PREFACE

Ancient fortifications are among the most durable monuments of the past. Whether overwhelmed amidst the sprawl of a modern town or city or standing solitary in the open countryside as a witness to past human industry, perhaps no isolated archaeological relic so provokes the historical imagination as a fortress wall. The energy manifestly spent in building it contrasts so sharply with its present uselessness that we are almost compelled to conjure up an image of the circumstances that required its construction. Among historians, topographers, and archaeologists, such flights of fancy sometimes lead to serious studies, as is the case here.

The countryside of Attica is liberally dotted with ancient defensive works and fortifications, including isolated towers and watchposts, rubble enclosures, a barrier wall (the Dema wall), and several substantial garrison forts. Individually or collectively, these remains have inspired numerous articles and several monographs (notably Wrede 1933, Pouilloux 1954, McCredie 1966, Ober 1985a, and Lauter et al. 1989), so that the study of Attic fortifications may legitimately be said to dominate the field of Greek rural fortifications in general. All of this attention to walls and fortifications, some of them well situated in the framework of Athenian history, has had a beneficial effect in that the broad outline of their chronology is by now firmly established. Remains once vaguely described by topographers of the eighteenth or early nineteenth centuries as "Pelasgic" or "Hellenic" can now usually be assigned with confidence to a particular century, and we can, most of the time, recognize the difference between a prehistoric and a Hellenistic rubble fortification. Our historical imaginations, however, impel us to attempt more precise historical associations, but in most instances to do so we must move beyond

what is demonstrable by purely archaeological criteria into arguments that are founded on historical interpretation.

At this level the field is comparatively open, for the archaeological evidence becomes remarkably pliant in the hands of historians, both in a chronological sense but even more widely in a functional sense. How, in military terms, did fortifications work? Where in the constellation of military, economic, and social considerations were rural fortifications placed by their builders, and in response to what circumstances? Answers to such questions can be, and have been, diverse and sometimes contradictory, since even in a territory as thoroughly studied as classical Attica, the evidence in most cases is so indefinite.

These questions are of fundamental importance to any study that attempts to assess the historical role of rural fortifications. Because of the ubiquity of such remains in the Greek landscape, these questions have still wider implications for studies concerned with the Greek countryside and its relationship to the social and economic structures of Greek states. Studies of that nature have come into their own in recent years (e.g.,. Lohmann 1983 and 1985, Snodgrass 1987, 93-131, Van Andel and Runnels 1987, Osborne 1987, Munn and Munn 1989 and 1990). In order to achieve a more comprehensive interpretation of the archaeological record, such studies will have to incorporate a well-grounded analysis of rural fortifications. Despite the ambiguities noted above, the territory of Attica and the arena of Athenian history together provide the fullest body of evidence for such an analysis. For both generalized and specific reasons, therefore, Part I of this book begins with a thesis about the nature and function of the most important class of fortification in the Athenian countryside, the garrison forts of Attica.

What do we know of Athenian institutions for the defense of their countryside in the fifth and fourth centuries? What texts address that issue in informative ways? The answers to these questions lie in texts and monuments, most of which cover the range between the time of Perikles and that of Demosthenes. A survey of this evidence and a commentary on the trends in its interpretation that have prevailed over the past century are provided in Part I of this book. The remainder of the work is devoted to illuminating some of the principles delineated in Part I through more precisely focused studies of a specific set of monuments and events that may be associated with the only war of the fourth century before the Macedonian domination in which Attica was invaded, the Boiotian War of 378-375 B.C.

Part II is a study of a unique Athenian fortification, the Dema wall, which bars a key pass into the plain of Athens. No ancient authority mentions this wall, but archaeological evidence, including a small excavation, and historical considerations demonstrate its role in the land war

fought in 378-375 by the Athenians and their Theban allies against Sparta. The understanding of the Dema wall established in Part II provides a new perspective on the strategic planning that affected Athenian involvement in the Boiotian War. This new insight is sufficient to justify a reinterpretation of the development and course of the land war of 378-375, and this is provided in Part III. Finally, the themes of Part I are reprised in a Postscript that relates the experiences of the Boiotian War to the development of Athenian institutions of territorial defense later in the fourth century.

Neither the Boiotian War nor the Dema wall is by itself a subject whose importance is widely recognized. While I hope that both subjects benefit in this respect from their exposition here, my greater object is to make them a case study that will illuminate the nature and historical role of the fortifications of classical Attica and, by example, some of the dominant characteristics of rural fortifications in the ancient world generally.

The importance of close observation and exacting judgment in the interpretation of archaeological remains was masterfully demonstrated to me by Colin Edmonson, who first introduced me to the Dema wall when I was his student at the American School of Classical Studies at Athens in 1977-78. If the present work is judged to be a positive contribution in any of the respects touched on above, no small share of the credit is due to Colin's influence. With support from Colin, with encouragement from J. Ellis Jones, who had previously studied the wall, and with permission from Vasileios Petrakos, Ephor of Antiquities of Attica, in the winter and spring of 1977-78 I began a study of Attic territorial defenses that later, under the thoughtful guidance of A. John Graham, became my dissertation (1983) and that I am still continuing beyond the scope of this book.

Excavation at the Dema tower was carried out between October 14 and November 21, 1979, under the authority of Vasileios Petrakos, Ephor of Antiquities of the 2nd Ephoreia, Attica. Heleni Konsolaki, Heleni Papastavrou, and Iphigeneia Dekoulakou assisted the project in many ways, both in the field and in the Peiraieus Museum, where the finds have been stored. Funding was provided by grants from the University Museum of the University of Pennsylvania, under the directorship of Martin Biddle, and by the American School of Classical Studies at Athens, under the directorship of Henry R. Immerwahr. Excavation was aided by volunteers from the American School of Classical Studies: Murray McClellan, William Murray, Suzanne Peterson, and Randy Strunk; and, through the generosity of Harry Carroll, by volunteers from the College Year in Athens Program: Jonathan Aretakis, Pavlos Dakopoulos, Peter Friedman, Tom Kornfeld, Mark Miner, John Sideek, and Tim Womack. John Camp, then Assistant Director of the Athenian Agora Excavations,

provided tools and other practical assistance. Fred Cooper, assisted by Brian Madigan, carried out the survey of the site upon which map 3 is based. My father, Robert Munn, produced most of the photographs, and Abbie Camp drew most of the finds. John Camp, G. Roger Edwards, Virginia Grace, and Charles Williams all provided helpful advice in the original study of the finds. Alison Adams has since then allowed me to consult comparative material which she is studying at the Athenian Agora. J. Ellis Jones allowed me to republish the Dema wall saltcellar, and T. Leslie Shear, Jr., gave permission for the publication of the comparative material from the Athenian Agora in appendix I. Eugene Vanderpool provided information and encouragement helpful to the early stages of my research.

Many more have provided advice, encouragement, and assistance as this work has developed over the span of a decade. Foremost among these is my wife, Mary Lou Zimmerman Munn, who has made immeasurable contributions to every step and stage of fieldwork and writing. Her patience and fortitude, and her observant eye and sound judgment, have sustained and aided me throughout. Michael Jameson has also been a valued source of advice at decisive points along the way. In addition to these two, the writing of this book has benefited most from the advice of J. K. Anderson, Kenneth Dover, A. John Graham, Antony Raubitschek, and the anonymous readers consulted by the University of California Press. Any disagreeable idiosyncrasies or lapses that remain are mere vestiges of the faults that these readers have corrected. Michael De Vinne performed a Herculean labor in checking all references in the penultimate version of the manuscript. Marian McAllister and members of the Publications Committee of the American School of Classical Studies gave encouragement at an early stage of this work. Mary Lamprech and Margaret Denny of the University of California Press have patiently guided it through its final stages. Fellowship support enabling writing and fieldwork at an intermediate stage was provided by the American Council of Learned Societies and by the Pew Memorial Trust. Support for the production of the illustrations has been provided by the Department of Classics at Stanford. To all I express my sincere thanks.

M. H. MUNN
STANFORD, NOVEMBER 1991