Last updated 10th July 2024: Online ordering is currently unavailable due to technical issues. We apologise for any delays responding to customers while we resolve this. For further updates please visit our website https://www.cambridge.org/news-and-insights/technical-incident
We use cookies to distinguish you from other users and to provide you with a better experience on our websites. Close this message to accept cookies or find out how to manage your cookie settings.
Published online by Cambridge University Press: 18 October 2013
One object of the excavations of 1907 was to attempt to determine the course of the city wall, so as to fix the limits within which the buildings mentioned by Pausanias were probably situated. In addition to the part traced by excavation in 1906 along the river bank (General Plan, O 15, 14, P 13, (Pl. I.)) I had observed in other places remains of Greek masonry and other indications which possibly belonged to the city wall. These were accordingly examined by excavation, and with the results thus obtained and the assistance of the stamped tiles which were found in great numbers at one or two points, it has been possible to determine approximately the line of the city wall, and consequently the extent of ancient Sparta.
page 5 note 1 B.S.A. xii. pp. 284 ff.
page 5 note 2 B.S.A. xii. pp. 280,436.
page 5 note 3 Expéd. de Morée, ii. Pl. 46, KK.
page 6 note 1 These numbers refer to the section on the stamped tiles, v. pp. 17 ff.
page 6 note 2 Paus. iii. 19. 7.
page 6 note 3 Hellenica vi. 5. 27.
page 6 note 4 See the section on the Stamped Tiles: p. 20.
page 7 note 1 Mr. Dickins however believes the ancient bridge to have stood here (B.S.A. xii. p. 437). This view would involve the assumption that the tile works of Athena Alea were not near her shrine.
page 7 note 2 Xenophon, loc. cit.
page 7 note 3 Vischer (Erinnerungen, p. 379) saw definite traces of the wall here; but Jochmus, (Jonrn. R. Geo. Soc. 1857, pp. 10 ff.)Google Scholar did not.
page 8 note 1 B.S.A. xii. pp. 284 ff.
page 8 note 2 B.S.A. xii. p. 309, Fig. 2.
page 8 note 3 The wall in the abandoned mill-stream north of the altar (B.S.A. xii. Pl. VII. P 12, pp. 300, 287, 438) is not part of the city wall. It runs in the wrong direction, and is made of large rough stones packed, not built, together. The upper courses are of smaller stones laid with earth; the city wall is always built of large cut blocks resting on a foundation of small stones. The wall in question is probably of a comparatively recent date, and intended as a defence against encroachments of the river.
page 8 note 4 The platform above the wall here is built of blocks torn from it, but is no part of the city wall; on the contrary it seems to belong to some quite late building.
page 8 note 5 B.S.A. xii. p. 438, Fig. 3.
page 9 note 1 Loring, J.H.S. 1895, pp. 42, 43.Google Scholar
page 9 note 2 MrDickins, however says that the embankment is ‘of similar material and construction to the bridge’ (B.S.A. xii. p. 437).Google Scholar This would involve the assumption that the city wall was built at the same time as the bridge, 1027 A.D., since it is similar in construction to the embankment.
page 9 note 3 C.I.G. 8704.
page 9 note 4 Expéd. de Morée, ii. Pl. 46.
page 9 note 5 B.S.A. xii. p. 437.
page 9 note 6 Pausanias, iii. 20. S; Loring, op. cit. pp. 41 sqq.; very possibly there stood here, as this part is very much exposed to the floods of the Eurotas, the παραπύλια mentioned in an inscription as having been ruined by the river, C.I.G. 1330, 1. 18.
page 10 note 1 iii. 18. 2.
page 10 note 2 B.S A. xii. p. 286, Fig. 2.
page 10 note 3 Called the ‘heights of Paktalia’ by Mr. Bosanquet in B.S.A. xii. p. 280; cf. ibid. p. 346, 1.
page 12 note 1 This stele (Mus. No. 839) which must be earlier than the third century B.C. is the best example yet found of a type that is apparently Laconian. A list of the known specimens is given in S.M.C. p. 179, No. 445 b, Fig. 58. The stele there mentioned as being in private possession at Slavochori, is now in the church of Hagios Nikon in the same village. To the list given must be added another stele outside the church of Hagios Nikolaos at Kalogoniá.
page 13 note 1 v page 43.
page 13 note 2 Of course this distance would not be constant. The towers of Nisyros are 23 metres apart (B.S.A. xii. p. 167, Fig. 12), but at Messene, Mantineia, Priene, and other sites the distance between the towers is irregular.
page 13 note 3 Towers of this shape are fairly common; they exist at Demetrias, 6·10 × 2·70 metres (Ath. Mitt. 1905, pp 221 ff.); Messene, 6·70 × 4·10 metres (Expéd. de Mortée, i. Pl. 39); Priene, 6 × 3·50 metres (Wiegand-Schrader, Priene, Pl. I.), and Orchomenos, 1·20–2·40 × 5·70–6·30 metres ( Frazer, , Pausanias, v. p. 183 Google Scholar).
page 14 note 1 v. Dörpfeld and others, Die Verwendung von Terrakotten, p. 16; cf. Furtwängler, Aegina. Pl. 63.
page 14 note 2 v. page 41, Type 57; v also page 24.
page 14 note 3 v. Dörpfeld, op. cit. p. 18.
page 15 note 1 v. page 24.
page 15 note 2 We have no material to enable any reconstruction at all similar to that of the walls of Athens: v. Choisy, Les murs d' Athènes.
page 15 note 3 Dörpfeld, op. cit. p. 14.
page 15 note 4 My warmest thanks are due to Dr. Dörpfeld for most kindly giving me information as to the details of tile roofs.
