The Theatre (Corinth vol.2)

RESULTS OF EXCAVATIONS CONDUCTED BY

THE AMERICAN

SCHOOL OF CLASSICAL STUDIES

AT ATHENS

VOLUME II

THE

THEATRE BY

RICHARD STILLWELL

THE AMERI CAN SCHOOL OF CLASSICAL STUD I ES AT ATHENS

1952

ALL RIGHTS RESERVED

PRINTED IN GERMANY AT 3. J. AUIGUSTIN, GLoCKSTADT

PREFACE The theatre of Corinth, first located over a half century ago, has shared, in its final publication, the fate of numerous other monuments of antiquity, and has also in commonwith them the fact that it has not even yet been entirely cleared. Ever since it was my good fortune to work on that excavation as architecturalassistant to the late Dr. T. Leslie Shear, and to publish in 1929 a preliminary report of the architectural aspects of the building, it was my hope that I could at some time take up the task once more and prepare a fuller publication. Other obligations and interests deferred this for many years and it was with much pleasure that I was able to turn once more to its many problems through a special grant from the American School of Classical Studies which enabled me to return again to Corinthin 1948. At first it was planned to do no more than clean away the accumulation of over twenty years of washed-down earth, and funds were made available for this purpose. They were generously extended to allow a small amount of new digging in testing certain areas below the depth to which tlhey had formerly been cleared, but the limiting of new excavation by order of the Archaeologicalauthorities, as well as the need to observe economy, discouraged as much new exploration as might have been desired. If therefore, as will be evident in what follows, certain areas were not more fully tested, the reason is not far to seek. It is difficult to record the many persons to whom one is indebted for assistance and advice; the number adds up to a long roster of names, with the certainty that some will be omitted who should have been included. I Princeton University October 1951

must, however,acknowledgegratefullythe kind cooperation of Professor Louis E. Lord, chairman of the ManagingCommitteeof the School, who made the trip of 1948 possible. Professor Oscar Broneer, then Acting Director of the School, gave freely of his time in consulting on various problemsin which his long experience was most valuable. As ever, in things connected with Corinth, Dr. Bert Hodge Hill, Honorary Director of the School, was most helpful through his intimate knowledgeof Corinthand its problems. Dr. Saul Weinbergkindly took a number of photographsfor me, many of which appear hereafter and, as assistant to the Director in charge of Corinthduringthe spring of 1948, placed at my disposal our ever efficient foreman, Evangelos Lekkas, and a small group of experienced workmen. All these and many others are associated in my mind with the work on the theatre in which they had a share. Dr. F. J. DeWaele excavated there under Dr. Shear's supervision in 1928 and 1929, W. A. Campbell in 1930, and, at other times, Dr. Edward Capps, Jr. and Dr. Howard Comfort. To their work, collectively and individually, much of the material gathered in this publication is due. To others, who did not work on the theatre, but to whom I am indebted for suggestions and assistance, thanks also are due: Dr. Homer Thompson, of the Institute for Advanced Study, Professor E. Baldwin Smith and ProfessorA. M. Friend, of the Department of Art and Archaeology at Princeton University, and also that authority on theatres both Greekand Roman, Dr. MargareteBieber, who has kindly called a number of references and articles to my attention. RICHARD STILLWELL

TABLE OF CONTENTS .V...

PREFACE...

.

ILLUSTRATIONS.. FIGURES IN THE TEXT

ix

...

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

PLATES.. CHAPTER

V

xi

.... I. INTRODUCTION: HISTORY OF THE EXCAVATION

.

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

.

3

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

5

DETAILED DESCRIPTION: THE GREEK PERIOD . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

15

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

15

II. LOCATION AND III.

ix

GENERAL DESCRIPTION .

ORCHESTRA

.

KOILON ..............................

32

.

SKENE..

IV. DETAILED DESCRIPTION. THE ROMAN PERIOD .

. . . . . . . . . . .

. . . . . . .

41 41

.

ORCHESTRA......

21

CAVEA .45 PARODOI AND ADITI

.

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

SCAENAAND PERIBOLOS . . . . . . . . . . . . . . PULPITUM

V. THE

VII.

. . . . . . . . . . .

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

THEATRE AS AN ARENA

VI. RESTORATION OF

. . . . . . . . . . .

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

SCAENAE FRONS .

. . . . . . . . . . .

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

INVENTORY OF ARCHITECTURAL FRAGMENTS

. . . . . . . .

49 58 775

84 99

. . . . . . . . . . 106

VIII. SUMMARYAND CHRONOLOGY. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 131

FIGURES IN THE TEXT Fig.

The theatre, looking north . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . The orchestra, looking southeast . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Upper part of Stair VI, Greek period . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Eastern part of orchestra showing the arena wall, Greek and late Roman gutters and drain connections.......................................9 5. View from the southwest showing the stage building, the peribolos and plaza . . . . . . . . 6. East end of scaena, and peribolos beyond . .. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 7. The Hellenistic gutter . . 8. Sections of gutter and bridge, and end elevation of typical seats and stair stringers . . .. . . . 9. Mason's marks on gutter blocks, one fifth full size . . .. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 10. Western mast socket. Excavation sketch . . . . . . . . .. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 11. Sections showing placing of mast sockets east and west. At lower left, section along line of drain . . . . . .. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . froin East Parodos joining main drain . 12. Foundations and rock cuttings at southeast angle of proskenion . . . .. . . . . . . . . . . 13. Detail of Greek seat construction and masons' marks on seat foundations . . .. . . . . . . . 14. Blocks with mason's marks . . . . . . . .. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 15. View across central part of koilon with Greek seat foundations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 16. Greek seat foundations and, at back, below foundations of upper Roman diazoma, two seat blocks in place . . . . . . . . . . . ...... . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .... . 17. Steps and stringers of Stair IX. At back, foundation for upper Roman diazoma . .. . . . . . 18. Restored section showing two periods . . . . . . .. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 19. Plan showing relation of earlier and later Greek periods . . . . .. . . . . . . . . . . . . 20. Looking down Stair IX. In middle distance, at left, seat blocks of row 45 are still in place . . 21. Sections showing relation and details of Greek and Roman diazomata . . . .. . . . . . . . . . . . .. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 22. Foundation blocks for outer wall at head of Stair IX. . . . . . . . .. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 23. Seat blocks in situ . .. . . 24. Post holes for early skene, in rock scarp immediately behind wall of Hellenistic skene . . 25. Area with rock cuttings in front of skene . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 26. Section of skene and plan of central part . . . . . . . . .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. 27. Stamp on roof-tile of skene . 28. The east wall of the Hellenistic skene . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . ... . . . 29. East wall of Hellenistic skene, looking down . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 30. Restored plan and elevation of stair. Detail of ramp . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 31. Cutting for stairway and inlaid blocks with setting lines . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 32. East end of stage building. At right, slanting socle for Hellenistic retaining wall and ramp . . . 33. Charonian stairs, east . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 34. Charonian stairs, west . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 35. East end of sparsiones basin, and later connection with main drain . . . . . . . . . . . . . 36. Channel connecting with main drain from the east . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 37. Late gutter block with holes for connection to main drain . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 38. Dowel holes for securing parapet in connection with the late Roman gutter . . . . . . . . . . 39. Rib wall foundations for Roman cavea. At bottom left, one of the Greek stairways . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 40. Outer wall and buttresses 41. Roman seats made from re-used Greek seat blocks . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 42. The east parodos . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 43. Sections in east parodos showing fountain..51 44. Sketch of east parodos.............. ...............52 45. Field sketch of filling in east end of aditus .......... ..............54 46. Isometricview of new entrance cUt in aditubs .......................54 47. Rock cuttings for inner end of east aditus, south wall........ . ...........55 1. 2. 3. 4.

6 7 9

11 12 16 17 17 19 19 20 22 23 23 23 24 25 26 29 29 29 31 32 32 34 35 36 37 38 37 39 39 40 42 42 44 45 46 48 49 50

FIGURES IN THE TEXT

x Fig.

48. Analemma of west parodos showing reinforcing construction. The buttress at the extreme left belongs to the original series. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 49. Inner end of west aditus, north side, showing re-used Greek seat blocks: a. north side; b. south side 50. Outer end of western parodos, and sill for gate. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 51. View looking east along the west parodos and the pulpitum to the east parodos . . . . ... . . 52. Profile of bench in exedra . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 53. Eastern part of scaena from northwest . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 54. Looking north over eastern part of scaena and adjacent areas . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 55. Foundations for central part of scaena . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 56. View showing western part of scaena . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 57. Section of north side of peribolos . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 58. East wall of scaena with lower course of shallow buttress (a), and poros step block . . . . . . 59. Fountain at centre of south side of peribolos at time of excavation . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 60. The fountain in 1928 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 61. Isometric view of the east hospitalium . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 62. Sections and plan at east end of scaena . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 63. Connection of east wall of east hall and buttress for analemma. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 64. West wall of the east hall, seen from within . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. . . . . . . . . . . . .. . . . . . . . . . . . ... . 65. East hall, details .... 66. Graffito from Byzantine reservoir in east hall . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 67. Restored section of pulpitum and aulaea . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 68. Late Roman walls under pulpitum, showing re-used capping blocks from arena. Looking south . 69. Late Roman walls of the post arena period, a, b. The skene front wall appears at c . . . . . . 70. Socket for curtain windlass . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 71. Plan and section of windlass block . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 72. Revetment of pulpitum of the post arena period . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 73. Section of southern refuge . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 74. Letters in block from arena wall capping . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 75. Half column re-used as a sill for north refuge . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 76. Arena frieze. The first group to east of southern refuge . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 77. Arena frieze. Charging lion and venator . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 78. Arena frieze. Venatores and cage . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 79. Arena frieze. Lion, charging to right toward cage. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 80. Arena frieze. Venatores and charging bull . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 81. Arena frieze. Venator pole-vaulting over a springing leopard . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 82. Arena frieze. Venator, to right (west) of southern refuge . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 83. Arena frieze. At left, a venator turning a handspring . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 84. Basin with protecting grille made in Hellenistic gutter . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 85. Architectural details. Poros stone . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 86. Architectural details. Poros stone and marble . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 87. Architectural details. Marble cornices . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 88. Architectural details. Marble cornices and architrave-frieze . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 89. Inscribed cornice block, No. 89 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 90. Capital from portico of regia, No. 107 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 91. Capital from portico of regia, No. 107, restored . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 92. Capital, No. 113, found at high level near west parodos . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 93. Pilaster capital, No. 114 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 94. Ionic capital, No. 119 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 95. Architectural details. Various . . . .. . . .. .. .. .. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 96. Lower part of acanthus column, No. 189 . 97. Base, drum and fragments of acanthus columns, No?s.189, 190). .1.............125

full size .................7*Ii*** 98. Moldings,

ee127

****

99. Moldings ....128 100. Moldings: above, Nos. 203, 217;s below, No. 208 half size. .................128 101. Moldings.... 102. Moldings: A-A'-A", Profile of No. 60; B. typical column base; C-K, string courses. 103. Limestone block with notch, No. 223. .............. ...........130

56 56 57 59 60 60 61 61 63 65 66 67 67 68 70 72 72 73 75 78 79 79 81 81 83 84 84 85 88 89 89 90 91 92 93 93 98 107 109 113 115 116 118 119 118 118 120 123 125

128 .....129

PLATES I

Plan. Corinth, the Central Area

II

Plan of Theatre in present state

III

Plan of Hellenistic Theatre, restored

IV

Plan detail of Greek orchestra and rock cuttings

Va Schematic drawing of cuttings for aulaea and phlyakes stage b Section of holes for aulaea masts c Elevation of stage building, present state VIa Section showing east parodos b Schematic restoration of east parodos VIIa Restored plan of Roman theatre of the Second Century b Restored plan of the arena VIIIa Restoration of the Greek skene b Schematic restoration of the Roman scaenae frons

THE THEATRE

CHAPTER

I

INTRODUCTION: HISTORY OF THE EXCAVATION When, in the spring of 1896, the American School of Classical Studies at Athens began to excavate on the site of Old Corinth, the location of the theatre was sought as a reference point with which to relate and possibly find a number of the other monuments of the city.1 Pausanias mentions the theatre in connection with several other buildings: the temple of Athena Chalinitis,the Odeion,the Gymnasium, Lerna, and the temple of Zeus.2 Aceordingly, the director of the School, Professor R. B. Richardson, rightly assumed that from the theatre as a starting point the topography of the city would gradually be revealed. It must be remembered that at the time nothing identifiable save the temple, later to be known as the Temple of Apollo, remained visible. A large number of trial trenches were sunk in various locations in and about the village of Old Corinth,but it was not until May 12, 1896, that a series of trials undertakenin a promising hollow about 250 metres to the northwest of the temple revealed the presence of a theatre of large dimensions. The account of the excavation was published by Dr. Richardson in the annual report of the Director for 1896, and a more detailed study followed in the American Journal of Archaeology.It was ascertained that the theatre was, originally,of the Greek period, and had been rebuilt in Roman times. Only some portions of the cavea were investigated; the orchestra and stage building were not found.3Had one of the trial trenches (XVIII) been carried a little farther to the north, and but a metre deeper, it would I For a brief account of the activities of the early years of the Corinth Excavations see Corinth, I, i, Cambridge, Mass., 1932, Introduction, pp. 3-13. 2 Pausanias, II, 4, 5. 3 Frank Cole Babbitt, A. J. A., I, 1897, pp. 481-494. 1*

have touched the curved wall which bounded an arena contrived in the theatre in late imperial times, and, with this discovery, the program of excavating the building might well have been accelerated. Work ceased, however, early in June, and nothing further was done until the campaign of 1902, when, on May 8th, a new trench (XXXIV) was begun "with a view to finding out something about the stage building." One of the trenches of the first campaign had indeed located what later proved to be a colonnaded peribolosbehind the Roman stage building, but since the level of the remains could not be satisfaetorily related to the lowest preserved row of seats, they were left for some time unexplained. The new trench was laid out to cut across the centre of the stage, and when it had reached a sufficiently low level, it produced a great many fragments of sculpture, including a series of reliefs depicting a Gigantomachy, a combat between Greeks and Amazons, and the labors of Herakles.4 Marble architectural fragments also appeared and, at the close of the season, a small section of the front wall of the Greekskene. Not enough was known, however, about the various periods of the building to make some of the problems intelligible, and Dr. Samuel Bassett, who was in charge of the treneh, terminated his work May 27th. The following year, 1903, Dr. David M. Robinson, then a member of the School, dug for two weeks a trench parallel with the one just mentioned, and found more fragments of sculpture, including an additional quantity of 4 To be published by Edward Capps, Jr., in Corinth,IX, ii. The fragments found in the early excavations were studied by E. M. Gardiner and published in A.J.A., XIII, 1909, pp. 304-321.

4

CORINTH

fragments of the reliefs. An extension toward the west, at right angles to the trench along the stage front, reached a point well beyond the end of the Greek skene and actually uncovered a segment of the wall of the Roman arena, which, however, remained unexplained. Dr. Robinson also was in charge of extending one of the early trenches toward the south (XVIII B) and established the outer limit of the circle of the cavea. A further period of quiet descended on the building until 1909 when Dr. W. B. Dinsmoor, then a fellow of the School, began, on May 10, to clean up the trenichesof 1902 and 1903 and study as much of the architecturalremains as were available. The south end of trench XXXIV was extended and deepened and the Roman level of the orchestra established. A brief trial in June and July located, in the southeast sector of the cavea, parts of two rows of Greek seats (TrenchXVIII K).5 Following this valuable piece of work, the theatre once more lay neglected until 1925, when Professor T. Leslie Shear undertook the excavation of the site. The accounts of his successive campaigns in 1925, 1926, 1928 and 1929 are fully published by him in the American Journal of Archaeologyand need only be summarizedhere.6 The first season (March 9 to June 7, 1925) resulted in the discovery of the paintings on the wall of the arena. The following year the entire orchestra and the whole of the arena wall were uncovered, as well as parts of the two parodoi and the greater part of the front wall of the scene building. The presence of a deep gutter of Greek construction was established, and many more fragments of the reliefs and other sculpture came to light. The third 5 The author must acknowledge his indebtedness to the careful collation of material from the early notebooks made by William Bell Dinsmoor, as well as to many of his observations which have proved just and helpful in the further study of the building. 6 T. L. Shear, A.J.A., XXIX, 1925, pp. 381-388; XXX, 1926, pp. 444-463; XXXII, 1928, pp. 474-489; XXXIII, 1929, pp. 515-536; R. Stillwell, A.J.A., XXXIII, 1929, pp. 77-97.

season saw, consecutively, the clearing of the stage building, the completion of the excavation of the east parodos, and the opening up of the paved street and the plaza to the east and northeast of the theatre. The work of the fourth season was chiefly in the west parodos which was excavated for its entire length, but not completely cleared of a number of late walls belonging to Early Christian and mediaeval times, and the clearing of a large sector of the central portion of the cavea. As a fitting climax to the four campaigns in which Dr. Shear had borne the entire cost of this major excavation, an inscriptionappeared, in the pavement of the northeast plaza, which stated that a certain Erastus, in return for his aedileship, had laid the pavement at his own expense: ERASTUS PRO AEDILITATE S. P. STRAVIT.7 The coincidence of two personal benefactors of the theatre is striking. In his work on the theatre Dr. Shear was assisted at various times by several members of the school: Dr. F. J. DeWaele, Dr. C. A. Robinson, Jr., Dr. Howard Comfort, W. A. Campbell, and Richard Stillwell as architect. To Nora Jenkins Shear we owe the accurate color record of the paintings of the arena wall. The original frescoeshave long since crumbled. In 1929, and again in 1930, the author had occasion to make a few small trials in searchof additional data on the relative chronology of various parts of the complex and, in 1948, after a long lapse of years, was again enabled to test out a few unexcavated corners. Much remainsundug. Over one half of the area of the cavea is still covered. The peribolos north of the stage building is but partly cleared, and much more could be done on the problem of the approaches to the theatre. It is doubtful, however, whether the additional information would fully repay the heavy cost of excavation, but there can be no doubt that many items of interest would be found. 7To be published by John H. Kent, Corinth, VIII, iii; Shear, A.J.A., XXXIII, 1929, pp. 525-526, fig. 9.

CHAPTER

I

LOCATION AND GENERAL DESCRIPTION (PLATE I)

The theatre lies about two hundred and fifty metres due northwest of the northwestern angle of the Roman market place. The site takes advantage of the natural slope of the terrain where it forms a step between the upper level on which the Agora is situated, and the lower terrace which extends almost on an even grade to the Asklepieion at the northern edge of the city, hard by the outer wall. Originally the natural difference in level between the highest and lowest grades at the location chosen for the theatre was from twelve to fourteen metres, and in order to obtain greater deptlh the floor of the original orchestra was sunk down about two metres into the disintegrated hardpan and soft, easily quarried rock beneath. As a result, the parodos entrances always sloped downwardtoward the orchestra. The Corinthianswere fortunate in being ahle to place their theatre in such a convenient location, near the centre of the city's activities and readily accessible to the extensive area which lay between the market place and the northern edge of the town, an area where in Greek times there were, apparently, many hiouses.One of these, with a rich pebble mosaic floor, was found by Dr. Shear not more than fifty metres east of the theatre.1 The geological situation also made it possible for the Corinthiansto observethe precepts later mentioned by Vitruvius, that theatres should not face south, nor be built in marshy places,2 and it was also possible for them to construct the koilon with a minimum amount of fill for the extremities of the horns of the XXXIII, 1929, p. 526, fig. 10. Vitruvius, De Architectura,V, iii, 1 and 2.

1 A.J.A., 2

auditorium. The material of this fill, wherever trials were made, is a clayey earth ranging from a reddish to a pale yellowish color, mixed with sherds and an occasional loom-weight none of which appear to date later than the third quarterof the fifth century before Christ. The inferenceis, of course, that most probably the first construction of the theatre cannot follow at any great interval of time and is best placed in the last quarterof the fifth or, at very latest, in the beginning of the fourth century. This matter will be considered more fully in connection with the chronologyof the building periods.3 The orientation of the theatre is almost exactly true north and south, the stage occupying the north side of the plan. In order to facilitate an understandingof the building and to give the reader a comprehensive view of the cycle of periods through which it has passed, the following brief, general description is given. The theatre has suffered so many changes in the course of its history, and in some parts is so completely destroyed, that even at the risk of a certain amount of repetition it seems desirable to outline the principal features before going into detail. THE ORCHESTRA The most striking feature to be seen today is the deep limestone gutter crossed by nine bridges which correspond to the nine central klimakes of the koilon (Fig. 1, Pls. II, III). 3F. J. DeWaele, R.E., Suppl. VI, col. 191, states that the theatre referred to by Xenophon, Hell., IV, 4, 3, cannot be the one with which we are concerned. If, however, the conclusions based on excavational evidence are correct, there is no reason why the reference may not be to this theatre, since the events mentioned occurred about 392 B. C.

NW

_4

... .......

'77M

41-

77,

a

77-

or M w

7L OP on,

4r L n, wo

7-C. 7ijugn,

NM

S: 4

FIG.

1. THE THEATRE,

0

LOOKING NORTH

LOCATION AND GENERAL DESCRIPTION

7

.c3

iNN _

II

'IN

FIG. 2.

THE

ORCHESTRA,

Within the arc formned by the gutter, and concentric with it, is a molding 0.05 m. high marking the foot of a now vanished curb course, which in turn bounded the full circle of the orchestra. This molding turns outward to either side when it reaches the first and ninth bridges, runs east and west for 2.30 m. from the angle thus formed, and then is returned nearly, but not quite, at a right angle to the ends of the proskenion (P1. III). The curb also followed the same lines and formed, in effect, shoulders at either side of the orchestra circle, a feature for which there is no exact parallel.4 4A somewhat similar effect is given by the way in which the wide, shallow gutter of the theatre at Epidauros terminates a little beyond the transverse axis of the orchestra circle, but in this case there is no trace of organic connection with the stage building., Cf. P. Kabbadias.

TTpaKT1Ka,1883,

pl. I; idem, Foujiles d'Epidaure, Athens, 1891, pl. II.

LOOKING

SOUTHEAST

About 0.50 m. higher than the top of the deep gutter are the remains of a broad, shallow gutter made from large blocks of hard Acrocorinth limestone. The inner ends of the blocks were cut to receive a marble parapet, or barrier, which was dowelled into place. This construction belongs to the late period of the theatre, later than the construction of a very hard packed sand and clay floor which was laid over a fill of poros stone fragments and lime mortar (Fig. 2). This layer will be referred to hereafter as the sand strosis, and it is to be connected with a period when the theatre was used as an arena. One other feature should be mentioned at this time. Across the entire breadth of the orchestra of the Roman period, below the level

8

CORINTH

of the sand strosis, was a shallow water basin, 1.80 m. wide and over twenty metres long (Pls. II, IV). The upper part of the basin was cut off by the laying of the sand strosis which runs quite across it; its present depth, below the top of the sand strosis, is about 0.35 m. No trace remains to show how water was brought to the basin, but a small hole at the east gives drainage into the great channel that formerly served the deep gutter. At a period subsequent to its first construction a space 0.50 m. wide was walled off on the north side of the basin to make a water channel. Where the channel reached the ends of the basin the walls were cut through and the channel extended west to an undetermined distance, and east to the margin of the early drain. The orchestra floor of Greek and early Roman times has been entirely removed. The original fill was dug out and replaced by the foundation of rubble concrete which lies immediately below the sand strosis, and extends down to bed rock, nearly at the level of the bottom of the deep gutter. Only two levels remain above the sand strosis: one, a hard, lime-cement layer based on a miscellaneous fill of broken stone, tiles, pieces of marble revetment and sculpture fragments;5 the other, resting almost directly on this layer, a pavement of marble slabs, somewhat irregularly laid and probably replacing, or perhaps only repairing,a pavement which once rested on the cement bed. THE CAVEA The koilon of Greek times provided a great amount of material for the Roman rebuilding, but enough remains to establish most of the principal features. Originally there were fourteen sections with fifteen stairways.6Many of the foundation blocks for the Greek seats re-

main, but of the seats themselves, only a scattered few are preserved in place. They were of a very simple rectangularsection with earth packed between each row, similar to those at the theatre at Eretria, but lacking even the slight nosing which is found there. The string blocks which flanked the stairs are fairly well preserved in some places, and high up in Stairs VI and IX, a few step blocks are still in place (Fig. 3). Nothing remains below the originalninth row of Greekseats since that part was all quarriedaway by the construction of the arena with its high protecting wall. Not a single seat of the Roman theatre survives.7 The seat foundations can be seen in many places, in the form of rubble walls which radiate, more or less, from the centre of the theatre. The slope of the cavea was made steeper in Roman times, apparently when the theatre was first reconditioned, and for this purpose heavy rib walls, filled in between with earth and debris, were erected. In the lower rows, as now preserved, just above the arena wall, a number of Greek seat blocks were reused as foundations, turned at right angles to their originalorientation. The diazomata of the Roman theatre were carried on solid rubble concrete foundations, and it is in connection with these especially that those rows of Greek seats which were preserved are still to be seen. It is evident that the builders merely saved themselves trouble in laying out the curve by leaving a couple of rows of the Greek seats in place and building to them. Further down, between the arena wall and the orchestra, are a few poor foundations for Roman seats that were erected when the arena was abandoned and the theatre returned to its proper use. At the extreme west side of the curve are four steps of one of the stairs which belongedto this last phase of the theatre (Fig. 2).

5 Including a portrait head identified as that of the emperor Galba. A.J.A., XXX, 1926, p. 455, fig. 8. 6 The even number of kerkides, with a stair on the central axis, is unusual. Epidauros furnishes the closest parallel, and the relative proximity of Corinthsuggests that its theatre had some influence on the Polyclitan building.

7R. B. Richardson, "Report of the Director", Fifteenth Annual Report of the Managing Committeeof the American School of Classical Studies at Athens, 1896, p. 33 and F. C. Babbitt, A.J.A., I, 1897, p. 490, pl. XX; both mention two Roman seat blocks in situ in Trench XVIII. The blocks are no longer in evidence.

LOCATION AND GENERAL DESCRIPTION

Of the outer wall there are some traces. Along the street just east of the theatre a section is still preserved, and to the southwest, at the head of Stair IX, are a number of foundation blocks and one block of a higher course. The remains at both these points are most

9

rock for about half of its height (ca. 1.50 ni.) and continued upwards in masonry, liberally chinked with fragments of marble revetment. The entire surface was stuccoed and painted with scenes of venatoresfighting with beasts, as will be describedelsewhere (Figs. 2, 4).8

-131

-:~

. ..,.,~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ ..........D,

FIG.

3. UPPER

PART OF STAIR VI, GREEK

PERIOD

FIG. 4.

EASTERN

WALL,

PART OF ORCHESTRA

GREEK

SHOWING

AND LATE ROMAN GUTTERS

THE ARENA

AND DRAIN

CONNECTIONS

probably Roman. No sure trace of the Greek outer wall has been identified. Probably it lay a little inside the line occupied by the Roman and its material supplied its successor. There is good evidence to show that the Greekouter limit did not extend uniformly in a curve of constant radius from one analemma to the other, but that the last section on each wing contained fewer rows. In the arena period a tribune was built in the western quadrant of the cavea, and the first nine or ten rows of Roman seats were removed when the protecting wall bounding the arena was established. This was cut in the soft native

THE PARODOI

In the Roman reconstruction of the theatre almost all the blocks of the Greekparodoi were ripped out, but enough remains to make a restoration possible. Several foundation blocks of the western Greekanalemma are still visible. The eastern has vanished entirely, and is only suggested by some cuttings in the rock, which, however, are not sufficiently definite to verify exactly the location of the analemma on that side. On the north of the parodoi, flanking the skene, were stone ramps leading to the logeion and serving also as retaining walls for the 8

Belw,

--p

87f

f.

CORINTH

10

earth behind. Their remains still exist at either end of the Greek stage. The Roman parodoi may be divided into two parts: an outer portion, along the analemma of the theatre, and an inner, vaulted adtitus,reached by an entrance from the north. Both the east and west entrances were later blocked, and new, narrowerentrances made by cutting through the north wall of each aditus at a point just outside the ends of the scene building. The analemmata were strengthened by buttresses, 0.90 m. square, but after a time these proved insufficient and, having been thrown out of plumb, they were supplemented by larger piers, 1.20 m. square, built against the wall midway between the earlierbuttresses. Further reinforcement was provided by large piers opposite the new buttresses and about 2.50 m. away, with an arch, forming a kind of flying buttress, thrown across each gap. On the west, in addition to the flying buttresses, the base of the analemma wall was thickened. It is evident that the pressure of the earth fill behind the analemmata was too great for the original construction, and it is also most probable that the settlement was hastened by an earthquake. The vaults over the covered parts of the parodoi were of strong rubble concrete, several large fragments of which had to be broken up in the excavations in order to clear the aditi. THE STAGE BUILDING GREEK

At present the Greek skene (Fig. 5, P1. Vc) consists of three courses of the front wall, a section of the rear wall, two courses high, and a short section of three courses that marks the northern extremity of the east end. All are bedded on rock or hardpan, which, along the back wall wherever the rock was sufficiently firm, was cut to form the inner face of the wall. The great span of ten metres from front to back is unusual, and must have

required the use of interior supports, but of these no trace has been distinguished. At the southeast corner of the skene is a deep cutting as though for the foundation of a stair tower. In it have been sunk, flush with the rock, three rows of blocks formingthe west, north and east sides of a chamber, whose interior dimensions are given by setting lines cut on the inset blocks. The floor of this cutting is at the level of the second course of the front wall, but the general rock level, and hence the main part of the floor of the hyposkenion, was 0.60 m. to 0.70 m. higher. Blocks projecting from the skene mark the ends of the proskenion and, on the east, a short section of the stereobate of the colonnade is preserved. The remainder of the line of the colonnade is well marked by a shallow rock cutting. A fainter rock cutting and a few blocks at the east indicate that the proskenion was deepened at some time. Subsequent to the originalconstruction,a central passage was inserted through the front wall of the skene, and carried forward to the front of the deeper proskenion. At either end of the skene are blocks with their joints normal to the lines of the parodoi. These are closely bonded with the remains of the front wall at its western end. On the east, the connection has been broken, but there are three blocks laid lengthwise on a downward slope toward the orchestra which give the grade of the approach.Thereis a raised nub on the easternmost block showing that a ramp up began at that point. On the west, foundations for the same construction may be seen. Cut into the rock in front of the skene are two sunken channels, roughly 0.50 m. wide and about one metre deep, which pass from within the proskenionto a point just a little beyond it to the south. Both were provided with shallow steps, best seen in the eastern one, where, at the same time, the under side of the stereobate of the colonnadewas cut away to form a corbel and give a little more headroom in the tunnel.

.~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~4.w

FG 5 VI W R MT

FIG.

5.

VIEW

SO H ET H WN T E T G

FROM THE SOUTHWEST

SHOWING

THE STAGE

I DN

BUILDING,

TH P RB

O

THE PERIBOLOS

N P0

AND PLAZA

CORINTH

12

l~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~0 or

l

~~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~

i.6

ATEDOFSAN,ADPRBLSBYN

It is quite easy, by stooping, to go through the hospitalia gave access to slightly larger rooms passage and emerge in the orchestrain front of at the east and west extremities of the buildthe proskenion. There can be no question but ing (P1. VIJa). that these passages are Charonianstairs; the Less than half the length of the stage buildinteresting feature for the Corinth theatre is ing is preserved above the foundations, and that there are two sets. even this much has suffered severely from pillaging, especially on the side toward the ROMAN stage, so that any reconstruction of the plan is The ruins of the Roman stage building show to some extent conjectural. The outer, north that it was of the usual western type, with wall is preservedto a height of three courses at three exedras in which were the porta regia the northeast corner (Fig. 6). A portion of the and the two hospitalia. At either end of the socle and three courses of the eastern hospitalscene building were stairs opening from the ium remain, together wvith the entrance north, which gave access either to upper rooms through it to the stage, and about one third of or to the eavea itself. On the north side of the the circuit of the eastern of the two exedras building, facing on a court, two semicircular facing on the court. A small section of poros exedras with stone benches provided for the stone paving for the area in front of the regia comfort of people using the colonnade behind still lies on an isolated rubble foundation. Elsethe theatre. Small rooms behind each of the where, the chief remains are the masses of

LOCATIONAND GENERAL DESCRIPTION

13

rubble concrete which formed the foundations ing down at right angles to the parodoi. Originfor those areas where no direct superinmposed ally the walls which faced the stage building weight of consequence was to be carried. At were pierced by five openings, provided with all points where the solid parts of the plan wooden doors. The eastern hall also had a were to be carried up to the full height of the large opening which faced south and gave on building the foundations were of cut stone the outer portion of the parodos, almost oppomasonry. In general the concrete masses were site the entrance to the vaulted aditus. The not laid directly on hardpan, but on a levelling corresponding portion of the west hall is no course of cut stone, many of the blocks being longer preserved, but the arrangement was re-used from a building of the early Roman doubtless similar. Subsequent to the first conperiod. There can be little doubt that an earlier struction of the halls the small doorways were scaenae frons once occupied most of the space filled by blocks set in from the outer side. The covered by the present ruins, which must date east hall, in the latest period of the theatre, befrom the second century of our era. The exact came a large reservoir,waterproofedby heavy plan of the earlier form of the Roman scaena stucco with careful thickening at the angles, cannot be recovered, but from the character and paved with large bricks or tiles. The southof the architectural blocks built into the late ern opening was heavily blocked up, and a foundations, especially certain cornice blocks, large piece of marble tympanum with a square it would seem that the first building was of the hole cut through it was placed low down in the straight-fronted, Asia Minor variety, with original opening as a gate to a well built flume columns, or pairs of columns, "en ressault." designed to carry water to flood the orchestra when it was desired to use it for a naumnachia.9 A spillway was contrivedjust outside the openSTRUCTURES CONNECTED WITH THE ing, thereby blocking most of the parodos THEATRE approachfrom the east, and from the spillway A large colonnaded court extended the en- the flume was led down through the eastern tire length of the stage building along its north porta versura. Although the original height of side. Beyond this was a street runningapprox- the room or reservoiris no longer preserved, a imately east and west. Originallybuilt of poros depth of only a trifle more than three metres stone, the court was later revetted in marble; wouldgive sufficient capacity to fill the orchesa new stylobate of white limestone installed tra contained within the marble parapet to a above the earlier one, and marble paving laid depth of about one metre, or very nearly the between the colonnade and the wall. Presum- level of the parapet top. ably the colonnadeitself was rebuilt in marble. On the south, in the centre, three long marble APPROACHES TO THE THEATRE slabs were placed instead of the white limeFull information on the approaches and stone, and the spacing of the columns interrupted by some sort of entrance to the regia, access to the theatre is lacking and can only be or by a backgroundfor a small water basin and obtained by a large amount of further excavafountain at the middle of the south side. This tion. Some of the approaches, however, are basin is to be associated in its original form known. 9 A recent article by Gustavo Traversari, "Tetimimo e with the early period of the court, but was Colimbe'tra,"Dioniso, Boll. dell'Ist. Naz. del DrammaAntico, retained in the remodelling. XIII, 1950, pp. 18-35 suggests that the supposed use of East and west of the stage building were two theatres for naumachia is erroneous, and that the orchestras were flooded to provide water spectacles or mimes. See below large halls, separated from it by a passage slop- p. 140.

14

CORINTH

On the east a paved street led down from the upper level. Near the southeast quadrant of the cavea a series of steps and short rampszigzagged down the slope where it was steepest, and the approachwas then continued, skirting the cavea wall past the end of the east parodos, to a large, paved plaza northeast of the stage building. From this plaza there was access to the court behind the stage, and also to the passage which led between the east hall and the end of the stage building to the east aditus. Theplazawas also accessiblefroma street which, coming from the east, presumably started at the Lechaion Road, and ran on past the north side of the theatre court. Excavations just outside the extreme limits

of the west parodos failed to discover any pavement, or any very conclusive signs of a street at this point, but the presence of a large sill at the entrance to the outer parodos, with cuttings for a gate, shows that there was definitely an entrance at this point and we must assume a street here, running in a generally northerly direction. To facilitate access to the upper parts of the cavea, vomitoria must have been provided. Traces of one may still be seen in the southeast sector, but the remains consist merely of a sill and foundations lying outside the circle of the cavea wall, which at this point has been entirely removed, and only the cuttings in hard pan remain to show where it once ran.

CHAPTER

II

DETAILED DESCRIPTION. THE GREEK PERIOD ORCHESTRA (PLATES II, III)

The original levels both of the earliest orchestra of the Greek theatre and of the orchestra of Hellenistic' times are no longer preserved, but they may be approximated very closely. The formerwould have been only a very little above the level to which the native rock was cut over an area that extends within the entire circle of the later, Hellenistic, gutter construction, as well as over that later occupied by the proskenion of the Hellenistic stage building. This level is from 0.80 m. to 1.10 m. below theatre datum level,2 and at least 0.80 m. below the lowest possible level for the Hellenistic orchestra floor. It is no longer practicable to recover accurately the radius of this early orchestra, but it would have measured about 10.80 m. to 11.00 m. from the lowest (now vanished) row of seats. Its existence may be assuredfrom a combination of facts, one being that otherwisethere would have been no logical reason to excavate the rock to such a depth over so large an area. The non-existence of any 1 The term Hellenistic as used here includes the latter part of the fourth century B. C. 2 Theatre datum level is taken on the marble and limestone edging course which formed the south side of a narrow channel between the late Roman orchestra cement floor and the pulpitum of the same period. It is established at 57.71 m. above mean sea level. The general Corinth datum for the publication of the buildings about the market place, in Corinth, I, i, was reckoned from the southwest angle of the stylobate of the Temple of Apollo, 84.85 m. above sea level, and hence 27.14 m. above theatre datum. Since it happens that this last correspondsvery closely with what was presumably the level of the Greekorchestra in the Hellenistic period, it has been thought preferable to retain it in the description rather than to express theatre levels in terms either of sea level or of the original Corinth datum, taken at the temple.

actual floor level is explained by the fact that the installation of a solid foundation for a later, marblepavement of the Roman period brought about a complete removal of whatever Greek or Hellenistic levels may have existed. The early orchestra is also indicated by the difficulty of reconciling the character of construction of the seats of the Greek theatre, which are of the simplest nature, with the high quality of workmanship and sophisticated technique of the Hellenistic gutter construction. The two simply cannot belong in the same period. East and west, a little to the north of a line bisecting the orchestra, are rock cuttings which have no relation to the Hellenistic orchestra, but which could well be connected with an earlier circle, although neither of the cuttings is preserved to a sufficient length to make sure that it follows a curved line. On the west, especially, a deep step of about 0.50 m. appears which may be the trace of an early water channel or gutter, in no way related to the later one which is preserved. It is impossible to recover more of this cutting without an extensive demolition of later work above it. There is no stone stage building to be associated with the early period, but two rows of holes for wooden uprights seem definitely earlier than the Hellenistic stage building, and probably indicate a wooden skene. These will be consideredbelow. The rock surface which underlay the early orchestra floor is only approximately smooth, and would have been covered by packed earth

CORINTH

16

and clay to a depth of a few centimetres. The existing rock levels show that this floor was pitched away from the stage. In digging under the floor of the long Roman water basin which runs across the orchestrafrom east to west, the fill between it and the rock was of a very clayey, yellowish soil and probably represents the original fill for the early floor. Unfortunately the only sherds found in this fill were of coarse fabric, but they appeared to be quite early.

blocks that broke joints with the course above. They project unevenly toward the interior of the circle, and are set down a little into bed rock. The height of the bottom courses varies according to the pitch of the bottom of the gutter; their top surfaces are level.

__i _

:

_

.

.

.

* .

.. ..

.~~~~~~~~~~~~~... . ...

THE HELLENISTIC ORCHESTRA (PLATES III, IV)

This is by far the most impressive piece of construction now preserved and deserves careful description. As an example of the high development of stereotomy of the fourth and third centuries it ranks with the best contemporary work at Corinthand elsewhere. A deep gutter, 0.52 m. wide and from 0.63 m. deep at the west to 0.76 m. at the east, surrounds about half of the orchestra circle (Fig. 7). The bottom is paved with slabs of poros stone, with a joint every 0.60 m., set directly into the soft, native rock. The outer edges of the slabs were cut down 0.04 m. to form a rebate to receive the wall blocks of the gutter. These are in two courses save where the northeast sector was not open to view, and along the drain which connected with the gutter and, maintaining the same width, but increasing in depth, passed northeastward under the east parodos and carried the water away from the theatre (Fig. 8). The drain walls in these parts consist of orthostate slabs. The bottom course, on both sides of the open gutter, had joints exactly under the centre line of the several bridges which spanned the gutter, and also half way between. Thus the outer blocks measured 1.40 m. long, the inner slightly less. The width of these courses cannot be measured, but the one to the inside is backed by a series of wedge-shaped

.~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~.. ..... . .

FIG. 7. THE HELLENISTIC GUTTER

The upper courses, inside and out, measure

o 29 m. high. On either side, three blocks, very

evenly spaced, occupy each interval between bridges. Toward the centre of the orchestrathe blocks show a raised surface, separated from the lower portion of the block by a cyma reversa molding, and serving as a bed for the ring of blocks that formed the curb of the orchestra. No curb block remains, but setting lines and pry-holes show that it consisted of blocks about 0.40 m. wide and approximately 1.40 m. long. The joints came directly above those of the lowest gutter course, next below the one with the cyma molding. On the inner ends of the only two blocks of the second

DETAILED DESCRIPTION.THE GREEK PERIOD

1.7

--~~~~~~~~~~~~r ~~~~~~~pI

I

III

I

i

o~~5

0

e

Al -

t+

.15

t

.525

?

.57

t

e

.a0

.57

SECTIONS

OF GUTTER

AND BRIDGE,

AND END ELEVATION

course which have been completely exposed are mason's marks: T and H (Fig. 9). The height of the curb may be approxiniated as follows. The top of the second course of the Hellenistic skene wall is, on the average,0.44 m.

FIG. 9. MASON'S MARKiS ON GUTTER BLOCKS, ONE FIFTII FULL

SIZE

above the top of the proskenion foundation, or, generally, 0.47 m. above the bed of the curb. The face of this second course of the skene has been cut down about 0.05 m. where it projects forward of the third course, and indicates the level of the floor of the proskenion, about 0.42 m. above the bedding of the curb. This, then, would be the maximum height for the curb if we suppose that the orchestra floor was at the exact level of the top of the stylobate of the proskenion colonnade, but it is reasonable to allow the stylobate to project a little above the orchestra and hence, if we allow ten centimetres, we may restore 2

1.00

.04 P1.

.04

S

FIG. 8.

I

OF TYPICAL

SEATS AND STAIR STRINGERS

the height of the curb at 0.32 m. or one foot.3 The beds of the bridge blocks are at the same level as those of the upper courses of the gutter, but their tops are about 0.01 m. higher, a device intended to compensate for wear. A raised band surrounds the lateral surfaces of each bridge and frames an arch-like hollowing of the stone, but the arch forms do not continue through the width of the bridge. Instead, they funnel downward so that under the middle line the stone is almost full thickness (Fig. 8). The width of the bridges is 0.79 m. On the inner end they show a joint just short of the eyma molding,whichis cut on anotherblock. Only the seven bridges nearest the central axis of the theatre spanned the open gutter. The next, east and west, were exposed to the south and carrieda return of the eyma molding and its curb to either side on a line parallel to the stage. This return extends outward for a distance of 2.30 m. and then turns north almost, but not quite, at right angles to the 3 At Epidauros the level of the stylobate of the proskenion is about 0.12 m. above that of the curb of the orchestra circle. W. Dorpfeld-E. Reisch, Das griechische Theater, Athens, 1896, p. 132.

18

CORINTH

stage. The angle of each is 92 degrees, with the two lines diverging toward the north. Beyond the line marked by this shoulder the gutter was covered, but it is clear that the circle of the orchestra was carried around the whole way, for its foundations still exist beyond the semicircle, and a rock cutting in front of the line of the Hellenistic proskenion fits this curve very exactly. The east and west edges of the shoulders, as has just been remarked,are not quite perpendicular to the front of the skene (P1.III). They ran, one to a point which may still be seen miarkedby an irregularity on the projecting end of the western stereobate of the proskenion, and the other to a line formed by two blocks which still extend from its eastern corner and served as foundation for the molded course, and the curb course above. The outer series of gutter blocks is uniformly 0.57 m. wide, measured on the radius of the orchestra, until the end bridges are reached. The outer end joints of the bridges follow the same curve. Outside of the outer range of gutter blocks, and set down flush into the rock, is a second series of blocks which bear a raised margin or lip cut on a curve concentric with the seats, and not with the orchestra. Their lengths, on the radius of the circle, vary, therefore, with the divergence of the two circles, from 0.75 m. at the centre axis to more than 1.60 m. at the angles of the shoulders, which, together with the raised lip for the passage in front of the lowest row of seats have been worked on single blocks. From this point northward there are again two series of blocks. The inner bears the eyma moldingand bed for the curb, as well as a lower surface which formed a very shallow depression or channel between the curb and the lip for the passage skirting the lowest row of seats. The outer range, beginning about 0.05 m. inside the lip, extends as far as was necessary to underlapthe step for the lowest row of seats, a distance of 0.75 m. to 0.80 m.

The inner, top course of the gutter is fastened with inverted U clamps, carefully leaded. No dowel holes appear to secure the curb, although one would expect it, since any pressure of trodden earth within would tend to displace the blocks outward, and it was for this purpose that the course below the curb was so carefully clamped together. Elsewhere there are no clamps or fastenings of any kind. The joints of the entire construction are radial to the orchestra centre as far as the last bridges; after that they radiate from the centre on which the seats are described. The adjoining surfaces of all the blocks of this gutter construction seem, if we may judge by the two or three places where a break makes inspection possible, to have been treated with a well cut anathyrosis with broad marginal areas, and appear very similar in all respects to the character of work on the South Stoa.4 For the stereotomy of the construction near the end bridges an examination of the plan (P1. IV) will be better than a verbal description. There are certain features, however, which should be pointed out. First, one end of the gutter never went further than just north of the western end bridge. Only the foundation for the orchestra circle is carried on, and consists of orthostates, well joined, but not brought to an even surface on the outer side. They are not curved, but set as the sides of a polygon. The straight course which carried the branch of the curb that ran back to the proskenion rests on a stereobate which is not aligned with the direction of the curb, but is set perpendicular to the stage. This in turn rests in a level rock cutting which is not quite parallel to the course for which it was cut. Obviously it was intended that final alignments should be made when the proper level was reached and not before. Some time after the gutter had been finished two massive blocks ca. 0.80 m. square were let 4 0. Broneer, A.J.A., XXXVII, 1933, pp. 554ff.; also Corinth, I, v (in preparation).

DETAILED DESCRIPTION. THE GREEK PERIOD

in to the east and west shoulders. Their tops are now very roughly hacked, as though they had been cut down at some time. Each has a bowl-shaped cutting about 0.45 m. in diameter centered in the top. The bowl in the west block is a little deeper (0.40 m.) than the other. The western block rests, in part, on a low, well cut slab which has been set into the rock, and the manner in which the projecting end of one of the blocks for the curb bed has been cut away is plainly seen (Figs. 10, 11). The large block, with the socket, was secured by a wedge-shaped block very carefully fitted be-

.. W

FIG.

,

10. WESTERN

SECTION,

MAST SOCKET.

EASr

EXCAVATION

SKETCH

SECTION

Ca. 5.00

tween it and the projecting end of the last bottom course block of the inner wall of the gutter. On the east face of the socket block is a cutting, 0.12 m. wide, which forms a channel in the side, and follows roughly the curve of the bowl within. What purpose this may have served is not clear unless it was a means of allowing water that accumulated in the area between the curb of the orchestra circle and the straight curb to reach the gutter. It may also have served in lowering the block into place, although one would expect a similar cutting on the opposite side. Thereis, however, none to be seen. The block in the eastern shoulderrests partly on the lower, outer course of the gutter and has been cut away in the form of a half arch so as to corbel out over it (Fig. 11). The half arch so formed could never have been visible, and this refinement may be merely to lighten the block on that side, where it lacked adequate support. It may also have been suggested by the rather curious fact that the block immediately north of the bridge block was also hollowed out slightly on the under side, though it in turn could never have been visible. There is no groove or channel in the east block, but on the south side, near one corner, is a series of pry-

5HOULDEP.

SECTION

_._

+0

FURTHER

,

, _._,

ALONC;

CUTTEQ.

?0

_,

NORTH

SECTION, 0

FIG. 11. SECTIONS

SHOWING

PLACING

OF MAST SOCKETS

EAST AND WEST.

EAST PARODOS

2*

19

JOINING

AT LOWER LEFT,

MAIN DRAIN

WEST

SHOULDER _

SECTION

ALONG LINE OF DRAIN

FROM

CORINTH

&~~~~~~~~~~~~~~&

FIG.

12.

FOUNDATIONS

AND

ROCK CUTTIGS

AT SOUTHEAST

ANGLE

OF PEOSKENIO

FIG. 12. FOUNDATIONS AND ROCK CUTTINGS AT SOUTHEAST ANGLE OF PROSKENION

holes that may have served the purpose of easing the block down onto its bed. The function of these blocks is uncertain, but a possible explanation is that they were intended to serve as sockets for masts to which a velum could have been attached. It is apparent also that they were used at a time when the Hellenistic gutter was still in operation, for if it had been abandoned it is unlikely that they would have been inserted with the same care, and quite unlikely that so much care should have been taken not to obstruct the eastern section of the gutter. The socket of the western block has a hole that goes clear through the bottom. The other has no outlet, and for this reason it is not probable that the sockets can be connected with fountains, or any similar device.5 5 There are two blocks in the theatre at Sikyon which lie in a position roughly analogous to those at Corinth, A.J.A.,

The orthostates which line the channel of the main drain beyond the last bridge are, in part, re-used blocks. Some of them bear a heavy coat of good, yellow, waterproof stucco such as is commonly employed in Corinth during the Greek period. Two blocks show a projecting, nearly rectangular taenia on one edge, but no other distinguishable characteristics. Possibly they are to be associated with the earlier orchestra gutter, if in fact there was one, or they may come from a water basin such VIII, 1893, pp. 405-409, fig. 15. Bulle, Untersuchungenan griechischen Theatern, (Abh. Mun. Akad., XXXIII, 1928) p. 193, suggests that they were for a water driven mechanical device which, perhaps, a Sikyonian mechanic had dedicated and used to entertain the spectators during an intermission. Since the upper surfaces of the blocks at Corinth appear to have been hacked off we cannot say positively that there were no cuttings on them for a similar purpose, but it is most unlikely that so much trouble would have been taken to bed and secure the two massive stones unless they were intended to resist weight and stress beyond any that would be needed for such a display as suggested for Sikyon.

DETAILED DESCRIPTION. THE GREEK PERIOD

as the one indicated by a channel at a low level in the east parodos of the Roman theatre. The straight curbs running north from the east and west shoulders of the orchestra were cut off about halfway between their southern ends and the proskenion by a long, shallow, Roman water basin that ran clear across the orchestra. There is no doubt, however, that they once extended to the angles of the proskenion, since there is a suitable rock cutting for the western one, and two foundation blocks of the eastern, as has been noted above, are still in situ (a, a, Fig. 12). On the west face of the northern of the two blocks is a mason's mark +. From the way in which the joints have been cut it appears that the curbs were laid after the foundation for the proskenion colonnade had been set. It is important to note this since, if the evidence is correctly interpreted, the construction of the proskenion,and hence the skene, cannot be later than the gutter.

21

though an irregularity which may be noted in the rise of two successive rows of seats about two thirds of the way up the slope may be explained as a sort of embryonic attempt at a diazoma. Half way up the slope, the usual seat construction is varied by a course of stones placed, rather roughly, between two successive rows of seats, and somewhat further down there is evidence that a diazoma was later introducedby the simple processof eliminating two rows. Each of these levels will be discussed in detail below. It may also be established that the two outer kerkidesdid not run up as far as the remainder of the circuit of the koilon, but ended some ten or twelve rows short of the outer limit. This appears in connection with the western analemma of which a few blocks are still in situ. As far as it is preserved the thickness of the analemmawall was nearly 1.24 m., just enough to carry a normal flight of stairs 0.75 m. wide and leave a little less than 0.50 m. for a parapet. The cutting for this wall can be traced THE KOILON along a line marked by the existing blocks to a The koilon of the Greek theatre was divided point just beyond the entrance from the north into fourteen kerkides by thirteen flights of into the vaulted portion of the Roman parodos. stairs. Two additional flights along the ana- Some part of the end of this wall must have lemmata brought the number of klinmakesup still existed in Roman times, perhaps only the to fifteen. Contraryto the practicerecomnmend- lowest course, for a later wall, connected with ed by Vitruvius6 additional flights were not the Roman period, is built against its western intercalated above the diazoma as was the return. The later wall survived whereas the case, for example, at Epidauros or at Athens. earlier fell prey to stone plunderers. The last In fact, the theatre in its originalform may be two metres of the cutting do not quite follow said not to have had proper diazomata at all, the line of the remainderof the analemma but 6 Vitruvius, V, vi, 2; V, vii, 2. The Vitruvian convention make an obtuse angle with it, thus eliminating for the plan of the Greek theatre with three inscribed squares in the orchestra gives seven kerkides, and eight an acute angle at the extreme corner of the klimakes. In a theatre the size of Corinth or Epidauros this analemma (P1. II). On the east side nothing would produce a series of long arcs of seats along which spectators would have to thread their way in order to reach their remains, but a careful investigation has estabplaces. Apparently the Roman architect ignoredthe possibility lished that in this direction the analemma that additional stairs were sometimes interpolated below the diazomata, thereby raising the total to fifteen, as originally never ran any further than its counterpart at at Corinth. If the central stair were blocked, as well as each the west. alternate stair to either side, but the extensions of all the arrangeideal his left open, diazoma upper The inner ends of the analemmata, toward stairs above the ment would correspond exactly with the Corinth theatre as the orchestra, are not recoverable, but may modified late in the Hellenistic period. It is also possible that the modification might have been made in the very early reasonably be located with reference to the Roman period, before the Augustan reconstruction of the curve of the lowest seats of the koilon. cavea was undertaken.

CORINTH

22

The construction of the seats is of the simplest kind (Figs. 13, 15, 16). They consist of plain blocks of poros stone, 0.30 m. high, 0.37 m. wide on the top surface, and of varying lengths, usually about 1.40 m. The front face is slightly curved to the periphery of the circle to which they are set, and the backs usually show a roughly finished surface projecting two to four centimetres beyond a drafting at the top, rear edge of the block. Thus the beds of the blocks, which are also generally only roughed out save where they rested on foundation blocks, vary in width between 0.39 m. and 0.43 m. The ends of the blocks, save where they abutted on a stair, have anathyrosis.

The foundations for these simple seats, which are nothing more than a stone version of the old wooden TIpiaare individual, roughly rectangular blocks provided with a raised lip at the front so as to keep the seats from slipping forward. One of these occurs under each seat joint. Three blocks have mason's marks, A, , F respectively (Figs. 13, 14). Very occasionally a foundation will consist of two narrow blocks side by side. Pry-holes are often in evidence on the tops of the foundation stones, which were set in hardpan or, in the higher levels of the koilon, on a hard packed fill of earth, clayey and reddish in tone, but sometimes verging to a yellow color. The fill con-

"L.~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~t

FIG.

13. DETAIL

OF GREEK

SEAT CONSTRUCTION

AND MASONS'

MARKS ON SEAT FOUNDATIONS

DETAILED DESCRIPTION. THE GREEK PERIOD

zG-_

|

|

i

l

|

s

N

>

|

l

s

|

6':.9.:.'#.'...,-|

.,:

s~~~~~~~~~~~6 J

.:e_'.4.-.@.

..... . .

."

E

..e? ......

:

:

.

- :;.w b

#s

,'

;

e

s'

23

!W

._

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

...... .. .. .... i

e

w

i-,,3,'

r

i

i

4

...

.

-

e

v.$i

s .

}E

f

fmf~~~~~~~~~~~. s;

s

.

t

!'

>

.

l.

.

0

r * . i

WALL

5gt4

UPPER,

ROMAN

#W45 S ECOND R-OMAN DIAZOMA #4)

#2) 0.IIq

VLOWVER

7-778-DIAZOMA

CENTR-AL

AXPS

RZOMAN

tDIAZOMA

... hM

FIG. 21.

SECTIONS

.

1

SHOWING

ROMAN NEAR,

r--45

j I

SECOND

0

1

RELATION

2

3

AND DETAILS

4

OF GREEK AND ROMAN DIAZOMATA

30

CORINTH

where some ten or twelve metres of wall with buttresses may still be seen (Fig. 40, P1. II). About half of this length is preserved to a height of three courses above the pavement of the street and, from its construction and its similarity to the work on the parodoi of the Roman theatre, seems almost certain to belong to the early Roman period. Another section is representedby some cuttings in hardpan just northwest of a large buttress of Roman date in the southeast quadrant, and a third section shows in a trench at the head of Stair IX (Fig. 22). This consists of a course of large header blocks resting on a foundation of rubble which has been laid without mortar. The blocks project unevenly and some carry a cutting for the next course near their forward, or inner, ends. Behind this cutting, ca. 1.00 m. further out, is a well defined setting line. A single block, which suggests a buttress, is also preserved, and this has been further strengthened by an additional block still further out, resting on a fill of concrete. The rough, poros rubble foundation for the header course has been faced on its inner side by a wall of rubble which extends down to hardpan. On the inner end of one header is a mason's mark in the form of a square theta (Fig. 17, at upper right). The problem is whether some part of this construction may be Greek. The working is fairly rough but not more so than for the foundations of the western analemma. The inner ends of the headers were never intended to be visible and consequently must have been covered by the last seats of the Greek koilon. It would be normal to provide some sort of passage around the top of the koilon, and to give this any breadth at all the slope of the upper seats would have to be raised considerably above what it is at present. It is very doubtful if the necessary amount could be made up by allowing for the settlement that has undoubtedly taken place. At present the line of the forward, upper edges of the seats strikes just about the front upper edge of the

headers. The face of the last preserved seat foundation is 4.85 m. inside of the cutting for the wall course that rested on the header blocks, and there is a change in the construction of the stair at this point which suggests that it never went any higher, but that in the string course beside it we may see the bedding for the last row of seats. The importance of deciding between Greek and Roman lies in the resulting determination of the actual size of the Greek theatre. The arguments may be briefly stated as follows: A. For Roman: 1. The character of the workmanship of the header blocks and the rubble foundation below is not decisive, but favors the Roman period. The mason's mark is not conclusive, but a similar mark appears on the second Roman diazoma (Fig. 20). The rubble poros stone foundation resembles other foundations of the Roman period in Corinth, especially that of at the east side the so-called "goodhigh wall'"14 of the court in front of the Basilica by the Lechaion Road, and another wall in the early Roman period of Peirene.15 2. It is very difficult to reconcile the level of the blocks with the disposition at the head of

StairIX. 3. The final string course blocks of this stair suggest that there were never any higher up (Fig. 17). B. For Greek: The fill against the forward face of the header course seems, from the records,to have been wholly Greek, of various periods, down to late Hellenistic.16A terracotta mold for a 14

Corinth, I, i, p. 165. "I As yet unpublished.

16 The fill immediately south of the header course contained no sherds later than the end of the fourth century B. C., together with fragments of good Greek stucco. The blocks, however, could easily have been laid down into an undisturbed fill, and the fact that their upper parts were backfilled with poros stone chips tends to confirm this. A little further south, just beyond the line of the addition to the buttress block, were a few pieces of prehistoric pottery, close against virgin soil.

DETAILED DESCRIPTION. THE GREEK PERIOD

helmeted head of Athenal7 was found in 1910 "at a low level" a short way within the outer wall, but the exact level is not recorded. Presumably it belonged to the fill put in by the Romans when the cavea was altered. Cuttingsin hardpan in a trench in the southeast quadrant suggest a circuit wall within the line of the Roman one, although no trace of the wall itself remains. Most probably it was built of squared stone, and was entirely removed by the Roman builders to furnish material for the largercircuit. It is also probablethat the Greek wall was not thick enough to serve for the higher building, and hence advantage was taken of this fact to enlarge slightly the area of the cavea. If we assume, then, that the Greek theatre was slightly smaller than the Roman, and that the present head of Stair IX represents the full range of the seats of the koilon, we have a total of 58 rows of seats for the theatre in its original Greek form, without deducting any for diazomata. The radiusto the last row would have measured very nearly 55 metres, or almost as much as the theatre at Epidauros, measured to a correspondingpoint. One other matter remains to be considered in the plan of the theatre; the question as to whether there was a widening out of the curve of the koilon in the end sections. This feature, particularly mentioned by Vitruvius,18is to be observed at Epidauros where the koilon is described on three centres. To be sure, from D6rpfeld's plan,19it is not done according to Vitruvius' formula, but rather more subtly. Athens, Megalopolis, and in fact nearly every other large Greek theatre from the fourth century on observe this feature. Corinth does not. A portion of Stair II is still in place, and a D. M. Robinson, A. J.A., XV, 1911, pp. 484-495, figs. 1-3. Vitruvius, V, vii, 1 and 2. 19Kabbadias, Fouilles d'Epidaure, pl. II; D6rpfeld-Reisch, op. cit., fig. 70, reproduced and discussed by 0. A. W. Dilke, "The Greek Theatre Cavea," B.S.A., XLIII, 1948, pp. 189-142, where he cites as examples of plans which are of the circular type Megalopolis, Sikyon, Argos, Ephesos, Dodona, and New Pleuron and states that this must have been common at first.

31

line sighted on its axis strikes the same point as do the axes of the other stairs. The west analemma, also, when restored on the basis of the preserved foundations, shows that it is parallel with a radius drawn from the common centre. Had the circle opened out this would not be the case. If, then, there is truth in the theory that the widening was caused by the increased use of the stage and area immediately in front of it, then the Corinth theatre should belong to a period when this was not the general practice and, save for a relatively temporary wooden skene, the orchestra was the locus of action according to the old tradition. SEATING

CAPACITY

On the upper surface of some of the seat blocks are grooved lines at right angles to the face of the seat, spaced uniformly 0.36 m. apart. Many of the preserved blocks are so worn that the lines no longer appear, but where they do there can be no doubt of their purpose, which was to mark off the spaces allotted to the spectators. Just west of Stair IX two seats of rows 31, 32 are still in situ. The upper shows the spacing lines very clearly and also bearson its face the words NIKANIKA, roughly incised in the soft stone (Fig. 23). Unfortunately we have no blocks so marked from the lower levels of the koilon and cannot tell

17 18

FIG. 23. SE:ATBLOCKS in situ

CORINTH

32

'.\

4,s

>~,,

.

w>#Z^ uaw_

.

FIG. 24.

POST

IMMEDIATELY

HOLES FOR EARLY BEHIND

SKENE, IN ROCK SCARP SKENE WALL OF HELLENISTIC

whether, for more favored spectators greater space was provided. The narrowness is surprising, and would not be acceptable by modern standards, nor does it agree with the wider space, usually 0.50 in., allowed by most calculations. By actual experiment, however, four persons of average size can occupy as many of these adjacent spaces without discomfort. Clothing did not bulk so large, probably, i antiquity and the ancient Greekswere not generally a large people. Such being the case the seating space allowed would have been just adequate. The maximum seating capacity of the theatre as originally planned would, on the basis of this measurement, have been between fifteen and sixteen thousand. We shall not be far wrong if we keep to the lower lisit and say that it was approximately fifteen thousand.20 THIESKENE The stage building of the earliest period, contemporary with the simple stone seats of the koilon, is represented merely by a number of holes cut in hardpan or the underlying rock, and evidently intended to receive wooden uprights (Fig. 24, Pis. H, III). Three of these, 20 Defrasse and Lechat, Epidaure, p. 200, cite E. A. Gardner as figuring 17,000 spectators at Megalopolis on the basis of three per running metre of seating and comment that this is a bit close. They allow two metres for five persons at Epidauros, or 0.40 m. per person. The Corinthian allowance of 0.36 m. would appear to mark a very fair compromise.

FIG. 25.

AREA

:

~~~ ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ . .. ........

WITH ROCK CUTTINGS

IN FRONT

OF SKENE

measuring about 20 by 30 centimetres, occur immediately behind the preserved courses of the front wall of the later Greek skene. There are traces of a fourth at a point near the eastern end of the rock cutting for the same wall. Correspondingto these holes, about 4.00 m. to the south, is a second series approximately 0.50 m. deep, and roughly 0.50 m. by 0.60 m. large at the top (b on Figs. 12, 25, Pls. IV, Vc). The sides slope inwardtoward the bottom where a shallowsocket about 0.20 m. squareis provided to act as a step for a square wooden post. The size of the upper part of the cuttings is explained by the need of giving room for a workman to cut his way down to the bottom of the hole in the rock which is comparatively hard at that point. The northern series, just mentioned, were cut in hardpan of a friable nature and hence could presumably have been worked with an excavating tool for a considerable depth without it being necessary for the workman to have room to chisel away the rock as he went down. That the two series are earlier than the remains of the later Greekskene is proved by the fact that the eastermmostpit of the southern series is partly covered by one of the blocks that formed the foundations for the curb of the eastern shoulder of the orchestra of the second Greek period (P1. IV). The fill in the holes was disappointingly pure. The northern series yielded a few sherds of early fourth century

DETAILED DESCRIPTION. THE GREEK PERIOD

date, some of unglazed fabric which could be, in Corinth, of either the fourth or fifth centuries. The southernseriesgave even less, perhaps a half dozen sherds which corresponded in characterand date to those found in the northern row. The evidence afforded by these cuttings for a wooden skene in the first period of the theatre is gratifying, but a disturbing factor must first be explained before they can be accepted without question. The two series are not symmetrically disposed with reference to the north-south axis of the theatre, but centre to the east. The easternmost holes come very nearly at the east end of the later proskenion; the westernmost are several metres short of attaining the limits of the west end of the later stage, although there is a shallow, unfinished sinkage in the rock, in line with the southern row, and only a metre short of the west end of the later proskenion (c, Fig. 25). It has not been possible to trace the holes behind the western part of the later skene on account of the Roman overbuilding and fill of opus incertum. As matters stand we appear to have to do with a wooden building, probably of a removable nature, which measured about 14.00 m. by 4.00 m., and whose axis lay about 8.40m. east of the centre line of orchestra and koilon. This asymmetry is unusual, but may be explained in either one of two ways: a) the movable wooden skene, representing a building or palace, may easily have been placed to one side for a specific purpose,21or, b) it may belong to a period even earlier than the construction of the first stone seats when there could have been a smaller orchestra at a higher level than 21 The convention mentioned by Pollux, Onomastikon,IV, 126, whereby the periaktoi showed, on the one hand what lay without the city, and on the other hand those things from the city, ,, No. 181

186

18No. 146 fflo.

.340 .295S

.253

'

L__

r_

_

_

_*_8_

'25-

.110

---.dy

-

J360

No. 194)c

330

.315 3

O

0 9

o.

No. 197

No. 196

.044

No. 206

",,"",,,l '

' -I

I--

^

---

oo

FIG. 95. ARCHITECTURAL DETAILS. VARIOUS

[123]

CORINTH

124

lack of astragal which appears on the other top fragments, and the lack of pour-channel for the dowel, the series would also seem to have had diminution. The material is either Hymettos marble or Breccia. BASES,

COLUMN.

Practically every base found in the theatre, and presumably belonging to it, is of the standard Attic Ionic variety, with the fillet above the scotia projecting evenly with the upper torus. None have any decoration, but all save one are provided with plinths carved from the same block as the rest of the base. Slight variations of height in base and plinth occur in pieces which from their diameters belong to the same series. The diameters are given in terms of the extreme dimensions of the upper torus, and only in cases where there is a clear indication is the diameter of the fillet of the apophyge of the column shaft indicated. The material, save where noted, is a white, Pentelic marble, frequently showing micaceous striations. 161. Base (Fig. 95). Diam. 0.68 m., diam. to setting line 0.625 m.; ht. 0.20 m., of plinth 0.165 m.; w. of plinth 0.79 m. Two square dowel holes, 0.35 m. on centres in top. 162. Base. Diam. 0.682 m., diameter to setting line 0.63 m.; ht. 0.19 m., of plinth 0.17 m.; w. of plinth 0.772 m. Two square dowel holes 0.40 m. on centres in top with pour-channels. Plinth has triangular lifting bosses on three sides. 163. Base. Diam. ca. 0.68 m.; ht. 0.19 m., of plinth 0.17 m. At a distance of ca. 0.60 m. from face of the plinth the base has been roughly picked off as though for a three quarter column. One square dowel hole in top, with pour-channel. A roughly circular area about 0.18 m. in diameter has been picked down in centre of top. Base is broken about in half. Part of lower torus, near cut, is unworked. 164. Base. Diam. 0.68 m.; ht. 0.19 m., of plinth 0.16 m.; w. of plinth 0.774 m. Two round dowel holes, 0.29 m. on centres, in top with pour-channels. 165. Base. Diam. ca. 0.67 m. +; ht. 0.198 m., ht. of plinth not measurable as lower part is broken off; w. of plinth 0.77 m. One dowel hole still visible at one side of top, but it was never completed, being sunk only about 0.01 m. Central relieving circle slightly picked down. 166. Base. Diam. 0.55 m.; at top of curve of torus 0.51 m.; ht. 0.195 m., of plinth 0.10 m.; w. of plinth 0.66 m. Top shows two square dowel holes, 0.25 m. on centres with pour-channels. 167. Base. Diam. 0.55 m.; at top of curve of torus 0.51 m.; ht. 0.195 m., of plinth 0.11 m. Lower torus badly hacked away. Two square dowel holes in top, with pour-channels.

168. Base. Diam. 0.405 m., of setting line ca. 0.385 m.;

ht. 0.145 m*,of plinth 0.09 m. Round dowelhole with pour-channelin top, centre. 169. Base. Diam. 0.408 m., at top of upper torus ca. 0.38 m.; ht. 0.152 m., of plinth 0.078 m.; w. of plinth

0.48 m. Dowel and pour-channelin top with lead still preserved. 170. Base. Coarsewhite marble. Diam. ca. 0.58 m.0.60 m.; ht. 0.21 m. No plinth. Broken so that less

than half of circleis preserved. 171. Base, similarto 170 but does not join. 172. Base. Pentelic marble, micaceous. Diam. 0.41 m.; ht. 0.16 m., of plinth 0.12 m.; w. of plinth 0.462

m. Circulardowel with pour-channelin top. Poorly finished. 173. Base. Blue-white marble. Diam. 0.475 m.; ht. includingcircularplinth which is tangent to the nose of the lower torus 0.24 m.; diam. of plinth 0.56 m. Round dowel and pour-channel in top centre. If lower torus had been completelyworked,the height of the plinth, assumingnormal proportionsfor the base, would have been about 0.057 m. The piece is crudelycut and can only belongto a late repairto the theatre, if it belongs at all. BASES, PILASTER.

Two pilaster bases, of the small number preserved, are of particular interest as they are cut away at the back in such a way as to fit against the curve of a hemicycle. They can only come, one from the portico of the porta regia, the other from that of one of the hospitalia. The material would seem to be a poor grade of Pentelic marble. 174. Base, pilaster (Fig. 95). W. measured on nose of upper torus, ca. 0.815 m. The torus is entirely broken at either end so that the above dimension is approximated. Ht. of base 0.231 m., of plinth.0.161 m.; w. of plinth on face 0.937 m. Two square dowels, probably with pour-channels, in top. The left side of the base measures about 0.461 m. on the plinth, and has, near the back, a cutting, as though for the insertion of a revetment slab, possibly the facing of a step. The right end measures only 0.228 m., from front to back; an unworked protecting surface covers part of the plinth. The back of the block is roughly hacked, but the working seems to be original. On bottom, two small dowel holes, 0.035 m. deep by 0.04 m. square.

175. Base, pilaster (Fig. 95). W. on face, on nose of upper torus, 0.642 m.; ht. 0.24 m., of plinth 0.16 m.; w. of plinth on face, 0.735 m. Right end of plinth measures 0.41 in., left end, which is cut at an angle as though for a radial joint, measures 0.21 m. on surface of joint, or ca. 0.23 m. straight back from the

angle to back of block. Two squaredowelswith pour channels in top. Back of block roughly worked, or split off before setting.

INVENTORY OF ARCHITECTURALFRAGMENTS 176. Base, pilaster; fragment of corner. Ht. of plinth 0.17 m., upper part of base broken off but dimensions of lower torus make it certain that the piece belongs in the series with the two just above. 177. Base, pilaster; Attic Ionic profile including part of shaft. Top is 0.50 m. wide by 0.46 m. deep. Total ht. 0.39 m., ht. of base proper 0.242 m. No plinth. Two rectangular dowels in top but no pour-channels. Back sawn smooth. 178. Base, pilaster; Attic Ionic profile, including part of shaft. Top had width of ca. 0.48 m., depth not measurable as front is broken away. Two dowels in top, and two in bottom. Total ht. 0.39 m., ht. of base proper 0.235 m. To be associated with 177. MISCELLANEOUS

PIECES.

179. Die of pedestal. Blueish-white marble. 1.00 m. by 0.99 m. by 0.825 m. high. Two square dowel holes with pour-channels in top, into which a round basin has been cut later. Smoothly finished. 180. Die of pedestal, similar to above, 0.99 m. square, 0.79 m. high. One side somewhat broken. These two massive blocks were found, one in the area in front of the scaenae frons, the other (with the basin) in the peribolos behind. They would most probably come from the pedestals which carried the large columns of the porta regia. 181. Coffered ceiling block, fragment (Fig. 95). Ht. from soffit to top of coffer, 0.213 m.; total th. 0.375 m. 182. Coffered ceiling block, fragment. Ht. from soffit to top of coffer, 0.213 m.; total th. 0.365 m. The length of one side of a coffer is measurable and gives a spacing for the coffers of ca. 0.69 m. on centres. A shallow rounded panel runs along the soffits of the beams, and along the side, next to the bedding which rested on the block below. W. of bedding 0.12 m. 183. Coffered ceiling block, fragment. Same series. Bed at one side 0.07 m. wide, next to the soffit of the beam which has a width of 0.21 m. 184 a, b. Two fragments of archivolt from an arched recess. Taken together they show an arch with radius of 1.56 m. The archivolt is in three fascias plus a

crown molding. Across the top of the arch was a horizontal architrave molding, of which only the two lower and the beginning of the upper fascias are preserved. At the side is a plain, raised vertical band, possibly a shallow pilaster. The right hand joint is smooth picked, the soffit also; back rough; thickness ca. 0.45 m. from spandrel. Pentelic marble. Good workmanship. The soffit does not run clear through but shows the stump of a panel at the back. Soffit 0.32 m. deep. Fascias have smooth bands on lower edge. 185. Seat, or bench, support, carved with a lion's leg and claws (Fig. 95). Ht. 0.34 m.; w. 0.145 m.; pres. d. (1.) 0.25 m. Good quality work. Pentelic marble. 186, 187. Seat supports, with lion's legs (Fig. 95). These have a height of 0.325 m., and total lengths from 0.78 m., and 0.92 m. The front and one side of each block are finished, the other sides are left rough and worked in such a way as to show that a facing slab for the front of the seat adjoined the blocks on one side. 188 a-c. There are three other such blocks almost wholly preserved, plus numerous fragments. Their execution varies from fair to poor, and the material is generally blueish-white marble. There can be little doubt that they came from the ends of the rows of cavea seats, where they flanked the stairs. 189 a, b. Foot of a shaft, surrounded with acanthus leaves (Figs. 96, 97). Square plinth 0.55 m. wide; pres. d. 0.30 m. (broken); total ht. 0.38 m. 190. Drum of shaft surrounded by acanthus leaves (Fig. 97). Diam. 0.43 m.; ht. 0.31 m. A few fragments of fluting with the arris v-shaped in plan have been noted, and belong to this column, or columns. 191. Pedestal, square with circular Ionic base carved integrally at the top (Fig. 95). Ht. of pedestal 0.465 m., of base 0.085 m. Pedestal 0.24 m. square; diam. upper torus of base 0.26 m.; presumable diam. of shaft above, 0.22 m. Centre part of upper surface of base

_~~~~CLMS

FIG. 96. LOWER

PART OF ACANTHUS

COLUMN,

NO. 189

125

FIG.

97.

BASE,

DRUM

NOe19

9

AND FRAGMENTS

OF AICANTHUS

126

CORINTH

has been sunk down about two centimetres,and a hole 0.04 m. in diameterhas been bored down from the top to a point one third of the way down the pedestal, widening there to a diameter of 0.11 m., which is continued through to the bottom. White marble.Fair workmanship. 192. Altar, circular (Fig. 95). Ht. 0.98 m.; diam. 0.52 m. Upperpart wornand chippedall around.The foot consists of a plain torus surmountedby a cyma recta, with Lesbian leaf. The shaft carries, in high relief, four boukraniaand swags or garlands. 193. Altar, circular,fragment.The lower part of an altar similar to 192. Diam. 0.54 m. Preserved to somewhatless than half its height, or about 0.45 m. 194. Pedestal base (Fig. 95). Fragments of three corners.Pentelic marble. Ht. 0.34 m. a. Preserved dimensions 0.40 m. by 0.85 m. Shows pour-channel. b. Preserved dimensions 0.60 m. by 0.57 m. Shows pour-channels. c. Preserved dimensions 0.97 m. by 0.34 m. Shows cuttings for repair clamps and a dowel hole. Moldingat one side merely a plain sloping surface. Probably rear side of base. Although the pieces do not make actual contact, the grain of the marble runs so that they can be arrangedto form a base of propersize to take one of the large cubical dies which carriedthe columns of the regia. They were found built into the mediaeval well just west of the centralpart of the scaenaefrons. 195. Pedestal base (Fig. 95). White limestone. Ht.

200. Plinth course block. Blue gray marble. Ht. 0.17 m.; 1. 0.935 m.; d. 0.615 m. Top medium roughpicked. Face sawn smooth. 201. Parapet slab from late barrier for naumachia. Ht. 0.83 m.; w. 0.81 m., th. ca. 0.15 m. Top roughly rounded with cuttings for hook clamps in top. Cut from a plinth block which had a raised lip at front and two circular dowels with pour-channels in top. 202. Parapet slab. Ht. 1.10 m.; w. 0.54 m.; th. 0.12m. Top roughly picked, rounded. No clamps. Lower end broken or roughly hacked. Has had later use as a door sill. 203. Parapet slab. Ht. 0.46 m.; w. 0.56 m.; th. 0.135 m. Top rounded, with hooked clamps. 204. Parapet slab, broken into two joining pieces. Ht. 0.46 m.; pres. w. 0.36 m.; th. 0.12 m. Clamp cutting in rounded top, dowel hole in bottom, which has anathyrosis. 205. Parapet slab. Ht. 0.46 m.; pres. w. 0.82 m.; th. 0.13 m. Top rounded, with clamp cutting. Dowel holes in bottom 0.15 m. from either end, ca. 0.66 m. apart. If symmetrical, the original width of slab would have been about 0.96 m. Built into edging course of late orchestra, naumachia floor. At least two other pieces of this series are built into the edging course, and another has been re-used in the sill of the western entrance to the arena. Hence we appear to have a low (0.46 m.) parapet, a barrier connected with the second century theatre. It can have nothing to do in its original form with the naumachia, but probably comes from a conistra of the 0.245 m. ; w. on bottom fascia 0.74 m.; on top surface period preceding the amphitheatre, and somehow sur(fordie)0.584m.; d. on bottom 0.67 m. A rounddowel vived to find place in the final reconstruction of the cutting is off centre in the bottom,anda smallsquare theatre.

hole appearsnear one cornerof top. 196. Cap for statue pedestal including part of die (Fig. 95). White limestone. Ht. 0.33 m.; w. of die, 0.36 m.; of top of cap, 0.58 m.; pres. d. 0.54 m. Back

MOLDINGS, STRING COURSES, ETC.

A large number of moldings of various profiles and

broken.Two roundholes are sunk to one side of the sizes were found. Most of these are in very fragmentary centre of the top surface. condition, and not all pieces will be listed. The 197. Pedestal cap (Fig. 95). Top (?) fragment.White repertory of profiles, however, is fully represented. marble. Ht. 0.315 m.; pres. on face 0.40 m.; on side 0.50 m.; which is less well finished. No dowels.

206. Cyma (Fig. 95). Blue gray marble. Ht. 0.375 m.; projection 0.27 m. Dowel in right end, clamp on top. 198. Pedestal cap (Fig. 95). White marble.Ht. 0.266 Bed and back sawn; molded surface worked with a m. to top edge of fascia crowningcyma; w. of bottom point. Pres. 1. 0.78 m. 207. Crownmold (Figs. 98, 99). Blue-white marble, (die) 0.41 m.; of top 0.58 m.; d. not preserved. 199. Plinth block. Ht. 0.175 m., right end and back similar to cornice 59 with same finish. Ht. 0.15 m.; broken off. Parts of two square dowel holes, set pres. 1.ca. 0.97 m. Angle piece, the top surface is worn 0.28 m. apart (0.35 m. on centres) are preserved,on smooth. Two clamp cuttings for attachment. This is either side of a setting, or centeringline which runs the largest and best preserved example from among forwardto, and downthe front of, the block. The left a number of fragments of the same series. The backs forwardcorner is indented; left side picked with a are all sawn; tops either sawn or rough picked. smoothed edge. Front, and sides of the corner in- 208. Crownmold(Fig. 100). Fine grained white marble. dentation smoothly polished. Top looks as though it Ht. 0.17m.; two pieces that join with a combined had been planed down slightly before inscribing pres. 1. of 0.87 m. Top and back sawn smooth; top setting line, bottom is picked. worn. Clamp for attachment to wall behind.

FRAGMENTS INVENTORYOF ARCHITECTURAL

V.~

127

~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~~ ~ ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~"V7

No. 212 No.2

No. 217

No. 213

..

No. 218

No.21

L

\.

No.220

1

..

No 216

No. 210

No. 221

No. 219

No. 207

No. 215

:7~~~~i

98

MOIGS

FUL

SIZ

CORINTH

128

209. A similar piece, which has the right end preserved, and a present length of 0.48 m. The back is rough. Top is worn along front edge, the rearmost two to seven centimetres is picked. 210. Crownmold, four fragments (Figs. 98, 99). Bluewhite marble. Ht. 0.115 m. to 0.12 m.; d. of top 0.12 m. Tops and backs sawn or rough picked. Clamps for attachment. Faces finished with toothed chisel. One fragment has an unworked surface at right end. 211. Crownmold, eight fragments (Fig. 98). White marble. Ht. 0.095 to 0.10 m. Backs and tops sawn, but top of one is rough picked.

212. Crownmold (2) angle piece (Figs. 98, 101). White marble, sawn top and back. Fine finish. Ht. 0.07 m.; d. of top 0.084 m. Above the cyma recta is a narrow fillet and then a reed. 213. Crownmold, several pieces, fine white marble (Figs. 98, 99). Ht. 0.10 m. Sawn top and back. The cyma has a narrow fillet sbove it, surmounted by a broader one which slopes backward. One piece ran back to a wall and shows cut for re-entrant angle. 214. Crownmold or string course, several fragments (Figs. 98, 99). White marble, well finished. Ht. 0.07 m. Back sawn. 215. Crownmold or string course (Fig. 98). One piece. White marble, very good finish. lit. 0.06 m.; max. d. 0.05 m. Clamp in top for attachment. 216. Crownmold, curved (Fig. 98). Ht. 0.11 in.; d. of top 0.08 m. Clamp in top. The piece is too small to give a reliable measurement for the radius of the curve. 217. Base mold, four fragments (Figs. 98, 99, 100). Blue-white marble. Beds sawn, backs rough picked. Ht. 0.14 m.; d. of bed 0.19 m. The moldings from bottom up are torus, cyma recta, inverted cavetto. There is a shallow sinkage behind the horizontal top to accommodate a revetment slab. This group must be associated with 207.

~~~~~~~I-E

-

FIG. 99. MOLDINGS, Nos. 210, 207, 214, 213, 217-220

r~~

~HL

SIZE

MOLDINGS,NS21,2724,1327-0 ~~~~FIG. 101.

.

...

.. _

L.

w ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~A

FIG. 100. MOLDINGS:

ABOVE

Nos.

208, 217,

BELOW

No.

208

..

~~ ~ ~ ~~~.

,I. ,jl~~~~?

???~"

-.~.? "E. '.:'~

~.I?~:"~.:'D .

?'

' :"~i:~Hi.~ " ' ? ~i.

~!:.'~ ?~~~~~~,:~~

'i:

i:

':i!

'"'::i!ii: '.ii.:.::.:.., '?i.:~:,...:: ??~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~:: :. C~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~:,.~: ;.:.~:.'

..;,.., -~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~. ...

??~~~;:

::... '~~~~~~~~~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~oo

I)???

B,TPCA

FiG~~~.10.MLIG'AA-"PRIL,oN. r?

I?_,?';

r

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

.o.

*

OUMNBS;CK ORE 6; SRN

?rl~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~12

.

130

CORINTH

218. Base mold, twelve fragments, white marble (Figs. 98, 99). Beds sawn, backs rough picked, clamps in top. Same elements as 217. Ht. 0.113 m., d. of bed 0.09 m. To be associated with 210. 219. Base mold, two fragments including one righthand corner (Figs. 98, 99). Gray-white marble. Ht. 0.075 m., d. of bed 0.10 m. The sequence of parts is torus, fillet, inverted cavetto. Torus element finished with toothed chisel. 220. Base mold, curved (Figs. 98, 99). Ht. 0.11 m. Same sequence of parts as 218 but not precisely same profile. Back sawn, bed picked. 221. Base mold (Fig. 98).

G. 11 Inner end. Joint 0.18 m. from inner lip. L. 0.43 m.; w. at lip 0.60 m.; at joint 0.63 m. Dowels and pour-channels. 223. Hard limestone blocks with rectangular notches or indentations in one end. These came from a late wall built parallel with the stage above the line of the Hellenistic proskenion. N. 1 L. 1.30 m.; w. 0.70 m.; th. 0.58-0.60 m. One rear corner hacked at about a 450 angle. Socket or channel cut through one end, 0.36 m. by 0.30 m. deep (Fig. 103). One broad surface is rough picked, the opposite one finished with a toothed chisel.

A selection of other moldings, from string courses, is given in Figure 102, C to J. Some are illustrated in Figure 101.

/o

,210

222. Blocks from the late limestone gutter, not in situ or replaced cf. Fig. 37. G. 1 Complete block. L. 1.78 in.; w. at outer lip 0.84 m., at inner lip 0.84 m. Both raised lips hacked off. Average th. at centre 0.27 m. Dowels in inner end. From mediaeval well in scaena. G. 2 Complete block. L. 1.68 m.; w. at outer lip 0.84 m.; at inner 0.85 m. Both raised lips hacked off. Th. 0.28-0.30 m. Dowels in inner end. From well in scaena. G. 3 Outer part. Pres. 1. 0.99 m.; w. at outer lip 0.84 m. Rim preserved. W. from lip to outer end 0.29 m.; th. at centre 0.26 m. The block was wedge-shaped, tapering 0.07 m. in 0.30 m. From well in scaena. G. 4 Outer end, with joint between it and inner end. Pres. 1. 1.05 m.; w. at lip 1.03, at centre joint 0.94 m. Outer rim hacked off. From well in scaena. G. 5 Outer end, broken at centre. Pres. 1. 0.86 m.; w. at lip 0.64 m.; tapers 0.01 in 0.30 m.; th. 0.25 m. From well in scaena. G. 6 Outer end, joint at centre. L. 1.02 m., w. at lip 0.59 m., at joint 0.59 m.; th. 0.30. From well in scaena. G. 7 Outer end, possible joint at centre. Pres. 1. 0.60 m.; w. at lip 0.62 m.; tapers 0.01 in 0.30 m. G. 8 Outer end. L. from lip to possible joint in centre, 0.45 m.; w. at lip 0.53 m.; outer part of lip (rear of block) hacked away; th. 0.21 m. G. 9 Outer end, broken very near lip. Now upside down in front of central preserved section of gutter. W. 0.80 m. On the bottom are two dowel holes to range with those cut in the inner ends of the blocks in situ, thus showing a repair to, or a possible re-laying of, the entire gutter. G. 10 Inner end. Joint 0.17 from inner lip. L. 0.46 in.; w. at lip 0.50 m. Dowels in groove.

.300

FIG.

103. LIMESTONE

*

BLOCK WITH NOTCH,

,57Q .700

NO.

223

N. 2 L. 1.22 m.; w. 0.66 m. on one bed, which is tooth chiselled, 0.72 m. on other which is rough picked; th. 0.60 m. Notch 0.35 m. wide; 0.27 m. deep. N. 3 L. 0.90 m.; w. 0.73-0.70 m.; th. 0.55 m. Notch 0.32 m. wide; 0.36-0.30 m. deep. The top (2) is worn along one edge. N. 4 L. 1.36 m.; w. 0.70-0.68 m.; th. 0.62 m. at back, 0.56 m. at front by notch, which is 0.32 m. wide, 0.38-0.40 m. deep. The notch is now filled with hard rubble cement. One lateral side seems to have been in part covered with a cement stucco. Onebroad surface (top ?) rough hacked, the opposite tooth chiselled. N. 5 L. 74 m.; w. 0.70-0.66 m.; th. 0.59-0.56 m. Notch 0.32 m. by 0.26 m. deep. One face of the notch was cut with a saw. This is the only case where this occurs. The varying thicknesses of the blocks, ranging from 0.60 m. to 0.55 m., and, in one block, varying from one end to the other by 0.03 m., together with the fact that they show both rough and well chiselled surfaces below and above suggests that they never could have formed part of a uniform course in the upper part of the building, where they might have served as guides for velum poles. It is altogether more likely that they were used on or below ground level in connection with barriers or various arrangements set up in the arena.

CHAPTER

VIII

SUMMARY AND CHRONOLOGY GREEK DATING

The theatre in its original form seenmsto date from the last part of the fifth century, probably about 415 B.C. Of this building there remain the seats, and traces or indications of the early, lowest orchestra level, the analemmata, and a wooden stage building, placed off centre to the east. This dating is supported by the excavational evidence from the soundings made between and below the rows of seats and their foundations. None of the pottery found contained any sherds later than the fifth century.1 The extremely simple form of the seats, and their low pitch, indicate an early date; for there is a great development from the plain, rectangular section observed at Corinth to the far more sophisticated seats in the koilon of Epidauros. Although it is not possible to say how much earlier,the gentle rise and the effect given of a translation from wooden timbers of the early theatre tradition to their stone equivalents should make the Corinththeatre antedate 350 B.C. by a considerableperiod of time. Anotherconsideration,admittedly more subjective, is the possible effect of the building of the first stone theatre at Athens, which, accordingto Dinsmoor,must now be dated in the late fifth century, most probably in the intermission during the Peloponnesian wars, from 425-413 B.C.2If we may imagine that the idea of emulating or bettering a rival entered into the Corinthianpsychology, this period, with a 1 A.

J. A., XXXII, 1928, pp. 482-3. Dinsmoor, The Architectureof Ancient Greece,ed. 1950, pp. 208, 209. 2

9*

prospect of an enduring peace, would provide a likely time for the establishment of the Corinth theatre. Although Xenophon's reference3 to the theatre in the events of the year 392 B.C. is no proof that the building he refers to is the one in which we are interested, it may be said, on the negative side, that in over half a century's excavation on the site no other theatre has been located, nor has any plausible situation for one been noted. Thus far no traces of a predecessor of the building wvithwhich this study is concerned have been observed on the same site. A final consideration, which, however, does not throw conclusive light on the problem, is the inscribed seats blocks. Professor John Kent, who has examined the various blocks with their lettering, concluded at first that they should be dated, for the most part, about the middle of the fifth century. Subsequently, in view of the improbability of dating the first stone theatre so early, he has revised his opinion to bring the lettering well down toward the end of the century.4The plain fact is that thus far we do not have sufficient knowledge of Corinthianepigraphy to be positive. The date of the second Greek period, with the construction of the new orchestra, the skene, and proskenion, is even more elusive. There is no excavational evidence of a satisfactory nature. The period between 338 B.C. and about 250 B.C., correspondingto the Antigonid rule, seems to have been marked by a great deal of new building at Corinth, and the 3 Hell., IV, 4, 3. 4 The inscriptions from the theatre are to be published in Corinth,VIII, iii.

132

CORINTH

renovation of the theatre would seem to fall within this time. Possibly the work may have been begun soon after the revival of the CorinthianLeague in 302 B.C. The hooked clamps in the gutter and in the foundations of the skene point to a date in the third century, but it will be rememberedthat in the Roman analemmata several wall blocks appeared, re-used, which had H clamps, and in their finish and anathyrosis resembled strongly the masonry of the gutter and skene.5 There is no positive proof that the blocks came from the ruins of the Hellenistic building, but they would serve admirably for the skene, and for hardly any other place. The ready proximity of the material to the new Roman analemmata would strengthen such a possibility. If they do belong, we have a combination of hook and H clamps used in the same structure, and this would suggest a date toward the end of the fourth century.6 The little cyma reversa molding at the foot of the gutter curbis not a very sound criterion, as it is relatively easy to find the same profile used over a fairly wide range of time. It does, however, resemble very closely a base molding from the Asklepieion at Corinth, dated to the second half of the fourth century.7 There are close analogies in technique between the theatre and the great South Stoa, which current study of the building would date in the third quarter of the fourth century B.C. Comparisons with certain features of the theatre at Sikyon, dated by Bulle, agreeing with Frickenhaus, in the first half of the third century, are suggestive.8 Especially so is the form of the gutter, which is deep, rather than 5 Above, p. 108, Nos. 20-24. 6 The use of hook above H clamps would be paralleled by the third temple of Apollo Patroos in the Athenian Agora, H. A. Thompson, Hesperia VI, 1937, pp. 102-104, for which a date between 338 and 326 B. C. is suggested. Reference is made also to a similar disposition in the stoa of Philip II at Megalopolis, J. H. S., Supplementary Papers I: Excavations at Megalopolis, London, 1892, pp. 59ff. 7 L. T. Shoe, Profiles of Greek Mouldings, Cambridge, Mass., 1936, pl. XXXVIII, 8. 8 Bulle, op. cit., p. 199.

shallow, as at Epidauros, and follows on a smaller scale the type of the Lykurgan gutter at Athens. There is also a similarity in the fact that the entire area of the lower floor of the skene (hyposkenion) is not made available. Dinsmoor9 comments on the neglect of the lower level of the Corinthian skene, but it seems quite certain that at least the central third of the area was usable. The outer thirds do not appear to have had sufficient headroom to make them useful. This definitely bespeaks an upper storey, or episkenion, which may at first have been of wood, though there is no direct evidence. Plutarch's reference?1to the captureof Acrocorinth by Antigonos Gonatas on the occasion of the entertainment given in the theatre for Queen Nikaia may allow the speculation that some time before this occasion the theatre had been newly remodelled, and if so, the work would have been done before 247 B.C. Such evidence as we have tends to place the remodelling either late in the fourth century, or surely not later than the second quarter of the third. The next step in the development of the theatre was the erection of a stairway at the southeast angle of the skene and, in all probability, a rebuilding of the upper part of the skene in stone. We do not know whether the first proskenionhad stone columns, or whether they may have been of wood, and moveable, with only a stone stylobate,1 but stone columns may have been introduced when the stairway was built. There are, save for one double column fragment, no recognizable elements of such a colonnade. It is highly improbable that the proskenion was widened at the time the stair was introduced, since the extraordinary care with which the stair tower was laid out does not accordwith the more slipshod work of the later proskenionfoundation, or the 9 Op. cit., p. 300 and note 1. 10Plutarch, Aratos, 17, 4. 11Cf. Dinsmoor, op. cit., p. 301.

SUMMARYAND CHRONOLOGY

passage way leading out from the hyposkenion to the face of this newer logeion. The greater projection given to this feature, with its consequent curtailing of the older, fully circularorchestra,bespeaks an increasing use of the top of the proskenion as a logeion and, actually, a stage. We have no indication of its height, but it probably was the same as that of its narrowerpredecessor. FIRST PERIOD

Several matters of interest, then, appear in the theatre of the first Greek period. First, the seats, to which the nearest parallel is to be found at Eretria, where, however, they areprovided with a slightnosing. Dilke12places this sort of seating in a special category adducing as parallels Megalopolis, Argos and the stadium at Olympia. But none of these is surely as early as Corinth, and hence we conclude that, if there was any connection, Corinth influenced Eretria. The Corinthian solution suggests a tradition of rectangular balks of timber, costly, but certainly more stable than a plank and prop construction from which the Argos type of seating is said to be derived. The absence of any skene save a wooden one is no longer a matter of surprise, but the fact that the cuttings assigned to the structure show that it was definitely off centre should be remembered. It may be purely coincidental, but if there is any foundation for Pollux' statement13that the parodoi were thought of as leading, one from the country, the other from the town, this off-centred Corinthian skene lies definitely on the side of the actual city centre of Corinth (cf. P1. I). We should also note that this temporary, removeable skene lies within the circle of the orchestra as measured from the lowest row of the original seats, and actually is tangent to 12

"The Greek Theatre Cavea," B. S. A., XLIII, 1948 p. 158. 13 Onomastikon,IV, 126, ed. Bethe, Leipzig, 1890.

133

that circle at the rear of the building. This suggests that the structure was thought of primarily as an integral part of the play, included in the orchestra where the early acting took place. If the post holes are to be considered not as intended for a roofed building, but merely to support a stage or platform, then we should look for some traces of a back wall on the analogy of Athens in the late fifth century. Of this, however, there is no evidence and, if there ever was one, the constructions of the Hellenistic period and subsequently the Roman epoch have entirely obliterated it. There must, from the nature of the terrain,have been some sort of scarp or terrace, but probably nothing more. The plan of the orchestra, as far as can be reconstituted from the scanty remains of the stairs, especially flights II and XIV, and the direction of the analemmata, must have been a simple 210 degrees of a circle, without the opening out provided by the Vitruvian or the Epidaureanscheme of three centres. Hence the plan is of the sort where all attention was focussed on the orchestra. It is only when the skene becomes a backdropto the play that the tendency to widen the curve at the ends is justified. SECOND PERIOD

In the second, or Hellenistic, period the chief features of interest are the unusual plan of the orchestra with wings, the double set of Charonian stairs, and the great depth of the skene. Dinsmoor14comments on the similarity of the arrangement of the orchestra to the "presumable trapezoidal orchestra in the daughter city of Syracuse." The time, however, separating the two forms would appear too great for there to be any connection between them. By the time the Hellenistic orchestra at Corinthwas laid out the Syracusan theatre had assumedthe normalcircularshape. It would be better to see in this arrangementa 14

Op. cit., p. 314.

134

CORINTH

deliberate effort to create a certain degree of unity between the stage, orchestra and koilon, and the trapezoidal shape given the 'wings' was carefully worked out so as to give very nearly the same intervalbetween their southern angles and the raised edge of the passage below the prohedria as occurred between the inner ends of the analemmata and the straight return of the curb (Fig. 19, P1. III). The adjustment was a delicate one and it is not the least of the achievements of the Corinthian planners. The actual orchestra circle has a diameter of only 17.16 metres, as against 23.40 m. for the circle defined by the prohedria step. Similardimensionstaken from Eretria, Athens, Epidauros and Ephesos, large theatres of the class of Corinth, are, for the orchestra circle proper, respectively about 20.00 m., 19.40 m., 20.00 m. and 24.00 m. It may be that additional area was thus defined for an orchestra which was felt to be too small. The attention given to the orchestralayout, with the tradition of the circularform, and the provisionof extra lateral space,15indicates that in the early years of the Hellenistic period the theatre had to serve for representations not alone of the new comedy but of the older plays which continued to be revived. Flexibility is perhaps the best term to use. The double Charonian stairs, of which Corinth furnishes the sole example, also point to the same desire for ready adjustability, and if we may assume, as Dinsmoorsuggests, that the earlierproskenion was of wood, and hence removeable, one more factor is added to the arguments that the final relegation of the action of the plays to a logeion did not occur until well along in the Hellenistic period. It is with this development that the forward extension of the Corinthian proskenionmust be related. 15 If a slight indulgence in fancy is permissible, we may recall Aratos, worn with the action of the previous night on Acrocorinth, posting his guards in the entrances to the theatre, and most probably also on the wings, and leaning on his spear after advancing Eis ,Eoov before he addressed the citizens of Corinth (Plutarch, Aratos, 23, 2-3).

Dinsmoor16has pointed out that in certain theatres, where the level was sunk below the general level of the plain and the lower part of the skene not completely excavated, the proskenion,in orderto mask the actors, must have been planned from the first. It is quite certain that the Corinthian proskenion is contemporary with the skene. It is also reasonably certain that the two ramps are a part of the same program. Although the eastern one has lost its connection, the foundations of the western ramp seem to show a good bond with the skene and proskenion,and the characterof the masonry confirms a contemporarydate. If the first proskenion, for which a good stone foundation was provided,was actually of wood and removeable on occasion, the ends of the ramps would have formed something in the nature of jutting paraskenia, and the function of the proskenion as a means of allowing the actors to pass back and forth across the width of the skene without being seen would have been lost. It seems more plausible to postulate a stone proskenionfrom the first. It is clear that there was an intention of clearing out the whole lower level of the skene, but of this only the narrow corridor against the back wall, and the central third of the skene proper was ever effected. It is obvious however, that the corridormust have remained open or else been dug out by the early Romans to allow the deposit of roof tiles from the Hellenistic building to accumulate. Whetherwhat is called the back wall is really that, or whether it served as the foundation of a colonnade along the back of the skene is not definite, but the complete absence of any evidence for the true back wall, somewhat further south, seems to indicate that we are not dealing with a colonnade foundation. It is hard to imagine, at this time, a sort of blind cryptoporticusbeneath the colonnade. It could have served no useful purpose. The stairway at the southeast angle is un16

Op. cit., pp. 290-300.

SUMMARYAND CHRONOLOGY

135

usual, and in restoring a stairway to the roof, extension without crawling, for the clear so that heavenly characters might appear as height beneath the orchestra floor could have on a platform, or in connectionwith a machine, been barely more than a metre. it may be admitted that there is no precedent. The stairway at Priene leads only to the ROMAN and the as to use authorities differ episkenion, of the small shaft connected with it.17 It was,

FIRST PERIOD

however, a later addition to the theatre and, as such, suggests an analogy with Corinth. It occurs, however, in the space between the second and third thyromata, instead of at the end. Either solution is awkward, and the Corinthianansweris made even more so by the curious disorientation of the east wall of the stair tower, bringing it out at right angles to the line of the ramp, with a consequent slight nose projecting from the angle of the skene. The care with which the foundation cuttings were made and provision by setting lines arrangedso that the inner face of the walls should be placed "just so," shows that it was no haphazard addition, but something carefully planned. If the stairway and the door opening into the proskenion have been correctly restored,it wouldappearthat some carewas taken to avoid the pit down which an actor went to reach the Charoniansteps. The greater width of the cutting toward the east may be interpreted as the foundation of a small stair leading up from behind, as at Priene, or it may be that the entire tower was carried up to the roof on this trapezoidal plan, and the machine by which gods could appear to fly based on it. It would also be practicable to restore a shaft adjacent to the stair, as at Priene. When the proskenion was moved forward, some time after the stair was built, the eastern Charonian steps were made useless. Possibly the extension of the cutting for the western Charonianstairs was made at this time, since they could have still been in use, but the levels are such that it is hard to see how an actor could have reached the orchestra through this

The rehabilitation of the theatre in the Roman period may be dated within narrow limits between the end of the reign of Augustus and early in the period of Tiberius. It will be remembered that none of the coins found in the fill between the rib walls of the Roman cavea was later than the reign of Augustus. We cannot say how soon after the reoccupation of Corinththere was any attempt to make use of the theatre, but it is probable that even in a partly ruined condition it saw some activity. The Hellenistic skene had lost its roof and probably most of its superstructure,but there is a strong possibility that, for a few years at least, a temporary stage of the Phlyakes type was installed in front of the ruins of the skene, and the old koilon, even if partly demolished, would have sufficed to accommodate the relatively scanty number of the first Roman colonists. By the end of Augustus' reign, however, work on the new cavea was initiated, and within a short space of time a new scaenae frons of the Asiatic-Hellenistic straight type begun. From the successive coats of stuccowhitewash noted on a few of the remaining architecturalblocks of this period, it is certain that this structure served for some time. During this first period, presumably about A.D. 77, the theatre was severely damaged by an earthquake, and supplementary reinforcements to the analemmata and scaena were provided. To this period belong the long water basin for sparsiones, a stone pulpitum wall, now almost entirely gone, and behind it two series of holes for the aulaea. The duplication of these indicates again a fairly extended period of use.

17 Dorpfeld interprets it as a well for a crane, rather than an elevator by which an actor could be raised up.

The name of Vespasianoccurson a small

136

CORINTH

block of Hymettos marble and, if it belongs with the theatre, may be connected with this period of repair, although the earthquake would seem to have occurredvery near the end of the reign. The cornice inscribed with the name of Trajan, (Inv. 89), giving him his title of Germanicus, but not adding any of the later titles, seems to date from no later than A.D. 101. It is hard, in the face of the probability that the general reconstructionof the great scaenae frons is to be dated in Hadrian's time, to account for this fragment, but it seems certain, from the number of similar cornices found, that it belongs with the theatre. From the fact that the pieces of this series seem all to have been unearthed toward either end of the stage building, and even in the east parodos, we may suggest that Trajan's work may have been restricted to the entrances to the wings of the versurae,18and possibly also to the 18

No exterior angles, or fragments of the same, for this series have been noted, and this would tend to preclude restoring them on the scaenae frons, which, whatever its type, would have called for numerous blocks of this sort. Six, Nos. 83, 84, 85, 86, 87, and 88 vary from 0.205 to 0.185 m. in height. The inscribed block, No. 89 is 0.225 m. No. 83 shows a dowel and pry-hole and hence had a stone course above it. No. 85 has two small dowel holes barely 0.02 m. from a rough surface at the upper forward edge so that they scarcely seem possible for an overlying course of stone. In addition there is a very long narrow dowel cutting only 0.03 m. from the same line. Moreover, the upper surface of the block slopes very slightly forward. It would be permissible to use these as the upper member of a single order, such as the colonnade around the top of the theatre, or about the peribolos. No. 88 shows the cornice ending and returned against a flat wall. This might be from the connection of the upper diazoma colonnade with the forward projection of the versura. The inscribed block, No. 89, has no dowels in the top, but shows a shallow cutting as for a wooden beam at the back, near one end. Although slightly higher than the others it may also belong to one of the colonnades with which they were associated. The large block showing the meeting, on an interior angle, of two pediments shows that the horizontal elements correspond in dimensions to this series and further complicates the problem. The angle between the versura and the scaenae frons seems to be the only possible place to put this, and, if so, we must restore pediments above the straight sections of the scaenae frons and thus assign the other, horizontal cornices to the upper order of this structure. This conflicts with the type of cornice already associated with this order, and hence, by mutual exclusion we are compelled to discard one or the other. As a last resort, the pediments could be placed in the reentrant angle where the outer end of the scaena meets the

colonnade above the upper Roman diazoma, or even to the peribolos. SECOND OR MARBLE PERIOD

This phase of the theatre begins in the second century and extends to the early years of the third. It is difficult, on the basis of the scanty remains, to say what minor repairs or adjustments were effected in the course of this period, and it is also difficult to be precise as to the date when the general rebuilding took place. Some work, as has just been suggested, seems to belong to the period of Trajan, but the presence of a coin of Hadrian in the easternmost of the aulaea post holes, of the latest series, E, suggests that the earliest date should be at least in the later part of the reign. The character of the architectural pieces bespeaks a Hadrianic, or very early Antonine, period of building. The cornice profiles resemble very strongly those from the theatre at Stobi, dated by Saria in the Hadrianic period.19The resemblance of the revetment moldings to those of Temple E at Corinth is also notable,20and while the capitals of the temple are more elaborate, due to larger scale and more serious purpose, they resemble in proportion and design those of the theatre.21Temple E has not been dated with precision, but the fragments of its pedimental sculpture, as hiasbeen pointed out by Miss Elizabeth Freeman,22bear a strong resemblance to some of the Parthenon figures, and hence suggest a date in the period when the copying and revival of fifth century Hellenism was the fashion. Hence, if we place analemma and thus provide an ornamental motif over the closely adjacent doorways to the versura, and to the aditus maximus. The Trajan block, as has been noted, is higher than any of the others. It may not belong, of course, to the theatre at all, or it may equally well have come from a) the peribolos, or b) the colonnade above the upper diazoma. Both would have suffered severely in A. D. 77 and may well have been rebuilt in the period of Trajan, when the scaena itself was only repaired and consolidated. 19 Arch. Anz., LIII, 1938, pp. 81ff. 20 Corinth I, ii, fig. 150. 21 lbid., fig. 120. 22 Ibid., p. 225.

SUMMARYAND CHRONOLOGY

the beginning of the marble period of the theatre in the second quarter of the second century, we shall probably be near the truth. Although in some respects the execution of the large Corinthian capital from the porta regia is lacking in fineness, the plastic quality of the acanthus is well marked and the tendency toward a more summary and even a coloristic treatment as noted for instance in the capitals fromithe Facade of the ColossalFigures is not present.23The latter building is to be dated in the Antonine period, about the middle of the century. Our capital cannot be compared, of course, with those from the Odeion in the Agora at Athens,24but it has much the same plasticity, and the treatment of the eyes of the acanthus, while not so deep, is very similar. The theatre capital is more compact, and the technique inferior, but the resemblance is fairly close and bespeaks an attempt to return to an earlier classicism. On the other hand, the capitals from the Library of Hadrian at Athens are quite different, as is the work on the Arch of Hadrian. It must be assumed that in the case of Corinth, both in the theatre and in Temple E, we have either a local school of the first half of the second century, or examples of a deliberate archaizing. Since the Hellenic period offered few prototypes the next most natural thing would be to return to the Augustan. The proposedHadrianicdating agrees,moreover, with the sculptured friezes which were found in the theatre. Edward Capps, Jr., who is studying these and will publish them separately, has concluded that two of the friezes, the Gigantomachy and the battle of Greeks and Amazons, are definitely Hadrianic. The series with the labors of Herakles he tends to date somewhat earlier, and if this is correct, that series may belong with a partial redecoration of the theatre under Trajan, a possibility which has been just considered. 23 24

Cf. ibid., figs. 42, 52. Hesperia, XIX, 1950, pls. 31, 32.

137

The question naturally arises as to where the friezes are to be located. We may exclude the pulpitum, since it was entirely destroyed to make way for the arena, and it is unlikely that the friezes would have been saved. From the way the fragments were scattered at a low level over the ruins of the third century pulpitum and the orchestra, it is necessary to assign them to the scaena. If so, there is only one reasonableway to use them, and that is to place them on the podia of the various storeys of the colonnades of the scaenae frons. The actual arrangement is problematical, and we do not know whether they were arrangedonly on the straight sections, or also swung back into the curved exedras. None of the pieces appearsto show any concavity for a curve, but we do not have any very long sections, and such an arrangement is not precluded. It seems, however, somewhat improbable, and for want of definite evidence we may assume that they adorned only the straight parts between the exedras. It is, however, the introduction into Greece at this time of the "Western Roman" plan of scaena and its significance which is of the greatest interest. The type raises a problem which has not been fully explained and can only be outlined in this study, pending more thoroughconsideration.25Theproblem,and the theory to be developed, hinge primarily on when the type was first developed. In the ruins of the latest scaenae frons of the large theatre at Pompeii we have at least one example which must be dated before A.D. 79. Is it possible to find a terminus ante quem? Maiuri26attributes the entire present scaenae frons of the large theatre to the period following the earthquake of A.D. 63. He notes the departure from the rectilinear rhythm of the 25 E. Weigand, Jahrb., XXIX, 1914, pp. 37ff. and Weiner Jb. f. Kunstgeschichte,V, 1928, pp. 71ff. raises the question

of eastern or western theatres on a sprachgrenzlinie. He also

identifies the large capital from Stobi as Hadrianic of the eastern type (Saria, op. cit., p. 000). 26 L'Ultima Fase Edilizia di Pompeii, (Instituto di Studi Romani, Sezione Campana),1942, XX, pp. 77-80.

138

CORINTH

Augustan period toward a more "baroque" style of the Neronian and early Flavian times and the close connection between the new type and the theatre-derived decorations of the Pompeian fourth style. G. von Cube27 has elaborated this connection and attempted to turn painted plaster into three dimensional stone construction. The analogy has been pointed out so often that it is scarcely necessary to labor the point. Maiuri'slatest dating is tlhoroughlywelcome, for it now becomes possible to associate the first appearance of the exedral type of regia with the reign of Nero. The Augustan dating28would give no good reason for the introduction of such a radically new feature into the stage front, but if we recall the recent studies of Alfoldi, E. B. Smith and Lehmann29we may readily suggest a solution: The introduction of the semi-circularexedra for the regia is to be directly connected with the self-identification of Nero as the incarnation of the sun-god,30his passion for appearing in the theatre in person, and his likening himself to Apollo as a musician. A powerful argument in favor of this point would be provided if it were possible to prove that the apsidal regia was covered by a canopy in the shape of a half or a segmental half dome.31The latter shape appears, much later, in the fifth or sixth century mosaics in the church of St. Georgeat Salonica,32and althoughseveral centuriesinter27 "Die Romische 'Scaenae Frons' in dem Pompejanischen Wandbildern4 Stils, " Beitrdgezur Bauu ssenschaft,Wasmuth, Berlin, 1906. 28 Fiechter, op. cit., p. 78 states that the umbau took place in the Augustan period. Mau-Overbach,Pompeii, p. 156, the same. Bieber, op. cit., p. 337, says that the final form was "at the earliest" in the age of Augustus. 29 Alf6ldi, "Insignien und Tracht der Romischen Kaiser," Rom. Mitt., L, 1935, p. 107; E.B. Smith, The Dome, Princeton University Press, 1950; Karl Lehmann, "The Dome of Heaven," The Art Bulletin, XXVII, 1945, pp. 1-27. 30 Alfoldi, loc. cit.; Dio Cassius, LXIII, 6, 2. 31 Caristie's consideration of such a possibility at Orange has been noted above, p. 206, Note 6, as well as a tentative restoration of a half dome over the regia at Dougga by H. F. Pfeiffer. 32 F. Boissonas, Salonique, Geneva, 1919, pls. 20, 22. Alfoldi, op. cit., p. 131, fig. 14, reproducesthe first of these and comments on the "stage architecture." It should be noted

vene between this monument and Corinth,the survivals of stage decoration and motifs in Christianart has long since been made apparent.33The only Roman theatre which has been almost completely restored in the stone rather than on paper is that at Sabratha where the three exedras now stand to the full height of three superimposedstoreys. The restoration34 shows no room for any sort of canopy between the exedras and the half roof jutting forward over the stage, but it is not clear from the publication how full the evidence is for the restoration of the third order. Another monument must also be noted in this discussion, namely the relief, many times reproduced,in the TermeMuseum.35This has been variously dated, and D6rpfeld uses it to establish the type of Hellenistic stage front; but the technique of the carving, with elaborate drill work on the small capitals, would seem to point to the Flavian period at the earliest. The important element, of course, is the presence behind the porta regia of a shallow, but well defined, exedra with a half dome. As has been pointed out, the piece is in a sense a compromise between the Hellenistic and the western Roman type of stage front, and for this reason if for no other, would fit into the Flavian period very neatly. At Orangethere remains a deep, archedniche over the portico of the regia which, Caristie suggested, once contained the statue of the emperor. A similar niche, but this time below the canopy of the portico, appears at Palmyra, and we learn that Trajan set up, over the four columns of the "nymphaeum" of the theatre at Antioch, a statue of the Tyche of that city.36 that in the mosaics at Salonika we see also the twisted or spiral columns mentioned for the theatre at Sabratha by Guidi, Africa Italiana, 1935, p. 46. 33 A. M. Friend, "Portraits of the Evangelists in Greek and Latin Manuscripts,"Art Studies, 1929, pp. 9ff. 34 G. Guidi, op. cit., figs. 2, 3. 35 Bieber, op. cit., fig. 458; Benndorf in Jahresh., 1902, pp. 185ff., figs. 53-55; Fiechter, op. cit., p. 102, fig. 99; Dorpfeld-Reisch, p. 333, fig. 84. 36 Malalas, Chronographia,ed. Dindorf, 1831, p. 276. See Bieber, op. cit., p. 380, note 32, where the fact that the Greeks

SUMMARYAND CHRONOLOGY

Alfoldi37has pointed out the relation of the pediment, as well as the arched niche, to kingly or divine persons, and states that even if we cannot cite examples that antedate the fifth century, it is certain that the practice is earlier.Even VTitruvius38remarks on the royal character of the tragic stage, and although the type with an exedra must have been unknown to him, the change in the theatre front from a royal palace, pure and simple, to a palace with both royal and divine connotations is entirely in accord with the trend that produced Nero's golden house with its cosmic dome.39 To trace the spread of the western type, once established, is no part of this publication, but inasmuch as Corinthfigures in it we must call attention to certain factors. It is well known that the western type is most prevalent in Italy, Provence, Upper Dalmatia (Trieste) and North Africa. It extended also to Syria, as at Antioch, Palmyra, Bosra and other places.40In Asia Minor it scarcely appears at all, although at Aizani41there is an obvious attempt to introduce the idea of a niche in the stage front, and even Termessos and Sagalassos show a sort of compromise.42 At Athens, the Neronian reconstructionof the theatre of Dionysos takes no account of the new type, but this is entirely natural since it would appear, from a recent study by von Gerkan, that it must be dated between A.D. 54/55 and 60/61,4 and hence antedates the prototype of the western theatre, Pompeii. The Odeum of Herodes Atticus, being a special type of building, would not be expected evidently had no term for the deep hemicycle of the regia is noted. Since this feature now can be shown to be definitely of the latter half of the first century of our era, Malalas'term, nymphaeum, is obviously derived from a fancied parallel. 37 Op. Cit., pp. 132, 133. 38 V, 6, 9, "quod tragicae defamantur columnis, et fastigiis, et signis reliquisque regalibus rebus." 39 Lehmann, op. cit., pp. 21, 22. Cf. Bieber, op. cit., pp. 379, 380.

40

Ibid., figs. 488, 489. Ibid., figs. 490-493. Although the front wall of the scaena is straight, the niche motif is recalled by the incurving entablature over the porta regia. 43 A. von Gerkan, "Die Neronische Scaenae Frons des Dionysus-theaters in Athen," Jahrb., LVI, 1941, p. 177. 41

42

139

to follow the new theatre fashion, which appears in Greece for the first and only time in Corinth, to the west of Athens and in business relations very much closer to Rome. The great fountain of Herodes at Olympia,44with its colossal exedra, and the triconch court of Peirene at Corinth45seem to reflect, a little later, the new trend, although neither is a theatre. The tetranymphon of Hadrian over the pool of Siloam at Jerusalem46comes into mind as does the Hadrianicfour-lobedvestibule of the 'Piazza d'Oro'at Tivoli.47E.B. Smith48 calls attention to the fact that the cella trichoria originated in Roman architecture and had presumably a cosmic and celestial symbolism for an imperial audience hall while the triapsidal nymphaea and other monuments must have had comparabledivine connotations. Another example, this time from the period of Trajan, is the Philopappos monument at Athens,49with its incurving facade which recalls to some extent a scenic front, in the midst of which the retired ruler sits enthroned in semi-heroicnudity in an arched niche. Corinth, as the principalcity of Greece during the second century, located on an important shipping and trade centre, and having a population increasingly cosmopolitan, naturally derived her architecturalideas both from east and west. The Facade of the Colossal Figures has a distinctly eastern aspect. The comparisonwith workat Miletoshas been noted elsewhere.50The "western" type of scaenae frons,whose ideology comes originallyfrom the east, is not surprising, and the fact that Olympia, II, pp. 134ff. G. P. Stevens, "The Fountain of Peirene in the Time of Herodes Atticus," A.J.A., XXXVIII, 1934, pp. 55-58, pls. VI, VII. 46 E. B. Smith, op. cit., p. 115 and note; E. Weigand, "Das Theodosius Kloster," Byz. Zeitschr., XXIII, 1914-1919, p. 179. 47 P. Gusman, La Villa limperidlede Tibur, Paris, 1904, fig. 151. 48 Op. cit., p. 120. 49 Recently studied by Maria Santangelo, "II Monumento di C. Julius Antiochos Philopappos in Atene," Annuario, III-V, 1941-1943, pp. 1-101. 50 Stillwell, CorinthI, ii, p. 87. 44 45

CORINTH

140

Pausanias speaks especially of Hadrian's benificence to the city in the form of baths51and an aqueduct bringing water from Stymphalos, shows that in that emperor's reign there was much building activity in the city. ARENA

The first quarter of the third century, probably between the years A.D. 211 and 217, saw the remodellinginto an arena or hunting theatre, for which the evidence and motivation have been considered above ;52namely, the imminent prospect of a visit on short notice by Caracalla at the time he was in Syria and might be expected at any moment to return hastily to Rome, by sea. Although the date of the great amphitheatre toward the northeastern part of the town still remains unknown, it is hardly likely to be as late as this. From an inspection of the scanty remains of construction appearing above ground it appears that the well quadrated masonry must be earlier, and it seems, moreover, unlikely that Roman Corinth would have done without an amphitheatrefor fully two centuriesand more. We cannot, therefore, say, as Dinsmoor suggests,53 that the building of the amphitheatre once again released the theatre to its properuse; but, more likely, that the need of a specific hunting theatre having passed, the return was made later in the third century. If the rapidity with which the paintings disintegrated in the few years between 1926 and 1939 is any criterion, it is improbable that they were exposed in antiquity for more than a generation or two at most. FINAL PERIOD

The final period lasts from the second half of the third to the end of the fourth centuries. The most significant change was the establishment of the naumachia with its enclosing 51 Pausanias, II, 3, 1. 52 Pp. 94-97. 53

Op.

cit., p. 315.

parapet, repaired and reinforced at various times. Although the term naumachiahas been generally used, especially when we find in other theatres a similar arrangement of parapet slabs, reinforced and made waterproof by a masonry backing, an interesting and most plausible suggestion has been made by Dr. Guido Traversari.54This is to the effect that these vast water-basins were in fact intended not for sham naval battles, but for aquatic performances, and he equates them with the term Ko?vp\Uepaemployed by St. John Chrysostom. In further support of this theory, insofar as Corinthis concerned,it seems that if the generation which remodelled the arena had contemplated actual naval battles, they would hardly have sacrificed the space available in the arena, and instead reduced the area by nearly a half in introducing the new, broad gutter, and restoring the lower rows of seats. The last phase saw from time to time a number of minor changes. The great gutter seems clearly to have been relaid once during the period, although with no essential change of plan. The marble parapet was patched and reset, and at the last a strong opus incertum backing built against it. Some amount of repair evidently took place on the stage front, but essentially it remained as it had been first erected in the second century. To all appearances the theatre went out of use at the end of the fourth century, perhaps after the invasion of Alaric in A.D. 396. The confirmatory evidence for this lies in the coins found in the excavation of the main drain where it left the orchestra, and hence must have served to the end. Here were found two coins of Constantine II (337-361) and one each of Valentinianus II (375-392) and Theodosius (379-395).55 We do not know how long the theatre stood after this until it began to be used as a quarry 54 "Tetimimo 6 Colimbetra," Dioniso, XIII, Nuova Serie, 1950, pp. 18-32. 55 Shear, A.J.A., XXXII, 1928, pp. 476, 479.

SUMMARY AND CHRONOLOGY and a place of residence (?) in Byzantine times, but it would seem that most of the marble architecture was removed before it had fallen down. Otherwise there should be a far greater number of splinters and fragments than actually were found. The dearth of capitals and columns from the orders of the scaena is notable; they were most probably removed to adorn churches of the Byzantine golden age. Some of the material may well have travelled as far as the imperial city itself. The sculptured friezes were, of course, of no use save for the limekiln, but the great number of pieces buried close to the level of the orchestra and in the ruins of the pulpitum suggest that when the theatre was dismantled, miaterialfor the limekiln was not the principal interest. As the middle ages wore on, buildings of various sorts appeared at a low level above the orchestra floor, on the ruins of the scaena, and in the area to the east and west. During this time the cavea as well was stripped of nearly all useable blocks. *

*

*

*

*

*

It is regrettable that the area between the theatre and the Odeum has not as yet been explored, for the relation of the two buildings was very close. Broneer dates the first construction of the Odeum toward the end of the first century56and ascribes a thorough reconstruction to Herodes Atticus, possibly around 56

Corinth,X, pp. 144-148.

141

A.D. 175. It is not unlikely that this embellishment was motivated by the renovation of the theatre some time before. The Odeum was destroyed by fire and restored, we are told, about A.D. 225, when it was arranged as an arena. Broneer suggests that it may have been about this time that the theatre was changed back from an arena to a normal theatre and the large new amphitheatre east of the town and the arena in the Odeum built to take its place. If Broneer'sdate for the arena period of the Odeum is correct it would agree with the observationthat the similarform of the theatre was of short duration. In any event, it would seem logical to establish the sequence as follows: Theatre rebuilt in first half of second century, probably under Hadrian; Odeum elaborately redecorated by Herodes Atticus, ca. A.D. 175; theatre converted to hunting theatre soon after A.D. 211; Odeum burnt some time afterward, and, when repaired, equipped as a small arena, the theatre being too large save as an especial project for a particular event which never transpired. At this time, then, the theatre was reconverted, and equipped for aquatic spectacles as well as, presumably, for such forms of more legitimate drama as still found favor with the citizens of Corinth. Future excavation of the area between the two buildings and an exploration of the amphitheatre should help to prove, or amend, this suggested relative chronology.

PLATE I

LIF

c i/, ri 4~ I: 'o\

------X---------

~

-

60

ri

S

5

0

10

20

30

S

E

rtJ~~

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

x~~j/0JjV /4 1|1

~ 4/47E

X~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~i~

4iS+_

ll~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

l~~~~~~~~

~

4 EU

T7nrlll

30

10

,,,

X

-,

t

50

g

K-/

'

1

T

)

>

'i'

S

4

'

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ // / _ _

a*| SeFs| ................ F

6. |_

wstnvsr_vn|.T.

/,sr |

4

.

w-|.wrwt} wl

4/

011taCnX~ S

___________

S~~

Q 'IX

10

.,

Wr=AX

i1

lL1bJl

T[

g

S

. 0 l 0 rA,-LjV V7 fiS/A. "E

';

-

. , ,~~~

/

'\\

~

~ ~

~tK

~

:

N\

'--X-D==},~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

0

K'-

'K

,."

Cl

"K",

I'

l

'

Ri'~~~~~~~~~~~~K'

"'K"'C

____

::

N

'

r?~~

"

/

-

\\'WE\~

>

A91 "A"

y

V4~~~~~~~~~~\

'FIQ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

Pla of Thar

in prsn

tt

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~' -

I W/

<S~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~'9'ns

\ >S

tat

-

~~~W/~

~

ul

/~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

4//

p, f 4 *,.

F

--------u--

L

ID

I .1

00

P.60M1 TO

PER.IMETER

1

110

1

0

'1

F

0~~~~~~~~~

l

Q1

0000

0S

*------1

MLKF1-11

FL

1,..

II1 II

~

~

%

,

II

510

~

10

0M

,i,,

I .1

1 1

110

l

5

10

60M~~~~~~~~~~~

TO

PER.IMETER

0

15

Plan of Hellenistic Theatre, restored

0

00

t t

II

I

0

0

0

1

11.70

5

10

15

Plan of Hellenistic Theatre, restored

20 M

''"

--

A E 5

fv

R O MA N

PA

--:1Z7-__25

RODOS5

.....

E.

.......

..

.

.

.

. ..

t.1

,t,,

l,

|

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~-0-52

^ \ .. ,,,. ,,,, ... , 1,,,,,, t7

WA L L~~~~

_ _

l

__

L~~~~/

*

4

0n

8

0

7

2

0

-ojT

- L-

C

2-05t

2I

F&

A

L

B

E

0

AUX

C