Drinking with the Dead? Glass from Roman and Christian Burial Areas at Leptiminus (Lamta, Tunisia).

REPRINTED FROM

JOURNAL OF GLASS STUDIES VOLUME 59 • 2017

Allison E. Sterrett-Krause

Drinking with the Dead? Glass from Roman and Christian Burial Areas at Leptiminus (Lamta, Tunisia)

Copyright © 2017 by The Corning Museum of Glass, Corning, NY 14830-2253

Drinking with the Dead? Glass from Roman and Christian Burial Areas at Leptiminus (Lamta, Tunisia) Allison E. Sterrett-Krause

T

HE SMALL city of Leptiminus in the Ro-

man province of Africa Proconsularis, on the coast of modern-day Tuni­sia, has long been the site of archaeological investigation (Fig. 1). In recent years, the international Leptiminus Archaeological Project (LAP) has used large-scale intensive surface surveys, nondestructive imaging, salvage excavation, and tar­ geted stratigraphic excavation to develop an un­ derstanding of the city’s archaeological histo­ry and its role in the Mediterranean economy. The LAP has identified more than 300 individual

Acknowledgments: I am grateful to the current directors of the Leptiminus Archaeological Project—Lea M. Stirling, Nejib Ben Lazreg, and Susan T. Stevens—for permission to consult excavation records and publish this subset of the glass. Comments from the directors, my colleagues, and the editors and anonymous readers of the Journal of Glass Studies have improved this essay tremendously; any errors that remain are my own. 1. Publications of the Leptiminus Archaeological Project, in addition to several interim reports, include Nejib Ben Lazreg and David J. Mattingly, eds., Leptiminus (Lamta) Report No. 1: A Roman Port City in Tunisia, Journal of Roman Archaeology Supplementary Series, no. 4, Ann Arbor: University of Michigan, 1992; Lea M. Stirling, David J. Mattingly, and Nejib Ben Lazreg, eds., Leptiminus (Lamta) Report No. 2: The East Baths, Ceme­ teries, Kilns, Venus Mosaic, Site Museum and Other Studies, Journal of Roman Archaeology Supplementary Series, no. 41, Portsmouth, Rhode Island: the journal, 2001; and David L. Stone, David J. Mattingly, and Nejib Ben Lazreg, eds., Leptiminus (Lamta) Report No. 3: The Field Survey, Journal of Roman Archaeology Supplementary Series, no. 87, Portsmouth, Rhode Island: the journal, 2011.

sites around the city, dating from the Punic, Roman, and Byzantine periods (approximately fifth century B.C.E. to seventh century C.E.). Among the sites inventoried are Punic tombs, Roman- and Byzantine-period public buildings and infrastructure works, production sites for amphoras and other trade goods, domestic sites, and Roman and Byzantine cemeteries (Fig. 2).1 The East Cemetery (Site S304), on the inland edge of the ancient city, has been subject to recent stratigraphic excavation (Fig. 3).2 This study revealed burial areas dating from the second to

2. Site S304 forms part of an extensive cemetery that ringed the city of Leptiminus. Previous studies have excavated other parts of this cemetery under the names of S200, S286, and S302. Excavations at S304 were begun after the site was discovered by looters in 1999. Following salvage excavations in 1999 and 2000, stratigraphic excavations took place there from 2004 to 2006, with seasons of study in 2007 and 2008. Two interim reports on the excavation at the East Cemetery (S304) have previously appeared: Nejib Ben Lazreg, “Roman and Early Christian Burial-Complex at Leptiminus: First Notice,” Journal of Ro­man Archaeology, v. 15, pt. 1, 2002, pp. 337–345; and Nejib Ben Lazreg and others, “Roman and Early Christian Burial Complex at Leptiminus (Lamta): Second Notice,” Journal of Roman Archaeology, v. 19, pt. 1, 2006, pp. 347–368. Preparation of the final publication of the East Cemetery Excavations (S304) is ongoing. In this article, I rely on the draft report of the ex­ cavators, who have generously shared their findings with me: Lea M. Stirling and Jennifer P. Moore, “Graves, Structures, and Stratigraphy in the East Cemetery,” in Leptiminus (Lamta) Report No. 4: The East Cemetery, in preparation.

47

FIG. 1. Location of Leptiminus in the central Mediterranean area, on the coast of the Roman province of Africa Proconsularis (modern Tunisia).

FIG. 2. Plan showing surveyed fields and features in the area of ancient Leptiminus, with location of the East Cemetery (S304) and previously excavated cemetery sites, after Stone, Mattingly, and Ben Lazreg [note 1].

48

FIG. 3. Plan of the East Cemetery (S304). (Drawing: Courtesy of the excavators)

seventh centuries3 and, among other arti­facts, a substantial assemblage of glass, mostly vessel fragments. Analysis of a subset of this assemblage—the vessels and objects found in the

cemetery, both in the tombs themselves and in contexts outside of the tombs that are probably related to cemetery activity—offers an oppor­ tunity to explore the nature of funerary and

3. Some residual ceramics, and one tiny fragment of mosaic glass (not discussed in this essay), suggest that this area was a site of human activities during the Punic period. The surface survey of the Dhahret Slama ridge, where the East Cemetery S304 is located, has identified areas of Punic tombs near the Roman and Christian East Cemetery (David L. Stone and David J. Mattingly, “Leptiminus: Profile of a Town,” in Leptiminus (Lamta) Report No. 3 [note 1], pp. 273–288, esp. pp. 273–277). No direct evidence for Punic burials at S304 has been noted (Stirling and Moore [note 2]). Other categories of evidence suggest continuities of practice in funerary and post-funerary rituals

between the Numidian, Punic, and Roman periods in North Africa; it is not possible to comment on those continuities via the glass evidence from the site (see David L. Stone and Lea M. Stirling, “Funerary Monuments and Mortuary Practices in the Landscapes of North Africa,” in Mortuary Landscapes of North Africa, ed. David L. Stone and Lea Margaret Stirling, Toronto and Buffalo, New York: University of Toronto Press, 2007, pp. 3–31, esp. pp. 22–25; and David J. Mattingly, “The African Way of Death: Burial Rituals beyond the Roman Empire,” in ibid., pp. 138–163).

49

commemorative practice at the cemetery, particularly during the fifth and sixth centuries. Limited evidence from earlier burials and ac­ tivity areas of the second–fourth centuries may invite speculation as to the continuity of com­ mem­orative practice from earlier to later periods. Glass from demonstrably Christian areas of the cemetery highlights the communal and intentional nature of funerary and post-funerary com­memoration of the dead and suggests specific locations where such rituals could have occurred in the cemetery. Extensive evidence from ancient literature4 and art5 indicates that funerary and commemorative rituals in the Roman world regularly included making sacrifices, eating meals in company, drinking wine, and pouring libations. Two banquets framed traditional Roman mourning rituals, marking at their beginning the family’s isolation caused by death and at their end its return to everyday life.6 Anniversaries and other important dates in the ritual year (especially the festivals of the Parentalia and the Feralia) were marked by family members’ return visits to the cemetery, at which time food and drink offerings were made to commemorate the deceased; the living family members probably also consumed meals at the cemetery on at least some of these

occasions.7 Architectural installations and archaeological evidence at cemeteries make it clear that certain elements of the meals were to be shared with the dead, even well after the burial rites.8 Evidence from early Christian literature suggests that these traditional rituals of commemoration were not incompatible with the practice of Christianity. Rebillard offers a summary survey of this literature, concluding that banqueting and drinking wine were essential to the act of commemoration, particularly in the third century and later, when sacrifice rarely formed part of funerary and commemorative rites.9 The well-known example of Augustine’s mother, Monnica, being prevented in Milan from celebrating rituals at martyrs’ tombs, as she had done in Africa,10 highlights several important fea­tures of such commemoration. While Rebillard is correct in urging caution in interpreting this anecdote, noting its apologetic nature,11 nevertheless a few useful observations can be made. First, the practice of commemoration occurred regularly and communally: Monnica shared food and wine with her relatives, and made these repeated episodes occasions for piety. Second, those practicing the commemorative ritual brought both prepared food and

4. E.g., Ovid, Fasti, II. 533–543; and Tertullian, “De resurrectione carnis,” I.1–3. 5. Robin M. Jensen, “Dining with the Dead: From Mensa to Altar in Christian Late Antiquity,” in Commemorating the Dead: Texts and Artifacts in Context. Studies of Roman, Jewish, and Christian Burials, ed. Laurie Brink and Deborah Green, Berlin: Walter de Gruyter, 2008, pp. 107–144, esp. pp. 120– 124; Paul-Albert Février, “À propos du repas funéraire: Culte et sociabilité,” Cahiers Archéologiques, v. 26, 1977, pp. 29–45; Katherine M. D. Dunbabin, The Roman Banquet: Images of Conviviality, Cambridge, U.K., and New York: Cambridge University Press, 2003, pp. 187–190. 6. John Scheid, Quand faire, c’est croire: Les Rites sacrificiels des Romains, Collection historique, Aubier, 2005, provides an excellent overview of funerary practices, which included sacrifices, two banquets over a period of nine days, and other rituals. For meals as markers of a family’s status during the mourning period, see esp. ibid., pp. 219–220. For food at Roman funerals, see Hugh Lindsay, “Eating with the Dead: The Roman Funerary Banquet,” in Meals in a Social Context: Aspects of the Communal Meal in the Hellenistic and Roman World, ed. Inge

Nielsen and Hanne Sigismund Nielsen, Aarhus Studies in Mediterranean Antiquity, v. 1, Aarhus, Denmark: Aarhus University Press, 1998, pp. 67–80. 7. Lindsay [note 6]; Scheid [note 6], pp. 161–188. 8. Jensen [note 5], pp. 117–118; Lea M. Stirling, “Archaeological Evidence for Food Offerings in the Graves of Roman North Africa,” in Daimonopylai: Essays in Classics and the Classical Tradition Presented to Edmund G. Berry, ed. Rory B. Egan and Mark A. Joyal, Winnipeg: University of Manitoba Centre for Hellenic Civilization, 2004, pp. 427–451, esp. pp. 428–432; Février [note 5]. 9. Éric Rebillard, “Commemorating the Dead in North Africa: Continuity and Change from the Second to the Fifth Century C.E.,” in Death and Changing Rituals: Function and Meaning in Ancient Funerary Practices, ed. J. Rasmus Brandt, Håkon Roland, and Marina Prusac, Studies in Funerary Archaeology, no. 7, Oxford, U.K., and Philadelphia: Oxbow Books, 2014, pp. 269–286. 10. Augustine, Confessions, 6.2.2. 11. Rebillard [note 9], p. 271.

50

wine to the grave sites: Monnica brought porridge, bread, and wine in a basket, and consumed them at the cemetery. Other references to commemorative rituals for the dead in patristic texts emphasize (and perhaps ex­aggerate) the excessive wine drinking that frequently occurred during such commemorations.12 Paintings of banquet scenes in Christian catacombs, which bear a strong resemblance to those in traditional non-Christian burial locales, underscore the importance of funerary and commemorative dining in both Christian and traditional pagan ritual spheres.13 Archaeological evidence from North Africa indicates that food and probably also drink were regularly brought to cemeteries in both the Roman and Christian periods. Architectural features such as altars with libation tubes, dining couches, and mensa-style tombs make it clear that dining took place at the cemetery, and that certain elements of the meals were to be shared with the dead, even after the tomb had been sealed.14 Paleoenvironmental sampling at other burial sites around Leptiminus indicates that drinking wine was one of a range of food-related activities carried out at the time of burial, along with depositing small amounts of food, and prob­ably drink, in the grave after it was sealed, via the libation tube.15 A variety of evidence, including the selection of glass presented here, suggests that such commemorative rituals also took place at the East

Cemetery. While it is not possible to firmly conclude whether the rituals involved drinking wine, pouring libations, or other activities involving liquids, the glass provides circumstantial evidence for drinking, probably wine, at or near the tombs during funerary rituals and during later commemorative visits to the cemetery. The glass may therefore serve to underscore the syncretic nature of Christian religious practice at the cemeteries of Leptiminus, with local Christians adopting and adapting existing traditional practices into new spaces and systems of religious belief.

12. Ibid., pp. 271–274, citing Augustine, Ep. 29.9; Cyprian, Ep. 67; Ambrose, De Helia et ieiuno 17.62; and Augustine, Enarratio in Psalmum 12, 15. 13. Paintings of banquets from the Christian catacombs at Rome are generally now interpreted as representing funerary or commemorative meals by mourners, although other interpretations are possible and multiple meanings may have been intended by the creators or patrons of these art works (see Dunbabin [note 5], pp. 175–202 for discussion of polysemy and previous interpretations). 14. Jensen [note 5], pp. 117–118; Stirling [note 8], pp. 428– 432; Février [note 5]. 15. Stirling [note 8], pp. 438–441. Samples came from Sites 10 and 200 (David J. Mattingly, Nejib Ben Lazreg, and Lea M. Stirling, “Rescue Excavation of a Roman Cemetery on the Southeast Edge of Leptiminus (Site 10): Summary of Excavations and Preliminary Typology of Burials,” in Leptiminus

(Lamta) Report No. 1 [note 1], pp. 301–333; David J. Mattingly, Nigel Pollard, and Nejib Ben Lazreg, “A Roman Cemetery and Mausoleum on the Southeast Edge of Leptiminus: Second Report (Site 10, 1991 Excavations),” in Leptiminus (Lamta) Report No. 2 [note 1], pp. 107–214; Nejib Ben Lazreg, “Un cimetière romain sur Jebel Lahmar (Site 200) près de Dhahret Slama: Fouille de sauvetage,” in ibid., pp. 409–411; Lea M. Stirling, D. J. Welle, and David J. Mattingly, “General Context of the Cemetery (Site 200) and the Grave Containing the Terracotta Mask,” in ibid., pp. 412–414). Botanical samples were also collected from some graves in the East Cemetery, S304 (Stirling and Moore [note 2]). 16. Descriptions of burial areas and dating evidence here summarize preliminary conclusions detailed in Leptiminus (Lamta) Report No. 4 [note 2]. 17. Ben Lazreg [note 2], p. 345; Ben Lazreg and others [note 2], p. 348; Stone and Mattingly [note 3], p. 276.

Burial and Activity Areas in the East Cemetery16 The find contexts of the glass vessels discussed in this article can be divided into two categories: glass found in graves, deposited at the time of burial; and glass found in nonburial contexts formed while the cemetery was in use, probably as a result of continued human activity there. I argue that this second group of glass vessel fragments represents repeated post-funerary commemorative activity at the cemetery. Activity at the cemetery began in the second century with burials in the southern portion of the excavated zone.17 Burials, both of cremated remains and of corpses in inhumations, took place in rock-cut hypogea and at the level of the surface, where graves were covered by a variety

51

of tomb markers. Many of the burial areas were demarcated in some way by built structures; the excavators have identified at least six such burial compounds (see Figure 3). These compounds may have served both as burial areas and as loci for later commemoration, as the testimony of Ovid and later authors suggests.18 Burials in the south­ern sector of the cemetery had largely ceased by the fourth century. At that time, underground chambers began to be excavated and used for Christian burials in a northern expansion of the cemetery.19 The Christian catacombs were used extensively in the fifth and sixth centuries, and were abandoned no later than the early seventh century. Following is a brief overview of selected burial areas, beginning with those in the southern sector.20 Compound 2 (C2), a walled-off area in the central zone of the excavated cemetery northwest of Compound 1 (C1), included burials found at the surface level and in the hypogeum below. The hypogeum of C2, accessed by a stairway contained in the walled compound, had two irregularly shaped lobes or alcoves and contained at least 13 burials in a variety of stacked grave structures along the alcoves’ walls. Nine additional burials were located at the surface level in C2, and five more were found outside its walls. Datable ceramic material associated with the burials indicates that they were interred in the second and third centuries; the hypogeum was gradually filled in the fourth and fifth centuries, possibly as the result of a combination of human and natural activities. At some point after burial, the remains in C2’s hypogeum were disturbed when a large rectangular shaft cut into that chamber. In addition to damaging extant burials, this shaft may have obliterated earlier burials that had been placed in the hypogeum. Compound 3 (C3) took a somewhat unusual form. Located east of C2, C3 was discovered dur­ing salvage excavation. C3 was further investigated during stratigraphic excavation in 2004. Built from mortar and rubble, the structure com­prises seven slots dug into the ground, each deep enough for at least three stacked inhu­ mation graves. Limited ceramic dating evidence 52

includes a fragment from the early second to early third centuries in one of the graves. In addition to burials and tomb structures en­closed in or closely connected to delineated compounds, burials were placed in unwalled cemetery earth outside the burial compounds. Outside C1, and possibly associated with it, is a cremation burial that was placed in a cupula tomb monument aligned with the northern wall of the compound.21 This carefully decorated monument appears to be broadly contempo­ raneous with activity inside C1, with ceramic evidence dating from the second and third centuries. To the south of C2, west of C1, a relatively large number of burials—20 or more—were placed in unenclosed areas of the cemetery. Although these burials were not po­sitioned inside walled compounds, they were otherwise similar to those inside the delineated burial areas: both cremations and inhumations in a variety of tomb structures.22 Not all of these graves were placed in the same orientation or interred at the same time, but burial activity in this area was broadly contemporaneous with activity inside the walled compounds during the second and third centuries.

18. Cf. Ovid [note 4], Tertullian [note 4], and Augustine [note 10]. 19. The presence of demonstrably Christian graves in the northern sector of the cemetery does not preclude the possibility that earlier burials belonged to individuals who identified as Christians, but they are not incontrovertibly marked thus. For the Christian and traditional Roman burials at the East Cemetery, see Ben Lazreg [note 2]; and Ben Lazreg and others [note 2]. For so-called aniconic Christianity, see, for example, Paul Corby Finney, The Invisible God: The Earliest Christians on Art, New York: Oxford University Press, 1994, esp. pp. 99–145. 20. Several of the compounds excavated during the course of study have not yielded glass finds that can be closely associated via their contexts with funerary and post-funerary activity (Compound 1 [C1], Compound 5, and the southwestern unenclosed area and unexplored Compounds 6 and 7). Because of the challenges of interpreting these objects in their contexts, they are not discussed in this article. 21. Grave G-071. 22. One of these contained ancient glass: G-012 (inhumation).

While some burials included durable grave offerings such as ceramic bowls, glass vessels, and items of jewelry (see Table 1), deposition of grave goods was relatively uncommon at the East Cemetery, a pattern also known from other cemetery sites in Roman North Africa.23 By contrast, excavations at the East Cemetery have revealed abundant evidence that perishable grave offerings were commonly left in tombs; offering tables or altars with burned surfaces and libation tubes were built into many grave structures.24 There is little evidence of burial activity during the fourth century in the southern part of the excavated cemetery, but a northern underground extension of the burial ground, apparently begun in the late fourth century, contained multiple rooms and rock-cut tunnels or corridors for burials.25 The burials in the northern section of the East Cemetery were in some cases marked by elaborate tomb mosaics with Christian iconography, including the Greek capitals A and Ω, the sacred monogram of Christ, and images of the Good Shepherd.26 Of these several catacomb areas, among the best understood is the Small Vaulted Room (SVR), cleared in stratigraphic excavations in 2006, which served as a vestibule to the adjacent catacomb corridors and the Large Vaulted Room. The northern underground expansion of the East Cemetery was abandoned, perhaps

in two phases, following the collapse of architectural features in the late fifth and sixth centuries.27 At a later date, debris that had apparently been removed from the rooms and tunnels of the northern cemetery expansion was probably deposited over the disused site of C3. Cleared in salvage excavations, the upper layers of this compound were found to contain a very large quantity of artifacts, including approximately 375 fragments of vessel glass. From these fragments, more than 100 individual glass vessels can be identified (see below and Table 3). Selectively retained for study as a discrete group, this glass shares many characteristics with that from the northern expansion; it probably represents debris from the underground burial areas. It is unclear whether the debris was deposited by members of the community seeking access to the underground burial areas after the collapse of the vaulted ceiling in the fifth or sixth century, or by the action of looters at a later date.

23. See, for example, Susan T. Stevens, “Commemorating the Dead in the Communal Cemeteries of Carthage,” in Commemorating the Dead [note 5], pp. 79–103; and Naomi Norman, “Death and Burial of Roman Children: The Case of the Yasmina Cemetery at Carthage – Part I, Setting the Stage,” Mortality, v. 7, no. 3, 2002, pp. 302–323, esp. p. 305. 24. See Ben Lazreg [note 2], pp. 344–345 and fig. 19; and Ben Lazreg and others [note 2], pp. 349 and 352–357, and fig. 3. Stirling [note 8] provides an overview of food offerings in Roman North African cemeteries, based on archaeological evidence. Tubes, altars, and grave fills in North African cemeteries have been found to contain (burned) food remains such as seeds, eggshells, and animal bones; while literary and visual evidence suggests that wine was also offered via these tubes, such evidence is not generally recoverable via archaeological excavation. In previously excavated cemeteries at Leptiminus, where archaeobotanical sampling formed part of the excavation program, several types of burned seeds were recovered

from burial contexts, including from burial structures with simi­ lar libation tubes (ibid., pp. 438–442). See also Arbia Hilali, “Les Repas funéraires: Un témoignage d’une dynamique socioculturelle en Afrique romaine,” in Ritual Dynamics and Religious Change in the Roman Empire: Proceedings of the Eighth Workshop of the International Network Impact of Empire (Heidelberg, July 5–7, 2007), ed. Olivier Hekster, Sebastian Schmidt-Hofner, and Christian Witschel, Impact of Empire, no. 9, Leiden and Boston: Brill, 2009, pp. 269–284. 25. Ben Lazreg and others [note 2], p. 349. 26. Ibid., pp. 365–367 discusses the stylistic features and comparanda of the Christian tomb markers. 27. Ibid., pp. 349 and 363. 28. Stirling and Moore [note 2]. Grave gifts are rare at other African cemeteries, as well (see, for example, Stevens [note 23]; Aïcha Ben Abed and Marc Griesheimer, eds., La Nécropole romaine de Pupput, Collection de l’Ecole Française de Rome, no. 323, Rome: the school, 2004, esp. pp. 183–187).

Glass as Elements of Funerary Ritual and Grave Gifts Glass finds follow the general pattern of rarity also evident among other durable grave gifts at the East Cemetery. 28 A few excavated graves contained glass items such as jewelry and vessels

53

TABLE 1 Minimum Number of Glass Vessels and Objects in Tombs in the East Cemetery (S304), Organized by Proximity to Burial Burial Areas with Glass Vessels and Objects

Glass inside Tomb Structures That Contained Burials

Glass inside Disturbed Tombs, Perhaps Intrusive

Unwalled burials

 2

 11

Compound 3 (C3) burials

 1

Compound 2 (C2) burials

Glass in Unused Tomb Structures

 3 1

10

Christian Small Vaulted Room (SVR) burials

 9

Totals

12

Total  2 10  9

11

1

24

1. One additional glass object, found in LL1845, was unquestionably modern, introduced into the tomb by animal activity. It is not discussed here or included in total MNV counts.

FIG. 4. Glass from Roman tombs (objects 1–3; see Appendix).

(Table 1). Some of the glass finds within burials are probably intrusive or may reflect multiple phases of activity in some areas. Thus, the total number of glass finds that can likely be identified as grave gifts or intentional depositions is quite small. As Table 1 shows, only 12 glass objects (vessels and jewelry) can be securely identified as intentionally deposited in the graves. Several of these may have been intended as grave gifts for the deceased, while other items may have been deposited in the tomb following their use during funerary activity.29 These finds, from both the Roman and Christian periods, offer limited—but perhaps suggestive—evidence for 54

the practice of funerary rituals at the East Cemetery over an extensive period of use. Several graves in the unwalled portion of the cemetery near C1 and C2 contained glass vessels (Fig. 4 and Appendix). From unenclosed burial areas in the southern portion of the cemetery, three fragments, which make up two vessels, were recovered from two burials (Fig. 4.1, .2).30 The vessels—a flask and the base of a flask or beaker—are simple forms, probably dating from the third or fourth century or later. These vessel fragments, found among the fill around a skele­ ton inside Grave G-012 and in the burned earth beneath a cremation burial (G-071), are highly fragmentary. They may have been deposited near the tombs, not as grave gifts but as part of the funerary ritual, with the beaker or flask

29. Such a practice is noted at other sites in Africa (Hilali [note 24], p. 276) and elsewhere in the Roman Empire (cf. Hilary Cool, “Bottles for Bacchus?,” in Artefacts and Archaeology: Aspects of the Celtic and Roman World, ed. Miranda J. Aldhouse-Green and Peter Webster, Cardiff: University of Wales Press, 2002, pp. 132–151). 30. A small lot of approximately 30 strongly colored body fragments from modern vessels, and a plastic button, were recovered from Grave G-008. These fragments have not been included in the totals and discussion of glass vessels from this site because the context was clearly disturbed by animal burrows in the modern period (Stirling and Moore [note 2]).

FIG. 5. Glass from Christian tombs (objects 4–12; see Appendix).

having been broken, perhaps even deliberately, and some pieces included in the filling of the tomb. Similarly, two fragmentary glass vessels were found in tomb structures of C3, although only one of them was associated with a burial.31 That vessel base (Fig. 4.3) was discovered by the right shoulder of a young adult whose body had been covered in plaster during the burial, with the glass fragment placed on top of the plaster beneath dirt infill in a slab grave. Given its close proximity to the skeleton, this vessel may have been deposited with the body, perhaps as a grave gift or as a symbol of the funerary ritual. In demonstrably Christian contexts, intentional deposition of glass in graves was apparently similarly rare; it has been detected in only two of the excavated burials at the East Cemetery (Table 1 and Fig. 5.4–.12).32 In the SVR,

within one of a series of underground tomb chambers used primarily for Christian burials, two excavated graves contained a total of at least nine glass vessels and objects. One grave, that of an adult buried in the floor of the SVR, held four fragments from three separate vessels: beakers or bowls, at least one of which may have been used as lamps (Fig. 5.4–.6). A second burial, containing the remains of two individuals, appears somewhat exceptional at the East Cemetery, based on the number of its glass finds, which include at least six objects: a possible ring bezel and a bead (Fig. 5.7, .8),

31. The other fragment is apparently intrusive in the unused grave structure; it is not discussed here. 32. Detailed study of other Christian burial areas at the cemetery, currently in very preliminary stages, may identify other glass intentionally deposited in graves.

55

three beakers (Fig. 5.9–.11), and a flask (Fig. 5.12). The similarity in the col­or and function of the vessel fragments—all of these vessels were probably used for drinking, pouring, or serving liquids—hints at the possibil­ity of a drinking set (somewhat heterogeneous in composition), of which some fragments may have been deposited in the tomb.33 Additional study of glass found in graves from the Christian burial chambers and corridors, currently in progress, may shed

further light on the nature of these burials— whether they represent anomalous special treatment of certain deceased individuals, an increase in the practice of depositing glass intentionally as grave goods in the fifth and sixth centuries, or the use of more substantial quantities of glass in funerary rituals.34 Glass related to burials in the hypogeum of C2 presents a thorny problem of interpretation because the vessel fragments were found in association with disturbed burials. At the time of excavation, most of these fragments were identified as the remains of fusiform toilet bottles that presumably held perfumed oils and were deposited at the time of burial in the third century. Excavations at other cemetery sites in Lep­ timinus have demonstrated that such glass vessels were occasionally placed in graves.35 The true picture of glass use in this burial area, however, is far more complex than the initial interpretation suggests. Glass from these burials includes 10 objects (Fig. 6) that were found in close proximity to three disturbed graves. In one context (G-067), an outfolded rim (Fig. 6.13) was found. In a second grave (G-065), four fragmentary vessels were discovered: one goblet or lamp (Fig. 6.14) and three hollow stems, probably of lamps (Fig. 6.15–.17). Plaster fill immediately covered the

33. Cf. sets of glass drinking and serving vessels found in other contexts at Leptiminus, discussed below. 34. Although jewelry is generally rare among finds from the East Cemetery, items of jewelry of various materials were found in a small number of tombs of infants and young children in the southern portion of the cemetery (Stirling and Moore [note 2]). Differential treatment of children and infants, including patterns of grave good deposition, in burials in North Africa is well established: see Norman [note 23]; Naomi J. Norman, “Death and Burial of Roman Children: The Case of the Yasmina Cemetery at Carthage – Part II, The Archaeological Evidence,” Mortality, v. 8, no. 1, 2003, pp. 36–47; Solenn de Larminat, “Le Mobilier déposé dans les sépultures d’enfants en Afrique du Nord à l’époque romaine = Material in the Child-Burials of Roman Africa in the Pre-Christian Era,” in L’Enfant et la mort dans l’Antiquité, v. 3, Le Matériel associé aux tombes d’enfants, ed. Antoine Hermary and Céline Dubois, Bibliothèque d’Ar­ chéo­logie Méditerranéenne et Africaine, no. 12, Aix en Pro­ vence: Centre Camille Jullian, 2012, pp. 293–312; and idem, “Gestes et pratiques funéraires autour des inhumations en fosse

d’enfants en Afrique romaine à l’époque païenne = Funerary Acts and Practices in Child Pit Burials of Roman Africa in the Pre-Christian Era,” in L’Enfant et la mort dans l’Antiquité, v. 2, Types de tombes et traitement du corps des enfants dans l’an­ti­ quité gréco-romaine, ed. Marie-Dominique Nenna, Etudes alex­ andrines, no. 26, Alexandria: Centre d’Études Alexandrines, 2012, pp. 501–538. 35. Site 250, burial 94-20: Joseph L. Rife, “Excavations Adjacent to the House of the Venus Mosaic,” in Leptiminus (Lamta) Report No. 2 [note 1], pp. 293–324, esp. pp. 317–318; cf. Véronique Arveiller-Dulong and Marie-Dominique Nenna, Les Verres antiques du Musée du Louvre, v. 2, Vaisselle et conte­ nants du 1er siècle au début du VIIe siècle après J.-C., v. 2, Paris: Réunion des Musées Nationaux, 2005, esp. p. 417, nos. 1153– 1155; ibid., p. 459, no. 1287, fusiform toilet bottles of eastern provenance in greenish glass, produced in the fourth century. No fusiform toilet bottles were found in the graves at Pupput, where all examples of toilet bottles were of the candlestick form (Daniele Foy, “Les Verres de la nécropole de Pupput,” in Ben Abed and Griesheimer [note 28], pp. 59–72, esp. p. 70).

FIG. 6. Glass from hypogeum of Compound 2 (objects 13–22; see Appendix).

56

skeleton inside the grave structure; on top of this fill, the glass vessels and brightly colored stains were found, and the excavator hypothesized that such stains could have resulted from the contents of the glass vessels.36 In a third grave (G-061), hollow bases or stems of five vessels, possibly lamps or toilet bottles, were found (Fig. 6.18–.22), along with a small ribbon of lead, probably a wick holder.37 This disturbed grave (G-061) also contained an intact third-century ceramic jug, probably deposited as a grave gift.38 Close examination of the glass remains reveals that at least eight of the fragments belong to lamps of the sixth or early seventh century, not to toilet bottles, as they were originally iden­ tified. The solid-stemmed goblet (Fig. 6.14) has clear parallels among sixth-century vessels, including other examples from late contexts at the East Cemetery in Leptiminus.39 Similarly, the presence of a lead ribbon in proximity to a hollow glass stem securely identifies one object (Fig. 6.19) as a lamp.40 Other examples from C2 (Fig. 6.15–.18, .20) strongly resemble the stem of this lamp and the stems and bodies of other lamps from late contexts at Leptiminus, with a carinat­ ed bowl and a very narrow (about 1 cm) diameter at the base. The folded rim fragment (Fig. 6.13) is most likely to have come from a lamp rather than a beaker, given the profusion of lamp stems in this area. The disturbance of the graves in this area, and the presence of Byzantine glass

vessel forms in burials probably of the Roman period, suggests renewed or continued activity in the hypogeum of C2 in the sixth and seventh centuries, although the nature of this activity remains unclear. The identification of the remaining glass vessels from the hypogeum of C2 (Fig. 6.21, .22) and their contextual relationship with other finds invite a bit of speculation. These vessels are somewhat distinct from the other lamp stems found in the hypogeum of C2 because of their deep green color, their uniformly thin walls of stem and base, and their wide (about 2.2 cm) diameter at the bottom. Their width and thin walls recall some third- and fourth-century examples of fusiform toilet bottles rather than lamps from Leptiminus.41 Although their disturbed context makes positive identification difficult, the presence of an unbroken third-century ceramic vessel suggests an earlier phase of activity in the hypogeum. This activity may have included the intentional deposition of grave gifts in G-061, represented by the ceramic vessel and these two possible fusiform glass toilet bottles (Fig. 6.21, .22). If these are in fact toilet bottles (and this iden­tification must remain tentative), they may indicate some level of special treatment for the deceased individual(s) originally buried in this spot.42 The narrow glass lamp stems also found in this context further suggest that the burial in

36. Stirling and Moore [note 2]. 37. For the wick holder, see Danièle Foy, “Les Porte-mèche des lampes en verre de l’Antiquité tardive,” Provence Historique, v. 61, 2011, pp. 207–238, esp. pp. 221–223. Two other small lead strips were found above another disturbed burial (G-063) in Hypogeum 2, but no glass was recovered in proximity to that burial (Stirling and Moore [note 2]). Small finds from S304, including metal objects and jewelry, will be published by Olfa Ben Aicha. 38. G-061 (Stirling and Moore [note 2]). 39. With a parallel at Leptiminus in the Christian debris over C3. 40. For a parallel for the wick holder, see Foy [note 37], p. 222, fig. 5. 41. Lamps at Leptiminus have a diameter at the bottom of the stem of 1.0–1.1 cm (objects 15–17 and 19). By contrast, objects 21 and 22 have base diameters of 2.2 cm. Fusiform toilet bottles from the Louvre have relatively wide diameters at the bottom (about 2–2.5 cm); two complete Louvre examples of

fu­siform toilet bottles have pontil marks. Fusiform toilet bottles from Site 250 at Leptiminus, found in a sealed burial context of the third century, have a smaller base diameter, about 1.25–1.5 cm at the stem (Rife [note 35], p. 318, fig. 50a, b [measurements taken by the present author from a published photograph]). By contrast, sixth-century green glass lamps from Sidi Jdidi have a stem whose base is about 1–1.5 cm in diameter, while seventhcentury blue lamps from Sidi Jdidi have a narrow stem (D. about 0.75–1.25 cm), more in keeping with the size of the Leptiminus S304 lamp examples; several examples from Sidi Jdidi have prominent pontil marks (e.g., Danièle Foy, “Les Verres,” in Sidi Jdidi, v. 1, La Basilique sud, by Aïcha Ben Abed-Ben Khader and others, Recherches d’archéologie africaine, no. 339, Rome: Ecole Française de Rome, 2004, pp. 317–329, esp. pp. 324–326, nos. 44 and 52–54 and figs. 189 and 190. 42. Toilet bottles were regularly deposited in graves at Pupput (Foy [note 35], pp. 70–71), but this practice appears to have been unusual at Leptiminus, highlighting regional variations in funerary practice.

57

Grave G-061 was disturbed in the sixth century by additional burial activity, commemorative rituals, looting, or other activities in the same space. Glass found in tomb structures at the East Cemetery therefore may reflect two distinct patterns of use and deposition. The provision of simple grave goods may appear in a burial in C2, where two toilet bottles may have been deposited at the time of burial (Fig. 6.21, .22). Similarly, the small items of jewelry in the Christian SVR (Fig. 5.7, .8) may have been included in the bur­ ial as personal effects of or gifts to the deceased. Other glass vessels found in or immediately around burials perhaps symbolize funerary activity and commemorative ritual: possibly broken during use, with remnants deposited along with the fill inside burial structures. These include the flasks, beakers, and lamps found in C3, in the unenclosed graves of the southern cemetery area, in C2, and in the Christian SVR. With the exception of the lamps, all such vessels apparently symbolize a drinking function and were possibly used for drinking wine, pouring libations, or other ritual activities at the cemetery, a pattern more evident in the glass found in contexts in the same areas formed during the cemetery’s period of use.

Glass Vessels from Nonburial Contexts Glass finds are far more numerous from contexts outside tombs at the East Cemetery (see Table 2). These finds came from layers of soil and artifacts deposited near graves and grave structures, possibly as a result of human activity, while the cemetery was in use. Here I will use the term “nonburial contexts” to indicate these deposits. The concentration and density of glass vessel fragments found in the soil matrix in nonburial contexts indicate that they were probably deposited after the time of burial, perhaps as part of periodic or repeated commemorative activities. Such regular graveside visits appear to have been an important practice throughout the cemetery’s existence, although the evidence is stronger for later periods at the site. 58

Glass evidence from nonburial contexts at Leptiminus further suggests that periodic commemorative activities in the cemetery, possibly involving food and drink, may have been even more important than banquets at the time of the funeral; that drinking or pouring libations was an important part of this activity; and that the practice of drinking or pouring libations dur­ing commemorative rituals may have been especially important during the period when the Christian cemetery was used, roughly from the early fifth to late sixth centuries. This rise in the glass evidence at Leptiminus corresponds closely to the impression gleaned from other material and literary sources about the growing role of commemorative dining and drinking during late antiquity.43 This prominence is seen in the numbers of finds stored in the SVR and related areas, and perhaps even hints at a continuity of practice, with similar types of vessels attested in the southern, Roman portion of the cemetery and in its northern, Christian expansion. Such continuity of practice, abundantly attested in other forms of evidence, is suggested but not strongly evidenced at the East Cemetery. Glass from nonburial contexts in the earlier, southern areas of the East Cemetery is, for the most part, very fragmentary (Table 2 and Fig. 7).44 Only one vessel was found in the excavation of nonburial contexts in C2: a beaker (Fig. 7.23) uncovered in a layer that was probably deposited in the fourth or fifth century.45 Glass from nonburial contexts inside C3 includes as many as six flasks of greenish glass (Fig. 7.24– .29). Although these fragments clearly came from different vessels, their similarities in form and function are notable; all are almost certainly

43. Février [note 5]; Lindsay [note 6]; Dunbabin [note 5]; Hilali [note 24]; Jensen [note 5]; Rebillard [note 9]. 44. No fragments were recovered from the clearance of nonburial areas in C1, and fragments from the excavation of C5 all derive from layers that overlie that area, deposited after it fell into disrepair (Stirling and Moore [note 2]). 45. Also from this area was a piece of glass waste found in a construction fill (Table 2). This object is not illustrated.

TABLE 2 Minimum Number of Vessels and Glass Objects, Grouped by Find Context, at the East Cemetery (S304) Vessel and Object Forms (minimum number of objects) Cemetery Burial and Use Contexts Unwalled burials near C1, C2

Beaker/ Cup

Flask/ Toilet Bottle

 1

 1

Goblet

Lamp

Bowl/ Plate

2

C3 burials

  1

     2*

C2 burials  6

C2 nonburial contexts

 1

C3 nonburial contexts

Jewelry

Glass Waste1

1

   8*

3

Christian SVR burials

Unidentified Fragments

 1

2 1

  6*

Unwalled nonburial contexts near C1, C2

 4

 1

Christian SVR nonburial (?) contexts (secondary deposition)

27

11

20

Totals by form

40

22

20

Total by Area

  2   2   10*   9   2     6*

1

1

1

  8

 1

3

 44

1

  67

10

4

6

3

106 objects

2

Objects marked with an asterisk (*) are possibly intrusive finds. 1. These objects are included in the table for the sake of complete data, and are not considered further here. 2. This object was found in a sterile grave shaft. It is included in the table for the sake of complete data, but it is not considered further in the text. 3. See discussion of these toilet bottles in text of article; their identification is tentative. 4. These vessels are represented only by miscellaneous body fragments that cannot be identified. They are included in the table for the sake of complete data, and are not considered further here.

FIG. 7. Glass from enclosed Roman nonburial contexts (objects 23–29; see Appendix).

59

FIG. 8. Glass from unenclosed Roman nonburial contexts (objects 30–37; see Appendix).

related to serving or pouring wine or other liquids. All six fragmentary flasks were found in one corner of the compound’s walled enclosure in a series of superimposed layers. It is not, however, entirely obvious whether these layers represent primary deposition; they could also have been formed by looting in the underground chambers to the north. If these vessels represent primary deposition in the corner of the C3 compound walls, they may have been used at the cemetery and accidentally broken, with some of their fragments subsequently left in a corner of the compound. In this case, it is tempting to see in these fragments, deposited in a single corner of the compound, a pattern of repeated use— drinking or pouring libations—near the graves in C3 and an accepted area for disposing of fragments of vessels broken during use there. The rituals probably took place at a time when the graves were closed, leading to deposition of fragments at or near the surface of the compound. On the other hand, if the layers were formed as a result of looting in the Christian catacombs, we can see these fragmentary vessels as representations of drinking or other ritual activities occurring underground, in proximity to the Christian burials, as will be discussed below. Although it is difficult to pinpoint the location of the ritual activities associated with wine, evidence of which was found in the corner of C3, 60

the presence of so many vessels for pouring liquids in such a small area hints that the activity probably occurred nearby. From layers deposited in nonburial contexts near unenclosed burial areas came fragments of at least seven vessels in eight fragments (Table 2 and Fig. 8).46 There are four fragmentary beak­ ers (Fig. 8.30–.32, .34) from four nonburial contexts outside C1, along with the base of a beaker or flask (Fig. 8.33), one flask (Fig. 8.35), and a small fragment that probably derives from a deep ribbed bowl (Fig. 8.36). This fragment of a ribbed bowl, found in a context possibly dating to the sixth century, is probably residual from an earlier period, although it may be a fragment of an heirloom vessel for ritual use. It is not clear whether the Leptiminus example was cast or mold-blown. Cemetery deposits outside C2 also produced a single vessel: probably a beaker, bowl, or flask (Fig. 8.37). These isolated finds cannot on their own shed significant light on post-funerary behaviors at the cemetery, although, taken in conjunction with evidence from other areas, they may perhaps suggest activities such as drinking, pouring libations, or other behaviors involving liquids. Along with the isolated finds from inside and

46. A piece of glassworking debris was also recovered in this area (see Table 2). It is not illustrated here.

near C2, these fragmentary vessels perhaps suggest that such activities occurred near many of the graves at the East Cemetery. Read in conjunction with literary and artistic evidence from the first and second centuries elsewhere in the Roman world, and with archaeobotanical evidence from other cemeteries at Leptiminus,47 it is tempting to speculate, even if direct evidence from the East Cemetery is limited, that these glass beakers and flasks may have been used to pour libations, drink wine, or perform other ritual acts at graveside ceremonies commemorating ancestors. Similar evidence of drinking and serving vessels found near tombs, but not inside them, came from the SVR in the Christian area of the ceme­ tery. Caution is required because the glass vessels were found in secondary deposition layers inside the SVR, but the materials located there do appear, in the opinion of the excavators, to relate to activities that took place in the underground chambers and corridors during the fifth, sixth, and possibly early seventh centuries. Thus, it is not possible to place these activities precisely inside the underground burial complex, but it may be possible to identify some of the activities for which the glass vessels were used. Excavation of these layers yielded at least 66 glass vessels, 62 of which can be at least tentatively identified (Table 2 and Figs. 9 and 10).48 Although the quantity of glass finds from the SVR is significantly higher than that in nonburial con­texts in the southern area of the cemetery, the overall character of the glass vessels remains consistent. Vessels probably used for drinking and serving wine or other liquids (beakers, goblets, and flasks) make up the lion’s share of the finds, with a limited number of lamps and other vessels. Beaker rims in the SVR form a prominent group, with three different types: one type with an outfolded rim (Fig. 9.38–.43), one with an unworked everted rim (Fig. 9.44, .45), and one with a rounded rim (Fig. 9.46–.57). At least some of these rims probably belong to the goblets described below. Beaker(?) bases in the SVR include a low foot (Fig. 9.58); pushed-in bases,

some slightly thicker than their truncated conical walls (Fig. 9.59–.63); and a thickened, padtype base (Fig. 9.64). The goblets appear in large numbers in the Christian SVR. All were made with a stem applied separately with the use of the pontil. Most examples are made of light green glass (Fig. 9.65–.82). One example (Fig. 9.82) should prob­ ably be associated with the rounded rims with spiral trails from the same artifact deposit (Fig. 9.46, .47). Three goblets in this group (Fig. 9.76–.78) are multicolored, made with bright blue stems and feet applied to greenish bodies. The blue-stemmed examples are remarkable only for their use of decorative color; their form is otherwise identical to that of other goblets from the same contexts. Two goblets (Fig. 9.83, .84) are made of light green glass, but they are slightly taller and thinner than the other goblet stems, possibly forming a distinct group among this deposit. In glass vessels found in the SVR’s secondary deposits, flasks are represented by as many as 11 vessels. Some narrow rims apparently derive from flasks without handles (Fig. 10.85–.92); flasks with handles and conical mouths are also represented (Fig. 10.93–.95), although it is not clear whether they derive from vessels with one or two handles. There is at least one lamp represented by two upright, ear-shaped handles and a rim (Fig. 10.96).49 There are fragments of perhaps three large dishes (plates or large bowls, Fig. 10.97–.99). Like nearly all of the beakers

47. Cf. Stirling [note 8]. 48. In addition to the glass vessels, finds in these contexts included one piece of glass waste, ceramic fine wares dated to the sixth and seventh centuries, 42 coins, marble, and ceramic building materials (Susan T. Stevens, personal communication). 49. The lamp(s) would originally have had three handles; it is not entirely clear whether the handles found here actually belong to the rim, but in estimating quantities of vessels, caution has been the rule. It is entirely possible that some of the vessels discussed here as “beakers” may have been used as lamps, as may some of the goblets (Danièle Foy, “Lampes en verre coniques et à pied tubulaire,” Lychnological Acts 1: Actes du 1er Congrès International d’Études sur le luminaire antique (Nyon– Genève, 29.IX–4.X.2003), ed. Laurent Chrzanovski, Mono­ graphies instrumentum, no. 31, Montagnac: Editions Monique Mergoil, 2005, pp. 107–113 and pls. 41–45).

61

FIG. 9. Glass from the Christian Small Vaulted Room (objects 38–84; see Appendix).

and goblets, the flasks, lamp(s), and plates are made of natural green(ish) glass, nearly all without added decoration. The evidence for drinking or other ritual behavior involving liquids from the SVR can be supplemented, although cautiously, with additional glass finds that were recovered from the area above C3 during a salvage excavation. These finds are numerous, closest in both the 62

quantity of finds and the glass colors and forms present to the glass finds from the SVR. At least 157 vessels were recovered in excavating this area (Table 3). The forms of these vessels are familiar from the Christian areas: beakers, many with rounded rims and conical bodies and/or pushed-in bases; lamps with hollow stems, most­ly in bluish green glass; lamps with three vertical handles on folded

FIG. 10. Glass from the Christian Small Vaulted Room (objects 85–99; see Appendix).

TABLE 3 Glass Vessels from Christian Debris over Compound 3 (C3) Beaker or Cup1

Flask/ Toilet Bottle

Rounded rims

42

14

Folded rims

  2

  1

Unworked rims

  6

  1

Pushed-in or kicked bases

30

Flat bases

  3

Christian Debris

Goblet

1   7 1

18

Hollow stems

  3 10

 3

2

Handles

  1

Decorated body fragments

  2

Totals

1

  2

Solid stems Base-rings

Lamp

Bowl Unidentified or Plate Vessel Fragments

86

19

  3

1 3

18

25

2

7

1. These rims could easily belong to goblets or lamps as well as beakers. The bases could belong to beakers or flasks.

rims; goblets in green, bluish green, and amber glass, all with a slender, smooth profile; and flasks with simple conical and cylindrical rims, apparently without handles, and occasionally decorated with spiral trails. While these objects cannot be closely dated by their excavation context, many of the forms can be dated to the sixth century or later (e.g., goblets, stems of lamps

for polycandela), and the overall character of these vessels is quite similar to that found in the sixth-century layers of the SVR. The goblets highlight the close relationship be­ tween the underground Christian burial chambers in the East Cemetery’s northern expansion and the deposits that covered C3. Goblets, found at this excavation site only in these two areas 63

and not in other burial areas or in the stratified layers inside C3, do not appear before the end of the fifth century. They are a characteristic find of the sixth- to seventh-century Byzantine period in North Africa.50 Despite this difference in form, however, vessels from the SVR of the Christian burial area are quite similar in supposed function to glass from the earlier, more southerly burial areas, with vessels usually employed for drinking and serving liquids predom­inant.

Commemorative Drinking Rituals at the East Cemetery? Glass from the East Cemetery at Leptiminus suggests that mourners performed rituals or drank (and possibly dined) there to commemorate their dead, almost certainly in the Christian period from the fifth to late sixth centuries, and perhaps even over the entire period of the cemetery’s use, beginning in the late second or third century.51 The changes visible in the increased presence of glass in Christian burial areas at the East Cemetery parallel changes present in other patterns of behavior at the same site, particularly the shift from burial in the southern half of the cemetery, in graves both at the level of the surface and underground, to burial in the north­ern half of the cemetery, exclusively in underground spaces. These changes may provide insight into the nature of the shift toward Christian beliefs in the region. The findspots of the glass vessels—both inside tombs and outside them in nonburial contexts formed during the cemetery’s use—could indicate that drinking or other ritual activities using drinking and serving vessels took place at the time of the funeral and after the tomb had been sealed and completed. Few vessels are found in tombs in either the Roman or the Christian areas of the cemetery (Figs. 4 and 5), but they suggest a relationship to drinking and perhaps also to eating (or to other rituals employing such vessels): eight beakers (four in each sector), two flasks (one in each sector), and one plate (in the Christian sector). Anointing the body or the pyre during the funeral and burying 64

the deceased with glass objects of personal adornment are practices possibly evidenced via the glass in only two graves (two possible toilet bottles in C2 [Fig. 6.21, .22] and two pieces of jewelry in a Christian grave [Fig. 5.7, .8]), although some of the drinking or pouring vessels found in the tombs may have been used to anoint corpses or deposited as grave gifts.52 Finds of glass from outside burial areas, particularly those in the Christian catacombs, suggest the presence of living visitors at the site who used these vessels as props in longstanding rituals of piety.53 The glass found in nonburial contexts—15 vessels from the Roman area (Figs. 7 and 8) and 62 from the redeposited strata in the Christian SVR (Figs. 9 and 10)—probably indicates that drinking or other ritual activities involving wine took place at the cemetery at times when the tombs were generally not open. The glass evidence from the SVR suggests that vessels used in later rituals (Figs. 9 and 10) were similar to those deposited in the tombs (Fig. 5.4–.6, .9–.12), with drinking and serving vessels predominant. Evidence for the earlier period is fragmentary and difficult to interpret, although the absence of such drinking and serving

50. Danièle Foy, “Le Verre en Tunisie: L’Apport des fouilles récentes tuniso-françaises,” Journal of Glass Studies, v. 45, 2003, pp. 59–89, esp. p. 73. 51. The well-known “Totenmahl” motif in visual media from the classical world suggests that the meals and drinking (or related rituals) regularly occurred near graves (Dunbabin [note 5], pp. 103–140); Monnica’s regular pious visits to the cemetery (Augustine [note 10]) suggest a similar location. 52. It has been suggested, regarding fusiform toilet bottles, that broken vessels in Romano-British tombs are symbols of funerary ritual, not grave gifts per se (Cool [note 29], p. 146). Vessels that are substantially complete are frequently interpreted as grave gifts (cf. Philippe Leveau, “Une mensa de la nécropole occidentale de Cherchel,” Karthago, v. 18, no. 1, 1978, pp. 127– 131 and pl. XXV–XXXI, esp. p. xxix, no. 2, and p. xxxi, nos. 3 and 4). Certainly no reconstructible or substantially complete vessels have been identified among glass finds from the East Cemetery at Leptiminus, although this might be a result of burial processes and structures at the site rather than ritual activity. 53. Acts of piety are not, of course, limited to relatively ephemeral commemoration; the location and position of the grave and the construction of permanent markers also served to maintain or publicly establish the connection between the deceased and the living community (see, for example, Stevens [note 23], pp. 98–101).

vessels in nonburial contexts in the hypogea of C1 and C2 may indicate that commemorative rituals took place aboveground. Another type of commemoration could have occurred in the hypogeum in C2, where many lamps were found in association with burials (Fig. 6.13–.20), but those glass vessels make it clear, even in the absence of ironclad stratigraphy (discussed above), that such activity occurred in the sixth or early seventh century, not during the second and third centuries, when most of the cemetery’s southern sector was initially used. As residents of Leptiminus changed their place of burial in the fifth and sixth centuries,54 so also they apparently changed the location of their commemorative activities, moving into the underground SVR of the cemetery’s northern expansion. In this burial area, commemorative rit­uals apparently took place near the graves, and not at the surface. If this represents a change from the earlier practice, it may be explained by the lack of a surface-level structure or enclosure in the Christian area, unlike those enclosures found around the Roman spaces. Although we lack stratigraphic resolution to support this sup­position, it is possible that one of the rooms underground served as a gathering space for commemorative rituals, as the surface-level com­ pounds and grave markers possibly did during the Roman period. Provision for lighting the commemorative activity in the Christian rooms and tunnels can be seen in the glass lamps excavated in the SVR (Fig. 10.96) and found in the Christian debris nearby (at least 25 examples). Glass lamps may well have been permanently installed in these underground areas; some evidence for this has been recovered in the same general area.55 There is little evidence for the Roman period that glass vessels used in commemorative rituals were stored near the graves themselves. Indeed, the glass finds from the southern area are so frag­mentary that it is tempting to see in them, particularly in the fragments from C3 (Fig. 7.24–.29), a practice of leaving at the cemetery only vessels broken accidentally during use, although, with such a small assemblage of only 16

vessels (Table 2: Roman nonburial contexts), this suggestion can be little more than speculation. Clearer evidence about the location of vessel storage appears in the evidence from the SVR; beginning in the fifth or sixth century, it may have become accepted practice, at this cemetery at least, to store there vessels intended for use in commemorative rituals. Several identical groups of vessels can be discerned among the glass evidence in the Christian SVR, suggesting that the vessels were made at the same time or in the same glass workshop. The most ob­ vious of these are two related groups of goblets and a group of beakers with pushed-in bases. As noted above, one group includes at least 17 naturally colored green goblets (Fig. 9.65–.75, .79–.84),56 and three goblets with blue stems and greenish bowls (Fig. 9.76– .78) form a similar group. At least two beakers with pushed-in bases from the SVR (Fig. 9.60, .61), and two additional ones from the Christian debris over C3,57 may make up another group of drinking vessels. In most instances in which sets of drinking vessels have been identified by careful excavation, several drinking vessels (beakers and cups) accompany a serving vessel (flask or pitcher); sometimes a plate or bowl is also included.58 Drinking sets may also have been grouped according to function rather than appearance, because in other contexts, sets are sometimes found with vessels made in several different colors of 54. Ben Lazreg and others [note 2]. 55. These objects include bronze chains, rings, and hooks, possibly used for suspending the lamps (Stirling and Moore [note 2]). They will be published among the S304 small finds by Olfa Ben Aicha. 56. It is unclear whether the two taller, thinner goblets (Fig. 9.83, .84) represent a variation of this set or a distinct group. 57. These objects are not illustrated. 58. Sets of glass tableware have been found at domestic sites widely separated by time and space, including first-century Herculaneum, fourth-century Karanis in Egypt (E. Marianne Stern, “Roman Glassblowing in a Cultural Context,” American Journal of Archaeology, v. 103, no. 3, 1999, pp. 441–484, esp. pp. 471–472), and fourth–fifth-century Petra (Daniel Keller, “Die Gläser aus Petra,” in Petra, Ez Zantur: Ergebnisse der Schweizerisch-Liechtensteinischen Ausgrabungen, v. 3, Terra archaeologica, no. 5, Mainz: P. von Zabern, 2006, pp. 1–251 and plates, esp. on pp. 142–163).

65

glass or with variations in decorative technique.59 But there is some evidence to suggest that glass was regularly bought in groups or sets of similarly colored and decorated items,60 as apparently occurred at Leptiminus at least in the case of the 15–17 green goblets and the three blue and green goblets from the SVR. Looking more broadly at this glass, nearly all of the drinking and serving vessels are of naturally colored greenish glass, and all of them were probably employed at approximately the same time. We could therefore consider that the 46 beak­ ers and goblets, as well as the 11 flasks (Fig. 10.85–.95), constitute a large drinking set that was intended to accommodate many people at the same time.61 The identification of three large plates or bowls (Fig. 10.97–.99) among the glass from the SVR does not detract from this in­ terpretation, because visual representations of din­ing practices indicate that many banqueters typi­cally shared plates, while each person had an individual cup for wine or other beverages.62 The presence of many identical vessels—making up several small sets or one large set—in the SVR strongly suggests that sets were stored in the underground chambers of the Christian sector of the cemetery. This is more likely than that Christian visitors to the underground graves discarded their broken glass vessels among the tombs that they had previously positioned and

decorated with such care.63 Instead, the vessels were probably stored in or near the burial areas, close to where they were used. Nearby storage is familiar from the excavations of both houses and ritual spaces.64 While the underground cham­bers at the East Cemetery in Leptiminus are neither house nor church, they are related to both: cemetery sites regularly include furnishings more familiar from domestic contexts, especially dining furniture. And ritual spaces, particularly Christian churches, often included burial areas, even when the primary purpose of the structures was nonfunerary. It is not unrealistic, then, to suggest that Chris­ tian visitors to the underground burial areas at Leptiminus were inclined to store their glass drinking sets where they regularly and repeatedly used them. After the burial chambers and tunnels went out of use, many pieces from the glass drinking sets were deposited in the SVR, and some were probably later removed as debris.65 While it cannot be definitively determined, it is tempting to see, in the large number of glass vessel finds in the Christian areas, a sizable group of pious cemetery visitors coming together to drink in memory of the dead.66 This is particularly true if all of the glass vessels derive from one large set rather than several small ones.67 It is impossible to see obvious evidence

59. Krystyna Gawlikowska, “Glass Finds from the Mithraeum in Hawarte,” Polish Archaeology in the Mediterranean, v. 21, 2012, pp. 496–503, esp. pp. 496–501; Keller [note 58], pp. 143–147. 60. Stern [note 58], p. 471. 61. It is, of course, possible that some of these vessels may have been used as lamps, because the forms are frequently indistinguishable (see Foy [note 49]), but vessels functioning specifically as lamps have also been identified from the SVR and the related Christian debris over Compound 3 (see Table 3). 62. For individual drinking vessels, see Katherine M. D. Dunbabin, “Wine and Water at the Roman Convivium,” Journal of Roman Archaeology, v. 6, 1993, pp. 116–141; for shared plates, see idem [note 5], pp. 150–163. 63. Many of the graves in the Christian areas of the East Cemetery are covered with elaborate—and probably costly— funerary mosaics (see Ben Lazreg and others [note 2]). 64. Cf. Keller [note 58], pp. 148–149 for storage contexts in a fourth-century house. For storing objects in churches, see Zbigniew T. Fiema, “Storing in the Church: Artefacts in Room I

of the Petra Church,” in Objects in Context, Objects in Use, ed. Luke Lavan and Ellen Swift, Late Antique Archaeology, no. 5, Leiden: Brill, 2007, pp. 607–623; and Vincent Michel, “Furniture, Fixtures, and Fittings in Churches: Archaeological Evidence from Palestine (4th–8th c.) and the Role of the Diakonikon,” in ibid., pp. 581–606. 65. Such an explanation would account for the slightly better state of preservation of the glass from the SVR and Christian debris, where a few joining fragments have been identified and a few profiles tentatively reconstructed. 66. Growth in the audience for funerary commemoration is noted in literary sources and archaeological evidence from North African churches: Ann Marie Yasin, “Funerary Monuments and Collective Identity: From Roman Family to Christian Community,” The Art Bulletin, v. 87, no. 3, 2005, pp. 433–457, esp. pp. 447–451. 67. The similarity, for example, between the forms of the green goblets and the blue and green goblets might allow them to be seen as a single set with a few distinct pieces, perhaps reserved for the use of a few members of the group.

66

of drinking sets in the glass fragments from the southern sector of the cemetery at Leptiminus, given the small assemblage, but many sets from domestic and ritual contexts include just a few drinking cups, and images of banquets regularly show fewer than 10 diners with individual cups.68 Funerary observances expanded in the Christian period, however, as martyrs and clergy came to be seen as members of the wider church family and thus, in some senses, as the ancestors of ordinary Christians.69 Thus, commemorative drink­­­ing at important tomb sites may have begun to involve larger groups than the commemorative rituals of traditional Romans. While there is no evidence of martyrs’ graves at Leptiminus, it is entirely possible, following the evidence of Augustine’s mother, Monnica, and other Christian testimonia cited above, that a fairly large group of Christians gathered in the cemetery at intervals to commemorate their dead collectively. The glass vessels excavated at the cemetery do not seem to be related to the celebration of the Christian Eucharist. Although tomb paintings of dining in the Christian catacombs at Rome have sometimes been interpreted as depicting the liturgical feast, such explanations have generally been rejected by modern scholars because the scenes are so similar to motifs found in pagan tomb contexts.70 Eucharistic celebrations at the tomb are rarely mentioned in African contexts; Augustine specifically notes that Italians who celebrate the Eucharist at a tomb, in the presence of a corpse, do so in contrast to the normal African practice.71 According to papyrological sources and archaeological finds, the liturgical apparatus for the Eucharist generally included one or more chalices, along with patens and other utensils. But it was probably rare for any but the largest churches to use multiple chalices during the Eucharist. Even some small, rural churches possessed liturgical vessels in precious metal, and glass vessels do not specifically feature in inventories of litur­gical objects from eastern provinces.72 Storage areas not far from the altar in Byzantine churches are the typical location for the Eucharistic objects,73

and neither an altar nor such a securable storage area was noted in the excavated underground burial area at Leptiminus. It seems unlikely, therefore, that the vessels from Leptiminus would have been used in the celebration of the Eucharist in the underground burial chambers of the northern sector of the East Cemetery. Instead, these vessels were appar­ ently stored at the cemetery for use in the regular practice of commemorating the dead with feasting, probably using the few large dishes (Fig. 10.97–.99) as communal food dishes and drinking wine or other beverages from the goblets and beakers (Fig. 9.38–.84). Underground lighting provided by hanging lamps (Fig. 10.96; similar vessels were found in quantity among debris above C3 [see Table 3]) afforded opportunities to dine and drink close to the deceased. Underground lighting in the hypogeum of C2 (Fig. 6.13–.20), typologically dated to the late sixth or early seventh century, may indicate that the Christian community also visited earlier bur­ ial sites in the southern sector of the East Cemetery. Perhaps they recognized the grave of one or more fellow Christians among the graves of the hypogeum. While no glass evidence suggests that fifthand sixth- to early seventh-century visitors drank in this hypogeum, the presence of so many lamps perhaps suggests the hypogeum of C2 as another nexus of Christian commemo­ ration, with the lamps offered as another sort 68. Gawlikowska [note 59]; Keller [note 58], p. 145, table 51; Dunbabin [note 62]; Février [note 5], pp. 31–34. 69. Jensen [note 5], pp. 126–128, citing Cyprian Epp. 12.2.1 and 39.3.1. Février ([note 5], pp. 42–43) highlights the relationship between Christian charity or euergetism and funerary feasts. 70. Jensen [note 5], pp. 120–124; Février [note 5]; Dunbabin [note 5]. 71. Augustine [note 10], 9.12.32; Jensen [note 5], p. 134; Augustine, Sermones 361.6, cited in Éric Rebillard, “Church and Burial in Late Antiquity,” Transformations of Religious Practices in Late Antiquity, trans. Aaron Pelttari, Variorum Collected Studies Series, no. CS1028, Burlington, Vermont: Ashgate, 2013, pp. 227–249, esp. pp. 244–245. 72. Béatrice Caseau, “Objects in Churches: The Testimony of Inventories,” in Lavan and Swift [note 64], pp. 554–558 and 574–576. 73. See Fiema [note 64]; and Michel [note 64].

67

of memorial to the deceased, as early Christian leaders urged.74 From the inception of the East Cemetery at Leptiminus, visitors to the cemetery may have commemorated their dead near the tombs with rituals related to drinking or pouring libations. In the early Christian period, the practice of commemoration with rituals related to drinking became prominent, and perhaps more frequent than in the Roman period. This is signaled at Leptiminus in the combination of storing vessels near the tombs, using large sets of nearly identical vessels possibly purchased for this purpose, and perhaps gathering larger groups of celebrants together for such rituals. Limited, circumstantial evi­dence from the Roman period at the cemetery suggests that this Christian commemorative activity retained the

spirit of the Roman practice and transferred it to a new religious context.75 Despite literary evidence that suggests disapproval of commemorative banqueting and drinking—and the associated rowdy behavior—by church authorities, the Christian citizens of Leptiminus probably considered regular visits to, and drinking beside, the tombs of their loved ones to be an important part of the honor due to the dead, regardless of the origins of the practice in traditional Roman religious observances.

74. Constantine, “Oration to the Assembly of the Saints,” 12: “For as the martyr’s life is one of sobriety and obedience to the will of God, so is his death an example of true greatness and generous fortitude of soul. Hence it is followed by hymns and psalms, words and songs of praise to the all-seeing God: and a sacrifice of thanksgiving is offered in memory of such men, a bloodless, a harmless sacrifice, wherein is no need of the fragrant frankincense, no need of fire; but only enough of pure

light to suffice the assembled worshipers” (trans. Schaff and Wace, 1890). 75. Similar patterns of continuity are evident between other traditional Roman and early Christian rituals and behaviors, such as the use of commemorative architecture (Stevens [note 23], p. 103) and the differential treatment of deceased children (Norman [note 34]; de Larminat, “Le Mobilier” [note 34]; idem, “Gestes” [note 34]).

Allison E. Sterrett-Krause Assistant Professor of Classics College of Charleston Charleston, South Carolina [email protected]

APPENDIX Catalog of Selected Glass Vessels and Findspots from the East Cemetery, Leptiminus Object No.

Form

Color

Description

Date

Glass Comparanda 1

Context Location

Context Type

1

Base: beaker, flask, or bowl

Bluish green

Hollow tubular base-ring

2nd–3rd c. F.K. no. 409; or later Corning nos. 99 and 150

Unwalled cemetery earth

Fill around Grave G-012 (inhumation)

2

Flask

Light green

Two fragments: rounded, outsplayed conical rim; pushed-in base

3rd–4th c. F. K. nos. or later 291 and 664; Louvre2 nos. 1049 and 1052

Unwalled cemetery earth

Burned earth beneath Grave G-071 (cremation)

1. F.K. = Sylvia Fünfschilling, “Gläser aus die Grabungen des Deutschen Archäologischen Instituts in Karthago: Die Grabungen ‘Quartier Magon’ und Rue Ibn Chabâat, sowie kleinere Sondagen,” Die Deutschen Ausgrabungen in Karthago, v. 3, ed. Friedrich Rakob, Mainz: P. von Zabern, 1999, pp. 435–529. 2. Louvre = Arveiller-Dulong and Nenna [note 35].

68

Object No.

Form

Color

Description

Date ?

3

Base: Colorless beaker or flask?

Pushed-in base, possibly with carinated walls(?) or applied foot(?). Finished edge preserved at top (?); bottom also finished; no obvious breaks indicating where walls might have been attached. Faint annular pontil mark on concave (bottom?) surface

4

Beaker

Bluish green

Articulated rounded rim with truncated conical walls

5th c.

5

Beaker, Bluish green bowl, or lamp

Outfolded rim

6

Beaker or bowl on a high foot

Two fragments: rounded rim and base-ring; presumed to be same vessel, based on visual inspection of color and weathering

Greenish

Glass Comparanda

Context Location

Context Type

Close parallels unknown. Possibly S.C.3 no. 115

C3

Above plaster fill over skeleton in Grave G-077 (inhumation)

F.K. nos. 235–237

Christian SVR

Inside burial fill with skeleton LL2704 (inhumation)

4th–7th c.

F.K. nos. 269 and 274; F.SJ.4 nos. 49–51

Christian SVR

Inside burial fill with skeleton LL2704 (inhumation)

5th–6th c.

Rim: F.K. nos. Christian SVR 235–237; base: TB.S.5 nos. 24, 25

Inside burial fill with skeleton LL2704 (inhumation)

3. S.C. = Mara Sternini, “I vetri provenienti dagli scavi della missione italiana à Cartagine (1973–1977),” Journal of Glass Studies, v. 41, 1999, pp. 83–103. 4. F.SJ. = Foy [note 41]. 5. TB.S. = Veronica A. Tatton-Brown, “The Glass,” in Excavations at Carthage: The British Mission, v. 1, The Avenue du President Habib Bourguiba, Salammbo, ed. Henry R. Hurst, Sheffield, U.K.: University of Sheffield, Department of Prehistory and Archaeology, 1984, pp. 194–212.

69

Object No.

Form

Color

Description

Date

Glass Comparanda

Context Location

Context Type

7

Ring bezel

Bright green

Small, flat circular piece with cut edges

1st c. or later

Corning6 nos. 996–1002

Christian SVR

Inside burial fill with skeletons LL2703 (inhumations)

 8

Bead: horned or spotted?

Black?

Small round bead with applied dots of dark, probably opaque color all over its surface

1st c. or later

Israel7 no. 109; S.C. no. 158

Christian SVR

Inside burial fill with skeletons LL2703 (inhumations)

 9

Beaker

Greenish

Cylindrical beaker with everted, cracked-off rim

4th–6th c.

Isings8 106/109; F.Tun.9 no. 37; F.K. nos. 208–222

Christian SVR

Inside burial fill with skeletons LL2703 (inhumations)

10

Beaker or bowl

Greenish

Rounded rim with cylindrical or (truncated?) conical walls

4th–6th c.

F.K. nos. 646–648

Christian SVR

Inside burial fill with skeletons LL2703 (inhumations)

11

Beaker or bowl

Greenish

Rounded rim with (truncated?) conical walls

4th–6th c.

F.K. nos. 141–142b

Christian SVR

Inside burial fill with skeletons LL2703 (inhumations)

12

Flask

Greenish

Conical rounded rim, funnelshaped neck, sloping shoulder

5th–6th c.

F.K. nos. 293–294

Christian SVR

Inside burial fill with skeletons LL2703 (inhumations)

13

Lamp or Bluish green beaker

Outfolded rim

6th–7th c.

F.K. nos. 269, Hypogeum Fill over 270; F.SJ. nos. of C2 skeleton inside 49–51 Grave G-067 (inhumation)

6. Corning = David Whitehouse, Roman Glass in The Corning Museum of Glass, v. 1, Corning: the museum, 1997. 7. Israel = Maud Spaer and others, Ancient Glass in the Israel Museum: Beads and Other Small Objects, Jerusalem: the museum, 2001. 8. Isings = Clasina Isings, Roman Glass from Dated Finds, Gronigen: J. B. Wolters, 1957. 9. F.Tun. = Foy [note 50].

70

Object No.

Glass Comparanda

Context Location

Form

Color

Description

Date

Context Type

14

Goblet or lamp

Bluish green

Conical body over very slender, solid stem pulled out from main mass of glass

6th c.

F.K. nos. 534–538, 768

Hypogeum Fill inside of C2 burial structure of Grave G-065 (inhumation)

15

Lamp

Bluish green

Hollow stem with rounded, thickened base; pontil scar on bottom

7th c.

F.SJ. no. 50

Hypogeum Fill inside of C2 burial structure of Grave G-065 (inhumation)

16

Lamp

Greenish

Hollow stem with rounded, thickened base; pontil scar on bottom

7th c.

F.SJ. no. 50

Hypogeum Fill inside of C2 burial structure of Grave G-065 (inhumation)

17

Lamp

Greenish

Hollow stem with rounded, thickened base; small, irregular mass of glass, used to attach pontil to vessel base during manufacture, retained on base

7th c.

F.SJ. no. 50

Hypogeum Fill inside of C2 burial structure of Grave G-065 (inhumation)

18

Lamp

Bluish green

Two fragments: body and bottom of carinated bowl

7th c.

F.SJ. no. 50

Hypogeum Disturbed fill of C2 over disturbed Grave G-061 (inhumation)

19

Lamp

Bluish green

Three fragments: body, bottom of carinated bowl, and hollow stem with rounded, thickened base. Lead ribbon wick holder found in same context (not illustrated)

7th c.

F.SJ. no. 50

Hypogeum Fill over of C2 skeleton inside disturbed Grave G-061 (inhumation)

71

Object No.

Form

Color

Description

Date

Glass Comparanda

7th c.

F.SJ. no. 50

Context Location

Context Type

20

Lamp

Greenish

Hollow stem with rounded, thickened base; pontil scar on bottom

21

Toilet bottle(?) or lamp

Green

Hollow stem with thin, rounded base; pontil scar on bottom

3rd–4th c. Louvre nos. or 7th c. 1153–1155, 1287; cf. F.SJ. nos. 49–55

Hypogeum Fill inside of C2 burial structure of disturbed Grave G-061 (inhumation)

22

Toilet bottle(?) or lamp

Green

Hollow stem with thin, rounded base; pontil scar on bottom

3rd–4th c. Louvre nos. or 7th c. 1153–1155, 1287; cf. F.SJ. nos. 49–55

Hypogeum Fill inside of C2 burial structure of disturbed Grave G-061 (inhumation)

23

Beaker

Bluish green

Rounded rim with cylindrical or truncated conical walls

4th–6th c.

Isings 106/109; F.K. nos. 646–648

C2

Nonburial context in C2; primary deposition?

24

Base: beaker or flask

Greenish

Cylindrical, slightly pushedin base

4th–6th c.

F.K. no. 397; S.C. nos. 110–112

C3

Nonburial context in northwest corner of C3; primary or secondary deposition

25

Rim: beaker or flask

Greenish

Narrow, rounded cylindrical rim

4th–6th c.

F.K. no. 670; H.BK.10 no. 41

C3

Nonburial context in northwest corner of C3; primary or secondary deposition

Hypogeum Fill inside of C2 burial structure of disturbed Grave G-061 (inhumation)

10. H.BK. = John W. Hayes, “The Glass Finds (1990),” in Susan T. Stevens and others, Bir el Knissia at Carthage: A Rediscovered Cemetery Church. Report, Journal of Roman Archaeology, Supplementary Series, no. 7, Ann Arbor, Michigan: Kelsey Museum, 1993, pp. 289–294.

72

Object No.

Form

Color

Description

26

Flask

Greenish

Narrow, rounded rim, slightly funnelshaped

27

Flask

Greenish

28

Flask (or toilet bottle?)

29

Date

Glass Comparanda

Context Location

Context Type

4th–6th c.

Isings 106/109; F.K. nos. 646–648

C3

Nonburial context in northwest corner of C3; primary or secondary deposition

Handle attached to small fragment of funnel-shaped, infolded rim

4th c. or later

F.K. no. 355; Louvre no. 1011

C3

Nonburial context in northwest corner of C3; primary or secondary deposition

Greenish

Thick, infolded rim, with cylindrical neck

1st–3rd c. or later

F.K. no. 673; possibly Corning nos. 261–264; possibly Isings 82

C3

Nonburial context in northwest corner of C3; primary or secondary deposition

Flask

Greenish

Thick, outsplayed rim, infolded and decorated with two thin spiral trails

4th–5th c.

TB.S. no. 93

C3

Nonburial context in northwest corner of C3; primary or secondary deposition

30

Beaker

Greenish

Cracked-off rim

3rd–5th c. F.K. no. 210

Unwalled cemetery earth

Nonburial context near C1, LL1238

31

Beaker

Greenish

Rounded rim with (truncated?) conical walls

4th–6th c.

Isings 106/109; F.K. nos. 646–648

Unwalled cemetery earth

Nonburial context near C1, LL1238

32

Beaker

Greenish

Rounded rim with cylindrical walls

4th–6th c.

F.K. nos. 235–237

Unwalled cemetery earth

Nonburial context near C1, LL1238

33

Base: beaker or flask

Greenish

Pushed-in base with cylindrical walls

4th–6th c.

F.K. no. 397; S.C. nos. 110–112

Unwalled cemetery earth

Nonburial context near C1, LL1238

73

Object No.

Form

34

Beaker?

Indeterminate

Extremely fragmentary rounded rim with curved body

4th–6th c.

F.K. no. 652

Unwalled cemetery earth

Nonburial context near C1, LL1265

35

Flask

Greenish

Outsplayed, rounded rim

5th–7th c.

F.K. nos. 293, 300

Unwalled cemetery earth

Nonburial context near C1, LL1298

36

Bowl

Bluish green

Rounded rim and one thick rib of deep ribbed bowl (?)

1st–3rd c.

F.K. no. 623; F.CO.11 no. 45

Unwalled cemetery earth

Nonburial context near C1, LL1206

37

Base: Colorless beaker, bowl, or flask

Small coiled foot

4th–5th c.

S.C. no. 103

Unwalled cemetery earth

Nonburial context near C2, LL1903

38

Beaker, Greenish bowl, or lamp

Outfolded rim and (truncated?) conical walls

4th–7th c.

F.K. no. 269; TB.CH.12 no. 4

Christian SVR

Secondary deposition, LL2011

39

Beaker, Greenish bowl, or lamp

Outfolded rim and (truncated?) conical walls

4th–7th c.

F.K. no. 269; TB.CH. no. 4

Christian SVR

Secondary deposition, LL2011

40

Beaker, Greenish bowl, or lamp

Outfolded rim and (truncated?) conical walls

4th–7th c.

F.K. no. 269; TB.CH. no. 4

Christian SVR

Secondary deposition, LL2011

41

Beaker, Greenish bowl, or lamp

Outfolded rim and (truncated?) conical walls

4th–7th c.

F.K. no. 269; TB.CH. no. 4

Christian SVR

Secondary deposition, LL2011

42

Beaker, Greenish bowl, or lamp

Outfolded rim and (truncated?) conical walls

4th–7th c.

F.K. no. 269; TB.CH. no. 4

Christian SVR

Secondary deposition, LL2011

43

Beaker, Greenish bowl, or lamp

Outfolded rim and (truncated?) conical walls

4th–7th c.

F.K. no. 269; TB.CH. no. 4

Christian SVR

Secondary deposition, LL2013

Color

Description

Date

Glass Comparanda

Context Location

Context Type

11. F.CO. = Danièle Foy, “Le Verre,” in Carthage, colline de l’Odéon: Maisons de la rotonde et du cryptoportique (recherches 1987–2000), ed. Catherine Balmelle and others, Collection de l’Ecole Française de Rome, no. 457, Rome: Ecole Française de Rome, 2012, pp. 765–796. 12. TB.CH. = Veronica A. Tatton-Brown, “The Glass,” in Excavations at Carthage: The British Mission, v. 2, The Pottery and Other Ceramic Objects from the Site, ed. Henry R. Hurst, Sheffield, U.K.: University of Sheffield, Department of Prehistory and Archaeology, 1994, pp. 282–290.

74

Object No.

Form

Color

44

Beaker

45

Glass Comparanda

Context Location

Description

Date

Context Type

Greenish

Unworked, slightly everted rim with cylindrical walls

4th–5th c.

Isings 106/109; F.K. nos. 208, 209

Christian SVR

Secondary deposition, LL2011

Beaker

Greenish

Unworked, slightly everted rim with cylindrical walls

4th–5th c.

Isings 106/109; F.K. nos. 208, 209

Christian SVR

Secondary deposition, LL2011

46

Beaker

Greenish

Rounded rim with (truncated?) conical walls; spiral trails on body

5th–6th c.

F.K. no. 238; H.BK.12 no. 32

Christian SVR

Secondary deposition, LL2014

47

Beaker

Greenish

Rounded rim with (truncated?) conical walls

5th–6th c.

F.K. no. 238; H.BK. no. 32

Christian SVR

Secondary deposition, LL2014

48

Beaker

Greenish

Rounded rim with (truncated?) conical walls

5th–6th c.

F.K. no. 238; H.BK. no. 32

Christian SVR

Secondary deposition, LL2013

49

Beaker

Greenish

Rounded rim with (truncated?) conical walls

5th–6th c.

F.K. no. 238; H.BK. no. 32

Christian SVR

Secondary deposition, LL2011

50

Beaker

Greenish

Rounded rim with (truncated?) conical walls

5th–6th c.

F.K. no. 238; H.BK. no. 32

Christian SVR

Secondary deposition, LL2011

51

Beaker

Greenish

Rounded rim with (truncated?) conical walls

5th–6th c.

F.K. no. 238; H.BK. no. 32

Christian SVR

Secondary deposition, LL2010

52

Beaker

Greenish

Rounded rim with (truncated?) conical walls

5th–6th c.

F.K. no. 238; H.BK. no. 32

Christian SVR

Secondary deposition, LL2011

53

Beaker

Greenish

Rounded rim with (truncated?) conical walls

5th–6th c.

F.K. no. 238; H.BK. no. 32

Christian SVR

Secondary deposition, LL2011

75

Object No.

Date

Context Location

Color

54

Beaker

Greenish

Rounded rim with (truncated?) conical walls

5th–6th c.

F.K. no. 238; H.BK. no. 32

Christian SVR

Secondary deposition, LL2011

55

Beaker

Greenish

Rounded rim with (truncated?) conical walls

5th–6th c.

F.K. no. 238; H.BK. no. 32

Christian SVR

Secondary deposition, LL2011

56

Beaker

Greenish

Rounded rim with (truncated?) conical walls

5th–6th c.

F.K. no. 238; H.BK. no. 32

Christian SVR

Secondary deposition, LL2011

57

Beaker

Greenish

Rounded rim with (truncated?) conical walls

5th–6th c.

F.K. no. 238; H.BK. no. 32

Christian SVR

Secondary deposition, LL2011

58

Beaker

Bluish green

Low foot, pinched out from main mass of glass

4th–6th c.

F.K. no. 434; Isings 109?

Christian SVR

Secondary deposition, LL2014

59

Beaker

Greenish

Pushed-in base with ovoid walls

4th–5th c.

F.K. nos. 397–401; H.BK. nos. 25–27

Christian SVR

Secondary deposition, LL2011

60

Beaker

Indeterminate

Pushed-in base with truncated conical walls

4th–5th c.

F.K. nos. 397–401; H.BK. nos. 25–27

Christian SVR

Secondary deposition, LL2011

61

Beaker

Greenish

Pushed-in base with truncated conical walls

4th–5th c.

F.K. nos. 397–401; H.BK. nos. 25–27

Christian SVR

Secondary deposition, LL2011

62

Beaker

Greenish

Pushed-in base with ovoid walls

4th–5th c.

F.K. nos. 397–401; H.BK. nos. 25–27

Christian SVR

Secondary deposition, LL2016

63

Beaker

Greenish

Pushed-in base with ovoid walls

4th–5th c.

F.K. nos. 397–401; H.BK. nos. 25–27

Christian SVR

Secondary deposition, LL2011

76

Description

Glass Comparanda

Form

Context Type

Object No.

Form

Color

64

Beaker

65

Glass Comparanda

Context Location

Description

Date

Context Type

Colorless

Folded, diskshaped foot and conical(?) walls

4th c. or later

Corning no. 176; TB.S. no. 36 (?)

Christian SVR

Secondary deposition, LL2011

Goblet

Greenish

Short, smooth, slender applied stem, of same thickness throughout, above rounded, inturned foot; open bowl above

Second half of 6th c.

F.Tun. nos. 44–49 (type A)

Christian SVR

Secondary deposition, LL2011

66

Goblet

Greenish

Short, smooth, slender applied stem, of same thickness throughout, above rounded, inturned foot; broad open bowl above

Second half of 6th c.

F.Tun. nos. 44–49 (type A)

Christian SVR

Secondary deposition, LL2011

67

Goblet

Greenish

Short, smooth, slender applied stem, of same thickness throughout, above rounded, inturned foot

Second half of 6th c.

F.Tun. nos. 44–49 (type A)

Christian SVR

Secondary deposition, LL2011

68

Goblet

Greenish

Short, smooth, slender applied stem, of same thickness throughout

Second half of 6th c.

F.Tun. nos. 44–49 (type A)

Christian SVR

Secondary deposition, LL2011

69

Goblet

Greenish

Short, smooth, slender applied stem, of same thickness throughout; open bowl above

Second half of 6th c.

F.Tun. nos. 44–49 (type A)

Christian SVR

Secondary deposition, LL2011

77

Object No.

Date

Context Location

Color

70

Goblet

Greenish

Short, smooth, slender applied stem, of same thickness throughout

Second half of 6th c.

F.Tun. nos. 44–49 (type A)

Christian SVR

Secondary deposition, LL2011

71

Goblet

Greenish

Short, smooth, slender applied stem, of same thickness throughout; open bowl above

Second half of 6th c.

F.Tun. nos. 44–49 (type A)

Christian SVR

Secondary deposition, LL2011

72

Goblet

Greenish

Short, smooth, slender applied stem, of same thickness throughout

Second half of 6th c.

F.Tun. nos. 44–49 (type A)

Christian SVR

Secondary deposition, LL2011

73

Goblet

Greenish

Short, smooth, slender applied stem, of same thickness throughout

Second half of 6th c.

F.Tun. nos. 44–49 (type A)

Christian SVR

Secondary deposition, LL2011

74

Goblet

Greenish

Short, smooth, slender applied stem, of same thickness throughout

Second half of 6th c.

F.Tun. nos. 44–49 (type A)

Christian SVR

Secondary deposition, LL2011

75

Goblet

Greenish

Short, smooth, slender applied stem, probably of same thickness throughout

Second half of 6th c.

F.Tun. nos. 44–49 (type A)

Christian SVR

Secondary deposition, LL2011

76

Goblet

Polychrome: green bowl and blue stem

Short, smooth, slender applied stem, of same thickness throughout. Stem is bright blue, applied to open green bowl

Second half of 6th c.

F.Tun. nos. 44–49 (type A); F.SJ. no. 29

Christian SVR

Secondary deposition, LL2011

78

Description

Glass Comparanda

Form

Context Type

Object No.

Form

Color

Description

Date

Glass Comparanda

Context Location

Context Type

77

Goblet

Polychrome: green bowl and blue stem

Short, smooth, slender applied stem, of same thickness throughout, above rounded, inturned foot. Stem and foot are bright blue, applied to open green bowl

Second half of 6th c.

F.Tun. nos. 44–49 (type A); F.SJ. no. 29

Christian SVR

Secondary deposition, LL2011

78

Goblet

Polychrome: green bowl and blue stem

Short, smooth, slender applied stem, of same thickness throughout, above rounded, inturned foot. Stem and foot are bright blue, applied to open green bowl

Second half of 6th c.

F.Tun. nos. 44–49 (type A); F.SJ. no. 29

Christian SVR

Secondary deposition, LL2011

79

Goblet

Greenish

Short, smooth, slender applied stem, of same thickness throughout, above rounded, inturned foot; open bowl above

Second half of 6th c.

F.Tun. nos. 44–49 (type A)

Christian SVR

Secondary deposition, LL2011

80

Goblet

Greenish

Short, smooth, slender applied stem, of same thickness throughout

Second half of 6th c.

F.Tun. nos. 44–49 (type A)

Christian SVR

Secondary deposition, LL2011

81

Goblet

Greenish

Short, smooth, slender applied stem, of same thickness throughout, above rounded, inturned foot; open bowl above

Second half of 6th c.

F.Tun. nos. 44–49 (type A)

Christian SVR

Secondary deposition, LL2011

79

Object No.

Form

Color

82

Goblet

83

Glass Comparanda

Context Location

Description

Date

Greenish

Short, smooth, slender applied stem, of same thickness throughout, above rounded, inturned foot; open bowl above

Second half of 6th c.

F.Tun. nos. 44–49 (type A)

Christian SVR

Secondary deposition, LL2014

Goblet

Greenish

Smooth, slender applied stem

Second half of 6th c.

F.Tun. nos. 44–49 (type A)

Christian SVR

Secondary deposition, LL2011

84

Goblet

Greenish

Smooth, slender applied stem above rounded, inturned foot; open bowl above

Second half of 6th c.

F.Tun. nos. 44–49 (type A)

Christian SVR

Secondary deposition, LL2011

85

Flask

Greenish

Narrow rounded rim

4th–6th c.

F.K. nos. 315–322

Christian SVR

Secondary deposition, LL2011

86

Flask

Greenish

Narrow rounded rim; cylindrical walls

4th–6th c.

F.K. nos. 315–322

Christian SVR

Secondary deposition, LL2011

87

Flask?

Greenish

Narrow, thin rounded rim; slightly outsplayed cylindrical walls

4th–6th c.

F.K. nos. 315–322

Christian SVR

Secondary deposition, LL2012

88

Flask

Greenish

Narrow rounded rim, slightly rolled in; cylindrical walls

4th–6th c.

F.K. nos. 315–322

Christian SVR

Secondary deposition, LL2012

89

Flask

Greenish

Narrow rounded rim, slightly rolled in; cylindrical walls

4th–6th c.

F.K. nos. 315–322

Christian SVR

Secondary deposition, LL2011

80

Context Type

Object No.

Form

Color

Description

Date

Glass Comparanda

Context Location

Context Type

90

Flask

Greenish

Narrow rounded rim, slightly rolled in; cylindrical walls

4th–6th c.

F.K. nos. 315–322

Christian SVR

Secondary deposition, LL2011

91

Flask

Greenish

Narrow, thin rounded rim; slightly outsplayed cylindrical walls

4th–6th c.

F.K. nos. 315–322

Christian SVR

Secondary deposition, LL2011

92

Flask

Greenish

Narrow rounded rim, slightly rolled in; cylindrical walls

4th–6th c.

F.K. nos. 315–322

Christian SVR

Secondary deposition, LL2012

93

Flask

Greenish

Tall, slender handle, circular in profile, with fold at upper attachment

4th c. or later

F.K. no. 355; Louvre no. 1011

Christian SVR

Secondary deposition, LL2011

94

Flask

Greenish

Tall, slender handle, circular in profile, with fold at upper attachment; conical rounded rim

4th c. or later

F.K. no. 355; Louvre no. 1011

Christian SVR

Secondary deposition, LL2011

95

Flask

Greenish

Tall, slender handle, circular in profile, with fold at upper attachment

4th c. or later

F.K. no. 355; Louvre no. 1011

Christian SVR

Secondary deposition, LL2011

96

Lamp

Greenish

Two fragments, possibly associated: two vertical earshaped handles with circular profile; hollow outfolded rim and conical walls

4th–7th c.

Handles: F.K. no. 524; rim: F.Tun. no. 84

Christian SVR

Secondary deposition, LL2011

81

Object No.

Form

Color

Description

Date

Glass Comparanda

Context Location

Context Type

97

Plate or large bowl

Greenish

Large, hollow tubular base

4th c. or later

F.K. no. 156; Louvre no. 974

Christian SVR

Secondary deposition, LL2011

98

Plate or large bowl

Greenish

Outfolded conical rim

4th c. or later

F.K. no. 140; Louvre no. 1195

Christian SVR

Secondary deposition, LL2011

99

Plate or large bowl

Greenish

Outfolded conical rim

5th–7th c.

F.K. nos. 116–119, 135

Christian SVR

Secondary deposition, LL2012

82