ICAA
International Centre for Albanian Archaeology
 |
 |
Latest News
Promotion of the ICAA Monograph Series Nr. 2
THE COMPLEX OF TUMULI 9, 10 and 11 in the NECROPOLIS of APOLLONIA (ALBANIA) by Maria Grazia Amore
On April 20, 2010 in the hall “Aleks Buda” of the Academy of Sciences was held the promotion of the new publication of the ICAA Monograph Series
Changes were brought to the “Cultural Heritage Law”
Recently some important changes were brought to the “Cultural Heritage Law” approved in 2003.
Field projects
Survey Fier-Levan
Introduction
The section Fier-Levan is part of the national road Fier-Vlorë,
which the Albanian Ministry of Transport and Telecommunications has
planned to build in the near future. Because of the fact that this
section runs close to an archaeological center, important such as
Apolonia, the International Center for Albanian Archaeology (ICAA)
together with the Albanian Rescue Archaeology Unit (ARAU) took the
initiative to organize an intensive surface survey project,
anticipating the development[1]. Never before in
the archaeological practice of the last ten years in the country a
proper archaeological project has anticipated imponent
infrastructure works. In this case the aim of this survey is the
identification of possible archaeological sites and monuments, as
well as the evaluation of the impact that the new infrastructure
will have on the archaeological heritage in the region affected by
the new road. The project, organized by ARAU and the Institute of
Archaeology of Tirana, took place during December 2004 and January
2005, with the participation of archaeologists[2] focused on the section Fier-Levan (Fig. 1). This will set the pace
for a more complex project called Roads Project which will aim to
survey the whole length of the new road till Vlora.
Figure 1: map of the road section Fier-Levan with tracts
Methodology In
order to acquire a more detailed knowledge of the area it was
decided to survey not just the width of the road, planned to be 20
m, but also two additional buffer parts at the sides of it, for a
total width of approximately 60 m. The whole surveyed area was
divided in tracts approximately 100 m long. However, it was not
always possible to keep all tracts at same length, because land
plots, canals, drainage ditches and other features required a
certain degree of flexibility, which is reflected in the fact that
the length of tract went from 65 m to 330 m. In most tracts the team
members walked the same length, except one case when a surveyor
walked 1 m in T006, while the rest of the team walked the usual
length.
The survey was intensive and systematic, and the distance between
the members was of 5 m, so to have a rigorous check of the ground.
Team members walked parallel to each other and to the direction of
the future road, starting from a virtual straight line (Fig. 2).
However, in some cases the distance among the field walkers became 8
m or 10 m, because the tracts crossed sometimes irrigation canals,
fences and marshes (such as in T078, T079, T087, T088, T090), and
were not easy to walk: as a consequence these tracts had only two
passes. Usually the tracts had three passes to cover all the width
of 60 m. The nature of the ground required a flexible application of
the methodology set at the beginning of the survey. Atypical were
T103 and T104, where three passes with 8 m distance between the
members were performed. These tracts (132 sqm) correspond to two
rotonda of the road, placed on the road of Pojani (T104) and in
Levan (T103), exactly where, according to the map, ends the section
Fier-Levan.
Figure 2: view of the team walking a tract
The measure of the distances walked was calculated by means of
converting into meters the number of steps made by each walker. The
numbering of these steps was done by mechanic clickers that each
field walker used. The direction of walking was set by the side
walkers of every pass, following compass bearings and permanent
objects in the field horizon. The side walkers, also, marked the
edges of the surveyed area with a naturally degradable red tape.
The planning and documentation of fieldwork was made possible by:
-maps: a) a topographical map of Albania 1:50 000; b) a detailed map
of the NW corridor of the road project Fier-Vlorë, built by Sintagma
and SWS Consulting Engineering srl 1:25 000[3];
-temporary and permanent signs (pegs) placed by the General
Directory of Roads along almost all the road section surveyed (Table
1);
-the help of the local people.
Part of the survey process was also the collecting of the material
visible on the ground during the walking. The material was divided
in three categories: tiles/bricks, pottery, small finds. This
division in this sequence was respected during the survey and in all
the documentation (log book and report). While walking all the
material visible on the ground was numbered and recorded, and the
diagnostic pieces were collected. It was considered diagnostic all
the material, such as tiles and bricks profiles, pottery fragments
of rims, handles, bases and walls from which it was possible to
rebuild the shape and to give a date of the original vessel; in some
cases the choice was determinate by the specific characteristics of
their fabrics. Small finds group included stone tools, glass
fragments, loom weights, spindle whorls, terracotta figurines,
coins, metal, wooden or bone objects, sculpture and architecture
fragments.[4]
Topographic description of the surveyed area
The survey of the section of the road Fier-Levan started at the
bottom of the hill of Ardenica, on the SW side, exactly where the
Seman River curves. Then it followed the Hoxhara Canal, oriented
E-W, leaving the town of Fier S of it. Close to Dërmenas the road
will curve, meeting at the NW the hills of Apolonia. Then it will
pass E of the village of Pojan, district of Sopi, and Shtyllas. The
line of the road ends 750 m W of the bridge of Levan. The section
Fier-Levan runs in the western Plain of Albania.
Difficulties in the survey were created not only by the
identification of the pegs, but also because of the presence of
drainage and irrigation canals, as well as marshes. Many of the pegs
found along this section were identified thanks to the local people
who new about the project of the road and even of its itinerary
which affects their fields, houses, or workshops. However, some pegs
placed by the General Directory of Roads had disappeared. On the
other hand, in some cases, the work was facilitated by the markers
left by the engineers on trees, bunkers, electrical poles, walls of
workshops, and bridges with annotations informing on measurements
and direction of the axis of the road. In the same way pegs of
concrete were found, used for measurements with total station and
marked with the symbols BM.
Data from the field
The surveyed area, ca. 17.5 km, was divided in 104 tracts, of which
47 (45%) did not produce any finds. In the other 57 tracts the
situation was various (Table 2). The finds were generally rare from
the starting point (the Seman River bend) till near Pojani (T058).
The same phenomenon was observed from the road which connects Sopi
to Shtyllas (T072) till Levan (T104). Concentrations of tiles and
bricks were found at the starting tract of the survey (T001), in
Dërmenas (042), and in the vicinity of Pojan (T056, T057).
An important aspect to mention is the different visibility of each
tract, depending on the nature of the soil: plowed or unplowed
plots, sown fields of wheat or fodder, and vineyards. The best
visibility, which reached even 90%, was offered by plowed and sown
fields. More problematic were tracts, like T024, where vineyards
extended on over 50% of their surface. In few cases surveying was
impossible in almost all the tract, like in T005, where there were
two gardens of fruit trees surrounded by a high fence.
Ceramic finds where sparse, in general. However, there were some
tracts which offer a different picture. Finds were moderate in all
the three categories (tiles/bricks, pottery, small finds) in T001,
T002, and T003 and even rarer in the following tracts. An exception
is T018, which produced a concentration especially of pottery,
exactly in the first pass of (1), (2), and (5), 120-150 m from the
starting line. Another concentration was found in the next tract
(T019), 10 m from the beginning of the first pass of (1), (2), and
(5). In the next tracts there were no more concentration, and the
finds, especially modern (fragments of modern tiles and bricks, and
fragments of the irrigation system pipes), were very rare.
As mentioned above, the situation changed in the vicinity of Pojani:
from T058 to T060, and from T063 to T065, the material was spread on
the whole surface of the tract. In T058, T059, and T060, besides the
Turkish pottery found usually, there were also fragments of
Hellenistic and Roman (T059) pottery. In tracts T063, T064, and T065
the same situation was attested. In T064, according to a local
farmer, ancient bricks joint with mortar have been found while
building a modern house.
Pottery
Most of the sherds found are of small dimensions and with the
surface damaged by plow and atmospherical elements. In general
pottery finds come from household ware, cooking pots and pitchers.
Less common, especially in the Hellenistic pottery, are opened
shapes such as plates and cups or bowls. In the Greek and Turkish
periods, where the highest quantity of pottery is grouped, transport
amphorae[5] (Figs. 3-4) and storage vessels are
found.
Figure 3: transport amphorae toes.
Figure 4: stopper of transport amphora.
In the Greek period the most frequent types of vessels are plain table amphorae and jars. Black-glazed pottery is rare and represented by drinking vessels; it is worth to mention a fragment of a molded black-glazed Hellenistic cup (Fig. 5).[6]
Figure 5: fragment of molded black-glazed cup, dated to the 2nd
century B.C.
On the other hand, fragments of tiles were frequent (Fig. 6). In the Roman period pottery is not abundant, but, among finds of this date, there are also red-glazed (presigillata)[7] and terra sigillata paterae (Fig. 7).
Figure 6: fragments of Hellenistic tiles.
Figure 7: fragments of Roman presigillata and terra sigillata
pottery.
The Turkish period is undoubtedly the best represented among the others, with abundant plain (Fig. 8), combed (Fig. 9)[8] , and glazed wares (Fig. 10). Early Modern sherds are also attested, especially from plates (Fig. 11).[9]
Figure 8: base fragments of plain pottery dated to the Turkish
period.
Figure 9: fragments of combed pottery dated to the Turkish period.
Figure 10: fragments of glazed pottery dated to the Turkish period.
Figure 11: fragments of pottery dated to the Early Modern period.
Small Finds
Small finds were rare. The Prehistoric period was represented only
by flints: three were found in T002, in T006, and T069 respectively.
Noteworthy are a loom weight and a spindle whorl (Fig. 12), both
Hellenistic, and a fragment of blue glass perhaps Roman, all found
in T059.[10] A conspicuous find, even if not strictly on the line of
the future road, is the one identified since the first day of
survey, the base of a marble column (Fig. 13) with the diameter
approximately of 0.75-0.80 m, 270˚ W of the first pass of (4) in
T002. The marble base was brought to the Museum of Apolonia
following its documentation in situ.
Figure 12: loom weight and spindle whorl dated to the Hellenistic
period.
Figure 13: base of marble column.
Conclusions
The survey of approximately 17 km long section of the road
Fier-Levan identified several artifacts concentrations on areas of
archaeological interests. Not surprisingly, a high density of finds
was recorded in the vicinity of Pojani, that means close to ancient
Apolonia. This concentration, which spread on the surface of three
tracts (T058, T059, T060), suggests a second and more careful
intervention − perhaps a test pit is needed − before the building of
the road Fier-Vlorë starts. Here the road goes through the protected
area, assigned as part of the Apolonia Archaeological Park. To the
west of the road the remains of important Archaic structures were
brought to light last Autumn by a small scale excavation of the ICAA
and the University of Cincinnati.[11] If we consider the results of
the survey that MRAP made in the area west of Apolonia, it becomes
clear and very important that the segment of the road between Pojan
and Sopi is tightly controlled during the process of road building.
Another area of interest is located within T018 and T019, where an
exceptional concentration of pottery and tiles/bricks might suggest
the existence of a farmhouse of the Post Medieval/Turkish Period. In
the other tracts, in general is not recorded anything more than rare
pottery fragments dated to the Turkish period.
Road Project 2005-Test Pits
__________________________________________________________
[1]Special thanks to Professor Richard Hodges who has been determinant in inspiring this project.
[2]Surja Lela, Enina Poçi, Sonila Metaj, and Rexhep Halili, who in the project and in the report will be named with numbers 1, 2, 3, and 4 respectively. The survey method was set up under the consultancy of Lorenc Bejko, who was named with number 5.
[3]Many thanks to Iris Pojani who made available this map obtained by the General Directory of Roads.
[4]The Road Project has followed the methodology experimented in the Mallakastra Regional Archaeological Project (MRAP). For further details see http://river.blg.uc.edu/mrap/MRAP_en.html
[5]Sciallano, M. and P. Sibella. 1991. Amphores: comment les identifier? Barcelone: 37 (Dressel 6A), 50 (Dressel 21-22).
[6]Corinth XVIII, i = E. Pemberton, The Sanctuary of Demeter and Kore. The Greek Pottery, Princeton 1989: pl. 21, 194a.
[7]Balzano, M. et al. 1994. Ceramica Romana-Guida allo studio I. Roma: 94.
[8]Komata, D. 1991. Qyteti Iliro-Arbëror i Kaninës. Tirana: 87, pl. XXXVII, 5.
[9]Dates from Late Roman to Modern periods are based on the chronology established by Vroom, J. 2003. After Antiquity. Ceramics and Society in the Aegean from the 7th to the 20th century A.C. Leiden: 28.
[10]Ceramic and small finds were analyzed under the consultancy of Professor Skënder Muçaj, Head of the Department of Late Antiquity and Middle Age at the Institute of Archaeology, and of Maria Grazia Amore.
[11]http://classics.uc.edu/~davis/Bonjaketreport2004.zip