The Earliest Greek Architecture in Corinth and the 7Th-Century Temple on Temple Hill Author(S): Robin F

Home , Isthmia (ancient city), Roof tiles

The Earliest Greek Architecture in Corinth and the 7th-Century Temple on Temple Hill Author(s): Robin F. Rhodes Reviewed work(s): Source: Corinth, Vol. 20, Corinth, The Centenary: 1896-1996 (2003), pp. 85-94 Published by: The American School of Classical Studies at Athens Stable URL: http://www.jstor.org/stable/4390718 . Accessed: 28/08/2012 10:04

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 of content in a trusted digital archive. We use information technology and tools to increase productivity and facilitate new forms of scholarship. For more information about JSTOR, please contact [email protected].

The American School of Classical Studies at Athens is collaborating with JSTOR to digitize, preserve and extend access to Corinth.

http://www.jstor.org RobinE Rhodes

6 THE EARLIEST GREEK ARCHITECTURE IN CORINTH AND THE 7TH-CENTURY TEMPLE ON TEMPLE HILL

As Greece emerges from the Dark Age three hundred and which made it possible to enlarge the supply of years after the collapse of the Mycenaean world, rec- water at those natural points of effluence. It also de- ognizable temple architecture begins to appear in termined the countenance of the city, for this poros various sanctuaries on the mainland, including the limestone quickly became the primary monumental Sanctuary of Hera Akraia at Perachora in the Corin- building material of Corinth (Fig. 6.1). thia, a region of Greece crucial to the early develop- Both the ancients and modern archaeologists as- ment of monumental architecture.' The foundations sociate the city of Corinth with the beginnings of of an 8th-century temple and associated votives were monumental architecture.5 It is no coincidence that found at Perachora, as were fragments of terracotta monumental architecture began on soil that was ev- models, almost certainly representing a building very erywhere underlain by a thick layer of easily cut, fine- similar to the temple, if not the temple itself.2 It is a grained poros limestone. Nor is it simple coincidence long road from the simple rubble and thatch struc- that this early home of monumental stone architec- tures represented at Perachora to the large-scale, solid ture was also a nation of shipbuilders-master carpen- stone, terracotta-tiled Doric temples of the 6th-cen- ters and inventors in wood.6 They soon discovered that tury mainland, but it is a direct road. the poros limestone could be worked with the same In the Corinthia that movement toward a monu- tools and techniques as those employed for wood, and mental conception of architecture begins with a tech- that it could even be used for similar purposes in con- nological advance: in the late 8th century the Co- texts normally reserved for wood. The early repertory rinthians first realized that they were sitting on top of of stone-working tools at Corinth was a simple one, a gold mine of building material, a layer of soft, fine- consisting of a quarry hammer, broad, flat chisels, and grained limestone. This poros limestone (porolithos)- an adze, used-as in carpentry-for the original, petrified from an ancient east-west sand dune-is in rough squaring of architectural members.7 The adze, many ways the prime determiner of both the physical like the flat chisels, often created the distinctive deep- organization and the look of post-Dark Age Corinth:3 grooved, "spatulaed"8surface of early Corinthian po- the "well-watered"character of Corinth4 is in large ros masonry (Fig. 6.2). measure due to the poros, for it is its consistent posi- It was a technological advance-the discovery of tion in the geology of the area, combined with the the potential uses of poros limestone-that started underlying marl, that determines the natural positions Corinthian builders on the road to monumental ar- of the springs around which the early city grew up, chitecture, and each step along the way was accompa-

1. I would like to begin by thanking Charles K. Williams II descriptions of poros, see Rhodes 1987a, p. 229, note 2; see for assigning to me the responsibilityof studying and publish- also Hayward,p. 32 in this volume. At present, an extensive ing the Greek stone architecture of the American School exca- studyof the geological nature of Corinthianlimestone is being vations at Corinth and for all the help and encouragement he carried out by Chris Hayward;see his contribution to this vol- and Nancy Bookidis have given me in my work over the past ume, including his discussion of the term "poros"(p. 32). two decades. I would also like to thank them for the marvel- 4. For the ancient references to this epithet and ancient ac- ously supportive and fertile atmosphere they have created and counts of the springs of Corinth, see CorinthI, vi, pp. 1-4. See maintained at Corinth for students and scholars alike. Finally,I also the article by MarkLandon in this collection (pp. 43-62). wish to express my deep gratitude to them for organizing the 5. Pindar, 01. 13.21-22; Pliny,NH35.43.151-152; CorinthIV, CorinthCentennial Symposium and for inspiringall of us Corin- i, pp. 5-7. thians-through their own example and through their faith in 6. For Corinth'ssignificant role in the earlyhistory of Greek us-to make our papers worthy of the hundredth anniversary shipbuilding, seeJeffery *1976, pp. 146, 159, note 2. of Corinth. 7. The earlytechnology of stone cutting at Corinth has been 2. Perachora*I, pl. 96. examined in Rhodes 1987b, 1987c; Brookes 1981. 3. For a description of this stone and references to other 8. This was Professor Henry Robinson's apt description. 86 ROBIN F. RHODES

_ S ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~S ......

FIGURE6.1. Corinth:Lechaion ~Road, Peirene (from northwest)

FIGURE6.2. 7th-centuryCorinth templeblock, showing FIGURE6.3. Thresholdblock in 7th-centurycomplex on tooling TempleHill (fromsouth)

nied and inspired, at least in part, by their increasing understanding of the structural capabilities of that stone. Contributing to the new "monumentality" in the post-Dark Age architecture of Greece is the practical concern of creating stronger, more long-lasting structures. The Corinthia, in the late 8th and 7th cen- turies B.C.,witnesses a gradually increasing use of cut poros limestone for purposes of structural reinforcement in retaining walls and in traditional half-timbered rubble and mudbrick constructions. Thresholds (Fig. 6.3),jambs, corners, socles (Fig. 6.4)-all positions traditionally occupied by wood in half-timbered construction-are more and more often constructed with stone, either as a replacement for wood or as a FIGURE Socle and cornerblock in smooth bed for it. But the of Corin- 6.4. 7th-centurycomplex superstructure on TempleHill (fromwest) EARLIEST ARCHITECTURE 87

,| t CI TI La ANA 6 C DOV T I Lt Yti,I ?T))L'I1 i'n . tmtP.!~ a itI.k K& UOl. ot*/iI, *ulL* * L i ., _,

T15:'fY L Il l

. 9_ ?.GU~t: ro, p. ,

'Z v

thian walls petrifies only in response to a second major technological advance of the late 8th-early 7th ;d'~~~~~~~~~~' century B.C.: the invention of the terracotta-tiled roof. It may be that this invention took place in Corinth. The earliest tiled roof in Greece that is well enough preserved to be reconstructed in detail is the one that was built for the 7th-century predecessor of the Ar- chaic Temple of Apollo on Temple Hill in Corinth (Fig. 6.5) .' The roof of the temple was hipped on both ends:'1 rather than sloping up to the ridge beam on LLY only the two long sides of the temple, and rather than having vertically faced pediments on each end, the roof was equally sloped on all four sides. The roof covering consisted of heavy combination tiles in which the pan and cover were of a single piece (Fig. 6.5). Ironically, though logically in the light of the early date, these tiles-except at the eaves-are not of the so-called Corinthian style, with pitched cover tiles and flanged pans, but are "Lakonian," the simplest and FIGURE 6.6. Combinationridge tilesfrom early Templeof apparently earliest style of Greek roof tile, consisting Apollo at Corinth of regularly curved pans and covers. The Corinth

9. Debris from the 7th-century temple was first recognized bris and its interpretation are discussed in Rhodes 1984; its re- by Weinberg (1939a, p. 197, note 1; 1939b, p. 595). Further lation to the development of the earliest architecture in the debris was uncovered by Carl and Mary Roebuck and is dis- Corinthia is also discussed in Rhodes 1987b, 1987c. The final cussed by the latter in Roebuck 1955; 1990, pp. 47-49. In sub- publication of the early temple at Corinth is now being pre- sequent excavations, new fragments of the temple were found, pared by the present author. and the temple is discussed in Robinson 1974a; 1976a, pp. 212, 10. In 1994 fragments of both ridge tiles that formed the 216-217, 224-235; 1976b, pp. 244-250; Williams 1978b, pp. transition with the hipped ends of the temple were identified, 346-347; and Robinson *1984. More recently, the temple de- proving that both ends were hipped. 88 ROBIN F. RHODES

FIGURE6.7. Corinth early templeblocks, as sorted in 1995 FIGURE6.8. Corinth early templeblocks, as sorted in 1995 (general viewfrom northeast, with 6th-centuryTemple of (general viewfrom north) Apollo in background) temple tiles are very early, but each tile is molded as a us to restore with confidence the lines of the temple combination cover and pan, and the decorative ar- and the details of its construction (Figs. 6.7 and 6.8). ticulation of pan and cover as separate elements in As a result of this new study, eight major types of neatly each of the combination tiles presupposes even ear- squared poros blocks have been identified in the de- lier Lakonian-type roofs at Corinth, with more con- bris (of which five are reconstructed in Fig. 6.9): foun- ventionally Lakonian, noncombination tiles. dation blocks, unadorned wall blocks, two types of wall The Corinth temple's system of intricately interlock- blocks that anchored a timber framework (Fig. 6.9:c), ing and overlapping terracotta tiles gave the impres- stuccoed wall blocks whose face was finished in a ver- sion of a normal tiled roof, but the consistently fixed tical band to receive a vertical timber of the frame- relationship of pan and cover in the combination con- work (Fig. 6.9:d), two major types of cornice blocks struction added a uniformity of pattern difficult to (Fig. 6.9:a, b), and a corner cornice. accomplish in the more flexible system of unattached It is possible that the Corinth temple walls were pan and cover. The result was a more impressive, more stone from foundation to cornice. It is also possible- monumental roof covering and temple. Elsewhere in the light of the large quantities of decayed mud in Greece a new interest in the monumentalization brick found among the block and tile debris-that of temple architecture had begun to be expressed the lowest courses of the walls served as the substan- through decorative elaboration and increasing scale; tial socle for a mudbrick superstructure.l2 The mud the larger buildings required heavier, more carefully brick in turn would have been capped by a heavy poros constructed walls, and local traditions of neatly cornice course (Fig. 6.10). Squared stone masonry squared, carefully joined, cut-stone foundations and foundations and socles were being employed else- socles had begun to appear. But it seems to have been where in Greece-in large-scale temples with lighter, at Corinth that the roof was first recognized as being traditional roofs of thatch or some other material- an appropriate vehicle for the further monumentali- but the introduction of the new heavy tile roof at zation of the Greek temple, and it is in the 7th-cen- Corinth required additional structural compensation. tury temple of Apollo on Temple Hill that that cru- Most immediately, the roof tiles required that there cial invention can first be documented in Greece and be a substantial system of supporting roof timbers and its immediate consequences analyzed. direct reinforcement where the weight of the roof met In 1994-1995 preparation for the final publication the walls. The result was the invention for the Corinth of the early Corinth temple began with a study of the temple of the stone cornice. remains of building blocks and tiles.11Although noth- The most numerous type of cornice block in the ing of the building remains in situ and the blocks and Corinth temple debris indicates a course into whose tiles are in a fragmentary state, the temple debris is upper surface a series of carefully notched cuttings extensive, and it provides enough evidence to allow was let (Figs. 6.9:b and 6.11). The cuttings served as

11. Due to illness, Henry S. Robinson was unable to prepare Fig. 6.10. Finally, I am grateful to the 1984 Foundation for the the final publication of this building. I would like to express financial support that made it possible for me to undertake my gratitude to Professor Robinson for the hours he spent with this project. The publication of the early temple on Temple me in the late 1970s on Temple Hill explaining his new exca- Hill is planned as a volume in the Corinthseries. vations, and to him and Mrs. Robinson and Charles K. Wil- 12. As suggested in Roebuck 1955, p. 157, and contra Robin- liams II for entrusting to me the publication of the early temple. son 1976a, p. 227. Unfortunately, no trace of in situ founda- I would also like to thank Pieter Broucke for assisting me for tions or bedrock cuttings of this temple is preserved. three weeks on Temple Hill in 1994 and for contributing to EARLIEST ARCHITECTURE 89

7 ...... - , / b

C!d

for anchoring timber framework at base of wall, (d) wall block with stuccoed panel and smooth bed for vertical timber

FIGURE 6.10o. Corinth early temple:reconstruction 90 ROBIN F. RHODES

FIGURE 6.12. Corinth early templ corniceblock with longitudinal bedding (primary)

of the wall at a shallow pitch similar to that of the beddings for the transverse timbers. In addition, the upper surface of the blocks was carved to receive the underside of a pair of eaves pan tiles: where the pans rested, the surface was smoothed, and where the pans curved up in the center beneath a cover and did not rest directly on the block, the original, more roughly finished surface of the block was left intact. The over- hanging portion of the eaves tiles was supported by a combination of the projecting transverse timbers and a fascia board that was attached to the ends of those timbers and faced the eaves for the entire length of the roof (Fig. 6.10). The two types of cornice blocks preserved from the Corinth temple indicate the presence of a system of primary and secondary roof support, the more numerous secondaries normally helping to anchor a pair of rafters (one at each end of the block), the prima- nice and ultimately held the roof in place; the notch- ries set at regular intervals among them and supporting prevented the transverse timbers from pushing ing a single, centered rafter (Fig. 6.10). In other words, out of the wall on its exterior face (Fig. 6.10). These a secondary cornice block with a pair of beddings for timbers projected beyond the face of the wall to form transverse beams served as an anchor, while the en- supports for the eaves tiles, and the very slight down- tire weight of a primary cornice block was utilized as ward slope of the timber beds toward the exterior face an unambiguous counterbalance to the weight of a of the wall (no steeper than 1 : 10) effected a simple single rafter. Thus, at regular intervals the roof was drip for the projecting eaves timbers. reinforced by means of more securely supported For the most part, the spacing of these transverse rafters. beddings corresponds to the spacing of the cover tiles Systems of primary and secondary support are com- of the roof and, therefore, to that of the rafters: a row mon in hipped roofs of later periods, as, for example, of cover tiles would have been supported by each in some Victorian constructions, where the hip rafters rafter. At regular intervals, however, an intermediate themselves (that is, the diagonal timbers that form rafter was attached to the cornice by another method: the transition between the flanks and ends of the roof it was anchored to a timber that ran the length of the and whose lower ends are supported at each corner block instead of transversely, a timber set into a deep of the building) are thicker in section than the oth- bedding cut along the inner edge of the top of the ers. It is impossible to restore the section of the Corinth block (Figs. 6.9:a and 6.12). These blocks are much hip rafters, but primary supports were used for them. less numerous than the other type of cornice block, Similarly-on the basis of the tile system, which re- but it is certain that they were distributed in the same quires a cover and, therefore, a rafter on the axis of course with the transverse timbers. The upper surface each hip-we can assume primary supports there as of these blocks slopes down toward the exterior face well. Tojudge, however, from the number of preserved EARLIEST ARCHITECTURE 91

whose covering or structure is horizontal or nearly horizontal along the eaves and more steeply sloped above, has traditionally been called "Chinese."Clearly, such was the nature of the underlying structure of the Corinth roof, and its roof tiles were laid accordingly; yet in spite of this, the break in the slope of the roof covering and the consequent visual effect would not have been great, perhaps even negligible, for a slight slope was molded into the upper surface of the eaves tiles themselves, and the pitch of the roof above was remarkably shallow. The significance then of the Chi- nese roof at Corinth lies not so much in its visual effect as in the structural design of the tile support at cornice level, a design different from that of later, FIGURE 6.13. Corinth early templewall blockwith stuccoed Doric buildings. panel and smooth bedfor vertical timber Plug cuttings (Fig. 6.9:c) that anchored timbers at the base of the wall indicate that, in the tradition of primary cornice blocks, they must also have been set half-timbered construction, both faces of the Corinth in intermediate positions on the hipped ends of the temple walls carried a framework of vertical and hori- building, as well as at regular intervals along the flanks. zontal timbers (Fig. 6.10). They were tied to the top This seems to indicate that the primary supports of of the wall via the transverse timbers of the cornice, the Corinth temple were employed not only at points and to the bottom by the wooden plugs, and thus of particular structuralvulnerability, but also as a more served as extra support for the roof, helping distrib- general system of regular roof buttressing. It is pos- ute its weight throughout the entire elevation of the sible that they supported rafters of thicker or wider wall. Finally, wall blocks whose face is roughened and than normal section, but it is perhaps more likely that stuccoed on either side of a smoothly finished band, the perceived advantage of the primary supports lay which received a vertical of the half-timber framework not in the size of the rafters they anchored, but in the (Figs. 6.9:d and 6.13), show that on at least one side reinforcement they provided at regular intervals and of the wall the timbers framed stuccoed panels. It is at strategic positions in the cornice. The system of rein- possible that the stuccoed panels were painted, though forcement in the Corinth roof may, in fact, have been to this point no pigment has been detected.14It should exactly what is preserved-a system of primary and be noted here that the appearance of the upper edge secondary cornice blocks-rather than a system of of these stuccoed panels on the cornice blocks of the primary and secondary rafters. Corinth temple (Figs. 6.9 and 6.10) precludes the The finishing of the primary cornice blocks to re- possibility that the cornice rested on a colonnade. ceive the eaves tiles is additionally significant for the It can be concluded with assurance that the early reconstruction of the Corinth temple, for it confirms temple at Corinth was not Doric and that it did not that, like the beddings for the transverse timbers that have a surrounding colonnade. It was a simple, rect- supported them, the orientation of the eaves tiles was angular, half-timbered building that made extensive essentially horizontal, not pitched like the rest of the use of squared stone masonry, certainly at the base of roof.13 This orientation is reflected in the character the walls and at cornice level, and perhaps in between. of the tiles that formed the transition from the hipped It is impossible to restore the dimensions of the temple ends of the roof to the flanks. For that place special with any certainty, though the size of its individual el- hip tiles were constructed, square tiles which had to ements suggests that it was substantial. We can at least be bent along their diagonal to accommodate the in- say that it was longer than it was wide, for numerous tersecting slopes of the roof (Fig. 6.5). It is a physical ridge tiles are preserved. Whatever its overall measure- impossibility that the two unbenthip tiles found in the ments, it is probably not unreasonable to assume that Corinth temple debris could have formed the transi- the temple's width was a simple fraction of its length, tion between adjacent slopes. They could only have for simple proportions were at the heart of the design rested on the horizontal supports at the eaves of the of the temple's most complex feature, its roof. temple. The widths of each tile and all its component parts In studies of Greek architecture, a roof whose cov- stand in simple proportional relationship one to an- ering or structure is broken at the eaves, that is, a roof other. The logic of these relationships is revealed in

13. As mentioned above, the slope is only great enough to served in the debris of the slightly later 7th-century Temple of form a simple drip for the eaves timbers. Poseidon at Isthmia (Isthmia *I, pp. 33-34). 14. Fragments of painted stucco from wall panels are pre- 92 ROBIN F. RHODES the method of tile design, in which the width of each element is a simple fraction of the construction unit,'5 and the smallest significant measurement is not a mil- limeter or an inch, but the equivalent of ca. 0.085 m (one palm, in ancient Greek parlance). The builders of this early monumental temple were thinking in broad outlines of proportion and dimension, not in the minutely precise terms of the refinement-filled buildings of the Classical period; there was no need. The tiles of the Corinth temple were reproduced in molds, so their measurements were consistent, but the building below required an order of accuracy and precision only great enough to accommodate that roof. The considerable variation in the spacings of the FIGURE 6.14. Isthmia early templeblocks with plug cuttings cuttings for the transverse timbers of the cornice in- and transversebeddings dicates that rather than following a minutely precise, preconceived plan of construction, the overall plan allowed the roof builders a generous leeway within suburbs of Corinth and included the entire Corinthia, which they were free to err and correct as each suc- even beyond. Fragments of virtually identical combi- cessive rafter was set in place. nation tiles (including hip tiles), cornice blocks with In the absence of refinements and any of the ele- notched, transverse beddings, and plug cuttings for ments of a formal architectural canon, the single over- anchoring a framework of half-timbering were discov- whelming determinant of design and appearance in ered at the nearby Corinthian sanctuary of Poseidon the 7th-century Temple of Apollo at Corinth was its at Isthmia. They belong to a slightly later building that roofing system. Thus, besides determining the char- was modeled in almost every detail-perhaps even acter of the walls and the cornice through structural built by the same workmen-on the early Corinth requirement, the roof was also the focus of decora- temple (Fig. 6.14).17 Similarly, fragments of a cornice tive elaboration. This included the careful articula- block with notched, transverse bedding, almost indis- tion of pan and cover on each combination tile; intri- tinguishable from those at Corinth, were discovered cate eaves tiles whose covers are peaked at the lower in the debris from the late-7th-early-6th-century end; and, finally, the colorful glazing of the tiles, which Temple of Zeus at Nemea. This block and the terra- were most probably arranged in vertical stripes.16 cotta remains of the hipped roof it helped support- Since the most characteristic features of the Corinth together with the noticeable lack of any columns or temple have yet to be found (or at least reported) in anything recognizably Doric in the Nemea temple any far-flung Greek context, and since they did not debris-indicate that at this early date the monumen- survive as regular structural features of later Greek tal, nonperipteral style of the Corinth temple ex- architecture, their appearance outside Corinth would tended even beyond the immediate environs of immediately suggest close contact with Corinth and Corinth, to the very edge of the Corinthia.18 its building tradition. In fact, scattered remains at sev- Beyond the edge of the Corinthia, a number of eral other sites indicate that this tradition of early blocks from another late-7th-early-6th-century, non- monumental architecture extended well beyond the peripteral, pre-Doric temple are preserved on the

15. lateral overlap = 1/6 cubit (1 part) been called into question by the present author (Rhodes 1984, cover tile = 1/2 cubit (3 parts) 1987b, 1987c). Subsequently, a restatement of Broneer's views, exposed pan (after laid) = 2/3 cubit (4 parts) including his restoration of a peristyle, was presented by the exposed pan (before laid) = 5/6 cubit (5 parts) Isthmia excavation team (Gebhard and Hemans *1992, pp. 23- exposed tile (after laid) = 11/6 cubits (7 parts) 40; Hemans *1989), but it was published before the present total tile = 11/3 cubits (8 parts) study of the Corinth temple was begun. The remains of the 16. Robinson suggested this possibility on the basis of the Isthmia temple must now be reinterpreted in the direct light of numbers and types of yellow and black tiles (1976a, pp. 233- its immediate predecessor and inspiration, the early temple at 234; also 1976b, p. 249, fig. 9). Other evidence supporting this Corinth, and in the light of its two closely related successors in arrangement will be discussed in detail in the final publication the region, the early temples at Nemea and Mycenae, which, of the temple. like the temple at Corinth, had no peristyle (see below). The 17. The remains of the Isthmia temple were published in Isthmia temple and the scholarship surrounding it will be con- detail by Broneer (Isthmia *I, pp. 1-56, 64, 69-70; summarized sidered in detail in an appendix of the Corinthvolume on the in Broneer *1976, pp. 41-46). His preliminary reports on the early temple on Temple Hill. excavations in the temple precinct appear in Broneer *1953; 18. The fragments of the early Nemea temple are described *1955, pp. 110-122, 128-141; *1958, pp. 24-31, 34-37. Since by Stephen G. Miller in Miller *1979, pp. 81-82; *1980, pp. then, his interpretation of the remains and his suggested re- 183-187; *1981, pp. 51-55. For the cornice block with the trans- construction of a wooden peristyle surrounding the temple have verse bedding, see Miller *1980, p. 185, pl. 38:d. EARLIEST ARCHITECTURE 93

so-called Treasury of Kypselos at Delphi, reputedly constructed by the first tyrant of Corinth.23 The roof cover consisted of a similar system of interlocking combination tiles, and a plug cutting in one of the in situ wall blocks indicates that a framework of timbers was anchored in the base of the wall in the Corinthian manner.24

In the 7th century B.C., a tradition of pre-Doric, monumental stone temple architecture emerges in the Co- rinthia. Its roots clearly lie in earlier traditions of half- timbered rubble and mudbrick construction, and the technique of its stoneworking and even the specific uses of the cut stone are closely related to Corinth's FIGURE 6.15. Hip cover tilesfrom Perachora (left) and venerable heritage of shipbuilding, framing, and car- Corinthearly temple(right) pentry. Increasing awareness of the practical advan- tages provided by poros limestone results in an in- acropolis at Mycenae.19The specific correspondences creasingly pervasive use of cut stone in the fabric of between its building blocks and those of the Corinth early Corinthian buildings, as does an increasing temple are not as close as in the blocks of the temples drive toward architectural monumentality. Through- at Isthmia and Nemea, but their surface finish is simi- out Greece in the 7th century, temples embody con- larly "spatulaed,"20and plug cuttings in several of the scious attempts to monumentalize religious architec- blocks indicate that, as at Corinth, the walls of the ture. The means to that end are various-larger scale, Mycenae temple carried a framework of timber. Simi- heavier masonry, colored tiles, columnar facades, ar- larly,paired cuttings in the upper surface of one block chitectural sculpture. In the 7th-century temple on (like the paired cuttings in the secondary cornice Temple Hill in Corinth neatly squared stone masonry blocks at Corinth) and a deep bedding along the back and impressive scale are used to structural and visual edge of another simple, unadorned, pre-Doric cor- advantage. But most important for the subsequent de- nice block, suggest the possibility that the Mycenae velopment of monumental architecture in Greece is temple roof was reinforced at cornice level by means that the builders at Corinth covered their temple with of the Corinthian system of primary and secondary a new, permanent roof cover of baked clay tiles. With supports. Finally, fragments of combination pan and the introduction of this immensely heavy, intricately cover tiles should be associated with this temple.21 wrought roof, the primary purpose of the temple walls Combination tiles very similar to those from the suddenly shifted from the punctuation of space to the Corinth temple-and including a hip tile-were also support of the roof. As a result, both the structural found in the Corinthian sanctuary of Hera at Pera- and decorative focus of the temple shifted to the top chora (Fig. 6.15).22The context of the Perachora tiles of the walls-for which the builders of the Corinth is unknown, but their size indicates that the building temple invented the heavy stone cornice-and to the (or buildings) of which they were a part was consider- roof itself. ably smaller than the Corinth temple; and the Corin- Here at Corinth, for the first time in Greece, monu- thian profile of the preserved hip tile-with continu- mental size, neat masonry walls, a stone cornice, and ously peaked covers-indicates that its building was a heavy tiled roof are all combined in the same build- constructed somewhat later than the Corinth temple. ing, and with the building of the Corinth temple the A final direct representative of this early Corinthian subsequent course of early monumental architecture style of monumental architecture is preserved in the in the Corinthia and environs is clearly set.

19. For descriptions of the early temple at Mycenae, see Wace ume on the early temple at Corinth. *1964, pp. 84-86, and Klein *1998. 23. Coste-Messeliere *1943, pp. 317 (plan), 321. 20. For a brief description of the tooling and the similarity 24. For similar combination roof tiles at Delphi and their between the tooling of the blocks from the early temples at Co- association with the Treasury of Kypselos, see Le Roy and Ducat rinth, Isthmia, Nemea, and Mycenae, see Rhodes 1987a, p. 232. *1967, pp. 21-28, 39. 21. Klein *1998, p. 289. A fragment of another combination tile, the cover width of 22. The hip tile and one other combination tile from the which is virtually identical to that of the 7th-century temple on same building at Perachora are now in the Corinth Museum Temple Hill, was discovered in the Sanctuary of Demeter and (FC-102, FC-103). They are mentioned in Robinson 1976b, p. Kore on the north slope ofAcrocorinth (FC-105: CorinthXVIII, 247, note 9; *1984, p. 55, note 1; Heiden 1987, p. 21; Roebuck iii, p. 465, no. 68). 1990, p. 49, note 6. They will be published in the Corinth vol- 94 ROBIN F. RHODES

REFERENCES

Broneer, 0. 1953. "Isthmia Excavations, 1952," Hesperia22, Klein, N. L. 1998. "Excavation of the Greek Temples at My- pp. 182-195. cenae by the British School at Athens," BSA93, pp. 247- . 1955. "Excavations at Isthmia, 1954," Hesperia24, 322. pp. 110-141. Le Roy, Ch., andJ. Ducat. 1967. Les terrescuites architecturales: . 1958. "Excavations at Isthmia, Third Campaign, La sculpturedecorative en terrecuite (FdD II), Paris. 1955-1956," Hesperia27, pp. 1-37. Miller, S. G. 1979. "Excavations at Nemea, 1978," Hesperia . 1976. "The Isthmian Sanctuaryof Poseidon," in Neue 48, pp. 73-103. Forschungenin griechischenHeiligtiimern, ed. U. Jantzen, - . 1980. "Excavations at Nemea, 1979," Hesperia49, Tubingen, pp. 39-62. pp. 178-205. Coste-Messeliere, P. de la. 1943. Delphes,Paris. -. 1981. "Excavations at Nemea, 1980," Hesperia50, Gebhard, E. R., and F. P. Hemans. 1992. "Universityof Chi- pp. 45-67. cago Excavations at Isthmia, 1989: I," Hesperia61, pp. 1- PerachoraI = H. Payne et al., Architecture,Bronzes, Terracottas, 77. Oxford 1940. Hemans, F. P. 1989. "The Archaic Roof Tiles at Isthmia: Robinson, H. S. 1984. "Roof Tiles of the Early Seventh Cen- A Re-Examination," Hesperia58, pp. 251-266. tury B.C.," AM 99, pp. 55-66. IsthmiaI= 0. Broneer, TheTemple ofPoseidon, Princeton 1971. Wace, A. J. B. 1964. Mycenae:An ArchaeologicalHistory and Jeffery, L. H. 1976. ArchaicGreece: The CityStates, c. 700-500 Guide,New York. B.C., New York.