the Tabularium.41 0.06 m. The spacesbetweenthe lines alsovary. Agora, close to the other civic buildingsof Onlythe first line can be restoredwith any the colony, would make such a designation kind of certainty: suitable (see above p. 12). [Gn. B]abbiu[s]Cn. F. Aem. [At]ta![us(?)]

This is the only inscriptionfrom Corinthin whichthe nameof Gn. Babbiusis followedby the names of his father and tribe. This Babbius is probablythe son of the well known benefactorwho erectedthe circularmonument at the west end of the Agora,and-if West's conjecturebe accepted-donated the building underdiscussion. I have suggestedon the basisof the existing letters that the youngBabbius'cognomenwas Attalus,39but this is hardlymorethan a guess. That the three letters in fragmentc (upper right cornerof P1. 17 2) are part of the cognomenis most likely, but there are doubtless other possibilities. Since most of the fragments were found inside the building,some packedin with the fill aroundthe pier of the late, fifth century, reconstruction,the inscriptionwas probably appliedon the wall of the mainhall. We may assume that it refers to the interior reconstructionthat took placeaboutthe turn of the century. If the originalconstructionwas the gift of the father Gn. Babbius Philinus, it would not be remarkableif his son, who had Romancitizenshipin Corinth'stribe,40should have paid for its restorationsome fifty years later. 39This name appears on another small fragment found in the vicinity of the Southeast Building (Corinth, VIII, ii, No. 173). 40 This is indicated by the name of the tribe Aemilia, which was the tribe of the colony (see Corinth,VIII, ii, p. 88).

CHRONOLOGY

In discussing the chronologyof the first Roman building on the site (p. 13) it was shown that its destructionmust be dated in the time of Tiberiusor slightly later. It was also assumedthat the erectionof the second building,now underdiscussion,musthave followedshortlythereafter,still withinthe second quarterof the first century after Christ.Althoughno evidencefor closerdatinghas come from the excavationsof this building,some otherconsiderationssupportwell a date in the secondquarterof the century.Of first importance is the use of a dark base for the colonnade, which was otherwiseof white marble. The other outstanding examples of such a combinationat Corinthare the Bema and the Babbiusmonument,both of whichhave been dated by Scrantonto this same quartercentury.42The similaritywith the BabbiusMonumentis particularlyinterestingsince,as stated above,it has alreadybeen suggestedby West in his publicationof the inscriptionon the frieze of the colonnade43that Babbius may havebeenthe donorof the SoutheastBuilding, whichwouldseemto necessitatea date for the 41It would be tempting to restore the letters of fragment c as tab[ularius, but this would presuppose that there was space enough for the cognomen before the occurrence of the title, and this would make the slab unduly long in view of its extreme thinness. 42 Corinth, I, iii, pp. 64, 130. 43Corinth,VIII, ii, p. 96, No. 122.

THE SOUTHEASTBUILDING

buildingbeforethe middleof the first century after Christ. The buildingseems to have remainedunchangedfor overa half century,but then some damageappearsto have necessitatedthe complete rebuildingof the north, west and south walls and of the colonnade,and perhapsalso of the upper part of the other walls. It was after this rebuildingthat the mosaicfloorwas laid in the north roomof the building,and to this periodbelongsinscriptiontwo above (P1. 17 2). Much evidence for the date of these mosaics can be derived from a comparative study, for the geometric motives used here have many parallelsin Greeceand Italy. The basis for any comparativestudy of Roman mosaicsis now the three large studiesby Marion Blake, dealing first with pavements of Italy in the Republicand EarlyEmpireto the end of the first centuryafter Christ,then with the mosaicsof the secondcenturyafterChrist, and lastly with those of the Late Empire.44 No such study has been madefor Romanmosaics in Greece,wherewe shouldexpect our closest similarities.Indeed,it is in Corinthitself that we find other examplesof several of the motives in the SoutheastBuildingmosaics. The first motive which can be paralleledin Corinthis the borderof alternatingcirclesand diamondsin the southwest panel (Pls. 13 3, 14 3). A very similarborder,with almostidentical fillingdesignsin the circlesand diamonds, occurs in one of the mosaics of the Roman housebuilt aboveand to the east of the South Basilica (Pls. 53, 55)45. Since this house used the east wall of the South Basilicaas part of its construction,it must post-date the latter and so dates after the middleof the first century after Christ.The borderof diamondsand circles, this time filled with crosses only, occursagainin the RomanVillaat Corinth,46 and 44M.A.A.R., VIII, 1930, pp. 11-159; XIII, 1936, pp. 67-214; XVII, 1940, pp. 81-130. 46 Broneer, A.J.A., XXXIX, 1935, p. 61, pl. XVII, 1. 46 Shear, Corinth, V, pl. X.

29

the diamonds filled with crosses occur as an all-over pattern in another mosaic in the same villa.47The mosaics of the Roman Villa were thought by the excavator to be Hellenistic,48 but Miss Blake has pointed out one prominent element, the pelta motive,49 which does not occur anywhere else before the early part of the first century after Christ,50and suggests that the mosaics in general are later than the mosaics of Delos or the early Pompeian floors. The only other parallel to the motives in this border occurs in a Roman house at Eleusis, where a small panel in a few doorways is decorated with a diamond in which is a cross in white with a square at its center.51While no date has been proposed for this house, a brief survey of the motives employed in the mosaics shows them all to be of the first century and the mosaics are probably to be dated in the second half of that century. For the main motive in the southwest panel, the hexagons developed into interlacing dodecagons, I have been able to find no parallel in Greece, but it is well known in Italy, where Miss Blake reports several examples, all of the first century after Christ,52except one example which she suggests is an early second century elaboration of the same type.53Hexagons with swastika filling occur in the first century,54but much more often the swastikas are in squares. The swastika motive seems to have been much less popular in the second century and Miss Blake illustrates but one example of its use.55 Nowhere do I find any parallel for the squares inscribed in hexagons which occur in a few instances in this southwest panel, but there is Ibid., pl. III. Ibid., p. 26. 49Ibid,. pls. VIII, X. 60 M.A.A.R., VIII, 1930, p. 117. '51 Tpo-rtK&,1936, p. 37, fig. 3. I am indebted to Mr. J. Travlos for allowing me the use of the original photographs of these mosaics for study purposes. 52 M.A.A.R., VIII, 1930, p. 113, pls. 23,4; 39,4; 40,3; 41,4; Notizie, 1926, p. 382, fig. 1. 53M.A.A.R., XIII, 1936, 104, p. pl. 28,4. 54 M.A.A.R., VIII, 1930, pl. 14,4. 65M.A.A.R., XIII, 1936, pl. 22,2. 47 48

CORINTH

30

one exampleof secondcenturydatewhichhas apparentlyunknown before the second censquaresinscribedin octagons.56 tury.68 The centralmotiveof the south-centralpanThe small fragmentwith interlacingcircles a is the common which befrom the centralpanelof the northside has a el, shield, pattern came popularin Italy in the first century,57 patternwhichis identicalin designand color and it continued so in the next century.58 with that in a panel above and in part of the Thereare,however,somegoodexamplesof its borderaboutthe shieldmosaicfromtheRoman use in Greece,one of the best of them being Villa.69Oneof the roomsin the villa at Eleusis from the RomanVilla at Corinth,59 for which also uses the same motive as an all-overpatwe have alreadysuggesteda firstcenturydate. tern,70and it occursas well in one roomof the A very similarshieldwas foundin a largeRo- baths on the Kladeosat Olympia.71 manbath in the Peiraeus,60 whichis alsodated The two panels at the southernend of the by coins to the first century.6'Yet another main roomof the SoutheastBuildingseem to shieldwas foundin the largebath to the east have been laid at the same time, as far as can of the temenos of Apollo at Delphi,62but no be determinedfrom the rather fragmentary date is suggestedby the excavators. juncture(PI.15 i), andso shouldbe considered The other main motive, or combinationof togetherin this stylistic analysis.Considering motives, in the central panel, the octagons the manyparallelsthat have beencitedfor the with crossesdevelopedinto eight-pointedstars, variousgeometricmotives employedin them, is not a commonpattern,but there are a few it wouldseemthat the mosaicsmusthavebeen instancesof similardesigns.From Anconain made at the end of the first centuryor in the Italy there is one pavement which has not early part of the secondcentury. A smallamountof externalevidenceis availonly this pattern,but also has a shield at the center.63This mosaicMiss Blake would date, able to supporta date in the earlysecondcenon stylistic grounds,to the secondcentury.In turyforthis secondphaseof the secondRoman a mosaicfromRiminitherearethe sameeight- building.At two points behindthe top founpointed stars built on crosses,but combined dation course of the west wall and the first with hexagonsratherthan octagonsand with wall course were found small fragments of no shield at the center.6 The excavatordates Type xxvII lamps (P1.17 3), one of whichbethe mosaic in the first or second century65 longs to the early group of this type which but Miss Blake prefersa date in the second ProfessorBroneerhas dated in the beginning of the secondcentury72and the otheris probcentury.66 The wide interlacethat occursin this panel ably of the second quarter of the century. is best paralleledin the large mosaic from Furtherevidencecomesfrom the pit and the Nero'sPalace at Olympia,67 but in Italy it is road to the south of the south portico wall, wherein the former,evidently dug and filled 66Ibid., pl. 20,1. 57M.A.A.R., VIII, 1930, pp. 115-117, pl. 38; Notizie, afterthe deepfoundationhad been built,were 1942, p. 371. 8 M.A.A.R., XIII, 1936, pls. 13,2; 14,2; 17,2; 24. found fragmentsof three Type xxvII lamps 59 Corinth,V, pl. X. with reliefs on their discus (P1. 17 3). All of 60 'ET. 'Apx., 1894, pp. 99-112, pl. 4; Tfpac-nKT , 1892, these are from lamps of good workmanship pp. 17-29. 61 Ibid., p. 26. that belongearlyin the reliefseries,most like62 Bourguet, Les ruines de Delphes, p. 287, fig. 96. 63 4

66

M.A.A.R., XIII, 1936, p. 194, pl. 7,2. Notizie, 1929, pl. VI. Ibid., p. 150.

66M.A.A.R., XIII, 1936, p. 194. Olympia, Tafelband II, Berlin, 1892-1896, pls. CVIII-CX. 67 Curtius-Adler,

68M.A.A.R., XIII, 1936, p. 90.

69 Corinth, V, pl. X. 70 npaorKtK, 1936, p. 40, fig. 9. 71 72

Olympia, II, pl. CXI. Corinth, IV, ii, p. 95.

THE SOUTHEAST BUILDING

ly in the time of Hadrian or a bit later, and this gives a terminus ante quem which again suggests the second quarter of the second century as the time of the rebuilding of the second Roman building. This building probably remained in a good state of repair for a long time, but at some time before the tile floor was laid the mosaic was already being destroyed. In the central panel of the south side there was sunk a small pithos (P1. 15 1), the bottom of which remained in place when the tile floor was put over it, and in the pithos was found a coin of Constantius Chlorus,A.D. 293-306. In the west aisle of the building, just north of the mosaic panel, and in fill closed over by the tile pavement, was a small part of a pithos filled with carbonized matter in which was found a group of fourteen bronze coins which covered the period from Diocletian, A.D. 284-305, to ConstantiusII, A.D. 324-361.73 Whatever the depredations to the building, it was completely refurbishedat the beginning of the fifth century. Apparently it had collapsed sufficiently to necessitate the rebuilding of the interior piers, including their foundations. At that time the marble revetment of the earlierphase of the buildingwas ripped off, if it had not already largely fallen off, and broken pieces of marble were used to chink the piers and to fill the pits about them. In the fill about the piers were found a couple of coins of Constantius II, A.D. 324-361, and one of Theodosius I, A.D. 379-395. Part of this same program was the tile floor, which can be dated 73 For an account of the building and its possible use in Early Christian and Byzantine times, see Scranton, Corinth, XVI, pp. 12, 41-42, 75, 126, 130.

31

first by a coin of Honorius, A.D. 395-423, and also by a large piece of a Type xxviiI lamp (P1. 17 4) which Professor Broneer tells me cannot date before ca. A.D. 400. Thus it seems clear that this third phase of the building begins early in the fifth century. Laterstill, and aftersufficienttime to allowthe tile floor to fall into disrepair,the rubble walls between the piers were added. The colonnade did not last beyond the latter part of the sixth century, for the architrave-frieze fragment with the end of the inscription was found in a large pit dug in the west aisle of the building, imbedded in fill in which was found a coin of Justin, A.D. 518-526, restruck by Justinian, A.D. 527-565. It is doubtful that the building retained much of its old form after this, for during the seventh and eighth centuries,when numismatic evidence shows Corinth to have been almost completely deserted,74 its ruin must have been completed. Yet enough remained to serve as part of Byzantine buildings, constructed here as early as the late ninth century. By the late tenth century the west wall was apparently down to its presentheight. In the twelfth century three large pits were dug in the northern part of the western aisle; a Turkishpit cut away the cornerof the southwestern panel of the mosaic. But despite continuous occupation of the site for centuries, enough of the Roman buildings remained to afford the excavators material sufficient to allow a reconstructionin general, and in some part even in detail, of the two buildings which during the Roman period successively formed the eastern border of the upper Agora terrace at Corinth. 74Harris, Hesperia, X, 1941, p. 159.

PART II THE TWIN BASILICAS

CHAPTER

I

THE JULIAN BASILICA INTRODUCTION While the Southeast Building just described borderedthe Upper Agora in Corinthfrom the first century B.C. to the end of the Roman Period, the Lower Agora may have had no monumental Roman building at its eastern end until about the middle of the first century after Christ, when the structure now known as the Julian Basilica was built. The planning for its construction was seen (p. 13) to have involved the rebuilding of the adjacent Southeast Building, largely because of the necessity of moving the latter's northern wall about 1.60 m. to the south to make more room for the Julian Basilica. The exact position of the south wall of the Julian Basilica, which was accommodated in this rather drastic and expensive way, would seem to have been dictated by the largerconsiderationsof over-allplanning of the Agora. The orientation of the building agrees with none of the adjacent structures, but aligns only with the buildings opposite it on the west side of the Agora (Plan X); it is possible, however, that its orientation was dictated by that of an earlier structure on the site, for which there are scant indications. It is notable that the southwest comer of the Julian Basilica is so placed that it is just slightly to the south of a line sighted along the fronts of the Central Shops (P1.18 1). Thus its fa9ade completely filled the field of vision of a person looking eastward across the Lower Agora; its southwest corner and the rather awkward relation with the colonnade of the Southeast Building were masked by the circular monument at the east end of the Central Shops,

already built in the first century B.c.1 The northern corner of the west fagade was not adjacent to the stoa south of Peirene, for the second stoa on this site, built in the first decades of the first century after Christ,2 was moved 1.80 m. to the north of its predecessor,3 and when the Julian Basilica was erected there remained about 2.50 m. between the corners of the two structures. Here the road that ran along the north side of the Julian Basilica would have been visible from the eastern end of the LowerAgora,but as one proceededwest of the Propylaea the view of it was increasingly restricted by the stoa south of Peirene (PlanX). Like the Southeast Building, a bit of the Julian Basilica was also uncovered by Trench VII in 1896, the first year of the American excavations at Corinth.4 Almost the entire building was cleared by Carl W. Blegen and Emerson H. Swift in the fall of 1914 and the spring and summer of 1915, the same campaigns which saw the excavation of the Southeast Building. Post-Roman constructions not only had penetrated to the floor of the cryptoporticus of the Julian Basilica, but in the west aisle, especially, had gone below it. The excavators cleared the cryptoporticus almost completely and found the original fill of the core of the building so disturbed that they dug this area, too, to about the same level, the hardpan floor of the original great cutting into which the edifice was set. Later, in 1931, Jul1 Corinth, I, iii, p. 127. 2 Ibid., p. 150. s Ibid., p. 138. 4 Corinth, I, i, p. 7, fig. 3.

36

CORINTH

ian H. Whittlesey dug four small pits back of the east wall. He drew plans, sections and details of this building; his sections have been adapted for use here (Plan III, 1). It was not until the spring of 1937 that the modern road which crossed the Agora diagonally could be cut, and then the northwest corner of the Julian Basilica was finally excavated5 under the supervision of the author, who did not return to the study of this building until the spring of 1948. At that time the area was entirely cleaned and investigations to the east of the east wall of the building were carried out, resulting in the discovery of the exedras, thus completing the identity of the Julian Basilica and the South Basilica.6 The late constructions over the area of the central exedra were investigated in a trench dug in the summer of 1950,7 and it was during that summer that the study of the reconstruction of the twin basilicas was carried out and drawings of the reconstruction and of many details were made by Edward B. Reed. The excavated area of the Julian Basilica is roughly 40 m. square, including not only the building itself with its porch and exedras but also a strip of two to seven meters to the east, except in the very southern part, and a narrow strip to the north. The building is borderedon the south by the Southeast Building; on the west it faces the open expanse of the Lower Agora. Along the north ran a road which rose from the level of the Agora to that of the road along the east side of the building, some three meters higher (P1. 27 3). Not much of this road to the north could be cleared as the retaining wall for the modern road which was detoured around the building had to be erected just back of the north wall of the Julian Basilica (P1. 18 1). The modern road to the east of the building rises gradually toward its south end and comes steadily closer 5 The plan in A.J.A., XLIII, 1939, p. 256, fig. 1, shows the area of the Julian Basilica excavated in 1937. 6 Weinberg, Hesperia, XVIII, 1949, pp. 154-157. 7 Broneer, Hesperia, XX, 1951, pp. 299-300.

to the east wall of the building, with the result that it was impossible to cut back the very high, almost vertical, scarp that was left over the southern part of this wall (P1. 18 2) and to expose it entirely. Thus the eastern half of some five meters at the southern end of the east wall, as well as half of the southern exedra, is not exposed, but otherwise the whole of the Roman building has been cleared. The road along the north side of the Julian Basilica (P1. 27 3) runs up the west side of a ridge extending roughly north-south on the east side of the Peirene hollow (P1. 18 1).8Into the side of this ridge a cutting was made for the building; at the western edge some filling had to be done to level the area. The level of the Greek Agora had been lower than the floor of the cryptoporticus and, where it can be seen in places, hardpan is 1.50 m. below the top of the toichobate of the west outer wall. But hardpan rose rapidly to the east, and the excavators remarked that in places hardpan had been cut down ca. 0.10-0.20 m. for the west core wall, while on the east side of the core it rose to ca. 0.15 m. below the top of the first course of the core wall. To the east of the Julian Basilica hardpan is level with the top of the third course of the outer wall at its northern end, is ca. 1.00 m. higher at the center, where it is within the level of the fifth course, and in the south exedra it is only ca. 0.30 m. below the top of the sixth course. On the south side of the building hardpan is level with the top of the third course in the middle of the south wall, and at the east end it rises again almost to the top of the sixth course (P1. 20 1). On the east of the Julian Basilica there is possibly an older cutting in hardpan with a slightly different orientation from the building itself. At the north end it is cut back ca. 1.10 m. from the back of the east wall (P1.211), but it comes close to the wall at about the

south side of the central exedra and is then 8

Corinth, I, iii, p. 133.

THE JULIAN BASILICA

37

cut for the wall. This cutting goes down to bate the face of the cutting in hardpanflares the bottom of the toichobate course, but at out a bit towardsthe west, ca. 0.10 m. where a point ca. 1.54 m. above the top of the toicho- it is best preserved.

PRE-BASILICAREMAINS IN THE AREA The deep cutting into the side of the ridge for the cryptoporticus of the Julian Basilica has obliterated most earlier remains in all but the western part of the area. Some indications of what has been lost was given in the investigations just to the east of this cutting that were carried out in 1948. Between the central and the south exedras there were found three roughlyrectangularcuttings into hardpan,filled with Byzantine refuse except for the southernmost, on the bottom of which there remained some 0.20 m. of Mycenaean fill, the only undisturbedMycenaeandeposit yet found in Corinth.9The cuttings are probably to be interpreted as the substructures of a Mycenaean building; the rich pottery suggests that it was one of some importance. Here, then, are the first clear indications of the Mycenaean settlement at Corinth, which is to be looked for on the north-south ridge into the side of which the cutting for the Julian Basilica was made. Numerous wells, which penetrated deeper into the hardpan than did the cutting for the building, remain to tell of the continous settlement of the area; they may be assumed to have belonged to houses. The earliest of these, located in the southwest corner of the core of the later building (Plan IV), was filled within the first half of the sixth century B.C.10The oldest well in the adjacent Southeast Building was filled in the third quarter of the same century (p. 4); together they indicate settlement of the slope of the ridge at least from the sixth century on. To the fifth century belong 9 Weinberg, op. cit., pp. 155-157. For a more detailed plan of the area and photographs of the pottery and other objects see op. cit., pls. 21-24. 10Weinberg, Corinth, VII, i, pp. 74, 77-80.

the well which had been cut through the wall and the Mycenaean deposit just mentioned, the well in the eastern half of the south aisle of the cryptoporticus, and also the well in the western half of the south aisle, from which came some fine red-figuredpottery of the second half of the fifth century. Probably of Hellenistic date are the well at about the center of the east aisle in the line of bases, one of which was removed from over the well (Plan IV), the cistern to the east of this well and the pit to the west of it within the aisle. In the cistern was found a coin of Philip I (A.D. 244-249), which apparentlyfound its way in during some late reconstructions in the cryptoporticus. The well near the center of the east side of the core was also Hellenistic, as may have been the well to the south of it; the upper part of the latter was refilled with poros chips at the time of the construction of the Julian Basilica. It can be assumed, then, that houses very likely occupied much of this area down to the end of the Greek city in 146 B.C.

But already in the fourth century, perhaps even at the end of the fifth, public constructions of the Greek Agora were beginning to encroach in this area. The earliest of these is the first of two starting lines for a race track that was laid out through the Agora (P1.19 1).11 Only ca. 1.50 m. of its length was revealed in a late cutting that went through its successor (Plan IV), but if it was as long as the latter it would have extended under the porch of the Julian Basilica, possibly as far as, if not beyond, its west wall. With so little exposed, its date must remain uncertain pending further 11

Morgan, A.J.A., XLI, 1937, p. 550.

38

CORINTH

investigation of the Greek levels of the Agora, but its orientation is similar to that of many Greek buildings of the late fifth and fourth centuries, and recent excavations have shown that this orientation was established as early as the Geometric period.l2 The orientation of the Greek Agora was changed, and that of the Hellenistic and Roman Agora set, by the building of the South Stoa in the third quarter of the fourth century B.C.13 At the eastern end

of this differently oriented Hellenistic Agora a new starting line was laid out,14 and this has been almost entirely cleared (P1. 19 1); its date must be late fourth or third century B.C.15 and it seems to have remained in use until 146 B.c. Of special interest here is the fact that the Julian Basilica is exactly parallel to this second starting line, as are also the temples and shops on the west side of the Lower Agora (Plan X). The starting line is not oriented with the South Stoa or the parallel Greek Stoa in the area of the easternhalf of the CentralShops. The implication is that already in the late fourth or third century B.c. there existed structures at one or both ends of the Lower Agora which determined the line of the race course. Only the North Building, of fifth century date, built to the north and down in the Lechaion Road hollow, has the same orientation. On the West Terrace no formal architectural development took place before the beginning of the second century B.C., when a terrace wall was

built about on the line of the front of the foundations of the later Roman buildings,'6 therefore parallel to the second starting line. It was this orientation that was preserved in Morgan, Hesperia, XXII, 1953, pp. 131-140. See Broneer, Corinth, I, iv, pp. 7-12, for the remains in the area of the South Stoa, shown especially on plans I, III, IV, VI; also see above p. 4 for a house in the area of the Southeast Building. Scranton, Corinth, I, iii, pp. 74-76, 124-125, 133134, sketches the development of the Greek Agora in this period. 13Corinth, I, iii, pp. 76, 134. See Broneer, Corinth, I, iv, pp. 94-98, for the date. 14 Morgan, A.J.A., XLI, 1937, pp. 549-550. 12

'1 Ibid., p. 550.

16 Corinth, I, iii, pp. 6, 64.

the temples of the West Terrace as well as in the West Shops. Just as the orientation of this whole western complex in Roman times seems to have been dictated by the axis of the most dominant feature to the west of the Agora, Temple E, the first Roman construction of which goes back to Claudian times,17 so it seems necessary to assume that the same orientation in Hellenistic times was fixed by a Greek predecessor of Temple E with the same or a parallel axis. Abundant late archaic remains in the area of Temple E, especially the terracotta sculptural decorationfor a temple,18may indicate the date of such an early temple, but no traces of it have yet been found in situ. Returning again to the east side of the Lower Agora, the parallelism of the second starting line and the Julian Basilica may be explained by the existence of some Hellenistic structure with the same orientation which survived long enough to transmit the axis after the starting line had been buried, for no part of it was visible after the Roman colony was founded, certainly not as late as the time of the construction of the Julian Basilica. With so much of the terrain removed for the levelling operations that preceded the erection of the basilica, there was little hope of learning of such a structure, but the foundations of the west and north outer walls of the Roman buildingaredifferentin characterfrom the other foundations (see pp. 41-42) and are perhaps to be assigned to terrace walls of Hellenistic date, one built a little more than three meters back from the starting line, probably as the eastern limit of the Agora19and offering another vantage point for spectators of the races that took place here, the other perhaps a retaining wall along the road to the north of the area. Swift noted in 1915 that a wide cutting east of the west outer wall, along its central 17

Corinth, I, ii, p. 233. Weinberg, Hesperia, XXVI, 1957, pp. 291-292. 19 Morgan, A.J.A., XLI, 1937, p. 549.

18

THE JULIAN BASILICA

part behind the porch, was earlier than the wall and yielded Greek pottery. It is 1.30 m. wide and is parallel to the wall. It could have been for an earlier terrace wall than that postulated in the position of the west wall of the Basilica. The Hellenistic wells in the east cryptoporticus suggest that the Agora ended here and the area to the east was still given over to domestic use. The absence of wells in both the north and west aisles of the Julian Basilica, while they are fairly abundant in the rest of the area, suggests that some public structure occupied these areas adjacent to the Agora and the road out from it, but no remains other than those for the postulated terrace walls exist to give any clue concerning them. The only construction within the area of the Julian Basilica which antedates the building itself is the line of three blocks in the north end of the core, the orientation of which is slightly different from that of the building itself (Plan IV). They stand alone and thus are inexplicable. It has been suggested that the difference in orientation between the deep cutting in hardpan to the east of the building and the building itself (P1.21 1) may be due to the fact that the cutting was earlier and was re-used.

39

There is no evidence to support such a conclusion; the one fragmentary wall is not perpendicular to the cutting and so cannot be connected with it. The cutting may very likely have been made for the construction of the Julian Basilica and then found to be slightly askew when the building itself was more carefully laid out. There were a few bits of Greek fill still found on the hardpan within the area of the core of the later building. The area may have continued to be inhabited after the foundation of the Roman colony in 44 B.C., for the well near the northeast corner of the core, over which a large block was later set, was filled in Roman times and in it were many coins from the reign of Augustus. The road that rose toward the east along the north side of the Julian Basilica also was in existence before the erection of the building (P1.27 3),for the hard roadfill was cut out for the construction of the north wall. Coins found in these roadlayers that were so cut are of greatest importance for the date of the building. They include Corinth duoviri coins of A.D. 23-49 and A.D. 30-49, thus giving a terminus post quem of A.D. 30 for the erection of the Julian Basilica.

THE ROMANBASILICA At the time it was excavated, in 1914-1915, the Roman building at the east end of the Lower Agora, which was very soon named the Julian Basilica because of the fine series of portraits of the Julian family found in it, was one of the best preserved structures of the period at Corinth. With its simple rectangular plan, its cryptoporticus running right around a filled rectangular core, with the walls of the cryptoporticus preserved in places to the top course with the beam cuttings for the supports of the floor of the main storey, and with many elements of the architecture of the upper part as well as of the sculpture that had been within

the building, the Julian Basilica was one of the most understandable, interesting and important remainsfrom Roman Corinth.20It was twenty years later, in the spring of 1934, that the excavation of the South Basilica and the realization that the two were twins21further elucidated the remains of the Julian Basilica. When the porch of the latter was found during the excavation of 1937 and the exedras appeared in the investigations of 1948, the identity was complete and it seemed obvious that the two must be studied together as each 20 21

Fowler, Art and Archaeology,XIV, 1922, pp. 207-209. Broneer, A.J.A., XXXIX, 1935, p. 60 and n. 2.

40

CORINTH

contributed much to the understanding of the other and taken together the remainsno longer in situ provided ample evidence for a reconstruction. While the South Basilica preserves even more of its cryptoporticusthan does the Julian Basilica, it was only in the south exedra of the latter that any part of the structure of the main storey of either of these buildings was found still in situ. The remains will therefore be described in three parts: the foundations, the ground floor or cryptoporticus, and the main storey. In both buildings the remains in situ give a quite complete picture of the ground floor or cryptoporticus (Plan IV), the elements of which are very simple and reflect an equally simple arrangement above (Plan VII). The essential elements are a large outer rectangle, the inner dimensions of which are 38.45 m. by 23.55 m. (measuredfrom inner wall faces), and a smaller rectangle, the core, with outer dimensions of 26.66 m. by 11.77 m.; the width of the latter is thus exactly half the inner width of the building (Plan IV). This leaves an aisle, the cryptoporticus, between the two rectangles; it has a width of 5.90 m. on the south and west and 5.85 m. on the north and east. Extending beyond the larger rectangle there is a porch centered on the west side, traces of the foundations of which have been found, runningin part over the second starting line (P1. 19 i). These are so fragmentary that the porch must be reconstructed on the analogy of the better preserved porch of the South Basilica, but the foundations for the sides of the porch of the Julian Basilica suggest that it had a width of possibly as much as 8.00 m., perhaps even a little more, as compared with 7.65 m. for the porch of the South Basilica. As will be suggested below (p. 68), the porch of the latter was probablyplanned to be this wide, but was later cut off on one side, apparently to line up with an earlier Greek shop wall, and

way of the porch began at about 7.00 m. in front of the west wall of the building (P1. 19 1, extreme left). On the opposite side, outside of the east wall, were three rectangular exedras, which again must be restored on the analogy of the better preserved ones in the South Basilica. The large central exedra (P1.24 1, 2) has been built over three, or perhaps even four, times, but the later north wall seems to be in the same position as the Roman wall. One block of the east wall seems still to be in situ (P1. 25 1) and a rubble bedding for the foundation of the south wall, laid in the northernmost of the three Mycenaean pits, shows that this exedra was the same size as its counterpart in the South Basilica, 9.25 m. by 3.10 m. in outer dimensions. Of the smaller side exedras, that on the south is well preserved, but only its northernhalf could be exposed (P1.25 3; Plan IV); for the northern exedra small foundations were set in the gap between the east wall and the cutting for it in hardpan (P1.21 1; Plan IV). Together they show that the side exedras were about 5.00 m. by 2.00 m. in outer dimensions, again like those of the South Basilica. Inside the cryptoporticus there were central supports on the long axis of each aisle and bases for several of these remain in place (Pls. 21 2, 22 1, 2; Plan IV). The two very large column drumsin the south aisle (P1.22 i), in the line of the east and west walls but not on the axis of the aisles, are later additions; earlier columns on the axis of both the north and south aisles and in line with the east and west walls must be restored on the analogy of those in the South Basilica. Because of the fact that the building was set in a great cutting in hardpan, which rises considerably from west to east and somewhat from north to south as well, and because the west wall falls outside of this cutting and in an area where the Greek Agora pavements were considerably lower than the floor of the

thereforewas not exactly on the center;that cryptoporticus,and was probablyprecededby of the JulianBasilicawas centered.The stair- a terracewall in Hellenistictimes, the nature

THE JULIAN BASILICA of the foundations and the treatment of the exterior of the ground floor walls vary considerably. As we have seen, an ancient road ran along the east side at about the level of the top of the ground floor,but probably sloping up to the south, so that the outer face of the east cryptoporticuswall was almost entirely buried, most of it being set in the cutting in hardpan. Likewise, the entire south wall was buried, for the narrow space between the Julian Basilica and the Southeast Building was certainly filled in to the level of the main floor of each, which were at about the same level. On the north the road out of the Agora started at about the level of the bottom of the wall, but it must have reached the level of at least the top of the third outer wall course by the time it reached the east end of the north wall, which thus was half exposed, half buried; it continued to rise to the east to meet the road along the east side. The west side was in full view from the Agora, with only a part of the lower floor covered by the porch. In the main floor, all the walls were above ground, but on the south the Southeast Building came close to the Julian Basilica, most of the south fa9ade of which could thus never have been fully appreciated. There seems to have been ample room on both east and north where there were roads, but certainly the west side on the Agora was the main fagade of the Julian Basilica at all times.

41

high throughout and it extends inward from the inner wall face ca. 0.11-0.12 m. In the northeast and southwest corners there are clearly visible L-shaped toichobate blocks with arms ca. 0.49-0.52 m. long, measured from the inner corner (P1. 25 2). While the southeast cornerhas been built over, it has been possible to ascertain that here too a single cornerblock exists, the eastern arm of which is 0.49 m. (the southern arm cannot be measured). Such a block must certainly have existed in the northwest corner as well. Similar L-shaped angle stones were not found in the South Basilica. On many of the toichobate blocks the side facing the cryptoporticus bears a lifting boss that has been left rough; these may have been at least partially exposed during the use of the cryptoporticus (Pls. 21 2, 25 4, 27 3).

Where it was possible to dig behind the east wall, to the north of the central exedra, it was found that the toichobate course has a backing as far as the center of the north exedra (Plan IV); this consists of stones laid in cement mortar and coated on top and side with a heavy layer of mortar, which makes it look like large blocks of stone; the width of the backing is ca. 0.53 rm. The widths of the two blocks at the western end of the toichobate course of the north wall can be measured: they are 0.85 and 0.90 m. In the west wall the toichobate blocks vary from 0.85 to 0.95 m. in width; on the west side they have a backing of stones in mortar which filled out the irregularline of the west side of the toichobate FOUNDATION blocks and gave a foundation of sufficient In the east and south walls and for the east- width for the west wall, some of the blocks of ern 4.40 m. of the north side, the foundations which are as much as 0.95 m. wide. This backof the outer walls of the Julian Basilica seem ing of the west toichobate course has a width to consist of no more than a toichobate course up to 0.15 m. (P1. 19 i). In the north wall, except for the eastern laid directly on hardpan. This course is completely preserved in the east and south walls, 4.40 m., the toichobate course rests on a course in all but the western 2.00 m. of the north of large blocks ca. 0.36 m. deep at the center, wall, to the south of the porch in the west wall where it has been exposed (P1. 25 4). The

as well as in scatteredblocks to the north in blocks, which vary greatly in width, extend this wall.The toichobatecourseis 0.28-0.30m. beyondthe innerface of the toichobatecourse

42

CORINTH

from 0.12 m. to as much as 0.67 m. Where we have exposed the depth of this course, it is seen to rest on a base of small stones set in cement mortar, just as in the west wall foundations. At the west end of this wall, as at the north end of the west wall, deeper foundations were requiredwhere a large drainwent through the foundations. Here the foundations extend down to ca. 1.15 m. below the bottom of the toichobate course. The west outer wall rests on a foundation the top course of which is peculiarly made of poros blocks, most of which seem to be re-used, laid with patches of small stones in mortar between the blocks (Pls. 19 i, 23 i), a construction reminiscent of the second starting line. A few blocks in the course seem to have been cut especially for it. The height of the course is ca. 0.40 m., the width ca. 1.20 m. This in turn rests on a bedding of small field stones laid in mortar, apparently in a shallow trench, such as was noted in the north wall foundations. At the north end, on either side of the drain, the foundations extend 0.75 m. farther down. The foundations of the appendages to the outer rectangle of the Julian Basilica varied considerably according to the terrain. The porch on the west side extended out into the Lower Agora, and its foundations fall into two sections (P1.191), those for the porch itself and those for the paratids of the stairway leading up to the porch. For the side walls of the porch there are beddings of stones set in mortar in a trench cut down to the hard surface of one of the Hellenistic Agora pavements. On the north side nothing more is preserved, but on the south there is a course above this which is made of blocks of irregularsize set in mortar; its maximum width is 1.47 m. This course too, which extends ca. 2.90 m. westward from the west wall, gives the appearanceof having been laid in a trench. Its top lies at ca. 0.06 m. above the top of the toichobate of the west

foundations there are remains of the concrete core of the porch. There are no traces of a west wall for the porch, such as the north wall of the porch of the South Basilica, and it is possible that none existed here and that the core of the stairway and the porch were continuous. The deep foundations in the great drain along the north wall of the South Basilica would have necessitated such a wall there, while the flat surface on which the porch and stairway of the Julian Basilica rested probably rendered it unnecessary. The lowest course of the foundation of the south paratid of the stairway to the Julian Basilica is well preserved; it consists of a line of heavy blocks extending westward from the southwest corner of the porch for 2.64 m. (P1. 19 1). The course has a straight south face, but the blocks extend irregularly on the interior, having a maximum width of 0.74 m. This course rests on the Hellenistic pavement level with the second starting line, in part on the line itself; it is 0.48 m. high. From the western end of this south paratid there is the beginning of a northsouth foundation, but only one block is preserved; it is 0.60 m. high and its top is 0.17 m. above the top of the adjacent southern foundation. A large poros block is fitted into this corner and about it are scant remains of a fill of stones set in mortar. On top of the south foundation for the porch, and at 0.33 m. to the east of the west end of the paratid foundation, there is a setting line running northsouth which probably marks the beginning of a second row of foundation blocks for the south paratid. This second course would have come to the level of the Roman Agora pavement, above which the paratid wall would have been exposed. The foundations of the exedras on the east side of the Julian Basilica vary greatly. In the area of the south exedra, hardpan is so high that there is almost no foundation at all. The

wall, but the Roman Agora level was some- east wall has a bedding of stones in mortar what higher than this. Between the paratid that is only ca. 0.20 m. deep at the center of

THE JULIAN BASILICA the wall where it disappears into the undug scarp, but it becomes deeper to the north as hardpan falls (P1. 25 3). Its top is level with the top of the sixth course of the east outer wall of the cryptoporticus and the course above is, properly speaking, a part of the main floor. The short north wall of this exedra had a foundation of a single course of blocks corresponldingto the sixth outer wall course and resting on hardpan. These blocks were backed by stones set in mortar which are a continuation of the bedding for the east wall of the exedra. Of the similar north exedra only two deep foundations for the side walls are preserved (P1. 21 i); these go down to hardpan in the space between the east outer wall and the face of the scarp in hardpan, a distance of ca. 0.90 m. The northern of these two foundations is ca. 0.95 m. wide, the southern one ca. 1.00 m. The side walls were carried in part by these foundations, but east of the cutting they rested on hardpan itself. There is a shallow cutting in hardpan, only ca. 0.10 m. deep, for the outer northeast corner of the exedra (P1. 21 ). The lowest full foundation course of this exedra would thus be about even with the fourth outer wall course. Like those in the South Basilica, these were probably foundations only in the sense that they were below ground, but they were probably constructed just like the exposed walls. They were probably also bonded into the east wall, as were those of the South Basilica. For the central exedra it is possible that at least one block of the lowest course of the east wall foundations is in place at the southern end of the remaining mass of stones of later date (P1. 25 i). This block is level with the sixth course of the east outer wall and rests on a shallow bedding of stones in mortar. This bedding extends to the south beyond the preserved blocks and then turns west on the

43

is ca. 0.85 m. wide; it fills the northern side of the northern one of the three pits cut in hardpan between the central and south exedras (Plan IV). None of the north wall of the central exedra is of the original construction, but its position does not seem to have been shifted in the various later rebuildings. There were three, or perhaps four, rebuildings of this exedra in the Late Roman and Byzantine periods (P1. 26 1); two foundations for apses are Late Roman, while the return to a rectangular form is Byzantine, probably of the eleventh century. Scranton, in his study of mediaeval Corinth, ascribes the addition of an apse over the central exedra to the remodelling of the Julian Basilica as the Metropolitan Church of Corinth, first in the Constantinian period but with a rebuilding in the late fourth or early fifth century, probably after the earthquake of 375.22 This possibly accounts for the

two sets of apsidal foundations. There are, however, no earlier apsidal foundations connected with the Roman building, which was completely rectangular, and so the several curved architrave-friezeblocks and curvedwall blocks found in the area and apparently re-used in the church apse must have belonged to another Roman building not far away. Since they belong to no known structurein the Agora, the likelihood is that there were important structures beyond the Julian Basilica to the east, on the other side of the main road that skirted the building on that side (P1. 26 2). The walls of the inner rectangle of the Julian Basilica do not, properly speaking, have any foundations, for the bottom course of the walls everywhere rests directly on hardpan, which has been cut to receive it. The lowest course of the inner walls consists of blocks that are much thicker than those of the superimposed courses and extend well back of the inner face of the walls (Pls. 20 l, 21 2), but on

the exterior exposed face of the walls the course

line of the south wall of the exedra.Here the is differentfromthose aboveonly in its greater foundationbeddingof small stones in mortar 22 Corinth, XVI, pp. 10-11.

44

CORINTH

height; it is 0.51 m. high and the courses above length, ca. 1.18-1.20 m. The back of the wall blocks is not dressed smooth since they were have a height of 0.46 m. all below ground level (P1.21 1); their average thickness is 0.75-0.85 m., but some blocks are THE CRYPTOPORTICUS as much as 0.95 m. thick. There are two cuttings into the upper half The north-south ridge to the east of the CorinthianAgora (P1.18 1) remained a feature of the inner face of the blocks of the fifth of the landscape long after the destruction of course. The northern one (P1. 26 3, 5), in the the Roman city, though it gradually became northernmost preserved block of this course less and less prominent as the hollows were and a little to the south of the south side of filled with debris and the habitation levels the central exedra, is 0.255 m. wide, 0.33 m. slowly rose. But when the Julian Basilica was high and 0.18 m. deep. The southern one destroyed and robbedof many of its blocks, the (P1. 26 4), just in line with the north side of debris still had a decided slope from east to the south core wall, is 0.235 m. wide, 0.39 m. west and the ridge sloped down from south to high and 0.195 m. deep. Since the sixth course north as well, and this was a major factor in is missing above each of these cuttings, it is determining the preservation of the remains not possible to determine whether or not the (Plan III, 1, Section B-B). Because of this cutting extended into the course above. The sloping terrain, the east wall of the crypto- cuttings apparently are not related to those porticus is in places preserved to the top of for the beams of the main floor; they are not the ground floor; in the south exedra even like the cutting for a girder in the south wall, a course above still remains in situ. The pre- and they are not spaced with the bases for served top of the south wall follows roughly posts on the axis of the east aisle; they seem the slope of the side of the ridge; the north more roughly cut than the beam cuttings and wall is less well preserved. The west wall is are probablylater additions for auxiliary suplargely stripped to its foundations, and even ports needed when the originalbeamingsystem some of these are gone. weakened or failed. It is the east outer wall (Pls. 18 2, 24 2, 26 3) In the two blocks of the sixth course still which is the most instructive. Its two lower in situ there are two beam cuttings, with dicourses are completely preserved and of the mensions of ca. 0.31 m. in width, 0.26 m. in third course only two blocks are missing near height and 0.37 m. in depth (P1. 26 4). The the northern end. The southern half of the beams are ca. 0.90 m. on centers. Similar beam fourth course, some of the fifth course in the cuttings occur in the sixth course block which southern third of the wall and a few blocks of has been reset on the wall (P1. 26 5); the one the sixth course just to the north of the south- complete beam cutting is 0.305 m. wide, 0.28 ern exedra are preserved; there is one isolated m. high and 0.35 m. deep. But between the block of the sixth course which is not actually two cuttings is a cutting for a window which in situ, having been moved somewhat during measures 0.30 m. across the top and is cut later rebuildings in the area, but it has now back 0.37 m. from the inner face of the block; been reset on the wall. The full height of the the cutting slopes down rapidly, splaying to a cryptoporticus walls, from the top of the width of 0.57 m. at the face of the block on a toichobate to the top of the sixth course, is line 0.04 m. from its bottom (P1.27 i). No such 3.55 m. (P1. 26 3). The courses are all of about window cuttings exist between the beam cut-

the same height, averaging0.59 m., and the ting on the blocksstill in situ (P1.26 4)because blocksgenerallyare twicethat dimensionin of the fact that they occur at a point where

THE JULIAN BASILICA the south exedra starts; since its wall bonds into the east wall, no light would be admitted here. To the north of the northern of these two beam cuttings there is half the cutting for a window (P1. 26 4), showing that these began immediately beyond the exedra. Another block with a cutting for a window, but with no beam cuttings, was found within the Basilica (P1. 27 2); it and the windows in generalwill be discussedlater in consideringthe reconstructionof the two Basilicas (pp. 80-81). The south outer wall has the three lowest courses completely preserved; there are some blocks of the fourth course in place at both ends, and a few blocks of the fifth course at the east end, and above these one and a half blocks of the sixth course (Pls. 201, 22 1; Plan III, 1, Section B-B). The courses are of the same height as those in the east wall, the blocks are of about the same size, of irregular thickness averaging ca. 0.75 m. with a few up to 0.90 m., with an even inner face and an uneven outer face since the entire wall was below ground level. Much of this wall is set in the cutting in hardpan, with only ca. 0.10 m. between the back of the wall and the scarp of the cutting. Above hardpan was the fill between the Julian Basilica and the Southeast Building up to the main floor level of both buildings, which was approximately the same. In the north face of the wall, and on the line of the axis of the east aisle of the cryptoporticus, there is a cutting ca. 0.50 m. high and 0.22 m. deep, the top of which is ca. 0.35 m. below the top of the sixth course (Plan III, 1, Sections A-A and B-B). This was the cutting for the south end of the great central girder running the length of the east aisle and supported by the row of central piers or wooden posts. The beam cuttings in the sixth course of the east wall average about 0.26 m. in height, so the girder must have extended above its cutting or the beams below theirs to make them

45

blocks of the sixth course of the south wall, since for the width of the east aisle, where they are located, the beams ran parallel to the south wall and were supported on the east wall, the central girderand the girder running from the corner of the core to the south wall (Plan VII, 2). Of the north outer wall of the Julian Basilica only the lowest course is preserved, and even this is lacking for about three meters at the western end (Pls. 20 2, 25 4). The backs of the blocks of this first course were dressed in an even line for the western third of the wall, giving a wall thickness of ca. 0.85 m.; in the eastern two-thirds they were left irregular, probably because there was a road here at least as high as the top of this course at this point in the wall, and higher to the east (P1. 27 3). This indicates that when the building was built the level of the road was below the top of this course only in the western third of the building, but the Roman Agora pavement of the end of the first century after Christ came up to the top of the first course and these blocks would then have been below ground level. Those courses which extended above the road would most probably have been drafted on the edges, as were the exteriors of the other exposed walls. The first course of the west wall is preserved only in its southern third, and four blocks of the second course are in place at the southern end of the wall (P1. 20 i). All the preserved blocks of the first course are irregularon their west side, for they were below the level of the Agora pavement, which here rose in a ramp between the Julian Basilica and the Circular Monumentup to the level of the Upper Agora.23 Of the blocks in the second course, the two at the southern end have smooth faces, but the next two to the north have heavy drafting on the two sides and the bottom, ca. 0.14 m. wide and 0.025 m. deep (P1. 27 4). It is most proba-

meet and bring the beams onto the girder. ble that the entire wall was finishedin this There are no beam cuttings in the preserved 23 Corinth,I, iii, pp. 78-79.

46

CORINTH

way and that the two southernmost blocks were left plain because they too were covered by the ramp. The thickness of the lower course in this west wall averages 0.90 m., while a few blocks are over 1.00 m.; the wall thickness in the second course, as shown in the drafted blocks, was 0.90 m., but the two southern blocks are a little wider. The blocks of the walls of the outer rectangle of the Julian Basilica cryptoporticus are thus seen to be usually about 1.20 m. long, half that high and 0.80-0.85 m. thick, except in the west wall which has a thickness of 0.90 m. The interior surface of the blocks is treated with a fine toothed chisel (Pls. 26 3-5, 28 1). All of them have a very heavy anathyrosis on their ends, also picked with the same toothed chisel, while the surface within the anathyrosis is chiselled back with a flat chisel (P1. 28 2). The blocks thus fit very tightly. The courseswere laid dry, and without clamps or dowels. A couple of the blocks in the east outer wall have traces of drafting ca. 0.10 m. wide, probably from an earlier use, but more likely they were originally intended for an exposed position but were relegated to the cryptoporticus when the drafted surface chipped. In the central or inner rectangle it is the east wall again (P1.19 2) which is the best preserved. Of its first course all but a few blocks at the north end are preserved; the second course is present in all but the north quarter, and the third course has its south half preserved. The southern third of the fourth course is in place, and there are a few blocks of the fifth and even of the sixth course preserved at the southern end. On the south side of the core (P1. 20 2) all of the two lowest courses are in place, only the western end block of the third course is missing, and some blocks of the fourth and fifth course are in place at the east end. Of the west side (P1. 20 i) only a

join the south wall; then there are a few scattered blocks of the first course in place farther to the north. A few blocks of the first course of the north wall (P1. 20 1) are in position at the east end and there is one block of the second course still preserved. As in the South Basilica, the inner walls would have had eight courses to attain the height of the outer walls. The first course of the inner walls is ca. 0.51 m. high and very wide, with blocks up to 1.44 m. in thickness, extending well beyond the inner face of the wall (P1. 20 1). The courses above are 0.46 m. high and have an average thickness of 0.90 m., though they are not of even thickness and the inner side of the wall is irregular since the core was filled up to the level of the main floor. The blocks of these inner walls vary somewhat in length, but most are about 1.20 m. long. The outer surface of the lowest course is treated with a toothed chisel like that used on the outer walls; the same chiselling extends ca. 0.10-0.12 m. into the second course. Above this the walls are smoothed with a broad flat chisel. These blocks of the lowest course of the core walls have anathyrosis similar to that of the outer wall blocks, sometimes even wider, also finished with a toothed chisel (P1. 28 3). Some of the blocks above the first course have only a very narrow anathyrosis (P1. 28 4), and the joints of the outer face where not sufficiently tight have been pointed up like those of the outer walls. The fill of the core of the Julian Basilica, while badly disturbed by later intrusions, was in places sufficiently well preserved to indicate how it had been laid. The sloping preBasilica fill was preserved in places slightly above hardpan; this fill and the hardpan had been levelled off even with the top of the lower course of the inner walls. A layer of poros chips was put over this and then as each

few blocks of the first and second courses higherwall coursewas laid the corewas filled are in place at the southernend, wherethey with well packed earth, topped by a layer of

THE JULIAN BASILICA

poros chips level with the top of each course. The excavatorsnoticedthese successiveporos chip layers even with the top of the first, second and third courses; none was preserved above this level owing to Byzantine intrusions, but from the South Basilica it was learnedthat they continuedto the top of the core. INTERIOR SUPPORTS

As part of the originalconstructionin the cryptoporticusof the JulianBasilica,as in the South Basilica, there was a system of axial supportsin the aisles, carryinggirderswhich in turn supportedone end of the floor beams for the main storey (Plan VII, 1-2). In the South Basilica,wherethe remainsof this system are well preserved,it is shown to have consisted of wooden posts based on stone blocks, except for the four supports on the axis of the end aislesin line with the long core walls, which were poros columns (Pls. 43 4, 44 1, 2). While much less well preserved in the

Julian Basilica, there are ample remainsto showthat a similarsystem existed.In the east aisle four bases on axis are still in situ within the length of the core (P1.212); a fifth base was removedfrom over the well at just about the centerof this aisle andits positionhas been indicatedon Plan IV. Thesebasesrise ca. 0.18 m. above the cryptoporticusfloor; they are spaced roughly4.00-4.20 m. on centers,just as in the long aisles of the South Basilica.In the north aisle, much disturbedlater, at least one base of the axial supports, that in line with the east core wall, is still in place (Plan IV). Anotherbaseto the east is alsoon the axis of the north aisle, but it is slightlyoff the axis of the east aisle and may have been shifted somewhatout of its originalcornerposition. These two bases are spaced ca. 3.25 m. on centers, while those in the end aisles of the South Basilica are ca. 2.90 m. on centers. A few of the bases for axial supportsin the west aisle seem still to be in situ;blocksfromothers

47

remainwithin the aisle but had been moved and re-used later (P1.23 2). Despite the conversion of the south aisle into a vaulted chamber and despite much disturbance within it, one of the original axial bases seems still to be in place; it is the western of the three blocks in a row and is on the line of the east core wall (P1.22 2). The general similarity of the system of bases on the axis of the aisles in both basilicas suggests that in each one this line of supports was part of the original construction. On the other hand, there is only scant evidence in the Julian Basilica of a second, and probably later, system of auxiliary supports such as the pilasters against the outer walls of the south and west aisles of the South Basilica. The evidence consists of two stones set against the outer wall of the south aisle of the Julian Basilica (P1. 22 2), on the line of the east core wall. These could have served as the base for a pilaster which in this case would have given added support to the girder extending from the southeast corner of the core across the south aisle to the south outer wall. If at a later date the bearing on the outer wall proved insufficient, such a pilaster would have given the added bearing surface that was required. Otherwise there is no evidence in the Julian Basilica for such a repair as that in the South Basilica which necessitated the addition of pilasters to the outer walls of the south and west aisles of the cryptoporticus. LATER CONSTRUCTIONS

While the remains describedthus far are part of the original building, numerous additions, alterations and later constructions changed the building and the area from later Roman through Byzantine times. The most important of these alterations closed off the south aisle for the entire width of the Basilica from both the east and west aisles and made of it a long vaulted chamber (PI. 22 1; Plan III, 1), thus

interruptingthe circulationwhich had been an importantfeature of the originalcrypto-

48

CORINTH

porticus.Wallswerebuilt acrossboth east and the core wall, where the vault starts (P1. west aisles in line with the south core wall 29 5). Thevault springsfromthe top of the second (Pls. 20 i, 29 1). That across the west aisle is built of large poros blocks, founded on a courseof the corewalls on the northside, and course which has its top 0.07 m. below the the top of the first outer wall courseon the top of the first course of the core walls; on south side (P1. 29 3). The second and third this foundationrests the first course of the outer wall coursesand the third, fourth and wall, whichhas a height of 0.68 m. A doorway bottom of the fifth inner wall courses were 0.91 m. wide has been left in this cross wall hackedaway to allowfor the thicknessof the at 0.68 m. from the west outer wall; it leads vault and to give it a bearingsurface. The from the west aisle into a small room at the vault itself is built of smallstones and marble west end of the south aisle which is walled fragmentsor layers of tiles or flat bricks in off from the rest of the aisle by a doublewall irregularalternatingsections,boundtogether (P1.221). Originally,thereprobablywas a wall in mortarforminga concrete,which the exon the line of the west core wall, but most cavatorsremarkedwas of not too goodquality. likely this was removedwhen the vault was The vault was laid on a centeringof planks extendedto the west; the vault seems at first varying in widths from 0.20-0.23 m., except to have reachedonly to the line of the west for one ca. 0.29 m. wide, and as muchas 5.40 core wall, but it was later extendedas far as m. long;the impressionsof these remainin the the preserveddoublewall. Thewesternsection cementon the soffitof the vault (P1.29 5). The of this doublewall has a base courseof re-used vault abuts againstthe east outer wall and is porosblocks;abovethis there aresectionsbuilt preservedto the heightof the top of the fourth of flat bricks,only ca. 0.036 m. thick, at the outerwall course.Whenoriginallyexcavated, sides, while the center is built up of poros many morepiecesof the vault werein or near blocks; the thickness of the wall averages their originalposition,but they had to be re0.45 m. The southernpart of this doublewall moved because of the impossibilityof supis preservedto a height of 1.65 m. The eastern portingthem in place. The highestpreserved, section of the wall (P1.22 2) is built of small in the east end of the aisle, was at a height of pieces of stone at the sides, of large blocksat 2.65 m. above the top of the toichobate,and the center; its thickness averages 0.40 m. here the vault had a thickness of 0.30 m.Thereprobablywas a drawbasinfor the vault- 0.35 m. The originalvault extendedonly to the west ed reservoirhere, servedfromthe smallvestiend of the core, but a narrowersection with bule at the west end of the south aisle. The eastern end of this south aisle is cut a highercurvewas addedon as far as the later off from the east aisle by anotherdoublewall doublewall which runs acrossthe south aisle runningeastwardfrom the southeast corer near its western end (P1. 29 3; Plan III, 1). of the core (P1. 21 2, 29 i). The northern part The constructionof this addedsectionis simiof this doublewall consistsof a great wall ca. lar to that of the main part of the vault, and 0.68 m. thickmadeof smallpiecesof porosand the changewas probablymade not long after somefragmentsof tile laid in a cementmortar the originalconstruction.Wherethis western (P1. 29 i); it is now preservedalmost to the section was added on to the vault, the north top of the sixth course of the core walls. wall of the vaultjogsoutsharply,some0.55m., The southernpart has a base built of rough to the south of the south core wall (P1.29 2). stone blocks, and above this the wall is built In this section the top of the vault is at ca. of brick up to the top of the secondcourseof 2.50 m. above the top of the toichobate;its

THE JULIAN BASILICA thickness at the top is 0.65 m., including some thickening on the side toward the wall to take the thrust. On the western part of the south outer wall, just opposite the west core wall, at a place where the vault has fallen away from it, traces of painted stucco decoration were revealed on the third and fourth courses (P1. 29 4). The stucco is very thin and is applied directly to the stone. The mural painting would seem to have been of a pictorial nature rather than geometric or architectural. When first disclosed the fragment seemed to portray a chariot wheel, in green, and either human or animal figures in red and purple on a yellow ground. This painting was not the original one on the wall, but was superimposed on earlier layers. At the east end of the south aisle there is a rough wall of re-used blocks and tiles, 0.75 m. thick, which abuts on the vault on both the north and south but is not bonded into it. Just to the east of the center of the wall is a rectangular stone, 0.585 m. by 0.43 m., which has a hole 0.12 m. in diameter running right through it for a depth of 0.27 m. It is probable that at some time still within the period of use of the reservoirthe rough entrance now existing from the east aisle into the east end of the vaulted chamber (P1. 21 2) was broken through the wall across the east aisle, and that the narrow vestibule thus provided served as an additional draw basin, in which the block with the hole through it also had some part. In the south aisle, on the lines of the extension of the east and west core walls, there are two colossal column drums (P1. 22 2); the one in line with the east core wall is 1.52 m. high and 0.76 m. in top diameter, that to the west is 1.11 m. high and 0.76 m. in top diameter. They stand to the north of the axis of the aisle, about 1.40 m. from the south core wall. A third similar drum, 1.37 m. high

49

removed from a late wall in which it lay on its side just above the eastern drum, on which it must have stood originally. These columns were added after the aisle had long been used as a reservoir, for each was set in a cutting made through the water-laid accumulation on the floor, as the excavators carefully observed. In the central section of the south aisle there are two small rectangularlimestone bases on the north side (P1. 22 i, 2), each with two iron dowels which in both cases have split the block. Along the south side of the aisle there are three large marble bases which also have dowels in them; there are also two smaller stones with cupped depressions in their upper surface. There are three stones in a row on the axis of the aisle just to the south of the eastern large drum; the westernmost of these has already been identified as an original base for the axial row of supports. These various alignments of stones suggest that at one time or another tables or benches were set up in this aisle. A wall which crossed the north aisle on the line of the east core wall was removed by the excavators, who gave the following facts about it: it was a heavily built wall resting practically on hardpan, composed of re-used and much battered poros blocks roughly laid in mortar. The wall was very rough and irregular on its west face, but the east face was fairly smooth and lined up exactly with the east face of the east core wall, continuing its line direct to the north outer wall. The greatest height of the wall, near its northern end, was 1.60 m. as preserved; it did not abut on the north core wall, but there was a space of 0.30 m. in the line of the east face of the wall and 0.75 m. in the line of its west face, hardly enough for a doorway. The removed wall was probablysimilar to that wall of which part remains on the line of the west wall core; this is rather crudely built of re-used blocks of poros,

and 0.74 m. in top diameter,now rests on chinkedwith tile and laid in mortar,with a the south outerwall (P1.22 1); it had been thicknessof 0.64 m. above the lowest course,

50

CORINTH

which has some much wider blocks, and a maximum height of 0.88 m. It closed off the aisle at this point, but there is ca. 1.20 m. between the south end of this wall and the north core wall, and a doorhere is a possibility. Thus the area of the north aisle to the north of the core was enclosed as a separate room, but there are no indications of its special purpose. Through this room ran the drain that started at the south end of the east aisle, continued parallel to the east wall at ca. 0.80 m. from it until it reached about mid-distance between the central and north exedras, where it curved to the west, coming close to the northeast corner of the core, and then went west down the north aisle (P1. 21 2), probably joining the drain that ran out the northwest corner of the building. The drain was cut into hardpan a depth of 0.28 m. and had an average width of 0.24 m. Near the north end of the west aisle there is a later structure of brick and mortar, possibly part of a rectangular reservoir of which only the west side is preserved (P1. 23 2). Scranton24has suggested that this structure may have been a built mausoleum in the basement of the Metropolitan Church. This would have been possible, however, only in the period before A.D.375, for there is clear evidence that the cryptoporticus was filled at that time, after which there would have been no basement. Farther to the south the floor of the cryptoporticus on the west has been disturbed by the digging of four large graves, which Scranton25 would also connect with the period of the fifthsixth centuries in which he conjectures that the Julian Basilica was remodeled to serve as the Metropolitan Church of Corinth. Again, this was after the cryptoporticus was filled with the debris from the destruction of 375, and if the graves are later than that they must have been dug in the debris rather than in an open basement. There have been other late 24Corinth,XVI, p. 11. 25 Loc. cit.

disturbances as well in this aisle, and the wall running diagonally over the northern part of the west outer wall foundations is a vestige of late building done when the lines of the Julian Basilica had been completely obliterated. The remains to the east of the Julian Basilica belong to a period subsequent to its destruction by earthquake in the late fourth century, and their significanceis discussed by Scranton in his book on mediaeval Corinth.26 It will suffice here, therefore, to give only a brief description of them, for their chief importance with regard to the Julian Basilica is that they were built of material from it. This is especially true of the long wall that parallels the east outer wall and is about three meters back of it (Pls. 21 1, 24 2; Plan IV). This wall has been traced from the north side of the northern exedra southward until it disappears into the high scarp just north of the south exedra. Built on a bedding of small stones in mortar, the wall has a width of ca. 0.70-0.75 m.; the preserved lower courses are composed largely of the poros cornice and architravefrieze blocks of the Julian Basilica, the cornices laid upside down as the lowest course of the wall (P1. 30 i, 2). For a width of 5.80 m. this wall was interrupted and a curved apse of a little more than a quarter circle, with a radius of ca. 3.90 m., was erected (P1. 26 1; Plan IV). Its northern end was along the north side of the original central exedra, but its width is about two meters less, and the apse was therefore not on the axis of the Julian Basilica. The curved foundations are built of re-used rectangular blocks of varying thickness so that the west face is kept fairly regular, but the east side is irregular and was very likely below ground level (P1. 30 3), except perhaps for the highest preserved course. The angles between the ends of the blocks were chinked with small stones to fill out the curve. It is of interest to note that four of the six

curved marblearchitrave-frieze blocks found 26 Ibid.,

pp. 10-11.

THE JULIAN BASILICA in this area, those with a radius of 3.875 m. (P1. 30 4), would just cover the segment of the circle given by these foundations and in one period of re-use these architrave-frieze blocks, not at all a matched set, must have been a part of this apse. How far they were brought to be used here cannot now be determined, but their presence in this area must date from this use in the apse. In the same line there had been an earlier, narrower and very shallow apse, the foundations for which have a thickness of ca. 0.50 m. at the southern end where they can be seen (P1.31 1).None of the known curved architravefrieze blocks fit the very open curve of this foundation. Between these two curved foundations, over the western one, and to the west of it as far as a foundation of re-usedlarge ashlar blocks laid parallel to and just west of the original east wall of the central exedra, there is a heavy mass of concrete which filled the whole of the later and deeper apse and an area in front of it (P1.31 1). A still later rectangular structure, possibly also an exedra, was built over this mass, with its north wall in the position of the original north wall of the central exedra (P1. 24 2), its east wall on the foundation laid just to the west of the east wall of that exedra. This structure, all of reused blocks, rose almost to the surface of the ground, and a large block in its topmost preserved course had beam cuttings in it (P1.31 2). A hoard of eleventh century coins very likely gives the date of its period of use. It would seem to indicate that even at this late date the form of the Julian Basilica was still influencing the Byzantine buildings in the area and that its foundations and wall blocks were still being re-used.27

More closely connected with the Julian Basilica itself are the remains of a pavement of rectangular white marble slabs (Pls. 26 2, 31 3), just like those used for the pavement laid down

in the CorinthianAgoraat the end of the first 27

Ibid., p. 75.

51

centuryafter Christor later.28The pavement was found to the north of the large late apse in the trench made to explore the central exedra;its level is aboutthat of the top of the cryptoporticus.The slabspreservedarealmost two metersto the east of the east side of the central exedra as restoredon the analogy of the one in the South Basilica;they suggestat once that a wide paved road ran north-south to the east of the mainfloorof the JulianBasilica. Thereis evidencefor a roadin a similar positionoutsidethe SouthBasilica.Therewas a considerabledepth of typical road fill and many hard road surfaces,together with numerousdrains(P1.31 3),in this areaand there probably was always a road along here, as thereis today. MAINFLOOR

It is only the most unusualfortune, combined with the fact that the Julian Basilica was set in a deep cutting of hardpan,which has preservedfor us some of its main storey, at aboutfourmetersabovethe cryptoporticus floor. In the northernhalf of the southern exedra, which is all that could be exposed (Pls. 25 3, 31 4), one courseis preservedwhich correspondsto the course above the sixth course of the outer wall and is the highest courseremainingin placein either the Julian or SouthBasilica.Onthe uppersurfaceof the blocks of this course there are pry holes for the settingof the courseabove,indicatingthat these small exedraswerecertainlywalled up and were not entrances.The blocks in both the east and north walls of this exedrahave draftedinner faces with shallowdrafting(ca. 0.09-0.10m. wide) on the sides and bottom of each block (P1. 25 3); the drafted edges are treated with the same kind of toothed chisel as that used on the inner face of the outer cryptoporticuswalls. On the east, the outer face of these blockshas not been exposed,but 28Corinth, I, iii, p. 149.

52

CORINTH

on the outer side of the western of the two blocks in the north wall there is clearly drafting (ca. 0.11-0.12 m. wide) on the sides and bottom (PI. 31 4); the outer surface of the eastern block is destroyed. The thickness of these walls of the exedra superstructure is 0. 60 m. These few blocks, then, give the all-important indications that the drafting noted for the west wall of the lower floorcontinued on the exterior of the main floor as well. What is more, such drafting was used to decorate the interior of the walls of at least the side exedras; perhaps it was used throughout the interior of the main floor of the building. Although little of the main floor of the Julian Basilica remains in situ, the circumstances of the building's destruction have preserved many remains of objects and embellishments that were in this storey at the time of the destruction. It has been noted above (p. 50) that the cryptoporticus, unlike that of the South Basilica which was filled in Hadrianic times, remained open until A.D. 375, though the south aisle was closed off for a reservoir, and part of the north aisle also was walled up. Yet these aisles were still kept fairly clean, as is shown by the finding of the coins of Septimius Severus (A.D. 193-211) and Plautilla (A.D. 202-212) on the cryptoporticus floor in the northern part of the west aisle. These date from well after the time when the south aisle was converted into a vaulted chamber.A coin of Julia Domna (A.D. 187-217) was found in the east aisle about 0.35 m. above the hardpan floor, showing that in the more remote parts of the cryptoporticus debris was accumulating more rapidly. This accumulation averaged 0.40 m. when, in the late fourth century, the building was destroyed by an earthquake. The excavators have given eloquent descriptions of the evidence of this destruction, of the masses of debris from the main floor and the roof that were precipitated into the crypto-

foraging in the debris for building material went on for a long time, its depth guaranteed the safety of much of the material. From the sculptures, the marble revetment, the marble columns, the inscriptions, the fragments of painted stucco, the masses of roof tiles found piled up in the cryptoporticus on top of the relatively thin layer of earlier debris, one gets a vivid picture of the main floor of the Julian Basilica. Emerson Swift observed in his field book for June 8, 1915, that the debris on the cryptoporticus floor looks "as though when the building fell it was precipitated in a direction from east to west." Again, when the statue of Augustus (P1. 32 1, 2) was found, he remarked that it "was not buried, but that it lay where it fell, in a stratum of Roman tiles, chips, small stones and debris and that there later accumulated about it the overlying stratum of the early mediaeval period." Near this, at the south end of the west aisle, was the fallen shaft of one of the interior columns, its capital thrown against the west wall of the west aisle of the cryptoporticus. The column is described as lying "upon a thick stratum of Roman tiles and debris which seems to have filled the whole west aisle." The area also produced "numerous fragments of revetment in fine colored marble." Patches of ash among the debris are probably the burnt remains of the wooden floor and roof construction. Throughout the cryptoporticus,including the collapsed vaulted chamberin the south aisle, the picture was much the same. From this debris comes the material necessary for the reconstruction of the marble interior colonnade of the building, which will be discussed in the chapter on the reconstruction, as well as elements of the clerestory, the roof tiles and the decorative architectural terracottas. The main floor was revetted in part, probably not for its entire height, with marble slabs

porticuson all sides (the vault of the south in differentcolors,and it is of specialinterest aisle also was destroyedat this time). While to have amongthe debrisan inscription,found

THE JULIAN BASILICA

53

in the south aisle,29mentioningthe marble incrustationof the building.Amongthe decorations on the walls must be consideredthe inscriptionson marbleslabs attached to the walls,for the cryptoporticusyieldedquantities of fragmentsof them. Thewallswereof painted plaster, probably above a dado of marble. Along the walls, and very likely between the columnsas well, stood an excellentcollection of earlyImperialsculptureandof statuesadded throughoutthe secondcentury.

earthquakeseems to have thrown the building from east to west, this pair of statuesmay with some confidencebe placedat the sides of the centralexedra,eitherjust withinit orjust outside it along the east outerwall-Gaius to the north,Luciusto the south.Fromveryclose to the east outer wall, at about two meters south of the centralexedra,came the armored statue ofHadrianicdate (P1.342; JohnsonNo. 143), and the east aisle yieldedthe head identified by Johnson as probablyNero, son of Germanicus(PI.34 3; JohnsonNo. 137), rather SCULPTURE than Tiberiusas Swift had suggested. The statues and fragments of sculpture The semi-nudemalefigure(P1.35 i; Johnson from the Julian Basilica attracted attention No. 140) was founda little to the north of the at onceandhave alreadybeentwicepublished, north exedra, but well over towardsthe west the best piecesin a seriesof articlesby Swift,30 side of the east aisle,so it may have stoodnear a larger group by FranklinP. Johnsonin a the northeastcorner,alongthe northwall or in definitive publicationof Corinthsculpture.31 the colonnade.The colossal semi-nudemale In the inventory of the sculptureat Corinth, figure (P1.35 2; Johnson No. 138) lay where all the numbersfrom 1050 to 1148, ninety- it had falleninto the west aisle;it cannothave nine items, are from the Julian Basilica. It is strayedmuchfromits originalpositionon the not the intent here to discuss the sculpture floorabove.TheAugustustoo (P. 321;Johnson further,but only to indicatewherethey were No. 134) lay just as it fell, on a bed of the found, and thus where they may have stood typicaldebrisfromthe upperpartof the buildon the main floor of the building,to present ing, in the southernpart of the west aisle,just new photographsof them and so to conjure north of the south core wall, lying obliquely up to some extent an image of the main floor. with its feet towardsthe southwestcorer of The east aisle yielded the largest group of the cryptoporticus,suggesting that is stood statues, and one is temptedat onceto think of againstthe west outerwall south of the porch. them as havingbeenin or flankingthe exedras. Another armoredstatue (P1. 35 3; Johnson The completestatue of LuciusCaesar(PI.33 2; No. 141)publishedby Johnsonwith the group Johnson No. 135)32 was found in the east aisle from the Julian Basilicawas found in a late about at the south end of the centralexedra wallnearthe southside of the adjacentSouth(P1. 34 i); the preservedupper part of the east Building, where it may well have been statue of GaiusCaesar(P1.33 i; JohnsonNo. broughtfrom the Julian Basilica,but the as136) was built into a wall a little within the sociationis thereforetenuous. core on the east side. The latter had probably Both Swift and Johnson agree that the been moved after it was brokenup. Since the statues of Luciusand GaiusCaesarmust have been erected beforethe death of Augustusin 29 West, Corinth, VIII, ii, pp. 105-107, No. 130. A.D. 14, moreprobablyon the occasionof the 30A.J.A., XXV, 1921, pp. 142-157, 248-265, 337-363; XXVI, 1922, pp. 131-147. 31 Johnson, Corinth, IX, pp. 70-85, Nos. 134-158. 32 The recent finding at Thasos of a head of Lucius Caesar, unquestionably identified by an inscription, supports the identification of Johnson as opposed to that of Swift. See Chamoux, Mon. Piot, XLIV, 1949, pp. 83-96.

death of Gaius in A.D. 4, and that the statue

of Augustuswas partof the samegroup.Johnson further suggests that the statues of the youths flankedthat of the emperor.The head

CORINTH

54

that JohnsonidentifiesasNero(?)he woulddate Roman and Byzantine walls and fill within and 29; as Tiberius, Swift suggested a date the same as that for the group,that is A.D. 4.

to

A.D.

WhileSwiftinclinesto seeksuch early datesfor the fourtorsoesas well,andto makethem part of the original Julian family group, Johnson leaves the two semi-nudefiguresundated and for the armoredfiguressuggestsClaudianand Hadrianicdates. If, then, the Julian family portraitswereset up in A.D. 4, they must have been set up originallyin anotherbuildingand moved to the Julian Basilica on its erection about four decadeslater. If, as suggested,the youths Lucius and Gaius stood flankingAugustus, they must have done so in this first building,for in the JulianBasilica,at least in its later period before the destruction,the Augustusmust have stood far from the other two, in the southwesternpart of the building. The Claudianarmoredfigurecould have had its first unveiling in the Julian Basilica, as indeed could the Hadrianicarmoredstatue; the two semi-nudefiguresmightfirsthavebeen seenhereaswell.But whenevertheyweremade and whereverthey were first exhibited,there existed in the Julian Basilica a sufficiently largegroupof RomanImperialportraitsculptures to make of the buildinga veritablemuseum. The collectionepitomizedRoman Corinth,for just as in the inscriptions,distinctly Greekelementsare lacking. INSCRIPTIONS

The decorativeschemeof the interiorof the Julian Basilica main floor seems clearly to have made use of numerousinscriptionsof publicimportancecut on thin slabs of marble and appliedto the walls,perhapsabovea dado of marblerevetment.Inscribedbases for statues and largeinscriptionsrestingon the floor also filled the Basilica,most likely placedbetween the columnsand alongthe outer walls. The fragmentsof all such inscriptionswere foundin largenumbers,especiallyin the debris filling the cryptoporticusas well as in late

about the area of the Julian Basilica, close enough to be considered as part of this building. However, that material once part of the Julian Basilica was ultimately dispersedwidely is shown by the fact that many fragments of inscriptions found at some distance have been joined to others from within the building itself. Since the Julian Basilica was almost completely excavated in 1914 and 1915, the majority of the inscriptions from it have long ago been published.33In subsequent investigations of the building itself, however, and in the excavation of the fill over its northwest corner as well as over the Agora to the west, more inscriptions relating to the Basilicawere found, often joining those from the earlier excavations. In preparingthe forthcoming third part of the volume on Corinth inscriptions, John H. Kent has reconsidered both the new fragments and new additions to old ones, as well as old inscriptions on which new light has been thrown.34It is not intended here to duplicate any of the material already published or forthcoming in the new volume on inscriptions, but only to see what information about the Julian Basilica may be derived from the inscriptions. It is of interest that the inscriptions found within the Basilica arepredominantlyin Latin,35 that the majority are of the first century after Christ while the rest are of the second century. 3 Meritt, Corinth, VIII, i, Greek Inscriptions; West, Corinth, VIII, ii, Latin Inscriptions, see below note 35. 34 I am greatly indebted to Professor Kent for undertaking to review for me the question of inscriptional evidence for the date of erection, the subsequent history or the architectural nature or use of the Julian Basilica. He has very kindly reported his results at length and they form the basis of what is written below, which again has been checked by him. 35 Of those published already, only two are Greek (Corinth, VIII, i, Nos. 76, 78a and 277, of which the first and last join), while twenty-four are Latin (Corinth,VIII, ii, Nos. 4, 5, 10, 13, 14, 17, 52, 71, 75, 83, 85, 93, 96, 103, 104a and b, 112, 130, 150, 163, 169, 173, 186, 195, 207 and 214, of which 14 and 214 join. Corinth, VIII, iii will contain but one addition to the Greek inscriptions from the Julian Basilica, No. 138, in which a new fragment is associated with Meritt No. 76. New readings of and additions to the Latin inscriptions found in and about the Julian Basilica will appear in Corinth, VIII, iii, Nos. 61, 69, 91, 120, 131, 149, 150, 162, 248, 249, 314, 322, 364 and 381.

THE JULIAN BASILICA

In seeking among these inscriptions for indication of the date of the Julian Basilica, Kent remarks: "In my opinion the most important inscriptions that would help to date the building are the revetment slabs, especially if architectural information were to show that they are contemporary with the building and are not later additions. These slabs are West's Nos. 13 and 130. In regard to No. 13, West's restoration [La]ribusseems to me far from certain, and the Augustis in the text does not necessarily refer to Augustus the Emperor but could refer to any of the later Emperors, all of whom also had the title Augustus. But even if [La]ribusis correct, the cult of the Lares Augusti could easily have been introduced into Corinth after Augustus' death (we have no confirmation on this point). "I feel almost certain that both West No. 13 and West No. 130 are not Augustan; at the earliest they date from the reign of Tiberius and are probably later. Nearly all Augustan inscriptions from Corinth are characterizedby a symmetrical V and M. Also, the tail of the R usually is attached at the juncture of the loop and the upright, and the tail of the Q is long and extends under succeeding letters (cf. West No. 135). In West Nos. 13 and 130 the letter V is off center, with the left arm set at a less upright angle than is the right arm. The tail of the R springs from the loop above it and does not approach the left upright. These features are very rare in Corinthianinscriptions of Augustan date, but very common in texts which date from the reign of Tiberius through to Nero (for a Tiberian example, cf. the Babbius monument). Furthermore, when an Augustan or Tiberian engraver was pressed for space near the end of a line (as in West No. 13, line 1), the letter T usually rises higher than its adjoining letters in order that the horizontal may be spread over the top of its neighbors (cf. West Nos. 14 and 110). For these same reasons,

55

"West No. 186, which together with a new fragment will be Kent No. 149, is a statue base bearing a dedication to a Corinthianduovir of ca. 33 B.C. West No. 103 plus fragments found later, now Kent No. 150, form part of a base with the name of a Corinthian duovir of ca. 6 B.C. West No. 14 joins West No. 213, together Kent No. 69, which can with some assurance be ascribed to the reign of Augustus. All three bases must have stood in the south aisle of the Julian Basilica at the time of its destruction, but since they were all free-standingthey could have been moved into this building at any time after its erection. "West No. 17 refers to the reign of Caligula. As Caligula reigned only four years, it might be possible for the inscription to have been cut during the early years of Claudius' reign, although this does not appear to me to be very likely. "I should add a little more about two more texts. West No. 52 contains the word Germanico. This does not necessarily mean Germanicus but could refer to Claudius, Nero or several other later emperors who held the title. West No. 96 has the characteristic V and R shapes that I have mentioned above and appears to be Claudianat the earliest. "To sum up: Besides the inscribed bases of ca. 33 B.C. and 6 B.C., only the base which comprises West Nos. 14 and 214 seems to be Augustan, but these are not structurally associated with the Julian Basilica!.The revetment slabs (West Nos. 13, 130 and 195) do not seem to be earlier than Tiberius' reign and in my opinion probably do not date earlier than A.D. 40. West No. 17 seems definitely to refer to Caligula's reign (A.D. 37-41), so that if this slab was part of the original Julian Basilica it would seem difficult to assign the building to a date later than Caligula. All other inscriptions found in the building appear to date from the reign of Claudius or later. Therefore, I see

I believethat West Nos. 124, 125 and 195 are no epigraphicalobjection at all to assigning all later than the reignof Augustus. the JulianBasilicato Caligula'sreign.On the

56

CORINTH

otherhand,thereis no convincingepigraphical close to the year A.D. 40; that they are conthat supportsanAugustandate." temporarywould be expectedfromthe exact consideration West No. 130, which Kent dates not earlier similarity of their original plan and conthan A.D.40, is the only inscription which may struction,even to minordetails. The subsequenthistory of the Julian Bagive information as to the nature of the building itself. The dozen fragmentsof revetment silica is not so clear as that of the South Baslabs were found largelyin the south aisle of silica, owing,first,to the fact that the cryptothe cryptoporticus,mostly towards its east porticusremainedopenuntil the buildingwas end, indicatinga position on the easternhalf destroyed in the late fourth century after of the south wall. Many of the pieces were Christ and, second, to the fact that the site found in the destructiondebris immediately was subsequentlybuilt over heavily in Late over the water deposit of the reservoirin the Roman and Byzantinetimes and then served south aisle. There is good reason to believe, as a quarry.Thereis no evidenceof a repair therefore,that the inscriptionwas placed on such as that involving the addition of the the basilica'ssouth wall at the time the build- pilastersagainst the outer walls of the South ing was firstconstructed,and that it remained Basilicacryptoporticus,most likelythe result, there throughoutthe use of the Romanbuild- as we shall see, of the earthquake of A.D. 79; ing. As restoredby West, the inscriptionhas possibly the blocks against the south wall of to do with namingthe benefactorswho paid the southaisleof the JulianBasilica,described for the marbleincrustationand possiblyother above (p. 47), indicate such a pilaster, but ornamentationfor the building. there are no others.It is also certainthat the cryptoporticusof the Julian Basilicawas not HISTORYAND CHRONOLOGY filled in in the Hadrianicperiodas was that A date in the time of Tiberiusor later had of the South Basilica.Rather, it appearsthat alreadybeen suggestedby the destructionof the cryptoporticuslost its originaluse in the the first SoutheastBuildingin orderto make secondhalf of the second century,for it was room for the buildingof the Julian Basilica. most probablythen that the vaultedchamber The epigraphicalevidencejust consideredsug- in the south aisle was built. The approximate gests rathera slightly later date in the reign date is indicatedby two coinsof LuciusVerus of Caligula.An even later Claudiandate seems (A.D. 161-169) whichwere foundstuck to the to be necessitatedby a coinfoundjust outside top of the outerwall toichobatein the western the west endof the northouterwallat the level partof the chamber.Sincea deepaccumulation of the top of the toichobate, in fill packed ofwater-deposited clay,interruptedat timesby thin layersof sand,markedthe useof the chamagainst this course. The coin is a Corinthian duoviri issue dated A.D. 41-54, having on ber, the toichobatewould have been covered one side a trace of a head of Claudiusand on very early.With the circulationin the cryptothe othera hexastyletempleona rock.36It was porticusthus interruptedat least by the chamanothercoin of the time of Claudiuswhich berin the southaisle(it is possiblethat another was most importantin establishingthe date of similar chamber existed in the north aisle, the originalconstructionof the SouthBasilica indicatedby the walls acrossthe aisle in line (p. 76). The evidence is thus clear in es- withthe longcorewalls),the rest seemsto have tablishingthat both basilicasare very likely gone into partial disuse and a slow accumuto be dated early in the reign of Claudius,if lation of debrisstarted on the cryptoporticus not at the end of that of Caligula,probably floor.This was especiallymarkedin the north 36 Edwards, andeastaislesandis datedby the largenumber Corinth,VI, p. 21, No.50.

THE JULIAN BASILICA

of Type xxvII lamps found in it, evidently used by those groping in the far recesses of the passageway. perhaps at a time when the light from the windows had been cut off. Besides the large majority of Type xxvII lamps, there are a few of Types xvi, xxi, xxvI, and even one of Type xxix, evidence of the use of the cryptoporticus from the latter part of the first century until well into the fourth century. The gradual accumulation on the cryptoporticus floor in which these were found attained a depth of at least 0.40 m. before the building was destroyed. The Julian Basilica, like its twin, was originally built entirely of poros, and except for the interior colonnade and perhaps the porch, or porches, it remained so to the end. This is clearly shown by the large numberof poros cornice and architrave-friezeblocks built into the late wall back of the Basilica and by the poros remains of the clerestory especially, which fell into the cryptoporticusat the time of the earthquake. The interior colonnade was replaced by a marble one, but the date of this change cannot be fixed by any external evidence. Stylistic criteria suggest a Hadrianic date, like that for the similar colonnade put into the South Basilica. No apse seems ever to have been added to the Julian Basilica, despite the curved architrave-friezeand wall blocks found in and near the east side of the building. No suitable foundations for such an apse exist in or around it; the late Roman apse behind the center of the east side was built after the Basilica was destroyed. This late apse, together with several curved architrave-frieze blocks and curved wall blocks found in the central part of the east aisle or along the east wall, suggests that the original apse also was in this area, probably east of and across the road from the Julian Basilica. Architectural members from this apse were brought within the area of the Julian Basilica only after the destruc-

tion of the Roman building, and never had any connectionwith the Basilicaitself.

57

The date of the violent and complete destruction of the Julian Basilica is best established by two coins, one found close to the head of the fallen Augustus statue, the other near its foot, apparently in the first debris which accumulated about the statue after the earthquake. The first is a coin of Valentinian II (A.D. 375-392), the second of Theodosius (A.D. 379-395). There seems thus to be no question but that the cause of the destruction was the earthquake of 375, which was responsible for levelling many of the buildings of the late Roman Agora. The filled cryptoporticus of the South Basilica seems to have given this building strength to survive the earthquake sufficiently so that it could be rebuilt in much the same form by Valentinian II. Only now was the cryptoporticus of the Julian Basilica filled with the debris of the statues, inscriptions, marble revetment, columns and roof tiles that had adornedit. Its poros cornice and architrave-frieze blocks, as well as its wall blocks, went into foundations and walls for the church which may now have used the site and incorporated what remained of the walls of the Roman building.37Some of its marble interior order was re-used here as well, but curved membersfor the newly added apse were brought from outside. With the disappearance of the churchin the seventh century, the building material seems to have served over and over in later Byzantine construction.The shallower fill in the western part of the building was conducive to intensive pillaging, which resulted eventually in the almost complete removal of the west and north walls of both the inner and outer rectangles and the consequent disturbanceof the destruction debrisand of earlier accumulations. Yet, thanks to the nature of the destruction of the building, to its position in the side of a ridge, and despite the subsequent pillaging, the form and history of the building are amply clear. 37

Scranton, Corinth,XVI, pp. 10-11.

CHAPTER

I

THE SOUTH BASILICA INTRODUCTION The South Basilica is unique among the major Roman buildings at Corinth in regard to its position with respect to the Agora. While all the other buildings excavated thus far in the center of the city have their main fagade facing one or another of the principal squares, terraces or roads, the South Basilica lies behind the South Stoa, its main entrancethrough the Stoa, its fa9ade visible only fromit.' Equally peculiar is the fact that despite this close connection with the South Stoa in its Roman phase, the South Basilica is slightly askew to the Stoa rather than parallel with it, as one would expect. The deviation is not sufficient to be noticed, but there is no apparent explanation for it; an explanation may lie in the orientation of the road known to have existed along the south side of the building, and perhaps in other buildings to the south not yet located. In addition to this road, the KenchreanRoad that led southwardout of the Agora through the South Stoa bordered the South Basilica on the west. On the east a house was built up against the northern half of the Basilica in the late second century after Christ,its floorlevel with the top of the fourth outer wall course; but there is no indication as to what occupied the high ground to the east in the first century of the building's existence, nor even just how high this ground level was. Like many of the buildings at Corinth, the South Basilica was first partly uncovered during the early years of excavation at Corinth by the American School of Classical Studies. In this case it was in Trench XXIII, dug in 1

Broneer, Corinth, I, iv, p. 114.

1898,2that part of the north wall of the building's core was disclosed. This trench was filled in and was not cleared out again until the spring of 1933, when Professor Oscar Broneer excavated the east end of the South Stoa and also uncovered much of the eastern half of the South Basilica's north wall.3 In the spring of 1934 the excavation of the building was begun4 and it continued until the fall of 1936,5 when the South Basilica was left in much the state in which it exists today (P1.36 1, 2). Many members of the Corinth staff had a hand in uncovering this large edifice, but most of the work was done by Professors Oscar Broneer, Richard H. Howland and D. A. Amyx. The later portico to the building, which was superimposed on a part of the South Stoa, was excavated by Professor Broneer in 1934.6 When the author had finished the study of the Southeast Building in the summer of 1947, he was asked by Professor Broneer to undertake the publication of the South Basilica and its twin, the Julian Basilica. The study was begun in the spring of 1948,7at which time the area was cleaned, completely new plans of the structure were drawn by G. V. von Peschke, and the author took the many photographs used to illustrate the text. The study of the reconstruction of the twin buildings was continued in the summer of 1950, with Edward B. Reed as architect. 2

Fowler, Corinth, I, i, pl. III. Broneer, A.J.A., XXXVII, 1933, p. 565. 4 Broneer, A.J.A., XXXIX, 1935, pp. 60-61. 5 Stillwell, A.J.A., XL, 1936, pp. 29-30, 481-482; Morgan A.J.A., XLI, 1937, pp. 540-541. 6 Broneer, A.J.A., XXXIX, 1935, pp. 57-58. 7 Weinberg, Hesperia, XVIII, 1949, pp. 153-154. 3

THE SOUTHBASILICA

59

THE PRE-BASILICA REMAINS The prehistoric occupation of the site of Corinth, which was previously known at the eastern end of the South Stoa, was found to extend beyond it to the south, for remains of a Neolithic pit were uncovered in the east aisle of the cryptoporticus of the South Basilica, and some remains of the Early Helladic period, mixed with a few Late Neolithic sherds, were found just above hardpan in the area of the core of the building.8 But though the beginnings of habitation in this area came very early, the prehistoric remains end with the Early Helladic period and there follows a long gap, which in the region of the Basilica lasts until the eighth century B.C. To the second half of this century belongs the earliest of the ten wells found within the area of the South Basilica, that in the northern part of the east aisle9(Plan V). The debris from this well's period of use belongs to the third quarter of the eighth century; the filling thrown in when it went out of use dates from the end of this century or the beginning of the seventh. During the Classical period the residential district that lay south of the Greek Agora apparently spread over this area, for within the extent of the South Basilica were found seven wells which had been used and filled in during the fifth, fourth, and third centuries B.C.; two other wells found in the area were filled in Roman times (Plan V). The first well to be filled was that in the southwest corner of the cryptoporticus; the pottery in it belongslargely to the early fifth century and some of it is even earlier. A well in the southwest corner of the core, about ten meters northeast of the other one, was also filled in the fifth century and much of the debris is from the first half of that century. About three meters north of this last well was another which contained remains 8 Weinberg, Hesperia, VI, 1937, p. 488; XVIII, 1949, p. 153. 9 Ibid., pp. 153-154.

of the late fifth and fourth centuries. There are two wells of fourth century date, one in the line of the north wall of the Basilica core, just opposite the entrance porch, the other in the southern part of the east aisle of the cryptoporticus. The remaining two wells of the Classical period contained objects of early Hellenistic date and were filled in the late fourth or, more probably, in the early third century B.C.; one of these is in the eastern half of the south aisle and the other is just outside of, and partly under, the west wall of the Basilica at about the line of the north core wall. It is not surprisingthat the wells are the only considerable Greek remains in an area which was later cut into so deeply. However, there is other evidence of the houses that once occupied this region in several fragments of a pebble mosaic floor (P1.38 1) of the late fifth or fourth century type already known at Corinth.l0 These were found broken up and throwninto the fill between the pre-Basilicaretaining wall just inside the north wall of the core and the core wall itself. In two of the fourth century wells were found fragments of "salt and pepper" mosaics of the same period. Small amounts of Classical and Hellenistic pottery were found in the core, but outside it the cryptoporticus was cut into hardpan, and thus all traces of Greek occupation other than the deep wells were obliterated. The Roman period before the building of the Basilica is representedby an extensive system of channels, a well and a terrace wall. The best preserved section of this system of channels is in the western part of the core (Plan V); it consists of a manhole near the north side of the core from which channels ca. 1.00 m. high go off to the north and southwest; both of these arms are cut short by the core walls. From the northernarm extended side channelsto the east 10

Shear, A.J.A., XXXIII, 1929, p. 527, fig. 10; Weinberg, C.J., XLII, 1946, p. 72, fig. 7.

CORINTH

60

and west. From the fill of these channels came much early Roman pottery-Arretine, Pergamene and Samian wares-as well as a duoviri coin from the reign of Caligula (A.D. 37-41). Among the small stones forming the mouth of the manhole was a fragment of a lamp of Augustan date. When the floor of the cryptoporticus was cleared, many open channels were found cut into hardpan below floor level, and when drawn on the plan it was seen that the northern arm of the system within the core extended beyond the core wall and across the cryptoporticus to the north wall of the Basilica, whereit was cut off. Apparently it emptied into the great drain which ran behind the South Stoa, for it is not evident in the scarp on the north side of this drain; the drain went out of use with the construction of the South Basilica." The southern arm is also traceable beyond the core in a system of drains that splits about two-thirds of the way between the core and the south outer wall. One drain which goes off to the west has been traced as far as the west outer wall; another which runs to the east and then southeast has been traced to about the middle of the south outer wall. Still another drain, apparently part of the same system, runs from the south outer wall, about midway between the central and eastern exedras, northeast to the east wall; a branch of it runs up the center of the east aisle to a point where there was an earlierwall, and here it meets another branch running southeast-northwest which is stopped by the outer wall foundationsat the eastern end. Plate 871 shows many of these drains. That this entire system antedated the Basilica is obvious from the fact that all the channels are cut off by the Basilica walls. The branch that crosses the north aisle of the cryptoporticus was clearly filled in before the building was completed, and sealed over by a thick layer of poros chips which formed part

the hardpan was a little lower than the floor; this is the case only in the western half of the north aisle. The same poros-chipfill was packed over the edge of the foundations in this area and up against the toichobate course. In the south aisle the fill in the drainswas of the same nature as that in the north channel, i.e., soft gray earth in the lower half (apparently from the period of use) and hardpacked red fill above. Two manholes in the northern half of the core which opened into these channels were sealed, apparently when the Basilica was built. The mouth of the western manhole was at 1.60 m. above the floor of the cryptoporticus. Embedded between the small stones of which the upper part of the mouth of this manhole was built was a fragment of a lamp (CL 3336) which cannot be later than the time of Augustus and which gives the terminuspost quemfor the construction of this system. The date of its filling is indicated by a Corinthianduoviricoin of the time of Caligula (A.D. 37-41) which was found in a channel within the core. The well that was filled up at the time of the construction of the Basilica, or shortly before, is that just inside and partly under the west outer wall. It was partly covered by a semicircular base for a pilaster which was added at a later date. The fill is of early Imperial date, with coins of the time of Augustusand Tiberius, except for one found about two meters from the top which is a Corinthian duoviri coin of the year A.D. 68/69. It is this coin which Professor Morgan considered as giving the terminus post quem for the original construction of the South Basilica.12However, it seems considerably later than anything else in the well, and its position near the top suggests that it infiltrated when the semicircular base was laid over the mouth of the well; at that time a fragment of a poros column was set into the fill just under the base to give it a firmer bedding, and this disturbed the upper fill of the

of the cryptoporticusfloorin this area,where well,in whichthe late coinwasfound.Since 11 Corinth, I,

iv, pp. 65-66.

12

Morgan, A.J.A., XL, 1936, p. 482.

THE SOUTHBASILICA all other evidence points to a date earlier than A.D. 68/69 for the construction of the South Basilica, this coin must date a repairlater than the original construction. Also of pre-Basilica date is the wall just inside the core on the north side (P1.37 1, 2; Plan V), extending for about 15.50 m. At its east end it is ca. 0.50 m. behind the north core wall; at its west end ca. 0.70 m.; thus it is parallel with the South Stoa. This wall, the bottom of which is roughly level with the top of the third course of the north core wall, rests on hardpan at its western end, but for most of its length it is founded on a fill of field stones, broken up architectural blocks and tile fragments that varies in depth according to irregularities in hardpan. The wall itself is built of large re-used blocks, many apparently from the South Stoa, and is chinked with fragments of tiles from that building. For most of its length two courses are preserved,with a height of ca. 0.90 m., bringing its top a little below the top of the fifth course of the north core wall. Whether or not this was its total height,

61

the general level of the area within the core was either at about this height or was reduced to it when the Basilica was built, for the entire area was sealed over, level with the top of the fifth course, by a layer of poros chips from the construction debris, and it was then filled up as each course was laid on the inner rectangle, with a poros-chip layer level with the top of each of the subsequent courses. The wall thus clearly antedates the Basilica, though by how much is not known. The construction of reused blocks and tiles is typical of the early colonial period, but seems to last in Corinth into the first century after Christ. The fact that the wall partly covered one of the manholes into the system of channels would preclude a pre-Roman date and would, in fact, indicate that it dates not much before the Basilica itself; as a terrace wall it may actually have been part of the preliminaryoperations in the Basilica construction, serving to hold up the loose habitational debris to the south when the deep cut for the cryptoporticus was made.

THE BASILICA The remains of the South Basilica preserved in situ give a better understanding of the ground floor, or cryptoporticus, of the building than do those of the Julian Basilica, for considerable stretches of the walls are preserved to the height of the beams which supported the floor of the main storey (P1.37 1). The elements of this lower level similarly comprise a large outer rectangle with inner dimensions 38.52 m. by 23.50 m. (measured from the outer wall faces) and a smaller inner rectangle, the core, with outer dimensions 26.80 m. by 11.80 m., leaving an aisle between the two rectangles which is 5.90 m. wide on the north and west sides and 5.85 m. on the other two sides (Plan V). Extending beyond the larger rectangle there is a porch almost in the center

of the north side, 7.65 m. wide and 2.65 m. deep, which is bonded into the north wall; it was reached by a stairway 6.80 m. wide. Outside the south wall, and bonded into it, are three rectangular exedras, the larger central one ca. 9.30 m. by 3.10 m. in outer dimensions, the eastern side one 5.10 m. by 2.00 m., the western side one 4.90 m. by 2.00 m. Inside the cryptoporticus, the four columns on the long axis of the east and west aisles in line with the north and south core walls are part of the original plan of the building, as seem also to be the other supports on the long axis of each of the aisles; the pilasters added against the west and south outer walls are probably later repairs. Since the ground to the south of the Agora

CORINTH

62

rose rapidly, a large cutting into the slope had already been made for the South Stoa,13and a still deeper cutting was made for the Basilica behind it. The great drain back of the Stoa had been cut down well below the level of the Stoa floor,14and the Basilica was planned so that its north wall lay in this drain. For this reason the depth of the foundations and the treatment of the exterior of the ground floor walls varied considerably. When the ground was prepared for the Basilica, a cutting was made into hardpan, varying in depth from about 0.90 m. at the north to somewhat over 3.00 m. at the south. Where this cutting can still be seen on the east side even with the inner face of the south wall, hardpan is at about the level of the top of the fifth outer wall course (P1.37 1), and it was noted by the excavators at about the same level south of the central exedra, where it cannot now be seen. However, at the center of the east wall it must have been no higher than the top of the fourth course, for here there is a window in the fifth course. Against the exterior of the east wall, at least its northern half, the Mosaic House (see below pp. 113-122) was built in the late second century after Christ, and the wall was thus covered for a considerablepart of the main storey. On the west side, the road which led out of the Agora by a ramp through Shop XVI of the South Stoa rose to the south, and as it went along the west side of the Basilica it rose from a level about equal to the top of the third course of the outer wall at the north to the top of the fourth course at the south. There seems to have been no construction in the narrow area, only ca. 4.50 m. wide at the north, between the road and the west wall of the Basilica,15so that the west fagade of the building must have been visible from this side. Thus, while the north wall had its outer face completely exposed and was, consequently, 13 14

Corinth, I, iv, p. 18.

Ibid., pp. 65-66. 15 Ibid., plan III.

dressed smooth and stuccoed, the south wall of the cryptoporticus was completely below ground level, as were at least the lower twothirds of the east and west walls. All the parts of the walls below the surface, which comprises all that is now preserved in situ, had rough exterior surfaces. However, except for this difference, the cryptoporticus walls are the same as those of the superstructure and, since they were all exposed on the interior, can be considered as part of it, for they all rest on a well-marked toichobate and distinct foundations. FOUNDATIONS

As noted above, the north wall of the building was founded in the drain at the rear of the South Stoa and therefore requireddeep foundations. In cleaning out the drain, the greater part of the north face of these foundations was exposed. To the west of the porch foundations, the north wall foundations have a depth of four courses (P1. 38 2), the two lower ones with an average height of 0.44 m., the two upper ones averaging 0.42 m.; the total depth is ca. 1.75 m. The foundations are built of large re-used blocks (P1.38 3), most of them laid as headers and showing anathyrosis on their exposed ends; many are probably South Stoa wall blocks. They were set in a trench with no attempt at alignment on the north face. The top of the fourth course was carefully levelled, however, and on it was set a low toichobate course,0.30 m. high and 1.03 m. thick (P1. 38 2, 3). Both faces of this course

are carefully dressed and the upper part was probably meant to be seen, as it certainly was at least on the interior. The toichobate course extends an average of 0.06 m. beyond the wall face on the north side, ca. 0.09 m. on the south. The foundations extend on an average 0.23 m. beyond the toichobate on the north and ca. 0.28 m. on the south in the one section ca.

6.00 m. long whichhas been exposed.To the east of the porch,whereall of the north face

THE SOUTHBASILICA of the foundations has been exposed except for the small stretch under the later exedra of Room D of the South Stoa,16built against the north wall, there are only three foundation courses below the toichobate with an average total depth of 1.10 m. (Pls. 38 4, 39 1). The

63

on hardpan at a level slightly above the first outer wall course. In the smaller side exedras the walls also rest on hardpan, level with the top of the third outer wall course in the east exedra and the middle of this course in the west exedra. The north porch foundations (P1. 39 s), like those of the north wall, had sufficient depth to reach to the bottom of the great drain. These are four courses in depth (a total of 1.87 m.) and come up as high as the top of the toichobate of the north wall. A channel 0.30 m. wide and ca. 0.04 m. deep is cut in the third course from the bottom, extending the full width of the porch from east to west. It is faced on north and south by the top foundation course, which is set back from the channel on either side, forming a drain 0.44 m. wide, covered by a solid row of large poros blocks which form the first course of the superstructure. On the west side, where alone the foundations can be seen, these blocks begin at 0.48 m. to the east of the west side of the porch foundations.17 Properly speaking, the walls of the inner rectanglehave no foundationsat all. The lowest wall course is higher than the others (ca. 0.60 m. compared with an average of 0.46 m. for the course above) and the lower half of this course is below floor level and rests on the levelled hardpanin a shallowfoundationtrench (P1.37 2; Plan III, 2). Only in one place, where hardpan has been disturbed in the line of the south wall, does there seem to be a foundation course below the lowest wall course (Plan III, 2). Where a stretch ca. 7.00 m. long is ripped out of the north core wall, there remains only the shallow wall trench into which the first course was set.

two upper courses are similar to those to the west, but the lowest course is shallower and seems to have been mainly a levelling course. The south face of the north foundation seems to have been laid close against the scarp in hardpan cut to receive the foundations, and so cannot be seen. The foundations of the other three sides of the building can be seen on the interior in those places where the walls cut across the earlier channels and in a wall trench on the south side; in every instance there are two foundation courses below the toichobate course. Like the northern foundation, these others are composed of re-used blocks laid largely as headers, and the heights of the courses are 0.48 m. (the upper one) and 0.45 m. (the lower one). Here, too, the foundations extend ca. 0.30 m. beyond the inner face of the toichobate in the east wall, but on the south and west they extend only ca. 0.13 m. and their inner face has been carefully aligned. In only one place on the south side can the foundations of these walls be seen on the exterior, and that is in a stretch one meter wide on the west side of the central exedra (P1. 39 2). Here the toichobate course has a rough outer face rather than the smooth one seen ornthe north side, and it extends about 0.10 m. beyond the rough outer face of the wall. Below it there are the two foundation courses, each one extending ca. 0.10 m. farther to the south (Plan III, 2). In general, the upper half of the toichobate seems to have been visible in the THE CRYPTOPORTICUS cryptoporticus. Of the various appendages to the outer recOn the foundationsjust describedrested the the central exedra on the south side walls of the outer and inner rectangles and of tangle,

had no properfoundations,but the wall rested the porchesand exedras.Fortunately,on ei16Ibid., 112, p. plan III.

17

Ibid., p. 122.

64

CORINTH

ther side of the south aisle of the cryptoporticus, the walls are preserved in part to the top of the cuttings for the beams which carriedthe floor above (P1. 37 i). The full height of the outer walls, from the top of the toichobate to the top of the sixth course, that with the beam cuttings, is 3.55 m. (Plan III, 2). The six courses are all identical in height, about 0.59 m., and the blocks average twice that dimension in length, or 1.18 m. to 1.20 m. Only the north outer wall has both faces dressedsmooth and its thickness is 0.85 m. (P1. 37 2). All the other outside walls have their exterior face rough and the blocks vary considerably in thickness, but average ca. 0.75 m. The north wall not only had its north face dressedsmooth, but it was also covered with a coating of rather coarsestucco ca. 0.005 m. thick, the surface of which was well smoothed. This stucco is visible on many of the remaining sections of the north wall, but it is best preserved on a section just east of the east doorway (P1.39 4). Here the wall is preservedin the fourth course in one place and the stucco extends at least this high and probably rose to the level of the main floor; it is unlikely that it continued to the roof. While the walls were made of wellsquared blocks of poros, cut to a uniform size and dressed with a flat chisel, the stone was rather soft and many of the edges chipped off. To improve the appearanceof the interior face of the wall, the joints were pointed up with stucco and so give an impression of very careful workmanship which, however, does not stand too close inspection (P1.40 2, 3). The wall blocks were laid dry and without the use of clamps; there is nowhere any chinking. Pry holes in the upper surface of most of the blocks assisted in shifting the blocks of the course above into place and in most instances seem to indicate that the blocks were laid starting at the center of a wall and working to the corers. On many blocks there is a very nar-

some blocks show a more distinct anathyrosis averaging 0.10 m. in width. The sixth or top course of the outer wall is preservedin three small sections on the south, one on each side of the central exedra, between it and the side ones, and one very close to the southwest corner of the building (Pls. 37 1, 41 1). The beam cuttings in this top course are ca. 0.30 m. wide, 0.26 m. high and extend back 0.36 m. from the inner face of the block. The distance between beams averages 0.58 m.; the beams were ca. 0.90 m. on centers. The fifth course as well is preserved largely in the south wall, and there are three blocks of this course still in situ in the east wall. In the northernmostof these, at a distance ca. 8.00 m. from the inner face of the north outer wall, a window was cut into the east outer wall (P1. 404). Only the south side is preserved; it splays back sharply from ca. 0.62 m. from the inner face of the wall, then for ca. 0.11 m. is perpendicularto the outer face of the wall. Much of the fourth course is preservedin all the walls but the northern one, where there are just two blocks of it in place. With the exception of one block, all of the three lower courses of the south wall are extant; in the east wall all of the first course is preservedand all but the northern quarter of the second and third courses. The first course also runs the entire length of the north wall, with only the corner block at the west end missing; the second and third courses are preserved in the central half of this wall, but these two courses are interrupted by two doorways, one on either side of the central porch (P1. 36 1, 2). The doorway at the east starts at 0.65 m. from the side of the porch, that at the west at 1.15 m., and they are 1.22 m. wide. These doorwaysare actually symmetrical about the axis of the building, but the porch was cut back on the west, which accounts for the discrepancyjust noted. If there once were thresholds, they

row anathyrosis,whichseemsin part to have must have rested on the first wall course,but been the cause of the chippingof the edges; the doorwayswere subsequentlyblockedup

THE SOUTH BASILICA

with large squared blocks and any possible cuttings are not visible. The drop to the floor of the cryptoporticus would have been at least 0.80 m., probably 1.00 m. including the threshold, so a step would have been necessary, but no trace of one remains at either door. How high these doors were originally cannot now be determined, but if their height was twice their width they would have been four courses high and would then have been covered by a lintel in the sixth, or beam course. The west wall remains to a height of four courses in its southern half, but none of the wall itself remains over the toichobate in the northern half. The walls of the inner rectangle, or core, are similar in construction to those of the outer rectangle, but the blocks are lower and therefore somewhat more than seven courses correspond to the six courses of the outer walls (Plan III, 2). As has been said, the lowest course is higher than the others, measuring 0.60 m., but much of it is below the floor level and its top is only 0.22 m. above the top of the toichobate of the outer walls. Above this lowest course are seven courses ca. 0.47 m. high, bringing the top of the eighth course, in which the beam cuttings are made, even with that of the sixth course of the outer walls. The individual blocks vary much more in length than do those of the outer walls-from 1.00 m. to 1.50 m. and averaging 1.30 m. The exterior surfaces of the walls, facing the cryptoporticus, are dressed smooth with a flat chisel (P1. 40 3) like the inner surfaces of the outer walls, and where the edges are broken they are similarly pointed up. Here, too, the anathyrosis is very narrow, if detectable at all. The inner surfaces were left rough, as these were covered by filling the core up to the top of the course with beam cuttings. While the blocks vary somewhat in thickness, the average thickness of these inner walls is 0.90 m., a little thicker than the walls

65

eighth, or top, course is still in place and has beam cuttings corresponding to those in the sixth course of the outer south wall (Pls. 36 1, 40 1). These cuttings likewise average 0.30 m. in width and 0.26 m. in depth, but while those in the eastern part of the wall are cut 0.40 to 0.50 m. into the block, those in the western part are only ca. 0.35 m. Morethan half of the seventh course of this side is preserved. The fifth and sixth courseseachhave a blockmissing at the eastern end only, and the four lower courses are complete. On the east side (P1.36 2) the four lower courses are also completely preserved,and at the northern end parts of the fifth and sixth courses are in place. The north inner wall (P1. 37 2) is completely removed in the middle stretch, exactly behind the porch, and only the cutting in hardpan for the wall is left (Plan V); to the east of the gap the five lower courses are preserved and a few blocks of the sixth course as well, while to the west of the gap only the lowest course is preserved to the corner and there are a few blocks of the second and third courses in place. On the west side only the lowest course is complete (P1. 36 1) but in the southern half the coursesstep up until a block of the sixth course is still in place at the very corner. On either side of the south aisle of the cryptoporticus,at just about its center, a series of inscriptions has been cut in the wall blocks. On the outer wall there are three such inscriptions, all reading TTPO (P1.40 2). The lowest is on the toichobate course at a point opposite the central internal support base of the south aisle, thus just about on the axis of the building as well as that of the large central exedra. The somewhat irregularletters average 0.07 m. in height. Just above and a little to the east, in the first wall course, the inscription is repeated; the TTPare about 0.09 m. high, the O is 0.06 m. Also in the second wall course, but considerablyto the right and just opposite the

of the outerrectangle. next internalsupportbase to the west, is the In two stretcheson the southinnerwall the third inscription;the liP are about 0.10 m.

CORINTH

66

high and the O is 0.07 m. This last inscription also falls within the limit of the central exedra. On the opposite side of the aisle, and also just about on the axis of the building (P1.401, in line with the long, narrow central support base shown on the left) are four more of these inscriptions (P1.40 3). Again, one is on the lowest course above ground, here the first wall course. It consists of a well cut TlPabout 0.08 m. high; there is possibly a very faint O. Just above the T of this inscription is another n, ca. 0.10 m. high, cut in the second course block, but very close to its right edge. There is no more of the inscription now, though there may have been before the block was trimmed. The block to the right, unusually short in length, has near its right side another rTP,ca. 0.08 m. high. Here too there may have been a much smaller O in line with the upper part of the P. The last inscription is above in the fifth wall course, again on a block of less length than is usual in the wall. It has only HTP, averaging 0.07 m. in height, with no traces of an O. But the P is very faint and there may have been some dressing of the block after the cutting of the letters. It is curious that the three examples of this inscription in the outer wall are all complete, the four in the inner wall all incomplete; yet there can be little doubt that they all served the same purpose. Perhaps that purpose can be divined largely from the position of all on or near the axis of the building and within the limits of the central exedra. Clearly the HlPO is an abbreviation, and when the inscriptions were first noticed it was at once suggested

INTERIOR SUPPORTS

In the cryptoporticus of the South Basilica there are two sets of supports, one consisting of a row of central posts down the long axis of each of the four aisles, the other a system of pilasters, possibly used only on the south and west outer walls (Plan V). In the first system there are two kinds of bases, but both seem certainly to be part of the original building. First, there are the four supports on the axis of the east and west aisles which are aligned with the north and south core walls. Bases for three of these supports are in situ (only the cutting for the southeast one is preserved, P1. 44 2), and on the two northern bases the poros columns are still standing (P1. 44 1, 2). The bases are made of well-cut, squared slabs set in a shallow cutting in the hardpan floor; they projectca. 0.06 m. above it, but are 0.05 m. below the top of the toichobate. Of the columns preservedin situ, the eastern one (P1.44 2) has a diameter of 0.41 m. at the top and 0.432 m. at the bottom, the western one (P1.44 1) 0.425 m. at the top and 0.44m. at the bottom; the western column is 2.215 m. high and the eastern 2.27 m. There are no cuttings on the tops of the columns. The top of the eastern column is 0.10 m. below the top of the fourth outer wall course. Across these columns, which had some form of capital, ran a girderspanning the end aisles on the line of the long walls of the core. These carried the beams that crossed the long aisles in the distance between the ends of the core and the north and south aisles. This arrangement is confirmed in the sixth course that it might stand for rrpoSIplov;l8 possibly at the east end of the south outer wall of the it was for Trp6oupov rather than the diminutive. Julian Basilica, where a few blocks of the The propriety of such an interpretation of the sixth course are still preserved and show no abbreviation will be reviewed below (p. 109) in beam cuttings (see above p. 45). The beams connection with the discussion of the possible across the end aisles would then be limited to reconstruction of the central exedra and the the distance between these girders, that is, the use of the building itself. width of the ends of the core (Plan VII, 2). 18

Stillwell, A.J.A., XL, 1936, p. 29.

Alongthe axis of eachof the aislesis a series of bases. Of these, seven are still in place in

67

THE SOUTHBASILICA the south aisle of the South Basilica (P1. 43 4) and two in the west aisle (P1. 44 1). For the three in the east aisle (P1. 44 2) and the four eastern ones in the north aisle (P1. 37 2), only the shallow cuttings in hardpan have been found. Not even these cuttings could be found for the northern base in the west aisle, for the two westernmost bases in the south aisle, and for the five bases in the center and western half of the north aisle. The bases in the north and south aisles are spaced roughly 4.10 m. on centers, those in the east and west aisles ca. 2.90 m. on centers. The nine blocks which are in situ vary considerablyin size and shape, and extend above the flooranywherefrom0.19m. to 0.33 m. Two of them are clearly re-used Greek blocks, still bearing a fine Greek stucco and most likely coming from the South Stoa. It is most probable that these bases supported not columns, but heavy wooden posts which carried a girder, which in turn supported beams crossing the aisles. Evidence for one of these girders is preserved in the southeast corner of the Julian Basilica, where there is a cutting in the upper half of the fifth and the lower half of the sixth courses of the south outer wall, on the axis of the east aisle (see above p. 44). An auxiliary line of supports is preserved along the south and west outer walls of the South Basilica. Seven bases were foundin place along the south wall (P1. 43 4) and four along the west wall (P1. 44 1). The bases, except for the northernmost one on the west side, are rectangular blocks of varying size, but with a constant height equal to that of the toichobate course. They are set against this course, and their tops are flush with the top of the toichobate (P1. 45 1, 2). The one exception, on the west side, is a poros base of an Ionic engaged half-column on a square low plinth (P1. 45 3). A cutting 0.48 m. wide and 0.08 m. deep was made in the toichobate course to bond this stone into it, and then the back of the base was

top of the base is ca. 0.20 m. above the top of the toichobate course. The bases on the south side are rather evenly spaced, with an interaxial distance of ca. 2.85 m., but those on the west side are less even, varying from 2.55 m. to 4.00 m. Only two pilaster bases align with the axial supports; the southern one on the west side (P1.45 2), which is in line with the southwest corner of the core and the south column of the west aisle, and the next from the east end on the south side, which is almost on the axis of the east aisle. The only pilaster still in place is the one at the southern end of the western series (P1. 45 2). It is made of three blocks 0.58 m. wide, 0.297 m. thick and 0.77 m. high. The pilaster rests partly on the top of the toichobate and partly on its base. The preserved top is flush with the top of the fourth outer wall course; the wall is not preserved above this point, but since the three blocks were calculated to bring the pilaster even with the wall coursing at this point, it is unlikely that the pilaster continued higher. Its height is just about that of the two preserved columns, and like them it probably had a capital and supported a girder running along the wall to give greater bearing surface and less span to the beams. It has also been suggested that the pilasters were added "to strengthen the floor at a point where statues were set against the wall on the upper storey."19 There are clear traces of the next pilaster to the north on the west wall (P1. 45 1), for the joints had been pointed up with stucco, which remained after the blocks were ripped out. In this case the pilaster was only ca. 0.45 m. wide. No such traces of the pilasters were visible elsewhere; there are no bases or traces along the north and east outer walls and none along the core walls. PORCH

Beyond the outer rectangle there are the

hacked away, as was also the back of the large centralporchon the north side and the 19 Stillwell, A.J.A., XL, 1936, p. 29. plinth, to fit the block against the wall. The

68

CORINTH

three exedras on the south. The porch, which is not quite centered on the north wall, but has been cut off a little on the west, possibly to align its west side with the Greekwall between shops XI and XII of the South Stoa, has a total width of 7.65 m. and a depth of 2.65 m. (Plan V). It consists of a central core of concrete which measures 5.85 m. by 1.75 m. and which is preservedto a height of 2.90 m. above the top of the toichobate of the outer wall (Pls. 37 2, 41 i; Plan III, 2). The lowest superstructure course of the porch consists of a row. of blocks which bond into the north wall and then extend 1.75 m. to the north of it, bridging the drain cut through the upper part of the porch foundations (Pl. 39 3). The concrete core rests on this row of blocks; it is then sheathed on the south by the north outer wall of the Basilica and on the other three sides by walls of poros blocks ca. 0.85 m. thick, in courses of the same height as those of the outer rectangle. On the east side one block of the fourth course is in place, on the west side only the three lower courses, and on the north side, the two lower courses, the bottom one of which is now completely underground except for part of its western edge. This porch was reached by a flight of steps; parts of the two lowest are still preserved (P1.41 2). The bottom step had its riser 4.50 m. to the north of the porch face. This step consists of three marble blocks, the eastern one 2.35 m. long, the central one 3.10 m. long, and the western one 1.55 m., but it is broken off irregularly at its western end. Of the second step there is a block 1.56 m. long at the east end and one 1.78 m. long at the west end, the latter also roughly broken at its outer edge; the middle block is missing. As now placed, the steps have a riser of 0.23 m. and a tread

first step is ca. 0.07 m. above the top of the toichobate of the wall between the Greek shops of the South Stoa; the bottom of the first step is thus well below the floor level of the Greek shops. The stairway was flanked on the east and west by paratid walls, only the foundations of which remain. That on the west was founded on the old Greek foundation for the wall between Shops XI and XII, which at its southern end came within 1.95 m. of the north face of the porch; there is no trace of a foundation in this space, but it may have been ripped out when the later entranceway was built. This Greek foundation has its west face aligned with the west face of the porch. The eastern wall of the staircase had a foundation 0.44 m. wide, extending 4.32 m. to the north of the porch and with its east face in line with the east face of the porch. The stairs themselves were set with their front edge resting for ca. 0.10 m. on the step below, but the rest was set on the rubble concrete core of the stairway, which was probably laid down in layers as each step was set in place. This stairway occupied the width of about one-and-a-half Greek shops; the distance between the east side of the staircaseand the wall between Shops IX and X, which apparently still stood in early Roman times, is ca. 2.10 m. and this probably served as a passageway leading to the east cryptoporticusdoorway. The doorway to the west side of the porch must have been approached through Shop XIV and the wide corridor left behind the Roman Fountain which occupied the area of Shops XII and XIII of the South Stoa.20 While the two blocks of the second step have smooth exposed faces, those of the lower step have their surfaces rough picked, except for the block at the western end which is of 0.30 m., indicating that the flight had a partly worn smooth on its upper face and total of sixteen steps, which would reach a sloped down to the south, indicating that this level ca. 0.13 m. above the top of the beam block had been turned around. Possibly the

coursesat a point about even with the north loweststep was alwaysburied,as it was later. face of the porch(Plan III, 2). The top of the 20 Corinth, I, iv, p. 125, plans III and XVI.

THE SOUTH BASILICA

The whole stairway may have been relaid at the time of the building of the monumental entranceway, though most likely on the same lines as the first stairway. The lowest step at present is cut into the Greek foundation ca. 0.15 m. from its eastern face and is set down into the foundation so that its top is only 0.06 m. above the foundation. At its eastern end it abuts partly on the northern end of the foundation for the stairway, but extends 0.16 m. beyond the foundation and has its top 0.13 m. below the top of the foundation. The top of the second step rises only 0.07 m. above the eastern foundation, which must thus either have showed above ground, if the lower step was exposed, or else have been coveredby pavement like the later court pavement, which also covered most of the second step. From its construction, the east foundation would seem clearly to be contemporary with the original porch and Basilica. ENTRANCECOURT

The original entrance court for the South Basilica was in the area of Shops X and XI of the Stoa, which were demolished for this purpose. Some time later this entranceway was enhanced by the building of a monumental fagade on the line of the front of the old Greek shops and by an enlarged court leading to the stairway (P1.41 1, 2). The east wall of the court remained on the line of the Greek wall between shops IX and X. It extended from the north wall of the Greek shops back to within 1.00 m. of the north Basilica wall. Near the north end two of the Greek orthostates were used and at the south end, beyond the south wall of the Greek Stoa, there were two more orthostates; the rest of the wall was built in two courses, 0.53 m. high, which were made of re-used Greek Stoa wall blocks. The bottom of this wall is 0.30-0.40 m. below the later split-

69

been exposed it is covered with a coating of stucco 0.02 m. thick, the outer 0.003 m. of which is a layer of fine plaster which is colored a deep burgundy shade. The eastern part of the south side of the court is closed off by a wall in line with the north face of the porch and running between the northeast corner of the porch and the east wall of the court. It is ca. 0.57 m. wide and its present top is 0.10 m. below the preservedtop of the east wall. It is built of squared poros blocks laid in mortar, and it bonds with neither wall at its ends. This wall effectively cut off the passage to the east cryptoporticusdoor and must have been built after the doorwas blocked up. It appears to be contemporary with the split-pebble pavement. On the west, the boundaries of the court were pushed some 0.90 m. beyond the old wall between Shops XI and XII, and a new foundation was laid running down the eastern part of the fountain room and spoiling its symmetrical arrangement.21 Most of this foundation has a width of 1.05 m. and is preservedin one course ca. 0.50 m. deep which is laid in mortar and chinked with tiles, apparently the same workmanship as in the short wall between the porch and the eastern side of the court. This foundation extends back to a point slightly to the south of the front of the first step, where it abuts on older walls of the fountain room, which were left in place. Apparently a short masking wall was erected, only 0.90 m. long, even with the front of the stairs. Thus the stairway was not symmetrically placed in the court, being 2.10 m. from the east wall and 0.90 m. from the west wall. There is also a short wall running from the north side of the porch westward to the west wall of the court, 0.90 m. away. The approachto the court is from the north and consists of a great distyle-in-antis fagade of colossal proportions, which is centered on the north side of the court (P1.41 , 2; Plan V).

pebble pavement of the court, and in one Short walls 0.47 m. thick extend for 1.35 m. 21Ibid., p. 123. place where this lower part of the wall has

70

CORINTH

from the east and west court walls on the line of the Greek foundation of the front wall of the shops. Here they abutted on the stylobate and the antae. The stylobate is made of five huge marble blocks (P1.41 2), 1.35 m. wide and having the following lengths from east to west respectively: 1.46 m., 1.715 m., 1.477 m., 1.835 m. and 1.427 m. While the first two and the fourth are ca. 0.41 m. high, the middle one is only 0.275 m. high and the one at the west end 0.305 m. The Greekfoundation was ripped out for the width of the stylobate and a new one laid at a lower level, extending 0.30-0.40 m. beyond the stylobate to the north. The stylobate blocks were laid on this foundation on a bed of mortar like that used on the other foundations and walls built at the same time. On this stylobate the two anta bases and the eastern column base were found in place; a large part of the western column base was found elsewhere and replaced. The antae are wider than the walls on which they abut and extend some 0.11 m. on each side; their bases rest on the stylobate with their position clearly marked by a setting line, as are also the settings for the columns (Pls. 40 5, 42 2). Two large square dowels hold the anta bases in position, and pour channels run to them from the foot of the bases on the side facing the columns. The column bases also are held in place by two large square dowels apiece (P1. 40 5); for the eastern base the pour channels lead in from the south, but for the western base they come from the east and west. One dowel cutting that can be seen under the western column base is 0.12 m. square and has a depth of 0.086 m. All the bases have a profile consisting of torus, scotia and torus, with narrowfasciae between, giving a total height of 0.316 m. Each of the anta bases has a large square dowel hole on top, 0.10 by 0.10 by 0.07 m. deep, with a pour channel leading in from the south side. The column bases have a circular dowel hole at the

the two columns is 2.85 m.; from column centers to the back of the antae is 2.62 m. While nothing of the fagade remains in situ above the anta and column bases, every element but the column capitals is representedby fragments found close to the original site (P1. 41 i), for the colossal scale of the marble order made difficult the moving of pieces without first breaking them up into smaller pieces. The missing capitals can be restored on the basis of the preserved anta capitals, thus giving a complete picture of the original fagade (Plan VI). Although the reconstruction of both the South Basilica and the Julian Basilica will be discussed later, it is best to consider here the reconstruction of the entrance facade of the South Basilica since it has no parallel in the Julian Basilica, which faced directly onto the Lower Agora. Remains of the antae are most numerous. Three large fragments were found close to the originalentranceway(P1.421,5)and one almost complete block appeared near the northeast corner of the South Basilica (P1. 42 4). The total height of this last block is 1.72 m., but the drumheight of ca. 1.80 m. indicated by the one preserved column fragment (P1. 42 3) shows that the blocks may not all have had the same height. It is the drum height which has been adopted in the reconstruction. The best preserved anta block shows again the square dowel hole (P1.42 4) with a pour channel running to the right side, on the court in this case since this block is from the east anta. Two large cuttings are for the U-clamps which held the anta to the wall. The other fragment of the east anta (P1. 42 5) has both ends damaged. Two fragments also remain of the west anta (P1.42 1), one badly damaged at both ends, the other, the topmost block, including the moulding and showing also the dowel and clamp cuttings on top. Again, the pour channel leads to the court side of the anta. Fortunately, a

center,with a diameterof 0.12 m. and a depth large piece of each anta capital is preserved. of 0.075 m. The interaxial distance between Althoughbadlydamaged,the capitalfromthe

THE SOUTHBASILICA

71

east anta (P1. 43 i, 2) gives the full width and shows part of both sides as well as the front; 1.b67 p!-------------that from the west anta (P1. 43 3) gives the total height, 0.97 m., as well as the complete corner, which is missing on the other pieces. 4Only the angle volute is missing, and this has been restoredon the analogy of similarcapitals; so that it has been possible to offer a full reconstruction of the anta shown in Plan IX, 1 Much less is preserved of the columns, but fortunately the one substantial fragment of a t / drum that remainshas its full length of 1.80 m. L-(P1. 42 3). The base exists and has a height of 0.315 m.; the capital would have had the same .740 ---i----OF ENTABLATURE FIG. 5. DRAWING height as that of the anta, 0.97 m. The column OF MONUMENTAL OF ENTRANCE FA9ADE COURT must have been made up of four drums, and if they were of equal height the total height -'4-.5c would have been 8.485 m. To complete the about 10 m. from the top of the toichobate to order, there are well preserved architrave- the top of the ridge. The discrepancy in our frieze and cornice blocks (P1. 41 i). One archi- restoration may well be due to the fact that trave-frieze block (P1. 42 5, left) is preserved all the column drums were taken to be 1.80 m., for its entire length of 2.90 m.; on its frieze is whereas the one anta block with its full length a carelessly cut late inscription and on the preservedis only 1.72 m. If two of the column architrave the name Valentinian, probably drums were of this shorter length, the total dating from a reconstruction of the fa9ade, or height of the order would have been almost some other re-use of the blocks after the earth- exactly 10 m. In any case, the monumental quake of A.D. 375.22 The profile of the archi- fa9ade to the court of the South Basilica must trave-frieze with its two identical faces is have been designed to fit beneath the ridge of shown in Figure 5. While the preservedcornices the South Stoa roof, for while the roof over the were more fragmentary (Pls. 41 1, 42 i), the back part of the building was drastically profile could be reconstructed without ques- changedwith the various Roman remodellings, tion (Fig. 5), and only the length of the cornice that over the colonnade was rebuilt in essenblocks remains unknown. With a total com- tially the form it had had in the Greek Stoa. bined height of architrave-frieze and cornice Indeed, when the monumental fagade was equal to 1.50 m., the complete height of the built, there was an unroofed court to the south order comes to 9.985 m. Since the top of the of it, and from the porch of the South Basilica stylobate was at ca. 0.18 m. above the top of one had the only free and full view of this the toichobate of the front shop wall of the fagade, shown as reconstructedin Plan VI. Greek stoa, the total height from the toichoOn the axis of the court there is a large imbate to the top of the cornice, on which must pluvium 2.20 m. square and ca. 0.28 m. deep have rested the ridge of the South Stoa roof, (P1. 41 2; Plan V), the sides of which are built comes to ca. 10.165 m. For his restoration of of seven layers of tiles 0.30 m. square and 0.035 the South Stoa, Professor Broneer estimates m. thick, which are laid in mortar. The floor --------------7

for the front wall of the shops a height of of the impluvium is alsomadeof tilescovered 22 Broneer, A.J.A., XXXIX, 1935, p. 58.

withcement,whichis carriedup the sidesas

CORINTH

72

well. The north side of the impluvium is 1.80m. from the inside of the stylobate; the south side is 2.55 m. from the front of the first step. A terracotta drain pipe leads off from the northwest corner of the impluvium and runs northwest under the stylobate just in front of the western anta base. The rest of the court is covered with a paving of split pebbles laid in mortar with the split surfaces up. At the north side, the pavement is ca. 0.007 m. below the top of the stylobate; on the south it goes over the first step and abuts on the second step at ca. 0.10 m. below its top; the whole pavement slopes down toward the north. Apparently a trench had been cut through this pavement from north to south about on the line of the eastern anta, and the pavement destroyed here was replaced by roughly laid slabs of marble. EXEDRAS

Abutting on the south outer wall of the South Basilica are three exedras, a large central one and smaller ones at the sides (P1.37 1; Plan V). While it was necessary for the excavators to cover up much of these exedras in order to build a heavy retaining wall immediately behind the south outer wall, openings have been left in which can be seen the side walls and part of the rear walls as well. The central exedra, on the north-south axis of the building, has an inner width of 7.65 m., exactly that of the porch on the north side, but since the porch centers a little east of the axis, the exedra is not immediately behind it. However, the differenceis only ca. 0.25 m., which would not have been noticeable in the interior of a building of this size. The depth of the exedra, from the inner face of the south outer wall, is 3.12 m. The small exedras are 3.45 m. wide and 2.00 m. deep; they are 3.70 m. in from the inner face of the end walls of the Basilica.

the walls of the two rectangles, though the height of the blocks varies somewhat and the coursing does not agree exactly with that of the south outer wall, into which the exedras are bonded on the south side. The west wall of the central exedra (and the small portion of the south wall which is visible) is preserved for a total of five courses (shownin the Section, Plan III, 2, instead of the east wall), the uppermost course having its top even with the top of the beam course. Only the lowest coursehas a rough interior face, and it is below the level of hardpan, which here is cut down to the middle of the third outer course; the rest of the courses are all dressed smooth and have pointed joints like the cryptoporticus walls. The north end blocks of the upper two courses of the west wall are gone, but the courses below come to the outside of the south outer wall, and the first and third coursesare bonded in for ca. 0.08 m. Of the east side wall of the central exedra, only the north end block of the top course now shows, its top even with that of the beam course. Much of the eastern part of this exedra was not uncovered because a later mosaic was laid over it (P1. 46 3). Of the two smaller exedras, the western is the better preserved,having been incorporated into a late Roman bath. Three courses of its west wall can now be seen in the southwest corner, the top even with that of the beam course; on the south wall the uppermost course is missing. In the east wall there are three courses, one of them lower than the lowest one now visible in the west wall, and this lowest course (fourth course from the top) is also to be seen at the east end of the south wall. The bottom of this fourth course is ca. 0.35 m. below the top of the third course of the outer wall. Apparently all these walls also had smooth inner faces, though they are now much burned,having been part of the firing chamber of the bath. In the eastern exedra, the one

The walls of the exedras average0.80 m. in preservedcourse of both the east and west thicknessand are built in the samemanneras walls and both ends of the south wall'sinner

THE SOUTHBASILICA face can be seen. This single course corresponds to the fourth course of the south outer wall and, like it, is 0.60 m. high. Here it can be seen clearly that the inner faces of the blocks are dressed smooth and the outer faces are roughly picked. MAINFLOOR

While the lower storey, the cryptoporticus, of the South Basilica is better preserved than that of the Julian Basilica, because of the fact that it was filled in the second century after Christ(see below pp. 76-77) and the debrisfrom the destruction of the building piled up over it and protected it, for the same reason much less is known of the main floor of the South Basilica. Since the level of the main floor was already well above that of the Upper Agora, the destruction debris remained near the surface and was open to continuous plundering, with the result that not a stone remains in place above the level of the beam course of the cryptoporticus.However, much of the material was re-used in the immediate vicinity, and it has now been removed from late walls in the area and laid out on the fill of the core (P1. 36 1, 2). The important members will be considered in the discussion of the reconstruction of the Basilicaswhichfollowsin the next chapter. From the remains in the cryptoporticus fill, however, it is clear that duringthe first century of its use, before the Hadrianic re-building, the main floor was elaborately adorned in a manner similar to that of the Julian Basilica. Piles of fragments of painted stucco and marble slabs, both plain and decorated,were found all over the floor of the cryptoporticus. These indicate that the lower parts of the walls were most probably revetted with marble, while the rest of the surface was covered with painted stucco. Relatively few inscriptions, on the other hand, came from the fill, and they were apparently not so important in the decoration of the South Basilica walls as they were in the Julian Basilica. Some inscribed monuments stood about, probably along the walls and in

73

the intercolumniationsof the inner colonnade. Here, too, there were some statues, but only one was found in the cryptoporticus fill and another on the core. They are probably those which suffered in the destruction; others may have been saved and continued to adorn the building in its next phase. On the other hand, there may have been fewer statues than in the Julian Basilica, just as there seem to have been fewer inscriptions. In the Hadrianic rebuilding, the main floor received a marble interior colonnade, many of the parts of which have been recovered from late walls in the area. These will be discussed later. SCULPTURE23

Of the two major sculptures which came from the South Basilica, one statue can be assigned with certainty to the building in its first phase, before the Hadrianic rebuilding. This statue of a winged Nike24(P1. 46 l) was found against the inside of the north outer wall on the cryptoporticus floor, just behind the east side of the porch. "The figure of the goddess is clad in an Ionic chiton with diploidion girt high beneath the breasts. She is representedin a striding attitude with the left leg, finely modelled beneath the drapery, advanced and supporting her weight. The bare right leg, revealed through an opening in the garment, is bent at the knee. The wings were carved separately and set in by means of marble tenons inserted into rectangular cuttings on the back of the shoulders and doweled in with lead. When the lead was removed from around the tenons, which were still in place, it was found that each tenon was marked with a letter, that on the left wing with a r, and the 23 I am greatly indebted to Professor Edward Capps, Jr., of Oberlin College, who has furnished the descriptions of the statues from which the following quotations were taken. Professor Capps is preparing the publication of the second volume on sculpture from the Corinth excavations (Corinth, IX, ii), in which these statues will be fully described and discussed as to style. 24 Inv. No. Sc 1932. Height with base 1.235 m., without base ca. 1.15 m. Head, arms, lower right leg, feet and wings missing. Pentelic marble.

74

CORINTH

right one with a A; the correspondingletters were cut in the back of the statue just below the dowel holes for the attachment of the wings. The right arm seems to have been broken and repairedin antiquity, for a lead dowel is still preserved at the break. The left arm stretched forward and the hand probably held a wreath or palm branch. "The modelling of the figure is accurate and the treatment of the drapery, with its marked transparency and decorative use of sweeping, rhythmic folds, reflects the characteristic style of Attic work of the late fifth and early fourth centuries B.C." Since the Nike was found in the cryptoporticusfill of Hadrianic date, this offers a firm terminus ante quem. "It represents, therefore, another product of the local 'NeoAttic' school which apparently flourished at Corinth in the second half of the first century after Christ. "The presence of the Greek letters on the wing tenons and beside the dowel holes may indicate that the Nike once had a companion figure whose wings would have been marked with the letters A and B. If there were originally a pair of Nikes adorning the South Basilica, they may well have served as akroteriafor the gable of the porch on the north side. That the Nike was intended to be seen from below is clearly indicated by the distorted proportions of the figure,in particularthe elongation of the legs; when viewed from below the proportions appear normal. Or if placed high on the wall, the two Nikes may have flanked the entrance on the interior." The second statue, of a nude male figure (P1. 46 2), was found on top of the core of the cryptoporticus, just inside its south wall and behind the sixth course.25"The statue is that of a young man, nude save for a single garment which rests on the left shoulder, whence it 25 Inv. No. Sc 1973. Height with base ca. 1.93 m. Two main pieces joined together, the break coming just above the left knee and passing through the tree-trunk support. Head, arms, right leg below thigh, part of left foot missing. Marble resembles Pentelic.

came down behind the body and presumably passed over the left forearm before merging with the tree-trunk support. The weight of the figure apparently rested on the missing right leg, as is indicated by the medial line, the sloping right shoulder and the slightly flexed left knee. The head, which was carved from the same block of marble as the torso, was apparently turned slightly to the right. "The design and style of the statue closely resemble the Lucius and Gaius Caesar (P1. 33 2, i) from the Julian Basilica, although the proportions are slightly more attenuated. The archetype for our figure, as in the case of the statues of Lucius and Gaius Caesar, is in the Polykleitan circle, although the particular model for our torso should probably be placed in the early fourth century. That Roman portrait statues were often mechanically copied from Greek models by the pointing process is dramatically shown by the two perforated mounds or puntelli which still exist on the left elbow of the Lucius Caesar.26By an oversight these were not removed. "These considerations suggest that the torso from the South Basilica was also a portrait statue, possibly of the imperial household. The style and workmanshipsuggest that it is later than the Julian Basilica group and was executed in the mid-firstcentury after Christ." The finding of one statue so similar to the series of imperial portrait statues which adorned the Julian Basilica suggests that the South Basilica as well may have housed such a series. If they continued to decorate the building after its Hadrianic rebuilding, at which time the cryptoporticus was filled, they would have stood exposed to destruction either in the earthquake of 375 or the subsequent sack by the Goths in 395. Their disappearance is thus understandable, but there is no certainty that so large a group of statues ever existed in the South Basilica. 26

Johnson, Corinth, IX, No. 135, p. 74; cf. G. M. A. Richter, Ancient Italy, Ann Arbor, 1955, p. 110, fig. 300.

75

THE SOUTHBASILICA INSCRIPTIONS27

As in the case of the sculpture, many fewer inscriptionswere found in the area of the South Basilica than in that of the Julian Basilica. None of the inscriptions has been found to have anything to do with the earliest phase of the building or to add any information concerning the date of its erection. What is interesting, on the other hand, is "that no inscription has been found in the South Basilica which antedates the reign of Trajan; the texts are all second century after Christ or later. This does not mean that the South Basilica did not exist in the first century, but at least it would appear that there were no inscriptions in it until the second century. The earliest datable

text is Inv. No. 1570B,whichjoins otherfragments and refersto a proconsulnamed Gal[lus], possibly L. Munatius Gallus, proconsul in the year 98/99. A second which must be a close contemporary is, of course, the inscription to the deified Nerva (Inv. No. 1655). Three of the texts appear to date from the reign of Trajan, two from the reign of Hadrian, four from the second century, three from the third century, and two are early Byzantine gravestones, probably late fourth or fifth century." This interesting absence of inscriptions from the first several decades of the building's history may be accounted for in one of several ways. It will be suggested below (p. 86) that there is evidence for rusticated masonry on the interior of the main floor in the original Basilicas, or at least in one of them. There is also evidence that this rustication was later hacked away and that the walls were then probably covered with plaster and painted. This might have occurred in the South Basilica after the disturbance which necessitated the addition of pilasters against the south and 27 In connection with his publication of another volume on inscriptions found at Corinth (Corinth,VIII, iii), Professor John H. Kent has very kindly reviewed those found in the area of the South Basilica. The quotations given here are from correspondence with Professor Kent, to whom I am greatly indebted.

west outer walls, a repair dated to 68/69 or later. Certainlythe walls of the South Basilica were covered with painted plaster at the time of the Hadrianic remodelling, for much of it fell into the cryptoporticusbefore it was filled. It is possible, then, that no inscriptions were attached to the rusticated walls, but that when the walls were smoothed and plastered, inscriptions were placed on them, as they had apparently been placed on the walls of the Julian Basilica from the beginning. After the Hadrianic remodelling of the South Basilica, the walls seem once again to have been plastered and painted, and they were probably decorated with marble wainscoting and with assorted inscriptions as well. It is also possible that at the time of the damage to the South Basilica which necessitated the filling of the cryptoporticusand the rebuildingof the structure, all earlier sculptures and inscriptions were cleared out, a few finding their way into the cryptoporticus, and that then a new series was started, with only inscriptions of current interest being replaced on the walls. HISTORY AND CHRONOLOGY DATE OF ORIGINAL CONSTRUCTION

In discussing the pre-Basilica remains, it was noted that the extensive system of drains was put out of use by the construction of this building, and that in one of these drains was found a Corinth duoviri coin of the time of Caligula (A.D. 37-41),

which would give a

terminus post quem for the original construction. This is confirmedby another duoviri coin of the same date which was found below the layer of poros chips that was put down all across the core at the level of the top of the sixth inner wall course. More evidence for the date of the original construction was obtained in the fill thrown in behind the south outer wall from the east side of the eastern exedra to the east end. According to the excavator,

this fillwasput in afterthe Basilicawaserected to the height of the top of the cryptoporticus,

76

CORINTH

and in it was found a Corinth duoviri coin of the period of Claudius (A.D. 41-54).28 This

would indicate, then, that while the building may have been started in the reign of Caligula, it must have been very late in that reign, since coins of Claudius were already current by the time the cryptoporticus was built. We have already considered (p. 60) the single coin of A.D. 68/69 which was found in the second meter of the fill of the well which is partly under the base of the engaged half-column set against, and partly into, the west outer wall of the cryptoporticus.It seems most reasonable to believe that it belongs to the period when the base was set against the wall and the upper part of the fill in the well was disturbed to put in a porosblock for added support for the base. A date at the very end of the reign of Caligula or early in the reign of Claudius agrees completely with both the evidence from the Southeast Building-which indicated that the early building on the site was demolished in the time of Tiberius or later to make way for the Julian Basilica, which must then be from the time of Tiberius or later-and with the epigraphical and numismatic evidence, which dates the Julian Basilica as well to the same time, about A.D. 40. There seems thus to be no doubt as to the contemporaneity of the original construction of the twin Basilicas. POSSIBLE REPAIRS

The coin of A.D. 68/69 suggests, as already stated, that the pilasters were added to the south and west outer walls of the cryptoporticus as a later repair, and the fact that they do not bond into the wall, except for the odd engaged column base, would also point that way. The occasion may possibly have been the great earthquake of A.D. 79, to which a building with a cryptoporticus such as this would be particularly susceptible. There is no evidence, however, that the Julian Basilica

CRYPTOPORTICUS FILL

For some reason, most likely structural, the cryptoporticus was abandoned about the middle of the second century after Christ and was entirely filled to the level of the beam course. The building above was rebuilt or repaired, eliminating the ground floor which probably was blamed for the structural weakness that caused its collapse; earlier repairs had already indicated this weakness. From the excavators' observations on the cryptoporticus fill, there is good reason to believe that the building had collapsed, the debris from the upper storey falling onto the cryptoporticusfloor, for on the floor was found a thick layer of architectural terracottas, pieces of marble revetment, painted stucco and at least the one statue which would seem to have fallen from above, the Nike. In one place, at the base of the inner wall near the northwest corner of the core, the excavators noted a layer of ash, possibly indicating a partial destruction by fire, though it seems too little for the conflagration of a large building with so many wooden beams in its construction. However, an east-west section from the northeast corner of the core through the column to the east outer wall indicates that the fill of the east aisle was dumped in from the core, and there are some heavy layers of ash over the fill that had piled up close to the east core wall. A section of the fill in the west corridor, on the other hand, indicates an even fill laid horizontally, the typical cryptoporticus fill. It is possible that after a destruction, accompaniedby some fire, the debris on the core was swept off on the east side, while the rest of the cryptoporticus was then filled with debris brought from elsewhere. Whatever the reason for filling the cryptoporticus, its date is certain. The great mass of fill contained a wealth of Roman objects of the

sufferedany considerabledamageat this time. first and early second centuriesafter Christ: 28 Cf. pottery, architectural terracottas, lamps Edwards, Corinth, VI, No. 51.

77

THE SOUTHBASILICA through Type xxvII, and coins. For dating, it is most important that the latest group of coins, except for obvious late intrusions, are those of Hadrian. Fourteen of his coins have been identified in this fill, and one of them was found at a depth of 6.70 m. below the cryptoporticus floor in the well in the south aisle in front of the west end of the central exedra. It is thus clear that this fill was deposited during or shortly after the reign of Hadrian (A.D. 117-138). However, in the cryptoporticus only one coin of Antoninus Pius and one of MarcusAurelius were found. These were most likely intrusive,whichwouldindicate againthat the filling occurredduringthe time of Hadrian. Whatever damage the building suffered at this time, it seems to have been very soon restored to new glory. The marble interior colonnade must be dated to this restoration, and the great entrance facade was also added most probably at this time, though possibly slightly later. A fill between the Greekfoundation for the wall between Shops XI and XII and the new foundation built to the west of it for the west wall of the court is useful for dating this facade. The excavator, Professor Broneer, noted several pieces of Type xxvII lamps, including one with the signature KPH[XKENTOS],which he says would date the faqadeto the middle of the second century, the Antonine period; the style of the antae would agree with such a date. The next clear date in the history of the building is its last, the date of destruction. Everywhere over the area of the South Basilica, and especially in the entrance court, as well as over the mosaics of the house adjacent to the east, there is clear numismatic evidence that all this area was destroyed at the end of the fourth century. In the earthquake of 375, there had possibly been damage which was repaired under Valentinian II, to whom the inscription on the re-used architrave-frieze of

the entrancefacade belongs.29The final de29Broneer, A.J.A., XXXIX, 1935, p. 58.

struction seems to be later, however, and can most probably be ascribed to the invasion by the Goths under Alaric in 395, which brought an end to Roman Corinth. POST-ROMAN

REMAINS

The post-Roman buildings in the area are surprisinglylate in date, possibly again because of the high level which resulted in the removal of earlier buildings as later ones were built. Over the eastern half of the Basilica, resting partly on the fill of the core and largely on the fill in the east and south aisles of the cryptoporticus, was a large complex, the major feature of which was a large rectangular room with an apse to the north, all built largely of reused material from the South Basilica (P1.53). While thought originally to be an early Christian church,30the building is now believed by Scranton to be late mediaeval, of the sixteenth century.31Lying just to the south of the south outer wall of the Basilica, and in part over the eastern half of its central exedra, is a late mosaic which has the same orientation as the sixteenth century building complex and may have belonged to it (P1.46 3). The bath in the southwest corner of the South Basilica, a small part of which has been left in place, may be part of the same complex, possibly the residence of a high Turkishofficial.32Earlierthere was a cemetery in the southwest corner of the Basilica, and Scranton believes that it was in use from the eleventh to the thirteenth century.33 Although the large, late building complex over the area used much material quarried from the ruins of the South Basilica, it in no way reflects the plan of the Roman building. The South Basilica ceased to exist in 395; it had no after-life such as that which carried the Julian Basilica, in modified yet recognizable form, into the Middle Ages. 30Ibid., p. 62, fig. 1, pl. XVII, 1, L. 31Corinth, XVI, pp. 29-30, 92-93. 32 Ibid.,

p. 93.

33Ibid., pp. 29-30.

CHAPTER

II

COMPARISON AND RECONSTRUCTION OF THE TWIN BASILICAS INTRODUCTION The description of the existing remains of both the Julian and South Basilicas has shown that it is safe to assume, in connection with the restoration of the two buildings, that in their original Caligulanor Claudianform they were identical twins, the same in their over-all dimensions as well as in such details as the number and height of the courses of the different walls, even in the average size of the wall blocks. Clearly,they were constructedfromthe same plans and specifications, and there is ample evidence to show that they were constructed at the same time. This is fully illustrated by the remains in situ of the cryptoporticus of each building, remains which often not only match, but also supplement one another to permit a more complete and accurate restoration of the ground floor than could be made from either one independently. The same would seem to be true of the remains no longer in place, for although subsequent remodelling and repairs have wiped away some of the original poros superstructureof the buildings,

what remains of poros architecture of the two Basilicas helps to give a good idea of the original structure. Just as topographical conditions have caused certain minor variations among the remains in situ, so they must be expected in other parts of the building, but they are relatively unimportant when compared with the identity of the original structures in most of their essential features. The same similarity is not to be expected in the various remodellings of the two buildings, though, as we have seen, the histories of the two separate structures are not dissimilar, for they suffered much the same destruction from earthquakes and invaders and the same prosperity in the affluent periods of the city's history. Also, with certain structural conditions dictated by the original identical buildings, remodellings, such as the replacement of the original poros colonnades by marble ones, were apt to bear a resemblance at least in dimensions, if not in actual form.

GROUNDFLOOROR CRYPTOPORTICUS In both the Julian and South Basilicas, the ground floor consisted of a cryptoporticus about the four sides of the building (Plans IV, V, VII, 1). The entrance to this ground floor is known, in the South Basilica, to have consisted of two doors, one on either side of the central stairway and porch which afforded

entrance to the main floor. These doorways are symmetrically placed in the building, but since the porch of the South Basilica is slightly eccentric towards the east, the doors in the fa9ade are not equidistant from the porch. This eccentricity would not be noticeable in the South Basilica, where the ground floor level of

AND RECONSTRUCTION COMPARISON OF THE TWIN BASILICAS the elevation was only partly visible from the area in front of the porch and only one door could be seen, for that on the west was always hidden behind the Fountain Room in the South Stoa (Plan V). From inside, the eccentricity of the porch would not appear, and the doors are symmetrically placed in the cryptoporticus wall. There is no reason to assume a similar situation in the Julian Basilica, for its porch is on axis and the doors would have been symmetrical about the porch as well as with respect to the main fagade of the building. This was more necessary in the Julian Basilica, for its fagade was the main architectural feature at the east end of the Lower Agora and was plainly visible throughout its height. Of these doors we know that their width in the South Basilica was 1.22 mr.,that they were not cut into the lowest outer wall course,but rather into the second and third of the preserved courses. It has been assumed that the doorway extended through the fourth and probably at least part, if not all, of the fifth course, giving a total height of not more than four courses, or ca. 2.40 m. While the lintel may have been in the sixth course, this course had beam cuttings and its thickness might not have been sufficient for this double purpose. In that case, the lintel might have extended into the fifth course, if it were not entirely in it. Similar doorways must be assumed for the Julian Basilica. but while those in the South Basilica were quite unadorned, probably because they were somewhat hidden, those in a more prominent position in the Julian Basilica may have been trimmed with mouldings, remains of which have not been recognized. The level outside the north wall of the South Basilica (Plan III, 2), as well as the level of the marble pavement of the Lower Agora in front of the Julian Basilica (Plan III, 1, Section B-B), was that of the top of the first outer wall course. Therefore, from the level of the

79

of the bottom wall course, ca. 0.60 m., probably more since there was very likely a threshold above this wall course, and also since the floor may have been a little below the level of the top of the toichobate. The drop was perhaps 0.80 or 0.90 m., so there must have been at least one, perhaps two, steps on the inside of the door. Just inside the east door of the South Basilica there is still in place a large poros block, 1.55 m. long, 0.48 m. high and 0.67 m. thick, which is roughly fitted against the wall and the top of which is ca. 0.19 m. below the top of the first wall course (P1.37 2). In this doorway the top of the first wall course has also been cut down ca. 0.19 m. and is therefore level with the top of the step; there probably was a threshold set into this cutting, but in the west doorway the first course has been left intact and a threshold would have rested on top of it. It is possible that the threshold in the east doorway was ca. 0.19 m. thicker than that in the west doorway, which would explain the cutting down of the first course in the east doorway. The step now in place looks like a rough and temporary arrangement, but it must have been in use before the cryptoporticus was filled in the Hadrianic period. Perhaps nothing more than this was done for the west door as well as for those in the Julian Basilica. The floor of the cryptoporticus in both buildings seems always to have been of beaten earth, and may have been originally only slightly below the top of the toichobate course, as it still is in the south aisle of the South Basilica. If this had been so in the Julian Basilica, the lifting bosses left on many of the toichobate blocks would not have been visible. At present, however, the floor level varies considerably in each of the Basilicas; in the South Basilica it is usually at the half-height of the toichobate course, except in the south aisle; in the Julian Basilica the floor level is also at

doorway to the floor of the cryptoporticus about the half-heightof the toichobatecourse there was a drop at least equal to the height or somewhatlower.

80

CORINTH

In both buildings the inner face of the walls was dressed fairly smooth and the joints pointed up to give the impression of good ashlar masonry. It would have been assumed that this was the final finish of the cryptoporticus walls had not a fragment of mural painting been disclosed on the south outer wall of the Julian Basilica (P1. 29 4) when a section of the vault fell away. In the adjacent sections which had not been so protected there is no trace of the continuation of this mural, but it must be assumed that at least a considerable section of this south outer wall, if not all the cryptoporticus walls, of the Julian Basilica was covered with paintings some time before the second half of the second century after Christ, at which time the vault was built. Indeed, large amounts of fragments of wall paintings were found in both cryptoportici, but it is most likely that they fell from the main floor. It seems unlikely that such paintings ever covered the cryptoporticus walls of the South Basilica, for there is no longer any trace of them, and unless they had been intentionally hacked away before the cryptoporticus was filled in, some trace should have been preserved. It does not seem that enough light was brought into either cryptoporticus to allow the proper display of murals. In the Julian Basilica, a small amount of light was let into the east aisle through the narrow slit windows placed very high in the east outer wall. The one block of the sixth course still in situ which has such a window cutting has been described (p. 44), but a better example is that which has been re-set in the sixth course of the east wall (Fig. 6; P1. 27 1). The drawing gives the essential dimensions of the block and indicates that in the course above, the first main floor course, there was probably a block on which the slope of the lower part of the window was continued out to the slit in the wall, with the

I ^.-

z

--J.

.2'T; .i .--tI

.

6. DRAWING WINDOW

.Z t13

k. 164-.i50 4-1.Z66

L,-.J53

.

5ECTION

FIG.

-

--

- -

','fi

---.95z ---.165 4

TOP

FRONT

OF BLOCK CUTTING

WITH BEAM

FROM JULIAN

CUTTINGS

AND

BASILICA

tween the ceiling beams, and the light shaft sloped up and out sharply and would have opened in the outer wall in a slit ca. 0.09 m. wide and perhapsone coursehigh in the second course of the main floor east faqade. This position was necessitated by the fact that the road to the east of the Julian Basilica was at the level of, if not even slightly higher than, the top of the beam course (see p. 51). Such windows were placed between the exedras and perhaps even beyond them at the ends of the east wall, but at what interval is not possible to say. They have been restored, on Plan VII,2, in every second space between beams rather than in every one, which would seem unduly close, and which is not indicated by the preserved blocks with both window and beam cuttings (Pls. 26 4, 27 i). There is no evidence that any attempt was made to bring light into the south aisle of the Julian Basilica, for not only was the level outside as high as that of the road to the east, but the narrow corridor between the Basilica and the Southeast Building would have permitted too little light to enter to repay the trouble of making windows. On the north side there could have been larger windows, for the upper half of the wall was exposed even at the slit itself occurringin the next courseabove. east end. There would likely have been a row Thus the bottom of the window was up be- of regularly spaced windows such as that to

81

OF THE TWIN BASILICAS AND RECONSTRUCTION COMPARISON be described in the east wall of the South Basilica. Larger windows could also have existed in the main west fagade, but there is no evidence remaining for them. Actually, other small, highly placed windows such as those just conjectured for the north wall would be more in keeping with the possible use of the cryptoporticus as a cool retreat or a place of storage and, as we shall see, they are the kind most usually found in such lower storeys. Thus, the part of the cryptoporticusin which the murals actually were found would have been among the darkest parts, getting light only from the west side. Such painted decorationin a cryptoporticus is not unusual,one of the best examples being in the House of the Cryptoporticusat Pompeii. Here the cryptoporticus is decorated in an architectural style with swags in panels between herms while above the panels are miniature scenes. Located on three sides of the garden, the vaulted aisles of the cryptoporticus are lighted by windows in the upper part of the wall and extending into the vault, and because of the latter the windows are larger than would be possible with a beamed ceiling, about 0.60 m. square.' Thus there is more light than could be provided in the cryptoporticus of either Basilica at Corinth. The cryptoporticusin the platform of the Villa of the Mysteries at Pompeii, some 95 m. long and on three sides of the platform, had plastered interior walls and vaults, but the walls were not painted. The windows were of the vertical slit variety, though they could have been larger.2 Other examples of a vaulted cryptoporticus with decorations are in the Villa of Domitian in the Alban Hills. which has stuccoed ornaments in the vault,3 and in Hadrian's Villa at Tivoli, where the cryptoporticus of the so-called "Basilica"has an elab1 V. Spinazzola, Pompei alla luce degli scavi nuovi di Via dell' Abbondanza(Anni 1910-1923), Rome, 1953, Vol. I, p. 455, figs. 517-518, pls. LXXXVII-LXXXIX; p. 459, fig. 523. 2 A. Maiuri, La Villa dei Misteri, 2nd ed., Rome, 1947, pp. 89-93, fig. 36. 3 G. Lugli, Bull. Comm., XLVI, 1918, pp. 57-63.

orate mosaic in part of the vault.4 In both cases, the windows extended up into the vault and were of good size. Thus, the presence of wall painting in the cryptoporticus of the Julian Basilica may be a basis for assuming that there were larger windows than the slit variety in the west wall of that cryptoporticus, the only possible source of much light. Within the Julian Basilica there was found another block for a window (Fig. 7; P1. 27 2)

fi

i ~-_

'- t:^ ----;;A^..

Jr; n ">

L-'

'7j] '_

j

4-

-r " - 'tog--

".-.z60

t-----7?094.----^

^r p

T

-1--- .590 ---

]

E

-i

JI

FIG. 7. DRAWING OF BLOCK WITH WINDOW CUTTING FROM JULIAN BASILICA

which preserves the cutting for the light slit, 0.09 m. wide and about the same in depth, and then splays widely to sides and bottom. The block is drafted on the outside, but its outer dimensions, 1.094 m. by 0.70 m. and 0.443 m. in thickness, do not agree with those known either from the cryptoporticus or from the few blocks of the main floor. It probably belongs to the lighting system of the Julian Basilica's cryptoporticus,but its exact position has not been determined. In the South Basilica there is no evidence of windows between the beams in the south outer wall, and so the south side would have been completely without direct light from outside. Probably no windows existed in the southern half of the east and west outer walls, for here hardpan comes up to the fifth course level. In the northern half of the east outer wall there 4 G. Lugli, Bull. Comm.,LV, 1927, pp. 166-175; La tecnica edilizia romana, con particolare riguardo a Roma e Lazio, Rome, 1957, pl. CLX, 1.

82

CORINTH

is a window opening in the fifth course; only the south side is preserved (P1. 40 4), as the fifth course is missing north of this point. The window was most probably the height of the course, ca. 0.60 m., for at this point the sixth course, with beam cuttings, would be above. The window opening in the outer face of the wall may have been only a narrow slit. The side of the opening goes straight back from the outer face of the wall for ca. 0.11 m. and then splays widely to the inner face; the bottom is the flat top of the fourth course. To judge from the preserved block shown in Figure 7, where the width of the slit and the depth of the cutting before the splay are about the same, the width of this window may also have been no more than 0.11 m., though it could have been wider. Such a window may be conjectured just opposite in the west outer wall and others probably existed at regular intervals both in the side walls to the north of the existing one and across the north or main facade. The use for which the cryptoporticus was intended would have dictated the kind of windows used. This is especially clear in comparingthe Villa of the Mysterieswith the House of the Cryptoporticus,both at Pompeii. In the former, the cryptoporticus about three sides of the platform that formed the villa's substructure seems to have been intended originally as a storeroom or cellar. Here, though ground level is everywhere below the cryptoporticus floor and windows of any size could have been used, those chosen were vertical slits about 0.12 m. wide and 0.45 m. high; on the interior the openings splay sharply downwards, less sharply sideways. The windows are evenly spaced at the center of the arcades decorating the exterior of the walls.5 On the other hand, the elaborately decorated cryptoporticus of the House of the Cryptoporticus, the very nature of which precludes its use as

a cellar, was provided with large windows, 5 Maiuri, op. cit., p. 90, fig. 36, p. 92, fig. 38.

ca. 0.60 m. square, placed in the upper wall and vault since most of the cryptoporticuswas below ground.6 It must be noted, too, that these windows face the garden and are not in an exterior wall of the building, as are those of the Villa of the Mysteries. The slit window, placed high in the wall, was commonly used in classical antiquity in exterior walls of the ground floor of both public and domestic buildings.7 Such windows are common in houses and are amply illustrated at Pompeii.8 Both safety and privacy dictated in part the size of exterior windows in the ground floor and the height at which they were placed second floor windows, even on the exterior, were usually much larger - but the fact that ground floor rooms were often used for storage must also have been a determining factor. On the other hand, Vitruvius indicates (VI, 6, 6-7) that in the closely packed buildings of large Roman cities windows placed high in the lower storey wouldbe moreefficientin gatheringlight. He also mentions specifically the kind of window between ceiling beams such as are found in the Julian Basilica, saying "But if the light is hindered by beams or lintels or flooring, there must be an opening made above to admit the light, and the whole must be so controlled that from whatever quarter the sky can be seen, window openings must be left there, for in this way the buildings will be well lighted."9 Many factors, then, indicate

6 Spinazzola, op. cit., I, p. 455, figs. 517-518, pls. LXXXVII-LXXXIX. 7 Cf. especially Broneer, Corinth, I, iv, pp. 42-43, figs. 19-20, for their use in the South Stoa. The use of windows in classical antiquity has been studied in detail by Reinhard Herbig and published in the following works: Das Fenster in der Architektur des Altertums. BaugeschichtlicheStudien (Inauguraldissertation zur Erlangung der Doktorwiirde der hohen philosophischen Fakultit der Ruprecht-Karls-Universitiit zu Heidelberg), Athens, 1929; "Fenster an Tempeln und monumentalen Profanenbauten," Jahrb., XLIV, 1929, pp. 224-262; "Fensterstudien an antiken Wohnbauten in Italien," Rom. Mitt., XLIV, 1929, pp. 260-321. 8 Herbig, Rom. Mitt., XLIV, 1929, p. 268, fig. 9, p. 277, fig. 19, p. 278, figs. 22-24; Mau-Kelsey, Pompeii, Its Life and Art, New York, 1907, p. 262, fig. 122, p. 311, fig. 150. 9 Loeb edition, Translated by Frank Granger, New York, 1934, Vol. II, p. 45. Herbig, op. cit., p. 279, fig. 25, gives a drawing which illustrates the principle for windows given by Vitruvius.

OF THE TWIN BASILICAS AND RECONSTRUCTION COMPARISON windows placed high in exterior walls of the lower storey, and if our conjectures concerning the purpose of the cryptoporticus of the Corinthian Basilicas are correct (see below p. 107), small windows are also called for. Only the bit of painting preserved on the south outer wall of the Julian Basilica cryptoporticus is contrary to this conclusion. The system of internal supports and of beaming was much the same in each cryptoporticus (Plan VII, 1 and 2). The walls themselves supported one end of most of the beams (Pls. 26 4, 5, 37 1), and their other end was

most likely supported by the girder along the axis of each aisle; exceptions were beams in each corner which had one end supported by girders crossing the end aisles and continuing the line of the long walls of the inner rectangle, the other end by the axial girders. While it is possible that the beams spanned the aisle and had their centers supported by the axial girders, it would have been more economical to use shorter beams spanning only half the aisle. The girders continuing the line of the long core walls were probably supported on the top of the sixth inner wall course, or perhaps a little higher in the seventh course, and in a cutting into the fifth and sixth outer wall courses. At their midpoint they were further supported by a column set on a low, carefully squared base. Two such monolithic poros columns are still standing in place in the South Basilica (Pls. 37 1, 44 i, 2). A shallow

plate would have formed the transition from column to girder; no capitals such as those used in the cryptoporticus of the Odeion in the Athenian Agora'1 were found, but they would have been unnecessary unless other columns stood above these, and such are not postulated. The columns themselves were unfluted, poros monoliths; besides the two in place, there are fragments of another which was cut up and used in the hypocaust of the

83

the South Basilica; it was most likely the one from the southwest corer. In the Julian Basilica there are also several fragments of such columns, but none is in situ. Besides this system of girders that continued the line of the long core walls across the end aisles, a second system extended down the center of the entire length of the long aisles, supported at irregular intervals by nine heavy wooden posts standing on stone bases of varying height, size and shape (Plans IV, V, VII, 1); at either end of the aisle the girdersfitted into a cutting in the fifth and sixth outer wall courses. In the end aisles the girder was only the length of the inner rectangle, supported by three similar wooden posts between the columns and the ends supported on the columns themselves (Plan VII, 2). To judge from the cutting on the axis of the east aisle of the Julian Basilica, these girders were ca. 0.45 m. high and at least 0.30 m. wide. The beams averaged 0.30 m. in width in both buildings and in both the cuttings for them in the sixth outer wall course are ca. 0.26 m. high; they were spaced on an average 0.88 m. on centers in both buildings. Such beams crossed the long aisles including the comers common with the end aisles, while in the latter the beams crossed from core end wall to outer end wall only for the width of the core. There is no indication of any beaming system in the exedras of either Basilica. In the Julian Basilica only the south small exedra is preserved, and here the level of hardpan is so high that only a shallow fill was needed to make a base for the floor; as hardpan fell to the north a somewhat deeper fill would have been requiredin the central and north exedra. The exedras in the South Basilica are somewhat better preserved and differ in construction, though not in dimensions, from those of the Julian Basilica. All the exedras in the South Basilica have their walls founded much

late bath built over the southwest cornerof deeper,the bottomcoursein the centralexedra 10H. A. Thompson, Hesperia, XIX, 1950, p. 75, pl. 50, a. goingdownalmostto the top of the firstouter

84

CORINTH

wall course, that of the east exedra down to the top of the third course and that of the west exedra to the middle of the third course. It is peculiar that the inner face of the walls of the side exedras is dressed, just like the cryptoporticus walls, right down to the bottom, while in the central exedra the bottom course at the back and the two lower courses on the west side were left somewhat rough and the rest were dressed smooth. The exterior of all these walls was rough, as far as can be seen, for they were all below groundlevel. However, although the back wall of the central exedra is preserved up to the level of the top of the sixth outer wall course, which carried the beams, there are no traces of beam cutting at this level either in this exedra wall or in the outside of the outer wall opposite. It is possible, however, that the exedra floors were at a somewhat higher level; if that were not so it would be necessary to assume that the area of the exedras was filled in up to the level of the top of the sixth outer wall course and that the floor rested on this fill (Plan VIII). In any case, whether filled or flooredwith beams at a higher level, the smoothly dressed inner face of the exedra walls must have been invisible and can be explained only as the result of a general specification which required the wall blocks below ground level to be dressed on the interior and rough on the exterior. In this connection, it must be remembered that in the south exedra of the Julian Basilica the course immediately above the beam course is drafted both on the exterior and on the interior; the latter would have been completely covered if the floor were considerably higher and must have been partly covered, in any case, by the thickness of whatever floor lay above the beams. In the South Basilica only, a further system of supports for the ends of the beams resting on the south and west outer walls was added

in the time of Hadrian; the most probable date is after the earthquake of A.D. 79. Pilasters built of poros blocks and resting on a variety of bases, with their top even with the top of the toichobate, were placed against the walls, reaching to the top of the fourth outer wall course (P1. 45 2), or just about to the height of the top of the monolithic columns. On these pilasters, too, there was probably a splayed cap or plate, on which rested the girders. Such added support for the ends of the beams along the west and south walls was probably necessitated by a weakening of the structure, perhaps caused by an earthquake, but it is possible that the added strength was provided to take care of an unusual load from large statues or other monuments placed along these walls." There remains to consider only the exterior treatment of the front walls of the ground floor of each Basilica, for it was part of the main facade of these buildings. In the case of the South Basilica, it is quite clear that the north outer wall was dressed smooth on the outside as well as on the interior, and that the exterior face was covered with a rather coarse stucco ca. 0.005 m. thick, which was then well smoothed (P1. 39 4). This stucco certainly covered the lower four courses of the outer wall and must have gone up at least another two courses, to the top of the cryptoporticus or ground floor level. There was no base moulding for this wall either inside or outside, though the toichobate may have been partially exposed. In the Julian Basilica, on the other hand, only four blocks are preserved at the south end of the second course of the west outer wall (P1. 27 4), which is the first course above the level of the Agora pavement. Of these, the southern two blocks are smooth on the exterior and the northern two, which are somewhat narrower,have a very wide drafting at the sides and bottom. Again, there is no

some time betweenthe originalconstruction, base mouldingof any kind. Since,as we shall ca. A.D. 40, andthe fillingof the cryptoporticus 11 R. Stillwell, A.J.A., XL, 1936, p. 29.

AND RECONSTRUCTION COMPARISON OF THE TWIN BASILICAS see below (p. 86), there is good evidence that the walls of the main floor in both buildings were also drafted on the exterior, it can be assumed with certainty that the ground floor fa9ade of the Julian Basilica as well was so treated. In both buildings, this front wall of the ground floor, which was the only wall of this level all of which was dressed on both faces, has a greater width than the average width of the other walls with their outer faces rough and irregular. In the Julian Basilica, the two drafted blocks have a full width of ca. 0.90 m., while the other walls average only 0.80 m. thick; in the South Basilica the north wall of the cryptoporticus is ca. 0.89 m. thick and the other walls average only 0.75-0.80 m. In the north outer wall of the Julian Basilica, the blocks in the western quarter of the first course are also dressed on both sides and have a consistent width of ca. 0.89 m., but there is no trace of drafting on the outside, for this course is below the Agora pavement level. These blocks were probably dressed to fit those above them which at this end of the building would have been exposed on the exterior where the road along the north side of the building rose from the Agora level. The front walls of the ground floor of each Basilica must have terminated with some form of crown moulding, but neither wall is preserved to a height to show such a member in place. While such a crown moulding may have

85

been an ordinary cornice, a variety of which has been found about both buildings, it is more likely that a special moulding was used here and that it is represented by one block with a cyma reversamoulding(Fig. 8; P1.471)12 found built into the late rectangular exedra over the central exedra of the Julian Basilica. ,t-6 ,3.6(

L

END

ELEVATION

\ .458 .o089 OVA.LL

LSNGrT

FIG. 8. DRAWING OF CYMA REVERSA CROWN MOULDING FOUND IN JULIAN BASILICA

While the bottom of this block is only 0.458 m. thick, as compared with an average thickness of 0.75-0.80 m. for the cryptoporticus wall, the floor construction would probably have required the remaining thickness for part of the height of this course; the total height of the block is 0.505 m. The exterior crown moulding may also have been backed by an interior base block.

THE MAIN FLOOR AND CLERESTORY Of the main floor of the Basilicas, the re- ca. 1.17 m. in length and 0.58 m. in height. It mains still in situ consist of four blocks of the seems clearthat all four blockshad a drafted first course of the southern exedra in the Julian 12 L. T. Shoe, Profiles of Greek Mouldings, Cambridge, Basilica (Pls. 253, 314). Yet these scant reMass., 1936, pp. 173-174,178-179, pls. XXVIII and XXXVI, mains give certain important indications con- lists numerous similar crown mouldings, some as late as the end of the second century s.C., and the type continued into cerning the exterior walls. Here, at least, there Roman times. Miss Shoe writes: "The large cyma reversa is is no base moulding for the walls either inside the regular podium crown in Roman architecture in Latium and South Italy from the third century B.C. to the early first or outside, for the first course consists of poros century B.C. and continues to be used occasionally in Auand Julio-Claudian gustan buildings even though the cornice blocks with the edges of both faces drafted.The type crown had in general replaced it in the first century B.C. wall is ca. 0.60 m. wide and the blocks average in Italy."

86

CORINTH

interiorface,the draftingbeingonlyca.0.01m. Basilicare-usedin a late wall which blocked deepand varyingfrom0.07-0.11m. wide. The the front of ShopXIV in the South Stoa. The exteriorfaces of the blocksin the east wall of singleblockfromthe JulianBasilicais 0.585m. the exedrahave neverbeen cleared,but those high, 1.19 m. long and 0.595 m. thick. On one in the northwall (P1.314) are in the open. Of face there is drafting ca. 0.01 m. deep which the latter two blocks,the easternone has its has a width of 0.11 m. on three sides and outerface completelyhackedaway; the west- 0.07 m. on the fourth side. The opposite face em orendblockhasa bolderrusticationl2a than of this block shows no sign of rustication, that of the interiorfaces of the four blocks. though there are scatteredtraces of toothed Its draftingis ca. 0.02 m. deep, as compared chisel marksnear the edges. While the block with 0.01 m. on the interior, and varies in may possibly be from the lower floor of the widthfrom0.06 m. at the top to 0.11 m. at the building,the thicknesssuggestsratherthat it left side and bottom and 0.13 m. at the right belongsto the mainfloorand that the rusticaside, whereit met the main east wall. Thisin- tion on one face has been hackedaway. The dication that the wall blocks were originally five blocksfromthe South Basilicaare all ca. rusticatedon both faces is borneout by wall 0.60 m. thick and have a height of ca. 0.59 m.; blocks, not in situ, from both the Julian and all but one are ca. 1.18 m. long, and the exthe South Basilicas.It has alreadybeen men- ception has a length of 1.255 m. On one face tioned that the pry holes in the top of these they all have draftingall aroundwhichvaries four blocksin the south exedraof the Julian from 0.015-0.025 m. deep and from 0.11Basilica indicate that a second course went 0.15 m. in width, except for one end of the above them, a fact which would preclude long blockwherethe draftinghas the unusual therehavingbeenan entranceopeningin these width of 0.19 m. In these blocks the drafted side exedras;thereis no evidencefor the cen- edge is dressedwith a toothedchisel;the rest tral exedrain eitherbuilding.Onemorefact is is roughpicked. On the oppositeface of two illustratedin the south exedraby the overlap of these blocks there is clear evidence of a of the westernblockin the northside overthe similarly drafted border, ca. 0.11 m. wide, sixth courseof the east outer wall. From the dressedwith the toothedchisel,but the rustiwest end of this blockto the innerface of the cation has been hacked away, as has been east wall is 0.62 m., the approximate width of some of the borderof these two and all of it the walls of the main floor,so it would seem on the rest of the blocks.It must be concluded that the upperwalls carriedup the line of the that these blocks, like those in situ in the inner or smooth face of the cryptoporticus Julian Basilica,had draftingon both sides,13 walls, which would be normal,and so would very likely with the preservedbolderdrafting not have to rest on the irregularparts of the on the exterior,and that the interiorrusticaouter face of the wall. In both Basilicasthere tion had been removed intentionally,most areblocksas little as 0.65 m. widein the upper likely at the time the interiorwasredecorated, coursesof the back cryptoporticuswall. eitherafterthe repairrelatedto the earthquake Besidesthese few blocksstill in placein the of A.D. 79 or that in the time of Hadrian which JulianBasilica,thereis onewallblock(P1.473) included the filling of the cryptoporticusof amongthe largeassortmentof porosarchitec- the SouthBasilicaand the replacementof the ture found in and about that building,and porosinteriorcolonnadewith one of marble. five similarwallblocks(P1.475)fromthe South 12a Rustication

is used here as synonymous with drafting; it does not imply roughening of the raised center of the block.

13Cf. R. Schultze, Basilika (Romisch-GermanischeForschungen,Vol. 2), Berlin and Leipzig, 1928, p. 10, fig. 2, pl. V, for the basilica at Pompeii.

AND RECONSTRUCTION OF THE TWIN BASILICAS COMPARISON At one, or possibly both, of these times the walls were decorated with a dado of marble revetment and with painted stucco on the upper part of the walls. The outer walls of the main floor must thus be reconstructed of courses ca. 0.59 m. high, like those of the outer walls of the cryptoporticus, and with an average thickness of ca. 0.60 m. Originally drafted on both faces, with bolder rustication on the exterior, the inner face was later roughly evened off for the application of marble revetment and stucco. The height of these exterior walls of the main floor is determinedby that of the interiorCorinthian order, to be discussed below (pp. 88-98), for it can be assumed that the beams over the aisles were at cornice level both on the walls and above the interior colonnade. While the amount of the superstructurein place above the cryptoporticus is extremely small, there is a considerable quantity of architectural blocks of all kinds, such as the wall blocks just described, which have been found in and about the two Basilicas, and from them it is possible to learn much about the main floor, and even the clerestory, of these Basilicas (Plan VIII). The general nature of the buildings is evident and many features of their architectural details can be recovered; much still remains open to conjecture. It is clear, first, from these remains that the plan consisted of an interior colonnade around the four sides of the room (Plan VII, 3), the columns founded on the inner rectangle or the inside walls of the cryptoporticus, and of aisles all about correspondingto the aisles of the cryptoporticus. As suggested above, the height of the aisles was the same as that of the interior colonnades; the shed roof over the aisles would have risen to well above the cornice over the inner columns, necessitating a solid wall above the cornice up to the top of the shed roof line. Over the inner rectangle, however, there was

87

clerestory consisted of arcades with an arch over each of the intercolumniationsof the inner colonnades. Above the clerestory, a gabled roof covered the area of the inner rectangle. Such was the original form of the building, and there is no indication that subsequent remodelling and repair involved any essential change in this form. It is evident, also, that the original construction was entirely in poros and that later remodellings in both buildings involved the replacement of at least the inner colonnades with marble ones; very likely the porches as well were rebuilt in marble. From the number of poros cornices, as well as other wall members, found in both buildings, it is most likely that the outer walls of the main floor remained unchanged to the final destruction of each of the Basilicas. In the Julian Basilica there remain sufficient poros fragments from the clerestory to suggest that it, too, remained essentially unchanged even when the marble interior colonnades beneath it were installed; this seems not to have been so in the South Basilica. The style of the interior order, as well as the spacing of the columns, was determined with the original poros colonnade and it, too, seems to have remained unchanged when marble columns replaced the poros. With no part of the stylobate of either poros or marble order in place, and with no architraves assignable to either order, the interaxial distance of the columns must be obtained from outside sources. In this case it is the preserved fragments of the clerestory arcade which give the necessary indications. From the scant fragments of arch springers and engaged columns between the arches, to be described in greater detail below (pp. 95ff.), an interaxial distance of approximately 2.90 m. was obtained. It was thus evident that there were four intercolumniations on the ends and nine on the sides, or 5 xlO columns. The actual interaxial distance

an addedstorey for the clerestorywhich pro- for a stylobate26.68m. long, subtractingca. videdlightforthe interiorof the building.This 0.90m.forthe widthof the stylobate(onwhich

88

CORINTH

the columns were probably centered), is ca. 2.865 m. on the sides. If one subtracts only the greatest diameter of the base, ca. 0.75 m., the interaxial distance becomes ca. 2.88 m. on the sides. On the ends, the distance would be 11.78 m. less 0.90 m. or 10.88 m., which divided by 4 equals 2.72 m., or alternately 11.78 m. less 0.75 m. equals 11.03 m., divided by 4 equals 2.757 m. The correctness of this intercolumniation is nicely illustrated by the fact that the fourth column from either end centers exactly on the side walls of the central exedra (Plan VII, 3), and the two central columns on the sides would thus be in line with the two columns placed between these walls in an exedra. Consideringthe possibility that this central exedra was actually an entrance porch from the side opposite the Agora, then either a tetrastyle-prostyle or a distyle-in-antis arrangement would again align with the four central columns of the side colonnades (Plan VII, 3, top). Since the porch on the Agora side is smaller, and in the case of the South Basilica is also slightly off center, there could be no alignment between its columns and those of the interior colonnade. The odd number of columns at the ends, with a column at the center of each end, is probably a good indication that there were no entrances at the ends of the building, though one might have been postulated at the south end of the Julian Basilica as a means of direct communication with the Southeast Building. Neither at the opposite end of the Julian Basilica nor at either end of the South Basilica is there any arrangement for an entranceway. The situation is thus analogous to that of the basilica along the Lechaion Road,14which has an even number of columns at the end, where there were entrances, and an odd number at the sides, where there were none. Of the original poros order very little remains, but there is enough to determine that

order,and that in size as well the porosorder was rather accuratelycopied in the marble columns.Actually,it was verylikelythe sameness of the originalporosorderwhichresulted in the close similarityin the marblecolumns of the two Basilicas,for there was no other reasonfor their being alike.Fromwhat is left of both poros and marblecolumns,however, it seems quite clear that the latter were in both cases a ratherclose copy of the former. Conversely,since the marbleorderis better known than the poros one, it is possible to work backwardin drawingconclusionsconcerningthe poros order.While originallythe stylobate was most probablyof poros,it was replacedby marbleandnoneof the porosstylobate has been recognized.One fragmentof a fine porosbase was found,but it is too small to determineaccuratelythe diameterwhich, as we havereconstructed it (Fig. 9), is too large TOP

SECTION

q

.893 ______8

1.

5JADLTEZI . 51D-

.'

S

X

TI

FIG. 9. RECONSTRUCTION OF POROS COLUMN BASE IN JULIAN BASILICA

for our poroscolumns.The profileof the base of the poroscolumnsis probablyreflectedaccurately, however, by the base of the anta block, which has the usual torus-scotia-torus in a base 0.225 m. high (Fig. 10; P1.47 2). Of the poroscolumnsthemselves,threelargefragthe orderwas Corinthian,like the latermarble ments (P1.47 4) and severalsmallerbits have been foundin the area. They representa colR. Stillwell, CorinthI, i, p. 197, fig. 131. 14

AND RECONSTRUCTION COMPARISON OF THE TWIN BASILICAS umn with twenty flutes, with a fillet ca. 0.015 m. wide between flutings and a depth of at least 0.02 m. for the flutes; the smallest diameter preserved is ca. 0.502 m. including the fillets, but since the fillets are all chipped off in part, the diameter should be at least 0.51 m. The largest measurable diameter is ca. 0.56 m. This is the measurement for the poros itself, but over it was a stucco coating which is ca. 0.008 m. thick, rather coarse except for the very smooth surface coating. Not enough is preserved of the poros columns to estimate their height, but it must have been very close to that of their marble replacements. For the latter, the lower diameter of the column shaft averages 0.56 m., which would give a column about 5.00-5.60 m. high, including capital and base. Since the latter are known to have been ca.0.80m. together (see belowpp.98ff.),theshaft itself would be from 4.20-4.80 m. high. A check on the height of the columns may perhaps be

m

'

--.

-'

. ;-. '

'

:'.

* ...

given by the wall coursing; since the courses average 0.58 m. and the preserved anta base (Fig. 10) and capital (Fig. 11) blocks also have a height of 0.58 m., a wall of nine courses would have a height of 5.22 m. This falls between nine and ten diameters for the column height. Taking 5.22 m. for the total column height, the shaft would then be ca. 4.42 m. high. The one completely preserved marble column drum is 2.395 m. high. There remains one badly battered poros Corinthian capital (P1.47 6) still recognizable by its shape but now devoid of all the decoration of the bell. The capital is interesting for its provenience, for it was found built into the west wall of the vaulted chamber of the Julian Basilica, where it was used after the replacement of the poros order by the marble colonnade, a remodelling which can thus be dated around the middle of the second century after Christ. The capital itself

.-.'..'

.60

.

615

. 739

TOP n

.2 M'ETR/ .6

H

/.

5

10 CM/. 20

/CAL

oF /-CCTION

j

,f.7,,I

______

-{~

J/CTION

.

/CALE TOP fIONT,. ND

' ,

L

.

-'-.---. :

t* fi

*1

.6t0

__._ ?

89

________

L4279

10ONT

FIG. 10. DRAWING OF ANTA BASE BLOCK FROM JULIAN BASILICA

r

MO

.67Z

RIGHTIND

~~CORINTH

~~~~90

JULIAN CORINT

.1

b

.1Z

.370

,.85

BASILICA

IIAN

METEIZ/.5

/6 4.185

|

? TOP

1=-%~:?\

\

FRONT F-P-. ONT

END LEST L~FT END .620

TO

.565

P .620

7~R

\~~~~~~~? '~~~~~~~

~~>??

\l

c

c:

L~~~~~~~~~~C

..

1

I

FI.1.DAWN

I

-

\ /et

gL

FPRs

NACPTL

BLC

FO

ULABSIIC

FIG. 11. DRAWING OF POROS ANTA CAPITAL BLOCK FROM JULIAN BASILICA

the upper part of the decoration has been broken off, but the lower half remains to some extent. The capital itself has on both faces a width of ca. 0.62 m., but the wall width is 0.588 m. The decorative elements seem to have been copied closely in the marble replacements in both buildings; the double row of acanthus leaves and the fluted cauliculi are plainly visible in the poros capital, but the volutes are completely destroyed. No piece of the poros architrave-frieze of the interior order has been recognized, but there remain three large fragments of poros architrave-friezeblocks (P1. 48 3) which must be from the top of the outer walls and would capital (Fig. 11; P1. 48 l, 2, 3, 4), with the probably correspondclosely in height and proCorinthiancapital on two sides. On both sides file to the architrave-friezeof the interiororder.

still has its abacus rather well preserved; its greatest preserved width is ca. 0.61 m., but originally it was a square of at least 0.63 m. on the side. The abacus is ca. 0.115 m. high. Of the bell itself, there remains a conical core, irregularly truncated at the bottom, where it was hacked off. The bell has a diameter of ca. 0.59 m. at the top and a maximum of ca. 0.40 m. at the bottom, this without any decoration. The preserved height of the capital is ca. 0.51 m., but the original bottom surface is nowhere preserved. Little idea of the order can be obtained from this wreck of a Corinthian capital, but much more help for the reconstruction of the order comes from a poros anta

OF THE TWIN BASILICAS AND RECONSTRUCTION COMPARISON

.4

..3 .4

_

*o

__

L~

.--'T..r- - :i

t')

_

.i .

--LL

. I-

i

,,'

IC iV/OMTZ

91

91GT I-ND.--08

I 12 DRAWINGOFPos

FIG. 12. DRAWING

OF POROS

ARCHITRAVEFRIEZ BLOCKFROMJULIN BA'ILICA

ARCHITRAVE'FRIEZE

The height is 0.613 m. (Fig. 12), the architrave with three fasciae and a crown moulding being 0.37 m. high and the cyma recta and crown moulding of the frieze having a height of 0.243 m. On the outer wall blocks the mouldings occur on one face only, the interior; in the interior colonnade the profileshould have been the same on both sides. While these poros blocks actually probably crowned the exterior walls, their bottom thickness is 0.718 m. as compared with a thickness of ca. 0.60 m. for the walls themselves. The difference of ca. 0.12 m. may possibly imply an engaged order of pilasters on one side of the wall, but no other evidence for such decoration has been found, except in the anta blocks mentioned above. Two of the poros architrave-frieze blocks show beam cuttings in the moulded face of the frieze and of exactly the same height as the frieze; they are most likely original and show that the ceiling beams came down into the frieze and the coffered ceiling was above, in the height of the cornice which

BLOCK

FROM JULIAN

BASILICA

would not have appeared at all on the inside of the wall. In one architrave-friezeblock from the top of the wall there is ca. 0.83 m. from the side of the beam cutting to the end of the block, indicating a space of at least that much between ceiling beams. In the block shown (Fig. 12; P1. 48 5), the side of the beam cutting is 0.295 m. from the end of the block and the cutting is 0.22 m. wide and 0.235 m. deep. Since, however, the beam cuttings could fall anywhere along the block, and there is nothing to indicate any consistency in these cuttings, it can only be said that the ceiling beams in the side aisles were at least 0.83+0.22 m., or 1.05 m. on centers; they may have been more. For the cornice blocks there is a wealth of material from both Basilicas. The three main series of cornices were: 1) those topping the outer walls of the main storey, 2) those above the inner colonnades of this storey and 3) the series atop the walls of the clerestory. It is the first two which concern us first, and from the evidence of the South Basilica especially it

CORINTH

92

.0 *42.3

Z

J.

.5

M&T&R

/

0

i.

;-'

-RE

jT

N=

13.

oF 'PoRos DRAWING

COEN&Z

40

20z

--.i

,% i N4.:.-h-

...;'T

5""CTION

BOTTOM

FFI.

5

.

..

5~-- .Z97

--.6$J7

5Cm5

,

^fi[

,^ ;

CORNICE

BLQCkI

K I

BLOC

Sr

FROM

SOUTH BA ILICC S

--

.203-4.-.---

.4039

t..

WITH DENTIL5 15 5OUTH BA51LICA:

.

5

C

FIG.14. PROFILES OF POROS CORNICE BLOCKS WITH DENTILS (F AND L) FROM SOUTH BASILICA

seems clear that the poros cornices atop the age a height of 0.473 m., the typical profile outer walls of the main floor had on the aver- being that of Block I (Fig. 13; P1. 48 6). This

93

OF THE TWIN BASILICAS AND RECONSTRUCTION COMPARISON

--V--x

I/OMETIZIC

---

I4

.E

1

5 I*.

r_

C_ FRONT -

.

"

.

R-ND v ....

.4

A

_i20

-'I

_.

.559 IGI4T

' 5,t 0 oiH______O_

5 CM.:

J . .L..3 4 .5 45s5-CTION

FIG. 15. DRAWINGOF POROS

..0

* X

8 i'--.4

o I-IGHT END

0 A .L

Irt ill-;05~

' BOTTOM

CORNER CORNICEBLOCKL FROMSOUTH BASILICA

-\

5,ja F-RONT

'

1

DETAILof DGNTIL/

.4 .$

.5 MET=E,/ toO

-r---

I(0

1/

I/OM/TIIC

BOTTOM

. .3

/-CT!ON

FIG. 16. DRAWING OF POROS CORNICE BLOCK H FROM SOUTH BASILICA

profileoccursboth with and without dentils, there being from the South Basilica three blockswith dentils(E, F and L), two of which (F and L) are shownin Figures14 and 15 and

Block H (Figs. 16, 17; P1. 493), and two (J and Y) in the group represented by Block J (Fig. 17). The slight differences in these thirteen blocks, especially in their present height, Plate 49 1, 2, and four without dentils (G, I, V does not preclude their being part of the same and X) that are exactly like I (Fig. 13), four series, for several were re-cut for later use. The (H, O, W and Z) in the grouprepresentedby minor variations in profile as well may be due

CORINTH

94

1" 56:rr --7-

co

.r--M

91

S L_

_

.

N'.232 ?Z__

SOUTW BASILICA CO NICE5

FIG. 17. PROFILES OF POROS

....o

CORNICE

I

_

WITIOUT

BLOCKS

DENTILS

(J, H, I

.Z47

__

.5

DENTILS5

WITHOUT

to the same reason, or there may have been differenceson the various sides of the buildings. Whether the cornices with dentils were used only above the columns of the porch (or porches if the central exedrawas an entrance), only along the main fagade or fagades, or all around the building, is not possible to determine accurately. The last seems most unlikely from the fact that many more blocks without dentils than with them have survived. This suggests that one of the first two possibilities is the more probable, and it would seem most likely that cornices with dentils were used in the porch and the fa9ade facing the Agora. Only two cornice blocks from the Julian Basilica (S and Q, the latter shown in Fig. 23) may possibly correspondto this series from the South Basilica, but more likely they come from the clerestory cornice. Several of the cornice blocks from the main floor series, six from the South Basilica (including one with dentils) and two from the Julian Basilica, have cuttings in the back of the block to receive the beams over the side aisles. Block I (Fig. 13) gives both the spacing of the beams (0.552 m. between them) and their thickness (0.263 m.). Block G (Fig. 18),

_

1

5

10

CENTIMTEA/

30

AND U) FROM SOUTH BASILICA

on the other hand, gives a slightly wider spacing, 0.60 m. between beams. The four blocks represented by Block H (Fig. 16), which vary in height from 0.432 to 0.452 m., have no beam cuttings and therefore must come either from the inner colonnadeor from the rakingcornices of the porches or exedras. The slope of the shed roof over the side aisles, and consequently the height of the wall restored above the cornices of the inner colonnade, remains a matter of conjecture. The cornice J (Fig. 17) may be consideredas indicating this slope in that of the front part of its top, which has a slope of approximately one in ten. Since the width of the roof over the side aisles is about seven meters, the height would be only ca. 0.70 m., which is too little. The slope on the front of the top of Block Q (Fig. 23) from the Julian Basilica, however, is in the ratio of about one in five, which would indicate a height of 1.50 m. for this wall if this block is indeed from the main floor cornice series. Aesthetically a greater height is requiredthan is suggested by either of the blocks, and it is probable that the cuttings were made for setting the simas at a slope considerably less than that of the roof itself.

OF THE TWIN BASILICAS AND RECONSTRUCTION COMPARISON

--

\\

" (I\

< I(

r^'I

%I

^S

A'CTION ):'):'/' C)

IVOMTETIC

"^ 76

95

- 4

1BOTTOM ~i, ....

T

5

/

FIG. 18. DRAWING OF POROS CORNICE BLOCK G FROM SOUTH BASILICA

Nor is the height of the arcaded clerestory established by the preserved elements. With the diameter of the arch established, however, the height has been reconstructed at the usual two diameters. As mentioned earlier (p. 87), the three preservedarch springers(Figs. 19, 20; P1. 49 4, 5, 6), all from the Julian Basilica, to-

gether with the fragment of the engaged column (Fig. 21; P1. 501), allow a reconstruction of the clerestory arcade as shown in Figure 22, and in which only the height of the arches is in doubt. The established distance of 2.944 m. from center to center of the arches must have correspondedto that of the interaxial distance of the inner colonnade below and has indicated that this colonnade has 5 x10 columns (Plan VII, 4). The arcade thus has four arches at the ends and nine on the sides. The arch springer blocks indicate a wall thickness in the clerestory of ca. 0.59 m., about the same as that of the walls of the main floor. Only one face of the arch had decorative mouldings, and in the restored drawing of the section of the Basilicas (Plan VIII), as well as the restored plan of the clerestory (Plan VII, 4), the decorated side has

been shown on the interior, where it seems to be required by, and is more in keeping with, the highly decorativeinterior colonnade.There is reason to believe, on the other hand, that except for the rustication of the wall blocks, the cornices, and the colonnaded porch, or porches, the exterior of the buildings was quite plain. While the single preservedblock with the engaged column (Fig. 21; P1. 50 1) has been hacked away on one side and so does not preclude the existence on the other side of similar half columns, or pilasters, the evidence from the arch springerspoints to decoration on one side only (Fig. 20). It is not unexpected that in the debris of the Julian Basilica, in which all the pieces of the clerestory were found, there should also be pieces of the upper cornice of the building. In the South Basilica, on the other hand, little of this upper storey has survived. There are from the Julian Basilica ten cornice blocks, one of them with dentils, whole or fragmentary, giving the seven profiles shown in Figures 23 and 24. That on the left of Figure 23 (Q) has already been associated possibly with the cor-

CORINTH

96

.285

,j .t97 FRONT

J

J

.Zl

.29Z j FEONT

4

.i

j

.M7 PZONT

A.e'

I

"'D-

'1A:..

/ /Y>-

/

:

////..

151

/

Ni

.

,U

A

..

N J

/(I

\*

I

i'' ?/

J

\ \

\.

. i-

.''PR0PILC IDENTICAL

^ ^

I

j

i f.f i..LCTION

.AfCTION

I

E

CTION

FIG. 19. DRAWING OF POROS ARCH SPRINGER BLOCKS FROM JULIAN BASILICA

nice of the main floor,for its total height is which the cornices vary in height from 0.294 to 0.34 m. Block Q, and the very similar Block excluding the sloping top, is only 0.329 m. S, may belong to the sides, while the others high,just like that of BlockR, and it may in- with flat tops could belong to either the horideed be part of this same clerestoryseries,in zontal or raking cornices of the gabled roof 0.47 m., like that course. But its profiledface,

A

,

Ij I I

/ /

/

,

?I -ONT/

/>

/\

5ECTION

.

FIG.

20.

DRAWING

,

OF PORO

RIG4T

&ND&

-

.4BOTTOM _':/S

::

I,

.4.

"T,t

/

,,%

- .-:(

.-

.-----

ARCH


r ~ A}I |~~ ;j

~~.....

....

:"~

. ?

..~i~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~-:..:. . . . . -

ii

7

S::

".,:. ,~,. ?..::.: ~~~~~ci;''~'E "':..';,;

~~s

??~~

.?.?i

?.

S,

??~~~~~~~ ?? ~ .: .., ~~~..'.. ~~~~~~~~~:.......?? ":i ....

:'ri,.-.'.

"?':,:: :. ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ t,... s~~~~~F1! ~ ~ ~7~~~~"f" I'$??

"~:''P;~~~.:. '.:.:~P:,.-;:i ?~....'~"~" ... :'i;:~' .......~?'.,.4; ?~-!-~??!; ,": . .;:? ............ ,........... ... ....

. .. .. . . ... .~. ..?%.:,:::.. ..r:,. ?.-- ...:,,.....!.:..::.

,

...-_. ?? i;; .,.?.,,~~.1.-? -~~~~

[~

~

~

~.:"

?

.....

.~

Sei-ud MaeSau,frmEs il

as Asl Mae tauefrm Semiinude 1~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~'.

2. Colossal Semi-nudeMale Statue, from West Aisle JULIAN BASILICA

""~:':;4'

PLATE 36

~~~~~~..'re~I ...,b.,,..~" ..... '';.t:--:..,

:"

'

'm

,..

" MOO: :::IuF3;1~~~~6?

'"- ';!.

.-: ,: .:

,

..

.:;,t:..,.I

.

,~~ e

w

' -.4.-?n ? iTi-.*y~;'

.

.~.:

',

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~.... ........ ~ .T~C~i

-~:~~,

from.:. -Y. .es S?

.slc

' .

':

... "~' . 2................... ,:-. ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~. .-. :. ;':-:':' --.:-,.: . ~" di`~ ~ ~~~~ ~ "' ~~~:., ~'?'~~~~;. ~' > ,~~~~~~

...g

..

. ?~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~~ ......

~~..... F? ~

:

...

.,

..

:

' .

...............~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ ' '"'~' ' ' "'~'~"d... *3L s~~

,

4?.

*

.

*

..

..

tEs

1.Dti?fFudton

n

1. Detail of Foundationsat East End of North Wall

1

_

I::.

";. ... ..:.....

fNrthWl

2. South Face of South Outer Wall and Foundations Exedra at Central Central Exedra at

~~~~~

;??~~~~~~~~~~~~:;

;.?I .

,'

t

''

...

z

e,"' L ;-',.-"

:. .. "

.

..

...'

'

~ ~

? '~:',.... .':',-.' v." .'.

?.' ':......'T ." . ~.!,':~..: ,: ?'.: " ' i:,':?'::~ rr"-.';.i?"a,:"

,,,'

.

:,,

:.'5-~

. ;::'..:.-.,'' ,., . .

. ..,:. ~.-~ ....-~~? P'?'I?-;7 .. ~"~.:~;.:'... ,,':-'~,~:'k~~ .{:::':~!:-~iie:!;'-ii:~:,!'3?

?...

?~ ~ ;~,..~: L

::.

......

~

-~,,': . .

.

'

... .:

....

- .-,~,~, ' ,~, "~;;~,''i.

.....~.Z,

-

rfi;

~

t?

;.i: ....

~

44

:: %~: . ...

.,

.-'.:"

Poc nNot 3.~~??~

3.

ie _"~ rmWs

...

9

~.

~ ~ ~~#

... ..-,L~:.

,

I.

,'i:

"..

: : ;Y'~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~:: .' ., ..,~:~-

..

A-~

~

....

~~~~I

Porch on North Side from West~~~~~~~~~~~~~'.'' C~.

4. Stuccoed Outer Face of North Wall to East of Porch and Door

....

?

~ ,

Ts?~i.'

Il.--:,c..

I.,,~~ .

~~~~~~~?

~

~

~,

~ ,,~

,

'~~,,-'~:;

*-..-., .-...-

:t

:

L'? , P. i '....:.. w .l: " :f.r Sot.' ... .l.' ... ':,; ..""'.. .a:-.';

-, L,~..'~; *?..

. -.':,~ ~.~'

K, ,,b '~ ,

C

. .;??

~ ,~~?;? ~ ~;~ ~ ~ * .. . . ~~~~~~~~~i?~~~~

~

.,~

2. .-.:

.

Central Part ofInner

Fac

r

1. Central Part of South Core Wall from South

2. Central Part of Inner Face o

; ;A1"l~b?c?~, ;,?~......,

f r | t?~~~~~~~~~~~~... .: :..,

i ?'

i

.

"

:.

4 Wi.... o i.nEasOuterWall.

*. ....-.

:;" '!.

::

a ...":... .~.':~-.'."~.t.

L

2

?.? ?? j ~'

~,

.

.. k......'":

...,~':~,::"

,...,Z!,-. '. ,..' '~:.-

i ~.,~~'ii~:;,~-,:::,? ~.,;:~:.?~' ,',? ... '~:.::::,:;::

-~ ~~~.".

~

.

,

.

'?~j

? 4.Wido in EasOuterWll

--.".

South Core Wall~~Y*ii

3. Inscriptions on Central Part of South Core Wall SOUTH BASILICA

PLATE 41

;,." .. ". ...... i.....

''.

,~..

~ .:.

.:.....'

.

........K

~

'.''~.

,'?..

O-

. ...-..

'

~

'

.

- :

..~.-

,j..~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ia*;.. h

K.

i:;? ?

f;~~~~~~ ;" .,,,,,~ ~

,

?~:~-.

.

'~~""~ "~,~ y ? ',':'4'~'~

.

.

.'

~'~".

. .-

I-AiP?

?,

,

P~%a?..,; ~ ~, ~ ~' ~

...., !~..'.;'..-. .........-:..:'...., ,.~ i .. ..~~'

.

41i.'. u'~~~~~~~~.

:.~

~~~~~~~..

:.~" .

.

From North. FoNrh

..

.

,?: ..

.

..i

~

~

~ ~~%L~~c.J2 ~~~~~~~~~~:;:'"~~? ;:"

.".-

.

..

,

..~.,,:

~..

::';.

..~.5.

? Clse Vie frm -- Nrt

,

'

SOUTH BA-SILICA ~ ~

"'i~. "~... ,::;: ?-'" ::~~!

;? ..

.

Elements of Monumental Fagade in foreground

:?i~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ .A*

~?.:

' ;; .~~~~~~~~~~~~~NO.~ .-........?- ':"'4:

?

""

~;2?

,0

.

.

.

"'

''

i,'.',:;:-.:i:?.?;'-tJ{

''127~Entan Court c

.

-.'.:.;

~~~~~~~~~~~~i Close 2. Viewfoot ? ?- . SOUT} B Asxx,lCa

7

O

.

3~: :'w

: !,Z~ s

:

:.4 -! .

? i i~'

"~'5;

?

~

zi

... ~ ~~~ ~ ~! ~~~~~~~~~~...' .,..~

.h... -

'

'A-

? .~,.

Antaan onc 1.P1 - .'

" ..y't

i

"

~"

:'::

lcso

4 .::.

.-

'

etHl

-'

,

:'"lf'

. ,