Trachia in the Argolid

The 'settlement' of Tracheia dominated the Tracheia valley in the SE Argolid.

The Trachia Valley is the region of the box in the center.

 

The route between Epidauros and Troizen led through the Trachia Valley and then skirting the mountains to the coast just S of the Methana peninsula and then on to Troizen.

 There were two towers protecting the entrance to the valley from the S. The first is the Mnema tou Andreiomenou.[1] 

A second, unnamed, building (presumably a small fort with tower) stood about 800 m to its north on a low hill. Perhaps the hill at 37.544871° N, 23.140036° E is intended.[2] 

The only other structure that may be identified is a small sanctuary in the neighborhood (In der Nähe) of the second tower, perhaps near 37.544343° N, 23.143016° E.[3]

Remains of the 'small sanctuary' [3a]

It is not now possible to say of what the settlement of Tracheia consisted. From Faraklas (through Blomley) we learn of a 'fort' or 'fortified settlement' lying on a low hill somewhere to the SW of modern Tracheia.[4] The settlement may have been of some significance because of the presence of the towers at the entry of the valley and, also, the presence of a major fortification at Bedeni Kiapha (C1081) on the valley's east side.[5]

Some confusion attends the location of the settlement.  Blomley says that the settlement of Tracheia is situated on " ... a low hill SW of Tracheia."[6]  On the S or SE sides of that hill Faraklas found ' ...  ' ... traces of a wall on the S and SE of the hill.'

Simpson and Dickenson say "A LH site was reported near the village of Trachia, on the route between the Asklepieion at Epidauros and Troizen."[7]

Anne Foley says "This site is situated in S central Epidauria about 500 m NW of modern Tracheia."  This would put it in the precise opposite direction from Blomley.

I suspect that the settlement of this little valley stretched to the S and W of the current modern town and back towards the 'small sanctuary' mentioned by Tausend.  I show the final suggested disposition for these various  points of interest in the next map:

And this final map shows how it all fits together:

Upper map superimposed onto a Google Earth image.

Footnotes

[1] For the Mnema tou Andreiomenou see Tausend [2006] 154.  Blomley [2022] 253. '77. TOU ANTREIOMENOU TO MNEMA 1 ... '.

[2] For this second tower: Tausend [2006] 154. ' ... befinden sich auf einem flachen Hügel die Reste eines zweiten Baues ... '

[3] Unwin [2020] npn.  " [footnote] 41 A klidophoros is attested at Side (I.Side 17), while kleidophoroi are also among a delegation sent from Laodikeia-on-the-Lykos to Klaros in the second century CE (Ferrary [2014], no. 40). The variant klakophoros is found at Apollonia in Illyria (I.Apollonia 16) and at Messene (IG V 1.1447); see the discussion of Quantin (2004), p. 596–600. A hero called Klaikophoros is attested at Epidauros in the third century BCE (IG IV² 1.297)."

[3a] Tausend [2006] Abb. 212. "212 Heiligtum von Philanorion".

[4] Blomley [2022] 293, '158. TRACHEIA (Τραχειά)'.

[5] For the Bedeni Kiapha fortress see Blomley [2022] Fig. 6.42, and 184, '16. BENTENI KIAPHA (Μπεντένι Κιάφα, Μπάφι)'.

[6] Blomley [2022] 293.

[7] Simpson and Dickenson [1979] 54, 'A 31 Trachia'.

Bibliography

Blomley [2022] : Blomley, Anna Magdalena. A Landscape of Conflict? Rural Fortifications in the Argolid (400-146 BC), Archaeopress Publishing Ltd., Oxford. ISBN: 978-1-78969-971-5 (e-Pdf). 2022. A precis and first 20 pages are here.

Faraklas [1972] : Faraklas, N., Ancient Greek Cities, xii: ’Επiδαυρος. Athens. 1972.

Simpson and Dickenson [1979] : Simpson, Richard Hope and O.T.P.K. Dickinson, Gazetteer of Aegean Civilisation in the Bronze Age, Vol. I: The Mainland and Islands, Göteborg, Paul Astroms Förlag, 1979.

Tausend [2006] : Tausend, Klaus, Verkehrswege der Argolis: Rekonstruktion und historische Bedeutung, Geographica Historica (Gh), Franz Steiner Verlag, 2006, ISBN-13: 978-3515089432.

Unwin [2020] : Unwin, Naomi Carless. 'Basket-Bearers and Gold-Wearers: Epigraphic Insights into the Material Dimensions of Processional Roles in the Greek East', Kernos (33) 33-125. 2020. Online here.

'Section Ro' of the Cyclopean Wall

 Oscar Broneer, in an article of 1966, reports a section of 'cyclopean wall' which he calls 'Ro'.  He says:

"Section Ro (Fig. 2, 4), on the property of Panagiota Roussi, ca. 120 m. to the west of St, is only 8.40 m. long, but this retains the interesting feature of a tower like projection, 2.80 m. wide and jutting out 0.63 m. from the face. This miniature tower, the stones of which project into the interior, is the first of several found in the wall. The setback on the north face of section St may have been made to serve the same purpose as these small towers. The few pottery sherds found in contact  with section Ro were undatable."[1]

In addition to this Broneer provides a drawing of this segment:[2]

Segment Ro, Broneer [1966] 350, Fig. 2, no. 4.

The drawing provides an orientation line from which we may deduce that the line of the wall is on an azimuth of ~102.25° (or ESE).  The question is 'where is Ro'?  In my opinion no one presently knows.  Broneer says it is 'on the property of Panagiota Roussi'.  In doing this he perpetuates a practice that cannot be sufficiently condemned - the naming of archaeological sites after the names of the people who own the property (looking at you, Emilia Kanta).  In the nearly 70 years since this segment was discovered 'Panagiota Roussi' has, presumably, been translated into a brighter and more glorious sphere and it's anyone's guess who owns the property now.  I suppose that this practice is thought of as a kind of 'site security' but it is really a practice of scholarly deviousness.  Obscuring the locations of sites in scholarly writings is not necessary for site security.  To see that just regard the work of Yannis Lolos, the eminent archaeologist of the Corinthia.  In his Land of Sikyon he not only gives exact lat/long pairs for every one of his many discoveries, he often gives the exact coordinates of each corner of the field in which the discovery was made.  Taking an example at random from Lolos [2011] we have HS-139, a set of ashlars for which all four coordinate pairs for the corners of the field in which it was discovered are given.[3]

As a result of the irresponsible practice of not giving adequate location information it now appears that no one knows where segment Ro actually is.[4]

Do we know anything at all about where Ro is?  Sort of.

We are told that Ro is about 120 m. to the west of segment St.  Where is St?  Well, St, according to Broneer [1966] is located next to the W side of the main road that travels to Kenchreai.[5]  If that's true then St would be about here: 37.913586 N, 23.003973 E.  Broneer goes on to say: "In the northeast corner, close to the modern road, some of the interior fill of small stones was exposed, ... " [6].  The northeast corner of the site could not be close to the modern road unless the bulk of St was on the western side of the road.  Fine.  Let's place it there momentarily and work forward to Segment Ro which, we'll remember, was 120 m. (about) to the W of St.  Where would that put Ro?  Let's look at the map:

In this photo we're looking roughly SW at the main road between Isthmia and Kenchreai.  North is to the lower right.  Segment St is  placed near the main road on the W side per Broneer.  A circle of 120 m radius is drawn centered on St.  Using that circle as a guide we see that segment Ro is somewhere on top of the ridge near where the Hexamilion wall begins its turn to the S.  Putting Ro here gets it in line for the next segment, Pe, which is some 600 m. further along.

An expert on the Hexamilion wall, Timothy Gregory, gives us a detailed look at the entire extent of that wall and, just where we're guessed a placement for Ro is the same place where the Hexamilion wall turns towards the S.  Gregory describes this area at the turning of the Hexamilion like this: "Just past 0+6,500 m. the Hexamilion reaches the end of the plateau and turns sharply to the south. At this point another tower (S-13) formed a lookout over the level ground to the east and north (Pl. 12:c). In this area, from 0+6,300 m. to beyond 0+6,500 m., the Hexamilion follows a line suggested by Oscar Broneer for a section of his Cyclopean wall across the Isthmus. According to Broneer, the wall ran along the north edge of the plateau, until the turning at Tower S-13, at which point the Cyclopean wall continued its course eastward on a nearly direct line to the Saronic Gulf. Section Ro of Broneer's wall seems to be located at the bottom of the hill on this line. The wall may be the one that Leake saw ..., as he speaks of two walls descending towards the sea, apparently from this point (S-13). ..."[7]  Emphasis is mine.

Gregory then discusses the possibility that the Hexamilion wall itself branched into two walls at this point (one going south and one east) and, if so, that " ... would explain the situation described by Leake in 1806. There can, however, be no question that in its original phase there was only one wall and that it turned southward at Tower S-13."[8]

If we follow Gregory and assume that Ro is on the foot of the ridge then that pushes St to the eastern side of the main highway.  Here I show a hypothetical position for Ro at the foot of the ridge.  The circle is 120 m in radius and is centered on our hypothetical Ro.  Do you see where it puts St?

Yes.   It puts St on the other or eastern side of the main road which contradicts Broneer.

So, if we follow Broneer, Ro is at the top of the ridge.  If we follow Gregory then Ro is at the foot of the ridge.  And this is what gives rise to my suspicion that the location of this little segment of wall is simply not now known to anyone.

Is there a potential solution that brings all these observations together?  Maybe.  It depends on whether we're willing to accept the old frontage road as the former main road that joins Kenchreae to Isthmia.  Here's what that would look like:

Broneer's diagram suggests that the orientation of the wall at Ro (wherever it is) is on an azimuth of 102.25 degrees.  I added 180 degrees to that and drew a reverse azimuth of 282.25 degrees from Sk (which position is known).  That is the green line on the map.

Now we can proceed if we are able to accept that the frontage road (brownish line labelled 'Old Main Road?') is the main road as it was in 1957 when these segments were discovered.  (The purple line is the modern road.) If so then we can place St roughly just to the west of the Old Road at the paddle labelled 'Hyp. St'.  The red circle there is 25 m in diameter which is the length for St given in Broneer.  On that green paddle I centered a circle of 120 m. radius (the yellow circle).  Where that circle intersects the green azimuth line on the W I placed the paddle for Ro.  It is labelled 'Hyp. Ro'.  That placement of Ro seems to agree with Gregory's idea that Ro might be at the bottom of the ridge.  And just at that point there begins a spur which rises to the top of Mytika ridge at the watchtower that Gregory has labelled 'S-13'.  At or near this hypothetical location for Ro the line of the wall would have to turn slightly to the W in order to mount this spur.

These constructions are hypothetical but, for now, I am using the corresponding positions for Ro and St in my Atlas:

Ro: C7760  37.913490° N, 23.003881° E

St:  C7759  37.913254° N, 23.005230° E

Footnotes

[1] Broneer [1966] 349-351.

[2] Broneer [1966] 350, Fig. 2, no. 4.

[3] Lolos [2011] 507, no. HS-139.

[4] And see this.

[5] Broneer [1966] 349.

[6] Ibid. 349.

[7] Gregory [1993] 49.

[8] Idem.

Bibliography

Broneer [1966] : Broneer, Oscar.  "The Cyclopean Wall on the Isthmus of Corinth and Its Bearing on Late Bronze Age Chronology",  Hesperia: The Journal of the American School of Classical Studies at Athens (35:4), 346-362.  1966.  Online <a href="https://www.jstor.org/stable/147564">here</a>.

Gregory [1993] : Timothy, Gregory E., Isthmia V, The Hexamilion and the Fortress. American School of Classical Studies at Athens, Princeton, New Jersey, 1993.  ISBN: 0-87661-935-9.

Lolos [2011]: Lolos, Yannis, A., Land of Sikyon: Archaeology and History of a Greek City-State, Hesperia supplements, 39.   Princeton:  American School of Classical Studies at Athens, 2011, ISBN 9780876615393.

'Section Pe' in Loader 6.42

The photo at Loader [1995] II, 6.42 purports to show the section called Pe of the Cyclopean Wall first described by Broneer [1966] 351.  What is actually shown is a segment of the Hexamilion Wall. 

A section of the Hexamilion Wall.  The tower (on R)
is named 'W-4' in Gregory [1993] 31.
Click to enlarge.

This photo was taken from coordinates 37.932622° N, 22.966297° E and the camera was facing  ~213.06°.  The picture is of poor quality because it has been reproduced so many times and I have cleaned it up in Photoshop as well as I was able. 

 If the reader clicks to enlarge he or she will notice the unmistakable Hexamilion construction of sandstone ashlars about 1.0 m x 0.6 m and laid stretcher to header.  The structure on the right of the picture is the watchtower that Gregory [1993] designates 'W-4'.  It can also be seen on his map (Gregory [1993], Figure 5).

The photo setup looked like this:

White arrow points to the H. wall which runs from L to R.
The watch tower foundation is marked by the 'W-4' paddle.
The photographer stood at the bottom center at the paddle 
marked '6.42 Pix Location'.  The red line is the angle of the shot.

A mistake of this sort is of little consequence.  I make a point of this error because it casts a shade of ambiguity on her discussion of Pe in vol. I of Loader [1995].  Here is what she says:

""Similarly, the rectangular towers placed along sections St, Ro, and Pe of the Isthmian wall, the latter with four rectangular towers projecting c. 0.70 m northwards from the wall face and separated at intervals of 7.90-9.50 m (Broneer 1966: 351; fig. 6.42.), would have strengthened those points of the wall where its course altered."[1]

Section Pe of the Cyclopean wall does have four projections.  It has, however, always been hard for me to read these as towers.  Lacking any other evidence they look like buttresses.  Pe does, after all, sit on the sloping ground near the top of the Mytika ridge.   I illustrate this with a photograph of Pe from Broneer. [2]

The horizontal offset/extension of these 'towers' is 0.7 m. according to Broneer.  Hardly towers(?); it's easier to understand them as buttresses.

Dr. Loader is an important and influential scholar.  This question does, however, go directly to the heart of the nature and purpose of Pe in particular and the Cyclopean Wall (if there was such a thing) in general.  I wouldn't like to think that when she discusses the rectangular towers of Segment Pe of the Cyclopean wall that she had the undoubted towers of the Hexamilion wall in mind.

Footnotes

[1] Loader [1995] vol. I, p. 98

[2] Broneer [1966], Plate 81

Biblio

Broneer [1966] : Broneer, Oscar.  "The Cyclopean Wall on the Isthmus of Corinth and Its Bearing on Late Bronze Age Chronology",  Hesperia: The Journal of the American School of Classical Studies at Athens (35:4), 346-362.  1966.  Online <a href="https://www.jstor.org/stable/147564">here</a>.

Gregory [1993] : Timothy, Gregory E., Isthmia V, The Hexamilion and the Fortress. American School of Classical Studies at Athens, Princeton, New Jersey, 1993.  ISBN: 0-87661-935-9.

Loader [1995] : Loader, Nancy Claire.  The definition of cyclopean: An investigation into the origins of the LH III fortifications on mainland Greece, Two vols., Durham theses, Durham University. Available at Durham E-Theses Online: http://etheses.dur.ac.uk/5374/

The Geography of Partheni Bay on Leros

 

The island of Leros, in the Dodecanese, lies between Patmos and Kalymnos. 

Leros is situated between Patmos and Kalymnos

 Simpson and Dickinson tell of an early Bronze Age site discovered on the edge of Partheni Bay which is in the north of Leros as shown on the next map.  

Partheni Bay on Leros

  Simpson and Dickinson characterize the site like this:

"The easternmost of three promontories (collectively named "Ta Poundaria") on the S shore of Partheni Bay in the N of the island was an EB settlement.  The site is only 80 m. NNW-SSE by 40 m., but may have been partly eroded by the sea.  The  sherds found are from jars and pithoi of EB I type.  ... "[1]

Where exactly is this site?

Partheni Bay on Leros with ta Poundaria labelled.

On this map we see the three promontories called 'ta Poundaria'. They are the easternmost on the south coast of Partheni Bay. The one furthest E I have arbitrarily labelled "Poundaria 1". Its neighbors,Ta Poundaria 2 and 3, lie just to its W.

Let's look at Ta Poundaria 1 in closeup:

Does this satisfy the criteria set out by our authors? Here's what Simpson and Lazenby said about it earlier:

" ... a very low and very small promontory ... with the remains of an L-shaped mole at its north-west tip. The promontory, which is about 80 m. long by 40 m. wide, is the easternmost of the three (named collectively 'Ta Poundaria') in the middle of the south shore of Partheni Bay (the central promontory is even smaller, and the westernmost is the peninsula discussed by Benson where both Ross and Burchner reported tholaria)."(52)[2]

Here Simpson and Lazenby are, confusingly, giving the size of the peninsula as 40 x 80 m. when, in fact, it's the site that's 40 x 80 m.[3] The hypothesized size of the site is thus 3200 m. The actual area of this peninsula is about 29,700 sq. m.

In order to give an idea of the size of the site relative to the peninsula I have drawn a circle with an area of 3200 m. (about 32 m. radius) against a photo of Ta Poundaria 1. I show this circle in the next photo:

Ta Poundaria 1 with a circle sized to approximately the dimensions of the site.

I have identified this site in the Mycenaean Atlas Project as C7111 and I suppose that we're no more than twenty or so meters away from wherever it was that these Early Bronze sherds were discovered.

A Second Site, C7112

Simpson and Dickinson [1979] 367 suggest the presence of another site in this area:

"Similar fragments of pithoi found on a hillock c. 1 km. to SW may  represent  a cemetery area connected with the settlement.'"[4]

Where is this 'hillock'?  

The hillock in question sits just to the SW of the Leros airport runway.  At its highest point it is 11 m. above the surrounding plain.  On its peak sit the ruins of a tower about 8m square, presumably Hellenistic, and about which there has been some debate.  Early investigators supposed it to be the site of the often-mentioned Temple to Artemis (Parthenos Iokallis).  The virgin Iokallis has been thought to be a local semi-deity whose cult was assimilated to that of Artemis.  In 1905 Dawkins and Wace established that this platform was really just a tower.[5]  Bean and Cook reaffirmed this in 1957.[6]  And even though no other location for the temple has been suggested, this remains the consensus of scholars today.  But the idea that Artemis' temple is located on this hill hasn't quite died.   (Including the Greek Ministry of Culture and Sports which still has this claim on their website here. )  In fact, Benson gives reasons why the tower base may have originally been the location of a small temple.  

Here's a photo of the entire top of the hill with some superimposed drawings of what can be made of the structures currently remaining.

The green cylinders (T1, ... ) are trees: a crude if effective way of representing them.  S1 and S2 are structures whose purpose I cannot determine.  The structure labelled 'Platform' is the proposed tower base.  The orange structure labelled 'Nave' is the location of the church of H. Eirene. I marked one structure, in yellow, with a question mark.  It is not clear whether or not this is part of H. Eirene.

Following is a photograph of the same area from directly above:

At some point in the Christian era the stones of the tower platform were re-used to build a small chapel to H. Eirene (F6216). [7]   Of H. Eirene Benson says this:

"Parallel and very near the tower on its north side is a small ruined chapel , known locally as Ayia Eirene, built largely with blocks taken from the tower. The small conch - like apse is constructed of brick and concrete , which was covered with plaster on which are traces of wall painting in red, yellow and dark greenish grey paint. The total height of the apse above the present surface is 2.45 m. A clandestine excavation which had taken place recently went down below the obvious level for a floor without revealing any traces of one."[8]

I found some pictures that show what remains of the nave of this chapel.  You should be able to link to them here: 

https://www.lerosinfo.com/media/k2/items/cache/954fb0ebf1d84fb921bfb0b6e045d57f_XL.jpg

This is the same scene from the photograph looking down the 'nave' of H. Eirene facing east.   Next to it on the S (right) is what's left of the tower platform.    On the N (left) of the chapel is a low yellow structure.  Photographs indicate that the slope falls away towards the N and I could not interpret what this structure was.  Take it with a grain of salt.

As for the platform itself there is another user-contributed photo that shows it up close and looking W.  You can find that photo here: https://media-cdn.tripadvisor.com/media/photo-m/1280/18/7c/ac/ae/view-of-temple-of-artemis.jpg

Here is a reproduction of that photo.  Here the viewer is looking directly W along the apse end of the nave (center).  The platform is to the S (on the left) under the shade of a tree.  

The temple that was thought to be here was famous in antiquity as sacred to Artemis.  The priests kept Guinea hens here which they advertised as Meleager's sisters, the Meleagrides.

In my next post I will devote more space to the myth of Meleager.

Footnotes

[1] Simpson and Dickinson [1979] 367, 'Partheni: Ta Poundaria etc.'.

[2] Simpson and Lazenby [1970] 52, 'Leros; Partheni'

[3] Simpson and Dickinson [1979] ibid.

[4] Idem.

[5] Dawkins and Wace [1905] But see Benson [1963] 16,  ' ... this may be the site of the Temple of the Parthenos, if it was of modest proportions.' 

[6] Bean and Cook [1957] 134, 'Leros': " ...; and at H. Eirene, between the bay and H. Georgios, is the ruin of a square tower described and illlustrated by Dawkins and Wace."

[7] The name confirmed in Benson [1963] 17 and n. 48.

[8] Benson [1963] 17.



Biblio

Bean and Cook [1957] : G.E. Bean and J.M. Cook, 'The Carian Coast III', Annual of the British School at Athens (52) 'Leros', pp. 58-146. [1957]. Especially 134 ff. It is online here.

Benson [1963]:  Benson Ancient Leros. Duke University, Durham, North Carolina and Eaton Press, Mass., U.S.A. 1963. Online here.

Dawkins and Wace [1905] : Dawkins, R.M. and Alan J.B. Wace, 'Notes from the Sporades, Astypalaea, Telos, Nisyros, Leros', Annual of the British School at Athens (12) 151-174, [1905-06]. esp. Section '4 - Leros', which starts on 172.  They include a photo of the base of the tower taken facing approx. W. It is online here:

Simpson and Dickinson [1979] : Simpson, Richard Hope and O.T.P.K. Dickinson. A Gazetteer of Aegean Civilization in the Bronze Age, Vol. I: The Mainland and the Islands. Paul Åströms Förlag, Goteborg. 1979., 'Partheni: Ta Poundaria etc.', pg. 367. Online here :

Simpson and Lazenby [1970] : Simpson, R. Hope and J.F. Lazenby. 'Notes from the Dodecanese II', The Annual of the British School at Athens (65). pp. 47-77. 1970. Online here: