"Icon","dc-publisher","dc-description","Chronology","Name","dc-creator","dc-date","Collection","Type","Redirect","UserLevel","Id","dc-subject","dc-title"
"","","Temple E, Southeast Excavations 2017; Coordinates: N: 1043.270, S: 1039.866, E: 114.763, W: 109.937; ; This is the final summary report for work undertaken in the northeastern corner of the courtyard of Unit 1, Frankish Area, during the second excavation session of the 2017 season. Personnel: Guy Sanders (Director), Ioulia Tzonou-Herbst (Assistant Director), James Herbst (Architect), Orestes Zervos (Numismatist), Rossana Valente (Field Director), Panos Kakouros (Assistant Foreman and Pickman), Marios Vathis (Shovelman and Sieve), and Tori Bedingfield (Recorder).; ; The area of excavation is located in the northeast corner of the unpaved section north of the paved courtyard in Unit 1. The western section of the unpaved part, 4.5 meters wide (E-W), had previously been excavated during session 1 of the 2017 excavation season. The excavation during session 2 was conducted in the remaining eastern section, approximately 5m (E-W) x 4m (N-S) area. The excavation was bounded in the north by an E-W reconstructed wall (labelled wall 2 in the 1992 excavations, NB 849); in the east by a N-S reconstructed wall (referred to as the south wall of room 8, or annex, in the 1992 excavations, NB 852); in the south by the northern limit of the paved courtyard; and in the west by the excavation scarp created in session 1 excavations. Room 8 is situated directly north of the excavation area, and room 3 is situated to the east. The unpaved portion of the courtyard in Unit 1 was last systematically excavated in April-May 1992 (NB 849, pp.  11-17, pp. 29-51, pp. 69-73, pp. 83-101, lots 1992-24, 1992-42, 1992-39, 1992-40, 1992-50, lot 1992-51; NB 852, pp. 8-10, pp. 38-62, lot 1992-31). The previous excavations removed approximately 1 meter of destruction debris, with a “Turkish house” built over the destruction layer (NB 832). The final elevation recorded in the excavation area by the 1992 excavation team (85.546 masl, NB 852, basket 114) is approximately ten centimeters higher than the opening elevations recorded for the 2017 excavation season (85.46 masl). The final context (NB 849, basket 54) of May 1992 excavation season in the eastern part of the unit, and the final context (NB 852, basket 114) of the June 1992 excavations in the north and western part of the unit, was recorded as being a hard clean clay surface, which is not incongruous with the hard, marl clay surface that was on the surface at the start on the 2017 excavation. The approximately ten centimeters of difference in level between 1992 and 2017 may be explained by a number of reasons. Given that this area was exposed to the elements for 25 years and experienced foot traffic from the restoration efforts on the north and east walls, it is not entirely impossible to exclude that there has been some loss from wind erosion and wear. As in all areas left open to the elements for such a long time, cleaning operations are imperative before the beginning of a new excavation season, in order to remove any potentially mixed strata.  The coordinates of the excavation area are N: 1043.270, S: 1039.866, E: 114.763, W: 109.937; the opening elevation was 85.494 masl, and the closing is 84.99 masl, though the lowest elevation recorded was at the bottom of a pit cut at 84.42 masl. ; ; The overall goals of session 2, 2017 excavation season were threefold: to understand the phasing of the east wall, the floor layers, and the pit deposit visible on the surface, and their relationship to one another; to understand the so-called “mud brick structure” (feature 1073) exposed during season 1 of the 2017 excavations; and to look for evidence for reorientation of the entire space, a theory posited in previous scholarship. By and large, theories and responses to these goals were satisfactorily developed, though more excavation is required to verify any conclusions with absolute certainty. In particular, excavation underneath the paved courtyard to the south of the excavation area would be fruitful for our understanding of this part of the Frankish occupation. ; ; Frankish Period (1210-1458 CE); ; The earliest use of this space that was uncovered was a levelling event made up of redeposited mud brick, resulting in a unified elevation in this portion of the unpaved section of the courtyard (context 1107, lot 2017-1). The westernmost boundary of the mud brick redeposited layer was first uncovered in session 1 of the 2017 excavations (feature 1073). ; ; During the late 13th to the early 14th century, a subfloor (context 1107, lot 2017-1) and accompanying lime floor (1106, lot 2017-3) were laid down on the redeposited mudbrick floor. Despite its relatively durable construction, a repair patch (context 1105) in the floor was needed in the southwest corner of the floor some time later in its use. The west edge of this floor was visible in the excavation unit, and it did not continue over the “mud brick structure” (feature 1073). Therefore, the original western boundary of the floor may be preserved. The southern boundary is unknown, as the floor stretches under the paved courtyard. ; ; At some point later in time, still during the late 13th to early 14th c., a wall stretching across the northern boundary of the courtyard was constructed, and a foundation trench cut through the lower flooring and redeposited mudbrick layer. Contemporary with this north wall, a clay floor approximately 8 centimeters thick was laid down (context 1104, lot 2017-2). After this, a pit (approximately 1 meter by 1 meter) was cut in the northwest corner of the excavation unit to a depth below context 1107 (bottom elevation 84.11 masl), the deepest layer excavated. Due to several days of heavy rain during the excavation season and the high clay content of the surrounding layers, the fill of the pit is not excavated. After this, though still in the late 13th to early 14th c., the clay floor and pit were overlaid by three subfloor layers (8-9 cm thickness in total, context 1103 lot 2017-4, context 1102 lot 2017-5, and context 1101 lot 2017-6), and a cement floor (context 1100).; ; In the 14th c., three more cement floor layers were laid down directly on one another (context 1099 lot 2017-7, context 1097, and context 1085, lot 2017-8), lacking the subfloors seen in previous layers. All layers up to this stage had continued under the paved courtyard to the south of the excavation unit. Additionally, all floor layers are characterized by a high residuality in respect to the artifacts recovered, due to the redeposited material used for the floors.; ; Continuing in the 14th c., another north wall was constructed on top of the earlier wall, and its foundation trench cut through all floor layers down to the lowest of three subfloor layers associated with one of the cement floors (context 1103, lot 2017-4, bottom elevation 85.22 masl). This wall was built directly on top of the earlier north wall. Due to the modern intrusion of the wall restoration, the exact dimensions of the earlier wall are not clear. The existence of an earlier wall was evident mostly in the presence of its foundation trench. ; ; A paved courtyard was constructed to the south of the excavation area, probably contemporaneously with the construction of this later north wall. Paving stones were laid over a section of the floor layers (to the south of the excavation area), and may have reoriented the space from a north-south orientation to an east-west one. In addition to the construction of a paved courtyard and the north wall, a marl floor was laid down in this area. During the 2017 excavation season, the floor was patchy and relatively thin, though in previous excavation this was recorded as being a sturdy clay floor layer (NB 849, p. 41). The clay floor was described as being flush with the level of the paving stones in the paved courtyard, though at the start of this excavation period, the floor was some centimeters lower than the courtyard. Even at its deepest level, this marl floor does not continue under the paved courtyard to the south, and so it is certain that the marl floor was laid down after the paving stones. ; ; After the paving of the stone courtyard, the space seems to have fallen into a period of disuse, and in the east of the excavation unit a pit was cut into the floor layers. Beginning at some point in the 14th c. and ending sometime in the second half of the 14th c., the pit was filled with dump fills of large joining fragments of matt painted amphora and other ceramics, tile, and refuse (from first to last deposited: contexts 1076, 1086-1089, lot 2017-10). Due to the relatively few animal bones and organics recovered and the absence in the soils of the loamy quality common in cesspits, it appears this was not used in a household context, at least in the latter part of the 14th c. During the 1992 excavations, the other portion of this pit was excavated (“pit A” in NB 849). The final elevation of pit A as well as the nature of the finds make it very likely they are from the same event, though there seem to have been around three different pits cut in this area, with at least one pit cutting through the southeast portion of pit A. In addition, a destruction layer covered over this whole area (NB 832), and the excavators who recorded the context below the deposit (NB 849) were ambiguous about the boundaries of the various pits at the start of their excavation. This makes it difficult to be certain the pits are related. The excavation drawings also show an outline that roughly aligns with pit 1078, though it was not explored. The drawing may show the slumping of the floor over the pit, as well as the difference in the adherence of the clay floor to the layer below it. ; ; Following this activity, a wall in the east of the excavation unit was built that cut through the pit. This was the last phase of activity excavated during this season. The clay floor layer mentioned in the 1992 excavation probably dates to this period as well, though it isn’t possible to be certain. To compensate for the loose fill of the pit, it was necessary to fortify the foundation with large cobbles and stones below and around the foundation trench within the pit. A precise date cannot be offered for this wall, other than the terminus post quem is  sometime after the final fill of the pit was deposited (1076, lot 2017-10), in the second half of the 14th c., and after the second phase of the north wall, which dates to the late 14th c. ; ; The previous excavations of April-May 1992 had recovered evidence for a large scale destruction event covering the whole area. It had been assumed that this was due to the Catalan destruction of Corinth in 1312. Given the dating of the pit (after the second half of the 14th c.), this gives good reason to rethink the phasing of the Frankish alteration of the site, as well as to the cause of the destruction layer. In fact, during the year 1312, this area of the site was experiencing continuous maintenance.; ; Outstanding goals; ; The removal of the mudbrick floor level would be important in clarifying the murky understanding of the relationship between the excavation units of session 1 and session 2. In addition, the removal of the paved courtyard would provide more understanding of the function of this area prior to the paving of the stone courtyard.","","Temple E, Southeast 2017 by Tori Bedingfield (2017-05-02 to 2017-05-19)","","","Corinth","Report","","","Corinth:Report:Temple E, Southeast 2017 by Tori Bedingfield (2017-05-02 to 2017-05-19)","Corinthia | Ancient Corinth | Central Area | Temple E, Temenos | Temple E, Southeast","Frankish Area: Unit 1, Courtyard, Northeast Corner"
"","","Nezi 2013 Season; Session 2 Final Report; Kyle Jazwa; Hilary Lehmann; N 1011.50-1017.49; E 259.60-269.70; 23 May 2013; ; This is the final report for the second session of excavation at Nezi, 2013. Guy Sanders (director) and Rossana Valente (field director) supervised. The excavation team of this session consisted of Kyle Jazwa and Hilary Lehmann (recorders), Panos Kakouros and Tasos Tsogas (pickmen), and Vassilis Kollias (shovelman). Our excavation area encompassed the area between walls 1007, 918, 945 and pit 870 in the first half of the session (hereafter referred to as “South Section”). During the third week, our efforts focused on the quadrant north of 918 and west of W5218 (bounded by the Turkish building) (hereafter referred to as “Northwestern Quadrant”). Our excavation goals are to elucidate the stratigraphy of these areas and the function of the architectural features. With this, we hoped to find uncontaminated habitation levels that would help us to determine the chronology of human interaction in this area.  ; ; Previous excavation in this area was undertaken predominantly by Session 1, Mohammed Bhatti and Dan Diffendale, and some contexts by Session 1, Jana Mokrisova and Katherine Harrington. During Session 1, a series of surfaces, cut and fills were uncovered that can be dated from the Late Roman (4th-6th c. CE) to the Byzantine period (8th-12th c. CE). The state of the trench at the beginning of Session 2 included a possible cut (filled by context 1009) in the SE, the partial exposure of the top surface of walls 1007 and 866, and pit 870. The eastern half of the trench was relatively level though not homogenous. The western half retained the mortar foundation of a hearth 1065, a lower level under 1078, an ashy surface under 1083 and a slightly raised area under 1084. In the Northwestern Quadrant, there was heavy disturbance by 1960s and 1970s excavation, the results and details of which are not preserved. Session one fully revealed the tile drain 1026 and a series of partial surfaces and uneven contexts under 1050, 1060, and 1061.; ; Because of the nature of the depositional material and the heavy pitting and dumping, we were unable to identify discrete chronological phases in this section. Significantly, there was not a single continuous or uncontaminated surface. Instead, our excavation revealed a series of dump fills of destruction and non-destruction debris and several pits and robbing trenches. Due to the notable absence of distinct chronological phases, we will present our material in relative chronological order. The South Section and the Northwestern Quadrant are separated by architectural feature W918 and we, therefore, cannot to discern the precise relationship between the contexts in each area. For this reason, we will present each material separately. Furthermore, excavation of the South Section was begun with a clear distinction in soil and contexts between the east and western side. Thus, the exact relative chronology between the two sides cannot be determined, despite appearing to be roughly contemporary (Late Roman). As a result, we will present each “side” with a separate subsection.   ; ; South Section – April 29-May 10 (259.80; 269.70 E | 1011.50; 1014.30 N); ; East Side; The earliest deposit excavated in the East Side is 1100. Although we originally believed 1101 cut the fill of 1100, excavation of 1101 revealed the deposit associated with context 1100 continuing under 1101. 1100 was a tile-rich and clayey deposit. It contained a dense mix of pottery, fragments of painted plaster, early roman lamps, pebble pavement and some bronze and iron. The mixed content of the deposit suggests 1100 was a dump fill. 1101 was dumped in the western portion of the fill. This context is relatively better sorted than 1100. It has fewer cobbles and tiles and is more compact and light than 1101. Despite the ostensibly different quality of soil, the ceramics found within the context point to a similar approximate 1st c. CE date as 1101. In spite of this low ceramic date (we must stress that neither context provides a precise date), these two contexts must date to the fifth c CE date because they partially overly C1106-1108 – three layers firmly dated to the Late Roman period. The appearance of Early Bronze burnished pottery and other earlier sherds, suggest a thorough mixing of the deposit.; ; Immediately superimposed over 1100 and 1101 was a dump fill, context 1099. This fill was a dark reddish brown color and very loose. It contained a moderate amount of pebbles, small cobbles and other finds. The finds are very mixed and include assorted painted plasters, iron nails, glass fragments, a lamp and a fragment of a terracotta animal figurine (as MF 10733). Further suggestive of a mixed debris deposit, the pottery was very mixed (Neolithic? bowl, Geometric skyphos) and contained little to no joins. ; ; There were three cuts into the deposit of 1099. C1098 initially appeared to be the foundation trench for wall 1007. Upon completion of the excavation of the fill of this cut (1097), it became apparent that the wall continued beneath the soil. 1097 was a dark and clayey soil with a few fragments of wall plaster, a terracotta draped female figurine, pebbles and tiles. The pottery consists of a varied collection of Roman and pre-Roman sherds; there is nothing of significance to provide a fixed date of the context, but stratigraphically it can be dated to the fifth c CE. C1096 and C1094 were two roughly rectangular cuts appx. 15 cm deep in the N portion of 1099. Too little pottery was recovered to provide any information relevant to the dating of the cuts. In the fill of 1094 (1093) was a large piece of wall plaster and a terracotta figurine with a high hair-bun (similar to MF 9001?). The fill of 1096 (1095) contained only two pre-Roman sherds. 1096 was roughly round in shape and was similar to a secondary depression in the SW corner of 1094 (and approximately level with each other). It was originally hypothesized that these were possible post holes. However, the shallow depth of the cut (ca. 15 cm) mitigates against this.; ; Immediately overlying context 1099 is deposit 1092, a relatively homogenous deposit of firm yellowish brown soil. In it were found plenty of plaster, ceramics, bones, carbonized wood, several iron nail fragments, worked obsidian and flint, and a figurine with a right hand preserved. Above 1092 were two distinct dump fills, 1091 and 1090. 1091 was a dense and dark tile and cobble filled area with sigillata and arretine pottery. Accompanying the pottery are nine pieces of iron, two pieces of glass slag, a fragment of a terracotta figurine of a child cradled in a disembodied arm (similar to MF-4106) and a black glaze lamp. 1090 was lighter and looser than 1091 and appears to have been deposited after 1090. Despite the soil difference relative to 1091, the inclusions within the fill are relatively similar. This includes several pieces of iron, glass, pebble flooring, wall plaster and a dark reddish-glazed lamp with raised cross-and-dot circle pattern (similar to Broneer XIX) (L2013-3). The pottery contains a Late Roman combed ware amphora with a wavy comb pattern.  This provides a terminus post quem for the deposit. Because neither deposit 1090 or 1091 can be precisely dated, they must be dated stratigraphically. Overlying 1092, they must post-date the Late Roman period - fifth c CE.; ; Immediately to the W of wall 1007, a hard rectangular surface was excavated. This context, 1088, contained a compact yellowish brown fill. Initially, we thought this context might be a pit, but it turned out to be a relatively shallow dump fill over 1092. There was relatively little pottery recovered.; ; In addition to the excavation area outlined in the first paragraph, a small context on top of the south portion of 1007 and between walls 1007 and 866 was excavated, 1089. This was done to reveal the southern extent of 1007. This fill appears to be mixed with some iron and plaster. The pottery was non-distinct and unable to provide a firm date. Of note, however, was the base of an Attic-type black gloss skyphos inscribed on the foot (C2013-10) and a lead “star” with a hole in the center. Through the excavation of this area, we could determine that W1007 was robbed in the south. This robbing was replaced by an E-W wall of small cobbles (W845), faced by slightly larger stones.; ; West Side; The earliest deposit excavated on the western part of our area (1111) was a dump fill consisting of dark, sandy soil filled with substantial pieces of tile and plaster, as well as other assorted debris such as charcoal, glass, iron, and part of a terra cotta figurine. At about the same time as this deposit, a smaller dump fill, deposit 1112, was deposited slightly to the west, which contained far fewer inclusions and consisted of a siltier soil than that of 1111. Beneath these two deposits, the entire area bounded by Pit 870 and Walls 945, 918, and 1007 was covered with a dense layer of dark-yellowish clayey soil which was, however, too irregular to be classified as a surface.; Into this layer was cut a pit, C1110, which contained deposit 1109. The pit was bounded to the south by Wall 945 and had a sheer vertical face to the East with more sloping faces to the north and west. Its dimensions were 1.7 x 1.4 x .86 m. and its depth was 0.65 m. The bottom of the pit sloped downwards to the south with a 0.20 m. difference between its highest and lowest points. Before this pit was filled, about 6-8 courses of Wall 945 were revealed: although this was not visible before the pit was originally cut, the wall is built up of alternating levels of roughly ashlar stones and tile leveling courses. The construction of the pit also revealed the NE corner of Wall 945—its finished face suggests that the wall may continue to the South. The SW wall of the pit cut through a surface of packed clayey soil, about 0.54 m. from the surface. Perhaps this surface represents a habitation level.; ; The fill of this pit consisted of dark red soil with a high percentage of tile, brick, and mortar inclusions, probably refuse from the destruction of a nearby architectural feature. Providing a terminus post quem for the fill is a coin of Constantius (337-361 c CE; 2013-168) and the pottery which yielded many interesting example of Late Roman (mid fifth c. CE) ceramics, including an LR C bowl, a type 77 Niederbieber, a bowl as Hesperia 2005 1-32 and a LR bowl as Hesperia 2005 242. The highest proportion of plaster inclusions was located in the deeper parts of the pit. The east face of the pit showed that this area was repeatedly spread with debris containing tile, pebbles, and other such inclusions. And this behavior continued: the interaction of people with this environment during the periods we are focusing on seem to have primarily consisted of depositing fill after fill of debris into this area. ; ; At some time after pit 1110 was filled, a series of discrete but related deposits were laid on top of it: these are deposits 1106, 1107, and 1108. The earliest of these is 1108, which is a small, shallow deposit just north of Wall 945 and west of deposit 1101. The chronological relationship between deposits 1108 and 1101 is unclear. Deposit 1108 consisted of dark, silty earth; although it had somewhat fewer ceramic and tile inclusions than other deposits at the same elevation, it did contain a great number of fragments of marble revetment in purple and white. Perhaps contemporary with deposit 1108, although the relative chronology is not understood exactly, is deposit 1107, a slightly larger context 0.5 meters to the west of 1108. The soil of this deposit is the same as that of 1108, but the types of items included in this fill are quite different. Notably, this deposit included several pieces of glass, including one waster which suggests that glass may have been manufactured nearby. A terracotta sima, decorated with a spiral pattern and painted red, was deposited with this context, as well as one coin possibly of Valentinian (337-361 CE; 2013-166).; ; After the deposition of 1107 and 1108, a darker, a debris layer was placed between and partially above them—this is deposit 1106. In this context was deposited a large amount of pottery, some nails, plaster, and glass, and, again, several pieces of marble revetment. One interesting item placed in this context is a fragment of a terracotta figurine of a person holding a baby (MF2013-11). A coin of Constantius II (346-350 CE) was also placed in this deposit (2013-165). ; ; To the west of deposits 1106-1108 and probably contemporaneous with them is a large deposit of debris, 1105. This deposit was bounded by pit 870 to the west (its chronological relationship to the pit is unknown) and by Walls 918 and 945 to the north and south. The soil in this area is much redder than that found in deposits 1106-1108 and resembles more closely the soil of deposit 1109, the fill of pit 1110. Deposit 1105 is very large and rich: there was a large number of ceramic and tile inclusions and a great quantity of glass fragments placed in this context. The pottery can be dated roughly to the fifth c. CE based on several fragments of Late Roman type 1 and 2 amphoras, As in the neighboring deposits, there is a good deal of painted wall plaster and marble revetment in this context, as well as a large (0.515 x 0.29 x 0.11 m) piece of pebble pavement. Also placed in this deposit were two loom weights, several iron nails, and 6 coins (2013-157, 159-164) all with a late fourth c CE date. These coins include a coin of Valentinian (388-392 CE; 2013-164) and a Constantius with Victory (337-361 CE; 2013-157). A good amount of plant matter was deposited in this context, including burned seeds and wood. The deposit overall is characterized by its ashiness in addition to the redness of its soil, which may be composed of disintegrated mudbrick.; ; Beneath 1106-1108 and to the east of 1105 is context 1103, which is made up of loose, yellowish, silty soil and debris similar to that found in 1105. A large quantity of pottery was placed in this layer, including a corrugated basin that joins a fragment in 1107, an Agora M234 amphora, an eastern Aegean cookpot as Hesperia 2005, 2-34.  In addition, there were several pieces of marble revetment and pebble pavement, a fair amount of glass, a loom weight, painted plaster, and iron nails. Also present in this deposit were three large pieces of plaster flooring and the base of a marble vessel. Only one coin (2013-155) was deposited in this context; interestingly, it was placed at the far western edge of the area, directly contiguous to the outline of deposit 1105. This coin has a head of an emperor on the obverse and with the legend VOTMULT on the reverse, a typical late fourth c CE design. Despite the similarities between 1103 and 1105, however, they should be considered as discrete because the ash that is found throughout 1105 is not present in 1103. The context, however, should be considered another dump fill similar to 1106-1108, due to the join with 1107 and the variegated mix of architectural elements.; ; On top of context 1105 and to the north was placed deposit 1104, a small and extremely ashy layer. ; Very few ceramics or other small items were included in this deposit, although one coin was placed among the debris (2013-156). However, a significant amount of charred plant matter is present in the context. Although both 1105 and 1104 contained a high percentage of ash, the evidence shows that neither was itself a destruction layer. To the south of 1104, a yellowish, silty deposit was placed on top of 1105. This deposit, 1102, contained some mid-fifth CE pottery, several pieces of glass, iron nails, a coin of emperor Arcadius ca. 383-392 CE (2013-151) and some wall plaster. On top of 1102, hearth 1065 was built, a structure associated with the surface 1093.; ; The final report of the 2013 session 1 Pink Team suggested that beneath 1083 and the adjacent dump fill 1084 a real destruction layer might be found. However, despite the presence of a great deal of ash in deposits 1104 and 1105, this destruction layer has not yet been identified. ; ; Northwest Quadrant – May 13-17 (259.60; 268.00 E | 1014.80; 1017.50 N); ; This area was brought to a roughly even level by Session 1 excavations, with a few raised contexts in the eastern portion. The northern portion of this area was heavily pitted and disturbed by the 1960/1970s excavation. In the west, a ca. 0.5 m wide extension protruded north on which a tile drain was built (1026; the cut for the drain is 1119, and it is filled with 1118). The leveling fill under this trench contained early Roman pottery of the 3rd-4th c CE date, thus providing a terminus post quem. Of note is the extremely dense concentration of painted wall plaster found herein. The debris from the destruction of a wall (or several) was clearly used for the fill of this leveling area. This extension still remains and is not fully excavated. Immediately to the west is a much later robbing trench.; ; The earliest deposit in this section is wall 1123. This wall was discovered at the bottom of robbing trench C1122. This wall is comprised of squared limestone blocks in ashlar masonry and appears to proceed under wall 918. A few blocks of this wall are found in pit 870: it appears that the corner of the wall is revealed, turning east. Directly under wall 918, a second course is preserved. We did not full excavate this wall or its foundation trench, so it is impossible to provide a firm date for this wall as of yet.  ; ; Wall 918 was constructed sometime thereafter (likely much later, in the Roman period). The foundation of the wall was revealed in the robbing trenches of C1122 and C1127 and is comprised of a heavy tile and ceramic inclusions. Wall 1123 was likely still above the surface at the time of the construction of wall 918. We know this because the walls of C1117 slope upwards to wall 918 and to the hypothetical face of wall 1123 and the hypothetical wall that was robbed in C1127. The robbing trench is equal in dimension and orientated the same way as C1122. Sometime thereafter, C1117 was filled with contexts 1115-1116 (1116 was a martyr left to make sure 1115 would not be contaminated from the accumulation in the 1960/1970s excavation pit immediately to the north).  1115 is a compact, clayey layer rife with pottery, metal fragments, several shards of glass, wall plaster and three coins. Although two of the three coins are illegible (2013-173; 2013-174), 2013-175 was a particularly well preserved silver coin of Mark Antony (ca. 32-31 BC). The coin has a galley steered by Victory on the obverse and three legionary standards (including the Aquila) with LEG II indicated on the reverse. The pottery in the fill suggests a 4th c CE date with several sherds of African Red Slip pottery and a Niederbieber. Two distinct strata were then superimposed on top of this: 1114 and 1113. Although there is a discernible soil change between these three layers, the nature of the finds is consistent between them.; ; The eastern portion of the quadrant is also covered by 1160/1161, but its deposition history cannot be defined in relation to the western portion with precision because C1127 separates it from the tile drain and C1117. However, the eastern portion under 1160/1161 (context 1129) is cut by C1127. Thus, we can say that the deposition of these layers pre-dates the cut and robbing of the hypothetical ashlar wall in C1127. ; ; 1135 represents the earliest level in the eastern portion of the northwest quadrant. It is a surface that was partially exposed and partially uncovered by the excavation of 1129-1134. Overlying 1135, 1133 and 1134 are possible pieces of earthen floor with flattened pottery (1133 has a broken amphora on surface) and some small pebbles. Although the deposit contains pottery suggestive of an early Roman 1-2nd c CE date, the contexts were so small that no precise date can be assigned to these floors. Similarly, 1132 was a raised triangular fill with a small assortment of Roman sherds overlaying the western portion of 1135. Because 1132 was such a small context, no diagnostic finds were able to help provide a date for the layer. A narrow trench along wall W5218 (similar and shape in form to C1098) cuts both 1132 and 1135 (and thus necessarily postdates both deposits). The fill of this (1130), is dated to Middle-Late Roman based on the pottery, including a Late Roman bowl (after Hesperia 2005, 243) and a late fourth c CE coin of Constantius (2013-182). 1133 and 134 were overlain by 1129, a dump fill of an imprecisely-dated Late Roman period. The layer contains fragments of marble revetment, a late second c. CE coin of Commodus (2013-181) and a fragment of a marble column.  ; ; Under 1060/1061, but necessarily postdating 1129 and 1113, are the cuts 1122 and 1127.  Although the relationship between the cuts cannot be precisely ascertained, it is likely that they were robbing trenches of two parallel ashlar walls. As stated explained above, these cuts postdate C1117. Because the foundation trench for W918 was not found within the cuts and because C1117’s wall of soil slopes up the face of W918 (and C1117 predates C1122 and C1127), wall 918 must necessarily have been in place at the time of the robbing of the two ashlar walls. The fill of these trenches appear to be of the mid-fifth c CE date. 1121 (fill of C1122) has one 11th c. CE sherd, but this is likely a contamination from the 1960/1970s excavations. Additional 5th c. CE pottery includes a Late Roman bowl, stewpot and a Niederbieber. The inclusions of the fill are rather heterogeneous and include a loomweight with a GLYK stamp (cf. Corinth XII no. 1153), a late 6th c. BCE loomweight (profile IV), much marble revetment, bronze, and an early coin. 1123-1125 were the fills of 1127 and is similarly heterogenous. It is filled mostly with pottery (mid fifth c CE), tile, and architectural revetments.; ; Conclusions and Future Study; ; Our excavations this session failed to produce any discernible or continuous floors or architectural features. Instead, we excavated a series of Late Roman dump fills and pits. Because of this, there is a distinct lack of evidence for definite habitation phases in the area. With the rampant pitting and looting of the area, however, we were able to catch a glimpse at the underlying layers via the profile of C1127 and pits 1110 and 870. Within both, we could see no distinct floor levels. For at least a meter in each instance, the deposition appears to be dump fill after dump fill. The only possible exception can be found in the pits south of W918 (C870 and C1110). In both pits, we were able to distinguish flat lying pebble flooring set in concrete. At some point, it was suggested that this might indicate a possible floor level that seals off pre-Roman material in the area. We took the elevation of both floor fragments, however, and there was a 14 cm discrepancy between the two pieces of flooring. Either there was a strong slope to the floor or the appearance of the two pieces of pebble flooring is merely coincidence.; ; Because of the dearth of clear floor levels or other habitation surfaces in the area, it might be wise to continue future excavations in the area to the east of wall 1007. Perhaps with luck, this area may yield distinct phasings or surfaces. In our immediate excavation area, however, one could test the possibility of the pebble floor ca. 0.5 m under the current excavation level. If such a surface does exist, it would provide a very useful starting point with which to examine early Roman and Hellenistic habitation in this area with it effectively sealing off these earlier layers from much of the later contamination and fills.","","Nezi Field 2013 by Kyle Jazwa; Hilary Lehmann (2013-04-29 to 2013-05-17)","","","Corinth","Report","","","Corinth:Report:Nezi Field 2013 by Kyle Jazwa Hilary Lehmann (2013-04-29 to 2013-05-17)","Corinthia | Ancient Corinth | Central Area | Nezi Field","Sesssion 2, Nezi Field, Final Report"