Kephallénia archaeology & history: The ancient Greek cities

Abstract

A. INTRODUCTION Ancient Kephallénia (nearly 800 square kms), the largest of the Ionian Islands, had four ancient Greek poleis, Pale (near Lixouri), Krane (at Argostoli, the modern capital), Same (todays Sami), and Pronnoi, an inland city (supported by coastal Poros), each occupying a distinct part of the island. Nearby Ithaka (100 square kms) made up a fifth polis (cf. Fig. IN. 1a). The landscapes of Kephallénia (and Ithaka) are highly varied and often dramatic. Precipitation is sufficient, and there are fine conditions for husbandry and agriculture in several places, including the lowlands, as well as excellent natural harbours. The high mountains (1600+ m) of eastern Kephallénia still carry coniferous forests, an important ancient source of large timbers for ships and buildings. In spite of the naval role and important strategic position of Kephallénia at the mouth of the Bays of Patras and Corinth, only little is known about its ancient history (cf. Fig. IN. 1b). Seemingly, the poleis of the island were never united. Coins were minted by the Kephallénian poleis from around 500 BC to the early fourth century BC, clearly a phase of independence, and mutual competition. B. THE PROJECT Under the auspecies of the Sixth Ephorate for Antiquities at Patras an archaeological investigation of the landscapes and sites of the large tracts of northern, central, eastern, and south-eastern Kephallénia (Same, Pronnoi, etc.) was carried out during the early to mid-1990s by the Archaeological department, University of Copenhagen. This work, directed by the Editor, also involved the recording and mapping of ancient Greek walls and other structures in stone. Comprehensive studies, particularly of walls and planned cities, in other parts of Greece, and even beyond, were also made in this connection. Common methodology stresses the necessity of highly detailed cross-country surveys (usually in limited areas only). The Kephallénian operation, however, has been a conscious mixture of intensive and extensive work (across whole regions). Aided by detailed artefact studies, this undertaking has provided an overall picture of the archaeology of all periods across a very large area indeed and thus enabled an historical approach to the development. By contrast, the pioneer mapping and detailed typological-chronological study of the ancient Greek walls, in reality stone by stone, has been higly detailed. The archaeological surveys have revealed a total of more than five hundred settlement sites, usually representing several of the main chronological phases from the Palaeolithic to c1500 AD, and even later. (The cities comprise several settlement units.) This number of settlement sites and components, however high, is doubtless but only a sample of the original number. C. PREHISTORY AND EARLY HISTORY The Stone Age settlement of Kephallénia was extensive, including major Middle Palaeolithic coastal sites, suggesting the existence of early maritime contacts with the mainland, a large quarrying site, and many (inland) Neolithic settlements (cf. Fig. XII. 1, below). Obsidians (of Early Bronze Age) suggest other maritime contacts. From the (Mid- to Late) Bronze Age come both numerous settlement sites and graves, including fine tholoi, and several fortresses. The Iron Age, with the Geometric and Archaic periods, saw the establishment of several sanctuaries (city-, prominent site in the landscape-, or border-), and a series of small round or square Archaic border fortresses or fortified compounds between the poleis. The poleis centres themselves were not fortified with certainty until the (later) fifth century BC, at the earliest. (In fact, only the enceinte of brave but ignorant Same - besieged and conquered by Rome in 189-88 BC - may ever have been completed.) Incidentally, Corinth, expanding westwards during the Archaic period, does not seem to have played a strong role in Kephallénia (contrary to Ithaka), although it may have provided the stimuli for the sixth century BC temples of the former island. D. CLASSICAL ANTIQUITY Apart from the city centre of Krane and a very few remains at Pale etc., ancient walls only seem to have been preserved in the eastern parts of Kephallénia. Planned walled cities, in various states of completion, have been found at Same, Pronnoi, Poros, and Krane. Smaller architectural sites, fortresses, towers, etc., are also known. While the Kephallénian poleis have a long history of their own, the enceintes, the fine planned city- and town-scapes, etc., are seemingly mostly the result of "foreign" intervention. Athens was the major external power on Kephallénia during the mid- to late fifth, and, especially, the early fourth centuries BC (e.g., the "Messenian fortification" at Krane of the late fifth century BC; the elegant planned city and impressive parts of the enceinte of Same; various larger fortresses, etc., all from c375 BC). Around 300 BC, the major external powers were the Macedonian kingdoms. Probably Demetrios "Poliorketes" was responsible for most of the enceinte of Same, which is in eastern Greek masonry, and, in particular, for the impressive bastioned (but unfinished) enceinte near Krane with its large Athenian style dipylon gate, behind which is a curious, huge, but never built, planned city, known only from the grids of its intended streets. The Aitolian league was felt around 200 BC, and Rome, of course, very much thereafter. The archaeological surveys have revealed a rich settlement in the (later) Classical and Early Hellenistic periods (before 200/150 BC). A change in the general pattern, from numerous and higher lying sites in the "Greek" to fewer and lower lying ones in the "Roman" period - including several coastal villas of the imperial centuries - is also noted. Furthermore, for the "Greek" period, Same displays relatively little settlement outside its fine city, while, by contrast, the territory of neighbouring Pronnoi has many rural settlements and only a small city (although supported by the harbour of Poros). Thus, the cultural differences (and rivalry) between the Greek poleis, wellknown from the written sources, even seem to show in the settlement pattern. E. MIDDLES AGES TO RECENT TIMES Late Antiquity, with an important Christian basilica from around 500 AD at coastal Panormos/later Phiscardo, not far from Nicopolis (at present-day Preveza), represented a new growth in settlement. Byzantine Kephallénia is relatively poorly known, but Kephallénia did give name to a military district (thema). In the Norman/Italian phase (c1200 till c1500 AD), or even slightly earlier, the acropoleis of the ancient cities were re-fortified to serve as strongholds, and several monasteries were built. Further building, including fortresses, manors and fine churches, took place in the Venetian period (till c1800 AD). (Kephallénia-Ithaka were never part of the Ottoman Empire.) The British (till 1864) in particular developed the towns of Western Kephallénia, and built roads and bridges. The population of Kephalle ́nia peaked in the early twentieth century AD. In 1953 a major earthquake destroyed almost all of Kephallénia. With communication being more important already then than an optimal location vis-à-vis the agricultural and highland resources, the new, and less populous, settlement moved down to the main roads. This left a Greece before modernity in the form of dozens and dozens of ghost-villages, an ethnological present (with informants still around) turning slowly into the archaeological data of the future. F. CONCLUSIONS Kephallénia (with Ithaka) holds a rather anonymous position in the written history of Greece, and was always marginal to the Mediterranean development. The archaeology of Kephallénia - walled planned cities and all - has proved much richer than anticipated from earlier work on the island, and fills in the voids of the written sources. Indeed, Kephallénia is a fine example of the interplay betweeen the "little history" of local entities, materially defined and bound together in a regional patchwork, and the major forces, setting the larger stage, and being culturally dominant. Local society may seem a victim to such forces, but the latter were only successful for shorter periods at a time. This is one of the lessons of traditional Mediterranean civilization. The contrast with the North-European homeland of the visiting archaeologists on Kephalle ́nia is striking - steady growth millennia by millennia.