Butrint 3: Excavations at the Triconch Palace

By William Bowden and Richard Hodges

This engaging and well-illustrated volume describes the excavations of a large urban sector, the so-called Triconch Palace, of the Adriatic seaport of Butrint. In so doing it adds to the new paradigm for the development of Roman towns in the Mediterranean. The book traces the changing nature of this rich and varied area - from 2nd-century Roman townhouses, to a 4th-century elite domus, to a Mid Byzantine trading area to late medieval allotments - and reveals the rhythms of Butrint and its Mediterranean connections. This is accompanied by discussions of the elaborate mosaic decoration of the palatial phase and their articulation of elite living, as well as of in-depth discussions of the implications of elite and domestic architecture in late antiquity and the Mid Byzantine period.

• Language: English
• Publisher: Oxbow Books
• Release date: Sep 8, 2011
• ISBN: 9781842176450

Book preview

1 Introduction

William Bowden and Richard Hodges

[A]mong the fundamental problems of Byzantine history it would be hard to name one that has been studied less than has that of the cities.

(Ostrogovsky 1959, 47)

When Ostrogovsky wrote these words, the cities of the post-Roman Mediterranean were little understood. Over the following decades, however, the late antique city has become the subject of an ongoing academic debate and the study of Roman and post-Roman urbanism has effectively become an academic sub-discipline, generating a huge body of literature within the wider field of late antique studies (e.g. Brogiolo, Gauthier and Christie 2000; Brogiolo and Ward Perkins 1999; Carver 1993; Christie and Loseby 1996; Lavan 2001; Liebeschuetz 2001; Popovič 1984; Rich 1992).

The Butrint Foundation’s programme has focused on Butrint in southern Albania, hitherto a little-known ancient and medieval port in a Mediterranean context. Given the opportunity to survey and excavate not only in several key areas within the deserted town, but also within its lagoonal micro-region, since 1994 we have been developing a new paradigm for the nature of an Adriatic Sea port between the Hellenistic and Ottoman ages (cf. Hodges 2006). As outlined in the introduction to Byzantine Butrint (Hodges et al. 2004), the first volume dealing with the results of the Butrint Project, the ongoing debate on urban transformation formed the academic background to the Butrint Project, which is in its fifteenth year at the time of writing. Unsurprisingly over this long duration the debate has changed and fluctuated, while at the same time the project itself has developed and responded to the changing circumstances of post-communist Albania. The Butrint Project in 2011 is responding to questions that have developed out of the research at the site over the last 17 years, yet also has to be understood in the context of the changing nature of the wider debate on Roman and medieval urbanism.

This volume describes the excavations of a large urban sector of Butrint. The excavations followed small scale excavations made by earlier archaeological missions to Butrint, but in this case involved uncovering almost all the so-called Triconch Palace and part of an adjacent building, which we called the Merchant’s House.¹ This sector of Butrint lies midway along the Vivari Channel, and it was clearly a locus of activity long before, and long after, the construction of the 5th-century Triconch Palace. Indeed, the present volume describes the sequence of occupation here from the 2nd century or earlier until the 16th century and later. This sequence encompasses a succession of Roman residential buildings that last in one form or another until the desertion of the Roman town in the early 7th century. It also encompasses the reoccupation of the area, first intermittently in Middle Byzantine times, then intensively for a brief spell in the 10th to 12th centuries, before the channel-side plots were turned over to allotments and the occasional location of fishing activities prior to the making of the woodland park today. The archaeology of this area then, represents a distinctive section of the ancient city, different in character from the more familiar public centre around the theatre, different, too, from the hillslopes of the acropolis, or indeed, the acropolis itself. In many ways, the excavations reveal the rhythms of Butrint as a small but enduring port close to the meeting of the Adriatic and Ionian Seas and chart its changing maritime connections.

This report does not describe the changing topography of the port in Roman and post-Roman times. This will only be possible once the full reports on other excavations in the forum, in the suburb on the Vrina Plain, and the maritime villa at Diaporit, for example, have been completed. Nevertheless, we offer a further opportunity (enlarging upon our earlier observations – see Bowden 2003; Hansen 2009; Hodges 2006; Hodges 2008; Hodges, Bowden and Lako 2004) to examine how an important sector in this town evolved, and how this history begins to throw new light on our understanding of urbanism in the Adriatic and Ionian Seas.

Figure 1.1. Butrint in relation to its surrounding region

The site of Butrint

Butrint sits at the crossroads of the Mediterranean, commanding the sea-routes up the Adriatic Sea to the north, across the Mediterranean to the west, and south through the Ionian islands. Like ancient Dyrrhachium (modern Durrës) to the north it also controlled a land-route into the mountainous interior. The abandoned ancient and medieval port is located 3 km inland from the Straits of Corfu in south Albania (Fig. 1.1). For much of its long history the settlement was confined to a hill on a bend in the Vivari Channel, which connects the Straits to the large inland lagoon of Lake Butrint. A narrow plain, formerly a marsh, separates the channel from a band of hills to the south, along which runs the present frontier between Albania and Greece. Immediately east of Lake Butrint, a range of hills and low mountains rise up to 824 m, effectively creating a basin around the ancient city and the inland lake.

The walled city, inscribed as a Unesco World Heritage Site in 1992, covers an area of c. 16 hectares (Fig 1.2), but geophysical survey on the eastern side of the Vivari Channel shows that at times in antiquity Butrint covered as much as 30 hectares (see Bescoby 2007) (Fig. 1.3). The walled city comprises two parts: the acropolis and the lower city. The acropolis is a long narrow hill, approximately 200 m long and 60 m at its widest, that rises up to 42 m above sea level at its east end; its sides are accentuated by a circuit of walls that separate it from the natural and artificial terraces gathered around the flanks of the hill. The lower city occupies the lower-lying contours down to the edge of the Vivari Channel. Remains of a cemetery are recorded on the spine of the hill running west from the acropolis (Budina 1988; Ugolini 1937, 174), but its extent is unknown. The most obvious monument outside the city walls, on the opposite side of the channel, is the Triangular Castle, which after 1572 became the nucleus of the early modern settlement (Karaiskaj 1980, 33–35; Karaiskaj 2009, 95–105; Leake 1835, 95). Beyond the fortress to the east, opposite the walled site, there are substantial remains of Roman to Byzantine date. These formed part of the Roman and late antique town.

Figure 1.2. The walled city of Butrint, with the Triconch Palace in the immediate foreground

The so-called Triconch Palace at Butrint was first noted in the 1920s, when the Italian Archaeological Mission to Butrint interpreted a tri-apsidal building as una chiesa bizantina. The interpretation of the building as a martyrium church was followed subsequently until 1994 when it was recognised as the triclinium of a palatial late Roman domus. From 1994 until 2003, the Triconch Palace and its surroundings were the subject of extensive excavations revealing a rich late antique and medieval occupation sequence.² The intention of these excavations was to understand how a major residence developed during the Roman period and to understand what happened to it in the post-Roman period. It was intended that these excavations would inform the ongoing debates on the nature of late Roman aristocratic housing (discussed further in Chapter 8) and provide an insight into the changing social and economic fortunes of Butrint itself between the Roman and medieval periods.

A brief overview of the excavations

The Triconch Palace lies of the south side of the city close to the Vivari Channel that connects Lake Butrint to the Straits of Corfu. The excavated area encompassed the area of the late antique domus together with an area to the west that appeared to have a different, possibly commercial, function (Fig. 1.4). It became clear that the area represented three separate building plots and something of the relationship between these plots (and perhaps their owners) could be discerned through the excavation (Bowden, Hodges, and Lako 2002). Of equal importance was the relationship between the buildings and the Vivari Channel and the way in which those relationships were changed by the construction of the late antique city wall, which was dated by the excavations to the first half of the 6th century.

The earliest origins of channel-side occupation in the Triconch Palace area could not be determined. However, as the Roman colony of Buthrotum prospered, expanding out from its Hellenistic nucleus at the foot of the acropolis hill, a modest town house occupied the plot beside the Vivari Channel. The earliest known structures date to the 2nd century AD. By the end of the 4th century this was enlarged into a major house – a domus – with a small peristyle. This relatively small but affluent property provided the starting point for making a much more ambitious dwelling here at the start of the 5th century. By occupying the adjacent properties, the architect was able to enlarge the peristyle, create an impressive marine doorway, and add a triconch dining room of substantial proportions. But the palace was never completed. Instead, its rooms were occupied by several small structures. Notwithstanding the enclosure of the area behind a town fortification in the first half of the 6th century, these small dwellings and their successors were used intermittently until the mid to late 6th century, with their occupants able to access a range of goods from across the central and eastern Mediterranean.

Figure 1.3 Butrint, showing all extant monuments

Figure 1.4. The excavated area of the Triconch Palace and the Merchant’s House with possible property boundaries marked

Major change came by the mid 7th century when the area was abandoned, and thereafter this area was seldom occupied in any permanent form. The rising water table, we surmise, may have made parts of it uninhabitable in the winter months. From the 10th to 12th centuries, however, the walled town became the focus of renewed activity, evidenced by deposition of significant quantities of material in the former courtyard area of the Triconch Palace. This was seemingly the context for new construction – at least one post-built dwelling that later was re-fashioned in stone was discovered here. Yet within a century or so, occupation of the area once again diminished. From the 13th century onwards, this section of the medieval town was maintained, we surmise, principally for its gardens and in all probability fishing activities.

The adjacent area to the west of the Triconch Palace contained a substantial but smaller later Roman building, the so-called Merchant’s House (although any commercial use remains ambiguous). It was not possible to excavate this complex fully, but one part had a lower floor decorated with fragments of marble veneer. At the end of the 5th century it was incorporated into the structure of the new city wall, which nonetheless allowed the owners of the property to maintain their access to the channel, which was facilitated by a small gate in the wall. Occupation of the building actually ceased at about this time, but in the ground separating it from the city wall and channel, there was evidence of occupation until the later 6th century. Thereafter, this channel-side area was partially covered in crushed mussel shells, indicating fishing activity, probably throughout the Middle Byzantine period. A cobbled surface or road, and a number of buildings of varying construction, suggest a short-lived bid to reoccupy this area in the 11th century, as occurred in the adjacent Triconch Palace area. Thereafter, following the closure of the gate to the channel in the 13th century and the construction of a tower at the start of the 14th century, like the Triconch Palace area, this ground was maintained primarily as gardens or agricultural land for nearby properties whose presence is evidenced by quantities of 13th- to 15th-century ceramics.

Methodology and this report

The first phase of the Triconch Palace excavations took place over four seasons between 1994 and 1999. Owing to the logistical difficulties of working in Albania during this period, this work was mainly an assessment exercise that involved sampling the archaeological assemblage in different parts of the site. Although relatively limited in scale this work succeeded in both producing major excavated assemblages and defining the basis of the occupation sequence at the site. These excavations are described in some detail in Gilkes and Lako 2004, although some elements will be repeated here in the context of this final report.

Figure 1.5. The Triconch Palace excavations in progress during the last season of excavation in 2003

From 2000–2003 major open area excavations were carried out, focused on the southern and eastern parts of the site (Fig. 1.5). These succeeded in clarifying and refining the sequence provided by the 1994–99 work and allowed us to understand the development of the Triconch Palace as a building and the contemporaneous use of the Merchant’s House area to the west. A complex occupation sequence dating to the period following the abandonment of the Triconch as a grandiose residence was also recovered, while in the Merchant’s House area the sequence provided reliable evidence for the late 5th-century construction of the city wall, together with evidence of a sequence of structures that extended to the end of the 6th century. Both the Triconch and Merchant’s House areas also produced complex sequences of intermittent occupation from the 10th to the 15th centuries.

In consequence the eight major phases identified in the 1994–99 report have been expanded to fifteen (Tables 1.1 and 1.2). In an effort to render this final report more readily comprehensible, phases have been limited to those that denote substantive changes in layout and function. Smaller structural alterations have been accommodated within sub-phases where necessary. Although the upper levels of walls often collapsed or were demolished it is apparent that foundations or the lower parts of walls would have remained visible and were often subsequently reused. Consequently the plans show all structures that were not clearly buried by later deposits, although in some cases they may have only stood to just above foundation level.

This report attempts to present the evidence in a way that is sufficiently comprehensive to allow readers to formulate their own interpretation if they so wish. However, the excavations of the Triconch Palace and the adjacent Merchant’s House area produced more than 3000 individual context records and consequently a full description of the archaeological sequence would be both impractical and indigestible. This report will therefore take the form of a narrative description of the phases of construction and occupation on the site, with descriptions of individual contexts and relationships limited as far as is possible to those that are pivotal for the definition and understanding of these phases. This volume is limited to descriptions and discussion of the archaeological and structural sequences. The primary record is housed on the Integrated Archaeological Database system developed by the York Archaeological Trust. Full reports on the finds will appear in subsequent volumes.

A common problem of archaeological reports is that interpretations and sequences that were tentative or ambiguous at the moment of excavation become more unequivocal during the process of writing the results in narrative form. At the Triconch Palace excavations, very complex depositional sequences were encountered and although we are confident that the analysis of the site is reliable and robust as a whole, it would be dishonest to suggest that no ambiguities are present within the interpretation presented here. Consequently, we have attempted where possible to provide some indication of the degree of confidence with which elements of the sequence have been identified, together with offering alternative explanations and possibilities where appropriate.

Table 1.1. 1994–1999 phasing

Table 1.2. Revised phasing following 2000–2003 excavations

The workforce was composed primarily of experienced excavators from UK and Ireland-based professional rescue archaeology units (who volunteered their services to the project), Albanian student volunteers (previously trained within the Butrint training excavation) and local workmen. The latter were generally used only for removal of vegetation and topsoil, shovelling spoil and moving wheelbarrows. This is obviously a departure from many excavations in the Mediterranean where, through legal requirements or tradition, most excavation is carried out by labourers, and the detailed nature of the sequence recovered reflects the use of professional archaeologists accustomed to working with complex stratified sequences.

One final point: from the outset it was envisaged that the Triconch Palace area would be conserved and presented as a ‘new’ (i.e. post-Ugolini) monument within the archaeological park at Butrint (Martin 2001). Being beside the Vivari Channel fortifications, it offers a natural midway point for an alternative trail to the path through Butrint, which begins at the Venetian Tower and ends at the Water Gate close to the Great Basilica. Richard Andrews created a design for the conservation and presentation of the Triconch Palace area in 2001. These were adopted by the Butrint National Park, and the work was completed in July 2005 under the overall direction of Daniel Renton assisted by Jerry O’Dwyer and Albana Hakani (Fig. 1.6). Agron Islami (Institute of Monuments, Tirana) aided by Elda Omari (University of Padua) was responsible for consolidating all the mosaic pavements here (Fig. 1.7).

Figure 1.6. The Triconch Palace following the conservation programme

Figure 1.7. Cleaning of the mosaics in progress prior to consolidation

Notes

1. The evidence for this building having a commercial function remains ambiguous. However, the name ‘Merchant’s House’ stuck from an early stage of the excavation, and as such is present throughout the primary archive. Although we are aware of the problems caused by the persuasive power of such names, we have decided to continue using it in order to avoid having to eliminate it from the primary record. Equally the use of more neutral terms such as Plot 1 structures risks rendering the report more indigestible than it is already.

2. For the 1994–2003 excavations see Bowden et al. 2000; Bowden, Hodges and Lako 2002; Bowden and Mitchell 2007; Hodges, Bowden and Lako 2004; Gilkes et al. 2002; Gilkes and Lako 2004; Hodges et al. 1997. For earlier work and interpretation see Anamali 1993: 470; Lako 1990; Meksi 1988: 207–8; Ugolini 1937: 176.

THE EXCAVATIONS

2 The domus and the Triconch Palace

William Bowden, Karen Francis, Oliver Gilkes and Kosta Lako

Introduction

This chapter details the excavations of the Roman and late Roman dwellings in the central and eastern areas of the Triconch Palace site (plots 2 and 3), from the earliest occupation phases noted on the site, until the last and most grandiose of the elite dwellings on the site: the Triconch Palace itself and its abandonment as an elite residence shortly after its construction in the early 5th century. The complex late antique levels of the 5th to 7th centuries are examined in the following chapter. In an attempt to make a large body of data more accessible, detailed descriptions of the structures and archaeology of each phase are concluded with short summary and interpretation sections.

Phase 1: 3rd century and earlier (c. AD 100–250)

The earliest occupation(Fig. 2.1)

The area of the triconch was occupied from at least the 2nd century AD and probably earlier, although the high ground water meant that it was only possible to reach deposits of this date on the west side of the site. Owing to the fragmentary nature of these earliest structural remains, they have been grouped together under one phase, although it is clear that not all were erected as part of one contemporaneous construction programme. Nonetheless, the evidence suggests that from around the 2nd century onwards the central area of the site was occupied by a unified complex of buildings that may well have been arranged around a central garden or courtyard.

The most significant assemblages were recovered from excavations within Rooms 29 and 31, where a major 2nd century deposit (3394) overlay a small structure represented by walls 5662 and 3392 (Fig. 2.2). This structure abutted wall 1282 (below the level of the later stylobate 1356). Wall 1282 in turn abuts wall 1355. Fragmentary traces of a further late 2nd-to early 3rd-century building, represented by walls 5525 and 5657, were also found, with dating provided by a late 2nd-century deposit (5645) beneath the walls, and a deposit (5523) dating to 200–250 that lay above them.

Wall 1282 seems to have delineated the western extent of a major complex. Only one entrance on this side (later blocked by 1835) can now be seen (Fig. 2.3), although much of 1282 was truncated by the insertion of the later stylobate 1356. Of particular interest in this area was the discovery of a trackway (5554), which ran between the major structure represented by walls 1355 and 1282, and that which was represented by walls 5525 and 5567, before curving to avoid the building comprising walls 5662 and 3392 (Figs 2.2 and 2.4). This trackway took the form of a wide linear depression (reminiscent of a ‘hollow way’) and showed no sign of a surface surviving from its earliest phases, although a rough mortar surface (5545) may have been laid subsequently. The earlier phases of the trackway date to the first half of the 3rd century (dating provided by underlying deposit 5523 (AD 200–250) and 5546 (AD 240–250) which filled much of the depression) (Fig. 2.5). As noted above, the deposit beneath the trackway (5523) overlay the earlier structure represented by walls 5525 and 5657 and so the track clearly post-dated this structure.

Traces of earlier structures were also detected below the later mosaic in the long gallery (Room 18). It is clear that, as at the nearby villa of Diaporit, buildings underwent frequent alteration during this period, with many minor changes occurring over a very short space of time.

On the eastern side of the central plot, there is also evidence for earlier structures, although in this case the early date must be extrapolated from wall relationships rather than stratified materials. Wall 1058/1062/1082/1083 (hereafter referred to as 1058) is thought to be contemporary with the 2nd-century wall 1282 (mentioned above) on the basis of its position and the fact that (like 1282) it predates the walls of Rooms 19–23 (see below). Both 1282 and 1058 share a similar distinctive construction technique (reminiscent of that of the scaenae frons of the theatre) featuring corners (1976 and 1083) made from well cut limestone blocks separated by mortar courses with horizontal and vertical scoring (Fig. 2.6). They are linked by a long southern wall (5000), which seemingly underlies walls 1976 and 1083 (which form the corners of walls 1282 and 1058).

Figure 2.1. Phase 1 (3rd century and earlier) showing features discussed in text

Figure 2.2. Detailed plan of western end (walls 1282 and rooms 29 and 31) showing phase 1 (3rd century and earlier) features

Wall 5589 (the continuation of 1058) abuts a structure comprising walls 5580, 5581, 5582, 5583, 5584 and 1939 (Fig. 2.7). One element of this building (5584) is constructed using the distinctive opus mixtum noted in late 1st- and 2nd-century buildings at Diaporit in which diagonally cut bricks are used with the long diagonals forming the external face of the wall, thereby economising on the number of bricks required. Wall 1939 continued as wall 5610 to form the south wall of a possible northern range of buildings.

It is noteworthy that there is only one entrance on this eastern side of the complex (see below for further discussion in relation to the phase 2 house). Equally the angle of the eastern boundary walls suggests that they respect a pre-existing land division, perhaps relating to another property to the east (on the area designated plot 3), or alternatively to a road or alley leading to the channel side (see Fig. 2.1). The presence of a major city drain on this alignment (see Fig. 2.49) (a drain that also appears in the so-called Gymnasium to the north) suggests that the second hypothesis is more likely, although no clear sign of a road was detected during excavation.

Figure 2.3. Elevation of wall 1282 showing blocking 1835

Figure 2.4. View of 3rd-century trackway beneath Rooms 29 and 31, looking north (1 m scale)

A further series of early walls (1169, 1350, 1306) are present on the northeast side of the site, which were overlain by deposits of the mid 3rd to 4th century. These are discussed in detail by Gilkes and Lako (2004, 154–6) and are shown here on Fig. 2.1. In the earlier report it was only possible to say that these features dated to the 3rd century or earlier. However, the dating of the structures on the west of the site to the 2nd century or earlier (which the coherence of the building plan and wall relationships imply are almost certainly contemporary with those to the northeast) suggests that this dating should be revised downwards. Also of note are a series of piers (1010, 1164, 1314, 1316, 1388) that may form part of an arcaded structure, perhaps the façade of a separate complex (see Gilkes and Lako 2004, 154–6 for detailed discussion of the associated stratigraphy).

Figure 2.5. Section through 3rd-century trackway showing deposits noted in text (1 m scale)

Figure 2.6. Wall 1058 (3rd century or earlier) showing distinctive construction of rectangular blocks and horizontal and vertical scoring in the pointing

Figure 2.7. Structure comprising walls 1939 and 5580–5584, which predates the structure represented by 1058/5589

Summary/interpretation

It is probable that by the 2nd century, if not before, the central part of the triconch area was occupied by a substantial structure that may have constituted a single property covering the same area as the later (phase 3) peristyle domus of the late 4th or early 5th century. Only structures on the west side of the complex have been confirmed as dating to the 2nd century, however. It is likely also that this building was arranged around a central courtyard or garden in the space later occupied by the phase 3 peristyle.

The complex was probably flanked by roads to the east and west; that to the west is indicated by the ‘hollow way’, while the presence of the eastern road is suggested by the alignment of the eastern boundary walls and the presence of a major city drain. Entrances to the complex seemingly existed from both these roads. The presence of the 3rd-century ‘hollow way’ also provides an intriguing glimpse into the appearance of this area of Butrint in which roads were not paved or metalled but instead must have been little more than muddy tracks (not dissimilar to those found in many modern Albanian villages).

Phase 2: 3rd to 4th century

The buildings before the peristyle domus (Fig. 2.8)

Probably during the later 2nd or 3rd centuries an extensive range of buildings was constructed on the south side of the site. The focus of these new buildings was an opulently decorated long gallery or corridor (18) that probably looked out over a garden immediately adjacent to the Vivari Channel. At the same time it is likely that a reception room (24) was added to the eastern end of this gallery. The southern range of rooms (19–22) also dates to this phase, and seems to form a part of the house to which visual access was more restricted.

There is no direct stratified dating evidence relating to this phase, as water levels meant that it was not possible to reach foundation levels for any of the walls concerned. All the dates are based on the relationships between the structural elements of this phase and those of earlier and later phases that are associated with dated deposits. Some broad indication of date is also provided by stylistic analysis of mosaics and wall painting.

Room 18: the long gallery

The gallery (18) is composed of the long phase 1 southern wall (5000), which abuts walls 1976 and 1083 (which form the corners of walls 1282 and 1058). The insertion of a northern wall (1368), which clearly abuts the earlier structures to the west (1282) and east (1058), created a long corridor-like space.¹ While the elements of this northern wall are more difficult to interpret, there is no doubt that the gallery postdates the 2nd-century buildings described in phase 1, and formed a unified structure that acted as a focal point within the 3rd- to 4th-century complex (Fig. 2.9).

The gallery was floored with two distinctive and finely executed mosaic pavements (seeChapter 7). That to the eastern end was a small square pavement, lying immediately in front of the principal entrance to the gallery, and was one of the finest Roman pavements known from Butrint. It depicted a series of theatrical masks set in four square panels separated by complex geometric borders. The pavement was composed of extremely small, closely set tesserae. A pair of pilasters and a threshold separated this area from the main part of the gallery, which was paved with a single unified geometric design more than 25 m in length. Although the tesserae used within this larger pavement were slightly bigger than those of the smaller eastern pavement, the overall effect would have been extremely impressive.

Traces of painted decoration surviving at the eastern end of the gallery indicate that its north wall and part of the southern wall were decorated with a scheme that illusionistically depicted a full-scale colonnade rising above a brightly panelled skirting stylobate-wall. It is likely that this scheme (described in Chapter 7) replicated a genuine colonnade or arcade that allowed a view to the south over a garden and to the Vivari Channel beyond. A series of flat stones that remain visible towards the western end of wall 5000 form a threshold between the gallery and the area to the south, suggesting that wall 5000 acted as a stylobate for this arcade or colonnade (Figs 2.10 and 2.11). Thus, it seems likely the principal purpose of this gallery was to provide a view across the