| Collection: | Corinth | |
| Type: | Basket | |
| Name: | Nezi Field, context 10076 | |
| Area: | Nezi Field | |
| Context Type: | Wall | |
| Title: | Wall | |
| Category: | Cut | |
| Notebook: | 1103 | |
| 1104 | ||
| Context: | 10076 | |
| Page: | 0 | |
| Date: | 2009/04/03 | |
| 2009/02/10 | ||
| Stratum: | Inclusions: 10% small stones | |
| 10% subrounded pebbles. | ||
| Description: | The soil color is light greyish brown. The soil compaction is firm. The soil is well sorted. It is sandy silt. Structure materials: Primarily reused squared limestone blocks; roof tile fragments, unworked limestone stones. Material size: Worked: (0.21mx0.41mx0.32m) to (0.65mx0.48mx0.48m). Material finish: Squared limestone, unworked limestone cobbles. Material construction: Rubble masonry with reused blocks. Material bonding: None. Features: None. | |
| The soil color is light greyish brown. The soil compaction is firm. The soil is well sorted. It is silty sand. Structure materials: Primarily reused squared limestone blocks; roof tiles fragments; unworked limestone stones. Material size: Squared blocks: (0.21m x 0.41m x 0.32m-0.65m x 0.4. Material finish: Squared limestone blocks; some unworked cobble siz. Material construction: Rubble masonry with resued blocks. Material bonding: none. Features: none. | ||
| Notes: | Notes from 10 February 2009: This wall is being recorded as part of a plan to have walls removed in this part of the site in order to reveal the 11th C AD phase of a house for public display. This wall was revealed by excavations in 1961 and is recorded in NB 229 where it was given wall #23. The condition of this wall at present is poor due to erosion and exposure to the elements. It is built of more reused squared limestone blocks and fewer smaller unworked stones than many walls in this part of the site. When this wall was planned by Travlos it was shown to abut wall 10078 (recorded in 2009) at its E end. However, since the room on the N side was excavated to a depth below the foundation of the wall we can see the foundations in section looking S. It is very clear that there was a threshold at the E end of this wall that was founded at a lower elevation than the rest of the wall to the W. While the wall itself is founded upon very little material, the threshold is founded upon 4 regular course of material: tile fragments laying horizontally atop atleast 3 courses of unworked cobbles. The threshold (10077) abutts the wall and the N and S faces are perfectly flush. The surface of the threshold is the same elevation as the upper surface of the first course of stones in this wall. These two observations lead me to conclude that the threshold (though founded on different materials than the wall) is a contemporary construction to the wall. The W end of this wall ends in a large squared limestone block that is the largest block used in this wall (.65x.48x.48) and is founded slightly deeper than the rest of the wall superstructure (.10m deeper). Notes from 31 March 2009: We removed the upper two courses of the wall to the level of of the top of wall 10076 in order to determine whether the third (bottom) course contains a threshold associated with a possible surface 5919. One of the stones in these top two courses was identified as part of a voussoir by its curving. Another 2 stones were identified as parts of a drain with waterproof mortar. Removal of the upper two courses revealed the surface of the large, squared block that is a possible threshold 5919 (.75x.50m). No cuttings are visible on the top of the stone. The remaider of the exposed portion of this course is composed of smaller, more irregular small boulders and large cobbles filled in with packed earth, tiles, and fieldstones. To the W. we left a large orthostate in place for the time being, which is above a partially exposed block of this wall that has a square cutting (0.1m x.08m). After removing the two courses, we took elevations on the top of the bottom (3rd) course- 85.95. Photographs were taken of the possible threshold and orthostate in relation to the possible surface (5915) to the NW. Later we decided to remove the large orthostate to reveal the full length of wall 10076. The bottom of the large orthostate had a long rounded cutting 0.15m wide running the length of the bottom of the stone (0.5m long). Upon exposing 5919, we began to question if 5919 was the threshold, and not 10077. We removed the surfaces under wall 10080 that obscure the foundations under the W end of 5919 in order to determine if there is a cobble foundation under this area. There are cobbled foundations west of here and under 10076, almost identical to those in 10077, which led us to conclude that 10077 is not a threshold after all, but is more likely a foundation of stones and cobbles for a post or an arch corresponding with the foundations under 10076 (5957), on either side of threshold 5919. * The size of materials field is not large enough to include that the smaller unworked limestone blocks in this wall are and average of 0.27m x 0.18m x 0.10m in size. | |
| Alicia Carter, JKP, RAB Size of Materials: Squared blocks: (0.21m x 0.41m x 0.32m-0.65m x 0.48m x 0.48); Unworked (0.27m x 0.18m x 0.10m) Finish of Stones: Squared limestone blocks; some unworked cobble sized limestone stones This wall is being recorded as part of a plan to have walls removed in this part of the site in order to reveal the 11th century AD phase of a house for public display. This wall was revealed by excavations in 1961 and is recorded in NB 229 where it was given wall #23. The condition of this wall at present is poor due to erosion and exposure to the elements. It was built of more reused square limestone blocks and fewer smaller unworked stones than many walls in this part of the site. When this wall was planned by Travlos it was shown to abutt wall 10078 (recorded in 2009) at its east end. However, since the room on the north side was excavated to a depth below the foundation of the wall we can see the foundations in section looking south. It is very clear that there was a threshold at the east end of this wall that was founded at a lower elevation that the rest of the wall to the west. While the wall itself is founded upon very little material, the threshold is founded upon four regular courses of material: tile fragments layinig horizontally atop at least three courses of unworked cobbles. The threshold (10077) abutts the wall and the north and south faces are perfectly flush. The surface of the threshold is the same elevation as the upper surface of the first course of stones in this wall. These two observations lead me to conclude that the threshold (though founded on different materials than the wall) is a contemporary construction to the wall. The west end of this wall ends in a large squared limestone block that is the largest block used in this wall (0.65 x 0.48 x 0.48) and is founded slightly deeper than the rest of the wall (superstructure 0.10m deeper). Removal of the upper two courses revealed the surface of the large, squared block that is a possible threshold 5929 (0.75 x 0.50m). No cuttings are visible on top of the stone. The remainder of the exposed portion of this course is composed of smaller, more irregular small boulders and large cobbles filled with packed earth, tiles, and fieldstones. To the west we left a large orthostate in place for the time being, which is above a partially exposed block of this wall that has a square cutting (0.1m x 0.08m). After removing the two courses we took elevations on the top of the bottom (3rd) course-85.95. Photographs were taken of the possible threshold and orthostate in relation to the possible surface 5915 to the northwest. Later we decided to remove the large orthostate to reveal the full length of wall 10076. The bottom of the large orthostate had a long rounded cutting 0.15m wide running the length of the bottom of the stone (0.5m). Upon exposing 5919, we began to question if 5919 in order to determine if there is a cobble foundation under this area. There are cobbled foundation west of here and under 10076, almost identical to those in 10077, which led us to conclude that 10077 is not a threshold after all, but is more likely a foundation of stone and cobbles for a post or arch corresponding with the foundations under 10076 (5957), on either side of threshold 5919. Later notes: We removed the two courses of the wall to the level of the top of wall 10077 in order to determine if the bottom course under this wall contains a threshold associated with a possible surface 5915. One of the stones in these top two courses was identified as part of a Voussoir by its curving. Another two stones were identified as parts of a drain with water proof mortar. | ||
| Context Pottery: | Fineware. ww plain (700-1120)1 bodysherd. ; Cooking ware. triangular rim stew pot (1100-1270)1 rim. ; Fineware. premedeval4 bodysherds. ; Fineware. coarse incised, slipped style VI (1200-1220), plate. 1 bodysherd. | |
| Pottery Summary: | 6 frag(s) 0.03 kg. (0% saved) fineware. | |
| 53 frag(s) 0.56 kg. (0% saved) coarseware. | ||
| 18 frag(s) 0.24 kg. (0% saved) cooking ware. | ||
| Period: | Frankish (1210-1458 AD) | |
| Chronology: | Late 13th | |
| Grid: | 279.92-276.59E, 1026.5-1027.2N | |
| XMin: | 276.59 | |
| XMax: | 279.92 | |
| YMin: | 1026.5 | |
| YMax: | 1027.2 | |
| Site: | Corinth | |
| City: | Ancient Corinth | |
| Country: | Greece | |
| Masl: | 85.21-86.6m. | |
| References: | Images (5) Coin: 2009 2 Coin: 2009 7 |
|
Show Everything (259,852) Publications (1,214) Reports (75) Places and Monuments (297) Plans and Drawings (2,887) Images (88,930) Objects (70,348) Coins (18,459) Notebooks (443) Classifications Sign in Provide feedback |
|
