Sequencing the EH II 'Corridor Houses'Author(s): Joseph W. ShawReviewed work(s):Source: The Annual of the British School at Athens, Vol. 102 (2007), pp. 137-151Published by: British School at AthensStable URL: http://www.jstor.org/stable/30245248 .Accessed: 12/03/2012 08:18

Your use of the JSTOR archive indicates your acceptance of the Terms & Conditions of Use, available at .http://www.jstor.org/page/info/about/policies/terms.jsp

JSTOR is a not-for-profit service that helps scholars, researchers, and students discover, use, and build upon a wide range ofcontent in a trusted digital archive. We use information technology and tools to increase productivity and facilitate new formsof scholarship. For more information about JSTOR, please contact support@jstor.org.

British School at Athens is collaborating with JSTOR to digitize, preserve and extend access to The Annual ofthe British School at Athens.

http://www.jstor.org

SEQUENCING THE EH II 'CORRIDOR HOUSES"

In two studies of the so-called EH21 II 'Corridor Houses',3 I proposed that inherent in their remarkable plans was evidence for their development from at least one axially arranged rectangular structure4 into complex two-storeyed buildings with stairways set in corridors along each side of their lengths. Basic to the hypothesis was the presence of 'incomplete corridors' projecting out from the sides of some of the earlier examples, one such appendage

A preliminary version of this article was the subject of a talk given on 8 Jan. 2005 at the AIA/APAjoint Annual Meeting in Boston. For various kinds of help in the process of research, I am much indebted to Vassilis Aravantinos, Lydia Berger, Daniel Pullen, Kiki Psaraki, Jeremy Rutter, Maria C. Shaw, Petros Themelis, and, especially, Martha Wiencke.

Special abbreviations: Aravantinos 1986 = V. Aravantinos, 'The EH II fortified

building at Thebes: some notes on its architecture', in Hagg and Konsola 1986, 57-63.

Felten 1986 = F. Felten, 'Early urban history and architecture of ancient Aigina', in Hagg and Konsola 1986, 21-28.

Higg and Konsola 1986 = R. Higg and D. Konsola (eds), Early Helladic Architecture and Urbanization (SIMA 76; Goteborg, 1986).

Kalogerakou 1997 = P. Kalogerakou, 'Tn7rot OtKttO'AV trg Hptbtjsqg Enrofl Tou0 XcaXKo6 nrv FTlV slot6vvnoo', HpaKrTKa rov E' AzeOvo3g Evvevpiov He2orovvrinaKoa)v wrovd)cv, 2f;er. 1995 (Athens, 1997), ii. 116-28. Kalogerakou 1999 = P. Kalogerakou, 'Ta F-Iptzo.laXXtud

II "OtKo6o80lga ra g8 Atap6p6oug,": 7UpoTdastl yta TfI XFartoupytd Kat z v flg(YtTd Ioug,' in I. Kilian-Dirlmeier (ed.), Eliten in der Bronzezeit: Monographien des Romisch- Germanischen Zentralmuseums, 43 (Mainz, 1999), 87-101.

Kalogerakou 20oo3 = P. Kalogerakou, 'H eqp6dvitCn Tg epcagtlK1g o'd6ag "AIczavTi I" CTOUg HIp) TosCXXta6tlog

otKcitooTg', in A. Vlachopoulos and K. Birtaka (eds), Apyovabrqg: A Volume in Honor of Professor Christos Doumas (Athens, 200oo3), 191-210.

Karagiorga 1971 = T. G. Karagiorga, 'AKoiPtitla', A. Delt. 26 (1971), 126-9.

Pullen 1986 = D. J. Pullen, 'A "House of Tiles at Zygouries"? The function of monumental Early Helladic architecture', in Hdigg and Konsola 1986, 79-83.

Pullen 1990 = D. J. Pullen, 'The Early Bronze Age village on Tsoungiza Hill, ancient Nemea', in P. Darque and R. Treuil (eds), LHabitat igden prehistorique (BCH supp. g19; Paris, 1990o), 331-46.

Pullen 20oo5 = D.J. Pullen, The Early Bronze Age Village on Tsoungiza Hill (Nemea Valley Archaeological Project, 1; Princeton, 200oo5).

Shaw 1987 = J. W. Shaw, 'The EH II "Corridor House"-development and form', AJA 91 (1987), 59-79.

Shaw 1990 =J. W. Shaw, 'The EH II "Corridor House": problems and possibilities', in P. Darque and R. Treuil

(eds), L'Habitat egeen prehistorique (BCH supp. 19; Paris, 1990), 231-54-

Shaw 2oo3 =J. W. Shaw, 'Palatial proportions: a study of the relative proportions between Minoan palaces and their settlements', in K. P. Foster and R. Laffineur (eds), Metron: Measuring the Aegean Bronze Age (Aegaeum, 24; Li&ge and Austin, TX, 200oo3), 239-46.

Themelis 1970o = P. G. Themelis, "lHpmoroeFXQu6tK6v ltyapov ig AKop3itta Mc(rnlvTij'aq", AAA 3 (1970), 303-11.

Themelis 1984 = P. G. Themelis, 'Early Helladic monumental architecture', AM 99 (1984), 335-51.

Walter and Felten 1981 = H. Walter and F. Felten, Alt- Agina iii. 1: Die vorgeschichtliche Stadt: Befestigungen, Hiiuser Funde (Mainz, 1981).

Wiencke 1989 = M. Wiencke, 'Change in Early Helladic II', AJA 93 (1989), 495-509.

Wiencke 2000ooo = M. Wiencke, Lerna, a Preclassical Site in the Argolid: The Architecture, Stratigraphy, and Pottery of Lerna III (Results of Excavations by the American School of Classical Studies at Athens, 4; Princeton, 2ooo).

2 For EH settlement architecture in general, informative discussions are to be found in Hagg and Konsola 1986, including articles by Felten and Pullen. Since then there have been significant additions (Kalogerakou 1999; Pullen 1990, 200oo5; Themelis 1984; Wiencke 1989, 2ooo; and others). Of some interest is an article by S. Harrison, 'Domestic architecture in Early Helladic II: some observations on the form of non- monumental houses', BSA 9go (1995), 23-40, that addresses an apparent odd gap between the small and the larger EH buildings, the latter discussed here. Harrison attempts to show that some of the poorly preserved 'small' buildings were actually much larger.

3aShaw 1987; 1990. 4 Recently Dan Pullen has made a strong case that the well-built House A at Tsoungiza may be such a progenitor for the corridor-house building type. In favour of this possibility is the arrangement of the building's doorways, and also the probable central support at its entrance way, above which there may have been a balcony. According to Pullen, the building dates to EH II Developed Phase 1 at Tsoungiza, or Lerna III A late-III B early, which probably makes it earlier than any of the corridor houses discussed herein. For details of construction and dating see Pullen 1990, 338-40, but especially now Pullen 200oo5, ch. 5, passim. For an earlier reference on my part to the possibility see Shaw 1990, 190-2.

138 SHAW

strongly suggesting the housing for a stairway (Space 1 in the so-called 'Fortified Building' at Thebes in FIG. 1).5

My original impression was that, like the House of the Tiles at Lerna (FIG. 2),6 the first such building discovered, which was named after the roof tiles found fallen in and around it, all corridor house roofs were protected by tiles. Much to my surprise was the realization that there was no mention of roof tiles in the excavation report on the building at Thebes.7 Presumably, then, there were no tiles.8 Of particular importance in this case is that not only is the Theban building typologically very early on architectural grounds, but its ceramic context is also an early one for Thebes (Thebes A,9 for which see TABLE 1). Moreover, the Theban building underlies a habitation layer with Lefkandi I pottery style, the latter typical of a later phase in the EH II sequence.'0 As a consequence, the building becomes the earliest datable corridor house discovered so far, and may serve as a kind of anchor, even if only temporary, at the beginning of the sequence." This prompts one to ask, since roof tiles were not used in the Theban structure but are found in other corridor houses, whether tiles were introduced on buildings (or on corridor houses in particular) some time during rather than before the development of this architectural style. If so, then the lack or presence of roof tiles may help indicate a building's relative date, as is the case when we consider the Archaic Period in later Greek architecture.

For a consideration of EH roof tiles, by far the most informative and best-published site is Lerna.'2 There the roofs of the two successive monumental buildings, Building BG and the House of the Tiles, published splendidly by Martha Wiencke, were protected by terracotta and schist tiling (FIGS. 2-5). At least in the case of the latter, hefty schist slabs projected out over the eaves, a sophisticated solution.13 These two buildings were constructed, respectively, during ceramic periods Lerna III C and III D (see TABLE i). Before they were built, however, both schist and terracotta tiles were known, having been introduced at the site some time towards the end of Lerna III B or the beginning of III C, although they cannot be associated with a particular structure.'4 The period may be subsequent to the introduction of terracotta tiles at Tsoungiza near Nemea.'5

5 Aravantinos 1986, passim. SWiencke 2000ooo, passim. 7 Aravantinos 1986. This was first pointed out by

Wiencke 2ooo, 650. 8 Aravantinos, the excavator, confirmed their absence

recently (pers. comm.). 9 J. Rutter, 'Review of Aegean prehistory II: the Prepalatial Bronze Age of the southern and central Greek Mainland, with addendum (1993-1999)', in T. Cullen (ed.), Aegean Prehistory: A Review (AJA supp. 1; Boston, 2001oo), 95-156, at lo6, 114.

SE. A. French, 'Archaeology in Greece', AR 37 (1990- 1), 34.-

The Theban building also supports the theory that stairways were added alongside ground floor rooms in order to provide access to a second floor. Wiencke 2000ooo, 301, for instance, noted that it had not been proved by ceramic or stratigraphic evidence that 'buildings with incomplete corridor spaces on the long sides were necessarily earlier than those with completed corridors'. Now the Theban structure establishes the precedent, as Akovitika A may if our argument below for its predating Akovitika B is accepted.

" Wiencke 2000.

'3 Ibid. 270. Kilian has noted a similar arrangement for the related corridor-like EH II building, the Rundbau, at Tiryns; see K. Kilian, 'The Circular Building at Tiryns', in Hiigg and Konsola 1986, 65-71, at 67.

14 Wiencke 2ooo, 642; at p. 197 she describes in detail how fine, thin terracotta tiles were replaced eventually by the coarser type used in the House of the Tiles. Pullen 1986, 8o has noted both thin and thicker tiles at Zygouries, equivalent in date to Lerna III 'mature' C phase (Wiencke 2oo000, 656 n. 1). In their analysis of the Lerna tile fabrics, Shriner and Murray have recently pointed out that the earlier, 'finer' tiles of micaceous clay were inferior to the later, coarser ones of the alluvial clay still used in modern times for making roof tiles. See C. M. Shriner and H. H. Murray, 'Explaining sudden economic change at Early Helladic Lerna: a technological paradigm', in I. C. Druc (ed.), Archaeology and Clays (BAR S942; Oxford, 2ool), 1-16, at 9.

'5 Pullen 200oo5, during Lerna's Late III A to Early B, the

period of House A at Tsoungiza, a building that may have been tiled; Wiencke 2ooo, 645. As mentioned in the text, on various sites roof tiles appear towards the end of Lerna

SEQUENCING THE EH II 'CORRIDOR HOUSES' 139

4

A OIDIPODOS 05

OIDIPOOsO 5m

B

rli f.

i

0 5 M.

C I/

FIG. i. EH II Fortified Building at Thebes, with (a) first- and (b) second-phase plans (after Aravantinos 1986, FIGS. 53-4), and (c), conjectural restored plan (after Shaw 1990, FIG. 3).

Space 1 probably contained a stairway.

140 S HAW

40 4b 5 6 7 f 12 8 Z - 9 -0 IO II

2 2

section 2-2

section I-I

0 5 10 M

J.W.S. 1986

FIG. 2. Lerna, the House of the Tiles: (a) plan adapted fromJ. L. Caskey, 'Activities at Lerna, 1958-1959', Hesp. 28 (1959), 202-7, pl. 45 b; (b) conjectural plan of the upper storey,

with sections below (after Shaw 1987, FIG. 3).

The earliest, formative period of the corridor houses, the period of the Theban building, is approximately that of late Lerna III B. The then-emerging architectural style, which led to the construction of Building BG during the subsequent Lerna III C period, probably developed over a relatively short period during which communities and areas were in contact

SEQUENCING THE EH II 'CORRIDOR HOUSES' 141

TABLE 1. Chronological chart suggesting EH II 'Corridor House' development.a

EH II Early (2650-2450/2350) Thebes Group A

EH II Late (2450/2350-2200/2150) Thebes Group B Lefkandi I (Kastri Group)

SITES Akovitika Kolonna

Lerna

Thebes

Tiryns

LERNA IIIB

No schist or tc roof tiles before late in Lerna III B; the III B tiles are not attributable to a

particular structure 'Fortified Building'. No tiles. Thebes ceramic Group A

LERNA IIIC

Akovitika A. No roof tiles Kolonna II. Haus am Felsrand. Tc roof tiles Building BG, possibly first with schist, then later also with tc roof tiles; tc tiles on fortifications and elsewhere

Lefkandi I layer above Theban 'Fortified Building'

LERNA IIID

Akovitika B with schist roof tiles Kolonna III. Weifes Haus. Tc roof tiles. Lefkandi I pottery House of the Tiles with tc and schist roof tiles, the latter along the north and south eaves

Rundbau, with tc tiles, and schist tiles on eaves

tc = terracotta The approximate chronological equivalents at the top of the table are taken fromJ. Rutter, 'Review of Aegean prehistory II: the Prepalatial Bronze Age of the southern and central Greek Mainland, with addendum (1993-1999)', in T. Cullen (ed.), Aegean Prehistory: A Review (AIA supp. 1; Boston, 2001), 95-156, at 106 table 2.

and in the process of influencing each other.'6 The known geographical range of such buildings, from Boeotian Thebes to Aegina in the Saronic Gulf, from Lerna in the Argolid to Messenian Akovitika near Kalamata, is already impressive; the presence of a similar sophisticated architectural style over such a large area can be explained only if one posits cultural interchange. This interchange must have involved decisions by those in charge to 'create tradition', in effect, through the emulation of architectural form.

In connection with this development of the style it is worth considering the question of roof tiles at Akovitika, a rescue excavation with at least three periods of excavation activity.'7 When

III B, remain in use into Lerna III D (the House of the Tiles is surely one of the later examples), and disappear not long afterwards, when apsidal houses became the norm and the corridor-house type of building vanished. During the stated period of use, perhaps to be extended as excavation continues, tiled buildings appear to have been rather common. Kalogerakou 1999, 94, also n. 25, and Wiencke 200ooo, 650 n. 8 have provided documentation based on excavation and survey, especially of sites in Attica, Boeotia, the Corinthia, the Argolid, and the Hermionid, among which are twenty-one with terracotta tiles (Orchomenos, Raphina, Kolonna, Askitario, Koropi, Rouph, Perachora, Tsoungiza, Zygouries, Berbati, Makrovouni, Lerna, Tiryns, Asine, H. Dimetrios Lepreou, as well as six sites in the Hermionid). Far fewer sites (five) had schist tiles: Rouph, Tsoungiza, Lerna, Tiryns, and Akovitika. Perhaps this is partly due to

the process of surface survey, for schist occurs naturally and therefore might not attract attention, whereas terracotta tiles are obviously manufactured artefacts and would be selected out. Of the five sites with schist tiles, all but Akovitika had terracotta slabs as well. Akovitika thus appears to be the only site with exclusively schist tiles. At at least two sites (Lerna, Rouph), some of the schist slabs were pierced, presumably so that they could be attached to the eaves. Wiencke (2o00oo, 650) comments that the amenity of tiles may perhaps not have been restricted to elite constructions, but that it is also possible that tiles were used on structures closely related to corridor houses, such as fortifications or storerooms, or for some other special purpose.

16 Of course there might have been a predecessor to Building BG at Lerna itself. See also Wiencke 200oo0, 192.

7As reported especially in Themelis 1970, 1984; G. A.

142 SHAW

(a) (b) smooth side

IDI

0 10 cm,

' lC I...S C 3

0 ocm,. Ti

(c) (d) T5? 7 T28 0 2 5cm. T16

. ..7....white red

//, schist

//// tile T34 T18

FIG. 3. Lerna: (a) early fine terracotta tile; (b) pierced schist tile; (c) later, rougher terracotta tiles laid out as if on the roof of the House of the Tiles; (d) restored section of eaves of

the House of the Tiles (after Wiencke 2ooo, 199, 272, 260, and 307 respectively).

SEQUENCING THE EH II 'CORRIDOR HOUSES' 143

\ \ \ \ \

\\

\%

' \

BUILDING 80

PNov 199

__ __ _ __ __ _ __ __ _ _

\V

TUILDTILES

1 $

- 94.

,o *s

''p\

FIG. 4. Lerna, plan showing the House of the Tiles (left) above earlier Building BG (right) (afterJ. L. Caskey, 'Activities at Lerna, 1958-1959', Hesp. 28 (1959), 202-7, at 203 FIG. 1).

first discovered along the south-western flank of the single building excavated at the time, the schist tiles found were, logically, associated with that building, now called 'Megaron A' (FIG. 6).'8 Later, however, another building ('Megaron B') was excavated just west of A, next to the same spot where the schist tiles had been found.19 Similar examples were recovered during the later excavations, especially alongside the southern flank of B. The excavator, Theodora Karagiorga, associated the pottery and character of Megaron B with those of Lerna BG.21 If

Papathanasopoulos, 'AKop3inta Kaarcaqtc', A. Delt. 25 (1970), 177-9; and Karagiorga 1971.

1" Themelis 1970o, 307, 311, shown in his pl. 4 and connected with the 'prothyron'. Papathanasopoulos (n. 17), 178, later also found tiles in the same general area.

'- Karagiorga 1971, 128. 2 Ibid. 126-8. Concerning the pottery, Wiencke 2000oo,

656 n. 1 suggests 'nothing before later Lerna III, Phase III C'.

144 SHAW

2 3 4 5 --4--k

I I F I --v-H r~

II I Ii II I

L..~. ~ I I I -- I I I

-"t-h II II

1 II I I I

I I II I I I II I

I I I 1

H

I

o 5m.

FIG. 5. Lerna, restored plan of Building BG (after Wiencke 2000, FIG. I. 102 a).

that approximation is correct, then the use of tiles at Akovitika began as late as Lerna's period III C, perhaps somewhat later than at Lerna itself.

Tiles, therefore, cannot be associated with Megaron A at Akovitika." The significance of this depends on whether A is earlier or later than B. If A is earlier than B, then tiles may not yet have been introduced at the Akovitika site when A was built. Coupled with the undeveloped plan of A (despite its grandiose proportions), this would strengthen an argument for the gradual introduction of tiles to the corridor house form. If, on the other hand, A proves to be later than B, then A's irregular plan as compared with more developed structures might be explained as a stylistic regression.22

" This has now been confirmed by its excavator Petros Themelis (pets. comm.).

"22 One might note here, however, that Megaron A has at least one characteristic not shared by other such

SEQUENCING THE EH II 'CORRIDOR HOUSES' 145

LII A

FIG. 6. Akovitika, general plan (after Karagiorga 1971, 127).

This Akovitika sequence is important, although there are inherent difficulties that complicate the issue. For instance, one cannot compare the floor pottery of the two structures since A's floors were never cleared.23 Also, detailed plans and sections of crucial areas, especially the eastern part of B just to the west of A, are not available, probably because two

buildings, namely a large 'antechamber' 1o.o0 m x 11.50 m (Themelis 1984, 145). Themelis thought that it might have been hypaethral or with a light roof supported by

columns (ibid. 146). Possibly, therefore, a new space (for gatherings?) was added to an old form. See also below.

2j Ibid. 344 n. 57.

146 SHAW

modern farm sheds built over the eastern end of Akovitika B prevented complete clearance of that end of the building (hatched areas in FIG. 6).

Among the excavators who worked at Akovitika, Themelis, who excavated A, thought it was later than B.24 He may have believed this because B's eastern end was so close to the south- western wall of A, for he assumed that B was either destroyed or abandoned when A was constructed. Also, B was set somewhat lower than A. Another consideration may have been the surprisingly large scale of A, significantly larger than B..2 Karagiorga, the excavator of B, stated that 'we cannot say with certainty if the entrance to B was on the western side, or if Megaron B was chronologically earlier than A, as seems quite likely.'26 She thought that B may have been abandoned as the level of the nearby Areos River rose and A was constructed on slightly higher ground.

Now A's southern 'room' should be introduced. This is a very large space, 10 om north- south and 1 1.50 m east-west, so large that it could not have been roofed at the time. Moreover, there is no evidence for a southern wall.27 We are most likely dealing, therefore, with an open court used for gatherings or some other purpose, from which people could enter the large, covered room to the north. Since the space seems court-like, its only load- bearing wall would have been located on the north. Its two side walls would most likely have been low, perhaps only waist-high, or somewhat lower if they could serve as rough benches for those gathering in the court. Thus the morning sun could still have lit the eastern end of Megaron B and any entrance that may once have been there. People could access it through the circa 2.oo m gap left between it and A's court wall.28 In this connection it is most significant, and surely not coincidental, that the high, built wall of Room A5 at Megaron A (in FIG. 7) begins at the same point that B's lower, corridor-like Room B5 was set, most likely so that B's eastern entrance on the lower floor, with a possible window above that, would be open to the east.

Another possibility, of course, is that Megaron B reused a court that had been abandoned when A went out of use, or that the court was shared by A and B when in use simultaneously, even though one was older. In this connection Martha Wiencke andJeremy Rutter have drawn to my attention the parallelism between the presence of courts at Akovitika and Lerna, for both Building BG and the House of the Tiles at Lerna faced an extensive open court paved with pebbles and stones.29 Also, at both sites the original buildings (Akovitika A, Building BG) faced south upon courts. Then, when new buildings (Akovitika B, the House of the Tiles) were constructed, their orientation was changed from north-south to east-west, but with the same courts now being east of the new structures.30 It must also be significant that the Lerna court is actually older than Building BG, which suggests that the paved court area there may have been the site for regional gatherings, which in turn brought about the construction of

24 Ibid. 347. S Actually, A is also larger than either of the corridor

houses at Lerna. 2 Karagiorga 1971, 126. The restored plan published by the excavator

(Themelis 1970, 305 drawing 2) gives the impression that the space was roofed, but he later suggested (1984, 346) that it may have been open to the sky.

2 The 2.0oo m approximation is minimal, as measured on the drawings published by Themelis (1984, figs. 4, 5) and Karagiorga (our fig. 6). As shown in fig. 6, there is a

north-south feature between Megarons A and B. This was identified by Themelis as a paved walkway (1970, 305 drawing 2 e; 308 pl. 3, left), a view reflected in Themelis 1984, fig. 4. Karagiorga 1971, 126 identified it as a (presumably low) retaining wall.

'9 That at Akovitika was bordered, as has been pointed out, on three sides. For the court at Lerna, see Wiencke 200ooo, 56-9, 121, 19go, 642, 646, 649-50.

3o At Kolonna, on the other hand, both the earlier Haus am Felsrand and the later WeiBes Haus were oriented north-south, nor did they 'share' a court.

SEQUENCING THE EH II 'CORRIDOR HOUSES' 147

A A GROUND UPPER

I FLOORS IFLOORS

IJ ! i1i

2/17"

8 -

S ,0 20 25M. BJ W S 1984

FIG. 7. Akovitika, conjectural restored plans of Buildings A and B at ground floor (left) and upper floor (right) levels (after Shaw 1987, FIG. 12).

buildings alongside them.3' Future discoveries of corridor houses may show whether such Lerna/Akovitika court arrangements were normal or unusual. If the former, then the functions of such courts for regional celebratory gatherings32 may go a long way in explaining the purposes and development of the corridor houses themselves.

My argument that Akovitika A is earlier than Akovitika B is based partly on the fact that, stylistically, A's plan, despite its grandiose proportions, still has projections, a sign of an early stage of development, as in the Theban building (FIG. 1).33 The plan of Megaron B plan, furthermore, has the more mature form with the corridor-like spaces incorporated into the overall plan of the building. Secondly, now there is the newly noticed absence of tiles in Building A-all the tiles once thought to belong to A can now be assigned to B. One would expect that an ambitious building such as A, if actually the successor of B, would have

3See Wiencke 2000ooo, 649 concerning the enclosure of ritual space in prehistoric Europe. She also posits the possibility of a predecessor to Building BG (ibid. 192) on the basis of tiles found. At Tzoungiza there was apparently an open court south of House A, reinforcing the idea of open courts associated with these buildings (Pullen, pers. comm.). It has been argued recently by Jan Driessen that the later second millennium Minoan palaces on Crete, which feature large rectangular courts, may also have developed from open court spaces later 'ritualized' by being defined by borders; seeJ. Driessen, '"The King must die." Some observations about the use of Minoan court compounds', in J. Driessen, I. Schoep, and R. Laffineur (eds), Monuments of Minos: Rethinking the Minoan Palaces

(Aegaeum, 23; Liege and Austin, TX, 200oo2), 1-14, at 9. See also Shaw 200oo3, 241 concerning the choice of 'appropriate sites for shared activities'.

32 The apparent importance of open space around such buildings has also been emphasized by M. Nilsson, 'A Civilization in the Making: A Contextual Study of the Early Bronze Age Corridor Buildings in the Aegean' (unpublished doctoral dissertation, Department of Classical Archaeology and Ancient History, G6teborg University, G6teborg, 200oo4), 137.

The southern part of A is quite similar in plan (and orientation) to the Haus am Felsrand at Kolonna (FIG. 8 b), known to predate the more developed Weifes Haus (FIG. 9) discussed below.

148 SHAW

continued the site tradition of permanent roofing.34 Of interest in this respect is that in their overviews both Wiencke and Kalogerakou date B to a relatively late period, but hesitate to place A after B.S5

Concerning overall sequencing of the corridor houses, Wiencke demonstrates in her Lerna volume how, ceramically, the pottery from the House of the Tiles at Lerna defines Lerna Phase III D, the latest phase shown in table 1 and the phase after which the type seems to disappear from the archaeological record. Morphologically, as noted above, the House of the Tiles also corresponds to what may have been the final stage in the development, one in which corridors along the sides of the buildings contained stairways leading up to rooms, most probably with balconies, on the upper floor.36 Among the other corridor houses there are other developed examples, e.g. the WeiBes Haus at Kolonna, to be discussed below, and Megaron B at Akovitika;37 but the point to be made here is that the mature stage epitomized by the House of the Tiles can be taken as our latest 'anchor' in the development. As we have seen already, the earliest point in that sequence is probably the Fortified Building at Thebes. Thus with the Theban building at the beginning, and the House of the Tiles representing the end, we are in a position now to discuss briefly those examples which fall somewhere in between.

By way of introduction, and to some extent summation, we can begin with the internal sequences at Kolonna (Aegina), Lerna, and Akovitika. At Kolonna, the earlier Haus am Felsrand (FIG. 8) belongs to Stadt II,3 with the WeiBes Haus (FIG. 9)39 belonging to Stadt III. Morphologically, as has been shown,4o the WeiBes Haus is more consolidated than its predecessor, and with an exterior rectangular outline that was complete or almost complete.41 Ceramically, Lefkandi I pottery associated with the WeiBes Haus level shows that the latter falls within Lerna III C-Ill D.4V The Haus am Felsrand appears more advanced morphologically, and thus most likely later, than the Fortified Building in Thebes.

At Lerna, Building BG precedes the House of the Tiles and dates to Lerna III C. Morphologically, while the 'corridors', at least those on the south, remain open, along with its entrance, its exterior may otherwise have been a complete rectangle. The House of the Tiles

34 As in the cases of the Kolonna and Lerna building sequences, where each successive building was also tiled. Concerning a tradition of tile roofing at Akovitika, Karagiorga 1971, 128 found plentiful EH II pottery, mud brick, and fallen schist roof tiles south of Megaron B. The tiles and a group of parallel walls reminded her of the walls of Megaron B, suggesting that B was not the only tiled EH II building on the site.

Wiencke 2000ooo, 656 n. 1; Kalogerakou 1999, 89 and n. 12.

Described in Shaw 1987; 1990. 37 Although the Rundbau at Tiryns has another shape,

similar aspects of its design (corridors, tiles, mud-brick construction) and its ceramic date certainly place it in the same mature phase mentioned in the text. Wiencke 1989, 497 n. 6 has thought that the Rundbau was constructed some time before the House of the Tiles. See also P. Haider, 'Zum friuhhelladischen Rundbau in Tiryns', in F. Krinzinger, B. Otto, and E. Wolde-Psenner (eds), Forschungen und Funde: Festschrift Bernhard Neutsch (Innsbruck, 1980), 157-72.

Lydia Berger, who has studied the scanty pottery from the building, has informed me (pers. comm.) that it corresponds with Lerna Phases III C or III D.

39 Shaw 1987; Walter and Felten 1981, passim. 40 Shaw 1987. 41 Wiencke has thought that the WeiBes Haus might be

contemporary with the House of the Tiles but perhaps continued longer in use (1989, 496 n. 6). Pullen (pers. comm.) has pointed out that the outline of the Haus am Felsrand indicates a transitional phase within its plan, namely that NW Space 1o may be a later addition (if present at all), for the west wall of Space 7 is not perfectly aligned with the west wall of Space 6, and that the suggested restoration by the original excavators (Walter and Felten 1981; FIG. 8 a) misrepresents the NW corner of the structure: it should be set back slightly from the north wall.

42 Wiencke 2000, 655, 656 n. 1; Kalogerakou 20oo3, 192 and n. 18.

SEQUENCING THE EH II 'CORRIDOR HOUSES' 149

a 14 FE5

810 0 1 2 3 4 5 M.

J WS 1984

6 I

/1; I/i

100 9 C

... . . . . . ... ._ __.a -"

.... . ...ti. . _;a

FIG. 8. Kolonna on Aegina, Haus am Felsrand: (a) restored plan by excavators with hatched areas indicating actual remains (after Walter and Felten 1981, 13 FIG. 3); conjectural plans of (b) lower and (c) upper

floors; (d) state plan (after Walter and Felten 1981, plan 4). (After Shaw 1987, FIG. 7.)

150 SHAW

,-- ~ a.

- - -- -a---a---a- Fl S0 3 4

5M

N

5 16

17 18

CJW 84e FIG. 9. Aegina, WeiBes Haus: (a) restored plan by excavators with hatched areas indicating

actual remains (Walter and Felten 1981, 15 FIG. 5); conjectural plans of (b) lower and (c) upper storeys (after Shaw 1987, FIG. 6).

and Phase III D pottery at Lerna were at least partly contemporary with Lefkandi I Phase elsewhere.43

At Akovitika, as we have seen, while ceramic evidence cannot help us date Megaron A at this point, circumstantial evidence suggests strongly that it is relatively early. Morphologically, with its incomplete exterior trace (but still more complete than that of the building at Thebes), it is early. I suggest that Megaron B follows A and belongs morphologically and ceramically in Lerna III C if not in Lerna III D.44

43 Wiencke 2000, 655. 44 For the pottery see Wiencke's confirmatory

comments ibid. 656 n. i, and 1989, 496 n. 6.

SEQUENCING THE EH II 'CORRIDOR HOUSES' 151

Thus the examples seem to be arranging themselves in some, even if temporary, order, with the Theban building and the House of the Tiles, respectively, at either end of the spectrum. Of those who have studied the style, Kalogerakou45 has arranged the examples in two groups, early and late:

Early Akovitika, Megaron B(?) Kolonna, Haus am Felsrand Lerna, Building BG Thebes, Fortified Building

Late Akovitika, Megaron A(?) Kolonna, WeiBes Haus Lerna, House of the Tiles

If, instead, we now place the Theban building at the beginning of the series, and the House of the Tiles, along with others, at the end, we can more conveniently and accurately create three categories which might be called 'rudimentary', 'transitional', and 'coalesced', as follows and in TABLE 1.

Stage i Thebes, Fortified Building

Stage 2 Akovitika, Megaron A Kolonna, Haus am Felsrand Lerna, Building BG

Stage 3 Akovitika, Megaron B Kolonna, WeiBes Haus Lerna, House of the Tiles

Of course even this arrangement is liable to change. We should still like to know about the floor pottery from Akovitika A, for instance. Also, as more corridor houses are discovered (for our sample of seven, though unusually informative and exciting, is limited), regional trends will no doubt appear.46 Most importantly, finds made within new structures may bring us to a better understanding of how they actually functioned.47 Then it would be possible really to re- examine the ongoing debate and place the building type with more assurance within its cultural context.

Department of Fine Art, University of Toronto J. W. SHAW

45 Kalogerakou 1999, 89, 101o. An earlier proposal, which attempted to correlate the Akovitika and Lerna structures, was made by Themelis 1984, 347. See also Pullen 1986, 81.

46 Other possible examples of such buildings have been reported. The most likely one is that suggested by Pullen 1986, 8o-1 from Zygouries. It consists of part of a large well-built room and adjacent 'corridor', originally roofed by tiles, and then reused within later houses (House of the Pithoi, Rooms 4, 19-2o), House of the Snailshells. Nilsson (n. 32), 165, 178 has reviewed other possible examples,

among them one at Eutresis and another at Perachora. Both had been suggested by Felten 1986, 25, along with Prosymna and House Y at Zygouries.

47 For reviews of some of the possibilities see Shaw 1987, 78; 1990, 192; also Nilsson (n. 32), 143-5; E. Alram-Stern (ed.), Die iigiische Friihzeit, 2. Serie: Forschungsbericht 1975-20ooo00, ii: Die Friihbronzezeit in Griechenland mit Ausnahme von Kreta (Ver6ffentlichungen der Mykenischen Kommission, 21; Vienna, 200oo4), i. 238-43-