HESPERIA 7I (2002) A N EW B RONZE AG E PagesII9-I48 SITE INTHE CO R I NTH IA THE ORNEAIOF STRABOAND HOMER?

ABSTRACT

A newlydiscovered Bronze Age site is reportedat Doratiin the Corinthia, overlookingthe NemeaRiver. Surface material indicates that this was a large Mycenaeansettlement, with structurespotentially well preserved,and that earlierperiods of the BronzeAge arealso represented.The locationof the sitemakes it possibleto identif;rit tentativelyas the CorinthianOrneai men- tionedby Strabo,who implies(contra Pausanias)that this is the site referred to in the Catalogueof Ships.I suggestthat Strabo is correct,and that Dorati mayinfactbe Homer's Orneai. Accepting this identification helps clarilithe logicbywhich sites in Agamemnon'srealm are listed in the Catalogue.

A previouslyunknown Mycenaean site overlookingthe NemeaRiver in the northeasternPeloponnese has recentlycome to my attention.1It is largeand the surfacematerial copious, diverse, and of highquality, yet no mentionof it hasappeared in anyscholarly publication.2 Therefore I offer

1. On November14, 1999,I first forvisiting the sitewith me;and Lolos, (Liondiand the adjacentNemean visitedthe areaof Dorati,north of the Miller,Stroud, and Tzonou for reading plain).It is ca. 11 km northwestof the modernvillage of Soulinari,in the earlierdrafts of this article.I owe a areaof modernSolomos, the western companyof P.Panagopoulos of Der- specialthanks to Herbstfor preparing extentof the EasternKorinthia Ar- veni (nearKiato), who hadlearned of it the accompanyingmaps. Finally, I am chaeologicalSurvey Project, and it is fromlocal residents as the possiblesite gratefillto the anonymousHesperia immediatelyeast of the areaincluded of a Classicaltemple. On September reviewersfor theirsuggestions. in Lolos'stopographical survey of the 20, 2000,I reportedthe site to the 2. The sitehas never been excavated Sikyonia(Lolos 1998). The site is not FourthEphoria of Prehistoricand or systematicallysurveyed. It is approx- mentionedin Blegen1920, Gebauer ClassicalAntiquities in Nauplionand imately5.5 km northof the summitof 1939,Alin 1962,Syriopoulos 1964, fileda draftof this articlewith the Mt. Apesas,the northernlimit of the Wiseman1978, or Sakellariouand ephorat thattime, E. Spathari;in regionsurveyed byWright et al. (1990) Pharaklas1971. It is not includedin Octoberof 2001 I fileda seconddraft forthe NemeaValley Archaeological anygazetteer of Mycenaeansites, such with the currentephor, A. Mantis. Project(NVAP), and 14 km northeast asHope Simpsonand Dickinson I thankthem both for their comments. of the New Nemeavalley, partially sur- 1979,Hope Simpson1981, and, more I wouldalso like to thankN. Bookidis, veyedin conjunctionwith NVAP recently,Isthmia VIII, pp. 469-482, M. Boyd,B. Burke,L. Costaki,J. (urbanarea of AncientPhlius: Alcock andMountjoy 1999, pp. 197-242 Herbst,G. J. Lolos,S. G. Miller,G. 1988and 1991) and now being stud- (Corinthia),which deals only with Sanders,R. S. Stroud,and I. Tzonou iedbyJ. Maran and H.-J. Weisshaar siteswith published pottery.

American School of Classical Studies at Athens is collaborating with JSTOR to digitize, preserve, and extend access to Hesperia ® www.jstor.org I20 JEANNETTE MARCHAND herean introductory description of thesite followed by some observations aboutits topographicallocation and possible identification, in the belief thatit will figuresignificantly in subsequentdiscussions of the number, size,and nature of BronzeAge settlementsin the Corinthia.3

LOCATION AND DESCRIPTION OF THE SITE

Thesite is locatedon topof a bluffonthe eastern side ofthe Nemea River, overlookingthe Silyonianand Corinthiancoastal plains (Fig. 1). This bluffisthe northernmost extension of a ridgeofthe foothills of Mt.Apesas thathas been eroded away on thewest by the Nemea River and on theeast byanother large tributary rema, orseasonal riverbed (Fig. 2, labeledDaveli), so thatit nowextends as an isolated promontory or finger of landstretch- ing towardthe north.The ridgesupports a thicklayer of topsoil,covered withpine trees where it hasnot been cleared, above a stratumof conglom- eraterock. Below this thicklayer of rock,the ridgeconsists primarily of soft marlthat has sufferedsevere erosion on all sidesexcept the south. Consequently,the unsupportedupper conglomerate shelf has broken up 3. This and paperis basedon a number fallenaway at the northern end, and here the ridge now forms a natu- of visitsto the site,alone and in the rallydefensible "acropolis," not unlike that at the similarly sited Aetopetra companyof colleagues.No surveywas fartherto theeast. The site is locatedon thisnatural conglomerate strong- conducted.The presentdiscussion is in noway hold,which at the northernend formsa relativelyflat, double-pronged meantto representthe results plateaumarked by a Greek ofa systematicfield project; its aimis ArmySurvey column at 190masl (Figs. 2-4). tobring Themodern attentionto the site andto toponymis Dorati.4 recommendthat such a projectbe con- A partiallypaved road running from north to southgives access to the ductedin futurebefore more destruc- ridgeand bisects the site;it maycorrespond to the routeof an ancient tioncan occur. road.5On the easternside of thisroad, two vineyards have been planted, 4. Dorati(Nxopaq) is the toponym listedon the GreekArmy onewithin the lastdecades, the otherwithin the lasttwo years (Fig. 2:1 mapof the and2, Corinthia(1:50,000). The localsknow respectively).Rubble and habitation debris (grinding stones, tripod thearea by the legs, nameDarani (Nxa- fragmentsof largestorage jars) from an ancient settlement have been pav), a toponymthat appears on the clearedfrom the vineyards and piled high along the road and the northern GreekArmy map of 1:5000and refers edgeof the cultivatedarea, and the vineyardsthemselves are dense with specificallyto the promontoryat the potteryfragments. northwesternend of the sitewhere To the westof the thesurvey column shown on Fig.2 is road,a relativelyflat field (Fig. 2:3), cleared and located. cultivatedatsome timein thepast, is overgrownwith weeds, but pottery is 5. An ancientroad in thislocation stillvisible on the surfaceand continues to theedge of theplateau. In late andcontinuing south along the crest July2000, when a longsection a meterwide was plowed along the north- ofthe ridgetoward Apesas would westernedge of the plateau,a largeamount of high-qualityMycenaean parallelthe routeon the westernside ofthe NemeaRiver potteryin verygoodcondition was turned up. Below the steep walls ofthe betweenTarsina conglomerate andKoutsi via Stimanga,documented shelf(Fig. 2:4), surface pottery continues down the eroded inLolos slopes 1998,pp. 14() 142.A further of the ridgeto boththe eastand west as faras one cannow safely indicationof the likelihoodthat this descend,but all of this materialcan have been washed or pusheddown routecan be tracedback to antiquity fromabove during clearing of theland: the surface material and the natu- (althoughnot necessarilyall the way raltopography suggest that in thenorth the site was primarily backto the BronzeAge) is the presence confinedto ofpreserved thetop of the two-prongedplateau. Local residents wheelruts along the ridge, reportthat pottery furthersouth above the modernvillage canbe foundin quantityall the way to thechurch of AgiaParaskevi to the ofSoulinari. A NEW BRONZE AGE SITE I2I

Figure 1. Dorati and the Corinthian Gulf plain.J. Herbst

Figure2. Sketchplan of Dorati J.Herbst JEANNETTE MARCHAND I22

Figure3. Dorati fromthe north. The site occupiesthe flat top of the highestplateau in middledistance. Mt. Apesasis visiblebeyond. Photoauthor northwest(Fig. 2:5), on the Soulinari-Vrachatiroad. I havenot been able to investigatethis possibility, but at the church of AgiaParaskevi there is a naturalspring that still provides water year-round. This springmay have beenthe primarywater source for the settlementduring the summer.6 At the southernend of the site,where a narrowmarl ledge connects the conglomerateplateau to the restof the Apesasridge, the situationis slightlydifferent. Here at thehighest point of thesite the plateau narrows andthe conglomerateshelf comes to an end,so thaton the eastand west thereare steep slopes rather than a sheerrock face. Most of thisarea has not been cultivatedand there is a good possibilitythat portions of the settlementare preserved here over a largearea and to a considerabledepth. To the eastof the road,a largestand of thickpournaria, or holm oak, coversa knollconsisting of a largequantity of rubblethat cannot have beennaturally deposited (Fig. 2:6). Where these shrublike trees are pen- etrable,Bronze Age pottery is visible interspersed densely among the rubble. Muchof this relativelyloose material on the surface(presumably debris fromstructures of the settlement)was probably pushed and piled into its presentlocation during the creationof the adjacentroad and vineyard, particularlyat the centerof the standof treeswhere a moundhas been formed. It appearsthat there was a goodreason why the areawas not cleared: sectionsof in situconstruction of considerablesize and depth are visible in the adjacentscarp to the east,beginning at andjust belowthe current surfacelevel. Four large walls, parallel to eachother and perpendicular to theslope of thehill, can be clearlyseen protruding from the present scarp. A seriesof narrowterraces planted with olive trees has been created here (Fig.2:7), descending down the slopebelow the standof oaksand the southernmostvineyard; the walls have been exposed between the levelof 6. Localsalso tell me thatthere used the top of the slope(elev. 211 m) andthe floorof the firstterrace (elev. to be othersprings near the churchthat the firstwall is a solidrubble construction havegone dry only in recentmemory, 203 m). Fromnorth to south, andso it is possiblethat there may have 1.90m in width;it is exposedfor a 5-m stretchfrom just below the top of beenothers closer to the ridgeitself at the slopedown to the levelof the terrace(the floor of whichobscures its one time. A NEW BRONZE AGE SITE I23

Figure4. Conglomerateshelf of the westernpromontory of the site, viewedfrom the east. Photoauthor

Figure5. Conglomerateblocks of a largewall protrudingfrom the southeasternslope, viewed from the east. Photoauthor

possiblecontinuation thereafter). A secondrubble wall of similardimen- sionsand orientation appears in the scarp3 m to the south,followed by a thirdat a similarinterval.7 Immediately to the south,a wall of heavier constructionprotrudes from the scarp,parallel to therubble walls but at a slightlyhigher elevation (Fig. 5). This wall as exposed consists of fivelarge, roughlyshaped conglomerate blocks in twocourses and is justunder 2 m 7. Someof the rubblefrom the in width.The top of theupper blocks is levelwith the modern ground sur- secondwall has been dug out andlitters the terraceat its base;apparently illicit face,but unlike the other walls, this construction only continues to a depth diggersinterpreted the rubbleas pos- of 1.5-2 m.The impressiongiven by these features is thatthe thick rubble siblybelonging to a tomb,but aban- wallsmay have served as foundationsfor a structureconstructed of the donedthe projectafter proceeding a largerblocks above. The presentrate of erosionat this end of the site meteror so into the scarpand finding wherethe conglomeratestratum is not apparentsuggests that the use of thatthe wallstill continued as a solid construction.There are also unmistak- suchlarge foundations was a prudentdecision. ablesigns of illicitdigging at the top of In the scarpbelow the firstterrace of olivetrees, roughly a meterbe- the hill,within the standof holmoaks. lowthe point to whichthe rubblewalls are exposed, another construction I24 JEANNETTE MARCHAND

Figure6. Artifactdensity at Dorati: is preserved,possibly a retainingor foundation wall. Unlike the upper walls, surfacematerial from two areason thisconstruction parallels the scarpand is constructedof medium-sized, the easternslope (sherdshave been roughlyformed conglomerate stones. It is preservedfrom a pointdirectly slightlyarranged but not gathered). belowand to theeast of thenorthernmost rubble wall and continues north Photosauthor. forapproximately 6.5 m;several large conglomerate stones scattered over the terracesnearby probably originate from this wall or thewall of larger stonesabove. In the scarpsand on the ledgesof the terracesbelow these preservedwalls is a high concentrationof pottery,and although there is muchcoarse ware, the proportion of fineware and its qualityare very high. Figure6 givesan idea of thedensity and nature of surfacepottery on these terraces,and Figure 7 an ideaof its quality.8Thus, on the easternslope, structuresare potentially preserved to at least6 m belowthe currentsur- facelevel. The tantalizinglikelihood that architecture is preserved to such a depthis increasedby the thicknessof thewalls, the sizeof someof the conglomeratebuilding stones, the quantity ofthe accompanyingfine ware, and alsoby the discoveryof smallfragments of paintedplaster on the slopesbelow. The potterylittering the terracesand protruding from the scarpsbe- lowthese constructions appears to havewashed down from above prior to Figure7. A largefragment of a thecutting of theterraces. Roughly 70 m belowthe lowest preserved wall, stirrupjar. Scale 1:2. Photo author. theterraces end and the slopeof thehillside is interruptedonly by a large, curvingaccess path cut by modern machinery (Fig. 2:8). In thisarea, con- finedby two large erosion gullies on theeast and west, are several accumu- lationsof stonesthat are not naturallydeposited and cannot be explained bythe forces of erosion.9Most of theseaccumulations are overgrown, dis- turbed,or obscured by soil,but in a fewcases they are surrounded by con- centrationsof potteryand some of the rubbleappears to be stillin situin

8. The photographsaccompanying groupings,they also accurately reflect this articlewere taken to illustratethe the presentstate of the site.These sitefor the Ephoria.It wasnot possible photographsdo not representthe full to movesherds from their positions or rangeof materialat Dorati;full to collectand group sherds by typeor analysisand publication of anyof the date.All materialwas photographed at potteryfrom the site at thispoint its findspotand left at the site;it was wouldbe premature. necessaryto orientsherds to take 9. The areais roughly67 m from advantageof the availablenatural light. eastto west,30 m fromnorth to south, The resultis thatalthough the photo- and150-164 maslin elevation. graphscontain somewhat miscellaneous A NEW BRONZE AGE SITE I25

Figure8. Examplesof LH III Thesecontinue to the presentedge paintedpottery: designs include a somesort of purposefulconstruction. of theravine overlooking the Daveli rema andindicate that activity associ- crestedbird (a: center) andwhorl shells (b:lower le:i). Scale1:2. Photos atedwith the settlementprobably also occurred in thislower area. author. In situconstruction can also be seenon thewestern slope at the south- ernend of the site.Adjacent to the standof oaktrees but west of theroad a smallolive grove has been planted (Fig. 2:9). In the scarpa few meters belowthis grove more in siturubble construction is visible over a horizon- taldistance of atleast 22 m (Fig.2:12). This construction appears in gen- eralto be on a smallerscale than that on theeast and to consistof stepped rubblewalls of smalland medium-sizedstones running parallel to the scarp.That these are also Bronze Age constructions is indicated by the co- piousMycenaean pottery in the soil erodingfrom around the stonesand coveringthe slopesbelow. The nearlycomplete absence of potterylater than the BronzeAge is striking.A few sherdsmay date to the Protogeometric,Geometric, and perhapseven Early Archaic period, but I haveobserved nothing on the surfacethat is Classicalor later.The vastmajority of the readilyidentifi- ablematerial is Mycenaean,and of thismaterial the later phases (through LH IIIB)predominate. Material is alsopresent from earlier prehistoric phases,for example,much EH handmadepottery (and some possibly Neolithic),MH yellowMinyan, and MH or LH I matt-paintedsherds, butthe majority of theidentifiable fragments of fineware are from LH III Mycenaeankylikes and deep bowls, many of whichshow well-preserved designs,including decorative bands, running spirals, whorl shells, rosettes, andfragmentary figures (Fig. 8). Thatthis was a settlementsite is clearfrom the large amount of coarse pottery,such as cups, ladles, and cooking pots, and from the sheer amount . d n

I26 JEANNETTE MARCHAND of looserubble originating from rough walls and structures. Tripod cook- ingpot legs and fragments of grindingstones can also be foundin particu- larlylarge quantities, and I noticedat leastten completegrinding stones fromall areas of thesite in additionto ubiquitousfragments. Also indica- tiveof domesticactivities or industry are the numerous murex and gaidouro- pusshells, and large pithos fragments (Figs. 9-10). Other artifacts include numerouspieces of chert,figurines (Fig. 11), one obsidian blade, and one steatitespindle whorl.10 At thenortheastern end of theplateau, at the edge of oneof thevine- yards,a largepile of clearedmaterial includes a numberof carefilllyworked blocks(Fig. 2:10). To the north,below the upperplateau, many similar large,well-worked conglomerate blocks lie low on the sideof the ravine on the east(Fig. 2:11 and Fig. 12).These probably came originally from the top of the plateau,and most of themdo not differsignificantly from thosestill in situat the southernend of the site(Fig. 5). Amongthe con- glomerateblocks are one or two poros blocks. None ofthese blocks can be datedand there is no immediatelyevident source for the poros stone. Withoutexcavation, the exactsize, nature, and periods of occupation of thesite at Doraticannot be definitelydetermined, but the surfaceindi- cationssuggest that it is potentiallyamong the largest Mycenaean sites yet locatedin the Corinthia.1lI estimate that the top of the plateaualone coversapproximately 46,595 m2.12 This is not the totalarea covered by surfacematerial and it doesnot include any of the areason the slopes,but itis likelyto representthe coreof the site.Extending this estimate to the areacovered with surface pottery and artifacts dating to the BronzeAge yieldsa minimumfigure of 106,000m2. To my knowledge, only at Korakou hassurface material covering a largerarea been reported for a BronzeAge s1te1n ti l1S reglOn.lJ

10. Identicalsteatite whorlsfrom conductedto establishthe parameters onthe dimensionsof the natural theAidonia tombs have been of tenta- surfacematerial. One exceptionis topographicalfeatures on whichthe tivelyinterpreted as beadweights for Tsoungiza in the ArchaiaNemea sitesare located); in all casesthe figures clothing:see Demakopoulou 1996, valley,where the sizeof the Myce- givenare only rough estimates. These pp.66-67, n. 59, fig. 59. naeanoccupation has been estimated figuresmust therefore be usedwith 11. It is virtuallyimpossible at to 75,000m2 by the NVAPteam (see extremecaution, but for the sakeof comparethis site accuratelywith the discussionof MycenaeanNemea illustrationonly, based on Hope Simp- othersthat have been partially at exca- http://river.blg.uc.edu/nvap/ son1981, the relativeextent of surface vatedor identifiedin surveyby the MycNVAP.html).The onlypublished materialat majorMycenaean sites in fullextent of surfacescatters. The fol- estimatesof size forthe majorBronze thewider region can be listedas fol- lowingfigures are only roughestimates Agesites long known and in somecases lows:Gonia 87,500 m2; Kleonai meantto providesome basisfor dis- partiallyexcavated in the regionare 75,000m2; Melissi 40,000 m2; cussion Perdi- andare not to be takenas a thosein Hope Simpson1981. Many of karia25,500 m2; definitive Vasiliko/AncientSi- quantificationof the mate- hisfigures are based on observations kyon24,050 m2; Aetopetra rialat the site. 22,500m2; madein the late 1950s(the samenum- Zygouries15,300 m2; Agia Irini 12.The surfacearea was berscan measured be foundin Hope Simpson 15,000m2; Mylos Cheliotou 6,375 m2. witha handheldGPS unit. and Dickinson1979 and to a certain SeeHope Simpson1981, pp. 34 (A57, 13. Hope Simpson(1981, p. extent 33) in Hope Simpson1965), and Gonia;A59, Perdikaria;A56, Aetope- estimatesthat the settlementat the Kora- criteriaused for the estimatesare tra;A55, MylosCheliotou), 35 (A62, koucovered an areaof 225,000 not m2.For alwaysmade explicit (in somecases Kleonai;A63, Zygouries),36 (A70, mostof the largestsites in the they Corin- appearto be basedon the fullex- Vasiliko;A66, AgiaIrini), and 37 (A73, thia,no extensivesurveys have been tentof surfacematerial and in others Melissi). A NEW BRONZE AGE SITE I27

Figure9. A typicalassemblage, includingmurex shell and coarse waretripod cooking pot leg (lower left). Scale3:8. Photo author.

Figure10. Andesitegrinding stone and pithos sherds.Photo author

Figure11. Figurinefragments: a) quadruped;b) Phi, backview (on right).Scale 1:2. Photos author. a I28 JEANNETTE MARCHAND

Figure 12. One of the largeconglom- erateblocks at the bottom of the Daveli rema to the east of the site. Photo author

Surfacearea is, however,not necessarily an accurate indication of this site'spotential size or significance; more indicative is theparticularly large amountand density of identifiablepottery dating to the Mycenaeanpe- riod.A roughidea of the amountof surfacematerial can be givenby the followingobservation: on thesoutheastern terraces alone, I stoppedcount- ingthe readily recognizable Mycenaean sherds when I reached2,000, having onlyprogressedpart ofthe way down the slope (this area is notincluded in theestimate of the sizeof the sitegiven above). In surveysof the north- easternPeloponnese, a total of morethan 200 sherdsrepresents a signifi- cantMycenaean component at a site.l4In manyareas of Dorati,more than 200Mycenaean sherds can be foundwithin an area of a fewsquare meters, andthe densityof sherdsover the entiretop of the plateauwhere the surfaceis visibleis consistentlyhigh. As notedabove, the surfacematerial clearlyindicates that this is a settlementsite, and large-scale construction isat leastpartially preserved. No Mycenaeansettlement on a scaleto comparewith the citadelsof theArgolid has yet beenlocated in the Corinthia,and only a few large- scaleMycenaean settlements have been located or excavated.Although sitesin the regionwith LH surfacepottery are numerousand several

14. Mountjoy(1995, p. 52) reports naeanNemea" on the NVAPWeb site beestimated as muchsmaller than the thatonly 1,241 Mycenaean sherds (all (above,n. 13). Wellsand her colleagues totalscatter area. The remainingsites phases)were recognized in the south- reportfrom the Berbati-Limnessurvey listedare smaller. For an overviewof ernArgolid survey. The largestsite (F5) (Wells1996, pp. 123-175)one find- surveysin the region,see Rutter1993, produced257 sherds.NVAP reports spot(no. 428, p. 126) consistingof 900 table1, pp. 748-749,ns. 8-15. The ca- twenty-fivesites with Mycenaean ma- Mycenaean sherdscontained within an veatstated in n. 11 aboveis particularly terialfrom their survey (not including areaof ca.30 x 30 m, andanother (no. relevanthere, since only a veryrough theexcavated areas, Tsoungiza and the 14,esp. pp. 133, 166) extendingover senseof the relativesize of Doratican Nemeansanctuary), more than half 60,000m2 at which269 artifactswere beobtained by comparinglimited on- consistingof fewer than five sherds; the collected;they notethat this spreadis siteobservations with the findingsof fewlargest sites are categorized as con- muchlarger than anyof the othersand formalsurveys employing varied meth- sistingof"over 200" sherds. See "Myce- thatthe core of the site shouldprobably odsof collectionand quantification. A NEW B RONZE AGE SITE I29

Figure13. Dorati and other sites in the northeasternPeloponnese. cemeteriesand tombs of theMycenaean period have been excavated, most J. Herbst oftheBronze Age sites that have been excavated (such as Gonia, Aetopetra, MylosCheliotou, and Agios Gerasimos) have so farproduced more exten- siveEH orMH components(Fig. 13).15 The predominance of Mycenaean potteryat Doratiis thereforeof particularinterest. In thewider area, only Korakouhas so farproduced evidence for an extensive Mycenaean settle- ment:foundation walls for numerous small LH III houses,a fortification wall,indications of largerstructures (a massive threshold block and part of

15. Note thatnone of the siteshave Blegen1920, pp.3-4; CorinthI.1, CorinthI.1, p. 108;Corinth XIII, p. 6; beenextensively excavated. At Gonia, p. 108;Syriopoulos 1964, p. 86;Sakel- Sakellariouand Pharaklas 1971, ap- despitethe largesurface scatter (see lariouand Pharaklas 1971, appendix II, pendixII, p. 19;Hope Simpsonand above,n. 13),trial trenches turned up p.21; Wiseman1978, p. 99;Hope Dickinson1979, p. 62, no.A53; Hope onlyeroded traces of the Mycenaean Simpsonand Dickinson 1979, p.62, Simpson1981, p. 34, no.A55; Isthmia settlementand a fortificationwall: no.A54; Hope Simpson1981, pp. 8 VIII,p. 470, no. 10, andp. 471. For Blegen1920, p.6; Blegen1930-1931; (mapA),10 (fig.1),34, no.A56; (but AgiosGerasimos, see CorinthI.1, Sakellariouand Pharaklas 1971, appen- notethat it is incorrectlyplaced on the p. 109;Alin 1962,p. 57; Sakellariou dixII, p. 16;Rutter 1974; Hope Simp- mapsas overlookingthe Longopota- andPharaklas 1971, appendix II, son andDickinson 1979, p.63, mos River:it is actuallylocated further pp.20-21;Protonotariou-Deilake no.A57; Hope Simpson1981, p.34, east.For the correctlocation see Blegen 1974;Wiseman 1978, p. 99;Hope no.A57; Isthmia VIII, p. 474, no.13. 1920,pp.2-3, fig. l); IsthmiaVIII, Simpsonand Dickinson 1979, p. 63, ForAetopetra, see Hatzepouliou- p. 470, no. 8. ForMylos Cheliotou, see no.A55; Hope Simpson1981, p.33, Kallire1984 (mostrecent excavations); Blegen1920, p.3; Blegen1921, p.116; no.A53; Isthmia VIII, p. 469, no. 5. I30 JEANNETTE MARCHAND

a fresco),as well as burials.l6 At Zygouriesin the AncientKleonai valley, Blegenexcavated an impressive two-level LH IIIB:1-2structure with fres- coesand an extensivestore of potteryas well as a numberof burialsat a locationnearby; only a portionof the hillwas exposed.l7 In the adjacent AncientNemea valley, the Mycenaeansettlement at Tsoungiza has been characterizedas a smallhamlet in the EarlyMycenaean period, growing to moresubstantial proportions by LH IIIB.18These are the onlysites in the Corinthiaat whicha substantialMycenaean phase has so farbeen confirmedby excavation. In the Phliusvalley, the richtombs excavated at Aidonia suggest that an importantLH settlementshould be locatednearby, but it hasnot yet beendiscovered.l9 Moreover, the numberof siteswhere surface material indicatesa largeLH settlementis relativelysmall. Among these, Perdikaria (withan impressivestretch of cyclopeanwall), Kleonai, and Agia Irini in the Phliusvalley stand out as the largest.20Traces of Mycenaeanoccupa- tionhave been found in AncientCorinth and on the slopes of Acrocorinth, butas yet no largeLH settlementsite has been uncovered.2l The situation

16. Blegen1921; Dickinson 1972; pp.64-65; Sakellariouand Pharaklas Rutter1974; Hope Simpsonand 1971,appendix II, p.17; Hope Dickinson1979, p. 61, no.A50; Hope Simpsonand Dickinson 1979, p.64, Simpson1981, p.33, no.A51; Isthmia no.A59; Hope Simpson1981, pp.34- VIII,p. 469, no. 6. 35, no.A59; Isthmia VIII, p. 474, 17. Blegen1928; Alin 1962,p. 58; no.14. ForKleonai see Gebauer1939, Hope Simpsonand Dickinson 1979, col.271; Alin 1962,p.58; Syriopoulos p.66, no.A67; Hope Simpson1981, 1964,p. 87; Sakellariouand Pharaklas p.35, no.A63; Thomas 1988; 1992; 1971,appendix II, pp.33-34;Hope IsthmiaVIII, pp.358-361, 469, no.2. Simpsonand Dickinson 1979, p.67, Shear(1986) has interpreted the re- no.A69; Hope Simpson1981, p.35, mainsas belonging to a numberof sep- no.A62; Isthmia VIII, p. 469, no. 1. aratesubstantial houses, but it is not A. Frickenhaus(in Karo1913, certainthat more than one structureis cols.114-116)reported finding over representedand Thomas (1988; 1992, 100 Mycenaeanfigurines near the esp.337)has characterized the pottery churchof AgiaTriada in the moun- as unusualfor a domesticcontext. tainsabove the vaSley;they have re- 18. Hope Simpsonand Dickinson centlybeen published in Kilian1990. 1979,p. 67, no.A70; Hope Simpson ForAgia Irini, see Hope Simpsonand 1981,p.36, no.A65; Wright et al. Dickinson1979, pp. 67-68, no.A71; 1990,pp. 631-638; Wright 1990, Hope Simpson1981, p.36, no.A66; p.353; Rutter1989; 1990a; 1990b; Rutter1993, p. 781. 1993;Pullen 1990, p.333; Thomas 21. Blegen1920, p.3; Dunbabin 1992;Isthmia VIII, pp.358-361. 1948;Weinberg 1949, p. 157;Broneer 19.Touchais1979; 1980; 1987; 1951,p. 293;Robinson 1976, p.211, Rutter1993, p. 788, n. 179;Krystalle- n.25 (onesherd, which he identifiedas Votse1989; 1996. LH);and Hope Simpson1981, pp.33- 20. Forsize estimatessee above, 34, no.A54. ForAcrocorinth, see n.13. Forunpublished new observa- CorinthIII.1, p. 28. Forthe LH IIIC tionsconcerning the siteof Perdikaria, structure,grave, and deposit from the originallylocated by Blegen(1920), see Sanctuaryof Demeterand Kore, see the fieldreports for the 1999 seasonon Bookidisand Fisher 1972, pp.291- the Website of the EasternKorinthia 292;1974, pp.286-289; Rutter 1979. ArchaeologicalSurvey Project (http:// Foran extensivebibliography, see eleftheria.stcloudstate.edu/eks).See IsthmiaVIII, pp. 47s471. alsoAlin o 1962,p. 57;Wiseman 1978, A NEW BRONZE AGE SITE I3I

Figure14. View from the northern end of the site overthe Silyonian is the samein andaround the Sikyonianplain; surface sherds and burials plaintoward the CorinthianGulf suggesta Mycenaeanpresence at numeroussites (e.g., Vasiliko/Ancient and Perachora.The courseof the Sikyon,Melissi), but no substantialsettlement site on the orderof those Nemea Riveris discernibleto the listedabove or comparable in surfacematerial to Doratihas been located.22 east (right)of the pavedroad. Silyon The sizeof thesite at Dorati, even considering only the top of theplateau, is locatedfar left in the distance. Photoauthor andthe densityof the specificallyMycenaean material thereon suggest thatthe Mycenaeanphase of the site is potentiallyas largeas or larger thanmost yet investigatedor identified in the area.23 The site'stopographical location is alsosignificant for estimating its potentialimportance, in thatit commandsan impressiveview overthe juncturebetween the Sikyonianand Corinthian plains (Fig. 14). It is in a positionto controlsignificant parts of thecoastal plain and access into the Nemeavalley viaa the NemeaRiver.24 This setting,on a naturallydefen- sibleplateau above a riverand along the coastal bluffs, similar to theloca- tion of a numberof otherBronze Age sitesalong the CorinthianGulf, conformsto a preferredtype of locationfor settlements in thisarea at this time,and further suggests that other similar areas between the Nemea and the LongopotamosRivers deserve closer investigation.25

22. The sheernumber of sitesin the lishedinformation from NVAP and the River(and therefore directly past Do- Corinthiaat whichMycenaean ma- EasternKorinthia survey can be ob- rati),an importantroad in the historical terialhas been found precludes listing tainedfrom their Web sites. period,was already in use in the Myce- or discussingthem all here.Some 23. The precedingdiscussion is not naeanperiod to provideaccess between notableomissions from the above intendedto ignorethe probabilitythat Mycenae,Tsoungiza, Aidonia, and the discussionare the Isthmiansanctuary, earliersettlement phases are preserved. CorinthianGulf. Kenchreai,Galataki, Kato Almyri, I estimatethat at least90 percentof the 25. Morgan(Isthmia VIII, p. 354) Athikia,Phlius, Krines, and Moulki materialthat I haveobserved at the site hasalready made a similarobservation nearSikyon. For complete gazetteers of is LH, butthe tendencyto overestimate concerningAetopetra: "The site loca- Mycenaeansites in the Corinthia,see periodsmore easily identified in the tion typifiesa localpreference for the workslisted above in n. 2. Fortwo fieldand the largeamount of totalsur- bluffs,removing settlement from agri- additionalsmall sites reported in the facematerial (not to mentionthe na- culturalland while allowing easy access Kleonaivalley not mentionedin gazet- tureof otherBronze Age sitesin the to it, facilitatingdefense, and lying teers,see Gauvinand Morin 1997. I region)suggest that the earlierprehis- closeto an importantroute of com- havenot includedany sites north of the toricphases could also prove to be munication."The site at AgiosPande- Isthmus;for the Perachorapeninsula, in substantial. leimonabove Kamari in Achaiais additionto the generalsite gazetteers, 24. Mountjoy(1999, p. 197) sug- similarlysituated: see Andersonand see Fossey1990. Some as yet unpub- geststhat the routealong the Nemea Anderson1975, p. 5, pl. 1, fig. 1. v , ton , \ , \ ,

I32 JEANNETTE MARCHAND

DORATI AS STRABO'S CORINTHIAN ORNEAI

The specificlocation of Doratiis particularlysignificant because it allows fora tentativeidentification ofthe site.Thegeographer Strabo, in a num- berof controversialpassages, mentions that there existed a secondtown calledOrneai, distinct from the town in theArgolid of thesame name. He describesthis secondOrneai as abandonedin his time,located between Corinthand Sikyon and next to a riveron a heightoverlooking the Sikyoni- an plain,but in the neighborhoodof Corinth.I proposethat Dorati fits exactlywith this topographical description by Strabo. Accepting Dorati as a viablecandidate for this second, "Corinthian," Orneai not onlyclarifies thedescription ofthat town by Strabo, but also solves some ofthe difficul- tiesin locatingthe Argivetown of the samename and in understanding theinternal logic ofthe arrangement ofAgamemnon's realm in theHomeric Catalogueof Ships,in whichan Orneai is mentioned. It is notmy intention to reviewall of thearguments already advanced by otherscholars concerning the locationof the ArgiveOrneai, but it is necessaryto prefaceany discussion of CorinthianOrneai with a relatively detailedreview of thesources for and problem of thetwo similarly named towns.An Orneiaiis listedin the Catalogueof Shipsas belonging to the "realmof Agamemnon":

0' 8e MvxNvagstXov, euxCCuevov sxoRC0toov, a(pvetovxe KototvOoveuxCCuevag xe KAsxuaq, 'Otovetag' eveCuovTo 'Atoa0vtosNv ' stoaxetvNv xat Stxvxv',o0' ato"'A8toaxog stox' sCu,BastAgvgv, 0t U l=CtONatNV TE xat ax=stvNv1 ovosovav IlrEnvNv' stXov8' A'cytovaCuxptveCuovTo AtytaBov' ava wavTaxat aCu(p''ERtxNv evtostav, xxv- exaxove \ vv - t°Xextostxv , . AyaCusCuvxv. .

, . ?, cs ATtOCtOG. Andthey that held Mycenae, the well-built citadel, and wealthy Corinth,and well-built Kleonai, and dwelt in Orneiaiand lovely Araithyreaand Sikyon, wherein at the firstAdrastus was king; and theythat held Hyperesia and steep Gonoessa and Pellene, and that dweltabout Aigion and throughout all Aigialus, and about broad Helike of thesewas the sonof Atreus,lord Agamemnon, captain, witha hundredships.26 Thereare a fewbriefreferencesto an Orneai that indicate that a place of thisname was involved in hostilitieswith Sikyon at sometime during the EarlyArchaic period.27 The firstclear reference to anArgive Orneai

26. II.2.569-577, A. T. Murray, ing a victoryover the Sikyonians.There appearsto indicatea borderdispute trans.,Cambridge, Mass., 1924. On the is nothingin eitherpassage to indicate betweenKleonai and Sikyon at this variantspelling Orneiai, see the passage the dateof the victory,but a reasonable time.McGregor (1941, pp. 277-278, of Eustathiusquoted in n. 34 below. settingfor the conflicthas been found n. 49), Kelly(1976, p. 124),Griffin 27. Plut.De Pyth.or. 15 (Mor.401d); in a warbetween Sikyon and Argos (1982p. 38, n. 20, andp. 51), andLolos Paus.10.18.5. Both arepassing refer- mentionedby Herodotos(5.67-68) (1998,p. 38, n. 107,and p. 49) haveall encesto a dedicationby the Orneataito duringthe tyrannyof Kleisthenes. hintedthat both Kleonai and Orneai the sanctuaryat Delphicommemorat- Plutarch(De sera. 7, Mor.553a-b) also mayhave formed an associationwith , , - ,> , . - \ v , , ,

A NEW BRONZE AGE SITE I33

appearsin Herodotos8.73.3, where he refersto thepeople of anOrneai at the time of the PersianWar as in someway subject to the Argivesand amongthose who sat apart from the war.28 The Orneatai next appear along- sidethe Kleonaiansas alliesof the Argivesat the battleof Mantineiain 418 B.C. (Thuc.5.67.2, 5.72.4, 5.74.3-4). Accordingto Thucydidesand Diodoros,the Lakedaimoniansinvaded the Argolidthe followingyear (Thuc.6.7.1-2, Diod.Sic. 12.81.4-5). Afterravaging the countryside, they settledfilgitives from Argos at Orneai,fortified the city,and left it witha stronggarrison. Soon thereafter, the Athenians arrived and together with theArgives besieged Orneai. According to Diodoros,after taking the city, the Argivesand Athenians put someof the garrisonand exiles to death andexpelled others. In Thucydides'account, the Argivesrazed Orneai.29 Theplace apparently continued to exist,however, since Diodoros (16.39.1- 6) mentionsit againin referenceto hostilitiesbetween the Lakedaimonians andthe Megalopolitans in 352/1 B.C.: the Lakedaimoniansadvance from Mantineiato the"Argive city of Orneai"and capture it beforethe Mega- lopolitansand their allies, including the Argives,can advance from their positionat the headwatersof theAlpheius River. When the Argives sub- sequentlytake the fieldagainst the Lakedaimoniansat Orneai, they are defeated.The Lakedaimonianseventually make an armisticewith the Megalopolitans,but we do notlearn the fate of Orneai,and its captureby theLakedaimonians is the last event in itshistory preserved in oursources. Fromthese few referencesit is alreadyindicated that Argive Orneai laysomewhere within the Argolidin the directionof Mantineia,but the most importantsource for the moreprecise location of this Orneaiis Pausanias2.25.4-6. He beginswith a descriptionof a road(which he later callsthe Klimax)leading from the Deiras ridge of Argosand past Lyrkeia to Mantineia.He givesan aition for a beaconfestival held at Argos,in whichhe makesit clearthat Lyrkeia and the Larissaare intervisible. Hav- ing giventhese clues to the roughlocation of Lyrkeia,he thencontinues:

sg Cuev8! xavTrv sv si 'AtoyovgsiNxovxa CuaRa sov a8ta, ex 8e AvtoxetageVxetoa xovavxa sg 'Otoveag.Avtoxetag Cuev 8!

,> v , , ,, b \ \ o >, , , \ ZOACUg, axe oNpUpevNg NoNxaxa zv tvxv oTtoaxetav sst "IAtov,oux CsoLsaTo VOCuoog Ev xaTaXoyX CuvuNv 'OtovEag 8E-

Argosalready at this timeto wagea ,, \ , tt , , v , ,, v \ territorialwar against their common CTCyato UxoUvXo , UssEto TZ TO=U Tt g AtoyELag ExCTvXo, ovTZ xaL andaggressive Sikyonian enemy. See Ev ToLg C=goL stooTEtoag N 4>XCoUvXa TE xaL CxvXva xaTEgiEv. alson. 67 below. ExaXoUvXo 8E aso ootovEXg Tov 'EtoEx0gUg Tov 8E ootovEXg Nv 28. Amongthe racesof the Pelo- xouxov Ilexexg, xov 8e Meves0eog, 8g'AyaCusCuvovLCusTa 'A0NvaLXv ponnese,Herodotos includes Ol 8C Ko- zv Iltota,uovovyxa0CXcv atoXNv.aso Cuev8! xovxov xo ovo,ua VOOplOl aDXoX0oMGS COWgS aOXCOUOl EyEMEToq ZOACt, AtOyELOtOX VgtOOV TOVT@Vutoveaxag yOUVOl ClVal''I@VGS, CX8g80plCUWal 8g 8e 8e oso Ts 'Apysixv apxoyevol xai xou averm7sav avaavCg ouvotxot ygyovastv 'Atoyetog. sc= Xp°MoO, CoWGS'0pVNTal xai [Ol] WC0l- ev xag 'Otoveag 'ACCu8og xe Ctoovxat goavov otoOovxat eVxetOog \ A o \ o o \ CS \ o o o tO OlXOl. On the strengthof Strab.8.6.7 vaogsog wastvsg xotwovaveuevog. xa os ssexetva utovexvN xe (C 370),Andrewes (1970, p. 109) ex- Stxvxvtaxat N 4>Xtastasoxcv. plainsthe Kynouriaalluded to hereas an areaof the Inachosvalley and not The distancefrom Argos to Lyrceais aboutsixty stades, and the the morefamiliar border area between distancefrom Lyrcea to Orneaeis the same.Homer in the Cata- the Argolidand Lakonia. 29. Ar.Jv. 399 andscholia and loguemakes no mentionof the cityLyrcea, because at the timeof Paus.8.27.1 also probably refer to these the Greekexpedition against Troy it alreadylay deserted; Orneae, events. however,was inhabited, and in his poemhe placesit on thelist I34 JEANNETTE MARCHAND

beforePhlius and Sicyon, which order corresponds to theposition of thetowns in theArgive territory. The nameis derivedfrom Orneus,the sonof Erechtheus.This Orneusbegat Peteos, and Peteosbegat Menestheus, who, with a bodyof Athenians,helped Agamemnonto destroythe kingdomof Priam.From him then did Orneaiget its name,and aftervfards the Argives removed all its citizens,who thereupon came to liveat Argos. At Orneaeare a sanctuaryand an upright wooden image of Artemis;there is besides a templedevoted to allthe gods in common.On the filrtherside of Orneaeare Sicyonia and Phliasia.30 The interpretationof partof thispassage is somewhatproblematic, and Pritchetthas argued that the translation, quoted above, by W. H. S.Jones is inaccurate.He arguesthat Orneai is theimplied subject of exetvxo,and thatthe sentence must be translated as follows: "But with respect to Orneai (forit wasthen inhabited), as it is situatedin thecountry ofthe Argives, it is mentionedby the poet before either Phleious or Sikyon.''3l In thistrans- lationit is particularlyclear that Pausanias places this Orneai within the Argolid,and also that he identifiesthis Orneai near Lyrkeia as the Orneai mentionedin the Catalogueof Ships. Straboalso refers to thisOrneai near Lyrkeia, but in thesame passage he clearlyrefersto a secondplace ofthe same name locatedbetween Sikyon andCorinth:

VOCuoog8 avxag oux ol8ev, ov8e xo Avtoxetov,ov8' 'Otoveag

xuat 8' sLat qg 'Atoyetaq,NCuev oCuxvvCuog xx otost xx sANatov,at 8e xag 'Otoveagxag CusxaivKototvOov xat Stxvxvog8tovCuevag. 30.Text and translation from Jones Homerdoesn't know these [Argive Hysiai and Kenchreai], nor yet 1918, pp.380-383. doeshe knowLyrkeion or Orneai,which are villages in Argeia,the 31. Pritchett1980, p.22, n. 35. formerbearing the samename as the mountainnear it andthe latter 32. Strab.8.6.17 (C 376). The text the sameas the Orneaiwhich is situatedbetween Corinth and givenhere is fromJones[1927] 1954, p.182, butit is problematic.Lyrkeion is Sikyon.32 an emendation,no doubtbased on At firstglance, Strabo's comment that Homer does not know of Orneai Pausanias'sdescription (2.25.4-5) of the twoArgive towns of Orneaiand appearsstrange, since an Orneaicertainly appears in the HomericCata- Lyrkeia.Andrewes (1970, p.108) logue.But Strabo soon turns to a discussionof therealm of Agamemnon, commentson the passagethus: aou8e andit becomesclear that, unlike Pausanias, he believesthat this second ToAuxoupytov (probably Aupxelov), Orneai,between Corinth and Sikyon and not a placein theArgolid, is the ou8''Opveag xyat 8' elCsiq5 'Ap-

, t fi t , - ,, - Orneaimentioned in the Iliad. He beginshis discussionof Mycenae, yelaq, N Xuev oXuxvoXuog TZ OpCl TZ . . . Corinth,Kleonai, Orneai, and so on with the preface"but let me speak (probablyAupxgi), ai 8e xalS'OpvealS xalS ysxaio KopLvOouxai ElXU@VOt nextof the placesthat are named in the Catalogueof Shipsas subjectto i8poXuevalS.Kramer excised all the Mycenaeand Menelaus" (Strab. 8.6.19 [C 377]).After quoting Homer wordshere cited in Greek,believing andproceeding to describethe sites in theorder listed in theCatalogue, he thatthis secondOrneai was the inven- reachesOrneai (Strab. 8.6.24 [C 382]): tion of an interpolator.But 6.24,382 is clearenough." Aly (1950, p.249) also 'Otoveax8' sxotv ssxvvCuox xx waoatotosovxsoxaCux, vvv Cuev stouox, advocatesthe emendation:aou8e TO AuXOupylOu(?)ou8' 'Opveag. xual 8'

stooxetoov8' otxovCuevax xaRg, xetooveXovaax Iltoxasov xuuevov, t fi - t * o t fi t o - Clot m5 ApystaS, N CV O@V0yOt TZ axp'xv xaxo xa IltoxasexasocXtasta xaBovCuev. Lyrkeiongemeint ist, siehtjeder." A NEW BRONZE AGE SITE I35

Orneaiis namedafter the river that flows past it. It is desertednow, althoughformerly it waswell-peopled, and had a templeof Priapus thatwas held in honour;and it wasfrom Orneai that the Euphro- niuswho composed the Priapeiacalls the god"Priapus the Orne- atan."Orneai is situatedabove the plain of the Sikyonians,but the countrywas possessed by theArgives. Araithyrea is the country whichis nowcalled Phliasia.33 Strabo(13.1.12 [C 587])mentions this second Orneai in passingin one lastpassage, where he callsit merely"nearCorinth":

. . . sE Otovexvxxv setoxKototvOov . . . fromthe Orneainear Corinth Fromthese three passages it is clearthat Strabobelieves that there wasa placecalled Orneai between Sikyon and Corinth, next to a riverof the samename and on a heightabove the Silyonianplain but better de- scribedas nearCorinth. It hada templeof Priapus,but it wascompletely abandonedby his day.B. Niesehas shown that the 2nd-century B.C. com- mentarieson the Iliad, primarilythat of Apollodoros,underlie Strabo's discussionof the HomericCatalogue, and his information on thissecond Orneaiprobably originates entirely from his sources.34Strabo is virtually the onlypreserved source for this secondOrneai, but Eustathius,using Straboand an unabridged version of Stephanusof Byzantium,repeats the sameinformation but adds the following:

Kakaat 8e ouxxgN aso 'Otovexg,vTov Etoex0CXgS Naso 'Otoveag vvCufpg,N oxt sfp' vQovg xetvTat, N oCuxvvCug'Otoveaxx soxaCu. It [theOrneai between Sikyon and Corinth] is namedafter Orneus, the sonof Erechtheus,or the nymphOrnea, or because it is on a height,or fromthe riverof the samename.35 Eustathiusis primarilyrepeating information that could have ultimately derivedfrom Strabo, but his assignmentof Orneusto thisOrneai (contra

33. Jones[1927] 1954, pp. 204-205. CVXOlv NOCl XClTal X@yN CCiV zlXU@Vi@V. Seevan der Valk 1971, 34. Niese 1877; Giovannini1969, 'Apysia5xaxa xov rexypaxpov.scrcl 8e pp.448-449. I do not putparticular p. 8, n. 2. Strabogives no indication xai sxepa ysxaE, KopivOouxai ElXU- emphasison the distinctionstressed in thathe knowsthe locationof Corin- xvog. xauTrv 8e o xa 'E0vlxaypaf aS thispassage between the designation thianOrneai firsthand. In his descrip- WOXlVgyCl, OU X@yNV. WN09OlX@t 8g xuN andwoBlg. Strabo does not actu- tion of Kleonai,he statesthat he saw xai aal AsyovTal, XS xai ai KAs- allyuse eitherterm in referenceto Co- the cityhimself from Acrocorinth; he vai. ypaxpovTal as Ala AlepOoyyou ai rinthianOrneai, and the ArgiveOrneai makesno suchclaim for Orneai.Do- 'Opuelai,xS xai Bpocselaixai Auyelai. wasnot alwayssubject to Argos.Dio- rati,my candidatefor Orneai,is dis- XaClTal 8C OUT@tN aso 'Opvexs, UlOU doros(16.39) specifically calls the cerniblefrom Acrocorinth, and so it is 'EpCX0g@5 N aSo'°09Cat V0yt, N OTl ArgiveOrneai a s°AlS-Therefore the possiblethat its generallocation was P' 0+°0S XCtVTaL,N oXuxvoXuxt'Opve,a apparentdiscrepancy in terminology pointedout to him fromthat vantage TZ, SOTaX. TOUTO8C Xal O rC@ypavOt alonedoes not persuasivelyargue for point,but sincehe doesnot sayso it NOl gyXv, OTl 0pVgal C=@V0yOl TZ the necessityof a secondOrneai to seemslikely that he is simplyquoting sapappeovxl soxay ,. og xai Tauxa explainthe variancein the sources.The his sources. vNOlV, 05 V0V yCV C0NyOl, =pOTC0OV8 differentterms could relate to a change 35. Trans.author. Eust. 2.291.7-15 oixouXuevalxaRxq. gTlyaTO 8' CXCl in the statusof ArgiveOrneai after its (= Strab.8.6.24 [C 382]): 'Oovelai8e N IIpiasog, o0ev xai'OpveaTq exaRelTo. reductionby Argosin 417/16 B.C. Aixaxou l 'Opveai souxoyap XuaBlaTa XClVTal 8 D=gp TOU =galOU TOUT@V s f s v

I36 JEANNETTE MARCHAND

Pausanias)and his reference to a nymphOrnea, both of whichdo notap- pearin Strabo'stext, may suggest that he is usingadditional information derivedfrom a differentsource (or one of Strabo'soriginal sources).36 Startingwith the earlytravelers to Greece,most scholars seeking the locationof Orneaihave assumed that Strabo was confused, and that there wasno second,Corinthian, Orneai; all ofthe information about an Orneai thatStrabo had taken from his sourcesmust refer to oneplace. This view wasfollowed most influentially by Frazer in his commentary on Pausanias.37 Buta numberof scholarswho have looked at theproblem in termsof the 5th-centuryhistory of Argosor actuallylooked for Argive Orneai by au- topsyhavebegun to arguefor the existence of a second,Corinthian, Orneai. Amongtheir arguments, they point out that there is no placethat can fit allthe topographicalrequirements in the sourcesfor a singleOrneai: for instance,it shouldbe immediatelyclear that there is no placeroughly 120 stadesfrom Argos (the 60 plus60 of Paus.2.25.4-5: approximately 24 km)that can also be describedas beingabove the Sikyonianplain or be- tweenSikyon and Corinth (Strabo).38 Themain difficulty for many scholars in acceptingStrabo's account of a secondOrneai has been that his accounthas seemed confused and self- contradictory:how could a site overlookingthe Sikyonianplain be both withinCorinthian territory but havebelonged to the Argives?It is this fact,that Strabo himself appears to locatethe second Orneai in theArgolid, thatinitially led to the assumptionthat Strabo was relating garbled infor- mationabout the sameOrneai as discussedby Pausaniasand the other sources.Meyer helped to createwhat is stillperhaps the common opinion by statingflatly "Strabons Unterscheidung ist irrig."39It is of thegreatest importance,however, to recognizethat Strabo is basinghis descriptionof thissecond Orneai, and indeed the entire area, on the realm of Agamemnon as describedin the Catalogueof Ships.He makesit clearthat he believes thatthe Corinthian Orneai is theone mentioned in Homer.Thus, he both indicatesthat the Orneai he hasin mindis a placethat his sources believed to havebeen important in theMycenaean period, and that it is at thattime thatthe land(along with Corinth, Kleonai, and Araithyrea) belonged to the"Argives." G.J. Lolos has recently interpreted Strabo's comments about Orneaiin a similarfashion, with "Argives"meaning the lordsof the Mycenaeancitadel, although he does not observethat Straboindicates thatthe Cataloguerefers to thissecond, Corinthian, Orneai:

36.The traditionof the eponymous p. 249. Herter(1932, pp. 251-252, n. 1) textabove, p. 134,and again at 13.1.12 nymphfinds support in Diod. Sic. hasalso argued that a cultof Priapusas (C 587):rIpiasog 8' soxi soBlgrsi 4.72.1-2,where he includesa nymph mentionedby Strabowould fit better OaBarm. . . rsxvl)oc, 8' ri xoi) Ornia,along with Kleone,among the with a Corinthianlocation; this opinion [Iptasol) xZZrvol) sap' ai)xolg,'ix' rE, daughtersof the riverAsopos. is secondedby Kruse(RE XVIII, 1939, 'Opvrxv xxv sroi KoplvOov rxrvNvry-

37. Frazer([1897] 1965, p. 217) col. 1124,s.v. Orneates). It is worth [lrVOI) T01) lrpOI), rlTz TZ tryroual ato- placesOrneai at Liondi,using infor- notingthat Pausanias does not mention vi)ool) xai Vi)llXpg Tov 0rov 60Z!savv mationfrom both Strabo and Pau- a cultof Priapusamong those at the rslX fi xofi xlllaval)xov fi fi xxv avfi sxv.s sanias. ArgiveOrneai, and that Strabo men- 39. RE XVIII,1939, col. 1123,s.v. 38. Pritchett1980, pp. 22-23; tionsthe cultin relationto the Corin- Orneai(E. Meyer). Andrewes1970, p. 108;Aly 1950, thianOrneai twice (8.6.24 [C 382], A NEW BRONZE AGE SITE I37

The notionof temporarypossession of the territoryat onetime in historyby the Argives is clearlyimplied. This historical time, I argue,must be placedin the almostlegendary era of Argive dominationover Araithyrea (Phlius), Sikyon, and Corinth to whichI brieflyreferred in the firstchapter [the domain of Agamemnonas given in theIliad Catalogueof Ships].To this periodthe geographerassigns the flourishingof Orneai,which was1n. ru1ns . 1n. n1s. . c Way. A candidatesite for Orneai along the 15 krn.of highland separatingSikyon from Corinth has yet to be advanced. Judgingfrom the specificationsrpL KopvOow,one would be temptedto placeit in the easternpart of theplain, beyond the NemeaRiver. Wiseman, who surveyedthe Corinthianland, favors thispossibility but says that "no remains of a suitableancient town haveyet to be foundbetween Corinth and Sikyon."40 Suitableremains of an ancienttown corresponding to Strabo'sac- counthave now been found at Dorati,and in exactlythe location favored by Lolosand Wiseman. Strabo and his sourcesclearly relate that there was a Mycenaeansite calledOrneai, abandoned at leastby the time of Strabo,near a majorriver and on a heightthat overlooked the territory of Sikyon.It waslocated not withinthe Argolidbut within the areaof the Corinthia.Dorati has a magnificentview over the CorinthianGulf, but becauseof the relativeheights of the bluffson eitherside of the site,its primaryview is to thewest over the Silyonianplain (Figs. 14-15). Dorati is, however,within what was Corinthian territory in thehistorical period, sinceit is just eastof the NemeaRiver,the historical boundary between Corinthand Sikyon.41 The site is lofty,up on a bluff,and there are two riversthat run past it: the Nemea and the Daveli rema to theeast. Ornea(i)

40. Lolos 1998,p. 103,quoting well.Kleonai was politically integrated Silyonwas once Argive). For Kleonai, Wiseman1978, p. 110. Lackinga into the Argivestate at leastfor a see Pierartand Thalmann 1980, candidatecloser to Silyon,Lolos periodof a littleless than a hundred pp.261-269, no.3; Miller1982; and presentedthe possibilitythat Aeto- years,and even when independent it Perlman2000, pp.131-149. For petracould be identifiedwith Orneai. wasa veryclose ally of Argos.Finally, Apesas,see RE I (2),1894,col.2699, This site,east of the Longopotamos Xenophontells us (Hell.4.4.5-6) that s.v.Apesas (G. Hirschfeld);RE I (2), River,seems however too fareast to in the 390s the Argivesremoved the 1894,cols.2698-2699, s.v. Apesantios be describedas overlookingSilyonian boundarystones between their state (O.Jessen); and in particularHes. land;the historicalboundary between andCorinth, bringing Corinthian Theog.326-332; Paus.2.15.3; [Plut.] the Corinthiaand the Silyoniawas territoryinto theirown "city limits." deFluviis 18.9; Plin. HN4.17; Stat. the NemeaRiver. It is worthnoting Althoughthis was a short-livedphe- Theb.3.461-462; Steph. Byz., s.v. herethat there is increasingevidence nomenon,it pointsup thatthe boun- Asroag.For Nemea, see Miller1994, thatArgos had great influence (as dariesbetween Argos and Corinth were pp.95-96; Nemea II, pp. 100, 170,233. well as periodsof completepolitical closerthan often supposed. Thus it is 41.The NemeaRiver was the

. . . . . control)in the historicalperiod in not lmpossl) e to lmaglnea tlmeeven boundaryby Strabo'stime, as he manyof the areasincluded in the Cata- in the historicalperiod when the area himselfcomments: Strab. 8.6.25 logue.Nemea was Argive, at leastin of Doratimay have belonged to Argive (C 382);Livy 33.15. Exactly when the 4th century,and all the extantan- territory,and similar arguments could the borderbecame fixed at thispoint cientsources attribute the altarof Zeus be advancedfor the areafurther west, is not known,but it wascertainly Apesantiosatop Mt. Apesasto Nemea includingSilyon andPellene (for in- alreadythe borderby the Classical or associateit withArgive heroes as stance,Pausanias [2.7.1] thought that period. I38 JEANNETTE MARCHAND

Figure15. View fromthe site to the east towardAcrocorinth and the Corinthianplain. Photo author

couldhave been an old namefor either.42The surfacematerial indicates thatthere was a majorBronze Age settlementhere, as Strabosuggests, andalso that it wasabandoned well before his day.The locationis exactly betweenCorinth and Sikyon,the view is primarilyin the directionof Sikyon,but it lies withinthe bordersof historicalCorinth. It is hardto imagineanother site that could not only so wellfit allof thetopographical indicationsas given by Strabo,but also explain the seeminglyself-contra- dictoryelements in Strabo'saccount.43

LOCATION OF ARGIVE ORNEAI

With a strongcandidate now proposed for Corinthian Orneai, the loca- tion of ArgiveOrneai can be clarified.There is no longerany reason to locateArgive Orneai near a riveror explain how it couldhave been thought to overlookthe Sikyonian plain, since these details relate to theCorinthian site.Andrewes, Pritchett, and Pikoulas have all arguedpersuasively that

42. Strabo'si)srto Toi) sr8tou at eventsthat occurred near the Longo- theyboth call it simply"the Nemea 8.6.24(C 382) impliesthat the sitewas potamosRiver to the east(satoa Tov River."Nevertheless, it shouldbe on a height,as Eustathiusemphasizes. Nr,uravsoxa,uov in Diod. Sic. 14.83.2; evidentthat the namederives from The NemeaRiver is conspicuousfrom Aeschin.2.168, srtot ri v Nr,uraAa the valleyand the site.It is therefore Doratiand presumably the proximityto zaBou,urvnvxatoa8toav, is ambiguous. not necessarythat the nameNemea for the riverwas one of the reasonsfor the Ephoros,FGrH 70 F82 [Harpokr.] the riverpredates the periodin which locationof the settlement(see Fig. 14). preservessAatov ri 5 Nr,urEa8>os the Nemeansanctuary and games If the sitederived its namefrom one of Xapa8pa5,also in Suid.Phot., s.v. Nr- gainedprominence. See REXVI,1935, the two riversnear it, the Nemea,given ,urasxatoa8toa, both without context, col.2322, n. 3, s.v.Nemea (E. Meyer) its considerablelength and size, seems a althoughreference is alsomade to andthe importantobservations of muchmore likely source than the rema Aischinesin Harpokration).Presum- Pritchett(1969, p. 78) andLolos to the east.The nameof the rivermay ablythe termis the resultof confused (1998,p. 131). havesubsequently changed after Orneai topographyderiving from a misreading 43. It canalso be notedthat directly wasabandoned and the sanctuaryof of Xenophon,who while discussing uponentering the plain,the Nemea Nemeagained influence. The earliest eventsin partnear the Nemearefers to Riverturns to the eastbefore continu- designationof a riveras Nr,urasxatoa- the Longopotamosas simplya xatoa- ing straightinto the gulf;therefore, 8toashould in factindicate that the 8pa (Hell. 4.2.15-23).Only Strab. althoughDorati is on the Corinthian nameof the riverderived from its ori- 8.6.25(C 382) andLivy 33.15 canbe sideof the river,the portionof the gin in the Nemeavalley. However, all definitelyassociated with the river plaindirectly in frontof the siteis the referencesin whicha contextis flowingfrom the Sanctuaryof Zeusout "Sikyonian." preservedfor this title actuallyrefer to to the CorinthianGulf past Dorati, and A NEW BRONZE AGE SITE I39

thebest candidate for the Argive Orneai is foundin theruins on andnear thehill Paliokastraki atKato Belesi (which, confilsingly, has been renamed Lyrkeia),located northwest of Argosin the Inachosvalley (Fig. 13).44 Certaintyis impossible,and the problemis compoundedby the circum- stancethat ancientLyrkeia has alsonot beendefinitely located. Pausa- nias,however, indicates that Lyrkeiashould be locatedapproximately 60 stades(ca. 12 krn)from Argos on the Klimaxroad leading from the Deirasridge of Argostoward Mantineia, and that it shouldbe intervis- ible with the Larissa.This descriptionfits a locationnear Schinochori and Skala,where appropriate remains have been found.45Argive Or- neaishould be approximately60 stadesfurther along the sameroad but still withinthe Argolid,corresponding to Paliokastrakiof KatoBelesi, wherePritchett documented impressive remains of a Classicaltown and fortification,and which Pikoulas has shown to havebeen on the Klimax routeto Mantineia.46 Despitewhat would in othercircumstances be consideredthe secure identificationof KatoBelesi with ArgiveOrneai, a site in the Gymno valleyis stillpersistently identified as the 5th-centurytown. The Gymno valleygives access from the Argolidinto the Phliasianplain via Liondi; theremains of a Classicalwatchtower of the4th centuryare located at the entranceto thatvalley, on a heightat KastroKourounas. The sitewas one of thoseoriginally proposed by the earlytravelers for Argive Orneai, and was supportedby Meyerwithout autopsy.47 There is absolutelyno evi- dence,however, for a Classicaltown near the site.Pritchett observed that thetower is situatedto permitcommunication not with the Argolid but to thenorth with Phlius, making it uncertainthat even the tower was Argive.48 Pritchetthas noted that the identificationhas persisted partly because of the attemptof scholarsto makeall of the informationabout the second Orneaifrom Strabo fit withPausanias's account of the Argivetown, and the locationnear Gymno was seento be moresuited than Kato Belesi to someof Strabo'stopographical indications: it is neara river(the source of the Inachos)and it lies closerto Sikyon,perhaps leading to Strabo's

44. Andrewes1970, p. 107;Tom- aboutthe samedistance beyond Belesi= Orneaibest fit the distances linson1972, p. 39;Pritchett 1980, Lyrkeia. givenby Pausanias. pp. 19-30;Pikoulas 1995, pp.267-270. 46. Pritchett1980, pp. 19-31. 47. REXVIll, 1939, cols. 1123- 45. Pritchett1980, pp. 12-17; Pikoulas(1995, p. 101, pp. 267-270, 1124, s.v. Orneai(E. Meyer);KlPauly 4, Pikoulas1995, pp.263-265 (full 290) hasconfirmed that the Argos- 1972, p. 346, s.v. Orneai(E. Meyer). bibliographies).Papachatzes (1976, Orneai-Mantineiaroute passed directly The siteis approximately3 km to p. 186,n. 1) andothers still follow the by Paliokastrakiof KatoBelesi: one of the southeastof the villageof Gymno earlytravelers in associatingthe re- the stretchesof preservedwheel ruts of on the backroad from Phlius to Sterna mainsat KatoBelesi with Lyrkeia; the roadis immediatelynorth of the andArgos. Pritchett (1980, pp. 23- however,Kato Belesi, at over18 km site.See alsothe earlierobservations of 24, 27-31) reviewsthe evidencefrom fromArgos, is too faraway to fit Pau- Frickenhausand Muller 1911, p. 24. the earlytravelers for remains near sanias'sdescription (although Tomlin- Papachatzes(1976, p. 187) estimates Gymnoand demonstrates that they son [1972,p. 39] hasrightly pointed thatKato Belesi is 18 km fromArgos; all appearto referto this same out thatPausanias's measurements are Pritchett(1980, p. 24, n. 41) estimates watchtower. onlyapproximate). Schinochori and thatit is farther,and observes also that 48. Pikoulas(1995, p. 73), while Skalaare approximately 12 km from the ancientroad would have taken a categoricallyrejecting the identifica- Argos:this firstmeasurement should be morecircuitous route than the modern tion of the towerwith Orneai,argues the moreexact, since Pausanias gives a one.Musti (1986, p. 295) alsocon- thatdespite the limitedvisibility the figureof 60 stadesin referenceto Lyr- cludesthat the identificationsof towermay have been Argive. keia;for Orneaihe simplysays that it is Schinochori/Skala= Lyrkeia, and Kato I40 JEANNETTE MARCHAND descriptionof Orneaias "above Sikyon."49 Such a compromiseis not satis- factory,however, and ultimately Gymno does not fit eitherthe evidence of Straboor Pausanias: a location near Gymno cannot be correctlydescribed as "aboveSikyon," and the locationdoes not fit with the evidencethat placesArgive Orneai within the Argolidand on the routeto Mantineia. With the discoveryof a candidatefor Corinthian Orneai, all of Strabo's informationcan be finally disassociated from Argive Orneai, and the iden- tificationby Andrewes,Pritchett, and Pikoulas of thattown with Kato Belesican be deemedsecure. Thereis, however,another significant reason for the stayingpower of Gymnoas a candidatefor Argive Orneai. Hope Simpsonand Lazenby reportedfinding Mycenaean sherds in the vicinityof the watchtowerat Gymno,which apparently made it appropriatefor a sitementioned in the Iliad.Following Frazer and Meyer, they identified it as the Orneaiof the HomericCatalogue.5° There was no doubt a Mycenaean presence at Kastro of Gymno,but there are numerous places with Mycenaean material that arenot mentioned in theIliad, and the site does not fit Pausanias'sdescrip- tion or thatof othersources: it maywell have been a Mycenaeansettle- ment,but it isvery unlikely to havebeen Classical Argive Orneai. Pritchett statesthe case well: "Unable to findany other remains of a sitein theupper Yimnon[Gymno] valley, I cannot accept the identification of aMycenaean settlement,having a fourth-centurywatchtower,oriented toward the north, as evidencefor Orneai, an Argive polis of the Classicalperiod.''5

STRAB O'S CORINTHIAN ORNEAI IN THE CATALOGUE OF SHIPS

It is of somesignificance that in discussionsof the Catalogueof Ships Gymnois consistentlyidentified with Argive Orneai, despite its clearin- congruitywith the evidencefor the 5th-centurytown. Although some prehistoricsherds and one worked obsidian blade have been observed at KatoBelesi, there is as yet no publishedevidence that there was a LH presencethere.52 This hascreated reluctance even among scholars who

49. Frazer([1897] 1965, p. 217) territoryin the 5th century;therefore, connectionwith the locationof evenplaced Orneai further north in the anyremains that may come to lightin HomericOrneai, especially if it Phliusvalley near the modernvillage the regionof Liondiin futurewould be shouldin factturn out thatthere are of Liondi(and thus "closer" to Sikyon; unlikelyto representArgive Orneai. no prehistoricremains in the [closer] but evena locationas farnorth as 50. Hope Simpsonand Lazenby vicinityof Gymno."Pikoulas (1995, Liondicannot by anystretch of the 1970,pp. 66-67: "Around it [thetower p. 227) reportedmore recently find- imaginationbe describedas overlook- on Kourounashill] andextending over ing at the site onlya few unglazed ing the Sikyonianplain). The identifi- the wholesummit and the upperslopes sherds,one LH kylixbase, and no cationcan still be found(e.g., Papa- to the southand east-the northern obsidian. chatzes1976, pp. 189-192)although slopesare much steepewe found 51. Pritchett1980, pp. 30-31. no moderninvestigator has yet to re- a considerablenumber of Mycenaean 52. Forthe ceramicsat Paliokastraki portany specific suitable remains in the sherdsof a 'provincial'nature, ranging of KatoBelesi, see Pritchett1980, area.In anyevent, this general area is fromLH II to LH IIIB (mainlythe p. 25; Pikoulas1995, p. 269. Pritchett muchtoo farfrom Argos to fit Pau- latter),together with five sherds of mentions"prehistoric" sherds; Pikoulas sanias'saccount and, as Andrewes GreyMinyan ware, some obsidian, and reports,from the prehistoricperiod, (1970,p. 107)points out, the areawas a few piecesof classicalpottery. This site onlyNeolithic sherds. certainlyin Phliasianand not Argive mustnow clearly be consideredin 601: "DaPaus mit den wortenasrto Towxqg 'Atoyaq rxvTo

A NEW BRONZE AGE SITE I4I

do not thinkthat the Catalogueof Shipsaccurately reflects the Bronze Age to identifyKato Belesi as the location of a citymentionedin Homer. Nowthat a candidatefor Corinthian Orneai has been located, there is no longerany reason to expecta majorMycenaean site at ArgiveOrneai, sinceStrabo clearly preserves a traditionthat it is the Corinthiantown thatis mentionedin theCatalogue. Even with no otherfactors taken into consideration,once a candidatefor the Corinthiantown is produced,it shouldautomatically become as likely a candidatefor Homer's Orneai as theArgive town, since there are literary traditions preserved for both claims. It becomesa questionof choosingbetween Pausanias and Strabo, and I proposethat in thiscase, Strabo's evidence is to be preferred. Evenwithout a locationfor Corinthian Orneai, W. Aly arguedthat Strabo'ssecond Orneai is morelikely to be the one mentionedin Homer simplybecauseStrabo is using2nd-centurys.c. sources, and"Wo Apollodor vorliegt,kann man mit einergenauen Ortskenntnis rechnen, die unsviel mehrzwingt zu lernenals zu korrigieren."53Indeed, for this reason Strabo is a majorsource for most modern discussions of theCatalogue of Ships.54 Pausaniasdoes not mention any source for his discussion of ArgiveOrneai andit is likelythat he is simplyrepeating local information. As hasbeen oftennoted, Pausanias is a veryreliable guide to the topographyof places thathe hashimselfvisited, and a faithfillreporter of whathe seesand what he is told;whether what is reportedto himis trueor notis anentirely dif- ferentmatter. Pritchett, following KaLkmann, has argued that in Pausanias's descriptionof ArgiveOrneai, he is consciouslyarguing against Strabo on the issueof the Catalogue: The mostdetailed treatment is thatof A. Kalkrnann,Pausanias der Perieget(Berlin 1886) 158-159, which is summarizedby H. Hitzig andH. Bluemner,Pausaniae Graeciae Descriptio 1.2 (Leipzig1899)

seineAnsicht zu motivierenscheint, vermuthet Kalkrnann 159 wohl mitrecht, dass er gegen die Meinung Apollodors, der Quelle Strabos,polemisieren wolle." Strabo (8.6.17. 376), or Apollodoros, haddecided that the Orneaiof the Cataloguewas the citybetween Corinthand Sikyon, not theArgive Orneai. Pausanias makes it clearthat the cityin the Cataloguewas the Argiveone.55 I seeno reasonto concludethat Pausanias had Strabo's text in mind.Pau- saniasgives no indicationhere or elsewherethat he knowsof anyOrneai otherthan the one in theArgolid. Corinthian Orneai had ceased to exist alreadyin Strabo'sday, and probably long before. Pausanias did not visit 53. Aly 1950,p. 249. Andrewesdoes the areaof Dorati,but he didat leastpass the Argive Orneai. Pausanias's not give a clearopinion. I knowof no explanationof ArgiveOrneai and the Catalogueappears to be his own otherscholar who hassupported Strabo attemptto explaina perceiveddifficulty with the Catalogueof Ships,or on thispoint. evenmore likely, an explanationoffered by localguides, who mayhave 54. Niese 1877,passim; Giovannini beenmore aware of the "rival"claimant. If theywere not, it wouldhave 1969,pp. 11-17;Visser 1997, p. 33 and beeneven more natural for them to claimHomeric status. Pausanias gives passim.As with anyancient source, Strabomust be usedwith suitable hisexplanation ofthe Cataloguewhen he is in theneighborhood ofArgive caution. Orneaiand Lyrkeia, and thus it is logicalthat he wouldgive a localac- 55. Pritchett1980, pp. 21-22. countthat interprets Homer as representingit, andnot a placein what I42 JEANNETTE MARCHAND laterbecame Corinthian territory, in theIliad. His comments about Lyrkeia alsoseem to fit thisapologetic mode.56 Evenif we assumethat Pausanias was aware of Strabo'scontrary claim, thereis nogood reason to thinkthat he hadbetter information than Strabo (orApollodoros)on Homer'smeaning. Indeed, his explanation ofthe Cata- logueas given above in Pritchett'stranslation (p. 134) does not make much senseper se: he claimsthat Orneai is mentionedbefore Phlius and Sikyon becauseit is locatedin the countryof theArgives. This explanationdoes not explainwhy Corinth and Kleonai, not "situated in the countryof the Argives"in Pausanias'sday, are mentioned before Orneai. Moreover, here "Argives"cannot be explainedas meaning the lords of theMycenaean cita- del,since this explanation would also not make any sense: "Homer" locates all of the placeson the list withinthe countrysubject to Mycenae,since thatis preciselythe point of the Catalogue.Pausanias seems to recognize thatthe orderof the Catalogueis topographical,but he cannotsuccess- fullyreconcile the physicallocation of ArgiveOrneai with the list;ac- ceptingJones'stranslation ofthe passage (above, p. 134)does not solve the problem.Indeed, the difficultiesin the sourcesfor Orneai now appear to arisenot from Strabo making two places out of one,but from Pausanias or hisguides, unaware of theCorinthian Orneai, conflating the two separate placesinto oneArgive town and associating all the mythsof Corinthian Orneaiwith that Argive place. Nowthat a sitehas appeared that vindicates the consistency of Strabo's sourcesconcerning the existence, nature, and location of CorinthianOrneai, I proposethat these sources also had better information concerning the Catalogueof Shipsthan Pausanias's local informants in theArgolid.

DORATI AS HOMERIC ORNEAI?

I do notsuggest that the claim of CorinthianOrneai to Homericstatus is superiorto thatof ArgiveOrneai because the surfacematerial and com- mandinglocation of Doraticlearly indicate that it wasa muchmore sig- nificantMycenaean settlement than Kato Belesi (or Kastro of Gymno,for thatmatter).57 I do propose,however, that accepting Dorati as the Orneai of the Cataloguecan elucidate the logicbehind the arrangementof the nameslisted in the firsthalf of Agamemnon'srealm. J. P. Crielaardhas recentlyobserved that the debateconcerning the historicalperiod, if any, whichthe worldof the Homericpoems most reflects has been elevated

56. Anderson(1995, p. 181) andfound in the Catalogueof Ships thatthe Catalogueis a Mycenaean makesa similarobservation about the bestopportunity to immortalizean document.Although I agreethat the Pausanias'saccount at Donussa: otherwiseforgotten corner of an procedureis prejudiced,one doesnot aPausaniaswas also told that Donussa obscuredistrict." See alsohis similar needto thinkthat the Catalogueorigi- hadplayed a part,though a humble commentson Pausanias'saccount of natedin the Mycenaeanperiod or even one,in worldhistory, and that 'lofty Chaeronea. fromMycenaean sources to recognize Donoessa'had been listed in the Iliad 57. Dickinson(1986, p. 31) has thata placewith majorvisible Bronze amongthe citiesof Agamemnon's faultedinvestigators into the Catalogue Age remainswould be morelikely to kingdom[instead of Gonoessa].... forusing the presenceof Mycenaean haveaccrued a heroicpast than one His Donussaninformants may have materialto argueHomeric status. This, thatcould produce little or none. sharedhis historiographicaloutlook, he says,is to arguewhat is to be proved, A NEW BRONZE AGE SITE I43 to the statusof a new HomericQuestion.58 Within this largerdebate, questionsconcerning the source and date of compositionof theCatalogue of Shipsand the historicity of thepolitical situation described therein pose a numberof problemsthat cannot be addressedhere.59 I confine my com- mentsto the natureand order of namesin the list, andindeed it canbe arguedthat the identificationof the placeslisted in the Catalogueshould as muchas possibleprecede any interpretation of the Catalogue'ssources, date,or meaning. Quiteapart from the difficultiesof whyAgamemnon was assigned onlypart of the Argiveplain and a seriesof placesalong the Corinthian Gulf,with Orneaiidentified as the Argivetown it hasbeen difficult to explainwhy in additionto Mycenaehe is assignedonly one otherrather unimportantplace in the Argolid.Furthermore, with Orneaias the Ar- givetown, the order in whichAgamemnon's holdings are listed is curious, as Pausaniasclearly noticed, regardless of whyor whenthose particular placeswere singled out to comprisehis realm.C. Morganrecently de- scribedthe realm as a arather strange balance of placenamesin theArgolid, the Corinthia,and Achaia."60 Although by no meanssolving the diffl- cultiesin interpretingAgamemnon's realm, recognizing the Orneaiof the Catalogueas Doratiremoves the problemof figuringout why only ArgiveOrneai, an unimportant place in the BronzeAge andin allsubse- quentperiods, is singledout for mentionalong with Mycenae,when a numberof importantBronze Age sitesin theArgolid are not mentioned at all. With Orneaiat Dorati,only one place in theArgolid proper is men- tioned:Mycenae itself. The remainingplaces in thispart of the realmare thenlisted in a cleartopographical order, and as with the Argolid,only one placeis mentionedin eachgeographically discrete area. These areas correspondto the valleysof the threemajor parallel rivers that flow into the CorinthianGulf (the Longopotamos,the Nemea,and the Asopos, respectively)and the sectionsinto which these rivers divide the gulf plain (Fig.13). The routesalong these rivers were important for accessto the gulf andthe Isthmusfrom the Argolidin both the prehistoricand the historicalperiods; it is nothard to imaginewhy one place controlling each valleywould be singledout for mention in thelist. Thus,the orderof the firstpart of the list is quiteclear and logical: Mycenaeis mentionedfirst, since it is theseat of Agamemnon'spower and regardedas the controllingcity of the northernhalf of the Argiveplain

58. Crielaard(1995, p. 201, and in the bardictradition). passim)provides extensive bibliography 59.There is stilllitde agreementon andsummary of previousand current anyof theseissues. For example, in a views.See alsoSherratt 1990, pp. 822- singlerecent volume of essaystwo 824. Crielaardargues that the Homeric completelydifferent periods for the poemsreflect a latestage in the Early worldthat the Cataloguerepresents IronAge (8th or 7th centuryB.C.), werepresented: Hood 1995 (LH IIIC) while Sherrattargues that the texts andAnderson 1995 (late8th century containlayers of informationfrom a B.C.). Fora filllbibliography on all successionof periodsfrom the issuesrelating to the Catalogue,see prepalatialto the later8th century Visser1997, pp. 75>773. (representingactively creative periods 60. IsthmiaVIII, p. 350. I44 JEANNETTE MARCHAND

(thesouthern half is assignedto Diomedesand Argos).6l The remaining placesare listed in topographicalorder from east to west,starting with Corinth:here again only one site is representedas controllingthe eastern gulf and Isthmus.Next in topographicalorder to the west is Kleonai, representingaccess along the LongopotamosRiver and controlling the modernAgios Vasilios valley. Next comes Orneai at Dorati,representing accessto the Nemeavalley via the NemeaRiver and control of the cen- tralportion of thecoastal plain. Araithyrea, next, represents control of the Phliusvalley and the sourceof the Asopos;the exactlocation of Arai- thyreais asyet unknown, but both Strabo (8.6.24 [C 382])and Pausanias (2.12.4-5)make Araithyrea the predecessorof Phlius.62Finally, Sikyon, standingalone in its ownhexameter, represents both control of thecoastal plainwest of theAsopos and the beginning of a newsection of the realm in the poem.63 Strabo(8.6.17 [C 378]) commentsthat some of the sectionsof the Catalogueare listed in topographicalorder; it is a logicalway to organize a listof place-namesand it doesnot require the hypothesis that an itiner- arylay behind the Catalogue(although it alsoobviously does not ruleit out).Only one place is listedfor each discrete region, and these places are clearlyrepresented as the mostimportant cities in theirrespective areas andones that were in controlof surroundingterritory: whether this situa- tion correspondsto the politicalsituation during the Bronze(or Early Iron)Age is anothermatter entirely. With Orneaiat Dorati,all of the placesin the list do haveMycenaean remains: Ancient Corinth has pro- ducedMycenaean material and much of the Mycenaeantown (if located in the areaof the Romanagora) may have been destroyed by lateroccu- pation.64Kleonai had an importantMycenaean settlement,65 and I have

61.This divisionof the plainis the havebeen a reality:Kirk (1985, p. 181) mostimportant Mycenaean settlement pointthat has caused the mostcontro- suggeststhe periodof declineat the in the Kleonaivalley. The site,however, versyand diverse explanations. Ander- endof the LateBronze Age. Vermeule hasbeen partially excavated (and as son (1995,p. 185) statesthe widespread (1987,p. 133) arguesthat Agamem- partof an importantexcavation by opinionthat it is hardto believethat non'srealm corresponds with elements Blegen)and Kleonai has not. I have "theMycenae of the shaftgraves, the in the mythof Adrastosat Sikyonand confirmedby autopsythe observations lion gateor thewarrior's vase" did not thattaken together the Catalogueand in Hope Simpsonand Lazenby (1970, controlthe entireArgive plain. Jame- the Sikyonianking-list (Paus. 2.5.6) p. 66) thatthe acropolisof Kleonaiwas son,Runnels, and van Andel (1994, mayrepresent a consistentBronze Age the centerof an importantMycenaean p. 59) considerthat "the geography of oraltradition predating the palatial settlement:"Indeed, to judgefrom the the northeasternPeloponnesos has period. sherdswe pickedup whenwe visited beengerrymandered to assign Aga- 62. See alsoSteph. Byz., s.v.'Apal- the placein 1960,the Mycenaean memnonand Diomedes, both impor- OI)pra,'Aparia, and@lOU5; M II (1), phasewas the mostimportant in this tantfigures in the narrativeof the Iliad, 1895,col. 374, s.v.Araithyrea area,the settlementapparently extend- homebases in the Argeia,"and Finkel- (G. Hirschfeld). ing forabout 300 metresnorth to south berg(1988, p. 39) notesthat the terri- 63. It wouldbe possibleto continue by about250 metreseast to west."It is toryof Diomedesand Argos has been the argumentfurther, but the places impossibleto determinethe relation- broughtinto alignmentwith the lot of listedafter Sikyon have not beenpre- shipbetween the sitesat present:only Temenos,and suggests that the Cata- ciselylocated, and it is alsopossible that Sakellariouand Pharaklas (1971, p. 45) loguein generalrepresents the interests the sectionfollowing Sikyon may em- havesubsequently argued that the of 7th-centuryAthens, Corinth, Argos, ploya differentorganizational method. actualstatus relationship between the andSparta. Others seek to finda his- 64. Seereferences for Corinth above two sitesin the valleymay have been toricalperiod other than the palatialin in n. 21. the reverseof the one usuallyimagined. whichsuch a politicalsituation could 65. Zygouriesis usuallycited as the A NEW BRONZE AGE SITE I45

arguedthat Dorati represents an impressive Mycenaean town. Araithyrea hasnot been located, but Mycenaean material is notlacking in thePhlius valleyand some have associated the cemetery at Aidonia with the name.66 Furthermore,these centers were the mostimportant places in their respectiveareas either in mythor factin the historicalperiod when the poemswere composed in roughlytheir present form (the 8th or 7th cen- tury):Mycenae is of coursethe focus oftheTrojanWar myth. Corinthwas 66. Vermeule1987, pp.134-135; bythat time the major power on theeastern gulf, and Kleonai by then cer- Krystalle-Votse1996, p.25. tainlycontrolled the Agios Vasilios valley. Orneai at Dorati,even if it had 67. Andrewes(1970, p.108) is amongthose who assignthe references ceasedto existat this time, was no doubtstill visible as an impressive ruin.67 to hostilitiesbetween an Orneaiand Visserhas argued that the inclusion of Orneaiin the Cataloguemay have Sikyonin the EarlyArchaic period to to do withits importancein myththrough association with Orneus. This the CorinthianOrneai (see above, is possiblebut, as seenabove, this myth is aslikely to belongoriginally to n.27): "thereseems to be a similar Corinthianas to ArgiveOrneai, and a visibleBronze Age site is more confusionin PausaniasX.18.5, a ded- likelyto haveaccrued such a mythicpast.68 Araithyrea was seen as the icationat Delphiby'Opvraxat ot sv q 'ApyoB8lfor the repulseof Silyonians predecessorto Phlius,which controlled its valleyin the historicalperiod. who hadoppressed them in war(cf. Thus,even if theplaces on thelist were never the controllingBronze Plut.De Pyth. or. 15, 401d).All this Agesettlements in theirrespective settings or at the same time, they could wouldbe easierto understandif there havebeenperceived in a subsequentperiod to havebeen powerfill cities of wasin fact,or hadonce been, an Or- the BronzeAge, or convincinglyrepresented as suchin a mytho-history neaiin the neighborhoodof Sikyonand Corinth."(Andrewes interprets the thatwas after all set in theheroic past. Dorati therefore makes better sense phraseot sv q 'ApyoB86as an addition of the Catalogue'sdescription of the realmof Agamemnon,whether one by Pausanias,not as a directquote from wishesto interpretit asrepresenting the real political geography of a phase the dedication.)In the associationof ofthe Bronzeor EarlyIron Age, orwhether one chooses to seeit asmerely this conflictwith the CorinthianOrneai a logicallyorganized description of a "gerrymandered"realm attempting he is followedby Lolos(1998, pp. 49, 102);I planto explorethe issueof the to reconcilemyths and traditions about visible remains with contempo- possiblecontinuation of Corinthian rarypolitical conditions.69 The significantpoint is thatwith Orneaiat Orneaiinto the EarlyArchaic period Dorati,the realmis clear,logical, and has a definitetopographical order; morefully in a futurearticle. the audienceof theIliadwould havehad no difficultyin believingthat it 68. Visser1997, p.161. hadexisted as a politicalreality at some unspecified time in theheroic age. 69. SeeJameson, Runnels, and van The identificationof Doratias Orneaimakes sense of the orderof place- Andel1994, and above, n. 61. 70. In this light,see the recentarticle namesin the list andprovides an explanationfor the inclusionof Orneai by Kolonas(1996-1997) in whichhe in the list thatfits with virtually any interpretation of the dateand histo- summarizesthe resultsof researchin the ricityof the Catalogue. westernportion of"Agamemnon's realm" Evenif onedoes not acceptthat Dorati can with some confidence be overthe pastfifteen years. He listsmany

. . . . . associatedwith the Orneaiof the HomericCatalogue and of Strabo,the new sltes,lnc uclng onesln tize reglon site meritsattention because of its commandinglocation and abundant of A'cytovand the AtytaSstaxpa, and concludes(p. 490) thatthe Mycenaean surfacematerial, and because of the strongpossibility that structures are presencein the regionof Achaiawas preserved.The predominanceof Mycenaeanpottery suggests that Dorati "powerfuland populous," and that "this shouldprove to havea significantLH settlementphase. Given the dearth new evidencehas indicated the high of attestedlarge Mycenaean settlements in theCorinthia and the continu- standardof culturaldevelopment of the ingcontroversies surrounding the interpretation ofthe Catalogue of Ships, Mycenaeaninhabitants, thus challeng- ing the prevailingview that Achaea was futurework at thissite is to be encouragedand the factunderscored that, onlya peripheraland rather backward evenin ourday in areaswell traversed, there is stillmuch to discoverin the regionof the Mycenaeanworld." Greeklandscape.70 I46 JEANNETTE MARCHAND

REFERENCES

Alcock,S. 1988.'LargeSite' Survey, Crielaard,J.P. 1995."Homer, History, Phlius1986,"AJA 92, pp.233-234 andArchaeology," in Homeric Ques- (abstract). tions:Essays in Philology,Ancient .1991. aUrbanSurvey and History,and Archaeology, Including the Polisof Phlius,"Hesperia 60, the Papersof a ConferenceOrganized pp.421-463. by theNetherlands Institute atAthens Alin,P. 1962. Das Ende der mykenischen (lS May 1993), J. P.Crielaard, ed., Fundstattenaufgriechischen Festland, Amsterdam,pp.201-288. Lund. Demakopoulou,K., ed.1996. The Aly,W.1950. aZumneuen Strabon- AidoniaTreasure: Seals andJewellery text,"PP 5, pp.228-263. of theAegeanLate BronzeAge. Anderson,J. G. T., andJ. K.Anderson. NationalArchaeologicalMuseum, 1975.aA Lost City Discovered?" Athens,30 May-1 September1996, CSCA8, pp. 1-6. Athens. Anderson,J.K. 1995.aThe Geometric Dickinson,O. T. P.K.1972. aLate Catalogueof Ships,"in TheAgesof HelladicIIA andIIB: Some Homer,a Tributeto Emily Townsend Evidencefrom Korakou," BSA 67, Vermeule,J. B. Carterand S. P. pp. 103-112. Morris,eds., Austin, pp. 181-191. . 1986."Homer, the Poetof the Andrewes,A. 1970.AHistorical Com- DarkAge," Greece and Rome33,2nd mentaryon Thucydides IV, Oxford. ser.,pp.2(}37. Blegen,C. W. 1920.aCorinth in Dunbabin,T. 1948."The Early History PrehistoricTimes," AJA 24, of Corinth,"JHS68, pp.59-69. pp.1-13. Finkelberg,M.1988. "Ajax'sEntry in . 1921.Korakou, a Prehistoric the HesiodicCatalogue of Women," Settlementnear Corinth, Boston. CQ38, pp.31-41. . 1928.Zygouries, a Prehistoric Fossey,J.1990. "The Perakhora Pen- Settlementin theValley of Cleonae, insulaSurvey," EchCl 34, n.s. 9, Cambridge,Mass. pp.201-211. .1930-1931."Gonia," MMS 3, Frazer,J. G. [1897]1965. Pausanias's pp.55-80. Descritfionof GreeceIII, repr., New Bookidis,N., andJ.E. Fisher.1972. York. aTheSanctuary of Demeterand Frickenhaus,A., andW. Muller.1911. Koreon Acrocorinth:Preliminary "Ausder Argolis," AM 36, pp.21- ReportIV: 1969-1970," Hesperia 38. 41, pp.283-331. Gauvin,G., andJ.Morin.1997. .1974. aSanctuaryof Demeter "Quelquessites prehistoriques a la andKore on Acrocorinth:Prelimi- peripheriedes plaines de Cleonees naryReport V: 1971-1973," et Phlionte:Une note,"in Argolo- Hesperia43, pp.267-307. Korinthiaka1, G. Gauvin,J.Morin, Broneer,O. 1951.Investigationsat andJ. Fossey,eds., Amsterdam, Corinth,1950,"Hesperia 20, pp. l-13. pp.291-300. Gebauer,K. 1939.Forschungenin der CorinthI.1 = H. N. Fowlerand Argolis,"JdI54,cols.268-294. R. Stillwell,Introduction, Topogra- Giovannini,A. 1969.Etude historique phy,Architecture (Corinth I, pt. 1), surles originesdu Cataloguedes Cambridge,Mass.,1932. Vaisseaux,Berne. CorinthIII.1 = C. Blegen,R. Stillwell, Griffin,A.1982. Sikyon,OXord. O. Broneer,and A. Bellinger, Hatzepouliou-Kallire,E. 1984. "Ar- Acrocorinth:Excavations in 1926 f ava HE xat ME otxtopov o Bovo (CorinthIII, pt.1), Cambridge, Arnowrnpa,"ArchDelt33,1978,A' Mass.,1930. [1984],pp. 325-336. CorinthXIII = C. Blegen,H. Palmer, Herter,H.1932. De Priapo,Tubingen. andR. Young,The North Cemetery Hood,S. 1995.aThe Bronze Age (CorinthXIII), Princeton 1964. Contextof Homer,"in TheAgesof A NEW BRONZE AGE SITE I47

Homer,a Tributefo Emily Townsend Lolos,G. J.1998.aStudies in the .1980. StudiesinAncienf Greek Vermeule,J. B. Carterand S. P. Topographyof Sikyonia"(diss. Univ. Topography,Pt. 3: Roads,Berkeley. Morris,eds., Austin, pp. 25-32. of California,Berkeley). Protonotariou-Deilake,E.1974. Hope Simpson,R. 1965.A Gazeffeer McGregor,M.1941. aCleisienes of aVAylogrrpaol,uos,"ArchDelf 26, andAtlas of MycenaeanSites (BICS Sicyonand the Panhellenic 1971,B' 1 [1974],pp. 68-71. Suppl.16), London. Festivals,"TAPA 72, pp.266-287. Pullen,D. 1990.aThe Early Bronze . 1981.Mycenaean Greece, Park Miller,S. G.1982.Kleonai, the Neme- Age Villageon TsoungizaHill, Ridge,N.J. an Games,and the LamianWar," in AncientNemea," in L'Habitategeen Hope Simpson,R., andO. T. P.K. Studiesin AthenianArchitecture, prehistorique:Actesdela Tableronde I)ickinson.1979. A Gazeffeerof Sculpture,and TopographyPresented internationale(BCH Suppl.19), AegeanCivilisation in the Bronze fo HomerA.Thompson (Hesperia P.Darcque and R. Treuil,eds., Paris, Age 1: TheMainland and Islands, Suppl.20),Princeton, pp.100-108. pp.331-346. Goteborg. .1994.Sosikles andthe Robinson,H.1976.Excavations at Hope Simpson,R., andJ.F. Lazenby. Fourth-CenturyBuilding Program Corinth:Temple Hill,1968-1972," 1970. The Catalogueof the Shipsin in the Sanctuaryof Zeusat Nemea," Hesperia45, pp.203-239. Homer'sIliad, Odord. in Proceedingsof theInternational Rutter,J.1974."The Late Helladic IsthmiaVIII = C. Morgan,The Late Conferenceon GreekArchitectural IIIB andIIIC Periodsat Korakou BronzeAge Settlementand EarlyIron TerracoffasoftheClassicalandHel- andGonia in the Corinthia"(diss. Age Sansfuary(Isthmia VIII), lenisticPeriods, December 12-15, Univ.of Pennsylvania). Princeton1999. 1991, N. A. Winter,ed. (Hesperia .1979. aTheLast Mycenaeans Jameson,M., C. Runnels,and T. van Suppl.27),Princeton, pp.85-98. at Corinth,"Hesperia 48, pp.348- Andel.1994. A GreekCountryside: Mountjoy,P. A.1995. aThePottery of 392. TheSouthern Argolidf om Prehistory the LateHelladic Period," in . 1989."A Ceramic llefinition fo fhe PresenfDay, Stanford. ArtifactandAssemblage: The Finds of the LateHelladic I fromTsoun- Jones,H. L. [1927] 1954. The Geogra- from a RegionalSurvey of the South- giza,"Hydria 6, pp. 1-19. phy of StraboIV, London. ernArgolid,Greece 1: ThePrehistoric . 1990a."Pottery Groups from Jones,W. H. S. 1918. Pausanias and EarlyIron Age Pofferyand Lithic Tsoungizaof the Endof the Middle Descritfionof GreeceI, London. Artifacts,C. Runnels,l). Pullen,and BronzeAge," Hesperia 59, pp.375- Karo,G. 1913."ArchaologischeFunde S. Langdon,eds., Stanford, pp.52- 458. imJahre1912,"AA 1913, cols.95- 56. .1990b.The'Aegeanization' 132. .1999. RegionalMycenaean of an InlandCorinthian Village: Kelly,T. 1976. A Hisforyof Argos fo 500 DecoratedPoffery, Rahden. The Transitionfrom Middle Hel- B.C., Minneapolis. Musti,D.1986. PausaniaGuida della ladicto LateHelladic I atTsoun- Kilian,K. 1990."Patternsin the Cult GreciaII, Milan. giza(Nemea)," AJA 94, p. 329 Activityin the MycenaeanArgolid: NemeaII = S. G. Miller,ed., Excava- (abstract). HaghiaTriada (Klenies), the Profitis fionsaf NemeaII: TheEarly Hel- .1993. aReviewof AegeanPre- EliasCave (Haghios Hadrianos), lenisfic Sfadium) Berkeley2001. historyII: The PrepalatialBronze andthe Citadelof Tiryns,"in Cele- Niese,B.1877. aApollodorsCom- Age of the Southernand Central brationsof Death and Divinify in the mentarzum SchifEskatalogeals GreekMainland," AJA 97, pp.745- BronzeAge Argolid: Proceedings of fhe QuelleStrabo's," RhM 32, pp.267- 797. SixthIn fernafional Symposiumaf the 307. Sakellariou,M., andN. Pharaklas. SwedishInstitute af Athens,11-13 Papachatzes,N.1976. nOwoorvc'ov 1971.Kosoc>8cos-Kisworc (Ancient June 1988, R. Haggand G. Nord- ERAordosIls,ocriyryoc5: Ko,oc>0cofxor- GreekCities 3), Athens. quist,eds., Stockholm, pp. 185-197. Aofx>cxor,Aiens. Shear,I.1986.The PanagiaHouses at Kirk,G. 1985. TheIliad:A Commentary Perlman,P.2000. Cify and Sansfuaryin Mycenaeand the 'Potter'sShop' at 1: Books14, Cambridge. AncienfGreece: The Theorodokia in Zygouries,"in cAc'orsm1 sc5 r@O- Kolonas,L. 1996-1997. ANZ@TZ! fhePeloponnese (Hypomnemata 121), rcovE- MVA@v=5ACA 1= 60 sg IOV Mvxnvaixn Tosoypaqxia rqg Gottingen. Of>aAX=CXOV IOV ,oyov A',Athens, oAxaviat,"in IlKorcowrlocofxor, Pierart,M., andJ.-P. Thalmann.1980. pp.85-98. SUPP1.22,II, PP.468-490. aNouvellesinscriptions argiennes Sherratt,E.1990. 'Readingthe Texts': Krystalle-Votse,K. 1989. "Ta Aaxxv- (1),"in Etudesargiennes (BCH Archaeologyand the Homeric BiAlaaso xa A8dala Koplv0taq,"in Suppl.6),Paris, pp.256-278. Question,"Anfiquify 64, pp.807- cic'= sm1 scf rEXsoycow E. Mvicovoss Pikoulas,I. A.1995. 'O8CXO aC'XIVO xac 824. aCA 1= 60 ETVIOV =v=X=vTXOV IOU ar,llv> Ko,oc>dooro Syriopoulos,K. 1964.H rcgoocaropc'orqs ¢,oyovr, Athens,pp. 34-43. 'A,oros xorcqv 'A,oxorAc'or,Athens. nfiO7TOWOV, Athens. .1996. "TheExcavation of the Pritchett,W. K.1969.Studies in Thomas,P. 1988.aA Mycenaean Per- MycenaeanCemetery at Aidonia," AncienfGreek Topography, Pt.2: fumedOil Workshopat Zygouries?" in Demakopoulou1996, PP.21-30. Battlefields,Berkeley. AJA92, p. 254 (abstract). I48 JEANNETTE MARCHAND

. 1992."LH IIIB1 Pottery from Visser,E. 1997.Homers Katalog der Tsoungizaand Zygouries" (diss. SchXe,Stuttgart. Univ.of NorthCarolina, Chapel Weinberg,S. 1949."Investigationsat Hin). Corinth,1947-1948,"Hesperia 18, Tomlinson,R. 1972.Argos and the pp. 148-157. Argolidfromthe End of the Bronze Wells,B., ed. 1996.The Berbati-Limnes Age fo theRoman Occupafion, ArchaeologicalSurvey, 1988-1990 London. (SkrAth4.44), Stockholm. Touchais,G. 1979.aChronique des Wiseman,J.1978. TheLand of fheAn- fouillesen 1978 [Aidonia],"BCH cienfCorinthians, Goteborg. 103,p. 555. Wright,J. 1990."An Early Mycenaean . 1980."Chronique des fouilles Hamleton Tsoungizaat Ancient en 1979[Aidonia],"BCH104, Nemea,"in L'Habitategeen pre- p.595. historique:Actesde la Tableronde . 1987."Chronique des fouilles internationale(BCHSuppl.19), en 1986:Aidonia," BCH 111, P.Darcque and R. Treuil, eds., Paris, p.530. BCH Suppl.19, pp.347-357. vander Valk, M. 1971.EustathEi Com- Wright,J., J. Cherry,J. Davis,E. Man- mentariiad HomeriIliademPerfi- tzourani,and S. Sutton.1990. "The nentesI, Lyon. NemeaValley Archaeological Vermeule,E.1987. "BabyAigisthos Project:A PreliminaryReport," andthe BronzeAge," PCPS, Hesperia59, pp.579-659. n.s.33, pp.122-152.

JeannetteMarchand UNIVERSITYOF CALIFORNIAAT BERKELEY GRADUATEGROUP IN ANCIENTHISTORY AND MEDITERRANEANARCHAEOLOGY 7303 DWINELLEHALL (2600) BERKELEY,CALIFORNIA 94720-2600 Kleonai@aol. com