Ancient Greek Colonies in the Black Sea 2 9781407301112, 9781407301129, 9781407301105, 9781407331522

Table of contents :
Front Cover: Volume I
Title Page: Volume I
Copyright
Preface
Contents
Dionysopolis, its territory and neighbours in the pre-Roman times
Bizone
La Thrace Pontique et la mythologie Grecque
Burial and post-burial rites in the necropoleis of the Greek colonies on the Bulgarian Black Sea Littoral
Le monnayage de Messambria et les Monnayages d’Apollonia, Odessos et Dionysopolis
Durankulak - a Territorium Sacrum of the Goddess Cybele
Kallatis
Tomis
Necropoles Grecques du Pont Gauche: Istros, Orgamé, Tomis, Callatis
«L’histoire par les noms» dans les villes Grecques de Scythie et Scythie Mineure aux VIe-Ier Siecles av. J.-C.
Tyras: The Greek City on the River Tyras
The Ancient City of Nikonion
Greek Settlements on the Shores of the Bay of Odessa and Adjacent Estuaries
Achilles on the Island of Leuke
Lower Dnieper Hillforts and the Influence of Greek Culture (2nd Century BC – 2nd Century AD)
Olbia Pontica in the 3rd–4th Centuries AD
Greek Imports in Scythia
Front Cover: Volume II
Front Cover: Volume II
Copyright
Contents
Distant Chora of Taurian Chersonesus and the City of Kalos Limen
Tauric Chersonesus and the Roman Empire
The Scythian Neapolis and Greek Culture of the Northern Black Sea Region in the 2nd Century BC
Tyritake
Small and Poorly Studied Towns of the Ancient Kimmerian Bosporos
Iluraton: A Fortress of the 1st- 3rd centuries AD
Torikos and the South-Eastern Periphery of the Bosporan Kingdom (7th C. BC – 3rd C. A.D.)
Greeks in the North Caucasus
The Necropolis of Kul Oba
Akra and its Chora
Kimmerikon
Hellenism and Ancient Georgia
Greek Necropolis of Classical Period at Pichvnari
Ancient Greek Settlements in Eastern Thrace
Cotyora, Kerasus and Trapezus: The Three Colonies of Sinope
The Central Black Sea Region, Turkey, during the Iron Age: The Local Cultures and the Eurasian Horse-Riding Nomads
Greek Fine Pottery in the Black Sea Region

Citation preview

BAR  S1675 (I)  2007   GRAMMENOS & PETROPOULOS (Eds)   ANCIENT GREEK COLONIES IN THE BLACK SEA 2

Ancient Greek Colonies in the Black Sea 2 Volume I

Edited by

Dimitrios V. Grammenos Elias K. Petropoulos

BAR International Series 1675 (I) B A R

2007

Ancient Greek Colonies in the Black Sea 2 Volume I

Edited by

Dimitrios V. Grammenos Elias K. Petropoulos

BAR International Series 1675 (I) 2007

ISBN 9781407301112 (Volume I) paperback ISBN 9781407301129 (Volume II) paperback ISBN 9781407301105 (Volume set) paperback ISBN 9781407331522 (Volume set) e-format DOI https://doi.org/10.30861/9781407301105 A catalogue record for this book is available from the British Library

BAR

PUBLISHING

Preface With this volume, part two of ‘Ancient Greek Colonies in the Black Sea’, our initial project is complete, even though a work of this kind necessarily has its own ongoing dimension. Part one (in two volumes, see p. iii) was published in 2003 by the Archaeological Institute of Northern Greece, supported by the Greek Ministry of Culture and the Publications Office of the Archaeological Receipts Fund of the same Ministry. Although it was the intention to publish part two through the offices of the Ministry of Culture in 2003, in the end this was not possible. Eventually, following negotiations with the Ministry of Culture and the editors of British Archaeological Reports, publication of this current volume was able to proceed, very generously supported by His Eminence, Anthimos, Bishop of Alexandroupolis, and the families of Heracles and Paraskevi Bibasi, Khrysi Bibasi and Konstantinos Boutos, and Athanassios and Khrysopia Bibasis. Their generosity met the expenses of the contributors who submitted papers for this volume. We would like to take this opportunity to thank Dr David Davison, as well as all our sponsors, and, of course, the contributors to this important work. Thanks are especially due to Mr Ioannis Pislis of the Department of Languages, Literature and Culture of the Black Sea Countries, for his indispensable help in editing the English texts and his assistance generally. Our good friend and colleague, Mrs Dominique Kassap Tezgör, Assistant Professor of Classical Archaeology at the Bilkent University of Ankara, undertook the editing of the French contributions, and we are extremely grateful to her for all her efforts. In addition, we extend thanks to our colleague Heleni Samaritaki, archaeologist and Assistant Director of the Odessa Branch of the Greek Foundation for Culture in the Ukraine, for her unstinting help in liaising on our behalf with local archaeologists. The support of the Association of the Friends of the Archaeological Museum of Thessaloniki is also gratefully acknowledged. Finally, we would especially like to thank Alexander Alexandrovitch Maslennikov (Russia), Professor of Classical Archaeology, for his unique contribution in presenting as completely as possible the archaeological monuments of the Northern Black Sea. For his practical assistance, we would like to thank Abrahm Panagiotidis, Systems and Network Administrator of the Archaeological Museum, Thessaloniki. Once again, this present publication aims to communicate to the widest possible international readership a collection of papers that, for the main part, deal with established work in progress at sites of ancient Greek cities on the Black Sea, and the broader region.

Dr Dimitrios V. Grammenos ex Director of the Archaeological Museum of Thessaloniki

Dr Elias K. Petropoulos Lecturer of Ancient History Democritus University of Thrace email: [email protected] www.epetropoulos.gr

Contents Volume I Dionysopolis, its territory and neighbours in the pre-Roman times ........................................................................ 1 Margarit Damyanov Bizone ................................................................................................................................................................... 37 Asen Emilov Salkin La Thrace Pontique et la mythologie Grecque ...................................................................................................... 51 Zlatozara Gotcheva Burial and post-burial rites in the necropoleis of the Greek colonies on the Bulgarian Black Sea Littoral ...................................................................................................................... 85 Krystina Panayotova Le monnayage de Messambria et les Monnayages d’Apollonia, Odessos et Dionysopolis ................................ 127 Ivan Karayotov Durankulak - a Territorium Sacrum of the Goddess Cybele .............................................................................. 175 Henrieta Todorova Kallatis ................................................................................................................................................................ 239 Alexandru Avram Tomis .................................................................................................................................................................. 287 Livia Buzoianu and Maria Bărbulescu Necropoles Grecques du Pont Gauche: Istros, Orgamé, Tomis, Callatis ............................................................ 337 Vasilica Lungu «L’histoire par les noms» dans les villes Grecques de Scythie et Scythie Mineure aux VIe-Ier Siecles av. J.-C................................................................................................................................... 383 Victor Cojocaru Tyras: The Greek City on the River Tyras .......................................................................................................... 435 Tatyana Lvovna Samoylova The Ancient City of Nikonion............................................................................................................................. 471 Natalya Mikhaylovna Sekerskaya Greek Settlements on the Shores of the Bay of Odessa and Adjacent Estuaries ................................................. 507 Yevgeniya Fyodorovna Redina Achilles on the Island of Leuke........................................................................................................................... 537 Sergey Borisovitch Okhotnikov and Anatoliy Stepanovitch Ostroverkhov Lower Dnieper Hillforts and the Influence of Greek Culture (2nd Century BC – 2nd Century AD).................. 563 Nadezhda Avksentyevna Gavrilyuk and Valentina Vladimirovna Krapivina Olbia Pontica in the 3rd–4th Centuries AD......................................................................................................... 591 Valentina Vladimirovna Krapivina Greek Imports in Scythia..................................................................................................................................... 627 Nadezhda Avksentyevna Gavrilyuk

iv

Volume 2 Distant Chora of Taurian Chersonesus and the City of Kalos Limen.................................................................. 677 Sergey Borisovitch Lantsov and Vladimir Borisovitch Uzhentzev Tauric Chersonesus and the Roman Empire........................................................................................................ 729 Vitaliy Mikhaylovitch Zubar The Scythian Neapolis and Greek Culture of the Northern Black Sea Region in the 2nd Century BC .............. 789 Yuriy Pavlovitch Zaytsev Tyritake ............................................................................................................................................................... 827 Viktor Nikolaevitch Zinko Small and poorly studied towns of the ancient kimmerian Bosporos.................................................................. 855 Alexander Alexandrovitch Maslennikov Iluraton: A Fortress of the 1st- 3rd centuries AD on the European Kimmerian Bosporos.................................. 897 Vladimir Anatolyevitch Gorontcharovskiy Torikos and the South-Eastern Periphery of the Bosporan Kingdom (7th C. BC – 3rd C. AD) ..................... 927 Аlexey Аlexandrovitch Malyshev Greeks in the North Caucasus ............................................................................................................................. 951 Аlexey Аlexandrovitch Malyshev The Necropolis of Kul Oba ................................................................................................................................. 979 Nikolay Fyodorovitch Fedoseev Akra and its Chora............................................................................................................................................. 1023 Alexey Vladislavovitch Kulikov Kimmerikon ...................................................................................................................................................... 1057 Vladimir Konstantinovitch Golenko Hellenism and Ancient Georgia ........................................................................................................................ 1083 Vakhtang Licheli Greek Necropolis of Classical Period at Pichvnari............................................................................................ 1143 Amiran Kakhidze Ancient Greek Settlements in Eastern Thrace................................................................................................... 1179 Sümer Atasoy Cotyora, Kerasus and Trapezus: The Three Colonies of Sinope....................................................................... 1195 Deniz Burcu Erciyas The Central Black Sea Region, Turkey, during the Iron Age: the Local Cultures and the Eurasian Horse-Riding Nomads ........................................................................................................................ 1207 Şevket Dönmez Greek Fine Pottery in the Black Sea Region ..................................................................................................... 1221 Jan Bouzek

v

vi

vii

Map 3 Courtesy of Professor Dominique Kassap Tezgor

viii

Dionysopolis, its territory and neighbours in the pre-Roman times Margarit Damyanov*

as a ‘maritime-coastal’ landscape that comprises a 2 to 5 km wide strip from cape Shabla in the north to the mouth of the River Batova in the south. The high coast in the area forms a kind of climatic border and isolates a specific microclimate, heavily influenced by the sea (Mishev/Popov, 1979, 102-103). To a certain extent it stops the strong northern and northeastern winds, though not completely, as O. Tafrali mentions the freezing climate in the winter; on the other hand, the bare hills and the lack of wind predetermine the rather high temperatures during the summer months (Tafrali, 1928, 6). The area is rich in water, for the water seeps down through the Dobrudzhan limestone on the surface, then reaches down to the hard-pan marl layer, flowing down the slope from northwest to southeast, and resurfacing again in the form of sources in places where the rock layers are cut by ravines. This is the case with the Balchik landslide amphitheatre (Ishirkov, 1918, 18).

Geographical position The ancient town of Dionysopolis (present-day Balchik on the Bulgarian Black Sea coast, to the north of Varna) is situated on the southern end of the littoral of Dobrudzha (it is commonly accepted that the southern border of Dobrudzha runs along the lower course of the River Batova). The town is in the so-called KavarnaBalchik subregion of the Dobrudzhan-Frangean region, where the coast reaches its highest altitude – up to 180 m. Up to about 100 m there are old sea terraces, and in the interior of the plateau of Dobrudzha most characteristic are the Sarmatian-Pontic and the denuded surfaces. The general appearance of the landscape is defined by the numerous landslides, cut by ravines in certain places. The landslides along the Dobrudzhan and the Frangean coasts comprise lower- and middle-sarmatian sediments that alternate with sandy limestone rocks and marls with formed pressureless aquifers. The area between Varna (ancient Odessos) and the Kaliakra promontory (ancient Tirizis) is characterised by the highest density of the landslides. To the west of Kavarna (ancient Bizone), i.e. precisely in the region under consideration here, they form an almost uninterrupted strip with an ever widening range. It should be added that the region between cape Shabla and the Kaliakra promontory has witnessed major seismic activity. As a result of these processes, above the valley of the River Batova a secondary slope facing south was formed, the declivity of which reaches up to 30° and even more. One of the most characteristic in the area is the landslide amphitheatre of Balchik, facing to the south. Three kilometres to the west is situated one of the most active landslides in the whole region – Momchilsko – which is circus-like and has a length of 1000 m (Ishirkov, 1918, 18; Popov/Mishev, 1974, 237-239; Mishev/Popov, 1979, 14, 21-23).

The vegetation in the region most probably has changed considerably through the ages from ancient times to the present day. The written sources preserve descriptions of large woods, of which almost nothing is left. The Bulgarian Black Sea coast is part of the so-called oakforests zone. At present more than 50% of these forests are destroyed and they cover merely 2% of the area of the littoral of Dobrudzha. In the region of the Frangensko plateau most widespread are the dark-grey and grey forest soils (Mishev/Popov, 1979, 33, 75, 102). It should be added that in earlier times the valley of the River Batova was also covered with woods (Ishirkov, 1918, 1415). The description that Jirecek makes of his trip (at the end of the 19th century) from Varna to Balchik is very indicative in this sense. From the edge of the plateau above Varna to the valley of the River Batova the whole area was covered with woods, and above the valley there are high steep cliffs from where the ‘flat steppe of Dobrudzha’ begins (Irechek, 1974, 893, 895). Another account is also of some interest here – the one O. Tafrali makes of his journey to Balchik (in the early 20th century). The road passed through thick woods that offered shelter to numerous bandits and the forest ended in the immediate vicinity of the town (Tafrali, 1928, 5). It is possible that this picture is much closer to the appearance of the region in ancient times.

This is the warmest region of Dobrudzha. The climate of the area is transitional continental, except for a narrow strip along the coast, where the influence of the sea is felt. In the interior some influence of the climate of the steppes can be felt (Dobrudzha is the southernmost part of the South Russian steppes, where there are no mountains to stop the penetration of the northern wind). The region of the ancient Dionysopolis could be defined

* Dr. Margarit Margaritov Damyanov. PhD thesis: ‘Polis, Chora, Hinterland in the north-western Black Sea area’ (submitted to the Archaeology Department of Sofia University). Participation in excavations: the necropolis of Apollonia Pontica (Sozopol, Bulgaria); The Thracian city at ‘Sboryanovo’ (North-Eastern Bulgaria). Home address: Krum Popov Str. 50A, 1421 Sofia BULGARIA. E-mail: [email protected]

1

ANCIENT GREEK COLONIES IN THE BLACK SEA 2 As was noted by the Skorpil brothers at the end of the 19th century, the littoral of northeastern Bulgaria is a region that is dangerous for navigation. In their words, only ‘small local ships’ could navigate between Varna and Balchik, and only in good weather. Nevertheless, the only two ports in the area are Balchik (Dionysopolis) and Kavarna (Bizone), where – although there are no convenient gulfs – the high shores that face to the south provide some protection from the strong northern and northeastern winds.1 What is more, these two ports are the only places where there is a suitable way from the high Dobrudzhan plateau down to the sea-shore (Irechek 1974, 894). In addition it should be noted that the Skorpil brothers record the major importance of the port of Balchik as a point from where foodstuffs are exported (Shkorpil/ Shkorpil, 1892, 16-18). In relation to this last note we should also mention O. Tafrali’s information that in the early 20th century the inhabitants of Balchik were occupied mainly in agriculture and stock-breeding and that fishing was not developed (Tafrali, 1928, 6). This is a situation which is in striking contrast with the other Black Sea settlements that developed on the sites of ancient Greek colonies, where fishing is traditionally very important, right up to the present day (Nesebar/Mesambria and Sozopol/Apollonia for example). One could assume that the geographic milieu of Dionysopolis – situated on the edge of the fertile land of Dobrudzha – played a major role in its economical profile in Antiquity.

Varna). In other words one could expect the lowest terrace of the antique settlement, where the harbour works were situated, to be at present below sea-level. Some underwater research work (the results of which unfortunately remain unpublished) has revealed that on the place of the modern port there was an ancient mole and a harbour (Dimitrov, 2001, 61). We could summarise what has been said above in a few remarks. The geographical position of the modern town of Balchik and respectively of ancient Dionysopolis is predefined by two specifics. On the one hand is the fact that the bay of Balchik is one of the few convenient harbours, and on the other is the configuration of the shoreline, which reaches its highest altitude precisely at this part of the Black Sea coast. While the first of the mentioned factors predetermines the continuity of life at this place, the second is decisive for the specific terraced organisation of the settlement. The landslide processes that led to the formation of the Balchik amphitheatre have also some importance concerning the archaeological research of ancient Dionysopolis. As a result of erosion of the terrain and seismic activity, the antique layers are at present at a great depth and this fact largely impedes their excavation. M. Dimitrov mentions that during some construction works on the second terrace (where presumably the centre of the ancient settlement was) the Early Hellenistic layer was reached at a depth of 15 m, but that the high level of ground water did not allow the work to continue (Dimitrov, 1990, 26; Dimitrov 2001, 61).

Another aspect that we should take into consideration here is the change in the sea-level. Unfortunately, these processes are not sufficiently clear for the Dobrudzhan littoral. Traditionally major significance is attributed to the eustatic factor, i.e. to fluctuations in the sea-level. For a long time now it has been commonly accepted that the time of the Greek colonisation in the Black Sea coincided with the lowest phase of the Phanagorian regression, when the sea-level reached down to maybe 7-10 m below the present level. The first settlers founded their settlements on the terrace that is at present four to six meters below the sea-level. Nonetheless it is necessary also to keep in mind the tectonic movements, as during the Holocene the Dobrudzhan littoral was characterised by strong positive fluctuations. Considerable differences are presumed to have existed between the development of the coastal areas to the south and to the north of Varna, for the northern part was characterised by a slow raising of the land (Orachev, 1990). In the area of the bay of Varna, however, some remains from ancient times were discovered at a depth of five meters – in the immediate vicinity of ancient Odessos, at the entrance of the modern harbour, as well to the south of the bay, in the sea below the Galata promontory (Popov/Mishev, 1974, 227-228). For such a big difference to have existed between the situation in the bay of Varna and the one in the Balchik area seems unlikely (Balchik is only about 30 km from 1

This part of the Black Sea coast is characterised by strong seismic activity (Rangelov, 1998). We could hardly expect that the devastating earthquake that destroyed Bizone in the 1st century BC did not affect Dionysopolis as well, though apparently the damage was not so extensive there. In this context the account of Theophanus Confessor should be added, which describes another natural disaster that struck Dionysopolis at some time in the 6th century AD.2 A huge wave, most probably caused by an underwater earthquake, engulfed the town. The last major earthquake struck the town in 1901. Its epicentre was some 15 km out to sea and it caused extensive damage. It is also to be remembered, that ancient Dionysopolis lies below the modern town of Balchik. This is yet another factor that predetermines a lack of systematic excavation in the territory of the town and the more or less chance character of finds.

2 Theoph. Conf. Chron. 22429-33 (ed. de Boor). An opinion has been voiced that after this catastrophe the town moved to the high coastal plateau, where – on the site of the ancient necropolis – the Early Byzantine fortress was built (Torbatov, 2002, 261).

See Isaac, 1986, 259, note 293

2

MARGARIT DAMYANOV: DIONYSOPOLIS, ITS TERRITORY AND NEIGHBOURS IN THE PRE-ROMAN TIMES but Strabo7 mentions only Krounoi (in the same area – between Bizone and Odessos) and Pomponius Mela8 lists Krounoi and Dionysopolis as two different settlements (the former one is defined as ‘port’ and the latter as ‘town’). If we accept the tracing of this tradition back to Demetrios from Kallatis, i.e. to a local authority whom we could presume to have known the history of the region well, we should also accept its authenticity. So the following situation emerges: 1) on the specific place there was a settlement, the earliest name of which was Krounoi (the etymological explanation points to the existence of numerous sources in the area); we do not know either when, or by whom it was founded; 2) at a certain moment (we could presume this was before the beginning of the 3rd century BC) the name was changed to Dionysopolis (the name Matiopolis is a hapax so we are allowed to ignore it). This particular change reflects some kind of historical event, but it seems unjustified to accept the explanation given by the sources – the miraculous appearance of the divine statue should be considered an etiological myth and not a historical reality,9 which does not diminish the importance of the fact that there was indeed a change in the name. This change and, one in the status as well, should be placed somewhere in the latter half of the 4th or in the very beginning of the 3rd century BC, as in the earliest known epigraphic monuments the collective name Dionysopolitai is already present (IGBR I2, 13bis).10 We could be positive that it was precisely the change of the name that marked the official foundation of the polis. The common descriptive place-name ‘Sources’ is changed to Dionysopolis – the settlement is already explicitly defined as a polis and has chosen its divine protector.

The written sources The ancient written sources are more than insufficient when the information they provide about Dionysopolis is considered. The rare and highly uninformative notes in the narrative sources were gathered and commented on by G. Mikhajlov in the introduction to the chapter ‘Dionysopolis’ in his collection of the Greek inscriptions found in Bulgaria (Mihailov, 1970, 49-51). Unfortunately, these sources do not mention the foundation of Dionysopolis; there is neither a date, nor a mother city, which largely impedes the reconstruction of the history of the settlement. As a whole three different pieces of information concerning the ancient colony could be distinguished (in different variations). The earliest accounts are those of Pseudo-Scymnos3 and the one in the Anonymous’ Periplus Ponti Euxini.4 They are largely identical and – following the information given in the work of Pseudo-Scymnos – could be traced back to the lost work of Demetrios from Kallatis, whose activity is dated to the latter half of the 3rd century BC (Blavatskaya, 1952, 5; Avram, 1999, 9).5 The essence of the two sources could be summarised as follows: on the coast between Bizone and Odessos there is a settlement named Dionysopolis; in earlier times Dionysopolis had another name – Krounoi (‘Sources’) – because there were numerous water sources in the area; later however a statue of the god Dionysos was washed up on the shore and for this reason the settlement was given a new name – Dionysopolis, i.e. ‘The town of the god Dionysos’ (the Anonymous periplus gives an intermediate name – Matiopolis); the last piece of information is that in the border area of the Scythians and the Krobyzoi there were some settlers that were ‘mixed Greeks’. This last mentioned information also has two variations – PseudoScymnos simply states that in the land that is on the border of the Scythians and the Krobyzoi there is some population of ‘mixed Greeks’; the Anonymous however specifies that Dionysopolis, ‘which is situated on the border between the Scythians and the Krobyzoi’, has a population of mixed Greeks. (For more on this topic see below.)

Some discrepancies in the written sources have contributed to the confusion among the scholars. On the whole the identification of Dionysopolis as present-day Balchik, established by Jirecek in the end of the 19th century (Jirecek, 1886, 183-184), raises no doubts. Only some earlier authors, among whom is F. Kanitz (Kanitz, 1882, 192, 200), proposed Krounoi and respectively Dionysopolis to be situated at the present-day village of Kranevo (to the south of Balchik, near the mouth of the River Batova), on the ground of its phonetic similarity with the name Krounoi. These authors do not accept as

The remaining narrative sources more or less repeat the same. Nonetheless there are some variations that cause some confusion among the scholars. Pliny the Elder6 and Stephanus from Byzantium provide the same story about the change of the name from Krounoi to Dionysopolis,

7

Strabo 7, 6, 1. Pomp. Mela 2, 2, 22: Est portus Crunos, urbes Dionysopolis, Odessos etc. 9 Stephanus from Byzantium mentions another Dionysopolis in Phrygia, founded by Eumenes and Attalus, the name of which is likewise explained by the discovery of a statue of the god (St. Byz. Ethnica. p. 233). 10 We should also note the major significance that the cult of Dionysos gained at the beginning of the Hellenistic period; according M. Oppermann the change of the name of the settlement – from Krounoi to Dionysopolis – is symptomatic of that phenomenon (Oppermann, 2004, 199). It could also be interesting to note the important role of Dionysos in the pantheon of the neighbouring Dorian colony Callatis (cf. Avram 1999, 91 ff.). It should be seen more as a phenomenon that was specific to the period (and the area?), and not as influence on the part of the much stronger Callatis. 8

3

Ps. Scymn. 751-757 (GGM 1, p. 226 Muller). Anonym. Peripl. Ponti Eux, vss. 78-79 (A. Diller, The Tradition of Minor Greek Geographers, 1952, p. 136). 5 Already in the introduction to his Orbis Descriptio the author mentions that he has made use of the Callatian historian Demetrius (Ps-Scymn. 117, GGM 1, p. 199 Muller); what is more, just before the start of the account on the Black Sea coast Pseudo-Scymnos explicitly states that ‘it seems that he [Demetrius from Callatis] had left the most accurate description’ of the area (Ps-Scymn. 719-720, p. 224 Muller). 6 Plin. Nat. Hist. 4, 11, 44: habuit et Bizonem terrae motu raptam; nunc habet Dionysopolin, Crunon antea dictam; adluit Zyras amnis. 4

3

ANCIENT GREEK COLONIES IN THE BLACK SEA 2 trustworthy the late information of Pomponius Mela (2nd century AD) about the existence of two different settlements – the town of Dionysopolis and the port Krounoi. Later, in the studies of the Skorpil brothers, an opinion is repeatedly voiced that there were indeed two settlements and Krounoi is to be identified with the village of Kranevo (Shkorpil, 1930-31, 58).

main water sources are concentrated (Irechek, 1974, 900; Tafrali, 1928, 9; Dimitrov, 2001, 48). During the Roman period Dionysopolis took its water precisely from this region (Dimitrov, 1973b). The foundation The above described state of our knowledge, based on the written sources mentioning Dionysopolis, as well as the more than insufficient archaeological excavations of the antique settlement make it very difficult to specify the date of its foundation. Numerous authors did not venture even to propose a hypothetical date (Lazarov, 1997, 92; idem, 2000, 32; Isaac, 1986, 258-259). Nevertheless in the publications a certain opinion has gained popularity – that Dionysopolis is probably a Milesian, but in any case an Ionian colony. Already Bilabel defined the settlement as a Milesian foundation, providing as an argument the Ionic dialect of the inscriptions (Bilabel, 1920, 15f.). This thesis was restated by M. Dimitrov in his recent work on the history of Dionysopolis (Dimitrov, 2001, 60; also idem, 1986, 90). Other scholars also accept this idea (Danov, 1938, 187; idem, 1990, 154; Jordanov, 1984, 97). Nonetheless the problem remains unsolved. Later an inscription from the Roman period was discovered mentioning ‘the seven tribes’ (IGBR I2, 15 ter, l.3), which seems to corroborate the hypothesis of the Milesian foundation. According to Ehrhardt these seven tribes are the original six Milesian tribes, to which the one of the ‘Romans’ was added. An identical combination of tribes is known to have existed in other Pontic colonies, which were explicitly defined as Milesian foundations, including neighbouring Odessos (Ehrhardt, 1983, 65-66, 101). The thesis that ‘the seven tribes’ of Dionysopolis are in fact the Milesian Geleontes, Aigikoreis, Argadeis, Hopletes, Oinopes and Boreis (and the Romans) could have some chronological significance for the time the settlement was founded, as it is well known that in the mid-5th century BC the Milesians adopted the ten Athenian tribes (Ehrhardt, 1983, 98). This is the opinion of K. Nawotka, who thinks there was an early Milesian apoikia (Krounoi), dating from the time before the Ionian revolt; in an unknown later period the settlement was refounded or reinforced with a new group of colonists (Nawotka 1997, 23-24). So if we accept Dionysopolis to have been an early Milesian colony, it should have been founded before the early 480s BC, most probably during the 6th century BC. According to M. Dimitrov the earliest settlement in the area was founded in the second quarter of the 6th century BC (Dimitrov, 2001, 60, without providing any arguments in favour of this hypothesis).

L. Robert also accepted the existence of two separate settlements Krounoi/Kranevo and Dionysopolis/Balchik, and pointed to the fact that in many cases the change of the name was parallel with the change of the place of the settlement (Robert, 1959, 197-198). In recent times Zl. Gocheva supported this hypothesis (Goceva, 1995; eadem, 1996). Following Robert, she relies heavily on the information of Strabo and Pomponius Mela. The author accepts that the two settlements coexisted in the earlier period and that Dionysopolis was founded somewhat later than Krounoi. The absence of the name Dionysopolis in Strabo’s text is explained with the assumption that in this time the newly-founded settlement had not completely overshadowed the earlier port, Krounoi. As it is demonstrated by the text of Pomponius Mela, it still had some importance in the 2nd century BC. It is possible to provide some arguments against this thesis. In the first place the fact that Krounoi is not mentioned in the earlier peripli as a separate and independent port. In the later sources this settlement is also absent – neither the Tabula Peutingeriana, nor the Ravenna Geographer mention a settlement in between Odessos and Dionysopolis. What is more, if we accept the hypothesis of Zl. Gocheva, it would mean that after the ‘refoundation’ of Dionysopolis (in which part of the population of Krounoi took part) Krounoi must have been included in the territory of the newly founded polis. And though Strabo and Mela mention that name, it is absent from the text of the horothesia of Dionysopolis; what is more, if we accept the identification of Krounoi with the present day village of Kranevo, it should be situated on the very border between the two poleis Odessos and Dionysopolis and more likely in the territory of the former (cf. below the text considering the territory of Dionysopolis). From this point of view it seems more appropriate to accept the thesis about the continuity (in space as well as in time) between the earlier settlement Krounoi and the later Dionysopolis. We should also add the doubts that have been raised considering the reliability of Pomponius Mela, especially regarding his text on the Pontic littoral (Hind, 1999, 80-81). And M. Oppermann notes with good reason, that – having in mind that Mela’s text lists the settlements along the coast from north to south and that Krounoi is mentioned before Dionysopolis – the identification of Krounoi with the present day village of Kranevo seems absolutely unjustified (Oppermann, 2004, 11, Anm. 69). In some publications another opinion was proposed – that Krounoi could be situated to the west of Balchik, in the area of the palace of the Romanian Queen, where the

There is however another possibility – Dionysopolis could have been a secondary foundation of one of the already existing Milesian colonies in the region, for example Odessos. This is a hypothesis that I. Velkov has already proposed (Velkov, 1931/32, 46). According to him, although the geographical position of the settlement 4

MARGARIT DAMYANOV: DIONYSOPOLIS, ITS TERRITORY AND NEIGHBOURS IN THE PRE-ROMAN TIMES was not a favourable one for the foundation of an independent colony, the citizens of Odessos took advantage of the harbour that was suitable for commercial activity. If we connect the foundation of Krounoi-Dionysopolis with some secondary colonising activity of Odessos, it would be quite enough to explain the appearance of the six Milesian tribes in the abovementioned inscription.11 That is to say, it is impossible to determine only on the basis of the presence of the ‘seven tribes’ either the foundation date of Dionysopolis, or its metropolis. Al. Avram dwells on the problem at some length and includes Dionysopolis (along with Tomis and Bizone) in the group of the ‘secondary settlements/ colonies’. This author stresses again the fact that there is no written source that states explicitly the Milesian foundation of Dionysopolis and that the mere mention of the seven tribes (without their names given) is not enough to prove this. Moreover, as the first epigraphic monuments date from the 4th-3rd centuries BC and fully developed political institutions appear only in the 3rd century BC, scholars still have to deal with the problem of what filled the two preceding centuries (Avram, 1996b, 294, 297-298).

BC Odessos witnessed a period of flourishing. In this regard we should mention the absence of Dionysopolis from the group of poleis that revolted against Lysimachos in 313 BC. These are only the ‘primary’ or ‘main’ colonies in this part of the Pontic littoral – Odessos, Kallatis and Histria. Also remarkable is the absence of Tomis, the development of which as an independent polis could be dated to the mid-3rd century BC (Avram, 1996b, 297-298).12 According to the historical interpretation of one of the monetary emissions of Dionysopolis, the polis could have existed with this name as early as the mid-4th century BC (Lazarenko, 2002, cf. below). As was already mentioned, Zl Gocheva assumes that Dionysopolis was founded not on the place of the Krounoi, but on a new place and with the participation of part of the population from the earlier settlement. Another no less original hypothesis was proposed by I. Shopova. According to her the change of the name to Dionysopolis could have taken place in the 4th century BC, since in epigraphic monuments the settlement is already present with this name. Moreover, since the leading role of the cult of Dionysos can not be explained either in the context of the Ionian, or in that of the Dorian colonisation, the only possibility that remains is that the name reflects some earlier indigenous tradition and reveals the strong position of the local Thracian population. According to this hypothesis Dionysopolis was founded on the place of an earlier native settlement (Shopova, 1998).13

On the whole one could adduce against the Milesian character of Dionysopolis the negligible significance of the cult of Apollo in the settlement – a feature that is not paralleled by any other Milesian colony in the Black Sea. Blavatskaya is categorical on the problem and reaches the conclusion that this particularity of the religious life of Dionysopolis does not allow us to consider it a Milesian foundation (Blavatskaya, 1952, 29). Ehrhardt also forms this opinion, but with the condition that most probably the importance of Dionysos in the pantheon of the town increased later, together with the change in the name (Ehrhardt, 1983, 66). Avram also points out that it seems impossible that Miletus founded a colony in which the role of the eponym belongs to the priest of Dionysos (cf. Goceva 1980, 52-53; see below). Avram proposes the original hypothesis that Dionysopolis was refounded by a group of worshipers of Dionysos in the time of Alexander the Great; this second foundation however was on the place of an earlier settlement with a commercial character (Avram, 1996b, 297-298). Maybe if not the very foundation, nevertheless the rise of Dionysopolis could be related to the Macedonian rule over the western Black Sea coast, most probably with the activities of Lysimachos and not with those of Alexander. A major part of the activity of the former was concentrated mainly in Dobrudzha and was connected with his conflict with the Greek poleis (cf. Lund, 1992, 33ff.). In the last decades of the 4th and the first half of the 3rd centuries

In the context of the foundation of Dionysopolis, we should also mention the opinion that has been voiced by some scholars – that the ‘mixed Greeks’ mentioned by Pseudo-Scymnos and the Anonymous Periplus are in fact a heterogeneous (in the sense of coming from different metropoleis) group of colonists. This thesis was stated as early as the work of Blavatskaya (Blavatskaya, 1952, 29) and was later repeated by Ehrhardt, Nawotka and L. Buzoianu (Ehrhardt, 1983, 65; Nawotka, 1997, 23; Buzoianu, 2001, 30-31).14 M. Dimitrov also accepts the 12

This opinion is based on the information provided by Memnon about the war between Byzantium and the alliance of Histria and Callatis for the ‘emporion Tomis’ (FGrHist III B F 13 [21]). Nevertheless the case of Tomis is different from that of Dionysopolis, as Ps.-Scymnos explicitly states that the former is a settlement of Milesians (765), which may signify an earlier date of foundation; and indeed the earliest finds date from the first half of the 6th century (Avram, 1996b, 293). Ps.Scymnos however did not use the verb ktízw (‘to found’), as for example in the cases of Apollonia (730-34), Odessos (748-49) and Histria (769-70), but the more neutral and vague Ápoikoi genómenoi Milhsíwn. 13 Against this hypothesis, see Oppermann 2004, 199, Anm. 2031. 14 L. Buzoianu specifies that in this case two different interpretations are possible – a mixture of Greeks and indigenous population, or a group of Greeks with different origins; according to her, for the moment of the colonisation only the latter case would be appropriate. However the text of Ps.-Scymnos does not take us back to the moment of foundation. On the contrary, it will be more appropriate a comparison to be made with

11

J. Brashinskij repeatedly stressed the apparently close economic relations between Odessos and Dionysopolis. He is inclined to regard Odessos and the southern part of the Dobrudzhan littoral (Dionysopolis and Odessos) as a separate sub-region (Brashinskij, 1970a, 132; idem, 1970b, 9). It should be added, that among the coins discovered in Balchik of the Black sea colonies, those of Odessos are the most numerous (Jordanov 1990, 51).

5

ANCIENT GREEK COLONIES IN THE BLACK SEA 2 thesis for the presence of both Ionians and Dorians, but with a numerical superiority of the former (Dimitrov, 2001, 61). Already Mikhajlov challenged this idea and pointed out, that in this case the mixing of Greeks and natives is meant (Mihailov, 1970, 50). (This topic will be discussed at length below, in the context of the territory of Dionysopolis.)

Aristomenes from Odessos. In first place on this list the right of the citizenship is mentioned. Mikhajlov proposes a date in the 3rd century BC, but specifies, that a date at the end of the previous century is by no means excluded. Following Vinogradov, Nawotka mentions, that in Olbia similar decrees disappear after c. 320 BC – a fact that could be used as a chronological point of reference. At some moment during the 3rd century the magistrates adopted the standard probouleumatic decrees, but apparently the institutions of the polis were already functioning in earlier times. Having in mind the vagueness of the narrative sources one should stress the fact that at least from the very beginning of the 3rd century BC Dionysopolis was a undoubtedly a functioning polis.16

Epigraphic monuments, social and cultural life The epigraphic monuments from Dionysopolis were collected in the first volume of Inscriptiones Graecae in Bulgaria Repertae (IGBR, I2, 13-34). Later only one monument was added, though very important (IGBR, V, 5011).

We have almost no information about the administrative structure of Dionysopolis. As was already mentioned, in a late inscription the ‘seven tribes’ are mentioned, which is interpreted as the six Milesian plus the one of the Romans (in the context of the similar organisation that existed in Odessos and most probably in Tomis as well) (Ehrhardt, 1983, 101-102). Concerning the eponymous magistrate, in the publications the opinion is voiced that it was the priest of Dionysos who performed this function, though no explicit data exists (Goceva, 1980, 52-53; Ehrhardt, 1983, 198). In the honorific decree of Akornion it is mentioned that the honorand was chosen for eponymous priest after a period of several years, in which there was no one to hold the office. A list of the priests of Dionysos from the 2nd century BC is preserved, where among the persons that held this office the name of the god himself is mentioned (IGBR, I2, 22). All this could justify the hypothesis that it was precisely the priest of Dionysos who had the function of eponymous magistrate. In a monument from Roman times the priest of ‘the founder of the polis, the god Dionysos’ is mentioned (IGBR, I2, 15bis). In another one from the same period the priest of Dionysos is named ˜rxiereúß and pontárxoß (IGBR, I2, 14).17 In the same inscription some archontai are mentioned, who were probably inherited as an institution from earlier times.

As inscriptions with administrative importance, three decrees should be mentioned, dating from the end of the 4th and the middle of the 1st century BC. Two of them – the one honouring Akornion from c. 48 BC (IGBR, I2, 13 – Figure 2/4) and another one in honour of Dionysios from Kallatis (IGBR, I2, 13ter) – demonstrate the characteristic for the Hellenistic age enacting the formula Édoce têi boulêi kaì tôi dëmwi.15 As K. Nawotka mentions, this so-called ‘probouleumatic’ formula predominates on the monuments from Miletus and Histria, and is also attested on monuments from Odessos, dating from the 3rd century BC (Nawotka, 1999, 63-64). It reveals the existence of the usual political institutions – city council and assembly – and in the second inscription the name of the citizen that made the proposition for the motion, […]ippos, son of Nikias. It is dated by Mikhajlov in the broader framework of 3rd-2nd centuries BC, but – on the base of the use of the stoichedon style – Nawotka proposes a date in the 3rd century BC, even before 225 (Nawotka, 1999, 63, note 296). Nawotka includes another inscription (IGBR, I2, 13bis – Figure 2/3) in the group of the so-called ‘abbreviated decrees’, in the case of which the enacting formula is absent. According to the scholars they are characteristic for an earlier stage of the development of the epigraphic tradition of the poleis (Nawotka, 1999, 69ff.). In fact they are known mainly from the metropolis Miletus, and among the colonies in the Black Sea appear only in Olbia. In the monument under consideration here after the superscript ’Agaqêi túxhi the abbreviated formula Dionusopolîtai Édwkan appears – ‘The citizens of Dionysopolis gave…’. What follows is characteristic for the Hellenistic decree series of privileges, given to

One the earliest inscriptions is a dedication to the goddess Aphrodite, made by Anaxander, son of Hegesianax, citizen of Methymna; Mikhajlov dated it to the 4th century BC (IGBR, I2, 19bis). Among the early monuments that illustrate the religious life of the polis we should mention two other dedications – a marble statue of the god Pan, dedicated to Dionysos (IGBR, I2, 20; see below), and an altar with dedicatory inscription to

other close examples from his texts. In many instances Ps.-Scymnos mentions the name of the settlement and (though not always) its founders, and after that provides some information about the neighbouring (indigenous) population (e.g. ‘Odessos, founded by the Milesians, when…; the Thracian Krobyzoi live in circle around it’). 15 In fact the prescript of the honorific decree of Akornion is not preserved, but at the end the other formula appears – dédoxqai têi boulêi kaì tôi dëmwi – which is indicative of that to be expected at the beginning of the above-mentioned probouleumatic formula.

16 This conclusion loses some of its strength when we are reminded that the earliest decrees from Histria and Odessos also date from the 3rd century BC, and those from Tomis are from the end of the 2nd or the beginning of the 1st century BC (Nawotka 1999). From this point of view Dionysopolis developed in the same way as its much more important neighbours. 17 Against the thesis about the eponymous function of the priest of Dionysos, see Nawotka, 1997, 120.

6

MARGARIT DAMYANOV: DIONYSOPOLIS, ITS TERRITORY AND NEIGHBOURS IN THE PRE-ROMAN TIMES goddess Demeter (IGBR, I2, 21). Both monuments date from the 3rd century BC. In the first inscription also an association of worshippers of Dionysos is mentioned, and from the honorific decree of Akornion we know about the Dionysia festival that took place every year. In addition to these cults and the main one of Dionysos, in the decree of Akornion two more deities and their cults are mentioned – the Great God and Serapis. From another epigraphic monument we know that in Dionysopolis there was a temple of the Samothracian Gods (Velkov, 1990, 4). In the same decree, issued in honour of Polyxenes, son of Melseon, citizen of Mesambria, a gymnasium is mentioned, where the bronze statue of the honorand was to be erected.

25). The proposed date is in the latter half of the 3rd century BC (Oppermann, 2002, 309-310; idem, 2004, 189, Anm. 1920). Two more monuments date from the same century – the one of Polynika, the wife of Phaidimos (IGBR, I2, 26 – Figure 2/2), and the one of Rhodokleia, daughter of Demochares (IGBR, I2, 26). On the former stele, unfortunately badly damaged, a seated woman is depicted, and on the latter a woman and girl standing. The coinage Yet another source containing information about the history of Dionysopolis during the Hellenistic times is the polis’ autonomous coinage. Bronze emissions from Dionysopolis were identified for the first time by Pick and Regling (Pick/Regling, 1898, 125ff). Pick also attributed to the mint of Dionysopolis some silver emissions, copying types from the coinage of Alexander the Great – a head of Herakles with the lion’s skin on the obverse and Zeus seated on a throne with eagle and staff on the reverse. On the reverse is present also the legend BASILEWS ALECANDROU, as well as the name of a magistrate LEON/LEONTISKOU. Later N. Mushmov included the coins of Dionysopolis in his catalogue of the antique and medieval coins from Bulgaria and dated the coinage of the polis between c. 200 BC and 72 BC (the year of the campaign of Lucullus) (Mushmov, 1912, 1011). This dating is accepted in the writings of M. Dimitrov (Dimitrov, 1995, 173; idem, 2001, 64). The main obverse type of the bronze coins of Dionysopolis is the head of the god Dionysos with wreath, turned to the left.19 The head of Demeter is also widespread – veiled and with a wreath of ears of wheat. These effigies exist throughout the whole period in which Dionysopolis mints coins. Also existing as obverse types are a head of Herakles and a depiction of a kantharos. One of the obverse types has been identified as the head of the god Pan (?) (see below). The effigies on the reverse are more varied. On the coins with the head of Dionysos, on the obverse mainly depicted are attributes of the gods – a vine, a bunch of grapes, a wreath of vines, a thyrsus, a basket, a cornucopia. On rare occasions appear stars (symbol of the Dioscuri), the conical caps of the Dioscuri or the club of Herakles.

The monetary emissions of Dionysopolis are another source containing information about the religious life of the polis. Most prominent are images of the god Dionysos and his paraphernalia (thyrsus, bunch of grapes, vine, kantharos). From the coin types we can also deduce the importance of the goddess Demeter. Though rarely, images of Herakles and his attributes are also present, as well as the Dioscuri. On some of the emissions a cornucopia is depicted, which is an attribute of the Great God in Odessos. A few statues discovered in Balchik also bring us information about the religious life of Dionysopolis. These are also indicative of the great significance of the cult of the eponymous deity Dionysos. Two small sculptures depict the god himself. Another one is an image of the god Pan. Unfortunately all the three are damaged. One of the statues of Dionysos depicts the god dressed in a chiton and seated on a rock, most probably with a thyrsus in his hand (Figure 3/1). The analogies point to a date in the 3rd-2nd centuries BC. The superb quality of the work may indicate that the statue was displayed in the god’s sanctuary (Manzova, 1978, 28-29). The second, almost lifesize, statue represents the god standing and naked (Figure 3/2). Unfortunately only the torso is preserved, which however is indicative of a very high-quality copy of an original work of Praxiteles. The proposed dating is the late 3rd century BC (Manzova, 1978, 36-37). The third monument depicts the god Pan, seated on a rock and playing a syrinx (Figure 3/3). The statue is a dedication to the god Dionysos, which is stated in the inscription. The proposed date is once more at the end of the 3rd century BC (Manzova, 1978, 30-33).18 A few gravestones were discovered, all dating from the Hellenistic period. The earliest is a marble stele with a pediment and acroteria, on which a kantharos is depicted in relief (Figure 2/1). According to the inscription, it was the gravestone of Hermaphilos form Cyzicus (IGBR, I2,

One of the main effigies on the reverse of the coins with head of Demeter is the image of the seated goddess with corona muralis on her head and holding a patera, as well as symbols connected with Demeter – mostly ears of wheat or a wheat wreath. In one case on the reverse there is a depiction of a chariot with two harnessed lions. On the reverse of the coins with head of Herakles the club of the hero was depicted, often accompanied by other

18 In the same work a late Hellenistic frieze with four dancing women is also given as coming from Dionysopolis (Manzova 1978, 38-39). It was reported as discovered in Balchik by E. Kalinka (Kalinka, 1906, 170, No. 189), but in fact was found in the antique settlement at the presentday village of Kranevo (Shkorpil/Shkorpil, 1912, 48, note 1).

19 The same effigies were attested on a lead weight, found in the village of Balgarevo. On the obverse there was a head of the young Dionysos with an ivy wreath and a legend MNA. On the reverse a thyrsus was depicted. According to the author of the publication, the weight should be dated to the 3rd-2nd centuries BC (Lazarov, 1995).

7

ANCIENT GREEK COLONIES IN THE BLACK SEA 2 symbols. On the reverse of all coins was the legend with the name of the polis (usually abbreviated – DIO, DIONUSO, DIONUSOPO, DIONUSOPOLEI, DIONUSOPOLIT etc.). V. Canarache composed a relative chronology of the autonomous coins of Dionysopolis and organised them into twelve different groups, comprising the period from the beginning of the 3rd century BC to the 2nd century AD (Canarache, 1957).

minted. Lazarenko interpreted the image not as mythological, but as a portrait type, most probably of a Scythian. According to him these coins are to be attributed to the Scythian ruler Ataias and to be dated in the mid-4th century BC (after 359 BC, when it is supposed that Scythians penetrated to the south of Danube for the first time, and before the death of Ataias in 339 BC). Therefore these emissions should be regarded as the earliest ones minted in Dionysopolis and, moreover, attest the existence of the polis (with its changed name) already in the Late Classical Period.

The first group, which is dated to the period 300-250 BC, includes two types with the head of Dionysos on the obverse and on the reverse respectively with a bunch of grapes or two bunches of grapes on a vine. About the middle of the 3rd century the series with the head of Demeter/biga with two lions appeared. In the 2nd century most widespread are coins with the head of Dionysos and the whole series of emissions with the head of Demeter/seated goddess with corona muralis and patera. Canarache makes some interesting observations on the barbarisation of the coin emissions in the 1st century BC. Among them there are coins on which the name of the magistrate AKORNION is preserved. This person could be identified with Akornion from the well-known inscription from the mid-1st century BC. Afterwards D. Draganov rejected such an early date (c. 300 BC) for the beginning of the coinage of Dionysopolis and pointed out that one could expect the polis to have started minting its own coins only after the death of Lysimachos (281 BC).20 Maybe a somewhat later start for the coinage of Dionysopolis could account for the fact that in the numismatic collection of the museum in Balchik only 30 autonomous coins from the Hellenistic period are preserved, against more than 60 of the Macedonian rulers Philip II, Alexander the Great and Lysimachos (Jordanov, 1990, 51).

This hypothesis however has one major flaw – it does not propose any explanation of the fact that on the bronze coins under consideration there is no legend with the name of the ruler, which is present on the reverse of all known silver coins of Ataias without exception. On the contrary, on the reverse of the bronze coins there is a legend with the abbreviated name of the polis (DI), which is absent in the case with the silver emissions of Ataias that most probably were minted in Kallatis. The archaeological situation Having in mind the paucity and the vagueness of the written sources, both narrative and epigraphic, it is archaeology that should provide us with the most unambiguous data about the date of foundation of the settlement. However, this is the place to say one more time that the antique layers of Dionysopolis have not been object of regular excavations. In the vicinity of the village of Obrochishte near Balchik several lugged axes have been discovered, dating from the very beginning of the 1st millennium BC. These finds prove the existence of early contacts between Anatolia and the region under consideration here. According to the proposed interpretation, the convenient bay of Balchik played an important role in these relations (Stoyanov 2000). Some specimens of Thracian Early Iron Age pottery (dating from the 7th century BC) have also been discovered in the area, as well as in Balchik itself (Tonceva, 1980, 75; Dimitrov, 2001, 59-60). The most characteristic find is a small jug with a biconical body and projecting rim, decorated with meanders filled with white paste. According to G. Toncheva the vase is characteristic for the second phase of Basarabi culture. It should be added that some material from the 7th century BC have been discovered from sites in Varna, e.g. in the suburb ‘Akatsiite’, and from the resort ‘Konstantin i Elena’ to the north of Varna (Toncheva, 1972; Tonceva, 1980, 74). A. Minchev presumes that there was a small Early Iron Age settlement on the shore of the bay of Varna (Minchev, 2003, 212).

On the other hand it is believed that in the second half (maybe the last quarter) of the 3rd and the beginning of the 2nd centuries BC Dionysopolis minted gold staters and maybe tetradrachms of the Alexander the Great types (Poenaru-Bordea, 1979, 42; Price, 1991, 179). This is the established picture of the coinage of Dionysopolis. Recently an article by I. Lazarenko appeared, in which the author proposed a revision of the date of the appearance of the first bronze emissions of the polis (Lazarenko, 2002, 134ff.). If it proves to be correct, the proposed hypothesis would turn out to be very important for the reconstruction of the historical development of the area. According to Lazarenko the obverse type of ‘head of Pan’, identified by Draganov, is not an image of the god, but in fact a depiction of an elderly man with long hair, beard and moustache. The type of the reverse – a bunch of grapes and a legend DI – leaves no doubt about the place where the coins were

Pottery fragments from the Early Iron Age have been unearthed during construction works in the centre of Balchik; in the museum’s exposition there are also some items from the Late Iron Age (Dimitrov, 2001, 59-60).

20 According to the same author it is also the date of the beginning of the coinage of Odessos (Draganov 1990).

8

MARGARIT DAMYANOV: DIONYSOPOLIS, ITS TERRITORY AND NEIGHBOURS IN THE PRE-ROMAN TIMES Traces from early Thracian settlements situated on the banks of the streams that flow to the west and to the east of the town can not be excluded (Dimitrov, 2001, 60). Another Thracian settlement was reported to have existed to the southwest of Balchik, in the vicinity of the palace of the Romanian Queen (Bobcheva, 1972, 25). Unfortunately we are not able to tell what the relation between these early materials and the finds that follow them from a chronological point of view was. So far archaeological research along the Western Black Sea coast has not revealed any case of continuity between a Thracian layer from the Early Iron Age and the following Archaic Greek layers. (However that may be due to the present state of our knowledge.). Such assumptions have been voiced about Mesambria, where on the position of the later Dorian colony some Thracian finds were discovered, but the overall situation is still far from clear.21 On the other hand, the chronology of the Getic sites in the interior of the region makes it clear that the hinterland of that part of the Pontic littoral was densely settled by the Thracians at least from the 6th century BC on (Hänsel, 1974, 210-217).

in the old part of Balchik. The first is from Type Б of the typology of M. Lazarov and could be dated to the beginning or the first half of the 5th century BC. Only the neck with one of the handles and part of the shoulders are preserved; on the neck there is a mark painted with dark red paint (Lazarov, 1973, 10, No. 14, Pl. XXIV/14; idem, 1982, 8-9). The second amphora is almost completely preserved (only the foot is missing) and is from the Type В of the same typology – amphorae with elongated and narrower collared neck – and can be dated in the third quarter of the 5th century BC (Lazarov, 1973, 11-12, No. 28; idem 1982, 9 – Figure 5/1).23 Though somewhat isolated, these two finds clearly demonstrate the existence of a settlement in the location of the later (?) Dionysopolis throughout the 5th century BC.24 In addition, in some publications some earlier materials are mentioned, e.g. fragments of Ionian amphorae from the mid- or late 6th century BC, unearthed during excavations in the central part of Balchik (Dimitrov, 1973a, 184; idem, 2001, 61, 85, note 6). According to some reports the 6th century BC is the time when neighbouring Bizone also appeared (Salkin, 1986; Lazarov, 1998, 93; Oppermann, 2000, 141, Anm. 24). This could mean that an organised and roughly contemporary settlement could have taken place on this part of the Black Sea coast, where – as previously mentioned – only Dionysopolis and Bizone offered the necessary conditions for a functioning ports.

There is information for some Thracian materials from the vicinity of the village of Hrabrovo, situated 12 km to the west of Balchik, on the plateau and overlooking the valley of the River Batova (Torbatov, 2002, 369-370). A Thracian tomb with a presumed date in the 6th century BC was discovered near the village of Batovo (Vasilchin, 1993).22 Unfortunately the information for the coastal region itself is much scarcer. In closed complexes in Odessos some indigenous materials were discovered – mainly handmade pottery – but the accompanying finds allow a date in the latter half of the 6th or in the beginning of the 5th century BC to be proposed; i.e. these materials should be considered in the context of an already existing Greek colony (Toncheva, 1967, 157ff.). Traces from a relatively early human presence were discovered in the vicinity of the village of Osenovo, on the edge of the Frangensko plateau, immediately to the south of Kranevo (finds from the end of the 6th-5th century BC – Oppermann, 2004, 84, Anm. 803, 104).

Here we should also mention the large collection of the ‘arrowhead-money’ which is preserved in the museum in Balchik (Jordanov, 1990, 51). Without venturing into the vast bibliography on these pre-monetary signs, it will be enough to say that they were ‘emitted’ from the earliest Ionian poleis along the western and northwestern Pontic littoral (Apollonia and Borysthenes/Berezan for sure and most probably Histria and Orgame) and remained in use from the mid-6th century BC (maybe even earlier?) at least to mid-5th century BC. Such finds are known from the area of Odessos (cf. Topalov 1993, Nos 2, 5, 7-10, 12, 14, 18-19). Some other pre-monetary devices are also mentioned as discovered in Balchik, e.g. small bronze ‘dolphins’ (Jordanov, 1990, 51; Dimitrov 2001, 65) that were in use in the Black Sea area in the end of the 6th and the 5th centuries BC. (A small ‘dolphin’ was also discovered in the area of Osenovo – cf. above). These finds, as well as the above-mentioned amphorae, point to

As the earliest traces for a Greek (?) settlement on the position of Dionysopolis two Chian amphorae with collared necks were unearthed during construction work 21 In the summarising work on ancient Mesambria that appeared in the first volume of the present collection, the author H. Preshlenov presumes a gradual transformation of the ‘Thracian royal city of the socalled bria type’ (defined as a ‘protopolis’) into a polis from the Classical type took place. This could have happened following some kind of agreement between the Dorian settlers and the local royal house of the Nipsaioi, concluded at the end of the 6th century BC (Preshlenov, 2003, 160-165). Nonetheless this hypothesis raises some doubts, as there is a chronological discrepancy between the Thracian and the first Greek materials from Mesambria (Alexandrescu/Morintz, 1982). 22 The burial rite is inhumation and not cremation, which is the usual for the contemporary Thracian necropoleis from the region. However some Thracian necropoleis with inhumation were excavated in the northern parts of Dobrudzha.

23

Two similar amphorae were discovered underwater in the northern bay of the Yajlata locality near the village of Kamen Bryag (to the north of the Kaliakra promontory) (Kuzmanov/Salkin, 1992, 28). 24 We should also note a collective find of Chian Type Б amphorae, discovered by chance on the territory of the city of Dobrich, about 30 km to the west. Though this find has not been fully published and even the exact number of the amphorae remains unclear, nevertheless their contemporary appearance with the one from Balchik is to be noted. Although considerably later, two Heraclean amphorae from the village of Polkovnik Sveshtarovo (Bobcheva, 1985, 45) maybe mark the functioning of a trade road starting from Dionysopolis and heading for the interior; in the vicinity of Dobrich another collective find of 22 Heraclean amphorae was discovered (Bobcheva, 1985, 45).

9

ANCIENT GREEK COLONIES IN THE BLACK SEA 2 the existence of the settlement at least from the end of the 6th century BC. Most probably it had some trade functions.

terrace, where most of the monuments were discovered. According to them the monumental tomb of a physician from the 3rd century AD, that was unearthed there during construction works, was actually situated on the ancient agora. In this neighbourhood inscriptions and elements from monumental buildings were found (Shkorpil/Shkorpil, 1912). After them O. Tafrali was the first scholar to make an attempt to propose a reconstruction of the layout of Dionysopolis (Tafrali, 1928). According to him it included the upper two terraces. Tafrali defined the ravine (where the fortification wall of Dionysopolis was located in two places) as an eastern limit, and drew the western one to the east of the hill, immediately to the west of the Bulgarian primary school. According to Tafrali the southern limit of the acropolis followed the base of the terrace that is defined by the 50-metre contour line, immediately below the church – there he located also parts of the southern wall, near the main transport artery of the town. To the northeast Tafrali traced the limit just above the 70-meters contour line. If that reconstruction is correct, the acropolis had a surface of about 6 ha. Tafrali located two areas with a high concentration of archaeological materials – the first one around the church and the second around the square to the north of the Bulgarian school. It should be noted that in the vicinity of the school the honorific decree of Akornion was discovered (Shkorpil/Shkorpil 1912, 48). In the text of the decree it is mentioned that the citizens of Dionysopolis will erect a bronze statue of Akornion on ‘the most prominent place of the agora’ (IGBR I2, 13, l. 48-49). The monumental tomb from the Roman period that was excavated in the immediate vicinity is also consistent with the localisation of the agora in this area. Also here was discovered the small statue of Pan, dedicated to Dionysos (Kalinka, 1906, №188). If we accept – following the text of the dedication – that the statue was displayed in the sanctuary of the god, it should also be sought for somewhere in the vicinity of the Bulgarian primary school.

The archaeological finds from the pre-Roman Dionysopolis are scarce. If we exclude the epigraphic monuments and the coinage that bear witness to the intensive life of the polis in the Hellenistic times, there are almost no other traces. Some of the materials will be discussed below in the context of the necropolis of Dionysopolis. A few amphorae and amphora stamps from various centres (Thasos, Heraclea, Sinope) have been published; they illustrate the commercial activity of Dionysopolis in the latter half of the 4th and the 3rd century BC (Mirchev, 1958, No. 23; Lazarov, 1973, Nos 128, 141, 161, 185). The settlement We do not have much information about the appearance of Dionysopolis, especially for the pre-Roman period of existence of the polis. Without any doubt the topography of the settlement was predetermined by the terraced structure of the terrain, which is characteristic as well for the present-day layout of Balchik. Here we are going to summarise the description of the place as given by the Skorpil brothers in the beginning of the 20th century: there are several terraces in the town, with amphitheatrical organisation and separated by steep slopes. The lowest part of the town is on the shore itself, where the hospital, the mill and the custom-house are situated; above it is the first terrace, where the buildings of the district and the municipal administration are, as well as the town’s park; on the second, higher terrace the primary school, the square, the Trinity church and the Solak mosque are situated. Overlooking the second terrace is the plateau of the so-called Gemidzhi mahalle (Shkorpil/ Shkorpil, 1912, 47). From the eastern side of these terraces a deep ravine runs from the plateau down to the shore. On the western end of the second terrace there is a high hill of Sarmatian limestone rocks, having a very steep southern slope (see Figure 1).

Later excavations elucidate to some extent the overall picture. Remains from the fortifications of the settlement were located in several places. The earliest parts of the walls date from the Hellenistic period. It goes round the second terrace (where the old Bulgarian school and the ‘St. George’, formerly ‘Trinity’, church are situated). The eastern part of the fortifications that was noted already by the first scholars is the easiest to trace. Here the wall follows the edge of the terrace, the slopes of which descend steeply to the ravine. The southeastern corner of the terrace, where the church is, had a revetment of cut stone that was up to nine metres high. Most probably it was both a fortification and a supporting wall. The earliest structure is made of large ashlar blocks without binding material. In its upper end the stepped retaining wall ends with broad stone platforms, where there were additional structures, towers etc. (Dimitrov, 1973a; idem, 1986, 94; idem, 2001, 63).

Several areas suitable for building could be seen: a broad spacious terrace in between the 40- and 50-metre contour lines (where at present ‘Independence’ square is situated); a second terrace between the 50- and 60-metre contour lines (where the ‘St. George’, formerly ‘Trinity’, church is); and to the north of it another one between the 60- and 80-metre contour lines (where the abovementioned hill is situated). On the plan, drawn by O. Tafrali, two water sources could be seen – on the location of the present-day ‘Independence’ square and on the square in the front of the Bulgarian primary school. It is precisely these spaces that define the reconstruction of the urban structure of Dionysopolis. Already the Skorpil brothers suggested that the centre of the ancient settlement should be sought for on the second 10

MARGARIT DAMYANOV: DIONYSOPOLIS, ITS TERRITORY AND NEIGHBOURS IN THE PRE-ROMAN TIMES On the basis of the new data M. Dimitrov proposed a new reconstruction of the fortified territory of Dionysopolis. According to him the eastern fortification wall continued to the south and comprised part of the above-described terrace, the lower limit of which follows the 40-metre contour line. The southern section of the wall has an approximate length of 300 m. After that it turns to the north, crosses the present-day town square and continues up to the next terrace. (In the text below some archaeological finds will be presented that may be an indication for the existence of a necropolis in the western part of the above-described first terrace). Somewhere in this area the southern wall (that is described by Tafrali) should be sought for. That is to say that the presumed layout of the western wall is by no means certain. There is a disagreement among scholars about whether the fortifications included the high limestone hill as early as the Hellenistic times. To the north of it the wall turns to the east and completes its course. If this reconstruction proves to be right, the fortified surface of Dionysopolis could be as large as 8-9 ha.

to the west and to the east of the settlement, as well to the north, on the plateau above it. Already the Skorpil brothers noted that the ancient necropolis was scattered on several places, and pointed explicitly to its eastern part – on the location of the former Turkish cemetery and along the road to the Tuzla. On the side of the road there was a natural hill, where there were ruins of an old sanctuary and also ‘old graves’; some of the graves were cut into the bedrock (Shkorpil/Shkorpil, 1912, 47). Unfortunately in their report there is no mention of any finds that could facilitate the dating of this part of the necropolis. We know more about the western part of the necropolis, which develops along the road leading to Odessos. During some construction works in the area between the modern town and the palace of the Romanian Queen, a number of ceramic vases were unearthed that could be defined as grave goods (Ovcharov, 1979). Among the finds there are a ‘Megarian’ bowl, a small kantharos, an unguentarium, two clay lamps and two small dishes. All these vases are characteristic of the Hellenistic burial practices of the Greek colonies in the Western Pontic region and bear witness for the existence of a cemetery from the 3rd century BC. The discovery of the two lamps is of particular interest, for clay lamps are very characteristic grave goods in the Hellenistic complexes in the necropolis of Odessos; at least one has been discovered in virtually every grave from that time. Such frequency is not to be observed in any of the contemporaneous necropoleis in the Western Black Sea area. This is an indication that at least in the Hellenistic period the population of Dionysopolis was under the strong influence of neighbouring Odessos, which experienced a period of flourishing. The dating of the black-glazed kantharos is indicative of the chronology of the finds. It has a garland painted in white paint on the neck.

During construction works in the area of the present-day bus station – to the east of the limestone hill – two overlapping towers from the Roman fortifications of Dionysopolis were discovered. They could be dated respectively to the end of the 3rd and the 4th century AD (Torbatov 2002, 263). Scholars agree that they have to be related to an extension of the fortified space. Therefore it seems reasonable to accept that in pre-Roman times the wall passed to the south of that area. We could hardly doubt that part of the settlement was situated on the lowest terrace, on the seashore itself, where some harbour structures existed. During construction works in that area a limestone lintel decorated with heads of bulls and garlands was discovered. Two identical blocks were reused in a retaining wall in the palace of the Romanian Queen. This proves the existence of monumental buildings on the lowest terrace, though in somewhat later times. Unfortunately we do not have any information for the pre-Roman times and the dating of the above-mentioned mole remains unclear. As far as we know, this lowest part of Dionysopolis remained unfortified till the 4th century AD. In the vicinity of the present-day harbour a section of fortification wall was discovered (Dimitrov, 1986, 95; Torbatov 2002, 263).

A similar one was discovered in the tumulus in the courtyard of the former girls’ high school in Varna (Odessos) (at present the building houses the archaeological museum) (Ivanov, 1956, 106, Pl. V/1). It has analogies among the finds from the Hellenistic necropolis of Olbia and should be assigned to Type IV of the typology of M. Parovich-Peshikan (ParovichPeshikan, 1974, 80, 81, fig. 77/4, 84, fig. 79/2). The type is dated to the end of the 3rd-beginning of the 2nd centuries BC. A similar kantharos was discovered in a cremation grave in Tomis that – according to the publication – should be dated to the 3rd century BC, most probably the latter half (Lungu/Chera, 1986, 91, Pl. III, M10). The whole pottery complex from the tomb in Odessos could be dated to the second quarter or at latest in the mid-3rd century BC. Among the datable finds from Dionysopolis the latest is the ‘Megarian’ bowl, which according to the author of the publication should be dated to the latter half of the 3rd century BC (most probably towards the end of the century). Unfortunately the

The necropolis We have at our disposal somewhat more information about the necropolis of the ancient Dionysopolis. As a result of some excavations, observations and chance finds, we can define to some extent the location and the topography of the necropolis. Like the cemeteries of Odessos for example, those of Dionysopolis developed along the roads leading out of the town – on the seashore 11

ANCIENT GREEK COLONIES IN THE BLACK SEA 2 information presented in the article is not enough for it to be decided whether at least part of the materials belonged to one grave.

plateau that overlooks the town. Later the Early Byzantine fortress was constructed there (the present-day ‘Horizon’ neighbourhood, formerly Gemidzhi mahalle). The only pre-Roman graves in Dionysopolis, which were discovered during regular excavations, were unearthed under a tumulus in that area, excavated in 1981-1982. In addition to the short note in the Archaeological Institute’s annual reports (Mikhajlov/Dimitrov, 1982), a preliminary publication later appeared (Mikhajlov/Dimitrov, 1985). The Hellenistic materials from the tumulus were recently republished by the author of the present study (Damyanov, 2003a). Here a shorter version of that text will be offered.

Here another question should be raised – the one about the eastern limit of the western necropolis of Dionysopolis. The above-described materials were discovered almost one kilometre to the west of the presumed acropolis. During construction works at ‘Marshal Tolbukhin’ Str., at the base of the main terrace of the ancient settlement, some more finds were unearthed, which could be interpreted as indications of the existence of a necropolis in that area. These are three perfectly preserved clay lamps. The good state of preservation of the lamps could be explained by their deposition as grave goods. Two of the lamps have a biconical body and a concave disc, and have conical projections on the right side of the shoulders (Figure 5/6). They are covered with matt black glaze and can be dated to the latter half of the 3rd century BC (Vasilchin, 1988, 60, Nos 1, 3). The third lamp is of a somewhat later date – 2nd-1st century BC (Vasilchin, 1988, 60, No. 5). Thus it is possible to assume that the western necropolis of Dionysopolis started immediately at the base of the terrace of the acropolis. Therefore, it is natural to conclude, that the settlement developed mainly in an eastern direction – towards the ravine that delimits the present-day town from its eastern side.

In addition to the Hellenistic graves in the tumulus are complexes from Roman and Medieval times. Such continuity in the use of Hellenistic burial mounds in later times is not exceptional in the region. Similar situations have been attested also in Osmanova tumulus on the Kaliakra promontory (Bobcheva, 1970; Kitov, 1990, 117) and in another one in the vicinity of the village of Balgarevo (Bobcheva/Salkin, 1973). Both of them were constructed in the Early Hellenistic period and were reused as necropoleis during the Middle Ages. According to the description in the preliminary report and from the finds now kept in the museum in Balchik, it can be assumed that there were two graves in the tumulus dating from Early Hellenistic times – No. 2 and No. 29. However, some of the specific features of the grave goods of the first complex suggest the presence of two separate graves – one of a man and one of a woman. Some finds from the embankment of the tumulus should be added as well. According to the publication, the burial rite in Hellenistic times was cremation outside the tumulus. The ashes and the grave goods were deposited on stone-paved platforms (most probably on the ancient surface?) (Mikhajlov/Dimitrov, 1985, 229). Their dimensions were about 2 x 1 m and 1.5 x 1 m respectively. In the description of grave No. 29 it is stated that the grave was covered with rough stones. What is to be noted is the parallel with another complex, discovered in the vicinity of Bizone (the present-day town of Kavarna, about 20 km to the west). According to the publication, it was a cremation on the place of the burial, with a rectangular stone structure about 0.5 x 0.9 m, where the grave gifts were deposited (Salkin, 1989, 10). As far as could be judged from the incomplete information, both (or all the three) graves were situated in the southern part of the tumulus under consideration here.

In the exhibition of the museum in Balchik two more vessels with a funerary function are displayed. They were found by chance during construction works on the territory of the old town. These are a large unguentarium made of beige-brownish clay and decorated with concentric stripes painted with dark-beige paint (Figure 5/2), and a ‘lekythos’ with one handle and traces of glaze or paint on the neck and the shoulders (Figure 5/3). The first vase was discovered during excavations in the area of the present-day bus-station. It cannot be ruled out that the second one was discovered there as well. As was mentioned in the text above, in that area two fortification towers from the period of the 2nd-4th centuries AD were discovered, which mark the extension of the fortified town during the Roman times (Dimitrov, 1986, 97; Torbatov, 2002, 261-263). It is quite possible in an earlier period that this area had been part of the necropolis. (In fact a Roman tomb was discovered immediately to the west of the fortifications – Dimitrov, 2001, 79.) Both vases are well preserved. The unguentaruim belongs to the earliest type, of which an almost spherical body and painted decoration are characteristic. This type is commonly dated to the late 4th-early 3rd centuries BC. Similar locally made lekythoi were found in Early Hellenistic graves both in the necropoleis of the Greek colonies and in the Thracian interior (Bozkova, 1997, 12, 14).

In grave No. 2 relatively rich grave goods were discovered. They can be separated into two different categories – metal finds and clay vases. To the first category some iron armour items and a bronze mirror should be assigned. In the grave an iron hemispherical helmet with a crest and a cuirass with iron parts were deposited. This is not the first instance in which armour was discovered in Early Hellenistic graves from the area

In the same period – the Early Hellenistic times – to the territory of the necropolis can be added part of the 12

MARGARIT DAMYANOV: DIONYSOPOLIS, ITS TERRITORY AND NEIGHBOURS IN THE PRE-ROMAN TIMES of the Greek colonies along this part of the Black Sea coast. An iron cheek-guard was unearthed in a disturbed cremation grave from the end of the 4th century BC in the ‘V. Levski’ neighbourhood in Varna (Minchev, 1978, 103-104). The only source of information about the cuirass is an unclear picture of the situation. There are two elements that are discernible: a) a large crescentshaped part with a relief line along the outer edge, most probably some kind of pectoral; b) a rectangular part, with the same relief line along the edges, maybe part of a shoulder-guard. If the above-proposed identification of the parts of the cuirass are correct, and having in mind what we know about armour in this period, it is possible to propose a possible reconstruction. Other finds from northeastern Bulgaria prove the widespread use of cuirasses made of perishable materials – leather or textile (linen in most cases) – with metal plates sewn onto them (for the type cf. Connolly, 1998, 58). The most telling example is the pectoral from Tumulus IV at Kyolmen, in which case even parts of the organic material were preserved (Dremsizova-Nelchinova, 1970, 213-214, Fig. 8). Unlike the one from Dionysopolis, the Kyolmen pectoral was composed of separate metal strips. An idea of what the cuirass from Dionysopolis may have looked like could be obtained from several examples from the northern parts of the Black Sea littoral. These are leather cuirasses with metal parts only on the chest and the shoulders. One should however keep in mind that these metal parts were not one-piece, but scale-armour (Chernenko, 1968, 42-43, Fig. 5/5, 6-7). The possibility that single-piece iron shoulder-guards existed is borne out by the cuirass from the tomb under Megali Toumba at Vergina in Greece (Connolly, 1998, 58, Fig. 3-4). We cannot know whether the lower parts of the cuirass from Dionysopolis also had some kind of metal protection (cf. Ognenova, 1959, 35-36).

the Olbian one (Parovich-Peshikan 1974, 109-110), and therefore a date in the first half of the 3rd century BC could be proposed. Similar finds are known from the necropoleis of the neighbouring Pontic colonies (Ivanov, 1956, 96-7, Pl. VІ/2а; Barladeanu-Zavatin 1980, 217218, Pl. I/3; Preda 1966, Fig. 2/4, 140-142). The dish with the shape of a truncated cone could be dated to the same period (cf. Alexandrescu 1966, 182, Pl. 91, XXXIII, 4; Bucovala 1967, 31; Toncheva 1964, 57-58, Fig. 22). In addition, in the southern part of the tumulus more finds from the Hellenistic period were discovered: parts of a funerary wreath; a black-glazed fish-plate; a small dish with an inward-turned rim, covered with matt black glaze; a dish with the shape of reversed truncated cone and with a slip of low-quality glaze only on the upper parts (Figure 4/9-11). All the materials should be dated to the Early Hellenistic period. Funerary wreaths are very characteristic for the period. Wreaths were discovered in a number of graves in the area of Odessos, dated in the late 4th-the first quarter of the 3rd centuries BC (Shkorpil, 1909, 13; Toncheva, 1951, 54, 60; Savova, 1971, 3; Ivanov, 1956, 97). According to the chronology of funerary wreaths from the necropolis of Apollonia presented by Y. Mladenova, the earliest example was discovered in a grave from the very end of the 4th century BC (Mladenova, 1963, 291, No. 887). The fishplate is a Type I from the necropolis of Apollonia, characteristic of the latter half of the 4th century BC (Ivanov, 1963, 231-232). All other analogies could be dated in the time of the last third of the 4th-the beginning of the 3rd century BC (Alexandrescu 1966, 182, Pl. 91, XXXIII, 1; ibid., 182, Pl. 91, XXXIII, 1; Bucovala 1967, 15-16 Chichikova, 1984, 71 – Fig. 39, 75-78, Nos 60-88, cf. especially No. 64; Zhuglev, 1955, 39, Fig. 12; Stoyanov, 2000, 12, Fig. 13). The same dating could be proposed for the small dish with partial glazing (see parallels in Alexandrescu, 1966, 188, Pl. 92, XXXIV, 20; Preda/ Georgescu, 1975, 58, Pl. VI/2; Lungu, 1993, 187, No. 27, Pl. XII).

The pottery finds comprise the following items: a hemispherical bowl with one handle (one-handled), covered with matt black glaze; a feeding-bottle (guttus) with hemispheric shape and one elevated handle (the whole body of the vessel is covered with black glaze, except for the shoulders; on the shoulders there are chaotic ornaments painted with black glaze); a fragmentary unguentarium without traces of glaze; a dish with the shape of a reversed truncated cone and on a ringshaped base; a small hemispheric dish with an inturned rim (Figure 4/1-5). All the vases can be dated to the late 4th-early 3rd centuries BC. The one-handled bowl has parallels from Histria from latter half of the 4th century BC (Alexandrescu, 1978, 113 - Fig. 29, 119-120, Nos 777-780), and from Apollonia as well (Ivanov, 1963, 190, No. 451, Fig. 75); from Kallatis there is an example from the Early Hellenistic period (Preda, 1966, 139 – Fig. 2/1, 142). An almost identical guttus was discovered in the necropolis of Apollonia (Ivanov, 1963, 211-212, No. 519, Fig. 84, Pl. 112). The unguentarium could be assigned to Type III (Ivanov, 1963, 247-248, Fig. 97/687) from the necropolis of Apollonia or Type II from

On the basis of the presence – in one complex – of armour, which is typical of a male grave, and of the combination of a mirror and a feeding-bottle, which are specific grave goods for female (and children’s) graves, one could assume that originally there were two burials. The finds that were dispersed in the embankment – parts of a funerary wreath and pottery – further strengthen this impression. What is to be noted is the unusually high number of the open vases discovered – four dishes and a fish-plate. Such an accumulation is uncharacteristic of the burial rites in the region from this period. A complex of two graves has been discovered under a tumulus near Odessos (Savova, 1971). In the preliminary publication the assumption is made that the finds from the embankment come from Hellenistic graves, which had been disturbed by the Medieval necropolis (Mikhajlov/Dimitrov, 1985, 230). It is highly possible 13

ANCIENT GREEK COLONIES IN THE BLACK SEA 2 that some later activity disturbed the initial Hellenistic complex and dispersed part of the grave goods.

conical body, IVД according to the classification of M. Lazarov, and dates from the end of the 4th-the beginning of the 3rd century BC (Lazarov, 1973, 29-30, №№ 145146). The last stamp could not be adequately deciphered.

In the second grave only clay vases were discovered: a fragmentary kantharos with a spherical fluted body and funnel-shaped upper section (it is covered with brownish glaze and has traces of West Slope decoration); a wheelturned clay lamp with a single wick-holder and a small protuberance on its right side; a closed vessel with biconical body and with stripes of red paint on the shoulders (Figure 4/6-8). The kantharos and the lamp can be dated more or less precisely. Similar kantharoi from the necropolis of Apollonia were classified as Type V (Ivanov, 1963, 198, Nos 472-473, Pl. 105); the closest parallel however is an example of the A-variant of the Type VI (Ivanov, 1963, 197, No. 479, Fig. 77). Similar finds are known from the Hellenistic necropolis of Olbia, where they were assigned to Type II (Parovich-Peshikan 1974, 79, Fig. 75/7, 76/1-2). The proposed dating is in the end of the 4th and the beginning of the 3rd centuries BC. A. Bozhkova defined these vases as specific to the Black Sea area and accepted a date in the beginning of the 3rd century BC (Bozkova, 1997, 11). The lamp has a rather close parallel among the finds from Tumulus III from the Thracian necropolis near Kralevo, where a stamped Thasian amphora from the second quarter of the 3rd century BC was discovered as well (Ginev, 2000, 22, Fig. 20, 43; for the amphora – ibid., 16-17, Fig. 14-15, 43). A similar lamp was discovered in a grave to the northeast of Odessos (Toncheva, 1961a, 31-32). The biconical vessel – lagynos or myke – is the first example discovered in a grave from the Bulgarian Black Sea coast, though the type is well known from the Romanian coastal region – e.g. from Tomis and Histria. In northern Dobrudzha it is possible to trace the development of the type back to the 6th-5th centuries BC. Two variations of the shape exist – with one and with two asymmetrically placed handles (cf. Alexandrescu, 1972, 122, Fig. 7/1-2; Lungu, 1995, 235-236, 258 – fig.5). Closer to the vase from Dionysopolis are some examples with one handle from Tomis that illustrate the existence of the type in Early Hellenistic times (Bucovala, 1967, 22; Lungu/Chera, 1986, 90, 99, Pl. II/ M7).

These Thasian eponyms are known from all the Greek colonies along the Western Black Sea coast from Odessos to Histria (see the distribution of the eponyms and the stamps in Avram, 1996a, 64-76; for Odessos see Lazarov, 1999). Two of the stamps – with the names of Aischrion and Archenax – have exact parallels among the finds from Histria, while Menedemos is presented with six different devices (Avram, 1996a, Nos 347-353). All three of them belong to one chronological group, from 294 to 287 BC, and the discovery of these stamps in a single complex in Dionysopolis confirms the homogeneity of the group. These eponyms provide a fixed date for at least one of the burials – somewhere in the beginning of 280s BC. What remains unclear is to which one of the two (or three) complexes the stamps should be related, but there are enough reasons to believe there was a relatively small chronological discrepancy between them. In any case, the finds from the tumulus – from the graves and from the embankment as well – demonstrate chronological homogeneity: all of them could be generally dated to the first quarter of the 3rd century BC. The two (or three) burials should have taken place in a relatively short time span. It is highly probable that the complex, designated as grave No. 2 (one could certainly consider it a rich male grave, which is confirmed by the presence of the armour), was the primary one. Therefore the construction of the mound should be regarded as related to this complex. It is logical for a funerary wreath to have been deposited in the grave, for it is a grave gift, which in these times was specific for male graves only. We cannot rule out the possibility that the complex has been disturbed in later times and that as a result part of the grave goods were dispersed in the embankment. It is also possible that there was more than just one grave in the tumulus. Unfortunately, there are no observations on the stratigraphy of the embankment available. Grave No. 29 should be considered later than No. 2, but most probably was constructed in the first quarter of the 3rd century BC as well.

Some fragments of Thracian hand-made pottery are also mentioned as discovered in the tumulus. Though rare, ‘local’ vases were found in contemporary graves from the area of the Greek colonies (Toncheva, 1961, 30-31, Pl. ІІ/11; Bucovala, 1967, 31).

The authors of the first publication made the definite claim that the persons buried under the tumulus were of Thracian origin. This is based on the use of cremation as a burial rite and on the raising of a burial mound (Mikhajlov/Dimitrov, 1985, 231). Such a statement is to be regarded as extreme, as there is an almost complete lack of information about the presumed ‘purely Greek’ necropolis of Dionysopolis, which information could be used for a comparison. Among the finds there is not a single item that does not have a parallel in the materials

In addition to the above-described finds, five amphora stamps were discovered in the embankment of the tumulus (Figure 4/12-16). They allow us to propose a more precise dating for the complexes. Four of the stamps are of the later type Thasian stamps and bear the names of three Thasian eponyms: Aischrion, Archenax and Menedemos (two examples). Only the upper half of a Thasian amphora has been preserved (with a stamp of Menedemos). The shape is of the Thasian amphorae with 14

MARGARIT DAMYANOV: DIONYSOPOLIS, ITS TERRITORY AND NEIGHBOURS IN THE PRE-ROMAN TIMES from complexes from the necropoleis of the Greek colonies in the region. The tumulus itself cannot be taken as an ethno-defining element, even if it is not rejected that it appeared as a result of native influence (see Panajotova, 1994, 87-88). In the Early Hellenistic period there are tumuli in the necropoleis of all Greek colonies in the area. Just a look at Odessos is sufficient to illustrate the point, for in this case there are numerous burial mounds scattered in the territory of the necropolis, in the immediate vicinity of the city-walls (Ivanov, 1956, 94; Mirchev, 1958, 571) and farther (Shkorpil/Shkorpil, 1909; Savova, 1971). The problem with cremation being a burial rite specific only to the Thracians should also be treated cautiously, though the description of the grave structures poses some questions. One should note, that in the ancient literary sources there is information about some mixed ‘Graeco-barbarian’ populations in the area in Hellenistic times (see below). It is possible that the graves under consideration here could illustrate such phenomena.

The Territory The study of the territories (the so-called ‘agricultural territories’ or chorai) of the Greek colonies along the Bulgarian Black Sea coast is still in its opening stage. In this regard Bulgarian archaeology is far behind research in neighbouring countries, most of all in comparison with the work of Romanian scholars, for which region a number of publications summarising this research have appeared in the last decade (see Avram, 1990; idem, 1991; idem, 2001). The discussion about the date of appearance of the territories of the poleis along the littoral of Dobrudzha started almost half a century ago. The situation is further complicated by the necessity to make a distinction between the chora in the narrower sense of the word (the lots of the citizens) and chora in the broader sense (as a zone of economic and political influence). I. Stoian should be right in saying that every polis or apoikia must have possessed arable land from its very foundation (Stoian 1957, 188-191). As far as the constitution of the larger territory under control is concerned, from the beginning of the discussion several different opinions have been voiced – as early as the 6th century BC (Vulpe 1955, 547-548; Stoian 1957, 191, 200-201), in the times of the ‘Scythian protectorate’ of Ataias in the mid-4th century BC (Iliescu 1970, 95-97), or at the latest in the times of the Macedonian domination (Pippidi 1967, 154-156; Pippidi 1984, 119-120). No matter what position one is going to adopt in this discussion, there are two basic statements that can be extracted – the existence of citizens’ lots of agricultural land from the foundation of the poleis on and the reign of Lysimachos as the latest possible time for the constitution of larger territories. It should be remembered that apparently Lysimachos had a large amount of agricultural land under his control, for at the end of the 4th century BC he had the resources to send large quantities of grain to various Greek poleis (Danov, 1938, 212-213). In this respect we should point to the information, provided by Memnon, that Tomis and Kallatis had a common border. This passage is interpreted in the sense that at this time Kallatis already had its territory; the date is somewhere around 250 BC (FGrHist, III, B, F 13 [21]; Pippidi, 1984a, 119-120; Avram, 1991, 104; idem, 2001, 614615). The earliest direct and explicit information about the existence of agricultural territories under the control of the Greek poleis in this part of the Black Sea littoral (the coast of Southern Dobrudzha) dates from the end of the 3rd or the beginning of the 2nd century BC. This is the well-known Histrian decree in honour of Agathokles, where it is mentioned that some Thracians, led by Zoltes, besieged Bizone and ravaged its chora (ISM, I, 15, l. 2527; see last in Oppermann, 2000, 142-143). If we are to accept that in this period such an insignificant settlement as Bizone (situated about 15 km to the east of Dionysopolis) had its own territory, it should also be true for Dionysopolis. We should not forget that in the Hellenistic period Dionysopolis was a fully developed

There are some further indications of the existence of a Hellenistic necropolis on the plateau above Dionysopolis. In the depository of the museum another unguentarium and a black-glazed lamp are preserved. Both finds were discovered during excavations in the area of the Early Byzantine fortress (i.e. in the vicinity of the tumulus, the materials from which are described above) and are indicative of a funerary context. The unguentarium has an elongated shape and can be dated to the end of the 3rd or the beginning of the 2nd century BC (Figure 5/4). The lamp has the conical protuberance specific to the Early Hellenistic examples and can be dated to the 3rd century BC (Figure 5/5). This area – the plateau of the Early Byzantine fortress and its eastern slopes (those descending to the ravine) – kept the function of main necropolis of Dionysopolis throughout the Roman period. Numerous graves from the 2nd-4th centuries AD were discovered there, but unfortunately remain unpublished (Dimitrov, 2001, 7980). On the plateau above the town there are numerous tumuli (Irechek, 1974, 902); in the beginning of the 20th century the Skorpil brothers defined their number as about 50 (Shkorpil/Shkorpil, 1912, 41). According to some authors, they attest the presence of a settlement of the indigenous Thracian population (Shkorpil/Shkorpil, 1912, 41; Naumov et al., 1971, 9). In fact large tumular necropoleis exist around all the Western Pontic colonies (Panajotova, 1994). Such is the case of Odessos for example (cf. Shkorpil/Shkorpil, 1909). On present-day maps of the area there are numerous tumuli marked, but in a somewhat larger area – with the highest concentration in between the villages of Tsarichino and Strazhitsa, and around the former village of Momchil (at present part of Balchik) (Northern Black Sea Coast, 1999, 4). 15

ANCIENT GREEK COLONIES IN THE BLACK SEA 2 polis (Avram 1996b, 294).25 In the same inscription it is described that Agathokles organised the defence of the Histrian chora (l. 8-14) and later was elected for strathgòß ™pì têß xýraß autokrátwr (l. 42). The relation between the chora and the ‘crops of the citizens’ is stated twice, i.e. the strict agricultural meaning of the word is emphasised. And although all the poleis along the littoral of Dobrudja were under the control of the king Rhemaxos, the attacks of the Thracians of Zoltes are described as incursions in Histria’s own territory. These notes on the terminology are meant to demonstrate that at this time the constitution of the agricultural territory of the polis was already finished.

Kallatianôn kaì Dionusopoleitôn (l. 23-24).27 We could also use what we already know about the territories of the two important neighbouring poleis – Odessos and Kallatis – the chorai of which were contiguous to that of Dionysopolis respectively from the south and from the north. Because of this, we may assume that the development of the poleis in this part of the Black Sea coast went in parallel. In this respect it is pertinent to remember that in the tracing of the borders of Dionysopolis representatives of the poleis Odessos and Kallatis, as well as envoys of the Thracian king Kotys took part. It is evident that in the period under consideration the local Thracian rulers played an important role in the life of the Greek poleis. From the latter half of the 1st century BC we could adduce a decree from Odessos, issued in honour of Menogenes; the Thracian king Sadalas appointed him strathgòß ™pì têß prosxýrou, i.e. ‘governor of the neighbouring land’. This expression most probably describes the Thracian territories around the chora of Odessos (Mihailov IGBR I2, 99; Mikhaijlov 1967, 33; Saprykin 1996, 241; Preshlenov 2002, 14; Damyanov, 2004, 48-50).28 The presence of the envoys of the Thracian king Kotys among the choriothetai that traced the borders of Dionysopolis half a century later (if we accept Mikhajlov’s dating) is also indicative of the considerable role the indigenous rulers played in the life of the Greek poleis. One of the envoys – Sadalas son of Mokaporos – is also defined as strategos.

A number of scholars have voiced the opinion that agriculture formed the basis of the economy of ancient Dionysopolis (Danov, 1968, 284) (the opposite opinion also exists – cf. Velkov, 1931/32, 46). In relation to the coinage of the polis it is repeatedly stated that the great significance of Dionysos and Demeter as coin devices (along with their attributes – vine, bunches of grapes, ears of wheat) is indicative of the great importance of viticulture and the production of grain (Canarache, 1957, 74). Unfortunately we do not have at our disposal any factual information about the territory of Dionysopolis. From this point of view it will be very difficult to reconstruct its internal organisation and chronology. To compensate however we possess a unique epigraphic monument, the horothesia of Dionysopolis (IGBR, V, 5011), which provides us with the opportunity to define more or less accurately the borders of the polis’ territory in the period of 1st century BC to the 1st century AD.26 What is more, some possibilities for retrospection exist (nevertheless we should not overlook either the three or four centuries that passed from the initial constitution of the chora, or the specifics of the given historical moment). In the text of the horothesia it is stated that before starting to trace the borders the choriothetai consulted the existing earlier documents – maqón|[teß ™]k tôn ˜rxaíwn grammátwn (l.13-14); in addition some earlier borders between the citizens of Dionysopolis and those of Kallatis are mentioned – tà ˜rxaîa †ria

In the present discussion a very important basic fact is that Dionysopolis had common borders with Odessos and Kallatis. For a long time now it has been accepted as proven that the River Batova (the ancient Zyras – Plin., Nat. hist., 4, 11, 44) shaped the northern border of the polis Odessos (and respectively the southern one of Dionysopolis) (Shkorpil, 1930-1931, 57; Mirchev, 1953, 74-77). This thesis is based on border stones from Roman times, discovered near the villages Osenovo, Novakovo and Nikolaevka and dated to the mid-2nd century AD (Tacheva, 2000, 68-75). Another problem should be mentioned – in the text of the horothesia of Dionysopolis there is nothing about a river called Zyras. The starting point, from where the choriothetai departed (after they had already reached the borders?), is named as [P]eukai (Mihailov 1997, 12).29 If we follow the logic of the text, this should be the point where the border between Odessos and Dionysopolis began on the littoral. Most probably the choriothetai

25 On the other hand, the status of Bizone is raising some questions. From the ancient sources only Pseudo-Scymnos names it a polis, to which we should add the information about territory and fortifications from the honorific decree of Agathokles. A. Avram notes that in the time of Demetrios from Callatis (3rd century BC) even the origin of the settlement was not clear – whether it was a Greek or a barbarian foundation (Avram, 1996b, 294-295); nevertheless he presumes that in the Hellenistic period Bizone had the status of a polis (Avram, 2001, 618, note 69). The opposite opinion was voiced by M. Oppermann (Oppermann, 2000, 143). 26 There is a discussion concerning the dating of the inscription – concerning which Thracian king Kotys is meant. Most scholars accept it is Kotys III, son of Rhoemetalces I, and accordingly date the monument in the beginning of the 1st century AD, before 19 AD (Mihailov, 1997, 12); only M. Tacheva proposed an earlier date – in the latter half of the 1st century BC (Tacheva, 1999, 9-12).

27 In this respect the text of the inscription is very similar to the Histrian horothesia of Laberius Maximus, where the ‘borders of the ancestors’ are mentioned - tà tôn progónwn †ria (ISM I 68, l. 60-61). 28 A badly damaged Hellenistic decree from Histria should be interpreted in the same way. In it prósxwroß Qraikë is mentioned, i.e. ‘neighbouring Thrace’ or ‘ the neighbouring Thracian lands’. 29 Mihailov preferred this reconstruction of the name, and not the alternative [L]eukai.

16

MARGARIT DAMYANOV: DIONYSOPOLIS, ITS TERRITORY AND NEIGHBOURS IN THE PRE-ROMAN TIMES Bizone,30 when the territory of that settlement (about which we have explicit data in the epigraphic sources) was divided between the neighbouring poleis; this hypothesis explains the omission of the name of Bizone from the text of the horothesia (Avram, 1991, 107; idem, 2001, 618-619). Following the same logic Avram reaches the conclusion that Dionysopolis and Kallatis had a common border even earlier (the ‘old borders’ are mentioned), but it was in the interior and not in the coastal area. According to him the new border on the coast was to the north of the Kaliakra promontory, as in the text it is stated that it was Écw Akraß, i.e. ‘out of, beyond Akra’ (Avram, 1991, 106-107). Cape Shabla (Karon Limen) is accepted as the initial southern border of Kallatis and the extension to the south of it is regarded as only temporary. Possible proof supporting the thesis of the southern border of Kallatis (in the Hellenistic times) at Shabla, is a fragmentary gravestone discovered there, on which only …]eíou guná could be read (IGBR, I2, 4; ISM, III, 245). The proposed dating is in the end of the 4th or more probably in the early 3rd century BC. If we accept that the monument has not been transported here from somewhere else, then the Doric dialect of the inscription could be an indication that the deceased was of Dorian origin and the nearest Dorian polis is Kallatis. At the nearby village of Tvarditsa (about 12 km to the northeast of cape Shabla) a border stone from the Roman period was discovered. It carries the inscription Fin(es) Terr(itorii) Call(atidis) and could be proof of the return of the border back to its original place.

proceeded from the sea to the interior, then to the north and then back to the coast, where they reached the settlement named Nymphaion (its location has not yet been identified). Mikhajlov interpreted [P]eukai as a place and not as a settlement. If we accept that the river itself marked the border, then the Hellenistic settlement at the present-day village of Kranevo should have belonged to the territory of Odessos. Most probably in ancient times – as well as at present – the valley of the river was marshy and not suitable for human settlement. According to the description of Dobrudzha, made by A. Ishirkov, the valley of the River Batova formed ‘a broad, marshy and thickly wooded lowland, where the Gejchikler swamp is situated’ (Ishirkov, 1918, 15). If we accept the reconstruction of the toponym in the text of the horothesia as [P]eukai, then we could expect the region to have been wooded [anc. Gr. peúkh - pine tree (pinus maritima), pine forest]. It is known that in later times – during the Ottoman (15th-19th century) period – at Kranevo there was an important port for the export of timber and charcoal from the area (Shkorpil, 1930-31, 58). We could find an analogy of this place-name in the Histrian horothesia of Laberius Maximus, which guaranteed the ‘borders of the ancestors’ to the southernmost arm of the Danube – Peúkh = ‘Ieròn stóma; apparently it was a heavily wooded area, for it was from there that the citizens of Histria took material for the production of torches (Avram, 1990, 17; cf. ISM I, 68, l. 20-24). In addition this hypothetical comparison could provide us with additional information about the economic characteristic of the territory of Dionysopolis.

M. Slavova opposes this rather hypothetical reconstruction and notes that it is precisely the absence of the name Bizone in the inscription that excludes the possibility that the horothesia was made with the idea of redistribution of its territory (Slavova, 1998, 60). According to her the horothesia was made in 15 AD, when Dionysopolis and Kallatis were included in the Roman province of Moesia.

Nonetheless the valley of the River Batova remains a natural border and natural borders were used for defining the territory of Histria in the horothesia of Laberius Maximus. To the north of the marshy lowlands, where at present the forest preserve ‘Baltata’ and the sea resort Albena are situated, the shore rises steeply to an altitude of over 200 m. Though we are unable to trace the border in the interior, we could safely assume that the lower reaches of the river formed the border between the two poleis – Odessos and Dionysopolis. M. Mirchev mentions Thracian settlements near the villages Prilep, Obrochishte, General Kantardzhievo and Vladimirovo (Mirchev, 1969, 105) – to the north of Odessos, in the area of the presumed border with Dionysopolis. All of them are situated along the courses of the rivers Batova and Chaltikdere. Unfortunately, the materials from these sites remain unpublished. Also in this area is a site at Odartsi, which is interpreted as seasonal marketplace (Torbatov, 1993).

If we accept Avram’s thesis, then we could imagine (at least for the 2nd-1st centuries BC) that Dionysopolis possessed a territory that ran (along the coast) from the mouth of the River Batova to some point to the west of Bizone (in between Dionysopolis and Bizone). (As for the explicit information in the decree of Agathokles the latter had its own chora.) It is possible the territory of Bizone can be said to have covered a relatively narrow coastal area and not to have reached as far as Cape Shabla. The studies of the territories of the other poleis in the Pontic region have shown that they developed mainly along the coast. This is true for Kallatis (Avram, 1991, 135, Abb. 4; idem, 2001, 623, Fig. 5), Histria (Avram, 1990, 21-22, 44, Abb. 1; idem, 2001, 605, Fig. 3; 608, Fig. 4), the

The northern border of the territory of Dionysopolis, separating it from that of Kallatis, is a much more complicated problem. A. Avram dwells on it at some length in his study concerning the chora of Kallatis. According to him the horothesia of Dionysopolis was made shortly after and in relation to the destruction of

30 All the written sources are unanimous that Bizone was destroyed by an earthquake (Strabo 7, 6, 1; Plin. Nat. hist. 4, 11, 44). The 72 BC Pontic campaign of Marcus Lucullus should be considered terminus post quem for the event, because Bizone is mentioned among the settlements that were taken (Avram 1996b, 295).

17

ANCIENT GREEK COLONIES IN THE BLACK SEA 2 colonies on the Dniester liman (Okhotnikov, 1983) and Olbia (Kryzhitskij et al., 1989, 21, Fig. 3, 98, Fig. 35). Though we have much less information about Odessos, there are grounds to suppose the same pattern (Damyanov, 2004, 52-53). We know about the existence of a Hellenistic settlement in the border area of the territories of Odessos and Dionysopolis – in the vicinity of Kranevo, on the mouth of the River Batova. As we already mentioned however, it should have belonged to the chora of Odessos.

settlements existed along the coast and in the conditions of the high and steep shores to the north of the River Batova these settlements occupied every suitable place. In this case such places are situated on an interval of about 4 km from west to east – Momchil, Dionysopolis, Tuzla, Topola. After that we reach Bizone and Kaliakra, the character of which remains unclear. (It should not be forgotten, that according to Strabo, Lysimachos used the fortress on the Kaliakra promontory to keep his treasury in;32 we also know that much later – at the beginning of the 1st century AD – Pharsalos, son of Bitys, strategos of the Thracian king Rhoemetalces, developed some activity at this place.33 In this respect it seems reasonable to assume that Kaliakra was not part of the territory of Dionysopolis. This assumption raises doubts about Avram’s thesis, at least for the pre-Roman period.

Chance finds of pottery attest the existence of a Hellenistic settlement in the locality of Tuzla, situated at about 5 km to the east of Dionysopolis. A number of authors mention traces of an ancient settlement on the strip of land that separates the marsh from the sea (Shkorpil/Shkorpil, 1912, 47; Bobcheva, 1972, 25). Most probably the remains should be related to a somewhat later settlement, dated in the Roman times; some graves from that period were excavated (Toncheva, 1953). (Still later, in the Early Byzantine period, a fortress was built on the edge of the plateau – Torbatov, 2002, 258-260.) But among the finds that were discovered in the marsh there are amphorae from Thasos, Rhodes, Sinope and Heraclea, as well as black-glazed pottery (Toncheva, 1964, 37). During trench excavations some Hellenistic materials were also discovered (Toncheva, 1953, 123124; Lazarov, 1975, No. 25). The place – a 1000 m broad terrace sloping towards the sea – seems suitable for a settlement to be founded there.

We do not have any clue about the northwestern limits of the territory of Dionysopolis, i.e. the borders in the interior. For the moment no identification and location have been proposed for any of the toponyms mentioned in the text of the horothesia. Of all the places mentioned only Atoptistaì is explicitly defined as a settlement, but its definition as néa póliß (l. 16-17) raises questions about the time of its foundation. According to Mikhajlov Skerezis and Karbateis were also settlements (Mihailov, 1997, 12-13), while Avram and Oppermann prefer to consider Karbateis (which may be identified as Cerbatis mentioned by Pliny) a small river (Oppermann, 2000, 139; Avram, 2001, 617). It is interesting to note that in the text of the horothesia a grave, most probably a tumulus, is mentioned and referred to as belonging ‘to the one who watches the chora’ (táfoß toû skopeúontoß tçn xýran – l. 19-21). Mikhajlov adduced some examples of graves used as points of reference (Mihailov, 1997, 12), but the direct relation of the deceased to the territory of the polis (as the only specification) could give us something more. It is possible that a person of some importance for the development of the polis is meant, somebody who was venerated (heroised?) after his death. However, this remains only a hypothesis.

Hellenistic materials were also discovered at the village of Topola, in between Dionysopolis and Bizone, 3.5 km to the east of Tuzla.31 The settlement is situated closer to Bizone than to Dionysopolis and therefore it is not clear to which of their territories it is to be related (see below for a possible identification). The place is suitable for settling – the Dobrudzhan plateau descends steeply to the south and shapes a coastal terrace with an altitude of 30 m, 250 m broad and more than 1000 m long; according to the results from field surveys the settlement reached its biggest size precisely in the Hellenistic period, when it was one of the most important centres along this part of the coast of Dobrudzha (Torbatov, 2002, 251). Some finds of black-glazed pottery and a Knidian amphora stamp are mentioned (Bobcheva, 1972, 66, Fig. 2). (For more about the settlement at Topola see below.)

In his description of the Black Sea littoral Pliny the Elder mentions some ‘Scythians – ploughmen’ and lists several of their settlements (see below). Of them only Aphrodisia/Aphrodeision is present in the text of the horothesia of Dionysopolis and it is possible to conclude that it was on the territory of Dionysopolis because it is precisely the citizens of Dionysopolis that yielded it to the Thracian king Kotys.34 This information is important from another point of view as well – according to the

We could also assume that a settlement existed on the place below the former village of Momchil, at about 4 km to the west of the town. The landslide circus has created conditions that are suitable for the foundation of a settlement (the topography of Dionysopolis itself is very similar); on the edge of the plateau a high concentration of tumuli is to be noted. Having in mind the territories of Odessos and Kallatis it seems justifiable that a chain of

32

Strabo, 7, 6, 1. IGBR I2, 12. 34 A. Avram considers it part of the territory of Callatis, though with an uncertain location (Avram, 2001, 620). From the logic of the text a different conclusion could be drawn – after the horiothetai concluded that according to the ‘old records’ the described territory belongs to the citizens of Dionysopolis, they add that the same citizens yielded Aphrodeision to the Thracian king Kotys. 33

31 Unpublished results from trench excavations, conducted in 1994 by K. Rabadzhiev and N. Theodossiev.

18

MARGARIT DAMYANOV: DIONYSOPOLIS, ITS TERRITORY AND NEIGHBOURS IN THE PRE-ROMAN TIMES assumption of K. Banev and M. Slavova, Kotys needed this coastal point for sitoponpîon or sitopompeîon, i.e. for ‘sending out of grain’ (Slavova, 1998, 57-58). On one hand it demonstrates the interest of the Thracian kingdom in the trade in grain from Dobrudzha, and on the other it is indicative of the economic characteristics of the territory of Dionysopolis. It is beyond doubt that the main activity of the citizens of the polis was also the cultivation of the Dobrudzhan lands and the growing of wheat. That Aphrodeision was indeed situated on the coast becomes clear from the already cited passage of Theophanus Confessor, according to whom in 544/545 AD this settlement – along with Dionysopolis and Odessos – was struck by a huge wave. The presumed commercial activity of Aphrodeision, connected with bulky goods such as grain, is indicative of its functioning as a port. On the basis of the text of the horothesia of Dionysopolis S. Torbatov reaches the conclusion that Aphrodisia is to be sought for somewhere on the coast between the Kaliakra promontory and the River Batova; according to him the only ancient settlement that could be identified as Aphrodeision/ Aphrodisia is the one at the village of Topola (Torbatov, 2002, 252).

some of the rich tumular graves as marking sites in the chora – family farms or the estates of rich citizens (Damyanov, 2004, 51-52). It seems possible that the case of Dionysopolis was the same and therefore these tumuli mark the limits of the immediate territory of the polis. A division of the territory of ‘close’ and ‘distant’ was proposed for Kallatis as well (Avram, 1991, 136; idem, 2001, 626-627). It is necessary to say some words about the possible time of the constitution of the territory of Dionysopolis. It is a hard task, bearing in mind the fact that we do not know the date of the foundation of the settlement itself. Nevertheless we should keep in mind its existence already in the 5th century BC and the presence of the political institutions in the Early Hellenistic period. We could also make a comparison with the neighbouring colonies. On archaeological grounds the emergence of the chora of Kallatis was dated to the beginning of the 4th century BC, i.e. more than a century after the foundation of the polis (Avram 1991, 127f.; idem 2001, 614). The information about the territory of Odessos is scarcer. It is not to be doubted that the citizens had their lots of arable land as early as the Archaic Age. Nevertheless the end of the 4th century BC and the beginning of the following century mark an apparent upsurge in the development of Odessos. This is the time when the settlement at Povelyanovo and most of the rich burials in the surroundings of the polis appeared. There are some reasons to believe that this phenomenon was accompanied by expulsion (and/or assimilation?) of the local Thracian population (Damyanov, 2004, 52). An opinion has been voiced, that this development is related to the changes in the general economic and political situation in the region, following the wars of Kallatis against Lysimachos and later against Byzantium (Stoyanov/Stoyanova, 1997, 22, 31). The Early Hellenistic period is the time when Dionysopolis appears rather suddenly as a full-fledged polis. Respectively its territory should have been formed in the same period.

From the study of the territory of Kallatis we know that the presumed western border of the territory could be traced at about 15 km in the interior of Dobrudzha, where a fortified settlement was excavated and some more sites were situated (Avram, 1991, 117-118; idem, 2001, 619, 622ff.). In the beginning of the Hellenistic period to the west of Odessos a settlement emerged that could be considered a border point of the territory of the polis (Damyanov, 2004, 53). Having in mind this data we could also suggest some depth of the territory of Dionysopolis. One should, however, remember the differences in the topography of the above-mentioned areas. Kallatis was situated in a flat landscape that simplified the communications and the penetration in the interior. The site at Povelyanovo to the west of Varna (Odessos) is situated along the line of lakes of Varna and Beloslav that project to the interior between the Frangensko and Avrensko plateaus and provide a way of communication. The littoral in the region of Dionysopolis up to Cape Shabla in the north is characterised by steep elevated shores and is to a certain extent separated from the high Dobrudzhan plateau. Therefore it is reasonable to assume a somewhat narrower territory. It has already been mentioned that on the plateau above Balchik/Dionysopolis there are numerous tumuli, with highest concentration between the villages of Tsarichino and Strazhitsa, but also in the area of the former village of Momchil and to the east of Balchik. We could adduce the testimony of C. Jirecek, writing in the late 19th century, that above Balchik ‘the flat steppe is filled with innumerable old mounds up to the horizon’ (Irechek, 1974, 902). Observations on present-day maps show it is a territory of some 16-17 km2, which is way too large to be interpreted as a necropolis. In the context of the territory of Odessos I have already proposed to consider

Another problem should be considered as well – concerning the population that lived in the land around Dionysopolis.35 It has to be discussed in the context of the dependent groups of indigenous or mixed population that, according to some scholars, worked the lands of the Greek colonies in the Black Sea (Pippidi, 1975; Tacheva, 1997). One more time we should return to the written sources and especially to the information given by Pseudo-Scymnos and later repeated by the anonymous author of the Periplus of the Black Sea. In the lines dedicated to Dionysopolis both sources mention that on the border between the Scythians and the Thracian Krobyzoi there were some migádaß §´Ellhnaß oœkhtaß. The first interpretation that should be commented on here is that given by T. Blavatskaya (Blavatskaya, 1952, 29). 35

19

See more in Damyanov, 2002; idem, 2003.

ANCIENT GREEK COLONIES IN THE BLACK SEA 2 According to her, these ‘mixed Greeks’ were in fact colonists who had come from different metropoleis. Later this opinion was adopted by N. Ehrhardt (Ehrhardt, 1983, 65) and recently was restated by K. Nawotka (Nawotka, 1997, 23) and L. Buzoianu (Buzoianu, 2001, 30-31).36 But if the use of the word migades is traced throughout classical literature, it becomes clear that it is never used concerning Greeks. The root of the verb meígnumi supposes that a ‘mixing of blood’ took place (Hošek, 1983, 155). A few examples may be given. There are two places in Isocrates’ speeches where the ethnic purity of the Athenians is stated, because they were ‘neither immigrants in their land, nor migádeß (Panathen. 124; Panegyr. 24). In a passage of Strabo’s Geographica the different gene inhabiting Alexandria are presented (17. 1. 12). What is to be noted is that of the citizens of Alexandria proper (in comparison with the Egyptians and the foreign mercenaries) the author says that ‘despite the fact they have become migádeß, originally they were Greeks’ (and therefore are fittest to rule). The closest parallel we have is a passage in Ephoros’ work (FGH 70, F 162 Jac.). According to him, there were 16 peoples living in the northwestern parts of Asia Minor, three Greek and the rest barbarian – without mentioning the mixed ones, xwriß tôn migádwn. Strabo’s doubts about this information are based on his opinion that, if there were some mixing of two different peoples, the prevalence of one of the elements would have made them either Greeks or barbarians (14. 5. 25). Another passage from the Geographica should be cited. In the description of the island of Alopekia (in the Don delta) Strabo says that it is ‘settlement of mixed men’ (katoikía migádwn ˜nqrýpwn); just above Tanais is defined as a polis, even though it was ‘a common emporion of the Asiatic and European nomads (™mpórion koinòn tôn te Asianôn kaì tôn ΕÕrwpaíwn nomádwn) (11. 2. 3).

From what have been said above it could be concluded that in the case of Dionysopolis we should expect an ethnically mixed population. There is an interesting difference to be noted between the two almost identical passages. According to Pseudo-Scymnos, these mixed Greeks lived in the border area of the Scythian and Krobyzian lands. The Anonymous Periplus however says that Dionysopolis, which was situated on the border between the Scythians and Krobyzoi, had a population of mixed Greeks. As was already stated, this information was most probably taken from the work of Demetrios from Kallatis and therefore illustrates the situation in the middle or in the latter half of the 3rd century BC. Having in mind the chronological precedence of the work of Pseudo-Scymnos we should accept his version and regard the text of the Anonymous Periplus as a later emendation. It is possible that this author changed the text in the way he understood it – that it is more logical that the additional information be related to the settlement itself (bearing in mind the lack of any information about the metropolis and the population of the polis, which otherwise is usual for this kind of work). Mikhajlov accepted the second version and considered the town to have been inhabited by people with different and mixed origin, i.e. Greek and barbarian (Mihailov, 1970, 50; idem, 1979, 264). This view was also recently adopted by M. Oppermann (Oppermann, 2000, 141, Anm. 27). Following the presumed parallel with the Olbian decree honouring Protogenes, certain scholars tend to see in these ‘mixed Greeks’ a denoting of status. A. Avram puts them in the context of all such groups of dependent population known from the sources o¥ tçn xýran gewrgoûnteß in Heraclea Pontica (Arist., Polit., VII 6, 1327b), the mixellenes in the Olbian decree, Taúroi paroikoûnteß mentioned in a decree of Chersonesus (cf. Pippidi, 1975, 72-4) – and defines them as part of the population with lower legal and social status (Avram, 1991, 130; idem, 2001, 631-632). M. Tacheva views them in a similar way and the translation she proposes is ‘mixed Greeks – oiketai’. According to her it is a population that is subject to the polis (Tacheva, 1997, 112, 116-117). She interprets the last word in the sense of the oœketeía mentioned in the Olbian decree (some kind of slave population). Such a connection cannot be accepted on philological grounds. The word that is used in the sources is not oœkéteß (to which the word oœketeía is related), but oœkhtëß. Its meaning is identical to that of oœkëtwr/oœkhtër and should be translated as ‘inhabitant, resident’ (Casevitz, 1985, 8286). In this context M. Tacheva sees some ‘public slaves’ – dhmósioi – in the text of the horothesia of Dionysopolis (l. 28; Tacheva, 1997, 117).

One more parallel is to be followed – the one with the mixellenes, mentioned in the well-known Olbian decree honouring Protogenes. Since I have discussed the problem in detail elsewhere (Damyanov, 2002, 120-122; idem, 2003, 256-258), here only basic conclusions will be repeated. The mixellenes are a group of population mentioned in the text of the decree (dating from the latter half or the end of the 3rd century BC) as inhabiting some territory around the polis (according the interpretation of Dittenberger ‘in the border areas’), outside the agricultural territory (where another group of people lives, defined as oœketeía). From what we know it could be concluded, that these mixellenes were a group of population that in some way was related to the polis and appeared as a result of the mixing of Greeks and barbarians. Most scholars consider them part of the population of the chora, deprived of citizens’ rights and living in some kind of dependence. According to some authors originally they had some military functions as well. 36

However, a better explanation has been proposed, that in fact what stands in the text is dhmosíonai o… šgorakóteß tòn Pónton, where dhmosíonai is equivalent to the Roman term publicani (Slavova 1998,

See above, note 14.

20

MARGARIT DAMYANOV: DIONYSOPOLIS, ITS TERRITORY AND NEIGHBOURS IN THE PRE-ROMAN TIMES 58ff.). None of the passages provide us with direct evidence about the social status of the described population. We are left only with the information about the mixed ethnic origin of the population of the settlement itself, if the Anonymous Periplus is taken as correct. The earlier and probably more correct version of Pseudo-Scymnos gives ground only for a broadening of the territory inhabited by the ‘mixed Greeks’. An interesting coincidence is to be noted – in the immediate proximity to Dionysopolis lies Bizone, the ethnic character of which is not clearly determined. The same sources that were cited about Dionysopolis give identical information – some people say it is a barbarian settlement, and others that it had become a colony of Mesambria.37 This enabled Mikhajlov to make a comparison with the mixed population of Dionysopolis (Mihailov, 1970, 36).

problem of the Scythian presence in Dobrudzha requires some more attention and therefore it would be better first to discuss the Thracian tribe Krobyzoi that appears on several occasions in the written sources. Among them the earliest is the work of Hecataeus; according to him the Krobyzoi are a tribe that lives to the south of Istros (i.e. the Danube river), in a land that was named after them – Krobyzike.38 Following Hecataeus later Hesychius specifies that Krobyzoi are a Thracian people.39 After Hecataeus Herodotus offers more precise geographical data about their location and again stresses their Thracian ethnicity. He lists the rivers that take their sources from the Haemus (the Balkan chain) and flow into Istros, and among them mentions Artis, Noes and Artanes that carry their waters through the land of the Krobyzoi.40 In their ‘Historical geography of the Thracian tribes’, Al. Fol and T. Spiridonov accepted the location of Herodotus and place the Krobyzoi in between the Triballoi in the west and the Getai in the East – in the interior of present-day northeastern Bulgaria, along the rivers Vit and Yantra (Fol/ Spiridonov, 1983, 97-98, 105). For this localisation of some importance is also the fact, that Herodotus, who made the first detailed description of the Thracian tribes, apparently placed in the coastal region the Getai, who were conquered by Darius in the course of his Scythian campaign.41 In this regard it should be noted, that there is a clear tendency that the Krobyzoi be mixed with the Getai. In a fragment of Hellanicus discussing Zalmoxis, it is mentioned that the Krobyzoi and the Terizoi also ˜qanatízousi, which is a direct reference to Herodotus.

A. Avram’s interpretation is also hard to accept. The texts do not give any supplementary information about the population of Dionysopolis, therefore we don’t have a starting point for researching a socio-defining statement. Both sources tell us only two things about the settlement – in the first place that its previous name was Krounoi and the cause for its change to Dionysopolis, and in the second the information that is under consideration here. The presence of a mixed population was a fact that was worth mentioning, i.e. it is important to be noted that this group (or groups) of population was characterised only by its ethnic origin.

In this respect it is necessary to say that all the Greek narrative sources from the 5th century BC stress the significance of the river Danube as a border separating the Scythians and the Thracians. This is clear from text of Herodotus and from Thucydides as well. The former describes the Scythian campaign of Darius (dated from 519 to 513 BC according to the different interpretations) (Hdt. 4, 97, 99, 122) and after that the episode of the dynastic strife in the Scythian kingdom (4, 80), in the aftermath of which the Thracian and the Scythian armies met on the Danube (the death of Skyles could be dated in the mid-5th century BC). According to Thucydides, in the time of Sitalkes the Odrysian kingdom comprised all the lands from Abdera on the Aegean in the south to the Danube in the north, including the whole Western Pontic littoral (Thuc. 2, 97). He also states that the Getai and the other tribes were immediate neighbours of the Scythians (2, 96). Thucydides mentions as well that the Greek poleis along the coast paid tribute to the Odrysian

The neighbours From the above-cited passage of Pseudo-Scymnos we know that in the 3rd century BC the region of Dionysopolis was regarded as a border area of two ethnic groups – Scythians and Krobyzoi (i.e. Thracians). As is clear from the whole description of this part of the Pontic littoral, the author tried to present an overall picture of the various barbarian peoples in the region, using the Greek colonies as points of reference. According to him the Krobyzoi lived around Odessos and up to Dionysopolis to the north, where their border with Scythians is. The Scythians lived around Tomis (v. 746 – the phrase is almost identical with the one used to describe the position of Odessos). In this respect the text of Pseudo-Scymnos does not demonstrate any incongruities, which is yet another indication of that the author used a single source for the description of this region. The information about the border between the Scythians and the Krobyzoi is interesting from another point of view as the valley of the River Batova is also an important geographical frontier – it is the southernmost part of Dobrudzha, i.e. the southernmost corner of the South Russian steppes (Karyshkovskij, 1971, 51). The 37

38

Hecat. Volume Jacoby-F1a, 1, F fragment 170. Hesych., K 4162. 40 Hdt., 4. 49. 41 This is the internal logic of the text in Hdt. 4, 93, where Darius – following the coastline – conquered in the first place the Thracians of the Salmydessos – the Skyrmiadae and the Nipsaeoi. After that, before reaching the Danube, he ran into the Getae who offered resistance. 39

Ps. Scymn., vs. 758-60; Anonym., PPE., vs. 75-7.

21

ANCIENT GREEK COLONIES IN THE BLACK SEA 2 kingdom (2, 97).42 That is to say that we have all the reasons to believe that in the 5th century BC Dobrudzha remained an exclusively Thracian domain. The next information that falls into that tradition is provided by Pseudo-Scylax; the author defines the Danube as a border of Thrace and locates the Scythians immediately to the north of Thrace.43

It should be mentioned that Strabo writes about the Krobyzoi (and the strange people of the Troglodytai) in relation to the ‘marshlands of the so-called ‘Small Scythia’’ that is situated ‘on this side of the Danube’ – têß ™ntòß Istrou (7, 5, 12). There they lived alongside the Scythians. Just above Strabo mentions that large numbers of Scythians crossed the Tyras (Dniester) and Istros (Danube) and drove out the local Thracian population, and that for this reason the land was called ‘Small Scythia’ (as an analogy with the one in Crimea) (7, 4, 5). According to Rostovtsev in this case Strabo relies on the work of Demetrios from Kallatis (Rostovtsev, 1925, 33-35), i.e. the above-described events should have happened at latest in the mid-3rd century BC. Apollonius from Rhodes also writes in his Argonautica about a Scythian population, mixed with Thracians, and localises them in the area of the Danubian delta (Apol. Rhod., 4, 320). This information could also be dated in the 3rd century BC, maybe in the first half of the century.

While the information of Pseudo-Scylax concerns the 4th century BC, the situation during the Hellenistic times is much more complicated. The following group of sources about the Krobyzoi comprises several later authors. The same confusion between Krobyzoi and Getai can be observed in the work of Pseudo-Scymnos, who mentions the Krobyzoi on several occasions.44 In verses 739-740 he discusses the Greek polis Mesambria that bordered the lands of the Getai. On the other hand, however, the eastern end of the mountain chain Haemus (that rises above Mesambria) is described as lying in the land of the ‘Pontic Krobyzoi’ (v. 746). Immediately afterwards Pseudo-Scymnos writes about Odessos that is ‘encircled’ by the ‘Thracian Krobyzoi’ (vs. 748-750). Then follows the passage about Dionysopolis and the border lands of the Krobyzoi and the Scythians. That is to say that according to Pseudo-Scymnos the territories of the Krobyzoi comprise the coastal area between the eastern spurs of the Balkan range to the south and Dionysopolis to the north. Nevertheless he considers them part of the larger ethnic group of the Getai. It is possible to see a parallel of this information in a passage of Thucydides, who mentions the Getai ‘living beyond Haemus’, but also ‘the other peoples that inhabit the lands on this side of Istros’ ‘in the territories closer to the Pontos Euxeinos’ (2, 96). Therefore the Getai were not the only indigenous population of northeastern Thrace, and it was precisely in the coastal areas where there were other tribes as well. What is more, the Greek historian explicitly states that these were Thracian peoples that were under the domination of the Odrysian kingdom. Most probably the Krobyzoi – though not mentioned by name – were also part of this group of peoples. Strabo locates them in the coastal area, but farther to the north, around Tomis, Kallatis and Histria (7, 4, 5). Two different traditions could be seen. The first could be traced back to Herodotus who localised the Krobyzoi in the interior of Thrace. The second one, which we could relate to Demetrios from Kallatis, placed them on the coast. If Strabo had used the same source,45 it remains unclear why he gave a location that is different from that of Pseudo-Scymnos.

Here we should once again quote the information provided by Pliny about the presence of ‘Scythiansploughmen’ on the coast of Dobrudzha. After mentioning Kallatis, Bizone, Dionysopolis and the nearby river Zyras (the River Batova), he states that the Scythians that were called ‘ploughmen’ inhabited the above-described section of the littoral and lists their settlements (forts – oppida): Aphrodisias, Libistos, Zygere, Rhocobae, Eumenia, Parthenopolis and Gerania (Nat. hist., 4, 11, 44). According to S. Andrukh, who made a painstaking analysis of the written sources on the ethnic geography of the region, the above-mentioned passages from the works of Pseudo-Scymnos, Strabo and Pliny reveal remarkable unity and bear witness to the permanent settling of the Scythians in Dobrudzha (at the latest in Early Hellenistic times) (Andrukh, 1995, 18-19). It should be stressed that in Pliny’s account the River Batova is one again defined as southern border of the ‘Scythians’. There are written sources that mention Scythians in Dobrudzha even earlier, in the 4th century BC. These are the accounts of the conflict between the Macedonian king Philip II and the Scythian king Ataias. The historical reality of this ruler is proven by the finds of silver coins bearing his name, most probably minted in Kallatis (Anokhin, 1973; Lazarenko, 2002, 130-134).46 This episode should be discussed in the context of the abovepresented hypothesis of I. Lazarenko that it is possible that Dionysopolis issued bronze coins of this Scythian 46 It seems very improbable for one of the series to have been minted in Heraclea Pontica, the metropolis of Callatis. The close similarities of the devices with some of those on the coins of Heraclea could find another explanation – having in mind that in the mid-4th century BC Callatis itself had not yet started its own coinage (cf. Avram 1999, 76f.), it is not excluded that its citizens invited engravers from the metropolis or imported the stamps (cf. Lazarenko 2002, 133). Some authors argued against the identification of the ruler from the coins with the Ataias from the sources (see Oppermann, 2002, Anm. 72).

42

As it is demonstrated by the archaeological finds, the settlement that later became known as Dionysopolis existed at least from the beginning of the 5th century BC and therefore the information that the Greek poleis were dependent of the Odrysian kings should be valid for it as well. 43 Ps.-Scyl. 67-68, GGM 1, p. 57 Muller. 44 Ps. Scymn. 738-750 (GGM 1, p. 226 Muller). 45 He quotes from him in another context in 1, 3, 20.

22

MARGARIT DAMYANOV: DIONYSOPOLIS, ITS TERRITORY AND NEIGHBOURS IN THE PRE-ROMAN TIMES ruler (despite the objections voiced). The written tradition is relatively laconic about Ataias (see the review of the narrative sources in Alexandrescu, 1967; Andrukh, 1995, 15-17; about the interpretation – Andrukh, 1995, 71-80). From the interpretation of our main source – the epitome of Pompeus Trogus, made by Justin (Just., 9, 2) – it follows that in the mid-4th century BC the Scythians had already permanently settled in Dobrudzha; no migration or invasion is mentioned.47 Ataias was dragged into a conflict with Rex Histrianorum; according to most of the scholars this people should be identified with the local Getai or the Triballoi that migrated to the east of their home territories.48 The Scythian king turned for help to Philip II (c. 340 BC), but later changed his mind. It is important to note that Philip demanded to have a statue of Herakles erected on the mouth of the River Danube, but Ataias refused to give him a safe passage through his land. This fact alone is sufficient to prove the location of the Scythian kingdom in Dobrudzha. The outcome is well known – Philip defeated Ataias, who was killed in the battle, and the Scythians (most probably) were driven out of Dobrudzha and to the other side of the Danube. Having in mind the presumed minting of the coins of Ataias in Kallatis and the existence of a powerful Thracian centre in the northern parts of Dobrudzha, the Scythian kingdom could be located in the central and the southern parts of the region (Oppermann, 2002, 256). Therefore it cannot be excluded that the above-described events could have had some influence on the historical development of Krounoi/ Dionysopolis.

Strabo writes about; in his opinion, in this case ‘Scythia’ means the territories that were not part of the chorai of the Greek poleis (Karyshkovskij, 1971, 45, 50-51). The archaeological traces of the Scythian presence in Dobrudzha are very scarce, in contrast to the relatively abundant written sources (for a review of the finds see Oppermann, 2002). In her monograph ‘Scythia on the Lower Danube’ S. Andrukh repeatedly stresses the poor state of research in the region. Nevertheless it has to be noted that there are no monuments that could be unconditionally interpreted as belonging to the Scythians. Pottery with North-Pontic origins has been discovered at several sites, most of all in the antique layers of the Greek colonies and the surrounding settlements (one of the well-known examples is the fortified settlement at Albesti to the west of Kallatis). There is one kind of find, however, that can be mentioned as an exception of this rather unclear situation. These are the coins of the so-called ‘Scythian kings’. The problem is complicated and requires the attention of a numismatist, therefore here it will be presented only briefly. On emissions of bronze coins the names of Kanites, Sariakos, Tanusa, Akrosa, Charaspes and Aelias are attested, accompanied by the title basileúß. The identification of these kings as Scythian rulers was made as early as the 19th century on the basis of an inscription discovered in Odessos (IGBR I2, 41; cf. Andrukh, 1995, 118). It is a decree honouring Hermeios from Antiochia, who spent some time with the Scythian king Kanites and did all kinds of favours for the citizens of Odessos. And as the coin emissions have a number of common traits, this identification was transferred to all the kings. Later in the sea near Kaliakra another inscription was found, which is a dedication to the Dioscuri that was made by the Macedonian Antigonus in the name of the king Sariakos (IGBR V, 5003; cf. Lazarov, 1985). This is another corroboration of the historical reality of the Scythian kings in Dobrudzha. The proposed dating of the two inscriptions is respectively the 3rd-2nd and 2nd centuries BC.49 As was proposed already by Gerasimov (Gerasimov, 1953)50 and later proven by further studies, all the emissions were issued by the mints of four of the Greek poleis in the region – Odessos, Dionysopolis, Kallatis and Tomis. It was J. Yurukova who studied in detail the similarities between the devices on the coins of the Scythian kings and those on the coins of the WestPontic poleis (Youroukova, 1977; Yurukova, 1992, 160163). Among the scholars only M. Tacheva presumed that coins of the Scythian kings were also minted in Histria (Tacheva, 1995, 12); this opinion is not supported by the rest of the specialists (Andrukh, 1995, 103). One of the Scythian rulers – Kanites – struck coins in the

Information about Scythians near the Danube delta is given also by Arrian and Plutarch, in relation to the campaigns of Alexander the Great and his general Zopyrion (Andrukh, 1995, 91). Of particular interest is the account of Diodorus about the war that Lysimachos waged against Kallatis, in which the ‘neighbouring Thracians and Scythians’ (tôn te Qräkôn kaì Skuqôn toùß ¦moroûntaß) were allies of the city (Diod., 19, 73, 2). After they were defeated, the Scythians retreated ‘beyond the borders’. According to D. Pippidi it should be understood as ‘beyond the river’ (Pippidi, 1984b, 162; cf. Karyshkovskij, 1971, 46, note 62). This information is about the war of 313 BC. Therefore the passage of Pseudo-Scymnos should be regarded as testimony following this from the chronological point of view (the middle or the latter half of the 3rd century BC). In addition in the already mentioned Histrian decree honouring Agathokles, (dating from the turn of the 3rd century BC), the neighbouring territories to the polis are called ‘Scythia’ (ISM I, 15, l. 16). According to Karyshkovskij it is the same marshy ‘Small Scythia’ that 47

Only Strabo proposes a different location for Ataias – according to him the Scythian king ruled over most of the barbaric peoples in the lands between the rivers Dniepr and Don (Strabo 7, 3, 18). There is nothing in the other sources that could support such a localisation. 48 The latter interpretation is corroborated by the information provided by two more sources – Polyaenus (Strat., 44, 1) and Frontinus (Strat., 2, 4) - that explicitly name the Triballoi as Ataias’ adversaries.

49 Antigonus from the second inscription is identified as the one who conducted the negotiations between Philip V of Macedon and the Bastarnae in 180-179 BC. 50 For Odessos, Callatis and Tomis. Somewhat later M. Mirchev added to the list the mint of Dionysopolis (Mirchev, 1961).

23

ANCIENT GREEK COLONIES IN THE BLACK SEA 2 mints of all the four poleis. In fact his coins are most numerous and demonstrate a great variety of types (Andrukh, 1995, 120). Tomis seems to have been the leading mint, where all the Scythian kings minted.

who were related not to the polis, but to the ruler. Tacheva considers the emissions a tribute paid by the poleis in exchange for the rulers’ friendship (Tacheva, 1995, 14). According to other scholars the coins had only a demonstrative character and circulated together with those of the poleis. These hypotheses were questioned by S. Andrukh on the grounds that the bronze emissions are of small value and therefore are not suitable for demonstrative functions (Andrukh, 1995, 137-138).

The monetary emissions of the Scythian kings provided grounds for some scholars to presume the existence of a Scythian state in Dobrudzha – the so-called ‘Small Scythia’. This thesis reaches its final expression in the work of S. Andrukh (Andrukh, 1995, 96ff. with references to numerous earlier studies). According to her the Scythian kingdom existed from the latter half of the 3rd to the beginning of the 1st centuries BC. Andrukh states that the sequence of the rulers corroborates this chronological framework. The circulation of the coins mainly in the coastal area between Odessos in the south and Tomis in the north is indicative that this region was the nucleus of the kingdom. To the west it bordered local Getic political formations. According to Andrukh the Scythian kingdom was a heterogeneous community with a predomination of the Getic element, who gradually assimilated the Scythians.

Finally I would like to draw attention to the hypothesis of A. Avram about the presence of Scythians around Kallatis (which accordingly could be transferred to the whole littoral of Dobrudzha). According to Avram, the coins of the Scythian kings could be dated in the late 3rd and most of all in the 2nd centuries BC (Avram 2001, 629). Having in mind the almost complete lack of archaeological material, he reaches the conclusion that there was not a massive and permanent settlement of Scythians in Dobrudzha, but that there were only small enclaves enjoying a limited autonomy and grouped in the periphery of the chorai of the poleis as some sort of klerouchoi (Avram, 1991, 129; idem, 2001, 630-31). What the author has in mind are settlements of the kind of Albesti. Another possibility that involves greater mobility (having in mind the centres of the Scythian ‘royal’ coinage) is to assume the existence of several different relatively small hordes; they could have established some kind of relations with the Greek poleis. Such a hypothesis does not contradict either the presence of the Scythians as an ethnic group in the written sources, or their absence (in the same sources) as a political power and the almost complete silence of the local epigraphic tradition.

The main problem is the precise dating of the monetary emissions of the Scythian kings, for the whole interpretation depends on it. The firm facts we have at our disposal are very meagre. Both inscriptions could not be dated with any precision and most probably belong to the 2nd century BC. In the vicinity of the village of Balgarevo (near Bizone/ Kavarna) a collective find was discovered, containing gold staters imitating types of Lysimachos and coins of Akrosa. Yurukova dates the staters in the late 2nd century BC (Youroukova, 1977, 113ff), and S. Andrukh to the period 140-120 BC (Andrukh, 1990). A coin of one of the Scythian kings (unidentified) was discovered in a grave in the necropolis of Kallatis (Barladeanu-Zavatin, 1980, 237). Though there are no grave goods that could be dated with greater precision, the shape of the two unguentaria discovered in the grave is indicative of a date at the end of the late 3rdearly 2nd centuries BC. Another problem is the chronological order of the kings. Among the scholars only Yurukova voiced the opinion that all the rulers should be placed in a relatively short period in the late 2nd - early 1st centuries BC and should be related to the political activity of Mithridates VI Eupator (120-63 BC) (Yurukova, 1992, 163ff.). The arguments she produces in support of her thesis are the identical magistrate names on the emissions of different kings and the fact that the mint of Tomis countermarked with identical countermarks the coins of four of the rulers – Kanites, Akrosa, Tanusa and Charaspes.

As we saw, the ancient narrative sources are speaking unconditionally about the presence of a Scythian population in Dobrudzha, at least from some time in the 3rd century BC on. We should however turn to the epigraphic monuments as well. Unfortunately it is only the rich collection of inscriptions from Histria that provides some information about the historical situation in Dobrudzha. In two of his works D. Pippidi dwells on the relations between Histria and the Getai in 3rd-2nd centuries BC (Pippidi, 1961; idem, 1975a). What is to be noted is that though some other peoples (?) are mentioned, nevertheless the ‘Thracians’ are the most active non-Greek power in the region. It seems justified that some of the conclusions be transferred on Dobrudzha as a whole, including the surroundings of Dionysopolis. In the repeatedly cited honorific decree of Agathokles it is described how the Thracian chieftain (defined in the text as Árxwn) Zoltes terrorises the Greek colonies in Dobrudzha; his activity reaches as far to the south as Bizone. The inscription is usually dated about 200 BC. In a somewhat earlier inscription prósxwroß Qraikë is mentioned, which expression is interpreted by Pippidi as ‘a part of the chora or a neighbouring territory that is densely inhabited with Thracians and in conditions that

The function of the monetary emissions of the Scythian kings also remains unclear. Yet another problem is not given its final solution – how the relations between the Scythian kings and the Greek poleis are reflected in these emissions. It is obvious that there were special magistrates who were responsible for the minting and 24

MARGARIT DAMYANOV: DIONYSOPOLIS, ITS TERRITORY AND NEIGHBOURS IN THE PRE-ROMAN TIMES are perfectly known to the citizens of Histria…’ (Pippidi, 1961, 55).

mind that Rhemaxos live on the left bank of the Danube, and that during a later action Zoltes attacked Bizone (which is situated in southern Dobrudzha), we have many reasons to assume that his lands were somewhere to the south of Histria, most probably in Dobrudzha. This is an immense front for waging military operations.55 Karyshkovskij on the other hand thinks that Zalmodegikos, as well as Zoltes should be sought in the immediate vicinity of Histria (Karyshkovskij, 1971, 41). Here is the place to remember that at least part of Dobrudzha was defined as ‘Scythia’, despite no Scythians appearing in the text. As was already mentioned, according to S. Andrukh the northern border of the Scythian kingdom in the ‘Small Scythia’ should have been somewhere around Tomis and therefore Histria was not part of it.

In another honorific decree there is a description of the diplomatic mission of three of the citizens that went to Zalmodegikos – without any doubt a local Thracian ruler (Pippidi 1961, 57)51 – to negotiate the release of a large number of hostages as well as to obtain his permission for the citizens of Histria to work their agricultural land. The account is very different from the idea of the ‘neighbouring Thrace’ – in order to reach to the Thracian chieftain, the envoys had to go through ‘enemy land’ and to run ‘all kinds of risks’. Starting from this description, Pippidi reaches to the conclusion that ‘the residence’ of the ruler (according to him Zalmodegikos was a basileúß) was on the left bank of the Danube (Pippidi, 1961, 57), though this is not stated explicitly. Most of the scholars however voiced the opinion that the domain of Zalmodegikos was in fact in Dobrudzha (Karyshkovskij, 1971, 40; Jordanov, 1984, 118-119; Andrukh, 1995, 92). A number of arguments can be adduced in support of this thesis. In the first place, no crossing of the Danube is mentioned in the text.52 On other hand, the envoys succeeded in convincing Zalmodegikos to release sixty hostages and to ‘return to the people their revenues’, which could hardly be interpreted otherwise than that they were allowed to work their land and harvest the crops.53

On the other hand, the presence of Thracian population to the south of the presumed border is unconditionally attested by numerous archaeological finds. Even without mentioning the abundance of the Thracian pottery on all sites, we could focus our attention on the finds from Durankulak, about 15 km to the south of Kallatis, where there was a ‘rural’ sanctuary, part of the territory of the polis (Avram, 1999, 17; idem, 2001, 625; for the results from the excavations, see: Burow 1993; idem, 1995; idem, 1996). What is to be noted are some of the attested rituals – a cluster of ritual pits from the 3rd century BC were excavated, where remains of human sacrifices were revealed. These rites have their parallels in many clearly Thracian cites, including from the Pontic littoral (Balabanov, 1999; Tonkova, 2003).

This is the interpretation Pippidi offers (Pippidi, 1961, 58ff.). It is difficult to imagine that the Thracians could have been able to exercise such control from the opposite side of the Danube. What is more, as Pippidi suggested, the presence of hostages implies that there was some kind of treaty to be observed. Here we should once more return to the honorific decree of Agathokles and the activity of the Thracian Árxwn Zoltes. Already before his name appears – if we accept that the listing of Agathokles’ merits follows their chronological order – there is a mention of a large number of Thracians who invaded the chora of the polis. The next episode is already about the ‘Thracians of Zoltes’, which ‘together with a large army’ were approaching ‘Scythia and the Greek poleis’ that were under the rule of the king Rhemaxos.54 Where did Zoltes come from? Having in

As we have seen, the epigraphic monuments from the period of the 3rd-2nd centuries BC bear testimony for a very active Getic political presence in Dobrudzha (at least in its northern parts). This fact raises doubts about the existence of a strong Scythian kingdom in the time from the end of the 3rd to the beginning of the 1st century BC. Therefore it seems better to accept that the Scythian enclaves were clustered in the coastal area and around the Greek poleis; they could have been some kind of mercenaries or population with a military function and limited autonomy living on the territories of the colonies. It seems reasonable to assume that in a predominately Thracian (Getic or Krobyzian) milieu the Scythians were quickly assimilated and lost their characteristic archaeological appearance (Andrukh, 2000, 71-72). In the immediate surroundings of the Greek poleis the Hellenic influence also played a certain role. Dionysopolis was situated on the border between the

51

Such an identification could be justified on the grounds of analogies with other inscriptions, as well as having in mind the closeness of the name Zalmodegikos to other Thracian (and especially Getic) names known from the written source – e.g. Zalmoxis. 52 Cf. the decree of Agathokles, in which it is described how he set off for the king Rhemaxos katà ploûn; it is beyond doubt that the king lived on the opposite side of the Danube. 53 Cf. the decree of Agathokles, in which on several occasions ‘the land, the stock and the crops’ are mentioned as threatened by the activity of the Thracians of Zoltes. 54 The question about the ethnic affiliation of the king Rhemaxos is outside the scope of this text. Pippidi considers him a Getic ruler (Pippidi, 1975a), but maybe the suggestion of Karishkovskij – that the king could be related to the Galatai from the Olbian honorific decree of Protogenes – is more justified (Karyshkovskij, 1971, 54-55).

55

The distance between Histria and Bizone is more than 130 km as the crow flies. In the decree all these events are described as happening in a short period of time: Zoltes invaded the chora (of Histria), then besieged Bizone and ravaged its territory, while in the same time the crops of the citizens of Histria (‘our crops’ in the text) have already ripened enough to be harvested. As far as I know, so far nobody has questioned the identification of Bizone in the decree of Agathokles with the settlement on the place of the present-day Bulgarian town of Kavarna.

25

ANCIENT GREEK COLONIES IN THE BLACK SEA 2 ——, 1967 - Ataias, St.Cl. IX, 85-91. ——, 1972 - Un groupe de céramique fabriquée à Istros, Dacia NS XVI, 113-131. ——, 1978 - La ceramique d’epoque archaïque et classique, Histria IV, Bucarest. Alexandrescu, P., Morintz, S. 1982 - A propos de la couche précoloniale de Mesambria, Pontica 15, 47-55. Andrukh, S. I. 1990 - Андрух, С.И., К вопросу о датировке монет скифского царя Акросака (K voprosu o datirovke monet skifskogo tsarya Akrosaka - To the question about the dating of the coins of the Scythian king Akrosak).// Нумизматические исследования по истории Юговосточной Европы (Numismatic studies on the history of Southeastern Europe), Kishinev, 83-89. ——, 1995 - Нижнедунайская Скифия в VІ - начале І в. до н.э. (Nijnedunayskaya Skifiya v 6 - nachale 1 v. do n. e. Scythia on the Lower Danube in the 6th - the beginning of 1st c. BC), Zaporozhye. ——, 2000 - ‘…смешанные с фракийцами скифы’ (‘…smeshannye s frakijtsami skify’ - ‘…Scythians mixed with Thracians’).// VDI 3, 63-73. Anokhin, V.A. 1973 - Анохин, В. А., Монеты Атея (Monety Ateya - The coins of Ataeas)// in Terenozhkin, A. I., 20-41. Avram, A. 1990 - Das histrianische Territorium in griechischromischer Zeit. Xenia 25. Histria. Eine Griechenstadt an der rumanischen Schwarzmeerkuste (Eds. Alexandrescu, P., Schuller, W.), 9-46. ——, 1991 - Untersuchungen zur Geschichte des Territoriums von Kallatis in griechischer Zeit, Dacia NS XXXV, 103137. ——, 1996a - Les timbres amphoriques, 1. Thasos, Histria VIII,1. ——, 1996b - Les cités grecques de la côte Ouest du PontEuxin. Introduction to an Inventory of Poleis. Acts of the Copenhagen Polis Centre, Vol. 3 (Ed. Hansen, M. H.), 288316. ——, 1999 - Inscriptions de Scythie Mineure III. Kallatis et son territoire, Bucarest-Paris. ——, 2001 - Les territoires d’Istros et de Kallatis. Problemi della chora coloniale dall’ Occidente al Maro Nero. Atti del Quarantesimo Convegno di Studi sulla Magna Grecia (Taranto 29 Settembre - 3 Ottobre 2000), Taranto, 593-633. Balabanov, P. 1999 - Балабанов, П. Тракийски ритуални ями край с. Дебелт, Бургаска област (Trakijski ritualni yami kraj s. Debelt, Burgaska oblast - The Thracian cult pits near Debelt, Bourgas region).// A. 3-4, 62-76. Barladeanu-Zavatin, El. 1980 - Noi descoperiri in necropolele Callatiene. Partea I, Pontica XIII, 216-240. Bilabel, F. 1920 - Die ionische Kolonisation. Untersuchungen über die Gründungen der Ionier, deren staatliche und kultliche Organisation und Beziehungen zu den Mutterstädten. Lepzig (Philologus Suppl. XIV, 1). Blavatskaya, T. V. 1952 - Блаватская, Т. В., Западнопонтийские города в VІІ-І веках до н.э. (Zapadnopontiyskie goroda v 7-1 vekakh do n. e. - The Westpontic cities in 7th-1st c. BC). Moscow. Bobcheva, L. 1970 - Бобчева, Л., Калиакра през Елинистическата епоха (Kaliakra prez Elinisticheskata epokha - Kaliakra during the Hellenistic period).// MPK 2, 15-16. ——, 1972 - Бобчева, Л., Археологическа карта на Толбухински окръг (Arkheologicheska karta na Tolbukhinski okrag - Archaeological map of district of Tolbukhin).

heterogeneous population of coastal Dobrudzha and the properly Thracian territories to the south. ABBREVIATIONS A

Археология (Archaeologia), Sofia (in Bulgarian). AA Archaologischer Anzeiger. AB Archaeologia Bulgarica. AEM Archäologisch-epigraphische Mitteilungen aus Österreich-Ungarn. Wien. AOR Археологически открития и разкопки (Arkheologicheski otkritiya i razkopki Archaeological discoveries and excavations) (in Bulgarian). IAI/IBAI Известия на Археологическия институт (Izvestiya na Arkheologicheskiya institut Reports of the Archaeological institute), Sofia (in Bulgarian). IBID Известия на Българското историческо дружество (София) [Izvestiya na Balgarskoto istorichesko drujestvo (Sofia) - Reports of the Bulgarian Historical Society (Sofia)], Sofia (in Bulgarian). IGBR I cf. Mihailov, G. 1970. IGBR V cf. Mihailov, G. 1997. ISM I cf. Pippidi, D. 1983. ISM III cf. Avram, Al. 1999. IVAD Известия на Варненското археологическо дружество (Izvestiya na Varnenskoto arkheologichesko drujestvo - Reports of the Archaeological society - Varna), Varna (in Bulgarian). INMB Известия на народния музей Бургас. (Izvestiya na narodniya muzey - Burgas Reports of the popular museum - Burgas), Burgas (in Bulgarian). INMV Известия на народния музей Варна Izvestiya na narodniya muzey - Varna - Reports of the popular museum - Varna), Varna (in Bulgarian). MPK Музеи и паметници на културата (Muzei i pametnitsi na kulturata - Museums and cultural monuments), Sofia (in Bulgarian). RBelgN Revue Belge de Numismatique. RPh Revue de philologie de litterature et d’histoire anciennes. SbNUNK Сборник за народни умотворения, наука и книжнина (Sbornik za narodni umotvoreniya, nauka i knizhnina - Bulletin for popular wisdom, science and litterature), Sofia (in Bulgarian). SCIV/SCIVA Studii si cercetari di istorie vece si arheologia. SCN Studii si cercetari de numismatica. StCl Studii clasice. TAB Terra Antiqua Balcanica. VDI Вестник древней истории (Vestnik Drevnej Istorii - Journal of Ancient History), Moscow (in Russian).

BIBLIOGRAPHY Alexandrescu, P. 1966 - Necropola Tumulara. Sapaturi 1955-1961, Histria II, Bucuresti, 133-294.

26

MARGARIT DAMYANOV: DIONYSOPOLIS, ITS TERRITORY AND NEIGHBOURS IN THE PRE-ROMAN TIMES ——, 2004 - Notes on the Territory of Odessos in Pre-Roman Times, AB 2, 47-56. Danov, Khr. 1938 - Данов, Хр., Из древната икономическа история на западното Черноморие до установяването на римското владичество (Iz drevnata ikonomicheska istoriya na zapadnoto Chernomorie do ustanovyavaneto na rimskoto vladichestvo - On the ancient economic history of the Western Black Sea coast before the establishing of the Roman rule).// IBAI XII, 185-258. ——, 1968 - Древна Тракия (Drevna Trakiya - Ancient Thrace), Sofia. ——, 1990 - Characteristics of Greek Colonization in Thrace.Greek Colonists and Native Populations, Proceedings of the First Australian Congress of Classical Archaeology Held in Konour of Emeritus Proffesor A. D. Trendall (ed. J.-P. Descoeudres), Oxford, Clarendon Press, 151-155. Dimitrov, M. 1973a - Димитров, М., Археологически разкопки на крепостните стени на Дионисопол (Балчик) [Arkheologicheski razkopki na krepostnite steni na Dionisopol (Balchik) - Archaeological excavations of the fortification walls of Dionysopolis (Balchik)].// Izvestiya na Okrajniya Istoricheski muzey i Balgarskoto istorichesko drujestvo - gr. Tolbukhin (Reports of the District Historical museum and the Bulgarian historical society in Tolbukhin) І, 183-186. ——, 1973b - Римският водопровод в Балчик (Rimskiyat vodoprovod v Balchik - The Roman waterline in Balchik).// Izvestiya na Okrajniya Istoricheski muzey i Balgarskoto istorichesko drujestvo - gr. Tolbukhin (Reports of the District Historical museum and the Bulgarian historical society in Tolbukhin) І, 167-172. ——, 1986 - Проучвания върху историята на античния Дионисополис (Prouchvaniya varhu istoriyata na antichniya Dionisopolis - Studies in the history of the ancient Dionysopolis).// Dobrudja 3, 90-99. ——, 1990 - Укрепленията на Дионисополис-Карвуна (Ukrepleniyata na Dionisopolis-Karvuna The Fortifications of Dionysopolis-Karvuna).// in Bozhilov, I., Dimitrov, M., 25-48. ——, 1995 - Монетите на Дионисополис-Карвуна: извор за административната, политическата и стопанската история на Северозападното Черноморие от ІV в. пр. Хр. до средата на ХV в. (Monetite na DionisopolisKarvuna: izvor za administrativnata, politichescata i stopanska istoriya na Severozapadnoto Chernomorie ot 4 v. pr. Khr. do sredata na 15 v. - The coins of DionysopolisKarvuna: source for the administrative, political and economic history of the Northwestern Black Sea coast from 4th c. BC till the middle of the 15th c. AD).// in Torbatov, S., Yotov, V., 173-179. ——, 2001 - Дионисополис (Dionysopolis), Varna. Dobrudja 1918 - Добруджа. География, история, етнография, стопанско и държавно-политическо значение (Dobrudja. Geografiya, istoriya, etnografiya, stopansko i darjavno-politichesko znachenie - Dobrudja. Geography, history, ethnography, economic and statepolitical significance), Sofia. Draganov, D. 1990 - Д. Драганов, Начало на бронзовото монетосечене на Одесос (Nachalo na bronzovoto monetosechene na Odesos - The beginning of the bronze coinage of Odessos).// Numizmatika 3, 19-25. ——, 1995 - New coin types of Dionysopolis.// in Torbatov, S., Yotov, V., 60-63.

Bobcheva, L., Salkin, A. 1973 - Бобчева, Л., Салкин, А., Средновековен некропол в с. Българево. (Srednovekoven nekropol v s. Balgarevo - Medieval necropolis in the village of Balgarevo).// Izvestiya na Okrajniya Istoricheski muzey i Balgarskoto istorichesko drujestvo - gr. Tolbukhin (Reports of the District Historical museum and the Bulgarian historical society in Tolbukhin) І, 173-182. Boshnakov, K., Boteva, D. 2002 - Бошнаков, К., Ботева, Д., Jubilaeus V - Сборник в чест на проф. Маргарита Тачева (Jubilaeus V - Sbornik v chest na prof. Margarita Tacheva Jubilaeus V - Readings in honour of Prof. Margarita Tacheva), Sofia. Bozhilov, I., Dimitrov, M. 1990 - Божилов, И., Димитров, М., Балчик - древност и съвремие (Balchik - drevnost i savremie - Balchik - antiquity and present day), Dobrich. Bozkova, A. 1997 - A Pontic pottery group of the Hellenistic age. (A survey based on examples from the Bulgarian Black Sea coast), AB 1, 8-17. Brashinskij, J. B. 1970a - Брашинский, И. Б., Опыт экономико-географического районирования античного Причерноморья (Opyt ekonomiko-geograficheskogo rajonirovaniya antichnogo Prichernomor’a - An attempt for economic and geographic division of the ancient Black Sea coast).// VDI 2, 129-138. ——, 1970b - За икономическите връзки на гръцките градове от Югозападното Черноморие в предримската епоха (Za ikonomicheskite vrazki na gratskite gradove po Yugozapadnoto Chernomorie v predrimskata epoxa - On the economic relations of the Greek cities on the Southwestern Black Sea coast in the pre-Roman times).// A 1, 7-19. Bucovala, M. 1967 - Necropole elenistice la Tomis, Constanta. Burow, J. 1993 - Durankulak. Vorbericht uber die Ausgrabungen 1991 bis 1992, AA, Heft 3, 333-345. ——, 1994 - The Different Types of Ritual Pits in Durankulak and their Contents, Thracia Pontica, VI, 1, 69-72. ——, 1996 - Durankulak. Vorbericht uber die Kampagnen 1993 bis 1995, AA, Heft 3, 427-441. Buzoianu, L. 2001 - Civilizatia greca in zona Vest-Pontica si impactul ei asupra lumii autohtone (sec. VII-IV a. Chr.). Ovidius University Press, Constanta. Canarache, V. 1957 Monede autonome inedite din Dionysopolis si cronologia lor relativa, SCN I, 61-68. Casevitz, M. 1985 - Le vocabulaire de la colonisation en grec ancien. Étude lexicologique: les familles de ktízw et de oœkéw-oœkízw. Études et commentaires 97, Klincksieck Paris. Chernenko, E. V. 1969 - Черненко, Е. В., Скифский доспех (Skifskij dospekh - Scythian armour), Kiev. Chichikova, M. 1984 - Чичикова, М., Антична керамика (Antichna keramika - Antique pottery).// in Ivanov, T., 18114. Connolly, P. 1998 - Greece and Rome at War2, London. Damyanov, M. 2002 - Дамянов, М., Към въпроса за населението в района на Черноморските колонии V-ІІІ в.пр.н.е. (Kam vaprosa za naselenieto v rayona na Chernomorskite kolonii 5-3 v. pr. n. e. - On the question of the population in the vicinities of the Black Sea colonies 5th-3rd c. BC).// in Boshnakov, K., Boteva, D., 119-125. ——, 2003a - Early Hellenistic grave finds from the vicinity of Dionysopolis (on the Bulgarian Black Sea coast), AB 2, 2536. ——, 2003b - On the Local Population around the Greek Colonies in the Black Sea Area (5th-3rd centuries BC), Ancient West and East 2, 253-264.

27

ANCIENT GREEK COLONIES IN THE BLACK SEA 2 Dremsizova-Nelchinova, Tsv. 1970 - Дремсизова-Нелчинова, Цв., Тракийски могилни погребения край с. Кьолмен, Шуменски окръг (Trakiyski mogilni pogrebeniya kray s. Kyolmen, Shumenski okrag - Thracian burial mounds near the village of Kyolmen, district of Shumen).// IAI ХХХІІ, 207-229. Ehrhardt, N. 1983 - Milet und seine Kolonien, Frankfurt am Main. Fol, Al. 1990 - Фол, Ал., Политика и култура в Древна Тракия (Politika i kultura v Drevna Trakiya - Politics and culture in Ancient Thrace), Sofia. Fol. Al., Dimitrov, Str. 1984 - Фол, Ал., Димитров, Стр., История на Добруджа, т. І (Istoriya na Dobrudzha, t. I The history of Dobrudzha, vol. I), Sofia. Fol, Al., Spiridonov, T. 1983 - Фол, Ал., Спиридонов, Т., Историческа география на тракийските племена до ІІІ в. пр. н.е. (Istoricheska geografiya na trakijskite plemena do 3 v. pr. n. e. - Historical geography of the Thracian tribes to the 3rd c. BC), Sofia. Gerasimov, T. 1953 - Герасимов, Т., Монети на Канит, Тануза, Харасп, Акроза и Сариа (Moneti na Kanit, Tanuza, Kharasp, Akroza and Saria - Coins of Kanit, Tanuza, Kharasp, Akroza and Saria).// IVAD ІХ, 53-58. Gicheva, R., Rabadzhiev, K. (eds.) 2002 - Гичева, Р., Рабаджиев, К., Pit?h. Изследвания в чест на проф. Иван Маразов (Pit?h - Izsledvaniya v chest na prof. Ivan Marazov - Pit?h - Studies in honour of Proff. Ivan Marazov), Sofia. Ginev, G. 2000 - Гинев, Г., Тракийски могили при с. Кралево, Търговищко (Trakiyskite mogili pri s. Kralevo, Targovishtko - The Thracian tumuli near the village of Kralevo, district of Targovishte), Varna. Goceva, Zl. 1980 - Pretres éponimes d’Odessos et Dionysopolis, Klio 62, 1, 49-53. ——, 1995 - The problem Krounoi-Dionysopolis. Studia in honorem Georgii Mihailov (Ed. A. Fol), Sofia, 219-220. ——, 1996 - The Problem of Krounoi-Dionysopolis: One Settlement of Two? Colloquia Pontica 1. New Studies on the Black Sea Littoral (Ed. G. Tsetskhladze), Brill, 13-16. Hansel, B. 1974 - Zur Chronologie des 7. bis 5. Jahrhunderts v. Chr. im Hinterland von Odessos an der westlichen Schwarzmeerkuste, PZ 49, 193-217. Hind, J. 1999 - Pomponius Mela on Colonies West and East. Ancient Greeks West and East. Mnemosyne Suppl. 196 (Ed. G. Tsetskhladze), Brill, 77-84. Hosek, R. 1983 - Die Mischbevolkerung, Listy filologicke (Praha), Vol. 106, 155-159. Iliescu, V. 1970 - Cu privere la coloniile grecesti din Dobrogea si la data constituirii teritoriului lor rural, Pontica III, 87-98. Irechek, K. 1974 - Иречек, К., Пътувания по България (Patuvaniya po Balgariya - Travels in Bulgaria), Sofia. Irimia, M. 2000-2001 - Despre sciti si Scitia Mica in ultimele secole ale milenului I a. Chr., Pontica 33-34, 299-317. Isaac, B. 1986 - The Greek Settlements in Thrace until the Macedonian Conquest. Studies of the Dutch Archaeological and Historical Society, Vol. X, Leiden. Ishirkov, A. 1918 - Иширков, А., Физическа география (Fizicheska geografiya - Physical geography).// in Dobrudja. Ivanov, R. (ed.) 2002 - Иванов, Р., Римски и ранновизантийски градове в България. Изследвания в памет на Теофил Иванов (Rimski i rannovizantijski gradove v Balgariya. Izsledvaniya v pamet na Teofil Ivanov - Roman and Early Byzantine cities in Bulgariya. Studies in memory of T. Ivanov), Sofia.

Ivanov, T. 1956 - Тракийски могилни погребения в Одесос и околността му през ранноелинистическата епоха (Trakiyski mogilni pogrebeniya v Odesos i okolnostta mu prez Rannoelinisticheskata epokha - Thracian burial mounds in Odessos and its surroundings from the Early Hellenistic Age).// IVAD Х, 87-108. ——, 1963 - Антична керамика от некропола на Аполония. (Antichna keramika ot nekropola na Apoloniya - Ancient pottery from the necropolis of Apollonia).// in Venedikov, I, 65-274. ——, (ed.) 1984 - Севтополис (Seuthopolis), Vol. І. Jirecek, K. 1886 - Archдologische Fragmente aus Bulgarien, AEM X. Jordanov, I. 1990 - Йорданов, И., Нумизматичната колекция на археологическия музей Балчик - исторически извор за историята на града и околностите му (Numizmaticheskata kolektsiya na arkheologicheskiya muzey Balchik - istoricheski izvor za istoriyata na grada i okolnostite mu - The numismatic collection of the archaeological museum in Balchik - a historical source for the history of the town and its surroundings).// in Bozhilov, I., Dimitrov, M., 49-55. Jordanov, K. 1984 - Йорданов, К., Добруджа през І хил. пр. н. е. Гети (Dobrudzha prez I khil. pr. n. e. Geti Dobrudzha in the 1st mill. BC Getae).// in Fol. Al., Dimitrov, Str., 72-123. Kalinka, E. 1906 - Antike Denkmäler in Bulgarien. Kanitz, F. 1882 - Dunaubulgarien und der Balkan, Band 3, Leipzig. Karyshkovskij, P. O. 1971 - Карышковский, П. О. Истрия и ее соседи на рубеже ІІІ-ІІ вв. до н.э. (Istriya i eyo sosedi na rubeje 3-2 vv. do n. e. - Histria and its neighbours on the turn of 3rd-2nd c. BC).// VDI 2, 36-56. Kitov, G. 1990 - Китов, Г. Куполните гробници на нос Калиакра и нос Чиракман край Каварна (Kupolnite grobnitsi na nos Kaliakra i nos Chiracman kray Kavarna The domed tombs on Kaliakra promontory and on Chirakman promontory near Kavarna).// TAB IV, 116-121. Kuzmanov, G., Salkin, A. 1990 - Кузманов, Г., Салкин, А., Антични амфори от акваторията на Черноморското крайбрежие на Южна Добруджа (Antichni amfori ot akbatoriyata na Chernomorskoto krajbrezhie na Yuzhna Dobrudzha - Antique amphorae found in the sea off the Black Sea coast of Southern Dobrudzha).// INMV 28 (43). Lazarenko, I. 2002 - Лазаренко, И. Бележки върху историята и монетосеченото на скитските царе Атей и Сариак (Belezhki varhu istoriyata i monetosecheneto na skitskite tsare Atej i Sariak - Notes on the history and coinage of the Scythian rulers Atheis and Sariakes).// INMB 4, 130-147. Lazarov, L. 1995 - Poids de plomb de Dionysopolis.// in Torbatov, S., Yotov, V., 57-59. Lazarov, M. 1973 - Лазаров, М., Антични амфори (VI-I в.пр.н.е.) от Българското Черноморие (Antichni amfori (6-1 v. pr. n. e.) ot Balgarskoto Chernomorie - Ancient amphorae (6th-1st c. BC) from the Bulgarian Black Sea coast).// INMV 9 (24), 3-52. ——, 1975 - Непубликувани амфори и амфорни печати от Българското Черноморие (Nepublikuvani amfori i amforni pechati ot Balgarskoto Chernomorie - Unpublished amphorae and amphora stamps from the Bulgarian Black Sea coast).// INMV 11 (26), 128-136. ——, 1982 - Търговията на Хиос със Западнопонтийските градове (Targoviyata na Khios sas Zapadnopontiyskite gradove - The trade of Chios with the Westpontic cities).// INMV 18 (33), 5-15.

28

MARGARIT DAMYANOV: DIONYSOPOLIS, ITS TERRITORY AND NEIGHBOURS IN THE PRE-ROMAN TIMES ——, 1961 - Към въпроса за сеченето на скитските монети (Kam vaprosa za secheneto na skitskite moneti - On the question of the minting of the Scythian coins).// IVAD ХІІ. ——, 1969 - Раннотракийски селища при с. Брестак, Варненско (Rannotrakiyski selishta pri s. Brestak, Varnensko - Early Thracian settlements near the village of Brestak, district of Varna).// INMV 5 (20), 95-112. Mishev, K., Popov, P. (eds.) 1979 - Мишев, К., Попов, П., Българското Черноморско крайбрежие. Природна среда, ландшафти, население, икономика, комплекси (Balgarskoto Chernomorsko kraybrejie. Prirodna sreda, landshafti, naselenie, ikonomika, kompleksi - The Bulgarian Black Sea coast. Natural setting, landscapes, economy, population, complexes), Sofia. Mladenova, Ya. 1963 - Младенова, Я., Погребалните венци от некропола на Аполония (Pogrebalnite ventsi ot nekropola na Apoloniya - Funerary wreaths from the necropolis of Apollonia).// in Venedikov, I., 287-292. Mushmov, N. 1912 - Мушмов, Н., Античните монети на Балканския полуостров и монетите на българските царе (Antichnite moneti na Balkanskiya poluostrov i monetite na balgarskite tsare - The ancient coins of the Balkan peninsula and the coins of the Bulgarian rulers), Sofia. Naumov, A., Staneva, M., Kuyumdjiev, T., Bobcheva, L. 1971 Наумов, А., Станева, М., Куюмджиев, Т., Бобчева, Л., Балчик (Balchik), Sofia. Nawotka, K. 1997 - The Western Pontic Cities, History and Political Organization, Amsterdam. ——, 1999 - Bule and Demos in Miletus and its Pontic Colonies from Classical Age until Third Century BC, Wroclaw - Warszawa - Krakow. Northern Black Sea Coast 1999 - Северно Черноморско Крайбрежие. Туристическа карта (Tourist map), Sofia. Ognenova, L. 1959 - Огненова, Л., Ризници на траки от V-ІІІ в.пр.н.е. (Riznici na traki ot 5-3 v. pr.n.e. - Thracian cuirasses from 5th-3rd c. BC).// A 1-2, 30-37. Oppermann, M. 2000 - Suddobrudschanische Studien. Civilisation grecque et cultures antiques peripheriques. Hommage à Petre Alexandrescu à son 70e anniversaire (Eds. A. Avram, M. Babes), Bucarest, 138-149. ——, 2002a - Zum Problem nordwestpontischer Einflusse und skythischer Prasenz in der Dobrudscha vom 7. Jh.v. Chr. bis zum Hellenismus.// in Gicheva, R., Rabadzhiev, K., 249263. ——, 2002b - Оперман, М., Обликът на западнопонтийските полиси в междинното пространство между Тракия и Мала Азия (Oblikat na zapadnopontiyskite polisi v mejdinnoto prostranstvo mejdu Trakiya i Mala Aziya - The looks of the Westpontic poleis in the intermediate space between Thrace and Asia Minor).// in Boshnakov, K., Boteva, D., 304-312. ——, 2004 - Die westpontischen Poleis, Beier&Beran, Langenwei?bach. Orachev, A. 1990 - Орачев, А., Приноси към палеогеографията на Добруджанското крайбрежие (Prinosi kam paleogeografiyata na Dobrudjanskoto kraybrejie - Contributions to the paleogeography of the Dobrudja littoral).// Dobrudja 7, 32-52. Ovcharov, N. 1979 - Овчаров, Н., Елинистическа керамика от Дионисопол (Балчик) [Elinisticheska keramika ot Dionisopol (Balchik) - Hellenistic pottery from Dionysopolis (Balchik)].// Vekove (Centuries) 2, 62-68. Panajotova, Kr. 1994 - Панайотова, Кр., Надгробни могили в районите на гръцките колонии по българското Черноморие (Nadgrobni mogili v rayonite na gratskite

——, 1985 - Новооткритая надпись Антигона за скифского царя Сариака (Novootkritaya nadpis’ Antigona za skifskogo tsarya Sariaka - A newly discovered inscription of Antigonos for the Scythian king Sariakos).// VDI 3, 47-50. —— (ed.), 1996 - Боговете на Понта (Bogovete na Ponta The gods of the Pont), Varna. ——, 1998 - Notizen zur griechischen Kolonisation am westlichen Schwarzen Meer. Schriftquellen und archäeologische Denkmäler The Greek Colonisation of the Black Sea Area, Historical Interpretation of Archaeology, Historia Einzelschriften 121 (Ed. G. Tsetskhladze), Franz Steiner Verlag Stuttgart, 85-96. ——, 2000 - Българското Черноморие през Архаичния период. Състояние на проучванията (Balgarskoto Chernomorie prez Arkhaichniya period. Sastoyanie na prouchvaniyata - The Bulgarian Black Sea coast in the Archaic period. State of research).// INMB 3, 23-41. Lund, H. 1992 - Lysimachus. A Study in Early Hellenistic Kingship. Routledge. Lungu, V. 1993 - Pour une chronologie de la ceramique attique du nord de la Dobroudja (IVe-IIIe siècles av.n.è), Pontica XXVI, 159-190. ——, 1995 - Une tombe du IVe siecle av. J.-C. dans la necropole tumulaire de la cite d’Orgame - Argamum, Peuce XI, 231-263. Lungu, V., Chera, C. 1986 - Contributii la cunoasterea complexelor funerare de incineratie cu ‘rug-busta’ de epoca elenistica si romana de la Tomis, Pontica XIX, 89-114. Manzova, L. 1978 - Мънзова, Л., Антична скулптура от България (Antichna skulptura ot Balgariya - Antique sculpture from Bulgaria), Sofia. Marinski, J. (ed.) 1998 - Марински, Й., Брегоукрепване и дълготрайно стабилизиране на склоновете на Черноморското крайбрежие (Bregoukrepvane i dulgotrajno stabilizirane na sklonovete na Chernomorskoto krajbrezhie - Coastal consolidation and long-term stabilization of the slopes of the Black Sea coast), Sofia. Mihailov, G. 1970 - Inscriptiones Graecae in Bulgaria Repertae, Vol. I2, Inscriptiones Orae Ponti Euxini, Serdicae. ——, 1979 - Documents epigraphiques de la cote bulgare de la mer Noire. Actes du VIIe Congrès international d’épigraphie grecque et latine, Bucarest-Paris, 263-272. ——, 1997 - Inscriptiones Graecae in Bulgaria Repertae, Vol. V, Inscriptiones novae, addenda et corrigenda, Serdicae. Mikhajlov, A., Dimitrov, M. 1982 - Михайлов, А., Димитров, М., Разкопки на некропола при Балчишката крепост (Razkopki na nekropola pri Balchishkata kerpost Excavations in the necropolis at the fortress of Balchik).// AOR in 1981, Mikhaylovgrad, 78. ——, 1985 - Антични гробове от Балчик (Antichni grobove ot Balchik - Antique graves from Balchik).// Severoiztochna Balgariya - drevnost i suvremie (Northwestern Bulgaria antiquity and present day), 229-232. Minchev, A. 1978 - Минчев, Ал., Елинистическа гробна находка от околностите на Одесос (Elinisticheska grobna nakhodka ot okolnostite na Odesos - A Hellenistic grave find from the vicinity of Odessos).// INMV 14 (29), 103111. ——, 2003 - Odessos. Ancient Greek Colonies in the Black Sea, Volume I. Publications of the Archaeological Institute of Northern Greece 4 (Eds. D. Grammenos, E. Petropoulos), Thessaloniki, 209-278. Mirchev, M. 1958 - Мирчев, М., Амфорните печати от музея във Варна (Amfornite pechati ot muzeya vav Varna - The amphora stamps in the Varna museum), Sofia.

29

ANCIENT GREEK COLONIES IN THE BLACK SEA 2 ——, 1989 - Два тракийски гроба от околностите на Бизоне (Dva trakijski groba ot okolnostite na Bizone - Two Thracian graves from the vicinity of Bizone).// INMV 25 (40), 9-12. Saprykin, S. Yu. 1996 - Сапрыкин, С. Ю., Понтийское царство. Государство греков и варваров в Причерноморье (Pontijskoe tsarstvo. Gosudarstvo grekov i varvarov v Prichernomore - The Pontic Kingdom. A Graeco-barbarian state in the Black Sea area), Moscow. Savova, O. 1971 - Савова, О., Две гробни находки във Варна от Елинистическата епоха (Dve grobni nahodki vav Varna ot Elinisticheskata epokha - Two grave finds in Varna from the Hellenistic Age).// MPK 3, 3-10. Shkorpil, K. 1930-31 - Шкорпил, К., Археологически бележки от Черноморското крайбрежие (Arkheologicheski belezhki ot Chernomorskoto krajbrezhie - Archaeological notes from the Black sea coast).// IAI VІ, 57-88. Shkorpil, Kh., Shkorpil, K. 1892 - Шкорпил, Х., Шкорпил, К., Североизточна България в географическо и археологическо отношение (Severoiztochna Balgariya v geografichesko i arkheologichesko otnoshenie Northeastern Bulgaria in geographic and archaeological aspects).// SbNUNK VІІ, 3-83; VІІІ, 3-58. ——, 1909 - Разкопки на могили до гр. Варна (Razkopki na mogili do gr. Varna - Excavations of tumuli near the city of Varna).// IVAD ІІ, 8-14. ——, 1912 - Балчик (Balchik).// IVAD V, 47-64. Shopova, I. 1998 - Шопова, И., Към проблема за култа на Дионис в Дионисополис (Kam problema za kulta na Dionis v Dionisopolis - To the problem about the cult of Dionysus in Dionysopolis).// in Lazarov, 34-36. Slavova, M. 1998 - Славова, М., Още веднъж за хоротезията от Дионисополис (Oshte vednazh za khoroteziyata ot Dionysopolis - One more time about the horothesia from Dionysopolis).// A 3-4, 57-62. Stoian, I. 1957 - In legatura cu vechimea teritoriului rural al Histriei, SCIV VIII, 1-4, 183-204. Stoyanov, T. 2000a - Стоянов, Т., Тракийският град в Сборяново (Trakijskiyat grad v Sboryanovo - The Thracian city in Sboryanovo), Sofia. ——, 2000b - Контакти на Североизточна Тракия с Анатолия, Кавказ и Близкия изток през Ранножелязната епоха преди гръцката колонизация (Kontakti na Severoiztochna Trakiya s Anatoliya, Kavkaz i Blizkiya Iztok prez Rannozhelyaznata epokha predi gratskata kolonizaciya - The contacts of Northeastern Thrace with Anatolia, Caucasus and the Near East during the Early Iron Age until the time the Greek colonisation).// INMB 3, 50-61 Stoyanov, T., Stoyanova, D. 1997 - The tholos of Odessos, AB 3, 22-33. Tacheva, M. 1995 - About the so-called Scythian kings and their coinage in the Greek cities of Thracia Pontica (the end of the 3rd - 2nd century BC).// in Torbatov, S., Yotov, V., 7-17. ——, 1997 - Тачева, М., Населението в тракийския хинтерланд на гръцките колонии (Naselenieto na trakijskiya khinterland na gratskite kolonii - The population of the Thracian hinterland of the Greek colonies). История на българските земи в древността през елинистическата и римската епоха2 (Istoriya na balgarskite zemi v drevnostta prez elinisticheskata i rimskata epokhi - Ancient history of the Bulgarian lands in the Hellenistic and Roman times), Sofia, 110-117.

kolonii po balgarskoto Chernomorie - Burial mounds in the vicinity of the Greek colonies on the Bulgarian Black Sea coast).// in Zarev et al. (eds.), 81-88. Parovich-Peshikan, M. 1974 - Парович-Пешикан, М., Некрополь Ольвии эллинистического времени (Nekropol’ Ol’vii ellinisticheskogo vremeni - The Olbian necropolis from the Hellenistic age), Kiev. Pick, B., Regling, K 1898 - Die antike Munzen von Dacien und Moesien (Die antike Munzen Nord-Griechenlands), Bd. I. Pippidi, D.M. 1961 - Istros et les Getes au IIIe siècle av. notre ère, Studii Clasice III, 53-66. ——, 1967 - Contributii la istoria veche a Romaniei2, Bucuresti. ——, 1975a - Istros et les Getes au IIe siècle. Observations sur le décret en l’honneur d’Agathoclès, fils d’Antiphilos. Scythica Minora, Editura Academiei Bucuresti - Adolf M. Hakkert B. V. Amsterdam, 31-55. ——, 1975b - Le problème de la maine d’oevre agricole dans les colonies grecques de la Mer Noire. Scythica Minora, Editura Academiei Bucuresti - Adolf M. Hakkert B. V. Amsterdam, 65-80. ——, 1983 - Inscriptiile din Scythia Minor, Vol. I, Bucuresti, 1983. ——, 1984 - Les villes grecques de Scythie Mineure à l’époque hellénistique. Parerga. Ecrits de Philologie, d’Epigraphie et d’Histoire ancienne, Bucuresti-Paris, 118-134. ——, 1984b - Les Macédoniens sur le Bas-Danube de Philippe II à Lysimaque. Parerga. Ecrits de Philologie, d’Epigraphie et d’Histoire ancienne, Bucuresti-Paris, 151-163. Poenaru-Bordea, Gh. 1979 - Les statères ouest-pontiques de type Alexandre le Grand et Lysimaque, RBelgN, 75, 37-51. Popov, V., Mishev, K. 1974 - Попов, В., Мишев, К., Геоморфология на Българското Черноморско Крайбрежие (Geomorfologiya na Balgarskoto Chernomorsko kraybrejie - Geomorphology of the Bulgarian Black Sea coast), Sofia. Preda, C. 1964 - Monede de un tip necunoscut provenind din Dobrogea, SCIV 15, 3, 401-410. ——, 1966 - Citeva morminte din epoca elenistica descoperite la Kallatis, SCIV 17, 1, 137-146. Preshlenov, Chr. 2002 - Прешленов, Хр., Одесос (Odessos, Odessus). Функционално-градоустройствена схема и архитектурни пространства (VІ в. пр. Хр. - VІІ в. сл. Хр.) [Odesos (Odessos, Odessus). Funktsionalnogradoustroystvena skhema i arkhitekturni prostarnstva Odesos (Odessos, Odessus). Functional city layout and architectural spaces].// in Ivanov, R., 59-80. ——, 2003 - Mesambria. Ancient Greek Colonies in the Black Sea, Volume I. Publications of the Archaeological Institute of Northern Greece 4 (Eds. D. Grammenos, E. Petropoulos), Thessaloniki, 157-208. Price, M. J. 1991 - The Coinage in the Name of Alexander the Great and Philip Arrhidaeus, Zurich-London. Rangelov, B. 1998 - Рангелов, Б., Земетресения, цунами, свлачища по Северния бряг на Черно море (Zemetreseniya, tsunami, svlachishta po Severniya bryag na Cherno more - Earthquakes, tsunami and landslides along the northern shore of the Black Sea).// in Marinski, J. (ed.), 46-51. Robert, L. 1959 - Les inscriptions grecques de Bulgarie, RPh 33, 165-236. Rostovtsev, M.I. 1925 - Ростовцев, М. И, Скифия и Боспор (Skifiya i Bospor - Skythia amd Bosporos), Leningrad. Salkin, A. 1986 - Evidence for the earlier foundation of Bizone colony, Thracia Pontica IV, 251-255.

30

MARGARIT DAMYANOV: DIONYSOPOLIS, ITS TERRITORY AND NEIGHBOURS IN THE PRE-ROMAN TIMES Vasilchin, I. 1988 - Василчин, И., Глинени лампи от Черноморското крайбрежие на Южна Добруджа (Glineni lampi ot Chernomorskoto kraybrejie na Yujna Dobrudja - Clay lamps from the Black Sea coast of Southern Dobrudja).// INMV 24(39), 59-70. ——, 1993 - Раннотракийски гроб от с. Батово, Добричко (Rannotrakijski grob ot s. Batovo, Dobrichko - An Early Thracian Grave from the village of Batovo, district of Dobrich)// Dobrudzha 10, 21-26. Velkov, I 1931/1932 - Велков, Ив., Бележки за колонизацията и градовете по нашето Черноморско крайбрежие (Belejki za kolonizaciyata i gradovete po nasheto Chernomoesko kraybrejie - Notes on the colonisation and the towns along the Bulgarian Black Sea coast).// IBID XI/XII, 33-53. Velkov, V. 1990 - Велков, В., Из културната история на Дионисополис през ІІ в. пр. н. е. (Iz kulturnata istoriya na Dionysopolis prez 2 v. pr. n. e. - On the cultural history of Dionysopolis in 2nd c. BC).// in Bozhilov, I. Dimitrov, M., 1-5. Venedikov, I. 1963 - Венедиков, И., Аполония. Разкопките в некропола на Аполония през 1947-1949 (Apoloniya. Razkopkite na nekropola na Apoloniya prez 1947-1949 Apollonia. Excavations in the necropolis of Apollonia in 1947-1949), Sofia. Vulpe, R. 1955 - Sapaturile de la Tariverdi (1954), SCIV VI, 34, 543-551. Youroukova, J. 1977 - Nouvelles donnés sur la chronologie des rois scythes en Dobroudja, Thracia IV, 105-121. Yurukova, J. 1992 - Юрукова, Й., Монетите на тракийските племена и владетели (Monetite na trakijskite plemena i vladeteli - The coins of the Thracian tribes and rulers), Sofia. Zarev, K. et al. (eds.) 1994 - Зарев, К. и др. (ред.), Надгробните могили в Югоизточна Европа. Първи международен симпозиум ‘Севтополис’ (Nadgrobnite mogili v Yugoiztochna Evropa. Parvi mezhdunaroden simpozium - Burial mounds in Southeastern Europe. First international symposium ‘Seuthopolis’), Vol. І. Zhuglev, K. 1955 - Жуглев, К., Разкопки и проучвания на могила №1 - Копринка. Част ІІ (Razkopki i prouchvaniya na mogila N1 - Koprinka, Chast II - Excavations and studies of Tumulus No. 1 - Koprinka, part 2).// GSU FIF XLIX, 33-221.

——, 1999 - За хоротезията от Dionysopolis (Thracia), IGB V 5011 [Za khoroteziyata ot Dionysopolis (Thracia), IGB V 5011 - About the horothesia of Dionysopolis (Thracia), IGB V 5001].// Minalo (The Past), 4, 8-16. ——, 2000 - Власт и социум в римска Тракия и Мизия (Vlast i sotsium v rimska Trakiya i Misiya - Power and society in Roman Thrace and Moesia), Sofia. Terenozhkin, A.I. (ed.) 1973 - Тереножкин. А.И., Скифские древности (Skifskie drevnosti - Skythian antiquities), Kiev. Tonceva, G. 1980 - Chronologie du Hallstatt ancien dans la Bulgarie de nord-est, Studia Thracica 5. Toncheva, G. 1953 - Тончева, Г., Сондажни разкопки край блатото Тузлата (Sondazhni razkopki kraj blatoto Tuzlata Trench excavations near the Tuzlata swamp).// IVAD IX, 119-123. ——, 1964 - Потънали пристанища (Potanali pristanishta Sunken ports), Varna. ——, 1967 - Архаични материали от Одесос (Arkhaichni materiali ot Odesos - Archaic materials from Odessos).// IAI ХХХ, 157-180. ——, 1972 - Новооткрито тракийско селище от Раннохалщатската епоха край Варна (Novootkrito trakijsko selishte ot Ranno-khalshtatskata epoha kraj Varna - Newly discovered Thracian settlement from the Early Halstatt period near Varna).// ИНМВ 8 (23), 260-263. Tonkova, M. 2003 - Late Iron Age Pit-Sanctuaries in Thrace: The Contribution of the Studies at Gledacevo.// Thracia XV, 479-504. Topalov, S. 1993 - Formes premonetaires de moyens d’echange. Les fleches-monnaies coulees d’Apollonie du Pont, Sofia. Tafrali, O. 1927 - Le cite pontique de Dionysopolis, Paris 1927. ——, 1928 - Dionysopolis. Analele Dobrogei, Vol. II, 5-19. Torbatov, S. 1993 - Торбатов, С., Антично периодично тържище край с. Одърци, Добричко (Antichno periodichno tarzhishte kraj s. Odartsi, Dobrichko - Ancient seasonal market-place near the village of Odurtsi, District of Dobrich).// INMV 29 (44), 47-63. ——, 2002 - Укрепителната система на провинция Скития (края на ІІІ - VІІ в.) [Ukrepitelnata sistema na provintsiya Skithiya (kraya na 3 - 7 v.) - The Defence System of the Late Roman Province of Scythia (the end of the 3rd - the 7th century AD)], Veliko Tarnovo. Torbatov, S., Yotov, V. (eds.) 1995 - Numismatic and sphragistic contributions to ancient and medieval history of Dobroudja (Dobroudja 12).

31

ANCIENT GREEK COLONIES IN THE BLACK SEA 2

Figure 1. Map of the region with the placenames (ancient and modern) mentioned in the text; map of Dionysopolis and its immediate surroundings: solid contour - the fortified area of the Hellenistic settlement according to O. Tafrali; hatched contour - the same area according to M. Dimitrov; shaded areas - positively identifies and hypothetical areas of the necropolis. 32

MARGARIT DAMYANOV: DIONYSOPOLIS, ITS TERRITORY AND NEIGHBOURS IN THE PRE-ROMAN TIMES

Figure 2. Epigraphic monuments from Dionysopolis.

33

ANCIENT GREEK COLONIES IN THE BLACK SEA 2

Figure 3. Hellenistic statues from Dionysopolis. 34

MARGARIT DAMYANOV: DIONYSOPOLIS, ITS TERRITORY AND NEIGHBOURS IN THE PRE-ROMAN TIMES

Figure 4. Finds from the burial mound on the plateau. 35

ANCIENT GREEK COLONIES IN THE BLACK SEA 2

Figure 5. Chance finds from the territory of the present-day town of Balchi 36

Bizone Asen Emilov Salkin*

Geografical Conditions in Dobrudzha The results of the annual underwater archaeological research along the Dobrudzha Black Sea coast, which started in 1979 (Salkin, Porozhanov, Popov, 1980, 176) and are still ongoing, proved that there were commercial contacts between the Aegean world and the west Black Sea in the second half of the 2nd millennium BC. The petrographic analysis of the stone anchors (Ivanov, Petrova, Simeonov, Choloev, Lukanov, Pimpirev, 1985) found along the Bulgarian Black Sea coast showed that 90 % of them were of local origin. The same percentage applies to the finds of the Dobrudzha Black Sea coast. This evidence shows that there was a well developed and dynamic local coastal navigation during the 2nd millennium BC. During fieldwork research at the archaeological site of ‘Yaylata’, located 20 km eastwards of Kavarna on the seaside, six stone anchors with one opening were found on the lower plateau, reused in later buildings and probably made in some local workshop (Salkin, 1984, 46). There was no evidence showing that the anchors found were used in the sea, which suggests that they had some religious purpose. A lot of anchor stock was also found, which was submitted to petrographic analysis. They had no analogies from the Bulgarian coast.

Dobrudzha in its greatest part is a high plateau 200 to 400 m above the sea-level tilted towards the river Danube and the Black Sea (Davidova, 1984, 9). The Black Sea Dobrudzha coast is a vast plain with maximum elevations in its southwest part and minimum elevations in the east, north and northeast part, where at the Durankulak and the Shabla Lakes it nearly reaches the sea-level. The ravines, that crease it, are slightly inclined towards the sea. Batovska Valley, Balchik, Kavarna, Bolata, Durankulak, the north and the east of Dobrudzha, which were part of the Sarmatian Sea, became dry land and that was accompanied with strong tectonic processes. The central and southwest part of Dobrudzha started gradually to rise, while the east one started to sink and that process went on during the late Holocene period and historic time. In terms of such motions of the land, the Rumanian archaeologist Banu reports that the lowering of the sealevel by 4 m along the north Dobrudzha coast started during the 1st century BC and finished in the 1st and 2nd centuries AD. This would suggests that a number of residential districts in some coastal settlements and parts of the land were submerged under the water. Land sliding processes are very intense along the Bulgarian Black Sea coast and especially in Dobrudzha land-sliding area, which is marked by its great seismicity in the area of Shabla, Kavarna, Kaliakra reaching magnitudes of 9 or 10 (Popov, Mishev, 1974). Disastrous earthquakes took place at different historical periods and were reported in various historical sources, for example landslides in Balchik, Kavarna, Taukliman, Yaylata.

The finds are dated from the end of the 2nd millennium BC to the middle of the 1st millennium BC. This fact shows that there was regular navigation all along the 2nd and the 1st millennia BC. The other 10 % of the anchors which were not made of the local stone had probably belonged to Greek or Phoenician ships that navigated along today’s Bulgarian coast. All this confirms the Carian thalassocracy from the end of the 9th century BC mentioned by Diodoros of Sicily (Danov, 1963, 81-86). Furthermore, today’s Shabla was found to have been a Carian port called Karon Limen. What is more, the inhabitants of Caria region in the southwest part of Asia Minor had their own ports along the Dobrudzha Black Sea coast. It is logical to suggest that this was the reason why the metropolis of Miletus, situated in the hinterland of Caria, created the earliest and the most numerous colonies along the West Black Sea coast between the 7th and 5th centuries BC.

Dobrudzha and East Mediterranean World in the 2nd and 1st Millennium BC Theories have recently appeared proving the existence of intensive economic and political contacts in ancient Thrace, between northeast Bulgaria and east Mediterranean world as far back as the end of the early Bronze era (late 3rd millennium BC) (Katincharov, 1979, 43-48). These contacts increased after the middle of the 2nd millennium BC. That was the time when a Getic tribal community was established in the northeast of Bulgaria (Yordanov, 1984, 74).

It is very difficult to define the ethnic character of the vessels which sailed during the 2nd and the first half of the 1st millennium BC. Old Greek myths describing the

* Asen Emilov Salkin is an archaeologist. He is the head of archaeological excavations at the archaeological complex ‘Yailata’ near the town of Kavarna, Bulgaria. He is also a leader of the sub aquatic archaeological research along the Dobrudja littoral. He was a member of the expedition that explored the Greek colony Bizone and the cape Kaliakra in Bulgaria ,etc. Address: Mr. Asen Salkin, 30, Bulgaria Str., Kavarna 9650, Bulgaria. E-mail: [email protected]

37

ANCIENT GREEK COLONIES IN THE BLACK SEA 2 navigation of the Argonauts reflect accomplished contacts of the local inhabitants with the earliest Greek sea-farers.

centuries of the early Iron Age there were several centres of Getic state political unions, proved by uncovered axescepters, scepters and other symbols of rulers’ political and religious power. An example of merging the political and the religious power in the hands of the ruler-priest are the accounts of the cult of the Getic deified king Zalmoxis, mentioned by Herodotus. This strange deity ruled over vast territories reaching beyond the boundaries of the Getic tribal community. He reflected, in different versions, an already established doctrine about the rulerpriest as a natural connection between the human and the divine. Apart from Herodotus interesting additional information is given by Helanicus who does not only insist on the early appearance of the anthropodemon Zalmoxis, but also gives interesting details about Getic religious mysteries, which are not described by Herodotus. ‘The Terizes (Teretises according to Photius) and the Krobyzoi immortalize by saying that the dead go to Zalmoxis and come back again. They always believe that this is true. They offer sacrifices and prepare feasts because the deceased will come back.’ (Hec. 171 - Steph. Buz. 634, 11). Herodotus, Helanicus and Hecateus place Krobyzoi westwards in the territory among the rivers Atris, Noes and Artanes. They may have inhabited a part of the Dobrudzha Black Sea coast as well.

In 1972 a polymetal ingot in the shape of a stretched oxhide was found in the bay of cape Kaliakra, in the depth of 7 m. It is 25 cm long, 12 cm wide, 1.4 cm thick and weighs 1455 gr (Toncheva, 1973, 17-24). It is an alloy of 32 % gold, 18 % silver, 43 % copper and some alloys of sulphur and nickel (Figure 1). Those ingots were one of the first pre-coin measures of exchange during the second half of the 2nd millennium BC. Copper ingots were found in Bulgaria (Karayotov, 1978, 12-16), two copper ingots were found in Varna; George Bass found a whole ship loaded with copper ingots near the cape Helidonia (Bass, 1982). There are pictures of gold ingots in Egypt, in Tell el-Amarna, which belonged to the time of the heretic pharaoh Amenhotep IV, known as Akhenaton. Presumably, the unique ingot from Kaliakra appeared on the Dobrudzha coast by the intercession of Mycenaean merchants; it was made either in Egypt or on Cyprus (Bonev, 1982, 14). The unique ingot from Kaliakra does not show only how far of the north the Aegean and the East Mediterranean sea-farers reached, but it also emphasizes the commercial character of those voyages and contacts.

It is also necessary to mention the hypothesis about massive invasions of Kimerians and Treres in Northeast Bulgaria during the 8th - 7th centuries and the existence of intensive ethnic, cultural, military and political relationships with the Getic tribal community (Artamonov, 1974, 19, 23; Kitov, 1979, 14). The scholars who support this opinion refer to Strabo and to the archaeological material found during the excavations in Tsarev Brod (Endzhe), Sveshtary, Belogradets and Golyamo Delchevo, emphasizing the funeral site near Belogradets (Toncheva, 1975, 49-52). However, according to the excavators, these sites must be dated to the period from the beginning of the late Bronze Age and up to the middle of the 7th century and are connected with an old Thracian political and religious tradition of worshiping heroized local rulers (Yordanov, 1979, 3132).

Ethnic, Cultural, Political and Religious Processes in Dobrudzha during the Early Iron Age As it was already mentioned, the Getic tribal community was established in the end of the second millennium BC in the Northeast Bulgaria. Some scholars believe that the tribe was Geto-Dacian or Geto-Thracian. (Russu, 1968, 73); although, there is enough evidence in the works of many ancient writers, which precisely define the boundaries between the Dacians and the Getae (Strabo, 7, 3, 12). ‘But there is also another division of the Getic land, remembered from old times: one part of the tribe accordingly is called Dacian, the other – Getae. Getae are called those who spread towards Pontos and to the east, while Dacians are those who live in the opposite direction…’ Hecateus (Hec. Fr. 170, 171, 189, 190) listed the following tribes: Crobyzoi, Terizoi, Matukethoi and Mygethoi, which were included in the Getic tribal community. The introduction of iron in the life of the Getae accelerated their social, economic and political development. Efficiency of labour increased, the process of its division went simultaneously with the process of determining and confirming the social privileges of the tribal aristocracy. There were already all the necessary premises for the appearance of a state institution of the Getic cultural community in today’s northeast Bulgaria. (Yordanov, 1984, 80).

Bizone during the Classical and Hellenistic Age The first who tried to localize Bizone was Ireče. He believed that Bizone must have been at the place of Kavarna port, because of what he noticed in the town: preserved relics of fortifications, Greek inscriptions and most of all because of the propitious location of the settlement on the coast (Ireček, 1899, 839). The port of Kavarna is the most convenient place for mooring along the entire Dobrudzha Black Sea coast – the coastline is low; there is a bay which is under the lee of three hills (up to 105 m high): Chayir Borun, Shaitan Bayir and cape Chirakman; broad valley formed after the merging of two valleys full of spring water; and easy access to the Dobrudzha plateau. Later, in the 1930s in the course of

The analysis of the archaeological monuments from the geographical region of the Getic cultural community shows that at the end of the Bronze Age and the first 38

ASEN EMILOV SALKIN: BIZONE several years the headmaster of the Rumanian High School in the town of Marculescu (Marculescu, 1934, 145) surveyed the plateau of the cape Chirakman, conducted fieldwork and reached the conclusion that the acropolis of the settlement was on Chirakman, while the settlement itself was located between Chirakman Bayir and Chayir Borun down in the valley (Figure 2). Marculescu found and published a lot of material and dated the establishment of the colony to the 6th century BC, although the findings in this possession belonged to a later period – not earlier than the 5th century BC. The earliest reference of Bizone is in an inscription from Istros from late 3rd and early 2nd century BC. The inscription mentions the siege of Histria and Bizone laid by the local Thracian dynast Zoltes, who was devastating their territories. (Karuyshkovski 1971, 40-41). The rich town of Histria gave a ransom of 600 gold staters, but obviously Bizone could not afford it for there is nothing in the text to show that Bizone took part in the negotiations. The text enables us to conclude that not only the colonies suffered, but also their territories and the rich Thracian settlements situated there.

Apollonia (Sozopol) is situated Bizone, much of which is demolished by an earthquake; Krunoi (Balchik), Odessos (Varna)…’ This information is repeated by Pomponius Mela in the year 44 AD: ‘Here (i.e. near cape Tirizis) there was the town of Bizone, destroyed by an earthquake.’

If we are to believe the ancient writers Skymnos and Anonimus, some Megarean settlers from Mesambria established in the end of the 5th century BC one of the latest colonies on the West Black Sea coast – Bizone (Skymnos, Orbis descriptio, v. 758). Pseudo-Skymnos (1st century BC) mentions the vague origins of the settlement: ‘some say that this small town (polichnion) is a barbarian settlement, others say that it is a Mesambrian colony.’

As a result of the fieldwork near the village of Bozhurets we found an earth bank 6 to 8 m wide and with preserved height of up to 0.80 m. The bank running from southeast to northwest crosses the plateau between the steep slopes towards the sea and the deep valley running towards Bozhurets. The bank does not allow the access to Bizone and the nearby Thracian settlement. Inside the base of the bank there are crumbled stones, mixed with earth and probably on the top of it there was a primitive earthen fortification with a wooden palisade, and perhaps it was built in a hurry due to some kind of danger (Salkin, 1989, 9). Over the bank two Thracian burials were uncovered: the first was with cremation on the spot and the following objects were found in the grave: a bowl, a balsamarium, funeral wreath of three clay fruit, a bronze mirror, a bronze ring, an iron blade, an iron strigil and beads of glass paste. The second was an inhumation burial of a child buried with a juglet, a bell-shaped ceramic dish, iron blade, ‘Megarean’ cup (Figure 3), a small amphora and beads of glass paste, among which there were two gold beads of biconical shape and filigreed decoration.

In 1972 regular archaeological explorations began along the plateau of the cape Chirakman and along its southern slopes towards the sea; in additin some fielwalking was undertaken several kilometres west of the cape. The researchers discovered new interesting facts about the history of the town of Bizone (Vasilev, Kitov, Kuzmanov, Sotirov, Salkin, 1972, 58). The plateau of the cape of Chirakman, where the colony of Bizone was situated, has the shape of a triangle whose base runs southeast-northwest. The area covers about 30 decares. The plateau is confined to all sides by sheer slopes, 105 m high, and there is a narrow neck of land, which connects it with the Dobrudzha plateau. In the west the plateau is as wide as 1.5 km while 4 km west of the cape by the village of Bozhurets it is as narrow as 650 m.

The archaeological excavations conducted in 1953-1956 by archaeologists from Varna, proved the existence of a settlement in the 3rd millennium BC. They also proved that the colony of Bizone was built on top of a Thracian settlement (Mirchev, Toncheva, Dimitrov, 1962, 31). The majority of ancient writers expressed the view that Bizone is a Thracian name (Skymnos, Strabo, Apianus, Anonimus). It is close to the names of other Thracian settlements along the Black Sea coast: Bizie, Karabizie, Trapobizie, Urdobiza (Velkov, 1982, 26). The names of many of the settlements repeat those of the Thracian tribes, which inhabited the respective region, for example Tirizis, which derives from the name of the Thracian tribe Tirizoi. There is more evidence for Bizone from the first centuries AD, when the ancient writers mention a disastrous earthquake that engulfed the settlement. Researchers have not been able to find out exactly when it took place, but it probably happened in the middle of the 1st century BC. In ‘Description of Pontos Euxeinos’ which duplicates the evidence of Pseudo-Skymnos it is said that Bizone became a victim of an earthquake somewhere around the 1st century AD. The Greek geographer Strabo gives more precise information about the date of the earthquake – the middle of the 1st century BC. He writes: ‘Between Kallatis (Mangalia) and

It is logical to accept that the funerals were Thracian, and the fact that nearly all burial objects were imported shows the influence which the nearby Greek colony of Bizone exerted over the Thracian population in the hinterland. The graves are dated to the 2nd or 1st century BC, which makes us think that the defensive fortification must be connected with an epigraphic monument mentioned above: the inscription about the attack of the Thracian dynast Zoltes on the colonies of Histria and Bizone and their hinterland (Pippidi, 1975, 49) in 180 BC. It may be suggested that the local Thracians and the inhabitants of Bizone defended themselves together against the mutual danger. The fact that over the useless earth bank two rich funerals were found shows that after 39

ANCIENT GREEK COLONIES IN THE BLACK SEA 2 the danger had passed life in the Thracian settlement went on.

and the development of economic relations. Before we start analyzing these issues it is necessary to define the economic and geographic disposition of Bizone and its population in comparison with the rest of the Greek citycolonies along the West Black Sea coast.

In the eastern part of the Chirakman plateau on the south slope which was torn apart after the earthquake in the 1st century BC, archaeologists found a well, split into two by the sea-level at the height of 50 m (Salkin, 1984a, 287). A similar well was discovered in the western part of the plateau in the narrowest part at 100 m above sea-level. The second well was uncovered only at a depth of 3 m and during the excavations a seal on the mouth of a Heraclean amphora were found as well as Hellenistic pottery. At the site of the first well few hundreds of fragments of Hellenistic ceramics were found as well as human bones among which parts of two skeletons which were examined (the anthropological investigation was done by Nely Kondova-Cholakova and Slavcho Cholakov from the Institute of anthropology is not published).

According to Brashinski (Brashinski, 1970, 7; Shelov, 1967, 220) ‘the West Pontos’ consisted of two parts: southwest Black Sea coast and northeast Black Sea coast. He suggests that Bizone was exactly on the border of the two. He promotes the idea that all the trade of Bizone passed through Odessos, which allows him to include it into the southwest Black Sea coast. He was probably influenced by Mirchev (Mirchev, 1958, 8), who thinks that there was brisk trade between Bizone and Odessos. As we shall see below this statement is wrong as far as later period – 3rd to 1st centuries BC – is concerned. At that time today’s Dobrudzha coast carried its own trade with some of the main providers of wine and olive oil (Banev, Lazov, Salkin, 1985, 29-33). That is why it is logical to draw the boundary line between southwest and northwest coast through Odessos. The economic relations of the west Black Sea coast include extraordinary wide range of problems, which are far from solved (Danov, 1938; Blavatskaya, 1952), but the amount of amphora stamps gives serious grounds for defining the specificity of the economic relations with Scythia Minor in the early pre-Roman Age.

Skeleton No1: Male, aged 25, fragments reserved are from the skull, lower limbs and backbone. What is interesting in this case is that on the front surface of the left femure there was a trace of a slash injury. As the bone was fragmented posthumously, the exact measures of the injured part cannot be defined but detected were the signs of healing process. The second skeleton belonged to a teenager - about 16 or 17 years old. On the one hand the wells show us how water was supplied to the ancient town of Bizone, but on the other hand these wells pose some interesting questions. Apart from the fact that inside the wells we found only Hellenistic pottery, in well No1 human bones were found, almost ‘in a complete set’. Obviously, the wells were deliberately filled in as early as Hellenistic age and not only with earth and puttery but with human corpses, as well. This makes us think that there was another attack against Bizone which was successful for the raiders, who slaughtered a part of the population, and the wells were filled up with earth and bodies of the slaughtered inhabitants of Bizone. This fact can be connected with two events from the political history of Bizone – Zoltes’s assault in 180 BC and Marcus Luculus’s punitive expedition in 73 BC. It is quite logical to believe that the event happened during the punitive expedition, because after that no one made any attempts to restore the wells and use them again.

The main directions of the maritime trade of the West Pontic cities were defined by their historically established trade partners: the Aegean islands and the major colonies along the south Black Sea coast: Sinope and Heraclea Pontica. The Aegean islands – Rhodes, Thasos, Chios, Cos – were for a long time the major trade partners of the cities situated along the coast of the ‘West Pontos’ and in Thrace (Velkov, 1963, 25; Danov, 1947, 138). This orientation of the southwest Black Sea coastal cities was only natural taking into consideration the proximity of the Mediterranean markets, especially of the city centres in the north Aegean. Their economic penetration started during the second half of the 7th and 6th century BC (Lazov, 1985, 256-261). It is in Dobrudzha that pottery and amphorae from Chios are best registered. Rhodes became active on the Pontic market at almost the same time and after a certain decrease of its activity the island kept on being a consistent presence along the entire west and north Black Sea coast.

ECONOMIC RELATIONS

If we look carefully at the dynamics of the Rhodian import we will see that there was an essential difference in the character of the trade contacts which Rhodes had with the cities in the south part of the West Black Sea coast and those in the north one. For a period of about one century Rhodes was the major foreign trade partner for Odessos, but for Bizone, Histria and Kallatis the island was not the main importer (Mirchev, 1958, 25).

Stamps on Amphorae The importance of foreign trade relations for the economic development of a certain region is doubtless. Their appearance and dynamics have been studied carefully and thoroughly. Especially amphora stamps are a significant source of information in this respect, because they give us evidence for both the appearance 40

ASEN EMILOV SALKIN: BIZONE The pottery and the amphora stamps show limited but constant connections with the West Black Sea coast in the opening stages of amphora sealing in Rhodes, which intensified considerably in the middle of this period. For the south part of the ‘West Pontos’ Rhodes remained the major foreign trade partner, for the north part it was a significant importer but not the dominating power on the market.

which had come from the early centuries of the preRoman period. In 1985 at the Second Congress of Thracia Pontica a Greek inscription from Dionysopolis was reported, which defines the boundaries of the territories of Dionysopolis, Kallatis and the Thracian king Kotys III (Banev, Dimitrov, 1985, 34-37; Slavova, 1998, 57-62). We make this digression from our presentation in order to prove that the Dobrudzha Black Sea coast was a significant grain-producing region, which attracted foreign traders’ attention, and this can be seen in the text: ‘…having learned this from the old documents we decide as follows: to leave this to the citizens of Dionysopolis and to the redeemers from the Pontos, as for Aphrodiziona the citizens of Dionysopolis agreed to let king Kotys use it to send grain.’ The researchers date this inscription to AD 15, when Dionyssopolis and Kallatis joined the newly established Roman province of Moesia (Slavova, 1998, 59). It was the time when the role of the Greek colonies along the West Black Sea coast as jobbers in the trade between the Thracian population and continental Greece lost its previous importance and faded away, while the years of Roman patronage over the Thracian tributary kingdom were a period of stable political and economic development (Danov, 1969, 154).

The same was the character of the Thasian import along the West Black Sea coast. Before Rhodes had ceased the market of the ‘West Pontos’ Thassian supremacy was indisputable in its south part. The north part of the ‘West Pontos’ including the cities in Dobrudzha also maintained active trade relations with Thasos but neither Thasos nor Rhodes were their major trade partner. The amphora stamps from Kavarna come from the hinterland of the ancient town of Bizone as well as from the excavations at cape Chirakman. As a result of a survey of 1093 amphora stamps it is established that the amphorae were produced in different Greek cities and their proportion is as follows: in Rhodes – 27 %; in Sinope – 27 %; in Heraclea Pontica – 24 %; in Thasos – 3 %; in Cos – 2.5 %, and there were a few from Paros, Cnydos and Chersonessos. It is necessary, however, to note that the percentage of the amphora handles from Rhodes must be reduced by half because of the fact that in Rhodes both handles were stamped.

An interesting fact is that Bizone is not mentioned in the inscription although it was located between Dionysopolis and Kallatis. It is logical to suggest that after the earthquake in the 1st century BC Bizone went through a tough period of restoration, furthermore, the inhabitants of the city moved from the plateau of Chirakman to settle in the valley near the coast. In spite of this A. Avram promotes the idea that the reference to the old documents and the delineation of the boundaries of Dionysopolis, Kallatis and the land of the Thracian king Kotys III were made because of the restoration of Bizone after the earthquake (Avram, 1991, 103-137). An attempt to localize Aphrodision was made (Torbatov, 2002, 260264). According to this hypothesis it was situated in the middle of the 14 kilometre distance between Dionysopolis and Bizone. Sure enough there was a Thracian settlement on the coastal line as well as caves used as granaries similar to those at the port of Kavarna. It is logical to connect this with the text of the inscription which in its turn connects Aphrodizion with the grain supply of King Kotys’s Thracians. Here is the place to go back to the beginning of the presentation where I stated that the boundary between the Southwest and Northwest Black Sea coast is Dobrudzha, whose resources to export grain were considerable and allowed the cities along the Northwest Black Sea coast to carry on their own trade with partners from other parts of the Black Sea coast as well as from the Mediterranean and played the role of jobbers between the Greek traders and the local Thracian population. The dynamics of the development of the trade of Heraclea with the cities from the ‘West Pontos’ shows

The data show that the major contacts of the maritime trade of the cities from the northwest part of the Pontos were directed to the great colonies along the South Black Sea coast – Sinope and Heraclea Pontica. This shows that the grain-producing areas in Dobrudzha were a convenient place to sell the Heraclean and Synopian products which consisted mainly of wine and olive oil. Heraclea appeared on the Dobrudzha market almost as soon as it started stamping the amphorae and the data reveal that it quickly gained control. The prevailing position of the Heraclean import in Dobrudzha lasted until the beginning of the 3rd century BC, after that Sinope and Rhodes took over. The fact that considerable part (more than the half) of the amphora stamps were from Aristocrat’s workshop, allows some researchers to suggest that in this case the stamps do not show regular and constant relations but rather the import of single big purchase of Heraclean wine (Brashinski, 1970, 9). What is more, this trade was carried on through the mediation of Odessos (Mirchev, 1958, 8). Even though in this case everything points to the fact that it was some article, adequate in amount, which could only be grain. During excavations on the slopes of Chirakman Bayir and Shaitan Bayir at the port of Kavarna the archaeologists found harbour works for storing and dispatching grain dated from the 4th to the 6th century AD (Salkin, 1987, p. 25-28; Salkin, 1994, 245). This proves the existence of a preserved tradition for storing and dispatching grain

41

ANCIENT GREEK COLONIES IN THE BLACK SEA 2 that to the north Heraclean economic expansion widens from north to south – Histria, Tomis, Kallatis, Bizone. In the south ports – Odessos, Mesambria, Apollonia – Heraclean stamp from a later period prevail. In general the trade infiltration of Heraclea along the West Black Sea coast developed in two stages: at the first one, chronologically the earlier one, it was directed from north to south. The endmost point of their maritime route was Bizone, where the early Heraclean stamps show complete predominance over Thasos, which at that time controlled the south markets. The second route followed by the Heraclean goods passed south, along the south coast – from Apollonia, Deultum, Mesambria to Odessos, which was probably the endmost point of this process both geographically and chronologically.

5th group – 20 names 6th group – 26 names 5th or 6th group – 4 names Data show that the intensification of the import from Sinope includes the last two chronological groups, i. e. the second half of the 2nd century BC. During the period of the 4th group the trade between Sinope and Bizone was quite humble in comparison with the other cities along the Northwest Pontos (for example Kallatis). During the next periods, however, it constantly and consistently increased in intensity and amount (Brashinski, 1970, 10). To this effect Brashinski’s conclusion that Kallatis had close trade relations with Bizone is not confirmed; at least it is not confirmed that the import to Bizone passed through Kallatis. Stamped Synopian amphorae appeared in Kallatis as early as the first period and the zenith was in the period of the 4th group. In Bizone, however, during the period of the 5th and 6th groups there was a dramatic increase of the import while in Kallatis there was a sharp drop. This confirms once more the statement that Bizone exported independently considerable amounts of grain to Sinope. The general dynamic of the economic relations between Sinope and the settlements along the coast of the Northwest Pontos show that this Greek city steadily gains control over the north sea route around the Crimean peninsula. Kallatis was obviously naturally established centre on a busy trade route, while Bizone was the endmost point of the trade relations along the north way. Despite the favourable conditions along the south sea route Sinope could not get the upper hand in the trade along the south part of the ‘West Pontos’, where the Aegean islands dominated. The situation was different in Dobrudzha: contacts which cities of Scythia Minor had with Aegaeis were important but were not of paramount importance.

The most significant trade partner of Bizone and Dobrudzha was Sinope. The percentage of the Synopian amphorae in Bizone and the area around it is the highest of all (Banev, Lazov, Salkin, 1985, 29-33). According to Maksimova Sinope established a political and economic system of towns along the South Black Sea coast in as early as the 4th century BC. Thanks to that it became a significant exporter not only of olive oil, but of roof-tiles, pithoi and architectural terracotta (Maksimova, 1956, 67). The topic concerning the Synopian production along the West and North Black Sea coast has been repeatedly discussed by different scholars (Danov, 1939, 223; Mirchev, 1958, 50, No.224; Blavatskaya, 1952, 134, 183; Brashinski, 1970, 9-10; Brashinski, 1963, 132-145). The first to attempt the classification of the amphorae from Sinope was Grakov, who included in his survey more than 9000 amphora stamps from the West and the North Black Sea coast. Vasilenko, Tsehmistrenko, Semenov, and Brashinski have tried to change Grakov’s classification (Vasilenko, 1972; Tsehmistrenko, 1958, 56-68; Brashinski, 1963, 133). Brashinski states that the amphora stamping appeared at the beginning of the 4th century BC, but this does not disturb Grakov’s main typological scheme. The archaeological surrounding of these finds (the amphorae) does not permit us to date them precisely but, nevertheless, even the relative chronological scheme shows essential facts about the dynamic of trade relations between Sinope on the one hand and Bizone and its hinterland on the other hand. In accordance with the general ideology of the relative chronological systems, the names of the registered astynomoi from Sinope are divided into chronological groups. The absolute chronology of the groups is still to be specified, but despite the differences the variation does not vary essentially. If we accept the prevailing opinion that there are six chronological groups (according to Grakov), the names of the astynomoi on the amphora stamps from Bizone and its hinterland are allocated as follows:

Coins Coins of the Hellenistic Age in Kavarna museum are not numerous but nevertheless they allow us to characterize the economic relations which Bizone had with the rest of its neighbours around the Black Sea and in Northeast Bulgaria. They also provide additional information confirming our conclusions, derived from the analysis of the amphora seals (Yordanov 1982, 57). Coins minted in Kallatis (Mangalia) are the most numerous; the coins from Dionysopolis (Balchik) are second in number. The coins of the Scythian rulers Canithes, Tanusa, Akrosa and Sariakos are also considerable in number (Figure 4), which is more a proof of the economic influence of the Scythian state unions in the last centuries of the 1st millennium BC than a proof of their political influence (Yurukova, 1977, 105). There are also coins of Philip II of Macedonia, Alexander III the Great and Philip III Arideus. Thracian kings are represented by the coins of Rhemetalcus, Seuthes III and Lysimachus. There are no coins from the cities along the Southwest Black Sea coast

3rd group – 2 names 4th group – 5 names 42

ASEN EMILOV SALKIN: BIZONE which prove the lack of economic interests in that part of the Black Sea coast.

the walls were built with rusticated stones as big as 1.60 m. The building was probably deserted before the earthquake which happened in the middle of the 1st century BC, because archaeologists did not find any debris of destruction, or any finds. In the bank below the building huge amount of Hellenistic pottery including 350 amphora handles with stamps, imported fine pottery, local Thracian pottery, fragments of coat with its polychrome decoration and other material were found.

In 1981 during underwater research in the bay of cape Kaliakra a Greek inscription of three lines was found. It was completely preserved and is a dedication inscription. (Lazarov, 1985, 47-50). Here is the text: ‘I, Antigon Heraclitus of Stybera Macedonian in the time of the king Sariakos to the Dioscuri I dedicate.’ The inscription gives us interesting information about the Scythian kings in North Dobrudzha and about the dissemination of the cult of the Dioscuri. The Dioscuri and the attributes of their cult are widely used in the coinage of the Scythian kings in Dobrudzha. The inscription was probably a part of an altar, where the twins Castor and Polydeuces, who were patrons of sailors and navigation, were presented. The inscription was found at the very coast of cape Kaliakra, at the only place accessible from the upper plateau of Tirizis, which shows that there was a sanctuary of the Dioscuri. The cult of the twins was particularly popular in Tomis and was closely connected with the Samothracian deities in the cities along the West Black Sea coast (Pippidi, 1975, 94)

During the excavations at the acropolis of the settlement an early Christian basilica was discovered and around it parts of walls of buildings from the Hellenistic period (Vasilev, Salkin, Gerasimov, Sotirov, Cholakov, 1977, 137). Their construction, typically for the age, is dry or with mud. Relics of architecture were found outside the settlement, as well. To the west under the graves of the late mediaeval necropolis a pottery store was found with amphorae and local Thracian ceramics. Its construction is of shattered and processed stones laid with mud, arranged carefully to make the front and the rear face of the wall look the same. In the narrow part of the avenues of approach to Chirakman stone boulders of square construction and fragments of imported Greek pottery from the 6th century BC were found (Salkin, 1985, 251) (Figure 5). This has motivated us to suggest the hypothesis that there were some early attempts, perhaps of Histria, to establish a point to trade with the local Thracian population on this spot, but the attempts failed.

It is possible to elaborate on the name of the person who dedicated the inscription – Antigon Heraclitus of Stybera Macedonian. Titus Livius reported a raid of the Bastarnes through Thrace in 179 BC led by certain Antigon. One can logically suggest that our inscription appeared several years later than 179 BC and that the abbreviation AN refers to the person mentioned above (Lazarov, 1985, 49).

Sepulchral Architecture and Funerary Rituals Architecture Despite the long years of consistent exploration of the Chirakman plateau and the area of Kavarna municipality no necropoleis have been found yet, neither the necropolis of Bizone, nor any Thracian necropolis from the Hellenistic Age. We have only found several graves in Bizone and some Thracian tumuli near the colony. We mentioned in the beginning that the colony of Bizone had mixed population of Greeks and Thracians which was the reason why there was considerable cultural interaction between the two nations in the hinterland of the settlement. This justifies the presentation of certain grave finds from Bizone and from the Thracian tumuli in the area of Kavarna municipality.

As it was mentioned at the beginning of this presentation, the acropolis of the colony was on the plateau of cape Chirakman, while certain residential districts were situated on the south slope towards the sea and in the valley next to the port of Kavarna (Mirchev, Toncheva, Dimitrov, 1962, 22-23). At the same place there was a late antique settlement and then a mediaeval one which existed up to the 17th century over the antique settlement. This makes it difficult to restore the town-planning during the Hellenistic age or its architectural and building traditions. The only completely preserved building from the Hellenistic period was uncovered in 1972 on one of the terraces on the south slopes of Chirakman (Salkin, 1984, 56). The building has a rectangular layout, 24 m in length, 8 m high and the walls are 1.35 m thick. It consists of one central room and three others symmetrically situated around the central one. The foundations of the construction were made of processed and shattered stones laid on mud. Above the foundations,

A ‘Macedonian’ type of tomb with rectangular layout was found 5 km eastwards of Bizone in the place called ‘Dimyashtite mogili’. Unfortunately, the tomb was completely destroyed. The finds from later times date its destruction to the 4th to 6th century and in the 9th to 11th centuries. The façade, which faces east as well as its inner side were built with hued rectangular boulders laid in fine lines. Externally, the wall was covered with a shield of small shattered stones (Salkin, 1984, 56-57). The preserved part of the north wall was 9.60 m long.

43

ANCIENT GREEK COLONIES IN THE BLACK SEA 2 In 1972 a small stone tomb with a dome-like cover was found 4.5 km west of cape Chirakman in the village of Bozhurets near the ancient bank (see above). The tomb was built with shattered slabstones laid in overlapping rows. It had a vaulted entrance, a short corridor and a semicircular chamber 2.5 by 1.5 m and a formed dome 1.50 m high (Kitov, 1972, 37). There were no archaeological finds so the tomb was probably a cenotaph. It is dated to the 4th or 3rd century BC.

An interesting grave was found near Bizone, on Shaitan Bayir, where there are remains of a small Thracian settlement. The grave was found accidentally while workers were making a canal. Some of the finds were plundered, others were broken. Two coloured balsamariae made of glass paste were found (imported from Egypt) (Figure 7), as well as small black glazed bowls, clay lamp, shells and a bronze mirror (Toncheva, Rafailov, 1980, 53-59). Many terracotta figurines were found in the grave, which according to the archaeologists had decorated a wooden sarcophagus (Gerasimov, 1969, 50). The effigies on them reflected the so-called ‘Aphrodiziae’ – feasts in honour of the goddess Aphrodite. The inhabitants of Bizone considered her to be the patron of their city. There were processions led by the priestess of the goddess Aphrodite (Figure 8), followed by Nike, carrying the statue of Mars fully accoutred; musicians; Eroses; baskets of fruit and flowers. On the top of the sarcophagus there was a statue of Aphrodite, sitting, without arms – a copy of a monumental statue of the goddess. The cult of Aphrodite was particularly popular along the North Black Sea coast (Kobuylina, 1970; Marchenko, 1-11).

A four metre high Thracian sepulchral mound was excavated between cape Chirakman and the village of Bozhurets (Teodosiev, Kitov, Teodosiev, 1991, 53). The body of the buried person was dismembered and some of the body parts were laid under the mound, while the rest of the parts were burnt on a funeral pyre, found outside the mound. The funerary stock was also put in the funeral pyre – a gold earring, three gold beads, fragments of a silver kantharos, four silver and five bronze buttons, a bronze ring, bronze arrows, three iron machairae, two clay balsamariae and a clay bowl. There are no doubts about the Thracian character of the burial and the status of the Thracian aristocrat buried there. The burial is dated to the 3rd century BC.

Among the terracotta figurines there was one of Heracles (Figure 9), a copy of the famous statue of Heracles Farnese with a lion hide. There was also a terracotta figurine of a rooster – both Heracles and the rooster are quite often found together with Aphrodite. The rough moulding, the sketchy representation of the effigies as well as the fact that the figurines had to be immersed in whitewash to remove the knots from a low-grade firing point unmistakably to the local character of the terracotta and date the grave to the 2nd century BC (Figure 10). Everything points to the fact that Aphrodite’s cult was wide spread in Bizone and its hinterland and the appearance of a settlement named after that Goddess in the area was no surprise.

In larger tumuli representatives of the Thracian aristocracy were buried. This is proved by the great and interesting gold Thracian treasure found at the foot of a mound near the ancient Bizone in 1902 (Shkorpil, 1907, 39-40; Figure 6). The treasure was probably buried in a small tomblet, built with rough shattered stones. According to the ex-director of Varna Archaeological Museum Karel Shkorpil part of the treasure – 66 objects – was bought by the Russian consul in Burgas, Prince Shahovskiy. In 1907 the treasure was resold in Paris and now its whereabouts are unknown. Fortunately, Shkorpil took a photograph of the treasure, which allows us to interpret the objects. Besides the objects mentioned above, whose weight was 1 kg, there were three other objects: a massive gold wreath; a phial with an effigy of a chariot with three horses; and a gold figurine of a lion or a dog. These three objects were melted and the gold was shared among the people who found the treasure. The objects on the photograph were components of two sets of accoutrements decoration. The sets consisted of breastplate, forehead ornaments, cheek-pieces, applications, lamellae and rings. Their workmanship was precise; all known techniques were used – casting, forging out on a matrix, granulation, filigree and glass paste inlay (Minchev, 1982, 41-44).

ABBREVIATIONS AAPhSHPh AOR IBAI INM Varna

The fine workmanship of the objects suggests that they were produced in some of the workshops of the larger West Black Sea coastal cities like Odessos, Tomis or Histria. One can easily guess that the treasure belonged to some local Thracian dynast and it proves the contacts the Thracian aristocracy had with the Black Sea citycolonies.

IVAD SA SAI

44

Acta antiqua Philippopolitana. Studia historica et philologica. Serdicae. Arkheologicheski otkritiya i razkopki (Archaeological Discoveries and Excavations). Various Bulgarian cities. Izvestiya na Arkheologicheskiya institute (Proceedings of the Institute of Archaeology). Sofia Izvestiya na narodniya muzey Varna (Bulletin of the National Museum – Varna). Izvestiya na Varnenskoto Arkheologichesko Druzhestvo (Bulletin of the Archaeological Society – Varna). Sovetskaya arheologiya (Soviet Arhaeology). Moscow. Svod arkheologicheskikh istochnikov (Thesaurus of Arcaeological Sources). Moskow.

ASEN EMILOV SALKIN: BIZONE VDI

Yordanov 1979 - Yordanov K. Thracians and Kimerians. // Vekove, No 2, 1979, p. 30–36. (Bulg.) Yordanov 1982 – Yordanov Iv. Coins from Chirakman. // Miscellanea ‘Chirakman, Karvuna, Kavarna’. Sofia, 1982, p. 57 – 59. (Bulg.) Yordanov 1984 – Yordanov K. Dobrudzha during the 1st millenium BC. Getae. // History of Dobrudzha, 1. Sofia, 1984, p. 72-123(Bulg.) Karayotov 1978 – Karayotov Iv. Copper ingot from Crete found in the village of Cherkovo, country of Burgas. // Numizmatica, 1978, No 1, p. 12 – 16. (Bulg.) Karuyshkovski 1971 – Karuyshkovski, P.O. Histria and its neighbours in the 3rd – 2nd centuries BC.// VDI, 1971, No 2, p. 36-55. (Russ.) Katincharov 1979 – Katincharov, R. Cultural relations of Thrace and Crete in the early Bronze Age. // Vekove, 1979, No 1, p. 43 – 48. (Bulg.) Kitov 1972 – Kitov G. A Thracian tumulus near Kavarna. // AOR, p. 37. (Bulg.) Kitov 1979 – Kitov G. Thracian symbolic axes and amulets with animal effigies. // Archaeologia, 1979, No 2, p. 13-19. (Bulg.) Kobuylina 1970 – Kobuylina M. The terracotts from North Black Sea coast. // SA, 1970, G 1-11. (Russ.) Lazarov 1985 – Lazarov M. Newly found inscription of Anthigon about the Scythian king Sariakos. // VDI, 1985, No 3, p. 47 – 50. (Russ.). Lazov 1985 – Lazov R. On the Early Economical Relationship of Dobrudja: East Pontus colonies versus the Aegean islands. // Thracia Pontica, 3. Sozopol, 1985, p. 256 – 264. Marchenko - Marchenko K. Terracotta figurines, SAI, 4, G 111. (Russ.) Marculescu 1934. - Marculescu O. Bizone-Portul Kavarna.// Anal. Dobrodgei, 15, 1934, p. 145-162. Minchev 1982 – Minchev Al. The treasure from Kavarna. // Miscellanea ‘Chirakman, Kravuna, Kavarna’. Sofia, 1982, p. 41 – 44.(Bulg.) Mirchev 1958 – Mirchev M. The amphora seals from Varna museum.// Sofia, 1958. (Bulg.) Mirchev, Toncheva, Dimitrov 1962 – Mirchev M., Toncheva G., Dimitrov D. Bizone – Karvuna.// IVAD,13, 1962, p.20102. (Bulg.) Maximova 1956 – Maximova, M.I. The Antique cities at the Southeastern Black Sea coast. Moskow - Leningrad, 1956. (Russ.) Pippidi 1975 - Pippidi D. M. Pour une histoire des cultes d’Istros. Scythica Minora. // Recherches sur les colonies greekues du littoral Roumain de la mer Noar. Bucureşti. Bucureşti – Amsterdam, 1975. Popov, Mishev 1974 – Popov, Vl., Mishev K. Geomorphology of the Bulgarian Black Sea coast and shelf. // Sofia, 1974. (Bulg.) Russu 1968 - Russu I.I. Die Sprache der Thrako-Daker. // Bucuresti, 1968. Salkin 1984 – Salkin A. Kavarna and its area in ancient times (2nd millennium BC – 4th century AD).// Kavarna, vol. 1. Sofia, 1984, p. (Bulg.) Salkin 1984a Salkin A. Underwater researches in the bay of Kavarna. // AOR, 1984, p. 287. (Bulg.) Salkin 1985 – Salkin A. Evidence for the Earlier Foundation of Bizone Colony. // Thracia Pontica, 3. Sofia, 1986, p. 251 – 255. Salkin 1989 - Salkin, As. Two Thracian tombs from the surroundings of Byzone// INM – Varna, 25, 9-12. (Bulg.)

Vestnik Drevney Istorii (Journal of Ancient History). Moscow

BIBLIOGRAPHY Anonimus, Periplus Ponti Euxini. Artamonov 1974 – Artamonov, M. Kimerians and Scythians. // Leningrad, 1974. (Russ.) Avram 1991 – Avram A. Untersuchungen zur geschichte des teritoriums von Kallatis in griechischer zeit. // Dacia, 35, 1991, p. 103 – 137. Bass 1982 – Bass G. Archaeology on the bottom of the sea. // Varna, 1982. (Bulg.) Banev, Dimitrov 1985 - Banev, Kr., Dimitrov, M. A new epigraphic monument from Dionysopolis.// Thracia Pontica, 2. ‘Le littoral Thrace et son role dans le monde ancient’. Yambol, 1985, p. 34-38. (Russ.) Banev, Lazov, Salkin 1985 - Banev K., Lazov R., Salkin A. Timbres amphoriques de Sinope dans le muse de la ville de Kavarna. // Thracia Pontica, 2. ‘Le littoral Thrace et son role dans le monde ancient’. Yambol, 1985, p. 29 – 33. Berciu 1974 – Berciu D. Contribution á l’étude de l’art ThracoGete. Bucureşti. Thraco-Dacica. // Bucureşti, 1974. Bonev 1982 - Bonev Al. Traces from prehistory. // Miscellanea ‘Chirakman, Karvuna, Kavarna’. Sofia, 1982, p. 12 – 14. (Bulg.) Blavatskaya 1952 – Blavatskaya T. West Pontic cities in the 7th through 1st century BC. // Moscow, 1952. (Russ.) Brashinski 1963 – Brashinski Y. Economic contacts of Sinope in 4th-2nd BC. // Miscellanea ‘Antique city’. Moscow, 1963, p. 132 – 145. (Russ.). Brashinski 1970 - Brashinski, Y. About the economic contacts of the Southwest Black Sea coast in the Pre-Roman age. // Arkheologia, 1970, No 2, p.7-19. (Bulg). Danov 1938 – Danov, Chr. On the ancient economic history of the West Black Sea coast before the establishment of the Roman domination. // IBAI, 12, 1938, p. 185-258. (Bulg.) Danov 1947 – Danov Chr. The West Black Sea coast in the Antique times. // Sofia, 1947. (Bulg.) Danov 1963 – Danov Chr. Altthrakien in den mythographischen Bücher Diodorus. // AAPhSHPh, Sofia, 1963, p. 81-89. Danov 1969 – Danov Chr. Ancient Thrace. // Sofia, 1969. (Bulg.) Davidova 1984 – Davidova. Geographical conditions in Dobrudzha. // History of Dobrudzha, 1. Sofia, 1984, p. 9 – 22. (Bulg.) Diacoviciu 1977 – Diacuviciu. Thrace et Daco-Getes á la fin du Hallstatt et au début de la Tène en Roumanie. // Thracia, 4. Serdicae, 1977, p. 5 – 13. Diod. 7, Fr. II /Vogel/. Freda 1973. - Freda C. Modele geto-dacilor. // Bucureşti, 1973. Gerasimov 1969 – Gerasimov T. Antique sarcophagi from Odessos. // INM Varna, 1969, 5, p. 49-71. (Bulg.) Hec. Fr. 170, 171, 189, 190 /Jacoby/. Hec. Fr. 171 – Steph. Buz. 634, 11. Ireček 1899 – Ireček K. The principality of Bulgaria. Vol. 2. // Plovdiv, 1899. (Bulg.) Ivanov, Petrova, Simeonov, Choloev, Lukanov, Pimpirev 1985 – Ivanov Zh., Petrova A., Simeonov A., Choloev Iv., Lukanov A., Pimpirev Chr. Geological, pectrographical and geomorphologic research of the Black Sea coast between cape Emine and the valley of the river Rezovska for the needs of maritime history and underwater archaeology. // Sofia, 1985. (Bulg.)

45

ANCIENT GREEK COLONIES IN THE BLACK SEA 2 Torbatov 2002 – Torbatov, S. Aphrodisias – Aphrpdeisision – Aphrodision. //The Roman and late Roman city. Sofia, 2002, p. 260 – 264. Tsehmistrenko 1958 – Tsehmistrenko V. On the topic about dividing into periods the ceramic seals of Sinope. // SA, 1958, No 1, p. 56 – 68. (Russ.) Vasilenko 1971 – Vasilenko, B. On the topic about dating the seals of Sinope. // SA, 1971, No 3, p. 245 – 250. (Russ.) Vasilev, Kitov, Kuzmanov, Sotirov, Salkin 1972 – Vasilev V., Kitov G., Kuzmanov A., Sotirov G., Salkin A. Researches on cape Chirakman near Kavarna.// AOR, 1972, p. 58. (Bulg.) Vasilev, Salkin, Gerasimova, Sotirov, Cholakov 1977 – Vasilev V., Salkin A., Gerasimova V., Sotirov Iv., Cholakov Iv. Excavations at cape Chirakman near the town of Kavarna.// AOR, 1977, p. 137. (Bulg.) Velkov 1963 – Velkov V. The roads along the West Black Sea coast in the pre-Roman times – 6th-1st BC. // IVAD, 14, p. 25-34. (Bulg.) Velkov 1982 – Velkov V. Antique data about Bizone. // Miscellanea ‘Chirakman, Karvuna, Kavarna’. Sofia, 1982, p. 25-28. (Bulg.) Yurukova 1977 – Nouvelles donnees sur la chronologie des rois scythes en Dobroudza – Thracia, 1977, IV, p. 105

Salkin 1994 – Salkin A. Antique harbour facilities in Kavarna bay. // Thracia Pontica, 6,1. Sozopol, 1994, p. 245 – 248. Salkin, Porozhanov, Popov 1980 – Salkin A., Porozhanov K., Popov V. Underwater research along the Dobrudzha Black Sea coast.// AOR 1980, p. 74. (Bulg.) Shelov 1967 – Shelov D. West and north Black Sea coast in Antiquity. In: Miscellanea ‘Antique society’. Moscow, 1967, p. 214-220 (Russ.) Shkorpil 1907 – Shkorpil K. The gold crown from Kavarna.// IVAD, 1, p. 39 – 40. (Bulg.) Shkorpil – Shkorpil, K. Topographic notes about the Black Sea region on the Balkan Peninsula.// Morski sgovor magazine, 13, No 6, p. 107. (Bulg.) Slavova 1998 - Slavova, M. Once again on the horotezia of Dionysopolis // Arkhaeologiya, 1998, p. 57-61. (Bulg.) Strabo. 7, 3, 12. 7, 3, 13, /Meineke/. Strabo, Geografika VII 6, 1. Skymnos, Orbis description, v. 758 Teodosiev, Kitov, Teodosiev 1991 - Teodosiev P., Kitov G., Teodosiev N. Explorations of the Thracian tumulus near Kavarna. // AOR, 1991, p. 53. (Bulg.) Toncheva 1973 – Toncheva G. New data about the trade along the Black Sea coast during 16th through 14th century BC.// Vekove, 1973, No 3, p. 17 – 24. (Bulg.) Toncheva 1975 – Toncheva G. About the Thracians in today’s Ukraine, Moldova, Dobrudzha and Northeast Bulgaria in the 11th through 6th century BC.// 1975, p. 49 – 52. (Russ.) Toncheva, Rafailov 1980 – Toncheva G., Rafailov Iv. The terracotts of Bizone. // Vekove, 1980, No 2, p. 53 – 59. (Bulg.)

Figure 1. A polymetal ingot in the shape of a ox hide was found in the bay of cape Kaliakra

46

ASEN EMILOV SALKIN: BIZONE

Figure 2. Chirakman Bayir

Figure 4. Coins of Scythian rulers in Kavarna Museum.

Figure 3. ‘Megarean’ cup found in an inhumation burial near the village of Bozhurets.

Figure 5. A fragment of imported Greek ceramic from the 6th century BC found in the narrow part of the avenues of approach to Chirakman. 47

ANCIENT GREEK COLONIES IN THE BLACK SEA 2

48

ASEN EMILOV SALKIN: BIZONE

Figure 6. Gold Thracian treasure found at the foot of a mound near the antique Bizone in 1902. 49

ANCIENT GREEK COLONIES IN THE BLACK SEA 2

Figure 7. Two coloured balsamariae made of glass paste (imported from Egypt) found in a grave on Shaitan Bayir near Bizone.

Figure 8. A terracotta figurine of the Goddess Aphrodite found in the grave on Shaitan Bayir near Bizone.

Figure 9. A terracotta figurine of Heracles found in the grave on Shaitan Bayir near Bizone. 50

La Thrace Pontique et la mythologie Grecque Zlatozara Gotcheva* Dans l’étude de la Thrace et des Thraces, on porte un très vif intérêt à l’histoire la plus ancienne de la Thrace pontique, avant la colonisation grecque. En effet, les fouilles archéologiques systématiques sur la côte pontique et une prospection sous-marine ont récemment apporté le témoignage d’une notable présence thrace dans la région littorale et ont contribué à localiser de nombreux emporia de la population thrace autochtone (Porozhanov 1998, 106-120). La découverte d’une grande quantité d’ancres d’époque très ancienne vient confirmer la thalassocratie des Thraces, connue par Diodore de Sicile (VII, 11). Toutefois, c’est la mythologie grecque qui continue à être l’une des sources les plus précieuses sur l’histoire antique de la Méditerranée, en général, et, dans ce cadre, de la côte pontique thrace. Prise dans son ensemble, elle constitue cependant une synthèse de faits historiques et d’éléments fabuleux, sur lesquels se greffent des remaniements d’époque tardive. Pour nous, le plus important est de dégager les récits mythologiques qui nous font connaître pour une bonne part la réalité historique ou, au moins, les contacts des Grecs avec la côte pontique thrace avant sa colonisation.

La légende de Phinée et son rattachement à l’ancienne histoire thrace Phinée intervient dans la légende de l’expédition des Argonautes que l'on est fondé d'attribuer aux strates les plus anciennes de la mythologie grecque (Nilsson 1932, 57) et que l'on rattache à l’apparition des Grecs sur les côtes méridionale et occidentale de la mer Noire bien avant leur colonisation. L’un des points cruciaux de cette légende est la pénétration dans la mer Noire par le Bosphore, riche en péripéties, autour de laquelle gravitent les diverses variantes de la légende de Phinée et de Salmydessos. Au cours du temps, s’amalgament des apports nouveaux, des éléments fantastiques et des généalogies d’ordre ethnique différent, le fruit des échanges d’idées entre les populations de la Méditerranée orientale. Les auteurs grecs rapportent certains détails de diverses manières, aussi sont-ils délicats à interpréter. La mise de l’accent, à l’époque hellénistique, sur les problèmes historicoculturels de cette région vient expliquer l’abondance de détails de la légende de Phinée dans les scholies aux oeuvres d’Hésiode, de Pindare, des tragiques et des poètes. Dans ce sens, notre attention est attirée par ces éléments et variantes qui nous permettraient d’élucider la

* Education and degrees: 1960 – Graduated from ‘St. Kliment Ohridski’ Sofia University, Faculty of Classical and Modern Languages, Major: Classical Philology, Minor: Archaeology; 1975 – PhD egree. PhD Thesis: ‘Apollo Cult in Thrace’; 1982 – Associate Professor at the Institute of Thracology at the Bulgarian Academy of Sciences; 1995 – Professor at the New Bulgarian University and at Institute of Thracology. Field of research: Ancient history, Thracology, Source analysis, History of religion, Ancient epigraphy. Positions held: 1961-1965 – Specialist at the Museum of Archaeology, Sofia; 1966 – curator at the Regional Museum of Archaeology in Kyustendil; 1966-1972 – Assitant Professor in Classical Archaeology at ‘St. St. Kiril and Methodius’ Veliko Turnovo University; 1972-1982 – Research Associate at the Institute of Thracology at the Bulgarian Academy of Sciences; 1982-1989 – Associate Professor at the Centre for Ancient Languages and Cultures at ‘St. Kliment Ohridski’ Sofia University; 1992 – Part-time lecturer at the New Bulgarian University; 1993 – Head of the Mediterranean Society and Culture Department at the New Bulgarian University; 1995 – Director of the ‘Mediterranean Culture and Religion’ M.A. Programme at the New Bulgarian University; 1996 – Director of the ‘Classical History And Culture’ B.A. Programme at the New Bulgarian University; Professor at the Institute of Thracology at the Bulgarian Academy of Sciences; Part-time Professor in Classical Archaeology and Epigraphy at ‘St. St. Kiril and Methodius’ Veliko Turnovo University; Member of the scientific council at the Institute of Thracology, Bulgarian Academy of Sciences. Membership: Korrespondierenden Mitglied des Deutschen Archaeologischen Instituts; Wincelmann Geselschaf – Stenadl; Association Internationale d'Epigraphie Greque et Latine ( A.I.E.G.L.); Associazione Internazionale di Archeologia Classica; Centre International d’Etudes de la Religion Grecque Antique, (CIERCA); Federation International des Associations d’etudes Classiques (F.I.E.C.) – Déléguée Bulgare. Activities and acknowledgments: 1961-1965 – Deputy Field Director of excavations in Pliska, Preslav, Varna, etc. 1961-1965 – Contributor to ‘Bulgarian Art’ Encyclopaedia, Institute of Fine Arts at the Bulgarian Academy of Sciences; 1966 – Field Director of the excavations at the Hisarlik fortress, Kyustendil, under the auspices of the Regional Museum of Archaeology at Kyustendil; 1966 – directed the Summer School in Archaeology for the students from ‘St. St. Kiril and Methodius’ Veliko Turnovo University: excavations of the Thracian fortress at Chertigrad and the ancient city of Kabyle. 1961-1965 – Deputy Field Director of excavations in Pliska, Preslav, Varna, etc.; 1966 – Field Director of the excavations at the Hisarlik fortress, Kyustendil, under the auspices of the Regional Museum of Archaeology at Kyustendil; 1966 – directed the Summer School in Archaeology for the students from ‘St. St. Kiril and Methodius’ Veliko Turnovo University: excavations of the Thracian fortress at Chertigrad and the ancient city of Kabyle. Delivered a course in Latin. Participated in the axcavations of Tsarevets; Field Director of field surveys of fortresses in the regions of Botevgrad, Sliven and Berkovitsa, as well as of excavations of the high-mountain fortresses of Kraevo, Malko Chochoven, etc. Member of the Kabyle team and Field Director of the excavations of the sanctuary of the Nymphs at the village of Ognyanovo; 1979-1980 – Delivered courses of lectures in Classical mythology and iconography at ‘St. Kliment Ohridski’ Sofia University; Delivered lectures as Visiting Professor at the University of Strasbourg, at the Humboldt University, Berlin and at Adam Mizkevich University at Poznan. E-mail: [email protected]

51

ANCIENT GREEK COLONIES IN THE BLACK SEA 2 question du rôle des Thraces dans la partie occidentale de la mer Noire.

manifestent à travers les causes de sa punition et l’intervention des Harpyes lui dérobant sa nourriture ou la souillant à mesure qu’il tente de manger. Une analyse plus approfondie nous mettrait en face d’une situation historique réelle caractérisée par les rapports entre les différents éléments thraces, qui jouent un rôle décisif dans ce centre important de la mer Noire. A un moment donné, le roi thrace a le pouvoir de porter secours à Phrixos en fuite, encourant ainsi la colère divine, et se trouve délivré, lui-même, de cette malédiction par les Thraces faisant partie de l’équipage de l’Argo et qui passaient par là dans la quête de la Toison d’Or, et qui sont les Boréades avec lesquels il a un lien de parenté. C’est le moment historique capital du mythe. Quoique aveuglé, Phinée est puissant, car il domine dans un des lieux les plus importants de la côte pontique.

D’après les témoignages les plus anciens d’Hésiode et d’Hellanicos, conservés dans les scholies aux Argonautiques d’Apollonios de Rhodes (II, 178), Phinée est le fils de Phoenix ou d’Agénor, qui est le père de Phoenix. Dans les Suppliantes d’Eschyle, il passe pour être le fils du roi d’Egypte Bélos et le frère d’Egyptos et de Danaos (Nauck. Trag. Graecorum Fr., Leipzig, 1926, fr. 881). Par la suite, le scholiaste indique aussi comme leurs frères Phoenix et Agénor. Le fait que Bélos est le roi mythique d’Egypte, que Phoenix est l’éponyme des Phéniciens et Egyptos – des Egyptiens, témoigne des contacts étroits et des interférences dans cette aire culturelle dès le début du IIe mill. av. J.-C. voire même plus tôt. Il apparaît qu’à une époque très ancienne, les Thraces entretiennent des rapports étroits avec toute la Méditerranée occidentale. Une autre légende, relatée toujours dans les scholies aux Argonautiques d’Apollonios de Rhodes (II, 181), selon laquelle le frère de Phoenix et le fils d’Agénor est Cadmos, le fondateur légendaire de Thèbes, laisse apparaître des liens avec la culture grecque de l’époque mycénienne.

Ainsi donc, il ne reste qu’à localiser le royaume de Phinée. Où sont les bords des Phinéïdes, cités par Euripide dans l’Iphigénie en Tauride (241-243) ? Les plus anciens témoignages nous viennent d’Hellanicos (Fr. Gr. H., 95) et de Phérécyde (Fr. Gr. H., 27), qui rattachent Phinée à la Bithynie. Or, le scholiaste aux Argonautiques d’Apollonios de Rhodes, qui rapporte cette information d’Hellanicos (II, 177-178), explique qu’il s’agit en effet de la Thrace et non pas de la Bithynie: …ïšê dí ôyò ðÝñáí Âéèõíßáé, Qëë'dí ôyé ôyò Èñáßêçò {óôò dóôr ôyò Åšñùðηò. Dans les allégations de Phérécyde, conservées dans la même scholie, il est dit: ‚ñ÷åí ìÝ÷ñé ôï™ Âïóðüñïõ Èñáéê§í. Il est difficile d’établir les événements historiques qui unissent la Thrace européenne et les tribus thraces d’Asie Mineure. Il existe apparemment une union plus puissante des Thraces des deux côtés du Bosphore, qui se trouve à l’origine de leur thalassocratie dans cette partie de la mer Noire. Il est possible que cette forte présence thrace rende la mer Noire encore plus inhospitalière: d÷èñüîåíïò íáýôçóé (Aeschyl. Prom., 727).

Phinée se trouve rattaché aux Grecs par une autre légende, racontée en détail par Sophocle dans Antigone (966 et schol.), selon laquelle il épouse la fille de Borée et d’Orithye qui est, de son côté, une princesse grecque, fille du légendaire roi d’Athènes Erechthée. Dans les versions de cette légende, la femme de Phinée meurt ou est tuée de diverses manières par Phinée lui-même, qui prend en secondes noces soit Idaea, la fille de Dardanos, soit Idothée, la soeur de Cadmos. Dans certaines sources postérieures, Phinée est lié à des éponymes légendaires de différentes tribus thraces d’Asie Mineure. D’après Phérécyde (Fr. Gr. H., 27), ses fils sont Thynos et Mariandynos – les éponymes des Thyniens et des Mariandynes, des tribus thraces habitant l’Asie Mineure. Par la suite, Bithynos apparaît aussi comme son fils (Arr. Bith., fr. 20). Selon l’auteur, ils sont tous ses fils adoptifs et ce n’est que Paphlagonos qui est son fils légitime. L’origine thrace de ces tribus se laisse déceler aussi dans les variantes du mythe, qui lient Thynos et Bithynos à Odrysos (Arr. Bith., fr. 20).

Tous les témoignages antiques situent Salmydessos au nord du Bosphore, dans ces parages dangereux. Dans toutes les descriptions, elle prend l’apparence des Cyanées. Dans certaines scholies plus anciennes, l’expression Óáëìõäçóßá ãíÜèоò, employée par Eschyle (Prom., 726), est commentée dans un sens plus large, à cause du relief du terrain. D’autre part, le scholiaste à l’Antigone de Sophocle (980-981) présente Salmydessos comme un fleuve thrace et soutient que c’est là que se trouve un sanctuaire d’Arès, le protecteur de la ville, ce qui témoigne de la puissance guerrière de la population locale. Ce n’est pas par hasard que Phinée, le roi de ce pays, aide à son tour les Argonautes à passer entre les écueils mobiles, se heurtant l’un contre l’autre. Toujours est-il que ce tableau poétique symbolise une bataille navale, une force qui écrase tout vaisseau dans cet endroit que même un oiseau ne peut survoler (Amm. Marc., XXII, 8, 14). A partir du moment où les Argonautes réussissent à franchir la passe, la mer Noire cesse d’être inaccessible aux navigateurs étrangers.

Il y a lieu de revenir sur la légende de l’expédition des Argonautes, qui font escale dans le pays de Phinée, aveugle et tourmenté par les Harpyes, un motif qui dénote aussi des éléments fabuleux ou, vraisemblablement, des emprunts à d’autres mythes. Les témoignages les plus anciens présentent deux variantes (Hes. Cat., fr. 52, 54). La première nous fait savoir que Phinée serait aveuglé parce qu’il aurait préféré vivre longtemps au prix de ses yeux, selon la deuxième, il serait puni parce qu’il aurait indiqué à Phrixos le chemin de Colchide. Une version d’époque tardive lui attribue même des dons de devin (Amm. Marc., XXII, 8, 14). Cet épisode du mythe foisonne d’éléments folkloriques qui se 52

ZLATOZARA GOTCHEVA: LA THRACE PONTIQUE ET LA MYTHOLOGIE GRECQUE Les fouilles archéologiques sur la côte pontique et l’exploration sous-marine de sa partie sud-ouest viennent corroborer les témoignages à propos de la thalassocratie ancienne des Thraces dans la mer Noire et de la riche culture matérielle de la population de l’arrière-pays, le résultat de ses contacts étroits avec l'ensemble du monde méditerranéen.

Strabon (VII, 6, 1) ne connaît pas le nom de Dionysopolis. En énumérant les villes ouest-pontiques, il situe entre Callatis et Apollonia Bizoné, Crounoi et Odessos. A la différence des autres colonies grecques, il ne fournit aucune information sur Crounoi. Au contraire, Pomponius Mela (LL, 2, 22) présente Crounoi et Dionysopolis comme deux localités différentes, la première étant un portus et la seconde – une urbs.

Dionysopolis – la statue de Dionysos jetée par les flots La majorité des auteurs modernes qui étudient cette question acceptent sans réserve l’identification des deux villes. Ils se fondent en général sur les témoignages de Pseudo-Scymnos et d’Etienne de Byzance, sans tenir compte des autres auteurs et des données archéologiques.

Le problème de la fondation de Dionysopolis, gravitant autour de la légende de la statue de Dionysos jetée par les flots sur la grève, fait depuis longtemps l’objet de discussions dans la littérature spécialisée (Mihailov 1970, 49-50). Des controverses sont soulevées par les témoignages divergents des anciens auteurs grecs et romains à ce sujet. La légende même, populaire depuis l’Antiquité, selon laquelle la ville serait appelée Dionysopolis par la volonté divine, est à l’origine de l’hypothèse que son ancien nom serait Crounoi et porte certains auteurs, même modernes, à identifier les deux sites. Le problème est d’autant plus compliqué que les résultats des recherches récentes viennent réfuter, dans la plupart des cas, cette hypothèse. Toutefois, la tradition écrite antique et les témoignages archéologiques et épigraphiques contribuent suffisamment à son élucidation.

Une hypothèse situe les deux villes près d’Ekréné, dont le nom dériverait de l’antique Crounoi (Kanitz 18771899, 192-200). Elle se trouve démentie par l’exploration archéologique de Balčik où les matériaux épigraphiques localisent avec certitude Dionysopolis. Sur la base des témoignages archéologiques, les deux villes sont localisées près de Balčik (Ireček 1974, 900-901). L’auteur cherche à expliquer le nom de Crounoi par l’existence de sources dans les alentours de Balčik. Quant à Ekréné, il l’associe à Gerania, mentionnée par Pline au sujet de l’origine des Pygmées. Or, on pourrait y déceler plutôt des légendes amalgamées vraisemblablement à une époque tardive dans le but d’établir l’étymologie du nom.

La première mention des deux noms se trouve chez Pseudo-Scymnos (751-757), qui identifie Dionysopolis à Crounoi (Müller 1923, I, 226). Il relate la légende de la statue de Dionysos que les flots jettent près de la ville de Crounoi, que les habitants, pour honorer le dieu, décident d’appeler Dionysopolis. Il explique le nom de Crounoi par l’existence de sources dans les environs de la ville. L’ auteur anonyme du Périple du Pont-Euxin (Diller 1952, 146) reprend cette information, mais il mentionne en outre un nom intermédiaire de la ville – Matiopolis, qui n’est enregistré nulle part ailleurs, et il ne donne aucune explication de l’étymologie de ce nom. En l’occurrence, la seule possibilité est de le faire dériver de la racine – ìáôéá- ‘erreur, folie’, ce qui ne saurait justifier une telle appellation de la ville. D. Detschew (1976, 291) cite un certain nom propre féminin thrace, connu dans une localité entre Drama et Bouk, et un autre – en Eubée, mais il ne propose pas une étymologie plus plausible. Etienne de Byzance rapporte aussi cette légende, mais ne mentionne aucun nom intermédiaire de la ville. Il semble qu’il l’emprunte directement à Pseudo-Scymnos ou que les deux auteurs puisent à une source plus ancienne. Or, il émet des doutes sur l’explication du changement du nom de la ville qui est aussi attesté pour d’autres endroits et il cite à l’appui le mythe d’Attale et d’Eumène qui recueilleraient une statue de Dionysos jetée par les flots. De son côté, Pline (N. H., IV, 11, 44) soutient que Crounoi et Dionysopolis seraient les deux noms successifs d’une même ville.

La découverte de vestiges d’une agglomération antique près du village de Kranevo (anc. Ekréné) porte certains auteurs à hésiter sur l’identification des deux villes (Tafrali 1927, 11). L’auteur affirme que les données archéologiques et épigraphiques ne viennent prouver que l’existence et la localisation de Dionysopolis. Quant au nom de Matiopolis, mentionné dans le Périple anonyme, il tend à le rattacher à Marcianopolis. Sur la base des monuments épigraphiques, Crounoi est localisée catégoriquement près d’Ekréné (Škorpil 1912, 47). Plus tard, il avance l’hypothèse de la localisation de Dionysopolis près de Balčik et renonce à l’identification des deux villes (Škorpil 1930-31, 57). Par la suite, dans la littérature spécialisée bulgare s’impose la tendance d'identifier Dionysopolis à Crounoi. Il est établi qu’elle se trouve déjà réfutée par les données épigraphiques (Robert 1959, 197-199). L’auteur passe en revue tous les arguments possibles et localise, en définitive, Crounoi près de Kranevo, en faisant appel à une épitaphe d’Isaurie de l’époque impériale romaine, adressée à un médecin, Dionysios, désigné comme Êñïõí§í, c.-à-d. originaire de Crounoi. Il s’associe à l’hypothèse des commentateurs de cette inscription, selon laquelle il s’agirait de la ville de Mésie inférieure portant ce nom. D’autre part, les inscriptions découvertes à Balčik y localisent assurément Dionysopolis. De toute évidence, les témoignages divergents des auteurs antiques donnent matière à controverse et sont 53

ANCIENT GREEK COLONIES IN THE BLACK SEA 2 délicats à interpréter. Ils sont incontestablement une source précieuse, qui n’est pourtant pas sûre sur certains points. Les auteurs modernes optent pour une information ou une autre et émettent des opinions différentes, plus ou moins fondées, sur la localisation des deux sites. En effet, la plupart des témoignages sont de seconde main et ne laissent pas déceler la source première. Pline et Etienne de Byzance semblent puiser directement dans PseudoScymnos et c’est pour cette raison que ses informations paraissent véridiques. Or, Etienne de Byzance ne fait que reproduire la légende de la statue de Dionysos jetée par les flots. D’autre part, il affirme que cette légende serait aussi populaire dans d’autres endroits, ce qui jette des doutes sur la véracité de son témoignage. Quant à Strabon, il paraît étrange qu’il ne mentionne que Crounoi. Si c'est l’ancien nom de Dionysopolis, pourquoi ne connaît-il pas son nouveau nom, par lequel la ville est déjà appelée à cette époque et se retrouve sur certains monuments épigraphiques. Il est peu probable que Strabon vise Dionysopolis, tout en la désignant sous le nom de Crounoi.

Dionysopolis qui offrait des possibilités économiques plus larges, raison pour laquelle Pseudo-Scymnos identifie les deux villes. D’autre part, il serait induit en erreur par le fait qu’à cette époque, Dionysopolis assumait certaines fonctions de Crounoi dans le commerce maritime. C’est au IIIe s. av. J.-C., où l’on situe le changement du nom de la ville, que Dionysopolis se développe et commence à frapper des monnaies. Crounoi continue à être un port important même à l’époque de Strabon et c’est pour cela qu’il la mentionne. Dionysopolis aurait déjà suffisamment d'influence dans la vie politique de la côte pontique pour être citée parmi les villes conquises par Marcus Lucullus (Iord. Rom., 2, 219-222). Crounoi n’opposerait pas de résistance, aussi ne figure-t-elle pas chez Suétone. A l’époque romaine, Dionysopolis cède le pas à Crounoi en tant que port en Mésie inférieure et c’est alors que Pomponius Mela la caractérise de cette façon. C’est de cette époque que date aussi l’épitaphe au citoyen de Crounoi, citée par L. Robert. L’actuel village de Kranevo, dont le nom est presque identique à celui de Crounoi, est situé dans un site aux sources abondantes, qui évoque la description de PseudoScymnos. On ne peut ne pas remarquer que, par comparaison avec Dionysopolis, les conditions y sont plus favorables pour l'installation d’un port. Les matériaux archéologiques témoignent de l’existence d’une agglomération, même à l’époque romaine, dans cet endroit, mais certains facteurs l’empêchent de se développer en ville à l’économie stable (Velkov 19311932, 33). Les monuments épigraphiques provenant des environs de Kranevo présentent un intérêt tout particulier (Mihailov 1970, 75-76), et ils ouvrent la voie à des recherches archéologiques plus systématiques.

Tout aussi invraisemblable est l’explication qu’il puiserait à des sources plus anciennes où le nouveau nom de la ville ne figurerait pas (Danov 1931-1934, 89). Suivant cette logique, le nom de Crounoi devrait être désuet à l’époque de Strabon et il est inconcevable qu'il le mentionne, étant donné ses observations personnelles sur la côte pontique. Si l’on admet que ce nom n'était plus porté par aucun site, Strabon ne le mentionnerait pas. Il y a lieu de supposer qu’à cette époque, Dionysopolis ne faisait pas encore ses preuves dans la vie économique et que Crounoi continuait à jouer un rôle important pour être citée parmi les villes pontiques. Dans ce cas, le témoignage de Pomponius Mela revêt un intérêt tout particulier. Quoiqu’il soit d’époque tardive, on ne doit pas le sous-estimer. L’information que Crounoi est un port et Dionysopolis – une ville, est à l’origine de l’hypothèse que Crounoi serait le port de Dionysopolis (Katsarov, Detshew 1949), ce qui paraît incertain. Dionysopolis est située au bord de la mer et a son propre port. Plus crédible est l’explication que du temps de Pomponius Mela – IIe s., Crounoi continuait à être, ellemême, un port important.

CARACTERE ET ORGANISATION DE LA VIE RELIGIEUSE DES COLONIES OUESTPONTIQUES GRECQUES Le culte d’Apollon Les colonies grecques sur la côte thrace occidentale de la mer Noire sont fondées relativement tard – au VIIe s. av. J.-C., à la suite de l’établissement de la grande vague ionienne de Milésiens et, en moindre mesure, des Mégariens. Au début, elles entretiennent des rapports étroits avec les métropoles qui exercent une grande influence sur le développement et l’organisation de leur vie religieuse. Après l’expansion d’Athènes en Chersonèse de Thrace, surtout après la répression de la révolte de l’Ionie en 494 av. J.-C., les Athéniens prennent le contrôle économique de toutes les colonies de Milet et de Mégare sur la côte pontique. Or, ces événements ne se répercutent pas sensiblement sur la vie culturelle, et d’autant moins sur la vie religieuse des villes pontiques, que celle-ci a déjà sa physionomie propre, et où les éléments micro-asiatiques sont enracinés dans l’esprit de la population. La présence thrace ne joue pas non plus un

Pesant le pour et le contre de ces témoignages, on pourrait conclure qu’à une époque très ancienne, même avant la colonisation grecque, il existait une localité thrace du nom de Crounoi qui semble occuper la place de l’actuel village de Kranevo. Malheureusement, on n’y a pas effectué des fouilles systématiques. Il n’y a que quelques trouvailles fortuites qui n’apparaissent pas comme des témoins de son histoire. Il est possible qu’elle soit, pour un certain temps, un port important communiquant avec Odessos et les autres villes de la côte pontique gauche. Par la suite, Crounoi perd vraisemblablement de sa vigueur pour faire place à Dionysopolis, colonie grecque fondée à cette époque. Une partie de ses habitants se seraient établis à 54

ZLATOZARA GOTCHEVA: LA THRACE PONTIQUE ET LA MYTHOLOGIE GRECQUE rôle décisif à l’époque préromaine dans ces villes, car leur culture se développe à l’unisson de la culture de la Méditerranée orientale, et en particulier de celle de l’Asie Mineure, qui leur semble apparentée sur le plan religieux.

numismatiques. Il est établi que cette inscription ne figure que sur une seule émission monétaire, la plus récente, datée par l’auteur même et postérieurement (Gerasimov 1965, 4, обр. 2; Karajotov 1976, 58, обр. 1; Stefanova 1981, 5, обр. 5) du IIe s. av. J.-C., bien après l’exécution de la statue. Une telle inscription n’est pas enregistrée sur les deux autres types de monnaies – d’argent et de bronze, à l’iconographie presque identique, datés d’une époque plus ancienne. C’est le premier type de monnaies, frappées vraisemblablement dans une période de prospérité de la ville, que l’on situe à l’époque où cette statue est commandée et érigée – le IVe s. av. J.-C.

A cette époque, les colonies ouest-pontiques sont ouvertes aussi aux diverses influences renforcées dans l’arrière-pays. Or, on ne dispose malheureusement pas de données suffisantes sur leur religion, particulièrement dans les cas d’édification de nouvelles villes sur leur emplacement. Les recherches archéologiques plus approfondies jettent toutefois de la lumière sur le développement de certains cultes, sur leurs particularités déterminées par de multiples facteurs intérieurs et extérieurs et sur l’organisation de leur célébration dans les différentes villes.

D’autre part, l’iconographie ne laisse pas du tout déceler quelque aspect concret de la divinité – sur l’avers, Apollon est debout, tenant de la main droite un rameau de laurier et de la main gauche – un arc. Sur les monnaies du deuxième type, la divinité s’appuie de la main droite sur un tronc d’arbre. Sur le revers des deux types est représentée une ancre. L’avers des monnaies du troisième type porte la tête d’Apollon aux cheveux longs et leur revers – la même effigie que les deux autres types. Il s’ensuit qu’on n’est pas fondé à interpréter cette image comme un ’Аðüëëùí káôñüò. Ceci posé, on ne peut ne pas être réticent à l’égard de certains auteurs qui vont jusqu’à étendre cet aspect du culte d’Apollon à toute la côte pontique et à toute l’Antiquité. Cette position est déjà commentée dans la littérature spécialisée (Stefanova 1981, 6-7; Mintchev 2003, 254), mais il y a toujours des auteurs qui acceptent sans réserve l’hypothèse de B. Pick. Dans cet ordre d’idées, il est à signaler une autre interprétation erronée, sans arguments à l’appui, selon laquelle, c’est le culte d’Apollon Iatros qui est caractéristique d’Apollonia et de toute la côte ouestpontique (Oppermann 2004, 40, 278).

Au premier plan ressort le culte d’Apollon, le culte principal de la population de toutes les colonies ouestpontiques, et qui est importé par les colons dont celui-ci est le protecteur. La première colonie, fondée sur la côte occidentale de la mer Noire, est Apollonia. Les abondants témoignages écrits sont pourtant laconiques et ne permettent pas d’étudier complètement sa religion et sa culture (Mihailov 1970, 342-344). Strabon (VII, 6,1) ne mentionne que la vénération d’Apollon par sa population, la statue de la divinité, attribuée à Calamis, gardée jusqu’à l’incursion de Marcus Lucullus qui l’emporte à Rome, et enfin un temple dans la ville, située dans une île. Quant à la statue, il ne nous en est parvenu aucune information. Seul Pline (N. H. XXXIV, 39) la décrit comme un colosse haut de 30 coudées. Dans la littérature spécialisée, cette statue d’Apollon fait depuis longtemps l’objet de controverses. Le manque de témoignages antiques sur son apparence et sur les attributs de la divinité est à l’origine de différentes hypothèses qui ne contribuent pas, pour le moment, à l’éclaircissement de cette question.

Sur l’avers d’un groupe de monnaies du Ve s. av. J.-C., Apollon porte une couronne de laurier, et sur leur revers, il est debout, en vêtement long ou nu, et, à sa gauche, une lyre est appuyée sur un autel – image d’Apollon Citharède. C’est sous cet aspect vraisemblablement que la divinité est vénérée lors de certains jeux ou concours organisés dans la ville, mais dont on ne dispose d’aucune information.

D’après les anciens auteurs, les Milésiens se dirigent vers la côte pontique, forts de la bénédiction d’Apollon, leur divinité principale. Celui-ci devient ainsi protecteur des colons, avec les mêmes fonctions polyvalentes qu’il a dans la métropole. Aussi la ville est-elle appelée d'après son nom. Cela ne cadre en aucune façon avec la conclusion hasardée que sa divinité tutélaire soit Apollon sous son aspect d’káôñüò. Cette erreur réside déjà dans la tentative d’établir un parallèle entre la statue d’Apollon, l’oeuvre de Calamis, et les effigies des monnaies frappées par Apollonia (Pick 1898, 219-230). L’une des émissions de monnaies de bronze porte l’inscription ’ÁÐÏËËÙÍОÓ ÉÁÔÑÏÕ qui encadre une statue reposant sur une base. Se fondant sur l’emploi du génitif et sur la représentation de la base, B. Pick affirme que c’est une reproduction de la statue de Calamis, qui serait érigée en l’honneur d’Apollon káôñüò. Cette constatation se trouve cependant démentie par les données

Les monuments des IIIe-IIe s. av. J.-C fournissent des données plus abondantes sur le culte d’Apollon à Apollonia. Ce sont les décrets qui contribuent au plus haut degré à l’étude de l’organisation de la vie religieuse de la ville. Des huit fragments qui nous sont parvenus, seuls deux nous conservent la dernière partie du texte où est écrit que ces décrets devraient être placés dans le temple d’Apollon. Les six autres seraient gardés toujours dans ce temple, qui serait le temple principal et servirait aussi d’archives lapidaires de la ville. Le décret le plus ancien, découvert à Apollonia, est daté du milieu du IIIe s. av. J.-C. (IGBulg., I, No 388). On n’en possède qu’un petit fragment de sa partie gauche. La 55

ANCIENT GREEK COLONIES IN THE BLACK SEA 2 plus importante est la dernière ligne conservée du texte que G. Mihailov reconstruit de la manière suivante: dí ô§é jåñ§é ôï™ ’Аðüëëùíоò. Se fondant sur la mention d’une couronne à la fin de la ligne précédente, il admet que le texte indique l’endroit où le personnage honoré devrait obtenir la couronne plutôt que l’endroit où devrait être placé le décret. Il s’agit évidemment du temple du culte habituel d’Apollon en tant que protecteur de la ville. Or, dans le texte, on a enregistré aussi des formes doriennes qui nous renvoient à une ville dorienne, notamment à Messambria voisine. Selon G. Mihailov, le décret serait émis par Messambria pour honorer les mérites d’un certain stratège, à la tête de troupes ayant défendu la ville contre un ennemi quelconque. Un exemplaire en serait placé dans le temple d’Apollonia en raison de ses contacts éventuels avec la ville. Aussi peuton admettre que le personnage obtiendrait la couronne à Messambria dans un temple d’Apollon, qui en est toujours la divinité tutélaire. Le deuxième décret, daté de la même époque, est promulgué incontestablement par Apollonia pour honorer un citoyen de Callatis (IGBulg., I, No 391). Sa partie centrale est mieux conservée et fournit plus de détails. Il y est indiqué que le décret devrait être inscrit sur une dalle de marbre et Píáèsíáé dí ô§é jåñ§é ôï™ ’Аðüëëùíоò. C’est l’unique témoignage épigraphique montrant l’importance du temple d’Apollon en tant que temple principal de la ville. Ses prêtres seraient aussi, au moins à l’époque hellénistique, des éponymes d’Apollonia, quoiqu’on ne dispose pas de données épigraphiques concrètes à ce sujet.

presque identique de la divinité, accompagnée de l’inscription APOLLWNOS IATROS – sont situées au IIIe s. av. J.-C. au plus tôt. Il s’ensuit que le culte d’Apollon présente ces deux aspects à des époques différentes. D’autre part, le décret ne nous informe pas du tout dans lequel des deux temples, et dans lesquelles des deux villes il devrait être placé, car à Histria, il existerait aussi deux temples d’Apollon. Selon toute vraisemblance, le décret a été fait en deux exemplaires, dont l’un a été mis à Histria où il a été découvert. Or, c’est un décret d’Apollonia, et il est tout à fait logique que son premier exemplaire officiel soit conservé dans les archives officielles de la ville, notamment dans le temple d’Apollon. Aussi possède-t-on son double, car la boulé et le démos ne pouvaient pas décider de déposer un document officiel d’Apollonia à Histria, alors que le double ne nécessite pas d’indication spéciale. De cette époque datent aussi deux dédicaces à la divinité portant cette épiclèse, conservées à Apollonia. La première dédicace, dont le lieu de la découverte demeure inconnu (IGBulg., I, No 399), est adressée à ’Аðüëëùí káôñüò pour la santé et le salut de Rhoemetalcès II et de son épouse, et cadre donc avec l’aspect de guérisseur du culte d’Apollon. La deuxième a été découverte près de l’église Saint-Georges (IGBulg, I, No 400) et est datée des Ier-IIe s. ap. J.-C. D’après d’autres auteurs, elle aurait été trouvée dans l’île Saint-Kirik parmi différents matériaux antiques. Il y est question d’un certain Thrace, à en juger par son nom, qui reconstruit la ville détruite et dédie un édifice à Apollon Iatros. L’époque et les événements auxquels se rattache l’inscription sont très controversés, mais il apparaît que c’est un Thrace, déjà devenu citoyen d’Apollonia, qui érige à l’époque romaine des édifices en l’honneur d’Apollon Iatros, vraisemblablement son temple aussi.

Un autre décret, découvert à Histria, mais directement lié à Apollonia, est daté du IIe s. av. J.-C. (IGBulg., I, No 388 bis = ISM, I, No 64). Il est émis par la boulé et le démos d’Apollonia pour honorer les mérites d’un citoyen d’Histria qui, à la tête de ses compatriotes, est venu au secours des Apolloniates, attaqués par les Messambriotes. Le temple d’Apollon y est mentionné à plusieurs endroits et à différentes occasions. Le plus grand mérite du personnage honoré est d’avoir empêché la profanation du temple d’Apollon. Le texte nous informe aussi de la décision de lui ériger une statue et de la placer åkò ô§é jåñ§é ôï™ EАðüëëùíоò EÉáôñï™. Or, la partie la plus importante du décret, indiquant où il devrait être déposé, ne nous est pas conservée. On peut supposer que c’est dans le temple d’Apollon, mentionné dans le décret précédent, qui devait être le temple principal de la ville. Le fait que la divinité est désignée de deux manières différentes dans un même monument officiel témoigne de l’existence de deux temples. C’est pour la première fois qu’Apollon y porte l’épiclèse d’káôñüò et l’on peut en déduire que cet aspect de son culte apparaît à l’époque hellénistique.

La localisation du temple d’Apollon à Apollonia fait depuis longtemps l’objet de discussions. Certains auteurs situent le temple, et par conséquent, la partie la plus importante de la ville, dans l’île Saint-Kirik, sur la base des éléments architecturaux livrés par les fouilles qu’on pourrait dater d’une époque très ancienne et rattacher au premier temple d’Apollon dont le culte serait importé par les colons milésiens (Frel 1960, 239-251). D’autres localisent le temple dans la partie la plus élevée de l’île en se fondant sur la découverte de différents éléments architecturaux, ainsi que d’un monument anépigraphe dédié à Apollon (Škorpil 1930-31, 57sq.). Selon une autre hypothèse, le temple se situe au centre de la ville actuelle de Sozopol d’où proviennent de nombreux matériaux antiques, le décret où il est indiqué qu'il est placé dans le temple d’Apollon, et le relief votif anépigraphe à Apollon (Galabov 1961, 224; Mihailov 1970, 353-355; No 388 bis). Lors des fouilles archéologiques, on a dégagé, en effet, au nord de l’église, une basilique médiévale et d’abondants matériaux antiques de périodes différentes de la ville (Nedev,

L’illustration en sont aussi les monnaies frappées par la ville. Les monnaies à l’effigie habituelle d’Apollon en protecteur sont datées des Ve-IVe s. av. J.-C. – celles d’argent, et éventuellement du IVe s. av. J.-C. – celles de bronze, alors que les monnaies qui portent l’image 56

ZLATOZARA GOTCHEVA: LA THRACE PONTIQUE ET LA MYTHOLOGIE GRECQUE Panayotova 2003, 97-98). Le fait que le temple fait face au port donne lieu à certains auteurs de le localiser dans l’île Saint-Ivan, mais il n’y en a pas de témoignages archéologiques.

polyvalentes qu’il a à Milet, et que tout au long de son existence, la colonie a entretenu des relations étroites avec sa métropole. Ce n’est donc pas par hasard qu’elle porte son nom. Le temple d’Apollon est le temple principal et sert d’archives lapidaires de la ville. C’est apparemment à l’époque hellénistique qu’apparaît à Apollonia et dans d’autres villes pontiques le culte quelque peu différencié d’Apollon Iatros.

Ces discussions aboutiraient à une impasse, si l’on procède à une interprétation exacte des données du décret découvert à Histria. Celui-ci nous informe à l'évidence de l’existence de deux temples – le temple principal d’Apollon, lié à son culte de divinité tutélaire de la ville aux fonctions polyvalentes, introduit avec l’arrivée des colons, et qui servirait d’archives lapidaires, et un autre temple, mentionné uniquement dans ce décret, consacré au culte d’Apollon aux fonctions concrètes de guérisseur, et où devait être déposée la statue de l’Histriote honoré. Les témoignages écrits sur la localisation de ces temples sont trop vagues. A en croire Strabon, la ville serait située dans une île où s’érigerait un temple d’Apollon qui serait son temple principal. Il convient ici de se rapporter au décret honorant les mérites de l’Histriote, qui sauverait justement ce temple. Le fait que le texte sur un monument officiel indique de placer la statue dans le temple d’Apollon Iatros, et qu’il s’agit faits méritoires concrets, est une preuve de l’existence d’un deuxième temple.

La cité la plus proche d’Apollonia, par ses contacts étroits avec la métropole et par le caractère de sa culture, est Histria. L’absence d’un niveau d’occupation moderne, à la différence d’Apollonia, ouvre de larges possibilités d’exploration du territoire de la colonie antique. Les fouilles systématiques, menées pendant de longues années par des missions roumaines, ont livré des matériaux archéologiques et épigraphiques abondants, qui éclaircissent le développement de la vie religieuse de la ville pendant les différentes périodes de son existence. Histria est fondée par les Milésiens peu après Apollonia – au VIIe s. av. J.-C. Son nom lui vient de sa situation – proche de l’embouchure de l’Istros. On ne dispose malheureusement pas de données sur le caractère et l’organisation de la vie religieuse et publique de la ville du temps de sa fondation. Des témoignages plus nombreux nous sont parvenus des IVe-Ier s. av. J.-C., donc plus anciens que ceux d’Apollonia, quand Histria est déjà une colonie grecque organisée sur le modèle de la polis, qui possède sa boulé et son démos, son administration et son sacerdoce avec à la tête un éåñÝõò. C’est l’époque de la floraison de la ville sur tous les plans (Danov 1969, 13 sq.). Les données les plus anciennes et les plus concrètes sur le culte d’Apollon datent du IVe s. av. J.-C. Deux monuments de cette période, consacrés à Apollon, fournissent des informations révélatrices sur le caractère de son culte à l’époque classique. Le premier, une base de statue, porte une dédicace à Apollon Iatros adressée par Îåüîåíïò FÉðïëü÷ï (ISM, I, No 169). La mention, à la fin de l’inscription, de dðrFÉðïëü÷ï ôï Èåïäüôï à titre d’éponyme la détermine comme un monument officiel et il est évident que le nom du prêtre, employé au génitif, correspond exactement au patronyme du dédicant.

En tout cas, de tels mérites renvoient incontestablement au temple principal de la ville qu’est le temple d’Apollon, son protecteur. Aussi est-on fondé à rechercher l’emplacement du temple en dehors de la ville, dans un téménos sacré, et c’est celui-ci qui serait sauvé par les Histriotes, venus au secours des Apolloniates, car il est établi que l’ennemi ne réussit pas à envahir la ville. Ces constatations nous portent à localiser le temple d’Apollon dans l’île Saint-Kirik où l’on a identifié des vestiges du temps de la fondation d’Apollonia. D’autre part, le texte du décret peut recevoir une interprétation plus nuancée. Il n’y est pas question tout simplement d’actions concrètes. La ville est sauvée en effet, mais le plus grand mérite du personnage honoré est d’avoir empêché la profanation de son lieu le plus sacré, le temple d’Apollon. La localisation du deuxième temple semble être un point plus délicat. Il est vraisemblable qu’il soit situé dans la ville même. C’est ce temple que viserait l’inscription de l’époque romaine qui nous informe de la reconstruction d’un certain édifice qui serait dédié à Apollon Iatros. Le lieu de la découverte et la datation de ce monument ne sont pas établis avec précision, mais il est évident que quelque désastre a mené à la destruction de quelque édifice et, en partie, de la ville. Ce temple d’Apollon Iatros serait situé à proximité de l’ancien temple, dans un téménos déterminé de l’île Saint-Kirik ou, ce qui est moins probable, quelque part dans une région qu’on pourrait lier à l’époque hellénistique et aux travaux publics qui lui sont caractéristiques.

On peut supposer que cette statue a été placée par quelque Histriote de rang élevé en un endroit central pour honorer Apollon sous un aspect qui occuperait une place importante dans la religion officielle de la ville. La filiation entre ces deux personnages ressort davantage du deuxième monument qui semble être une architrave de temple (ISM, I, No 144). Il s’agit apparemment d’une famille sacerdotale de deux frères, dont l’un figure dans l’inscription précédente en éponyme, et l’autre – dans celle-ci – dðß jÝñåùFÇçóáãüñåù ôï™ Èåïäüôï, la preuve en étant leur patronyme commun. La récurrence des trois noms dans l’énumération des personnages vient corroborer leur lien de parenté. Quoique cette inscription n’indique pas formellement que ce sont des prêtres

Aussi insuffisantes que soient les données d’Apollonia, l’on peut toutefois en déduire qu’Apollon est la divinité tutélaire principale de la ville, avec les mêmes fonctions 57

ANCIENT GREEK COLONIES IN THE BLACK SEA 2 d’Apollon Iatros, c’est une évidence, si l’on prend en considération le caractère officiel des dédicaces que ceux-ci adressent à la divinité. Il s’ensuit qu’à une époque très ancienne, le culte d’Apollon Iatros jouit déjà d’une grande popularité à Histria et que ses prêtres héréditaires en sont aussi des éponymes. Quoique inconnu sous cet aspect à Milet, Apollon Iatros occupe une place d’honneur dans le panthéon de la ville en tant que divinité tutélaire principale (Bilabel 1912, 80-118).

probant de la vénération à Histria d’Apollon Iatros et ne contribue en aucune façon à l’élucidation de ce point délicat. Des deux décrets qui nous informent où ils devraient être conservés, dans l’un (ISM, I, No 21), on ne lit qu’Apollon. L’épiclèse d’Iatros y est ajoutée arbitrairement par les éditeurs. Dans l’autre, on ne pourrait voir qu’un A (ISM, I, No 18). Il est à signaler aussi une dédicace à Apollon où il porte l’épithète de Öïëçõôçñéïò que l’éditeur fait dériver d’un mot qui signifierait ‘lieu de réunion’. Aussi peut-on rattacher cette épithète à ses fonctions sociales de protecteur de la ville.

Ce culte est attesté aussi par trois décrets de date ultérieure où le nom d’Apollon est accompagné de l’épiclèse d’Iatros. Dans le décret le plus ancien, daté du IIIe s. av. J.-C. (ISM, I, No 1), on peut lire [jÝñåù EАðüëë]ùíоòEÉáôñï™ et il est évident que le prêtre d’Apollon y figure en tant qu'éponyme. Or, la partie du décret, indiquant où celui-ci devrait être placé, n’est pas conservée. Le fait que le prêtre d’Apollon Iatros y est mentionné comme éponyme, bien que seulement comme jÝñåõò, nous porte cependant à admettre que son temple servirait aussi d’archives lapidaires d’Histria à cette époque.

Il ressort de ce qui précède qu’à Histria, vers la fin du IVe s. av. J.-C., le culte d’Apollon importé par les colons se trouve remplacé, dans une certaine mesure, par le culte d’Apollon Iatros, qui occupe une place primordiale dans sa vie religieuse, mais dont la voie de la pénétration demeure inconnue. Son prêtre est éponyme et son temple servirait, dans la plupart des cas, d’archives lapidaires de la ville. Toutefois, le culte d’Apollon en tant que protecteur des colons et de sa population, ne perd pas de son importance. Il est vraisemblable qu’un temple lui était dédié à Histria à l’époque hellénistique, lorsque cette cité connaît une grande prospérité sur tous les plans. Si l’on en juge par les matériaux épigraphiques et archéologiques, on peut admettre qu’il y existait deux temples d’Apollon, d’autant plus qu’une des inscriptions nous apprend qu’un temple d’Apollon Iatros aurait été édifié à la fin du IIIe s. av. J.-C. Les recherches ultérieures jetteront de la lumière sur le temple le plus ancien d’Apollon à l'époque de la fondation de la colonie. Après sa destruction par Burebista en l’an 55 av. J.-C., Histria dépérit et ne connaît que de brèves périodes d’essor dans le cadre du koinon, ce qui n’a pas d’écho dans les monuments épigraphiques. On ne dispose pas d’informations sur le développement ultérieur du culte d’Apollon et sur sa place dans la religion officielle de la ville. Il ne reprend vigueur que dans la basse antiquité, à l’époque paléochrétienne.

Le deuxième décret est daté du IIe s. av. J.-C. (ISM, I, No 34). Dans un petit fragment de sa partie droite, on peut lire íïò ôï™ EÉáôñï™, mais il serait opportun d’y restituer le nom d’Apollon. Pour nous, plus important est le texte suivant: ðáñN ô’í âùì’í] ôï™ EАðüëëùíоò. Il soulève la question si c’est un autel dédié au culte commun d’Apollon ou si cette omission de l’épiclèse d’Iatros est intentionnelle, car le temple est déjà mentionné de cette manière ci-dessus. En tout cas, il est évident que le temple d’Apollon Iatros servirait d’archives lapidaires de la ville, au moins au IIe s. av. J.-C. Il y a enfin un autre décret qui mentionne le temple d’Apollon Iatros (ISM, I, No 54). C’est un décret long et abondant en détails, qui porte sur certains rapports de la ville avec Apollonia. Un prêtre d’Apollon Iatros y figure, mais le texte laisse supposer que c’est un prêtre d’Apollonia plutôt que d’Histria.

La troisième colonie milésienne, Odessos, est fondée à peu près à la même époque. Se fondant sur le nom de la ville, qui serait d’origine thrace, certains auteurs considèrent que celle-ci apparaît sur l’emplacement d’une ancienne agglomération thrace. Les recherches étymologiques les plus récentes (Beševliev 1974, 3-7) indiquent aussi que ce nom est formé sur une racine préhellénique, en invoquant à l’appui de nombreux parallèles. Pour le moment, il n’y a pas de données sur l’existence d’une telle agglomération sous Odessos. Cependant, les résultats des fouilles permettent de conclure qu’à la fin de l’époque hellénistique et au début de l’époque romaine, la religion thrace locale exerce une forte influence sur la vie religieuse de la ville. A proximité de l’antique Odessos, on a découvert une tombe du Ve s. av. J.-C. et dans une nécropole hellénistique, explorée par G. Tončeva (matériaux inédits) – une petite tombe quadrangulaire, édifiée en

Dans deux autres décrets de cette époque, dont on ne possède que la fin (ISM, I, Nos 6, 28), est employée, d’après les éditeurs, une même formule. Dans le premier, il est indiqué qu’il devrait être placé dans le temple d’Apollon, mais il n’y a pas d’espace vide pour ajouter l’épiclèse. Le décret se termine par les mots êáëÝóáé äc ášô’í êár ðñ’ò ô’í jåñÝá ôï™ EАðüëëùíïò et l’on peut en déduire qu’il s’agit d’un temple et d’un prêtre d’Apollon sous son aspect général. Bien que la dalle soit brisée en deux, l’inscription y est bien lisible et paraît assurée. Les éditeurs ont reconstitué un texte identique dans la deuxième inscription, vraisemblablement par analogie avec la première. Il semble qu’ils considèrent comme sûre cette formule pour ne pas combler la lacune existante. Aucun des autres cas où les éditeurs essaient de restituer le texte manquant n'apparaît comme un témoignage 58

ZLATOZARA GOTCHEVA: LA THRACE PONTIQUE ET LA MYTHOLOGIE GRECQUE J.-C.∗ Pour trois d’entre eux (IGBulg., I, Nos 37, 43 bis, 45 bis), la partie indiquant où ils devraient être conservés ne nous est pas parvenue.

dalles de pierre dans l’appareil des grandes tombes en dalles rectangulaires. Celle-ci a livré une urne cinéraire thrace et une petite cruche caractéristique de la céramique thrace. Ces témoignages matériels viennent confirmer aussi que la population thrace, quoique fortement hellénisée, marque de son empreinte le développement de la vie culturelle et religieuse de la ville qui présente des aspects multiples et variés. Elle entretient, d'autre part, des rapports étroits avec l’arrière-pays voisin, en subissant la forte influence de la culture et de la religion déjà développées de sa population gète.

Dans l’autre décret (IGBulg., I, No 42 bis), G. Mihailov ajoute èåsíáé åkò ô’ jåñ’í, mais dans son commentaire, il propose plutôt ôï™ Áðüëëùíïò ou des dieux de Samothrace, par analogie avec une autre inscription (IGBulg., I, No 42) qui contient cette indication. Or, c’est une question à part, qui n’a rien à voir avec Apollon, sa place dans la religion d’Odessos et l’importance de son temple en tant qu’archives lapidaires. Il est à signaler deux autres monuments, dont l’un, un décret bien conservé des IIIe-IIe s. av. J.-C., permet de lire èåsíáé åkò ô’ jåñ’í, sans mentionner le nom de la divinité (IGBulg., I, No 41). Cette inscription a malheureusement disparu. Or, la copie que l' on possède laisse voir un espace vide, ce qui nous porte à supposer que cette formule serait jugée suffisamment éloquente pour ne pas indiquer la divinité. Du moment que c’est un document officiel, on peut en déduire qu’il s’agit du temple principal de la ville, qui serait celui d’Apollon en tant que divinité tutélaire aux fonctions polyvalentes. G. Mihailov établit un parallèle entre ce décret et l’inscription No 42 de la même datation qui fait mention du sanctuaire des dieux de Samothrace et avance différentes hypothèses. Au demeurant, celle-ci est restituée assez arbitrairement et ne pourrait constituer qu’un témoignage isolé de leur culte à Odessos. On n’est pas fondé non plus à lier les Grands Dieux de Samothrace au Èå’ò ÌÝãáò, aussi conviendrait-il d’attribuer cette indication anonyme au temple d’Apollon.

Bien que recouverte entièrement par l’actuelle ville de Varna, Odessos est parmi les villes ouest-pontiques les mieux explorées. Les travaux de construction déployés à partir du début du XXe s. ont ouvert des possibilités nouvelles aux recherches archéologiques qui ont contribué à l’étude de sa vie économique, culturelle et religieuse. Comme dans toutes les colonies milésiennes de la côte pontique, le culte d’Apollon prédomine à Odessos. On ne dispose pas de données sur l’époque la plus ancienne de son existence et il est établi qu’on n’est nullement fondé à parler d’un culte d’Apollon Iatros (Mintchev 2003, 254). L’unique monument du musée de Varna que certains auteurs rattachent à Apollon est une tête de marbre, datée, d’après certaines particularités stylistiques, du Ve s. av. J.-C. Elle est considérée, sans arguments pertinents, comme une copie de la statue de Calamis d’Apollonia (Frel 1960, 239-251). Des informations indirectes sur la vénération d’Apollon aux Ve-IVe s. av. J.-C. fournissent aussi certains noms théophores, dérivés d’Apollon, enregistrés sur des stèles funéraires (IGBulg., I, Nos 95-106). Apollon apparaît sur l’avers des premières monnaies frappées au IVe s. av. J.-C. par la ville et c’est son image qui demeure la plus fréquente par la suite (Pick, Regling 1910, Nos 423-526).

La preuve en est une autre inscription bien conservée, datée de 44-43 av. J.-C., qui représente une liste de prêtres (IGBulg., I, No 46) Suivant l’opinion commune, ce sont des prêtres éponymes. Du fait qu’à Odessos, tout comme à Apollonia et à Histria, c’est l’ jåñÝõò et non l’Nñ÷éåñÝõò qui est éponyme, il est évident que c’est une liste de prêtres éponymes de la ville (Robert 1959, 192; Gočeva 1979, 49-53). Si l’on s’en rapporte à l’inscription No 41 de la même date où il est dit qu'elle a été déposée dans le temple d’Apollon, dans la mesure où nous avons affaire à un document officiel portant sur les relations politiques avec la population thrace, on pourrait conclure qu’il s'agit de prêtres d’Apollon. Les prêtres d’Apollon seraient dans ce cas les prêtres éponymes d’Odessos. Se ralliant pour une part à l’opinion de L. Robert, G. Mihailov nous renvoie toutefois à son propre commentaire de l’inscription No 42, où il aboutit à la conclusion aléatoire que c’est le Èå’ò ÌÝãáò qui serait l’éponyme de la ville. En effet, à part les monnaies de cette époque, celui-ci apparaît rarement sur d’autres

Des témoignages plus nombreux sur le développement et sur l’organisation de la vie religieuse d’Odessos nous sont parvenus de l’époque hellénistique. Sur ce point, les décrets de proxénie sont d’une grande importance. Ils sont cependant très fragmentaires pour la majorité, et le texte indiquant où ils devraient être placés ne nous est pas conservé. Dans un décret intact, daté de 45-44 av. J.-C. (IGBulg., I, No 43), on peut lire Píáèåsíáé åkò ô’ jåñ’í ôï™ Áðüëëùíïò, mais c’est une découverte fortuite qui ne peut contribuer à la localisation du temple d’Apollon. L’hypothèse (Mirtchev 1967, 3), selon laquelle il est identifié comme un édifice ionique, n’est fondée que sur la découverte d’un fragment architectural, vraisemblablement d’architrave, sur lequel on ne lit que Áðüëëù… En effet, le plan de l’édifice présente certains éléments qui permettraient de le déterminer comme un temple et de le dater de l’époque de la fondation de la ville. D’autant plus que dans le voisinage, on a retrouvé plus tard encore quatre décrets, réutilisés dans la construction de thermes romains, datés des IIе-Ier s. av.

∗ Sur l’indication de G. Tončeva, G. Mihailov les situe dans un édifice que celle-ci détermine sans fondement comme un sanctuaire du Héros Karabazmos et de Bendis. Cet édifice est d'époque plus tardive et son architecture n’évoque pas du tout un temple. En effet, ces décrets ont été livrés en spolia par les fouilles dans les murs des thermes romains.

59

ANCIENT GREEK COLONIES IN THE BLACK SEA 2 monuments officiels. Il y a lieu d’affirmer catégoriquement que durant toute l’époque préromaine, au moins, Apollon demeure la divinité tutélaire principale d’Odessos. Quant aux prêtres éponymes, leur lien avec Apollon se trouve confirmé par leurs noms mêmes. Des 45 prêtres, 9 portent un nom ou un patronyme théophore, dérivé d’Apollon. Une autre illustration de l’importance de son culte sont les monnaies frappées à son effigie. Sur l’avers de certaines d’entre elles figure seulement sa tête cernée d’une couronne de laurier.

cette époque il ne soit plus l’éponyme d’Odessos, mais continue à jouer un rôle important dans sa vie religieuse indépendamment de la pénétration de différents cultes et du renforcement de l’influence de la religion thrace. Quant à l’autre colonie milésienne, Tomis, on ne dispose que d’informations très fragmentaires. Il semble qu’elle soit fondée en même temps qu’Odessos, mais qu’elle joue, à l’époque la plus ancienne, un rôle insignifiant dans la vie de la côte pontique. C’est Apollon vraisemblablement qui serait son protecteur au temps de sa fondation. Le développement ultérieur de son culte n’est attesté que par deux monuments. Au début d’un décret, daté des IIe-Ier s. av. J.-C. par certains auteurs (ISM, II, No 15), on peut lire dðr jÝñåù EАðüëëùíïò. Malgré certaines hésitations dans le commentaire, il y a lieu de présumer qu’à l’époque hellénistique, au moins, Apollon serait l’éponyme de la ville. Or, il n’y a pas de données sur l’existence d’un temple qui lui serait dédié. A la fin du décret, il est indiqué que celui-ci était placé sur l’agora, ce qui paraît admissible pour cette époque en l’absence de temple d’Apollon.

Quoique mutilés, les monuments épigraphiques provenant d’Odessos viennent prouver qu’à cette époque, c’est le culte d’Apollon, importé par les colons milésiens, qui prédomine dans sa vie religieuse, que son temple sert d’archives lapidaires et que ses prêtres sont éponymes. A l’époque romaine, on voit pénétrer d’autres cultes, mais Apollon garde toujours sa place importante. Quelques listes d’éphèbes du début du IIIe s. laissent voir, à côté de la datation traditionnelle d’après les consuls romains, une formule singulière où figure en éponyme Darzalas, un témoignage de l’accroissement de l’influence thrace. Sur deux de ces monuments, Apollon est représenté en citharède, protecteur des concours organisés dans la ville. Sur l’un (IGBulg., I, No 47), audessus des inscriptions, Apollon est de face, sa cithare étant appuyée sur un autel. Sur l’autre (IGBulg., I, No 47 bis), au coin droit, c’est toujours Apollon à la cithare. Sur un autre décret-liste (IGBulg., I, No 48), Apollon porte la corona donatica. De toute évidence, Apollon apparaît comme le protecteur de ces concours, qui ont sans doute un caractère officiel, et qu’on pourrait rattacher au culte impérial, caractéristique de cette époque. Il existe aussi un monument dont il ne subsiste que la partie centrale et qui semble être une inscription honorifique (IGBulg., I, No 67). On ne peut y lire que –ðïí]ôÜñ÷ç------- õjïí ôyò ðïë[Ýùò--------------jåñÝá Ðïó[åéä§íïò êár È]å[ï™ ÌåãÜë]ïõ êár EÁðüëëïíïò. Cette inscription n’est pas datée, mais la désignation du personnage honoré comme pontarque laisse supposer qu’elle serait très ancienne, car il s’agirait du pontarque du koinon. Si l’on admet qu’à une époque plus ancienne, Odessos serait la métropole du koinon (Gočeva 1987, 247-249), ce qui paraît vraisemblable, on pourrait la dater au plus tard du début du IIe s. au plus tard. Les trois fonctions de ce personnage sont importantes.

D’une grande importance pour l’étude de la vie religieuse de Tomis est une inscription de l’époque romaine (ISM, II, No 116). C’est une dédicace en deux parties adressée à EÁðüëëùí áãõéåýò, c.-à-d. protecteur des routes. Le nom et le titre de l’empereur la font dater de 166-172. La dédicace serait faite suivant un oracle pour le salut et la victoire de Marc Aurèle et pour le salut et la victoire de la métropole Tomis. La première partie indique une datation d’après le légat de la province et la deuxième – une double datation – d’après le légat de la province et d’après le pontarque, ce qui démontre le caractère officiel de la dédicace. Le fait qu’Apollon y porte une épithète déterminée, même indiquée par un oracle qui ne serait plus celui de Didymes, et que la dédicace est adressée par la métropole de la pentapolis, vient prouver l’importance de son culte, le rôle accru de Tomis à l’époque romaine, et la place primordiale du pontarque dans la vie religieuse du koinon, ainsi que dans la célébration du culte impérial en Mésie inférieure. Insuffisantes sont aussi les données sur Messambria et Callatis, fondées presque un siècle après par Mégare, plus précisément, par ses colonies Byzantion et Chalcédoine. On dispose de plus d'informations sur Messambria. Elle est mentionnée chez plusieurs auteurs antiques, ce qui permet de situer sa fondation à la fin du VIe et au début du Ve s. av. J.-C. A en croire Strabon (XVII, 7, 6, 1), elle porte le nom de son fondateur Messa. Or, le deuxième élément de son nom – bria est d’origine thrace et signifie ‘ville’. L’exploration archéologique de l’actuelle ville de Nessebar vient étayer l’hypothèse que Messambria serait apparue sur l’emplacement d’une grande agglomération thrace, serait fortifiée et aurait une structure urbaine développée (Venedikov 1964, 46-51), ce qui implique la multiplicité de sa culture et de sa religion. Le plus ancien

A part le titre de pontarque, celui-ci est aussi désigné comme prêtre de trois divinités, ce qui est typique pour l’époque romaine: Apollon, qui serait toujours la divinité principale de toutes les villes du koinon, Poséidon, en tant que souverain de la mer, et le Èå’ò ÌÝãáò, qui jouerait déjà un rôle important dans la religion officielle d’Odessos. En effet, l’inscription est presque entièrement restituée par G. Mihailov qui souligne à maintes reprises l’importance de ce culte dans la ville. En l’occurrence, ce qui importe, c’est qu’Apollon occupe toujours une place primordiale dans la religion du koinon. Il semble qu’à 60

ZLATOZARA GOTCHEVA: LA THRACE PONTIQUE ET LA MYTHOLOGIE GRECQUE témoignage de la vénération d’Apollon dans la ville sont les monnaies frappées à son effigie aux VIe-Ve s. av. J.C. (Mouchmov 1912, Nos 3152-3164).

d’Apollon Iatros dans la ville par la seule analogie avec certaines colonies milésiennes, dont Histria et Apollonia, encore moins avec Olbia, où la situation est tout autre. D’autre part, les rapports entre Messambria et Apollonia ne sont pas suffisamment étroits pour parler d’une influence éventuelle dans ce sens. En l’occurrence, il conviendrait d’opter pour l’épithète de Ðýèéïò, sous laquelle Apollon serait honoré à Mégare, vraisemblablement par les colons mêmes qui seraient partis sur le conseil de son oracle de Delphes. En tout cas, ce n’est qu’une hypothèse qui n’est pas corroborée, pour le moment, par les monuments de Messambria. Il est tout à fait possible qu’Apollon y soit désigné sous une autre épithète fonctionnelle qui le caractériserait d’une manière ou d’une autre comme protecteur.

Les décrets de proxénie de l’époque hellénistique fournissent plus d’informations sur l’importance du culte d’Apollon dans la religion de Messambria. Le plus ancien, le décret en l’honneur du souverain thrace Sadalas, daté du IIIe s. av. J.-C. (IGBulg. I, No 307), est parmi les monuments les plus importants de l’histoire de la ville, et témoigne de ses rapports continus avec l’arrière-pays thrace et l’Etat thrace. A la fin du décret, bien conservé, il est dit que celui-ci est placé dans le temple d’Apollon, justement ðáñN ôNò óôÜëáò ô§ì ðñïãüíùí. Etant donné que quatre de ses prédécesseurs seraient honorés de décrets qui seraient déposés aussi dans ce temple, on pourrait reporter la date de son utilisation en tant qu’archives lapidaires à la deuxième moitié du IVe s. av. J.-C. La même indication est enregistrée encore sur quatre décrets, datés de la fin du IIIe et du début du IIe s. av. J.-C. (IGBulg., I, Nos 307 bis, 308 bis, 308 undec., 312). Tous sont malheureusement de provenance inconnue et ne pourraient contribuer à la localisation du temple d’Apollon. Seul l’un d’entre eux a été découvert, à côté d’autres monuments très fragmentaires, réemployés vraisemblablement comme des matériaux de construction, près de l’église Saint-Stéphane, mais le lieu d’où ils proviendraient n’est pas établi. Aussi insuffisants que soient les témoignages de Messambria, il en ressort qu’Apollon est sa divinité tutélaire, que son temple est le temple principal et sert d’archives lapidaires officielles de la ville à l’époque hellénistique, au plus tard, mais en fait apparemment à une époque plus ancienne, si l’on en juge par la mention des monuments des prédécesseurs de Sadalas.

Parmi les colonies grecques de la côte ouest-pontique, Dionysopolis présente un cas particulier. Les témoignages en sont très incertains et ne permettent d’établir ni l’époque de sa fondation ni l’origine de ses colons. Le nom de la ville, ainsi que sa localisation, sont longuement discutés. Les matériaux épigraphiques laissent supposer qu’elle existait déjà à la fin du IVe ou au début du IIIe s. av. J.-C. Il s'agit de trois stèles funéraires découvertes à Balčik (IGBulg., I, Nos 25, 26, 27). Sur la première, le défunt porte un mon grec et est désigné comme êõæéêçíüò. Les deux autres sont consacrées à des femmes dont les noms sont également grecs. La représentation du canthare sur la première est très caractéristique de l’époque. Elle est enregistrée aussi sur deux monuments de Messambria, datés du IIIe s. av. J.-C. (Robert 1959, 107, note 2), et sur une autre stèle, provenant de Cyzique (Mendel 1912-1914, No 1083). On la rattache en général, particulièrement dans les cas d’ornements de lierre, à Dionysos. G. Mihailov suggère l’hypothèse de la fondation de la colonie par des Cyzicains pour cette raison.

Selon la légende, certaines des colonies mégariennes, dont Byzantion et Chalcédoine, qui sont en effet des métropoles de Messambria et de Callatis, seraient fondées suivant les prophéties de l’oracle d’Apollon à Delphes. C’est ce qui explique le rattachement des colons à Apollon. L’indication sur certains monuments qu'ils sont conservés dans les temples d’autres divinités, rarement enregistrées, serait due à quelque circonstance particulière. Il est à signaler le décret honorant les mérites d’un médecin où il est dit être placé dans le temple d’Asclépios, dont le culte ne serait pas si populaire dans la ville, mais de lui ériger une statue dans le temple d’Apollon (IGBulg., I, No 322 ter). Du fait que l’inscription est endommagée et qu’après le nom d’Apollon, qui paraît sûr, il y a un vide, les éditeurs y ajoutent arbitrairement l’épiclèse d’Iatros. En fait, une telle restitution est tout à fait inopportune. A Messambria, on n’a jamais enregistré un culte d’Apollon Iatros.

L’organisation de Dionysopolis en polis se trouve attestée par le premier décret promulgué par la boulé et le démos, daté de l’an 48 (IGBulg., I, No 13), qui nous informe aussi de sa vie religieuse. Le personnage honoré y est mentionné comme prêtre du Èå’ò ÌÝãáò, mais il est peu probable qu’il soit celui d’Odessos, quoiqu’il existe une hypothèse, selon laquelle Dionysopolis serait une colonie d’Odessos (Škorpil 1930-31, 57; Tafrali 1928, 5-18; Vulpe 1943, 14-29). D’autre part, il serait lié à Sérapis et aux dieux de Samothrace. La majorité des monuments officiels de la ville sont de l’époque romaine et sont dédiés au culte impérial. A Dionysopolis, on n’a pas enregistré un culte d’Apollon. Or, on dispose d’une plaque votive consacrée à Apollon, Artémis et Dionysos, découverte à Kranevo (anc. Ekréné) que certains auteurs rattachent à l’ancien nom de Crounoi (IGBulg., I, No 33). Apollon y est représenté en citharède, en vêtement long, aux cheveux longs et de face, dans le champ au-dessus de son épaule gauche, on voit une lyre et à sa droite – Artémis, appuyée sur un

Il n’y a pas non plus de données sur la vénération d’Apollon sous cet aspect à Mégare. Il s’ensuit qu’on n’est pas fondé à supposer l’existence d’un temple 61

ANCIENT GREEK COLONIES IN THE BLACK SEA 2 monuments qui nous permettraient de le rechercher dans la religion ancienne contemporaine de la fondation de la colonie ou de le considérer comme importé par les colons de Milet. L’on ne saurait le situer non plus dans la religion de la population grecque de la colonie en tant que protecteur de la ville et culte principal qui rivaliserait avec celui d’Apollon (Gočeva 1996, 121-127). En effet, l’hypothèse de son origine micro-asiatique paraît plus plausible. Les monuments les plus anciens, qui fournissent les informations les plus crédibles sur l’apparition de ce culte, sont les monnaies frappées par la ville à la fin du IIe s. av. J.-C. (Pick, Regling 1910, Nos 2177-2198). L’avers de certaines porte la tête d’un homme barbu âgé. Sur d’autres est représentée la tête d’Apollon qui, apparemment, demeure la divinité patronne principale de la population à cette époque (Pick, Regling 1910, Nos 2191-2209). B. Pick les répartit en trois groupes.

sceptre long, portant un carquois sur l’épaule – une iconographie inhabituelle en Thrace. Dionysos, qui figure dans l’inscription, n’y est pas présent. On peut y lire dðåêüïiò. Selon une hypothèse (Mendel 1914, cat. 3, No 853), cette épithète serait employée au pluriel à la suite de l’apparition sur la plaque de l’image d’Artémis. Quelque insuffisants que soient les témoignages des colonies ouest-pontiques grecques, on peut en déduire qu’à l’époque hellénistique, au moins, Apollon est leur divinité tutélaire principale. Son culte, importé par les colons de Milet, occupe une place dominante dans la vie religieuse des colonies milésiennes surtout et demeure traditionnel dans l’esprit de leur population. C’est ce qui pourrait expliquer la pénétration du culte d’Apollon dans la religion de la population autochtone des régions orientales de la Thrace et son syncrétisme avec sa divinité principale – le Cavalier thrace.

Le premier groupe est constitué des monnaies à l’image du même dieu, allongé et demi-vêtu, tenant de la main la corne d’abondance (Pick, Regling 1910, No 2177) ou une phiale (Pick, Regling 1910, No 2200). Celui-ci est flanqué d’un côté d’une amphore d’où coule de l’eau. Tous ces éléments attestent du caractère chtonien de son culte. La divinité ainsi allongée se rattache, selon B. Pick, à Pluton ou à une divinité anonyme, qui apparaît comme protectrice de la ville et que l’inscription désigne comme QEOS MEGAS ODHSITWN. L’amphore déversant de l’eau qui figure sur certains exemplaires semble symboliser la fertilité de cette contrée. La situation géographique d’Odessos et le développement de son économie laissent supposer aussi quelque lien de la divinité avec la mer, qui n’est pourtant pas représentée en symbole. Certaines de ces monnaies portent une tête féminine. Par analogie avec les personnages féminins des mystères d’Eleusis, elle est considérée comme l’image de sa parèdre (Pick, Regling 1910, No 523). Quelque exagéré que cela puisse paraître, on est fondé à admettre la vénération, à cette époque, d’un tel couple, voire même l’existence du culte d’une Grande déesse-mère.

Le culte des Grands Dieux L’apparition du culte des Grands dieux anonymes dans la Méditerranée orientale est un phénomène typique de l’époque hellénistique. Déjà Hérodote (II, 52) parle des dieux de la population préhellénique de la Méditerranée orientale: ‘Équon dè pánta próteron o¥ Pelasgoì qeoî ¢peuxómenoi ªß ¢gõ ¢n Dwdýnü oÎda ˜koúsaß ,epwnumíhn dè o©d’ o¾noma epouevnto oudenì a©twn…... qeoùß dè proswnómasán sfeaß ˜pò toû poioútou †ti kósmö qénteß tà pánta prëgmata kaì pántaß nomàß eîxon’, c.à-d. ‘Autrefois, à ce que j’ai entendu dire à Dodone, les Pélasges offraient tous les sacrifices en invoquant ‘les dieux’, sans désigner aucun d’entre eux par un qualificatif ou par un nom personnel… Ils les avaient appelé ainsi ‘qeoùß’∗ en parlant de cette considération, que c’est pour avoir établi l’ordre dans l’univers que les dieux présidaient à la répartition de toutes choses.’ Ce témoignage, selon lequel cette désignation des dieux est héritée de la langue pélasgique, les définit comme créateurs et maîtres de l’univers et de ses lois. Le terme de Qeòß Mégaß semble avoir la même signification, c’est-à-dire divinité tutélaire d’un site. Cela cadre avec les tendances à la vénération de dieux aux fonctions polyvalentes de l’époque hellénistique. Ce phénomène est aussi enregistré dans les villes ouestpontiques. La question du culte de cette catégorie de divinités a fait l’objet de beaucoup de publications sur différents monuments, sans pour autant aboutir à quelque étude comparative. Le culte du Qeòß Mégaß $Odësitwn, que l’on identifie au dieu thrace Darzalas syncrétisé à une époque plus récente, soulève beaucoup de problèmes. Aussi l’étude de leur culte abonde-t-elle en erreurs et imprécisions (Gočeva 1981, 229-234; Gočeva 1994, 243256).

Les monnaies du deuxième groupe portent l’effigie d’un dieu barbu monté à cheval, au diadème ou à la couronne, tenant lui aussi la corne d’abondance (Pick, Regling 1910, No 2214). Bien que d’une époque ancienne, cette représentation laisse déceler quelque influence ou syncrétisme de l’iconographie du Qeòß Mégaß $Odësitwn avec le culte local de la divinité protectrice thrace – le Cavalier thrace. (Tončeva 1952, 83-91). Ce n’est qu’une hypothèse car, excepté la figure équestre, l’iconographie diffère sensiblement de celle de la divinité thrace (CCET, 1979, I). Sur les monnaies du troisième groupe, la divinité est debout, avec une barbe et un bandeau sur la tête (Pick, Regling 1910, No 2228). C’est l’iconographie généralisée du culte du dieu protecteur, caractéristique de l’époque hellénistique, tout comme celle de Zeus,

L’apparition du culte du Qeòß Mégaß $Odësitwn à Odessos n’a pas de datation certaine. Il n’y a pas de ∗

On considère que le mot dérive de la racine du verbe tíqhmi

62

ZLATOZARA GOTCHEVA: LA THRACE PONTIQUE ET LA MYTHOLOGIE GRECQUE d’Asclépios, de Poséidon. Toutes ces pièces portent la même inscription qui souligne la valeur de l’image. Estce là une copie d’une statue érigée dans la ville (Gerasimov 1951, 65) ou son prototype serait-il une statue de Zeus ou d’une autre divinité (Tončeva 1969, 912) ? Selon T. Gerassimov, ce sont des monnaies à destination particulière, phénomène typique de plusieurs villes micro-asiatiques de l’époque hellénistique. C’est une illustration de l’importance du culte de la divinité, vénérée vraisemblablement à cette époque à l’égal d’Apollon, le dieu protecteur principal. Cela explique la représentation simultanée des deux divinités sur l’avers de certaines monnaie frappées par Odessos à cette époque. Des éléments iconographiques analogues sont aussi enregistrés sur des terres cuites d’une des nécropoles d’Odessos, révélateurs du caractère chtonien du culte (Tončeva 1952, 83). D’autre part, la grande ressemblance de cette iconographie avec celle de Sérapis est à l’origine de longues discussions dans la littérature spécialisée (Pippidi 1965, 112-114). Or, il convient de signaler que Sérapis est un dieu hybride, né à l’époque hellénistique de la fusion des idéеs égyptiennes et grecques d’un culte généralisé, et unissant les traits d’Osiris, de Zeus, d’Asclépios et de Poséidon. D’autant plus qu’à l’époque hellénistique, le terme de Qeòß Mégaß est largement utilisé dans ce sens (Gočeva: à paraître). Tout à fait inopportun est le parallèle avec l’iconographie de Dionysos (Oppermann 2004, 199) qui présente en effet des différences essentielles, en particulier à Odessos.

Le Qeòß Mégaß est mentionné sur quelques monuments épigraphiques d’Odessos. Sur une stèle funéraire, le défunt est désigné comme ˜rxiatròß dhmofílhtoß kaì ¥ereùß Qeoû Megálou kaì gumnasíarxhß (IGBulg., I, No 150). L’attribution de ces trois fonctions paraît tout à fait logique. La fonction de médecin, précisément de médecin en chef ‘aimé du peuple’, est étroitement liée à la fonction de prêtre. Il en est de même du gymnasiarque. Ces données se trouvent confirmées par le monument même, qui possède tous les attributs de monument funéraire d’un personnage de rang élevé – il est de grandes dimensions, orné d’un fronton et d’acrotères, et exécuté en haut relief. La représentation est disposée dans une sorte d’édicule – le personnage est assis sur une chaise à dossier et fait face à son épouse, ensevelie avec lui. Le monument est daté du IIe s. (Gerov 1948/1949, No 642). Il y a lieu de faire appel au commentaire d’un décret dont on ne possède que la fin, où il est dit qu'il doit être placé dans le temple des dieux de Samothrace (IGBulg., I, No 42). G. Mihailov essaie de localiser ce temple et d’expliquer son importance étant donné que c’est l’unique mention de leur culte à Odessos. Ainsi donc, il conjecture que l’épouse du défunt serait prêtresse de quelques Grandes déesses (quoiqu’elles ne soient pas mentionnées de cette façon dans le décret et que cette désignation n’est enregistrée nullement sur la côte pontique, il affirme qu’elles apparaissent comme des épouses du Qeòß Mégaß), en établissant arbitrairement un parallèle avec les déesses d’Eleusis et Poséidon.

A la fin du Ier s. av. J.-C., la ville frappe des monnaies dont le revers porte une corne d’abondance, à côté dе l’inscription ODHSITWN, en tant qu’attribut du Grand dieu d’Odessos. Son image demeure fréquente aussi sur les monnaies de l’époque impériale romaine. Des monnaies à son effigie sont déjà émises au temps de l’empereur Trajan (Pick, Regling 1910, Nos 2227, 2232). Elles témoignent de la perpétuation de l’ancienne tradition préromaine. Il est à signaler la représentation d’un dieu, allongé sur une kliné, tenant la corne d’abondance – type caractérisant uniquement l’époque de Marc Aurèle. Pendant une brève période – vers le milieu du IIe s., le dieu est représenté en cavalier barbu (Pick, Regling 1910, Nos 2246, 2247). Sur les monnaies de ce type, la corne d’abondance est absente. Ceci indique que l’iconographie du Cavalier thrace est déjà fermement établie et que son culte jouit d’une grande popularité à Odessos. Sur certains exemplaires, le cavalier porte une lance, mais sur d’autres est enregistrée une iconographie mixte – il tient une phiale dans la main droite, et une corne d’abondance – dans la gauche (Pick, Regling 1910, No 2244). Or, sur ces monnaies ne figure aucune inscription qui identifierait la divinité au Qeòß Mégaß ou à Darzalas. Il semble que cet amalgame d’attributs et d’éléments iconographiques prouve le syncrétisme de ces deux cultes.

Plus loin, ses observations dénotent l’influence des opinions de différents auteurs portant soit sur les divinités d’Eleusis, soit sur celles de Samothrace, qui sont désignées dans la littérature spécialisée comme Cabires, Dioscures, Grands dieux, pour aboutir à Darzales dont le lien avec le Grand dieu d’Odessos n’est attesté par aucun monument. Pour nous, plus importantes sont ses réflexions sur le Qeòß Mégaß qu’il rattache à Sérapis, à Pluton, même à Dionysos, du seul fait qu’il porte une couronne, ainsi qu’aux dieux de Samothrace, toujours sans fondement. D’autre part, il s’associe à l’hypothèse que la représentation du Qeòß Mégaß debout sur certaines monnaies serait la reproduction d’une statue érigée devant son temple, dont l’existence ne fait aucun doute (Gerasimov 1951, 116-117). Il y a aussi une tentative, fondée sur la découverte de trois dédicaces aux Dioscures, dont deux sûres et une restituée, de rechercher leur culte et leur temple à Odessos, de les lier aux Cabires, qui n’y sont nullement attestés, ainsi qu’aux dieux de Samothrace et d’admettre même l’existence d’un temple commun, ce qui paraît absurde (Mirtchev 1967, 21-39). En effet, une telle hypothèse ne se trouve confirmée, pour le moment, ni par d’autres monuments, ni par des matériaux archéologiques. Un autre monument funéraire porte l’inscription ¥ereùß Qeoû Megálou kaì ¢uposiárxhß (IGBulg., І, No 186). En l’occurrence, il s’agit d’un titre particulier, enregistré 63

ANCIENT GREEK COLONIES IN THE BLACK SEA 2 uniquement à Odessos et à Tomis, que l’on pourrait lier à quelque fonction accomplie au cours des cérémonies religieuses accompagnant le banquet (Gočeva 2000, 7577).

l’empereur en compagnie du Grand dieu et le revers – l’inscription DARZALEIA (Gerasimov 1939, 332-335). Un fragment, vraisemblablement d’une inscription honorifique, où le personnage honoré est mentionné, entre autres, comme néocore du Qeoû Megálou Derzela, suggère le lien de son culte avec celui de l’empereur (IGBulg., I, No 230). C’est une mention toute particulière de la néocorie, qui est accordée en général sous cette forme à une ville ou à un temple à l’époque impériale, et qui apparaît comme un grand privilège. Il semble que ce soit un prêtre dans le temple de la divinité, dont la hiérarchie à l’orientale se trouve confirmée par le caractère oriental du culte du Grand dieu.

Dans un fragment de décret que les données paléographiques permettent de dater du milieu du IIe s. ou plus tôt, le personnage honoré est désigné comme pontarque et un peu plus loin – comme ¥ereùß Poseidônoß Qeoû Megálou kaì $Apóllwnou kaì ¢uposiárxhß. Là aussi, il s’agit de fonctions très importantes; d’autres encore pourraient figurer dans la partie détruite de l’inscription (IGBulg., І, No 67). Cette fonction de pontarque le rattache au gouvernement de la pentapolis, dont Odessos serait la métropole du koinon, à en juger par ces trois inscriptions (Gočeva 2002, 129131). Il est en outre prêtre de trois divinités, vénérées vraisemblablement dans la pentapolis, dont Apollon est le principal dieu protecteur de toutes les villes du koinon depuis leur fondation. Le Qeòß Mégaß joue à cette époque, comme le montrent les monnaies et ces trois monuments, un rôle important dans la religion officielle de la ville. La présence de Poséidon à côté des deux autres divinités serait due à l’importance de la mer Noire dans la vie économique de la pentapolis.

On juge des origines thraces de Darzalas par son nom et par deux monuments de l’intérieur de la Thrace du NordEst portant des inscriptions où la divinité, représentée sous une iconographie proprement thrace, est appelée sur l’un Darzei et sur l’autre – Darzala (IGBulg., II, Nos 768, 770). Il s’agit évidemment d’une divinité thrace vénérée sous une forme ou sous une autre dans cette région de la Thrace comme l’une des hypostases du dieu suprême anonyme thrace – le Cavalier thrace. Contrairement à la grande popularité du culte du Qeòß Mégaß $Odësitwn à Odessos et à sa liaison probable avec la pentapolis même, du temps où la ville est sa métropole, ce culte n’est pas concrètement attesté dans les autres poleis ouest-pontiques. Ainsi, le fameux monument d’Histria (ISM, I, No 145) demeure un cas isolé et énigmatique. Il s’agit d’un fragment d’architrave d’un temple de grandes dimensions, phénomène exceptionnel dans les villes ouest-pontiques. C’est le deuxième monument d’Histria, après un fragment d’inscription du temple d’Apollon Iatros, qui, suivant les données épigraphiques, est incontestablement le protecteur de la ville à cette époque. Ces deux monuments datent du IIIe s. av. J-C. – la période de l’épanouissement de la ville. C’est le seul témoignage de l’existence du culte d’un Grand dieu, probablement son patron.

Dans la littérature spécialisée, il existe depuis longtemps une hypothèse qui identifie le Qeòß Mégaß $Odësitwn à Darzalas déjà à l’époque préromaine, sans égard à l’absence de témoignages. Ce n’est qu’au début du IIIe s. que dans trois décrets d’éphèbes, qui fournissent des informations sur les jeux organisés à Odessos, figure déjà le Qeòß Mégaß, syncrétisé avec le culte thrace de Darzalas (IGBulg., І, Nos 47, 47 bis, 48). La datation des monuments est indiquée tout à fait selon les règles – d’après les consuls romains. Il est pourtant difficile d’interpréter la singulière formule œerwménou Qeoû Megálou Derzela, qui double cette datation, dans laquelle cette nouvelle divinité figure en tant qu’éponyme. L’absence du nom du prêtre ne permet pas de l’expliquer comme éponyme, en raison de la pénétration de l’influence thrace dans la ville. L’assertion de G. Mihailov que dans la liste des prêtres (IGBulg., I, No 46), il s’agirait de prêtres de Darzalas et que ce sont eux qui seraient éponymes d’Odessos n’est pas logique, puisqu’il manque le nom de la divinité (Гочева 1998, 30). En l’occurrence, il est évident que les jeux étaient dédiés à cette divinité, vénérée dans la ville, et portent aussi son nom – DARZALEIA. Les représentations équestres sur les monnaies ne permettent pas de les lier catégoriquement à celle-ci.

On peut y lire: Ðåéóßôñáôïò ÌíçóéóôôñÜôïõ ÈÜóéïò Èå§é ÌåãÜëùé dðr jåñÝù Îåíï÷Üñïõò ôï™ EАðïëëùíßïõ L’inscription est très laconique et fournit peu de données, qui ne permettent pas d’affirmer qu’il s’agit d’un temple au Grand dieu. En effet, les matériaux archéologiques sont beaucoup plus éloquents – les nombreux fragments architecturaux du même marbre, découverts dans le même site, témoignent de l’existence d’un édifice monumental richement décoré, qui se distingue parmi tous les autres édifices d’Histria. Or, il est difficile d’expliquer la présence de ce temple dans le téménos de la ville, faute de données sur la propagation d’un culte pareil à l’époque hellénistique et à une époque plus

L’on ne saurait parler d’un certain développement et de la propagation du culte de Darzalas en syncrétisme du Grand dieu que sous le règne de Gordien III. Les figures équestres sur les monnaies frappées à son époque témoignent plutôt d’une iconographie mixte. Un exemple en sont les monnaies dont l’avers porte l’image de

64

ZLATOZARA GOTCHEVA: LA THRACE PONTIQUE ET LA MYTHOLOGIE GRECQUE récente. L’on ne saurait parler d’un lien éventuel avec le culte du Qeòß Mégaß $Odësitwn (Salač 1928, 395; Pippidi 1959, 455-465). Les monnaies d’Odessos mettent en évidence le culte de ce dieu en tant que protecteur de la ville, qui ne recèle pourtant pas des vestiges d’un temple qui lui soit consacré. Or, il faut se rendre compte que l’exploration d’Odessos se trouve entravée par l’existence de la ville moderne. Selon une hypothèse (Condurachi 1938, 33-37), il s’agirait dans cette inscription de Sérapis ou de Pluton. D’autres auteurs (Suceveanu 1999, 217; Avram 1999, 575) supposent que ce serait un temple d’Hélios ou de Sérapis, ou un temple commun aux deux divinités. Au demeurant, la tendance, à l’époque hellénistique, à la vénération de différentes divinités aux fonctions polyvalentes pourrait nous amener à la conclusion qu’elles porteraient toute cette appellation. Or, en l’occurrence, on n’est pas fondé à désigner la divinité à laquelle était adressée cette dédicace. Si l’on en juge par l’inscription d’Odessos où le dieu est indiqué catégoriquement comme son protecteur, on pourrait parler aussi d’un dieu anonyme, protecteur d’Histria (Gočeva 2004, 44-45).

– alou par analogie avec les Qeoû Megálou d’Odessos, mais dans les différentes publications, ce texte reçoit des lectures diverses. L’inscription dit qu’il participe à des sacrifices et à des processions. Il est aussi prêtre de Sérapis et le tirage au sort le charge des frais des célébrations de Sérapis à titre de ¢pwnúmoß têß pólewß Dionúsou et aussi de la viande pour les divinités de Samothrace. Dans ce cas, l’identification du Qeòß Mégaß est incertaine et il est toujours impossible d’établir qui est ce Grand dieu. Dans la littérature spécialisée, il y a des tentatives de lier le culte du Qeòß Mégaß $Odësitwn au culte des Grands Dieux de Samothrace, répandu dans certaines villes pontiques. Ce problème est beaucoup plus délicat. Les deux cultes n’ont rien de commun et chacun a sa propre place parmi les religions pontiques. Quant à Odessos, le témoignage en est donné par un des décrets provenant de la ville (IGBulg., І, No 42) dans lequel il est indiqué qu'il doit être placé eœß tò Samoqråkiwn. L’inscription est datée des IIIe-IIe s. av. J. -C. G., et Mihailov la rattache à une autre inscription de la même date dans laquelle figure une indication incomplète qeînai eœß tò ¥erón (IGBulg., І, No 41ter) et l’attribue aussi au temple des dieux de Samothrace. C’est le même cas que la liste des prêtres qu’il lie au Qeòß Mégaß en tant que culte principal de la ville. Mais un tel lien n’est pas motivé – en l’occurrence, le dieu anonyme serait Apollon, dont le temple servirait d’archives lapidaires de la ville (Gočeva 1979, 49-53). Dans le commentaire de cette inscription, G. Mihailov considère ce lien comme incodédié au Grand dieu, ce qui le porte à supposer l’existence d’un temple commun des deux cultes. Selon l’auteur, les cultes du Grand dieu d’Odessos, des Cabires et même des Dioscures de l’époque hellénistique présentent des traits communs et appartiennent à un même groupe.

Il semble que ce soit une dédicace au Grand dieu dont le nom n’est pas indiqué, comme c’est le cas de l'inscription d’Odessos. Le prêtre y figure aussi en éponyme, mais il n’est pas dit de quel dieu il serait prêtre. L’interprétation la plus plausible d’une telle formule, enregistrée à Histria et à Odessos, veut que ce soit un prêtre d’Apollon, qui est incontestablement la divinité principale de la ville à cette époque (Gočeva 1979, 49-53). Dans l’inscription, le dédicant est désigné comme Qásioß, ce qui ne nous donne pas lieu de faire des conclusions définitives sur l’origine du culte et de le lier à l’île de Thasos. Le fait que le dédicant provient de Thasos, où l’on vénère Dionysos, est à l’origine de l’hypothèse que ce sont une inscription et un temple consacrés à Dionysos (Oppermann 2004, 202). On ne saurait rattacher ce culte largement attesté à quelque inscription en l’honneur de concours où celui-ci serait appelé Grand dieu, d’autant moins que nous avons affaire à un texte de l’époque impériale où la situation est tout autre et où cette désignation figure déjà sur certains monuments. Il ne s’agit non plus de quelque culte thrace de Dionysos, ni de quelque lien de Dionysos avec le Grand dieu d’Odessos. Sur le fond des grandes migrations à l’époque hellénistique et de la fusion des cultes, nous ne possédons pas d'éléments pour expliquer la célébration d’un culte ou d’un autre, ou son apparition accidentelle. L’on n’est pas fondé non plus à lier ce culte au Grand dieu vénéré à Odessos, d’autant moins à Darzalas, qui à cette époque ancienne n’est pas connu même à Odessos.

Certains auteurs (Mirtchev 1967, 21-39) vont jusqu’à localiser ce temple. Puisque cette désignation des dieux de Samothrace n’est pas attestée sur des monuments épigraphiques d’époque hellénistique de la côte pontique ou d’ailleurs, le problème paraît plus compliqué et nous n’avons aucune raison de réunir ces trois mentions de temples, il s’agirait plutôt de temples différents. Une telle conclusion contribuerait à élucider le caractère du culte dans le sanctuaire de Samothrace et la vision des Grecs sur les divinités vénérées. Un décret, découvert à Samothrace, nous informe de la participation aux mystères de Samothrace d’un citoyen d’Odessos, et témoigne du lien d’Odessos avec le sanctuaire de Samothrace (IGBulg., І, 93-95 et com.). Cet Odessitain, dont le nom manque dans l’inscription, serait un prêtre éponyme et donc un prêtre du Grand dieu d’Odessos (Robert 1959, 191-193). Or, le texte conservé ne donne pas lieu de faire une conjecture pareille. Il n’y a pas non plus de données qui permettraient de supposer quelque lien avec les mystères de Samothrace. La mention même serait utilisée, en l’occurrence, comme une simple formule de datation.

Un Grand dieu est mentionné dans un décret de Dionysopolis (IGBulg., І, No 13). L’inscription est fortement endommagée à cet endroit et ne donne aucune information certaine. G. Mihailov complète la désinence 65

ANCIENT GREEK COLONIES IN THE BLACK SEA 2 Bien que le culte des dieux samothraces est largement attesté à Histria, leur lien avec le Grand dieu y est moins évident. Dans un fragment d’inscription, daté du IIIe s. av. J.-C., il est dit que celle-ci doit être placée ¢n tþ Samoqrakiþ (ISM, I, No 58). Un autre décret (ISM, I, No 19) en l’honneur d’un citoyen aux grands mérites envers la ville fournit une information qui éclaire davantage le caractère du culte des dieux de Samothrace. L’on peut y lire: dedóstai dè a©tôi kaì ¢kgónoiß ˜eí tôi presbeútatôi tôn Óntwn œerosúnhn dhmosíai Qeôn tôn en Samoqráikhi..., ‘de le charger lui et l’aîné de ses descendants d’une fonction sacerdotale particulière auprès des dieux de Samothrace ‘. L’importance du culte des dieux samothraces de ces derniers, lié probablement à la religion officielle d’Histria, se trouve confirmée par l’expression œerosúnhn dhmosíai. Il s’agirait d’un personnage aux grands mérites envers leur culte, selon toute vraisemblance, le fondateur de celui-ci à Histria ou l’un de ses premiers habitants (Pippidi 1965, 112-114). Par la suite, l’auteur réfute lui-même la deuxième hypothèse en affirmant que la pénétration du culte des dieux de Samothrace à Histria se situe dans la période de diffusion de leur culte dans cette partie de la péninsule Balkanique à l’époque hellénistique.

différents cultes (IGBulg., І, No 13), l’on a découvert récemment encore un décret de cette ville en l’honneur d’un citoyen de Messambria qui devrait être placé aussi dans le temple des divinités de Samothrace (Velkov 1990, 1-5). Trois stèles fragmentaires, portant des traités de Tomis, devraient être déposées elles aussi dans le temple des dieux samothraces, ce qui souligne une fois de plus leur rôle important dans la religion de la ville à l’époque hellénistique (Cole 1984, 142, Ap. 1, No 6). Sur la base des vestiges disponibles, l’on pourrait conclure que nous sommes en présence de deux cas de pénétration du culte des Grands dieux sur la côte ouestpontique. Le plus important et le plus discuté est le culte du Qeòß Mégaß $Odësitwn, célébré surtout à Odessos, comme le montrent les monnaies à son effigie et les matériaux épigraphiques. Il est difficile d’établir la date de sa propagation dans la ville. Si l’on en juge par les monnaies, il ne serait importé par les colons, ni considéré comme le culte principal d’Odessos. Il pénètrerait à l’époque hellénistique, de toute évidence sous l’influence micro-asiatique. A une époque plus récente, marquée par le renforcement des influences thraces à Odessos, son culte se syncrétise avec le culte local du dieu thrace Darzalas. C’est alors et surtout à l’époque romaine qu’il reprend vigueur à Odessos et se trouve, dans certains cas, sur un pied d’égalité avec le protecteur principal de toutes les colonies ouest-pontiques – Apollon. Son apparition à Dionysopolis est faiblement attestée et ne permet pas de faire des conclusions probantes. La présence d’un seul monument, bien que d’importance, donne lieu de rechercher le temple d’un Qeòß Mégaß, que l'on ne saurait lier en aucune façon au Qeòß Mégaß $Odësitwn vénéré à Odessos.

Ce commentaire laisse apparaître un certain amalgame du culte dieux de Samothrace et de celui des Cabires. L’auteur se fonde sur l’inscription de Seuthopolis, dans laquelle, ni dans le commentaire qui en a été fait, les Cabires ne sont mentionnés (Dimitrov 1957, 65). Ici aussi, comme dans l’autre inscription, il est dit qu’elle devrait être placée parà tôn býmon tôn qeôn tôn en Samoqráikhi. Selon D. Pippidi, il s’agit d’un même endroit, vraisemblablement d’un temple, où les documents officiels seraient déposés. Quant à la deuxième inscription, cela paraît plausible, puisque le personnage honoré est étroitement lié au culte; de la première, il n’y a rien à dire, et l’on ne saurait établir si à une période déterminée c’est précisément leur temple qui servirait d’archives lapidaires d’Histria. Le temple des dieux de Samothrace figure aussi dans un autre décret, très fragmentaire, ce qui vient confirmer cette hypothèse (ISM, I, No 11).

L’autre groupe de monuments témoigne que le culte des Grands Dieux de Samothrace pénètre aussi dans la région à l’époque hellénistique. Il existe différentes hypothèses sur ce point. Après la découverte de l’inscription de Seuthopolis, D. Dimitrov avance l’opinion que c’est le premier monument de ces dieux en Thrace. Ce culte y serait importé grâce à l’importance accrue de leur sanctuaire à Samothrace précisément à cette époque. G. Mihailov affirme le contraire et situe le début de la propagation de leur culte dans les colonies ouestpontiques. Une telle hypothèse contredit pourtant la datation de l’inscription de Seuthopolis. L’on ne saurait rechercher un éventuel lien entre les deux aires d’extension du culte. Une autre opinion veut que le culte soit venu de Samothrace à Seuthopolis, ayant été proche de la vision thrace.

Les Grands Dieux de Samothrace seraient vénérés aussi à Callatis. Le témoignage en sont quatre décrets, datés du IIIe s. av. J.-C. (ISM, III, Nos 4, 7, 19, 20). A la fin de trois d’entre eux figure une indication d’assurer leur conservation. Sur le quatrième, fort mutilé, n’est lisible que la mention du temple des divinités de Samothrace. On peut en déduire qu'à défaut d'un rôle principal, il jouait du moins un rôle important dans une période déterminée.

D’autre part, la place importante qu’occupe à l’époque hellénistique le sanctuaire des divinités samothraces dans la Méditerranée orientale, et leur vénération par la population locale et les successeurs d’Alexandre le Grand portent à lier la propagation et la forte influence de ce culte dans toute la région à Lysimaque. Toutefois il est plus probable qu’à la fin de l’hellénisme une

L’existence d’un temple des dieux de Samothrace à Bizoné est attestée par un fragment d’inscription mal conservé où l’on lit seulement en Samoqráikhi. A part le long décret de Dionysopolis qui mentionne tous les mérites du personnage honoré dans les cérémonies de 66

ZLATOZARA GOTCHEVA: LA THRACE PONTIQUE ET LA MYTHOLOGIE GRECQUE communauté politique et religieuse soit créée, qui tend à perpétuer les traditions religieuses locales. Les influences thraces se manifestent à cette époque dans la région pontique, ce dont témoignent les monuments du Cavalier thrace, et c’est par cette voie que le culte des Grands Dieux de Samothrace trouverait un bon accueil, apparu dans les colonies sous l’influence micro-asiatique. L’étude approfondie du culte des Grands Dieux de Samothrace et l’élucidation de son rôle dans le développement de la religion Méditerranée orientale jetteraient une nouvelle lumière sur ce problème.

étroit avec le culte de Dionysos. Une autre preuve en est la décision de lui ériger en pleine agora une statue de bronze et de l’honorer chaque année, pendant les Dionysies, d’une couronne d’or. Des données plus précises fournissent une liste d’éphèbes (IGBulg., I, No 14), dans laquelle la datation est indiquée d’après l’Pñ÷jåñåýò et pontarque de la pentapolis, qui figure en même temps en jåñåýò äc Äéïíýóïõ. La mention de cette charge sacerdotale témoigne que celui-ci serait grand prêtre de Dionysopolis et que Dionysos serait la divinité principale de la ville.

Le culte de Dionysos Une inscription fort endommagée, découverte près du village de Rogačevo, dans les environs de Balčik, représente une liste de prêtres de Dionysopolis qui exerceraient cette fonction à vie (IGBulg., I, No 22). Selon une hypothèse, il s’agirait d’éponymes de Dionysopolis, car le nom du dieu même y figurerait aussi (Robert 1959, 200-204). Au demeurant, il conviendrait d’évoquer le cas d’Odessos où le dieu apparaît en éponyme mais, en fait, le cas est différent. Ce sont évidemment des prêtres éponymes de Dionysos, mais il est peu probable que le nom du dieu y soit présent. Ce serait plutôt une erreur du lapicide, d’autant plus que la lacune existante offre l’éventualité d’un patronyme. L’autre inscription, qui semble présenter des prêtres ou des membres de quelque collège bachique (IGBulg., I, No 22 bis), ne pourrait servir de témoignage sûr, car elle est d’époque romaine (241-244) et est dédiée à l’empereur.

Parmi les autres divinités du panthéon grec, c’est Dionysos qui occupe la place principale dans la religion officielle de presque toutes les villes ouest-pontiques, surtout à l’époque hellénistique. Certains phénomènes, dont l’organisation de thiases dionysiaques suivant les traditions grecques, et plus précisément, micro-asiatiques, donnent lieu de rattacher son culte à la religion grecque plutôt qu’à une certaine influence thrace. Il est tout à fait logique que le culte de Dionysos soit le plus populaire à Dionysopolis, son nom étant lié à la légende de la fondation de la ville. Bien que son exploration soit entravée par l’existence de la ville moderne, les matériaux dont on dispose laissent toutefois apparaître la large propagation de ce culte. Le plus ancien décret, daté de l’an 48 (IGBulg., I, No 13), est promulgué par la boulé et le démos pour honorer les grands mérites d’un personnage, étroitement lié aux différentes fêtes et cérémonies religieuses consacrées aux divinités vénérées à Dionysopolis. Dionysos y figure en eðùíýìïò ôyò ðüëåùò Äéïíýóïõ. D’autre part, il est désigné comme prêtre du Èåòò ÌÝãáò, ce qui amène la plupart des commentateurs de l’inscription à la conclusion erronée qu’il s’agirait ici du protecteur d’Odessos. En effet, l’absence du nom de la divinité ne devrait pas nous dérouter, car il est déjà établi que c’est le Grand dieu qui est le protecteur d’Odessos. G. Mihailov identifie même ce Èåòò ÌÝãáò à Darzalas, ce qui est un anachronisme, en affirmant que c’est celui-ci qui serait l’éponyme d’Odessos. Une autre hypothèse l’assimile à Dionysos par analogie avec le Èåòò ÌÝãáò d’Histria (Oppermann 2004, 199). En l’occurrence, on n’est pas fondé à qualifier Dionysos de Èåòò ÌÝãáò, car le texte ainsi restitué ne paraît pas assuré. Plus crédible est la conclusion que le personnage honoré serait prêtre de Dionysos, d’autant plus qu’il est désigné comme éponyme de la ville de Dionysos (Gočeva 1979, 50). Le texte suivant: Tíáëáâ¦í ô’í óôÝöáíïí ôï™ èåï™, nous apprend qu’il devrait occuper le poste de prêtre du dieu, vacant depuis plusieurs années. Comme dans tous les autres cas, il y a lieu d’attribuer cette mention anonyme à la divinité tutélaire de la ville qui serait aussi son éponyme. Le patronyme théophore, dérivé de Dionysos, du personnage vient confirmer une fois de plus son lien

Le culte de Dionysos se trouve attesté aussi par une autre inscription de l’époque impériale (IGBulg., I, No 15 bis) où il est désigné comme êôßóôïò ôyò ðüëåùò. Elle est émise par la boulé et sur la décision de la pentapolis, le prêtre de Dionysos y est honoré du titre de öéëüôåéìò, enregistré fréquemment dans les colonies pontiques. Parmi les autres témoignages, il est à signaler une statue de Pan jouant de la syrinx du IIIe s. av. J.-C. La plinthe porte une dédicace adressée à Dionysos par son prêtre ›ðcñ ô§í âá÷åáóô§í (IGBulg., I, No 20), qui nous laisse supposer qu’à cette époque, il existait déjà à Dionysopolis une association de dionysiastes. De la même date est une dédicace d’un fils à sa mère, sur une ara, qui est très mutilé et ne laisse pas lire le nom du dieu (IGBulg., I, No 21). Le dédicant y figure comme Ôáýñéïò, ce qui nous renvoie toujours à quelque thiase dionysiaque. Dionysos apparaît déjà sur les plus anciennes monnaies frappées par la ville au IIe s. av. J.-C., sur l’avers desquelles est représentée sa tête couronnée de lierre et sur le revers – une couronne de lierre (Pick 1910, Nos 368, 369). L’avers d’un autre groupe de monnaies porte la même effigie et leur revers – une couronne de pampres et le nom de la ville (Pick 1910, No 370). Sur les

67

ANCIENT GREEK COLONIES IN THE BLACK SEA 2 monnaies d’époque impériale, Dionysos se tient au milieu de son temple.

fêtes en l’honneur d’Apollon et d’Artémis et l’auteur exprime lui-même des doutes là-dessus. La seule information qui paraît sûre, c’est l’existence d’un théâtre à Histria à l’époque hellénistique que l’on pourrait rattacher infailliblement aux fêtes consacrées à Dionysos.

Quelque insuffisants que soient les matériaux de Dionysopolis, il apparaît que le culte de Dionysos occupe la place principale dans la vie religieuse. Ainsi donc, l’hypothèse que la ville serait fondée par un groupe de dionysiastes à l’époque d’Alexandre le Grand (Avram 1996, 298) paraît crédible, si l’on s’en rapporte aux témoignages écrits et aux monuments épigraphiques.

Des témoignages plus nombreux nous sont parvenus de l’époque romaine. Dans une dédicace, adressée à Dionysos par un certain prêtre, datée du IIIe s. (ISM, I, No 142), ce sont les Dioscures qui figurent en éponymes, ce qui est typique pour la région pontique à cette époque.

L’apparition du culte de Dionysos à Bizoné est attestée par une inscription des IIe-Ier s. av. J.-C. C’est un catalogue de prêtres dans lequel ils sont désignés comme jåñåýò Ôáýñöí (IGBulg., I, No 6). Si l’on en juge par leurs noms, qui se répètent au début, ceux-ci seraient d’une même famille. G. Mihailov conjecture qu’il s’y agirait d’un thiase de prêtres de Dionysos Tauros, en soulignant que les mystères bachiques sont centrés sur le sacrifice du taureau, en tant qu’incarnation de Dionysos, qui serait dépecé au cours du rite de l’omophagie. Or, l’auteur n’exclut pas non plus la possibilité que ce soit Poséidon Tauros dont le culte existerait à Histria et à Tomis, et dont les adorateurs seraient appelés Ôáõñåáóôáß. En l’occurrence, il conviendrait d’admettre le lien de ces prêtres avec Dionysos, ce qui pourrait être expliqué aussi par l’influence éventuelle de Dionysopolis voisine. Près du village de Balgarevo, dans les alentours de Bizoné, on a découvert un autel portant une dédicace à Dionysos d’époque romaine (IGBulg., I, No 11). Le nom du dédicant témoigne d’une certaine romanisation.

Le plus ancien monument, daté du IIIe s. av. J.-C., est dédié ÂáóóáñÝùò Äéïíýóïõ (ISM, I, No 111). Ce qualificatif dériverait de âáóóÜñá, vêtement thrace en peau de rеnard porté, d’après les auteurs antiques, par les Bacchantes, et qui donnerait le nom de ÂáóóÜñïò à Dionysos même (Detschew 1976, 44).

Différentes inscriptions nous informent de l’organisation des thiases dionysiaques. Très éloquente est la dédicace adressée à l’empereur romain Elagabal par une óðåsñá Äéïíõóéáóô§í ðñåóâõôÝñùí (ISM, I, No 99). En termes généraux, la speira est une association vouée au culte d’une divinité, liée à des mystères, caractéristique de l’Asie Mineure. Dans le cas envisagé sont mentionnés concrètement des adorateurs ‘âgés’ de Dionysos, ce qui montre qu’il existerait des organisations établies d’après l’âge. Leur chef est désigné comme ðáôÞñ, suivi d’un prêtre, vraisemblablement de Dionysos, et d’un jåñïöÜíôçò. Selon D. Pippidi, le ðáôÞñ serait le père spirituel de la speira. Si l’on en juge par les noms, c’est celui-ci qui figure dans une autre inscription (ISM, I, No 100), appelé cette fois-ci ðáôÞñ des ›ìíùäïr ðñåóâõôÝñоi. A cette époque, cette charge serait fréquente dans les associations religieuses de ce type, dont le but principal serait l’éducation spirituelle de leurs membres. D’autre part, les thiases dionysiaques organisent des concours musicaux en l’honneur de Dionysos, ce dont témoigne la mention, dans l’inscription, des chefs de musique comme ðñïóôÜôáé et des hymnodes – comme ïk ðåñr ìÝãáí èå’í Äéüíõóïò. A l’époque romaine, cette épithète se trouve dans différents cultes et vient souligner l’aspect de protecteur d’une divinité. Sur certains monuments de Thrace, elle est attribuée au Cavalier thrace (Gočeva: à paraître). L’organisation de concours musicaux est attestée par une inscription (ISM, I, No 207), datée des 140-160, et par une autre inscription (ISM, I, No 221) de la même provenance. Il existe aussi un témoignage de l’existence d’une speira de Dionysos (ISM, I, No 199), dans lequel, au lieu du ðáôÞñ, en chef des dionysiastes figure un prêtre, suivi d’un archimyste. L’explication en est la position sociale différente des membres des deux associations. A cette époque, il existerait à Histria au moins deux associations de ce type (Pippidi 1962, 171-174).

Du caractère officiel du culte de Dionysos témoignent deux décrets (ISM, I, Nos 8, 25), toujours du IIIe s. av. J.-C., dans lesquels sont mentionnés des représentations théâtrales et des personnages honorés de couronnes d’or. Dans la deuxième inscription, D. Pippidi ajoute que le personnage cité devrait obtenir la couronne d’or […ôïsò Èáñãçëßïéò e] ô§é èåÜôñùé. En effet, on ne saurait lier en aucune façon les Thargélies à Dionysos, ce sont des

Une dédicace à Poséidon de l’Hélicon – la montagne des Muses de Béotie (ISM, I, No 143) présente un intérêt tout particulier. Elle est adressée par un personnage de rang élevé, désigné dans l’inscription comme pontarque Pð’ ðáôñ’ò et, en même temps, comme jåñå’ò ôï™ èåï™ äéN âßïõ. Il est peu probable que cette mention anonyme du dieu se rapporte à Poséidon portant ce nom qui lui est étranger. Ce texte nous porte à admettre que le

Quant à Milet, les témoignages épigraphiques permettent de conclure que le culte de Dionysos s’y propage déjà à l’époque archaïque et se développe pleinement à l’époque hellénistique (Ehrhard 1983, 168, No 824 et bibl.). Parmi les colonies milésiennes de la côte ouest-pontique, c’est à Histria que le culte de Dionysos jouit de la plus grande popularité. Or, les témoignages les plus anciens sont d’époque hellénistique et ne laissent pas déceler quelque influence directe de Milet.

68

ZLATOZARA GOTCHEVA: LA THRACE PONTIQUE ET LA MYTHOLOGIE GRECQUE personnage fait la dédicace et érige une statue à Poséidon conjointement avec d’autres membres de la speira de Dionysos. Nous ne sommes pas fondés à les considérer comme des mystes de Dionysos, aussi faudrait-il donner une autre explication à leur charge sacerdotale.

comme accompagnateur soit des Attalides, soit des Bacchantes. La fête Êáèáã§ãéá serait célébrée au IIIe s. av. J.-C. à Milet, ainsi qu’à Ephèse et à Priène (Nilsson, RE, X, 1919, col. 2549). Du fait que l’épithète se trouve quelquefois attribuée à Hermès, on admet qu’elle caractériserait Dionysos, doté aussi de fonctions chtoniennes, de Psychopompe. Une telle hypothèse paraît insoutenable. Absurde aussi est la tentative de rattacher la figure équestre à l’héroïsation, à l’instar de l’image du cavalier sur les stèles funéraires, le culte de la divinité thrace ayant pénétré plus tard dans la ville.

Dans cinq inscriptions, Dionysos porte l’épiclèse de Êáñðïöüñïò, apparue à une époque tardive. Ainsi désigné, il figure dans une dédicace qui lui est adressée par son prêtre (ISM, I, No 198). Les quatre autres inscriptions sont datées de la même époque et ont un contenu presque identique (ISM, I, Nos 203, 204, 205, 206). La première ne mentionne que le nom du prêtre de Dionysos Êáñðïöüñïò. Dans la deuxième, son prêtre figure en éponyme et sont énumérés d’autres noms. Les deux autres ne donnent que le nom de son prêtre. Il en ressort qu’à cette époque, cet aspect du culte de Dionysos occupe une place importante dans la vie religieuse d’Histria.

L’existence d’un thiase de dionysiastes est attestée aussi par un relief du IIIe s. en l’honneur de Gordien et de Tranquillina (ISM, II, No 107). La supposition des éditeurs de l’inscription qu’elle serait l’oeuvre d’un thiase dionysiaque est fondée sur la représentation du relief. Au milieu se tient debout Dionysos, tenant de la main gauche le thyrse. Sur son épaule gauche est jeté un chiton court et sa tête est entourée de pampres et de grappes de raisin. Il est flanqué à gauche d’un Satyre dansant, jouant de la syrinx, et à droite – de Pan, la cista mistica sur la tête. Un Curète armé est représenté sur le côté de part et d'autre.

Peu abondants sont les témoignages de Tomis. Dans une épigramme dédicatoire est mentionnée un thiase bachique de l’époque hellénistique (ISM, II, No 120). Dionysos y est désigné comme Ðõñßâñïìïò ‘frémissant au feu’, une épithète connue des hymnes orphiques (Nonn. Dion., 14, 229:22, 338), et Ôáõñüêåñùò ‘celui aux cornes de taureau’, ce qui évoque le mythe orphique principal lié à Dionysos-Zagreus (Eur. Bacch., 100, Orph. H., 52,2). La dédicace est gravée sur une statue que le dédicant érigerait, lui-même, après avoir connu le ìéóôéê’í âáê÷ïsóé ëá÷¦í óôÝöïò, c.-à-d. après avoir été initié aux mystères de Dionysos sous son aspect de Bacchus, qui se trouve rattaché ici à la pratique d’Pñ÷áßá ôåëåôÞ. Le thiase y est appelé ‘de Passo’, du nom d’une femme, déjà décédée, qui serait sa fondatrice. Il est peu probable qu’elle soit prêtresse de Dionysos, quoique les femmes prennent souvent part aux mystères bachiques, qu’elles soient parfois à la tête du thiase et accomplissent même la fonction de mystagogues (Sokolowski 1969, 318). Ce nom est rarement enregistré, on le retrouve surtout à l’époque hellénistique. L’information vient rattacher Dionysos à un culte bachique, accompagné de rites orphiques archaïques,

Une autre inscription (ISM, II, No 90) ne laisse lire que ÌõóôÜñ÷çò que l’on ne saurait interpréter comme prêtre des mystères dionysiaques. Du fait qu’à Tomis ne sont attestés que des mystères en l’honneur de Dionysos, il convient de considérer ce monument comme une nouvelle preuve de l’existence de thiases dionysiaques. Comme à Histria, Dionysos semble être vénéré à Tomis sous son aspect de Êáñðïöüñïò (ISM, II, No 11). Le témoignage en est une inscription du IIe s., très mutilée, qui ne nous conserve pas complètement l’épithète, et où le nom restitué de Dionysos ne paraît pas assuré. Il apparaît qu’un culte mystique de Dionysos prédomine à Tomis jusqu’à une époque tardive. Les plus anciens témoignages d’Odessos sont d’époque romaine. Dans une liste d’éphèbes, datée du IIe s. (IGBulg., I, No 50), c’est Dionysos même qui figure en éponyme, comme c’est le cas du Grand dieu identifié à Darzalas. En l’occurrence, cette mention apparaît plutôt comme un symbole de la vénération pour la divinité. On n’est pas fondé à mettre le culte de Dionysos au premier plan ou à le lier aux concours organisés dans la ville. La lacune existante porte G. Mihailov à supposer qu’après cette formule serait inscrit le mois, vraisemblablement d’Apaturios, pendant lequel auraient lieu les concours, ce qui pourrait expliquer une telle mention du dieu. Audessus de l’inscription, à droite, est représenté Apollon et, à gauche – un éphèbe.

De la même date est un relief, en forme de temple, devant lequel se tient debout Dionysos, en chiton court, tenant de la main droite un canthare et de la gauche – le thyrse. Il est flanqué à droite de Pan et à gauche – de Priape et d’un Satyre. Au-dessus du temple, dans un des coins, un cavalier s’avance à droite, vers un arbre. Sur le fronton du naïskos sont représentés des pampres sortant d’un vase. L’architrave de l’édicule porte une dédicace à Dionysos, désigné sous l’épiclèse de Êáèçãåìïíåýò, qui n’est enregistrée nulle part sous cette forme (ISM, II, No 121). Une épithète analogue est connuе d’Asie Mineure, de Pergame, où Dionysos serait vénéré en tant que protecteur des Attalides et où seraient organisés en son honneur des mystères – Êáèçãåìþí (Adler, RE, X, 1919, col. 2519-2521). Cette épithète est interprétée

Dans une autre liste d’éphèbes, du IIIe s. (IGBulg., I, No 47 bis), la datation est indiquée d’après les consuls. En éponyme figure le Èåüò ÌÝãáò. Sous un arc, Apollon 69

ANCIENT GREEK COLONIES IN THE BLACK SEA 2 Citharède se tient au milieu. Ce monument ne pourrait être rattaché à Dionysos que par sa représentation audessus de l’arc, malheureusement brisée. D’Odessos provient aussi une épigramme funéraire, dédiée à un personnage de rang élevé (IGBulg., I, No 225). Le texte restitué ne nous autorise nullement à le considérer comme un prêtre de Dionysos. L’hypothèse, selon laquelle la mention dans l’inscription de vêtements pourpres et d’une couronne d’or nous renvoie au culte de Dionysos (Robert 1948, H, 180), paraît incertaine.

importées par les colons de leur métropole. Dans une autre inscription (ISM, III, No 47) est mentionné un sanctuaire – Äáóýëëéåsïí. La base d’une statuette de Dionysos porte une inscription, dans laquelle il est désigné aussi sous l’épithète de Âáê÷åýò (ISM, III, No 79). Cet aspect du culte de Dionysos est attesté par une série d’inscriptions, liées à quelque thiase bachique et datées de la période entre le IIIe s. av. J.-C. et le Ier s. ap. J.-C. Un décret intact de la fin du IIIe s. av. J.-C. (ISM, III, No 35) établit l’édification d’un nouveau temple dédié au patron du thiase. Il nous informe de la décision d’honorer ses membres les plus fervents du titre de óôÝöáíïò öéëïôéìßáò äéN âßïõ et d’inscrire leurs noms sur une dalle de marbre. Il fournit de surcroît des informations sur la hiérarchie dans le thiase et sur les récompenses accordées à ses membres pour leurs services.

Dans les environs d’Odessos, on a découvert une statuette, portant une inscription illisible, qu’on attribue arbitrairement à Dionysos. En effet, on n’a enregistré aucune épithète que l’on pourrait lier catégoriquement à Dionysos. Il n’y a qu’une inscription, fort endommagée, dans laquelle les éditeurs ont ajouté le nom de Dionysos d’après la terminaison de l’épithète conservée. Or, cette épithète pourrait être portée aussi par d’autres divinités. La terminaison masculine, toutefois, ne permet pas de la lier à quelque culte féminin (IGBulg., I, No 195).

Il est à signaler trois décrets de la même teneur . Les décisions émanent non pas de la boulé et du démos mais des membres du thiase, ce qui les portent au rang de documents officiels. Par ses décrets sont honorés leurs mérites principaux – PñåôÞ et öéëоôéìßá, à savoir la manifestation de leur morale et de leur civisme.

Le culte de Dionysos est le plus faiblement attesté à Apollonia. On ne dispose que d’une liste des membres d’un thiase bachique (IGBulg., I, No 401). La partie supérieure de l’inscription est détruite et ne laisse lire aucune dédicace à Dionysos. Plus loin sont énumérés les noms et les fonctions des membres du thiase, dont ëéêíïöüñïò – porteur de la cista mistica dans les processions, et âïõêüëïò, qui évoque le mythe de Dionysos-Zagreus-taureau lié aux mystères dionysiaques. On y retrouve aussi des charges qui sont connues d’autres thiases d’Asie Mineure et de Thrace – de Cillae, sur le territoire de Philippopolis (IGBulg., III, 1, 1517), de Périnthe (Epigr. Gr., 103a), d’Abdère (SEG, 17, 320). On peut en déduire qu’à l’époque hellénistique, les thiases de dionysiastes et les mystères dionysiaques sont largement répandus dans toute l’Asie Mineure.

Le premier de ces décrets (ISM, III, No 36) est daté du IIIe s. av. J.-C. En raison des services rendus et des dépenses consenties pour les affaires du thiase, le personnage honoré y est appelé öéëüäïîïò êNé öéëüôõìïò. Il manque la partie inférieure de l’inscription qui pourrait nous renseigner sur les récompenses de ses mérites. Le deuxième (ISM, III, No 44) est daté d’après le roi Cotys, fils de Rhoemetalcès, du mois de Dionysion, pendant les fêtes triétériques de Dionysos (Orph. H., II, 53, 3; Eur. Bacch., 133). Il est émis en l’honneur d’Ariston, fils d’Ariston, qui y est désigné comme åšåñãÝôá êár êôßóôá ôOò ðüëéïò et öéëïôåßìïõ ôï™ èéÜóïõ, et qui est toujours prêt à porter secours à ses compatriotes. Ce monument témoigne de la participation active du thiase non seulement à la vie religieuse, mais aussi aux affaires publiques.

Le culte de Dionysos jouit d’une grande popularité à Mégare. A en croire Pausanias (I, 43, 4), il y existerait déjà à l’époque archaïque un sanctuaire de Dionysos où il serait vénéré sous l’épithète de Ðáôñ²ïò. L’existence d’un thiase bachique dans la ville au IIe s. est attestée par une inscription qui mentionne un baccheon ancien (IG, VII, 107, 1). Le culte de Dionysos se répand aussi à Byzantion, à Héraclée du Pont et à Chalcédoine (Hanell 1934, 181 sq.), ainsi que dans les colonies mégariennes de la côte ouest-pontique.

Le troisième, dont il ne subsiste que la deuxième partie (ISM, III, No 63), nous informe aussi des services rendus par le thiase à la ville. Il s’agirait du même personnage, à en juger par son nom, qui serait honoré d’une couronne d’or pour ses bienfaits et ses mérites envers le peuple. A la fin du décret, on peut lire que son nom doit être inscrit par les membres du thiase sur une dalle de pierre et placé dans un endroit spécial avant la fête de Dionysos au mois de Lycéion.

Très abondants sont les témoignages épigraphiques de Callatis. Dans une inscription du IVe s. av. J.-C. (ISM, III, No 48A), Dionysos porte les épiclèses de Ðáôñ²ïò, de Âáê÷åýò et de Äáóýëëéеïò. La première de celles-ci figure déjà dans le témoignage de Pausanias sur la vénération de ce dieu à Mégare. La troisième nous est connue par le même passage. Leur mention dans cette inscription ancienne laisse supposer qu’elles seraient

Un autre décret, dont on ne possède qu’une petite partie (ISM, III, No 45), mentionne aussi les mérites d’un père et de son fils, dont les noms laissent voir les mêmes

70

ZLATOZARA GOTCHEVA: LA THRACE PONTIQUE ET LA MYTHOLOGIE GRECQUE personnages. Le père est proclamé pour la deuxième fois ‘fondateur de la ville’ et son fils continue son activité de bienfaiteur.

Dionysos. De son côté, le thiase bachique célèbrerait tous les trois ans, au mois de Dionysion, une fête à elle – ôñéåôçñßäé.

Un fragment d’inscription (ISM, III, No 47) fournit des informations précieuses sur l’organisation et l’accomplissement des sacrifices d’animaux. Le rite aurait lieu le jour 12 du mois de Dionysion. Le texte restitué laisse apparaître qu’on sacrifierait une chèvre, les cuisses seraient servies à table, les autres chairs seraient réparties entre les habitants de la ville et la peau, la tête et les pieds seraient emportés dí ô§é Äáñóõëëéåßùé, c.-à.-d. dans le sanctuaire de la divinité, dont le nom viendrait d’une épithète de Dionysos qui caractériserait ses fonctions mystiques. Le texte met en évidence qu’il est interdit aux femmes et aux enfants d’y aller. De prime abord, on pourrait supposer que les femmes seraient exclues des mystères pratiqués par ce thiase bachique, car c’est dans ce sanctuaire qu’auraient lieu les mystères liés à Dionysos (ISM, III, No 47, comm. p. 342). Une lecture plus adéquate nous amène pourtant à la conclusion que les femmes ne sont pas exclues totalement de l’initiation, mais qu’il leur est interdit de participer aux sacrifices. D’autre part, il est évident que ce sacrifice est effectué par des initiés aux mystères, pendant une grande fête célébrée au mois de Dionysion, désignée dans le décret portant sur l’édification du temple, comme ôñéåôåñéò. La partie la plus importante du rite aurait lieu dans le sanctuaire, dédié à Dionysos Dasyllius, situé, d’après V. Parvan, quelque part en dehors de la ville, et que l’on pourrait lier à un aspect du culte très ancien, importé vraisemblablement de la métropole.

Dionysos apparaît aussi sur les monnaies frappées par la ville. Les plus anciennes sont les monnaies de bronze, datées de la période depuis la mort de Lysimaque en 218 jusqu’au milieu du Ier s. av. J.-C. Leur avers porte la tête de Dionysos couronnée de pampres et leur revers – une panthère, la patte postérieure posée sur un épi, et un thyrse (Pick 1910, Nos 217-224).

Plus de lumière sur ce moment du rite est donnée par une dédicace à Äéüíõóïò Âáê÷Ýõò et aux membres du thiase (ISM, III, No 80). La restitution de cette épithète paraît tout à fait logique. La dédicace, adressée par une prêtresse d’Athènes, présente pour nous un intérêt tout particulier. Elle dédie au dieu et aux membres du thiase un Síôñïí, c.-à-d. une grotte, ce qui vient compléter l’idée de la salle réservée aux mystères (ISM, III, No 47, comm. p. 342; Фол 1986, 218). Dans l’inscription No 35, le temple est désigné comme øÜëéò, ce qui est à l’origine de quelques hypothèses sur le caractère de ce type de temples. Selon A. Avram, il s'agit d'une salle souterraine dans le temple bachique qui serait réservée aux rites mystiques du culte.

Il est à signaler une dédicace à Dionysos Eleuthereus, adressée par six stratèges et grammatei de la ville (IGBulg., I, No 324). G. Mihailov la date du milieu du Ier s. av. J.-C. et la rattache à une incursion dans la ville des Gètes de Burébista. Cette épiclèse est connue d’Athènes, où Dionysos était vénéré comme protecteur de la tragédie, et elle aurait pénétré à Messambria sous son influence. Selon G. Mihailov, c’est un document officiel émis en signe de gratitude envers la divinité.

Peu nombreux sont les témoignages de Messambria. Le monument le plus ancien est un décret du IIIe s. av. J.-C. qui fournit des informations intéressantes sur le culte de Dionysos (IGBulg., I, No 308 ter). Le décret nous apprend que le personnage honoré devrait obtenir une couronne d’or dans le théâtre pendant les Dionysies et qu’un héraut devrait proclamer publiquement ses mérites de trésorier. A la fin, on peut lire que cette décision devrait être inscrite sur une dalle de marbre qui devrait être placée dans le temple de Dionysos. Une telle information paraît étrange, étant donné que d’autres décrets témoignent que c’est le temple d’Apollon qui servirait d’archives principales de la ville. On pourrait expliquer cette exception par le fait que c’est pendant les Dionysies que le personnage honoré devrait recevoir la couronne d’or. Le monument n’est malheureusement pas trouvé in situ, mais parmi des matériaux réutilisés, ce qui ne saurait justifier l’hypothèse que le temple de Dionysos serait situé sur l’agora de Messambria (Velkov 1970, 465-468).

Des environs de Messambria proviennent deux reliefs votifs, sur lesquels Dionysos est représenté en compagnie d’Héraclès. Cette iconographie est attestée aussi sur d’autres monuments de l’intérieur de la Thrace de l’époque romaine (Rabadjiev 1998, 201-206). Sur le premier, Dionysos passe son bras autour des épaules d’Héraclès, qui est enveloppé dans la peau de lion et appuyé sur sa massue (IGBulg., I, No 351). La dédicace est adressée seulement à Dionysos, portant l’épithète d’Eucarpos, qui le caractérise comme protecteur de la fécondité, et qui est enregistrée aussi dans le nord de la région. L’autre, découvert près du village de Dulino, présente une iconographie complexe (IGBulg., V, No 5128). Les deux divinités sont accompagnées des figures du cortège dionysiaque – Pan, le Satyre et la panthère. L’inscription est exécutée d’une manière fruste et abonde

Un monument épigraphique nous informe d’une autre fête dionysiaque célébrée à Callatis – ôN Äéïíýóéá ôN îåíiêÜ. L’hypothèse, selon laquelle celle-ci serait accompagnée d’un îåíéóìïò (banquet) en l’honneur de Dionysos (Pippidi 1975, 138-141), paraît la plus crédible. Une inscription, presque entièrement restituée par les éditeurs (ISM, III, No 87), nous apprend que le personnage cité devrait recevoir une couronne d’or dans le théâtre pendant les Dionysies et mentionne une îÝíéêá en son honneur. Il en ressort que chaque année, pendant les Dionysies, serait organisé un banquet en l’honneur de 71

ANCIENT GREEK COLONIES IN THE BLACK SEA 2 en erreurs. La dédicace est adressée seulement à Héraclès, appelé Dios. G. Mihailov conjecture que le dédicant aurait l’intention d’employer l’appellation de divus. Son nom – Iulianus, témoigne d’une certaine romanisation. Il serait lié d’une façon ou d’une autre à l’armée pour ne faire une dédicace qu’à Héraclès.

ennemis et affligée par des maladies. La deuxième vient honorer ceux qui ont participé volontairement à la défense de la ville et ont fait des sacrifices Ìçôñß èå§í êár Äéïóêüñïéò. La datation de l’inscription fait difficulté car on ne peut pas établir avec certitude les événements survenus. Selon certains auteurs, il s’agit de l’assaut du roi gète Burebista au Ier s. av. J.-C. D’autres reportent la date au IIe s. av. J.-C. (Rostovtzeff 1931, 764-765). L’apparition de la Grande déesse en compagnie des Dioscures est tout à fait naturelle. D’autant plus que les sacrifices y sont faits ‘pour le salut du peuple’ et on rattache particulièrement les Dioscures à des actions de salut. Les Dioscures se retrouvent aussi avec la Grande déesse-mère de Tomis sur des monnaies de l’époque impériale dont l’avers porte l’image de la déesse voilée et le revers – les étoiles des Dioscures (Pick, Regling 1910, Nos 2496, 2500, 2501, 2502).

Il apparaît que le culte de Dionysos se répand inégalement et à des époques différentes dans les villes ouest-pontiques. Dans les colonies milésiennes, il pénètre à la haute époque hellénistique, alors que dans les colonies mégariennes, il serait importé de la métropole où il serait populaire dès l’époque archaïque. D'une façon générale, c’est un culte à mystères et qui présente, surtout à l’époque hellénistique, plusieurs éléments microasiatiques. La preuve en est le caractère officiel du thiase et des fêtes dionysiaques célébrées à Callatis.

Il serait exagéré de considérer que le rattachement des jumeaux à Cybèle tiendrait de son lien avec les dieux de Samothrace (Nilsson 1906, 421). En effet, leur culte est plus complexe et conduit à l’époque romaine à certaines confusions arbitraires des Dioscures, des Cabires et des Grands Dieux. Il y a même une hypothèse qui assimile le Cavalier thrace, le Qeòß Mégaß $Odësitwn, les Cabires et les Dioscures en les identifiant tous avec les Grands Dieux de Samothrace. Une telle assimilation de cultes d’origine et d’importance différentes paraît tout à fait hasardeuse, d’autant plus qu’il n’y a de données concrètes, ni dans des monuments écrits, ni dans des monuments épigraphiques.

Le culte de la Grande Déesse-Mère La Grande déesse-mère, qui personnifie le principe féminin dans la religion, qui est la créatrice de la vie et dont la puissance s’étend à la nature entière, apparaît sous l’aspect de Cybèle, la Grande Mère ou la Mère des Dieux, vénérée sous divers noms en Asie Mineure, et de Déméter, la Déesse maternelle, protectrice de la nature et de la fécondité, qui préside à la vie et à la mort. Ces deux cultes sont répandus dans toutes les villes ouestpontiques. Cybèle – la Mère des Dieux

A l’époque romaine, le culte de la Grande déesse-mère jouit d’une grande popularité sur la côte pontique. La plupart des monuments proviennent de Tomis. Tout d’abord, c’est une inscription de l’époque de Septime Sévère – une dédicace faite à la famille de l’empereur (ISM, II, No 83) par le collège des Dendrophores, qui apparaît à l’époque impériale et qu’on rattache à Cybèle. Leur nom vient du rite de porter pendant une procession en l’honneur de Cybèle un arbre décoré, symbole de la mort. On lie très souvent ce culte à Attis. Depuis l’époque de Claude, il est pratiqué à Rome, ainsi qu’en Asie Mineure. Dans l’inscription sont mentionnées différentes charges honorifiques des membres de ce thiase – ìÞôçñ äåíäñïöüñùí, jåñåýò, un ðáôÞñ, deux Pñ÷éäåíäñïöüñïé.

Le culte de la Grande déesse anatolienne est le plus populaire à l’époque hellénistique, et les monuments qui s'y rapportent sont en effet les plus anciens dans les villes ouest-pontiques. Cybèle est vénérée tout particulièrement à Tomis. Son monument le plus ancien est un relief de marbre (Tacheva-Hitova 1983, 41). Il n’en subsiste que la partie supérieure qui présente la déesse coiffée d’un calathos et où est visible son tympanon. Elle est flanquée à droite de la tête d’un dieu barbu et à gauche – d’une autre figure. Comparaison faite avec un relief du sanctuaire de Cybèle à Ephèse, ces images sont identifiées à Zeus et à Hermès (Bordenache 1969, 38, No 590). La datation du relief au IIe s. av. J.-C. pourrait être admise aussi pour deux autres monuments de Tomis (Tacheva-Hitova 1983, Nos 44, 45). Le premier, une dalle de calcaire, représente la déesse assise sur un trône, vêtue d’un chiton et d’un himation, coiffée d’un calathos, tenant de la main droite une phiale et de la gauche – un tympanon, et sur ses genoux – un lionceau. Le deuxième suit le même schéma iconographique.

Deux autres inscriptions de Tomis (ISM, II, Nos 144, 145), datées des IIe-IIIe s., représentent des dédicaces en latin – Matri deum magnae et Matri deorum sacrum. A Cybèle est liée aussi une dédicace en grec Ìçôñr dðêüù êár ðÜíôùí äåóðïßíu. L’inscription figure sur un fragment de la partie gauche inférieure d’une dalle qui porte une image de Cybèle très mutilée (ISM, II, No 146). Au culte de Cybèle est consacrée une inscription de l’époque romaine (ISM, II, No 119) dont le dédicant est désigné comme archidendrophoros. Quelques statuettes avec les attributs usuels de Cybèle et une statue de

Le culte de Cybèle à Tomis est attesté aussi par un décret hellénistique (ISM, II, No 2), constitué de deux décisions – de la boulé et du démos. Dans la première sont présentés les désastres accablant la ville, assiégée par des 72

ZLATOZARA GOTCHEVA: LA THRACE PONTIQUE ET LA MYTHOLOGIE GRECQUE marbre de la déesse trônant témoignent de la grande popularité de son culte à Tomis à l’époque romaine, quand il se répand largement dans la plupart des provinces de l’Empire. Or, il y a lieu de souligner qu’à Tomis, ce culte est déjà attesté à l’époque hellénistique, ce que l’on pourrait expliquer par une influence directe d’Asie Mineure.

côté, son époux serait prêtre de Dionysos Carpophoros, comme le témoigne une autre inscription (ISM, I, No 198). La stèle sur laquelle figure le décret est décorée d’un fronton et d’acrotères. Au milieu du fronton est représentée Cybèle sur un trône, tenant de la main droite une phiale et de la gauche – un tympanon. Il existe encore trois dédicaces à Cybèle de l’époque romaine (ISM, I, No 126, 127, 128). La première figure sur le cadre inférieur d'un haut relief dont il ne subsiste que des traces de la représentation. C’est une dédicace à Ìçôñr èå§í faite par Alexandre Hegesagoras. La deuxième est inscrite sur une base de marbre vraisemblablement d’une statue qui n’est pas conservée. La dédicace a la même teneur. Le dédicant ne porte qu’un nom – Hélios, qui semble être un nom d’esclave. La troisième est le fragment mal conservé d’une stèle. Seul le patronyme du dédicant – Philinos, est lisible. De l’époque romaine datent aussi trois statuettes de marbre et de calcaire qui présentent l’iconographie conventionnelle de la déesse, sans détails (Tacheva 1983, Nos 71-73).

En effet, le plus ancien témoignage du culte de Cybèle est une terre cuite d'Histria, datée de l’époque archaïque – Ve s. av. J.-C., sur la base de parallèles d’Asie Mineure, du cercle ionien Samos-Milet (Alexandrescu-Vianu 1990, 221, fig. 211). La déesse y est représentée sous son iconographie ordinaire – assise sur un trône, vêtue d’un chiton à plis qui lui tombe jusqu’aux genoux et d’un himation jeté sur son épaule gauche. Ses cheveux lui couvrent les épaules. Sur ses genoux est couché un lion qu’elle tient entre ses bras. Deux statuettes de marbre de Cybèle sont datées du IVe s. av. J.-C. (Bordenache 1969, 31, No 39; Tacheva 1983, 57, 58). Un nombre plus grand de statuettes et de reliefs de marbre viennent de l’époque hellénistique (Bordenache 1969, Nos 41-50 ; Tacheva 1983, Nos 59-62). Du IIIe s. av. J.-C. sont deux plaques d’argent très fragmentaires (Alexandrescu-Vianu 1990, fig. 1, 2). Une terre cuite est datée du IIe s. av. J.-C. (Tacheva 1983, No 63). Sur tous ces monuments, Cybèle figure sous son iconographie usuelle – assise sur un trône, tenant de la main droite une phiale et de la gauche – un tympanon, coiffée d’un polos. Sur certains, le lion est sur ses genoux et sur d’autres – un animal plus gros se tient à côté de son trône. Sur l’un des monuments, la déesse est en compagnie d’une femme à genoux, les bras levés – un élément qui n’est pas typique pour les monuments de la côte pontique (Bordenache 1969, No 42 ; Tacheva 1983, No 59). Une plaque céramique sur laquelle sont représentés deux servantes, Hermès-Cadmilos et une figure portant une lanceprésente un grand intérêt. Elle est datée du IIIe s. av. J.-C. (Alexandrescu-Vianu 1990, note 1, fig. 1).

Le culte de Cybèle à Histria est également attesté par les monnaies frappées à l’époque romaine. La déesse est représentée sur un trône, tenant de la main droite une phiale et de la gauche, appuyée sur un tympanon, un sceptre. Sa tête est cernée de la corona murale. Un lion se tient debout de chaque côté du trône (Pick, Regling 1910, Nos 495, 496, 500, 512, 517). Moins nombreux sont les monuments des parties méridionales de la côte ouest-pontique. Le culte de Cybèle est le plus largement attesté à Messambria à la haute époque hellénistique, hormis une statuette du IVe s. av. J.-C. (inédite, dans l’exposition du musée). La déesse est assise sur un trône, les cheveux tombant des deux côtés du visage, et elle tient sur ses genoux un lionceau. De l’époque hellénistique nous sont parvenus quelques décrets. Un décret du IIIe s. av. J.-C. (IGBulg., I, No 308 septies = IGBulg., V, No 5091), très fragmentaire, fournit des informations précieuses qu’on pourrait rattacher au culte de Cybèle. Il nous apprend qu’à Messambria il existerait un Ìáôр²ïí lié d’une certaine manière aux Cabires. L’inscription est consacrée à leur culte et à leur collège, et l’on peut y lire qu’elle devait être écrite par ôï˜ò ðåñr ÌÜôñùíá . D’autre part, elle fait mention d’une fête des Dioscures, pendant laquelle devraient être couronnés tous les ans les kêáäåsò honorés par le décret. Le même collège est mentionné dans une autre inscription de Messambria (IGBulg., I, No 308 octies) des IIIe-IIe s. av. J.-C., fort mutilée, qui nous informe de quelques sacrifices. Il s’agit évidemment d’un collège de 20 personnes, mais on ne saurait établir à quel culte il était lié. Dans son commentaire de l’inscription No 314b, G. Mihailov tend à le rattacher au Matroon mentionné cidessus. On n’est pas fondé non plus à parler d'un lien avec le culte des Dioscures. L’inscription mentionne bien

Le culte de Cybèle continue à être populaire à Histria à l’époque romaine. Un décret du IIe s. vient honorer une certaine Aba, fille d’Hécatée, fils d’Euxénide, et épouse d’Héraconte, fils d’Aristomaque (ISM, I, No 57). On peut y lire ‘ãïíÝùí dðóÞìùí êák ðñïãüíùí dðéöáíåóôÜôùí ïšóá’, ce qui vient souligner son rang social élevé. Dans le décret sont énumérés ses qualités morales, ses grands mérites envers la ville et les différentes fonctions qu’elle assume volontairement – äéN ôï™ôï kåñùýíçí Ìçôñ’ò èå§í ášôåðÜããåëôïò Píáëáâï™óá. D’autre part, une grande importance est accordée à sa charge sacerdotale. La fin de l’inscription ne nous est malheureusement pas parvenue, mais c’est en effet un décret d’époque tardive qui ne nous serait pas d’une grande utilité. Le nom de la prêtresse est microasiatique, mais les noms de ses parents et de son époux ne laissent pas déceler leur origine. Il semble qu’elle porte ce nom en tant que prêtresse de la déesse. De son 73

ANCIENT GREEK COLONIES IN THE BLACK SEA 2 quelques personnages qui devaient être honorés d’une couronne tous les ans pendant la fête des Dioscures. Or, on ne saurait établir en l’occurrence si les Dioscures étaient liés à Cybèle et si ce temple était dédié à Cybèle ou, en général, à l’une des déesses de la fécondité, vénérées comme mères. En effet, dans la Méditerranée orientale, la déesse-mère se trouve unie à certains cultes masculins. En Thrace, elle est liée au Cavalier thrace, le principal culte masculin (Stojanov 1998, 150-158). Ce phénomène est à observer aussi dans les villes ouestpontiques à l’époque romaine. Le syncrétisme avec les cultes thraces locaux est attesté par les monuments du Cavalier thrace en compagnie de Cybèle dans les territoires d’Histria et de Tomis (CCET, IV, Nos 37, 115, 118).

celui-ci a été commenté par quelques auteurs (Alexandrescu-Vianu 1980, 261-265 ; Naumann 1983, Beiheft 28; Vikela 67-123, 23 Tafel) qui l’interprètent unanimement comme une représentation de la Grande déesse-mère – Cybèle. Selon eux, c’est un monument votif de Cybèle de l’époque archaïque – VIe s. av. J.-C. Aussi peut-on affirmer que c’est le plus ancien monument de la déesse sur la côte ouest-pontique. Deux reliefs de Cybèle ont été découverts à Sozopol et sont exposés au musée de Burgas (Alexandrescu-Vianu 1980, 263-264). Le premier représente la partie supérieure d’un prisme de marbre, munie d’une niche dont la partie supérieure épouse la forme d’un fronton. Une femme voilée appuie contre sa poitrine deux lionceaux en tant que nourrissons, à en croire M. Alexandrescu. Par analogie avec un relief semblable de Thasos, Eu. Vikela date le monument du Ve s. av. J.-C. Le deuxième relief, découvert dans le même endroit, serait réutilisé. Selon I. Karajotov, les deux reliefs seraient des réemplois dans la construction de la basilique paléochrétienne à cet endroit. Aussi suppose-t-il qu’il y existerait un temple antique. La découverte récente de quelques terres cuites de Cybèle l’amène à la conclusion que ce serait le plus ancien temple de la ville dédié à Cybèle (Karajotov 2004, 288).

On ne dispose malheureusement pas de monuments épigraphiques de Cybèle à Odessos. Peu nombreux sont aussi les matériaux anépigraphes qui témoignent du développement du culte dans la ville. Il n’y a qu’une statuette de l’époque hellénistique qui représente la déesse sous son iconographie conventionnelle, tenant sur ses genoux un lionceau (Tacheva 1983, No 16). On peut rattacher aussi à Cybèle une terre cuite d’Attis, vêtu d’un chiton court et d’une chlamyde, coiffé du bonnet phrygien et tenant une syrinx (Tacheva 1983, No 17).

Une inscription de Bizoné sur une ara pourrait être rattachée au culte de la déesse-mère (IGBulg., I, No 8). L’inscription est fort endommagée et on ne lit que la dédicace. Une statuette de marbre de Dionysopolis représente la Mère des Dieux sur un trône, avec la phiale et le tympanon et sur les genoux – un lionceau (Tacheva 1983, No 75).

Tous les autres monuments d’Odessos sont de l’époque romaine. Deux statuettes de marbre représentent Cybèle sous son iconographie usuelle – sur le trône, avec la phiale et le tympanon (Tacheva 1983, No 15). L’unique monument épigraphique est de l’époque de Septime Sévère et de Caracalla. Il ne subsiste qu’une partie de l’image, grossièrement exécutée et aux proportions vagues. Le relief est relativement haut, disposé dans une niche. Cybèle est assise sur un trône, flanquée à gauche d’un gros lion, dont la présence à droite est à supposer (Tacheva 1983, No 19; IGBulg., I, No 90). Le monument est une dédicace aux deux empereurs. Il y a aussi une dalle de marbre dont n’est conservée que la partie supérieure gauche laissant voir la déesse sur un trône: celle-ci tient de la main droite une phiale, en compagnie d’Héraclès debout. Au-dessus est visible une partie d’une dédicace (IGBulg., I, No 81) aux deux divinités – å˜÷áñéóôÞñéïí Ìåôñr [ êár FÇ] /ñÜêëåé.

Il apparaît que le culte de la déesse-mère anatolienne pénètre sur la côte ouest-pontique en tant que Cybèle ou la Mère des Dieux. On ne saurait établir si ce culte est importé par les colons, car les monuments d’une époque très ancienne sont peu nombreux. Toutefois, l’existence de tels monuments témoigne de la popularité de ce culte dans la région. Déméter et Coré A la différence de Cybèle, Déméter est plus étroitement liée à la Grèce continentale. C'est le cas de Mégare où elle est vénérée tout particulièrement. D’après Pausanias (I, 39, 5:40,6), le nom de la ville lui vient du mégaron que le roi légendaire Caros édifie sur son acropole. Le culte de Déméter est très populaire aussi dans la colonie mégarienne Héraclée du Pont qui fonde, de son côté, des colonies sur la côte ouest-pontique (Hannel 1934, 50).

Les données sur le culte de Cybèle à Apollonia sont peu abondantes, mais sont d’époque très ancienne et font l’objet de beaucoup de commentaires. Tout d’abord, il est à noter un monument en pierre en forme de prisme. Sa partie supérieure est à la forme d'un fronton de sanctuaire, sous lequel est disposé un champ en relief rectangulaire. Le monument évoque plutôt un obélisque. Certains chercheurs supposent qu’il est importé d’un autre lieu. Dans le champ est visible la figure d’une femme assise, grossièrement exécutée, tenant de la main droite une phiale et de la gauche – un tympanon schématisé. Le relief a été publié à deux reprises (Galabov 1960, 226-228; Galabov 1965, 65). Par la suite,

Le culte de Déméter est le plus largement attesté dans la première colonie mégarienne – Callatis. Le plus ancien monument est daté du Ier s. av. J.-C. (ISM, III, No 40). C’est un décret promulgué sur l’initiative de èïéíÜôáéò ôOò ÄÜìáôñáò ôOò ×èïíßáò. Il nous informe qu’il existerait dans la ville une organisation qui préparerait les 74

ZLATOZARA GOTCHEVA: LA THRACE PONTIQUE ET LA MYTHOLOGIE GRECQUE fêtes, plutôt les banquets sacrés – èïßíç, en l’honneur de Déméter, vénérée sous l’épiclèse de Chtonia, qui la caractérise comme déesse da la fécondité. Sous cette épithète, Déméter est désignée aussi dans une inscription du IVe s. av. J.-C. (ISM, III, No 48A), qui représente un texte oraculaire où elle figure à côté d’autres divinités vénérées à Mégare et à Callatis – Dionysos Patroos, Bacchus. Toujours en tant que déesse de la fécondité Déméter est caractérisée par l’épithète de Ìáëïöüñïò, à en croire Pausanias (I, 44, 3). Bien n’y ait pas d’épithète de la déesse enregistrée sur les monuments de Callatis, le mois de Malophoros du calendrier callatien (ISM, III, No 38) serait lié, déjà dans la métropole, à des fêtes en l’honneur de Déméter portant la même épithète.

consacrés (Velkov 1960, 130-131). L’épithète de Malophoros est interprétée de diverses manières. Pausanias propose la racine ìáëëüò, laine des brebis. Il serait plus opportun de la traduire comme ‘offrant des fruits’, en se fondant sur ses fonctions de déesse de la fécondité. Quant aux colonies milésiennes, le culte de Déméter sous son aspect de déesse de la fécondité est peu populaire. A Histria, le culte est attesté par des monuments épigraphiques et numismatiques. Trois dédicaces à Déméter, sans épithète, sont adressées par de femmes (ISM, I, Nos 120, 109, 125). La première, datée du IIe s. av. J.-C., mentionne aussi l’époux et le père de la femme. Elle-même est désignée comme Rñîáóá, ce qui témoigne qu’elle remplit la fonction d’archonte. Dans la deuxième, de la même date, figurent aussi les noms de son époux et de son père, pour souligner vraisemblablement son origine. Dans la troisième, il n’y a que le nom de son père. Une autre inscription, très endommagée, ne laisse lire que cinq lettres du nom de la déesse, ce qui ne permet pas d’établir s’il s’agit de Déméter ou de Cybèle (ISM, I, No 115).

L’apparition du culte de Déméter à Callatis est attestée par les plus anciennes monnaies d’argent et de bronze, frappées par la ville au IVe s. av. J.-C., dont le revers porte un épi, à côté des attributs d’Héraclès (Pick, Regling 1910, Nos 196, 203, 205, 207, 208). D’autre part, l’épi, symbole de Déméter, apparaît aussi sur les contremarques apposées par Callatis sur les monnaies d’Alexandre et de Lysimaque (Pick, Regling 1910, Nos 209-215). Le culte de Déméter est populaire aussi à l’époque romaine, ce dont témoignent les monnaies, sur lesquelles la déesse porte un voile et une couronne d’épis (Pick, Regling 1910, 190-194).

Déméter apparaît sur les monnaies d’Histria déjà à l’époque hellénistique. Une monnaie de bronze, datée de l’an 200 av. J.-C., porte sur l’avers un dauphin et sur le revers – un épi (Pick, Regling 1910, No 451). Par la suite, sur l’avers des monnaies figure la tête de Déméter portant un voile et une couronne d’épis, et sur le revers – l’emblème d’Histria – un aigle attaquant un dauphin (Pick, Regling 1910, Nos 472-476). Sur une seule monnaie, la tête féminine ne porte qu’une couronne d’épis (Pick, Regling 1910, No 477). On suppose que c’est Coré.

Une inscription fort mutilée laisse lire une autre épiclèse de Déméter – Ðëïõôïäïôåßá, c.-à-d. bienfaitrice. Dans l’autre colonie mégarienne sur la côte ouestpontique, Déméter est vénérée avec sa fille Coré. Une épitaphe de Messambria mentionne une prêtresse de Déméter et de Coré sous l’épithète de Èåóìïöüñïé. Aussi peut-on admettre que les deux déesses seraient liées à la métropole Mégare où, selon Pausanias (I, 42), il existerait un sanctuaire de Déméter Thesmophoros, et où seraient célébrées ses fêtes – les Thesmophories.

De Tomis ne nous est parvenue qu’une inscription du IIe s. av. J.-C. (ISM, II, No 36). Le petit fragment conservé laisse lire le nom de Déméter en tant qu’éponyme FÉåñùìÝíçò ÄÞìçôñïò. De l’époque romaine est datée une dédicace à Déméter et à Asclépios (ISM, II, No 118). Il y a également un relief anépigraphe à Déméter et à Pluton (Tocilescu 1900, 233).

Une prêtressse de Déméter et de Coré est honorée par un décret de Messambria de la fin du IVe-IIIe s. av. J.-C. Parmi ses grands mérites est la bonne organisation des sacrifices (IGBulg., V, No 5095). Une inscription d’Anchialo est l’unique cas où Déméter est désignée comme Ìáëïöüñïò (IGBulg., I, No 370). Quoique Anchialo soit fondée par Apollonia, il n’est pas exclu qu’elle subisse l’influence de Messambria, du fait qu’elle se trouve pendant une certaine période sous son occupation. C’est de ce moment que daterait la pénétration du culte de Déméter sous cette épithète. Le monument représente une ara de calcaire, sur lequel est gravée la dédicace. Bien que dans la dédicace la déesse ne figure pas sous son nom, mais seulement comme èåÜ, on est fondé à l’identifier à Déméter, puisqu'à en croire Pausanias (I, 44, 3) se trouverait à Mégare un sanctuaire où elle était vénérée sous cette épithète. Déméter est connue aussi sous cette épithète dans d’autres colonies mégariennes et à Byzantion, où des sanctuaires lui étaient

Déméter figure aussi sur les monnaies frappées par la ville aux IIe-Ier s. av. J.-C. L’avers d’un groupe de monnaies de bronze porte la tête de Déméter avec le voile et la couronne d’épis et le revers – les symboles de la déesse – les épis, flanqués des deux étoiles des Dioscures (Pick, Regling 1910, Nos 2487-2493). Seule une monnaie porte sur l’avers Zeus et sur le revers – la même représentation (Pick, Regling 1910, No 2494). L’image de Déméter sous la même iconographie continue à figurer sur les monnaies de Tomis à l’époque romaine. De Dionysopolis n’est connu qu’un autel de calcaire, daté du IIIe s. av. nJ.-C. (IGBulg., I, No 21). La dédicace est faite par un fils à sa mère, désignée comme æáêïñåõïýóçò ÄÞìçôñïò. ÃëõêÝñá est un prêtre 75

ANCIENT GREEK COLONIES IN THE BLACK SEA 2 spécial, remplissant des fonctions subalternes dans le temple. En l’occurrence, il s’agirait d’une telle prêtresse dans le temple de Déméter qui se trouverait dans la ville. Les monnaies frappées à l’époque romaine portent les images et les attributs usuels (Pick, Regling, 1910, Nos 371, 374, 377).

Les plus anciens monuments de Déméter sont des terres cuites des VIe-Ve s.av. J.-C. Leur abondance dans la nécropole témoigne de l’existence d’un atelier dans la ville. Les statuettes représentant la figure assise de Déméter y prédominent. L’un des exemples les plus anciens de ce groupe est une Déméter assise sur une chaise à dossier et à support pour les pieds (Dremsizova 1963, No 801). Le corps est représenté de face, les bras reposent sur les genoux. Sous le voile surgit une chevelure drue tressée. L’expression du visage est sévère.Une autre statuette, dont les traits sont plus doux, est plus tardive (Dremsizova, Tončeva 1971, 30).Le chiton couvre la tête de la déesse, ce qui suggère son angoisse pour sa fille disparue. Un grand intérêt présente une statuette de Déméter et de Coré (Dremsizova, Tončeva 1979, No 2). Les deux déesses sont assises sur un banc. Elles sont vêtues d’un même chiton et himation qui enveloppe leur corps jusqu’aux chevilles. Le voile couvrant leur tête tombe sur leurs épaules et leur dos. Leurs cheveux entourent leurs fronts comme une couronne. Selon Tsv. Dremsizova, les terres cuites de Déméter et de Coré sont les plus anciennes dans la nécropole d’Apollonia et révèlent leur caractère chtonien. A cet aspect du culte des deux déesses, qui évoque aussi les mystères d’Eleusis en Attique, est lié un lécythe à figures rouges provenant de la nécropole (Ivanov 1963, 92-94). Une scène du cycle éleusinien représente le retour de Perséphone des Enfers. Déméter est assise solennellement sur un trône tenant dans son giron Perséphone. A droite se tiennent Iacchos portant deux torches et Triptolème sur son char ailé, des épis en main, Dionysos debout avec le thyrse et Hermès avec le caducée. T. Ivanov fait dater le monument de 360-350 av. J.-C. et l’attribue aux oeuvres d’Apollonia maler. L’emploi du vase dans la nécropole évoque les mystères d’Eleusis et leur attitude envers la mort, leur but d’assurer aux morts une béatitude éternelle.

Quant à Odessos, les matériaux épigraphiques manquent, mais c’est de là que proviennent les statuettes les plus nombreuses de Déméter qui, découvertes près de la nécropole de la ville où se trouve un atelier de terres cuites (Mirčev 1965, 8, 11), rattachent la déesse plutôt au rite funéraire et la présentent aussi comme déesse du royaume souterrain et protectrice des morts. Le plus ancien monument est une terre cuite de Déméter, assise sur une chaise sans dossier, la tête légèrement inclinée et les bras posés dans son giron. Elle porte sur la tête un polos et un voile. Les particularités stylistiques la font dater de la fin du Ve – début du IVe av. J.-C. Dans l’atelier de terres cuites d’Odessos prédominent les représentations de Déméter. Sur huit d’entre elles, façonnées dans un même moule, la déesse est debout, vêtue d’un chiton long et drapée dans un himation. Son bras droit, enveloppé en partie dans l’himation et lui couvrant la tête, est posé sous son menton (Dremsizova, Tončeva 1979, Nos 86, 92, 97). Selon M. Belova (1977, 277), sa tête voilée accentue son aspect matronal, mais suggère son caractère chtonien, en évoquant son angoisse pour Perséphone enlevée. Dans le même atelier, on a découvert deux reliefs votifs d’un même sujet – Déméter devant un temple, en chiton et en himation, celui-ci lui couvrant le cou et les épaules. Cette représentation laisse supposer l’existence d’un temple à Odessos, mais on ne dispose malheureusement pas d’autres données. Le culte officiel de Déméter en tant que déesse de la fécondité se trouve confirmé par les monnaies frappées par la ville à l’époque hellénistique, en particulier à l’époque romaine. Sur les monnaies de bronze de l’époque hellénistique sont représentées Déméter et Coré. Leurs têtes sont tournées à gauche. Déméter est voilée et les deux déesses ont la tête entourée d’une couronne d’épis, le revers portant d’ordinaire un ou deux épis (Pick, Regling, 1910, Nos 2218, 2223-2225). Les images de Déméter et de Coré dominent sur l’avers des monnaies de l’époque impériale romaine (Pick, Regling 1910, Nos 2234, 2241, 2252-2255, 2280).

Un aspect plus particulier du culte de Déméter montre une dédicace à ÃÝ ×èüíéá que G. Mihailov détermine comme Déméter Chtonia. Selon l’auteur, on organise en l’honneur de Déméter Chtonia des ìåãáñßæåéí, fêtes liées à la fécondité, dans toute la Grèce, ayant lieu dans un ìÝãáñïíе, sanctuaire caractéristique du culte de la déesse. Le culte de Déméter Chtonia est populaire aussi dans d’autres colonies ouest-pontiques de caractère agricole, notamment des banquets sont organisés à Callatis en don honneur (ISM, III, Nos 41, 42). Comme dans toutes les villes pontiques, le culte de Déméter est attesté par les monnaies frappées par Apollonia, sur lesquelles elle est représentée avec ses attributs de déesse de la fécondité, protectrice de l’agriculture.

Les monuments d’Apollonia sont peu nombreux, mais montrent un aspect particulier du culte de la déesse. Leur petit nombre pourrait être expliqué par l’exploration insuffisante de la ville. Les résultats de l’exploration de la nécropole d’Apollonia contribuent à éclaircir certains aspects du culte.

76

ZLATOZARA GOTCHEVA: LA THRACE PONTIQUE ET LA MYTHOLOGIE GRECQUE Tout autre est la situation de Messambria. Pendant une certaine période, elle serait liée au koinon pontique et à ses inscriptions. Il n’y a pas de données sur la célébration du culte impérial.

ORGANISATION DE LA RELIGION OFFICIELLE SOUS L’EMPIRE ROMAIN La situation particulière des colonies grecques de la côte ouest-pontique à l’époque romaine détermine le développement spécifique de leur vie religieuse officielle. La raison en est leur division administrative dans les provinces de Mésie Inférieure et de Thrace faisant partie de l’Empire romain. Une partie de ces villes jouissent pourtant d’une certaine indépendance par suite de l’organisation du koinon pontique, notamment la pentapolis (l’hexapolis), particulièrement sur le plan de leur vie religieuse (Gočeva 1998, 141-147).

Une autre partie des villes sont organisées dans le koinon ouest-pontique appartenant formellement à la province de Mésie Inférieure. Le fait que cette province occidentale, la plus à l’est de l’Empire, est caractérisée par une forte présence militaire sur le limes danubien, en particulier dans sa partie septentrionale – la Scythie Mineure, laisse supposer une situation différente de la romanisation. C’est ce qui rend cette question difficile. Les problèmes ayant trait au koinon ouest-pontique sont discutés depuis longtemps dans la littérature spécialisée (Perrot 1874, 192), mais demeurent toujours en suspens. Cela tiendrait, dans une grande mesure, aux conditions complexes dans lesquelles le koinon apparaît. Il existe dans le cadre de la province de Mésie Inférieure, tout en perpétuant les anciennes traditions des poleis grecques.

Quoique insuffisantes, les données sur ce point permettent d’élucider le caractère du culte officiel – le culte impérial, ses particularités dans les deux provinces, ainsi que la pénétration de l’influence de la religion thrace locale. Excepté les différences qu’elles présentent, toutes ces villes maintiennent à un haut degré leur structure orientale de poleis grecques. D’autre part, leur vie religieuse se développe en général de la même manière qu'aux époques antérieures, en particulier qu'à l'époque hellénistique.

Les plus anciens monuments épigraphiques datent de l’époque romaine. En effet, on ne saurait parler de l’existence d’un vrai koinon à une époque antérieure (Mihailov 1979, 7-42). Or, l’étude de la chronologie du matériel épigraphique éclaire l’histoire la plus ancienne du koinon. Les plus anciens témoignages proviennent non pas de Tomis, comme l’affirment certains auteurs, mais d’Odessos (Cočeva 2002, 129-131). Sur une base de marbre d’Odessos, on peut lire le nom d’un citoyen de la pentapolis honoré, qui y est désigné comme Árcanta têß pólewß kaì Árcanta têß Pentapóleoß, mais aussi comme teimhqénta ©pò тoû koinoû tšß Penтapólewß. (IGBulg., I, No 64). Selon certains auteurs, la datation du monument ne paraît pas assurée (Stojan 1965, 70-89), mais selon d’autres, il est du Ier s. (Toutain 1903, 132). Aussi peut-on affirmer avec certitude qu’il s’agit d’un citoyen d’Odessos, bien que ce ne soit pas mentionné. Le fait que le personnage honoré gouvernerait le koinon et créerait en même temps ses lois nous porte à supposer qu’Odessos était la métropole du koinon – son centre le plus ancien. L’accomplissement simultané de ces deux fonctions est très significatif. Un même personnage y figure en pontarque, c.-à-d. exerçant le pouvoir administratif, et en archiprêtre, charge qui n’est pas caractéristique en général pour les villes pontiques. Il s’agit évidemment de l’archiprêtre de tout le koinon, comme le témoignent aussi les autres matériaux.

Célébration du culte impérial C’est le culte impérial qui distingue nettement les villes appartenant aux deux provinces. Ce culte est le plus faiblement attesté dans les villes de la province de Thrace, qui sont pourtant liées à degré différent au pouvoir romain officiel. Les plus insignifiantes sont les données sur la religion officielle à Apollonia. En effet, à l’époque romaine, cette cité perd de son importance dans l’économie de la région et son rôle dans la province de Thrace décroît. Au contraire, un grand essor connaît Anchialo voisine. Quoique insuffisamment explorée, Anchialo a livré des témoignages de son importance dès la fondation de la province Thrace, à l’époque d’Hadrien. On a découvert une inscription bilingue aux environs du village d’Izvorite (IGBulg., I, No 384), dont la première partie est en latin, ce qui vient confirmer son caractère officiel. D’après le nom du légat de la province, elle est datée de l’an 124. Deux autres inscriptions d’Anchialo sont dédiées à Caracalla et à Sévère Alexandre (IGBulg., I, Nos 369, 369 bis). La première, une inscription honorifique, est datée, d’après la titulature de Caracalla, des 213-214. Elle est placée, du nom de la boulé et du démos, sur Ïšëðéïí ô§í EÁí÷éáëÝïí, ce qui témoigne de l’importance de la ville depuis Trajan. L’autre dédicace est faite de la même manière. On ne dispose malheureusement pas d’autres données sur l’organisation du culte impérial.

Une inscription, datée de la même époque ou un peu plus tard – Ier-IIe s. (IGBulg., I, No 65), ne mentionne ni le nom du personnage, ni sa charge, mais il y a lieu de supposer que c’est un citoyen d’Odessos, honoré par ‘O dêm[oß $Odhssitôn......] kaì ¦ dšm[oß Tomitôn kaì Kall[atianôn] kaì $Istri[anon]kaì Di[onusopolitôn]kaì [Messambrianôn]... ˜gálmati 77

ANCIENT GREEK COLONIES IN THE BLACK SEA 2 [¢stefánwse]. En effet, l’inscription est l’œuvre de toutes les villes de l’hexapolis. En premier lieu figure le nom d’Odessos qui serait le centre le plus important du koinon.

est lié au pouvoir romain comme pouvoir de la polis, tandis que le pouvoir officiel est représenté le gouverneur de la province. En général, les jeux organisés dans les villes des provinces orientales se rattachent à l’empereur (Cočeva 1988, 50-58). Une autre inscription, dont il ne subsiste que le début, vient honorer Lucius Septime Sévère et Marc Aurèle Antonin (IGBulg., I, No 90). Sur la partie conservée du coin gauche supérieur de la dalle est représentée Cybèle assise sur un trône, un lion marchant vers celle-ci. L’iconographie est inhabituelle pour Odessos et l’exécution est assez grossière. A l’empereur et à sa famille seraient dédiés les jeux et les concours organisés dans la ville, appelés Darzaleia, qu’on pourrait rattacher à la pénétration à l’époque romaine du culte local de Darzalas, syncrétisé avec le protecteur de la ville – le Qeòß Mégaß $Odësitwn. Cinq listes d’éphèbes, participant à des concours (IGBulg., I, Nos 47, 47 bis, 48, 49, 50), nous permettent de situer leur organisation à Odessos entre 117 et 238. Les matériaux disponibles témoignent de la floraison d’Odessos à l’époque romaine, de sa place importante dans la pentapolis en tant que métropole dans la période ancienne de son existence, ainsi que de ses rapports éventuels avec toutes les parties de la province de Mésie Inférieure.

Une inscription, vraisemblablement honorifique, de la même date n’indique que le nom du personnage honoré et le titre de pontárxhs (IGBulg., I, No 64 bis). Du IIe s. est une autre inscription (IGBulg., I, No 66) qui mentionne une Πεíαν $Apollodýrou tšn ˜rxiéreian ,gunaîkan dè toû pontárxou Dionusíou $Agaqënoroß. Cette grande prêtresse est la femme du pontarque. L’inscription renvoie à Odessos quoique son nom n’y figure pas. On peut conclure que ce serait le pontarque d’Odessos. Il y a encore deux inscriptions de la même date fort mutilées. La première (IGBulg., I, No 67) ne mentionne que pontárxhn kaì....u¥òn têß pól[ewß------------¥eréuß Poseidônou kaì Qeoû Megálou kaì $Apóllwnoß. Il est à noter que le personnage honoré est désigné tout d’abord comme pontarque et ensuite comme prêtre d’Apollon Èå’ò ÌÝãáò et de Poséidon. Il semble qu’il s’agisse d’un prêtre de la ville qui vénère ces divinités, mais cela n’a pas trait à la pentapolis. L’autre inscription honorifique mentionne un pontarque (IGBulg., I, No 64 bis), qui porte trois noms romains. Dans une inscription funéraire (IGBulg., I, 297), le défunt figure en pontárxhß καì ˜gwnoqéthß d’Odessos. Il est à ajouter un monument intéressant découvert dans un sanctuaire essentiellement thrace – le sanctuaire du Cavalier thrace, au nord-ouest du village de Rojak, aux environs d’Odessos (Gočeva 1990, 135). Sur un petit fragment d’une plaque votive est visible la représentation du Cavalier thrace. La bordure inférieure porte une inscription disposée en quatre lignes dont il ne subsiste qu’une petite partie qui ne laisse lire que ˜rxiereúß kaì pontárxhß. On peut rattacher avec certitude le monument et le dédicant à Odessos.

Des témoignages peu nombreux nous sont parvenus concernant le rôle de Dionysopolis à l’époque romaine. Une inscription, dont il ne subsiste que les quatre premières lignes, laisse supposer qu’elle est adressée à Caracalla (IGBulg., I, No 17). La dédicace ôý÷çò êár íßêçò est faite par l’association des jeunes hymnodes liés vraisemblablement au culte de Dionysos, le culte principal de la ville, et on peut en déduire qu’il est tout à fait naturel que ces hymnodes honorent aussi l’empereur. Une inscription brisée en trois morceaux présente un grand intérêt (IGBulg., I, No 22 bis). Seules quelques lignes nous sont parvenues, qui indiquent que c’est une inscription honorifique adressée par le collège bachique à Gordien III, appelé èåïôÜôïò ìÝãéóôïò êýñéïò, et à son épouse Sabina Tranquillina. Il y a encore une inscription adressée ôý÷çò êár íßêçò à Sévère Alexandre par la speira des Asiatiques. A Dionysopolis seraient organisés des concours liés aussi à l’empereur, dédiés à Dionysos (IGBulg., I, No 50).

D’Odessos proviennent aussi un grand nombre d’inscriptions liées à l’empereur. La plus ancienne, dédiée à l’empereur Tibère, est datée des 14-37 (IGBulg., I, No 57). Gravée par un certain citoyen pour honorer les mérites de Tibère, celle-ci figure sur un édifice dédié à tous les dieux. Une autre inscription en l’honneur de Tibère est l’oeuvre de FÇñáêëÝùí Äéïíõóßïõ Qñ÷éåñå˜ò qui érigerait à ses frais une statue et puis äï˜ò êár íïìxí ðïëåßôáéò êárFÑùìáßïéò êár îÝíïéò.Il est à noter la division des citoyens d’Odessos en Romains et en étrangers du nom du grand prêtre local, vraisemblablement de la pentapolis, en parlant d'un banquet en l’honneur de l’empereur. Antonin le Pieux est mentionné dans une longue inscription, très endommagée, qui laisse supposer que c’est un décret émis par la boulé et le démos (IGBulg., I, No 70 bis). Un autre décret vient honorer Sévère Alexandre et son épouse Iulia Mamaia. Il est promulgué par l’archiprêtre et le bouleute au sujet des êõíÝãåóßá êár ìïíïìá÷ßá, organisés dans la ville. La participation de l’archiprêtre vient souligner la vénération de l’empereur et tout ce qui

La plus ancienne inscription impériale de Tomis daterait de 102-103 (ISM, II, No 41). L’empereur est honoré par une inscription en latin de la Respublica Tomitanorum, sur l’initiative du légat provincial. Il s’agit évidemment de la vénération de l’empereur seulement par la polis de Tomis. Une inscription (ISM, II, No 43), datée de 116117, a le même contenu. Une autre inscription (ISM, II, No 72), datée des environs de l’an 116, présente une différence. La dédicace est en grec et n’a pas de caractère officiel, étant faite par la boulé et le démos de Tomis. Deux inscriptions, fort fragmentaires, sont dédiées à 78

ZLATOZARA GOTCHEVA: LA THRACE PONTIQUE ET LA MYTHOLOGIE GRECQUE Trajan. La première, en grec (ISM, II, No 38), est placée par äÞìù Ôïì(åéô§í), et de la deuxième, en latin (ISM, II, No 39), ne subsiste qu’une ligne contenant le nom et une partie de la titulature de l’empereur.

celle-ci était héréditaire. Titus Flavius Poseidonius est aussi chef de la phila à laquelle il adhère. Quatre inscriptions grecques, qui sont des décrets ordinaires, sont datées par D. Pippidi du IIe s. D’après les règles de la polis grecque, elles commencent par la formule EÇ âïõëx êár ¿ äßìïò ôyò ìçôñïðüëåùò Ôóìåùò (ISM, II, Nos 59,71, 72) , ou par EÇ âïõëx êár ¿ äßìïò ôyò ìçôñïðüëåùò Ðüíôïõ Ôóìåùò (ISM, II, No 70). Bien qu’elles ne soient pas précisément datées, elles correspondent à la datation de la première inscription relative au koinon qui laisse supposer que Tomis est déjà sa métropole.

Très nombreuses sont les inscriptions de l’époque de l’empereur Hadrien. La plus ancienne, en latin, est datée d’après la nomination de l’empereur – de 119-123 (ISM, II, No 50). A la fin, on peut lire que l’empereur est honoré par le senatus populusque Tomitanorum. La langue latine témoigne du caractère officiel de l’inscription, mais, d’autre part, il y est dit qu’elle est placée par la boulé et le démos de Tomis, ce qui vient confirmer la participation de ses citoyens. Dans une inscription, mal conservée, les éditeurs n’ont restitué que la titulature de l’empereur (ISM, II, No 51). Une autre inscription de l’époque d’Hadrien est datée par les éditeurs de 117-138 (ISM, II, No 48). La dédicace est bilingue et a un texte identique au précédent. A la fin, il est dit qu’elle est placée par la Respublica Tomitanorum, d’une part, et par la boulé et le démos, d’autre part, la datation étant donnée d’après le légat de la province.

Trois monuments sont consacrés à Antonin le Pieux. Le premier (ISM, II, No 54) est daté, d’après le gouverneur de la province, des 137-138. La dédicace est faite sur l’initiative de la boulé et du démos Ðüíôïõ Ôоìåùò. Elle est en grec et il n’y a pas de doute qu’elle est l’oeuvre du koinon, indépendant des autorités provinciales. La deuxième dédicace (ISM, II, No 55) est adressée seulement par la ville, sur l’initiative non pas du pouvoir officiel du koinon, mais d’un certain citoyen qui l’offre à Antonin le Pieux en tant qu’empereur, et à Marc Aurèle en tant que césar. Celui-ci assume les frais et désigne luimême sa place sur l’agora. La troisième dédicace (ISM, II, No 153) est faite à èå§ ìåãÜëù ÓáñÜðéäé êÜé ôïs óõííÜïéò èåïsò ášôïêñÜôïñé Ô ÁkëßùFÁäñéáí§ EÁíôùíåßíù, ainsi qu’à Marc Aurèle en tant que césar. Elle nous informe qu’un certain citoyen érigerait un autel ô§í EÁëåîáíäñÝùí en l’an 23, vraisemblablement sous le règne d’Antonin le Pieux, et trois prêtres y figurent en éponymes. Il s’agirait d'un collège de prêtres d’Alexandrie qui créeraient un collège à Tomis. La dédicace est faite plutôt à titre privé.

Il y a encore deux monuments en grec (ISM, II, Nos 47, 52). La première inscription est dédiée à Hadrien, désigné comme ÷áñéóôÞñéïí, à titre anonyme. L’empereur y figure sous ses noms propres, sans détails sur sa nomination, mais porte trois épithètes éloquentes – noble, Olympios et sauveur, qui viennent expliquer la raison de la gratitude qu’on lui témoigne. D. Pippidi date l’inscription, d’après la deuxième épithète, de 129, en prenant l'Olympiade d'Athènes en 138 comme terminus ante quem. La deuxième inscription est très significative de la célébration du culte impérial. C’est la plus ancienne inscription de Tomis liée au koinon pontique, datée de 130-138. C’est une base de statue, érigée probablement en l’honneur de Titus Flavius Poseidonius qui est désigné comme ...tòn p]ontárxhn kaì ˜rxieré]a têß ‘Ecapólewß. D’autre part, il y figure en ...uœòn toû Póntou, ce qui vient confirmer son rôle dans la pentapolis. Il est aussi protoò ˜gwnoqéthò Qeoû $Antinóou lié directement à l’empereur. Lui-même est fils d’un pontarque et est honoré comme père de la polis. L’inscription indique que sur le plan religieux, le koinon est gouverné par un archiprêtre, qui célèbre le culte impérial et n’est pas subordonné au pontifex provinciae. Cette énumération des charges témoigne de leur distinction dans la vie religieuse du koinon. Le pontarque assume plutôt des fonctions administratives dans l’organisation du culte, alors que l’archiprêtre est directement lié à cette organisation. Etant donné la nomination romaine du personnage honoré, sa citoyenneté romaine ne fait aucun doute. Or, à en juger par son cognomen, il serait d’origine hellénique. D’autre part, son père est mentionné aussi comme pontarque. En l’occurrence, on ne saurait établir s’il s’agit de pontarques remplissant en même temps cette charge ou si

Une autre inscription liée au koinon (ISM, II, No 69) est datée de 161-169, l’époque de Marc Aurèle et de Lucius Verus. Le personnage est désigné comme sofisтëò kaì ˜gwnoqéthn et est honoré ˜ретêß xárin. Plus loin, on peut lire tón pontárxhß têß ‘Ecapólewß kaì ˜rxieréuò kaì œeréа tôn b(=duoîn) a©tokratórwn. La situation ici est délicate à interpréter. En premier lieu sont mentionnés ses qualités personnelles et ses mérites, et en deuxième lieu – les charges qu’il remplit au niveau de l’hexapolis. Il est à la fois pontarque et archiprêtre, fonction que l’on rattache en général à l’organisation de la vie religieuse du koinon. Or, la célébration du culte impérial à Tomis est confiée ici à un simple prêtre, ce qui vise à dénigrer dans une certaine mesure le caractère officiel de ce culte au niveau du koinon, et à mettre en évidence l’indépendance de l’hexapolis de la religion officielle de la province. De l’époque de Marc Aurèle nous sont parvenues encore quatre inscriptions. Trois d’entre elles, dont il ne subsiste qu’une partie infime, sont très brèves et fournissent peu de données sur le culte impérial (ISM, II, Nos 63, 64,

79

ANCIENT GREEK COLONIES IN THE BLACK SEA 2 67). Dans la première, on ne lit qu’une partie du nom de Marc Aurèle et dans la deuxième – une partie du nom de Lucius Verus. La troisième est dédiée aux deux empereurs pour ôý÷çò êár ákùíßïõ. Äéáìïíyò, c.-à-d. pour le bonheur et une vie éternelle. L’inscription a un caractère officiel, mais le texte qui suit a malheureusement disparu. La quatrième est une dédicace à Apollon EÁãõÝò (ISM, II, No 116) pour le salut et la victoire de l’empereur, et pour la santé et le salut de la métropole de Tomis. Elle est gravée sur les deux côtés d’une ara. La datation est faite, d’une part, d’après le consul et, d’autre part, d’après le pontarque qui remplit cette charge pour la deuxième fois.

avec quelque centre voisin caractérisé par une présence romaine. Un décret (ISM, II, No 97) d’une datation incertaine (Ier-IIe s.) vient honorer un Tomitain, désigné comme pontarque du koinon et Pñ÷åñáóÜìåíïí ôxí äé'‘ðëùí êár êõíçãåóßùí, ainsi que ôxí Pñ÷éÝñåéáí ,óýìâéïí ášôïõ... En l’occurrence sont présentées différentes charges de responsabilité que le pontarque remplirait successivement dans sa carrière ou, comme c’est le cas de Philippopolis, les deux à la fois (Cočeva 1981, 493501). La mention de $Arxiereúß di’†plwn, unique pour Tomis, témoigne de l’organisation de combats de gladiateurs liés au culte impérial. A cette organisation participerait aussi l’épouse de l’empereur. Un autre décret est également émis par la boulé et le démos en l’honneur d’un Tomitain (ISM, II, No 96) où il figure en pontarque et en Pñ÷åñáóÜìåíïí ôxí äé'‘ðëùí et son épouse – en grande prêtresse. Il s’ensuit qu’il y a deux cas dans la ville où l’archiprêtre participe avec son épouse à l’organisation de combats de gladiateurs. Il accomplit à la fois d’autres fonctions, comme on l’a constaté dans le koinon thrace (Cočeva 1988, 50-57).

De Tomis proviennent aussi des monuments en l’honneur de Septime Sévère. Sur les fragments de deux inscriptions brèves (ISM, II, Nos 81, 86), l’une en latin, l’autre – en grec, on ne lit que le nom et la titulature de l’empereur. Plus intéressantes sont trois autres inscriptions en grec (ISM, II, Nos 82, 83, 85). La première est dédiée à Septime Sévère, à Marc Aurèle Antonin et à Geta en tant que césar pour le succès et la victoire de tous les trois, de la mère des camps Iulia Augusta, de leurs familles, du sénat, de l’armée et du consul, ainsi que de Åšùíýìïõ Ðüíôïõ Ìçôñïðüëåïò Ôüìåùò. L’inscription mentionne tout ce qui a rapport à l’empereur mais aussi Tomis, ce qui témoigne du rôle important du koinon, au moins à l’égal de la province à laquelle il appartient. D’un caractère moins officiel est la deuxième dédicace. Elle est adressée à Septime Sévère, à Marc Aurèle et à Geta pour le bonheur, la victoire et une vie éternelle, ainsi qu’à la mère des camps Iulia Augusta, à toute la famille de l’empereur et au sénat. La dédicace est l’œuvre d’un thiase dionysiaque dont les membres sont présentés avec leurs charges.

Par la suite, le culte impérial perd de son importance. Il n’y a qu’un monument de l’époque de Sévère Alexandre dédié à la mère de l’empereur – Iulia Mamaia (ISM, II, No 62). L’inscription est l’œuvre de la boulé, du démos du koinon pontique et de la métropole Tomis. Les plus anciens monuments d’Histria sont de l’époque d’Hadrien. Du premier, en latin, n’est conservée que la partie où sont lisibles son nom et sa titulature (ISM, I, No 72). Le deuxième est dédié à Hadrien et à son fils Antonin le Pieux en tant que césar (ISM, I, No 193). La dédicace est adressée à ôý÷çò êár ákùíßïõ. Äéáìïíyò et à toute la famille. Elle représente le début de la partie officielle d’une décision de la gérousie. De l’époque d’Antonin le Pieux ne nous sont parvenus que deux petits fragments (ISM, I, Nos 75, 76), sur lesquels n’est lisible qu’une partie de son nom.

Le texte de la troisième inscription est presque identique aux deux premières. Elle ne contient que des vœux à l’adresse du peuple romain, de la boulé et du démos de la métropole de Tomis. A la famille de Septime Sévère sont liées quelques inscriptions consacrées à Jupiter Optimus Maximus, provenant probablement d’un sanctuaire qui lui est dédié aux alentours de Tomis. C’est le premier cas où le culte proprement romain de la triade capitoline apparaît sur la côte pontique – quelque chose d’inhabituel. Or, cela paraît naturel étant donné que le territoire voisin de Tomis entretient déjà des rapports directs avec le limes bas-danubien dont le degré de romanisation est très élevé. L’une d’entre elles est dédiée à Marc Aurèle (ISM, II, No 113). Les trois autres dédicaces concernent Septime Sévère (ISM, II, Nos 134, 135, 136). Dans la première, on peut lire pro salute L. Septimio Severo. L’ara est érigée par un magistratus vici Clementianes à ses frais. La deuxième est faite pro salute Iuliae Domnae Augustae et la troisième est adressée à Septime Sévère par un magistratus du même village. Le village n’est pas localisé, mais serait situé aux environs de Tomis et entretiendrait des rapports avec la ville ou

A Septime Sévère et à sa famille sont dédiées quatre inscriptions (ISM, I, Nos 79, 81, 82, 87). La première est faite par la boulé et le démos d’Histria en l’honneur de Septime Sévère. La deuxième et la troisième viennent honorer Septime Sévère, Marc Aurèle Antonin, Caracalla et Geta en tant que césar íåßêçò êár ôý÷çò êár ákùíßïõ. Äéáìïíyò, et dans la quatrième sont mentionnés aussi Iulia Domna, toute la famille et le sénat. Une inscription, l’œuvre de la boulé et du démos, est consacrée seulement à Iulia Domna en tant que mère de l’empereur. Cinq inscriptions sont de l’époque de Caracalla (ISM, I, Nos 80, 83, 88, 90, 182). Des trois premières il n’y a que de petits fragments où l’on peut lire le nom et une partie de la titulature de l’empereur. Dans la quatrième, plus longue, l’empereur est appelé aussi ãyò êár èÜëáóóçò

80

ZLATOZARA GOTCHEVA: LA THRACE PONTIQUE ET LA MYTHOLOGIE GRECQUE äåóðüôçò. La cinquième figure sur une base de statue et est consacrée à l’empereur et à Iulia Domna. Toutes les cinq sont placées du nom de la boulé et du démos d’Histria. Les inscriptions les plus tardives d’Histria sont dédiées à Maximin le Thrace et à son fils Maxime (ISM, I, Nos 94, 95). Dans la première, Maximin est appelé ãyò êár èÜëáóóçò êár ðNíôïò Píèñþðùí ièíïõò äåóðüôçò. Dans la deuxième, en l’honneur de son fils, l’empereur figure en èåïöiëÝóôáôïò. Les deux inscriptions sont l’œuvre de la boulé et du démos de la ville. Il est à noter que dans ces inscriptions ne sont mentionnés ni le gouvernement du koinon, qui se trouve à cette époque à Tomis, ni l’archiprêtre. En effet, la célébration du culte impérial n’a lieu que dans la ville.

Il n’y a pas de données probantes sur la pénétration des cultes orientaux dans les villes de la côte est-pontique, quoique ce soit dans cette région que l’influence orientale est largement attestée dans les colonies milésiennes et mégariennes déjà à l’époque hellénistique. En général, sa religion présente plus d’affinités avec l’Orient et l’Asie Mineure qu’avec la Grèce continentale. La preuve en sont les cultes de la Grande déesse-mère et de Dionysos, en particulier à l’époque hellénistique, quand cette influence marque de son empreinte la religion de toute la Méditerranée orientale. Or, à l’époque impériale, la pénétration de cultes orientaux dans les provinces de Thrace et de Mésie Inférieure suit un cours différent. En Mésie Inférieure, on pourrait les rattacher avant tout à la présence militaire. Leur lien direct avec l’armée se trouve confirmé par le culte de Mithra qui n’est pas populaire sur la côte pontique. En Thrace, ces cultes seraient importés par des émigrés orientaux.

Le culte impérial est faiblement attesté à Callatis. Le premier monument est de l’époque de Trajan. Il y a encore deux inscriptions consacrées à cet empereur (ISM, III, Nos 59, 83). De la première il ne subsiste que deux lignes qui laissent lire une partie du nom de l’empereur. La deuxième est faite civibus Romanus consistentibus Callatis. Une dédicace est émise par la boulé et le démos de la ville en l’honneur de Marc Aurèle et de Lucius Verus en tant que césar (ISM, III, No 61). Une autre inscription, œuvre de la boulé et du démos, est consacrée à Commode exprimant des vœux pour le succès de l’empereur et de sa famille (ISM, III, No 65). Par deux inscriptions sont honorés Septime Sévère, Marc Aurèle (Caracalla) et Geta en tant que césar, ainsi que Iulia Domna (ISM, III, Nos 73, 269). Dans la première, on ne lit que les noms et la nomination de l’empereur. La deuxième est placée par l’un des thiases dionysiaques à Callatis. Les matériaux épigraphiques viennent confirmer que le culte impérial n’est pas populaire dans la ville, ce qui indique qu’elle ne joue pas un rôle important dans le koinon.

A l’époque romaine, en Thrace se répand le culte de Sabazios, qui n’est pas enregistré sur la côte ouestpontique. On n’a pas de données suffisantes sur la propagation du culte de Séparis et d’Isis et de leurs mystères dans certaines régions de la Méditerranée orientale à l’époque hellénistique et plus tard dans l’Empire. A Sérapis et à Isis sont liées deux inscriptions de Messambria, datées de l’époque hellénistique. La première est une dédicace à Isis et à Sérapis faite par un Pñ÷éôÝêôùí (IGBulg., I, No 328). La deuxième, très mutilée, est dédiée à Isis, à Sérapis, à Anubis et à Aphrodite (IGBulg., I, No 322 ter). Sérapis figure parmi les divinités dans le long décret de Dionysopolis daté de l’époque préromaine (IGBulg, I, No 12). Seulement dans une inscription de Tomis, de l’époque romaine, Agrippine est honorée par une prêtresse de Sérapis et d’Isis. Or, la dédicace semble avoir un caractère privé et ne fournit pas de données sur le lien des deux divinités avec le culte impérial (ISM, II, No 38).

Il apparaît que dans la partie méridionale de la côte ouestpontique, appartenant à la province de Thrace, le culte impérial est faiblement attesté, à l’exception d’Anchialo qui connaît une floraison à l’époque romaine. D’autre part, ce culte se développe inégalement dans les différentes villes du koinon. Au premier plan ressort Tomis, qui reste le plus longtemps sa métropole. Suit Odessos, qui serait au début sa métropole, ce dont témoignent les monuments épigraphiques indiquant le caractère officiel du culte impérial lié à tout le koinon et l’organisation par des prêtres spéciaux de jeux et de concours en son honneur. En effet, on ne saurait parler de développement sur la côte ouest-pontique d’un culte impérial, au sens propre du mot, lié à des pratiques religieuses déterminées ou aux cultes romains officiels de la triade capitoline, de Dea Roma, et de Dea Augusta. On n’a pas découvert un temple spécial, mais seulement des inscriptions honorifiques, comme c’est le cas dans la plupart des provinces de l’Empire.

A Dolichenus est dédiée une belle statue d’Odessos, et une inscription de Dionysopolis d’époque romaine vient honorer Äér Äïëé÷áßù, le nom du dédicant, indiquant au moins une faible romanisation (IGBulg., I, No 24 bis). Le problème de l’influence thrace locale sur la religion de la côte pontique fait l’objet de controverses dans la littérature spécialisée. Il est à noter le cas de Darzalas qui trouve un bon accueil à Odessos pour se syncrétiser avec le culte de Theos Megas, sa divinité tutélaire. C’est aussi à Odessos que se répand le culte du Cavalier thrace. Selon toute vraisemblance, c'est de cette cité que proviennent les monuments les plus anciens le concernant et c’est là qu’apparaissent ses premiers schémas iconographiques. Or, sa présence sur la côte pontique est une question délicate dont l’élucidation apporterait une solution à certains problèmes de la religion thrace locale.

81

ANCIENT GREEK COLONIES IN THE BLACK SEA 2 Avram A., 1999 – in Der Vortrag zwischen Rom und Kallatis, p. 575. Amsterdam. Belova M., 1977 –Белова М., Религията на Одесос, Дионисополис и Бизоне в предримската епоха (Religiata na Odesos, Dionisopolis i Bizone v predrimskata epoha – La Religion d’Odessos, de Dionysopolis et de Byzoné à l’époque préromaine). // in Трудове на ВТИ ‘Кирил и Мртодий – Travaux de l’Université de Veliko Tarnovo ‘Cyrille et Méthode’. Bilabel Fr., 1912 – Milet und seine Kolonien. Leipzig. Bordenache, 1969 – Sculture greche e romane del Museo Nazionale di antichita di Bucarest. // in Statue e rilievi di culto. Elementi architettonici e decorativi, I. Bucarest. Cole S., 1984 – Theoi Megaloi: the cult of the Great Gods at Samothrace. Leiden. Condurachi E., 1938 – Gordien et Sérapis sur les monnaies pontiques. –CNA, 13, 1938, No 110-111, 33-37. Danov Hr. M., 1931-1934 – Данов Хр. М., Епиграфски приноси към историята на лекарското съсловие в Долна Мизия (Epigrafski prinosi kam istoriata na lekarskoto saslovie v Dolna Misia – Données épigraphiques sur l’histoire de la société des médecins en Mésie Inférieure). // GPNBM. ________, 1969 – Характер и значение на гръцката колонизация по западния бряг на Черно море (Harakter I znatchenie na gratskata kolonizatsia po zapadnia briag na Tcherno more – Caractère et importance de la colonisation grecque de la côte ouest-pontique). // Archéologie, No 1. Detschew D., 1976 – Die thrakischen Sprachreste. Wien. Diller A., 1952 – The Tradition of the Minor Greek Geography. Dimitrov D. P., 1957 – Димитров Д. П., Към въпроса за религията на траките през елинистическата епоха (Kam vaprosa za religiata na trakite prez elinistitcheskata epoha – Sur la religion des Thraces de l’époque hellénistique). // IPr., No 2. Dremsizova Tsv., 1961 –Дремсизова Цв., Теракоти от Археологическия музей в София (Terakoti ot Arheologitcheskia musey v Sofia – Terres cuites du Musée archéologique de Sofia). Sofia. Dremsizova Tsv., Tončeva, G., 1979 –Дремсизова, Цв., Тончева Г., 24 антични теракоти от България (24 anticni terakoti ot Balgaria – 24 terres cuites de Bulgarie). Sofia. Ehrhard N., 1983. – Milet und seine Kolonien. // in Verleihende Untersuchung der Kulturischen und politischen Einrichtungen. Frankfurt. Fol Al., 1986 – Фол Ал., Тракийският орфизъм (Trakiiskiat orfizam – L’Orphisme thrace). Sofia. Frel J.,1960 – Monuments d’Apollonie Pontique au Musée du Louvre. // IAI, 23. Galabov Iv., 1961 – Гълъбов Ив., Нови паметници на Аполонийската пластика (Novi pametnitsi na Apoloniiskata plastika – Monuments nouveaux de la plastique d’Apollonie). // in (Изследвания в памет на Карел Шкорпил. Сб. София) – Recherches in memoriam K. Skorpil. Recueil, Sofia. ______, 1965 – Каламис и аполонийската пластика. София. (Calamis i apoloniyskata plastika – Calamis et la plastique d’Apollonie). Sofia. Gerasimov T., 1939 – Герасимов Т., Корона донатика върху един списък на ефеби (Corona donatica varhu edin spisak na efebi – Corona donatica dans une liste d’éphèbes). // IAI, 13. _______, 1951 – Култовата статуя на великия бог Дарзалас в Одесос (Kultova statuia na velikia bog Darzalas v Odesos

ABRÉVIATIONS Acta TAB

Acta Associationis internationalis ‘Terra Antiqua Balcanica’. Sofia. Arheologia Археология – Archéologie (en bulgare). Sofia. BCH Bulletin de Correspondance Hellénique. CCET Gočeva, Zl., M. Oppermann. Corpus Cultus Equitis Thracii. Etudes préliminaires aux religions orientales dans l’Empire Romain. Vol. 74.1: Monumenta Orae Ponti Euxini Bulgariae. Leiden, 1979. GSU-IFF Годишник на Софийския университет – Историко-филологически факултет – Annales de l’Université de Sofia – Faculté historico-philologique (en bulgare). Sofia. IAI Известия на Археологическия институт – Bulletin de l’Institut d’archéologie. Sofia. IBAD Известия на Българското археологическо дружество – Bulletin de la Société bulgare d’archéologie. IBAI Известия на Българския археологически институт – Bulletin de l’Institut bulgare d’archéologie. Sofia. IGBulg Georgi Mihailov. Inscriptiones Graecae in Bulgaria repertae. Vol. 1-5. Sofia. IID Известия на Историческото дружество – Bulletin de la Société historique. INMB Известия на Народния музей – Бургас – Bulletin du Musée national de Burgas (en bulgare). Burgas. INMV Известия на Народния музей – Варна – Bulletin du Musée national de Varna (en bulgare). Varna. IPr Исторически преглед – Аperçu historique (en bulgare). Sofia. IRIM-V.Tarnovo Известия на Pегионалния исторически музей – В. Търново – Bulletin du Musée régional de Veliko Tarnovo. V. Tarnovo. ISM Pippidi D. M., Russu L., 1983-1999. Inscriptile din Scythia Minor grecesti si latine. Vol. 1, 1983; Vol. 2, 1987. Al. Stoian. Inscriptile din Sciythia Minor grecesti si latine. Vol. 3, 1999. (= Inscriptions grecques et latines de Scythie Mineure, vol. 3, 1999). IVAD Известия на Варненското археологическо дружество – Bulletin de la Société archéologique de Varna (en bulgare). Izkustvo Изкуство – Art (en bulgare). Sofia. Numismatika Нумизматика – Numismatique (en bulgare). Sofia. Pulpudeva Semaines Philippopolitaines de la culture et de l’histoire thrace à Plovdiv. Sofia. SEG Supplementum Epigraphicum Graecum, 1923.

BIBLIOGRAPHIE Alexandrescu-Vianu M., 1980 – Sur les diffusions du culte de Cybèle dans le bassin de la mer Noire à l’époque archaïque. – Dacia, No 24, 261-265. Alexandrescu-Vianu M., 1990 – Nouveaux documents concernant le culte de Cybèle à Istros. – Dacia, NS, No 34, fig. 1.

82

ZLATOZARA GOTCHEVA: LA THRACE PONTIQUE ET LA MYTHOLOGIE GRECQUE nadpisite ot elinistitcheskata epoha, sravneni s ÊÕÑÉÏÓ ÊÕÑÉÁ – L’épiclèse ÈÅÏÓ ÌÅÃÁÓ dans les inscriptions de l’époque hellénistique, comparées avec ÊÕÑÉÏÓ ÊÕÑÉÁ). // in Сборник в чест на К. Попконстантинов – Recueil in honorem K. Popkonstantinov . Hanell Kr., 1934 – Megarische Studien. Lund. Ireček K., 1974 – Иречек К., Пътувания по България (Patuvania po Balgaria – Voyages en Bulgarie). Sofia. Ivanov, T., 1963 – Иванов Т., Антична керамика от некропола на Аполония (Antična keramika ot nekropola na Apolonia – Céramique antique de la nécropole d’Apollonie). // in Аполония. Сб. – Apollonia. Recueil. Sofia, 1963, 65-273. Kanitz F., 1877-1899 – Donau-Bulgarien und Balkan. Leipzig. Karajotov Iv., 1976 – Карайотов Ив., Нови данни за Аполонийския колос на Каламис (Novi Danni za Apoloniiskia kolos na Kalamis – Données nouvelles sur le colosse d’Apollon de Calamis). // Izkustvo, No 3. _______, 2004 – Култът към Кибела в Аполония Понтика (Kultat kam Kybela v Apolonia Pontika – Le culte de Cybèle à Apollonie Pontique) // in Черно море между Изтока и Запада. Варна – La mer Noire entre l’Orient et l’Occident. Varna. Katsarov, G., Detshew D., 1949 – Кацаров Г., Дечев Д., Извори за старата история и география на Тракия и Македония. София. (Izvori za starata istoria i geografia na Trakia i Makedonia – Sources sur l’histoire ancienne et la géographie de la Thrace et de la Macédoine), Sofia. Mendel G.,1912-1914 – Catalogue des sculptures grecques, romaines et byzantines. Vol.1-3. Musées impériaux ottomans, Constantinople. Mihailov G., 1979 – The Western Pontic Koinon. // Epigraphica, 41. _______, 1961-1997 – Inscriptiones Graecae in Bulgaria repertae. Vol. 1-5. Sofia. (=IGBulg). Mintchev Al., 2003 – Odessos, Religion and Arts. // in Ancient Greek Colonies in the Black Sea, vol. 1, (= Publications of the Archaeological Institute of Northern Greece, No 4). Thessaloniki, 209-278. Mirtchev M., 1967 – Мирчев M., За античните храмове в Одесос (Za antitchnite hramove na Odesos – Sur les temples anciens d’Odessos). // INMV, 3 (18). Mouchmov N., 1912 – Мушмов H., Античните монети на Балканския полуостров и монетите на българските царе. София (Antitchnite moneti na Balkanskia poluostrov i monetite na balgarskite tsare – Les monnaies antiques de la péninsule Balkanique et les monnaies des rois bulgares). Sofia. Naumann F., 1983 – Die Ikonographie der Kybele in der phrigischen und der griechischen Kunst. // Istambuler Mitteilungen, Beihht 28. Müller C., 1923 – Geogr. Graecae Minores, vol. I. Nedev D., Panayotova Kr., 2003 – Apollonia Pontica. // in Ancient Greek Colonies in the Black Sea, vol. 1, (= Publications of the Archaeological Institute of Northern Greece, No 4). Thessaloniki. Nilsson M., 1906 – Griechische Feste. _______, 1932 – The Mycenaean Origin of griechischen Religion. Oppermann M., 2004 – Die Westpontischen Poleis. // in ZAKS, 2, [Beir-Bern], p. 386, Tafeln 1-82. Perrot G., 1874 – Mémoires d’archéologie, d’épigraphie et d’histoire. Pick B., 1898 – Observations sur les monnaies autonomes d’Apollonie de Thrace. – Revue numismatique, 219-230.

– La statue cultuelle du Grand dieu Darzalas à Odessos). // IVAD, 8. _______, 1965 – Статуята на Аполон от Каламис в Аполония на Черно море (Statuiata na Apolon ot Kalamis v Apolonia na Tcherno more – La statue d’Apollon de Calamis d’Apollonie Pontique). // INMB, 2. Gerov B., 1948-1949 – Геров Б., Романизмът между Дунава и Балкана. Ч. 1. От Август до Хадриан (Romanismat mejdu Dunava I Balkana. P. 1. Ot Avgust do Hadrian – Le romanisme entre le Danube et les Balkans. P. 1. D’Auguste à Hadrien). // GSU-IFF, No 642. Gočeva, Zl., Oppermann M.,1979 – Corpus Cultus Equitis Thracii. Etudes préliminaires aux religions orientales dans l’Empire Romain. Vol. 74.1: Monumenta Orae Ponti Euxini Bulgariae. Leiden, 1979 (= CCET). Gočeva Zl., 1979 – Prêtres éponymes d’Odessos et de Dionysopolis. // Klio, 62.1. Berlin. _______, 1980 – Le mythe de Phinée et la Thrace Pontique. // in Pulpudeva, 3. _______, 1981 – Gladiatoren kämpfe in Thrakien. // Klio, 63,2. Berlin. _______, 1981 – Der Kult des Theos Megas Darzalas in Odessos. // Warzburger Jahrbuch für die Altertümwissenschaft, 7. _______, 1987 – Einige Bemerkungen zum Problem der Metropolia des westpontischen Koinon. // in ActaTAB, 2. _______, 1988 – La vie religieuse à Philippopolis à l’époque romaine. – Thracia, 8. [Sofia]. _______, 1990 – Гочева, Зл., Светилища на тракийския конник в района на Провадия (Svetilichta na trakiiskia konnik v raïona na Provadia – Sanctuaires du Cavalier thrace dans la région de Provadia). // in ActaTAB, 4. _______, 1994 – Darzalas Cult in Northeastern Bulgaria. // in Хелис/Hellis, 3. (Bulgarie). _______, 1996 – Organization of Religion Life in Odessos. // Kernos, 9. _______, 1998 – Organization of the Religious and Administrative Life of the Western Pontic Koinon. // Thracia, 12. _______, 1998 – Организация на религиозния живот в Одесос (Organisatsia na religioznia jivot v Odesos – Organisation de la vie religieuse à Odessos). // in Боговете на Понта – Les Dieux du Pont. Bibliotheca Pontica. Seminaria Pontica, 1. Varna. _______, 2000 – Титлата EYΠOΣIAΡXHΣ в гръцките колонии по западния бряг на Понта (Titlata EYΠOΣIAΡXHΣ v gratskite kolonii po zapadnia briag na Ponta – Le Titre EYΠOΣIAΡXHΣ dans les colonies grecques de la côte ouest-pontique). // in Jubilaeus, III. In honorem B. Gerov. Troisième symposium universitaire. Sofia. _______, 2002 – Някои бележки по въпроса за метрополията на западнопонтийския койнон (Niakoi belezki po vaprosa za metropoliata na zapadnopontiyskia koinon – Quelques notes sur la question de la métropoie du koinon ouestpontique). // IRIM – V. Tarnovo, 17-18. ______, 2004 – Почитането на Велики богове в гръцките колонии по западния бряг на Понта (Počitaneto na Veliki bogove v gratskite kolonii po zapadnia briag na Ponta – Le culte des Grands dieux dans les colonies grecques de la côte ouest-pontique). // INMV, 36-37 (51-52), pour 20002001. ______, (à paraître) – Определението ÈÅÏÓ ÌÅÃÁÓ в надписите от елинистическата епоха, сравнени с ÊÕÑÉÏÓ ÊÕÑÉÁ (Opredelenieto ÈÅÏÓ ÌÅÃÁÓ v

83

ANCIENT GREEK COLONIES IN THE BLACK SEA 2 Stojan J., 1965 – De nouveau sur la communauté des cités grecques du Pont gauche. // Latomus, 24. Stojanov T., 1998 – Les figurations féminines sur les monuments du Cavalier thrace et le problème des déesses en Thrace. // in Pulpudeva, 6 – Supplementum. Suceveanu A., 1999 – Ktema, 24.9, p. 217. Tacheva-Hitova M., 1983 – Eastern Cults in Moesia Inferior. // in Thracia, EPRO, 85, Leiden. Tafrali Okt.,1927 – La cité pontique de Dionysopolis. KaliAcra, Cavarna, Téké et Ecréné. Paris. _______,1928 – Dionysopolis. // Analele Dobrogei, 9. Tocilescu Gr., 1900 – in Fouilles et recherches archéologiques en Roumanie. Tončeva G., 1952 – Тончева Г., Принос към иконографията на Великия бог на Одесос (Prinos kam ikonografiata na Velikia bog na Odesos – Apport sur l’iconographie du Grand dieu d’Odessos). // IAI, 18. _______, 1969 – Скулптурата в Одесос от V-I в. пр. н. е. (Skulpturata v Odesos ot V-I v. pr. n. e. – Sculptures d’Odessos du V-I s. av. n. è.). // INMV, 5 (20). Toutain J., 1903 – Les pontarques de Mésie inférieure. Mémoires de la Société des antiquaires de France, 62, p. 132. Velkov Iv., 1931-1932 – Велков, Ив. Бележки за колонизацията и градовете по нашето Черноморско крайбрежие (Belejki za kolonizatsiata I gradovete po nacheto Tchernomorsko kraïbrejie – Notes sur la colonisation et les villes de la côte Ouest-Pontique). // IID, 11-12. Velkov V., 1970 – Antike Tempel im Mesambria Pontica. // Klio, 52. ______, 1990 – Велков, B. Из културната история на Дионисопол през II в. пр. н. е. (Iz kulturnata istoria na Dionisopol prez II v. pr. n. e. – De l’histoire culturelle de Dionysopolis pendant le IIe s. av. n. è.). // in Балчик. Древност и съвремие (Balčik. Drevnost I savremie – Balčik. Le passé et le présent. Balčik. Venedikov Iv., 1964 – Венедиков, Ив. Разкопките и проблемите на нашето Черноморие (Razkopkite I problemite na nacheto Tchernomorie – Fouilles et problèmes de la côte pontique). // Arheologia, No 3. Vikela Eu., 2001 – Bemerkungen zu Ikonographie und Bidtypologie der Kybelereliefs: vom phrygischen Vorbild zur griechischen Eigenstädigkeit. // Mitteilungen des deutschen archäologischen Instituts. Athenische Abteilung, 116, Tafel 23. Vulpe R., 1943 – ‘Geran ia, Cranea, Ekrene’. // Balcania, No 6.

Pick B., Regling, K., 1910 – Die antiken Münzen von Dacien und Moesien. Berlin. Pippidi D., 1959 – Le temple du Qeóß Mégaß à Istros. – BCH, 83. ______,1962 – Epigraphische Beiträge zur Geschichte Histrias in hellenistischer und römischer Zeit. Berlin. ______, 1965 – Studia Classice, 7. Pippidi D. M., Russu L., 1983-1999. Inscriptile din Scythia Minor grecesti si latine (=ISM), Vol. 1, 1983; Vol. 2, 1987. Al. Stoian. Inscriptile din Sciythia Minor grecesti si latine. Vol. 3, 1999. (= Inscriptions grecques et latines de Scythie Mineure, vol. 3, 1999). Bucarest. Porozhanov K., 1998 – Порожанов K., Общество и държавност у траките средата на ІІ – началото на І хил. пр. Хр. (в контекста на палеобалканозападнопонтийската общност) Obchtestvo I darjavnost u trakite sredata na II – natchaloto na I hil. pr. Khr. (v konteksta na paleobalkano-zapadnopontiiskata obchtnost) – Société et Etat chez les Thraces, milieu du IIe – début du Ier mill. av. J.-C. (dans le contexte de la société paléobalkanique-ouest pontique). // in Studia Thracica, 6. Rabadjiev K., 1998 – The triumph of Dionysos (and Herakles?). // Thracia 12. Studia in honorem Christo M. Danov. Robert L., 1948 – Bulletin épigraphique, 61. _______ , 1959 – Les inscriptions grecques de Bulgarie, vol. I. – Revue Philologique, No 33. Rostovtzeff M., 1931 – Social and Economic History of the Hellenistic World. Oxford. Salač A., 1928 – Le Grand dieu d’Odessos-Varna et les mystères de Samothrace. – BCH, 52. Škorpil, K. et H., 1912 – Шкорпил К. и Х., Балчик – Baltchik. // IBAD, 5. Škorpil, K., 1930-1931 – Шкорпил К., Археологически бележки от Черноморското крайбрежие (Arheologitcheski belejki ot Tchernomorskoto kraibrejie – Notes archéologiques de la côte de la mer Noire). // IBAI, 6. Sokolowski F., 1969 – Lois sacrées. Stefanova A., 1981 – Стефанова А., Нови наблюдения за представянето на статуята на Аполон от Каламис върху монетите на Аполония Понтика (Novi nabliudenia na statuiata na Apolon ot Kalamis varhu monetite na Apolonia Pontica – Nouvelles observations sur la représentation de la statue d’Apollon de Calamis sur les monnaies d’Apollonie Pontique). // Numismatika, 4.

84

Burial and post-burial rites in the necropoleis of the Greek colonies on the Bulgarian Black Sea Littoral Krystina Panayotova* The study of the details and the specifics of the funerary rites and rituals are of particular importance for the analysis of the history of ancient peoples. The burial rite is among the most essential and stable ethnographic characteristics. The grave complexes are the most numerous group of monuments that provides grounds for the study of the ritual practices. There are some limitations, though. The archaeological evidence could not reflect the burial rites in their completeness and the archaeological contexts do not contain explicit information about the rites that precede the burial itself. These are things one should remember when speaking about the burial rites and rituals.

The tumular necropoleis and single tumuli were usually situated on the heights close to the town – ‘St. Ilia’, ‘St. Marina’ etc. On Kolokita promontory to the south of the town there was a small tumular necropolis (Seure, 1924, 328ff.; Tsaneva, 1986); most probably this specific location was chosen, because the promontory is visible from the present-day old town of Sozopol, where the Greek colony was situated. If we are right to assume that under the tumuli on Kolokita promontory prominent citizens or members of aristocratic families were buried, the place seems to be the best one for stating the elevated status of the deceased. The tumuli appeared in the 4th c. BC. The embankments of some of them were in fact heaps of crushed stones piled on the top of the grave structure, while in other cases they consisted of alternating layers of soil and stones (Panayotova, 1994b, 81). The embankments of some of the tumuli on Kolokita promontory had ringwalls on their base.

THE NECROPOLEIS Apollonia Pontica (Sozopol) The necropoleis of Apollonia Pontica – the oldest Greek colony on the present-day Bulgarian territory (Figure 1, 1) – are the best studied and excavated (Panayotova, 2003c, 123-127). The flat necropoleis (Figure 1, 2) are situated along the coastal stripe to the southeast of the town. The one on the territory of the present-day ‘Kharmanite’ neighbourhood was used from the mid-6th until the beginning of the 3rd c. BC. In ‘Kalfata’ locality, there is another one, used from the middle of the 5th until the beginning of the 2nd c. BC. The third one is in the present-day Sea Garden of the town of Sozopol, where the population of the ancient Apollonia buried their dead from the end of the 4th to the 1st c. BC. This is the territory where the topography and the internal structure of the necropoleis of Apollonia could be observed. In the Sea Garden, there were special places for the burial of the prominent citizens of Apollonia, and in the ‘Kalfata’ locality there were family plots. The earliest graves in the Kalfata locality (Figure 2, 6) were encircled with shallow ditches dug in the bedrock clay. Later in this area a peribolos wall was constructed, that separated the necropolis from the seashore. The wall was constructed in several stages – one sector after the other – from limestone ashlars and/or crushed stones (Panayotova, 2003c, 128, Figure 4/1-2). Now it is already known, that from the southern side of the necropolis in the Sea Garden there was an encircling wall, built of crushed stones.

Anchialos (Pomorie) This phrourion, founded by Apollonia Pontica in the 5th c. BC – in order to protect the territory of the polis (it was one of the largest settlements in the territory of Apollonia) – is poorly excavated (Giuzelev, 2003, 107109). In the late 19th c. the Škorpil brothers were the first ones to pay attention to the tumular necropolis of Anchialos. They counted nine burial mounds and suggested that there were probably many more that have been destroyed during agricultural activities (Shkorpil/Shkorpil, 1890, 14-15; Shkorpil/Shkorpil, 1891, 11, 116; Shkorpil/Shkorpil, 1898, 32-33). The famous Pomorie tomb (vaulted and built of bricks) belongs to this necropolis (Petrov, 1960, 35). In the 1950s two more tumuli were excavated, in which material from the 1st2nd c AD was discovered. During rescue excavations in 1975, within about 800 m to the southwest of the Roman brick-made tomb, another burial mound has been excavated. Two graves were discovered, but a bulldozer destroyed one of them. The first grave was a primary cremation in a shallow pit. The grave goods were extremely rich. In addition to the numerous clay, metal and glass vases, there was also golden jewellery with overall weight of 155,3 grams: two pairs of earrings, two necklaces and a wreath, dating to the 2nd c. BC. Among the goods there were also various articles of toilette, cult objects, fragments of bone and wooden items, animal teeth and shells. According to P.

The internal division of the territory of the necropoleis of Apollonia was fixed with stone blocks, placed perpendicularly to the peribolos, with stone walls and stone enclosures built of ashlars or crushed stones. These structures encircled the embankments of one or several graves (Panayotova, Nedev, Hermary, 2004, 153). 85

ANCIENT GREEK COLONIES IN THE BLACK SEA 2 Balabanov, the woman who was buried here had some religious functions. He also proposed a date for the burials in the tumulus to the 1st c. BC-1st c. AD (Balabanov, 1976, 28-32; 1979, 23-32).

graves covered with roof-tiles arranged as a doublepitched roof (Galabov, 1952, 102). These fragmentary data allow us to form only a vague idea about the character of the necropolis (or the necropoleis) of the ancient Anteia and about the ethnic affiliation of the people buried there. Given the information provided by I. Pandaleev, we could assume that the burial rite was inhumation. This is confirmed by the presence of tile graves; the cases in which ashes from a cremated body were discovered in such structures are extremely rare.

The necropolis of Anchialos, situated to the southwest of the ‘Paleokastro’ locality, is only partly excavated and this impedes the creation of a complete and correct picture. Sladkite kladentsi (Burgas) We are relatively well informed about the necropoleis of the emporion (founded by Apollonia Pontica) that is localized in the area of the present-day ‘Yana’ factory (the ‘Sladkite kladentsi’ locality – the name means ‘The fresh water sources’) in Burgas (Giuzelev, 2003, 109110). The excavations of the southern periphery of the settlement, conducted by M. Lazarov in 1962-1964, revealed a part of the necropolis, consisting of cremation graves (Lazarov, 1971, 7).

‘Kavatsite’ locality A grave was discovered in the ‘Kavatsite’ locality some 5 km to the south of the ancient Apollonia (Danov, 1938, 202). In the grave there were four lekythoi and a mirror; the date is the 4th c. BC (Reho, 1990, 395-398). Having in mind the distance between this area and the ancient town we could assume that there was a settlement on the shore of the large bay. Later more graves were excavated but only preliminary reports appeared (Caneva, 1980). From all we know we could reach the conclusion that the inhabitants of this settlement had the same burial practices as the population of Apollonia.

The construction works that followed resulted in the excavations of another part of the necropolis with a surface of about 500 square meters (Balabanov/Drazheva, 1985, 9-29). It is supposed that this sector was situated in the northern periphery of the presumed territory of the settlement, to the northeast of the site, excavated by M. Lazarov. Here again the burials (14 in number) were cremation graves. The cremation was not conducted in the grave but somewhere else. The ashes were collected in clay vases and then either buried in shallow pits, or deposited in ring-walls built of crushed stones. In the eastern part of the excavated territory, three structures built of stones were discovered. Above and immediately around them numerous fragments of clay vases, burned animal bones and objects of everyday life were unearthed. Based on the pottery finds the necropolis could be dated to the period from the end of the 6th to the beginning of the 3rd c. BC. Most of the published finds however point to a narrower date to the latter half of the 5th and to the mid 4th c. BC (Damyanov, 2003b, 22-23).

The necropoleis of other settlements that in some period belonged to the territory of Apollonia are still to be localized and excavated. Mesambria (Nesebar) A chance-find attracted the attention of the scholars to the necropolis of ancient Mesambria. In 1910 during construction works in the locality named ‘Bregat’ (‘The Shore’), beneath the Turkish cemetery, a bronze hydria was discovered containing ashes (Katsarov, 1911, 308316; Kazarov, 1911, 308-316, Abb. 4-5). During the construction works on about a hundred houses for refugees in the ‘Aloni’ (‘Threshing floors’) locality, in the mainland, numerous graves from the ancient necropolis of Mesambria were discovered. Most of the structures were destroyed and the objects found in them were stolen. Only a small portion was collected and saved by the members of the Archaeological Society in Burgas (Katsarov, 1931, 44; idem, 1932/33, 281-290).

Anteia (Cape Atiya) There is very little evidence about the character of the ancient settlement, founded by Milesians and Phocaeans on the present-day Cape Atiya (Giuzelev, 2003, 110). Almost nothing is known about the necropolis. I. Pandaleev mentions some graves that were discovered in 1927, containing ‘bones, fish-like bronze arrowheads, coins and a small pitcher’ (Pandaleev, 1928/29, 328). In his publication about the collective find of bronze arrowhead-coins, unearthed on the northern shore of the Cape Atiya, T. Gerasimov mentions that on several occasions various antiquities had been discovered there: ‘pieces of amphorae, clay lamps, graves with small finds’ (Gerasimov, 1939, 425). I. Galabov also writes about

The necropolis of Mesambria begins in the eastern part of the mainland that is turned to the isthmus connecting it with the peninsula (Figure 1, 3). It spreads in a western direction and one could distinguish the ancient plots arranged along the ancient coastal road. One of these (the northwestern) is organized along the road to Anchialos (Velkov, 1930/31, 311; Galabov, 1948; idem, 1949b; idem, 1950; idem, 1951; idem, 1955, 129-145). The complexes discovered indicate that this part of the

86

KRYSTINA PANAYOTOVA: BURIAL AND POST-BURIAL RITES IN THE NECROPOLEIS OF THE GREEK COLONIES necropolis was used exclusively in the Hellenistic period. So far no graves earlier than the latter half of the 4th c. BC have been excavated.

Garden of Varna (Mirchev, 1947, 235-241; Toncheva, 1952, 83-90; eadem, 1953, 29-40; eadem, 1961, 29-32; eadem, 1964, 111-115). This part of the necropolis was in use from the 5th/4th c. BC to 1st-2nd c. AD.

Another part of the necropolis (the southeastern) developed most probably along the road leading to Apollonia (Chimbuleva, 1962, 38-41; eadem, 1964, 5761; Petrov/Chimbuleva, 1963, 23-26; Čimbuleva, 1969, 165-176). Most probably, the gravestone of Kalikrita, discovered near Ravda, originates from this part of the necropolis (Chimbuleva, in print, 33).

On both sides of the road to Dionysopolis (in the area around the Archaeological Museum and to the Northeast) a third, smaller necropolis was situated (Ivanov, 1956, 87-108; Mirchev, 1956, 4-5). Most probably the citizens of Odessos buried their dead to the west of the city as well, but the development of the ancient town led to the destruction of this necropolis. The earliest graves discovered in the later Western necropolis, localized in the area of the Theater, dated to the Late Hellenistic age. According to M. Mirchev’s suggestion burials started here at the end of the 2nd c. BC and continued throughout Roman and Early Byzantine times up to the Middle Ages (Mirchev 1958).

Construction works most often provoked the excavations in the new part of Nesebar and, for that reason, the complexes discovered there (about 130 in number) are not organized in a compact group. What has been discovered is dated to Hellenistic times only and the finds from 3rd-2nd c. BC burials predominate. We have no information about the place where the first Dorian settlers buried their dead. Having in mind the present state of research of the necropolis of Mesambria it is hard to define with any degree of certainty whether the graves were arranged according to some internal division of the territory of the necropolis. There are some grounds to assume that the graves built of stone slabs were constructed on the higher terraces, but the simple pits with no complementary structures were dug into the lower sandy areas. However, this division should not be regarded as absolute.

Groups of tumuli and single grave mounds surrounded the ancient town from all sides. At the end of the 19th century, the Škorpil brothers numbered 286 tumuli in the surroundings of Varna (Shkorpil/Shkorpil 1898, 20). Forty one (single and in groups) were excavated in Varna itself (Shkorpil/Shkorpil, 1921, 7; Mirchev, 1958b, 573574; Toncheva, 1974, 288-289; Savova, 1971, 3-8) and in its suburbs: Galata (Shkorpil, 1930/31, 68-69; Toncheva, 1951, 49-64; Minchev, 1975, 136-142), Asparukhovo (Shkorpil, 1909a, 8-12; Toncheva, 1956, 52-53), Vladislavovo (Mirchev, 1958a, 272-273), Topolite (Toncheva, 1964b, 51-61) and Chajka (unpublished results from excavations of A. Minchev). M. Mirchev related some of them to the Thracian settlements localized nearby: for example, the tumuli in the Asparukhovo neighbourhood, those to the north of the city and those along the road to the sea-resort of Sts Constantine and Helene (Mirchev, 1958b, 570-575). Recently, M. Damyanov suggested that these tumuli could have been related to the suburban estates of rich families (Damyanov, 2004, 52).

Burial mounds were piled in the farthest western part of the necropolis of Mesambria. Odessos (Varna) The results of more than a hundred years of archaeological excavations in the city of Varna and in its surroundings, as well as the numerous gravestones discovered there give us the opportunity to outline the spatial and chronological framework of the necropoleis of Odessos (Minchev, 2003, 246-247). The earliest and the largest necropolis (Figure 1, 4), which was almost completely destroyed by later construction works on the site and from the changes of the sea level and the coastal stripe, developed on the southwestern slopes of the ancient town and along the northern shore of the Varna lake (Mirchev, 1958b, 569-570, Fig. 1; Gerasimov, 1969, 54). It was organized on both sides of the ancient road leading to Mesambria. To this necropolis (the Southern one) a tomb from the end of the 4th c. BC and a tholos belong (Stoyanov/Stoyanova, 1997, 22-23), as well as the graves, discovered near the sanctuary of Heros Karabazmos (Shkorpil, 1930/31, 77-78, Fig. 61; Toncheva, 1974, 287-302, Figures I-VII). The citizens of Odessos continued to bury their dead in this area during Hellenistic and Roman times.

Dionysopolis (Balchik) We have rather little information about the necropoleis of Krounoi-Dionysopolis (the settlement itself is localized on the second terrace in the centre of the present-day town of Balchik – cf. Dimitrov, 1986, 94). According to the Škorpil brothers, ‘the cemeteries of the ancient town were not in one place, but scattered, for example to the east of the town, on the place of the old Turkish cemetery after the road to Tuzla etc. On the old terrace, near the road there is a natural mound with the ruins of an ancient sanctuary and around it there are graves, dug into the rocky soil.’ (Shkorpil/Shkorpil, 1912, 47). A collective find of clay vases dated to the 4th-3rd c. BC is indicative of the location of a part of the necropolis of Dionysopolis on the elevated shore to the South of

Another necropolis was situated to the east of the citywalls, mainly on the territory of the present-day Sea 87

ANCIENT GREEK COLONIES IN THE BLACK SEA 2 Balchik (Ovcharov, 1979, 62-68). According to the author of the publication, these vessels were used as grave goods.

not excluded that it was never finished and used. On the grounds of the few finds from the embankment of the tumulus the tomb was dated to the 4th-3rd c. BC (Kitov, 1973, 37; Salkin, 1982, 31).

A burial mound – the only one excavated so far – was situated on the plateau above the town, immediately in front of the Early Byzantine fortifications. In the mound graves from different times were discovered – Hellenistic, Roman and Medieval (Mihajlov/Dimitrov, 1982, 78; 1985, 229-232; Damyanov, 2003a, 25-36).

The few archaeological finds in the surroundings of the town of Kavarna provide us with the vague picture of the existence of a flat necropolis in the immediate vicinity of the settlement, situated on the Cape Chirakman, and of tumular necropoleis, scattered on the territory of the Greek polichnion Bizone.

Bizone (Kavarna) During the last hundred years the regular and rescue excavations of the Greek colonies along the Bulgarian Black Sea coast increased our knowledge about their necropoleis. They were situated outside the city-walls, and in the cases of Apollonia and Mesambria, which were situated on peninsulas almost completely detached from the mainland, the cemeteries were organized on the continent. The plots of the necropoleis were arranged along the main and some of the minor roads, among which is the main road Via Pontica, providing the land connection between the Straits and the delta of the river Danube. Other roads led to the interior, connecting the Greek colonies with the Thracian hinterland.

Two graves were discovered, dug into an earthen vallum; they were dated to the 2nd-1st c. BC. The structure, which was most probably a primitive earthen fortification with a wooden palisade on the top, is situated within 4 km from the head of the Chirakman plateau, where Bizone is localized. Starting from the grave goods that have direct parallels among the finds from Apollonia, Odessos and Tomis, A. Salkin considers the buried wealthy local inhabitants that emulated the citizens of the Greek colonies and had the possibility to buy imported goods (Salkin, 1989, 9-12). Near the Port of Kavarna a grave was excavated, containing a sarcophagus decorated with terracotta appliqués and rich grave goods from the 3rd-2nd c. BC (Salkin, 1982, 32; Toncheva, 1982, 3839).

The horizontal stratigraphy of the necropoleis shows that the plots with plane graves only were situated close to the city-walls, and those with plane and tumular graves were farther away in the interior (Mesambria, Odessos). The tumular necropoleis and the single tumuli spread on top of or near the hills and elevations that encircled immediately the territory of the colony. The burial mounds in the region under consideration here have their predecessors and close analogies among the burial customs of the Thracians from the latter half of the 1st millennium BC, as well as in the necropoleis of the Greek colonies along the northern shore of the Black Sea. These monuments, about which T. Ivanov once wrote that if the very fact of the piling of a tumulus did not exist, we could never identify the Thracians (Ivanov, 1956, 98), provide us with the best mean to trace the mutual influence of the Greek and the Thracian eschatological ideas.

In the area of Kavarna about 300 tumuli have been registered. Most of them are situated on the eastern side of the valley that goes down from the town to the sea. In the southernmost tumulus a grave was discovered, built of and covered with stone slabs; in it only a skeleton was unearthed (Shkorpil/Shkorpil, 1898, 39). To the East of Kavarna, in a small tomb, built of roughly hewn stones and covered with a low mound, a hoard of golden items was discovered. Following the comparison with some similar finds and the stylistic analysis of the items, the treasure could be dated to the end of the 4th or the beginning of the 3rd c. BC (Minchev, 1982, 40-44). In the ‘Tyutyukler’ (‘The Smoking Mounds’) locality, some 3 km to the east of the road leading to Shabla, a dismantled tomb of the so-called ‘Macedonian type’ was discovered, dated by the excavator to the 4th c. BC (Salkin, 1982, 31).

Most of the excavated necropoleis could be dated entirely to the second half of the 1st millennium BC and the Hellenistic complexes predominate. We know almost nothing about the graves of the first Greek settlers on the Western coast of the Black Sea. Also there are few complexes from the end of the period of their autonomous existence before the coming of Rome (2nd1st c. BC).

On the northern end of the Cape Chirakman, 3 km from the town of Kavarna there is a tumular necropolis of 16 tumuli. Only one of them has been excavated, situated in about 4,5 km from the end of the Cape Chirakman, in the immediate surroundings of the village of Bozhurets. In the embankment, secondary medieval graves were discovered. The primary structure is a domed tomb with a short dromos and a vaulted entrance. The lack of finds does not allow us to give an exact answer to the questions about whether it was robbed, or if it was a cenotaph; it is

BURIAL RITES The burial rites are a process composed of consecutive actions, only a part of which leaves archaeological traces. 88

KRYSTINA PANAYOTOVA: BURIAL AND POST-BURIAL RITES IN THE NECROPOLEIS OF THE GREEK COLONIES From a historical point of view, the burial is a rather complex phenomenon, existing in time as well in space, but the archaeological science works with only a part of this phenomenon – the part that is fixed in the material remains, unearthed during the excavations (Leonova/Smirnov, 1977, 17-20). The system of religious ideas, norms and prescriptions that regulates the process of the disposal of the dead body remains entirely in the ideological field. The funerary and commemorative rituals are closely related to the image of death and the ideas about the existence of the person after his/her death – ideas that could be found in every ancient society. These are unwritten rules that form the base of the conservatism and the continuity of the burial customs, predefined by the debt of the living to the dead. In the usual case, the rite forms on the base of the existing customs and from a compositional point of view is a strictly regulated system of actions, performed in accordance with some ideas and prescriptions (Ol’khovskij, 1986, 66-68).

persons. The deceased being buried by a stranger was considered improper, as the burial was an obligation and a privilege of the family. If for some reason the family could not perform the rituals, then the burial of the body became an obligation of a friend of the deceased or of the demarches. The slaves in ancient Greece had also the right to a decent burial. Up to the Classical period, they were buried in the family plot, along with the members of the family, but without grave goods. From the Hellenistic period, we have evidence of slaves, whose graves were marked with gravestones. On some of them, there were epitaphs with information about the profession of the deceased (Kurtz/Boardman, 1971, Fig. 33). The material from two of the graves in the necropolis of Apollonia in the ‘Kalfata’ locality (Venedikov, 1963a, Graves 264, 471) demonstrate that though deprived of most of their rights, the slaves in this Pontic town were buried in the citizens’ necropolis and not in a cemetery reserved especially for them. In the former case two rings from an iron chain were discovered around the lower legs of the deceased, and in the latter there was only one ring. It is possible that these two persons, buried with their chains still on them and without grave goods, but along with the free citizens of Apollonia, were slaves, oarsmen on the ships, or criminals.

The planning and the preparations for the way in which the burial is to be conducted is a separate stage in the funerary cycle. For the ancient Greeks death itself was not a reason for particular fears, for the fate of the man after his death was not predetermined by his deeds while being alive. According to their beliefs, the afterlife of the soul depended most of all on how the living performed the necessary rituals concerning the dead body. Only the soul of the person that did not receive a formal burial with all the commonly accepted ritual actions was deprived from the final rest in the underworld (Martin/ Metzger, 1976, 8-9). If the prescribed by tradition ritual actions were not performed, the soul was condemned to remain in an awful position – without access to the world of the dead, where it could receive the necessary food offerings and libations. In the Homer’s ‘Odyssey’, the hero Elpenor who was left unburied begs Ulysses not to leave him without a grave; otherwise, the wrath of the gods would be upon him (XI, 71-75).

In the Thracian lands the dead could not be left unburied. During the whole 1st millennium BC in the Thracian interior, an amazing variety of funerary practices existed. It could be seen not only in the parallel use of the cremation and the inhumation as burial rites, but also in the parallel use of plane graves and tumuli, in the variety of the grave structures, in the coexistence of ritual features inherited from the Bronze Age and some new rites leading to unification of the funerary practices, in the regional particularities and in the social meaning of some rituals (Gergova, 1989, 231-240). All the rituals, performed by Thracians from the moment a person died until the closing of the grave, were directed mainly to making easy the transition of the deceased to the world beyond, while in the same time the deceased was treated with great care for their favour was sought for (Georgieva, 1999a, 228).

According to ancient Greeks the improper treatment of a dead body was an expression of extreme malice and shameful human behavior. The lack of a proper burial was regarded as a blasphemy from the part of the living and as a shame for the dead. The inhabitants of Attica treasured the burial in the land of their ancestors and the deprival of a proper burial was maybe the worst punishment inflicted by the state. It is a case that is reflected in Sophocles’ tragedy ‘Antigone’, where Polyneikes – after trying to take his native Thebes by force and being killed in the battle – was deprived of burial and mourning (200-205).

Preparation of the body for burial Among the first funerary ceremonies performed in the Greek colonies along the Bulgarian Black Sea coast by the relatives of the deceased after his death were probably the closing of his eyes and his mouth, as well as the washing of the body and its anointment with scented oils. The closing of the eyes was a widespread ritual, related to the fear from the gaze of the dead (Garland, 1985, 23). Though the rite of covering the face of the deceased had disappeared from the funerary practices in mainland Greece, it is attested in the necropolis of

In Classical Greece not only the observation of the burial customs was important, but it was also required the rituals and the burial itself to be performed by the proper 89

ANCIENT GREEK COLONIES IN THE BLACK SEA 2 Odessos (Shkorpil, 1930/31, 69-76). A lead object was discovered among the grave goods of a burial, built of stone blocks and containing a bronze hydria with the cremated remains of the body. The author of the publication suggested it was a mask that covered the decaying face of the body while it was shown during the prothesis. The use of a mask or gold lamellae in the burial is a rite attested in many ancient peoples that have neither geographic, nor chronological or ethnic relations. Arising spontaneously at a certain stage of the development of a given society, it is related to some common ideas about the death and the afterlife (Zubar’, 1982, 112).

To the items that were related to the costume, we could probably add the cast bronze rings with pairs of small projecting spheres, discovered in graves in Apollonia, Odessos and Bizone (Salkin, 1989, 10, Fig. I/5). The three examples from Apollonia, each one of which had three pairs of spherical projections, were discovered on the skeleton, between the ribs and the pelvic bones (Venedikov, 1948, 22, Fig. 25). From the necropolis in the Sea Garden in Sozopol, another ring was discovered, having heart-shaped projections; it was found between the femurs of the skeleton. The rings from Odessos are interesting for their numerous projections (seven and fifteen), each one composed of three small spheres; two more rings have pointed conical projections. According to G. Toncheva the rings from Odessos were parts of horse harness (Toncheva, 1956, 54).

In the Hellenistic necropolis of Apollonia in the Sea Garden some golden threads were discovered, which most probably were a part of the decoration of a tissue band that covered the mouth of the deceased. The tying of the lower jaw of the dead with bandages of leather or linen is known from scenes on Attic black- and red-figure vases; in many places in the ancient Greek world golden bands that covered the mouth of the deceased were discovered (Kurtz/Boardman, 1971, 212-213, Fig. 43; Garland, 1985, 23).

Single cast rings or groups of rings attached to oneanother – made of bronze or precious metals – are known from numerous archaeological complexes in the Balkans since the 6th c. BC (Filov, 1927, 125, Abb. 102; KilianDirlmeics, 2002, Figure 58), as well as from the Northern Black Sea littoral from 5th-4th c. BC (Melyukova, 1979, 228-229, Fig. 48; Wamers/ Stutzinger, 2003, 39). They were discovered in graves of men, women and children. As far as their function is concerned, there are two suggestions: they were either a part of ornaments of the dress, or were used for attaching the sword to the belt.

The ritual washing of the dead is an obligatory element of the pre-burial rites – not only for the Greek, but also for the indigenous non-Greek population of the Balkans (Georgieva, 1999a, 218). According to Greek tradition, women in the family performed the purifying ritual on the dead body; they washed it with water from the sea and then anointed it with scented oils. The oiling and the perfuming of the body was an important element of the Greek ritual (Kurtz/Boardman, 1971, 144, 209; Garland, 1985, 24).

Plain bronze rings, a part of the ornaments of the dress of the deceased, were discovered in graves in the necropoleis of Apollonia in the ‘Kalfata’ locality (Mladenova, 1963b, 302, Figure 161) and Mesambria (Chimbuleva, in print, Grave 1). The fibulae that were discovered in graves in the necropoleis of Apollonia (Venedikov, 1963b, 313-315; Panayotova, Nedev, Hermary, 2003, 106), Mesambria (Galabov, 1955, 134, 144-145, Grave 10/50) and Odessos (Toncheva, 1956, 51) are of the so-called ‘Thracian’ type. Made of bronze or iron, they were worn on the shoulder.

Because of the use of perishable materials, from the necropoleis of the Greek colonies along the Bulgarian Black Sea coast we have almost no archaeological data about the clothes, in which the dead body was laid in the grave. In the chamber of the tomb in the ‘Mapite’ locality near Sozopol (Apollonia) (Seure, 1924, 120) some remains of linen tissue were discovered. Traces of the clothing were preserved in two graves from Odessos (Savova, 1970, 4; Toncheva, 1951, 59, 4, Fig. 110). The remains in the latter grave were of two different tissues – one thinner and another one thicker. According to T. Ivanov, the women buried in two tumular graves in the necropolis of Odessos were dressed in a chiton and a peplos.

In the end of the 4th or the beginning of the 3rd c. BC the population of Mesambria and Odessos used for fastening of the chiton or the peplos agraphae made of precious metals. From the necropolis of Mesambria bronze, silver and golden agraphae are known; they were attached to bronze fibulae (Galabov, 1955, 142, 144-145; Chimbuleva, 1964, 60-61). The golden agraphae from Odessos have special devices for fastening (Toncheva, 1951, 60-61, Fig. 112a-b; Ivanov, 1956, 92). In the necropoleis of Apollonia, bronze sewing needles were used for fastening the dress on the shoulder or on the chest, mainly in graves of women and children (Panayotova, 1989a, 214). This practice appeared in the third quarter of the 5th c. BC and continued until the end of the 3rd c. BC. In the Greek mainland, the pins had a widespread use. In the graves of women usually three

We have information about the presence of buttons in the grave only from Mesambria. As such, two small iron balls were interpreted, discovered on the chest of a skeleton in a tile grave (Galabov, 1949b, 2). G. Katsarov reported about ‘six buttons of bronze sheet’, unearthed in a grave built of stone blocks (Katsarov, 1932/33, 287).

90

KRYSTINA PANAYOTOVA: BURIAL AND POST-BURIAL RITES IN THE NECROPOLEIS OF THE GREEK COLONIES pins are discovered – one on the chest and one on each shoulder; in the male graves only one pin was placed. They were used mostly for fastening the dress on the shoulders, but also for fastening of additional elements of the costume such as veils or hats; they were used as for fastening the shroud as well (Gansisniec, 1978, 68-69).

Apollonia, 18 openwork lead bull sculls are known; on the forehead, a head of a Gorgon or a rosette is depicted. These objects were discovered in the graves (on the chest of the deceased), in the embankment above the grave and in the so-called ‘ritual fireplaces’ (remains of commemorative feasts) from the latter half of the 4th and the 3rd c. BC (Panayotova, 2003c, 136, Figure 5/8, a-b).

The body was decorated with various accessories that are discovered in the grave on the places where the deceased wore them in his lifetime. Among the jewellery discovered in the necropoleis along the Bulgarian Black Sea coast (Toncheva, 1956, 54; Galabov, 1955, Graves 10/50, 15/52; Chimbuleva, 1964, 60; Petrov/Chimbuleva, 1963, 25-26) the fingerings predominate. They were made of precious metals, bronze, iron, bone and glass. Sometimes in one grave a golden and an iron fingering could be discovered together (Galabov, 1955, Grave 15/52). Some fingerings are just plain rings – with open or closed ends – but others have a bezel with an engraved figure – a female bust, a human figure or images of animals and birds (Mladenova, 1963b, 299-304, Fig. 107, Figure 161, 163). From what we know about the location of the fingerings, we could reach to the conclusion that they were worn mostly by women and mainly on the left hand.

The preparation of the burial also required the body to be covered with flowers and in some cases to be crowned with a wreath. The wreaths that were commonly used by the citizens of Apollonia (Mladenova, 1963a), Mesambria, Odessos and Bizone had gilded bronze leaves and clay fruits and bunches of grapes, as well as flowers with multicolour decoration, attached with bronze wires to a lead band or a wooden ring. In some graves in the necropolis of Apollonia in the ‘Kalfata’ locality only clay fruits were discovered, probably used as additional decoration of a wreath of flowers and twigs. Funerary wreaths were discovered in the necropoleis of the Greek colonies along the Bulgarian Black Sea coast in graves with rich grave goods or in graves where the only item was a single coin. In the graves where the rite was inhumation the wreaths were usually discovered on the scull (Venedikov, 1963a, Graves 17, 405, 408, 733; Chimbuleva, 1969, 170), on the chest (Venedikov, 1963a, Grave 708), on the pelvis (Venedikov, 1963a, Graves 20, 667, 671, 704) or along the skeleton (Chimbuleva, in print, Grave 2). Two tumular graves from Odessos contained three wreaths each – one on the head, one on the chest and one on the pelvic bones/ near the legs (Shkorpil 1909a, 13; Savova 1971, 3).

In the necropoleis of Apollonia (Mladenova, 1963b, 297299, Fig. 106, Plate 160) and Mesambria bracelets made of silver, bronze and iron were discovered. They were unearthed in graves of women and children and, in some cases, two to four bracelets were placed in one grave. The earliest silver specimens were discovered in graves of Apollonia dated to the third quarter of the 5th c. BC. They are with open ends that are shaped as conical buds with notches, or as a schematically depicted snake’s head. Some of the bracelets were made of wire, the ends of which cross each other and are twisted into spirals.

In one case in the necropolis in the Sea Garden in Sozopol the body that was crowned with a wreath was cremated on the spot (Venedikov, 1963a). Parts of two funerary wreaths were discovered in the necropolis of Mesambria, around a bronze hydria with the ashes of the cremated body (Chimbuleva, 1962, 38). Probably the wreaths were placed on the urn, as it was in the case with a hydria with a wreath on the shoulders, discovered in the necropolis of Tarent (GOT, 1984/85, 94, Fig. 24).

Golden necklaces, medallions and chains were also part of the jewellery that accompanied the inhabitants of Apollonia (Mladenova, 1963b, 293-294, Fig. 104, Plate 158), Mesambria, Odessos and Bizone. To this group of personal ornaments, worn on the neck we should add the strings of beads (Mladenova, 1963c, 310-312, Figure 164-167; Galabov, 1955, Grave 5/52; Petrov, 1964, 3031; Chimbuleva, 1963, 60; Toncheva, 1956, 54; 1961a, 24-30; Mirchev, 1956, 8-9; Ivanov, 1956, 94; Minchev, 1975, 136-141; Salkin, 1989, 10-11, Fig. 3). Such items were discovered in graves of women and children. The beads were made most of all of glass paste, but there are also clay, bone and golden examples. Sometimes in the strings there are also bronze coins, pendants of semiprecious stones, small figurines of glass, clay and bone, animal teeth (bear and wild pig), seashells, miniature loom-weights and other amulets worn as apotropeia.

The rite of placing gilded wreaths made of bronze and clay in the grave was widespread throughout Greece and the colonies in the Mediterranean and the Black Sea (Vermeule, 1981, 15; GOT, 1984/85, 71-101, Figs. 16, 19; Zavatin-Coman, 1972, 271; Prushevskaya, 1955, 349, Fig. 36), as well as in Thrace (Georgieva, 1999a, 219). It was probably a more durable and a more expensive variation of the wreaths of flowers and twigs that were used for crowning the dead. In a rich grave of a young woman in the necropolis of Odessos (the rite was primary cremation) a golden diadem was discovered (Mirchev, 1947, 235-236; Mirchev, 1956, 8-9). The use of diadems in the burial rite was a widespread custom in the Greek world. Men and

The inhabitants of Apollonia used lead boukrania (bull sculls) as apotropeia as well. From the necropolis of 91

ANCIENT GREEK COLONIES IN THE BLACK SEA 2 youths received it as a prize for victory and the priestesses wore it as a sign of their rank. The crowning of the dead with a diadem could be interpreted as a sign of piety and devout life (Garland, 1985, 26). In Thrace, the wreaths and the diadems were mainly discovered in burials of men and it seems that they had a complex meaning. The wreath could be regarded as a symbol of power or immortality, but the crowning of the deceased could be related to the heroization and not so much to the royal investiture (Georgieva, 1999a, 220).

coins put in grave is related to some differences in the practices. The larger amounts of money discovered in the graves were put there not as a larger fee for Charon’s services but as a gift or as means needed in the underworld (Grinder-Hansen, 1991, 215). In another grave from the necropolis of Apollonia 11 silver, 7 bronze coins and an arrowhead were discovered. According to T. Gerasimov, that particular type of arrowheads had some monetary value in this period and that is the reason the arrowhead has been laced in the grave together with the coins (Gerasimov, 1963, 333). Four arrowhead-coins were discovered in a tile grave on the Atiya peninsula (Pandaleev, 1928/29, 328). These two examples are indicate that even after the Black Sea colonies started their own minting, the bronze arrowheadcoins continued to be used – at least as ‘Charon’s obol’ if not in the everyday life.

Among the stages of preparation, one should also mention the necessary means that the deceased needed for a safe journey in the underworld – according to the beliefs of ancient Greeks it was on the other side of a river. A terracotta figurine from the necropolis of Apollonia in the ‘Kalfata’ locality could be interpreted as a boat, in which there is a seated human figure with a pointed hat (Charo?). Models of boats, or vases and amulets in the shape of water birds could be related to the obstacles that were expecting the soul in the underworld (Georgieva, 1999a, 227).

We have no information about how the body – after being prepared in the above-described way – was exhibited during the prothesis (in the coffin or on a kline). The purpose of the watch of the relatives and the friends was not only to confirm the fact of dying but also to provide the opportunity the deceased to be mourned. The mourning had a strictly regulated place in the line of the rituals that preceded the burial itself. As all other demonstrations of grief, it is specific for every nation. The mourners in Ancient Greek and Roman world tore their hair and hit their chests. Professional wailers were hired who performed songs telling about the life of the deceased (Garland, 1985, 30).

The relatives of the deceased placed a coin in his hand or in his mouth. The discovery of coins in the grave is usually interpreted as paulon (a fee) for Charon. We do not know how and in which part of Ancient Greece the idea of paying Charon for the transportation of the souls appeared. It is usually accepted that the rite of paying for the services of Charon is very ancient and belongs to the unwritten conventions of the dead. In the ancient literary tradition the Charon’s obol is mentioned for the first time by Aristophanes (405 BC) in his comedy ‘The Frogs’, where the god Dionysus had to pay two obols for his journey in the underworld, for he took his slave with him. The earliest known grave with a coin in it is dated to the second quarter of the 5th c. BC. Another opinion exists, according to which the coin was a symbolical amount of money that was given to the dead for his personal needs. This fact could be related to the existence of a monetary circulation (Robinson, 1949, 204).

According to the beliefs of ancient Greeks, death caused impurity. In different poleis, this impurity was cleared with a variety of strictly defined rituals. The living honored the dead, but touching the body was considered a pollution. For that reason in the house of the deceased there was a vessel with water for the purification of the leaving guests. For strangers to be saved from the contact with the impure death, above the door twigs from the socalled ‘death trees’ (mirth, laurel etc.) were placed. They were meant to warn people to avoid the contact with the dangerous mysteries of death (Kurtz/Boardman, 1971, 201).

The coins (usually bronze, in rare cases silver) discovered in the necropoleis of Apollonia, Mesambria, Odessos and Bizone are a testimony that the inhabitants of the Greek colonies along the Western Black Sea coast were aware of the rite of placing a ‘Charon’s obol’, but observed it only sporadically. The best evidence for the practicing of this rite is provided by the coins discovered in the necropoleis of Apollonia, where it appeared in the mid-4th c. BC. The emissions of Apollonia predominate, but also coins of the poleis in the Propontis, of some of the Greek islands and of the cities in Asia Minor were found (Gerasimov, 1963, 331-340). In most cases, a single coin was placed in the mouth of the deceased, but in some graves, two or three coins were discovered. In one grave from Apollonia, in between the pelvic bones, 51 coins were discovered that were most probably placed in a purse. It is believed that the different number of the

The burial itself took place the day after the death was confirmed; according to other authors, the body was buried on the third day. The carrying of the body out of the house had to be done before sunrise, which according to Lucian was due to the will of the living not to offend the Sun-god Apollo with the look of the dead (Winniczuk, 458). According to D. Kurtz and J. Boardman the limitation of the ekphora to the early hours – as well as the prohibition of the mourning outside the house in Attica – affected only the family and not the public processions (Kurtz/Boardman, 1971, 145, Figs. 34, 35).

92

KRYSTINA PANAYOTOVA: BURIAL AND POST-BURIAL RITES IN THE NECROPOLEIS OF THE GREEK COLONIES In Thrace the burial took place either in the end of the third or in the beginning of the fourth day – time was provided not only for burning the body, for the deposition of the ashes and for the accompanying rituals, but also for the funerary games that took place immediately after that. On the grounds of Homeric descriptions of funerary games (in honour of Patrocles and Hector), a suggestion has been made that the burning of the Thracian dead could have taken place during nighttime (Georgieva, 1999a, 223).

stones without binding material (Panayotova/Nedev, 2001, 117; Panayotova, Nedev, Hermary, 2003, 105). In most cases the pits do not have additional structures: neither the floor nor the top of the pit were covered (Minchev, 2003, 247). Two graves from Mesambria (Chimbuleva, 1964, 57-61) and Odessos (Shkorpil/Shkorpil, 1909b, 58) are an exception from the rule. They were pits hewn into the bedrock and covered with four limestone slabs each. A pit-grave dug into the sandy soil of the ‘Kalfata’ locality was covered with two roof-tiles. In some cases, stones were piled on top of the grave (Panayotova, Nedev, Hermary, 2003, 105).

The body laid on a stretcher was transported with a car or carried by relatives and friends of the deceased. In the funerary procession, men and women took part and the participants were chosen according to their age and relation to the dead. An Attic terracotta represents a funerary cart with wailers, a child and a bird (Vermeule, 1979, 18, Fig. 12). It is possible that the lead cart discovered in the necropolis of Apollonia was a part of representation of the funerary procession, in which human figures were made of perishable materials.

What is specific for the necropolis of Apollonia in the ‘Kalfata’ locality is the placing of stones at the bottom of the pit and the building of a wall on one of the sides of the pit (sometimes gravestones were reused for that purpose) (Panayotova, 1998a, 11-12). The inhumation in pits hewn into the bedrock or dug into soil was the main burial practice in Greece from the end of the Bronze Age and throughout the 1st millennium BC. In Attica, the strengthening of the walls of the pit was practiced since the Archaic Age on (Kurtz/Boardman, 1971, 29, 46, 71, 164, 191). Pits covered with stone slabs are well known from the necropoleis of Rhodes, Olynthos and other cities (Clara Rhodos, 1924/48, 10; Robinson, 1942, 158-193, Fig. 73). The pits of rectangular or oval form are the simplest and the most widespread type of grave structure in the necropoleis of the Greek colonies along the Pontic littoral (AG, 1984, 52; Belov, 1978, 48; idem 1981, 166; Parovich-Peshikan, 1974, 9; Tsvetaeva, 1951, 66; Kastanayan, 1959, 258; Papanova, 1994, 11).

Grave structures Based on the scenes on Greek vases that show various moments of the burial it becomes clear that the preparation of the grave itself took place during the night. On some vases that show the digging of the grave there are some burning torches depicted, and the diggers carry lamps (Vermeule, 1979, 21). The clay lamps with traces of burning on the wick-holder that have been discovered in the Greek necropoleis along the Bulgarian Black Sea coast reflect this custom. Pits The pit was the most widespread type of grave structure during the whole period of existence of Apollonia, Mesambria and Odessos. It was dug into the soil or hewn into the bedrock (Panayotova, 1989a, 64-65). The pits were used mainly for inhumations. In most of the cases of primary cremations in the necropoleis of Apollonia (Venedikov, 1963a, Grave 721) and Odessos (Mirchev, 1947, 235-236; Mirchev, 1965, 5-7; Toncheva, 1951, Grave 5) there is no information about the grave structure itself.

The ordinary rectangular pit was one of the structures that was used in the Thracian interior in the pre-Roman period. The body was either inhumed or cremated and, in most cases, a tumulus was piled on top. In the necropoleis of the Greek colonies on the Bulgarian Black Sea littoral the body – after being wrapped in tissue (Apollonia) or put into a coffin, a clay sarcophagus, a pithos or an amphora – was laid directly into the pit (Chimbuleva, 1969, 178, N6).

The pit (Figure 2, 1) is the only grave structure that was used in the Archaic and Classical necropoleis of Apollonia and remained in use during the Hellenistic period. The same is true for the cemeteries of Mesambria and Odessos in the 3rd-1st c. BC (Minchev, 2003, 247). The pits are mostly rectangular in plan, with rounded corners. The size depended on the height of the deceased. The pits from the latter half of the 5th and the beginning of the 4th c. BC that were recently discovered in the necropolis of Apollonia in the ‘Kalfata’ locality are much bigger than necessary. The embankment above some of them was surrounded by ring-walls made of crushed

Wooden coffins The use of wooden coffins as containers for the dead body is a widespread practice throughout the Greek world. It is a larnax – a simple chest, made in most cases of oak (Quercus), of the iron tree that is met in the Mediterranean (Celtis australis), of poplar (Populus), of lime-tree (Tilia argentea), of cedar (Pinus masculas) (it was used most of all in the Near East), of cypress (Cupressus semprivirens), of yew (Taxus bacata). These are the so-called ‘trees of death’, the use of which could 93

ANCIENT GREEK COLONIES IN THE BLACK SEA 2 be traced back to the Minoan and Mycenaean times (Wasowicz, 1966, 194).

the burials of children (Figure 2, 4), youths and adults (most of all of children and individuals who had not reached the height of an adult) (Venedikov, 1948, Graves 1, 18; Venedikov, 1963a, Graves 2, 219, 379, 334, 371, 421, 601, 690, 696, 704, 714, 737; Panayotova/Nedev, 2001, 119). In most of the cases, the large storage vessels were put in the grave lying on their side and propped with stones. Grave 371 was an exception, for the pithos was put in with his mouth up. Having an egg-shaped spherical body, the pithoi in the necropoleis of Apollonia are of various sizes (most often the height of a man) and were provided with lids. They were most probably of local manufacture (Ivanov, 1963, 255). Some specimens were repeatedly repaired with lead.

In the necropolis of Apollonia in the ‘Kalfata’ locality two types of coffins (Figure 2, 2) were used – nailed together and put along with joints. According to the shape of the coffin and that of the lid two different types could be distinguished: a chest with sloping sides and double-pitched lid and a chest with parallelepiped shape (Venedikov, 1963a, 9-10; Panayotova, 1998a, 12; Panayotova, 2001b, 100; Panayotova, Nedev, Hermary, 2004, 153). Along with the iron nails, braces were sometimes used for putting together the planks. The wooden coffins were not decorated. Despite the fact that in the necropoleis of Attica the body was laid directly into the pit, in some cases there are traces of wooden coffins (Kurtz/Boardman, 1971, 71, 164). Some large pits in Pydna have holes on the corners – most probably for the legs of a kline (Mpesios, 1989, 160, Fig. 9, 10). According to C. Preda in the necropoleis of the West Pontic Greek colonies (on the territory of present-day Romania), the body was laid into wooden coffins, though no explicit evidence exists (Preda, 1961, 278). The inhumations in wooden coffins were characteristic of the burial customs of Olbia most probably from its foundation on; in the Hellenistic times the use of coffins increased. In the graves from the 4th2nd c. BC traces of wood were frequently discovered, in most cases along with iron or bronze nails (Sokol’skij, 1969, 14; Parovich-Peshikan, 1947, 12).

In Greece, the use of pythoi as coffins is attested from the Geometric up to Hellenistic times (Kurtz/Boardman, 1971, 55, 72, Pl. II; Firatli, 1964). According to D. Ovcharov in Thrace the use of storage vessels for funerary purposes (Popov, 1934, 240-251, Fig. 203; Filov, 1934, 151-152, Figs. 174-177; Radev, 2000) was influenced by the burial practices of the population of Apollonia Pontica (Ovcharov, 1961, 67). The large amphorae, which mainly functioned as containers for transportation of wine and olive oil were used for burials of very young children (newborn babies). Such cases are known from the necropoleis of Apollonia in the ‘Kharmanite’ neighbourhood, in the ‘Kalfata’ locality and in the Sea Garden (Venedikov, 1948, Graves 54, 86, 117; Venedikov, 1963a, Graves 34, 88, 91, 353, 365, 436, 461, 701, 713, 744, 745, 748, 753, 757, 760; Panayotova, 1989a, 76-77; Panayotova, 2001b, 100). They are dated from the beginning of the 5th to the end of the 3rd c. BC.

Clay sarcophagi Apollonia is the only site where the body was laid into a clay sarcophagus. The two examples are almost identical in size and shape. They are dated to the end of the 4th or the beginning of the 3rd c. BC. The first one, discovered in the plane necropolis in the ‘Kalfata’ locality (Venedikov, 1963a, Grave 674) was covered with three tiles. The second one had six handles decorated with buttons – two on each one of the long sides and one on each one of the short. There was a groove on the rim for fixing the lid. The lack of more evidence does not allow us to conclude whether the sarcophagi in Apollonia were imported or were manufactured in local workshops. In Greece clay sarcophagi with simple shape and without decoration were used in the necropoleis of Samos, Chios, Abdera, Rhodes, Thasos, etc. (Kurtz/Boardman, 1971, 72, Fig. 17, 269, Fig. 70; Audin, 1960, 316; Vermeule, 1981, 2, Fig. 3; Koukouli-Chrysanthaki, Sgourou, Angelarakis, 1996, 790); they were also used in Thrace (Botusharova, 1954, 265-271, Figs. 1-6).

In order to place the small body into the amphora a hole was usually made on one of the sides of the vessel; after that the hole was covered with the fragments of the amphora, with a dish or something else. The amphora was laid on its side, propped with stones on the sides of the body and beneath the neck. The use of clay vases for burials of babies is a practice that existed in the Greek world from Mycenaean times (Kurtz/Boardman, 1971, 72; Robinson, 1942, 139, 152, 167, Pl. III/10, V/20). This custom was widespread in the necropoleis of the Greek colonies along the Aegean (Koukouli-Chrysanthaki, 1983, 10-11; fig. 4) and the Pontic littoral (AG, 1984, 40; Panayotova, 1989a, 49-79; Korovina, 1987, 21, Fig. 16; Preda 1961, 280). An archaic grave from Athens is indicative about the ideas the ancient Greeks put in use of clay vases for burials of children. On the curve of the shoulder of the amphora in the grave, there was a three-letter abbreviation of the word mneme (Kurtz/Boardman, 1971, 72).

Pithoi and amphorae In the necropoleis in the ‘Kalfata’ locality and in the Sea Garden of Sozopol some pithoi were discovered, used for

94

KRYSTINA PANAYOTOVA: BURIAL AND POST-BURIAL RITES IN THE NECROPOLEIS OF THE GREEK COLONIES Chersonese; in some cases, the lateral walls of the grave were built of stones (Belov, 1978, 48). Inhumations in graves made of tiles were widespread in the necropoleis of Panticapaeum (Kastanayan, 1959, 276), Phanagoria, Kepoi, etc. (Panayotova, 1989a, 81-84).

Tile-graves The second most widespread type of grave structures in the necropoleis of the Greek colonies along the West Pontic coast were the graves made of tiles or only covered with them. The most widespread variation is the double-pitched tile-grave. The double-pitched ‘roof’ is made of one to four pairs of standard roof-tiles propped one against the other. From both short sides the grave was closed with a single tile placed in an upright position. The number of the tiles used for the construction of the grave depended on the height of the deceased. The tiles were placed immediately over the body (Figure 2, 3), in the pit itself. On the base, they were strengthened with crushed tiles or fieldstones. This type of grave structure is represented in the necropoleis of Apollonia from the middle of the 4th c. BC on (Venedikov, 1948, Graves 2, 12, 25, 35, 40; Venedikov, 1963a, 11-12; Panayotova, 1989a, 81-82; Panayotova, 2003a, 129; Panayotova, Nedev, Hermary, 2004, 153). Such graves were also discovered on the Atiya peninsula (Galabov, 1952, 102), in Mesambria (Galabov, 1949a, 2; Chimbuleva, 1969, 175) and Odessos (Shkorpil/Shkorpil, 1909b, 36-37). Almost all of them are dated to the Hellenistic period.

In the end of the Hellenistic period, the tile-graves disappeared from the necropoleis of the Greek colonies along the Black Sea coast and only in the cemeteries of Apollonia and Chersonese such structures well dated to the first centuries of the Christian era were discovered. One more time both variations are represented: doublepitched and sarcophagus-like. In most cases, these were Hellenistic graves reused in later times (Zubar’, 1984, 1517, Figs. 4-6). In the Roman provinces of Moesia and Thrace, this type of graves (Type VII according to the typology of L. Getov) remained unknown up to the arrival of Romans. It appeared in the end of the 1st or the beginning of the 2nd c. AD – first in the urban and later in the tumular necropoleis (Getov, 1970, 5-6). Structures built of stones In the necropoleis of the Greek colonies along the Bulgarian Black Sea coast there are graves built of stones or ashlars with one (Apollonia, Mesambria, Odessos) and with two (Mesambria) chambers. Their length and width vary, for the size depended on the height of the deceased.

The construction of several graves in the necropolis of Apollonia (Panayotova 2003a, 129) and Odessos (Toncheva, 1961a, 30-31) differs; the tiles were not only used for covering the body, but also for building structures in the shape of a sarcophagus. Its walls were made of tiles in upright position; tiles were also used for the floor and the roof of the structure. The earliest appearance of this type in the necropolis of Apollonia could be dated to the middle of the 4th c. BC and the latest excavations (three such structures were discovered in 2004) have demonstrated that this variation of the tile graves is characteristic for the earliest period of the construction of tile graves.

The differences in the construction of the grave in the case of the single-chambered structures allow us to distinguish several variations and sub-variations – according to the material and the way the grave was built. The first type comprises structures built of crushed stones arranged in walls without binding material. There was no covering of durable material. The sandy soil was used for the floor. The building material was taken from the surroundings of the settlement and for this reason most of all andesite, sandstone of poor quality and limestone were used. In the necropolis of Apollonia, there were cases in which gravestones were reused for the construction of later graves (Venedikov, 1948, 14, Grave 13; Panayotova, 1989a, 85; Panayotova, 2003a, 157-159, Fig. 2; Panayotova, 1998a, 13, Fig. 5). Similar cases are known from the necropolis of Mesambria (Petrov, 1966, 31, Grave 4).

The use of Corinthian and Laconian flat tiles (more often in the Hellenistic period) was widespread in the funerary architecture in mainland Greece and on the islands from the beginning of the 5th c. BC and on (Blegen, Palmer, Young, 1964, 344, Pl. 490; Kurtz/Boardman, 1971, 164, 192; Hagg/Fossey, 1980, 28-125; Higgins, 1986, 50, Fig. 42; Luca, 1982, 289-298; Ghaly-Kahil, 1954, 230-232, Fig. 9). The same is true about the colonies in Magna Graecia (Carter, 1998, 92, Fig. 3.35) and along the Black Sea littoral (AG, 1984, 52, 62, 81, 85). According to Jacopi, tile-graves replaced entirely the wooden coffins in the necropoleis of Samos and Rhodes (Jacopi, 1929, 12).

The graves built of fieldstones without binding material are located sporadically among the pits and in most cases have the orientation E-W. With rare exceptions (Apollonia), there is no data on the presence of a wooden coffin. No age or sexual differentiation could be traced in the use of that type of graves.

Tile-graves had a significant place in the Classical and Hellenistic necropolis of Kallatis. The parallelepiped variation was the most widespread, but in some cases, it seems that the tiles were placed in the shape of a doublepitched roof (Preda, 1961, 281-282). During Hellenistic times, tile-graves were constructed in the necropolis of

The second type comprises the grave structures in which slabs or ashlars of andesite, sandstone or limestone were 95

ANCIENT GREEK COLONIES IN THE BLACK SEA 2 used. Such graves were discovered in the plane necropolis and under tumuli as well. The stone structures were constructed in pits dug into the sand or the clay, or hewn into the bedrock (Galabov, 1955, 130-131, 142145, Graves 12, 15; Panayotova/Nedev, 2001, 119). The cists were used for both inhumation and cremation graves (Panayotova, 1989a, 89). The long walls were constructed of one or several blocks or slabs, arranged in two rows and without binding material. The stones are smoothly cut from the interior (the sides turned to the chamber) and in the areas where they touch. In some graves in Apollonia (Seure, 1925, 120; Tsaneva/Dimitrov, 1976, 5, Grave 1; Panayotova, 1998a, 14, Fig. 7) and Odessos (Shkorpil, 1930/31, 69-76), iron wedges covered with lead ‘swallow-tail’ braces were used for fastening together the blocks from the walls or the slabs of the covering. The joints made of metal were often used in the Thracian funerary architecture. The use of metal joints is part of Greek building tradition from the Archaic Period and on (Stoyanova, 2002, 20-21).

In most cases the graves constructed of stone blocks or slabs do not have stone floors, but in the necropolis of Apollonia in the ‘Kalfata’ locality and in Mesambria (Galabov, 1955, 132, Grave 1/48) there are several instances in which the floor of the chamber is also covered with slabs. Graves built of stone slabs were also used in the necropolis of Apollonia in the ‘Kharmanite’ neighbourhood and in the Sea Garden of Sozopol (Panyotova, 2003a, 159-162, Fig. 3-8). A. Minchev distinguishes several types of graves and tombs from the necropolis of Odessos. He mentions the existence of structures built of limestone slabs in the period of the 4th-2nd c. BC and of ashlars in the 4th-3rd c. BC; some of them had stone floors (Minchev, 2003, 247). Some of the cists, discovered in the plane and tumular necropoleis of Apollonia (Panayotova, 2003a, 161) and Odessos (Shkorpil/Shkorpil, 1909a, 12; Toncheva, 1965, 52-53; Savova, 1971, 4), were painted in white or red colour. Traces of red paint were discovered on the internal walls of a stone urn discovered in the necropolis of Apollonia in the ‘Kalfata’ locality (Panayotova, 1998a, 1). According to G. Seure the differences in the location and the colour of the two sarcophagi discovered in the tomb in the ‘Mapite’ locality near Sozopol depended on the sex of the deceased. On the grounds of the grave goods from the one painted in red Seure reached the conclusion that the skeleton (that was discovered in a very bad state of preservation) was ‘undoubtedly male’ (Seure, 1924, 337). The anthropological analysis, made by A. Keenleyside on the bones of two painted graves from the necropolis in the ‘Kalfata’ locality – 289 (painted in white) and 309 (painted in red) – demonstrated that in both of them women were buried.

A grave from Mesambria is an exception from the usual manner of construction of cist-graves. To the northern short wall of the chamber another, a smaller chamber was added, filled with charcoal, ashes and fragments of vases with traces of burning (Galabov, 1955, 131, 145). A similar construction (with an additional almost square in plan chamber on the northwestern wall of the main construction) was attested in the case of Grave 137 from the necropolis of Apollonia (Panayotova, 2003a, 159); in this case, however the grave was built of crushed stones. These structures resemble some dolmens or cists from the early Thracian necropolis near the village of Ravna, Varna region (Mirchev, 1962, 97). Another unusual structure was discovered under a tumulus in the village of Galata (now a suburb of Varna). In this case three different in size roughly hewn slabs shaped a triangular chamber covered with another slab. In the grave, a clay amphora used as an urn for the ashes of the cremated body was discovered (Minchev, 1975, 136-141).

Graves with a chamber painted in red are known from other ancient necropoleis (Rouseva, 2000, 62-63; Kisyov, 2002, 54; Nikolaidou-Patera, 1993, 479; ThemelesTouratsoglu 1997, 130). The white or the coloured plastering of the walls of the burial chambers most probably corresponded to a well-known and obligatory symbolism that reflected the ideas of the world, death and transition to the underworld in colour.

The covering of the graves built of well-hewn blocks or slabs is made of one to six slabs wrought in the same manner (Figure 4, 1). Usually they are placed flat on the chamber and the remaining gaps are filled with clay and small stones. Two graves from Apollonia are exceptions from the rule. They were covered with a single slab shaped like a gabled roof (Panayotova, 1998a, 14, Fig. 7). Another grave – from the necropolis of Mesambria – was covered with two well-hewn blocks, also shaping a gabled roof (Galabov, 1955, 130). One more grave from Mesambria is to be regarded as an exception – it had no chamber but only a covering of two limestone slabs, shaping a double-pitched roof (Galabov, 1955, 132, Grave 13/52).

The rite of painting or covering the body with a red pigment is known in many ancient cultures, but there is no information that it existed in ancient Greece. Apparently, the use of ochre in the burial rites is one of these universal phenomena that could be observed in many parts of the world and have sometimes a similar but in most cases completely different symbolic content (Bachvarov, 2003). Only the rites of the Spartans required the use of a red shroud, but in many parts of the Greek world from the 8th c. BC cists, stone or clay sarcophagi and wooden coffins painted in red were used. It is interpreted in the same way as the painting of the body, but we could not be sure in this case whether the 96

KRYSTINA PANAYOTOVA: BURIAL AND POST-BURIAL RITES IN THE NECROPOLEIS OF THE GREEK COLONIES red paint symbolized the (Kurtz/Boardman, 1971, 217).

fire

or

the

blood

The inhumations and the primary cremations (Toncheva, 1961c, 20, 5) were carried out either in the burial chamber itself (the shape of which is close to that of the stone sarcophagi), or in wooden coffins or sarcophagi. The use of sarcophagi is attested by the holes on the four corners of the stone floor of the chamber, by the remains of wood, by the darker colour of the filling of the grave or by the presence of nails and metal braces. Having in mind the flat covering of the whole structure, we could assume that the coffin was also covered with a flat lid made of wooden planks. The coffins were most probably manufactured in the colonies and it is not excluded that some of them were made in the house.

The rectangular pit – dug into the ground or hewn in the bedrock and lined with stone slabs – is the most characteristic and the most carefully constructed type of grave structures in the necropoleis in Greece (Kurtz/Boardman, 1971, 32, 35, 54, 70-71; Firatli, 1964, 9; Robinson, 1942, 116, Fig. 22, Pl. LI/577a-c, LII/595ab; Sgourou, 2002, Fig. 4,5, Pl.1/b-c, Pl.2/a) and in the cemeteries of the Greek colonies in the Mediterranean and the Black Sea (Carter, 1998, 60-61, 69, Fig. 3.23; Preda, 1961, 294; Belov, 1978, 49). M. ParovichPeshikan regards the graves with stone structures from the late 4th-3rd c. BC that are rarely discovered in the necropolis of Olbia as a relic of a more ancient rite (Parovich-Peshikan, 1974, 9-10, 14). Though graves built of stone slabs were discovered in several necropoleis in Greece, E. G. Kastanayan does not consider them to be characteristic for the Greek world as a whole and not even for a single Greek necropolis. According to her, in the cemeteries of Greek colonies on the Northern Pontic littoral grave structures that appeared were common for the eschatological ideas of the Greek and indigenous population (Kastanayan, 1959, 293). Of course, no architectural form could be transferred in its finished shape from one region to another, if in the latter there are no ideological grounds for its existence. That is why in the Mediterranean and in Thrace in different periods there were the same constructions, as well as compositional and structural ideas (Ruseva, 2002, 13).

There is no difference in the function of a coffin and a sarcophagus. The two types differ in size, shape, manner of manufacture and decoration. According to N. Sokol’skij, the sarcophagus is a large coffin that was made in a particular shape and was decorated in a particular manner (Sokol’skij, 1969, 7). Traces of wooden sarcophagi and most of all their decoration (small wooden cylinders, bone and terracotta appliqués) were discovered in graves in Odessos, Mesambria and Bizone. The double-chambered grave is the last ideological step before the tomb with its monumental appearance and memorial function. In this case we could see the creation of a particular space, the function and the appearance of which was planned in advance so that it could reflect the relationships within the family. It is an insignificant transition between the graves constructed of stone blocks or slabs and the one-chambered tombs without additional constructions: only the chamber is enlarged, a door is made and the covering construction becomes more sophisticated. In this way, the internal space also changes (Ruseva, 2002, 32-33).

Along the Bulgarian Black Sea coast, double-chambered graves appeared in the Hellenistic period only in the necropolis of Mesambria (Petrov, 1966, 31-33, Graves 5, 6, 7; Petrov/Chimbuleva, 1963, 23-26; Chimbuleva, in print, 18, Grave 1, 21-22, Grave 1; Katsarov, 1911, 265; idem, 1932/33, 281-282, 284). They were two graves built of stone blocks or slabs that have a common long wall. The ‘family tomb’ that is constructed in that way consists of two almost identical chambers (2,1/2,2 x 0,7/0,8 x 0,9/1,0 m). The walls of the graves were built of large, rectangular, well-hewn slabs, placed in one or several rows without binding material. In most cases a single slab 0,25-0,3 m thick separated the two chambers. The number of the covering slabs was from three to six. The floor was formed from the natural terrain, and in one case it was leveled and covered with lime and sand plastering (Petrov/Chimbuleva, 1963, 24).

Tombs The tombs discovered in the necropoleis of Apollonia (Seure, 1924, 335ff.), Odessos (Mirchev, 1958b, 571575; Ivanov, 1956, 94; Minchev, 2003, 247) and Bizone (Panayotova, 1994b, 93) are with a single chamber and with parallelepiped or of almost cubic shape. A single exception is a tomb from the region of Bizone (Kitov, 1973, 37; idem, 1989, 40, note 23). It was constructed on the ancient terrain and was built of crushed stones without binding material. The tomb has a short corridor with a vaulted entrance, leading to a small ellipsoidal domed chamber; the dome was made of stone slabs arranged in a step-like manner.

Double (double-chambered) graves with one common long wall are known from the necropoleis of the Dorian colonies Megara Hyblaea and Gela. In the cemeteries of Kallatis and other Pontic colonies, numerous structures of this type were discovered (Barladeanu-Zavatin, 1985, 8598, Pl. 1a). In the necropolis of Tanagra several cistgraves with common walls are grouped together and encircled in a ring-wall built of large blocks (Higgins, 1986, 54, Fig. 54).

The tombs made of ashlars were constructed in a large pit dug into the ground and then covered with a mound. They are built of well-hewn limestone blocks and no binding material was used. The ashlars that were used for the construction of the tomb in the ‘Kharmanite’ neighbourhood in Sozopol (Panayotova, 1994b, 83) had 97

ANCIENT GREEK COLONIES IN THE BLACK SEA 2 their sides marked with Greek letters. It stands clear that this structure was built according to a plan made in advance. It was made of ashlars that go straight up in the first four rows above the floor and then turn sharply to the interior. The covering was made of slabs, the gaps between which were filled with lime milk.

Sea coast from identical and better-preserved monuments from other regions of the ancient world (Watzinger, 1905, 2, 3, 8-17, 20-28; Gaitsch, Kuniholm, Radt, Scehiefer, 1985, 139-172; Lullies, 1962, 9-31; Kurtz/Boardman, 1971, 268-269). Watzinger and Ivanova distinguish two types of ancient wooden sarcophagi according to their shape – the first type is in the shape of a chest and the second in the shape of a house (Ivanova, 1955, 410-411). Sokol’skij made a larger study of the wooden sarcophagi from the Northern Black Sea coast, in which he combined the chronological and the morphological principle. He distinguishes four types of sarcophagi: 1) sarcophagi in the shape of a chest with a flat lid; 2) sarcophagi the body of which is chestlike, but the covering imitates the roof of a temple; 3) sarcophagi in the shape of a temple with columns and pilasters; 4) sarcophagi with bulging lid (Sokol’skij, 1969, 12). On the grounds of the shape, the construction and the decoration of the sarcophagi kept in the Hermitage Museum Vaulina and Wasowicz distinguish three main types and two variations of the last type. The first type comprises the sarcophagi with a chest-like shape. The walls join straight in the corners. The decoration covers the entire surface of the lid and could be related to the traditions of Klazomenai. The authors regard as a main feature of the second type its resemblance to the Greek temple, which is seen in many of the parts of the construction, such as the gabled lid, the triangular pediments, the acroteria, the lavishly decorated cornice and other elements typical for the monumental architecture. The sarcophagi from Abusir and Tarent belong to this type. Type III-A resembles to Doric architecture and Type III-B comprises the sarcophagi with columns.

Considering the construction of the covering, the tomb discovered in the ‘Mapite’ (Figure 3, 1) locality to the South from Sozopol has its particular place. On the grounds of the remains of wooden beams found there, G. Seure assumed that the structure had a four-pitched covering of beams and planks (Seure, 1924, 335ff.). The covering of other tombs is formed like a barrel-vault; in the case of the tomb in the ‘Akchilar’ locality near Varna the vault was made of eleven rows of ashlars hewn into a trapezoidal shape (Mirchev, 1958b, 573-574; Ruseva, 2002, 106, 19). The access to the camera was provided by a door, which in the case of the ‘Wladislaw Varnenchik’ tumulus near Varna (Mirchev, 1958b, 572-573) was decorated with a narrow relief frame on the external side. The door of the tomb in the ‘Akchilar’ locality was closed with four stone blocks placed one on top of the other. The ‘Mapite’ tomb is an exception, for there was no passage between the corridor and the chamber, but a massive wall (Ruseva, 2002, 125, 32). The vaulted tombs of the so-called ‘Macedonian type’, discovered in the surroundings of Odessos, have in some cases a longer or a shorter dromos (Mirchev, 1958b, 572573; Ruseva, 2002, 122, 29), an antechamber and in the chamber a funerary bed (kline) (Shkorpil/Shkorpil, 1898, 50; Mirchev, 1958b, 571-573; Ruseva, 2002, 123, 30). All the tombs could be dated within the broadest chronological limits of the late-4th-2nd c. BC.

The wooden sarcophagi discovered in the necropoleis of Mesambria, Odessos and Bizone could be divided in two groups according to the material of which their decoration was made:

The single-chambered tombs discovered in the surroundings of the Greek colonies along the West Pontic littoral have similar predecessors and exact parallels in Thrace (Ruseva 2000), Greece (Kurtz/Boardman, 1971, 274-278), Macedonia (Gossel, 1980, 7-23), and the Northwestern and Northern shores of the Black Sea (Parovich-Peshikan, 1974, 47-48, 10/1907, 32/1907, 1/1913).

1. Sarcophagi with bone appliqués There are bone decorative elements among the materials from six graves from Odessos. The appliqués from Tumulus II from Galata neighbourhood are engraved bone plaques with heads of women, Satyrs and Maenads, volutes with inlays of glass paste, numerous lamellae in the shape of palmettes, triangles, rectangles, prisms, leafs, flowers, lotuses, eggs etc. (Toncheva, 1951, 49-56, Figs. 96-101). They have their close parallels among the inlays from the sarcophagus from the Pavlov Tumulus, a part of the necropolis ‘Yuz-Oba’ near Panticapaeum. The sarcophagus that was discovered in a stone tomb from the latter half of the 4th c. BC belongs to the type with a gabled roof and columns (Sokol’skij, 1969, 36-37, Figures 17/3-4, 18, 19). According to N. Sokol’skij, the sarcophagus from Galata that has volutes – without any doubt shaping the capitals of Ionic columns or pilasters –

Sarcophagi In the tombs, as well as in the graves, the body was laid into a wooden coffin or in a sarcophagus. There is some information about only one sarcophagus – the one from the tomb in the ‘Eshil tepe’ tumulus near Varna. It was made of oak wood (Shkorpil/Shkorpil, 1898, 141). We could acquire some information about the shape and the construction of the wooden sarcophagi from the necropoleis of the Greek colonies on the Bulgarian Black 98

KRYSTINA PANAYOTOVA: BURIAL AND POST-BURIAL RITES IN THE NECROPOLEIS OF THE GREEK COLONIES belongs to the third type of his classification (Sokol’skij, 1969, 39).

the hair, mouth and eyes. Some of the finds from Odessos had gilted parts (Mirchev, 1956, 1-2; Toncheva, 1982, 37-40).

The inlays discovered in the ‘Kokardzha’ tumulus are plaques of yellowish bone with graphite drawings of Chimera, women playing lyres, a man holding a horn, floral and geometrical ornaments, long stripes of egg-like ornament painted in red and a relief depiction of a swan (Toncheva, 1951, 56, Fig. 104). The stylistic characteristics of these appliqués are similar to those from the sarcophagus (Type III – with columns) from Tomb III in the tumulus ‘Great Bliznitsa’, dated to the second half of the 4th c. BC. Among the engraved ivory plaques with architectural elements and floral motives, there are ten winged figures with kalathoi. There are similar figures on the pediment of the sarcophagus discovered in 1969 in the tumulus ‘Tuzla’, as well as on that from the Serapaeum in Egypt (Sokol’skij, 1969, 39, Figures 9, 21). The identical in style and manner of manufacture decoration of the sarcophagus from Odessos suggests that it also belongs to Type III (with columns); it is an indication of one production centre or even one workshop. N. Pyatysheva connects the Hellenistic wooden sarcophagi from the territory of the Bosporan kingdom with the Ionian artistic school (Pyatysheva, 1949, 16).

There are various scenes represented: maidens, women, dancers, singers, dancing Satyrs and maenads, Eros, a praying figure and a comic actor, Dionysus and Ariadne, Nike, Hermes, Atys, Aphrodite and the Great God (of Odessos) Darzalas. In addition to the human figures the decoration of the wooden sarcophagi comprised terracotta figurines of doves, rosettes, torches etc. Having in mind the shape of similar sarcophagi from the Northern Pontic littoral (Sokol’skij, 1969, 12) and Magna Graecia (Lullies, 1962, Figure 27/7) we could assume that the finds from the Bulgarian Black Sea littoral had the same appearance. Most probably, it is the same Type III with the shape of a temple and walls divided in sectors by columns or pilasters. In the normal case the terracotta figurines were organized two by two according to the scene; this fact indicates that they were placed symmetrically on the decorated surface. It could be assumed that the small clay ornaments were used for the decoration of the edges or the plinth of the sarcophagi. The compositions on the walls are related to the cycle of the god Dionysus or represent solemn processions. G. Toncheva thinks the terracotta figurines from Bizone represented a procession honoring Aphrodite. The composition of figures of Erotes carrying a toiletries box, an alabastron, and a basket with fruits and flowers, as well as figures of musicians and a singer with a lyre, of dancing Erotes and maidens, resembles the scene from the dome of the famous Kazanluk Tomb (IBII, 1976, 33, Fig. 44).

On the grounds on the scant evidence of the presence of bone inlays in the tomb in the ‘Akchilar’ locality (Toncheva, 1951, 56) – fragments of egg-like ornament, of glass elements from volutes and of bone lamellae with geometrical shape – we could assume that this sarcophagus had also the shape that is typical for Type III of the classification of Sokol’skij. The same is true of the sarcophagus, remains of the decoration of which (bone inlays in the shape of volutes and ten ornaments of greenish glass paste) were discovered in an ashlar-built grave in a tumulus near the village of Topolite (at the present a suburb of Varna) (Toncheva, 1964b, 56-59).

The terracotta figurines from the Bulgarian Black Sea coast are imported or of local manufacture, although copying the imported specimens. This is particularly visible in some figurines from Odessos (Mirchev, 1956, 13, 15) and Bizone (Toncheva/Rafailov, 1980, 53-58) that were made of not well refined clay. What concerns the imported sarcophagi with terracotta appliqués, their origin should be sought in the same region where the sarcophagi with bone inlays were produced, i.e. in the centres on the coast of Asia Minor.

The high artistic quality of the manufacture of the bone appliqués from the tumular necropoleis in the surroundings of Odessos and the lack of any elements that could relate them to the art and culture of the local population one more time corroborate the opinion that these sarcophagi were imported (Toncheva, 1951, 57; Gerasimov, 1969, 50). Most probably, they were manufactured in workshops that had commercial relations with the colonies and worked in accordance with the tastes of their clients.

The rite It seems that whether the body was laid in the grave or cremated on a pyre (and the ashes buried in an urn) had no influence on the burial ceremony and on the ideas that ancient Greeks had about the underworld. It is more likely that the particular rite depended on the personal beliefs and the tradition of the family or the community.

2. Sarcophagi with terracotta appliqués Sarcophagi decorated with terracotta appliqués were discovered in the necropoleis of Mesambria, Odessos and Bizone. They were made of clay that was refined to various degrees was of yellowish-gray to red colour. On the terracotta figurines, traces of white ground are preserved, as well as of the multicoloured decoration of

The cult of the dead was not so much an abstract religious obligation, but a practical necessity related to 99

ANCIENT GREEK COLONIES IN THE BLACK SEA 2 the transition of the deceased to the world beyond. The remains of the dead are one of the two constant elements that form the grave (Smirnov, 1990, 218) as a complex and it has its own specific structure.

that are specific for a certain stage in the development of a given society. In mainland Greece, burials in contracted position were carried out from Neolithic times until the 6th c. BC. In the Pantanello necropolis (in the chora of Metapontum in Italy), contracted skeletons were discovered in graves from the 3rd c. BC (Carter 1998, 65). The rare cases of contracted burials in the Thracian interior during the 1st millennium BC are regarded as anachronistic (Georgieva 1999a, 220).

The inhumation The inhumation is the most widespread way of disposal of the dead body in the necropoleis of the Greek colonies on the Bulgarian Black Sea littoral. Its use was constant throughout their existence. A specific feature of the burial practices of these settlements is that the graves – no matter if plane or under tumuli – were used only once. The double and the multiple burials are exceptions (Venedikov, 1963a, 53, Grave 536). Although it was not a widespread practice, the use of a single grave for two or more subsequent burials is mentioned in the ancient literary tradition. According to Plutarchus every Athenian had his own grave, but in Megara one grave was used for three or four burials (Plut., Sol. X). This information indicates that the religious norms did not prohibit the opening and the reuse of an already existing grave.

There are several opinions concerning the interpretation of the contracted burials in the necropoleis of the Greek colonies in the Black Sea (Preda, 1961, 278; AG, 1984, 52, 85, 233). According to the first and most accepted one, the deviation from the normal stretched position is due to the different ethnic (barbarian) affiliation of the dead. The second opinion sees in this phenomenon differences in the social and economical structure of the population of the poleis – according to the proponents of that hypothesis the domestic slaves were buried in contracted position (Stoyanov, 2002, 296-300). The orientation of the bodies buried in the necropoleis of the Greek colonies in the Black Sea is not constant. In the best-studied necropolis of Apollonia – the one in the ‘Kalfata’ locality – as well as in the cemeteries of Odessos and Mesambria (in the cases about which we have information) the orientation of the bodies with the head to the east predominates. Most of the buried in the necropolis in the Sea Garden in Sozopol were laid with their heads to the west. No dependence of the orientation of the body on the sex or age of the deceased, on the position, or on the type of the grave structure could be observed.

In some graves from the necropolis of Apollonia, there were parts of the body that were missing. An opinion exists that when it was impossible to carry the body of a foreigner in his motherland it was buried in the necropolis of the city he died in. In some cases however, the relatives of the deceased received the head and buried it at home; the other possibility was to make a symbolic burial (Kurtz/Boardman, 1971, 172). The predominating position in which the body was laid in the grave in the necropoleis of the Greek colonies on the West Pontic littoral was laying on its back with the stretched limbs (Figure 2, 2). There are very few exceptions to this rule – the arms could be bent in the elbows and placed on the pelvis; the legs could be crossed or bent in the knees and arranged in a rhomboid manner. From both the necropoleis of Messambria and Apollonia one case is known in which the body was laid facing down.

Though the general opinion holds that ancient Greeks buried their dead with the head to the east, in Greece itself a great diversity in the choice of the orientation could be seen (in the inhumation graves). This fact leads us to the conclusion that the different orientation of the buried did not depend on one strict rule or prescription. It was in accordance with the local specifics of every necropolis or depended on the slope of the terrain or on the direction of the road that served as organizing axis of the necropolis (Kurtz/Boardman, 1971, 194).

Though not numerous, in all the necropoleis of Apollonia there were skeletons discovered in a contracted position lying on their sides. In some cases, only some elements of the contracted position were observed – the body lying on its back but with the legs bent in the knees and turned to one of the sides (Panayotova, 2003c, 130). The burials in contracted position or with elements of the contracted position were carried in pits or tile graves (Panayotova, 1994a, 151-155). The rare cases in which the body was laid on its back but with contracted limbs could be due to some illness the deceased had in the moment he died. This hypothesis however is based only on the grounds of logical assumptions.

The cremation The burning of the body on a funerary pyre is the second, relatively rarely applied way of disposal of the body. It coexisted with the inhumation in all the Greek colonial necropoleis. Cremation graves were discovered in every Greek necropolis on the Bulgarian Black Sea littoral – in Apollonia (Figure 2, 5), the settlement in ‘Sladkite kladentsi’ (Figure 5, 8) neighbourhood of Burgas (where only cremations were discovered, which is an exception of the rule), Mesambria Figure 5, 10), Odessos, Dionysopolis and Bizone. The cremation of men and women appeared in the plane and tumular necropoleis of

The rite of burying the dead in contracted position has its roots in most ancient times and is connected to beliefs 100

KRYSTINA PANAYOTOVA: BURIAL AND POST-BURIAL RITES IN THE NECROPOLEIS OF THE GREEK COLONIES the Greek colonies in the region from the mid-4th c. BC and on (Panayotova, 1989b, 64). There is no evidence of cremations of children.

2003c, 160, Fig. 7; Panayotova, Nedev, Hermary, 2004, 153). The variations in the ways of the disposal of the body in one necropolis are most often explained by the ethnic affiliation of the deceased. In the necropoleis under consideration here, the cremation is regarded as an infiltration of the indigenous Thracian population in the Greek colonies (Venedikov, 1963a, 14-16; Minchev, 2003, 248).

Primary cremations (the burning of the body on the place of the burial) are extremely rare. Very few instances were attested in the necropolis of Apollonia in the Sea Garden of Sozopol (Venedikov, 1963a, Graves 703, 721), Anchialos (Balabanov, 1979, 23-32), Odessos (Mirchev, 1947, 235-236; Toncheva, 1956, 54; Minchev, 2003, 247) and Bizone (Salkin, 1989, 9). In one of the graves from Apollonia, the remains of the pyre were covered with large fragments of a pithos, and in the second, the covering was of tiles in a shape of a double-pitched roof. In the necropolis of Odessos, a primary cremation of the body together with the wooden sarcophagus was discovered (Mirchev, 1956, 5-7). In a grave in the Ezerovo suburb of Varna after the cremation the burned bones were collected in an urn that was placed in a small pit on the place of the pyre and after that the whole place was covered with stones and a mound was piled (Toncheva, 1956, 54). In this case however – having in mind that a hand-made pot was used as an urn – one could assume that the buried was not of Greek origin (Damyanov, 2004, 52).

The population of the Balkan Peninsula began to use the cremation (along with the inhumation) in the Bronze Age (Delev, 1986, 10). In Greece in the Late Geometric and Early Archaic periods, as well as in the beginning of the times of the colonizing movement the cremation of the dead was a widespread practice though it did not have a universal meaning (Carter, 1998, 57). A great diversity of vessels were used as urns – from coarse and undecorated kitchenware to exquisite bronze or red-figured vases (Kurtz/Boardman, 1971, 73-75, 98-99). The collecting of the bones from the pyre and their deposition in the urn is one of the basic specifics of the Greek rite of cremation (Vernant, 1982, 7). An opinion exists that the cremation was a more expensive and more aristocratic rite that was used more often for the burial of the wealthy part of the population (Robinson, 1942, 148; Kurtz/Boardman, 1971, 329).

In most cases of cremation in the necropoleis of the West Pontic colonies, the burning of the body was carried out not on the place of the grave but somewhere else. It is possible a special place for the cremation to have existed, but there is no example discovered so far. The bones that were washed with water or wine (Garland, 1985, 36) and the grave goods were buried among the graves in the plane necropoleis or under tumuli in urns or structures built of well-hewn stone blocks (Tsaneva/Dimitrov, 1976, Grave 1). The containers in which the ashes were collected after the cremation are made of clay (Venedikov, 1948, 10-11, Grave 3, Fig. 5; Venedikov, 1963a, Graves 224, 333, 357, 358, 360, 402, 478, 514, 665, 675; Panayotova, 1998a, 15, Figs. 8-9: Panayotova, 2003c, 131, Figure 4/6; Mihajlov/ Dimitrov, 1985, Grave 41) or stone (Venedikov, 1963a, Grave 244; Panayotova, 1998a, 15). Various type of vases were used: red-figure kraters (Venedikov, 1963a, 30, Grave 227; Panayotova, Nedev, Hermary, 2003, 153; Bakalova-Delijska, 1960, 257; Toncheva, 1964a, 111, 113-115, Fig. 4, 120-126), a red-figure hydria (Panayotova, Nedev, Hermary, 2003, 153), amphorae (Venedikov, 196, 58, Grave 676; Panayotova, 2003c, 131, Figure 4/7; Balabanov/ Drazheva, 1985, 10-13; Minchev, 1975, 137), a pot (Balabanov/Drazheva, 1985, 11; Čimbuleva, 1969, 168169), bronze vases (Katsarov, 1911, 264-265; Chimbuleva, 1962, 38; Chimbuleva, in print, 24; Toncheva, 1974, 288-289, Fig. 1; Shkorpil, 1930/31, 6976; Minchev, 2003, 248; Zavatin-Coman, 1972, 280). In rare cases, the inhabitants of Apollonia and Odessos placed the urns in small cists, built especially for this purpose (Toncheva, 1974, 288, Fig. 1; Panayotova,

During the latter half of the 1st millennium BC in the burial customs in Thrace both rites were used. The parallel practicing of the inhumation and cremation offers a great diversity of types and shapes of grave structures (Getov, 1970, 1; Georgieva, 1999a, 225-226). The parallel use of inhumation and cremation in the necropoleis of the Greek colonies along the Bulgarian Black Sea coast in the second half of the 1st millennium BC corresponds with the practices that were widespread both in Thracian and in Greek milieu. This fact does not allow us to regard the burial rite as an ethno-defining sign. Symbolic burials Although rarely, the inhabitants of Apollonia (Venedikov, 1948, 17-18, Grave 38; Panayotova, 1998b) and Odessos (a grave built of stone blocks and covered with a mound of sand – excavated by A. Minchev) carried out symbolic burials. M. Tsaneva interpreted as a cenotaph the primary grave under the tumulus on the Kolokita promontory (4 km to the south of Apollonia); it was a rectangular structure built of crushed stones on clay (Tsaneva, 1986, 61-62). The grave goods consisted of two alabastra and a bronze mirror. In all the other cases there was a grave structure built of stone or rooftiles, in which there were no human bones, but only grave goods. The grave that was excavated in the necropolis of Apollonia in 1946 was a space closed with a wall 2,5 x 1,5 m, in which there were seven amphorae, 101

ANCIENT GREEK COLONIES IN THE BLACK SEA 2 a bell-shaped krater turned upside down and a blackglazed kylix beneath the krater.

of various gifts (food and objects). Every item that belonged to the deceased could be used as a grave good; there were also items with a specialized funerary function. The rite of deposing gifts in the grave has its roots in the most ancient time and testifies of the existence of clear ideas about the state of the man after his death. The manner in which the body was exhibited and the objects with which it was buried, indicate that the deceased was prepared to make the transition to the underworld in the same conditions he was during his lifetime or in the conditions he was supposed or wanted to be.

The carrying out of a symbolic burial was the only possibility for the family to observe the last obligations to somebody who died in battle far away from home or perished in the sea. If there were missing bodies after a battle a cenotaph was constructed on the battlefield that was considered a tomb of those, whose bodies could not be found. If the dead were buried in a common grave on the battlefield, the cenotaph was built in their hometown to commemorate their sacrifice. It was suggested that the Lion Monument in Amphipolis is in fact a cenotaph of Hephestion – a friend of Alexander the Great who died in Ekbatana in 324 BC (Kurtz/Boardman, 1971, 257-259). Symbolic burials were also attested in the Thracian world (Georgieva 1999a, 226).

The ancient literary tradition does not provide us with an explanation of the principles according to which Greeks placed gifts in the grave. Only a broad, if logical, interpretation of the purpose of the grave goods existed. Some items were deposited in the grave because they belonged to the deceased in his lifetime, others because they had a particular value for him/her. Among the gifts there were items he/she could need in the afterlife or that could be used for honoring the deities of the underworld. In the also the items used during the burial were grave deposited; they could not be used by the living any more. Nevertheless, the most accepted idea was that the grave goods were of some value for the deceased – a personal item or something needed in the afterlife.

Reburials In rare cases, only the citizens of Apollonia reburied the bones of the dead (Venedikov, 1948, 11-12, Grave 4, Fig. 8, 14, Grave 15, Fig. 12; Panayotova, Nedev, Hermary, 2003, 106; Panayotova, 2003c, 131-132, Figure 4/3). Clay urns or deep dishes were used as containers. In close proximity to the urns with the reburied bones ritual fireplaces are discovered that are most probably the remains of some purifying rituals. It is interesting to note the situation in which the first urn with reburied bones that was unearthed was situated next to an urn with cremated bones (Panayotova, 2003c, 135). According to I. Venedikov, the grave goods of the two burials were put together after the grave was opened for the second one. The material is indicative of that on the first place a woman was buried in the grave and later the ashes of a man were added. We could assume that the exhumation was carried out following the wish of one of the deceased (a member of the family?) so that both of them will be buried together. The testament of Aristotle (384-322 BC) mentions such a possibility: the philosopher wanted the bones of his wife to be exhumed and reburied in his grave (Humphrays, 1980, 111).

The rituals that accompanied the burial of a child did not differ from those carried out for an adult. In the deposition of grave goods however, a greater care for satisfying the needs of those who died young could be seen. Children were provided with several vases of the same type (but smaller than the normal size), with terracotta figurines, toys, knucklebones etc. The grave goods that were deposited in the graves in the necropoleis of the Greek colonies on the Bulgarian Black Sea littoral could be divided into two separate groups. The first one comprises the items that belonged to the dead or were parts of the costume or personal ornaments. The second group comprises the grave goods properly said that could be items from the everyday life but also objects that were manufactured especially for the grave and the funerary rituals.

The rite of reburying the bones after the flesh decomposed existed in many periods and among various people. Its use is more or less sporadic and the specific reasons for its appearance could differ (Korpusova, 1973, 92-93).

Articles of toilette Mirrors were placed in the graves of women. These are bronze disks usually without decoration; only in rare cases, a bronze or iron handle is riveted to the disk. In most cases, one mirror is placed in the grave; only as an exception two mirrors were discovered in one grave. From the graves in the necropoleis of Apollonia (Venedikov, 1948, Graves 35, 39, Fig. 16; Venedikov, 1963a, Grave 378; Venedikov, 1963a, 1110, 1101), Mesambria (Chimbuleva, 1964, 60; Chimbuleva, in print, 13, 22, 24; Galabov, 1955, Grave 19/52), Odessos (Shkorpil/Shkorpil, 1909b, 58; Toncheva, 1961b, 24-30;

Grave goods The main purpose of all the rituals performed from the moment of dying to the moment the grave was closed was to facilitate the transition of the deceased to the underworld. In addition to the care for the body and the preparation of the grave, the third significant element of the burial practices was satisfying both the physical or emotional ‘needs’ of the dead and the eschatological ideas of the living. It required the deposition in the grave 102

KRYSTINA PANAYOTOVA: BURIAL AND POST-BURIAL RITES IN THE NECROPOLEIS OF THE GREEK COLONIES Mirchev, 1956, 9; Minchev, 1978, 103-109; Savova, 1970, 4) and Bizone (Salkin, 1989, 10, Fig. 1/4), in which mirrors were discovered, we know that there was not a fixed place in the grave where this item was deposited. In most cases, the mirrors were discovered to the right of the scull or nearby or in the hand. In one grave in the necropolis of Apollonia, the mirror was placed with its long handle stuck into the ground (Venedikov, 1948, 15, Grave 23, Fig. 16). Along with vases used for toilette purposes, mirrors are a standard gift in the graves of women in Greece (Kurtz/Boardman, 1971, 208).

The lekythoi discovered in the necropoleis of the Greek colonies in the Western Pontic region are of Eastern Greek, Attic or local manufacture. The imported specimens are decorated in black- or red-figure techniques or covered entirely with black glaze (Ivanov, 1963, 79-133; Reho, 1992; Lazarov, 2003, 157). Some of them have a plastic decoration. The lekythoi found in the Greek colonies on the Bulgarian coast are of medium or small size and have a relatively simplified shape. There are only single examples from Classe Athenes 581 (Apollonia), from the Haimon workshop, and from the Marathon Painter workshop (Odessos) (Lazarov 2003, 33). The black-figure vases do not have scenes that are connected with the burial rite, but are covered (Figure 5, 2/ with floral or geometrical ornaments (from the Beldam workshop – second or third quarter of the 5th c. BC). Among the red-figure lekythoi (Figure 5, 4), we should note the group of the Apollonia Painter (Lazarov 2003, 38). In her study on the black- and red-figure Attic pottery from Bulgaria, M. Reho underlined the dependence of the scenes on the shape and the size of the vase. Therefore the presence of mythological scenes is not an indication of the propagation of a given cult or ritual. The vases decorated with scenes with figures of Eros predominate – only because his image was one of the most widespread on the lekythoi of medium and small size of the Kerch style (Reho-Bumbalova, 1986, 10).

In the latter half of the 5th c. BC the inhabitants of Apollonia began to place bronze strygilae in the graves (in the necropolis in the ‘Kalfata’ locality) of men and children. They were also used in the commemorative rituals. In the Hellenistic period the Apollonians (Venedikov, 1963b, 315-317, Figure 170-171), as well as the citizens of Mesambria, Odessos (Toncheva, 1974, 288; Shkorpil, 1930/31, 69-76) and Bizone (Salkin, 1989, 10, Fig. 1/7) placed in cremation and inhumation graves strygilae made of iron. Most of the strygilae discovered in the necropolis of Mesambria were found broken into pieces or only fragments of strygilae were unearthed (Galabov, 1955, Graves 4/50, 12/52, 13/52, 19/52; Chimbuleva, in print, Graves 1-4; Čimbuleva, 1969, 173174; Chimbuleva/Petrov, 1963, 25). According to C. Preda, in the necropolis of Kallatis the fragments of strygilae that were discovered in graves built of stone blocks or slabs were remains of items that were ritually broken (Preda, 1961, 290).

The citizens of Apollonia, Mesambria and Odessos placed alabastra made of alabaster, clay or glass in graves. In one grave in the necropolis of Apollonia in the ‘Kalfata’ locality three alabastra were discovered – one made of alabaster, one of clay, and one of glass. These vases were discovered in plane and tumular graves and were deposited at the same places as the lekythoi. Often their mouths were broken off. The alabaster and glass alabastra were apparently expensive imported goods; in Apollonia they were often replaced by clay imitations painted in white (to resemble with the original ones). Some imported examples are decorated in red-figure technique (Panayotova, 2003c, Figure 5, Fig. 5).

Pottery From all the grave goods the most numerous are vases used as containers for olive or scented oils. They were used in the toilette of women, for the exercises of young men and for the funerary ritual. The most widespread were the lekythoi, the earliest examples of which were discovered in graves of the necropolis of Apollonia, dated to the mid-6th c. BC. In the necropolis of Odessos, such vases were discovered both in inhumation and cremation graves. The small number of lekythoi discovered in the necropolis of Mesambria could be explained by the fact that the excavated parts of the cemeteries of this polis dated to the time when this type of vases was not in use any more (this phenomenon is well documented in the necropolis of Apollonia in the Sea Garden).

During Hellenistic times lekythoi were replaced by clay unguentaria that had no practical purpose and were used only for the burial. This transition could be traced clearly in the necropolis of Apollonia in the ‘Kalfata’ locality, where unguentaria appeared for the first time in graves from the end of the 4th c. BC. In the necropolis of Apollonia in the Sea Garden and in the cemeteries of Mesambria, these were the most widespread containers for scented oils. Some examples are known from the necropoleis of Anchialos, Odessos and Dionysopolis. The usual place where they are discovered is around the head and arms. In some graves in the necropolis of Messambria, broken unguentaria with missing parts were unearthed (Cimbuleva 1969, 166-178, Fig. 123). This ritual was probably similar to the breaking off the mouths of the lekythoi in Apollonia.

Usually one lekythos was placed in the grave, but sometimes up to five vases are discovered in one complex. They were put into the grave – intact or with the neck and mouth deliberately broken off – around the head or near the hands. We could assume that the lekythoi that had their necks broken off were used for the preparation of the body for the burial.

103

ANCIENT GREEK COLONIES IN THE BLACK SEA 2 Most of the unguentaria that were used in the necropoleis of the Greek colonies in the present-day Bulgarian lands were manufactured in local workshops. The vases with a spindle-like shape predominate; they are decorated with horizontal stripes of black glaze and in exceptional cases are entirely covered with black glaze (Ivanov, 1963, 245252).

Pyxidae (make-up boxes) were also placed in the graves of women. They were made of alabaster (Apollonia), glass (Mesambria), bronze (Apollonia, Mesambria), or lead (Mesambria). In the plane and tumular necropoleis of Apollonia and Odessos make-up boxes with red-figure lids were discovered (Seure 1924, 113-114; Toncheva 1964, 122-124; Reho 1992, 58-59).

In the graves in the necropolis in the ‘Kalfata’ locality from the middle of the 5th to the beginning of the 3rd c. BC the citizens of Apollonia placed imported or locally manufactured clay askoi. These vases, however, were used much more often in the post-burial and the commemorative rituals. The red-figure askoi were decorated in most cases with images of animals (lions, panthers, dogs etc.). Some of the vases (Figure 5, 3) are of Type I, named Shallow. Not a single example of that shape was discovered in the necropolis of Apollonia in the Sea Garden and in the necropolis of Mesambria that were in use in the Hellenistic period. According to T. Ivanov, the askoi that were discovered in the Northeastern necropolis of Odessos belong to the type that was used for drinking wine – this suggestion is based on the discovery of a vase that is a combination of an askos and a kylix (having only one handle) (Ivanov, 1963, 141).

In addition to the vases that had some functions related to the toilette, various vessels for keeping, drinking and pouring of wine and water were placed in the graves. These were all the vases used in everyday life. Their presence among the grave goods is related to the libations of wine and the purifying power of water. The large vases are usually discovered near the head or the feet and the smaller ones were arranged around the head or near the arms of the deceased. In most cases, the vases were placed in the grave intact. Imported items were used alongside with locally produced and are often discovered in the same grave. In some early graves in Apollonia and Odessos, transport amphorae and amphorae for serving wine were placed (Ivanov, 1963, 256-264; Lazarov, 2003, 70, 84-85). Transport amphorae were commonly used in the postburial rituals during the latter half of the 1st mill. BC. Various production centres are represented – Heraclea Pontica, Thasos, Chios, Rhodes, Kos, Mende etc. (Lazarov, 1973; idem, 1974; idem, 1977; idem, 1980; idem, 1982). In the 4th c. BC in the Apollonian necropolis amphorae of the so-called ‘Cypriot’ type were used as urns (Panayotova, Nedev, Hermary, 2003, 106).

The rarely discovered aryballoi and amphoriskoi also belong to the group of the containers for scented oils. In the 6th c. BC, the citizens of Apollonia placed clay aryballoi in the graves; in the following century they were replaced by vases made of glass. In the end of the 5th c. BC, in the necropoleis of Apollonia and Odessos – though not very often – Attic black-glazed or glass amphoriskoi were deposited in the graves (Ivanov, 1963, 142-143; Mladenova, 1963b, 305-312).

In the necropoleis of Apollonia, Mesambria and Odessos red-figure craters and hydriae were discovered (Ivanov, 1963, 168-169, 172; Tsaneva, 1982; Lazarov, 2003, 7677, 80, 90-91, 104-105, 126, 134-136, 141-144, 147-156, 160-162, 165-166). Some of the craters were attributed to the Black Thyrsus Painter. Craters (Figure 5, 6) and hydriae were rarely placed as grave goods and more commonly served as cinerary urns.

In Greece, the containers for olive or scented oils that were used most of all in everyday life were the most widespread grave goods, especially in Athens. The oil and the perfumes were used for the preparation of the body for the burial. They played a particularly significant role in the Greek post-burial rituals (Kurtz/Boardman, 1971, 209). These vessels are regarded as new shapes in the funerary context in the Thracian interior where they appeared for the first time in the first half of the 5th c. BC (Reho-Bumbalova, 1986, 8).

East Greek, black- and red-figure, black-glazed and plain oinochoai were discovered in graves in almost all the necropoleis of Apollonia. Such finds come from the cemeteries of the ancient settlement near ‘Sladkite Kladentsi’ (near Burgas) (Figure 5, 5), Mesambria and Odessos (Lazarov, 2003, 59, 69, 106, 109-118, 12, 133). Among the oinochoai there are vases painted by Eretria Painter (Lezzi-Hafter, 1997, 353). In the graves of small children in the necropolis in the ‘Kalfata’ locality, there are often small and miniature vases, as well as oinochoai in the shape of a female head (Figure 5, 7). These were related to the fact that the children did not participate in the Anthesteria (Reho, 1992, 35-36, Tabl. V, VI, IX).

In the 5th and 4th c. BC, the citizens of Apollonia used lekanai that served for keeping items of toilletry and jewellery. These vases had a particular role in the postburial rites. In the ritual fireplaces, there are often Attic black-glazed lekanai with red-figure lids (Figure 5, 9). On the lids, scenes from women’s life are depicted (Reho 1992, 56-57). Among the finds, there is a lekane lid that was attributed by M. Lazarov to the Phiale Painter (Lazarov 2003, 88-90).

In the 5th-2nd c. BC, various types of locally produced and imported jugs were commonly used in the burial and post-burial rites in the necropoleis of the Greek colonies 104

KRYSTINA PANAYOTOVA: BURIAL AND POST-BURIAL RITES IN THE NECROPOLEIS OF THE GREEK COLONIES on the Bulgarian Black Sea coast (Ivanov, 1963, 153167). In the necropolis of Mesambria, the locally produced jugs were the commonest category of grave goods and in some graves are the only grave goods. They all have an almost identical shape (Chimbuleva, 1969, 166-178) and were deliberately broken before their deposition in the grave; the fragments are found scattered in the grave and sometimes there are missing parts. These jugs were most probably produced in local workshops, especially for the needs of the burial rite. The smashing of the jugs in the grave could be related to some purifying rituals that were carried out by the citizens of the Dorian colony.

manufacture. In the 4th c. BC in inhumation graves Attic red-figure and black-glazed skyphoi were placed, as well as vases covered with net ornament. There are also skyphoi of local manufacture (Ivanov, 1963, 198-204). Fragments of such vases were discovered in cremation graves in Odessos. In some graves a kylix and a skyphos were discovered, the former on top of the latter. Most probably in the 4th c. BC the skyphoi lost their role in the burial rites; no such finds are known from the necropolis of Mesambria and the necropolis of Apollonia in the Sea Garden. Among the earliest examples of drinking vessels discovered in graves are the Chian cups from the mid-6th c. BC, found in the ‘Kharmanite’ neighbourhood in Sozopol (Lazarov, 2003, 61-62).

East Greek, Attic and locally produced olpai were used only by the population of Apollonia that buried its dead in the cemeteries in the ‘Kalfata’ locality and ‘Kharmanite’ neighbourhood (Ivanov, 1963, 171-172; Lazarov, 2003, 64-65). Such vases are absent from all the other Greek necropoleis in the present-day Bulgarian lands. Among the vases that are rarely presented in the burial rite and were more commonly used in the commemorative rites are the pelikai. In recent years, a number of such items was discovered in the necropolis of Apollonia (Reho, 1992, 49-52; Lazarov, 2003, 130-131; Panayotova, 1998, 106, Fig. 11; Panayotova, 2003, 133).

The deep thin-walled bowls with relief decoration and without handles – the so-called ‘Megarian’ or ‘Delian’ bowls – were part of the grave goods of graves of children in the necropolis in the Sea Garden and were also discovered in ritual fireplaces in the same necropolis. They were used more often in Mesambria than the other necropoleis of the Greek colonies on the Bulgarian Black Sea coast, where they were deposited as grave goods in 16 cases (Chimbuleva, 1969, 166-178, Fig. 129, 130, 133, 134; Panayotova, 1989a, 179-180) and date from 3rd-2nd c. BC.

Laginoi that most probably replaced oinochoai in the Hellenistic period (Ivanov, 1963, 172) were discovered most of all in the necropolis of Apollonia in the Sea Garden. Single items were discovered in the cemeteries of Mesambria and Dionysopolis, as well as in the necropolis of Apollonia in the ‘Kalfata’ locality.

Characteristic grave goods in the Greek necropoleis, the vases for liquids most probably reflect the idea that the dead are always thirsty in the underworld. In graves in Greece, on Crete and in South Italy inscriptions have been found, containing instructions for where to find water (Kurtz/Boardman 1972, 209-210).

The kylikes predominate among the drinking-vessels from the best-studied necropolis of Apollonia in the ‘Kalfata’ locality. Black- and red-figure, and blackglazed Attic cups were discovered most often in the graves of children from the third quarter of the 5th to the beginning of the 3rd c. BC. Throughout this period most commonly used were the cups entirely covered with black-glaze. From one to three (and in some cases as many as six) kylikes were placed in the grave – arranged on both sides of the head, alongside the chest and the arms.

Attic black-glazed and red-figure gutti were discovered in the necropolis of Apollonia, usually in graves of small children from the second quarter of the 5th c. BC onwards. Their use in the cemeteries of the Greek colonies in the present-day Bulgarian lands continued throughout the 4th and in the first quarter of the 3rd c. BC (Chimbuleva, in print, 8; Ivanov, 1963, 205-213). Some of the later examples were of local manufacture. A red-figure guttus was discovered among the grave goods of a cremation grave, containing pottery, a bronze mirror and iron helmet and cuirass (Mihailov/Dimitrov, 1985, 231; Damyanov, 2003, 26, Figure 1/2).

Glazed kantharoi are present among the finds from the necropolis of Apollonia in the ‘Kalfata’ locality and in the cemeteries of Mesambria, Odesos and Dionysopolis. They were part of the grave goods of pit-graves, tilegraves and graves built of stone slabs, dated from the mid-4th to the end of the 3rd c. BC.

Gutti for olive oil, having a tall neck and a small ring-like handle, were discovered in ritual pyres in the necropolis of Apollonia. They were used in the post-burial rituals in the ‘Kalfata’ locality and in a tumulus on the Kolokita promontory (Ivanov, 1963, 213; unpublished excavations of M. Tsaneva). The gutti are of Attic manufacture and could be dated to the middle and the latter half of the 4th c. BC (Rotroff, 1997, 352, Pl. 83). There are also some local imitations.

The citizens of Apollonia used skyphoi as grave goods in the necropoleis in the ‘Kharmanite’ neighbourhood and ‘Kalfata’ locality. The earliest examples are of Corinthian

105

ANCIENT GREEK COLONIES IN THE BLACK SEA 2 The strainers that were discovered only in the necropolis of Apollonia could be also attributed to this group of vessels. Such ‘vases’ were found most of all in ritual pyres from the mid-4th c. BC. Their shape copies Greek models, but based on the clay and the technique of manufacture T. Ivanov considers them a production of local workshops (Ivanov, 1963, 214).

In the metropoleis and in the Classical and Hellenistic necropoleis in the Northern Pontic area lamps were rarely deposited in the graves. Their number increased in the 2nd-3rd c. AD. According to V. Zubar’ this is due to some changes in the ideology of the ancient society that lead to increasing the role of the light and hence of the lamps in the burial rites (Zubar’, 1982, 83).

One of the commonest categories of finds from the necropoleis of the Greek colonies on the Bulgarian coast consists of various types of dishes and plates (Ivanov, 1963, 214-229). The large dishes were relatively rarely placed as grave goods in graves from the 5th-4th c. BC, but were an obligatory item used in the post-burial rituals in the 4th-3rd c. BC. They also served as lids for the cinerary urns. During the 4th and the 3rd c. BC, in the necropolis of Apollonia almost every ritual pyre had at its base a large local dish turned upside-down. A large portion of the dishes could be attributed to the Attic black-glazed production, but there are also numerous dishes of local manufacture. Small and even miniature dishes are often discovered in graves of children and in ritual pyres.

However, some other observations could be added. The deposition of lamps in the graves provides us with an interesting example of the local variations in the burial practices of the Greeks living in the Black Sea area. Though in the necropolis of Apollonia (and in other necropoleis) only a small number of lamps was discovered, at least one lamp was deposited in almost every grave of the Hellenistic cemeteries of Odessos. There are no grounds to assume that this contrast between the two colonies was due to some differences in the eschatological ideas. It makes more sense to attribute it to the specific traditions of the communities. Terracotta figurines Among the grave goods and the materials from the ritual pyres in the necropoleis of Apollonia, Mesambria and Odessos there are often terracotta figurines representing deities, people, animals, birds, comic and tragic masks etc. The earliest examples were discovered in the necropolis of Apollonia in the ‘Kharmanite’ neighbourhood, in graves from the latter half of the 6th c. BC. The figurines that are discovered most often in graves of children (but also of women) depict various subjects. In the early period, these are gods, deities and mythological creatures. The presence of images of chthonic deities is well attested in the necropolis of Apollonia – figurines of Demeter, Persephone, Hermes, Charon, Aphrodite and Eros were discovered in graves. Personages of the suite of Dionysus – Pan, Silenos, Satyrs, maenads – along with figurines of musicians, dancers and actors are often among the grave goods in the necropolis of Apollonia. They are usually accompanied with figurines of goats, young bulls and heads of bulls that are indicative of the widespread worshipping of the god Dionysus in his chthonic hypostasis.

The deposition of kitchenware as grave goods was not a widespread practice. Such vessels were discovered much more often not in the graves but in the ritual pyres, in the deposits of ritually broken vases and in the filling of the graves. Among the grave goods, there are pots with one or two handles that were used in everyday life for preparation of food. On some of them, there are traces of everyday use, but others served only for the purpose of the burial rite. They were mainly placed around the head, above the shoulders, or were arranged with other vases on both sides of the body. In graves of children, small pots were discovered. Based on the quality and the colour of the clay, T. Ivanov attributed the vases discovered in the necropoleis of Apollonia to the production of local workshops that imitated the shapes of the imported Attic pots (Ivanov, 1963, 233). Though considered an obligatory item for the Greek burial customs, clay lamps are extremely rare among the grave goods in the necropoleis of Apollonia. They appear in the graves from the end of the first half of the 4th c. BC; the practice of placing lamps in the graves lasted to the mid-2nd c. BC. Most of the lamps were with a single wick-holder and covered with a black or brownish glaze (Ivanov, 1963, 240, 245). Clay lamps with or without glazing were placed in graves in Mesambria and Dionysopolis. In a cremation grave in the necropolis of Odessos, dated to the end of the 4th or the beginning of the 3rd c. BC, a bronze lamp with two wick-holders was discovered (Minchev, 1978, 107). Some of the lamps were placed in the graves only as a grave good, but others have traces of burning and could have been used during the burial.

Among the terracotta figurines from Odessos there are numerous depictions of Eros, as well as of the Great God of the city (Darzalas). In her study of the cults of Odessos and Dionysopolis, M. Belova concluded that Darzalas was a chthonic deity, protector of the fertility and ruler of the Underworld. From an ethnic point of view, he represents a synthesis of Thracian and Greek elements (Belova, 1977, 143-153). In addition to the figurines related to some mythological themes, in many graves figurines depicting scenes from everyday life were placed, as well as genre figurines, most of all of young women. In the necropolis of 106

KRYSTINA PANAYOTOVA: BURIAL AND POST-BURIAL RITES IN THE NECROPOLEIS OF THE GREEK COLONIES Mesambria clay ornaments in the form of an open mirror, a lily blossom and a brooch were discovered. These objects most probably substituted for the real items. Imitations of jewellery made of gilt clay are known from many ancient Greek cities (Kurtz/Boardman, 1971, 213).

Placing weapons in graves of men was a widespread custom in Greece before the Archaic Age, but it was also practiced in later periods (Kurtz/Boardman, 1971, 39-40, 62, 207). While the weapons were regularly placed in Thracian graves from the 1st millennium BC (Delev, 1986, 21), in the necropoleis of the Greek colonies on the Bulgarian Black Sea coast there are very few instances of arms discovered in graves. These are most often bronze arrowheads of the so-called ‘Scythian’ type; some of them were found between the ribs of skeletons in the plane necropolis of Apollonia and in tumuli near Odessos. The discovery of three bronze arrowheads in the grave of a young woman from Apollonia is of particular interest. The grave is dated to the mid-4th c. BC. Isolated iron spearheads were discovered in graves in the necropolis of Apollonia in the ‘Kalfata’ locality and under a tumulus near Odessos (Venedikov, 1963b, 320; Toncheva, 1961, 31). A bronze sword was placed on the left side of the body in a grave under a tumulus on the ‘St. Ilia’ hill near Sozopol (Seure 1925, 126-127). In two cremation graves under tumuli – one near Odessos and the other in the necropolis of Dionysopolis – body armor was discovered: an iron cheek-guard in the former (Minchev, 1978, 103-109) and iron helmet and cuirass in the latter (Mihailov/ Dimitrov, 1985, 230-231; Damyanov 2003, 25-26).

Some terracotta figurines discovered in the Greek colonies on the Bulgarian Black Sea coast could be attributed to the production of workshops in Athens, Tanagra, Rhodes, Cyprus, and Cyrenaica (Dremsizova, 1963, 285). Others were manufactured in Apollonia with imported moulds or following imported models. It is difficult to say with any degree of certainty whether the terracotta figurines belonged to the deceased, or if they were a gift from the living, aiming to please the underworld deities or to recreate the settings of the life in the real world. Some of the figurines depict animals that were offered as a sacrifice to the chthonic deities. However, we could be sure that the terracotta figurines discovered in the necropoleis of the Greek colonies in present-day Bulgaria were related to the age of the dead. They are discovered most often (and in the larger numbers – up to 10-15 figurines) in graves of children. The widespread opinion that the knucklebones were a common grave good in the graves of children and adolescents (Kastanayan, 1959, 266) is confirmed in a definite way by the finds in the necropoleis of Apollonia and Odessos. They are also discovered in graves of adults. What is to be noted is the presence of more knucklebones (up to 192), than needed for the game that according to the tradition was invented by Palamedes during the siege of Troy (Press, 1978, 251-253). Knucklebones were also found in some of the ritual pyres in the necropolis of Apollonia. Some of them were coated in lead or had polished surfaces, and some were marked with letters from the Greek alphabet. Another fact is an indication of the popularity of the knucklebones game among the citizens of Apollonia: for the purposes of the burial and post-burial rites, they used knucklebones made of glass (Mladenova, 1963b, 310), as well as blackglazed Attic vases, having the shape of an astragalos (Ivanov, 1963, 213).

In the graves in the necropoleis under consideration here, remains of sea animals were discovered: shells of Black Sea black mussels, a crab pincer, and shells of mollusks from the Mediterranean. Eggshells were discovered in a small dish in a grave in Apollonia, dated to the mid-4th c. BC (Venedikov, 1963, 41), and in a pot in a grave in Odessos from the 4th-3rd c. BC (Toncheva, 1956, 5253). Eggs – real ones or imitations – appear as grave goods in the Greek necropoleis. The placing of an egg in the grave could be related to the Orphic cult. It was not only food, but also an accessory of the chthonic deities. It also had a purifying function (Kastanayan, 1959, 268). Grave monuments The erection of a grave monument is one of the elements of the Greek burial practice. It could be an act of care and obligation on the part of the relatives of the deceased, but it could also be a sign of gratitude and honor on the part of the whole population of the polis. Above the grave mneme was raised, for the deceased to be remembered, and for his soul to settle down. It was also needed as a mark of the place where the soul received honours and sacrifices. The traditional form of the grave monument is a stone block or slab (stele) placed in an upright position. In the necropoleis of the Greek colonies on the Bulgarian Black Sea coast, there are almost no cases in which the tombstones were discovered in situ. In most cases, they were reused on the territory of necropolis itself – for the construction of new graves or other structures.

There are almost no tools and weapons among the grave goods discovered in the necropoleis of the Greek colonies on the Bulgarian Black Sea coast. In the first category we could list iron knives, scissors, and an ax, discovered in graves in Apollonia (Venedikov, 1963b, 318-319) and Odessos (Toncheva, 1951, 45), and some bronze tools (bradawls and pallets), also from the necropolis in the ‘Kalfata’ locality. Among the goods that accompanied the dead in the necropoleis of Apollonia, Mesambria and Odessos there are also clay spindle whorls and loom weights that were usually placed in women’s graves along with items of toilette and jewellery.

107

ANCIENT GREEK COLONIES IN THE BLACK SEA 2 The most widespread type of grave monument from the Classical period was a rectangular block made of limestone, of sandstone or (rarely) of marble. Some of them have pediments and acroteria or decoration of relief or painted rosettes. The blocks were stuck directly into the ground or were fixed with lead to a stone base. Such bases that were lately discovered along the peribolos in the necropolis in the ‘Kalfata’ locality provide grounds to suppose that – in addition to their function as marker of the grave – the monuments were also placed on the wall that delimited the necropolis or on the walls of the separate family plots. Most of the stelae have no decoration and bear only the name(s) of the deceased, and if it was a woman, a note if she was married. The letters are usually filled with red paint. The monuments are humble and do not provide us with information about the profession or the biography of the deceased. There are no epitaphs. On the grave monuments of foreigners, the place they came from is mentioned (Saprykin/Panayotova, 2000, 28-38). On some monuments, the names of several persons are inscribed, for example a tombstone from Mesambria, bearing the names of a whole family – father, mother and son (Velkov, 1969, 194, 15). There are some instances from Odessos, in which the name of a woman was added on the husband monument at a later time (Toncheva, 1964b, 20, 148).

stag (in a later publication Venedikov interpreted the animal as a goat) (Venedikov/Velkov, 1963, 329, 1161; Venedikov, 1969, 76). In the Hellenistic period the frame, the relief and the inscription were the main elements that characterised the grave monument. The field in the frame was filled with images of people and items. On stelae from Mesambria and Dionysopolis, kantharoi or krateriskoi were depicted (Cimbuleva, 1969, 166, Fig. 119; Mihailov, 1970, 25; Velkov, 1969, 196, Fig. 146). On the stelae warriors (Venedikov/Velkov, 1963, 1159, 1160), athletes (Toncheva, 1961, 234), a teacher (Mihailov, 1970, 335; Velkov, 1969, 196), matrons and young girls (Minchev, 2003, 276, Pl. 3) are depicted. In the necropolis of Mesambria and most of all in Odessos grave monuments with coena funebris appear. The reuse of decrees for the production of grave monuments is indicative of the development of a local workshop in the Dorian colony (Chimbuleva, 1976, 101). According to G. Toncheva already in the latter half of the 3rd c. BC the craftsmen in Odessos started copying the monuments with coena funebris, coming from Athens, Asia Minor and the Greek islands. In the end of the 2nd and in the 1st c. BC a local style was created and a strict iconography of the scene was developed under the influence of Byzantion (Toncheva, 1969, 13). The grave monuments from Apollonia, Mesambria, Odessos and Dionysopolis witness the abilities and the development of the local sculptors and stonecutters. They did not only copy the production of the famous centres in the Greek world, but also created genuine masterpieces of the stone plastic.

In most cases the names are purely Greek – some of them well known from Greece proper and others appearing in the Black Sea colonies for the first time (Giuzelev, 2002, 119-132). Some Thracian names appear as well. On a tombstone from Apollonia, dated to the end of the 5th or the beginning of the 4th c. BC, there are three names and one of them is the Thracian female Paibine (Venedikov/Velkov, 1963, 326, 1146). There are two monuments of women with Greek names and Thracian patronymics (Mihailov, 1972, 264). According to V. Velkov, the name Kallion that was attested on a tombstone from Mesambria belonged to a slave girl and is an indication that in the Dorian colony there was the practice of making monuments for slaves or freedmen (Velkov, 1969, 202, 26).

POST-BURIAL RITES The burial customs are tightly interwoven with the postburial rites that form a complex of symbolic and real actions that were performed in accordance with welldefined norms of behavior and ideas in the course of the burial and for some period of time after it. The practice has shown that in many cases the commemorative rituals began during the burial itself; however the burial and the commemorative rites were as a whole separated in time and in space (Ol’khovskij, 1986, 69).

Along with these modest monuments, in the necropoleis of the Greek colonies on the Bulgarian Black Sea coast some remarkable specimens of the ancient sculpture were discovered. The tombstone of the Apollonian citizen Deines, son of Anaxandros, is one of the masterpieces of the Ionian plastic art (Dimitrov, 1942/43, 1-16). In the necropolis of Apollonia, the only painted grave monument from the Bulgarian Black Sea coast was discovered. It is dated to the period between the last quarter of the 5th and the middle of the 4th c. BC. The monument is made of coarse-grained sandstone with a pediment and acroterion. The triangular field of the pediment is decorated with the images of a bird and a dolphin. In another field, marked with two red lines on the upper part of the stone, there was a lion attacking a

In many religions the construction of various grave structures and the performance of various rituals – such as libations and offerings on the grave – is connected with the beliefs about the life continuing after death and with the ideas about the existence of the dead in the underworld (Rusyaeva, 1992, 172). Many ancient people had the belief that the soul of the deceased does not reach its final destination immediately after the moment of dying, but lingers for a while in between the two worlds. The period between the death and the reception of the soul in the underworld should be 108

KRYSTINA PANAYOTOVA: BURIAL AND POST-BURIAL RITES IN THE NECROPOLEIS OF THE GREEK COLONIES accompanied by certain ceremonies that are defined as rites of passage (Garland, 1985, 39). The burial itself is the first act that has to ensure the safe transition. The connection with the dead does not end with the burial as we can conclude from the traces of periodical visits on the grave. The grave itself and the surrounding space were regarded as belonging to the dead – it was a space where it was possible to establish some kind of relation with him/her. The commemorative rituals were performed directly upon or beside the grave, on the stele, on stone platforms or altars constructed especially for the purpose.

observations on the necropolis of Apollonia made during the last decade of excavations show that the amphorae were deposited with their bottoms broken off in advance and the jugs had pierced bottoms and mouths painted in red. Vases with deliberately pierced bottoms have been discovered in many places in Greece and the Greek colonies in South Italy and Sicily. Often if not always such finds come from a funerary context. The practice of piercing the bottoms is interpreted as ritual killing of the vases – for to be useless for the living and probably useful for the dead. The relation of these pierced vases to the libations for the chthonic deities and the dead could be sought in various directions, among which is their use as bothroi (Carter, 1998, 121-122) or as containers for collecting rain (Kurtz/Boardman, 1971, 57-58). It seems that the inhabitants of Apollonia used as bothroi clay water pipes. Such are discovered often in the necropolis and some of them were placed in an upright position immediately above a grave (Panayotova, 2002, 5).

The regular visits to the grave are attested in the necropolis of Apollonia Pontica and in the cemetery in the ‘Sladkite kladentsi’ locality near Burgas – through the traces of libations (deposits of pottery) and food offerings (ritual pyres and platforms). The ancient Greek tradition required from the relatives of the deceased to visit the grave on the third, the ninth and the thirtieth day from the moment of dying (or the burial). The living came to the grave and performed rituals for appeasing the soul on various occasions, among which the birthday of the deceased and the common feast of all dead. This obligation of the living is grounded on the pan-Greek belief that the souls of the dead needed everything a living person needed, treasured and used in his lifetime and everything that could provide the soul a better fate (Garland, 1985, 40). Regular visits to the grave are for the living as important as the burial itself.

The citizens of Apollonia organized funerary and commemorative feasts and libations on the grave immediately after the burial. We could trace this practice in the finds of vases that were placed immediately upon the covering of the grave (stone slabs or tiles), usually with their bottoms up. This should have been done before the filling of the grave. The fact itself indicates that the first commemorative ritual – probably the trita – was performed in the very day of the burial, which as a rule is the third day from the moment of dying (Kurtz/Boardman, 1971, 276).

The ideas about the existence of the soul in the underworld are the basis of all rituals that had to provide the dead with food and drink. Aesopus told about a drunkard that complained about his wife bringing him only food when he wanted to drink (Kurtz/Boardman, 1971, 207). It is well known that in the Greek commemorative practice the first offering of food was made on the third day after the death, but it is difficult to make the difference between this offering and the next ones on the ninth and the thirtieth day. Besides in Greece annual feasts were organized, about which we do not know whether they were carried out on the birthday of the deceased or on the day he/she died (Kurtz/Boardman, 1971, 146-147; Garland, 1985, 40, 105).

The absence of large deposits of pottery and amphorae in the necropolis of Apollonia in the Sea Garden of Sozopol and in the other Greek necropoleis on the Bulgarian Black Sea coast is an indication of that in the Hellenistic period the libation lost the significance it had for the citizens of Apollonia in the 4th and the beginning of the 3rd c. BC. The ritual pyres are another important testimony for the rituals carried out on the grave. They appeared in the necropoleis of Apollonia in the 4th c. BC (Panayotova, 2003b, 133-140). The tradition of burning gifts and offerings on or near the grave continued in the Hellenistic period in the necropolis in the Sea Garden. The filling (ash, charcoal and ceramic fragments with traces of burning) of the small compartment that was added to the northern side of the cist in the necropolis of Messambria (Galabov, 1955, 145) provides us with grounds to assume that these were the remains of a ritual pyre and that the ritual was carried out somewhere else.

The libation usually consisted of offerings of wine, water, honey, milk and oil that were poured from various vases (oinochoe, hydria, amphora) into cups (phyale, skyphos (Figure 5, 1/, kantharos, kylix and a great variety of bowls) (Garland, 1985, 115). The deposits of amphorae (up to several dozens of vessels), jugs and other vases are indicative of the performance of some rites that included pouring of liquids. Such deposits were discovered in the Classical and the Early Hellenistic necropolis of Apollonia in the ‘Kalfata’ locality (Panayotova, 1989a, 19, Fig. 16; Panayotova, 2003c, 138) and in the necropolis near the sanctuary of Heros Karabazmos in Odessos (Toncheva, 1974, 289). The

The rituals that required the vases used in them and the offerings to be thrown in the fire were carried above or between the graves, or outside the walls that separated the family plots. Llarge pyres, discovered in front of 109

ANCIENT GREEK COLONIES IN THE BLACK SEA 2 (outside) the peribolos that marked the border of the necropolis in the ‘Kalfata’ locality from the side of the sea could be related to rituals that were carried out by the whole family or by the community – most probably on the special days for honouring the dead.

A similar situation was observed in the western periphery of Olbia, where square structures built of limestone ashlars were discovered. In the interior of these altars lead boukrania, labryses, a fishplate and fragments of red-figure vases were found. The complex is dated to the end of the 4th – beginning of the 3rd c. BC and is situated between the so-called ‘Suburb’ (that was not inhabited any more) and the part of the necropolis that was used between the 2nd c. BC and the 3rd c. AD (Kozub, 2001, 29-34).

The ritual pyres that were situated among the graves did not depend on a particular type of grave structure. We cannot see any rule in the choice of the place for burning the offerings, though there are fireplaces that were situated to the west of graves in which the body was buried with its head to the west (Panayotova, 2003b, 134). Similar is the location of most of the pyres related to commemorative rituals in the Bosporan tumuli – they are situated to the west of the grave (Kastanayan, 1950, 127).

The pottery assemblage from the ritual pyres is specific and uniform. In addition to the big, locally produced dishes on the base of the fireplace, a large number of intact and fragmentary black glaze and red- or grayware dishes of local manufacture were discovered. They differ in shape and size. Some dishes have graffitti – for example me that could mean ‘honey’. Lucian relates that one could enter the underworld through an iron door that is guarded by the three-headed dog Cerberus; the dog was kindly disposed to the coming in but did not let the souls go out. The ancient Greeks, however, did not always believe in the benevolence of Cerberus to the soul that entered the underworld – they placed a honey cake (melitoessa) in the hand of the deceased so that he or she could appease the dog.

Most of the ritual pyres have oval, circular or trapezoid shape. With the exception of one all the others were used only once. The fire was lit directly on the ground, but in some cases shallow pits (= ritual pits) could be observed. The remains that are discovered in such complexes usually comprise one or several large dishes turned upside-down, above and around which there is a layer of ashes and charcoal, intact or broken vases, bones of hen, pig, dog, sheep or goat, seashells, nuts (almond, hazelnut, pistachios etc.), coins, parts of funerary wreaths, terracotta figurines (Dremsizova, 1963a, 839-850), bronze strygili, fibulae, pins and tools, knucklebones (dozens in some cases) (Panayotova/Nedev, 2001, 118). It is not yet clear whether the meat was consumed during the ritual or if it was offered to the chthonic deities. In a grave near Odessos (Toncheva, 1974, 288) bones of horse legs were discovered. Horse sacrifices are also known from the archaic necropolis of Histria (Alexandrescu/ Eftimie, 1959, 143-164).

Locally made pots with flat or rounded bases, sometimes lidded, are often discovered in the ritual fireplaces. In the necropolis of Apollonia in the Sea Garden, vases of the lopas type, that are considered a cheaper variation of the pots were used. These vessels are specific for the Greek cultural milieu and as a rule were provided with lids. They were used in the funerary feasts that accompanied the offerings to the dead (Gajdukevich, 1987, 97). In the Thracian interior, such vases have been found only in the Early Hellenistic centre in the ‘Halka bunar’ locality near the village of Malko Belovo, dated to the last quarter of the 4th c. BC (Tonkova, 2002, 153, 155, Figs. 33-35).

In the necropolis of Apollonia in the Sea Garden, before the beginning of the ritual a stone platform was constructed, made of ashlars of limestone and of field stones of local andesite. In this case, the rituals began before the fire was lit – vases without traces of burning (a dish and a jug) were discovered among the stones from the lower layer. After the end of the ritual, the remains of the fire and the offerings were also covered with stones that shaped a platform.

Red-rigure lekanai and askoi were often used. In pyre fireplace, vases for drinking were also found – a single kylix, kantharos, phyale, relief bowls (‘Megarian/Delian’) and locally made cups with one handle. In the pyres were almost no jugs, oinochoai and pelikai. Though rarely, among the finds there were various vases used as containers for scented oils (Panayotova, 2003b, 136137).

The stone structures that were discovered in the necropolis in the ‘Sladkite kladentsi’ locality in Burgas were stone platforms with rectangular, semicircular or circular shape. They were built of small sized crushed stones arranged in one layer. On and immediately around them was ashes and charcoal, fragments of vases (kylikes, skyphoi, lekanai, dishes), some of them broken on the spot, burned bones and items from the everyday life (Balabanov/Drazheva, 1985, 10-11). These assemblages are identical with the ritual pyres in the necropoleis of Apollonia from the 4th-3rd c. BC.

In the pyres, bones from domestic animals were discovered that could be interpreted either as food used in the ritual or as offerings to the chthonic deities. In a grave in Odessos, bones from the legs of a horse were discovered (Toncheva, 1974, 288). Entire skeletons or parts of horses were discovered in four tumuli in the necropolis of Histria in Northern Dobrudzha (Alexandrescu/Eftimie, 1959, 143-164).

110

KRYSTINA PANAYOTOVA: BURIAL AND POST-BURIAL RITES IN THE NECROPOLEIS OF THE GREEK COLONIES Though in the ritual pyres in the necropolis of Apollonia no fish bones were discovered, the constant presence of fish-grills and fishplates (Panayotova, 2003b, 135-136) is an unambiguous indication of that fish was an obligatory part of the funerary and commemorative feasts. The offering and the use of fish in such rituals is a practice that is known from the ancient literary tradition (Athen., VIII, 344b). The earliest fishplates are imported, but in later times, mostly locally manufactured specimens were used. The fishplates have their natural and logical place in the inventory of the tableware of the coastal settlements. Their use in the necropoleis of the Greek colonies in the Western Pontic area is relatively rare and, only in exceptional cases, they are placed in the graves as a grave good – only a few cases in the necropoleis of Apollonia, Mesambria and Odessos are known (Panayotova, 1989a, 185). In some cases in the necropolis in the ‘Kalfata’ locality fishplates were used as lids for the urns with the ashes of the cremated body (Panayotova, Nedev, Hermary, 2004). The discovery of fishplates mainly in the ritual pyres is indicative of their use mostly in the commemorative rituals.

in the following days – the location of the pyres indicates that there was not a long period between the burial and the post-burial rituals (Georgieva, 1999b, 235-236). As they are very traditional, the burial rites are among the most conservative elements of the spiritual culture. The study of the necropoleis of the Greek colonies on the Bulgarian Black Sea coast provide us with an idea of both the rites that were universal for the Greek world and those that appeared for the first time in the region. This feature is demonstrated in the parallel existence of plane and tumular necropoleis, in the variety of the grave structure and in the parallel use of inhumation and cremation. We could note the coexistence of the inherited and the newly appeared characteristics of the ritual that led to the unification of the rite in a wider region. The rituals that were performed from the moment somebody died to the moment the grave was closed reflected the ideas about and the belief in the afterlife. These rituals were aimed at facilitating the transition of the deceased to the world of the dead. It is beyond doubt that the postburial rites completed the ritual practices. They are indicative of the existence of strictly defined rules of behaviour in the time after the burial and of cult to the dead and the ancestors.

Cereals and nuts were used in the funerary and the commemorative rituals as a purifying offering. Their use is related to the important place the grain and the bread had in the rituals performed in the most important moments in the life of a man – birth, marriage, and death (Cic., Leg. 2, 52, 63).

ABBREVIATIONS A

Археология (Archaeologia), Sofia (in Bulgarian). AB Archaeologia Bulgarica (Sofia). ΑΕΜΤh Το Αρχαιολογικό Έργο στη Μακεδονια και Θράκη (Archaeological research in Macedonia and Thrace) (in Greek). AG Античные государства Северного Причерноморья. Археология СССР (Antichnye gosudarstva Severnogo Prichernomor’ya. Arkheologiya SSSR Ancient states in the Northern Black Sea area. Archaeology of the USSR), Moscow (in Russian). AGSP Античные города Северного Причерноморья (Antichnye goroda Severnogo Prichernomor’ya – Ancient cities in the Northern Black Sea area), Moscow-Leningrad 1955, (in Russian). AOR Археологически открития и разкопки (Arkheologicheski otkritiya i razkopki – Archaeological discoveries and excavations) (in Bulgarian). Apollonia Venedikov, I. 1963 – Венедиков, И., Аполония. Разкопките в некропола на Аполония през 1947-1949 (Apoloniya. Razkopkite na nekropola na Apoloniya prez 1947-1949 Apollonia. Excavations in the necropolis of Apollonia in 1947-1949), Sofia (in Bulgarian). ASGE Археологический сборник Государст-веного Эрмитажа (Arkheologicheskij Sbornik Gosudarstvenogo Ermitazha – Archaeological Annual of the State Hermitage), Leningrad (in Russian). BCH Bulletin de correspondance hellenique.

Layers of soil with traces of burning, usually containing fragments of vases and animal bones, are often discovered near the covering slabs of the cist graves or as a separate stratum in the pits in the Greek necropoleis from the Geometric period onwards. At the end of the 8th c. in Attica long, narrow and shallow ditches appeared that were specific for the Archaic Period. In the trenches fragments of burnt vases, charred wood and seashells were discovered. It was not an obligatory element and should be considered an expensive addition to the burial or to the commemorative rituals. The practice of setting apart a special place near the grave where offerings were burnt continued in the Classical Period. Though in Hellenistic times no general rules existed, remains of burnt offerings were discovered in many necropoleis in Greece and in the Greek colonies; it is not clear yet whether the ritual was performed during or after the burial (Kurtz/Boardman, 1971, 76, 100, 204). A similar situation could be observed in Thrace in the 1st millennium BC – remains of offerings of food were discovered in small pyres containing ashes and charcoal; sometimes there are also burnt animal bones and fragments of pottery. The traces of the post-burial rituals are easier observed in the burial mounds, but such remains were also discovered near plane graves (mostly in Southwestern Thrace). Though we cannot be sure of the exact moment the offerings were made – whether immediately after the burial or during visits to the grave 111

ANCIENT GREEK COLONIES IN THE BLACK SEA 2 BS BSA GMPO

GSU IFF

IAI/IBAI

IBAD

IBID

IBM IIA IKNK

IMYuIB

INMB

INMV

IVAD

JHS KIAM MIA

MPK

RA RP

Revue Archeologique. Разкопки и проучвания (Razkopki i prouchvaniya – Excavations and studies), Sofia (in Bulgaria). SA Советская археология (Sovetskaya arkheologiya – Soviet archaeology), Moscow (in Russian). SAI Свод археологических источников (Svod arkheologicheskikh istochnikov – Body of archaeological sources), Moscow (in Russian). SbNUNK Сборник за народни умотворения, наука и книжнина (Sbornik za narodni umotvoreniya, nauka i knizhnina – Bulletin for popular wisdom, science and litterature), Sofia (in Bulgarian). SCC Studies in Classical Archaeology. SGMIII A. S. Pushkina Сообщения Государствен-ного Музея изобразительных искусств имени А. С. Пушкина (Soobshteniya Gosudarstvenogo Museya izobrazitel’nykh iskusstv imeni A. S. Pushkina – Reports of ‘A. S. Pushkin’ State Museum for Fine Arts), Moscow (in Russian). SP Студентски проучвания (Studentski prouchvaniya – Students’ studies) (in Bulgarian). VDI Вестник древней истории (Vestnik Drevnej Istorii – Journal of Ancient History), Moscow (in Russian). TVTU Трудове на Великотърновския Университет (Trudove na Velikotarnovskiya Universitet – Works of the University of Veliko Tarnovo), Veliko Tarnovo (in Bulgarian).

Боспорский сборник (Bosporskij sbornik – Bosporan collection) (in Russian). Annual of the British School at Athens. Годишник на музеите в Пловдивски окръг (Godishnik na muzeite v Plovdivski okrag – Annual of the museums in the district of Plovdiv), Plovdiv (in Bulgarian). Годишник на Софийския университет. Историко-философски факултет (Godishnik na Sofijskoya universitet. Istoriko-filosofski fakultet – Annual of the Sofia University. Faculty of History and Philosophy), Sofia (in Bulgarian). Известия на Археологическия институт (Izvestiya na Arkheologicheskiya institut – Reports of the Archaeological institute), Sofia (in Bulgarian). Известия на Българското археологическо дружество (Izvestiya na Balgarskoto arkheologichesko drujestvo Reports of the Bulgarian Archaeological Society), Sofia (in Bulgarian). Известия на Българското историческо дружество (София) [Izvestiya na Balgarskoto istorichesko drujestvo (Sofia) – Reports of the Bulgarian Historical Society (Sofia)], Sofia (in Bulgarian). Известия на българските музеи (Izvestiya na balgarskite muzei – Reports of the Bulgarian museums), Sofia (in Bulgarian). Известия Института археологии (Izvestiya Instituta Arkheologii – Reports of the Archaeological Institute) (in Russian). Известия на камарата на народната култура (Izvestiya na kamarata na narodnata kultura – Reports of the Chamber for national culture), Sofia (in Bulgarian). Известия на музеите от югоизточна България (Izvestiya na muzeite v Yugoiztochna Balgariya Reports of the museums in Southeastern Bulgaria) (in Bulgarian). Известия на народния музей Бургас. (Izvestiya na narodniya muzey – Burgas – Reports of the popular museum – Burgas), Burgas (in Bulgarian). Известия на народния музей Варна Izvestiya na narodniya muzey – Varna – Reports of the popular museum – Varna), Varna (in Bulgarian). Известия на Варненското археологическо дружество (Izvestiya na Varnenskoto arkheologichesko drujestvo – Reports of the Archaeological society – Varna), Varna (in Bulgarian). Journal of Hellenic Studies. Культура и искусство античного мира (Kul’tura i iskusstvo antichnogo mira – Culture and art of the ancient world) (in Russian). Материалы и исследования по археологии СССР (Materialy i issledovaniya po arkheologii SSSR – Materials and studies on the archaeology of USSR), Moscow (in Russia). Музеи и паметници на културата (Muzei i pametnitsi na kulturata – Museums and cultural monuments), Sofia (in Bulgarian).

BIBLIOGRAPHY Abramov, A. P. 1993 – Абрамов, А. П., Античные амфоры. Периодизация и хронология (Antichnye amfory. Periodizatsiya i khronologiya – Ancient amphorae – Periods and chronology).// BS 3, Moscow. Alekshin, V. A. 1986 – Алекшин, В. А., Социальная структура и погребальный обряд древнеземледельческих обществ (по археологическим материалам Средней Азии и Ближнего Востока) [Sotsial’naya struktura i pogrebal’ny obryad drevnezemledel’cheskikh obshtestv (po arkheologicheskim materialam Sredney Azii i Blizhnego Vostoka) – The social structure and the burial rite of the ancient agricultural societies (based on the archaeological materials from Central Asia and the Near East)]. Leningrad. Alexandrescu, P., Eftimie, V. 1959 – Alexandrescu, P., Eftimie, V. Tombes Thraces d’epoque archaique dans la necropole tumulaire d`Histria, Dacia NS III, 143-164. Audin, A. 1960 – Inhumation et incineration, Latomus XIX, 2, 31-322. Bachvarov, K. 2003 – Бъчваров, К., Неолитни погребални обреди (Neolitni pogrebalni obredi – Neolithic burial customs). Sofia. Bakalova-Delijska, M. 1960 – Бакалова-Делийска, М., Керамични находки от западното Черноморие (Keramichni nakhodki ot zapadnoto Chernomorie – Pottery finds from the Western Black Sea littoral).// IAI XXIII, 253260. Balabanov, P. 1976 – Балабанов, П., Златни накити от погребение на богата тракийка (Zlatni nakiti ot

112

KRYSTINA PANAYOTOVA: BURIAL AND POST-BURIAL RITES IN THE NECROPOLEIS OF THE GREEK COLONIES ——, 2004 – Notes on the territory of Odessos in pre-Roman times, AB 2, 47-56. Danov, Kh. 1969 – Данов, Х., Из древната икономическа история на западното Черноморие до установяването на римското владичество (Iz drevnata istoricheska istoriya na zapadnoto Chernomorie do ustanovyavaneto na rimskoto vladichestvo – On the ancient economic history of the Western Black Sea littoral to the establishemnt of the Roman rule).// IBAI XII, 185-258. ——, 1969 – Древна Тракия. Изследвания върху историята на българските земи, Северна Добруджа, Източна и Егейска Тракия от края на ІХ до края на ІІІ в.пр.н.е. (Drevna Trakiya. Izsledvaniya varkhu istoriyata na balgarskite zemi, Severna Dobrudzha, Iztochna i Egejska Trakiya ot kraya na IX do kraya na III v. pr. n. e. – Ancient Thrace. Studies on the history of the Bulgarian lands, Northern Dobrudzha, Eastern and Aegean Thrace from the end of the 9th to the end of the 3rd c. BC). Sofia. Delev, P. 1986 – Делев, П., Раннотракийски погребални обичаи и вярвания. (Rannotrakijski pogrebalni obichai i vyarvaniya – Early Thracian burial customs and beliefs). Annotation of PhD thesis. Sofia. Dimitrov, B. 1974 – Димитров, Б., Политическо и икономическо развитие на Аполония Понтика VІ – І в.пр.н.е. (Politichesko i ikonomichesko razvitie na Apoloniay pontika VI-I v. pr. n. e. – Political and economic development of Apollonia Pontica in 6th-1st c. BC).// SP 2, 42-87. Dimitrov, D. P. 1942/43 – Димитров, Д. П., Нови наблюдения върху надгробната плоча на Анаксандър от Аполония (Созопол) [Novi nablyudeniya varkhu nadgrobnata plocha na Anaksandar ot Apoloniya (Sozopol) – New remarks on the grave monument of Anaxander from Apollonia (Sozopol)].// GSU IFF ХХІХ, 1, 1-16. Dimitrov, M. 1986 – Димитров, М., Проучвания върху историята на античния Дионисополис (Prouchvaniya varhu istoriyata na antichniya Dionisopolis – Studies in the history of the ancient Dionysopolis).// Dobrudzha 3. 90-99. Dimitrova, M. 1989 – Димитрова, М., Обеци с лъвски глави от елинистическата епоха (по материали от България) [Obetsi s lavski glavi ot elinisticheskata epokha (po materiali ot Balgaria) – Hellenistic lion-head earrings (based on finds from Bulgaria)].// A. ХХХІ, 3, 1-14. Dremsizova, Ts. 1948 – Дремсизова, Ц., Теракоти от некропола на Аполония (Terakoti ot nekropola na Apoloniya – Terracotta figurins from the necropolis of Apollonia).// Apollonia on the Black Sea, RP II, 53-58. ——, 1952 – Теракоти от Одесос (Terakoti ot Odesos – Terracotta figurines from Odessos).// IAI ХVІІІ, 349-353. ——, 1963a – Теракоти от некропола на Аполония (Terakoti ot nekropola na Apoloniya – Terracotta figurines from the necropolis of Apollonia).// Apollonia, 275-285. ——, 1963b – Керемиди с печати от некропола на Аполония (Keremidi s pechati ot nekropola na Apolloniya – Tiles with stamps from the necropolis of Apollonia).// Apollonia, 321324. Dremsizova-Nelchinova, Ts., Toncheva, G. 1971 – Дремсизова-Нелчинова, Ц., Тончева, Г., Антични теракоти в България (Antichni terakoti v Balgariya – Ancient terracotta figurines from Bulgaria). Sofia. ——, 1979 – Двадесет и четири антични теракоти от България (Dvadeset i chetiri antichni terakoti ot Balgaria – Twenty four ancient terracotta figurines from Bulgaria). Sofia.

pogrebenie na bogata trakijka – Golden jewellery from the tomb of a rich Thracian woman).// Izkustvo (Art) 4, 28-32. ⎯⎯ , 1979 – Могилно погребение на богата тракийка от Анхиало (Mogilno pogrebenie na bogata trakijka ot Ankhialo – A tumular grave of a wealthy Thracian woman from Anchialos).// A. ХХІ, 3, 23-32. ⎯⎯, Drazheva, Ts. 1985 – Балабанов, П., Дражева, Ц., Тракийски некрополи в кв. ‘Победа’ в Бургас (Trakijski nekropoli v kv. ‘Pobeda’ – Thracian necropoleis in ‘Pobeda’ neighbourhood).// IMYuIB VIII, 9-31. Barladeanu-Zavatin, E. 1985 – Statuete de teracota dintr-un complex funerar descoperite la Kallatis, Pontica XVIII, 8598. Belov, G. D. 1978 – Белов, Г. Д., Некрополь Херсонеса эллинистической епохи (Nekropol’ Khersonesa ellinisticheskoj epokhi – The Hellenistic necropolis of Chersonesos).// ASGE 19, 5-66. ⎯⎯, 1981 – Некрополь Херсонеса классической эпохи (Nekropol’ Khersonesa klasichescoj epokhi – The Classical necropolis of Chersonesos).// SA 3, 163-180. Belova, M. 1977 – Белова, М., Религията на Одесос, Дионисопол и Бизоне в предримската епоха (Religiyata na Odesos, Dionisopol i Bizone v predrimskata epokha – The religion of Odessos, Dionysopolis and Bizone in the Pre-Roman times).// TVTU ХІV, 3, 141 – 177. Botusharova, L. 1954 – Ботушарова, Л., Погребение с глинен саркофаг при с. Песнопой (Pogrebenie v glinen sarkofag pri s. Pesnpoj – A burial in a clay sarcophagus near the village of Pesnopoj).// GMPO 1, 265-261. Boulter, C. G. 1963 – Graves in Lenormant Street Athens, Hesperia XXXII, 113-138. Brashinskij, I. B. 1984 – Брашинский, И. Б., Методы исследования античной торговли (Metody issledovaniya antichnoj torgovli – Methods of study of the ancient trade). Leningrad. Caneva, M. 1980 – Die neusten Forschungen in der Nekropole Von Apollonia Pontica. Actes du IIe congres international de thracologie. Vol. II. Bucuresti, 447-450. Carter, J. C. 1998 – The Chora of Metaponto: The Necropolis, V, I. Austin. Chimbuleva, Zh. 1962 – Чимбулева, Ж., Две новооткрити бронзови хидрии от Несебър (Dve novootkriti bronzovi khidrii ot Nesebar – Two newly discovered bronze hydriae from Nesebar).// A. 3, 38-41. ——, 1964 – Новооткрита елинистическа гробница от Несебър (Novootkrita elinisticheska grobnitsa ot Nesebar – Newly discovered Hellenistic tomb in Nesebar).// A. 4, 5761. ——, 1976 – Надгробни плочи с ‘погребално угощение’ от Несебър (Nadgrobni plochi s ‘pogrebalno ugoshtenie’ ot Nesebar – Grave monuments with ‘burial feast’ from Nesebar).// IMYuIB, 91-102. ——, in print – Античния некропол на Mесамбрия. Материали и изследвания (Antichniya nekropol na Mesambriya. Materiali i izsledvaniya – The ancient necropolis of Messambria. Materials and studies). Nessebre, Vol. III (38 p.). Čimbuleva, J. 1969 – Trouvailles de la necropole de Nessebre. Nessebre, Vol. II, Sofia, 165-178 Damyanov, M. 2003a – Early Hellenistic grave finds from the vicinity of Dionysopolis (on the Bulgarian Black Sea coast), AB 2, 25-36. ——, 2003b – An antique site at Sladkite Kladentsi area, Burgas district: An attempt for interpretation, Archaeologia Iuventa, Vol. I. Sofia, 21-26.

113

ANCIENT GREEK COLONIES IN THE BLACK SEA 2 ——, 1939 – Съкровище от бронзови стрели – монети (Sakrovishte ot bronzovi streli-moneti – A collective find of bronze arrowhead-coins).// IAI ХІІ, 424-427. ——, 1963 – Монетите от некропола на Аполония (Monetite ot nekropola na Apoloniya – The coins from the necropolis of Apollonia).// Apollonia, 331 – 340. ——, 1969 – Антични саркофази от Одесос (Antichni sarkofazi ot Odesos – Ancient sarcophagi from Odessos).// INMV V, 49-71. Gergova, D. 1989 – Thracian Burial Rites of Late Bronze and Early Iron Age. Thracian and Mycenaeans. Proceeding of the Fourth International Congress of Thracology. Leiden – Sofia, 231-240. Getov, L. 1970 – Гетов, Л., Погребални обичаи и гробни съоръжения у траките през римската епоха (І – ІV в.) [Pogrebalni obichai i grobni saorazheniya u trakite prez rimskata epokha (I – IV v.) – Thracian burial customs and grave structures in the Roman period (1st-4th c. AD)].// A. ХІІ, 1, 1-12. Ghaly-Kahil, L. B. 1954 – Necropoles Thasiennes, BCH 78. Giuzelev, M. 2002a – Ancient Funerary Monuments at Sozopol Archaeological Museum.// INMB IV (Studia in honorem Ivani Karayotov), 119-132. ——, 2003 – Apollonia Pontica (end of the 7th – 1st centuries BC): Settlement Structure of the Apollonian Territory and the Thracian Hinterland. Ancient Greek Colonies in the Black Sea (eds. D. Grammenos, E. Petropoulos), Vol. I, Thessaloniki, 107-119. Gossel, B. 1980 – Makedonische Kamergraben. Diss. Berlin. GOT 1984/85 – Gli ori di Taranto in Eta Ellenistica. Milano. Grinder-Hansen, K. 1991 – Charon’s fee in Ancient Grece ? Some remarks on a well-known Death rite, Acta Hyperborea 3, 207-218. Hagg, I., Fossey, J. M. 1980- Excavations in the Barbouna Area at Asine. The Hellenistic Necropolis and Later Structures on the Middle Slopes, 1973-77, Boreas, Studies in Ancient Mediterranean and Near Eastern Civilizations, 4:4. Uppsala. Higgins, R. 1986 – Tanagra and the Figurines, London. Humphrays, S. C. 1980 – Humphrays, S. C. Family tombs and tomb cult in ancient Athens: Tradition or traditionalism, JHS, 96-127. IBII 1976 – История на българското изобразително изкуство (Istoriya na balgarskoto izobrazitelno izkustvo – History of the fine arts in Bulgaria), Vol. I. Sofia. Ivanov, T. 1948 – Иванов, Т. Керамиката от некропола на Аполония (Keramikata ot nekropola na Apoloniya – Pottery from the necropolis of Apollonia).// Apollonia on the Black Sea, RP II, 31-52. ——, 1956 – Тракийски могилни погребения в Одесос и околността му през ранноелинистическата епоха (Trakiyski mogilni pogrebeniya v Odesos i okolnostta mu prez Rannoelinisticheskata epokha – Thracian burial mounds in Odessos and its surroundings from the Early Hellenistic Age).// IVAD Х, 87-108. ——, 1963 – Антична керамика от некропола на Аполония. (Antichna keramika ot nekropola na Apoloniya – Ancient pottery from the necropolis of Apollonia).// Apollonia, 65274. Ivanova, A. P. 1955 – Иванова, А. П., Художественые изделия из дерева и кости (Khudozhesvenye izdeliya iz dereva i kosti – Works of art made of wood and bone).// in AGSP, Vol. І, 406-436. Ivanova, M. 1988 – Иванова М., Ювелирството в Тракия през елинистическата епоха. (Yuvelirstvoto v Trakiya

Filov, B. 1913 – Филов, Б., Археологически сондажи в Созопол (Arkheologicheski sondazhi v Sozopol – Archaeological trench excavations in Sozopol).// IBAD II, 316. ——, 1927 – Die Archaische nekropole von Trebeniste am Ochrid-see. ——, 1934 – Надгробните могили при Дуванлий, Пловдивско (Nadgrobnite mogili pri Duvanlij, Plovdivsko – The burial mounds at the village of Duvanlij, Plovdiv region). Sofia. Firatli, N. 1964 – Les steles funeraires de Byzance grecoromaine. Paris. Gaitsch, W., Kuniholm, P., Radth, W., Schiefer, S. 1985 – Ein holzerner hellenistischer Sarkophag aus Elaia bei Pergamon, Istambuler Mitteilungen 35, 139-172. Gajdukevich, V. F. 1987 – Гайдукевич, В. Ф., Античные города Боспора. Мирмекий (Antichnye goroda Bospora. Mirmekij – Ancient cities on the Bosporos. Myrmekion). Leningrad. Galabov, I. 1949a – Гълъбов, И., Отчет за разкопките в античния некропол на Месемврия, извършени от 1.11. до 25.11.1948 г. (Otchet za razkopkite v antichniya nekropol na Mesamvriya, izvarsheni ot 1.11 do 25.11.1948 g. – Report for the excavations in the ancient necropolis of Mesambria, conducted from 1 to 25 November 1948).// Archive of I. Galabov, District Historical Museum – Burgas. ——, 1949b – Дневник на разкопките през 1949 г. (Dnevnik na razkopkite prez 1949 g. – Journal of the excavations in 1949).// Archive of I. Galabov, District Historical Museum – Burgas. ——, 1950 – Дневник на разкопките през 1950 г. (Dnevnik na razkopkite prez 1950 g. – Journal of the excavations in 1950).// Archive of I. Galabov, District Historical Museum – Burgas. ——, 1951 – Дневник на разкопките през 1951 г. (Dnevnik na razkopkite prez 1951 g. – Journal of the excavations in 1951).// Archive of I. Galabov, District Historical Museum – Burgas. ——, 1952 – Аполонийски приноси (Apolonijski prinosi – Apollonian contributions).// IAI ХVІІІ, 93 – 118. ——, 1955 – Каменни гробници от Несебър (Kamenni grobnitsi ot Nesebar – Stone tombs from Nesebar).// IAI ХІХ, 129-147. Gansiniec, Z. 1978 – Odziez. Kultura materialna starozytnej Grecji. Wroclav-Krakow-Warszawa. Garland, R. 1982 – A First Catalogue of Attic Peribolos Tombs, BSA 77, 125-176. ——, 1985 – The Greek Way of Death. London. Georgieva, R. 1999a – Георгиева Р., Погребението (края на ІІ – І хилядолетие пр.н.е.) [Pogrebenieto (kraya na II-I khilyadoletie pr. n. e.) – The burial (the end of the 2nd-1st millennium BC)]. Etnologiya na trakite (Thracian Ethnology). Sofia, 216-232. ——, 1999b – Поменални практики (края на ІІ – І хилядолетие пр.н.е.) [Pomenalni praktiki (kraya na II-I khilyadoletie pr. n. e.) – Commemorative practices (the end of the 2nd-1st millennium BC)]. Etnologiya na trakite (Thracian Ethnology). Sofia, 233-241. Gerasimov, T. 1938 – Герасимов, Т., Мраморна архаична главичка от Созопол (Mramorna arkhaichna glavichka ot Sozopol – Small archaic marble head from Sozopol).// IBAI XII, 399-400.

114

KRYSTINA PANAYOTOVA: BURIAL AND POST-BURIAL RITES IN THE NECROPOLEIS OF THE GREEK COLONIES Koukouli-Chrysanthaki, Ch. 1983 – Anaskaphikes ereunes sta archaia Abdera. Anatypon ek ton praktikon tes archaiologikes Hetaireias 1982. ——, Sgourou, M., Angelarakis, A. 1996 – Archaeological investigations in the necropolis of Ancient Thasos, AEMTh 10/2, 710. Kozub, Yu. I. 2001 – Козуб, Ю.И., Культовый комплекс западной окресности Ольвии (Kul’tovyj kompleks zapadnoj okrestnosti Ol’vii – A cult complex on the western periphery of Olbia).// in Bosporskij fenomen: Kolonizatsiya regiona. Formirovanie polisov. Obrazovanie gosudarstva (The Bosporan phenomenon: The colonisation of the region. The formation of the poleis. The foundation of the state). Sankt-Peterburg, Vol. 2, 29-34. Kurtz, D., Boardman, J. 1971 – Greek Burial Customs, London. Kuzmanov, G. 1992 – Кузманов, Г., Антични лампи. Колекция на Националния археологически музей (Antichni lampi. Kolektsiya na Natsionalniya arkheologicheski muzej – Ancient lamps. The collection of the National Archaeological Museum), Sofia. Lazarov, M. 1971 – Лазаров, М., Археологически разкопки и проучвания в Бургаски окръг. Резултати, проблеми и задачи (Arkheologicheski razkopki i prouchvaniya v Burgaski okrag. Rezultati, problemi i zadachi – Archaeological excavations and research work in the district of Burgas. Results, problems and tasks).// IBM І, 320. ——, 1980 – Timbres amphoriques de Nessebre. Nessebre, Vol. II, 156-185. Lazarov, M. 1973 – Лазаров, М., Антични амфори (VІ-І в. пр. н. е.) от Българското Черноморие [Antichni amfori (VI-I v. pr. n. e.) ot Balgarskoto Chernomorie – Ancient amphorae (6th-1st c. BC) from the Bulgarian Black Sea coast].// INMV 9 (24), 3-52. ——, 1974 – Амфорни печати от Одесос (Amforni pechati ot Odesos – Amphora stamps from Odessos).// INMV 10 (25), 19-55. ——, 1977 – Търговските връзки на Родос със Западнопонтийските градове през елинистическата епоха (Targovskite vrazki na Rodos sas Zapadnopontijskite gradove prez elinisticheskata epokha – The trade relations of Rhodes with the West Pontic cities in the Hellenistic times).// INMV 13 (28), 1-46. ——, 1980 – Timbres amphoriques de Nessembre. Nessebre, Vol. II, 156 – 185. ——, 1982 – Търговията на Хиос със Западнопонтийските градове (Targoviyata na Khios sas Zapadnopontijskite gradove – The trade of Chios with the West Pontic cities).// INMV 18 (33), 5-14. Leonova, N. B., Smirnov, Yu. A. 1977 – Леонова, Н. Б., Смирнов, Ю. А., Погребение как обьект формального анализа (Pogrebenie kak ob’ekt formal’nogo analiza – The burial as object of formal analysis).// KSIA 148, 16-23. Lezzi-Hafter, A. 1997 – Offerings Made to Measure: Two Special Commissins by the Eretria Painter for Apollonia Pontica. Athenian Potters and Painters, 353-369. Luca, C. 1982 – Sesso e classi di eta nelle necropoli Greche di Locri Epizefiri. La mort, les morts dans les societes anciennes, Paris, 289-298. Lullies, R. 1962 – Vergoldete Terrakotta-apliken aus Tarent. Heidelberg. Manzova, L. 1970 – Мънзова, Л., Нови проучвания върху стелата на Анаксандър от Аполония (Novi prouchvaniya varkhu stelata na Anaksandar ot Apollonia – New studies on

prez elinisticheskata epokha – Jewellery-making in Thrace in the Hellenistic period). Annotation of PhD thesis. Sofia. Jacopi, D. 1929 – Scavi nella necropoli di Jalisso 1924-1928, Clara Rhodos VIII. Kalitanova, Z. 1982 – Калитанова, З., Тракийските погребални ритуали и обичаи от ХІІ до І в.пр.н.е. (Trakijskite pogrebalni rituali i obichai ot XII do I v. pr. n. e. – Thracian burial rites from 12th to 1st c. BC).// in Balgariya 1300: Institutsii i darzhavni traditsii (Bulgaria 1300: institutions and state traditions. Papers from the 3rd congress of the Bulgarian Historical Society), 1981, Vol. II. Sofia, 71-76. Kastanayan, E. G. 1950 – Кастанаян, Е. Г., Обряд тризны в боспорских курганах (Obryad trizny v bosporskikh kurganakh – The ritual of the funerary feast in the tumuli of Bosporos).// SA ХІV, 124-138. ——, 1959 – Грунтовые некрополи боспорских городов V – ІV вв. до н.э. и местные их особености (Gruntovye nekropoli bosporskikh gorodov V-IV vv. do n. e. i mestnye ikh osobenosti – The plane necropoleis of the Bosporan cities 5th-4th c. BC and their local specifics).// MIA 69, 183-284. Katsarov, G. 1911 – Кацаров, Г., Находка в Месемврия (Nakhodka v Mesembriya – A find in Mesambria).// IBAI ІІ, 264-265. ——, 1931 – Гробни находки от Месемврия (Grobni nakhodki ot Mesemvriya – Grave finds from Mesambria).// Vekove (Centuries) І, 3, 44. ——, 1932/33 – Нови находки от некропола на Месемврия (Novi nakhodki ot nekropola na Mesemvriya – New finds from the necropolis of Mesambria).// IBAI VІІ, 281-290. Kazarov, G. 1911 – Grabfund bei Mesembria, DM XXXVI, 308-316. Kilian-Dirlmeics, I. 2002 – Kleinfunde aus dem ItoniaHeiligtum bei Philia (Thessalien), Mainz. Kisyov, K. 2002 – Кисьов, К., Археологически проучвания на могилен некропол край с. Чернозем, общ. Калояново (Arkheologicheski prouchvaniya na mogilen nekropol kraj s. Chernozem, obsht. Kaloyanovo – Archaerological excavations of a tumular necropolis near the village of Chernozem, district of Kaloyanovo).// AOR 2001, Sofia, 5455. Kitov, G. 1973 – Китов, Г., Тракийска могилна гробница край Каварна (Trakijska mogilna grobnitsa kraj Kavarna – Thracian tumulus with a tomb near Kavarna).// AOR 1972, Sofia. ——, 1989 – Куполните гробници при Равногор в Родопите (Kupolnite grobnitsi pri Ravnogor v Rodopite – The domed tombs near Ravnogor in the Rodopi mountain).// Vekove (Centuries) 3, 28-41. Kobylina, M. M. 1951 – Кобылина, М. М., Раскопки южного некрополя Фанагории в 1947 г. (Raskopki yuzhnogo nekropolya Fanagorii v 1947 g. – The excavations of the southern necropolis of Phanagoria in 1947).// IIA 19, 238240. Korovina, A. K. 1987 – Коровина, А. К., Раскопки некрополя Тирамбы (1960 – 1970 г) [Raskopki nekropolya Tiramby (1960-1970 g.) – Excavations of the necropolis of Tiramba (1960-1970)].// in SGMIII A. S. Pushkin, Moscow. Korpusova, V. N. 1973 – Корпусова, В. Н., Некрополь Золотое: К этнокультурной истории Европейского Боспора (Nekropol’ Zolotoe: K etnokul’turnoj istorii Evropejskogo Bospora – The Zolotoe necropolis: On the ethnic and cultural history of the European Bosporos), Kiev.

115

ANCIENT GREEK COLONIES IN THE BLACK SEA 2 Thracian necropolis near the village of Ravna).// IAI XXV, 97-164. Mladenova, Ya. 1963a – Младенова, Я., Погребалните венци от некропола на Аполония (Pogrebalnite ventsi ot nekropola na Apoloniya – Funerary wreaths from the necropolis of Apollonia).// Apollonia, 287-292. ——, 1963b – Накитите от некропола на Аполония (Nakitite ot nekropola na Apoloniya – Personal ornaments from the necropolis of Apollonia).// Apollonia, 293-304. ——, 1963c – Предмети от стъкло и алабастър от некропола на Аполония (Predmeti ot staklo i alabastar ot nekropola na Apoloniya – Glass and alabaster items from the necropolis of Apollonia).// Apollonia, 305-312. Mollard-Besques, S. 1954 – Catalogue raisonné des figurines et reliefs en terre-quite grecs, étrusques et romains, I, Époques préhellenique, géometrique, arhaique et classique, Paris. Monakhov, S. Yu. 1999 – Монахов, С. Ю., Греческие амфоры в Причерноморье. Комплексы керамической тары (Grecheskie amphory v Prichernomor’e. Kompleksy keramicheskoj tary – Greek amphorae in the Black Sea. Complexes of ceramic containers), Saratov. Mpesios, M. 1989 – Anaskaphe sto boreo nekrotapheio tes Pydnas. AEMTh 3, 155-163. Nikolaidou-Patera, M. 1993 – Ereuna nekrotapheiou sthn perioche tes archaias Amphipoleos, AEMTh 7. Ol’khovskij, V. S. 1986 – Ольховский, В. С., Погребальнопоминальная обредност в системе взаимосвязаных понятий (Pogrebal’no-pominal’naya obrednost v sisteme vzaimosvyazanykh ponyatij – The burial and commemorative rituals in the system of interrelated notions).// SA 1, 65 – 76. Ovcharov, D. 1961 – Овчаров, Д., Могилни погребения при с. Долна Росица, Търговищко (Mogilni pogrebeniya pri s. Dolna Rositsa, Targovishtko – Tumular graves near the village of Dolna Rositsa, District of Targovishte).//A. ІІІ, 4, 61-67. Ovcharov, N. 1979 – Овчаров, Н., Елинистическа керамика от Дионисопол (Балчик) [Elinisticheska keramika ot Dionisopol (Balchik) – Hellenistic pottery from Dionysopolis (Balchik)].// Vekove (Centuries) 2, 62-68. Panayotova, K. 1989a – Панайотова, К., Погребални обреди и гробни съоръжения в некрополите на гръцките колонии по Българското Черноморие VІ – І в. пр. Хр. (Pogrebalni obredi i grobni saorazheniya v nekropolite na gratskite kolonii po Balgarskoto Chernomorie VI-I v. pr. n. e. – Burial customs and grave structures in the necropoleis of the Greek colonies on the Bulgarian Black Sea coast). PhD thesis, Sofia. ——, 1989b – Погребальный обряд в некрополях греческих колоний на берегу Черного моря Болгарии в эллинистическую эпоху (Pogrebal’nyj obryad v nekropolyakh grecheskikh kolonij na beregu Chernogo morya Bolgarii v ellinisticheskuyu epokhu – Burial customs in the necropoleis of the Greek colonies on the Bulgarian Black sea coast in the Hellenistic period).// in Skifiya i Bospor. Arkheologicheskie materialy k konferentsii pamyati akademika M. I. Rostovtseva (Skythia and Bosporos. Archaeological materials for the conference in memoriam acad. M. I. Rostovtsev), Novocherkask, 64-65. ——, 1994a – Хокерите от античния некропол на Аполония Понтика (Khokerite ot antichniya nekropol na Apoloniya Pontica – Cotracted burials in the ancient necropolis of Apollonia Pontica).// in Maritsa-Iztok. Arkheologicheski prouchvaniya (Maritsa-East. Archaeological research), Vol. II, 151-55.

the stele of Anaxander from Apollonia).// IAI XXXIII, 255276. Martin, R., Metzger, H. 1976 – La religion grecque, Paris. Melyukova, A. I. 1979 – Мелюкова, А. И., Скифия и фракийский мир (Skifia i frakijskij mir – Skythia and the Thracian world), Moscow. Mihailov, G. 1948 – Михайлов, Г., Надписи намерени в Созопол през 1946 г. (Nadpisi namereni v Sozopol prez 1946 g. – Inscriptions discovered in Sozopol in 1946). // Apollonia on the Black Sea, RP II, 59-67. ——, 1970 – Inscriptiones Graecae in Bulgaria repertae, Vol. I, Inscriptiones orae Ponti Euxini, Serdicae. ——, 1972 – Траките (Trakite – The Thracians), Sofia. Mikhajlov, A., Dimitrov, M. 1982 – Михайлов, А., Димитров, М., Разкопки на некропола при Балчишката крепост (Razkopki na nekropola pri Balchishkata kerpost – Excavations in the necropolis at the fortress of Balchik). AOR 1981, Mihaylovgrad, 78. ——, 1985 – Антични гробове от Балчик (Antichni grobove ot Balchik – Antique graves from Balchik).// in Severoiztochna Balgariya – drevnost i suvremie (Northwestern Bulgaria – antiquity and present day), 229232. Mikov, V. 1925 – Миков, В., Разкопки при Созопол (Pazkopki v Sozopol – Excavations in Sozopol).// IBAI ІІІ, 236-241. Minchev, A. 1975 – Минчев, А., Тракийско могилно погребение от ІІІ в.пр.н.е. в с. Галата, Варненско (Trakijsko mogilno pogrebenie ot III v. pr. n. e. v s. Galata, Varnensko – A Thracian burial mound from the 3rd c. BC in the village of Galata near Varna).// INMV ХІ, 136-142. ——, 1978 – Елинистическа гробна находка от околностите на Одесос (Elinisticheska grobna nakhodka ot okolnostite na Odesos – A Hellenistic grave find from the vicinity of Odessos).// INMV 14 (29), 103-111. ——, 1980 – Антично стъкло (V – І в.пр.н.е.) във Варненския музей [Antichno staklo (V-I v. pr. n. e.) vav Varnenskiya muzej – Ancient glass in the Varna Museum].// INMV 16 (31), 111-114. ——, 1982 – Каварненското съкровище (Kavarnenskoto sakrovishte – The Kavarna treasure).// in ChirakmanKarvuna-Kavarna, Sofia, 40-44. ——, 2003 – Odessos. Ancient Greek Colonies in the Black Sea (eds. D. Grammenos, E. Petropoulos), Vol. I. Thessaloniki, 209-278. Mirchev, M. 1947 – Мирчев, М., Две ценни гробни находки във Варна (Dve tsenni grobni nakhodki vav Varna – Two valuable grave finds from Varna).// IKNK І, 235-243. ——, 1951 – Късноримският некропол на Одесос (Kasnorimskiyat nekropol na Odesos – The Late Roman necropolis of Odessos).// IVAD VІІІ, 93-100. ——, 1956 – Сбирката от теракоти в музея на гр. Варна (Sbirkata ot terakoti na museya na gr. Varna – The collection of terracotta figurines in the museum of Varna).// IVAD Х, 1-50. ——, 1958a – Амфорните печати от музея във Варна (Amfornite pechati ot muzeya vav Varna – The amphora stamps in the museum of Varna), Sofia. ——, 1958b – Паметници на гробната архитектура в Одесос и неговата околност (Pametnitsi na grobnata arkhitektura v Odesos i negovata okolnost – Monuments of the funerary architecture in Odessos and its surroundings).// in Studies in honor of acad. D. Dechev, Sofia, 569-582. ——, 1962 – Раннотракийският некропол при с. Равна (Rannotrakijskiyat nekropol pri s. Ravna – The Early

116

KRYSTINA PANAYOTOVA: BURIAL AND POST-BURIAL RITES IN THE NECROPOLEIS OF THE GREEK COLONIES ——, 1994b – Надгробни могили в районите на гръцките колонии по българското Черноморие (Nadgrobni mogili v rayonite na gratskite kolonii po balgarskoto Chernomorie – Burial mounds in the vicinity of the Greek colonies on the Bulgarian Black Sea coast).// in Parvi mezhdunaroden simpozium Sevtopolis: Nadgrobnite mogili v Yugoiztochna Evropa (First international symposium Seuthopolis: The burial mounds in Southeastern Europe), Veliko Tarnovo, 81-88. ——, 1994c – Once Again about the Archaeological Material from the Harbour of Sozopol (1927). Thracia Pontica V, 1991, Varna, 125-131. ——, 1996 – Связи погребальных традиций Аполонии Понтийской с обрядовыми нормами античного мира (Svyazi pogrebal’nykh traditsii Apolonii Pontijskoj s obryadovymi normami antichnogo mira – The connections of the burial traditions of Apollonia Pontica with the ritual norms of the ancient world).// in Mezhdunarodnye otnosheniya v bassejne Chernogo morya v drevnosti i srednie veka. Tezisy dokladov VIII mezhdunarodnoj nauchnoj konferentsii (The international relations in the Black Sea area in ancient and Medieval times. Summaries of the papers for the 8th International conference), Rostovna-Donu, 58-61. ——, 1998a – Некрополът на Аполония Понтийска в местността Калфата (Nekropolat na Apoloniya Pontijska v mestnostta Kalfata – The necropolis of Apollonia Pontica in ‘Kalfata’ locality).// A. ХХХІХ, 3-4, 11-24. ——, 1998b – Apollonia Pontica: Recent Discoveries in the necropolis. The Greek Colonisation of the Black Sea Area (ed. G. Tsetskhladze). Historia Einzelschriften, Heft 121, 97-113. ——, 2001a – О свинцовых букраниях из Аполонии Понтийской (O svintsovykh bukraniyakh iz Apolonii Pontijskoj – On the lead boukrania from Apollonia Pontica).// in Mezhdunarodnye otnosheniya v bassejne Chernogo morya v drevnosti i srednie veka. Tezisy dokladov VIII mezhdunarodnoj nauchnoj konferentsii (The international relations in the Black Sea area in ancient and Medieval times. Materials from the 8th International conference), Rostov-na-Donu, 63-66. ——, 2001b – Hекоторые итоги раскопок некрополя Аполлонии Понтийской в последнее десятилетие двадцатого века (Nekotorye itogi raskopok nekropolya Apollonii Pontijskoj v poslednee desyatiletie dvattsatogo veka – Some conclusions on the excavations in the necropolis of Apollonia Pontica in the last decade of the 20th c.).// in Ol’viya ta antichnij svit. Materiali naukovikh chitan’ prisvyachenikh 75-richchyu utvorennya istorikoarkheologichnogo zapovidnika Ol’viya NAN Ukraini (Olbia and the ancient world. Materials from the scientific readings dedicated to the 75th anniversary of the foundation of the historical and archaeological reserve ‘Olbia’), Kiev. ——, 2002 – Поминовения усопших в некрополе Аполлонии Понтийской в м. Калфата (Pominoveniya usopshikh v nekropole Apolonii Pontijskoj v m. Kalfata – Commemoration of the deceased in the necropolis of Apollonia Pontica in ‘Kalfata’ locality).// in Bosporskij fenomen II. Pogrebal’nye pamyatniki i svyatilishta (Bosporan phenomenon II. Necropoleis and sanctuaries), Sankt-Peterburg, 3-8. ——, 2003a – Каменни гробове в некропола на Аполония Понтика в м. Калфата (Kamenni grobove v nekropola na Apoloniya Pontika v m. Kalfata – Grave structures built of

stone in the necropolis of Apollonia Pontica in ‘Kalfata’ locality).// in Patyat. Sbornik nauchni statii, posveten an zhivota i tvorchestvoto na G. Kitov (The road. A collection of articles dedicated to the life and the work of G. Kitov). Sofia, 156-166. ——, 2003b – Обредни огнища в некрополите на Аполония Понтика (Obredni ognishta v nekropolite na Apoloniya Pontika – Ritual fireplaces in the necropoleis of Apollonia Pontica).// in Studia Archaeologica. Suppl. I. In memoriam P. Gorbanov. Sofia, 133-140. ——, 2003c – Apollonia Pontica (end of the 7th – 1st centuries BC): The necropoleis of Apollonia Pontica. In: Ancient Greek Colonies in the Black Sea (eds. D. Grammenos, E. Petropoulos), Vol. I. Thessaloniki, 123-140 ——, Nedev, D. 2001 – Панайотова, К., Недев, Д., Античен некропол на Аполония в м. Калфата гр. Созопол (Antichen nekropol na Apoloniya v m. Kalfata, gr. Sozopol – The ancient necropolis of Apollonia in ‘Kalfata’ locality near the town of Sozopol).// AOR 1999-2000, Sofia, 118120. ——, Nedev, D., Hermary, A. 2003 – Панайотова, К., Недев, Д., Ермари, А., Античен некропол на Аполония Понтика в м. Калфата (Antichen nekropol na Apoloniya v m. Kalfata, gr. Sozopol – The ancient necropolis of Apollonia in ‘Kalfata’ locality near the town of Sozopol).// AOR 2002, Sofia, 105-107. ——, 2004 – Българо-френски проучвания на античния некропол на Аполония (Balgaro-frenski prouchvaniya na antichniya nekropol na Apoloniya – Joint BulgarianFrench excavations in the ancient necropolis of Apollonia).// AOR, 2003, 152-154. Pandaleev, I. 1928/29 – Пандалеев, И., Нови археологически находища в Бургаско (Novi arkheologicheski nakhodishta v Burgasko – New archaeological sites in the region of Burgas).// IBAI, 325-328. Papanova, V. A. 1994 – Папанова, В. А., Некрополь Ольвii (iсторична топографiя та поховальний обряд) [Nekropol’ Ol’vii (istorichna topographiya ta pokhoval’nij obryad – The necropolis of Olbia (historical topography and burial customs))]. Annotation of the PhD thesis, Kiev. ——, 2002 – Символика оружия в античных погребениях (Simvolika oruzhiya v antichnykh pogrebeniyakh – The symbolism of arms in the ancient burials).// in Bosporskij fenomen II. Pogrebal’nye pamyatniki i svyatilishta (Bosporan phenomenon II. Necropoleis and sanctuaries), Sankt-Peterburg, 279-284. Parovich-Peshikan, M. 1974 – Парович-Пешикан, М., Некрополь Ольвии эллинистического времени (Nekropol’ Ol’vii ellinisticheskogo vremeni – The Olbian necropolis from the Hellenistic age), Kiev. Peev, D. 1974 – Пеев, Д., Погребални обичаи, вярвания и гробни съоръжения на траките VІІІ – ІІІ в.пр.н.е. (Pogrebalni obichai, vyarvaniya i grobni saorazheniya na trakite VIII-III v. pr. n. e. – Thracian burial customs, beliefs and grave structures 8th-3rd c. BC). PhD thesis, Sofia. Petrov, T. 1960 – Петров, Т., Античната гробница край Поморие ‘Кухата могила’ (Antichnata grobnitsa kraj Pomorie – ‘Kukhata mogila’ – The ancient tomb near Pomoria – ‘The Hollow Mound’), Burgas. ——, 1966 – Градежът на новооткрити елинистически гробници от Месамбрия (Gradezhat na novootkriti elinisticheski grobnitsi ot Mesambriya – The construction of recently discovered Hellenistic tombs in Mesambria).// A. 3, 29-33.

117

ANCIENT GREEK COLONIES IN THE BLACK SEA 2 Thracian graves from the vicinity of Bizone).// INMV 25 (40), 9-12. Saprykin, S., Panayotova, K. 2000 – Сапрыкин, С., Панайотова, К. Надгробие гераклеота из Аполлонии Понтийской (Nadgrobie gerakleota iz Apollonii Pontijskoj – Tombstone of a Heraclean from Apollonia Pontica).// VDI 3, 28-38. Savova, O. 1971 – Савова, О., Две гробни находки във Варна от Елинистическата епоха (Dve grobni nahodki vav Varna ot Elinisticheskata epokha – Two grave finds in Varna from the Hellenistic Age).// MPK 3, 3-10. Seure, J. 1924 – Archeologie Thrace, RA XIX, 307-350. Sgourou, M. 2002 – Excavating Houses and Graves: Explaining Aspects of Everyday Life and Afterlife in Ancient Thasos, SCA, I, Excavating Classical Culture. Recent Archaeological Discoveries in Greece, 1-19. Shkorpil, K. 1930-31 – Шкорпил, К., Археологически бележки от Черноморското крайбрежие (Arkheologicheski belezhki ot Chernomorskoto krajbrezhie – Archaeological notes from the Black sea coast).// IAI VІ, 57-88. Shkorpil, Kh., Skorpil, K. 1890 – Шкорпил, Х., Шкорпил, К., Черноморското крайбрежие и съседните подбалкански страни в Южна България (Chernomorskoto krajbrezhie i sasednite podbalkanski strani v Yuzhna Balgariya – The Black Sea littoral and the neighboring foothill regions in Southern Bulgaria).// SbNUNK III, 3-40. ——, 1896 – Черноморското крайбрежие и съседните подбалкански страни в Южна България (Chernomorskoto krajbrezhie i sasednite podbalkanski strani v Yuzhna Balgariya – The Black Sea littoral and the neighboring foothill regions in Southern Bulgaria).// SbNUNK IV, 103-145. ——, 1898 – Могили (Mogili – Tumuli), Plovdiv. ——, 1909a – Разкопки на могили до гр. Варна (Razkopki na mogili do gr. Varna – Excavations of tumuli near the city of Varna).// IVAD II, 8-14. ——, 1909b – Обяснения към плана на гр. Варна (Obyasneniya kam plana na gr. Varna – Explanations on the layout of the city of Varna).// IVAD II, 54-71. ——, 1912 – Балчик (Balchik).// IVAD V, 47-64. ——, 1921 – Двадесетгодишната дейност на Варненското археологическо дружество (Dvadesetgodishnata dejnost na Varnenskoto arkheologichesko druzhestvo – Twenty years of work of the Archaeological Society in Varna).// IVAD VII, 3-84. Smirnov, Yu. A. 1990 – Смирнов, Ю. А., Морфология погребения (опыт создания базовой модели) [Morfologiya pogrebeniya (opyt sozdaniya bazovoj modeli) – Morphology of the burial (an attempt for creation of a basic model)].// in Issledovaniya v oblasti balto-slavyanskoj dukhovnoj kul’tury i pogrebal’nyj obryad (Studies in the field of Balto-Slavic spiritual culture and burial rite), Moscow, 216-224. Sokol’skij, N. I. 1969 – Сокольский, Н. И., Античные деревянные саркофаги Северного Причерноморья (Antichnye derevyannye sarkofagi Severnogo Prichernomorya – Ancient wooden sarcophagi in the Northern Black Sea area).// SAI, Г1-17. ——, 1971 – Деревообработывающее ремесло в античных государствах Северного Причерноморья (Derevoobrabotyvayushtee remeslo v antichnykh gosudarstvakh Severnogo Prichernomor’ya – Woodworking craft in the ancient states in the Northern Black Sea area), Moscow.

——, Chimbuleva, Zh. 1963 – Петров, Т., Чимбулева, Ж., Новооткрита гробница от античния некропол на Месамбрия (Novootkrita grobnitsa ot antichniya nekropol na Mesambria – Newly discovered tomb in the ancient necropolis of Mesambria).// MPK 2, 23-26. Popov, R. 1934 – Попов , Р., Могила № 1 (Mogila 1 – Tumulus 1).// Madara, Vol. I, 240-251. Preda, C. 1961 – Archaeological Discoveries in the Greek Cemetery of Kallatis-Mangalia (IV – III centuries before our era), Dacia NS V, 275-303. ——, 1962 – Una nuova tomba a volta scoperta presso Mangalia-Kallatis, Dacia NS VI, 157-172. Preshlenov, Hr. 2003 – Mesambria. In: Ancient Greek Colonies in the Black Sea (eds. D. Grammenos, E. Petropoulos), Vol. I. Thessaloniki, 157-208. Press, L. 1978 – Zabawy, nauczanie, sport. Kultura materialna starozitnej Grecji, III, Wroclaw-Warszawa, 231-291. Prushevskaya, E. S. 1955 – Прушевская, Е. С., Художественная обработка металла (торевтика) [Khudozhestvennaya obrabotka metalla (torevtika) – Artistic metalworking (toreutics)].// in AGSP, MoscowLeningrad, 325-355. Pyatysheva, N. 1949 – Пятышева Н., Таманский саркофаг (Tamanskij sarkofag – The sarcophagus from Taman), Moscow. Radev, R. 2000 – Hellenistic Age Burials in Pithoi in Thrace. Tombes tumulaires de l’Âge du Fer dans le Sud-Est de l’Europe. Actes du II-e Colloque International d’Archéologie Funéraire, Tulcea. 155-167. Reho, M. 1990 – La ceramica Attica a figure nere e rosse nella Tracia Bulgara, Archaeologica n.86. Giorgio Bertschneider Editore, Roma. ——, 1992 – Рехо, М., Атическа червенофигурна керамика в Националния археологически музей София (Aticheska chervenofigurna keramika v Natsionalniya arkheologicheski muzej Sofia – Attic red-figure pottery in the National Archaeological Museum in Sofia), Sofia. Reho-Bumbalova, M. 1986 – Рехо-Бумбалова, М., Черно и червенофигурна атическа керамика от България (Cherno- i chervenofigurna aticheska keramika ot Balgariya – Black- and red-figure Attic pottery from Bulgaria). Annotation of PhD thesis, Sofia. Robinson, D. 1949 – Olinthus. P. XI, Necrolynthia, A Study in Greek Burial Customs and Anthropology, Baltimor. Rotroff, S. I. 1997 – Hellenistic Pottery. Athenian and Imported Wheelmade Figure Ware and Related Material. The Athenian Agora, Vol. XXIX, Princeton, New Jersey. Ruseva, M. 2002 – Русева, М., Тракийска гробнична архитектура в българските земи през VІ – ІІІ в. пр. н. е. (Trakijska grobnichna arkhitektura v balgarskite zemi prez VI-III v. pr. n. e. – Thracian funerary architecture in the Bulgarian lands in 6th-3rd c. BC), Yambol. Rusyaeva, A. S. 1982 – Русяева, А. С., Античные терракоты Северозападного Причерноморья (VІ – І вв. до н. э.) [Antichnye terrakoty Severozapadnogo Prichernomor’ya (VI-I vv. do n. e.) – Ancient terracotta figurines from the Northwestern Black sea area (6th-1st c. BC)], Kiev. ——, 1992 – Религия и культы античной Ольвии (Religiya i kul’ty antichnoj Ol’vii – Religion and cults of ancient Olbia), Kiev. Salkin, A. 1982 – Салкин, А., Следи от античността (Sledi ot antichnostta – Traces from ancient times).// in ChirakmanKarvuna-Kavarna, Sofia, 29-36. ——, 1989 – Два тракийски гроба от околностите на Бизоне (Dva trakijski groba ot okolnostite na Bizone – Two

118

KRYSTINA PANAYOTOVA: BURIAL AND POST-BURIAL RITES IN THE NECROPOLEIS OF THE GREEK COLONIES ——, 1964b – Новооткрити гробници около Одесос (Novootkriti grobnitsi okolo Odesos – Newly discovered tombs in the vicinity of Odessos).// IVAD XV, 51-61. ——, 1968 – Одесос и Маркианополь в свете новых археологических исследований (Odessos and Markianopol’ v svete novykh arkheologicheskikh issledovanij – Odessos and Marcianopolis in the light of the recent archaeological research).// SA 1, 230-235. ——, 1969а – Скулптурата в Одесос V – І в.пр.н.е. (Skulpturata v Odesos V-I v. pr. n. e. – The sculpture in Odessos 5th-1st c. BC).// INMV 5 (20), 3-48. ——, 1969b – Хронологическо развитие на плочите с погребално угощение от Одесос (Khronologichesko razvitie na plochite s pogrebalno ugoshtenie ot Odessos – The chronological development of the monuments with ‘burial feast’ from Odessos).// A 4, 37-64. ——, 1971 – За надгробната плоча на атлет от Одесос (Za nadgrobnata plocha na atlet ot Odesos – On the grave monument of an athlete from Odessos).// MPK 1, 2-3. ——, 1974 – Некрополът край светилището на Херос Карабазмос в Одесос (Nekropolat kraj svetilishteto na Kheros Karabazmos v Odesos – The necropolis near the sanctuary of Heros Karabazmos in Odessos).// INMV 10 (25), 277-302. ——, 1982 – Теракотите от Бизоне (Terakotite ot Bizone – The terracotta figurines from Bizone).// in ChirakmanKarvuna-Kavarna, Sofia, 37-40. ——, Rafailov, I. 1980 – Тончева, Г., Рафаилов, И., Теракотите на Бизоне (Terakotite ot Bizone – The terracotta figurines from Bizone).// Vekove (Centuries) 2, 53-58. Tonkova, M. 2002 – Тонкова, М., Новооткрит тракийски център от ранноелинистическата епоха при извора Халка Бунар в землището на с. Горно Белово (проучвания през 2000 и 2001 г.) [Novootkrit trakijski tsentar ot rannoelinisticheskata epokha pri izvora ‘Halka Bunar’ v zemlishteto na s. Gorno Belovo (prouchvaniya prez 2000 i 2001 g.) – Newly discovered Thracian centre from the Early Hellenistic times at ‘Halka Bunar’ water source in the vicinity of the village of Gorno Belovo (excavations in 2000 and 2001)].// Annual of the Archaeological Institute and Museum, Vol. II, Sofia, 148196. Tsaneva, M. 1982 – Цанева, М., Кратери от Аполония (Krateri ot Apoloniya – Craters from Apollonia), Sofia. ——,1987 – Траки на морския бряг (Traki na morskiya bryag – Thracians on the sea shore).// More (The Sea) 1, 359-364. ——, Panayotova, K. 1991 – Цанева, М., Панайотова, К., Антични некрополи на Аполония (Antichni nekropoli na Apoloniya – Ancient necropoleis of Apollonia).// AOR 1990, Lovech, 77-79. ——, Stoyanov, T. 1981 – Цанева, М., Стоянов, Т., Спасителни разкопки в Созопол, обект ‘Културен дом’(Spasitelni razkopki v Sozopol, obekt ‘Kulturen dom’ – Rescue excavations in Sozopol, ‘House of Culture’ site).// AOR 1980, Sofia, 69-71. Tsvetaeva, G. A. 1951 – Цветаева, Г.А., Грунтовый некрополь Пантикапея, его история, этнический и социальный состав (Gruntovoj nekropol’ Pantikapeya, ego istoriya, etnicheskij i sotsial’nyj sostav – The plane necropolis of Panticapaeum – its history, ethnic and social composition).// MIA 19, 63-86. Vaulina, M. A., Wasovicz, A. 1974 – Bois grecs et romains de l`Ermitage, Wroclaw-Warsawa-Krakow-Gdansk.

Sparkes, B. A., Talcott, L. 1970 – Black and Plain Pottery, 6th, 5th and 4th Centuries BC, The Athenian Agora, Vol. XII, Princeton. Stoyanov, R. V. 2002 – Стоянов, Р. В., Погребенные в скорченном положении в греческих некрополях Причерноморья: состояние проблемы и перспективы ее решения (Pogrebennie v skorchennom polozhenii v grecheskikh nekropolyakh Prichernomor’ya: sostoyanie problemy i perspektivy ee resheniya – Contracted burials in the Greek colonies in the Black Sea: state of research and perspectives for finding a solution of the problem).// in Bosporskij fenomen II. Pogrebal’nye pamyatniki i svyatilishta (Bosporan phenomenon II. Necropoleis and sanctuaries), Sankt-Peterburg, 297-302. Stoyanov, T., Stoyanova, D. 1997 – The Tholos of Odessos, AB 3, 22-33. Stoyanova, D. 2002 – Стоянова, Д., Монументална архитектура в Тракия V-ІІІ в. пр. Хр. Строителни материали, техника, конструкции, ордери (Monumentalna arkhitektura v Trakiya V-III v. pr. Khr. Stroitelni materiali, tekhnika, konstruktsii, orderi – Monumental architecture in Thrace 5th-3rd c. BC. Materials, technique, constructions, orders). Annotation of PhD thesis, Sofia. Tacheva, M. 1987 – Тачева, М. История на българските земи в древността. История на българските земи в древността през елинистическата и римската епоха (Istoriya na balgarskite zemi v drevnostta prez elinisticheskata i rimskata epokhi – Ancient history of the Bulgarian lands in the Hellenistic and Roman times), Sofia. Themeles, P. G., Touratsoglou, I. P. 1997 – Oi taphoi tou Derbeniou, Athens. Toncheva, G. 1951 – Тончева, Г., Разкопките на Петте могили край с. Галата (Razkopki na Pette mogili kray s. Galata – Excavations of The Five Tumuli near the village of Galata).// IVAD VІІІ, 49-64. ——, 1952 – Принос към иконографията на Великия бог на Одесос (Prinos kam ikonografiyata na Velikiya bog na Odesos – Contribution to the iconography of the Great God of Odessos).// IAI XVIII, 83-90. ——, 1953 – Старогръцката керамика в музея на гр. Сталин (Starogratskata keramika ot muzeya na gr. Stalin – The ancient Greek pottery in the Museum of the city of Stalin).// IVAD IX, 29-40. ——, 1956 – Тракийското влияние в Одесос (Trakijskoto vliyanie v Odesos – The Thracian influence in Odessos).// IVAD Х, 51-64. ——, 1961a – Гробни находки от Одесос (Grobni nakhodki ot Odessos – Grave finds from Odessos).// IVAD ХІІ, 29-52. ——, 1961b – Гроб на тракийка от Одесос (Grob na trakijka ot Odesos – Grave of a Thracian woman from Odessos).// A. ІІІ, 2, 24-30. ——, 1961c – Сюжетът ‘погребално угощение’ върху паметници от Одесос (Syuzhetat ‘pogrebalno ugoshtenie’ varkhu pametnitsi ot Odessos – The scene of ‘funerary feast’ on monuments from Odessos).// A. 4, 18-23. ——, 1961d – Два надгробни паметника от Одесос (Dva nadgrobni pametnika ot Odesos – Two grave monuments from Odessos).// Izsledvaniya v pamet na K. Shkorpil (Studies in memory of K. Shkorpil), Sofia, 233-238. ——, 1964a – Нови находки от старогръцкия некропол на Одесос (Novi nakhodki ot starogratskiya nekropol na Odesos – New finds from the ancient Greek necropolis of Odessos).// IAI XXVII, 111-130.

119

ANCIENT GREEK COLONIES IN THE BLACK SEA 2 ——, Velkov, V. 1963 – Венедиков, И., Велков, В., Надгробни плочи от некропола на Аполония (Nadgrobni plochi ot nekropola na Apoloniya – Gravestones from the necropolis of Apollonia).// Apollonia, 325-330. Vermeule, E. 1979 – Aspects of Death in early Greek Art and Poetry, London. Vernant, J.-P. 1982 – La mort, les morts dan les societe ancienne, Introduction, Paris, 1-15. Warmers, E., Stutzinger, D. 2002 – Stepengold, Grabschatze der Skyten und Sarmatien am unteren Don, Frankfurt. Wasowicz, A. 1966 – Obrovka drewna w starozytnej Grecji, Wroclaw-Warsawa-Krakow. Watzinger, C. 1905 – Griechishe Holzsarkophage aus der Zeit Alexander der Grossen, Leipzig. Winniczuk, L. 1988 – Ludzie, zwyczaje i obiczaje Starozitnej Grecji i Rzymu, II, Czesc, Warsawa. Zaitseva, K. I. 1971 – Зайцева, К. И., Ольвийские культовые свинцовые изделия (Ol’vijskie kul’tovye svintsovye izdeliya – Lead objects with cult functions from Olbia).// in KIAM, Leningrad, 84-106. Zavatin-Coman, E. 1972 – La tombe grecque avec kalpis de Mangalia, Dacia NS XVI, 271-280. Zubar’, V. M. – Зубарь, В. М., Некрополь Херсонеса Таврического І-ІV вв.н.э. (Nekrpol’ Khersonesa Tavricheskogo I-IV vv. do n. e. – The necropolis of the Taurian Chersonesos 1st-4th c. BC), Kiev. Zubar’, V. M., Ivlev, S. M., Chepak, V. N. 1990 – Зубарь, В.М., Ивлев, С.М., Чепак, В.Н., Западный некрополь Херсонеса Таврического (Раскопки 1982 г.) [Zapadnyj nekropol’ Khersonesa Tavricheskogo (Raskopki 1982) – The western necropolis of the Taurian Chersonesos (Excavations 1982)].Kiev.

Velkov, I. 1926/27 – Велков, И., Новооткрити старини (Novootkriti starini – Newly discovered antiquities).// IAI ІV, 312. ——, 1930/31 – Новооткрити старини (Novootkriti starini – Newly discovered antiquities).// IAI VІ, 311. Venedikov, I. 1948 – Венедиков, И., Разкопките в некропола на Аполония през 1946 г. (Razkopkite v nekropola na Apoloniya prez 1946 g. – The excavations in the necropolis of Apollonia in 1946).// Apollonia on the Black Sea, RP ІІ, Sofia. ——, 1952 – Оловни тежести за хвърляне с прашка (Olovni tezhesti za khvarlyane s prashka – Lead sling-projectiles).// IAI ХVІІІ, 368-370. ——, 1963a – Разположение на некропола и организация на разкопките през 1947 – 1949 г. (Razpolozhenie na nekropola i organizatsiya na razkopkite prez 1947-1949 g. – Location of the necropolis and organization of the excavations in the period 1947-1949).// Apollonia, 7-64. ——, 1963b – Металически и костени предмети от Аполония (Metalicheski i kosteni predmeti ot Apoloniya – Metalic and bone finds from Apollonia).// Apollonia, 313320. ——, 1963c – Общ поглед върху разкопките (Obsht pogled varhu razkopkite – A general overview of the excavations).// Apollonia, 341-348. ——, 1965 – Бронзовите хидрии с изображение на грабването на Орейтия от Бореас, открити в Несебър (Bronzovite khidrii s izobrazhenie na grabvaneto na Orejtiya ot Boreas, otkriti v Nesebar – The bronze hydriae with depiction of Boreas abducting Oreithia, discovered in Nesebar).// INMB 2, 49-62. ——, 1969 – Фракийцы в греческом искусстве Понтийской Аполонии (Frakijtsy v grecheskom iskusstve Pontijskoj Apolonii – The Thracians in the Greek art of Apollonia Pontica).// SA 3, 71-78.

120

KRYSTINA PANAYOTOVA: BURIAL AND POST-BURIAL RITES IN THE NECROPOLEIS OF THE GREEK COLONIES

The necropolis of Apollonia Pontica (after Venedikov, 1963).

The Greek Colonies on the Bulgarian Black Sea Littoral.

The necropoleis of Mesambria

The necropoleis of Odessos (after Mirchev, 1951) Figure 1. Maps. 121

ANCIENT GREEK COLONIES IN THE BLACK SEA 2

Figure 2. Grave structures from Apollonia. 1. A simple pit with wooden coffin. 2. A inhumation in a simple pit with wooden coffin. 3. A tile grave. 4. Burial in a pithos. 5. Inhumation and a cinerary urn. 6. The necropolis of Apollonia /2004/. 122

KRYSTINA PANAYOTOVA: BURIAL AND POST-BURIAL RITES IN THE NECROPOLEIS OF THE GREEK COLONIES

Figure 3. Tomb structures and finds. 1. A tomb from Apollonia (after Ruseva, 2002). 2. A tomb from Odesos (after Ruseva, 2002). 3. A tomb from Odesos (after Ruseva, 2002). 4. A bone appliqués from Odesos (after Toncheva, 1951). 5. A bone appliqué from Odesos (after Toncheva, 1951). 6. Terracotta appliqués from Odesos (after Mirchev, 1956). 123

ANCIENT GREEK COLONIES IN THE BLACK SEA 2

Figure 4. Post-burial structures. 1. Pottery-deposit on the cist in Apollonia necropolis (2000). 2.A amphora-deposit in Apollonia necropolis (2004). 3. Pottery-deposit in Apollonia necropolis (2004). 4. Pottery-deposit and fireplace in Apollonia necropolis (2002). 5. A fish-grill in situ in Apollonia necropolis (2004). 6.A fireplace in Apollonia necropolis (2004).

124

KRYSTINA PANAYOTOVA: BURIAL AND POST-BURIAL RITES IN THE NECROPOLEIS OF THE GREEK COLONIES

125

ANCIENT GREEK COLONIES IN THE BLACK SEA 2 Figure 5. Grave goods. (Page 125) 1. A black- figure skyphos from sacred pit in Odessos. The last decade of the 6th centuries B.C. (After Lazarov, 2003). 2. A black-figure ekythos from Apollonia. The third quarter of the 5th centuries B.C. 3. A red-figure askos from Apollonia. The second quarter of the 4th centuries B.C. 4. A red-figure lekythos. from Apollonia. The third quarter of the 5th centuries B.C. 5. A red-figure oenochoe from the necropolis in Sladkite kladentsi (Burgas). The Modica Painter, end of the 5th centuries B.C. (After Lazarov, 2003). 6. A red-figure crater from Apollonia. The second quarter of the 4th centuries B.C. 7. Two red-figure oenohoai from Apollonia. The second quarter of the 4th centuries B.C. 8. A redfigure crater from the necropolis in Sladkite kladentsi (Burgas). The Kadmos Painter, 420-410 B.C. (After Lazarov, 2003). 9. A lid of a red-figure lekane from Apollonia. The middle of the 4th centuries B.C. 10. A red-figure crater from Mesambria. The Following au by Painter of Athens 1375, Imitator the Painter of Munich2391, 360-340 B.C. (After Lazarov, 2003).

126

Le monnayage de Messambria et les Monnayages d’Apollonia, Odessos et Dionysopolis Ivan Karayotov∗ Les monnaies de Messambria et des cités voisines du littoral ouest du Pont répondaient aux besoins économiques d’un même milieu ethnique thrace. Fondées par des métropoles différentes, formées à des époques différentes, indépendamment les unes des autres, les colonies grecques antiques de Messambria, Apollonia, Odessos et Dionysopolis ont des types de monnaies complètement différents. Cependant, dans une certaine mesure, leurs monnayages se croisent et comportent des traits parallèles. Ce parallélisme apparaît surtout au IIIe s. av. J.-C., lorsque Messambria, Odessos et Dionysopolis commencent à battre des tétradrachmes d’argent aux types d’Alexandre. Pendant la même période, Odessos, au nord du Hémus, et Messambria, au sud, frappent des statères d’or, également du type ‘alexandrin’, ainsi que des imitations des statères de Lysimaque.

Chalcédoine, s’est effectuée en plusieurs fois, et c’est pour cette raison que les auteurs anciens associent la fondation de Messambria à ces deux événements importants (Velkov 1969, p. 16). La fondation la plus ancienne d’Apollonia implique également des contacts économiques avec la population autochtone. C’est ce qui a sans doute imposé l’introduction d’un instrument d’échange prémonétaire – les flèches-monnaies, qui se sont par la suite largement répandues dans toute la partie ouest et nord-ouest de la région pontique. Dès 1934, sur le cap d’Attia, situé entre Burgas et Sozopol (Fig. 3), a été mise au jour une trouvaille importante de plus de 2000 flèches-monnaies de bronze. Todor Guerassimov les interprète comme ‘une forme prémonétaire de l’argent dans la tribu thrace des Astes’ (Guerassimov 1959, 85-86). Le fait qu'elles aient été mises au jour à Jourilovka, à l’embouchure du Danube, dans les ruines d’Histria et près de Tariverde, non loin d’Histria, et leur diffusion à Olbia, dans l’île de Berezan, ainsi que sur le territoire d’Olbia (Dimitrov 1975, p. 43) ont poussé de nombreux chercheurs à ne pas accepter l’interprétation de Guerassimov. Ils pensent, pour la plupart, que les monnaies-flèches devraient être associées aux Scythes ou, respectivement, aux tribus thraces de la région d’Histria, et non aux Astes, qui ne sont mentionnés que dans des documents postérieurs. La diffusion radiale de cette forme prémonétaire autour des colonies milésiennes d'Apollonia, d'Histria et d'Olbia ont amené B. Dimitrov à la conclusion que ces ‘flèchesmonnaies’ ne sont typiques que des colonies de Milet (Dimitrov 1975, p. 44). C’est évidemment vrai, mais comment expliquer le fait qu’aucune monnaie-flèche de la métropole même de Milet ne soit connue?

Messambria ne connaît pas de formes d’échange prémonétaire. Un seul lingot de bronze en forme de dauphin a été découvert sur la presqu’île de Nessébar (Fig. 1), et une monnaie-flèche, marquée par la lettre ‘A’, provient du territoire de la cité. Cela est sans doute dû au fait que la cité dorienne a été fondée environ un siècle après Apollonia (Fig. 2) qui, selon la tradition antique, est constituée en cité à la fin du VIIe s., vers l’an 610 av. J.-C. (Danov 1968, p. 275). La fondation de Messambria est généralement datée de la dernière décennie du VIe et de la première décennie du Ve s. av. J.-C. (Velkov 1969, p. 15). Cette datation repose sur les témoignages des auteurs antiques, dont le plus ancien est Hérodote. Le père de l’histoire mentionne une fois la ville en parlant de la campagne scythe de Darius en 513/512 av. J.-C. (Hdt. IV, 93) et une deuxième fois en décrivant l’écrasement de la révolte des Grecs d’Asie Mineure contre les Perses et les événements qui s’ensuivirent en 493 av. J.-C. Alors, chassés de leur pays natal, les Byzantins et les Chalcédoniens fuirent ‘vers l’intérieur, en direction du Pont-Euxin, et y fondèrent la cité de Messambria’ [...oÍxonto... Ésw ™ß tòn EÚceinon pónton, kaì ™nqaûta pólin Mesambríhn oÍkhsan.] (Hdt. VI, 33). Le matériel archéologique et les monnaies, découverts dans l’actuelle Nessébar et non loin de la ville, près des villages de Ravda et de Svéti Vlas, laissent supposer que l’arrivée de colons doriens de Mégare, Byzance et

Petar Balabanov, qui adopte le terme de ‘flèches-argent’, a fait une analyse technologique détaillée de la trouvaille d’Attia et a proposé, lui aussi, une interprétation. Selon lui, le poids moyen des 1810 monnaies (c’est le nombre des monnaies-flèches dans la collection du Musée archéologique de Burgas) est de 4,42 g, la différence entre les pièces les plus légères et les plus lourdes dans

∗

Dr. KARAYOTOV IVAN DIMITROV, Professeur de recherches au Musée Archéologique de Bourgas; Professeur en archéologie classique à l’Université de Shumen ‘Epeskope Konstantin Preslavski’. 1971 –Archéologue au Musée de Sandanski. 1972–1974 -conservateur dans le département d’Archéologie du Musée départemental de Bourgas. 1974–1982 -collaborateur scientifique IIIe degré en archéologie classique au Musée de Bourgas. 1982–1986 -collaborateur scientifique IIe degré en archéologie classique. 1986–1996 -collaborateur scientifique Ier degré en archéologie classique et numismatique. 1996–2002 -professeur associé en archéologie classique et numismatique au Musée archéologique de Bourgas. 2003 Professeur de recherches dans le Musée archéologique de Bourgas. 2004 – Professeur d’archéologie classique à l’Université de Shumen Address: Bourgas 8000, 8 Saedinénié. Tél. (+359)(0) 823 297; Mobile: (+359) (0) 888 178 088; Office (+359)(0) 843 541. Web: www.ivankarayotov.hit.bg E-mail: [email protected]

127

ANCIENT GREEK COLONIES IN THE BLACK SEA 2 les différents types étant de l’ordre de 2,5 à 6,4 g. Il constate que plus de 75 % des lingots pèsent entre 4,0 et 4,9 g (Balabanov 1986, p. 8), et propose un classement arbitraire de la trouvaille d’Attia en type A et type B, et distingue plus de 20 variétés de ces principaux types. La tentative de dénombrer les moules qui ont servi à couler ces formes prémonétaires a amené cet auteur à la conclusion qu’ils étaient plus de 69 (Balabanov 1986, p. 8).

hasard si des pointes de flèches fonctionnelles ont été placées dans le trésor de la région de Nessébar, comprenant 1 obole d’Apollonia et 40 monnaies de bronze de Messambria (Guerassimov 1937, p. 319). Or, ce trésor a été enfoui au plus tôt au IIIe s. av. J.-C. À cette époque, les monnaies-flèches anciennes en forme de lingots avaient certainement déjà disparu, et avaient été remplacées par des pointes des flèches fonctionnelles à trois tranchants. Il semble que, dans ce cas, nous nous trouvons en présence d’un motif sacral. C’est pour cela que Mihail Lazarov et le numismate ukrainien Vladilen Anohin découvrent un lien direct entre les monnaiesflèches et le culte d’Apollon Iatros, pratiqué à Apollonia, Histria et Olbia. Lazarov nous rappelle même le mythe du prêtre hyperboréen du dieu de la colonisation grecque, qui errait tenant une flèche en or. C’était l’arme sacrée avec laquelle Apollon aurait tué les Cyclopes (Lazarov 1992, 98-100).

Aux trouvailles déjà connues, Balabanov ajoute des renseignements sur quelques-unes encore, qui élargissent considérablement l’aire géographique de diffusion des monnaies-flèches. Au nord, elle s’étend jusqu’à la partie centrale de l’Ukraine actuelle, au sud elle touche à Smolyan, à l’ouest – aux alentours de la ville de Lom (Balabanov 1986, p. 11). Pour déterminer la date haute de l’émission des monnaies-flèches, Balabanov utilise l’analyse physico-chimique des trouvailles de l’île de Berezan. Leur composition correspond à celle des bronzes découverts dans les couches archéologiques des VIIe – VIe s. av. J.-C. (Balabanov 1986, p. 10). Les limites chronologiques dans lesquelles il place la production et la circulation des monnaies-flèches, à savoir le début du VIe – le début du IVe s. av. J.-C., sont confirmées par les trouvailles postérieures isolées, marquées par les symboles d’Apollonia et d’Histria, respectivement une ancre dressée et une roue à quatre rayons.

Il s’est avéré que la présence de l’ancre, le symbole d’Apollonia, sur les monnaies-flèches, n’était pas un phénomène isolé. Dans le livre de Manfred Oppermann est publiée une monnaie-flèche, découverte sur le territoire d’Histria, et marquée d’une roue à quatre rayons (Fig. 6) (Oppermann 2004, Tab. 26, 1b). Or, la roue à quatre rayons est typique des monnaies de bronze d’Histria de la fin du Ve s. av. J.-C. (SNG, IX, 1, 220224). Nous disposons déjà de données fiables quant à l’emplacement des ateliers de monnaies sur le littoral ouest et nord-ouest du Pont, qui émettaient des flèchesmonnaies dans la période de la fin du VIIe au tout début du IVe s. av. J.-C. Sur la presqu’île d’Attia, non loin d’Apollonia et des remparts de Yagorlitz dans la région d’Olbia, ont été mis au jour des moules ayant servi à couler des monnaies-flèches (Guerassimov 1959, p. 85; Balabanov 1986, p. 11). Le moule de la presqu’île d’Attia représentait une plaque rectangulaire d’argile, sur laquelle il y avait des rangées de monnaies-flèches en creux. Malheureusement, dès sa mise au jour en 1934, cet instrument précieux a été brisé et jeté.

La mise au jour de monnaies-flèches portant l’image d’une ancre dressée avec la lettre A au-dessous (Fig. 4), nous pousse à réexaminer les hypothèses formulées précédemment et à en émettre de nouvelles. Le premier exemplaire portant ces marques significatives est arrivé dans la collection du Musée archéologique de Varna. Le fait même que cette fléchette ait été marquée de la lettre A, et la présence de dizaines d’exemplaires ne portant que ce A (Fig. 5), sans l’image de l’ancre, signifient que ces monnaies-flèches sont postérieures aux grandes trouvailles d’Attia et des territoires d’Histria et d’Olbia. Nous devons les dater, de manière très générale pour l’instant, au Ve s. av. J.-C., ce qui signifie qu’elles auraient été coulées en même temps que les premières émissions d’argent d’Apollonia et de Messambria.

La présence de l’ancre dressée d’Apollonia et de la roue à quatre rayons d’Histria sur des flèches-monnaies est un nouvel argument prouvant qu’elles ont été coulées par ces colonies ouest-pontiques. Dans la chôra et la proshôra d’Apollonia, nous avons des trouvailles isolées de la forteresse du village de Rusokastro (commune de Kameno) – deux fléchettes. Un exemplaire a été trouvé dans le village de Tcherkovo (commune de Karnobat), un autre – dans la forteresse de Balgarovo (commune de Burgas) (Guerassimov 1959, p. 86, Fig. 65). Nous disposons déjà d’informations sur des trouvailles de Plovdiv (Philippopolis) et une petite trouvaille collective dans le village de Smilyan, région de Smolyan (Jurukova 1977, p. 68). Rappelons également la découverte dans le village de Strandja (Guerassimov 1946, p. 240), situé à la frontière bulgaro-turque, ainsi que des exemplaires isolés

Une question se pose alors: à quoi est dû ce conservatisme qui consiste à faire circuler des lingots primitifs de bronze en même temps que les monnaies proprement dites? Probablement, la prolongation de la circulation des monnaies-flèches en bronze est-elle due à la nécessité d’un petit module de bronze bien avant que les Apolloniens et les Histriens commencent à frapper des monnaies de bronze véritables. Habitués à un instrument d’échange en bronze, les Thraces habitant la proshôra et la chôra (les territoires éloignés ou proches) des colonies grecques, y sont probablement restés attachés pendant longtemps. Ce n’est certainement pas un 128

IVAN KARAYOTOV : LE MONNAYAGE DE MESSAMBRIA ET LES MONNAYAGES D’APOLLONIA, ODESSOS ET DIONYSOPOLIS provenant d’Apollonia même, et de sépultures de la presqu’île d’Attia (Dimitrov 1975, p. 44 ; Guerassimov 1959, p. 85). Nous avons ainsi une image complète de la circulation des monnaies-flèches d’Apollonia, qui, même si elles ne sont pas reconnues comme une forme ancienne de monétarisation proprement dite de la région d’Apollonia, peuvent être considérées comme une anticipation de celle-ci. Nous avons désormais la certitude que les monnaies-flèches appartiennent non pas à la tribu thrace des Astes, mais à Apollonia même ; elles sont émises parce qu’elles sont efficaces aussi pour les tribus thraces locales. À un moment très ancien de la vie de la colonie milésienne, elles commencent à jouer le rôle d’une sorte de ‘devise’ dans les contacts économiques des Grecs et des Thraces dans l’arrière-pays proche et éloigné d’Apollonia.

Les hémioboles d’Apollonia du type ‘Ancre dressée – Croix gammée’ doivent être datés, selon moi, de la première moitié du Ve s. av. J.-C. Sur ces monnaies sont absents deux éléments typiques des émissions postérieures, la lettre A et l’écrevisse flanquant l’ancre dressée. La croix gammée sur le revers n’a pas de lettres entre les branches, et sur d’autres pièces sont gravés des dauphins minuscules. Les hémioboles sans inscription sont rares. Dans une collection privée de Burgas, il y a trois pièces, découvertes sur la plage de Sozopol : Avers : Ancre dressée Revers : Croix gammée avec des dauphins symétriques entre les branches 1. AR 0,34 g (Fig. 7a) 2. AR 0,33 g (Fig. 7b) 3. AR 0.39, (Fig. 7c) 4. AR 0.38 (avec la lettre A (Fig. 8)

Le toponyme Attia provient du nom de l’antique Anthée, mentionnée par Étienne de Byzance (Anqeia) et de l’Anthia de Pline l’Ancien (Plinio, N. h. 11, 45), qui était l’ancien nom d’Apollonia. S’appuyant sur les sources antiques, Ivan Venedikov et Ivan Galabov ont lié l’actuelle Attia à l’ancienne Anqeia’ (Venedikov 1948, p. 9 ; Galabov 1957, p. 408). Anthia – l’ancien nom d’Apollonia, selon Pline, est interprété par les philologues classiques comme une glose thrace, qui est même attestée comme une épiclèse du dieu Apollon sur un monument épigraphique de la région de Haskovo (Dechev 1976, S. 17 $Anqihnóß). Le fait d’associer l’épithète $Anqihnóß au dieu Apollon dans notre cas nous fait revenir tout naturellement à l’idée de Vladilen Anohin et de Mihail Lazarov, que les pointes de flèches de bronze non fonctionnelles sont liées au culte d’Apollon Iatros et à un de ses corrélations chez les Thraces et chez des Scythes locaux. Là encore, comme dans la plus haute Antiquité, le sacré se mêle à l’utilitaire. Les monnaies-flèches nous parviennent pour témoigner de la complexité de la vie spirituelle et économique dans une zone de contact englobant tout le littoral ouest et nord-ouest du Pont-Euxin. Tout naturellement, elles aboutissent à l’introduction des monnaies proprement dites qui seront, elles aussi, chargées d’une sémantique spirituelle et d’un effet économique utilitaire. Le monnayage d’argent d’Apollonia Messambria aux Ve – IVe s. av. J.-C.

et

Il y a également un hémiobole dans la collection du British Museum, et d'après le Sylloge de Martin Price, il pèse 0,33 g et a été frappé selon le système de Rhodes (SNG, IX, 1, 149). Il y a une différence entre cette pièce et les hémioboles de la plage de Sozopol et de la collection du Musée de Varna. La monnaie du British Museum porte l’inscription ‘АПО’ et elle est datée très exactement de la deuxième moitié du Ve s. av. J.-C. Les drachmes anciennes sont extrêmement intéressantes. Elles sont du type ‘Ancre dressée – Croix gammée dans un carré creux’ (Fig. 9). Sur certains exemplaires rares, entre les branches de la croix gammée sont gravés des dauphins (Fig. 10). D’après Martin Price, ces émissions ont été frappées selon le système pondéral de Rhodes. La drachme du British Museum pèse 3,74 g (SNG, IX, 1, 148). Les drachmes de la collection personnelle de D. Dimitrov de la Fig. 10 pèsent : 4.30, 4,37, 4.30, 3.30 et 3,40. Le poids moyen des monnaies citées est de 3.90 g. Price date la monnaie du British Museum de ‘la fin du Ve s. av. J.-C.’, mais je pense qu’elle remonte, ainsi que les autres exemplaires cités, à la première moitié du siècle, parce qu’ils ne portent pas de lettres. Dans le champ droit, on voit une écrevisse. Nous pouvons avancer un argument archéologique en faveur d’une datation plus ancienne de ces hémioboles et de ces drachmes. Les ancres sur l’avers des monnaies ont non pas un jas de plomb, mais un jas de pierre parfaitement distinct, et les spécialistes de la navigation s’en servent pour procéder à des reconstructions. Cela soutient la thèse d’une datation plus ancienne de ces hémioboles et de ces drachmes. Si les jas de pierre sont datés, assez témérairement, de l’an 600 environ, une date peu après l’an 500 av. J.-C. semble parfaitement plausible pour les monnaies sur lesquelles les spécialistes d’histoire de la navigation distinguent les jas de pierre typiques du VIe s. av. J.-C. (Kapitän 1982, 290-299). L’ancre, qui est le symbole d’Apollonia, doit aussi avoir influencé fortement les Thraces de la région. Ainsi, nous retrouvons l’image primitive d’une ancre sur un fragment de vase façonné à la main (Fig 11),

de

Les deux cités, situées des deux côtés du Golfe de Burgas, commencent à frapper des monnaies d’argent presque simultanément dans la première moitié du Ve s. av. J.-C. Dès cette époque, leurs ateliers de monnaies émettent des types complètement différents, mais devenus par la suite principaux pour ces cités. Le seul élément qui les rapproche est qu’Apollonia et Messambria commencent par battre des monnaies de petit module: des hémioboles (Apollonia) et des oboles (Messambria), mais peu de temps après, ces cités passent aux drachmes.

129

ANCIENT GREEK COLONIES IN THE BLACK SEA 2 découvert dans les couches anciennes des VIe – Ve s. av. J.-C. dans la forteresse thrace de Malkoto Kalé, située à 14,5 km au sud-ouest de Sozopol (Domaradski, Karayotov 1982, p. 366, Fig. 788).

comme la chouette athénienne est présente sur le monnayage de la ville pontique du sud Amisos (SNG, IX, 1, 1053-1126), il est possible que la Méduse apotropéique de l’armure et de l’égide de la déesse Athéna apparaisse sur les drachmes d’argent d’Apollonia. Selon la datation de Martin Price, le Gorgoneion sur les émissions de bronze d’Olbia date aussi de la seconde moitié du Ve s. av. J.-C. (SNG, IX, 1, 379-389).

La présence de dauphins sur les drachmes anciennes d’Apollonia peut naturellement être associée au culte du dieu éponyme de la cité. Cependant, elle est encore plus proche des lingots prémonétaires : les dauphins de bronze. Un exemplaire en a été récemment découvert à Nessébar, un autre à Sozopol, et enfin, un dans les ruines de la ville romaine de Deultum. Les musées de Varna et de Balchik possèdent encore plus de ‘dauphins’. La collection du Musée archéologique de Balchik contient, selon Ivan Jordanov, près de 150 exemplaires de ‘documents prémonétaires’, notion englobant les lingotsflèches et les lingots-dauphins (Jordanov 1990, p. 51). Une photo de quelques dauphins de la région de Varna (Fig. 12) a été publiée par Igor Lazarenko (Lazarenko 2003, p. 6). Ces trouvailles témoignent clairement que les lingots de bronze en forme de dauphins n’étaient pas le seul attribut d’Olbia. Ils étaient visiblement en circulation également dans les territoires des cités ouest-pontiques, situées le long de l’actuelle côte bulgare.

C’est du Ve s. av. J.-C. que datent deux tétradrachmes d’Athènes de la première période de son monnayage, qui ont été trouvés à Burgas (Fig. 14) et à Ahtopol. L’emplacement du premier correspond avec certitude à la chôra (le territoire proche) de la cité d’Apollonia, et le deuxième provient probablement de sa proshôra (les territoires plus éloignés). Au début de cette transition, les magistrats monétaires et les graveurs d’Apollonia restent fidèles au symbole principal de la ville et continuent à placer l’ancre sur l’avers des drachmes. Les pièces les plus anciennes présentent une écrevisse, gravée à droite de l’ancre, sans la lettre A à gauche. En commentant une drachme de ce type, Todor Gerassimov a inversé les places de l’avers et du revers (Gerassimov 1975, p. 26 no 19). Récemment, une monnaie du même type (sans A) est apparue dans une vente aux enchères aux États-Unis (Auction 58, CNG 2001, n° 349). Ces deux drachmes pèsent respectivement 3,40 et 3,41 g. Gerassimov date l’émission entre 480 et 440 av. J.-C., et les éditeurs de Auction 58 descende la limite chronologique à 450-400, ce qui est probablement plus exact, parce que l’introduction du type Gorgone Méduse par Apollonia, comme nous l’avons vu, présente un lien, bien qu’indirect, avec le renforcement de l’influence d’Athènes dans les régions du Pont après l’expédition pontique de Périclès vers 437 av. J.-C. (Brachinski 1958, 110-121). Les drachmes de Lanz, Auktion 72 (29 mai 1995), n° 136 et Auktion 50 (27 novembre 1989), n° 117, présentent les mêmes caractéristiques. Elles pèsent 3,32 g et 3,36 g, leur poids est donc approximativement le même que celui des deux pièces décrites plus haut. Dans la collection du British Museum, il y a trois drachmes du type ‘Ancre – Méduse’ sans A, et sept autres présentant la même combinaison de coins, mais avec la lettre A (SNG, IX, 1, 150-152, 153159).

Le dauphin en tant que créature marine et symbole d’Apollon est tout naturellement entré aussi dans le monnayage proprement dit d’Olbia et d’Apollonia. Les dauphins sur les revers des drachmes d’Apollonia sont la preuve que, dans cette colonie milésienne, Apollon était également vénéré comme Delphinios. Si les flèchesmonnaies peuvent être rattachées à son hypostase de Iatros, les dauphins évoquent directement son épiclèse de Delphinios. Il serait incorrect de traiter la divinité seulement comme un guérisseur, en nous fondant sur l’épithète de ‘Iatros’. En l’occurrence, ce terme a un sens plus général, et ‘Iatros’ doit être interprété non seulement dans le sens de ‘guérisseur’ de maladies, mais aussi de protecteur des colons qui ont fondé la cité d’Apollonia. Ce n’est pas un hasard si, à une époque plus tardive, l’inscription ‘$Apóllwnoß $Iatroû’ est placée sur les émissions portant l’effigie de la statue de bronze du principal sanctuaire d’Apollonia. Au cours de la première moitié du Vème siècle ont été frappées des séries de drachmes sans dauphins du type Ancre dressé – croix gammée ou bien quadratum incusum’.

Lors de l’analyse de 112 drachmes d’Apollonia (des tétroboles, selon Gerassimov), l’auteur de la publication a remarqué une anomalie dans l’utilisation des coins d’avers et de revers. Dans les groupes I, II et III selon son classement, il constate que la tête de la Gorgone Méduse est imprimée avec un coin de revers, c’est-à-dire mobile. Selon lui, il s’agit d’une ‘anomalie’ (Gerassimov 1948, p. 146). Après la publication du trésor de Partisani (ancien Ganchevo) par A. Stephanova (Stephanova 1985, 19-28), il devient clair que la disposition de l’ancre sur l’avers des drachmes est un phénomène tout à fait naturel, justement parce qu’elle est le symbole d’Apollonia.

Dans le troisième quart du Ve s. av. J.-C., Apollonia commence à battre aussi des drachmes avec une ancre sur l’avers et la Gorgone Méduse sur le revers (Fig. 13). Le symbole principal d’Apollonia, l’ancre, continue à marquer ces nouvelles émissions en argent, mais parallèlement, on voit apparaître la Gorgone Méduse apotropéique. Cette nouvelle complication du type monétaire d’argent est probablement due à des changements politiques, et avant tout à l’influence d’Athènes à Apollonia (Erxleben 1970, S. 123). Tout 130

IVAN KARAYOTOV : LE MONNAYAGE DE MESSAMBRIA ET LES MONNAYAGES D’APOLLONIA, ODESSOS ET DIONYSOPOLIS Comme nous l’avons vu, l’ancre dressée apparaît comme un type d’avers dès le début du monnayage d’argent d’Apollonia, et même sur les monnaies-flèches de bronze, que nous faisons remonter à la première moitié du Ve s. av. J.-C. Lorsque la Gorgone Méduse apparaît sur les drachmes, elle est gravée sur le revers des drachmes présentant une ancre dressée sur l’avers, qui ne portent pas encore la lettre A. Après l’introduction du marquage par une lettre, l’ancre reste une image de l’avers, et il y a probablement un moment de transition, quand la Méduse et l’ancre échangent souvent leurs places. Voilà pourquoi dans le trésor de la région de Shoumen et celui de Partisani (ancien Ganchevo) apparaît ce que l’on croyait être une anomalie, et la Méduse apparaît tour à tour sur le revers et sur l’avers. Cependant, dans le trésor du sanctuaire d’Apollon Karsénos de la colline Shiloto près de Burgas (Fig. 15), les 120 pièces portent toutes sur l’avers la Méduse et sur le revers une ancre dressée (Kiyashkina 2000, 106-116).

moyen des monnaies de Ténévo est de 3.24 g, et de celles de Roza – de 3.25 g. Les autres trésors de drachmes d’Apollonia contiennent des émissions plus tardives. Pour celles-ci, le poids de moins de 3 g peut être considéré comme étant un signe distinctif. Dans le trésor de Partisani (Ganchevo), il y a six pièces dont le poids est inférieur à 3 g, la plus légère ne pesant que 2,45 g (Stephanova 1985, 19-28), et dans le trésor de la région de Shumen, seules 10 des 112 monnaies pèsent moins de 3 g, la plus légère pesant 2,25 g. Cependant, le trésor de Shumen est homogène et il serait risqué de dater son enfouissement en nous appuyant uniquement sur des signes métrologiques. Le fait que ces trésors contiennent surtout des émissions du Ve s. av. J.-C. me fait penser que leur enfouissement pourrait plutôt remonter à la première moitié du IVe s. av. J.-C. Sur unne drachme du type ‘Méduse – Ancre dressée’ a été gravé le nom du magistra: ΖΩΠYPOΣ (Fig. 15a).

Nous pouvons à juste titre admettre que les émissions dans lesquelles l’ancre apparaît sur l’avers sont antérieures à celles présentant la Gorgone Méduse. En l’occurrence, nous sommes simplement en présence de deux types monétaires d’Apollonia. L’un, ‘Ancre dressée – Méduse’, et l’autre ‘Méduse – Ancre dressée’. Une certaine contemporanéité de ces deux types est possible, mais nous devons admettre que cette contemporanéité ne peut être appelée ‘anomalie’ et qu’il s’agit simplement d’une période de transition entre les deux types. Seul l’examen de l’ensemble du matériel monétaire nous permettrait de fixer la durée relative de la transition entre ces deux types monétaires homogènes. Les données métrologiques nous permettraient également de résoudre ce problème essentiel, mais pour l’instant insoluble. Car tout porte à croire que les monnaies d’argent d’Apollonia présentant la Méduse et l’ancre ont été battues pendant une longue période entre le milieu du troisième quart du Ve et le milieu du troisième quart du IVe s. av. J.-C., soit une période de près de 100 ans.

Il est parfaitement clair que le trésor du sanctuaire d’Apollon Karsénos de la colline Shiloto près de Burgas, mis au jour en 1996, a été enfoui le dernier. Chacune des 120 monnaies de ce trésor porte la Gorgone Méduse sur l’avers et une ancre dressée sur le revers. Elles ont été frappées avec 50 coins d’avers et 68 coins de revers. Aucune d’entre elles ne pèse plus de 3 g, limite pondérale que j’ai adoptée. Leur poids moyen est de 2,86 g, la drachme la plus lourde pesant 2,96 g, et la plus légère 2,74 g (Kiyashkina 2000, 107-108, Fig. 1 et 112-113). Tous ces signes témoignent que le trésor de Burgas ne contient que des émissions tardives de drachmes d’Apollonia, et qu’il a probablement été enterré plus tardivement que les autres. L’auteur de la publication propose une date parfaitement crédible pour son enfouissement en admettant que la thésaurisation dans le sanctuaire s’est produite lors de l’une des campagnes de Philippe II en Thrace, vers 339 av. J.-C. Après avoir examiné les plus anciennes émissions d’argent d’Apollonia remontant à la première moitié du Ve s. av. J.-C., et avoir constaté qu’à l’aube de son monnayage on trouve le petit module qu’est l’hémiobole, je soulignerai une fois encore que sur ce point la colonie milésienne présente certaines ressemblances avec la colonie dorienne Messambria.

Ces réflexions sont corroborées dans une large mesure par le contenu des trésors dans lesquels nous retrouvons des drachmes d’Apollonia. Les émissions les plus anciennes du type ‘Ancre dressée – Méduse’ sont présentes dans les trésors de Roza et de Ténévo, région de Yambol (Draganov 1981, 29-39). Il est clair que ceuxci comprennent des émissions d’argent d’Apollonia datant de la période chronologique 440-400 av. J.-C. La plupart des drachmes ont des flans irréguliers, 8 pièces de Ténévo portent une ancre dressée sur l’avers, 7 autres – la Gorgone Méduse. Dans le trésor de Roza, seuls 3 exemplaires portent une Méduse sur l’avers, 6 une ancre dressée. Chacune de ces monnaies pèse plus de 3 g, le poids maximal des 15 monnaies d’Apollonia dans le trésor de Ténévo étant de 3,31 g, et le poids minimal de 3,02 g. Pour les 9 exemplaires du trésor de Roza, ce poids est respectivement de 3,37 et de 3,18 g. Le poids

Avant la parution de mon article sur les ‘Les plus anciennes monnaies de Messambria’ (Karayotov 1998, 53-58), Martin Price avait daté d’une manière très générale du Ve s. av. J.-C. une obole de Messambria du type ‘Casque de face – Quatre carrés creux, disposés en diagonale (Four part incuse, diagonal quarters filled – 0,51 g)’ (SNG, IX, 1, 265). Une autre monnaie d’argent du même module a été datée par Todor Gerassimov ‘d’environ 440 av. J.-C.’ (Gerassimov 1975, p. 30). Les oboles de Messambria découvertes au cours des dernières années, avec une roue archaïque sur le revers, sans la 131

ANCIENT GREEK COLONIES IN THE BLACK SEA 2 légende META entre les rayons, apportent la preuve que Messambria a commencé son monnayage d’argent en même temps qu’Apollonia, dès la première moitié du Ve s. av. J.-C. Je commencerai par la description des émissions messambriennes d’oboles et de drachmes qui sont, selon moi, les plus anciennes, pour arriver aux dioboles de même valeur et circulant ensemble, des deux cités de l’actuel littoral bulgare méridional de la mer Noire.

Oboles de Messambria ‘Athéna – META dans quatre carrés’ Nikola Mushmov et Todor Gerassimov ont commenté une obole de Messambria de la collection du Musée archéologique de Sofia. Trois autres pièces de ce type viennent d’être découvertes sur le territoire de Messambria. Les caractéristiques en sont : Avers : Tête d’Athéna portant un casque corinthien, tournée à gauche. Revers : META dans quatre carrés creux. 9. AR 8 mm. 0,596 g. La vallée de la rivière Hadjiika. Collection du Dr Decho Dechev, Burgas. (Fig. 21). 10. AR 9 mm. 0,580 g. Nessébar, le quartier moderne. Collection Todor Vassilev, Ahéloï, commune de Nessébar. Avers : Tête d’Athéna portant un casque corinthien, tournée à droite. Revers : META dans quatre carrés creux. 11. AR 7 mm. 0,621 g. Nessébar, le quartier moderne. Collection personnelle, Burgas.

Oboles de Messambria sans inscription Avers : Casque de face. Dans les ouvertures pour les yeux, des points en relief marquent les yeux de l’oikiste (fondateur de la cité). Revers : Roue à quatre rayons qui se terminent par de petits triangles, absence d’inscription et de croix gammées. 1. AR 8 mm. 0,41 g (Fig. 16). Découverte dans les dunes de sable entre Nessébar et Ravda. Collection Angel Harizanov, Ahéloï, commune de Pomorié. 2. AR 7 mm. 0,40 g (Fig. 17). Découverte dans les dunes de sable entre Nessébar et Ravda.

Drachme de Messambria avec Melsas de profil sur le revers Avers : Casque de face, avec des points visiblement saillants dans les ouvertures en forme d’amande pour les yeux. Revers : Roue à quatre rayons. Absence de légende. L’un des secteurs comporte une tête d’homme avec un casque à oreillons, aux traits archaïques, et dans le secteur opposé est gravée la croix gammée ou tétraskèle, que nous connaissons des drachmes, des oboles et des dioboles. 12. AR. 3,08 g. Découverte dans le lieu-dit Kosharitsa de Messambria (Fig. 22). Collection privée (Karayotov 2001, 11-14 ; Idem 2003, p. 58, Fig. 3).

Oboles de Messambria à quatre croix gammées Revers : Roue à quatre rayons avec quatre croix gammées entre les rayons. 3. AR 10 mm. 0,69 g (Fig. 18). Découverte entre Nessébar et Ravda. Collection Todor Vassilev, Ahéloï, commune de Pomorié. (Karayotov 1998, p. 53, n° 1, Fig. 1). 4. AR 9 mm. 0,55 g. Découverte entre Nessébar et Ravda (Fig. 19). Collection Angel Harizanov, Ahéloï, commune de Pomorié. Oboles de Messambria avec l’inscription MEΣ et une croix gammée Revers : MEΣ, croix gammée entre les rayons d’une roue. 5. AR 7/9 mm. 0,66 g. Burgas, Musée archéologique, numéro d’inventaire 1584 (Karayotov 1998, p. 55, n° 5, Fig. 5). 6. Revers : MEΣ [croix gammée] contraire au sens des aiguilles d’une montre. Minuscules lignes en relief sur la périphérie de la roue. AR. 8 mm. 0,52 g. Découverte au bord de la mer dans le glissement de terrain entre Nessébar et Ravda (Fig. 20). Collection Angel Harizanov, Ahéloï, commune de Nessébar. 7. AR 0,51 g. Londres, British Museum (SNG, IX, 1, 267). 8. MEΣ [croix gammée] dans le sens des aiguilles d’une montre. AR 7/9 mm. 0,64 g. Découverte au bord de la mer, entre Nessébar et Ravda (Fig. 20R1). Collection Angel Harizanov, Ahéloï.

Sur les avers de toutes ces monnaies on distingue clairement des yeux d’homme derrière le casque, et il est tout naturel d’admettre qu’il ne s’agit pas uniquement d’un élément des armes de protection d’un guerrier, mais que c’est l’effigie du fondateur de la cité. Au Ve s. av. J.C., cette pratique existait également dans d’autres villes, où cependant la tête casquée est représentée de profil. Nous citerons les exemples de la colonie phocéenne Massalia [Marseille] (Fürtwängler 1999, 175-181; Idem 2000, S. 177) et de Phocée, qui ont des émissions avec la tête du fondateur de la cité Phocos, ou avec son casque et un phoque au-dessus (Bodenstedt 1973, S. 43). Il s’agit cependant de fondateurs qui étaient à la tête des groupes des premiers colons: c’étaient donc des Grecs d’une métropole précise, qui n’appartenaient pas à l’ethnie locale. En m'appuyant sur les numismates reconnus que j'ai cités, et tenant compte de plusieurs faits archéologiques et historiques concrets concernant Messambria, je tiens pour acquis que derrière le casque, sur les oboles et les drachmes anciennes de Messambria, se trouve le fondateur thrace Melsas. Mais des chercheurs 132

IVAN KARAYOTOV : LE MONNAYAGE DE MESSAMBRIA ET LES MONNAYAGES D’APOLLONIA, ODESSOS ET DIONYSOPOLIS hypercritiques pourraient objecter que cela reste contestable, parce que les auteurs qui le mentionnent sont éloignés dans le temps de la fondation de la cité de Messambria.

historiens de l’époque. Cela signifie-t-il que les historiens d’aujourd’hui devraient, eux aussi, les ignorer? Le culte des héros et des divinités locales existait chez les Grecs dès les premiers siècles de la colonisation. Apollonios de Rhodes écrit que les Argonautes, ces héros littéraires par excellence de l’époque de la colonisation, avaient toujours honoré les héros et les ‘divinités du lieu’. Cette qualité, selon Hanell, caractérisait également les habitants de Mégare, qui étaient les ancêtres des Messambriens (Hanell 1934, S. 161). Même dans la lointaine Colchide, ils célébraient leur culte, honorant les dieux des tribus locales: ‘spéndei dè $Iáswn katà tò palaiòn Éqoß. Tò dè Ên spéndein toùß eœß ˜llodapçn ˜fikoménoß toîß ™gxwríoiß qeoîß spéndei dè $Iáswn katà tò palaiòn Éqoß. Tò dè Ên spéndein toùß eœß ˜llodapçn ˜fikoménoß toîß ™gxwríoiß qeoîß ‘ (Apoll. Rod. II, 1274).

Je rappellerai donc que la cité grecque a été fondée environ un siècle après sa voisine Apollonia, à l’extrême fin du VIe et dans la première décennie du Ve s. av. J.-C. Même si nous admettons que derrière le casque de face se cache un fondateur d’origine dorienne, celui-ci devrait, selon la tradition, être un ancien citoyen noble de Byzance ou de Chalcédoine, d’où sont arrivés sur la presqu’île de l’actuelle Nessébar, probablement en deux vagues, les colons grecs. Et c’est son nom qu’auraient ressuscité les ‘auteurs tardifs’ cités dans le détail par Krzisztof Nawotka (Nawotka 1994 et 1997). Tel est le cas d’Apollonia. L’auteur tardif Claude Aelian témoigne qu’elle a été fondée par le célèbre philosophe naturaliste Anaximandre (Aelianus, Var. Hist. 3, 17). Le nom d’Apollonia porte des traits grecs traditionnels et il est tout naturel que ses habitants recherchent le fondateur le plus illustre possible. Quant aux Messambriens, ils se sont établis sur la presqu’île de Nessébar, poussés par les Perses. Ils se trouvaient dans une situation extrême et la bienveillance des Thraces du littoral en 512 (519 selon Nawotka) leur était bien plus nécessaire. C’est cette situation frontalière qui a provoqué une mnémé mythologique durable, qui a acquis, dans la conscience des Messambriens, le caractère d’historicité.

Le fondateur au casque de face sur les émissions anciennes de Messambria ne peut être que Melsas, qui s’est affirmé dans la tradition antique. À l’argument que les renseignements sur lui n’existent que chez des auteurs tardifs, on peut répondre d’abord par une contrequestion. Hormis Hérodote, existe-t-il d’autres renseignements écrits sur Messambria, datant du Ve au IIIe s. av. J.-C.? C’est grâce aux auteurs plus tardifs comme Strabon (Strab. 7, 6, 1) et Nicolas de Damas, qui ont puisé leurs informations chez Étienne de Byzance (FrGrH Jacoby 2A, 346 ; 2C, 224), que nous est parvenu le fil d’Ariane qui seul peut nous conduire à travers le dédale des siècles précédents, pour nous mener aux couches culturelles spirituelles de la Messambria préhellénique. Selon Venedikov, les couches archéologiques du Halstatt sur la presqu’île de Nessébar atteignent par endroits 2 m d’épaisseur. La phase finale des couches thraces date, selon lui, du VIe s. av. J.-C. (Venedikov 1980, p. 22). Cela a permis au Prof. Ognenova-Marinova, au terme de plusieurs années de recherches au large de la presqu’île de Nessébar, de parler d’une ‘protopolis’ thrace, contemporaine de la cité des Phéaciens, décrite dans l’Odyssée (Od. VI, 262-269) (Ognenova 1991, 133-136 ; Porojanov, 345-350).

Naturellement, elle ne nous est pas parvenue dans un document écrit d’une époque plus ancienne. Rien ne nous empêche cependant de supposer que la mnémé héritée des Thraces d’un héros local existait au temps de Nicolas de Damas et de Strabon, et même plus tard. Pourquoi les Messambriens élèveraient-ils un Thrace au rang de héros à une époque aussi tardive que le IIe – Ier s. av. J.-C., comme nous le suggère Nawotka ? (Nawotka 1994, p. 326). À cette époque, Messambria devait faire face à ses relations difficiles avec les Thraces de la région. Les inscriptions tardives qui en témoignent appartiennent au collège des stratèges (Mihailov-IGBR, I(2), 326, 327ter). Dans la proxénie beaucoup plus ancienne, consacrée au dynaste thrace Sadalas (Mihailov-IGBR, I(2), 307) de la fin du IVe et du début du IIIe s. av. J.-C., sont mentionnés encore quatre de ses prédécesseurs, avec qui les Messambriens entretenaient des relations amicales. Situés dans le temps, ces souverains locaux arriveraient au tout début du IVe s. av. J.-C. Si Sadalas n’avait été qu’un proxène de Messambria, pourquoi le nom du légendaire Melsas, lié à la tradition orale thrace, n’aurait-il pas pu passer, bien que tardivement, dans la tradition écrite des Grecs? Il est possible que Strabon et Nicolas de Damas aient puisé les renseignements le concernant dans des sources écrites désormais perdues. Il est peu probable qu’ils aient pu apercevoir les yeux de Melsas en observant son casque. Les monnaies portant son effigie ne sont découvertes qu’à présent. À la fin du Ier s. av. J.C., ces monnaies n’étaient certainement pas connues des

Quelques têtes de serpents, par lesquelles se terminent des bracelets de bronze en spirale, mis au jour récemment dans les katoikias (faubourgs) de Messambria à proximité des villages de Kosharitsa et d’Orizaré, près de Nessébar, nous permettent de comparer les éléments de décoration à la céramique halstattienne des couches préhelléniques. Sur ces ‘serpents’ de bronze, nous découvrons des triangles hachurés juxtaposés. Ils sont aussi typiques de la céramique. Mais l’essentiel est que, sur deux de ces ‘serpents’, nous retrouvons un ornement de cercles concentriques (Fig. 23), alors que deux autres sont ornés de roues creuses radiées à quatre rayons (Fig. 24) et représentent une analogie très exacte du type de revers des plus anciennes monnaies d’argent de Messambria. Aux IVe – IIe s. av. J.-C., le type ‘Roue radiée à quatre 133

ANCIENT GREEK COLONIES IN THE BLACK SEA 2 rayons’ persiste dans les monnaies de bronze de Messambria.

légère – 0.93, la plus lourd – 1.55 g), pour celles d’Apollonia nous n’avons pas information exacte mais d’après nos observations sporadiques il ///est presque le même. Pour ce module, nous avons une similitude de poids ; en outre, les monnaies des deux cités sont présentes dans tous les trésors.

La roue en tant que symbole d’Apollon Iatros est utilisée sur la monnaie-flèche d’Histria, mais aussi sur le revers des monnaies de bronze histriennes. Nous la retrouvons également sur le revers des monnaies d’une autre colonie milésienne, Olbia. Mais ce n’est pas tout. Dans le téménos d’Olbia a été découvert un fragment de kalyptère milésien, daté du VIe s. av. J.-C., avec un graffito significatif (Fig. 25). Il porte le dessin griffonné d’une double roue avec des secteurs, entre lesquels est écrit ‘IHTROON’ (Rusjaeva 1998, p. 16, Fig. 1, 4). La présence de l’épiclèse seule, sans le nom de la divinité, nous aide à interpréter la logique de l’olbiote antique, auteur de ce graffiti. Pour lui, la roue centrale est divisée en quatre et symbolise probablement le nom même d’Apollon, en l’occurrence ‘Le Guérisseur’, parce que le caractère de l’inscription votive est marqué par l’épiclèse concrète ‘IHTRON’, et l’ensemble est radié. Je donne l’exemple de ces images monétaires et votives d’une roue de deux cités ioniennes, pour illustrer le symbolisme religieux identique des Doriens de Messambria et des Ioniens d’Histria et d’Olbia. Les têtes de serpents de bronze de la chôra de Messambria nous conduisent à ajouter les Thraces de la chôra de Messambria. Et pourquoi pas toute la population autochtone de la rive gauche du Pont-Euxin qui, justement parce qu’elle avait adopté Apollon le Guérisseur, avait montré sa prédilection pour les monnaies-flèches de bronze. Ne sont-ce pas autant de preuves archéologiques témoignant concrètement de relations cultuelles entre les colons et les Thraces de la région? Ils partageaient probablement le même culte dominant du soleil et, respectivement, d’Apollon dans la période relativement tardive de l’apparition de la cité grecque de Messambria. Et cela ne présuppose-t-il pas des relations politiques entre Grecs et Thraces, qui se sont exprimées par l’enracinement de la légende thrace du fondateur Melsas dans la conscience des nouveaux venus de Byzance et de Chalcédoine?

Le plus important de ces trésors est celui du village de Vratarité, région de Dobrich (1985). Il ne contient que des dioboles de Messambria et d’Apollonia. Il s’agit d’un total de 132 pièces, partagées également – 66 appartiennent à Messambria (Fig 27), et 66 à Apollonia (Fig. 28). Seules celles de Messambria ont déjà été étudiées et publiées (Karayotov 1994, 24-26 et 79-81, nos 13(1)-78(66), Pl. II – III). C’est pour la première fois que des photos de 12 pièces d’Apollonia sont publiées ici. La plupart des dioboles d’Apollonia sont marquées des deux jusqu’aux quatre premières lettres des noms des monétaires, tandis que de Messambria nous ne connaissons que deux inscriptions (Fig. 29). Dans la région de la Stara planina orientale a été mis au jour un second trésor de dioboles de Messambria et d’Apollonia, dont les proportions sont pratiquement les mêmes que dans pour celui de Vratarité. Ce trésor a été découvert sur les terres du village de Medovets, région de Varna. Il contenait plus de 36 dioboles des deux cités pontiques. De ce trésor, 16 dioboles de Messambria et 20 d’Apollonia sont arrivés dans la collection du Musée archéologique de Varna (Karayotov 1994, 26-27 et p. 81, nos 79(1)-94(16), Pl. III). Dans la collection de Dimitar Dimitrov à Varna, il y a une drachme avec les premières lettres du nom de la ville d’Apollonia (Fig. 29a) Le troisième trésor a été découvert à la frontière bulgaroturque, dans la région de l’ancien village de Trakiitzi, commune de Sredets, en 1991. De ce trésor, la collection du Musée archéologique de Burgas a reçu deux drachmes d’Apollonia (numéros d’inventaire A856 et A857) et deux dioboles de Messambria (numéros d’inventaire A858 et A859) (Karayotov 1994, p. 82, nos 115 et 126). À la différence de la plupart des trésors enregistrés ici, celui-ci contient des pièces de modules différents. Cependant, les exemplaires dont nous disposons sont trop peu nombreux pour qu’il soit possible d’en tirer des conclusions significatives.

Vers la fin du Ve s. av. J.-C., Messambria et Apollonia ont commencé à battre des dioboles en grande quantité. Avant l’apparition des émissions qui remontent à la première moitié du IVe s., Apollonia a dû frapper une émission de dioboles d’un type rare, ‘Hermès coiffé du pétase de face – Ancre dressée’ (Fig. 26) (Gerassimov 1975, p. 29, no 22). Une autre raison de ne pas accepter la datation proposée par Gerassimov (IVe s. av. J.-C.) et de proposer une autre date, plus ancienne, au Ve s. av. J.-C., pour cette émission, m’est fournie par le fait que le revers de la diobole publiée n’est pas marqué de la lettre A, ni l’ancre reproduit les modèles que nous voyons sur les plus anciennes monnaies d’Apollonia.

Des drachmes d’Apollonia et des dioboles de Messambria ont également été découvertes dans les trésors du village de Kladentsi, région de Varna, et de Kuzgun (Kalaraşi), IGCH 734 (Roumanie, Dobroudja du nord), non loin de Tomi. Selon Margaret Thompson, ce trésor aurait été enfoui vers 330-320 av. J.-C. Ces données complexes sont une raison suffisante pour que nous puissions conclure que les dioboles d’argent de Messambria étaient en circulation, avec les dioboles et les drachmes plus tardives d’Apollonia, jusqu’à la fin du troisième quart du IVe s. av. J.-C. Cependant, leur monnayage doit, selon moi, être daté de la première

Au IVe s. av. J.-C., la diobole devient le module le plus répandu des deux colonies ouest-pontiques. Le poids moyen des dioboles de Messambria que nous connaissons du trésor de Vratarite est de 1.25 g (la plus 134

IVAN KARAYOTOV : LE MONNAYAGE DE MESSAMBRIA ET LES MONNAYAGES D’APOLLONIA, ODESSOS ET DIONYSOPOLIS moitié de ce même siècle. Le périmètre de leur circulation est très vaste. Dans l’ensemble, cependant, les trésors ne s’éloignent pas beaucoup de la rive gauche du Pont-Euxin. La proportion égale des dioboles des deux cités dans les trésors de Vratarité et de Medovets est significative. Cela est probablement dû au fait que dans la seconde moitié du Ve s. av. J.-C., Messambria et Apollonia se retrouvent toutes les deux dans l’orbite de l’influence d’Athènes. On considère qu’elles figurent sur les listes tributaires de la Ligue athénienne de 425 (IGBR, 1(2), p. 256 ; Athenian Trib. Lists 1939, pp. 116, 157, 207 fr. 38). Sous l’égide commune d’Athènes, elles se sont probablement rapprochées économiquement. Les ’importations d’Attique aux Ve – IVe s. av. J.-C., qui sont beaucoup plus visibles dans les nécropoles d’Apollonia (Ivanov 1962, 65-274), mais qui sont aussi présentes à Messambria (Reho 2005, ), témoignent clairement de relations économiques avec Athènes. En outre, Athènes exerce une influence artistique dans les colonies pontiques. On considère que la stèle funéraire de Kalikrita, mise au jour dans la katoikia messambrienne de Ravda, est une œuvre plastique appartenant à l’école athénienne (IGBR, I(2), 330 ; Gerassimov 1973, 54-55, Fig. 55).

vu, ce phénomène est caractéristique des émissions plus tardives d’Apollonia. C’est aussi de la Stara planina orientale que proviennent une drachme du IVe s. et six des dernières décennies du Ve s. av. J.-C. (Karayotov 1995, 406-407, nos 11 et 12-17). Outre les trouvailles mentionnées, dans la région proche de Messambria ont été également trouvés trois dioboles apolloniennes du IVe s. av. J.-C., dont la première porte l’inscription d'un magistrat ΣΩ (Karayotov 1995, p. 408, nos 21-23). Nous sommes en présence d’une situation contrastée. Les monnaies d’argent d’Apollonia, trouvées dans la Stara planina orientale, proche de Messambria, sont beaucoup plus nombreuses que les monnaies d’argent de l’apoikia dorienne, battues aux Ve – IVe s. av. J.-C. Les oboles messambriennes anciennes, publiées ici, proviennent de la nécropole proche de la cité, le long de la côte, entre l’actuel quartier moderne de Nessébar et la villégiature de Ravda. Elles sont le plus souvent découvertes à la suite de glissements de terrain, anciens ou actuels, le long de la côte. Cependant, selon les documents que j’ai pu consulter, les dioboles messambriennes ont aussi pénétré au sud-ouest d’Apollonia, où elles se sont mêlées aux drachmes apolloniennes dans le trésor de Trakiitzi. Cette trouvaille a été faite près de la route Apollonia – Périnthe, et il n’est pas impossible que son contenu ait été destiné à des contacts commerciaux avec les régions de la Propontide.

Messambria et Apollonia avaient des intérêts communs dans la vaste vallée de la rivière Hadjiika, dans la région de la Stara planina orientale et dans les régions au nord de la montagne. La plus grande partie de la Stara planina orientale est sur le territoire de Messambria. De par son emplacement, elle est devenue une charnière pour la diffusion des drachmes apolloniennes dans un premier temps, et ensuite des dioboles qui, réunies aux dioboles messambriennes dans les trésors de Vratarité et de Kuzgun (Kalaraşi), avaient apparemment servi à l’acquisition d’une quantité importante de blé, destiné à l’exportation vers Athènes.

Au nord de la Stara planina orientale, à part le trésor de Vratarité, on connaît plusieurs trouvailles isolées de la vallée de la rivière de Batovo, qui se jette dans le Pont non loin de l’actuelle station balnéaire d'Albéna, au sud de Dionysopolis. Outre les monnaies, on trouve le long de son cours des instruments d’échange prémonétaires : des dauphins et des fléchettes. Certaines fléchettes sont marquées de la lettre A, deux d’entre elles portent une ancre et un A. Une grande partie des ‘près de 150 documents prémonétaires’ de la collection du musée de Balchik proviennent de la vallée de la rivière de Batovo (Jordanov 1990, p. 51). On y a également trouvé plusieurs drachmes et dioboles d’Apollonia, des dioboles et des monnaies de bronze de Messambria. La collection du Musée archéologique de Burgas contient : 1 obole de Messambria (Burgas, Musée archéologique, n° A2066), 9 drachmes d’Apollonia (Burgas, Musée archéologique, nos A2067-A2075) et 1 drachme d’Histria (Burgas, Musée archéologique, n° A2076). Nous pouvons admettre que les points de distribution des documents prémonétaires et des monnaies d’argent apolloniennes étaient Odessos et Dionysopolis.

Dans la chôra même de Messambria, les drachmes apolloniennes sont parmi les monnaies les plus répandues au Ve et dans la première moitié du IVe s. av. J.-C. Cette circulation témoigne du libre accès des monnaies d’argent d’Apollonia sur des territoires contrôlés par les ‘sentinelles de jour et de nuit’ messambriens («fúlakeß amerinoí, nukterinoí, períodoi») (IGBR, I(2), 324 ; IGBR, V, 5103). Il s’agit d’une nouvelle preuve indirecte de l’influence bénéfique de la Ligue maritime athénienne sur les relations entre les deux cités à l’époque classique et à l’époque classique tardive. À l’appui de ces réflexions, nous pouvons citer le trésor de drachmes apolloniennes, découvert près du village de Sredna Mahala, enfoui au IVe s. av. J.-C. La datation repose sur le poids moyen des quatre exemplaires de la collection du Musée archéologique de Burgas, qui est de 2,79 g (Karayotov 1995, 405-406, nos 6-9). Ce poids présente une baisse considérable par rapport au poids des drachmes du Ve s. av. J.-C. Cette datation tardive de l’enfouissement est aussi étayée par l’effigie de la Gorgone Méduse sur l’avers. Or, comme nous l’avons

Une diobole messambrienne provient d’Odessos, deux autres exemplaires – du village de Suvorovo, proche de Vratarité (Karayotov 1994, p. 82, nos 111, 112-113 ; Idem 1995a, 24-38). De son côté, Messambria doit avoir été l’une des charnières de la diffusion des monnaies d’argent apolloniennes vers les régions du nord. Le fait qu’on les trouve à proximité des voies croisant la Stara 135

ANCIENT GREEK COLONIES IN THE BLACK SEA 2 planina orientale, en apporte la preuve irréfutable. Nous devons analyser l’information, pourtant contradictoire, selon laquelle la ‘petite ville’ de Bizoné, qui se trouvait sur le cap Chirakman près de Kavarna, aurait été fondée, comme l’affirme Pseudo-Scymnos, ‘selon certains par les Barbares, selon d’autres c’est une apoikia de Messambria’ (‘‘Bizýnh [..]Toûto dè tò políxnion fasín tineß mèn barbárwn, tinèß d’Ápoikon gegonénai Meshmbríaß’) (GGM I, 226, C. Müler 758-760). Les monnaies messambriennes découvertes dans l’actuelle plaine de Dobroudja pourraient être aussi rattachées à Bizoné, parce que son port est extrêmement pratique pour l’exportation des céréales de l’antique grenier du Dobroudja.

12. ΔHMOYXOΣ (Lanz, Auktion 58, Mail bid sale, 19 septembre 2001, n° 347) 13. [AΘH]NAIΣ (Lanz, Auktion 58, Mail bid sale, 19 septembre 2001, n° 348; Plovdiv, AM, n° 747 ) 14. [.Σ?]OXO[Λ..] (Dimitrov 2001, p. 4). D'après la liste des trésors de monnaies apolloniennes que je connais, publiée ici, seule la trouvaille de la région de Varna comprend quatre tétradrachmes apolloniens, mais le trésor de Varna a été dispersé et nous ne sommes actuellement pas en mesure de tirer des conclusions pertinentes en nous fondant sur ce trésor. La collection du British Museum renferme deux tétradrachmes apolloniens. Sur l’avers, l'un présente Apollon à droite, l'autre à gauche (SNG, IX, 1, 164 et 165). Le premier porte le nom du magistrat AΘHNAГ[OPA], et le deuxième : ..ΣIΛAΣ. Ils ont été datés par Martin Price du milieu du IVe s. av. J.-C., mais je pense qu’ils pourraient remonter à la première moitié du siècle.

Au IVe s. av. J.-C., Apollonia émet des tétradrachmes en introduisant un nouveau type monétaire. À son tour, Messambria introduit le plus grand module d’argent. Un seul exemplaire en a été publié à ce jour, et il suit le type habituel de la cité ‘Casque de face – META entre les rayons d’une roue’. Autour de la légende avec le nom de la cité, des lettres plus petites forment le nom de magistrat ΑΝΘΕΣΤΗΡΙΟΣ (Head, HN, p. 278).

Au cours de ces dernières années, nous avons trouvé des renseignements sur quelques tétradrachmes d’Apollonia nouvellement découverts :

Le nouveau type de tétradrachmes d’Apollonia se présente comme suit :

Tétradrachme d’Apollonia du magistrat Lihès Avers : Tête d’Apollon lauré, à droite. Revers : ΛIXHΣ à gauche d’une ancre dressée, dans le champ droit : une écrevisse, dans le champ gauche : un A renversé. 1. AR, 16,91 g. Vers 420. Lanz, Auktion 68, 6 juin 1994, n° 80. 2. AR, non pesée. Trouvée aux environs de la ville d’Aytos (Fig.30). Collection privée. Les deux exemplaires présentent la même liaison de coins monétaires et se caractérisent par la disposition de la lettre A, qui est inversée par rapport à sa disposition habituelle sur les autres tétradrachmes et dioboles d’Apollonia.

Avers : Tête d’Apollon lauré à droite ou à gauche Revers : Ancre dressée flanquée par la lettre A et une écrevisse, ainsi que le nom en toutes lettres d’un magistrat monétaire au nominatif (signe caractérisant aussi la seule émission connue de Messambria, comme je l’ai mentionné). Les sources que j’ai pu consulter en utilisant les inscriptions de magistrats sur des dioboles, m’ont permis de tirer 14 noms de magistrats monétaires d’Apollonia. Espérons que certains d’entre eux (nos 2, 3, 9 et 14) seront complétés lors de futures trouvailles de tétradrachmes. Il est possible que certaines de ces trouvailles complètent les lacunes des inscriptions incomplètes que je trouve. 1. EГHNΩP (Mushmov 1912, 3140, Pl. XVI, 2) 2. …BATAK… (Mushmov 1912, XVI, 1) 3. …IMOΞOY… (Mushmov, XVI, 3) 4. AПYPO (Mushmov 1912, 3148) 5. AΘHNAГ… (Mushmov 1912, 3151, SNG, IX(1), Pl. VI, 164) 6. AΛΚΙΟΣ (Mushmov 1912, 3152) 7. KΛEOKPATHΣ (Karayotov 1995, p. 400, n° 2, p. 399, fig. 3a et b) 8. ΛIXHΣ (Lanz, Auktion, 68, 6 juin, 1994, p. 12, n° 80) 9. …{E}ΣIAΣ (SNG, IX, 1, 165) 10. [Σ]ΩΛΩTHΣ (Lanz, Auktion 74, 20 novembre 1975, n° 115). Sur les dioboles : ΣΩ 11. KΛEINIO (SNG, Copenhagen 1942, n° 454 ; Stephanova 1980, p. 8)

Magistrat Kléokratès Avers : Tête d’Apollon lauré, à gauche. Revers : ΚΛΕΟΚΡΑΤΗΣ à gauche d’une ancre dressée, dans le champ gauche : un A, dans le champ droit : une écrevisse. AR 24 mm. Non pesée. Trouvée à Sozopol (Fig 31). Collection privée. Aytos (Karayotov 1995, p. 405, n° 2, Fig. 2). Magistrat Solotès Avers : Apollon lauré, à gauche. Revers : [Σ]ΩΛΩΤΗΣ à gauche d’une ancre dressée. Sous le bras gauche de l’ancre, un A, sous le bras droit, une écrevisse. AR 17,15 g (Fig. 32) (Lanz, Auktion 74, 20 novembre 1975, n° 115).

136

IVAN KARAYOTOV : LE MONNAYAGE DE MESSAMBRIA ET LES MONNAYAGES D’APOLLONIA, ODESSOS ET DIONYSOPOLIS En 2001, lors de la vente aux enchères Auction 58 du CNG (A Mail Bid Sale), sont apparus deux nouveaux tétradrachmes d’Apollonia, datés des environs de 380 av. J.-C. :

messambrienne Svéti Vlas, contenant des monnaies de Cyzique et du roi de Lydie Crésus, a été mis au jour en 1948 (Gerassimov 1950, p. 325), et nous venons d’apprendre la découverte d’une monnaie isolée et d’un trésor de cyzicains dans la chôra (territoire proche) de Messambria. Je n’ai pu photographier que la monnaie isolée.

Magistrat Demouhos Avers : Apollon lauré, à gauche. Revers : ΔΗΜΟΥΧΟΣ à droite d’une ancre dressée, dans le champ gauche une écrevisse, dans le champ droit un A. AR, 16,59 g. (Fig 33) (Auction 58, CNG, 19 septembre 2001, n° 347).

Il s’agit d’un statère de Cyzique du type ‘Dionysos chevauchant une panthère’ (Fig. 36), trouvé dans la katoikia messambrienne Orizaré (15,44 g). Il date du IVe s. av. J.-C. J’ai aussi appris que le trésor découvert dans la région entre Pomorié et Nessébar comprenait plus de trois types de cyzicains : ‘Lion au-dessus d’un thon – Carré creux’, ‘Figure accroupie au-dessus d’un thon – Carré creux’ et ‘Tête portant un chapeau ou un casque de face – Carré creux’. La découverte date de 1998. En 2000, à Sozopol, lors de la construction d’une maison, a été trouvé un trésor contenant un nombre inconnu de cyzicains, qui ont été vendus à des collectionneurs. Leurs types sont demeurés inconnus. C’est de l’antique Apollonia que provient aussi le statère publié par Mihail Lazarov (Lazarov 1963, 40-41 ; Idem 1967, 14-15) et conservé dans la collection du Musée archéologique de Burgas (Fig 37).

Magistrat Athenais Avers : Apollon lauré, à droite. Revers : [ΑΘΗ]ΝΑΙΣ à gauche d’une ancre dressée. Dans le champ gauche, un A, dans le champ droit – une écrevisse. 1. AR 16,69 g. (Auction 58, CNG, 19 septembre 2001, n° 347). 2. ΑΘΗΝΑΙ[Σ]. AR 21/23 mm. 17,30 g (Fig.34). Musée archéologique de Plovdiv, numéro d’inventaire 767 (Kisiov, Prokopov, Dotchev 1998, p. 17, n° 31). Du même monétaire – Fig. 34a. Ce nom est connu comme étant le patronyme d’un polémarque sur une inscription funéraire apollonienne avec la représentation d’un festin funèbre (coena funebris) en relief (IGBR, I2, 463bis).

L’interruption du monnayage d’argent d’Apollonia et Messambria pourrait s’expliquer par la chute des terres thraces sous dépendance macédonienne et les événements orageux qui ont suivi au dernier quart du IVe s. av. J.-C. Après cette tension dans l’histoire des deux cités pontiques, Apollonia a définitivement interrompu ses émissions d’argent originales. Il existe une seule exception : dans les années 80 du XXe s., sur les terres du village de Marinka, commune de Burgas, a été découvert un tétradrachme d’Apollonia qui pourrait être daté de la fin du IIIe ou du tout début du IIe s. av. J.-C. (Fig. 38). Sa frappe a probablement un caractère festif ou sacré. En 1991, cette monnaie est apparue dans une vente aux enchères à Zurich. Elle est du type ‘Apollon à droite – ΑΠΟΛΛΩΝΟΣ/ΙΑΤΡΟΥ, Apollon nu en pied, de face, tenant de la main gauche un arc et une flèche, s’appuyant de la droite à un laurier, dans les branches duquel s’est posé un oiseau’. Apollon se tient sur un socle: il s’agit probablement de la fameuse statue de la divinité, œuvre du sculpteur athénien Calamis. De part et d'autre du dieu, on lit les premières lettres du nom de magistrat ΑΘ/Η (Auction Sternberg 1991, 82 ; Karayotov 1995, p. 408, n° 29, fig. 24).

En même temps que les tétradrachmes, Apollonia frappe aussi des dioboles du même type ‘Apollon – Ancre dressée’ (Fig. 35). Ils sont extrêmement rares. Dans la collection du British Museum, il y a un exemplaire (SNG, IX, 1, 166), auquel s’ajoute un deuxième (1,19 g) de la collection de Stancomb, marqué de la lettre ‘Π’ en exergue (Fig. 35a) (SNG, XI, 40). Au cours des deux dernières décennies du XXe s., deux nouveaux statères d’or d’Apollonia sont apparus dans les catalogues des ventes aux enchères. L’un appartient au type ‘ΑΠΟΛΛ Ancre dressée – Méduse’ [9,75 g] (Auction 50, Lanz, 27 novembre 1989, 116), et l’autre au type ‘Apollon à gauche – ΠΟ Ancre dressée ‘ [8,53 g], Auction 52 Bank Leu, 15 mai 1991, p. 32, 40). Si ces deux statères sont authentiques, les lettres du nom du magistrat du second pourraient faire partie du nom ΠΟΛΥΑΝΑΞ (Karayotov 1995, p. 405, n° 4 ; IGBR, I(2), 458), ou bien ΠΟΛΥΑΡΧΟΣ (IGBR, I(2), 427). Pour l’instant, cependant, nous ne sommes pas certains que ces statères d’or apolloniens sont authentiques. De même, le statère d’or de Messambria portant un nom de magistrat coïncidant avec celui de ΑΝΘΕΣΤΗΡΙΟΣ du tétradrachme unique, pourrait se révéler faux. (Karayotov 1992, p. 11, Fig. 2a). Cependant, alors que l’authenticité de ces statères uniques paraît douteuse, nous pouvons être certains qu’à Messambria, Apollonia et dans les agglomérations de ces deux cités, ont circulé des monnaies d’électrum de Cyzique. Le trésor de la localité

Le monnayage d’argent prépondérant des souverains macédoniens a certainement joué un rôle essentiel pour l’interruption de la frappe des monnaies d’argent originales d’Apollonia et de Messambria. Après les conquêtes de Philippe II et surtout d’Alexandre III, le monde hellénistique a commencé à s’unifier. Les marchés étendus ont vite adopté les tétradrachmes au nom d’Alexandre III. Ils ont commencé à être frappés également par les cités sur le littoral ouest du Pont. Parmi 137

ANCIENT GREEK COLONIES IN THE BLACK SEA 2 elles, Apollonia est la seule exception. Messambria a repris son monnayage d’argent en mettant en circulation des tétradrachmes posthumes d’Alexandre III de Macédoine vers 275 av. J.-C. Mais, dorénavant, son partenaire dans ce monnayage et dans sa diffusion ne sera plus sa voisine Apollonia, mais deux cités plus éloignées : Odessos et Dionysopolis. Qui plus est, au IIIe s. av. J.-C., les deux cités situées des deux côtés du Hémus, Odessos et Messambria, se sont jointes aux cités émettant des statères d’or posthumes d’Alexandre III et du souverain thrace Lysimaque.

debout regardant en arrière – Tête de Gorgone’ ?) d'Abdère (‘Apollon – Griffon’), de Maronée (‘Protomé de cheval – Grappe de raisin’) (Tacchela 1898, 214-215). 12. Région de Karnobat (1954) – plus de 51 drachmes d’Apollonia (Varna, Musée archéologique) (Draganov 1981, p. 36).). 13. Kladentzi, commune de Tervel, région de Varna – un nombre inconnu de drachmes (tétroboles) d’Apollonia et 2 dioboles de Messambria (IGCH 770 ; Karayotov 1995, p. 27). 14. Krumovo, commune de Nova Zagora (1936) – un nombre inconnu de drachmes d’Apollonia avec des drachmes de Parion (Gerassimov 1937, p. 322). 15. Cuzgun (Kalaraşi), Roumanie, Dobroudja du nord, près d’Adamklisi dans la région de Constanţa (Tomis) (1937). Le trésor qui y a été découvert comprend des monnaies d’électrum de Cyzique et des monnaies d’argent. Il contenait : Apollonia Pontica – 21 tétroboles et dioboles, Messambria – 6 dioboles, drachmes de Callatis et d’Histria, Cyzique – 7 statères d’électrum, Parion – 3 drachmes (IGCH 734 Calarasi ?). Selon Petrescu- Dămboviza, les cyzicains dateraient du Ve s. av. J.-C. (Petrescu-Dămboviza 1951, 522; IGCH 86). 16. Maritza-Iztok, mine Troyanovo (Draganov 1981, p. 36). 17. Médovetz, région de Varna – 16 dioboles de Messambria et 20 dioboles d’Apollonia (Karayotov 1994, 26-27). 18. Alentours de Nessébar (1935) – 1 drachme d’Apollonia, 40 bronzes de Messambria, 2 flèches de bronze (Gerassimov 1937, p. 319 ; Draganov 1981, p. 36). 19. Région de Nova Zagora (1936) – un nombre inconnu de drachmes d’Apollonia (Gerassimov 1937, p. 322). 20. Partizani (Ganchevo), 1951, région de Provadia – plus de 34 drachmes d’Apollonia (Gerassimov 1955, 602-603 ; Draganov 1981, p. 36). Les 34 drachmes de la collection du Musée archéologique de Sofia (numéro d’inventaire CXXXI) ont toutes été publiées par Anastasiya Stephanova (Stephanova 1985, 1928). 21. Plovdiv (1941) – 1 diobole d’Apollonia, 77 de la Chersonèse de Thrace, 6 de Parion (Gerassimov 1946, p. 237). 22. Roza (1957), département de Yambol – 8 drachmes d’Apollonia ; 9 de Parion (Draganov 1981, p. 36). 23. Sredna Mahala, commune de Ruen, région de Burgas – un nombre inconnu de drachmes d’Apollonia, dont 4 exemplaires dans la collection du Musée archéologique de Burgas, numéros d’inventaire A26, A27, A193 et A259 (Karayotov 1995, 405-406, nos 6-9). 24. Staroselka, région de Preslav (1957) – environ 100 drachmes d’Apollonia (Gerassimov 1957, p. 325 ; Draganov 1981, p. 36).

TRÉSORS DE MONNAIES D’ARGENT D’APOLLONIA ET DE MESSAMBRIA 1. Aytos (1953) – 15 drachmes d’Apollonia (Gerassimov 1955, p. 605 ; Draganov 1981, p. 36). 2. Akandjievo, région de Pazardjik – 1 drachme d’Apollonia, 1 de Parion (Draganov 1981, p. 36). 3. Assénovgrad (Stanimaka) (1896) – un nombre inconnu de drachmes d’Apollonia Pontica et de monnaies d’argent de Chersonèse, Parion, Abdère et Maronée (Tacchela 1898, p. 215). 4. Burgas (colline Shiloto, près du quartier Méden Rudnik) (1996) – 120 drachmes d’Apollonia (Kiyashkina 2000, 106-116). 5. Région de Varna – 4 tétradrachmes d’Apollonia (Jourukova 1977, p. 68). 6. Vratarité, région de Dobrich (1985) – ne contient que des dioboles de Messambria et d’Apollonia. Il s’agit d’un total de 132 exemplaires, dont 66 appartiennent à Messambria et 66 à Apollonia. Seules les monnaies de Messambria ont déjà été étudiées et publiées (Karayotov 1994, 24-26 et 79-81, nos 13(1) – 78(66), Pl. II – III). 7. Golyam Chochoven, région de Sliven (1965) – 2 dioboles d’Apollonia, 2 statères d’or de Philippe II de Macédoine, 108 monnaies de bronze de Philippe II de Macédoine, 2 bronzes d’Alexandre III de Macédoine (Batzova-Kostova 1973, p. 13). 8. Gorno Novo Sélo, département de Stara Zagora – 3 drachmes d’Apollonia, 44 de Parion et 285 de la Chersonèse de Thrace (Nikolov 1963, p. 41 ; Draganov 1981, p. 36). 9. Gorni Domlyan, département de Plovdiv (19621963) – 1 drachme d’Apollonia, 52 drachmes de Parion, 51 monnaies du type ‘Satyre ravissant une ménade’ (Gerassimov 1964, 237-248 ; Draganov 1981, p. 36). 10. Gorno Yabalkovo, département de Burgas – 2 drachmes d’Apollonia, 1 de Parion (Draganov 1981, p. 36). 11. Didymoteichon (Grèce) – environ 12 drachmes d’Apollonia du type ‘Tête de Gorgone – Ancre’, attribuées avant l' article de Tacchela à Abydos, 20 tétradrachmes, dont trois ou quatre de Maronée et les autres de Thasos, plus de 1000 petites pièces de Chersonèse (Protomé de lion), de Parion (‘Bœuf 138

IVAN KARAYOTOV : LE MONNAYAGE DE MESSAMBRIA ET LES MONNAYAGES D’APOLLONIA, ODESSOS ET DIONYSOPOLIS champ gauche, sous le trône ou en exergue – un monogramme ou une inscription.

25. Ténévo, département de Yambol (1956) – 15 drachmes d’Apollonia, 138 de Parion et 2 tétradrachmes d’Athènes de la 1ère période (Gerassimov 1959a, p. 359 ; Draganov 1981, p. 36). 26. Tomis, Konstanţa, Roumanie (dans la période 19281942), un trésor enfoui selon Margaret Thompson entre 330 et 320 av. J.-C. Il comprenait : Apollonia Pontica – environ 30 à 40 dioboles ; Messambria – ? dioboles. Ce trésor est arrivé dans la collection de l’Académie de Bucarest (Moisil 1913, 62-64). 27. Haskovo – ? drachmes d’Apollonia. Le trésor de Haskovo comprenait environ 300-400 monnaies d’argent, surtout de Chersonèse et de Parion, ainsi que 10 exemplaires de Maronée et d’Abdère (Tacchela 1898, p. 215). 28. Région de Shumen (1946) – 112 drachmes d’Apollonia (Gerassimov 1937, p. 319 ; Idem 1948, 138-149).

Comparée à Messambria, Odessos a frappé plus de tétradrachmes qui présentent sur le revers une légende contenant seulement le nom sacralisé après 323, ΑΛΕΞΑΝΡΟΥ, au génitif. L’absence du titre royal ΒΑΣΙΛΕΩΣ sur ces émissions témoigne avec certitude qu’elles ont été frappées plus tôt que les émissions sur lesquelles celui-ci est présent. Un regard rapide sur les publications anciennes suffit à nous convaincre de la supériorité des émissions d’Odessos de cette phase ancienne. Pick et Regling décrivent une émission sans monogramme de magistrat, avec seulement un monogramme de cité (Pick, Regling, 2109). Le trésor d’Armenak contient un tétradrachme d’Odessos sans monogramme. Son coin de droit est identique à celui de deux monnaies d’Odessos d’un trésor découvert dans le village de Botevo, région de Varna, marquées par le monogramme le plus ancien de la cité, qui est composé d’un Δ inscrit dans un O (Fig. 391). Suivent quelques émissions marquées par ce même emblème de cité plus ancien, accompagné de trois monogrammes de magistrats différents, dont l’un est présent dans deux variantes (Pick, Regling, 2110-2114). Sur la base de la coïncidence déjà mentionnée de coins de droit, K. Dimitrov identifie comme provenant d’Odessos le tétradrachme n° 147 du trésor d’Armenak, dans le nord de l’Asie Mineure (IGCH 1423 ; Price 1991, 1132A). Quatre tétradrachmes de la collection du Musée archéologique de Varna ne contiennent que le nom du souverain dans la légende (Dimitrov 1987, p. 55, nos 4-7, numéros d’inventaire 3062, 3063, 3093 et 2592). Dans certains cas, les tétradrachmes anciens d’Odessos induisent en erreur et sont attribués incorrectement. Ainsi par exemple, un tétradrachme présentant ΑΣ et Δ dans le champ gauche, dans un catalogue de vente du CNG, est attribué comme une monnaie d’Aspendos de Pisidie, frappée en l’an 4 du monnayage de cette cité, soit 209/208 av. J.-C. (Auction CNG 2001, p. 40, n° 276). Une analyse plus attentive du coin de droit montre cependant qu’il est identique à celui du tétradrachme d’Odessos n° 1158 de la collection du British Museum (Price 1991). Son revers présente aussi un ΑΣ, mais il provient d’un autre coin et on voit très clairement qu’un O est inscrit dans le Δ (Fig. 395): il s’agit en fait de l’ancien monogramme d’Odessos. Le O inscrit est à peine visible sur la photo de la monnaie du SNG et c’est probablement la raison pour laquelle il n’a pas été remarqué.

Les monnaies posthumes d’argent et d’or de Messambria, Odessos et Dionysopolis aux IIIe – Ier s. av. J.-C. Au début du IIIe s. av. J.-C., Odessos était, semble-t-il, l’une des nombreuses cités du monde hellénistique émettant des tétradrachmes et des statères posthumes au nom et aux types d’Alexandre III le Grand (Price 1991, 1132, 1132A ; Dimitrov 1987, p. 55, nos 3-7). À la limite du premier et du deuxième quart du siècle, Messambria se joint à Odessos, suivie vers 250 av. J.-C. par Dionysopolis. Les émissions les plus intenses pendant cette période sont celles de statères et de tétradrachmes de Callatis. Histria est également présente avec 19 statères dans le trésor d’Anadol. Pourtant, Apollonia n’a pas de production d'imitation en or et en argent. Il est vrai que le trésor de Mârâşeşti contient deux statères avec une ancre comme symbole dans le champ gauche, mais ils sont originaires la cité phénicienne d’Arados (PoenaruBordea 1974, 121-122, nos 36 et 37). Les coins de tous les tétradrachmes et statères des trois cités ouest-pontiques (Odessos, Messambria et Dionysopolis) auxquels j’ai eu accès et qui ont déjà été publiés, ont manifestement été gravés par les mêmes graveurs. Dans ma monographie sur les monnaies d’argent de Messambria, leur style commun est appelé ‘style ancien’ des tétradrachmes Messambriens (Karayotov 1994, p. 43). Pour des raisons de parallélisme stylistique, j’attribue à ce même style le monnayage d'imitation en argent du roi celte en Thrace Cauarus, lié par un même coin de droit et un même symbole (Artémis aux flambeaux) aux émissions de Cabylé (Draganov 1993, 77-79 et 147-148, nos 862-883 ; Karayotov 1994, p. 33). Ce type de tétradrachmes posthumes d’Alexandre a déjà été décrit plusieurs fois :

Nous ne connaissons que trois tétradrachmes de Messambria sur lesquels le titre ΒΑΣΙΛΕΩΣ est absent. Sur ces pièces, un coin de droit lie deux revers, et dans le second le titre royal apparaît. Cette particularité technologique me permet d’affirmer que les émissions Messambriennes portant l’inscription ΑΛΕΞΑΝΡΟΥ, et celles présentant la légende complète ΒΑΣΙΛΕΩΣ ΑΛΕΞΑΝΡΟΥ, ne sont pas très éloignées dans le temps (Karayotov 1994, p. 83, nos 1-7). Cependant, les

Avers : Tête d’Héraclès coiffé de la peau de lion à droite. Revers : Zeus assis à gauche sur un trône, tenant un aigle de la main gauche et un sceptre de la main droite. Dans le 139

ANCIENT GREEK COLONIES IN THE BLACK SEA 2 émissions anciennes d’Odessos ont probablement duré au moins une décennie. On pourrait admettre que certains tétradrachmes d’Odessos datent même du premier quart du IIIe s. av. J.-C., mais il est peu probable qu’ils soient séparés de plus de cinq ans de l’an 275 av. J.-C. Cette datation est probablement surtout valable pour les émissions sur lesquelles le symbole ‘amphore’ et les monogrammes sont absents. Elles ne sont identifiées comme des émissions d’Odessos que sur la base de la coïncidence des coins de droit avec des tétradrachmes marqués du monogramme de la cité ou du symbole d’Odessos – l’amphore renversée. Ce symbole, comme nous le verrons, caractérise également les émissions les plus anciennes de monnaies de bronze d’Odessos, frappées dans la seconde moitié du IVe s. av. J.-C. (Lazarenko 2004, 33-51).

sur les tétradrachmes d’Odessos de la phase ancienne de son monnayage. Selon Martin Price, ils correspondent à un intervalle de temps trop long, de 280 à 200 av. J.-C. (SNG, IX, 1, 1132-1176). Quant à Messambria, en dehors de l’émission sans inscription ni monogramme de magistrat à l’époque du style ancien, ses tétradrachmes sont marqués de 38 monogrammes (Karayotov 1994, p. 130, Table II). Mais cela ne signifie probablement pas que Messambria a mis en circulation plus d’émissions qu’Odessos. Le nombre plus important de monogrammes de magistrats est probablement dû au fait que Messambria n’interrompt pas son monnayage d’argent au début du IIe s. av. J.-C. Ses émissions du style ancien sont naturellement liées aux émissions du style moyen, et cette transition s’effectue lorsque le stratège Oinias était monétaire, de même qu’au temps du magistrat dont le nom commence par les quatre lettres ΠΥΡΟ, dans le monogramme M37.

Les plus anciens tétradrachmes d’Odessos (Fig. 40) se rapprochent par leur exécution du premier groupe du style ancien de Messambria (Fig. 41). Les coins de droit, produits par les deux ateliers, se distinguent par la beauté de leur style. La tête d’Héraclès est ronde et exécutée dans un haut-relief très saillant. La peau de lion et ses attributs sont représentés avec une plasticité exceptionnelle. La crinière ondoyante est savamment modelée. Le menton est charnu et arrondi. Les boucles sur le front d’Héraclès sont très souples.

La présence d’un tétradrachme de Dionysopolis dans le trésor de Büyükçekmece, enfoui vers 220 av. J.-C., prouve que dans le troisième quart du IIIe s. av. J.-C., cette cité pontique a déjà, elle aussi, un monnayage d’argent d'imitation des types d’Alexandre le Grand (Thompson 1954, 11-34). Büyükçekmece est une baie sur la rive européenne de la mer de Marmara, à environ 30 km à l’ouest d’Istanbul. Les deux coins du tétradrachme d’Odessos avec le nom de magistrat ΕΥΠΡΟ [16,52 g] (Auction, NfA, 18 décembre 1987; Pick, Regling, 2141 ; Price 1991, 1174b) sont très proches de ceux des tétradrachmes de Messambria, frappés avec les coins O9 – R30 (Karayotov 1994, nos 52 et 54). Ce rapprochement stylistique signifie probablement que le monogramme Messambrien M6, composé des lettres ΠΑ, marque plusieurs émissions de la cité, probablement postérieures au M5, composé des mêmes lettres. D’autre part, les tétradrachmes d’Odessos avec l’inscription ΕΥΠΡΟ, outre leur ressemblance avec ceux de Messambria, se rapprochent par certains signes stylistiques du style des tétradrachmes du magistrat dont le nom commence par ΚΥΡΣΑ. En plus, sous le trône de l’émission ΚΥΡΣΑ est gravé un monogramme qui coïncide avec le monogramme Messambrien M6.

Le haut-relief caractérise également les coins de revers de ce premier sous-groupe du ‘style ancien’ des deux cités du littoral ouest du Pont. Sur tous les coins, les muscles du torse et des bras de Zeus sont modelés en détail et présentent des traits post-classiques visibles. Les tétradrachmes de Messambria dont le titre ΒΑΣΙΛΕΩΣ est absent appartiennent à ces revers. Cependant, comme je l’ai déjà noté, dès le premier sous-groupe apparaissent aussi des coins de revers avec le titre royal. Les plus anciens tétradrachmes d’Odessos sans le titre ΒΑΣΙΛΕΩΣ se distinguent des émissions plus tardives non seulement par leurs signes stylistiques, mais aussi par le monogramme désignant le nom de la cité. On considère que les plus anciens sont deux monogrammes réunissant le O et le Δ (Fig. 391, 3, 4,et 5). Dans le premier sous-groupe de statères et de tétradrachmes d’Odessos, le monogramme représente un O dans lequel est inscrit un Δ, alors que dans le deuxième sous-groupe, plus tardif, la disposition des deux premières lettres du nom de la cité est inversé : le Δ renferme un petit omicron (Fig. 39, 3, 4 et 5). Dans le troisième sous-groupe des tétradrachmes d’Odessos, qui est le plus tardif, pour le magistrat dont le nom commence par les lettres KOI, les monogrammes typiques des deux premiers sous-groupes sont suivis d’une complication, et sur certains exemplaires apparaît une variante d’un monogramme de cité, alors que sur d’autres on voit les mêmes trois lettres ΟΔΗ.

Il me semble que nous devrions étudier ce fait et à partir de là, compte tenu du rapprochement stylistique déjà souligné, formuler l’hypothèse de l’existence d’une forme d’union monétaire entre Odessos et Messambria, réalisée et ayant fonctionné dès la seconde moitié du IIIe s. av. J.-C. À Messambria, le M5 et le M6 qui s’en rapproche par sa composition, sont également présents sur des statères d’or de la cité, imitant ceux d’Alexandre (Rogalski 1982, p. 97, nos 2, 3 et 4). Pendant cette période, on ne peut pas non plus exclure la possibilité d’une forme d’union concernant le monnayage d’or et impliquant Odessos et Dionysopolis. Un statère d’Odessos de la collection du British Museum est marqué de la grappe de raisin de Dionysopolis dans le champ

Dans les ouvrages que j'ai consultés, j'ai trouvé un peu plus de 20 inscriptions et monogrammes de magistrats 140

IVAN KARAYOTOV : LE MONNAYAGE DE MESSAMBRIA ET LES MONNAYAGES D’APOLLONIA, ODESSOS ET DIONYSOPOLIS droit, et du monogramme d’Odessos dans le champ gauche. Ces signes, liant les trois cités ouest-pontiques – Odessos, Messambria et Dionysopolis, sont selon moi significatifs et me conduisent à l’hypothèse de l’existence d’un koinon monétaire engageant leur politique monétaire. Cette possibilité est également envisagée par K. Dimitrov, pour qui le monogramme composé des lettres ΔΙΟΝΥ sur les statères d’Odessos est le monogramme de la cité de Dionysopolis, accompagné du monogramme ancien d’Odessos, un Δ renfermant un petit omicron (Dimitrov 1987, p. 59). Son hypothèse est plausible et elle est étayée par le fait que le monogramme de la cité d’Odessos, comme le note Rogalski, a été ajouté (Rogalski 1979, 4-7, nos 4-7).

debout’ est abrégée : ΘΕΟΥ ΜΕΓΑΛΟΥ, à la verticale, et ΟΔΗ à l’horizontale, dans le champ gauche. Le nom du magistrat avec les lettres ΚΥΡΣΑ est de nouveau présent sous l’effigie statuaire du Grand Dieu Darzalas (AR, 34 mm, 16,33 g) (Gerassimov 1960, p. 59, n° 2, T. 1, 2 ; Gocheva 2000/1, 41-47). Selon Gerassimov, ce tétradrachme appartient à la ‘seconde émission’, sur laquelle est gravée la statue de Grand Dieu (Gerassimov 1951, 65-72). Le nom du monétaire ΚΥΡΣΑ est au génitif (le nominatif est Κύρσας). Nous le connaissons par une inscription funéraire d’Apollonia, la sœur ionienne d’Odessos (IGBR, I(2), 458). Gerassimov pense que cette émission de tétradrachmes d’Odessos n’était pas destinée au marché, mais a servi à ‘célébrer un événement particulier à Odessos’. Il date l’émission de la période entre 140 et 130 av. J.-C., s’opposant ainsi à Pick, qui la fait remonter à l’an 113 av. J.-C., et associe cette date à l’expulsion des Krobyses (Gerassimov 1960, p. 60). Si cependant nous considérons la date des imitations d’alexandres d’Odessos présentant l’inscription de magistrat ΚΥΡΣΑ (Fig. 43), ainsi que le style des tétradrachmes originaux d’Odessos, nous devrions admettre que ces monnaies sont contemporaines, et les dater des toutes dernières années du IIIe s. ou du tout début du IIe s. av. J.-C.

Il est cependant possible que ΔΙΟΝΥ soit le début du nom du monétaire ΔΙΟΝΥΣΙΟΣ. Ces statères font partie du trésor de Mârâšešti, mais G. Poenaru-Bordea ne se permet pas d’avancer une telle hypothèse (PoenaruBordea 1974, p. 108, nos 57-59). En outre, un statère d’Odessos de la collection du British Museum (Price 1991, 1151) et un autre de l’ANS sont marqués dans le champ gauche du monogramme d’Odessos et d’un monogramme, composé des lettres ΔΙΟΝΥ. Cette combinaison de monogrammes est un peu différente, et sur les monnaies qui en sont marquées, le titre ΒΑΣΙΛΕΩΣ, présent sur les statères de Mârâšešti, est absent. Il s’agit probablement d’une émission plus ancienne d’un magistrat du même nom, ΔΙΟΝΥΣΙΟ, et ce précédent nous empêche dans une grande mesure de lier le monogramme commenté à la cité des Dionysopolitains. Pour l’instant, le seul lien certain entre le monnayage d’or d’Odessos et celui de Dionysopolis reste le symbole ‘grappe de raisin’ que l’on retrouve dans le trésor d’Anadol (Price 1991, 1142; Rogalski 1979, p. 6, nos 19 et 20). Sur ces monnaies d’or d’Odessos, dont on peut supposer qu’elles étaient aussi émises par Dionysopolis, la légende est complète: ΒΑΣΙΛΕΩΣ ΑΛΕΞΑΝΡΟΥ.

Dans ce cas, sur le plan chronologique, elles correspondraient aussi à l’émission apollonienne de tétradrachmes avec la statue de Calamis sur le revers et l’inscription de magistrat ΑΘΗ (Fig. 38) Cette émission pourrait, elle aussi, avoir un caractère commémoratif. La mauvaise qualité de l’argent du tétradrachme apollonien ne nous permet pas de le rapprocher des monnaies d’argent d’Apollonia du IVe s. av. J.-C. avec les magistrats ΑΘΗΝΑΓ.. et ΑΘΗΝΑΙΣ, qui par leurs signes technologiques et stylistiques se distinguent radicalement du tétradrachme dont le revers présente la statue gravée de l’Apollon de Calamis. À l’exemplaire déjà publié s’est ajoutée récemment encore une monnaie, qui est dans une collection privée, et dont l’éditeur de littérature numismatique Atanas Koychev m’a montré une photo.

Je ne peux ne pas relever le fait que l’inscription de magistrat d’Odessos ΚΥΡΣΑ est aussi présente sur les tétradrachmes originaux de la cité, qui sont d’un type bien connu et extrêmement rare :

Les statères d’or de Messambria et d’Odessos ont été réunis et publiés par Adolf Rogalski. En ce qui concerne leur marquage avec le symbole de Messambria, les monogrammes d’Odessos et les monogrammes de magistrats, ils ne se distinguent pas des tétradrachmes. Les statères les plus anciens de Messambria sont aux types d’Alexandre, et le ‘casque corinthien à droite’ y est généralement gravé sous l’aile droite de Niké, dans le champ gauche aux pieds de la déesse (Fig. 44). Dans l’émission Messambrienne la plus ancienne de statères aux types d’Alexandre, le nom ΑΛΕΞΑΝΡΟΥ apparaît seul, à droite de Niké (Rogalski 1982, p. 94, n° 1). Je dois tout de suite souligner que nous connaissons deux coins de droit provenant de l’atelier d’Odessos (D1 et D2), associés à des coins de revers ne portant que le nom d’Alexandre (Fig. 45). Cependant, le coin de droit D2

Avers : Tête du Grand Dieu, à droite ; Revers : ΘΕΟΥ ΜΕΓΑΛΟΥ ΟΔHΣΙΤΩΝ, gravé des deux côtés. Le Grand Dieu debout, de face, la tête tournée à gauche, revêtu d’un chiton à manches et portant l’himation sur les épaules. Dans sa main droite tendue, le dieu de la cité tient une phiale, dans la gauche – une corne d’abondance, d’où s’échappent des grappes de raisin. À l’exergue : ΚΥΡΣΑ. AR 33/36 mm. 16,05 g. (Fig. 42) (Gerassimov 1960, p. 59, n° 1, T. I, 1). Gerassimov publie un autre tétradrachme avec le même coin de droit (Fig. 42a). Il présente un revers différent, sur lequel l’inscription des deux côtés de ‘Darzalas 141

ANCIENT GREEK COLONIES IN THE BLACK SEA 2 n’est associé qu’à un coin de revers sans le titre ΒΑΣΙΛΕΩΣ (R2 [F2 selon Rogalski]) et continue avec deux coins de revers (R3 et 4). Sur le R3, on lit ΒΑΣΙΛΕΩΣ à gauche de Niké, et à sa droite la légende ΑΛΕΞΑΝΡΟΥ, alors que dans le R4 le titre et le nom sont inversés (Rogalski 1979, p. 4, nos 1-14).

de raisin’ dans le champ gauche (Price 1991, 947-949 et 953). Deux tétradrachmes de la collection du British Museum ont été frappés avec le même coin de droit, qui est très proche du coin de droit Messambrien O27 (Karayotov 1994, p. 86, 114, 115) et encore plus proche du coin de droit d’Odessos du tétradrachme n° 1158 du British Museum, marqué de ΑΣ, du monogramme de la cité – un O dans un Δ (Fig. 393, 4 et 5), et d’un Σ sous le trône (Price 1991, 1158). Ces caractéristiques et rapprochements stylistiques des tétradrachmes et des statères de Dionysopolis me poussent à ne pas adhérer à la datation proposée par Martin Price – 225-190 av. J.-C. (Price 1991, p. 179). Le début du monnayaged'imitation en argent et en or de Dionysopolis devrait être avancé d’un quart de siècle et être daté de ± 250 av. J.-C. Cette datation est appuyée par la présence d’un tétradrachme de Dionysopolis dans le trésor de Büyükçekmece (n° 12 d’après la liste), qui selon Margaret Thompson a été enfoui vers 220 av. J.-C. (Thompson 1954, 11-34; IGCH 867).

Ces mêmes particularités d’emplacement des inscriptions se retrouvent également sur les statères de Messambria (Rogalski 1982, p. 94-95, nos 1-13) et sur les tétradrachmes Messambriens les plus anciens, marqués du monogramme M2 et de l’inscription de magistrat EP (Karayotov 1994, p. 83, nos 8 et 14). L’emplacement du titre à gauche de Zeus assis peut être considéré comme un signe permettant de dater les statères les plus anciens de Messambria et d’Odessos. Cela concerne aussi les tétradrachmes de ces deux cités, mais il faut noter que vers la fin du style ancien des tétradrachmes d’Odessos, pour les magistrats désignés par les légendes ΚΛΕΑΝ et ΕΥΠΡΟ, le titre ΒΑΣΙΛΕΩΣ apparaît à gauche de Zeus (Price 1991, 1173a et 1174a).

À la limite du IIIe et du IIe s. av. J.-C., Odessos et Dionysopolis interrompent leur monnayage d’argent (Price 1991, p. 179 et 192). Aux dernières émissions d’Odessos, il convient d’attribuer les tétradrachmes aux types d’Alexandre avec le nom du magistrat ΚΥΡΣΑ et les monnaies d’argents originales de la cité, frappées en l’honneur du Grand Dieu Darzalas, appelé ΘΕΟΥ ΜΕΓΑΛΟΥ ΟΔΗΣΙΤΩΝ. La question de l’interruption de ce monnayage est compliquée, elle est certainement due à des raisons complexes, découlant de la pression extérieure de tribus thraces et scythes sur Odessos. Alors, au sud du Hémus, Messambria continue ses émissions d'imitation en argent et préserve le type, pour qu’il réapparaisse à Odessos au dernier quart du IIe s. av. J.-C.

Un autre détail surprenant est le fait que l’un des tétradrachmes d’Odessos du trésor de Mektepeni, marqué par l’inscription de magistrat KOI, ne présente que la légende ΑΛΕΞΑΝΡΟΥ à droite de Zeus assis, et sous son trône on voit le monogramme ancien de la cité, composé d’un O, inscrit dans un Δ. Cette même inscription de magistrat KOI se lit dans le champ gauche d’une autre monnaie du trésor, associée au monogramme tardif de la cité (Olcay Seyrig 1965, nos 5 et 6). Un nom sans titre caractérise deux autres tétradrachmes avec un KOI, dans les collections du British Museum et de l’ANS. Le monogramme de la cité sur ces monnaies est aussi ancien, mais l’agencement des lettres est inversé. Là, le Δ est inscrit dans un O, comme je l’ai déjà souligné (Price 1991, 1162). On peut supposer que le monétaire d’Odessos, désigné par KOI, marque des émissions de tétradrachmes et de statères, séparées par un intervalle de temps considérable. Une autre particularité est que sur le statère avec un KOI du British Museum, il n’y a pas de monogramme de la cité (Price 1991, 1161). On n’y voit que le blason de la cité – une amphore renversée, caractérisant aussi le monnayage de bronze ancien d’Odessos, ainsi que je l'ai noté plus haut. Cela me permet de mesurer toute la relativité d’un classement chronologique fondé sur des noms communs de magistrats. C’est ce qu’il faut toujours faire, surtout lorsque les coins de revers ne sont pas liés par un coin de droit commun.

Après la découverte des trois reliefs portant des effigies du collège des stratèges à Messambria en 1972, il est apparu que les monétaires de Messambria étaient aussi, à des moments donnés, des stratèges de la cité. Sur le relief n° 1 (Fig. 47), on lit le nom du stratège principal Oinias, qui dans le second quart du IIe s. était aussi un monétaire, et son nom est aussi présent, seul, dans la combinaison de monogrammes ΔΑ – ΟΙΝΙΑ chez M38 et M39 (Karayotov 1994, T. II). Son fils Dionysios, apparaît comme stratège sur le relief n° 3 (Fig. 48.), et ses monogrammes M74, M78, M81 et M83, appartiennent au dernier quart du IIe s. et sont contemporains de la reprise du monnayage d’argent d’Odessos. Un diminutif du nom du petit-fils d’Oinias et du fils de Dionysios, sous la forme Apollas, apparaît aussi sur le relief n° 3 et sur des tétradrachmes de Messambria aux types de Mithridate chez le M105 (Venedikov 1980, 81-95) ; IGBR, V, 5102, 5103 et 5104). Plusieurs noms de stratèges du relief n° 2 (Fig 49.) peuvent être associés à des monogrammes de la seconde phase du style moyen du monnayage d'imitation de Messambria (Karayotov 1994, T. II). Ces magistrats Messambriens étaient-ils en même temps des stratèges et des monétaires? Nous ne pouvons en être certains. Nous

Le monnayage d’argent et d’or de Dionysopolis (Fig. 46) au IIIe s. av. J.-C. est peu abondant, comparé à ceux de Messambria et d’Odessos. Comme je l’ai déjà relevé, il est possible que les statères anciens de Dionysopolis soient liés à ceux d’Odessos. Il convient cependant de se pencher sur le fait que quelques tétradrachmes et un statère de Dionysopolis présentent une légende avec seulement le nom ΑΛΕΞΑΝΡΟΥ et le symbole ‘grappe 142

IVAN KARAYOTOV : LE MONNAYAGE DE MESSAMBRIA ET LES MONNAYAGES D’APOLLONIA, ODESSOS ET DIONYSOPOLIS sommes cependant persuadés que les personnes représentées sur les reliefs, dont les noms sont également gravés sur les tétradrachmes du style moyen et du style tardif, sont les mêmes.

Donc, en l’occurrence, il ne s’agit pas seulement d’un rapprochement stylistique entre les premières émissions du monnayage d'imitation en argent d’Odessos après sa reprise et les derniers tétradrachmes Messambriens du ‘style moyen’ (Fig. 40a). La présence du casque Messambrien sur les deux tétradrachmes qui portent en même temps les marques des deux cités, est significative. Elle nous apporte aussi la preuve de l’uniformité de ces émissions et des motifs communs qui ont amené à leur frappe. Par la reprise de ses émissions aux types d’Alexandre, Odessos se place parmi les cités du secteur nord du littoral ouest du Pont. On y frappe des statères d’or aux types de Lysimaque avec l’emblème de Byzance – un trident sous le trône d’Athéna (Calataÿ 1995, 3950). Les émissions d’argent abondantes d’Odessos viennent s’ajouter à celles d’or de Callatis, Tomis et Histria, et témoignent clairement que dans cette zone pontique, il y avait dans les premières décennies du Ier s. av. J.-C., un besoin exceptionnel de moyens financiers pour engager de grands contingents de mercenaires pour la coalition anti-romaine de Mithridate VI Eupator.

À Byzance, la métropole de Messambria, nous trouvons aussi une coïncidence des noms des stratèges Hécatodôros et Olympiodôros chez Polybe et sur les monnaies d’argent de la cité du IIIe s. av. J.-C. (Polyb. IV, 47, 3 ; Seyrig 1968, 186-187). Cela nous pousse à avancer l’hypothèse que dans la métropole de Byzance, tout comme à Messambria, des stratèges ou d’anciens stratèges étaient également des monétaires. Bien qu’il n’existe pas de concordances aussi nombreuses pour Odessos entre les sources épigraphiques et numismatiques, nous pouvons néanmoins supposer, avec une grande probabilité, que le monnayage y était dirigé par le grand prêtre du Grand Dieu des Odessitains. La preuve en est le nom ΚΥΡΣΑ, génitif de ΚΥΡΣΑΣ, que nous lisons aussi sur les tétradrachmes d’imitation, et sur l’émission d’honneur originale de la cité, frappée à la limite du IIIe s. et du IIe s. av. J.-C. En se fondant sur ces réflexions, nous pouvons déduire que Messambria et Odessos avaient une structure constitutionnelle différente. Tout porte à croire qu’à Messambria l’éponyme du calendrier local (hiéromnémon) était probablement le stratège principal (ou bien un ancien stratège principal nommé déjà «ΒΑΣΙΛΕΩΣ», alors qu’à Odessos cet honneur incombait au grand prêtre du Grand Dieu des Odessitains. Quant au nom Leontiscos (Moushmov 1912, 82, 83; Price 1991, 959, 960) que nous lisons sur les tétradrachmes de Dionysopolis, nous n’avons pour l’instant aucune base de comparaisons, de commentaires ou d’hypothèses de travail quant aux milieux dans lesquels les monétaires de Dionysopolis étaient choisis. Vers la fin du IIIe s. et le début du IIe s. av. J.-C., Dionysopolis interrompt définitivement son monnayage d'imitation en argent.

Dans le premier quart du Ier s. av. J.-C., Odessos met en circulation beaucoup plus de tétradrachmes que Messambria. Les deux trésors découverts dans la chôra de Messambria, près du village de Roudnik (CHII 98), et dans la région de Burgas (IGCH 959), en témoignent clairement (nos 11 et 29 d’après la liste). La proportion des tétradrachmes de Messambria et d’Odessos y est de 1 : 2. Cependant, la cité au sud du Balkan continue ses émissions annuelles et cela se traduit par le changement fréquent des couples de monogrammes et leurs liaisons (Karayotov 1994, T. II, nos 98-125). Ces émissions sont peu nombreuses et Messambria n’est pas en mesure de satisfaire les besoins de ses territoires éloignés aussi bien que ceux de ses territoires les plus proches en tétradrachmes d’argent. C’est pour cette raison que les monnaies d’Odessos trouvent une aussi grande diffusion. Outre les trésors déjà mentionnés, on découvre maintenant des pièces isolées de tétradrachmes tardifs d’Odessos dans les remparts de la cité romaine Deultum (Musée archéologique de Burgas, n° 801) et dans la cité antique et médiévale Agatopolis (marque ΘE ; Musée archéologique de Burgas, n° 799 ; Galabov 1957a, 6172). Cependant, un tétradrachme ancien d’Odessos du IIIe s. av. J.-C. a été trouvé dans les ruines d’Apollonia (Musée archéologique de Burgas, numéro d’inventaire 936) ; il ne peut pas être associé à la présence dans la cité de la garnison de Mithridate, sous la commande d’Epitynghan de Tarsus (IGBR, I(2), 392).

Lorsque vers 115/110 av. J.-C., au temps du monétaire ΔΗ, Odessos reprend son monnayage d’argent, les coins pour les tétradrachmes sont faits par des graveurs Messambriens (Karayotov 2004, 145-158). Non seulement ces monnaies se rapprochent-elles par leur style de celles de Messambria, mais il existe une pièce de la collection du British Museum qui a été frappée avec un coin de droit d’Odessos, portant l’inscription de magistrat ΔΗ, sans le monogramme d’Odessos, mais marquée du symbole de Messambria – un casque de profil dans le champ gauche (Price 1991, 1178 ; Callataÿ 1997, 85, D2R1). Cependant, son coin de droit a servi à frapper encore des dizaines de tétradrachmes d’Odessos (Callataÿ 1997, p. 84). Sur un autre tétradrachme, publié par moi comme Messambrien (Karayotov 1994, p. 108, n° 725) et par Fr. de Callataÿ comme odessitain (Callataÿ 1997, p. 85 et 110), dans le champ gauche il y a un monogramme A R et un casque de profil, et sous le trône ΘΕ .

La pénétration de tétradrachmes tardifs d’Odessos au sud du Balkan montre aussi que le littoral de la mer Noire de la Dobroudja actuelle a été touché dans une bien plus grande mesure par la fièvre militaire, provoquée par les préparatifs pour les campagnes des guerres de Mithridate dans le premier quart du 1er s. av. J.-C. Le recrutement de troupes nombreuses nécessitait évidemment des monnaies d’or et d’argent solides et fiables. Pour cette 143

ANCIENT GREEK COLONIES IN THE BLACK SEA 2 raison, les ateliers des cités voisines Histria, Tomis, Callatis et Odessos, assistés par la trésorerie centrale de Mithridate, ont accéléré leur monnayage de métaux précieux. Au sud, ce rôle a incombé non à Messambria, mais à Byzance, qui occupait une position stratégique plus importante. Ses tétradrachmes aux types de Lysimaque étaient émis à une vitesse telle que dans certains cas, lorsque l’argent venait à manquer, pour exécuter les ordres des stratèges de Mithridate, les ateliers de la cité émettaient des tétradrachmes fourrés. Un tel fourré fait partie du trésor de tétradrachmes de Byzance, découvert dans les remparts de la cité romaine de Deultum (Fig. 50).

rencontrent désormais avec les premières émissions du monnayage d’argent renouvelé d’Odessos, marquées de ΔΗ et de A R, et du monogramme le plus tardif de la cité Η (nos 7, 13, 33 et 34). Il est tout à fait possible que les trésors de Shoumen, décrits sous les nos 33 et 34, bien qu’ils figurent dans l’IGCH sous des numéros différents et avec des dates différentes, soient en fait un seul et même trésor. Dans le trésor de Snyagovo, il y a un seul tétradrachme de Messambria avec M64 et 31 bronzes de Messambria du type ‘Athéna Alkis’ avec un Σ dans la légende. La date de son enfouissement devrait aussi être antérieure à la reprise du monnayage d’argent d’Odessos vers 115/110 av. J.-C.

La liste des trésors fait clairement ressortir le fait qu’au IIIe s. av. J.-C., les statères de Messambria et d’Odessos ne sont présents que dans les deux trésors d’Anadol et de Mârâšešti (nos 1 et 2 d’après la liste), classés par B. Rousseva dans le troisième groupe, qui est le plus tardif (Rousseva 2002, p. 505). Les tétradrachmes des trois cités – Messambria, Odessos et Dionysopolis – ont une diffusion bien plus vaste. Dans les trésors d’Europe et d’Asie Mineure, la présence de tétradrachmes de Messambria et d’Odessos est pratiquement égale. Les tétradrachmes d’Odessos font partie de 10 trouvailles (nos 3, 4, 10, 15, 21, 22, 23, 24, 31 et 46 d’après la liste), ceux de Messambria – de 12 (nos 5, 6, 12, 15, 17, 19, 22, 24, 27, 31, 35 et 46). Les tétradrachmes de Dionysopolis sont assez rares et on les retrouve seulement dans les trésors de Büyükçekmece (n° 12), de Roumanie (n° 31), de Silistra (n° 35) et, selon Martin Price, de Mektepeni (n° 24) (Price 1991, 947, References). Si, à la production de l’atelier de Messambria, on ajoutait les trésors de tétradrachmes de Cabylé et de Cauarus, cet atelier devancerait considérablement ceux d’Odessos et de Dionysopolis. Ce sont les trésors nos 6, 24, 27, 31 et les trésors cités à la fin de la liste : un trésor de la région de Yambol IGCH 873, de Tvarditza, dans la région de Sliven, d’Idlib en Syrie IGCH 1543, d’Asie Mineure centrale IGCH 1411 et de Pisidie.

Les trésors qui ont été enfouis les derniers sont ceux de la région de Burgas (n° 11), Roudnik (n° 29), Sladka Voda (n° 38), Topolitza (n° 42) et Varna II (n° 45). Dans le trésor de Bolyarovo (n° 9), enfoui plus tard, on retrouve un tétradrachme de Messambria parmi les deniers romains républicains. Mais la date de son enfouissement au milieu du 1er s. éloigne ce trésor du flux global de la circulation, qui est stoppé par l’expédition de Marc Lucullus vers les côtes ouest du Pont en 72 av. J.-C. Après cette date, les conditions historiques imposent de nouvelles règles et le monnayage d’argent posthume d’Alexandre III, réalisé à Messambria et Odessos, demeuré le dernier du monde hellénistique, s’interrompt à jamais. TRÉSORS DE STATÈRES D’ODESSOS ET DE MESSAMBRIA 1. Anadol, département d’Izmaïl, Bessarabie (1895) ; IGCH 886 Enfoui vers 228-220 (Seyrig 1969, p. 42; Rogalski 1979, p. 11). Plus de 1000 statères d’or de différentes cités hellénistiques aux noms de Philippe ІІ, Alexandre le Grand, Philippe ІІІ Arrhidée, Séleucos Іer et Démétrios Poliorcète.

Au milieu de la période du style Messambrien moyen (180/175 à 115/100 av. J.-C.), vers 155/150 av. J.-C., ont été enfouies les trouvailles de Babylone (n° 8 d’après la liste) et de Souha Reka, dans la région de Shoumen (n° 39). L’interruption du monnayage d’argent d’Odessos pendant les trois premiers quarts du IIe s. av. J.-C., apparaît dans le trésor de Samovodene (n° 32), contenant 4 tétradrachmes de Messambria et 50 monnaies de bronze d’Odessos du type dit ‘le Grand Dieu cavalier des Odessitains’. Les trésors de Droumévo (n° 14), Pirgovo (n° 27), Gorna Oryahovitza (n° 16), Hotnitza (n° 18) ont probablement été enfouis avant la reprise du monnayage d’argent d’Odessos. Je n’ai pas d’informations quant à la présence de tétradrachmes d’Odessos dans le trésor de Kotel, mais le monogramme Messambrien M74 témoigne clairement que ce trésor a été enterré pendant le dernier quart du IIe s. av. J.-C. À la fin de la période, les tétradrachmes Messambriens dominent encore, mais se

Odessos – 46 (102) ex. (Pridik 1895 ; 46 ex. d’après Rogalski 1979, р. 1-16, T. I-IV ; 102 ex. d’après Newell, cité par Poenaru-Bordea 1974, 121-122). Messambria – 65 exemplaires, dont 50 sont marqués du casque corinthien à gauche, et 16 du casque corinthien à droite (Pridik 1903, nos 123-171 et nos 172-187 ; Rogalski 1982, p. 92-99, T. I). ‘…la situation des statères pontiques de la côte occidentale telle qu’elle a été établie par E. T. Newell, est la suivante : sur 694 statères aux noms et aux types d’Alexandre le Grand, 230 sont émis par Callatis, 102 par Odessos, 65 par Messambria, 19 par Istros et 36 par un atelier non identifié, probablement Tomis’ (Poenaru-Bordea 1974, 121-122). 2. Mârâşeşti (Roumanie), 1909, IGCH 958 (PoenaruBordea 1974, 103-125). 144

IVAN KARAYOTOV : LE MONNAYAGE DE MESSAMBRIA ET LES MONNAYAGES D’APOLLONIA, ODESSOS ET DIONYSOPOLIS Statères d’or de différentes cités hellénistiques: Callatis – 20 exemplaires ; Amphipolis – 10 exemplaires ; Lampsaque – 9 ex. ; Abydos – 9 ex. ; Babylone – 8 ex. ; Odessos – 7 ex., frappés entre 279/5 et 225 (PoenaruBordea 1974, p. 108, nos 57-63 et p. 116) ; Alexandrie de Troade – 5 ex. ; Milet – 4 ex. ; Lysimachie – 4 ex. ; Arados – 3 ex. ; Byzance – 3 exemplaires; Tomis – 2 ex. ; Pella – 1 ex. ; Sidon – 1 ex. ; Akè – 1 ex.

8. Babylone, 1900, IGCH 1774 (Regling 1928, 92-132). Enfoui vers 155-150 av. J.-C. (Regling). Messambria – 1 ex. avec M45 (Regling 1928, 92-132, n° 14). 9. Bolyarovo, département de Plovdiv, 1963, IGCH 975 (Gerassimov 1964, p. 241). Enfoui en 44 av. J.-C. (Thompson). Contient 13 monnaies d’argent : Messambria – 1 ex. ; avec M47, Maronée (deuxième période) – 2 ex., deniers républicains romains – 7 ex.

TRÉSORS DE TÉTRADRACHMES DE MESSAMBRIA ET D’ODESSOS 3. Adramittion (Asie Antérieure), 1954, IGCH 1302 (Poenaru-Bordea 1974, p. 116). Enfoui vers 210 av. J.-C. (Rogalski 1979, p. 11). Odessos – 1 ex. du magistrat KOI, sans BAΣIΛEΩΣ dans la légende.

10. Botevo, département de Varna (Dimitrov 1987, p. 5559). Contient des tétradrachmes posthumes d’Alexandre ІІІ : Odessos – 3 ex. sans BAΣIΛEΩΣ et sans monogramme de magistrat, mais avec le monogramme le plus ancien de la ville dans le champ gauche (Dimitrov 1987, p. 55 nos 4-6).

4. Armenak, IGCH 1423 (Thompson 1986, 63-106). Enfoui après 281 av. J.-C. selon М. Thompson (Thompson 1968, p. 163) Odessos – 1 ex. (n° 147) sans monogramme et sans BAΣIΛEΩΣ dans la légende

11. Burgas, la région, 1966, IGCH 959 (Gerassimov 1967a, p. 187). Enfoui vers 72/71 av. J.-C. (Karayotov 1994, 119). Contient 132 tétradrachmes posthumes : Messambria – 45 ex. Sur une partie des monogrammes М64, М105 (AПOΛΛA), М115 ; Odessos – 86 ex. Avec des symboles de magistrats, 5 ex. avec ΔH et 81 ex. avec ΘE ; Byzance – 1 ex.

5. Asie Mineure (Centrale), 1924, IGCH 1412. Enfoui vers 190 av. J.-C. Contient 152 tétradrachmes posthumes d’Alexandre ІІІ : Messambria – 1 ex. ; Héraclée du Pont – 1 ex. ; Pella – 1 ex. ; Cymé – 1 ex. ; Cos – 1 ex. ; Rhodes – 1 ex. ; Pergé – 1 ex. ; Arados – 1 ex. ; cité inconnue d’Asie Mineure – 1 ex.

12. Büyükçekmece (baie à 30 km à l’ouest d’Istanbul), 1952. Enfoui avant 220 av. J.-C. (Thompson 1954, 11-34 ; IGCH 867). Composé de 184 monnaies d’argent dont 57 sont des tétradrachmes originaux et posthumes d’Alexandre ІІІ : Amphipolis – 6 ex. ; Macédoine – 2 ex. ; Grèce – 2 ex. ; Messambria – 1 ex. avec M5 ; Dionysopolis – 1 ex. ; Asie Mineure – 1 ex. ; Magnésie – 2 ex. ; Milet – 1 ex. ; Biblos – 1 ex. ; Damas – 1 ex. ; Aze – 1 ex. ; Babylone – 2 ex. ; New York, ANS – 36 ex. ; Oxford – 1 ex.

6. Ayaz-in ( Phrygie, 30 km au nord d’Afyon Karahisar), 1953, IGCH 1413 (Seyrig 1973, n° 8, 36-46). Enfoui vers 190-188 d’après Henri Seyrig. Alexandre le Grand – 4 ex.; Cassandre – 3 ex.; Antigonos Doson – 2 ex. Côtes du Pont-Euxin – 5 ex.: Ville incertaine du Pont Gauche – 1 ex.; Messambria – 1 ex. avec M19; Cabylé – 1 ex.; Héraclée du Pont – 1 ex.; Sinope – 1 ex. Les autres tétradrachmes ont été frappés par: Parion – 2 ex.; Mitilène – 4 ex.; Pergame – 3 ex.; Sardes – 1 ex.; Clazomée – 2 ex.; Chio – 4 ex.; Colophon – 1 ex.; Samos – 2 ex.; Magnésie du Méandre – 1 ex.; Milet – 1 ex. ; Alabanda – 4 ex.; Cos – 1 ex. ; Nisyros? – 1 ex.; Rhodes – 5 ex.; Phasélis – 11 ex.; Pergé – 11 ex.; Aspendos – 13 ex.; Sidé – 34 ex.; Tarsus – 2 ex.; Myriandros – 1 ex.; Antioche – 4 ex.; Arados – 13 ex.; Nisibe – 19 ex.; Séleucie du Tigre – 4 ex.; Suse – 1 ex.; Ecbatane – 1 ex.; Corinthe – 1 ex.; Mégalopolis – 1 ex.; Imitation barbare – 1 ex.; Ateliers séleucides incertains – 2 ex.

13. Dolna Zlatitza (région de Targovishte), 1962, IGCH 904 (Antonovo), (Gerassimov 1964, p. 238). Enfoui vers 150-100 av. J.-C. (Price). Contient des tétradrachmes posthumes d’Alexandre ІІІ : Messambria – 1 ex. avec M58, Odessos – 1 ex., signé ΔΗ. 14. Droumévo, département de Shoumen, 1975 (Karayotov 1994, p. 97, n° 412, p.121). Contient des tétradrachmes posthumes d’Alexandre ІІІ : Messambria – 1 ex. avec M56.

7. Aytos (la région), département de Burgas, 1925, IGCH 899 (Mushmov 1926/27, 322-323). Enfoui vers 125-100 av. J.-C. Contient 25 tétradrachmes posthumes d’Alexandre ІІІ. Мésambria – 17 ex. avec M25 (6 ex.) et M28? Odessos – 7 ex.

15. Golyam Manastir (région de Yambol), 1938, IGCH 884, Sofia, Musée archéologique, n° CХІІІ et Musée historique national (Ruseva 1988, 15-27). Thésaurisé avant l’an 200 (Thompson). Tétradrachmes posthumes d’Alexandre ІІІ.

145

ANCIENT GREEK COLONIES IN THE BLACK SEA 2 Amphipolis – 1 ex. ; Callatis – 2 ex. ; Odessos – 5 ex. du magistrat AΣ, avec le monogramme de la ville (O dans un Δ) dans le champ gauche KOI et une amphore renversée sous le trône (Rouseva 1988, nos 4-8) ; Messambria – 4 ex. avec M5 et M13 (Rousseva 1988, nos 9-12) ; le Pont Ouest (imitation) – 1 ex. ; Mytilène – 1 ex. ; Pergame – 1 ex. ; Magnésie du Méandre – 1 ex. ; Milet – 1 ex. ; Silion – 1 ex. ; Arados – 3 ex. ; Babylone – 1 ex. ; non attribué (Asie Mineure du Sud) – 1 ex. ; Asie Mineure (imitation) – 1 ex. ; Lysimaque – contemporains et posthumes – 9 ex. ; Cauarus – 1 ex. ; Séleucos Ier – 1 ex. ; Antiochos Ier – 1 ex. ; Antiochos II – 2 ex. ; Séleucos II – 2 ex. ; Nicomède III Épiphane – 1 ex. ; Maronée (deuxième période) – 1 ex.

20. Kotel (non loin de la ville), département de Sliven. Le lot contenait 17 ou 18 tétradrachmes (posthumes), dont 2/3 de Messambria (la moitié ou un peu plus). Le Dr Raev a vu 8 tétradrachmes, dont 4 ou 5 de Messambria, avec des flans moyens et petits avec М74 (ΔA – ΔI). 21. Latakié (Laodicée sur mer), 1946, (Seyrig 1973, 3031). Enfoui entre 199/198 et 190 av. J.-C. (Seyrig 1973, p. 31). 32 tétradrachmes examinés par Seyrig. Arados – 5 ex. ; Apamée – 1 ex. ; Nisibe – 4 ex. ; Ecbatane – 2 ex. ; Odessos – 1 ex. avec KOI dans le champ gauche et le monogramme de la ville sous le trône (Seyrig 1973, p. 30, n° 13) ; Chio – 3 ex. ; Milet – 1 ex. ; Phasélis – 1 ex. ; Sidé – 1 ex. ; Antigonos Doson – 2 ex.

16. Gorna Oryahovitza, 1939, IGCH 521 (Gerassimov 1939, p. 342). Enfoui vers la fin du IIe siècle av. J.-C. (Karayotov 1994, 118-119). Contient 355 monnaies d’argent, trouvées dans un vase de bronze. Messambria – 7 tétradrachmes avec M50, M58, M62 et M78 ; Philippe II – 1 ex. ; Macédoine Première – 338 tétradrachmes et imitations de Macédoine Première – 7 tétradrachmes.

22. Malomir, région de Shoumen, 1966, IGCH 887 (Gerassimov 1966, p. 212). Enfoui vers 190 av. J.-C. (Price). 23 tétradrachmes et drachmes. 13 tétradrachmes posthumes d’Alexandre III. Amphipolis, Callatis, Odessos, Asie Mineure, Messambria – 3 ex. avec le monogramme M5 d’un même coin de droit, Philippe II – 1 drachme, Lysimaque – 7 tétradrachmes, Atalidae – 1 tétradrachme, Séleucos Ier – 1 tétradrachme, Shoumen, Musée régional, Collection ‘Dr Haralanov’.

17. Gostiliza, département de Gabrovo, 1958 (Gerassimov 1962, p. 225). Enfoui vers 225 (Karayotov 1994, p. 120). Contient 22 tétradrachmes d’Alexandre ІІІ, dont 21 sans le titre ВАΣІΛΩΣ ; Messambria – 1 ex. avec M24, Veliko Tarnovo, Musée historique.

23. Meydancikkale, Cilicie Trachée, 1980 (Davesne, Le Rider 1989). 5215 monnaies en argent : Odessos – 1 tétradrachme avec un monogramme composé des lettres ΞΩ ; Messambria – 1 ex. (Davesne, Le Rider 1989, p. 46, n° 530, Tableau 22 ; p. 45, n° 529, Tableau 22).

18. Hotnitza, département de Veliko Tarnovo, 1961, IGCH 525 (Gerassimov 1963, p. 265). Enfoui vers 125-100 (M. Thompson). Contient 63 tétradrachmes : Messambria – 1 ex. avec M50 ; Thasos (deuxième période) – 62 tétradrachmes, Veliko Tarnovo, Musée régional.

24. Mektepeni (Phrygie), 1956, IGCH 1410 (Olcay, Seyrig 1965). Enfoui vers 190 av. J.-C. Une grande partie du trésor – 686 tétradrachmes – est entrée au Musée archéologique d’Istanbul. Au total, 753 tétradrachmes ont été examinés par N. Olcay et H. Seyrig. Monnayages royaux : Alexandre le Grand (IVe siècle) – 14 ex. ; Philippe III – 1 ex. ; Cassandre – 6 ex. ; Démétrios Poliorcète – 1 ex. ; Antigonos Gonatas – 8 ex. ; Antigonos Doson – 6 ex. ; Philippe V – 7 ex. ; Lysimaque (de son vivant) – 10 ex. ; Séleucus Ier – 3 ex. ; Antiochos Ier – 8 ex. ; Antiochos II – 12 ex. ; Antiochos Hiérax – 35 ex. ; Séleucos III – 1 ex. ; Antiochos III – 34 ex. ; Prusias Ier – 8 ex. (Seyrig 1973, p. 30, n° 13). Tétradrachmes posthumes d’Alexandre le Grand et de Lysimaque. Côtes du Pont-Euxin (75 pièces) – Ville incertaine – 2 ex. ; Callatis – 2 ex. ; Odessos – 3 ex. avec KOI (2) et KΛEAN ; Messambria – 13 ex. avec M5, M10, M11, M12, M14, M18 et M25 ; Cabylé – 10 ex. ; Dionysopolis – 1 ex. (Price 1991, 947, References);

19. Kosseir (Qalaat Kosseir, au sud-est d’Antioche), 1949, (Seirig 1973, n° 7, 32-36 ; IGCH 1537). Enfoui vers 191/190 av. J.-C. Contient 82 tétradrachmes : Arados (Alexandre III) – 1 ex. ; Antioche, Antiochos III – 1 ex. ; Séleucie du Tigre, Antiochos III – 1 ex. ; Ecbatane, Antiochos III – 1 ex. ; Messambria – 2 ex. (Monogrammes : en exergue – ΔI ; sous le trône – EP) ; Prusias Ier – 1 ex. ; Aenos, posthume de Lysimaque – 1 ex. ; Chalcédoine – 1 ex. ; Lampsaque (du vivant de Lysimaque) – 1 ex. ; Ténédos (posthume de Lysimaque) – 1 ex. ; Assos (posthume d’Alexandre III) – 1 ex. ; Sardes (Antiochos III), 1 ex. ; Chio (Alexandre III) – 1 ex. ; Colophon (Alexandre III) – 1 ex. ; Milet (Alexandre III) – 1 ex. ; Rhodes (Alexandre III) – 2 ex. ; Phasélis (Alexandre III) – 4 ex. ; Pergé (Alexandre III) – 3 ex. ; Aspendos (Alexandre III) – 3 ex. ; Sidé (Tête d’Athéna – Niké) – 9 ex. ; Ateliers incertains, Alexandre III – 1 ex. ; Lysimaque – 1 ex. 146

IVAN KARAYOTOV : LE MONNAYAGE DE MESSAMBRIA ET LES MONNAYAGES D’APOLLONIA, ODESSOS ET DIONYSOPOLIS Héraclée du Pont – 30 ex. ; Sinope – 7 ex., et les monnaies déjà mentionnées de Prusias Ier.

29. Roudnik, département de Burgas, 15 km au nord de Burgas, 1975, CHII98=CHIII74=CHVI43 (Karayotov 1976, 36-44). Enfoui en 72/71 av. J.-C. (Karayotov 1994, p. 119 ; Idem 2004, 145-158). Messambria – 43 ex. avec M39, M45, M50, M53, M56, M62, M63, M64, M67, M78, M81, M82, M85, M86, M95, M98, M99, M100, M102, M104, M106, M110, M111, M114, M115 et M124 ; Odessos – 80 ex. avec ΔH, ΘE, et APe Byzance – 1 ex. Burgas, Musée archéologique, n° XXXII.

Les autres monnaies proviennent des côtes de la Propontide, de Macédoine, d’Égypte, etc. Propontide et ses détroits – 131 ex. ; Éolide, Pergame, Sardes – 54 ex. ; Ionie – 119 ex. ; Carie – 82 ex. ; Pamphylie, Cilicie, Chypre – 99 ex. ; Syrie et Phénicie – 37 ex. ; Mésopotamie, Arabie, Iran – 39 ex. ; Alexandrie d’Égypte – 1 ex. ; Macédoine – 43 ex. ; Péloponnèse – 5 ex. ; Ateliers indéterminés – 41 ex. 25. Mindya, département de Veliko Tarnovo, 1959, IGCH 864 (Gerassimov 1962, p. 231). Enfoui vers 50 av. J.-C. (Thompson). Contient 80 monnaies d’argent : Messambria – 3 ex. d’un même coin de droit ; Odessos – 1 ex. ; Thasos (seconde période) – 2 ex. ; Asie Mineure – 1 ex. ; Lucius Longinus (denier) – 1 ex.

30. Rouen, département de Burgas, 1991. Un nombre inconnu de tétradrachmes de Messambria et d’Odessos de l’époque du ‘style de Mithridate’ tardif, Prusias II – 2 ex. 31. Roumanie, 1934, IGCH 886. Enfoui vers 220-190 av. J.-C. (Price). Contient 22 tétradrachmes posthumes d’Alexandre ІІІ. Odessos – 7 ex. ; Messambria – 2 ex.; Dionysopolis – 1 ex.; Cabylé – 2 ex.; Callatis – 4 ex.; Héraclée du Pont – 1 ex.; Pergame – 2 ex.; Carie – 1 ex.; non attribués – 2 ex. New York (21).

26. Ossikovo, département de Targovishte, 1966 (Gerassimov 1967a, 188-189 ; Guinev 1978, 18-25). Enfoui entre 100 et 75 av. J.-C. (Guinev). Contient 27 tétradrachmes : Thasos (deuxième période) – 22 ex. ; Odessos – 2 ex. avec ΔH et ΘE (Guinev 1978, p. 19 nos 3-4) ; Messambria – 1 ex. avec M37 (Guinev 1978, p. 18, n° 1), Targovishte, Musée archéologique.

32. Samovodene, département de Veliko Tarnovo, 1933, IGCH 522 (Gerassimov 1934, 469; Idem 1956, p. 74). Enfoui vers 125 (Thompson). Messambria – 4 ex. avec M18; Imitations de Philippe III – 5 tétradrachmes, Macédoine Première – 1 tétradrachme; Thasos, deuxième période – 15 tétradrachmes ; Odessos – 50 pièces de bronze du type ‘Le Grand Dieu cavalier’.

27. Propontide (littoral thrace), 1950, IGCH 888, (Waggoner 1979, 7-27). Enfoui vers 180 av. J.-C. (Seyrig); 180-170 (Waggoner). Contient 200 tétradrachmes posthumes d’Alexandre ІІІ. Messambria – 24 ex. avec les monogrammes: M2, M3, M5, M13, M15, M18, M25, M26, M30, M31, M33, M36 (Karayotov 1994, T. II), Cabylé – 1 ex. (sans monogramme); Sicion – 1 ex.; Amphipolis – 1 ex.; Bottiae – 9 ex.; Amisus – 1 ex.; Sinope – 1 ex.; Héraclée du Pont – 1 ex.; Temnus (Éolide) – 11 ex.; Colophon – 1 ex.; Milet – 3 ex.; Erythrée – 1 ex.; Samos – 1 ex.; Mylasa (Carie) – 1 ex.; Phasélis (Lycie) – 21 ex.; Aspendos (Pamphylie) – 18 ex.; Pergé (Pamphylie) – 39 ex; Tarsus (Cilicie) – 2 ex.; Marium (Chypre) – 1 ex.; Arados (Phénicie) – 7 ex.; atelier incertain – 5 ex.; Sidon (vieille imitation) – 1 ex.; Phasélis (vieille imitation) – 1 ex.; Pergé (vieille imitation) – 2 ex.; imitations incertaines – 2 ex.; Carrhae près d’Antioche? (successeur d’Alexandre) – 1 ex; Antigonea sur Oronte – 1 ex.; Pergame sous Philétaerus – 1 ex. Dernière date pour le tétradrachme de Pergé ΛГ (33 = 189/88 av. J.-C.).

33. Shoumen (la région), 1941, IGCH 898 (Gerassimov 1946, p. 238; Idem 1956, 65-78; Price 1968, p. 71). Enfoui entre 115 et 110 av. J.-C. (Karayotov 1994, p. 118). Messambria – 48 ex. avec M25, M40, M42, M45, M52, M55, M56, M58, M59, M62, M63, M64, M70, M74, M77, M78 ; Odessos – 13 ex.; Thasos – 1 ex. 34. Shoumen 2 (la région), 1949, IGCH 903 (Gerassimov, 1952, p. 400). Enfoui vers 115-100 av. J.-C. (Karayotov 1994, p. 117). Contient des tétradrachmes posthumes d’Alexandre ІІІ. Messambria – 6 ex. avec M77, Varna, Musée archéologique. 35. Silistra, 1968, IGCH 891. Enfoui vers 180/150 av. J.-C. Contient des tétradrachmes posthumes d’Alexandre ІІІ. Мésambria – 2 ex. avec M5; Dionysopolis – 1 ex.

28. Pyrgovo, département de Rousse, IGCH 896 (Gerassimov 1963a, p. 263). Enfoui entre 125 et 100 av. J.-C. (Karayotov 1994, p. 118) Messambria – 9 ex. avec M40, M43, M47, M50, M53, M55, M56, M58 et M70. Rousse, Musée régional.

36. Silistra (dans la région), 1947, IGCH 870 (Gerassimov 1950, p. 322). Enfoui vers 250-220 av. J.-C (Martin Price). Un nombre inconnu de drachmes et de tétradrachmes posthumes d’Alexandre ІІІ: Histria – 1 drachme, Callatis

147

ANCIENT GREEK COLONIES IN THE BLACK SEA 2 – 1 drachme, Messambria – 5 tétradrachmes avec M5, Séleucos Ier – 1 ex.

Contient 15 monnaies d’argent : Messambria – 3 ex. vérifiés avec M69, M77 et M81.

37. Snjagovo, commune de Rouen, département de Burgas. Enfoui vers 125-100 av. J.-C. Un trésor de 31 bronzes de Messambria du type ‘Athéna Alkis’ avec l’inscription MEΣAM/BPIAMNΩN et 1 du type ‘Casque de face – МЕТА dans une roue’, ainsi qu’un tétradrachme de Messambria du ‘style de Mithridate’ tardif avec М64 (Karayotov 1994, T. II).

45. Varna 2 Enfoui en 72/71 av. J.-C. Contient des tétradrachmes posthumes d’Alexandre ІІІ : Messambria – 9 ex. avec M45, M58, M70, M78, M125, Varna, Musée archéologique. 46. Varna, la région, 1955, IGCH 859 (Dimitrov 1987, 55-62). Enfoui après 265 av. J.-C (Dimitrov 1987, p. 59). Contient des tétradrachmes posthumes d’Alexandre ІІІ : Messambria – 2 ex. sans monogramme – M1 ; Callatis – 2 ex. ; Odessos – 1 ex. sans monogramme ; Sinope – 3 ex. ; Mytilène – 4 ex. Varna, Musée archéologique.

38. Sladka voda, région de Provadia, 1911, IGCH 900. Enfoui en 72-71 av. J.-C. (Karayotov 1994, p. 118). Le trésor de tétradrachmes de Messambria et d’Odessos a été mis au jour à l’est du village, dans le lieu-dit ‘Poryaza’. On y a aussi trouvé un bronze de Cauarus (Lazarov, L 1993, р. 22). Contient 14 tétradrachmes posthumes d’Alexandre ІІІ. Messambria – 4 ex. avec les monogrammes M124 et M125; Odessos – 10 ex.; Varna, Musée archéologique (Gerassimov 1956, p. 73).

On peut également attribuer aux ateliers des cités ouestpontiques de Messambria, d'Odessos et de Dionysopolis, la présence de tétradrachmes du roi celte Cauarus et de Cabylé dans un trésor de la région de Yambol (IGCH 873), avec un tétradrachme de Cauarus, et un trésor de Tvarditza, région de Sliven, avec un tétradrachme de Cabylé, ainsi que dans les trésors d’Asie Mineure d’Idlib, Syrie (IGCH 1543) – 1 tétradrachme de Cauarus ; Syrie (IGCH 1593) – 1 tétradrachme de Cauarus ; Asie Mineure Centrale (IGCH 1411) – 1 tétradrachme de Cabylé ; et Pisidie, 1963 – 1 tétradrachme de Cabylé (Draganov 1993, 83-84).

39. Souha Reka, 20 km de Shoumen, IGCH 892 (Gerassimov 1960, p. 228). Enfoui vers 150 av. J.-C. Contient des tétradrachmes posthumes d’Alexandre ІІІ : Messambria – 6 ex. avec M45 (1) et M47 (5). 40. Susiana (Asie Mineure), IGCH 902 (Le Rider, RN, 1966, p. 127; Idem, RN, 1969, 18-22, RN, 1971, 109140). Enfoui vers 138 av. J.-C. Contient 2 statères, 485 pièces d’argent и 5 bronzes; Messambria – 1 ex.

Les monnaies de bronze Le monnayage de bronze de Messambria, Apollonia, Odessos et Dionysopolis, a un caractère local et n’offre pas une base particulièrement riche de comparaison. Mais comme ces cités ont des frontières communes, à des moments historiques précis leurs monnaies de bronze circulent ensemble, en desservant avec la même efficacité leurs agoras et emporia intérieurs et limitrophes. Dans certains cas, leurs bronzes sont retrouvés dans les mêmes trésors. Dans d’autres, ils se retrouvent dans les couches culturelles de la cité voisine, dans d’autres encore, ils sont surfrappés ou contremarqués dans l’atelier de la cité voisine.

41. Targovishte (la région), 1921, IGCH 902 (Moushmov 1921/22, p. 243). Enfoui vers 150-100 av. J.-C. (Thompson). Contient 45 tétradrachmes posthumes d’Alexandre ІІІ: Messambria – 1 ex. 42. Topolitza, commune d’Aytos, département de Burgas. Un nombre inconnu de tétradrachmes posthumes, dont la plupart de Messambria, de la période du style tardif. Le trésor est dispersé parmi des collectionneurs.

L’avers du type Messambrien de bronze le plus ancien, ‘Athéna – META dans une roue’ provient directement des oboles d’argent du Ve s. av. J.-C. Le revers se rattache à l’autre type d’argent ancien d’oboles et de dioboles, datant du Ve et continuant au IVe s. av. J.-C. Le principal type de bronze apollonien ‘Apollon de profil – Ancre dressée’ se rapproche, lui aussi, du type rare d’argent d’une émission peu nombreuse de dioboles et de quelques brèves émissions de tétradrachmes apolloniens. Or, les bronzes odessitains et dionysopolitains n’ont pas de prédécesseurs d’argent et cela apporte quelques incertitudes quant à la datation de leur début.

43. Trastikovo, département de Varna, IGCH 897 (Gerassimov 1956, p. 13). Enfoui vers 115/100 av. J.-C. (Karayotov 1994, p. 118). Contient 30 tétradrachmes posthumes d’Alexandre III : Messambria – 9 ex. avec M40, M42, M44, M46, M47, M62, M67, M74 ; Odessos – 15 ex. avec ΔH, A Ret ΘE. 44. Varna, 1946, IGCH 901 (Gerassimov 1950, p. 316). Enfoui vers la fin du IIe siècle av. J.-C. (Karayotov 1994, p. 120).

148

IVAN KARAYOTOV : LE MONNAYAGE DE MESSAMBRIA ET LES MONNAYAGES D’APOLLONIA, ODESSOS ET DIONYSOPOLIS IVe s. av. J.-C. La seule caractéristique qui les rapproche des émissions de bronze anciennes de Messambria et d’Apollonia, c’est le faible module.

En ce qui concerne Messambria, nous pouvons être certains que cette cité commence son monnayage de bronze par le type ‘Athéna – META dans une roue’ dès la première moitié du IVe s. av. J.-C. Dans un petit trésor de 8 pièces Messambriennes, il y a un bronze de Byzance du type ‘Athéna – Trois dauphins autour d’un monogramme composé de ΠΥ et ΗΡ’, daté par E. Schönert-Geiß ‘avant 340 av. J.-C.’ (Schönert-Geiß 1970, p. 53 et 130, nos 946-950). Le type monétaire ‘Athéna – META dans une roue’ a un poids moyen relativement faible (1,26 g calculé sur 151 exemplaires). Nous pouvons être certains que ce type jouait le rôle d’un petit module. C’est à la même époque, la première moitié du IVe s., qu’est frappé le type ‘Casque de face – META dans une roue’, qui joue le rôle d’un module moyen. Le poids moyen des monnaies du trésor Slanchev Briag 1 (11 exemplaires) est de 3,912 g, celui de Slanchev Briag 2 (13 exemplaires) est de 3,347 g.

Les 151 monnaies de bronze du type ‘Athéna de profil – META dans une roue’ que nous avons classées, présentent un poids moyen de 1,26 g, avec un minimum de 0,58 g et un maximum de 1,87 g (Karayotov 2001a, p. 32). Le diamètre moyen des monnaies apolloniennes anciennes du type ‘Apollon de profil – Ancre dressée’ est, comme nous l’avons déjà mentionné, de 10/11 mm. Le poids moyen du plus ancien type de bronze d’Odessos, selon Igor Lazarenko, est de 1,35 g. Les monnaies du type odessitain présentent, elles aussi, un diamètre de 9/11 mm (Lazarenko 1997/99, p. 54). Leurs caractéristiques typologiques sont les suivantes : Avers : Tête de femme avec un chignon, à droite dans un cercle grené. Revers : ΟΔΗΣΙΤΩΝ gravé sur un socle, sur lequel, à gauche, est à demi couché le Grand Dieu d’Odessos. De la main gauche, il s’appuie sur un coussin, la droite étant posée sur son genou. Devant lui, une amphore renversée (Fig. 51).

À Apollonia, l’utilisation du bronze comme instrument d’échange remonte aux VIe – Ve s. av. J.-C., comme nous l’avons vu. Les monnaies apolloniennes de bronze proprement dites, provenant de la nécropole de la cité, se retrouvent dans des ensembles archéologiques clos, et plusieurs d’entre elles sont datées avec certitude du IVe s. av. J.-C. (Guerassimov 1963, nos 1173-1207). Bien que T. Gerassimov ne nous indique pas le poids de ces monnaies, les données métriques de leurs diamètres nous font penser que la plupart sont de faible module. Les monnaies du trésor de 59 bronzes apolloniens de l’emporium de Burgas présentent les mêmes dimensions réduites (9 à 12 mm) (Filov 1911, 268-287), ainsi que plusieurs de celles découvertes dans le captage de Aquae Calidae (Filov 1910/11, 349-357; Idem 1911, 268-287); Kiyashkina et Karayotov 1997). Il est vrai que B. Filov ne fournit aucune donnée métrique les concernant, mais les diamètres des monnaies apolloniennes de bronze, découvertes dans le captage en 1994, sont de 10/12 mm. Le faible poids de ce module apollonien de bronze est également confirmé par les 6 exemplaires pesés par S. Topalov, dont le poids moyen est de 0,97 g (Topalov 1995, p. 18).

La monnaie de Dionysopolis du IVe s. av. J.-C. que I. Lazarenko attribue au roi scythe Athée pèse 1,24 g (diamètre 10 mm) (Lazarenko 2002a, p. 134). Ces données métriques minimales pour les monnaies de bronze dans l’ensemble des quatre cités du littoral ouest du Pont (Messambria, Apollonia, Odessos, Dionysopolis) apportent la preuve certaine qu’au moment de son apparition, leur monnayage de bronze desservait avant tout le marché local. Cela explique pourquoi ces monnaies se retrouvent surtout dans les cités mêmes, ou bien dans leurs agglomérations proches. Le plus grand module du type odessitain ‘Tête de femme portant des boucles d’oreilles – Le Grand Dieu des Odessitains à demi couché’ est introduit sous l’influence des bronzes de Philippe II et d’Alexandre III, et cela est très bien exprimé dans les cinq trésors de la région de Varna (Lazarenko 2004, p. 43). Lazarenko analyse dans les détails le trésor du village de Vaglen, découvert en 1986, et compare sa composition à celle des quatre autres trésors. L’un d’eux a été trouvé près du village d’Oreshak, région de Varna (IGCH 953), on sait que le troisième provient aussi de la région de Varna, le quatrième a été découvert dans les vignobles de Varna, maintenant engloutis par les nouveaux quartiers de la ville, et le cinquième provient du village de Souvorovo, région de Varna (mis au jour en 1942) (Lazarenko 2004, p. 42). Les trésors de Vaglen et d’Oreshak sont composés de monnaies d’Odessos du même type, portant la contremarque de la cité Δ dans un O (Fig. 391), qui ont été frappées, selon I. Lazarenko, au IVe s. av. J.-C. D'après ce même auteur, la première trouvaille de la région de Varna a été, elle aussi, enfouie dans le dernier quart du IVe s. av. J.-C., alors que les trésors de

Dans la vallée de la rivière de Batovo où, selon des inscriptions frontalières de l’époque romaine, se trouvait la frontière entre les territoires d’Odessos et de Dionysopolis (Mirchev 1953, 69-80), on découvre des quantités très importantes de monnaies d’argent d’Apollonia et de Messambria des Ve – IVe s. av. J.-C. On y trouve aussi de nombreux documents prémonétaires – des fléchettes et des dauphins de bronze, dont la collection du Musée archéologique de Balchik contient le nombre impressionnant de 150 (Jordanov 1990, p. 51). Par conséquent, dans les territoires au nord du Balkan, le besoin d’un instrument d’échange en bronze s’est fait sentir bien avant l’apparition des monnaies de bronze proprement dites. Ce vide a probablement été comblé par les premières émissions de monnaies de bronze, frappées par Odessos et Dionysopolis vers le troisième quart du 149

ANCIENT GREEK COLONIES IN THE BLACK SEA 2 Souvorovo et des anciens vignobles de Varna l’ont été dans le second quart du IIIe s. av. J.-C. Pour l’instant, aucun trésor de bronze ancien de la cité n’a été découvert dans les territoires éloignés d’Odessos.

lui-même (Lazarenko 2002, 103-104) et Draganov – un ‘Pan à cornes’ (Draganov 1995, 60-63 ; Idem 1990, 1925), le caractère scythe de l’effigie reste malgré tout incontestable. L’homme barbu de l’avers de ces monnaies est entièrement dans le style d’autres effigies plastiques scythes du littoral nord de la mer Noire. Je ne pense pas seulement aux parallèles des monuments numismatiques cités par Lazarenko. ‘Le Scythe’ de l’avers de Dionysopolis est absolument identique aux Scythes à cheval du fameux torque découvert dans le tombeau Kul Oba (History of the art 1971, p. 172, Fig 224), à l’effigie sur un statère de Cyzique, et au cavalier Athée du revers des drachmes du souverain, comme le note Lazarenko (Lazarenko 2002, 134-135, Fig. 3, 4 et 5).

Comme nous l’avons déjà fait remarquer, le plus ancien type de bronze d’Odessos, ‘Tête de femme – Le Grand Dieu à demi couché, avec une amphore renversée devant lui’, n’a pas de prédécesseur d’argent. Les chercheurs s’accordent à croire que ces monnaies représentent le principal dieu local dans le panthéon des Odessitains, et on y voit pour la première fois le symbole de la cité – l’amphore renversée. Sans approfondir l’interprétation de ce symbole qui fait sans doute apparaître la nature chtonienne du Grand Dieu des Odessitains (Gocheva 2000/1, 41-49), nous relèverons de nouveau son caractère local. Les habitants de Messambria choisissent le casque du fondateur thrace Melsas (Karayotov 1994a, S. 11) les Odessitains placent sur les monnaies de bronze l’attribut du Grand Dieu – l’amphore renversée. Elle marque, ainsi que nous l’avons noté, la plupart des tétradrachmes et des statères d’Odessos, imitant les types monétaires d’Alexandre III et de Lysimaque. Cette prédilection pour les symboles du lieu où s’établissent les colons grecs est relatée dans la littérature antique. Les sources antiques témoignent clairement du culte voué par les Grecs aux héros et aux divinités locales dès les premiers siècles de la colonisation, comme je l’ai déjà mentionné, en citant Hanell (Hanell 1934, p. 161; Apoll. Rod.II, 1274).

En comparant les monnayages d’argent des trois cités de l’ouest du Pont au IVe s., nous avons du mal à trouver des traits communs qui vaillent la peine d’être analysés et qui fassent espérer des conclusions importantes. Néanmoins, il y a déjà des hypothèses intéressantes et très bien argumentées, faisant penser que les monnaies anciennes de bronze d’Odessos du type ‘Tête de femme – Le Grand Dieu des Odessitains’ étaient contremarquées dans l’atelier de Messambria. Selon Lazarenko, cette première contremarque de Messambria représente une croix gammée (Lazarenko 2004a). L’auteur avance de sérieux arguments en faveur de l’hypothèse qu’après la mort de Lysimaque en 281 av. J.-C., Messambria avait utilisé la contremarque à la croix gammée. Voici une description des deux monnaies contremarquées publiées par Lazarenko :

La situation économique et politique qui favorise l’apparition des monnayages de bronze à Odessos et Dionysopolis diffère de celle de Messambria. Alors qu’au sud du Balkan la typologie des monnaies de bronze représente une transition naturelle du métal noble au bronze, au nord le bronze ne s’appuie pas sur des modèles d’argent. Les monnayages de bronze anciens d’Odessos et de Dionysopolis reflètent surtout les cultes locaux originaux du Grand Dieu des Odessitains et du Dieu éponyme des Dionysopolitains. C’est pour cela que le début de leurs monnayages fait l’objet de discussions. Certains auteurs font remonter le monnayage d’Odessos au IVe s. av. J.-C. (Pick, Regling 1910, S. 522; Lazarenko 1997/99, 51-64 ; Idem 2004, 33-51), d’autres le rattachent aux décennies suivant la mort de Lysimaque dans la bataille de Couropédion en 281 av. J.-C. (Draganov 1990, 19-25). Récemment, Lazarenko, se basant sur l’analyse précise des trésors mentionnés cidessus, a apporté des preuves solides que les émissions de bronze d’Odessos et de Dionysopolis remontent au IVe s. av. J.-C.

1. Avers. Tête de femme à droite. Sur la tête, la contremarque ‘croix gammée’. Revers. ΟΔΗΣΙΤΩΝ. Le Grand Dieu à demi couché à gauche, tenant de la main gauche une corne à boire. Devant lui, une amphore renversée et le plus ancien monogramme de la cité. Poids 3,07 g ; diamètre 15 mm ; Musée archéologique de Varna, numéro d’inventaire I 4356 (Fig. 52) ; lieu de la découverte inconnu. 2. Avers. Tête de femme à droite. Sur la tête, la contremarque ‘croix gammée (carré creux)’. Revers. ΟΔΗΣΙΤΩΝ. Le Grand Dieu à demi couché à gauche, tenant de la main gauche une corne à boire. Devant lui, une amphore renversée et le plus ancien monogramme de la cité. Poids 2,65 g ; diamètre 14/15 mm ; Musée archéologique de Varna, numéro d’inventaire I 3738 (Fig 52) ; découverte dans le village d’Obrochishté, région de Balchik.

À Odessos, elles ont débuté vers le milieu du IVe s. avec le type ‘Tête de femme – Le Grand Dieu à demi couché ‘ (Lazarenko 1997/99, 51-64; Idem 2004, 33-51), et à Dionysopolis elles ont commencé au temps du roi scythe Athée, qui est mentionné dès 339. Bien que le type d’avers frappé sous influence scythe reste sujet à discussions, même si Lazarenko y voit l’effigie d’Athée

L’hypothèse de Lazarenko est tout à fait plausible, et nécessite évidemment d’autres preuves complexes. Une de ces preuves pourrait être la présence de la croix gammée dans l’un des secteurs de la roue sur la drachme unique (Fig 22.) portant l’effigie du fondateur Melsas, entre les quatre rayons de deux oboles anciennes, ainsi 150

IVAN KARAYOTOV : LE MONNAYAGE DE MESSAMBRIA ET LES MONNAYAGES D’APOLLONIA, ODESSOS ET DIONYSOPOLIS ‘Apollon de profil – Ancre dressée’ du IVe s. av. J.-C. (Dimitrov, Penchev 1984, nos 308, 309 et 310). Mais à Seuthopolis manque le type de bronze encore plus ancien de Messambria ‘Athéna de profil – META dans une roue’ (Karayotov 2005, p. 214), et on n’y retrouve pas non plus de monnaie ancienne de bronze d’Apollonia. La raison en est qu’au IVe s. av. J.-C. ces monnaies de bronze de petit module étaient utilisées exclusivement dans les cités mêmes (Messambria et Apollonia) et dans leur territoire urbain (Guerassimov 1963, nos 1173-1207). Deux monnaies du type ancien de Messambria ont néanmoins été découvertes à Cabylé et aux alentours d’Elhovo, au sud de Cabylé. Une pièce du type ‘Athéna – META dans une roue’ a été trouvée à Odessos, 18 autres ont été découvertes dans le captage d’Aquae Calidae (Karayotov 2001a, p. 53-61, nos 4, 54 et 94).

que dans l’un des secteurs de la roue sur les revers de deux autres drachmes et de quelques oboles et dioboles de Messambria (Karayotov 1998, 53-58). Outre les monnaies d’Odessos, la contremarque à la croix gammée est également présente sur des monnaies de Philippe II et de Lysimaque (Lazarenko 2004a). Il est tout naturel, selon nous, que cette contremarque ait réellement été utilisée par l’atelier de Messambria dans le premier quart du IIIe s. av. J.-C. C’était l’époque où cet atelier avait déjà abandonné les types ‘Athéna – Roue’ et ‘Melsas – Pelta’ (Karayotov 2003, 57-73). Il est vrai que nous manquons de données confirmant la thèse d’une pause dans la frappe du type ‘Casque de face – META dans une roue’, mais il est tout à fait certain que dans le premier quart du IIIe s. av. J.-C., le type Messambrien le plus répandu, ‘Athéna Alkis’ (Fig. 53), n'est pas encore apparu. Et pendant les trois premières décennies du siècle, Messambria aurait pu satisfaire le besoin grandissant de monnaies de bronze dans son territoire en contremarquant les quantités existantes de numéraire de Philippe II, de Lysimaque et d’Odessos. Comme je l’ai déjà noté, la croix gammée caractérise le monnayage d’argent de Messambria dès le Ve s. av. J.-C. Il est bien possible que ce symbole solaire soit réapparu au IIIe s. av. J.-C., dans les années de crise, avant que Messambria n’accumule un solide potentiel économique et ne commence son monnayage d'imitation en or et en argent, et avant qu’elle inonde les emporia locaux sur le littoral et à l’intérieur de la Thrace de son abondante production de bronze du type ‘Amazone – METAM/BPIANΩN Athéna Alkis’, en dominant toutes les cités de l’ouest du Pont.

La dernière publication de Lachezar Lazarov fait ressortir que les monnaies de bronze anciennes de Messambria sont rares dans le riche ensemble de monnaies découvertes au nord de la chaîne centrale de la Stara Planina orientale (le Balkan d’Eminé). La collection du musée de Dalgopol possède une seule monnaie du type ‘Melsas – META dans une pelta’, découverte dans la localité antique du lieu-dit Besh Tepe, près du village de Bozveliiski (Lazarov 2003, p. 21, n° 13). À la fin du IVe s. av. J.-C., un nombre restreint d’exemplaires du type ‘Casque de face – META dans une roue’ y parvient tout de même, et parmi les monnaies retrouvées dans les ruines des forteresses et des localités thraces (et, à un moment, celtes), huit appartiennent avec une certitude absolue à ce type (Lazarov 2003, p. 21, nos 1-8). Au IIIe s. av. J.-C., l’atelier d’Odessos introduit un nouveau type de monnaies de bronze – ‘Homme barbu lauré – Le Grand Dieu cavalier’ (Fig. 54). On pourrait admettre que l’homme barbu de l’avers de la monnaie est le Grand Dieu des Odessitains. Sur le plan thématique, ce type de bronze est associé à l’émission de tétradrachmes originaux de la cité, frappés à la limite entre le IIIe et le IIe s. av. J.-C., dont nous avons déjà parlé.

e

Nous disposons de données concrètes prouvant qu’au IV s. et au cours des premières décennies du IIIe s., les plus anciennes monnaies de bronze d’Odessos avaient commencé à pénétrer dans le territoire de Messambria. Dans les ruines de Messambria même a été découverte une seule monnaie ancienne d’Odessos du type ‘Grand Dieu à demi couché ‘ (Burgas, Musée archéologique, numéro d’inventaire 491). Ce type est présent dans l’importante trouvaille d’Aquae Calidae, ainsi qu’à d’autres endroits de la partie orientale de la Stara Planina et dans la vallée de la rivière Hadjiika. Cependant, les monnaies de Dionysopolis de cette phase ancienne sont, pour l’instant, absentes de la vallée de la Hadjiika et, d’une manière générale, du sud du Balkan oriental.

Dans les grands trésors de bronzes Messambriens du type ‘Amazone – METAM/BPIANΩN Athéna Alkis’, frappés dans la période 275 – 180/175, malgré le manque de diversité, on retrouve tout de même des monnaies d’Odessos, justement avec le Grand Dieu des Odessitains lauré sur l’avers, et un cavalier sur le revers. Il existe une monnaie odessitaine du même type dans le grand trésor de Bratovo, commune de Burgas (IGCH 885). Ce type est également présent dans les trésors de Bilka, commune de Ruen, et de Goritsa, commune de Pomorié. Dans ces trésors, les monnaies d’Odessos côtoient des bronzes de Philippe II et d’Alexandre III. Un petit trésor de Ruen, mis au jour non loin d’une forteresse thrace, contient des monnaies de Messambria, de Philippe II, d’Alexandre III et du roi celte Cauarus, ainsi qu’une monnaie d’Odessos du type ‘Le Grand Dieu cavalier’. Un petit trésor de bronze, découvert entre les villages de Tankovo et de

L’absence de monnaies de bronze d’Odessos dans le complexe monétaire extrêmement riche de la cité thrace de Seuthopolis ne saurait constituer un argument contre leur datation au IVe s. av. J.-C. D. Draganov s’appuie sur ce fait pour étayer sa thèse que les plus anciennes monnaies de bronze d’Odessos avaient été frappées entre 281 et 270 av. J.-C. (Draganov 1990, 21-22). Il est vrai qu’à Seuthopolis ont été découvertes deux monnaies de bronze de Messambria du type ‘Casque de face – META dans une roue’ et une diobole d’Apollonia du type 151

ANCIENT GREEK COLONIES IN THE BLACK SEA 2 Kosharitsa, commune de Nessébar, présente une composition similaire. Au même endroit, dans les ruines de la katoikia de Messambria, ont été trouvées 8 monnaies de bronze: 5 de Messambria du premier groupe ‘Athéna Alkis’ avec un T, 1 de Philippe II, 1 d’Alexandre III et 1 d’Odessos du type ‘Le Grand Dieu des Odessitains cavalier’ (Karayotov 2005, 194-220). Les monnaies de Messambria du type ‘Athéna Alkis’ et d’Odessos du type ‘Le Grand Dieu cavalier’ reposent également ensemble dans le trésor de Paracin, Serbie (Ujes 2004, p. 86).

Grand Dieu cavalier’ atteignent de telles proportions qu’elles en deviennent méconnaissables. Aux IIIe – IIe s., il est difficile d’établir des rapprochements entre les monnayages de bronze de Messambria et de Dionysopolis. Les monnaies de ces deux cités ne se retrouvent ensemble que dans le trésor de Preslav (CH, VI 22 ; VII 63 ; Jouroukova 1979, 59-60). Mais, même dans ce trésor, leur rencontre dans la circulation n’est que symbolique. Chacune de ces deux cités n’y est représentée que par un seul exemplaire. Le contact monétaire devient beaucoup plus important à la limite entre le IIe et le Ier s. av. J.-C. C’est à cette époque que remontent plusieurs surfrappes de Dionysopolis, effectuées sur des monnaies de Messambria des types ‘Athéna Alkis – Σ’ et ‘Dionysos – Grappe de raisin’. Voici la description de sept monnaies de Dionysopolis, surfrappées sur des monnaies de Messambria.

Au IIe s. av. J.-C., ce type d’Odessos est représenté par 50 exemplaires dans le trésor de Samovodéné, région de Veliko Tarnovo (IGCH 522), mis au jour en 1933. Dans ce cas, nous sommes en présence d’un rare trésor mixte, composé de monnaies d’argent et de bronze. Outre les 50 bronzes d’Odessos du type ‘Le Grand Dieu cavalier’, il contenait : des tétradrachmes de Messambria – 4 exemplaires (Karayotov 1994, 119, n° 23), des imitations de Philippe III Arrhidée – 5 exemplaires, ainsi que des tétradrachmes de Macédoine Première et de Thasos (seconde période) – 15 exemplaires (Gerassimov 1934, p. 469).

La première monnaie a été surfrappée sur un bronze de Messambria du type ‘Amazone – MEΣAM/BPIANΩN Athéna Alkis’, les six autres sur des mithridates de bronze ‘Dionysos – MEΣAM/BPIANΩN des deux côtés d’une grappe de raisin’. Les monnaies se présentent de la manière suivante :

Au IIIe ou au début du IIe s. av. J.-C., dans l’atelier d’Odessos, a été surfrappée une monnaie de Messambria du type ‘Athéna Alkis – T’. Elle a servi de flan à une monnaie d’Odessos du type ‘Le Grand Dieu cavalier’ (Topalov 2004, 63-64, Fig. 28). Cela constitue la preuve que les monnayages des deux cités se croisent non seulement en participant au courant de circulation monétaire, mais aussi parfois dans la production même de numéraire.

1. Avers : Tête de la déesse de la cité avec une couronne crénelée. La nuque de l’Amazone est préservée. Revers : Déesse assise sur un trône. On distingue une partie de l’ancienne inscription MEΣAM…ANΩ du type Messambriabrien ‘Amazone – Athéna Alkis’. On voit la tête d’Athéna et la lance qu’elle brandit. AE, ∅ 21,5, 8,05 g ; (Fig 55.), trouvée entre Odessos et Dionysopolis. Peut-être dans la vallée de la rivière de Batovo. Collection de D. Dimitrov, Varna.

Au cours des dernières décennies du IIIe et des premières décennies du IIe s., Odessos et Messambria se rapprochaient aussi par le style de leurs coins monétaires. C’est à cette époque que remontent les nombreuses émissions barbarisées des types ‘Athéna Alkis – T’ et ‘Le Grand Dieu cavalier’. Par leur degré de barbarisation, certaines émissions d’Odessos dépassent considérablement celles de Messambria. Selon nous, cela est dû à la monétarisation déjà bien enracinée de la Thrace antique. Le besoin d’instruments d’échange sur le marché thrace a apparemment mené à la fabrication hâtive et peu soignée de nombreux coins monétaires. Dans cette situation, il n’est pas impossible que les officines aient été installées en dehors des cités mêmes et qu’elles aient fonctionné dans les katoikias proches. Là, à l’évidence, le matériel monétaire tombait de plus en plus souvent entre les mains de graveurs peu instruits ou complètement illettrés, qui n’étaient pas en mesure de graver des légendes correctes sur les monnaies. Il y eut des perturbations profondes dans l’iconographie habituelle des émissions de bronze, fabriquées au nom de Messambria et d’Odessos. Les écarts des caractéristiques iconographiques des monnaies d’Odessos du type ‘Le

2. Avers : Déesse de la cité avec une couronne crénelée. Une partie du profil du Dionysos Messambrien est préservée ; contremarques Messambriennes : ‘casque à gauche’ et ‘Déméter à droite’. Revers : Cybèle avec une patère. Les lettres BPIAN se sont préservées. AE, ∅ 22,5/23,5, 6,97 g (Fig. 56). Collection de Stavri Topalov, Sofia (Topalov 1997, 86, Fig. 37). 3. Avers : Déesse de la cité, surfrappée sur le Dionysos Messambrien et sur une contremarque Messambrienne ‘Déméter’. Revers : ΔΙΟ[ΝΥΣΙΟΥ] Déesse assise ΔΙΟΝΥΣ. AE, ∅ 24,5/25, 4,79 g ; (Fig.57), trouvée entre Odessos et Dionysopolis. Collection de D. Dimitrov, Varna. Trouvée entre Odessos et Dionysopolis. Peut-être dans la vallée de la rivière de Batovo. 4. Avers : Tête de Dionysos. Subsiste le sommet de la tête du Dionysos Messambrien, couronné de lierre. 152

IVAN KARAYOTOV : LE MONNAYAGE DE MESSAMBRIA ET LES MONNAYAGES D’APOLLONIA, ODESSOS ET DIONYSOPOLIS témoigne. L’inscription n’a pas été publiée à proprement dit, mais a été commentée par Velizar Velkov dans une publication en bulgare (Velkov 1990, 1-5). Des passages isolés ont été traduits par Velkov comme suit : ‘… Le Conseil et l’Assemblée ont décidé de glorifier pour tout cela (c’est-à-dire pour ses mérités envers la cité, décrits dans la partie manquante du monument) Polyxène, fils de Melseonos de Messambria …’.

Revers : Déesse (Déméter) assise sur un trône, tenant une grappe de raisin et des épis ? De l’ancienne inscription Messambrienne seules subsistent les lettres ME…/BP… AE, ∅ 25/22, 6,70 g ; (Fig. 58), trouvée entre Odessos et Dionysopolis. Peut-être dans la vallée de la rivière de Batovo. Collection de D. Dimitrov, Varna. 5. Surfrappe sur une monnaie de Messambrien du type ‘Dionysos – Grappe de raisin’. AE, ∅ 23/22, 6,43 g, (Fig 59.); trouvée entre Odessos et Dionysopolis. Peut-être dans la vallée de la rivière de Batovo. Collection de D. Dimitrov, Varna.

Dans le cas du monument de Dionysopolis, nous nous trouvons en présence d’une heureuse coïncidence du nom de Polyxène, fils de Melseonos. On retrouve ce même nom dans une inscription sur le relief n° 2 des stratèges de Messambria. ‘Polyxène, fils de Melseonos’ est le nom du sixième stratège du relief qui date de l’extrême fin du IIe s. av. J.-C. (Fig....). La précision de la date a été rendue possible grâce au fait qu’un monogramme composé des deux premières lettres du nom ‘Polyxène’ est aussi présent sur des tétradrachmes de Messambria remontant approximativement à l’an 100 av. J.-C. (Karayotov 1994, T. II, M98).

6. Surfrappe sur une monnaie de Messambrien du type ‘Dionysos – Grappe de raisin’. AE, ∅ 23, 7,04 g; (Fig 60.) trouvée entre Odessos et Dionysopolis. Peut-être dans la vallée de la rivière de Batovo. Collection de D. Dimitrov, Varna.

Le professeur Velkov associe le patronyme ‘Melseonos’ au nom du fondateur thrace légendaire de Messambria, Melsas. Selon lui, ce nom royal aurait été hellénisé et aurait ainsi survécu depuis le VIIe – VIe jusqu’au IIe s. av. J.-C. Nous disposons depuis peu de preuves que le nom ‘Melsas’, au génitif ‘Melsa’, est présent sur les monnaies de bronze d’un souverain ayant régné aux IVe – IIIe s. av. J.-C. dans l’actuelle Bulgarie du nord-est. Il s’agit de monnaies du type ‘Bucranios – MEΛΣA Poisson, à droite’.

7. Avers : Dionysos à droite. En tournant la monnaie à 90° à gauche, on distingue clairement le profil du Dionysos Messambrien. La contremarque Messambrienne ‘Déméter voilée’ est préservée. Revers : [ΔΙ]ΟΝΥΣΙΟΥ à droite de Déméter avec des épis et une grappe de raisin. Au-dessous, une inscription à demi effacée avec le nom de la cité. AE, ∅ 23,5/22,5, 8,26 g; (Fig. 61) trouvée trouvée entre Odessos et Dionysopolis. Peut-être dans la vallée de la rivière de Batovo. Collection de D. Dimitrov, Varna.

Bien que fragmentaire, l’inscription de Balchik renferme des informations sur les mérites du Messambrien Polyxène, fils de Melseonos, envers la cité de Dionysopolis. Il aurait aidé la cité dans une situation dangereuse, liée à des combats. Le professeur Velkov émet l’hypothèse qu’il s’agirait de ‘combats navals’, mais il est peu probable que ce soit le cas puisque, à cette époque, le pourtour de la mer Noire avait été maîtrisé par Mithridate VI Eupator. Probablement, une fois encore, Dionysopolis avait-elle dû être sauvée de ses voisins thraces ou plutôt des Scythes qui avaient pénétré dans la Dobroudja actuelle pendant cette période. L’inscription mentionne aussi une aide pour résoudre d’autres problèmes de la cité, mais les fragments de l’inscription qui sont conservés n’apportent pas plus de précision. On peut conclure avec certitude que Polyxène, fils de Melseonos, a accordé par l’intermédiaire de l’ecclésia (l’assemblée) de Dionysopolis un emprunt sans intérêt pour l’achat d’huile d’olive, destinée aux éphèbes (les adolescents), et peut-être aussi à la construction d’un gymnasion dans la cité. Pour cette raison, c’est justement dans le gymnasion de Dionysopolis que les notables de la ville ont décidé d’ériger une statue de bronze au Messambrien Polyxène. Cette donation concernait également d’autres bienfaits liés aux cérémonies religieuses, mais il manque les détails. Tout ce que l’on

À ces monnaies, nous ajouterons une surfrappe effectuée à Messambria même. Dans cette surfrappe, le type de Messambria ‘Athéna Alkis avec un Σ’ de la légende a été surfrappé avec des coins Messambriens d’un mithridate du type ‘Dionysos – Grappe de raisin’. 8. Avers : Tête de Dionysos à droite. Revers : MEΣAM/BPIANΩN Grappe de raisin. La partie supérieure de la figure d’Athéna brandissant une lance, apparaît clairement derrière la grappe, et est interprétée comme un ‘tropaion’. AE, ∅ 20, 5,27 g, Tarnavioara, Transylvanie (Chirila et al. 1967, 457, n° 4). La monnaie de Dionysopolis n° 1 a été surfrappée sur le type Messambrien ‘Amazone – MEΣAM/BPIANΩN Athéna Alkis’. Selon nous, ces ‘Messambriennes’ de bronze sont à dater de la période chronologique 175/170 – 125/100 av. J.-C. (Karayotov 1995/97, 52 ; Idem 2001, 52). Tout porte à croire qu’elle aurait été surfrappée dans l’atelier de Dionysopolis à la limite entre le IIe et le Ier s. av. J.-C. À cette époque, des contacts extrêmement étroits liaient Messambria et Dionysopolis. Un monument épigraphique découvert à la fin du XXe s. à Balchik en

153

ANCIENT GREEK COLONIES IN THE BLACK SEA 2 apprend, c’est que Polyxène a aussi reçu d’autres honneurs et privilèges, tels qu'une couronne d’or et le droit définitif d’importer et d’exporter des marchandises . Et ses descendants en bénéficieront aussi. Cette inscription est la première à mentionner le collège des synèdres de Dionysopolis et à noter que ce décret honorifique sera placé dans le temple des dieux de Samothrace. Ces derniers sont également mentionnés dans un décret plus tardif de Dionysopolis, qui parle du sauveur de la cité Akornion (IGBR, 1(2), 13).

type ‘Dionysos – Grappe de raisin’, mais elle surfrappe de ce dernier ses propres monnaies plus anciennes. Sur le plan typologique, ‘Dionysos – Grappe de raisin’, que nous appelons ‘Type de Mithridate’, se rapproche non seulement des monnaies de Dionysopolis, mais aussi de toute une série de types monétaires des cités pontiques, fait que nous avons relevé à plusieurs reprises. D’une manière générale, la phase finale du monnayage de bronze autonome de Messambria, Odessos et Dionysopolis porte la marque d’une prédilection évidente pour les divinités de la fertilité Dionysos, Déméter, Cybèle, et, dans plusieurs cas, pour leurs attributs. Ainsi, après avoir commencé par des types monétaires locaux différents, ces cités finissent par adopter une unification typologique monétaire. Elle serait due moins au dictat politique de Mithridate VI Eupator qu’à la vénération généralisée vouée à la fertilité de la Mère Terre, qui était particulièrement forte à la limite de l’époque hellénistique et romaine.

L’important pour nous, en l’occurrence, c’est l’information que la cité de Dionysopolis nomme proxène un citoyen éminent de Messambria, qui est même lié au monnayage de la cité. Outre le poste de stratège, il semble qu’à un moment il a aussi occupé celui de monétaire. Nous ignorons en quelles monnaies étaient les sommes assurées par le Messambrien Polyxène au gymnasion de Dionysopolis, mais nous pouvons croire que les liens qu’il avait établis entre les deux cités ont aussi provoqué le flux correspondant de numéraire de la cité plus riche de Messambria, au sud, vers celle, plus pauvre, de Dionysopolis au nord.

ABREVIATIONS APF

Avant d’être surfrappées à Dionysopolis, les pièces nos 2 et 7 avaient été contremarquées à Messambria même. Sur l’avers du n° 2 on voit des traces de deux contremarques, ‘Casque à gauche ‘ et ‘Déméter’, et sur le n° 7 – seulement ‘Déméter voilée’. Cela démontre clairement qu’elles ont longtemps été utilisées à Messambria même, avant d’arriver à l’atelier de Dionysopolis. Leur surfrappe a probablement eu lieu après le milieu du Ier s. av. J.-C. Le notable de Dionysopolis déjà mentionné, Akornion, s’est non seulement distingué comme un excellent diplomate au profit de sa ville vers l’an 48 av. J.-C. (IGBR, I(2), 13), mais il était aussi monétaire. Son nom est gravé sur une émission de monnaies de Dionysopolis du type surfrappé ‘Dionysos – Déméter’, et cela constitue la preuve indirecte que la surfrappe a été réalisée immédiatement après le milieu du Ier s. av. J.-C. (Canarace 1957, 67-76).

AMV ANS, MN ZfN

Archiv für Papyrusforschung und verwandte Gebiete. Statliche Museen zu Berlin. Acta Musei Varnensis American Numismatic Society, Museum Notes. Zeitschrift für Numismatik.

BIBLIOGRAPHIE Auction 58, CNG 2001 – A Mail bid sale, Classical Numismatic Groupe, Inc. September 19, Lancaster (USA), London (UC). Auction, NfA – Numismatic fine arts, Inc., Auction-sale Catalogues. Auktion, Lanz – Numismatik Lanz München, Auktion, Münzen der Antike, München, Deutschland. Auktion, Sternberg 1991 – Auktion XXV, am 25 und 26 november 1991 in Zürich, Frank Sternberg AG – Zürich. Balabanov P., 1982 – Nouvelle étude des monnaies-pointtes de flèches de la presqu’île d’Attia. Thracia Pontica, I, 40-56. Balabanov P., 1986 – Балабанов, П. Нови изследвания върху стрелите пари (Novi izsledvanija varhu strelite-pari – Nouvelles observations au sujet des flèches- argent (monnaies). // Нумизматика (Numismatica), XX, 2, 3-14 Batzova-Kostova, El., 1973 – Бацова-Костова, Ел., Нови монетни находки от Сливенски окръг (Novi monetni nahodki ot Slivenski okrag – Des nouvelles trouvailles monétaires du département de Sliven). // Musées et monuments de la culture, [МПК, MPK], ХІІІ, 2, 13-15. BMC – A Catalogue of the British Museum, London, UK. Bodenstedt F., 1973 – Studien zur Elektronprägung von Phokaia und Mytilene. Revue Suisse de Numismatique, 52, 1973,17-56 Bojadziev, 1986 - Un cas de contact entre la langue thrace et la langue grecque. Thracia Pontica, III, (Troisième symposium international, Sozopol, 6-12 octobre 1985), Sofia, 1986, 182-185

Quant à la monnaie n° 8 du catalogue, elle représente une surfrappe réalisée à Messambria même. Dans ce cas, c’est le type ‘Athéna Alkis – Σ’ qui a servi de flan, et la pièce a été surfrappée pour obtenir le type de Messambria ‘Dionysos – Grappe de raisin’. Cet acte d’auto-surfrappe a dû avoir lieu dès le premier quart du Ier s. av. J.-C., lorsque l’influence de Mithridate VI sur Messambria était extrêmement puissante. Le fait que cette surfrappe se retrouve aussi loin qu’en Transylvanie est significatif, et cela peut s’expliquer par les perturbations provoquées par l’expédition du roi des Gètes Burebista contre les cités pontiques au milieu du Ier s. av. J.-C. Du point de vue numismatique, il est important de souligner que dans la première moitié du Ier s., Messambria remplace son type traditionnel de bronze, vieux de deux siècles, ‘Amazone – Athéna Alkis’, par le 154

IVAN KARAYOTOV : LE MONNAYAGE DE MESSAMBRIA ET LES MONNAYAGES D’APOLLONIA, ODESSOS ET DIONYSOPOLIS Museum in Sofia (IGCH 884). – Thracia, 11 (Studia in honorem Alexandri Fol), 409-418. Dimitrov K., 1995b. IGCH 843 (Nesebar 1959) and the bronze Coinagе of Mesembria in the late 4th Century B.C. – In: Studia in honorem Georgii Mihailov, S. 145-148. Dimitrov М., 1995 – Димитров, М., Монетите на Дионисополис – Карвуна: извор за административната, политическата и стопанската история на Северозападното черноморие от ІV в. пр. Хр. до средата на ХV век (Monetite na Dionysopolis-Karvouna: izvor za administrativnata I stopanskata istorija ka Severozapadnoto Chernomorie ot IV vek predi Christa do sredata na XV vek – Les monnaies de Dionysopolis – Karvouna: source pour l’histoire administrative, politique et économique du littoral nord-ouest de la Mer Noire à partir du IVème siècle av. J.-C. jusqu’au XVème siècle). // Numismatic and sphragistic contribution to ancient and medieval history of [Dobroudja, Dobroudja], 12, 173-179. Domaradski M., Karayotov Iv., 1982 – Домарадски, М., Карайотов, Ив., Археологически проучвания на ‘Малкото кале’ (Archeologicheski prouchvanija na ‘Malkoto kale’ – Prospection archéologique de la ‘Petite forteresse’). // Mégalithes en Thrace [Мегалити в Тракия], София, 360-378. Draganov D., 1981 – Драганов , Д. 1981, Две монетни съкровища от V в. пр. н. е. от Ямболско (dve monetni sakrovishta ot V vek predi Novata era ot Yambolsko – Deux trésors monétaires du Ve siècle av. J.-C. .- de la région d’Yambol) // Bulletin des musées de la Bulgarie du Sud-Est [ИМЮИБ}\], ІV, 29-39. съкровищата от Тенево и Роза Draganov D., 1990 – Драганов, Д., Начало на бронзовото монетосечене на Одесос (Nachalo na bronzovoto monetosechene na Odesos – Début du monayage d’Odessos). // Numismatica [Нумизматика], Sofia, 2, 1925. Draganov, D., 1991a. The countermarks of Cabyle. Klio, 73, 1, 220-225. Draganov, D., 1991b. The countermarks of Moesia inferior and Thrace. Klio, 73,2, 495-509. Draganov D., 1995 – New coin types of Dionysopolis. Numismatic and sphragistic contribution to ancient and medieval history of Dobroudja, Dobroudja, 12, 60-63. Draganov, D., 2000. The bronze coinage of Dionysopolis. Typologi. XII Internationaler Numismatisher Kongress Berlin 1997, Akten – Procedings – Actes, Herausgegeben von Bernt Kluge und Bernhard Weisser, B. 275-279. Erxleben, Eb., 1970 – Die Münzgesetz des DelischAttischenseebundes. APF, Berlin, XX, 66-132. Fabricius, J., 1999 – Die hellenistischen Totenmahlreliefs, Grabpräsentation und Weltvorstelungen in ostgriecheschen Städten, Studien zur antiken Stadt, 3, München. Filov, B. 1910. Archäologische Funde im J. 1910, Bulgarien. – AA, XXV, 1910/11, 349-357. Filov B., 1911 – Филов, Б., Новооткрити старини (Novotkriti starini – L’antiquités récement découvertes). // Bulletin de la Société archéologique bulgare [ИБАД, IBAD], ІІ, 1911, 268-287. Furtwängler An., 1999 – Le trésor d’Auriol et les types monétaires phocéens. Les cultes des cités phocéennes, Actes du colloque international organisé par le centre Camille Jullian (Aix-en-Privence/Marseille), 175 -181 Furtwängler An., 2000 – Massalia in 5.Jh.v.Chr.: Tradition und Neuorientirung. Ein Uberblick uber die statlischen Emissionen im Lichte neuer Funde. In: Etudes offertes à

Detchev, 1976 - Dimiter Detchev, Die thrakischen Sprachreste, Wien,1976 Brachinski, J. 1958 - Брашинский, Й. Б. Понтийская экспедиция Перикла (Pontiiskaja expedicija Pericla – L’expédition pontique de Périclès). // Journal d’histoire ancienne [VDI – ВДИ], 3(65), 1958, 110-121. BSNR. Bultenul Societaţii numismatice Române, Bukarest, Roumânia. Bulatovich S. A., 1971 – Булатович С. А. Монетные находки на острове Левки (Monetnie nahodki na ostrobe Levka – Trouvailles monétaires de l’île de Levka) // MISPr (МИСПр – Материалы по истории Северного Причерномолья, ,7, Odessa, 212 –225. Callataÿ, Fr. de, 1995. Les derniers statères posthumes de Lysimaque émis à Istros, Tomis et Callatis. – In: Numismatic and sphtagistic contributions to ancient and medieval history of Dobroudja, International Symposiun, Dobrich/1993 (Dobroudja, 12/1995), p. 39-50. Callataÿ Fr. de, 1997. L’histoire des Guerres mithridatiques vues par les monnaies, Louvain-la-Neuve. 450 p. Callataÿ Fr. de, 1998. Les derniers alexandres posthumes d’Odessos à la lumière d’une trouvaille récente. – In: Stephanos numimatikos, Edithe Schönert-Geiss, zum 65 Geburtstag, Herausgegeben von Ulrike Peter, Berlin Akademie Verlag, 169-192. Canarache, V. 1950 – Monedele scitilor dein Dobrogea, SCIV, I. Canarache, V., 1957 – Monede autonome inedite din Dionysopolis si cronologia lor relativa. – SCN, I, 61-76. Chirilă, E. V. Lucăcel, P. Vasile, G. Togan 1967, Descuperiri monetare antice si bizantine in Transilvania. AMusNapocensis, 4, 1967, p. 457 -459. SCN – Studii şi Cercetări de Numismatică. Academia Română. Institutul de Archeologie. Bucareste, Roumanie. Danov Hr., 1968 – Данов, Хр., Древна Тракия (Drevna Trakija – la Thrace ancienne). София, 472 стр. Dimitrov B., 1975 – Димитров, Б., За стрелите пари от Западното и Северното черноморско крайбрежие (Za strelite-pari ot Zapadnoto I Severnoto Chernomorsko kraibregie – Sur les flèches-monnaies du littoral occidental et septentrional de la Mer Noire). // Archeologia [Археология], 2, 43-47. Dimitrov B., 2001 – Димитров, Б., Аполония – Созопол (Вечният град) – Apollonia – Sozopol – La ville éternelle). Созопол, 24 p. Dimitrov K. Penchev V., 1984. Димитров, К. Пенчев, Вл., Севтополис, т. II (Seutopolis, v. II), София, БАН, 162 с. LI табл. Dimitrov, K., 1987 – Димитков, К., Началните монетосечения от Александров тип по Западното Черноморие (Nachalnite monetosechenija ot Alexandrov tip po Zapadnoto Chernomorie – Les premières monnaies du type alexandrin, battues sur le littoral occidental de la Mer Noire). // Musées et monuments de la culture, [МПК, MMK], 27, 55-59 et 62. Dimitrov, K., 1987a – Димитров, К., Държавата на тракийската ‘Свещарска’ династия и нейните контакти през ранноелинистическата епоха (Dargavata na trakiiskata ‘Svechtarska’ dynastija i neinite kontakti pres rannoelinisticheskata epoha – L’état de la dynastie thrace de ‘Sveshtari’ et ses relations au cours de l’époque hellénistique – résumé en anglais). // La revue historique [IP,ИП], № 12 17-30. Dimitrov, K., 1995a. Hoard of hellenistic bronz coins from Messambria Pontica of the National archaeological

155

ANCIENT GREEK COLONIES IN THE BLACK SEA 2 Guerassimov T., 1955 – Герасимов, Т., Колективни находки от монети през 1951, 1952, 1953 и 1954 г. (Kolectivni nahodki ot moneti prez 1951, 1952, 1953 и 1954 g. – Trouvailles collectives des monnaies découvertes au cours des années 1951, 1952, 1953 et 1954). // Bulletin de l’Institut archéologique [ИАИ, IAI) , XX, 602-611. Guerassimov T. 1956 – Герасимов, Т., Находки на месамбрийски и одесоски тетрадрахми (Nahodki ot mesambriiski I odesoski tetradrahmi – Trouvailles de tétradrachmes de Messambria et d'Odessos). Bulletin de la Société archéologique de Varna [ИВАД, IVAD], Х, 65-78. Guerassimov T., 1957 – Герасимов, Т., Колективни находки от монети през 1955 г. (Kolektivni nahodki ot moneti prez 1955 godina – Trésors des monnaies découvertes en Bulgarie au cours de l'année 1955. // Bulletin de l’Institut archéologique [ИАИ, IAI], XXI, 323-327. Guerassimov T., 1959 – Герасимов, Т., Домонетни форми на пари у тракийското племе асти (Domonetni formi u trakiiskoto pleme asti – La monnaie avant l’établissement des formes monétaires chez les Thraces de la tribu des Asti). // Archeologia [Археология], Nr. 1-2, 85-86. Guerassimov T., 1959a – Герасимов, Т., Колективни находки от монети през 1956 и 1957 (Kolektivni nahodki ot moneti prez 1956 i 1957 – Trouvailles collectives des monnaies au cours des années 1956 et 1957. // Bulletin de l’Institut archéologique, [ИАИ, IAI], XXII, 356-366. Guerassimov T., 1960 – Герасимов, Т., Принос към нумизматиката на Одесос (Prinos kam numizmatikata na Odessos – Beitrag zur Münzkunde von Odessos). // Bulletin de la Société archéologique de Varna [ИВАД, IVAD ХІ, 59-69. Guerassimov T., 1962 – Герасимов, Т., Колективни находки от монети през 1958 и 1959 г. – ИАИ, XXV, 325-337. Guerassimov T., 1963 – Герасимов, Т., Монетите от некропола на Аполония (Monetite ot necropola na Apolonia – Les monnaies de la nécropole d’Apollonia). // Apollonia, Les fouilles dans la nécropole d’Apollonia en 1947 – 1949 [Аполония, Разкопките в некропола на Аполония през 1947-1949, София, 331-340] с. 334-338 № 1163-1236. Guerassimov T., 1963a – Герасимов, Т., Съкровища от монети, намерени в България през 1960 и 1961 г. (Sakrovishta namereni v Balgarija prez 1960 i 1961 g. – Trésors trouvés en Bulgarie en 1960 et 1961). // Bulletin de l’Institut archéologique) [ИАИ, IAI], XXVI, 257-270. Guerassimov T., 1964 – Герасимов, Т., Монетни съкровища намерени в България през 1962 и 1963 г. (Monetni sakrovishta namereni v Balgarija pre 1962 I 1963 g. – Trésors monétaires trouvés en Bulgarie au cours des années 1962 et 1963. // Bulletin de l’Institut archéologique, [ИАИ, IAI], XXVII, 237-248. Guerassimov T., 1965 – Герасимов, Т., Монетни съкровища намерени в България през 1964 г. – ИАИ, ХХVІІІ, 247250. Guerassimov T., 1967a – Герасимов, Т., Монетни съкровища, намерени в България през 1966 г.(Monetni sakrovishta namereni v Balgarija prez 1966 g. – Trésors monétaires trouvés en Bulgarie pendant 1966). // Bulletin de l’Institut archéologique [ИАИ IAI], ХХХ, 187-192. Guerassimo7v T., 1967b – Герасимов, Т., Образ на амазонка върху монети на Месамбрия на Черно море (Obraz na amazonka varhu moneti na Mesmbria na Cherno more – Effigie d’Amazone sur les monnaies de Messambria Pontica. // Bulletin de l’Institut archéologique [ИАИ, IAI], ХХХ, 193-194.

Jean Schaub. Bliesbrug Reinheim, 1993 (BLESA,I), S.438448 Gardner P., 1880 – Ares as a sun-god, and solar symbols on the coins of Macedon and Thrace. NC, 1880, p. 49 - 61. Galabov Iv., 1957 – Гълъбов, Ив., Въхело = Анхиало, Атия = Антея (Топонимични приноси) [Vahelo = Anchialo, Atia = Antea (Des rapports toponymiques)]. // Bulletin de l’Institut de la langue bulgare [Известия на института по български език], V, 407-409. Galabov Iv., 1957a – Гълъбов, Ив., Археологически материали и наблюдения из Странджа (Atcheologicheski materiali I nabludenija iz Strandja – Des matériaux archéologiques et observations dans la montagne de Strandja. // Expédition scientifique complexe de Strandja en 1955, rapports et matériaux [Комплексна научна странджанска експедиция през 1955 г. Доклади и материали], София, p. 61-72. Gocheva Zl., 2000/1 – Гочева, Зл., Почитането на велики богове в гръцките колонии по Западния бряг на Понта (Pochitaneto na veliki bogove v grazkite kolonii po Zapadnija brjag na Ponta – Vénération des Grands Dieux dans les colonies grecques du littoral Ouest du Pont). // Bulletin du Musée national de Varna [ИНМВн, INMVn], 36-37 (51-52), 41-49. Guerassimov Т., 1934 – Герасимов, Т., Колективни находки на монети през 1933 и 1934 г. (Kolektivni nahodki ot moneti prez 1933 i 1934 g. – Trésors de monnaies trouvés en Bulgarie pendant 1933 et 1934). // Bulletin de l’Institut archéologique bulgare [ИБАИ, IBAI], VІІІ, 467-473. Guerassimov T., 1937 – Герасимов, Т., Колективни находки от монети през 1934, 1935 е 1936 г. (Kolektivni nahodki ot moneti prez 1934, 1935 i 1936) – Trésors de monnaies trouvés en Bulgarie pendant 1934 – 1936 // Bulletin de l’Institut archéologique [IAI [ИАИ], XI, 315-324. Guerassimov T., 1946 – Герасимов, Т., Колективни находки от монети през последните години (Kolektivni nahodki ot moneti prez poslednite godini – Des trouvailles collectives de monnaies pendant les dernières années). // Bulletin de l’Institit archéologique [ИАИ, IAI], XV, 235-244. Guerassimov T., 1948 – Герасимов, Т., Находка със сребърни монети на Аполония на Черно море (Nahodka sa srebarni moneti na Apollonian a Cherno more – Une trouvaille des monnaies en argent d’Apollonie Pontique). // RP [РП] (Razkopki I prouchvanija – Foilles et recherches), І, 138149 (IGCH 769) Guerassimov, Т. 1950 – Герасимов, Т., Колективни находки на монети (Kolektivni nahodki na monete – Trouvailles collectives de monnaies). // Bulletin de l’Institut archéologique [ИАИ, IAI], XVII, 316-326. Guerassimov T., 1950a – Герасимов, Т., Оловна тежест от Аполония на Черно море. – ИНМБс, 1, 35-37. Guerassimov Т., 1951 – Герасимов, Т., Култовата статуя на великия бог Дарзалас в Одесос (Kultovata statuja na velikija bog Darszalas – La statue cultuelle du Grand Dieu Darzalas à Odessos). // Bulletin du Musée archéologique de Varna [IVAD, ИВАД,] VІІІІ, 65-72. Guerassimov Т., 1952 – Герасимов, Т., Колективни находки на монети през последните години г. (Kolektivni nahodki na moneti prez poslednite godini – Trésors monétaires des dernières années). // Bulletin de l’Institut archéologique [ИАИ, IAI], XVІІI, p. 400-404. Guerassimov T., 1957 – Герасимов, Т., Колективни находки от монети през 1955 г. (Kolektivni nahodki ot moneto prez 1955 godina – Trésors des monnaies de 1955. Bulletin de l’Institut archéologique [ИАИ, IAI], XXI,

156

IVAN KARAYOTOV : LE MONNAYAGE DE MESSAMBRIA ET LES MONNAYAGES D’APOLLONIA, ODESSOS ET DIONYSOPOLIS Bulgarie en 1981). // Archeologia [Археология], 1-2, с. 113-117. Jouroukova, J., 1985. Монетни находки, открити в България през 1982 (Monetni nahodki, otkriti v Balgarija prez 1982 g. – Des trouvailles monétaires, découvertes en Bulgarie en 1982). // Archeologia [Археология], 2, с. 58-64. Jouroukova, J., 1987. Монетосеченето на градовете в Долна Мизия и Тракия II - III в. Хадрианопол (Monetosecheneto na gradovete v Dolna mizija I Trakija II – III vek – Le monnayage des villes en Mésie et Thrace au cours des IIème – IIIème s). С. БАН, 1987 268 с. LXV табл. Kapitän G., 1982 – On stone-stocked Greek anchors as found in Thracia Pontica: suggested reconstruction of their wooden parts. Thracia Pontica, I, 290-299. Karayotov Iv., 1992 – Карайотов, Ив., Монетосеченето на Месамбрия (Monetocsecheneto na Messambria – Le monnayage de Messambria). // Бургас, 130 с. Karayotov Iv., 1994 – The Coinage of Messambria, I, Silver and gold coins of Messambria, Sozopol, Center of underwater Archaeology, 135 p. XLVIII Pl. Karayotov Iv., 1995 – Le monnayage d'Apollonia à la lumière des découvertes les plus récentes.- Thracia. 11: Studia in honorem Alexandri Fol. Serdicae, 397-408. Karayotov Iv., 1995a – La circulatiton des monnaies de Messambria Pontica dans la région du Bas-Danube. – Dobroudja, 12, 24-38. Karayotov Iv., 1998 - Карайотов, Ив., Най-старите монети на Месамбрия (Nai-starite moneti ma Messambria – Les plus anciennes monnaies de Messambria). // Jubileus I, Recueil à la mémoire d’académicien Dimitar Dechev Юбилеен сборник в памет на акад. Димитър Дечев, София 1998, с. 53-58, Обр. 1-16. Karayotov, Iv., 1999 - ‘…Arta sub Anciali moenia…’(Ovid. Tristia, I,10,35) - Réalités numismatiques et archéologiques. – In: XI-th International congress of classical Studies (Sumaries), Kavala, 24-30.08, 1999, p.94. Karayotov Iv., 2001 – Карайотов, Ив., Мелсас – основателят на Месамбрия върху монета от V в. пр. Хр. (Melsas – osnovateljat ma Messambria varhu moneta ot V vek predi Hrista – Melsas, le fondateur de Messambria, sur une monnaie du Ve siècle av. J.-C.). // Mer [Море], nO 1-2, 1114. Karayotov Iv., 2001a – Карайотов, Ив., Бронзовото монетосечене на Месамбрия, Автореферат на дисертационен труд за придобиване на научната степен ‘доктор на историческите науки’, Рецензенти проф. д.и.н Йорданка Юрукова, проф. д-р Михоил Лазаров, доц. Петър Делев (Bromsovoto monetosechene na Messambria – Le monnayage en bronze de Messambria), София, 64 p. Karayotov Iv., 2003 – Карайотов, Ив. Характер на бронзовото монетосечене на Месамбрия. Периодизация (Haracter na bronzovoto monetosechene na Messambria. Periodizatsia – Caractère du monnayage en bronze de Messambria. Périodisation). // Bulletin des musées de la Bulgarie du Sud-Est [ИМЮИБ], ХХ, 56-73. Karayotov, Iv., 2004. Les derniers tétradrachmes posthumes de Messambria et d’Odessos du trésor de Roudnik près de Bourgas (CH II 98 = CH III 74 = CH VI 43). – In: Numismatic and sphragistic contributions to history of the western Black Sea Coast (International conference, Varna, septembre 12th – 15th, 2001), AMV, II, 145-158. Karayotov Iv., 2004a – Карайотов, Ив., Големите епохи на Месамбрия (Golemite epohi na Messambria – Die grossen

Guerassimov T., 1973. – Изкуството в гръцките колонии в Тракия (Izkustvoto v gratzkite kolonii v Trakija – L’art dans les colonies grecques en Thrace). // Иван Венедиков, Тодор Герасимов, Тракийското изкуство (Venedikov, Iv. T.,Guerassimov, T – Trakiiskoto izkustvo – L’art thrace), София, 50-59. Guerassimov T., 1975 – Герасимов, Т., Антични и средновековни монети от България ( Antichni I srednovekovni moneti ot Balgaria – Monnaies antiques et médiévales de Bulgarie , София, 160 стр. Hanell Kr., 1934 – Megarische Studien, Lund. Head, HN – Barklay V.Head, Historia Numorum, A Manual of Greek Numismatiks, Oxford, 1911. History of the art 1971 – Монгайт, А. Черкасова, Н. История искуства народов СССР, Т. 1 Искуство первобытного общество и древнейших государств на територии СССР (Istorija izkustva narodov SSSR… - History of the art of the peoples of the USSR, Vol I). // Москва, 312 p. IAI, IBAI, IBAD [ИАИ, ИБАИ, ИБАД] – Известия на Археологическия институт – Bulletin de l’Institut archéologique, Sofia. IP [ИП] – Исторически преглед – La revue historique, Sofia. IVAD, IMNVn [ИВАД, ИМНВн] – Izvestija na Varnenskija naroden musei – Bulletin du Musée national de Varna, Varna. Ivanov Th., 1962 – Иванов, Т. Антична керамика от некропола на Аполония – La céramoque antique de la nécropole d’Apollonia). // Apollonia [Аполония], София, 65-274. Jucker, H., 1982. Apollo Palatinus und Apollo Actius auf augusteischen Münzen. – Museum Helveticum, Schweizerische Zeitschrift fr Altertumswissenschaft, 39, 1, 82-104. Jordanov Iv., 1990 – Йорданов, Ив., Нумизматичната колекция на археологическия музей Балчик – исторически извор за историята на града и околностите му (Numizmatitichnata kolectzija na atcheologicheski musei Balchik – istoricheski izvor za istorijata na grada I ocolnostite mu – La collection numismatique du Musée archéologique de Balchic – source historique pour l’histoire de la ville et ses alentours). // Balchic – l’antiquité et actualité [Балчик – древност и съвремие], Балчик, 49-55. Jouroukova J., 1977 – Юрукова, Й. Монетни находки, открити в България през 1971 и 1972 година (Monetni nahodki, otkriti v Balgarija prez 1971 I 1972 g. – Trésors monétaires découverts en Bulgarie en 1971 et 1972). // Archeologia [Археология], Nr. 1, 67-63 Jouroukova J., 1978 – Юрукова, Й., Монетни находки, открити в България през 1973 и 1974 г. (Monetni nahodki, otkriti v Balgarija prez 1973 I 1974 g. – Des trouvailles monétaires, découvertes en Bulgarie au cours des années 1973 et 1974). // Archeologia [Археология], 2, 72-77. Jouroukova, J., 1979. Монетни находки, открити в България през 1977 и 1978 г. (Monetni nahodki, otkriti v Balgarija prez 1977 I 1978 g. – Des trouvailles monétaires, découvertes en Bulgarie au cours des années 1977 et 1978). // Archeologia [Археология], 4, 59-65. Jouroukova, J., 1982. Политическата обстановка в Югоизточна Тракия около средата на III в. пр. н.е. // Archeologia [Археология], 2, 1-7. Jouroukova, J., 1983. Монетни находки, открити в България през 1981 г. (Monetni nahodki, otkriti v Balgarija prez 1981 g. – Des trouvailles monétaires, découvertes en

157

ANCIENT GREEK COLONIES IN THE BLACK SEA 2 Lazarov, L., 1993. The Problem of the Celtic States in Thrace (On the basis of Kavars coins from Peak Arkovna). – Bulgarian Historical Review, 2/3, 3-22. Lazarov, L., 1996. Относно келтската държава с център Тиле, In: Нумизматични изследвания, 2, 96, с. 73-86. Lazarov, L., 1996a. Аркуна (Аркунес, Аркунис) резиденция на Кавара, In: Bulgarian Historical Review, 1996, 1, p. 92-96. Lazarov, L., 1997. An interesting autonomous coin of Messambria, In: Revue belge de Numismatique, Tome CXLIII (1997), p. 17-20. Lazarov L., 2003 – Лазаров, Л., Нумизматични проучвания и материали, част 4р 1998 (авторска поредица) (Numizmatichni prouchvanija I materiale, Chast 4, 1998 (avtorska porediza) – Numismatic researches and materials, Part 4, (autor’s series), София, 188 стр. Lazarov, M., 1963 – Kyzicke elektronovy stater ze Sozopole (Statère d’électron de Cyzique de Sozopol), Numizmaticke listy, XVIII, 2, 40-41. Lazarov, M., 1967 – Лазаров, М., Паметник на античното монетосечене (Pametnik na antichnoto monetosechene – Un monument du monnayage antique). // Musée et monuments de la culture [МПК], VІІ, 4, 14-15. Lazarov M., 1991 – Лазаров, М., Аполон - покровител на мореплаването (Apolon – pokrovitel na moreplavaneto – Apollon – protecteur de la navigation). //Almanach Phar [алманах Фар], Варна, 98-100. Mihailov-IGBR – Inscriptiones graecae in Bulgaria repertae, Vol. I-V, Serdicae,1958-1970, Vol. I-IV; 1997, vol. V. Mirchev M., 1953 – Мирчев, М., Латински епиграфски паметници от Черноморието (Latinski epigrafski pametnitzi ot Chernomorieto – Des monuments épigraphiques en latin, provenant de la région du littoral ouest de la mer Noire.// Bulletin de la Société archéologique de Varna [ИВАД, IVAD], ІХ, 69-80. Мirchev, М., 1953. Латински епиграфски паметници от Черноморието. – ИВАД, ІХ, 69-80. MISPr (МИСПр – Материалы по истории Северного Причерноморья (Materiali po istorii Prichernomorja – Matériaux sur l’histoire du littoral Pontique du Nord, Odessa. Mitrea, B. 1964. Découvertes anciennes et plus récentes des monnaies antiques et byzantines dans la République populaire Roumaine. – Dacia, N. S. VIII, Sozopol, 371-403. Mitrea, B. 1973. Découvertes des monnaies antiques et byzantines dans la République socialiste de Roumanie (XIV). – Dacia, XVII, 399-416. Mitrea, B., 1975. Découvertes monétaires en Roumanie (XVIII). – Dacia. XIX. 1975. p. 320. Mitrea, B., 1978. Monede pontice la daco-getii lui Burebista. – Pontica, XI, 89-95. Mitrea, B. 1985. Geto-dacii şi monedele vestpontice din secolele III - I î. e.n. – In: Thraco-Dacica, VI, 1-2, Bucureşti, 50-58. Moisil, C., 1913. Monete şi Tesaure monetari gasite în România şi ïn ţeruturile româneşti învecinate (Monnaies et trésor de Roumanie et de son territoire). Bulletin Societăţii Numismatice Române [BSNR], Bucareste (Roumanie), 10, 62-64. Monteanu, M. R. Ocheseanu, 1975. Descuperiri monetare in satele din Dobrugea (sec. III - I e.n.). – Pontica , 8, 175 213 Mouchmov N., 1912 – Мушмов, Н., Антични монети на Балканския полуостров и монетите на българските царе (Antichni moneti na Balkanskija poluostrov I monetite na

Epochen von Messambria. // Art studies Quarterly [Проблеми на изкуството, Problemi na izkustvoto], 1, 918. Karayotov, Iv., 2005 – Circulation des monnaies de bronze de Messambria. Nessèbre, III, Burgas, 194-220. Kisiov K., Prokopov Il., Dochev C., 1998 – Numismatic riches of Archeological museum – Plovdiv. Sofia, 76 p. 288 ill. Kiyashkina P., 2000 – Кияшкина, П. За един неизследван археологически обект от територията на Бургас (Za edin neizsledvan obekt ot teritorijata na Burgas – Pour une site inexplorée du territoire de Burgas). // Bulletin du Musée national de Bourgas. Studia in memoriam Ivani Galabov, 3, 106-116. Koichev, At. Vasil Mutafov 2002. Thracian coins of Kotys (10087 BC), the contemporary of Mostis and Kotys (57-48 BC): recent finds from the region of Messambria. – In: Studia in honorem Ivani Karayotov, Bulletin du Musée national de Burgas (ИНМБс, ІV), 153-160. Kroll, J.H., 1993. The Athenian agora. Results of excavations conducted by the American School of classical studies at Athens. Vol. XXVI, The Greek Coins. Princeton, N. J. 376 p. 33 pl. Lazarenko Ig., 1997/99 – Лазаренко, Иг., Начало и първи етапи от бронзовоти монетосечене на Одесос (Nachalo I parvi etapi na bronzovite monetosechenija na Odesos – Le début et les premières étapes du monnayages en bronze d’Odessos). // Dobroudja [Добруджа], 14-16, 51-64. Lazarenko Ig., 2002 – The Southernt Bordary of Terra Odessitanorum (1st – beginning of 2nd c.). Archaeologia Bulgarica, 1, 45-57. Lazarenko Ig., 2002а – Лазаренко, Иг., Белжки върху историята и монетосеченето на скитските царе Атей и Сариак (Belegki varu istorijata monetosecheneto na skitskite zare Atei I Sariak – Notes on the history and coinage of the Scythian rulers Atheis and Sariak). // Bulletin du Musée national de Bourgas, IV [ИНМБс, INMBs, IV] Studia in honorem Ivani Karayotov, 130-147. Lazarenko Ig., 2003 – Лазаренко, Иг., Антични и средновековни монети от Варна и Варненско (Antichni I srednovekovni moneti ot Varna I Varnensko – Des monnaies antiques et médiévales de Varna et la région de Varna). Варна, 32 стр. Lazarenko Ig., 2004 – Лазаренко, Иг., Монетосеченето на Одесос в края на ІV в. пр. Хр. (Monetosecheneto na Odesos v kraja na IV vek predi Xrista – The coinage of Odessos at the end of the 4th C. BC. // Numislatic and sphragistic Contributions to History of the western Black Sea coast (International conference, Varna, septembre 12th – 15th , 2001), AMV, II, 33-51 Lazarenko Ig., 2005 – Лазаренко, Иг., За датировката и мястото на поставяне на някои контрамарки от елинистическата епоха (Za dtirovkata i mlastoto na postavjane na njakoi kontramarki ot elinisticheskata epoha – About the dating and the site of striking of some Hellenistic contermarks). // Bulletin des musées de la Bulgarie du Sud-Est [ИМЮИБ, IMUIB], ХХІ, (sous presse). Lazarenko Ig., 2005а - Лазаренко, Иг., Бронзови владетелски монети, отсечени през ІV–ІІІ в. пр. Хр. в Дионисополис и Одесос (Bronzovite vladetelski moneti, otsecheni prez IV – III v Dionysopolis I Odesos – Des monnaies de bronze de souveraines, frappées pendant les IVème et IIIème s. av. J.-C.) (sous presse).

158

IVAN KARAYOTOV : LE MONNAYAGE DE MESSAMBRIA ET LES MONNAYAGES D’APOLLONIA, ODESSOS ET DIONYSOPOLIS Porojanov K., 2000 – La ville thrace de Mesembria sur la côte de la Mer Noire. Thracia, 13 (Studia in memoriam Velizri Velkov), 345-350. Oppermann M., 2004 – Die Wespontischen Poleis, Beier & Berne, 397 S. 82 Tafel. Petrescu-Dămboviza, M. 1951. Monete autonome din Messambria pe teritoriul R.P.R. – Studi Clasice II, 1-2, 519529. Pick B. Regling, K., 1910 – Die antiken Münzen von Dacien und MOesian, II. Berlin. Poenaru-Bordea Gh., 1970 – Discuţii pe marginea cîtorva monede străine din Dobrogea antică. SCIV, XXI, 133-144. Poenaru-Bordea Gh., 1974 – Le trésor de Mărăşeşti, Les statères en or des cités du Pont Gauche et le problème des relations avec le monde grec et les populations locales aux IVème -IIIème siècles av. n. è. Dacia, XVIII, 103-125. Preda, C. H. Nubar, 1973 – Descuperile monetare 1914 – 1970. – In: Histria, III, Bucureşti. Price M., 1968 – Mithhridates VI Eupator, Dionys and the coinages of the Black Sea. NC, 1-12, Pl. I-IV. Price M., 1991 – The coinage in the name of Alexander the Great and Philip Arhideus (A British museum catalog, Vol. 1. Zurich, London. Pridik E., 1902 – Придик, Е., Анадольский кладъ золотых статеров 1895 года (Anadolskii klad staterov 1895 goda Le trésor de statères d’or de 1895 d’Anadol). // Bulletin de la commission archéologique d’empereur [Известия императорской археологической коммисiи], série [вып.] 3. С.-Петербургъ. Regling K., 1928 – Helinistischer Münzschaft aus Babylon. ZfN, 38, 92-132, pl. VIII – XIII. Reho M., 2005 – Céramique attique à figures noires et rouges. Nessèbre, III, Burgas, 30-50. RIC – The Roman Imperial Coinage. I. London, Spine, 1923, 279 p. Rogalski Аd., 1978 – Рогалски, Ад., Златни статери от Одесос и Месамбрия (Zlatnite stateri na Odesos I Messambria – Les statères d’or d’Odessos et de Messambria). // Numismatica [Нумизматика], 4, 3-14. Rogalski, Аd., 1979 – Рогалски, Ад., Златните статери на Одесос (Zlatnite stateri na Odesos – Les statère d’or d’Odessos). // Bulletin du Musée national de Varna [ИНМВ, INMVn], ХV, (ХХХ), 1-16. Rogalski Ad., 1982 – Рогалски, Ад., Златните статери на Месамбрия (Zlatnite stateri na Messambria – Les statère d’or de Messsambria). // Bulletin du Musée national de Varna [ИНМВн, INMVn], 18 (33), 92-99. Rousséva B., 1988 – Русева, Б., Принос към циркулацията на сребърни монети в Тракия през елинистическата епоха (Prinos kam cirkulazijata na srebarnite moneti v Trakija prez elinisticheskata epoha – Apport sur la circulation des monnaies en argent en Thrace à l' époque hellénistique). // Archeologia [Археология], 30, 2, 15-27. Rousséva B., 1997 – Русева, Б., Златните статери от Тополово (IGCH 853) – екземпляри от колекцията на Археологическия музей в София (Zlatnite stateri ot Topolovo (IGCH 853) – exempljari ot koleczijata na Arheologicheskija musei v Sofia – Les statères d’or de Topolovo (IGCH 853) – des exemplaires de la collection du Musée archéologique de Sofia). Annuary of the National Museum of archaeology [ГНАМ, GNAM], 10, 243-256. Rousséva B. 2002. Les philippes et les alexandres d’or en Thrace Ancieenne, – In: Thrace and the Aegean, Procedings of the Eighty international congress of thracology, Sofia – Yambol, 25-29 September 2000, Volume II, 501-512.

balgarskite tzare – Les monnaies antiques de la péninsule Balkanique et les monnaies des rois bulgares, С. 510 p. LXX Tabl. Mouchmoff N., 1922 – Une trouvaille de monnaies de la Mésie Inférieure et de la Thrace. – RN, 58-172. Mushmov N., 1921/22 – Мушмов, Н., Колективни находки на монети от 1921/22 г. (Kolektivni nahodki na moneti ot 1921/22 g. – Trésors de monnaies des années 1921/22. // Bulletin de l’Institut bulgare d’archéologie [ИБАИ, IBAI], І, 239-243. Mushmov N., 1926/27 – Мушмов, Н., Колективни находки на монети през 1925 – 26 год. (Kolektivni nahodki na moneti prez 1925 – 26 god. – Trésor de monnaies trouvé en Bulgarie en 1925 – 26). // Bulletin de l’Institut bulgare d’archéologie [ИБАИ, IBAI], IV, 322-325. Mushmov N., 1932/33 – Мушмов, Н., Колективни находки на монети (Kolektivni nahodki na moneti – Trésors de monnaies trouvées en Bulgarie. // Bulletin de l’Institut bulgare d’archéologie [ИБАИ, IBAI] , VII, 1932/33, 423425. MPK [МПК] – Музеи и паметници на културата (Musei I pametnizi na kulturata – Musées et monuments de la culture, Sofia. Newskaya V., 1953 – Невская, В. И. Византий в классическую и эллинистическую эпохи (Vizantii v klasicheskouu I elinisticheskouu epohi – Byzance pendant l'époque classique et hellénistique), Moscow, p. 155, t. 2. Nawotka Kr., 1994 – Melsas the Founder of Mesambri. Hermes, Zeitschrift fur klassische Philologie, Band 122, 320 – 326. Nawotka Kr., 1997 – The western Pontic Cities. History and political Organization, Rudolf M. Hakkert - Publischer Amsterdam, 1997. Nikolov, D. 1963 – Николов, Д., Нови колективни находки от монети на Парион, Тракийски Херсонес и Аполония Понтика – (Novi kolektivni nahodki ot moneti na Parion, Trkiiski Hersones I Apolonia – Des nouveaux trésors de monnaies de Parion, Chersonèse de Thrace et Apollonia Pontica). // Archéologia [Археология], V, 4, 39-42. Nikolov, D., 1984 – Николов, Д., Тракийската вила при Чаталка, Старозагорско (Trakiiskata vila pri Chatalka, Starozagorsko – La villa rustica thrace près de Chatalka, region de Stara Zagora). // Fouilles et recherches [РП, RP], ХІ, 5-73, p. 38, № 1. Ocheseanu, R. A Dumitrascu., 1972. Un tesaur de la Theodosius I, descuperit la Medjidia. – Pontica, 5, 537 – 546. Ocheseanu, R. Ch. Papuc., 1973 Monede greceşti, române şi bizantine, descoperti în Dobrrogea II. – Pontica, 6, p. 351 – 381. Ognenova-Marinova L., 1991 – La ‘bria’ thrace d’après les recherches archéologiques à Nessèbre. Thracia Pontica, IV, Sofia, 133-136. Ohotnikov, S. 1998. Охотников, С., Ахил - покровитель Понта (Ahil, pokrovitel Ponta – Achilleus, le protecteur du Pont). Les Dieux du Pont [Боговете на Понта]. Seminaria Pontica. Варна, 1998, ВСУ ‘Черноризец Храбър’, 37- 45. Olcay N. Seyrig A., 1965 – Le trésor de Mektepeni en Phrygie, Trésors monétaires Séleucides, I, Paris. Petrescu-Dămboviza, M., 1951 – Monete autonome din Messambria pe teritoriul R.P.R. (Les monnaies autonomes de Messambria du territoire de la République Populaire de Roumanie). // Etude classique [Studi Clasice], II, 1-2, 519529.

159

ANCIENT GREEK COLONIES IN THE BLACK SEA 2 Tacheva M., 1995 – About the so-called Scythian kings and their coinage in the Greek cities of Thracia Pontica, – In: Numismatic and sphragistic contribution to ancient and medieval history of Dobroudja. Dobroudja, 12, 717. Thompon M., 1954 – A countremarked hoard from Büyükçekmece (IGCH 867). ANMSMN 6, 11-34. Thompon M., 1968 – The Mints of Lyzimachus. Essayss in Greek Coinage presented to Stanly Robinson. Oxford, 163182, PL. 16-22. Thompson, M., 1986 – The Armenak Hoard (IGCH 1423). ANS, MN, 31, 63-106. Topalov St., 1995 – Топалов, Ст., Messambria Pontica. Stavri Topalov, Contribution to the Study the Coin Minting of the City 5th - 1th B.C. (in Bulgarian), Sofia, 1995. Topalov, St., 2004 – Топалов, Ст. Контрамаркиране и надпечатване на монети в монетарницата на Одесос (ІІІІ в. пр. н. е.) (Kontramarkirane I nadpechatvane na moneti v monetarnizata na Odessos (III – I vek pr. Chr. – Les contremarques et les surfrappes de l’atelier d’Odessos (III – I s. av. J.-C). // Numislatic and sphragistic Contributions to History of the western Black Sea coast (International conference, Varna, septembre 12th – 15th, 2001), AMV, II, 52-67. Topalov St., 1999 – Топалов, Ст., Одесос. Приноси към проучванет монетосеченето на града ІV-І в. пр. н. (Odessos prinose kam monetosecheneto na grada IV – I vek predi Christa – Topalov, St., Odesos contribution to the studi of the coin minting of the city 4th – 1th c. B. C.). Rapports sur le monnayage de la ville entre le IV-I s. av. n. è. p. 342. Velkov, V., 1969 – Messambria – Mesemvria – Nessèbre (Situation, recherches, notes historiques). Nessèbre, I, Sofia, 9-28. Velkov V., 1990 – Велков, В., Из културната история на Дионисополис през ІІ в. пр. н. е. _Iz kulturnata istorija na Dionysopolis – Pour l’histoire culturelle de Dionysopolis). // Balchik – antiquité et actualité [Балчик древност и съвремие], Балчик, 1-5. Venedikov Iv., 1948 – Венедиков, Ив. Разкопките в некропола на Аполония през 1946 г. (Razkopkite v nekropola na Apolonia prez 1946 g. – Fouilles de la nécropole d’Apollonie en 1946). // Fouilles et recherches, II, Apollonie Pontique [Разкопки и проучвания, ІІ, Аполония на Черно море], София, р. 7-29. Venedikov Iv., 1980 – La Messambria thrace (p. 7-22) et Trois reliefs surprenants de Messambria (p. 81-95). Nessèbre, II, 258 p. VDI [ВДИ] – (Vestnik drevnei istorii – Jurnal de l’histoire ancienne) Ujes, D., 1997 – Le dépôt de monnaies en bronze des rois macédoniens et des villes ouest-pontiques de l’époque hellénistique découverte à Paracin. – In: Numismatica e Antichita Classiche, Gaderni Ticinesi, XXVI, 185-204 № 21. Ujes, D., 2004 – Coins of the cities of the Black Sea coast discovered in the Scordisci ( end of the 3rd –beginning of the 1st century BC). – In: Numislatic and sphragistic Contributions to History of the western Black Sea coast (International conference, Varna, septembre 12th – 15th, 2001), AMV, II, 86-98. Waggoner N., 1979 – The Propontis hoard (IGCH 888), RN, 729, pl. I-X.

Rusjaeva A., 1998 – Русяева, А. С. Культ Аполлона Иетрос в Северо-Западном Причерноморье (Kult Apollona Ietros v Severozapadnom Prichernomore – Le culte d’Apollon Iatros sur le littoral Nord-Ouest de la mer Noire). // Les dieux du Pont [Боговете на Понта], Bibliotheca Pontica, Seminaria Pontica, Varna, 12-21. RN – Revue numismatique RP [РП] (Razkopki I prouchvanija – Fouilles et recherches Schönert-Geis Ed., 1970 – Die Münzpragung von Byzantion, Teil I, Autonome Zeit. Berlin-Amsterdam, 174 S. Schönert-Geis Ed., 1999 – Bibliographie zur antiken Numismatik Thrakiens und Mösiens. Akademie Verlag, Berlin, 1710 S. SCIV – Studiişi Cercetări de Istorie Veche – Etudes et recherches d’Histoire ancienne, Bucarest. Seyrig H., 1968 – Monnaies hellénistiques de Byzance et de Chalcédoine. – In: Essays in Greek Coinage presented to Stanly Robinson, Oxford, 183-200Pl. 23-25. Seyrig H., 1969 – Date et circonstance du trésor d’Anadol. RN, XI, 40-45. Seyrig H., 1973 – Trésors du Levant anciens et nouveaux, Trésors monétaires Séleucides, , Paris. SNG - Syloge numorum graecorum SNG, IX – SNG, Vol. IX, the British Museum, 1 the Black Sea, London, 1993. SNG, XI – Siloge numorum Graecorum, The William Stancomb collection of coins of the Black Sea region, Oxford, New York, 2000. SNG, ANS, 7 – SNG, The collection of the American numismatic society, Pars 7, Macedonia I: Cities, ThrcoMacedonian Tribe, Paeonian Kings, ANS, New York, 1987. SNG, Copenhagen – SNG, The Royal Collection of Coins and Medals, Danish National Museum; Thrace I, Copenhdgen, 1942. SNG, Lewis – SNG , Lewis Collection, London, 1972. Stephanova An., 1985 – Стефанова, Ан., Монетите и търговията на Аполония Понтика V – ІV в. пр. Хр. (Monetite I targovijata na Apolonia Pontika V – IV vek – Les monnaies et le commerce d’Apollonia Pontica au cours des Vème – IVème siècle av. J.-C.) // Numismatica [Нумизматика], 4, 3-9. Stephanova An. 1985. Колективна находка със сребърни монети на Аполония Понтика от с. Ганчево, Шуменски окръг. – In: Нумизматика (Сборник от доклади по проблемите на античната и средн Stephanova An., 1985 – Стефанова, Ан., Колективна находка със сребърни монети на Аполония Понтика от с. Ганчево (Партизани), Шуменски окръг (Kolektivna nahodka sas srebarni moneti na Apollonia Pontika ot selo Ganchevo (act. Partizani), Shoumenski okrag – Trésor des monnaies d’argent d’Apollonie Pontique du village Ganchevo (act. Partizani), département de Shoumen. // Numismatica – recueil des rapports sur les problèmes de la numismatique antique et médiévale [Нумизматика (Сборник от доклади по проблемите на античната и средновековната нумизматика и медалистика)], І Част, София, 19-28. Tacchella D., 1898 – Monnaies autonomes d’Apollonia de Thrace. – RN, 210-218. Tacchella D., 1903 – Monnaies de la Mésie Inférieure. RN, 203-220.

160

IVAN KARAYOTOV : LE MONNAYAGE DE MESSAMBRIA ET LES MONNAYAGES D’APOLLONIA, ODESSOS ET DIONYSOPOLIS

Figure 1 – La presqu’île de Nessébar, vue aérienne.

Figure 2 – La presqu’île de Sozopol, ancienne Apollonia, vue d’espace. 161

ANCIENT GREEK COLONIES IN THE BLACK SEA 2

Figure 3 – Une partie de la trouvaille des monnaies-flèches du cap d’Attia.

Figure 4 – Monnaie-flèche avec le symbole d’Apollonia – ancre dressée.

Figure 5a et b – Monnaie-flèche avec la lettre A

Figure 6 – Monnaie-flèche, marquée d’une roue – le symbole d’Histria.

Figure7a, b, et c – Hémioboles d’Apollonia.

Figure 8 – Hémiobole avec les lettres AΠO.

Figure 9 – Drachmes d’Apollonia du type «Ancre dressée – Croix gammée dans un carré creux» .

162

IVAN KARAYOTOV : LE MONNAYAGE DE MESSAMBRIA ET LES MONNAYAGES D’APOLLONIA, ODESSOS ET DIONYSOPOLIS

Figure 10 – Drachmes d’Apollonia du type «Ancre dressée – Croix gammée avec des dauphins».

Figure 12 – Quelques dauphins de bronze de la région de Varna.

Figure 11 – Fragment de vase avec l’image d’une ancre.

Figure 13 – Drachmes d’Apollonia du type ‘Ancre dressée – Gorgone Méduse’ sans lettre A.

Figure 14 – Tétradrachme d’Athènes trouvé à Burgas.

Figure 15 – Une partie du trésor de Burgas, trouvé dans le sanctuaire d’Apollon Karsénos sur la colline «Shiloto».

163

ANCIENT GREEK COLONIES IN THE BLACK SEA 2

Figure 15a – Drachme avec le nom de Zopyros sur le revers, trouvée probablement dans la vallée de la rivière de Batovo entre Odessos et Dionysopolis. Collection D. Dimitrov, Varna.

Figure 16 et 17 – Les plus anciennes oboles de Messambria.

Figure 18 et 19 – Oboles de Messambria avec croix gammée entre les rayons de la roue sur le revers.

Figure 20 – Oboles de Messambria avec l’enscription MEΣ et une croix gammée.

Figure 21 – Obole de Messambria du type «Athéna – META dans quatre carrés».

Figure 22 – Drachme de Messambria avec Melsas de profil sur le revers. 164

IVAN KARAYOTOV : LE MONNAYAGE DE MESSAMBRIA ET LES MONNAYAGES D’APOLLONIA, ODESSOS ET DIONYSOPOLIS

Figure 23 – Bracelet de bronze en spirale qui se termine en tête de serpent, ornée des roues.

Figure 24 – Bracelet de bronze en spirale qui se termine en tête de serpent, ornée de roues semblables celles des revers des monnaies messambriennes.

Figure 25 – Fragment de kalyptère milésien, daté du VIe s. av. J.-C, découvert à Olbia.

Figure 26 – Monnaie d’Apollonia du type «Hermès coiffé du pétase de face – Ancre dressée» (fin du Ve siècle av. J.-C.).

Figure 27 – Dioboles de Messambria du trésor de Vratarité, région de Dobrich.

165

ANCIENT GREEK COLONIES IN THE BLACK SEA 2

Figure 28 – Dioboles d’Apollonia du trésor de Vratarité, région de Dobrich.

166

IVAN KARAYOTOV : LE MONNAYAGE DE MESSAMBRIA ET LES MONNAYAGES D’APOLLONIA, ODESSOS ET DIONYSOPOLIS

Figure 29 – Les premières lettres du nom des monétaires sur les dioboles d’Apollonia et Messambria.

Figure 30 et 31 – Tétradrachmes d’Apollonia.

Figure 32 et 33 – Tétradrachmes d’Apollonia.

Figure 34 et 34a – Tétradrachmes d’Apollonia.

167

Figure 29a – Diobole d’Apollonia avec les premières lettres du nom de la ville. Collection D. Dimitrov, Varna.

ANCIENT GREEK COLONIES IN THE BLACK SEA 2

Figure 35 – Dioboles d’Apollonia du type «Apollon de profil – Ancre dressée». Figure 36 – Statère de Cyzique du type «Dionysos chevauchant une panthère», trouvé dans la katoikia messambrienne Orizaré.

Figure 37 – Statère de Cyzique, découvert à Sozopol, ancienne Apollonia.

Figure 38 – Tétradrachme d’Apollonia du type ‘Apollon à droite – ΑΠΟΛΛΩΝΟΣ/ ΙΑΤΡΟΥ, Apollon nu debout, de face, tenant de la main gauche un arc et une flèche, s’appuyant de la main droite sur un laurier, dans les branches duquel s’est posé un oiseau’.

Figure 39 – Table des monogrammes de la cité d’Odessos et de quelques-uns de ses monétaires.

168

IVAN KARAYOTOV : LE MONNAYAGE DE MESSAMBRIA ET LES MONNAYAGES D’APOLLONIA, ODESSOS ET DIONYSOPOLIS

Figure 40 – Tédrachmes du style ancien d’Odessos.

Figure 40a – Tétradrachmes du style tardif d’Odessos.

Figure 41 – Tétradrachmes du style ancien de Messambria.

169

ANCIENT GREEK COLONIES IN THE BLACK SEA 2

Figure 41a – Tétradrachmes du style moyen de Messambria

Figure 41b – Tétradrachme du style tardif de Messambria.

Figure 42 et 42a – Tétradrachmes d’Odessos avec le Grand Dieu des Odessitains.

Figure 43 – Tétradrachme d’Odessos du type d’Alexandre avec l’inscription du monétaire ΚΥΡΣΑ

170

IVAN KARAYOTOV : LE MONNAYAGE DE MESSAMBRIA ET LES MONNAYAGES D’APOLLONIA, ODESSOS ET DIONYSOPOLIS

Figure 44 – Statères de Messambria.

Figure 45 – Statères d’Odessos.

Figure 46 – Tétradrachmes de Dionysopolis.

171

ANCIENT GREEK COLONIES IN THE BLACK SEA 2

Figure 47 – Le relief No 1 des stratèges de Messambria.

Figure 48 – Le relief No 3 des stratèges de Messambria.

Figure 49 – Le relief No 2 des stratèges de Messambria. 172

IVAN KARAYOTOV : LE MONNAYAGE DE MESSAMBRIA ET LES MONNAYAGES D’APOLLONIA, ODESSOS ET DIONYSOPOLIS

Figure 50 – Tétradrachme fouré de Byzance trouvé entre les restes de la collonie Romain Deultum.

Figure 51 – Monnaie de bronze d’Odessos du type ‘Tête de femme – Grand dieu d’Odessos’.

Figure 53 – Le type monétaire de Messambria ‘Amazone – METAM/BPIANΩN Athéna Alkidémos’.

Figure 52 – Deux monnaies d’Odessos contremarquées à Messambria.

173

ANCIENT GREEK COLONIES IN THE BLACK SEA 2

Figure 54 – Le type monétaire d’Odessos «Homme barbu lauré – OΔHΣITΩN le Grand Dieu cavalier» et leurs imitations barbares.

Figure 55 – Monnaie de Messambria du type ‘Amazone – Athéna Alkis’, surfrappée à Dionysopolis.

Figure 56 – Monnaie de Messambria du type ‘Dionysos – Grappe de raisin’ avec contremarque de la ville, surfrappée à Dionysopolis (d’après Topalov).

Figure 57 – Monnaie de Messambria du type ‘Dionysos – Grappe de raisin’ avec contremarque de la ville ‘Déméter’, surfrappée à Dionysopolis (Collection Dimitrov).

Figure 58 – Trois surfrappes de monnaies de bronze de Dionysopolis sur le type messambrien ‘Dionysos – grappe de raisin’.

Figure 59 - 60 – Trois surfrappes de monnaies de bronze de Dionysopolis sur le type messambrien ‘Dionysos – grappe de raisin’. 174

Durankulak - a Territorium Sacrum of the Goddess Cybele Henrieta Todorova∗

Durankulak archaeological area, research Results 1974–2005

Culture). It is clear that the Big Island at Durankulak was the centre of this culture.

Durankulak is a many-faceted archaeological district in which the most important periods of Bulgarian prehistory are represented in addition to Hellenistic and medieval layers. The excavations in the area have been in progress for 31 years under my direction. Archaeological layers are to be found on the Big Island and on the west shore of the lake opposite the Big Island (Figs. 2 and 3).

A fortified late Bronze Age settlement of the Coslogeni culture, an extensive early medieval settlement and pits of the Cernavoda III Culture have also been researched here. On the cliffs of the island is an extensive Hellenistic cave temple to the goddess Cybele and a contemporary well carved into the rock which have been completely excavated.

On the Big Island on Durankulak Lake a prehistoric settlement was found. Research there has brought a wealth of information pertaining to the question of the founding, development, social structure, and end of the Neolithic-Eneolithic Hamngia Culture and the Late Eneolithic Varna Culture. In the case of the latter we are dealing with the oldest human proto-high culture (second half of the 5th mill. BC). The oldest stone architecture in Europe (outside Greece) has also been identified (early Copper Age, period III of the Hamangia

On the west shore of the lake is the earliest Neolithic presence in Dobrudzha represented by the first period of the ‘Blatnica–Cocoaşe’ of the Hamangia Culture. Neolithic, Copper-Age, Hellenistic and medieval burial grounds were also found, as well as burial mounds from the proto-Bronze-Age and a number of medieval constructions, a Hellenistic votive site, altars, votive pits and burials – all investigated.

∗ Prof. Dr. Dr. Henrieta Todorova. Geboren am 25 II 1933 in Sofia. 1954 Abschluß des Studiums an der Universität J. A. Komenský in Bratislava. 1964 Promotion an dem Archäologischen Institut der SAW in Nitra. 1964 Dr. Phil. an der Universität J. A. Komenský in Bratislava. 1978 Dr. habil. in Sofia, Thema: ‘Die Kupferzeit Bulgariens’. Laufbahn: 1967 wissenschaftlicher Mitarbeiter des Archäologischen Instituts der BAW in Sofia. 1977 Habilitation und Docent am Archäologischen Institut der BAW in Sofia. Ab 1980 bis 2004– Professor am Archäologischen Institut der BAW in Sofia. Ab 2004 – Korrespondierendes Mitglied der Bulgarischen Akademie der Wissenschaften. Vorlesungen: an den Universitäten in Sofia (Sof. Univ. und Neue Bulg. Univ.) und Univ. Veliko Târnovo. Doktormutter von 10 Doktoranden. 1988 Gastprofessor an der Universiät in Bonn. 1989/1990 Gastprofessor an der Hacettepe Universität in Ankara. 1999/2000 Gastprofessor am Lehrstuhl für Archäometallurgie der TU Bergakademie Freiberg. Vorträge: an vielen europäischen Universitäten wie Frankfurt, Köln, München, Berlin, Heidelberg, Mainz, Freiburg, Halle, Moskau, Samara, Kiev, Bratislava, Prag, Brno, Beograd, Budapest, Bucarest, Thessaloniki, Krakau, Wien, Salzburg u.a. Weiteres: Korrespondierendes Mitglied des Deutschen Archäologischen Instituts in Berlin; Mitglied des Conseil permanent der Union International des Sciences Pré- et Protohistoriques; Mitharausgeber der Reihe In the Steps of J. H. Gail (Blagoevgrad) Herausgeber der DAI Reihe Durankulak. Ehrenbürger der Stadt Dobrič. Archäologische Ausgrabungen unter der Leitung von H. Todorova: 1967 - Gräberfeld bei Devnja, Bez. Varna. 1967 –1970 Tell Goljamo Delčevo, Bez Varna. 1971 - 1980 Neolithische Siedlung Usoe bei Asparuchovo/Dâlgopol, Bez. Varna. 1971 - 1973 Tell Ovčarovo, Bez Târgovište. 1973 - 1974 Tell Poljanica, Bez. Târgovište. 1974 - Neolithische Siedlung Šabla, Bez Dobrič. 1974 - bis heute Mittelalterliche Siedlung und Gräberfeld; Hellenistisches Heiligtum; Spätbronzezeitliche Siedlung; Kupferzeitlicher Tell und das dazugehörige Gräberfeld mit über 1200 Bestattungen bei Durankulak, Bez. Dobrič. 1975 - Kupferzeitliches Gräberfeld Poljanica, Bez. Târgovište. 1976 - Frühneolithische Siedlung Poljanica-Plateau, Bez. Târgovište. 1978 - Final-kupferzeitliche Siedlung Djugera bei Rebârkovo, Bez. Vraca. 1979 - Kontrollgrabung in Golemanovo Kale bei Sadovec, Bez. Pleven. 1979 - Höhensiedlung Galatin, Bez. Vraca. 1983 - 1988 Spätneolithische Siedlung Topolnica, Bez. Blagoevgrad, ab 1996 - bis heute als griechisch - bulgarische Grabung Promachon-Topolnica auf den griechischen Bereich der Siedlung fortgesetzt. 1983 - Spätkupferzeitliche Siedlung Negovanci, Bez. Pernik. 1987 - Höhle mit Wandmalereien bei Bailovo, Bez. Sofia. 1988 - Vinčazeitliches Haus in Poduene, Sofia. Wissenschaftliche Entdeckungen: Archäologische Kulturen: Monochromes Neolithikum – Kultur Poljanica-Plateau; Mittelneolithikum – Kulturen Tsonevo und Ovčarovo; Spätneolithikum – Kulturen Kurilo und Usoe; Früh- und Mittelkupferzeit – Kulturen Sava, Poljanica und IV Stufe der Hamngia Kultur; Spätkupferzeit – Kultur Varna und Kulturkomplex Kodjadermen–Gumelniţa–KaranovoVI; Protobronzezeit – Kulturen Pevec und Galatin. Neue Perioden im der Urgeschichte Bulgariens: Das Monochrome Neolithikum ( 6400–5800 BC) und die Protobronzezeit (4000–3200 BC), sowie die ökologische Krise im Klimaoptimum im Süden Europas.

175

ANCIENT GREEK COLONIES IN THE BLACK SEA 2 7. Late Roman burials (Todorova (Edit.) Durankulak III, DAI, Berlin, Sofia 2006 (in print). 8. Early medieval houses extramurum and burial ground 9th-10th c. AD. (Тодорова (Edit.) 1989)

It is clear that the island was inhabited only when the water level was at its lowest, i.e. when it was a peninsula connected to the west shore by a small rock formation which today is 0.30 m under the water surface and covered by an artificial dam. At times of low water level present day fresh-water lake was a harbour connected to the Black Sea. The numerous fresh-water sources and the rich fishing in the harbour attracted people to the area and during the Neolithic and Copper-Age especially the presence of the molluscs Spondylus and Glycimeris, which were much valued during the 6th–5th mill. BC, was a further attraction.

**** The research in Durankulak has an interdisciplinary character. In addition to the archaeological excavation, palaeobotanical, archaeozoological, palaeometallurgical, anthropological, chemical, geological, archaeomagnetical and other research is carried out as well as 14C–Dating and trace analysis.

The Dobritsh Histotical Museum is endeavouring to make the area accessable for visitors and to build an archaeological park there.

Refereces Тодорова (Edit.) 1989 X.: Тодорова, Дуранкулак І: Ранносредновековни обекти. БAH, София 1989, (Edt. H. Todorova, Durankulak I, Srednovekovni obekti, BAS, Sofia 1989). Todorova (Edit.) 2002 H. Todorova (Edit.), Durankulak II, 1,2. Die prähistorischen Gräberfelder. DAI Berlin, Sofia 2002. Todorova (Edit.) 2006 H. Todorova (Edit.), Durankulak III. Die hellenistischen Befunde. DAI Berlin, Sofia 2006.

**** The archaeological monuments on the Big Island (Figs. 2 and 3) 1. Copper-Age Tell with 8 levels, each with stone architecture. 2. Proto-Bronze-Age pits and a votive place from the Cernavoda Culture I and III (3500-3200 cal BC). 3. Late Bronze-Age settlement of the Coslogeni Culture on the south side of the island (14-13 centuries BC). The settlement has been almost completely excavated. It is fortified and consists of apse houses. 4. Hellenistic cave temple in the rock face on the south part of the island (Todorova (Edit.) 2006 in print). 5. Early medieval settlement from the 9-10 c. AD. This is the only completely excavated Proto-Bulgarian settlement from this period (Fig. 4). (Тодорова (Edit.) 1989).

Foreword Since 1974 the Archaeological Institute of the Bulgarian Academy of Sciences in tandem with the Dobritsh Historical Museum have been involved in the excavation of the rich archaeological areas on the Big Island at Durankulak and the shore which lies west of it. Durankulak is the Bulgarian Troy. The western shore area was excavated between 1979–1996. (Durankulak II, 1, 2, DAI Berlin, Sofia 2002). Black/grey colouration of the soil which marked numerous Hellenistic votive pits was revealed. Under the medieval fortification wall in the south-west area of the island fragments of Greek amphorae were found, and one discovered an enclosure carved into the rock and a well. This indicated the presence of a Hellenistic complex. Traces of a Hellenistic complex were, however, not found. During the ensuing excavations evidence of an extensive cave temple with its territorium sacrum was found, which obviously belonged to the Greek colony Kalatis and was used during the 3rd c. BC.

The archaeological monuments on the west shore of the lake 1. Small late Neolithic settlement with pits from the I and II periods of the Hamangia Culture (5100-4750 cal. BC). This population introduced the Neolithic to Dobrudzha. 2. Early Copper-Age settlement with timber architecture preserved in substruction. III A period of the Hamangia Culture (4750-4650 cal. BC). 3. The Neolithic and Copper-Age burial grounds (5100-4200 сal. BC). 1200 burials have been excavated. (Todorova (Edit.), Durankulak II, 1,2, DAI Berlin, Sofia 2002) 4. Burial mounds and horizontal graves from the proto-Bronze-Age (3500-3400 cal. BC), (Todorova (Edit.) Durankulak II, 1,2. DAI Berlin, Sofia 2002) 5. Votive pits from the early Iron-Age (10th c. BC) (Todorova (Edit), Durankulak IV, in preparation). 6. Hellenistic offering places, votive pits and a small burial ground (3rd-beginning 2nd c. BC), (Todorova (Edit.) Durankulak III, DAI Berlin, Sofia 2006. (in print)

Between 1991 and 1996 the Deutsche Archäolog. Institut in Berlin aided in the excavation and evaluation of the Hellenistic finds and took responsibility for the publication of the excavation report in a DAI-series. The economic situation in Bulgaria at that time was such that without their help the research could never have been carried out. For this support I would like to thank the then president of the Deutschen Archäologischen Instituts, Prof. Dr. H. Kyrieleis and the present president of the Institute Prof. Dr. H. Parzinger. Dr. Johannes Burow† from the Archäolog. Institut in Berlin was deeply involved in the evaluation of the finds. 176

HENRIETA TODOROVA: DURANKULAK - A TERRITORIUM SAKRUM OF THE GODDESS CYBELE in the hinterland Thraco-Getian and Scythian. A certain percent would also have been of mixed origin.

His early demise unfortunatley hindered the completion of this work. The difficult excavation of the cave temple was carried out by Dr. Ivan Vajsov, Dr. Georgi Mavrov (Archaeological Institute, BAW, Sofia) and Dr. Volodja Popov (Russian Archaeological Museum); the excavation of the Antique burial ground by Todor Dimov (Dobritsh Historical Museum); the technical documentation was done by Ing. Yuri Boianin, Ing. Ivanka Oratsheva, Stefan Goshev† und Elena Krondeva. The evaluation of the amphora stamps was carried out by Andrej Malamed, Desislava Yordanova, Todor Dimov and Tchavdar Tsotshev.

The western Black Sea coast was colonised early. The earliest Greek colony on the western Pontos is Histria (Alexandru 2003, 280-283) and Apollonia (Milesians founded it in the 7th c. BC). A little later, during the 6th c. BC, Odessos (Panajotova et al. 2003, 213-226) and Messambria were founded, again from Milet. Kallatis came into being around the early 5th c. BC as a subsettlement of the Greek Black Sea colony Herakleia Pontica, in north-west Anatolia (Erçyas 2003, 1406). In the Hellenistic period an interconnected system of Greek poleis existed in the west of the Pontos Euxinos dominated by marine trade. Contact with Sinope was particularly intensive in this period (Owen 2003, 13851387).

The Hellenistic features and artifacts from Durankulak will be published in volume III of the DAI-series Durankulak. Introduction

During the Hellenistic period Kallatis had a leading role among the west Pontic Greek colonies. Kallatis is mentioned by many antique authors as the most powerful trade and cult centre in the north Pontic. In relation to its history during the Hellenistic period the following facts have been established:

South-Dobrudzha – the extreme north-east of Bulgaria (Fig.1a), (which corrolates to the south-west of the antique ‘Scythia Minor’) has for long been one of the least reasearched regions on the Balkan peninsula. Archaeological excavations on the Bulgarian Black-Sea coast have mainly taken place in the more southern and better known Greek colonies such as Messambria (today’s Nesbar) und Apollonia (today’s Sozopol). Further to the north the situation is complicated by the fact that the structural remains of the Greek Poleis Odessos (todays Varna), Dionysopolis (todays Balčik), Bisone (todays Kavarna), Kallatis (todays Mangalia) etc. are at the moment partly under the water level and partly covered by modern settlements which make large scale excavation impossible. In addition to this until now no trace of a significant Greek settlement between Kallatis and Dionysopolis was found. This situation has changed recently in that Karõn Limẽn has been localised with some certainty in written sources on the coast beside the lighthouse near the modern town of Šabla (Dobritsh distr. Bulgaria). Small trenches revealed, beside Late Roman remains, also Late Classical and Hellenistic material. Unfortunately this settlement is also partly under the water level. This sole Hellenistic site on the west Pontic coast which has not been built over is threatened with destruction, because the area in which it lies, although under a heritage protection order, has lately been privatised by the the mayor of the town of Šabla. The site of the Big Island in Durankulak Lake on the Black Sea is situated 25 km north of Karõn Limẽn and 10 km south of Kallatis. As Karõn Limẽn, Durankulak also belongs to the Kallatis–Chora. (Fig. 1b).

After the death of Alexander the Great in 323 BC Kallatis came under the control of the Macedonian Satrap Lysimachos, who had occupied Chora. In the years 313310/309 Kallatis, along with its allies Histria and Odessos, and in alliance with certain Thracian and Scythian tribes rose against Lysimachos, was twice under siege for long periods from land and in 310/309 was defeated. After the death of Lysimachos in 281, Kallatis went through a boom period and minted its own coins as well as those of her Scythian allies. In circa 280 BC the Celts who arrived in the Lower Danube area presented a serious threat for both Kallatis and for the indigenous Thraco-Getian tribes in the hinterland. The Celtic presence in north-east Bulgaria (composed of Belgic tribes) is attested to by Polybius (Polyb. VIII, 22, 3) during the period of the Celtic King Cavaros (270/260-216/210), and confirmed by Celtic coinage found at Arkovna, 80 km inland from Varna. (Panajotova et al. 2003, 225). The towns of Svitshtov, Tutrakan und Silistra on the Danube were also founded by the Celts. It is probable that some of the numerous votive pits found on the west shore of Durankulak lake which date from this period are connected with the Celtic/Belgic threat. In circa 260 BC Kallatis came into conflict with Byzantion because of its claim to the harbour at Tomis. The military conflict ended with a serious defeat for Kallatis which the city never recovered from.

The Greek imported pottery and the large amounts of amphora stamps from this region and the bordering areas as well as the large numbers of antique anchors found along the coast of Karõn Limẽn illustrate that by the 4 th c. BC at the latest, but probably earlier, a harbour with considerable marine trade existed here. The population of the Black Sea coastal area must have been mostly Greek,

*** The Kallatis colonists who came from the Bithynia in Asia Minor brought with them and continued to practise the most important Asia Minor cult – that of the goddess 177

ANCIENT GREEK COLONIES IN THE BLACK SEA 2 Cybele and on the Big Island on the harbour in Durankulak built a cave temple to her in BythnianPhrygian tradition. As Kallatis itself is situated in a loess covered incline in the Dobrudzha-platform, its hinterland consists of a flat Steppe landscape without rock formations, for the building of the Cybele Temple in rock (mountain) to be true to tradition the only possibility was to situate it in the rocky Big Island in Durankulak harbour which lay 10 km to the south and where obviously a small natural cave was available. The area lay in sight of Kallatis and was easily reached by boat or ship over the sea or by land along the high coast by horse or wagon.

loess deposits, which on the shore are dragged away by the sea during stormy weather. Obviously the loess cover in the antique period stretched far eastwards over todays shelf so that the course of the shore then was different from todays’. The Durankulak hinterland is an almost flat waterless steppe. On the shore of the lake, however, numerous fresh-water sources are present, which mix the lake with fresh-water. There is today no connection between the lake and the sea but in the antique period at times of low water level the lake was connected to the sea and formed a navigable harbour. At times of low water levels todays’ Big Island was a peninsula linked to the west shore by a narrow rock formation which today lies 30 cm under the water level. The island was habitated only at times when it was easily accesable, serviced by a number of freshwater sources and the surrounding area was not swampy. The fact has been established (Bamett 1996) that in Hellenistic times the level of the world’s oceans and the Black Sea was lower than today because of global climatic conditions (Gibin 1978; Jansen u.a. 1993; Fairbridge 1961; Raban 2003) (Fig.5) which began after the massive period of heat of the 2nd mill., whose lowpoint lay in the 9th–10th c. AD when the sea-level was several metres lower than today. The depth levels are different for the Black and eastern-Mediterranean seas because of the local tectonics as a result of the fluctuations of the European and Anatolian platforms.

The archaeological excavations at Durankulak contribute therefore to the question of the north-west Hellenistic Pontus. Here the extensive cult site of the goddess Cybele has been researched, which consists of a large cave temple, a votive enclosure, a number of votive sites, numerous votive pits a well and a small burial ground. Durankulak was clearly a territorium sacrum of this goddess. The complex functioned, unfortunately, for only a little over a century. It was founded at the end of the 4th c. BC and functioned until the beginning of the 2nd c. BC – i.e. during Kallatis’ greatest period. References Alexandru 2003 A. Alexandru, Histria. –In: Ancient Greek Colonies in the Blac Sea I. (Eds. D.V. Grammenos & E.K. Petropoulos). Publications of the Archaeological Institut of Northern Greece 4. Thessaloniki 2003, 279–340. Erçyas 2003 D.B. Erçyas, Herakeia Pontica – Amastris. – In: Ancient Greek Colonies in the Blac Sea I. (Eds. D.V. Grammenos & E.K. Petropoulos). Publications of the Archaeological Institut of Northern Greece 4. Thessaloniki 2003, 1403–1440. Owen 2003 Doonan Owen, Sinope. – In: Ancient Greek Colonies in the Black Sea I. (Eds. D.V. Grammenos & E.K. Petropoulos). Publications of the Archaeological Institut of Northern Greece 4. Thessaloniki 2003, 1379–1402. Panajotova et al. D. Nedev, Kr. Panayotova, Apollonia Pontica. – In: (Eds. D.V. Grammenos & E.K. Petropoulos). Publications of the Archaeological Institut of Northern Greece 4. Thessaloniki 2003, 213–226. Minchev A. Minchev, Odessos (6. c. BC–1. c. A.D.). – In: Ancient Greek Colonies in The Blac Sea I. (Eds. D.V. Grammenos & E.K. Petropoulos). Publications of the Archaeological Institut of Northern Greece 4. Thessaloniki 2003, 209–278.

A lasting period of warmth followed, which continued throughout the first millenium and was accompanied by a slow ascent of the water level. Todays’ water level was reached during the first quarter of the 2nd mill. BC. This rise in temperature continued until the end of the millennium. The climate during the Hellenistic period was therefore warm and humid with a lower water level than today. The abovementioned fluctuation is closely related to the foundation and fall of the Hellenistic cult complex at Durankulak. References Bamett 1996 T.P. Bamett, Recent Changes in Sea level: Summary in Sea Level Changes (Washington 1996). Fairbridge 1961 R.E. Fairbridge, Eustatic changes in Sea level. Physics and Chemistry of the Earth 4, 1961. Gibin 1978 J. Gibin, Climatic Changes (Cambridge 1978). Jansen u.a. 1993 S.J. Jansen/ H.B. Clausen/W. Dansgaard/K. Fuhrer/N. Gundestrup/C.U. Hammer/P. Eversen/J. Jouzel/B. Stauffer/J.P. Steffensen; Irregular glatial interstadials record in a new Greeland ice core. Nature 359, 1992, 311–313. Raban 2003 A. Raban, The Bronze age harbours of Cyprus and the Levant, Thacia Pontica VI.2, 2003. In Honorem Michail Lazarov, 175–200.

The geographical situation of Durankulak, climate and sea level in the 3rd c. BC Durankulak is situated 5 km south of he BulgarianRomanian border on the Varna-Constanza. South-west of the village lies the large lake of Durankulak in which are two islands the Big Island and the Small Island. The lake was formed at the conjunction of two parts of the Moesian platform (today’s Wadis of Vaklino and Durankulak), which also continues on the Black Sea shelf. The Moesian karst platform is covered by deep 178

HENRIETA TODOROVA: DURANKULAK - A TERRITORIUM SAKRUM OF THE GODDESS CYBELE The stratigraphy of the deposits

The Hellenistic Cave Temple of the Goddess Cybele (Fig 6.), (Vajsov/Mavrov/Todorova 2002)

The deposits in the area of the cave temple were 3-15 m thick. They were made up, for the most part, of stone resulting from the periodic collapse of the cave ceiling. These were seperated from each other by fine weathered material and smaller stones. There are three habitation layers present: Hellenistic, late Roman and early medieval.

The Position of the Cave Temple (Map and Fig 2 and 3) The warm, south and south-east extremes of the Big Island at Durankulak, protected from the north-wind falls relatively steeply to the water and consists of two terraces which are between 2 and 7 meters wide. The first (lower) lies circa 1–2 m above the water level and obviously came into being as a cliff-terrace during the 4th c. BC when the world ocean had reached a level of 3.5 m above todays’ level. The Black Sea therefore was in an ingression phase during which the harbour at Durankulak was flooded as some of the cliffs in the area testify to (Oračev 1990). The eastern and southern parts of the island were exposed to the waves through which the cliff terrace was formed. A series of crevaces and caves on the island were created at this period by the washing away of the loose miocenean chalk sediment. It is to be presumed that at the location of the Hellenistic cave temple in trenchs M and H 19-17 a larger natural cave existed. This must have been visible and frequented during the late Bronze Age also because the fortified late Bronze Age settlement of the 14th-13th c. BC which lies on the first terrace took the cave into account. In a small adjacent cave in trench O 17 late Bronze Age pottery fragments have also been uncovered in situ under an intact loess cover. In contrast to this, the Copper Age population of the island in the 5th mill. BC knew no cave, and regarded the aforementioned area only as a quarry.

On the rock floor of the Hellenistic cave temple i.e. on the lower part of the wall there is a 5-27 cm thick orange–lightbrown layer of fine material which comes from fragments of the wall plaster; white/umbra particles are present which indicate wall decoration. This layer is covered by a fine, grey, weathered layer which is then followed by the late Roman floor level, marked by a dense dark-brown burning layer. This is followed by a burnt layer and a number of charcoal layers which have fallen from the interior of the late Roman dwelling and are the remains of roof-beams. Irregular coarse eroded collapsed material follows from the roof of the cave and in turn a compact stone layer consisting of large stone slabs. On top of this lies a number of weathered layers of various consistence seperated by stone layers, on which lies a massive stone slab – the final collapse of the cave ceiling. This is partly covered by a medieval floor but it is mostly cut by trenches and pits which date from the 9th c. AD which in their turn have been filled by debris and lie under 10th c. AD constructions. To the north remains of the cave arch are preserved, while the room below was filled with layers of dirt which covered the medieval level (Todorova 1989, 30–59).

The second (upper) terrace was used in the Copper Age (4700-4200 cal. BC) as a source of building stone. Later, in the 14th-13th c. BC and in the 9th-10th c. AD, both terraces represented a suitable settlement site protected from the north wind and was also regarded as such in the early medieval period in the upper part of the miocenean deposits, on the slope above the north wall of the cave temple there is a circa 80 cm thick sediment layer of loose, fine, white consistence (Fig. 7) which was used from the 5th mill. BC for wall plaster in the dwellings and was also used later as plaster for the coarse stone wall of the Hellenistic Temple. The Hellenistic plaster, however, is of an orange/light-brown colour because it was mixed with reddish-brown earth which is also found on the island.

The Plan of the Cave-Temple (Fig. 8, 8a, 11a, 11b). The cave temple is 25 m long and 6.40–8.15 m wide. It consists of a porch (A), a corridor (entrance way) (B), an enclosure hall (Sud Hall) (C), a western (D), and an eastern hall (E). The Porch (A), opening to the south, is preserved only as a stone platform as in the medieval period it was built over by dwellings and the fortification wall. Its original form was rectangular, 4.80 х 4.20 m in size. A smooth rock patform formed the floor. To the south a number of steps carved into the rock lead to the water. Traces of these steps were revealed by trenches dug in the area of the water. One should imagine the forecourt as having been roofed which was held up by a number of pillars. Remains of the pillars have not been found, with the exception of two pillar segments which were found in a field on the shore opposite the island and which undoubtedly were used recently. During the clearing of the destruction of the medieval fortification wall, two large carved cornersones from the fronton came to light.

Due to the fact that the sea-level was much lower than today, the lower terrace including the cave was completely dry during the 14th-13th c. and 4th-3rd c. BC. During the late Bronze Age a fortified settlement of the Coslogeni Culture was situated here (Durankulak IV, in preparation) and in the 3rd c. BC the path to the cave temple led through here from which, in trench O 19, steps carved into the rock led down to the water.

The Corridor (Entrance way) (B). To the west is a 1.10–1.40 m wide platform, flanked by a 4.20 m long passageway which is cut approx. 1m into the rock and 179

ANCIENT GREEK COLONIES IN THE BLACK SEA 2 which leads to the entrance to the temple. The massive marble slab (Fig.9) which was found on the west shore obviously comes from the doorframe of a double-door, which led from the pathway into the interior of the temple. The slab corresponds the width of the pathway. On both sides of it the juncture of the side pillars with the doorframe are to be seen. The slab came into secondary usage in the medieval graveyard on the west shore of the lake as is evident from the Christian cross carved into it.

north is a high stone podium with a big votive trough (Fig.13). The trough is rectangular, 20 cm deep and its front side is grooved in order to allow the blood of the votive animal to flow down. This complicated groove system (Fig. 14) is partly a remenant of the grooves which came from the breaking of the stone slabs but has further, deeper grooves which run south to the stone basin. Grooves in the floor occur only in this area of the temple.

The Enclosure Hall (Sud Hall) (C). Via a 30 cm step one comes from the pathway up into the porch of the temple, which runs east-west and in the east ends in an irregular triangular apse. The hall is 2,56 m wide and und 8,20 m long (Fig. 10). Its floor level is 14.90 m deep and therefore the deepest part of the complex. Along the rock wall, circa 30 cm above the floor, there is a small, 4–5 cm wide protrusion which was obviously intended to support the wooden floor. The floor of the porch was formed of smooth rock which ends in the east in an triangular apse.

In the south of the west hall there was a stone votive basin sunk into the ground, 0,80 m deep, and 1 m x 1.20 m wide (Fig. 15). On the south edge of the basin a stone orthostat protruded and another lay broken beside it (Fig. 15a). These were obviously the feet of a table, which was erected over the basin. The aforementioned grooves in the floor support this. The whole construction can be interpretated as a votive table and baptismal font for dealing with blood. It is well known that the bloodbaptism and blood-cleansing played a central part in the Cybele cult. (Nilsson 1941, 95-96).

On the floor of the hall debris from the collapsed southern stone wall has been uncovered, which has in places a so-called ‘library structure’ with niches, which leads to the conclusion that the south wall of the porch had wide window niches which illuminated it. The interior of the temple consists of two long rooms, which are somewhat at an angle to the front area. They are seperated by an east-west running stone wall. The seperating wall in the middle is broken through and here two steps connect the rooms.

In the west wall of the interior of this hall, at a height of 1.50 m above the votive trough there are two small lateral caves, one of which proceeds 2 m into the rock and is 0.70 cm high. They have been interpretated as storage areas for votive goods. In the medieval area they functioned as storage areas. Intact vessels from the 10th c. AD have been uncovered there. Specialised areas in the interior of the temple served for the most important tasks. In the west room there are two altars: the large grooved votive trough was probably used for the sacrifice of large animals (cattle, horse, deer, boar) and for oracle interpretations of the flow of the blood. The smaller votive table above the stone basin in the south of the west room must have been used for smaller animals. The basin collected the blood nessecary for the ritual. One can imagine the person responsible for the blood procedure crouching under the votive table. The sluicing obviously took place in the lake.

The so-called deviation of the interior from the axis of the complex seems to have been no coincidence. This deviation may have had the purpose of screening the interior (which was only accessable to the priests and adepts) from the front area, where the ordainary visitors were. The East Hall (D) (Fig.11a – c) is 16,5 m long and 2,40 m wide. A 30 cm high podium (2.40 m wide and 12 m in legnth (At 14.60 m), stretched to the north from the gap in the seperating wall which led to the throne of the Cybele statue (Fig.12). This was obviously the most sacred area. Athough the north wall is quite erroded the throne is partly preserved. There is still a compact armrest and part of a seating area. Circa 2 m in front of the deis, a small trough in the rock of 12 cm diameter has been uncovered as well as a stone slab with the same trough. This is obviously the keystone of the door which shut the statue off. Above the deis, slightly higher in the eastern wall, a small side-cave is to be observed which was also utilised in the medieval period.

The cleaning of the temple after numerous sacrifices and blood procedures must have been difficult and required a large amount of water. Construction Technique The construction of the cave temple gives us many valuable insights. As mentioned, it is to be assumed that a natural cave already existed as the work on forming the temple began. This is clear from the fact that all the chisel marks on the wall of the temple are under the level of the platform in the front room, the wall above that being quite pitted.

The West Hall (E) (Fig.11a – c), is narrow and has a long trapezoid form. It is 15 m long, 2.90 m wide in the north and 1.30 m in the south. This is the votive area of the temple, accessable both from the front area and from the east hall trough the gap in the seperating wall. In the

This means that work began from the floor of the natural cave. Therefore circa 100 m3 of rock was removed during the construction of the temple. During this process they cut mainly through the softer reddish limestone, partly 180

HENRIETA TODOROVA: DURANKULAK - A TERRITORIUM SAKRUM OF THE GODDESS CYBELE reasons. Among these was the war between Kallatis and Byzantion for control over the harbour at Tomi in which Kallatis suffered a heavy defeat in 260 or 255 BC (Oppermann 2004, 186). However, the general cultural decline at the end of the Hellenistic period may be mirrored here also.

leaving the harder material therefore resulting in the gradation of the podium. The floor levels are smooth and follow the course of the limestone. The softer lime layers brake easily and would have delivered poor construction material. One partly removed the harder material, for example in the floor levels of the front room and west room. In the west room clear traces of the removal of 10 cm thick limestone is to be found. These are cut in rectangular forms and broken with the help of wooden wedges. The regular limestone slabs harvested in this manner have been found at the small votive area in the southern area of the west room as well as in the Hellenistic wall construction. In places these stone slabs also found secondary use in the medieval fortification wall as well as in the medieval burials.

The area remained unpopulated for a long period after the abandonment of the temple as the rising water-level turned the peninsula into an island, flooded the freshwater sources and swamped the surrounding area. Only in the late Roman period (6th c. AD) did ordinary life begin again in the ruins of the temple under the still intact part of the cave-arch. At this point the still visible remains of the cave temple were renovated in the following manner: the access to the west room and partly to the east room was walled up (Figs.18 and 19). The stone used for this came partly from the debris of the front wall of the Temple, further stone was broken away from the centre of the seperating wall of the Hellenistic complex, on which traces of tools use for this purpose are to be seen. Thus in the interior of the temple a closed-off room was created, accessable only through a 60 cm wide hole between the aforementioned wall and the eastern wall of the former temple. A hearth was erected on the votive podium in the north of the room which must have been still visible and on this late antique vessels have been uncovered. One of the legs of the little votive table was removed while the other remained. The floor of the Hellenistic complex has not been freed from the erosion material which covers it.

The stone slabs harvested in the mentioned fashion were used in the façade and the fronton of the temple. Two triangular fronton stones, further large stone blocks and the aforementioned marble ledge were used for secondary purposes. These indicate a very representative configuration of the façade of the temple. The double door in front of the throned statue of the goddess at the back of the complex was made of timber. The dating of the cave temple and its fate The artifacts found in the area of the complex are not numerous but nonetheless enable a precise dating of its chronlogical position as they come from absolutley sealed features. Black-slipped pottery, a kantharos (Fig.16), a fragment with satyr–lead appliqué and the earliest amphora stamp from 310–300 BC uncovered on the floor in the corner, as well as the Cybele votive found outside the complex, indicate a date at the end of the 4th c. BC The complex was used most during the periods between 285/280 and 270/265 BC. The latest find comes from shortly after 200 BC. Here, as in the area of the votive pits and the late Hellenistic burials, artifacts from the late Hellenistic period are not present. Thus it follows that the Cybele Temple was only used for a little over a century.

The damp late Roman floor was partly laid with pithoi pieces. The southern part of the cave arch must have already collapsed at this time because here, at a height of 3.5 m along both walls cut into the rock there massive, carbonized split beams have been identified which indicates that this area was roofed. The late Roman living area was obviously fitted with a lot of timber. The connected, black burning layers which cover the late Roman level, are obviously a result of the carbonised roof beams. These traces of burning mark the termination of the utilisation of the cave area.

The reason for its abandonment may have been the rising level of the sea at the end of the 3rd century as the floor of the complex became flooded. One endeavoured to militate against this by installing a timber platform which the narrow protrusion on the walls along the front rooms testifies to. This was only a short-term solution, however, and the temple was abandoned and the statue of the goddess obviously taken elsewhere. Whether this was of stone or wood remains unsure.

Between the 6th and 9th c. AD the rock arch of the cave gradually ctumbled and partly collapsed, a process in which an earthquake apparently played a descisive role. Strong earthquakes from the seismic active area around Vrancea in south-west Romania tend to devastate this area, the last of these having been in 1976. Traces of previous earthquakes e.g. from the middle Copper Age circa 4450 cal. BC and the late Bronze Age in the 13th cal. BC have been found on the island.

Today the water covers the floor level of the front hall until late summer and its excavation was only possible in autumn.

On the site of the collapsed cave arch was a trough, protected from the elements, where in the 9th-10th c. AD the construction of the chieftain’s complex of the early medieval Durankulak settlement took place (Fig.20). (Todorova 1989, 54–56, Tabl. 5). The situation of the

The decline in votive goods and votive ceremonies after 260/255 BC obviously had economic and political 181

ANCIENT GREEK COLONIES IN THE BLACK SEA 2 indicates that the votive rituals carried out there were dedicated to this goddess. (Burov 1993, Abb. 15-17; Burow 2003). A clay votive arm has also been found – obviously a thanksgiving gift to the goddess for the healing of an illness i.e. a wounded limb, as was common in the antique period (Nilsson 1941, 128). An upper torso was also found in the pits (Burov 1993, Abb. 17).

roof beams for the cellar of this complex, which also formed the floor of the medieval house, were uncovered during the excavation of the west and east walls of the cave temple. The excavation of the aforementioned cellar reached the Antique level in the east and north wall area. Renovation here also included the medieval cellars. They were renovated twice. As stated, the lateral caves served as storage areas in which intact medieval vessels were uncovered. The medieval fortification wall ran over the enterance and fronton, and stone from the façade of the temple and fronton were built into this. Besides the fortification wall a hearth of a 10th c. AD house was also found.

Votive places and offering pits The votive pits on the western shore of the harbour, which were dug up to 2 m into the loess are without doubt connected to the cult of Cybele. This goddess was worshipped in the antique period as mother-earth, as goddess of the mountains, as goddess of nature, as well as goddess of healing etc. One can therefore say that the votive gifts which were deposited in the earth were dedicated to her (in her role as ‘mother-earth’). Naturally archaeology can find only a part of the known votive gifts. Many other offerings would have been deposited: beverages and oil in amphorae and jugs, food and baked goods in jars and baskets, honey, flowers, plants, wool, grain, the inards of sacrificed animals, choice cuts of domestic animals (cattle, horse, donkey, pig, sheep/goat, dog, chicken, goose), of wild animals (stag, deer, wildpig, rabbit, fox, wild-goose, swan etc.), fish, tools, weapons, jewellery, fabrics, leather, cosmetics etc. (Pauly der Neue 6: votive gifts: Honey 584, Oil 585, Wine 586, Wool 586, Fruit 587, Domestic and Wild animals 585, Dog 591, Horse, Donkey 592).

The medieval settlement was abandoned at the beginning of the 11th c. AD which is no local phenomonen as at the same time the early medieval settlement system in the whole of Dobrugea-region disintegrated because of the regular invasions from the north-east. From this time on there was no more settlement on the Big Island, the water level sharply rose again, which turned the island into a peninsula and therefore not easily accessable. It also meant that the area was blighted by malaria. Interpretation The Hellenistic artifacts consist of a votive stella from the Big Island, a number of finds from the area of the votive pits.

Cattle had pride of place among the votive animals, as can be defined from the bones found in the pits. It is known that the Taurobolia was a central element of the Cybele-cult (Burkert 1987, 6, 10). Cattle i.e. bulls also provided most of the meat for the ritual feasts.

The votive stella The 0.47 m high, 0.37 m wide und 0.10 thick fronton limestone slab was found on the dome of the Big Island in the stone socket of a medieval grave beside the Christian rotunde from the 10th c. AD (Fig.21) (Todorova 1989, 19). It is a stela with relief of the seated goddess Cybele (Fig. 22). Similar Hellenistic monuments are common not only in the Pontos region but in the entire Mediterranean areal (Škorpil 1913) e.g. a votive from Paros (Vermaseren 1977, PL. VII) as well as one of unknown origin in the Barcelona museum which are most similar to our relief, (Vermaseren 1977, Pl. X) as in these cases the figure runs asymetrically and the right hand lies on a rectangular backrest. The fact that the representation of the seated goddess was common in the Greek Pontos– poleis, supports the presumption that the missing statue of the goddess from the interior of the cave temple would have been similar.

In the antique period it was common to present the image of the goddess new garments (Naumann 23, 27). Roman sources mention the sacrifice of bulls (Taurobolium) in March to celebrate the ludi Megalensis dedicated to this goddess, at which the statue was also washed (‘ lavatio’) (Pauli der Neue 6, 954–955). The simultaneous and sequential filling of the pits may be an indication of allyear round festivities during which a large number of sacrafices took place at the temple. The animals sacrificed here were those which were commonly sacrificed at such events in the antique period (Pauly 1939: Domestic and wild animal 585, Dog 591, Horse, Donkey 592). The large amount of horses sacrificed is noteworthy and may be connected to the Thraco-Getic hinterland.

The votive in question was obviously originally beside the storage niche in the interior of the cave complex and discovered during the medieval excavation of the cellar and subsequently used as a grave marker.

The south-western part of the Big Island During the Hellenistic period, the Big Island of Durankulak was actually a peninsula connected to the inland through a narrow rocky ridge extending from its western end. In that time, there was a covered passage (F on Fig. 8), leading for 15 m from this natural bridge

The Cybele–Terracotta (Fig. 17) In the area of the votive pits on the western shore of the harbour, Cybele terracotta has been found, which 182

HENRIETA TODOROVA: DURANKULAK - A TERRITORIUM SAKRUM OF THE GODDESS CYBELE starts to converge rapidly. The present water table reaches 1.30 m above the bottom. Underneath this level the walls were damaged but from there to the top they are still in perfect condition. Obviously the rock underneath the water level is far less compact in structure and prevents fine dressing. Therefore this portion and the bottom are only roughly shaped. During the excavation work, two powerful water pumps were needed to reduce the water level to 0.60 m. At this level we could observe clean drinking water pouring out between the bedrock layers from the core of the island.

along the rocky south-western edge of the island towards the cave temple. A number of interesting finds were unearthed in a well dug out in the immediate vicinity of the temple, some 15m to the west of the entrance corridor (G on Fig.8) Further westwards stood the foundation of a building for offerings (H on Fig.8). To judge by the associated small finds, it should be considered synchronous both to the temple and the well. To the south of this building were discovered the remains of a hearth and next to it (below the present water table) a large area of black deposit was documented. It contained high concentration of ashes, charcoal and Hellenistic pottery, possibly revealing the location of votive waste debris.

In the well, just below the water level, a deposit was discovered containing mostly pottery fragments identical to those from the layer of late antiquity, which covered the temple after its abandonment. Underneath this layer, there was a stone deposit 50-60cm thick. There were bigger stones but on average they were of moderate size. Immediately above the very bottom, there was ca. 0.40m thick layer consisting exclusively of Hellenistic finds, mostly bottoms of jugs and amphora fragments. From both shapes there were enough pieces to reconstruct the complete profiles providing the rare occasion for presenting complete shapes. There were several stamped amphora handles fixing the termini post quem for the use-life of the well. A stamp from Sinope (№ 3) dates to 260/50 BC. Another stamp originates from Heracleia Pontica (№ 69). A third stamp is found on the neck of amphora, which is so poorly preserved, that prevents from reading the inscription. Nevertheless, the porous structure of the clay is highly suggestive of Heracleian provenance.

The Hellenistic pottery not coming from the abovementioned structures is largely limited to the southwestern part of the island. These are mostly fragments of imported amphorae. Some of the handles carry stamps ranging in date between 280–260 BC .Amphorae make up to 90% of all the pottery fragments discovered (Melamed, 83). A pile of bigger amphora fragments was discovered just below and outside of the medieval fortification wall (Todorova 1989, Tabl. 11, 4), which could be taken as indication for the existence of another votive building, possibly erased during later construction works. Certain portions of the walls of the medieval settlement to the west could have originally stood as part of the construction of upper terrace from the Hellenistic period. However, such possibility should be considered only very carefully, since it is very problematic to date walls with multiple use preserved only by fundaments standing up to three or four rows. Nevertheless, these are relatively long segments of walls, stratigraphically certainly pre-dating the medieval buildings (Todorova 1986, 14 and Abb 4.6), but completely integrated within these structures at a later date. During the Hellenistic period, there could have stood structures belonging to the temple district limiting it to the west. Eventually, this could have been the occupation area for the priests and the temple personnel ascribed to the temple (watchmen, servants, slaves, etc.).

Twenty-two amphora feet were found in total. Five of them are certainly from Sinope and another one comes probably from Chios. To judge by the reddish porous clay, the rest are very likely from Heracleia Pontica, similarly to the already mentioned fragment with the stamped neck. This ware is represented by nine handles and a number of wall fragments, mostly from the lower part of the vessels. Most of the household ware is characterised by closed shapes. There are only two fragments from black varnish plates. Mention also deserve 21 bases of jugs, the ratio being 16 fragments of grey ware against five fragments of red ware. The related wall fragments were conspicuously underrepresented. There were two rim fragments, in one case together with the attached handle. Three bases as well and three wall fragments closely resemble grey wares but have an intense black slip. Finally, there were fragments from further seven jugs, which should be classified as red ware with white slip. In two cases, it was possible to reconstruct almost the entire vessel – one with round and the other with trefoil-shaped rim. In both cases, there were knobs on the handles. From the remaining vessels there are mostly handles, among them another knob-handled jug with two knobs on the handle, as well as bases and fewer wall fragments from the lower parts of the vessels. The most plausible reason

The Well Above the walking level in trench K 20/3, there is a rockcut well, placed to the west of the entrance to the cave temple. Its opening is round, measuring 1m in diameter, with a small notch pointing towards north-east. The medieval fortification wall runs just to the north of its rim without overriding it. The shaft of the well was dug into the bedrock. Its total height measures exactly four metres. In profile, the upper part widens slightly downwards, reaching 1.50 m in diameter at 1.40 m from the base. Thereafter, it continues straight all the way down until it reaches 0.40 m above the bottom. There the diameter is 1m and there from it 183

ANCIENT GREEK COLONIES IN THE BLACK SEA 2 why mostly bases and fragments of the lower parts both of amphorae and jugs were found could be that they were possibly suspended on a rope to be filled with water. Somewhere on the way up or down some vessels could have hit the walls and got broken. The lower part fell into the well while the remaining one was pulled up.

The Tradition of the Cybele Rock- and Cave Sancturies The Cybele-Cult is one of the oldest Asia Minor cults attested in written sources (Preller 1894, 636–643). The goddess was worshipped there as Earth-Mother, Mother of Nature, Mother of the Gods and above all as Mountain Goddess. As the highest nature-god she was the creator of agriculture, livestock breeding, music and was also the founder and protector of the towns and fortresses. (Preller 1894, 638–642). This explains the crowning polos. The fact that town and fortress are strategically linked explains the gleaming over the polos of our terracotta which can be interpretated as a mountain peak. (Burow 2003, 50) This depiction of the polos is typical of the Cybele terracota produced in Kallatis.

Seemingly, the well was built at the same time as the Hellenistic temple, obviously to meet the need for fresh water of the temple personnel, the visitors and for ceremonial purposes. The remaining water sources in the area are at a considerable distance and could be reached only via roundabout routes following the contour of the surrounding water. Certainly, it cannot be excluded either that the water from the well cut into the core of the island, i.e. originating from the temple could have been considered sacred or healing. The latter could possibly explain why the visitors gathered water in the pots they brought with them (amphorae, jugs, etc.) instead of using the usual wooden buckets.

For the inhabitants of the flat Dobrudzha region i.e. for the Kallatians, they represented mountains and illustrates that Cybele was worshipped also in the north-western Pontos as a goddess of non-existent mountains.

Building for offerings

The oldest Cybele temple was erected on the Phrygian mountain Dindimon by King Midas. In Asia Minor Cybele cult-sites were situated exclusively on wild cliffs, which is echoed by the erection of the cave temple on the Big Island in Durankulak in and not on the rock face. The lion is Cybele’s permanent companion – as a small animal lying on her lap and/or as a grown animal standing at her side at her service. The lion mirrors the almighty charactr of this goddess.

At the foot of the island at its south-western part the foundations of a small building with rectangular plan and measuring 2.50 x 2.20 m were discovered. The building was surrounded by a stone wall, 0.30–0.40 m wide. Its north-western and south-eastern corners were destroyed by construction activities in the early middle ages. However, an intact hearth against the northern wall was preserved. It is enclosed on its sides with orthostates, being 30 cm high and set at 35cm distance from each other. Inside the hearth, on the top of 10 cm thick ash layer, fragments of an offering plate (50 x 40 cm across) were discovered lying in situ. The plate must have been originally placed horizontally on the top of the orthostates. The entire floor of the building was covered with black layer, rich in ashes. Another similar hearth surrounded by somewhat smaller orthostates was registered against the southern wall. The offering plate seems to indicate the function of the building. Most likely it functioned as a covered space intended for smaller sacrifices performed in front of a very limited number of participants.

L. Preller (648) mentions an interesting tradition from Asia Minor in connection with the Attis-Cybele mysteries: in spring a spruce from the forest is brought to her temple and adorned with violets and ribbons as a symbol of the deseased Attis. After different mysteries and orgies in the woods accompanied by music, drumming and noise, the spring arrives i.e. the dead Attis is reborn and returns. The goddess is satisfied, awakes nature and gives blessings. This custom is also mentioned in Rome. (Pauli der neue 6, 954). The Taurobolium (Burkert 1987, 6, 10) and the blood baptism were core elements of the cult. These aspects are also well testified to in Durankulak.

The passage-way to the cave temple (Fig. 23)

The fact that no similar archaeological research has been carried out into Cybele cave sanctuaries on the Balkan peninsula, may be do to the lack of research. Numerous examples exist from Asia Minor, the birthplace of the Cybele-cult i.e. from the south Pontos region – Phrygia, Bythnia and Lydia, where the cult sites dedicated to Cybele are known and may be mentioned as parallels to our temple. Worth mentioning in this context is the imposing cliff-complex at Tekeköy near Sinope in the south Pontos region where a number of cave sanctuaries are to be found, accessable by way of wide paths and steps cut into the rock. Here the walls of a number of natural caves with intact roofing have been carved in the

From the western bank of the island, a 20 m long passage-way leading along the foot of the hill towards the entrance of the temple was documented. Its floor was covered by the flat stone plates of the Miocene deposits which form the very core of the island. Numerous postholes registered along its course indicate that the passage-way was actually covered. Some of the postholes were dug down deep inside the rock; others were supported by orthostates. At this favourable wind-proof corner of the island, although outside the fortification wall, a number of single room buildings during the medieval period were also constructed. 184

HENRIETA TODOROVA: DURANKULAK - A TERRITORIUM SAKRUM OF THE GODDESS CYBELE 1995), where on a perpendicular cliff-face on the north face of the Panayr-daği there are numerous nishes with Cybele-reliefs in many rows on the lower part of the rock-face (Karwiese 1995, 62). From our perspective the upper part of this cult-centre is important as there are no nishes but at least three large rooms cut into the rock, seperated by a 50-60 cm thick rock wall and are identical to those at Durankulak. We are obviously dealing here with the original rock-temple of the goddess Cybele. In tandem with the lower niches with the Cybele reliefs the entire complex gives the impression of a Cybele cultcomplex, whose reverberations reached the Balkan peninsula.

same manner as in Durankulak. A number of rooms led deep into the rock face. Votive altars and baptisimal fonts are also present. The mariners who came from Sinope to the north would have found a familiar cult cave-complex, something evident from the dominance of votive goods from Sinope. The Cybele-cult is mentioned in written sources from at least 12th c. BC (Neumann 40-46) (as Kubaba, Magna mater, Mother of mountains etc). It would appear, however, to be much older. J. Mellaart and other researchers connect her even with the matriarchal figure flanked by panthers from Çatal Hüyük (Mellaart 1967, 234-237). From the chronological perspective, however, this idea is doubtful. In view of new discoveries from Promachon–Topolnitsa on the Strymon (S-W Bulgaria), where a late Neolithic souterrain temple, which was dug over 8 m into the earth and where many bukrania have been uncovered (Koukouli-Chryzantaki et al. 2006), it appears that the principal of worshipping the motherearth and her husband – the bull, had embedded itself deeply in cultural tradition.

A large Cybele cult-centre is also mentioned on the Pergamon–Altar (Naumann, 251). On the Samos city hill there are also Cybele cult-centres in caves surrounded by numerous niches with Cybele reliefs. (Naumann, 217). It is to be presumed that the Calatians constructed the Cybele sanctury on the Big Island at Drankulak in line with the Asia Minor models. Its advantage over the Asia Minor monuments of this type which were exposed to the elements, is that it was completley protected from erosion and is therefore comparatively well preserved.

Other Anatolian Cybele cult-sites provide many parallels with the temple at Durankulak. They are all situated on exposed cliff faces and can still be visited today. There are many cliff façades (Naumann 41), at Arslankaja a double door is depicted, which presents a parallel with Durankulak. Some of the cult sites were built on two levels and have stairways. E. Haspels (1971), who researched, documented and published them extensively, also mentions inscriptions such as ‘matarkubile’ (in Köhnüş, Haspels 91, 97, 293, Abb. 138), ‘smateran matera’ (most numerous in Minas Kale, Haspels 55, 291), ‘materan’ (in Akpara Kale, Haspels 28, 29, 46–48, 293) and comments that these imposing cult sites were dedicated to the goddess Cybele. They date from between the 7/6th c. BC and the Roman period with a peak during the Hellenistic period.

The large scale of the cave-complex at Durankulak, as well as the number of votive pits on the shore suggest that it was a temple of a wider significance, frequented not only by the Kallatians but also by the population from the hinterland and by mariners. The large number of amphorae found in the area of the cave temple and in the votive pits which make up the majority of the Hellenistic finds, and fragments of which were found in large quantities in places, such as under the medieval fortification wall, illustrate the strong relationship between the temple and the sea. Its situation in the navigatible harbour, protected from the wind, gave it an ideal position to offer antique ships protection in bad weather. Along the harbourless stretch of shore between Kallatis and Bisone, whch was exposed to the north and east the harbour at Durankulak would have been the only place of refuge during a strong storm at sea. This fact was well known to mariners and led to them landing here and offering rich votive gifts. In addition the mariners from Herakleia and Sinope would have found a direct link to their Cybele cult-site at Tekeköy.

Analogies to Durankulak lie mostly in the fact that all the Anatolian cult-centres were carved into the rock-face (Haspels 170), such as Demirli Kale (Haspels 34, 60-62, Fig.170-173), Değirme (Haspels 58-59, 89-87, Fig.161166), Yapildak Kale (Haspels 8, 33, 53-56), Mal Taş (Haspels 85-86, Fig.157-158) and Tekeköy. The temple at Pişmiş Kale (Haspels 11, 30, 45, 61-65, Plan 496, Abb.61-65) has an internal seperation wall which is technically identical to that in Durankulak. Rock felsreliefs in niches of the goddess flanked by lions have also been recorded (Haspels 39, 76, 89, 97-99, 105-106, 162).

On the west shore of the stormy Pontos Euxinus we have uncovered not just an important and well known Cybele cult-site but also a marine staging-post which supports the use of the term ‘euxinus’.

Beside those in Phrygia one should also mention here some of the other best known cave sanctuaries such as those at Milet, Didima, on Samos, in Phokaia etc. (Naumann, 216). From the Anatolian attestation the large Cybele cult-centre at Ephesos is noteworthy (Karweise

References Burow 1993 J. Burow, Durankulak. Vorbericht über die Kampanen 1991 und 1992. Archl. Anz. 1993, 333–345.

185

ANCIENT GREEK COLONIES IN THE BLACK SEA 2 Burow 1996 J. Burow, Durankulak. Vorbericht über die Kampanen 1993 bis 1995. Archl. Anz. 1996, 426–441. Burow 2003 J. Burow, Eine ungewöhnliche Terrakotte aus Durankulak. Thracia Pontica V/2, 2003. In Honorem M. Lazarov, 49–55. Burow/Todorova 2006 J Burow, H. Todorova, Die Befunde aus der Umgebung des Höhlenheiligtums. –In: Todorova (Edit.), Durankulak III. Die hellenistischen Befunde. DAI Berlin, Sofia 2006. Burkert 1987 W. Burkert, Ancient Mystery Cults. Cambridge– Massachusetts–London 1987. Kallatis 1980 Kallatis. Führer des Museums von Mangalia. Constanţa 1980. Karwiese 1995 S. Karwiese. Groß ist die Artemis von Ephesos. Die Geschichte einer der großen Städte der Antike. Wien 1995. Koukouli–Chryzantaki et al. 2006 Ch. Koukouli–Chryzantaki, H. Todorova, J. Aslanis, I. Vajsov, M. Valla, Promachon– Topolnitsa (A Greek–Bulgarian Archaeologikal Projekt). – In: M. Stefanovich, H. Todorova, G. Ivanov (Edits.). Struma/Strymon River Valley in Prehistory. Proceedings International Symposium ‘Strymon Praehistoricus’, 09.2004 Kjustendil–Blagoevgrad–Amphipolis. In the Steps of James Harvey Gaul 2, Gerda Henkel Foundation, Sofia 2006. Haspels 1971 E. Haspels. The Highlands of Phrygia. Sites and Monumentes I and II. New Jersy 1971. Mellaart 1967 J. Mellaart, Çatal Hüyük. Stadt aus der Steinzeit. Berg. Gladbach 1967. Naumann 1983 F. Naumann. Die Ikonographie der Kybele der Phrygischen und der griechischen Kunst. Istanbuler Mitteilungen Supl. 28, Tübingen 1983. Nilsson 1941 M. Nilsson. Geschichte der griechischen Religion I. –In: Handbuch der Altertumswissenschaft (Ed. W. Otto), München 1941. Oppermann 1984 M. Opperman, Thraker zwischen Karpatenbecken und Ägäis. Berlin 1984. Opperman 2004 M. Oppermann, Die westpontische Poleis und ihr indigenes Umfeld in vorrömischer Zeit. Schriften des Zentrums für Archäologie und Kulturgeschichte des Schwarzmeerraumes. Langenweißbach 2003. Parzinger 2004 H. Parzinger, Die Skyten. München 2004. Pauly der Neue 6 Der Neue Pauly. Enzyklopädie der Antike. H. Cancik, H. Schneider. Bd. 6, Stuttgart–Weimar 1999. Kybele 954–955. Pauly 1939 Paulys Real–Enzyklopädie der classischen Altertumswissenschaften, Stuttgart 1939. Opfer: Honig 584; Öl 585; Wein 586; Wolle 586; Früchte 587; Haus– und Wildtiere 585; Hunde 591; Pferde, Esel 592. Preller 1894 L. Preller. Theogonie und Goetter I, Berlin 1894. Škorpil 1913 V. V. Škorpil, Kybelin kult v Říši Bosporskej, Sbornik prací filosofickích dvornímu Radovi Prof. J. Kárlovi , Prag 1913, 190–203. Velkov/Tačeva 1973 V. Velkov, M. Tačeva–Hitova, Eléments orientau méditerranéen en Thace et Mésie. Bull. Internat .d`Etudes Sud-Est Europ. 11, 1973, 61–101. Vermaseren 1977a M. J. Vermaseren, Cybele and Attis, The Myth and the Cult, London 1977. Vermaseren 1977b M. J. Vermaseren, Corpus Cultus Cybelae Attidisque VII, Musea et Collect. privatae, Leiden 1977. M. Vermaseren 1982 M. J. Vermaseren, Corpus Cultus Cybelae Attidisque II, Greacia atque insulae, Leiden 1982. Vermaseren 1989 M. J. Vermaseren, Corpus Cultus Cybelae Attidisque VI, Germania, Raetia, Nordicum, Panonia, Dalmatia, Macedonia, Tharcia, Moesia, Dacia, Regnum Bospori, Colchis, Scythia et Sarmatia. Leiden–New York– Kopenhavn–Köln 1989.

Vajsov/Mavrov/ Todorova 2006 I. Vajsov, G. Mavrov, H. Todorova, Das hellenistische Höhlenheiligtum der Göttin Kybele. –In: Todorova (Edit.), Durankulak III. Die hellenistischen Befunde DAI Berlin, Sofia 2006. Oračev 1990 А. Oračev, Приноси към палеогеографията на Добруджанското крайбрежие. Сб. Добруджа 7, 1990. 32–52. (A. Oratshev, Prinosi kam paleogeografijata na dobrudzhanskoto krajbrezhie, Sb. Dobrudzha 7, 1990) Архитектура на Todorova 1989 Х. Тодорова, средновековното селище. –In: Дуранкулак І: Ранносредновековни обекти, София 1989, 29–110. (H. Todorova, Architektura na srednovekovnoto selishte. –In: Durankulak I, Rannosrednovekovni obekti, Sofia 1989).

THE HELLENISTIC POTTERY FROM THE BIG ISLAND (after Tzotchev 2006 –In: Todorova (Ed.) 2006 in press) Amphorae The amphora types from the Big Island are largely identical to those discovered at the pit field on the coast. The amphora finds from the island originate from various locations, mostly from the cave temple with its surroundings, from the small building for offerings, from a specific location underneath and outside the medieval fortification wall, from the well in trench K 20, and finally from surface finds well. Some of them carry indications of their place of origin. There are two stamps from Thasos (No 33 and 51 in Catalogue of Stamps) and eight from Sinope (No 1-3, 1315, 17, 21). Among the latter, five date to the second half of the 3rd c. BC. There are three stamps from Rhodes (No 54-56), which are contemporary to another three stamps from Heracleia Pontica (No 60, 62, 69). Finally, there are four more stamps of unknown provenance (No 74, 75, 79, 80). One of two completely preserved amphorae, found on the floor level outside the fortification wall in area Ж 20 (Todorova 1989, 50, 79 and Таb. XI), carries an unidentifiable Heracleian stamp on its neck (No 62). However, some of its features such as the name abbreviation and the relief letters against the negative flat stamp field resemble very much the late Heracleian production. In absolute terms it should be dated to the end of the fourth – the beginning of the third c. BC (Kac 2003, 271-273). The peculiar thing is that the amphora itself has somewhat clumsy proportions which are not typical at all for the Heracleian production of this period. The second complete amphora is not stamped, but is typologically comparable to the Chersonessian production from the 4th c. BC (Монахов 1999, 409, Таb. 182, 3; Monakhov/Rogov1990, 136-138, Tаb. 4, 22-25). In the small Building for Offerings, an upper part of a Thassian amphora with stamp on the handle was found, on which ‘K’ could be recognized (No. 74). However, since the inscriptions are largely worn off, it is included among the unidentifiable specimens in the catalogue. 186

HENRIETA TODOROVA: DURANKULAK - A TERRITORIUM SAKRUM OF THE GODDESS CYBELE Another somewhat peculiar shape was found on the floor of the cave temple, next to one of its walls. It is a slender and raised kantharos-shape, which seems to be characteristic for the late Hellenistic period of the Pontus area, thus probably also produced there (Coja/Dupont 1979, 12-13, Domăneanţu 1993, 61, №3; Božkova 1997, 9-11). This kantharos shape dates to the end of the 3rd and the first half of the 2nd c. BC. The proportions of Durankulak kantharoi relate to the advanced phase of its development, so they could be dated to the beginning of the 2nd c. BC (Parović-Pešikan1974, 76, Fig. 74, 5-6; 77, № 5-6; Božkova 1997, 10, Pl. I, Type 1.2). The use of these kantharoi probably marks the final phase of the functioning of the temple.

Most probably it has to be identified with the magistrate Κλειτος, who is one of the first showing such characteristics in the late style of the Thassian stamping. Avram dates this magistrate to the beginning of the last quarter of the 4th c. BC, whereas Debidour suggests alternative date, 15-20 years earlier (Debidour 1999, 8689). This find is particularly important for dating the construction of the Building for Offerings and possibly the entire complex to not later than the end of the third quarter of the 4th c. BC. There is one more stamped handle from the same building (No. 75), but it was not possible to identify its exact origin. Inside the well some characteristic shards such as the one of Heracleian amphora with englyphic stamp on the neck, or the Sinopean stamp with the astynom, Απολλόδωρος 3 Διοωυσίου, dating after Conovici to the end of the 4th3rd c. BC (Conovici 1998, 48) were found. The latest date for this stamp is 265 BC (Kac 2003, 273), which should indicate that the well functioned already in the second quarter of the 3rd c. BC.

There is yet another variation of the classical kantharos type, which still cannot be assigned to a particular production centre. Rotroff (2002) calls it ‘Hellenistic small angular kantharos’. It is decorated with the usual olive wreath around its neck. The body is bulgy and Sshaped. The rim averts and the handles are decorated with knobbed decoration. It represents supposedly an Anatolian shape, since it is much closer the Pergamon types than to the proper Attic ones (Rotroff 2002, 100). This type of kantharoi is often found in offering deposits (Rotroff 2002, 103).

The remaining amphora finds discovered on the island are very fragmented. Altogether three Heracleian stamps were found dating to the end of the 4th – the first half of the 3th c. BC. One of them has an inscription – ΑΡΙСΤΟ|ΚΡΑΤΕΟΣ. That stamp has parallels on a handle from Tir and in Elisavetinskoe, where it is dated to the eighties-seventies of the 3rd c. BC (Monakhov 2002, 175–176). Stamp No. 56, found on the surface, was on the handle of an amphora of the ‘Islam Geaferka’ type. In the initial publication it is erroneously identified as originating from Rhodes (Melamed 1987, 84, II, 1), which is further repeated in the present catalogue. If one adds the amphorae of ‘Islam Geaferka’ type found at Durankulak to the eighteen pieces known from the eponymous site in neighbouring Rumania, it emerges that the coast of Dobrudzha marks the highest concentration of amphorae of this interesting type.

There is a single small base of a cup-kantharos which finds its best parallels among shapes Nos. 70 and 73 after Rotroff (2002), who dates them to the 3rd c. BC. Plates (Fig. 27) Plates comprise the most popular shape among the black varnish pottery from Durankulak. With only a few exceptions they fall within the early Hellenistic repertoire of fishplates, having their best parallels among the Attic production from the end of the 4th – first half of the 3rd c. BC (Rotroff 1997, № 712–718). Some of the shapes discovered, such as a find from pit No 33, however, could be dated somewhat earlier, to the 4th c. BC. It is indicated by some of its attributes such as the very thick walls with sharply folded rim, as well as the slightly convex base on the inner site (Rotroff 1997, 147–148). This shape has its representatives both on the island and in the pit field on the coast.

BLACK VARNISHED POTTERY Kantharoi (Fig. 25 and 26) The kantharos was the most popular drinking cup in the Hellenistic period and this is clearly attested among the finds from Durankulak. With several exceptions, all the finds follow the classic form with a straight rim. The outer surface could be smooth or rippled. Some pieces are decorated with popular west slope motives such as olive- or ivy wreaths painted on the neck. The shapes follow closely the Athenian models, suggesting that they were most likely imported. In other cases, it is possible to observe less precise manufacture. Some red varnish vessels display Λ-shaped decoration instead of rippling, which is very often the case in the northern and northwestern Black sea region, obviously characteristic for the local production (Hannestad et al 2002, 128).

One fragment displays the typical impressed decoration on the inner side, which is typical for the rolled rim plates. Similar shapes are found in pits. All shapes found in Durankulak follow the same decorative tendency with somewhat free and less precise execution starting after 275 BC (Rotroff 1997, 143). PLAIN GREY WARE This is the most popular ware in Durankulak assemblages (Burow 1997a). The clay is relatively fine, but contrary to the fine wares it often contains bigger temper particles and cavities. The vessels are well baked but their walls 187

ANCIENT GREEK COLONIES IN THE BLACK SEA 2 are thicker than those of the fine wares. Sometimes colouration spots and red surfaces can be observed. Usually there is no slip or if there is any, it is very thin, negligibly applied and flakes off easily. A considerable degree of use-wear is to be observed on most of the vessels and so it seems that they were in use for considerable time before being ritually consecrated.

Conclusions The pottery finds from the Big Island set the general temporal framework for the functioning of the cave temple of Cybele, starting sometime in the third quarter of the fourth and ending in the first quarter of the second century BC. However, these dates should not be accepted without caution because the finds often display considerable rate of use-wear, which could indicate considerably long use-life before their ultimate consecration and deposition in Durankulak. This must have been particularly the case, as much as the amphorae are concerned. Thus especially the date proposed for the beginning of the ritual activity in the temple cannot be regarded as ultimately fixed.

Jugs Two complete jugs were discovered in the well (Burow 1996, 436-437). One of them belongs to the local knobbed-handle jugs, which is characteristic for the north-western Pontic area (Božkova 1997, 13-14, Type VI). It was most possibly manufactured in Histria. Typical for these jugs is the rim is cut at the joint with the handle, whereas the handle itself carries a flat button or a small knob. However, botton-handled jugs are also known, the rim of which is not cut out.

References Božkova 1997 A.Božkova, A Pontic Group of the Hellenistic Age (A Survey Based on Examples from the Bulgarian Black Sea Coast). Arch. Bulgarica I/2, 1997, 8-17. Bucovală 1967. M. Bucovală, Necropole elenistice la Tomis, Constanţa 1967. Burow 1996 J. Burow, DURANKULAK. Vorbericht über die Kampanen 1993 bis 1995. Arch. Anz. 1996, 426-441. Burow 1997a J. Burow, Hellenistische Keramik in Durankulak (Bulgarien) Δ’επιστημονικη σγναντηση για τηε ελληνικη κεραμικη. Χρονολογικα προβληματα κλειστα σινολα – εργαστηρια. Πρακτικα, Αthen 1997, 135–137, Tabl. 103– 108. Coja 1986 M. Coja, Les centres de Produktion amphorique identifiés à Istria pontique. –In: J.–Y. Empereur, Y. Garlan (eds.), Recherches sur les Amphores greques. Bull. de Corresp. Hell., Suppl.13, Paris 1986, 417–450. Coja/Dupont 1979 M. Coja, P. Dupont, Ateliers céramiques. Histria V. Bucureşti 1979. Debidour 1999 M. Debidour, Kleitos, un magistrat thasien attesté sur les rives de la Mer Noire. –In: Production et commerce des amphores anciennes en Mer Noire. (Ed. Y. Garlan). Aix–en–Provence 1999, 81–89. Domăneanţu 1993 C. Domăneanţu, Un sanctuaire hellénistique du site de Nuntaşi II. Dacia XXXVII, 1993, 59–78 Hannestad et al. 2002 L. Hannestad, V.F. Stolba, H.B. Hastrup, Black–Varnish, Red–Figure and Grey Ware Pottery.- In: L. Hannestad, V.F. Stolba, A.N. Šceglov (eds.). Archaeological Investigations in Western Crimea, Panskoye I. Vol. 1, The Monumental Building U 6. Aarh. Univ. Press 2002, 128–149. Kac 2003 V.I. Kac, A New Chronology for the Ceramic Stamps of Herakleia Pontika. –In: P.G. Bilde, J.M. Højte, V.F. Stolba (eds.) The Cauldron of Ariantas. Studies presented to A.N. Ščeglov on the occasion of his 70th birthday. Black Sea Studies1. Aarh. Univ. Press 2003. Kašaev 2002 S.V.Kašaev, Commonware. –In: L. Hannestad, V.F. Stolba, A.N. Ščeglov (eds.). Archaeological Investigations in Western Crimea, Panskoye I. Vol. 1, The Monumental Building U6. Aarh. Univ. Press 2002, 150– 179. Oppermann 1984 M. Opperman, Thraker zwischen Karpatenbecken und Ägäis. Berlin 1984. Rotroff 1997 S.I. Rotroff, Hellenistic pottery: Athenian and Imported Wheelmade Table Ware and Related Material. Athenian Agora 29, Princeton 1997.

One of the most popular shapes to be found in the pits, the jug with heavy body and highly pronounced handles, finds no counterparts among the finds from the island. These jugs are very popular in the North Pontic region and particularly typical for Chersonessos, which was probably their main production centre (Kašaev 2002, 152, № 16-18; Zolotarev 2004, 197; 207, fig. 9). Bowls All types of bowls find their counterparts both on the Big Island and in the pit field area. They are all locally produced and described in greater detail by Burow (1997, 136, Tab. 105 106 und 107). Plates Grey fishplates were very popular in the Pontic area, so it seems that they were produced in regional workshops (Hannestad et al, 131; Božkova 1997, 13). The local production displays some details that distinguish it from the Attic production. For instance, a plate found in the well has a straight horizontal rim instead of the standard everted one. However, among the finds from the pit field there were exact copies of the Attic shapes. Chitrias (Fig.28) The typical shape is the cooking pot with heavy proportions, s-shaped profile and particular shape of the rim, which is designed to hold a lid. There are two such finds with differently shaped handles found in the cave temple. Both of them find their parallels among the finds from the pit field, as well as in the pottery assemblages from the entire Black Sea region (Kašaev 2002, 152, № C 126, C 132; Zolotarev 2004, 213, Fig. 15). Fragments of lids designed to cover such vessels were found in votive pits.

188

HENRIETA TODOROVA: DURANKULAK - A TERRITORIUM SAKRUM OF THE GODDESS CYBELE Rotroff 2002 S.I. Rotroff, West slope in the east. –In: F. Blonde, P. Ballet, J.–F. Salles (eds), Céramiques hellénistiques et romaines, «productions et diffusion en Méditerranée orientale (Chypre, Egypte et côte syro– palestinienne), Princeton 2002. Tzotchev 2006 Ch. Tzotchev, Die hellenistische Keramik von der Großen Insel. –In: Todorova (Edit.), Durankulak III, Die hellenistischen Befunde. DAI Berlin, Sofia 2006 Zolotarev 2004 M.I. Zolotarev, A Hellenistic ceramic deposit from the north–eastern trench of Chersonesos. –In: Chronologies of the Black Sea Area in the Period 400–100 BC Black Sea Studies 3 (Eds.V. Stolba, L.Hannestad). Aarh. Univ. Press 2004. Melamed 1987 К. Melamed, Амфорни печати от Големия остров и ‘Нивата’ край село Дуранкулак, Толбухински окръг. Сб. Добруджа 4, 1987, 83–86. (Melamed, Amforni petshati ot Golemija ostrov kray selo Durankulak, Tolbuchinski okrag. Sb. Dobrudzha 4, 1987) Monakhov 1999 С.Ю. Монахов. Греческие амфоры в Причерноморье. Комплексы керамичечкой тары VІІ–ІІ веков до н.э., Саратoв 1999. (Monachov, Gretsheskie amfory v Prtshcernomorye. Komplexy keramitsheskoy try VII-II vekov do n.e., Saratov 1999) Monakhov 2002 С.Ю. Монахов, Поздние серии гераклейских амфор (конца IV–первой трети III в. до н. э.). Античний мир и археология 11, Саратов 2002, 167– 177. (Monachov, Pozdnye serii geraklejskych amfor (konca IV – pervoj treti III v. do n.e), Antitshnyj mir i arheologija 11, Saratov 2002) Monakhov/Rogov1990 С.Ю. Монахов, Е.Я. Рогов. Амфоры некрополя Панское Ι. Античний мир и археология 7. Саратов 1990, 128–153.(Monachov/Rogov, Amfory nekropolja Panskoe 1. Antitshnyj mir i arheologija 7, Saratov 1990) Parović-Pešikan1974 M. Парович–Пешикан, Некрополь Ольвии эллинистического времени. Киев 1974.( Parovitsh-Peshikan, Nekropol Olvii ellinistittsheskovo vremeni, Kiev 1974) Todorova 1989 Х. Todorova (ed.) Дуранкулак І: Ранносредновековни обекти. БAH, София 1989 (Todorova, Durankulak I, Rannosrednovekovni obekti, BAS, Sofia 1989).

offering places, which one would normally expect to be placed rather in the centre of the open-air ceremonial area and not on its fringe. Altogether, 91 pits were excavated, 71 of them certainly of Hellenistic date. Their number could possibly increase by adding another 12, which cannot be precisely dated. In the fill of pit No. 6A a single find from the Early Iron Age was found. Five pits contained medieval pottery and therefore they should be associated with the medieval necropolis from the 10th c. AD, which partly overlaps the area of the pit field. The remaining pits cannot be dated. It proved also hard to recognize some kind of a pattern in the spatial distribution – pits big and small, rich and poor in finds were placed right next to each other. Only very rarely they intersect each other, which suggests that there must have been some kind of markers on the surface indicating their position. Some of the isolated structures in the southern area – Nos.152, 153, and 154 – attract particular interest. Feature No.152 is referred to as the big ‘amphora heap’ and No.154 – as ‘the big, empty ash heap’. However, greater detail will be given with the description of the offering places. The offering places Offering place A (Fig. 29) This is an elongated, stone construction oriented along the north/south axis. A stone wall closes it to the north, whereas its southern part is paved with large stone slabs. There it ends in oval shape having concave inclination towards its centre. The offering place extends from trench 2 Ш/Щ, until areas 9 Г/Д. It is 8.5 m long, with preserved width measuring four meters. The pavement inclines slightly southwards, the level of the oval at the southern end being 0.95 m deeper than on the northern side. All the slabs were laid directly on the ancient surface. Their size varies considerably. In the southern part, they measure 1.20 x 0.75 m, being 8-12 cm thick, while in the northern part they are much more moderate in size, 0.30-0.40 m across and 6-8 cm thick. The northern half of the pavement is surrounded by some construction of irregular stones. To the north and to the west it is 1.10 m wide, to the east it is slightly thinner, 1m. This structure could be seen as a foundation on top of which were placed relatively big stone blocks, such as five preserved in situ at the north-eastern corner. The height of the blocks reaches 65 cm; the width they span is 70-80 cm and it is possible to expect that they were supporting a raised wall. On the other hand, the numerous iron nails discovered suggest the existence of some kind of wooden structure, possibly some kind of roof. However, this wall could not have extended for more than two meters westwards since the paved floor there covers the inner side of the base. It could not be determined whether the pavement extended beyond the preserved length of the wall base, as possibly indicated by the first bigger slabs on the western side.

The Field of the votive pits (after Burow 2006) Location The Big Island with its Hellenistic cave temple is located in the western part of the lake (Map A). Some 300 m to the southwest of it, on a gently inclined slope of the south-eastern coast of the lake facing the sea, a field of votive pits is located. It overlaps the north-western area of the prehistoric necropolis and is located in trenches 24, 9-10, and 17. Its trench measures 50 x 50 m following the cardinal directions. Three more pits were located beyond the limits of the field to the south. In the southwestern part of the field several loci for votive activities were discovered. The topsoil in the adjacent areas was removed to check the possible existence of other features. The pottery finds from the surface contained exclusively imported Hellenistic wares and absolutely none of the local ‘Thracian’ coarse wares. No structures from the Hellenistic period were found however. This is particularly noteworthy for the area to the west of the 189

ANCIENT GREEK COLONIES IN THE BLACK SEA 2 amphora fragments, making up the highest percentage of the finds, were processed in a similar way.

The oval part of the structure was built of moderately sized slabs inclining towards the center. It reaches 2.30 m along the axis but it should be noted that two slabs on the south-western end have collapsed. In the centre of the oval platform a 35 cm thick ashy layer containing pottery fragments was discovered. The surface of the slabs shows clear indication of firing in situ.

Upon the completion of the excavation work at Offering place A, there were additionally set testing trenches at two locations on the western edge of the structure, where peculiar denudations of the terrain could be observed. The initial consideration was that they could have indicated some more pits, although there was obviously no stone sealing atop. As the excavations proceeded, it soon became clear that some other kind of structures must have stood there.

Numerous pottery fragments were also registered on the paved floor and around it. They are mostly parts of amphorae, grey and red Hellenistic wares. This assemblage provided 31 amphora handles, some carrying stamps from Sinope and Thasos, dating to 290-280 BC, thus closely matching the material filling the pits. The plate fragments are by far most numerous, followed by jugs. The most characteristic among the latter have rippled necks, light coloured slip on the rim or very fine dark-brown slip, as observed on a shoulder piece with a very slender neck, which can be assigned to the category of fine ware. Besides, there should be noted some rimand wall fragments of bowls. On the floor within the enclosed space, pieces were also found belonging to at least three different vessels from the repertory of the coarse ‘Thracian’ ware. One has a distinguished relief decoration and discoid handle; the other two have horseshoe-shaped handles.

Offering place B About 1m to the south of the north-western corner of the Offering place A a slight depression was observed. It was deforming the line of the western wall next to the pavement, which sank at this place. On the plan it is indicated as feature No.149. After the foundation of the stones of the enclosure wall and the pavement slabs were removed, an elongated area with distinct coloration appeared. It measured 1.70 m in the North/South axis and 2.80 m East/West. Its limits were blurred and not easy to detect precisely except for its northern end where a row of stones was found. The soil was extremely rich in ashes and there were clearly distinguishable spots with concentrations of charcoal. Sterile soil was reached only at depth of 0.50 m. This seems to indicate that the place must have functioned as an unpaved precursor of the later platform. The associated assemblage consists exclusively of pottery shards, fragmented bones and multiple fragments of votive dishes. Most numerous among the pottery finds were the amphora fragments, among them big wall fragments and feet sometimes displaying yellow residue. The remaining finds comprise fragments of red and grey wares, one black varnish piece of kantharois and fragments of at least two ‘Thracian’ coarse vessels. Among the bone remains bones of a horse, cattle, sheep, goat, and pig could be recognized. There were also numerous cranial fragments, but with two exceptions the bones did not display any burning traces.

A long curved iron knife was found on the paved floor, to the west of it – a spearhead, and to the north of the blocks at the north-eastern corner a small javelin head. As already mentioned, numerous iron nails complement the metal finds. The pavement and the foundation of the enclosing wall must have remained completely underground in medieval times, since not a single shard from this period was found, in spite of the immediate proximity of the medieval necropolis. No doubt, the most prominent part of the entire structure is its oval platform, although the number of recovered finds is quite modest – few pottery shards and bone fragments, as well as small fragments of offering plates. Curiously, a base of a jug and a rim of a plate find their exact counterparts in pits No 14 and 59, as well as in No 33. This could only mean that these two vessels were broken at the oval platform and some pieces were further deposited in different pits, whereas others remained. As long as fire played a considerable role, it could be assumed that the ritual activity was mostly related to fire sacrifices. The offerings must have been brought on big offering plates and thrown together into the fire.

Offering place C: The Altar Platform As the excavations of the stone structure on the northern side of the Offering place B advanced, it turned out that it extends not only downwards but also northwards to form a rectangular platform placed right under Offering place A. Its upper surface is located 15 cm underneath the foundation stones of the enclosure wall. To the east they missed each other by 20 cm, whereas its northern edge follows exactly the course of the northern enclosure wall of Offering place A. The base of this ‘platform’ is laid with six rows of stones. The uppermost had some bigger slabs and displayed clear burning traces. At its maximal span from east to west, the structure reached 2.10 m and 1 m in a north-south direction. Its height reaches 1m, but the stone structure tapered downwards on the eastern side and even more on the western one. Since the slabs of the

During the processing of the pottery finds, it was discovered that there were numerous matches between shards found at the offering places and in various pits. All the fine pottery fragments, as well as the red and grey wares, were carefully studied for matching counterparts. It turned out that 30% of the Hellenistic pits contained parts of the same vessels. The number of the cross links could have been certainly somewhat higher, if all the

190

HENRIETA TODOROVA: DURANKULAK - A TERRITORIUM SAKRUM OF THE GODDESS CYBELE (Offering place G), as well as No.154 in trench 17 Д/2 (Offering place F).

uppermost layer and the one underneath were raised and would not remain in place without support, it should be expected that the lower part of the construction was placed in a natural depression of the terrain. Such assumption is further supported by the stratigraphic observations on the deposition pattern of the ashy heap leaning towards it to the south. In depth it was in contact only with the upper three layers of stones before reaching sterile terrain. During the process of removal of the stones, only five pottery shards were registered, an elongated lead piece with a groove, and a few bone fragments. The soil below the stones had dark colouration and a fatty consistence, similar to the one described for the pits of Type 3. Seemingly, the rainwater or other liquids transported ashes and charcoal between the stones.

Votive pits All of the pits were dug in the yellowish loess. Therefore, irrelevant to the actual composition of their deposit – whether organic remains or stones – their filling has contrasting appearance against the light coloured soil. This made the recognition of their borders relatively easy, both at the opening as well as at the bottom. In most cases the rim the pits were sealed with a stone slab that also proved a useful indicator during the excavation work. The model shape of most votive pits closely resembles that of a pear. Their broadest part is located just above the pit floor, whereas upwards the diameter gradually diminishes. There are also some pits, which are cylindrical in shape. The floor was often covered with thin but even layer of ashes with the notable exception of the stone-filled pits. The ash layer has an extremely fine consistence, without solid charcoal particles. Thus it seems thet it must have been composed of burned grass, reed or hay. As a rule, two or three stones were placed in the very centre, or the entire floor would be paved with stone slabs. The stones are identical with the local limestone bedrock. Normally those slabs bear clear firing traces on the lower side, indicating that they must have been placed in the pit before the extinguishing of the fire. The basic criterion for distinguishing among varieties of pits is the composition of their filling or their internal structure. Accordingly they could be classified as follows:

At the south-western corner a small pit was discovered, which was partly covered by the stone ‘platform’ and therefore must have been constructed at an earlier date. It is 60 cm deep and ca. 45 cm in diameter. The finds comprised mostly of pottery shards, identical to the filling of the remaining pits. However, among them, there was one piece decorated with brown and white stripes, with parallels among the shards coming from the platform. It provides an indication that the filling of the pit and the construction of the platform were closely related events. Offering place D Another dark coloured spot, No.151 has elongated oval shape but its limits could not be set absolutely precisely. It extends below the paved platform of Offering place A to the east. Its maximum dimensions reach 1.50 x 1m, being 60 cm deep. The filling contained a concentration of ashes, as well as numerous amphora fragments including big pieces displaying traces of fire. Red and grey wares, fine ware and multiple wall fragments of the ‘Thracian’ coarse ware, as well as plentiful animal bones were found. Similar to the ashy heap on its northern side, numerous small fragments of offering plates were also found. The metal finds comprise an iron nail head together with various minor iron pieces and a small fragment of a mirror. Again, this must have functioned as an earlier open-space place for votive activities and so is referred to as Offering place D.

Type 1 – pear-shaped pits filled with soil and ashes (Fig.30). The most common type has a pear shape with max height 1.6m and diameter 1.3m. Numerous filling layers with varying thickness and consisting of soil and ashes in various proportions could be recognised, sometimes including single stones as well. The rim of the pits is constructed of big stone slabs, often inclining inwards. Presumably heaps of smaller stones were piled both for sealing the opening and indicating the location of the pits. Upon the eroding of the loess rims of the pits, the slabs inclined inwards, thus resulting in the conical appearance of the upper parts, also making way for the penetration of the marker stones inside the pits.

The above described stone structures could be interpreted as altars. The traces of tire indicate burning sacrifices. After the ceremonies the charred remains were swept aside, together with the broken vessels, the animal bones and the remaining votive objects, to make space for the following procedures. At a somewhat later point all the remains must have been secondarily deposited in the surrounding pits.

Type 2 – pear-shaped pits filled with soil, ashes and stone slabs (Fig.31). These follow closely the characteristics of the previously described type, the principal difference being that there is a layer of stone slabs around the mid-height dividing the fill in two. Two varieties of the main type could be recognised. Var. 2a – there is a concentration of ashes right below two stone slabs set on top of each other. They lay in an ashy layer covering the clay floor. The latter shows firing traces, indicating burning in situ before

Other features that could possibly be interpreted as offering places are the big ashy heap No.152 in trench 17 Б/4 (Offering place E), No.153 in trench 17 Ж/3 191

ANCIENT GREEK COLONIES IN THE BLACK SEA 2 votive pit of type 3a is unique and must have been constructed by someone with considerably high social status or probably in the name of the town of Kallatis. As a contrasting example, one could consider the pits of type 4, certainly representing private dedications to the Goddess performed by single individuals.

laying the stone slabs. Var. 2b – the stones are set next to each other and the firing took place on their top as indicated by the firing traces on their upper surface and a layer of ash. Thus, it could be generally concluded that multiple fire offerings took place in the same pits. Type 3 – stone-filled pits (Fig.32). This pit type is also of the same pear-shaped form, but but contrary to the previously described types, the filling is exclusively composed of stones. Their height ranges from 0.5-3m, max diameter reaching 2m. Sometimes, at the lower edge of the pits, vertically set big slabs and irregular stones were placed. The walls are so well set that there is only a limited possibility for retaining pottery shards. In a single case, on the pit floor, a small heap was found – ca. 40 cm high – composed of clayish ash, burned bones and very small pottery fragments. On top of it a dressed round stone, 65 cm in diameter was placed. The pit was otherwise completely stacked with stones. Particularly characteristic for this kind of pits is their considerable height and width, as well as their stone covered walls. Upon the completion of the offering practices, the opening of the pit would be covered with a big rounded stone, which was the first to fall inside after the erosion of the rim, followed by the marking heap on the top, eventually resulting in the complete filling of the pit with stones. The latter provided the support needed for retaining the stone construction of the walls.

The filling of votive pits Most of the votive pits contained layers of ashes and soil of varying thickness, colouration or concentration of ashes, as well as some small finds of clay and other materials. There are cases in which pieces of the same vessel are registered in the upper, as well as in the lower levels of a single pit. This should probably indicate that the process of depositing the remains from the offerings executed at the offering areas, took place in separate but chronologically closely related phases. The concentration of finds in the filling of the pits varies considerably. Types 1 and 2 usually provided considerably more finds than the stone-filled pits of type 3, or the modest representatives of type 4. However, there are clearly recognisable differences in the concentrations of finds also among the first two types, some being considerably better furnished with finds than others. At least 70 of the total of 91 votive pits contained enough characteristic finds to allow the determination of the usetime of the entire complex strictly to the Hellenistic period. The pottery finds are the most numerous of all the finds documented in all types of votive pits. The amphorae are the best represented finds in the assemblage, making up to 50– 60% of the entire material. Some of the handle- or neck fragments carry stamps indicating that they originated mostly from Thasos, Rhodes, Sinope, Chersonessos, Kos and Heracleia Pontica. They also provide a secure chronological framework for the period between 290-260 BC.

Stone-filled pits are undoubtedly the most representative structures of the entire complex, therefore the absence of usual archaeological finds cannot be taken as indication for poorer character of their offerings. It seems far more likely that the offering made use of archaeologically nondetectable remains, e.g. liquids, intestines, or carefully chosen meat portions without bones, textiles, leather objects, furs, wax, honey, wool, incense, fruits, etc. Type 4 These are the smallest pits. They reach not more than 3040 cm in height and contain only limited numbers of pottery shards and ashes that were sequentially covered with stones of varying size. Obviously the latter marked the end phase of their use.

Sometimes on the neck and shoulder fragments graffiti and dipintae (?) are also found, most often containing a single letter or two connected through ligature. The plain ware makes up one third of the pottery material. The occurrence of fine wares, mostly imported, as well as the ‘Thracian’ coarse ware (Fig. 33) should also be noted, both having equal, 5% share of the total assemblage. The amphora fragments and the various plain and fine wares appear in all filling layers. The ‘Thracian’ coarse bowls, on the contrary are exclusively found on the pit floor and even more in its centre. Although the vessels in question were always broken, it must be noted that they were also almost completely preserved with all their parts. This could possibly mean that on the contrary to the remaining wares, they were intentionally offered and deposited on the floor of the pit together with their presumable contents. It should also be noted that the ‘Thracian’ coarse ware is registered almost exclusively inside the votive pits unlike the remaining wares often documented in the areas adjacent to the offering platforms as well. This obviously ritual practice contrasts with the usual

*** Seemingly all the various pit types were designed to serve one and the same purpose, both as a stage and as receptacles of offerings dedicated to the Mother-Earth. With minor variations their construction follows an identical scheme – they were all dug out in the loess sediment in a pear shape, showing firing traces on the floor, and containing ash layers with remains of offering plates. They were covered with small heaps of earth and stones, which marked their exact location. So, they must reflect consistently structured and performed offering practices. The differences are mostly quantitative with reference to their dimensions and execution. The latter would reflect in turn the occasion, the number of dedicators and the expectations from the Goddess. The 192

HENRIETA TODOROVA: DURANKULAK - A TERRITORIUM SAKRUM OF THE GODDESS CYBELE pits were ‘purified’ by lighting fire at the bottom and paving it at least partially with stones. Sometimes the filling of the pits was preceded by the consecration of a ‘Thracian’ coarse vessel at the pit floor. The vertical subdivision of the pits of type 2 in two parts by setting slabs at their mid-height indicates that another intermediate offering took place before the final filling. Judging by the presence of fragmented offering plates, they must have played a significant role in all performed rituals. In some cases complete vessels and amphorae containing oil were also found. The burnt organic residue on the floor of some pits could also indicate that either some of the contents of the oil carrying amphorae were poured or that animal fats or intestines were burned. Upon the end of the ceremonies, the pits were often sealed with big stone slabs, covered by some marker standing above the surface.

case of breaking the remaining ware categories at the offering place. The fragments of offering plates are also quite numerous. They could be found in almost every pit. They were made of clay richly tempered with organics. Such plates have varying thicknesses but most of them have halfround pittings, ca. 1cm in diameter, on their lower side, as well as patchy traces of intensive firing on the upper side. As much as the manufacture procedure could be reconstructed, these offering plates were made of reed shafts placed next to each other and covered by organic tempered clay, only the edges being carefully modelled by hand. They were left to dry in the sun and only superficially baked in open fire. In most cases, they are so heavily fragmented that it would be hardly possible to tell anything about their size were it not for two specimens with completely preserved outlines. Their dimensions were 60x50cm. In these cases, the edges appear thicker and raised on the sides. The black firing traces on the upper surface certainly indicate that something was burned on them before they were used and broken. Since the firing traces are exclusively located on the upper surface, they could not have been used to cover small oven or hearths. Rather, it must be accepted that these served as offering plates manufactured at the spot for some particular purpose.

One could consider where the fire offering place, the remains of which were deposited in the excavated votive pits was located. Regarding the considerable number of simultaneously used pits, it could hardly be accepted that the offering platform A was the sole offering place. Hence, one needs to consider other structures for complementary offering purposes. One such place could be the big ‘ash spot’, located in the southern part of the pit-field, No. 154 on the plan. It was excavated at the end of the 1980s and could not be properly identified then. Now, it is referred to as Offering place F. The field notes document only that voluminous ashy deposits were discovered lacking indication of the recovery of any small finds. A certain relationship to the ‘big amphora heap’ referred to also as structure No. 152 or offering place E cannot be ruled out. Seemingly related to the latter two features could also possibly be the circular structure No. 153, i.e. offering place G, which seems otherwise somewhat isolated on the southern periphery of the pit field. At this location, three various intact vessels were found – a balsamarium, a varnished plate and one thymiaterium, as well as three more fragments of the common grey ware.

Interpreting the votive pits and the offering places From comparative field experience, one could expect that pits could function as waste bins, receptacles for pottery containers or even as dug-out houses. The abovedescribed features on the contrary show completely different concept of use. The consistently repetitive internal structure of the pits, having thin ash layers on their floor, which was covered with stone slabs or simply with big stones in the centre of the floor; stone levels at the mid-height covered with ashes or alternatively, the wedged slabs sealing another layer; as well as the composition of the finds and the representative stone structure at the opening, all obviously indicate that these pits must have had some special, possibly ritual function. They form an entire complex together with the places for offerings to the west of the pit field.

Certain offering place in the immediate proximity of the Temple on the Big Island was also registered. So, one should possibly assume that in fact there were a number of ceremonies taking place at the same time at different locations, especially when ceremonial processions with numerous participants were performed.

The chronological sequence in the establishment of this offering complex could be reconstructed as follows. First, the offering places B and D started functioning as open space loci without any formal structures, starting sometime at the end of the fourth – early third century BC. At somewhat later period a rectangular stone structure, interpreted as formal altar, referred to as offering platform C was build. The structure which was built last was the oval fireplace No. 122, referred to also as the oval platform.

The offering places and the votive pits as a complex The processing of the pottery finds reveals a very high occurrence of matching pottery shards, deposited in different pits thus establishing cross-links between more than 40% of the votive pits. Seemingly, this indicates that voluminous offering procedures were taking place at the same time.

Some pits had an extended period of use being filled more than once thus containing evidence for numerous ceremonies. Before depositing the sacrificial waste, the

The fact that the offerings to Cybele are deposited in votive pits indicates that the Goddess was venerated in 193

ANCIENT GREEK COLONIES IN THE BLACK SEA 2 the cave temple wherefrom the image of the goddess must have been annually taken to the water to be washed and clad in new splendid clothes. A new make-up must have also been applied before it was brought back to the temple. The mysteries must have been accompanied by a lot of noise in the surrounding forest. In the meantime the temple personnel would have dug out the votive pits and prepared the needed slab stones, offering plates, and the ceremonial food, as well as the combustible materials, of course.

her Mother-Earth hypostasis. The large number of pits identical in contents and construction, which are found throughout the Balkan Peninsula sometimes as isolated features or organized as pit fields, certainly confirms the popularity of this cult. The construction of votive pits matching our Type 1 was documented in number of sites distributed from the northern parts of Romania to Turkey to the south. It seems that they are not strictly confined to the Black sea region, since we also find them in western Bulgaria and Romania (Sîrbu 1991, 41 ff.; Theodosiev 1994, 118). Contrastingly, we could not find any published parallels to our Types 2 – 4. It is noteworthy mentioning that during recent rescue excavations in the region of Stara Zagora in southern Bulgaria, a pit-field containing over 100 votive pits was discovered ranging in date from the late 4th to the mid. 3th c. BC. Their dimensions and small find assemblages comply with the practices already known from Durankulak. Find-rich as well as almost empty pits were recorded. What is particularly different in this case is that in one of the pits a skeleton of a young woman furnished with grave goods was discovered. The excavating archaeologist interprets it as a human offering, pointing out to the fact that the woman was killed with a big stone.

On the next day, the offering animals were slaughtered at the temple. Their blood must have been used for purifying purposes and dipping-in-blood related procedures as suggested by the containers, placed next to the altar in the southern part of the West Hall. Then, the slaughtered animals must have been brought outside for skinning and butchering. The fats and intestines were normally consecrated to the goddess. They must have been brought to the pits and deposited on the pit floor or even burned, which could well explain the fatty organic residue recorded in many of the pits. One could expect that the processions of the pilgrim groups took place on the following day. The offerings were assembled on the offering plates and taken by the procession to the offering place, where they were consecrated being thrown in fire. One such procedure is displayed on a painted image from Corinth. Not only the offering plates with various offerings are depicted, but also the offering place and the piles of offering waste scattered about it, as well as various participants.

Similar votive pits in Durankulak are also known from the Early Iron Age. What is even more peculiar, they are located in the same field, which raises the issue of the possible local origin of the cult of Mother-Earth, being already established before the Greek colonisation of the Pontus. The southwards bound connections on the other hand could well indicate certain level of contacts between Thrace and Anatolia in the period between 1100 and 900 BC. They are most explicitly documented through the range of parallels between Pshenichevo- and BabadagCultures on one hand and Troia VIIb horizon on the other. Thracian connection for this period is explicitly documented in Homer’s Iliad.

Seemingly, at first the offering remains were simply swept aside right after the extinguishing of the ceremonial fire in order to make place for the following ritual. Certain amounts of ashes and other remains must have been taken away on new offering plates, although a considerable number of fragments must have remained scattered around. So, they had the chance to mix up with fragments from the preceding and following offers before being swept and taken away at a later instance. This seems to be the most plausible scenario for explaining the matching pottery shards discovered both at the offering place and in number of closed structures, such as the sealed votive pits. Seemingly, this practice should be accepted as a norm in other areas as well. Following the preliminary publication of the votive pits from Durankulak (Burow 1997; Burow 2003), there were documented matching shards from discontinuous structures also at some other sites in Upper Thrace (Tonkova/Savatinov 2001, 117–121) and particularly from Plovdiv. Piling offering remains in the immediate vicinity of the places for offering seems also to be a widespread phenomenon on the Balkans.

References Burow 2006 J. Burow, Das Opfergrubenareal. –In: Todorova (Edit.), Durankulak III, Die hellenistischen Befunde. DAI Berlin, Sofia 2006.

AN ATTEMPT FOR RECONSTRUCTION OF THE OFFERING PRACTICES In our opinion, the offering ceremonies taking place at the temple on the Big Island, as well as at the offering place and votive pits on the coast could be reconstructed with certain probability as follows. The focal point of the cult was the spring mysteries of Cybele and Attis. At this part of the year, the temple must have attracted the highest number of visitors bringing all possible offering animals, donations, food and accessories. They must have camped somewhere in closer proximity. The central event must have been the ceremonies taking place around

To continue with our reconstruction of the ceremonial routine, the consecrated remains of the offerings, must have been collected at a certain point, loaded on offering plates and taken to the votive pits together with other 194

HENRIETA TODOROVA: DURANKULAK - A TERRITORIUM SAKRUM OF THE GODDESS CYBELE In general, it could be noted that the chronology of the amphora stamps discovered in the votive pits, match closely the peak of trade contacts in north-western Black Sea region during the period 281-270 BC, i.e. right after the death of Lysimachus (Oppermann 1984, 148). The large quantity of deposited amphorae also indicates intensified sea fare and trading activities along the western Black Sea coast at the same time.

food offerings, roasted meat, wine and oil, carried in amphorae and jugs. Without solid arguments, it could be tentatively suggested that the ‘Thracian’ bowls were used as containers for honey. Along the likely offerings of organic origin one could expect flowers, sometime arranged in wreaths, and other votive gifts. As the procession reached its destination, the pits must have been already purified with fire and possible consecrations of fats and/or intestines. Eventually, the fire must have extinguished after placing stones and offering plates over it. Then offerings and sometimes amphorae were also thrown in. The stratigraphic sequence in certain pits suggests that several such procedures took place after each other, being separated by layers of soil fill. Eventually, the narrow neck of the pear-shaped pits was covered with tree branches and stone slabs, which were then covered in turn by heaps of stones and earth. The intention of eventual closing of the opening of the pit could possibly explain their pear-shaped design that is largely facilitating it.

To the same period the highest number of visitors arriving at the Temple of Cybele is estimated. But this could have been influenced by the political situation at the time as well. However, tracing historical events in the archaeological record should only be pursued with utmost care. Along these lines, the Celtic invasion following the death of Lysimachus could have posed a certain menace not only to the local Thraco-Gettic communities but also to the population of the Greek colonies on the Pontus. This way one could also relate the increasing number of offerings to the growing need for seeking protection from the Goddess, not least especially in the occasional evidence for practicing human offerings.

The stratigraphy of the pit filling reflects the sequence of the above-described procedures, as well as certain postdepositional phenomena taking place after the sealing of the pit, such as the crumbling of the stone heaps in the partly empty space left after the close of some pits, or the penetration of black top soil, the disposition of some stone slabs from the covering, as well as the wedgeshaped counter-position of some bigger slabs towards the centre of the opening.

In a similar way, the noticeable decrease in the number of Thasian stamps after 260 BC should be influenced by the general disagreement between Kallatis and Byzantion over the control of the harbour of Tomis. In fact, the Thasian import started to loose its importance in the region already by the mid-third century BC, gradually coming to an end soon after (Oppermann 1984, 238). Similarly, the Thasian stamps disappear completely in Durankulak by 260 BC. Nevertheless, this did not affect much the importance and the frequency of ceremonial activities taking place there well until the close of the century.

Some of the votive pits however were constructed differently. Their inner walls were supported by stone blocks thus making up a domed construction. The construction of the dome must have collapsed first, providing the support needed to retain at least the stone construction of the lower portion of the wall. None of the pits have shown any traces of robbing. From this fact it could be deduced that normally the votive offerings were damaged to such an extent that made them of no interest even to the ancient plunderers.

References Oppermann 1984 M. Oppermann, Thraker zwischen Karpatenbecken und Ägäis. Berlin 1984. Teodosiev 1994 N. Teodosiev, Thracian tumulus near the town of Kavarna. – In: Култура и религия в северна Тракия, Хелис III/1, 1994, 101-120.( – In: Kultura i religija v severna Trakyja, Helios III/1, 1994) Tonkova/Savatinov 2001 M. Tonkova, S. Savatinov, Thracian Culture of the Late Iron Age. Maritsa-Iztok Archaelogical Research 5, 2001, 95–126. Todorova 2006 H. Todorova, Ein Rekonstruktionversuch des Verlaufs der Opferpraktiken und einige historische Aspekte. –In: Todorova (Edit.), Durankulak III, Die hellenistischen Befunde. DAI Berlin, Sofia 2006.

Amphorae of various origins were found in many of the pits. One could thus assume that a considerable variety of wine with distinguished provenance was consecrated. Of course, this could only prove true, given the amphorae still contained their original contents. The observation that the stamped amphorae from Rhodes were exclusively discovered at the cave temple of Cybele on the Big Island could possibly suggest that particularly the expensive Rhodian wines were destined for certain offerings, taking place only at the cave temple. As much as the votive pits containing amphorae of single provenance are concerned – e.g. pits No 6, 8, 139, etc. – one can assume that they were offerded by the crew or the owner of a ship distributing wine from Thasos or Sinope.

THE AMPHORA-STAMPS FROM DURANKULAK (Fig. 34) To date, in Durankulak, 84 Amphorae stamps have been found (4 of which are now not traceable) (Burow et all. 2006). Seventy are datable: with five exceptions they date to the first half of the 3rd c. BC, one stamp appears to be slightly earlier and four date to the second half of 195

ANCIENT GREEK COLONIES IN THE BLACK SEA 2 the 3rd c. BC. The handle stamps come from Sinope (24 pieces), Thasos (28 pieces), Rhodos (5 pieces), Chersonessos (2 pieces), Herakleia Pontica (10 pieces) and Kos (1 piece). The origin of 10 amphorae stamps are not to be assertained with any degree of certainty.

Πύθης The astymon Αττάλος belongs to group 4 after Conovici (ca. 279-258 ). The astymon appears on stamps from Kallatis and Histria (Gramatopol/Poenaru–Bordea № 421-424; Conovici № 83-86).

Most of the pieces found in the votive pits date to the first third of the 3rd c. BC. As the votive pits were not disturbed, undated stamps can be dated through the stamps which were found with them, especially through those stamps found on the neck of the amphorae.

6. K 2915. votive pit area, Pit 36A, trench 3 Л/2; d. 0.80 m. Rectangular on stamp, three lines, emblem above right. Βόρυος αστυνόμου Bearded head → [ Απολλώνιου The astymon Βόρυς belongs to group IIId after Conovici ca. 295-280, and occurs quite often on stamps from Odessos (Tončeva1972), Histria (Conovici № 57-62) and Sborjanovo (Balkanska1985, № 1).

Stamps from Sinope (24 Examples) 1. A 1008. The Island, trench Ж 20, d. 9.90 m. Rectangular, four lines, Emblem right. αστυνόμου Αντίπατρου Ships bow του Νίκονος Kλεαίνετος Αντίπατρος Νίκονος belongs to group 5b after Conovici (252–242 BC). The stamp dates to around 248 BC. An identical stamp comes from Histria (Conovici, № 406). The common astymon appears on many stamps from Odessos, Bisone (Škorpil, № 16; Lazarov1978, 43, № 2), Satu Nou, Kallatis and Histria (Conovici/Irimia, № 84; 90; Gramatopol/Poenaru-Bordea № 519–524; Conovici, № 400–413).

7. K 1920. Stray find from the votive pit area. Rectangular on handle, three lines, emblem right. [Βόρυος ασ]τυ– νόμοντος Radiant head → Πύθηω The astymon belongs to group 3d after Conovici (ca. 295280). 8. Я 0084. votive pit area, Pit 36 B, trench 3 М/1. Rectangular on handle, three lines (possibly four), third line barely legible. αστυ[νόμου] Βόρυος Probably belongs to group 3d after Conovici (ca. 290285). From pit 36 B we also have an anepigraphical stamp(Cat. № 39), so the astymon Βόρυς, which belongs to the period 295-280 also gives us a dating on the anepigraphical stamp.

2. Aa 2352. The Island, trench Л 19–20/M 20/2, d. 11.20 m. Rectangular on handle, four lines, emblem below right. αστυνομούντος Απολλωνίδου Grape του Ποσειδωνίου ‛Εύκλης I The astymon Απολλωνίδης Ποσιδωνίου belongs to group 5d after Conovici (222-211), dated around 214. This very common astymon is found on many stamps from Tomis, Bisone (Škorpil 1934, № 153), Kallatis and Histria (Lazarov1978, 48, № 3; Gramatopol/Poenaru–Bordea № 579-580; Conovici, № 571-573).

9. A 0832. Test-trench 4 in the votive pit area from 1979, d 1.10 m. Rectangular on handle, three lines. Emblem partly broken off. Βόρυος αστυνόμου Bearded head → Φιλοκρατης Probably the astymon Βόρυς of group 3d after Conovici (ca. 290-285). An identical stamp has been found in Histria (Conovici 62)

3. A 1649. The Island, Well, trench К 20/3. αστυνομούντος Απολλωδόρου του Διονυσίου Beginning 5 Group (ca. 260-250). (Conovici № 400-413).

10. K 2477. votive pit area, trench 10 М/3; d. 0.60 m. Rectangular on handle, three lines, Emblem below right. [αστυνόμου] Δημήτριου Heracles head ← Φιλοκρατης The astymon Δημήτριος І belongs to group 4 after Conovici (ca. 280-270). Identical stamp from Kallatis (Avram 1988, № 60; Conovici et al 1989, №. 26, Lazarov1978, 37-38, № 9) and Dionisopolis (Škorpil 1934, № 28 ).

4. Я 0138. votive pit area. Pit 139, trench 2 Щ/4, d.2.00 m. αστυνόμου  [ Αττάλου Head n. l. ←↓ Νουμηνίου 5. K 2625. votive pit area, trench 10 Б/2; d. 1.50 m. Rectangular on handle, three lines, Emblem below right. First line illegible. [ Αττάλο]υ αστυ– [ν]όμυντος Head →

11. K 2617. votive pit area, Pit 112, trench 10 A/2, d. 0.53 m. Rectangular, three lines. Emblem below right. [ Απολλονίος] 196

HENRIETA TODOROVA: DURANKULAK - A TERRITORIUM SAKRUM OF THE GODDESS CYBELE 17. A 0358. The Island, trench C 10, d. 10.10. Rectangular on handle, only half preserved, three lines, emblem right. [Μικρι]νου αστυνο[μουν]τος Hors ←↑ [--] The astymon Μικρίας Ι belongs to group 3d after Conovici (ca. 295-280). It is very common and found on stamps from Odessos (Tončeva№ 90), Histria (Conovici № 63-67), Tomiss and Kallatis (Lazarov1978, 32, № 10). On two stamps from Histria Μικρίας it is found together with the producers Πύθης and Τεύθρας (Lazarov1978, 32, № 10). Their names are also found at Durankulak (№ 5, 21, 19, 24).

[ασ]τυνόμου Grape Διονυσίου The astymon Διονύσιος 4 belongs to group 4 after Conovici and dates to 279-258. An identical stamp comes from Histria (Conovici et al. № 123-125), which allows us to reconstruct the name of the producer. Further stamps of this kind come from Kallatis and Histria. (Lazarov1978, 39, № 12 ). 12. Я 0147.votive pit area, Pit 47, trench 3 Д/2-4 А/1, d 0.60 m. Three lines, third line illegible. Emblem right. (Fig.38) αστυνόμου Εστιαίου Great Kantharos ---------The magistrat Έστιαίου belongs to group 4, after Conovici and dates to 279-258.

18. K 2055. Sacrificial pit area, trench 3 P/2, d. 0.80 m. Rectangular on handle, three lines. Emblem right. Αθου[ς] Ρ[-]υσ[--] Μν[ησικλέους] The writing technique of the producer with the Theta belongs to the end of group 2 / beginning of group 3 after Conovici (63 und №. 50); (Melamed 1987, 85, № III 2, but reconstruction unsure)

13. A 1301. The Island, Cave Temple, Front-hall C, trench Н 18, d. 11.35 m. ´ ´Αγάθων αστυνόμου Bird →↓ ‛Iκεσίου The astynom ‛Ικέσιος 2 belongs to the end of group 4, 279-258 (Conovici 298-299).

19. K 2773. votive pit area, trench 3 Ц/3, d. 0.40 m. Rectangular on handle, three lines, emblem below right. First line barely legible. [Πολ]υχάρμ(ου) αστυνόμ(ου) Grape ↓ Τεύθρα The astymon Πολύχαρμος belongs to group 2d after Conovici (ca. 333-296). Such stamps are rare.

14. A 0972. The Island, trench M 20, Pathway F. d. 7.05 m. Rectangular on handle, four lines, emblem right. [αστυ]νόμ[ου] [‛Ικε]σίου του Ships bow → [Βα]κχίου [‛Ηφα]ίστιος Melamed 1987, 85, № III 4. The astymon ‛Ικέσιος 3 Βακχίου belongs to group 5 after Conovici (5a), circa 250. Identical examples by Mirčev1958, №. 193 (from Bizone); Pridik1941, 187, №. 107 (from Myrmekion); Rădulescu et al. №. 193 (from Albeşti).

20. Я 0023. votive pit area, trench 2 Ф/1, d. 2.00 m. Rectangular on handle, three lines, emblem below right. αστυνόμου Πυθοκλέους Bearded head → Άττιος Group 3d after Conovici (ca. 295-280), more exactly circa 281.

15. A 1134. The Island, under the medieval fortification wall, trench 3 20, d. 11.34 m. [ασ]τυνόμου ‛Ικεσίου του Βακχίου Ships bow→ Κτήσων Identical stamps from Bisone (Mirčev№ 195, 196), Satu Nou (Conovici/Irimia 414-429), Kallatis (Gramatopol/ Poenaru-Bordea № 557) and Histria (Conovici № 414429). The astymon is also depicted on a further stamp from Dutrankulak (№ 14).

21. K 2099. The Island. Trench E 20/3, d. 0.40 m. Rectangular on handle, damaged. Probably three lines with emblem right. Πυθοκλέους αστυνόμο(υ) Bearded head ??? ←↑ [Πύθης] The astymon Πυθοκλης belongs to group 3d Conovici (ca. 295-280). It is found on two stamps from Durankulak (№ 21 und 22) and on stamps from Odessos, Kallatis, Tomis (Lazarov1978, 33, № 16) and Histria (Conovici № 68-71).

16. Я 0019. votive pit area, Pit 139, trench 2 Щ/4, d..2.00. αστυνόμου Lightening Μιλτι[ά]δου The astymon Μιλτιάδης belongs to group 4 after Граков, can be assigned to group 4 of Conovoci and dated 279258. Identical stamps from Kallatis (Gramatopol/ Poenaru-Bordea № 505-507) and Histria (Lazarov1978, 42 № 24 ).

22. K 2468. Sarificial pit area, trench 10 M/3, d. 0.60 m. Rectangular on handle, four lines, right corner broken off. ασ[τυνόμου] Πυθοκλ[έους] Απολλωνι[ου] [Akrostyl] 197

ANCIENT GREEK COLONIES IN THE BLACK SEA 2 Because of the retrograde writing style the eponym is identified as Αριστοφων ІІ, which puts it between 287275 (more exactly circa 280). (Garlan 2000, 135-152) Identical pieces come from Callаtis (Gramatopol /Poenaru-Bordea № 27-29) and Histria (Avram/Bordea № 21).

Μα [--] The astymon Πύθοκλης belongs to group 3d after Conovici (ca. 295-280). 23. Я 0076. Votive pit area, Pit 36 B, trench 3 М/1, d. 0.70 m. Small, rectangular on handle, damaged. Retrograde script of name. Σιμία(ς) The reconstruction of the producers name as Σιμίας indicates a producer from Rhodes, whose stamp is known from Odessos (Mirčev№ 163) and dated to circa 180 (Šelov№ 451). The handle is not typical for Rhodes amphorae. A similar stamp (Lazarov1974, № 142), but no further detailed information is given there.

28. Я 0010. votive pit area, Pit 33, trench 3 Л/3-3 M/4, d. 0.60 m. Rectangular on handle, two lines, emblem in middle. A part of the stamp is missing. [Θα]σίων Lyra → [Κηφι]σοφων The eponym Κηφισοφων is dated between 287-275. Stamps of this magistrat are known from Kallatis (Gramatopol/Poenaru-Bordea № 91-93) and Histria (Avram 1996, № 424-425).

24. K 2412. votive pit area, trench 10 C/3, d. 1.20 m. Rectangular on handle, three lines, emblem left; barely legible, stamped over. Φίλων αστυνόμουντος Herakles head → Κα[-] Τεύθρα Obviously counter-stamped. The producer Φίλων belongs to group 2, 3 and 5 after Conovici. Stamps with his name are also known from Odessos and Kallatis (Lazarov1978; Gramatopol/Poenaru-Bordea № 12). Φίλων II. Second half (closer to the middle) of the 3 group (ca. 300-290). Pridik1917, 98, №. 762. 763; Škorpil 1904, №. 357 (all form Pantikapaion); Grakov1928, Taf. 11, №. 6).

29. К 2478. votive pit area, trench 10 M/3, d. 0.60 m. Rectangular on handle, two lines, emblem in middle. Right corner missing. [Θα]σίων grashopper→ Κριτίας The eponym Κριτίας is dated between 310-296 BC. This common stamp has various emblems (Garlan 2000). Simlar pieces come from Vojvodino near Šumen, Odessos (Škorpil 1934, № 101), Kallatis (Gramatopol/Poenaru-Bordea 1969, № 106, 108), Histria (Avram 1996, № 324, 327, 578, 587) etc.

Stamps fromThasos (28 pieces) 25. K 2476. Sacrifical pit area, trench 9 O/2, d. 1.20 m. Rectangular on handle, two lines, with emblem in middle. Θασίων Palm n. l. ← Αισχρίων The eponym Αίσχρίων І dates to 296-288. The palm is type 2 after Conovici. Counterparts come from Cabyle (Getov№ 20), Zeutopolis (Balkanska1984, № 16), Kallatis (Gramatopol/ Poenaru-Bordea, № 4; Avram /Bordea, № 14) and Histria (Avram 1996 № 367-370, 580).

30. Я 0024. votive pit area, trench 2 К/3-2 Е/1, d. 1.50 m. Rectangular on handle, two lines, emblem in middle, right corner broken off. Νικόδημος Lobster ← Θασίων Lunar writing style. A hypothetical expansion of the eponym could be Θεόπομπος. The Magistrate Θεόπομπος was active in the period 266-256 (Garlan 2000, 135 152). Stamps with the name Θεόπομπος come from Kallatis (Gramatopol/Poenaru-Bordea 1969, № 74) and Histria (Gramatopol/Poenaru-Bordea 1969, № 65-73; Avram 1996, № 274-276, 476)

26. K 2878. Scrificial pit area, trench 4 Р/3 - 4С/4, d.0.95 m. Θασίων Bearded head ← [--]ς Due to the lunar sigma the stamp is dated to the first half of the 3rd c. BC. Grakov1929. After Avram 1996 the lunar sigma appears only after 275.

31. Я 0011. votive pit area, Pit 33, trench 3 Л/3-3 M/4, d. 0.60 m. Rectangular on handle, weakly stamped, two lines, with emblem. Νικόδημος ← Palm → Θασίων ← As this stamp was found with stamp № 28 in pit 33, it is to be dated in the period 287-275 (Garlan 2000, 135152). Palms with the eponym Νικόδημος І are dated to 280 (Bon/Bon 1258; Coja 1986, №. 56; Avram 1996, №. 421a). A number of them come from Histria (Avram 1996, № 426).

27. K 2716. votive pit area, Pit 114, trench 9 Г/1, d. 1.30 m.. Rectangular on handle, two lines, emblem in middle. Badly preserved. [Θασί]ων Rhyton ? ← [ Αρισ]τοφω(ν) 198

HENRIETA TODOROVA: DURANKULAK - A TERRITORIUM SAKRUM OF THE GODDESS CYBELE Whael [Χαιρέ]ας Lunar Sigma. The stamp can therefore be dated to the first half of the 3. c BC (Bon/Bon 1691; Balkanska1984, 118; Canarache №. 91). Similar emblems in Histria (Avram 1996, № 591). The Magistrat Χαιρέας is dated after Avram 1996 to 274-267.

32. Я 0020. votive pit area, Pit 139, trench 2 Щ/4, d. 2.00 m. Rectangular on handle, two lines, with emblem in the middle. Θασίων ← Square frame Πουλυάδ[ου] ← The period of activity of the eponym Πουλάδης was in the period 274-267. Stamps with his name have also been found at Histria (Avram 1996, № 427-432).

38. Я 0145. votive pit area, trench 10 C/1. Θ Αγη Small, thin letters.

33. A 0833. The Island, South face, trench Б 16, d. 7.85 m. Πουλιάδο Strigilis? ← Θασ[ίων] Retrograde, meaning of the insignia unclear. (Vgl. Avram 1996, 431, ca. 280)

39. K 2895. votive pit area, Pit 36 B, trench 3 M/1. Rectangular with stamp, anepigraphical, only with emblem. Small Thyrsos Identical stamps come from Histria, where the emblem was interpretated Thyrasos (Avram 1996, № 519). As these anepigraphical stamps have not been dated, the fact that they were found in Durankulak in closed complexes facilitates their dating. From pit 36 B comes a SinopeStamp (№ 8) with the astymon Βόρυς, which is dated to 295-280

34. K 2877. votive pit area, Pit 23, Trench 4 Р/4, d. 1.20 m. Θασίων Double axe← Πρηξίπο[λ](ις) Avram 1996 dates the Magistrat Πρηξίπολι(ς) circa 274267.

40, 41. K 2413 and K 2414, votive pit area, stray find. Each with a small Thyrsos

35. K 2881. votive pit area, Pit 29, trench 4 C/2-4 Т/1, d. 2.20 m. Rectangular on handle, two lines with emblem in middle. Θασίων Eagle →↓ Πυθίων Cornered Sigma. There are 6 eponyms with Πυθίων known. In this case it is the eponym Πυθίων IІ, because on the stamps from Zeutopolis und Kabyle (Balkanska1984, № 19; Getov№ 81) Πυθίων ІV comes with a lunar Sigma while ours is cornered. Identical pieces from Odessos (Lazarov1974, 47, № 31), Kallatis and Histria. (Gramatopol/Poenaru-Bordea 1969, № 149178; Avram/Bordea № 19-20; Avram, Πυθίων II - № 3445, 346, Πυθίων IV - № 441-446 ).

42. Я 0143. votive pit area. Pit 6, trench 3Т/2-3Н/3, d. 1.18 m. Small Thyrsos 43. Я 0045. votive pit area. Pit 8, trench 3 О/3-3У/2, d.1.00 m. Handle with round stamp Round stamp with Monogram. (Bon/Bon 499, №. 2188). 44, 45. Я 0037 a. b. votive pit area. Pit 27, trench 4 Х/2, d. 1.22 m. Two handles with round stamps. Round stamp with Monogram ΑΨ/ΑΚ. ( Bon/Bon 499, №. 2188).

36. K 2871. votive pit area, Pit 8, trench 3 О/3-3 У/2, d. 2.44. Rectangular on handle, four lines with emblem. Badly preserved. Θασίων Macedonian shield ← Σκύμνος The eponym Σκύμνος І, in retrograde, is dated to the period 287-275 (more exactly circa 279) (Bon/Bon 1560). Stamps with the same eponym, but with different emblems come from Vojvodovo (Šumen district), Kallatis (Gramatopol/Poenaru-Bordea 1969, № 187192) and Histria (Avram 1996, № 406-409).

46. Without №. Rectangular on handle, two lines, emblem in middle. (after Melamed 1987, 84, № I 2) [ Ι]σόδικος Delphin ← Θασίων The period of activity of the eponyms Ίσόδικος dates to 310-295, more exactly circa 304 (Garlan 2000, 135-152). Stamps with his name come from Histria (Avram № 300305). 47. Without №. Rectangular on handle, two lines, emblem in middle. Broken. One line and the emblem are intact.(after Melamed 1987, № I 5) [--] Eight pointed star Θασίων

37. K 2714. votive pit area, trench 10 Б, d. 0.40. Probably rectangular, on handle, two lined, with emblem in the middle. (Θασίω)ν

199

ANCIENT GREEK COLONIES IN THE BLACK SEA 2 Bordea 1969, № 74) and Histria (Gramatopol/PoenaruBordea 1969, № 65-76; Avram 1996, № 274-276, 476).

The emblem is depicted on a number of stamps from Histria with different eponyms, such as Τηλέμαχος (Dating, after Avram 1996, 316-310 (Avram 1996, № 279), Αλκείδης (circa 305) (Avram 1996, № 289) and Δέαλκος (circa 300) (Avram 1996, № 318). A stamp with the same emblem but with the eponym Αλκείδης is recorded at Cabyle (Getov № 18).

Stamps from Rhodes (5 pieces) 53, 54. The Island, under the medieval fortification wall in trench Ж 20/2, d. 11.20m. Complete amphora with two stamped handles:

48. Without №. Rectangular on handle, two lines, emblem in middle (after Melamed 1987, № I 3). [Θα]σίων Vase → [Μ]ενε[δημ](ος)? The period of activity of the eponyms Μένεδημος lies between 295-288 (Garlan 2000, 135-152). The name is also represented on a number of stamps from Histria (Avram 1996, № 347-353) and on two stamps from Odessos (Mirčev № 26-27) one of which is almost identical to our one.

53. A 1129a Αγαθοκλεύς The period of activity of the producer Αγαθοκλης lies between 220-180 (Šelov № 854). His stamp is common in Odessos, Bisоne, Histriа, Tomiss (Škorpil 1934, № 7; Lazarov 1977, 33, № 1) and Costineşti. (Gramatopol/Poenaru-Bordea 1969, № 1145). 54. A 1129b Επ(ί) Αίνησιδάμου The name is identified with Αίνεσιδαμος ІІ, between 220180 (Šelov№ 9). His name appears frequently in Odessos, Histriа (Škorpil 1934, № 60; Lazarov1977, 23, № 9), Cabyle (Тачнева-Василева № 76; Getov№ 96) and Satu Nou (Conovici/Irmia № 252).

49. Without №. Rectangular on handle, broken, two lines, emblem in middle ( Melamed 1987, 84, № 1 4). [Θ]ασίων Vase → [Μενεδημος]? Reconstruction of the name after Melamed 84, № І 4. The period of activity of the eponyms Μένεδημος dates to 294-275 (Garlan 2000, 135-152). Identical stamps come from Histria (Avram 1996, № 351).

55. Aa 2351. The Island, trench Л 19-M 20/2, d. 11.20 m. Rectangular on handle, three lines with emblem below right. Μικύθου Πεδαγε Flower? (Ίθνιου) The producer Μικύθος dates to the second half of the 3rd c BC. (Šelov№ 412). The stamp was found together with stamp № 2 (Aa 2352), which is dated to 222-211 and therefore stamp № 45 (Aa 2351) is to be dated to this period. The producer occurs often on stamps, as in Kabile (with moon emblem) (Гетов, № 168), in Odessos, Bisone, Kallatis (Škorpil 1934, № 140 and 161; Lazarov1977, 39, № 81) and Satu nou (Conovici/Irimia № 305) etc.

50. Without №. Stray find. Rectangular on handle, badly stamped, two lines, emblem in middle Θασ[ίων] Sword ← [Σκ]ύμνος The eponym Σκύμνος І appears on other stamps from Durankulak. It dates between 287-275 (Garlan 2000, 135-152). 51. А 0937. The Island, trench О 18/2, d. 10.70 m. Rectangular, badly stamped. Two lines, emblem in middle. [--] Alabastron →↓ [--]υ[--] There are similar examples of this emblem from Cabyle (Getov № 89) and Histria (Avram 1996, № 489, 493). The Cabyle stamp carries the eponym Χαιρέας, whose period of activity dates to 274-256, more exactly circa 268. On the Histria stamp the alabastron is accompanied by a flower.

56. Without № . Stray find from the island. Rectangular. Stamp badly preserved and only the letter ρ is discernable. After Melamed 84, № IІ, 1, who saw it as A and didn’t realise that this was a Herakleia stamp on an Amphora of the type ‘ Isalam Geaferka’. 57. A 1145. The Island, trench 3 20, d. 0,30 m. Rectangular on handle, three lines, fragment. Δαμ oκρά της The producer is Δαμοκράτης І, (ca. 220-180). The handle belongs to the so-called transformation phase and is rounded. For these reasons we can date it to the beginning of the period between 220 und 200. Δαμοκράτης І is very common on round and rectangular stamps such as those from Odessos (Mirčev № 132-133; Lazarov1974, № 72-73) Bisone (Mirčev № 134), Histria, Aitos, Medgidia, Tulcea etc. (Lazarov 1977, 35, № 30).

52. № Я 002. votive pit area, trench 2 К/3; d. 2,50m. Rectangular on handle, two lines, emblem in the middle. [Θεόπο]μ[π]ος Flower in alabastron? -------The activity period of the Magistrat Θεόπομπος lies in the period 266-256. Lunar script. Stamps with the name Θεόπομπος come from Kallatis (Gramatopol/Poenaru200

HENRIETA TODOROVA: DURANKULAK - A TERRITORIUM SAKRUM OF THE GODDESS CYBELE 64. Я 0140. votive pit area, Pit 97, trench10 Л/3-10 М:4, d. 0.90 m. Ήρα ... Monahov (458) dates the producer to the first quarter of the 3rd c. BC.

Stamps from Chersonessos (2 pieces) 58. Я 0075. votive pit area. Pit 36 B. Trench 3 М/1, Rectangular on handle, broken. Φιλ]ίππ[ου] [άστ]υνόμ[ου] Group 1b after Kac 1994 dated 300-285. Parallel find Борисова 1974 (Taf. XIV 1.2; Borisova 1958, № 61,62,71)

65. Я 0046 b. votive pit area, Pit 23, trench 4 Р/4, d. 0.95 m.ABB Ήρα ... Dated to circa 274-267 because of the other stamps in the pit.

59. A 1191. The Island. Stray find. αστυνόμου Lun. Sigma

66. Я 0121. votive pit area, Pit 113, trench 10 А/1, d. 0.85 m. Stamp on amphora neck of the type Islam Geaferka, weakly stamped. ΔΙ(--) NΟΣ The stamp is leafed shaped, which points to its origin in Herakleia Pontica. On an amphora of the Islam Geaferka type.

Stamps from Herakleia Pontica (10 pieces) 60. A 0981. The Island, trench E 20/3, d. 10.34. Rectangular on handle, two lines, without emblem. Amphora Type ‘Isalam Geaferka’. Αριστο κράτεος М. Mirčev dates stamps bearing the name of this magistrat to the first half of the 3rd c. BC (Mirčev52). Such stamps from Satu Nou are dated to the middle of the 3rd c. BC (Conovici /Irma 140-141). According to the latest research the dating of Αριστκράτης is more precise and belongs to the late production (end of the 4th-first half of the 3rd c. BC) (Kac 2003, 277). A large number of Herakleia stamps with the name Αριστκράτης come from Bisone, Odessos and Histria (Мирчев, 247-252; Lazarov 1974, 39; Conovici /Irma 322)

67. K 2418. votive pit area, trench 9 Н/2, d. 1.00 m. Amphore, Stamp on the neck of an amphora Type Islam Geaferka, so the stamp is Heraklian. ΠА 68. Я 0034, votive pit area, Pit 97, trench 9 Л/3-9 М/4, d. 1.10 m. [--]Ρ in triangular frame. A number of letters (?) on the neck. The stamp is probably Heraklian. 69. A 1643. The Island, well in trench К 20/3, d.11.30 m. Stamp on amphora neck. ΥΩΚΡ? At least four letters are legible (?). Englyptique stamp on the neck of a clearly Heraklian amphora.

61. K 2898. votive pit area, Pit 48, trench 3 К/1-2, d. 0.85 m. Rectangular on Amphora neck of the type Islam Geaferka, 3 cm under the rim. Inscription and emblem are framed. Not complete. [--]υλου Grasshopper? → The emblem is fairly unclear. At the bottom of the stamp an ear of corn with a long stalk can be distinguished with what is probably a grasshopper above it. The amphora belongs to the Islam Geaferka type.

Stamps from Kos 70. № Я 0097 votive pit area. Pit № 151=Offering place D, trench 17 Б/2, d. 1.80 m. Stamp on double handle. Englyfic writing style. Νι(--) The find can be identified as a Kos stamp because of the double-handle.

62. Aa 2283. The Island, Trench Ж 20, d. 10.50 m. In front of the fortification wall. A?ρα ... Ήρα ?... Fully preserved amphora, stamp on neck. The first Alpha is doubtful, it is possibly an Eta as in the case of the next catalogue numbers, it is unsure whether there is another letter before the first Alpha. Dipinto on the shoulder of the amphora, base clearly Heraklian.

Stamps of unknown origin (10 Stück) 71. Я 0066. votive pit area, Pit 36 B, trench 3 М/1, d.0.90 m. Square stamp, ca 1x1 cm. K The typology of the amphora points to Kos. In line with the other stamps from this pit the find is to be dated to 295-280.

63. Я 0035. votive pit area, Pit 132, trench 10 C/4-10 Ц/1, d. 1.23 m. Ήρα ... The stamp is clearly Heraklian. Монахов (458) dates the producer to the first quarter of the 3rd c. BC

72. K 2411. votive pit area. Stray find. Double handle (small writing). Νικά γορος 201

ANCIENT GREEK COLONIES IN THE BLACK SEA 2 1. Я 0144, votive pit area, Pit 32, Q Trench 3 M/3, d. 1.25 m. Alpha on the Amphora handle with round cross-section, Chiotian 2. Я 0134, votive pit area, Pit 147, trench 2 О/1–4. Alpha on an edge fragment of an amphora. 3. Я 0136, votive pit area, Pit 147, trench 2 О/1– 4.Epsilon on the edge fragment of an amphora 4. Я 0082, votive pit area, Pit 59, trench 4 E/1, d. 1.18 m.Vertical in ligature Alpha and Gamma on an edge fragment of an amphora. On the neck of the same amphora is a dipinto. 5. K 2897, votive pit area, Pit 36A, trench 3 Л/2. Unclear symbol on an edge fragment of an amphora

Double handle (Small writing). Certainly Kos. 73. Я 0097. votive pit area, Pit 151= Offering place D, Trench 17 Б/2, d. 1.60 m. Double handle, stamp placed at a slant to the handle. ABB Νι(--) Double handle, stamp at a slant to the handle. Englyph of a name. Certainly from Kos. 74. A 1650. The Island. К 75. A 1652. The Island. ΩΤΑ? Sign? It is unclear if before the Omega there are other letters; after the Tau there may also be an Alpha.

Of the 17 Dipinti, 14 are found on pottery fragments from the Hellenistic period, and with two exceptions, were found in the pits. Almost without exception we are talking about Greek letters, which were painted on the neck or shoulder of imported amphorae in red. In the case of №. 12 it remains unclear whether it is letters or a symbol which is represented. The three dipinti consisting of a number of symbols/letters from the late Roman amphorae in the cave are also painted in red.

76. K 2914. votive pit area, Pit 15/16, trench 3 Щ/2, d. 1.10. IT Round stamp on a neck fragment. Because of the other stamps in this pit the find is to be date to 285-280. 77. Я 0146. votive pit area, Stray find. ΛΙ Round stamp, letters in the above reading upside-down.

THE AMPHORA-STAMPS FROM DURANKULAK General Results

78. K 2805. votive pit area, Pit 14, trench 3 Ф/4, d. 0.65 m. Heart-shaped stamp on an edge fragment. Because of the other stamps in the pit it is to be dated to the period circa in 285-280 (more exactly 280).

During the archaeological excavations in Durankulak numerous amphora-stamps have been uncovered. In 1987 A. Melamed published the first of them, most of which were stray-finds. Their number, along with the many amphorae, grew substantially with the excavation of the votive pit area on the west shore of Durankulak Lake so that today there are 80 stamps (Table 1). All of them belong to the Hellenistic period and come from the production centres of the Aegean and the south Pontos area. They are dated, with different concentrations, during the 3rd c. BC.

79. A 1653. The Island, from the well, Trench К 20/3, d.12.20 m. Handle stamp consisting of two short rectangular fields with two lines of no longer legible letters. Because of the clay probably from Herakleia Pontica. 80. A 1323. The Island, Cave Temple, on the floor of the outer hall, Trench H 18, d. 14.90 m. On the stamp nothing is legible. The handle belongs to a Sinopian amphora.

The amphorae to which the stamps belong, because of their contents such as wine or oil, came to Durankulak as offerings to the goddess Cybele. They throw light not only on the trade activity of the Greek colony Kallatis (today’s Mangalia, Romania), but on the character of the Cybele cult itself, as they confirm how highly this goddess was worshipped in the west Pontos during the Hellenistic period. Expensive imported wine and olive oil were offered to her. Not only Callatians sacrificed to her but also mariners and representatives of the ThracoGetian tribes in the hinterland. Stamps from Thasos, Rhodos, Herakleia Pontica, Sinope, Kos and others which are of unknown origin are present.

GRAFFITI AND DIPINTI The Graffiti, with the exception of №. 6, are found on handles (№. 1) and on edge fragments (№. 2-5) of imported amphorae, which were found in the votive pits. Because of the curvature we are probably talking about the neck area of amphorae. Handle №. 1 is Chiotian, the origin of the other fragments is not more closely definable, but in view of the clay and surface texture they probably come from amphorae from Sinope or Herakleia. On №. 1-4 Greek letters have been scratched, on №. 5 only unclear symbols, and the lines on the handle of the late Roman amphora №. 6 it appears to be a question of a numerical tally.

202

HENRIETA TODOROVA: DURANKULAK - A TERRITORIUM SAKRUM OF THE GODDESS CYBELE

Production centre

Number stamps

Thasos Rhodos Sinope Herakleia Pontica Chersonesos Kos Unknown Total

28 5 24 10 2 1 10 80

of

Amphora-stamps from Sinope (24 Pieces, 30%)

%

35% 6.25% 30% 12.50% 2.50% 1.25% 12.50% 100 %

Group after Conovici

Year BC

II III IV V Unknown Total

333–296 295–280 279–258 257–190

No. of stamps % 1 10 6 5 2 24

4.17% 37.50% 20.83% 29.17% 8.33% 100%

Table 2. Amphora stamps from Sinope according to Canovici’s classification.

Тable 1. Stamps from Durankulak according to their origin

The production from Sinope – an important south-Pontic centre – is represented by 30% of the stamps from Durankulak (Table 2). From 296 BC a regular presence of Sinopean amphorae is registered, which continues until the end of the 3rd century. Sinope had a leading position in the trade of the northern Pontos. Sinope stamps are also the most common in Bisone (verbal communication from Dr. Asen Salkin, to whom I am indebted for this information). All the stamps from Durankulak have astynoms which are known from Histria, Kallatis, Bisone and Odessos.

The same stamps are known from other west-Pontos – cities such as Mesambria (today Nesebar), Apolonia (today Sozopol) (Alexieva 1950а; Ivanov et al.), Odessos (today Varna), Dionosopolis (today Balčik), Bisone (today Kavarna) (Škorpil 1934; Mirčevet al. 1947, Tončeva/Dimitrov; Lazarov1974; Lazarov1975), Tomiss (today Constanţa), Kallatis (today Mangalia), Histria (today Istria) (Gramatopol/Poenaru-Bordea 1969; Avram; Conovici) etc. They also appear commonly in the interior, for example in Cabyle (near Jambol) (Tančeva– Vasileva; Getovu.a.), Sborjanovo (Bei Rarzgrad) (Tančeva–Vasileva; Getov et al.), Zeutopolis (near Kazanlyk) (Alexieva 1950б, Balkanska1984) etc.

The analysis of the astynoms gives us a different picture. (Appendix 1). The astynoms Βόρυς, Πύθοκλής and Ίκέσιος ο Βαχχίου are generally spread over 18 years. From the period 295-280 there are 7 Sinope stamps, thus over 30%. They carry, however, only the names of two astynoms (Βόρυς and Πύθοκλής). Out of 7 stamps of group 3 (295-280) there are only 3 astynoms. We are obviously dealing with large deliveries within a short period, possibly in the years 281, 282 and 283 BC – when Kallatis was at its peak. The amphora-stamps with the names Βόρυς, Πύθοκλής and Μικρίας from Sborjanovo in north-east Bulgaria may have come with the same deliveries (Božkova, № 1, 5 und 8).

In the analysis of these finds a number of factors should be borne in mind. For example the fact that numerous similar finds from other Pontic centres remain mostly unpublished or statistically evaluated. Furthermore, the finds from the production centres themselves do not deliver corresponding chronological data. Further one must consider the Hellenistic events in the Pontos region as they often had a descisive effect on trade. Our finds, however, completely mirror the structure of the marine trade of Kallatis-Chora as well as the intensity of activity in relation to the Cybele cult.

After 258 there is a decrease of Sinopean imports. From the period between 258 and 214 only 7 Sinope stamps are known, which would indicate a sporadic import.

Amphora-Stamps from Herakleia Pontica (10 Pieces, 12.5%)

The Amphorae-stamps Thasos (28 Pieces, 35 %)

The earliest stamps from Durankulak come from Herakleia Pontica – the home polis of the Kallatis Pontos colony. The Herakleian production is represented by 10 pieces in Durankulak. Herakleia stamps are fairly common in the north Pontos, as for example in Kallatis, Histria, Odessos, Bisone etc. (Lazarov1980, табл. І), which is to be attributed to the presence in this region of the flourishing Herakleia colony- Kallatis.

Year BC 310–296 295–275 274–256 Unknown Total

No. of Stamps 2 8 7 11 28

% 10.71% 46.43% 21.43% 14.29% 100.00%

Table 3. Amphora-stamps from Thasos and their dating. Stamps from Thasos appear in the north-western Pontos somewhat later than in the south of the west Pontos region (Table 3). In the south, Thasos imports are known 203

ANCIENT GREEK COLONIES IN THE BLACK SEA 2 In conclusion it may be stated that the amphora-stamps from Durankulak mirror the dynamic of the Greek trade in the north of the west Pontos, i.e. the wine and oil imports in return for grain and horse exports from this region. The appearance of the earliest stamp from Durankulak at the end of the 4th c. BC can be linked to the founding of the Cybele Temple on the Big Island as no Greek settlement in the area is known. The pinnacle of sacrifices and votive gifts lies in the period between 299 and 265 BC, during which amphora-stamps from all the aforementioned production centres are represented. The pinnacle of the Sinope presence coincides with the pinnacle of the Thasos presence i.e. before 260 BC. Afterwards the imported produce in the votive offerings in Durankulak declines abruptly. In the second half of the 3rd century they become rarer which coincides with the general collapse of the Hellenistic world at this time. The last stamp dates to the end 3rd/beginning of 2nd c. BC, and one can presume therefore that at this time the temple was abandoned. Based on the amphora-stamps, the period of activity of the cave temple at Durankulak can be placed between the end of the 4th and the beginning of the 2nd c. BC (Table 4). The same amphora stamps were uncovered on the island and in the votive pits on the west shore which indicates a close connection betweem both archaeological sites.

already from the last quarter of the 5th c. BC (Getov, 113). An extensive expansion of the Thasos imports to the north is well documented. Trade contacts with Thasos are most intense in the first half of the 3rd c. BC (Lazarov 1980, 5-19). To this period belong also the 28 Thasos stamps from Durankulak (35 %), which fall into a time period of circa 304-259 BC, while the Sinopian stamps cover double this time-span. The fact that on the Thasos stamps names of 17 eponyms are represented, indicates an intensive but short-lived trade relationship between Kallatis and Thasos. After 260 Thasos imports halt abruptly, a general trend in the Pontos region. The amphora-stamps from Rhodes (5 Pieces, 6.25%) Rhodes only joined west Pontic trade at the end of the 4th – beginning of 3rd c. BC. Its trade partners were Histria, Odessos and Kallatis (Lazarov 1977, 7) as well as the north Pontic cities, over whom the whole of Scythia received the valuable wine from Rhodes. In the first half of the 3rd c BC stamps from Rhodes also appear in Durankulak but only as stray finds and not from the votive pits, which may be an indication of how precious the wine from Rhodes was, as it was brought directly into the temple on the island and possibly used in the taurobolien and blood baptisms. The latest stamps from Rhodes date to the end of the 3rd c. BC and indicate, together with the latest stamp from Sinope the end of the period during which the Cybele Temple on the Big Island functioned.

Chronological frame of imports from: Sinope – 320-210 BC Thasos – 310-265 BC Rhodes – 2nd quarter of the 3rd century BC Herakleia Pontica – last quarter of the 4th-first quarter of the 2nd c. BC

The amphora-stamps from Kos Production from Kos is sparsly represented in the west Pontos. One must bear in mind that stamps on Kos amphorae are only dated from the 3rd c. BC (Getov 1995, 121). Only one certain Kos stamp is attested to at Durankulak as well as some uncertain ones.

Table 4.

204

HENRIETA TODOROVA: DURANKULAK - A TERRITORIUM SAKRUM OF THE GODDESS CYBELE

Appendix 1. Alphabetical index of the personal names on the amphora stamps from Durankulak  γαθοκλής – Rhodes, Producer, № 53 Α Άθους – Sinope, Producer, № 18; Αίνεσιδαμος ІІ – Rhodes, Eponym, № 54 Αισχρίων І – Thasos, Magistrat, № 25; Αγάθων – Sinope, Producer, № 13 Αντίπατρος Νίκωνος – Sinope,Astynom,№ 1 Απολλόδωρος Διονυσίου – Sinope, Astynom, № 3 Απολλώνιος – Sinope, Producer, № 6, 11, 22 Απολλωνίδης Ποσειδωνίου – Sinope, Astynom , № Αριστοκράτης – Herakleia, Producer, № 60 Αριστοφων ІІ – Thasos, Magistrat, № 27 Άτταλος – Sinope, Astynom, № 4, 5 Άττις – Sinope, Producer, № 20 Βόρυς Ι – Sinope, Astynom, № 5, 6, 7, 8, 9 Δαμοκράτης І – Rhodes, Producer, № 57 Δημήτριος І – Sinope, Astynom , № 10 Διονύσιος IV– Sinope, Astynom , № 11 ‛Εςτιαιος – Sinope, Astynom, № 12 ‛Εύκλης І – Sinope, Producer, № 2 ‛Ηρα(–) – Herakleia(?), Producer, № 62, 63, 64 ‛Ηφαίστιος – Sinope, Producer, № 14 ‛Ικέσιος ΙΙ – Sinope, Astynom, № 15 ‛Ικέσιος ΙΙΙ Βακχίου – Sinope, Astynom, № 14, 15 Ισόδικος – Thasos, Magistrat, № 46 Κηφισοφων – Thasos, Magistrat , № 28

Κλεαίνετος – Sinope, Producer, № 1 Κριτίας – Thasos, Magistrat, № 29; Κτήσων – Sinope, Producer, № 15 Μενέδημος – Thasos, Magistrat, № 48, 49 Μικρίας Ι – Sinope, Astynom, № 17 Μικύθος – Rhodes, Producer, № 55 Μιλτιάδης – Sinope, Astynom, № 16 Μνησικλης Ι – Sinope, Astynom, № 18 Νικαγόρος(?)– Kos, № 72 (unknown) Νικόδημος Ι– Thasos, Magistrat, № 30, 31 Νουμήνιος – Sinope, Producer, № 4 Πολύχαρμος – Sinope, Astynom, № 19 Πουλυάδης – Thasos, Magistrat, № 20, 32, 33 Ποσειδώνιος – Sinope, Producer, № 8 Πρηφξίπολις – Thasos, Magistrat, № 34 Πύθης – Sinope, Producer, № 5, 21 Πυθίων ІІ – Thasos, Magistrat, № 35 Πύθοκλης – Sinope, Astynom, № 7, 21, 22 Σιμίας – Sinope, Astynom, № 2; Σκύμνος І – Thasos, Magistrat, № 36, 50 Τεύθρας – Sinope, Producer, № 17 Φιλίππος – Rhodes, Eponym, № 57 Φιλοκράτης – Sinope, Producer, № 9, 10 Φίλων – Sinope, Astynom, № 24 Χαιρéας – Thasos, Magistrat, № 37

Appendix 2. The origin of the stamps from the pits. Rhodes 5: Only on the Big Island and stray finds. Herakleia Pontica 10 : In votive pits 23, 36B; 48, 97, 113, 132. Sinope 24: in votive pits 36A (+ Graffiti), 36B, 47, 112, 139. Thasos 28: in votive pits 6, 8, 23 (+ Dipinti), 27, (+ Dipinti), 29, 33, 36B, 114,139. Chersonesos 2: in pit 36B.and stray find. Kos 1: in pit 23 and under unclassified. Unknown origin 10 in votive pits 14, 15/16, (+ Dipinti), 36B, (+ Dipinti), Dipinti, 151. Graffiti 6: in votive pits 32, 36a, 59 (+ Dipinti), 147 (+ Dipinti), 151 (+ Dipinti). Dipinti 12: in votive pits1, 23, 27, 48, 59 (+ Graffiti), 106, 113, 130, 147 (+ Graffiti), 151( + Graffiti).

205

ANCIENT GREEK COLONIES IN THE BLACK SEA 2 Tабл. 2 b,c), whereby the rim can be dated to the first half of the 3rd century. Corinthian amphorae are seldom found in the Black Sea area during the Hellenistic period as, for example, in house 6 from Panskoe I, where an exact counterpart of this find was located. (Kac et all 2002, Plate 48, Ad 85–86). This house was quite generally dated between the last quarter of the 4th c. BC and the first third of the 3rd c. BC. The fact that our Corinthian amphora was found in pit 33 together with two stamps from Thasos which date to the period 287275, facilitates the precise dating of the aforementioned amphora type.

Appendix 3. Pits dated post quem by stamps Pit №

Origin of stamp

6 8 23 27 29 33 36 A 36 B

Thasos Thasos Thasos Thasos Thasos Thasos, 2 Stück Sinope, Thasos Sinope, Thasos Chersonesos, unknown Sinope Herakleia (Type Geaferka) Herakleia (HPA) Sinope Herakleia (Type Geaferka) Thasos Herakleia (Type Geaferka) 2 Sinope, 1 Thasos 1 Kos, 1 unknown

47 48 97 112 113 114 132 139 151

Post quem Period BC Cir. 279 300–279 285–280 Cir. 270 Cir. 292 Cir. 274 Cir. 283 Cir. 283

Two amphora with typical double handles are typical for Kos production at the end of the 4th c. BC. They have a funnel-shaped neck and a mushroom-shaped rim. One was found in votive pit 36B together with a Sinopian stamp from the period 295-280 after Conovici. An intact amphora from Kos or a related production centre comes from pit 23. Its form mirrors the development of this vessel at the beginning of the 3rd c. BC as the mushroom shaped rim withdrew and tended to transform later into a simple rounded rim. This transformation of the rim profile parallels, along with the creation of a slightly convex neck and a compact base, the development of the Knidian amphora from this period (Monakhov 1999b, 165-166). Our amphora from pit 23 was uncovered together with a Thasos stamp of the magistrat Πρεξίπολις, which because of the lunar Sigma Avram ois dated to shortly after 275.

285–280 310–275 300–275 Cir. 271 310–275 Cir. 270 310–275 Cir. 274 310–300

Certain attributes of our amphora finds should be taken into consideration (after Tsochev in Print). Herakleian stamps from pits 8, 23, 48, 97, 113 belong to the late production group and carry names in abbreviated forms in square frames and lunar script (Monakhov 2002, 170). This Heraklian group belongs to the end of the 4th – first quarter of the 3rd c. BC (Kac 2003, 271-273). Four of these amphorae belong to the Isalam Geaferka type, named after the village in northern Dobrutzha, where they were first discovered (Monakhov 1999, 457; Monakhov 2002, 175-176). They are small, have a complicated profile and often have double handles. Among the stamps from Durankulak № 61, 63, 66 and 67 on this amphora, № 61 from pit 48 is highly interesting, because here is the square frame of the producer ΔΟΥΛΟΥ with a grasshopper on an ear of corn, which is not usual for Herakleia stamps and is more similar to those of Thasos.

The Heraklian amphora found in the votive pit 8 (363) on whose handle is a monogram with the letters Α, Ε(T), Υ and Ρ in ligature should be also taken into consideration. These monograms are rare and their dating is unsure. As they appear on Chersonese stamps together with the name of the magistrate, one presumes that we are talking about a producer. They are placed between the first and second group after Kac, ergo in the 280s BC. In the aforementioned house 6 from Panskoe I, 14 monograms on Chersonese amphorae were found, all with letters A, E und Y, individual and with no further names. The opinion has been expressed, that we are dealing with an abbreviation of the name of the earliest Chersonese magistrate, from the period shortly after 425. Our amphora throws light on this problem because it was found in a closed feature together with the classical kantharos form with grooved body and painted depiction of an olive branch on the vertical neck. The fact that olives are also referred to dates this form to the first half of the 3rd c. BC (Rotroff 1997, 49). Even later is Thasos stamp found there with the magistrat Σκúμνος Ι, which after Avram is to be dated to the beginning of the 270s BC. The difference of 50 years should be noted. A similar phenomonen appears in votive pit 139, where a Knidian (?) amphora with a mushroom shaped rim which, according to the typology, dates to the middlethird quarter of the 4th c. BC was found together with stamps from Thasos and Sinope from the second quarter of the 3rd c. BC. This major time difference can only be

Further rare examples from the north Pontic region with this name are englific and without emblems. (Monakhov 1999, 455-456). Stamp ΠΑ (№ 67) is also to be found on an amphora of the Islam Geaferka type. The ΠΑ may represent the name of the late Heraklian producer Πασιáδας. Two of the HPA come from fragments and their Heraklian origin is uncertain, as such stamps also appear on amphorae of Sinopean form (Monakhov 1999, 458459). The third such stamp (№ 65) is from an amphora typical of Herakleia, which, however, has an unusual handle. A Corinthian amphora, discovered in pit 33, can be attributed to type A after Koehler (Keler1992, 269-271; 206

HENRIETA TODOROVA: DURANKULAK - A TERRITORIUM SACRUM OF THE GODDESS CYBELE Ivanov 1963 Т. Иванов. Антична керамика от некропола на Аполония. –In: Аполония, София 1963, 257–263. (Antitshna keramika ot nekropola na Apolonija. –In: Apolonija, Sofia 1963) Kac 1994 В.И. Кац, Керамические клейма Херсонеcса таврического. Каталог – определитель. Саратов 1994. (Kats, Keramitsheskie klejma Chersonessa tavritsheskogo. Katalog – opredelitel. Saratov 1994). Kac/Fedoseyev 1986 В.И. Кац, Н.Ф. Феодосев, Керамические клейма ‘Боспорского эмпория’ на Елисаветовском городище. –In: Античний мир и археология, Саратов 1986, 85–105. (Kats, Feodosiev, Keramitsheskie klejma ‘Bosporskogo emporoja’ na Elisavetinskom gorodishte. –In: Antitshniji mir i archeologia, Saratov 1986) Keler 1992 (Koehler) K. Келер, Общая типология и хронология коринфских транспортных амфор. –In: Грческие Амфоры. Проблемы развития ремесла и торговли в античном мире. Саратов 1992, 265–282. (Keler, Obshtshaja tipologija i chronologija korinfskich transportnych amfor. –In. Gretsheskie Amfory. Problemy razvitija remesla i torgovli v antitshnom mire. Saratov 1992). Lazarov 1974 М. Лазаров, Амфорни печати от Одесос. Изв. Нар. Муз. Варна 10 (25), 1975, 128–136. (Lazarov, Amforni petshati ot Odesos, Izv. Nar.Muz.Varna 10 ,1975) Lazarov 1975 М. Лазаров, Непубликувани антични амфори и амфорни печати от българското Черноморие. Изв.Наp. Муз. Варна 11 (26), 1976, 128–136. (Lazarov, Nepublikuvani amfoti i amforni petshati ot balgarskoto Tshernomorie, Izv.Nar.Muz.Varna 11, 1976) Lazarov 1977 М. Лазаров, Търговските връзки на Родос със Западнопонтийските градове през елинистическата епоха. Изв.Нар.Муз. Варна 13 (28), 1977, 1–45. (Lazarov, Targovski vrazki na Rodos sas Zapadnopontijskite gradove prez elinistitsheskata epocha., Izv.Nar.Muz.Varna 13, 1978) Lazarov 1978 М. Лазаров, Синопе и Западнопонтийския пазар. Изв. Нар. Муз. Варна 14 (29), 1978, 11–65. (Lazarov, Amforni petshati ot Odesos, Izv.Nar.Muz.Varna 10 ,1975) Lazarov 1980 М. Лазаров, Разпространението на хераклейските амфори и печати в Тракия. Изв.Нар.Муз. Варна 16 (31), 1989, 1–15. (Lazarov, Razprostranenieto na cherakleiskite amforni petshati v Trakija, Izv.Nar.Muz.Varna 16 (31), 1989) Me;amed 1987 А. Меламед, Амфорни печати от Големия остров и ‘Нивата’ край село Дуранкулак, Толбухински окръг.Cb. Добруджа 4, 1987, 83–86. (Melamed, Amforni petshati ot Golemija ostrov i ‘Nivata’ kraj selo Durankulak, Tolbuchinski okrag. Sb. Dubrudzha 5, 1987) Mirčev 1958 М. Мирчев, Античните печати от музея във Варна, Varna 1958. (Mirtshev, Antitshni petshati ot muzeja vav Varna.Varna 1958) Monakhov 1999а С.Ю. Monakhov. Греческие амфоры в Причерноморье. Комплексы керамичечкой тары, Саратoв 1999. (Monachov, Gretsheskie amfory v Pritshernomorje. Kompleksy keramitsheskoj tary. Saratav 1999). Monakhov 1999b С.Ю. Monakhov, К типологии книдских амфор IV–II вв. до н.е. –In: Боспорский феномен: греческая культура на периферии античного мира. Ст. Петерсбург 1999, 161–172. (Monachov, K tipologii knidskich amfor IV-II v.v. do n.e. –In: Bosporskij fenomen: gretsheskaja kultura na periferii antitshnogo mira. St. Peterburg 1999)

explained if one accepts that the amphorae were in use for quite a time before they were presented as votive gifts in Durankulak. References Alexieva 1950а А. Alexieva, Амфорни печати от Бургаския музей. Изв.Нар.Муз. Бургас 1, 1980, 45–51. (Alexieva, Amforni petshati ot Burgaskija muzej. Izv.Nar.Muz. Burgas 1, 1980) Alexieva 1950b А. Alexieva, Амфорни печати от Копринка. Год.Нар Муз. Пловдив II, 1950, 185–190. (Alexieva, Amforni petshati ot Koprinka. God.Nar.Muz. Plovdiv II, 1950) Baadlyants 1980 Ю.С. Баадальянц, Опыт хронологической классификации родосских фабрикантских клейм. Нумизм. и Эпигр. XIII, 1980, 3–12.(Baadaljanz, Opyt klassifikacii rodosskich fabrikantskych klejm. Numizm.Epigr. XIII, 1980) Balkanska 1984 А. Балканска, Амфори и амфорни печати. – In: Севтополис І, София 1984, 115–155.(Balknska, Amfori i amforni petshati. –In: Zeutopolis I, Sofia 1984) Balkanska 1985 А. Балканска, Амфорни печати от укрепеното тракийско селище в м. Сборяново при Исперих. Археология 1985/4, 24–30. (Balknska, Amforni petshati ot ukrepenoto trakijsko selishte v m. Sborjanovo pri Isperich. Archeologija ( Sofia) 1985/4) Božkova 1990 А. Божкова, Нови синопски амфорни печати от резервата ‘Сборяново’, Исперихско. Археология 1990/2, 37–40.(Bozhkova , Novi sinopski amforni petshati ot rezervata Sborjanovo, Isperichsko, Archeologija (Sofia) 1990/2) Borisova 1974 Б. Борисова, Керамические клейма Херсонеса и класификация Херсонесских амфор. Нумизм. Эпигр. XI, 1974, 99–124.(Borisova, Keramitsheskie klejma Hersonesskich amfor. Numizm. Epigr. XI, 1974) Brashinky 1970 И.Б. Брашинский, Някои въпроси на икономическите връзки на гръцките градове на Юго– Западното Черноморие в предримската епоха. Археология (Sofia) 1970/2, 7–18.(Brashinskij, Njakoi vaprosi na ikonomitsheskite vrazki na gratskite gradove na Jugozapadnoto tshernomorie v predrimskata epocha. Archeologija (Sofia) 1970/2). Brashinky 1980 И.Б. Брашинский, Греческий керамический импорт на Нижнем Дону в V–III вв. до н. э. Ленинград 1980. (Brashinskij, Gretsheskii keramitsheskii import na Nizhnem Donu, Leningrad 1980) Brashinky 1984 И.Б. Брашинский, Вопросы хронологии керамических клейм и типологическое развитие амфор Гераклей Понтийской. Нумиз.Эпиг . XIV, 1984, 3–22. (Brashinskij, Voprosy chronologii keramitsheskich kleim i tipologitsheskoe razvitie amfor Geraklei Pontijskoj. Numizm.Epigr. XIV, 1984) Getov 1995 Л. Гетов, Амфори и амфорни печати от Кабиле. София 1995.(Getov, Amfori i amforni petshati ot Kabile, Sofia 1995) Golentsov/Peters 1981 A.C. Голенцов, Б. Г. Петерс, Керамические клейма из раскопок Феодосии 1975– 1977. Сов. Археол. 2, 1981, 207–222. (Golentsov, Peters, Keramitsheskie klejma iz razkopok Feodosii, Sov.Archeol. 2, 1981). Grakov 1928 Б. Граков, Древногреческие керамические клейма с именами астиномов. Москва 1928. (Grakov, Drevnogretsheskie keramitsheskie klejma s imenami astinomov. Moskva 1928).

207

ANCIENT GREEK COLONIES IN THE BLACK SEA 2 Buzoianu /Cheluta–Georgescu 1983 L. Buzoianu, N. Cheluta– Georgescu, Ştampile de amfore inedite de la Callatis. Pontica 16, 1983, 149–188. Canarache 1957 V. Canarache, Importul amforelor ştampilate la Histria. Bucureşti 1957. Coja 1986 M. Coja, Les centres de production d`amphores timbrees indentifies a Istros pontique. Bull. de Corresp. Hell. Suppl.13, 1986 Conovici 1998 N. Conovici, Timbres amphoriques 2. Sinope. Histria VІІІ/2, 1996, 206–218.Bucarest/Paris 1998 Conovici /Irma 1991 N. Conovici, M. Irma, Timbres amphoriques et autres inscriptions ceramiques decouverts a Satu Nou (comm. Оitina, dep. de Constantza). Dacia 35, 1991, 139–175. Conovici / Avram /Poenaru–Bordea N. Conovoci, A. Avram, Gh. Poenaru–Bordea, Nouveau timbres amphoroques Sinopéens. Dacia N.S. 33/1–2, 1989, 111–123. Garlan 2000 Y. Garlan, Amphores et timbres amphoriques gréce. Entre érudition et idéoligie. Mem. Acad. Inskr. et Belle–Letters IV, S.XXI, Paris 2000 Gramatopol/Poenaru–Bordea 1969 M. Gramatopol, Gh. Poenaru–Bordea, Amphora stamps from Callatis and South Dobrudzha. Dacia NS 13, 1969, 127–282. Kac 1999 V.I. Kac, Les timbres amphoriques de Chersonèse Taurique. Essai d’analyse documentaire. –In: Production et commerce des amphores anciennes en Mer Noire. (ed. Y. Garlan). Aix–en–Provence 1999. 91–102. Kac et al. 2002 V.I. Kac, S.J. Monachov, V.F. Stolba, A.N. Šceglov, Tiles and Ceramic containers. In: L. Hannestad, V.F. Stolba, A.N. Šceglov (eds.). Archaeological Investigations in Western Crimea, Panskoye I. Vol. 1, The Monumental Building U 6. Aarh. Univ. Press 2002, 101– 126. Kac 2003 V.I. Kac, A New Chronology for the Ceramic Stamps of Herakleia Pontike. –In: The Cauldron of Ariantas, Studies presented to A.N. Ščeglov on the occasion of his 70th birthday. Black Sea Studies, vol. (Eds. P. Guldager Bilde, J. Munk Højte, V.F. Stolba) Aarh. Univer. Press 2003 Oppermann 1984 M. Opperman, Thraker zwischen Karpatenbecken und Ägäis. Berlin 1984. Oppermann 2004 M. Oppermann, Die westpontische Poleis und ihr indigenes Umfeld in vorrömischer Zeit. Langenweißbach/Sachsen 2004. Popeea 1967 Citeva toartede anforă ştampilate descoperite la Medgogia, Stud.Cerc.Ist.Vece 18/3, 1967, 509–512. Pridik 1926 E. M. Pridik, Zu den rhodischen Amphoren. Klio XX, 1926, 324–334. Pridik 1928 E. M. Pridik, Die Astynomennamen auf den Amphoren und Ziegelstempln aus Südrusland. Berlin 1928. Rădulescu et al. 1987 A. Rădulescu, M. Bărbulescu, L. Buzoianu, V.Georgescu, Tipuri de amfore elenistice descoperite în aşezarea greco–autohtonă de la Albeşti (jud. Constanţa), Pontica 20, 1987, 79–106. Rădulescu et al.1988/1989 A.Rădulescu, M. Bărbulescu, L. Buzoianu, V. Georgescu, Importul de amfore la Albeşti Sinope, Pontica 21/22, 1988/1989, 29–48. Rădulescu et al. 1990 A.Rădulescu, M. Bărbulescu, L. Buzoianu, V. Georgescu, Importuri amforice la Albeşti (jud. Constanţa): Chersonesosul Tauric, Cnidos, Cos, Paros, Pontica 23, 1990, 29–48. Rădulescu et al. 1990 A.Rădulescu, M.Bărbulescu, L.Buzoianu, V.Georgescu, Pentru un catalog complet al importurilor amforice la Albeşti (jud. Constanţa), Pontica 23, 1990, 49– 80.

Monakhov 2002 С.Ю. Monakhov, Поздние серии гераклейских амфор (конца IV–первой трети III в. до н. э.). Саратов 2002. (Monachov, Pozdnye serii gerakleiskich amfor (konca IV – pervoj treti III v. do n.e.) Saratov 2002) Pridik 1917 Е. Придик, Инвентарный каталог клейма на амфорных ручках и горлышках и на черепицах Эрмитажного собрания. Петроград 1917. (Pridik, Inventarnyi katalog klejm na amfornych rutshkach i gorlyshkach i na tsherepitsach Ermitazhnogo sobranija. Petrograd 1917) Pridik 1941 Е. Придик, Керамические надписи из раскопок Тиритаки и Мирмекия в 1932/34, Матер.Исслед.Арх. 4, 1941. (Pridik, Keramitsheskie nadpisi iz razkopok Tiritaki i Mermekija v 1932/34, Mater.Issled.Arch. 4, 1941) Toneva-Vasileva Н. Танчева-Василева, Амфорни печати от Кабиле. –In: Кабиле І, София 1982, 90–113. (TatshevaVasileva, Amforni petshati ot Kabile. –In: Kabile I, Sofia 1982. Tončeva 1972 Г. Тончева, Керамика от антична яма във Варна. Изв.нар.Муз. Варна 8 (23), 1972, 263–268. (Tontsheva, Keramika ot antitshna jama vav Varna, Izv.Nar.Muz.Varna 1972) Tsekhmistrenko 1960 В. Цехмистренко, Синопские керамические клейма с именами гончарных мастеров. Сов. Археология 3, 1960, 59–71. (Sov.arch. 1960/3). Šelov 1975 Д. Шелов, Керамические клейма из Танаиса ІІІ – І в. до н. э. Москва 1975. (Shelov, Keramitsheskie kleima iz Tanaisa III–I v. do n.e., Moskva 1975) Škorpil B. 1902 В.B. Шкорпил, Керамические надписы, найдениые при раскопках на северном склоне горы Митридата в г. Керчи. Изв.Импеp.Археолог. комиссии 3, 1902,132. (Shkorpil V. Keramitsheskie nadpisy nejdennye pri raskopkach na severnom sklone gory Mitridata v g. Kertshi. Izv.Imper.archeol.komissii 3,1902) Škorpil B.1904 В. B. Шкорпил, Керамические надписы приобретенные Керчински музеем древностей в 1901 и 1902 г.г. Известия императорской археологическоий комиссии 11, 1904, 84–86. (Shkorpil K. Keramitsheskie nadpisy priobretennye Kertshenskym museem drevnostej v 1901 i 1902 g. Izv.Imper.archeol. komissii 11, 1904) Škorpil K. 1934 К. Шкорпил, Печати върху амфори от Черноморското крайбрежие. IAI VII, 1934, 24–43. (Shkorpil K. Pecati varchu amfori ot tshernomorskoto krajbrezhie. Izv.Arch.Inst. Sofia 1934) Avram 1996 A. Avram, Timbres amphoriques Thasos. Histria VІІІ/1, 1996, 176–190. Avram /Poenaru–Bordea 1988 А. Avram, Gh. Poenaru–Bordea, Nouveaux timbres amphoriques thasiens de Callatis. Dacia 32, 1988, 27–35. Avram 1988 A.Avram, Amfore şi tigle ştanpilate din colecţia ‘Dr. Horia Slobosianui’, Stud.Cerc.Ist.Vece 39/3, 1988, 381–389. Bon/Bon 1957 A–M.Bon, A. Bon, Les timbres amphoriques de Thasos. Etudes thaciennes 4, Paris 1957. Burow et. all. 2006 J. Burow, H. Todorova, T. Dimov, D. Jordanova, Die Amphorenstempel aus Durankulak (Addenda Ch. Tzochev).–In Durankulak III. Die hellenistischen Befunde. DAI Berlin, Sofia 2006. Buzoianu 1981 L. Buzoianu, Consideratii asupra ştampilelor Sinopeene de la edificiul Roman cu mosaic. Pontica 14, 1981, 133–151. Buzoianu 2001 L. Buzoianu, Civiliyaţia greacă în zona vest– pontică şi impactulei asupra lumii autohtone, sec. VII–IV, Constanţa 2001.

208

HENRIETA TODOROVA: DURANKULAK - A TERRITORIUM SACRUM OF THE GODDESS CYBELE Robinson 1905 D.M. Robinson, Greek and Latin Inskriptions from Sinope and Environs. Am.Journ.Arch. 9, 1905, 249 – 333. Rotroff 1997 S.I. Rotroff, Hellenistic pottery Athenian and imported wheelmade table ware and related material. Athenian Agora 29, 1997. Rotroff 2002 S.I. Rotroff, West slope in the east. –In: F. Blonde, P. Ballet, J.–F. Salles (eds), Céramiques hellénistiques et romaines, «productions et diffusion en Méditerranée orientale (Chypre, Egypte et côte syro– palestinienne). Paris 2002.

Škorpil 1913 V.V. Škorpil, Kybelin kult v Říši Bosporskej, Sbornik prací filosofickích dvornímu Radovi Prof. J. Kárlovi , Prag 1913,190–203. Tzotchev 2006 Ch. Tzotchev, Zu der hellenistischen Keramik von der Großen Insel. –In: H. Todorova (Edit.), Durankulak III, DAI Berlin, Sofia (in Print) Vinogradov 1977 J.G. Vinogradov, Pontische Studien, Mainz 1977.

List of the pits Pit № Grub

In trench, Depth (d)

Stamps and Amphoras

Correspon-ding of pit

Bones

Artefacts

*1

3 C/2, d. 0.90 m

Dipinto (I H)

*2

3 С/3–3 O/2, d. 1.60 m

Dipinto ?

Pieces of: Cattle, Stag, Sheep/Goat, Burnt Pieces of: Cattle, Frog Piglet, burnt

Red: Fr. Jar; Black: Fragments of 2 Kantharoi, Pyxis lid, bowl; Skyphos; Grey: Jar, bowl; plate 2 fr. Amphorae; ‘Thracian’ bowl. Red: Lagynos, Jar, broken vessel; Grey: Jar, bowl Cooking pot; Amphorae. Nail shaft

*3

3 С/2–3 Т/1, d. 1.15 m 3 Ч/1, d. 1.25 m

2, 15/16, 32, 46, 54. 1, 15/16, 54 14 15/16

4

5

3 Ц/3–3 Ч/4.

*6

3 Н/3– 3 O 4/2

Late BronzeAge? Thasos Thasos

6ª 7

3 H/3 3 Ш/4–3 Ч/3

Hallstatt Human bone

*8

3 О/3–3 У/2, d. 1.60 m

Thasos Thasos

9 10 11

3 У/2–3 Ф/1 3 У/4 3 У/3 d. 2.10 m

*13

3 Ф/2 d. 1.30 m

*14

3 Ф/4, d. 1.30 m

Stamp, origin unknown

*15/16

3 Ф/3–3 Щ/2 15 – d. 1.40, 16 – d. 0.70

Stamp, origin unknown

*17

3 Щ/4 d.1.20 m 3 Щ/2–3

*18

Pieces of: Cattle, Dog, Horse, Sheep/goat Human bones 15/16, 35.

Pieces of: Cattle, horse, Sheep/goat, Domestic pig. Shell Cattle, burnt, Sheep/goat, Domestic pig Pieces of: Horse, Sheep/goat, Wild pig,burnt

8, 13, 15/16, 33

Red: 2 Fr. Jar; grey: bowl; Fr. 7 Amphorae; Offering plate; Red: jar; Grey: Bowl, br. vessel; ‘Thracian’ Ware; Amphora frag. Coslogeni – Kantharos Red: Fr. Br.vessel, Kantharos; Grey: bowl, Krater?, Cooking pot; ‘Thracian ‘ bowl; Amphora, Offering plate. Scythian arrowhead Amphora, Babadagculture

Red: Jug; Fr. Amphorae. Black: Kantharos, plate, Fish-plate; Grey: Jug, bowl, br. vessel; ‘Thracian’ bowl; Spearhead,

Haltstatt ? Halstatt ?

8, 15/16, 27, 29, 104. 3, 15/16 23, 59, 122, 1, 2, 3, 6, 8, 14, 19,35, 36A, 123 46, 51, 54, 59,

Pieces of: Cattle/horse? burnt 10 shells Human skeleton with knife blade

Red: Jug, Bowl; Grey: bowl, dish; ‘Thracian’ bowl; Amphora; iron blade. Nail head Grey: Fr. Fish plate, Jug, dish, br. vessel; Amphorae; ‘Thracian’ bowl; Offering plate; Knife blade, Bronze nail, Clay object

Pieces of: Cattle, Sheep/goat, piglet, (burnt) Ptoto-/Bull, Horse, Fox, Sheep/Goat, Dog, Chicken, Stag, Pig, Greylag Goose, Wild Duck

Black: Bowl; Red: Fr. Jug, Bowl; Grey: Jug, bowl; ‘Thracian’ bowl; Amphorae; large Offering plate. Fr. Bronze nail (?), Fr. Female statuette; Loom weight, Iron nail, Spearhead. Black: Jug, Kantharos, Bowl, Fish-plate; Red: Jug, Bowl, 2 br, vessels, Fish-plate; Grey: Jug, Bowl; ‘Thracian’ bowl; Amphorae; Offering plate.

23, 106, Human bones neolith. , Shell

209

Grey: Cooking pot; Amphorae; Offering plate. Amphora handle; Offering plate.

ANCIENT GREEK COLONIES IN THE BLACK SEA 2 *19

3 П/3–4Л/4 d. 0.85 m

*20

4 Р/1, d. 1.30 m 11 E/3– 11 Л /2 4 Р/4, d. 0.65 m 4 Р/3, d 0.50 m 4 Р/4 d. 0.75 m

s.g. ‘Tumulus’ *21 *22 *23 NB: Die FuFinds from 21–25 are here combined.

*24 *25 26

4 Х/1 d. 0.40 m 4 Р/4–4 X/1, d. 0.30 m 4 P/2–3–4C/4 h. 1.20 m

*27

4 Х/2–4 Ц/1 d. 0.75 m

*28

4 С/1 d. 1.20 m 4 С/3–4 Т/1, d. 1.30 m

*29

15/16 119

Stone mound, no finds. Two complete Amphorae Offering plate Thasos, Harekleia, Kos 2 Dipinti (HΡA)

14, 17, 106, 113, 116.

Thasos

Piece of: Piglet

Thasos Dipinto(MA)

13, 29, 33 29

Thasos

13, 27 28, 31 28, 29, 33

*32

3 М/3 d. 1.25 m

Graffito Dipinto (A)

1

*33

З Л/3–3М/4 d. 1.40 m

Thasos

8, 27 31, 35, 36A, 122

*35

3 М/2 d. 1.90 m

*36 A

3 Л/2–3 М/1 d. 1.20 m

Pieces of: Cattle/Horse?, Sheep/Goat, Unidentified bones Pieces of: Cattle, Sheep/Goat, Carp, Pieces of: Cattle Pieces of: Cattle, pheasant, Sheep/goat, Carnivore Pieces of: Cattle, Sheep/goat, Domestic duck, Swan.Shell

6, 15/16, 33

Sinope Graffito Sinope

Pieces of : Cattle, horse, dog, Swan, Sheep/Goat, Swan, dog. Shell

14, 15/16, 36B, 142 36 A

Pieces of: Cattle, Pig, Sheep/goat Pig, Tortoise

Thasos K 2895, Chersonesos Я 0075, Unknown 38

3 Ж/2, d. 0.70 m

39 40

3B/1–2, 3 И/1–3 И/2

Red: Jug; Black: Kantharos; Grey: Jug; bowl, dish, 2 cooking pots; ‘Thracian’ small bowl; a lot of amphorae. Loom weight Spinning whorl

Finds under pit 23

4 Ц/1

3 М/1

Pieces of: horse, stag, deer? Piglet

Finds under pit 23

31

*36 B

Horse skull, Red: Jug, br. vessel; Pieces of burnt: Grey: Jug, bowl, br. vessel; Cattle, burnt ‘Thracian’bowl; Amphora; Offering plate. Grey: bowl, Amphora.

Black: Kantharos; Red: Jug; Amphorae. Grey: Jug, bowl, Cooking pot, Small bowl, Fish-plate; Black: Kantharos, plate; Red: Jug; Grey: Bowl; 2 Amphorae. Grey: Jug, Bowl; Offering plate; Amphora; ‘Thracian’bowl. Black: Kantharos, plate; Red: 2 Jugs; Offering plate. Grey: Jug, dish; ,,Thrcaian’ bowl; Amphorae; Red: 2 Jugs, plate, bowl; Grey: Jug; ‘Thracian’ bowl; Amphora; Offering plate.. Grey: bowl, br. vessel, cooking-pot; ‘Thracian’ Ware; Amphora; Offering plate. Pyxis lid. Black: Kantharos;Fish-plate; Red: 2 Jugs. Skyphos; Grey: Jug, Bowl, Dish, Plate, Cooking pot; ‘Thracian’ small bowl; Amphorae; Offering plates. Iron ring, Scythian arrowhead, Lead ring,nail, Glass fragment, Fibula, Knife. Red: Jug. Bowl; Grey: Jug, dish, Krater?; ‘Thracian’ bowl; Offering plate;Many amphora frag.. Scythian arrowhead. Red: Jug, Bowl, Dish, Cooking pot; Black: Plate; ‘Thracian’ bowl; Amphorae.. Fr. female stauette Glass alabastron, Balsamarium Red: Jug. bowl; Grey: Jug, bowl, br. vessel, cooking pot; ‘Thracian’ bowl; Many amphorae. Female head Black: Kantharos; Red: Jug; Amphorae; Offering plates; Grey: Bowl, Cooking pot; ,,Thracian’ bowl; loom weight. Ash-pile on bottom, rocks. Stone-pile on bottom

210

HENRIETA TODOROVA: DURANKULAK - A TERRITORIUM SACRUM OF THE GODDESS CYBELE 41

45 46/54

3 Г/1, d. 0.50 m 3 Г/1, d. 0.70 m 3 Д/2 4 А/2

47

3 Д/2–4 А/1

Sinope

48

3 К/2

Dipinto , Herakleia

51

4 Е/1–4 Е/4 d. 1.10 m 4 Е/1–2

Dipinto (Τ)

44

52 53 *54/46 56

4 А/4 4 А/2 4 Е/4–4 Л/1 d. 0.70 m

58

4 Е/1 d. 1.18 m 10 Ц/3 d. 0.55 m

*59

Sheep/goat, shell Hallstatt 1, 15/16

Human skeleton Animal bones 1, 15/16

3 Graffiti (A,Г,?) Dipinto

14, 15/16, 112, 114, 122, 131, 132

10 М/1

97

10 Л/3– 10 М/4

102 *104

10 К/1 9 К/2–3 d. 1.30 m

*106

0 M/3–10 C/2 d. 1.00 m

Dipinto (Μ+Α) Dipinto (Π)

17, 23, 113

107

10 П/3– 11 Л/4 10 Н/3–4 10 A/1

Sinope

59, 114 23, 106, 116

113

10 А/1 d. 1,65 m

Herakleia Unknown

Herakleia?

115

9 Г/1, d. 0,50 m 9 В/4 d. 1.00 m

Thasos

Black: Kantharos, Bowl; Red: Jug, dish, lid, bowl;. Grey:krater ??, Bowl, dish, Fish-plate, Cooking-pot; 4 Amphorae, Fe. nail, 4 ‘Thracian’ bowls; Offering plate. Female Terrakotta, Loom weight; Female Statuette.

Pieces of: Cattle (Calf)

Black: Jug, Lamp; edt: Jug; Amphora; Grey: br. vessel; ‘Thracian’ bowl; Offering plate. Lead aplik – Silven head on pottery fr. Black: Plate, Kantharos; Red: Jug, Bowl, br. vessel;. Thimiaterion Grey: Jug, bowl, Kantharos, br. vessel, Cooking pot, lid; ‘Thracianr’ bowl; Offering plate Amphora frs. and handle. Grey: Jug, Fish plate; Amphora Black: Kantharos; Grey: Bowl, Cooking pot; ‘Thracian’ ware. Black: Kantharos; Red: Jug;. ‘Thracian’ bowl; Grey: Jug, bowl, br. vessel, cooking-pot; Amphotra frgs.Spindle whorl. Red: Jug; Grey: Jug; Amphora. Red: Jug; grey: Bowl, Cooking-pot. Black: Kantharos; Grey: Jug, Dish; Amphora. Black: Krater, Kantharos, Bowl, plate, Fishplate; Amphorae Red: Jug, Pyxis lid, br. vessel, bowl;. Grey: Jug, Bowl, Dish, Lid, Cooking pot; Thymiaterion. ‘Thraian’ bowl; Offering plate. Lamp, Spearhead fr., Lead frag.. Red: Jug, Bowl; Grey: Bowl; Amphora. Red: Jug, Bowl, br. Vessel Grey: Jug, Bowl; Amphora. ‘Thracian’ bowl; Offering plate. Red: Jug, Askos, Pithos frag.; Grey: Jug, Bowl, Dish, Cooking pot; Amphorae frags. Skyphos Fr. Red: Jug, br. vessel; Grey: Jug, Bowl;

Piece of: Cattle

Pieces of: Domestic pig (burnt), Sheep

12, 59 Unidentified bone

*116

10 Б/4, d. 1.40 m

23. 113

119

10 Н/1

19

Pieces of: Cattle, horse. Shell

211

Black: Fish-plate; Amphora; Grey: Jug, Bowl, br. vessel; ‘Thracian’ bowl; Offering plate. Red: Jug, Bowl; Amphora; Grey: Bowl,br. Vessel Many Amphora fr. Offering plate frs.. Offering plate frs.. Finds under 46 Red: Bowl; Amphorae; Grey: Bowl; ‘Thracian’ bowl; Unidentified bronze fragment K 2930; Amphora frs.

Pieces of: Sheep/Goat, Stag skull

13

Dipinti (HΠΛ)

114

Black: Kantharos, Bowl; Red: Jug; 4 Amphorae; Grey:br. vessel, Cooking-pot; ‘Thracian’ bowl; Offering plate. Balsamarium, Loom weight, Knife blade. Grey: Bowl, plate; 5 Amphorae;

15/16

96

111/111A 112

Grey: bowl; ‘Thracian’ bowl; Amphora. Red: Jug; Amphora; Offering plate.

ANCIENT GREEK COLONIES IN THE BLACK SEA 2 120 122 votive site A- (Oval)

10 Н/2 d. 1.30 m 9 Г/2–3– 9 Д/1

123

9 З/3–9 Н/2

h. 1.50 m

130

10 C/3 d. 0.90 m

Dipinto (Π) Dipinto (Ф)

131

10 Ц/2– 10 Ч/1

132

10 С/4– 10 Ц/1. d. 0.50 m 10 З/4 d.1.10 m 3 М/3–3 С/2 d. 0.95 m 3 Р/2

137 138 139

140

2 Ф/2 d. 2.55 m

141 142

3 Л/4 2 П/1 d. 1.40 m

143

2 О/3 d. 1.40 m

144

2 У/ Centre d. 2.00 m

145

2 О/4, d. 1.30 m

146

2 О/2 d. 1.00 m

147

2 О/1–4 d. 0.50 m

149

2 Ш/1–2 (Off. pl. B9 d. 0.50 m

150

2 Ш/1

151

9 Г/2–2Ш/3 d. 0.60 m (Off. pl. D)

14, 33, 59, 142 15/16

Pieces of: Cattle, horse, piglet. (burnt) Unidentified Pieces of: Sheep/goat

59, 132 Herakleia Dipinto

59, 131

Pieces of: Sheep/goat

Red: Bowl; Amphora. Grey: Jug, Bowl, Dish, Cooking-pot; Black: Bowl; Red: Jug;. Amphora. Grey: Jug, Bowl, Cooking-pot; ‘Thracian’ bowl; Offering plate Black: Fishplate; Red: Jug; Grey: Bowl; Amphora, Offering plate, Black: Fish-plate Grey: Bowl Amphora: Herakleia Red: Bowl; Grey: Bowl, Cooking-pot; Amphora. ‘Thracian’ bowl; Offering plate. Red: Jug; Grey: Bowl, Fish-plate, Cooking-pot; Amphora.

Dipinto (T) Grey: Jug, Bowl, Amphora. Sinope Sinope

Pieces of: Cattle, Horse, Piglet, Unidentif. Pieces of: Cattle, Horse, Donkey, Sheep/goat Carp. Common mussel. 36A, 122

Calf skull, Pieces of: Sheep, Pig, Chicken, Whiting, Unidentified Pieces of: Cattle, Horse, Fish Dog, Lamb, Dog, Fish, Sheep/Goat, Piglet, Chicken. Pieces of: Cattle, Fish, Sheep/Goat Pieces of: Cattle, Horse, Cock. Turtle Pieces of: Cattle, Horse, Sheep/goat Wheat, Barley, Rye, Herbs, Acorn. Pieces of: Cattle, Horse, Sheep/Goat, Domestic pig. Plant remains. Pieces of: Cattle, Horse, Pig, Stag, unidentified Pieces of: Cattle, Horse, Stag, Sheep/goat, Domestic pig,

2 Graffiti (A, E) , Dipinto A 150

Dipinto (L,E) Koss

212

Grey: Jug, Bowl, Cooking-pot; ‘Thracian Ware’; Amphora. Fragment of statuette Y 0031,votive hand Rot: Jug, Bowl; Grey: Cooking-pot; ‘Thracin Ware’; Amphora; Lead object, Comb? Fragment of male statuette. Amphora; ‘Thracian Ware’. Black: Fish-plate, Bowl, Jug, Dish; Grey: Bowl; Offering plate; ‘Thracian ware’; Amphora. Spearhead, Knife-blade, ‘Scythian’ Arrowhead; Sickle, Lamp. Black: Kantharos; Red: Jug; Grey: Bowl, Jug; votive-plate; ‘Thracian’ bowl; Amphorae: Kife-blade Fr, Iron nail. Black: Kantharos; Bowl. Red: Jug; Amphorae. Grey: Bowl, Jug. Schwarz: Kantharos;. Red: Jug; Thracian’ Small bowl; Amphorae Grey: Bowl, Jug; Grey: Jug, Lid – cooking-pot; Amphorae. Red: Jug; votive-plates. Black: Kantharos, Jug;. Grey: Bowl, Jug; Fragments of 8 Amphorae Black: Kantharos;. Red:Jug; Grey: Bowl, Jug, Cooking-pot; ‘Thracian’bowl, Amphorae. Lead, Comb?; ‘Scythian’ Arrowhead Fr. Black: Kantharos;Oinohoe. Red: Jug; Offering plate; Grey: Bowl, Jug; ‘Thracian’ Ware; Amphorenbruchstücke. Bronze pfriem bent Я 0094 Schwarz: Kantharos, Jug, Bowl, Plate, Fish-plate; Red: Jug; Bowl; Grey: Jug, Bowl, Beaker; ‘Thracian’bowl; Offering plates;

HENRIETA TODOROVA: DURANKULAK - A TERRITORIUM SACRUM OF THE GODDESS CYBELE Dog, Frog, unidentified. 152 153

17 Б/3–4 (Off. Pl. E) 17 Д/2 (Off. pl. F)

Fr. of 16 Amphorae, Unidentified iron objekt, Bronze sickle. Amphorae pile with ash Large ash pile, Balsamarium, Small bowl, Amphora lid a.o. Ash pile.

154

17 Ж/3 (Off. pl. G) Podium (main votive site) 2 Ш/2– 2 Щ/1 (Off. pl. C)

Bones from: Sheep/goat, Dog, Pig, Stag,

POTTERY FROM THE PITS

Ash and pile of amphora frags.

In the case of the red domestic ware the clay is light- to red-brown, in two cases also tile-red; the varnish varies from clay hue to bright red, but can also be dark-brown or whitish-green. Some fragments show signs of striped pattern of a red color and in one case a circular decoration is visible.

The Classification J. Burow divided the pottery from the votive pits into four groups: fine pottery, domestic pottery, amphorae and ‘Thracian’ hand-made coarseware (Burow 1997).

In the case of the grey-ware the clay is light-grey and in one case dark-grey. The varnish is clay-coloured, in the case of the bowls and dishes on the interior, on the upper edge as well as ca. 2 cm on the exterior, black. This varnish, which is often carlessly executed, shows a Craquelé–structure, which is typical for some local production.

The Fine Pottery This group may be with red or brack coating. The clay is of superior quality and the body is reddish-orange to brownish-red. All pieces are regarded as imports although in the case of the fine red pottery this is sometimes doubtful, as they may just as easily be classified as good examples of the red domestic pottery. The red pottery has various coatings mostly in the case of jugs: light-, reddish or dark-brown, sometimes with a metalic sheen, ivory coloured, in some cases decorated with red stripes. The surface is smooth and firm.

The so-called ‘Thracian’ hand-made coarse-ware The hand-made, thick vessels of dark clay are certainly local production which have many inclusions. They are poorly fired, have a course surface and are generally of poor quality. Fragments are found mostly in the votive pits, generally on the bottom; in some cases broken, but complete vessels are found there. Prior to 1991 this kind of pottery was commonly referred to as ‘Hallstatt’; their presence in the pits which have since been dated to the early Hellenistic period makes it clear that they must have been produced at that time. This category is referred to as ‘Thracian’ coarse-ware.

The black fine-pottery consists mostly of bowls, dishes and kantharoi. The varnish is predominantly of good, in some cases excellent quality; deep-black or black with a silver sheen. Many pieces, however, have burnt areas and some are completely burnt to a brown color. The fine pottery vessels must have been in use over a long period as almost all of them show strong signs of use. Of the three black fine pottery vessel types there are local copies: the clay is grey, less fine and thicker. The varnish is matt black, or the pieces have the light-grey varnish common in the grey domestic pottery.

References Burow 1997 J. Burow, Hellenistische Keramik in Durankulak (Bulgarien) Δ΄ Επιστημονική Συνάντηση για την ελληνική κεραμική. Χρονολογικά προβλήματα-κλειστά σύνολα – εργαστήρια. Πρακτικά, Αthens 1997, 135–137, Tabl. 103– 108. Oppermann 1984 M. Opperman, Thraker zwischen Karpatenbecken und Ägäis. Berlin 1984. Oppermann 2004 M. Oppermann, Die westpontische Poleis und ihr indigenes Umfeld in vorrömischer Zeit. Langenweißbach/Sachsen 2004.

The domestic ware The vessels in this category are divided into red and grey. It may be that we are talking about the same ware which received different colouration becuse of different firing techniques. The fragments of the same bowl from votive pit 33 as well as a dish from 2 E/I/O, in which the clay and varnish is in one case grey, in the other red, seem to support this. The clay is quite fine, but in contrast to the fine pottery shows evidence of inclusions and airbubbles. The thickness of the pottery superceeds that of the imported fine pottery.

The bone-finds from the pits A. Human skeleton and bones There were human bones found in eight votive pits (Nos 5, 7, 13, 18, 52, 92, 132 and 143). 213

ANCIENT GREEK COLONIES IN THE BLACK SEA 2

In pits No 5, 7, 13, 52, lay almost complete skeletons: in pits 7 and 52 in a crouched position, wherein the first had the arms raised and the hands in front of the face. A knife-blade lay under the ribs. In other cases one arm was raised, the other angled while the head was unnaturally bent backwards. In the case of the skeleton in pit 13 the arms were in an unnatural position and the spinal bones and the ribs were found separate from the others. The positioning of this skeleton suggests that it was thrown into the grave with little care. In pit 5 the leg bones were separated from the skeleton and were found in the east of the pit. The only find here was a late-bronze age kantaros of the Coslogeni culture from the fill, which makes the dating of the pit difficult. The assumption that this person died an unnatural death and that this was a sacrifice is fairly certain. Pits with human sacrifices are fairly common in the Thraco-Getian area (Sîrbu 1991; Sîrbu 1993; Sîrbu/Sîrbu 1997, Fig. 3-6, 342-348;). Similar finds are known from the Hellenistic cult-site on the Čirakman plateau near Balčik (Bisone), if wrongly interpretated (Salkin 1984, 55). They also appear in votive pits in Thrace, e.g. in Gledatshevo, Dvora Region (Tonkova/Savatinov 2001, Abb.9–12, 16, 17).

B. Animal bones from the pits Animal bones come mostly from horses, cattle, sheep or goats as well as from pigs. They are present in most votive pits which does not mean that no meat was offered in the others as boneless meat may have been present. There seems to be no preference for a particular animal part as the bones come from all parts of the animals. The total number of bones would indicate that they came from a large number of animals. Only a small number of the bones from the sacrificed animals ended up in the pits. Connected bones were seldom found. Only on the bottom of pits 33 and 142 complete skulls were found. One must ask the question as to what occurred with the rest of the animals’ meat. It is possible that after the slaughter of the animal the entrails and choice cuts of meat were put into the pits, the rest eaten by the celebrants and the remaining bones thrown away. The animal bones from the votive pits with indication of the meat quantities (Determinations: *A. von den Driesch, München. ** N. Spasov und Z. Boev, Sofia)

Herodotes clearly mentions human sacrifice among the Getae (Hdt 4.94). He states that when a particularly important offering to Zalmoxis was to be made, a notable person had to be sacrificed to the god. Human sacrifice was generally not uncommon in the antique world if only in extreme situations. For example, Themistokles sacrificed Persian prisoners before the battle of Salamis (Nilsson 1941, 123).

Pit 1**: Portions from Cattle, Sheep/Goat (burned), Red deer. Ca.280 kg meat = approximately 140 participants. Pit 2**: Portions from Cattle (burned), Piglet (very young), Frog. Ca.100 kg meat = approximately 50 participants. Pit 4**: Portions from Cattle, Horse, Dog, Sheep/Goat. Ca.250 kg meat = approximately 125 participants. Pit 5: Human skeleton, Late Bronze Age? Pit 6**: Portions from Cattle, Horse, Pig, Sheep/Goat, Mussels. Ca.260 kg meat = approximately 130 participants. Pit 7**: Human skeleton, Hellenistic. Cattle, Pig (burned), Sheep/Goat. Ca.250 kg meat = approximately 125 participants. Pit 8**: Portions from Horse, Wild pig, Sheep/Goat (burned). Ca.200 kg meat = approximately 100 participants. Pit 11**: Portions from Cattle/Horse (burned), Mussels. Ca.100 kg meat = approximately 50 participants. Pit 13: Human skeleton, Hellenistic. Pit 14**: Portions from Cattle, Piglet, Sheep/Goat. Ca.140 kg meat = approximately 70 participants. Pit 15+16**: Portions from Aurochs/Bull, Horse, Pig, Sheep/Goat, Dog, Fowl, Red deer, Goose, Wild Duck, Fox. Ca.440 kg in 2 pits = 220kg meat per pit = approximately 110 Participants per pit. Pit 18**: Mussels. Human bones, possibly Neolithic. Pit 19**: Portions from Cattle (burned), Horse Skull. Ca.200kg meat = approximately 100 participants. Pit 23*: Horse, Thoracic vertebrae; Red deer, Mandible; Fallow deer; Piglet.

References Hdt 4, 94. Herodotes,4, 94. Nilsson 1941 M. Nilsson. Geschichte der griechischen Religion I. –In: Handbuch der Altertumswissenschaft (Hg. W. Otto), München 1941. Theodosiev 1994 N. Teodosiev, Thracian tumulus near the town of Kavarna. –In: Култура и религия в северна Тракия, Хелис III/1, 1994, 101–120 (Kultgruben auf 118) Todorova (Edit.) 2002 H. Todorova (Edit.). Durankulak, Bd. II, Teil 2. Die prähistorischen Gräberfelder von Dukankulak. (Deutsches Archäologisches Institut, Berlin), Sofia 2002, Gräber 2, 149, 215, 278, 320. 355, 390, 694. Sîrbu 1991 V. Sîrbu, Semnificaţia unor grupi de cult descoperite în dava Geto–Dacica de la Grdiştea (Judeţul Braila). Peuce X/1, 1991 57–61. Sîrbu 1991 V. Sîrbu, Semnificaţia unor grupi de cult descoperite în dava Geto–Dacica de la Grădistea (Judeţul Braila). Peuce X/2, 1992 39–47. Sîrbu 1993 V. Sîrbu, Croyances et pratiques funéraire chez les Géto–Daces, Hellis (Sofia) 1993, 3 Sîrbu/Sîrbu 1997 V. Sîrbu, L. Sîrbu, Coutumes funéraires et sacrifices humaines dans le monde des Géto–Daces. –In: Actes 2e Symposium international des études thrciennes. Thrace ancienne I, Komotini 1997, 336–361. Tonkova/Savatinov 2001 M. Tonkova, S. Savatinov, Thracian Culture of the Late Iron Age. Maritsa Iztok Archaelogical Research 5, 2001, 95–126.

214

HENRIETA TODOROVA: DURANKULAK - A TERRITORIUM SACRUM OF THE GODDESS CYBELE Ca.240 kg meat = approximately 120 participants. Pit 26*: Piglet Ribs. Ca.20kg meat = approximately 10 participants. Pit 27*: Portions from Cattle/Horse, Sheep/Goat. Ca.120 kg meat = approximately 120 participants. Pit 29*: Portions from Cattle, Round portion 1, Sheep/Goat, Unidentified, Carp. Ca.140 kg meat = approximately 70 participants. Pit 31*: Cattle, Round portion 1. Ca.100 kg meat = approximately 50 participants. Pit 32*: Cattle: Round portion 1, Sheep/Goat: Ribs, Bone from big wild carnivore 1, Peasant. Ca.140 kg meat = approximately 70 participants. Pit 33**: Portions from Cattle, Sheep/Goat, Dog, Swan, Duck, Mussels. Ca.140 kg meat = approximately 70 participants. Pit 35**: Portions from Cattle, Horse, Sheep/Goat, Dog, Swan, Fowl, Mussels. Ca.250 kg meat = approximately 125 participants. Pit 36 B*: Cattle: foot bone 1 (skinning traces), Pig: Ribs 1, Sheep/Goat, big Turtle. Ca.160 kg meat = approximately 80 participants. Pit 44**: Portions from Sheep/Goat, Mussels. Ca.20 kg meat = approximately 10 participants. Pit 52: Human skeleton, Hellenistic. Pit 53*: Unidentified Pit 59**: Sheep/Goat; Red deer Skull 1. Ca.120 kg meat = approximately 60 participants. Pit 96*: Cattle (young): Thoracic vertebrae 1; Fibula 1. Ca.100 kg meat = approximately 50 participants. Pit 97*: Cattle: Ribs 4; Phalanx (adult) 1. Ca.100 kg meat = approximately 50 participants. Fragments of human skull and clavicle, possibly Neolithic. Pit 106*: Pig: Pelvis 1; Metapodial 1 (burned), Sheep (subadultus): fibula 1. Ca.100 kg meat = approximately 50 participants. Pit 119*: Cattle, Tibia, Horse skull, Mussels. Ca.200 kg meat = approximately 100 participants. Pit 122*: Cattle: Caudal vertebrae 1; Mandible 1 (burned); Ribs 1 (burned), Horse (middle age): maxillary molar 1, Pig (Piglet): Pelvis 1(burned). Ca.250 kg meat = approximately 125 participants. Fragment of human skull, possibly Neolithic Pit 123*: Unidentified 1

Pit 126*: Unidentified 1 Pit 130*: Sheep (adultus): fibula 1, Sheep/Goat: Mandible 1; Ribs 1; Maxilla (young-adult) 1. Ca.30 kg meat = approximately15 participants. Pit 132*: Sheep (adultus): Fibula 1, Sheep/Goat: Mandible 1 Pit 139*: Cattle: Thoracic vertebrae 3; Ribs 2; Lumbar vertebrae 1; Pelvis 1; Round portion 1; Tibia (almost adultus) 1, (young) 1; Hoof bone 1, Horse: Pelvis 1, Pig: Mandible (female, almost adultus) 1; Leg bone (Piglet) 1, Unidentified 1. Ca.260 kg meat = approximately 130 participants. Pit 140*: Cattle: molar (young adult) 1; Round portion 1; Foot bone 1; Leg bone 1, Horse: Incisive 1; Metapodium 1, Donkey: Molar 2, Sheep/Goat: Mandible (young adult) 1; Neck vertebrae 1; Carp: Caudal vertebrae 7 (in anatomical order), Mussels. Ca.300 kg meat = approximately 150 participants. Pit 142*: Cattle Skull, Sheep: Fibula 1, Pig, Leg bone 1, Fowl, White fish. Pit 143**: Portions from Cattle, Horse, Lamb, Sheep/Goat, Piglet, Dog, Barbel, Unidentified. Human tibia, possibly Neolithic Pit 144*: Cattle: Thoracic vertebrae 2; Ribs 2, Sheep/Goat: Mandible, Barbel. Ca.130 kg meat = approximately 65 participants. Pit 145*: Cattle: Ribs 2; Tibia 1, Horse: Incisive 1, Rooster, Turtle, Unidentified. Ca.200 kg meat = approximately 100 participants. Pit 146*: Cattle: Mandible (adult) 1; Thoracic vertebrae 1; Ribs 2; Tibia 1, Horse: Phalanx 1, Sheep/Goat: Tibia 1 (artefact, chisel?), Unidentified 1. Ca.220 kg meat = approximately 110 participants. Pit 149 ** (Offering place B): Portions from Horse, Cattle; Pig, Sheep/Goat = Waste Pit 150**: Portions from Cattle; Horse, Red deer, Piglet, Unidentified. Ca.200 kg meat =approximately 100 participants. Pit 151** (Offering place D): Portions from Cattle; Horse, Red deer, Pig, Sheep/Goat, Dog, Frog = Waste Podium** (Offering place C): Portions from Cattle, Sheep/Goat, Pig, Red deer, Dog, Unidentified = Waste

Table 5. Bone finds from the pits. Pit No

1 2 4 6 7 8 11

Horse

Cattle

Proto-

Deer

Wild–pig

Domestic– pig

Dog

Sheep/Goat

Chicken

19

28

3

6

1

14

6

25

5

X..... X..... X..... X.....

X..... X..... X..... X..... ........

........

Shell, Fish, Bird etc..

X #´ Piglet

Frog X.....

X..... ........ X.....

?

X..... X..... ........ X.....

Shell Human Skeleton Shell

215

ANCIENT GREEK COLONIES IN THE BLACK SEA 2 13 14 15/16 19 23 26 27 29 31 32 33 35 36B 44 52 59 96 97 106 119 122 123 126 130 132 139 140 142 143 144 145 146 147 149.Opl.B 150 151.Opl.D Sac. sit. C

Human Skeleton ....... ........ X....

X..... X.... X.....

X..

X.....

Fox

X.....

X.....

Grey goose, Duck

X..... X.....

X..... X.....

X.....

X.... X.... X.... ......... X....

Carp

X.....

Pheasant, Scavanger Duck. Swan Tortoise Shell Human Skeleton

X....

X..... X..... X..... X..... X.....

....... X....

X.... Shells

Piglet Unidentified Unidentified X.... .......

X..... X.....

X..... X.....

........ ........ ... .. ........ X.....

X..... Donkey ....... Piglet

.......

........ X.....

....... ........ .......

....... ........ Nn.n.. ........ Cattle

.... .

Unidentified Carp; 14 shells White-fish Fish Fish Tortoise Unidentified Unidentified votive debris

....... ...... Sheep/ Goat

votive debris votive debris Shells, Fish, Bird etc.

X....

........

Horse

....... ....... .......

........ ........ .........

.......

Proto-

. ... ....... Stag

Wild–pig

........ ........ ........ ........ Domestic– pig

....... ....... ....... Dog

Sheep/Goat Donkey Red-deer Domestic pig Piglet Carp Stag Deer Wild pig Chicken Grey-goose

Commentary The general picture of the meat offerings shows a gradation in the sort and number of animals sacrificed. Whether this picture mirrors the social status of those offering the sacrifice is not clear because other aspects may be responsible – Hekatombe, the number of people involved in the sacrifice and whether boneless meat was offered. In any case, burnt bones from the pits illustrate that the animals were ritually slaughtered in the temple but butchered and cooked outside the complex. Some of the choice cuts and the innards were offered to the goddess, the rest went to the priests or the participants and was ritually consumed. The hides were sold or auctioned to support the temple or went to the donor of the Hekatombe.

Chicken

15-25 kg, 60-100 kg, 65-228-240 kg, 30-50 kg, 4-10 kg, 1-3 kg, 60-100 kg, 10-23 kg, 33-165 kg, 2 kg, 2-3kg.

I compute approx. 2 kg of raw meat per person during a two day stay at the temple. As it is known that meat during cooking loses approx. 25–30% of its weight and that meat also went into the pits, the meat consumed per person would not have been more than 1200–1300 gr.

The meat (without bone) quantity has been computed as follows. For the following information I am grateful to Prof. N. Benecke (Berlin): Horse Cattle Calves

X.....

........ X.....

Piglet Piglet

X..... X..... X..... X..... X..... X..... X.....

X.....

Piglet. X.....

There are sacrifices where over 300 kg of meat was consumed, which illustrates the massive scale of the ceremony. There are also, however, examples of private sacrifices to the goddess where only a small animal which would have given little meat was offered.

100-350 kg, 80-150 kg, 40-60 kg, 216

HENRIETA TODOROVA: DURANKULAK - A TERRITORIUM SACRUM OF THE GODDESS CYBELE Group III: Rectangular or oval shaped burial pits dug into the loess with vertical walls without stone slabs; orientation West (head), or East (head); 8 graves (№ 1, 2, 3, 9, 11, 13, 29, 41). Group IV: Rectangular or slightly trapezoidal shaped burial pits with a burial niche along one of the long sides. The niches were enclosed with a row of orthostats (5 graves, № 22, 28, 37, 47, 99); 3 skeletons were oriented with the head to the West, one to the East and one to the North.1 Group V: Rectangular catacombs, with a dromos and a burial chamber at the end of the dromos. They were dugin at a depth of 1:00–1:20 m. into the loess (3 graves, № 19, 59, 60). 2 skeletons with head East, and one to the West.

Apart from the human skeletons found in situ (Pits 5? 7,13 und 52), the individual human bones from the votive pit area obviously come from disturbed Neolithic or Copper-Age graves as the votive pits are in the area of the prehistoric burials. During the excavation of the latter, disturbed graves were indeed found as in the cases of № 149, 215, 390, 406, 524, 970 (Todorova 2002, Bd 2.) Cattle was the preferred source of meat and votive animal, followed by domestic animals like horse, domestic pig, donkey, sheep/goat, dog and chicken. Wild animals are rarely present and include stag, deer, wildboar, rabbit, fox, wild-goose and swan. They illustrate the fact that, in combination with the forthcoming sacrifices, hunts were also organized to supplement the meat. Fish are rare but the presence of types such as carp and white-fish show that fishing was practiced in the sea south-west of the island

GRAVES FROM THE AREA OF THE PREHISTORIC CEMETERY Grave № 341, Trench 24R/1, depth 1.50 m. Group ІІ Chronology: 3rd c. BC. Grave construction type: Pit with 2 stone slabs covering. Type of Burial: Cremation. Grave goods: Hellenistic Gray Ware sherds. Grave № 407, Trench 30B/1, Depth 1.43 m. Group ІІ. Chronology: End of the 3rd c. BC. Type of Burial: Pit with 3 stone slabs covering Skeletal remains: two pieces of bone from a child’s arm. Skeletal condition: Poor preservation Age: Inf. I. Position of deceased: Probably supine. Orientation: Head facing West. Context: The grave was destroyed by the foundation of an early medieval house and was partly disturbed by the pit of Grave 441. Grave goods: Oinochoe (Fig. 36); small bowl, red glazed spindle whorl; 2 blue glass beads, pink chalcedony bead – probably belongs to a earlier prehistoric gave; bronze thimble; white clay bead incrusted with glass paste ‘bird’s eye decoration found near the above-mentioned jug. Under the ceramic pots a round copper bead was found which also probably came from an earlier prehistoric grave. A bell shaped laginos (Fig. 37) with decoration in a horizontal row on the neck wreath, harp, kylix, loom or comb, net, Phrygian cap and some other elements that probably refer to the cult of Cybelle. Grave № 419. Trench 30B/3–4, depth 2 m. Group II Chronology: 3rd c. BC. Grave construction type: Four stone had been placed near the feet of the deceased – two were located along the long side of the rectangular cist while two smaller ones were placed on top of the other two. Type of Burial: inhumation. Skeleton: good state of

The presence of horse bones is interesting as it gives not only an insight into the local diet but also indicates close contact with the local horse-breeders among the local Thraco-Dacian and Scythian population. It is fairly sure that representatives of these groups also took part in the votive ceremonies and contributed horses for sacrifice. As the horse was a particularly valuable animal, its sacrifice illustrates how high the goddess Cybele was thought of in this region. It is interesting that votive pits which were of a more massive construction as in the case of that with the stone walling, often lack animal bones which points to different votive practises which have not left archaeological traces. Therefore sacrifical pits with no animal bones should not be thought of as ‘poor’ as the votive gifts may have consisted entirely of boneless meat. The Burials (after Dimov in print) CATALOGUE OF HELLENISTIC AND LATE ANTIQUE GRAVES During the systematic excavations of the DurankulakNivata settlement on the west bank of Durankulak Lake (Dimov 1982) in 1983 and 1989: 37 Hellenistic and late Roman graves were discovered and partially investigated; one round pit with burnt walls and filled with ash was also excavated. All burials were inhumation. The graves were divided into five different groups: Group I: Burials are placed in rectangular cists constructed from large stone slabs; orientation is West (head) 14 graves (№ 5, 7, 10, 20, 21, 24, 30, 35, 36, 43, 52, 272, 280, 282). Group II: The graves are dug into the loess. The burial area is rectangular or oval-shaped with the vertical sides covered with stone slabs or unworked stones; orientation is West (head)–East; 7 graves (№ 8, 18, 31, 32, 33, 34, 45).

1 The dromoi of this group of graves (a total of 5 burials) were not detected during the excavations in 1989. The place where the cemetery was located is now arable land. The dromoi of these burial constructions could have been destroyed by cultivation of the land. These types of burial constructions are well known in the Russian steppes and the North Black Sea coast area and are related to the Scythians and Samarians (Grakov 1964, 118-127).

217

ANCIENT GREEK COLONIES IN THE BLACK SEA 2 preservation, 1.62 cm height Age: Adult (20–25)2, Male. Position of deceased: supine. Orientation: East (head); skull faced left. Context: Soil under the upper half of the torso formed a thin layer of reddish color and uneven density – this was probably due to the red mineral pigment used to dye the cloth that the deceased had been wrapped in. Grave goods: Iron object found near the left shoulder; also on the left side a 38cm long mahaira with a blade width of 7 cm was located in poor corroded condition between the arm and the pelvis – the handle was near the upper part of the left thigh – the tip of the mahaira was pointing towards the head; on the right side of the deceased, under the pelvis was a fragment of a corroded knife and above it was a bronze ring (clay?) (2.5 cm) with a rectangular knob that was broken off. Under the left shoulder were two sherds Hellenisticc Gray Ware. Grave № 441, Trench 24W/4-24V/3, depth 2,30 m, Group II. Chronology: End of the 4th c. BC. Grave construction: Pit with 2 stone slabs as covering. Inhumation. Skeletal condition: poor. Age/Sex: Adult, female. Position of deceased: supine; arms along side the body. Orientation: East (head). Grave goods: round bronze mirror, 8 cm in diameter, found near the right shoulder; next to the left femur was a small corroded iron knife (10 cm). To the left and behind the skull a stone slab was found.

Chronology: Probably 3rd c. BC. Grave construction: Rectangular burial cist with vertical stone slabs 1.95 m x 0.80 m. Inhumation. Skeletal remains: Disarticulated – appears to be the remains of two individuals. Condition: Poor state of preservation. Age: Adult. Position: supine. Orient.: head West. Grave goods: None. Grave № 21. Trench Г 90/4 ; depth 1.10 m. Chronology: Probably 3rd c. BC. Grave construction: Rectangular burial cist with vertical stone slabs; 2.10 m x 0.90 m. Inhumation. Skeletal condit. good. Adult. Position: Supine. Orient.: West. Grave goods: None. Grave № 24. Trench Б 21/1; depth 0.90 m. Chronology: Probably 3rd c. BC. Grave construction: Rectangular burial cist with massive vertical stone slabs; 2.20 m x 0.95 m. Inhumation. Skeletal condition good. Age: Adult. Position of deceased: Supine. Orientation: head West. Grave goods: Copper earring with a bone bead (2 cm), glass bead (1.9 cm). Grave № 30. Trench Б 2/1; depth 0.70 m. Chronology: Probably 3rd c. BC. Grave construction: Rectangular burial cist with vertical stone slabs; 2.00 m x 0.80 m. Inhumation. Skeletal remains: Disarticulated; remains of two individuals scattered in the grave; two skulls found on the eastern side. Poor state of preservation. Age: Adult. Orientation: head East. Grave goods: Copper ring (2 cm.), and a bone awl (9.5 cm) Grave № 35. Trench Б 11/1–2; depth 0.95 m. Chronology: 3rd c. BC. Grave construction: Rectangular burial cist with massive vertical stone slabs; 2.55 m x 1.35 m. Inhumation. Remains of three individuals; the one buried last was in a supine position with head to the west; the bones from the other two individuals were collected and placed in the northwestern corner of the grave. Age: Adult. Position: Supine. Orientation: heads West. Grave goods: Copper earring, a string of blue and black glass beads, two copper bracelets (6 cm) – one flat and one from twisted wire, a glass bracelet (5.7 cm) a bone hair pin (Fig. 38) whose reverse is in the shape of a human hand holding a small sphere (H 0026, 12.2 cm) a small trefoil mouthed pitcher – oinohoe type (15 cm). Grave № 36. Trench Б 12/1–2; depth 1.00 m Chronology: Probably 3rd c. BC. Grave construction: Rectangular burial cist with massive vertical stone slabs; 2.20 m x 0.70 m. Inhumation. Skeletal remains: The bones were piled up in the western have of the grave. Poor preservation. Age: Adult. Orientation: head West. Grave goods: None. Grave № 43. Trench Б 22/4; depth 0.60 m. Chronology: Probably 3rd c. BC. Grave construction: Destroyed burial cist with vertical stone slabs. Inhumation. Skeletal remains: The bones were scattered among the displaced stones. Very poor state of preservation. Age: Adult. Grave goods: None Grave № 52. Trench Б 33/1; depth 0.91 m. Chronology: Probably 3rd c. BC. Grave construction: Rectangular burial cist with vertical stone slabs; 1.48 m X 0.38 m. Skeletal: Supine. Age: Infant (II) about 10 years. Orientation: head West. Grave goods: None Grave № 278. Trench Б 4/1; depth 1.05m.

HELLENISTIC AND LATE ANTIQUE GRAVES FROM THE AREA OF THE LATE NEOLITHIC SETTLEMENT ‘DURNAKULAK-NIVATA’ (Fig. 35) GROUP I Grave № 5. Trench B 30/1; depth 0,90 m. Chronology: Probably 3rd c. BC. Grave construction: Rectangular burial cist 1.80 m x 0.65 m with vertical stone slabs. Inhumation. Skeletal remains: moved to one side of the cist. Skeletal condition: Poor. Orientation: Cist orientation East–West. Grave goods: None. Grave № 7. Trench A 91/3; depth 1.10 m. Chronology: 3rd c. BC. Grave construction: Severely damaged rectangular cist with vertical stone slabs – preserved length 1.10 m x 0.65 m. Inhumation. Skeletal condition: heavily damaged. Age: Inf. (I). Orient: head West Grave goods: pair of silver earrings (2.1 cm), 5 glass beads (0.7 –1.2 cm) (2.1 cm), corroded iron artifact, ceramic vessel (7.1 cm), and a glass balsamarium (8.5 cm). Grave № 10. Trench B 29/1; depth 0.80 m. Chronology: Probably 3rd c. BC. Grave construction: Rectangular burial cist with vertical stone slabs; 1.85 m x 0.53 m. Inhumation. Skel. disarticulated; skull, leg and arm bones were found in the western part of the cist, the rest of the bones were scattered around the grave. Age: Juv. (II). Orient.: head West. Grave goods: None. Grave № 20. Trench A 71/2; depth 0.65 m. 2 Prof. Dr. Jordan Jordanov from the Institute of Morphology at BAS. did the anthropological analyses of the skeletons.

218

HENRIETA TODOROVA: DURANKULAK - A TERRITORIUM SACRUM OF THE GODDESS CYBELE ends – between them was a row of rectangular bronze strips, decorated with two concentric circles in relief in the corners – in the middle of the edges there is also a row of bronze cruciform pendants; near the legs the strip ends with a small row of four parallel small bronze 4 cm long and 5 mm diameter tubes – after this row there is another row where the tubes are 4.5 cm long with a 3 mm diameter. In the middle of both forearms there was a bronze bracelet (5.4 cm) with a circular cross-section and triangular ends that terminate in a snake’s head. On the right hand writ there was a concentration (Fig. 42) of 15 glass beads, 3 circular iron rings, one bronze ring, an oval bronze medallion (Fig.55), one cruciform bronze pendent with crab claws etc. Grave goods total: 5 ceramic vessels (12.5 cm, 27 cm, 4 cm, 7 cm, 14 cm), 2 bronze bracelets (5 cm), one bronze earringring with a stag’s tooth; 2 bronze earrings-rings and 73 glass beads of different colours and shapes, one bronze medaillon, bronze cruciform pendant, crab claws (Crustacta, Malacostraca decapoda), cauri (Cyprecidae, Erosaria spurca /Linnaeus 1758/ ), Murcidae, Bolinusq brandaris /Linnaeus 1758/. Grave № 31. Trench B 10, 1–2; depth 1.10 m. (Fig.55a), Chronology: 3rd c. BC. Grave construction: Rectangular shallow burial pit dug-into the loess and covered with large horizontal stone slabs; 1.75 x 0.50 m. Skeletal remains: Two adult individuals; to the right of one of them the bones of the second were scattered in the southern portion of the pit when the second deceased was buried – these bones are now disarticulated; the skull of the first was lying on the skull of the second skeleton facing up. Good state of preservation for one of the skeletons. Sex: Male. Position of deceased: Supine for both. Orientation: head West. Context: A ceramic button handled bowl, 19 cm (Fig. 44) had been placed on the bones of the two skeletons. Grave № 32. Trench B 9/2–3; depth 1.10 m. Chronology: 3rd c. BC. Grave construction: Rectangular shallow burial pit dug-into the loess and covered with 3 large horizontal stone slabs; 1.70 m x 0.38 m. Skeletal remains: Single skeleton with right arm bent at the elbow and placed on the stomach – the left one was placed on the chest. Age: Child. Position of deceased: Supine. Orientation: head West. Grave goods: Small ceramic vessel (8.3 cm) was placed near the feet. Grave № 33. Trench B 19/2; depth 1.00 m. Chronology: 3rd c. BC. Grave construction: Rectangular shallow burial pit dug-into the loess and covered with 3 large horizontal stone slabs; 1.70 m x 0.38 m. Skeletal remains: The deceased had hands crossed on the stomach. Age: Adult. Sex: Male. Position of deceased: Supine. Orientation: head West. Context: Little below the knees, a broken ceramic pitcher (oinohoe). Grave goods: red oinohoe (17 cm). Grave № 34. Trench Б 11/4; depth 0.95 m. Chronology: 3rd c. BC. Grave construction: Rectangular shallow burial pit dug-into the loess and covered with 1 large horizontal stone slab with the dimensions 0.80 x 0.50 m; 1.10 x 0.35 m. Skeletal remains: The hands were crossed on the stomach. The right thighbone was missing. Age: Inf. II (10–12 years). Position of deceased: Supine.

Chronology: Probably 3rd c. BC. Grave construction: Rectangular burial cist with massive vertical stone slabs; 1.95 m x 0.87 m. Skeletal remains: Two disarticulated individuals. Age: Inf. (II). The bones were scattered all over the grave. Orientation: head West. Grave goods: Silver buckle; five bronze belt appliqué with pieces from other appliqués. Grave № 280. Trench Б 3/1; depth 1.12m. Chronology: Probably 3rd c. BC. Grave construction: Rectangular burial cist with vertical stone slabs; 1.38 m x 0.47 m. Age: Inf. (II). Position of deceased: Supine. Orientation: head West. Grave goods: Single handled pitcher; 28 dark blue glass beads. Grave № 282. Trench Б 3/2–3; depth 0.98 m. Chronology: 2nd half of the 3rd c. BC. Grave construction: Rectangular burial cist with massive vertical stone slabs; 2.05 m x 0.94 m. Two children. Supine for both. Orientation: heads West. Grave goods: Pitcher with amphora-like handle; handle from ceramic pot. GROUP II Grave № 8. Trench A 91/1; depth 1.40 m. Chronology: 2nd half 3rd c. BC. Grave construction: Rectangular burial pit dug-into the loess and covered with stone slabs; 1.40 m x 0.65 m. Skeletal condition: Very poor state of preservation. Age: Inf. (I). Position of deceased: Supine most likely. Orientation: head West. Context: Deceased was most likely buried in a wooden coffin – as 8 cm long iron nails were found along the sides of the burial pit and in the corners. Grave goods: Ceramic vessel (14.5 cm), glass balsamarium (5 cm), silver earring (2 cm), bronze fibula (Fig. 39). Grave № 18. Trench A 61/1; depth 1.46 m (Fig 52a, 52b). Chronology: 2nd half 3rd c. BC. Grave construction: Large rectangular burial pit dug-into the loess; 1.95 m x 1.20 m; the grave was covered with five horizontally placed stone slabs. Skeletal remains: Two individuals placed next to each other; arms placed alongside the body; the left-hand wrist of the skeleton to the south was placed on the right-hand wrist of the second skeleton that was placed to the north (Table VI, 1). Age: Adult and Juvenile (II). Sex: Adult female and young girl. Position of deceased: Supine for both. Orientation: heads West. Context: Behind the head of the southern skeleton two ceramic vessels had been placed next to each other; scattered around the neck and right shoulder of the southern skeleton were glass beads of different colours and shapes (cylindrical, trapezoidal or pyramidal); near the left shoulder of the northern skeleton three small pots had been placed inside of each other; near these three pots was a small bowl; scattered near the head of the northern skeleton were a string of beads of different colors and shapes; on the left side of the chest of the northern skeleton was placed a bronze mirror (8.5cm diam.). Below the mirror were traces of long strip (Fig. 41a and b) (probably leather) about 3 cm wide – attached to it were cruciform bronze pendants with small spherical 219

ANCIENT GREEK COLONIES IN THE BLACK SEA 2 into the loess – no covering slab; 0.80 m x 0.35 m. Skeletal remains: Above the skull there are remains of second human skull. Age: Inf. (I/II). Position: Supine with legs bent at the knees. Orientation: head West. Grave goods: Fragments of glass, copper earring with blue cylindrical glass beads (1.4 cm); glass beads were also found near the wrists: 4 near the left and 2 near the right. (0.7 cm). Grave № 13. Trench Б 1/4; depth 1.30 m. Chronology: 3rd c. BC. Grave construction: Oval shaped burial pit dug into the loess with no covering slabs; 0.85 m x 0.40 m. Skeletons of two young children of different ages were buried at different times – the second burial is of the younger child – at 7cm to the southeast of the skull of the younger child the skull of the second child was located – the rest of the bones were not found. Skeletal condition: Bad state of preservation. Age: Inf. (I) and Inf. (II). Position of deceased: Supine. Orientation: head East (100°). Grave goods: In the southwest corner of the pit a red slipped two-handled kantharos (5.4 cm, Fig.59) ceramic vessel was found. Grave № 29. Trench Б 2, 4; depth 0.8 m. Chronology: ? Grave construction: Rectangular shaped burial pit dug into the loess – no covering slab; 1.30 m x 0.55 m. Skeletal remains: Disarticulated. Skeletal condition: Bad state of preservation. Position of deceased: Supine. Orientation: head East. Grave goods: None. Grave № 41. Trench B 29/2; depth 0.85 m. Chronology: ? Skeletal remains: Poor preservation. Age: Inf. (II). Position of deceased: Supine. Orientation: head West. Grave goods: None.

Orientation: head West. Grave goods: Two copper gold gilded earrings (1.6, 1.5 cm), a string of 108 blue glass spherical beads, 3 anthropomorphic beads (1.7, 1.5 cm) from a red mineral and 2 white glass beads. Grave № 45. Trench B 29, 2; depth 0.85m. Chronology: 3rd c. BC. Grave construction: Rectangular shallow burial pit dug-into the loess and covered with 1 large horizontal stone slab; pit dimension 1.30 m x 0.75 m. Skeletal condition: Poor state of preservation. Age: Juvenile (I). Position of deceased: Supine. Orientation: head West. Context: The skeleton was immediately below the stone slab and the deceased had been probably buried in a coffin – because along the west side of the pit, 7 cm from the heel 4 iron nails were found. Grave goods: Two ceramic vessels (one kantharos with horizontal >>>(herringbone) motif (14 cm, Fig.57); hand made ‘Thracian’ pot (20.0 cm) with shell and sand inclusions was found near the head. GROUP III Grave № 1. Trench B 9/3; depth 1.05 m. Chronology: 3rd c. BC. Grave construction: Small oval shaped burial pit (0.65m x 0.30m) dug into the loess – no covering slab. Skeletal condition: Poor state of preservation – only the skull and two bone fragments were preserved. Age: Inf. (I). Position of deceased: Supine. Orientation: head East. Grave goods: Small ceramic red pitcher of the oinochoe type (7.4 cm), a light red guttus (8.8 cm, Fig. 46). Grave № 2 . Trench B 9/ 1; depth 1.35 m. Chronology: ? Grave construction: Oval shaped burial pit (0.65m x 0.30m) dug into the loess – no covering slab; 1.70 m x 0.80 m. Skeletal remains: The legs are flexed. Skeletal condition: Good state of preservation. Age: Adult. Position of deceased: Supine. Orientation: head East. Context: To the right of the spinal column, there is a dark rectangular area (6 cm x 3 cm) probably from a decomposed piece of wood or leather and traces of a bronze appliqué were also noticed – traces of a row of appliqués were also found around the waist – these are probably the remains of a belt with bronze appliqués. Grave goods: Near the legs there were the remains of a corroded spherical or hemispherical bronze vessel. Grave № 3. Trench B 1/3; depth 1.20 m. Chronology: probably 3rd c. BC. Grave construction: Small rectangular shaped burial pit (0.70 m x 0.35m) dug into the loess – no covering slab. Skeletal condition: Good state of preservation. Age: Inf. (I). Position: Supine, gently resting towards the left with flexed legs and arms extended alongside the body. Orientation: head Northeast. Grave goods: None. Grave № 9. Trench A 91/2; depth 1.15 m. Chronology: ? Grave construction: Burial pit outline could not be discerned. Skeleton: Good state of preservation, disarticulated. Age: Adult. Orientation: Probably Northeast. Grave goods: None. Grave № 11. Trench Б 1/3; depth 1.30 m. Chronology: 3rd c. Grave construction: Rectangular shaped burial pit with slight bowing on the long sides dug

GROUP IV Grave № 22. Trench A 84/2–3; depth 1.10 m. Chronology: 3rd c. BC. Grave construction: Oval shaped burial pit (1.90 m x 0. 90m) with a niche along the longer side that is enclosed by 3 orthostats. Skeletal remains: Two individuals buried at different times; Skeletal condition: Good preservation. Age: Adult for both. Position of deceased: the later burial is supine. Orientation: head Northeast. Context: Near the digits of the right hand a large blue glass bead with white incrustation (type Bird’s eye) was found. An open ended copper ring was found near the thighbone. Somewhat under this skeleton were found the scattered bones of the second skeleton. Grave goods: Large blue glass bead (2.3 cm, Fig. 48); open-ended copper ring (2 cm). Grave № 28. Trench Б 29/2; depth 0.70 m. Chronology: ? Grave construction: Oval shaped burial pit with a niche along the longer side, which is enclosed from the north by a fallen wall, made from unworked stones. Precise measurements for the burial pit were not possible. Skeletal remains: Fragments of the skull were found in the niche. Skeletal condition: Disarticulated. Age: Adult. Position: Supine. Orientation: head West. Context: It appears that the grave was already destroyed in middle ages. Grave goods: None. Grave № 37. Trench Б 14/2; depth 1.16 m. 220

HENRIETA TODOROVA: DURANKULAK - A TERRITORIUM SACRUM OF THE GODDESS CYBELE by a golden band with two parallel edges in relief – the connected ends were inserted into a golden cone at the apex and fixed using a glass paste. The conical pendant that was part of the left earring was not found. (The floor, and walls of the dromos and the burial chamber, and the excavated soil were scanned with a metal detector without any result.). Near the waist three long deep red splotches were noticed – probably the remains of a now decomposed leather belt. Grave goods: A balsamarium (6.5 cm, Fig. 51) was placed vertically on the floor in the southwest corner of the burial chamber – the rim had broken off. Grave № 59. Trench A 93/3–4; depth 1.72 m. Chronology: 1st–4th c. AD (?). Grave construction: Rectangular catacomb (length 4.20 m x width 1.00 m) dug into the loess, and into the infill of Pit dwelling № 3 from the Neolithic settlement Durankulak-Nivata. The 2.20 m dromos begins in the west and has two steps, which lead, down to the floor level. The burial chamber was 2m long and rectangular. Skeletal condition: the skull was separated from the rest of the body and was 5cm away from the upper vertebrae – the mandible was resting on the neck vertebrae – near the neck a string of 10 glass beads of different shapes was found – the rest of the skeleton was in a good state of preservation. In the fill in the burial chamber, above the skull, fragments of another skull and bones were found along with a glass bead. It appears that these are the remains of an earlier burial. The deceased had been placed on a thin layer of yellowish clay. Position: Supine with arms along side the body. Orientation: the construction is east–west; head East. Grave goods: the pin from a corroded bronze fibula; string of 10 glass beads of different shapes. Grave № 60. Trench A 92/1–4; depth 1.57 m. Chronology: 1st–4th cent AD (?). Grave construction: Rectangular catacomb (length 4.30 m x width 1.00 m) dug into the loess, and into the infill of Pit dwelling № 3 from the Neolithic settlement Durankulak-Nivata. The dromos begins in the West and has two steps, which lead, down to the floor level – at a distance of 2.30 m a wall of broken stones divided dromos from burial chamber. The burial chamber was 2 m long x 1 m wide. The floor slopes slightly to the East. The floor of the dromos was covered with a yellow-green clay plaster. The skeleton was separated from the rest of the body. Age: Adult. Position: Supine with arms along side the body. Orientation: head East. Context: The skeleton had been placed in the burial chamber of a layer of yellow-green soil. Grave goods: Near the left thighbone were the remains of a heavily corroded iron knife with traces of an organic sheath.

Chronology: ? Grave construction type: Slightly oval shaped burial pit (1.95 m x 0.85 m), enclosed to the south by a row of 7 orthostats. Skeletal remains: The arms were placed across the chest; the skull is facing to the left. Skeletal condition: Good state of preservation. Age: Adult. Sex: Male. Position of deceased: Supine. Orientation: head East. Grave goods: None Grave № 47. Trench Б 32/4; depth 0.83 m. Chronology: ? Grave construction: Slightly oval shaped burial pit on the northern side (2.00 m x 0.85 m), enclosed to the south by a row of 5 orthostats. The bottom of the burial pit was about 25 cm below the entrance pit level. Skeletal remains: The legs were close together, left arm was bent at the elbow and rested on the chest, and right arm was on the stomach. Skeletal condition: Good state of preservation. Age: Adult. Position of deceased: Supine. Orientation: head West. Grave goods: None. Grave № 99. Trench B 19/2-3; depth 1.31 m. . Chronology: 3rd c. BC. Grave construction: Slightly oval shaped burial pit on the western side (2.05 m x 0.85 m), with a niche along the length enclosed to the south by two rows of orthostats, small unworked stones were placed on the top edge of the stone slabs. Skeletal remains: Right hand was placed on the pelvis, while the left was along side the body. Skeletal condition: Good state of preservation. Age: Adult. Position of deceased: Supine. Orientation: head West. Grave goods: Single handled red ceramic tankard (H 0047, Tabl. XV.5), inside there was black varnish cup (19.5 cm, Fig.61); between the thighbones a tip of an iron knife was found. GROUP V Grave № 19. Trench Г 90/3; depth 1.84 m. Chronology: 1st-4th cent AD (?). Grave construction: Rectangular catacomb dug into the loess, with a dromos and a burial chamber (1.35 x 0.90 m) at the end of the dromos. Dimensions of the entire catacomb: length 3.95 m x width 0.90–1.00 m. The dromos begins with three steps that lead down to the continuation of the dromos that is 2.60 m long and 1.00 m wide. The roof of the dromos was arched and located about 0.80-0.90 m below the modern surface that has been destroyed by modern plowing. The West end of the dromos terminates with a large vertical stone slab 0.60 x 0.60 x 0.20 m that closes off the entrance to the chamber. The sides were held inplace by two smaller slabs located at the sides, now lying in the dromos. Skeletal condition: the middle section of the skeleton was lowest while the skull was the highest; finger bones from the right hand were near the upper joint of the right thighbone; the hand was resting on the pelvis. The left arm was extended alongside the body. Age: Adult. Position of deceased: Supine in the burial chamber. Orientation: the construction is East-West; head West. Context: Two golden earrings (1.2 cm, Fig. 50) made from golden wire about 1mm thick ending with a hook were found next to the skull – the earring found below the place of the right ear had a conical pendant made from a thin sheet of gold. It was attached to the ring

List of the graves Number of the graves 1 2 3 5 7

221

Trench

Orientat.

Group

C 9/3 C 9/1 B 13/2 C 30/1 A 91/3

E. Inf. E, Ad. NE, Inf. ? ? Inf.

3 3 3 1 1

ANCIENT GREEK COLONIES IN THE BLACK SEA 2 8 9 10 11 13 18 19 20 21 22 24 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 41 43 45 47 52 59 60 99 278 280 282

A 91/3 A 91/2 C 29/1 B 1/3 B. ¼ A 61/1 D 89/1–2 A 71/2 D90/4 A 84/2–3 B 21/1 B 2/1–2 B 2/4 B 2/3 C 10/1–2 C 9/2–3 C 19/2 B 11/4 B 11/1–2 B 12/2 B 14/2 B 23/3 B 22/4 C 29/2 B 31/4–B 32/1 B 33/1 A 93/3–A 92/1 A 92/1–4 C 19/2–3 A 4/1 A 83/1–A 93/2 B 3/2–3

? Inf. NE ? Ad. W, Juv. W, Inf. W, 2 Inf. W, 2 Ind. W, Ad. ? 2 Ad. W, Ad. NE, 2 Ad W, Ad. W, Ad. W–E? E, Ad. W, 2 Ad. W, Inf. W, Ad. W, Inf. W, 3 Ad. W, Ad. E, Ad. W, Inf. ? Ad. W, Juv. W, Ad. W, Inf. E, Ad. E, Ad. W, Ad. ? Inf. W, Inf. W, Inf.

№ 1 occurs in Tomis in burials №, № 22, 34 (Bucovală 1967, Tab. 56.b; 60.6; 61.b); the small kantharos from burial № 13, in burials №, № 4 and 32 at Tomis (Bucovală 1967, Tab. 59.i; 26,a); the gutus from burial № 1 in burial № 43 at Tomis (Bucovală 1967, Tab. 63.a); the one-handle vessel from burial № 7 has a parallel from burial № 345 at Tomis (Bucovală 1967, Tab. 20.b); the one-handle vessels from burials №, № 18 and 31 have beside lekythoi many parallels at Tomis, e.g. from burials № 175, 339, 349, 355, etc. (Bucovală 1967, Tab. 25.a, 35.b; 46.b; 49.b; 50.b); the Augenperlen from burials №, № 18 und 22 find parallels in burials №, № 16 and 339 in Tomis (Bucovală 1967, Tab. 44.f; 46.c) etc.

2 3 1 3 3 2 5 1 1 4 1 4 3 1 2 2 2 2 1 1 4 3 1 2 4 1 5 5 4 1 1 1

The burials from Tomis, based on the amphora stamps, have been dated to between middle of the 3rd c. BC and the first half of the 2nd c. BC (Bucovală 1967, 293). For the Hellenistic burials at Durankulak the time-frame is different. It is clear that early burials from the beginning of the 3rd c. BC, i.e. the peak period of the cave temple, are very rare. It may be that the number of servants of the temple grew over the years and that not only priests and pitia but also slaves and free families with children buried their dead on the shore of the lake but outside the area of the votive pits and votive loci. Among the Hellenistic burials are to be included groups I und II after T. Dimov as well as two burials from group III (№ 1 und 13) and burials № 22, 28 and 99 from group ІV. Most burials have the head orientated west. The burials which are covered with stone slabs and lack casing from group II, I believe are a variant of the stonecasing graves of group I, mostly utilised for children and people of inferior rank. Burials of groups III and IV probably belong to strangers to the temple. An analysis of the data provides the following picture:

Commentary on the Hellenistic burials on the west shore of Durankulak harbour On the west shore of Durankulak Lake, among the 41 burials researched by T. Dimov, 30 are Hellenistic (№ 341, 407, 419, 441, 278, 280, 282, 1, 5, 7, 8, 10, 13, 18, 20, 21, 22, 24, 28, 30, 31, 32, 33, 34, 35, 36, 43, 45, 52, 99), which are linked to the Cybele–cult complex and provide us with extra information on the present theme. It is important to mention that the pottery in the abovementioned burials is also present in the votive pits which mostly date to the 3rd c. BC or shortly afterwards. Firstly we should mention a small lagynos from burial 407. It is a small, well made yellow vessel with an interesting relief and belongs to the best of the local pottery production. On the belly is a sprig of ivy in a brown colour, on the neck a frieze of objects where a net, a bag, a Phrygian cap, a harp, amphora, and loom or comb are represented. These symbols are obviously connected to the Cybele cult. A similar piece is recorded form Tomis (Bucovală 1967, 292). It was dated to the end of 3th – beginning of 2nd c. BC.

Children and juveniles Adults Unidentified Total

14 13 3 30

Head orient. West Head orient. East Head orient. n-e Burial orient. w-e Unclear Total

20 4 2 2 2 30

As far as the quality and quantity of the grave offerings are concerned it is notable that not only children’s but also most adult burials have very modest offerings. Only burials № 407, 1 and 18 vary from this pattern in that they have rich burial offerings. This data is certainly not representative but illustrates that a family of high rank also lived at the temple.

Many more forms from the Hellenistic burials in Durankulak have parallels from Tomis. Our chytrae from burial № 99 have exact parallels with the Chytras in burials №, № 38, 41, 44 at Tomis (Bucovală 1967, Tab. 62.e; 60.b); the jug with a beak-shaped spout from burial 222

HENRIETA TODOROVA: DURANKULAK - A TERRITORIUM SACRUM OF THE GODDESS CYBELE Dimov in Print T. Dimov, Hellenistic and late antique graves from Durankulak - Nivata, –In: H Todorova (Edit.), Durankulak III, DAI, Sofia (in Print) Opperman 2004 M. Oppermann, Die westpontische Poleis und ihr indigenes Umfeld in vorrömischer Zeit. Schriften des Zentrums für Archäologie und Kulturgeschichte des Schwarzmeerraumes. Langenweißbach 2003. Mirčev 1962 М. Мирчев, Раннотракийски могилен некропол при с. Равна. Изв.Арх.Инст. 32, 1970, 308–310. ( Mirtshev, Rannotrakijski mogilen nekropol pri s. Ravna. Izv.Arch.Inst, 32,1970)

In the scase of the rich burial № 18, the small finds in the right hand of the younger of the two burials indicate a soothsayer. Among these small finds there are perforated shells and a crab shell: Crab Crustacta, Malacostraca decapoda, which is not indigenous to the Black Sea; Mussels: Cyprecidae, Erosaria spurcaq, which today is indigenous to the Mediterranean, Indian and Atlantic Oceans. The mussel type Cyprecidae, Erosaria spurcaq was until last century used as currency in many parts of Africa and Asia and today is still popular in the manufacture of jewellery. This mussel type was also found in the Pontos region at the early Hellenistic, Thracian mound burial at Ravna, Varna district. (Мирчев 1962) Murcidae, Bolinusq brandaris, are also not indigenous to the Black Sea and occur in the Mediterranean and in the Atlantic. They were much valued in the antique period and are still a delicacy today. (For the analysis I am grateful to Dr. Ivajlo Dedov from the ecological lab of the BAW in Sofia).

Conclusion The excavations at Durankulak have unearthed a unique early-Hellenistic complex, which throws more light on the culture of the Greek colonies of the Pontos. It shows both that a close tie to the motherland in Bythnia in west Anatolia was preserved for a long period and left a lasting stamp on the belief system of the colonists, something which is illustrated by the construction of the Cybele cave temple in the rock-face at the Big Island at Durankulak. Numerous votive pits on the west shore of the lake illustrate the intensive cultural activity during the first half of the 3rd c. BC in the north Pontos region. This, however, came to a standstill at the end of the 3rd – beginning of the 2nd c. BC and the temple was finally abandoned.

The uncommonly rich costume of the younger person buried and the magic utensils in her right hand suggest the grave of an important phytia buried with her slave, as the older person is buried with little jewellery and a few vessels. These facts give us more information on the cultpractices at the Cybele Temple where soothsaying was obviously also carried out.

The development of the sacred area of the goddess Cybele is in tandem not only with the development of the Greek colony Kallatis at the same time but with the general historical process in th entire west-Pontos area in the early-Hellenistic period.

References Bucovală 1967. M. Bucovală, Necropole elenistice la Tomis, Constanţa 1967.

Map. Plan of the area on Durankulak Lake with the Big Island. 223

ANCIENT GREEK COLONIES IN THE BLACK SEA 2

Figure 1a. Dobrudzha between the Danube and the Black Sea.

224

HENRIETA TODOROVA: DURANKULAK - A TERRITORIUM SACRUM OF THE GODDESS CYBELE

Figure 1b. Satelite photo of the Kallatis – Durankulak Kostregion.

Figure 2. The Big Island on Durankulak Lake. Aerial view.

Figure 3. Archaeological structures on the Big Island. Aerial view.

225

ANCIENT GREEK COLONIES IN THE BLACK SEA 2

Figure 4. Archaeological structures from the Early medieval times.

Figure 5. Variation of the Sea Level of North-Western Black Sea Coast according to archaeological Data. 226

HENRIETA TODOROVA: DURANKULAK - A TERRITORIUM SACRUM OF THE GODDESS CYBELE

Figure 6. The Hellenistic Cave-Temple of Cybele.

Figure 7. A white limestone layer in trench M14. 227

ANCIENT GREEK COLONIES IN THE BLACK SEA 2

Figure 8. Plan of the Cave Temple of Cybele.

Figure 8a. The Temple of Cybele. View from north. 228

HENRIETA TODOROVA: DURANKULAK - A TERRITORIUM SACRUM OF THE GODDESS CYBELE

Figure 9. A lintel with the secondary engraved Cross.

Figure 10. The Enclosure Hall (South Hall) with collapsed wall and triangular apse.

Figure 11a., 11b A general view towards the East and the West Halls of the Temple of Cybele. A view from north. 229

ANCIENT GREEK COLONIES IN THE BLACK SEA 2

Figure 12. The throneplace of Cybele.

Figure 13. The big votive altar.

Figure 14. The floor in front of the votive altar with a system of grooves.

Figure 15a. A votive basin. 230

HENRIETA TODOROVA: DURANKULAK - A TERRITORIUM SACRUM OF THE GODDESS CYBELE

Figure 16. Black varnished kantharos

Figure 15b. The votive stone basin with orthostat.

Figure 17. Terracotta bust of Cybele.

Figure 18. A partition from the Late Antiquity.

Figure 19. Burnt features from the Late Antiquity.

231

ANCIENT GREEK COLONIES IN THE BLACK SEA 2

Figure 20. A medieval stone wall by the northern corner of the Temple of Cybele.

Figure 21. A votive stella of Cybele in situ.

Figure 22. A votive stella of Cybele.

232

HENRIETA TODOROVA: DURANKULAK - A TERRITORIUM SACRUM OF THE GODDESS CYBELE

Figure 24. A jug, with relief botton decoration on the handle. Figure 23. The pasageway to the Cave Temple of Cybele.

Figures 25 and 26.. Black varnished kantharoi.

7 Figure 27. Black varnished dish.

Figure 28. A chitrias from grave 99. 233

ANCIENT GREEK COLONIES IN THE BLACK SEA 2

Figure 29. A votive platform.

234

HENRIETA TODOROVA: DURANKULAK - A TERRITORIUM SACRUM OF THE GODDESS CYBELE

Figure 30. The Type 1 pit.

Figure 31. The Type 2 pit.

Figure 32. The Type 3 pit.

Figure 33. A ‘Thracian’ handmade pottery.

Figure 34. A stamped handle of an amphora.

235

ANCIENT GREEK COLONIES IN THE BLACK SEA 2

Figure 35. A plan of the Hellenistic cemetery and the grave types

Figure 36. An oinochoe from grave 407.

Figure 37. A lagynos from grave 407. 236

HENRIETA TODOROVA: DURANKULAK - A TERRITORIUM SACRUM OF THE GODDESS CYBELE

Figure 38. A bone hair pin in the shape of human hand holding a sphere from grave 35.

Figure 39. A bronze fibula from grave 8.

40a

Figure 41. A belt with applications. Grave 18.

Figure 40a and b Grave 18.

Figure 42. Finds from the right hand. Grave 18. 237

ANCIENT GREEK COLONIES IN THE BLACK SEA 2

Figure 43. A bronze medallion. Grave 18. Figure 44 a and b. Grave 31 and a small jug found in it

Figure 45. A vessel from grave 45.

Figure 46. A guttus from grave 1.

Figure 47. Red slipped kantharos from grave 13.

Figure 48. Blue glass beads from grave 22.

Figure 49. Small black varnished cup from grave 99. Figure 50. Two golden earrings grom grave 19.

238

Figure 51. Balsamarium from grave 19.

Kallatis Alexandru Avram*

Les inscriptions que l'on trouvait bien fréquemment par hasard commencèrent à être soigneusement publiées dans les longues séries consacrées dans les Archäologischepigraphische Mitteilungen aus Österreich-Ungarn par Grigore Tocilescu (1850-1909) – professeur à l'Université de Bucarest et, à partir de 1881, directeur du Musée National des Antiquités – aux monuments épigraphiques découverts sur le territoire de la Roumanie4. Grâce surtout aux publications de Tocilescu, auxquelles on pourrait ajouter quelques contributions d'autres épigraphistes, les inscriptions callatiennes devinrent accessibles au monde savant : les quelques inscriptions latines furent inclues dans le CIL5, alors que certaines inscriptions grecques trouvèrent leur place dans les grands recueils6. À la même époque, en mettant à profit la moisson épigraphique et en y ajoutant un dépouillement exemplaire des sources littéraires concernant Kallatis, Behrendt Pick parvint à en donner une très bonne synthèse dans la note introductive à son corpus de monnaies7.

LE SITE* Les ruines de l'ancienne Kallatis se trouvent aujourd'hui sous la ville de Mangalia, située à ca. 44 km au sud de Constanţa et à ca. 10 km au nord de la frontière actuelle entre la Roumanie et la Bulgarie. L'apparition de cette ville portuaire au Moyen-Âge1 et son développement au XXe siècle ont réservé à Kallatis le sort partagé par tous les sites antiques enterrés par des établissements modernes. Cependant, même dans ces circonstances, les vestiges de Kallatis ont été étudiés soit par des fouilles méthodiques, là où les conditions le permettaient, soit surtout par des interventions préventives imposées par des travaux édilitaires2. L'intérêt porté par le monde savant aux antiquités de Mangalia date des dernières décennies du XIXe siècle3. * Dr. Alexandru Avram, Professeur d'histoire grecque (Professor of Greek History), Université du Maine, Faculté des Lettres, Langues et Sciences humaines, Avenue Olivier Messiaen F - 72085, Le Mans Cedex 9. Ancien professeur d'histoire grecque à l'Université de Bucarest (jusqu'en 2002). Membre correspondant de l'Institut Archéologique Allemand. Directeur du Centre d'études des sociétés antiques et médiévales (CESAM) de l'Université du Maine. Fouilles: Istros (Histria), Roumanie (Zone Sacrée). Domaine d'activité : archéologie et épigraphie grecques de la mer Noire. E-mail: [email protected] 1 La première mention de Mangalia (Pangalia) dans la cartographie médiévale date du XIIIe siècle (portulan de Pise) : voir Grămadă 1930, p. 236-241 ; Cihodaru 1968, p. 236 et suiv. Barnea, dans Barnea et Ştefănescu 1971, p. 166 et 330-333, signale pourtant quelques découvertes monétaires isolées du XIe siècle. Voir aussi Barnea 1959, pour d'autres vestiges d'époque médiévale. Pour Mangalia à l'époque médiévale et les voyageurs étrangers qui en ont fait mentions dans leurs récits, voir la littérature rassemblée dans ISM III, p. 75, n. 302. 2 Pour l'histoire des recherches archéologiques à Mangalia, voir notamment Preda 1968, p. 18-32. Pour les inscriptions, ISM III, p. 124138. 3 Il convient de rappeler qu'à la suite du Congrès de Berlin (1878), la Dobroudja, qui se trouvait depuis le Moyen-Âge sous la domination ottomane, revint à la Roumanie. Le contexte de la mise en place de l'administration roumaine et de l'extension du réseau scolaire entraîna entre autres un nouveau traitement des quelques antiquités déjà signalées à Mangalia.- Le premier à avoir attiré l'attention sur les vestiges antiques encore visibles de Mangalia fut le Français Aubry de la Motraye qui, après l'expédition manquée du roi Charles XII de Suède, avait visité Mangalia en 1711. Sa relation de voyage fut publiée en anglais en 1723, puis traduite en français – Voyages du Sr. Aubry de la Motraye en Europe, Asie et Afrique… I-II, La Haye, 1727, et en allemand (1783) : pour la côte de la mer Noire, voir la carte (assez approximative) insérée à la p. 472 du premier volume et la description qu'il en donne dans le deuxième volume, p. 208-209. Érudit et collectionneur passionné de monnaies antiques, Aubry de la Motraye s'était rendu dans cette région spécialement pour y chercher des antiquités et surtout les traces de l'exil d'Ovide. Il identifie pourtant Constanţa à l'ancienne Constantia (qui est le nom byzantin de Tomis), alors que Pangala aurait été pour lui Tomis et l'ancienne Kallatis un village décevant situé plus au sud. À Mangalia (Pangala) il affirme avoir vu, guidé par le pope orthodoxe de la ville, l'ancienne muraille « de Tomis » ; il a également acquis quelques monnaies – il en donne la description – mais avoue n'avoir trouvé aucune inscription.- Cependant,

L'activité de Tocilescu à Mangalia ne fut que brièvement continuée par le nouveau directeur du Musée National des Antiquités, Vasile Pârvan (1882-1927), dont l'énergie était plutôt consacrée aux célèbres fouilles d'Istros qu'il avait ouvertes en 1914. Toujours est-il que le même savant ne cessait de prôner la nécessité de commencer des fouilles méthodiques à Mangalia. Après quelques prospections sans lendemain dirigées en 1924 par Oreste Tafrali (1876-1937), professeur à l'Université de Iaşi8,

si on laisse de côté cet épisode isolé, il n'est question d'enquêtes archéologiques à Mangalia qu'à partir de 1878. Pour l'histoire des études épigraphiques consacrées aux cités grecques de la côte roumaine de la mer Noire, voir Pippidi 1967a, p. 17-31 ; 1975a, p. 20-30 ; 1984, p. 108-117 ; ISM I, p. 31-37 ; ISM II, p. 11-21 ; ISM III, p. 124-138. 4 G. Tocilescu, AEM 6 (1882), p. 4-11, nos 2-17 ; 8 (1884), p. 3, nos 5-6, 26-27, n° 2, 33-34, n° 3 ; 11 (1887), p. 33-36, nos 32-39, 65, n° 138 ; 14 (1891), p. 32-36, nos 75-88 et 90-91 ; 17 (1894), p. 99-102, nos 41-44 ; 19 (1896), p. 93-94, n° 37, et 103-110, nos 59-68. Voir aussi Tocilescu 1900, p. 112-115, n° 7, et 229-230, n° 62. 5 CIL III 7616, 7585-7587, 12506, 13743, 13757, 14214.33. Voir aussi, quelques années plus tard, ILS 8925. 6 Cf. SIG2 736 = SIG3 1108 (= ISM III 36) ; LGS I 22 (= ISM III 47) ; Michel 1900, 333 (= ISM III 13) et 996 (= ISM III 36) ; SGDI 3089 (= ISM III 7) et 3090 (= ISM III 43) ; IGR I 649-657 (= respectivement, ISM III 61, 73, 100, 56, 114, 57, 117, 30, 51). 7 Pick 1898, p. 83-96. Avant Pick on n'aurait pu citer que l'opuscule (depuis longtemps suranné) de Polsberw, De rebus Chersonasitarum et Callatianorum, Berlin, Programm des Real-Gymnasiums, 1838. 8 Si l'on excepte les observations de Pamfil Polonic (le collaborateur de G. Tocilescu et auteur, en 1901, d'une première esquisse du rempart d'époque romaine) et la petite fouille exécutée en 1915 par Dimitrie Mihail Teodorescu à la soi-disant « basilique syrienne », il n'y jamais eu de recherche archéologique à Mangalia avant Tafrali. Le gros des recherches de Tafrali, portant notamment sur quelques tumuli monumentaux des environs de Callatis et sur des inscriptions grecques, dont deux décrets du célèbre thiase bachique (ISM III 35 et 44), est présenté dans deux études : Tafrali 1925 = 1927 ; 1928.

239

ANCIENT GREEK COLONIES IN THE BLACK SEA 2 Pârvan confia dans la même année la direction des fouilles archéologiques de Mangalia à Teofil SauciucSăveanu (1884-1971).

fouilles dans les nécropoles hellénistiques et romanobyzantines, dont il publia largement les résultats13. Le Musée « Kallatis » de Mangalia, organisé dans un premier temps comme section du Musée d'Histoire Nationale et d'Archéologie de Constanţa, et à partir de 1990 comme institution à personnalité juridique, en prit la relève14. Nombre de trouvailles plus anciennes ou plus récentes furent publiées – et parfois reprises dans des corpus thématiques – par des savants roumains15 et étrangers16. Il convient d'ajouter les fouilles dans le territoire de Kallatis, dont le fleuron demeure le phrourion d'Albeşti. Quant à la moisson épigraphique, devenue de plus en plus impressionnante17, autant par la

Hormis les sondages pratiqués dans les différents secteurs de l'enceinte callatienne d'époque romaine, Sauciuc-Săveanu semble avoir plutôt fouillé selon les impératifs édilitaires du moment. Des trouvailles de toutes sortes ne tardèrent pas à s'accumuler : le petit musée de Mangalia – fondé par Sauciuc-Săveanu et inauguré le 15 septembre 1924, c'est-à-dire juste après le démarrage des fouilles – en est le témoin. Quant aux publications, hormis une longue série de rapports sur les fouilles9, Sauciuc-Săveanu consacra un bon nombre d'articles à ses découvertes, essentiellement épigraphiques10.

13 Preda 1961a, 1962, 1966, 1968, 1980 ; Preda et Georgescu 1975 ; Preda et Bârlădeanu 1979. Pour d'autres fouilles (époques hellénistique, romaine et romano-byzantine, dans la ville, ainsi que dans les nécropoles) : Theodorescu 1963 ; F. Preda 1968 ; Iconomu 1968 et 1969 ; Scorpan 1970 et 1974 ; Zavatin-Coman 1972 ; Rădulescu, Coman et Stavru 1973 ; Scarlat 1973 ; 1976 ; Cheluţă-Georgescu 1974 ; Bârlădeanu-Zavatin 1977 ; 1980 ; 1985 ; Bounegru et Chiriac 1981. 14 Bounegru et Bârlădeanu 1990 ; Ionescu 1991 ; Papasima et Georgescu 1994 ; Georgescu et Ionescu 1998 ; Ionescu, Alexandru et Constantin 2002-2003a ; 2002-2003b. 15 Timbres amphoriques d'époque grecque (Callatis et son territoire) : Gramatopol et Poenaru Bordea 1969 ; Buzoianu 1979 ; 1984 = 1986 ; Buzoianu et Cheluţă-Georgescu 1983 ; 1998 ; Rădulescu, Bărbulescu et Buzoianu 1985 ; Sîrbu 1985 ; Poenaru Bordea 1986b ; Avram 1988b ; Avram et Poenaru Bordea 1988 ; Conovici, Avram et Poenaru Bordea 1989 ; 1992 = Avram, Conovici et Poenaru Bordea 1990.- Céramiques hellénistiques à décor en relief : Ocheşeanu 1969.- Reliefs au Cavalier Thrace : Scorpan 1967 ; Zavatin-Coman 1971 ; Hampartumian 1979.Sarcophages et stèles funéraires d'époque impériale : Alexandrescu Vianu 1970 (cf. Popescu 1970) ; 1973 ; 1977 ; 1985 ; 1986.- Lampes grecques, romaines et romano-byzantines : Scorpan 1973 ; Harţuche et Bounegru 1982.- Les publications de monnaies de toutes les époques sont trop nombreuses pour être évoquées ici. 16 Stèles funéraires hellénistiques et romaines : Pfuhl et Möbius 19771979, nos 1186, 1503, 1549, 1714, 2111 (= respectivement, ISM III 165, 181, 161, 183, 177).- Stèles funéraires d'époque impériale : Conrad 2004, nos 116-122 (= respectivement, ISM III 180, 183, 188, 177, 181, 187, 194). 17 Il convient d'attirer l'attention surtout sur les études de D. M. Pippidi : Pippidi 1960a = 1967a, p. 439-444 = 1988, p. 229-232 ; 1962 a = 1969a, p. 83-93 = 1975a, p. 131-137 ; 1962b = 1967a, p. 260-269 = 1975a, p. 123-128 ; 1964a = 1969a, p. 106-115 = 1975a, p. 142-149 ; 1965b = 1969a, p. 115-120 = 1975a, p. 138-141 ; 1966a = 1969a, p. 94106 = 1975a, p. 149-158 ; 1966b = 1967a, p. 329-337 = 1967c = 1975a, p. 202-207 ; 1966c = 1967a, p. 528-532 = 1975a, p. 128-130 ; 1969b = 1970 = 1975a, p. 257-262 ; 1972 = 1975a, p. 263-269 = 1975b ; 1973b = 1988, p. 232-234 ; 1974b = 1975a, p. 182-192 ; 1977 = 1984, p. 195207. Autres contributions à l'épigraphie callatienne : Sauciuc-Săveanu 1958 ; 1960 ; 1963 ; 1964 ; 1965 ; 1967 = 1969a ; 1969b ; SauciucSăveanu et Popescu 1965 ; Sauciuc-Săveanu et Rădulescu 1968 ; Noi monumente, p. 35-40 (= Aricescu 1963), 67-74 (= Gostar 1963a, p. 299302), 103, 129-134 (G. Poenaru Bordea), 147-153 (= Rădulescu 1963, p. 83-89) ; Rădulescu 1962 ; 1968, nos 2, 5, 6 ; Gostar 1963b ; Poenaru Bordea 1963, p. 292-293 ; Lifshitz 1964, p. 362-364 ; Peek 1964, nos 10, 13, 18, 19 ; 1975 ; Popescu 1964 ; 1970 (pour les contributions du même savant aux inscriptions tardives, voir IGLR) ; Doruţiu Boilă 1968a, p. 404-408 ; 1968b ; 1971 ; 1988 ; Suceveanu 1969, p. 269-274 ; 1977 ; 1982 ; Ştefan 1973 ; 1974a ; 1974b ; 1975a ; 1975b ; 1977 ; 1979 ; 1984a ; 1984b ; Munteanu [Bărbulescu] 1975, p. 389-391 ; Rădulescu et Munteanu [Bărbulescu] 1977, nos 1-4 ; BărbulescuMunteanu 1978, p. 127-132 ; Calder III 1979 ; Bounegru 1981-1983 ; Domăneanţu et Suceveanu 1996 ; Avram 1988a ; 1991 ; 1992-1994 ; 1994a ; 1994b ; 1995b ; 1995c ; 1995d ; 1995e ; 1996b ; 1996c ; 1997a ; 1997b ; 1998a ; 1998b ; 1999a ; 1999b ; Avram et Bărbulescu 1992 ; Avram et Lefèvre 1995 ; Avram, Bărbulescu et Georgescu 1992-1998 ; 1999a ; 1999b.

Après la deuxième guerre mondiale, les fouilles furent reprises en 1949 par une équipe de l'Institut d'Archéologie de l'Académie Roumaine. Ces recherches atteignirent un apogée vers 1958-1959, lorsque la transformation radicale de la falaise de Mangalia – située juste au milieu de la ville antique et où l'on construisit un ensemble d'hôtels – et de la zone de la nécropole située à l'extérieur du rempart nord de l'enceinte d'époque romaine, réservée à l'aménagement d'un parc abritant le stade, réclamèrent des travaux archéologiques préventifs d'une grande ampleur11. Toujours est-il que les monuments antiques ne furent que partiellement conservés. À cette occasion (en 1959) fut découverte entre autres la « tombe à papyrus » dont il sera question plus bas. C'est d'ailleurs sous la voûte restaurée de ce tumulus que fut aménagé le local du nouveau musée de Mangalia, lequel expose la plus grande partie des monuments épigraphiques, sculpturaux et architectoniques découverts à cette époque12 et encore plus récemment. À partir des années soixante, les recherches archéologiques furent dirigées, en collaboration avec les musées de Constanţa et de Mangalia, par Constantin Preda, lequel privilégia les 9 Sauciuc-Săveanu 1924a ; 1925 ; 1927-1932 ; 1935-1936 ; 1937-1940 ; 1941-1944. Voir aussi les présentations plus générales du même auteur : Sauciuc-Săveanu 1940 ; 1943 ; 1947. Pour d'autres recherches archéologiques à Mangalia, vers la même époque, voir PetrescuD\mboviţa 1944. 10 Sauciuc-Săveanu 1924b ; 1935 ; 1936a ; 1936b ; 1937a ; 1937b ; 1938 ; 1946. Pour certaines des inscriptions publiées dans ces articles, voir les interventions décisives de Wilhelm 1922, p. 72-76 ; 1928a ; 1928b ; Haussoullier 1925 ; Robert 1929 ; 1939 ; 1940, p. 78-80 ; 1946, p. 51-53 (à ajouter les contributions annuelles de J. et L. Robert dans le Bull. ép.). À partir de la même époque, d'autres inscriptions callatiennes furent publiées par Scarlat Lambrino (1891-1964) : Lambrino 1933 ; 1935-1936 ; 1945 ; 1962. Un premier recueil des inscriptions de Callatis, mais à diffusion plutôt confidentielle, puisqu'il s'agissait d'une thèse (dirigée par A. Wilhelm et soutenue à l'Université de Vienne) multipliée en quelques exemplaires seulement, est dû à Danov 1932. Quelques épigrammes de Callatis figurent dans le corpus de Mihailov 1942-1943. 11 Preda, Popescu et Diaconu 1962 ; Preda 1968. 12 Pour les sculptures et les pièces d'architecture : Bordenache 1960 ; 1969, p. 104, n° 216. Pour les inscriptions récupérées d'anciennes collections : Tudor 1956, p. 619-620, n° 159 ; 1980, p. 251-253, nos 6163 ; Russu 1957 ; Vulpe 1964 = 1976, p. 266-276.

240

ALEXANDRU AVRAM: KALLATIS quantité que par la qualité des documents, elle fut rassemblée en 1999 dans un corpus publié dans la série Inscriptiones Scythiae Minoris Graecae et Latinae18.

De toute façon, cette première enceinte callatienne semble être restée en usage grosso modo jusqu'à l'époque impériale. Dans un secteur de son côté nord, les sondages ont démontré que les restes du rempart de l'époque autonome étaient recouverts, sans doute à partir de l'extrémité est (située au bord de la mer) et jusque vers sa moitié, par le mur érigé vers 172 ap. J.-C. par les soins du gouverneur M. Valerius Bradua. La date et les circonstances de cette œuvre de reconstruction sont révélées par les inscriptions (ISM III 97-98 ; cf. 99-100), tandis que les recherches archéologiques en ont apporté des précisions supplémentaires. À la suite de cette réfection, la surface intra muros s'est vue réduite par rapport à la ville d'époque hellénistique à près d'une moitié. Les fouilles exécutées à plusieurs occasions ont presque entièrement dégagé le côté nord de ce rempart25, dont la longueur a été estimée à ca. 370 m, et seuls quelques tronçons dans la zone d'incidence de ses côtés ouest (ca. 420 m) et sud (ca. 120 m). L'état de conservation en est parfois satisfaisant : il existe des endroits où les assises sont conservées in situ jusqu'à une hauteur de 2 m, soit ca. un quart de la hauteur initiale estimée à ca. 8-9 m. L'épaisseur en varie de 3,12 à 3,40 m. Les parements sont composés de blocs de calcaire de la même provenance que pour le rempart hellénistique et dont la longueur va de 0,70 à 1 m. L'enceinte était pourvue d'un nombre non déterminé de tours de forme carrée26, de deux portes monumentales, du côté ouest et sud de la ville et d'un fossé profond de ca. 5-6 m27.

Les plus anciennes trouvailles céramiques de Kallatis datent du tout début du IVe s. av. J.-C.19. En ce qui concerne les premiers monuments, il est tout d'abord question de définir le contour de la première enceinte, érigée peut-être vers le milieu du même siècle et dont les fouilles ont identifié quelques tronçons de ses côtés nord, ouest et sud20. Sur le côté nord, le tronçon qui allait du bord de la mer jusque vers l'actuelle route Mangalia– Constanţa (tout près du « tumulus à papyrus » qui abrite aujourd'hui le musée) sera plus tard remplacé par l'enceinte érigée au IIe s. ap. J.-C. ; à partir de ce point, le côté nord continuait vers l'ouest, l'espace intra muros à l'époque grecque étant donc beaucoup plus étendu que plus tard, à l'époque romaine. La limite ouest de la même muraille, pourvue d'un double fossé, a été identifiée grâce aux fouilles de 1993 (rue Ţepeş Vodă, près de l'église catholique de Mangalia)21. Quant à la limite méridionale, elle pourrait être mise en évidence par les quelques tronçons fouillés en 1981 près de la « Casa Armatei » (Maison de l'Armée), ce qui donnerait pour l'ensemble de l'espace fortifié une surface de ca. 80 ha22. L'enceinte du IVe s. av. J.-C. a sûrement été remaniée à l'époque hellénistique, sans doute après la prise de la ville par Lysimaque23, mais la portée de ces interventions demeure moins claire24.

Quant aux autres monuments de Kallatis, il convient surtout d'attirer l'attention sur les fouilles (demeurées, hélas, inédites) exécutées en 1981-1983 dans le téménos, identifié d'ailleurs par hasard tout près de l'office postal de Mangalia et aussitôt enlevé à la science par les « impératifs » édilitaires de l'époque communiste. Les quelques mentions que l'on trouve dans un rapport assez général28 font état des restes d'un petit temple (6,8 x 6 m) et de trois autels, datables, selon toute vraisemblance, du IVe s. av. J.-C. Des quartiers d'époque hellénistique ont été fouillés dans les années soixante, puis dans les années 1980-1990 dans le secteur ouest de la ville préromaine (rues Oituz et Ştefan cel Mare)29 et, encore plus récemment, dans le centre-ville même (rue Vasile Pârvan)30.

18 ISM III (cf. Bull. ép. 2002, 302 ; SEG XLIX 1012). Ajouter, après la parution du corpus, Avram 2000 ; 2002a ; |ajtar 2001 ; Manov 2001 (sur ISM III 7) ; Jaccottet 2003, corpus, nos 54-61 (= ISM III, respectivement 35, 36, 42-46, 80), et passim, riches commentaires sur le thiase bachique ; Avram, Bărbulescu et Ionescu 2004. Les inscriptions callatiennes tardives (grecques et latines) ont été recueillies dans IGLR, p. 128-147, nos 84-108 ; pour les trouvailles plus récentes, voir les références mentionnées ISM III, p. 141-143. 19 Popescu 1964 (= ISM III 254). Les plus anciens timbres amphoriques sont à peu près de la même période : cf. Buzoianu 1984 = 1986. 20 Preda 1968, p. 20. Le mur présente des parements exécutés en pierre calcaire taillée en provenance de la région limitrophe (le soi-disant « calcaire de Hagieni »). On n'en conserve, sur le côté ouest, que les fondations et, selon le cas, une ou deux assises. La longueur des blocs varie de 0,70 à 1,15 m, alors que leur largeur va de 0,40 à 0,45 m. Cf. F. Preda 1968. 21 Georgescu et Ionescu 1998, p. 205-206 et 213, fig. I/1-2. Le remplissage du fossé contenait entre autres un dépôt de tuiles sinopéennes timbrées toutes (!) sous l'astynome Nikomhvdh" (avec trois fabricants différents). L'astynome en question (sous-groupe Id) date des années quarante du IVe s. av. J.-C. (Conovici 1998, p. 23 et 51), ce qui pourrait donner un repère chronologique : l'érection du rempart date donc d'une époque antérieure à la date indiquée par ces tuiles. 22 Voir, pour les fouilles de 1958-1967, Preda 1968, p. 20-22 ; F. Preda 1968 ; Coja 1986, p. 101 (qui écrivait à tort que « l'enceinte la plus ancienne a été attribuée à l'époque hellénistique »). Pour les fouilles des années 1980-1990, Georgescu et Ionescu 1998 ; Oppermann 2004, p. 80. 23 Pour cet événement, voir plus bas, Histoire politique. 24 Preda 1968, p. 22, mentionne les restes d'un mur orienté E–O identifié par les fouilles de 1965 au sud de la ville. Ce mur, érigé dans un terrain marécageux et dont les fondations étaient, par conséquent, composées de poutres de bois, avait une épaisseur de 3,75 m ; il a pu être poursuivi sur une longueur de ca. 100 m. Il date de « l'époque hellénistique ».

25 Il semble qu'une partie en soit restée toujours visible, à preuve, le récit du Seigneur Aubry de la Motraye, qui prétend avoir vu en 1711 cette muraille (supra, note 3). 26 On en a identifié jusqu'ici deux sur le côté nord. 27 Voir, pour tous ces détails, F. Preda 1968 ; Georgescu et Ionescu 1998. 28 Georgescu et Ionescu 1997. 29 Il convient d'attirer l'attention sur une mosaïque d'un édifice dégagé dans le secteur de la rue Ştefan cel Mare (Iconomu 1968, p. 242-249). La mosaïque date de la première moitié du IIe s. av. J.-C. (Oppermann 2004, p. 251 et n. 2562, avec les références). 30 Presque aucune de ces fouilles n'a été publiée. Il faut dire que si, à l'époque communiste, il était pratiquement impossible de s'opposer aux « projets d'urbanisation » issus du cabinet de la plus haute instance politique, le traitement réservé aux antiquités de Callatis par les représentants de l'actuel pouvoir local de Mangalia ne trouve aucune excuse. Ce n'est qu'avec beaucoup de peine que les archéologues du

241

ANCIENT GREEK COLONIES IN THE BLACK SEA 2 cultuels39. Enfin convient-il d'ajouter les terres cuites de la fin de l'époque classique et de l'époque hellénistique, dont les ateliers de Kallatis ont fourni quelques beaux spécimens, récupérés parfois de contextes funéraires40.

Les sources épigraphiques d'époque hellénistique mentionnent quelques édifices que l'on suppose plus ou moins monumentaux, tel le bouleutèrion (ISM III 49), le prytanée (ISM 3 et 7), le théâtre (ISM III 3 et sans doute 5), le dikastèrion (ISM III 39), le gymnase (dont on ne dispose que de renseignements indirects), ou encore une stoa érigée à l'époque d'Auguste (ISM III 58), sans préjudice de plusieurs sanctuaires31. Aucun de ces édifices n'a été identifié par des fouilles. Nous disposons, en revanche, de plusieurs membra disiecta – réutilisés pour la plupart comme matériaux de construction pour les édifices de la ville romano-byzantine ou bien comme pierres tombales ou comme plaques des cistes de la nécropole tardive – qui nous permettent d'apprécier le niveau assez haut de l'architecture hellénistique, civile et religieuse, du haut hellénisme à Kallatis : des métopes représentant une centauromachia32, d'autres fragments de métopes33, de frises34 ou de chapiteaux35, une table sacrée (iJera; travpeza)36, etc. D'autres trouvailles nous renseignent sur l'activité des ateliers lapidaires locaux ; à preuve, les stèles funéraires à reliefs, dont quelques-unes d'une haute qualité37, les frises à divinités38 ou les reliefs

Si la ville de Kallatis aux premiers siècles de notre ère demeure presque inconnue du point de vue archéologique41, nous disposons, en revanche, de quelques données sur l'habitat tardif (IVe – VIe s. ap. J.C.). Il convient de mentionner à ce propos les quartiers dégagés près du côté sud du rempart du IIe s. ap. J.-C. (là où se trouve aujourd'hui l'hôtel « Président »)42 et, plus récemment, dans la zone de la rue Vasile Pârvan, et surtout la soi-disant « basilique syrienne » (Ve – VIe s. ap. J.-C.), située tout près du côté nord du rempart et conservée in situ43. Pour le reste, il faut se contenter de trouvailles isolées : des stèles funéraires44, des sarcophages45, des sculptures46, des reliefs bachiques47 ou au Cavalier Thrace48.

Un relief de moindre qualité est pourtant à retenir, pour peu qu'il soit le seul de tout le Pont Gauche à représenter la dexiosis (observation de M. Oppermann) : Ştefan 1974b (avec une datation phantaisiste) = ISM III 135 = Oppermann 2004, p. 273 et pl. 72, 4. 38 Sauciuc-Săveanu 1924a, p. 123-124, fig. 2 = Oppermann 2004, p. 263 et pl. 63, 3 (IIe s. av. J.-C.) ; Bordenache 1960, p. 497-499, n° 7 et fig. 10-11 = Oppermann 2004, p. 264 et pl. 63, 2 (IIe s. av. J.-C.). 39 Slobozianu et Ţicu 1966, p. 691-692 et fig. 13, 2 = Oppermann 2004, p. 264 (relief à Nymphes découvert à Schitu, dans le territoire de Callatis, fin du IIe ou Ier s. av. J.-C.). 40 Sauciuc-Săveanu 1924a, p. 158, fig. 80 ; 1935-1936, p. 308, fig. 21 ; Vulpe 1935-1936 ; Bordenache 1960, p. 501-502 et fig. 14-15 ; Preda 1961a, p. 282-293 et fig. 9-12 ; 1966, p. 145-146 et fig. 5, 1-8 ; Iconomu 1968, p. 251, n° 6, et fig. 25 ; Canarache 1969 ; CheluţăGeorgescu 1974, p. 177-178, 184-187 et pl. 4, 2-3 ; 7, 6 ; 8, 1-7 ; Bârlădeanu-Zavatin 1980, p. 235-236 et pl. 8 ; 1985 ; Bounegru et Bârlădeanu 1990, p. 335-338 et fig. 5, 1-2 ; Szilágyi 2000 ; Oppermann 2004, p. 100, 191-196. Voir aussi les trouvailles d'Albeşti. 41 On connaît mieux le quartier extra muros situé à l'ouest de l'enceinte du IIe s. ap. J.-C., dans la zone de l'actuelle « Maison de la Culture ». Ce quartier semble avoir été abandonné vers le milieu du IIIe s. ap. J.-C. La recherche d'une villa à parois peintes, détruite par un incendie, a pu en fournir une date, car c'est ici que l'on a trouvé un trésor composé de plus de 9000 monnaies émises pour la plupart par Callatis et Tomis. Toutes les monnaies sont du IIIe s., alors que les derniers exemplaires datent de 260 ap. J.-C. : cf. Preda 1961b ; 1993 ; Vertan 1999, p. 132-133 (brève description et bibliographie complète des publications signalétiques). Pour un autre trésor, trouvé par hasard en 1958 dans le quartier extra muros de Callatis romaine (rue Oituz) et composé de ca. 800 monnaies (dont seuls 77 exemplaires publiés jusqu'à présent) s'échelonnant de Philippe l'Arabe à 267 ap. J.-C., voir Vertan 1999, p. 131-132 (avec la bibliographie). 42 Les premières fouilles dans ce secteur avaient été exécutées vers 1958-1959 par Constantin Preda. Un hôtel érigé à cette époque juste sur le rempart du IIe s. a définitivement enterré ce monument. De nouvelles fouilles préventives ont été engagées en 1992 et 1993 par A. Avram, E. Bârlădeanu et M. Ionescu à l'occasion de la transformation de l'ancien hôtel en un hôtel de luxe. La découverte d'une tour située sur le tronçon sud du rempart et la mise au jour d'un habitat de l'époque tardive (IVe – VIe s. ap. J.-C.) ont réclamé un nouveau projet, grâce auquel la tour finit par être restaurée et intégrée au foyer de l'hôtel, alors que les autres monuments furent conservés dans un sous-sol « archéologique » spécialement aménagé. Tous ces monuments peuvent être visités. 43 Theodorescu 1963 ; cf. Condurachi 1971 ; Lungu 2000, p. 72. 44 Alexandrescu Vianu 1973 ; 1977 ; 1985 ; Covacef 2002, p. 210-211 ; Conrad 2004, nos 116-122. 45 Alexandrescu Vianu 1970 (cf. Popescu 1970) ; Iconomu 1969, p. 181-185 = ISM III 189.

musée « Callatis » de Mangalia obtiennent le « privilège » d'entreprendre des fouilles préventives, même si la législation roumaine est, sur ce point, toute aussi claire que dans n'importe quel pays européen. Encore faut-il que l'on respecte la loi, ce qui n'est toujours pas le cas à Mangalia. 31

Avram 1995e ; ISM III, p. 120-123. Pour les lieux de culte consacrés à Dionysos et quelques hypothèses sur leurs aspects, Avram 2002a. Pour les sanctuaires, voir aussi infra, Les cultes. 32 Preda 1980, p. 15 ; cf. Oppermann 2004, p. 163, qui, sur la foi de quelques parallèles à Éphèse, les date de la première moitié du IIIe s. av. J.-C. 33 Sauciuc-Săveanu 1924a, p. 122, fig. 28 ; Bordenache 1960, p. 492, n° 3 et fig. 3 (bucranes). D'autres fragments (inédits) proviennent des fouilles exécutées dans le téménos. 34 Sauciuc-Săveanu 1924a, p. 122-123, fig. 29-31 ; Bordenache 1960, p. 492-495, n° 4 et fig. 4-7 = Preda, Popescu et Diaconu 1962, p. 452, fig. 10 a-b ; Preda 1980, p. 15 et pl. 43. Pour la typologie, voir maintenant Oppermann 2004, p. 163. 35 Sauciuc-Săveanu 1924a, p. 120-121 et fig. 20-21 ; Oppermann 2004, p. 163 et pl. 45, 3. Pour un chapiteau de moindre qualité du IIe s. av. J.C., voir Bordenache 1960, p. 491, n° 2 et fig. 2 ; cf. Oppermann 2004, p. 251. 36 Avram, Bărbulescu et Georgescu 1999a, n° 1 = ISM III 78 (IIIe s. av. J.-C.). 37 Par exemple, la stèle à anthémion de la deuxième moitié du IVe s. av. J.-C. (Bordenache 1960, p. 490, n° 1 et fig. 1 = ISM III 151 = Oppermann 2004, p. 190 et pl. 49, 6). Parmi les autres stèles funéraires, il convient de mentionner notamment : Sauciuc-Săveanu 1941-1944, p. 275-277, fig. 15, 1 = Pfuhl et Möbius 1977-1979, n° 836 = Oppermann 2004, p. 189 et pl. 49, 3 (IIIe s. av. J.C. ?) ; Bordenache 1960, p. 495-497, n° 5 et fig. 5 = Pfuhl et Möbius 19771979, n° 1549 = ISM III 161 = Oppermann 2004, p. 266 et pl. 67, 2 ; cf. Alexandrescu Vianu 1986, p. 104 et fig. 5 (fin du IIIe – première moitié du IIe s. av. J.-C. : « stèle des stratèges ») ; ISM III 167 = Oppermann 2004, p. 189 et pl. 49, 2 (IIe s. av. J.-C.) ; Avram, Bărbulescu et Georgescu 1999b, p. 98, n° 9 et fig. 9 = ISM III 169 = Oppermann 2004, p. 271-272 et pl. 71, 2 (IIe s. av. J.-C.) ; Bordenache 1960, p. 497, n° 6 et fig. 6 = Pfuhl et Möbius 1977-1979, n° 1186 = ISM III 165 = Oppermann 2004, p. 272 et pl. 71, 4 (fin du IIe ou début du Ier s. av. J.-C.) ; Avram, Bărbulescu et Georgescu 1999b, p. 101-104, n° 12 et fig. 12 = ISM III 172 (fin du IIe ou début du Ier s. av. J.-C.) ; Avram, Bărbulescu et Georgescu 1999b, p. 101, n° 11 et fig. 11 = ISM III 171 = Oppermann 2004, p. 270 et pl. 65, 4 (IIe ou Ier s. av. J.-C.).

242

ALEXANDRU AVRAM: KALLATIS Un problème qui, malgré les acquis accumulés jusqu'à ce jour, attend encore des précisions supplémentaires, concerne l'emplacement exact du port de la ville. Le port de Kallatis, pour lequel il n'y a aucune mention dans les inscriptions, est désigné comme o{rmo" nausivn par Arrien (Peripl. Pont. Eux. XXIV 3 ; cf. Anonym. Peripl. Pont. Eux., éd. Diller 1952, p. 136), ce qui porterait à croire qu'il s'agissait d'un port naturel. Il est hautement probable que la lagune naturelle située au sud de la ville – arrachée au fil du temps à la mer par un cordon littoral et constituant de nos jours le lac de Mangalia – a été mise à profit pour l'aménagement du port de Kallatis. D'autre part, les restes d'une digue disposée en zigzag le long du littoral étaient encore visibles au Moyen-Âge49 ; en plus, les quelques prospections sous-marines effectuées dans la même zone50 semblent indiquer l'existence d'un aménagement portuaire antique. Il est bien possible que le port de Kallatis ait eu deux bassins : un avant-port aménagé juste devant la ville en pleine mer et une baie naturelle située plus au sud, peut-être au lieu-dit « Plaja marinarilor »51.

parfois révélé de riches mobiliers funéraires. L'inhumation supposait soit des fosses simples (avec, parfois, un cercueil en bois déposé dans la fosse), soit des fosses à parois plaquées de pierres ou de tuiles et couvertes de deux ou trois dalles ; il existe également des sépultures en amphores ou en pithoi, mais uniquement pour les enfants54. Quant à l'incinération, elle était pratiquée, semble-t-il, d'une manière très variée : avec ou sans urne, avec crémation sur place ou non, et parfois en ciste de pierre55. Le nombre restreint des tombes publiées fait pour autant obstacle à un essai de typologie des usages funéraires.

Les données archéologiques sur Kallatis sont heureusement complétées par les recherches consacrées à ses nécropoles de différentes époques. Depuis le IVe s. av. J.-C. jusque vers la fin de l'époque hellénistique, la nécropole de Kallatis s'étendait, semble-t-il, tout autour de la ville, même si les fouilles ont porté notamment sur ses secteurs nord et ouest. Plus de cent tombes en ont été fouillées et publiées52, dont la plus ancienne semble être pour l'instant une tombe du troisième quart du IVe siècle53. Il s'agit, à quelques exceptions près, d'une nécropole plane à inhumations et incinérations, ayant

Une attention toute particulière est réclamée par les trois tumuli groupés dans la zone de l'angle NO de l'enceinte d'époque impériale, et dont le plus important est le « tumulus à papyrus ». Il s'agit d'un grand tumulus abritant une tombe d'inhumation creusée à une profondeur de 1,50 m, à parois constituées de blocs de calcaire et couverte de trois dalles. Au SO de la tombe il y avait un petit autel funéraire. Tout le complexe était entouré d'un cercle de pierres (14 m de diamètre), sur lequel on avait érigé un tertre. Sur les dalles de la tombe, on avait déposé une couronne confectionnée de feuilles de bronze et de pastilles d'argile ainsi que des coques d'œuf. Le squelette, sur lequel étaient semés des grains, tenait dans sa main droite un papyrus. Une autre couronne avait été déposée à l'intérieur de la tombe57. Sur la foi du mobilier funéraire, et notamment des quatre canthares à vernis noir trouvés dans la terre qui recouvrait la tombe, le complexe a été daté du dernier tiers (sans doute des années vingt) du IVe s. av. J.-C. C'est à peu près la même date qu'il convient d'attribuer au tertre (?) situé à quelques mètres plus au sud du « tumulus à papyrus » et abritant une tombe collective, cette fois-ci d'incinération, composée de trois foyers. Le mobilier funéraire fourni par deux de ces foyers comptait entre autres les restes de couronnes appartenant au même type que les couronnes trouvées dans la tombe voisine. La relation entre les deux complexes demeure incertaine ; car d'une part, le caractère tumulaire de la tombe collective n'est pas assuré (si tumulus il y eut, il aura été entièrement aplati), d'autre part, les deux rites divergents – inhumation et incinération – posent problème.

D'autres types de tombes sont beaucoup plus rares. Récemment, les interventions faites sur le secteur de la nécropole romano-byzantine situé à l'ouest de a ville, près de la « Staţia de biogaz » (rue Oituz) ont mis à jour, hormis quelques hypogées datables du IVe au VIe s. ap. J.-C., une tombe du même type, avec dromos, dont le mobilier céramique et une monnaie callatienne de bronze indiquent comme date le IIIe ou le IIe s. av. J.-C.56

46

Statuette féminine, Ier s. ap. J.-C. (Bordenache 1969, p. 23, n° 19, avec une datation trop haute = Covacef 2002, p. 83, n° 1) ; tête de fille, fin du IIe s. (Covacef 1990, p. 151, n° 2 = 2002, p. 83-84) ; tête de garçon, ca. 150-170 (Covacef 1990, p. 151, n° 3 = 2002, p. 84) ; statuette représentant Hercule, époque des Sévères (Bordenache 1969, p. 79, n° 128 ; cf. Covacef 1975 ; 2002, p. 145-148) ; statuette représentant Aphrodite, deuxième quart du IIIe s. (Bordenache 1960, p. 504-505, n° 16 et fig. 19 a-b = 1969, p. 26-27, n° 29 = ISM III 94 = Covacef 2002, p. 120) ; statuette représentant Némésis , après le milieu du IIIe s. (Bordenache 1960, p. 506-509, n° 17 et fig. 20 a-c = ISM III 75 = Covacef 2002, p. 144) ; tête de Pan, ca. 230-250 (Sauciuc-Săveanu 1938, fig. 35 et 37 = Bordenache 1969, p. 66-67, n° 121 = Covacef 2002, p. 131-132). 47 Scorpan 1966, nos 23, 30, 38, 39, 75 ; cf. Covacef 2002, p. 127-131. 48 Scorpan 1967 ; Hampartumian 1979 ; Covacef 2002, p. 169-177. Pour les références détaillées, voir infra, note 200. 49 Le premier à témoigner de la présence de ce port à Panguala est le « croisé » Walerand de Wavrin, participant à la bataille de Varna (1444) : Anchiennes Croniques d'Engleterre par Jehan de Wavrin seigneur de Forestel, éd. Dupont, II, Paris, 1863, p. 93. Plus tard, en 1651, Evlia ∫elebi en donne une description dans Seyahatnamé : « un port des plus nécessaires », malheureusement non soigné. Voir, à ce propos, Tafrali 1927, p. 18-19 ; Gramatopol 1966. 50 Scorpan 1970 ; Scarlat 1973 ; 1976 ; Cosma 1973. 51 Bounegru 1986b ; cf. maintenant Ionescu et Georgescu 1997, p. 161162, n° 6, pour quelques trouvailles céramiques d'époque hellénistique dans cette zone. 52 Preda 1961a ; 1966 ; Zavatin-Coman 1972 ; Cheluţă-Georgescu 1974 ; Scorpan 1974 ; Preda et Georgescu 1975 ; Preda et Bârlădeanu 1979 ; Bârlădeanu-Zavatin 1980 ; 1985. 53 Preda 1961a, p. 281-293 et fig. 5-12, tombe 20 (parois de la fosse plaquées de tuiles sinopéennes).

54

Par exemple, Preda 1961a, p. 280 ; Cheluţă-Georgescu 1974, p. 179. Voir les exemples réunis par Oppermann 2004, p. 164. 56 Ionescu, Alexandru et Constantin 2002-2003b, p. 282 et fig. 14, tombe 4. 57 Preda 1961a ; cf. Preda 1968, p. 27 ; Pippidi 1967b = 1969a, p. 121132 et pl. XIX ; ISM III, p. 118-119 ; Oppermann 2004, p. 163-164 et pl. 38. 55

243

ANCIENT GREEK COLONIES IN THE BLACK SEA 2 Quoi qu'il en soit, il convient de remarquer l'emplacement surprenant de la tombe à papyrus à l'intérieur d'une nécropole plane et juste devant l'enceinte. Il est hautement probable que l'on a affaire à la tombe d'un notable58. Quant au papyrus, il était non seulement fort endommagé au moment de sa découverte, mais il le devint davantage après son exposition en plein air. Une intervention manquant, paraît-il, de compétence en fit le reste. Les débris du papyrus furent ensuite transportés en Russie (à Moscou ?) en vue d'un traitement ; cependant, on en perdit depuis lors la trace59.

l'extrémité ouest de la ville de Mangalia62. Hormis les inhumations appartenant à des types plutôt communs dans la région63, ce sont notamment les quelques hypogées à chambre funéraire voûtée et à dromos qui attirent l'attention64. Ces tombes sont, pour la plupart, chrétiennes65 ; il y en a même une (datée du VIe s. ap. J.C.) qui conserve sur ses parois deux inscriptions exécutées en couleur rouge et dont le texte reproduit les psaumes 18, 15 et 22, 466.

Dans le territoire de Kallatis, les tumuli sont plutôt fréquents. On en connaît quatre qui cachaient des constructions à chambre funéraire voûtée et à dromos, datées de la fin du IVe ou plutôt du début du IIIe s. av. J.C. Il semble cependant que ces tumuli aient été destinés à une élite issue d'une population non grecque habitant les environs de Kallatis plutôt qu'aux citoyens grecs. D'autres tumuli abritent des inhumations aménagées à peu près de la même manière que les sépultures de la nécropole plane60. Il existe enfin d'autres tertres qui sont d'époque romaine et qui datent pour la plupart du IIe s. ap. J.-C.

Kallatis67 fut fondée par Héraclée du Pont68 vers la fin du VIe s. av. J.-C. La date de sa fondation ne nous est léguée que par une seule source : il s'agit du Pseudo-Scymnos

LA FONDATION

62 367 tombes dans la monographie de Preda 1980 ; à ajouter, plus récemment, les 169 tombes publiées par Ionescu, Alexandru et Constantin 2002-2003a (et encore, dans le même article, 5 tombes d'époque hellénistique et 4 datables, selon toute vraisemblance, de la haute époque romaine). 63 Aussi faut-il quand même souligner la fréquence des tombes en cistes, une tradition que l'on a héritée, semble-t-il, de l'époque hellénistique. 64 Preda 1980, p. 16-17 ; Ionescu, Alexandru et Constantin 2002-2003b. 65 Pour les inscriptions chrétiennes (IVe – VIe s.) trouvées dans la nécropole ou ailleurs, voir IGLR 88, 89, 91, 92, 94, 95, 98, 106 ; Preda 1980, p. 110 (tombe 316, à chambre funéraire voûtée) ; cf. Lungu 2000, p. 45-46 ; Georgescu et Ionescu 1995-1996 ; Barnea 1994. Deux autres inscriptions inédites (Musée « Callatis » de Mangalia), dont une trouvée dans la nécropole de basse époque romaine, sont à ajouter. 66 Rădulescu et Lungu 1989, p. 2591 et fig. 22 ; Pillinger 1992 ; Barnea 1995-1996 ; Georgescu et Ionescu 1995-1996, p. 197-198 ; Lungu 2000, p. 45-46. Cf. Bull. ép. 1990, 900 ; 1995, 727 (D. Feissel) ; SEG XXXIX 672 ; XLII 671 ; XLIV 628 ; XLVIII 975. 67 Le nom usuel attesté dans les sources pour la ville fondée par Héraclée du Pont est Kavllati" : Ps.-Scylax, 67 (GGM I 56-57) ; Ps.Scymnos, v. 760 éd. Diller 1952, p. 166 ; Strabon, VII 6, 1, etc. ; Kavlati" (Anonym. Peripl. Pont. Eux., éd. Diller 1952, p. 136) ; Cal(l)atis dans les sources latines ; accentué Kallavti" à l'époque byzantine (Procope de Césarée, Aed. IV 11, 20 ; Constantin Porphyrogénète, Them. [47] 1, 59, p. 86, éd. A. Pertusi). La forme Kallativa ne figure que chez Diodore, XX 112, d'où Cal(l)atia dans les manuscrits de certains auteurs tardifs de langue latine. La légende de la première émission monétaire de Callatis est KALLATIA, ce qui n'est qu'une abréviation de l'ethnique collectif au génitif Kallatia(nw'n) et ne peut guère suggérer une forme originaire Kallativa du nom de la cité. Certes, l'étymologie du nom de la ville alléguée par Étienne de Byzance n'est qu'une fantaisie érudite : wJ" kavlaqo" euJrevqh ejoikw;" toi'" Qesmoforiakoi'". En revanche, l'explication fournie par EtM, p. 486, 41, pourrait bien être réelle : wjnovmastai d∆ ajpo; th'" parakeimevnh" livmnh". Quant à la mention isolée de Pline l'Ancien (Callatis quae antea Cerbatis uocabatur), elle vient d'être partiellement confirmée par une inscription de Dionysopolis (IGB V 5011). L'ethnique est invariablement Kallatianov" (voir également la variante Kallantianoiv dans le texte de Diodore, XX 73, 1 et 4-6 ; XX 25, 1, ainsi que les formes sans gémination des manuscrits de Memnon [= Photios], FGrHist III B 434 F 13 (21) : Kalatianouv", Kalatianoi'", Kalatianw'n, mais th'" Kallavtido" quand il s'agit de la ville). 68 Voir, cependant, Pomponius Mela, II 2, 22 : in litoribus Histro est proxima Histropolis, deinde Milesiis deducta Callatis, tum Tomoe et portus Caria et Tiristis promunturium. Il ne s'agit apparemment que d'un lapsus calami ou bien d'une confusion avec Istros (Histropolis) mentionnée plus haut dans le même passage : cf., entre autres, Hind 1998, p. 139, note 31 ; 1999a, p. 81. Selon un autre point de vue, le passage en question suggérerait une exploration milésienne ayant précédé l'installation des colons venus d'Héraclée du Pont : Asheri 1972, p. 16-18 ; Saprykin 1997, p. 69-70 ; Vinogradov 1997, p. 410 ; Oppermann 2000, p. 140.

Tout comme dans le cas de la ville, les nécropoles des trois premiers siècles ap. J.-C. continuent à être assez mal connues61. En revanche, plus de 500 tombes ont été publiées de la grande nécropole (ca. 5 ha) de basse époque romaine (IVe – VIe s. ap. J.-C.) située à 58

J'ai supposé (ISM III, p. 119), sur la foi de plusieurs éléments, qu'il s'agissait du fondateur du culte bachique à Callatis ou, de toute façon, d'une personnalité issue du thiase mentionné à plusieurs reprises par les inscriptions. 59 Pour autant que le papyrus de Callatis soit évoqué dans toutes sortes de publications et que l'on se pose constamment la question de ce qu'il en advint, je m'estime autorisé à préciser plus en détail l'histoire mouvementée de cette découverte presque unique (seul parallèle serait – autant pour la date très haute que pour la zone géographique de la trouvaille – le célèbre papyrus de Derveni). En pleine conscience du caractère exceptionnel de sa découverte (1959), Constantin Preda – auquel l'archéologie callatienne doit énormément – avait immédiatement annoncé les instances compétentes de Bucarest. L'on a jugé bon (qui ?) de faire appel à un spécialiste de l'Union Soviétique, ce qui, au demeurant, était une pratique usuelle à l'époque. D'après le témoignage verbal de C. Preda, il s'agissait d'un spécialiste de la restauration des textiles (venu de Moscou), dont « l'intervention » aurait plutôt détruit ce qui restait du papyrus. Mais ce qui est encore plus grave, c'est le silence total qui règne depuis plus de quatre décennies. À Moscou ou ailleurs, en Russie, est-ce qu'on en sait quelque chose dans les milieux des papyrologues ? Il est légitime de lancer publiquement la question.- Quant à l'écriture du papyrus, D. M. Pippidi, un connaisseur hors pair de l'épigraphie pontique et qui a eu la chance de voir le papyrus juste après sa découverte, estime qu’il s’agissait de « caractères épigraphiques », comme à Derveni (Pippidi 1969a, p. 126, n. 12). Dans une brochure de vulgarisation, R. Vulpe pensait qu’il était question du texte d'un décret de proxénie (Vulpe 1966, p. 86) : ce qui serait sans parallèles dans le monde grec. C'est à Pippidi d'avoir supposé, sur la foi de plusieurs éléments, un lien avec le dionysisme (Pippidi 1967b = 1969a, p. 121-132). S'agirait-il d'un « talisman pour l'au-delà » (Picard 1963, p. 186) ? 60 Bounegru et Bârlădeanu 1990. 61 Iconomu 1968 et 1969 (cf. Poenaru Bordea et Ocheşeanu 1991, p. 359-360) ; Rădulescu, Coman et Stavru 1973 ; Bârlădeanu-Zavatin 1977.

244

ALEXANDRU AVRAM: KALLATIS (IIe s. av. J.-C.), un poème à prétention de chronique universelle qui, pour sa section pontique, met à profit les données fournies par Démétrios de Kallatis, un historien local dont l'œuvre, jugée par la postérité immédiate comme très fiable, ne nous est pas parvenue. La notice du Ps.-Scymnos (vv. 760-764, éd. Diller 1952, p. 166-167) ne nous renseigne que sur ce que la cité fut fondée vers l'époque à laquelle le roi Amyntas instaurait son pouvoir en Macédoine :

reste qu'à admettre que cette institution très ancienne existait encore à Héraclée au moment de la fondation de Kallatis, autant dire que cette colonie était plus ancienne que la Chersonèse de Crimée71. Enfin, la prééminence de l'opinion sur la haute datation (autour de 500 av. J.-C.) de la section pontique du périple connu sous le nom du Pseudo-Scylax (GGM I, p. 56-57)72 – dont la compilation définitive est de l'époque d'Alexandre le Grand – fournit un atout majeur à la variante « Amyntas Ier », car Kallatis y est mentionnée à côté d'autres cités ouest-pontiques (67) : eijsi; de; ejn tw'/ Povntw/ povlei" ÔEllhnivde" ai{de ejn Qra/vkh/: ∆Apollwniva, Meshmbriva, ∆Odhssovpoli", Kavllati" kai; potamo;" “Istro".

ajpoikiva ãtw'nà ÔHraklewtw'n genomevnh kata; crhsmovn: ektisan de; tauvthn hJnivka th;n Makedovnwn ajrch;n ∆Amuvnta" parevlaben. « (La cité de Kallatis), colonie des Héracléotes issue à la suite d'un oracle. Ils l'ont fondée lorsque Amyntas reçut le commandement des Macédoniens. »

Le problème devient encore plus compliqué si l'on ajoute au dossier la tradition, conservée par Pline l'Ancien, selon laquelle le nom initial de Kallatis aurait été Cerbatis : Callatim, quae antea Cerbatis73 uocabatur (Nat. hist. IV 11 [18], 44). D'autre part, une horothésie de Dionysopolis (IGB V 5011) du début du Ier s. ap. J.-C., dont il sera encore question plus bas, mentionne, entre autres repères, Karbati" : ce qui, en principe, serait en état de confirmer la source de Pline l'Ancien, s'il ne s'agissait plutôt d'une rivière située à l'extrême sud du territoire callatien. Récemment, en combinant toutes ces données, M. Oppermann vient de proposer une solution ingénieuse. Il identifie Cerbatis avec la rivière qui passe par la ville de Šabla et constate que dans la région du Cap Šabla (où l'on peut localiser le « Port des Cariens » mentionné par des sources plus tardives) il y avait un site ayant fourni des témoignages céramiques de la fin de l'époque archaïque, ce qui pourrait accréditer l'idée d'un premier établissement (peut-être milésien), lequel serait éventuellement celui dont on trouve l'écho chez Pline l'Ancien74. Une telle reconstruction a, à mon avis, toutes les chances de s'imposer ; néanmoins, dans ces

Il n'y a malheureusement guère de précision sur le roi en question. Car, si le règne d'Amyntas Ier est datable de la deuxième moitié du VIe s. av. J.-C., Amyntas III, le père de Philippe II (393-370/69 av. J.-C.), est beaucoup plus récent69. Le parallélisme établi par la source du Ps.Scymnos est donc moins clair pour les exégètes modernes qu'il ne l'était sans doute pour ses contemporains. Toujours est-il que la variante « Amyntas Ier » est à préférer à plus d'un titre. Il s'agit tout d'abord de la mention sur la consultation de l'oracle (sans aucun doute, celui de Delphes), qui trouve sa place à une époque plus reculée plutôt qu'au tout début du IVe s. Deuxièmement, pour autant que – eu égard aux relations entre les deux contrées depuis l'époque de Philippe II – l'histoire récente de Macédoine ait été bien connue à Kallatis, il est peu concevable qu'un historien averti comme Démétrios de Kallatis ait fait usage d'un repère aussi vague s'il s'agissait du règne récent d'Amyntas III. Troisièmement, quelques inscriptions de Kallatis (ISM I 2-4, 7, 19) attestent, à partir du IVe s. av. J.-C., des proboules (provbouloi), lesquels étant connus à Mégare (Aristophane, Ach. 754-756), la métropole d'Héraclée du Pont, relèvent sans l'ombre d'un doute de l'héritage mégarien ; d'autre part, comme les mêmes proboules ne sont guère mentionnés dans les documents épigraphiques de Chersonèse Taurique, dont la fondation, toujours héracléote, est datée de 422/1 av. J.-C.70, il ne

Zolotarev 2003, qui insiste sur l'existence d'une polis dès la fin de l'archaïsme). 71 Avram 1994a. 72 Baschmakoff 1948, p. 22-29 ; Arnaud 1992 ; Avram 1996a, p. 289293. 73 Les manuscrits diffèrent sur ce point : on trouve aussi Cerbetis et Aceruetis. 74 Oppermann 2004, p. 16-17 : « … so könnte der Oberlauf dieses Baches südwestlich des Ortes Šabla am ehesten jener in der Horothesie bezeichnete Grenzpunkt gewesen sein. Interessant ist dabei, dass auf Kap Šabla eine antike Hafensiedlung nachgewiesen ist, die mindestens bis in die Zeit um 500 v. Chr. zurückreicht, wobei durchaus ältere Materialien zu erwarten wären. Hier wäre also eine mögliche Lokalisierung von Cerbatis zu erwägen. Ob sich dort zunächst milesische Kolonisten im thrakischen Milieu niedergelassen hatten, bliebe noch zu klären. Doch dass im späteren 6. Jh. v. Chr. bzw. zur Regierungszeit des makedonischen Königs Amyntas I. hier eine dorische Apoikia entstanden sein könnte, scheint allein angesichts der nicht sehr bedeutenden Rolle, die Kap Šabla offenbar später gespielt hat, schwer möglich zu sein. Wenn man die Gründung von Kallatis unter dem Aspekt einer “neuen Kolonistenwelle” betrachtet und dabei auf die Neukolonisierung der Schwesterstadt Chersonesos im Jahre 422/421 v. Chr. durch Herakleia Pontike hinweist, so impliziert dies die Existenz einer frühen Anlage. Doch hier liegt ein bis heute völlig unlösbares Problem. Während wir aus der Zeit vor 400 v. Chr. keine archäologischen Zeugnisse für die Existenz von Kallatis besitzen, nahm dann die Stadt seit dem frühen 4. Jh. v. Chr. einen ungeahnten Aufschwung ».

69 Hammond et Griffith 1979, p. 57-60 (Amyntas Ier, ca. 540 – mort probablement en 498), 168-170 (Amyntas II, autour de 394/3), 172-180 (Amyntas III, 393-370/69). Le seul à ne pas entrer en discussion est Amyntas II, dont l'apparition fut moins qu'éphémère.- Pour la fondation de Callatis à l'époque d'Amyntas Ier, voir, entre autres, Pippidi 1971, p. 38-39 et 63-64 ; Burstein 1976, p. 25 ; Isaac 1986, p. 262 ; Nawotka 1997, p. 21-22 ; Bittner 1998, p. 12 et 126 ; plus récemment, avec certaines réserves, Buzoianu 2001, p. 201, et Ruscu 2002, p. 12 ; plus décidé, Cojocaru 2004, p. 110-111. Pour une date de fondation vers le début du IVe s. av. J.-C. se prononcent, par contre, Ulanici 1974 ; Hind 1984, p. 75 ; 1993, p. 89 ; 1998, p. 139 ; 1999b, p. 30 ; Graham 1994, p. 6 ; Ivantchik 1998, p. 322, note 77. 70 Je laisse de côté la Chersonèse archaïque (brièvement, à ce propos, les points de vue entièrement opposés de Saprykin 1998, lequel s'en tient à la date « traditionnelle » de la fondation de Chersonèse, et de

245

ANCIENT GREEK COLONIES IN THE BLACK SEA 2 conditions, il conviendrait d'accorder plus de respect à Pomponius Mela (II 2, 22), lequel tenait Kallatis pour une fondation milésienne, et reprendre l'ensemble du dossier bien épineux de l'installation milésienne à l'époque archaïque sur des sites pontiques colonisés (dans un deuxième temps ?) par les Doriens75.

25) et nous fait part de deux toponymes donnés comme repères (Nymphaion et to; ∆Afrodeivsion = Aphrodisias ?)81, auxquels on pourrait ajouter Karbati", un hydronyme, selon toute vraisemblance82. La même inscription ne mentionne guère Bizonè (actuelle Kavarna), située entre Kallatis et Dionysopolis ; ce qui s'explique aisément par la disparition de cette ville à la suite d'un tremblement de terre (Strab., VII 6, 1 ; Pomp. Mel., II 2, 22 ; Plin., Nat. hist. IV 11 [18], 44)83. Kallatis et Dionysopolis se partageaient donc la cwvra de Bizonè. D'autre part, pour autant que l'inscription parle des « anciennes frontières entre les Callatiens et les Dionysopolitains », il est évident que les territoires des deux villes étaient limitrophes quelque part à l'intérieur ; ce n'était que vers la côte que la petite cwvra de Bizonè s'interposait entre les deux. Dans ces conditions, la limite méridionale du territoire callatien semble avoir été, à l'origine, le Cap Šabla (Karw'n limhvn des sources plus tardives)84, où l'on pourrait aussi chercher l'ancienne Cerbatis85.

Cela étant, il ne reste qu'à attendre de nouvelles trouvailles archéologiques qui puissent faire incliner définitivement la balance vers l'une des deux possibilités analysées ci-dessus. Car, s’il s’agit d’accréditer une date de fondation plus ou moins exacte, ce sont justement les témoignages archéologiques qui font défaut. Pour l'instant, le plus ancien document matériel de Kallatis est un bolsal attique portant un graffite de la fin du Ve s.76 Qui plus est, les sites du territoire de Kallatis n'ont fourni des trouvailles qu'à partir du tout début du IVe s. Bien que du point de vue historique une date de fondation vers la fin du VIe s. soit apparemment plus acceptable, le manque de témoignages archéologiques nous empêche d'en apporter la preuve décisive. L'essai de restituer le nom de Kavªllati"º à la place de Kaªrkini'ti"º, préféré par les éditeurs (IG I3 71.IV.165), sur une liste plus que fragmentaire des cités pontiques tributaires à Athènes en 425/4 av. J.-C.77 reste, dans ces circonstances, également sujet à caution.

En ce qui concerne les limites septentrionale et occidentale, il ne reste qu'à supposer – sur la foi de la distribution de quelques trouvailles archéologiques et de la configuration topographique de la zone – que le territoire de Kallatis s'étendait au nord jusque vers l'actuel lac de Techirghiol et vers l'ouest jusqu'aux sites fortifiés des environs d'Albeşti.

L'AMÉNAGEMENT DU TERRITOIRE RURAL L'installation des Callatiens dans la chôra date du début du IVe s. av. J.-C. Vu la discussion autour de la date de fondation, il convient donc d'admettre ou bien un décalage chronologique de plus d'un siècle entre la ville et son territoire, ou bien une fondation plus tardive du site, à une date plus proche du moment de l'aménagement du territoire rural78. Le territoire de Kallatis (cwvra dans quelques inscriptions : ISM III 26, 56, 106) est connu grâce à des sources littéraires, numismatiques et épigraphiques79. Une inscription de Dionysopolis (IGB V 5011)80 concernant une opération de bornage – accomplie sous le patronage du roi thrace Cotys (selon toute évidence, le fils de Rhoemétalkès, ayant régné de 12 à 19 ap. J.-C.) et des villes voisines d'Odessos et de Kallatis – décrit la nouvelle frontière entre Kallatis et Dionysopolis (l. 21-

Hormis les toponymes révélés par la horothésie de Dionysopolis, les noms de plusieurs localités situées dans le territoire callatien nous sont connus grâce aux sources littéraires ou épigraphiques : ∆Amlaiduna = Amlaidina, située sans doute dans la zone du village de 23 August, sur la côte, au nord de Kallatis86 ; Parthenopolis, située dans les environs des villages de Schitu et de Costineşti, sur la côte de la mer, entre 23 August (ci-dessus) et Tuzla (ci-après)87 ; 81

Pour des hypothèses concernant l'identification de ces toponymes, voir Avram 1991, p. 105-108 ; 2001, p. 617-618 ; Oppermann 2000. 82 La limite méridionale du territoire callatien sur l'alignement du Cap Šabla est confirmée à l'époque impériale par une inscription trouvée à Tvărdica : CIL III, Suppl. 1, 7587 = ISM III 241. 83 Le terminus ante quem en est l'époque de Strabon, alors que le dernier événement à date assurée, mentionné en liaison avec Bizonè, est la conquête de la ville par les Romains en 72/1 (Eutrope, VI 10). Les premières sources en état de confirmer la reconstruction de la ville sont du IIe s. ap. J.-C. : Arrien, Peripl. Pont. Eux. XXIV 3-4. Pour les inscriptions locales (qui sont toutes d'époque impériale), voir IGB I2 610. Cf. M. Oppermann 2000, p. 146 ; 2004, p. 253-254. L'inscription de Dionysopolis date donc d'une période suivant de près la destruction de la ville. 84 Testimonia chez G. Mihailov, IGB I2, p. 29. Pour les découvertes archéologiques : Oppermann 2004, p. 16 et 167. 85 Cf. supra, note 74. 86 CIL III, Suppl. 2, 13 743 = Hampartumian 1979, n° 117 = ISM II 266 = ISM III 237. 87 Pline, Nat. hist. IV 11 (18), 44 ; Eutrope, VI 10 (Rufius Festus, 9 ; Jordanès, Rom. 221). Une localité portant le même nom est attestée par le même Pline l'Ancien (Nat. hist. V 148 ; cf. Constantin Porphyrogénète, Them. V 17, p. 70, éd. A. Pertusi) dans le territoire

75 Le cas d'école serait, à ce titre, Chersonèse Taurique, cependant, il n'est pas question de s'y attaquer dans les limites de cet article (voir, dernièrement, Zolotarev 2003). Aussi faut-il rappeler que même pour Héraclée du Pont, la future métropole de Callatis, Asheri 1972 avait prôné une présence milésienne avant l'arrivée des Mégariens. 76 Popescu 1964 (SEG XXIV 1032). 77 Pippidi 1965a (SEG XXII 9) = 1988, p. 20-22 ; cf. Avram 1995a, p. 195-198. 78 C'est notamment l'argument – dont je reconnais l'importance – de J. Hind, dans les travaux cités à la note 69. Néanmoins, il serait permis de rétorquer : si la date de fondation de Callatis est plutôt basse, comment expliquer l'épanouissement soudain de la ville et de son territoire à partir du tout début du IVe s. av. J.-C., c'est-à-dire juste après le débarquement des colons ? Cf. Oppermann 2004, p. 17 (« ungeahnter Aufschwung ») et 80 (« rasanter Aufschwung »). 79 Avram 1991 ; 2001, p. 612-632. 80 Cf. Slavova 1998a = 1998b.

246

ALEXANDRU AVRAM: KALLATIS Stratonis (Cap Tuzla ?), mentionnée uniquement par des itineraria tardifs88 ; Aphrodisias89, Libistos, Zygere, Rhocobae, Eumenia et Gerania90 (localisations inconnues), données par Pline l'Ancien (Nat. hist. IV 11 [18], 44), à côté de Parthenopolis (voir ci-dessus), comme étant des oppida des Scythae aroteres ; Heraclea (localisation inconnue), mentionnée par Pline l'Ancien dans le même passage ; Kwvmh Keª - - º (ISM III 51, l. 2), Oujalª - - º (ISM III 51, l. 6), ∆Asbolodeinoiv ou kwvmh ∆Asbolodeinw'n (ISM III 51, l. 12), Savrde" ou kwvmh Sardevwn (ISM III 51, l. 12), (kwvmh ?) ª - - ºmulh et Pª - - º (ISM III 55, l. 6), ª - - º puvrgo" (ISM III 55, l. 9), des localités données comme repères pour les limites des klèroi.

respectivement à la première et à la deuxième moitié (ou au dernier quart) du IVe s., alors que la troisième phase, pendant laquelle la fortification a été élargie vers le sud, est datée du IIIe s. av. J.-C. Les murs de la fortification sont constitués de parements de pierre calcaire taillée de provenance locale et d'un emplekton de pierres calcaires non taillées et liées à l'aide de l'argile91. Parmi les riches trouvailles, il convient de signaler – hormis le matériel amphorique timbré ou non timbré, que l'on a constamment publié d'une manière exemplaire92 –, les céramiques hellénistiques93 et indigènes (tournées et à la main), une certaine catégorie de céramiques « nordpontiques », les terres cuites94 et les monnaies. Une mention à part est réclamée par les terres cuites trouvées dans deux habitations datables de la troisième phase, depuis les premières décennies du IIIe s. jusque vers 240 : Aphrodite accompagnée de deux Érotes, Cybèle assise sur le trône, et notamment un autel céramique aux facettes à reliefs représentant Poseidon, Nikè, Dionysos et Apollon dans le premier complexe, une statuette fragmentaire de Cybèle, des fragments d'un autre autel céramique, ainsi que des représentations de Déméter et d'Aphrodite à la colombe dans le deuxième complexe95. Ces objets relèvent, selon leurs inventeurs, de la pratique de quelques cultes privés ; il est, d'autre part, possible que le progrès des fouilles arrive à la découverte de sanctuaires96.

À juger d'après leurs noms et les contextes de leurs occurrences, ces localités existaient déjà à l'époque hellénistique. Il est, d'autre part, instructif de constater quelques coïncidences toponymiques avec le territoire d'Héraclée du Pont (Nymphaion, Parthenopolis, Heraclea), à côté d'une éventuelle réminiscence mégarienne (Gerania). Il n'y a qu'un seul site à avoir été fouillé d'une manière systématique dans le territoire de Kallatis, mais qui est très intéressant à plus d'un titre. Il s'agit d'un établissement situé sur un plateau à deux kilomètres sudouest du village d'Albeşti (soit ca. 15 km à l'ouest de Kallatis), et qui occupe une surface de ca. 12 ha. Le noyau en est constitué par une fortification rectangulaire de 40 x 40 m, élargie dans un deuxième temps à 45 x 45 m, et pourvue d'une tour d'angle de 9 x 9 m. Les fouilles exécutées à partir de 1976, et qui continuent de nos jours, ont révélé, autant pour la fortification que pour l'établissement civil constitué autour d'elle, trois phases d'habitat. Les deux premières phases correspondent

D'autres sites, sans doute semblables à celui d'Albeşti, ont été identifiés dans la même région, mais n'ont pas encore fait l'objet de fouilles méthodiques97. À part ces sites fortifiés, on peut encore mentionner plusieurs établissements à vocation agricole : Tuzla, Costineşti – « Mănăstirea », Schitu, 23 August, 2 Mai, Vama Veche, Šabla, Hagieni, Albeşti – « La vie », Cotu Văii – « Via lui Avram », Arsa, Dulceşti, Moşneni, Pecineaga98. Il convient d'ajouter quelques trouvailles isolées à caractère

d'Héraclée du Pont, sans doute identique à Parqeniva kwvmh. Selon Asheri 1972, p. 16, le nom – tiré de l'épithète d'Artémis – serait une des traces toponymiques de la précolonisation milésienne ; mais la Parthenos n'a rien à voir avec Milet dans la région pontique : Ehrhardt 1988, p. 149. 88 Scut. Dur. Eur., 12 ; Tab. Peut., VIII 4 ; Géographe de Ravenne, IV 6, 47. Le nom (grec) au génitif invite à imaginer un toponyme comme Stratonis (turris), qui serait en fait un Stravtwno" (puvrgo") d'époque hellénistique (Avram et Nistor 1982, p. 372). 89 Voir aussi Théophanès le Confesseur (éd. C. de Boor, Leipzig, 1893, I, p. 224), année 545, et la confirmation venue grâce à l'inscription de Dionysopolis (to; ∆Afrodeivsion). 90 Selon Vulpe 1943, Gerania serait la même localité que Krounoiv, un toponyme donné par certaines sources comme ancien nom de Dionysopolis (testimonia dans IGB I2, p. 49-51), à identifier avec l'actuel Kranévo (Ekréné). Cependant, dans le même passage, Pline note Dionysopolin, Crunon antea dictam, ce qui, à moins qu'il ne s'agisse de deux localités portant le même nom (d'où le pluriel), invite à une certaine prudence devant une telle identification (cf. Oppermann 2004, p. 11). Le toponyme est, de toute façon, d'origine mégarienne, car Geravneia est le nom de la montagne de Mégare, sur laquelle s'était retiré, selon les étiologies locales, Mégaros, le fils de Zeus, pendant le déluge de Deucalion : cf. Pausanias, I 40, 1 ; Harpocration, s. v. Geravneia ; EtM, p. 228, 20-25, s. v. Geravneia, avec le commentaire de Piccirilli 1975, p. 36-37 et 83-84.

91 Rădulescu, Cheluţă-Georgescu et Bărbulescu 1979 ; CheluţăGeorgescu et Bărbulescu 1985 ; Rădulescu, Bărbulescu, Buzoianu et Cheluţă-Georgescu 1993 ; Rădulescu, Bărbulescu, Buzoianu, Georgescu et Arsenie 1999 ; Rădulescu, Bărbulescu et Buzoianu 2000 ; Rădulescu, Buzoianu, Bărbulescu et Georgescu 2000-2001 ; cf. Oppermann 2004, p. 81, 165-166, 252 et pl. 15, 1. 92 Rădulescu, Bărbulescu et Buzoianu 1986 ; 1987 ; 1990 ; Bărbulescu, Buzoianu et Cheluţă-Georgescu 1986 ; 1987 ; 1990 ; Rădulescu, Bărbulescu, Buzoianu et Cheluţă-Georgescu 1988-1989 ; Buzoianu, Bărbulescu et Cheluţă-Georgescu 2000-2001. 93 Buzoianu et Bărbulescu 2002-2003. 94 Rădulescu, Buzoianu, Bărbulescu et Cheluţă-Georgescu 1995-1996. 95 Rădulescu, Buzoianu, Bărbulescu et Cheluţă-Georgescu 1995-1996 ; Rădulescu, Bărbulescu, Buzoianu, Georgescu et Arsenie 1999, p. 59 et pl. IV ; Rădulescu, Buzoianu, Bărbulescu et Georgescu 2000-2001, p. 202-203 et fig. 6. 96 Cf. Rădulescu, Bărbulescu et Buzoianu 2000, p. 177 : « S'il y a eu des sanctuaires ou d'autres édifices relevant des cultes publics, il n'est point exclu qu'on en trouve les traces à l'extérieur de l'espace fortifié ». 97 Irimia 1989, p. 100-101. 98 Voir, pour toutes ces découvertes, Slobozianu 1959 ; Slobozianu et Ţicu 1966 ; Boronean] 1977 ; Avram 1991, p. 118-122 ; 2001, p. 624626 ; ISM III, p. 37, n. 142 ; Ionescu et Georgescu 1997 ; Oppermann 2004, p. 81-82, 165-167, 251-252.

247

ANCIENT GREEK COLONIES IN THE BLACK SEA 2 funéraire, comme à Comana et à Neptun99. Il existe enfin un sanctuaire rural qui vient d'être révélé par les fouilles de Dourankoulak, dans la partie méridionale de la chôra callatienne100.

à l'aide des photographies aériennes ; néanmoins, on ne risque pas de se tromper en admettant que la configuration des lots suggérée par l'étude de ces fragments devait remonter au moins à l'époque hellénistique104.

Cependant, dans le domaine sépulcral, la particularité la plus intéressante est représentée par une série de tombes à chambre funéraire voûtée et à dromos qui se répartissent sur une aire restreinte aux environs de Kallatis : à l'ouest de l'actuel village de 2 Mai, à ca. 5 km au nord de Mangalia, à 1,5 km au sud de Mangalia, sur le bord du lac de Mangalia, à ca. 5 km l'ouest de Mangalia (colline Dokumaci)101. Toutes ces tombes sont datées du tout début du IIIe s. et l’on en reconnaît un type de construction d'origine macédonienne102. Il convient d'attirer l'attention notamment sur la découverte récente (1993) de la tombe de Dokumaci, qui n'a été que brièvement signalée103. Il s'agit d'une tombe à chambre voûtée de forme rectangulaire (3,56 x 3,62 m) et à un dromos composé de deux parties : le premier segment, qui fait la jonction avec la chambre funéraire et en est le contemporain, est en arc en plein cintre, alors que le deuxième segment de la galerie, ajouté dans un deuxième temps, décrit en section un arc en ogive.

À l'extérieur de ce réseau de klh'roi, le territoire de Kallatis se sera présenté sous la forme d'un conglomérat de sites à caractères et statuts juridiques fort différents : des ports, des villages et des hameaux, des forts et des tours de guet, etc. Faute de précisions à ce propos, il est inutile d'essayer de formuler des hypothèses. D'autre part, les documents archéologiques sont en mesure de faire intégrer à un contexte plus cohérent les quelques suggestions fournies par les inscriptions ou les témoignages littéraires sur l'existence des fortifications dans le territoire de Kallatis. Les oppida mentionnés par Pline l'Ancien, Parthenopolis, dont il est dit qu'elle avait été prise par les Romains en 72/1 (Eutr., VI 10) – ce qui suppose des fortifications – ou bien le puvrgo" attesté par l'inscription ISM III 55, pourraient être des fortins comme celui d'Albeşti, déjà fouillé, ou encore d'autres qui n'ont été que repérés. Il est significatif que de telles fortifications – qui seraient en état de suggérer la limite ouest du territoire callatien – trouvent leurs parallèles dans l'aménagement du territoire de Chersonèse Taurique105.

Le territoire de Kallatis était composé de deux parties : une zone située tout près autour de la ville et comprenant les klèroi des citoyens et un territoire plus large, habité non seulement par des Grecs, mais aussi – peut-être même notamment – par des non-Grecs. En ce qui concerne la configuration du cadastre du territoire callatien, les informations ne nous sont parvenues que par une voie indirecte. Les documents fondamentaux sont les cinq fragments (en grec ou en latin) d'une limitatio exécutée selon toute vraisemblance sous le règne de Trajan (ISM III 51-55). Les distances entre les pierres terminales données par ces fragments sont des multiples de 100 ou de 120, ce qui porte à croire à l'existence d'unités cadastrales équivalant aux schoinoi carrés. Pour autant que les analogies avec Chersonèse en Crimée ne manquent pas à nous renseigner sur ce point, il est à supposer que la délimitation du territoire de Kallatis à l'époque de Trajan n'ait fait que reprendre un dessin cadastral plus ancien. Il est difficile de se prononcer sur l'ancienneté de cette distribution des klh'roi – et cela d'autant plus qu'à la différence de Chersonèse, à Kallatis il n'y a guère de traces visibles dans le terrain, pas même

La présence des Scythes dans le territoire de Kallatis est suggérée par une série de documents divers. Il est tout d'abord question de l'information fournie par Démétrios de Kallatis (Ps.-Scymnos, vv. 756-757) sur le mélange ethnique des régions situées entre Kallatis et Dionysopolis : ejn meqorivoi" de; th'" Krobuvzwn kai; Skuqw'n É cwvra" migavda" ”Ellhna" oijketa;" e[cei. D'autre part, la région de la Dobroudja (ou pour le moins une partie106) est désignée comme (mikra;) Skuqiva bien avant la date de la source de Strabon (VII 4, 5 et 5, 12), à savoir dans un décret d'Istros de la fin du IIIe s. (ISM I 15, l. 16). Il convient enfin de faire état d'une curieuse série de monnaies de bronze (et, en moindre mesure, d'argent) frappées sans doute à Kallatis et dans d'autres villes grecques de la même région au nom des « rois » (basileis) scythes Ailios, Kanitès, Sariakos, Tanousa, Akrosas et Charaspès107. Ces émissions, qui datent sans doute de la fin du IIe et du tout début du Ier s., ont été mises en liaison avec les subsides accordés par Mithridate VI Eupator à ses alliés ouest-pontiques108.

99

Comana (Aricescu 1961, p. 81 ; cf. Ocheşeanu 1969, p. 224) ; Neptun (Iconomu 1968, p. 260-261 et 265-267). 100 Burow 1993 ; 1999. Voir aussi la communication faite au même sujet par le regretté Johannes Burow au Premier Congrès International d'archéologie pontique (Varna, septembre 1997). 101 Tafrali 1925, p. 242, fig. 2 ; Pârvan 1974, p. 123, 206, n. 386, et fig. 81 ; Preda 1962 (cf. Preda et Bârlădeanu 1979, p. 97) ; Irimia 1983, p. 118-123 ; 1984, p. 67-72 ; 2000-2001, p. 302 et n. 31 ; Oppermann 2004, p. 164-165. 102 La technique de construction, exercée dans le domaine funéraire, semble avoir influé également sur l'architecture de certains bâtiments consacrés au culte bachique (voir ISM III, commentaire au n° 35 ; Avram 2002a, p. 77-79). 103 Papasima et Georgescu 1994 ; Ionescu et Georgescu 1997, p. 164.

104

Avram 1991, p. 132-134 ; 2001, p. 626-627. Saprykin 1997, p. 120-126 ; Kolesnikov et Jacenko, p. 293-294 (plan de la forteresse de ∫ajka à la p. 292, fig. 3). 106 Irimia 2000-2001, p. 304-306. 107 Blavatskaja 1948 ; Canarache 1942 ; 1950 ; Tacheva 1995 ; Preda 1998, p. 120-129 ; Talmaţchi 1999. Kanitès est également mentionné dans le décret d'Odessos IGB I2 41, alors que le nom du « roi » Sariakos (abrégé sur les monnaies) figure aussi dans la dédicace IGB V 5003. 108 Youroukova 1977 ; cf. Poenaru Bordea 1986a, p. 99-100. 105

248

ALEXANDRU AVRAM: KALLATIS La pénétration des Scythes au sud du Danube est explicitement mentionnée par les sources concernant l'expédition manquée du roi Atéas contre Philippe II en 339109 ; sauf qu'il n'en résulte pas d'une manière évidente que les Scythes aient mis le pied en Dobroudja, et cela malgré les deux passages dans lesquels Diodore (XIX 73, 2 et 5) fait état de la participation des Scythes à la révolte contre Lysimaque110. En plus, les découvertes archéologiques sont pour l'instant insuffisantes pour pouvoir en tirer des arguments pour une présence massive des Scythes dans la région de Kallatis111.

justement dans ces tombes qu'ont été déposés les corps des « rois » comme ceux dont les noms figurent sur les monnaies113. Même dans ces circonstances, les Scythes n'étaient pas les seuls à contrôler les oppida dont parle le passage emprunté à Pline l'Ancien. Des Grecs, des Gètes et des Crobydes (cf. Ps.-Scymnos, v. 756-757)114 auraient pu relever d'un statut similaire115. Et il est peut-être significatif que le même Ps.-Scymnos parle de miga'de" ”Ellhne". La population désignée par cette expression – qui correspond parfaitement aux mixevllhne" mentionnés à Olbia116 – ne consiste pas forcément en « Grecs mélangés » au sens ethnique. Il est plutôt question d'une connotation sociale relevant de la situation périphérique de ces communautés, quelles qu'elles fussent117. Comme pour les agriculteurs de la cwvra d'Héraclée du Pont (oiJ th;n cwvran gewrgou'nte")118, il s'agissait d'une population agraire ayant cultivé les domaines appartenant aux maîtres des oppida ; le degré de leur dépendance reste, cependant, sujet à réflexion.

Dans ces circonstances, s'il est peu probable que les Scythes se soient établis d'une manière durable aux abords de Kallatis après les défaites que leur avaient infligées Philippe II et Lysimaque, il est encore plus téméraire d'imaginer qu'ils aient exercé une domination sur cette même contrée. Il s'agit plutôt de quelques enclaves pourvues d'un certain degré d'autonomie et groupées autour des forts comme celui d'Albeşti112. Une colonisation des Scythes comme une sorte de « clérouques » dans les forts situés à la frontière du territoire callatien pourrait expliquer à la fois les passages cités plus haut du Ps.-Scymnos et de Pline l'Ancien et l'émission plus tardive des monnaies à noms « royaux » dont l'aire de diffusion est strictement locale : ce qui exprime leur fonction de symbole du prestige « royal » plutôt que leur destination commerciale.

LE MONNAYAGE Les premières monnaies frappées dans les ateliers callatiens119 datent selon toute vraisemblance de la seconde moitié (peut-être de la fin) du IVe av. J.-C.120 : il s'agit de drachmes d'argent à la tête d'Héraclès jeune à peau de lion sur le droit121 et à arc en carquois, massue et épi (comme attribut de la cité) sur le revers. La légende KALLATI (ou KALLA, KALLATIA), qui figure sur le revers, est accompagnée de monogrammes de magistrats monétaires. Les poids des monnaies (5-5,58 g)122 indiquent que la cité s'était ralliée à l'étalon éginète qui était en usage, entre autres, dans sa métropole, Héraclée du Pont. Aussi n'est-il pas exclu que l'on ait utilisé l'étalon perse123, mais la rareté des trouvailles et l'absence

Un autre argument à l'appui de la présence d'une enclave scythe dans le territoire de Kallatis pourrait être tiré de l'existence du groupe déjà mentionné de tombes à chambre funéraire voûtée et à dromos. La présence de la nécropole plane de Kallatis et nos informations sur le régime démocratique de la ville font obstacle à tout essai d'attribuer ces tombes monumentales à des Callatiens, quels qu'en aient été les statuts. En revanche, le parallèle avec les tombes de la noblesse scythe du nord de la mer Noire semble s'imposer. Il n'est pas exclu que ce soit

113

Avram 1991, p. 129 ; 2001, p. 631. On a attribué aux Crobydes le radical -d(e)ina, dont l'aire de diffusion coïncide avec le territoire mentionné par le Ps.-Scymnos : Be√evliev 1961. Voir, dans le territoire de Callatis, Amlaidina (ISM III 237) et ∆Asbolodeina (ISM III 51, l. 12). Cf., sur la parenté des Crobydes avec les Gètes, Strabon, VII 5, 12. 115 Voir aussi Buzoianu 2001, p. 204-205. 116 IOSPE I2 32 = SIG3 495.B.17 et le décret publié par Vinogradov 1984 (SEG XXXIV 758), rest. l. 14-15, comm. p. 55 et suiv. ; cf. Vinogradov 1989, p. 180, note 12. 117 Sur les mixevllhne" du décret d'Olbia pour Protogène, voir notamment von Bredow 1996. 118 Avram 1984 ; cf. Papazoglou 1997, p. 95-96 ; Bittner 1998, p. 10-11. 119 Depuis Pick 1898, il manque, à vrai dire, un corpus des monnaies callatiennes ; voir, pour l'instant, les types figurant chez Price 1993 et Stancomb 2000. 120 Une datation plus basse chez Price 1991 (ca. 280 av. J.-C., après la mort de Lysimaque). 121 Pick 1898 p. 86-88, nos 196-204 et pl. I 17. Le savant allemand attirait l'attention sur les analogies avec les représentations du héros sur les monnaies d'Héraclée du Pont. L'éponyme de la cité y est représenté plutôt barbu, "aber schon früh findet sich auch dort der unbärtige Kopf". 122 Pick 1898, p. 86, citait également comme exception une monnaie de 4,73 g. 123 Pick 1898, p. 86-87, suivi par Poenaru Bordea 1997.

109

114

Šelov 1965 ; V. Iliescu 1971. 110 Pippidi 1971, p. 91-92, se prononce décidément contre la présence des Scythes en Dobroudja à la suite de la campagne d'Atéas et refuse tout lien entre cet épisode et les sources attestant la présence scythe à l'époque hellénistique. Contra : V. Iliescu 1982.- Les monnaies à la légende ATAIAS ou ATAIA ont été frappées, de l'avis de plusieurs chercheurs, avant 339, à Héraclée du Pont, ensuite à Callatis, afin de servir comme moyen de verser le tribut dû au roi : Anokhin 1965 ; Rogalski 1970. Cependant, ces monnaies sont suspectes à plus d'un titre ; elles peuvent être ou bien des faux modernes – Gerasimov 1967 ; 1972 – ou bien des monnaies d'un homonyme plus tardif : Poenaru Bordea 1973-1975, p. 24-26. 111 Le chaudron scythique de Castelu est du Ve s. av. J.-C. : Aricescu 1965. Pour la possible présence scythe, voir cependant Irimia 1983 ; 1984 ; 2000-2001. 112 V. Iliescu 1982, p. 82, a attribué le fort d'Albeşti aux Scythes. Une monnaie scythique (Sariakos) trouvée à une époque ultérieure à la parution de son étude – Rădulescu, Bărbulescu et Buzoianu 1986, p. 36 ; Rădulescu, Buzoianu, Bărbulescu et Georgescu 2000-2001, p. 204 – pourrait en constituer un argument supplémentaire, bien que la pièce soit plus tardive que la date assignée à la fin de la fortification. En revanche, le graffite SKU (Skuªlh'"º ou Skuvªqaº, selon Rădulescu, Buzoianu, Bărbulescu et Georgescu 2000-2001, p. 201) ne peut rien dire sur les Scythes.

249

ANCIENT GREEK COLONIES IN THE BLACK SEA 2 d'Alexandre le Grand132, et après ca. 228-220, des statères et des tétradrachmes « posthumes » aux types de Lysimaque133. Les tétradrachmes et les drachmes aux types d'Alexandre le Grand ont des contremarques et présentent la légende K ou KAL : ce qui continue à mettre à rude épreuve l'ingéniosité des savants, qui oscillent entre Kallatis et Calcédoine134. Il est maintenant acquis que les monnaies contremarquées de la tête couronnée d'épis de Déméter sont de Calcédoine135, mais pour d'autres contremarques, la question reste ouverte136.

des trésors significatifs rendent difficile une définition plus serrée de ces émissions124. À côté des drachmes, quelques exemplaires, fort rares et dispersés dans plusieurs collections, attestent que la cité frappait également des demi-drachmes comme monnaies divisionnaires125. La question de la fin du monnayage en argent reste ouverte : selon B. Pick – dont les opinions sont partagées par la plupart des savants – Kallatis aura cessé de frapper des drachmes autour de 280 av. J.-C., soit peu après la mort de Lysimaque (281) et la désintégration du pouvoir macédonien en Thrace126. Cependant, M.J. Price datait certains types de drachmes et de demi-drachmes du IIIe et du IIe s.127.

D'après leur « style », les statères aux types de Lysimaque peuvent être divisés en deux groupes, les statères de « mauvais style » étant visiblement plus tardifs137. Le grand nombre de statères de ces types frappés à Kallatis a été mis en relation soit avec des paiements versés à des chefs barbares locaux, afin de « racheter » la cwvra et de sauver la récolte, soit avec l'achat de céréales138. Pour autant que la cwvra de Kallatis ait été à l'époque hellénistique, semble-t-il, le principal fournisseur pour les besoins céréaliers de la ville, je souscrirais plutôt à la première des deux explications139. J'ajouterais à ce propos l'exemple du seul trésor de monnaies callatiennes de bronze trouvé dans un établissement gète, celui trouvé en 1986 à Poiana (BasseMoldavie). Ce trésor consiste en 32 monnaies à la tête d'Apollon (types Pick 227, 228, 230 et 231) dont au moins deux dorées140, ce qui est sans parallèle dans la région. Il s'agit sans l'ombre d'un doute d'un essai des Callatiens de tromper le dynaste local dont il fallait obtenir la protection, en lui faisant passer le bronze pour de l'or141.

Le monnayage en bronze – dont les débuts datent sans doute de la fin du IVe s. plutôt qu'à partir de 281 – est représenté jusqu'au Ier s. av. J.-C. par nombre de types. Récemment, G. Poenaru Bordea en a proposé la chronologie relative suivante128 : tête d'Héraclès, tête de Dionysos sur le droit et panthère bondissant sur le revers (émission contemporaine des types à la tête de Déméter sur le droit et couronne d'épis sur le revers129), tête d'Apollon sur le droit et trépied sur le revers130, tête de Dionysos sur le droit et feuille de lierre sur le revers, tête d'Artémis, tête d'Hermès, tête d'Athéna à casque corinthien (avec plusieurs types de revers)131. Ces monnaies portent la légende KALLATIANWN, parfois abrégée de plusieurs manières, parfois des contremarques (en état d'assurer quelques successions obligées) et, dans la plupart des cas, des noms de magistrats monétaires rendus par des monogrammes ou par des abréviations plus ou moins concluantes ; ce qui, à part le style très différent, les fait distinguer des monnaies pseudoautonomes (soit disant « coloniales ») frappées plus tard à l'époque de la domination romaine.

Selon B. Pick, après l'instauration de la domination de Mithridate sur la côte ouest du Pont-Euxin, les « lysimaques » de Kallatis auraient remplacé – comme dans d'autres villes du Pont Gauche – le portrait de l'ancien roi de Thrace et de Macédoine avec la représentation iconographique du roi du Pont142 ; ce qui

À partir du deuxième quart du IIIe av. J.-C., c’est-à-dire après la mort de Lysimaque (281) et jusque vers 225, peut-être même plus tard, les ateliers callatiens ont frappé des tétradrachmes, des drachmes et des statères aux types 124

132

Il est significatif que, jusqu'à ce jour, les fouilles de Mangalia n'ont fourni aucune drachme. Seule une drachme a été trouvée dans le territoire callatien, à Albeşti : Preda 1998, p. 74. 125 Pick 1898, p. 86 ; cf. Price 1993, pl. VII, nos 203-204. On pourrait ajouter un exemplaire fragmentaire de la collection George Severeanu (Bucarest) qui semble être une diobole ; cf. Poenaru Bordea 1997. 126 Pick 1898, p. 89-90. 127 Price 1993, loc. cit. 128 Poenaru Bordea 1997. 129 La circulation contemporaine de ces deux types a été établie sur la foi d'un petit trésor trouvé à Mangalia (12 monnaies au type de Dionysos et 36 monnaies au type de Déméter) : Poenaru Bordea 1968. 130 Preda 1998, p. 78, signale que les exemplaires à la tête d'Apollon sont les plus nombreux parmi les monnaies callatiennes trouvées dans les milieux gètes de la deuxième moitié du IIe s. et du commencement du Ier s. et en suggère, par conséquent, une date plus basse que celle communément admise. 131 Sur les traces de Pick 1898, Preda 1998, p. 74-76, arrive à une chronologie différente : tête de Dionysos (les deux types, à panthère et à feuille de lierre sur le revers, pris ensemble, comme chez Pick) et tête de Déméter, ensuite tête d'Héraclès, tête d'Apollon, tête d'Athéna casquée, tête d'Artémis et tête d'Hermès.

Price 1991. Seyrig 1969, p. 40-45 ; Poenaru Bordea 1974a. Pick 1898, p. 88-89, nos 209-216 et pl. I 19. 135 Thompson 1954 ; cf. Seyrig 1968, p. 185-192. 136 Poenaru Bordea 1973-1975, p. 22, et informations verbales aimablement fournies à l'auteur. 137 Poenaru Bordea 1979. Les statères de "bon style" sont plus lourds, par exemple ceux que l'on a recensés dans le trésor de Bălgarevo (8,50 g ; 8,40 g ; 8,35 g ; 8,60 g) : Gerasimov 1975. Pour le mode des statères callatiens tardifs, voir le tableau illustré par de Callataÿ 1997, p. 143 : 8,20-8,24 g. 138 Poenaru Bordea 1974a, p. 121. 139 Voir, dans le même sens, Price 1991, p. 176 ; Preda 1998, p. 115. 140 Teodor, Nicu et Ţau 1987. 141 Preda 1998, p. 78. 142 Pick 1898, p. 92 et 106, n° 262. Le savant allemand croyait avoir identifié le nom de Mithridate dans un monogramme. En glosant sur le portrait du roi sur les monnaies de Mésambria, Price 1968 allait pousser ces interprétations à l'extrême et en tirer des conséquences chronologiques. Ses idées ont été reprises par les historiens des guerres de Mithridate, notamment par Salomone Gaggero 1978, p. 298-299, et McGing 1986, p. 58, n. 67. 133 134

250

ALEXANDRU AVRAM: KALLATIS vient d'être démenti par les dernières recherches143. D'autre part, tous les statères aux types de Lysimaque de « mauvais style » ne sont pas contemporains des guerres mithridatiques, pour autant qu'un premier groupe, plus proche de l'étalon attique, vienne d'être daté du milieu du IIe s. av. J.-C. Il reste cependant que les 48 exemplaires tardifs retenus pour le catalogue des derniers statères aux types de Lysimaque de Kallatis, soit 6 coins de droit et 18 coins de revers, datent de l'extrême fin du IIe s. av. J.-C. Ces types sont apparentés aux statères tardifs frappés à Istros, Tomis et Byzance qui, à Byzance, peuvent être mis en rapport avec des tétradrachmes datés de ca. 11090. « Au total, les quelque 25 coins de droits utilisés alors par les quatre villes permettent de monnayer une quantité impressionnante de ces statères. Ce nombre de coins de droit représente à peu près le double de celui obtenu pour l'ensemble des statères au nom d'Eupator lui-même (13.6 ± 0.9) et dépasse très vraisemblablement les besoins habituels de ces cités. Émis apparemment sur une brève période de temps et sans relation directe avec l'importance économique des villes dont ils proviennent, ces statères remplissent toutes les conditions d'une frappe exceptionnelle. Dès lors, la relation entre l'émission de ces monnaies et le recrutement de mercenaires ouestpontiques par Mithridate, déjà prônée par G. Poenaru Bordea, apparaît comme une explication vraisemblable »144.

c'est-à-dire dès que les légions romaines regagnèrent le terrain perdu148. Kallatis figure, elle aussi, sur la carte de ces découvertes ; à part les trouvailles isolées, il convient d'attirer l'attention sur un petit trésor de deniers républicains trouvé à Mangalia dont la dernière monnaie est de 42 av. J.-C.149 C'est sans doute grâce à l'extrême popularité du denier romain et peut-être aussi à cause de ses propres difficultés internes que la cité de Kallatis n'a pas réactivé ses ateliers monétaires. En effet, après une frappe entièrement isolée à l'époque de Néron, les ateliers callatiens ne recommencent leur activité que sous Antonin le Pieux. Le monnayage local continue sans interruption jusqu'à l'époque de Philippe l'Arabe, avec un remarquable essor sous Commode et notamment sous les Sévères150. Il s'agit uniquement de monnaies de bronze, soit à la représentation de la tête barbue d'Héraclès (accompagnée parfois de l'épithète KTIÇTHÇ) ou de la tête d'Athéna, ou encore de Déméter, soit à portraits et titulatures des empereurs (et parfois des membres de leur famille). Ces dernières présentent des revers assez variés, alors que la légende est constamment KALLATIANWN. L'iconographie reste largement mythologique. Intégrées à la circulation monétaire de la Mésie inférieure, les monnaies frappées à Kallatis sont signalées notamment dans les trésors et les trouvailles isolées de Kallatis même151, de la région méridionale de la Dobroudja ou de Bulgarie. Il est rare que les mêmes monnaies se retrouvent parmi les découvertes au sud des Balkans.

Un groupe à part est représenté par les tétradrachmes aux types de Lysimaque145. On n'en connaît que six exemplaires : tête d'Alexandre le Grand, au diadème orné des cornes d'Amon, sur le droit ; légende BASILEWS LUSIMACOU et Athéna casquée assise sur le trône, faisant reposer son coude gauche sur un bouclier et présentant dans la droite une Nikè qui couronne le nom de Lysimaque (légende KAL sous le trône)146.

LES INSTITUTIONS Les inscriptions de Kallatis ne révèlent rien sur les trois tribus doriennes (Hylleis, Pamphyloi, Dymanes) ; on ne peut qu'en postuler la présence. Le seul indice à ce propos, et d'ailleurs sans trop de valeur, serait la mention d'un fuvlªarco"º au IIe s. ap. J.-C. (ISM III 70), à condition que la restitution de ce mot soit assurée. De même, il manque tout renseignement direct sur les eJkatostuve" connues à Mégare, à Byzance, à Calcédoine et dans la métropole de Kallatis, Héraclée du Pont152. D'autre part, une division centésimale semble résulter du traitement des quelques données fournies par le cadastre des territoires de Chersonèse et de Kallatis, ce qui invite à admettre que les mêmes subdivisions du corps civique avaient été transmises aux colonies fondées par Héraclée.

À partir de la fin du IIe s. av. J.-C., c'est le denier romain républicain qui s'impose comme « monnaie universelle » dans les régions du bas Danube147. D'après les statistiques présentées dans une étude qui fait état de toutes les découvertes isolées signalées sur le territoire de la Dobroudja, la pénétration des deniers aura atteint le point culminant à l'époque où la zone se situait sous le contrôle de Rome, c’est-à-dire après la campagne de Varron Lucullus (72/1) et avant la révolte des cités grecques de la côte contre Antonius Hybrida (61/0). Après une diminution du flux de numéraire expliqué par les guerres civiles à Rome, les trouvailles de deniers en Dobroudja redeviennent nombreuses juste après ca. 30 av. J.-C.,

148

Ocheşeanu 1986, avec tableaux de fréquence et listes complètes des découvertes isolées, des trésors et des magistrats monétaires attestés par les trouvailles isolées. 149 Vertan, Georgescu et Ocheşeanu 1990. 150 Pick 1898, p. 92-96 ; cf. Poenaru Bordea 1997. 151 Vertan 1980 : 43 deniers impériaux s'échelonnant de Vitellius à Gordien III dont les plus nombreux frappés sous Élagabale et Severus Alexander (dernières monnaies de 240-243). Pour le grand trésor trouvé dans la villa à parois peintes, voir supra, note 41. 152 Hanell 1934, p. 140-144 ; Pippidi 1969c = 1988, p. 35-38 ; Burstein 1976, p. 21-22 ; Saprykin 1997, p. 41-43.

143

de Callataÿ 1994 ; 1997, p. 139-140, 143-144 (cat. ; cf. pl. 37) et 146-147. 144 de Callataÿ 1997, p. 150. 145 Regling 1928, p. 301-302 ; de Callataÿ 1995. 146 Sur l'aire de diffusion des séries successives de monnaies callatiennes autonomes, voir Poenaru Bordea 2001 ; Talmaţchi 20022003. 147 Pour les découvertes de deniers sur le territoire de la Dobroudja, voir, par exemple : Mitrea 1970 ; Ocheşeanu 1971 ; Poenaru Bordea 1974b.

251

ANCIENT GREEK COLONIES IN THE BLACK SEA 2 Comme dans la plupart des fondations mégariennes, l'éponyme de Kallatis est le basileus. Les inscriptions le mentionnent très souvent, puisque le basileus en charge indique l'année de tout document public ou quasi public ; par conséquent, la formule ejpi; basilevo" figure en tête des décrets du Conseil et de l'Assemblée (ISM III 6, 1012, 30), et fréquemment même dans les décrets du thiase bachique (ISM 35, 44, 46) ou d'autres associations (ISM III 38). Les charges du basileus étaient éminemment cultuelles et représentatives ; ce qui explique la clause qui figure parfois dans les décrets accordés aux étrangers concernant l'invitation formulée par le basileus au bénéficiaire de se rendre au repas sacré dans le prytanée : kalevsai de; aujto;n eij" (to;) prutanei'on to;n basileva (ISM III 3, 7).

Les documents concernant l'Assemblée et le Conseil, desquels on peut tirer toutes ces données, relèvent d'un type de constitution démocratique. À peine faut-il rappeler que nous ignorons en totalité la situation politique interne à Kallatis avant la fin du IVe s. av. J.-C., c'est-à-dire avant la date du premier décret connu (ISM III 2). D'autre part, les décrets de basse époque hellénistique témoignent, comme il arrive assez souvent vers cette date, de certaines activités de notables « évergètes ». Quelques inscriptions révèlent l'existence des stratèges (stratagoiv), dont le nombre n'est pour autant jamais mentionné. Le premier document à ce propos est le décret ISM III 7 du milieu du IIIe s. av. J.-C., alors que deux autres sont des décrets de très basse époque hellénistique (ISM III 28 et 30). À ces documents, il convient d'ajouter le monument honorifique fragmentaire ISM III 106, dans lequel la restitution ªaiJreqei;" uJºpo; tou' davmªou stratagov" - - º semble être suggérée d'une manière satisfaisante par le contexte. Aussi, est-il possible que l'on ait ici affaire à une charge exceptionnelle réclamant des prérogatives spéciales158. L'organisation collégiale des stratèges à Kallatis est suggérée par la restitution du mot sustraªtagoivº dans le décret ISM III 28 ainsi que par la mention collective des stratèges comme initiateurs du décret ISM III 30. Vu les analogies de Mésambria, il est hors de doute que le collège similaire callatien comptait, lui aussi, six stratèges et un grammateuv" et que cette formule était d'ancienne origine mégarienne.

Les organes de la cité sont le Conseil (boulav) et l'Assemblée, communément appelée da'mo" dans les formules employées par les décrets. Il n'y a qu'une seule mention de l'Assemblée au sens technique : ejk(k)lhsiva (ISM III 12). Le président de l'Assemblée (proaisumnw'n, orthographié praisimnw'n : ISM III 10, 12, 35) fait figure de « faux éponyme »153. Une inscription des environs de notre ère (ISM III 30) désigne les membres du Conseil comme suvnedroi154, un terme employé au même sens dans plusieurs inscriptions de basse époque hellénistique en provenance de cités milésiennes du Pont Gauche155. Le Conseil était composé de 12 divisions exerçant des charges mensuelles dans le même domaine d'activité que les prytanes à Athènes. Il s'agit des provbouloi, mentionnés selon les mois pendant lesquels ils étaient en exercice (ISM III 2-4, 7, 19). Même si la documentation épigraphique fait défaut autant dans la métropole que dans toutes ses autres colonies, l'origine mégarienne de cette institution peut être considérée comme assurée grâce à Aristophane (Ach. 754-756), chez lequel un Mégarien parle de provbouloi comme des chefs de la cité. Il n'y a aucune raison de douter du sens technique156 ; il convient, par contre, d'admettre que l'institution des probouloi a été introduite par les colons mégariens à Héraclée du Pont et puis transmise à Kallatis. Sauf qu'au fil du temps elle aurait perdu son caractère oligarchique originaire. Car à Kallatis les probouloi appartiennent déjà aux institutions démocratiques : l'argument en est justement la périodicité de leur charge, d'ailleurs comme à Carystos ou à Delphes157.

Pour ce qui est des magistratures de moindre importance, ce sont notamment les eijsagwgei'" (ISM III 38-39) sur lesquels on dispose d'informations en quelque sorte plus satisfaisantes. Il s'agit d'introducteurs en justice dont le domaine de compétence concernait notamment les affaires maritimes159. Les inscriptions révèlent également l'existence de quelques magistrats financiers, comme le caissier (tamiva" : ISM III 3) ou les agents financiers (meristaiv : ISM III 3, 5 ?, 26), auxquels il convient d'ajouter les magistrats monétaires dont la présence à l'époque hellénistique est mise en évidence par les inscriptions et les sigles monétaires, ainsi que les magistrats responsables des poids officiels160. En revanche, une magistrature aussi importante que celle du gumnasivarco" n'est attestée d'une manière explicite qu'à l'époque impériale (ISM III 31, 73 B, 109). Cependant, son ancienneté résulte de quelques données révélées par un décret fragmentaire du IIe s. av. J.-C. (ISM III 18). C'est ensuite un fragment de décret du IIIe s. av. J.-C. (ISM III 16) qui mentionne un pédotribe.

153 Sur l'origine de cette institution et ses correspondances mégariennes, voir Avram 1994a et ISM III, p. 86-87. 154 Cf. à Mégare IG VII 18, 20, 31 (IIe – Ier s. av. J.-C.). 155 ISM I 55 et 65 (Istros) ; IGB I2 39 (Odessos) ; IGB I2 388 bis = ISM I 64 et IGB I2 390 (Apollonia). 156 Sur les attestations de probouloi dans le monde grec, voir Ruzé 1974 ; Tréheux 1989. 157 Tréheux 1989, p. 242-244

158

Il convient de verser au même dossier la stèle ISM III 161 (fin du IIIe – première moitié du IIe s. av. J.-C.).), avec le commentaire iconographique et les parallèles de Mésambria étudiés par Alexandrescu Vianu 1986. 159 Avram 1995c ; cf. Bull. ép. 1996, 284 (Ph. Gauthier). 160 Moisil 1957 ; Preda 1957 ; 1964 ; O. Iliescu 1967 ; Ocheşeanu 1975 ; 1993 ; 1997 ; Ocheşeanu et Georgescu 1983-1985 ; Ocheşeanu et Cliante 1988.

252

ALEXANDRU AVRAM: KALLATIS Quant aux « archontes » (ISM III 3, 75 et peut-être 28), il n'est pas question d'imaginer une acception technique, car le sens en est plutôt général (« dignitaires »)161.

Quant à Cronos, je n'en connais pas d'autres attestations dans le monde mégarien, mais l'ancienneté de son culte ne pose pas de problème. Cronos appartient à un groupe d'anciennes divinités chthoniennes, qui comprend également Déméter Chthonia, désignée simplement par son épithète, sans doute parce que le culte en aura acquis une large autonomie.

LES CULTES Les riches données fournies notamment par les inscriptions callatiennes, mais également par les monnaies et par certains documents iconographiques permettent de classer les divinités attestées dans le panthéon de Kallatis selon un schéma chronologique. Un premier groupe à distinguer est composé de divinités appartenant sûrement à la couche initiale des cultes célébrés par les colons arrivés d'Héraclée du Pont.

Une inscription de la fin de l'époque hellénistique nous renseigne sur l'existence d'une association cultuelle de qoina'tai consacrée à Déméter Chthonia (ISM III 40), alors qu'une dédicace fragmentaire d'une autre association (d'époque impériale) est consacrée à Déméter appelée Plouªtodovteiraº (ISM III 259). D'autre part, Déméter est représentée sur des monnaies de bronze d'époque hellénistique164.

C'est à ce groupe qu'il convient de rattacher tout d'abord les divinités révélées par la liste ISM III 48 A, datée du IVe s. av. J.-C. : Dionysos Patrôos et Dasyllios, Aphrodite Pandamos, Peithô, Artémis, Déméter (Damater) Chthonia et Cronos. Le seul dieu qui n'appartient pas à cette catégorie d'anciennes divinités, bien qu'il figure dans la même liste, est Dionysos Bakceuv" dont le culte aurait pu pénétrer à Kallatis aux environs de la date même de notre inscription. Les épithètes Patrw'/o" et Dasuvllio" de Dionysos sont exclusivement mégariennes, ce qui prouve que le culte a été introduit par les colons venus de Mégare à Héraclée du Pont et à partir de là, plus tard, à Kallatis. D'autre part, les divinités de cette liste se retrouvent – à l'exception d'Artémis et de Cronos – dans la description donnée par Pausanias (I 43, 5-6) du téménos de Mégare. La face postérieure de la stèle de Kallatis a plus tard été utilisée pour transcrire des réponses de l'oracle de Delphes (48 B) : ce qui pourrait autoriser l'hypothèse que la liste en question faisait partie, elle aussi, d'un texte oraculaire, concernant sans doute le (ré)aménagement de l'espace sacré162. Les coïncidences – si coïncidences il y a – avec l'aménagement de l'espace sacré de Mégare ne sauraient être le fait du hasard ; il est donc à supposer que le téménos de Kallatis en fût une copie assez fidèle.

C'est à Gè (Ga) de compléter la liste des divinités chthoniennes : un sanctuaire en est mentionné dans l'inscription oraculaire ISM III 48 B du IIe s. av. J.-C., mais les origines du culte remontent sûrement à la fondation de la cité. L'opposé absolu des divinités chthoniennes est Apollon, qui est le plus important des dieux mégariens et dont le culte est attesté également dans les colonies165. Cependant, c'est justement à ce propos que la documentation callatienne est en quelque sorte décevante. Premièrement, il est étrange qu'il n'y ait jusqu'ici aucune inscription qui révèle l'épiclèse Puvqio" ; car Apollon célébré à Mégare est par excellence celui de Delphes. Qui plus est, à Kallatis, les représentations de la tête d'Apollon à couronne de laurier sur le droit des monnaies de bronze d'époque hellénistique sont accompagnées du trépied sur le revers, ce qui prouve qu'il s'agissait précisément d'Apollon Pythien166. Les autres colonies mégariennes du Pont-Euxin n'apportent rien à ce sujet, si ce n'est qu'une inscription de Mésambria, dans laquelle on pourrait restituer l'épiclèse Puvqio" (IGB I2 315). Pour le moins en ce qui concerne Kallatis, ce silence n'est qu'accidentel ; car les relations de cette ville avec l'oracle de Delphes sont illustrées par nombre de documents.

Artémis est attestée à Kallatis, hormis cette inscription, par une épigramme funéraire du IIIe s. av. J.-C. pour une de ses prêtresses (ISM III 132 ; cf. 131), par une iJera; travpeza que lui consacre au IIIe s. av. J.-C. une autre prêtresse (ISM III 78) et sans doute par un décret du Ier s. ap. J.-C. (ISM III 32), qui semble indiquer l'existence d'un sanctuaire. Son culte est largement illustré par des documents divers à Mégare et dans ses colonies ; à Kallatis il appartenait donc sans l'ombre d'un doute au bagage initial des colons ayant fondé la ville163.

En revanche, c'est une épiclèse beaucoup plus rare, universellement dorienne plutôt que typiquement mégarienne, qui est attestée à Kallatis : ∆Agueuv" (ISM III 30) ; bien qu'elle soit faiblement documentée dans le monde mégarien, son origine et son ancienneté sont incontestables. À leur tour, les inscriptions oraculaires du IIe s. av. J.-C. font connaître des épithètes plus banales, comme Nomios (ISM III 48 B ?) et Apotropaios (ISM III 48 B et 49).

161

Cf., pour le monde milésien, Ehrhardt 1988, p. 208-210. Voir, à ce propos, Avram et Lefèvre 1995, p. 21. Sur le droit de certaines monnaies de bronze hellénistiques est figurée la tête d'Artémis : Pick 1898, nos 248-252 ; cf. la contremarque au buste de la déesse avec arc et carquois, n° 224a. À l'époque impériale, Artémis est représentée comme chasseresse sur le revers des monnaies de Septime Sévère (n° 303), Géta (n° 324), Iulia Mamaea (n° 336), Philippe l'Arabe (n° 351), Otacillia (n° 363). Un beau relief d'époque hellénistique représente Artémis à la chasse : Preda, Popescu 162 163

et Diaconu 1962, p. 450, fig. 10c ; Bordenache 1960, p. 498 et fig. 1011. 164 Pick 1898, nos 225-226 et pl. I 22. Représentations de la tête de Déméter sur les monnaies de bronze d'époque impériale : nos 279-288. 165 Hanell 1934, p. 164-174 ; Antonetti 1999. 166 Pick 1898, nos 227-233 et pl. I 23 ; cf. Hanell 1934, p. 167.

253

ANCIENT GREEK COLONIES IN THE BLACK SEA 2 Un autre culte appartenant à la couche originaire du panthéon callatien est celui d'Athéna. À suivre Pausanias (I 42, 4), la déesse était adorée à Mégare dans trois sanctuaires, consacrés respectivement à Athéna Aiantis, à Athéna Nikè et à une Athéna sans épithète, mais qui était sans aucun doute la Polias. Une Athéna Poliav" est connue à Kallatis dès le IVe s. av. J.-C. (ISM III 76). En revanche, aucune des attestations de Zeus à Kallatis ne relève d'une particularité mégarienne. Zeus et Athéna, qui constituent presque toujours un couple inséparable, sont attestés plutôt comme des dieux de la communauté civique.

Athéna accompagne usuellement Zeus ; elle est Hypata et Hyperdexia dans les mêmes inscriptions oraculaires. D'autre part, une dédicace du IVe s. av. J.-C. atteste Athéna Polias (ISM III 76), laquelle est sûrement d'origine mégarienne. Le nom de la déesse figure enfin non accompagné d'épithète dans une inscription de la deuxième moitié du Ier s. ap. J.-C. (ISM III 80). Il s'agit d'un don fait par une prêtresse de la déesse, comme peutêtre dans le cas de la femme qui avait consacré la dédicace à Athéna Polias, mais qui ne mentionne pas explicitement cette qualité. À tout cela il convient d'ajouter les types iconographiques d'Athéna sur les monnaies callatiennes171.

À part tous ces dieux, c'est le héros Héraclès qui occupait une place de choix dans l'ancien panthéon de Kallatis, avec la précision que dans ce cas, le culte n'était pas mégarien, mais héracléote. Outre qu'il était le héros éponyme de la métropole, il n'est pas sans portée qu'Héraclès figurait à partir du IVe s. av. J.-C. sur les premières émissions monétaires d'argent de Kallatis167. D'autre part, le premier sanctuaire attesté à Kallatis est celui d'Héraclès (ISM III 3) : l'inscription est du début du IIIe s. av. J.-C., mais le sanctuaire était sûrement encore plus ancien. Une éventuelle origine béotienne, filtrée par Mégare, pourrait être suggérée par l'épithète ∆Alexivkako" portée par le héros dans une dédicace des qoina'tai du Ier s. ap. J.-C. (ISM III 68)168. En revanche, Héraclès Faraggeivth" adoré par une suvnodo" ÔHraklewtw'n à l'époque impériale (ISM III 72) ne saurait être que le héros d'Héraclée du Pont, qui n'avait rien à voir avec Kallatis169.

L'inscription oraculaire ISM III 49 nous fait part d'un groupe de divinités de l'agora : Thémis Agoraia, Zeus, Aphrodite Agoraia172 et Hermès Agoraios173. Il s'agit de dieux protecteurs des magistrats ; leur culte aura été introduit à une époque plus récente, sans doute peu avant la date même de l'inscription. D'autre part, le même document ainsi que l'inscription ISM III 48 B font connaître, hormis Apollon Apotropaios, Poseidon Asphaleus, le protecteur des constructions174. L'ancienneté de ces cultes à caractère civique plus ou moins prononcé aurait pu être fort différente selon les divinités, mais leur vogue au IIe s. av. J.-C. témoigne d'un certain rapport avec le régime démocratique de Kallatis, remis éventuellement en place après de possibles bouleversements sur lesquels nous ne sommes, il est vrai, nullement renseignés. Le dieu bénéficiant de la plus riche documentation est sans aucun doute Dionysos : 11 inscriptions s'échelonnant depuis le IVe s. av. J.-C. jusque vers la fin du Ier s. ap. J.-C. Il s'agit notamment d'une série de décrets d'un thiase extrêmement actif surtout à la basse époque hellénistique et au début de l'époque impériale (ISM III 35, 36, 42-46) ; il y a ensuite des documents plutôt rares, comme le fragment déjà cité d'une liste de divinités du IVe s. av. J.-C. appartenant sans doute à une inscription oraculaire (ISM III 48 A), un fragment d'un règlement sacré du même thiase du IIe s. av. J.-C. (ISM III 47), sans préjudice de deux dédicaces du Ier s. av. J.-C. (ISM III 79) et du Ier s. ap. J.-C. (ISM III 80). La place occupée par Dionysos dans le panthéon de la cité est, d'autre part, mise en évidence par les monnaies

Un deuxième groupe est constitué par les dieux de la communauté civique et des magistrats. Le premier document épigraphique de Kallatis, à savoir le graffite ISM III 254, qui date du début du IVe s. av. J.-C., est une dédicace à Zeus Sôtèr. C'est ensuite à l'époque hellénistique que dans un minuscule fragment d'inscription, on peut rétablir l'épiclèse Polieus (ISM III 22). Dans les inscriptions oraculaires du IIe s. av. J.-C. Zeus est attesté comme Hypatos (ISM III 48 B), Agoraios (?) et Hyperdexios (ISM III 49). En revanche, sur les monnaies, il ne figure qu'à l'époque impériale, et encore très rarement170. Dans ces conditions, il est difficile de se prononcer sur l'arrière-plan mégarien du culte de Zeus à Kallatis.

167 Pick 1898, nos 196-204 et pl. I 17 : tête d'Héraclès jeune sur le droit, arc et carquois, massue et épi sur le revers. Pour les types d'Héraclès sur les monnaies de bronze de la même époque, voir nos 205-206 et pl. I 18. Ajouter, à l'époque romaine, les monnaies de bronze à la tête d'Héraclès barbu sur le droit, nos 275-278 et notamment 289-296 (à la légende KTIÇTHÇ, IIe–IIIe s. ap. J.-C.), et les monnaies à la tête d'Héraclès sur le revers. En revanche, la statuaire est jusqu'ici pauvre à ce propos. Seule une statuette de marbre d'Héraclès (Hercule) de l'époque des Sévères pourrait être mentionnée : Bordenache 1969, p. 79, n° 128 ; cf. Covacef 1975 ; 2002, p. 145-148. 168 Pour une possible dédicace à Héraclès au IIe s. ap. J.-C., voir aussi ISM III 101. 169 Chirica 1998, contre l'interprétation erronée de Suceveanu 1982. 170 Pick 1898, n° 315.

171 Pick 1898, nos 234-247 et pl. I 24, 25 (époque hellénistique) ; 267274, 309, 340 (époque impériale). 172 À Callatis, Aphrodite est connue comme Pandamos dès le IVe s. av. J.-C. (voir plus haut), dont le caractère est également éminemment civique : cf. Petre 1992-1994. On peut ajouter un torse d'Aphrodite et d'Éros du Ier s. av. J.-C. (Bordenache 1969, p. 30-31, n° 38) et une statue d'Aphrodite consacrée par une prêtresse au IIIe s. ap. J.-C. (ISM III 94 ; cf. Covacef 2002, p. 120). 173 La tête d'Hermès est représentée sur des monnaies callatiennes de bronze d'époque hellénistique : Pick 1898, n° 253. 174 Voir également la représentation du trident (parfois en exergue) sur le revers des « Lysimaques » posthumes ; cf. Poenaru Bordea 1979.

254

ALEXANDRU AVRAM: KALLATIS d'une souscription vers la fin du IIIe s. av. J.-C. (ISM III 35) et pourvu d'un enclos à l'époque de Tibère (ISM III 46) ; ce temple est désigné également comme mucov" (ISM III 44) et semble imiter une grotte dionysiaque prête à abriter des cérémonies accompagnées de mystères179.

hellénistiques de bronze à la représentation de Dionysos sur le droit175. Les inscriptions révèlent trois épiclèses. La liste des divinités attestées au IVe s. mentionne, l'un après l'autre, Dionysos Patrôos et Dionysos Baccheus, ensuite, après l'insertion des noms de quelques autres divinités, (Dionysos) Dasyllios. Très importante s'avère la première des trois épiclèses (dont la restitution s'impose sans crainte de tomber dans l'erreur) ; car il s'agit de la première attestation épigraphique de cette épiclèse adjointe à Dionysos, qui est en état de confirmer d'une manière décisive l'information fournie par Pausanias (I 43, 5) sur l'existence de ce culte à Mégare. Le reflet presque parfait des cultes du Dionysos mégarien à Kallatis est également illustré par la troisième des épiclèses mentionnées, obtenue toujours par une restitution, mais confirmée par le règlement sacré (ISM III 47), où il est précisément question d'un sanctuaire désigné comme Dasulliei'on. Cette épiclèse est, elle aussi, uniquement mégarienne au regard du même récit de Pausanias sur les sanctuaires de Mégare et d'une information due à Nonnos (Dionysiaca XXX 188-190), pour lequel Dasuvllio" était un auxiliaire de Dionysos originaire d'Héraclée du Pont, métropole de Kallatis.

Plusieurs divinités sont documentées d'une manière indirecte : Asclépios (?)180 et Hygie181 (ISM III 48 B), ensuite les Nymphes, qui auraient pu figurer accompagnées de Pan (?)182, d'Hermès (?) et de Dionysos (?) dans un ensemble de divinités pastorales dans la même inscription. D'autres divinités n'ont pas laissé de traces épigraphiques. Héra n'est représentée que sur une monnaie locale datée du règne de Caracalla183. Il en va à peu près de même pour les Dioscures, qui ne figurent que sur des monnaies d'époque impériale184, alors qu'un relief votif est d'époque antonine185. Eu égard au grand nombre de noms théophores tirés de ÔHra- et de Diosk- et déjà attestés à l'époque hellénistique, il convient pour autant de compléter le panthéon callatien hellénistique par ces divinités. À part les dieux et les déesses, le répertoire compte ensuite quelques abstractions divinisées. Il a déjà été question de Peithô (la Persuasion), attestée dès le IVe s. (ISM III 48 A). Il convient d'ajouter ∆Agaqo;" Daivmwn, qui tient l'éponymie à la date du décret ISM III 38 du Ier s. av. J.-C., et la Concorde – ÔOmovnoia (ISM III 1 et 41)186.

L'épiclèse Baccheus, attestée dès le IVe s. av. J.-C., se retrouve dans les dédicaces ISM III 79 et 80. D'autre part, le thiase dont on connaît plusieurs décrets est une fois désigné (ISM III 45) comme bakciko;" qivaso"176, alors que dans le règlement sacré (ISM III 47) figurent entre autres les neovbakcoi. La date de l'inscription ISM III 48 A fait remonter au IVe s. av. J.-C. au plus tard la première attestation de l'existence du culte du dieu extatique et des mystères qui lui sont adjoints à Kallatis.

L'époque hellénistique voit le panthéon de la cité s'enrichir de quelques nouvelles divinités très en vogue à peu près partout. Il s'agit tout d'abord des dieux de Samothrace (ISM III 4, 7 ?, 19, 20) dont les mystères auront été introduits assez tôt par rapport aux autres villes pontiques. La première mention d'un Samothrakion est, en effet, de la première moitié du IIIe s. av. J.-C. (ISM III 4).

Quelques fêtes consacrées à Dionysos sont connues d'une manière plus ou moins satisfaisante. Il s'agit tout d'abord des fêtes triétériques (ISM III 35 et 44) célébrées au mois Dionysios, à l'occasion desquelles on proclame entre autres les couronnes accordées par le thiase. Il y a ensuite les Dionuvsia ta; xenikav (ISM III 3 et 44), célébrées au mois Lykeios, qui sont les « fêtes où l'on accomplit le xenismov" de Dionysos »177. D'autres fêtes, qui sont sûrement propres au thiase, sont mentionnées par le règlement sacré (ISM III 47), dont les lignes conservées nous ont également légué quelques détails sur les sacrifices à accomplir178.

Il y a, d'autre part, la pénétration des cultes orientaux, avec Cybèle en tête de file. Avant l'époque impériale, lorsqu'elle figure parfois associée au Cavalier Thrace, Cybèle est représentée à Kallatis par quelques reliefs de marbre ou de terre cuite. Le plus ancien document semble

179

Avram 1995e ; 2002a ; Jaccottet 2003 II, p. 152-154. Représentation sur des bronzes d'époque impériale : Pick 1898, n° 352. 181 Représentations sur des bronzes d'époque impériale : Pick 1898, nos 330 et 353. 182 Cf. une tête de Pan des années 230-250 ap. J.-C. : Sauciuc-Săveanu 1938, fig. 35 et 37 = Bordenache 1969, p. 66-67, n° 121 = Covacef 2002, p. 131-132. 183 Pick 1898, n° 316. 184 Pick 1898, nos 279-286, 312, 337, 364. 185 Sauciuc-Săveanu 1941-1944, p. 278 et fig. 15/8 = Bordenache 1969, p. 45, n° 71. 186 Voir, sur ce culte, Pippidi 1974b = 1975a, p. 182-192 ; Thériault 1996 (sur Callatis, p. 51-54) ; cf. ISM III, p. 101-102.

Les données des inscriptions sur les édifices de culte consacrés à Dionysos complètent le tableau. Il s'agit, d'une part, du Dasyllieion, le sanctuaire de Dionysos Dasyllios, situé selon toute évidence à l'extérieur de la ville (ISM III 47), d'autre part, d'un temple érigé à la suite

180

175

Pick 1898, nos 217-224 a et pl. I 20-21. Voir, sur ce thiase, Avram 2002a ; Jaccottet 2003 I, p. 110 et suiv., nos 54-61, et II, p. 151-155. 177 Pippidi 1965b = 1975a, p. 138-141. 178 Avram 1995b. 176

255

ANCIENT GREEK COLONIES IN THE BLACK SEA 2 en être une terre cuite datée des IVe–IIIe s. av. J.-C.187 ; il y a ensuite quelques statues et statuettes de marbre ou de terre cuite d'époque hellénistique188. Les documents iconographiques deviennent encore plus fréquents à l'époque impériale189 ; ils sont complétés par des représentations monétaires190 et trouvent même une confirmation épigraphique dans une dédicace en provenance du territoire callatien (ISM III 247). Attis est, à son tour, documenté par des terres cuites d'époque hellénistique191.

témoigner de son culte. Les représentations de la même déesse sur des monnaies de bronze sont toujours du IIIe s.198 Rien ne suggère que le culte ait été considérablement plus ancien que les dates assignées à tous ces documents. Une épiclèse locale de Zeus – “Ombrimo" (« le pluvieux ») – qui n'est pas attestée explicitement à Kallatis, mais qui pourrait être suggérée par les fêtes des Diombries (ISM III 31), célébrées déjà au Ier s. ap. J.-C., serait, elle aussi, de date assez récente. Le Cavalier Thrace est en vogue, comme à peu près partout dans la région balkanique, à partir de la basse époque hellénistique, mais surtout à l'époque impériale. Kallatis et ses environs ne s'avèrent pas trop riches en monuments consacrés au Héros Thrace : on en compte tout de même une statuette199, 10 monuments à dédicaces (ISM III 86-93, 239-246), un monument funéraire à la représentation du Cavalier (ISM III 237) et 10 reliefs anépigraphes200.

C'est toujours vers le début de l'époque hellénistique que l'on voit les cultes égyptiens pénétrer en mer Noire. Il est peut-être utile de rappeler qu'un Alexandrin est attesté à Kallatis au IIIe s. av. J.-C. (ISM III 155), qu'un Callatien figure comme mercenaire dans l'armée d'Alexandre le Grand192 et que des intellectuels d'origine callatienne fréquentent les milieux alexandrins et s'établissent même à Alexandrie193. C'est, non pas en dernière ligne, grâce à de tels personnages que les cultes égyptiens se propagèrent dans les villes pontiques194. En ce qui concerne Kallatis, le premier document à ce propos est de la fin du IIIe ou du début du IIe s. av. J.-C. : il s'agit d'une inscription de Délos (IG XI 4, 1238) qui atteste une famille d'adorateurs callatiens de Sarapis, Isis et Anoubis195. Les renseignements à cet égard font ensuite défaut ; ce n'est qu'à l'époque impériale que les monnaies de bronze représentent Sarapis196 ou Isis197.

C'est toujours à une époque plus tardive, plus exactement à partir de la fin du IIIe s. ap. J.-C., que sur certaines monnaies locales de bronze figure une personnification de la ville de Kallatis201. Une monnaie de l'époque de Commode représente même le couronnement de l'empereur par cette déesse202. Quant aux associations cultuelles révélées par les inscriptions, hormis le thiase bachique dont il a été question plus haut, il convient de noter les qoinh'tai (qoina'tai) de Déméter Chthonia (ISM III 40) vers la fin de l'ère païenne, d'Héraclès Alexikakos (ISM III 68) au Ier s. ap. J.-C., et encore les qoina'tai attestés dans des contextes lacunaires (ISM III 41 et 66). Une association de qrhªskeutaivº observant le culte d'une divinité

Il y a enfin un groupe de cultes dont il est permis de supposer, au moins dans l'état actuel de nos connaissances, qu'ils aient été introduits à l'époque impériale plutôt qu'à une date plus ancienne. Un exemple en est Némésis, dont la statue consacrée par les magistrats (« archontes ») après le milieu du IIIe s. ap. J.-C. (ISM III 75) est le seul document épigraphique à

198

Pick 1898, nos 310 (Septime Sévère), 344 (Gordien III), 355 et 359 (Philippe l'Arabe). 199 Sauciuc-Săveanu 1927-1932, p. 448 = Hampartumian 1979, n° 98. 200 Voir les concordances, d'après le corpus de Hampartumian 1979 : n° 5 = ISM III 239 (Arsa, territoire de Callatis) ; n° 88 = Scorpan 1967, n° 32 = Tacheva-Hitova 1983, n° 40 = Vermaseren 1989, n° 431 (Limanu, territoire de Callatis) ; n° 89 = Bordenache 1969, p. 104, n° 215 ; n° 90 = ISM III 246 (territoire de Callatis, provenance non précisée) ; n° 91 = Sauciuc-Săveanu 1941-1944, p. 279-280 = Scorpan 1967, n° 31 ; n° 92 = Bordenache 1960, p. 502-503, n° 14 = Scorpan 1967, n° 40 ; n° 93 = Scorpan 1967, n° 39 = Zavatin-Coman 1971 = Tacheva-Hitova 1983, n° 39 = Vermaseren 1989, n° 407 ; n° 94 = ISM III 93 ; n° 95 = Bordenache 1969, p. 104, n° 216 = ISM III 91 ; n° 96 = ISM III 88 ; n° 99 = Sauciuc-Săveanu 1937-1940, p. 241-242, n° 32 ; n° 100 = Sauciuc-Săveanu 1941-1944, p. 285 ; n° 101= ISM III 89 ; n° 102 = Scorpan 1967, n° 21 = Preda 1968, fig. 12 ; n° 117= CIL III, Suppl. 2, 13 743 = ISM II 266 = ISM III 237 ; n° 204= ISM III 92. Ajouter maintenant ISM III 86, 87, 90. 201 Pick 1898, nos 289, 297, 299, 308, 333, 355a. 202 Il est pour autant impossible de vérifier la suggestion de Pick 1898, p. 96, sur le rapport avec « ein bestimmtes Ereignis der Stadtgeschichte ».

187 Bordenache 1960, p. 501 et fig. 14 ; Preda 1968, fig. 29 ; TachevaHitova 1983, p. 84, n° 25 et pl. XXVII ; Vermaseren 1989, n° 422. Cf. Oppermann 2004, p. 191 et n. 1941. 188 Vermaseren 1989, nos 415, 417, 418, 420, 421, 423, 424-425 (?). Il faut ajouter maintenant les terres cuites d'Albeşti (références chez Oppermann 2004, p. 191, n. 1942). 189 Vermaseren 1989, nos 406 (?), 408-414, 416, 419, 430 (ce dernier en provenance de Costineşti, site du territoire callatien). En compagnie du Cavalier Thrace : nos 407 (= Hampartumian 1979, n° 93) et 431 (= Hampartumian 1979, n° 88, en provenance de Limanu). 190 Pick 1898, nos 292-295, 298, 313, 325, 332, 343, 347. 191 Vermaseren 1989, nos 405 (ici en compagnie de Dionysos), 426-429 = Canarache 1969, nos 34 et 49-51. 192 Arrien, Anab. VI 23, 5 (325/4 av. J.-C.) ; cf. Suceveanu 1966 ; Ruscu 2002, p. 75. 193 Firicel 2001-2002. 194 Sur la diffusion des cultes égyptiens en mer Noire, voir Fraser 1960 ; Pippidi 1964b = 1969a, p. 60-82 = 1975a, p. 96-110 ; Vinogradov et Zolotarev 1999. 195 Cf. Ruscu 2002, p. 225-226. 196 Pick 1898, nos 301, 338, 348-349. 197 Pick 1898, n° 302.- En éditant les inscriptions de Callatis, je pensais avoir trouvé un Isiakos dans ISM III 183 ; cependant, Dan Dana m'attire aimablement l'attention qu'il en donnera prochainement une toute autre lecture à cette inscription, à la suite de laquelle le prétendu Isiakos disparaît.

256

ALEXANDRU AVRAM: KALLATIS déjà existant. D'autre part, une inscription du IIe s. av. J.C. est un décret en l'honneur d'un maître d'armes (?) étranger qui aura fait des exhibitions à Kallatis ; il est question d'éphèbes et sans doute de nevoi (ISM III 18), lesquels auront été initiés dans l'art du combat hoplitique209. Quoi qu'il en soit, l'enseignement callatien devait reposer sur des bases plutôt satisfaisantes : il y avait même à l'étranger des maîtres callatiens qui faisaient preuve de leurs compétences, comme tel didavskalo" honoré dans un décret de Mésambria210. Quant au climat culturel et, en général, à la circulation des idées, que l'on se souvienne aussi de « la tombe à papyrus »211.

inconnue est révélée par une dédicace fragmentaire de l'époque de Septime Sévère et Caracalla (ISM III 260). Les documents de Kallatis ou d'ailleurs permettent de constituer un dossier assez riche concernant les relations de Kallatis avec l'oracle de Delphes203. L'histoire est, en effet, très ancienne : car un cliché que l'on retrouve à peu près partout est la fondation des colonies de Mégare à la suite d'une consultation oraculaire204. Il en va de même pour Héraclée du Pont, qui prit l'initiative de fonder Kallatis kata; crhsmovn205. Les relations de Kallatis avec l'oracle d'Apollon Pythien remontent donc à l'origine de la ville même, mais c'est grâce à un heureux hasard que nous disposons de plusieurs documents qui permettent de constituer le dossier le plus complet qu'une ville pontique en ait jamais produit.

C'est entre autres grâce à la qualité de son enseignement que la ville a pu produire quelques historiens, écrivains et philosophes qui allaient acquérir une certaine renommée parmi leurs contemporains et dont les activités ont été retenues parfois même par la postérité212.

Deux décrets de Delphes, datés respectivement de ca. 265-260 (peut-être de 265/4) et de 263/2 av. J.-C., accordent la proxénie et les autres privilèges qui en découlent à des Callatiens206. D'autre part, quelques inscriptions callatiennes du IVe (ISM III 48 A) et du IIe s. av. J.-C. ( ISM III 48 B, 49 et 50) contiennent des réponses de l'oracle (oJ qeo;" e[crhse lovi>og kai; a[meinon ei\men) concernant les pratiques religieuses de Kallatis. Nos renseignements sur les cultes de Kallatis à l'époque hellénistique proviennent, on l'a vu, majoritairement de ces inscriptions. D'autre part, l'étroitesse des liens réunissant la colonie d'Héraclée et le sanctuaire d'Apollon Pythien est un indice décisif pour mieux définir l'Apollon adoré à Kallatis, même si l'épiclèse Puvqio" n'a pas encore été révélée par les inscriptions locales207.

Le Callatien sinon le plus connu à son époque, en tout cas, le plus souvent invoqué par les exégètes modernes, est sans aucun doute Démétrios de Kallatis (deuxième moitié du IIIe s. av. J.-C.)213. Son œuvre en vingt livres Sur l'Asie et l'Europe – qui ne nous est pas parvenue – faisait incontestablement autorité, notamment en ce qui concerne la géographie et l'histoire des régions du PontEuxin. Grâce au Ps.-Scymnos, nous en conservons quelques points de référence et c'est justement l'auteur anonyme de cette chronique versifiée qui fait l'éloge de la qualité de sa source (vv. 718-720) : « ensuite c'est le Pont dont Démétrios de Kallatis décrit la position ; et il semble qu'il s'en soit informé très soigneusement ». Un érudit originaire de Kallatis, mais ayant déployé son activité dans les milieux alexandrins et à la cour de Ptolémée VI Philométor, a été, dans la première moitié du IIe s., Héracleidès (Kallatianov", ∆Alexandreuv" ou ∆Oxurugcivth"), surnommé Lembos, qui aura écrit une quantité impressionnante de biographies et d'abrégés de philosophie214. La tradition antique est plus

Avant de conclure sur les cultes, il faut rappeler que la moisson épigraphique callatienne, étudiée en rapport avec les témoignages fournis par les autres colonies mégariennes, a permis de reconstituer avec un haut degré de précision le calendrier de Kallatis208. DONNÉES SUR L'ENSEIGNEMENT ET LA VIE CULTURELLE Les documents sur le climat scolaire et culturel de Kallatis sont peu nombreux. En effet, le gymnase et les gymnasiarques ne sont attestés qu'au Ier s. ap. J.-C. (ISM III 31 et 109). Il est cependant impossible qu'une ville comme Kallatis n'ait pas connu de gymnase à l'époque hellénistique ; en plus, comme il résulte du décret ISM III 31, Apollonios, le fondateur de la gérousie, avait fait ajouter de nouveaux espaces au bâtiment d'un gymnase

209

Voir aussi l'inscription fragmentaire ISM III 16, où il est question d'un pédotribe. 210 IGB I2 307 bis (cf. V 5087) ; voir Pippidi 1973c = 1988, p. 225-228 ; Doruţiu Boilă 1988 ; Ruscu 1996, p. 23 ; 2002, p. 167. 211 Voir, sur la circulation des papyrus en mer Noire, le témoignage de Xénophon (An. VIII 5, 14). 212 Ce qui ne veut point dire que l'éducation des personnalités recensées ci-après se soit parachevée exclusivement à Callatis. Des voyages d'études et des stages d'apprentissage auprès des maîtres habitant les villes d'Égée, de Grèce continentale, d'Asie Mineure ou d'Égypte, parfois suggérés par les sources mêmes, sont toujours à envisager. Pour les érudits originaires de Callatis, voir Pippidi 1971, p. 120 ; ISM III, p. 117-120 ; Ruscu 2002, p. 229-230 ; et surtout Firicel 2001-2002 (testimonia et commentaires exhaustifs). 213 Schwartz 1901, qui suppose que Démétrios ait été originaire d'Odessos et qu'il n'ait reçu que plus tard la citoyenneté de Callatis ; contra : Pippidi 1971, p. 266, n. 111. Voir maintenant Firicel 20012002, p. 136-137, 141-142 et 148-149. 214 Voir notamment Diogène Laërce, Vit. V 94 ; VIII 7 ; 44 ; 58 (ÔHrakleivdh" oJ tou' Sarapivwno") ; Souda H 462, s. v. ÔHrakleivdh" ∆Oxurugxivth" ; P.Oxy. 1376 fr. 2 (Peremans et Van't Dack 1968, n° 16

203

Avram et Lefèvre 1995. Hanell 1934, p. 170-172 ; Legon 1981, p. 140-141. Pour la fondation d'Héraclée du Pont après la consultation d'Apollon Pythien, voir notamment Asheri 1972, p. 9-34 ; Burstein 1976, p. 12-18 ; Malkin 1987, p. 73-77. 205 Plus haut, La fondation. 206 FD III 3, 2, 207 et III 1, 158. 207 Antonetti 1999, p. 18-19. 208 Avram 1995d ; 1999b ; ISM III, p. 110-115. 204

257

ANCIENT GREEK COLONIES IN THE BLACK SEA 2 parcimonieuse avec un certain Istros (de Kallatis ?), qui aurait écrit « un beau livre sur la tragédie »215, et avec Thalès, un rhéteur originaire, semble-t-il, de la même ville216. En revanche, dans le cas mieux connu de Satyros le Péripathéticien, l'historien littéraire de la deuxième moitié du IIIe s. av. J.-C., auquel on attribuait la création du genre biographique217, c'est son origine callatienne qui est sujette à caution218.

sommes nullement renseignés, mais dont la présence est hautement à supposer222, auront eu à protéger la ville notamment devant la menace des indigènes (Gètes, Thraces ou Scythes, lesquels avaient lutté du côté des Callatiens contre Lysimaque). Selon toute vraisemblance, ceux-ci étaient devenus de plus en plus agressifs ; il suffit de faire état des guerres que les Macédoniens eurent à mener contre le roi gète Dromichaitès, dont le royaume était situé sur le Danube223. D'autre part, l'invasion des Celtes (Galates), si éphémère qu'elle ait été dans les Balkans, pour ne plus parler de la Dobroudja, aura contribué à l'instauration d'un climat d'insécurité, devenu à vrai dire chronique durant toute l'époque hellénistique. Dans ces circonstances, un fragment de décret accordant la proxénie à un étranger (ISM III 3) pour son courage a toutes les chances d'en conserver un faible écho ; et il ne reste qu'à regretter la perte des considérants qui nous auraient peut-être renseignés d'une manière plus satisfaisante.

HISTOIRE POLITIQUE Les débuts de l'histoire de Kallatis demeurent totalement inconnus. Ce n'est que vers la fin du IVe s. av. J.-C. que la cité se voit mêlée dans un épisode digne d'attirer l'attention des historiens anciens. Il s'agit de la mainmise de Lysimaque sur la côte occidentale du Pont-Euxin, suivie par l'émeute des villes grecques contre le régime qui leur fut imposé par le diadoque219. À suivre Diodore (XIX 73, 2-4), Kallatis en aura pris l'initiative et la direction – sans aucun doute, à l'instigation d'Antigone le Borgne – et elle aura subi les rigueurs d'un siège communément daté vers 313220. De l'examen du récit de Diodore, il ressort que le siège fut levé en 311 au plus tard, lorsque les diadoques conclurent une paix garantissant entre autres la liberté des cités grecques (Diodore XIX 105, 1). Cependant, les hostilités entre Lysimaque et ses adversaires une fois reprises – avec Ptolémée Ier Sôtèr en tête de file – la ville fut de nouveau assiégée à partir, selon toute vraisemblance, de 309 ; elle finit par être conquise et intégrée jusqu'en 281 à la sphère d'influence de Lysimaque. C'est à cette occasion que 1000 Callatiens quittèrent leur patrie pour s'installer, grâce à la bienveillance d'Eumèle, roi du Bosphore, dans une colonie qui leur fut spécialement concédée.

Aucune source ne parle d'une manière explicite de ce qui advint des villes du Pont Gauche après la disparition de Lysimaque224. En revanche, la documentation sur une séquence de deux décennies plus tardive de l'histoire politique de cette région est en mesure de nous renseigner en quelque sorte à ce propos. Il s'agit d'une guerre déclenchée pour le contrôle de l'emporion de Tomis (peri; Tovmew" tou' ejmporivou), sur laquelle nous bénéficions d'un bref aperçu dû à l'historien héracléote Memnon (F 13 [21]) : « Peu de temps après, les Byzantins firent éclater une guerre contre les Callatiens (ceux-ci étaient des colons des Héracléotes) et les Istriens autour de l'emporion de Tomis, qui était limitrophe des Callatiens, et dont les Callatiens pensaient à faire leur monopole. Les deux ont envoyé des ambassades auprès des Héracléotes afin d'en obtenir l'alliance ; mais ceux-ci ne firent incliner la balance guerrière d'aucune part, et envoyèrent des conciliateurs à tous les deux, leur effort restant pour autant sans effet. Ceux de Kallatis ayant eu beaucoup à souffrir de la part des ennemis, ils en vinrent plus tard à demander l'armistice, sans être presque jamais en état de se remettre de ce malheur. »

Il est sûr que la domination de Lysimaque sur la côte occidentale du Pont-Euxin (Diodore, XX 112, 2) se prolongea jusque vers 281, sans que nous ayons pour autant la possibilité d'en connaître la forme221. Les garnisons du diadoque devenu roi, sur lesquelles nous ne 922, avec commentaire = 14 764 = 16 857 ; La’da 2002, E 974 ; Grainger 1997, p. 651). Cf. Susemihl 1891, p. 501-505 ; Lucas 1940 ; Firicel 2001-2002, p. 137-139, 142-143 et 149-154. 215 Étienne de Byzance, s. v. Kavllati". Cf. Jacoby 1914 ; Firicel 20012002, p. 140, 144 et 155 (origine callatienne non assurée). 216 Diogène Laërce, Vit. I 38. Cf. Diehl 1934 ; Firicel 2001-2002, p. 139-140, 143 et 154. 217 Peremans et Van't Dack 1968, nos 16 948 = 16 949 ; La’da 2002, E 975. 218 Dans une « Vie de Socrate » découverte à Herculanum (P.Herc. 558 F 1), Satyros est nommé Kallatianov". Voir Firicel 2001-2002, p. 134136, 141 et 144-148. 219 Lund 1992, p. 33-50 ; Franco 1993, p. 21-36 ; Ruscu 2002, p. 78-88. On ignore la date de l'installation des garnisons de Lysimaque dans les villes ouest-pontiques : sans doute vers 315 av. J.-C., pour contrecarrer la propagande d'Antigone le Borgne, favorable à l'autonomie des cités. 220 Saitta 1955, p. 109-116. 221 Pippidi 1971, p. 94-95 ; 1984, p. 162-163. Lund 1992, p. 35-39, estime qu'il n'y a aucune preuve pour que les cités du Pont Gauche aient été contraintes à payer un fovro" et que les régimes démocratiques y aient été renversés. En ce qui concerne Callatis, elle s'appuie entre autres sur un fragment d'inscription qui n'a rien à voir avec ces événements (ISM III 14).

Un deuxième fragment de la chronique de Memnon (F 15) mentionne le siège qu'Antiochos II Théos mit devant Byzance :

222 Elles sont, en revanche, directement attestées par Diodore quand il mentionne les causes de la révolte des Callatiens. 223 Diodore, XXI 11-12 ; cf. Pippidi 1971, p. 92-93 ; Lund 1992, p. 4549 ; Franco 1993, p. 259-262. 224 Niese 1899, p. 74, avait jadis supposé que « einige thrakische Küstenplätze wie Kallatis und Mesambria, vielleicht auch Kypsela am Hebros scheinen dem Seleukos zugefallen und dem Antiochos dann verblieben zu sein ».

258

ALEXANDRU AVRAM: KALLATIS « Quand Antiochos faisait la guerre aux Byzantins, les Héracléotes les assistèrent avec quarante trières et firent de sorte que la guerre s'arrêtât aux menaces. »

tel enchaînement des événements, autrement dit, qu'il soit prouvé que la guerre entre Byzance et Kallatis avait précédé l'action d'Antiochos.

D'autre part, une autre tradition, dont seule une anecdote transmise par Polyen nous est parvenue, veut que le même roi Antiochos II ait mené en personne une expédition en Thrace (Strat. IV 16)225 :

Il convient donc, dans un premier temps, d'essayer de mieux préciser la date de la guerre peri; Tovmew" tou' ejmporivou. Les concordances avec d'autres événements ne peuvent être qu'approximatives228 : car, d'une part, vu l'état dans lequel l'ouvrage de Memnon nous est parvenu, il n'est pas certain que l'ordre admis par les philologues pour ses fragments assure la chronologie relative des faits dont il est question, d'autre part, les événements à valeur potentielle de repères chronologiques sont eux-mêmes peu ou pour le moins incomplètement connus, par exemple la guerre de la succession de Bithynie (F 14 [22])229. À juger d'après toutes les concordances, la fourchette chronologique demeure assez large : il s'agit d'événements situés après la fondation de Nicomédie (ca. 264-261 av. J.-C.)230 et peu avant la mort du roi Nicomède Ier de Bithynie (sans doute vers 255-253 av. J.C.)231.

« Antiochos assiégeait Cypséla, une ville thrace, ayant de son côté beaucoup de nobles thraces sous la commande de Térès et de Dromichaitès. Ayant orné ceux-ci de cuirasses d'or et d'armes brodées d'argent, il partit pour le combat. Ceux de Cypséla, voyant leurs congénères et des gens qui parlaient la même langue ornés de beaucoup d'or et d'argent, les estimèrent heureux d'avoir suivi l'expédition d'Antiochos et, en jetant les armes, se rangèrent du côté d'Antiochos et d'ennemis, ils en devinrent des amis. » Le lien entre le siège de Byzance et la campagne d'Antiochos en Thrace semble maintenant admis par tous les historiens, même s'il n'y a pas d'accord sur la chronologie226. Il n'en va pas de même pour le rapport entre ces événements consommés en Thrace et la guerre peri; Tovmew" tou' ejmporivou. Le premier à l'avoir soupçonné est B. Niese, selon lequel le siège mis par Antiochos II devant Byzance s'expliquerait par le désir du roi séleucide de venger la défaite subie par les Callatiens dans la guerre pour Tomis227 : ce qui impliquerait 1) qu'il soit acquis que les Callatiens étaient, à l'époque, les alliés d'Antiochos et 2) que la chronologie relative permette un

Rappelons les quelques données qui nous invitent à beaucoup de précaution devant les passages de Memnon. Ce qui nous reste du récit de Memnon est, on le sait, l'abrégé qu'en a fait Photios, et il est sûr que l'érudit byzantin en a, comme ailleurs, comprimé le contenu. Puisqu'il n'y a nulle garantie en ce qui concerne la qualité des critères de la sélection opérée par Photios, il est à supposer que notamment dans les récits concernant Byzance l'abrégé ait voulu souligner, ou pour le moins ne pas occulter, la place tenue par cette cité. Autant dire qu'il n'est pas du tout assuré que Byzance ait joué, dans le contexte qui retient notre attention, le rôle suggéré par ce qu'il nous reste de Memnon après que le ciseau de Photios eut accompli son travail.

225 On s'accorde aujourd'hui d'identifier cet « Antiochos » à Antiochos II. Beloch 1925, p. 672, n. 4, n'excluait pas la possibilité que ce fût Antiochos Hiérax, mais son opinion est restée apparemment isolée. Voir tout de même Will 1979, p. 248. 226 Le premier à s'y être attardé est, à ma connaissance, Droysen 1877, p. 314-318, lequel concluait qu'il s'agissait de « Begebenheiten, die zwischen 262 und 258 lagen ». L'autorité de Droysen suffit à plusieurs historiens plus récents pour dater le siège de Byzance des environs de 260 : Newskaja 1955, p. 151 (« im Jahre 260 v. u. Z. ») ; Saprykin 1997, p. 176 (« in 260 B.C. ») ; Bittner 1998, p. 67, n. 415 (« um 259/58 v. Chr. »), etc. Bouché-Leclercq 1903, p. 197-198, voyait les événements se dérouler toujours vers le début du règne d'Antiochos II. Voir aussi Bouché-Leclercq 1913, p. 77 et suiv. Une telle manière de voir les choses est retenue par Préaux 1978, p. 142, pour laquelle la campagne s'expliquerait par « le désir d'Antiochos II de s'assurer une base de prise à revers, Byzance » après la fondation de Nicomédie par le roi de Bithynie. En revanche, Beloch 1925, p. 672, n. 5, datait le siège de Byzance « in die letzten Jahre der Regierung des Antiochos, da der König während der ersten Hälfte seiner Regierung durch den Krieg gegen Ptolemaeos und durch die ionischen Angelegenheiten in Anspruch genommen war ». Il est suivi sur ce point par Will 1979, p. 248. Sans pour autant se prononcer sur la date, Bevan 1902, p. 175-176, pensait que « Antiochus has perhaps expoused the native cause against the new-come Galatians who had founded a separate kingdom in this region ». 227 Niese 1899, p. 138. Il datait le siège de Byzance de « etwa 255 v. Chr. » et estimait, en s'appuyant sur quelques supposés témoignages numismatiques (p. 74 et n. 3 ; cf. p. 23, 138 et 777), que la ville de Callatis se trouvait déjà sous l'influence séleucide. La même explication fut reprise par Merle 1916, p. 55-56, mais depuis lors définitivement écartée par Heinen 1972, p. 44-46.

228

Les chronologies trop hautes, comme celle de Merle 1916, p. 55 (ca. 275 av. J.-C.), ou trop basses, comme celle de Saprykin 1997, p. 223 (ca. 225-220 av. J.-C.), ne reposent sur rien. Pour la plupart, les historiens se sont contentés d'accepter une date autour de 260 ou peu après : Vulpe 1938, p. 85-86 ; Rostovtzeff 1941, p. 591 ; Blavatskaja 1952, p. 113-116 ; Newskaja 1955, p. 150-151 ; Pippidi 1971, p. 99100, etc. Voir, plus récemment, Bittner 1998, p. 68 : 255 av. J.-C. (mais sans arguments). 229 Le premier à avoir essayé de dater ces événements à partir des concordances avec la guerre de la succession de Bithynie est toujours Niese 1899, p. 136, n. 2 : il estimait que la guerre pour le contrôle de l'emporion de Tomis avait eu lieu « einige Zeit » avant la guerre de succession. 230 Memnon F 12 (20) ; Arrien, Bithyniaka F 63, éd. A.G. Roos – G. Wirth ; Pausanias V 12, 7 (dont la source est toujours Nymphis, comme pour Memnon) ; Chronicon Paschale I, p. 328 D (olympiade 128, 3) ; Eusèbe, Chron. 131, 9, éd. R. Helm (olympiade 129, 3, mais 128, 3 dans la version arménienne). Cf. Vitucci 1953, p. 27-28 : « nell'insieme può ritenersi che poco prima del 260 Nicomedia divenisse la sede della corte e la capitale del regno ». 231 La date de la mort du roi bithynien n'est pas assurée : entre 255 et 253 pour Tarn 1913, p. 326-327 ; ca. 255 pour Beloch 1927, p. 212213, etc. Vitucci 1953, p. 31, estimait que « la morte di Nicomede va posta al più presto intorno al 250, e più probabilmente qualche anno dopo ». Voir, cependant, avec de bons arguments, Habicht 1972, col. 390 : ca. 255-253 av. J.-C.

259

ANCIENT GREEK COLONIES IN THE BLACK SEA 2 Il demeure, d'autre part, possible que, même si la chronique de Memnon avait connu un sort meilleur, nos connaissances des mêmes événements eussent été tout aussi approximatives. Car Memnon ne fait ici que résumer une histoire que son illustre prédécesseur Nymphis avait consacrée à Héraclée du Pont (Peri; ÔHrakleiva")232. Celle-ci aura-t-elle été plus détaillée sur ce point ? Sans doute, mais peut-être également sélective : puisqu'il s'agissait d'une histoire locale, il est probable que seuls les événements ayant impliqué Héraclée du Pont eussent été retenus233. Il est par exemple permis de douter que la guerre qui concerne notre propos eût jamais été mentionnée, si Héraclée du Pont n'avait pas été sollicitée comme arbitre par les combattants.

de Ziaèlas en Arménie, mais avant sa reconquête du trône. En plus, il est intéressant à retenir que, outre à Ptolémée Philadelphe et à Antigone Gonatas, c'est aux cités de Byzance, d'Héraclée du Pont et de Kios que la tutelle des héritiers mineurs de Nicomède Ier fut confiée ; pour parler avec É. Will, « c'était faire appel par avance à tout ce qui pourrait s'opposer à une éventuelle poussée séleucide »234. En effet, Héraclée du Pont, Byzance et Calcédoine avaient conclu vers 281 av. J.-C., semble-t-il, une summaciva anti-séleucide que les historiens modernes appellent parfois, à tort ou à raison, la « Ligue du Nord ». Cette alliance allait attirer encore d'autres dynastes d'Asie Mineure ainsi que quelques autres villes de moindre importance235. Cela étant, il me semble acceptable de reconstituer le récit originaire de Nymphis de la manière suivante : cet historien aurait commencé par évoquer le contexte bithynien, tout en mentionnant, bien entendu, que sa ville natale figurait bien parmi les ejpivtropoi désignés des rois mineurs, et il aurait continué par rendre compte de la réaction d'Antiochos II, notamment de sa politique à l'égard des cités de la « Ligue du Nord ». Et c'est peut-être pour expliquer les difficultés que connaissaient ces dernières que l'épisode de la guerre pontique y fût inséré. Nymphis aurait ensuite présenté l'expédition d'Antiochos en Thrace, le siège de Byzance et l'intervention d'Héraclée en faveur de son alliée. Memnon, à son tour, aurait préféré ordonner son récit par régions : tout d'abord l'épisode secondaire concernant la mer Noire, ensuite les affaires bithyniennes et enfin, sans doute dans un cadre plus large, la campagne d'Antiochos contre Byzance. Quant à Photios, il aurait retenu de tout cela notamment les deux épisodes qui impliquaient Byzance : la guerre pour l'emporion Tomis et le siège de la ville par Antiochos II.

Cela étant, je commence par rappeler brièvement le contexte microasiatique, tel qu'il résulte de Memnon, lequel semble avoir réservé un chapitre à part à la crise bithynienne. Je remarque, au demeurant, qu'un tel développement aurait trouvé sa place légitime dans la monographie de Nymphis, car les affaires bithyniennes concernaient hautement Héraclée du Pont. À suivre l'exposé qui nous a été légué, le roi bithynien Nicomède Ier avait désigné comme successeurs au trône ses fils mineurs (issus d'un deuxième mariage) et en avait confié la tâche de « tuteurs » (ejpivtropoi) aux rois Ptolémée II Philadelphe d'Égypte et Antigone II Gonatas de Macédoine ainsi qu'aux cités de Byzance, Héraclée du Pont et Kios (F 14 [22], 1). Mécontent de cette décision, le fils aîné de Nicomède, Ziaèlas, qui s'était d'abord réfugié en Arménie, revint pour réclamer son trône ; il était activement soutenu par les troupes des Galates. À leur tour, les Bithyniens, lesquels s'en tenaient aux dispositions testamentaires de Nicomède, parvinrent à obtenir une armée de la part des « tuteurs ». Le récit continue par évoquer d'une manière imprécise des luttes en Bithynie et un armistice, la participation des Héracléotes à la fois aux confrontations militaires et aux négociations étant, bien entendu, soulignée (F 14 [22], 2). Le territoire d'Héraclée fut ensuite pillé par les troupes des Galates (F 14 [22], 3). Finalement, Ziaèlas regagna le trône ; sauf qu'on en ignore la date exacte.

Dans une telle reconstruction, il faudrait donc comprendre l'expression ouj pollw'/ de; u{steron crovnw/ qui introduit le fragment 13 (21) de Memnon comme se rapportant uniquement aux débuts de la crise bithynienne. La guerre pour l'emporion Tomis, dont il est impossible de dater le commencement, était de toute façon en cours lorsque Antiochos II se rendit dans les Détroits et en Thrace. Contrairement à Niese, je pense donc qu'il ne s'agissait point de venger la défaite de Kallatis, mais de donner un coup de main aux Callatiens attaqués par Byzance.

Puisque le fragment 13 (21) concernant le conflit entre Kallatis et Byzance précède le chapitre consacré à la guerre de la succession de Bithynie – qui commence par ouj pollou' de; pavnu rJuevnto" crovnou, ce qui inviterait à supposer une succession immédiate –, les historiens modernes ont été tentés de situer le déroulement de cette guerre avant la crise bithynienne : ce qui ne va pas sans dire, car les chapitres de Memnon sont ordonnés selon les régions, de sorte que les concordances chronologiques restent toujours sujettes à caution. Il est possible que la guerre entre Kallatis et Byzance ait éclaté après la fuite

Il convient encore de signaler un aspect pour le moins étrange du récit fourni par le fragment 13 (21) de Memnon. La cause de la guerre aurait été le monopwvlion sur l'emporion Tomis236, et l’on a parfois interprété le

234

Will 1979, p. 246-247. Bevan 1902, p. 134-135 et 175 ; Tarn 1913, p. 130-131 ; Otto 1928, p. 20 ; Rostovtzeff 1941, p. 26-27 ; Newskaja 1955, p. 148-149 ; Saprykin 1985 ; 1986, p. 124-139 ; 1997, p. 161-178. Bittner 1998, p. 63-69, est, sur ce point, beaucoup plus prudente. 236 Cf. Vinogradov 1997, p. 42. 235

232 F. Jacoby, FGrHist III, commentaire, p. 259-265, n° 432 (sur le rapport entre Nymphis et Memnon, p. 267 et suiv.) ; Desideri 1967 ; 1970-1971. 233 Cf. Desideri 1967, p. 412.

260

ALEXANDRU AVRAM: KALLATIS terme comme se rapportant tout simplement au port de Tomis. Cependant, si cela avait été le cas, l'expression grecque aurait sans doute été peri; (tou') ejmporivou (th'") Tovmew". Tomis n'était que l'objet de la dispute et elle est désignée comme emporion, et non pas comme polis : ce qui semble d'ailleurs rendre compte du statut réel de Tomis à cette époque237. Pour autant qu'il s'agisse ici de la première mention de Tomis dans un contexte historique assuré, qu'il n'y ait pas d'attestations épigraphiques d'institutions propres à une polis avant la basse époque hellénistique et que les premières émissions monétaires de Tomis ne datent que de la deuxième moitié du IIIe s. av. J.-C. au plus tôt, il est à supposer que Tomis ait été, à l'origine, un comptoir istrien238. Les témoignages archéologiques de l'existence d'un site dès la première moitié du VIe s. av. J.-C.239 n'enlèvent rien à cette hypothèse, car ces données ne disent rien au sujet du statut de l'établissement. Qui plus est, une mention tardive des Dioscures comme « fondateurs de la cité » (ISM II 122 ; IIIe s. ap. J.-C.) pourrait favoriser, elle aussi, la piste istrienne, d'autant plus que, d'après une inscription des environs de 100 av. J.-C. (SIG3 731 = ISM II 2, l. 37-38), la communauté civique apportait des sacrifices aux mêmes dieux uJpe;r th'ª"º tou' dhvmou swthrivaª"º ; car les Dioscures appartiennent au panthéon d'Istros plutôt qu'à celui de Milet240. Ceci étant, il est bien étrange que, d'après Memnon, les Istriens eussent fait preuve de tant d'ardeur pour assurer le monopole callatien sur un emporion qu'ils contrôlaient déjà selon toute vraisemblance. Il y a plus de cent ans, B. Pick exprimait son étonnement à ce propos241. Dans une étude de 1963, consacrée à d'autres affaires pontiques, H. Bengtson est allé encore plus loin : il affirmait, sans pour autant en donner les raisons, que la guerre mentionnée par Memnon avait opposé Istros à Kallatis242. Enfin, Ju.G. Vinogradov s'est attaqué au même problème dans une communication faite en 1997 ; sur les traces de Bengtson, Vinogradov cherchait d'accumuler des arguments divers pour faire de la guerre peri; Tovmew" tou' ejmporivou une confrontation entre Istros et Kallatis dans un contexte international plus large243.

Il est heureusement possible d'ajouter aux pauvres témoignages littéraires un dossier épigraphique se rapportant aux mêmes événements. Il est, tout d'abord, question d'une inscription trouvée à Apollonia du Pont (IGB I2 388), mais dont les traits doriens ne peuvent faire qu'un décret de Mésambria (pour la majorité des exégètes, à commencer par G. Mihailov, son éditeur) ou de Kallatis (pour Vinogradov). On s'accorde maintenant sur l'identité de l'Antiochos dont le nom est révélé par ce qui est resté de la l. 4 : il s'agit sans aucun doute d'Antiochos II244. Pour ce décret, Vinogradov a entre autres proposé de restituer à la l. 2 ªejºp∆ ∆Astav" (là où Mihailov coupait ª - - º . a" ta'") ; ce qui révèle que la campagne d'Antiochos était dirigée contre les Astes, une population thrace située par les géographes anciens entre Périnthe et Apollonia du Pont245. Aussi reviendrais-je au supplément de Mihailov à la l. 4 (tetagmevªno" stratagov"º), ce qui supposerait que le roi eût désigné l'un de ses lieutenants comme responsable militaire d'une région située près d'Apollonia246. Une stratégie d'Astikè, correspondant justement à la côte entre Périnthe et Apollonia du Pont, nous est d'ailleurs connue grâce au géographe Ptolémée (Geog. III 11, 6)247. Cependant, cela serait peut-être trop exiger d'un texte transmis d'une manière aussi épouvantable. En ce qui concerne la cité qui aura émis le décret, il est évident que pour des raisons géographiques, il convient de choisir entre les seules cités doriennes de la région, Kallatis et Mésambria. Contrairement à Vinogradov, je suis encore sur ce point Mihailov et je plaide pour Mésambria, et cela pour deux raisons. Tout d'abord, le uacat indiscutable après la dernière ligne montre qu'il s'agit là de la fin du texte et l’on y attend la décision concernant la publication du décret : ce qui invite à accepter le supplément trouvé par Mihailov, ªejn tw'i iJerw'i tou' ∆Apovllwnºo" (à la rigueur, ªeij" to; iJero;n tou' ∆Apovllwnºo"). Or, la publication des décrets dans le sanctuaire d'Apollon est de règle à Mésambria, alors qu'elle n'est pas du tout attestée à Kallatis, où l'on préfère, semble-t-il, au IIIe s. av. J.-C., le Samothrakion248. Deuxièmement, l'expression ªejpi; ta'" ejºcfora'" (encore un supplément assuré) trouve deux parallèles à

237 Sur la distinction entre « (1) a community which has an emporion and (2) a community which is an emporion », voir Hansen 1997, p. 85 et suiv. 238 Avram 1996a, p. 297-298. 239 Rădulescu et Scorpan 1975 ; Buzoianu 1991. 240 Il convient de rappeler que, sauf erreur de ma part, il s'agit du seul cas où les Dioscures sont fondateurs d'une cité : Leschhorn 1984, p. 367, n° 52. Le culte des Dioscures est illustré à Istros : ISM I 112, 123, 142 ; cf. Pippidi 1969a, p. 57-59 ; 1975a, p. 94-95. En revanche, il n'y a pas de documents sur les Dioscures à Milet : Ehrhardt 1988, p. 187. Tout bien considéré, la tradition des Dioscures ktivstai de Tomis pourrait être interprétée comme expression du souvenir d'une (re)fondation istrienne de Tomis sous le signe des Dioscures, peut-être justement après la guerre peri; Tovmew" tou' ejmporivou. 241 Pick 1898, p. 144. 242 Bengtson 1963, p. 98-99 = 1974, p. 392. 243 Ju.G. Vinogradov, « Vom “Monopolkrieg” um Tomis zur Seeschlacht bei Kos », communication faite le 7 septembre 1997 au Premier Congrès International d'archéologie pontique (Varna), dont je conserve, par hasard, un brouillon (cf. Avram 2000-2001, p. 340). Quelques thèses en sont déjà présentées : Vinogradov 1999.

244

Voir à ce propos G. Mihailov, IGB I2, p. 348-351. Polybe, XIII 10, 10 (apud Étienne de Byzance, s. v. Kabuvlh) ; Ps.Scymnos, vv. 728-729 ; Tite-Live, XXXVIII 40, 7 ; Strabon, VII 6, 1 et 2 ; fr. 47. La région habitée par les Astes est désignée soit comme cwvra Buzantivwn (Théopompe, fr. 247, apud Étienne de Byzance, s. v. ∆Astaiv et ∆Astakov"), vu qu'elle était limitrophe des Byzantins (cf. d'ailleurs Strabon, VII 6, 2 : uJpevrkeitai de; tou' Buzantivou to; tw'n ∆Astw'n e[qno"), soit comme ∆Astikh; Qrav/kh (Ps.-Scymnos) ou comme ∆Astw'n cwvra (Polybe) = Astice regio (Pline, Nat. hist. IV 45 ; la forme Astice suppose une source grecque). 246 On pourrait peut-être songer à tetagmevªno" stratago;" uJpo; basilevo" ∆Anºtiovcou ejp∆ ∆Aªstikh'"º, comme dans une inscription d'Odessos du Ier s. av. J.-C. (IGB I2 43) : kaqestamevno" uJpo; basilevw" Qra/kw'n Sadalou strathgo;" ejpi; th'" proscwvrou. 247 Cf. Gerov 1970, p. 124, avec n. 2. Pour les questions de topographie, voir dernièrement Loukopoulou, dans Hatzopoulos et Loukopoulou 1987, p. 77. 248 ISM III, p. 146. 245

261

ANCIENT GREEK COLONIES IN THE BLACK SEA 2 Mésambria (IGB I2 308 bis et 341), alors qu'elle ne figure pas dans les inscriptions de Kallatis.

Vinogradov propose, à partir d'ici, un scénario somptueux. La guerre « contre les Istriens » aurait été menée par Kallatis (et donc pas par Byzance, en dépit du texte de Memnon), la riposte serait probablement venue d'Antigone II Gonatas (dont le nom aurait figuré dans la lacune mentionnée)254 et c'est dans ce contexte que des ambassadeurs venus de Bithynie et de Milet (à la l. 11 il restitue uJpo; a{ãmÃa Biqªunw'n kai; Milaºs≥ivwn) auraient entre autres demandé à ce dernier de mettre un terme à cette guerre255. Toujours est-il que le texte ne permet pas de comprendre qui faisait la guerre aux Istriens. Il est tout aussi bien possible qu'un troisième menât la guerre à la fois contre Kallatis, laquelle aurait été sans doute déjà vaincue, et contre Istros256. Ceci étant, rien n'empêche de voir Istros du côté des Callatiens et des Apolloniates.

Il reste donc à s'accorder sur deux points : 1) l'inscription IGB I2 388, bien que trouvée à Apollonia, est un décret de Mésambria ; 2) elle est en état de confirmer l'engagement d'Antiochos II en Thrace, entre autres contre les Astes. Il importe moins si ce décret était en l'honneur d'un Apolloniate249 ou d'un autre compagnon d'Antiochos II ; ce qu'il faut retenir, c'est que Mésambria aussi était, au vu de ce document, l'alliée du roi séleucide dans l'entreprise thrace de ce dernier. La deuxième inscription en état de stimuler l'enquête est un décret de Kallatis (SGDI 3089 = ISM III 7)250. Je considérais la pierre comme perdue, mais entre temps je viens d'apprendre qu'elle se trouve au Musée Archéologique de Sofia. M. Manov, qui est revenu récemment sur ce texte251, en donne une photo en état de confirmer les lectures suggérées par un estampage conservé à Vienne. Puisque dans le corpus des inscriptions de Kallatis j'ai consacré un long commentaire à ce document, je ne reviens que sur les conclusions qui me semblent fermes et notamment sur les points obscurs ; car il y en a, malheureusement, plusieurs. Il est sûr qu'il s'agit de la copie d'un décret (voir l. 29 et suiv.) promulgué par Kallatis en l'honneur du peuple des Apolloniates et de Stratônax, fils de Lygdamis. De même, il est sûr que le décret date du IIIe s. av. J.-C., ce que prouvent à la fois la paléographie et quelques orthographes : c'est donc à cette époque qu'il faut chercher un cadre historique pour l'alliance entre Kallatis et Apollonia.

Une alliance militaire entre Istros et Apollonia est attestée à peu près vers la même époque par une inscription mentionnant des soldats embarqués au secours des Apolloniates (ISM I 112). Admettons que cette intervention ne se rapporte pas forcément aux mêmes événements, bien qu'il soit séduisant d'y penser ; quoi qu'il en soit, il est peu probable que la donne eût radicalement changé en si peu de temps, pour que l'on trouve les mêmes Apolloniates (alliés des Callatiens d'après le décret en l'honneur de Stratônax) impliqués dans une guerre « contre les Istriens »257. Je compte donc sur une triple alliance Apollonia – Kallatis – Istros. D'autre part, au vu du décret précédemment commenté (IGB I2 388), il convient d'ajouter Mésambria. En plus, dans un décret fragmentaire de Mésambria, disparu depuis longtemps (IGB I2 316), il est question, dans un contexte malheureusement lacunaire, de la ª - Kall?ºatianw'n swthriva, tout comme dans le décret en l'honneur de Stratônax.

Tout dépend des l. 9-12. À la l. 11, la solution proposée par Vinogradov (pot∆ ∆Isªtrianouv"º, au lieu de poti; Sª - - º des éditions antérieures) et que j'ai reprise dans le corpus, continue à me paraître convaincante. Il s'agissait donc d'une guerre « contre les Istriens ». D'autre part, à la l. 10, le groupe de lettres ASABIQ, parfaitement visible, n'a guère de sens252. Une faute de lapicide est hautement à supposer – il y en a encore d'autres plus bas253 – et je corrige, toujours sur les traces de Vinogradov, uJpo; a{ãmÃa Biqªunw'n kai; - - ºivwn. Enfin, le nom du roi qui figurait au commencement de la l. 10 demeure inconnu.

Avant d'insister sur le contexte de cette alliance des villes ouest-pontiques, il convient de prêter attention à une série d'inscriptions qui révèlent des opérations de sauvetage de captifs de guerre. En mettant à profit une suggestion de Vinogradov, je suis parvenu à rapprocher deux fragments d'inscriptions d'Istros (ISM 4 et 16). Il en résulte un décret daté, d'après les caractères paléographiques, du milieu du IIIe s. av. J.-C., en l'honneur d'un médecin ayant racheté des captifs istriens à Tomis (l. 15)258. Or,

254 Cela me semble presque impossible. Il faudrait d'abord attendre que l'on prouve définitivement une implication de Gonatas dans la « deuxième guerre de Syrie ». Même objection chez Ruscu 2002, p. 157. 255 En plus, Vinogradov date la rencontre entre Gonatas et les ambassadeurs de 255 et imagine qu'elle se déroulât sur la côte égéenne de l'Asie Mineure. 256 Ruscu 2002, p. 158-161, estime que l'inscription concerne éventuellement une autre guerre, entre Callatis et Istros, qui n'aurait aucun rapport avec les événements discutés ici et qu'elle date de l'époque de Ptolémée III Évergète. 257 Cela est d'autant plus difficile d'imaginer que l'alliance entre Istros et Apollonia est encore clairement évoquée au IIe s. av. J.-C. par le décret ISM I 64 = IGB I2 388 bis ; cf. Pippidi 1984, p. 164-176. Voir aussi ISM I 30 (avec les suppléments de J. et L. Robert, Bull. ép. 1984, 268). 258 Avram 2000-2001, p. 339-344 ; cf. Bull. ép. 2003, 390.

249

Idée défendue par Robert 1959, p. 217 et suiv. Cf. Bull. ép. 2002, 302 (Ph. Gauthier). Sur l'interprétation historique, voir les remarques de Ruscu 2002, p. 155-158. 251 Manov 2001. 252 Sans avoir pu connaître ISM III, Manov 2001 imagine une confrontation entre Bastarnes (ou Gètes) et le roi scythe Sariakès (!). À la p. 66, Manov restitue les l. 10-12 : kai; ajºxiªwqºevnto" uJpo; Asabiqª(uo" ?) a[rconto" Bastarnºw'n (vel Getºw'n), o{pw" luvsh/ to;n poti; Sªariakaºn ejnestakovta povlemon ktl. Avant toute objection d'ordre épigraphique, il convient de signaler que la date attribuée par l'auteur à ces événements (187/5–167/5 av. J.-C.) ne s'accorde pas avec la date visiblement plus haute du décret. 253 Voir l. 23 et 31, avec le commentaire, ISM III 7. 250

262

ALEXANDRU AVRAM: KALLATIS c'est justement la mention de Tomis dans ce contexte qui, compte tenu de la date suggérée par l'écriture, autorise la mise en rapport de ce décret avec la même guerre pour l'emporion Tomis.

Lysimacheia, dont le traité la reliant aux Séleucides pourrait dater de l'époque d'Antiochos Ier ou des premières années du règne d'Antiochos II263. Et puis, les alliances avec les roitelets thraces, dont Polyen n'a retenu que les anecdotes, ne cacheraient-elles pas les jalons de la même politique ? Les princes thraces à cuirasses et à armes en or et argent n'étaient surtout pas Térès et Dromichaitès ; ce n'est que Polyen qui, sans trop se soucier du contexte, aura donné aux alliés d'Antiochos II des noms de Thraces censés célèbres264. N'empêche que la tradition utilisée par Polyen eût fait état de subsides et d'autres privilèges accordés aux princes locaux, afin que ceux-ci se rangent du côté d'Antiochos. Il y en aurait même un candidat : Adaios, un prince qui régnait sur le domaine de Cypséla265 et frappait des bronzes266. L'iconographie de ces monnaies renvoie à une autre série de bronzes, frappés cette fois-ci par Agathopolis267, un site que l'on est aujourd'hui à même à localiser à Akhtopol (au sud d'Apollonia) et qui pourrait être une fondation séleucide268 ; à moins qu'il ne s'agisse d'une

Il n'en va pas forcément de même pour trois autres documents fragmentaires datant, à juger toujours uniquement d'après l'écriture, de la même époque et qui pourraient appartenir au même contexte : un décret d'Apollonia en l'honneur du Callatien Aisias (IGB I2 391)259, qui est en état de confirmer les bonnes relations entre Kallatis et Apollonia ; un monument honorifique de Kallatis (ISM III 106) qui mentionne, selon toute vraisemblance, un rachat de captifs istriens ; un décret d'Istros (ISM I 24) dont le contexte demeure peu clair260. Même si on laisse de côté les inscriptions moins sûres, le dossier épigraphique que je viens de présenter est en état d'enrichir considérablement nos connaissances sur les événements qui se sont déroulés en Thrace et dans le Pont Gauche dans les années cinquante du IIIe s. av. J.-C. La guerre pour l'emporion Tomis mentionnée par Memnon, et dont les principaux efforts avaient été supportés par Kallatis et Istros, a impliqué plus qu'une cité de la région. Tout plaide, en effet, pour une alliance des villes du Pont Gauche, avec Apollonia, Mésambria et peut-être encore d'autres, tout comme naguère, à l'heure de l'émeute des cités ouest-pontiques contre Lysimaque. En plus, il est désormais certain que derrière toute cette mobilisation se trouvait Antiochos II. Aurait-il hérité de quelques possessions en Thrace tombées aux mains des Séleucides après que Séleucos Ier eut raison de Lysimaque, comme le supposait Niese ?261. Rien ne le prouve pour l'instant ; néanmoins, rien ne s'oppose non plus à ce que les Séleucides eussent cultivé de bonnes relations avec les villes ouest-pontiques262. C'est ce qu'avait fait Antigone le Borgne en soutenant activement les insurgés du Pont Gauche contre Lysimaque (voir plus haut) et c'est peut-être encore ce qui serait venu à l'esprit des deux premiers Antiochos, ne serait-ce que pour bénéficier dans la région pontique d'un contrepoids aux poussées du royaume de Bithynie et des villes de la « Ligue du Nord ».

263

Ferrary et Gauthier 1981. En conclusion de leur enquête approfondie, les auteurs estiment prudemment que « le “roi Antiochos” du traité exposé à Ilion est sans doute Antiochos I (281-261), peut-être Antiochos II dans les premières années de son règne (vers 260 ou peu après). En revanche, les brèves périodes de domination séleucide sur Lysimacheia, d'abord sous Antiochos II (vers 250-246), puis sous Hiérax (vers 230 ?) paraissent devoir être écartées » (p. 343-344).L'installation de l'atelier royal séleucide à Lysimacheia (Newell 1941, nos 1610-1613 ; Olçay et Seyrig 1965, n° 104 ; cf. Ferrary et Gauthier 1981, p. 342) ne peut être que contemporaine de la campagne d'Antiochos II en Thrace. Si, sur les traces de Beloch et de Will, on date cette campagne d'une époque postérieure à la deuxième guerre de Syrie, l'atelier royal séleucide de Lysimacheia aurait été mis en place vers 250. Si, en revanche, l'intervention d'Antiochos est contemporaine des dernières années de la deuxième guerre de Syrie, soit de 255-254 av. J.C. (comme je tente de le suggérer), l'atelier y eût été installé vers cette époque, et à une durée, on le comprend, éphémère. Même dans ce dernier cas, le traité entre « Antiochos » et Lysimacheia serait, de toute façon, antérieur à l'arrivée d'Antiochos II en Thrace, soit antérieur à 255. 264 Térès avait été le fondateur du royaume des Odryses, alors que Dromichaitès, le roi gète, était devenu célèbre grâce à sa résistance à Lysimaque. On cherchera donc en vain des précisions prosopographiques. Droysen 1877, p. 317, estimait, cependant, que le Dromichaitès du texte de Polyen était (« vielleicht ») un descendant de l'ancien adversaire de Lysimaque. 265 Ceci résulte d'un fragment de Damoxénos (un représentant de la Nouvelle Comédie ; cf. Sud., s. v. Damovxeno", ∆Aqhnai'o", kwmikov"), cité par Athénée (XI 468-469). Voir Niese 1900 ; Buraselis 1982, p. 122-123 et 139. Adaios sera capturé et tué par Ptolémée III. 266 Youroukova 1976, p. 31-32. 267 Velkov 1994 ; Youroukova 1995 ; Stancomb 1998. 268 À part l'évidence numismatique, il n'y a guère de témoignages littéraires ou épigraphiques d'Agathopolis. Il faut attendre l'année 812 ap. J.-C. (!) et une inscription de Pliska. Les bronzes d'Agathopolis (aux légendes AGA, AGAQ, AGAQO, etc.) sont assez rares, et ce n'est que dans le dernier temps que des monnaies trouvées aux environs d'Akhtopol (en Bulgarie, au sud d'Apollonia) vinrent trancher la question de la localisation (suggérée d'ailleurs par la continuité toponymique Agathopolis – Akhtopol). Voir Oppermann 2004, p. 180, avec la bibliographie.- Eu égard aux similitudes iconographiques manifestes entre les bronzes frappés par le dynaste Adaios et les monnaies d'Agathopolis, Stancomb 1998, p. 337, suggère une hypothèse séduisante : « It is possible that Adaeus was an adherent of Antiochos II and remained in a part of Thrace when the Seleucid garrisons withdrew. If this connection is correct, then the regal portrait head on the autonomous coins of Agathopolis may be that of Adaeus himself ». D'autre part, le toponyme Aujlaivou tei'co", légué par la

Dans ces circonstances, la campagne d'Antiochos en Thrace relève d'un enjeu plus large qu'on ne le croyait. Car, en effet, à quoi bon s'aventurer en Thrace, sinon que pour s'assurer une base de prise à revers après ce qui se fût passé en Asie Mineure ? La politique d'Antiochos en Thrace semble avoir été complexe. Nous avons déjà vu quelle aura été son attitude à l'égard des villes grecques du Pont Gauche. Il en serait allé de même pour 259

Quelques nouvelles restitutions chez Avram 2002b. Cf. les doutes exprimés par Bielman 1994, qui reprend, avec quelques petits changements, ce document sous le n° 67. 261 Niese 1899, p. 74 et n. 3. 262 Cf. Heinen 1972, p. 45 : « Es ist von vornherein nicht ausgeschlossen, daŞ der Nachfolger Seleukos' I. in einigen Punkten Thrakiens FuŞ gefaŞt haben könnte. In dem groŞen Umfange, wie das Niese annimmt, ist dies jedoch sicherlich nicht geschehen ». 260

263

ANCIENT GREEK COLONIES IN THE BLACK SEA 2 fondation de Lysimaque (le nom Agathopolis, n'aurait-il pas quelque rapport avec Agathoclès, le fils de Lysimaque ?)269.

activités lagides en mer Noire se laissent percevoir, à vrai dire, à tous ces moments, et il serait en principe difficile d'en exprimer une préférence. D'autre part, à relire Denys de Byzance, il ne me semble pas forcément obligatoire de concentrer toutes les libéralités de Philadelphe à un seul moment. Il est hautement probable que « la chôra en Asie » avait été accordée à Byzance lors du traité de 279 av. J.-C. entre Nicomède Ier et les Galates (Memnon, F 11, 2)275, quasiment contemporain de la trêve conclue entre Philadelphe et Antiochos Ier. Mais l'aide en céréales, projectiles276 et argent suppose, à mon avis, un autre contexte, et je pense au siège mis par Antiochos II.

Un tel effort guerrier et diplomatique d'Antiochos II ne peut s'expliquer que si l’on trouve un adversaire digne du Séleucide ; et je ne pense pas que cet adversaire pût être Byzance, même pas la « Ligue du Nord » dans son ensemble. En s'attaquant aux Callatiens, les Byzantins, qui n'avaient jamais montré quelque intérêt à la mer Noire, sinon que pour en contrôler l'accès, et qui n'en auront guère plus d'envie désormais270, faisaient, eux aussi, le jeu de quelqu'un de plus puissant : Ptolémée II Philadelphe. Aussi discrète que fût l'action du Lagide, les sources sont en état d'en dévoiler la portée.

À en suivre Memnon (F 17 [25]), un Ptolémée, devenu « au sommet de son bonheur » (eij" a[kron eujdaimoniva") évergète des cités, accorda des dons de blé à Héraclée du Pont et y fit même ériger un temple d'Héraclès277. Il est séduisant de relier ces donations faites à Héraclée et à d'autres villes (à comprendre, à coup sûr, de la mer Noire, mieux encore, de la « Ligue du Nord ») aux dons de céréales accordés à Byzance, dont parle Denys de Byzance278. Ceci dit, le fragment 17 de Memnon (le dernier à relater des événements ayant eu lieu avant l'arrivée des Romains et, à la fois, le dernier à dépendre

Il conviendrait, en effet, de rompre un silence imposé par la filière Nymphis – Memnon (F 15) – Photios. L'intervention des 40 trières envoyées par les Héracléotes au secours des Byzantins assiégés par Antiochos II, aurait-elle suffi pour délivrer Byzance ? Le texte dit que « la guerre s'arrêta aux menaces ». N'en serait-il pas question d'une intervention encore plus importante, c'està-dire de la part de Ptolémée II ? Cela peut être indirectement prouvé par la divinisation de Ptolémée II à Byzance, qui doit, à mon avis, dater de cette époque. En effet, un géographe local du IIe s. ap. J.C., Denys de Byzance, mentionne un temple consacré à Ptolémée II Philadelphe, lequel avait donné aux Byzantins « une chôra en Asie, plusieurs myriades [sc. d'artabes ?] de céréales, des projectiles et de l'argent »271. Les savants modernes ont commencé par dater ces libéralités de la deuxième272 ou de la première guerre de Syrie273, avant de se rallier à la solution avancée par Chr. Habicht, selon lequel les donations de Philadelphe auraient été en rapport avec une expédition navale égyptienne en mer Noire en 280/279 av. J.-C.274 Des

par Kotsidu 2000, p. 298-299, n° 202. Contra : Vinogradov 1999, p. 288 et suiv. 275 Niese 1899, p. 81 et 136, n. 5. Habicht 1970, p. 120, donne des arguments décisifs pour une date très proche (notamment le parallèle avec la donation faite par Ptolémée II Philadelphe à Milet en 279/8 av. J.-C. Voir maintenant tout le dossier épigraphique chez Bringmann et von Steuben (éds.) 1995, p. 324-329, n° 275). Sur ces possesions asiatiques de Byzance, voir, hormis le témoignage de Denys, Polybe, IV 50, 4, ainsi que Strabon, XII 8, 11 (kai; th'" Daskulivtido" livmnh" ta; me;n e[cousin ejkei'noi [sc. les Cyzicènesţ, ta; de; Buzavntioi). Tous ces passages sont réunis par Corsten 1987, p. 48. Il faut y ajouter un témoignage indirect, Phylarchos, FGrHist II 81 F 8 : Buzantivou" ou{tw Biqunw'n despovsai w}" Lakedaimonivou" tw'n eiJlwvtwn ; cf. Papazoglou 1997, p. 50-52. Car, s'il s'agit de Bithyniens, on les chercherait plutôt du côté asiatique. Il reste, néanmoins, à s'interroger de quelle source Ptolémée II avait-il taillé cette cwvra aux Byzantins. Car, à l'époque, les Lagides n'étaient encore maîtres de rien dans la zone en question : Bagnall 1976, p. 159-162 ; Gauthier 1979. Les Galates avaient causé, il est vrai, beaucoup de malheurs aux Byzantins, mais une fois l'alliance entre Nicomède Ier et les Galates conclue, un compromis aurait été trouvé entre ces derniers (déplacés, pour la plupart, en Asie Mineure) et Byzance. Dans ces circonstances, Ptolémée II, l'allié de la « Ligue du Nord » (donc, entre autres, de Byzance), aurait sans doute pu intercéder en faveur des Byzantins auprès de Nicomède. 276 Les bevlh du texte de Denys de Byzance – sagittas (flèches) dans l'édition latine médiévale – peuvent, il est vrai, êtres pris au sens général d'armes. Cependant, j'en entendrais, peut-être plus exactement, des projectiles, ce qui irait mieux avec une riposte pendant un siège. 277 F. Jacoby, FGrHist III 434, commentaire, p. 278, pensait prudemment à Ptolémée III Évergète, alors que Otto 1931, p. 408-409, n. 17, préférait y voir Ptolémée II et en comprenait le « sommet du bonheur » dans les années soixante-dix. Habicht 1970, p. 119, n. 14, qui date ce don de 280/279, même si « die Nachricht ist von Memnon an späterer Stelle, auŞerhalb des chronologischen Zusammenhanges, gegeben », estime que « diese Wertung [eij" a[kron eujdaimoniva"] vom Standpunkt der pontischen Gemeinden aus erfolgt, die diesen Höhepunkt zu der Zeit als gegeben ansahen, in der sie selbst die ptolemäische Aktivität am stärksten spürten ». Ce qui demeure également valable pour les années cinquante, comme on le verra. Habicht est encore une fois suivi par Bringmann et von Steuben (éds.) 1995, p. 278, n° 243. 278 Habicht 1970, p. 119.

tradition manuscrite des périples de la mer Noire (Arrien, Peripl. Pont. Eux. 36 ; Anon. Peripl. Pont. Eux. 87) et que l'on a constamment identifié à Agathopolis, pourrait être, dans ces conditions, ∆Adaivou tei'co" : Avram 2002b, p. 22. 269 Cohen 1995, p. 81-82. 270 À peine faut-il remarquer que, dans les sources, il ne sera jamais question d'un « monopole » de Byzance à Tomis, ce qui indique une fois de plus que l'enjeu du conflit est à chercher ailleurs. Quant aux péages du Bosphore, introduits par les Byzantins et qui provoquèrent la riposte de Rhodes et la guerre de 220 av. J.-C., il résulte clairement de Polybe (IV 45-46) qu'il ne s'agissait, aux yeux des Byzantins, que d'un palliatif destiné à alimenter leur caisse, constamment mise à l'épreuve par les tributs versés aux Celtes. Il n'est donc point question d'une stratégie « pontique ». 271 Anaplous Bospori 41 (GGM II 34 = éd. R. Güngerich, 1927, p. 17, 11 et suiv.). 272 C. Müller, GGM II 34, commentaire ; Merle 1916, p. 56 ; Newskaja 1955, p. 152 ; Saprykin 1997, p. 176. 273 Otto 1931, p. 409, peu après 275 av. J.-C. (« vielleicht »). À la note 18 de la même page, Otto accepte comme date alternative 280/279 (ce qui sera repris, avec des arguments supplémentaires par Chr. Habicht : voir note suivante). 274 Habicht 1970, p. 116-121 Ses raisonnements sont entièrement acceptés par Bringmann et von Steuben (éds.) 1995, p. 271, n° 239, et

264

ALEXANDRU AVRAM: KALLATIS des informations tirées de Nymphis) est trop éloigné du fragment 11, lequel concerne les années 280/279 av. J.-C. Nymphis et/ou Memnon, seraient-ils soudainement revenus à cette époque après avoir fait avancer leur récit jusque vers le milieu des années cinquante ? C'est donc la position du fragment F 17 qui, à mon esprit, suggère une date plus basse pour les donations accordées à Héraclée du Pont et, autant qu'on en accepte le synchronisme, pour les mêmes libéralités envers Byzance279.

mentionne, on l'a vu, une demande adressée à un roi de mettre un terme à la guerre contre les Istriens. Serait-ce faire violence au texte si on suggère que le roi en question soit justement Ptolémée (donc, l. 9-12 : tou' te basªilevo" Ptolemaivouº aj≥xiªwºq≥evnto" uJpo; a{ãmÃa Biqªunw'n kai; - - ºivwn, o{pw" luvsh/ to;n pot∆ ∆Isªtrianou;" h[dºh ejnestakovta povlemon) et que les Bithyniens demandassent au roi de finir avec l'aventure contre Istros, afin de se consacrer le plus vite possible à l'expédition en Bithynie ?

Enfin verrais-je dans l'aide en armes (projectiles) dont parle Denys la réponse à un danger plus sérieux que les attaques répétées des Celtes (Galates) environnants, lesquels pillaient, il est vrai, les terres des Byzantins, mais, faute de moyens poliorcétiques, ne pouvaient guère prétendre s'emparer de la ville. Il ne reste alors que le siège mis par Antiochos II pour expliquer une telle intervention. Tout bien considéré, j'estime que, malgré l'absence de sources explicites, Ptolémée II aida d'une façon décisive la ville assiégée par Antiochos II ; la divinisation de Philadelphe à Byzance en fut donc la conséquence.

Les succès de Ptolémée II Philadelphe en mer Noire ne vont pas forcément de pair avec une mainmise en Thrace. Il est, pour l'instant, acquis qu'au tout début de son règne, vers 246/5 av. J.-C., Ptolémée III Évergète se rendit maître de « l'Hellespont et de la Thrace »282 : une action dont on ignore, à vrai dire, toute circonstance. Cela étant, il nous faut expliquer ce qui se passa en Thrace entre 255/4 (intervention victorieuse de Ptolémée II à Byzance) et 246/5 av. J.-C. (conquête de la Thrace hellespontique par Ptolémée III)283. Tout d'abord, le siège manqué de Byzance ne signifiait pas pour Antiochos II la perte de toutes ses positions en Thrace, et encore moins que celles-ci eussent été bel et bien occupées par Ptolémée II. On sait que la deuxième guerre de Syrie finit plutôt mal pour Ptolémée II284, et il reste peu de chances que ses positions en Thrace en constituassent une exception. D'ailleurs, l'activité de l'atelier monétaire séleucide de Lysimacheia suppose une certaine durée, aussi courte qu'elle ait pu être. Il est donc à supposer que seul le roi séleucide se retirât (avec le gros de ses troupes) vers 255/4 av. J.-C., tout en laissant sur certaines places ses stratèges (voir plus haut, ce qui pourrait résulter de l'inscription IGB I2 388). Les positions séleucides n'auraient été donc compromises que dix ans plus tard, dans la débâcle du début de la troisième guerre de Syrie.

La portée de l'action de Ptolémée dans une région encore plus éloignée est révélée par d'autres documents. La présence de la flotte lagide en mer Noire, voire de son navire-amiral, Isis, est attestée par la fresque mise à jour à Nymphaion, en Crimée280. Dans ces conditions, il n'y a qu'un pas à franchir pour expliquer l'ambassade du roi du Bosphore, Pairisadès II, en Égypte, révélée par un papyrus des archives de Zénon281. Ce dernier document est, heureusement, exactement daté (peu avant le 21 septembre 254 av. J.-C.) ; ce qui, à condition que l'on comprenne cette ambassade comme la réponse courtoise des rois du Bosphore à la visite faite par Isis à Nymphaion, autorise à dater la démonstration navale lagide en mer Noire de quelques mois plus tôt, soit sans doute du printemps 254. À continuer le raisonnement, le siège de Byzance par Antiochos II aurait été levé vers la fin de 255 ou au printemps 254 au plus tard ; ce qui, d'un coup, aura ouvert aux troupes ptolémaïques la route vers la Bithynie pour intervenir contre Ziaèlas (cf. Memnon, F 14 [22], 2) et à la flotte la porte de la mer Noire. Il va de soi que tout cela aura entraîné la défaite des Callatiens et de leurs alliés ouest-pontiques. Le décret callatien en l'honneur des Apolloniates et de Stratônax (ISM III 7)

Deuxièmement, si les sources sont en état, on l'a vu, de plaider pour les succès de la flotte lagide, cela n'a, du point de vue strictement militaire, rien à voir avec une possible campagne terrestre, et encore moins en Thrace, une terre renommée difficile à conquérir. En plus, sans encore tenir les îles du nord de l'Égée (Samothrace et Thasos notamment), il était impossible de songer à s'aventurer sur le continent thrace.

279 Un autre argument pourrait être avancé dans la même direction. Selon Memnon (F 11, 1), Héraclée du Pont avait fait don aux Byzantins de 4000 statères lorsque ceux-ci avaient été attaqués par les Celtes vers 280/279 av. J.-C. (pour la solidarité internationale avec le sort de Byzance, voir aussi Polybe, IV 38, 10) ; est-ce alors la même Héraclée, capable d'une telle aide, qui aurait eu, à son tour, besoin du blé de Ptolémée (F 17) ? En revanche, la prospérité d'Héraclée n'eût pas été la même après 255, lorsque son territoire fut saccagé par les Galates (Memnon F 14, 3), et alors le blé de Ptolémée n'eût pas été inutile.Voir, pour tous ces arguments, Avram 2004. 280 Le navire égyptien nommé Isis est manifestement le navire-amiral de la flotte lagide : Grach 1984 (SEG XXXIV 756); 1987, avec les observations de Ju.G. Vinogradov, Bull. ép. 1990, 590, et de M. Sève, Bull. ép. 2002, 70. Cf. Vinogradov 1999 ; Höckmann 1999. 281 SB 7263 = Skeat 1974, p. 62-66, n° 1973.

282

C'est ce qui résulte sans conteste de l'inscription triomphale de Ptolémée III d'Adoulis (OGIS 54), laquelle fait soigneusement la différence entre ce que Ptolémée III avait hérité de son père et ce qu'il acquit lui-même. 283 Il va de soi qu'une telle question ne saurait être posée si l'on accepte une date plus tardive pour le siège de Byzance et la campagne d'Antiochos II en Thrace, vers la fin du règne du roi séleucide (notamment Beloch et Will). Car il y aurait alors une succession absolue : Antiochos serait mort sur son chemin de retour de Thrace ; à Ptolémée III de le remplacer ici. Cependant, comme j'ai essayé de plaider pour une chronologie plus haute, j'assume ce décalage entre les premiers succès de Ptolémée II en Thrace et l'installation définitive de son fils dans la même région. 284 Will 1979, p. 239.

265

ANCIENT GREEK COLONIES IN THE BLACK SEA 2 Troisièmement, les projets lagides en Thrace s'opposaient non seulement à Antiochos II mais également à Antigone II Gonatas, lequel n'aurait jamais accepté qu'il fût pris à revers par son rival déclaré.

d'Antiochos : il entreprit d'assiéger Byzance, afin d'essayer de dégager la pression sur Kallatis et ses alliés. L'intervention d'Héraclée du Pont et de la flotte lagide mit fin à l'aventure d'Antiochos et ouvrit le Pont-Euxin à Ptolémée. D'un coup, celui-ci sera parvenu à pénétrer en Bithynie, et l'on ne peut que regretter notre ignorance à ce propos. Dans le texte de Memnon il est vaguement question d'une armée mise à la disposition des Bithyniens par les tuteurs des rois mineurs, et seuls les Héracléotes sont nommément mentionnés. Cependant, tout porte à croire que, comme pour le siège de Byzance, l'action des troupes ptolémaïques eût été plus consistante que l'intervention d'Héraclée. Et puis, la mise à sac du territoire d'Héraclée qui s'ensuivit, ne s'expliquerait-elle par une retraite prématurée des soldats de Philadelphe ?

Quatrièmement, et dernièrement, il conviendrait de tenir compte de la réaction des dynastes thraces déjà ralliés à la cause d'Antiochos II (Polyen IV 16). Une notice conservée de Trogue-Pompée (Prol. 27) sur Adaios, le prince de Cypséla que j'ai mentionné plus haut, est doublement instructive à ce propos : ut Ptolomaeus Adaeum (mss. : eum ou adeum) denuo captum interfecerat et Antigonus proelio nauali Oprona [Sophrona ?] uicerit. D'une part, ce prologue assure la concordance chronologique entre la bataille d'Andros (sans doute 246/5 av. J.-C.) et l'exécution d'Adaios sur l'ordre de Ptolémée (III), qui s'insère d'ailleurs très bien dans le contexte de la conquête de la Thrace hellespontique par le roi lagide, révélée par l'inscription triomphale d'Adoulis (OGIS 54). Autant dire que la poussée lagide en Thrace se heurtait à la résistance, à la fois, de Gonatas et de certains princes thraces. Action concertée ? Sans doute, mais impossible à prouver. D'autre part, il résulte du texte (denuo) qu'Adaios fut « de nouveau » capturé ; ce qui prouve qu'il fit au moins une autre expérience pareille, ce qui ne peut s'expliquer que par une opposition constante aux Ptolémées (Philadelphe et, après 246, Évergète)285. Vu ce que j'ai avancé plus haut sur l'alliance hautement probable entre Antiochos II et Adaios (et encore d'autres comme lui), il serait à comprendre que les positions séleucides en Thrace avaient été défendues avec un certain succès jusqu'à l'avènement de Ptolémée III, entre autres, par des princes locaux. Tout cela peut expliquer d'une manière satisfaisante la décennie que les Ptolémées ont mise pour mettre un pied ferme en Thrace depuis leur première intervention dans la région.

Quoi qu'il en soit, j'estime qu'il est permis de parler dès maintenant du commencement d'une remarquable domination de Ptolémée II Philadelphe en mer Noire. Car les résultats sont là : contrôle de la côte méridionale, alliance avec Pairisadès II, roi du Bosphore, et dissolution de l'alliance entre les villes de la côte occidentale et les Séleucides. Quant à Samothrace, Thasos et la Thrace hellespontique, il faudra attendre les exploits des premières années du règne de Ptolémée III Évergète. J'en essaierais même un croquis de chronologie : après 260 (sans doute vers 256 av. J.-C.) : commencement de la guerre de la succession de Bithynie (Memnon F 14 [22] 1) ; 255 : campagne d'Antiochos II en Thrace, alliance avec les villes grecques (IGB I2 388) et avec certains dynastes thraces (Polyen, IV 16 ; monnaies d'Adaios) ; Byzance, fidèle à Ptolémée II, attaque Tomis pour compromettre l'alliance d'Antiochos avec les villes grecques ouest-pontiques et fait appel, par conséquent, à Héraclée du Pont, laquelle était son alliée dans le cadre de la « Ligue du Nord » (Memnon F 13 [21], 1) ; les Callatiens, faisant état de leur ascendance (« ceux-ci étaient des colons des Héracléotes », précise Memnon) et tout en connaissant les rapports entre Héraclée et Byzance, intercèdent, eux aussi, auprès des Héracléotes (Memnon F 13 [21], 2) ; pour aider Kallatis et ses autres alliés, Antiochos II se met à assiéger Byzance, laquelle est soutenue, dans un premier temps, par une flotte héracléote (Memnon, F 15 [22]) ; 254, au printemps : Byzance est délivrée à la suite de l'intervention de la flotte lagide ; Ptolémée est divinisé à Byzance (Denys de Byzance, Anaplous Bospori 41 = GGM II 34) ; la flotte lagide continue son expédition en mer Noire ; défection de Kallatis qui demande l'armistice (dialuvsei" : Memnon F 13 [21], 3) par l'intermédiaire d'Apollonia (mission de Stratônax) ; Istros continue à résister, lorsque les Bithyniens demandent à Ptolémée de mettre un terme à cette aventure secondaire (ISM III 7, l. 10-12) et de se concentrer sur la Bithynie ; fin du conflit peri; Tovmew" tou' ejmporivou ;

De toute façon, il me semble que les informations disparates dont nous disposons grâce à Memnon, Polyen et aux inscriptions peuvent s'expliquer d'une manière cohérente si on accepte une confrontation entre Antiochos II et Ptolémée II en Thrace et en mer Noire : autrement dit, un volet secondaire de la deuxième guerre de Syrie. Afin de verrouiller les Détroits et d'empêcher Ptolémée II d'utiliser des bases à Byzance et notamment à Héraclée du Pont, laquelle aurait favorisé l'invasion de la Bithynie, Antiochos II entreprit une campagne en Thrace, pendant laquelle il déploya une intense activité diplomatique (alliances avec les villes grecques et avec certains dynastes thraces, peut-être aussi quelques fondations) et militaire (luttes contre les Astes et, en général, contre les dynastes thraces non encore ralliés à sa cause et qui étaient en même temps les ennemis des cités grecques). Réaction de Ptolémée II : il poussa Byzance à attaquer Tomis pour empêcher l'engagement des cités grecques du côté d'Antiochos. Contre-réaction

285

Cf. Niese 1900, p. 72, n. 2.

266

ALEXANDRU AVRAM: KALLATIS 254, de l'été à l'automne : intervention des adversaires de Ziaèlas en Bithynie (Memnon F 14 [22], 2-3), sans doute appuyée par les troupes ptolémaïques ; dans ce même contexte, Ptolémée accorde des donations à Héraclée du Pont (Memnon F 17 [24]) ; simultanément, la démonstration navale lagide en mer Noire continue jusqu'en Crimée (fresque de Nymphaion) ; alliance conclue avec Pairisadès II, roi du Bosphore, scellée par l'ambassade spartocide en Égypte (peu avant le 21 septembre : P.Lond. VII 1973) ; 253 : fin de la deuxième guerre de Syrie et de toutes les opérations militaires connexes (guerre de Bithynie comprise) ; les captifs de Tomis sont libérés (ISM I 4 + 16 et peut-être aussi ISM III 106 et ISM I 24).

Même si les données statistiques sur les timbres d'Héraclée du Pont font pour l'instant défaut, un coup d'œil général montre que l'image est absolument comparable à la situation révélée par le comportement des importations amphoriques en provenance de Thasos, Sinope ou Rhodes. On a parfois opposé au témoignage de Memnon sur le déclin de Kallatis le nombre assez grand de décrets callatiens accordant la proxénie à des étrangers291. Sauf que la proxénie n'est pas forcément « commerciale », et encore moins une preuve pour la prospérité de telle ville à une telle époque292. Si, par exemple, la qualité de proxène est accordée à un étranger qui aurait aidé les Callatiens, en leur vendant des produits à des prix avantageux – comme je suis enclin à interpréter les décrets ISM III 12 et 13 dont je crois avoir identifié les titulaires293 – les documents en question suggèrent plutôt une vision moins optimiste. Quant aux Callatiens ayant reçu la qualité de proxènes, les raisons n'en sont données que par un décret de Mésambria (IGB I2 307 bis) et par un autre d'Istros (ISM I 9). Dans le premier, il est question d'un instituteur (didavskalo"). Istros accorde à son tour la proxénie à un marchand callatien qui avait volontairement renoncé aux intérêts que lui devait la ville (400 statères sur une dette initiale de 300 statères), tout en acceptant de faire échelonner les versements d'une façon favorable aux Istriens ; le document est donc tout aussi concluant pour la fortune d'un marchand callatien que pour l'état lamentable des finances d'Istros.

À en croire Memnon, après leur défaite dans cette guerre que je viens de présenter en détail, les Callatiens ne furent « presque jamais en état de se remettre de ce malheur ». Ce qui est, sans l'ombre d'un doute, une exagération. Les quelques données archéologiques et épigraphiques semblent suggérer un certain déclin de Kallatis pendant la seconde moitié du IIIe s., ce qui irait de pair avec les dires de Memnon. Pour autant que l'on puisse juger d'après le traitement statistique des données fournies par les timbres amphoriques, les importations vinaires thasiennes – qui n'avaient pas cessé d'augmenter constamment depuis ca. 370, pour atteindre le maximum vers 275-255, connaissent une chute évidente juste après ca. 255 (76,35 % par rapport au coefficient antérieur), pour disparaître ensuite pratiquement vers la fin du troisième quart du IIIe s.286 Encore plus significative est la chute des importations amphoriques sinopéennes. À l'intérieur de la période qui correspond aux groupes III, IV et aux sousgroupes Va–Vd (qui a fourni, à elle seule, 97,20 % des timbres sinopéens identifiés jusqu'à ce jour à Kallatis et qu'il conviendrait de dater grosso modo de 295-210), on constate sur les représentations graphiques données par N. Conovici un « pic très pointu » à l'époque des astynomes classés sous les nos 86-90 (peu avant la fin du IVe groupe chronologique)287, soit autour de 260288, suivi d'une chute extrêmement spectaculaire jusque vers la période des astynomes nos 96-100, soit autour de 240, à partir de laquelle commence une légère (et tout à fait éphémère) croissance289. Il en va de même pour les timbres rhodiens datés de ca. 240-205, le groupe le plus faiblement représenté parmi les trouvailles de Kallatis de tout l'ensemble des timbres en provenance de ce centre290.

Bien entendu, tous les Callatiens n'étaient pas en mesure d'accepter aussi sereinement – quels qu'en fussent les honneurs – de renoncer à un montant de 400 statères. Un décret quasi contemporain du thiase bachique concernant la souscription organisée afin de faire ériger un temple de Dionysos294 nous donne une idée sur les fortunes d'un échantillon de la population callatienne. Outre que la somme résultant de la souscription est plutôt dérisoire, les donations d'un statère sont suffisantes pour valoir aux souscripteurs les plus grands honneurs et en faire une catégorie privilégiée. À la différence d'Istros, qui a livré quelques beaux décrets concernant les relations de la ville avec les Gètes et les troubles provoqués par les attaques périodiques de ces derniers, les inscriptions de Kallatis sont muettes à ce propos. Même si on ajoute que les prospections archéologiques ont révélé l'existence de plusieurs sites datés des IVe–IIe siècles dans le territoire de Kallatis, il

timbres (4 % du total) de la deuxième période (ca. 240-205) ; cf. Avram, Conovici et Poenaru Bordea 1990, p. 115. 291 Pippidi 1975a, p. 125. Il y a, d'autre part, un nombre assez surprenant de Callatiens attestés à peu près partout dans le monde pontique et égéen, et même ailleurs, y compris comme proxènes de plusieurs cités : voir Doruţiu Boilă 1988 ; Ruscu 1996 ; ISM III, p. 185-187 (Prosopographie externe) ; Cojocaru 2004, p. 369-380. 292 Marek 1984 ; 1985. 293 Avram 1988a et ISM III 12 et 13, commentaires. 294 ISM III 35 = Jaccottet 2003 II, n° 54.

286

Avram 1996d, p. 45 et tableaux VIII-IX. 287 Conovici 1998, p. 177-181 et fig. 2-5. 288 Le quatrième groupe chronologique (qui, selon Conovici 1998, p. 39, finit avec l'astynome n° 93) pourrait dater de ca. 279-258. 289 Conovici 1998, p. 175-176, n. 550, avec des rectifications par rapport à ce qui avait été présenté par Avram, Conovici et Poenaru Bordea 1990. 290 Dans le lot publié par Gramatopol et Poenaru Bordea 1969, on compte 50 timbres rhodiens (42 % du total) antérieurs à ca. 240 et 2

267

ANCIENT GREEK COLONIES IN THE BLACK SEA 2 convient d'admettre que notre ignorance est à cet égard presque totale. En revanche, nous sommes en quelque sorte mieux renseignés sur la pénétration des monnaies callatiennes, notamment des statères aux types d'Alexandre et de Lysimaque, dans le monde gète d'audelà du Danube, en Moldavie méridionale et centrale où se trouvaient les centres du pouvoir indigène295. Aux IIIe et IIe siècles av. J.-C. la monnaie callatienne est ici mieux représentée que les émissions d'autres villes ouestpontiques296. Si les monnaies isolées trouvées dans des établissements gètes tels que Poiana297 permettent de circonscrire certaines voies du commerce, en revanche, les monnaies callatiennes identifiées dans la composition des trésors peuvent être interprétées plutôt comme des subsides versés aux dynastes gètes par Kallatis qui, à côté d'autres cités du Pont Gauche, était obligée de recourir à ce moyen pour faire garantir la sécurité de son territoire298.

prouinciam redacta, iugum excepit Romanum (Jordanès, Rom. 219). Cette information avait été considérée suspecte par les savants, avant qu'elle ne soit brillamment confirmée par « la loi de Delphes et de Cnide »303, dans laquelle il est, entre autres, question de l'obligation des propréteurs ou des proconsuls de Macédoine de se rendre eij" Cersovnhson Kaineikhvn te (col. IV 5 et suiv.), une région que T. Didius avait conquise et annexée : h}n Tivto" Dªeivdio"º polemw'n dorivkthton e[laben. L'expression Cersovnhson Kaineikhvn te n'est qu'une traduction maladroite de Chersonesum Caenicamque qui aurait figuré dans l'original latin : il s'agit donc de la Chersonèse thrace et de la soi-disant regio Caenica, qui s'étendait, semble-t-il, jusqu'à Périnthe304. C'est, à mon avis, dans ce contexte, ou plus exactement, dans l'intervalle compris entre la pacification de la région balkanique par Minucius Rufus (106 av. J.-C.) et la date de la lex de prouinciis praetoriis (101 ou 100 av. J.-C.) qu'il faut chercher la date du célèbre traité de Kallatis avec Rome, dont le hasard a choisi de nous léguer un fragment de l'exemplaire latin (CIL I2 2, 2676 = ISM III 1). Il s'agit, parmi tous les traités conclus par Rome avec des communautés hellénophones, du seul cas où la version latine est conservée, bien que d'une manière fragmentaire : ce qui en fait sans l'ombre d'un doute le fleuron de l'épigraphie callatienne305.

Le tableau change à partir de la fin du IIe s. av. J.-C. Il faut, tout d'abord, tenir compte de l'avance des légions romaines, illustrée à cette époque par une série d'expéditions menées par les proconsuls de Macédoine contre les Scordisques entre 114 et 107 av. J.-C.299 C'est notamment après les campagnes de M. Minucius Rufus (110-106), lequel célébra son triomphe en 106300, que la domination romaine commença à s'instaurer au nord de la Macédoine. Même si nos connaissances à cet égard reposent essentiellement sur des Fasti et des Breuiaria tardifs, il arrive parfois que les inscriptions s'en fassent l'écho : il s'agit, par exemple, des monuments consacrés à M. Minucius Rufus à Delphes et à Europos, en Macédoine301. Dans les deux textes, on trouve la formule nikhvsanta to;n pro;" Galavta" Skordivsta" kai; Bevssou" kai; tou;" loipou;" Qra'ika" povlemon, interprétée à juste raison comme se rapportant à deux expéditions différentes : la première, et la plus importante, contre les Scordisques (« Galates ») et la deuxième contre les Besses et « les autres Thraces ». Il est très probable que la lutte contre les tribus thraces fut livrée dans la région de l'Hébros.

L'alliance de Kallatis avec Rome fut cependant sans lendemain. Quelques années après, fort probablement dès les premières années du Ier s. av. J.-C., Kallatis entra, comme toutes les autres villes de la côte occidentale du Pont-Euxin, dans la sphère d'influence de Mithridate. En ce qui concerne Kallatis, on en ignore à la fois les circonstances et la date exacte. Il est sûr qu'à la veille de la première guerre mithridatique, à savoir en 89/8, toute la côte se trouvait déjà sous le contrôle de Mithridate. Faute de renseignements plus détaillés, il convient d'admettre que cette domination aura été mise en place au fur et à mesure pendant la première décennie du Ier s.306. Quant à la forme sous laquelle cette domination était exercée, il est question d'un réseau d'alliances conclues d'une manière individuelle avec chaque ville à part plutôt que d'une occupation violente. Il est fort probable que le roi du Pont avait passé des conventions avec Kallatis et

À son tour, le préteur Titus Didius mena une autre expédition contre les Thraces en 101302, à la suite de laquelle il fit annexer une partie de leur territoire à la Macédoine : ad postremum a Marco [lire Tito] Didio et ipsi [à savoir les Thraces] subacti et loca eorum in 295

Seyrig 1969, p. 40-45 ; Poenaru Bordea 1974a. Poenaru Bordea 1979, p. 49-51 ; Mihăilescu-Bîrliba 1990, p. 54 et 60. Il est pour autant difficile d'établir une hiérarchie des villes ouestpontiques à partir de l'activité monétaire de leurs ateliers, d'une part parce qu'on ignore les quantités réellement monnayées, d'autre part, parce que la frappe des monnaies n'est pas le seul critère pour se prononcer sur le niveau économique d'une cité : voir de Callataÿ 1997, p. 145-146. 297 Mihăilescu-Bîrliba 1990, p. 54. 298 Poenaru Bordea 1974a, p. 121 ; Price 1991, p. 176 ; Preda 1998, p. 78. 299 Papazoglou 1979, p. 313-316. 300 Sarikakis 1971, p. 60-63. 301 Delphes : SIG3 710 ; Europos : Kougeas 1932. 302 Papazoglou 1978, p. 304-310 ; 1979, p. 314-315. 296

303 Blümel 1992, n° 31. Cf., pour le caractère de lex de prouinciis praetoriis, Ferrary 1977. 304 Loukopoulou, dans Hatzopoulos et Loukopoulou 1987, p. 75-78. 305 Hormis le commentaire consacré à cette inscription dans ISM III 1, voir Avram 1999a. Entre temps, l'essentiel de mes thèses a été accepté dans les comptes-rendus que L. de Libero, Historische Zeitschrift 273 (2001), p. 150-151, et N. Ehrhardt, Gnomon 76 (2004), p. 80-81, m'ont fait l'honneur de consacrer à mon opuscule. Ehrhardt estime que la date que j'ai proposée est plausible, même si l'intervalle ca. 114-107 av. J.-C. n'est pas à exclure. En revanche, Ruscu 2002, p. 127-141, revient à la datation autour de ca. 72/1 av. J.-C., vigoureusement défendue naguère par Pippidi 1973a = 1974a = 1975a, p. 172-181. 306 Pippidi 1971, p. 136-138 ; Salomone Gaggero 1978, p. 297.

268

ALEXANDRU AVRAM: KALLATIS les autres villes de la côte et qu'il y avait envoyé ses mercenaires307.

Toutefois, l'instauration de la domination romaine sur les villes grecques du Pont Gauche aura lieu quelques années plus tard, et ce sont justement les inscriptions de Kallatis qui en assurent une chronologie satisfaisante312. Il s'agit notamment d'une série de décrets du thiase bachique en l'honneur du notable Aristôn, « fondateur de la cité » (ktivsta" ta'" povlio" : ISM III 44), et quelques années plus tard, « pour la deuxième fois fondateur de la cité » (ISM III 45) et de son fils homonyme, ainsi que d'un monument honorifique pour P. Vinicius (futur consul en 2 ap. J.-C.), désigné comme « patron de la cité » (ISM III 57)313. L'étude détaillée de tous ces documents mène à la conclusion que, lors de la mission de P. Vinicius en Thrace et en Macédoine, Kallatis a obtenu des privilèges importants de la part du général romain. Il s'agit presque sûrement du statut de ciuitas foederata ; autant dire que l'ancien traité, dont il a été question plus haut, aura été renouvelé. Quant au Callatien qui aurait négocié le nouveau statut avec les autorités romaines, il est sûrement question d'Aristôn, le « fondateur de la cité » ; c'est ainsi que le titre de patron accordé à P. Vinicius et le titre de ktivsta" ta'" povlio" octroyé à Aristôn I s'éclaircissent l'un par l'autre.

La domination de Mithridate sur les villes de la côte occidentale de la mer Noire prit fin en 72/1. À la suite de la campagne menée par M. Terentius Varron Lucullus, le proconsul de Macédoine, contre les avant-postes de Mithridate de la côte occidentale de la mer Noire, les Romains s'emparèrent de toutes les villes de cette région308. Elles furent soumises à l'autorité du proconsul de Macédoine, sans pour autant être intégrées à la province. Cependant, elles retrouvèrent pour un bref délai leur liberté après la révolte et la défaite infligée au proconsul C. Antonius Hybrida en 61 av. J.-C. (Dion Cassius, XXXVIII 10, 3). Plus tard, sans doute vers 48 av. J. -C., elles furent saccagées par le roi gète Byrébista309, il est vrai, dans un contexte qui, faute de sources plus détaillées, demeure mal connu. En ce qui concerne spécialement Kallatis dans le contexte de tous ces événements, nous ne sommes, à part l'activité de son atelier monétaire sous Mithridate, nullement renseignés310. Après la disparition de Byrébista (assassiné en 44) il a fallu attendre les années 29/8 pour voir le proconsul de Macédoine M. Licinius Crassus se rendre sur le bas Danube lors d'une campagne menée contre les Gètes311. Le proconsul avait commencé par intervenir en faveur des Denthelètes, lesquels étaient attaqués par les Bastarnes. Les Bastarnes s'étant réfugiés dans une fortification située quelque part sur le Danube, le proconsul accepta l'aide de Rholès, un roitelet gète régnant sur le sud-ouest de la Dobroudja dont il récompensa les efforts en lui accordant le titre de fivlo" kai; suvmmaco". Lorsque ce dernier fut, à son tour, attaqué par son voisin Dapyx, Crassus intervint en Dobroudja et élimina Dapyx, qui trouva la mort, ainsi que son allié Zyraxès, qui se réfugia au nord du Danube ; ce qui valut à Crassus un triomphe célébré le 4 juillet 27 ex Thraecia et Geteis (CIL I2 478).

La reconnaissance des Callatiens envers les nouveaux maîtres est également illustrée par la consécration d'un lieu de culte à Auguste encore vivant (ISM III 58). Ce premier témoignage du culte impérial relève d'une initiative locale : il n'y a pour l'instant rien qui permette d'imaginer un koinon des cités ouest-pontiques. Par conséquent, s'il est très probable que toutes les cités du littoral sont entrées sous le contrôle romain lors de la mission de P. Vinicius de 3-2 av. J.-C., il est encore plus raisonnable d'imaginer que les modalités en ont été différentes selon le cas. À l'heure qu'il est, on ignore encore la forme juridique sous laquelle les villes ouest-pontiques sont entrées, pour parler avec Ovide (Trist. II 199), Ausonio sub iure. Selon une hypothèse plus ancienne, chaleureusement accueillie depuis lors par de nombreux savants, le littoral aurait constitué une soi-disant praefectura orae maritimae ; sauf que les sources persistent à garder le silence à ce propos314. Quant à l'ensemble de la Dobroudja (la ripa Thraciae : ISM I 67-68), ce territoire fut d'abord attribué au royaume des Odryses315, rétabli à titre d'État clientélaire à l'époque d'Auguste (Tacite, Ann. II 64), pour être annexé à la province de Mésie, créée sous Tibère316, à l'époque de Claude, plus exactement en 46317.

307

Voir, en général, Reinach 1890 ; McGing 1986 ; Ballesteros Pastor 1996 ; de Callataÿ 1997 ; pour la côte septentrionale de la mer Noire : Molev 1976 ; Vinogradov et Wörrle 1992 ; Vinogradov 1997, p. 526562 ; Avram 2002c ; pour la côte occidentale : Pippidi 1975a, p. 165 et suiv.; Salomone Gaggero 1978 ; Avram et Bounegru 1997 (cf. Bull. ép. 1999, 388 [Ph. Gauthier] et SEG XLVII 1125 [H.W. Pleket]) ; Poenaru Bordea 1999. Pour l'atelier royal ouvert à Callatis à l'époque de Mithridate, voir plus haut, Le monnayage. 308 Ce qui ne demeure évoqué que par des breuiaria tardifs : Eutrope, VI 10 ; Rufius Festus 9 ; Jordanès, Rom. 221. 309 Dion Chrysostome, Or. XXXVI 4, et l'inscription IGB I2 323 de Mésambria. Cf. Pippidi 1981, p. 255-262 = 1984, p. 177-188. Pour les traces archéologiques de cette destruction à Istros : Alexandrescu 1994. 310 Il est vrai que dans le décret fragmentaire ISM III 26, daté du milieu du Ier s. av. J.-C., il est question d'une activité de reconstruction, mais d'ici à en entrevoir un rapport avec la les dégâts provoqués par les Gètes de Byrébista, serait trop demander à ce document conservé d'une manière pitoyable. 311 Récit détaillé chez Dion Cassius, LI 23-27 ; cf. Pippidi 1971, p. 153154.

312

Avram 1998a. Pour la mission de P. Vinicius en Thrace et en Macédoine, datée de 3-2 av. J.-C., voir Velleius Paterculus, II 101, 3. Cf. Thomasson 1991, p. 42, avec la littérature de la question. 314 Cf. Ovide, Ex Pont. IV 7, 1-2 (cf. 7, 21-22) sur (Iulius) Vestalis ; IV 9, 75-80 sur L. Pomponius Flaccus. On a essayé à plusieurs reprises d'en voir des praefecti, mais rien n'est moins sûr. 315 Une confirmation en est entre autres l'éponymie de Cotys, fils de Rhoemétalkès, le roi odryse des années 12-19, révélée par un décret des thiasites de Callatis (ISM III 44). 316 Dans un premier temps, la frontière orientale de la nouvelle province ne dépassait pas la petite ville de Dimum (cf. ISM I 67-68).- En ce qui 313

269

ANCIENT GREEK COLONIES IN THE BLACK SEA 2 L'annexion de la ripa Thraciae à la Mésie est peut-être contemporaine de la création d'un nouveau organisme des cités grecques : le koinon ouest-pontique.

de la constitution du koinon ouest-pontique, plutôt connu comme ÔExavpoli"320. C'est grâce au même décret en l'honneur d'Apollonios que nous sommes renseignés sur l'existence de la charge d'agonothète (ISM III 31, l. 15-16), elle aussi étroitement liée aux jeux qui accompagnaient les fêtes consacrées aux empereurs ; et ce sont à peu près les mêmes fêtes qui figurent également dans le décret de peu postérieur en l'honneur d'Isagoras fils d'Iatroklès (ISM III 32).

Une des plus importantes inscriptions de Kallatis, le décret en l'honneur d'Apollonios, fondateur de la gérousie (ISM III 31), date, à en juger d'après plusieurs critères, du milieu du Ier s. ap. J.-C. Or, cette inscription mentionne les Kaisareia, à savoir les fêtes consacrées aux empereurs régnants ; ce qui n'a rien d'étonnant, car à cette époque, la gérousie était par excellence l'institution gérant le culte impérial dans l'Orient grec318. Qui plus est, la même date peut être assignée grosso modo à la gérousie d'Istros à la suite de plusieurs connexions prosopographiques que l'on peut établir sur les listes de ses membres (ISM I 193 ; cf. 191)319. Puisque la fondation des gérousies relève d'un rapport spécial avec l'attitude de l'empereur à l'égard des cités en question et pour autant que les gérousies d'Istros et de Kallatis semblent avoir été fondées vers le milieu du Ier s. ap. J.-C. ou peu après, il serait permis d'en voir une initiative plus ou moins commune – accueillie aussi par les autres villes du Pont Gauche, qui n'ont pas encore fourni de documents aussi révélateurs – et, en même temps, un reflet de la transformation politique de 46. Cela étant, je trouve que c'est justement à cette époque qu'il faut chercher les débuts du koinon du Pont Gauche, mentionné plus tard par des documents du IIe s.

Les données sur d'autres aspects de la vie à Kallatis pendant la deuxième moitié du Ier s. sont assez parcimonieuses. Il n'y a à signaler que l'activité de ce nouvel évergète, Isagoras, qui aurait sauvé la population à une époque de « très grande disette » (ISM III 32, l. 8) ; ce qui lui valut le titre honorifique d'euposiarchès pour la deuxième fois (diseuposiavrch"). Les deux évergètes, Apollonios et Isagoras, se firent aussi remarquer par des activités édilitaires : le premier aura accompli des travaux dans le gymnase, alors que le deuxième, après avoir pourvu le sanctuaire d'Artémis (?) d'un enduit, aura financé la construction d'une muraille appartenant sans doute à un autre sanctuaire ou à un quelconque édifice public. Un autre évergète, actif sans doute à partir de l'époque du gouverneur Ti. Plautius Silvanus Aelianus, dont il emprunte le nom, porte le titre honorifique de uiJo;" th'" povleo" (sic), hérité également par son fils (ISM III 174), mais on en ignore les circonstances.

Le même décret en l'honneur d'Apollonios décide pour son titulaire des honneurs décernés e[n te ajrcieªratika'/ ejk(k)lhsiva/º (l. 13) La même formule est ensuite révélée par des décrets de quelques années plus récents, celui en l'honneur d'Isagoras fils d'Iatroklès (ISM III 32, l. 13) et encore un décret très endommagé (ISM III 34, l. 11). Il serait donc question de l'adjectif ajrcieratikhv tiré du substantif ajrciereuv". Or, c'est justement l'archiereus qui, dans les documents de la communauté ouest-pontique, fait à peu près partout bonne paire avec le pontarchès. Ces assemblées « archiératiques » étaient ou bien propres à la gérousie, ou bien des assemblées « fédérales » de la communauté des villes grecques de la côte occidentale du Pont-Euxin. Somme toute, je vois mal un koinon conçu pour entretenir le culte impérial se constituer avant la création des gérousies dans toutes les villes ayant rejoint la fédération. Les dates de fondation de gérousies de Kallatis et d'Istros définissent donc le terminus post quem

Après la division de la Mésie en deux provinces en 86, la Dobroudja revint à la Mésie inférieure. À partir de l'époque de Trajan, les villes grecques allaient connaître, comme à peu près partout dans le monde romain, l'apogée de leur épanouissement à l'époque impériale. La belle série de monuments épigraphiques de Kallatis permet de s'en faire une image parfois assez détaillée. Il est question, tout d'abord, de quelques documents datés du règne de Trajan, ou bien assignés pour plusieurs raisons à l'époque de celui dont les savants reconnaissent en unanimité le rôle décisif dans l'organisation administrative de cette région. C'est de cette époque que datent les premières inscriptions latines321, et il est significatif que la première, datée de 103-114, est une 320 Si ces arguments sont vraiment suffisants pour faire remonter la constitution du koinon à l'époque des derniers Julio-Claudiens ou des Flaviens, il faudrait alors séparer koinon et pontarchie (car les pontarques ne sont attestés qu'à partir de l'époque de Trajan ou plutôt d'Hadrien ; voir plus bas). Je rencontre ici Stoian 1965 = 1972, p. 147166 ; sauf que pour Stoian le koinon datait, comme pour Pippidi 1975a, p. 230-249, de l'époque d'Auguste ou de Tibère. Si, en revanche, ces raisonnements ne sont pas convaincants, il vaudrait mieux accepter, avec Veyne 1966, p. 152-154, que le koinon était inséparable de la pontarchie, et qu'il datait, par conséquent, de l'époque d'Hadrien ou de l'époque de Trajan (Nawotka 1987 ; 1990 ; 1993 ; 1994 ; 1997 ; 1998). 321 Je laisse, bien entendu, de côté le texte de l'ancien traité entre Rome et Callatis (ISM III 1) dont la copie latine exposée à Callatis a sa propre histoire, laquelle n'a encore rien à voir avec l'élément romain à Callatis.

concerne Callatis, les reflets des nouveaux découpages administratifs – à la suite desquels son statut de cité fédérée nu fut, semble-t-il, en rien touché – peuvent être identifiés, d'une part, dans le deuxième octroi du titre de « fondateur de la cité » au notable Aristôn (ISM III 45), d'autre part, dans l'éponymie tenue à un certain moment par l'empereur Tibère (sur la portée des éponymies impériales, voir notamment Robert 1938, p. 142-150). 317 Il est impossible de reprendre ici le dossier des questions ayant trait aux débuts de la domination romaine dans cette région. J'ai essayé d'en faire le point dans ISM III, p. 54-60. 318 Oliver 1941 ; 1958 ; van Rossum 1988. 319 Commentaires détaillés dans ISM III, p. 61-63.

270

ALEXANDRU AVRAM: KALLATIS seul vétéran (ISM III 237)326. Les noms latins portés par des personnes qui érigent des monuments en latin n'en constituent pas, eux non plus, une preuve suffisante ; leurs porteurs auraient pu être ou bien des colons romains (civils ou militaires) ou bien des Gètes ou des Thraces méridionaux. À regarder l'évidence onomastique, la présence de l'élément romain est d'ailleurs tout aussi faible dans la ville même327.

dédicace adressée aux ciues Romani consistentes Kallatis (ISM III 83) ; il s'agit, en effet, du premier conuentus de citoyens romains – à vocation sans doute commerciale – de toute une série d'inscriptions du même genre dont les documents de la région nous offrent des exemples à foison aux IIe et IIIe siècles322. Ce noyau de citoyens romains établis à Kallatis, bénéficiant sans l'ombre d'un doute d'un régime d'extraterritorialité, constitue le premier témoignage de la présence de l'élément romain dans la ville.

C'est toujours de l'époque de Trajan, sinon plus probablement de l'époque d'Hadrien qu'il convient de dater les débuts de la pontarchie. J'ai déjà essayé de montrer que les données sur les assemblées « archiératiques » sont en état de suggérer que le koinon existait dès la deuxième moitié du Ier s. ap. J.-C. D'autre part, dans un dossier assez riche comprenant des pontarques en provenance de toutes les villes en question328, il n'y a encore aucun document antérieur à l'époque d'Hadrien ; et ce silence doit être autre chose que pure coïncidence. À l'heure qu'il est, le premier pontarque que l'on connaît est Phaidros, père de T. Flavius Poseidonios, de Tomis qui, à son tour, avait déjà été agonothète du divin Antinoos (ce qui date sa charge de 130-138), avant qu'il ne devienne lui-même pontarque ; son père aura été en charge encore plus tôt, soit vers la fin de l'époque de Trajan ou peu après l'avènement d'Hadrien (ISM II 52). Je me rallie donc au point de vue selon lequel le koinon aura été réorganisé sans doute par Hadrien dans une formule réclamant un pontarque à sa tête.

Encore plus importants s'avèrent être les cinq fragments d'une limitatio du territoire de Kallatis (ISM III 51-55). Datée communément du règne de Trajan323, voire de la même époque que la horothésie à date assurée d'Istros (ISM I 67-68), l'opération en question a porté sur l'ancienne chôra de la ville, à savoir sur le territoire déjà divisé en klèroi. Elle a, selon toute vraisemblance, largement obéi aux données des cadastres plus anciens : c'est ce qui ressort de quelques analogies métrologiques avec les tailles des lots de Chersonèse Taurique324. Malgré des essais plus anciens ou plus récents de déceler des traces de centuriation325, je ne vois encore aucun argument capable d'accréditer une telle hypothèse. Les quelques repères toponymiques révélés par les fragments conservés de la délimitation callatienne font connaître, hormis les agglomérations rurales beaucoup plus anciennes, grecques ou indigènes, des communautés sûrement plus récentes, apparues à la suite de la colonisation romaine. Un fragment d'une version grecque (ISM III 51, l. 6) de la délimitation mentionne une kwvmh Oujalª - - º, dont le nom ne peut être tiré que d'un « éponyme » comme Valerius, Valens, etc. : ce qui porte à croire qu'à l'extérieur de la chôra proprement dite (= territorium), soumise à l'opération de délimitation, était constituée, comme à Istros, une regio accessible aux colons originaires d'autres régions. Il est, somme toute, significatif que la colonisation romaine faisait déjà sentir ses effets à l'époque de Trajan. Toutefois, la présence des colons romains dans le territoire de Kallatis semble être restée plutôt superficielle. Même si les fouilles dans le territoire sont peu représentatives et, par conséquent, les inscriptions d'origine rurale trop peu nombreuses pour assurer de la solidité aux conclusions, il est pour le moins suggestif qu'il n'y a, outre cette communauté mentionnée dans la limitatio, aucune autre agglomération attestée d'une manière directe. D'autre part, il n'y a jusqu'ici qu'un

La question chronologique est étroitement liée à l'interprétation que l'on est prêt à donner au titre de prw'to" pontavrch", attesté à Istros aux environs de 140329, mais aussi à Kallatis (ISM III 99 ; cf. 100). Selon que l'on s'est prononcé pour un sens temporel absolu (le « premier pontarque » ayant jamais exercé cette charge)330 ou relatif (le « premier pontarque » originaire d'Istros)331 ou bien – ce qui est moins probable – pour une prééminence par rapport à de simples pontarques « locaux »332, on a essayé ou bien d'en tirer des 326 Certes, le statut de cité fédérée de Callatis était en principe incompatible avec l'installation des vétérans dans son territoire. Mais, d'une part, cela aurait été possible dans la regio « attribuée » à la ville, d'autre part, à partir de l'époque des Sévères, la décadence des statuts traditionnels devient manifeste. Voir par exemple ISM III 56, où il semble être question d'un tel abus. 327 Pour une description complète du territoire callatien à l'époque impériale, voir Bărbulescu 2001, p. 61-69 ; cf. p. 158-160, sur sa population. 328 Mihailov 1979, p. 9-21 ; Musielak 1994. 329 Il s'agit de M. Ulpius Artémidôros, un notable d'ailleurs bien connu (ISM I 207) ; voir, sur ce personnage, les contributions de K. Nawotka citées supra, note 320. 330 Veyne 1966, spécialement p. 149 et suiv. ; Nawotka (travaux cités à la note 320) ; Musielak 1993 ; 1994. 331 Pippidi 1960b = 1975a, p. 230-249 ; 1969d = 1975a, p. 250-256. Deininger 1983, p. 223, semble en accepter l'idée, tout en restant plus réservé : « vorläufig nicht genau bestimmbare Ehrenbezeichnung ». 332 Doruţiu Boilă 1975, p. 154-155, avec n. 26 ; Mihailov 1979, p. 2933. Il convient cependant de rappeler qu'aucun koinon de toute la série attestée dans les autres régions de l'Orient romain ne connaît d'organisation collégiale ; cf. Deininger 1983, p. 221-223.

322

Bounegru 1986a. Doruţiu Boilă 1971. Avram 1991 ; cf. supra, L'aménagement du territoire rural. Il est possible que l'inscription qui publiait la délimitation de l'époque de Trajan ait largement repris le texte d'un document plus ancien conservé dans les archives locales peut-être depuis l'époque d'Auguste, lorsque la ville s'est vue octroyer le statut de ciuitas foederata (puisque les textes des exemplaires latins donnent des formes comme uicensimum, quadragensimum, qui semblent être plus anciennes). Pour les archives locales des cités grecques de la région, voir l'inscription déjà citée de Dionysopolis IGB V 5011 (maqovnªte" ejºk tw'n ajrcaivwn grammavtwn). 325 Lambrino 1962 ; Suceveanu 1977, p. 84-85. 323 324

271

ANCIENT GREEK COLONIES IN THE BLACK SEA 2 arguments pour la date d'apparition de la pontarchie, ou bien d'en nier la portée. L'inscription de Kallatis, qui est de 172 et qui mentionne un deuxième personnage, le Callatien T. Aelius Minicius Athanaiôn, portant le même titre de prw'to" pontavrch", est en état d'annuler tout lien entre cette désignation et l'apparition de la pontarchie. Elle soutient, par contre, l'opinion de D. M. Pippidi sur la valeur temporelle relative de l'expression : M. Ulpius Artémidôros serait donc le premier pontarque originaire d'Istros, alors que T. Aelius Minicius Athanaiôn serait le premier pontarque originaire de Kallatis333. Et c'est précisément pour autant que le premier ait été en charge vers 140 et le deuxième vers 150-160334, que la date de l'apparition de la pontarchie ne saurait remonter par trop avant ca. 140 ; car il est peu concevable que des villes comme Istros ou Kallatis n'aient donné pendant des décennies aucun pontarque. L'évidence invite donc à accepter que le koinon fondé pendant la deuxième moitié du Ier s. ap. J.-C. a été profondément remanié à l'époque de Trajan ou plutôt d'Hadrien, afin de répondre aux exigences du culte impérial ; la seule trace documentée par les inscriptions en est l'introduction de la charge de pontarque.

famille (ISM III 104) et ne reculant jamais devant des épithètes, parfois superlatives, par exemple koinoswvsth", « sauveur du koinon » (ISM III 73 B)336. Quant à l'activité « politique » de la communauté, il est à supposer que le koinon bénéficiait des services assurés par les juristes (ekdikoi : ISM III 73 B et 121)337. Les informations concernant les pontarques et l'activité de la communauté ouest-pontique peuvent être complétées par les données fournies par plusieurs dédicaces et monuments honorifiques pour des empereurs (Trajan : ISM III 59 ; Antonin le Pieux : ISM III 60 ; Antonin le Pieux, Marc Aurèle et Lucius Verus : ISM III 61 ; Marc Aurèle et Lucius Verus : ISM III 116 ; Commode : ISM III 65) ou pour des gouverneurs de Mésie inférieure (L. Minicius Natalis Quadronius Verus : ISM III 114, de 140/141-144 ; T. Vitrasius Pollion : ISM III 115, de 157-159). Il y a enfin plusieurs monuments honorifiques consacrés à des notables locaux. Dans la plupart des cas, les circonstances des honneurs demeurent inconnues. Il n'en va pas de même pour un groupe d'inscriptions murales (ISM III 97-100) qui nous renseignent sur la réfection de l'enceinte callatienne en 172 par les soins du gouverneur M. Valerius Bradua. Les deux premières inscriptions (versions latine et grecque du même texte) mentionnent explicitement une levée de taxes (exactio pecuniae) en vue de faire reconstruire les remparts de la ville. Les circonstances sont à peu près les mêmes à Philippopolis, en Thrace, où l'enceinte a été refaite toujours en 172 ; sauf que les frais en ont été pris en charge par l'administration provinciale338. Confirmée par les recherches archéologiques accomplies dans plusieurs secteurs de la ville de Kallatis339, une opération d'une telle ampleur pourrait être mise en relation avec certains dégâts subis par l'enceinte sans doute pendant les incursions des Costoboques de 170 ap. J.-C. Une action conjointe à cette entreprise est ensuite évoquée par une autre inscription dont on a identifié deux copies (ISM III 99-100) et qui est toujours de 172 : il s'agit de la (re)construction des « sept tours et des murailles autour d'elles » ainsi que des portes par les soins du prôtos pontarchès T. Aelius Minicius Athanaiôn et de son fils, le pontarque T. Aelius Minicius Moschiôn.

Il est difficile de répondre à la question si le pontarque était en même temps le prêtre (ajrciereuv") du culte impérial ou si, par contre, ces charges étaient exercées consécutivement. On en ignore ensuite non seulement les modalités d'élection (ou de désignation ?), mais en effet tout ce qui tient de l'exercice de cette charge. Une implication diplomatique des pontarques – comme intermédiaires entre la communauté et l'empereur – est non seulement probable, mais bien attestée par le monument honorifique ISM III 122, qui mentionne un pontarque ayant accompli à ses propres frais des missions au service de la ville auprès de Caracalla « jusqu'en Orient »335. Il y a, en effet, de bonnes raisons pour douter qu'une telle activité diplomatique ait relevé des prérogatives de la pontarchie ; il est, en revanche, évident que le prestige personnel accumulé par les pontarques leur donnait la possibilité de rendre des services à leurs villes, que ce fût pendant la charge ou à la sortie. Même si on ignore les détails sur la célébration du culte impérial, il est sûr que les fêtes étaient communément accompagnées de jeux financés par des agonothètes (ISM III 31 et 121). Les pontarques accordaient eux-mêmes des libéralités (ISM III 104 : don de 10 000 deniers), et il est probable que c'était la charge même qui l'imposait. La reconnaissance publique se manifestait par des monuments honorifiques – ce qui explique d'ailleurs le nombre assez grand de pontarques attestés à peu près partout – associant au pontarque les membres de sa

Une autre initiative impériale avait été sans l'ombre d'un doute la réfection du segment callatien de l'artère littorale, mise en évidence par un ensemble cohérent de cinq bornes milliaires qui datent sans exception de 163340 ; et c'est peut-être là qu'il faut chercher une des raisons du monument honorifique érigé par la cité de Kallatis pour Marc Aurèle et Lucius Verus (ISM III 116).

333 Voir maintenant une discussion détaillée de tous ces problèmes chez Avram, Bărbulescu et Ionescu 2004. 334 En effet, T. Aelius Minicius Athanaiôn aurait dû être en charge bien avant 172 (date assurée de l'inscription), puisque le même document désigne son fils également comme pontarque, ce qui invite à compter sur un certain délai entre les deux exercices. 335 À comparer avec IGB I2 16 de Dionysopolis.

336

Cf. Avram 1992-1994. Pour une liste des pontarques originaires de Calatis, voi ISM III, p. 71. 338 CIL III 7409 = 6121 = ILS 5337 = IGR I 712 = IGB III 878. 339 Voir supra, Le site. 340 Commentaire exhaustif chez Ştefan 1984a. 337

272

ALEXANDRU AVRAM: KALLATIS Somme toute, les inscriptions de Kallatis mentionnent à l'époque des Antonins à peu près partout, que ce soit d'une manière directe ou indirecte, des travaux édilitaires de plus grande ou de moindre importance. Monimos fils d'Hérakleidès (ISM III 111) aurait restauré, bien avant l'intervention des Minicii de 172 (ISM III 99-100) soit la porte monumentale de la ville, soit la porte de l'agora. La dédicace consacrée à Antonin le Pieux et aux Césars Marc Aurèle et Lucius Verus (ISM III 61) est disposée sur une architrave. On compte également d'autres fragments d'architraves qui, par leurs dimensions, font penser à des édifices de grandes dimensions datés de l'époque des Antonins (ISM III 101-103).

Grâce aux inscriptions proto-byzantines et aux données archéologiques, l'évolution de Kallatis peut encore être poursuivie jusque vers le tout début du VIIe siècle342. Désertée peu après la chute de la frontière byzantine sur le Danube (602), Kallatis cessa d'exister343. Ce n'est que beaucoup plus tard, au Moyen Âge, qu'une petite bourgade allait en prendre la relève. ABRÉVIATIONS AA AAWW ABAW

Comme à peu près partout sur le littoral ouest-pontique, l'époque des Sévères semble avoir été – à en juger autant d'après les données archéologiques que d'après les sources épigraphiques – un âge de relative prospérité pour la ville de Kallatis341. Le statut de cité fédérée et tous les droits qui en découlaient auront été confirmés, sans doute à la suite de quelques ambassades comme celle assumée par le pontarque ayant « accompli à ses propres frais des ambassades auprès du divin Antonin jusqu'en Orient » (ISM III 122). Quant à l'attitude favorable des autorités romaines, c'est une inscription datée du règne commun soit de Septime Sévère et de Caracalla, soit plutôt de Caracalla et de Géta – trop fragmentaire par rapport à ce que l'on aurait attendu (ISM III 56) – qui nous fait part d'une lettre envoyée aux Callatiens par un gouverneur : il s'agissait, semble-t-il, de régler les rapports entre la ville et les troupes romaines.

ACSS AEM BCH BSNR Bull. ép. CIL CRAI Dacia (N.S.) FGrHist GGM

Les monuments honorifiques consacrés par la cité de Kallatis aux empereurs de la dynastie des Sévères sont moins nombreux qu'à Tomis ou à Istros. On n'en compte que deux dédicaces d'associations cultuelles à Septime Sévère et à sa famille (ISM III 260 : après le 28 janvier 198 ; 73 A : peu après 199) et, plus tard (222-235), une inscription consacrée cette fois par le Conseil et le peuple à Iulia Mamaea, mère de Severus Alexander (ISM III 123). Une dédicace (ISM III 95) est consacrée par un architecte au gouverneur Cosconius Gentianus Ge[ - - ], dont la mission mésique peut être datée de 195-198.

IGB IG IGLR IGR IK ILS

Il est difficile de se prononcer sur l'histoire de Kallatis à l'époque qui va des derniers Sévères à Dioclétien. Tout ce que l'on peut retenir c'est qu'elle n'a fourni que peu de documents épigraphiques : la dédicace d'un bénéficiaire consulaire de l'époque de Gordien III à une association de filokuvnhgoi (ISM III 74), la dédicace d'un pontarque (le dernier à être attesté) et d'autres notables (ISM III 75), la dédicace consacrée en 274 à l'empereur Aurélien par un praeses prouinciae dont le nom reste inconnu (ISM III 96) et un monument honorifique érigé par le Conseil et le peuple pour un autre gouverneur (diashmovtato"), toujours anonyme, du dernier tiers du IIIe s. (ISM III 124).

IOSPE I2 ISM I ISM II

342

Archäologischer Anzeiger. Berlin. Anzeiger der Akademie der Wissenschaften in Wien, phil.-hist. Klasse. Wien. Abhandlungen der Bayerischen Akademie der Wissenschaften, phil.-hist. Kl. München. Ancient Civilizations from Scythia to Siberia. Leiden. Archäologisch-epigraphische Mitteilungen aus Österreich-Ungarn. Wien. 1877-1897. Bulletin de correspondance hellénique. Athènes – Paris. Buletinul Societăţii Numismatice Române. Bucarest. Bulletin épigraphique, dans REG. Corpus inscriptionum Latinarum. Berlin. Comptes rendus de l'Académie des Inscriptions et Belles-Lettres. Paris. Dacia. Revue d'archéologie et d'histoire ancienne. Bucarest. 1924-1944 ; nouvelle série : 1957 sqq. F. Jacoby, Die Fragmente der griechischen Historiker, 1906 sqq. C. Müller, Geographi Graeci Minores I–II, 1855-1861. G. Mihailov, Inscriptiones Graecae in Bulgaria repertae I–V, Serdicae, 1956-1997. (I2, 1970). Inscriptiones Graecae. Berlin. Em. Popescu, Inscripţiile greceşti şi latine din secolele IV–XIII descoperite în România, Bucarest, 1976. Inscriptiones Graecae ad res Romanas pertinentes. Paris. Inschriften griechischer Städte aus Kleinasien. Bonn. H. Dessau, Inscriptiones Latinae selectae I– V, Berlin, 1892-1916. B. Latyšev, Inscriptiones antiquae orae septentrionalis Ponti Euxini I2, Petropoli, 1916. D. M. Pippidi, Inscripţiile din Scythia Minor greceşti şi latine I. Histria şi împrejurimile, Bucarest, 1983. I. Stoian, Inscripţiile din Scythia Minor greceşti şi latine II. Tomis şi teritoriul său, Bucarest, 1987.

Sur les monuments chrétiens, voir Georgescu et Ionescu 1995-1996. Sur l'histoire générale de la Scythie Mineure aux IVe–VIIe siècles, voir Barnea, dans Vulpe et Barnea 1968, p. 369-556 ; A. Barnea, dans Suceveanu et Barnea 1991, p. 154-297. 343 Les dernières monnaies sont de l'époque de Nicéphore Phocas (602610).

341 En général, sur la Mésie inférieure à l'époque des Sévères, voir Boteva 1997.

273

ANCIENT GREEK COLONIES IN THE BLACK SEA 2 Aricescu A., 1961 – « Die bodenständige Bevölkerung der Dobrudscha und ihre Beziehungen zu den Griechen in der hellenistischen Epoche », StCl 3, p. 67-82. – 1963 – « Notă asupra unui decret elenistic inedit din Muzeul Regional de Arheologie Dobrogea », StCl 5, p. 315-318. – 1965 – « Cazanul scitic de la Castelu », SCIV 16 (3), p. 565568. Arnaud P., 1992 – « Les relations maritimes dans le Pont-Euxin d'après les données numériques des géographes anciens », REA 94, p. 57-77. Asheri D., 1972 – « Über die Frühgeschichte von Herakleia Pontike », dans F. K. Dörner (éd.), Forschungen an der Nordküste Kleinasiens I. Herakleia Pontike. Forschungen zur Geschichte und Topographie, Denkschriften Wien 106, Wien, p. 11-34. Avram A., 1984 – « Bemerkungen zu den Mariandynern von Herakleia am Pontos », StCl 22, p. 19-28. – 1988a – « Zu den Handelsbeziehungen zwischen Kallatis und dem Taurischen Chersonesos », MBAH 7, p. 87-91. – 1988b – « Amfore şi ţigle ştampilate din colecţia ‘Dr. Horia Slobozianu’ », SCIVA 39 (3), p. 287-313. – 1991 – « Untersuchungen zur Geschichte des Territoriums von Kallatis in griechischer Zeit », Dacia N.S. 35, p. 103137. – 1992-1994 – « Ein neues griechisches Wort : koinoswvsth" », StCl 28-30, p. 121-123. – 1994a – « Zur Verfassung von Kallatis in hellenistischer Zeit », Il Mar Nero 1, p. 167-177. – 1994b – « Kallatianav (I). Decrete callatiene din epoca elenistică », SCIVA 45 (4), p. 303-325. – 1995a – « Poleis und Nicht-Poleis im Ersten und Zweiten Attischen Seebund », dans M. H. Hansen et K. Raaflaub (éds.), Studies in the Ancient Greek Polis, Papers from the Copenhagen Polis Centre 2, Historia. Einzelschriften 95, p. 195-198. – 1995b – « Un règlement sacré de Kallatis », BCH 119, p. 235252. – 1995c – « Kallatianav (II). Eijsagwgei'" », SCIVA 46 (1), p. 17-34. – 1995d – « Kallatianav (III). Calendarul callatian », SCIVA 46 (2), p. 105-117. – 1995e – « Date epigrafice cu privire la edificiile de la Kallatis din epoca elenistică », Historia urbana 3, p. 7-29. – 1996a – « Les cités grecques de la côte Ouest du PontEuxin », dans M. H. Hansen (éd.), Introduction to an Inventory of Poleis, Acts of the Copenhagen Polis Centre 3, Historisk-filosofiske Meddelelser. Det Kongelige Danske Videnskabernes Selskab 74, p. 288-316. – 1996b – « Kallatianav (IV). Monumente epigrafice din epoca imperială », SCIVA 47 (1), p. 5-20. – 1996c – « Der Vertrag zwischen Rom und Kallatis (CIL I2 2, 2676) », dans Funck (éd.) 1996, p. 491-511. – 1996d – Histria VIII. Les timbres amphoriques, 1. Thasos, Bucarest – Paris. – 1997a – « Kallatianav (V). Inscripţii funerare », SCIVA 48 (3), p. 191-198. – 1997b – « Un nouveau document sur le culte d'Isis à l'époque impériale », Revue roumaine d'égyptologie 1, p. 5-12. – 1998a – « P. Vinicius und Kallatis. Zum Beginn der römischen Kontrolle der griechischen Städte an der Westküste des Pontos Euxeinos », dans Tsetskhladze (éd.) 1998, p. 115-129. – 1998b – « Date cu privire la pirateria de pe coasta de vest a Mării Negre în epoca elenistică », dans M. Cihó, V. Nistor et D. Zaharia (éds.), Timpul istoriei I. Memorie şi

ISM III

A. Avram, Inscriptions grecques et latines de Scythie Mineure III. Kallatis et son territoire, Bucarest – Paris, 1999. Izvestija (Sofia) Izvestija na Bălgarskia Arkheologičeski Institut. Sofia. Izvestija (Varna) Izvestija na Narodnija Muzej Varna. Varna. LGS J. von Prott, L. Ziehen, Leges Graecorum sacrae e titulis collectae I–II, Leipzig, 18961906 Materiale Materiale şi cercetări arheologice. Bucarest. MEFRA Mélanges de l'École Française de Rome. Antiquité. Paris – Rome. NC The Numismatic Chronicle and Journal of the Numismatic Society. London. Noi monumente Noi monumente epigrafice din Scythia Minor, Constanţa, 1964. OGIS W. Dittenberger, Orientis Graeci inscriptiones selectae I–II, Leipzig, 19031905. RA Revue archéologique. Paris. RBN Revue belge de numismatique et de sigillographie. Bruxelles. RE Realencyclopädie der classischen Altertumswissenschaft. 1894-1980. REA Revue des études anciennes. Bordeaux. REG Revue des études grecques. Paris. REL Revue des études latines. Paris. RESEE Revue des études sud-est européennes. Bucarest. RN Revue numismatique. Paris. SCIV(A) Studii şi cercetări de istorie veche (şi arheologie). Bucarest. SCN Studii şi cercetări de numismatică. Bucarest. SEG Supplementum epigraphicum Graecum, Leiden – Amsterdam. 1923 sqq. W. Dittenberger, Sylloge inscriptionum SIG3 Graecarum, 3e éd., I–IV, Leipzig, 19151924. StCl Studii clasice. Bucarest. VDI Vestnik drevnej istorii. Moscou. ZPE Zeitschrift für Papyrologie und Epigraphik. Bonn.

BIBLIOGRAPHIE Alexandrescu P., 1994 – « La destruction d'Istros par les Gètes, 1. Dossier archéologique », Il Mar Nero 1, p. 179-214. Alexandrescu Vianu M., 1970 – « Les sarcophages romains de Dobroudja », RESEE 8, p. 269-318 (cf. Popescu 1970). – 1973 – « Contribution à une classification des stèles funéraires de la Mésie inférieure », Dacia N.S. 17, p. 217241. – 1977 – « Le banquet funéraire sur les stèles de la Mésie inférieure : schémas et modèles », Dacia N.S. 21, p. 139166. – 1985 – « Les stèles funéraires de la Mésie inférieure », Dacia N.S. 29, p. 57-79. – 1986 – « L'iconographie des reliefs aux stratèges de Mésambria », StCl 24, p. 99-107. Anokhin V.A., 1965 – « Monety skifskogo carja Ateja », Numizmatika i sfragistika 2, p. 11-15. Antonetti C., 1999 – « Le culte d'Apollon entre Mégare et ses colonies du Pont », dans Lordkipanidzé et Lévêque (éds.) 1999b, p. 17-24.

274

ALEXANDRU AVRAM: KALLATIS patrimoniu. In honorem emeritae Ligiae Bârzu, Bucarest, p. 114-122. – 1999a – Der Vertrag zwischen Rom und Kallatis. Ein Beitrag zum römischen Völkerrecht, Amsterdam. – 1999b – « Les calendriers de Mégare et de ses colonies pontiques », dans Lordkipanidzé et Lévêque (éds.) 1999b, p. 25-31. – 2000 – « Wohltäter des Volkes (eujergevtai tou' dhvmou) in den pontischen Städten der späthellenistischen Zeit », dans M. Dreher (éd.), Bürgersinn und staatliche Macht. Festschrift für Wolfgang Schuller zum 65. Geburtstag, Konstanz, p. 151-170. – 2001 – « Les territoires d'Istros et de Kallatis », dans A. Stazio (éd.), Problemi della chora coloniale dall'Occidente al Mar Nero. Atti del quarantesimo convegno di Studi sulla Magna Greci, Taranto, 29 settembre – 3 ottobre 2000, Taranto, p. 593-632. – 2001-2002 – « Autour de quelques décrets d'Istros », Pontica 33-34, p. 337-348. – 2002a – « Der dionysische thiasos in Kallatis. Organisation, Repräsentation, Funktion », dans U. Egelhaaf-Gaiser et A. Schäfer (éds.), Raum und Gruppe. Religiöse Vereine in der römischen Antike, Tübingen, p. 69-80. – 2002b – « Zu zwei Inschriften aus Agathopolis », dans K. Bošnakov et D. Boteva (éds.), Jubilaeus V. Sbornik v ªest na prof. Margarita Taªeva, Sofia, p. 17-22. – 2002c – « Ein neuer Stratege des Königs Mithridates VI. Eupator im Taurischen Chersonesos », Izvestija na Narodnija Muzej Burgas 4 (Studia in honorem Ivani Karayotov), p. 69-73. – 2004 – « Sur la date de la divinisation de Ptolémée II Philadelphe à Byzance », dans L. Ruscu, C. Ciongradi, R. Ardevan, C. Roman et C. Găzdac (éds.), Orbis antiquus. Studia in honorem Ioannis Pisonis, Cluj-Napoca, p. 828833. Avram A., Babeş M. (éds.), 2000 – Civilisation grecque et cultures antiques périphériques. Hommage à Petre Alexandrescu à son 70e anniversaire, Bucarest. Avram A., Bărbulescu M., 1992 – « Inscripţii inedite de la Kallatis aflate în colecţiile Muzeului de Istorie Naţională şi Arheologie din Constanţa », Pontica 25, p. 167-205. Avram A., Bărbulescu M., Georgescu V., 1992-1998 – « Une épigramme funéraire de Kallatis », Horos 10-12, p. 463467. – 1999a – « Deux iJerai; travpezai de Kallatis », Horos 13, p. 225-232. – 1999b – « Inscriptions grecques du Musée ‘Kallatis’ de Mangalia », Pontica 32, p. 89-117. Avram A., Bărbulescu M., Ionescu M., 2004 – « À propos des pontarques du Pont Gauche », Ancient West & East 3 (2), en cours d'impression. Avram A., Bounegru O., 1997 – « Mithridates al VI-lea Eupator şi coasta de vest a Pontului Euxin. În jurul unui decret inedit de la Histria », Pontica 30, p. 155-165. Avram A., Conovici N., Poenaru Bordea G., 1990 – « Étude quantitative sur les timbres amphoriques sinopéens de Kallatis », Dacia N.S. 34, p. 111-127 = Conovici, Avram et Poenaru Bordea 1992. Avram A., Lefèvre F., 1995 – « Les cultes de Kallatis et l'oracle de Delphes », REG 108, p. 7-23. Avram A., Nistor G. V., 1982 – « Apărarea teritoriului în cetăţile greceşti şi problemele zonei pontice », SCIVA 33 (4), p. 365-376. Avram A., Poenaru Bordea G., 1988 – « Nouveaux timbres amphoriques thasiens de Kallatis », Dacia N.S. 32, p. 27-35.

Bagnall R.S., 1976 – The Administration of the Ptolemaic Possessions outside Egypt, Leiden. Ballesteros Pastor L., 1996 – Mitrídates Eupátor rey del Ponto, Granada. Barnea I., 1959 – « Descoperiri arheologice din epoca feudală la Mangalia », Materiale 6, p. 903-911. – 1994 – « Frühbyzantinische Inschriften aus der Dobrudscha », RESEE 32, p. 21-33. – 1995-1996 – « Despre două inscripţii paleocreştine de la Kallatis (Mangalia) », Pontica 28-29, p. 183-186. Barnea I., Ştefănescu Şt., 1971 – Din istoria Dobrogei III. Bizantini, români şi bulgari la Dunărea de jos, Bucarest. Baschmakoff A., 1948 – La synthèse des périples pontiques. Méthode de précision en paléo-ethnologie, Études d'ethnographie, de sociologie et d'ethnologie III, Paris. Bărbulescu M., 2001 – Viaţa rurală în Dobrogea romană (sec. I–III p. Chr.), Constanţa. Bărbulescu M., Buzoianu L., Cheluţă-Georgescu N., 1986 – « Importuri amforice la Albeşti (jud. Constanţa) : Thasos », Pontica 19, p. 61-74. – 1987 – « Tipuri de amfore elenistice descoperite în aşezarea greco-autohtonă de la Albeşti (jud. Constanţa) », Pontica 20, p. 79-106. – 1990 – « Pentru un catalog complet al importurilor amforice la Albeşti (jud. Constanţa) », Pontica 23, p. 49-79. Bărbulescu-Munteanu M., 1978 – « Inscripţii recent descoperite în Scythia Minor », Pontica 11, p. 127-136. Bârlădeanu-Zavatin E., 1977 – « çn legătură cu o necropolă de epocă romană timpurie la Kallatis », Pontica 10, p. 127152. – 1980 – « Noi descoperiri în necropolele callatiene », Pontica 13, p. 216-240. – 1985 – « Statuete de teracotă dintr-un complex funerar descoperit la Kallatis », Pontica 18, p. 85-98. Beloch K. J., 1925 – Griechische Geschichte IV 1, 2e éd., Berlin – Leipzig. – 1927 – Griechische Geschichte IV 2, 2e éd., Berlin–Leipzig. Bengtson H., 1963 – « Bemerkungen zu einer Ehreninschrift der Stadt Apollonia am Pontos », Historia 12, p. 96-104 = Bengtson 1974, p. 389-397. – 1974 – Kleine Schriften, München. Beševliev V., 1961 – « Amlaidina und Sippe », Linguistique balkanique 3 (2), p. 67-70. Bevan E.R., 1902 – The House of Seleucos I, London. Bielman A., 1994 – Retour à la liberté. Libération et sauvetage des prisonniers en Grèce ancienne. Recueil d'inscriptions honorant des sauveteurs et analyse critique, Diss. Lausanne. Bittner A., 1998 – Gesellschaft und Wirtschaft in Herakleia Pontike. Eine Polis zwischen Tyrannis und Selbstverwaltung, Asia Minor Studien 30, Bonn. Blavatskaja T.V., 1948 – « Greki e skifi v Zapadnom Priªernomor'e », VDI (1), p. 206-213. – 1952 – Zapadnopontijskie goroda v VII–I vekakh do našej ery, Moscou. Blümel W., 1992 – Die Inschriften von Knidos I, IK 41, Bonn. Bordenache G., 1960 – « Antichità greche e romane nel nuovo Museo di Mangalia », Dacia N.S. 4, p. 489-509. – 1969 – Sculture greche e romane del Museo Nazionale di Antichità di Bucarest I. Statue e rilievi di culto, elementi architettonici e decorativi, Bucarest. Boroneanţ V., 1977 – « Cercetări perieghetice pe malul Mării Negre între Constanţa şi Vama Veche », Pontica 10, p. 319324. Boteva D., 1997 – Dolna Mizija i Trakija v rimskata imperska sistema, 193-217/218 g sl. Xr., Sofia.

275

ANCIENT GREEK COLONIES IN THE BLACK SEA 2 Bouché-Leclercq A., 1903 – Histoire des Lagides I. Les cinq premiers Ptolémées, 323-181 avant J.-C., Paris. – 1913 – Histoire des Séleucides I, Paris. Bounegru O., 1981-1983 – « Un decret inedit de la Kallatis », Istros 2-3, p. 161-164. – 1986a – « Über die cives Romani consistentes von Skythia Minor », MBAH 5, p. 59-73. – 1986b – « Consideraţii privind portul cetăţii Kallatis în antichitate », Pontica 19, p. 267-272. Bounegru O., Bârlădeanu E., 1990 – « Săpăturile arheologice de salvare din zona nordică a necropolei tumulare de la Kallatis », Pontica 23, p. 335-343. Bounegru O., Chiriac C., 1981 – « Cîteva descoperiri izolate de la Kallatis », Pontica 14, p. 249-254. von Bredow I., 1996 – « Der Begriff der Mixhellenes », dans Funck (éd.) 1996, p. 467-474. Bringmann Kl., von Steuben H. (éds.), 1995 – Schenkungen hellenistischer Herrscher an griechische Städte und Heiligtümer I. Zeugnisse und Kommentare, Berlin. Buraselis K., 1982 – Das hellenistische Makedonien und die Ägäis. Forschungen zur Politik des Kassandros und der drei ersten Antigoniden (Antigonos Monophthalmos, Demetrios Poliorketes und Antigonos Gonatas) im Ägäischen Meer und in Westkleinasien, Münchner Beiträge zur Papyrusforschung und antiken Rechtsgeschichte 73, München. Burow J., 1993 – « Durankulak. Vorbericht über die Ausgrabungen 1991 und 1992 », AA, p. 333-345. – 1999 – « Excavations at Durankulak (NE Bulgaria) : The Ritual Pits and their Contents », dans Lordkipanidzé et Lévêque (éds.) 1999b, p. 33-35. Burstein S.M., 1976 – Outpost of Hellenism : The Emergence of Heraclea on the Black Sea, Berkeley – Los Angeles – London. Buzoianu L., 1979 – « Noi ştampile de amfore descoperite la Kallatis », Pontica 12, p. 77-95. – 1984 – « Despre începuturile importului de amfore ştampilate în cetăţile greceşti Tomis şi Kallatis », Pontica 17, p. 51-59. – 1986 – « Les premières importations d'amphores timbrées dans les cités grecques de Tomis et de Kallatis », dans Empereur et Garlan (éds.) 1986, p. 407-415. – 1991 – « Tipuri de amfore din sec. VI-V descoperite la Tomis », Pontica 24, p. 75-96. – 2001 – Civilizaţia greacă în zona vest-pontică şi impactul ei asupra lumii autohtone (secolele VII–IV a. Chr.), Constanţa. Buzoianu L., Bărbulescu M., 2002-2003 – « Categorii ceramice de import în aşezarea greco-indigenă de la Albeşti (jud. Constanţa) », Pontica 35-36, p. 61-77. Buzoianu L., Bărbulescu M., Cheluţă-Georgescu N., 2000-2001 – « Ştampile amforice recent descoperite la Albeşti (jud. Constanţa) », Pontica 33-34, p. 219-252. Buzoianu L., Cheluţă-Georgescu N., 1983 – « Ştampile de amfore inedite de la Kallatis », Pontica 16, p. 149-188. – 1998 – « Noi ştampile amforice de la Kallatis », Pontica 31, p. 49-98. Calder III W.M., 1979 – « A Note on the Fourth Century Graffito from Kallatis », Dacia N.S. 23, p. 313. de Callataÿ F., 1994 – « Les derniers alexandres posthumes frappés à Odessos et Mésembria », dans D. Draganov (éd.), Studies on Settlement Life in Ancient Thrace. Proceedings of the IIIrd International Symposium ‘Cabyle’, 17-21 May 1993, Jambol, p. 300-342. – 1995 – « Les tétradrachmes de Lysimaque frappés à Kallatis », SCN 11, p. 55-58.

– 1997 – L'histoire des guerres mithridatiques vue par les monnaies, Louvain-la-Neuve. Canarache V., 1942 – « O monedă inedită a regelui scit Kanites », Cronica numismatică şi arheologică 16 (121122), p. 3-5. – 1950 – « Monedele sciţilor din Dobrogea », SCIV 1 (1), p. 213-257. – 1969 – Masken und Tanagrafiguren aus Werkstätten von Kallatis – Mangalia, Constanţa. Cheluţă-Georgescu N., 1974 – « Morminte elenistice şi romane descoperite în zona de nord-vest a necropolei callatiene », Pontica 7, p. 169-189. Cheluţă-Georgescu N., Bărbulescu M., 1985 – « Fazele constructive ale fortificaţiei de la Albeşti (jud. Constanţa) », Symposia Thracologica 3, p. 78-80. Chirica É., 1998 – « Le culte d'Héraclès Pharangeitès à Héraclé du Pont », REG 111, p. 722-731. Cihodaru C., 1968 – « Litoralul de apus al Mării Negre şi cursul inferior al Dunării în cartografia medievală (secolele XII–XIV) », Studii. Revista de istorie 21, p. 217-241. Cohen G.M., 1995 – The Hellenistic Settlements in Europe, the Islands and Asia Minor, Berkeley–Los Angeles. Coja M., 1986 – « Les fortifications grecques dans les colonies de la côte Ouest du Pont Euxin », dans P. Leriche et H. Tréziny (éds.), La fortification dans le monde grec, Actes du Colloque international ‘La fortification et sa place dans l'histoire politique, culturelle et sociale du monde grec’, Valbonne, décembre 1982, Paris, p. 95-103 et fig. 211-221. Cojocaru V., 2004 – Populaţia zonei nordice şi nord-vestice a Pontului Euxin în secolele VI–I a. Chr. pe baza izvoarelor epigrafice, Iaşi. Condurachi Em., 1971 – « Problema unor basilici creştine de la Histria şi Kallatis », Pontica 4, p. 173-189. Conovici N., 1998 – Histria VIII. Les timbres amphoriques, 2. Sinope, tuiles timbrées comprises, Bucarest – Paris. Conovici N., Avram A., Poenaru Bordea G., 1989 – « Nouveaux timbres amphoriques sinopéens de Kallatis », Dacia N.S. 33, p. 111-123. – 1992 – « Količestvennyj analiz sinopskikh amfornykh klejm iz Kallatisa », dans V.I. Kac et S.Ju. Monakhov (éds.), Grečeskie amfory, Saratov, p. 229-253 = Avram, Conovici et Poenaru Bordea 1990. Conrad S., 2004 – Die Grabstelen aus Moesia Inferior. Untersuchungen zu Chronologie, Typologie und Ikonographie, Leipzig. Corsten Th., 1987 – Die Inschriften von Apameia (Bithynien) und Pylai, IK 32, Bonn. Cosma V., 1973 – « Prospectări arheologice submarine », Buletinul monumentelor istorice 42 (1), p. 31-38. Covacef Z., 1975 – « Contribuţii privind cultul lui Hercule în Scythia Minor », Pontica 8, p. 399-428. – 1990 – « Unele consideraţii privind sculptura laică în Dobrogea romană », Pontica 23, p. 129-159. – 2002 – Arta sculpturală în Dobrogea romană, secolele I–III, Cluj-Napoca. Danoff [Danov] Chr. M., 1932 – Die griechischen Inschriften aus Tomis und Kallatis (Sammlung und Beiträge), Diss. Wien. Deininger J., 1983 – « Zu einer neuen Hypothese über die Pontarchie im westpontischen Koinon », ZPE 51, p. 219-27. Desideri P., 1967 – « Studi di storiografia eracleota », Studi classici ed orientali 16, p. 366-416. – 1970-1971 – « Studi di storiografia eracleota », Studi classici ed orientali 19-20, p. 487-537. Diehl E., 1934 – « Thales (2) », RE V A, col. 1212.

276

ALEXANDRU AVRAM: KALLATIS Diller A., 1952 – The Tradition of the Minor Greek Geographers, Amsterdam (repr. 1986). Domăneanţu C., Suceveanu A., 1996 – « Une nouvelle pièce des graffiti callatiens », dans M. Porumb (éd.), Omaggio a Dinu Adamesteanu, Cluj-Napoca. Doruţiu Boilă E., 1968a – « Über einige Statthalter von Moesia Inferior », Dacia N.S. 12, p. 395-408. – 1968b – « Note onomastice », SCIV 19 (2), p. 327-329. – 1971 – « Zur Abgrenzung des Territoriums von Kallatis », Dacia N.S. 15, p. 325-333. – 1975 – « Contribution épigraphique à l'histoire de Tomis à l'époque du Principat », Dacia N.S. 19, p. 152-157. – 1988 – « Relaţiile externe ale cetăţii Kallatis în epoca elenistică », SCIVA 39 (3), p. 243-249. Droysen J. G., 1877 – Geschichte des Hellenismus III, 2e éd., Gotha. Ehrhardt N., 1988 – Milet und seine Kolonien. Vergleichende Untersuchung der kultischen und politischen Einrichtungen, 2. Auflage, Frankfurt am Main – Bern – New York – Paris. Empereur J.-Y., Garlan Y. (éds.), 1986, – Recherches sur les amphores grecques, BCH, Suppl. 13, Athènes – Paris. Ferrary J.-L., 1977 – « Recherches sur la législation de Saturninus et de Glaucia », MEFRA 89, p. 619-660. Ferrary J.-L., Gauthier Ph., 1981 – « Le traité entre le roi Antiochos et Lysimacheia », Journal des savants, p. 327345. Firicel M., 2001-2002 – « Écrivains originaires de Kallatis », SCIVA 52-53, p. 133-156. Franco C., 1993 – Il regno di Lisimaco. Strutture amministrative e rapporti con le città, Pisa. Fraser P.M., 1960 – « Two Studies on the Cult of Sarapis in the Hellenistic World », Opuscula Atheniensia 3, p. 1-54. Funck B. (éd.), 1996 – Hellenismus. Beiträge zur Erforschung von Akkulturation und politischer Ordnung in den Staaten des hellenistischen Zeitalters, Akten des Internationalen Hellenismus-Kolloquiums 9.-14. März 1994 in Berlin, Tübingen. Gauthier Ph., 1979 – « ∆Exagwgh; sivtou. Samothrace, Hippomédon et les Lagides », Historia 18, p. 76-89. Georgescu V., Ionescu M., 1995-1996 – « Mărturii creştine la Kallatis », Pontica 28-29, p. 187-200. – 1997 – « Kallatis », dans Cronica cercetărilor arheologice, 1983-1992 (éd. par le Ministère de la Culture de Roumanie), Bucarest, p. 17. – 1998 – « Le système défensif callatien », dans M. Zahariade et I. I. C. Opriş (éds.), The Roman Frontier at the Lower Danube 4th–6th Centuries. The Second International Symposium, Murighiol/Halmyris, 18-24 August 1996 , Studia Danubiana, pars Romaniae, series Symposia, Bucarest, p. 205-219. Gerasimov T., 1967 – « Istinski li sa monetite s nadpisi ATAIAS i ATAIA », Izvestija–Sofia 30, p. 181-186. – 1972 – « Otnovo za falšivite moneti s nadpisi ATAIAS i ATAIA », Izvestija–Varna 8 (23), p. 3-16. – 1975 – « Un trésor de monnaies antiques du sud de la Dobroudja », SCN 6, p. 25-26. Gerov B., 1970 – « Zum Problem der Strategien im römischen Thrakien », Klio 52, p. 123-132. Gostar N., 1963a – « Monumente epigrafice inedite din lapidariul Muzeului Regional de Arheologie Dobrogea », StCl 5, p. 299-313. – 1963b – « Miliarium roman din nordul Dobrogei », Analele Universităţii ‘Alexandru Ioan Cuza’ din Iaşi, secţiunea a III-a 9, p. 169-171. Grach N.L., 1984 – « Otkrytie novogo istoriªeskogo istoªnika v Nimfee », VDI (1), p. 81-88.

– 1987 – « Ein neuentdecktes Fresko aus hellenistischer Zeit in Nymphaion bei Kertsch », ABAW 98, p. 87-95 et pl. 35-39. Graham A.J., 1994 – « Greek and Roman Settlements on the Black Sea Coast : Historical Background », dans G.R. Tsetskhladze (éd.), Greek and Roman Settlements on the Black Sea Coast, Colloquenda Pontica, Bradford, p. 1-8. Grainger J.D., 1997 – A Seleukid Prosopography and Gazetteer, Leiden – New York – Köln. Gramatopol M., 1966 – « Un port comercial la Kallatis », Revista muzeelor 3 (4), p. 333-336. Gramatopol M., Poenaru Bordea G., 1969 – « Amphora Stamps from Kallatis and South Dobruja », Dacia N.S. 13, p. 127-282. Grămadă N., 1930 – « La Scizia Minore nelle carte nautiche del medio evo. Contribuzione alla topografia storica della Dobrogea », Ephemeris Dacoromana 4. Habicht Chr., 1970 – Gottmenschentum und griechische Städte, 2e éd., München. – 1972 – « Ziaelas », RE X A 1, col. 387-397. Hammond N.G.L., Griffith G.T., 1979 – A History of Macedonia II, Oxford. Hampartumian N., 1979 – Corpus cultus equitis Thraci IV, Leiden. Hanell K., 1934 – Megarische Studien, Lund. Hansen M. H., 1997 – « Emporion. A Study of the Use and Meaning of the Term in the Archaic and Classical Periods », dans Th. Heine Nielsen (éd.), Yet More Studies in the Ancient Greek Polis, Papers from the Copenhagen Polis Centre 4, Historia. Einzelschriften 117, Stuttgart, p. 83-105. Harţuche N., Bounegru O., 1982 – « Opaiţe greceşti şi romane din colecţiile Muzeului Brăila », Pontica 15, p. 221-233. Hatzopoulos M. B., Loukopoulou L. D., 1987 – Two Studies in Ancient Macedonian Topography, Meletèmata 3, Athènes. Haussoullier B., 1925 – « Observations sur deux inscriptions de Kallatis », RA 5e sér., 22, p. 62-65. Heinen H., 1972 – Untersuchungen zur hellenistischen Geschichte des 3. Jahrhunderts v. Chr. Zur Geschichte der Zeit des Ptolemaios Keraunos und zum Chremonideischen Krieg, Historia. Einzelschriften 20, Wiesbaden. Hind J., 1984 – « Greek and Barbarian Peoples on the Shores of the Black Sea », Archaeological Reports 30, p. 71-97. – 1993 – « Archaeology of the Greek and Barbarian Peoples around the Black Sea 1982-1992 », Archaeological Reports 39, p. 82-112. – 1998 – « Megarian Colonisation in the Western Half of the Black Sea (Sister- and Daughter-Cities of Herakleia », dans Tsetskhladze (éd.) 1998, p. 131-152. – 1999a – « Pomponius Mela on Colonies in West and East », dans G.R. Tsetskhladze (éd.), Ancient West and East, Leiden – Boston – Köln, p. 77-84. – 1999b – « The Dates and Mother-Cities of the Black Sea Colonies (Pseudo-Scymnus and the Pontic Contact Zone) », dans Lordkipanidzé et Lévêque (éds.) 1999a, p. 25-34. Höckmann O., 1999 – « Naval and Other Graffiti from Nymphaion », ACSS 5 (4), p. 305-356. Iconomu C., 1968 – « Cercetări arheologice la Mangalia şi la Neptun », Pontica 1, p. 235-268. – 1969 – « Noi morminte paleocreştine la Mangalia », Pontica 2, p. 81-110. Iliescu O., 1967 – « Contribuţii la studiul metrologiei ponderale a oraşului Kallatis », SCIV 18 (4), p. 687-691. Iliescu V., 1971 – « Le problème des rapports scytho-byzantins au IVe s. av. n. è. », Historia 20, p. 172-185. – 1982 – « Agrarische Verhältnisse in Kleinskythien im 4. Jh. v. u. Z. », Klio 64, p. 75-82.

277

ANCIENT GREEK COLONIES IN THE BLACK SEA 2 – (éds.), 1999b – Religions du Pont-Euxin, Actes du VIIIe symposium de Vani (Colchide), 1996, Paris. Lucas H., 1940 – « Zu Herakleides Lembos », Hermes 75, p. 234-237. Lund H.S., 1992 – Lysimachus. A Study in Early Hellenistic Kingship, London – New York. Lungu V., 2000 – Creştinismul în Scythia Minor în contextul vest-pontic, Sibiu – Constanţa. Malkin I., 1987 – Religion and Colonization in Ancient Greece, Leiden. Manov M., 2001 – « Dekret na Kallatis (IGBulg. II, 780 ter) », Arkheologia (Sofia) 42 (3-4), p. 63-68. Marek Chr., 1984 – Die Proxenie, Frankfurt am Main – Bern – New York. – 1985 – « Handel und Proxenie », MBAH 4, p. 67-78. McGing B.C., 1986 – The Foreign Policy of Mithridates VI Eupator King of Pontus, Leiden. Merle H., 1916 – Geschichte der Städte Byzantion und Kalchedon, Diss. Kiel. Michel, Ch. 1900 – Recueil d'inscriptions grecques, Bruxelles. Mihailov G., 1942-1943 – « Die griechischen Epigramme aus bulgarischen Ländern », Godišnik na Sofijskija Universitet 39, p. 1-75 (en bulgare, avec résumé en allemand). – 1979 – « The Western Pontic Koinon », Epigraphica 41, p. 742. Mihăilescu-Bîrliba V., 1990 – Dacia răsăriteană în secolele VI–I î. e. n. Economie şi monedă, Iaşi. Mitrea M., 1970 – « Contribuţii la studiul circulaţiei monetare în Dobrogea în secolul I î. e. n. Tezaurul de denari romani republicani de la Costineşti, jud. Constanţa », Pontica 3, p. 131-137. Moisil C., 1957 – « Ponduri inedite sau puţin cunoscute din Histria, Kallatis şi Tomis », SCN 1, p. 247-295. Molev E.A., 1976 – Mifridat Evpator, Saratov. Mrozewicz L., Ilski K. (éds.), 1994 – Studia Moesiaca I–II, Poznan. Munteanu M., 1975 – « Inscripţii funerare inedite din Scythia Minor », Pontica 8, p. 389-397. Musielak M., 1993 – « Prw'to" pontavrch" », Pontica 26, p. 191-195. – 1994 – « Pontarchowie », dans Mrozewicz et Ilski (éds.) 1994, I, p. 101-115. Nawotka K., 1987 – « Zgromadzenia prowincjalne w rzymskich prowincjach naddunajskich », Antiquitas 13, p. 189-191. – 1990 – « KOINON TOU PONTOU », Balcanica Posnaniensia 5, p. 151-161. – 1993 – « The ‘First Pontarch’ and the Date of the Establishment of the Western Pontic KOINON », Klio 75, p. 342-350. – 1994 – « Pierwszy Pontarcha raz jeszcze », dans Mrozewicz et Ilski (éds.) 1994, II, p. 79-84. – 1997 – The Western Pontic Cities. History and Political Organization, Amsterdam. – 1998 – « Inscr. Scyth. Min. I 207 (Istros) Reconsidered », ZPE 120, p. 107-108. Newell E.T., 1941 – The Coinage of the Western Seleucid Mints from Seleucus I to Antiochus III, New York. Newskaja W.P., 1955 – Byzanz in der klassischen und hellenistischen Epoche, Leipzig. Niese B., 1899 – Geschichte der griechischen und makedonischen Staaten seit der Schlacht bei Chaeronea II. Vom Jahre 281 v. Chr. bis zur Begründung der römischen Hegemonie im griechischen Osten, Gotha. – 1900 – « Adaios, Dynast in Thrakien », Hermes 35, p. 69-72,

Ionescu M., 1991 – « Un nou apeduct din teritoriul callatian », Pontica 24, p. 419-424. Ionescu M., Alexandru N., Constantin R., 2002-2003a – « Noi cercetări în necropola paleocreştină callatiană », Pontica 35-36, p. 225-277. – 2002-2003b – « Morminte de tip hypogeu din necropola callatiană de epocă romano-bizantină », Pontica 35-36, p. 279-291. Ionescu M., Georgescu V., 1997 – « Cercetări perieghetice în teritoriul callatian », SCIVA 48 (2), p. 155-175. Irimia M., 1983 – « Date noi privind necropolele din Dobrogea în a doua epocă a fierului », Pontica 16, p. 69-148. – 1984 – « Morminte plane şi tumulare din zona litorală a Dobrogei (sec. IV–II î. e. n.) şi problema apartenenţei lor etnice », Thraco-Dacica 5, p. 64-83. – 1989 – « Unele consideraţii privind civilizaţia geţilor din Dobrogea în a doua epocă a fierului în lumina descoperirilor arheologice », Symposia Thracologica 7, p. 94-114. – 2000-2001 – « Despre sciţi şi Sciţia Mică în ultimele secole ale mileniului I a. Chr. », Pontica 33-34, p. 299-317. Isaac B., 1986 – The Greek Settlements in Thrace until the Macedonian Conquest, Leiden. Ivantchik A.I., 1998 – « Die Gründung von Sinope und die Probleme der Anfangsphase der griechischen Kolonisation des Schwarzmeergebietes », dans Tsetskhladze (éd.) 1998, p. 297-330. Jaccottet A.-F., 2003 – Choisir Dionysos. Les associations dionysiaques ou la face cachée du dionysisme I–II, Zürich. Jacoby F., 1914 – « Istros (8) aus Kallatis », RE IX, col. 2270. Kolesnikov A.B., Jacenko I.V., 1999 – « Le territoire agricole de Chersonèsos Taurique dans la région de Kerkinitis », dans M. Brunet (éd.), Territoires des cités grecques. Actes de la Table Ronde Internationale, organisée par l'École Française d'Athènes 31 oct.–3 nov. 1991, BCH, Suppl. 34, Athènes – Paris, p. 289-321. Kotsidu H., 2000 – Timh; kai; dovxa. Ehrungen für hellenistische Herrscher im griechischen Mutterland und in Kleinasien unter besonderer Berücksichtigung der archäologischen Denkmäler, Berlin. Kougeas S., 1932 – « Nivkh rJwmaivou strathgou' timwmevnh uJpo; Makedonikh'" povlew" », ÔEllhnikav 5, p. 5-16. La’da C.A., 2002 – Prosopographia Ptolemaica X. Foreign Ethnics in Hellenistic Egypt, Leuven – Paris – Dudley, MA. Lajtar A., 2001 – « I. Scythia Minor III 187 (Kallatis) : ein Lesungsvorschlag », ZPE 137, p. 187. Lambrino S., 1933 – « Inscription latine de Kallatis », CRAI, p. 278-288. – 1935-1936 – « Valerius Bradua, un nouveau gouverneur de la Mésie inférieure », Revista istorică română 5-6, p. 321-332. – 1945 – « Decreto stoichdovn di Kallatis (Scizia Minore) », Epigraphica 7, p. 22-26. – 1962 – « Traces épigraphiques de centuriation romaine en Scythie Mineure (Roumanie) », dans M. Renard (éd.), Hommages à Albert Grenier, Coll. Latomus 58, Bruxelles, p. 928-939. Legon R.P., 1981 – Megara. The Political History of a Greek City-State to 336, Ithaca, New York. Leschhorn W., 1984 – ‘Gründer der Stadt’. Studien zu einem politisch-religiösen Phänomen, Stuttgart. Lifshitz B., 1964 – « Notes d'épigraphie grecque », La parola del passato 19 (98), p. 357-364. Lordkipanidzé O., Lévêque P. (éds.), 1999a – La mer Noire, zone de contacts, Actes du VIIe symposium de Vani (Colchide), 26-30 septembre 1994, Paris.

278

ALEXANDRU AVRAM: KALLATIS Ocheşeanu R., 1969 – « Bolurile ‘megariene’ din colecţiile Muzeului de Arheologie Constanţa », Pontica 2, p. 209244. – 1971 – « Denari romani republicani descoperiţi în Dobrogea », Pontica 4, p. 75-87. – 1975 – « Ponduri inedite din Kallatis şi Tomis », SCN 6, p. 153-157. – 1986 – « Cîteva descoperiri de denari romani republicani din Scythia Minor », Pontica 19, p. 75-88. – 1993 – « O măsură ponderală din Kallatis », SCN 10, p. 137138. – 1997 – « O măsură ponderală callatiană descoperită în teritoriu », SCN 12, p. 189-192. Ocheşeanu R., Cliante T., 1988 – « Un pond callatian din epoca elenistică descoperit la Parthenopolis », Apulum 25, p. 121125. Ocheşeanu R., Georgescu N., 1983-1985 – « Un pond callatian din epoca romană », BSNR 77-79 (131-133), p. 355-359. Olçay N., Seyrig H., 1965 – Le trésor de Mektepinı en Phrygie, Trésors monétaires séleucides I, Paris. Oliver J.H., 1941 – The Sacred Gerusia, Hesperia, Suppl. 6. – 1958 – « Gerousiae and Augustales », Historia 7, p. 472-496. Oppermann M., 2000 – « Süddobrudschanische Studien », dans Avram et Babeş (éds.) 2000, p. 138-149. – 2004 – Die westpontischen Poleis und ihr indigenes Umfeld in vorrömischer Zeit, Schriften des Zentrums für Archäologie und Kulturgeschichte des Schwarzmeerraumes 2, Langenweißbach. Otto W., 1928 – « Beiträge zur Seleukidengeschichte des 3. Jahrhunderts v. Chr. », ABAW 34. – 1931 – « Zu den syrischen Kriegen der Ptolemäer », Philologus 86, p. 400-418. Papasima T., Georgescu V., 1994 – « Însemnări pe marginea sgraffiti-lor din mormîntul elenistic de la Mangalia », Pontica 27, p. 223-228. Papazoglou F., 1978 – The Central Balkan Tribes in PreRoman Times. Triballi, Autariatae, Dardanians, Scordisci and Moesians, Amsterdam. – 1979 – « Quelques aspects de l'histoire de la province de Macédoine », dans Aufstieg und Niedergang der römischen Welt II. Prinzipat VII 1, Berlin – New York, p. 312-334. – 1997 – LAOI et PAROIKOI. Recherches sur la structure de la société hellénistique, Beograd. Passerini A., 1935 – « Il testo del foedus di Roma con Kallatis », Athenaeum 23 (N.S. 13), p. 57-72. Pârvan V., 1974 – çnceputurile vieţii romane la gurile Dunării, 2e éd., Bucarest. Peek W., 1964 – « Griechische Epigramme aus Rumänien », StCl 6, p. 119-136. – 1975 – « Drei griechische Epigramme von der Westküste des Pontos Euxeinos », dans J. Bingen, G. Cambier et G. Nachtergael, Le monde grec. Pensée, littérature, histoire, documents. Hommages à Claire Préaux, Bruxelles, p. 457463. Peremans W., Van't Dack E., 1968 – Prosopographia Ptolemaica VI. La cour, les relations internationales et les possessions extérieures, la vie culturelle, Leuven – Paris – Leiden. Petre Z., 1992-1994 – « Aphrodite Pandemos », StCl 28-30, p. 5-14. Petrescu-Dîmboviţa M., 1944 – « Raport relativ la cercetarea descoperirilor arheologice de la Mangalia (14-17 martie 1940) », dans Raport asupra activităţii Muzeului Naţional de Antichităţi în anii 1942-1943, Bucarest, p. 60-65. Pfuhl E., Möbius H., 1977-1979 – Die ostgriechischen Grabreliefs I–II, Mainz.

Picard Ch., 1963 – « Usages funéraires grecs récemment révélés en Macédoine et Scythie Mineure », RA, p. 179-194. Piccirilli L., 1975 – MEGARIKA. Testimonianze e frammenti, Pisa. Pick B., 1898 – dans B. Pick et K. Regling, Die antiken Münzen von Dacien und Moesien I, Berlin. Pillinger R., 1992 – « Ein frühchristliches Grab mit Psalmenzitaten in Mangalia/Kallatis (Rumänien) », dans R. Pillinger, A. Pülz et H. Vetters (éds.), Die Schwarzmeerküste in der Spätantike und im frühen Mittelalter, Wien, p. 97-102. Pippidi D. M., 1960a – « Un nuovo pontarca callatiano del III secolo e. n. », Dacia N.S. 4, p. 511-514 = Pippidi 1967a, p. 439-444 (en roumain) = Pippidi 1988, p. 229-232 (en roumain). – 1960b – « Un nouveau document sur le koinon pontique au IIe siècle. En marge d'un album agonistique d'Istros », BCH 84, p. 434-458 = Pippidi 1975a, p. 230-249. – 1962a – « Inscription oraculaire de Kallatis », BCH 86, p. 517-523 = Pippidi 1969a, p. 83-93 (en roumain) = Pippidi 1975a, p. 131-137. – 1962b – « Décrets honorifiques de Kallatis », Dacia N.S. 6, p. 469-474 = Pippidi 1967a, p. 260-269 (en roumain) = Pippidi 1975a, p. 123-128. – 1964a – « Grottes dionysiaques à Kallatis », BCH 88, p. 151158 = Pippidi 1969a, p. 106-115 (en roumain) = Pippidi 1975a, p. 142-149. – 1964b – « Sur la diffusion des cultes égyptiens en Scythie Mineure », StCl 6, p. 103-118 = Pippidi 1969a, p. 60-82 (en roumain) = Pippidi 1975a, p. 96-110. – 1965a – « Cetăţi dobrogene în Lista tributurilor atice », StCl 7, p. 329-330 = Pippidi 1988, p. 20-22. – 1965b – « Xenika; Dionuvsia à Kallatis », StCl 7, p. 319-322 (en roumain) = Pippidi 1969a, p. 115-120 (en roumain) = Pippidi 1975a, p. 138-141. – 1966a – « Sur un décret des thiasites de Kallatis », StCl 8, p. 87-96 (en roumain) = Pippidi 1969a, p. 94-106 (en roumain) = Pippidi 1975a, p. 149-158. – 1966b – « În jurul gerusiilor din Histria şi Kallatis », StCl 8, p. 235-240 = Pippidi 1967a, p. 329-337 ; version francaise : Pippidi 1967c = Pippidi 1975a, p. 202-207. – 1966c – « Inscription funéraire de Kallatis », dans R. Chevalier (éd.), Mélanges d'archéologie et d'histoire offerts à André Piganiol I, Paris, p. 283-288 = Pippidi 1967a, p. 528-532 (en roumain) = Pippidi 1975a, p. 128-130. – 1967a – Contribuţii la istoria veche a României, 2e éd., Bucarest. – 1967b – « çn jurul papirilor de la Derveni şi Kallatis », StCl 9, p. 203-210 = Pippidi 1969a, p. 121-132. – 1967c – « Sur les gérousies d'Istros et de Kallatis », dans Caristhvrion eij" A. K. ∆Orlavndon IV, Athènes, p. 75-82 = Pippidi 1975a, p. 202-207 ; version roumaine : Pippidi 1966b = Pippidi 1967a, p. 329-337. – 1969a – Studii de istorie a religiilor antice. Texte şi interpretări, Bucarest. – 1969b – « Gouverneur inconnu de la Mésie inférieure au IIe siècle », REL 47 bis (Mélanges Marcel Durry), p. 311-319 = Pippidi 1975a, p. 257-262 ; version roumaine : Pippidi 1970. – 1969c – « Frămîntări politice şi sociale în Heracleea Pontică », StCl 11, p. 235-238 = Pippidi 1988, p. 35-38. – 1969d – « Réflexions sur la pontarchie et les pontarques de Mésie », dans J. Bibauw (éd.), Hommages à Marcel Renard II, Bruxelles, p. 623-633 = Pippidi 1975a, p. 250-256.

279

ANCIENT GREEK COLONIES IN THE BLACK SEA 2 – 1970 – « Guvernator necunoscut al Moesiei inferioare într-o inscripţie din Kallatis », StCl 12, p. 127-133 ; version française : Pippidi 1969b = Pippidi 1975a, p. 257-262. – 1971 – I Greci nel basso Danubio dall'età arcaica alla conquista romana, Milano. – 1972 – « În marginea unei inscripţii bilingve din Kallatis », StCl 14, p. 141-148 ; version française : Pippidi 1975a, p. 263-269 = Pippidi 1975b. – 1973a – « În jurul datei tratatului Roma–Kallatis », StCl 15, p. 57-67 ; version française : Pippidi 1974a = Pippidi 1975a, p. 172-181. – 1973b – « Două noi documente la dosarul Cavalerului Trac », StCl 15, p. 175-177 = Pippidi 1988, p. 232-234. – 1973c – « Ştiri noi despre răspîndirea callatienilor în epoca elenistică », StCl 15, p. 171-175 = Pippidi 1988, p. 225-228. – 1974a – « Autour de la date du ‘foedus’ Rome–Kallatis », dans J.A.S. Evans (éd.), Polis and Imperium. Studies in Honour of Edward Togo Salmon, Toronto, p. 183-200 = Pippidi 1975a, p. 172-181 ; version roumaine : Pippidi 1973b. – 1974b – « Une hypothèse sur le temple de la Concorde à Kallatis », StCl 16, p. 89-99 (en roumain) = Pippidi 1975a, p. 182-192. – 1975a – Scythica Minora. Recherches sur les colonies grecques du littoral roumain de la mer Noire, Bucarest – Amsterdam. – 1975b – « Sur un album de Kallatis récemment édité », dans Essays in Memory of Basil Laourdas, Thessalonique, p. 137-146 = Pippidi 1975a, p. 263-269 ; version roumaine : Pippidi 1972. – 1977 – « Sur un fragment de décret inédit de Kallatis », dans Pippidi et Popescu (éds.) 1977, p. 51-64 = Pippidi 1984, p. 195-207. – 1981 – « Gètes et Grecs dans l'histoire de la Scythie Mineure à l'époque de Byrébista », Dacia N.S. 25, p. 255-262 = Pippidi 1984, p. 177-188. – 1984 – Parerga. Écrits de philologie, d'épigraphie et d'histoire ancienne, Bucarest – Paris. – 1988 – Studii de istorie şi epigrafie, Bucarest. Pippidi D. M., Popescu Em. (éds.), 1977 – Epigraphica. Travaux dédiés au VIIe Congrès international d'épigraphie grecque et latine, Constantza, 9–15 septembre 1977, Bucarest. Poenaru Bordea G., 1963 – « Cîteva inscripţii recent descoperite în Dobrogea », StCl 5, p. 289-297. – 1968 – « Un tezaur de monede callatiene din perioada autonomiei », SCN 4, p. 103-124. – 1974a – « Le trésor de Mărăşeşti », Dacia N.S. 18, p. 103125. – 1974b – « Cîteva date noi privind circulaţia denarilor romani republicani în Dobrogea », Pontica 7, p. 219-238. – 1973-1975 – « Studiile de numismatică greacă în România între 1947 şi 1974 », BSNR 67-69 (121-123), p. 17-41. – 1979 – « Les statères ouest-pontiques de type Alexandre le Grand et Lysimaque », RBN 125, p. 37-51. – 1986a – A Survey of Numismatic Research 1978-1984, International Numismatic Commission, London. – 1986b – « Les timbres amphoriques de Thasos à Kallatis », dans Empereur et Garlan (éds.) 1986, p. 335-351. – 1997 – « Issues of Greek Mints on the Romanian Coast of the Black Sea (Sixth Century B.C. to Third Century A.D.). A Stage of the Question », dans 130 Years since the Establishment of the Modern Romanian Monetary System, Bucharest, p. 58-70. – 1999 – « À propos du Pont occidental et du Bas-Danube à l'époque de Mithridate VI Eupator », RBN 145, p. 155-164.

– 2001 – « La diffusion des monnaies d'Istros, Kallatis et Tomis du VIe au Ie siècle av. J.-C. dans leurs territoires, zones d'influence et ailleurs », dans A. Stazio (éd.), Presenza e fonzioni della moneta nelle chorai delle colonie greche dall'Iberia al Mar Nero, Napoli, 16-17 giunio, Napoli. Poenaru Bordea G., Ocheşeanu R., 1991 – « Cîteva depozite monetare din Scythia Minor depuse ca ofrande funerare (secolele III–V d. Cr.) », Pontica 24, p. 347-371. Popescu Em., 1964 – « Zeus Soter la Kallatis », SCIVA 15 (4), p. 545-549. – 1970 – « Commentaire épigraphique », RESEE 8, p. 319-328 (cf. Alexandrescu Vianu 1970). Préaux Cl., 1978 – Le monde hellénistique I, Paris. Preda C., 1957, – « Ponduri antice inedite de la Kallatis şi Histria », SCN 1, p. 297-306. – 1961a – « Archaeological Discoveries in the Greek Cemetery of Kallatis–Mangalia », Dacia N.S. 5, p. 275-303. – 1961b – « Date şi concluzii preliminare asupra tezaurului descoperit la Mangalia în anul 1960 », SCIV 12 (2), p. 241251. – 1962 – « Una nuova tomba a volta scoperta presso Mangalia– Kallatis », Dacia N.S. 6, p. 157-172. – 1964 – « Cîteva ponduri antice de la Kallatis şi Tomis », SCIV 15 (1), p. 53-57. – 1966 – « Cîteva morminte din epoca elenistică descoperite la Kallatis », SCIV 17 (1), p. 137-146. – 1968 – Kallatis, 2e éd., Bucarest. – 1980 – Kallatis. Necropola romano-bizantină, Bucarest. – 1993 – « Noi date şi consideraţii asupra tezaurului descoperit la Mangalia în 1960 – Lotul de monede romane imperiale », SCN 10, p. 27-41. – 1998 – Istoria monedei în Dacia preromană, Bucarest. Preda C., Bârlădeanu E., 1979 – « Săpăturile arheologice de salvare din zona şantierului naval de la Mangalia », Pontica 12, p. 97-107. Preda C., Georgescu N. 1975 – « Săpăturile de salvare de la Mangalia din 1972 – necropola callatiană din zona stadionului », Pontica 8, p. 55-75. Preda C., Popescu Em., Diaconu P., 1962 – « Săpăturile arheologice de la Mangalia (Kallatis) », Materiale 8, p. 439455. Preda F., 1968 – « Noi contribuţii arheologice la cunoaşterea sistemului de apărare a oraşului Kallatis », Analele Universităţii din Bucureşti, seria istorie 17, p. 27-36. Price M.J., 1968 – « Mithridates VI Eupator, Dionysus, and the Coinages of the Black Sea », NC 7th series, 8, p. 1-12. – 1991 – The Coinage in the Name of Alexander the Great and Philip Arrhidaeus. A British Museum Catalogue I. Introduction and Catalogue, Zürich. – 1993 – Sylloge nummorum Graecorum, Great Britain IX : The British Museum 1. The Black Sea, London. Rădulescu A., 1962 – « Inscription inédite de Kallatis », StCl 4, p. 275-279. – 1963 – « Inscripţii inedite din Dobrogea », SCIV 14 (1), p. 79105. – 1968 – « Note epigrafice I », Pontica 1, p. 319-339. Rădulescu A., Bărbulescu M., Buzoianu L., 1985 – « Observaţii privind importul amforelor ştampilate în sud-estul Dobrogei », Pontica 18, p. 55-74. – 1986 – « Importuri amforice la Albeşti (jud. Constanţa) : Heraclea Pontică », Pontica 19, p. 33-60. – 1987 – « Importuri amforice la Albeşti (jud. Constanţa) : Rhodos », Pontica 20, p. 53-77. – 1990 – « Importuri amforice la Albeşti (jud. Constanţa) : Chersonesul Tauric, Cnidos, Cos, Paros », Pontica 23, p. 29-48.

280

ALEXANDRU AVRAM: KALLATIS – 2000 – « Données récentes sur le site d'Albeşti (dép. de Constanţa) », dans Avram et Babeş (éds.) 2000, p. 172-179. Rădulescu A., Bărbulescu M., Buzoianu L., Cheluţă-Georgescu N., 1988-1989 – « Importuri amforice la Albeşti (jud. Constanţa) : Sinope », Pontica 21-22, p. 23-90. – 1993 – « Observaţii privind aşezarea greco-autohtonă de la Albeşti (jud. Constanţa) », Pontica 26, p. 121-158. Rădulescu A., Bărbulescu M., Buzoianu L., Georgescu N., Arsenie L., 1999 – « Cercetările arheologice de la Albeşti (jud. Constanţa), 1996-1999 », Pontica 32, p. 51-69. Rădulescu A., Buzoianu L., Bărbulescu M., Cheluţă-Georgescu N., 1995-1996 – « Reprezentări figurate în aşezarea de epocă elenistică de la Albeşti », Pontica 28-29, p. 23-72. Rădulescu A., Buzoianu L., Bărbulescu M., Georgescu N., 2000-2001 – « Albeşti (département de Constantza) – site fortifié gréco-indigène », dans G.R. Tsetskhladze et J.G. de Boer (éds.), The Black Sea Region in the Greek, Roman, and Byzantine Periods, Talanta 32-33, p. 189-206. Rădulescu A., Cheluţă-Georgescu N., Bărbulescu M., 1979 – « Şantierul arheologic Albeşti 1978 », Materiale 13, p. 167173. Rădulescu A., Coman E., Stavru C., 1973 – « Un sarcofago di età romana scoperto nella necropoli tumulare di Kallatis (Mangalia) », Pontica 6, p. 247-265. Rădulescu A., Lungu V., 1989 – « Le christianisme en Scythie Mineure à la lumière des dernières découvertes archéologiques », dans Actes du XIe Congrès international d'archéologie chrétienne, Lyon, Vienne, Grenoble, Genève et Aoste (21-28 sept. 1986) III, Rome, p. 2591-2593. Rădulescu A., Munteanu M., 1977 – « Unveröffentlichte Inschriften aus Tomis und Kallatis », dans Pippidi et Popescu (éds.), p. 99-111 ; version roumaine dans Pontica 10, p. 79-90. Rădulescu A., Scorpan C., 1975 – « Rezultate preliminare ale săpăturilor arheologice din Tomis (Parcul Catedralei) », Pontica 8, p. 9-54. Reinach Th., 1890 – Mithridate Eupator, roi du Pont, Paris. Regling K., 1928 – « Neue Königstetradrachmen von Istros und Kallatis », Klio 22 (N.F. 4), p. 292-302. Robert L., 1929 – « Inscription de Kallatis », RPh 55, p. 149151. – 1938 – Études épigraphiques et philologiques, Paris. – 1939 – « Inscriptions de Kallatis », RPh 13 (65), p. 151-153. – 1940 – Hellenica I, Paris. – 1946 – Hellenica II, Paris. – 1959 – « Les inscriptions grecques de Bulgarie », RPh 33, p. 165-236. – 1980 – À travers l'Asie Mineure, Athènes – Paris. Rogalski A., 1970 – « Za njakoj ‘falšivi’ antični moneti, sečeni na Balkanskija poliostrov », Izvestija–Varna 6 (21), p. 3-19. van Rossum J. A., 1988 – De Gerousia in de Grieske Steden van het Romeinse Rijk, Diss. Den Haag. Rostovtzeff M.I., 1941 – Social and Economic History of the Hellenistic World I, Oxford. Ruscu L., 1996 – « Die wechselseitigen AuŞenbeziehungen zwischen Einzelpersonen und Staaten in bezug auf die Griechenstädte der rumänischen Schwarzmeerküste », Ephemeris Napocensis 6, p. 11-42. – 2002 – Relaţiile externe ale oraşelor greceşti de pe litoralul românesc al Mării Negre, Cluj-Napoca. Russu I. I., 1957 – « Le décret inédit de Kallatis en l'honneur d'Isagoras », Dacia N.S. 1, p. 179-190. Ruzé F., 1974 – « La fonction des probouloi dans le monde grec antique », Mélanges d'histoire ancienne offerts à William Seston, Paris, p. 443-462. Saitta G., 1955 – « Lisimaco di Tracia », Kokalos 1, p. 62-154.

Salomone Gaggero E., 1978 – « Relations politiques et militaires de Mithridate VI Eupator avec les populations et les cités de la Thrace et avec les colonies grecques de la mer Noire occidentale », Pulpudeva 2, p. 294-305. Saprykin S.Ju., 1985 – « Severnaja liga », dans Pričernomor'e v epokhu ellenizma, Tbilisi, p. 49-61. – 1986 – Gerakleja Pontijskaja i Khersones Tavričeskij, Moscou. – 1997 – Heracleia Pontica and Tauric Chersonesus before Roman Domination, VI–I Centuries B.C., Amsterdam. – 1998 – « The Foundation of Tauric Chersonesus », dans G.R. Tsetskhladze (éd.) 1998, p. 227-248. Sarikakis Th., 1971 – ÔRwmai'oi a[rconte" th'" ejparciva" Makedoniva" I, Thessaloniki. Sauciuc-Săveanu T., 1924a – « Kallatis », Dacia 1, p. 108-165. – 1924b – « Observations concernant deux décrets des ‘thiasites’ de Kallatis », Dacia 1, p. 317-324. – 1925 – « Kallatis », Dacia 2, p. 104-137. – 1927-1932 – « Kallatis », Dacia 3-4, p. 411-482. – 1935 – « Epigrama sepulcrală din Muzeul din Constanţa a lui Hermogenes şi alte fragmente de inscripţii », Analele Dobrogei 16, p. 163-165. – 1935-1936 – « Kallatis », Dacia 5-6, p. 247-319. – 1936a – Titus Vitrasius Pollio şi oraşul Kallatis, Cernăuţi. – 1936b – Inscripţie murală latină din Kallatis din vremea praes. prov. M. Valerius Bradua, Cernăuţi. – 1937a – Un nou fragment al inscripţiei murale din Kallatis şi alte fragmente arheologice, Cernăuţi. – 1937b – « Eijsagwgei'" la Kallatis », dans Omagiu lui Ion Nistor, Cernăuţi, p. 691-696. – 1938 – « Kallatis », dans L'archéologie en Roumanie, Bucarest, p. 51-72 + LXIX pl. hors-texte. – 1937-1940 – « Kallatis », Dacia 7-8, p. 223-281. – 1940 – « Archäologische Grabungen im alten Kallatis », Bericht über den 6. Internationalen KongreŞ für Archäologie, 1939, Berlin. – 1943 – « Aus der Vergangenheit einer dorischen Kolonie am Westgestade des Schwarzen Meeres », Europäischer Wissenschaftsdienst 3 (8), p. 16-18. – 1941-1944 – « Kallatis », Dacia 9-10, p. 243-347. – 1946 – « çmpăratul Traian şi Marea Neagră », Revista istorică română 16, p. 119-128. – 1947 – « Nouvelles recherches et fouilles archéologiques en Roumanie », Bulletin de la Section historique de l'Académie Roumaine 28 (1), p. 1-35. – 1958 – « Ariston Aristons Sohn aus Kallatis », Dacia N.S. 2, p. 207-225. – 1960 – « Publius Vinicius, stratagos, patron al oraşului Kallatis », dans Omagiu lui Constantin Daicoviciu, Bucarest, p. 501-507. – 1963 – « Fragment de inscripţie greacă funerară », SCIV 14 (2), p. 419-425. – 1964 – « Bemerkungen zur Thiasiteninschrift aus Kallatis aus der Zeit des Basileus Simos », Dacia N.S. 8, p. 331-334. – 1965 – « Dedicaţie pentru Athena Polias din Kallatis », SCIV 16 (2), p. 353-355. – 1967 – « Un decret de politie callatian », SCIV 18 (3), p. 501507 ; version allemande : Sauciuc-Săveanu 1969a. – 1969a – « Zu einem Politiedekret aus Kallatis », Klio 51, p. 217-229 ; version roumaine : Sauciuc-Săveanu 1967. – 1969b – « Un fragment de epigramă greacă pentru Nikaso din Kallatis », Pontica 2, p. 245-252. Sauciuc-Săveanu T., Popescu Em., 1965 – « O inscripţie din secolul al IV-lea e. n. descoperită la Kallatis », SCIV 16 (4), p. 809-817.

281

ANCIENT GREEK COLONIES IN THE BLACK SEA 2 Sauciuc-Săveanu T., Rădulescu A., 1968 – « Inscripţia lui Herennios Apollinaris din Kallatis », Pontica 1, p. 307-317. Scarlat S., 1973 – « Portul antic Kallatis. Cercetări de arheologie submarină », Acta Musei Napocensis 10, p. 529540. – 1976 – « Studiu asupra modificării conturului ţărmului dintre Constanţa şi Mangalia în ultimele milenii pe baza cercetărilor submarine şi a obiectelor arheologice descoperite pe fundul mării », Studii şi materiale de muzeografie şi istoire militară 9, p. 16-31. Schwartz E., 1901 – « Demetrios (77) », RE IV 2, col. 28062807. Scorpan C., 1966 – Reprezentări bacchice, Constanţa. – 1967 – Cavalerul Trac, Constanţa. – 1970 – « Ancore antice descoperite pe coastele submarine ale Kallatisului şi unele probleme ale navigaţiei în Pontul Stîng », SCIV 21 (4), p. 639-647. – 1973 – « Tipi sconosciuti di lumini a olio romani e il problema di certe trasmissioni nel primo feudalesimo », Pontica 6, p. 209-228. – 1974 – « Note sur les fouilles de sauvegarde [sic !] de Kallatis – 1971 », Pontica 7, p. 191-197. Seyrig H., 1968 – « Monnaies hellénistiques de Byzance et de Calcédoine », dans C.M. Kraay et G.K. Jenkins (éds.), Essays in Greek Coinage presented to Stanley Robinson, Oxford, p. 183-200. – 1969 – « Monnaies hellénistiques XIV-XVII », RN 6e sér., 11, p. 36-53. Sîrbu V., 1985 – « Ştampile de amfore inedite de la Kallatis », Pontica 18, p. 75-84. Skeat T.C., 1974 – Greek Papyri in the British Museum VII. The Zenon Archive, London. Slavova M., 1998a – « Ošte vednă za horotezijata ot Dionisopolis (IGBulg V, 5011 », Arkheologija (Sofia) 39 (3-4), p. 57-62. – 1998b – « Lines 26-32 of the Horothesia of Dionysopolis (IGBulg V, 5011) », ZPE 120 (1998), p. 99-106. Slobozianu H., 1959 – « Consideraţii asupra aşezărilor antice din jurul lacurilor Techirghiol şi Agigea », Materiale 5, p. 735-752. Slobozianu H., Ţicu I., 1966 – « Aşezarea antică de la Schitu (reg. Dobrogea) », SCIV 17 (4), p. 679-702. Stancomb W.M., 1998 – « Agathopolis : A Mint on the Black Sea Coast », dans R. Ashton & S. Hurter, in association with G. Le Rider & R. Bland (éds.), Studies in Greek Numismatics in Memory of Martin Jessop Price, London, p. 335-338. – 2000 – Sylloge nummorum Graecorum, Great Britain XI : The William Stancomb Collection of Coins of the Black Sea Region, Oxford. Stoian I., 1965 – « Sur la communauté des cités grecques du Pont Gauche », Latomus 24, p. 70-89 = Stoian 1972, p. 147166. – 1972 – Études histriennes, Bruxelles. Suceveanu A., 1966 – « Un Callatien dans l'armée d'Alexandre le Grand », Dacia N.S. 10, p. 339-346. – 1969 – « Două note privind istoria Moesiei în secolul I î. e. n. », Pontica 2, p. 269-284. – 1977 – « Beiträge zur rechtlichen Struktur der landwirtschaftlichen Produktionsstätten in den westpontischen Städten (2. bis 3. Jahrhundert u. Z.) », Jahrbuch für Wirtschaftsgeschichte (2), p. 65-89 ; version roumaine dans Pontica 10 (1977), p. 97-116. – 1982 – « ÔHraklh'" Farangeivth" = Hercules saxanus ou ripensis », Wissenschaftliche Zeitschrift der HumboldtUniversität zu Berlin, Ges.–Sprachwiss. 31, p. 291-292.

Suceveanu A., Barnea A., 1991 – La Dobroudja romaine, Bucarest. Susemihl F., 1891 – Geschichte der griechischen Literatur in der Alexandrinerzeit I, Leipzig. Szilágyi J. Gy., 2000 – « Späthellenismus in Kallatis », dans Avram et Babeş (éds.) 2000, p. 216-223. Šelov D.B., 1965 – « Car' Atej », Numizmatika i sfragistika 2, p. 16-40. Ştefan A., 1973 – « Chronologie des inscriptions grecques de Kallatis établie à l'aide du calculateur », StCl 15, p. 99-107. – 1974a – « Die Getreidekrisen in den Städten an den westlichen und nördlichen Küsten des Pontos Euxeinos in der hellenistischen Zeit », dans E. Ch. Welskopf (éd.), Hellenische Poleis. Krise–Wandlung–Wirkung II, Berlin, p. 648-663. – 1974b – « Epigramă funerară din Kallatis », Pontica 7, p. 281-293. – 1975a – « Le début de la domination romaine sur les cités de la côte Ouest du Pont-Euxin : date et circonstances », dans Actes de la XIIe Conférence internationale d'études classiques ‘Eirene’, Cluj-Napoca, 2–7 octobre 1972, Bucarest – Amsterdam, p. 621-631. – 1975b – « Kallatis à l'époque du Haut-Empire à la lumière des documents épigraphiques », Dacia N.S. 19, p. 161-172. – 1977 – « Graffite callatien du IVe siècle av. n. è. », dans Pippidi et Popescu (éds.) 1977, p. 25-32. – 1979 – « Rapports religieux entre les cités du Pont-Euxin – Histria, Tomis, Kallatis – et le monde oriental », Actes de la XIVe Conférence internationale d'études classiques ‘Eirene’ I, Erevan, p. 266-279. – 1984a – « Kallatis şi artera litorală în secolul al II-lea e. n. », StCl 22, p. 95-107. – 1984b – « Relations étrangères des cités du Pont Gauche à l'époque hellénistique », dans J. Harmatta (éd.), Actes du VIIe Congrès de la Fédération Internationale des Associations d'Études Classiques I, Budapest, p. 329-338. Tacheva M., 1995 – « About the so-called Scythian Kings and their Coinage in the Greek Cities of Thracia Pontica (The End of the IIIrd–2nd Century B.C.) », Dobrudža 12, p. 717. Tacheva-Hitova M., 1983 – Eastern Cults in Moesia Inferior and Thracia, Leiden. Tafrali O., 1925 – « La cité pontique de Kallatis », RA 5e sér., 21, p. 238-292 ; texte repris avec quelques compléments dans Arta şi arheologia 1 (1927), p. 17-55. – 1928 – « Les tumuli de Kallatis », Arta şi arheologia 2, p. 2353. Talmaţchi G., 1999 – « Monede scitice descoperite în Dobrogea », Pontica 32, p. 307-312. – 2002-2003 – « Scurtă privire asupra ariei de difuzare a monedelor autonome emise de Kallatis şi Tomis », Pontica 35-36, p. 395-408. Tarn W.W., 1913 – Antigonos Gonatas, Oxford. Teodor S., Nicu M., Ţau S., 1987 – « Tezaurul de monede callatiene descoperit la Poiana, judeţul Galaţi », ThracoDacica 8, p. 133-138. Theodorescu D., 1963 – « L'édifice romano-byzantin de Kallatis », Dacia N.S. 7, p. 257-300. Thériault G., 1996 – Le culte d'Homonoia dans les cités grecques, Québec. Thomasson B., 1991 – Legatus. Beiträge zur römischen Verwaltungsgeschichte, Stockholm. Thompson M., 1954 – « A Countermarked Hoard from Büyükçekmece », The American Numismatic Society. Museum Notes 6, p. 11-34.

282

ALEXANDRU AVRAM: KALLATIS Vitucci G., 1953 – Il regno di Bitinia, Roma. Vulpe R., 1935-1936 – « Deux terres cuites grecques de Kallatis », Dacia 5-6, p. 329-339. – 1938 – Histoire ancienne de la Dobroudja, Bucarest. – 1943 – « Gerania, Cranea, Ekrenè », Balcania 6, p. 14-29. – 1964 – « Ex-voto au Cavalier Thrace provenant de Kallatis », Dacia N.S. 8, p. 335-343 = Vulpe 1976, p. 266-276. – 1966 – Vechi focare de civilizaţie : Istria, Tomis, Kallatis, Bucarest. – 1976 – Studia Thracologica, Bucarest. Vulpe R., Barnea I., 1968 – Din istoria Dobrogei II. Romanii la Dunărea de jos, Bucarest. Wilhelm A., 1922 – « Zu griechischen Inschriften und Papyri », AAWW 59, p. 72-76. – 1928a – « Zu einem BeschluŞe von Thiasiten aus Kallatis betreffend Beiträge zum Baue eines Tempels des Dionysos », AAWW 65, p. 129-145. – 1928b – « Zu einem BeschluŞ von Thiasiten aus Kallatis », Hermes 63, p. 225-231 et 364-366. Will É., 1979 – Histoire politique du monde hellénistique I. De la mort d'Alexandre aux avènements d'Antiochos III et Philippe V, 2e éd., Nancy (réimpression Paris, 2003). Youroukova Y., 1976 – Coins of the Ancient Thracians, Oxford. – 1977 – « Nouvelles données sur la chronologie des rois scythes en Dobrudža », Thracia 4, p. 105-121. – 1995 – « Une nouvelle monnaie d'Agathopolis », SCN 11, p. 23-27. Zavatin-Coman E., 1971 – « Un nou relief votiv privind cultul Cavalerului Trac », Pontica 4, p. 297-301. – 1972 – «La tombe grecque avec kalpis de Mangalia», Dacia N.S. 16, p. 271-280 ; version roumaine dans Pontica 5, p. 103-116. Zolotarev M.I., 2003 – «Chersonesus Tauricus. The Foundation and the Development of the Polis», dans D. V. Grammenos et E. K. Petropoulos (éds.), Ancient Greek Colonies in the Black Sea I, Thessaloniki, p. 603-644.

Tocilescu G., 1900 – Fouilles et recherches archéologiques en Roumanie, Bucarest. Tréheux J., 1989 – « Sur les probouloi en Grèce », BCH 113, p. 241-247. Tsetskhladze G.R. (éd.), 1998 – The Greek Colonisation of the Black Sea Area. Historical Interpretation of Archaeology, Historia. Einzelschriften 121, Stuttgart. Tudor D., 1956 – « Inscripţii romane inedite din Oltenia şi Dobrogea », Materiale 2, p. 563-624. – 1980 – « Comunicări epigrafice X », Pontica 13, p. 241-253. Ulanici A., 1974 – « Cu privire la data întemeierii oraşului Kallatis », Muzeul Naţional 1, p. 191-195. Velkov V., 1994 – « Le port de la colonie grecque Agathopolis », dans M. Lazarov et C. Angelova (éds.), Les ports dans la vie de la Thrace ancienne, Actes du Symposium international, 7-12 octobre 1991, Sozopol (Thracia Pontica 5), p. 105-112. Vermaseren M. J., 1989 – Corpus cultus Cybelae Attidisque VI, Leiden. Vertan A., 1980 – « Tezaurul monetar de la Mangalia din vremea lui Gordian al III-lea », Pontica 13, p. 330-340. – 1999 – « Evenimente politice reflectate în descoperirile de tezaure monetare imperiale din Dobrogea », Pontica 32, p. 119-136. Vertan A., Georgescu N., Ocheşeanu R., 1990 – « Un depozit de denari romani republicani descoperit la Mangalia », Pontica 23, p. 221-224. Veyne P., 1966 – « Augustal de l'an I – premier pontarque », BCH 90, p. 144-155. Vinogradov Ju.G., 1984 – « Dekret v chest' Antesterija i krizis Ol'vijskogo polisa v epokhu ellinizma », VDI (1), p. 51-80. – 1989 – Politicheskaja istorija Ol'vijskogo polisa VII–I vv. do n.e., Moscou. – 1997 – Pontische Studien. Kleine Schriften zur Geschichte und Epigraphik des Schwarzmeerraumes, Mainz. – 1999 – « Der Staatsbesuch der ‘Isis’ im Bosporos », ACSS 5 (4), p. 271-302. Vinogradov J.G., Wörrle M., 1992 – « Die Söldner von Phanagoreia », Chiron 22, p. 159-170. Vinogradov Y.G., Zolotarev M.I., 1999 – « Worship of the Sacred Egyptian Triad in Chersonesus (Crimea) », ACSS 5 (4), p. 357-381.

283

ANCIENT GREEK COLONIES IN THE BLACK SEA 2

Figure 1. Le côté N du rempart romain tardif vu de l'O.

Figure 2. La "basilique syrienne".

284

ALEXANDRU AVRAM: KALLATIS

Figure 3. Détail du côté N du rempart romain tardif.

Figure 4. Le côté N du rempart romain tardif vu de l'E.

285

ANCIENT GREEK COLONIES IN THE BLACK SEA 2

Figure 5. Le site fortifié d'Albesti (d'après Talanta 32-33, 2000-2001, p. 190, fig. 1a).

286

Tomis Livia Buzoianu* Maria Bărbulescu** Tomis1 was founded together with Histria and Kallatis during the Greek colonisation process at the West Pont in

the 7th-6th century BC.2 The Tomitan promontory was used as an unavoidable stopover for navigators. The literary sources (Strabo, Geogr., VII, 6, 1; Pomponius Mela, De Chorogr., II, 2, 22; Ptolemaeus, Geogr., III, 10, 3; Arrian, Scutam Durae Europi repertum, Tabula Peutingeriana, Itinerarium Antonini etc.) determine its place on the West Pont, between Histria and Kallatis, and the distance in stadia to this site: 250 stadia from Histria and 280 from Kallatis according to Strabo, or 300 stadia from both according to Arrian.3 Later sources do not emphasize this enumeration order so much, however it is worth mentioning the sequence recorded by a geographer from Ravenna: Kallatis-Stratonis-Tomis-Histria; other documents either use a selective notation (Amminaus Marcellinus) or a combination of the position of various toponyms (Procopius of Caesarea).

∗

Livia Buzoianu, Romania, Constanţa, 1c Dragoslavelor Street, Bl. B1, Sc A, ap. 7. Archaeologist, Constanţa National History and Archaeology Museum. Graduated from the Faculty of Classical Languages, University of Bucharest. Works as an archaeologist at the excavations sites of Histria and Albeşti (Constanţa county). PhD in history. Author of The Greek Civilisation in the West-Pontic Area and its Impact upon the Autochtonous World (the 7th-4th Centurys B.C.) and Poetica Verba. Interest: Greek amphorae imports in the West-Pontic area. E-mail: [email protected] ∗∗ Maria Bărbulescu, Romania, Constanţa, 2 Căpitan Dobrilă Eugeniu Street, Bl. H, sc A, et 4, ap. 19. Professor, Faculty of History, ‘Ovidius’ University, Constanţa, Romania. Graduated from the Faculty of History, ‘Babeş-Bolyai’ University, Cluj-Napoca. Works as an archaeologist at the excavation sites of Tomis, Tropeaum Traiani and Albeşti (Constanţa county). PhD in history. Author of the volume Rural Life in Roman Dobrudja (the 1st-3rd Centuries A.D.). Specialist in Greek-Latin epigraphy. 1 Tomis’ history is presented in some monographs: I. Stoian, Tomitana. Contribuţii epigrafice la istoria cetăţii Tomis (Tomitana. Epigraphical Contributions to the history of the city of Tomis), Bucureşti, 1962; V. Barbu, Tomis, oraşul poetului exilat (Tomis, the city of the Exiled Poet), Bucureşti, 1972; V. Canarache, Tomis, Bucureşti, 1961; A. Rădulescu, Tomis, Constanţa, 1967; idem, Ovidiu la Pontul Euxin (Ovid at Pontus Euxinus), Bucureşti, 1981. Historical information about Tomis is included in the volumes: Din istoria Dobrogei (Dobruja’s History) (from now on abbreviated to DID), vol. I: D. Berciu, D.M. Pippidi, Geţi şi greci la Dunărea de Jos (Getae and Greeks at the Lower Danube), Bucureşti, 1965; vol. II: R. Vulpe, I. Barnea, Romanii la Dunărea de Jos (Romans at the Lower Danube), Bucureşti, 1968; vol. III : I. Barnea, Şt. Ştefănescu, Bizantini, romani şi bulgari la Dunărea de Jos (Byzantines, Romans and Bulgarians at the Lower Danube), Bucureşti, 1971; A. Rădulescu, I. Bitoleanu, A concise History of Dobruja, Bucarest, 1984; idem, Istoria Dobrogei (The History of Dobrudja), Constanţa, 1998. We add to these: R. Vulpe’s earlier paper, Histoire ancienne de la Dobroudja, Bucureşti, 1938 (abridged HAD) and a recent paper of Al. Suceveanu, Al. Barnea, La Dobroudja romaine, Bucureşti, 1991. The Tomitan discoveries are discussed in: V. Pârvan, Zidul cetăţii Tomi (The city of Tomis’s wall), Bucureşti, 1915; D.M. Teodorescu, Monumente inedite din Tomis (Unpublished Monuments from Tomis), Bucureşti, 1918; P. Nicorescu, Monumente nouă din teritoriul oraşului Tomi (New Monuments in the city of Tomis’s territory), Bucureşti, 1920; I. Micu, Călăuza vizitatorului în Muzeul regional al Dobrogei (Visitor’s Guide to Dobruja Regional Museum), Cernăuţi, 1937; V. Canarache and A. Aricescu, V. Barbu, A. Rădulescu, Tezaurul de sculpturi de la Tomis (The Catalogue of Sculptures from Tomis), Bucureşti, 1963, (note further Tezaurul); M. Bucovală, Necropole elenistice la Tomis (Hellenistic Necropolis at Tomis), Constanţa, 1968; A. Rădulescu, Monumente romano-bizantine din secenturyorul de vest al cetăţii Tomis (Roman-Byzantine Monuments from the City of Tomis, west side), Constanţa, 1966. The inscriptions are published by I. Stoian in Inscripţiile din Scythia Minor greceşti şi latine. II. Tomis şi teritoriul său (The Greek and Latin Inscriptions from Scythia Minor. II. Tomis and its territory), Bucureşti, 1987 (from now on ISM II); the latest are included by Em. Popescu în Inscripţii greceşti şi latine din sec. IV-XIII descoperite în România (in The Greek and Latin Inscriptions from the 4th-13th centuries found in Romania), Bucureşti, 1976 (from now on IGLR); we mention a collective paper signed by A. Aricescu, V. Barbu, N. Gostar, Gh. Poenaru-Bordea and A. Rădulescu, Noi monumente epigrafice din Scythia Minor (New Epigraphical Monuments from Scythia Minor), Constanţa, 1964 (abridged NMESM). Other information is found in: A. Aricescu, Armata în Dobrogea romană (The Army in Roman Dobruja), Bucureşti, 1977, (from now on Armata); Al. Suceveanu, Viaţa economică în Dobrogea romană (The economy in Roman Dobruja), Bucureşti, 1977 (abridged VEDR); G. Bordenache, Sculture greche e romane del Museo nazionale di antichità di Bucarest. I. Statue e relievi di culto, elemente arhitettonici e decorativi, Bucureşti, 1969; D.M. Pippidi, Contribuţii la istoria veche a României (Contributions to Romania’s ancient history),

The settlement’s name varies in Greek: Τόμις or Τομεύς and in Latin, Tomi or Tomis.4 Other forms – Τομέοι (Pseudo-Skymos), Tomoe, (Pomponius Mela), Tomos (accusative form of a nominative Tomoi in Pliny the Elder) or in the Greek form in the same case relation Τόμους-Τόμοι (Apollodori Bibliotheca), Τομέα (Scutum Durae Europi) or with the accusative form Τομέας from the nominative Τομεῖς (in Arrian) – are considered incorrect or rare forms. The coins have at various times Bucureşti, 1967; (note Contribuţii2) idem, Studii de istorie a religiilor antice. Texte şi interpretări (Ancient Religions Studies. Texts and Interpretations), Bucureşti, 1969, (note Studii); the recent monographs on Dobruja’s separate subjects during the Roman age: M. Bărbulescu, Viaţa rurală în Dobrogea romană (sec. I-III p. Chr.) (Rural Life in Roman Dobruja (the 1st-3rd centuries AD), Constanţa, 2001; Z. Covacef, Arta sculpturală în Dobrogea romană (sec. I-III) (The Sculpture Art in Roman Dobruja (the 1st-3rd centuries AD), ClujNapoca, 2002; A. Vertan, Circulaţia monetară în Dobrogea romană (secolele I-III) (Coin Circulation in Roman Dobruja 1st-3rd centuries AD), Cluj-Napoca, 2002. 2 J. Boardman, The Greeks Overseas, London, 1964 (Romanian version by M. Alexandrescu-Vianu and P. Alexandrescu, Bucureşti, 1988), chapter 6 (The North and the Black Sea); P. Alexandrescu, Dosar pentru Marea Neagră (File for the Black Sea), Ibid., p. 409-428; D.M. Pippidi in DID I, p. 139-156; idem, Contribuţii2, passim; idem, Scythica Minora. Recherches sur les colonies grecques du littoral roumain de la mer Noire, Bucureşti-Amsterdam, 1975, passim; P. Alexandrescu, ‘La colonisation grecque’, in l’Aigle sur le Dauphin, Bucarest-Paris, 1999, p. 1-48; Istros/Histria, Ibid., p. 49-181.; G.R. Tsetkhladze, Greek Colonisation of the Black Sea Area. Stages, Models and Native Population, in The Greek Colonisation of the Black Sea Area, Stuttgart, 1998, p. 9-68 (especially p. 15-43); Al. Avram, ‘Pentru o fenomenologie a raporturilor dintre geţi şi greci’ (For a Phenomenology of the Relationships between the Getae and Greeks), in Symposia Thracologica, 7 (1989), Tulcea, p. 70-93; L. Buzoianu, Civilizaţia greacă în zona vest-pontică şi impacenturyul ei asupra lumii autohtone (sec. VII-V a. Chr.) (The Greek Civilisation in the West-Pontic Area and Its Impacentury Upon the Autochtonous World (7th–5th centurys BC), Constanţa, 2001, p. 192-207. 3 For the quoted authors see also, Fontes ad Historiam Dacoromaniae Pertinentes, I, Bucureşti, 1964, passim; in brief, M. Bărbulescu, L. Buzoianu, ‘Tomisul în lumina izvoarelor literare antice’ (Tomis in light of the ancient literary sources), în Din istoria Europei romane (in From the History of the Roman Europe), Oradea, 1995, p. 61-68. 4 See the subject in I. Stoian, Tomitana, p. 13 and 16.

287

ANCIENT GREEK COLONIES IN THE BLACK SEA 2 different engravings: Τόμι, Τομέως, Τόμος, Τομέων (on the autonomous coins the most frequent form is Τόμι).5 Epigraphical documents6 constantly mention Τόμις (in Greek) and Tomis (in Latin). A nominative form Τομεύς appears like a poetical form for Τόμις. The settlement is named terra Tomitana (Ovid, Ex Ponto, I, 1, 1-2) and the inhabitants are Tomitae (Ovid), Τομίτης, Τομ(ε)ίτης (plural Τομ(ε)ῖται) and Tomitani in the epigraphical sources.

using older sources from the 5th century AD, maintains the form Τόμις, referring to the distance of 6000 stadia which separates this city from the mouth of the river Phasis. Later on (7th-8th centuries), the form Tomis can be found in the geographer from Ravenna; inspired by older maps, the above-mentioned source maintains the sequence Kallatis-Stratonis-Tomis-Istriopolis.13 Based on Hierocles, a source from the 10th century, Constantinus Porphirogenetus maintains both toponyms of Τόμις and Κωνσταντιανά.14

The toponym gave rise to some searching etymologies connected with Absyrtos’ death, in Ovid (Tristia, III, 9, 1-10) and in a mythological compendium from the 1st– 2nd centuries AD. known as The Library of Apollodorus.7 Both sources bring together the settlement’s name and the Greek names τόμος = cutting, piece and τομεύς = knife, blade. There are also myths about ‘the founder hero’ and ‘the founder heroine’, the first recognized on the local coins8 and the latter variant mentioned by a writer of the 6th century AD, Iordannes, who probably wanted to explain the Scythian presence in Dobruja in the 4th century BC. According to Iordannes (Getica, 62), their queen, Tomyris, built the city of Tomis on the Moesian shore of the Pont and named it after her.

In the 11-12th centuries Georgios Kedrenos15 and Zonaras16 mention the recurrent Byzantine authority over the Greek city on the north of the Danube named Constanteia (Κωνσταντεία), from whence came messengers to the Emperor Ioannes Tzimiskes. The toponym has been successively identified with Constantiana Daphne (location as yet unknown) or with Constanţa. Italian nautical maps from the 14th–16th centuries use the name Constanza.17 Under the Ottoman administration, the adapted name Kiustenge did not eliminate the old one, Constanza. Finally the Romanian administration, installed after 1878, definitively established the form Constanţa.

Beyond these popular etymologies we take into consideration Ovid’s notation, according to whom the name of this place is older than the city (sed vetus huic nomen positaque antiquius urbe, Tristia, III, 9, 5). Maybe starting from this sentence, some researchers pronounce their support for a Thracian etymology9 and suggest that Tomi was a result of an older Indoeuropean root * tum- = elevation of the ground, refering to a geographical aspect of the place.10

Considering again the older toponyms Tomis and Constantiana, the simultaneity of their usage in the same sources creates two interpretations: a city Constantiana or Constantia could have been existed near Tomis, which would permit the name substitution; or both names Tomis and Constantiana could have been simultaneously attributed to the same city in the 4th century AD.18 Later on, the old name would have disappeared from usage and only the name Constantiana remained in use.

Written sources from the 6th century A.D. (Hierocles, Procopius of Caesarea), mention a new toponym in parallel with the old one Τόμις, that is Κωνσταντιανά.11 However, as none of the sources observed a toponymical order and the two forms appear in texts in different places, it is difficult to determine whether the two names represent one topos or two different topoi. An anonymous source (Υποτύποσις γεωγραϕίας ἐν ἐπιτομή, 41),12 probably from the beginning of the 6th century AD and

A problem would be the possible derivation from Constantiana of the name Constantia: it is generally admitted that Constantia and then Constanţa would be the shortening of the archaic form.19 A funeral inscription from the 5th-6th centuries BC, found in Constanţa (IGLR 37) mentions clearly that the deceased originated from Constantiana (ἀπὸ Κωνσταντιανᾶς).20 This inscription provides epigraphical confirmation only for the toponym Constantiana, but

5 C. Moisil, Creşterea colecţiilor, 1912 (Collections Development, 1912), The Romanian Academy, The Numismatic Office, 1912, p. 21102. 6 ISM II, p. 407 and 409, Geographica: Τομ(ε)ῖται, Τομ(ε)ίτης, Τομεύς, Τόμις, Tomis, Tomitani. 7 Apollodori Bibliotheca, I, 133, in Fontes, I, p. 464-465. 8 B. Pick, K. Regling, Die Antiken Münzen von Dazien und Moesien, II, 1, Berlin, 1910, p. 614. 9 Chr. Danov, Zapadnijat briag na Cerno More v drevnostata, Sofia, 1947, p. 80-81. 10 W. Tomaschek, Die alten Thraken: eine ethnologische Untersuchung, Wienne, 1893-1894, II, 2, p. 75; E. Philippon, Les peuples primitifs de l’Europe méridionale, Paris, 1925, p. 7. 11 Hierocles, Synekdemos, 637, 1 şi 6; Procopius of Caesarea, De aedificiis, IV, 11 (see Fontes, II, Bucureşti, 1970, p. 350-351 and 472475). 12 Ὑποτύποσις γεωγραϕίας ἐν ἐπιτομή, 41, in Fontes, II, p. 343.

13

Cosmographia, IV, 6, 47. Constantinus Porphyrogenetus, De thematibus, 47, 1, 58-60. Georgios Kedrenos, Synopsis, 23. 16 Zonaras, Chronicon, XVII, 2, 33. 17 N. Grămadă, ‘La Scizia Minore nelle carte nautiche del Medio Evo’, Ephemeris Daco-romana 4 (1930), p. 220-227, 236-240. 18 N. Grămadă, op.cit., p. 238. 19 A. Aricescu, Armata, p. 164 rebuts the variant Constantiana: the toponym belongs to another Dobrujan settlement, and the present word for the city’s name cannot be explained as originating in the former Constantiana. 20 I. Barnea, DID II, p. 463; Em. Popescu, ‘Constantiana. Un problème de géographie historique de la Scythie Mineure’, BZ 66 (1973), p. 359382 (other localization); R. Vulpe, ‘Note de istorie tomitană’ (Tomitan History Notes), Pontice 2 (1969), p. 159. 14 15

288

LIVIA BUZOIANU & MARIA BĂRBULESCU: TOMIS consideration the 6th century BC, but no later than the second quarter of the century.31

does not solve the identity problem or provide the site of the two toponyms. Making a distinction on the actual city map between the peninsular area and the continental area, it was assumed21 that the first represents the older Tomis and the second refers to Constantiana/Constantia. The evolution of this continental city area called for a new name, which, by extension was then applied to the whole territory.22 The moment when the name Tomis went out of use is dated to the second half of the 7th century AD.23

Histria is without doubt the oldest colony among those in the area, chronologically speaking. Concerning Tomis and Kallatis, opinions differ in accepting the priority of the first, citing as an argument the topographical situation and the city’s origin: ‘building Histria, the Milesians must have been sure about all the main stations and the access road to Histria and the Tomitan promontory’.32 D.M. Pippidi suggests a reverse chronological order: both Tomis and Kallatis are founded in the 6th century, but with the possible precedence of Kallatis.33

The name Constantiana/Constantia would have been connected with one of the members of the Constantinian dynasty, either Constantius II, known for carrying out an intensive building activity in Scythia Minor, or his daugther, Flavia Maxima Constantia, who was canonized by the Orthodox church.24

The resolution of what chronological relationship between Tomis/Kallatis was, has had only archaeological evidence for support until now and this evidence urges for the precedence of the Tomis.34

The identification of the old city with contemporary Constanţa was adopted in the 19th century, after some different hypotheses had been taken into consideration, for territories including Kiev, Ovidiopol, Midia Cape, Tomiswar, Tuzla, Mangalia, Varna, and the closest area, Anadolchioi, in the district of modern Constanţa.25

The Milesian origin of the colony has been indisputable for a long time. Demetrios of Kallatis affirmed it and Pseudo-Skymos confirmed it: ‘The city of Tomis was a Milesian colony’ (Τομέοι πόλις ἄποικοι γενόμενοι Μιλησίων) (Periegesis, 774); also Ovid later: Miletosida ad urbem, Tristia, I, 10, 41 or Huc quoque Miletoso missi venere coloni (Tristia, III, 9, 3).

The problems concerning the date of the settlement and the origin of the Tomis colony should be discussed simultaneously. Unfortunately, the literary sources do not provide any information about the moment of settlement. It was assumed that Tomis was built at the same time as the first Milesian colonies at Pontus Euxinus or shortly after that (the latest at the beginning of the 6th century BC).26 Other opinions have established this moment during the 7th century BC (Regling, Weiss, Danov).27 However, the majority of historians accept a date in the 6th century BC28: the first half of the century.29 The theory has also been suggested – which we consider the most likely – that a group of colonists left Miletus and settled in the Tomitan promontory between 549-494 BC.30 The most recent historiography also takes under

Arrian gives a general reference, mentioning only the Greek origin of the first colonists (Arrian, Peripl., 24, 1). However, the first written evidence about Tomis appears in Memnon and deals with an event from the middle of the 3rd century BC, an event which we will have the opportunity to mention later on: ‘the war for the emporion of Tomis’(ἐπὶ Τόμεως τοῦ ἐμπορίου). The late literary notation and the special usage of the word ἐμπόριον near Tomis facilitates another opinion: Tomis could have been a colony built not directly by Milesians, but by Histria.35 The first Milesian colonists settled in Tomis would have come from Histria, some time in the first half of the 6th century BC; Tomis would have been used as a main support for the enlargement of Histrian trade interests along the Black Sea west coast to the south.36 The supporters of this opinion are looking for confirmation in archaeological discoveries, especially pieces with pre-monetary value and Histrian wheel coins – in both settlements in the Histrian territory and at

21

R. Vulpe, Pontice 2 (1969), p. 160-162. See also A. Aricescu, Armata, p. 163-164. I. Barnea, DID II, p. 443; R. Vulpe, Pontice 2 (1969), p. 165. 24 Following this idea it was assumed even that one of the basilicas from the city’s continental area could bear its name; R. Vulpe, op.cit., p. 163164. 25 I. Stoian, Tomitana, p. 16 and note 10; N. Lascu: ‘Ştiri şi tradiţii cu privire la locul de exil al lui Ovidiu’ (News and traditions regarding Ovid’s place of exile), in v. Publius Ovidius Naso, Bucureşti, 1957, p. 340-373. 26 R. Vulpe, Pontice 2 (1969), p. 150; I. Stoian, Tomitana, p. 18. 27 B. Pick, K. Regling, op.cit., p. 590; J. Weiss, Die Dobrudscha im Altertum, Sarajevo, 1911, p. 27 and 62; Chr. Danov, Zapadnijat briag, p. 80-81; idem, RE, Suppl. IX, v. Tomis, col. 1397-1398. 28 R. Vulpe, Pontice 2 (1969), p. 152 considers that Milesian colonization activity ended in the first half of the 6th century BC (after 546 BC Miletus couldn’t have colonies and the most recent Milesian city in the left Pontus is Odessos dating to about 570 BC). 29 D.M. Pippidi, DID I, p. 152; further on, p. 157 considers a date at the end of the 6th century AD for the settlement of Histria, Tomis and Kallatis. 30 A. Rădulescu, C. Scorpan, ‘Rezultate preliminare ale săpăturilor arheologice din Tomis (Parcul Catedralei), 1971-1974’ (Preliminary results of the archaeological excavations from Tomis (Cathedral Park) 1971-1974), Pontica 8 (1975), p. 9-54 and especially p. 46-49. 22 23

31 G.R. Tsetskhladze, Greek Penetration of the Black Sea, in The Archaeology of Greek Colonisation, Oxford University Committee for Archaeology, 1994, p. 111-135. 32 R. Vulpe, Pontice 2 (1969), p. 151. 33 D.M. Pippidi, DID I, p. 155. 34 A. Rădulescu, C. Scorpan, Pontica 8 (1975), p. 9-54; A. Rădulescu, ‘Ştiri despre începuturile oraşului Constanţa’ (News about the beginning of Constanţa City), Pontica 10 (1977), p. 53-57; L. Buzoianu, ‘Tipuri de amfore de sec. VI-IV a. Chr. descoperite la Tomis’ (Types of 6-4th century BC amphorae found at Tomis), Pontica 24 (1991), p. 75-96. 35 Vl. Iliescu, ‘Cu privire la coloniile greceşti din Dobrogea şi la data constituirii teritoriului lor rural’ (About the Greek colonies in Dobruja and the date of the formation of their rural territory), Pontica 3 (1970), p. 91-92 and note 52; Al Avram, in Symposia Thracologica 7 (1989), p. 73. 36 C. Preda, Cu privire la începuturile oraşului Tomis (About the beginnings of the city of Tomis), Istro-Pontica, 2000, p. 113.

289

ANCIENT GREEK COLONIES IN THE BLACK SEA 2 Eusebius of Caesarea) or civitas (Eutropius, Rufius Festus, Ammianus Marcellinus – using in parallel the term oppidum – Iordanes, and the Geographer of Ravenna). Strabo uses a diminutive of polis-polichnion, but we are not aware of whether this word is still adequate for the reality of Tomis at the beginning of the Roman age or if it is only an external remark.46 We consider two premises, as follow:

Tomis. At the same time, they cannot find a local trading partner for the relations that the new settlement was supposed to have with the surrounding populations. Just the existence of these pre-monetary and monetary pieces37 and of important handmade ceramic vessels signifies38 – in our opinion – the presence in this very place of exchange partners.39 As a matter of fact, Tomis can be compared, both by its position and by its future development, with the settlements founded by Histria in the area (including also the Nikonion/Roxolani settlement). Considering that ‘Histria played an essential role in Tomis’ early history, by controlling all its economic and political life’,40 we revoke any aspect of autonomy. On the other hand, elements suggesting a direct Milesian foundation are too numerous to be considered all of Histrian origin; we are taking into consideration inscriptions dialect, attestation of Ionian tribes, institutions, religion and anthroponomy.41 We retain the opinion that the researchers at Cathedral Park have expressed for some time: the hypothesis that Tomis could have been a Histrian creation continues to be a difficult statement to prove.42

a) the existence of the settlement of Tomis earlier than the first written record; we have already proved and accepted that Tomis was settled in the 6th century BC (probably in the second half of the century). b) the second premise means admitting to some common events for Tomis and the West Pontic shore by content and consequence, events taking place previous to those of the middle of the 3rd century BC mentioned by Memnon. Using a methodological point of view, we divide the above-mentioned period of time into four stages corresponding to the most important historical moments for the ancient city:

A study of the different data from the settlement of Tomis has been done, taking into consideration the moments when it was nominated as an emporion or a polis: the early date would refer to the emporion phase (which would have lasted until the event from Memnon’s text) and the later date to that of polis.43 As has been demonstrated,44 the two terms do not exclude one another and do not have any legal implication, and we consider that the first refers to the financial position and marks Tomis as an exclusive port settlement, built only for small trade.45 This could explain as well, the modest developmental level maintained by Tomis for a long time after its foundation and its absence in major events in the West Pont until the 3rd century B.C.

– stage I: the 6th century–middle of the 3rd century BC (from the settlement to the ‘war for Tomis’); – stage II: middle of the 3rd century BC–the first decades of the 1st century B.C. (from ‘the war for Tomis’ to the first Roman military presence in the West Pont); – stage III: the 1st century BC–the 3rd century AD, the early Roman Age; – stage IV: the end of the 3rd century BC–6th (7th) century AD, the late Roman period. This chronology is based on the stratigraphical evidence discovered in the area (the Cathedral Park area47 and notes about the salvage excavations from other places in the peninsula)48 in correlation with archaeological materials found and with city administration elements, even if historians haven’t completed their opinion regarding these last. The presentation of the archaeological situation is precedeed by a historical commentary for every period.

Regarding its nomination, the majority of the literary sources call it a polis (Ptolemaios, Arrian, Sozomenus, Zosimos) or the Latin equivalents urbs (Ovidius and 37 C. Scorpan, ‘Vârfuri de săgeţi – semne premonetare şi monede cu „roată’ descoperite la Tomis’ (Arrow Heads – Pre-monetary symbols and coins with wheels found at Tomis), SCN 7 (1980), p. 25-34; G. Talmaţchi, ‘Descoperiri premonetare şi monetare în Dobrogea (sec. VI-I a. Chr.)’ (Pre-monetary and Monetary discoveries in Dobruja (the 6th1st centuries AD)), Pontica 35-36 (2002-2003), p. 360. 38 C. Scorpan, ‘Prezenţa şi continuitatea getică în Tomis şi Kallatis’ (The Getic Presence and the continuity in Tomis and Kallatis), SCIV 21 (1970), 1, p. 65-90; L. Arsenie, ‘Ceramica lucrată cu mâna de la Tomis. Stadiul actual al cercetărilor’ (Handmade ceramics from Tomis. The Present Research Stage), Pontica 33-34 (2000-2001), p. 283-298. 39 L. Buzoianu, Civilizaţia greacă, p. 281-286. 40 C. Preda, Istro-Pontica, 2000, p. 112. 41 D.M. Pippidi, DID I, p. 202-203; I Stoian, Tomitana, p. 17-18; 56-74; 148-160; idem, ‘Le culte des Dioscures et les tribus tomitaines à la lumière d’un monument récemment publiés’, Dacia NS, 10 (1966), p. 347-349, 355-356; R. Vulpe, Pontice 2 (1969), p. 151-152; L. Buzoianu, op.cit., p. 207-220. 42 A. Rădulescu, C. Scorpan, Pontica 8 (1975), p. 49. 43 I. Stoian, Tomitana, p. 18; R. Vulpe, Pontice 2 (1969), p. 153 and note 19; G. Talmaţchi, Pontica 35-36 (2002-2003), p. 362 and note 36, 37. 44 A. Bresson, Les cités grecques et leurs emporia, in Emporion, ed. A. Bresson, P. Rouillard, Paris, 1993, p. 163-226. 45 R. Vulpe, Pontice 2 (1969), p. 153-154.

Stage I (the 6th–middle of the 3rd century BC) Following major events as they develop, unfortunately we cannot pronounce our opinion upon the first, the invasion or rather the consequences of the Persian invasion at the end of the 6th century BC.49 This date is 46 Strabo, VII, 6, 1; see the discussion about the word at D.M. Pippidi, DID I, p. 319; R. Vulpe, op.cit., p. 154. 47 See above, note 30. 48 Many unpublished; see also our notes in Pontica 24 (1991), p. 80. 49 See generally, P. Alexandrescu, ‘Izvoare greceşti despre retragerea lui Darius din expediţia scitică’ (Greek Sources about Darius’ retreat from the Scythian expedition), SCIV 7 (1956), 3-4, p. 319-341; idem, ‘Histria în epoca arhaică’ (Histria in Archaic Age), Pontica 19 (1986), p. 28-31 also and especially note 99; S. Dimitriu, ‘Evénements du Pont Euxin de la fin du VI e siècle av.n.è. reflétés dans l’histoire d’Histria’, Dacia NS 8 (1964), p. 133-144; see L. Buzoianu, Civilizaţia greacă, p. 31-39.

290

LIVIA BUZOIANU & MARIA BĂRBULESCU: TOMIS the Sicilian historian mentioned only Histria deliberately, that was on account of the fact that the powerful Milesian city was not neighbouring Kallatis, so it could not be included in the cathegory of καὶ τὰς ἄλλας τὰς πλησιοχώρους πολεῖς which was appropiate for Tomis. Neither its geographical position or its economic condition, as we will see below, until that moment excluded this participation (we should admit the name πόλις, indirectly mentioned for the settlement at the end of the 4th century BC). Moreover, if we consider that Miletos was involved in the uprising against Lysimachus, then Tomis’ participation in the event seems certain.59

early for Tomis and for us to venture making any supposition or analogy with Histria would be helpful. Furthermore, concerning the interest of Athens and its league for the Pontic Greek cities,50 we do not think the small settlement would attract the attention of the powerful symmachia, or that it could afford to be a member and take on that responsibility. We do not have any direct information even for Scythian domination (until the date of the conflict between Athens and Phillip II from 339 B.C.) or Macedonian domination following the event mentioned above, which probably ended when Lysimachus died (281 B.C.). If we admit to Scythian authority in Dobruja from the middle of the 4th century, so before the date of the war,51 probably Iordanes’ note from Getica (II, 10, 65) according to which Tomis is under Gethian authority actually referred to the Scythians.52 The word subjected could refer to some tribute like a money payment.53 Later, Macedonian military intervention could represent the relieving of the barbarian fear and the establishment of a new ‘protectorate’. It is difficult to determine if this protectorate was installed in a violent manner54 or if it was accepted and followed by agreements and an immediate Macedonian presence here.55 We are not sure if a comparison with Histria would help at this point. The statement that Tomis had a similar attitude to Histria with regard to Phillip and occupied the same position56 does not have adequate argumentation.57 It is possible that the traces of fire noticed at Tomis were the consequence of these events or else some others following towards the end of the century, meaning the Pontic cities uprising against the diadoch Lysimachus.58 Tomis seemed to take part in the Pontic cities alliance against Lysimachus, followed twice by the siege against Kallatis and the defeat of the allies. Diodorus’ information (XIX, 73, 1-2) refering to the alliance of Kallatis and the neighbouring cities seemed to take Tomis into consideration as well. If

There were no more violent events after Kallatis was definitively defeated (the siege started again after 309 BC)60 and until Lysimachus’s death, the Pontic cities were still under the authority of the king of Thracia. No literary source offers information about the situation of these cities after Lysimachus’s death. ‘The Seleucid protection’ which would have followed was only from a distance and only for the Thracian shore. Stratigraphy at Tomis, around the Cathedral Park determines the order for the 6-4th century archeological levels, with the following structure from the bottom up:61 – N XII-XI: the 6-5th centuries with the specification the two levels belong to the second half of the 6th century, and XI passes to the 5th century BC, continuing into the first years of that century (but no further than the end of the second decade of the 5th century BC). – NX and the IX: the 5-4th century BC. NX: the first half of the 5th century; NIX: the second half of the 5th century and probably the first years of the 4th century BC. The two levels are formed of many clay floors superimposed above one another, with fire traces on each, interpretated as repeated reconstructions. – NVIII is well formed; it is to be found in the whole research area and it is covered with a very thick fire stratum.

50 For the possible participation of Histria and Kallatis in the DelianAttic League, see D.M. Pippidi, DID, I, p. 181-183. 51 Vl. Iliescu, Pontice 3 (1970), p. 87-90; see D.M. Pippidi, DID I, p. 213-215 and note 129. 52 Vl. Iliescu, ‘Geten oder Skythen? Zu lord. Get., 65’, in Eos 56 (1966), 2, p. 341-346. 53 D.M. Pippidi, Contribuţii2, 1967, p. 152 and note 111 with a reference to the text of Diodor, XVI, 71; Ligia Ruscu, Relaţiile externe ale oraşelor greceşti de pe litoralul românesc al Mării Negre (Foreign Affairs of the Greek Cities on the Romanian Coast of the Black Sea), Cluj-Napoca, 2002, p. 66-67. 54 See the destruction of the Histrian precincts because of Philip II’s intervention, in M. Coja, ‘Zidul de apărare al cetăţii Histria şi împrejurările istorice ale distrugerii lui în sec. al IV-lea î.e.n.’ (The defensive wall of the city of Histria and the historical circumstances of its destruction in the 4th century BC), SCIV 15 (1964), 3, p. 383-398; for a different opinion, D.M. Pippidi, DID I, p. 218 and note 149. 55 L. Ruscu, op.cit., p. 71-73 with reference (note 71) also to E. Badian, ‘Philip II and Thrace’, Pulpudeva 4 (1983), p. 51-71. 56 L. Ruscu, loc.cit. 57 However see G. Talmaţchi, ‘Descoperiri monetare macedonene în Dobrogea’ (Macedonian Coins discovered in Dobruja), BSNR 92-97 (1998-2003), p. 27-37. 58 Otherwise, for Histria as well, the two events are considered both possible sources for the destruction of the classical precincts; see above, note 54.

Mentioning the chronology of the archaelogical levels from the Cathedral Park and in connection with numismatic findings, R. Ocheşanu62 considers that the dates given by the authors of the report in brackets: N XII-XI: the 6-5th century BC are correct for the levels XII-IX; NXI: the 5-4th century BC. From the point of view of stratigraphical analysis, this observation does not change in our opinion some dates, but emphasizes them. We note, however, the hypothesis according to which NXI ends in the first quarter of the 4th century and 59 D.M. Pippidi, DID I, p. 216-217, Iu.G. Vinogradov, ‘Der Pontos Euxeinos als politische, ökonomische und kulturelle Einheit und die Epigraphik’, Acta Centri Historiae ‘Terra Antiqua Balcanica’, 2, Târnovo, 1987, p. 43; Al. Avram, ISM III, p. 23 and note 94. 60 D.M. Pippidi, DID I, p. 218; Al. Avram, ISM III, p. 24. 61 A. Rădulescu, C. Scorpan, Pontice 8 (1975), p. 9-49 and pl. 1-4. 62 R. Ocheşeanu, P. Dicu, ‘Monede antice şi bizantine din Dobrogea’ (Ancient and Byzantine Coins from Dobruja), BSNR, 75-76 (19811982), 1983, especially p. 447-454.

291

ANCIENT GREEK COLONIES IN THE BLACK SEA 2 The ceramics categories found here67 prove a stable Greek settlement in Tomis, well defined even from the second half or the last quarter of the 6th century BC.

whereby NX should begin in 465-460 BC. The simultaneous presence of the pre-monetary evidence and of the wheeled coins also in NX, for example, and the presence of the pre-monetary symbols in level N IX, along with the circumstance that the wheeled coins are completely missing in NVIII (the 4th century BC), is connected with the disintegration period of the first Pontic-Athenian maritime league which would correspond to the level IX.

Greek-Eastern ceramics are the most representative for the 6th-5th centuries BC; there are common vessels and these could be found in usual shapes excavated in the archaic levels of Histria. Most of the pieces look like Histria NA III ceramics.68 Among the pieces from the 6th-5th centuries BC we mention some irrelevant Corinthian fragments; probably they belong to the late Corinthian style, though we do not exclude the middle phase of this style.

Some materials dated to the 5th century BC and others from the 6th century BC come from a previous excavation stratigraphic control in the peninsula, from 1959-1960. An excavation report of that time63 mentions the fact that all materials come from one level (N I) situated in a depth of 4 m, where an indigenenous handmade vessel dated to the late Hallstatt was found. The author of the report, A. Aricescu, dated the abovementioned level to the beginning of the 5th century and considered it to be ‘for the moment the earliest level for Tomis’. Maintaining this opinion, we broaden the level’s date to the end of the 6th century-beginning (or the second quarter) of the 5th century and we connect it with the next excavations from the Cathedral Park (NXI respectively).64

The Attic ceramics with decorations have similar phases to the Histria ones: relatively common in the 6th century BC and the second half of the 5th century BC, totally absent in the first half of the 5th century BC and ‘massive’ at the end of the 5th century and the 4th century BC. Attic ceramics from the end of the 6th century BC are present in more fragments belonging to the category of high footed cups and cups decorated with stripes, dating to around 530–520 BC, cups with black oil varnish without any decoration (about 525 BC) and pieces with black figures, to be dated about 520–510 BC. At the end of the 5th-beginning of the 4th centuries BC the ceramic series with black oil varnish continued, represented by cups, skyphoi, bowls with a low edge and bolsals with painted decoration. There are also ceramic types with red figures, representating the first half of the 4th century BC on fragments of pelike and skyphoi. The decorative themes are common: individuals in draped clothes, Satyrs, palmettae and accolades.

Comparing this new data with that from the plateau settlement in Histria,65 we notice: 1) the beginnings of the settlement of Tomis correspond to NA III from Histria; 2) two archaeological levels from Tomis correspond to the 5th century; the repetitive reconstructions of the arrangements on these levels do not have general significance; 3) the 4th century BC seems to end with a strong fire which the authors’ report hesitates to attribute to one of these two events: Phillip II’s expedition or Lysimachus’s expedition (however the second event seems, in the report’s view, to be the cause of destruction);66 4) important fire traces were detected in NXI. The limited research area does not allow us to conclude if there was a general fire with an historical cause, or an accidental incomplete one. We do not exclude, though, the possibility of a correlation with the fire which destroyed NA III at Histria.

The supposed colonial ceramics are similar to known shapes among the Histrian products; talking about common shapes, they need not necessarily be Histrian imports, but could also be the products of Tomitan workshops. Analysis of soils taken from the loess deposits on the north cliff of the city identified usable qualities. As is known, the argils of some regions form a ‘unity whole’, the qualities of the Tomitan argils are probably very close to the Histrian ones. From this point of view the selection is difficult, and the answer could not be given by a fine comparative analysis in the laboratory. Among the categories supposed colonials we notice fish plates with red paint inside, trays with channelled skirts, bowls of a red argil, insufficiently burnt, with a grey core.

63 Unpublished materials in the documentary fund of the Constanţa National History and Archaeology Museum (MINAC). The level notations belong to the authors of excavations (here N I is first chronologically). 64 Otherwise, the whole peninsula area was studied in a campaign of salvage excavations between 1959-1960 and 1986-1988 which bronght about the precise observation of only two habitable levels from the Roman age and Roman-Byzantine. The Hellenistic and Greek materials were found in the whole research area, but without forming a compact, uniform level. 65 For the plateau area stratigraphy from Histria, see S. Dimitriu, in Histria II, Bucureşti, 1966, p. 21-37; see more recently M. Angelescu, in Cronica cercetărilor arheologice. Campania 1994, Cluj-Napoca, 1995, p. 42; Campania 1995, Brăila, 1996, p. 58-59. 66 A. Rădulescu, C. Scorpan, Pontice 8 (1975), p. 25-27.

We particularly point out the amphorae which prove the vivid economic activity in Tomis in the 5th century BC which was prefigured in the second half to the end of the 6th century BC.69 Similarly to Histria, the imports were 67 The Greek period ceramics from Tomis are mostly unpublished; for a general reference about the materials coming from the Cathedral Park see A. Rădulescu, C. Scorpan, Pontica 8 (1975), p. 34 and fig. 28-35; A. Rădulescu and collaborators, Pontica 6 (1973), p. 333-347; L. Buzoianu, Civilizaţia greacă, p. 254-260. 68 See the ceramics at S. Dimitriu, Histria II, p. 41-54. 69 L. Buzoianu, Pontica 24 (1991), p. 75-96.

292

LIVIA BUZOIANU & MARIA BĂRBULESCU: TOMIS century. The number of pieces is too small (28 samples) to support the tempting idea of the local workshops. We should accept the observation73 according to which these coins represent a circulating value in the Histria’s maximum trade relation area. This observation deserves recognition, moreso since pre-monetary symbols and wheeled bronze coin discoveries74 are not known from the shore area south of Tomis.

directed to Chios, Lesbos and Thasos. This feature is preserved also in the first half of the 4th century BC. Eloquently, the comparison of the amphorae imported between the 5th century and the first half of the 4th century BC is quasi-equal. In the second half of the 4th century the imports, though more varied, were less numerous, probably because of the insecure political situation in Dobruja and along most of the shore during this period.70 The comparison between Tomis and Kallatis concerning the beginning of the stamped amphora imports is in its turn eloquent. Taking into consideration the general situation of the imports between the two colonies, Thasos becomes the first exportation goods centre using stamped packing materials on the Tomitan market, with trade activity beginning permanently from the second quarter of the 4th century BC. Unlike Histria and Tomis, the Kallatian market was orientated at that time to the trade with Pontic Heraclea. The absence of the early stamps from the end of the 5thbeginning of the 4th centuries BC, both in Tomis and Kallatis, is proof of more restricted economic activity compared to Histria, owing to the more recent date of their settlement. On the other hand, the increased number of stamps from Tomis in the middle of the 4th century BC compared to Kallatis, is proof of earlier trade activity with Thasos island.

For the initial period, it was admitted75 that from a monterary point of view Tomis is still in Histria’s ‘sphere of influence’. Histria’s influence there was considered to have been maintained until at least halfway through the 4th century BC. We prefer a modulated opinion for these definite observations, meaning that Tomis benefitted from its position in the area where Histrian coins circulated. Histrian coins proved to be powerful enough in the 6th4th centuries BC to cover the coin necessary of the other neighbouring Greek settlements.76 The 6th century BC discoveries area covers the extremity of the Tomis peninsula (the Cathedral Park area and that close to it)77 and generally the peninsula existing in the place and close to the south and west of the present-day Ovidiu Square.

The local element proved to be strong enough for the two aspects noticed also in Histria: the natives (prevailing) and the North Pontic region. Probably, a local colonial aspect is also present, but it is difficult to put into light in the research stage.

It is true that 4th century BC materials are more numerous in the peninsula. We cite a group of 8 Chios amphoras dated to the first half of the 4th century, probably from a storehouse whose excavation conditions are not clearly known to us.78

Regarding coin discoveries, our notes take into consideration only bronze arrowheads with a premonetary value and wheeled bronze coins.71 Concerning the first one, we note that: 1) the stratigraphical distribution of the pieces from the Cathedral Park: this shows for the 6th century BC both the presence of the three edged arrows and the foliforme ones; in the first half of the 5th century the two types still exist, in the second half of the 5th century BC only foliforme arrowheads appear; 2) some pieces have special symbols marked in relief, which could be interpreted as workshop marks; 3) a thesaurus of pre-monetary symbols found in 1992 brought Tomis to a unique situation of excavating such a thesaurus in a ‘Greek’ milieu.72 Possibly the thesaurus belonged to the Greeks from the city and was used in exchanges they made; this could be an argument for the emporion status of the settlement.

Building elements are represented only in the searched area by some huts/houses (the 6-5th century BC), pavings and the walls of some surface houses (5th-4th century BC). We notice a street with two made-up levels (N II, inferior, the 5th-4th centuries BC; N 1-the 4th century BC). Its way is similar to the late Roman street.79 For the moment we note that the characteristic elements for this period are: – the reduced inhabited area; 73 Bucur Mitrea, ‘Roata, simbol solar pe monedele histriene’ (Wheel, Sun symbols on Histrian Coins), Pontica 15 (1982), p. 97. 74 We haven’t taken into consideration the discoveries around Apollonia Pontica. See the report about them in C. Preda, Istoria monedei în Dacia preromană (Coin History in Pre-Roman Dacia), Bucureşti, 1998, p. 33 and fig. 1. Apollonia is recognized as a possible coin producer. 75 Gh. Poenaru-Bordea, ‘Discuţii pe marginea câtorva monede străine din Dobrogea antică’ (Debates concerning some Foreign Coins from Ancient Dobruja), SCIV 21 (1970), 1, p. 137. 76 For the Histrian coin distribution area, see G. Talmaţchi, Pontica 3536 (2002-2003), p. 357-394. 77 New research in the Episcopal churchyard and in the area of Ion Jalea museum; see Z. Covacef, Constanţa (Tomis), (Constanţa County), in Cronica cercetărilor arheologice, 1983-1992, Bucureşti, 1997, p. 25, nr. 18; Gh. Papuc et al., Constanţa (Tomis); Cronica cercetărilor arheologice din România, Campania 2001 Bucureşti, 2002, p. 108-110, nr. 73; further research is in progress. 78 L. Buzoianu, Pontica 24 (1991), p. 88. 79 A. Rădulescu, C. Scorpan, Pontica 8 (1975), p. 44 and the researched area’s general plan; C. Scorpan, ‘L’évolution urbanistique de la cité de Tomis’, RRH 15 (1976), 1, p. 3-10.

The wheeled bronze coins, attributed to Histria, were found in the 5th century levels and were absent in the 4th 70 See L. Buzoianu, ‘Les premières importations d’amphores timbrées dans les cités grecques de Tomis et de Callatis’, BCH Suppl. 13 (1986), p. 406-415. 71 A. Rădulescu, C. Scorpan, Pontica 8 (1975), p. 34-37; C. Scorpan, SCN 7 (1980), p. 25-34. 72 Unpublished discovery announced by G. Talmaţchi, Pontica 35-36 (2002-2003), p. 360.

293

ANCIENT GREEK COLONIES IN THE BLACK SEA 2 The narrated event has an outstanding importance for West Pontic city history and is placed in a larger political and military context82 which encompassed many geographical areas – the Aegean Sea, the eastern part of the Mediteranean Sea and the Black Sea – and put into opposition kingdoms and political unions with different interests. Among the latter we mention the Northern League, a temporary symmachia with an anti-Seleucid orientation, whose interests were connected with the economic interests of Heraclea Pontica.83 Its attitude towards Byzantium, in its turn a member of the League, changed because of the fact that Byzantium held the trade monopoly in the Pontic basin, and the fact of the mediating role that Byzantium played in Pont’s relationship with the Aegean Sea basin. This explains why Heraclea, which under different circumstances considerably helped Byzantium, maintained its neutrality and chose reconciliation faced with a conflict in which both Byzantium and Kallatis were involved.

– the conditions of settling Greeks in an autochthonous millieu more defined than that of Histria; – economic relations orientated to the same micro-Asian and Aegean centres identified at Histria. The 2nd stage: the middle of the 3rd century - 1st century BC. The important event of the period is the so-called ‘war for Tomis’or, according to the Greek phrase ‘περὶ Τόμεως τοῦ ἐμπορίου’, summarized by Memnon after a more detailed presentation by Nymphis. Considering as very important this information we quote Memnon literally80: F.Gr. Hist III B, p. 347-348 ‘Οὐ πολλῷ δὲ ὕστερον χρόνῳ πόλεμος ἀνερράγη Βυζαντίοις πρὸς Καλλατιανοὺς (ἄποιϰοι δὲ οὗτοι Ἡραϰλεωτῶν ᾖσαν) ϰαὶ πρὸς Ἰστριανοὺς περὶ Τόμεως τοῦ ἐμπορίου, ὃ τοῖς Καλλατιανοῖς ὅμορον ἦ, μονοπώλιον τοῦτο διανοουμένων ϰατασϰευάσαι τῶν Καλλατιανῶν. Διεπρεσβεύοντο οὖν πρὸς Ἡραϰλεώτας ἐπὶ συμμαχίαν ἑϰάτεροι˙ οἱ δὲ πολεμιϰὴν μὲν ῥοπὴν οὐδετέρῳ ἔνεμον μέρει, διαλλαϰτήριους δὲ ἄνδρας ἑϰατέροις ἀπέστελλον, ϰἂν ἄπραϰτος αὐτῶν ἡ σπουδή τοτε γέγονε. Πολλὰ δὲ οἱ τῆς Καλλάτιδος ὑπὸ τῶν πολεμίων παθόντες, ὕστερον εἰς διαλύσεις ἦλθον, ἀπὸ ταύτης τῆς συμϕορᾶς οὐϰέτι σχεδὸν ἀναλαβεῖν αὑτοὺς δυνηθέντες.’

More than the economic interests of this conflict, which for the League meant the setting up of Greek free cities, and for Tomis meant its position as much as this status was right for it, the Byzantines were aiming at other interests, mainly political ones, i.e. the breaking up of the Seleucid sphere of influence, under which Kallatis seemed to be for a long time. Following the order of events, Kallatis should have been the reason for which the Seleucid king Antiochos II Theos (261-246 BC) started a siege against Byzantium, an operation associated with a campaign in Thracia (255-254 BC).84 We consider ‘the war for Tomis’ to be related precisely to this conflict in which Byzantium was involved and which finished, if not at the end of 255 BC, at the latest in the spring of 254 BC.85 For the date of the beginning of the war for Tomis we find a hint in the succession from Bythinia.86 In Memnon’s narration, the fragment refering to the war for Tomis is placed before the narration about the conflict in Bythinia; the start of both conflicts is placed between 256-255 BC. We conclude that the limits of the war for Tomis are 256/255-254 BC.87 So, the date 260 BC, generally accepted by historians88 should be corrected; other chronologies – 275 BC or 253-247 BC – are considered either too early or too late and without any supporting evidence.89

‘Not long after that, a war broke out, which the Byzantines began versus Kallatians (these being colonists of Heraclea) and, [at the same time] versus Histrians for the emporion Tomis which was close to Kallatis. They were thinking about their monopoly here. Both of them sent messengers to Heraclea to help them, but Heraclea offered military support to neither of them. It sent messengers to both cities to pacify them, but this effort was in vain. The Kallatians suffered many losses from their enemies and later on they started peace negotiations, but they could not recover themselves from this misfortune’.81 Analyzing traditionally every sequence, this information deals with: – a military confrontation between a Histria-Kallatis coalition and Byzantium, as enemies; – the confrontation target was the monopoly upon the emporion Tomis; – the appeal both parts sent to Heraclea Pontica; – Heraclea’s diplomatic (but not military) approach which was without any result; – the conflict went against Kallatis (peace negotiations probably before the final defeat).

82 B. Niese, Geschichte der griechischen und makedonischen Staaten, II, Gotha, 1899, p. 137-138; W.P. Newskaia, Byzanz in der klassischen und hellenistischen Epoche, p. 150-151; M. Rostovtzeff, Social and Economic History of the Hellenistic World, Oxford, 1941, I, p. 590-591; S.Iu. Saprykin, Gerakleja Pontiiskaja i Hersones Tauriceskiij, Moscova, 1986, p. 124-139. 83 About the Northen League, see especialy M. Rostovtzeff, op.cit., p. 26-27 and 590; S. Iu. Saprykin, op.cit.; idem, ‘Severnaja Liga’, Pričernomor’e v epohu ellenizma, 1985, p. 49-61. 84 Memnon, p. 228 a, 53 f; b 28 f. 85 See the dates also at Al. Avram, op.cit., p. 31. 86 Apud B. Niese, op.cit., p. 137; see also Al. Avram, op.cit., p. 26-27, note 115. 87 See the plan of the events development suggested by Iu.G. Vinogradov at Al. Avram, ISM III, p. 31-32; ibid., p. 27, note 116. 88 See above, note 82. 89 For dating see also Iu.G. Vinogradov, ‘Der Pontos Euxeinos als politische, ökonomische und kulturelle Einheit und die Epigraphik’, Actes du IX e Congrès International d’Épigraphie Grecque et Latine, I,

80 Memnon, fr. 21 (FHG III, p. 537 = FGr. HIST, III, B, 434, fr. 13). Reference about the war for Tomis at D.M. Pippidi, DID I, p. 222; idem, Contribuţii2, p. 33-35 and 215-216; I. Stoian, Tomitana, p. 20-21; see recently, A. Rădulescu, ‘Constanţa, 2250’, Pontica 23 (1990), p. 23-28; L. Ruscu, Relaţiile, p. 150-163; Al. Avram, ISM III, p. 26-32. 81 The translation of the text from Memnon, in Fontes I, p. 511.

294

LIVIA BUZOIANU & MARIA BĂRBULESCU: TOMIS A new interpretation98 changes the alliance structure and poses some questions. Vinogradov put forward this interpretation, taking into consideration just ‘Monopolkrieg um Tomis zur Seeschlacht bei Kos’. He begins by admitting that the conflict between Histria and Kallatis was connected with the war for Tomis. The epigraphical document mentioning this conflict (ISM III, 7) is dated by Vinogradov (with supporting arguments from Al. Avram) to 253 BC. We notice a war between Histria and Kallatis, even connected with the war for Tomis, is different in matter and consequences from the conflict mentioned by Memnon.

The development of the warfare described incompletely by Memnon arouses suppositions. Byzantium seemed to have provoked, as R. Vulpe wrote, ‘voullait s’emparer de cette ville située au milieu de la côte de Dobroudja et bien placée pour contrôler le commerce de tout le Pont Gauche’.90 Although the advantages to themselves were not to be ignored,91 we rather think that Byzantium started to fight this war according to the interests of the League and in the name of the League, since the ultimate purpose was to abolish any monopoly upon Tomis and to declare it a free port. Byzantium indeed achieved that. Tomis was benefitted further by these new circumstances and consolidated its position at head of the Pontic cities. We are not confirming other suppositions concerning the war at sea.92

It is possible that this war, if it took place in the middle of the 3rd century BC, was the beginning or the first phase of the war for Tomis: first Histria and Kallatis, antagonists for controlling the emporion Tomis may have become allies when Byzantium became interested in this matter as well. But more likely Histria and Kallatis were not allies in this conflict and the reference to Histria in Memnon’s text mentions a conflict which Histria also had περὶ Τόμεως τοῦ ἐμπορίου; only Kallatis and Byzantium continued to be enemies. Heraclea’s messengers only concern them; the disastrous result is mentioned only for Kallatis. Furthermore, Kallatis asked for ‘peace negotiations’, an attitude put into practice also during the war against Histria. There was a short lapse of time between the two conflicts, a period when ‘the initial position of matters was re-established’ (εἰς τὰν ἐξ ἀρχᾶς διάϑεισιν, in ISM III, 7).

Memnon’s purposeful mention of μονοπώλιον τοῦτο διανουμένων κατασκευάσαι τῶν Καλλατιανῶν, caused some historians to think that the setting up of this monopoly was aimed at only by Kallatis, and that at the same time Histria wanted to annex a part of Tomis’s rural area.93 Under these circumstances we do not understand why Memnon, refering precisely to this agriculture territory94 takes into consideration first neighbouring Kallatis, ὁ τοῖς Καλλατιανοῖς ὅμορον ἦ. On the other hand, we do not think that Histria, having a rural territory95 which must already have been well extended to the south,96 creating defensive difficulties,97 needed in the middle of the 3rd century BC to extend this territory against a city with similar interests. Histria rather aimed for the monopoly upon the transit trade which, according to the alliance, was shared with Kallatis. At the time of conflict, Kallatis did not actually hold this monopoly, the Kallatians were just ‘thinking’ of taking up the right for this and while Histria did not want to lose it for the benefit of Byzantium or the Pontic confederation, if it had.

This interpretation, argues that the war between Histria and Kallatis was before the one between Kallatis and Byzantium, and that both of them were about control over the emporion Tomis. We can suggest a date around 264/261 BC as the beginning of these events.99 No matter what the order of the events was, their consequences were favourable to Tomis; the city began to develop thenceforth. In the second half of the 3rd century BC, Tomis issued its first coins, some bronze ones, more numerous and various than the coins issued at the same period by Histria and Kallatis.100 Small amounts of these coins circulated beyond the city market, in Dobruja and generally in the neighbourhood of the Danube. It is possible that in the 3rd century BC Tomis issued Alexander the Great-type gold staters, considered to be posthumous, staters dated in Kallatis around 279/5, 228220 BC.101 The first official city inscriptions are dated to the 2nd century BC.102

Acta Centri Historiae Terra Antiqua Balcanica, II, Sofia, 1987, p. 47, note 184; K. Nawotka, The Western Pontic Cities: History and Political Organization, Ohio State University, 1991, p. 41, n. 116. 90 R. Vulpe, HAD, p. 85-86. 91 B. Niese, op.cit., p. 137. 92 Cf. D.M. Pippidi, Contribuţii2, p. 34. Although difficult to verify, the supposition holds good, taking into account that Byzantium had numerous naval war vessels (maybe not to the same extent as Heraclea Pontica); Tomis and Kallatis seem to have in their turn a fleet of, firstly trade vessels, and also possibly some defence vessels. 93 R. Vulpe, Pontica 2 (1969), p. 154 şi n. 22. 94 D.M. Pippidi, DID I, p. 197-198; idem, Contribuţii2, p. 175, note 22. 95 See the previous note; see also P. Alexandrescu, ‘Însemnări arheologice’ (Archaeological Notes), StCls 12 (1970), p. 152, who adds prudently: ‘For the moment we don’t know which was the south limit of the Histrian territory in the archaic and classical age.’ 96 For the Roman age, the assumed southern limit is Taşaul lake – Midia Cape; see D.M. Pippidi, Contribuţii2, p. 348-385 and fig. 4; Al. Avram, ‘Întinderea teritoriului Histriei în epoca romană în lumina hotărniciei consularului Manius Laberius. Încercare de reconstituire’ (The area of Histrian territory in the Roman age in light of the Borders decided by the Consularis Manius Laberius. Reconstruction attempt), in Cultură şi Civilizaţie la Dunărea de Jos, Călăraşi, 5 – 7 (1988-1989), p. 189-197. 97 D.M. Pippidi, Contribuţii2, p. 167-185 (for the 3rd century BC) and p. 186-221 (for the 2nd century BC).

98

Iu.G. Vinogradov, Vom Monopolkrieg um Tomis zur Seeschlach bei Kos, quoted by us at Al. Avram, ISM, III, p. 27-32. It remains for us to agree possible common interests between Bithynia and Miletus during this time. Such ‘common interests’, L. Ruscu, op.cit., p. 160 were accepted as possible in the period between about 241 BC and at least the time when the 4th Syrian war began. 100 C. Preda, Istoria monedei, p. 78-84. 101 Ibid., p. 113. 102 Isolated in the 4th century BC there is the inscription published by Maria Munteanu, ‘Câteva inscripţii tomitane inedite’ (Some unpublished Tomitan inscriptions), Pontica 7 (1974), p. 157-159. 99

295

ANCIENT GREEK COLONIES IN THE BLACK SEA 2 commentators to establish a connection between the inscription content and a possible official envoy or messenger of the king in the city.108

We do not have any evidence about an important event involving the Pontic cities until the beginning of the 1st century BC. They passed over an insecure period when words like καιροί, περιστάσεις, δύσελπις, ἀπορία appear frequently in inscriptions (ISM II, 2,3).

Tomis would have interacted with the Pontic world under protection: a citizen of Tomis, Euenorpides (?), the son of Philolaos benefited from a decree in Histria (ISM I, 48); another unknown citizen from Tomis is also mentioned in an inscription of the 2nd century BC in Histria (ISM I, 38);109 a decree from Odessos (IGB, I2, 43 bis) is enacted in honour of a Tomis citizen, Artemon Chairionos, in the 1st century BC. In its turn, Tomis honours a citizen from Tyras who ‘showed himself amiable with all the merchants from Tomis in their way to Olbia, facilitating them a preferential attendance there’ (ISM II, 5).110

Around the beginning of the 1st century BC, the West Pontic cities were allied with Mithridates VI Eupator. We are not aware of the date and under what circumstances these cities were included into Mithridates’ Pontic kingdom. It is assumed that Mithridates established his domination here in the first decade of the 1st century BC,103 or between Crimea’s conquest and the inclusion of the Bosporan and Chersonesos kingdoms into the Pontic kingdom (114-107 BC), and the outbreak of the first war with Rome.104 Al. Suceveanu determines this date immediately after Mithridates extended his domination over the Crimea (mentioning this moment should be dated later);105 the latest date post quem is considered 86 BC, when, after Athens’ conquest, the situation of the war turned against Mithiridates. Finally, an argument for considering Mithridates’ domination upon the West Pontic area between 106-76 BC is the lack of governors mentioned in Macedonia and Thrace precisely in this period. The new domination would have been shown by a network of individual alliances with the Greek cities. It is not so important whether these alliances were settled at the precise requirement of the Greek cities106 or, by Mithridates’ initiative (by ‘advantages’ or ‘gifts’, according to Trogus Pompeius, XXXVIII, 3, 6). Anyway these cities maintained their authonomy as part of a political union with the Pontic kingdom and the Kimmerian Bosporos, and had internal and external security. Tomis would not have been an exception, avoiding the alliance or refusing its protection.

This practice continued: a citizen from Olbia, Theocles of Satyros is honoured at the beginning of the Christian era by his native city and by another 18 cities, among them Tomis, for the services he rendered to their citizens temporarily present in Olbia. Around the year 100 BC, an indigenous citizen of Sinope raised a monument dedicated to Sarapis (ISM II, 152) at Tomis. The Tomitan inscription, as well as other epigraphical documents from the same period, demonstrate that the Pontic world achieved unity under Mithridates.111 Mitrhridates’ domination ended at the same time as the campaign of Macedonia’s proconsul M. Terentius Varro Lucullus between 72-71 BC. His operation was equivalent to the first Roman military presence on the West Pontic shore. The word constantly used to describe Lucullus’ actions towards the Pontic cities, excepting Apollonia, is ‘holding’, ‘occupancy’ – capta, cepit, occupavit, capiens – and only for Apollonia was the action devastating: evertit Apolloniam.112 From an arcaheological point of view, Tomis’ 2nd stage history is represented by one archaeological level (N VIII), but this level is fragmented. It consists of one or two strata with diverse archaeological materials from the late Hellenistic Age, or even early Roman Age. N VII is often missing, with remains passing directly to N VI. This does not mean that the Hellenistic Age is poorly represented at Tomis. Not far from the research area there have been found hundreds of amphora stamps from the

Arguments can be found in the numerous staters of the Lysimachus type issued by Tomis, mostly between 90 and 72 BC, and a smaller quantity in the 2nd century BC.107 Probably like Histria and Apollonia (and in North Olbia), Tomis benefitted from the presence of a garrison. The name of the city appears on an inscription from Mesambria (IGB I2, 320) beside Histria, Apollonia and Mesambria in the common activity of celebrating an unknown. As every quoted city had excellent relationships with the Pontic king (some of these relationships, as in Mesambria’s case, existing from the 2nd century BC), it was not difficult for the

108 The inscription was dated, on turns, from the beginning of the 1st century (G. Mihailov, IGB, V, 5097 = idem, Epigraphica 41 (1979), p. 24-25); the 2nd-1st centurys BC (Em. Doruţiu-Boilă, ‘Contribution épigraphique à l’histoire de Tomis à l’époque du Principat’, Dacia NS 19 (1975), p. 153; the end of the 2nd century – the beginning of the 1st century BC. (L. Ruscu, Relaţiile, p. 113-121). 109 The argument that the relationships between the two cities continued as well after the events from the middle of the 3rd century BC. 110 About the connections among Tomis, Tyras and Olbia, see V. Cojocaru, Populaţia zonei nordice şi nord-vestice a Pontului Euxin în secolele VI-I a. Chr. pe baza izvoarelor epigrafice (Pontus Euxinus Northen and North-Western Area Population in the 6th–1st centuries BC. Based on Epigraphical Sources), Iaşi, 2004, p. 382. 111 D.M. Pippidi, ‘Sur la diffusion des cultes égyptiens en Scythie Mineure’, StCls. 6 (1964), p. 103-118 (especially p. 106); idem, Studii, p. 60-82. 112 D.M. Pippidi, DID I, p. 276; idem, Contribuţii2, p. 224 and note 9; L. Ruscu, p. 127-141 (and p. 128 note 151).

103

Al. Avram, O. Bounegru, ‘Mithridates al VI-lea Eupator şi coasta de vest a Pontului Euxin. În jurul unui decret inedit de la Histria’ (Mithridates Eupator the 6th and the west coast of Pontus Euxinus. About an unpublished decree from Histria), Pontica 30 (1997), p. 155165. 104 L. Ruscu, Relaţiile, p. 100-101 and note 40. 105 Al. Suceveanu, Πρῶτος καὶ μέγιστος (βασιλεύς) τῶν ἐπὶ Θράκης βασιλέων (IGB I2, 13, r. 22-23), Pontica 33-34 (2000-2001), p. 319-335 (especially, p. 326-327). 106 L. Ruscu, Relaţiile, p. 119-120. 107 C. Preda, Istoria monedei, p. 112-114.

296

LIVIA BUZOIANU & MARIA BĂRBULESCU: TOMIS 3rd century BC;113 as we have already mentioned, the city issued its own coins;114 we have the first epigraphic lapidary inscriptions from the 2nd century BC or even earlier115 and, finally, salvage excavations permitted the localization of the city necropolis.116

Economic development during these centuries can be studied from the point of view of the import of amphorae,119 the only important material remains for us in pointing out some periods and determining the originality of features for Tomis (if they existed).

Taking again into consideration the discovery place, we notice a broadening of the inhabited area of the city in the whole peninsula, affected even in ancient times by successive changes and rebuilding activities. The excavated materials were found either in modern filling or mixed with later materials used in operations following the Hellenistic Age.

From this we notice: 1) old trading activity was continued; 2) after the economic ‘collapse’ from the end of the 4th century BC, to the first decades of the 3rd century BC there was a certain flourishing, but this did not generally exceed the previous level; 3) a real trade liberality for Tomis from the middle of the 3rd century BC pointed out by the apogee of Sinope products (between 261 and 229/183 BC) and Rhodian products (210-188 BC).120 This is the period following the event mentioned by Memnon, and which, economically speaking, was equivalent to allowing the first trade functioning and revocation of any intention of monopoly; 4) the values of economic exchanges diminished slowly until the middle of the 2nd century BC and more in the second part of the 2nd century BC and the beginning of the 1st century BC.

We have information117 about an excavation in 1961 in front of the tenth mosaic warehouse which reached ‘a pit’ with unmixed Hellenistic material. The pit was passed over by the wall of Roman Mosaic Edifice and by a modern wall following the line of an ancient wall (ceramic fragments were found between –9.40 and – 12.60 m).118 Other mixed materials were found on the occasion of the survey of the wall from the main warehouse edifice nearer the sea, in front of the large room of the bath building, in the area of the basilica at the port entrance; this is enough to prove the fact that we are near the Hellenistic city port superimposed at least in part by the great mosaic edifice.

Although during the period of our discussion the Pontic cities had common trade partners, the details allow us to mention some similarities with Histria (we take into consideration less important imports from Pontic Heraclea; the apogee of Thassos products was the same for Histria; the situation of Sinope imports was different from the last two chronological groups, which somehow distinguish it from Kallatis).

The salvage excavations on the north side showed two Hellenistic levels with archaeological materials from the 3rd-2nd centuries BC.

The last aspect of the studied period concerns the city planning structure. If the simple narrow clay stripes, evidence of some floors found in the Cathedral Park area, can be considered insignificant, more important data is to be found ascribing the necropolis area to a possible precinct.

113

L. Buzoianu, ‘Ştampile rhodiene de la Edificiul roman cu mozaic’ (Rhodian Stamps from the Roman Mosaic Edifice), Pontica 13 (1980), p. 119-139; ‘Consideraţii asupra ştampilelor sinopeene de la Edificiul roman cu mozaic’ (Considerations about the Synopean stamps from the Roman Mosaic Edifice), Pontica 14 (1981), p. 133-151; ‘Importul amforelor thasiene la Tomis în perioada elenistică’ (The Thasian Amphora Imports to Tomis during the Hellenistic Age), Pontica 15 (1982), p. 137-151; ‘Importurile amforice la Tomis în perioada elenistică’ (The Amphora Imports to Tomis during the Hellenistic Age), Pontica 25 (1992), p. 99-165. 114 See also G. Talmaţchi, ‘Scurtă privire asupra ariei de difuzare a monedelor autonome emise de Callatis şi Tomis’ (Short Note about the spreading area of the autonomous coins issued by Tomis and Callatis), Pontica 35-36 (2002-2003), p. 395-408. 115 See above, note 102; the inscription from Tomis has an uncertain origin; see the commentary in ISM II, 456. 116 V. Barbu, ‘Considérations chronologiques basées sur les données fournies par les inventaires funéraires des nécropoles tomitaines’, StCls. 3 (1961), p. 203-205; M. Bucovală, Necropole elenistice la Tomis (Hellenistic Necropolis at Tomis), Constanţa, 1968; idem, ‘Un alt mormânt de epocă elenistică la Tomis’ (Another Hellenistic Age Tomb at Tomis), Pontica 8 (1975), p. 375-388; see recently, V. Lungu – C. Chera, ‘Contribuţii la cunoaşterea complexelor funerare de incineraţie cu „rug-busta’ de epocă elenistică şi romană de la Tomis’ (Contributions to the knowledge of the Funerary Complexes with Hellenistic and Roman Age ‘Busta Pile’ from Tomis), Pontica 19 (1986), p. 89-114; M. Bucovală, ‘Un alt mormânt elenistic descoperit la Tomis’ (Another Hellenistic Tomb found at Tomis), Pontica 28-29 (1995-1996), p. 73-82. 117 M. Gramatopol, Gh. Poenaru Bordea, ‘Amfore ştampilate din Tomis’ (Stamped Amphoras from Tomis), SCIV 19 (1968), 1, p. 43-44 and note 9. 118 Notes of the excavations authors, measured from the present level of Ovidiu Square; see M. Gramatopol, Gh. Poenaru Bordea, op.cit., p. 44, n. 9.

The Hellenistic necropolis was placed inside the Late Roman city and reached in its southern extent up to Ovidiu Square, where a lot of burial places dated to the 3rd century BC and the majority to the 2nd century BC have been found.121 The chronological distribution of the published tombs (given in its general data), agrees with the topographical distribution in determining the older tombs from the 4th century BC; but their excavation area is too broad not to exclude the possibility that some of them belonged to settlements around Tomis;122 the findings from the old 119

See above, note 113 and mainly Pontica 25 (1992), p. 125. L. Buzoianu, Pontica 13 (1980), p. 125-129; Pontica 14 (1981), p. 139-144. 121 Unpublished materials (information, Tr. Cliante, MINAC); the funerary inventaries have been presented in the exhibition Ceramică greacă la Pontul Euxin (Greek Ceramics at Pontus Euxinus), Constanţa, September, 2004. 122 See above note 116. 120

297

ANCIENT GREEK COLONIES IN THE BLACK SEA 2 cannot finish a presentation of Tomis during this period without mentioning other elements specific to the representation and structure of a Greek city: eponimy, cults and religions, magistrature, city planning.

Railway station are certainly the oldest and belong to the Greek city. In the line of the later gate on the north and the Butcher’s Tower, tombs dated to the 2nd century BC have been found; the broadening of the necropolis after the 4th century BC can be traced in the findings on the north side of this wall.

The city’s eponimy belonged to a priest who could have been Apollo’s priest.128 Yet Tomis inscriptions name either the position only, not indicating the deity god, or the deity himself occupying the position (Apollo, in ISM II, 5 or Demeter, in ISM II, 36).

The precinct wall has been placed hypothetically, relying on the necropolis area. The Hellenistic precinct can be proven epigraphically and historically, even if these sources refer to a situation dated between the end of the 2nd century and the end of the 1st century (ISM, II, 2) or even the beginning of the 1st century AD.

The public Tomitan pantheon included the gods of Samothrake129 (ISM II, 1), Cybele and the Dioskouroi (ISM II, 2), Apollo (ISM II, 5 and 6) and Demeter (ISM II, 36). The coins had marked images of Apollo, Zeus, Hermes, Athena, The Great God, Helios, Dioskouroi, Demeter.

Placing the site of this precinct is far more difficult to determine: following the indication of the literary sources and the site notes, A. Aricescu considers the precinct to be at the north-eastern boundary of Ovidiu Square.123 The author points out that there is an evident decrease in ground level to the south and south-east, and also notes the Hellenistic materials found there, beyond the suggested line he considers to come from filling strata or from the prolongation of the higher shore on the NE side of the peninsula. Aricescu also separates the Hellenistic precincts from the early Roman precincts (the 2nd century AD), also placed hypothetically on the line of the Greek church – the 2nd port entrance124. V. Barbu takes into consideration125 approximately the line connecting the two cliffs – the west side and the east side – which concours with the line Aricescu suggested for the early Roman precincts. However, he considers that the Hellenistic precinct maintained its function during the early Roman Age too.

Probably, Dionysos was also included in this pantheon, considering how frequently he was represented and the god’s veneration aspects during the Roman age.130 A special importance was attached to the Egyptian cults which had penetrated early into the west Pontic area. A temple and a priest of Isis were mentioned at Tomis, a temple of Sarapis, an association venerating Sarapis and Isis, temple servants (προσεδρεύονται τῶι ἱερῶι), and finally a celebration for Isis - χαρμόσυνα (ISM II, 7, dated to the 1st century BC). Among the months in the Milesian calendar, the only one attested is Ἀπατουρεών131 (for Ἀπατουρίων), present in Odessos, Olbia and Tanais.132

Archaeological research has twice given occasion to the discovery of monumental walls, unfortunately too isolated to consider them as precincts components or belonging to a public edifice: a) shaped wall blocks, possibly fragments of a very large precinct, found on the Casino cliff;126 b) during the excavations between 1974-1976 on the south-east side of Roman Mosaic Edifice a wall built of massive stone blocks was found, possibly belonging to a Hellenistic edifice (though we must specify it was integrated later into the Late Roman arrangements in this area); c) other discoveries on the line of the supposed early Roman precinct. All these discoveries show a broadening of the city’s civilian area, a fact that was initiated during the Hellenistic Age and continued in later periods.127 We

The essential element of society structure was the tribal organization, even if we accept the hypothesis that it had at first a territorial aspect. All six Milesian tribes are attested at Tomis on Roman period inscriptions;133 the only earlier inscription (but not earlier than the first half of the 1st century) mentions the tribe Ἀργαδεῖς (ISM II, 35). The tribes had political tasks during the autonomous

128 I. Stoian, Tomitana, p. 148 and following; D.M. Pippidi, DID I, p. 202 and 258. 129 The inscription from Tomis (ISM II, 1) includes ‘buying regulations’ (νόμος) from the gods of the Samothrake sacerdocy. At D.M. Pippidi’s statement, DID I, p. 255, in the west Pontic cities the Samothrake gods cult must have been first a cult of the Dioskouroi; for Tomis, see also Jean Babelon, in RA, 1948 (I), p. 24-33. 130 I. Stoian, ISM I, p. 147. 131 The lecture of ISM II, 1 is prefered to that suggested by L. Robert (Ταυρέων); see I. Stoian, Tomitana, p. 77, note 1 and N. Ehrhardt, Milet und seine Kolonien, Frankfurt am Main, Bern, New York, Paris, 1988, p. 118, n. 227. 132 L. Buzoianu, Civilizaţia greacă, p. 214-215 and 309. 133 For the Milesian tribes from Tomis, see I. Stoian, Tomitana, p. 5674; idem, ‘Contribution à l’étude des tribus de Tomis’, StCls. 3 (1961), p. 175-202; idem., ‘Cultul Dioscurilor şi triburile tomitane. În lumina unui monument de curând publicat’ (the cult of the Dioskouroi and the Tomitan Tribes. In light of a recently discovered monument), SCIV 16 (1965), 3, p. 519-532; Em. Doruţiu-Boilă, ‘Triburile la Tomis în epoca romană’ (The Tribes at Tomis During the Roman Age), StCls. 12 (1970), p. 117-126; see and N. Ehrhardt, op.cit., p. 67, note 514.

123 A. Aricescu, ‘Despre zidul de apărare al Tomisului în vremea lui Ovidius’ (About Tomis’s defensive wall in Ovids’ time), Pontica 5 (1972), p. 439-446. 124 Idem, Armata, p. 156. 125 V. Barbu, StCls. 3 (1961), p. 204. 126 The wall is known by A. Aricescu and used as a possible argument in favour of the idea of the περίβολος feature of the Tomitan precincts; see Pontica 5 (1972), p. 443. 127 A. Aricescu, Pontica 5 (1972), p. 442 estimates the area of the Tomitan peninsula covered by the Greek city at about 17 ha; in the 2nd century AD the inhabited area was about 30 ha (loc.cit. and note 13).

298

LIVIA BUZOIANU & MARIA BĂRBULESCU: TOMIS the city (ISM II, 5), a theatre (ISM II, 4)142 and a few temples (for Apollo, in ISM II, 6; Isis and Sarapis, in ISM II, 7).

age and more (if not exclusively) religious tasks during the Roman period.134 The leadership structure is similar to that in the democratic cities – βουλὴ καὶ δῆμος – at Tomis a special assembly is mentioned which elected the magistrates (ἀρχαιρετική ἐκκλησία, ISM II, 6).135 Beyond the council there was a secretary (γραμματεύς τῆς βουλῆς) with useful tasks.

City activities included payment of taxes, port activities with custom taxes of course, buying goods, justice activities;143 these activities would have had their own institutions and edifices to take place in. The city had also an agricultural area (χώρα), which is mentioned in Memnon’s text;144 its approximate area was compared to the approximate borders of Histria on the north and Kallatis on the south.145 As the trade activities and not the agricultural ones seem to prevail at Tomis and as the surface of the rural territory depends on the size and the importance of the colony, the limits are changeable. Some discoveries close to Constanţa to the north belong with no doubt to the Tomitan territory; they were found on the south-west shore of Siutghiol lake and in the present district of Palazu Mare. It is also possible that to the north the territory spread up to Taşaul lake and Casimcea river (which marked, otherwise, one of the southern borders of the Histrian territory). In this area were discovered Greek and autochthonous materials dated generally from the 4th-1st centuries BC. The 6th5th centuries BC early archaeological discoveries from Midia cape, at the present location of the Petromidia Chemical Plant or from Ovidiu are to be interpreted rather as Greeks attempts to settle in the Pontic shore area and not as parts of a colony (of Histria for the first two, or of Tomis for those from Ovidiu).

Among the magistrates we mention the body of archons (ἄρχοντες) with general administrative duties (ISM II, 2, 4, 5, 36); in special situations we have clear evidence of the ἄρχοντες ἐν τῶι λιμένι, considered to be archons administrating the port or the market.136 The ἀγορανόμος function is attested as well on an inscription where traders are again mentioned (οἱ μετάβολοι, ISM II, 4).137 Probably there was an οἰκονόμος, too, who provided the expenses stipulated in decrees (ISM II, 6). For special situations, two leaders were elected from the citizens as millitary commanders (ἡγεμόνες) for a limited period.138 Concerning the onomastics, Greek names prevail, some of the them common to the Pontus Euxinus area; important by their number are those of Theonian and of frequent occurence Theofore.139 Among the rare names we mention one of a tribe leader (ϕυλάρχησας) Κερκίων Τιμομάχου (ISM II, 35).140 A funerary inscription (ISM II, 165) mentions a Greek feminine name (Ἀντιγόνη), along with two Thracian names (Αὐλοσάνις and Σεύϑης).141 Though very few of the autonomous age inscriptions show the ethnical structure, with a prevailing Greek element population.

To the south the territory spread up close to the former lake Agigea and the present Black Sea-Danube canal. Other settlements, situated farther to the south at Techirghiol-Urluchioi and Tuzla, could possibly represent the maximum limit of Tomitan territory, although if not some of them may have been part of the Callatian territory.

The city organization was Greek too; we have already referred to the walls which would have defended the city even from the beginning. There was also an agora inside

Finally, the minimum limit to the west reached Constanţa-Palas and the present village of Valu lui Traian. In any case, the suggested limits are naturally bordered; the settlement type seemed to belong to the Milesian tradition also noticed for Histria (open settlements) and less of the Callatian one (with fortified settlements).

134

D.M. Pippidi, Contribuţii2, p. 105 agreeds that at Tomis and Odessos the gentile tribes had the occupations assured in other places by the territorial tribes; according to the same researcher, at Histria the tribes have been replaced by the territorial tribes which had administrative tasks. 135 I. Stoian, ‘Un decret inedit din Tomis’ (An Unpublished Decree from Tomis), in Omagiu lui Constantin Daicoviciu, Bucureşti, 1960, p. 509513. 136 In the first situation it is assumed the archonts’ tasks were divided; in the second situation, the function was superpassed by that of the agoranomos; see ISM II, p. 32, with debate. 137 The proper merchants (ἔμποροι) are also mentioned in an inscription from the 2nd century AD (ISM II, 5). 138 For the function of ἡγεμόνες, see D.M. Pippidi, Contribuţii2, p. 75; for dating the inscription ISM II, 6, see further on. 139 V. Cojocaru, op.cit., p. 153-341. N. Ehrhardt, op.cit., p. 67 and note 515 talks about the Ionic-Milesian features of the anthroponyms from Tomis; in inscriptions of the autonomous period we notice the forms Ἑκαταῖος, Ἑστιαῖος, Νουμήνιος. 140 See L. Robert, RÉG 75 (1962), p. 186-187. 141 The association of the first two (Ἀντιγόνη Αὐλοσάνις; feminine double name) shows the Greek-Macedonian influence; see ISM II, p. 193-194; V. Cojocaru, op.cit., p. 143, n. 155.

Unlike Histria and Kallatis, in no settlement which could be assigned to the Tomitan territory have there been any systematic researches. 142 D.M. Pippidi, DID I, p. 243 and with reference to L. Robert, RA, 1933, p. 144; idem, ‘Note de lectură’ (Lecture notes), StCls. 8 (1966), p. 231-232; Contribuţii2, p. 532-534. 143 We find out about all of these from the decree ISM II, 5 for Nylos of Tyras. 144 See the commentary at D.M. Pippidi, DID I, p. 197; idem, Contribuţii2, p. 155, note 22. 145 M. Irimia, ‘Consideraţii privind teritoriul rural al Tomisului în perioada elenistică’ (Considerations regarding Tomis’ rural territory during the Hellenistic Age), in Dobrujan History Studies, Constanţa, 2003, p. 57-67.

299

ANCIENT GREEK COLONIES IN THE BLACK SEA 2 neighbourhood and the connections it always had with Histria. Without doubt is the fact that Hybrida’s incident put an end to the first period of Roman authority presence at the Danube. There was a lack of authority; without powerful political protection on the south, the west Pontic cities would be included in the union of states created by Burebista.150

At the beginning of the Roman age, Tomis showed all the attributes and structural aspects of a Greek city which would have existed and functioned here even from the beginning. The 3rd stage M. Terentius Varro Lucullus’s campaign (72/71 BC) and that of M. Licinius Crassus (29/28 BC) represent the start of the period of Roman conquest in Dobruja. All this time Dobruja remained in the field of Roman attention excluding two periods – one marked by the operation against Caius Hybrida, the second one by the Burebista conquest. The first campaign, which aimed at drawing the Pontic cities into the Rome political sphere of interest, did not seem to happen under the most friendly conditions.146 Under these circumstances even the relation of this event and the mutual treaty (foedus) with Rome and Kallatis147 becomes uncertain, as was the legal status the Pontic cities received after 71 BC. Immediately after the military success of Varro Lucullus, the Pontic cities fell under the authority of Macedonia’s proconsul, not being integrated into the province.

The event is considered to have taken place at some stage between 55-48 BC,151 or after 48 BC, the year when Pompei was defeated at Pharsalos.152 According to Dio Chrysostomos’ narration (XXXVI, 4), remembering the fact that the orator lived in Olbia (95 AD) and addressed his oration in 97 AD, the Burebista’s operation occurred in 55-53 BC.153 We notice the texts talks about a conquest (μεγίστην ἅλωσιν) after which the Getae took (εἷλον) the city of Boristene (Olbia) ‘and also other cities set on the west Pontic shores, up to Apollonia’ (καὶ τὰς ἄλλας τὰς ἐν τοῖς ἀριστεροῖς τοῦ Πόντου πόλεις μέχρι Ἀπολλωνίας). This action, violent154 or not,155 had as a consequence an aggravation of the situation of the Pontic cities. The same text of Dio Chrysostomos furthermore mentions (XXXVI, 5) ‘the situation of the Greeks who live here is very unpleasant (….); the majority of the Barbarians have allied to come against these cities’. It is not difficult to notice here the same condition of uncertainty that Ovid exiled at Tomis would complain of after not much time.

The civitates liberae status became questionable if we take into consideration the conditions (and mostly the ways) under which the Roman ‘protection’ was imposed. The above-mentioned status was still valid if it refers to the situation of the same cities ‘set free’ from the obligations stipulated in Mithridates system of alliances.

This uncertainty explains the arrangements done by the city’s administration to train a civilian guard to watch the walls and the gates; the fact that the two decree texts (ISM II, 2) did not refer to Burebista, and are possibly dated earlier (to the end of the 2nd century BC)156 does not prevent us from noticing a long-standing situation characterized by ‘times of vicissitude’, ‘difficult situations’ and ‘great trouble’, ‘despair’, ‘weakness’, ending with city leaning and the impossibility of being defeated. We consider these aspects consequences of a lack of protection which took place either before Mithridates (if we maintain that the decrees date to the

In its turn, civitates foederatae status is valid if we consider certain the inclusion of other cities into Rome’s system of alliances; this status does not seem compatible with the situation of the same cities after the Lucullus operation. In 61 BC a common action took place (of the Greek cities of Moesia or of the barbarian populations) against Macedonia’s governor, C. Antonius Hybrida. The text of Dio Cassius (XXXVII, 10, 3) is too general not to give way to supposition: καὶ περὶ τοὺς συμμάχους τοὺς ἐν τῇ Μυσίᾳ could mean the allied Greek cities from Moesia148 or the barbarian population (local or diverse) helped by Bastarnae149 or, finally, a Greekbarbarian alliance. The fact, though, that Hybrida ran to the Pontic area and was defeated ‘near the city of Histria’ (πρὸς τῇ τῶν Ἰστριανῶν πόλει) suggests an alliance of the cities in this area. We argue that Tomis did not miss out on this alliance, considering the geographical

150

About this, generally, see H. Daicoviciu, Dacia de la Burebista la cucerirea romană (Dacia from Burebista to the Roman Conquest), Bucureşti, 1972; I.H. Crişan, Burebista şi epoca sa (Burebista and his age), Bucureşti, 1977. 151 D.M. Pippidi, Parerga. Ecrits de Philologie, d’Epigraphie et d’Histoire Ancienne, Bucureşti-Paris, 1984, p. 177-188; idem, ‘Gètes et Grecs dans l’histoire de la Scythie Mineure à l’époque de Byrebistas’, Dacia NS 25 (1981), p. 255-262; for a possible presence of Burebista in the Pontic area even from 61/60 B.C. see Al. Suceveanu, ‘Πρῶτος καὶ μέγιστος (βασιλεὺς) τῶν ἐπὶ Θρᾴκης βασιλέων: IGB I2, 13, z. 22-23’, Tyche 13 (1998), p. 240-241 (= Pontica 33-34 (2000-2001), p. 319335). 152 Al. Avram, ISM III, p. 48 and note 189; the operation would have aimed at stopping the west Pontus ranging on Caesar’s side. 153 Al. Avram, ISM III, p. 47, note 186. 154 At Olbia, Histria, Mesambria; see Dio Chrysostomus, XXXVI, 4; P. Alexandrescu, ‘La destruction d’Istros par les Gètes. 1. Dossier archéologique’, Il Mar Nero I (1994), p. 179-214; (= SCIVA 44 (1993), 3, p. 231-266); see also G. Mihailov (ed.), IGB I2, 323. 155 Is the situation of Dionysopolis, as resulting from the decree for Acornion, IGB I2, 13. 156 See the subject summary at I. Stoian, ISM II, p. 29-30.

146

Al. Suceveanu, VEDR, p. 15. D.M. Pippidi, DID I, p. 277 ff.; Al. Suceveanu, ‘Două note privind istoria Moesiei în secolul I î.e.n.’ (Two Notes about Moesia’s History in the 1st century BC), Pontice 2 (1969), p. 269-274 considers a later date for foedus, referring it to Crassus’ campaign; see the whole subject and the bibliography in Al. Avram, ISM III, p. 38-44 and p. 201-226, 1 (here too the suggestion of dating the treaty between 106-101/100 BC); idem Der Vertrag zwischen Rom und Callatis. Ein Beitrag zum römischen Völkerrecht, Amsterdam, 1999. 148 D.M. Pippidi, DID I, p. 281; idem, ‘În jurul datei tratatului RomaCallatis’ (About the date of Roma-Callatis Treaty), StCls. 15 (1973), p. 64-67; see Al. Avram, ISM III, p. 45-46 and mostly the notes 175, 183. 149 See the subject at L. Ruscu, Relaţiile, p. 141-143. 147

300

LIVIA BUZOIANU & MARIA BĂRBULESCU: TOMIS Ovid wrote that this region entered very soon under the Ausonic jurisdiction (haec est Ausonio sub jure novissima, Trist., II, 199-200); but the legal condition that the Greek cities held under the Roman authority established at that point for good is not known.

end of the 2nd century BC), or, more uncertainly in the 1st century BC conflict between Hybrida and Burebista or post Burebista.157 We mention a last aspect in the middle of the 1st century BC: a year before the Pharsalos confrontation, Pompeius had among his allies ‘all the East populations and both populations from the Pontus Euxinus shores, either Greeks, or Barbarians. And the Kings, both the Roman peoples friends and mine [Pompei’s friends] brought troops, weapons, foods and other useful things to prepare us’ (Appian, the Civilian Wars, II, 51).

It is generally admitted that the area between the Danube and the sea (excepting the shore) was controlled by the Odrydes Kings; the shore with the Greek cities would have been a praefectura (orae maritimae165 or civitatium orae maritimae166). This situation was maintained after the province of Moesia was organized (15 AD), but note that the shore was now controlled by praefecti under the authority of Moesia’s governor. Ovid mentions the presence of some of Odrydes troops at Aegyssus (Ex Ponto, I, 8; IV, 7)167 and Troesmis (Ex Ponto, IV, 9) and appealled to king Cotys to ensure the safety of the exile (Ex Ponto II, 9). In a region where ‘the Getae did not fear the Roman soldiers weapons’ (nec Ausonii militis arma timet; Ex Ponto, II, 2, 8, 4), peace became uncertain (pacis fiducia numquam, Tristia, II, 5, 17). Not only the Geti attacked the empire’s borders; Ovid wrote about ‘the Sarmatian lances’ (picula Sarmatica), ‘the Bistonian spears’ (Bistonias sarissas), ‘the Scythian bow’ (Scythico arcu) and ‘the impulsive Iazigi’ (Iazyges acres or ferox Iazyx). Tomis bore the same insecure condition. The poet noticed the numerous population in the neighbourhood (circa innumerae gentes) who were ‘threatened with cruel wars’ (fera bella minantur). Poisoned arrows were found inside the city, in the middle of the roods (intra muros, per medias vias; Trist., II, 10, 21-22) or thrust into the houses roofs ‘like a parapet’ (veluti vellato; Ex Ponto, I, 2, 23). For certain, there were difficult moments, but the poet’s imagination exaggerated on purpose some aspects in order to make an impression on his readers.168 The ethnic Getic element is always present. Ovid sent his regards ‘from the Getic country’ (e Getico; Tristia, V, 13, 1), the fields are Getic (Geticis….ab arvis, Ex Ponto, I, 9, 45); he lives among Getae (inque Getis; Tristia, III, 9, 4); the unruly Getae were are not entirely ruled (non bene pacatis flumina pota Getis; Ex Ponto, III, 4, 9, 2).

Among these friendly kings (ϕίλοι), there is Burebista, of course.158 Pompei’s prestige in the east Pontic area would have been great; this explains both the Greek cities and the local kings range on his side. The common attitude of Greeks and Burebista concerning these events could be an argument according to which the Getic king’s actions in this area would be a part of a strategy.159 The Getic authority lasted until Burebista’s death (44 BC)160 and was followed by the unstable period which Dio Chrysostomos described. The second part of the Roman presence in Dobruja is the campaign of M. Licinius Crassus, proconsul of Macedonia,161 between 29/28 BC. Probably also should be mentioned here the hypothesis according to which the Licinius Crassus campaign would have been justified by Augustus’s intention to draw to his side an area which depended until then on Marcus Antonius and under the circumstances that Marcus Antonius’s interest in the Balkan area was growing after 35/34 BC.162 The date of this campaign is considered only a terminus post quem for the moment when Roman authority was established here; the year when Ovid was exiled to Tomis (8 AD) represents a terminus ante quem.163 A closer date is determined for 3-2 BC when P. Vinicius had the imperial legate title propraetor in Thracia and Macedonia.164

Mentioning the Getae from Tomis, the poet notices that they own most of the houses (tecta plus quoque parte tenet; Ex Ponto, III, 4) and though they are mixed with Greeks, the shore belonged mostly to the fiery Getae

157 See also R. Vulpe in DID II, p. 37 and mostly note 53. For dating the same decrees at the beginning of the 1st century AD, see D.M. Pippidi, DID I, p. 293 and 285-297. 158 For the Getic king’s title, the date of taking it and, for the pro-Roman attitude and the date of taking the side of Pompei see Al. Suceveanu, Pontica 33-34 (2000-2001), p. 319-335, mostly p. 330-332. 159 Evasively, we could find here an argument for Burebista’s actions in this area before 49/48 BC. 160 In 48 BC, after Pharsalos, Burebista retreated beyond the Danube (Avram, ISM III, p. 48). 161 See Dio Cassius’s narration, 51, 23-27; R. Vulpe, DID II, p. 33-34; V. Lica, BJ, 192 (1992), p. 225-230. 162 Al. Suceveanu, Pontice 2 (1969), p. 274-284. Two inscriptions are indirect arguments: one from Odessos IGB I2, 46, dated between 44/43 BC – 2/3 AD and the second one from Tomis, ISM II, 37 dedicated to Agrippina, on which there are marked persons called Antonius. 163 For this data, see D.M. Pippidi, ‘Note de lectură’ (Lecture Notes), StCls. 16 (1974), p. 256-260; idem, Parerga, p. 209. 164 Al. Avram, ISM III, p. 46-54; idem, ‘P. Vinicius und Kallatis. Zum Beginn der römischen Kontrolle der griechischen Städte an der

Westküste des Pontos Euxeinos’, in G.R. Tsetskhladze (ed), The Greek Colonisation of the Black Sea Area. Historical Interpretation of Archaeology, Stuttgart, 1998, p. 115-129; idem, ISM II, 57. 165 About the name and evolution of this structure see Al. Suceveanu, ‘În legătură cu data de anexare a Dobrogei de către romani’ (Concerning the date of Dobruja’s annexation by the Romans), Pontica 4 (1971), p. 114-115. 166 See the subject at Al. Avram, ISM III, p. 54-56. 167 Ex Ponto, I, 8, 15: Odrisiis inopino Marte peremptis. 168 N. Lascu, ‘Pământul şi vechii locuitori ai ţării noastre în opera de exil a lui Ovidiu’ (The Territory and the Ancient Inhabitants of our country in Ovid’s Exile Literary Works, in Publius Ovidius Naso, Bucureşti, 1957, p. 119-191; idem, ‘Ovidiu, omul şi poetul (Ovid, The Man and the Poet)’, in the volume Publius Ovidius Naso, Cluj, 1971, p. 309-348; L. Franga, ‘Ovidiu şi spaţiul danubiano-pontic’ (Ovid and the Danubian-Pontic Territory), Thraco-Dacica 11 (1990), p. 1-2, p. 225238.

301

ANCIENT GREEK COLONIES IN THE BLACK SEA 2 the province of Moesia at this time176 or later177 during the reign of Vespasian. The traditional interpretation accepts that the event would have taken place in 46 AD and would have been ‘a peaceful and gradual change’178 when the Pontic cities kept ‘their internal autonomy’.179 According to a new opinion, only during the Vespasianic period do we have ‘certain evidence about a reorganization of Moesia, where Dobruja seems to be included irreversibly at least from a military point of view’.180 A final deed refering to Roman administration in this early imperial age was the breaking up of Moesia during the Domitianic period (86 AD); Dobruja and the Pontic cities are included in the province of Moesia Inferior.

(Mixta sit haec quamvis inter Graecosque Getasque / a male pacatis plus trahit ora Getis; Tristia IV, 7, 11-12). Ovid overestimated here the results of a long cohabitation and a more recent and strongly pronounced demonstration of the Getic element. Many times the poet offers valuable information about Tomis defence system. A precinct wall set on a promotory (tumullus) is mentioned; the wall had towers and gates (Tristia, V, 10). In most of his excerpts Ovid tries to show how insecure this system is with epithets underlining the poor strength of the wall and gates: brevis murus (small wall) moenia exigua (low walls), porta vix firma (not-strengthened gate). This is an exaggeration, too: the wall, perhaps lower than others, which concerned the poet, resisted outside attacks and could adequately cope with city’s security needs.

Among all the West Pontic cities, Tomis was the object of special attention. Until Vespasian it probably had civitas libera status.181 This status, temporarily revoked, would have become civitas stipendiaria under which Tomis would have had more financial and military duties to Rome (the evidence being a garrison here at the end of the 1st century to the beginning of the 2nd century AD).182

Otherwise, the poet himself, trying to draw attention to other difficulties of his exile, wrote that the wind razed to the ground ‘the high towers’ (altas turres). The contradiction is obvious: the wall was too low speaking when he was talking about the danger of attack, but its towers are too high when he mentions the winter’s harshness. It is not necessary to discuss here that the wall was defending the city only on one side or that it was an enclosure fence;169 but the fact the poet uses for city the words castellum and castra suggests there was an enclosure wall. This information is also supported by an epigraphical document which we have already mentioned before (ISM II, 2) and where we note the use of the word περίβολος.

Tomis’s pre-eminence can be noticed even from the 1st century AD. Tullius Geminus,183 Moesia’s governor was present here at a date between 47-53 AD; he came to Tomis either for settling Histria’s border problems or his headquarters were here.184 Otherwise, Tomis is considered to have been the province capital.185 It was certainly the headquarters for the Pontic community in the 2nd century AD (κοινὸν τοῦ Πόντου sive τῶν Ἑλλήνων), a confederation of the west Pontic Greek cities. Different dates have been suggested for its foundation; without leaving out the Hellenistic Age, the Roman age was taken into consideration more obviously, precisely, the Augustan Age186 or that of Tiberius187, or the middle of the 1st century AD, when the province of Moesia was enlarged.188 The community was better known in the 2nd–3rd century AD (the first half), the date of the epigraphical documents concerning the west Pontic

After the province of Moesia was organized,170 though the Getic attacks continued, some elements of stability can be noted in the area. Mentioning the attack from 15 AD against the city of Troesmis and Pomponius Flaccus’s victory,171 the poet wrote: ripa ferox Histri (…) tuta fuit (Ex Ponto, IV, 9, 76); Tomis inhabitants organized public games in the same year; on the occasion of a ceremony dedicated to Augustus’s memory, Ovid was elected agonothetes (Ex Ponto, IV, 9, 101-116)172. The city issued coin again173 and a temple celebrating the imperial cult appears to have been built.174 With Thracia changed into a Roman province in 46 AD, the Odrydis Kings ‘mandate’ ended in Dobruja.175 We do not intend to discuss whether this territory is included in

176

See Al. Suceveanu, Pontica 4 (1971), p. 106-111 and notes 4-15. Al. Suceveanu, Pontica 4 (1971), p. 105-123; VEDR, p. 19-22; ‘Sugli inizi della dominazione romana in Dobrugia, Punti di vista e controversie’, QC 2 (1980), p. 486-490; M. Arruntius ‘Claudianus et l’annexion romaine de la Dobroudja’, Ancient Society, 22 (1991), p. 255-276. 178 R. Vulpe, DID II, p. 48. 179 Ibid. 180 Al. Suceveanu, VEDR, p. 22. 181 Al. Suceveanu, VEDR, p. 47: civitas sine foedere libera; Em. Doruţiu-Boilă, Dacia NS, 19 (1975), p. 152: civitas foederata sive libera. 182 Al. Suceveanu, La Dobroudja romaine, p. 30 şi 31; vezi infra note 198. 183 See the important document: Ὁροθεσία Λαβερίου Μαξίμου ὑ[πατικοῦ] apud D.M. Pippidi, ISM, I, 67 şi p. 210. 184 Al. Suceveanu, VEDR, p. 47, n. 185. 185 B. Pick, Münzen, p. 73; R. Vulpe, HAD, p. 129; I. Stoian, Tomitana, p. 38-40. 186 D.M. Pippidi, Contribuţii2, p. 401-431 = Scythica Minora, p. 230249. 187 I. Stoian, Études histriennes, Bruxelles, 1972, p. 147-166. 188 Al. Avram, ISM, III, p. 63-64, 67-73 and nr. 99-100. 177

169

A. Aricescu, Pontica 5 (1972), p. 439-446. R. Syme, Danubian Papers, Bucharest, 1971, p. 40-72; R. Vulpe, DID II, p. 40-46. 171 See Avram, ISM III, p. 54-56 about Pomponius Flaccus’s position as military commander or praefectus. However, we notice, beside the word praefuit which can be assimilated with the position of dux, or military commander, Ovid also refers to the same Flaccus as praeses: in quoque quo laevus fuerat sub praeside Pontus (Ex Ponto, IV, 9, 119).; see and R. Vulpe, DID II, p. 45, n. 96. 172 Ex Ponto, II, 8, 1-10; IV, 9, 105-112; III, 1, 161-164. 173 K. Regling, Münzen, p. 673; R. Vulpe, ‘Ovidio nella città dell’esilio’, in Studi Ovidiani, Roma, 1959, p. 59; see also ‘Una città di provincia al limite dell’impero romano: Tomi al tempo di Ovidio’, Studi Romani, 6 (1958), 6, p. 629-648. 174 D.M. Pippidi, DID, I, p. 323; for Histria, see ISM I, 146 and for Callatis, ISM III, 58. 175 R. Vulpe, DID II, p. 46-49. 170

302

LIVIA BUZOIANU & MARIA BĂRBULESCU: TOMIS Beginning in Hadrian’s time (117-138 AD) Tomis regained its civitas libera198 status, a condition for its developmental increase. The official dedication is written by respublica Tomitanorum (βουλὴ δῆμος Τομείτων)199 or by senatus populusque Tomitanorum.200 We notice two honorary inscriptions from Tomis dedicated to Hadrian. Two fragments of the first are known, one found in the filling soil from the Roman Mosaic,201 and the second found in an excavation near the aforementioned monument.202 The other dedication was in an area closer to the Mosaic, in the south-east area.203 The two honorary inscriptions found in a limited area were probably not far from their initial places.

κοινόν concentrated on the imperial cult, led by a pontarch.189 For the period between Claudius and Domitian’s time (41-96 AD) the epigraphical documents found at Tomis demonstrate city’s support from the emperor;190 an influx of new population, veterans settled here from various places: the Ligurian territory of Aquae Statellae (ISM II, 8), from Pannonia (ISM II, 170), from Pessinus (ISM II, 169); we find completely Romanized names showing new citizenship status. The interest for the increasing Roman authority grew under the Antonini.191 Otherwise, at the beginning of the 2nd century Dobruja was full of rebuilding activity, and administrative and military arrangements initiated by the emperor Trajan after he defeated the Dacians.

An inscription from Tomis (ISM II, 52) is very important for the birth and structure of the Pontic community in the 2nd century AD being until now its first mention in that century; there is a dedication on a statue bottom addressed to ‘τὸν ποντάρχην καὶ ἀρχιερέα τῆς Ἑξαπόλεως τὸν υἱὸν τοῦ Πόντου καὶ πρῶτον ἀγωνοϑέτην Θεῦ Ἀντινόου, Τ. Φλάουιον Ποσειδώνιον, υἱὸν Φαίδρου τοῦ ποντάρχου καὶ υἱοῦ τῆς πόλεως…’ by the Argadeis tribe. Phaidros was pontarch before the inscription date (130-138 AD), so resulting in the conclusion that the community had been structured during Hadrian’s time204 or probably during Trajan’s time, when he organized the Danube provinces (107-117 AD).205

Numerous inscriptions are dedicated to this emperor in the name of the ‘Tomitan people’, named clearly in expressions as δῆμος Τομείτων (ISM II, 38) or βουλὴ δῆμος Τομείτων (ISM II, 42).192 In two situations, the inscriptions on architrave fragments are made by the respublica Tomitanorum during the age of provincial governors Fabius Postuminus (ISM II, 41; 102-103 AD) and Quintus Roscius Coelius Murena Pompeius Falco (ISM II, 43; 116-117 AD).193 The named governors presence and the interest in building activity194 indicate that Tomis was about to become the most important city in Moesia Inferior.195 The bottom of a statue raised probably about the beginning of Trajan’s rule, was found at Tomis.196 The Adamclisi Triumphal Monument appears on Tomitan coins;197 more evidence of the glorification of Trajan’s operations in the region.

Special attention was given to maintain the roads; the Pontic coast inspection ordered by the emperor and done by Arrian and the visit the emperor himself paid in Moesia Inferior in 123-124 AD, when he also visited Tomis, are well-known. Two milliary pillars, one from 124 AD and in connection, probably with the forementioned visit,206 and the second one from 134

198 There is an interpretation given by Al. Suceveanu, ‘În legătură cu statutul juridic al oraşului Tomis în epoca romană’ (About the city of Tomis’s legal status in the Roman age), Pontica 8 (1975), p. 115-124 and VEDR, p. 47 to the epithet Ἐλευϑέριος honouring the emperor on the inscription ISM II, 47, dated by I. Stoian between 129-138 AD. 199 ISM II, 48 bilingual inscription with the name of governor C. Ummidius Severus Sertorius (120 AD). The inscription was completed based on a new fragment found at Tomis; see A. Rădulescu, M. Munteanu, ‘Inscripţii inedite din Tomis şi Callatis’ (Unpublished Inscriptions from Tomis and Kallatis), Pontica 10 (1977), p. 84-87, nr. 5; D.M. Pippidi, ‘Note de lectură’ (Lecture Notes), StCls. 20 (1981), p. 77-79; B.E. Thomasson, L. P.; 20: 74; C. Ummidius Quadratus Sallustius Se]rtorius: G. Molisani, Tituli 4 (1982), p. 395 sq = AE, 1985, p. 759. 200 ISM II, 50, dated inscription 129 AD. 201 A. Rădulescu, ‘Note epigrafice’ (Epigraphical Notes), Pontice 1 (1968), p. 329-330 and fig. 4. 202 A. Aricescu, ‘Adnotări epigrafice’ (Epigraphical annotation), SCIVA 27 (1976), 4, p. 523-525 and fig. 1. 203 M. Bărbulescu-Munteanu, A. Rădulescu, ‘Descoperiri epigrafice recente’ (Recent Epigraphical Discoveries), Pontica 14 (1981), p. 159162. 204 P. Veyne, ‘Augustal de l’an I - premier pontarque’, BCH 90 (1966), p. 144-145; M. Musielak, ‘Πρῶτος ποντάρχης’, Pontica 26 (1993), p. 191-195. 205 Cf. K. Nawotka, ‘The ‘First Pontarch’ and the Date of the Establishment of the Western Pontic KOINON’, Klio, 75 (1993), p. 342-350. 206 ISM II, 49; see also DID, II, p. 136.

189

Supra notes 186-188. We mention the complete bibliography: Em. Doruţiu-Boilă, op.cit., p. 152-157. G. Mihailov, ‘The Western Pontic Koinon’, Epigraphica, 41 (1979), p. 7-42. M. Musielak, Pontarchowie in Studia Moesiaca, I, Poznan, 1994, p. 101-115; K. Nawotka, ‘Κοινὸν τοῦ Πόντου’, Balcanica Posnaniensia, 5 (1990), p. 151-161 etc. 190 ISM II, 37, inscription for ‘divine Agrippina’ (ϑεά Ἀγριππείνα), Claudius’s wife and Nero’s mother; the inscription is dated between 4959 AD. 191 R. Vulpe, DID, II, p. 117-179; Al. Suceveanu, VEDR, passim. 192 However see at Sorin Olteanu, ‘Note epigrafice’ (Epigraphical Notes), Pontica 21-22 (1988-1989), p. 313-315 for the supposition that the two fragments ISM I, 42 and 38 form one dedication. 193 The name appears on other three Tomitan inscriptions: ISM II, 44, 45, 46; as well on inscriptions from: Tropaeum Traiani, Durostorum, Oescus, Tyras and others; see B.E. Thomasson, Laterculi praesidum, Göteborg, 1984, 20:73 (governor’s full name). 194 The number of the architraves with the emperor’s name and governor’s names is larger; beside the inscriptions on the architrave quoted we mention ISM II 40, 44, 45. 195 I. Stoian, Tomitana, p. 39-40, considers the city as already being an offical province capital; contra R.Vulpe, DID II, p. 127-128. 196 The monument is also dedicated to the Tomitan people by private persons. See the proposal to complete ISM II, 42 and 38 to S. Olteanu, op.cit. 197 B. Pick, K. Regling, Münzen, II, 1, p. 635 and 680-681; M. Sâmpetru, ‘Trofeul lui Traian de la Adamclisi pe monede ale oraşului Tomis’ (Empereur Trajan’s trophy on the city of Tomis coins), SCIV 30 (1979), 3, p. 367-376.

303

ANCIENT GREEK COLONIES IN THE BLACK SEA 2 AD,207 show a permanent interest in a better road system. Antoninus Pius (138-161 AD) is the first to state Tomis as a west Pontic metropolis (μητρόπολις τοῦ Εὐωνύμου Πόντου),208 a name also mentioned on the coins.209 The evidence that the emperor took an interest in Tomis210 are dedications put on architraves of some public edifices during the governors L. Minicius Natalis Quadronius Verus,211 Q. Fuficius Cornutus212 and Titus Flavius Turbo’s213 rules; many milliary pillars set along the coast and Danube show the imperial administration’s wish for a better road system.214

activities existed;219 a number of dedications are devoted only to Marcus Aurelius (ISM II, 63)220 or in co-regency with Lucius Verus (ISM II, 67); Marcus Aurelius’s name having the authority of Caesar when the monument was built is mentioned on a statue bottom; a marble statue from Tomis also refers probably to Marcus Aurelius221; finally, some milliary pillars show that some roads on the coast were reconstructed between 162-163 AD (ISM II, 68).222 This process stopped for a while, around 170 AD as a consequence of the Costoboci invasion223 which affected mainly Dobruja’s central and western area and was felt in the Pontic cities too.224 Destruction or rebuilding actions for Tomis are not clearly proved. An important public edifice during governor M. Servilius Fabianus’s time was left unfinished; the date – 162 (162/164?) – is too early to connect this with the Costoboci invasion in 170 AD.225 Most likely an external event, for example the Orient war and its costs, could determine the date for the stopping of works at Tomis.226 The payer’s list (ISM II, 21) for rebuilding a scanty precinct wall fragment originally connected with the restoration during Marcus Aurelius’s time,227 seems from the study of the letters, to date rather to the 3rd century AD. A similar, ISM 22, studied in connection with ISM II, 21, referring precisely to this wall-rebuilding work, dates rather from the 3rd century AD, after the Antonine Constitution.228 An altar devoted to Apollo Agyeus (ISM 116) is dated based on the governors’ name, M. Catonius Vindex, either around 170 AD, or later,229 but anyway to after the Costoboci ‘storm’ when Roman life returned to normality. Finally, an inscription from a public monument recently published230 can prove works at Tomis after 170 AD.

The emperor was held in respect: the head of a huge marble statue representing Antoninus Pius215 was found at Tomis. The personal genius was transferred to a genius loci,216 an expression meaning the divine tutela from which the city benefitted when an emperor considered himself ‘too divine’.217 On a votive marble monument from 160 AD the names of Antoninus Pius and of the caesar Marcus Aurelius are mentioned together with Egyptian divinities (ISM II, 153). The inscription made by οἶκος τῶν Ἀλεξανδρεῶν calls our attention by naming the ethnical element present at Tomis at that time who formed a religious association (to celebrate Sarapis and the other Egypthian divinities) and at the same time include professionals (merchants and shipowners). As an association of shipowners (οἶκος τῶν ἐν Τόμει ναυκλήρων; ISM II, 60) existed in Tomis during the period, when Marcus Aurelius was still Caesar (139-161 AD), it is not difficult to conclude that the city developed a flourishing trade activity.218 Tomis’s development during the reign of Antoninus Pius continued into the first years of Marcus Aurelius’s time; possibly building 207 ISM II, 53; a Tomitan settlement was mentioned Tres Protomae, to localize it see more recently, M. Bărbulescu, A. Câteia, ‘Drumurile din Dobrogea romană pe baza stâlpilor miliari din sec. II-III p. Chr.’ (The roads in Roman Dobruja based on the 2nd-3rd century AD Milliary Pillars), Pontica 31 (1998), p. 121, notes 11-16. 208 ISM II, 54 (20); the inscriptions date is established between 140/141144 AD; it is possible the monument was done by care of the governor L. Minicius Natalis; see the observations at note 211. 209 Pick-Regling, Münzen, I, p. 72; II, p. 683-688. 210 Otherwise, Antoninus Pius’s rule is known as ‘the period of the most exultant building activities of ancient times’, R. Vulpe, DID II, p. 149150. 211 M. Bărbulescu, A. Rădulescu, ‘Dedicaţii imperiale din Tomis’ (Imperial Dedications from Tomis), Pontica 30 (1997), p. 167-170, nr. 1; the authors point out the fragment should be studied related to ISM II, 54. About the governor see Thomasson, LP, 20:82; Em. Doruţiu-Boilă, ‘Legaţii Moesiei Inferioare între anii 137 şi 160’ (Moesia Inferior Legates between 137 and 160), SCIVA 40 (1989), 2, p. 161 and 163. 212 ISM II, 55; governor dated about 147-155 (LP. 20:85) or 152153/154 (by Em. Doruţiu-Boilă, SCIVA 40 (1989), 4, p. 325-338). 213 ISM II 56, the governor F. Flavius Longinus Q. Marcius Turbo was present in Moesia Inferior in 155 (LP., 20:86) or 153/4-156 (cf. Em. Doruţiu-Boilă, op.cit.). 214 M. Bărbulescu, A. Câteia, op.cit., p. 122, notes 21-23. 215 G. Bordenache, ‘La statue imperiali nella Moesia Inferior e la propaganda officiali nell’impero’, StCls. 7 (1965), p. 218-219, fig. 5. 216 ISM II, 124; for personal genius, see D.M. Pippidi, Studii, p. 278279. 217 For the epithet, see ISM II, 61. 218 See Al. Suceveanu, VEDR, p. 120-128; O. Bounegru, Economie şi societate în spaţiul ponto-egean (sec. III a. Chr. – III p. Chr) (Economy and Society in Pontic-Aegean Area, the 3rd century BC–the 3rd century AD), Iaşi, 2003, p. 105-119.

219

ISM II, 65. However see M. Bărbulescu, A. Rădulescu, ‘Inscripţii inedite din Tomis şi împrejurimi’ (Unpublished Inscriptions from Tomis and Vicinity), Pontica 27 (1994), p. 166, n. 63 who consider uncertain the admission of Marcus Aurelius in ISM II, 63. 221 G. Bordenache, StCls. 7 (1965), p. 217-218 and fig. 4. 222 See also A. Ştefan, ‘Callatis şi artera rutieră litorală în secolul al IIlea e.n.’ (Kallatis and the Coast Road in the 2nd century AD), StCls. 22 (1984), p. 95-104; Al. Avram, ISM III, 195, 199. 223 Seee also Em. Popescu, ‘Epigraphische Beiträge zur Geschichte der Stadt Tropaeum Traiani’, StCls. 6 (1964), p. 192-200. 224 Al. Suceveanu, ‘Observations sur la stratigraphie des cités de la Dobrougea aux IIe – IVe siècles à la lumière des fouilles d’Histria’, Dacia NS 13 (1969), p. 340; VEDR, p. 26-27. Without excluding the possibility that the Costoboci attack could be simultaneous with other population attacks coming from the sea, the quoted author points out that traces of invasion are, however, less clear at Tomis. 225 B.E. Thomasson, LP., 20:93. 226 R. Vulpe, DID II, p. 162-163 and note 203. 227 A. Aricescu, Armata, p. 155; V. Pârvan, Zidul, p. 17 and I. Stoian, ISM II, 21 takes into consideration that a wall fragment was restored (μέρις τοῦ τεiχους); the restored parts varies between 1-3 ells (πήχεις); only one part reaches 13 ells; the contribution was in gold coins (χρυσοῦς). 228 One argument could be the great number of Aurelii mentioned in text; ISM II, 22 doesn’t mention the work, but refers to the same unit of measure (πήχεις). 229 B.E. Thomasson, LP, 20:96 (169-176 AD); Leiva Petersen, PIR2, V, 2, M, nr. 22 (175-176 AD); Em. Doruţiu-Boilă, ‘Die Statthalter Niedermösiens zwischen 161 und 175’, Dacia NS 36 (1992), p. 32-33, 35 (170-172/173 AD). 230 M. Bărbulescu, A. Rădulescu, Pontica 27 (1994), p. 161-166. 220

304

LIVIA BUZOIANU & MARIA BĂRBULESCU: TOMIS stop in Dacia too,241 then passed into Thracia and from there into Asia Minor.242 From the last period of the dynasty we notice a dedication to Iulia Mamaea, Severus Alexander’s mother written by ‘the council and the citizens of the very splendid metropolis and capital of the West Pont, Tomis’ (βουλὴ δῆμος τῆς λαμπροτάτης μητροπόλεως καὶ α’ τοῦ Εὐωνύμου Πόντου, Τόμεως), dating between 222-235 AD. The extended phrase, including local administrative structures, can be found in two more documents dated to the Severan period, probably from Severus Alexander’s time243 and is connected with the Roman administration for this region.244 At the end of Severus Alexander’s rule the empire is confronted with external threats which would, probably, create difficult moments in Dobruja, too.

The period between the reigns of Marcus Aurelius and Septimius Severus is characterized by building activities at Tomis as well. Probably to this period can be dated the first stage of the Roman Mosaic Edifice and the city public baths (thermae).231 The Severian dynasty meant a rather calm period for the west Pont Greek cities and a continuation of previous living habits.232 In Tomis we find many dedications to Septimius Severus and his family, associated with the Senate, the army, the governor of the province and the city of Tomis.233 Two bilingual dedications to Septimius Severus234 mention a great edifice built by metropolis Tomitanorum, under the care of C. Ovinius Tertullus. The name of the same governor is associated with the imperial family also on the dedication of a religious association (ϑίασος) for Cybele ‘for the gift offered to the association’.235 Two milliary pilars found at Tomis have this governor’s name as well.236 Two altars devoted ‘to Septimius Severus’s health’ were found in Tomis area, from vicus Clementianensis; they are to be dated to the beginning of his activity (195 and 196 AD).237 Emperor Caracalla’s name appears on two epigraphical documents: the first is a greeting to Caracalla and to Geta on the occasion of their raise to power (inscription dated 211-212 AD)238, brought by the council and people of Tomis; the second document is most likely dedicated also to Caracalla and it is dated between 212-217 AD.239 On an altar dated to 216 AD the emperor is mentioned without a name (ISM II, 130), a situation unlike the presence on local inscriptions of his mother’s name, Iulia Domna.240

Between Maximinus Thrax and Gallienus (238-269 AD), the empire was disturbed by huge groups of barbarians. Tomis seemed to escape the destruction, even if some evidence leads us to think not completely. We have a fragmentary altar from Maximinus Thrax (235-238 AD) done by the cives Romani et Lae consistentes vico Turre Muca (…); the imperial hammer-wrought names belong most likely to Maximinus and his son Maximus.245 More numerous are the Tomitan epigraphical monuments dedicated to Gordian III (238-244 AD) and his wife, Sabinia Tranquillina. The situation was also probably due to the province governor, Tullius Menophilus who negotiated with the Carps, preventing their attacks for three years as long he ruled the province (238-240/241 AD).246 The governor’s name is registered in Tomis on a milliary pile, which we date to the period of the road reconstruction (and generally, of the province) after the Carps-Goths attack in 238 AD.247 An important person was also Aelius Ammonius (ISM II, 106), who held some military and civil positions, among which we note that of procurator Augusti – in charge of the financial problems in Lower Moesia – and that of praefectus of the fleet Flavia Moesica Gordiana.248 The imperial couple has an

An important event is the Emperor’s visit to the Danube provinces in 214 AD, a circumstance where he made a 231

Al. Suceveanu, La Dobrudja romaine, p. 33. R. Vulpe, DID II, p. 180-217. See ISM II, 82. 234 ISM II, 84 dated 201 AD; M. Bărbulescu, A. Rădulescu, Pontica 30 (1997), p. 170-174, fig. 2 (here ISM II, 84 is rectified: metropolis Tomitanorum instead of respublica Tomitanorum). For the city’s monumentality during Severan age, see Al. Suceveanu, VEDR, p. 27; idem, La Dobroudja romaine, p. 33. 235 ISM II, 83; for ϑίασος see Pippidi, Studii, p. 230-231, 245, 246 and 259, note 104. A dedication to a certain thiasos for ‘the whole Augusta house’ (συμπάσης οἰκίας Αὐγούστης) is also ISM II, 85 dated between 198/199 and 209/210 AD. For C. Ovinius Tertullus (198-201 AD) see also D. Boteva, Lower Moesia and Thracia in the Roman Imperial System (AD 193-217/218) (in Bulgarian), Sofia, 1997, p. 4688; 331-332. 236 M. Bărbulescu-Munteanu, A. Rădulescu, ‘Stâlpi miliari inediţi din Scythia Minor’ (Unpublished Milliary Pillars from Scythia Minor), Pontica 13 (1980), p. 140-148; ‘Contribuţii privind seria guvernatorilor Moesiei Inferioare în secolul III p. Chr.’ (Contributions about the series of Moesia Inferior Governors in the 3rd century AD), Pontica 24 (1991), p. 123-126 (as on the milestone the distance is not mentioned, it is supposed to have been set around Tomis’s precinct wall, on the spot marking the repaired coast road). 237 ISM II, 134 and 136, for the last see Em. Doruţiu-Boilă, ISM V, 93. 238 ISM II, 91; the inscription mentiones also the name of Augusta Julia Domna, ‘mother of Roman camps’. 239 ISM II, 86; see however R. Vulpe’s note from HAD, p. 255-256 regarding the lack of dedications to Caracalla when he ruled the empire by himself. 240 The note belongs also to R. Vulpe, op.cit., p. 256. Julia Domna’s name appears also on a stone monument (ISM II, 135) and is followed by the epithet Augusta. The monument could be also dated to during Septimius Severus’s rule. 232 233

241

L. Ruscu, Provincia Dacia în istoriografia antică (Dacia Province in the Ancient Historiography), Cluj-Napoca, 2002, p. 142-149. We are not sure about his presence in Dobruja. 243 ISM II, 96: λαμπρότατος δῆμος τῆς λαμπροτάτης μητροπόλεως Τόμεως; ISM II, 97: λαμπρότατος δῆμος τῆς λαμπροτάτης μητροπόλεως καὶ τοῦ Εὐωνύμου Πόντου Τόμεως. The second inscription is considered to be of a later date than the first (note ISM II, p. 121 and 123, reference also at Pick-Regling, Münzen, p. 73). The short version in another document – ISM II, 105 - ἡ βουλὴ καὶ ὁ δῆμος λαμπροτάτης μητροπόλεως Τόμεως refers also to the Severan dynasty. 244 A dedication found at Tomis (ISM II, 93 mentions L. Anninus Italicus Honoratus’s name, with an important career, among which was the position of Lower Moesia province governor during Alexander Severus’ time (224 AD). 245 ISM II, 141; see also I.I. Russu, ‘Note epigrafice’ (Epigraphical Notes), SCIV, 10 (1959), p. 139-140; for vicus Muca(…), localized in Anadalchioi district in Constanţa, see further on. 246 Information transmitted by Petrus Patricius, FHG IV, p. 186, fr. 8 = FHDR, p. 488-489; see also LP, 20:131, c.a. 238/241 vel 239/241 AD. 247 M. Bărbulescu, A. Rădulescu, Pontica, 24 (1991), p. 126-132, nr. 2. 248 The last position means the fleet was reorganised under Gordian III by his legate, Tullius Menophilus; see also R. Vulpe; DID II, p. 237. For 242

305

ANCIENT GREEK COLONIES IN THE BLACK SEA 2 religious confrontations Paganism.255

honorary inscription written by a Dionysos’s thiasos in 241 AD (ISM II, 107). Only Sabinia Tranquillina, is honoured by a monument set up by the local authorities under the care of the governor Proscius Tertullianus, at a date between 241-244 AD (ISM II, 108).249 It is most likely the Isis bust found in a sculptural deposit from Tomis also represents Sabinia Tranquillina as a priestess of the Egyptian godess cult.250 The following rulers, Phillip the Arabian, Decius and Valerian, were confronted with invasion by powerful Transdanubian peoples, who reached Moesia and the Thracian provinces.251 Tomis maintained its position as a metropolis; the citizens had the necessary means to rebuild parts of the coast road, being supported by the governers having their headquarters here or to show their devotion to the empire. An honorary inscription from the time of Decius probably originating in Tomis was raised to honour probably the empress Herennia Etruscilla and the Caesar Q. Herennius Etruscus, about 250-251 AD.252 Between the repeated Carp and Goth attacks, however, existed a time of peace from 254-258 AD. Two milliary pillars from the time of the Emperors Valerian and Gallienus set up by metropolis Tomitanorum prove that the coast road was reconstructed around the city, precisely during this period.253 Immediately afterwards, in 258 AD, ‘Scythian’ invaders according to Zosimos (I, 34, 2), but in fact Goths, Carps and other TransDanubian populations, passed near Histria, Tomis and Anchialos on their way to Byzantium. On the other hand, in 269 AD, during the time of Claudius the Goth, the invaders, this time more numerous and in a migrating proccess stopped at Tomis and tried to lay siege to the city. Zosimos wrote this piece of information (I, 42), clearly stating beyond the figures of the double invasion – 6,000 ships (but probably around 2,000) and 320,000 people – that ‘they attacked Tomis, a city strengthened by walls’ (Τομεῖ μεν τειχήρει πόλει προσβαλόντες). The besiegers were pushed away, but the city suffered damages.254 These seem to have affected sacred monuments, as some cult sculpture pieces were damaged at that time and deposited in the 4th century AD, possibly as a consequence of the

between

Christianity

and

After the TransDanubian attacks, and with the danger gone, the Tomitans reconstructed the road close to the city. The only milliary pillars from the time of Claudius the Goth known in Lower Moesia come from Tomis. The coast roads were also reconstructed by care of the province governor, Titus Saturnius,256 whose activities took place between 268-270 AD or probably about the beginning of this period. The stability of the empire is guaranted for a while by the administrative and military arrangements of Aurelian (270-275 AD). Tomis benefitted from the straightening actions of the emperor.257 A milliary pile found in Constanţa (ISM II, 109) is connected precisely with the emperor’s actions to consolidate the Danube limes.258 The Tomis precinct wall was built or only rebuilt, important work enclosing an area double the size of the presumptive Hellenistic precincts and which crossed the peninsula from north to south, stretching probably on the south area of the city, to the port. The wall reconstruction continued during the time of the Emperors Tacitus (275-276 AD) and Probus (276-282 AD). There followed no important historical events until the time of Diocletian. Other aspects regarding Tomis during the Principality period will be discussed below. They deal with: coin circulation, army, population, cults, institutions, city administration (and stratigraphy), territory. Coins (workshop, monetary circulation) The local mint ceased its activity, in unclear conditions, at the end of 1st century BC.259 It started up again very soon afterwards and totally covers the period between Augustus and Philip II inclusively (with a period of cessation during the reigns of the Emperors Macrinus and Diadumenianus).260 Statistically, we note that the Tomitan workshop can be considered first for its production rate (1128 coins), which represent 33% of all Moesian emissions in the 1st–3rd centuries A.D.261

P. Aelius Ammonius see I. Piso, ‘La carrière équestre de P. Aelius Hammonius’, Dacia NS 20 (1976), p. 251-257; IDR III/2, 83 and 246. 249 For dating the inscription to 242 AD, according to V. Pârvan or 241243 AD, according to R. Vulpe, in connection with the political and personal facts, see DID II, p. 236. 250 G. Bordenache, St.Cls. 7 (1965), p. 221-222, fig. 10. 251 About that long Scythicum bellum (SHA, Vita Maximini et Balbini, XVI, 3) see Em. Doruţiu-Boilă in Actes de la Conférence Internationale d’Études Classiques Eirene, Cluj-Napoca, 2-7 Oct. 1972, BucureştiAmsterdam, 1975, p. 635-642; Al. Suceveanu, La Dobroudja romaine, p. 34. Probably, in connection with the confrontation Phillip the Arabian had with a powerful Goth, Carp, Taiphali and Peucini coalition in 248 AD, cohors I Cilicum gains the epithet Philippiana. An altar set by a cohort soldier with the new name ISM II, 452 comes from Tomis; see, further on, the army. 252 M. Bărbulescu, A. Rădulescu, ‘O nouă inscripţie din vremea lui Decius în Dobrogea’ (A New Inscription from Decius Time in Dobruja), Pontica 31 (1998), p. 131-138. 253 Idem, Pontica 13 (1980), p. 148-151, nr. 4; Pontica 24 (1991), p. 132-136, nr. 3; the second sample preserves the name C. Iulius Victor as praeses provinciae. 254 The expedition ends with the invaders defeat at Naissus.

255 V. Canarache, A. Aricescu, V. Barbu, A. Rădulescu, The Sculpture Thesaurus from Tomis, p. 121-123 (the most recent pieces are dated in the middle of the 3rd century AD–the beginning of the 4th century AD); there is also the hypothesis the sculpture thesaurus was buried during the conflict between Christianity and Pagan cults in the 4th century AD. See for the last also D.M. Pippidi, Studii, p. 284-310. 256 M. Bărbulescu, A. Rădulescu, Pontica 24 (1991), p. 136-139, nr. 6; we also notice here the governor’s nomination as praeses provinciae. 257 R. Vulpe, DID II, p. 271-277. 258 The inscription is dated at the earliest to the end of 271–beginning of 272 and at the latest to the middle of 275 AD. 259 See, C. Preda, Istoria monedei, p. 83; the author connects the end of Tomitan independent coinage with Burebista’s actions or Licinius Crassus’s campaign in 29-28 BC rather than Varro Lucullus’s campaign in 72 BC. 260 Here and further on see M. Iacob, ‘Noi descoperiri de monede tomitane în Dobrogea. Atelierul monetar tomitan în epoca romană’ (New Tomitan Coin Findings in Dobruja. The Tomitan Mint During the Roman Age), Peuce, 1 (14), 2003, p. 283-340. 261 The dates apud M. Iacob, op.cit.

306

LIVIA BUZOIANU & MARIA BĂRBULESCU: TOMIS consequence of some state intervention and not following a military operation.

The first stage of the Tomitan mint (established between Augustus and Hadrian) is marked by a small number of coins and almost unchanged iconographic types.262 This low level could be the consequence of the deflation policy of the Julio-Claudian dynasty. The workshop’s activity grew especially during the reigns of Nero and Domitian; during the age of Trajan and Hadrian the production is limited; the next changes are to be noticed during the peaceful and flourishing period. The condition of the metropolis is clearly shown on the reverse side of coins at the beginning of Antoninus Pius’s rule. The coinage reaches high values only during this emperor’s time.263 During the reigns of Marcus Aurelius and Annius Verus there is a period of low coinage,264 while during Commodus’s reign (Caesar and Augustus), the coinage increases again.265

We confirm these dates with some others reflecting the situation on the Tomitan market.270 At the beginning (the last decades of the 1st century BC and the first decades of the 1st century AD) Roman Republican and Imperial coinage is recorded and the Pontic coinage from the autonomous period is very rare. The coin circulation level was low until Thracia was transformed into a Roman province; after this date a real growth is recorded. Over a long period of time (until Antoninus Pius) the coinage is intermittent.271 Alongside this emperor, an organised coinage can be mentioned.272 The period 161192 AD produced a rather poor coinage for Marcus Aurelius and Lucius Verus with a sudden change under Commodus.273 Coinage flourished spectacularly in Dobruja during the time of Septimius Severus, as a consequence of the better economical and political situation. This growth is recorded also at Tomis, but, it is true, with values not considerably increased from to the previous period.274 The situation is similar in the following period. The figures grow under Caracalla, Geta275 and Severus Alexander, illustrating rather quiet living conditions; a difficult moment seems to affect an area outside of the city.276 The biggest coin number is recorded in Dobruja under Gordian III;277 Tomis coinage activity in this period reaches values almost equal with Histria. Phillip the Arabian and his family ends the Greek colonial coinage series in the Tomitan market.278 We note two discoveries in the suburban area of Tomis; an isolated coin group in the present district of Viile Noi, with 20 pieces from Tiberius to Claudius II.279 The second discovery from Tomis north area (Grăniceri) refers to a hoard of 470 pieces. The majority of them are Tomitan coinages from the first half of the 3rd century AD. The greatest share (173 pieces) belongs to the time of Severus Alexander and then respectively in frequency to Caracalla (96 pieces) and Geta (61 pieces);280 the hoard was buried during the time of Severus Alexander, probably after 232 AD. The last note concerns the

During the time of Pertinax, the Tomitan workshop is the only one in Lower Moesia issuing coins with the emperor’s name. The period between 193-217 AD is marked by coinage for Septimius Severus, Iulia Domna, Caracalla, Plautila and Geta. The majority of types and variants are registered during Caracalla’s time;266 the amount of coinage during Geta’s Age is also significant.267 After a short cessation period during the time of Macrinus and Diadumenianus (217-218 AD), the Tomitan workshop continued its activity. Elagabal’s coinage is numerous enough. The maximum output during the Severan dynasty is reached by Severus Alexander (and Iulia Mamaea).268 Though difficult, the period of Severan’s dynasty is reflected less keenly in Tomitan workshop procuction. Beginning with Maximinus, the workshop issued coin continuously until activity stopped under Phillip II. As a matter of fact, during Gordian III’s age the most important coinage of all workshop activity269 is to be noticed. The last period is that of Phillip I (M. Iulius Phillippus) and his son Phillip II, with a small coinage output (compared to the previous period). The workshop ceased its activity during Phillip II, probably as a 262 Though the invariable aspect of the Tomitan workshop coinage under the circumstances when is the only workshop of the province in some periods, should be noted. 263 Beyond 35 coins of the province Regling corpus, are mentioned 3 more new coins at Ruzicka and 24 new as well at M. Iacob; to add to them 30 coins of Marcus Aurelius Caesar; see, M. Iacob, op.cit., p. 296298. 264 Now there is added on the coins the city’s name, the quality Πόντος: the legend becomes Μητροπ(-) Πόντου Τόμεως. 265 Commodus (Caesar): 9 Regling + 1 Ruzicka coin; 6 pieces at M. Iacob are all new types or variants of the known types; (Augustus): 35 Riegling coins; at M. Iacob 37 of 38 pieces represent new types (the total would be 69 types and in addition more variants); see M. Iacob, op.cit., p. 300-302. 266 M. Iacob, op.cit., p. 203-205; we conclude only for Caracalla 24 types and 9 variants; a Caracalla + Plautilla coinage and 9 Plautilla coinage alone are added. 267 Only M. Iacob, op.cit., p. 303 and 308-309 refers to 27 new types; most of them come from the period 211-212 AD. 268 M. Iacob, op.cit., p. 312-315. 269 Regling records 133 coins only for Gordian, 49 coins for Gordian + Tranquillina; 2 Tranquillina alone; in addition, the supplement brought by Ruzicka, another 7 Gordian III coinages and 2 new Tranquillina coinages (apud M. Iacob, op.cit., p. 317-322).

270

See here and further on A. Vertan, Circulaţia monetară, passim. A. Vertan, op.cit., p. 337, table A and catalogue. Note worthy is the fact that of all 20 coins known of this emperor, Tomis has first place with 13 coins (apud A. Vertan, op.cit., p. 163). 273 But better marked at Histria; of all 46 coins, Tomis has 10 (ibid.). 274 14 samples of all 83 for Dobruja (most of them come also from Histria). For the same period see the quoted paper and p. 69-77. 275 Caracalla (and Plautila) – 18 coins (the majority issued by Tomis); Geta – 17 (the majority also issued by Tomis). See the dates here and further on at A. Vertan, op.cit., p. 163-165, the table of the GreekOriental coin distribution by emperors. 276 See further on, the hoard from Tomis-Grăniceri; probably the settlement is a vicus or a villa of the territory. 277 A. Vertan, op.cit., p. 164. 278 Ibid.; Phillip I – 29 pieces, the majority (9) issued by Kallatis and only two by Tomis. 279 Dates from Gh. Poenaru-Bordea, The 15th National Numismatic Symposium, Alexandria – Teleorman, 12-14 May 1998, in brief, p. 3133. 280 A. Vertan, op.cit., p. 183-184 and 202-204 tables; idem, ‘Evenimente politice reflectate în descoperirile de tezaure monetare imperiale din Dobrogea’ (Political events reflected in Imperial Hoard discoveries from Dobruja), Pontica, 32 (1999), p. 130, nr. 11. 271 272

307

ANCIENT GREEK COLONIES IN THE BLACK SEA 2 documents, probably being commemorative monuments, they suggest the real presence of the Roman army at Tomis.

Tomitan coins area of use; they are present in the rural territory of the city, in the coastal area between Tomis and Kallatis,281 north of Dobruja (the Histrian coins dominate here), in the north-east area of the Pontic coast up to Chersonesus, south of Dobruja beyond the Danube in Moldavia and the Walachian Plain.

The Cohors VII Gallorum is attested by the middle of the 2nd century in Syria,287 Tomis losing its garrison. This moment is close to the veneration of the Emperor Hadrian with the name of Ἐλεύϑερος, and for Tomis regaining its civitas libera status.288

Army The interest in coastal defence, including Tomis, has been shown during the period of the Principality. In the period between the first years of Vespasian’s rule and Trajan, a Roman garrison was probably installed at Tomis, the city losing its civitas libera status.282 We have the first attestations from Vespasian’s time, when there were quartered here (or in the neighbourhood) the Cohors I Flavia Commagenorum and Cohors VII Gallorum.283 During Trajan’s time, after the Dacian wars, only the Cohors VII Gallorum284 is attested, supported in case of need by the vexilationes of the Legions situated on the Danube. For Tomis there are known beneficiarii consulares of the Legio V Macedonica (ISM II, 192, 193); the Tomitan epigraphical material does not allow the certain identification of some active legion soldiers, only some veterans.285 Based on the discoveries in the area we can presume that in the first half of the second century AD the Legio V Macedonica watched the whole Dobrujan coast. After this legion left for Dacia (167 AD) Tomis, like the other two west Pontic cities, was watched by the Legion XI Claudia; a few times active soldiers belonging to this legion were mentioned at Tomis (ISM II, 263, 348). The epigraphical documents from Tomis point to a multitude of troops even during Trajan’s time: a lot of centuriones (ISM II, 10) and praefecti equitum (ISM II, 15)286 are mentioned. Even though we cannot conclude any clear military operation from these

Antoninus Pius revived the concern for coastal defence,289 even if we cannot assume that military units were quartered at Tomis. The Ala I Flavia Gaetulorum (ISM II, 247) was possibly to be quartered at Tomis during Marcus Aurelius’s time, but more certainly from the Severan period.290 Brought in as part of the action to increase coastal defence capacity, the Ala I Flavia Gaetulorum unit is attested at Tomis in the middle of the 3rd century AD without the name Flavia (ISM II, 127).291 During Severus Alexander’s time, the Ala Gallorum Atectorigiana had the name Severiana and it seemed to be quartered in Dobruja and for a short time in Tomis.292 An inscription from 224 AD is dedicated to the province governor, L. Annius Italicus Honoratus, by a decurion of this ala (ISM II, 93). By 244-249 AD, during the reign of Phillip the Arabian, a vexilation of Cohors I Cilicum (called further on Philippiana) operated in Tomis (ISM II, 345 and 452).293 The inscriptions give no clue to decide whether the Classis Flavia Moesica would have been under Tomitan control too. This is very likely, mostly because there is no evidence that the Classis Pontica294 extended its activity here. The funerary inscription of a fleet veteran was

281

287

Noteworthy are the great number of pieces, 3000 (32.69 %), in the Mangalia hoard; see C. Preda, ‘Date şi concluzii preliminare asupra tezaurului descoperit la Mangalia’ (Data and Preliminary Conclusions about the Hoard Discovered in Mangalia), SCIV 12 (1961), 2, p. 241250; ‘Monede coloniale rare şi inedite – Histria, Callatis şi Tomis din tezaurul de la Mangalia’ (Rare and Unpublished Colonial Coins – Histria, Kallatis and Tomis from the Mangalia Hoard), SCN 4 (1968), p. 223-237; ‘Noi dovezi şi consideraţii asupra tezaurului descoperit la Mangalia în 1960 – lotul de monede romane imperiale’ (New Evidence and Considerations about the Hoard discovered in Mangalia in 1960 – the Group of Roman Imperial Coins), SCN 10 (1993), p. 27-41); A. Vertan, op.cit., p. 277-278. 282 Al. Suceveanu, ‘La défence du littoral de la Dobroudja à l’époque romaine (I-er – IIIe siècles de n.è.)’, RRH, 13 (1974), 2, p. 231; idem Pontica, 8 (1975), p. 115-124. 283 Both military units are attested on funerary inscriptions written by active soldiers; ISM II, 176 and 177; A. Aricescu, Armata, p. 59-60 and 69; Fl. Matei-Popescu, ‘Trupele auxiliare romane din Moesia Inferior’ (The Auxiliary Roman Troops from Moesia Inferior), SCIVA 52-53 (2001-2002), p. 204-205 and 210-211 argues against the cohors I Flavia Commagenorum being stationed at Tomis and suggests instead the hypothesis of the presence in this city of the cohors II Gallorum equitata during the time it was stationed in Moesia Inferior. 284 The Cohors I Flavia Commagenorum, after Trajan’s wars was transferred to the north of the Danube and then drafted to the province of Dacia Inferior; see C.C. Petolescu, Auxilia Daciae, Bucureşti, 2002, p. 95-97, nr. 30. 285 Al. Suceveanu, La Dobrudja romaine, p. 59 and 146, note 179. 286 For ISM II, 10, the first publisher, D.M. Teodorescu, Monumente, p. 24-25 determines a possible connection with Trajan’s Dacian wars; for ISM II, 15, I. Stoian, p. 50 supports a later date.

Al. Suceveanu, op.cit., p. 66; Fl.Matei-Popescu, op.cit., p. 210 (about the moment of troop transfer). 288 Supra, note 282. 289 Al. Suceveanu, ‘La défence du littoral de la Dobroudja à l’époque romaine (Ier – IIIe siècles de n.è.)’, RRH, 13 (1974), p. 229-230 supposes a fully aware coastal defence operation; idem, BJ. 1992, p. 195-223. (for the general subject of west Pontic coastal defence). 290 More recent data about the ala I Flavia Gaetulorum in the province Moesia Inferior, at Al. Suceveanu, ‘Două inscripţii inedite de la Histria’ (Two Unpublished Inscriptions from Histria), Pontica, 31 (1998), p. 109-114. Fl. Matei-Popescu, op.cit., p. 179-183; the last author thinks we cannot determine the place where the troops had their camp during the period they were stationed in Moesia Inferior (the 2nd–3rd centuries AD). 291 The Ala I Flavia Gaetulorum is indirectly attested by an inscription (ISM II, 106) of which we are acquainted with P. Aelius Ammonius’s career; before he was the fleet prefect under Gordian and Lower Moesia’s commander, Ammonius used to be prefect of this cavalery unit after 234 or during Maximinus Thrax’s time, cf. I. Piso, ‘La carrière equestre de P. Aelius Hammonius’, Dacia NS 20 (1976), p. 251-257; Fl. Matei-Popescu, op.cit., p. 182, note 85, with reference to Devijver, PME,S, 13, p. 724, considers that ISM II, 127 refers to the Ala Gaetulorum who were stationed in Arabia. 292 A. Aricescu, Armata, p. 53; Fl. Matei-Popescu, op.cit., p. 183-185; the camp of this ala is still not localized. 293 It is one of the known unities of the province which quartered at Sacidava in 2nd–3rd centurys AD; see also Fl.Matei-Popescu, op.cit., p. 199-202. 294 A. Aricescu, Armata, p. 73. Almost certainly a part of the west Pontic coast from the Danube’s month up to Histria was under the control of the Moesian fleet (ibid., p. 71).

308

LIVIA BUZOIANU & MARIA BĂRBULESCU: TOMIS found at Tomis (ISM II, 199);295 near Tomis was also found the cippus from 240-244 AD, referring to the military career of P. Aelius Ammonius, Lower Moesia’s procurator, who was also in command of the Classis Flavia Moesica, named with the epithet Gordiana (ISM II, 106).

Population During the Roman Age, Tomis’s population304 continued to be mainly Greek, but the Roman influence produced changes to the demographic structure reflected by the onomatology in inscriptions. The proper names in the 1st century AD inscriptions were Greek, with rare exceptions, in the well-known structure: two names in Greek filiation. There was an increasing proportion from the 1st century AD until the 3rd century AD,305 probably as a consequence of a demographic growth. Even the Greek names changed during the first centuries; the differences between the names coming from the Ionian cities and the Dorian cities diminished. The traditional Ionian names became rare: Antianax, Demonax, Ariston, Aristarchos, Epikrates, Damastratos, Neikostratos, Kallimachos, Trasymachos306 etc.

An important number of veterans settled down in Tomis and its territory; they came from the legions of Lower Moesia, the Legio V Macedonica (ISM II, 226, 458),296 XI Claudia (ISM II, 383, 374) and I Italica (ISM II, 250),297 or from military units of other provinces, the Legio VII Claudia (ISM II, 169),298 Legio XIII Gemina (ISM II 190, 221, 296), ala I Asturum (ISM II, 172),299 ala I Pannoniorum (ISM II, 170),300 ala II Hispanorum et Aravacorum (ISM II, 225) and cohors I Lusitanorum Cyrenaica (ISM II, 196). A special note should be made of the veterans coming from the Praetorian cohorts from Rome; one of them, originally from Aquae Statiellae was a soldier of the cohors VI praetoria and reached Tomis in Vespasian’s time (ISM II, 8).301 Other records of Praetorian cohort veterans are from the first half of the 2nd century AD (ISM II, 140) and from the end of the 2nd/beginning of the 3rd century AD (ISM II, 266).

Based on a more recent statistics of 739 names fully recorded, 217 (37.56 %) are Greek and 29 (5 %) were Hellenized.307 Among the Greek names the most frecquent are Alexandros, Dionysios, Theodoros, Poseidonios etc. The Roman influence grew gradually in onomatology: of the aforementioned 739 names, 221 (38.23 %) are Roman and 81 (14 %) were Romanized (the majority of them Graeco-Roman).308

There was at Tomis a station of beneficiarii consulares and other of speculatores (ISM II, 327).302

Among the recently declared Greek citizens are numerous bearing Imperial names: Iulii, Flavii, Ulpii, Aelii and Aurelii. The right of citizenship was admitted only at the beginning of the Claudian period. Then, during the Flavian dynasty, the process is extended, continuing without cease until the middle of the 2nd century AD, the period of maximum flourishing of the Romanization process. If at the end of the 1st century AD the Roman names were rather rare in Tomis, their number increases suddenly during Trajan’s time and in the first half of the 2nd century. At the end of the 2nd century and the beginning of the 3rd century AD Roman names exceeded the number of the Greek ones on inscriptions, covering the entire social structure. After the Constitutio Antoniniana came into effect, the status of a Roman citizen was generalized in Tomis, likewise in the whole Roman Empire. With rare exceptions, the attested persons in Tomitan inscriptions bear Roman names after this date.309

The inscription bearers have different military ranks: praefectus alae, praefecti equitum, decurio, duplicarius praefecti equitum, centurio, centurio trecenarius, primuspilarus signifer, eques vexillarius, librarius legionis or simply soldiers (milites). Some soldiers act, though, alongside the governors: we learn about a cornicularius of governor T. Flavius Turbo (ISM II, 56 dated to 55 AD); Flavius Severianus dec(urio) alae Atecenturyorum Severianae was candidatus of Lucius Annius Honoratus (ISM II, 93 dated to 224 AD). Of special interest is the soldiers involvement in civil life: two veterans became senators in Tomis (buleutae Tomitanorum (ISM II, 180 and 249).303

295

Inscription dated probably in the 2nd century AD. See also ISM II, 466, 442; M. Bărbulescu-Munteanu, A. Rădulescu, Pontica 14 (1981), p. 165 - 169, nr. 3 and 4. 297 For the militaries coming from legions these see ISM II, 221 and 260. 298 Inscriptions dated to the second half of the 1st century AD; for dating see G. Bordenache, ‘Temi e motivi della plastica funeraria di età Romana nella Moesia Inferior’, Dacia NS 9 (1965), p. 260. 299 The same 1st century AD; for dating, see also G. Bordenache, op.cit., p. 261-262. 300 Inscription from Vespasian’s time or soon after; his bearer was ‘rewarded by Vespasian for his courage and bravery’ (donis donato ab imperatore Vespasiano ob virtutem). 301 The inscription is precisely dated the 2nd December 76 AD; possibly the former Praetorian had an important position at Tomis (Aricescu, Armata, p. 74). 302 See also ISM II, 8, 140 and 211 (veterans). 303 For the military organisation in Moesia Inferior see A. Aricescu, op.cit., passim; Al. Suceveanu, La Dobroudja romaine, p. 56-72.

304 Tomis population for the 1st–3rd centuries AD is estimated at about 20-30,000 inhabitants; see Al. Suceveanu, VEDR, p. 49. 305 The 1st century AD: 33 persons; the first three quarters of the second century AD: 49; until the middle of the 3rd century AD: 55; cf. Al. Suceveanu, VEDR, p. 19, note 211. The increasing proportion can be the consequence of the fact that beginning with the 2nd and 3rd centuries AD we are aware of more and more epigraphical documents. 306 Em. Doruţiu-Boilă, Dacia NS 19 (1975), p. 159. 307 Cf. V. Cojocaru, ‘ Ὀνομαστικόν. Aspects démographiques dans les villes ouest-pontiques de la province Moesia Inferior’, ArhMold., 19 (1996), p. 135-148, table, p. 136. 308 At Em. Doruţiu-Boilă, op.cit., p. 160 are 800 names mentioned of which 120 are Roman and 162 belong to the Greek and Roman elements. 309 On the inscriptions dated after 212 AD we find more than 50 people bearing the name Aurelius. See A. Boilă, Em. ‘Doruţiu-Boilă, Discuţii recente cu privire la Constitutio Antoniniana’ (Recent Debates about

296

309

ANCIENT GREEK COLONIES IN THE BLACK SEA 2 (ISM II, 344),319 Σολα (ISM II, 330), Curithie (ISM II, 303), Daciscus (ISM II, 352) and Ziles (ISM II, 303). Most of them are double Greek native names (Ἀντιγόνη Αὐλοσάνις, ISM II, 165) or with a Greek structure (Κουϑίας Καλλικράτου, ISM II, 468; Βούτεις Ἡροξένου, ISM II, 125; Νιέτον Δεκεβάλου320). The Thracian names are also romanized, a consequence of Roman citizenship status: Aurelius Daleni and Aurelia Uthis (ISM II, 266),321 Castus Mucapori (ISM II, 191), Tiberius Claudius Mucasius (ISM II; 128).322

An important trade centre and Pontic community capital, Tomis is the favourite of many foreigners.310 There are mentioned in inscriptions Ζωπύρισκος Καλλατιανός (ISM II, 312), Aurelius Sozomenos, Zotichos’ son, originally from Byzantium (ISM II, 257) and Pontikos, son of Neikias of Olbia (ISM II, 279). Some others come from more remote regions, for example from Athens (ISM II, 375), Perinth (ISM II, 365), Cyzik (ISM II, 366), from Ancyra (ISM II, 375) and Pessinus in Galatia (ISM II, 169), from Mazaca and Tyana in Cappadocia (ISM II, 129), from Abonoteichos (Paphlagonia; ISM II, 129), from Capitolias and Neapolis in Syria (ISM II, 348 and 188), and from Antipatris (ISM II, 96) and Sidon in Phoenicia (ISM II, 290).311 Numerous persons are originally from Bithynia: from Prousa (ISM II, 368, 248, 308), Nicomedia (ISM II, 281, 328, 256, 259), Heraclea (ISM II, 57, 235), Caesareia and Tius (ISM II, 129).312 The existence of the Alexandria’s association (οἶκος τῶν Ἀλεξανδρέων, ISM II, 153) means its members were mainly, if not exclusively, merchants and shipowners from the well-known Egyptian town. Concerning some nomina Aegyptia graecata313 we quote Ἀμμώνιος, Ἀνουβίων, Εἰσίδωρος (Ἰσίδωρος), Σαβείϑη, Σαραπίων (Σεραπίων), Σεραπόδωρος, Σέππων.

The occupations of the population323 are mainly orientated to navigation and trade.324 We have had the opportunity to raise for discussion ‘Alexandrini’s association’, mentioned in an inscription from 160 AD (ISM II, 153). Two other inscriptions, also from the 2nd century AD, mention a Tomitan shipowner’s association, οἶκος τῶν ἐν Τόμει ναυκλήρων (ISM II, 60)325 or οἶκος τῶν ναυκλήρων (ISM II, 132).326 Beside the Tomitan shipowner’s collegium are attested isolated shipowners (ISM II, 186327 and 291), as well as a foreign shipowners settled in Tomis (ISM II, 375). The attribute of merchant (ἔμπορος) is mentioned on a fragmentary catalogue of proper names (professional association?; ISM II, 403) and on two funerary monuments (ISM II, 462 and 248) of some merchants originally from Prousias (Bithynia).328 On a limestone plate (ISM II, 463) is mentioned a wine merchant from Alexandria (οἰνέμπορος Ἀλεξανδρίας). A small goods

Among the people of Eastern origin we notice some nomina Asiana as Ἄπϕη (ISM II, 238), Ἄϕϕος (ISM II, 282), Ἄτταλος attested many times (ISM II, 340, 459, 70);314 Δάδας (Dada, in Latin inscriptions): ISM II, 17, 18, 26, 295, 137.315 Other nomina Asiana in Tomis are Δάη (ISM II, 125), Θιϑισάττα and Κίαττα (ISM II, 307),316 Νανας (ISM II, 83), Παπᾶς (ISM II, 26 and 125), Παπείας (ISM II, 362); Iranian names Ιρασταμος, Ἀδιαγος, Ἀβραγος (ISM II, 313);317 a Semitic name, if not a Jewish one, Sambatis (ISM II, 367).

19 (1996), p. 136, of 739 anthroponyms from Tomis, 4 (0.69 %) are Thracian and 4 as well (0.69 % ) to be Thracized. 319 The second name is supposed to be Illyrian; see also I.I. Russu, Ilirii (The Illyrians), Bucureşti, 1969, p. 246. 320 Attested more recently in the Tomitan territory, at Topraisar, see M. Bărbulescu, ‘Numele Δεκέβαλος pe o inscripţie descoperită în Dobrogea’ (The name Δεκέβαλος on an inscription discovered in Dobruja), Thraco-Dacica, 11, 1990, 1-2, p. 5-9; C.C. Petolescu, IDR, II, 2000, 348. 321 The inscription appears in ISM III, 237 because the text mentions vicus Amlaidina, integrated to the territory of Kallatis. D. Detschew, op.cit., p. 114-Dalenus. I. I. Russu, Limba traco-dacilor (ThracoDacian language), Bucureşti, 1967, p. 100-101. 322 These inscriptions were found in the territory too (Tomitan this time), at Mihail Kogălniceanu (vicus Clementianensis, ISM II, 191) and at Poarta Albă (ISM II, 128). 323 For detailed information about that see Al. Suceveanu, VEDR, passim. About the names, see also V. Cojocaru, op.cit., p. 146-147. 324 O. Bounegru, Comerţ şi navigatori la Pontul Stâng şi Dunărea de Jos (sec. I-III p. Chr.) (Trade and Navigators at the Left Pont and Lower Danube (the 1st–the 3rd centuies AD)), Iaşi, 2002; Idem, Economie şi societate în spaţiul ponto-egean (sec. II a.C. – III p.C.) (Economy and Society in the Pontic-Aegean Area (the 2nd century BC– 3rd century AD)), Iaşi, 2003, p. 105-119. 325 For the significance of the words οἶκος and ναύκληρος, see D.M. Pippidi, St.Cls. 6 (1964), p. 108, n. 32 = Studii, p. 66, note 32; O. Bounegru, op.cit., p. 51-81. 326 The two associations of the navigators are different to ‘Alexandria’s house’, so that there seem to be three associations at Tomis – proof of its importance for the trade between provinces of the Black Sea area (cf. O. Bounegru, Comerţ şi navigatori, p. 75). 327 To date the inscription (which also has a ship representation), see G. Bordenache, Dacia NS 9 (1965), p. 279. The monument is for Theocritos, Theocritos son, shipowner, called ‘the king’. 328 If we admit a connection between the trade goods and the representation on the monument, we mention for ISM II, 248, the deceased holding a roll (volumen?) in his hands.

There are also persons with Thracian names (almost 28 of 800 recorded names):318 Σεύϑης (ISM II, 165), Σκίρτος Constitutio Antoniniana), StCls. 14, 1973, p. 179-194; Em. DoruţiuBoilă, Dacia NS 19 (1975), p. 160. 310 We don’t dwell here on the active soldiers or veterans names, living or settled at Tomis. 311 For other foreigners from Sydon established here, see M. Bărbulescu, A. Rădulescu, Pontica 27 (1994), p. 168-169. 312 See also ISM II, p. 406-409, index. 313 Ibid., p. 387; the Eastern names are 19 (3.29 %), cf. V. Cojocaru, op.cit., p. 136. 314 These are their derivatives richly attested in Minor Asia and the Pontic area, maybe hypocoristic with parallel forms in all languages; to see the commentary at Al. Avram, ISM III, p. 411. 315 Dada is a hypocoristic name, attributed frequently to the Thracian onomatology; but it appears often in the Pontic Greek cities; see Al. Avram, ISM III, p. 381. Mama is also a hypocoristic; this name belongs to many word stocks, including the Thracian one; D. Detschew, Die thrakischen Sprachreste, Wien, 1957, p. 284. 316 The last two appear on an inscription from the Tomitan territory, at Valul lui Traian; for them it is also suggested a Thracian origin, see ISM II, 307 and p. 291. 317 See L. Robert, RÉG 73 (1960), p. 178, I.I. Russu, ‘Note epigrafice’ (Epigraphical Notes), StCls. 8 (1966), p. 226-227. 318 Including those in the territory; see ISM II, p. 383. About the Thracian names of Tomis (15) and its territory (6), see also Em. Doruţiu-Boilă, in Acenturyes du IIe Congrès International de Thracologie, II, Bucharest, 1980, p. 281-287. At V. Cojocaru, ArhMold,

310

LIVIA BUZOIANU & MARIA BĂRBULESCU: TOMIS their activity337, being frequently attested from the end of the 1st century BC to the 3rd century AD. They had confined functions; they ruled upon internal problems and for external problems they were limited to the relationships in the frame of koinon. The Roman citizens participation in the city council, and the honorary nomination of the title βουλευτής to the influent persons, represents the most characteristic function of these bodies.338 Similar to the deliberative bodies, the magistratures of Tomis were exclusively Greek until the end; the archon continued to be the first magistrate (ISM II, 61, 70, 96, 150, 273, 390).339 Other traditional magistratures are indicated by the functions of ἀγορανόμος (ISM II, 57, 104, 70, 71, 273), ἀστύνομος (ISM II, 21) and ταμίας (ISM II, 57, 70). The institution of ephebes is indicated by the function of γυμνασίαρχος (ISM II, 17, 12, 26)340 or γυμνασίαρχος τοῦ δήμου τῆς τε ϕυλῆς (ISM II, 95) (in the last situation a public function). The direct nomination of the ephebes at Tomis, organized into age groups, in detail, an ephebe of the first group,341 but also a σοϕιστής, reaching a west Pontic community leadership position (ISM II, 69) leads us to suppose intense activity in the Tomitan gymnasium. New functions are mentioned: πάτρων τῆς πόλεως (ISM II, 77) or πάτρων τῆς μητροπόλεως (ISM II, 101, 110), ἔκδικος (defensor civitatis; ISM II, 61),342 εὐποσιάρχης public high position (ISM II, 79, 298) or of a collegium. The collegia, in their turn, alongside the common high public positions – γυμνασίαρχος, ἔκδικος343, προστάτης (ISM II, 19, 27), νομοϕύλαξ (ISM II, 17, 19, 125), γραμματεύς (ISM II, 16, 23, 25, 82, 125) – have their own positions: ἱερεῦς (ISM II, 26), ἱερέα (ISM II, 125), ἱεροκήρυξ (ISM II, 17, 19, 125) and μυστάρχης (ISM II, 90).344 Only in one situation at Tomis, also in the framework of a collegium, do we find also the function of δημοσώστης ‘people saviour’ (ISM II, 19).345

trade was practiced, and though the word κάπηλος329 is not precisely mentioned, it is not difficult to notice in the inscription this kind of merchant on the funerary monument of a foreigner originally from Byzantium (ISM II, 257). Other practical occupations include architecture and gold processing. Without seeing a connection between these occupations, the same Pontianos carried on both of them in Tomis (ISM II, 253; χρυσοχόος and ἀρχιτεκτόνως).330 Tribes, Institutions The civil community continued to be organized around tribes.331 The inscriptions preserve the name of the six Milesian tribes - Ἀργαδεῖς, Αἰγικορεῖς, Ὅπλετες, Οἰνώπες, Γελέοντες and Βορεῖς,332 but they have now more and more (if not exclusively) religious functions. The seventh tribe appears on the inscription ϕυλὴ Ρωμαίων. When this tribe was formed and who its members were is not known precisely. We should mention that ϕυλὴ Ρωμαίων does not include a legal aspect or ethnical element, but was simply honorary, similar to the newly created tribes in other Greek cities. The inscriptions mentioning ϕυλὴ Ρωμαίων at Tomis and Histria, Dionysopolis and Odessos are dated to the 3rd century AD. This tribe must be connected with the Roman authorities set up here, being a recent formation, called like this honour the masters of the world.333 The only inscription attesting this tribe at Tomis (ISM II, 256) is written by a Greek coming from Nicomedia, Τειμοκράτης Ἀλεξάνδρου who became also citizen of Tomis.334 The tribes had an internal structure: a patron προστάτης (ISM II, 52 and 123), a tribe leader ϕύλαρχος (ISM II, 35) or δισϕύλαρχος (ISM II, 123), an administrator ἐπιμελήϑης (ISM II, 123) and a secretary γραμματεῦς (ISM II, 179 and 95). Sometimes (ISM II, 123) the same person had more important positions in the tribe or had a position out of the tribe, important for the city (ISM II, 95).335 The city maintained its internal structure in the Roman period. The two bodies – the council and the people (βουλὴ καὶ δῆμος)336 continued

The most important position, frequently mentioned in the city members of the west Pontic κοινόν was that of ποντάρχης, president of the community, in his aspect of Ἑξάπολις (the 2nd century AD) or Πεντάπολις (the first half of the 3rd century AD).346 337

For the earliest preserved decrees, dated around 100 BC, see ISM II, 2 and 5. 338 K. Nawotka, op.cit., p. 94-95, note 469 and studies ‘25 public tituli honorarii of Tomis’. 339 In many situations, the magistrature is indicated by the aorist participle of the verb ἄρχω. 340 Here magistrates of a collegium. 341 ISM II, 79, r. 6-7 ‘ἔϕηβον τῶν προηγουμένων’. 342 Function often mentioned in religious associations (ϑίασοι); ISM II, 17, 18, 125, 468. 343 See above. 344 Some religious functions are to be mentioned below at cults; see also V. Cojocaru, op.cit., p. 143-144. 345 This position is known for Kallatis as well, see ISM III, 32, r. 7 and p. 283. 346 Supra; see also Z. Gocheva, ‘Organization of the Religious and Administrative Life of the Western Pontic Koinon’, in Studia in Honorem Christo M. Danov Univ. Prof. D.Dr. Collegae et Discipuli

329

About merchants names see also O. Bounegru, op.cit., p. 87-108. 330 We don’t refer here to other occupations connected with theatre, plays, art or the arena games; see V. Cojocaru, op.cit., p. 146. 331 For the Tomitan tribes, see I. Stoian, StCls. 3 (1961), p. 175 sq; Tomitana, p. 56 sq; SCIV 16 (1965), 3, p. 519 sq. Dacia 10 (1966), p. 347 sq.; Em. Doruţiu-Boilă, StCls. 12 (1970), p. 117 sq. 332 See ISM II, p. 420, index. 333 For this tribe, see Em. Doruţiu-Boilă, op.cit., p. 120 sq. 334 But the other members of the family have Roman names: Olpia (for Ulpia) Casta and Ulpius Martinus – son. 335 ISM II, 95, inscription for an anonymus person ‘phylarchos and gymasiarchos of the people and of the tribe’ (ϕύλαρχος καὶ γυμνασίαρχος τοῦ δήμου τῆς τε ϕυλῆς). 336 K. Nawotka, Boule and Demos in Miletus and its Pontic colonies from Classical age until Third Century A.D., Wroclaw, Warszawa, Krakow, 1999, studied recently their duties and activities, including in Tomis (see p. 61-63, 94-95, 138-139 etc.).

311

ANCIENT GREEK COLONIES IN THE BLACK SEA 2 A Tomitan inscription (ISM II, 188) mentions a person who was pontarch twice (Δὶς γὰρ ἐποντάρχησα), on an occasion when he presented Ares fights (= gladiators games), having as a function the care for the imperial cult, the main duty of the community, not excluding other activities.358

T. Flavius Poseidonius, ποντάχης καὶ ἀρχιερεύς τῆς Ἑξαπόλεως Phaidros’ son, pontarch, appears on a Tomitan inscription from Hadrian’s time (ISM II, 52, from 130-138 AD), proving that the Hellenic federation of the west Pont was functioning in this structure during the time of the abovementioned emperor or during Trajan’s time at the earliest.347

At the festivals of τοῦ κοινοῦ held in Tomis, but probably also in the other community cities, as at Dionysopolis, are honoured ‘τῆς Πενταπόλεως βουλευταί’ passing over the city (IGB I2, 15 and 15 bis).

At Tomis – ‘the brilliant metropolis and capital of the West Pont’ – ‘the first magistrature of the Hellenic Community’ (ἄρξαντα τοῦ κοινοῦ τῶν Ἑλλήνων - ISM II, 97) is mentioned on many inscriptions, with the names of 7 pontarchs known and in a few cases preserving only the position. It should be noted that some pontarchs bear the community title, and other are called only pontarchs.348 The hypothesis that the latter could be local pontarchs, members of a council of κοινόν, led by a πρῶτος ποντάρχης349 has been refuted,350 based on the fact that the pontarchs’ titles could be shortened or not on inscriptions,351 and on the fact that the others, τὰ κοινά of the Roman Orient, do not offer analogies of a fellow leadership.

An unpublished inscription from Tomis359 attested a βουλευτῆς τῆς Πενταπόλεως, strengthening the existence of this position in the framework of the west Pontic κοινόν. Cults Information about the cults of the city can be found in epigraphical evidence and iconographic representations. They allow the identification of some common features with those of neighbouring Pontic cities, but also features peculiar to Tomis.

The recent attestation of a πρῶτος ποντάρχης at Kallatis (ISM III, 99; see also 100),352 besides that already known at Histria (ISM I, 207),353 supports the older opinion that he is the first pontarch of this centre, compared to his antecedents in this position in the same city,354 the word πρῶτος having here a chronological meaning and not hierarchical.355

Among the first we mention the inclination towards the Greek and Roman traditional cults. Apollo continues to be venerated in a new hypostasis of ἀγυεύς,360 ‘protector of the roads’ (ISM II, 116) in an inscription written at the recommendation of an oracle (κατὰ χρησμόν) for the emperor Marcus Aurelius and the Tomis metropolis. The sculptural monuments present him also with a cithara.361 For the hypostasis of Πύϑιος are mentioned the god’s representations on the coins.362 Indirectly connected with the cult of Apollo we note the games in honour of Pythia, in Smyrna, where Tomis sent a participant (ISM II, 189). Among the Olympian deities we mention also Zeus, indicated by his patronym ‘Son of Cronos’ (Κρονείων, ISM II, 197). More numerous is the evidence about the Roman god Jupiter with the epithets Optimus Maximus. In this phrase, the god is invoked alone (ISM II, 133-139) or together with Junona Regina (ISM II, 141), Diana Augusta (ISM II, 143) or in the Capitoline triad Jupiter – Juno – Minerva (ISM II, 142); we also notice an association with Heros (ISM II, 140).363 The deity is represented at Tomis in the classical iconographic

Some of the pontarchs have also the position of ἀρχιερεύς, great priest of the imperial cult, but we do not know whether this is a civil and religious position for only one person356 or if there were different positions.357

Dedicaverunt (Thracia, 12), Sofia, 1998, p. 141-146. M. Tacheva, Vlast i sotiym v rimska Mizia i Trakia, II, Sofia, 2004, p. 181-190. See also the following notes. 347 D.M. Pippidi, Scythica Minora, p. 253. P. Nawotka, op.cit.; Al. Avram, ISM, III, p. 69, note 282. 348 For the complete list of the pontarchs see G. Mihailov, Epigraphica, 41 (1972), p. 9-21. M. Musielak, in Studia Moesiaca, [I] (1994), p. 110115. K. Nawotka, The Western Pontic Cities. History and Political Organization, Amsterdam, 1997, p. 234-236. Al. Avram, ISM, III, p. 71. 349 Em. Doruţiu-Boilă, Dacia NS 19 (1975), p. 154-156. G. Mihailov, op.cit., p. 29-33. 350 J. Deininger, ‘Zureiner neuen Hypothese über die Pontarchie im westpontischen koinon’, ZPE 51 (1983), p. 219-227. 351 M. Musielak, Πρῶτος ποντάρχης, Pontica 26 (1993), p. 191-195. 352 Al. Avram. ISM III, p. 69, note 280 and p. 428-431; T. Aelius Minicius Athanaion attested in 172 AD together with his son is the first pontarch originally from Kallatis who acted in the 50s or 60s of the 2nd century AD. 353 The inscription is dated to around 140, see K. Nawotka, in Studia Moesiaca, II (1994), p. 79-84; see also further interpretations about the inscription at Al. Avram, Le corpus des inscriptions d’Istros vingt ans après nr. 207; 137 (in press.). 354 D.M. Pippidi, Scythica Minora, p. 230-256. 355 P. Vyne, BCH 90 (1966), p. 149-150. 356 D.M. Pippidi, StCls. 17 (1977), p. 196-198, = Studii de istorie şi epigrafie (History and Epigraphy Studies), Bucureşti, 1988, p. 178-180. 357 I. Stoian, Latomus 24 (1965), p. 85.

358 Em. Doruţiu-Boilă, op.cit., p. 156-157; Al. Avram, ISM III, p. 70; see also the caution of J. Deininger, op.cit., p. 227, note 49. 359 The piece is now in MINAC collection, inv. 35808. We’ll discuss its importance later. 360 For the same epithet of the deity, see also ISM III, 30 and p. 268 with bibliography. 361 G. Bordenache, Sculture, p. 68, nr. 125; Gr. Florescu, ‘Monuments antiques du musée régional de la Dobrogea à Constanţa’, Dacia 5-6 (1934-1936), p. 433. For other representations, see Z. Covacef, Arta sculpturală, p. 109-111. 362 See ISM II, p. 144; Z. Covacef, loc.cit. 363 Em. Doruţiu-Boilă, ‘O nouă inscripţie a lui Q. Trebellius Maximus?’ (A New Q. Trebellius Maximus Inscription?), SCIV 13 (1962), 2, p. 415-419 suggests the associations Jupiter-Hercules; though see Aricescu, Armata, p. 218, nr. 12 (Heros).

312

LIVIA BUZOIANU & MARIA BĂRBULESCU: TOMIS the ‘city’s health’ to the God’s mother and to the Dioskouroi (ISM II, 2). Their assimilation with the Great Gods of Samothrake is assumed, attested as such at Tomis in the autonomous period (ISM II, 1), and maybe also assimilation with the local deities. The Dioskouroi representation on an architectural element and the numerous coin representations, suggest the idea of the existence of a temple for deities protecting navigation in Tomis.374 Dionysos’s cult is especially frequent in Tomis375 as in the whole province.376 The god is mentioned on inscriptions with less common names: καϑηγημών (‘the leader’; ISM II, 121), πυρίβρομος (‘the brilliant’) and ταυρόκερος (‘that with bull horns’, ISM II, 120). The cult is maintained by many ϑίασοι involved in the city’s life (ISM II, 107). Thiaseitai (named βάκχοι) are assimilated with the god himself (ISM II, 120)377 and build a statue to the god probably in local workshops.378 The complexity of the cult with two essential elements – agricultural and mystical – has been frequently studied.379 Beside Dionysos and Demeter there are also other agricultural deities, the Nymphs and Artemis, as a Rosalia festival was known (ISM II, 370).380 Asklepios is present on two dedications together with Hygeia (ISM II, 117) and Demeter (ISM II, 118). The deity is represented also in fine arts, alone or along with the other health deities.381 We note a possible representation of Asklepios at Tomis as Glykon.382 Nemesis appears in numerous fine art representations: in a double hypostasis on an aedicula (ISM II, 148) and in two statuettes included in the iconographical types specific for the veneration of the goddess at Smyrna.383 The number of representations of this goddess at Tomis allows the hypothesis of the existence there of a nemeseion.384

hypostasis; on a dedication (ISM II, 159), the god is recognized by the eagle representation.364 On another Tomitan monument the eagle appears together with a feminine person, who can be Hera/Juno. The fragmentary inscription preserves, if we agree with the editor,365 Hera’s name. Demeter’s cult epigraphically attested from the 1st century BC (ISM II, 36), continued to be very important. The function of Archiereus and a priest of the goddess are mentioned in the 2nd century AD (ISM II, 59). On other monuments of the same period Demeter appears together with Asklepios, (ISM II, 118) or Pluto and Kore (ISM II, 150). The Eleusian triad has a fine art replication on a marble frieze.366 Demeter’s representation appears also on Tomitan monetary issues.367 The other Olympian gods are only slightly represented. Poseidon is present on a votive monument with the well-known, in the Ionian world, epithet Helikonios (ISM II, 151) and by a fine art representation (the only one in the West Pontic cities) from the 3rd century AD.368 Hades and Ares are mentioned in inscriptions; but their names have a metaphorical meaning – the first for ‘death’ or ‘grave’ (ISM II, 166, 197, 326), the second for ‘gladiators games’ and ‘gladiator’ (ISM II, 188). The word Hestia could also have a meaning not necessarily connected with the deity: κατασκεύασεν τήν Ἑστίαν (ISM II, 132) could refer precisely to ‘fireplace’. Though she was not mentioned epigraphically, Aphrodite is present at Tomis in eight fine art representations, offering the most numerous evidence concerning veneration of the goddess. Most of the representations belong to the type ‘Venus pudica’.369 It is plausible that also Τύχη πόλεως of the couple Fortuna with Pontos370 could be interpreted as Ἀϕροδίτη Ποντία.371

Among the heroes, Heracles is present on more than ten reliefs and statues.385 It has even been suggested that

Among the other non-Olympian deities, we note the Dioskouroi, Dionysos, Asklepios and Nemesis. As navigation deities, the Dioskouroi have an important place in the Tomitan pantheon. On the statue fragment of the sculptural deposit372 they are venerated as ‘founders of the city’ (κτίσται τῆς πόλεως; ISM II, 122).373 In their turn, the civil guard commanders brought sacrifices for

374 I. Stoian, SCIV 16 (1965), 3, p. 523. Z. Covacef, op.cit.,p. 124, note 128. 375 Beside the epigraphical monuments, see Tezaurul, p. 29-30; C. Scorpan, Reprezentări bacchice (Bacchus representations), Constanţa 1966, passim; G. Bordenache, Sculture, nr. 106, 107, 111, 113-116; other reference in ISM II, p. 147; Z. Covacef, Arta sculpturală, p. 127131. 376 D.M. Pippidi, Studii, p. 234-266. 377 The association is founded by a woman, Paso, an uncommon situation; see I. Stoian, ISM II, p. 147. 378 In the same inscription (ISM II, 120) are mentioned the names of two artists-workers, (the son of) Parmis and Hermogenes. 379 D.M. Pippidi, op.cit.; Alexandra Ştefan, Cultul lui Dionysos în cetăţile nord şi vest-pontice în epocile greacă şi romană, în lumina monumentelor epigrafice şi figurate (Dionysiac Cult in the north and west Pontic Cities in the Greek and Roman Ages in light of the Epigraphical and Figurative Monuments), the résumé of the Ph.D. thesis, Bucureşti, 1978. 380 Al. Suceveanu, VEDR, p. 88, notes 122-127. 381 Tezaurul, p. 42-44; G. Bordenache, Sculture, p. 16-18, nr. 6, 7, 9, 10. 382 G. Bordenache, StCls. 6 (1964), p. 157-163. 383 G. Bordenache, op.cit., p. 165-167 and fig. 11-12; Z. Covacef, Arta sculpturală, p. 144-145; add a small bas-relief of the deity for which see Z. Covacef, ‘Reliefuri inedite din Muzeul de arheologie Constanţa’ (Unpublished Reliefs from Constanţa Archaeological Museum), Pontica 5 (1972), p. 519, nr. 5. 384 Z. Covacef, Arta sculpturală, p. 144. 385 D.M. Pippidi, ‘Studii, passim; Z. Covacef, Contribuţii privind cultul lui Hercule în Scythia Minor’ (Contributions concerning Hercules’s cult in Scythia Minor), Pontica 8 (1975), p. 391-428.

364

See also G. Bordenache, Sculture, p. 79, nr. 154. For other artistic representations of the god, see Z. Covacef, op.cit., p. 104-105. See N. Gostar, in NMESM, p. 76 and fig. 6. Otherwise, it would be the only inscription with the goddess’s name at Tomis. For an artistic representation, see Z. Covecef, op.cit., p. 107 and note 44 (marble head fragment, 1st–2nd centurys AD). 366 G. Bordenache, ‘La Triade Eleusina à Tomis’, StCls. 4 (1962), p. 281-290. 367 M. Iacob, ‘Culte şi zeităţi în Moesia Inferior. Demetra – evidenţa numismatică’ (Cults and Deities in Moesia Inferior. Demeter – the numismatic evidence), Pontica, 33-34 (2000-2001), p. 355-371. 368 G. Bordenache, Sculture, p. 40-41, nr. 63. 369 Z. Covacef, op.cit., p. 119-120 and note 143. 370 See Tezaurul, p. 16-24. 371 G. Bordenache, ‘Contributi per una storia dei culti e dell’arte nella Tomi d’età romana’, StCls. 6 (1964), p. 167-175. 372 See Tezaurul, p. 90-93, fig. 46-47. For other representations add: A. Aricescu, ‘O nouă reprezentare a Dioscurilor la Tomis’ (A New Dioskouroi Representation at Tomis), SCIVA 22 (1971), 2, p. 337-339; Z. Covacef, op.cit, p. 123-124. 373 See J. Babelon, ‘Les Dioscures à Tomis, in Mélanges Ch. Picard’, RA, 1949, p. 24-33. 365

313

ANCIENT GREEK COLONIES IN THE BLACK SEA 2 found not far from Constanţa,398 sacrati dumi; sacrati, of course, a synonym with consacrani, cultores and dumus (δοῦμος) is found in some epigraphs from the Thracian – Phrygian cultural area, which here means ‘collegium’; Aur(elius) Valeria[nu]s pater dumi and Fl(avia) Nona, mater dumi, dedicated the monument to the collegium prayers (sacratis dumi), by the care of the standard bearer (vexillarius), Dionysius. The latest monument is dedicated to the goddess by Aurelius Firminianus, dux limitis provinciae Scythiae in 293-305 AD (ISM II, 144).399 On the sculptural monuments the goddess is represented alone, with Attis400 or surounded by choribants.401 The stylistical and typological unity of the representations arouses the hypothesis that a procuction centre could have existed at Tomis.402

there was a temple in Tomis: two columns on which there are painted scenes of Hercules’ labours could only come from a temple dedicated to the hero.386 Among the oriental deities, it seems the Egyptian gods were the most frequently venerated. Even from the 1st century BC, their popularity increased in the following centuries. In the eras of Antoninus Pius and Marcus Aurelius their prestige was probably increased by the presence of the οἶκος τῶν Ἀλεξανδρέων. Their penetration (and especially that of Sarapis) seems to occur despite the official propaganda and due to people’s journeys and goods exchange.387 The Egyptian gods are mentioned in groups in epigraphs – Sarapis, Isis, Anubis – in association with ‘all gods’ (οἱ ϑεοί πάντες; ISM II, 154).388 A votive monument is made for the ‘great god Sarapis’ and ‘the gods venerated together with him in the same temple’ (οἱ σύνναοι ϑεοί; ISM II, 153); an inscription from the 1st century AD mentions a priest of Sarapis and Isis (ISM II, 37). In connection only with the cult of Isis, more precisely with the ceremonies included in navigium Isidis, we find a fraternity of believers ἱεροναῦται with a ‘priest of pastophoroi’ (πατὴρ τῶν παστοϕόρων) and a ‘president’ (προστάτων τοῦ κοινοῦ(?) or, rather τοῦ οἶκου; ISM II, 98). The same Egyptian deities are represented in fine arts. Sarapis appears alone389 or accompanied by Isis and Harpocrates.390 Isis is represented in two busts, one from Flavian period,391 the second from the middle of the 3rd century AD (240-250 AD), similar to Sabinia Tranquillina’s portrait.392 Osiris’ representation can be found on a votive altar from the 2nd century AD.393

The cult of Glykon god-serpent, Asklepios’ hypostasis, established by Alexandros from Abonuteichos, is supported at Tomis by a sculptural piece considered unique in its artistic and iconographical manner of representation.403 Jupiter’s syncretism with Baal of Doliche is Jupiter Dolichenus. This penetrated into Tomis due to Syrian merchants and soldiers, the cult had a college of priests (ISM II, 292) and votive statuettes (ISM II, 158).404 Also venerated at Tomis, by Sosippos of Callicratos from Sydon, was the ϑέα Συρία.405 The Persian deity Mithras is attested here from the first half of the 3rd century AD and in the 4th century AD. There are known Mithras monuments with inscriptions (ISM II, 454 and 147) and reliefs with the consacrated image of sacrifice.406 Among the autochthonous gods the Thracian Horseman (Ἥρως or Ἥρων) is the best represented. The deity becomes a complex funerary god as well as a great god in syncretism with other Greek or Roman gods.407 Among the epigraphical materials408 we notice a dedication from the Severan dynastic period made by a thiasos (ISM II,

As well as the Egyptian cults, others originating in Asia Minor and Syria should be noted. Cybela is one of the oldest deities394 and the one with the most numerous representations. The goddess’s name (Μήτηρ ϑεῶν) is mentioned in the decree for city’s guard (ISM II, 2) and on many dedications from the 2nd and 3rd centuries AD (ISM II, 72, 146).395 During Septimius Severus’s time a thiasos for Cybele was functioning at Tomis (ISM II, 83); among the magistrates with special duties we mention the archidendrophoroi,396 a mother of dendrophoroi and an archirabdouchisa. The worshippers of a collegium, likely of Cybele (ISM II, 160)397 are mentioned in an inscription

(Lecture notes), StCls. 9 (1967), p. 226-228 supposed it is the Iranian goddess Anaitis. 398 In Mihail Kogălniceanu village, not excluding the origin of this altar in Tomis. 399 ISM II, 144: Mater deum magna; 145: Mater deorum. 400 G. Bordenache, Sculture, cat. 56 401 Z. Covacef, ‘Cultele orientale în panteonul Dobrogei romane’ (The Oriental Cults in Roman Dobruja’s Pantheon), Pontica 33-34 (20002001), p. 374-375. 402 Z. Covacef, Les cultes thraco-phrigiens au Bas-Danube, in Thrace and the Aegean, Eight International Congress of Thracology, Sofia, 2002, p. 825. 403 Tezaurul, p. 109-111; G. Bordenache, StCls. 6 (1964), p. 157-163; eadem, ‘Ancora su due sculture del deposito di Constanza: Glykon, la Tyche di Tomis’, StCls. 12 (1970), p. 135-136. 404 The origin from Tomis is uncertain, see ISM V, 109. 405 M. Bărbulescu, A. Rădulescu, Pontica, 27 (1994), p. 166-168, nr. 5. 406 Tezaurul, p. 102-103, fig. 53; G. Bordenache, Sculture, cat. 182 (Tomis?); M.J. Vermaseren, Corpus Inscriptionum et Monumentorum religionis Mithriacae, II, 1960, p. 263-264, nr. 2297-2302; Z. Covacef, Arta sculpturală, p. 165-166. 407 D.M. Pippidi, Studii, p. 219-224, N. Hampartumian, Corpus Cultus Equitis Thracii, IV. Moesia Inferior (Rumanian Secenturyion) and Dacia (abriged CCET), Leiden, 1979. 408 The epigraphical documents are dated from the 1st century AD until the 3rd century AD (inclusively).

386

Z. Covacef, Arta sculpturală, p. 148. See also D.M. Pippidi, ‘Cu privire la răspândirea cultelor egiptene în Sciţia Mică’ (About the spread of Egyptian Cults in Scythia Minor), in Studii, p. 60-82. 388 The same deities appear on an inscription recently found at Tomis (inv. 35802 MINAC); see the note above. 389 G. Bordenache, Sculture, cat. 165, 168. 390 G. Bordenache, op.cit., cat. 171 (originated probably at Tomis). 391 Ibid, cat. 170. 392 G. Bordenache, StCls. 6 (1964), p. 175-176. 393 G. Bordenache, Sculture, cat. 172. 394 D.M. Pippidi, Studii, p. 228 and 292. 395 In ISM II, 146 is named: [Μήτηρ] ἐπήκοος καὶ [πάν]των δέσπο[ινα]. 396 See and ISM II, 119. 397 R. Vulpe, Akten des IV Kongresse für griechische und lateinische Epigraphik, Wien, 1964, p. 411 sq.; D.M. Pippidi, ‘Note de lectură’ 387

314

LIVIA BUZOIANU & MARIA BĂRBULESCU: TOMIS 125).409 The name is associated with epithets expressing the multiple hypotheses in which the deity was venerated: Manimazos (ISM II, 126) or Manibazos (ISM II, 127), Irsaios,410 Domnus (ISM II, 129, the inscription made by a Roman fraternity),411 Invictus et Sacer (ISM II, 130), Κατοικάδιος (alteration for κατοικίδιος, ‘domestic’, ISM II, 131) and Ἐπιϕανής (ISM II, 455). The syncretism of the Hero with the Dioskuroi (perhaps by the syncretism with Cybele and Kabires),412 with Cybele,413 or with Dionysos is well-known.414 The Thracian Horseman iconography415 is well represented by the sculptural monuments, with features defining the votive or funerary quality of the representations.416

by the representations on coins, by figurative bronzes,422 by lamps,423 ceramic statuettes and even glass vessels,424 most of them found in funerary complexes.425 Stratigraphy and City Planning The 3rd stage is stratigraphically proven by three archaeological levels:426 – N VI, found in limited areas, possibly dated to the 1st – 2nd century AD. It looks like a heavily burnt walking level; the fire in some areas is evidence of a violent destruction in the 2nd century AD; – N V, less visible, is dated based on the ceramics to the 2nd – 3rd centuries AD; it is not marked by any fire or other special evidence; – N IV is characterized by a thick fire level; it is the thickest fire level of the Roman age and shows a violent destruction in the second half of the 3rd century AD. This level’s ceramics are dated to the 3rd century AD with some elements indicating the next century.

We find at Tomis both monuments dedicated to the Danubian Horsemen, a cult in which there are mixed some local beliefs with elements of other cults.417 Before continuing we should mention the discovery at Tomis of a 24-piece sculptural deposit418 in 1962 of statues and votive reliefs.419 The representations belong both to the Roman-Greek pantheon (Dionysos, Artemis, Hecate, the Graces, Selene, Mercurius and others mentioned above) as well as the oriental deities (Cybele, Mithras, Isis, Glykon) and local ones (the Thracian Horseman). Only a few pieces are dated to the 2nd century AD; the date for the majority of the samples is limited to the first half of the 3rd century AD.420 The burying of the pieces with a religious purpose was determined by important historical events: either the Carpae and Gothic attacks from the middle of the 3rd century AD (of which should be noted the siege of Tomis in 269 AD), or a period of increase in the conflict between paganism and the ascending Christianity.421

The archaeologically researched areas preserve little evidence of city planning. During an excavation in Ovidiu Square there was noted an intensely inhabited area from the 2nd century AD, built over in the 4th century by an edifice.427 Recent excavations (1988) in a neighbouring area on the north-east of the aforementioned area, under the ruins of a great basilica, wall fragments were discovered; they enclosed an ellipsoidal area. The site of the walls shows an arena of 55-60 m in length and 30-35 m wide.428 From this area some limestone benches were retrieved, which were broken in ancient times.429 We can make a connection between the discovered evidence and the inscriptions from the 2nd century which mention gladiatorial performances at Tomis (ISM 96, 188, 288, 341, 342, 343, 344, 206) and beast fights (ISM II 96, 341) taking place in the amphitheatre; a theatre existed in the autonomous period and we know about an association of actors (ϑυμελικὴ σύνοδος)430 active during the great annual festivals (ISM II, 70). The numismatic and epigraphic evidence mentions other important buildings: a precinct wall, temples, trophies and

The image of the deities venerated in Tomis is completed 409 The inscription’s importance lies in the fact that there are mentioned a lot of functions in the collegium; also should be mentioned in the catalogue is the mixture of Greek, Roman and native names. 410 The piece was found near Constanţa, at Oituz, see Cr. Matei, ThracoDacica 9 (1988), 1-2, p. 219-223. 411 As matter of fact, a number of Romanized oriental individuals, see also D.M. Pippidi, Studii, p. 292. 412 ISM II, 126 and p. 157. 413 G. Bordenache, StCls., 6 (1964), p. 163. N. Hampartumian, CCET, IV, nr. 35 and 37 (Tomis). 414 Tezaurul, p. 32-37; ISM II, 121. 415 Tezaurul, p. 94-103, nr. 18-21; C. Scorpan, Cavalerul Trac (The Thracian Horseman), Constanţa, 1967, passim; G. Bordenache, Sculture, cat. 206-209. N. Hampartumian, CCET, IV, passim. 416 Z. Covacef, Arta sculpturală, p. 169-177. 417 D. Tudor, Corpus Monumentorum Religionis Equitum Danuviorum I, Leiden, 1969, nr. 93-96; idem, ‘Unele aspecte iconografice ale reliefurilor cavalerilor danubieni în Scythia Minor’ (Some Iconographical Aspects of the Danubian Horsemen Reliefs in Scythia Minor), Pontica, 5 (1972), p. 503-511. 418 See V. Canarache, A. Aricescu, V. Barbu, A. Rădulescu, Tezaurul (see note 1); G. Bordenache, StCls., 6 (1964), p. 155-178; eadem, ‘Il deposito di sculture votive di Tomis’, Eirene 4 (1965), p. 67-69. 419 In one situation it could be a cult statue: the Glykon serpent. 420 Tezaurul, p. 123; D.M. Pippidi, Studii, p. 303-307 considers also the beginning of the 4th century AD. 421 Both hypotheses are to be taken into consideration in Tezaurul, p. 122-123; D.M. Pippidi, op.cit., p. 307 considers more plausible the hypothesis that ‘we notice a characteristic episode of religious war’, the pieces being sheltered because of the fury ‘of the Christian enemies or the imperial authorities’.

422

M. Irimia, Bronzuri figurate (Figurative Bronzes), Constanţa, 1966. C. Iconomu, Opaiţe greco-romane (Greek-Roman Lamps), Constanţa, 1967. 424 C. Chera, V. Lungu, ‘Importuri de vase de sticlă suflate în tipar descoperite în necropolele Tomisului’ (Blown into Pattern Glass Vessles Imports Discovered in Tomis Necropoles), Pontica, 25 (1992), p. 273-280. 425 C. Chera, ‘Reprezentări mitologice în inventarele funerare din Tomis (sec. I-IV d. Ch.)’ (Mytological Representations in the Funerary Inventaries from Tomis (the 1st-4th century AD), Pontica, 30 (1997), p. 217-236. 426 A. Rădulescu, C. Scorpan, Pontica 8 (1975), p. 11-13, pl I. 427 Materiale, 2 (1957), p. 88-94. 428 See also A. Rădulescu, ‘Recherches archéologiques recents dans le périmètre de la cité de Tomi’, Études Byzantines et Post-Byzantines, II (1991), p. 35-36. 429 Some of the benches preserve a bas relief on the frontal side and a fragmentary inscription. 430 I. Stoian, Tomitana, p. 176-177. 423

315

ANCIENT GREEK COLONIES IN THE BLACK SEA 2 century AD and the first half of the 3rd century AD a unitary material culture, a feature of the whole Dobruja territory. In the second half of the 3rd century AD the ceramics seem to attest a reappearance of the Oriental influence.436 The glass products437 follow the main lines of the Tomitan trade noticed for ceramics too: the Greek oriental element during the Principate period to which an important Western element was added in the beginning of the 2th-3th centuries AD. The capital’s trade activities are reflected also in the outlying territory.438

triumphal arches. The city development at the end of the 1st century and in the 2nd century AD necessitated the extension of the inhabited area and the building of a new defence wall. The precise line of this wall is not known. Probably it connected the eastern (close to the Greek church) and the western cliffs (near the Court building), defending the city only by land. On the west cliff can be seen the traces of a tower, which seems to have been reused for other purposes later on. The defended area is double that of the Hellenistic city area. Two epigraphical documents (ISM II, 21 and 22) mention restoration or completion works for the precinct wall, at a date to be determined in the second half of the 2nd century AD (probably even during Marcus Aurelius’s time).431 Taking into account the important spiritual life of the city, the number of the cult places should have been remarkable. The city temples are represented on coins dated from the periods of Tiberius, Nero, Titus, Domitian, Septimius Severus, Caracalla, Geta, Elagabal, Severus Alexander and Maximinus. The coins from Trajan’s time and the Severan dynasty represent trophies, while those from Maximinus and Maximus show triumphal arches. Numerous architectural marble and limestone fragments show the city features in Tomis; there are known architraves with dedications to Trajan (ISM II, 40, 41, 43, 44, 45), Antoninus Pius and Marcus Aurelius (ISM II, 55), Septimius Severus and the imperial family (ISM II, 84)432 with the city’s monumentality during the Severan period being well-known. It is possible that two of the really important public buildings, the lentiarion and the mosaic edifice, well documented for the 4th-6th centuries AD were built and functioned as early as from the 3rd century AD.433

Tomis, according to its status as a free city, had effective possession over its own territory, which is why we cannot actually talk of delimitation between its own territory and regio.439 The size of the Tomitan territory would be important if we take into consideration the importance of the city during the Roman age and the areas of the neighbouring cities, Histria and Kallatis. Without clear borders, the territories are estimated. If the northern border was set on the Casimcea line and northwards to the Taşaul lake, the south one could have reached Techirghiol lake; inside the line is hypothetical. The presence of Roman elements inside the Tomitan territory even from the second half of the 1st century AD led to the early settlement of some villae and vici. Besides vicus Celeris, which we would localize rather in the Histrian territory, of the few still preserved toponyms, other vici localized here are: v. Clementianensis, v. Narcissiani, v. Scaptia, v. Turris Muca (…). For most of them organization is attested during the Roman Age. As we have no evidence about the organization of the territory on tribes (phylai), of an indigenous community or of leaders from the non-Roman communities (principes locorum), we believe more intense Romanization led to a more unitary organization of the Tomitan territory. The presence of indigenous elements everywhere and the epigraphical evidence about the Greek population, especially on the coast (κώμη Ἀπολλωνίου)440 and in other places, does not exclude the possibility of the maintenance of the traditional organizational relationships.

Economically speaking, trade seemed to have been Tomitans main activity. The number of the cities with which Tomis had trade relationships is large: beside the normal connections with the neighbouring Greek cities, a lot of foreigners coming from territories around the Black Sea are mentioned at Tomis, from Greece, Asia Minor and Egypt.434 Relationships with the cities of the Danubian provinces and Italy are added to these. The Tomitan trade activity controlled by the Roman authorities was more intense than Histria’s. An indication is represented by the ceramics import. The first Western imports appeared even from the 1st century AD.435 There are also Oriental imports which, along with the local production, would create in the second half of the 2nd

Stage IV (4th -7th centuries AD) In the same time Emperor Diocletian set up the ‘Dominate’, provincial administration changed. Separated from Lower Moesia, Dobruja would be transformed into an independent province under the name of Scythia Minor, Tomis being the provincial capital in the new

431 A. Aricescu, Armata, p. 155-156; a dating in the second half of the 3rd century is noticed only for ISM II, 21. 432 The last is a dedication on a marble plate preserved in a fragmentary state; M. Bărbulescu, A. Rădulescu, Pontica 30 (1997), p. 170-174. 433 Al. Suceveanu, VEDR, p. 27; idem, La Dobroudja romaine, p. 33; see further on, Stage IV. 434 See Al. Suceveanu, VEDR, p. 121, note 119. O. Bounegru, Comerţ şi navigatori, passim and p. 165-192. 435 M. Bucovală, ‘Tradiţii elenistice în materialele funerare de epocă romană timpurie la Tomis’ (Hellenistic Traditions in Early Roman Age Funerary Materials at Tomis), Pontice 2 (1969), p. 297-332; see also Al. Suceveanu, op.cit., p. 125, note 165-166; see further for Oriental imports, O. Bounegru, Kleinasiatische und östliche keramische Importfunde aus Histria und Tomis (1. – 3. Jh.n.Chr.), MBAH, XII/2 (1993), 33 ff.; idem, Economie şi societate, p. 229-238.

436 Situation explainable by the increasing Byzantine authority in the area; Al. Suceveanu, op.cit., p. 125 and note 168. 437 M. Bucovală, Vase antice de sticlă la Tomis (Ancient Glass Vessels at Tomis), Constanţa, 1968; C. Chera, V. Lungu, Pontica 25 (1992), p. 273-280. 438 For the discoveries, see Al. Suceveanu, VEDR, p. 126-128. 439 M. Bărbulescu, Viaţa rurală, especially p. 47-61 and 151-158; Al. Suceveanu, ‘Contribuţii la cunoaşterea satului dobrogean în epoca romană’ (Contributions to the Knowledge of Dobrujan Village during the Roman Age), SCIVA 52-53 (2001-2002), p. 157-172. 440 M. Bărbulescu, A. Rădulescu, Pontica 27 (1994), p. 168-170.

316

LIVIA BUZOIANU & MARIA BĂRBULESCU: TOMIS Tomis dated between 323-337 AD (IGLR 6)452 is a proof of that. The Gothic invasion which seemed to pass through Scythia Minor453 in 331-332 AD did not reach Tomis. Constantius II is associated with the toponym Constanti(an)a in the areas neighbouring Tomis built or restored by this emperor.454 At the same time as Constantius II’s rule ended, the flourishing period for Tomis and Scythia Minor finished, as a consequence of the reforms of the first half of the 4th century AD.

structure. The provincial governor (praeses) had his headquarters there. It is very likely that the Pontic cities community ended its activity now.441 Even from the beginning of Diocletian’s rule, in 284 AD, ‘the council and the people of Tomis’ dedicated an inscription to the emperor ‘most loved by gods’ (ϑεοϕιλέστατος; ISM II, 111). The inscription was made probably on the occasion of his coronation or when the provincial capital was settled at Tomis.442 In both situations the Tomitans show their loyalty to the emperor. The imperial defensive policy required special works. By order of the emperors Diocletian and Maximian, and under care of the province military commander (dux limitis Scythici) C. Aurelius Firminianus,443 the Tomitans built the gates or a gate of the governor’s city residence444 (ISM II, 155 = IGLR 3). The same Firminianus, vir perfectissimus, dux limitis provinciae Scythiae, is mentioned on a votive monument from 293-305 AD dedicated to ‘the great gods’ mother’ for the Emperor’s (Augusti) and the Caesar’s (Caesares)445 health. Probably Firminianus446 as well or a city protector447 is the person to whom a statue is dedicated, because ‘he eased up the difficult tasks of the council from Scythia448 and made possible for them a nice and secure life’ (ISM II, 113).

Julian the Apostate’s name is associated with the coastal road recostruction (IGLR 82). Gothic attacks in the diocese of Thracia bring about campaigns against them, led by the emperor Valens himself,455 in 367-369 AD. The orator Themistios, who accompanied Valens in Dobruja during the campaign in 369 AD mentions restoration works at the aqueducts, warehouses and sea ports.456 It is possible these kinds of works were done at Tomis too. A milliary pile with the name of the emperors Valentinian, Valens and Gratian (ISM II, 114) is associated with Valens’ presence in Scythia Minor during 367-369.457 A dedication only for Valentinian (ISM II, 115) dates to around 369 AD; the emperor is called ‘the conqueror of the Barbarians’ (debelatur gentium barbarum); if this is not simply a loyalty gesture, then the inscription probably refers to the victories during the campaigns against Goths.458 This political event, though, is surpassed in the written historical sources by a religious one. Two historical sources – Sozomenos and the Acta Sanctorum459 describe, in the same words, the emperor Valens’ visit to Tomis in 368-369 AD and his meeting with the Orthodox bishop Bretanion or Vetranion.460 Sozomenos’ information about Tomis (VI, 21) is important from these reasons:

The restoration of the roads was also a part of the defensive policy. There are known milliary pillars from the period of the Tetrarchy on the main roads of the province,449 including those on the coast, (for example, near Tomis, at Corbu (IGLR 82)450 on the way to Histria). Diocletian’s name is associated with the persecution of Christians from 303-304 AD. The martyrology mentions a great number of martyrs at Tomis.451 Continuing and developing the reform system initiated by Diocletian, Constantine the Great maintained the province Scythia in the Thracian diocese; Tomis continued to be the province capital. It is possible that some precinct wall fragments and public buildings along the coast could be dated to this period. The roads near Tomis were restored also at this time: a milliary pile from

– identifies Tomis as the province capital, as a ‘large and rich city’ (πόλις μεγάλη καὶ εὐδαίμων); – mentions an Orthodox bishop at Tomis and numerous Christians; – registers one bishop for the whole province at this date and identifies his residence at Tomis.

441

I. Barnea, DID, II, p. 370, note 6. Em. Popescu, commentary to IGLR 1. Considered by Em. Popescu, IGLR p. 37 can be the first dux after the province settlement by Diocletian. A. Aricescu, Armata, p. 125 determines C. Aurelius Firminianus’ activity between 284-286 AD. 444 Em. Popescu, IGLR 3 and p. 38 completes the inscription porta [s sive –m civita]ti praesida[li sive-ariae] (285-292 AD); see also Al. Barnea, La Dobroudja romaine, p. 195. 445 It is to be understood the mentioned ones are Diocletian and Maximian (Augusti), Galerius and Constantius Chlorus (Caesares). 446 Apud Em. Popescu, IGLR 4. 447 Apud I. Stoian, ISM II, 113 and p. 139. 448 For ordines Scythici, in the text, see further on. 449 See L. Hollenstein, in Studia Balcanica, 10, Recherches de géographie historique, Sofia, 1975, p. 23-44, Al. Barnea, ‘Voies de communication au Bas-Danube aux IVe – VIe siècles’, in Études Byzantines et Post-Byzantines, III, Bucureşti, 1997, p. 29-43; idem, La Dobroudja romaine, p. 291, fig. 21. 450 The pillar was found at Corbu de Sus and has two inscriptions: a) dated 293-305 AD; b) dated 360-363 AD. For the second sample from Corbu and other pillars from Tetrarchia period, see M. Bărbulescu, A. Câteia, Pontica, 30 (1997), p. 183-197. 451 I. Barnea, DID II, p. 378-379.

The next event, about 386 AD, is associated with Gerontios, the local garrison commander, and it is mentioned by Zosimos (IV, 40). Tomis has a Roman

442 443

452

See also DID II, p. 387; ISM II, 112 (324-333 p. Chr.). DID II, p. 389. 454 DID II, p. 391 and note 108; La Dobroudja romaine, p. 162, 196 and the notes 37 (p. 302) and 196 (p. 307); see at us the toponymy. 455 DID, II, p. 394 sq. 456 Themistios, Or. X, 133-140. 457 The milliary pillar was brought to a inner settlement from Dobruja (Miriştea) coming from the coast; the road was probably restored by the city of Kallatis (see Em. Popescu, debate at IGLR, 81). 458 See the inscription also at A. Rădulescu, ‘Dédicace en l’honneur de Valentinien’, Pontica 11 (1978), p. 151-154, where other hypotheses are suggested as well. 459 In the Acta Sanctorum, III, 235 Tomis was considered ‘Urbs magna et opulenta prope mare posita’. 460 Passing over Tomis, Valens tried to impose here the Arianism, but the bishop Bretanion (Vetranion) put up resistance. 453

317

ANCIENT GREEK COLONIES IN THE BLACK SEA 2 Justinian or his direct predecessors.468 The sagittarii juniores (or σαγιττάριοι) probably participated in the works of building (or renewing); they are mentioned twice on funerary stela from Tomis (IGLR 30 and 41).469 Justinian’s administrative reform includes, in 536 AD, a separation of the provinces Scythia (Minor) and Moesia Secunda from the Thracian diocese; they were put under the control of a quaestor Justinianus exercitus with military and civil jurisdiction, whose residence was in Odessos.

inner garrison, and outside, in front of the city, troops of foederati, Visigoths, settled there by the emperor Theodosius. This is a difficult time for both the leadership of the empire and the provinces. Scythia Minor is to a certain extent only in name a Roman province, and the capital – Tomis – is threatened with the danger of being taken by the foederati. The ‘walls’ and ‘gates’ of the city about which Zosimos wrote very often did not seem like a serious obstacle for them.461 The situation of the empire and of Scythia Minor continued to deteriorate; there were Hun attacks, a population which the empire wanted to christianize. During the last years of Theodosius I’s rule and under Arcadius, the Byzantine sources mention a bishop of Tomis – Theotimos I, also called ‘the Scythian’, who seemed to be a Christian missionary to the Huns.462 Also at that period should be noted the good relationship between Tomis and Constantinople, Theotimos’s activities being supported by the patriarch Chrysostomos.463

During the period between the last decades of the 5th century AD (when the vicarship function of Thracia was revoked) and 536 AD (when quaestura exercitus was settled) a dean could have existed for the provinces Scythia and Moesia Secunda, with their residence at Odessos. The existence of this service is suggested by a funerary inscription discovered in Tomis, made for Marcellus ‘Ὀδυσιτᾶνος βικάρις’ (IGLR 47). The syntagm raises questions – vicar of Odessos (who carried on his function in the city of Odessos)470 or dean originary in Odessos (and died in Tomis).471 For the moment the Tomitan inscription continues to be the only evidence of this office. Under Justinian and during the following period, until the end of the 6th century AD, the Scythian territory is destroyed but not conquered by barbarians (Kutriguri, Huns, Bulgarians, Avars, Slavs). The unique seal belonging to the Gepidae king Conimundos Stratelates (550-567 AD) was discovered in Constanţa;472 the discovery brings forward the relationship he had with Byzantium and his relationship with the Scythia Minor provincial metropolis. The cities on the coast resisted the attacks of the Avars from 586587 AD. Near Tomis, the army commanded by the Avar commander (χαγάνος) Baian is caught by troops sent by Comentiolus, Thracia’s commander and led by Martinus. The Avars are driven away, but not defeated, Baian came back to the empire and against Thracia (Theophylactos Simocatta, Historiae, II, 10).473

During the reign of the Emperor Anastasius I (491-518 AD) Scythia Minor was rather prosperous. There are important works to mention for Tomis during this period.464 Otherwise, the only lead seal from Dobruja issued by the emperor Anastasius was also discovered at Tomis.465 The deed initiated by Anastasius was continued by Justinian (527-565 AD); during his time Tomis had its last great flourishing period. Three inscriptions in Greek certify the restoration of the city walls in the first half of the 6th century, probably during Justinian’s time. The inscription from the exterior of a defensive tower mentions restoration work to the precinct wall on a part (πεδατοῦρα) of 24 feet (about 8 m), done by the butchers’ association (IGLR 8). Near the wall with the inscription a coin issued during Justinian’s time was found, dated 547548 AD.466 A second inscription, on a block coming from the veneering of the Tomitan precinct includes the names of two individuals - Ἀλέξανδρος and Βᾶσ(σ)ος who contributed to the restoration works of a precinct wall fragment (IGLR 9).467 The third official inscription is an invocation to the god to help ‘the renewed city’ (Βοήϑι πόλιν ἀνανεουμένην; IGLR 7). It indicates the time of

The last remains of the empire on the Lower Danube are struck by repeated barbarian attacks and settlements of the Slavs on the south of the Danube. After Mauricius Tiberius died (602 AD) and until the first Bulgarian state structure on the south of the Danube (681 AD) there is a lack of information about Dobruja in the literary sources. 468 Apud I. Barnea, DID II, p. 424; Em. Popescu, IGLR 7 takes into consideration a renewal at the end of the 5th – the beginning of the 6th centuries AD, during Anastasius or Justinian’s time. 469 Both inscriptions are dated by I. Barnea to the first half of the 6th century AD; the same A. Aricescu, Armata, p. 124 and 185; Al. Barnea, La Dobroudja romaine, p. 217; Em. Popescu considers for IGLR 30 an older date, the 4-5th centuries AD and the 5-6th centuries AD for IGLR 41. 470 Apud I. Barnea, ‘Un vicar de Odessos la Tomis’ (A Dean of Odessos at Tomis), SCIV 8 (1957), 1-4, p. 347-351. 471 V. Velkov, Die thrakische und dakische Stadt in der Spätantike (4.6.Jh.). Untersuchungen und Materialen, Sofia, 1959, p. 58; see also Em. Popescu, ‘Die spätgriechischen Inschriften aus Klein-Skythien’, Dacia NS 11 (1967), p. 171-172. 472 I. Barnea, ‘Sigilii bizantine inedite din Dobrogea’ (Unpublished Byzantine Seals from Dobruja), Pontica 18 (1986), p. 295. 473 I. Barnea, DID II, p. 433-434.

461

Al. Barnea, La Doboudja romaine, p. 16. He is called by ‘the Huns from Istros’, ‘The Romans God’; Sozomenos, Hist.eccl., VII, 26; see also DID II, p. 407, note 13 and 14. 463 About 399 AD Constantinople’s patriarch, Ioannes Chrisostomos sent missionaries to the ‘Scythians nomads at Istros’, probably meaning the Huns; Theodoretos, Hist. Eccl., IV, 31. 464 I. Barnea, ‘Contribution to Dobrudja history under Anastasius I’, Dacia NS 4 (1960), p. 367-373. 465 H. Metaxa, ‘Plumburi de marcă de la Tomi’ (Seal leads from Tomis), BCMI, 8 (1915), p. 33. 466 Pârvan, Zidul, p. 416-421. 467 See also I. Barnea, ‘Quelques considérations sur les inscriptions chrétiennes de la Scythie Mineure’, Dacia NS 1 (1957), p. 269-270. and fig. 3/2. 462

318

LIVIA BUZOIANU & MARIA BĂRBULESCU: TOMIS The military units attested in Tomis are used for exercises (comitatenses).481 Probably, cuneus D(almatarum)482 was present here at the end of the 3rd century and the beginning of the 4th century AD; (perhaps if it is the name of a palatine unit of which only a sub-unit participated in restoration works in Tomis). It is also possible483 that at the end of the 3rd century AD a cuneus or even more sub-units were brought to Tomis to work on the precinct wall building. Two funerary inscriptions, both from the 6th century AD,484 name Atala, Tzeiuk’s son (IGLR 41) and Terentius, Gaione’s son (IGLR 30) of the sagittarii iuniores. The quoted inscriptions are important for many reasons: the two archers died young, probably killed in a military operation against barbarian attacks upon Tomis.485 Their names are suggestive for recruiting into the Roman army of some individuals belonging to migrating populations: Turanian (maybe Hun) – as Tzeiuk and Atala – and Gothic, as Gaionas. It was assumed the military unit they belonged to – sagittarii iuniores Gallicani (or Orientales) – took part in the wall restauration at Tomis486 in the 6th century AD. More likely487 we refer to a vexillatio comitatensis of equites sagittarii iuniores, who acted in the diocese of Thracia.

Tomis would face Avar and Bulgarian attacks from 614615 AD, which would also reach numerous Dobrujan cities.474 The connections with the empire’s capital were also maintained during the 7th century AD. Discoveries permit the supposition that life there continued to have Roman-Byzantine features until about 680 AD.475 After this date, for a period of almost three centuries, Tomis’s history (as well as Dobruja’s) is poorly known. In a synthetic work concerning Dobruja’s history it is assumed that Tomis became a simple village, still existing at the beginning of the 8th century AD.476 Administration and Army We have little information about the province and its resident city administration during the Roman-Byzantine period. The province leader (praeses) is replaced rather early by a military commander (dux), who also had civil tasks. His headquarters were in the province capital. C. Aurelius Firminianus, vir perfectissimus (ISM II, 144 and 155),477 had the position of dux limitis provinciae Scythiae between 284-286 AD. Tomis was also the residence for an officium praesidis, the office of the provincial civil leader. Two inscriptions from the 4th century AD name Valerius Felix princeps officii praesidis (ISM II, 373)478 and Flavius Ursinianus miles officii praesidis (ISM II, 382). It is to be noted that it is the civil signification and not military for miles (= officialis), the same for the ex quaestionarius of the administration court (and not the army’s) for Martinus, Ursinianus’ father.479 A stele from the 5th-6th centuries AD (IGLR 36) mentions Marcus, former principalis. Due to the fact that the title was given to the city council members, the inscription is quoted as evidence for the continuity of the older Roman administrative structure480 into the 5th-6th centuries AD. New functions are attested in Tomis in the second half of the 6th-beginning of the 7th centuries: primus singularis and silentiarius. The first indicates a relatively important official, probably in the province governor’s office; the second a less important one, whose task was to maintain order in the palace when the emperor was present.

Coins After suspending the local coin issue, Roman coins continued to circulate until the end of the 5th century AD; circulation was then continued by Byzantine coins. Numerous hoards were found on the territory of the city and the neigbouring areas. Two hoards are associated with the Gothic invasion of 295 AD. The first, discovered in 1936, includes 62 colonial coins issued by Alexandria in Egypt.488 The hoard is an import brought probably by one of the soldiers who actively participated in the defeat of the Egyptian uprising under Diocletian. The latest coin in the hoard was issued by caesar Galerius and dated between 295-296 AD. The second hoard includes bronze imperial coins; it is a fragmentary hoard, discovered to the north of ancient Tomis in one of the suburban city districts, of which 288 pieces were retrieved. The latest coins did date beyond 294 AD.489

474

M. Sîmpetru, ‘Situaţia imperiului romano-bizantin la Dunărea de Jos la sfârşitul secolului al VI-lea şi începutul celui de al VII-lea’ (The Situation of the Roman-Byzantine Empire at the Lower Danube at the end of the 6th and the beginning of the 7th centuries AD), SCIV 22 (1971), 2, p. 222-225 considers Tomis ended its existence now. 475 A. Petre, ‘Quelques données archéologiques concernant la continuité de la population et de la culture romano-byzantines dans la Scythie Mineure aux VI-e – VII-e siècles de notre ère’, Dacia NS 7 (1963), p. 348-353; I. Barnea, DID II, p. 442-444; R. Vulpe, Pontice 2 (1969), p. 165. 476 I. Barnea, Şt. Ştefănescu, DID III, p. 9. For information about the settlement during the next centuries, see Gh. Mănucu-Adameşteanu, ‘Tomis – Constantia – Constanţa’, Pontica 24 (1991), p. 299-327. 477 See above, the historical commentary. 478 The same inscription at Em. Popescu, IGLR 5; idem in Epigraphica. Travaux dédiés au VII-e Congrès d’épigraphie grecque et latine (Constantza, 9-15 septembre 1977), Bucureşti, 1977, p. 256-258. 479 With this meaning, see also M. Zahariade, Moesia Secunda, Scythia and Notitia Dignitatum, Bucureşti, 1988, p. 54 480 I. Barnea, ‘Note de epigrafie romano-bizantină’ (Roman-Byzantine Epigraphy Notes), Pontica 10 (1977), p. 275; for the word principalis meaning municipal official, see IGLR, p. 72.

Another hoard, from the 4th century AD, but formed in some other place, was discovered in the port of 481 For the military organisation of Scythia province, see Al. Barnea, La Dobroudja romaine, p. 209-221; M. Zahariade, op.cit., p. 55-99. 482 If the completion for CVND on a tegula is correct; see A. Aricescu, Armata, p. 122-123, who didn’t exclude other completion possibilities. 483 Also apud A. Aricescu, loc.cit.; see also Al. Barnea, op.cit., p. 216. 484 For dating the inscriptions see the note above 469. 485 Notice at A. Aricescu, Armata, p. 124. 486 D.M. Teodorescu, Monumente, Bucureşti, 1918, p. 38-44, nr. 18. 487 D. Hoffman, Das spätrömische Bewegungsheer und die Notitia Dignitatum, II, Düsseldorf, 1969, p. 109, note 591; see the debate at Em. Popescu, IGLR, p. 66. 488 It is considered to be the latest hoard of colonial Greek coins discovered on the Romanian territory; see A. Vertan, Circulaţia monetară, p. 261; idem, Pontica 32 (1999), p. 126. 489 Ibid, note 59.

319

ANCIENT GREEK COLONIES IN THE BLACK SEA 2 In 1959, on the occasion of the excavations at the Roman Mosaic Edifice, a hoard of 153 bronze pieces was discovered in the deposits covering the mosaic perimeter.500 The majority of the pieces (102 coins) are dated during 425-475 AD. An important percentage (75 %) represents the emperor Leon I’s coins. This discovery reflects the sufficient supply of newly issued coins in the province during the third quarter of the 5th century AD and the end of the difficult period of the barbarian invasions.

Constanţa. The coins – 18 bronze pieces bearing the names of the emperors Diocletian, Maximian, Galerius and Constantius I – belonged to a coin deposit on a ship sunk in Tomis port roadstead.490 The structure, according to mints, shows an Aegean origin. A hoard of 50 bronze pieces discovered in the Cathedral Park491 area was dated to time of Constantine the Great. The hoard includes pieces issued between 320-324 (13 coins) and 330-335 AD (37 coins); the intermediary period issues are missing.492 As the hoard includes exclusively issues from Siscia and Thessalonica, it can be admitted493 that it was brought here as such formed from the west Balkan area and from the middle Danube. The hoard’s presence at Tomis can be associated with the transfer of the Sarmatians by the imperial authorities to Italy and to regions devastated from the Balkan Peninsula, among which was Scythia, in 334 AD. The hoard could have belonged to a soldier transferred to Scythia Minor to escort the Sarmatians. Its loss about 334 AD, or immediately after this date, could be the consequence of a local event of minor importance, without a political or military motivation and perhaps with no consequences for Tomis.494

A fragmentary Byzantine coin hoard also comes from the Analdachioi district neighbouring Tomis; about 383 pieces were retrieved from it.501 The coins were issued by Anastasius,502 Justin I and Justinian; the latest coins of this hoard are dated to 545/546 AD. The majority of them are Constantinople coins (84 %), proving that the necessary coin for the province was supplied by the empire’s capital; it is followed in frequency by Nicomedia (11,54 %); the other mints (Cyzic, Thessalonic and Antiochia) account for little. The burying of the hoard in 545/546 AD (or immediately after this date) cannot be connected with historical or epigraphical information of a nature to prove a military event or an invasion. The comparison with other hoards from Justinian’s time known in other areas led to the conclusion that around the burying date of the hoard there was an important outside event with devastating though temporary consequences for the province. The date of the event and of the hoard burial is an argument for the reason of the restoration of the Tomitan precinct during Justinian’s time, in the first half of the 6th century AD.503

Two coin deposits have been given as funerary offerings. The first of them includes 11 Roman imperial coins issued in the last quarter of the 3rd century AD.495 The second, which is under debate here, includes 13 pieces; with only one exception496 the coins are dated between 355-361 AD.497 They cover Constantius II and Julianus Apostatus’s rule (the last one with only two pieces). A hoard was discovered in Tomis suburban area498 in 2003. The hoard, unpublished, includes 6500 pieces and about 500 fragments. The preliminary analysis concludes it was hidden on the occasion of the Gothic attack in 378 AD.499

More than 500 pieces dated to the 6th-7th century AD have been discovered in isolated places.504 These allow us to evaluate more strictly the Byzantine coin presence in the Tomitan market during the period between the reigns of Anastasius and Constant II (by recording the periods of flourishing or regression of coin issue). Thus, very few coins are noted between 498-512 AD; a better situation developed for the second half of Anastasius’s rule; almost of double value during Justin I’s rule as a normal consequence of previous measures. During the first stage of Justinian’s rule an important diminution motivated by

490 R. Ocheşeanu, ‘Câteva descoperiri monetare din sec. IV e.n. în Scythia Minor’ (Some Coins Discoveries from the 4th century AD in Scythia’Minor), Pontica 17 (1984), p. 131-134. 491 Gh. Poenaru-Bordea, R. Ocheşeanu, A. Smaranda, A. Diaconu, ‘Un tezaur de monede de bronz din vremea împăratului Constantin cel Mare descoperit la Tomis’ (A Bronze Coins Hoard from Constantine the Great Time Discovered at Tomis), Pontica 23 (1990), p. 267-275. 492 It is considered the only hoard in Dobruja dated to the end of Constantine the Great’s rule. 493 See Gh. Poenaru-Bordea, R. Ocheşeanu et al., loc.cit. 494 The authors of this paper don’t exclude the possibility of associating this hoard with events from the first years of Constantine the Great’s rule, between 337-342 AD, but the hypothesis mentioned in the text is generally accepted. 495 Gh. Poenaru-Bordea, R. Ocheşeanu, ‘Câteva depozite monetare din Scythia Minor depuse ca ofrande funerare (secolele III-IV d. Chr.)’ (Some Coin Deposits from Scythia Minor Given as Funerary Offerings (the 3rd – 5th AD), Pontica, 24 (1991), p. 349-353. 496 Idem, op.cit., p. 353-359; the exception is a coin from Cyzic from 348-350 AD. 497 Among them 7 are issued between 357-358 or perhaps only 358 AD. 498 The hoard named Constanţa-Obor, 2003 was found in a ceramic vessel. 499 Information, Dr. Gabriel Custurea who is studying the hoard; apud the same information the earliest information is from Licinius; the latest coins are issued by Valens and Valentinian; see also G. Custurea, Recent Monetary Discoveries, in Preda’s International Magazine, March 2005, p. 118-121.

500

R. Ocheşeanu, Circulaţia monetară între anii 270-498 e.n. la Dunărea de Jos, cu specială privire asupra Scythiei Minor (Coin circulation between 270-498 AD on the Lower Danube with a special consideration of Scythia Minor); PhD, vol. IV, Bucureşti, 1995 (mss), p. 147-150. 501 B. Mitrea, ‘Un tezaur de monede bizantine descoperit la Constanţa’ (A Byzantine Coin Hoard discovered in Constanţa), Pontica 16 (1983), p. 239-262; see also Gh. Poenaru-Bordea, Eug. Mihail, BSNR 80-85 (1986-1988), p. 101-115. 502 Anastasius’s coins are issued after the reform from 498 AD. 503 Hypothesis formulated by I. Barnea, DID II, p. 423-424. 504 Here and further on, see Gh. Poenaru-Bordea, Al. Popeea, ‘Monede bizantine dintr-o colecţie formată la Constanţa’ (Byzantine Coins from a Collection Formed in Constanţa), SCIVA 27 (1976), p. 215-229; Gh. Poenaru-Bordea, ‘Problèmes historiques de la Dobroudja (VI-e – VII-e siècles) à la lumière des monnaies byzantines traitées par des méthodes statistiques’, Pact 5 (198), p. 365-377; Gh. Poenaru-Bordea, R. Ocheşeanu, Al. Popeea, Monnaies byzantines du Musée de Constanţa (Roumanie), Moneta, Wetteren, 2004.

320

LIVIA BUZOIANU & MARIA BĂRBULESCU: TOMIS We mention for the same category a lamp with the image of Christ blessing, surrounded by Apostles,512 and another fish-shaped bronze one.513 The oldest Christian object known until recently in Tomis is no later than the end of the 3rd century AD – the beginning of the 4th century AD; it is a ceramic lamp which has the monogram cross engraved three times.514 Another lamp has the same date; it represents two fish, probably a Christian symbol.515 Recently has been published a lamp from Tomis with three Palaeo-Christian symbols – the cross, the pigeon and the dolphin – dated before the 4th century AD.516 At the beginning of the 4th and mostly in the 5th century AD, Christianity strongly influenced provincial culture.517

the deterioration of the political and military conditions at the Lower Danube should be noted. The difficulties seem in part surpassed during the next period – 538-542 AD – and in spite of the invasions from 540 AD. The period between 542 AD until the end of Justinian’s rule was marked again by a diminution, motivated by pressures and invasions by migrating populations. During the rule of Justin II, Byzantine coins were increasing again in number, motivated by inflation tendencies. Immediately after that (perhaps even from the end of Justin II’s rule), under Tiberius II Constantinus, there was a drastic diminution, followed by a new increase505 under Mauricius Tiberius. The variations noted for the following period are not so important. It should be mentioned that a series of coins was issued in Tomis from Mauricius Tiberius until Constantine IV the Pogonate.506 Byzantine coin circulation at Tomis ended about 680 AD during this emperor’s rule. Though rare, they prove the presence, although slight, of the Byzantine empire here.507 From the point of view of mints, the first place belongs to the pieces produced in Constantinople, followed, with a great difference by Nicomedia, Thessalonica, Cyzik and Antiochia.508

Hierarchically organized, the church was led, during the reign of the emperor Anastasius, by one bishop with his residence at Tomis.518 After the ecumenical patriarchy was established in Constantinople, Tomis’s bishopric depended directly on it and the cultural connections between the Lower Danube region and the Byzantine Empire’s capital became stronger and stronger. Evangelicus seems to have been the first Tomitan bishop and he lived during Diocletian’s time. His name is mentioned in connection with the martyrs Epithet and Astion who suffered at

Culture bibliography); among the newest contributions, P. Diaconu, ‘Documentele vechi creştine din Dobrogea’ (The Old Christian documents from Dobruja), Pontica 17 (1984), p. 166; V. Lungu, C. Chera, ‘Din nou despre gema creştină de la Constanţa’ (Again about the Christian Gem from Constanţa), Pontica 23 (1990), p. 177-182. 512 The object, with inscriptions apud John’s Gospel XIV, 27 (Pacem meam do vobis), is considered to be originally from Italy and proof of the Latin feature of Dacian-Roman Christianity; see I. Barnea, Les monuments, p. 74, nr. 42; idem, Arta creştină, p. 92, 2. 513 I. Barnea, Les monuments, p. 230; Arta creştină, p. 230-231, nr. 3; Em. Popescu, IGLR, 55. 514 C. Chera Mărgineanu, V. Lungu, ‘Noi descoperiri din necropolele tomitane’ (New Discoveries in the Tomitan Necropolis), Pontica 17 (1984), p. 128-129; A. Rădulescu, V. Lungu, Le christianisme en Scythie Mineure à la lumière des dernières découvertes archéologiques, in Actes du XIe Congrès International d’Archéologie Chrétienne, Roma, 1989, p. 2565-2567. 515 Pontica 17 (1984), p. 128 and p. 118, the pl. 3/29; generally, see V. Lungu, Începuturile creştinismului în Scythia Minor în lumina descoperirilor arheologice (The Beginning of Christianity in Scythia Minor in the Light of the Archaeological Discoveries, in Izvoarele creştinismului românesc, Arhiepiscopia Tomisului, 2002, p. 29-45. 516 C. Băjenaru, ‘Un opaiţ cu simboluri paleocreştine descoperit la Tomis’ (A Lamp with PaleoChristian Symbols Discovered at Tomis), Dacia 35-36 (2002-2003) suggests dating the lamp to the 2nd–3rd century AD. 517 Al. Barnea, La Dobroudja romaine, p. 267-295. 518 We find the information in the first half of the 5th century AD at Sozomenos, Theodoret and in the law of emperor Zenon from 480 AD. For the organization of the Tomitan church, see also I. Barnea, ‘Noi date despre mitropolia Tomisului’ (New Information About the Metropolitan Seat of Tomis), Pontica 24 (1991), p. 277-282; Em Popescu, ‘Die Kirchliche Organisation der Provinz Scythia Minor vom vierten bis ins sechste Jahrhundert’, Jahbruch der Österreichischen Byzantinistik 38 (1988), p. 75-94; idem ‘Ierarhia eclesiastică pe teritoriul României. Creşterea şi structura ei până în secolul al VII-lea’ (The Ecclesiatical Hierarchy on Romania’s Territory. Its development and structure until the 7th century AD), Biserica Ortodoxă Română 108 (1990), 1-2, p. 152-154, 160-163; idem ‘Începuturile îndepărtate ale mitropoliei Bisericii Ortodoxe Române: Tomisul, Arhiepiscopie autocefală’ (The Remote Beginnings of the Autocephaly of the Romanian Orthodox Church: Tomis, Autocephal Bishopric), in Izvoarele creştinismului românesc (The Sources of Romanian Christianity), p. 171-200.

Cultural activities follow the Greek-Roman tradition in the 4th century AD. The cult of the sun spread into the Roman Empire even from the 3rd century AD,509 attested in Tomis in a dedication (ISM II, 155) from the period of the Emperors Diocletian and Maximian. The latest monument dedicated to Cybele (ISM II, 144) is also dated to that period. Evidence of the Christian faith is registered in Tomis before the date of Constantine the Great’s edict. It is isolated and includes pagan elements. We deduce this from unusual expressions in inscription content or from the possible Christian values of some decorative elements.510 Perhaps more valuable for the beginning of Christianity at Tomis is a minor art object: the already famous cornelian gem representing Christ crucified among the Apostles.511 505 The coins from Mauricius Tiberius show the moment of 587 AD was less critical than it was assumed; the city was not destroyed at this time. 506 Irimia Dimian, ‘Câteva descoperiri monetare bizantine pe teritoriul RPR’ (Some Byzantine Coin discoveries on RPR territory), SCN 1 (1957), p. 197, nr. 1-5; possible hoard hidden probably on the occasion of Bulgarians invasion on the south of the Danube. 507 The number of coins from Phocas (16 registered by Gh. PoenaruBordea, R. Ocheşeanu, Al. Popeea, loc.cit.) and Heraclius (5 after the same registration) show that Tomis had in that time an important role. 508 See this way also Al. Barnea, La Dobroudja romaine,p. 251. 509 D.M. Pippidi, Studii, p. 329-330. 510 See the synthesis, I. Barnea, ‘Consideraţii privind cele mai vechi monumente creştine de la Tomis’ (Considerations about the oldest Christian Monuments at Tomis), Pontica 24 (1991), p. 269-275. 511 The gem, originally dated to the 2nd–3rd centuries AD, was for a long time considered the oldest Christian document from Tomis; the iconographical subject, studied again, led to the conclusion that it did not date before the 4th–5th centurys AD (see I. Barnea, Les monuments paléochretiens de Roumanie, Città del Vaticano, 1977, p. 73-74, nr. 41); idem Arta creştină în România (The Christian Art in Romania), Bucureşti, 1979, p. 92, 1; Em. Popescu, IGLR 53 (with the

321

ANCIENT GREEK COLONIES IN THE BLACK SEA 2 Halmyris around 290.519 No later than to the 4th century AD is dated an inscription set up for a ‘witness of Christ and bishop’ (IGLR 22). The inscription, incomplete now, is supposed to have been for Titus (or Philus),520 known to have suffered during emperor Licinius’s time, around 319-323 AD.521 The historical document attests certainly Bretanion (or Vetranion), ‘competent and famous man due to his qualities’ (Sozomenos, VI, 21), who ‘was leading as bishop the cities of the whole of Scythia’ (Theodoretus, IV, 35). In 368-369 AD this one resisted the penetration of Arianism supported by the emperor Valens.522 He was followed by Gerontios (or Terentius), participant in 381 AD of the 2nd ecumenical Synod in Constantinople.523 Theotimus I the Scythian, between 392-407 AD is known also as a writer;524 a famous Christian preacher among Huns525 and called by them ‘the Roman’s God’ (Θεός Ρωμαίων), this bishop was an opponent of Arianism.526 Timotei is participant to the 3rd ecumenical Synod from Ephes, in 431 AD. A τράπεζα ἀγαπῶν, discovered at Tomis, which was part of a funerary edifice, is dedicated to ‘His Holiness Timotei’ by a neophyte (IGLR, 25).

Synod from Constantinople with the title of episcopus provinciae Scythiae metropolitanus. The title seems to support the hypothesis532 according to which, during Anastasius’s time, under the authority of the older Tomis episcopate, now a metropolitan seat, other episcopates were created in Dobruja.533 Paternus is considered the first Scythian metropolitan bishop and had 14 episcopates534 under his authority. His activity took place during the last decade of the 5th century AD (in any case, before 498 AD).535 The last known bishop of Tomis was Valentinian (550-553 AD), who had close connections with the church of Constantinople and was in correspondence with the pope Vigilius at Rome.536 Valentinian maintained probably the title of episcopus metropolitanus who distinguished him from the other bishops of Scythia Minor. We are not aware of any other hierarchy at Tomis after the 6th century AD. The bishops of Tomis were cultural and religious personalities who maintained permanent connections with the most important representantatives of the official church. These connections contributed to the maintenance of church unity and the cultural development of the province Scythia Minor.

The written name is considered to represent a religious personality – martyr527 or even bishop.528 Ioannes seems to have acted before 448-449 AD. The sculpted monogram of bishop Ioannes could be identified on the impost of a capital (IGLR, 14).529 Alexander follows, and signs in 451 AD the papers of the 4th ecumenical synod from Chalcedon; Theotim II, who also signed a letter as Theotimus humilis Scythiae regionis episcopus addressed to the emperor Leon to defend Christianity.530 For some decades no names of bishops are known in Tomis, until the plate with the inscription of the bishop Paternus is dated.531 In 520 AD Paternus signs the papers of the

The Tomitan inscriptions mention a priest of the church’s hierarchy (presbyter), Patricius (IGLR, 27); a hypodiaconos of Syrian origin, but bearing the Latin name Paulos (IGLR, 48);537 also Ioannes, administrator of the St. Ioannes church (πραγματευτής τοῦ ἁγίου Ἰωάννου; IGLR, 32);538 and Heraclides ‘reader of the holy and universal church’ (ἀναγνώστης τῆς ἁγίας καὶ καϑολικῆς ἐκκλησίας; IGLR, 45).539 Among the believers only the new Christianized individuals (neophytes; νεόϕυτοι; IGLR 25 and 29) and catehumeni (the audientes) are mentioned; they were prepared to be baptized (IGLR, 23).

519 About these martyrs, see M. Zahariade, O. Bounegru in Izvoarele creştinismului românesc, p. 115-126. 520 I. Barnea, ‘Inscripţii paleocreştine inedite din Tomis’ (Unpublished PalaeoChristian Inscriptions of Tomis), Pontica 7 (1974), p. 376-380. 521 Cf. Acta Sanctorum, in Fontes II, p. 704-707. The inscription under discussion would have been set at the entrance of a martyrium, built to the end of the 4th century and the beginning of the 5th century AD. However see also Petre Năsturel, ‘De la o inscripţie creştină din Tomis la pătimirea Sf. Teogene’ (From a Christian Inscription from Tomis to of St. Teogene’s suffering), Pontica 24 (1991), p. 283-286. 522 See, above, the historical commentary; the literary information at Sozomenos, VI, 21. 523 Sozomenos, VII, 9 (Terentius; during emperor Theodosius’ time). 524 Hieronymus, Liber de viribus illustribus, 131 (22, 152): Theotimus, Scythiae Tomorum episcopus. 525 Sozomenos, VII, 26: ‘the church from Tomis and of the rest of Scythia was led by the Scythian Theotimos’. 526 Sozomenos, VIII 14; Acta Sanctorum, April II, 753 mentions him as participant in the Synod at Constantinople. 527 Apud R. Berlinger, ‘Ein früchristlichen Agapentisch aus Konstanza’, Byz Neugr. Jahrb. II, 1921, p. 150-153. 528 Apud J. Zeiller, Strena Buliciana, Zagreb, 1924, p. 415 (apud Em. Popescu, commentary at IGLR 25). 529 I. Barnea, ‘Monumente de artă creştină descoperite pe teritoriul RPR’ (Christian Art Monuments Discovered on RPR Territory) in St. teologice 17 (1965), p. 3-4, p. 153-154 and fig.15. 530 R. Netzhammer, Die christlichen Altertümer der Dobrudscha, Bukarest, 1918, p. 52-56: J. Zeiller, Les origines chrétiennes dans les provinces danubiennes, Paris, 1918, p. 173 (quoted in DID II, p. 458, note 8). 531 The golden silver plate, 0.61 m in diameter and 7855.11 g weight, was included in the thesaurus of Tomis cathedral; the work technique

would indicate a product of a Constantinople workshop. About the conditions of discovery, see IGLR, 64 (the bibliography). 532 V. Pârvan, ‘Nouve considerazioni sul vescovato della Scizia Minore’, in Rendiconti della Pontificia Accademia Romana di Archeologia, II (1924), p. 122 and 132-135; see also DID II, p. 458-459 and note 12. 533 Hypothesis proved also by the testimony of the ‘Scythian monks’: isti de sua provincia episcopos accusant inter quos est Paternus Tomitanae civitatis antistes (Papa Hormisdas, Epistolae, 217). 534 Em. Popescu, ‘Contributions à la géographie historique de la Péninsule Balkanique aux Ve – VIIIe siècles de notre ère’, Dacia NS 13 (1969), p. 411 and the following; idem in Izvoarele creştinismului românesc, p. 197. 535 It is the date for the plate marked with Paternus’ name; see I. Barnea, Pontica 10 (1977), p. 276; it is corrected this way the broader dating during the emperor Anastasius’ time, 491-518 A.D., accepted for a long time. 536 Vigilii Papae Epistola (olim XII) ad Valentinianum episcopum Tomitanorum, in Fontes II, p. 401-405. 537 It is the first mention of a hypodiaconos in Scythia Minor; for the Syrians of this area, see I. Barnea, ‘Relaţiile provinciei Scythia Minor cu Asia Mică, Siria şi Egiptul’ (Scythia Minor’s relations with Asia Minor, Syria and Egypt), Pontica 5 (1972), p. 255-257; Em. Popescu, IGLR 92. 538 The text should be πραγματευτής τῆς ἐκκλησίας τοῦ ἁγίου Ἰωάννου. 539 ἡ καϑολικὴ ἐκκλησία means probably the Orthodox universal church in contrast with the heretical one (apud Em. Popescu, IGLR 46 and I. Barnea, DID II, p. 462).

322

LIVIA BUZOIANU & MARIA BĂRBULESCU: TOMIS which repeats, shortly, the prophecy of Jesus’s birth and of the name of Ioannes, who appeared on numerous inscriptions of the same period (IGLR 14, 32, 37).546 Probably a Semitic name is also Sulifera (IGLR, 44), certainly associated with the Semitic form Suleif-; the individual bearing it and that who built the funerary monument, Entolios, could be originally from Caesarea in Cappadocia547 rather than Caesarea in Palestine.548 Greek origin names are also frequent. A funerary stele from the 4th-5th centuries AD mentions Theodule, the daughter of the priest Patricius (IGLR 27). Orentes, Timotheos,549 Eufemia, Kalliope and Heracleides are names of Greek origin as well, but used in a Roman or Oriental environment.

The greatest number of Christian martyrs of Scythia are registered at Tomis; the majority of them lived during the emperors Diocletian, Maximian, Galerius and Licinius’s time (290-325 AD). According to some sources there are more than 60 martyrs executed here, more than in others cities of the province.540 Among the mentioned names in the Greek synaxarions, the Orthodox liturgy books and Acta Sanctorum we notice two of them: Efrem and Theogenes. The first, mentioned as bishop of Tomis was sent to Scythia by the patriarch Ermon of Jerusalem and would have been beheaded here in 304 AD; some sources consider him as the first bishop of Tomis known in the literary sources.541 The second name was ‘a case study’ who placed him not among the martyrs from Tomis, but among of Cyzic ones.542 This mention does not diminish the importance of the Palaeo-Christian evidence in Tomis.

For the name Georgios must be mentioned its frequent usage in Greek.550 Studying again the inscription IGLR 52, and its correct reconstruction,551 determines the votive feature (and not funerary)552 of the inscription. The same feature, determined also for IGLR 49553 is associated with the cult of Saint George as a military saint, which penetrated Dobrujan territory554 in the 6th-7th centuries AD.

Population An important piece of evidence for emphasizing Christianity at Tomis are the anthroponimes. The onomatology of the Tomitan inscriptions show the connections Scythia Minor had with Asia Minor, Syria and Egypt. Frequent proper names on inscriptions originally from the Eastern empire – Alexandros and Alexandria, Basos, Genadios, Focas, Thecla etc. – are attested at Tomis. For some of them we can specify their origin in Syria. Thus, the proper name Sergios, the founder or the beneficiary of a funerary or cult edifice (IGLR, 12), written on fragments of a marble capital of the 5th -6th century AD543 is associated with the settlement Sergiopolis from Syria and with the St. Sergie, whose tomb is there. The woman name Maru, Ioannes’s daughter, church administrator (IGLR, 32) can be originated also among the names coming from Syria and Asia Minor.544 The Syrian origin is precisely specified on a funerary stele from the 6th century AD for a name Paul, hypodiaconus and for his wife Paula (IGLR, 48). On a fragmentary marble block from the 5th-6th centuries AD the name Nazarin (…) is mentioned, associated with Nazareus, epithet for Jesus in Syria, or Nazarinus, in other places of the empire (IGLR, 40).545 Other names have Semitic origins, though later on they were adapted by the Christians, especially in the Orient. It is the situation of the names Em(m)anuel, on a Tomitan inscription from the 5th-6th centuries AD (IGLR, 16)

The Latin names have a special importance. From the beginning of Christianity we mention the name Aurelia Ianuaria, Ianuarius’ daughter who married Flavius Martinus (IGLR 21). Other Christian monuments from the 5th-6th centuries mention Terentius, filius Gaione (…) (IGLR 30),555 Marcella and her son Marcellus (IGLR 31), Marcia Aurelia, wife of a certain Marcus (IGLR 36), Aurelia Veneria (IGLR 39) and Sabina, Leontina, Venera (IGLR 35). Other women’s names also belong to the Christian epigraphy: Lupicina (IGLR 46, a name created after the male form Lupicinus); Colunba (for Columba; IGLR 51) and Romana (IGLR 37), created also after a male name, Romanus. Bassianus and Ianuaria, attested on an inscription in verse from the beginning of the 4th century AD (IGLR 18), both with Roman names, state the faith of their early 546 For the frequency of the name in Bulgaria, see V. Besevliev, Spätgriechische und spätlateinische Inschriften aus Bulgarien, Berlin 1964, p. 191. 547 I. Barnea, Pontica 10 (1977), p. 275-276 (the argument is based on the rather intense relationship of the province Scythia Minor with Cappadocia, in the first half of the 4th century AD). 548 Apud Em. Popescu, IGLR 44. 549 For the possibility of identification with the bishop’s name, see above. 550 I. Barnea, Pontica 10 (1977), p. 276. 551 N. Duval, Revue Archéologique, 1980, p. 318-319 (apud Al. Barnea, ‘Sigilii şi inscripţii din Dobrogea (sec. VI-VII e.n.)’ (Seals and Inscriptions from Dobruja (the 6-7th centuries AD), SCIVA 37 (1986), 2, p. 137-139 and note 20). 552 Al. Barnea, loc. cit. 553 Reinterpreted as [Sanc]ti Georgii. 554 The penetration of this cult is considered normal here and into the area of the Orient, except that its western area up to Salonica, where in the same period the cult of Saint Demeter was dominant; see Al. Barnea, loc. cit. 555 Patronymic considered to be of Germanic origin (Goth); see above, the army.

540 See C. Auner, Dobruja, in Dicentury. d’Archéol. Chrét. et de Litourgie; Ene Branişte, ‘Martiri şi sfinţi pe pământul Dobrogei de azi’ (Martyrs and Saints on the Territory of Present Dobruja), in De la Dunăre la mare. Mărturii istorice şi monumente de artă creştină (From the Danube to the Sea. Historical Evidence and Christian Art Monuments), Galaţi, 1977, p. 34-62; I. Barnea, Romanitate şi creştinism la Dunărea de Jos (Roman World and Christianity at the Lower Danube), Symposia Thracologica 7, Tulcea, 1989, p. 168-174; V.H. Baumann, in Izvoarele creştinismului românesc, p. 99-113; 541 See E. Branişte, op. cit., p. 39 and note 33 and 34. 542 P. Năsturel, Pontica 24 (1991), p. 283-286. 543 Apud I. Barnea, Pontica 10 (1977), p. 274 (dated to Justinian’s time). 544 See generally L. Zgusta Kleinasiatische Personennamen, Prague 1964. 545 Ibid, p. 77; Nazarius is known as the name of martyr and saint in the Christian onomatology.

323

ANCIENT GREEK COLONIES IN THE BLACK SEA 2 From the point of view of city planning, the researched levels mark a topographical change related to the two fundamental street axes.

dead child, Lillas, who bore a name possible originally from Thracia or Bithynia.556 The name Dinias (IGLR 25), attested on some inscriptions from Bulgaria and Boeotia, has also a form Dinis of Thracian origin.

The period is marked by great civil complexes, pavements, streets, and sewers, and a possible bath complex. An edifice with a proper sewerage system, porch traces and inner steps was identified for the 5th -6th centuries AD. These accessories were also found in the Histrian edifices of the Domus area.

The mention of Atala, the son of Tzeiuk (IGLR 41)557 on a monument from Tomis is conclusive for the role of Christianity in converting the migrating populations and their inclusion into the local stable element. The name of Gaione (-as?) on another inscription (IGLR 30) seems to be that of a foederatus Goth. In this way the Christian religion, first embraced by the stable local population, becomes one of its features as opposed to the nonChristianized ‘Barbarians’. Beyond the apparently heterogeneous feature of the antrophonimy,558 we notice the new Christian religion is first the feature of the stable Romanized population, and on the way in its penetration to the Orient had passed first through Scythia Minor and the provincial capital.

Further study of Tomitan city planning from the researched area to the north, illuminates not only the general aspects, but the elements which make possible particular chronological features. In the area close the to eastern cliff, the 2nd century AD habitation level is superimposed over an edifice with a mosaic area of about 60 sq. m.559 Its building period is dated to the 4th century AD; two coins dating from 355360 AD and ceramics from the 4th century AD were discovered in the level; the mosaic was damaged in the 5th century AD.

Stratigraphy and Urbanism The levels III-I corresponding to the 4th -5th centuries AD have been revealed in the archaeologically researched areas around the Cathedral Park. The preserved public monuments represent the most important elements for the following period, until the 7th century AD.

Close to the eastern cliff as well, on Sulmona street, a salvage excavation uncovered fragments of a public edifice of a massive wall, sewerage canal and inner pavements of big stone slabs, a street running to the sea and a rich archaeological inventory: ceramics, amphorae, common vessels, lamps, glass vessels, metal objects and coins, discoveries which attest habitation in the area, in the 4th-6th centuries AD (likely until the first decades of the 7th century AD).560 As a matter of fact, the aforementioned period is well documented by other recent research in the area of Tomis during the last decades.561

– Level III belongs to the 4th century AD, very likely to the first half, date attested by various coins. The majority of the preserved monuments in the area were built or are supported by this level. The restoration and reconstruction activities from the beginning of the 4th century AD followed general levelling activities. – Level II, marked by fire traces could be dated to the end of the 4th century AD. Actually, levels II and III with evident fire traces are to be found at a similar width and are similar in structure. – Level I (as a matter of fact formed by two levels marked I1 and II2), are dated to the 5th century AD. This date is based on a monetary deposit discovery (about 200 pieces), whose later coins are dated to 402, 408 and 423 AD. Level I2 is dated to the first half of the 5th century AD and level I1 to the second half and probably the beginning of the 6th century AD. The habitation traces from the 6th century AD were destroyed in the research area when the park near the Cathedral was arranged. The 6th century AD is archaeologically proven by the materials discovered in the pits and the fill strata.

The buildings of the western frontage represented by ‘the great mosaic edifice’ and lentiarion are included in a possible unitary city arrangement, supposedly built beginning with a stage before the 4th century AD and finished by a destruction (probably natural) around the end of the 6th century AD and beginning of the 7th century AD. The first edifice would have been a place for social, economic and trade activities of the city.562 Set up in front of the port, the edifice includes four terraces 559

Vl. Zirra, P. Alexandrescu, Materiale 4 (1957), p. 88-94. M. Bucovală, ‘Raport preliminar privind cercetările arheologice cu caracter de salvare din Constanţa, str. Sulmona, nr. 7’ (Preliminary Excavation Report Concerning the Salvage Archaeological Research from Constanţa, nr. 7, Sulmona street), Pontica 31 (1978), p. 171-200. 561 We refer to excavations on Muzeelor (now Arhiepiscopiei), Marcus Aurelius and Mircea cel Bătrân streets, and on the present court location, led by specialists from Constanţa Museum, many of them unpublished. 562 V. Canarache, L’édifice à mosaïque découvert devant le port de Tomis, StCls. 3 (1961), p. 229-240; A. Rădulescu, ‘Date tehnice despre Edificiul cu mozaic din Constanţa’ (Technical Data about the Building with Mosaic of Constanţa), BMI 39 (1970), 3, p. 52-56; I. Barnea, ‘Quelques nouvelles considérations sur le pavés mosaïques Tomi’, Dacia NS 20 (1976), p. 265-268. 560

556

The woman’s name is written Ἰανβαρία. About Λίλλας, see IGLR p. 53. Considered Hellenized and Christianized Huns; the two names are connected with the missionary activity among the Huns of the bishop Theotimos I of Tomis; see Em Popescu, commentary at IGLR 41; I. Barnea, St teol., 6 (1954), p. 90, 103, note 33; idem, Dacia NS 1 (1957), p. 286. 558 Generally analysed for this period by Em Popescu, IGLR, passim. 557

324

LIVIA BUZOIANU & MARIA BĂRBULESCU: TOMIS of the 6th-the beginning of the 7th centuries AD, having changed function.566 Other opinions567 admit the ‘flourishing period’ when the mosaic was made could not have been at the end of 3rd-beginning of the 4th centuries AD, but possibly dated to the first half of the 3rd century AD, corresponding to the Severan’s ‘flourishing period’. More arguments are to be found in the marble capitals and frieze decoration and also by redating the head of an imperial statue to the middle and the second half of the 3rd century AD.568 Further on, the edifice in the 2nd stage and even the 3rd stage is dated in the 4th century AD. The period when the edifice ceased functioning for its prime purpose could be determined earlier in its turn, at the end of the 4th or the beginning of the 5th centuries AD, with activities taking place inside the edifice until the 6th century AD.

corresponding each at its turn to the habitation level of the ancient city (A), to the pavement with mosaic (B) and goods warehouses (the terraces C and D). Corresponding to the terrace B, a large room is paved with more than 2000 sq. m of polychrome mosaic, placing it among the greatest such areas of the empire. The terrace supportingwall, preserved to the east, of 65 m in length, has a maximum 5.4 m height. Made of brick rows alternating limestone with small blocks, the wall has pilasters at a distance of 4 m apart each, possibly united on the top by arches. The wall surface was covered by marble and the pilasters were decorated on the top with capitals. Further changes brought as new elements a niche and a platform for this wall. The building sizes can be determined by studying other preserved walls: the southern one, 18 m long, corresponding to the edifice width and the western and the north ones partially, all supporting the roof of the marketplace type hall. The most interesting feature of the room is the mosaic pavement of which about 850 sq. m are still preserved. The decoration includes geometrical and flowered patterns made of naturally coloured tesserae (the only zoomorphic representation is a pigeon). The central area worked in opus vermiculatum is covered by large circles, placed in great intervals, framed by squares and separated by rectangular areas (the circle diameter is 7 m). Terrace C represents the warehouse level. These 11 warehouses are each of 11 m length and 6 m width; the massive entrances are 8 m high. The lowest level of the cliff, covered by terrace D was destined for other storehouses; now under the sea level, the terrace is covered. The complex area was also connected with the platform in front of the city level by a shell limestone staircase.

As we do not aim at a congruity of all opinions, we mention them as admissible variants for a possible revaluation of the whole complex. The same observations for the lentiarion can be noticed: the similarity of the building system with the first edifice; the possible dating of its inscription during the Severan dynasty; after the edifice ceased to function in its prime role material evidence (lamps) from the end of the 6th-the beginning of the the 7th centuries AD is still found. The edifice, including many rooms, has been largely destroyed by modern works. It was probably functioning public city baths (at least one), as an inscription on the entrance frame mentions.569 The main room (30 x 10 m) and a hall with stairs leading to the city terrace are preserved, both covered by white marble plates.570

It was determined the edifice was included in a unitary building system built during a period of city flourishing, at the end of the 3rd century AD-beginning of the 4th century AD. It was restored and completed during its period of functioning.563 The 4th century AD coins found at the pavement level of one warehouse could be a proof that the warehouses had been used in a previous period.564 The last function level for the edifice is dated by the broken amphorae in situ, from a typological point of view all dated to the end of the 5th century and the 6th century AD.565 The edifice continued to exist to the end

Other public city edifices situated inside the ancient city precincts which have been identified up to the present time are the seven Christian basilicas. The great basilica571 orientated east-southeast to westnorthwest, with an area of 48.10 x 23.45 m, is to be found in the western city area; it had a naos separated by two rows of columns into three naves,572 a simple nartex and a gallery above the side naves. The most important building element is the cross-shaped crypt (with an area of 50 sq. m) and divided into seven communicating areas.

563 I. Barnea, op.cit., suggests that the pavement with mosaic was made at the end of the 5th century AD. 564 M. Sâmpetru, ‘Precizări cronologice în legătură cu Edificiul roman cu mozaic din Constanţa’ (Chronological Explanations Regarding the Roman Building with Mosaics from Constanţa), BMI 42 (1973), 4, p. 59-60; see also C. Iconomu, Pontica 9 (1976), p. 143-144 and notes 36, 40. 565 M. Sâmpetru emphasizes rather the first date. About the amphorae see A. Rădulescu, ‘Amfore cu inscripţii la Edificiul roman cu mozaic din Tomis’ (Amphoras with Inscriptions at the Roman Mosaic Edifice from Tomis), Pontica, 6 (1973), p. 193-207; Gh. Papuc, ‘Ceramică romană târzie cu decor ştampilat descoperită la Edificiul roman cu mozaic din Tomis (sec. IV-VI p. Chr.)’ (Roman Late Ceramics with Marked Decoration Discovered at the Roman Mosaic Edifice from Tomis (the 4-6th centuries AD) ibid, p. 153-192; M. Munteanu, Gh. Papuc, ‘La céramique romaine tardive à décor estampé découverte à Tomi’, Pontica 9 (1976), p. 117-154. C. Iconomu, Descoperiri de tipare de opaiţe la Tomis (Lamps Patterns Discoveries at Tomis), ibid, p. 135144.

566 M. Sâmpetru, BMI, 42 (1973), 4, p. 59-60; C. Iconomu, op. cit., 142145. 567 Al. Suceveanu, Dacia NS, 13 (1969), p. 349-351; idem VEDR, p. 27 and 14 (2nd-3rd centurys AD); idem, La Dobroudja romaine, p. 119120. 568 As concerning the imperial portrait see Z. Covacef, ‘Monumente sculpturale descoperite la Edificiul roman cu mozaic din Constanţa’ (Sculptural Monuments discovered at the Roman Mosaic Edifice in Constanţa), Pontica 30 (1997), p. 206 (the end of the 3rd century AD). 569 ISM, II, 389: Ἱερᾶ βουλῆ κατεσκευάσϑη τὸ λεντιάριον ὑπὸ Ἑρμίππου Ἄττα; J.- L. Robert, RÉG 83 (1970) p. 415, nr. 403. 570 A. Rădulescu, Pontice 1 (1968), p. 325-329. 571 Idem, Monumente romano-bizantine din secenturyorul de vest al cetăţii Tomis (Roman-Byzantine Monuments from the Western Area of the City of Tomis), p. 28-84; I. Barnea, Arta creştină, p. 128-131; idem, Les monuments paléochretiens de Roumanie, p. 125-126. 572 The inner length is 43 m.

325

ANCIENT GREEK COLONIES IN THE BLACK SEA 2 the first bishop’s cathedral in Scythia Minor.577 Some 4th-5th century AD architectural fragments, the marble pavement and the accurate monument building support this hypothesis.578

The crypt could be reached by a 7.5 m long hall with marble stairs. The blocks used for the stairs’ construction came from older monuments. The horizontal level of the crypt can be inscribed into a square; six of the areas are square (2.20 x 2.20 m) and the seventh is rectangular inscribed into the apse (2.70 x 2.28 m size). The roofs of these rooms were dome- and vault-shaped and were only 2.50 metres in height from the crypt’s ground level.

Another basilica (4) was situated at the present port entrance. Uncovered partially, it is 24 m in length and its apse is 8.70 m in diameter. The monument, probably including only a nave, was built in the 5th-6th centuries AD, inside a 4th century AD larger edifice.579

The plastered walls were covered with paintings of which few traces are still preserved. Small areas of the naos and nartex brick pavement and the marble plates of the altar are still preserved. There were found fragments of: columns, capitals, cancelli plates and the marble cover of the walls. It was assumed for a long time that the basilica was functioning as the city cathedral in the 6th century AD.573

The 5th basilica was discovered on the east city cliff; it was built of stone and bricks. The edifice was damaged by modern works. The rectangular crypt (1.52 x 1.22 m), with a maximum vaulted roof height of 2.05 m, is set under the altar. On the east, north and probably south crypt walls and at a height of 0.78 m from the pavement level there were niches; the niche on the east wall has a red-coloured painted crux latina and inside a reliquary glass vessel. The building is dated to the 5th-6th centuries AD.580

On the northeast side of the great basilica and at about 35 m there is the ‘small basilica’574 orientated to northeast. It is almost parallel in length with the precinct wall identified in the neighbourhood. Modern building works allowed the partial study of the monument. Its length is estimated at about 35 m; the other sizes are 18.80 m in width and 8 m the diameter of the apse. Under the apse and partially under the central nave there is the crypt with an inside width of 2.20 m. The wall-plaster preserved a few traces of fresco. Both the crypt and the pavement of the basilica are made of bricks. There were a few marble pieces – a parallelipipedic block used probably as a descending stair and a fragment of the inner wall coverings bear traces of older inscriptions.575 Around the basilica on the outside there is a stone plated pavement contemporary with the building.

The traces of a basilica edifice (6) orientated north, eastsouth, west were discovered in 1979 as well on the eastern cliff.581 This includes a nartex and a nave, the apse being destroyed by modern constructions. The most important building element is the wall inside the nave, identified as a baptiserium. The building is not older than the 5th Century AD.582 The foundations of the largest basilica known so far at Tomis583 were discovered on the northeast cliff of the peninsula in 1989. Orientated west-northwest to eastsoutheast, its outside sizes are 54.7 x 24.3 m; at the foundation level, the walls’ width is about 1.25 m; inside, the naos is 32.1 x 21.7 m. Two rows of columns create three naves; the apse is 9.15 m in breadth and outside it is inscribed in a pentagon. There are three annexe rooms along the northern apse wall and structurally connected with the basilica. The north side of the ensemble was bounded by a portico fragmentarily preserved. The edifice was dated to the end of the 5th-beginning of the 7th centuries AD.584

Christian basilica ruins (3) were discovered near the port high cliff.576 The building of ‘Mihai Eminescu’ high school was superimposed over it. Of the ancient building only fragments of an eastern wall and a hall leading to the crypt under the altar were found; the crypt is situated at 2.50 m under the pavement level, it has an area of 6.15 x 3.75 m and a vaulted roof. The western side of the crypt is a square-shaped room (3.70 x 3.75 m), with the maximum height of 2.32 m. The room walls still preserve fragments of painted plaster; in the inferior half there are larger painted rectangular borders and in the superior half and at the bottom of the vault there are smaller borders with vegetal decoration. Three vaulted niche-shaped tombs (1.68 in height and 0.90 m in width) are walled on the East side of the crypt. Marble plates with decoration coming from the basilica pulpit were found inside the crypt. Probably in the second half of the 4th century AD this would have been the Tomis cathedral and probably

573

7.

The last public monument we are discussing is the Roman Byzantine precinct wall. This borders the largest part of the ancient city; it follows a line connecting the two peninsula shores, to the continental side, from northwest to northeast. The analyses of this monument 577 V. Barbu, Tomis, oraşul poetului exilat, Bucureşti, 1972, p. 100-101; I. Barnea, Pontica 24 (1991), p. 271-272. 578 I. Barnea, loc. cit.doesn’t exclude the possibility this could be the cathedral where the bishop Bretanion was when Valens arrived. 579 I. Barnea, Les monuments, p. 128; Virgil Lungu, Creştinismul în Scythia Minor în contextul vest-pontic (Christianity in Scythia Minor in the West Pontic Environment), Sibiu-Constanţa, 2000, p.69. 580 V. Lungu, op. cit., p. 69-70; idem, in Izvoarele creştinismului românesc, p. 157-158. 581 The basilica is situated 25 m southwest of the Palace hotel. 582 V. Lungu, Creştinismul în Scythia Minor, p 70. 583 At the crossroads of Mircea cel Bătrân and Dragoş Vodă streets. 584 V. Lungu, op. cit., p. 70-71.

I. Barnea, Pontica 24 (1991), p. 275; however see following basilica

574

A. Rădulescu, op.cit., p. 23-27; I. Barnea, Les monuments, p. 126. A. Rădulescu, ‘Inscripţii inedite din Dobrogea (Unpublished Inscriptions from Dobruja)’, SCIV 14 (1963), 1, 83, nr. 5 = ISM, II, 90. 576 I. Barnea, Les monuments, p. 126-128; idem, Arta creştină, I, p. 132133. 575

326

LIVIA BUZOIANU & MARIA BĂRBULESCU: TOMIS tower foundation. Only the semicircular front connection is still preserved of the second tower damaged by modern works. The gate access way is 10.50 in width and is covered with stone plates. Orientated to the northwest, the gates’ aperture is over 31 m in total.

have taken into consideration both the plan and the building’s chronology.585 Concerning the plan, the only side raising no questions is the northern one. Research by Vasile Pârvan, this side has two gates: the northeast gate with the famous ‘butchers’ tower’ (4.34 m in aperture).586 The southeast gate is framed by defensive rectangular towers with the front sides of about 5.40 m; the precinct is here 3.20 m in width; the entrance is about 4 m; two coins from the time of Tacitus (275-276 AD) and Probus (276-282 AD) were found in the mortar of the precinct segment between the two gates.

The towers sizes as well as their complexity and the size of access ways lead to the conclusion this is the most important gate of the city. The peninsula’s outline has been changed over time by sea erosion; the gate did not in the ancient period have a peripheric position which we are inaccurately inclined to believe today.592 Beyond the second tower, the precincts were continuing up to the sea.593 The question of whether Tomis had a perimeter precinct or the peninsula was defended only from the land side has not a definite answer.594 Chronologically speaking, the late precinct buildings could start in the second half of the 3rd century AD, after the Gothic invasion. Construction could have been initiated probably by Gallienus.595 It was continued (if not started) by Aurelian and Tacitus596 and finished probably by Diocletian (during his time the gate or the gates of the city were built (IGLR 3). The possibility that the work was finished by Constantine the Great is not excluded.597 Precinct fragments were rebuilt during the emperor Justinian (or probably even during Anastasius’s time). The building security permitted the ancient city’s defence until the 7th century AD.

The wall orientation on the other sides is only hypothetical: to the west/southwest the precincts follow an obtuse angle which could have a corner tower at the crossing point. The precinct design is restored on the west based on wall fragments found occasionally and sometimes with different orientations. The wall branches from the southwest gate: a part follows the expected line to the southwest up to the seashore, where a stone pile could be the clue about the precinct, possibly even one of its areas; another part goes west/southwest, where it turns off to the south to the same ending point marked by the stone piles.587 Archaeologists estimate different dates for the two west/southwest lines: the first line is structurally and chronologically connected with the north precinct (the end of the 3rd–beginning of the 4th centuries AD); the second is a precinct added later (the 5th-6th centuries AD) together with the city enlargement to the west and the defence of the Tomis ecclesiatical centre.588

The kilns were set near the precincts; six kilns for brick burning598 (three inside the city, three outside) have been identified in the northwest side of the city.599 The two kiln groups actually represent handmade goods complexes. Built in a limited area600 they functioned contemporaneously. This area was chosen on one hand because there was a building necessity on the west side, on the other hand, due to the clay quality. Bricks similar to those identified in the pavement of the neighbouring basilicas601 were found on the platform of one kiln. Numerous elements support the idea of dating the kilns to the second half of the 5th century AD: the late Roman age ceramic material, preponderant in the kilns’ stratigraphy; the rudimentary aspect of the installation construction; the same typology of the bricks used for the Paleo-Christian basilicas and those on some kiln

The precinct continues to the east, beyond the butchers’s tower589 and it had here a gate framed by towers.590 Archaeological excavations in many stages revealed an ensemble of a defensive gate towers.591 The towers, of which 2-3 seating rows are still preserved, had semicircular frontal sides. The southwest tower is about 15 m long and the width measured at the front vault arch is 11.50 m, the elevation is 3.50 m wide. Some building elements confirm a special feature of the tower. The inside northwest side shelters a 1 m wide and 2 m high tunnel; coming from the precinct wall this opens inside the tower; the tunnel pavement is about 0.70 m under the 585

V. Pârvan, Zidul cetăţii Tomis in ARMSI, s II, t. 37 (1914-1915), p. 45-450; V. Canarache, Tomis, Bucureşti, 1961, p. 19-20; A. Aricescu, Armata, p. 156-157 and 163-164; N. Cheluţă–Georgescu, ‘Contribuţii la topografia Tomisului în sec. VI e.n.’ (Contributions to the topography of Tomis in the 6th century AD), Pontica 10 (1977), p. 253-260; p. 258259; A. Rădulescu, ‘Zidul de apărare al Tomisului, de epocă târzie, în reconstituirea actuală’ (The Late Defence Wall of Tomis in Its Present Restauration), Pontica 28-29 (1995-1996), p. 83-93; Gh. Papuc, L. Lungu, ‘Poarta mare a cetăţii Tomis’, (The Large Gate of the City of Tomis), Pontica 31, (1998), p. 201-208. 586 The names in inscription IGLR 8 indicating a wall fragment rebuilt by the butchers association; Μακελαρί[ω ν] πεδατοῦ[ρα] (πόδες) ΚΔ. 587 A. Rădulescu, op. cit. p. 86, 88, fig. 4: huge stones probably parts of the wall having a gate here. 588 N. Cheluţă-Georgescu, loc.cit.; A. Rădulescu, op. cit., p. 86-87. 589 Note of V. Pârvan, op. cit., p. 417 and pl. I. 590 A first description of the monument was made by Sc. Lambrino, in Arhiva pentru ştiinţă şi reformă socială (The Archive for Social Science and reform), 14 (1936), vol I, p. 912-917. 591 Gh. Papuc, L. Lungu, op. cit., researchers took place in 1988, 19911992, 1993 and 1998.

592 Ancient broken walls, visible in the cliff wall confirm this hypothesis. Actually, Cărămidari street existed here half of century ago which disappeared because of shore slippage. 593 The precinct walls seem to pass over the possible exterior side of the NE tower; see Gh. Papuc, l. Lungu, op. cit., p. 205 and note 15. 594 See A. Rădulescu, op. cit., p. 91-92, where is mentioned ‘vague evidence’ about a perimeter precinct existing here. 595 A. Aricescu, Armata, p. 156. 596 See the coins of these emperors found in the building emplecton, cf. A. Rădulescu, op. cit., p. 84-85, note 5 and 6. 597 V. Canarache, Tomis, p. 17, R. Vulpe, Pontice 2 (1969), p. 163. 598 A. Rădulescu, Monumente romano-bizantine, p. 5-23. 599 Another unstudied brick kiln found near the precinct to the east; see A. Rădulescu, op. cit., p. 6 and note 5. 600 The distances from one brick kiln to another are about 10-12 m. About the handmade complexes in the area see also Al. Barnea, La Dobrouja romaine, p. 230. 601 It is considered almost the only brick kiln group and it was specially made for building the basilicas.

327

ANCIENT GREEK COLONIES IN THE BLACK SEA 2 platforms; the late Roman cultural stratum contemporary to the kilns.

workshop was used in the main for marble processing for monumental constructions.612

Workshops for ceramics would have been more numerous than those discovered until now. There was certainly a workshop for lamps: the products stamps,602 the deposits and the patterns of lamps found at Tomis603 are all evidence. 141 broken lamps were found in an ancient pit at about 200 m from the late Roman precincts wall;604 all are production scraps from a local workshop605 whose installations should have been in the neighbourhood. The pieces were produced either with imported patterns or, more likely, by copying some imported originals at a date that should have been in the first half of the 4th Century AD.606 The patterns preserved hidden among the wall stones of the one mosaic edifice vaults are later: the 6th century AD, possibly the first half (or the beginning) of the 7th century AD.607 The patterns presence means the existence of some handmade goods workshops in the neighbourhood.608

Local production does not reduce the importance of imported products. Provinces such as Egypt, Palestine or Syria are among the foremost places concerning products and exportation.613 Scythia, inclusively Tomis, had trade relationships both with economic centres inside and outside the empire, but the former are the most important. To Tomis were brought amphoras with goods both from the Syrian-Palestinian area, and from the western Mediteranean area. Many of the amphoras discovered at the Mosaic edifice and dated to the end of the 7th century AD and the beginning of the next one, hold vegetal resins (colophony, turpentine, mastix), many of which came from the west coast of Asia Minor, others from the shores of Arabia and Somalia.614 In 599 AD, when Tomis was besieged by Avars, it was possible to offer to the Avar Khan some kinds of exotic condiments probably coming from India.615 It is possible some of the amphorae bearing Christian inscriptions were gifts sent by the Sirian bishops to the bishop of Tomis.616 Tomis, more than other city in the Pontic area, distinguishes itself due to the variety of North African amphorae. If we add to this variety of amphorae, that of the table vessels617 and lamps,618 we have a complete representation of the products coming to this city.

Glass production at Tomis is still uncertain: the traces of two kilns were discovered near the building of the old Post office and near the museum; they could not be studied enough.609 Whether glass production was normal can only be a supposition at the present time. Instead, traces of a marble workshop seem to be more certain. They were discovered some time ago (1958) at the bottom of the west cliff, at the ancient port level.610 Numerous massive marble pieces have also been retrived611 from this area on the occasion of some port construction and arrangement, before 1900. It seems the

The province’s financial and trade organisation619 is illustrated by a series of discoveries at Tomis: Flavius Servandus, περίβλεπτος κόμης καὶ ἄρχων, issued ἐξάνιον – a measure (and checking) of the old coin (solidus) (IGLR 86, 5th century AD); very likely he applies the orders of the imperial authorities, in the province there is also other evidence of the centralized control upon trade.

602 C. Iconomu, Opaiţe, p. 19, tip XIX: ‘Μάρκος Τομείτης ἐποίει’; other names of Tomitan producers: (Ἐκτήμων, Ἄμια) at C. Iconomu, G. Bordeianu, ‘O nouă descoperire de lucerne la Constanţa’ (A New Discovery of Lamps in Constanţa), Pontica 14 (1981), p. 269-276 (pieces discovered in a tomb and dated to the middle or the third quarter of the 2nd century AD with a a longer circulation); a name Eὐ (…) appears on a lamp from the beginning of the 4th century AD: See C. Iconomu, ‘Un depozit de opaiţe la Constanţa’ (A Deposit of Lamps in Constanţa), Pontica 3 (1970), p. 237-238, note 1. 603 See also the synthesis in article A. Rădulescu, ‘Die lokale Herstellung der Beleuchtungsgegenstände – Lucernae’, Pontica, 14 (1981), p. 181-209. 604 C. Iconomu, Pontica 3 (1970), p. 237-254. 605 After restoration there were determined 10 lamp variants which belong to some important types. 606 The study’s author takes into consideration precisely the period of Constantine the Great. 607 C. Iconomu, Pontica 9 (1976), p. 135-146; the hidden pieces are associated with a danger threatening Tomis in this period; the danger is identified as being the Avars and Slaves invasions in 601-602 AD (the date matches with the last destruction of the Mosaic Edifice). 608 The archaeological excavations at the Mosaic Edifice revealed both brick and lime kilns, but they belong to a later period; see C. Iconomu, op. cit., p. 144 and notes 41 and 42. 609 M. Bucovală, Vase antice de sticlă la Tomis (Ancient Glass Vessels from Tomis), Constanţa, 1968, p. 154-156. 610 More monuments in various building stages were discovered here: a 5 m length architrave, a cornice, two corner capitals and the superior piece of a sarcophagus: see V. Canarache, Tomis, 1961, p. 33-35; V. Canarache et alii, Tezaurul, p. 120 ff. 611 G. Bordenache, ‘Correnti d’arte e riflessi d’ambiente su alcuni ritratti del Museo Nazionale di Antichità’, Dacia NS 2 (1958), p. 267, note 19.

The lead trade seals indicate goods coming from Asia Minor and the neighbouring regions, Smyrna, Ephes, Metropolis, Koloe (Lydia),620 in the 4th century AD and also during the following centuries until the beginning of the 7th century AD. 612

Its maximum function period is dated in the 2nd century AD. See A. Opaiţ, Aspecenturye ale vieţii economice din provincia Scythia (secolele IV-VI p. Chr.). Producţia ceramicii locale şi de import (Economic Aspects in the Scythia Minor Province (IVth – VIth centuries AD). The local and imported ceramics production), Bucureşti, 1996, passim. 614 A. Rădulescu, ‘Amfore romane şi romano-bizantine din Scythia Minor’ (Roman and Roman-Byzantine Amphoras from Scythia Minor), Pontica 9, (1976), p. 99-114. 615 Theophylactus Simocatta, Historiae, 7, 13, 1-6 (Fontes II, p. 545). 616 A. Opaiţ, Aspecte, p. 165. 617 Gh. Papuc, ‘Ceramica romană târzie cu decor ştampilat descoperită la Edificiul roman cu mozaic din Tomis’ (The Late Roman Stamped Decoration Ceramics Discovered at Roman Mosaic Edifice from Tomis), Pontica 6 (1973), p. 153-192. 618 Gh. Papuc, ‘Opaiţe de import la Tomis’ (Imported Lamps at Tomis), Pontica 9 (1976), p. 201-205. 619 Al. Barnea, La Dobroudja romaine, 236-257. 620 I. Barnea, ‘Plombs byzantins de la collection Michel C. Soutzo’, RÉSEE 7 (1969), p. 23-25, notes 1-7. 613

328

LIVIA BUZOIANU & MARIA BĂRBULESCU: TOMIS The first necropolis627 is situated approximately in the area between the Hellenistic precinct walls and the late Roman age one. It is the main Hellenistic necropolis over the Roman city which is partially superimposed. There are also some areas situated further from the city where an important number of Hellenistic burials have been discovered. Their situation, about 2-3 km from the Hellenistic wall, as well as the existence of some suburban settlements, could suggest the hypothesis of some smaller necropoleis kept by those settlements and not by Tomis. About ⅔ of the Hellenistic tombs are cremation burials, the rest, about ⅓, are inhumation. The most frequent cremation burial is that of burning on the spot (funeral pile-tomb);628 the burial is usually done in rectangular graves.

Maritime trade goods are well-illustrated by the discoveries at the Roman Mosaic Edifice: metal anchors, important quantities of iron ore, marble weights for big scales, resins and, obviously, amphorae.621 Analyzing again the city structures, we must specify some data about the special constructions – the underground galleries crossing the Tomitan peninsula.622 Set up in a net, having built ventilation facilities and entrance apertures, they were dug directly into the loess and have stone and brick walls. Two sections623 have been studied, the first connecting the eastern cliff with Tomis’s tourist port is almost 285 m long and 1.65-2.50 m high. The second section, between Tomis port and the Roman Mosaic Edifice is 265 m long. They cross the peninsula at 20 m under the present ground level. Considered, in turn, sewers for the rain and processing waters, shelter in times of danger and escape routes during sieges, they are actually larger aqueducts, able to store an important quantity of water.624 The aqueduct flow direction goes to the west cliff, where the city baths with their own basins and reservoir are also situated. The aqueduct-galleries system was probably built in the first half of the 2nd century AD; they functioned in the period of the Roman-Byzantine city, being known also as a transport installation for water in the neighbourhood.625 The last domain of the city structures we are going to write about are the necropoleis.626

Necropolis II, which spreads beyond the early Roman precincts, begins probably immediately in its neighbourhood and spreads to the north and northwest, from the cliff to the other side of Tomis and crossing Lăpuşneanu boulevard. There were identified629 dozens of marble and stone sarcophagi and a few hundred burials with tile coverings or with wooden coffins. This necropolis already existed at the beginning of the 2nd century AD and continued to be used until the end of the 3rd century AD.630 Necropolis III spread along the eastern cliff; it begins in the main area of the city gate and continues to the north. An important part of its area was destroyed by erosion and landslip. The necropolis is dated to the end of the 3rd and to the 4th century AD. A funerary construction with a very special quality and significant wallpainting631 has been discovered in this area in 1988. It is a vault with a dromos used as a family burial place for about 50 years.632 The inside walls are covered with fresco painting, with anthropomorphic, zoomorphic, vegetal and geometrical representations. A specific partition for walls and vault was made. On the northen tympanon a ritual

Related to the precincts, there have been identified and localized five necropoleis areas in Tomis; these spread around the ancient city, from the northeast peninsula corner to the west, and along the coast roads connecting Tomis with Histria and Kallatis.

621

A Rădulescu, ‘Amfore cu inscripţii de la Edificiul roman cu mozaic din Tomis’ (Amphoras with inscriptions from the Roman Mosaic Edifice in Tomis), Pontica 6 (1973), p. 194 sq. 622 Notes about this building see at V. Canarache, Tomis, 1961, p. 36-37 and unpublished manuscripts at MINAC; V. Barbu, Tomis, oraşul poetului exilat, p. 95-99; Mircea D. Matei, ‘Le troisième colloque mixte roumaino-soviétique d’archéologie et d’ethnographie’, Dacia NS 3 (1959), p. 573-579. 623 See Gh. Papuc, ‘Tipuri de apeducte pe litoralul vest-pontic’ (Aqueduct types on the West-Pontic Coast), Pontica 30 (1977), p. 237250; idem, Aprovizionarea cu apă a cetăţilor vest-pontice în epoca romană şi romană târzie (The Water Supply of the West Pontic Cities During the Roman and late Roman Age), PhD paper, Constanţa, 1999 (mss.). 624 About the Tomis water supply see M Botzan, ‘Observaţii din secolul trecut asupra unor construcţii antice din Dobrogea’ (Observations from the last century about some ancient buildings in Dobruja), Pontica, 12 (1979), p.175-179; idem, ‘Consideraţii asupra alimentării cu apă a oraşelor-cetăţi Histria, Tomis şi Callatis’ (Considerations about the water supply of the cities Histria, Tomis and Kallatis), Pontica 13 (1980), p. 305-341; Gh. Papuc, Aprovizionarea cu apă, p. 129-159 and notes 133, 135, 139. 625 Gh. Papuc, Mihai Ionescu, ‘Noi cercetări privind apeductul de la Ovidiu, jud. Constanţa’ (New researches about the Aqueduct from Ovidiu, Constanţa County), Pontica, 27 (1994), p. 209-221. 626 V. Barbu, ‘Considérations chronologiques basée sur les données fournies par les inventaires funéraires des nécropoles tomitaines’, StCls. 3 (1961), p. 222-225; C. Chera, Necropolele tomitane în contextul lumii romane vest-pontice (sec. I-IV p. Chr.) (The Tomitan Necropoles in the Roman West Pontic Environment (the 1st-4th centuries AD), PHD (mss.), Constanţa, p. 10-23.

627 M. Bucovală, Necropole, p. 131-133; idem, ‘Un alt mormânt de epocă elenistică târzie la Tomis’ (Another Late Hellenistic Age Tomb at Tomis), Pontica 8 (1975), p. 375-388; idem, ‘Un alt mormânt elenistic descoperit la Tomis’ (Another Hellenistic Tomb Discovered at Tomis), Pontica 28-29 (1995-1996), p. 73-82. 628 V. Lungu, C. Chera, ‘Contribuţii la cunoaşterea complexelor funerare de incineraţie cu ‘rug-busta’ de epocă elenistică şi romană de la Tomis’ (Contributions to the Knowledge of the Funerary Complexes with Hellenistic and Roman Age Busta Pile from Tomis), Pontica 19 (1986), p. 89-114. 629 See V. Barbu, ‘Din necropolele Tomisului. I. Tipuri de morminte din epoca romană’ (About Tomis Necropolis I. Tomb types of the Roman age), SCIV 22 (1971), 1, p. 47-68. 630 See a limestone plated tomb dated to the beginning of the 3rd century AD at M. Bucovală, ‘Découvertes récentes dans les nécropoles de Tomis’, Dacia NS 35 (1991), p. 189-199 (this unusual tomb is distinguished by a very rich funerary inventory). 631 V. Lungu, C. Chera, ‘Un monument arheologic de o excepţională valoare la Tomis/Constanţa’ (An Archaeological Monument of an Excelent Value from Tomis/Constanţa), Arta 35 (1988) 4, p. 11-14; idem, ‘Romische Wandmalereien in neugefundenen Gräbern aus den Nekropolen der Dobrogea’, in Die Schwarzmeerküste der Spätantike und im frühen Mittelalter, Vienna, 1992, pl. 94-96 and pl. 10; A. Rădulescu, ‘Entre faste et dénouement. Les mystères soulevés par le ‘Tombeau au banquet’ retrouvé à Constantza’, in Archéologie Nouvelle, 1 (1993), p. 42-47. 632 Building’s exterior sizes are 3.84 x 3.18 x 3 m.

329

ANCIENT GREEK COLONIES IN THE BLACK SEA 2 As a unique discovery we mention a funerary complex with six rooms636 made of stone slabs. The large number of skeletons found (11) and the succession of burials suggests there is a burial vault belonging to some related families. The retrieved inventory is chronologically dated to between the 2nd and 3rd centuries AD.

banquet is represented, in which mostly men are taking part; on the southern tympanon above the entrance four pigeons are painted around a kantharos. The west side represents two scenes at the vault bottom: a group of four partridges and a rabbit eating grapes. The vault is covered by vegetal decoration, painted in various colours. More deceased were put in the burial vault successively.633 Based on the naturalistic style of the rich floral and zoomorphic decoration, mixed with geometrical elements and on few inventory discovered pieces, the tomb was dated to the second half of the 4th century AD (noting that it was used for burials for a longer period). The painting interpretation raises various hypotheses. Bird and rabbit representations could at the same time be Christian and Pagan symbols; also the funerary banquet since it has no specific Christian mark or inscription. The only specifically Christian feature is the west-east orientation of the tombs inside the burial vault. The closest analogy can be found in a scene of the eucharistical banquet of ‘Santi Pietro e Marcellino’ catacomb from Rome, where Christian features are doubtless.634

Necropolis V covers the area between the necropoleis II and IV, partially superimposed over the latter. It is dated to the 4th century AD, but in some areas the 4th century AD graves are mixed with the 2nd and 3rd centuries AD ones. The great number of tombs identified in recent years, the continuity of the necropoleis areas and sometimes their superimposition over one another creates a large cemetery area around Tomis. The area’s delimitation is artificial, the burials being done without taking into consideration any enclosure or parcelling. Only between 1987-1988, for example, 106 tombs were researched in the city’s southwest area,637 the majority of them dated to the 2nd-3rd centuries AD; few of them belong to the 4th-5th centuries AD. Beside the individual burials, there were noticable collective burials of 2-3 individuals (and a peculiar situation in this perimeter, a large collective tomb for 40 individuals). Research has identified the existence in the west area of Tomis a necropolis intensively used during the RomanByzantine period.638 Further excavations (1991-1992) in the same area revealed another 45 inhumation tombs, dated by ritual and funerary inventory elements to the 2nd and 3rd centuries AD.639 Continuing to the west, another 46 inhumation tombs from the 2nd up to the 6th centuries AD were also studied in 1992 (the latest one is dated to the end of the 6th/possibly even the beginning of the 7th centuries AD).640

Necropolis IV is situated to the west and southwest, between the late precinct wall and the present railway station. A lot of sarcophagi and stone funerary complexes, as well as inhumation graves with tile coverings, have been studied. The necropolis is dated to the second half of the 2nd century up to the middle of the 3rd century AD. An important archaeological complex representing a female inhumation tomb was discovered in 1986 on Ferdinand Boulevard. The tomb is important for the great number of bronze, silver and gold pieces; the gold pieces represent a real ‘treasure’: 7 rings (4 of them with settings of engraved semiprecious stones), 2 big earrings (each of them with 7 stone settings), 14 pieces from a gold pendant, 14 little crosses, over 50 golden leaves, 2 bracelets with stone settings, a necklace with lion heads (made of gold leaf on a vegetal support), small tubes from another necklace and a miniature amphora. We can continue the enumeration with a large collection of silver, bronze, lead, iron, ceramic, glass and bone pieces. They are all of 2nd century, Roman style, some of them of a Hellenistic tradition, showing their provenence from an Oriental part of the Empire.635

We mention the discovery from the southwest necropolis area for its special feature: a burial vault preserving the traces of a Palaeo-Christian wallpainting. It is a hypogeum construction with only one funerary room

636 C. Chera, V. Lungu, ‘Un complex funerar inedit de la Tomis’ (An Unpublished Funerary Complex from Tomis), Pontica 18 (1985), p. 203-214. 637 M. Bucovală, C. Paşca, ‘Descoperiri recente în necropolele de epocă romană şi romano-bizantină la Tomis’ (Recent Discoveries in the Roman and Roman-Bzyantine Age Necropoles from Tomis), Pontica 21-22 (1988-1989), p. 123-161. 638 There were not possible references to a 4-6th centurys AD necropole unnoticed at that date ‘d’une manière concrète’ (V. Barbu, StCls. 3 (1961), p. 207). For 4-6th centurys AD tombs at Tomis see also C. Chera Mărgineanu, Noi morminte din necropolele Tomisului (Tomis Necropoles New Tombs), Pontica, 12 (1979), p. 247-250; M. Bucovală, ‘Cavou din secolul IV d. Chr. descoperit în necropola de vest a Tomisului’ (the 4th century AD burial vault discovered in Tomis west Necropolis), Pontica, 26 (1993), p. 207-214. 639 M. Bucovală, C. Paşca, ‘Descoperiri recente în necropola romană de Sud-Vest a Tomisului’ (Recent Discoveries inTomis Roman South West Necropolis), Pontica 24 (1991), p. 185-236. 640 M. Bucovală, ‘Cercetări în necropola romană de Vest a Tomisului (1992)’ (Researches in Tomis West Roman Necropolis (1992), Pontica 25 (1992), p. 241-272.

633 Four skeletons were found in coffins, others without funerary boxes near the entrance and a child in an amphora. 634 See the observation in I. Barnea, Pontica 24 (1991), p. 272-273 and note 12; V. Lungu, Începuturile creştinismului în Scythia Minor în lumina descoperirilor arheologice (Christianity Beginnings in Scythia Minor In the Light of the Archaeological Discoveries), in Preda’s International Magazine, Jan 2005, p. 148 (also there the possible significance of the Burial Vault North Wall Paintings); idem, in Izvoarele creştinismului românesc, p. 30-33. 635 C. Chera, Necropolele tomitane în contextul lumii romane vestpontice (sec. I-IV p. Chr.) (The Tomis necropoles in the Roman WestPontic world context (1st–4th cent. AD), PhD, Constanţa, 1999, p. 87-88 (ms.).

330

LIVIA BUZOIANU & MARIA BĂRBULESCU: TOMIS (6.15 x 3.90 and 2.90 in height), preceded by a dromos.641 The burial vault seems to have had marble architectural elements.642 The walls are covered by painting set in panels imitating marble. The panels are supported by pilasters with Corinthian capitals;643 these support a fictive architecture including a series of strips and nets superimposed by larger panels with figurative scenes. The panel decoration represents a funerary banquet and two figures praying.644 The banquet scene, rare in the Roman world, is also to be found in Tomis; instead, the praying persons represented, though frequent in the Italian peninsula catacombs, now appear for the first time in Tomis. The monument was dated earlier to the middle of the 4th century AD;645 the tomb was used at the end of the 4th century AD and possibly at the beginning of the 5th century AD.

spiritum naturae suae reddedit) or the deceased is considered a hero, passing through death to be among the gods.648 Finally, on a Tomitan inscription dedicated to the Great Mani and the Eternal Safety, is expressed the belief of the deceased that soon after death he would have to answer for his life (ISM, II, 383, modo post obitum redo meae vitis rationem). It is unnecessary to mention that this is not the judgement of Christian teaching. Nothing in the inscription content justifies such an opinion: either the belief in fatum and the darkness of death, or much less the addressing expression.649 One of the most profound funerary inscriptions in verse appreciated as well by V. Pârvan among the most beautiful of this genre was found long ago in Constanţa (ISM II, 275). Due to the importance of its content we take the liberty of quoting it here almost completely: ‘But the deceased grieves for nothing, as there is no more love for those who passed away, and the deceased person lays as a motionless stone in the middle of the plain, spreading his flesh into the fresh soil (…). Of water, of soil and of breath was I made before. Once dead, I lay here giving everything to all. These are left to everybody. But what more?

Of special importance is a limestone646 plated funerary complex used for collective burials done in stages from the first half of the 3rd century AD until the second half of the 4th century AD. The majority of the individuals were buried in the 3rd century AD. The unusually large number of deceased and the weapons present among the inventory objects have determined a hypothetical connection between these burials with the events in 269 AD, when Tomis was confronted with strong attacks of the allied Goths, Bastarnae, Sarmatians and other migrating populations. The next burials took place probably during the time of Constantine the Great. After Constantius II, the funerary complex was also used by Christians for burying some co-religionists.

Resuming Pârvan’s commentary650 we have to note once again: ‘Nothing is still left of us after our death, not even the soul’. There is no trace of regret, lament, revolt or hope in this inscription in verse. The materiality of human existence is almost trivially expressed, but there are also inscriptions which offer us expressis verbis, occasions to identify essential principles of Christianity. In the sense of the new religion the spirit does not die, but it is given to God (IGLR 2); the individual is not afraid of death as he has the hope of resurrection and eternal life (IGLR 92) or, otherwise as ‘in death is the resurrection’ (in morte resurrection, IGLR 94). Is there any hope in the face of death? Is it, indirectly a hymn to life as Pârvan has seen651 in the pagan inscriptions? For us there is only a statement beyond which we read the Christian reconciliation with fatality.

If we also refer to the funerary inscriptions we reach some conclusions about some life concepts and special attitudes. From this point of view, the funerary inscriptions are among the most expressive documents. Beyond the common elements of content speaking about people’s transience, unforeseen death and the survivors grief, there are also notes accepting the idea that ‘death annihilates all pains’ (ISM II, 188, 166) and ‘everything becomes ashes’ (ISM, II 311), or, on the contrary, life in its spiritual shape continues after death (IGLR 92, 94).647 Other inscriptions affirm, on the contrary, the immortal soul returned by death ‘to its nature’ (ISM, II, 346,

Tomis’s history after the 7th century AD is less known. As with all the western Pontic area, the city undergoes social and economic changes and a process of almost total conversion into a village.

641 Alix Barbet, M. Bucovală, ‘L’hypogée paléochrétien des orants à Constanţa (Roumanie), l’ancienne Tomis’, MEFRA 108 (1996), p. 105158. 642 These marble elements – fragments of colonettes and some fragments of the tomb furniture – were possibly brought from another place, along with the ancient violation of the tomb. 643 The pilasters are coloured light blue, the capitals violet and the achanthus leaves white; the architrave is decorated by longitudinal greenish shadows. 644 One of them bears a nimbus; it is not possible to determine the identity of the person without any epigraphical indication. 645 A few coins representing the burial moment are dated in the second third of the 4th century AD. 646 V. Lungu, C. Chera, ‘Un mormânt în plăci, de epocă romană, descoperit la Tomis’ (A Roman age tomb with slates discovered at Tomis), Pontica 18 (1985), p. 215-231. 647 A. Rădulescu, L. Buzoianu, Elementele de gândire umanistă în unele epigrafe din Dobrogea (Humanist Thought Elements in Some Inscriptions in verse from Dobruja), Istro-Pontica, Tulcea, 2000, p. 241245.

In the 8th century AD, the patriarch Nikephoros of Constantinople mentioned the settlement with the old

648 Becoming a hero is a form of immortality, superior to common survival in Hades. See the commentary of D.M. Pippidi for ISM I, 309. 649 Dis Manibus et Perpetuae Serenitatis is a syntagm often used on 2nd-3rd centuries AD monuments and which expresses in funerary terms the philosophical idea about the complete quietness and the absence of the emotions, passions and troubles when passing to the shadow world; see Fr. Cumont, Recherches sur le symbolisme funéraire des Romains, Paris, 1966. 650 V. Pârvan, Gânduri despre lume şi viaţă la greco-romanii din Pontul Stâng. Memoriale (Thoughts about World and Life at the Greek-Romans from the Left Pont. Memoirs), Cluj, 1973, p. 52-53. 651 V. Pârvan, op. cit., p. 85.

331

ANCIENT GREEK COLONIES IN THE BLACK SEA 2 preserve some elements of pagan influence.658

name Tomis, but as a village (χωρίον).652 The archaeological discoveries of seals and coins seem to indicate the existence of a modest settlement in the second half of the 8th century and the beginning of the 9th, which was named Tomis.653 There follows a hiatus of almost a century for which we do not have any information about the area’s history. Around the middle of the 10th century, the emperor Constantine the Porphirogenet mentions the settlement Constantia without defining more accurately its status of village or city. More archaeological vestiges654 – houses, kilns, domestic pits, inhumation graves – prove the existence of the settlement in the 10th century. Probably Constantia as well is mentioned in the chronicles of Scylitzes and Zonaras, referring to the confrontation at Durostolon in 971 between Ioan Tzimiskes and the prince Sviatoslav of Kiev.655

Seal discoveries and Christian objects present aspects connected with the local community’s economic and religious life. Constanţa is among the few settlements in Dobruja where seals were discovered.659 Two lead Byzantine seals belonging to two Tomis metropolitan bishops (Anicet and Vasile) from the 10th-11th centuries should be mentioned.660 The function of the two metropolitan bishops and the precise title ‘bishop of Tomis’ is, according to I. Barnea, proof of settlement continuity and perpetuation of its city features. Moreover, in the opinion of the same researcher, the two seals above-mentioned represent proof that the metropolitan seat of Tomis continued to exist in parallel with the new established metropolitan seat at Dorostolon, both of them depending directly on the ecumenical Patriarchy of Constantinople.661 Concerning the coinage, the maximum development of the settlement is noted under Roman III (1028-1034). It seems the Pecheneg attacks in 1036 affected Constanţa as well. The last important coin discoveries are dated during the reigns of the Emperors Constantine IX (1042-1055) and Constantine X (10591067). The invasion of Ghuzz in 1064 was the event which seemed to put an end to the settlement’s existence. Though the same consequences could be the result of the uprising of the Paristrian cities, the coin issues between 1067-1081 (during the reigns of the Emperors Roman IV, Mihail VII and Nicephor III) have an incidental characteristic. 12th-14th century issues have the same features;662 only a few pieces from Theodor I Lascaris and Ioan III Ducas Vatatzes could suggest a revival in the 13th century. In the 14-15th centuries the names of Constantia, Constanza or Constansa are recorded, toponymical variants of present Constanţa.

After Byzantine rule came back to the Lower Danube during the time of the Emperor Ioan Tzimiskes (971), and thema Paristrion (Paradunavon) was organized in this region, the old Tomis underwent a new period of prosperity.656 For political-administrative reasons, the core of the new province was moved to Durostolon (Silistra, Bulgaria). It is assumed the settlement had a system of fortifications, but they have not yet been found in the area;657 an uncertain late precinct from the 12th13th centuries found in the port area is difficult to identify. It could be a new building or the reconstruction of a pre-existing wall from the 10th-11th centuries. Vestiges, though, from the end of the 10th century and the beginning of the 11th have been discovered in the territory of the old city, as well as habitation centres scattered over a broad area; they belonged to some rural settlements around Constanţa. A necropolis from the 10th-11th centuries has also been studied at Tomis. The necropolis in the area of the ‘Portul’ sports-ground could be contemporary with the last habitation period. The graves, though the majority observe the Christian rite,

ABBREVIATIONS ArchMold ARMSI

652

I. Barnea, DID III, Bucureşti, 1971, p. 9. Gh. Mănucu-Adameşteanu, ‘Tomis-Constantia-Constanţa’, Pontica 24 (1991), p. 302-303 note 17 (monetary discoveries) and note 19 (epigraphical discoveries); the author advances his doubt that here could have existed an Episcopal centre. 654 C. Cârjan, ‘Ceramica de epocă feudal timpurie descoperită pe teritoriul oraşului Constanţa’ (Early Middle Age Ceramics Discovered on the Territory of Constanţa City), Pontice 2 (1969), p. 373-394; A. Rădulescu, ‘Contribution a une meilleure connaissance du répertoire archéologique du Haut Moyen Age en Dobrodja’, Actes du VIIIe Congrès des Sciences Préhistoriques et Protohistoriques, Prague, II, 1971, p. 981; I. Barnea, op.cit., p. 243; Gh. Mănucu-Adameşteanu, op.cit., p. 303-307. The last author relating the monetary discoveries from Constanţa to the Byzantine Empire historical realities, considers the settlement was established here between 927-941 as a supporting area on the coast for the Byzantines destined to facilitate their control upon navigation in the Danube mouths area. 655 I. Barnea, op.cit., p. 73-74; see also Fontes III, Bucureşti, 1975, p. 141; for different interpretations occasioned by the mention of Constantia beside ‘the other cities beyond Istros’, see Gh. MănucuAdameşteanu, op. cit., p. 316-317 and notes 54-56. 656 For the early Middle Age settlement from Tomis, see also I. Barnea, DID III, p. 15 and 20; idem, Byzantinische Bleisiegel aus Rumänien, in Byzantina 13 (1985), p. 298. 657 R. Florescu, Ghid arheologic al Dobrogei (Dobruja Archaeological Guide), Bucureşti, 1968, p. 29-30.

BCH

653

Arheologia Moldovei, Iaşi-Bucureşti. Academia Română. Memoriile Secţiunii Istorice, Bucureşti. Bulletin de Correspondance Hellénique, Atena-Paris.

658 Researches from 1986, unpublished; the necropolis noticed by Gh. Mănucu-Adameşteanu, op.cit., p. 321 with information quoted from the researchers who found it. 659 I. Barnea, ‘Plombs byzantins de la collection Michel C. Soutzo’, RÉSEE, 7 (1969), p. 32-33; RÉSEE 24 (1986), 2, p. 117; Gh. MănucuAdameşteanu, op.cit., p. 320. 660 The seals found probably in Istanbul have been published in Catalogue of Byzantine seals at Dumbarton Oaks and in the Fogg Museum at Art, I, Washington, D.C., 1991, p. 180-181 (ed. John Nesbitt and Nicolas Oikonomides); see information at I. Barnea, ‘Date noi despre mitropolia Tomisului’ (New Data about the Metropolitan seat of Tomis), Pontica 24 (1991), p. 279-281. 661 The bishops from Dobruja north half would have depended on the Metropolitan Seat of Tomis in the 11-12th centuries, Tomis and Durostolon metropolitan seats existed probably until the Asans’ uprising (1186) as long as thema Paristrion existed. Doubts concerning Tomis recognition as an important Orthodox centre at Gh. MănucuAdameşteanu, op.cit., p. 320. 662 Gh. Mănucu-Adameşteanu, op.cit., p. 323-324, notes 84, 85 and the table at p. 324.

332

LIVIA BUZOIANU & MARIA BĂRBULESCU: TOMIS BCMI BJ BMI BSNR BZ Dacia

Epigraphica Fontes IDR IGB Klio Latomus LP MBAH MÉFRA MINAC

Buletinul Comisiunii Monumentelor Istorice, Bucureşti. Bonner Jahrbücher des Rheinischen Landesmuseums in Bonn. Buletinul Monumentelor Istorice, Bucureşti. Buletinul Societăţii Numismatice Române, Bucureşti. Byzantinische Zeitschrift, München. Dacia. Recherches et Découvertes Archéologiques en Roumanie, Bucureşti; seria nouă (NS); Dacia Revue d’Archéologie et d’Histoire Ancienne, Bucureşti. Epigraphica. Travaux dédiés au VIIe Congrès International d’Épigraphie Grecque et Latine, Constantza, 9-15 septembre 1977. Fontes Historiae Dacoromanae (= Izvoare privind istoria României), vol. I-IV, Bucureşti. Inscripţiile Daciei Romane, Bucureşti. Inscriptiones Graecae in Bulgaria Repertae (ed. G. Mihailov), vol. I, Sofia, 1970. Klio. Beiträge zur alten Geschichte, Leipzig/Berlin. Latomus. Revue d’études latines, Bruxelles. B.E. Thomasson, Laterculi praesidum I (1984), II (1972-1980), III (1990). Münstersche Beiträge zur Antiken Handel geschichte, Münster. Mélanges de l’École Française de Rome, Antiquité, Paris-Roma. Muzeul de Istorie Naţională şi Arheologie Constanţa (institution).

Pact

Peuce PIR PME Pontica Pulpudeva QC RA RÉG RÉSEE RRH SCN SCIV(A) StCls. Thraco-Dacica Tyche

333

Revue du groupe européen d’études pour les techniques physiques, chimiques et mathématiques appliquées à l’archéologie, Strasbourh. Peuce. Studii şi comunicări de istorie şi arheologie, Tulcea. Prosopographia Imperii Romani, saec. I-III (ed. 2), Berlin-Leipzig. M. Devijver, Prosopographia Militiarum Equestrium quae fuerunt ab Augusto ad Gallienum, Louvain, 1976-1993. Pontica, Constanţa, Muzeul de Istorie Naţională şi Arheologie. Pulpudeva. Semaines philippopolitaines de l’histoire et de la culture, Sofia. Quaderni catanesi di studi classici e medievali, Catane. Revue Archéologique, Paris. Revue des Études Grecques, Paris. Revue des Études Sud-Est Européennes, Bucureşti. Revue Roumaine d’Histoire, Bucureşti. Studii şi Cercetări Numismatice, Bucureşti. Studii şi Cercetări de Istorie Veche (şi Arheologie), Bucureşti. Studii Clasice, Bucureşti. Thraco-Dacica, Bucureşti, Institutul de Thracologie. Tyche. Beiträge zur alten Geschichte. Papyrologie und Epigraphik, Vienne.

ANCIENT GREEK COLONIES IN THE BLACK SEA 2

Figure 1. Constanţa: the peninsular area covered by the ancient city Tomis (archaeological discoveries).

Figure 2. Statues of the sculptures thesaure: a) Glykon; b) Fortuna with Pontos; c) Nemesis; d) Hecate. 334

LIVIA BUZOIANU & MARIA BĂRBULESCU: TOMIS

Figure 3. Archaeological discoveries: a) Roman-Byzantine precincts; b) the crypt basilica.

Figure 4. The Roman Mosaic Edifice: a) view from the storehouses; b) view from interior; c) the pavement (detail).

335

ANCIENT GREEK COLONIES IN THE BLACK SEA 2

Figure 5a. Painted tomb hypogeum

Figure 5b. Painted tomb hypogeum

336

Necropoles Grecques du Pont Gauche: Istros, Orgamé, Tomis, Callatis Vasilica Lungu*

40 tumuli sur un total estimé à 1000 environ, dispersés sur une surface de 5 km2 à la périphérie ouest de la ville2. Au moment du début des fouilles, la nécropole était à peu près intacte, à l’exception de quelques tumuli pillés, peu nombreux. Les découvertes fortuites sont assez isolées3.

Introduction L’évolution historique des colonies fondées par Milet aux VIIe-VIe siècles av.J.-C. sur la côte ouest du Pont-Euxin va de pair avec la généralisation d’un ensemble diversifié de manifestations funéraires. Leur analyse relève de différentes traditions de recherche mises en évidence par l’histoire même des fouilles pratiquées depuis le XIXe siècle à Tomis et Callatis et seulement à partir du milieu du XXe siècle à Istros et Orgamé. Les recherches de deux premières cités ont été essentiellement influencées par le fait que les restes antiques de Tomis et Callatis sont recouverts en grande partie par les agglomérations modernes de Constantza et de Mangalia, alors que, par un heureux hasard, les deux autres sites ont été épargnés par les aménagements modernes. C’est ainsi qu’à Istros et à Orgamé, les investigations ont pu déboucher sur des études exhaustives et systématiques, alors que, dans le cas de Tomis et Callatis, il existe un net décalage entre la masse des données livrées notamment par les fouilles de sauvetage et l’état actuel de nos connaissances, les méthodes de fouille employées ayant engendré de graves lacunes dans notre documentation.

Les premières recherches ont livré essentiellement des tombes tumulaires de dimensions variées (grandes, moyennes et petites), ainsi qu’une série de tombes planes, regroupées en cimetières ou isolées parmi les tombes tumulaires. Elles on permis également un ensemble d’observations sur la topographie des tumuli, sur les pratiques funéraires, ainsi que sur les étapes chronologiques de l’occupation de l’espace funéraire. Organisation de la nécropole A l’intérieur de la nécropole d’Istros, les tumuli forment manifestement deux ensembles distincts: l’un à l’ouest de la cité antique, l’autre au nord et nord-ouest. A en juger d’après la configuration actuelle de la nécropole et les observations des photos aériennes, les tumuli sont plus nombreux au voisinage de la cité et se raréfient vers la périphérie de la nécropole.

Au vu des résultats des recherches menées sur ces quatre sites, il semble donc intéressant, dans un premier temps, d’examiner les pratiques funéraires de cet espace géographique, tant à partir des publications plus anciennes que des travaux récents. On prendra principalement en compte ici les trouvailles des sites du littoral ouest du Pont-Euxin - Istros, Orgamé, Tomis et Callatis -, dont les rapports avec les populations indigènes - Scythes, Gètes et Thraces - ont été particulièrement développés (fig. 1).

La nécropole est délimitée au nord-ouest par un fossé et un vallum, aujourd’hui en grande partie comblés et peu discernables, s’étirant en direction O-SO / E-NE. Ces deux dispositifs composent le système de démarcation de la nécropole ; ils ont été mentionnés pour la première fois par Pamfil Polonic sur une esquisse d’Istros réalisée en 1890 et sont bien visibles sur les photos aériennes. Ils bordent la zone de concentration maximale des tumuli et ont dû former, avant même l’époque hellénistique, la ligne de séparation entre les nécropoles de la ville et le territoire agricole de celle-ci4. Le vallum a été érigé à l’aide de deux couches de terre au dessus du sol antique. Par endroits, il est traversé par des routes antiques qui reliaient la ville à sa chôra, à peu près à égale distance les unes des autres, selon un module de 460 m. Le fossé, de 10 m de largeur et d’une profondeur moyenne de 2,50 m est creusé du côté est de ce vallum. Le contenu est formé de terre brune noirâtre, sans aucun autre aménagement ni mobilière, à l’exception d’un fragment d’amphore d’Héraclée Pontique, qui pourrait être une intrusion tardive.

ISTROS Les vestiges de la cité et la nécropole d’Istros se sont conservés au fil des siècles, depuis leur abandon jusqu’aux premières fouilles, offrant ainsi la possibilité d’y entreprendre des recherches à la fois méthodiques et étendues (fig. 2)1. Les premières investigations archéologiques sur la nécropole d’Istros ont débuté en 1955 sous la direction du professeur Petre Alexandrescu qui, au terme de sept campagnes de fouilles menées jusqu’en 1961, a dégagé ∗

2

Dr. Vasilica Lungu is Senior Researcher of Classical Archaeology, Institute of Southeast European Studies, Romanian Academy, and Address of the Institute: 13, Calea 13 Septembrie street, Bucharest. tel. 0040 21 318 24 29 fax. 0040 21 318 24 22 E-mail: [email protected] 1 Sur la problematique d'habitat, Avram 2003, p. 279-340, avec la bibliographie.

Alexandrescu 1957, p. 55-69; 1959, 289-299; 1960; 255-264; 1962a, 415-422; 1962a, p. 325-336 ; 1963a, 212-213; 1963b, p. 257-265 ; 1965a, p. 163-184 ; 1965b, p. 336-339 ; 1966, p. 133-294 ; 1971a, p. 77-86; 1971b, p. 319-325 ; 1978a, p. 331-342 ; 1994b, p. 15-32 ; 1999, p. 117-137; Alexandrescu, Ieftimie 1959, p. 143-164. 3 Marinescu Bîlcu 1969, p. 587-595. Il s’agit d’un tumulus situé à 2 km environ sud-ouest de la cité. 4 Alexandrescu 1985, p. 49 ; 1999, p. 60-61.

337

ANCIENT GREEK COLONIES IN THE BLACK SEA 2 Les tumuli sont répartis en groupements plus ou moins importants à l’intérieur de la nécropole, en relation avec le réseau routier de la ville. Le tracé des routes antiques révèle l’existence de lotissements au sein de l’espace funéraire5. A côté des aires déjà occupées par des groupes de tumuli, on constate aussi, dans l'évolution historique de la cité, l'existence de plusieurs parcelles réservées intentionnellement à de nouvelles sépultures, conçues peut-être pour les nouveaux colons6.

situés à l’extérieur de la nécropole de la cité sont à rapporter à une population agraire de type mixhellène, établie dans le territoire d’Istros. Les premières recherches de surface et les premiers relevés aerophotogrammétriques ont permis d’identifier plusieurs groupements de tumuli entre les limites du village moderne d’Istria et du lac Sinoe, ou entre le village d’Istria et celui de Tuzla, sur la route qui relie la cité d’Istros à l’établissement de Nuntaşi. Leur présence témoigne du développement de kleroi dans la chôra d’Istros, identifiés sous la forme de lotissements de dimensions standard de 500-600 m x 200 m, proches de ceux de Chersonèse, de Métaponte ou d’Héraclée10.

L'étude consacrée par P. Alexandrescu à l'aménagement spatial de la nécropole tumulaire de la ville a mis en évidence la présence de deux systèmes distincts dans la distribution des routes antiques, avec des orientations différentes quoique se recouvrant partiellement7. Le premier se compose d’une série de routes en ligne droite se recoupant parfois à angle droit selon des directions nord-sud et est-ouest. Elles découpent l’aire de la nécropole en une série de lotissements rectangulaires. Le deuxième système vient se greffer sur le précédent dans la partie septentrionale de la nécropole et se raccorde d’une certaine façon avec le premier. Cette fois, les trajets de routes sont plus ou moins rectilignes, distribués selon des directions ouest-nord-ouest / sud-sud-est et est-nordest / ouest-sud-ouest respectivement. Les différences résultent de la mise en place de nouveaux parcellaires funéraires, correspondant à un redécoupage, selon une direction nord-sud - est-ouest, du premier système susmentionné8.

Un cas particulier est constitué par le tumulus XXVIII [1], daté du Ve s. av. J.-C.11, sous lequel ont été dégagées les galeries d'une soi-disant “catacombe” du Moyen Age creusée dans le lœss. La structure, les dimensions et les détails de cette construction ne sont pas sans rappeler la forme des tombes à loculi multiples répartis sur un ou deux étages d’époque hellénistique excavées dans la roche de Zeytintepe à Milet (Forbeck 2002, fig. 3, Grab 2). N'aurait-on pas affaire aussi à une tombe grecque du même genre, réutilisée à l’époque byzantine? Tombes de la chora d’Istros Le caractère limité des recherches menées jusqu’à présent sur la chôra d’Istros explique le nombre restreint des découvertes funéraires. Parmi les plus anciennes, on peut citer les nécropoles à inhumations de Corbu de Jos, datées à partir de 500 av. J.-C. - début du Ve s. av. J.C.12, de Nuntaşi13 et d’Histria-Bent, près du village actuel d'Istria14. Toutes ces nécropoles sont situées jusqu'à 18 km vers l’intérieur des terres. Un tumulus isolé à tombe d'inhumation a été signalé en 1952 à 600 m de village de Tariverde15.

La mise en relation des tumuli avec le réseau routier antique a permis de procéder à toute une série d’observations faisant ressortir les particularités de la nécropole d’Istros. En effet, il semble que les tumuli n’aient jamais été recoupés par la moindre route, ni principale, ni secondaire. Par contre, celles-ci ont influé sur la distribution des tumuli, répartis tout au long de leurs trajets. Malheureusement, à la suite d’un phénomène naturel de transgression marine, qui a fait remonter le niveau des eaux et recouvert partiellement la zone archéologique de la proximité de la ville, nous ne sommes plus en mesure de suivre aujourd’hui ces trajets jusqu’aux alentours immédiats de la ville. Il existe toutefois des raisons suffisantes pour penser que la nécropole a dû s’arrêter, d’un côté, sous les remparts de la cité, et de l’autre côté, se perdre dans l’intérieur des terres de la Dobroudja9.

La nécropole de Corbu a été découverte lors de fouilles de sauvetage en 1969. Les données recueillies à cette occasion portent sur 7 tombes à inhumation, trouvées très bouleversées au moment de la découverte. Malgré cela, on a pu établir quelques unes des caractéristiques de ces tombes, organisées au sein d’une nécropole plane. C’est ainsi que l’on a identifié la présence de deux types des 10

Doruţiu-Boila 1971, p. 44-45. Alexandrescu 1966, p. 174-176 et p. 232-235. Le fond d’amphore mentionné dans le tumulus XXVIII d’Istros, cf. Alexandrescu 1966, p. 176 et pl. 89, est susceptible de représenter un fond d’Amphore de Mende du dernier quart du Ve s. av. J.-C., cf. S. Yu. Monachov, Grecheskie amfori v Prichernomorije. Typologija amfor veduthih tsentrov-eksporterov tovarov v keramicheskoi tare, Moskva, Saratov 2003, p. 89-90, variante I-A-2, datée du deuxième quart du Ve s. av.J.C. 12 Bucovala, Irimia 1971, p. 41-56 ; Teleaga 1999, p. 33-44 ; Avram 2001, p. 599 ; 2003, p. 291; Buzoianu 2001, p. 131-132. 13 Radulescu 1961, p. 377-393 ; Bucovala, Irimia 1971, p. 52. 14 Zirra 1970, p. 213-220; Zirra 1985, p. 56 (104 tombes d’inhumation et d’incinération) ; Avram 2001, p. 600 ; 2003, p. 291; Buzoianu 2001, p. 133 ; Teleaga, Zirra 2003. 15 Condurachi et collab. 1952, p. 272-274 ; Buzoianu 2001, p. 135 ; Ruscu 2002, p. 46, note 52. 11

D’autres tumuli sont encore visibles, formant d’importantes concentrations autour des établissements antiques ; dispersés à travers la chôra d’Istros, ils sont de plus en plus rares à mesure que l’on s’éloigne vers l’intérieur de la Dobroudja. Les groupements tumulaires 5 D. Adameşteanu 1967, 'Histria II', comptes-rendus, Archaeologia Classica, p. 374 et suiv. ; Alexandrescu 1999, p. 62, note 21. 6 Alexandrescu 1999, p. 64. 7 Alexandrescu 1971a, p. 77-85 ; 1978a, p. 331-342 ; 1999, p.48- 65. 8 Alexandrescu 1999, p. 62. 9 Selon les observations de D. Adameşteanu, cf. Alexandrescu 1999, p. 62, note 21.

338

VASILICA LUNGU: NECROPOLES GRECQUES DU PONT GAUCHE: ISTROS, ORGAMÉ, TOMIS, CALLATIS lécythe25, soit par un alabastron ou des œnochoés de la Grèce de l'Est ou de production locale26. Du IVe s. av. J.C. jusque dans la première moitié du IIIe s. av. J.C., on constate des changements dans la structure du mobilier funéraire : les objets de parure sont maintenant plus fréquents ; ce sont maintenant les unguentaria qui prédominent, au détriment des lécythes, caractéristiques des phases plus anciennes ; la coutume de déposer des monnaies, correspondant à l’obole faite à Charon, fait son apparition27. A partir du milieu du IIIe s. av. J.-C. les tombes deviennent manifestement plus pauvres qu’auparavant, un fait qui pourrait être lié à un appauvrissement de la communauté ou à un changement dans sa composition. Appartenant à la dernière phase de la nécropole, la tombe no 33 semble être la plus récente, datée par une fibule du type de La Tène III du Ier s. av. J.-C.28 La nécropole a été attribuée à une population grecque installée dans la chôra d’Istros, au tout début de l'aménagement de son territoire.

constructions funéraires, consistant en tombes en ciste de pierre (6 tombes) et tombes en fosse simple sans protection (1 tombe). Les tombes se signalent par leur orientation commune est-ouest, à la mode grecque, une pratique fréquente parmi les découvertes funéraires du Pont Gauche. Les mobiliers funéraires sont dominés par des objets d'origine grecque, notamment des vases céramiques d’importation de très bonne qualité. Les formes identifiées consistent en un vase-couronne nordionien16, un lécythe à figures noires du groupe d'Athènes 581, du groupe Phanyllis, du début du Ve s. av. J.-C.17, une coupe-attique à pied type C18, une olpé19. Parfois, ces vases prouvent des analogies avec les mobiliers d'Istros20. La nécropole d’Histria Bent a également été identifié au cours de fouilles de sauvetage en 1960-196121. On a dénombré jusqu’à présent dans cette nécropole un total de 104 tombes à inhumation, datées du VIe au Ier s. av. J.-C. et identifié trois autres complexes funéraires. Les adultes étaient enterrés, soit en position dorsale, soit en position accroupie, dans des fosse ovales ou rectangulaires, à l’exception d’une tombe d’adolescent en larnax, datée de la fin du VIe s. av. J.-C. Les tombes à enchythrismoi, au nombre de sept, étaient réservées aux enfants. Sur les 104 tombes, 36 étaient accompagnées d’un mobilier funéraire, comprenant notamment des récipients à huile et des vases à boire, ainsi que des objets personnels.

Une autre nécropole a été localisée dans la chora d’Istros, à 1 km environ de village de Nuntaşi29. A la suite d’une fouille de sauvetage effectuée dans les années soixante, on a pu constater la présence de plusieurs tombes à inhumation, déjà détruites au moment de l’intervention. Une seule tombe a été fouillée systématiquement. Elle correspond à une inhumation accompagnée d’un très riche mobilier grec, où dominent les vases céramiques. Ainsi, à côté d’un miroir en bronze30, on a récupéré aussi un lécythe à décor de palmettes31, un canthare attique à vernis noir et à lèvre en corniche32, un scyphos attique à vernis noir33, une amphore de Thasos à timbre34 et plusieurs fragments de vases modelés. Les formes attiques identifiées sont assez habituelles sur les sites du Pont Gauche au IVe s. av. J.-C. Les meilleures indices pour la datation fine de la tombe sont fournis par le fabricant Pyllades du timbre de l’amphore thasienne35, datable du milieu du IVe siècle av. J.-C.

Parmi les formes céramiques, on trouve des œnochoés, des plats à poissons, des lampes, ainsi que des lécythes ovoïdes en provenance de la Grèce de l'Est22. Cinq tombes renfermaient des vases-couronnes. Quant à la céramiques locale, elle est représentée par quelques exemples de « tasses à anse surélevée » de production histrienne23 et par des vases modelés à décor imprimé. Les plus anciennes tombes remontent au début du VIe s. av.J.-C.24 Les tombes se succèdent par ordre chronologique, couvrant la première moitié du VIe s. av. J.-C. Elles sont caractérisées par des mobiliers funéraires plus riches que ceux des tombes du Ve s. av. J.-C., qui sont plutôt pauvres, voire absents. Parfois on trouve un seul objet comme offrande, constitué soit par un

Les tombes à inhumation identifiées dans les nécropoles de Corbu, d'Histria-Bent et de Nuntaşi partagent donc très peu des pratiques funéraires voisines avec celles des 25 Alexandrescu 1978b, p. 104, note 29 et cat. 684-685 ; Zirra 1970, p. 216-217, fig. 30 ; Teleaga, Zirra 2003, la tombe no 22, pl. 5.6 ; 17.4 ; 29.1. 26 Pour 'oinochoé de facture locale de la tombe 31,Zirra 1970, p. 215 ; Alexandrescu 1978b, p. 100, cat. 656 ; Teleaga, Zirra 2003, p. 18, no 31.1 pl. 18.4 ; 32.2-3, voir Dupont, dans Coja, Dupont 1979, p. 143, cat. 306. 27 Teleaga, Zirra 2003, les tombes nos 1, (p. 12), 19 (p. 16) et 45 (p. 20). L'usage des monnaies est vu par les auteurs de l'étude comme argument pour le caractère grec de la nécropole d'Histria-Bent. 28 Zirra 1970, p. 219; Teleaga, Zirra 2003, p. 18, pl. 18.1. 29 Radulescu 1961, p. 387-393. 30 Radulescu 1961, p. 389, fig. 1; Teleaga 1999, p. 41, fig.3. 31 Radulescu 1961, p. 390-391, fig. 5; Teleaga 1999, p. 38-39, fig. 5.1 (IVe s. Av. J.-C.). 32 Radulescu 1961, p. 390, fig. 3; Teleaga 1999, p. 39-40, fig. 5.4 (375350 av. J.-C.). 33 Radulescu 1961, p. 390, fig. 4a-b; ; Teleaga 1999, p. 39, fig. 5.3 (début du Ive s av.J-C.). 34 Radulescu 1961, p. 388-389, fig. 2; ; Teleaga 1999, p. 40, fig. 2. 35 Teleaga 1999, p. 40, no 5 fig. 2 ; Garlan 1999, p. 73-75.

16 Bucovala, Irimia 1971, p. 48-49, fig. 6a-b ; Alexandrescu 1978b, p. 107, cat 698 bis ; Teleaga 1999, p. 36, fig. 4.4. 17 Bucovala, Irimia 1971, p. 43-44, fig. 2a-b ; Alexandrescu 1978b, p. 69, cat 331 ; Teleaga 1999, p. 34, fig. 4.1. 18 Bucovala, Irimia 1971, p. 42, fig. 1a-b ; Alexandrescu 1978b, p. 8283, cat 518 ; Teleaga 1999, p. 34-35, fig. 1. 19 Bucovala, Irimia 1971, p. 44, fig. 3 ; Alexandrescu 1978b, p. 118, cat. 10 ; Teleaga 1999, p. 36, fig. 4.2 20 La coupe attique à pied de la tombe no 1, Bucovala, Irimia 1971, p. 42, ressemble à l'exemplaire de la tombe 22, no 14, de la nécropole d'Istros, Alexandrescu 1966, p. 167, tumulus XXII. 14, pl. 73 et 87 ; 1978b, p. 82-83, no 518. 21 Zirra 1970, p. 213-220 ; Irimia 1983, p. 71; Zirra 1985, p. 56 ; Teleaga, Zirra 2003. 22 Alexandrescu 1978b, p. 104, cat 683, 688, fig. 23. 23 Alexandrescu 1978b, p. 113, cat. 738. 24 Zirra 1970, p. 213-214 ; Teleaga, Zirra 2003, p. 12-13, la tombe no 3, pl. 2.2,4 ;14 ; 28.5 ; 30.1-3, dont le mobilier contient une écuelle modelée et un bol à rosettes du début du VIe s. av. J.-C

339

ANCIENT GREEK COLONIES IN THE BLACK SEA 2 tombes de la nécropole de la cité d'Istros. En même temps, il ne faut pas absolutiser une telle remarque, alors que les excavations sont si réduites encore dans la nécropole principale d’Istros. Ce qu’on connaît aujourd’hui est que, par rapport à la pratique de l’incinération dominante dans la nécropole principale d’Istros, celle de l’inhumation est dominante dans ces tombes de la périphérie d’Istros et elle est pratiquée aussi par la population indigène établie dans la contrée environnante, surtout dans les tombes attribuées aux Scythes et au populations « d’origine sud-thrace » établies en Dobroudgea36. La situation des rites funéraires étudiés dans les nécropoles identifiées jusqu'à présent dans la chora d'Istros s'avère différente par rapport à celle de la ville même, et par contre, elle s’avère proche de celles de nombreuses autres nécropoles du monde grec. Nous disposons donc de toute une série d’indices permettant de penser que l’on a affaire ici à pratiques funéraires caractéristiques de diverses populations grecques-ioniennes établies à côté d'autres populations dans la chôra d’Istros, dès les premiers temps de l'aménagement de son territoire.

tombes des deux rites en ce qui concerne l’orientation est-ouest du défunt, tant dans les tombes-bûchers que dans les tombes d’inhumation, et la disposition des offrandes. En effet, on trouve toujours un groupe d’offrandes déposé à l’intérieur de la tombe, sur le bûcher ou bien dans le cercueil ou encore sur le sol aux côtés du défunt, et un deuxième groupe d’offrandes hors de la tombe, sur le niveau du sol antique, en bordure du tumulus, mais encore recouvert par celui-ci. P. Alexandrescu associe ce dernier groupe à une pratique funéraire en rapport avec une des phases de la construction du tumulus39. Les plus anciens tumuli (XX, XVII, XIX), datés de 550 à 525 av. J.-C. environ40, sont de moyennes dimensions jusqu’à 11 m de diamètre -, et se signalent par un mode de construction particulier, consistant une superposition de plusieurs couches de terre, parfois renforcées de pierres. Certains tumuli ont été entourés d’un fossé circulaire, quelquefois pavé des pierres, où on a déposé des offrandes41. A l’intérieur de ces tumuli, on a signalé parfois la présence de plate-formes de terre de faible hauteur la surface du bûcher ou sur toute la surface de tumulus42.

Pratiques funéraires Les recherches, menées par P. Alexandrescu dans diverses zones de la nécropole, de part et d’autre des lacs Istria et Sinoé (fig. 2) ont eu pour but d’établir la séquence chronologique et territoriale des tumuli. Les résultats ont mis en évidence la présence d’un noyau initial situé sur la plage en bordure du lac Sinoé et sur les hauteurs avoisinantes, où ont été retrouvées les plus anciennes tombes de la nécropole (Tumuli XVII, XIX et XX), datées du troisième quart du VIe s. av. J.-C. Le développement de la nécropole d’époque grecque s’est poursuivi sur les versants du plateau de la péninsule et, également, aux environs immédiats de la ville. Les derniers tumuli, par ordre chronologique, ceux d’époque romaine, ont été identifiés à la périphérie nord-ouest de la nécropole tumulaire et leur localisation constitue un indice précieux, permettant de fixer la limite de la nécropole grecque37.

Les tombes tumulaires d’époque hellénistique continuent les pratiques funéraires des époques anciennes. Parfois, elles se signalent par leur caractère modeste, voire même misérable dans certains cas, qui se traduit par l’absence de constructions intérieures au sein des tumuli et par l’appauvrissement manifeste des mobiliers funéraires43. Tombes à incinération Les tombes à incinération, bien identifiables dans la plupart des cas, présentent une variété typologique importante pour l’étude des pratiques funéraires de la colonie milésienne. Elles se répartissent en deux groupes principaux, en fonction du lieu de crémation du défunt : on distingue ainsi des tombes-bûchers, lorsque l’incinération a été réalisée à l’emplacement même du tumulus, et des tombes sans bûcher, où l’incinération a été effectuée en dehors de la zone de tumulus44. Au sein de chaque type principal, Alexandrescu distingue encore plusieurs variantes. Dans le groupe des tombes à bûcher de surface, le critère distinctif retenu dans l’étude des complexes fouillés réside dans la configuration de la fosse de combustion. La répartition détaillée de ceux-ci permet de distinguer des tombes à bûcher de surface, sans fosse de combustion (type JAaI) ; des tombes à bûcher de surface, à fosse de combustion de formes variées (type JAaII – de forme circulaire ; type JAaIII – de forme

A l'époque grecque, le rite le plus fréquemment attesté dans la nécropole d’Istros est celui de l’incinération, dans la proportion de 4,5 : 1 par rapport aux tombes à inhumation. Le caractère restreint des recherches sur les nécropoles planes de la cité fait que ces chiffres n’ont encore qu’une valeur indicative38. L’analyse du matériel exhumé a mis en évidence des traits communs aux 36 Voir aussi, Avram 2003, p. 292 ; Simion 2003, la nécropole de Celic Dére, p. 247-258, ou celle de Ciucurova, p. 187-206, et p. 250. 37 Alexandrescu 1962, p. 326; 1963b, p. 259; 1999, p. 60-64. 38 P. Alexandrescu postulait en 1966, p. 273, l’existence des nécropoles planes à Istros en partant de la présence des stèles funéraires parmis les ruines de la cité. Un cas d’une stèle implantée dans un tumulus (TB95) identifié à Orgamé montre également la présence des stèles dans des tumuli, voir Lungu 2000a, fig. 5.3 et 5.4 ; 2004c, p. 49-60. Donc, on pourra suggèrer que, au moin en partie, les stèles d’Istros peuvent être attribuées aux tumuli présents en grand nombre dans l’espace de la nécropole.

39

Alexandrescu 1966, p. 267-272. Alexandrescu 1966, p. 273. 41 Les tumuli XVII, XIX, XX, Alexandrescu 1966, p. 146-150 ; p. 150155 ; p. 143-146 et p. 236. 42 Les tumuli XX, XVII, XIX, XXII, XXVIII, XXX, XXXVI, Alexandrescu 1966, p. 143-146 ; p. 146-150 ; p. 150-155 ; p. 162-168 ; p. 174-176 ; p. 197-200 ; p. 201-204 et p. 236. 43 Tumulus XXV, Alexandrescu 1966, p. 196 et p. 278. 44 Alexandrescu 1965a, p. 164. 40

340

VASILICA LUNGU: NECROPOLES GRECQUES DU PONT GAUCHE: ISTROS, ORGAMÉ, TOMIS, CALLATIS rectangulaire ou ovale ; type JAaIV – de plan cruciforme; type JAaV – de forme ovale ; type JAaVI – en gradins). Parfois les tombes sont situées à proximité du bûcher sous le même tumulus. Les complexes de ce genre se répartissent entre des tombes à bûcher de surface, sans fosse de combustion (JAbI) ; des tombes à bûcher aménagé dans une fosse de combustion ovale (JAbV) ; tombes à bûcher aménagé dans une fosse circulaire profonde (JAbVII).

la forme des fosses de combustion, rectangulaires ou ovales, et l’orientation est - ouest ou nord - sud. Dans les tombes où les incinérations ont été effectuées hors du tumulus, les dépôts cinéraires occupent une place restreinte à l’intérieur du tumulus (type JB1) ou sont déposés dans une fosse (type JB2) ou dans une urne (type JB3) à l’intérieur du tumulus. Les tombes à incinération effectuée hors du tumulus ne sont pas aussi variées, ni aussi nombreuses que les autres types. Dans ce groupe, on retrouve des tombes à incinération hors de la tombe, avec dépôt cinéraire au niveau du sol antique ou dans une fosse, le tout recouvert par le tumulus. Les données publiées omettent de préciser que tous les restes du bûcher ont été collectés en vue d’être enterrés47. Les objets d’offrandes sont toujours brisés et brûlés, leur restauration complète s’avérant impossible. La chronologie de ces types de tombes oscille entre le Ve s. av. J-C. et l’époque romaine.

Dans les tombes à incinération du premier type, (type JAaI), le bûcher se présente sous la forme d’une zone fortement rubéfiée au niveau du sol antique, de dimensions variant de 3 à 6 m de diamètre. Les restes de la crémation, parfois abondants, sont conservés en place et rassemblent, outre des ossements humains fortement calcinés, des cendres, des fragments de bois carbonisé, des vases d’offrandes toujours brisés et parfois incomplets, ainsi que d’autres objets de mobilier soumis au feu. Il semble que les objets déposés comme offrandes avant d’allumer le bûcher aient été disposés auprès du défunt, leur distribution coïncidant parfois avec celle du cadavre sur le bûcher. Dans le tumulus XIX, qui se signale par une orientation nord-sud du bûcher, tous les objets étaient tournés dans la même direction que les restes osseux45.

Tombes à inhumation La proportion réduite de tombes à inhumation se limite à quelques exemples trouvés sous tumuli (Tumuli I et XVIII) ou à découvert48. Les tombes à inhumation sous tumulus renferment des cadavres déposés dans un cercueil ou dans une fosse, délimitée par une rangée de pierres sur trois côtés. Les défunts ont été toujours déposés en décubitus dorsal, avec la tête à l’est. Les deux tombes tumulaires ont livré des vases d’offrandes.

On constate parfois des pratiques particulières dans le traitement de restes du bûcher : dans le tumulus XIX, on a ramassé les restes de crémation trouvés à la périphérie du bûcher tout en laissant intacte la zone centrale, recouverte ensuite par le tumulus, et on a déplacé une partie des restes carbonisés en dehors du tumulus46.

Constatant leur présence, Alexandrescu n’exclut pas la possibilité que ce rite de l’inhumation ait pu être plus fréquent, à certaines périodes, dans des tombes planes signalées par la présence des stèles funéraires49 et à en juger d’après les exemples de plusieurs colonies grecques pontiques, à Olbia50, Apollonia51 etc. Il s’appuie aussi sur le fait que certaines nécropoles de la chora d’Istros, datant de VIe-Ier siècles av. J.-C., témoignent du même rite52.

Les tombes à incinération placées sous des tumuli élevés au dessus du bûcher présentent des traits constants tout au long de leur évolution historique. On a donc tout lieu de penser qu’il s’agit là d’un type caractéristique de la nécropole d’Istros. Parfois, on reconnaît dans ces tombes des alvéoles ou des fosses circulaires plus ou moins profondes, au-dessus desquelles a été installée le bûcher (type JAaII). Ce type, datable du milieu du VIe s. J.-C., se retrouve sur un groupe de tumuli, comptant parmi les plus anciens de la nécropole, ce qui indique que ce type est attesté dès le début de l’organisation de l’espace funéraire de la nécropole. Il se développe tout au long de l’époque grecque sous les diverses variantes énumérées plus haut. Les tombes de ce type présentent toute une série de caractéristiques communes portant sur la forme de la zone de combustion, le traitement des dépôts d’ossements calcinés rassemblés à l’intérieur de la fosse, le nettoyage de la zone de combustion et la disposition des offrandes selon la même direction que celle du cadavre sur le bûcher. Des différences sont perceptibles seulement dans

45 46

Mobiliers funéraires Les mobiliers funéraires identifiées dans les tombes à incinération d’Istros se composaient surtout d’objets personnels, d'offrandes représentées par divers types de vases céramiques, d'objets en métal et par les ossements 47

Alexandrescu 1966, p. 256-257. Alexandrescu 1966, p. 171-173, p. 176 et p. 257. Certaines tombes planes ont été fouillées parmi les tombes tumulaires à l’intérieur de la nécropole, cf. Alexandrescu 1962, p. 329 ; 1966, p. 247. 49 Parvan 1925, p. 1999-201, nos 1-6 (dates du Ve-IVe s. av.-C.); Pippidi 1954, p. 550-552, nos 23-28; Pippidi 1983=ISM I, nos 231-369. 50 Skudnova 1988. A notre avis, la plupart des grandes tombes à dromos creusées dans la terre d’Olbia d’époque classique et hellénistique présentent des fortes analogies avec celles de la nécropole de Milet (Kazartepe : Foerbeck 2002, fig. 2, d’après les fouilles de Salis 1906, et fig. 4) et de Myrina située sur la côte ouest micrasiatique. 51 Venedikov et al. 1963, p. 9-14 ; Panajotova, dans Nedev, Panajotova 2003, p. 123-140. 52 Voir plus haut, la nécropole d’Histria Bent. 48

Alexandrescu 1965a, p. 165 ; Alexandrescu 1966, p. 151-152, fig. 18. Alexandrescu 1966, p. 151.

341

ANCIENT GREEK COLONIES IN THE BLACK SEA 2 d’animaux (volaille, porcs, chevaux, etc.) 53. Les objets retrouvés sur les bûchers sont intégralement ou partielement brisés et comportent des traces de cuisson secondaire, ce qui suggère qu’ils y ont été déposés préalablement à la crémation du défunt. Ils sont composés presque exclusivement de céramiques d’origine grecque, représentées par des vases d’importation ou de facture grecque coloniale. Ils offrent en même temps d’importants repères chronologiques et ethnologiques pour éclairer la discussion toujours ouverte de l’appartenance des tombes. En outre, dans les tombes du troisième quart du Ve siècle, apparaîssent pour la première fois des exemplaires de la céramique peinte produite à Istros54.

oinochoai66, un schyphos67, les canthares68, les amphores69. La vaisselle de table, identifiée par des plats ou plats à poison70 et lékanés71, complète parfois les mobiliers funéraires. Les figurines en terre cuite sont assez rares72. Les objets en métal sont retrouvés en petites quantités, mais leur catalogue assez divers comprend des monnaies73, strigiles74, couteaux75, bijoux76. Dès les premières phases de la nécropole, on remarque la présence des objets importés des régions qui fournissent alors les marchés pontiques : Ionie et les îles proches, Samos, Chios, Lesbos et Athènes. Les importations de céramiques fines, originaires de la zone grecqueorientale, notamment d'Ionie du Nord, sont assez fréquentes, avec des vases du style de “Fikellura”, des coupes à bandes, etc. Les importations d'Athènes commencent à prendre le relais de ces centres et se diversifient au VIe et plus encore aux Ve-IVe siècles av. J.-C. jusqu’à l’époque hellénistique. Une grande partie de la vaisselle fine de table utilisée alors dans les mobiliers funéraires d'Istros est constituée de vases à figures noirs, à figures rouges ou à vernis noir, portant souvent un décor surpeint (le style West Slope), ou imprimé, fabriqués à Athènes. Les tombes de la nécropole d'Istros contiennent souvent, à côté d'une majorité d'objets importés, des vases fabriqués localement en pâte claire et grise. Les formes coloniales les plus fréquentes dans les tombes sont les cruches, les plats à poisson et les coupes à une anse, décorées ou pas à peinture rouge.

Les objets personnels sont reconnus par boucles d'oreille55, perles56 ou bouttons57. Le groupe des vases céramiques domine quantitativement ; il comprend des vases à parfums ou autres cosmétiques, des vases à boire et de la vaisselle de table, ou encore des vases conteneurs. Une autre catégorie est représentée par les vases de cuisine (chytrai), fréquemment attestés58, ce qui pourrait correspondre à la coutume d’offrandes alimentaires préparées à l’occasion des funérailles. En revanche, les amphores conteneurs sont moins bien représentées à Istros que sur les autres nécropoles grecques de la mer Noire, celle d’Orgamé notamment, pourtant peu éloignée. Les vases à parfums témoignent du degré de raffinement des élites. On constate d’ailleurs leur présence en assez grande quantité, dès les débuts de la nécropole, avec de lydia59 et de vases-couronnes60, de nombreux exemplaires de lécythes61, d’alabastrons62, puis, aux époques plus tardives, d’unguentaria63. Le fait que la fréquence des vases de parfums soit assez importante à partir de l’époque archaïque pourrait constituer une des particularités d’Istros64.

Chronologie Au stade actuel des recherches, il semble que les plus anciennes tombes datent du VIe s. av. J-C. et que la nécropole ait été constituée dès cette époque77. Ces données font de la nécropole d’Istros l’une des plus anciennes du Pont-Euxin ; son fonctionnement s’est poursuivi jusqu’au IIe s. ap. J.-C. La petite quarantaine des tumuli fouillés par Alexandrescu correspond aux trois

Les plus nombreux sont les vases destinés essentiellement au service du vin : les cratères65, les

66

Tumulus XX.5 ; XVII. 4, 11 ; XIX.1, 8, 14 ; XI.8 ; XXIII.4; XXI. 2 ; XXIX.5, Alexandrescu 1966, p. 146 ; p. 149-150 ; p. 153-154 ; p. 162 ; p. 171 ; p. 180 ; p. 184. 67 Tumulus XVII.3, Alexandrescu 1966, p. 149. 68 Tumulus XXII.15, III.2 ; XXXIII.6-7 ; XXIX.2 ; XXXIV. 14, 16 ; XXVI.4 ; XXXVII.4, 22, Alexandrescu 1966, p. 167; p. 169; p. 183; p. 183-184 ; p. 187 ; p. 190; p. 195. 69 Tumulus XX.6-8 ; XVII. 14-15 ; XII. 11 ; XI.1-3; XXII.1a,b-2, 7-8 ; XIV.2-3 ; XXII.2 ; XXVIII.1 ; XXI.13 ; XXIX.6-7 ; XXVI. 5-6, 17-19, Alexandrescu 1966, p. 146 ; p. 150; p. 159; p. 161; p. 164 ; p. 168 ; p. 170 ; p. 176 ; p. 181 ; p. 184 ; p. 194. 70 Tumulus XX.4 ; XXII.16 ; II.1 ; XXI.8 ; XXXIII.1 ; XXXIV.6, 1718; XXVI, 13 ; XXXVII.1, 18-20, Alexandrescu 1966, p. 146 ; p. 167; p. 178 ; p. 181 ; p. 182 ; p. 187 ; p. 191 ; p. 193 ; Tmulus XV, Alexandrescu 1993, p. 261h et i, fig. 11 et 12. 71 Tumulus XVII.10 ; XIX.3 ; XXII.3, 10, Alexandrescu 1966, p. 149 ; p. 153 ; p. 166. 72 Tumulus XXIII.5 ; XXVI. 21-26, Alexandrescu 1966, p. 171 ; p. 192. 73 Tumulus XXII.11 ; II.10 ; XXI.9 ; XXXIV.5 ; XXXI.3 ; XXXVII.6, Alexandrescu 1966, p. 167 ; p. 179 ; p. 181 ; p. 187; p. 189; p. 194. 74 Tumulus XXXIV.10 ; XXV.1, Alexandrescu 1966, p. 187 ; p. 196. 75 Tumulus XIX.13a, b ; XII.6 ; XXXIV. 11 ; XXXI.4, Alexandrescu 1966, p. 154 ; p. 159 ; p. 187 ; p. 189. 76 Tumulus XII.12-13 ; XXVI.28, Alexandrescu 1966, p. 159 ; p. 192. 77 Alexandrescu 1962, p. 329; 1966, p. 273.

53

Alexandrescu 1966, p. 270. Alexandrescu 1963b, p. 261. 55 Tumulus XII. 12-13, Alexandrescu 1966, p. 159 = Alexandrescu, dans Condurachi et al.1959, p. 294, fig. 16. 56 Tumulus XXVI.28, Alexandrescu 1966, p. 192. 57 Tumulus XII.5, Alexandrescu 1966, p. 159 = Alexandrescu dans, Condurachi et al., 1959, p. 290, fig. 14.2 = Alexandrescu, Ieftimie 1959, p. 155. 58 Tumulus XVII.12, XIX.6, XII.3, XXII.9, Alexandrescu 1966, p. 150 ; p. 153 ; p. 158 ; p. 166. 59 Tumulus XVII.1, Alexandrescu 1966, p. 149. 60 Tumulus I, Alexandrescu 1966, p. 172-173. 61 Tumulus XII.1; XI.6; III.3, 4 ; XXIII.3 ; XVIII.1-2; II. 6-7, 9 ; XXI.1, 10 ; XXXVII. 2-3, Alexandrescu 1966, p. 158 ; p. 161; p. 169170 ; p. 171 ; p. 176 ; p. 179; p. 179-181; p. 193-194 ; Tumulus XV, Alexandrescu 1993, p. 261, c,d,e, figs. 11, 13. 62 Tumulus XVII.7, 16 ; XII.4 ; I.4, Alexandrescu 1966, p. 149-150 ; p. 158-159 ; p. 173. 63 Tumulus XXIX.1; XXXIV.2, 9,15 ; Alexandrescu 1966, p. 183 ; p. 186-187. Tumulus XV, Alexandrescu 1993, p. 261j, fig. 13. 64 Alexandrescu 1966, p. 269. 65 Tumulus XX.2, XVII.13, I.2, Alexandrescu 1966, p. 145; p. 150; p. 173. Tumulus XV, Alexandrescu 1993, p. 261, p. 261a, fig. 11 et 12. 54

342

VASILICA LUNGU: NECROPOLES GRECQUES DU PONT GAUCHE: ISTROS, ORGAMÉ, TOMIS, CALLATIS différents groupes chronologiques (I = VIe-IVe s. av. J.C.; II = IVe s. av. J.-C.- début du IIe av. J.-C.; III= IIe. s. av. J.-C.-IIe s. ap. J.-C.). Le plus ancien d’entre ceux se place entre le milieu du VIe s. av. J.-C. et le milieu du IVe s. av. J.-C. Il se compose de quatorze tumuli, pour la plupart situés sur la plage de lac Sinoé et sur le versant attenant du plateau de la nécropole. Huit tumuli placés à la périphérie nord-ouest de la nécropole sont les plus récents, datés du I-II ap. J.-C.78

d’Ionie du Nord, une écuelle et plusieurs fragments d’amphores) portant des traces de cuisson secondaire, et un polissoir en pierre. Parmi les pièces les plus intéressantes, il faut mentionner un poignard en fer de type machaira, retrouvé dans le tumulus No XII, à côté de récipients à parfums, dont un lécythe attique à figures noires et un alabastron en albâtre81. La procédure suivie, tant dans l’aménagement de ces tombes à l’intérieur des tumuli, que dans la succession des étapes du rituel funéraire, présente des similitudes flagrantes avec le texte d’Homère concernant les obsèques de Patrocle82.

Selon la typologie d’Alexandrescu, les tombes à bûcher de surface, sans fosse de combustion, du type JAaI, sont les premières attestées à Istros au VIe s. av. J.-C. Ce type est remplacé au siècle suivant par sa variante JAbI, représentée par des tombes à bûcher de surface sans fosse de combustion, placé près de la tombe. En même temps, ces dernières sont contemporaines du type JAaII, c’est à dire des tombes-bûchers à fosse de combustion circulaire. Ces trois types sont les plus anciennement attestés de toute la nécropole d’Istros jusqu'à présent. Tous les autres types sont considérés comme des variantes tardives et présentent parfois de fortes ressemblances avec les complexes funéraires contemporains de la culture thrace méridionale.

Les quatre tumuli ont été érigés dans la zone centrale de la nécropole d’Istros. Ils témoignent encore de pratiques funéraires complexes, qui n’ont été retrouvées dans aucune autre tombe de la nécropole. P. Alexandrescu estime qu’ils ont dû former le noyau central de la nécropole et conditionner l’organisation ultérieure de celle-ci tout au long de l’époque grecque. Il y voit là motif à attribuer ces tombes à la génè de l’aristocratie de la cité, en liaison avec les aeinautai de Milet, à l’origine de la fondation de la cité83.

Les tombes à bûcher placé dans une fosse de combustion ovale, du type JAaV, un type purement grec79, sont attestées dans la nécropole d’Istros à partir du Ve s. av. J.-C. Elles ont influencé, d’une certaine manière, l’apparition dans une étape suivante de deux autres types, JAaIII et JAaIV, représentés par des tombes à bûcher placé dans une fosse de combustion rectangulaire ou ovale, ou en forme de croix,

Démographie et société Le fait même, qu’il y ait une cohérence manifeste dans l’évolution des pratiques funéraires de la nécropole d’Istros, pourrait être le fait d’une structure ethnique d’origine assez homogène de la communauté histrienne. Les différences enregistrées au niveau des tombes traduisent plutôt des différences de niveau social au sein de cette communauté.

Rituel Homérique à Istros A en juger d’après les relations constatées entre les pratiques funéraires relevées dans les tumuli No. XII, XVII, XIX et XX de la nécropole et certains comportements de l’aristocratie milésienne, responsable de la fondation de la cité, on perçoit, au travers des poèmes homériques, des indices en faveur d’une identification de la population à des Grecs d’Ionie établis dans la cité. Les découvertes de ces tumuli « homériques » d’Istros donnent une dimension toute nouvelle aux interprétations d’Alexandrescu sur l’organisation sociale de la communauté histrienne archaïque. Reconnus comme tumuli des aeinautai milésiens84 - c'est-à-dire du groupe qui possédait le pouvoir politique, arché, à Milet85, les quatre tumuli de la zone centrale se détachent des autres tumuli fouillés dans la nécropole histrienne. Ils montrent la présence à Istros d’une société hiérarchisée et des élites bien formées dès le VIe s. av. J.-C. Dans un récente article, Z. Petre formulait « une thèse générale » selon laquelle la

Selon une thèse soutenue à diverses reprises par P. Alexandrescu, un groupe de quatre tumuli d’époque archaïque, situés au cœur même de la nécropole d’Istros, témoignerait de pratiques funéraires dans la tradition homérique80. Ces tumuli sont les plus anciens retrouvés jusqu’ici à Istros et constituent le noyau originel de toute la nécropole. Il s’agit des tumuli Nos XII, XVII, XIX et XX, dont les trois derniers, très rapprochés, ne doivent former en réalité qu’un seul et même seul lot funéraire. Ils ont livré des tombes à incinération à bûcher de surface érigé en poutres en bois (empilées à angle droit dans le tumulus No XIX). Le cadavre incinéré était déposé au centre en direction N-S et tous les objets personnels ou d’offrandes disposés autour. Le mobilier funéraire de ces tumuli est composé d’objets en métal (un couteau en fer, un manche de miroir en bronze de style animalier scythe), de céramique (une œnochoé du style Fikellura, une coupe attique à bande, une lékanis à vernis noir, un pinax 78

81 Alexandrescu, dans Condurachi et al. 1959, p. 293, fig. 14.1 ; 1966, p. 159, tumulus XII.6 ; 1999, p. 119. 82 Homère, Iliade, XXIII, 105-257 ; Alexandrescu 1999, p. 134. 83 Alexandrescu 1994b ; 1999, p. 137. 84 Alexandrescu 1994b, p. 15-32 = 1999, 117-137. 85 Petre 2003-2005, p. 36-37.

Alexandrescu 1962, p. 331. Alexandrescu 1965a, p. 183. 80 Alexandrescu 1994b, p. 15-32 ; 1999, p. 117-137 Alexandrescu y corrige son ancienne hypothèse concernanat l’attribution à l’aristocratie thrace, cf. Alexandrescu, Ieftimie 1959 ; Alexandrescu 1966, p. 277 ; 1990 ; 1999, p. 104 et suiv. et p. 117, note 2. 79

343

ANCIENT GREEK COLONIES IN THE BLACK SEA 2 nécropole tumulaire réservée aux génés privilégiées d’Istros, semble avoir céder la place à la nécropole plane jusqu’au IIIe s. av. J-C., où les tumuli deviennent encore nombreux, après une phase intermédiaire de fonctionnement en parallèle86. De prime abord, cette hypothèse parait assez séduisante, mais elle ce heurte à une certains nombres des difficultés : 1. la découverte d’une stèle funéraire dans une tombe tumulaire d’Orgamé (TB95)87 prouve le contredit la théorie généraliste sur l’utilisation exclusive des stèles seulement dans les nécropoles planes ; 2. on observe à Istros une continuité des rites funéraires pour toute l’époque grecque, fait prouvé aussi à Orgamé (exception faite des découvertes du Ve siècle qui n’ont été pas encore localisées dans la nécropole) ; 3. les élites continuent d’avoir des tombes importantes dans la nécropole d’Orgamé aux IVe s. av. J.-C., voir la tombe IV9088 et la tombe publiée par Canarache89 ; 4. les fouilles d’Istros n’ont pas fourni d’arguments suffisants à l’appui d’une telle théorie.

l’orientation de celui-ci selon la direction nord-sud, que sur les pratiques funéraires de traitement des restes cinéraires du cadavre et de dépôt d’offrandes de vases et d’objets personnels. L’incinération des cadavres dans des fosses individuelles (type JAaV) est aussi considérée comme d’origine grecque. Cette pratique est attestée à Istros à partir de Ve s. av. J.-C. Les défunts incinérés sont orientés sur leur bûcher selon la même direction que dans les tombes à inhumation, c’est à dire est - ouest. La même orientation se retrouve aussi bien chez les populations grecques de Grèce propre que chez celles d’Asie Mineure. Elle est attestée aussi en Thrace, notamment dans le Tumulus No 13 de Dunvali94. D'autre part, dans l'opinion de M. Bucovala et M. Irimia, les inhumations de la nécropole de Corbu de Jos, située dans la chora histrienne, ont un caractère indigène95 et la tombe de Tariverde est attribuée aux Scythes96.

Les autres tombes à incinération sous tumuli se rattachent également directement à la tradition funéraire de la Grèce90 : « ce type de tombe monumentale, d’origine phrygienne, sinon même centrale-européenne en Egée, a été repris par les Grecs de la côte d’Anatolie».91 Connu par les Ioniens avant leur émigration vers les côtes de la mer Noire, ce type de tombe sera répandu dans certaines de leurs colonies pontiques.

P. Alexandrescu a relevé, pour les complexes d’incinération de la nécropole d’Istros, toute une série des caractéristiques communes aux populations thraces environnantes, aux celles de Chypre, d’Athènes ou d’Europe Centrale97. Il a mis en évidence la dynamique des phénomènes d’acculturation entre les Grecs des colonies pontiques et les populations autochtones. Cela est manifeste dans l’évolution des pratiques funéraires d’Istros par rapport aux autres colonies milésiennes de la mer Noire, notamment celles du littoral nord, où l’on constate également des influences du milieu ethnoculturel indigène98.

On a souligné à diverses reprises que les tombes de la première période de la nécropole d’Istros se signalent par des pratiques communes avec les complexes funéraires de la culture indigène92. C’est ainsi que le type JAaI, identifié à Istros seulement dans les tombes du VIe s. av.J.-C. se perpétue jusqu’au milieu du siècle suivant sous sa variante à bûcher de surface sans fosse de combustion (JAbI). La variante la plus ancienne, la tombe à incinération en fosse, possède des pendants dans les tombes thraces93, dont l’aire de diffusion s’est étendue à partir du Ve s. av. J.-C., sur presque toute la Bulgarie actuelle, la Dobroudja et, probablement, sur une partie de la plaine du Danube.

ORGAMÉ Si les débuts des recherches sur l’habitat grec d’Orgamé (comm. de Jurilovca, dép. de Tulcea) remontent déjà à une date ancienne, nos connaissances sur l’histoire de la cité grecque ont surtout bénéficié de l’apport des fouilles récentes, du fait de travaux programmés à l’intérieur de l’enceinte gréco-romaine99 et, plus encore, sur la nécropole grecque (fig. 3)100.

Les tombes à incinération sur place d’Istros présentent des traits communs avec celles du même type signalé dans l’aire culturelle de la Thrace méridionale, où P. Alexandrescu a recensé toute une série d’analogies avec son type JAaI. Les plus proches de ces analogies sont à trouver dans la nécropole Gète de Zimnicea, située au sud de la plaine roumaine, près du Danube. Elles portent, tant sur la construction du bûcher en poutres en bois et

94

Alexandrescu 1965a, p. 181. Bucovala, Irimia 1971, p. 53. 96 Condurachi et collab. 1952, p. 272-274 ; Buzoianu 2001, p. 135 ; Ruscu 2002, p. 46, note 52. 97 Alexandrescu 1999, p. 136-137. 98 A Olbia, Skudnova 1988 ; à Berezan, Solovyov 1999. 99 Coja 1972a, p. 33-42; 1972b, p. 267-274 ; 1986, p. 95-103 ; 1990, p. 157-168 ; Manucu-Adameşteanu 1985, p. 169-175 ; 1992, p. 55-67; 1996a, p. 101-109; 1999, p. 194-204; 2000-2001, p. 211-218; 2001a ; 2001b, p. 229-231 ; 2002, p. 179-180 ; 2003, p. 341-389 ; Lungu 1992, p. 60-98 ; 2003, p. 103-109. 100 Lungu 1995, p. 231-263 ; 1996, p. 745-752 ; 1999, p. 71-80 ; 2000a, p. 101-118 ; 2000b, p. 67-87; 2000c, 49-60 ; 2000-2001, p. 171-188; 2001, p. 165-174 ; 2002a, p. 283-300 ; 2002b, p. 133-142 ; 2002c, p. 317 ; 2004a, p. 85-97; 2004b, 217-228 ; Lungu, Poenaru Bordea 2000, p. 282-300. 95

86

Petre 2003-20005, p. 40-41. Lungu 2004c, p. 49-60. La présence des pratiques communes aux deux nécropoles ioniennes d’Istros et d’Orgamé justifie leur analyse en parallèle. 88 Lungu 1995, p. 231-263. 89 Canarache 1957, 378-380. 90 Alexandrescu 1963b, p. 264. 91 Alexandrescu 1963b, p. 265. 92 Alexandrescu 1963b, p. 264. 93 Alexandrescu 1963b, p. 264. 87

344

VASILICA LUNGU: NECROPOLES GRECQUES DU PONT GAUCHE: ISTROS, ORGAMÉ, TOMIS, CALLATIS Les premières informations sur les découvertes funéraires d'Orgamé sont dues à Vasile Canarache101, qui a donné une courte description d’un mobilier de tombe, partiellement récupéré, provenant d’un tumulus détruit au cours de travaux fortuits en 1955. Sa référence est accompagnée d’une restitution graphique ad memoriam d’un enclos formé d'une centaine d’amphores grecques qui entourait l’aire sépulcrale de la tombe (fig. 5). Il existe des indices, si l’on se réfère à nos récentes découvertes, suggérant que le tumulus ne renfermait que la tombe d’un seul individu. La localisation de cette découverte peut être située à 4 km à vol d’oiseau à l’ouest de la présente nécropole et à 2 km environ de la limite nord-ouest de village actuel de Jurilovca. Nombreux tumuli sont distribués dans le territoire du village moderne de Jurilovca plus ou moins éloingnés de la cité antique.

Jusqu’à présent, des fouilles systématiques ont été pratiquées dans plusieurs secteurs de l’aire concernée, plus quelques sections de sondage portant sur d’autres zones : un de ces secteurs (Secteur II) occupe les sommets nord du versant de Capul Dolojman, où ont été identifiés plusieurs tombes d’époque archaïque (du VIIe au VIe s. av. J.-C.); les deux autres (Secteurs I et III) sont situés sur un plateau au pied du même versant et ses pentes douces, occupées par des tombes des IVe-IIIe s. av. J.-C. Dans ces secteurs de la nécropole, se répand de manière précoce la pratique de l’incinération sur une période chronologique qui va de la deuxième moitié du VIIe av. J.-C. à la première moitié du IIIe siècles av. J.-C. C’est en effet à l’échelle de cette séquence de trois à quatre siècles que se développe un ensemble distinctif de pratiques funéraires, identifiant les particularités d’une polis coloniale pontique.

L’identification proprement dite et la localisation précise de la nécropole grecque de la ville d’Orgamé ont été établies en 1988, lors des fouilles de sauvetage effectuées sur une tombe sous tumulus superficiel, située à environ 1,2 km à l’ouest du dernier vallum de la fortification romaine tardive. Dès 1990, un programme de recherches systématiques a été entrepris sur une vaste zone aux alentours de ce tumulus et aux abords de la cité, afin d’étudier la nécropole tumulaire d’Orgamé d’une manière exhaustive. Les recherches se sont étendues à quelques points de la zone ouest de la cité, où les travaux agricoles avaient également exhumé des matériaux archéologiques provenant de tumuli, répartis sur une vaste portion d’environ 100 ha du promontoire de Capul Dolojman.

L’importance de cette nécropole c’est révélé progressivement au cours des campagnes annuelles de fouilles. On compte actuellement 72 tombes tumulaires de deux types, à incinération et à inhumation102. Tombes à incinération Pour les tombes à incinération on rencontre habituellement deux types de bûchers: les bûchers à usage unique et les bûchers à usage multiple. Les premiers sont toujours situés à l’intérieur de la tombe, les seconds sont nettement éloignés de celle-ci. Tous les bûchers analysés jusqu’à présent à l’intérieur de tumuli sont construits en poutres en bois. Ils sont généralement orientés de Est-Ouest, ce qui constitue la règle générale dans les nécropoles grecques du Pont Ouest. Trois catégories peuvent être distinguées : 1. les tombes à incinération sous tumulus, sur un bûcher dressé au-dessus d’une fosse creusée dans la zone centrale de la superficie délimitée par l’enclos en pierre103; 2. les tombes à incinération sous tumulus, sur un bûcher aménagé à la surface du sol antique104 ; 3. les tombes à incinération hors de la tombe ; ce type représente la majeure partie des tombes ; les dépôts cinéraires et les offrandes sont déposés, soit au niveau du sol antique et recouverts d’un petit tumulus, soit dans des urnes, enterrées aussi sous un petit tumulus105.

Les vestiges archéologiques occupent les versants calcaires sur les tronçons nord et ouest et descendent en légère pente vers le bord sud du lac Razelm. Les limites de la nécropole ont déterminées provisoirement par rapport au dernier vallum de la fortification romaine tardive à l’est, au bord du lac Razelm, au sud et au nord, et au sommet du cap Dolojman à l’ouest. Les résultats des premières fouilles ont abouti à la délimitation d’une vaste zone archéologique, dont environ 70% de la surface est occupée par des vestiges de tombes et qui, à partir de 1995, a obtenu le statut de réserve archéologique, protégée par la législation roumaine. De nos jours les tumulus sont très érodés et leur localisation demeure plutôt aléatoire. Même les plus évidents sont aplatis et leur élévation est diminuée du fait de l’érosion et des activités humaines. Souvent ils sont signalés par des agglomérats de gros blocs et de galets calcaires au niveau du sol actuel, mais parfois ils restent complètement cachés et ils ne sont révélés qu’à l’occasion de sondages systématiques.

Les tumuli abritent habituellement des tombes individuelles, rassemblées dans des ensembles familiaux. Les tombes à incinération constituent la norme principale d’enterrement dans la nécropole d’Orgamé. La présence de certains éléments tels que phytolithes vitrifiés, charbons de bois et ossements incinérés 102

Pour la déscription des tombes, voir Lungu 2000a, p. 102-103. Lungu 2000a, p. 103, fig. 6.1. 104 Lungu 1995, p. 255, fig. 2 et 256, fig. 3.1 ; 2000a, p. 104, et fig. 4.1 ; p. 116, fig. 5.1 ; 2000-2001, p. 184, fig. 8. 105 Lungu 2000a, p. 117, fig. 6.2; 6.3; 6.4.

101

103

Canarache 1957, p. 379-380. Limitée à une brève mention, cette découverte n’a jamais été soumise à une étude significative. Cela est d’autant plus regrettable que le mobilier de cette tombe reste complètement perdu.

345

ANCIENT GREEK COLONIES IN THE BLACK SEA 2 indiquent une crémation à haute température (900– 1000°C). Quant aux charbons de bois partiellement carbonisés, ils témoignent d’un arrêt de la combustion ou du ramassage de fragments incomplètement brûlés à la périphérie de l’aire de combustion. Les ossements humains sont dans la plupart des cas fortement calcinés, avec une majorité de fragments blancs, mais on trouve aussi de petits morceaux gris bleuté ou noirâtres, résultant d’une crémation incomplète. Faute d’une analyse anthropologique approfondie, il est difficile de préciser le mode de traitement des ossements regroupés dans les urnes ou la valeur symbolique plutôt que le tri intentionnel de certaines parties anatomiques dans les cas des dépôts sur place.

interprétables comme des “exceptions” cultuelles. Chacune renferme un seul (T B95), or plusieurs individus (T E99). Dans le dernier cas, le tumulus T E99 constitue un cas isolé au sein de nos fouilles : les tombes à inhumation multiple ne présentent pas d’orientation préférentielle, les sujets étant inhumés dans des positions variables, soit à tête à l'Est, soit à l'Ouest. L’exemple du tumulus T E99 présente des traits typiques des inhumations, se traduisant par des incohérences constatées notamment dans la position des squelettes et dans la construction du tumulus. Ces anomalies procèdent de comportements distincts, certainement liés aux normes religieuses dépendantes des circonstances historiques ou de l’origine des individus enterrés ; les deux sépultures en question peuvent donc être qualifiées de cas exceptionnels par rapport aux sépultures à incinération du site qui constituent la norme.

Les urnes funéraires à incinération ont été retrouvées dans les tombes de l’époque hellénistique, en particulier dans celles du début du IVe et du III s. av. J.-C. Les vases utilisés comme urnes sont soit des vases d’importation, comme les cratères attiques à figures rouges, les oenochoés attiques à vernis noir, les hydries à décor de bandes peintes en rouge, les amphores de transport ou même des pithoi, soit des vases-urnes modelés selon la tradition gète. Ils sont placés debout, dans les cas des vases à dimensions moyennes (oenochoé, hydrie), ou couchés sur le côté, dans le cas de grands récipients (amphores, pithoi).

Tumulus-Hérôon (T A95) Découvert en 1995 dans le secteur II de la nécropole, le plus grand des tumuli occupe une surface de 42/3 m de diamètre sur l’une des hauteurs nord du promontoire de Capul Dolojman (fig. 4)111. Il abrite une tombe à incinération élevée au-dessus d’une fosse profonde de 0.60 m, située au centre d’une aire fortement calcinée, au diamètre de 8 m. Vers l’extérieur de la surface cendreuse ont été identifiés les restes d’un bûcher rectangulaire, réalisé en poutres de chêne112. Il était entouré d’un grand enclos de protection élevé en pierres jusqu’à 1.25 m de hauteur au centre du tumulus. Devant la fosse d’incinération, dont l’ouverture est orientée vers l’est, s’étendait une surface présentant de fortes traces de combustion et renfermant des traces d’offrandes alimentaires. La plupart des fragments d’ossements analysés correspondent à des ovi-capridés et à des oiseaux. Compte tenu de la quantité réduite de restes calcinés découverts dans la fosse d’incinération, il est permis de penser que la majeure partie de ceux-ci a été déposée dans un larnax, enterré vraisemblablement sur place. Il est fort possible que ce larnax ait été volé par les pillards, dont la présence est trahie par plusieurs fosses creusées a posteriori et que nous avons décelées en différents points du tumulus. Certaines de leurs interventions ont détruit partiellement les zones centrale et méridionale de la tombe, où les pièces de mobilier font totalement défaut.

Tombes à inhumation La découverte de quelques tombes à inhumation (trois exemples) contemporaines de celles à incinération constitue un cas particulier dans la nécropole106. Des trois cas identifiés à nos jours, une tombe sous tumulus marquée TB95 et la sépulture à enchytrismos peuvent être attribuées aux traditions grecques. A Ialissos, à Rhodes, et à Erétrie, en Eubée, on a insisté sur le fait que l’inhumation était pratiquée jusqu’à l’âge où le défunt recevait un statut juridique et religieux, c’est à dire, vers la seizième année107. Dans la tombe à enchytrismos d'Orgamé, nous pouvons supposer qu’il s’agit d’un squelette de bébé selon les analogies avec les autres cas du monde grec. Dans de nombreux cas, les sépultures de bébés en amphores représentent la norme. Parmi les interprétations proposées on fait souvent référence à une information de Pline108, selon laquelle on n’incinérait pas un enfant décédé en bas âge avant l’apparition de ses premières dents. Deux autres tombes, le tumulus T B95109 et T E99110, dont l’architecture ne paraît pas se différencier de celle des tombes à incinération analysées, semblent

Le mobilier funéraire retrouvé dans l’aire encore intacte nous a livré quelques pièces céramiques qui comptent parmi les documents les plus anciens du site. Il s’agit de deux amphores d'origine de Clazomènes (fig. 6)113, d’une

106 Deux cas publiés déjà, voir Lungu 2000a, p. 117, fig. 6.5 (TE99) et fig. 6.6 (TB95). 107 Pour Ialissos, cf. Laurenzie 1936, p. 12; pour Erétrie, cf. Bérard, 1970, p. 50. Voir le commentaire dans Vidal-Naquet 1974, p. 147. 108 Pline, Nat.Hist. VII, 72. 109 Lungu 2000a, p. 116, fig. 5.3, 4 et fig. 6.6. 110 Lungu 2000a, p. 117, fig. 6.5.

111 Lungu 2000a, fig. 2.3 et fig. 6.1 ; 2000b, p. 67- 87; 2000-2001, p. 174, fig. 2, p. 176, fig. 3, 4; 2002b, p. 135, fig. 2 ; 2002c, p. 7, fig. 2. 112 Nous devons les résultats des analyses dendrologiques à la gentillesse du Prof. Margarita Primas de l’Université de Zürich, que nous remercions vivement. 113 Une amphore proto-clazoménienne à décor de bandes peintes en rouge, voir Lungu 2000b, p. 69, note 11, et p. 81, fig. 4.6 a-b; 2000-

346

VASILICA LUNGU: NECROPOLES GRECQUES DU PONT GAUCHE: ISTROS, ORGAMÉ, TOMIS, CALLATIS coupe ionienne de type Villard A2, d'origine samienne114 et de trois œnochoés à pâte claire ou grise, tournées d’après des modèles grecs orientaux115. Leur chronologie s'inscrit vers le milieu du VIIe s. av. J.-C. et permet d’attribuer à la cité d’Orgamé une date de fondation plus proche de celle que la chronique d’Eusèbe assigne à la fondation d’Istros, soit vers 657- 656 av. J.-C.116, que celle de Ps. Scymnos fixée pour la plupart de savants dans « les années trente du VIIe s. av. J.C. »117

aussi des graffiti, notamment sur les fragments d’amfores du IVe s. av. J.-C.119 Certains aspects relatifs à l’agencement des éléments du tumulus dans le cadre d’un rituel se retrouvent dans la description des funérailles de Patrocle, donnée par Homère: la présence de poutres en bois de chêne utilisées pour l’érection du bûcher (Iliade, XXIII, 117–118); la forme rectangulaire de celui-ci (Iliade, XXIII, 160–162); le cadavre déposé au milieu du bûcher (Iliade, XXIII, 163–164); les sacrifices d’animaux pratiqués devant le bûcher (Iliade, XXIII, 166–167); les offrandes disposées autour du bûcher (Iliade, XXIII, 167–170: vases à miel et à huile); les braises éteintes avec du vin, ce dont témoigne la présence des amphores (Iliade, XXIII, 236– 238); un fossé creusé autour du bûcher pour en obtenir la terre qui va servir à l’érection du tumulus (Iliade, XXIII, 253–256). Compte tenu des informations transmises par Homère, les données archéologiques permettent de conférer à la tombe TA95 d’Orgamé le statut d’hérôon120.

Le caractère particulier de la découverte réside aussi dans l’identification d’un fossé circulaire à offrandes situé à proximité de l’enclos de pierres118. Il était creusé dans la roche à une profondeur variable, allant de 0.10 à 1.35 m et un diamètre de 42 m à l’extérieur. Dans le remplissage de ce fossé, on a retrouvé un certain nombre de fragments des vases tournés: amphores, canthares, cratères, lekanai, œnochoés etc., des tuiles, des monnaies, des pointes de flèche et un petit nombre de vases modelés. On y trouve

La pratique régulière des offrandes durant plusieurs siècles, du VIIe siècle jusqu’à la première moitié du IIIe siècle av. J.-C., indique que la tombe a été le centre d’un culte consacré à un personnage de première importance, que nous avons identifié comme étant le chef du premier groupe de colons grecs - l’oikistés en personne -, qui, après sa mort, aurait été promu au rang de gardien de la cité (polyssûchos)121.

2001, p. 178, fig. 7 ; 2004a, p. 96, fig. 7. Quant à l'origine de l'atelier, les dernières recherches sur les trouvailles d'Abdère et de Clazomènes indiquent une production clazoménienne de ce type, voir Scarlatidou 2004, p. 255-256, fig. 28 ; Sezgin 2004, p. 170-172, groupe I, ca 650620 av. J.-C. ; Dupont, Scarlatidou 2005, p. 78. 114 Une coupe samienne, de forme VillardA2, voir Cook, dans Cook, Dupont 1998, p. 130–131, fig. 18.1 (e). Selon la récente opinion de U. Schlotzhauer, Die Knickrandschalen aus Milet, thèse présentée à l’Université de Bochum, 1995, sa datation haute peut être fixée à 650 av. J.-C. ; idem, ’Die südionische Knickrandschalen : Formen und Entwicklung der sog. Ionischen Schalen in archaischer Zeit‘, dans Die Ägäis und das westliche Mittelmeer, Akten des Symposium Wien 1999 (2000), pl. IV. 6-7. Les plus proches analogies sont à Samos : Walter H. 1957, ’Frühe samische Gefässe und ihre Fundlage”, AthMitt 72, p. 47, fig. 4 : 670 av. J.-C. ; Vierneisel, K., Walter, H. 1959, ‘Die Funde der Kampagnen 1958/59 in Heraion von Samos’, AthMitt 74, p. 18-19 (Brunnen 6), fig. 33.3, ca 710-640/30 av. J.-C. La datation précoce proposée par Lungu (1995) 2000b, p. 69, note 11, fig. 5.7a-b a été acceptée par Alexandrescu 1999, p. 21, note 13, par Manucu Adamesteanu 2001a, p. 23 et par Al. Vulpe. Les matériels de cette tombe sont plus anciennes que tous les autres publiés d’Istros dans des contextes assurés, fait qui suggère une fondation plus précoce à Orgamé que à Istros. Les fragments d’une kotyle euboïque géométrique tardif, mentionné à Istros par Alexandrescu 1985, p. 47, n. 32 ; 1988, p. 111 et suiv. ; 1992, ‘Les Eubéens et les débuts de la navigation grecque en mer Noire’, DHA (Hommage à Pierre Lévêque), avec la bibliographie, n’ont pas une provenance bien assurée ; les fragments de « Cypriot WhitePainted IV », continue en « Cypro-Archaic II », c'est-à-dire, au VIe s. av. J.-C., Alexandrescu 1978b, p. 63, cat 256, pl. 26, tandis que l’amphore « Trojan G2-3 », Alexandrescu 1978b, p. 63, no 253, pl. 1, est attribuée au VIe s. av. J.-C., voir Boardman 1991, p. 387-390 - fait qui rende encore discutable la présence grecque dès la première moitié du VIIe s. av. J.-C. à Istros. 115 Inédites. 116 Eusèbe de Cesarée, apud Hieronymus (Chron., 95 b, Helm....Histrus civitas in Ponto condita). 117 Avram 2003, p. 284. Ps. Scymnus v. 766-770, éd. A. Diller, p. 167; cf. Anonym. Peripl. Pont. Eux. 70, éd.A. Diller, p. 136. A. Vulpe redige les anciennes théories sur la chronologie tardive de Ps Scymnos et note que les événements transmis dans sa chronique « ont eu lieu vers ou à l’an 650 av. J.-C. » et dans ce cas là « les traditions eusébiennes et celle exposée dans des termes vagues chez PsScymnus en ce qui concerne la fondation de la cité d’Istros ne paraîtraient pas contradictoires si l’on donnait l’importance adéquate aux données archéologiques… », cf. Vulpe 1997, p. 185. Une chronologie tardive, vers 627 av. J.-C. pour la fondation d’Istros, a été proposée par Hind 1999, p. 29. 118 Des fossés pareils, continus ou segmentés, ont été identifié aussi à Istros, dans les tumuli XX, XVII, XIX, Alexandrescu 1966, p. 143-154 ; 236 ; 239-240, et dans le tumulus de Topraisar, Irimia 1976, p. 41-42.

Quant à l’emplacement, les sources littéraires et les découvertes archéologiques démontrent que les hêroa étaient le plus souvent situés sur l’agora ou à l’entrée de la cité.122 Il semble que les tombes des héros-fondateurs soient rarement attestées en dehors des murs de la fortification. Une exception notable est constituée par le tombeau du fondateur Ilos, le héros éponyme d’Ilion, situé, selon Homère, à l’extérieur de la cité et tenu, par la communauté de cette cité, comme un important repère géographique et médiatique pendant les rencontres militaires. Il apparaît donc clairement que le choix de l’emplacement de la tombe du héros comptait parmi les devoirs essentiels du premier groupe de colons. Selon nous, l’œuvre d’Homère constitue une source de première importance, en qu’elle nous fournit le témoignage d’une

119

Lungu 2000b, p. 70 ; 2000-2001, p. 179 et note 10 ; 2002c, p. 10-15. La description corresponde aux critères analysés par Andronikos 1968 ; Antonaccio 1995, 1999 ; Malkin 1987 ; Morris 1987 ; 1992 ; 2000 ; de Polignac 1995. 121 Le terme polyssûchos est attesté chez Apollonios de Rhodes (II, 846850) dans une mention relative à la fondation de la cité d'Heraclée Pontique : il dit qu’après la mort de l’argonaute Idmon, le dieu a demandé aux colons d’adorer le héros comme le gardien de leur cité (polyssûchos), bien qu’à ce moment-là ils honorassent Agamestor, voir Lungu 2000a, p. 109 et note 23. 122 Sur ce point, le monument découvert à la porte ouest de la cité d’Eretrie, à l’intérieur de la cité, a été souvent invoqué et analysé. Theodora Hadzisteliou-Price, 1973, p. 129-144, estimait qu’il existe un rapport incontestable entre les qualités du héros homérique Erechteus, le fondateur d’Athènes, et le héros anonyme honoré à la porte de la cité d'Eretrie. 120

347

ANCIENT GREEK COLONIES IN THE BLACK SEA 2 variante ionienne du culte héroïque, diffusée outre-mer par les colons milésiens au gré de leurs fondations.

de ces enclos sont parfaitement compatibles avec des critères d’ordre social126. L’ampleur de certains tumuli est le meilleur argument en faveur de leur attribution à des membres de l’aristocratie locale. Quant aux plus petits, il importerait de déterminer dans quelle mesure ils ne répondraient pas aussi à d’autres critères, comme le critère d’âge ou de genre, par exemple. Ils se trouvent toujours à la périphérie des ensembles familiaux et auraient donc pour rôle principal de baliser et de fermer l’espace funéraire. D’ailleurs, la structure des dépôts funéraires témoigne d’une certaine corrélation entre le type d’enclos et le niveau social de la personne enterrée.

A en juger d’après les indices à notre disposition, le tumulus TA95 était érigé à l’entrée de la nécropole d’époque archaïque. Compte tenu de ses dimensions et de ses particularités architecturales et rituelles, il peut être considéré comme un point de repère majeur ayant conditionné l’implantation des autres aménagements funéraires de l’époque. À 20 m environ du côté est, commence la série des tombes d’incinération, datées du dernier quart du VIIe et du début du VIe siècle av. J.-C. Par ailleurs, ce tumulus, contrôlait une voie d’accès importante en direction de la cité, ce qui pourrait même faire supposer l’existence, dès cette époque, d’une porte et d’un chemin de desserte à proximité.

Les dépôts funéraires sont pratiqués systématiquement. Ils sont formés d’offrandes déposées tant à l’intérieur qu’à l’extérieur de la tombe. Le défunt est assez souvent accompagné d’objets personnels. Les membres de la famille ou d’une confédération déposent leurs offrandes dans des vases aux abords des tumuli rassemblés. Il est délicat d’interpréter ces données. Les offrandes sont-elles des reliquats d’un repas funéraire occasionnel ou bien des dépôts utiles au défunt pour sa vie dans l’au-delà? Ces dépôts d’offrandes sont-ils faits seulement par les membres de la même famille ou bien ne pourraient-ils pas avoir été effectués par des personnes spécialisées dans cette fonction ?

Pratiques funéraires Les résultats des fouilles, menées jusqu’à présent à Orgamé, montrent la permanence de certaines coutumes architecturales et symboliques dans la nécropole d’Orgamé sur plusieurs siècles et notamment, le découpage des lotissements funéraires par ensembles familiaux123. Comme le suggèrent particulièrement les tumuli fouillés, les différentes composantes du même monument sont apparues successivement dans un intervalle de temps assez rapproché. Entre les tombes de chaque ensemble familial, on constate des différences dimensionnelles : on distingue presque toujours une tombe principale plus grande, entourée par des tombes plus petites124.

L’organisation des dépôts funéraires à l’intérieur des tombes à bûcher de surface ou au-dessus d’une fosse révèle une disposition très précise des différents objets. Elle se développe particulièrement autour du bûcher. Les vases céramiques les mieux conservés ont été trouvés aux limites de celui-ci et ce fait indique qu’ils étaient appuyés à l’origine en bordure du bûcher. Les vases recueillis à la surface du bûcher sont toujours très abîmés. Cette situation pourrait alors indiquer qu’ils avaient été placés directement sur le bûcher aux côtés du défunt.

L’élément principal de chaque tombe au sein de l’ensemble familial reste l’enclos circulaire en blocs de calcaire, qui délimite physiquement et protège symboliquement l’aire sépulcrale125. Il se présente souvent comme un cercle de gros blocs ou de dalles de calcaire soigneusement sélectionnées et comportant de 1 à 4/5 assises. Le plus souvent cet enclos principal est ceinturé à l’extérieur d’un enclos secondaire concentrique de blocs de même origine, étalés en surface sur une largeur de 0,60 m à 2 m. Il se différencie nettement du cercle intérieur par les dimensions moindres de ses pierres.

Dès le début de la nécropole, on commence à implanter, à côté de tombes, des monuments à fonction cultuelle. Certaines tombes sont pourvues des trapeza ou des petits autels matérialisées par des cercles de pierres de 1 à 2 m de diamètre, aménagées dans la partie sud de l’enclos. Dans le trois cas examinés jusqu’à présent, le bris des vases a été effectué manifestement sur les pierres de cettes aires circulaires, à en juger d’après la dispersion des fragments céramiques au sein même de l’enchevêtrement de pierres, sans doute en rapport avec quelque rituel. Le caractère sacré de petits autels aménagés à l’extérieur de la tombe paraît évident. Cette pratique est très certainement en rapport avec un culte familial donnant lieu à des commémorations périodiques. Certains tumuli d'époque hellénistique étaient marqués de stèles funéraires.127

Une hiérarchie se dessine au fil de la perpétuation sur plusieurs siècles de cette forme d’enclos funéraire, qui traduit, en fait, un certain conservatisme au niveau de la réalisation. Les dimensions des grandes tombes sont très voisines, toujours comprises entre 6 et 8 m de diamètre intérieur et entre 13 et 15 m de diamètre extérieur, tandis que les autres s’inscrivent entre 1 et 5 m de diamètre intérieur. Les dimensions et la disposition dans l’espace 123

Sur la famille ancienne, Humphreys 1980, p. 96-126. Lungu 1995, p. 255, fig. 2 ; 2000a, fig. 3.3; 3.4. 125 Des constructions circulmaires pareilles sont à signaler à Samos et à Myus (15 km loin de Milet), Boehlau 1898, p. 26-33 et fig. 20; Boehlau, Habich 1996, p. 105, fig. 20; Larissa, Boehlau Schefold 1940, pl.31 b; 124

126 Sur les dimensions de la tombe comme indice de la position sociale, voir Pausanias 6.21.7. 127 Lungu 2000a, p. 116, fig. 5.3-4; 2004c, p. 49-60 ; Oppermann 2004, p. 188-189, pl. 47.4.

348

VASILICA LUNGU: NECROPOLES GRECQUES DU PONT GAUCHE: ISTROS, ORGAMÉ, TOMIS, CALLATIS Parmi les autres aménagements à fonction cultuelle, on remarque la présence des fosses à libations. L’exemple offert par le tumulus T IV 90, daté du IVe s. av. J.-C., est constitué par une fosse circulaire en bordure du cercle de protection du tumulus, dans laquelle ont été découverts un bol attique à vernis noir au fond percé d’un trou intentionnel, destiné à la pratique des libations128. Cette petite structure cultuelle apparaît nettement disproportionnée par rapport à l’espace de la tombe et surtout elle n’est pas synchrone. L’espace réduit et la présence d’un seul objet de libation nous suggère que cette fosse a été utilisée une seule fois au début de la cérémonie sépulcrale. En dépit de sa localisation marginale, la cérémonie semble avoir présenté un caractère public. Les libations ont été célébrées probablement avant l’incinération du défunt. Une situation similaire a été constatée aussi sur d’autres tumuli129.

fondation vers le milieu du VIIe s. av. J.-C., lorsque les textes font défaut. Au cours des IVe-IIIe s. av. J.-C., le développement des pratiques funéraires se traduit par une densification des tombes sur le versant sud et dans le secteur ouest, et par une extension en surface des ensembles familiaux. Les dépôts se répartissent également des deux côtés des routes antiques avec une évolution chronologique d’ouest en est. La diversité des matériaux archéologiques suggère aussi que nous sommes en présence d’une nécropole mixte, qui réunit des sépultures d’adultes et d’enfants. Divers indices topographiques relient les tombes d’enfants avec celles d’adultes au sein des mêmes ensembles en fonction de leur degré de parenté. On peut en déduire que le traitement réservé aux morts devait être inégal dans la société d’Orgamé. La majeure partie de la population semble avoir été enterrée sous des tumuli de taille réduite par rapport aux tumuli de taille relativement imposante réservés aux élites de la communauté d’Orgamé. Dès lors, la question se pose de savoir si la configuration de la nécropole d’Orgamé constitue un cas isolé ou bien si d’autres nécropoles du monde grec présentent la même architecture et la même disposition des éléments du mobilier funéraire.

Délimiter une aire sacrée à l’intention d’un individu ou d’une collectivité, même symboliquement, constituait assurément un acte important. En tout cas, la mission de délimiter l’espace sacré d’une tombe en conformité avec les normes de la communauté, de même que celle d’obtenir par des libations un assentiment divin, ne pouvait être dévolue qu’aux élites. L’examen de la distribution des tombes à l’intérieur de la nécropole d’Orgamé permet de remarquer qu’elles sont disposées le long des anciennes voies de circulation, qui peuvent même correspondre avec les artères principales de la cité, orientées Est-Ouest130. Les tombes sont généralement alignées plus au moins régulièrement en bordure de ces routes. Parfois on peut voir des allées de raccordement du tumulus à une route principale, ce qui prouve l’existence d’une certaine conception d’organisation interne de la nécropole. Le développement linéaire de l’espace funéraire par rapport à la direction des routes antiques constitue une particularité importante de la nécropole d’Orgamé. Elle nous permet de restituer l’image de lotissements de tombes, desservis par des routes de circulation vers la cité ou des allées funéraires, lesquelles relient parfois les routes et les tombes, un agencement élaboré à mettre au compte d’une société structurée au sein d’une polis. Les données archéologiques montrent donc, d’une certaine façon, le statut de polis mentioné par Hécatée aux VIe s. av. J.C.131

Mobiliers funéraires Les mobiliers funéraires sont formés d’objets qui accompagnent les restes cinéraires à l’intérieur du tumulus et d’objets déposés à l’extérieur de la tombe. Les mobiliers internes sont distribués, soit sur l’espace occupé par le bûcher, dans le cas des tombes- bûchers, soit déposés au niveau de la tombe ou dans des urnes, dans les cas d’incinérations effectuées hors de la tombe. La majorité des mobiliers funéraires est formée de vases céramiques, alors que les objets en métal sont assez rares132. Cette coutume apparaît de la même manière dans les nécropoles d’Istros, de Tomis ou de Kallatis. La quantité des objets des mobiliers funéraires varie d’un (T C96, m 3) à plusieurs dizaines (tumulus T IV 90), voire plusieurs centaines (tumulus-hérôon, T A95). Il apparaît donc clairement qu’il existe des différences marquées dans le traitement réservé au défunt en fonction des normes funéraires propres aux différentes époques. Par ailleurs, à l’exception du tumulus-hérôon, T A95, les tombes archaïques ont livré des mobiliers plus réduits que les tombes des IVe-IIIe siècle av. J.-C. Au niveau des mobiliers funéraires, il faut voir là le signe de changements dans l’évolution des pratiques funéraires.

La phase la plus ancienne a vu la mise en place des premières sépultures juste après le milieu du VIIe s. av. J.-C. sur les hauteurs septentrionales du promontoire, avec une implantation plus dense du côté est. Les tombes les plus anciennes permettent de fixer la date de

Les mobiliers funéraires comprennent divers assemblages de vases céramiques, notamment l’association d’une ou deux cruches avec un ou deux plats à poissons, situation qui pourrait indiquer l’existence de mobiliers

128

Lungu 1995, p. 255, fig. 2. Inédits. Ils seront inclus dans la monographie de la nécropole d’Orgamé, à paraître. 130 Lungu 2000a, p. 114, fig. 3.1–2. 131 Orgamé polis epi to Istro: Hecatei Milesii fragmenta , a cura di G. Nenci, Firence, 1854, frg. 183 (= Fr.Gr.Hist I, 28, frg. 172). 129

132

349

Lungu 2000a, p. 106-108.

ANCIENT GREEK COLONIES IN THE BLACK SEA 2 standardisés, au moins pour le IVe s. av. J.-C., époque à laquelle se manifeste une certaine stabilité des normes funéraires. La plupart des vases ont été retrouvés brisés à l’intérieur de la tombe, mais de nombreux tessons ont été découverts à l’extérieur.

brûlés ou bien mêlés aux ossements avec lesquels ils ont été incinérés. Dans les cas de ce genre, il s’agit toujours d’objets de parure ou d’accessoires vestimentaires. Particulièrement rares sont les fibules, telle celle en fer découverte dans le tumulus T IV90145, ou des objets de parure, comme des anneaux en bronze, un pendentif en or et en argent (fig. 11), une boucle d’oreille en argent, dont deux exemplaires ont été retrouvés dans la tombe m 4 du tumulus T XII. L’inventaire de la nécropole renferme encore un strigile en bronze, un couteau en fer, des pointes de flèche, etc.146

Les vases céramiques sont souvent importés de diverses régions de la Grèce. Parmi les plus fréquents pour l’époque archaïque, on peut signaler les amphores de Samos, de Clazomènes133 ou de Lesbos, les aryballes corinthiens, les bols aux oiseaux et les vases-couronnes d’Ionie du Nord, etc. A partir de IVe s. av. J.-C., la quantité de vases importés trouvée dans les tombes fouillées indique une augmentation importante des produits importés. Parmi les centres identifiés, les découvertes les plus significatives sont constituées par des amphores de Chios134, de Thassos135, de Mendé136, d’Héraclée Pontique, de Sinope, de Paros, de Cnide, etc..., les vases attiques à figures rouges (cratères, pélikés137, askoi138 ; fig. 7 et 8) ou à vernis noir (plats à poisson, canthares, skyphoi, coupes-skyphoi139, coupescanthares140, gutti141, bols142 etc...), ou à bandes peintes en rouge (fig. 9). Inversement, les figurines en terre cuite constituent l’exception (fig. 10).

Plus nombreuses sont les monnaies découvertes au cours des fouilles, rassemblant des monnaies en bronze ou en argent, retrouvées isolées ou sous forme de trésors. Un petit trésor de trois monnaies en bronze, du type histrien à la roue, était enterré à la base de l’enclos en pierres d’une tombe du IVe siècle av. J.-C. Un autre trésor, plus important, formé de 39 monnaies en argent d’origine également histrienne, a été retrouvé à la base d’une tombe archaïque du secteur no II, située près de tumulushérôon147. Il est difficile de dire si sa localisation est le fait du hasard ou bien répond à une forme particulière d’ex voto148.

Les céramiques locales (fabriquées à Orgamé) ou régionales (fabriquées à Istros ou dans d’autres endroits de la zone pontique) sont représentées par un groupe de cruches tournées à pâte grise ou claire, parfois porteuses de graffiti, et par des plats à poissons de forme particulière143. La typologie de ces récipients est très variée et rassemble des formes indigènes et des imitations de modèles de la Grèce de l'Est. Parmi les céramiques tournées, les œnochoés à embouchure trilobée constituent les plus anciennes imitations de vases grecs dans les ateliers pontiques. Quant à la céramique indigène modelée, elle est représentée par quelques urnes ovoïdes à boutons et à cordons décorés d’impressions de doigts144.

Les découvertes monétaires dans les tombes revêtent une signification rituelle149, bien que les recherches archéologiques n’en fassent pas état de manière systématique. A l’état de trouvaille isolée, les monnaies semblent correspondre à l’obole de Charon, le prix à payer pour le traversée des fleuves infernaux. Selon le sophiste Lucien150 et d’autres auteurs antiques151 une seule monnaie suffisait. Un tel rituel semble avoir été pratiqué à Orgamé également, à échelle réduite cependant (dans environ 3% des tombes), et il en est de même à Istros152 et à Tomis153. Il se justifie probablement par la généralisation de l’incinération. Démographie et sociéte

Le mobilier métallique est beaucoup plus restreint que le mobilier céramique et son répertoire de formes peu varié. Les objets sont souvent placés au niveau du sol antique sur le lieu de la tombe, mais ils peuvent accompagner le défunt au moment de la crémation et dans ce cas, ils sont

Le stade actuel des fouilles indique que le fonctionnement de cette nécropole s’est étalé sur plusieurs siècles, du milieu du VIIe jusqu’au milieu du IIIe av. J.-C. La date des plus anciennes trouvailles suggère que la colonie d’Orgamé a été fondée à une date ancienne, vers le milieu du VIIe siècle av. J.-C., très vraisemblablement par un groupe de colons venus de

133

Lungu 2000b, p. 81, fig. 4 a-b; 2000-2001, p. 178, fig. 7 ; 2004a, p. 96, fig. 7. 134 Lungu 1995, p. 263, pl. 3, inv. 43170. 135 Lungu 1995, p. 231-263; 1999, p. 71-80 ; 2001, p. 169, fig. 3.6 ; 2004 a p. 217-228 ; Manucu Adameşteanu 2001a, p. 66, fig. 31. 136 Lungu 2001, p. 169, fig. 3.4. 137 Manucu-Adameşteanu 2001, p. 64, fig. 27; Lungu 2004a, p. 25, fig. 6. 138 Lungu 2001, p. 169, fig. 3.1 ; Lungu, Poenaru Bordea 2000, p. 295, fig. 2 et pl. XVIII, XXI, XXII ; Manucu-Adameşteanu 2001a, p. 65, fig. 28-30; Lungu 2004a, p. 95, fig. 5. 139 Lungu 2001, p. 170, fig. 4.2. 140 Lungu 1995, p. 259, fig. 4.2; Manucu Adameşteanu 2001, p. 67, fig. 33. 141 Lungu 2001, p. 169, fig. 3.3. 142 Lungu 1995, p. 263, pl. III.3. 143 Lungu 1995, p. 258, fig. 5.5 et 259, fig. 6.6-7. 144 Lungu 2001, p. 170, fig. 4.5.

145

Lungu 1995, p. 259, fig. 6.8. Matèriel inédit. Il sera analysé dans la monographie du site, à suivre. 147 Lungu, Poenaru Bordea 2000, p. 282-300. 148 Lungu 2000a, p. 107. 149 Sur la fonction rituelle des trouvailles monétaires dans les tombes de la Grèce classique et hellénistique, voir aussi Kurtz, Boardman 1971, p. 166, 211; Morris 1992, p. 105-106. 150 Lucien, Sur le deuil, 926, 10. 151 Pour un passage en revue des sources antiques relatives à l’obol de Charon, voir Stevens 1991, p. 215-225. 152 Alexandrescu 1966, p. 166-167, XXII.5 et 11; p. 179, II.10 ; p. 181, XXII.9 ; p. 187, XXXIV.5 ; p. 189, XXXI.4 et p. 194, XXXVII.5. 153 Bucovala 1967, p. 13, no 3 = I, i et j ; p. 42, 30 = XIX, 1; p. 43, 31 = XXIVg; p. 50-51, 3= XXIy, 10-11; p. 80, 48 = CCCXLIg; p. 90, 50= XXIIe; p. 100, 61 = XXXIVd et p. 104, 63 = XLIIIe. 146

350

VASILICA LUNGU: NECROPOLES GRECQUES DU PONT GAUCHE: ISTROS, ORGAMÉ, TOMIS, CALLATIS Tichilesti161, Rachelu162, ont livré des céramiques grecques qui témoignent des échanges entretenus précocement, selon toute vraisemblance par la colonie d’Orgamé, avec les populations indigènes. Selon J. Boardman, les Grecs seraient venus dans le Pont-Euxin pour y faire du commerce autant que pour y chercher des terres163. Or la cité d’Orgamé était située dans une région côtière au débouché de voies commerciales en provenance, tant de l’arrière-pays que de la vallée du Danube ou des autres sites du littoral de la mer Noire. Sans vouloir trop insister trop sur cet aspect de la question, il nous semble que la colonie d’Orgamé réunit quelques-unes de plus importantes caractéristiques d’une véritable emporion grecque au cours des VIe–IVe siècles av. J.-C.164 avec un port maritime sur le flanc sud et un réseau viaire developpé vers l’intérieur des terres de Dobroudja. À partir début du IIIe s. av. J.-C. on remarque la présence plus soutenue des populations indigènes de Gèto-Daces à Orgamé, identifiées dans les tombes à incinèration en vases-urnes modelés165.

l’aire ionienne sous la protection de Milet. Les données chronologiques livrées par les tombes fouillées s’accordent bien avec certaines informations concernant la colonisation ionienne-milésienne du Pont Euxin, telles que transmises par les sources écrites concernant la fondation de la ville voisine d’Istros154. On parle toujours d’un synchronisme entre l’organisation de l’habitat et celui de la nécropole au moment de la fondation d’une cité grecque. Si les fouilles développées à l’intérieur de la cité n’ont pas permis de suivre les traces et la chronologie des étapes de l’organisation de l’espace urbain, les tombes de la deuxième moitié de VIIe s. av. J.-C. et de la première moitié du VIe s. av. J.-C. déjà alignées par rapport à la route principale et repartises dans les complexes familiaux hiérarchisés indiquent une certaine systématisation de type urbain. Il est ce qui les fouilles récentes de la nécropole d’Orgamé permettent de proposer, compte tenu du fait que les tombes fouillées étaient rassemblées au même endroit. Dans la nécropole d’Orgamé sont mis en évidence des grands tumuli autour desquels se sont groupés des tumuli plus modestes. Cette pratique révèle donc l’existence des critères familiaux comme principe régulateur des normes funéraires. La présence de groupements de tombes à proximité de la route et de l’héroon constitue les principaux indices en faveur de l’existence d’une nécropole organisée à ses débuts. L’implantation de la nécropole d’époque archaïque montre que nous avons affaire ici à un espace réservé aux familles aristocratiques. Quant à la part grandissante accordée à l’incinération au cours des VIIe-IIIe siècles av. J.-C., elle pourrait être le résultat d’un mimétisme vis à vis des rites aristocratiques par les autres classes sociales. On peut donc supposer que la polis d’Orgamé a connu à l’origine un régime oligarchique, comme d’ailleurs presque toutes les cités ioniennes du Pont Euxin, où le pouvoir était concentré entre les mains de quelques familles, sans doute héritières du fondateur de la cité.

En effet, les données archéologiques remontant à la plus ancienne période d’occupation du site sont fondamentales pour l’histoire de sa fondation et de l’organisation de la cité, mais pas seulement. Elles constituent une base de référence et de comparaison avec les autres cités coloniales et apportent une contribution importante à l’étude de la civilisation grecque dans le bassin du Pont. TOMIS La cité antique de Tomis, l'actuelle Constantsa, située à une quarantaine de kilomètres au sud d'Istros, compte parmi les plus importantes colonies grecques du Pont Gauche. Fondée au VIe s. av. J-C.166 par les Milésiens, elle a bénéficié, dès le début, du statut de polis, confirmé par la nature même de ses institutions, de type milésien. Trois siècles plus tard, vers 257-253 av. J.-C., la tradition littéraire mentionne Tomis comme emporion à l'origine du conflit entre Callatis et Byzance167. Dans ce contexte du IIIe s. av. J.-C., la ville a connu une deuxième

Même si, pour plusieurs tombes, la récupération intégrale des informations n’a pas été possible, toutes les données nous paraissent concorder avec l’hypothèse d’un ensemble de tombes organisé selon les normes d’une nécropole grecque urbaine. La diversité des importations indique que la cité a fonctionné comme un véritable comptoir commercial, ce que confirment aussi les nombreuses découvertes effectuées dans l’arrière-pays proche. Les fouilles de Visina155, Beidaud156, Enisala157, Sabangia158, Ghiolul Pietrei159, Celic Dere160,

orientale et amphores à bandes brun rougeâtres de Chios. Fouilles V. Lungu, 1986-1988. Inédits. 160 Fouilles systématiques G. Simion 1988 ; 2003, p. 234, fig. 10a,b ; Manucu Adamesteanu 1996b, p. 40, fig. 3.5 et note 5, cothon corinthien et amphores de Clazomène et de Chios. 161 Manucu Adamesteanu 1996b, p. 40, fig. 2.2 et 3.3, et note 3, aryballos corinthien et plusieurs fragments d'amphores de Lesbos et de Chios. 162 Les fouilles de sauvetage effectuées en 1990 par V. Lungu ont remis quelques fragments céramiques d’époque archaïque: un exemplaire de coupe grecque-orientale à bandes, fragments d’amphores de Chios. Inédits. 163 Boardman 1980, p. 241. 164 Hecatei Milesii fragmenta, a cura di G. Nenci, Firence, 1854, frg. 183 (= Fr.Gr.Hist I, 28, frg. 172). Un bilan des fouilles sur la fortification grecque, voir à Manucu Adamesteanu 1992, p. 55 – 67 et 2003, p. 341-388. 165 Lungu 2001, p. 170, fig. 4.5. 166 Ps. Scymnos, v. 765, A. Diller - éd., p. 167 ; Strabon 319 ; Ovide, Tristia I.IX (sur l’origine du nom de Tomis) ; Pline, HN, IV. 18.15 ; Stoian 1961, p.238-239 167 Memnon, FGrHist III B 434 F 13; Stoian 1961, p. 239.

154

Pour les dernières données, voir Avram 2003, p. 284-286. Manucu Adamesteanu 1980, p. 157-160 ; 1983, p. 174-178. Simion, Lazurca 1980, p. 37-54, pl. IV, fig. 9, col a lèvre d’une amphore de Chios ; Simion 2003, p. 96, fig. 10, amphores de Chios, Lesbos et Clazomène; p. 98, fig. 12, céramique grecque fine ; p. 130, fig. 5c. 157 Simion 1971, p. 63-129; 2003, p. 312, fig. 12; p. 328, pl. 2. 3,5-6. 158 Simion 2003, p. 173, fig. 1d. 159 À la suite des fouilles de sauvetage ont apparu quelques fragments des vases importés archaïques : coupes à bandes d’origine grecque155 156

351

ANCIENT GREEK COLONIES IN THE BLACK SEA 2 fondation à l'initiative d'Istros avec, comme fondateurs mythiques, les Dioscures, attestés également comme sauveurs à Istros (ISM I, 112)168. Comme le constatait en 1854 Xavier Hommaire de Hell, au cours de son voyage en Dobroudja169, Tomis, englobée à cette date au sein de l'Empire Ottoman, « se recommande également par l’importance de sa propre histoire, attestée par l’innombrable quantité de débris antiques, aussi riches que divers, qui font de cette localité un véritable musée en plein air».

recherches n'a pu être développé pour parvenir à une meilleure connaissance des nécropoles de Tomis. Les fouilles de sauvetage sont encore très fréquentes et très fructueux, même si Tomis demeure, comme Callatis d'ailleurs, une des villes grecques les plus exposées aux effets destructifs de leur emplacement au-dessous d'une ville moderne. Cette étape a été franchie avec les fouilles menées, entre 1961 et 1966, par M. Bucovala, sur quelque 400 tombes appartenant à plusieurs nécropoles, explorées partiellement et remontant à des époques différentes173. A cette occasion, une vaste nécropole d'époque hellénistique a été identifiée à l'extérieur de la cité, audessus de laquelle s'est développée par la suite la ville d'époque romaine ; c'est ainsi que le mur d'enceinte du IIIe s. ap. J.-C. recoupe une partie de la nécropole hellénistique. Au cours de ses investigations, M. Bucovala a procédé à l'enregistrement des données archéologique de 79 tombes de cette nécropole - qu'il appelait nécropole A -, localisée plus précisément entre le rempart d'époque hellénistique et celui d'époque romaine174. Les résultats de ces fouilles de sauvetage ont été publiés en 1967 par M. Bucovala et ont grandement contribué à dresser une première esquisse, quoique partielle, des pratiques funéraires en vigueur dans cette cité grecque.

L'occupation de Tomis s'est ainsi poursuivie, presque sans discontinuer, depuis le début du VIe s. av. J.-C. jusqu'à nos jours. La ville a connu des périodes d'intense floruit culturel à l'époque grecque. Aux époques archaïque, classique et hellénistique, c'était un grand centre commercial de la sphère coloniale pontique, grâce à son emplacement en bordure de la mer Noire. Aujourd'hui, la grande ville moderne de Constantsa occupe en partie l'emplacement de l'ancienne cité grécoromaine et de ses nécropoles. Pour s'en tenir aux monuments funéraires d'époque grecque à Tomis, ce sont encore les relations des voyageurs étrangers ou des savants du XIXe siècle qui nous informent sur la présence de tumuli170 ou les découvertes de stèles funéraires171. Jusqu'au début des années soixante, les découvertes occasionnelles de tombes n'ont pas été étudiées d'une manière systématique, si bien qu'une bonne partie de la documentation archéologique - notes sur les découvertes de tombes, ou sur les récupérations de mobiliers funéraires - a été perdue dans l'intervalle. Un bon nombre de tombes et de mobiliers funéraires provenant de tombes détruites entre 1899 et 1909 et, par la suite, en 1931, pendant les travaux d'aménagement du port moderne de Constantsa, n'a pas été enregistré ou leur contenu dispersé.

Une autre étape importante des fouilles portant sur les nécropoles de Tomis, a été franchie, entre 1981 et 1986, sur l’aire extra-muros de la cité romaine tardive, par une équipe du Musée de Constanta, menée par V. Lungu et C. Chera175. Les résultats portent sur plusieurs centaines de tombes d'époque gréco-romaine, où les pratiques funéraires correspondent à celles déjà relevées par V. Barbu et M. Bucovala. Pour ce qui concerne l'époque hellénistique, 16 nouvelles tombes à incinération ont été identifiées.

Les fouilles de sauvetage, conduites d'une manière plus soutenue entre 1959-1960, ont livré près de 185 tombes, réparties en 5 nécropoles, sur une vaste étendue à la périphérie de la ville moderne172.

De 1995-1996 date la publication d'une des dernières découvertes effectuées à Tomis par Bucovala176. Il y présente le mobilier funéraire d'un tombeau hellénistique des IIe-Ier s. av. J.-C., récupéré au cours d'une intervention de sauvetage. L'inventaire se compose de céramique commune, d'objets personnels (miroir, bague en bronze) et de vases miniatures.

Des informations archéologiques plus importantes sur les découvertes funéraires effectuées à Tomis ont été obtenues principalement grâce aux résultats des fouilles d'urgence conduites à partir des années soixante, lorsque de grands travaux d'aménagement urbanistique, menés tant à l'intérieur de la ville qu'à sa périphérie. A partir de cette date, les chantiers édilitaires se sont sans cesse multipliés, contribuant du même coup à l'enrichissement de notre documentation archéologique. Malheureusement, du fait de la superposition des vestiges par l'agglomération moderne sur toute l'étendue de la cité antique, aucun programme spécifique cohérent de

L'ensemble des données accumulées de toutes ces découvertes fortuites a permis d'établir la présence des plusieurs nécropoles d'époque hellénistique à Tomis et leur chronologie du IVe jusqu'au début de l'époque romaine. Jusqu'à présent, on n'a pas trouvé de tombes plus anciennes, attribuables aux étapes antérieures de la cité antique.

168

Stoian 1961, p. 245; Avram 2003, p. 290, avec des commentaires. de Hell 1854, p. 175. 170 de Hell 1854, p. 174. 171 Stoian 1987, p. 193-195, no. 165-167. 172 Barbu 1961, p. 204. 169

173

Popescu 1962, p. 523 ; Bucovala 1967. Bucovala 1967, p. 7. Lungu, Chera 1986, p. 89-114. 176 Bucovalã 1995-1996, p. 73-82. 174 175

352

VASILICA LUNGU: NECROPOLES GRECQUES DU PONT GAUCHE: ISTROS, ORGAMÉ, TOMIS, CALLATIS En ce qui concerne les tombes à incinération, deux types sont à distinguer:

Tombes de la chôra de Tomis Sans être très nombreuses, les recherches archéologiques ou les découvertes fortuites effectuées dans la chôra de Tomis ont livré des informations sur la présence de tombes d'époque grecque dans une série d'endroits plus ou moins éloignés de cette ville. Une tombe tumulaire à chambre voûtée a été signalée sur le territoire de la localité moderne de Techirghiol177. La description de cette découverte, faite en 1930 par Tafrali d’une manière assez confuse et la note sommaire sur le mobilier nous empêchent développer un commentaire plus soutenu. Il faut toutefois rappeler l’attribution aux Scythes, proposée à l’époque par le même auteur. A notre avis, l’architecture de la tombe rappelle plutôt le type des tombes macédoniennes et son identification s’explique bien par la présence des garnisons militaires macédoniennes implantées dans certaines villes pontiques au temps de Lysimaque.

1. tombes à incinération en fosse rectangulaire, à plateforme de combustion et fossé du tirage, ou de type rugbusta, correspondant au type JAa VI d'Istros, où l'orientation des bûchers est presque constamment EstOuest et les restes cinéraires conservés en place sous une couche de terre ; les objets d'offrandes identifiées dans ces tombes portent des traces de cuisson secondaire et, dans plusieurs cas, sont fragmentaires183; 2. tombes à incinération en fosse rectangulaire sans fossé de tirage, équivalentes au type JA V d’ Istros, où ce type est attestée du Ve s. av. J.-C. jusqu'à l'époque romaine184 ; les dimensions moyennes de la fosse sont de l'ordre de 1,85 à 1,95 m de longueur, pour 1,15 à 1,25 m de largeur ; les restes du bûcher sont, soit laissés en place et enterrés tels quels, soit repoussés dans un coin de la fosse ; ces tombes reçoivent souvent une couverture de tuiles en bâtière et sont ensevelies sous une couche de terre dont l'épaisseur ne dépasse pas aujourd'hui 0,80 à 1,0 m par rapport au niveau actuel185.

Dans certains cas, reconnus à Agigea178, Cumpana179, Nazarcea180, Poarta Alba181, les informations archéologiques sont plutôt sommaires et ils ne montrent pas que la dispersion des vestiges d’époque grecque est assez importante autour de la cité de Tomis. La plus importante concentration des tombes (d’inhumation et de crémation) a été signalée dans la zone de Constantza Medeea182, située à 5 km environ de la zone péninsulaire de Tomis et de ses nécropoles hellénistique. Ils annoncent la présence d’un établissement dans la chora tomitaine.

Les deux types sont contemporains, mais il est possible que le deuxième soit plus ancien186. Les plus fréquentes sont les tombes à incinérations à plate-forme de combustion et fossé du tirage, de type JA VI187. Par rapport à ce qu’on connaît dans les cas étudiés à Istros188, Orgamé189 ou Callatis190, à Tomis il n y a pas des tombes à crémation effectuée autrement que sur la place de la tombe. Les tombes étaient individuelles et les bûchers étaient toujours orientés Est-Ouest. La même orientation a été signalée dans les nécropoles grecques d'Orgamé, d'Istros ou de Callatis.

Pratiques funéraires Les tombes connues de la nécropole hellénistique de Tomis ne représentent évidemment qu'une faible proportion de l'ensemble. Cependant, si limité qu'en soit le nombre, ces tombes fournissent des informations substantielles sur les pratiques funéraires en cours à Tomis sur plusieurs siècles, même si celles-ci, collectées lors de fouilles de sauvetage, ne sont pas toujours complètes. Toutes les sépultures répertoriées appartiennent aux IVe-Ier s. av. J.-C. Même si certaines ont été détruites par les travaux d'aménagement modernes, l'ensemble de données est suffisamment dense pour livrer une série d'observations sur les pratiques funéraires.

Les tombes à inhumation forment une série plus restreinte. Il s'agit toujours d'inhumations en fosses simples, de forme rectangulaire, de dimensions moyennes 1,80 x 2 m. Sur la plupart des tombes découvertes intactes, on a pu établir l'orientation qui varie selon les cas entre Est-Ouest et Nord-Sud. Les squelettes, découverts le plus souvent en très mauvais état, n'ont jamais été étudiés191. D'après les offrandes et l'orientation, il est parfois possible de faire la distinction entre les tombes de femmes et celles d'hommes. On

En ce qui concerne le traitement du cadavre, tant l'incinération que l'inhumation sont attestées, avec une nette prédominance, de l'ordre de 2 à 3, en faveur de la première.

183

Bucovala 1967, p. 119 ; Lungu, Chera 1986, p. 93, fig. 1-2. Alexandrescu 1966, p. 260. 185 Bucovala 1967, p. 119 ; Lungu, Chera 1986, p. 93, fig. 3-4. 186 Lungu, Chera 1986, p. 111. 187 Lungu, Chera 1986, p. 111. 188 Alexandrescu 1966, p. 256-257. 189 Lungu 2000a, p. 101-118. 190 Preda 1961, p. 275-303 ; 1966, p. 137-146 ; Bârladeanu Zavatin 1980, p. 216-240. 191 Bucovala 1967, p. 9, M CCCLVII ; p. 10-11, M CCCLIV ; p. 19, M CCCXLII ; p. 20 M CCCXLIII ; p. 21, M CCXLIV ; p. 25, M CCCXLVII ; p. 30, M CCCXXXVII ; p. 31, M CCCXLV ; p. 33, M CCCLI ; p. 36, M CCCXLXI ; p. 65, M XIII ; p. 73-74, M CCCXXXIX ; p. 83, M CDXXV ; p. 85-86, M CCCCXXVI ; p. 90, M XXII ; p. 101, M XLIV ; p. 103-104, M XLIII ; p. 105, M CDXXII ; p. 116, MLIII ; p. 117, M XLII. 184

177 Tafrali 1930, p. 56-59 ; Irimia 1983, p. 72 et note 26a. La description de l’inventaire reste confuse. 178 Irimia 1973, p. 62-63 ; 1980, p. 71, note 38 ; 1983, p. 72, note 22 et p. 92. Il mentionne un groupe de tumuli d’époque hellénistique distribués sur 1km environ en suivant la route Constanta- Mangalia. 179 Irimia 1983, p. 72, 106-110. 180 Bujor 1962, p. 479; Irimia 1983, p. 72 et note 21. 181 Irimia 1973, p. 29-33 ; 1976, p. 37-56. 182 Bucovala 1967, p. 10-11; Irimia 1977, p. 75; 1983, p. 98-101.

353

ANCIENT GREEK COLONIES IN THE BLACK SEA 2 compte également quelques tombes d'enfants, mais leur nombre demeure assez faible. On note aussi la présence d’une tombe familiale à trois inhumations de IVe-IIIe s. av. J.-C. dans la zone de Constantsa sud192, qui annonce une ferme ou un autre établissement de la chora tomitaine.

décoré de motifs végétaux peints en brun foncé sur le fond blanc ou sur le fond d’argile208 ; vase à parfums, comme les lécythes209 ou les unguentaria, à pâte grise à engobe brun ou à pâte beige orangé à décor des bandes peintes en brun, trouvés en grand nombre210. Les vases ouverts de type plats à poisson sont présents seulement dans les tombes de IVe s. av. J-C., tandis les trouvailles d'écuelles proviennent exclusivement de tombes des IIe-Ie s. av. J.-C.211

En général, les nécropoles de Tomis présentent une typologie similaire tant pour l'époque hellénistique que pour les trois premiers siècles de l'époque romaine, et à partir du IIIe ap. J.-C. l'inhumation remplace complètement l’incinération.193

Il est bien évident que les mobiliers funéraires comportent essentiellement des vases céramiques, soit d’importation, soit de production locale. Parmi les productions importées, présentes dans les mobiliers funéraires, on trouve : des askoi à figures rouges212, des coupe-schyphoi attiques à vernis noir213, des canthares à vernis noir ou à décor West Slope de tradition attique214 ou pergaménienne215, des plats à poisson attiques à vernis noir et bord tombant216, des bols à relief217, un petit bol en faïence à décor géométrique estampé et glaçure verte, maintenant presque complètement effacée, rattachable aux vases en faïence d'origine alexandrine218. Ce vase est attribuable par la forme et le décor aux exemplaires de la classe de Fayenceschälchen, datée du IIe av. J.C. (fig. 12)219.

Mobiliers funéraires Dans la nécropole hellénistique de Tomis, les mobiliers funéraires retrouvés peuvent nous donner une idée assez précise des pratiques et, implicitement, des croyances de la population locale. L'inventaire des mobiliers funéraires met en évidence des tombes avec des mobiliers assez modestes, à côté de tombes à riches mobiliers. Le choix de ces mobiliers révèle également la présence des objets personnels (vêtements, miroirs, parure) aux côtés de vases de libations et de vases d'offrande. Les vêtements sont annoncés par des fibules en bronze194 ou par des ornements en céramique similaire aux exemplaires de Callatis195. Les objets de parure sont réalisés soit en métal – par exemple, des colliers en or196, des pendentifs197 ou de bagues198, ou des bracelets199 et des diadèmes en bronze200-, colliers de perles en verre201, ou peuvent se limiter à de simples coquillages202.

Analogies à Istros, Alexandrescu 1966, p. 196, pl. 98, tumulus XXXVII.23, daté du milieu du IIe s. av.J.-C. 208 Bucovala 1967, p. 117, fig. 74, M XLII, fin du Ier av. J.-C.-début du Ier ap. J.-C. ; Lungu, Chera 1986, p. 98 et 101, pl. III.32. 209 Bucovala 1967, p. 55, fig. 35, M VIc, IIe s. av.J.-C. ; p. 132, fig. 93 a,b ; Lungu, Chera 1986, p. 96, 98, pl. I.6 et p. 101, pl. III.22, datés du IIIe au IIe s. av.J.-C. Analogies à Istros, Alexandrescu 1966, p. 231, pl. 84, m 6.2, IIIe s. av. J.-C. ; Coja 1983, p. 56, pl. 39, no. 89, milieu du IIe s. av. J.-C. ; à Callatis, Preda, Cheluţa-Georgescu 1975, p. 64, pl. VI.3, M 11, IIIe s. av. J.-C. 210 Bucovala 1967, p. 14, 122, et fig. 4, M XXc, et 78b,c ; Lungu, Chera 1986, p. 100, pl. I, 8, 9, 10 ; II, 15, 17, 19 ; Analogies à Callatis, Bârladeanu Zavatin 1980, p. 235, m10, pl. VI, 6, 7 ; Preda, CheluţaGeorgescu 1975, p. 68, pl. V, 7. 211 Bucovala 1967, p. 124, 126, fig. 82 a, b, c. 212 Bucovala 1967, p. 12, M 1 e, c’est à dire d’un askos lenticulaire à décor d’une guirlande d’olivier sur la pense. Analogies à Orgamé, tumulus T III, fouilles V. Lungu, inédit. 213 Bucovala 1967, p. 10, MCCCLIV b, daté du IVe siècle av.J.-C. Analogies à Orgamé, tumulus T I88, Lungu 2001, p. 170, fig. 4.2 ; Enisala, Alexandrescu 1978b, p. 87, pl. 65, no 561. 214 Bucovala 1967, p. 24, fig. 13, M CCCXLIII.a, IIIe s. av.J.-C. ; Lungu, Chera 1986, m 7, et p. 98, pl. II.18 ; Analogies à Istros, Alexandrescu 1966, p. 187, pl. 92, tumulus XXXIV.14, daté de la fin du IVe au début du IIIe s. av. J.-C. ; Callatis, Preda, Cheluţa-Georgescu 1975, p. 64, M17, pl. V.1, daté de la fin du IV au début du IIIe s. av.J.C., plus ancien que celui de Tomis ; Orgamé, fouilles V. Lungu, Tumulus TIV et TB95, datés dans le deuxième quart du IIIe s.av.J-C. inédits. 215 Bucovala 1967, p. 37, fig. 26, M CDXXXII, IIIe s. av.J.-C. ; Lungu, Chera 1986, p. 98, 101, M 10, pl. III.23 . Analogies à Istros, Alexandrescu 1966, p. 190, pl. 93, tumulus XXVI.4 ; p. 194, pl. 79, tumulus XXXVII.4, datés entre 200-180 av.J.-C. 216 Bucovala 1967, p. 15, M XXX1 a, avec nombreuses analogies à Isteros et à Orgamé. 217 Ocheseanu 1969, p. 224-226, fig. 16-19 ; Bucovala 1967, p. 57, M VIIIc, fig. 37c ; Lungu, Chera 1986, p. 102, pl. II, 14, M6. 218 Bucovala 1967, p. 60-61, tombe XXXVIII, fig. 38g. 219 Parlasca 1976, p. 135-156, avec la bibliographie. Pour le décor, Lunsing Scheurleer 1972, p. 52, fig. 4 et p. 53 no 6 = Londres, University College, Departament of Egyptology, inv. No 2321.

Dans toutes les tombes, on déposait en grand nombre des vases récipients pour l'eau ou le vin : cruches à col cylindrique de production locale à pâte jaunâtre203, ou de production histrienne204, amphoriskoi205, lagynoi de deux types, à panse arrondi206 ou bi-tronconique207, parfois 192

Irimia 1983, p. 101-104. Bucovala 1967, p. 119 ; Lungu, Chera 1986, p. 94. 194 Bucovala 1967, p. 49, M XXIV; p. 99-100, M XXXIVc. 195 Bucovala 1967, p. 42, fig. 30, M XIXi ; p. 68, fig. 43, M XVc ; Lungu, Chera 1986, p. 96 et 102, pl. I, 7, M 3 ; p. 99, II, 21, M 9 ; p. 101, III, 30, M 11 ; p. 104, IV, 38, M 16, datés au IIe s. av. J.-C. 196 Bucovala 1967, p. 47, M XXIa. 197 Bucovala 1967, p. 113, M XLVIa. 198 Bucovala 1967, p. 113, M XLVIb. 199 Bucovala 1967, p. 73-74, M CCCXXIXd. 200 Bucovala 1967, p.60-61, M IXm. 201 Bucovala 1967, p.60-61, M IXh. 202 Bucovala 1967, p. 60-61, M IXk,l. 203 Bucovala 1967, p. 12, M Ic et p. 22, M XXIXb ; Lungu, Chera 1986, p. 103-104, pl. VI, 36, M 15. Analogies à Istros, Alexandrescu 1966, p. 186, pl. 92, tumulus XXXIV. 4, daté du IVe au IIIe s. av.J.-C. 204 Bucovala 1967, p. 132, fig. 94 a, b, c, e. 205 Bucovala 1967, p. 41-42, M XIX c ; p. 47, M XXI k ; p. 57, M VIII b ; p. 72, M VIII a. 206 Bucovala 1967, p. 52, fig. 34, MVa-c, IIe s. av. J.-C. ; p. 55, fig. 35, M VIa, IIe s. av. J.-C. ; p. 22, fig. 11, M XXIXd, IIIe s. av. J.-C. ; Lungu, Chera 1986, M 1, M 2, M 5, M 7, M 11, M 12, M 13, et p. 98, pl. I, 2, 5, M1 et M 2 ; pl. II, 12, 16, M 5, M 7 ; pl. III, 31, M 12. 207 Bucovala 1967, p. 34, fig. 23, M CCCLVIa, début du IIIe s. av.J.-C. ; p. 35, fig. 24, M XVII a, IIe s. av.J.-C. ; p. 68, fig. 43, M XVb, IIe s. av.J.-C. ; p. 124, fig. 83 ; Coja 1983, p. 55, pl. 38.85, IIIe-IIe s .av.J.-C. 193

354

VASILICA LUNGU: NECROPOLES GRECQUES DU PONT GAUCHE: ISTROS, ORGAMÉ, TOMIS, CALLATIS or ou en bronze, des types déjà mentionnés228, de strigiles en fer229 , bracelets en bronze230, ou de monnaies231, des puisoirs232 etc. Parfois, les tombes des hommes ont livré des strigillia et plus rarement des miroirs, alors que les dépouilles des femmes sont accompagnées de leurs bijoux en or, en argent ou en bronze, tels que bracelets, boucles d'oreilles et bagues, ou de leurs cosmétiques233.

Notons par ailleurs le riche inventaire de la tombe, avec des unguentaria, une cruche du groupe histrien à engobe blanc et à pastille au sommet de l'anse, et une lampe, datables de la première moitié du IIe s.av. J-C. Parmi les importations des vases céramiques à Tomis, il faut aussi noter la présence d'une pyxis à décor brunrougeâtre, témoignant d'une exportation de céramique en provenance de Crète220 à l'époque ptolémaïque. Cet exemplaire se rapproche d'une série plus abondante de vases, en particulier, des hydries ou des lagynoi, caractérisés par un motif de bouquet de trois feuilles et datés après 175 av. J.-C.221. L'inventaire de la tombe comporte d'autres objets, datés généralement vers le milieu du IIe av. J.-C. ou peu après.222

Malheureusement la technique de fouille utilisée n'a pas permis d'analyser plus en détail l'organisation de l'espace sépulcral, ni la façon de marquer les tombes. Il y a parfois des indices sur la présence de stèles funéraires234. En revanche, l'inventaire des offrandes déposées à l'intérieur des tombes, allant du IVe av. J.-C. au début du Ier siècle ap. J.-C., traduit une association constante d'objets personnels et de vases céramiques, témoignant d'une grande diversité de provenances grecques, attique ou coloniale. Parmi ce matériel grec dominent largement les récipients de table, notamment les vases à boire, et les vases à parfums, associés aux objets personnels. En fait, cet usage semble partagé par les autres trois sites présentés ici, un trait qui devrait conduire à une meilleure connaissance des communautés du Pont Ouest et de leurs pratiques funéraires du IVe au Ier s. av. J.-C.

Une autre catégorie de vases importés est constituée par les amphores conteneurs en provenance d'Héraclée Pontique223. Parmi les objets céramiques souvent retrouvés dans les tombes, on trouve encore des lampes de plusieurs types : à pâte grise, à vernis noir et aileron latéral224, à pâte orange, sans vernis et décor radial225 ou à décor de demioves sur le réservoir226, qui doivent correspondre à des importations et d'autres à des productions locales ou régionales. Parmi ces dernières, on compte aussi des cruches à pastille au sommet de l’anse227, en céramique peinte ou simple.

Démographie et société Un des intérêts majeurs de cette analyse réside dans l'observation des particularités ethniques. En effet, il est bien clair que, si l'inhumation et l'incinération sont toutes deux attestées, cette dernière est de loin la plus répandue, comme sur toutes les autres colonies ioniennes du Pont Ouest. La situation qui se dégage de la sélection du contenu des mobiliers funéraires témoigne d'une intégration certaine de la culture grecque. L'opinion généralement acceptée attribue une large majorité de ces tombes aux ressortissants grecs de Tomis235.

Le répertoire d’objets métalliques est assez varié ; il est formé de boucles d’oreille, de colliers et de bracelets en 220 Bucovala 1967, p. 69-70, tombe XLIV, fig. 44b. Lidia Forti a retrouvé des ressemblances stylistiques pour ce vase sur une hydrie découverte dans la nécropole d’Itanos (Crète), voir Forti 1984, p. 226, note 30. J’ajoute une autre analogie pour le décor, trouvée sur une hydrie de groupe Clay Ground, analysée par Callaghan 1983, p. 123129, pl. 17, b-c, 56.5.41. 221 Le motif étant attesté sur les monnaies d'Antiochus IV (175-164 av. J.-C.), cf. Callaghnan 1980, p. 33-47 ; 1983, p. 126. 222 De l'inventaire fait partie un unguentarium, voir Bucovala 1967, p. 70-71, fig. 44, c, avec des analogies à Pella ou à Veroia, daté vers et après le milieu du IIe av.J.-C, cf, Allamani, Tsanavari 1990, p. 153, fig. 79g. 2. Le lagynos et la lampe de l'inventaire funéraire, voir Bucovala 1967, p. 70-71, fig. 44, a et d., viennent aussi de la même époque. 223 Bucovala 1967, p. 10-11, M CCCLIVa. 224 Iconomu 1967, p. 46, fig. 73, no. 100, type IV: deuxième et troisième quart du IIIe s. av.J.-C. ; Bucovala 1967, p. 17, fig. 6, M CCCXVIIIa, daté de la fin du IVe au début du IIIe s. av.J.-C. ; Lungu, Chera 1986, p. 101-102, M 10, pl. III, 25. Analogies à Callatis, Preda, Georgescu 1975, p. 64, pl. V, 2 ; pl. VI, 5, IIIe s. av. J.-C. 225 Iconomu 1967, p. 10, fig. 13, 14, type V, deuxième moitié du IIIe s. av.J.-C. ; Bucovala 1967, p. 47, fig. 33, M XXIi, fin du IIIe-début du IIe s. av.J.-C. ; Lungu, Chera 1986, p. 102, pl. I, 4, M1. Analogies à Callatis, Iconomu 1968, p. 265, fig. 47. 226 Lungu, Chera 1986, p. 102, pl. III, 26, M11. 227 Bucovala 1967, p. 42, fig. 30 : M XIXb, IIIe-IIe s. av. J.-C.; p. 52, fig. 34 : M Vd, IIe s. av. J.-C. ; p. 55, fig. 35, M VIb, IIe s. av.J.-C. ; p. 57, fig. 37, M VIIIa, IIIe s. av. J.-C. ; p. 62, fig. 39, M Xa, IIe s. av. J.C. IIe s. av. J.-C. ; p. 65, fig. 41, M XIIIb, IIe s. av. J.-C. ; Lungu, Chera 1986, M 6, M 8 et p. 97, pl. II, 13, 20 ; pl. III, 29 ; Istros, Alexandrescu 1966, pl. 98, tombe XXXVII.26, datée de la première moitié du IIe siècle av.J.-C. ; Orgame, plusieurs exemplaires datés du IIIe s. av. J.-C. Fouilles, V. Lungu. Inédits ; Callatis, Bârladeanu Zavatin 1980, p. 231, pl. I. 4, pl. VI.1-2, datées du IIe siècle av. J.-C.

A en juger d'après l'ensemble de la nécropole hellénistique, il semble toutefois que, dans les secteurs explorés, les tombes ne manifestent pas de variations bien importantes, ni sur le plan architectural, ni sur celui de la composition des mobiliers funéraires. Les différences d'ordre matériel sont donc presque insignifiantes, un fait qui nous autorise à reconstituer une communauté assez homogène, sans élites définies par des pratiques funéraires ostentatoires. Dans certains cas toutefois, on a cru voir dans une série de tombes à incinération d'époque hellénistique, où ont 228

Bucovala 1967, p. 129-130, fig . 89 c, d Bucovala 1967, p. 108-109, M XXXIXf. 230 Bucovala 1967, p.47-51, M XXIp. 231 Bucovala 1967, p.47-51, M XXIy, et p. 131, fig. 91. 232 Bucovala 1967, p. 39, M XXIIIc. 233 Bucovala 1967, p.97-98, M XXXVIIIi. 234 Stoian 1987, les plus anciennes datent de IIe-Ier s. av. J.-C., p. 193195, nos 165-167. 235 Barbu 1971, p. 455 ; Lungu, Chera 1986, p. 94. La domination de la population grecque est mise en évidence aussi par les documents épigraphiques, voir Stoian 1961, p. 269. 229

355

ANCIENT GREEK COLONIES IN THE BLACK SEA 2 été trouvés des objets d'origine Gète, des éléments de la population locale présente également dans la cité de Tomis236.

étaient installés » ; un deuxième cimetière antique, de moindre importance, était situé à un kilomètre au sud de la ville243.

CALLATIS

O. Tafrali, lui aussi, demeurait frappé par le grand nombre des tumuli qui entouraient à l'époque la ville moderne de Mangalia, au nord et à l'ouest notamment. « On se dirait en présence d'un vaste cimetière, dont les tombes gardent encore leur secret. »244 O. Tafrali supposait également que plusieurs d'entre eux avaient dû être violés dès l'antiquité, ce qui était le cas du tombeau publié par V. Pârvan, mentionné plus haut. Il en a fourni une description plus complète : celui-ci qui était formé d'une dromos, conservé sur 1,85 m de long et composé de trois blocs de pierre calcaire ; une entrée, pourvue d'une porte large de 0,95 et haute de 2,08 m, ouvrait du côté sud ; à l'intérieur du tombeau, on descendait par un escalier de trois marches dans une pièce unique, longue de 2,03 m et large de 2,04 m, aux parois construites en pierres de taille et recouvertes d'un stuc coloré en rouge ; la voûte de la salle était admirablement construite en grands blocs, soigneusement taillés et ravalés, montés en encorbellement. « L'impression est celle d'une tholos ou d'une voûte mycénienne », précisait même O. Tafrali245. A quelque 10 m de distance à la périphérie de la tombe, il notait encore la présence d'un cercle de pierres délimitant la base du tumulus.

Les fouilles pratiquées depuis des années à Callatis fouilles de sauvetage le plus souvent - ont mis au jour plusieurs monuments importants dans le périmètre habité et les nécropoles antiques237. Les résultats obtenus sont le fruit de longues années de travail effectuées en plusieurs étapes : 1) une première étape est dominée, à partir de la fin du XIXe s., par la personnalité de Gr. Tocilescu et, dans les années qui ont suivi la première Guerre Mondiale, par celles de ses successeurs V. Pârvan, O. Tafrali et de Th. Sãuciuc - Sãveanu ; 2) une seconde étape, qui a débuté après les années cinquante, a été placée sous l'égide de C. Preda et de V. Georgescu ; 3) la troisième, qui se poursuit encore actuellement, est le fait de la nouvelle équipe de recherche du Musée de Callatis. Cette politique de fouilles intensives est cependant soumise aux contraintes engendrées par les projets d'urbanisme développés par la municipalité. Comptant parmi nos meilleures sources d'information sur les nécropoles de Callatis, la description des environs de Mangalia faite par Evlia Celebi au XVIIe siècle mentionnait la présence d'un grand nombre des tumuli. Une inscription funéraire publiée par Gr. Tocilescu en 1887 en a permis l'identification, jusque là déduite de la seule présence d'une nécropole du IVe siècle av. J-C. à proximité238; parallèlement, Gr. Tocilescu attirait, lui aussi, l'attention sur le nombre impressionnant de tumuli aux alentours de la ville de Mangalia239. Parmi les monuments funéraires les plus importants de Callatis jusqu'au début du XXe siècle, on trouve une sépulture tumulaire à deux chambres et dromos, construite en gros blocs de calcaire et peinte en rouge, décrite par V. Pârvan en 1923240. Elle avait été découverte trente ans plus tôt par des habitants, qui utilisèrent le monument comme carrière pour la construction d'une route241.

Parmi les autres monuments funéraires de Callatis étudiés par O. Tafrali, on trouve aussi un tumulus à sépultures multiples d'époques différentes246. La tombe la plus ancienne est une inhumation en pseudo-ciste, faite de pierres sommairement disposées, datant de l'époque hellénistique d'après le mobilier funéraire déposé aux pieds du défunt. Au-dessus de la ciste ont été déposés successivement plusieurs squelettes, dont deux ensevelis verticalement. Un deuxième tumulus recouvrait une tombe à incinération en fosse simple, semi-circulaire, protégée par des pierres. Elle a livré quelques fragments d'ossements humains calcinés et deux perles d'ambre provenant d'un collier, ce qui suggère que l'on a affaire à une sépulture féminine.

En 1924, O. Tafrali présentait pour la première fois à Paris à l'Académie des Inscriptions un rapport complet sur les monuments de la cité pontique, faisant le point sur l'état des connaissances sur les nécropoles et les pratiques funéraires de Callatis242. Il a notamment fourni des indications sur l'emplacement des nécropoles par rapport au rempart de la ville antique : à l'ouest de la cité, tout près de l'enceinte, se trouvait un premier cimetière antique, en grande partie dévasté par les « potiers qui s'y

Th. Sauciuc Saveanu a procédé, à partir de 1923, à plusieurs campagnes des fouilles de sauvetage, dans le cadre d'un vaste programme de collecte d'informations archéologiques. Malgré les contraintes liées au développement rapide de l'agglomération sus-jacente à cette époque et les carences de la méthode archéologique, sa contribution à la sauvegarde du patrimoine archéologique de Callatis s'est révélée déterminante. Parmi les résultats des ses premières campagnes de fouilles archéologiques, il signalait la découverte fortuite d'une tombe à chambre voûtée, détruite au moment de son intervention, mais d'où provenait un rhyton en métal précieux « en forme d'animal fantastique, mi-cerf, mi-

236 Scorpan 1970, p. 81, fig. 1.9, 3.3, et p. 82-83, dans les tombes VIII et LXII, publiées par Bucovala 1967, p. 57, 115 et 131; Lungu, Chera 1986, p. 94-95 , par rapport à une lampe d’origine gète traditionnelle – catuie, retrouvée dans la tombe M 14. 237 Pour les derniers résultats, voir Avram 1999. 238 Tocilescu AEM , 1887, no 34 = Avram 1999, p. 463-464, no. 130. 239 Tocilescu 1902, p. 281. 240 Pârvan 1923, p. 208, fig. 81. 241 Tafrali 1925, p. 241. 242 Tafrali 1925, p. 238-241.

243

Tafrali 1925, p. 240-241. Tafrali 1925, p. 239. Tafrali 1925, p. 242. 246 Tafrali 1927-1938, p. 19. 244 245

356

VASILICA LUNGU: NECROPOLES GRECQUES DU PONT GAUCHE: ISTROS, ORGAMÉ, TOMIS, CALLATIS aigle », ainsi que de plusieurs tombes à inhumation en ciste ou en fosse simple recouvertes de tuiles, sans préciser leur nombre exact. Les rapports des fouilles suivants font référence à de nombreuses autres tombes à inhumation, en ciste ou en fosse couverte de tuiles ou de pierres, et à des tombes à incinération sur place ou aux cendres déposées dans des urnes247.

que la nécropole tumulaire, se soient étendues surtout à la périphérie de la ville à l'époque hellénistique, même si les excavations ont mis en évidence la présence de tombes en divers endroits de la ville moderne. Les tumuli sont présents à peu près partout, de l'ouest au sud et au nord de la ville Mangalia. On en a même trouvé quelques uns, à chambre appareillée, à l'intérieur de la nécropole plane.253 Dans le secteur du stade actuel, on a mis au jour un important monument funéraire, connu dans la littérature de spécialité sous l'appellation de ‘Tombe à papyrus’ (fig. 7)254. Il s'agit d'une tombe à inhumation en fosse creusée jusqu'à 1,50 m de profondeur, aux parois revêtues de gros blocs de calcaire, soigneusement dressés du côté intérieur et dont la couverture était assurée par trois dalles de pierre ; la tombe était surmontée d'un imposant tumulus. A l'intérieur de la ciste on a retrouvé le squelette d'un adulte, serrant un rouleau de papyrus dans sa main droite. Des graines ont été éparpillées au-dessus du squelette. Le défunt était accompagné d'un riche mobilier funéraire, formé notamment de deux couronnes de feuilles en bronze et en argile plaquée d'or, l'une déposée à l'intérieur de la tombe et l'autre, sur les dalles de couverture de la tombe. Des débris de coquilles d'œuf parsemant les dalles de la tombe évoquent des rites funéraires d'un type particulier. Quatre vases à vernis noir, retrouvés dans la couche surmontant la tombe, parmi lesquels un canthare comparable à ceux du groupe A27 de Thompson, daté du deuxième quart du IVe s. av. J.-C.255, permettent d'assigner cette tombe au dernier tiers du IVe s. av. J.-C. Tout le complexe de celle-ci était entouré d'un grand péribole de 14 m de diamètre, fait de blocs de calcaire dressés seulement sur le parement extérieur. Au sud-ouest de la tombe, mais toujours à l'intérieur du péribole, on a exhumé également un autel d'offrandes (ou trápeza), édifié en blocs de calcaire. Fait notable, ce complexe de la “Tombe à papyrus” ne se superpose à aucune autre construction funéraire antérieure.

Impressionné par le nombre considérable de tumuli qui jalonnaient la contrée au nord-ouest de la route de Constantza à Mangalia, R. Vulpe entreprit d'y effectuer entre 1930-1931 une série de sondages dans un secteur en bord de mer, dont il a donné, en 1935-1936, un rapport sommaire, dans lequel il signale quelques trouvailles de tombes à Callatis, à l'occasion de l'étude de deux figurines de terre cuite d'une beauté exceptionnelle, livrées par l'une de ces tombes. 248 Quelques années plus tard, l'équipe de recherche d'Istros, menée par le professeur E. Condurachi, a repris également quelques sondages dans la même nécropole de Callatis avec des résultats plus limités249. Même si, durant toute cette période, les fouilles effectuées n'ont consisté qu'en travaux de sauvetage, les résultats ont montré clairement, dès cette époque, la présence d'une nécropole tumulaire assez étendue et d'une grande importance de point de vue de l'architecture funéraire, des pratiques et des mobiliers funéraires, contemporaine d'une nécropole plane, où « des tombes, qui pour être invisibles à la surface du sol, ne sont pas moins nombreuses »250. La deuxième étape de collecte de données sur les nécropoles de Callatis s'est effectuée dans le cadre d'un programme de recherches plus cohérent, marqué par le passage de simples trouvailles fortuites à celui de fouilles systématiques. Même si, au cours des premières années 1959-1960, les travaux de modernisation de la périphérie nord et est de la ville ont imposé des interventions d'urgence, ils ont permis en même temps la mise en place d'un projet élaboré de recherches archéologiques, menées par une équipe conduite par C. Preda. Le périmètre concerné se situait entre l'actuel Musée d'Archéologie, le stade, au centre-ville de Mangalia et le bord de la mer Noire, où les investigations se sont concentrées sur deux grands objectifs : le tracé du mur d'enceinte de la ville et la nécropole sud d'époque grecque251. Les fouilles ont permis de dégager une surface importante de la nécropole dans un secteur situé à l'angle nord-ouest du rempart d'époque impériale, où plusieurs monuments funéraires, datés des périodes classique et hellénistique - IVe-IIIe siècles av. J.-C. -, étaient dispersés sur une surface de près de 3 ha252. Il semblerait que, tant la nécropole plane

Dans le secteur environnant, on a mis en évidence deux autres zones de la nécropole, distinctes sur le plan architectural comme sur celui du mobilier. Un complexe de tombes à incinération, regroupant trois tombesbûchers, a été découvert quelques mètres plus au sud de la ’Tombe à papyrus’ (fig. 13)256. Tous les trois sont rassemblées dans une construction rectangulaire de 12m x 6 m de pierre taillés, qui à notre avis, suggère la présence d’un hérôon. Parmi les mobiliers funéraires 253 Tafrali 1925, p. 242, fig. 2 ; Pârvan 1974, fig. 81 ; Preda 1962, p. 157-172 ; Irimia 1983, p. 118-123 ; 1984 , p. 67-72 ; Avram 2001, p. 626 et note 100. 254 Preda 1961, p. 275-303, et fig. 1, 15, 16 ; Preda, Popescu, Diaconu 1962, p. 445-448, fig. 6a,b. Sur la signification de la Tombe à papyrus, voir Pippidi 1967a, 203-210 ; 1967b, p. 121-132. 255 Preda, Popescu Diaconu 1962, p. 447, fig. 7; Preda 1961, p. 279, fig. 3.2; Rotroff 1983, cat. 2, pl. 51, p. 264, “…cannot have been made much later than ca. 350”, note 28 = Agora XII, no 707; eadem, 1987, p. 242, cat. 1-2, “cca 325 BC”. 256 Preda, Popescu, Diaconu 1962, p. 448, fig. 8; Preda 1961, p. 277, fig. 1, et p. 296, fig. 15.

247 Sauciuc Saveanu 1925, p. 114-115 ; 1935-1936, p. 248-249 et 285287. 248 Vulpe 1935-1936, p. 329-339. 249 Condurachi et colab. 1951a, p. 156-157. 250 Vulpe 1935-1936, p. 329. 251 Preda 1961, p. 275-303. 252 Preda, 1961, p. 276 ; Popescu 1962, p. 523.

357

ANCIENT GREEK COLONIES IN THE BLACK SEA 2 livrés par deux de ces tombes, mentionnons entre autres les restes de couronnes du même type que celles trouvées dans la tombe décrite plus haut, plusieurs fragments de vases grecques hellénistiques, 2 strigiles en fer.

allant du milieu du IVe au début du IIIe siècle av. J.-C. comme un possible repère chronologique étudié autour de la Tombe à papyrus. Afin de compléter le tableau des découvertes funéraires de Callatis, il convient de signaler une découverte assez récente (1993) qui n'a été que sommairement traitée : il s'agit d'une tombe à chambre voûtée de forme rectangulaire (3,56 x 3,62m) et à dromos (9,55x 1,61m) composé de deux parties : un premier tronçon, attenant à la chambre funéraire et, donc, contemporain de celle-ci, est voûtée en plein cintre, alors que le deuxième tronçon de la galerie, rajouté après coup, est voûté en ogive daté du III av. J.-C.262. Des fouilles récentes de sauvetage on livré une tombe à crémation en fosse du premier quart du IIIe s. av. J.-C. à l’ouest de Callatis263.

Au voisinage immédiat de la construction circulaire en pierre faisant office de péribole de la ‘Tombe à papyrus’, on a retrouvé, du côté nord-est, une importante concentration de tombes d'incinération en urnes, alors que, dans le secteur ouest de la nécropole, ce sont les tombes à inhumation, construites ou creusées en pleine terre, qui prévalent. A la limite nord, entre les deux aires, on a retrouvé encore une tombe désignée par le sigle M.16 257, renfermant une hydrie du type de Hadra, réutilisée comme urne cinéraire258, dont C. Preda a bien identifié l'ornementation et donné le contenu, formé d'ossements calcinés et de fragments d'une couronne semblable à celles qu'on avait retrouvées dans la Tombe à papyrus. Le plan des fouilles, publié en 1961, laisse voir que la tombe M.16 occupait, ainsi que quelques autres tombes des deux séries, l’aire voisine de la Tombe à Papyrus.

Tombes dans la chora de Callatis Dans les environs de la ville antique, ont été signalées des trouvailles isolées à caractère funéraire, comme à 2 Mai264, Comana (IIe s. av. J.-C.)265, à Néptun (La Tène géto-dace et Ier-IIe s. av. J.-C.)266 et 23 August267, qui pourraient correspondre à la présence, dans la chôra de Callatis, de nécropoles aux pratiques funéraires comparables à celles de la cité. La tombe à chambre double et dromos de 2 Mai a été volée avant de l’intervention de C. Preda, mais les fragments céramiques récupérés montrent des imitations locales des vases à vernis noir de la typologie attique, des petits bols à lèvre incurvée, des plats ou des schyphoi à décor estampé, datables de la première moitié du IIIe s. av. J.-C.268

Le matériel archéologique recueilli consiste, pour l'essentiel, en un groupe de céramiques datable des deuxième / troisième quarts du IVe s.av. J.-C. Dans les autres tombes situées au même niveau que la tombe M.16, a été retrouvée une amphore du type Solocha I, faisant office d'urne funéraire dans la tombe la plus proche du côté NE (M.8) et également datable des deuxième / troisième quarts du IVe s.av. J.-C.259 Dans le secteur Ouest, renfermant des tombes d'inhumation, les plus proches comparenda sont les tombes M.4 et M.5 , dont le mobilier, selon l'auteur, comprenait quelques vases grecs, datables des IIIe-IIe siècles av. J.-C., dont certains à vernis noir et d'autres à engobe rouge, ainsi que de la verrerie de couleur et une bague de fer (dans la tombe M5)260. N'ayant bénéficié que d'un accès limité à ce matériel resté inédit, nous ne pouvons que conjecturer que ces pièces ne sont pas très éloignées dans le temps de celles que nous venons de mentionner. Ces dernières forment un groupe assez unitaire chronologiquement, comme formé de vases attiques à figures rouges et à vernis noir de la dernière partie de l'époque classique261,

Parmi les plus importantes découvertes funéraires en Dobroudgea figure une tombe sous tumulus, la première d'une série plus nombreuse, explorée à proximité du village moderne de Topraisar269. Les dimensions relevées - 20 m de diamètre de 20 m pour une surface au sol de 80 m2 -, sont celles d'un monument funéraire d'une certaine importance. A l'intérieur du tumulus, on a fouillé un fossé périphérique de 0,50 m à 1, 20 m de largeur, pour une profondeur allant de 0,50 à 0,60 m par rapport au niveau

49-50 (lécythes à palmette), datés entre la fin du IVe siècle et le début du IIIe siècle av. J.-C., et d’Eridanos, Schlörb-Vierneisel 1966, fig. 46, 8.126 ; 9, 110, 120, 122 ; fig. 53, 4.139 ; fig. 67. I. 9. D’autres analogies sont à signaler dans la nécropole de Céramique d’Athénes, cf. Kovacsovics 1990, nos 30.114 ; 10.1 ; 11.1 ; 1, Taf. 29.5 (lécythes à palmette) ou d’Olynthe, Robinson 1950, p. 144-145 ; pl. 101, nos 91-91 (lécythes à oie) et pl. 103, no 101 (lécythe à palmette), datés du première quart du IVe s. av. J.-C. 262 Georgescu, Lascu 1995, p. 44-45; Ionescu, Georgescu 1997, p. 164 ; Avram 2001, p. 624-626. 263 Pâslaru, Colesnic 2004-2005, p. 408, m3 et fig.1. 264 Sauciuc-Saveanu 1941-1944, p. 247-248, tumulus fouillé en 1937 ; Preda 1962, p. 157-172, daté du IIIe s. av. J.-C. ; Popescu 1962, p. 523. 265 Aricescu 1961, p. 81; Ocheseanu 1969, p. 223-224; Irimia 1983, p. 72; Avram 2001, p. 626. 266 Iconomou 1968, p. 260-261; Irimia 1983, p. 72 ; Avram 2001, p. 626. 267 Irimia 1983, p. 94-96. 268 Preda 1962, p. 163-164, fig. 5, 6 et p. 165. 269 Irimia 1976, p. 37-56 ; 1983, p. 72.

257

Preda 1961, p. 277, fig. 1 Preda 1961, p. 298-299 et fig. 17. Sur la chronologie des amphore Solocha I de la deuxième moitié du IV au premier quart du IIIe s. av.J.-C., voir A.Avram, ’Zo sind die Amphoren von Type Solocha I hergestellt worden ?’, Dacia NS 33, 1989, p. 248-250, fig. 1.3. 260 Preda 1961, p. 280 et fig. 3. 261 Les repères importants pour en fixer la chronologie sont : un couvercle de lékanis à figures rouges, Preda 1961, p. 283, fig. 7, identifiable dans The Group of Vienna Lekanis, cf. Boardman 1989, cat. 402, daté après 370-360 av.J.-C., et une salière à vernis noir découverts dans la tombe M20, Preda 1961, p. 279, fig. 3.7, qui date de la seconde moitié du IVe siècle av.J.-C., cf. Rotroff 1983, p. 267, cat. 6, fig. 5 et pl. 51; eadem, 1997, p. 347, cat. 1075, fig. 65, pl. 79, cca. 325 ; deux lécythes à figures rouges de la tombe M12, Preda 1961, p. 279, fig. 3.1 et 3.4, ont des analogies dans les nécropoles d’Apollonia, cf. Ivanov dans Venedikov et al. 1963, p.104 –116, cat. 64, pl. 48 et p. 124, cat. 68 , pl. 258 259

358

VASILICA LUNGU: NECROPOLES GRECQUES DU PONT GAUCHE: ISTROS, ORGAMÉ, TOMIS, CALLATIS antique270. La zone centrale de la tombe avait déjà été détruite par les interventions des pilleurs d'antiquités quelque temps auparavant et, par conséquent, aucune trace de sépulture n'a été relevée au cours de la fouille conduite par R. Ocheşeanu. Les opérations de sauvetage se sont donc bornées à récupérer le mobilier funéraire identifié dans le fossé périphérique et formé de 22 amphores hellénistique provenant de Thasos (1 exemplaire) et d'Héraclée Pontique (21 exemplaires), d'un schyphos à figures rouges, de quelques fragments d'un vase modelé et quelques débris osseux provenant des offrandes de chevaux et concentré sur un tronçon de 10 m de long de ce fossé271. D'après les analogies concernant la présence du fossé périphérique et, surtout, des offrandes de chevaux, relevées aussi à Istros, l'auteur de la publication, M. Irimia, le considère comme un des monuments princiers mis en relation avec les chefs des Scythes plutôt que des Gètes272.

partie d'entre elles renferment de riches mobiliers funéraires275. Tombes à inhumation La plupart des tombes à inhumation, de plan rectangulaire, étaient orientées Est-Ouest, avec des variations de quelques degrés seulement. On peut distinguer trois modes d'ensevelissement : • soit en ciste simple, construite en blocs de pierre calcaire276 ; • soit en ciste double, construite aussi en blocs de pierre calcaire, avec deux compartiments occupés invariablement par une couple, homme-femme277 ; • soit en fosse simple, creusée en pleine terre et recouverte d’une ou plusieurs pierres, d’orientation général Est-Ouest278 . Dans les cas des tombes à inhumations, les sépultures des adultes offrent une typologie comparable à celles abritant des enfants279. Les fouilles ont livré aussi des sépultures d'enfants en urnes - enchythrismoi, où les urnes consistent notamment en amphores280.

Pratiques funéraires Les investigations menées jusqu'à présent dans les nécropoles callatiennes ont porté sur plusieurs centaines de tombes, fouillées de manière plus ou moins exhaustive. Une part importante des données a disparu au cours des travaux d'aménagement modernes. Toutefois, les secteurs explorés ont déjà livré suffisamment d'indices pour conclure à l'existence de plusieurs nécropoles : 1) une nécropole du côté sud de la ville moderne, où en 1974, ont été découvertes 16 tombes, 12 à inhumation et 4 à incinération et une série des trois tumulus à chambre voûtée ; il s’agit de soit-disant ‘Tumulus scythe’ à chambre voûtée, découvert en 1900, d’un autre tumulus signalé dans les années quarante et du tumulus à chambre double investigué en 1961, tous situés près de Mangalia, vers 2 Mai 273; 2) une nécropole identifiée dans la partie nord et ouest274, dont le plus important monument est représenté par la ‘Tombe à papyrus’, considérée comme la principale nécropole de la cité de Callatis. D’ailleurs, la zone nord de la ville moderne de Mangalia est bien marquée par nombreux tumuli, parfois de grandes dimensions arrivant jusqu’à 10 m d’hauteur.

Au fil des nombreuses fouilles, il est apparu que les tumulus abritent des inhumations aménagées à peu près de la même manière que les sépultures de la nécropole plane281. Tombes à incinération L'incinération est généralement effectuée hors de la tombe, sur une bûcher collectif et les restes cinéraires rassemblés dans une urne, en compagnie des quelques offrandes carbonisées. Le mode de construction des bûchers varie du simple amoncellement à une construction élaborée. La forme la plus simple consiste en une fosse-bûcher de forme rectangulaire, peu profonde, creusée sur le pourtour supérieur pour l'ancrage de la base du bûcher. Parfois, on trouve un petit fossé destiné à améliorer le tirage. En général, la fosse de crémation présente une forme ovale et de dimensions proches de celles des tombes à inhumation : les valeurs moyennes se situent autour de 2 m de longueur pour 0,80

Les pratiques funéraires sont les mêmes dans les deux nécropoles : les deux sont bi-rituelles, comme mêlant des tombes à inhumation et à incinération. Typologiquement, les tombes se répartissent entre tombes tumulaires et tombes organisées en nécropoles planes. Seule une petite

275

Preda 1961, p. 275-303 ; 1966, p. 137-146 ; Zavatin-Coman 1972a, p. 103-116=1972b, p. 271-280 ; Cheluţã-Georgescu 1974, p. 169-189 ; Scorpan 1974, p. 191-197 ; Preda, Geaorgescu 1975, p. 55-75 ; Preda, Bârldeanu 1979, p. 97-107 ; Bârlãdeanu -Zavatin 1980, p. 216-240 ; 1985, p. 85-98 ; Avram 1999, p. 7-9. 276 Vulpe 1935-1936, p. 330, fig. 2 ; Preda 1961, p. 291, fig. 13 ; Cheluţa-Georgescu 1974, p. 178, pl. II.d, m5 ; Bârladeanu-Zavatin 1980, p. 220, m2 ; Preda, Bârladeanu 1979, p. 98, fig. 1; Bounegru, Bârladeanu 1990, p. 337, 339 et fig. 3, 1-2. 277 Sauciuc-Saveanu 1941-1944, p. 244-245, fig. 2-3 ; Preda 1962, p. 158 ; 1966, p. 137-140, fig. 1; Bârladeanu-Zavatin 1980, p. 222-225 ; 1985, p. 87, pl. 1; Bounegru, Bârladeanu 1990, p. 335-337, fig. 2. 278 Preda 1961, p. 277, fig. 1, 2 ; Cheluţa-Georgescu 1974, p. 179, m7 ; Bounegru, Bârladeanu 1990, p. 337-338, fig. 3, 3. 279 Preda 1961, p. 282, fig. 6, tombe d’enfant : inhumation en ciste à tuiles. 280 Preda 1961, p. 280, fig. 4. 281 Bounegru, Bârlãdeanu 1990, p. 335-343.

270 Analogies à Istros, Alexandrescu 1966, p. 143-154, 236, 239-240, les tombes XX, XVII, XIX. 271 Analogies à Istros, Alexandrescu 1966, p. 143-159, 236, 239-240, les tombes XII, XVII, XIX XX. 272 Irimia 1976, p. 47 ; 1983, p. 72 et 76. 273 Tafrali 1925, p. 241 ; idem, 1927, p. 19-20 ; Pârvan 1923, p. 208, fig. 81= 1974, fig. 81 ; Preda 1962, p. 165-166, fig. 7, 8/1-2 et note 2 ; 1963, p. 38-39 ; 1966, p. 137-146 ; Preda, Bârladeanu 1979, p. 97-107 ; Bârladeanu Zavatin 1980, p. 216. 274 Pârvan 1923, p. 208 ; Tafrali 1927, p. 19-20 ; Preda 1962, p. 166, fig. 8.1-2 ; Preda, Popescu, Diaconu 1963, p. 445-451 ; Gheluţa Georgescu 1974, p. 178-179 ; Bounegru, Bârladeanu 1990, p. 335-343.

359

ANCIENT GREEK COLONIES IN THE BLACK SEA 2 m - 1 m de largeur et 1 m - 1,50 m de profondeur. Après combustion du cadavre, l'urne renfermant les restes cinéraires avec les offrandes carbonisées est déposée dans la fosse, que l'on recouvre d'une plaque de calcaire ou de tuiles. Il existe aussi des tombes à incinération en ciste, faite de tuiles sur le modèle des tombes à inhumation282.

tombes plus importantes, on trouve des couronnes à feuilles d'or ou à feuilles en céramique dorée. On ajoute parfois des objets d'offrandes destinés à assurer symboliquement le confort survie du défunt, sous la forme de récipients pour aliments solides (écuelles, chytrai) ou liquides (canthares, bols, oenochoés, amphores, lagynoi). La présence de vases à boire, complets ou brisés, prouve donc qu'un ultime hommage était rendu au disparu sous la forme des traditionnelles libations effectuées sur sa tombe.

La plupart du temps, les tombes à incinération sont des tombes individuelles, mais on connaît aussi quelques cas de tombes collectives. L'une d'entre elles, déjà citée, présente les traces de trois crémations parallèles, matérialisées par des loculi de crémation nettement orientés Est-Ouest. Les trois fosses bûchers ont été méticuleusement excavées dans la roche naturelle et leurs abords soigneusement aménagés avec des blocs en pierres calcaire et en pierre de taille (fig. 13, M2)283. Le monument donne une dimension toute nouvelle à ce que nous considérons comme un hérôon284.

Sans être toujours riches, les mobiliers funéraires livrés par les nécropoles de Callatis ont fourni des vases grecs d'importation en grande quantité, notamment des amphores d'origines variées290, ainsi que une lékané à figures rouges291, des lécythes attiques à figures rouges292, des bols à vernis noir et décor estampé293, ou les canthares à vernis noir, sans décor294 ou à décor West Slope. Les unguentaria sont très souvent attestés aussi dans les mobiliers funéraires295. On trouve aussi des hydries à engobe blanc et décor peint en rouge 296, parfois caractéristiques du style de Hadra d’Alexandrie297. Une de ces pièces permet de préciser la datation du complexe funéraire callatien qui, de l'intervalle 300- 240 av. J.-C. proposé par l'auteur des fouilles298 peut être ramené à 260-240 av. J.-C. Une autre hydrie en céramique à décor peint signale plutôt un vase d’importation de la première moitié du IIIe s. av. J.-C. qui appartenait soit au cercle alexandrin soit aux ateliers de Chersonèse, d’où il a été amené par un de 1000 callatiens colonisés dans le royaume du Bosphore après la conquête de la ville par Lysimaque299.

Les urnes sont souvent des amphores-conteneurs d'origines variées, des hydries, soit en bronze (fig. 14)285, soit en céramique286, des amphores hellénistiques peintes (fig. 15)287, ou même pithoi288. Les urnes sont tantôt déposées à l'intérieur d'un caisson en ciste, fait de blocs calcaires dégrossis ou non, tantôt enterrées dans une fosse creusée en pleine terre. Mobiliers funéraires On constate dans les nécropoles de Callatis un souci manifeste d'ensevelir le défunt avec ses objets personnels, ses vêtements et objets de parure (bijoux) ou de toilette (miroir, strigile, lécythes). Il semble, en effet, que les défunts aient été enterrés, incinérés ou inhumés, avec leur vêtements et bijoux, laissés de préférence à leur place : les colliers autour du cou, les bagues aux doigts, les boucles d'oreille aux oreilles etc. Des perles en céramique dorées, des boutons, des rosettes, ou les disques à décor figuré, de fabrication très probablement locale, faisaient probablement le même usage289. Les assemblages dans les tombes signalent des inventaires standardisés, aussi bien pour les femmes (collier, bracelets, boucles d'oreilles, miroirs) que pour les hommes (bagues, strigiles). En ce qui concerne le matériel, il fait toujours des différences entre les tombes des femmes riches en bijoux précieux, en or notamment, et les tombes des hommes, où on trouve toujours assemblés des bagues en fer ou an bronze, avec des strigiles en fer. Dans les

290

Preda 1961, p 280, fig. 4, amphore de type Solocha I. Preda 1961, p 283, fig. 7. 292 Preda 1961, p 279, fig. 3. 1, 4. On trouve des analogies à Istros, Alexandrescu 1966, tumulus II, pl. 90, II.7 293 Preda 1961, p. 279, fig. 3. 7; Preda, Bârladeanu 1979, p. 101. D’autres analogies, à Istros, Alexandrescu 1978, p. 91-93, fig. 15 ; à Orgamé, dans le tumulus TIV, Lungu 1995, p. 263, pl. III.3. 294 Preda, Bârladeanu 1979, p. 98, tombe no 2 ; Preda 1961, p 279, fig. 3.2 ; analagies à Istros, Alexandrescu 1966, p. 182, pl. 91, XXXIII.6. 295 Vulpe 1935-1936, p. 331, fig. 3 ; Sauciuc-Saveanu 1927-1932, p. 422, fig. 24-25 ; p. 433, fig. 40; Preda 1966, p. 137-146 ; Preda, Georgescu 1975, p. 67, pl. 5. 4, 6 ; Preda, Bârladeanu 1979, p. 102, pl. III-IV ; Bârladeanu-Zavatin 1980, p. 219, pl. I, 3, 5 ; p. 230, pl. VI, 4, 67; 1985, p. 87, pl. 1, 1-3. Pour d’autres analogies, voir Tomis, Bucovala 1967, p. 14-22, fig. 4, 8, 11, 17 ; 1969, p . 312. 296 Bârladeanu- Zavatin 1980, p. 216-218, fig. 2. La découverte a été enregistrée en 1974, dans une tombe en ciste de pierre identifiée dans l’enceinte de l’actuel Lycée Industriel du Chantier Naval, à 200 m environ des tombes étudiées entre 1959-1960. Pour les fouilles antérieures dans cette aire, voir Preda 1966, p. 137-146. 297 Les pièces s’inscrivent dans la classe “White Ground” de la classification de Cook 1966, p. 9-10. 298 Les analogies proposées par l’auteur de la première étude ne sont pas tout à fait exactes puisqu’elles portent sur une série d’hydries attiques recouvertes de vernis noir et à décor doré appliqué suivant la technique West-Slope, datées de la seconde moitié du IVe s. av.J.-C., cf. sa référence à Kopcke 1964, fig. 24, 1 et 36, no 88. 299 Preda 1961, p. 275-303 et fig. 17; 1994 (coordinateur), pl. VII. Cette hydrie fait l’objet d’une étude récente, voir V. Lungu, ‘Une hydrie de type Hadra à decor polychrome de Callatis’, Revue des Etudes Sud-Est Européennes XLV, no 14, 2007, à suivre. 291

282

Preda 1961, p. 282, fig. 6. Preda, Popescu, Diaconu 1962, p. 448, fig. 8; Preda 1961, p. 277, fig. 1, et p. 296, fig. 15. 284 Ce monument fait l’objet d’une etude particulière prise en charge par nous, à suivre. 285 Zavatin-Coman 1972a, p. 103-116, Fig. 1. 4-6 =1972b, p. 271-280, fig. 4 a-c. 286 Les fouilles de Sauciuc-Saveanu ont mis au jour une hydrie fragmentaire, cf. Sauciuc-Saveanu 1937-1940, p. 277, fig. 42.1 ; Bârladeanu-Zavatin 1980, p. 217-218, et fig. 2. 287 Bârladeanu-Zavatin 1980, p. 227–228 et fig. 3, Musée de Mangalia, No. inv. 60. 288 Preda, Bârladeanu 1979, p. 99, tombe no 6. 289 Preda 1961, p 286, 288-289, fig. 9, 11 et 12. 283

360

VASILICA LUNGU: NECROPOLES GRECQUES DU PONT GAUCHE: ISTROS, ORGAMÉ, TOMIS, CALLATIS Parmi les pièces en céramique, on compte aussi une amphore à décor peint en blanc sur le fond noir300, des supports301, des figurines302 ou des disques avec représentation des satyres ou des gorgones303. Des raisins en terre cuites ont été mis en relations avec Dionysos chtonien, célébré dans la ville de Callatis304. Trois alabastres d’albâtre ont été retrouvés dans une tombe d’enfants305. L’utilisation des lampes pour les rites funéraires n’est pas fréquente. De même, il y a peu d’exemples de vases modelés ou de perles en verre306.

Démographie et société La variété des formes sépulcrales et des mobiliers funéraires témoigne donc d'une certaine adaptation à la structure ethnique de la communauté callatienne et à l'évolution des pratiques rituelles. La détermination précise des particularités individuelles inhérentes aux divers groupes ethniques présents dans la ville de Callatis n'est pas chose aisée. Toutefois, dans certains cas, les indices ont conduit à des différenciations. La plupart du temps, les tombes des nécropoles de Callatis présentent des particularités que l'on retrouve dans le reste du monde grec entre le IVe et le Ier siècle av. J.-C. Toutefois, dans le territoire de Callatis, on a identifié également quelques tumuli présentant des particularités de construction qui posent des problèmes d'interprétation. Ainsi, dans le cas du tumulus de la ‘Tombe à papyrus’, sa taille et son emplacement, juste devant l'enceinte, de même que le décorum mis en oeuvre dans la chambre funéraire, incitent à attribuer la tombe à un notable callatien de haut rang, parfois identifié avec le fondateur du culte bachique à Callatis ou l'un des hiereîs du thiase313.

Les objets en métal sont parfois d'une richesse remarquable, avec des rhytons, des bijoux en or (boucles d'oreille, diadèmes)307, ou des pièces en bronze (miroirs, bracelets, vases). On peut citer notamment une hydrie en bronze (kalpis), utilisée comme urne dans une tombe de la nécropole, dont l'ornementation s'inspire d'un thème figuré très courant au IVe s. av. J.-C., celui du couple Dionysos et Ariane (fig. 8)308. Les armes sont rares309. Plus fréquentes sont les miroirs en bronze, pour les femmes310, et les strigiles en fer et les bagues en fer, qui forment ensemble un mobilier standard des tombes masculines311.

Par ailleurs, quatre des tumuli fouillés à Callatis ont livré des tombes à chambre funéraire voûtée et dromos, datées de la fin du IVe ou du début du IIIe s. av. J.-C. Ils sont implantés sur une aire restreinte à proximité de l'enceinte de la ville. On y reconnaît un type de construction d'origine macédonienne314, dont la présence pourrait s'expliquer par le passage de la Dobroudja dans la sphère d'influence de Lysimaque.315 Il semble donc que la domination des Macédoniens sur les villes ouestpontiques jusqu'à la mort du Lysimaque, survenue en 281 av. J.-C.316, n'ait pas été sans laisser de traces. Toutefois, en dépit des ressemblances constatées avec l'architecture funéraire macédonienne et de l'occupation même de la ville par les Macédoniens, on persiste à croire que ces tumuli étaient destinés à une élite issue d'une population non grecque habitant les environs de Callatis plutôt qu'à des citoyens grecs317. En partant de Pline, qui atteste la présence des Scythes à Callatis318, on a fait parfois allusion à une lignée “royale” formée de l'aristocratie scythe et identifiée, entre autres, par les portraits des “rois” figurant sur les monnaies319. Avram appuie cette attribution sur une série de sources littéraires invoquant, soit le mélange ethnique de l'aire de la ville dorienne, selon le témoignage de Démétrios de Callatis320, soit l'ancienne appellation de Mikrà Skythía donnée à la Dobroudja, selon celui de Strabon (VII, 4, 5 et 5, 12). Il

Les tombes de la chora de Callatis ont livé des mobiliers semblables et parfois elles sont aussi riches que celles de la ville312.

300

Bârladeanu-Zavatin 1980, p. 227-228, fig. 3. Vulpe 1935-1936, p. 331, fig. 4 ; Bârladeanu-Zavatin 1985, p. 85, 87, pl. 1b. 302 Vulpe 1935-1936, p. 331, figs. 5-9 ; Canarache 1969 ; BârladeanuZavatin 1980, p. 234, pl. VIII ; Preda 1961, p 285, fig. 9.3-5 (papposilen), fig. 10.1-4 (danseuses), 7, 10, (Niké), 8-9 (sirènes chanteuses) ; Bârladeanu-Zavatin 1985, p. 90, pl. 2 ; p. 92, pl. 3 ; p. 94, pl. 4. 303 Preda 1961, p. 285, fig. 9, 1-2 ; Zavatin-Coman 1972a, p. 105, ig. 2 =1972b, p. 273, fig. 2. 304 Preda 1961, p. 293 et fig. 12.1. Sur le culte de Dionysos à Callatis, voir Avram 1999, p. 97-100. 305 Preda 1961, p 282-284, fig. 6 et 8. 306 Bârladeanu-Zavatin1980, p. 221, pl. II, et p. 236, pl. IX ; Preda, Barladeanu 1979, fig. 1. 307 Preda 1961, p. 140, fig. 3. 308 Fouilles de 1970 dans la nécropole a été localisée au long de la route Mangalia-Albesti. Voir Zavatin-Coman 1972a, 107-108, fig. 4, 5, 6 = 1972b, p. 271 - 280, fig. 4 a, b, c. Parmi les analogies étudiées, la plus proche est celle de la collection du Musée Condé, en France, voir Ch. Picard, Trois urnes cinéraires sculptées du Musée Condé à Chantilly, Fondation Eugène Piot : Monuments et Mémoires. Tome 34, 1940, Paris, p. 71-103, pl. VIII ; G. Richter, A Fourth-Century Bronze Hydria in New York, AJA L.2, 1946, p. 361- 367, pl. XXVI, fig. 13. Quant à l’origine, Ch. Picard notait (p. 99) « Ces créations certes, de toreuticiens ioniens, répandus en Anatolie et en Grèce du Nord… ». 309 Preda, Bârladeanu 1979, pl. 5, 3 (couteau); Bârladeanu-Zavatin 1980, p. 226, pl. V (épée celtique). 310 Preda 1961, p. 279, fig . 3, 5 ; Preda, Bârladeanu 1979, tombe no 2, 4, 12. 311 Preda 1961, p. 299, fig . 18 ; Preda, Bârladeanu 1979, tombe no 1, 2, 10, 13, 16 ; Bârladeanu-Zavatin 1980, p. 224, pl. IV.4. 312 Voir, par exemple, la tombe de 2 Mai, avec des vases d’importation d’origine attique et micrasiatique, Preda 1962, p. 163-164, fig. 5-6. 301

313

Avram 1999, p. 8. Andronikos 1987, p. 1-16. 315 Avram 2003, p. 310, avec la bibliographie. Callatis a subi deux siéges successifs, en 313 et à partir de 311, et l’occupation par Lysimaque vers 307, cf. Diodore, XIX 73, 2-7; XX, 25, 1. 316 Diodore XX, 112,2. 317 Irimia 1983, p. 76, les attribue aux roix Scythes; Avram 1999, p. 8 et 21. 318 Pline, Nat. Hist. IV, 44. 319 Condurachi et al. 1951b, p. 54 ; Vulpe 1938, p. 55-57. 320 Ps.-Scymnos, 756-757. 314

361

ANCIENT GREEK COLONIES IN THE BLACK SEA 2 fait aussi état des ressemblances des tombes callatiennes avec les tombes de la noblesse scythe du nord de la mer Noire et soutient même la présence d'une enclave scythe dans le territoire de Kallatis, qui expliquerait l'existence du groupe de tombes à chambre funéraire voûtée et à dromos. « Il n'est pas exclu », ajoute Avram, « que ce soit justement dans ces tombes qu'aient été déposés les corps des 'rois' comme ceux dont les noms figurent sur les monnaies » [Ailios, Kanitès, Sariakos, Tanousa, Akrosas et Charaspes].321

nécropoles d’Istros, d’Orgamé et de Tomis forment une unité régionale qui contraste avec le faciès funéraire propre aux cités milésiennes du Pont Nord, caractérisé par la pratique dominante de l’inhumation. À Bérézan et à Olbia, aux VIe-Ve s. av. J.-C., comme à Tanaïs, à l’époque hellénistique, par exemple, les proportions relevées sont de l’ordre de 4% de tombes à incinération contre 96% de tombes à inhumation. Dans l’aire ouestpontique, où les concentrations de nécropoles tumulaires comptent parmi les plus anciennes, on note, à Orgamé par exemple, à peu près le même rapport entre les deux pratiques, mais inversé cette fois ci en faveur de l’incinération, tandis que dans les nécropoles grecques situées plus au sud, à Apollonia, par exemple, le pourcentage des incinérations est également réduit, avoisinant les 11% du total, cette nécropole se rapprochant ainsi du faciès nord-pontique.

D'autres tombes mettent en avant une relation avec les Gètes, présents également dans la ville aux côtés des Grecs322. Mais comme, à l'appui de cette hypothèse, on ne peut guère faire état que de la présence de vases modelés dans certaines tombes, la prudence s'impose, car il peut s'agir de cas fortuits. La tombe de 2 Mai a été attribuée, comme d’ailleurs deux autres tombes situées près de Mangalia, soit à des personnages importantes de la population grecque, soit à des chefs des tribus des populations Scythes ou Gètes, voisins de la cité323.

Tombes à incinération Les tombes à incinération mises au jour sur les sites en question présentent de nombreux points communs. Le plus fréquent s’avère être la présence de structures tumulaires érigées à l’emplacement du bûcher ou du foyer ou, le plus souvent, au dessus des urnes cinéraires. Dans les nécropoles du Pont ouest, les dépôts funéraires sont attestés aussi bien dans les sépultures planes, que dans les sépultures tumulaires, conservés sur place sur le lieu du bûcher ou déposés dans des fosses ou dans des urnes. Leur examen révèle à la fois des modalités différentes d’aménagement des tombes à incinération.

La diversité des pratiques et des mobiliers funéraires pourrait donc s'expliquer par le mélange ethnique attesté à l'époque hellénistique dans les régions situées près de Callatis, telle que révélée par les sources écrites324. Particularités des nécropoles grecques du Pont Gauche Malgré les carences de la littérature, on constate tout d’abord une relative diversité des monuments inventoriés dans les nécropoles des villes grecques du Pont Gauche. Ceux-ci se prêtent en effet à des classifications assez sûres selon des critères différents :

Alors que la pratique de l’inhumation se généralise dans la plupart des nécropoles grecques d'autres zones du Pont-Euxin, particulièrement dans les tombes planes, de concert avec une diversification dans la construction des monuments, le faciès occidental à incinération conserve une homogénéité apparente. A Istros, l’incinération a été pratiquée, dans la plupart des cas, à l’emplacement même du tumulus : 21 complexes funéraires de ce genre y sont recouverts par des tumuli. Pour certains de ces tumuli, la tombe à incinération primaire se trouve à l’emplacement même du bûcher. Alexandrescu parle de bûchers-tombes, les ossements calcinés demeurant sur le bûcher sans être prélevés ni rassemblés en tas325. Les monuments funéraires relevant de ce groupe sont concentrés sur le littoral ouest, à Istros, à Tomis, à Callatis et à Orgamé.

1. par rapport à la forme de la tombe, il y a des tertres tumulaires isolés, des nécropoles à tombes tumulaires, ou des nécropoles à tombes planes ; 2. par rapport au nombre des occupants, on compte des tombes individuelles, des tombes collectives, ou des complexes mono-familiaux ; 3. par critères d'emphase sociale, on note des sépultures ordinaires ou appartenant aux élites, etc. Les découvertes funéraires du Pont Ouest ont révélé la pratique des deux rites de l’inhumation et de l’incinération. Si l’on raisonne à partir des trouvailles publiées, on constate que la pratique de l’incinération dans les nécropoles planes et/ou tumulaires prédomine sur l’ensemble des colonies grecques du Pont Ouest. Les

Les trouvailles les plus nombreuses des nécropoles du Pont Ouest proviennent de deux types des tombes: de tombes-bûchers à fosse centrale et de tombes-bûchers de surface (au niveau du sol antique). L’incinération ne porte habituellement que sur les restes d’un seul corps d’adulte. A la surface du bûcher on retrouve, en quantités importantes, des restes de charbons ainsi que des amas de bois calcinés, des cendres et des offrandes.

321 Canarache 1933-1934, p. 60-83 ; 1950, p. 215-258 ; Ocheseanu 1970, p. 485-486 ; Avram 2001, p. 631. 322 Scorpan 1970, p. 85, fig . 3, 6; 8, 1. 323 Preda 1962, p. 172. 324 Ps. Scymnos, 756-757, migádas héllenas. L'information de Ps. Scymnos vise particulièrement les régions situées entre Callatis et Dionysopolis.

325

362

Alexandrescu 1965a, p. 164.

VASILICA LUNGU: NECROPOLES GRECQUES DU PONT GAUCHE: ISTROS, ORGAMÉ, TOMIS, CALLATIS Le premier type apparaît comme le plus ancien sur le littoral pontique, attesté dès le milieu du VIIe s. av. J.-C. sur le tumulus-hérôon (TA95) d’Orgame, et compte parmi les plus répandus dans le monde grec. A Istros, les tombes de ce type ont livré aussi des témoignages de sacrifices humains et animaux, de chevaux notamment326. Ce groupe, aux pratiques relevant d’un rituel homérique, a été mis en rapport avec l’aristocratie métropolitaine de Milet327. Les exemples connus montrent également que les ossements brûlés restaient sur le foyer et ne faisaient pas l’objet d’un prélèvement.

soit dans des loculi. Les urnes présentent une typologie variée. Parmi les formes céramiques les plus fréquentes, citons des vases grecs importés, notamment des amphores, des hydries, des cratères, des oinochoai, ou des vases indigènes modelés, etc…, fermés parfois par des couvercles. En règle générale, les urnes étaient disposées de la même manière dans les nécropoles planes et les tumuli, comme à Orgamé et à Callatis330. Les fouilles ont laissé parfois apparaître des structures de protection propres aux sépultures à urne, sous la forme d’enclos circulaires en pierres à Orgamé331, ou d’une ciste à Callatis332. Les offrandes sont déposées, soit à l’intérieur, soit à l’extérieur de l’urne. De petits unguentaria prennent place parfois à l’intérieur de l’urne cinéraire, tandis que les vases à boire restent hors de celle-ci333. D’une manière générale, les tombes à urne ne renferment guère de mobiliers exceptionnellement riches.

Les tertres localisés dans les nécropoles d’Istros et d’Orgamé se distinguent des tertres reconnus dans les autres zones par la présence presque constante de clôtures concentriques et de cercles de pierres, au tracé continu ou discontinu. Parfois on trouve des parallèles dans d’autres nécropoles des colonies milésiennes comme à Olbia328, à Berezan329 ou à Apollonia. Au niveau de ces limites, on relève la présence de divers fragments de récipients céramiques, ce qui les fait interpréter comme des lieux sacrés destinés aux offrandes.

Par ailleurs, les tombes à urne sont plus fréquentes à Orgamé et à Callatis qu’à Istros ou à Tomis. Par rapport aux autres types de tombes à incinération, leur nombre est relativement restreint. Le fait pourrait être mis en relation avec l'évolution des normes religieuses et des structures ethniques des colonies pontiques. À Apollonia, tous les cas d’incinérations à urnes sont attribués à des individus d’origine thrace334. En revanche, à Orgamé ils sont mis en rapport avec la population grecque335. Dans les exemples d’Érétrie, on perçoit une connexion entre l’usage des urnes à incinération et les coutumes de l’élite locale336. Au stade actuel, même si le bien-fondé de ces hypothèses reste encore à être démontré, il est toutefois intéressant de penser qu’une évolution parallèle des pratiques funéraires pourrait exister entre les nécropoles du monde grec.

Les bûchers de ces tombes à incinération sous tumuli sont de dimensions sensiblement constantes, couvrant des aires de diamètre compris entre 3 et 5 m. Parmi les plus grands on peut mentionner le bûcher de quelque 8 m de diamètre, aménagé à côté du foyer, présent dans le tumulus-hérôon (TA95) de la nécropole d’Orgamé. Les bûchers sont généralement entourés d’une aire rubéfiée, engendrée par la chaleur intense de la crémation. Les tombes à incinération sont aménagées, soit au-dessus d’une fosse, soit sous une plate-forme de terre intermédiaire entre le sol antique et le niveau de la tombe (Istros, Tumuli XVII, XIX, XX), soit directement sur le sol antique (Istros, Tumuli XVIII, XXI ; à Orgamé, sauf quelques exceptions, cette dernière pratique constitue la règle générale).

Quelle que soit leur forme, les urnes contiennent toutes des ossements incinérés d’enfants ou d’adultes. Dans la plupart des cas recensés, les informations sur la nature des restes osseux calcinés font défaut. Par conséquent, nous ne savons pas toujours si on a affaire à une collecte symbolique ou à une volonté délibérée de regrouper tous les restes du défunt incinéré.

Le type de tombes à incinération effectuée en dehors de la tombe, caractérisé par le dépôt symbolique des cendres du défunt à même le sol, domine parmi les trouvailles d’Orgamé, alors qu’il est bien moins représenté à Istros ou à Tomis. A Istros, la tombe est placée quelquefois près du bûcher, au sein du même tumulus. Dans ce cas, les ossements étaient ramassés sur le foyer encore brûlant; seule une petite partie de la masse osseuse demeurait en place, alors que la majorité des ossements étaient déposés dans une fosse aménagée à côté du foyer.

Les analyses anthropologiques effectuées sur les trouvailles d’Istros ont montré la présence dans une urne d’esquilles d’os appartenant aux principaux éléments du corps humain, sans que le squelette entier puisse être pour autant reconstitué337. Dans la nécropole d’Odessos, on a découvert un cratère en cloche du style de Kerch, contenant une quantité incomplète d’ossements humains,

Les tombes à incinération à dépôt cinéraire en urne sont attestées dans toutes les nécropoles grecques du PontEuxin. Les urnes sont généralement déposées dans la zone centrale de la tombe, soit au niveau du sol antique,

330

Des exemples similaires sont signalés à Panticapée tout le long des VIe-IIIe s. av.J.-C., cf. Tsvetaeva 1957, p. 237. Lungu 2000a, p. 117, fig. 6, 3-4. 332 Preda 1961, p. 282, fig.6. Parmi d'autres exemples pontiques d'urnes en ciste, à Odessos, voir Toncheva 1974, p. 288-289, fig. 1. 333 Lungu 2000a, p. 117, fig. 6. 4, tumulus TVI. 334 Venedikov et al. 1963, p. 394 (Gerasimov) ; Hoddinott 1975, p. 36. 335 Lungu 2000a, p. 109-110. 336 Bérard 1970, p. 28-32. 337 Nicolaescu-Plopsor 1966, p. 355-358. 331

326

Alexandrescu 1966, p. 146-159, les tumulus XII, XVII, XIX. Alexandrescu 1994b, p. 15-32 ; 1999, p. 137. 328 Skudnova 1988, p. 10, mentione la présence des constructions semicirculaires en pierre et des fosses circulaires pour la protection des tombes, mais leur nombre est assez réduit. 329 Solovyov 1999, p. 81, fig. 60. 327

363

ANCIENT GREEK COLONIES IN THE BLACK SEA 2 tandis qu’à Apollonia les cendres d’un adulte incinéré ont été déposées dans deux bols de dimensions similaires338. Les trouvailles d'une tombe d’Orgamé suggèrent un ramassage partiel (Tumulus TB95, tombe II)339; l’urne, une amphore d’Erythrées de la première moitié du IIIe s. av. J.-C.340, était déposée au-dessus d’un bûcher et orientée plutôt vers le milieu de la tombe que vers les limites de celle-ci, matérialisées par des offrandes déposées au cours de la crémation. Notre hypothèse s’appuie sur l’absence de tout tesson ou de vase d’offrande porteur de traces de cuisson secondaire à l’intérieur de l’urne; on n’y a trouvé que des fragments d’ornement en ivoire du lit funéraire. En outre, il semble que le dépôt des restes cinéraires dans l’urne ait été accompli immédiatement après la crémation du corps, des traces de cuisson secondaire étant observables sur la pense de l’amphore.

manière, la comparaison synchronique et diachronique des nécropoles, met en lumière des relations hiérarchiques entre les tombes. A Callatis, à en juger d’après la documentation numismatique et prosopographique, l’influence du milieu scythe local est assez forte aux IVe-IIe siècles av. J.-C., de même que l’élément gréco-macédonien est plus qu’évident dans la construction de tombes à chambre à dromos horizontal, revêtu de dalles de pierre et à recouvert d’une voûte en berceau343. Les observations faites sur les nécropoles des colonies ouest-pontiques tendent à mettre en évidence un organisation plus rigoureuse de l’espace funéraire et une spécificité grecque très bien marquée par les trouvailles de stèles funéraires à reliefs et à inscriptions, effectuées souvent à l’extérieur des sépultures. On en trouve partout des exemples, à Istros344, à Tomis345 et Orgamé346. Ces stèles sont fréquemment porteuses d’inscriptions fournissant des renseignements détaillés sur la structure ethnique de certaines nécropoles.

De toute évidence, la pratique parallèle de l’inhumation et de l’incinération, au sein de la même nécropole ou dans des nécropoles différentes de même époques, ne relève pas seulement de l’évolution chronologique. On pourrait donc avoir affaire à une différenciation intentionnelle de statut social et, peut-être même, dans certains cas, à une différenciation d’ordre ethnique ou de genre.

Le faciès funéraire ouest-pontique est caractérisé également par le développement de nouveaux modes de représentation des défunts adaptés à la hiérarchie des sépultures au sein des nécropoles tumulaires, de même que par la présence de grands tumuli à cercles d’amphores dans la nécropole d’Orgamé347, comme dans les nécropoles d’Apollonia348 ou d’Olbia349, datés des Ve-IVe s. av. J-C.350 En effet, certaines coutumes sont communes à plusieurs nécropoles pontiques, mais leur signification initiale dans chaque contexte reste encore difficile à saisir. Sont elles toujours des symboles d’un culte heroïque ? N’aurait-on pas affaire plutôt à des manifestations de genê cultuelle ou des orgeones (koina des citoyens)? A ces difficultés reconnues viennent s’ajouter des différences de contexte et de tradition qui apparaissent au gré de la localisation des cités coloniales, plus ou moins éloignées des centres indigènes. En ce qui concerne les attestations de cercles d’amphores à l’intérieur des tertres fouillés en milieu indigène, bien que rares, les points de comparaisons ne manquent pas. Les traces d’une pratique similaire en territoire gète ont été identifiées dans deux tumuli du IIe s. av. J.-C. fouillés à Murighiol, près du delta du Danube, qui semblent témoigner d’un statut héroïque conféré au défunt sous

Il convient de signaler également l’existence de tombes isolées appartenant manifestement à des personnages d’exception. C’est le cas à Orgamé du tumulus-hérôon TA95 de l’oikistés, datable du milieu - troisième quart du VIIe s. av. J.-C., érigé à la limite nord-ouest de la nécropole archaïque, à l’écart des tombes de l’époque suivante341. L’isolement des élites dans les nécropoles compte parmi les particularités du monde ionien archaïque. A Clazomènes, Juliette de La Genière a déjà noté que les grands tumulus abritant de somptueux sarcophages étaient situés sur les collines dominant la cité342. L’isolement des élites est encore attesté au IVe s. av. J.-C dans la nécropole de Callatis, avec la Tombe à papyrus, entourée par un péribole à l'intérieur de la nécropole. S’il est un trait commun aux grands tumuli (Istros, Orgamé) et aux monuments tumulaires à chambre (Callatis), c’est bien leur rôle ostentatoire. On est tenté de voir dans ce phénomène le témoignage d’une pratique courante, avec d’importantes implications sociales au niveau des élites urbaines. Il s’agit peut-être d’une réintégration symbolique du défunt au monde des vivants, au terme d’une existence exemplaire, par l’érection emphatique de la construction funéraire. De la même

343 Des constructions similaires sont rapportées de nécropoles grecques du nord de la mer Noire, comme à Olbia, Parovich-Peshican 1974, p. 214. 344 Alexandrescu-Vianu 2000, p. 140-145. 345 Pippidi, Russu 1987, p. 193-195, no. 193-195. 346 Lungu 2000a, p. 116, fig. 5. 3-4 ; Oppermann 2004, p. 188-189, pl. 47.4. 347 Canarache 1957, p. 378 ; Lungu 1995, p. 231-263. 348 Venedikov et alii 1963, p. 40; Damyanov 2005, p. 214-223. 349 Farmakovsky 1929, p. 66-69, fig. 58-59. 350 Au IVe s. av. J.-C. a été aussi daté un important dépôt d’amphores trouvé récemment à Akanthos, E. Trakosopoulou-Salakidou, ‘Akanthos. To Anaskafiko ergo tes hronias tou 2004’, dans To archaeologiko ergo ste Makedonia kai ste Thrake 18, 2004, p.157-166 et fig. 14-16.

338

Hoddinott 1975, p. 52, pl. 23, 36. Lungu 2000a, p. 117, fig. 6.3. 340 Sur cette amphore, voir V. Lungu, ‘Les amphores hellénistique d’Erythrées’, dans D. Kassab Tezgör, N. Inaishvili « Production et commerce amphoriques en mer Noire», Table-ronde Batumi-Trabzon (27-29 Avril 2006), à suivre 341 Lungu 2000a, p. 108-109 ; 2000b, p. 67-87. 342 de la Genière 1980, p. 82-96. 339

364

VASILICA LUNGU: NECROPOLES GRECQUES DU PONT GAUCHE: ISTROS, ORGAMÉ, TOMIS, CALLATIS l’influence des coutumes grecques351, ou plutôt d'une présence grecque parmi les indigènes.

Tombes à inhumation L’ensemble des tombes à inhumation mises au jour dans les nécropoles des cités ouest pontiques révèle un répertoire à la fois varié et particulièrement riche. Le type le plus fréquent est la tombe à fosse de plan rectangulaire, rencontrée tant dans les sépultures des nécropoles planes que dans les tumuli. Les cas de tumuli érigés au dessus de cadavres déposés à même le niveau du sol antique sont rares. On en connaît un exemple à Istros355. Plus fréquentes sont les tombes renfermant un dépôt funéraire en fosse de plan ovalaire, comme à Istros356, ou rectangulaire, comme à Apollonia357. On a souvent pu observer que les corps ont été déposés directement dans les fosses ou bien dans des cercueils ou sarcophages en bois ou en pierre, comme à Istros et à Callatis. Des pratiques similaires ont été mises en évidence également dans les villes grecques du nord de la mer Noire, comme à Phanagoria, à Tanaïs et à Olbia358. La conservation du bois dans plusieurs sépultures ou, lorsqu’il n’était pas conservé, les différences de coloration parfois très nettes entre les sédiments de remplissage des fosses et ceux des cercueils, ont permis de distinguer différentes sortes de cercueils : à Istros, deux gros clous de fer trouvés dans la fosse du tumulus XVIII constituent des arguments en faveur de l’hypothèse d’une construction en poutres en bois assemblées à l’aide de tels accessoires359. Les cercueils sont généralement rectangulaires, de dimensions plutôt stéréotypées, d’environ 2,20 x 0,60 m, à l’exception de ceux des tombes d’enfants qui sont sensiblement plus courts. Dans les tombes sans cercueil, une grande dalle protège parfois la tête du défunt, comme dans le tumulus I d’Istros360.

A la lumière des sépultures des nécropoles pontiques, on constate que les colons grecs ont adopté certaines traditions autochtones ou bien que les élites indigènes se sont ouvertes aux coutumes grecques. Les analogies sont manifestes en ce qui concerne les constructions circulaires de pierres, les dimensions des tombes et la pratique des offrandes. Par ailleurs, les objets des mobiliers funéraires présentent parfois des origines communes. De même, en ce qui concerne leur répartition au sein des tumuli, on constate des analogies dans l’emplacement des céramiques autour des bûchers et à l’extérieur de la tombe. Par ailleurs, un examen plus attentif de données fait apparaître des disparités dans les constructions tumulaires. Les principales différences relevées dans la nécropole d’Orgamé sont les suivantes : le nombre réduit des tombes à fosse excavée au centre d’un enclos circulaire ; le fait qu’unes des tombes à cercles de blocs de calcaire ouvrent généralement vers le sud ; la fréquence des enclos circulaires de pierres. Les éléments topographiques sont également à prendre en compte : les tombes archaïques d’Orgamé sont implantées surtout en bordure du promontoire, sur les hauteurs, alors qu’à Istros les tumuli les plus anciens se trouvent en position centrale de l’espace funéraire, le développement de la nécropole s’effectuant de manière centrifuge par rapport à ceux-ci, ainsi que l’ont montré les fouilles menées entre 1955 et 1961 par P. Alexandrescu. Par rapport aux trouvailles de la nécropole d’Istros, on remarque à Orgamé - à titre d'hypothèse en absence des analyse ostéologiques des ossements incinérés-, entre autres, l’absence complète de chevaux enterrés. Aucune arme défensive ou de parade, seul un petit dépôt de pointes de flèche dans une tombe d’époque archaïque pourrait être lié avec circonspection au statut d’un guerrier. En revanche, la typologie et les pratiques funéraires présentent de nombreuses traces similaires ; certaines tombes d’Orgamé, tel le tumulus TIV352, peuvent se ranger dans la classe des tumuli à triple superstructure, du type II d’Istros353. Ce qui semble faire la différence entre les deux sites, c’est la prédominance à Istros des tombes disposées sur le foyer même de crémation par rapport à Orgamé, où dominent les tombes à enterrement des dépôts au niveau du sol antique354.

Les inhumations individuelles sont les plus fréquentes, mais on rencontre également des inhumations doubles ou multiples. Ces sépultures associent des adultes et des enfants à Istros361. Les cas d’inhumations multiples dans le contexte de sépultures successives sont toutefois rarement identifiés dans les nécropoles des colonies ouest-pontiques, mais elles sont attestées tant dans les nécropoles de villes d'origine milésienne, comme à Orgamé362, que dans celles de cités d'origine dorienne, comme à Callatis363. Il semble toutefois qu’il ne s’agisse là que de cas fortuits.

355

Istros, Alexandrescu 1966, p. 171-173, tumulus I. Alexandrescu 1966, p. 176-177, tumulus XVIII. On trouve des analogies parmi les nécropoles du nord de la mer Noire, comme à Kerkinitis, Kytaisov, Lantsov 1989, p. 29, fig. 9. 357 Venedikov et alii, 1963, p. 17-64. On retrouve des ressemblances dans les nécropoles grecques du nord de la mer Noire, comme à Olbia, Skudnova 1988, p. 7. 358 Phanagoreie, les tombes no 106 et no 117, à cercueil en bois, voir Blavatsky 1951, p. 210, 217 ; Tanaïs, Shelov 1961, p. 89 ; Olbia, Parovich-Pechikan 1974, p. 214. 359 Alexandrescu 1966, p. 176. 360 Alexandrescu 1966, p. 171-173. 361 Alexandrescu, Ieftimie 1959, p. 156, fig. 15 ; Alexandrescu 1966, p. 157, fig. 20 ; 1999, p. 121, fig. 9.3. 362 Lungu 2000a, p. 117, fig. 6. 5. 363 Tafrali 1927-1930, p. 19. 356

351

Simion 1995, p. 265-302 ; 2003, p. 337-358. Lungu 1995, p. 232-233. Alexandrescu 1966, p. 237. 354 La série de rapprochements et de différences entre les nécropoles de ces deux cités grecque sera analysée en détail dans une étude monographique en cours de préparation. Un premier volume devrait paraître d’ici deux ans. 352 353

365

ANCIENT GREEK COLONIES IN THE BLACK SEA 2 Dans la sphère pontique, les sépultures à inhumation présentent des orientations relativement précises ; l’axe principal de ces tombes est un axe est-ouest (avec chevet à l’est), une particularité propre au rituel de type grec. En effet, la position du cadavre, allongé sur le dos, les membres en extension le long du corps, et la tête orientée vers l’est, correspond aux coutumes funéraires du monde grec qui sont couramment pratiquées tant dans les nécropoles planes que dans les nécropoles tumulaires à cette époque. Cependant, on rencontre fréquemment différentes variantes posturales au sein de la même nécropole, comme cela a été constaté à Istros, Orgamé, Tomis et Callatis. Toutefois, les incohérences constatées essentiellement dans la position du squelette, sont encore rares ; elles se manifestent plus dans la position des bras, fléchis aux coudes et reposant sur les hanches, la tête ou le ventre, ou dans celle des pieds, repliés ou croisés.

d’Istros. Ce type de tombe a des analogies dans les nécropoles grecques de la mer Noire, à Phanagoria366, à Bérézan367, à Olbia368 et à Panticapée369. L’étude du remplissage identifié hors de Pont Ouest permet quelquefois de retrouver des traces de linceul autour du squelette de l’enfant370. Quant à la trouvaille d’Orgamé, il s’agit pour l’instant d’une découverte isolée, consistant en une amphore complète de Lesbos, datable du VIe s. av. J-C, sur laquelle une ouverture intentionnelle a été pratiquée au niveau de l’épaule. Plusieurs auteurs ont rapporté cette pratique à l’information de Pline371, selon laquelle on n’incinérait pas un enfant mort avant l’apparition de ses premières dents. C’est sans doute la raison pour laquelle la pratique de l’inhumation des enfants en amphores ou autres récipients se généralise dans tout le monde grec. Elle était courante en Grèce continentale comme en Grèce insulaire ou coloniale. Les trouvailles d’Athènes - Céramique372, d’Olynthe373, de Pithécusses374, Métaponte375 ou de Syracuse376 montrent que ce type de sépulture était en usage depuis l’époque archaïque jusqu’à l’époque hellénistique. Les fouilleurs de Ialissos377, à Rhodes, et d’Erétrie378, en Eubée, ont insisté sur le fait que l’inhumation était pratiquée jusqu’au moment où le défunt recevait une personnalité juridique et religieuse, vers sa seizième année379.

La fermeture des tombes à inhumation est assurée de plusieurs manières: soit à l’aide de dalles de dimensions conséquentes ou d’un bloc de pierre (Callatis, Tomis), soit par un amoncellement de galets ou de blocs (Istros). Cet usage se rencontre tant dans les tombes d’adultes que dans les tombes d’enfants des nécropoles pontiques, à Orgamé, à Tomis et à Callatis. L’emploi de dalles couvre toute l’époque hellénistique et se perpétue dans les premiers siècles de notre ère. Les découvertes de tombes à couverture de tuiles sont, elles aussi, assez fréquentes à partir du milieu du IVe s. av. J.-C. dans les nécropoles de Callatis, avec des analogies dans les nécropoles situées plus au sud de la mer Noire, comme à Apollonia364 ou, plus au nord, à Panticapée365.

Modèles d’organisation d’espace funéraire Les nécropoles d’Istros et d’Orgamé révèlent l'organisation des tombes par lots familiaux, distribués le long des routes antiques. La régularité de cette norme nous incite à croire qu’il existait une étroite parenté entre l'organisation des habitats et les ensembles funéraires correspondantes, pour autant que l’évolution même de cette similitude puisse être puisse être recoupée par d’autres critères. Ils concernent l’architecture des monuments funéraires, la pratique des offrandes et la position dans l’aménagement du territoire.

Les tombes à chambre appareillée en pierre font leur apparition dans les nécropoles du Pont Ouest à partir de la deuxième moitié du IVe s. av. J.-C. Leurs dimensions sont variables et leur typologie ainsi que les matériaux utilisés variés. Elles sont signalées à Callatis, où on les met en rapport avec la présence des garnisons macédoniennes stationnées sur place jusqu'à la mort de Lysimaque en 280 av. J.-C.

En effet, les recherches sur l’organisation des nécropoles des colonies ouest-pontiques ont y montré l'établissement des normes précises à partir de la fondation des colonies grecques. A mesure qu’on se rapproche de l’époque hellénistique, de nouvelles structures funéraires viennent

Les chambres funéraires, constituées par une ou deux pièces, sont réalisées à l’aide de grandes dalles façonnées, ou en blocs de pierre calcaire, assemblées à joints secs, desservies par un dromos plus au moins long. La nécropole de Callatis fournit divers modèles d’aménagement des sépultures à inhumation dans des tombes à chambre. On constate leur absence à Istros, Tomis et Orgamé.

366 Blavatsky 1951, p. 212, fig. 13, 3, 14, 1; Kobilina 1951, p. 246; 1989, p. 38, fig.5 ; Marchenko 1956, p. 111, 112, 118, 123. 367 Gorbunova 1969, p. 20 ; Treister, Vinogradov 1993, p. 539, ca. 7% ‘were children buried in amphoras’. 368 Skudnova 1988, no 47, 49, 58. 369 Kastanayan 1959, p. 280, 285-286. 370 Blavatsky 1951, p. 213, fig.14, tombe no 109. 371 Pline, Hist.Nat.VII, 72 372 Céramique, Kovasovics 1990, p. 45, tombe 40. 373 Robinson 1942, p. 167. 374 Ridgway 1992, p. 51. 375 Carter 1998, p. 108. 376 Orsi 1895, p. 111. 377 Jacobi 1928-1941, p. 12. 378 Bérard 1970, p. 50. 379 Vidal-Naquet 1974, p. 137–168, et particulièrement, p. 147.

A côté de ces types de sépultures, les fouilles ont livré des exemples de tombes à enchytrismos à partir de l’époque archaïque dans les nécropoles d'Orgamé et 364 Venedikov et alii, 1963, p. 17-64 ; Panayotova 1998, p. 11-24 ; 1999, p. 97-113. 365 Tsvetaeva 1957, p. 233.

366

VASILICA LUNGU: NECROPOLES GRECQUES DU PONT GAUCHE: ISTROS, ORGAMÉ, TOMIS, CALLATIS samienne du type A 2 Villard-Vallet387, datables du milieu - troisième quart du VIIe s. av. J-C. De plus, sa monumentalité sans équivalent dans tout le reste de la nécropole, la tombe d’oikistés constitue un argument pour le considérer comme le point de référence pour l’aménagement de l’espace funéraire d’époque archaïque. Parmi les autres tombes anciennes fouillées sur la côte ouest du Pont, on peut citer des trouvailles d'Istros et d'Apollonia, remontant à la première moitié du VIe s. av. J.-C. A peu près à la même date remontent aussi de nombreux exemples du nord de la mer Noire388.

occuper des places importantes dans les nécropoles planes ou tumulaires. Une série importante d’innovations apparaît simultanément au IVe s. av. J.-C., époque à laquelle de nouveaux types de tombes et de pratiques funéraires se font jour dans la plus grande partie des nécropoles. Parmi les particularités des nécropoles ouest pontiques, les groupements de tombes individuelles matérialisés par des juxtapositions des tombes révèlent des liens familiaux. Les juxtapositions deviennent quasiment la règle dans la nécropole d’Orgamé380, où la cohésion des tombes pourrait avoir couvert aussi un intervalle d’au moins un demi-siècle. De vastes espaces vides séparent parfois les groupements de tombes les uns des autres, assimilables aussi à des parcelles funéraires, comme à Istros381, dans les secteurs ayant livré les tombes archaïques et classiques les plus riches, disposées le long des routes antiques identifiées à l’ouest de la cité. Ces parcelles funéraires perpétuent le souvenir des ancêtres, c’est à dire la durée de la mémoire de famille. Elles sont identifiées tout au long de l'époque grecque.

Les plus anciennes tombes connues jusqu’à présent à Istros sont celles des tumuli no XVII, XIX et XX, datées du milieu du VIe s. av. J.-C.389 Parmi les plus récentes, on compte aussi des trouvailles d’Istros390. Dans les nécropoles du nord de la mer Noire, les plus anciennes tombes sont datées de la deuxième moitié du VIe s. av. J.C., comme à Olbia391, tandis qu’à Nymphaion, les plus anciens tumuli appartiennent à la fin du VIe ou au début du Ve s. av. J.-C.392. Parmi les plus récentes, les découvertes des nécropoles d'Istros, de Tomis et de Callatis descendant jusqu’à la fin d’époque hellénistique ou au début de l'époque romaine sont également parmi les mieux représentées.

Les périboles funéraires connus dans le monde grec par des enceintes de pierre, circulaires ou rectangulaires, délimitant des aires occupées par plusieurs tombes ne sont pas clairement représentés. Le catalogue topographique des périboles dressé par Garland382 fournit d’utiles observations sur la conception grecque de la mort et de la tombe, dominée nettement par l’importance accordée à l’individu au sein de sa famille et de la société. Cette équivalence péribole / famille est démontrée d’une manière encore plus convaincante dans l’étude de Humphreys383 sur les cultes funéraires d’Athènes.

Mobiliers funéraires La structure des mobiliers retrouvés dans les sépultures des régions qui nous occupent est constituée d’objets divers et notamment de céramiques d’origines très variées. Dans les nécropoles des VIIe - Ve s. av. J.-C. d'Istros et d'Orgmé, les tombes grecques ne sont pas riches; cet aspect relève d’une norme religieuse et ne constitue point un indice révélateur du niveau socioéconomique. Le tumulus-hérôon d’Orgamé constitue un cas particulier en raison de son statut exceptionnel.

Skudnova fait également état à Olbia de constructions circulaires de pierres complètement fermées ou “en fer à cheval”, afin de marquer la division de la société olbienne en tribus ou en familles. Celles-ci jouent, en effet, le même rôle que le péribole grec. D’autres constructions similaires sont attestées dans les nécropoles de Bérézan384 et d’Orgamé385; elles font défaut dans la littérature concernant d’autres nécropoles du Pont-Euxin. Chronologie

Au IVe s. av. J.-C., on trouve des tombes aux mobiliers exceptionnellement riches, qui ont même livré, à côté de vases, d’objets de parure en or, en argent ou en verre et, parfois, d’offrandes animales, des vêtements décorés d’ornements en or (Tumulus TIV90 d’Orgamé ou, à Callatis, la Tombe à chambre ou la Tombe à papyrus, datées du IVe s. av. J-C.). Elles étaient manifestement réservées aux élites urbaines.

De cette revue d’ensemble des nécropoles grecques du Pont Ouest, il ressort nettement que le tumulus-hérôon d’Orgamé (TA95) constitue la découverte funéraire à la fois la plus ancienne, en raison de la présence d’une amphore archaïque de Clazoménes386 et d’une coupe

Au IIIe s. av. J.-C., on remarque des changements au niveau des offrandes et des répartitions des tombes dans les nécropoles urbaines du Pont Ouest causés d'une pression soutenue de populations indigènes. La survenue de tels changements semble devoir être liée à

380

387 Lungu 2000b, (1997), p. 82, fig. 4.6 a,b et 5.7 a,b ; Alexandrescu 1999, p. 20, note 13, fig. 3.2 ; 2000, p. 519, note 13, fig. 352. 388 Lapin 1966, p. 110-121 ; Gorbunova 1969, p. 20-25 ; Domanskij, Vinogradov, Solovjev 1986, p. 32-36. 389 Alexandrescu 1963b, p. 260 ; 1966, p. 143-150. 390 Alexandrescu 1966, p. 192-196, tumulus XXXVII, ca 150 av.J.-C. ; 1993, p. 258 ; 1994a, p. 187, tumulus XV, Ier siècle av. J.-C. 391 Farmakovsky 1929, p. 54-69 ; Skoudnova 1988, p. 7. 392 Silantseva 1959, p. 93.

Lungu 2000a, p. 105-106. Alexandrescu 1978a, p. 340-342. 382 Garland 1982, p. 125-176. 383 Humphreys 1980, p. 96. 384 Skudnova 1988, p. 10. 385 Lungu 2001, p. 167, fig. 2. 386 Determination obtenue par l'examen archéometrique de Pierre Dupont. Laboratoire de Céramologie, Lyon. Groupe I de Clazomène, cf. Sezgin 2004, p. 170-172, fig. 1, ca 650 av. J.-C. 381

367

ANCIENT GREEK COLONIES IN THE BLACK SEA 2 l'accroissement du pouvoir local, qui a culminé sous le protectorat exercé par les rois « barbares » sur Istros393.

groupements standardisés, constitués d’œnochoés et de plats à poissons, parfois complétés par des canthares.

Au cours des premiers siècles, ce sont les céramiques de la Grèce de l’Est et d’Athènes qui dominent les mobiliers funéraires des nécropoles grecques. En raison de l’évolution historique de chaque ville, il semblerait que les centres d’importation soient beaucoup plus nombreux qu’au début. Aux époques classique et hellénistique, les approvisionnements sont plus variés, avec des productions de plusieurs ateliers de Grèce continentale (d'Athènes notamment et de la Grèce du Nord), insulaire (Chios, Samos, Thasos, Rhodes) ou coloniale pontique (Héraclée Pontique, Chérsonése), de différentes régions d'Asie (Pergame, Ephèse, Sinope, Knide), d’Alexandrie ou d’Italie du Sud (céramique campanienne, amphores). D’après notre enquête, les pourcentages d’objets indigènes s’avèrent assez réduits.

La répartition et la position stratigraphique des tessons ou des vases complets montrent que les dépôts ont souvent été effectués non seulement au moment de l’achèvement des tertres mais au delà, témoignant ainsi de pratiques assimilables à un véritable culte des ancêtres. De telles offrandes ont été identifiées au cours des fouilles dans des fosses creusées dans le remblai, soit près du sommet du tumulus, soit à sa base, comme à Istros394 et à Orgamé395, avec des analogies au nord de la mer Noire, à Panticapée et à Olbia396. Les offrandes d’animaux viennent compléter cette première mise au point sur les pratiques funéraires des nécropoles de l’espace colonial ouest-pontique. Peu fréquentes, elles consistent en diverses parties du corps (crâne, membres, etc.) d’animaux d’espèces variées. Malheureusement, il est encore difficile de donner toujours des précisions sur le répertoire des espèces concernées, faute de données ostéologiques régulières. On trouve parfois des références sur la présence d’ossements de chevaux. Une revue rapide des occurrences examinées permet toutefois d’opérer une distinction entre dépôts d’ossements frais et d’ossements brûlés (comme à Istros). Parmi d'autres offrandes, les fouilles de Callatis ont livré aussi des œufs dans la Tombe à papyrus.

En ce qui concerne le mobilier céramique, le répertoire fonctionnel des vases est très varié. Dans les tombes prédominent, à partir de l’époque archaïque et jusqu’à l’époque hellénistique, les vases containeurs, les amphores, notamment pour le vin, et les vases distributeurs à huile et à parfums. On y trouve de nombreux lécythes de production attique ou ionienne, à côté d’aryballes, d'alabastres, d'askoi, de lampes, d'amphoriskoi ou de skyphoi, d’œnochoés, de pélikai, de figurines en terre cuite, etc. A partir de la fin de l'époque classique et, surtout, de l'époque hellénistique, les mobiliers à figurines de terre cuite gagnent en importance parmi les tombes à inhumation ou à incinération de Callatis et moins d'autres sites. Leur faible fréquence, dans les tombes, d’Istros et d’Orgamé notamment, pourrait constituer une particularité du rituel grec de ces cités.

Sur la foi de cet inventaire sommaire des trouvailles, il est permis d’envisager que les ossements étaient regroupés en deux endroits différents par rapport à la position du corps : des os d’animaux étaient déposés sur ou à côté du défunt et d’autres déposés à une certaine distance. Les deux options sont attestées parfois en même temps dans les tombes les plus importantes et pourraient donc être liés à des pratiques réservées aux élites. En fait, la pratique des dépôts d’offrandes d’animaux ne se retrouve pas uniquement dans les rituels grecs, mais aussi chez plusieurs groupes ethniques cultivant des relations avec les Grecs, tels les Scythes, les Thraces, les Gètes, etc. Dans tous les cas, c’est le statut social élevé du défunt qui semble constituer le critère essentiel.

Les nécropoles grecques ouest-pontiques ont fourni des quantités importantes de vases grecs des VIIe-Ier s. av. J.C. Dans la plupart des cas, les vases sont complets ou peuvent être intégralement restaurés, tant le rituel est systématique. Dans la plupart des tombes à inhumation, les vases sont déposés complets, parfois par paquets, tandis que dans les tombes à incinération, ils sont souvent retrouvés brisés et répartis sur des aires plus vastes. De tels rituels, maintes fois observés, peuvent concerner un ou plusieurs récipients, voire plusieurs dizaines. Ces pratiques sont bien attestées dans les nécropoles de Tomis et de Callatis. Dans les tombes à incinération d’Orgamé et d’Istros, les tessons sont dispersés dans tous les tertres et les vases complets plutôt rares. L’étude de leur répertoire indique une nette prédominance des vases– conteneurs, consistant en amphores d’origines très diverses (Milet, Chios, Lesbos, Clazomènes, Thasos, Samos, Mendé, Sinope, Rhodes, etc.) ; des vases à boire, tels que canthares, coupes et skyphoi ; de récipients, tels que cratères, pelikai, œnochoés, etc. Les inventaires du IVe s. av. J.-C. d’Orgamé suggèrent clairement l’usage de

Données anthropologiques Les études anthropologiques consacrées à l’époque grecque sont peu satisfaisantes. Il existe plusieurs raisons à cette carence. Premièrement, les recherches du début du siècle dernier se sont attachées à la récupération des mobiliers funéraires plutôt qu’à l’information archéologique. D’autre part, la mauvaise conservation des ossements dans les régions calcaires ou les dimensions très réduites des ossements incinérés n’ont pas toujours permis des observations fines. Un autre facteur qui fait 394

Alexandrescu 1966, p. 267-272. Lungu 2000a, p. 106-108. 396 Skudnova 1988, p. 10. 395

393

Pippidi 1983 =ISM I, no 8, 15, 36.

368

VASILICA LUNGU: NECROPOLES GRECQUES DU PONT GAUCHE: ISTROS, ORGAMÉ, TOMIS, CALLATIS encore obstacle à une analyse anthropologique plus précise relève du nombre réduit de dépôts osseux décrits ou conservés. Ces aspects influent donc directement sur la recherche funéraire, occultant notamment les données anthropologiques tant pour les tombes à incinération que pour celles à inhumation.

distinguent des autres nécropoles du Pont Gauche et de beaucoup d'autres nécropoles du reste du Pont Euxin : 1. la prédominance de l'incinération400 ; 2. les correspondances avec les traditions thraco-gètiques du première Age du Fer401 et anatoliennes dans les pratiques funéraires dans les tombes à incinération sous tumuli402 : connu par les Ioniens avant leur émigration vers les côtes de la mer Noire, le type phrygien de tombe sera répandu dans certaines de leurs colonies pontiques ; 3. les constructions circulaires en pierres brutes dans les nécropoles de la zone anatolienne témoignent de traditions ouest-anatolienne et égéenne remontant à la fin de l'Age du Bronze et au début de l'Age du Fer : Demircihüyük-Sariket403, Bešik-Tepe404, où au début de la colonisation grecque, à Pitané405, à Clazomènes406, ou dans sa colonie d'Abdère407, à Samos etc.; les enclos en pierres sont assez rares dans les nécropoles archaïques du nord de la mer Noire, voir Bérézan408 ; 4. les premières céramiques importées de l’Ionie du Nord et du Sud, sans un monopole milésien évidente409 : la plus ancienne tombe d'Orgamé (TA95 : milieu - troisième quart du VIIe s. av. J.-C.) a livré un mobilier composite, formé de céramiques importées de Samos, de Clazomènes, de certains exemples de la vaisselle commune d'influence anatolienne, fait qui montre le caractère cosmopolite des premiers groups coloniaux venus sur le littoral du Pont Ouest 410; 5. les pratiques funéraires correspondantes à celles de l'épopée homérique411; 6. les enterrements de chevaux à Istros, se retrouvent dans la tradition homérique des obsèques de Patrocle et, aussi, dans celle des Phrygiens participant à la Guerre de Troie, originaires du sud de la Propontide et appellés

A cet égard, il convient de souligner les intéressants résultats des analyses anthropologiques effectuées par D. Nicolaescu Plopsor sur des restes osseux de la nécropole tumulaire d’Istros397, contre les résultats de W. Wolska398 mettant en évidence, parmi les habitants d’Istros, la présence d’individus d’origine iranienne, interprétés comme des soldats Perses participant à l’expédition scythique de Darius en 514 av. J.-C. Il n’en va pas de même pour les trouvailles de Tomis, où les descriptions font entièrement défaut. L’analyse des restes humains incinérés dans la nécropole d’Orgamé n’a pas encore pu être effectuée. Dans la majeure partie des cas, la possibilité de déterminer le sexe du défunt d’après des ossements incinérés est très délicate, car elle se fonde sur des os très fragmentés et déformés. Toutefois, il n’est pas rare que l’on rencontre des fragments significatifs, tels ceux retrouvés dans des urnes. Essai d'évaluation historique Une étude menée sur les pratiques funéraires des colonies milésiennes du Pont Gauche fait ressortir, d’un côté, des analogies associant les nécropoles d’Istros et d’Orgamé, et de l’autre, les nécropoles de Tomis (tombes à inhumation) et de la chôra d'Istros, entre autres de la nécropole d'Histria Bent. Les données livrées par les nécropoles d’Orgamé et d'Istros, où l’incinération est majoritaire, et celles des autres poleis coloniales de la mer Noire, comme par exemple, celles d'Olbia ou d'Apollonia, où l’inhumation est prédominante et les autres aspects généraux sont proches du groupe Tomis - chôra d'Istros, révèlent des pratiques funéraires distinctes entre les divers groupes sociaux installés dans ces colonies, et, surtout, entre les différentes étapes de la colonisation ionienne/milésienne en mer Noire.

400

La pratique d’incinération est connue aussi dans les nécropole ouestanatoliennes, voir Philipp 1981, p. 152-156. Quant à la pratique de l'incinération, rependue en Thrace surtout dans l'aire du Nord-Est à la fin de l'Age du Bronze et le début de l'Age du Fer, Gergova notait que “...the Getean aristocracy was inhumated and the rest of population incinerated. It is difficult to say, however, on the basis of the available data how the relatively rich graves with incineration should be treated as a transitional form of burial or as evidence of the existence of a third social group within this society.”, voir Gergova 1989, p. 27. 401 Les tombes à incinération sous tumuli de la Culture Bîrsesti-Ferigile, Vulpe 1967. 402 Le tumulus “a typical feature of Phrygian culture”, von der Osten 1929, p. 226. Sur l’histoire des tumuli et sur les interférences thracoanatoliennes, Roosevelt 2003, chp. 4 The tumulus tradition in Lydia, p. 120-130 ; F. Prayon et A.-M. Wittke,’ Kleinasien vom 12.-6. Jh. v. Chr., Kartierung und Erläuterung archäologischer Befunde und Denkmäler’. TAVO Beih. Reihe B 88. Wiesbaden 1994, ont cartographié nombreux tumuli de l’Asie Mineure. 403 Seeher 1998, fig. 3 et pl. 9.3 ; 2000, p. 176-183. 404 Basedow 2000, p. 151-165 et pl. CVI. 405 Akurgal 1987, pl. 10. 406 Hürmüzlü 2004, p. 80. 407 Kallintzi 2004, p. 274-280, et fig. 6 et 15, dans les cimetières de Teïens. 408 Solovyov 1999, p. 79-80 et fig. 60. 409 Dupont 2002, à paraître. 410 Dupont voit ici de simples emporoi participant aux activités, en partie saisonières, déroulées par des portes d'escale, voir ci-dessus, note 406. 411 Voir plus haut, les chapitres sur un Rituel homérique à Istros et sur le Tumulus-Hérôon T A95 d'Orgamé.

Les données les plus anciennes proviennent de la nécropole d'Orgamé, puis de celle d'Istros, datée de quelques décennies plus tard399. Les deux nécropoles présentent donc des particularités très voisines, qui les 397

Nicolaescu Plopşor 1959, p. 165-178 ; Nicolaescu Plopşor 1966, p. 355-381 ; Riscuţia, Nicolaescu Plopşor 1966, p. 383-385. 398 Wolska 1980-1981, p. 99-116. 399 Les données de la nécropole d'Orgamé annoncent un établissement urbain à partir du milieu du VIIe s. av.J.-C. dont la fondation aurait précédé celle d'Histria, cf. Lungu (1995) 2000a, p. 110 ; Alexandrescu 2000, p. 518-520. Il est possible aussi que le hasard des fouilles soit responsable de la différence chronologique de quelques décennies entre les données de fouilles de deux sites, d'Istros et d'Orgamé. Si on juge la situation d'Istros d'après celle d'Orgamé, on suppose alors l'emplacement des tombes les plus anciennes dans le voisinage imédiate de la cité archaïque, où les tombes ne sont pas encore examinées.

369

ANCIENT GREEK COLONIES IN THE BLACK SEA 2 aœolópwloi412, ou dans celle concernant les tombes des princes Thraco-Gètes, comme celle d’Agighiol413.

Dans ces conditions on peut parler d'une seconde vague de colonisation milésienne en mer Noire, différente de la première à laquelle se rattachent Istros et Orgamé. Avram parle d'une colonisation secondaire aux environs de 600 av. J.-C., en rapport avec le sac de la chôra de Milet par Alyattes, le roi de Lydie. Cette date coïncide avec celle de l'aménagement du territoire d'Istros et, peut-être aussi, de la fondation de Tomis, où, ni les sources écrites, ni les données archéologiques disponibles ne sont assurées. C’est également le cas à Olbia, dont l’implantation sur le continent, à proximité de l'établissement insulaire (ou péninsulaire?) de Bérézan, se situe à une date plus tardive que pour Istros ou Orgamé418.

L'interprétation des données archéologiques est donc à même de fournir des indices précieux sur la première phase de la colonisation grecque du Pont Gauche, qui est à placer vers le milieu du VIIe s. av. J.-C., comme l’indiquent les sources écrites relatives à la fondation d’Istros et les trouvailles archéologiques de la nécropole d'Orgamé414. Le faciès culturel dominant du mobilier funéraire des premiers groupes des colons, au moins dans le cas d’Orgamé, semble être celui des régions situées au nord du Milet, en l’occurrence celles de l'Ionie et de l'Eolide au sud de la Propontide. La présence de céramiques les plus anciennes du Nord de la mer Noire (Middle Wild Goat I) a été expliquée par la présence des Scythes en Anatolie415. Les Scythes ont utilisé aussi des tumuli, mais accompagnés de pratiques rapportées exclusivement à l'inhumation416. Les inventaires funéraires aussi anciennes, de même que les pratiques d’ensevelissement liées à l'incinération imputables aux premières colons arrivés sur le littoral ouest de la mer Noire, sont-ils le fruit du hasard ou bien sont-ils à même de nous informer parfois sur l'origine des défunts? C'est pour chercher une réponse à ces questions que nous avons procédée à une analyse comparative de la situation entre les diverses colonies de la même métropole. La nécropole d'Orgamé montre une installation organisée déjà au troisième quart du VIIe siècle av. J.-C. selon des normes qu'ont subsisté, de moins dans le domaine funéraire, presque toute la période grecque de la ville.

Tous ces éléments mettent en évidence deux étapes successives dans la constitution des nécropoles des colonies milésiennes du Pont Gauche : la première par ordre chronologique remonte au milieu - troisième quart du VIIe s. av. J.-C. et concerne les colonies d'Orgamé (à en juger d’après les résultats des fouilles archéologiques de la nécropole) et d'Istros (d’après le témoignage indirect des données d'habitat) ; la deuxième correspond aux établissements fondés à partir du début du VIe s. av. J.-C. et visent, dans le Pont Ouest, les découvertes de la chôra d'Istros, celles d'Histria Bent notamment et, ensuite, de Tomis. Pour ce qui est de la première étape, il est possible de remarquer même un certain décalage de quelques décenies entre Orgamé et Istros. Pour ce qui est de la deuxième étape, la nécropole d'Histria Bent, dans la chora d’Istros, se signale par des pratiques et des mobiliers funéraires plus proches de ceux rencontrés habituellement dans d’autres nécropoles grecques de la mer Noire.

Les données obtenues jusqu'à présent sur d'autres sites révèlent des différences importantes, qui, selon nous, traduisent l’arrivée de plusieurs vagues successives de colons d'origine différente conduits par Milet en mer Noire. Les faciès funéraires d'Olbia et d'Apollonia s'avèrent plus proches de ceux de Tomis et de la chôra d'Istros. En effet, les plus anciennes trouvailles de la nécropole d'Olbia sont plus tardives que celles d'Orgamé et même d'Istros : Olbia n’a été fondée que vers 600 av. J.-C., de même que la fondation d’Apollonia ne remonte qu’à ca. 611 av. J.-C.417 De fait, les nécropoles de ces deux dernières villes sont fort comparables.

Bien que la masse des données archéologiques comporte encore des lacunes irrécupérables, quelques grandes lignes directrices de recherche se dégagent de cette brève étude des complexes funéraires du Pont Gauche. Celle-ci a permis de collecter un grand nombre d’observations taphonomiques sur un ensemble unitaire de nécropoles urbaines, dressé ici pour la première fois sur trois colonies de Milet, Istros, Orgamé et Tomis, et une d’Héraclée Pontique, Callatis. Au fur et à mesure de l’avancement des travaux, on se heurte à de nouvelles interrogations. ABREVIATIONS

412

Homer, Iliade, 3, 184 et suiv. Berciu 1969, p. 214-215. 414 Les traditons littéraires concernant la fondation d'Istros emplace l'événement, soit vers les années trente du VIIe s. av. J.-C., chez Ps. Scymnos, v. 766-770, (éd.) A. Diller, p. 167, soit vers 657/6 av. J.-C., cf. Eusebius, Chron. (éd.) E. Helm, p. 95b. Selon les dernières découvertes archéologiques, il semble que les fondations d'Orgamé et d'Istros sont donc plus anciennes que la chronologie établie par Roebuck or Hind vers le dernier quart du VIIe s. av. J.-C., pour la première vague de la colonisation milésienne, où les deux cités pontiques sont comptées à côté d'Apollonie, d'Olbia, de Sinope et d'Amissos. Il semble que entre Istros et Orgamé, d’un côté, et Apollonia et Olbia, d'autre côté, il y a des décallages de quelques décénnies. 415 Domanskii 1979, p. 81-88, particulièrement, p. 84. 416 Voir, par exemple, le tumulus (kurgan) no 3 de Mar'inskie, Sjepihsckij 1960, p. 257, fig. 7, daté du VIe s. av. J.-C., et Skorij 2003. 417 Ehrhardt 1988, p. 61 (Apollonia) ; p. 75-77 (Olbia). 413

AA ABSA AJA AO Ath.Mitt. BABesch BCH

418

370

Art et Archéologie, Bucarest Annual of the British School at Athens, London. American Journal of Archaeology, Boston. Arkheologiceski Otkritija, Moskou. Mitteilungen des Deutschen Archäologischen Instituts. Athenische Abteilung. Athen, Berlin. Bulletin Antike Beschaving, Leyde-Utrecht. Bulletin de Correspondance Hellénique, Athènes.

Avram 2001, p. 602-603.

VASILICA LUNGU: NECROPOLES GRECQUES DU PONT GAUCHE: ISTROS, ORGAMÉ, TOMIS, CALLATIS B'EllKer

BICS BMI CRAI DHA IMV JdJ JHS KSIA MAIET MCA MEFRA MIA NSc RA RESEE RPAN OAK OJA SA SCIV(A) SGAIMK StCls VDI

Alexandrescu, P. 1963b, ‘Les tertres funéraires d’Histria. Recherches archéologiques dans la nécropole tumulaire’. Klio 41, p. 257-266. Alexandrescu, P. 1965a, ‘Types des tombes dans la nécropole tumulaire d’Histria’, Dacia N.S. 9, p. 163-184. Alexandrescu, P. 1965b, ‘Les rapports entre indigènes et Grècs à la lumière des fouilles de la nécropole d’Histria’, dans Le rayonnement des civilisations grecque et romaine sur les cultures périphériques. Huitième Congrès international d’Archéologie Classique, Paris, p. 336-339. Alexandrescu, P. 1966, ‘Necropola tumulara. Sapaturi 19551961.’, dans Condurachi, E. (éd.) Histria II, Bucarest, p. 133-294. Alexandrescu 1970, ‘Necropola tumulara’, dans Condurachi, E. et colab., ‘Santierul arheologic Histria’, MCA IX, p. 212213. Alexandrescu, P. 1970, ’Insemnari arheologice’, StCls 12, p. 149-160. Alexandrescu, P. 1971a, ‘Observaţii asupra organizarii spaţiale în necropola Histriei,’ Peuce 2, p. 77-85. Alexandrescu, P. 1971b, ‘Deux types de sépultures à incinération sur l’emplacement de la tombe’, Dacia N.S. 15, p. 319-324. Alexandrescu, P. 1978a, ‘Notes de topographie histrienne’, Dacia N.S. 22, p. 331-342. Alexandrescu, P., avec la collaboration de S. Dimitriu et M. Coja, 1978b, Histria IV. La céramique d'époque archaïque et classique (VIIe-IVe s. av.J.-C.), Bucarest-Paris. Alexandrescu, P. 1985, ’Histria în epoca arhaica‘, Pontica 18, 1985, p. 41-55. Alexandrescu, P. 1988, ‘Insemnari arheologice. Eubeenii si inceputurile navigatiei grecesti in Marea Neagra’, StCls 26, p. 111-116. Alexandrescu, P. 1990a, ‘Histria in der archaischen Zeit’, dans W. Schuller, P. Alexandrescu, Histria. Eine Griechenstadt an der rumänischen Schwarzmeerküste, (Konstanz) p. 47101 = Alexandrescu 1999, p. 66-107. Alexandrescu, P. 1990b, ‘Histrias golden Weitalter’, dans The Black Sea littoral in the 7th-5th centuries BC : litterary sources and archaeology (problem of authenticity). Materials of the 5th international symposium (sic) dedicated to the problems of the ancient history of the Black Sea littoral, Vani 1987, Tbilisi, p. 338-345. Alexandrescu, P. 1993, ’Distrugerea zonei sacre a Histriei de catre geţi‘, SCIVA 44.3, p. 231-266. Alexandrescu, P. 1994a, ’ La destruction d'Istros par les Gètes. 1. Dossier archéologique’, Il Mar Nero 1, p. 179-214. Alexandrescu, P. 1994b, ‘Un rituel funéraire homérique à Istros’, dans de la Genière, J. (éd.) Nécropoles et sociétés antiques (Grèce, Italie, Languedoc). (Actes du Colloque International du Centre de Recherches Archéologiques de l’Université de Lille III, Lille, 2-3 Décembre 1991) Cahiers du Centre Jean Bérard, (Naples), p. 15-32. Alexandrescu, P. 1999, Laigle et le dauphin, (Bucarest-Paris). Alexandrescu, P. 2000, ‘Colonisation occidentale et colonisation pontique’, dans Krinzinger, Fr. (éd.), Die Ägäis und das wesrliche Mittelmeer. Beziehungen und Wechselwirkungen 8. bis 5. Jh.v.Chr. (Akten des Symposions Wien 1999) (Wien), p. 515-520. Alexandrescu, P., Dimitriu, S. 1968, CVA-Bucureşti. Alexandrescu, P., Ieftimie, V. 1959, ‘Tombes thraces d’époque archaïque dans la nécropole tumulaire d’Histria’, Dacia N.S. 3, p. 143-164. Alexandrescu, P., D. Vilceanu, ‘Necropola Tumulara’ dans 1962, Condurachi, E. et colab., 1962, ‘Şantierul arheologic Histria’, MCA VIII, p. 415-422.

B'Episthmonikë Sunánthsh gia thn Ellhnistikë Keramikë. Xronologiká problëmata thß ellhnistikëß keramikëß, Aqhnai. Bulletin of the Institute of Classical Studies of the University of London, London. Buletinul monumentelor istorice, Bucarest. Comptes rendus de l'Académie des inscriptions et belle-lettres, Paris. Dialogue d’Histoires Anciennes Izvestja na narodnija musei Varna,Varna. Jahrbuch des Deutschen Archäologischen Instituts, Berlin. Journal of Hellenic Studies, London. Kratkije Soobshenija Instituta Arkheologii Akademij Nauk SSR, Moskou. Materialy po arheologii, istorii i etnografii Tavrij, Simferopol. Materiale si cercetãri arheologice, Bucureşti. Mélanges de l’Ecole Française de Rome, Rome. Materialy I issledovaniya po arkheologii SSSR, Moskou-Leningrad. Notizie degli scavi di antichità.Atti della Accademia Nazionale dei Lincei. Roma. Revue Archéologique, Paris. Revue d'Etudes du Sud-Est Europeen, Bucarest. Revista de Preistorie si de Antichitati Nationale, Bucureşti, I-IV, 1937-1940 Otchot Imperatorskoy Arkheologitcheskoy Komisii, Sankt-Petersburg. Oxford Journal of Archaeology Sovetskaja Arkheologija, Moskou. Studii si cercetari de istorie veche (si arheologie), Bucureşti. Soobshenija Gosudarstvennoi Akademij istorii material‘noi kul‘turi, Moskou Studii Clasice, Bucureşti. Vestnik Drevnej Istorii , Moskow.

BIBLIOGRAPHIE Akurgal, E. 1987, Grechische und Römische Kunst der Türkei, München. Allamani, B., Tsanavari, K. 1990, Pëlineß pucídeß apó th Béroia. Xronologikéß endeíceß, B'EllKer, Athènes p.151-159 Alexandrescu, P. 1957,‘Necropola. 6. Sectorul Necropolei Tumulare’, dans dans Condurachi, E. et colab., ‘Şantierul arheologic Histria’, MCA IV, p. 55-69. Alexandrescu, P. 1958, ‘Sectorul Necropolei Tumulare’, dans dans Condurachi, E. et colab., ‘Activitatea şantierului Histria in campania 1956’, MCA V, p. 303-311. Alexandrescu, P. 1959, ‘Sectorul Necropolei Tumulare’, dans dans Condurachi, E. et colab., ‘Şantierul arheologic Histria’, MCA VI, p. 289-299. Alexandrescu, P. 1960,‘Sectorul Necropolei Tumulare’, dans Condurachi, E. et colab., ‘Şantierul arheologic Histria’, MCA VII, p. 255-264. Alexandrescu, P. 1962, ‘Cercetari în necropola tumulara de la Histria’, SCIV 13, 2, p. 325-336. Alexandrescu, P. 1963a,‘Histria. Necropola Tumulara’, dans Condurachi, E. et colab., ‘Şantierul arheologic Histria’, MCA IX, p. 212-213.

371

ANCIENT GREEK COLONIES IN THE BLACK SEA 2 Alexandrescu-Vianu, M. 2000, Histria IX. Les statues et les réliefs en pierre, Bucarest-Paris. Andronikos, M. 1968, ‘Totenkult’, Archeologia Homerica III, Göttingen. Andronikos, M. 1987,’Some Reflections on the Macedonian Tombs” ABSA 82, p. 1-16. Antonaccio C. 1995, An Archaeology of Ancestors. Tomb Cult and Hero Cult in Early Greece, Lanham, Maryland. Antonaccio C., 1999, ‘Colonisation and the Origin of Hero Cult’, dans Hägg R., (éd.), Ancient Greek Hero Cult. Fifth International Seminar on Ancient Greek Cult, Göteborg, April 21-2 Andronikos, M. 1968,3,1995, p. 109-121. Antonaccio, C. 2001,’Ethicity and colonization’, dans Malkin, I. (éd.), Ancient perception of Greek ethnicity (Center of Hellenic Studies Colloquia 5), Cambridge, MA London, p. 113-157. Aricescu, A. 1961, ‘Die bodenständige Bevölkerung der Dobroudscha und ihre Beziehungen zu den Griechen in der hellenistischen Epoche’, StCl 3, p. 67-82. Avram, A. 1991, ‘Untersuchungen zur Geschichte des Territoriums von Kallatis in griechischer Zeit’, Dacia N.S. p. 103-137. Avram, A. 1999, Inscriptiones grecques et latines de Scythie Mineure, voL. III. Callatis et son territoire, Bucarest. Avram, A. 2001, ‘Les territoires d'Istros et de Callatis’, dans Problemi della “chora” coloniale dall'Occidente al Mar Nero, Atti del quatro convegno di studi sulla Magna Grecia, Taranto, 29 settembre - 3 ottombre 2000, Taranto 2001, p. 593- 632. Avram, A. 2003, ‘Histria’, dans D.V. Grammenos, E.K. Petropoulos, Ancient Greek Colonies in the Black Sea, vol. I., Thessaloniki, p. 279-340. Arsen'eva, T.M., Bezyglov, S.I., Tolocko, I.V. 2001, Nekropol' Tanaisa. Raskopki 1981-1995, Moskova Barbu, V. 1961, ‘Considérations chronologiques sur les données fournies par les inventaires funéraires des nécropoles tomitaines’, StCls 3, p. 203-225 Barbu, V. 1971, Sesiunea de comunicari stiintifice a muzeelor de istorie, Vol. I, Bucureşti. Basedow, M. A. 2000, Bešik-Tepe. Das spätbronzezeitliche Gräberfeld. Mainz am Rhein. Bârladeanu-Zavatin, E. 1980, ‘Noi descoperiri în necropolele callatiene’, Pontica 13, p. 216-239. Bârladeanu-Zavatin, E. 1985, ‘Statuete de teracota dintr-un complex funerar descoperit la Kallatis’, Pontica 18, p. 8598 Bérard, Cl. 1970, ‘L’Héroon à la porte de l’Ouest’, dans Erétrie III. Bern. Berciu, D.1969, ‘Das thrako-getische Fürstergrab von Agighiol in Rumänien’, 50. Ber. Der R.G.K. 17, p. 211-265. Berciu, D., Pippidi, D.M. 1965, Din istoria Dobrogei, Vol. I, Bucarest Blavatsky, V.D. 1951, ‘Paskopki necropoliya Fanagorii 1938, 1939 i 1940’, MIA 19, p.189- 226. Boardman, J. 1980, Greeks Overseas, their Early Colonies and Trade, London. Boardman, J. 1989, Athenian Red Figure Vases. The Classical Period: a Handbook, New York. Boardman, J. 1991, ‘Early Greek Pottery on the Black Sea?’, OJA 10.3, p. 387-390. Boehlau, J. 1898, Ionischen und italischen Nekropolen, Leipzig. Boehlau, J., Habich E. 1996, Samos- die Kasseler Grabung 1894 in der Nekropole der archaischen Stadt, Kassel. Boehlau, J., Schefold K., 1940, Larisa am Hermos I, Berlin. Bolomey, A. 1966, ‘Equideele din tumulul XII în necropola tumulara de la Histria’, dans Condurachi, Em. (éd.), Histria II, Bucarest, p. 387-396.

Bounegru, O., Bârladeanu, E. 1990, ‘Sapaturile archeologice de salvare din zona nordica a necropolei tumulare de la Callatis’, Pontica 23, p. 335-343. Bucovala, M. 1967, Necropole elenistice la Tomis, Constanţa. Bucovala, M. 1969, ‘Tradiţii elenistice în materialul funerar de epoca romana timpurie la Tomis’, Pontica 2, p. 297-232. Bucovala, M. 1975, ‘Un alt mormînt de epoca elenistica tîrzie la Tomis’, Pontica 8, p. 375-388. Bucovala, M. 1995-1996, ‘Un alt mormînt elenistic descoperit la Tomis’, Pontica 28-29, p. 73-82. Bucovala, M., Irimia, M. 1971, ‘Cimitirul din secolele VI-V î.e.n. de la Corbu, jud. Constanţa, Pontica 4, p. 41-56. Bujor, Ex. 1962, ‘The Amphorae deposit of Islam Geaferca’, Dacia NS 6, p. 475-487. Buzoianu, L. 2001, Civilizaţia greaca în zona vest-pontica şi impactul ei asupra lumii autohtone (sec. VII-IV a.Chr.), Constanţa. Callaghan, P.M. 1980, ‘The Trefoil Style and second-century Hadra Vases’, ABSA 75, 1980, p. 33-47 Callaghan, P.M. 1983, ‘Three Hadra Hydrie in the Merseyside County Museum’, BICS 30, p. 123-129 Canarache, V. 1933-1934, ‘Regi Sciti si Regatele lor dintre Istru si Pontul Euxin, Buletinul Societatii Numismatice Romane, XXVII-XXVIII, no 81-82, p. 60-83. Canarache, V. 1950, ‘Monedele Scitilor din Dobrogea’, SCIV I.1, p. 215-258. Canarache, V. 1957, Importul amforelor ştampilate la Histria, Bucureşti. Canarache, V. 1969, Maşti şi figurine Tanagra din atelierele de la Kallatis, Mangalia, Constanţa. Carter, J.C. 1998, The chora of Metaponto. The Necropoleis. Texas. Casabona, J. 1966, Recherches sur le vocabulaire des sacrifices en Grèce, des origines à la fin de l’époque classique, Aixen-Provence. Cheluţa Georgescu, N. 1974, ‘Morminte elenistice şi romane în zona de nord şi nord vest a necropolei calatiene’, Pontica 7, p. 169-189. Coja, M. 1972a, ‘Cercetari noi în aşezarea greco-romana de la Capul Dolojman’, BMI XLI, 3, p. 33-42. Coja, M. 1972b, ‘Recherches dans un établissement pontique peu connu et observations sur son territoire’, dans Actes du II Congrès International des études du sud-est européen . Tome II, Athènes, p. 267-274. Coja, M. 1983, Vase greceşti in Muzeul National, Bucureşti. Coja, M. 1986, ‘Les fortifications dans les colonies de la côte ouest du Pont Euxin’, dans Leriche, P., Treziny, P. (éd.), La fortification dans l’histoire du monde grec, Actes du colloque international. La fortification et sa place dans l’histoire politique, culturelle et sociale du monde grec, Valbonne 1982, Paris, p. 95-103. Coja, M. 1990, ‘Greek Colonists and Native Population in Dobroudja (Moesia Inferior). The Archaeological evidence, dans Descoeundres J.-P. (éd.), Greek Colonists and Native Population. Proceedings of the First Australian Congress of Classical Archaeology (Sydney 1989), Oxford, p. 157-168. Coja, M., Dupont, P. 1979, Histria V. Les ateliers céramiques, Bucarest-Paris. Coldstream, J.N. 1993, ‘Mixed marriages at the frontiers of the early Greek World , OJA 12, p. 89-107. Condurachi, E., et colab. 1950, ‘Raport aupra cercetarilor arheologice de la Kallatis-Mangalia’, SCIV 1, p. 83-89. Condurachi, E., et colab. 1951a, ‘Lucrarile de salvare de la Mangalia’, SCIV 1-2, p. 156-157. Condurachi, E., et colab. 1951b, ’Cu privire la raporturile dintre autohtoni şi greci in aşezarile sclavagiste din Dobrogea’, SCIV 2.2, p. 46-60.

372

VASILICA LUNGU: NECROPOLES GRECQUES DU PONT GAUCHE: ISTROS, ORGAMÉ, TOMIS, CALLATIS Condurachi, E., et colab. 1952, ‘Şantierul Histria’, SCIV 3, p. 268-279. Cook, B.F. 1966, ‘Inscribed Hadra Vases in the Metropolitan Museum of Art’, The Metropolitan Museum of Art. Papers 12, New York, p. 9-10. Cook, R.M, Dupont, P. 1998, East Early Pottery, Londres-New York, Damyanov, M. 2003, ‘On the local populations around the Greek colonies in the Black Sea area (5th-3rd centuries BC)’, Ancient West and East 2, p. 253-262. Damyanov, M. 2005, ‘Graves zith circles of amphorae in the Greek Necropolis in the Black Sea’, Studia Archaeologica Univesitatis Serdicensis, Supplementum IV, in honorem Professoris Ludmili Getov, Sofia, p. 214-223. Dejardins, E. 1867, ‘Rapport sur les résultats de son exploration archéologique dans la région de Danube inférieur’, CRAI, p. 290. Dejardins, E. 1869, ‘Exposé des résultats géographiques et archéologiques de son voyage dans la région du bas Danube’, CRAI, p. 40-62 Dihel, E. 1964, Die Hydria. Formgeschichte und Verwendung im Kult des Altertums, Mainz. Domanskii, Ya. V. 1979, ‘O Kharaktere grecheskoi kolonizatsii i poslekolonizatsionnom periode v Severnom Prichernomor'e’, dans Problemy grecheskoi kolonizatsii Severnogo i Vostochnogo Prichernomor'ya, Actes du Ier Symposium sur l'Histoire ancienne de la mer Noire (Tskhaltubo 1977), Tbilisi, p. 81-88. Domanskii, J.V., Vinogradov, Y.G., Solovyev, S.L. 1986, Drevnije pamiatniki kulturi na territorii SSSR , Leningrad. Doruţiu-Boila, Em. 1971, ‘Observaţii aerofotografice în teritoriul rural al Histriei’, Peuce 2, p. 37-46. Doruţiu-Boila, Em. 1988, ‘Relaţiile externe ale cetaţtii Callatis în epoca elenistica’, SCIVA 3, p.243-249. Drews, R. 1976, ‘The earliest greek settlements on the Black Sea’, JHS 96, p. 18-31. Dupont, P. 2002, ‘Le Pont-Euxin archaïque : lac milésien ou lac-nord-ionen ? Point de vue de céramologue’, dans A. Bresson, J.-L. Ferrary, A Ivantchik (éds), Cités grecques, sociétés indigènes et empires mondiaux dans la région nord-pontique: origines et développement d’une koine politique, économique et culturelle (VIIe s.a.C. – IIIe s.p.C.), Actes du Colloque international CNRS de Bordeaux, 14-16 novembre 2002, sous presse. Dupont, P., Scarlatidou, E. 2005, ‘Les débuts de la colonisation en mer Noire : éléments de chronologie amphorique’, dans D. Kacharava, M. Faudot, E. Geny (éds), Pont-Euxin et Polis. Polis hellenis et polis barbaron, Actes du Xe Symposium de Vani – 23-26 septembre 2002,Hommage à Otar Lordkipanidze et Pierre Lévêque, Besançon, p. 77-82. Ehrhardt, N. 1988, Milet und seine Kolonien. Vergleichende Untersuchung der kultischen und politischen Einrichtungen, Frankfurt am Main. Farmacovsky, B.V. 1929, Rozkopuvannya Ol’vii g. 1926, Odessa. Filow, B.D. 1934, Die Grabhügelnekropole bei Dunvalij in Südbulgarien, Sofia. Forbeck, E., Heres, H. 1997, Das Löwengrab von Milet, Berlin. Forti, L. 1984, ‘Appunti sulla ceramica di Hadra’, dans N. Bonacasa et A. di Vita, Alessandria il mondo ellenisticoromano. Studi in onore di Achille Adriani III. L’ERMA di Bretschenider, Roma, p. 222-241 Garland, R. 1982, ‘A first catalogue of attic peribolos tombs’, ABSA 77, p. 125-176. Genière, J. de la 1980, ‘Recherches récentes à Clazomènes’, Revue des archéologie et histoire de l’art de Louvain XV, p. 82-96.

Georgescu, V., Lascu, S. 1995, Callatis-Mangalia 2500, Mangalia. Gergova, D. 1989, ‘Thracian Burial Rites of the Late Bronze and Early Iron Age’, dans Best, J.G., de Vries, N.M.W., Thracians and Myceneans, Leiden, New York, Københaven, Köln, p. 231-240. Gorbunova, K.L. 1969, Drevnie Greki na ostrove Berezan, Leningrad, p. 20-25. Hadzisteliou Price, Th. 1973, ‘Hero-Cult and Homer’, Historia 22, p. 129-144. Hall, J. 1997, Ethnic identity in Greek Antiquity, Cambridge. de Hell, X.H. 1854, Voyage en Turquie et en Perse, Paris. Hind, J. 1999, ‘The dates and the mother cities of the Black Sea colonies (Pseudo-Scymnus and the Pontic contact zone)’, dans O. Lordkipanidze, P. Lévêque, La mer Noire, zone de contacts, Paris, p. 25-34. Hoddinott, R.F. 1975, Bulgaria in Antiquity, London Tonbridge. Humphreys, S.C. 1980, ‘Family Tombs and Tomb cult in Ancient Athens. Tradition or traditionalis?’ JHS 100, p. 96126. Hürmüzlü, B. 2004, ‘Burial Grounds at Klazomenai : Geometric through Hellenistic Periods’, dans Moustaka, A., Skarlatidou, E., Tzannes, M.-C., Ersoy, Y. (éd.), Klazomenai, Teos and Abdera: Metropoleis and Colony, Proceedings of the International Symposium held at the Archaeological Museum of Abdera, 20-21 october 2001, Thessalinki, p. 77-95. Iconomou, C. 1967, Opaiţe greco-romane, Bucureşti. Iconomou, C. 1968, ‘Cercetari arheologice de la Mangalia şi Neptun’, Pontice 1, p. 235-267. Ionescu, M., Georgescu N.C. 1997, ‘Cercetari perieghetice în teritoriul callatian’, SCIVA 48.2, p. 155-175. Irimia, M. 1968,’Cimitirele de incineraţie de la Bugeac-Ostrov’, Pontice 1, p. 193-234. Irimia, M. 1969, ‘Noi cercetari arheologice în cimitirul II getodacic de la Bugeac’, Pontice 2, p. 23-42. Irimia, M. 1973, ‘Desoperiri noi privind populaţia autohtona a Dobrogei şi legaturile ei cu coloniile greceşti (sec. V-I i.e.n.), Pontica 6, p. 7-71. Irimia, M. 1976, ‘Un mormînt tumular de la Topraisar, Pontica 9, p. 37-56. Irimia, M. 1977, ‘Un tip de bratari din a doua epoca a fierului la Dunarea de Jos’, Peuce VI, p. 73-77. Irimia, M. 1980, ‘Date noi privind aşezarile getice din Dobrogea în a doua epoca a fierului’, Pontica 13, p. 66118. Irimia, M. 1983, ‘Date noi privind necropolele din Dobrogea’, Pontica 16, p. 69-148. Irimia, M. 1984, ‘Mormintele plane şi tumulare din zona litoralã a Dobrogei (sec. IV-II î.e.n.) şi problema apartenenţei lor etnice’, Thraco-Dacica 5, p. 67-72. Jacobi, G. 1928-1941, ‘Clara Rhodos : Scavi nella necropoli di Jalisso’. Vol. 3 Studi e materiali. Istituto storicoarcheologico. Rhodes. Kallintzi, K. 2004, ‘Abdera. Organization and Utilization of the Area Extra Muros’, dans Moustaka, A., Skarlatidou, E., Tzannes, M.-C., Ersoy, Y. (éd.), Klazomenai, Teos and Abdera: Metropoleis and Colony, Proceedings of the International Symposium held at the Archaeological Museum of Abdera, 20-21 october 2001, Thessalinki, p. 272-289. Kastanayan, E.G. 1959, ‘Gruntovie nekropoli Bosporskich gorodov VI –IV vv do n.e. i mestnie ich osobennosti’, MIA 69, 257-295. Kobilina, M.M. 1951, ‘Raskopki “vostochnogo” nekropolya Fanagorii v 1948 g.’, MIA 19, 241-249.

373

ANCIENT GREEK COLONIES IN THE BLACK SEA 2 sud-Est de l’Europe, Actes du IXe Congrès International des études du sud-est européen, 30 août 4septembre,Tirana 2004, Bucarest, p. 10-28. Lungu, V. 2004b, ‘Un dépôt d'amphores thasiennes du IVe siècle av. J.-C. à Orgamé’, dans J. Eiring, J. Lund (éd.), Transport Amphorae and Trade in the Eastern Mediterranean, Actes of the International Colloquium at the Danish Institute at Athens, (September 26-29, 2002), Monographs of the Danish Institute at Athens, Vol. 5, Aarchus, p. 217-228. Lungu, V. 2004c, ‘Iconographie et société antique: à propos d’une stele funéraire d’Orgamé’, Peuce II (XV), p. 49-60. Lungu, V., Chera, C. 1986, ‘Contribuţii la cunoaşterea complexelor funerare de incineraţie cu “rug-busta” de epoca elenistica şi romana de la Tomis, Pontica 19, p.89-114. Lungu, V., Poenaru-Bordea, Gh. 2000, ‘Un trèsor de monnaies d’Istros à Orgamé’, dans Avram, A., M. Babes (éds), Civilisation grecque et cultures antiques périphériques. Hommage à Petre Alexandrescu à son 70e anniversaire, Bucarest, p. 282-300. Lunsing Scheurleer, R.A 1972, ‘Influence perse sur la décoration de bols égyptiens en faïence’, BABesch XLVII, p. 50-60. Malkin, I. 1987, Religion and Colonisation in Ancient Greece, Leiden, New York, Kobenhovn, Koln. Marchenko, I.D. 1956, ‘Raskopki vostochnogo nekropolya Fanagorii v 1950-1951 gg.’, MIA 57, p.102-127. Marinescu-Bîlcu, S. 1969, ‘Un mormînt tumular din necropola Histriei’, SCIV 20.4, p. 587-593. Manucu Adameşteanu, M. 1980, ’Sondajul efectuat în aşezarea antica de la Vişina, com. Jurilovca, jud. Tulcea’, MCA Tulcea, p.157-160. Manucu Adameşteanu, M. 1983, ’Cercetarile din aşezarea de la Vişina, com. Jurilovca, jud. Tulcea’, MCA Bucureşti, p.174177. Manucu Adameşteanu, M. 1985, ’Le rôle de la colonie grecque d’Orgamé dans la diffusion des éléments de civilisation hellénique’, dans Praktika. (Actes du XIIe Congrès International d’Archéologie Classique I, Athènes 1983), Athènes, p.169-175. Manucu Adameşteanu, M. 1992, ‘Orgame Polis…’, Pontica 25, p. 55-67. Manucu Adameşteanu, M. 1996a, ‘Orgame polis epi to Istro’, dans E. Porumb (éd.), Omagio a Dino Adameşteanu, ClujNapoca, p.101-109. Manucu Adameşteanu, M. 1996b, ‘Cîteva piese corinthiene din colectiile Muzeului de Archeologie al ICEM-Tulcea’, Peuce 12, p. 39-46. Manucu Adameşteanu, M. 1999, ‘Céramique archaïque d’Orgamé’, dans A. Avram, M. Babes, Civilisation grecque et cultures périphériques. (Hommage à Petre Alexandrescu à son anniversaire), Bucarest, p.194-204. Manucu Adameşteanu, M. 2000-2001, ‘Amforele arhaice de la Orgame şi câteva probleme de economie antica’, Pontica 33-34, p. 211-218. Manucu Adameşteanu, M. 2001a, Orgamé/Argamum, Tulcea. Manucu Adameşteanu, M. 2001b, ‘Analyse quantitative des céramiques archaïques importées d’Orgamé’, dans Actes du Symposium International, Griechische Keramik im kulturellen Kontext, Kiel, p. 229-231. Manucu Adameşteanu, M. 2002, ‘128. Jurilovca, jud. Tulcea (Orgame/Argamum)’, dans Cronica cercetarilor arheologice din România. (Campania 2001, CIMEC), Bucarest, p. 179-180 Manucu Adameşteanu, M. 2003, ‘Orgame’, dans D.V. Grammenos, E.K. Petropoulos (éds.), Ancient Greek Colonies in the Black Sea, vol. I., Thessaloniki, p. 341-389.

Kopcke, G. 1964, ‘Golddekorirte attische Schwarzfirniskeramik des vierten Jahrunderts v.Ch.’, Ath.Mitt. 79, p. 22-84. Koshelenko, G.A., Kruglikova, I.T., Dolgorukov, B.S. (éds.), 1984, Antichnje gosudarstva Severnogo Prichernomor’ja. Archeologi’ja SSSR, Moscou. Kovasovics, W.K. 1990, ‘Die Ekterrasse an der Gräberstrasse des Keramikos’. Keramikos, Ergebnisse der Ausgrabungen. Vol XIV, Berlin. Kurtz, D., Boardman, J. 1971, Greek Burial Customs, London. Kutajsov, V.A., Lantsov, S.B. 1989, Necropoli antichnii Kerkinitidi. Catalog pogrebenii, Kiev. Langier, L. 2002, De l’Egypte à Pompéi. Le Cabinet d’Antiques du duc d’Annale, Paris. Lapin, V.V. 1966, Grecheskaiya kolonizatiya severnogo Prichernomoriya, Kiev. Laurenzi, L. 1936, ‘Necropoli Ialisie : scavi dell’anno 1934’, Clara Rhodos VIII, Rhodes. Lungu, V. 1992, ‘Circulaţia amforelor ştampilate în zona Capul Dolojman’, Pontica 25, p. 60-98. Lungu, V. 1995, ‘Une tombe du IVe siècle av. J.-C. dans la nécropole tumulaire de la cité d’Orgamé – Argamum’, Peuce 9, p. 231-263. Lungu, V. 1996, ‘Archaeological Data and Literary Sources about the Funerary practices from the North- and Westth Pontic GreekCities’, Proceedings of the XIII International Congress of Prehistoric Sciences, Forli, p. 745-752. Lungu, V. 1999, ‘Remarques sur la chronologie des timbres thasiens à propos d’une tombe du IVe siècle av. J.-C.’, dans Garlan Y. (éd.), La production et le commerce des amphores anciennes en mer Noire, Actes du Colloque international organisé à Istanbul, 25-28 mai 1994, Aix-enProvence, p. 71-80. Lungu, V. 2000a, ‘Pratiques funéraires et formes d’organisation sociale dans la nécropole de la cité grecque d’Orgamé’, dans Simion, G. V. Lungu (éds.), Tombes tumulaires de e l’Âge du Fer dans le Su-Est de l’Europe, Actes du II Colloque International d’Archéologie Funéraire, (Tulcea 1995), Tulcea, p.101-118. Lungu, V. 2000b, ‘La tombe d’un héros et l’organisation de la nécropole d’une cité milésienne du Pont-Euxin’, dans Lungu V. (éd.), Pratiques funéraires dans l’Europe des e e XIII -IV s.av.J.-C., Actes du IIIe Colloque International d’Archéologie Funéraire, (Tulcea 1997), Tulcea, p. 67-87. Lungu, V. 2000-2001, ‘La tombe d’un Héros et l’organisation de la nécropole d’une cité milésienne du Pont Euxin : le tumulus T A95 d’Orgamé’, Talata XXXII-XXXIII, p. 171188. Lungu, V. 2001, ‘Argamum. Necropola tumulara. Sapaturile arheologice din anii 1990-1996’. Materiale si Cercetari Arheologice, (Seria noua) I, Bucureşti, p. 165-174. Lungu, V. 2002a, ‘Argamum. Sector: Necropola tumulara’, dans Cronica cercetarilor arheologice din Romania. Campania 2000, CIMEC, Bucarest, p. 283-300. Lungu, V. 2002b, ‘Tombs, Texts and Images : Fire in Greek Funeral Ritual’, dans Gheorghiu, D., Fire in Archaeology, (Papers from a session held at the European Association of Archaeologists. Sixth Annual Meeting in Lisbon 2000), BAR 1089, p.133-142. Lungu, V. 2002c, ‘Hero Cult and Greek Colonization in the Black Sea Area’, RESEE XL.1-4, p.3-17 Lungu, V. 2003, ‘On the etymology of Orgame. A Greek Colony on the West Black Sea’, RESEE XLI.1-4, p. 103109. Lungu, V. 2004a, ‘Vessel structures – Social structures in Orgame Necropolis’, dans Peuples, Etats et Nations dans le

374

VASILICA LUNGU: NECROPOLES GRECQUES DU PONT GAUCHE: ISTROS, ORGAMÉ, TOMIS, CALLATIS Miller, S. 1974, Menon’s Cistern, Hesperia 42.2, p. 194-245. Morris, I. 1987, Burial and Ancient Society. The Rise of the Greek City-State, Cambridge. Morris, I. 1992, Death-ritual and social structure in Classical Antiquity, Cambridge-New York-Melbourne. Morris, I. 2000, Archaeology as Cultural History, Bodwin, Cornwall. Nedev, D., Panajotova K. 2003, ‘Apollonia Pontica’, dans D.V. Grammenos, E.K. Petropoulos (éds.), Ancient Greek Colonies in the Black Sea, vol. I., Thessaloniki, p. 95-156. Nicolaescu Plopşor, D. 1959, ‘Données anthropologiques préliminaires sur les squelettes humains des tombes thraces d'Histria’, Dacia 3, p. 165-178. Nicolaescu Plopşor, D. 1966, ‘Studiu antropologic al osemintelor umane descoperite la Histria în necropola tumulara’, dans Em. Condurachi (éd.), Histria II, Bucureşti, p. 355-381. Nilsson, M.P. 1955, Geschichte der griechische Religion, Vol. I.3, Berlin. Ocheşeanu, R. 1969, 'Boluri “megariene” din colecţiile Muzeului de Arheologie Constanţa', Pontica 2, p.209-244. Ocheşeanu, R. 1972, ‘Monede rare si inedite din colectiile Mluzeului de archeologie din Constanta’, Pontica V, p. 485486. Oppermann, M. 1999, ‘Süddobroudschanische Studien’, dans Avram, A., Babeş, M. (éds.), Civilisation grecque et cultures antiques périphériques. Hommage à Petre Alexandrescu à son 70e anniversaire, Bucarest, p. 138-149. Orsi, P. 1895, ‘Siracusa’. NSc, p. 109-192. von der Osten, H.H. 1929, Exploration in Central Anatolia. Season 1926, Chicago. Oppermann, M. 2004, Die westpontischen Poleis und ihr indigenes Umfeld in vorrömischer Zeit, Halle 2004. Panayotova, K. 1998, ‘La nécropole d’Apollonia Pontica au lieu-dit de “Kalfata”’, Arkheologya 3-4, p. 11-24. Panayotova, K. 1999, ‘Apollonia Pontica: Recent Discoveries in the Necropolis’, dans G.R. Tsetskhladze (éd.), The Greek Colonisation of the Black Sea Area, Historia Einzenschriften 121, Stuttgart, p. 97-113. Papanova, V. 2000: ’Tumulary Necropolis of Olbia’, dans Simion, G., V. Lungu (éds.), Tombes tumulaires de l’Âge du Fer dans le Sud-Est de l’Europe, Actes du IIe Colloque International d’Archéologie Funéraire, 18-24 septembre 1995, Tulcea, Braila Calaraşi, Slobozia, Tulcea, p. 89- 100. Parlasca, K. 1976, ’Zur Verbreitung ptolemäicher Fayancekeramik ausserhalb Ägyptens’, JdJ 91, p. 135–156. Parovich-Peshican, M. 1974, Nekropol’ Olv’ii. Ellinisticheskogo vremeni, Kiev. Pârvan, V. 1915, ‘Rumanien’, AA, col. 255-270 Pârvan, V. 1923, Ţara noastra, Bucureşti Pârvan, V. 1925, ‘Fouille d’Histria. Inscriptions: Troisième série: 1923-1925’, Dacia 2, p. 198-248. Pârvan, V. 1974, Începuturile vieţii romane la gurile Dunãrii, (2e éd.) Bucarest. Pâslaru, I. Colesniuc, S. 2004-2005, ‘Noi morminte elenistice si romane cercetate la Mangalia’, Pontica 37-38, p. 407-412. Petre, Z. 2003-2005, ‘Histria. Spatiu public si organizare politica in secolelel VII-V a. Chr.’, SCIVA 54-56, p. 33-53. Philipp, H. 1981, ’Archaische Gräber in Ostionien’, IstMitt 31, p. 149-166. Pippidi, D.M. 1954, ‘Monumente epigrafice inedite’, dans Histria. Monografie arheologica I, Bucuresti, p. 473-564. Pippidi, D.M. 1958a, ‘Les fouilles d’Istros (1914-1957)’, BCH 82, p. 335-350. Pippidi, D.M. 1958b, ‘Raport asupra şantierului Histria în campania 1956’, MCA V, p. 283-328.

Pippidi, D.M. 1964, ‘Sur la diffusion des cultes egyptiens en Scythie Mineure’, StCls 6, p. 10-118. Pippidi, D. 1965, ‘Les plus anciens monuments grecs de la Dobroudgea : VIe et Ve siècles avant notre ère’, dans Le rayonnement des civilisations grecque et romaine sur les cultures périphériques, Huitième congrès international d’Archéologie Classique, Paris (1963), p. 332-336. Pippidi, D.M. 1967a, ‘In jurul papirilor de la Derveni şi Kallatis’, StCls 9, p. 203-210. Pippidi, D.M. 1967b, Contribuţii la istoria veche a României, Bucarest. Pippidi, D.M. 1969, ‘In jurul papirilor de la Derveni şi Kallatis’, Studii de istorie a religiilor antice, Bucureşti, p. 121-132. Pippidi, D.M. 1983, Inscriptiones Scythiae Minoris Graecae et Latinae, Vol. I : Inscriptiones Histria et viciniae, Bucarest. Pippidi, D.M., Popescu, Em. 1959, ‘Les relations d'Istros et d'Apollonie du Pont à l'époque hellénistique. A propos d'une inscription inédite’, Dacia N.S. 3, p. 235-258. Polignac, de Fr. 1995, Cults, Territory, and the Origin of the Greek –State, Chicago. Popescu, D. 1962, ‘Les fouilles archéologiques dans la R.P.R. en 1961’, Dacia N.S. 6, p. 515-531. Preda, C. 1961, ‘Archaeological Discoveries in the Greek Cemetery of Kallatis-Mangalia (4th – 3rd centuries BC)’, Dacia N.S. 5, p. 275-303. Preda, C. 1962, ‘Una nuova tomba a volta scoperta presso Mangalia-Kallatis’, Dacia N.S. 6, p. 157-172. Preda, C. 1963, Callatis, Bucuresti Preda, C. 1966, ‘Cîteva morminte din epoca elenistica descoperite la Callatis’, SCIV 17, 1, p. 137-146. Preda, C. 1994, (éd.), l’Encyclopédie de l’archéologie et de l’histoire ancienne de la Roumanie, Bucarest. Preda, C., Bârladeanu E. 1979, ‘Sapaturile arheologice de salvare din zona şantierului naval din Mangalia’, Pontica 12, p. 97-107 Preda, C., Cheluţa-Georgescu, N. 1975, ‘Sapaturile de salvare de la Mangalia din 1972: necropola callatianaa din zona stadionului’, Pontica 8, p. 55-75. Preda, C., Cheluţa-Georgescu, N. 1975, Callatis, Bucuresti. Preda, C., Popescu, Em., Diaconu, P. 1962, ‘Sapaturile arheologice de la Mangalia’, MCA VIII, Bucuresti, p. 439455. Radulescu, A. 1961, ‘Noi marturii arheologice din epoca elenistica de la Nuntaşi’, SCIV 12.2, p. 387-393. Radulescu, A., Munteanu, M. 1977, ‘Inscripţii inedite din Tomis şi Callatis’, Pontica 10, p. 79-89. Roebuck, C. 1959, Ionian Trade and Colonisation, New York. Roosevelt, Ch. H. 2003, Lydian and Persian Period Settlement in Lydia, PhDissertation, Cornell University. Rotroff, S. 1983, ‘Three Cistern Systems on the Kolonos Agoraios’, Hesperia 52, p. 257-291. Rotroff, S. 1997, Hellenistic Pottery Athenian and Imported Wheelmade Table Ware and Related Pottery, The AthenianAgora XXIX, Princeton, New Jersey. Ridgway, D. 1992, The first western Greek, Cambridge. Riscuţia, C., Nicolaescu-Plopşor, D. 1966, ‘Tipuri de oameni din tumulii XII si XIX de la Histria necropola tumulara. Studiu pe baza reconstituirilor grafice dupa metoda lui M.M. Gherasimov’, dans Condurachi, Em. (éd.), Histria II, p. 383-385. Robinson, D.M. 1942, ‘Necrolythia: A study in Greek burial customs and anthropology’. Excavations at Olynth. Part XI, Baltimore. Robinson, D.M. 1950, Excavations at Olynth. Vases Found in 1934 and 1938, Oxford. Ruscu, L. 2002, Relaţiile externe ale oraşelor greceşti de pe litoralul românesc al Marii Negre, Cluj Napoca.

375

ANCIENT GREEK COLONIES IN THE BLACK SEA 2 Rusjaeva, A.S. 1986, ‘Milet-Didimy-Borisfen-Ol'vija. Problemy kolonizacii Nijnego Pobu?'ja’, VDI 2, p. 25-64. Sauciuc-Saveanu, Th. 1924, ‘Callatis. Le Ier rapport préliminaire, fouilles et recherches de l’année 1924’, Dacia 2, p. 108-165. Sauciuc-Saveanu, Th. 1925, ‘Callatis. Le IIe rapport préliminaire’, Dacia 2, p. 104-137. Sauciuc-Saveanu, Th. 1927-1932, ‘Callatis. Le IVe rapport préliminaire’, Dacia 3-4, p. 435-482. Sauciuc-Saveanu, Th. 1935-1936, ‘Callatis. Le Ve rapport préliminaire’, Dacia 5-6, p. 247-278. Sauciuc-Saveanu, Th. 1935-1936, ‘Callatis. Le VIe rapport préliminaire’, Dacia 5-6, p. 279-319. Sauciuc-Saveanu, Th. 1937-1940, ‘Callatis. Le VIIe rapport préliminaire’, Dacia 7-8, p. 223-281. Sauciuc-Saveanu, Th. 1941-1944, ‘Callatis. Le VIIIe rapport préliminaire. Fouilles et recherches des années 1937-1940’, Dacia 9-10, p. 243-347 Schlörb-Vierneisel, B. 1966, 'Eridanos Nekropole', Ath.Mitt LXXXI, p. 1-111. Scarlatidou, E. 2004, 'The Archaic Cemetery of the Clazomenian Colony of Abdera', dans Moustaka, A., Skarlatidou, E., Tzannes, M.-C., Ersoy, Y. (éd.), Klazomenai, Teos and Abdera: Metropoleis and Colony, Proceedings of the International Symposium held at the Archaeological Museum of Abdera, 20-21 october 2001, Thessalinki, p. 249-257. Scorpan, C. 1970, ‘Prezenţa şi continuitatea getica la Tomis si Callatis’, SCIVA 21, 1, p. 65-95. Scorpan, C. 1974, ‘Note sur les fouilles de sauvetage de Callatis – 1971’, Pontica 7, p. 191-197. Seeher, J. 1998, ‘Die Nekropole von Demircihüyük-Sariket im 7 bis 4. Jahrhundert v. Chr’, IstMitt 48, p. 135-155. Seeher, J. 2000, Die bronzezeitliche Nekropole von Demircihüyük-Sariket. Ausgrabungen des DAI in Zusammenarbeit mit dem Museum Bursa 1990-1991, Tubingen. Sezgin, Y. 2004, 'Clazomenian Transport Amphorae of the Seventh and Sixth Centuries', dans Moustaka, A., Skarlatidou, E., Tzannes, M.-C., Ersoy, Y. (éd.), Klazomenai, Teos and Abdera: Metropoleis anc Colony, Proceedings pf the International Symposium held at the Archaeological Museum of Abdera, 20-21 october 2001, Thessalinki, p. 169-183. Shelov, D.B 1961, Nekropol Tanaisa, Moskow. Silant’eva, P.F. 1959, ‘Nekropol’ Nimfeya’, MIA 69, p. 5-107. Simion, G. 1971, ‘Despre cultura geto-daca din nordul Dobrogei în lumina descoperirilor de la Enisala’, Peuce 2, p. 63-129. Simion, G. 1995, ‘O noua necropola getica la Murighiol’, Peuce XI, p. 265-301. Simion, G. 2003, Culturi antice în zona Gurilor Dunarii, ClujNapoca. Simion, G., Lazurca, E. 1980, ‘Aşezarea hallstattiana de la Beidaud-Tulcea’, Peuce 8, p. 37-54. Siapkas, J. 2003, Heterological ethnicity. Conceptualiwing identities in Ancient Greece, Upsala. Sjepinskij, A.A. 1960, ‘Mar'inskie kurgan' epohi Bronzi’, Zapiski Odesskogo Arheologiceskogo Obšestva . Vol I.34, Odessa. Skorij, S.A. 2003, Skiti v Dneprovskoj pravoberejnoi lesostepi, Kiev. Skudnova, V.M. 1988, Arhaicheskii nekropol’ Ol’vii, Leningrad. Solovyov, S.L. 1999, Ancient Berezan. The Architecture, History and Culture of the First Greek Colony in the Northern Black Sea, Leiden-Boston-Köln.

Stevens, S.T. 1991, ‘Charon’s Obol and other coins in Ancient Funerary Practice’, Phoenix 45.1, p. 215-229. Stoian, I. 1961, ‘La citta pontica di Tomis’, Dacia 5, p. 232274. Stoian, I. 1987, Inscripţiile antice din Dacia şi Scythia Minor : Tomis si împrejurimile, Bucureşti. Ştefan, Al. 1979, 'Rapports religieux entre les cités du Pont Euxin – Histria, Tomis, Callatis et le monde oriental', Actes XIV Eirene (Problemy anticnoj istorii i kul'tury), vol. 1, Erevan, p. 266-275. Tafrali, O. 1925, ‘La cité pontique de Callatis’, RA 5e sér., p. 238-292. Tafrali, O. 1930, ‘La cité Pontique de Callatis’, Arta si Archeologie 3, 5-6, Bucarest. Teleaga, E. 1999, ‘Despre cronologia descoperirilor funerare de la Corbu şi Nuntaşi’, SCIVA 50, 1-2, p. 33-44. Teleaga, E., Zirra, Vl. 2003, Die Nekropole des 6.-1. Jhs.v.Chr. von Istria Bent bei Histria. Archaologische Untersuchungen zur Bevolkerung in der westlichen Schwarzmeerregion, Verlag Marie Leidorf GmbH, Rahden/Westf. Archaologische-epigraphische Tocilescu, Gr.1887, Mitteilungen aus Osterreich-Ungarn. Vienne (1877-1897) = Tocilescu AEM. Tocilescu, Gr.1900, Fouilles et recherches archéologiques en Roumanie, Bucarest Tocilescu, Gr. 1900, Sapaturi arheologice in Dobrogea. Caiete de sapaturi, Biblioteca Academiei Romane, Bucureşti Tocilescu, Gr. 1902, Revista pentru Istorie, Arheologie si Filologie, 4. 8, Bucureşti. Toncheva, G. 1974, ‘Necropol’t crai svetilitcheto na heros Carabazos v Odessos’, IMV X(XXV), p. 287-302. Treister, M.J., Vinogradov, Yu.G. 1993, ‘Archaeology on the Northern Coast of the Black Sea’, AJA 3, p. 521- 563. Tsvetaeva, G.A. 1957,’Kurganii nekropol’ Pantikapeya’, MIA 56, p. 227-250. Venedikov, I, Gerasimov, T., Dremsizova, C., Ivanov, T., Mladenova, Y., Velkov, V. 1963, Apollonia. Les fouilles dans la nécropole d’Apollonia en 1947-1949, Sofia. Vidal-Naquet, P. 1974, ‘La cru, l’enfant grec et le cuit’, dans Faire de l’histoire III, p. 137-168. Vinogradov, Ju.G., 1997, Pontische Studien. Kleine Schriften zur Geschichte und Epigraphik des Schwarzmeeraumes, Mayence, p. 377-384. Vinogradov, Ju.G., Domanskij, Ja., Marcenko, K. 1990, ‘Sources écrites et archéologiques du Pont Nord-Ouest. Analyse comparative’, dans O. Lordkipanidzé, P. Lévêque (éds.), Le Pont-Euxin vu par les Grecs. Sources écrites et archéologie, Paris, p. 121-139. Vulpe, Al. 1967, Necropola Hallstattiana de la Ferigile, Bucureşti. Vulpe, Al 1990, ‘Archäologische und schriftliche Quellen über die Gründung der Stadt Istros und ihre Bedeutung für die Chronologie der Donaukarpatischen Hallstattzeit’, dans Akten des XIII internationalen Kongress für klassische Archäologie, Berlin (1988), Mainz am Rheim, p. 600-604. Vulpe, Al 1997, ‘En marge de Ps. Scymnus 766-770’, dans Prima epoca a fierului la gurile Dunarii si in zonele circumpontice, Lucrarile Colocviului international septembrie 1993, Tulcea, p. 181-191. Vulpe, R. 1935-1936, ‘Deux terres cuites grecques de Callatis’, Dacia 5-6 p. 329-339. Vulpe, R. 1938, Histoire ancienne de la Dobroudja, Bucarest. Vulpe, R. 1966, Vechi focare de civilizaţie : Istria, Tomis, Callatis, Bucureşti. Zavatin-Coman, E., 1972a, ’Un mormînt ellenistic cu kalpida de la Mangalia’, Pontica 5, p. 103-116

376

VASILICA LUNGU: NECROPOLES GRECQUES DU PONT GAUCHE: ISTROS, ORGAMÉ, TOMIS, CALLATIS Zavatin-Coman, E. 1972b, ‘La tombe grecque avec kalpis de Mangalia’, Dacia 16, p. 271-280. Zirra, V. 1970, ‘Punctul Histria sat’, dans Condurachi E., Şantierul archeologic Histria, MCA IX, p. 213-220. Zirra, V. 1985, ‘Date finale cu privire la necropola de epoca greaca de la Istria (jud. Constanţa)’, Symposia Thracologica 3, p. 56-57

Wolska, W. 1980-1981, ‘Suivant les traces de l’expédition de Darius contre les Scythes’, ActaPrHistA, 11-12, p. 99-116. Weiss, D. 1911, Die Dobroudscha im Altertum. Historische landschafts Kunde. (Zur Kunde der Balkanhalbinsel: Reise und Beobachtungen 12), Sarajevo.

Figure 1. Colonies grecques du littoral ouest du Pont Euxin

377

ANCIENT GREEK COLONIES IN THE BLACK SEA 2

Figure 2. Nécropole tumulaire d'Istros

378

VASILICA LUNGU: NECROPOLES GRECQUES DU PONT GAUCHE: ISTROS, ORGAMÉ, TOMIS, CALLATIS

Figure 3. Orgamé-Argamum : cité et nécropole

Figure 4. Orgamé-Argamum : Hérôon (tumulus T A95) 379

ANCIENT GREEK COLONIES IN THE BLACK SEA 2

Figure 6. Orgamé-Argamum : amphore de type chiote d'origine de Clazomène

Figure 5. Orgamé-Argamum : tombe à incinération et cercle d'amphore - Canarache 1957

Figure 7. Orgamé-Argamum : pélike à figures rouges

Figure 8.Orgamé-Argamum : askos à figures rouges

380

VASILICA LUNGU: NECROPOLES GRECQUES DU PONT GAUCHE: ISTROS, ORGAMÉ, TOMIS, CALLATIS

Figure 9. Orgamé-Argamum : myké

Figure 10. Orgamé-Argamum : kourotrophos

Figure 11. OrgaméArgamum : pendentif en argent et en or

Figure 12. Tomis : pyxis à décor peinte et bol en fayence

381

ANCIENT GREEK COLONIES IN THE BLACK SEA 2

Figure 13. Kallatis : la nécropole principale de la cité (au nord-est)

Figure 14. Kallatis : hydrie-kalpis en bronze

Figure 15. Kallatis : amphore à décor peint 382

«L’histoire par les noms» dans les villes Grecques de Scythie et Scythie Mineure aux VIe-Ier Siecles av. J.-C.* Victor Cojocaru**

En ce qui concerne les limites chronologiques, notre étude s’arrête au Ier siècle av. J.-C., ou, plus exactement, elle descend jusqu’à la fin de l’époque de Mithridate VI Eupator, lorsque les premières influences de la culture et de la civilisation romaine pénètrent dans le nord et dans le nord-ouest de la mer Noire. En ce qui concerne le terminus post quem, l’étude des sources épigraphiques implique comme période initiale la première moitié du VIe siècle av. J.-C., date des plus anciennes inscriptions d’origine nord-pontique.

I. Introduction D’après l’excellent épigraphiste et historien de l’antiquité L. Robert, l’anthroponymie: «c’est un miroir de l’histoire ethnique et sociale du pays» (Robert, 1963, 523) et, en conséquence, «nous devons faire non point de catalogues de noms, mais l’histoire des noms, et même l’histoire par les noms» (Robert, 1969, 987). Cette dernière remarque était le résultat d’une longue période d’accumulation, lorsque plusieurs corpora – que l’on consulte aujourd’hui encore – sont apparus concernant les noms grecs (Matthews, Hornblower, 2000, 2 sqq.); au cours des années, le savant français allait être paraphrasé en fonction de l'avancement des recherches: «Nous ne devons point faire que des catalogues de noms, mais aussi l’histoire des noms, et même l’histoire par les noms» (Hatzopoulos, 2000, 99).

Le plus souvent les noms propres de la zone en question ont été le sujet d’une analyse linguistique utile et intéressante dans la lignée de l’étude fondée sur l’histoire d’une langue (comme celle des Thraces ou des ScythoSarmates), qui nous a fourni des résultats remarquables, mais qui se confronte encore à beaucoup d’inconnues. Néanmoins, il n’y a aucun doute que les progrès enregistrés par la recherche linguistique et l’utilisation de ces résultats dans l’étude des noms – des noms non-grecs surtout – que l’on rencontre dans les inscriptions: anthroponymes, ethnonymes, théonymes, toponymes etc. ont permis une meilleure connaissance des réalités ethniques nord-pontiques de la période qui nous intéresse.

En nous occupant, à partir des sources épigraphiques, de l’étude des populations habitant le pays au nord et au nord-ouest du Pont-Euxin, et en élaborant un travail de synthèse concernant les rapports entre les Hellènes et les autochtones de la région comprise entre le Bosporos Cimmérien et la Dobroudja pendant les six premiers siècles de l’existence des villes grecques du littoral (Cojocaru, 2004), nous avons essayé de répondre au desideratum de L. Robert; en conséquence, nous avons élaboré un catalogue exhaustif des anthroponymes, accompagné par l’analyse des noms propres non-grecs et des noms grecs qui sont moins connus, esquissant, dans les limites des informations dont nous disposons à ce moment, un tableau fidèle de cette population (Ibidem, 123-380).

Par ailleurs, nous avons essayé, avec succès, d’étudier les noms de personnes pour obtenir des informations nouvelles concernant certains aspects de la vie des communautés grecques situées au nord et au nord-ouest du Pont-Euxin, mais jusqu'à récemment on ne possédait pas pour cette région une étude exhaustive des anthroponymes qui apparaissent dans les inscriptions datant depuis les VIe- Ier siècles av. J.-C., provenant des villes grecques du nord et du nord-ouest de la mer Noire.

Les limites de la zone envisagée par notre recherche semblent être entièrement justifiées, surtout si l’on tient compte du fait que les frontières actuelles des États n’ont rien à faire avec les réalités géographiques et politiques du monde antique (cf. Shelov, 1967). En dépit de quelques particularités locales, les régions situées au nord et au nord-ouest de la mer Noire ont connu dans la période grecque des phénomènes politiques, socioéconomiques et culturels-religieux similaires.

En assumant le risque d’une telle recherche, extrêmement complexe, nous nous sommes intéressé dans la même mesure aux inscriptions lapidaires, aux graffiti, aux inscriptions sur le métal (y compris les monnaies) ou sur os, aux estampilles sur les amphores (dans le cas de Chersonèse Taurique) et sur les tuiles (dans le cas des villes du Bosporos Cimmérien), qui ont été publiées dans plusieurs corpora, volumes et revues spécialisées

*Traduit par Irina Scurtu. Nos sincères remerciements vont au Prof. Dr. Dimitrie Năstase (Athènes), au Dr. Lucreţiu Mihăilescu-Bîrliba (Iaşi) et au Prof. Mihaela Spinei (Iaşi), qui ont révisé et amélioré cette traduction. **Dr. Victor Cojocaru, Institutul de Arheologie, Str. Lascar Catargi 18, 700107 Iasi, Romania, these doctorale, “The Population of the North and North-West-Pontic Area during the 6th-1st centuries BC on the Basis of Epigraphic Evidence” and “The Language of Greek Inscriptions in the North of the Black Sea in the 6th century BC to the 3rd century AD”. DAAD- and Hanns Seidel-fellowship in Munich and Trier (Germany). Senior Researcher (=Associate Professor) at the Institute of Archaeology in Iasi. Excavations in Histria, Olbia, Tyras, Barbosi. Knowledge of German, French, Russian, English, Ancient Greek, Latin. E-mail: [email protected]

383

ANCIENT GREEK COLONIES IN THE BLACK SEA 2 (Cojocaru, 2004, 22, avec une liste complète des sources épigraphiques utilisées). Parmi les publications essentielles, représentatrices du stade de la recherche de la question étudiée à un certain moment historiographique, on remarque surtout la monographie de L. Zgusta, qui a été le point de départ dans l’élaboration de notre propre travail (Zgusta, 1955).

chacune des catégories de noms –, dans lequel nous avons pris en considération la plupart des informations offertes par cette catégorie de textes (Cojocaru, 2004, 123-380). Du point de vue méthodologique, nous avons fait quelques innovations par rapport aux démarches antérieures, strictement onomastiques. Premièrement, nous avons catalogué les noms – lorsque c'était nécessaire – en ajoutant les patronymes. D’autre part, nous avons mentionné, dans la partie supérieure des tableaux, beaucoup plus complexes, la qualité par laquelle est attesté le personnage en question et les divinités qu’il adorait (lorsque les sources épigraphiques s’avèrent plus généreuses du point de vue des informations qu’elles offrent), puis la catégorie à laquelle appartient l’inscription de référence, la datation de celleci et la place où elle a été trouvée. Nous avons considéré que ce type de présentation est plus pratique pour ceux qui voudraient utiliser notre livre comme instrument de travail, puisque les tableaux peuvent être combinés différemment, en fonction de l’objectif suivi et pour des études les plus variées.

Les investigations que nous avons effectuées pendant une dizaine d’années nous ont permis de mettre au point un catalogue anthroponymique, auquel nous avons ajouté les commentaires de rigueur; toutefois ce catalogue n’est pas un supplément du livre de Zgusta, mentionné ci-dessus, mais une contribution distincte, pour plusieurs raisons: 1) nous avons rassemblé et analysé tous les noms de personnes sans les limiter à ceux qui sont intéressants du point de vue linguistique, offrant ainsi pour la première fois un catalogue anthroponymique exhaustif, élaboré à partir des inscriptions des régions nord et nord-ouest de la mer Noire; 2) la région envisagée par notre recherche comprend aussi les villes grecques de Dobroudja (Istros, Tomis et Callatis ); 3) on a recouru à des limites chronologiques plus réduites (les VIe- Ier siècles av. J.C.), pour pouvoir cerner aussi exactement que possible la situation prosopographique et, dans une certaine mesure, les réalités démographiques de la région, liées à l’existence des communautés grecques dans la période classique et hellénistique, qui diffèrent nettement de la situation et des réalités des premiers siècles ap. J.-C.; 4) bien que l’on ait recouru de manière constante à l’argument linguistique, notre étude est élaborée d’un point de vue historique-épigraphique, car nous ne nous sommes pas intéressé aux noms de personnes en tant que matériel utile à l’étude des langues de la région – l’iranien, le thrace, le grec etc. – mais surtout comme un moyen d’obtenir plus d’informations en vue de la juste compréhension des influences des différentes ethnies sous le rapport de l’anthroponymie, dans le contexte des communautés grecques de la région nord et nord-ouest du Pont-Euxin aux VIe-Ier siècles av. J.-C.; 5) les cinq décennies qui se sont écoulées depuis la rédaction de la monographie de L. Zgusta ont augmenté de façon considérable le matériel documentaire et ont perfectionné la méthode de recherche, ce qui nous a permis une extension significative du catalogue anthroponymique, tout comme l’élaboration de nombreux éclaircissements concernant certains anthroponymes ou les différentes catégories de noms (on mentionne ici l’introduction de quelques catégories nouvelles – des noms égyptiens et des noms appartenant aux Nord-Pontiques attestés dans d’autres régions du monde grec).

De ce que l’on a présenté ci-dessus et de ce qu’il reste encore à présenter, il résulte sans aucun doute, croyonsnous, qu’il ne s’agit ici ni d’une reprise, à partir de sources documentaires sensiblement enrichies, de la démarche de L. Zgusta, ni d’une étude linguistique, mais d’une ample entreprise historique fondée sur l’analyse onomastique et prosopographique, d’une part, et sur la valorisation de toutes les sources éloquentes pour un traitement systématique de la composition des populations de la région en question, d’autre part. Mais avant de passer à la tentative d’une esquisse d’histoire à partir des noms propres, distribués dans des catégories différentes, nous proposons un bref aperçu général de la situation ethnique et géographique au nord et au nordouest de la mer Noire pendant la période étudiée. II. Aperçu général sur la situation ethniquegéographique au nord et au nord-ouest de la mer Noire aux VIe-Ier siècles av. J.-C. Bien que l’existence d’une phase de colonisation des territoires situés au nord et au nord-ouest du Pont-Euxin avant celle de Milet, commencée vers la moitié du VIIe siècle av. J.-C., ne puisse être soutenue qu’au niveau des hypothèses, il est certain que les régions pontiques s’étaient déjà dirigées vers le début de la grande colonisation grecque dans l’horizon géographique des Hellènes, dans la fantaisie mythique desquels elles se retrouvaient (dans les mythes du cycle des Argonautes et Médée, Prométhée, Ulysse, Iphigénie, Achille, Hyperboréens, Arimaspes et Griffons, Amazones). C’est toujours dans un contexte mythique qu’apparaît chez Stasinos (VIIIe siècle av. J.-C.) la première mention concernant une population nord-pontique réelle – les Taures. Vers la fin du VIIe siècle, Alcée mentionne les

En tenant compte de la contribution des chercheurs qui nous ont précédé dans la connaissance de la prosopographie pontique nord et nord-ouest, et comme résultat de nos propres investigations concernant les inscriptions provenant des villes grecques de cette région, nous avons publié un tableau anthroponymique – pour

384

VICTOR COJOCARU : «L’HISTOIRE PAR LES NOMS» DANS LES VILLES GRECQUES DE SCYTHIE ET SCYTHIE MINEURE scythiques, on peut expliquer le fait qu' Hérodote ait choisi Olbia comme résidence pendant son voyage pontique, le halicarnassien la considérant comme le centre de la Scythie, d’où il pouvait obtenir les informations les plus nombreuses et les plus exactes sur ceux qui peuplaient les bassins du Bug et du Dniepr. Les territoires plus lointains ont peu d’importance pour «le père de l’histoire», et par conséquent le Bosporos Cimmérien n’est mentionné qu’en passant, tandis que sa capitale – Panticapée – n’apparaît nulle part.

Scythes, invoquant Achille comme maître du territoire scythique1. Après la fondation des colonies pontiques, les Ioniens entrent en contact direct avec les populations de la région, ce qui permet à Hécatée de Milet de nous offrir des informations exactes sur quelques peuples, comme les ÌåëÜã÷ëáéíïé (les Manteaux noirs), ÌõñãÝôáé, ÌáôõêÝôáé, #Éóçðïò, Áãíßùí, /LEG I ITAL PRAEP/VEX MOES INF, which is transcribed as Per L. A(---)C(--)>(centurionem) / leg(ionis) I It(alicae) praep(ositum) / vex(illariorum) Moes(iae) inf(erioris) (CIL, III, 14215, 4; Rostovtsev, 1902, p. 93; Saxer, 1967, p. 92, no. 270; Sarnowski, 2000, p. 229-230), that is to say building materials with such stamps were made under the patronage of an unknown centurion of the I Italica legion, the commander of the vexillatio of the Lower Moesia provincial army (Rostovtsev, 1900, p. 155-156; Blavatskiy, 1951, p. 254) (Fig. 14.6). And, finally, the third type of Latin stamps LEGXICL (Fig. 14.5) can be reconstructed as the name of XI Claudia legion – le(gio) XI Cl(audia) – without great difficulty (Rostovtsev, 1900, p. 156; Blavatskiy, 1951, p. 254; Sarnowski, 2000, p. 230).

Kharax was another important place of Roman military presence in Taurica; its name has been interpreted as ‘fortified place’, ‘castella’ (Rostovtsev, 1900, p. 159; Firsov, 1990, p. 268-269; Zubar’, 2000, p. 176-200) (Figs 1.2.6 and 11). Kharax is mentioned only by Claudius Ptolemy in his Geography of the mid-second century AD; according to M.I. Rostovtsev, this place should be identified with the ruins of a hillfort located seven kilometres west of Yalta, on Cape Ay-Todor (Rostovtsev, 1900, p. 159). Late nineteenth and early twentieth century excavations uncovered two fortress walls with towers and gates there (Figs 13.1 and 14.1), nymphaeum – water pool, thermae (Fig. 13.2), a sanctuary of beneficiaries, and remains of other buildings erected on the fortress territory by the Roman soldiers, and also a large amount of material and a number of epigraphic monuments (IOSPE, I2, no. 674 683; D’yakov, 1930, p. 4; Blavatskiy, 1951, p. 258; Kuz’mina, 1972, p. 114) (Fig. 14.2-3). During 1931, 1932, and 1935 a team headed by V.D. Blavatskiy investigated the upper and lower fortification walls and the space between them, and also cleaned the thermae and nymphaeum, which had been uncovered already in the early twentieth century (Fig. 13.2). Besides these works within the fortress itself, they discovered a necropolis of the second half of the third and fourth century AD that had belonged to the population living

The finds of Latin stamps mentioning the vexillatio of Ravenna squadron allowed M.I. Rostovtsev and then V.N. D’yakov and V.D. Blavatskiy to state that the first Roman stronghold on Ay-Todor appeared during the socalled first Roman occupation of Taurica in the third quarter of the first century AD (Rostovtsev, 1900, p. 155; D’yakov, 1942, p. 95; Blavatskiy, 1951, p. 254; Saprykin, 1981, p. 61), which followed Tiberius Plautius Silvanus’ expedition. In these scholars’ opinion that expedition included ships of the Ravenna squadron, sailors of which took Cape Ay-Todor (D’yakov, 1930, p. 94; Repnikov, 1941, p. 121-123; Blavatskiy, 1951, p. 254; idem, 1985, p. 232). 748

VITALIY MIKHAYLOVITCH ZUBAR: TAURIC CHERSONESUS AND THE ROMAN EMPIRE water-collecting reservoirs (Blavatskiy, 1951, p. 289; Orlov, 1988, p. 22) allows me to think – with a certain degree of probability – that the inscription concerned a building related to water supply. These might be for example opera thermarum or nymphaei.

As has already been said, Roman soldiers appeared on the territory of Cape Ay-Todor no earlier than the early 120s AD, based on the date of the altar with dedication to Jupiter by M. Geminius Fortis, beneficiary of Ummidius Quadratus (Fig. 3.1). This monument is important evidence that the Roman army already was on Cape AyTodor at that time (Zubar’, 2000, p. 192-193).

One should remember in this regard that two water reservoirs have been discovered. The great importance paid there to water-storage can be explained as a result of the garrison’s needs and also the needs of crews of the Roman battle ships running along the southern coast of Taurica to maintain connections between Kharax and Chersonesus and the main headquarters of the Roman army (Zubar’, 1994, p. 55-56). According to the text of the inscription, Roman soldiers (vexillarii) located in Kharax in 166 AD were under the command of the centurion of the XI Claudia legion.

There is a traditional point of view that the second type of stamps mentioning the vexillatio of I Italica legion and discovered in excavations of Kharax dates to no earlier than the second half of the second century AD (Rostovtsev, 1900, p. 151; Blavatskiy, 1951, p. 259; Zubar’, 1994, p. 63; Sarnowski, Zubar’, 1996, p. 234; Zubar’, Sarnowski, 1997, p. 50-59) (Fig. 14.6), when soldiers of that unit came to Chersonesus and its vicinity.

On the territory of a cemetery of the later period located in the vicinity of the Roman fortress of Kharax, a burial relief was found in the early twentieth century (Rostovtsev, 1911, p. 38-39, plate III, fig. 3; D’yakov, 1930, p. 4). The upper part of the headstone depicts the Thracian Horseman, a dog, and a boar; the inscription located below was reconstructed by M.I. Rostovtsev as: D(is) M(anibus) / L. F(urio) Seu(tho) / op(tioni) / [prae]f(ecti) coh(ortis) I T[hr(acum) ... – ‘To Gods Manes. L. Furio Seutho, optio prefecti (commander’s deputy) of (cohort) I Thracum ...’ (Rostovtsev, 1911, p. 38; Blavatskiy, 1951, p. 258) (Fig. 15.4).

However it is still possible that these stamps may be of an earlier period. Up until this time Chersonesus had no monuments of ceramic epigraphy that could be related to the works of I Italica legion soldiers. Hence it is not possible to restrict the chronology of this group of stamps to the second half of the second century AD unless new materials are discovered; these stamps may be dated hypothetically even to the 120s AD when I Italica legion soldiers could have been detached to Chersonesus and Ay-Todor. Unfortunately, until recently there were only a few fragments of data regarding the Roman garrison of Kharax in the middle and the third quarter of the second century AD. But in 1984 archaeological studies in the middle and southwestern part of the Roman fortification discovered eight fragments of a slab with building inscription in Latin (Orlov, 1988, p. 19-21), which dates to the second half of 166 AD or early 167 AD (Zubar’, Sarnowski, 1997, p. 50-59; Sarnowski, Zubar’, 1996, p. 229-234; Zubar’, 2000, p. 194-195) (Fig. 15.3).

However M. Speidel supposes a bit different reconstruction of that inscription: D(is) M(anibus) / L. F(urio) Seu(tho) / [se]q(utori) p[r(aepositi)] / [v]ex(illationis) coh(ortis) I T[hr(acum)]. M. Speidel thinks that L. Furio Seutho was secutor of the commander of I Thracum cohort of the vexillatio, whose rank corresponded to the Roman military title of optio praefecti, that is deputy to the unit commander. The scholar notes that the name of Seutho in Roman prosopography appeared most often in the time of the Severi, which possibly gives a reason to date this monument to ca. 200 or the early third century AD (Speidel, 1989, р. 515-516).

In M.I. Rostovtsev’s and V.D. Blavatskiy’s opinion, a rather mighty Roman garrison was stationed in Kharax around the middle of the second century AD and built a Roman fortress there (Rostovtsev, 1900, p. 151; Blavatskiy, 1951, p. 259). This conclusion correlates well with the content of the new epigraphic monument, which is now one of the earliest documents about Roman military building in Taurica. If one proceeds from the reconstructed text, one will see that by no later than 166 AD there was large-scale building related to the establishment of the Roman garrison on Cape Ay-Todor. The content of this inscription coincides with the results of archaeological investigations by K.K. Orlov (Orlov, 1988, p. 24, 26).

Taking the history of the Roman army Thracian cohort movements into account, I can draw the conclusion that L. Furio Seutho was a soldier of the Cohors I Thracum Syriaca Equitata (Zubar’, 1994, p. 63) assigned to command a cavalry unit, which was a part of the Roman garrison of Kharax (Rostovtev, 1911, p. 39, note 1). The main camp of that cohort was located apparently in Transmarisca (Beneš, 1978, p. 53; Strobel, 1984, p. 144) not far from Durostorum – the most important station of XI Claudia legion. This observation allows one to think that this cohort was in operational subordination to the commanders of XI Claudia legion. That is why the most probable hypothesis is that the soldiers of Cohors I Tracum Syriaca Equitata were on the territory of Kharax together with XI Claudia legion soldiers in the late

The eighth and the ninth lines of the inscription deal with a certain building. The construction of a fortress on Cape Ay-Todor where no water sources were present and water supply was possible only via a special water channel supplying water from springs on Ay-Petry mountain to 749

ANCIENT GREEK COLONIES IN THE BLACK SEA 2 second century and first half of the third century AD. Distribution of Roman garrisons and military posts on the territory of Taurica required their permanent contacts with Chersonesus, which in the second half of the second and the first half of the third century AD remained the main base for the Roman military presence and the residence of the military tribune, the officer who was ordered to command all the Roman troops in the region in the last quarter of the second century AD.

Thracian votive reliefs discovered in the so-called houses of beneficiaries allows one to draw a reliable conclusion that the soldiers of Thracian origin composed a great part of the Kharax garrison (Rostovtsev, 1900, p. 36). The same is evidenced – indirectly – by the tombstone of L. Furio Seutho, deputy prefect of the I Thracum cohort, which was stationed in the Danube region for a long period. The practice of filling Roman military units with natives of the provinces where these troops were stationed began notably from the 130s AD after Hadrian’s military reform (Dobson, Mann, 1973, p. 191, 196; Campbell, 1978, p. 165; Mann, 1983, p. 38, 66; Keppie, 1984, p. 180-181). In the second half of the second century AD this practice affected not only auxiliary units but legions also – the latter were supplied from residents of provincial cities of the Danube region (van de Weerd, 1907, p. 305-312; Mann, 1983, p. 37) (Fig. 15.2). Thus, the structure of the Roman garrison of Kharax was not exceptional in that sense; so its case just confirms the conclusions made regarding the ethnic structure of the army of Moesia. It is quite possible that there were a certain number of civilians living on the territory of Kharax. As an indirect support, there is a fragment of a votive marble slab with an inscription mentioning the feminine name Parthenope (Rostovtsev, 1911, p. 42) – but it is too early to draw a conclusion about the existence of canabae in Kharax (D’yakov, 1930, p. 29; Orlov, 1988, p. 25; Savelya, Sarnowsky, 1999, p. 43-44).

Communication between Kharax and Chersonesus probably took place by sea – one can speak of this because of the presence of ships of classis Flaviae Moesicae there and because of the bay near Cape AyTodor which could have been used for stationing Roman battle ships (Rostovtsev, 1911, p. 41; D’yakov, 1930, p. 7). However sea communication could not have been safe in autumn and winter because of stormy weather in the Black Sea, which is why there is some basis to hypothesize that there was an overland road between the two aforementioned points. M.I. Rostovtsev was the first to have written that such a road really existed (Rostovtsev, 1911, p. 9). A.I. Tyumenev relied upon A.L. Bertier Delagarde’s opinion and considered that the whole mountainous part of Taurica had no overland roads so that communication between its regions was realized via mountain paths (Tyumenev, 1949, p. 79; сf. Bertier Delagarde, 1920, p. 34). However O.I. Dombrovskiy’s exploration has shown that there is a certain basis to draw the conclusion that such a road really existed. This road started in Chersonesus, then went through the Heraclean peninsula, then down around the south-eastern edge of the Sapun mountain plateau to the Zolotaya ravine, then passed by the Roman stronghold on the territory of present-day Balaklava, and through Baydarskaya valley, Tarpan-Bair mountain pass and At-Bash down to the south coast of the Crimea (see Solomonik, 1964, p. 127; eadem, 1983, p. 39; Firsov, 1990, p. 137, fig. 3). There are deep ruts in the bedrock made by moving wheeled vehicles and visible at some sites on that road. The rut dimensions are the same as the width of Roman cart-wheels (cf. Firsov, 1990, p. 380; Junkelmann, 1990, p. 64-85). In the scholars’ opinion, along this road there are sites of first century AD settlements, which might have developed during the period of the most active use of that strategically important route (Shcheglov, 1961, p. 341; Firsov, 1990, p. 380, fig. 132). In this regard, two altars dedicated to Nemesis and Jupiter Optimo Maximo by Titus Flavius Celsinus, beneficiary of the consularis of XI Claudia legion, which were discovered in Chersonesus and Kharax (Fig. 9.4) and date to the period no later than the late second century AD (Solomonik, 1983, p. 39-40, no. 10; Zubar’, Antonova, Savelya, 1991, p. 102-108), and also a beneficiaries’ sanctuary discovered not far away from the walls of Kharax (Rostovtsev, 1911, p. 12, 16; D’yakov, 1930, p. 32), are very important. The presence of traces related to the Roman soldiers’ stay in the Al’ma-Kermen hillfort allows one to suggest that

Unfortunately, at present one is not able to say exactly when Roman soldiers left the fortress. M.I. Rostovtsev has supposed that – according to numismatic data – this event took place ca. 244 AD (Rostovtsev, 1900, p. 156; cf. Blavatskiy, 1951, p. 254; Sarnowski, 1988, plate 8) and was probably a result of Philip the Arab’s (244-249 AD) preparations for military operations against barbarians threatening Thracia and Moesia (Vinogradov, Zubar’, 1995/1996, p. 139-140; Vinogradov, Zubar’, Antonova, 1999, p. 78). It is also possible, however, that the Roman garrison was taken away from Kharax a bit earlier – in the second half of the 230s AD because of the earthquake which may have caused collapse of fortifications of that Roman fortress (Zubar’, 2000, p. 198). After the Roman soldiers went away, the water supply and fortifications of Kharax were demolished (Orlov, 1988, p. 22, 27), and Cape Ay-Todor was taken by representatives of a multi-ethnic tribal union headed by the Goths, who undertook burials with the rite of cremation in the vicinity of the former Roman stronghold (Blavatskiy, 1951, p. 262-274; Orlov, 1987, p. 106-132; Sidorenko, 1987, p. 133-143; Gey, Bazhan, 1997, p. 3135). It is also possible that their placement there was agreed to by the Roman administration which may have considered the barbarians living there to be allies of the Empire (Zubar’, 1998, p. 148-150). 750

VITALIY MIKHAYLOVITCH ZUBAR: TAURIC CHERSONESUS AND THE ROMAN EMPIRE cohorts with cavalry. Each of these cohorts (Equitata) consisted of 800 infantrymen and 256 cavalrymen (Davies, 1971, р. 751-763; Keppie, 1984, p. 26; Junkelmann, 1991a, p. 54-72). That is why it is possible that cavalrymen from the Roman auxiliary troops were stationed not only at Balaklava but in Chersonesus itself as well.

there was an overland road: it started from the Heraclean peninsula, went through Kamenolomnaya ravine down to Inkerman valley, and passed along alpine valleys at the first ridge of the Crimean mountains to the northeast, Al’ma-Kermen hillfort and then to Scythian Neapolis (Filippenko, 1994, p. 136) (Fig. 11). If the hypothesis about the Roman garrison staying in Ust’-Al’ma hillfort is correct, one probably has to conclude that this garrison communicated with Chersonesus by sea, and with Al’maKermen hillfort via an overland road coming along the river Al’ma valley eastwards.

There is a find that supplies evidence that cavalrymen were a part of the Roman garrison in Chersonesus and in other ancient Greek cities of the Northern Black Sea Littoral: bronze badges and belt-plates discovered in a burial in Chersonesus necropolis (Zubar’, Son, 1999, p. 118-123). These badges and plates find numerous analogies among the artefacts excavated from military camps in Roman limes. They are attributed as a part of belt sets of soldiers or decorations for horse-trappings of cavalrymen of Roman auxiliary troops and date to the second half of the second and first half of the third century AD (Oldenstein, 1977, p. 137-139, 170, 171-173, 178-184, 186, 187, 226-239; plate 34, nos 269-272; plate 46, nos 473-489; plate 47, nos 490-503; plate 56, nos 686-694; plate 85, nos 1119, 1120; plate 86, nos 11211125; plate 90, no. 1165; Treyster, 2000, p. 159-160).

At the same time, if one assumes that the overland roads existed in Taurica, one should underline that in contrast to the territories of the Roman provinces proper and regions adjacent to borders (cf. Karyshkovskiy, Kozhokaru, 1992, p. 174), in Taurica there are no discovered sites of roads with hard surfaces built according to Roman standards nor Roman milestones typically built when Roman units were constructing roads (see details in Domaszevski, 1902, p. 158-211; Pekary, 1968; Chevallir, 1976; Esch, 1997; Torbatov, 2000, p. 59-72). That is why we have every reason to conclude that when the Romans stayed in Taurica, they did not engage in deliberate building of a network of roads, but in most cases used for their own needs the road-bed which had existed there earlier, with its possible repair by Roman soldiers (cf. Filippenko, 1994, p. 137). The aforesaid is well-illustrated by the fact that the Roman itineraries possess no data regarding overland roads either in Taurica or in the Northern Black Sea Littoral as a whole (Miller, 1916).

Although there is no remaining monument about auxiliary troops in Chersonesus and its environs from the middle and the second half of the second century AD, one is in possession of accounts that in the late second and first half of the third century AD the Roman garrison of the city and its vicinity had soldiers of four auxiliary units at once: I Sugambrorum, I Bracarum, and I Cilicum cohorts, and also ala I Atectorigiana (Figs 9.1-3 and 11.3). I can hardly explain such a situation. On the one hand, it is possible that epigraphic monuments mentioning auxiliary troops soldiers of the earlier period exist but have not yet been found. On the other hand, one can interpret this situation as a reflection of changes in manning the Chersonesus Roman garrison.

With regard to its organization, the Roman garrison of Chersonesus was a vexillatio taken from the army located in Moesia Inferior (IOSPE, I2, no. 404; Solomonik, 1983, p. 20-29, no. 1; p. 70, no. 46). Vexillatii as more or less permanent military units appeared in the Roman army as early as the first century AD; this form of military organization began to be widespread from the reign of the emperor Hadrian (117-138 AD), when this term began to refer to special military troops sent to service in this or that region (Neumann, 1958, col. 2442-2444; Parker, 1958, p. 164; Grant, 1974, p. 237). Vexillatii could include soldiers of one or several legions, auxiliary troops, and naval units depending on particular circumstances (Rostovtsev, 1908, p. 59-61; Saxer, 1967; Webster, 1969, p. 80). Such troops were entrusted with executing tasks of a certain military campaign outside the province in which the army was located (Rostovtsev, 1909, p. 7; Parker, 1958, p. 165), or to carry out garrison service at this or that point on the imperial border or outside of it (Stephens, 1987, p. 240). Garrisons of Chersonesus and Kharax were mixed, and thus belonged to the second type of vexillatii (CIL, III, 600, 6627, 7449; Domaszewski, 1967, p. 136).

Unfortunately, the principles of manning the Chersonesus vexillatio are still unknown. Epitaphs of G. Iulus Valens, soldier of the I Sugambrorum cohort, and Marcus Maecilius, soldier of the I Bracarum cohort, mention names of particular centuries; the tombstone of a cavalryman of the ala I Atectorigiana refers to turmae, tactical sub-units of a century. These facts allow one to think that up until the late second century AD Chersonesus vexillatii included small groups of soldiers from auxiliary units side by side with soldiers of, at first, the V Macedonica legion and then the I Italica legion; the core of the garrison consisted of legionaries, certainly. Later on, centuries and turmae of the auxiliary troops mentioned above were introduced into the Chersonesus vexillatii. If this is the way things were, Chersonesus vexillatii consisted not only of soldiers of different troops but of a set of tactical units detached from the Moesian army. Hence one has reason to suppose that in comparison with the earlier period, the number of legionaries was smaller than that of soldiers of auxiliary

In the late second and the first half of the third century AD vexillatii of Chersonesus incorporated soldiers of I Cilicum and I Sugambrorum (earlier II Lucensium) 751

ANCIENT GREEK COLONIES IN THE BLACK SEA 2 the rank of military tribune headed a vexillatio assigned with special operational duties (Neumann, 1958, col. 2444). The centurions mentioned in the correspondence regarding prostitution tax (Fig. 6.2) and in Balaklava inscriptions were deputies or assistants of the tribune and managed the daily life of their vexillatio soldiers both in Chersonesus itself and its vicinity (cf. Rostovtsev, 1900, p. 6-7; Sarnowski, 1988, p. 144).

troops under the operational command of leaders of the XI Claudia legion. If this reconstruction is true, the manning of Chersonesus garrison in the late second and first half of the third century AD had the same tendency as that in Olbia (see details in Zubar’, 1998, p. 103). The aforesaid finds indirect support in a find of a piece of Roman military equipment, which deserves special attention. Such items of material culture were extremely rare in the ancient Greek centres and their environs in the Northern Black Sea Littoral until recently (Chernenko, Zubar’, Son, 1989, p. 250). The number of such finds rose quickly and considerably in the past decade due to excavations over many years of a sanctuary at the Gurzufskoye sedlo mountain pass and work with materials from excavations at Tyras, Olbia, and Chersonesus (Chernenko, Zubar’, Son, 1989, p. 250-252; Zubar’, 1993b, p. 66-70; Son, Nazarov, 1993, p. 120-123; Novichenkova N.G., 1998, p. 51-67; Zubar’ V.M., Son N.A., 1999, p. 118-123; Treyster, 2000, p. 156-164). Therefore, one can use this category of archaeological finds together with epigraphic materials as a source of real value to reconstruct the structure and manning of the Roman troops located in Taurica.

The above reconstruction corresponds to the territory where roof tiles with VEMI stamps were spread; that abbreviation could be deciphered as V(exillatio) е(xercitus) M(oesiae) i(nferior). Stamps with such an abbreviation were discovered in excavations of Chersonesus (Zubar’, Antonova, 1991, p. 80-82; Zubar’, 2000a, p. 253-254), the Roman stronghold on the territory of present-day Balaklava, and at Kazatskaya hill (Savelya, 1997, p. 90 and 92) where the Roman watchtower was located (Zubar’, 1997, p. 165-174) (Fig. 8.6-8). Hence one can hypothesize that all these points included soldiers of one vexillatio. Latin inscriptions discovered on the territory of Balaklava supply information that Roman soldiers started to produce roof tiles with VEMI stamps from the middle or the third quarter of the second century AD.

Excavations on the territory of the citadel in Chersonesus in 1992 uncovered an end-piece of scabbard for a long Roman sword (chape) made of a solid piece of ivory (Zubar’, Antonova, 2001, p. 122-125). This chape belongs to a group of artefacts of the same type discovered at places where the Roman army was stationed; such chapes date to the second half of the second and the first half of the third century AD (Oldenstein, 1977, p. 116-123; plate 25). Finds of bone chapes for scabbards of long Roman swords are known in those ancient Greek cities of the Northern Black Sea Littoral where permanent Roman garrisons were stationed. Two chapes of the same period were discovered in Tyras and one such artefact in Olbia (Chernenko, Zubar’, Son, 1989, p. 250-252, fig. 1, 1; 2; Son, Nazarov, 1993, p. 120-122, figs 1-4). J. Oldenstein considers such chapes as pieces of armament used not by legionnaires but by soldiers of an auxiliary army (Oldenstein, 1977, p. 116-124).

Roof tiles with OPUSNOV stamps (Fig. 8.9) from Chersonesus and the territory of Balaklava (Sarnowski, 2000, p. 226) date to the same period. V.V. Borisova followed B.N. Grakov in reconstructing this legend as opus nov(um) considering that the roof tiles with such stamps had been produced specially for certain new buildings (Borisova, 1961, p. 42, 45). Now one is able to state that this abbreviation referred to the name Novius, who should be identified with Novius Vlpianus, centurion of the I Italica legion (Zubar’, Sarnowski, Savelya, 1997, p. 71), who headed the Roman soldiers during construction on the territory of present-day Balaklava in the middle or the third quarter of the second century AD. In this case, Novius Vlpianus was the Roman military officer holding the highest rank in that Roman military stronghold; the roof tiles were made by his subordinate soldiers and under his immediate supervision. It seems that two fragments of roof tiles with OPVS PVBLIC-stamp discovered in Chersonesus and Balaklava (Fig. 8.10) (Zubar’, 1994, p. 98, fig. 44, 2; Sarnowski, Savelya, 1998, p. 40-41) should be dated to the third quarter of the second century AD. According to T. Sarnowski’s hypothesis, that stamp can be interpreted as opus Public(ii) (Sarnowski, Savelya, 1998, p. 40-41; Sarnowski, 2000, p. 226). The same scholar has interpreted the abbreviations CLA and CAI also found on roof tiles (Fig. 8.11-14) (Filippenko, 1998, p. 114, fig. 3, 2–4; Sarnowski, Savelya, 1998, p. 41) as (opus) Cla(udii ?) (Sarnowski, Savelya, 1998, p. 41; Sarnowski, 2000, p. 227) and (opus) Gai(i)(?), that is to say as indications that these tiles were produced under Claudius’ and Gaius’ supervision (Sarnowski, Savelya, 1998, p. 41; Sarnowski, 2000, p. 227).

Taking the Latin inscriptions uncovered in Balaklava into account, I can draw the conclusion that the Roman army stationed there in the second half of the second century AD was a part of the Chersonesus vexillatio organisation under the head of the military tribune of the I Italica legion Antonius Valens (Zubar’, 1999, p. 93-100; idem, 2000a, p. 253-254). Keeping in mind that the tribune built the temple of Jupiter Dolichenus and erected the statue of Hercules via the centurion of the same legion, Novius Ulpianus, it would be logical to suggest that this tribune commanded the whole vexillatio, which was called Cersonessitana in correspondence regarding a prostitution tax in Chersonesus (IOSPE, I2, no. 404; Solomonik, 1983, p. 20-27, no. 1). This situation agrees with Roman military practice when a commander with 752

VITALIY MIKHAYLOVITCH ZUBAR: TAURIC CHERSONESUS AND THE ROMAN EMPIRE Tyras, Olbia, and Chersonesus. S.A. Belyayev did no analysis of sources, but made another reference to M.I. Rostovtsev and wrote: ‘it is well-known that in the Greek and Roman scholarship Taurica always [emphasis added] meant the Crimean peninsula as a whole, and Scythia – steppes adjoining the northern coast of the Black Sea’ (Belyayev, 1968, p. 132; cf. Rostovtsev, 1908, p. 65). This opinion seems to me very much disputable and moreover the reference to M.I. Rostovtsev is incorrect as he writes nothing similar in the work referred to.

It is rather suggestive that ceramic building wares discovered in Chersonesus and its environs were marked with stamps with the names of Novius, Publius, Claudius, and Gaius. The mention of Novius Vlpianus, centurion of the I Italiaca legion, in the monuments of lapidary inscription from Balaklava and the legends of stamps with the first characters of names of centurions from Kharax and Tyras (Blavatskiy, 1951, p. 254; Son, 1993, p. 33-35; Sarnowski, Zubar’, 1996, p. 233-234, fig. 3) allows one to hypothesize that these abbreviations represented the titles of the Roman vexillatio administrators responsible for ceramic building ware manufactured by the soldiers. It is also possible that at least some of them might be centurions supervising the Roman soldiers in Chersonesus and in the stronghold located on the territory of Balaklava.

What is more, S.A. Belyayev’s supposition that in the late second century AD the Romans and Greeks called the whole Crimean peninsula Taurica and the steppe zone of the Northern Black Sea Littoral Scythia contradicts the sources. Herodotus and Pseudo-Skylax used the term Taurica for the alpine part of the present-day Crimea only (Ol’khovskiy, 1990, p. 28). Later authors, even such reliable ones as Strabo and Pliny, also located the Taurians or Tauroscythians in the mountainous part of the peninsula, between Chersonesus and Theodosia (Strabo, VII, 4, 5; Plin., NH, IV, 85; Solomonik, 1962, p. 154155; Ol’khovskiy, 1981, p. 53-56). That is the reason that one now can hardly identify Taurica with the whole Crimean peninsula.

On the authority of the materials cited above one may draw the conclusion that about the middle of the second century AD the Roman army was installed in Chersonesus and its vicinity and started constructions there, for which they used roof tiles with VEMI stamps and the abbreviated Roman names of the officeholders who supervised manufacturing of building ware in the second half of the second century AD. The finds of roof tiles with such stamps from Chersonesus and other places in its vicinity allows one to suggest that all the Roman troops in the region were from one vexilllatio under the head of the military tribune. This hypothesis finds support from a Greek inscription fragment of the later period which twice mentioned Arrius Alcibiadus, the military tribune, who is also known from the correspondence of the Chersonesus civil community and the Roman administration about a prostitution tax during the time of Septimius Severus (Zubar’, 1994, p. 84-85; cf. Makarov, 2003, p. 124-125). E.I. Solomonik has published this inscription and has expressed the opinion that the fragment was a part of a copy of some decree or order by L. Arrius Alcibiadus exhibited at the place where the Roman military unit was located (Solomonik, 1974, p. 34-36); that alleged unit is supposed to have been a part of Chersonesus vexillatio.

As for the geographic concept of Scythia, it also changed in the late second century AD. Strabo mentioned Scythia Minor and restricted it to the ‘Tauric or Scythian’ peninsula and possibly the area beyond the Perekop isthmus, up to Borysthenes (Strabo, VII, 4, 1, 5). The map of Agrippa calls the steppe zone of the Northern Black Sea Littoral Sarmatia (Rostovtsev, 1925, p. 43-44), and Claudius Ptolemy, who lived in the second century AD, drew a clear border between European Sarmatia and Tauric Chersonesus – the present-day Crimean peninsula – in his description (Ptol., III, 5, I - 6; III, 6, I - 5). There is a decree from Olbia, which was discovered at the footsteps of Mangup mountain and dated to the second half of the first century AD by Yu.G. Vinogradov; this source states that the Olbiopolitai sent an embassy to Aorsia (Vinogradov, 1994, p. 167-168). There can be no doubt that Aorsia was located somewhere not far from Olbia and that its rulers played an important part in the history of that city during that period (Zubar’, 1994b, p. 218-222). Hence it becomes obvious that in the second century AD the Romans used Taurica for the alpine part of the Crimea, while the steppe region of the Northern Black Sea Littoral and the area of Olbia received the geographic name of Sarmatia.

Currently it is difficult to tell whether Kharax vexillatio was in operational subordination to the military tribune having his headquarter in Chersonesus in the third quarter of the second century AD. The epitaph of T. Plavtius Felix Ferruntianus mentioned several of his titles including that he was ‘praepositus vexillationibus apud Scythiam et Tauricam’ with the task of military tribune. This allows one to suggest that in the 180s or even 190s AD (Rostovtsev, 1908, p. 65; Belyayev, 1968, p. 132; cf. Sarnowski, 1995, p. 323) he commanded all the Roman troops located in the southwestern and southern Crimea (Zubar’, Sarnowski, 1997, p. 56-58).

From the time of Strabo or even earlier onwards, Scythia was the name of the steppe and foothill region of the Crimea in contrast to its mountainous area and a part of the coastline where the Taurians lived (Ol’khovskiy, 1981, p. 53-56; idem, 1990, p. 32, 33). It is significant in this regard that Arrian in his Periplous speaks of Scythian Cercinitis and Scythian Kalos limen, that is to say these cities were located in Scythia (Arr. P. Pont., 30; cf. Anon. P. Pont., 83/57). In this connection, I would like to call

S.A. Belyayev analyzed the epitaph of T. Plavtius Felix Ferruntianus, made a reference to M.I. Rostovtsev, and suggested that in the 180s and perhaps in the 190s AD this person commanded all the Roman troops located in 753

ANCIENT GREEK COLONIES IN THE BLACK SEA 2 appointed the head of the military troop and was called ‘saviour’ in the decree (Antonova, Yaylenko, 1995, p. 76). It is also possible that an official of the provincial administration with such a high rank arrived in Taurica not only because there was a threat to Chersonesus, but also because barbarians defeated the large Roman stronghold on the territory of present-day Balaklava so that the Romans could have suffered serious losses from that (Zubar’, 1999, p. 97-98).

your attention to E.I. Solomonik’s interesting note that in T. Plavtius Felix Ferruntianus’ epitaph the preposition apud with the accusative should be translated as at and not as in. In this case – the scholar considers – the part of the epitaph which is especially interesting to us should be read not as ‘in Scythia and Taurica’, but as ‘at (the coast of) Scythia and Taurica’ (trib[unus] milit[um] leg[ionis] I Italic[ae], praepositus vexillationibus Ponticis apud Scythia et Tauricam) (Solomonik, 1973a, p. 144). This reconstruction agrees well with the real location of the Roman military posts known from the archaeological data.

It is not certain that before the 180s AD all the Roman troops in the southwestern and southern Crimea were under the single command of a military tribune. It is possible that the 174 AD mission to Chersonesus of the Roman procurator Т. Aurelius Calpurnianus Apollonidus and his special military unit resulted both in defeat of the barbarians who threatened that city and in reorganization of the administration of the Roman troops in the region. The Vexillatii located in Chersonesus and its vicinity, in Kharax, and possibly in other places, were united under one command which was given to the ‘praepositus of Pontic vexillatii in Scythia and Taurica’. The conclusion drawn above agrees with the fact that military tribunes in the Roman army headed big vexillatii with special operational tasks and sometimes commanded several vexillatii at once (see Domaszewski, 1967, p. 136; Saxer, 1967, p. 120-121; Luttwak, 1976, p. 124-125; Smith, 1979, p. 268). According to the evidence of T. Plavtius Felix Ferruntianus’ epitaph, in the second half of the second century AD this position was occupied by military tribunes of the I Italica legion, which was engaged in providing military control over the region of Taurica (Zubar’, 1999, p. 97).

Besides Chersonesus and Kharax, there were Roman posts and small garrisons on the northern side of presentday Sevastopol, in the Al’ma-Kermen foothills and evidently at the Ust’-Al’ma hillfort, on the territory of Scythia, and also on the Heraclean peninsula and in the area of present-day Balaklava, that is in Taurica (Zubar’, 1994, p. 68-78, fig. 1) (Fig. 11). Hence if one proceeds from the ancient authors’ account and archaeological data, one will see that there is a need to search for Pontic vexillatii mentioned in the epitaph of T. Plavtius Felix Ferruntianus outside the Crimean territory. The Roman garrisons in the aforementioned points were precisely those under T. Plavtius Felix Ferruntianus’ command, as well as under the command of other military tribunes known from epigraphic monuments of Chersonesus (IOSPE, I2, nos. 404, 417; cf. Rostovtsev, 1900, p. 1). It is most likely that the commander of the Roman troops in Chersonesus holding the rank of military tribune also commanded the vexillatio located in the territory of Kharax and possibly that in the area of present-day Alushta, that is to say in Taurica (Zubar’, 1994, p. 74-77, fig. 1; idem, 1999, p. 97) (Fig. 11). This conclusion gains support from the fact that T. Plavtius Felix Ferruntianus was called praepositus of Pontic vexillatii, and it is known that in the second half of the second century AD the rank of praepositus was given to officers in charge of more than one vexillatio (Smith, 1979, p. 269-271).

Until recently, epigraphic data revealed the names of four military tribunes in charge of the Roman army in Taurica: Tiberius Plavtius Felix Ferruntianus, and also Flavius Sergianus Sosibius, Atilius Primianus, and Arrius Alcibiadus (Solomonik, 1983, p. 20-27, no. 1; p. 37-38, no. 9; cf. eadem, 1974, p. 34-36). Now, after the discovery of new epigraphic monuments in the territory of Balaklava, one can add to the list Antonius Valens, who held the position of military tribune in the I Italica legion in the third quarter of the second century AD and became the 21st tribune of the legion now known from the sources (Sarnowski, 1993, p. 63-80).

Although it would be hard to say anything definite about reasons to combine all Taurica vexillatii under a single command in the 170s-180s AD, one can draw a certain hypothesis. As these come from Chersonesus decrees in honour of Т. Aurelius Calpurnianus Apollonidus and his wife Paulina dated at 174 AD, the Roman procurator must have come to the city shortly before that (Antonova, Yaylenko, 1995, p. 58-86). Taking Yu.G. Vinogradov’s reconstruction of this document into account (Vinogradov, 1996, p. 48-60), one has to agree that the person honoured in the decree came to Chersonesus not on a diplomatic mission (Antonova, Yaylenko, 1995, p. 72, 74) but as the leader of a military troop to help Chersonesus in the period when the barbarians of the Northern Black Sea Littoral increased their activities in connection with the so-called Sarmatian war (Vinogradov, 1996, p. 57 f.; cf. Sventsitskaya, 1996, p. 138-139; Smyshlyayev, 1996, p. 141-147). That was the reason that Т. Aurelius Calpurnianus Apollonidus was

Speaking of the military tribunes known from epigraphic sources, one note that in Titus Aurelius Secundus’ dedication in honour of the Emperor Commodus and Flavius Sergianus Sosibius, military tribune of the I Italica legion (Fig. 6.1), the latter is called ‘noble youth’ (IOSPE, I2, no. 417). This allows one to hypothesize – with a certain degree of probability – that the tribunes appointed to serve in Taurica were young men for whom this was one of their first responsible positions. This hypothesis agrees with the fact that in Tiberius Plavtius Felix Ferruntianus’ epitaph and other epigraphic monuments this position was one of the first in cursus honorum of Roman officeholders (see Belyayev, 1968, p. 754

VITALIY MIKHAYLOVITCH ZUBAR: TAURIC CHERSONESUS AND THE ROMAN EMPIRE economic complexes could have had Roman garrisons to engage in farming besides protecting borders of the state of Chersonesus (Zubar’, 1994, p. 79).

129-130). For young representatives of equestrian and senatorial families military service was an obligatory element of their careers, which started with the position of tribune before age 25 (Alföldy, 1969, p. 283; cf. Smith, 1979, p. 271; Junkelmann, 1991, p. 115-120).

There was one more source of supply – craft production by the soldiers themselves. As has been discovered recently, Roman vexillatio workshops manufactured a rather large quantity of ceramic building ware used in military construction and also in civil buildings. This is supported by the fact that roof tiles with V Macedonica legion stamps have been uncovered in a farmhouse at plot 227 (150) (Saprykin, 1981, p. 58-62; Kuzishchin, Ivanchik, 1998, p. 213-214). The income from selling ceramic building ware was most probably used for the needs of the Roman garrison (Zubar’, 1994, p. 89-91), as it was for example in the Danube region (Kolosovskaya, 1973, p. 133). Besides ceramic building ware, Roman soldiers stationed in the southwestern and southern Crimea manufactured glass pottery and metal products – this is known from the site of a glass-making workshop at the Al’ma-Kermen hillfort and slag found in Ay-Todor and on the territory of Chersonesus citadel. Products of those workshops could have been exchanged with the local population for food (Zubar’, 1994, p. 81-83).

It is alleged that a Roman squadron of battle ships located in Chersonesus was a part of the Chersonesus vexillatio organisation (Solomonik, 1973a, p. 143-145). Although the scholar makes a reference to Titus Aurelius Secundus’ dedication, this monument does not allow one to draw such an indisputable conclusion. The text of these epigraphic monuments states that this person was trierarch of the Flavian navy of Moesia and served under the command of Flavius Sergianus Sosibius, who held the same position as Tiberius Plavtius Felix Ferruntianus and other military tribunes having their residence in Chersonesus (Rostovtsev, 1900, p. 146 f.; Belyayev, 1968, p. 128). The aforesaid reconstruction agrees with the text of a dedication to Jupiter by one Terentius, who erected it together with ordinati and trierarchs (Speidel, 1988, p. 119-121) (Fig. 10.3). The mention of a number of officials of the Flavian navy of Moesia in that dedication probably allows one to draw a conclusion – a rather strong conclusion – that the ships of the squadron located in Chersonesus were not a part of the Chersonesus vexillatio organisation, but were immediately subordinate to the praepositus of all the Roman armed forces in the region (cf. Speidel, 1988, p. 121). The fact that ships of the Flavian navy of Moesia were included in that given vexillatio seems unlikely also because the navy’s main aim was to guard sea communications and the coastland of Taurica – such responsibilities could not be within the competence of the commander of the Chersonesus vexillatio; these responsibilities belonged precisely to a military tribune – praepositus of all the Roman armed forces in Taurica (cf. Rostovtsev, 1909, p. 8).

The Roman garrisons of Taurica were supported not only by means of their own economic activities, but also from taxes collected in Chersonesus. A tax on bawdy-houses or prostitution in general was one such tax, a part of which was used for the needs of the Roman soldiers (IOSPE, I2, no. 404; Rostovtsev, 1916a, p. 63-69; Solomonik, 1983, p. 20-27, no. 1; Makarov, 2003, p. 126-135). In spite of the fact that the amounts given to the Roman soldiers were determined by special decrees, the soldiers themselves levied them in the late second century AD. This caused a conflict between the civil community of Chersonesus and the Roman garrison and became a reason for the Chersonesians turning to the governor of Moesia Inferior (Rostovtsev, 1916a, p. 63-69; Zubar’, 1998, p. 123-124). The governor supported Chersonesus; later on tax-collection was likely taken away from the responsibilities of the Roman garrison and given to tax farmers or tax renters (see details in Zubar’, 1994, p. 8384).

Soldiers of the Roman garrisons in Taurica were taken from the Moesian imperial army, so they were isolated from main supply bases. That is the reason that the Roman soldiers’ daily needs – first of all the need for food – had to be covered largely from local resources (MacMullen, 1963, p. 85). Hence there probably were specially allotted plots of lands in the vicinity of Chersonesus – in the Heraclean peninsula – used to supply the Roman soldiers with foodstuffs, similar to other areas of the greater Roman world (Zubar’, 1994, p. 78-79; cf. Junkelmann, 1997, p. 52-56). Unfortunately, now one can only hypothesize that this was so, as archaeological investigations of the chora of Chersonesus have not turned up any traces of the Roman soldiers’ farming. But the fact that the Roman soldiers were stationed not only in Chersonesus but in its environs also allows one to suggest – with a high degree of probability – that at least some of them could have been placed in complexes of buildings with towers which have been uncovered in the Heraclean peninsula. These military and

Besides the prostitution tax, part of which was used to support the Roman garrison, the Chersonesians probably provided other money for the soldiers. This suggestion is based on fragmentary epistle of the Emperor Commodus to the civil community of Chersonesus with mention of means which the city might employ to support the garrison (Solomonik, 1964, p. 43-46, no. 14). The location of the Roman military posts in the southwestern and southern Crimea allows one to hypothesize that the local population also was to provide some foodstuff, but one can say nothing definite in this regard due to the absence of sources on the matter (Zubar’, 1994, p. 109117).

755

ANCIENT GREEK COLONIES IN THE BLACK SEA 2 Sarnowski, 1999, p. 43; Sarnowski, Savelya, 2000a, p. 200).

As has been already mentioned, a number of the Roman soldiers located to Taurica were of Thracian origin but bore typical Roman names (see details in Zubar’, 1994, p. 86). Such variety in ethnicity of the Roman garrisons can be explained as a result of the fact that throughout the second century AD Roman legions and auxiliary troops were supplied with men from those provinces where the garrisons were stationed (Dobson, Mann, 1973, p. 191, 196; Campbell, 1978, p. 165; Mann, 1983, p. 38, 66; Keppie, 1984, p. 180-181). Taking the fact that the Roman soldiers came from the army of Moesia to be sent to Taurica into account, one should find it unsurprising that local garrisons possessed a great number of soldiers of Thracian origin (Zubar’, 1994, p. 87-88). Monuments of material culture and epigraphy prove that the Roman soldiers included Thracians side by side with natives of the western provinces or those who served there before they were transferred to Taurica (Zubar’, 1994, p. 89-90), and also persons from the area of traditional Roman culture and beliefs (Zubar’, Sarnowski, Savelya, 1999, p. 213).

In places where the Roman army was stationed on a permanent basis, the civil population related to certain units and family members of the soldiers lived in canaba or in vicus, special settlements located not far from the military camps. Such civil settlements close to permanent Roman camps can be typically found in less urbanized western imperial provinces. However, in the territory of the eastern provinces, the role of such civil settlements was played by the cities where the Roman military troops were stationed (Vittinghoff, 1971, p. 299-318; Sarnowski, 1988a, p. 81; Junkelmann, 1991, p. 143-146). In Taurica, no canabae sites have been discovered near the places of Roman army locations. This fact in its turn allows one to suggest that most of the civil population related to the Roman army concentrated in Chersonesus (cf. Savelya, Sarnowski, 1999, p. 44-45; Sarnowski, Savelya, 2000a, p. 199-200). Such a unique canabae might have been in the quarters of the so-called Port region of Chersonesus; these quarters are bounded by curtain walls 16, 18, and 22 and are connected with the citadel territory through a wicket in curtain wall 18 (cf. Saprykin, D’yachkov, 1999, p. 77) (Fig. 4). This hypothesis finds indirect support in fragments of cult reliefs originating in the circle of Thracian cultures and excavated in the Port region. The same place could have been a residence of veterans of the Roman army who stayed in Chersonesus after their service had ended (Zubar’, 1994, p. 93-95), because the privileges received after retirement opened rather wide perspectives to them in civil life (Fijala, 1955; Renz, 1972; Link, 1989). It is not impossible that simultaneous to sending the Roman garrison to Chersonesus, a special canaba area was designated within the city limits, as was the case in other places (cf. MacMullen, 1963, p. 78-80). One more badly-preserved epigraphic monument possibly is a part of an emperor’s or provincial governor’s decree (IOSPE, I2, no. 405) and is rather informative in regard to the aforementioned. This document deals with borders within which the Roman garrison and its canaba could be stationed (Zubar’, 1994, p. 93) – but the bad state of preservation of this inscription makes such a reconstruction debatable (Solomonik, 1987, p. 129).

Although most of the Roman soldiers in Taurica came from the Danube region, there also were two officers of higher ranks – military tribunes Arrius Alcibiadus and Flavius Sergianus Sosibius – representing the Roman equestrian families of Greek or Oriental origin (Devijver, 1976, p. 120, 378; Sarnowski, 1993, nos. 13, 14). It is most likely that this was a result of the fact that leaders of the Roman army stationed in Chersonesus had not only military responsibilities but also provided contact with civil authorities and the local Greek-derived population. On this basis, the Roman administration probably appointed officers originating from an appropriate ethnic environment to such positions as they were able to administer policy required by the Empire at Chersonesus under the local circumstances, which included the possibility of periodical conflicts between the soldiers and the civil population, as is known from the correspondence regarding the prostitution tax (Zubar’, 1994, p. 89). Latin epigraphic monuments show that civil persons – natives of the Roman provinces, members of the Roman soldiers’ families, and also veterans of the Roman army – lived in Chersonesus and possibly on the territory of Kharax side by side with the Roman soldiers (Zubar’, 1994, p. 90-92). In this respect, a tombstone erected in Chersonesus by the centurion of the XI Claudia legion Antonius Proculus and his wife Antonia Procula to their daughter (Savelya, Sarnowski, 1999, p. 42-44; Sarnowski, Savelya, 2000a, p. 198-200) is rather significant. Taking this monument and other tombstones of Roman soldiers’ family members which had been previously known (see Zubar’, 1994, p. 90-92) into consideration, one can draw the conclusion that in spite of the fact that the centurion Antonius Proculus was garrisoned in Balaklava, his family had their permanent residence most probably in Chersonesus (Savelya,

The Lives of Holy Bishops of Cherson – a source created no earlier then the sixth or seventh century AD (Latyshev, 1906, p. 13-18) – states that soldiers, headed by Theona, following the bishop Capiton, were awarded an area in the eastern part of the city (Latyshev, 1907, p. 112; Latyshev, Kekelidze, 1913, p. 88). According to the text of the Lives, residents were driven away from that area to leave it free for the soldiers and the bishop (Zuckerman, 1994-1995, p. 549). I do not say that this source is absolutely reliable as it is biased in many respects, but I would like to point out that it was written by persons who knew local circumstances in Chersonesus well (Latyshev, 1906, p. 34-57), so it may reflect a 756

VITALIY MIKHAYLOVITCH ZUBAR: TAURIC CHERSONESUS AND THE ROMAN EMPIRE a lower stage of social development this process quickened the breakdown of primitive communal order and also reinforced property and social differentiation related to the aforementioned (see Zlatkovskaya, 1951, p. 71 f.; Kruglikova, 1955, p. 80 f.; Vasil’yev, Stuchevskiy, 1966, p. 82; Mircovič, 1968, p. 133; Kolosovskaya, 1973, p. 75 f.; eadem, 1985, p. 167 f.; Shkunayev, 1985, p. 258 f.), it did not have as important an influence on social and economic development and cultural life in the areas populated mainly by Greeks (see Mashkin, 1945, p. 365; Kudryavtsev, 1952, p. 81-88; Petit, 1967, р. 71-72; Jones, 1974, р. 90-91). There was most likely to be found the process of syncretizing ancient Greek and Roman roots into a single Late Roman culture (Shtayerman, 1985, p. 10). This actually made the main difference between the process of Romanization in the barbarian periphery of the ancient world and that in the regions populated by the Greeks, who were close to the Romans in regard to the level of their development. Romanization should have had less importance in all sides of Greek life in those regions (cf. Jones, 1974, р. 90). That is why the study of the process of Romanization within the concrete historical circumstances of the Northern Black Sea Littoral should be aimed at the determination of the degree and intensity of Roman influence in the social and economic development of the Greek cities in the region. In the sphere of culture, Romanization should not be restricted to the process of levelling, as not only the levelling impact of Roman culture is important, but also the degree of its perception (Mócsy, 1970, p. 199-212; Solomonik, 1973, p. 269). This was the eventual reason for either the complete merging of traditional culture or the development of a certain level of perception of rules of law by some social strata (Khazanov, 1971, p. 25).

practice developed in interrelations between the Roman garrison and the Chersonesus civil community during an earlier period. Hence although Roman posts or garrisons were located in a number of settlements in Taurica, a civil population related to the Roman soldiers has been identified in Chersonesus only that is in the place where the headquarters of the Roman military contingent was located. This was exactly the part of the population, along with the Roman military men in the first place, to bear Roman provincial culture and, together with those citizens of Chersonesus who had received the right of Roman citizenship, to be mediators of Roman policies in Chersonesus and to contribute to Romanization of that city’s population, most of which was Greek (see details in Zubar’, 1994, p. 99-109). The inclusion of Chersonesus in the sphere of political, economic, and military influence of the Roman Empire would inevitably result in a certain Romanization of the city’s population. That is the reason one has to make a special analysis of that problem in its theoretical aspects and attempt to understand the degree of Romanization of the population under the special historical circumstances of Chersonesus. Roman military expansion and inclusion of large regions populated with nations standing at different stages of social, economic, and cultural development into the imperial structure led to the development of the populations under Roman political and military authority being forced to the same level. It should be underlined, however, that there is still no exact and common interpretation of the term Romanization, which aggravates studies of the process with its specific features in specific regions (Мirсоvič, 1968, p. 100; Мóсsу, 1970, p. 6-8, Rikman, 1975, p. 253; Solomonik, 1973, p. 269; Shkunayev, 1985, p. 258). In spite of this, the process of Romanization had some general features in all regions of the Roman Empire (see Barkóczi, 1964, p. 292-298; Mócsy, 1970, p. 199-250; Khazanov, 1971, p. 21-22). Military conquest of territories populated with a certain mass of people of various ethnicities and cultures, or peaceful inclusion of this or that region into the sphere of Roman interests or influence, was the starting point of the process of Romanization (Breeze, 1990, р. 85-97; Jones, 1990, р. 99-110, Poulter, 1990, р. 143-152). The Roman administration undertook functional measures aimed at putting the population into political, social, and economic dependency on the Empire (Petit, 1967, р. 71). This policy resulted in the nations included in the imperial structure or closely connected with Rome inevitably undergoing certain changes in political, social, economic, and cultural spheres (see Strabo, III, 2, 15, 20; Caesar, De bell. Gall., I, I; VI, 24; Tac., De vita Agric., 21)

In the case of Chersonesus, the Roman administration found a base of support for its policies for the most part from the upper stratum of the civil community, which received Roman citizenship and related privileges, and also from the soldiers of the Roman garrison and their family members (Solomonik, 1973, p. 269; Kadeyev, 1981, p. 63, 83-84). At the same time, bearers of the Roman cultural traditions in Chersonesus were mainly the Roman soldiers and the civil population associated with them. But the soldiers and their family members were not Romans by origin, as most of them were born into the Romanized population of the Danube region. Thus the case of Chersonesus presents the influence of provincial Roman culture of the Danube region on the city population rather than Romanization in general: the Danube was the area from which military contingents were sent and from which a civil population migrated to Chersonesus in the second half of the second and first half of the third century AD. This is possibly one of the most important features of the process of Romanization of the populations of Chersonesus and other ancient Greek centres in the Northern Black Sea Littoral also.

The degree of Roman influence in different places was not the same. Although in the case of nations standing at

Today it is difficult to say anything definite regarding the proportion of the population bearing provincial Roman 757

ANCIENT GREEK COLONIES IN THE BLACK SEA 2 Late Scythians in the middle of the second century AD to the Bosporan kings’ victories and the installation of Roman garrisons in Taurica only (cf. Vysotskaya, 1979, p. 196, 206). A certain role in the process was played by the political situation within the steppe area of the Northern Black Sea Littoral where the tribal union of the Alans became the leading power in the second century AD (Machinskiy, 1974, p. 132; Puzdrovskiy, 1999, p. 107-110).

culture and being influenced by the process of Romanization to the deepest extent. But if one proceeds from the supposition that the Roman garrison of Chersonesus and its environs reckoned no more than 1,000 soldiers, then that category of the population (including family members of soldiers and civil population) would be about 1,500-2,000. Currently one can hypothesize that the population of Chersonesus and its immediate environs in the first centuries AD was at least 20,000-25,000. Hence the direct bearers of the provincial Roman culture made up about 10% of the total population. If one adds the Chersonesus nobility which was influenced by the process of Romanization to the deepest extent and comprised about 10-15% of the citizens according to very rough calculations (Zubar’, 1982, p. 121) to the number mentioned above, one will get ca. 20% or one-fifth of the Chersonesus population bearing provincial Roman culture to some extent (cf. Nadel, 1969, p. 124; Solomonik, 1983, p. 19). The aforesaid agrees with the fact that Roman names in Chersonesus made up 25.5% of the total (Kadeyev, 1981, p. 87). If one takes into consideration that epigraphic monuments usually reflected names of nobility, one will find that the real ratio of Roman to non-Roman names in the city’s prosopography should be a bit lower, which is an indirect argument for the conclusion about the percentage of Romanized persons.

The appearance of new Sarmatian tribes migrating from the east was related to the decline and fall of the Late Scythian hillforts in the Lower Dnieper region (Pogrebova, 1958, p. 236-237; Abramova, 1962, p. 277). The escalation of the situation in the Dnieper region must have affected the Late Scythians in Taurica; this is evidenced by burials discovered in Scythian Neapolis, especially that of the so-called Alan military commander (Vysotskaya, 1979, p. 202, fig. 93). Taking the analysis of artefacts from that assemblage into account, the conclusion has been made that this burial dates to no later than the second century AD (Vysotskaya, 1979, p. 203; Zubar’, Simonenko, 1984, p. 148-154; Zubar’, 1994, p. 110). This allows one to hypothesize that probably in the second century AD Neapolis was taken by the Alans, who left at least some of the burials discovered in excavation of residential quarters of the Late Scythian capital (Puzdrovskiy, 1999, p. 106-109).

To compare the degree of Romanization in Chersonesus with that in other ancient Greek centres, one should probably use prosopographic data as well. Scholars have calculated that Roman names in the Bosporos throughout different periods of its development comprised 2.5-17% of the total (Tsvetayeva, 1979, p. 111), in Olbia 6.75% (Savostina, 1977, p. 136) and in Tyras 52.5%. Of the 52.5% in Tyras, Roman citizens accounted for 22.5% of the names, and representatives of the Roman garrison 17.5 % (Son, 1993, p. 96). Taking this data into account, one can draw a probable conclusion that Chersonesus occupied the second place (after Tyras) among the aforedescribed centres from the point of view of Romanization of their populations. This is no a surprise because in the first centuries AD Tyras was actually tied to the Roman Empire more closely than any of the other ancient Greek cities in the Northern Black Sea Littoral. Aside from that, provincial Roman influence and the process of Romanization touched most of the mainly Greek population of Chersonesus to a relatively small extent. Most of the effect was superficial and did not cause cardinal changes in the life of the majority of the Greek-Chersonesians.

Excavations of palace church in the city of Preslav in 1978-1979 uncovered a marble column with a Latin inscription, which has been published by Ovcharov and Ovcharov (Ovcharov, Ovcharov, 1988, p. 122-129). As the Bulgarian scholars rightly supposed, the phrase ‘in bello Bosporano’ in the inscription allows one to view this monument as an important new source relating to the Roman army’s stay in the Northern Black Sea Littoral (see Zubar’, 1991, p. 118-127; idem, 1994, p. 110-113; cf. Sarnowski, 1991, p. 137-144; Sarnowski, 2000a, p. 246-248). In D. and N. Ovcharov’s opinion, this dedicatory inscription dates to the late second century or the first decades of the third century AD. It was probably carved under the Emperor Septimius Severus or one of his immediate heirs. As the editors have pointed out, a number of historical considerations allow one to relate the Bosporan war mentioned in the inscription to violent events in the second quarter of the third century AD, when the Bosporan kingdom suffered crushing raids by the Goths, and the Roman administration rendered the Bosporan rulers military assistance (Ovcharov, Ovcharov, 1988, p. 127, 129). This interpretation of the inscription is very disputable, which is a reason for me to turn to that monument once more and to try to relate the Bosporan war mentioned in the text to concrete historical events in the Northern Black Sea Littoral.

The series of military defeats suffered by the Late Scythians in their struggles with the Bosporan kings in the late first century and first half of the second century AD as well as the placement of powerful Roman garrisons in Chersonesus and in Ay-Todor about the middle of the second century AD must have caused a certain decline in Scythian pressure on the ancient Greek cities. But is it impossible to relate the weakening of the 758

VITALIY MIKHAYLOVITCH ZUBAR: TAURIC CHERSONESUS AND THE ROMAN EMPIRE Bosporan kings or independently (cf. Vysotskaya , 1979, p. 203-204). The situation in which the Late Scythians suffered armed pressure from both the Bosporan rulers and the steppe zone of the Northern Black Sea Littoral is important ipso facto. In addition, one should take into account that there were Roman garrisons in Taurica playing a considerable part in military and political developments.

According to the inscription, the dedicator finished his military service in the I Italica legion and constructed a building or dedicated a column to a certain local deity according to a vow taken when he had been a young soldier and participated in the Bosporan war: this was a usual practice in the Roman army (cf. CIL, III, 3437, 3512, etc.). Hence the events related to the Bosporan war and the dedicator’s service as principalis were not simultaneous because it would be scarcely probable that this young legionnaire immediately became beneficiarius consularis and cornicularius procuratorius (see Rankov, 1999, p. 27-29; Nelis-Clément, 2000). Taking these considerations into account, one can distance the Bosporan war from the time when the inscription was erected by a certain period of time (15 to 20 years) during which the dedicator held the offices indicated one after another. One may to agree with D. and N. Ovcharov that the first line of the inscription included, after the legion’s name, its honourable title received between 212 and 214 AD (see Fitz, 1983, p. 99-105; cf. Sarnowski, 2000a, p. 247). Hence the inscription dates to the first quarter of the third century AD, so it is not to be used as a source for the history of Bosporos in the second quarter of the third century AD This conclusion agrees with the characters used on the monument – it dates to the very late second or the third century AD. Soldiers of the I Italica legion were located in Taurica (Chersonesus, Kharax) until ca. 200 AD and then were replaced by the soldiers of the XI Claudia legion. On that assumption, the dedicator took part in the Bosporan war as a soldier of the I Italica legion before the soldiers of these units exchanged with each other in vexillatii located in the Northern Black Sea Littoral.

An inscription from the reign of King Sauromatus II (174/175-210/211 AD), which dates to 193 AD, stating that it was he who conquered the Sirachians and the Scythians and annexed Taurica by treaty, is very important in this regard (KBN, no. 1237). An inscription of King Tiberius Julius Reskuporis, son of Sauromatus II, states that he was a king of the Bosporos and of the Tauroscythians as well (KBN, no. 1008). Hence both inscriptions supply evidence that in the late second century AD the Scythians were defeated, which had already occurred under the Kings Sauromatus I and Cotys II (KBN, nos. 32, 33), and they also were conquered and subjugated by the Bosporan kings, which had never happened before. The words of the inscription from the reign of Sauromatus II about his annexation of Taurica by treaty (KBN, no. 1237) deserve special attention. The mention of the conquest of the Scythians makes problematic the conclusion of any treaty with their kings by which Taurica passed into Bosporos’ power. It seems more probable that the conquest of the Scythians and installation of a Roman military post at the Al’maKermen foothill (Fig. 11.3), where the roof tiles with stamps of XI Claudia legion and a number of rather suggestive sites of buildings were uncovered, far from Chersonesus’ territory itself, should be viewed as a result of the Bosporan king’s and the Roman military commanders’ concerted actions aimed against the Late Scythians. The soldiers of the I Italica legion were probably transferred from their posts in Chersonesus and Kharax to the eastern Crimea to strengthen the Bosporan army and to take part in the war against the Scythians.

It is well-known that there were no legionaries in the Bosporos; it is only possible that soldiers of auxiliary troops were placed there from time to time. So the soldiers of the I Italica legion who possibly were a part of the Chersonesus and Kharax vexillatii took part in the Bosporan war probably because of extraordinary circumstances, which forced the Romans to send soldiers of the Moesian army to the Bosporos. It would not be an exaggeration to suppose that these circumstances were related to policy of the Roman military administration in Taurica, as any conflict between Rome and the Bosporos in the late second or early third century AD is out of question. On the contrary, all materials in our possession supply evidence that the Bosporan kings were absolutely loyal to the Empire (cf. Tsvetayeva, 1979, p. 14-15).

Obviously, the military operations ca. 193 AD resulted in the defeat of the Scythians and control over a part of their territory being taken by the Bosporan rulers by treaty with the Roman military administration; these probably were lands in eastern Taurica and perhaps in central Crimea as well (cf. D’yakov, 1939, p. 86; Vysotskaya, 1979, p. 204). This hypothesis finds indirect support from an inscription of King Reskuporis III, of 223 AD, which was found in Staryy Krym (KBN, no. 953). Taking this inscription and a number of other considerations into account, I.T. Kruglikova has come to the conclusion that, after Sauromatus II’s war, the western border of the Bosporan kingdom lay to the west of Theodosiya and Staryy Krym (Kruglikova, 1966, p. 10-11). In addition, this conclusion is reinforced by Sauromatus II’s proRoman policies (cf. KBN, nos. 52, 53, 74, 77, 955, 1134, 1136, 1277, etc.), his active operations with sea

If one turns to the military and political situation in Taurica, one will see the typical second century AD feature of a series of armed conflicts between the Bosporan army and the Scythians; epigraphic monuments of the time tell of defeats of barbarians (see KBN, nos. 32, 33). It is likely that the Scythians were weakened not only because of the Bosporan troops’ successful operations, but also because they were involved in hostilities with the Sarmatians. It is not so important in this case whether the Alans acted in alliance with the 759

ANCIENT GREEK COLONIES IN THE BLACK SEA 2 Scythian state before and was subordinated to the Roman administration in the second half of the second century AD with the help of the Roman army. It is also possible that in that period the Alans forced some of the Late Scythians to leave the Lower Dnieper region and the central Crimea for southwestern Taurica where they would be in relative safety under the guard of the Roman army. In this regard, the topography of the Late Scythian hillforts and sites of non-fortified settlements containing second and third century AD materials becomes very expressive: a number of these sites were located south of the Al’ma river, within the limits of territory guarded by the Roman posts (see Vysotskaya, 1972, p. 17-68, fig. 1). All this allows one to hypothesize that this area was both an economic (Sorokina, Gushchina, 1980, p. 98) and political dependency of the Roman administration in Chersonesus.

communications connecting the Bosporos with the province Bithynia-Pontus, a decree of honour probably from the reign of Sauromatus II from Partenit (KBN, no. 955), and a fragment of inscription discovered in Sudak (Saprykin, Baranov, 1995, p. 137-140). The southern area of Taurica and a large region in southwestern Crimea with its northern border along the Al’ma river found themselves under the control of the Roman military administration; this was the reason that the Roman military post appeared at the Al’ma-Kermen hillfort (Fig. 11.3). This is in accordance with the fact that the southwestern Taurica population’s economic contacts with Chersonesus widened precisely in the second half of the second and the first half of the third century AD. This was the period when wares imported from ancient Greek and Roman cities flooded the immediate vicinity of Chersonesus as well as the area between the Al’ma, Kacha, and Bodrak rivers and the area between the Bel’bek and Chyernaya rivers (see Sorochan, 1981, p. 28; Kadeyev, Sorochan, 1989, p. 80-89). It is very suggestive that the northeastern borderline of the massive spread of the ancient Greek and Roman wares was along the Al’ma river with the Roman military post of ca. 200 AD located in its midst (Sorochan, 1981, p. 28-29).

When the Late Scythian state weakened and a part of its territory in southwestern Taurica passed under Roman army control, it resulted in a consequent transition of economic tenor and social relations within Late Scythian society. The increase in the number of cemeteries without mounds in this area of the Tauric peninsula throughout the second and third centuries AD is most probably related to that process. As the population of southwestern Taurica became a dependency of structures which were more highly developed in social, economic, political and cultural respects, it was included also in the sphere of the economic life of Chersonesus from the second half of the second century AD. This situation should have been reflected in the material and spiritual culture of the population together with its economy, a great part of which must have been oriented towards the needs of Chersonesus and its Roman garrison from that time. Although the situation is well-documented in all the cemeteries of southwestern Crimea, its interpretation is usually restricted to the conclusion of a certain Hellenization of the Late Scythian population (cf. Shul’ts, 1971, p. 139-140; Vysotskaya, 1972, p. 99; Gushchina, 1974, p. 44; eadem, 1982, p. 27; Sorokina, 1982, p. 4142; Bogdanova, 1982, p. 33).

Thus, the Bosporan war, in which that I Italica legion soldier participated, might be related – with a certain degree of probability – to the concerted operations of the Roman army in south-western Taurica and of the Bosporan rulers in its eastern part. Complete conquest of the Late Scythians was this campaign’s main result. In spite of the continuance of the Late Scythian hillforts even later, it is impossible to say that an independent Late Scythian state in the Crimea existed after 193 AD (cf. Shul’ts, 1971, p. 143). That is cause for me to agree with Grakov who wrote that ‘politically and ethnically, Scythia died by the late 2nd century or in the early 3rd century.’ (Grakov, 1971, p. 32). This conclusion finds confirmation from data obtained from excavating cemeteries, which are assumed to have been Late Scythian ones (Vysotskaya, 1972, p. 72-101). Although there were only four first century AD cemeteries without burial mounds in the southwestern Crimea and the valley of Inkerman, in the second and third centuries AD there were twenty such cemeteries (Vysotskaya, 1972, p. 70, fig. 20). Most of the burials in this area date precisely to the second and third centuries AD (Vysotskaya, 1972, p. 101). If one considers all the cemeteries mentioned above with burials of the second and third centuries AD as sites of the population of the Late Scythian kingdom, one must conclude that during the second half of the second and the first half of the third century AD this kingdom flourished and prospered rather than declined, which supposition contradicts the sources in our possession. It is easy to solve such a contradiction by assuming the accuracy of the conclusion about the population if southwestern Taurica had been a dependency of the Late

The rise of economic contacts with Chersonesus affects the material culture of the south-western Crimean population and its beliefs also (cf. Vysotskaya, 1979, p. 156-177). Obviously the change in economic tenor and the rise of farming in it resulted in a spread of cults related to agriculture (cf. Strabo, IV, 1, 5), which was related to the appearance of child pot burials in cemeteries of this area throughout the first centuries AD: such a funeral rite is usually connected with the idea of fertility (Zubar’, Bunyatyan, 1991, с. 237). Since in the second half of the second and in the first half of the third century AD the Roman army was stationed in Chersonesus and other points in the southwestern Crimea, large territories were included within the sphere of the Roman Empire’s and Chersonesus’ military, political, and economic influence. But productive forces developed 760

VITALIY MIKHAYLOVITCH ZUBAR: TAURIC CHERSONESUS AND THE ROMAN EMPIRE settlements in the given region (Sorochan, 1981, p. 2935; Kadeyev, Sorochan, 1989, p. 80-89).

there to a relatively smaller extent, as circumstances did not allow exploitation of the region by economic methods only. Installation of Roman garrisons and troops in Taurica should have ensured some form of non-economic constraint of the conquered population. Naturally, this did not make the use of economic methods for the exploitation of the population of the region, such as unequal exchange involving some of the Chersonesians, impossible, but I think that the most important role belonged to non-economic exploitation based on military force (Zubar’, 1993a, p. 91-92, 113).

Taking a fragment of Latin inscription mentioning the title of honour Severianae given to the XI Claudia legion into account, one can draw the conclusion that centurions of that unit commanded the vexillatio of Chersonesus at least to 223-234 AD. Later on, the presence of the Roman garrison in Chersonesus is fixed by another inscription, which dates to 250 AD during the second consulship of Trajan Decius (249-251 AD) and his colleague Vettius Gratus. This monument (Fig. 6.3) states that Marcus Ratinus Saturninus, Centurion of the I Italica legion and Commander of the vexillatio of Chersonesus, rebuilt schola principalium, which had collapsed to the foundations, at his own expense (Vinogradov, Zubar’, 1995/1996, p. 129-141; Vinogradov, Zubar’, Antonova, 1999, p. 71-80). Within this context one should note the fact that the vexillatio of Chersonesus in 250 AD was headed by the Centurion of the I Italica legion and not of the XI Claudia legion as before. This allows one to hypothesize that the formation of this city’s Roman garrison in this period consisted of soldiers of a new unit (Vinogradov, Zubar’, 1995/1996, p. 129-143; Vinogradov, Zubar’, Antonova, 1999, p. 77-78). What is more, the dates of change in the composition of the Roman garrison and of the destruction of the earlier schola principalium close to one another.

There is no reason to hypothesize that the population of the southwestern Taurica was integrated politically into the structure of the Roman Empire or into that of the Chersonesus state. As in other regions, the home life of this region’s population would not have undergone any kind of strict regulation unless the region was included in the Empire. Southwestern Taurica probably kept its selfgovernment; the Roman military administration conducted its policies through the local nobility, the overwhelming majority of which would have been interested in strengthening overall relations with the Roman administration and Chersonesus. Certainly, archaeological materials in our possession and the general trends of Roman policies towards neighbouring barbarian peoples do not contradict this. All this allows one to conclude that there is no reason to speak of the exploitation of the population of Taurica on the basis of any kind of landed property. The contrary interpretation is more likely: the location of the Roman troops in Taurica supplies evidence that the Late Scythian population was exploited on the basis of non-economic constraints realised through the Roman army. The population of southwestern Taurica maintained production and social relations of its own even after the Roman garrisons and posts were installed in the region. Its exploitation was realised through collecting tribute not from selected representatives of the society but from the whole population (cf. Kolganov, 1962, p. 373; Pershits, 1976, p. 292). This form of exploitation is similar to nomadic ‘tributarism’ (ср. Herod., IV, 20; Strabo., VII, 4, 6; XI, 83; Plin., NH, IV, 20: Khazanov, 1976, p. 278-279; Pershits, 1976, p. 290-292); taking the concrete historic relations into account one might better call it rent-tax, as opposed to ground rent (see details in Ilyushechkin, 1980, p. 388-396).

The fragment of Latin inscription from Chersonesus of 223-234 AD on the one hand and the Latin inscription of 250 AD on the other supply information about changes in the composition of the vexillatio of Chersonesus in the second quarter of the third century AD. This allows one to suggest that in the second half of the 230s AD and the first half of the 240s AD, probably after an earthquake, the Roman commanders removed the garrison of the XI Claudia legion soldiers from the Al’ma-Kermen hillfort (Vysotskaya, 1972, p. 58, 62), Kharax (Rostovtsev, 1900, p. 156; idem, 1907, p. 4), and possibly Chersonesus and its neighbourhood (Vinogradov, Zubar’, 1995/1996, p. 139-140; Zubar’, 1998, p. 131; Vinogradov, Zubar’, Antonova, 1999, p. 78). This event likely took place during the reign of the soldiers’ Emperor Maximinus the Thracian (235-238 AD), who led military campaign against Trans-Danubian barbarians and Sarmatians as did his heirs (see details in Aybabin, 1999, p. 29). After the Emperors Philip the Arab (244-249 AD) and then Trajan Decius undertook a series of military campaigns against the barbarians who menaced Moesia and Thracia (see Zosimos, I, 20, 1; Dexippus, 18; Iord. Get., 90-93; Budanova, 1990, p. 84-85), the Roman garrison was installed in Chersonesus anew ca. 250 AD. This time the garrison was commanded by the Centurion of the I Italica legion Marcus Ratinus Saturninus who also headed the rebuilding of the schola principalium. However the absence of traces of the Roman soldiers’ stay in the vicinity of Chersonesus and in other points in Taurica during this period, and the relatively low rank of the commander of the vexillatio of Chersonesus, who was

The Roman administration pocketed most of that rent and used it to support the Roman army in Taurica. Naturally this interpretation does not mean that the civil community of Chersonesus would not have been able to participate somehow in military subordination of the region and profit from a part of the rent-tax as was the case with revenues from the prostitution tax. The citizens of Chersonesus and other categories of the city population milked the population of southwestern Taurica through unequal exchange – this follows from numerous archaeological materials discovered in cemeteries and 761

ANCIENT GREEK COLONIES IN THE BLACK SEA 2 Emperor Aurelian later on, when he made the decision for the Roman province of Dacia’s final evacuation, which had already begun by Gallienus (Scorpan, 1980, р. 134; Cătăniciu, 1981, р. 53-55; Kolosovskaya, 2000, p. 147-150). All these facts allow one to draw the conclusion that the violent events on the Danube frontier forced the Roman army to leave the ancient Greek cities in the Northern Black Sea Littoral finally no later than the third quarter of the third century AD (Vinogradov, Zubar’, 1995/1996, p. 138-139; Vinogradov, Zubar’, Antonova, 1999, p. 80). At any rate, one cannot say anything about the Roman army coming to Chersonesus again on the basis of the epigraphic monuments before the very end of the third century AD.

one of 60 centurions in his sub-unit, in comparison with the second half of the second century AD when Chersonesus had been the residence of a military tribune, allows one to draw the conclusion that in the middle of the third century AD the Roman garrison had only to protect the city itself and possibly its immediate vicinity. Hence the scale of the Roman military presence became smaller in comparison with the previous period because the military and political situation in the Danube region and in the Northern Black Sea Littoral changed. It is rather striking in this regard that according to two epigraphic monuments a Roman garrison was stationed in Olbia as well (IOSPE, I2, no. 167; Zubar’ V. M., Krapivina V. V., 1999, p. 76 – 83; Zubar’ V. M., Kozub Y. I., 2002, p. 207 - 208). The presence of Roman troops in Chersonesus and Olbia in the middle of the third century A.D. makes one curious to know why and when the Roman vexillatio was removed from Chersonesus.

Similarly to the other ancient Greek states in the Northern Black Sea Littoral, Chersonesus opened a new, Late Roman stage of its development from the third quarter of the third century AD. That stage’s characteristic features include changes in the nature of the Chersonesus civil community’s military and political cooperation with the administration of the Eastern Roman Empire, or Byzantium (Zubar’, 1994, p. 132; idem, 1998, p. 142166; idem, 1998a, p. 237-246).

It is known that the Danube region played a rather important role in Roman foreign policy in the middle of the third century AD (Kolosovskaya, 2000, p. 137). The Emperor Trajan Decius and his son perished in 251 AD during his second campaign against the Goths in Dobrudja, when sunk in a swamp near Abritus (Zos., I, 23; Zon., XII, 20; Vit. Caes. 29,4). Therefore it is not a surprise that epigraphic monuments fixed the presence of the Roman army in Chersonesus and Olbia exactly during the reign of that Emperor; no doubt, this should be analyzed in relation to Roman policy towards the Danube region and the Empire’s struggle with the barbarians who became active at that time. When Roman garrisons were installed in Chersonesus and Olbia, even though small in numbers, they took the responsibility of protecting the Greek populations and thus made these centres natural allies at the approaches to the Empire’s borders allowing them to withstand barbarian aggressions; all this was an important component of Roman policy towards the ancient Greek states in the Northern Black Sea Littoral throughout the period (see Zubar’, 1998, p. 131).

*** Thus, after Rome defeated Mithridates VI Eupator, Chersonesus found itself a dependency of Bosporos; but Caesar took Roman interests in the Northern Black Sea Littoral into consideration and granted the city eleutheria, so the centre came into the sphere of Roman imperial politics. Augustus sorted out relations between the civil community of Chersonesus and the rulers of the Bosporos ca. 25/24 BC. Apparently the Roman administration’s initiative was the reason for the conclusion of a defensive alliance between Bosporos and Chersonesus; this alliance existed until the war between Rome and the Bosporos, with participation of the Chersonesus army on the side of the Empire. After that war, Chersonesus received certain privileges, and the Roman administration probably took over responsibility for protecting the city from the barbarians. As a result of that, in the middle of the 60s AD the legate of Moesia T. Plautius Silvanus came to the aid of Chersonesus and defeated the barbarians who threatened the city.

After the Decii died, Trebonianus Gallus (251-253 AD) became the Emperor, although most of the ancient authors accused him of his predecessors’ death. He made a disgraceful peace with the Goths; the decision for the final removal of the Roman garrisons from the ancient Greek centres in the Northern Black Sea Littoral, Chersonesus and Olbia was probably made soon afterwards. This was a time when the Empire desperately needed armed forces and reserves on its own borders. This is evidenced by reform of the Roman army, already been started by Philip the Arab and continued actively by Valerian (253-259 AD) and Gallienus (259-268 AD) from the one side (Grosse, 1920, p. 1-23; Alföldy, 1967, p. 342-374; Jones, 1992, р. 21-36), and the Empire’s desperate military efforts in its struggle with barbarians on the Danube under the reign of the latter Emperor from the other side (Regibus, 1939, р. 63-82; Strobel, 1993, p. 185-298). The same considerations probably guided the

In the second half of the first and the first half of the second century AD the city strengthened its contacts with the Roman Empire, which provided it with military assistance in extraordinary cases. However the Roman units stayed in the city for a short time only and left it for their permanent residences in the Danube region after all their tasks in Taurica were complete, so the Chersonesians had to seek help from the Bosporan kings who were allies of Rome. The situation changed completely as early as the late 130s-140s AD: the Roman army was installed in Chersonesus and its environs. This decision played the most important role in making the situation in this area of Taurica stable and resulted both in 762

VITALIY MIKHAYLOVITCH ZUBAR: TAURIC CHERSONESUS AND THE ROMAN EMPIRE AGSP

Античные государства Северного Причерноморья (Antichnyye gosudarstva Severnogo Prichernomor’ya – Ancient Greek states of the Northern Black Sea Littoral), Moscow, 1955 (in Russian) AINYuVE Археологические исследования на юге Восточной Европы (Arkheologicheskiye issledovaniya na yuge Vostochnoy Yevropy – Archaeological sudies in the southeastern Europe), Moscow, 1974, Vol. 1; 1982, Vol. 2 (in Russian) AO Археологические открытия (Arkheologicheskiye otkrytiya – Archaeological discoveries), Moscow (in Russian) AP URSR Археологічні пам'ятки (Arkheolohichni pam’yatky – Archaeological monuments), Kiev (in Ukrainian) AS Археологический сборник. Эрмитаж (Arkheologicheskiy sbornik. Ermitazh – Collected archaeological articles, Hermitage Museum), Leningrad (in Russian) CIL Corpus inscriptionum Latinarum. GIM Государственный исторический музей. Москва (Gosudarstvennyy istoricheskiy muzey. Moskva – State Historical Museum, Moscow), Moscow (in Russian) IAK Известия Императорской археологической комиссии (Izvestiya Imperatorskoy arkheologicheskoy komssii – Proceedings of the Imperial Archaeological Commission), St. Petersburg (in Russian) IOSPE, I2 Latyshev V. V., 1916. ITUAK Известия Таврической ученой архивной комиссии (Izvestiya Tavricheskoy uchyenoy arkhivnoy komssii – Proceedings of the Tauric Scholarly Archive Commission), Simferopol (in Russian) JRS Journal of Roman Studies. KBN Корпус боспорских надписей (Korpus bosporskikh nadpisey – A collection of Bosporan inscriptions), Moscow and Leningrad, 1965 (in Russian). KhSb Херсонесский сборник (Khersonesskiy sbornik – Chersonesus collected articles), Sevastopol (in Russian). KSIA Краткие сообщения Института археологии АН СССР (Kratkiye soobshcheniya Instituta arkheologii AN SSSR – Brief reports of the Institute of Archaeology of the Academy of Sciences of USSR), Moscow (in Russian). KSOAM Краткие сообщение Одесского археологического музея (Kratkiye soobshcheniya Odesskogo arkheologicheskogo muzeya – Brief reports of the Odessa Archaeological Museum), Odessa (in Russian). MAIET Материалы по археологии, истории и этнографии Таврии (Materialy po arkheologii, istorii i etnografii Tavrii – Materials on the archaeology, history, and ethnography of Taurica), Simferopol (in Russian). MGU Московский государственный университет (Moskovskiy gosudarstvennyy universitet – Moscow State University), Moscow (in Russian). MIA Материалы по археологии СССР (Materialy po arkheologii SSSR – Materials on the archaeology of the USSR), Moscow and Leningrad (in Russian). NE Нумизматика и эпиграфика (Numizmatika i epigrafika – Numismatics and epigraphy), Moscow (in Russian).

a new economic revival of Chersonesus, which lasted more than a century, and the strengthening of the Roman Empire’s political position in Taurica. From the middle of the second to the third quarter of the third century AD Chersonesus was an important base of Roman military presence in Taurica with both land forces and ships of the Roman navy stationed there. However the personnel of the Roman garrison located in that centre and its vicinity was not all the same from the middle of the second to the third quarter of the third century AD: they changed depending on circumstances developing on the Roman frontiers in the Danube region and in Taurica. Throughout all that period, the Roman soldiers were taken from the personnel of the Empire’s Moesian army, commanders of which were responsible for controlling the situation in Taurica, in accordance with the Roman administration’s policies. Beside Chersonesus, the Roman army was also stationed in other places in Taurica, not only on the coast but inland also. This is evidence that in the second half of the second and the third quarter of the third century AD the Roman administration conducted a purposeful policy aimed at both protecting the Roman ally, the state of Chersonesus, which was the main Roman stronghold in the Northern Black Sea Littoral, and gradually developing adjacent territories. The installation of Roman garrisons and posts in Taurica resulted in the Roman military administration subjugating southwestern Taurica militarily and politically, thus deriving both strategic and economic benefits from the situation. However, we have no basis to conclude that this region became the Empire’s immediate dependency. Although that decision possibly had its strategic aim at making a great part of southwestern Taurica a Roman province later on, the Empire had insufficient force to realise the plan in the circumstances developing in the late second and first half of the third century AD. What is more, the barbarians’ great pressure on the Danube frontier resulted in the second quarter of the third century AD in the Roman army being taken away from all their posts in Taurica and Chersonesus itself for a certain period. Although the Roman army returned ca. 250 AD, from that time onward it was restricted to Chersonesus only, hence the scale of the Roman military presence became smaller in comparison with the previous period. This time the Roman army stayed there for a short period and left Chersonesus no later than in the third quarter of the third century AD. These events closed the Roman period in the history of Chersonesus and opened a new, Late Roman stage of the city’s development with different relations with the Eastern Roman empire. ABBREVIATIONS AAH ADSV

Acta Archaeologica Hungarica. Античная древность и средние века (Antichnaya drevnost’ i sredniye veka – Classical antiquity and Middle Ages), Sverdlovsk (in Russian).

763

ANCIENT GREEK COLONIES IN THE BLACK SEA 2 PISPAE

Проблемы истории Северного Причерноморья в античную эпоху (Problemy istorii Severnogo Prichernomor’ya v antichnuyu epokhu – Problems of the history of the Northern Black Sea Littoral in the Classical period), Moscow, 1959 (in Russian). RA Российская археология (Rossiyskaya arkheologiya – Russian archaeology), Moscow (in Russian). RE Pauly A., Wissowa G., Kroll W., Realencyclopädie der klassischen Аltertumswissenschaft. SA Советская археология (Sovetskaya arkheologiya – Soviet archaeology), Moscow (in Russian). SAI Свод археологических источников (Svod arkheologicheskikh istochnikov – Collection of archaeological sources), Moscow (in Russian). SCIV Studii ši cercetări de istorie veche. SE Советская этнография (Sovetskaya etnografiya – Soviet ethnography), Moscow (in Russian). SHA Scriptores Historiae Augustae. SKhM Сообщения Херсонесского музея (Soobshcheniya Khersonesskogo muzeya – Chersonesus Museum reports), Sevastopol (in Russian). UIZh Український історичний журнал (Ukrayins’kyy istorychnyy zhurnal – Ukrainian historical journal), Kiev (in Ukrainian) UZMGPI Ученые записки Московского государственного педагогического института (Uchyenyye zapiski Moskovskogo gosudarstvennogo pedagogicheskogo instituta – Scholarly proceedings of the Moscow State Pedagogical Institute), Moscow (in Russian). VDI Вестник древней истории (Vestnik drevney istorii – Journal of ancient history), Moscow (in Russian). VI Вопросы истории (Voprosy istorii – Problems of history), Moscow (in Russian). VkhGU Вестник Харьковского государственного университета (Vestnik Khar’kovskogo gosudarstvennogo universiteta – Journal of Kharkov State University), Kharkov (in Russian). ZOAO Записки Одесского археологического общества (Zapiski Odesskogo arkheologicheskogo obshchestva – Proceedings of the Odessa Archaeological Society), Odessa (in Russian). ZPE Zeitschrift für Papyrologie und Epigraphik.

Anokhin V. A., 1977 - Анохин В. А., Монетное дело Херсонеса (IV в. до н. э. - XII в. н. э.) (Monetnoye delo Khersonesa [IV v. do n. e. – XII v. n. e.] – Coinage of Chersonesus [4th c. B. C. – 12th c. A.D.]), Kiev. _______, 1986 - Анохин В. А., Монетное дело Боспора (Monetnoye delo Bospora – Coinage of Bosporos), Kiev. _______, 1989 - Анохин В. А., Монеты античных городов Северо-Западного Причерноморья (Monety antichnykh gorodov Severo-Zapadnogo Prichernomor’ya – Coins of the ancient Greek cities of the Northwestern Black Sea Littoral), Kiev. _______, 1999 - Анохин В. А., История Боспора Киммерийского (Istoriya Bospora Kimmeriyskogo – A history of Cimmerian Bosporos), Kiev. Antonova I. A., 1994 - Антонова И. А., Раскопки в цитадели Херсонеса (Raskopki v tsitadeli Chersonesa – Excavations in the citadel of Chersonesus). // in Археологические исследования в Крыму 1993 г. (Arkheologicheskiye issledovaniya v Krymu 1993 g. – 1993 archaeological investigations in the Crimea), Simferopol. _______, 1996 - Антонова И. А., Юго-восточный участок обороны Херсонеса. Проблемы датировки (Yugovostochnyy uchastok oborony Khersonesa. Problemy datirovki – The southeastern area of defence of Chersonesus: problems of chronology). // KhSb, no. 7. _______, 1997 - Антонова И. А., Административные здания херсонесской вексилляции и фемы Херсона (Administrativnyye zdaniya khersonesskoy veksillyatsii i femy Khersona – Administrative buildings of Chersonesus vexillatio and the theme of Cherson). // KhSb, no. 8. _______, 1997а - Антонова И. А., Раскопки цитадели Херсонеса (Raskopki tsitadeli Khersonesa – Excavations of the citadel of Chersonesus). //Археологические исследования в Крыму 1994 г. (Arkheologicheskiye issledovaniya v Krymu 1994 g. – 1994 archaeological investigations in the Crimea), Simferopol. Antonova I. A., Kostromichyev D. A., 2000 - Антонова И. А., Костромичев Д. А., Римские гарнизоны Юго-Западного Крыма по данным керамических клейм (Rimskiye garnizony Yugo-Zapadnogo Kryma po dannym keramicheskikh kleym – Roman garrisons of the southeastern Crimea in light of ceramic ware stamps). // MAIET, 7. _______, 2000a - Антонова И. А., Костромичев Д. А., Латинские клейма на строительной керамике из Херсонеса (Latinskiye kleyma na stroitel’noy keramike iz Khersonesa – Latin stamps on construction ware from Chersonesus). // in Sarnowski T., Savelya O. Ya., 2000. Antonova I. A., Yaylenko V. P., 1995 - Антонова И. А., Яйленко В. П., Херсонес, Северное Причерноморье и Маркоманнские войны по данным херсонесского декрета 174 г. н. э. в честь Тита Аврелия Кальпурниана Аполлонида (Khersones, Severnoye Prichernomor’ye i Markomannskiye voyny po dannym khersonesskogo dekreta 174 g. n. e. v chest’ Tita Avreliya Kal’purniana Apollonida – Chersonesus, Northern Black Sea Littoral, and Marcomannian wars in light of the 174 A.D. Chersonesian decree in honour of Titus Aurelius Calpurnianus Apollonidus). // VDI, no. 4. Antonova I. A., Zubar’ V. M., 2003 - Антонова И. А. Зубарь В. М., Некоторые итоги археологических исследований римской цитадели Херсонеса (Nekotoryye itogi arkheologicheskikh issledvaniy rimskoy tstadeli Khersonesa – Some results of archaeological studies of the Roman citadel of Chersonesus). // KhSb, no. 12. Aricescu A., 1977 - Armata în Dobrogea Romană, Bucharest.

BIBLIOGRAPHY Abbott F. F., Johnson A. C., 1926 - Municipal Administration in the Roman Empire, Princeton. Abramova M. P., 1962 - Aбрамова М. П., Взаимоотношения сарматов с населением позднескифских степных городищ Нижнего Днепра (Vzaimootnosheniya sarmatov s naseleniyem pozneskifskikh stepnykh gorodishch Nizhnego Dnepra – Sarmatian relations with the population of the Late Scythian steppe hillforts in the Lower Dnieper region). // MIA, no. 115. Absil M., 2000 - Legio I Italica//Les légions de Rome sous le Haut-Empire, I, Paris. Agbunov M. V., 1984 - Агбунов М. В., Материалы по античной географии Причерноморья (Materialy po antichnoy geografii Prichernomor’ya – Materials on the ancient geography of the Black Sea Littoral). // VDI, no. 4. Alföldy G., 1967 - Studien zur Geschichte der Weltkrise des 3. Jahrhunderts, Darmstadt. _______, 1969 - Die Personennamen in der römischen Provinz Dalmatia, Heidelberg.

764

VITALIY MIKHAYLOVITCH ZUBAR: TAURIC CHERSONESUS AND THE ROMAN EMPIRE _______, 1977a - În legătură în zonele de acţiune ale ligiunilor moesice pe teritoriul Dobrogei, Pontica, 10. Arnold W. T., 1974 - Thе Roman System of Provincial Administration to the accession of Constantine the Great, Chicago. Austin N. J. E., Rankov N. D., 1995 - EXPLORATIO. Military and political intelligence in the Roman world from the Second Punic War to the battle of Adrianopole, London and New-York. Avdiyev A. G., 1993 – Авдиев А. Г., О времени пребывания подразделений V Македонского легиона в Херсонесе (O vremeni prebyvaniya podrazdeleiy V Macedonskogo legiona v Khersonese – On V Macedonica legion units in Chersonesus). // VDI, no. 2. Aybabin A. I., 1984 - Айбабин А. И., Проблемы хронологии могильников Крыма позднеримского периода (Problemy khronologii mogil’nikov Kryma pozdnerimskogo perioda – Problems of the chronology of the cemeteries of the Crimea in the Late Roman period). // SA, no. 1. _______, 1999 - Айбабин А. И., Этническая история ранневизантийского Крыма (Etnicheskaya istoriya rannevizantiyskogo Kryma – Ethnic history of the early Byzantine Crimea), Simferopol. Baatz D., 1975 - Der römische Limes. Archeologische Ausflüge zwischen Rhein und Donau, Berlin. _______, 1976 - Die Wachttürme am Limes, Stuttgart. Barkóczi L., 1964 - The Population of Pannonia from Marcus Aurelius to Diocletian, AAH, vol. 16. Belov G. D., 1948 - Белов Г. Д., Херсонес Таврический (Khersones Tavricheskiy – Tauric Chersonesus), Leningrad. Belyayev S. A., 1968 - Беляев С. А., К пониманию CIL, VIII, 619 (K ponimaniyu CIL, VIII, 619 – Towards the understanding of CIL, VIII, 619). // VDI, no. 4. Beneš J., 1978 - Auxilia Romana in Moesia atque Dacia, Prague. Bertier Delagarde A. L., 1907 - Бертье-Делагард А. Л., О Херсонесе (O Khersonese – On Chersonesus). // IAK, vol. 21. _______, 1920 - Бертье-Делагард А. Л., Исследование некоторых недоуменных вопросов средневековья в Тавриде (Issledovaniye nekotorykh nedoumyennykh voprosov srednevekov’ya v Tavride – A study of some unresolved problems of the medieval period in Taurida). // ITUAK, vol. 57. Beshevliev B., 1985 - Бешевлиев Б., Долен Дунав в античната картография (Dolen Dunav v antichnata kartografiya – The lower Danube in ancient cartography). // Arkheologia, vol. 2. Bishop M. C., Coulson J. C. N., 1993 - Roman Military Equipment from the Punic Wars to the fall of Rome, London. Blavatskiy V. D., 1951 - Блаватский В. Д., Харакс (Kharaks Kharax). // MIA, 19. _______, 1954 - Блаватский В. Д., Очерки военного дела в античных государствах Северного Причерноморья (Ocherki voyennogo dela v antichnykh gosudarstvakh Severnogo Prichernomor’ya – Essays on warfare in the ancient Greek states of the Northern Black Sea Littoral), Moscow. _______, 1985 - Блаватский В. Д., О римских войсках на Таврическом полуострове в I в. н. э. (O rimskikh voyskakh na Tavricheskom poluostrove v I. v. n. e. – On the Roman army in the Tauric peninsula in the 1st c. A.D.). // in Блаватский В. Д. Античная археология и история (Antichnaya arkheologiya i istoriya - Classical archaeology and history), Moscow.

Bogdanova N. A. [Bogdanova N. O.], 1963 - Богданова Н. О., Могильник I ст. до н. е. - III ст. н. е. біля с. Завітне Бахчисарайського району (Mogyl’nyk I st. do n. e. – III st. n. e. bilya s. Zavitne Bakhchysarays’kogo rayony – 1st c. B. C. – 3rd c. A.D. cemetery near Zavitne village in the administrative region of Bakhchisaray). // Arkheologiya, vol. 15. _______, 1982 - Богданова Н. А., Погребальный обряд сельского населения позднескифского государства в Крыму (Pogrebal’nyy obryad sel’skogo naseleniya pozdneskifskogo gosudarstva v Krymu – Funeral rites of the farming population of the Late Scythian state in the Crimea). // AINYuVE, 2. Borisova V. V., 1961 - Борисова В. В., Черепица с клеймами римских легионов (Cherepitsa s kleymami rimskikh legionov – Roof tiles with stamps of Roman legions). // SKhM, 2. Braund D., 1991 - Браунд Д., Римское присутствие в Колхиде и Иберии (Rimskoye voyennoye prisutstviye v Kolkhide i Iberii – Roman military presence in Colchis and Iberia) // VDI, no. 4. Breeze D. J., 1974 - The Organisation of the Career Structure of the Immunes and Principales of the Roman army, Bonner Jahrbücher, 174. _______, 1990 - The Impact of the Roman Army on the Native Pioples of the North Britain, Akten des 14. Internationalen Limeskongresses 1986 in Carnuntum, Vianna. Budanova V. P., 1990 - Буданова В. П., Готы в эпоху Великого переселения народов (Goty v epokhu Velikogo pereseleniya narodov – The Goths in the Great Migration period), Moscow. Buyskikh S. B., 1991. - Буйских С. Б., Фортификация Ольвийского государства (первые века н. э.) (Fortifikatsiya Ol’viyskogo gosudarstva [pervyye veka n. e.] – Fortification of the Olbian state [first centuries A.D.]), Kiev. Campbell B., 1978 - The Marriage of Roman Soldiers under the Empire, JRS, vol. 18. Сampbell D. B., 1984 - The Emperor and the Roman Army. 31 B. C. - A.D. 235, Oxford. Cătăniciu I. D., 1981 - Evolution of the System of Defence Works in Roman Dacia, Oxford. Cheesman C. L., 1914 - The Auxilia of the Roman Imperial army, Oxford. Chernenko Ye. V., Zubar’ V. M., Son N. A., 1989 - Черненко Е. В., Зубарь В. М., Сон Н. А., Бутероль из Тиры (Buterol’ iz Tiry – A scabbard-end from Tyras). // SA, no. 2. Chevallir R., 1976 - Roman Roads, London. Connolly P., 1975 - The Roman Army, Edinburgh. Сonole P., Milns R. D., 1983 - Neronian frontier Policy in the Balkans: The Career of Ti. Plautius Silvanus, Historia, 32. Cumont F., 1926 - Un extrait d'une carte Romain d'état-major, La Geographie, vol. 43. D’yachkov S. V., 1992 - Дьячков С. В., Римские граждане и римская политика на Боспоре в I в. до н. э. - III в. н. э. (Rimskiye grazhdane i rimskaya politika na Bospore v I v. do n. e. – III v. n. e. – Roman citizens and Roman policy in Bosporos in the 1st c. B. C. – 3rd c. A.D.). // VkhGU, no. 363: История (Istoriya - History), fasc. 26. D’yakov V. N., 1930 - Дьяков В. Н., Древности Ай-Тодора (Drevnosti Ay-Todora – Antiquities of Ay-Todor), Yalta. _______, 1939 - Дьяков В. Н., Таврика до римской оккупации (Tavrika do rimskoy okkupatsii – Taurica before the Roman occupation). // VDI, no. 3. _______, 1941 - Дьяков В. Н., Оккупация Таврики Римом в I в. н. э. (Okkupatsiya Tavrki Rimom v I v. n. e. – Roman occupation of Taurica in the 1st c. A.D.). // VDI, no. 1.

765

ANCIENT GREEK COLONIES IN THE BLACK SEA 2 _______, 1942 - Дьяков В. Н., Таврика в эпоху римской оккупации (Tavrika v epokhu rimskoy okkupatsii – Taurica in the period of the Roman occupation). // UZMGPI, vol. 28, fasc. 1. Dashevskaya O. D., 1964 - Дашевская О. Д., Раскопки Южно-Донузлавского городища в 1961 - 1962 гг. (Raskopki Yuzhno-Donuzlavskogo gorodishcha v 19611962 gg. – 1961-1962 excavations of YuzhnoDonuzlavskoye hillfort). // KSOAM. _______, 1967 - Дашевская О. Д., Раскопки ЮжноДонузлавского городища в 1963 - 1965 гг. (Raskopki Yuzhno-Donuzlavskogo gorodishcha v 1963-1965 gg. – 1963-1965 excavations of Yuzhno-Donuzlavskoye hillfort). // KSIA, vol. 109. _______, 1989 - Дашевская О. Д., Поздние скифы (III в. до н. э. - II в. н. э.) (Pozdniye skify [III v. do n. e. – II v. n. e.] – The Late Scythians [3rd c. B. C. – 2nd c. A.D.]). // in Археология СССР. Степи европейской части СССР в скифо-сарматское время (Arkheologiya SSSR. Stepi yevropeyskoy chasti SSSR v skifo-sarmatskoye vremya – Archaeology of the USSR. Steppes of the European part of the USSR in the Scythian-Sarmatian period), Moscow. Davies R., 1971 - Cohortes Equitatae, Historia, 20. Davison D. P., 1989 - The Barrack of the Roman Army from the 1-st to 3rd Centuries A.D., London. Devijver H., 1976 - Prosopographia Militiarum Equestrium quae fuerunt ab Augusto ad Gallienum, vol. 1, Louvain. Dobson B., Mann J. C., 1973 - The Roman Army in Britain and Britons in the Roman Army, Britannia, vol. 4. Domaszewski A., 1902, Die Benefiziarierposten und die römischen Strassennetze, Westdeutsche Zeitschrift, 21. _______, 1967 - Die Rangordnung des römischen Heeres, Cologne and Graz. Doruţiu-Boilă E., 1972 - Teritoriul militar al legiunii V Macedonica la Dunărea de Jos, SCIV, vol. 23, no. 1. Eck W., 1983 - Jahres und Provinzialfasten der Senatorischen Statthalter von 69/70 bis 138/139, Chiron. Esch A., 1997 - Römische Straβen in ihrer Landschaft, Mainzon-Rhine. Fabricius E., 1927 – Limes, RЕ, 13. Fellmann R., 1983 - Principia-Stabsgebäude, Limesmuseum Aalen, 31. Fijala E., 1955 - Die Veteranenversorgung im römischen Heer vom Tod des Augustus bis zum Ausgang der Severerdynastie, Vienna. Filippenko A. A., 1994 - Филиппенко А. А., О сухопутных дорожных магистралях Северного Причерноморья и Таврики в первые века н. э. (O sukhoputnykh dorozhnykh magistralyakh Severnogo Prichernomor’ya i Tavriki v pervyye veka n. e. – On overland arterial roads in the Northern Black Sea Littoral and Taurica in the first centuries A.D.). // in Ольвия - 2000. Тез. докл. (Ol’viya – 2000. Tez[isy] dokl[adov] – Olbia 2003: abstracts of papers presented), Nikolayev. _______, 1996 - Филиппенко А. А., Основные вехи и итоги в изучении римского пограничья Северного Причерноморья и Таврики (Osnovnyye vekhi i itogi v izuchenii rimskogo pogranich’ya Severnogo Prichernomor’ya i Tavriki – Major milestones and conclsions of study of the Roman frontier in the Northern Black Sea Littoral and Taurica). // in Мир Ольвии. Тез. докл. (Mir Ol’vii. Tez[isy] dokl[adov] – The world of Olbia: abstracts of papers presented), Kiev. _______, 1998 - Филиппенко А. А., Строительные керамические материалы с пунктов дислокации римских войск в Кадыковке и на высоте Казацкой (Stroitel’nyye keramicheskiye materialy s punktov

dislokatsii rimskikh voysk v Kadykovke i na vysote Kazatskoy – Building ceramic ware from Roman army posts in Kadykovka and Kazatskaya hill). // KhSb, 9. Filippenko A. A., Alekseyenko N. A., 2000 - Филиппенко А. А., Алексеенко H. А., Клад римских денариев из Балаклавы (Klad rimskikh denariyev iz Balaklava – A hoard of Roman denarii from Balaklava). // in Sarnowski T., Savelya O. Ya. Filow B., 1906 - Die Legionen der Provinz Moesia von Augustus bis auf Diocletian, Klio, 6. Firsov L. V., 1990 - Фирсов Л. В., Исары. Очерки истории средневековых крепостей Южного берега Крыма (Isary. Ocherki istorii srednevekovykh krepostey Yuzhnogo berega Kryma – Isary: Essays on the history of medieval fortresses on the southern Crimean coast), Novosibirsk. Fitz E., 1983 - Honorific Titles of the roman military Units in the 3rd Century, Budapest and Bonn. Fitz J., 1959 - Der Besuch des Septimius Severus in Pannonien im Jahre 202 u. Z., AAH, vol. 11, fasc. 1 - 4. _______, 1962 - A military History of Pannonia from the Marcomann War to the Death of Alexander Severus (180 235), AAH, vol. 14, fasc. 1- 2. _______, 1964 - Ummidio Quadrato Covernatore della Moesia Inferiore, Epigraphica, no. 26. _______, 1966 - Die Laufbahn der Statthalter in der römischen Provinz Moesia Inferior, Weimar. Frolova N. A., 1977 - Фролова Н. А., О времени правления Гипепирии и Митридата III (O vremeni pravleniya Gipepirii i Mitridata III – On the chronology of reigns of Gepaepyrea and Mithridates III). // VDI, no. 3. _______, 1986 - Фролова Н. А., Золотая монета 338 г. б. э. 41 г. н. э. Митридата III из собрания ГИМ (Zolotaya moneta 338 g. b. e. – 41 g. n. e. Mitridata III iz sobraniya GIM – A gold coin of 338 Bosporan chronology – 41 A.D. of Mithridates III from the collection of the State Historical Museum). // VDI, no. 4. _______, 1992 - Фролова Н. А., Монетное дело Боспора VI в. до н. э. - IV в. н. э. в свете новых исследований (Monetnoye delo Bospora VI v. do n. e. – IV v. n. e. v svete novykh issledovaniy – The 6th c. B. C. – 4th c. A.D. coinage of Bosporos in light of recent studies). // in Очерки истории и культуры Боспора (Ocherki istorii i kul’tury Bospora – Essays on the history and culture of Bosporos), Moscow. _______, 1997 - Фролова Н. А., Монетное дело Боспора (Monetnoye delo Bospora – Coinage of Bosporos), part 1, Moscow. Gaydukevich V. F., 1949 - Гайдукевич В. Ф., Боспорское царство (Bosporskoye tsarstvo – The Bosporan kingdom), Moscow and Leningrad. _______, 1955 - Гайдукевич В. Ф., История античных городов Северного Причерноморья (Istoriya antichnykh gorodov Severnogo Prichernomor’ya – A history of ancient Greek cities of the Northern Black Sea Littoral). // AGSP, vol. 1. _______ [Gajdukevič V. F.], 1971 - Das Bosporanische Reich, Berlin. Gey O. A., Bazhan I. A., 1997 - Гей О. А., Бажан И. А., Хронология эпохи "готских походов" (на территории Восточной Европы и Кавказа) (Khronologiya epokhi “gotskikh pokhodov” [na territorii Vostochnoy Yevropy i Kavkaza] – A chronology of the Gothic Invasion period [on the territory of Eastern Europe and the Caucasus]), Moscow. Gilevich A. M., 1965 - Гилевич А. М., Прибрежненский клад римских монет (Pribrezhnenskiy klad rimskikh monet – Pribrezhnoye hoard of the Roman coins). // NE, vol. 5.

766

VITALIY MIKHAYLOVITCH ZUBAR: TAURIC CHERSONESUS AND THE ROMAN EMPIRE Golenko K. V., 1964 - Голенко К. В., Состав денежного обращения в Херсонесе в I в. до н. э. (Sostav denezhnogo obrashcheniya v Khersonese v I v. do n. e. – The structure of currency circulation in Chersonesus in the 1st c. B. C.). // VDI, no. 4. Golubtsova Ye. S., 1951 - Голубцова Е. С., Северное Причерноморье и Рим на рубеже н. э. (Severnoye Prichernomor’ye i Rim na rubezhe n. e. – The Northern Black Sea Littoral and Rome at the turn of an era), Moscow. Grakov B. N., 1971 - Граков Б. Н., Скифы (Skify – The Scythians), Moscow. Grakov B. N., Vinogradov Yu. G., 1970 - Граков Б. Н., Виноградов Ю. Г., Новые надписи из Херсонеса Таврического (Novyye nadpisi iz Khersonesa Tavricheskogo – New inscriptions from Tauric Chersonesus). // VDI, no. 3. Grant M., 1974 - The Army of the Caesars, London. Grinevich K. E., 1947 - Гриневич К. Э., Херсонес и Рим (Khersones i Rim – Chersonesus and Rome). // VDI, no. 2. Grosse R., 1920 - Römische Militärgeschichte von Gallienus bis zum Beginn der byzantinischen Themenverfassung, Berlin. _______, 1926 – Liburna, RE, 13, vol. I. Guidoboni Ed. E., Comastri A., Traina G., 1994 - Catalogue of Ancient Earthquakes in the Mediterranean area up to the 10th Century, Rome. Gushchina I. I., 1974 - Гущина И. И., Население сарматского времени в долине р. Бельбек в Крыму (Naseleniye sarmatskogo vremeni v doline r. Bel’bek v Krymu – The population of the Bel’bek river valley in the Crimea in the Sarmatian period). // AINYuVE. _______, 1982 - Гущина И. И., О локальных особенностях культуры населения Бельбекской долины Крыма в первые века н. э. (O lokal’nykh osobennostyakh kul’tury Bel’bekskoy doliny Kryma v pervyye veka n. e. – On specific culture of the Bel’bek valley population in the Crimea in the first centuries A.D.). // AINYuVE. Heinen H., 1994 - Mithradates von Pergamon und Caesars bosporanische Pläne zur Interpretation von Bellum Alexandrium 78, Studien zur Kultur des Altertums, 8. Ilyushechkin V. P., 1980 - Илюшечкин В. П., Система и структура добуржуазной частнособственнической эксплуатации (Sistema i struktura doburzhuaznoy chastnosobstvennicheskoy ekspluatatsii – System and structure of pre-bourgeois private-ownership exploitation), Moscow. Ivanov A. V., 1997 - Иванов А. В., Этапы развития и некоторые черты топографии Балаклавы (Etapy razvitiya i nekotoryye cherty topografii Balaklava – Stages of development and some features of topography of Balaklava). // KhSb, 8. Johnson A., 1990 - Römische Kastelle, Mainz-on-Rhine. Jones A. H. M., 1940 - The Greek City from Alexander to Justinian, Oxford. _______, 1974 - The Roman Economy. Studies in Ancient Economic and Administrative History, Oxford. _______, 1992 - The Late Roman Empire 284 - 602. A Social, Economic and Administrative Survey, vol. 1, Oxford. Jones R. F. J., 1990 - Natives and Roman Army: Three Models Relationship, Akten des 14. Internationalen Limeskongresses 1986 in Carnuntum, Vienna. Junkelmann M., 1990 - Die Reiter Roms, vol. 1, Mainz-onRhine. _______, 1991 - Die Legionen des Augustus, Mainz-on-Rhine. _______, 1991a - Die Reiter Roms, vol. 2, Mainz-on-Rhine. _______, 1992 - Die Reiter Roms, vol. 3, Mainz-on-Rhine.

_______, 1997 - Pans Militaris. Die Ernährung des römischen Soldaten oder der Grundstoff der Macht, Mainz-on-Rhine. Kadeyev V. I., 1981 - Кадеев В. И., Херсонес Таврический в первые века н. э. (Khersones Tavricheskiy v pervyye veka n. e. – Tauric Chersonesus in the first centuries A.D.), Kharkov. Kadeyev V. I., Sorochan S. B., 1989 - Кадеев В. И., Сорочан С. Б., Экономические связи античных городов Северного Причерноморья (на материалах Херсонеса) (Ekonomicheskiye svyazi antichnykh gorodov Severnogo Prichernomor’ya [na materialakh Khersonesa] – Economic relations of the ancient Greek cities of the Northern Black Sea Littoral [in light of materials of Chersonesus]), Kharkov. Karyshkovskiy P. O., Frolova N. A., 1990 - Карышковский П. О., Фролова Н. А., К истории правления Асандра на Боспоре (K istorii pravleniya Asandra na Bospore – On the history of Asander’s reign in Bosporos). // in Нумизматические исследования по истории ЮгоВосточной Европы (Numizmaticheskiye issledovaniya po storii Yugo-Vostochnoy Yevropy – Numismatic studies of the history of the southeastern Europe), Kishinev. Karyshkovskiy P. O., Kleyman I. B., 1985 - Карышковский П. О., Клейман И. Б., Древний город Тира (Drevnyy gorod Tira – The ancient city of Tyras), Kiev. Karyshkovskiy P. O., Kozhokaru V. M., 1992 - Карышковский П. О., Кожокару В. М., Следы римского укрепления на юго-восточном побережье озера Картал (Sledy rimskogo ukrepleniya na yugo-vostochnom poberezh’ye ozera Kartal – Traces of a Roman settlement on the southeastern coast of Lake Kartal). // in Древности степного Причерноморья и Крыма (Drevnosti stepnogo Prichernomor’ya i Kryma – Antiquities of the Black Sea Littoral and the Crimea steppe), vol. 3, Zaporozhe. Keppie L., 1984 - The Making of the Roman Army from Republic to Empire, New-York. Khazanov A. M., 1971 - Хазанов А. М., Первобытная периферия античного мира (Pervobytnaya periferiya antichnogo mira – The primitive periphery of the ancient Greek and Roman world). // SE, no. 6. _______, 1976 - Хазанов А. М., Роль рабства в процессе классообразования у кочевников Евразийских степей (Rol’ rabstva v protsesse klassoobrazovaniya u kochevnikov Yevraziyskikh stepey – The role of slavery in the process of class formation among the nomads of the Eurasian steppes). // in Становление классов и государства (Stanovleniye klassov i gosudarstva – Genesis of classes and state), Moscow. Kienast D., 1966 - Untersuchungen zu den Kriegsflotten der römischen Kaiserzeit zur alten Geschichte, Bonn. _______, 1990 - Römische Kaisertabelle. Grundzüge einer römischen Kaiserchronologie, Darmstadt. Kolganov N. V., 1962 - Колганов Н. В., Собственность. Докапиталистические формации (Sobstvennost’. Dokapitalisticheskiye formatsii – Property: pre-capitalist formations), Moscow. Kolobova K. M., 1954 - Колобова К. М., Политическое положение городов в Боспорском царстве (Politicheskoye polozheniye gorodov v Bosporskom tsarstve – Political status of cities within the Bosporan kingdom). // VDI, no. 4. Kolosovskaya Yu. K., 1973 - Колосовская Ю. К., Паннония I III вв. н. э. (Pannoniya v I – III vv. n. e. – Pannonia in the 1st – 3rd cc. A.D.), Moscow. _______, 1985 - Колосовская Ю. К., Римский провинциальный город, его идеология и культура (Rimskiy provintsial’nyy gorod, yego deologiya i kul’tura –

767

ANCIENT GREEK COLONIES IN THE BLACK SEA 2 The Roman provincial city, its beliefs and culture). // in Культура древнего Рима (Kul’tura drevnego Rima – Culture of ancient Rome), vol. 2, Moscow. ________, 2000 - Колосовская Ю. К., Рим и мир племен на Дунае I - IV вв. н. э. (Rim i mir plemyen na Dunaye I – IV vv. n. e. – Rome and the world of the 1st – 4th cc. A.D. barbarian tribes in the Danube), Moscow. Kovalevskaya L. A., 1998 - Ковалевская Л. А., Керамический комплекс конца II - первой половины III вв. н. э. из раскопок виллы 341 (Keramicheskiy kompleks kontsa II – pervoy poloviny III vv. n. e. iz raskopok villy 341 – A pottery assemblage of the late 2nd – first half of the 3rd cc. A.D. from the excavations of villa 341). // KhSb, 9. Krapivina V. V., 1993 - Крапивина В. В., Материальная культура Ольвии I - IV вв. (Material’naya kul’tura Ol’vii I – IV vv. – The 1st – 4th cc. material culture of Olbia), Kiev. _______, 1998 - Крапивина В. В., Ольвія у другій половині I ст. до н. е. - третій чверті III ст. н. е.(Ol’viya u drugiy polovyni I st. do n. e. – tretiy chverti III st. n. e. – Olbia in the second half of the 1st c. B. C. – third quarter of the 3rd c. A.D.). // in Давня історія України (Davnya istoriya Ukrayiny – Ancient Ukrainian history), vol. 2, Kiev. Kris Kh. I., 1981 - Крис Х. И., Кизил-Кобинская культура и тавры (Kizil-kobinskaya kul’tura i tavry – Kizil-koba culture and the Taurians). // SAI, vol. D 1 - 7. Kruglikova I. T., 1955 - Кругликова И. Т., Дакия в эпоху римской оккупации (Dakiya v epokhu rimskoy okkupatsii – Dacia in the period of the Roman occupation), Moscow. _______, 1966 - Кругликова И. Т., Боспор в позднеантичное время (Bospor v pozdneantichnoye vremya – Bosporos in the Roman period), Moscow. Kryzhyts’kyy S. D., Zubar’ V. M. [Zubar V. M.], 2000 Крижицький С. Д., Зубар В. М., До питання про реконструкцію храму Юпітера Доліхена на території сучасної Балаклави (Do pytannya pro rekonstruktsiyu khramu Yupitera Dolikhena na teritoriyi suchasnoyi Balaklavy – On the problem of reconstruction of Jupiter Dolichenus’ temple on the territory of present-day Balaklava). // Arkheologiya, no. 1. Kudryavtsev O. V., 1952 - Кудрявцев О. В., Ахайя в системе римской провинциальной политики (Akhaya v sisteme rimsoy provintsial’noy politiki – Achaia within the system of Roman provincial policy). // VDI, no. 2 Kutaysov V. A., 1986 - Кутайсов В. А., Новые находки легионных клейм в Херсонесе (Novyye nakhodki legionnykh kleym v Khersonese – New finds of legion stamps in Chersonesus). // in Античная культура Северного Причерноморья в первые века нашей эры (Antichnaya kul’tura Severnogo Prichernomor’ya v pervyye veka nashey ery – Ancient Greek and Roman culture of the Northern Black Sea Littoral in the first centuries A.D.), Kiev. Kuz’mina A. G., 1972 - Кузьмина А. Г., К вопросу о римской оккупации Херсонеса Таврического (K voprosu o rimskoy okkupatsii Khersonesa Tavricheskogo – On problems of the Roman occupation of Tauric Chersonesus). // in Некоторые вопросы всеобщей истории (Nekotoryye voprosy vseobshchey istorii – Aspects of global history), Tula. Kuzishchin V. I., Ivanchik A. I., 1998 - Кузищин В. И., Иванчик А. И., “Усадьба Басилидов” в окрестностях Херсонеса Таврического (Результаты работ Херсонесской историко-археологической экспедиции исторического факультета МГУ в 1976 – 1987 гг.) (“Usad’ba Basilidov” v okrestnostyakh Khersonesa Tavricheskogo [Resul’taty rabot Khersonesskoy istorikoarkheologicheskoy ekspeditsii istoricheskogo fakul’teta

MGU v 1976 – 1987 gg.] – “The Basilid Estate” in Tauric Chersonesus [The results of 1976-1987 work of the Chersonesian historical and archaeological expedition of the historical faculty of Moscow State University]). // VDI, no. 1. Lantsov S. B., 2003 - Ланцов С. Б., Античное святилище на Западном берегу Крыма (Antichnoye svyatilishche na Zapadnom beregu Kryma – Ancient Greek and Roman sanctuary on the western coast of the Crimea), Kiev. Latyshev V. V., 1906 - Латышев В. В., Жития святых епископов херсонских. Исследование и тексты (Zhitiya svyatykh yepiskopov khersonskikh. Issledovaniya i teksty – Lives of holy bishops of Cherson: studies and texts). // Записки императорской Академии наук (Zapiski imperatorskoy Akademii nauk – Proceedings of the imperial Academy of sciences), series VIII, vol. 8, no. 3. _______, 1907 - Латышев В. В., Страдания святых священномученников и епископов херсонских Василия, Капиона и иных с ними (Stradanya svyatykh svyashchennomuchenikov i yepiskopov khersonskikh Vasiliya, Kapitona i inykh s nimi – Martyrdoms of holy martyr and bishop saints of Cherson Basil, Capiton and others among them). // IAK, vol. 23. _______ [Latyschev B. B.], 1916 - Inscriptiones antiquae orae septentrionalis Ponti Euxini grecae et latinae, vol. 1, 2nd ed., Petrograd. Latyshev V. V., Kekelidze K., 1913 - Латышев В. В., Кекелидзе К., Житие святых св. епископов херсонских в грузинской минее (Zhitiye svyatykh sv. yepiskopov khersonskikh v gruzinskoy mineye – Lives of holy bishop saints of Cherson in a Georgian Menaia). // IAK, vol. 49. Le Bohec Y., 1993 - Die römische Armee. Von Augustus zu Kostantin d. Gr., Stuttgart. Lekvinadze V. A., 1969 - Леквинадзе В. А., "Понтийский лимес" (“Pontiyskiy limes” – “Pontic limes”). // VDI, no. 2. Leper R. Kh., 1912 - Лепер Р. Х., Херсонесские надписи (Khersonesskiye nadpisi – Inscriptions of Chersonesus). // IAK, vol. 45. Leskov A. M., 1965 - Лесков А. М., Горный Крым в I тыс. до н. э. (Gornyy Krym v I tys. do n. e. – Mountainous Crimea in the 1st mil. B. C.), Kiev. Linderski J., 2000 - Iuppiter Dolichenus, Hercules and Volcanus in Balaklava, Historia, 49, no. 1. Link S., 1989 - Konzepte der Privilegierung römischer Veteranen, Stuttgart. Loboda I. I., Puzdrovskiy A. Ye. [Puzdrovskij A. E.], Zaytsev Yu. P. [Zajcev Ju. P.], 2002 - Prunkbestattungen des 1. Jh. n. Chr. in der Nekropole Ustäß Fläma auf der Krim, Eurasia antiqua, 8. Luttwak Ed. N., 1976 - The Grand Strategy of the Roman Empire. From the First Century A.D. to the Third, Baltimore and London. Machinskiy D. A., 1974 - Мачинский Д. А., Некоторые проблемы этнографии Восточноевропейских степей во II в. до н. э. - I в. н. э. (Nekotoryye problemy etnografii Vostochnoyevropeyskikh stepey vo II v. do n. e. – I v. n. e. – Problems of Eastern European steppe ethnography in the 2nd c. B. C. – 1st c. A.D.). // АС, no. 16. MacMullen R., 1963 - Soldier and Civilian in the Later Roman Empire, Cambridge, Massachusetts. Magic D., 1950 - Roman Rule in Asia Minor to the End of Third Century after Christ, Princeton, New Jersey. Makarov I. A., 2003 – Документальное досье о налоге на проституцию из Херсонеса Таврического (к интерпретации IOSPE, I2, 404) (Dokumental’noye dos’ye o naloge na prostitutsiyu iz Khersonesa Tavricheskogo [k

768

VITALIY MIKHAYLOVITCH ZUBAR: TAURIC CHERSONESUS AND THE ROMAN EMPIRE interpretatsii IOSPE, I2, 404] – A documentary dossier of the prostitution tax found in Tauric Chersonesus [on the interpretation of IOSPE, I2, 404]). // VDI, no. 4. Maksimova M. I., 1956 - Максимова М. И., Античные города Юго-Восточного Причерноморья (Antichnyye goroda Yugo-Vostochnogo Prichernomor’ya – Ancient Greek and Roman cities in the Southeastern Black Sea Littoral), Moscow and Leningrad. Mann J. S., 1983 - Legionary Recruitment and Veteran Settlement during the Principat, London. Mashkin N. A., 1945 - Машкин Н. А., Из истории римского гражданства (Iz istorii rimskogo grazhdanstva – On the history of Roman citizenship). // Izvestiya AN SSSR. Seriya istorii i filosofii, vol. 2, no. 5. Maxfield V. A., 1981 - The Military Decorations of the Roman Army, Berkeley, Los Angeles. Mikhlin B. Yu., 1980 - Михлин Б. Ю., Фибулы Беляусского могильника (Fibuly Belyausskogo mogil’nika – Brooches from Belyaus cemetery). // SA, no. 3. Miller K., 1916 - Itineraria Romana, Stuttgart. Minns E. H., 1913 - Scythians and Greeks, Cambridge. Mirković M., 1968 - Rimski gradovi na Dunavu u Gornoj Meziji, Belgrade. Mócsy A., 1970 - Gesellschaft und Romanisation in der römischen Provinz Moesia Superior, Budapest. Naddel B., 1969 - Penetracija Rzymu i wplywy rzymskie na Połnocnym wybrzeżu morza Czarnego, Meander, no. 3. Nelis-Clément J., 2000 - Les beneficiarii: militaires et administrateurs au service de l'Empire (Ier s. A. C. - VIe s. P. C.), Bordeaux. Neumann A., 1958 – Vexillatio, RE, 8, vol. 2. Nikolayenko G. M., 1988 - Николаенко Г. М., Херсонесская хора в I в. до н. э. – IV в. н. э. (по материалам Гераклейского полуострова) (Khersonesskaya khora v I v. do n. e. – IV v. n. e. [po materialam Gerakleyskogo poluostrova] – Chersonesus chora in the 1st c. B. C. – 4th c. A.D. [in light of Heraclean peninsula materials]). // in Античные древности Северного Причерноморья (Antichnyye drevnosti Severnogo Prichernomor’ya – Classical antiquities of the Northern Black Sea Littoral), Kiev. _______, 1999 - Николаенко Г. М., Хора Херсонеса Таврического. Земельный кадастр IV - III вв. до н. э. (Khora Khersonesa Tavricheskogo. Zemel’nyy kadastr IV – III vv. do n. e. – Chora of Tauric Chersonesus: 4th – 3rd cc. B. C. land register), vol. 1, Sevastopol. Novichenkova N. G., 1998 - Новиченкова Н. Г., Римское военное снаряжение из святилища у перевала Гурзуфское Седло (Rimskoye voyennoye snaryazheniye iz svyatilishcha u perevala Gurzufskoye sedlo – Roman military equipment from the sanctuary at Gurzufskoye Sedlo mountain pass). // VDI, no. 2. Ol’khovskiy V. S., 1981 - Ольховский В. С., Население Крыма по данным античных авторов (Naseleniye Kryma po dannym antichnykh avtorov – The Crimean population in light of classical writings). // SA, no. 3. _______, 1990 - Ольховский В. С., До етнічної історії давнього Криму (Do etnichnoyi istoriyi davn’ogo Krymu – On the ethnic history of ancient Crimea). // Arkheologiya, no. 1. Oldenstein J., 1977 - Zur Ausrüstung römischer Auxiliareinheiten. Studien zu Beschlägen und Zierat an der Ausrüstung der römischen Auxiliareinheiten des obergermanisch-raetischen Limesgebietes aus dem zweiten und dritten Jahrhundert n. Ch., Bericht der römischegermanischen Kommission, 57.

Orlov K. K., 1987 - Орлов К. К., Ай-Тодорский некрополь (Ay-Todorskiy nekropol’ – The Necropolis of Ay-Todor). // Материалы по этнической истории Крыма VII в. до н. э. - VII в. н. э. (Materialy po etnicheskoy istorii Kryma VII v. do n. e. – VII v. n. e. – Materials on the 7th c. B. C. – 7th c. A.D. ethnic history of the Crimea), Kiev. _______, 1988 - Орлов К. К., Архитектурные комплексы Харакса (Arkhitekturnyye kompleksy Kharaksa – Architectural assemblages of Kharax). // in Архитектурноархеологические исследования в Крыму (Arkhitekturnoarkheologicheskiye issledovaniya v Krymu – Architecturalarchaeological studies in the Crimea), Kiev. Ovcharov D., Ovcharov N., 1988 - Овчаров Д., Овчаров Н., Мраморная колонна III в. н. э. с надписью на латинском языке из Преслава (Mramornaya kolonna III v. n. e. s nadpis’yu na latinskom yazyke iz Preslava – A 3rd c. A.D. marble column with an inscription in Latin by Preslav). // Thracia, 8. Parker H. M. D., 1958 - Roman Legions, New York. Pekary T., 1968 - Untersuchungen zu den römischen Reichsstrassen, Bonn. Pershits A. I., 1976 - Першиц А. И., Некоторые особенности классообразования и раннеклассовых отношений у кочевников-скотоводов (Nekotoryye osobennosti klassoobrazovaniya i ranneklassovykh otnosheniy u kochevnikov-skotovodov – Some aspects of class formation and early class relations of nomadic cattle-breeders). // in Становление классов и государства (Stanovleniye klassov i gosudarstva – Genesis of classes and state), Moscow. Petit P., 1967 - Pax Romana, Berkeley, Los Angeles. Petrikovits H. V., 1975 - Die Innenbauten römischer Legionslager während der Prinzipatszeit, Abhandlungen der Rheinisch - Westfälischen Akademie der Wissenschaften, 56. Pippidi D. M., 1955 - Tiberius Plautius Aeliany şi frontiera Danării de jos în secolol I al erei noaste, SCIV, no. 3 - 4. Podosinov A. V., 1999 - Подосинов А. В., Черное море в картографической традиции античности и раннего средневековья (Chernoye more v kartograficheskoy traditsii antichnosti i rannego srednevekov’ya – The Black Sea in the Classical and Early Medieval cartographic tradition). // in Древнейшие государства Восточной Европы 1996 - 1997 гг. Северное Причерноморье в античности. Вопросы источниковедения (Drevneyshiye gosudarstva Vostochnoy Yevropy 1996 – 1997 gg. Severnoye Prichernomor’ye v antichnosti. Voprosy istochnikovedeniya – The most ancient states of Eastern Europe, 1996 – 1997: the Northern Black Sea Littoral – problems of source study), Moscow. Pogrebova N. N., 1958 - Погребова Н. Н., Позднескифские городища на Нижнем Днепре (городища Знаменское и Гавриловское) (Pozdneskifskiye gorodishcha na Nizhnem Dnepre [gorodishcha Znamenskoye i Gavrilovskoye] – Late Scythian hillforts in the Lower Dnieper region [Znamenskoye and Gavrilovskoye hillforts]). // MIA, no. 64. Poulter A. G., 1990 - Frontier Piople beyond the Limes: The Impact of the Native Population upon the Lower Danubian Frontier, Akten des 14. Internationalen Limeskongresses 1986 in Carnuntum, Vienna. Puzdrovskiy A. Ye., 1994 - Пуздровский А. Е., О сарматах в Крыму (O sarmatakh v Krymu – On the Sarmatians in the Crimea). // MAIET, 4. _______, 1997 - Пуздровский А. Е., Граффити на краснолаковой посуде из раскопок Усть-Альминского некрополя в 1993-1995 гг. (Graffiti na krasnolakovoy posude iz raskopok Ust’-Al’minskogo nekropolya v 19931995 gg. – Graffiti on red-slip pottery from 1993-1995

769

ANCIENT GREEK COLONIES IN THE BLACK SEA 2 excavations of Ust’-Al’ma necropolis). // Bakhchisarayskiy istoriko-arkheologicheskiy sbornik, vol. 1, Simferopol. _______, 1999 - Пуздровский А. Е., Очерк этносоциальной истории Крымской Скифии во II в. до н. э. – III в. н. э. (Ocherk etnosotsial’noy istorii Krymskoy Skifii vo II v. do n. e. – III v. n. e. – An essay on the ethno-social history of 2nd c. B. C. – 3rd c. A.D. Crimean Scythia). // VDI, no. 4. _______, 2001 - Пуздровский А. Е., Римско-боспорская война и этнополитическая ситуация в Крымской Скифии в середине I в. н. э. (Rimsko-bosporskaya voyna i etnopoliticheskaya situatsiya v Krymskoy Skifii v seredine I v. n. e. – Roman-Bosporan war and the ethno-political situation in Crimean Scythia in the middle of the 1st c. A.D.). // in Боспорский феномен: колонизация региона, формирование полисов, образование государства (Bosporskiy fenomen: kolonizatsiya regiona, formirovaniye polisov, obrazovaniye gosudarstva – The Bosporan phenomenon: colonisation of the region, formation of polis, and genesis of the state), fasc. 2, St. Petersburg. _______, 2001a - Пуздровский А. Е., Политическая история Крымской Скифии во II в. до н. э. - III в. н. э. (Politicheskaya istoriya Krymskoy Skifii vo II v. do n. e. – III v. n. e. – Political history of Crimean Scythia in the 2nd c. B. C. – 3rd c. A.D.). // VDI, no. 3. Rădulescu A., Munteanu M., 1977 - Unveröffentliche Inschriften aus Tomis und Callatis, Epigraphica (VII Congres International d'Epigràphie Crecque et Latine), Bucharest. Rankov D., 1999 - The governor's men: the officium consularis in provincial administration, The Roman Army as a community, Portsmouth and Rhode Island. Rayevskiy D. S., 1973 - Раевский Д. С., К истории грекоскифских отношений (II в. до н. э. - II в. н. э.) (K istorii greko-skifskikh otnosheniy [II v. do n. e. – II v. n. e.] – On the history of Greek-Scythian relations [2nd c. B. C. – 2nd c. A.D.]). // VDI, no. 2. Regibus L., 1939 - La Monarchia militare di Gallieno, Milan. Renz R., 1972 - The Legal Position of the Soldier and Veteran in the Roman Empire, New York. Repnikov N. I., 1941 - Репников Н. И., О характере римской оккупации Южного берега Крыма (O kharaktere rimskoy okkupatsii Yuzhnogo berega Kryma – On the nature of the Roman occupation of the Southern Crimean coast). // SA, vol. 7. Richardson A., 2000 - The Numerical Basis of Roman Camps, Oxford Journal of Archaeology, 19 (4). Rikman E. A., 1975 - Рикман Э. А., Этническая история населения Поднестровья и прилегающего Подунавья первых веков н. э. (Etnicheskaya istoriya naseleniya Podnestrov’ya i prilegayushchego Podunav’ya pervykh vekov n. e. – Ethnic history of the population of the Dniester and adjacent Danube regions in the first centuries A.D.), Moscow. Ritterling E., 1925 – Legio, RE, 12. Rostovtsev M. I., 1900 - Ростовцев М. И., Римские гарнизоны на Таврическом полуострове (Rimskiye garnizony na Tavricheskom poluostrove – Roman garrisons in the Tauric peninsula). // ZhMNP, April. _______ [Rostovzeff M.], 1902 - Römische Besatzungen in der Krim und das Kastell Kharax, Klio, 2, 1. _______, 1907 - Ростовцев М. И., Новые латинские надписи из Херсонеса (Novyye latinskiye nadpisi iz Khersonesa – New Latin inscriptions from Chersonesus). // IAK, vol. 23. _______, 1908 - Ростовцев М. И., Новые латинские надписи с юга России (Novyye latinskiye nadpisi s yuga Rossii – New Latin inscriptions from South Russia). // IAK, vol. 27.

_______, 1909 - Ростовцев М. И., Новые латинские надписи с юга России (Novyye latinskiye nadpisi s yuga Rossii – New Latin inscriptions from South Russia). // IAK, vol. 33. _______, 1911 - Ростовцев М. И., Святилище фракийских богов и надписи бенефициариев в Ай-Тодоре (Svyatilishche frakiyskikh bogov i nadpisi benefitsiariyev v Ay-Todore – A sanctuary of Thracian gods and inscriptions by beneficiaries in Ay-Todor). // IAK, vol. 40. _______, 1915 - Ростовцев М. И., Военная оккупация Ольвии римлянами (Voyennaya okkupatsiya Ol’vii rimlyanami – The Roman military occupation of Olbia). // IAK, vol. 58. _______, 1916 - Ростовцев М. И., К истории Херсонеса в эпоху ранней римской империи (K istorii Khersonesa v epokhu ranney rimskoy imperii – On the history of Chersonesus in the early Roman imperial period). // in Сб. статей в честь гр. П. С. Уварова (Sb. statey v chest’ gr. P. S. Uvarova – Collected articles in honour of the count P. S. Uvarov), Moscow. _______, 1916a - Ростовцев М. И., Дело о взимании проституционной подати в Херсонесе (Delo o vzimanii prostitutsionnoy podati v Khersonese – The case of collection of the prostitution tax in Chersonesus). // IAK, vol. 60. _______, 1917 - Ростовцев М. И., Цезарь и Херсонес (Tsezar’ i Khersones – Caesar and Chersonesus). // IAK, vol. 63. _______ [Rostovtseff M.], 1917 a - Caesar and the South of Russia, JRS, vol. 7, part 1. _______, 1918 - Ростовцев М. И., Эллинство и иранство на юге России (Ellinstvo i iranstvo na yuge Rossii – The ancient Greeks and Iranians in south Russia), Petrograd. _______, 1925 - Ростовцев М. И., Скифия и Боспор (Skifiya i Bospor - Scythia and Bosporos), Petrograd. Saprykin S. Yu., 1981 - Сапрыкин С. Ю., Черепица с клеймами римского легиона из усадьбы хоры Херсонеса (Cherepitsa s kleymami rimskogo legiona iz usad’by khory Khersonesa – Roof tiles with Roman legion stamps from a farmhouse on the chora of Chersonesus). // KSIA, vol. 168. _______, 1986 - Сапрыкин С. Ю., Гераклея Понтийская и Херсонес Таврический (Gerakleya Pontiyskaya i Khersones Tavricheskiy – Heraclea Pontica and Tauric Chersonesus), Moscow. _______, 1987 - Сапрыкин С. Ю., Асандр и Херсонес (к достоверности легенды о Гикии) (Asandr i Khersones [k dostovernosti legendy o Gikii] – Asander and Chersonesus [on the reliability of Gycian legend]). // SA, no. 1. _______, 1990 - Сапрыкин С. Ю., Уникальный статер боспорской царицы Динамии (Unikal’nyy stater bosporskoy tsaritsy Dinamii – A unique stater of the Bosporan queen Dynamis). // SA, no. 3. _______, 1993 - Сапрыкин С. Ю., Из истории Понтийского царства Полемонидов (по данным эпиграфики) (Iz istorii Pontiyskogo tsarstva Polemonidov [po dannym epigraphiki] – From the history of the Pontic Kingdom of the Polemonids [in light of epigraphic data]). // VDI, no. 2. _______, 1999 - Сапрыкин С. Ю., Херсонесские проксении и пути плавания по Понту (Khersonesskiye proksenii i puti plavasniya po Pontu – Chersonesus proxeniai and routes of Pontus navigation). // Problemy istorii, filologii, kul’tury, vol. 8. Saprykin S. Yu., Baranov I. A., 1995 - Саприкін С. Ю., Баранов I. А., Грецький напис із Судака (Hrets’kyy napys iz Sudaka – A Greek inscription from Sudak). // Arkheologiya, no. 2. Saprykin S. Yu., D’yachkov S. V., 1999 - Сапрыкин С. Ю., Дьячков С. В., Новый римский алтарь из Херсонеса

770

VITALIY MIKHAYLOVITCH ZUBAR: TAURIC CHERSONESUS AND THE ROMAN EMPIRE (Novyy rimskiy altar’ iz Khersonesa – A new Roman altar from Chersonesus). // VDI, no. 4. Sarnowski T., 1977 - Fortress of the Legio I Italica at Nove, Limes. Akten des 11 International Limeskongresses, Budapest. _______, 1988 - Wojsko rzymskie w Mezji Dolnej i na połnocnym wybrzeżu Morza Czarnego, Warsaw. _______, 1988a - Das römische Heer im Norden des Schwarzen Meeres, Archeologia, vol. 38. _______, 1991 - Barbaricum und Bellum Bosporanum in einer Inschrift aus Preslav, ZPE, 87. _______, 1993 - Die ritterlichen Tribunen der Legio I Italica, Prosopographica, Poznań. _______, 1995 - L’organisation hiérarchique des vexillationes Ponticae au miroir des trouvailles épigraphiques récentes, La hiérarchie (Rangordnung) de l’armée romanine, Paris. _______, 2000 - Сарновски Т., К вопросу о чтении и хронологии латинских клейм на строительной керамике из Крыма (K voprosu o chtenii i khronologii latinskikh kleym na stroitel’noy keramike iz Kryma – On the problem of decipherment and chronology of Latin stamps on construction materials from the Crimea). // in Sarnowski T., Savelya O. Ya., 2000. _______, 2000a - Сарновски Т., О Боспорской войне в конце II в. н. э. (O Bosporskoy voyne v kontse II v. n. e. – On the Bosporan war in the late 2nd c. A.D.). // in Sarnowski T., Savelya O. Ya., 2000. Sarnowski T., Savelya O. Ya. [Savelja O.], 1998 - Das Dolichenum von Balaklawa und die römischen Streitkräfte auf der Südkrim, Archeologia, 49. Sarnowski T., Savelya O. Ya., 2000 - Сарновски Т., Савеля О. Я., Балаклава. Римская военная база и святилище Юпитера Долихена (Balaklava. Rimskaya voyennaya baza i svyatilishche Yupitera Dolikhena – Balaklava: a Roman military base and Jupiter Dolichenus’ sanctuary), Warsaw. Sarnowski T., Savelya O. Ya., 2000a - Сарновски Т., Савеля О. Я., К вопросу о семейной жизни римских офицеров и солдат в Крыму (K voprosu o semeynoy zhizni rimskikh ofitserov i soldat v Krymu – On the problem of the family life of Roman officers and soldiers in the Crimea). // in Sarnowski T., Savelya O. Ya., 2000. Sarnowski T, Trynkowski J., 1990 - Stemple «Okretowe» legionu I Italskiego na cagłach i dachowkach z Novae, Balcanica Posnaniensia, 5. Sarnowski T., Zubar’ V. M. [Zubar V. M.], 1996 - Römische Besatzungstruppen auf der Südkrim und eine Bauinschrift aus dem Kastell Kharax, ZPE, 112. Sarnowski T., Zubar’ V. M. [Zubar V. M.], Savelya O. Ya. [Savelja O. Ja.], 1998 - Zum religiosen Leben der niedermoesischen Vexillationen auf der Südkrim. Inschriftenfunde aus dem neuentdeckten Dolichenum von Balaklawa, Historia, 47/3. Savelya O. Ya., 1997 - Савеля О. Я., Некоторые результаты работ Севастопольской археологической экспедиции в округе Херсонеса в 1990 - 1995 гг. (Nekotoryye rezul’taty rabot Sevastopol’skoy arkheologicheskoy expeditsii v okruge Khersonesa v 1990 – 1995 gg. – Some results of the Sevastopol archaeological expedition’s 1990 – 1995 work in the vicinity of Chersonesus). // KhSb, 8. Savelya O. Ya., Sarnowski T., 1999 - Савеля О. Я., Сарновский Т., Две латинских надписи из Балаклавы и Херсонеса (Dve latinskikh nadpisi iz Balaklavy i Khersonesa – Two Latin inscriptions from Balaklava and Chersonesus). // VDI, no. 1. Savostina Ye. A., 1977 - Савостина Е. А., Римские имена в ономастике Северного Причерноморья (Rimskiye imena

v onomastike Severnogo Prichernomor’ya – Roman names in Northern Black Sea Littoral onomastics). // SA, no. 4. Saxer R., 1967 - Untersuchungen zu den Vexillationen des römischen Kaiserheeres von Augustus bis Diokletian, Epigraphische Studien, 1. Scorpan C., 1980 - Limes Scythiae. Topographical and Stratigraphical Research on the Late Roman Fortifications on the Lower Danube, Oxford. Shcheglov A. N., 1961 - Щеглов А. Н., Об изучении средневековой топонимики Крыма (Ob izuchenii srednevekovoy toponimiki Kryma – On the studying of medieval toponymy of the Crimea). // ZOAO, vol. 1 (34). _______, 1969 - Щеглов А. Н., Фракийские посвятительные рельефы из Херсонеса Таврического (Frakiyskiye posvyatitel’nyye rel’yefy iz Khersonesa Tavricheskogo – Thracian votive reliefs from Tauric Chersonesus). // MIA, no. 150. _______, 1978 - Щеглов А. Н., Северо-Западный Крым в античную эпоху (Severo-Zapadnyy Krym v antichnuyu epokhu – Northwestern Crimea in the Classical period), Leningrad. Shchukin M. B., 1994 - Щукин М. Б., На рубеже эр. Опыт историко-археологической реконструкции политических событий III в. до н. э. - I в. н. э. в Восточной и Центральной Европе (Na rubezhe er. Opyt istoriko-arkheologicheskoy rekonstruktsii politicheskikh sobytiy III v. do n. e. – I v. n. e. v Vostochnoy i Tsentral’noy Yevrope – On the transition between eras: historical-archaeological reconstruction of the 3rd c. B. C. – 1st c. A.D. political events in the Eastern and Central Europe), St. Petersburg. Shelov D. B., 1981 - Шелов Д. Б., Римляне в Северном Причерноморье во II в. н. э. (Rimlyane v Severnom Prichernomor’ye vo II v. n. e. – The Romans in the Northern Black Sea Littoral in the 2nd c. A.D.). // VDI, no. 4. Shelov-Kovedyayev F. V., 1982 - Шелов-Коведяев Ф. В., Новый декрет из Херсонеса (Novyy dekret iz Khersonesa – A new decree from Chersonesus). // VDI, no. 2. Sherwin-White A. N., 1984 - Roman Foreign Policy in the East. 168 B. C. to A.D. 1, London. Shkunayev S. V., 1985 - Шкунаев С. В., Культура Галлии и романизация (The culture of Gallia and the Romanisation). // in Культура древнего Рима (Kul’tura drevnego Rima – The culture of ancient Rome), vol. 2, Moscow. Shtayerman Ye. M., 1985 - Штаерман Е. М., Введение (Vvedeniye - Introduction). // in Культура древнего Рима (Kul’tura drevnego Rima – The culture of ancient Rome), vol. 1, Moscow. Shul’ts P. N., 1971 - Шульц П. Н., Познескифская культура и ее варианты на Днепре и в Крыму (Pozdneskifskaya kul’tura i yeyo varianty na Dnepre i v Krymu – Late Scythian culture and its variants in the Dnieper region and in the Crimea). // MIA, no. 177. Sidorenko V. A., 1987 - Сидоренко В. А., К вопросу об этнической атрибуции Ай-Тодорского клада монет IV начала V вв. с подражаниями "лучистого типа" (K voprosu ob etnicheskoy atributsii Ay-Todorskogo klada monet IV – nachala V vv. s podrazhaniyami “luchistogo tipa” – On the problem of ethnic attribution of the Ay-todor hoard of the 4th – early 5th cc. coins with imitations of ‘radiate type’). // in Материалы по этнической истории Крыма VII в. до н. э. - VII в. н. э. (Materialy po etnicheskoy istorii Kryma VII v. do n. e. – VII v. n. e. – Materials on the 7th c. B. C. – 7th c. A.D. ethnic history of the Crimea), Kiev.

771

ANCIENT GREEK COLONIES IN THE BLACK SEA 2 _______, 2001 - Сидоренко В. А., Золотая монетная чеканка Херсонеса I - II в. н. э. (Zolotaya monetnaya chekanka Khersonesa I – II vv. n. e. – The 1st – 2nd cc. A.D. gold coinage of Chersonesus). // MAIET, 8. Smith R. E., 1979 - Dux, praepositus, ZPE, 36. Smyshlyayev A. L., 1976 - Смышляев А. Л., Септимий Север и principales (Septimiy Sever i principales – Septimius Severus and principales). // Vestnik MGU, no. 6. _______, 1996 - Смышляев А. Л., Карьера, миссия и статус Т. Аврелия Кальпурниана Аполлонида (Kar’yera, missiya i status T. Avreliya Kal’purniana Apollonida – The career, mission, and status of T. Aurelius Calpurnianus Apollonidus). // VDI, no. 3. Solomonik E. I., 1962 - Соломонік Е. І., Про значення терміну "тавро-скіфи" (Pro znachennya terminy “tavroskify” – On the meaning of the term ‘Tauroscythians’) // AP URSR, vol. 11. _______, 1963 - Соломоник Э. И., Надписи на стеле из Марьино (Nadpisi na stele iz Mariyino – Inscriptions on the stela from Mar’yino). // SKhM, vol. 3. _______, 1964 - Соломоник Э. И., Новые эпиграфические памятники Херсонеса (Novyye epigraficheskiye pamyatniki Khersonesa – New epigraphic monuments of Chersonesus), Kiev. _______, 1966 - Соломоник Э. И., О римском флоте в Херсонесе (O rimskom flote v Khersonese – About the Roman navy in Chersonesus). // VDI, no. 2. _______, 1973 - Соломоник Э. И., Новые эпиграфические памятники Херсонеса (Novyye epigraficheskiye pamyatniki Khersonesa – New epigraphic monuments of Chersonesus), Kiev. _______, 1973a - Соломоник Э. И., О пребывании римского флота в Крыму (O prebyvanii rimskogo flota v Krymu – On the Roman navy in the Crimea). // ADSV, 10. _______, 1974 - Соломоник Э. И., Несколько неизданных надписей Херсонеса и его округи (Neskol’ko neizdannykh nadpisey Khersonesa i yego okrugi – Some unpublished inscriptions of Chersonesus and its vicinity). // NE, vol. 11. _______, 1983 - Соломоник Э. И., Латинские надписи Херсонеса Таврического (Latinskiye nadpisi Khersonesa Tavricheskogo – Latin inscriptions of Tauric Chersonesus), Moscow. _______, 1984 - Соломоник Э. И., Граффити с хоры Херсонеса (Graffiti s khory Khersonesa – Graffiti from the chora of Chersonesus), Kiev. _______, 1987 - Соломоник Э. И., Два античных письма из Крыма (Dva antichnykh pis’ma iz Kryma – Two ancient letters from the Crimea). // VDI, no. 3. Son N. A., 1986 - Сон Н. А., Новая латинская надпись из Тиры (Novaya latinskaya nadpis’ iz Tiry – A new Latin inscription from Tyras). // VDI, no. 4. _______, 1993 - Сон Н. А., Тира римского времени (Tira rimskogo vremeni – Tyras in the Roman period), Kiev. Son N. A., Nazarov V. V., 1993 - Сон Н. О., Назаров В. В., Знахідки римської зброї в Тірі та Ольвії (Znakhidky ryms’koyi zbroyi v Tiri ta Ol’viyi – Finds of the Roman weapons in Tyras and Olbia). // Arkheologiya, no. 1. Soproni S., 1985 - Die letzten Jahrzehnte des pannonischen Limes, Munich. Sorochan S. B., 1981 - Сорочан С. Б., Экомические связи Херсонеса со скифо-сарматским населением Крыма в I в. до н. э. - V в. н. э. (Economicheskiye svyazi Khersonesa so skifo-sarmatskim naseleniyem Kryma v I v. do n. e. – V v. n. e. – Chersonesus’ economic relations with the Scythian-Sarmatian population of the Crimea in the 1st c. B. C. – 5th c. A.D.). // in Античные государства и варварский

мир (Antichnyye gosudarstva i varvarskiy mir – Ancient Greek states and the barbarian world), Ordzhonikidze. Sorokina N. P., 1982 - Сорокина Н. П., Стеклянная посуда как источник по истории экономических связей Причерноморья и локального стеклоделия первых веков н. е. (Steklyannaya posuda kak istochnik po istorii ekonomicheskikh svyazey Prichernomor’ya i lokal’nogo steklodeliya pervykh vekov n. e. – Glassware as a source for the history of economic relations in the Black Sea Littoral in the first centuries A. D . and local glass-making). // AINYuVYe, Moscow. Sorokina N. P., Gushchina I. I., 1980 - Сорокина Н. П., Гущина И. И., Стеклянные изделия из могильников первых вв. н. э. Юго-Западного Крыма (Steklyannyye izdeliya iz mogil’nikov pervykh vv. n. e. Yugo-Zapadnogo Kryma – Glassware from cemeteries of the first centuries A.D. in the southwestern Crimea). // Trudy GIM, vol. 51. История и культура Евразии по археологическим данным (Istoriya i kul’tura Yevrazii po arkheologicheskim dannym – The history and culture of Eurasia in light of archaeological data). Speidel M. P. [Speydel M.], 1988 - Спейдел М., Капитаны и центурионы в Херсонесе (Kapitany i tsenturiony v Khersonese – Captains and centurions in Chersonesus). // VDI, no. 3. _______, 1989 - Furius' Gravestone from the Crimea, The Eastern Frontier of the Roman Empire, London. Starr Ch. G., 1960 - The Roman Imperial Navy. 31 B. C. - A.D. 324, New York. Stein A., 1940 - Die Legaten von Moesien, Budapest. Stephens G. R., 1987 - A Severan Vexillations at Ribchester, Britannia, vol. 18. Strobel K., 1984 - Untersuchungen zu den Dakerkriegen Trajans. Studien zur Geschichte des mittleren und unteren Donauraumes in der Hohen Kaiserzeit, Bonn. _______, 1993 - Das Imperium Romanum im «3. Jahrhundert», Stuttgart. Strzheletskiy S. F., 1959 - Стржелецкий С. Ф., Основные этапы экономического развития и периодизация истории Херсонеса (Osnovnyye etapy ekonomicheskogo razvitiya i periodizatsiya istorii Khersonesa – Main stages of economic development and periods in the history of Chersonesus). // PISPAE. Sventsitskaya I. S., 1996 - Свенцицкая И. С., Еще раз о новом херсонесском декрете (Yeshchye raz o novom khersonesskom dekrete – Once more about a new Chersonesus decree). // VDI, no. 3. Syme R., 1968 – Ummidii, Historia, 17. _______, 1971 - Hadrian in Moesia, Syme R., Danubian Paper, Bucharest. Thomae B. E., 1984 - Laterculi praesidum, vol. 1, Göteborg. Torbatov S., 2000 - The Roman Road Durostorum – Marcianopolis, Archaeologia Bulgarica, 1. Treyster M. Yu., 1991 - Трейстер М. Ю., Бронзова матриця з Херсонеса (Bronzova matrytsya z Khersonesa - A bronze matrix from Chersonesus). // Arkheologiya, no. 1. _______, 2000 - Трейстер М. Ю., К находкам металлических деталей римского военного костюма и конской сбруи в Северном Причерномоье (K nakhodkam metallicheskikh detaley rimskogo voyennogo kostyuma i konskoy sbrui v Severnom Prichernomor’ye – On the finds of metal details of Roman military costume and horse harness in the Northern Black Sea Littoral). // RA, no. 2. Tsvetayeva G. A., 1979 - Цветаева Г. А., Боспор и Рим (Bospor i Rim – Bosporos and Rome), Moscow. Tudor D., 1960 - Тудор Д., Киликийская когорта в Малой Скифии и Тавриде (Новые данные в изучении связей

772

VITALIY MIKHAYLOVITCH ZUBAR: TAURIC CHERSONESUS AND THE ROMAN EMPIRE западного и северного побережья Черного моря в I - III вв. н. э.) (Kilikiyskaya kogorta v Maloy Skifii i Tavride [Novyye dannyye v izuchenii svyazey zapadnogo i severnogo poberezh’ya Chyernogo morya v I – III vv. n. e.] – The Cilician cohort in Scythia Minor and Taurica [New data concerning contacts between the western and northern coasts of the Black Sea in the 1st – 3rd cc. A.D.]). // in МИА Юго-Запада СССР и РНР (MIA Yugo-Zapada SSSR i RNR – Materials and Sstudies in the Archaeology of the Southwest USSR and RNR), Kishinev. Tyumenev A. I., 1949 - Тюменев А. И., Херсонесские этюды. III. Херсонес и местное население: тавры (Khersonesskiye etyudy. III. Khersones i mestnoye naseleniye: tavry – Chersonesus essays, 3: Chersonesus and the local population – the Taurians). // VDI, no. 4. Vasil’yev L. S., Stuchevskiy I. A., 1966. - Васильев Л. С., Стучевский И. А., Три модели возникновения и эволюции докапиталистических обществ (Tri modeli vozhiknoveniya i evolutsii dokapitalisticheskikh obshchestv – Three models of genesis and evolution of pre-capitalist societies). // VI, no. 6. Velkov V., 1989 - Römisches Militärwesen in der Provinz Thrakien, Thracia, 9. _______, 1991 - Велков В., Надписи от Кабиле (Nadpisi ot Kabile – Inscriptions from Kabile). // Кабиле (Kabile Kabile), vol. 2, Sofia. Vinogradov Yu. G., 1988 - Виноградов Ю. Г., От элевтерии к зависимости: проблема политической правоспособности Херсонеса в конце II - I вв. до н. э. (Ot elevterii k zavisimosti: problema politicheskoy pravosposobnosti Khersonesa v kontse II – I vv. do n. e. From eleutheria to dependency: the problem of political competence of Chersonesus in the late 2nd – 1st cc. B. C.). // in Проблемы исследования античного и средневекового Херсонеса. 1888 - 1988 гг. - Тезисы докладов (Problemy issledovaniya antichnogo i srednevekovogo Khersonesa. 1888 – 1988 gg. – Tezisy dokladov – Problems in the study of ancient and medieval Chersonesus, 1888 – 1988: abstracts of papers), Sevastopol. _______, 1990 - Виноградов Ю. Г., Ольвия и Траян (Ol’viya i Trayan – Olbia and Trajan). // in Восточная Европа в древности и средневековье. - Тезисы докладов (Vostochnaya Yevropa v drevnosti i srednevekov’ye. – Tezisy dokladov – Eastern Europe in the ancient and medieval periods: abstracts of papers), Moscow. _______, 1992 - Виноградов Ю. Г., Херсонес, Боспор и Рим (Khersones, Bospor i Rim – Chersonesus, Bosporos, and Rome). // VDI, no. 3. _______, 1994 - Виноградов Ю. Г., Очерк военнополитической истории сарматов I в. н. э. (Ocherk voyenno-politicheskoy istorii sarmatov v I v. n. e. – A survey of the political history of the Sarmatians in the 1st c. A.D.). // VDI, no. 2. _______, 1996 - Виноградов Ю. Г., Новое документальное досье императорской эпохи из Херсонеса (О превратностях судеб херсонеситов и их лапидарного архива) (Novoye dokumental’noye dos’ye imperatorskoy epkhi iz Khersonesa [O prevratnostyakh sudeb khersonesitov i ikh lapidarnogo arkhiva] – A new documentary dossier of the empire period in Chersonesus [On the vicissitudes of fate of the Chersonesians and their lapidary archive]). // VDI, no. 1. _______, 1997 - Виноградов Ю. Г., Цезарь, Херсонес и Боспор (Tsezar’, Khersones i Bospor – Caesars, Chersonesus and Bosporos). // in Херсонес в античном мире. Историко-археологический аспект (Khersones v antichnm mire. Istoriko-arkheologicheskiy aspekt –

Chersonesus within the ancient world: historicalarchaeological aspect), Sevastopol. _______, 1998 - Виноградов Ю. Г., Позднеантичный Боспор и ранняя Византия (В свете датированных боспорских надписей V века) (Pozdneantichnyy Bospor i rannyaya Vizantiya [V svete datirovannykh bosporskikh nadpisey V veka] – Late Classical Bosporos and early Byzantium [in light of Bosporan inscriptions of the 5th century]). // VDI, no. 1. Vinogradov Yu. G. [Vinogradov Ju. G.], Zubar’ V. M. [Zubar V. M.], 1995/1996 - Die Schola Principalium in Chersonesos, Il Mar Nero, 2. Vinogradov Yu. G., Zubar’ V. M., Antonova I. A., 1999 Виноградов Ю. Г., Зубарь В. М., Антонова И. А., Schola principalium в Херсонесе (Schola principalium v Khersonese – Schola principalium in Chersonesus). // NE, vol. 16. Visy Z., 1988 - Der pannonische Limes in Ungarn, Stuttgart. Vittinghoff F., 1971 - Die rechtliche Stellung der Canabae Legionis und die Herkunftsangabe Castris, Chiron, 1. Vysotskaya T. N. [Vysots’ka T. M.], 1964 - Висотська Т. М., Про виробництво скла в пізньоантичному Криму (Pro vyrobnytstvo skla v pizn’oantychnomu Krymu – On glass production in the Late Roman Crimea). // Arkheologiya, vol. 16. _______, 1972 - Высотская Т. Н., Поздние скифы в ЮгоЗападном Крыму (Pozdniye skify v Yugo-Zapadnom Krymu – The Late Scythians in the southwestern Crimea), Kiev. _______, 1979 - Высотская Т. Н., Неаполь - столица поздних скифов (Neapol’ – stolitsa pozdnikh skifov – Neapolis: the capital of the Late Scythians), Kiev. _______, 1994 - Высотская Т. Н., Усть-Альминское городище и некрополь (Ust’-Al’minskoye gorodishche i nekropol’ – Ust’-Al’ma hillfort and necropolis), Kiev. Webster Gr., 1969 - The Roman Imperial Army, London. Weerd van de H., 1907 - Etude l’historique sur trois legions romains du Bas-Danube (V-e Macedonica, XI-e Clavdia, I-e Italica) suivie d’un apercu general sur l’armee romaine de la province de Mesie Inferieure sous le Haut-Empire, Louvain and Paris. Yatsenko I. V., 1970 - Яценко И. В., Исследование сооружений скифского периода на городище Чайка в Евпатории (Issledovaniye sooruzheniy skifskogo perioda na gorodishche Chayka v Yevpatorii – A study of Scythian period construction in Chayka hillfort in Yevpatoriya). // KSIA, vol. 124. Yatsenko I. V., Popova Ye. A., 1976 - Яценко И. В., Попова Е. А., Исследование западных кварталов скифского поселения в Евпатории (Issledovaniye zapadnykh kvartalov skifskogo poseleniya v Yevpatorii – A study of the western quarters of a Scythian settlement in Yevpatoriya). // АО of 1975. Yaylenko V. P., 1990 - Яйленко В. П., Династическая история Боспора от Митридата Евпатора до Котиса (Dinasticheskaya istoriya Bospora ot Mitridata Yvpatora do Kotisa – A dynastic history of Bosporos from Mithridates Eupator to Cotys). // in Эпиграфические памятники и языки древней Анатолии, Кипра и античного Северного Причерноморья (Epigraficheskiye pamyatniki i yazyki drevney Anatolii, Kipra i antichnogo Severnogo Prichernomor’ya – Epigraphic monuments and languages of ancient Anatolia, Cyprus, and the classical Northern Black Sea Littoral), Moscow. Yel’nitskiy L. A., 1937 - Ельницкий Л. А., Новый источник по географии Северного Причерномoрья (Novyy istochnik

773

ANCIENT GREEK COLONIES IN THE BLACK SEA 2 po geografii Severnogo Prichernomor’ya - A new source for the Northern Black Sea Littoral geography). // VDI, no. 1. Zahariade M., 1977 - The Structure and Functioning of the Lowel Danube Limes in the 1-st - 3-rd Century A.D. A Few Problems, Limes. Akten 11 Internationalen Limeskongresses, Budapest. Zavadski T., 1975 - La légation de Ti. Plautius Dilvanus Aelianus en Mésie et la politique frumentaire de Néron, La Parola del Passato, vol. 30. Zaytsev Yu. P., 1995 - Зайцев Ю. П., Хронология Неаполя Скифского (Khronologiya Neapolya Skifskogo – A chronology of Scythian Neapolis). // in Древности степного Причерноморья и Крыма (Drevnosti stepnogo Prichernomor’ya i Kryma – Antiquities of the Black Sea Littoral and Crimean steppes), vol. 5, Zaporozhe. Zhuravlyev D. V., 2001 - Журавлев Д. В., Граффити на краснолаковой керамике из могильника Бельбек IV (Graffiti na krasnolakovoy keramike iz mogil’nika Bel’bek IV – Graffiti on red slip ware from Bel’bek IV cemetery). // in Поздние скифы Крыма (Pozdniye skify Kryma – The Late Scythians of the Crimea), Moscow. Zlatkovskaya T. D., 1951 - Златковская Т. Д., Мезия в I и II вв. н. э. (Myeziya v I i II vv. n. e. – Moesia in the 1st and 2nd cc. A.D.), Moscow. Zograf A. N., 1951 - Зограф А. Н., Античные монеты (Antichnyye monety – Ancient coins). // MIA, 16. Zubar’ V. M., 1982 - Зубарь В. М., Некрополь Херсонеса Таврического I - IV вв. н. э. (Nekropol’ Khersonesa Tavricheskogo I – IV vv. n. e. – Necropolis of Tauric Chersonesus in the 1st – 4th cc. A.D.), Kiev. Zubar’ V. M., 1987 - Зубарь В. М., Из истории Херсонеса Таврического на рубеже н. э. (Iz istorii Khersonesa Tavricheskogo na rubezhe n. e. – On the history of Tauric Chersonesus at the turn of our era). // VDI, no. 2. Zubar’ V. M. [Zubar V. M.], 1988 - Зубарь В. М., Про похід Плавтія Сільвана в Крим (Pro pokhid Plavtiya Sil’vana v Krym – On Plautius Silvanus’ campaign to the Crimea). // Arkheologiya, vol. 63. Zubar’ V. M. [Zubar V. M.], 1990 - Зубарь В. М., Нотатки з латинської епіграфіки Херсонеса і Харакса (Notatki z latyns’koyi epigrafiki Khersonesa i Kharaksa – Notes on the Latin epigraphy of Chersonesus and Kharax). // Arkheologiya, no. 2. Zubar’ V. M. [Zubar V. M.], 1991 - Зубарь В. М., Новий латинський напис з Болгарії і деякі питання історії Таврики (Novyy latyns’kyy napys z Bolgariyi i deyaki pytannya istoriyi Tavrika – A new Latin inscription from Bulgaria and certain problems of the history of Taurica). // Arkheologiya, no. 1. Zubar’ V. M., 1993 - Зубарь В. М., Северное Причерноморье и Септимий Север (Severnoye Prichernomor’ye i Septimiy Sever – The Northern Black Sea Littoral and Septimius Severus). // VDI, no. 4. Zubar’ V. M., 1993a - Зубарь В. М., Херсонес Таврический в античную эпоху (экономика и социальные отношения) (Khersones Tavricheskiy v antichnuyu epokhu [ekonomika i sоsial’nyye otnosheniya] – Tauric Chersonesus in antiquity [economy and social relations]), Kiev. Zubar’ V. M. [Zubar V. M.], 1993b - Зубарь В. М., Нові знахідки фрагментів римських шоломів у Тавриці (Novi zhakhidky fragmentiv ryms’kykh sholomiv u Tavrytsi – New finds of Roman helmet fragments in Taurica). // Arkheologiya, no. 1. Zubar’ V. M., 1994 - Зубарь В. М., Херсонес Таврический и Римская империя. Очерки военно-политической истории (Khersones Tavricheskiy i Rimskaya imperiya. Ocherki voyenno-politicheskoy istorii – Tauric Chersonesus

and the Roman empire: essays in military and political history), Kiev. Zubar’ V. M. [Zubar V. M.], 1994a - Зубарь В. М., Ольвія і Рим в першій чверті II ст. (Ol’viya i Rym v pershiy chverti II st. – Olbia and Rome in the first quarter of the 2nd c.). // Arkheologiya, no. 2. Zubar’ V. M., 1994b - Зубарь В. М. Ольвия, сарматы и Рим во второй половине I в. н. э. (Ol’viya, sarmaty i Rim vo vtoroy polovine I v. n. e. – Olbia, Sarmatians, and Rome in the second half of the 1st c. A.D.). // VDI, no. 3. Zubar’ V. M. [Zubar V.], 1995 - Zur römischen Militärorganisation auf der Taurike in der zweiten Hälfte des 2. und am Anfang des 3. Jahrhunderts, Historia, XLIV/2. Zubar’ V. M. [Zubar V. M.], 1997 - Зубарь В. М., Про так званий Таврійський лімес (Pro tak zvanyy Tavriys’kyy limes – On the so-called Tauric limes). // Kyyivs’ka starovyna, no. 1/2. Zubar’ V. M., 1998 - Зубарь В. М., Северный Понт и Римская империя (Severnyy Pont i Rimskaya imperiya – Northern Pontus and the Roman empire), Kiev. Zubar’ V. M. [Zubar V. M.], 1998a - Зубарь В. М., Херсонес Таврійський (Khersones Tavriys’kyy – Tauric Chersonesus). // in Україна крізь віки (Ukrayina kriz’ viky – The Ukraine throughout the centuries), vol. 2. Kryzhyts’kyy S. D., Zubar V. M. [Zubar V. M.], Rusyayeva A. S. - Крижицький С. Д., Зубар В. М., Русяєва А. С. Античні держави Північного Причорномор`я (Antychni derzhavy Pivnichnogo Prychotnomor’ya – Ancient Greek states of the Northern Black Sea Littoral), Kiev. Zubar’ V. M., 1999 - Зубарь В. М., О римской вексилляции Херсонеса в середине – второй половине II в. н. э. (O rimskoy veksillyatsii Khersonesa v seredine – vtoroy polovine II v. n. e. – On the Roman vexillatio of Chersonesus in the middle and second half of the 2nd c. A.D.). // in Старожитності Північного Причорномор’я і Криму (Starozhitnosti Pivnichnogo Prychornomor’ya i Krymu - Antiquities of the Northern Black Sea Littoral and the Crimea), vol. 7, Zaporozhe. Zubar’ V. M. [Zubar V. M.], 1999a - Зубарь В. М., Про так звану Боспорську війну (Pro tak zvanu Bospors’ku viynu – On the so-called Bosporan war). // UIZh, no. 1. Zubar’ V. M., 2000 - Зубарь В. М., Римская крепость Харакс (Rimskaya krepost’ Kharaks – The Roman fortress of Kharax). // Stratum plus, no. 4. Zubar’ V. M., 2000a - Зубарь В. М., О римских войсках в Херсонесе и его округе в середине II - первой трети III вв. (O rimskikh voyskakh v Khersonese i yego okruge v seredine II – pervoy treti III vv. – On the Roman army in Chersonesus and its vicinity in the middle of the 2nd – ca. 230 A.D.). // in Sarnowski T., Savelya O. Ya., 2000. Zubar’ V. M., 2000b - Зубарь В. М., Еще раз о Таврическом лимесе (Yeshchye raz o Tavricheskom limese – Once more on the Tauric limes). // RA, no. 2. Zubar’ V. M., 2002 - Зубарь В. М., Armamentarium римского гарнизона Херсонеса (Armamentarium rimskogo garnizona Khersonesa – Armamentarium of the Roman garrison of Chersonesus). // in Боспор Киммерийский, Понт и варварский мир в период античности и средневековья (Bospor Kimmeriyskiy, Pont i varvarskiy mir v period antichnosti i srednevekov’ya – Cimmerian Bosporos, Pontus, and the barbarian world in the ancient and medieval periods), Kerch. Zubar’ V. M., 2003 - Зубарь В. М., Еще раз о походе Плавтия Сильвана в Таврику (Yeshchye raz o pokhode Plavtiya Sil’vana v Tavriku – Once more on Plautius Silvanus’ expedition to Taurica). // in Исседон: альманах по

774

VITALIY MIKHAYLOVITCH ZUBAR: TAURIC CHERSONESUS AND THE ROMAN EMPIRE древней истории и культуре (Issedon: al’manakh po drevney istorii i kul’ture – Issedon: miscellany of ancient history and culture), vol. 2, Yekaterinburg. Zubar’ V. M., Antonova I. A., 1991 - Зубарь В. М. Антонова И. А., Об интерпретации и датировке клейм с аббревиатурой VEMI из Херсонеса (Ob interpretatsii i datirovke kleym s abbreviaturoy VEMI iz Khersonesa – On the interpretation and chronology of stamps with the abbreviation VEMI from Chersonesus). // VDI, no. 2. Zubar’ V. M., Antonova I. A., 2000 - Зубарь В. М., Антонова И. А., Новые данные о римском гарнизоне Херсонеса в первой половине III в. (Novyye dannyye o rimskom garnizone Khersonese v pervoy polovine III v. – New data on the Roman garrison of Chersonesus in the first half of the 3rd c.). // VDI, no. 1. Zubar’ V. M., Antonova I. A., 2001 - Зубарь В. М., Антонова И. А., Бутероль ножен длинного римского меча из Херсонеса (Buterol’ nozhen dlinnogo rimskogo mecha iz Khersonesa – A scabbard-end for a Roman long sword from Chersonesus). // RA, no. 2. Zubar’ V. M. [Zubar V. M.], Antonova I. A., Savelya O. Ya., 1991 - Зубар В. М., Антонова І. А., Савеля О. Я., Надгробок римського кавалериста з околиці Балаклави (Nadgrobok ryms’kogo kavalerista z okolytsi Balaklavy – A Roman cavalryman’s tombstone from the vicinity of Balaklava). // Arkheologiya, no. 3. Zubar’ V. M., Bunyatyan Ye. P., 1991 - Зубарь В. М., Бунятян Е. П., Новый участок детских погребений позднеантичного некрополя Херсонеса (Novyy uchastok detskikh pogrbeniy pozdneantichnogo nekropolya Khersonesa – A new area of child burials in the Roman necropolis of Chersonesus). // SA, no. 4. Zubar’ V. M., Kostromichyeva T. I., 1990 - Зубарь В. М., Костромичева Т. И., Новый ауреус из окрестностей Херсонеса (Novyy aureus iz okrestnostey Khersonesa – A new aureus from the vicinity of Chersonesus). // KSIA, vol. 197. Zubar’ V. M. [Zubar V. M.], Kozub Y. I., 2002 - A New Tombstone with a Latin Epitaph from Olbia, Ancient Civilizations from Scythia to Siberia, vol. 8, no. 3 - 4. Zubar’ V. M., Krapivina V. V., 1999 - Зубарь В. М., Крапивина В. В., О римском гарнизоне Ольвии в середине III в. н. э. (O rimskom garnizone Ol’vii v seredine III v. n. e. – On the Roman garrison of Olbia in the middle of the 3rd c. A.D.). // Vita Antiqua, no. 2. Zubar’ V. M., Sarnowski T., 1997 - Зубарь В. М., Сарновский Т., Новая строительная надпись с Ай-Тодора и некоторые вопросы римской военной организации в Таврике во второй половине II в. н. э. (Novaya stroitel’naya nadpis’ c Ay-Todora i nekotoryye voprosy rimskoy voyennoy organizatsii v Tavrike vo vtoroy polovine II v. n. e. – A new building inscription from AyTodor and some aspects of Roman military organisation in Taurica in the second half of the 2nd c. A.D.). // VDI, no. 4. Zubar’ V. M. [Zubar V. M.], Sarnowski T., Savelya O. Ya., 1997 - Зубар В. М., Сарновський Т., Савеля О. Я., Нові латинські написи з римського храму в околицях Херсонеса Таврійського (Novi latyns’ky napysy z ryms’kogo khramu v okolytsyakh Khersonesa Tavriys’kogo

– New Latin inscriptions from a Roman temple in the vicinity of Tauric Chersonesus). // Arkheologiya, no. 4. Zubar’ V. M., Sarnowski T., Savelya O. Ya., 1999 - Зубарь В. М., Сарновский Т., Савеля О. Я., Новые эпиграфические памятники из римского храма в окрестностях Херсонеса Таврического (Novyye epigraficheskiye pamyatniki iz rimskogo khrama v okolytsyakh Khersonesa Tavricheskogo – New epigraphic monuments from a Roman temple in the vicinity of Tauric Chersonesus). // VDI, no. 2. Zubar’ V. M. [Zubar V. M.], Savelya O. Ya., 1989 - Зубар В. М., Савеля О. Я., Новий сарматський могильник другої половини I - початку II ст. н. е. в Південно-Західному Криму (Novyy sarmats’kyy mohyl’nyk drugoyi polovyny I – pochatku II st. n. e. – A new Sarmatian cemetery from the second century of the 1st – early 2nd c. A.D. in the southwestern Crimea). // Arkheologiya, no. 2. Zubar’ V. M., Shmal’ko A. V., 1993 - Зубарь В. М., Шмалько А. В., Римско-боспорская война и Херсонес (Rimskobosporskaya voyna i Khersones – The Roman-Bosporan war and Chersonesus). // Древности степного Причерноморья и Крыма (Drevnosti stepnogo Prichernomor’ya i Kryma – Antiquities of the Black Sea Littoral and Crimean steppes), vol. 4, Zaporozhe. Zubar’ V. M., Simonenko A. V., 1984 - Зубарь В. М., Симоненко А. В., О снаряжении боевых коней в первые века нашей эры на территории Северного Причерноморья (O snaryazhenii boyevykh koney v pervyye veka nashey ery na territorii Severnogo Prichernomor’ya – On warhorse equipment in the first centuries A.D. in the Northern Black Sea Littoral). // in Вооружение скифов и сарматов (Vooruzheniye skifov i sarmatov – Armament of the Scythians and the Sarmatians), Kiev. Zubar’ V. M., Son N. A., 1987 - Зубар В. М., Сон Н. О., До питання про політичний статус Тіри в середині I ст. н. е. (Do pytannya pro politychnyy status Tiry v seredyni I st. n. e. – On the problem of the political status of Tyras in the middle of the 1st c. A.D.). // Arkheologiya, vol. 59. Zubar’ V. M. [Zubar V. M.], Son N. A. [Son N. O.], 1997 Зубар В. М., Сон Н. О., З приводу інтерпретації нового латинського напису з Херсонеса (Z pryvodu interpretatsiyi novogo latyns’kogo napysu z Khersonesa – On the interpretation of a new Latin inscription from Chersonesus). // Аrkheologiya, no. 1. Zubar’ V. M., Son N. A., 2000 - Зубарь В. М., Сон Н. А., Надгробие солдата I Сугамбрской когорты из Херсонеса (Nadgrobiye soldata I Sugambrskoy kogorty iz Khersonesa – Tombstone of a soldier of I Sugambrorum cohort from Chersonesus). // VDI, no. 3. Zubarev V. G., 1999 - Зубарев В. Г., Римские дороги в междуречье Истра (Дуная) и Тираса (Днестра) по данным Клавдия Птолемея (Rimskiye dorogi v mezhdurech’ye Istra [Dunaya] i Tirasa [Dnestra] po dannym Klavdiya Ptolemeya – Roman roads between the Istros [Danube] and Tyras [Dniester] rivers in light of Claudius Ptolemy’s data). // VDI, no. 3. Zuckerman K. [Tsukerman K.], 1994-1995 - Цукерман К., Епископы и гарнизон Херсона в IV веке (Yepiskopy i garnizon Khersona v IV veke – Bishops and garrison of Cherson in the 4th century). // MAIET, 4.

775

ANCIENT GREEK COLONIES IN THE BLACK SEA 2

Figure 1.1. Black Sea Littoral in the first centuries A.D.

Figure 1.2. Western and southern Taurica in the first centuries A.D.: 1 – Chayka hillfort; 2 - embankment of Saki lake; 3 – Ust’-Al-ma hillfort; 4 – Symbolon Limen (present-day Balaklava); 5 – cape of Ram’s Forehead (Sarych); 6 – Ay-Todor cape (Kharax); 7 – Al’ma-Kermen.

776

VITALIY MIKHAYLOVITCH ZUBAR: TAURIC CHERSONESUS AND THE ROMAN EMPIRE

Figure 2. Epigraphic monuments from Chersonesus and itinerary of a Parthian bowman from Dura Europus: 1 - Inscription in honour of a citizen of Chersonesus who participated in embassy to the governor of the province of Moesia; 2 – early third century A.D. itinerary on the shield of a Parthian bowman from Dura Europus; 3 – base of statue erected on behalf of the People to Chersonesus’ Arriston, son of Attinas.

777

ANCIENT GREEK COLONIES IN THE BLACK SEA 2

Figure 3. Epigraphic monuments from Kharax, Chersonesus, and territory of present-day Balaklava: 1 – altar with dedication to Jupiter by Geminius Fortis, beneficiary of Ummidius Quadratus, from Kharax; 2 – tombstone of Marcus Antonius Valens, soldier of II Lucensium cohort, from Chersonesus; 3 – base of a statue of Hercules from 1996 excavations on the territory of present-day Balaklava; 4 – inscription mentioning Jupiter Dolichenus’ temple from 1996 excavations on the territory of present-day Balaklava; 5 – tombstone of the soldier Volusius of I Italica legion, from Chersonesus.

778

VITALIY MIKHAYLOVITCH ZUBAR: TAURIC CHERSONESUS AND THE ROMAN EMPIRE

Figure 4. Ground plan of Chersonesus and its Roman citadel: 1 – ground plan of the abandoned city of Chersonesus with location of the citadel (I); 2 – scheme of the citadel of Chersonesus: 1 – barracks buildings; 2 – building at tower XVI; 3 – building at crossing of the main longitudinal and main transverse streets; 4 – sixth century A.D. thermae; 5 – second and third centuries A.D. thermae; 6 – remains of pottery kiln; 7 – southern square. 779

ANCIENT GREEK COLONIES IN THE BLACK SEA 2

Figure 5. Excavations of the building at tower XVI (1) and ground plan of thermae on the territory of Chersonesus citadel (2).

780

VITALIY MIKHAYLOVITCH ZUBAR: TAURIC CHERSONESUS AND THE ROMAN EMPIRE

Figure 6. Epigraphic monuments from Chersonesus: 1 – dedication of Titus Aurelius Secundus, trierarch of classis Flaviae Moesiae, to the health of Commodus and Flavius Sergianus Sosibius, tribune of I Italica legion; 2 – correspondence between the civil community of Chersonesus and legate of Moesia regarding prostitution tax; 3 – 250 A.D. inscription about the reconstruction of schola principalium by Marcus Ratinus Saturninus, centurion of I Italica legion. 781

ANCIENT GREEK COLONIES IN THE BLACK SEA 2

Figure 7. Tombstones of Roman soldiers from Chersonesus: 1 – tombstone erected by Valens, soldier of V Macedonica legion, to his brother; 2 – tombstone of Aurelius Victor, soldier of I Italica legion; 3 – tombstone of Aurelius Salvianus, trumpeter of XI Claudia legion.

Figure 8. Roof tiles with Latin stamps from Chersonesus and its environs: 1-5 – with abbreviation of V Macedonica legion; 6-8 – with abbreviation VEMI; 9-14 – with abbreviated names of persons responsible for making tiles; 15-17 – with abbreviation of XI Claudia legion. 782

VITALIY MIKHAYLOVITCH ZUBAR: TAURIC CHERSONESUS AND THE ROMAN EMPIRE

Figure 9. Tombstones of soldiers of auxiliary troops of the Roman army from Chersonesus: 1 – tombstone of Aurelius Valens and Aelius Iulius, soldiers of I Cilicum cohort; 2 – tombstone of Marcus Maecilius, soldier of I Bracarum cohort; 3 – tombstone of G. Iulius Valens, soldier of I Sugambrorum cohort; 4 – altar to the goddess Nemesis Conservatrix by Titus Flavius Celsinus, beneficiary of the consularis of XI Claudia legion.

783

ANCIENT GREEK COLONIES IN THE BLACK SEA 2

Figure 10. Inscriptions of sailors of the Roman navy from Chersonesus: 1 – tombstone erected by sailor Auluzenus; 2 – tombstone of Aelius Maximus, naval sailor; 3 – dedication to Jupiter Optimo Maximo erected by Terentius with naval centurions and trierarches; 4 – altar installed by G. Valerius Valens, sailor of classis Flaviae Moesicae, of liburna ‘Arrow’.

784

VITALIY MIKHAYLOVITCH ZUBAR: TAURIC CHERSONESUS AND THE ROMAN EMPIRE

Figure 11. Roman army’s locations and roads in Taurica: 1 – Ust’-Al’ma hillfort; 2 – Al’ma-Kermen hillfort; 3 – northern side of present-day city of Sevastopol; 4 – Heraclean peninsula; 5 – Symbolon Limen (Balaklava); 6 – Kazatskaya hill; a – cities; b – hillforts; c – Roman army locations; d – possible Roman army locations; e - roads.

Figure 12. Monuments related to the Roman stronghold in the territory of the present-day city of Balaklava: 1-2 – 1996 excavations of the cult complex; 3 – tombstone of Iulius Valens, cavalryman of ala I Atectorigiana; 4 – altar erected to the god Vulcan by Antonius Proclus, centurion of XI Claudia legion.

785

ANCIENT GREEK COLONIES IN THE BLACK SEA 2

Figure 13. Ground plans of the Roman fortress of Kharax at Ay-Todor cape, based on V. I. Novichenkov and N. G. Novichenkova (1), and of thermae in this territory, based on V. D. Blavatskiy (2)

786

VITALIY MIKHAYLOVITCH ZUBAR: TAURIC CHERSONESUS AND THE ROMAN EMPIRE

Figure 14. Monuments of the Roman fortress of Kharax at cape Ay-Todor: 1 – lowermost fortification wall of the fortress, reconstructed by K. K. Orlov; 2 – altar with dedication to Jupiter Optimo Maximo by Titus Flavius Celsinus, beneficiary of the consularis of XI Claudia legion, based on M. I. Rostovtsev; 3 – altar with dedication to Jupiter Optimo Maximo, gods and goddesses, by Domitius Aemilianus, beneficiary of the consularis, for the health of himself and his (relatives), based on M. I. Rostovtsev; 4 – stamp of Ravenna squadron, based on V. D. Blavatskiy; 5 – abbreviation of XI Claudia legion, based on K. K. Orlov; 6 – stamp of I Italica legion, based on M. I. Rostovtsev.

787

ANCIENT GREEK COLONIES IN THE BLACK SEA 2

Figure 15. Monuments of the Roman fortress of Kharax at cape Ay-Todor: 1 – fragment of stonework of the lowermost fortification wall: present-day state; 2 – dedicatory relief of a circle of Thracian culture; 3 – 166/167 A.D. inscription about building; 4 – tombstone of L. Furio Seutho.

788

The Scythian Neapolis and Greek Culture of the Northern Black Sea Region in the 2nd Century BC Yuriy Pavlovitch Zaytsev*

1. Introduction1

fortifications. He dug various crypts and a kurgan mound on the eastern necropolis (Dubois de Montpereux 1843, 199, vol. VI, tab. XXXI). In 1833, the settlement was researched by P.I. Koppen (Koppen 1837, 334), and in 1836 by N.I. Mazurkevich, who published a brief description of the site, agreeing with the conclusions of Blaramberg (Murzakevich 1837, 334).

The ruins of the ancient fortifications of Kermenchik were found in the 19th century, south of the Tatar settlement of Ak-Mechet’ (now in Simferopol). At the beginning of the 20th century these ancient remains were actively used as a source of building stone. In 1827, the collector of antiquities A.I. Sultan-Krym-Girey Kata Girey met a peasant carrying some stone from Kermenchik. Inside his vehicle Kata Girey noticed a slab of limestone ornamented with relief representing a horseman and three pedestals (one limestone and two marble) with Greek inscriptions. He purchased these finds and informed I.P. Blaramberg – the director of the Odessa museum of antiquities – of these interesting items.

The Russian archaeologist Count A.S. Uvarov also carried out considerable fieldwork at the settlement in 1853 (Tunkina 2002, 544–545, fig. 146). At the same spot where the reliefs and inscriptions were found, Count Uvarov uncovered a pedestal with a dedication to Achilles on behalf of Posideos (Fig. 60, 4), as well as fragments of inscriptions referring to Khodarz and Achilles (Fig. 60, 5) (Uvarov 1856, 526). As well as his excavation records, Uvarov reported to the Imperial Archaeological Commission a detailed description of the settlement. Summing up, he noted that the city of Neapolis had originally been a Greek settlement founded by the Rhodians, but subsequently the settlement had become a fortified residence of the Scythian kings, in whose possession it remained until the 3rd c. AD.

Once Blaramberg arrived in Simferopol, he carried out a small excavation at the place where the slabs were found. He found there some fragments of limestone and marble reliefs, several gold plaques, and a fragment of tile with a stamp (Tunkina 2002, 538–541). The finds were brought to Odessa and in 1827 were published in the Journal de Odessa (Nos. 47, 69, and 73). In this article, the author claimed that he had discovered the city of Neapolis, built by Skiluros, the Scythian king. The limestone and ‘marble’ reliefs were described as representations of Skiluros and his son Palakus. In 1831, Blaramberg’s work was published in Odessa as a monograph, with figures of the reliefs, inscriptions, a plan of the settlement of Kermenchik, and representations of Olbian coins with portraits of Skiluros, which were included for analogies (Blaramberg 1831, 10–16). Around the same time as these finds, a hoard was casually discovered in the southwestern section of the Kermentchik settlement. The hoard consisted of 165 coins dating from Alexander the Great to the time of the Roman emperor Makrinus (Tunkina 2002, 543–544).

In 1872, a student of local lore and citizen of Simferopol, G.Ch. Karaulov, noticed in the necropolis (located in the west Neapolis) several crypts cut into the rock and these he examined to a small extent. Some years later, G.D. Filimonov continued researching the western necropolis (Filimonov 1880, 17), and his work was continued later by N.P. Kondakov (Tolstoy, Kondakov 1889, 116). At the beginning of the 1880s the western necropolis was excavated by Ch.P. Yaschurzhinsky, F.F. Lashkov and A.O. Kashpar – teachers at the Simferopol Gymnasia (Yaschurzhinsky 1889, 46–55). In 1887, the Tauric Scientific Archival Commission was set up in Simferopol, and they took over supervision of the investigations of the western necropolis (Lashkov 1890, 20; ITUAK No. 6, 113; No. 7, 52).

In 1834, the Swiss traveller Friederike Dubois de Montpereux continued research at Kermenchik. He carefully examined the settlement and its vicinity and made a new plan of the site, with drawings of the

In 1889, the Imperial Archaeological Commission appointed N.I. Veselovsky to direct the excavations of the settlement and the western necropolis (Fig. 8) (Veselovsky 1894, 27). Veselovsky was to write that his work ‘did not result in important discoveries or produce any interesting finds’ (Veselovsky 1889, 20–27). However, the famous Russian archaeologist and historian Prof. M.I. Rostovtzeff considered that the settlement at Kermenchik was a major ancient Crimean fortress – ‘the old Greek-Scythian city of Skiluros’ (Rostovtzeff 1925, 145).

* Yuriy Pavlovitch Zaytsev was born in 1967. He was taking part in the excavations of Neapolis Scythian since 1979, professionally since 1983. Dissertation ‘Neapolis Scythian from the 3 c. BC to the 3 c. AD’ was defended in 1996 at the Institute of archaeology, Ukrainian Academy of Science, Kiev. Job: Director of the Department of Scythian-Sarmatian Arhaeology at the Institute of Archaeology, Ukrainian Academy of Science (Crimean Branch), Simferopol. An author of ca. 70 works, among which is ‘Neapolis Scythian from the 3 c. BC to the 3 c. AD’, Oxford, 2003. E-mail: [email protected] 1 Zaytsev, 2004, p. 1-3.

789

ANCIENT GREEK COLONIES IN THE BLACK SEA 2 monograph (1979). The latest stage in the archaeological investigations of the Scythian Neapolis began in 1978 and is still ongoing.

In 1926, in Soviet times, the excavations were continued, along with the construction of a water tank, at a location near the eastern façade of the southern defensive wall. The talented Crimean archaeologist N.L. Ernst supervised the excavation. During these fieldworks, vital new information on the stratigraphy and chronology of the Kermenchik settlement were recorded (Ernst 1927, 24). In 1927, several crypts of the western necropolis were investigated by the same scientist.

The results of field investigations in the 1980-90s were published subsequently. In several articles S.G. Koltukhov developed the site’s chronology and divided its defensive system into periods (Koltukhov 1990; 1999). The Neapolis settlement is traditionally appraised from the level of fortification and military-administrative organization.

In 1945, soon after the end of the Second World War, the so-called Tauro-Scythian expedition began working at the settlement of Neapolis, under the direction of P.N. Schultz. Overall supervision of the Simferopol archaeologists at Neapolis was conducted by A.N. Karasev.

A.E. Puzdrovsky generalized the information received from the necropolis and offered his version of the ethnicpolitical history of the Crimean Scythia in the 2nd– 3rd centuries AD (Puzdrovsky 1987; 1989; 1992; 1993; 1993a). Under his direction the Bitak necropolis, situated to the north-east of Neapolis, was investigated (Puzdrovsky 2001; 2002).

The results of these investigations were published in various editions soon after the fieldwork (Schultz 1947; 1947a; 1949; Karasev 1951; 1953; Pogrebova 1947). Particularly noteworthy was the article ‘Investigations of Scythian Neapolis in 1945–50’ written by P. Schultz in 1957. Materials from the Mausoleum were assembled in a separate monograph (Schultz 1953). The volumes devoted to different finds were published later: pottery (Dashevskaya 1968), amphorae (Zeest 1954), and gold eye- and mouth-pieces (Pogrebova 1957). Between 1945 and 1964 various other works appeared on the settlement of Scythian Neapolis and its eastern necropolis.

Yu.P. Zaytsev has devoted several volumes to the investigation of various aspects of the Scythian Neapolis (Zaytsev 1990; 1990a; 1991; 1994; 1994a; 1995; 1995a; 1996; 1997; 1999; 2000; 2000a; 2001; 2002; 2002a; Zaytsev, Puzdrovsky 1994). The main attention in these works is paid to the problems of chronology, typology of architectural structures and reconstruction of the settlement, and the publication of several important complexes and objects. As a result of these works a new cultural-historical division into periods was suggested for the Scythian Neapolis.

O.D. Dashevskaya (1960) and E.I. Solomonik published the epigraphical monuments unearthed during these excavations (1962). O.D. Dashevskaya, in a separate work, discussed the graffiti from the same megaron (1962). I.V. Yatsenko analysed frescos from the megaron A (1960). She also published the silver plate bearing the name of the Bosporean queen Hepepyria (1962). O.A. Makhneva (1967; 1967a) and D.S. Raevsky (1970) published some complexes and several examples of imported ceramics. P.N. Schultz has given the analysis of reliefs and bronze statuettes (1946; 1969). The fundamental work of N.N. Pogrebova (1961) was devoted to the publication of the Mausoleum burials and analyses of the burial rites. L.P. Kharko published the numismatic finds of the Scythian Neapolis (1961) and an essay about the manufacture of some gold ornaments from the Mausoleum (1961).

2. The problem of localization of the Scythian Neapolis2 A place by the name ‘Neapolis Scythian’ is given twice in ancient sources. In the Geography of Strabo the Scythian Neapolis is mentioned among fortifications made by King Skiluros [Strabo. VII, 4, 7] (Solomonik 1977, 54). In the Chersonesian Decree in honour of Diophantos, the geographical position of the Scythian Neapolis was ‘situated in the centre of Scythia’ [IOSPE, I2, No. 412. Line 12]. The Scythian fortresses of Khabei and Neapolis were also mentioned in the description of the campaign of Diophantos – a well-known commander of Mithridates VI Eupator (Solomonik 1952, 114; Vinogradov 1987, 70).

Two general works by P.N. Schults (1953; 1957) and the article by E.I. Solomonik (1952) contained historical and theoretical conclusions. The results of the investigations into Late Scythian antiquities were summarized in the work Late Scythian culture and its variants on the Dnieper and in the Crimea written by P.N. Schults (1971).

Attempts to locate the Scythian Neapolis began with the first finds at the settlement of Kermenchik in 1827. I.P. Blaramberg recognized the settlement as the royal Scythian fortress of Neapolis after the Greek dedicative inscriptions, reliefs, and the pedestal with the name of Skiluros were found (Blaramberg 1889). A.S. Uvarov agreed with I.P. Blaramberg after some new and important finds, and on the basis of his own observations (Uvarov 1854).

An important place in the history of the study of the Scythian Neapolis is occupied by the works of T.N. Vysotskaya (1975; 1976; 1978), which were subsequently included, to a very large extent, in her

2

790

Zaytsev, 2004, p.4-5.

YURIY PAVLOVITCH ZAYTSEV: THE SCYTHIAN NEAPOLIS AND GREEK CULTURE OF THE NORTHERN BLACK SEA REGION

In 1856 P. Becker raised an objection against the hypothesis of Blaramberg and Uvarov. He suggested a site for the Scythian Neapolis near the village of Inkerman (Becker 1856, 41–46); F.K. Braun took his side in 1879 (Braun 1879, 70).

(Koltukhov 1994). The author most convincingly makes a new attempt to identify Kermenchik with the ancient Scythian Neapolis. Thus the great majority of researchers firmly hold the view that the Scythian Neapolis is associated with the settlement at Kermenchik.

In 1881, after the Chersonesia Decree in honour of Diophantos was found, it became clear that Neapolis and Khabei were situated in the heart of the Crimean peninsula (Yurgevich 1881, 23). However, P.O. Burachkov, commenting on the first edition of the Decree spoke against such an opinion (Burachkov 1881, 228). A little later the identification of Kermenchik as Neapolis was supported by V.V. Latyshev, and then by the wellknown Crimean scientists Ch. Yaschurzhinsky (1889, 46) and A.I. Markevich (1928, 14). N.L. Ernst, the director of excavations at the settlement of Kermenchik wrote in 1926, ‘We call the settlement at Simferopol ‘the Neapolis’ only conditionally and presumably’ (Ernst 1927, 24).

A Greek name for a metropolitan barbarian fortress is not easy to explain. It possibly reflects a number of indications of Greek influence on the higher-status inhabitants of the Neapolis and the Greeks might have come to view Neapolis as their ‘own’ settlement (Puzdrovsky 1988; Zaytsev, Puzdrovsky 1994, 233). Yu.G. Vinogradov takes an associated position. From his point of view the absence of any indication of citizenship (demotikon) in the dedications made by Posideos, son of Posideos, suggests that the Scythian Neapolis had the status of poleis, enjoying full rights – citizenship as well (Vinogradov 1989, 243). A different version is also possible: Skiluros gave the Greek name to the royal fortress as his attempt at a diplomatic rapprochement with certain Greek states in the northern Black Sea region.

The results of the Tauro-Scythian expedition allowed P.N. Schultz to suggest that the main Scythian fortress was located in the territory of modern Simferopol. He considered it as the Scythian Neapolis. His opinion raised the criticism of O.D. Dashevskaya, who published a special article entitled ‘On the question of localization of three Scythian fortresses mentioned by Strabo’ (1958). The author concluded that the main fortress of the Crimean Scythia is not obviously identified in the written sources and therefore its exact name has to remain obscure (Dashevskaya 1958, 148–149). She offered a different interpretation of the settlement at Kermenchik and preferred it as being associated with Palakium. D.S. Raevsky has developed this point of view (1977, 106). In his opinion Kermenchik was a dwelling of the Scythian military aristocracy, and the name Palakium derived from the Iranian word ‘pala’ (warriors).

Thus, summarizing all these arguments, the available sources and archaeological evidence make it possible to adopt the prevailing traditional point of view concerning the identity of the settlement of Kermenchik and the royal Scythian fortress of Neapolis. All the historical reconstructions, theories, and opinions regarding Neapolis unequivocally testify that it was the most powerful royal fortress as well as the military-political centre of Skiluros’ kingdom. 3. Topography and archaeological map of the Scythian Neapolis3 The ancient settlement is located on one of the massifs of the third ridge of the Crimean mountains. On one side it is surrounded by a steep slope down to the river Salgir, and on the other by a deep gully of the Petrovskaya.

T.N. Vysotskaya generally supported the position of P.N. Schultz. She also sided with the hypothesis of B.N. Grakov in the switching of the Scythian capital from the settlement at Kamenskoe, in the Lower Dnieper region, to the Crimea, in the 4th c. BC (Grakov 1971, 31; Vysotskaya 1979, 190). Thereafter the new capital was named Neapolis, i.e. the ‘new city’. This opinion well fitted the previously believed date for the foundation of Kermenchik in the 4th c. BC and the general historical situation in the northern Black Sea region. However, this proof should be viewed as inconsistent: modern investigations convincingly prove the much later appearance of Neapolis (Golentsov, Golenko 1979, 78; Koltukhov, Makhneva 1988, 140; Zaytsev, Puzdrovsky 1994, 232; Zytsev 1995; 1997; 1999; 2001).

The settlement occupies about 16.5–16.0 ha of the plateau, in the shape of an isosceles triangle. To the south, the settlement is marked by the vallum over the remains of the defensive wall (Fig.1, 3). The northeastern and north-western borders of the settlement are framed by the Petrovskie rocks and the steep slopes of the Petrovskaya gully. A topographical study of the settlement allows one to distinguish three sections of the external defensive line. The southern part is the most massive. A wall is situated here that separated the plateau from a steep cape (Koltukhov 1990, 176; 1999, 29). The walls of the western and north-western flanks of the settlement are not recognized in the relief so their exact location has not yet been established. It is probable that the north-western part of the fortifications is hidden under

The modern localization of fortresses mentioned in the description of Diophantos’ campaign at the end of the 2nd c. BC is undertaken by S.G. Koltukhov in his work Notes on the military-political history of Crimean Scythia

3

791

Zaytsev, 2004, p. 6-7

ANCIENT GREEK COLONIES IN THE BLACK SEA 2 at least, to trial trenches of various sizes, and enough to give an idea of the nature and sequence of the cultural layers.

one of the three terraces (Uvarov 1856, 524–525; Koltukhov 1990, 177–178; 1997, 30). The eastern defensive boundary is located in the precipices of the Petrovskie rocks. It extends to around 700–750 m.

Two features are characteristic of the cultural layers at the Scythian Neapolis:

Along the defensive wall, 200 m south, is the settlement’s southern district, with an area of approximately 9 ha. Within the limits of the fortress and the suburban territory lies the bulk of the cultural layer from the 2nd c. BC to the 3rd c. AD. The surface of these cultural deposits has been disturbed in modern times – trenches, craters, etc. Three large ash hills (and a number of smaller ones) are situated there. Originally there were other large ash hills as well, but they have not been preserved, as they were included in a zone of modern building.

1. The absence of continuous building over all periods of the existence of the fortress is displayed by the irregular distribution of cultural layers. Their expressive structure is shown only in the ash hills and within the limits of the building complexes. In other places the ceramic materials, dating from the 2nd c. BC to the 3rd c. AD, were found consistently within the homogeneous layer of the ash/humus. The average thickness of the cultural layers of the Scythian Neapolis is 0.8–1.5 m. In some areas it decreases to 0.1–0.3 m, and in the ash hills it can reach 5–6 m.

The ancient hydraulic engineering structures were situated beyond the settlement, in the Petrovskaya gullies and further east. These were a series of stepped reservoirs with dams, which remained as recently as the 1960s (Babkov 1956, 10). The ancient road from the Neapolis to the valley of the River Salgir ran over the dam of the lower reservoir of the eastern gully.

2. All the building remains have survived in poor condition. As late as in the 19th and 20th centuries stones were being removed by locals for reuse, but the gradual removal of the earliest material had already begun by the inhabitants of the Scythian Neapolis at the end of the 2nd/3rd centuries AD.

The necropolis of the Scythian Neapolis was situated near the ancient reservoirs. The Western necropolis (c. 3 ha) occupied both slopes of the Petrovskaya gully. The rocky ledges were adapted for cut crypts. Clay soil, which is to be found opposite the southern defensive wall, was used for earthen burials. The eastern necropolis (5–6 ha) was organized similarly (Symanovich 1983, 10, 14) (Zaytsev, 2004, fig. 2; 11).

Primarily, the considerable ceramic material in evidence was used for dating the layers. Sherds of amphorae and imported red-slip and black-glazed ceramics, domestic pottery and rare coins can be analysed first. For the Hellenistic period, the stamps of amphora handles (about 600) are extremely important (Zaytsev, 2004, 9– 12). Over 450 of these are Rhodian, about 30 come from Chersonesos, 55 from Knidos, 18 from Sinopa, 15 are of Koan production, with 14 attributable to other centres. More than 40 stamps from Sinopean tiles form a separate group that only occurs within sections A and B.

One more necropolis synchronous to the settlement was discovered and investigated in 1978 and between 1989 and 1991 (Koltukhov, Puzdrovsky 1983; Puzdrovsky and others 1991, 103–104, fig. 26; Puzdrovsky 2001; 2002). It is located along the right bank of River Salgir, 700 m north-east of the precipice of the settlement (Zaytsev, 2004, fig. 12). From the preliminary data it seems to extend over an area of 05–1 ha (Puzdrovsky 2001).

For a chronological reconstruction, I have mainly used Rhodian stamps (especially the eponyms), the dates of which have been fully explored in the academic literature (Grace 1952; Shelov 1975; Badal’yants 1976; 198; Finkielsztein 2000; 2001).

Another settlement, dated from the end of the 4th to the first quarter of the 3rd c. BC, was found in the northern part of the plateau of the Scythian Neapolis, below the layer of the Late Scythian period (Zaytsev, 2004, fig. 2, 12). This settlement has a shallow cultural layer and although its area seems to extend over 4 or 5 h, its overall size has not yet been ascertained.

Particularly indicative is the situation with the Chersonesian stamps of groups 3b and 3v (after Katz 1994), which were found during the excavation of Neapolis. V.I. Katz dated them between 215–185 BC (Katz 1994, 77). However, this work was made only on the basis of a general revision and reconstruction of the events in the political history of the Chersonesos around 180–170 BC. In particular, the destruction of the nearest chora of the Chersonesos (and discontinuance of the amphora stamping) was taken as being simultaneous with the treaty of 179 BC, made by Pharnak I – the king of Pontos (Katz 1994, 72). However, several recent researchers have suggested re-dating this event to c. 155/154 BC (Hojte 2003; Stolba 2003). Such changes in the dating are interesting in the light of joint finds of the above-mentioned Chersonesian stamps and the Rhodian

4. Stratigraphy and chronology of the cultural layers at the Scythian Neapolis in the Hellenistic period4 The excavated area within the limits of the defensive walls extends to a total of approximately 2.6 ha, and a further 1.2 ha covering the southern suburb (Zaytsev, 2004, Fig. 2, 2; 10). The settlement has not been fully investigated, however every hectare has been subjected, 4

Zaytsev, 2004, p. 8-15.

792

YURIY PAVLOVITCH ZAYTSEV: THE SCYTHIAN NEAPOLIS AND GREEK CULTURE OF THE NORTHERN BLACK SEA REGION

In 1994, I offered a detailed chronology of the Southern Palace. It was based on a very detailed examination of the stratigraphy, and dated from 140 to 110 BC. This chronology of the Southern Palace is coordinated with the Rhodian amphora stamps as determined by Gerald Finkielsztejn (Finkielsztein 2001, 192, tab. 19). There are two of the nine eponyms from his group IVa (Τιμούρροδος, c. 158/157 BC, and Γόργων, c. 154/153 BC), three of the eignt eponyms from group IVb (Παυσανίας III, c. 152 BC, Πυθόδωρος, c. 150 BC, and Αύτοκράτης I, c. 146 BC), 11 of the 12 names from group Va, 11 of the 12 eponyms from group Vb, and 10 of the 11 names from group Vc, the latest of which are the named Δάμων (c. 110 BC) and ’Αρατοφάνης II (c. 109 BC).

stamps bearing the eponyms ‘Ηραγόρας (c. 156 BC) and Γόργων (c. 154/153 BC) (Katz 1994, 74; Finkielsztein 2001, 192, Tab.19). In the cultural layers of the Scythian Neapolis these have also been found with Rhodian stamps of 160–120 BC. It is also important to note a further characteristic feature of the Neapolis – joint finds of Sinopean tile stamps of the 4th c BC and Rhodian amphora stamps of dating between 160-110 BC. This combination is repeatedly found in the earliest unbroken layers and in the closed complexes of sections A and B, where numerous imported ceramics of the 2nd c. BC were also found (Rotroff 1997, Kovalenko 2002, tab. 5). This is probably the result of the secondary use of these tiles as building materials (Golentsov and Golenko 1979).

Particularly indicative is the micro-stratigraphy revealed from the floors investigated inside the main megaron (Fig. 4). 23 different floor layers, re-covered with a layer of total destruction, were found (D1). These wattle and daub layers are identical in structure and divided by thin lenses of dirt. A new layer of wall-plaster and of the central hearth also supplemented each new floor surface. Thus the megaron was constantly renewed. Such a situation has ethnographic parallels: in many cultures annual repairs of cult constructions and dwellings, besides being of practical importance, also have a deep sacral significance.

The archaeological history of the Scythian Neapolis covers a period from the 2nd c. BC to the 3rd c. AD and can be divided into five periods. The main interest centres around the initial historical period – the 2nd century BC. The situation investigated at the largest and most informative section (A-B-V) is central to understanding the chronology (Zaytsev, 2004, fig. 14, 15) (Fig. 4). In this section the most important complex of the fortress was excavated – the Southern Palace, and the mausoleums of Kings Argotus and Skiluros (Zaytsev 1997; 1999; 2001; 2004, fig. 34–73; 2004a; Vinogradov, Zaytsev 2003) (Fig. 2, 1, 2).

The layer D1 can be interpreted as a layer connected with Diophantos’ wars, as described in the written sources. This layer could be dated to the events occurring in 112 or 108 BC. Two coins of this time belong to the D1 layer – one of Amis (a head of Ares/sword with ammunition) (Imhoof-Blumer 1912, 169–184), and another of Panticapaeum (a head of Athena in a helmet/prow of a ship) (Anokhin 1986, 69–70).

As well as the architectural remains, the well-divided layer of the Late Hellenistic period is especially important. Section A-B-V revealed more than 400 stratified amphora stamps, eight coins, brooches, gold ornaments, beads, and various imported ceramics. During excavations of the Mausoleum of Skiluros in 1946, much Hellenistic pottery, weaponry, gold ornaments, beads and other objects were also uncovered. This range of material is comparable to similar finds taken from the cultural layer of the South Palace.

Below the first (lowest) floor of the megaron (N), a stamp of the Rhodian eponym ’Αριστόγειτος (c. 140 BC) was found. It belongs to the lower layers of the protomegaron. In the stratum of Fire 1 (the layer of the first floor of megaron N), several Rhodian stamps were also found. The latest (with the eponym Τιμόθεος) is dated to c. 128 BC.

Recent examination of all this material has led to a uniform chronology (Fig. 4), the basic horizons of which are shown in a retrospective sequence, using the Latin alphabet.

It can be suggested, therefore, that there is an accordance between the number of floors (23) and number of years in the chronological period between 140 and 112/108 BC. Fire 1 would have happened around 135/131 BC, and Fire 2 in 127/123 BC. The destruction of the megaron happened in c. 112/108 BC. This sequence of floors inside the megaron, in concentrated form, is repeated in other buildings within the Southern Palace.

Major changes in the architecture of the palace were taken as criteria for each horizon market. In almost every case they are accompanied by changes of layer structures. In turn, each horizon is divided into more detailed subhorizons; these have been given Arab numerals, e.g. D3. These represent particular events (the reorganization and erection of separate structures, fires, etc.), which, essentially, did not change the function, or type, of the relevant architectural complex. The archaeological material was divided in accordance with the stratigraphical data.

Palace. Horizon Е is the earliest. It is divided into two sub-horizons – Е2 and Е1.

793

ANCIENT GREEK COLONIES IN THE BLACK SEA 2 Two of these correspond with stamps of a fabricant by the name of Δαμοκλής, and the third with a stamp of Κομος. The fourth pair – with the eponym Παυσανίας (c. 152 BC) and fabricant Τιμώ – are from the largest amphora, the handle of which was drawn with graffito. One handle is stamped with a brand of the fabricant Μίδας.

Sub-horizon E2 consists of thin layers of loamy soil, clay floors, and other surfaces. It was discovered in several houses and ground buildings (Fig. 3, 1). Remains of the earlier ground construction (a proto-megaron) are noted below the megaron. They are connected with the first nine layers of a clay floor (Fig. 4). Judging by the stratigraphy, this proto-megaron was completely rebuilt as a new megaron.

In most cases, horizon E is not found at other sites within the fortress. In some places it was obviously not deposited at all, and in some others it cannot be distinguished because of the paucity of the material.

Sub-horizon E2 is dated by the following finds: several handles of Rhodian amphorae (with the eponyms Παυσανίας III (c. 152 BC), ’Αριστόγειτος (c. 140), and Θέρανδρος (c. 137/136 BC)), fragments of painted, black-glazed Attic amphora with twisted handles, and mould-made bowls.

Various other features were investigated – ground buildings, semi-earthen houses, household pits, and layers E2/E1 (Fire 1) associated with them. Apart from the plentiful ceramic material recovered from these structures, Rhodian stamps of the eponym ’Αρίστακος (c. 135 BC) and the fabricant Λινος, and a bronze, crescentshaped pendant were also found. At the same locations (and under the mound of the latest ash hill No. 3), building remains and a layer of soil were also investigated: these were obviously earlier than horizon E1/E2 and were conditionally classified as sub-horizon E3.

Sub-horizon E1. This layer shows obvious traces of a major fire: scorched clay and wall plaster, plentiful charcoal, and tempered fragments of ceramics. Local layers demonstrate this sub-horizon, and thin lenses were found in situ inside and near the buildings of this complex. Megaron N was the only palace building to have been carefully cleared out from the fire layer. (Most of this ash residue was dumped 150 metres to the south, where it was found during the 1979–1988 excavations.

A small number of well-dated finds accompanying the objects from sub-horizon E3 allows one to assign a date of the second quarter/middle of the 2nd c. BC. Only below ash hill 3, below the layer of Fire E1, is the rather significant ash layer of sub-horizons E2/E3 revealed, containing quantities of stamped handles of Rhodian amphorae, including those with the names of eponyms of Finkielsztein’s groups IVa, IVb, Va, Vb, and dated c. 160–132 BC. The fabricants named are Βρόμιος, Βούλαρχος, ‘Іέρων, Δαμοκράτης, Δρακοντίδας, Εύφράνωρ, Μίδας, Μόσχος, Τιμω, ‘Ιπποκράτης, Πυθόδωρος, and ‘Ιεροκλεος.

The dating material from sub-horizon E1 (Fire 1) is extraordinarily rich and various. There were more than 100 Rhodian amphora stamps (from Finkielsztein groups IVb, Va and Vb), various glass beads, a Middle La Tene bronze brooch, hundreds of fragments of black-glazed and red-slip vessels, painted unguentaria and lagynoi, lamps, small ceramic altars and thimiaterionae, clay frying pans and saucepans, and mould-made bowls, etc. (Zaytsev 1998; Zaytsev, 2004, fig. 24, 35–37). From the layer of Fire 1 came various Rhodian stamps – one eponym of group IVb, five of group Va, and four of group Vb (after Finkielsztejn 2001).

Palace. Horizon D is divided into four sub-horizons: D4–D1.

One of the buildings revealed various burnt ceramic: a small Rhodian amphora, a lagynos, and a double-handled pot (Zaytsev, 2004, fig. 35). Another building contained a red-slip kantharos, a plate, and several other handmade pots and lamps (Zaytsev, 2004, fig.83, 2; 84, 1).

Sub-horizon D4 is represented by several floors from megaron N, a reservoir made of stone blocks, and several walls. Its stratigraphy directly follows the layer of Fire E1. At the same time, a heroon of King Argotus was erected, constructed in antis in the Doric style.

The local ceramic complex from Fire E1 is particularly interesting: it can be interpreted as the contents of a burnt vehicle. West of the megaron, in an area of no more than 10–15 m2, were found an amphora (presumably of Samian manufacture), five Rhodian amphorae, a blackglazed cup with stamped ornamentation, the base of an unguentarium, and the head of a terracotta thimiaterion; the latter was made in the shape of a half-figured Demetra and had polychrome painting (Zaytsev, 2004, fig. 36). Particularly important are the necks of four Rhodian amphorae with rectangular stamps on the handles (Zaytsev, 2004, fig. 37). Three eponymous brands are made by the same stamp, with the name ’Ανάξανδρος (c. 143/142 BC) and the month Panam.

Sub-horizon D3 is a layer of general reconstruction of the complex, including the erection of buildings around megaron N and the courtyard (Fig. 2, 1, 2). Equal-sized limestone blocks were widely used in their construction. Sub-horizon D2 reflects the reconstruction of separate palace, and includes the localized Fire 2, associated with the 9th floor of megaron N. The architectural remains of sub-horizons D4, D3 and D2, are found within homogeneous ash-loamy soil, up to 0.6 m thick. In many places it is divided by a thin layer 794

YURIY PAVLOVITCH ZAYTSEV: THE SCYTHIAN NEAPOLIS AND GREEK CULTURE OF THE NORTHERN BLACK SEA REGION

palace (sub-horizon D3) (Zaytsev 1997, 43; Koltukhov 1999, 35; Zaytsev 2001, 43–44, 2004, 53–60, figs. 94– 123) (Fig. 2, 1, 2).

from Fire 2, which is also seen on the floors of all three buildings. From the incidence of Fire 2 up to the time of the destruction of megaron N (sub-horizon D1), 16 clay floor layers were deposited.

The main burial of Skiluros in the Mausoleum (see below) took place in 114/113 BC. For several years after this event, various members of his clan were buried there, desiring to be close to the body of the king. Among the finds from the burials are: unguentaria, red-slip cups and other vessels (Zaytsev, 2004, fig. 119, 120), a gold brooch and bronze fibulae of Middle La Tene scheme, two La Tene swords, an iron helmet (Fig. 6), a vast amount of beads and gold ornaments (Zaytsev, 2004, figs. 109–112, 122–123).

In these sub-horizons more than 200 handles of Rhodian amphorae, with stamps of groups IVb-Vc, were found by Finkielsztein (c. 152–109 BC). On the 21st floor of the megaron, a bronze coin of King Skiluros was found (Fig. 4). On the same floor, at the location of a hearth, a large Synopean amphora was deposited. Numerous types of broken, imported vessels were also found (Zaytsev, 2004, figs. 78–89; Zaytsev, 2004a), including plates, cups with figured handles, kantharoi, mould-made bowls, lagynoi, and unguentaria. Over half of these items have a red-slip and one lagynos has a graffito ‘χαιρε’ (Zaytsev, 2004a, ριν. 352, 4a).

So far, the complex of the Southern Palace and Mausoleum of Skiluros is still unique in the northern Black Sea region, in that it features both a royal residence and burial. The date of this complex is partly confirmed by the ‘Artyukhov Barrow’ site, the main burials of which date from 140–125 BC (Maksimova 1979, 8–9). Numerous objects from these burials are similar to finds taken from the Mausoleum of Skiluros and from the Southern Palace of the Scythian Neapolis.

Fragments of several painted vessels with white glaze are of special interest: these are very rare in the northern Black Sea region. Sets of Greek cooking-ware are also important finds (Zaytsev, 2004a, ριν. 354). These include saucepans with lids, frying pans, and pots with concave bases. This is the only site in Crimean Scythia where these vessels are found in such a numbers.

Other fortress sites. Horizon D has not been fully investigated. Building remains obviously connected with this horizon are found only in sections E (megaron E) and 7 (semi-earthen house, sections of stone wall, household pits).

Sub-horizon D1 is represented by compressed yellow clay containing fragments of white daub, sherds of tiles and raw bricks, and pieces of painted plaster. This layer resulted from the remains of simultaneously destroyed clay walls and tile roofs of the palace buildings.

In the first case this horizon is traceable from stratigraphical data. The layers of the multi-structured clay floors from megaron E is repeated in the stratigraphy of megaron N from the Southern Palace. In section 7, the Rhodian stamps with the names of eponyms Πολυάρατος II (c. 125 BC) and Γόργων (c. 154/153 BC), a stamp of the fabricant Δίων, and also the handle from a Sinopean amphora, belong to horizon D.

This layer revealed more than 30 eponymous stamps of Rhodian amphorae, dated between 146–109 BC, fine gold ornaments (an earring, various beads and appliqués), a Middle La Tene bronze brooch, and four bronze coins (two of Panticapaeum and one of Amis).

From the horizons E–D of the settlement and suburb, which are unrelated stratigraphically, come further examples of eponymous stamps from handles of Rhodian amphorae. Other amphora handles featured the fabricant names ‘Αγαθόβουλος, ’Αγαθοκλής, ’Απολλωδορος, ’Αριστοκλής, Βούλαρχος, ‘Іέρων, Δαμοκράτης, Διόδοτος, Δώρος, Εύκλείτος, Ζηνόδοτος, Λίνος, Μάρσια, ‘Ρόδων, Τιμόξενος, Φανιας, ‘Ερμίας, ‘Ηφηστιων, and Λυσίων. Rare finds of Chersonese amphora stamps of groups 3B–3V should also be mentioned (Katz 1994, 107).

Imported ceramics are also plentiful and varied in this layer, and its composition, as a whole, is comparable with the finds from earlier palace horizons. Particularly interesting is a set of objects from the so-called ‘Eastern House’ of the Southern Palace – an unusual painted jag with a double handle, a tiny painted amphora with fluted body, a terracotta of Aphrodite with Eros, a leaden weight, and bronze casket keys (Zaytsev, 2004, fig. 88). Horizons D and E of the Southern Palace can be securely dated to the second half of the 2nd century BC, as indicated by a number of Rhodian stamps of the group dated 150–108 BC by Grace, or 152–109 BC by Finkielsztejn.

A complicated question for the Scythian Neapolis is the interrelationship between the cultural layers of horizons E–D and the chronology of the fortifications (Zaytsev 2004, 14–15). S.G. Koltukhov, who concentrated on the settlement fortifications set, ascribes the earliest wall to the last quarter of the 3rd c. BC, or more likely to the first quarter of the 2nd (Koltukhov 1990, 184–185; 1999, 31–

Sub-horizons D2 and D1 can be synchronized with the majority of the burials in the Mausoleum of Sciluros, which was built during the general reconstruction of the 795

ANCIENT GREEK COLONIES IN THE BLACK SEA 2 32). I have expressed another point of view, concluding that the beginning of the fortress should be dated close to Fire E1, i.e. after the middle of the 2nd c. BC (Zaytsev 1995, 87; 1999, 130).

The situation became clearer in 1999, after the excavation of the south-eastern part of the section A. Careful investigation here, including the stratigraphy of the earliest wall, suggests the following sequence of events.

For both cases, the same amphora stamps were used as criteria, the finds of which, in any event, are somehow connected with the erection of the fortifications. So far, 34 stamps from Rhodian amphorae handles have been found, coming from the sections located on the southern line of the defensive wall of the Scythian Neapolis.

The earliest feature within section A was the ash hill, the central part of which was recovered later near the Mausoleum of Skiluros (Fig. 2, 1). In addition to other finds (including stamps of ’Αμύντας and Μάρσυας), there was the scorched handle of a Rhodian amphora bearing the stamp of Κρατίδας (c. 187 BC) – the earliest Rhodian stamps found at Neapolis. Three semi-earthen houses were cut into the southern and northern parts of this ash hill.

In the loamy soil deposited above the subsoil in Section E, over an area of c. 100 m2, ten stamps – eight Rhodian, one from Knidos and one from Kos – were found. The layer in which they were found was a compact one between the suburban megaron E and the earliest defensive wall. As wells as the stamped handles there were numerous fragments of red-slip tableware, mouldmade cups, large fragments of amphorae and hand-made pottery, and a casting mould for the manufacture of a horse head-piece with a hook made from the handle of a Rhodian amphora.

One of these (No. 2) was cut in half during the construction of the earliest defensive wall. Its undisturbed part was filled in with earth from the ash hill that was destroyed at the time the wall was built. The next layer, which uncovered the fill of the foundation pit of the semi-earthen house and the surface of the ash hill, differs sharply in structure. It is very dense and also contains clear signs of the building process – lens and strata of clay, rubble, and stone fragments from the cutting. Such features were not noted on the subsoil surface, or on the ash hill. Therefore, it is assumed that this layer marks a phase in the building of the earliest wall, and an initial stage in its functioning.

The deposition of this layer can be connected with the neighbouring megaron E. Its subsequent partial move northwards can be explained by the construction of the defensive wall; this is also proved by the discovery of fragments of Hellenistic amphorae, a fragment of mouldmade cup, and the handle of a Rhodian amphora bearing a stamp of the eponym Λαφείδης (c. 138/139 BC) in the fill of the earliest wall. This find is unique in the total excavations of the defensive wall, the fill of which revealed no other finds. It is therefore possible to assume that a part of the neighbouring cultural layer, which was deposited before the fortifications were built, has intruded into the body of the wall, together with rocky rubble.

At this section, the layer from Fire E1 was recovered during subsequent strengthening of the wall, when it was attached to an ‘urban’ zone from the north. The southern defensive walls, therefore, were constructed after the formation of small rubbish/ash hills of horizon E3, and after the semi-earthen houses were inserted in one of these hills. This event probably occurred after 140 BC.

The most representative collection of amphorae handles with stamps occurs from the section excavated in 1926. Their distribution over the section is significant. 13 stamps lay compactly in the central part of the section, this assemblage ‘cut’ by a line of the defensive wall.

5. Distribution of the architectural remains by chronological periods The 2nd century BC is represented in the Scythian Neapolis by two periods corresponding to stratigraphical horizons – E and D.

This, in turn, suggests that the defensive wall arose here after the formation of the localized lens of the cultural layer. As well as at other locations, the clearing away of the surface for building purposes could be done here and the material removed. The layer could be connected with the house of sub-horizon E3, the insignificant remains of which were investigated in section 7b. The features are 25–30 m apart.

Sub-horizon E3 (Zaytsev, 2004, fig.31). In several places of the settlement and suburb, remains were found that preceded the features of sub-horizon E2; they are mainly represented by sections of stone walls up to 1 m thick. In the northern part of section D, two such walls were found, joining at an acute angle. They bordered a limestone pavement, on which a stratum with various material was deposited – dated to the 2nd c. BC.

The above-mentioned sites demonstrate the ambiguity of the stratigraphy to be found near the defensive wall of the Scythian Neapolis, and suggest the existence of farmstead structures on the site of the future fortress in the second quarter/middle of the 2nd c. BC. Each of the complexes was connected with rubbish ash hills that contained Rhodian amphora stamps dated to 180–140 BC.

Another feature thought to relate to sub-horizon E3 is the so-called ‘tower of the acropolis’ in the central part of the settlement (Vysotskaya 1979, fig. 15; Koltukhov 1999, fig. 47). The tower was square in plan, with walls c. 1.4 m thick and a ‘room’ size c. 5 x 5.2 m. It was constructed in a layer of horizon F and a stratum of Fire 1 was 796

YURIY PAVLOVITCH ZAYTSEV: THE SCYTHIAN NEAPOLIS AND GREEK CULTURE OF THE NORTHERN BLACK SEA REGION

building were partly investigated, on the clay floor of which survived a stratum of burnt grains.

investigated in its upper floors. It is possible that a wall of the ‘acropolis’ was joined to the tower at a later date. Both constructions are dated to the 2nd c. BC (Koltukhov 1999, 37), and it is likely that the tower appeared in period E as part of a fortified farmstead.

In the north-eastern part of the section (Zaytsev, 2004, fig.75, 2) a group of semi-earthen houses were discovered, with clay ‘floors’ and pavements connected to them. A series of round foundation pits associated with semi-earthen houses Nos. 1–3 were of similar construction and situated in one line. Two other semiearthen houses were rectangular in shape. Houses 1, 3, 5 shared an entrance. Postholes for pillars were found in all the constructions, and in house 6 there were two fireplaces – both in the western corner. The stratigraphy suggests that this complex might relate to sub-horizon E2, but, of course, it existed only for a short period: at the time of Fire 1 all the constructions were filled with a cultural layer.

The remains of a wall, more than 1 m thick, were discovered in section 7b, as well as the remains of two further ‘rooms’ apparently joining the wall. Also noted were parallel trenches with masonry foundations connected to the sub-soil ground. It is thought that there was a farmstead here which disappeared when the semiearthen house of sub-horizon E2 was constructed, the latter being destroyed in Fire 1. Hence the trench and foundations could be connected with sub-horizon E3. Amphorae handles with stamps and fragments of imported ceramics in the section excavated in 1926 (a hypothetical rubbish/ash hill) were most likely connected with this particular farmstead.

In section A-B-V, sub-horizon E2 is represented by the important megaron N complex in an area of c. 240 m2, with its large rock-cut pit, several walls, semi-earthen houses and ground buildings. All these constructions were conditionally called the ‘megaron settlement’, which, in fact, was a predecessor of the Southern Palace of horizon D (Fig. 2, 1, 2). After a short time the semiearthen house 5 ceased to exist and was filled with a cultural stratum; megaron N was then rebuilt and followed by a building of similar construction but smaller in size.

Part of a stone wall, with a gate aperture 3.2 m wide, was discovered in the northern part of section 1 (Puzdrovsky 1988, 303). In phase E2 the gate was filled in with stones and the wall continued to stand in the later complex of sub-horizon E2-1. This could mean that the wall was constructed in phase E3, as well as the four partly excavated farmsteads (with three ash hills possibly connected to them). Sub-horizon E2. The remains of two ground-level buildings and three semi-dugouts were discovered in section D. Building D consisted of three aligned rooms. In the south-eastern room an entrance and traces of a hearth were noted. In the central room a hearth was found and a pythos buried in the floor. Near the western corner of the building a thin stratum of Fire 1 from sub-horizon E1 was discernable. On the south-western side, close to this building, two round, semi-earthen houses were discovered cut into the subsoil rock. They were filled in with ash and soil and covered by a stratum of Fire 1.

The walls of megaron N were possibly covered by red plaster, on fragments of which illegible graffiti has survived (Zaytsev 2004, figs. 14–15). In the main apartment of megaron N there were a large hearth platform and a stone platform/bench, and opposite the side entrance there was a single wooden pillar. In section 7b (Fig. 1, 3, 13) a round semi-earthen house and a surface connected to it were investigated, both covered by the stratum of Fire 1. Construction elements include a clay hearth (here also was found a handmade clay pan), made in a special niche, and inclined postholes that give a clue as to the height of the construction – c. 2.5 m. Localized finds here include a Sinopean amphora, fragments of Rhodian amphorae, sherds of handmade ceramics and assorted pottery. In the central part of section 7a the lower part of a semi-earthen house, rectangular in plan, was investigated. A hearth was situated to the left of the entrance. A floor was paved with small, almost flat stones. To the north, the clay surface of the courtyard, covered by a stratum of Fire 1, was noted. The remains of a small, one-roomed building survived to the west of the complex. It was built on the natural and its remaining features were masonry from the northern wall, a threshold, and a burnt clay floor (Zaytsev, Puzdrovsky 1994, 227–228).

A further building was found in the south-western part of section D. It is represented by several masonry features, among which some parts of the clay floors have survived. The layout of this construction, which consisted of several rooms, is unclear. A large (3.5 x 3.6 m), semi-earthen house, square in plan, was investigated north of these buildings (Vysotskaya 1979, fig. 27). Its foundation pit was cut into the subsoil, and a platform (0.5 m wide) made. A clay table was situated in the centre. As mentioned above, a stratum of Fire 1 from subhorizon E1 was noted on the upper floor of the tower of sub-horizon E3. Some time earlier, a supposed defensive wall belonging to the small fortification (‘acropolis’) (Koltukhov 1999, 36–37) of sub-horizon E2 was adjoined to this tower. Near the tower the remains of another

In section E (Fig. 1, 3, 16) the remains of a rectangular building with multi-level clay floor and a central fireplace 797

ANCIENT GREEK COLONIES IN THE BLACK SEA 2 rock extracted during digging were found scattered around the heroon, and as far as the defensive wall and central gate to the south. To the north, fragments were also found at the southern facade of the Palace (the former ‘building K with porticos’). After the fieldwork of 1949/1950, this layer was regarded as the main pavement of the ‘city square’, situated in front of the gate (Schultz 197, 69, fig. 4, 4).

were discovered; four postholes were noted in its corners. To the north of this building was found the platform of a courtyard with a hearth. At the edges of this platform two crushed, handmade pots, a bronze crescent-shaped pendant, and a fragment of terracotta representing Kybela were retrieved. The stratigraphical situation suggests that this complex is associated with horizon E. This particular building directly preceded the later megaron E, which kept its orientation and layout.

The construction of this building is still hard to define in detail (Zaytsev 2000, 52). According to one version of its reconstruction, it was a two-level building in antis, erected on a high stylobata in the Doric style (Fig. 7, 2). It consisted of an underground tomb and a temple/heroon above. A monument with an inscription was erected. The latest research connects this construction with the majority of other artistic monuments found here at different times (Zaytsev 2002).

In section 1 (Fig. 1, 3, 20) a new complex was adjoined from the south to the farmstead of sub-horizon E3. A clay platform and the remains of a building with a burnt clay floor survived from this complex. The finds are typical: fragments of amphorae, handmade ceramics, pottery, a lamp, and a female terracotta figurine. The appearance of independent buildings, seldom connected to existing farmsteads, is characteristic of sub-horizon E2. In the general topography and layout of Neapolis, localized zones represent this sub-horizon and are distributed over the whole extent of the settlement.

It is thought that when the ground floor in the hall of megaron N was being built, a first floor-gallery, based on pillars, was erected along the walls. Approximately at the same time, localized layers of ash and rubbish began to be deposited in the rocky pit, in semi-earthen house 3, and near the side entrance of the megaron. Large amounts of amphorae fragments, black-glazed tableware, mouldmade bowls, and the cut bones of animals have been found.

Among the architectural features of sub-horizon E2, megaron N is particularly distinctive and it was probably the ‘aristocratic’ hub of the settlement. Its prominence is testified by the following history of the fortress in period D. The southern defensive wall of the fortress appeared simultaneously with the construction of megaron N. As a consequence of its construction, the area of the fortress increased to around 20 h in comparison to the earlier ‘acropolis’.

Sub-horizon D3 (Section A-B-V). The complete reconstruction and improvements to the Palace complex are connected with this sub-horizon. The western wall of megaron N was painted with polychrome frescos (Fig. 3, 4). In the same wall two niches were made. One of them probably contained the limestone herma of a female deity (Fig. 2, 5) and an altar with a polychrome geometric ornament. The second niche was constructed in the north-western corner, separated by a wooden panel. Several altars, a table, and two large figurines were placed here. All the objects were made of terracotta with traces of polychrome painting and gilding. Near the second niche a large marble hekataion was placed, from which a lower fragment has survived (Fig. 2, 4).

Sub-horizon D4 (Section A-B-V). After Fire 1, only megaron N was reconstructed in the complex of the Southern Palace. However, three new features appeared here – the ritual stone reservoir, the ‘sacral’ southern facade of the Palace (‘building K with porticos’, as defined in the literature between 1848 and 1950), and the sanctuary/heroon of Argotus. The reservoir (or pool?), constructed of well-made slabs (Fig. 2, 3), is situated to the west of megaron N; its floor retained various signs, painted in red and black. The eastern section of the reservoir has a roughly made channel, allowing rainwater to drain in from the adjoining courtyard surface.

Considerable areas for freestanding buildings were cleared around megaron N, separated by walling. South and west of the megaron there were two, two-storeyed constructions (‘House R’ and the ‘Eastern house’). Evidently the eastern apartment of the upper floor of House R was sacral. Its walls were ornamented with frescos similar to that of the painting in megaron N. A winery with pythoi adjoined House R.

The southern facade seems to have been constructed as a wall with projections or pylons. In front of this facade a small sanctuary/heroon of King Argotus was built (Zaytsev 2000; Zaytsev, 2004, fig. 51–53, 73; Vinogradov and Zaytsev 2003). A rock-cut pit survived from this building; it was of irregular rectangular shape, 5.80 x 4.15 m in extent, and 1.2 m deep (Fig. 2, 2; 7, 2). It was oriented west-east, and cleaved from a crack in the natural rock. When it was cut, a strip of friable, rocky crust, 1.0–1.4 m wide, was removed. Marks and masonry fittings were cut into the rock’s surface. Fragments of

At this time the ‘sacral’ southern facade of the Palace was reconstructed (‘building L with porticos’, after the terminology of 1949/1950 – Schultz 1957, 71–72). It was restored using large blocks and reached 30 m in thickness (Fig. 2, 2). 798

YURIY PAVLOVITCH ZAYTSEV: THE SCYTHIAN NEAPOLIS AND GREEK CULTURE OF THE NORTHERN BLACK SEA REGION

m apart. The buildings present the same main features – similar locations of such elements as hearth, shelf-bench, door apertures, niches, and pillars; similar elements of internal ornamentation (whitewashing, coating and painting of hearth and bench); similar stratigraphical situation (sequence of repairs; multi-level floors). Synchronous functioning of both buildings, at least in the period D, could complete the picture. All this makes one suggest that megarons E and N could be connected by their origin, closeness of their functions, and perhaps by related inhabitants.

At the same stage the Mausoleum was built – a magnificent above ground, stone tomb (Fig. 5, 3). Simultaneous destruction of all the palace buildings, and therefore the end of phase D, occurred when the Pontos garrison stayed there, or just afterwards (Saprykin 1996, 147–148; Zaytsev 1997, 46). It is significant that, so far, no architectural features connected with horizon D, apart from the Southern Palace, have been found around the fortress: not one building was restored after its collapse following Fire 1. Also for period D there are no examples of new buildings above the stratum of Fire 1.

6. The Mausoleum of King Skiluros and its investigation5

The situation within the territory of the southern suburb looks different. Semi-dugouts, remains of ground houses, and household pits were discovered. All these constructions could not be exactly attributed to horizons E or D because of their rather plain stratigraphy and archaeological material. Only under ash hill No. 3 were several household pits noted that had been inserted into a layer of Fire 1.

The year 1946 occupies a special place in the history of the archaeology of the northern Black Sea region. The excavations at the Scythian Neapolis, while not promising sensations, were intended to pursue the modest purpose of studying a site around the central gate and contiguous part of the fortress. However, on 6th August, the first turns of the spade began the excavation of the famous Mausoleum – since recognized as the most important monument of Late Scythian culture.

The most complicated, impressive and interesting feature and its archaeological history is megaron E, situated 12 m south of the defensive wall (Zaytsev 2004, figs. 19 and 20). Its walls were erected on a stratum of Fire 1. This fire destroyed a previous building with a clay floor, as mentioned above in the description of sub-horizon E2.

After a series of preliminary reports (Pogrebova 1947; 1947a; Schultz 1947; 1947a), two basic works on this structure were published (Schultz 1953; Pogrebova 1961), which, for several decades, posed a series of questions and problems. The basic achievement of P.N. Schultz was his conclusion that the stone crypt contained the burial of the famous king, Skiluros. The main success of N.N. Pogrebova was a detailed analysis of all the burials within the Mausoleum, and the accompanying burial goods. The researcher offered her own concept of the monument and came to the conclusion that in the stone crypt lay Palakus – a senior son of Skiluros. Both points of view are still current.

The new building was 14 x 6.5 m in dimension, with walls between 0.7–08 m thick. The longitudinal walls featured three pairs of pillars: two in the main apartment and one along the line of the southern facade. In the west wall there was a wide niche, opposite which a side entrance was situated. In the centre of the main apartment a clay table-hearth was located, the south-eastern corner of which included a shelf-bench made of stone and clay. The walls of the megaron had been whitewashed many times and the hearth had at least 12 coats of clay, and the bench 14. The sides of the bench were decorated with horizontal lines of black (soot) and reddish-brown (ochre) colouring. Within the main apartment there was a multilevel clay floor. Of particular interest is a ‘sacrifice’ depression in the south-west corner, which contained animal bones and hand-made anthropomorphic and zoomorphic figurines (Malikov 1967, 64–69). No movement from horizon D to horizon C could be observed within the limits of megaron E.

The research of all the data found in the archives and museum collections by the present author has resulted in a significant amount of field information and finds from the Mausoleum, and an ambition to investigate some of the key moments of the excavation, so as to compare them with the published data (Zaytsev 1992, 93–99; 1994, 94–105). As a result, the material from the burial in the stone crypt (No. 37) of the Mausoleum was radically reassessed on the basis of the accumulation of all the field material, together with repeated processing and personal study of all the finds coming from there.

Thick lenses of a localized cultural layer found 2–10 m north of the megaron could be connected with the megaron E in the period E–D. This layer was partly covered by the II–IV zones of the southern defensive wall.

The stone crypt (Fig. 5, 2). The author’s reconstruction of a funeral process in the stone crypt is given below.

It is important to underline the impressive similarity megarons E and N, which were situated approximately 80

5

799

Zaytsev, 2004, p. 53-60.

ANCIENT GREEK COLONIES IN THE BLACK SEA 2 plate found at the extremity of the main accumulation of gold items, near the bone plate, was also overturned. Notice should be paid to the equal numbers of many of the plate types, a prevailing amount of appliqués without any means of fastening, and an identical styling to the majority of them. The figured cuts to the bases of the triangular plaques correspond to the folds of a running ‘wave’.

– The crypt was constructed simultaneously with the Mausoleum. It was then covered with three stone slabs and left in such a condition for a while. – At a certain time there was an attempt to move the central slab to a wall of the Mausoleum, probably for its subsequent rise. – The above attempt appeared extremely unsuccessful. It was obviously impossible to hold up the edge of the slab: it fell downwards having occupied an inclined position. In such condition the stone crypt undoubtedly became unsuitable for a burial.

It is obvious that most of the set of ornaments was casually applied using an organic glue or paste and therefore not the decoration of practical objects. A small golden nail and a golden loop found among the ornaments testify some ways of fastening, or suspending, of the ornamented object (Fig. 6, 1). The presence of a plate that differs slightly from the other plates of the type, suggests the general and later rearrangement of the whole composition, when the missing or lost original plate was replaced with an ‘alien’ substitute close in shape. About two thirds of the ornaments have decorative motifs: obvious evidence of the art and semantic unity of the complete assemblage. Lastly, the use of glue to fix the large gold plates assumes a relatively rigid form. Therefore, taking into account the multi-layered disposition of ornaments, the presence of several parts of the whole is likely. In other words, the gold ornaments could be the remains of a ceremonial robe (breast-piece? apron? other variants?), which was laid on the knees of the deceased after his body was placed in the crypt.

The fallen slab, without being lifted, was moved to the side and leaned against the northern wall of the stone crypt. A gap between its base and the floor of the crypt was filled with several flat stones. Thus, from this moment, the crypt could only be accessed through the ‘hatch’ thus formed (0.6 x 0.8 m). At a subsequent stage several objects were placed in the eastern part of the crypt: two halves of a broken sword of La Tène type, a set of arrows, spear-heads with shortened shafts, and a (presumed) staff with a top covered with silver. Next, the deceased was arranged on the crypt floor. The head was dressed in a semi-spherical cap ornamented with gold plaques – this was detached from the skull during the later destruction of the skeleton.

The likely conclusion of this obscure funeral ceremony would be the closure of the ‘hatch’ – an actual entrance hole. However no traces of its recovering were noted, but on the last slabs of the crypt’s top were found the remains of the wooden coffin XII, with the burials of two adults and one child. Coffin XI, with two burials of youths, was placed by a nearby wall of the Mausoleum. The location of these two coffins suggests that coffins XI and XII closed the entrance hatch of the stone crypt.

Silver and bronze brooches had been placed over the chest (Figs. 6, 5, 12), but these had subsequently fallen to the pelvis area. A gold brooch was found on a sacrum – such finds have appeared in synchronous burials of highstatus barbarians of the Asian Bosporos (Maksimova 1979, 69, 71). On each side of the dead, near the hands, a set of belt fittings was found: the left-hand set featured bronze details, the right one had iron buckles, plates and rings. The second set probably had a leather sheath with a silver triangular tip attached (Fig. 6, 10).

The strange circumstances of the stone crypt require explanations and extend the investigations to the extremities of the actual Mausoleum chamber.

The original location of the iron helmet (Fig. 6, 3) is harder to ascertain. It seems probable, however, that it had fallen to the right, with the leg bones, and hence could originally have been placed on bent knees.

‘Sarcophagus’ (Fig. 5, 5) The researches of Schultz and Pogrebova, which were based on the data of the reconstruction by O.I. Dombrovsky, hypothesized that, on the left of the entrance, near the southern wall of the Mausoleum, there was a complex funeral construction with the remains of a high-status female burial (No. 70). It consisted of a rectangular platform on four carved feet, and a coffin covered with pitch lid. The whole construction was richly decorated with carving and polychrome painting (Schultz 1953, 25–28, tab. VIII, IX, colour ill. I; Pogrebova 1961, 104). It is supposed that this burial had been looted in antiquity and that the falling walls had subsequently destroyed the sarcophagus itself.

Gold plaques covered the area of the thighs and knees. Study of the field material allowed one to doubt the interpretation of this accumulation of gold plaques as ornaments of the sleeves and hem of a jacket, or as a hypothetical horytos (bow-case) (Schultz 1953, fig. 10, tab. 1). Ornaments with loops and beads could have decorated the sleeves. The majority of the gold fittings can be treated differently. They were located haphazardly, but seemed to form a compact group extending aslant above the skeleton. Many plates and plaques in some layers were overlapping; some were on edge, and some were turned over. A triangular golden 800

YURIY PAVLOVITCH ZAYTSEV: THE SCYTHIAN NEAPOLIS AND GREEK CULTURE OF THE NORTHERN BLACK SEA REGION

distance between the external planes of the columns No. 6). If these are the remains of the ‘sarcophagus’ itself, its useful length is reduced to 1.4–1.45 m. Both these possibilities result in an obviously smaller length than is required for the normal placement of an adult body. Incidentally, the heights of the two adults in burial No. 70 (based on the reconstruction of the thigh bones), could not be less than 1.65–1.68 m.

As with other objects from the Mausoleum, a critical approach has resulted in some unexpected conclusions. Omitting unnecessary details, the results will be presented here. The remains of two adults were found, on their backs and with extended limbs. They were not placed in a special coffin, but were lying at the edge of some decaying wooden planks that were not as long as the skeletons. It is clear that these two burials were later and not related to the ‘sarcophagus’ itself.

It seems clear that the carved wooden construction (in its restored section) is not the platform of the ‘sarcophagus’, but represents a richly decorated podium complex, with a deliberately ornamental facade.

The lower accumulation of bones was found in a 20cm layer of a dense loamy soil, between the limestone floor of the chamber and the level of the lower frame of the ‘sarcophagus’ (Fig. 5, 5, A-B).

In any hypothetical reconstruction of the upper part of this construction, some factors should be highlighted. First, the general height of the construction could not exceed the height of the doorway of the Mausoleum – c. 1.6 m. The placing of later burials on this construction was only possible if there were a horizontal plane. Such a plane could only have been provided after the dismantling of the top section of the construction, up to the level of the top frame (Fig. 5, 4, 5). Then the carved planks, along with others, could be placed flat on top of the podium, on a level with the cornice (one with a pattern facing downwards, the other facing up). The columns topped with a figure and the figures of ‘centaurs’ were deliberately broken and deposited here – where they were uncovered by the excavators (Fig. 5, 5).

A special anthropological analysis has shown that the accumulation of bones contained isolated and fragmentary remains of four individuals: a youth and three adults (12–15, 18–21, 30–40, and over 40 years of age respectively). In different places among the bones were found a gold needle, large gold beads, three plate ornaments with holes for sewing to fabric, and various other beads and pendant of gold, cornelian, glass and amber. A golden medallion and a ring were found underneath one pelvis (Pogrebova 1961, fig. 7). Among the bones there were many thread fragments of purple dye and gold. There can be no doubt that there was an association between the remains of the carved wooden construction (‘sarcophagus’) and the human burials found below it. There are two likely explanations: either the carved construction was placed above the collective burial, or isolated bones were inserted below the construction at a later time.

A position higher than the cornice found in situ is suggested for the reconstruction of the carved planks – these were different construction details. A pair of large, free-standing figures of ‘centaurs’ obviously occupied symmetrical positions (in relation to the basic axis), when approached (taken from their findspots) from the shorter sides of the construction, and were definitely designed to be viewed from the front.

A volumetric assessment of the restored elements of the ‘sarcophagus’ (Fig. 5,5) allows a possible reconstruction of the bottom half of the object, make some interesting observations, and hypothesize the restoration of its upper part.

Horse burials6 In all works the horse burials of the Mausoleum were unequivocally connected with the main burial in the stone crypt, but on the plans of the Mausoleum the horse skeleton No. 4 was placed in the first layer (together with the stone crypt, the ‘sarcophagus’ and many wooden coffins), and horse skeletons Nos. 1-3 were placed in the second layer - with other coffins (Pogrebova 1961, fig. 1, A, B).

The construction was undoubtedly a magnificent object in its own right, standing on four feet, about which O.I. Dombrovsky was correct. It is also clear that this structure had a highly ornamented front – the northern end was decorated with figures of fantastic animals sitting face-to-face and two angular columns. It was probably not by chance that back legs (Nos. 3 and 4) had no decoration, unlike the front pair (Nos. 1 and 2). Obviously they were of different, less expressive, design (perhaps they were draped).

The actual picture was more complicated. From the plan it is visible (Fig. 5,3), that the horse bones occupied a corner limited from the south by a wall of the chamber, and from the east by the ends of coffins Nos. IX, X and the end of the carved construction, to which the skull and foreleg bones of horse No. 3 were adjoined. The lowest

The size of this construction excludes its use as the compound base of a sarcophagus. If it is taken as a pedestal platform, one needs to notes that the length of the ‘sarcophagus’ itself was no more than 1.6 m (the

6

801

Schultz 1953, 35; Pogrebova 1961, 215-216.

ANCIENT GREEK COLONIES IN THE BLACK SEA 2 style to the antique two-layer one-line horizontal/orthostatic masonry (Kryzhitsky 1982, 24, fig. 5, 7, 9).

and most easterly horse skeleton (No. 2) has almost completely kept its primary position, and bones of other horses (much disarticulated) were found lying on top of it. In other words, horse skeleton No. 2 was found in its original position. The skeletons of the other animals, also inverted northwards with their heads on original ‘pillows’ of flat stones, were later recovered with skeleton No. 2. The hind legs of one of the horses remained approximately in place – opposite the bottom step of the stairs – and most of its skeleton was displaced aslant the main accumulation of horse bones.

The varied masonry courses and the abundance of decayed wood (logs and planks) suggests either the presence of additional storeys made of brick rows, beginning at a height of 2.65 m, or the wooden recovering of the funeral chamber. The different technique used for the northern wall of the Mausoleum (from the three others) allows the present author to join those researchers who considered that the construction was attached to the external part of the front wall. A first look at the Mausoleum, with its magnificent external facades and rather thin walls, suggests that it must be a funeral construction (Schultz 1953, 50) that was planned and erected beforehand – during the general reconstruction of the Southern Palace (Zaytsev 1997, 43). The junction of the lower funeral chamber to the walls certainly suggested its inclusion into the perimeter of the defensive system. However this function was secondary and was also dictated by the special nature of the construction and by the need for it to be a secure and strengthened location. In other words, it was not the special need for towers at the central gate that determined the presence of the burial chamber in the lower floor of one of them. On the contrary, the need for a splendid funeral construction as close as possible to the Palace was the determining factor when choosing its location (Schultz 1953, 50–51).

Finds on the chamber floor These finds were never associated with the main burial (Schultz 1953, 40; Pogrebova 1961, 213). In former publications they were mentioned partially in the other context and not completely. By the bottom step of the stairs a rectangular iron buckle was found, and under coffin No. III, among the horse bones, lay a bronze ring. To the north, the skull of horse No. 2 was found at the eastern end of the stone crypt; associated with it were a small crushed amphora, fragments of a handmade jug, and a massive iron arrowhead with the remains of a wooden shaft. Under one of the facade columns of the carved podium was found the overturned ceramic altar (Fig. 5, 1), its square base next to it, under the bones of burial No. 70. Nearby, a bronze coin of Chersonesos was found, and at the end of the vertebra of horse No. 2 (under the skull of horse No. 3) there was a large glass bead. The assemblage also included a broken brown-slip cup, fragments of which were found by the southern edge of the stone crypt, near the horse skulls.

In time the facades of the southern and western walls were closed by an inclined armature made of clay rubblework (Schultz 1953, 16–17; Koltukhov 1993, 186; 1999, 35–36).

The architecture of the funeral chamber7 (Fig. 5,3) The Mausoleum was conceived as a rectangular construction – 8.65 x 7.5 m. Its sides were oriented to the four cardinal points of the compass and the south side adjoined the front wall (Koltukhov 1999, 35, fig. 29, 5). The size of the funeral chamber was 6.6 x 5.75 m, with walls c. 1m thick. The foundation pit was made of rubblework on a rock platform, around which trenches were dug from the earlier ash mound. Its height varied (from 0.4 to 0.7 m) depending on the natural inclination of the surface subsoil. The lower masonry was complicated and distinctive. The eastern, southern and western facades were monumental from the outside and very skilfully built. Their lower courses featured bands and uprights and orthostatic plates left traces of rust. The internal facings of the same walls, to the top of these lower courses, and also the whole of the northern wall, were executed using rubble-work and dressed blocks.

The elements of the Mausoleum described above are those that give few grounds for disagreement. The interpretations that have been most argued over from the outset relate to ‘doorway’ and ‘stone stairs’, whose chronologies most determine the reconstruction of the burials, the definition of their sequence, and their dating (Schultz 1946, 14–17; Pogrebova 1961, 177–178). The ‘doorway’ is 1.6 m high by 1.3 m wide and is located in the eastern wall. The construction seems to have involved a series of logs, over which was place a massive stone threshold, around 0.3–0.4 m thick. Subsequently this large block cracked and dropped through the logs below (as was noted during excavation) (Zaytsev, 2004, fig. 99, 100). Between the limestone floor and the wooden overlapping a rectangular frame was inserted made of four oak bars (by section 10 x 10 cm and 12 x 10 cm). The external width of this frame (0.9 m) was less than the width of the door aperture (1.32 m), and the space between the uprights and the masonry was filled with small stones in a clay mortar. The six oak planks, secured by three pairs of

The three obverse walls were made of well-processed blocks of approximately equal size (1.0 x 0.8 – 1 x 0 .25/0.30 m) on a clay mortar and keyed in. Overall the construction of the Mausoleum walls is the closest in 7

Zaytsev, 2004, fig. 94-98.

802

YURIY PAVLOVITCH ZAYTSEV: THE SCYTHIAN NEAPOLIS AND GREEK CULTURE OF THE NORTHERN BLACK SEA REGION

cross bars, were set into the frame from inside the funeral chamber. The dimensions of this ‘door’ (1.65 x 0.95 m) were just larger than the frame and no traces of any opening or closing system have been found.

2004, fig. 95, 3). Under the decayed wood was found a mass of homogeneous clay, 0.2–1.0 m thick, in which were place coffins Nos. I and II, resting on the limestone floor.

The photographs strongly suggest from the inside stones and logs, mortar.

In descriptions made by P.N. Schultz, N.N. Pogrebova and A.N. Karasev the stairway was considered a rather late construction. Its purpose was supposed at that time as an exit via the front wall, occasionally functioning together with the door (Pogrebova 1961, 177). From the above-mentioned details it is possible to conclude that the construction of the stairs was suspended.

and drawings made by A.N. Karasyov that this doorway was firmly closed – first by horizontal beams, then by and finally by an homogeneous clay

The archaeological situation from the external side of the door aperture is also interesting. Up to a height of 0.75 m it was blocked with large stones, which were compressed from above by a great limestone slab. Above this there was a thick clay layer with inclined strata and lenses of rubble. On top of this (1.7 m) there was another layer of rubble and stone, which included the skeleton of dog.

Even the most elementary calculation of the stairs, as basically consisting of five rather thin and inclined logs, on which there was a layer of rubble and 8 stone blocks (with a constant loading – c. 2000 kg), results in a fundamental problem of design.

The external blocking of the door was done at the same time as the filling in of the courtyard in front of the Mausoleum. The logical conclusion of these activities was the laying of the worked blocks along the eastern facade of the Mausoleum. Its sole purpose was to finally exclude any access to the entrance to the funeral chamber. The dog’s burial above the final stone layer was intended as a ritual obstacle against any possible future attempts to penetrate the Mausoleum from this access.

The three construction elements (stone steps, amorphous rubble filling, and wooden logs) could only make engineering sense if the load did not exceed 2.5 tons; this would equate to a basic ramp of logs and earth layer. The presence in this ramp structure of two coffins (Nos. I and II) shows that the ramp was built after the two burials and that the foundations of this staircase were laid at one time, after the recovery of the two coffins and the corner of chamber where the main burial was placed.

The conclusions are that this door aperture was used until the second stage of the fortification works, that basic purposes of which were the strengthening of the central gate of the fortress and the complete external isolation of the funeral chamber. It seems that the wooden construction, inserted into the door aperture, was not actually a door, but rather acted as a form of grave marker.

Now this construction must be assessed within the context of the overall defensive complex. Exactly opposite the staircase and the hypothetical entrance platform (the top of the superstructure above the stone crypt), a stone crosspiece, 5 m wide, was located in the peribola. Additionally, in 1948, opposite the staircase (but within the area of the fortress), the remains of the eastern façade of a wide platform were discovered, adjoining the earliest defensive wall (Zaytsev, 2004, fig. 98).

This entrance to the Mausoleum was finally sealed by its complete and simultaneous protection from both sides and an internal barrier. These processed suggest the need for a stairway of some nature, which would have been a second way into the funeral chamber.

These remains presented the excavators with three aligned features: the staircase in the chamber of the Mausoleum, the crosspiece of the peribola, and the stone platform (Zaytsev, 2004, fig. 98). This cannot be coincidental and these three elements are most likely linked to a common plan. Within the complex of the defensive wall there existed a corridor, 11 m long, which directly connected the funeral chamber of the Mausoleum to the Southern Palace of the Scythian Neapolis (Fig. 2, 1). This might well explain the features of the staircase, the top step of which coincides with the stone border and brick courses of the walls, as well as the presence of the crosspiece in the peribola (the monumental foundation of the ‘suspended’ part of this corridor), and the platform within the fortress (the base for the steps). Such a corridor would appear to solve the two main concerns that inevitably arise in connection with a tomb of such status: the need for complete external isolation and its protection. The sole entrance could be well overlooked

The stairs were arranged along the western wall of the chamber. Two of its lower steps were placed in the southwest corner of the chamber on the limestone floor. They were inverted towards the east and were found in situ. Step No. 3 (the lowest one on the eastern line) rested on them and was found in its original position. The blocks of steps 4 to 10 overlapped each other and were found in an inclined situation, edge up. All of them were of correctly geometrically shaped and made of limestone. Under them was a layer of small stones and rubble, which overlapped five completely decayed logs (Fig. 94). Of particular importance is the inclined situation of the logs, their ends resting on the two first steps, and their characteristic deflection under steps 4 to 10 (Zaytsev, 803

ANCIENT GREEK COLONIES IN THE BLACK SEA 2 numerous burial goods. Among the surviving artefacts were a hand-made jug, a red-slip cup, an amphora, and a ceramic altar. It is clear that one of the wives of the deceased was buried at the same time, although it is impossible now to determine the place and circumstances of this burial. It is most likely that her remains, together with other bones, gold ornaments, and fragments of fabric, found their way under the throne bed. The eastern part, near the entrance of the chamber, was left free for subsequent burials.

and supervised from within the palace territory and the process of transporting the deceased into the chamber became much easier. We are now in a position to finish the descriptive part of the monument and to proceed to a complex restoration of the events connected with the main burial of the Mausoleum of the Scythian Neapolis. The preliminary construction of the funeral chamber and the assembly of the stone crypt raise some questions – the preparation in good time of a place for a status burial. Nevertheless, the body was brought in in an unusual way and there were already at least two coffins already there (Nos. XI and XII). The assumption that the main burial here was not the first contradicts the ancient funeral traditions and it cannot be supported. Another version is more probable: before the high-status burial was placed in the stone crypt he was laid elsewhere within the chamber. The construction of the crypt was obviously designed for the standard positioning of the body – extended on its back, with stretched lower extremities. However, this standard positioning was obviously disregarded here and the body was arranged in a semisitting pose. It is appropriate here to recall the carved construction, which: a) was not a sarcophagus, b) was not connected initially with the humans found buried underneath it, c) was sharply in contrast to the simple coffins of the Mausoleum by its construction and ornamentation, d) was brought into the chamber through a door aperture before the installation of a wooden block, obviously connected the very first burials. The coincidence of its length (c. 150–160 cm) in relation to the overall area occupied by the semi-sitting skeleton No. 37 (140–160 x 60 cm), provides the final link in the chain of comparisons and allows us to formulate the main conclusion: the carved podium was the lower part of the bed, on which, in a semi-sitting pose (Fig. 5, 4, 6) the high-status deceased was brought into the Mausoleum.

These activities have all the hallmarks of having taken place in a great hurry, with the need to rebury the body so quickly that some serious technical miscalculations were made. The impression is that those undertaking this hurried work were technically unprepared and had few skills in lifting heavy weights. The execution of such actions required the minimal number of participants in the interests of secrecy. Those involved were likely to be high-ranking figures in some way connected or related to the deceased, and this could explain their lack of technical expertise. Now the special steps required to preserve the Mausoleum could pass on to the second stage. The most important of these was the obliteration of the external entrance, which automatically provided an alternative entrance to the funeral chamber. The construction of the stairway required significant expenditure on labour, transport and materials – not less than fifteen cubic metres of clay, wood and stone. The temporary presence of third-party workers within the funeral chamber would then have become inevitable and, obviously, it was prepared in such a way by them. It is possible to assume that the construction of the stairs relative to the plan of the chamber was the result of a careful survey. The builders who were assembling the wattle and daub ramp and the entrance platform saw in front of them only a line regular coffins facing the western wall, and they did not suspect that, by their actions, the main burial would be ultimately preserved. For the history of the Mausoleum the assembly of the stairs is important in another respect: at the time if its construction, coffin No. III was drawn aside (on top of the moved horse bones), and coffins Nos. II and I were partially obstructed by earth, indicating that they were all in situ at the time of this building work,

It now remains to try and locate where the deceased and his bed were laid before the reburial. It was placed in the eastern part of the chamber when coffins Nos. IX and X already occupied the southeast corner, and the ceramic altar was broken and overturned. The southwest part of a chamber may be disregarded – this was where the horse burials took place. The most likely position is the northwest corner. In this part of the Mausoleum the stone crypt, closed by three slabs, was constructed. The platform formed by these slabs was the most convenient for the location of a funeral bed. Additionally, if this throne bed had been set up in another location there would have been no need to replace it, which is what happened.

The synchronous works outside the chamber of the Mausoleum were focused on the complete and permanent isolation of the external door aperture and on the construction of the corridor inside the raw-brick walls.

The initial procedure of this extraordinary funeral ceremony must remain, of course, supposition. It is most likely that the deceased lay for a while on his throne bed before burial in the stone crypt, with the three sacrificial horses, muzzles turned towards their owner, and also

In such a reconstruction, a clear chronological framework can be provided for the initial history of the Mausoleum of the Scythian Neapolis. The lower limit (the time of the erection of the funeral chamber ca. 130–125 BC) is determined by the general chronology of the palace 804

YURIY PAVLOVITCH ZAYTSEV: THE SCYTHIAN NEAPOLIS AND GREEK CULTURE OF THE NORTHERN BLACK SEA REGION

It seems clear that the man’s body in the stone crypt performed an exclusive public and state role, which predetermined all the activities undertaken to safeguard it. Under all circumstances the body was to remain in the Mausoleum of the Southern Palace – the main royal fortress of Scythia, even though the safety of the remains could have been assured by their secret deposition in another location at a distance from Neapolis.

complex (Zaytsev 1997, 43), and does not conflict with traditional concepts (Schultz 1953, 40–41; Koltukhov 1990, 186). The top limit can now be determined by the fact of the partial robbery of burials, by means of the corridor and stairs, at the time of the total destruction of the Southern palace during the stay of Diophantos’ armies here (Zaytsev 1997, 36). In turn, it allows us to compare the reconstructed history of a known archaeological feature and the data of its written sources, which have been repeatedly analysed in detail (Solomonik 1977; Vinogradov 1987, 67–79; Koltukhov 1994, 210–216).

Taking into account all the old and new data and the complicated situation around Neapolis at the end of the II c. BC, the human remains from the stone crypt (burial No. 37) of the Mausoleum must belong to the only man known from written sources – King Skiluros.

As may be seen from the table below, such a comparison is productive both in terms of visualizing the chronology and sequence of events.

1

2

3

4

Reconstruction of events on the basis of written sources ... the king of the Pontos ... displaces the former authorities and assigns the redoubtable general and diplomat Diophantos to command the armies. Diophantos arrived in the Chersonesos about 113 BC. Skiluros died at this time, and Palakus assumed power... (Vinogradov 1987, 70) After the 1st victory over Palakus, Diophantos temporarily reduces military activities, forms a barrier against the Tauroi, and conducts a parley with King Perisad. He then returns with his army to the Chersonesos ... and undertakes a field campaign into the heart of Scythia, where he occupies the Scythian fortresses of Khabei and Neapolis (Vinogradov 1987, 72-74) Ca. 112 BC. The perfidious separation of the Scythians from Pontos. In late autumn, Diophantos urgently comes to the Chersonesos with his army. The second campaign of Diophantos (late autumnwinter of 112-111 BC). The army sets out for the royal fortresses and turns to the western Crimea. The siege of Kerkenitida and Kalos Limen. Complete victory of Diophantos. (Vinogradov 1997, 74) Early spring – the capture of the main Scythian fortresses. The flight in panic of Palakus and his retinue from the country (Vinogradov 1987, 74-75)

Phases of the Mausoleum building The assembly of the anti-ram defences that distorted the main look of the Mausoleum. The external door in the eastern side still exists at this time.

Events in the funeral chamber of the Mausoleum The first and the main burial ceremony in the Mausoleum

The appearance in the chamber of not less than 8 coffins, containing at least 11 burials.

The external barricading of the doorway in the eastern wall of the Mausoleum. It was replaced by the fighting platform flanking the gate of the fortress from the west

The hurried and secret reburying of the high-status personage in the stone crypt. Obliteration of the door aperture. Assembly of the stairs and the corridor connecting the chamber and the Southern Palace.

Total destruction of the Southern Palace and the rapid accumulation of the stratum of crushed rawbricks (sub-horizon D1)

Partial robbery of the chamber through the corridor.

805

ANCIENT GREEK COLONIES IN THE BLACK SEA 2 interpretations. Although the king’s longevity is emphasized in the sources, the term ‘sons’ is most likely conditional. It could be explained by terminological usage, whereby Skiluros is ‘father’ to his citizens, military, and/or administrative chiefs (Koltukhov 1993, 213) – although some indeed might have been his actual sons. On coins, King Skiluros is represented with a beard, but this does not in itself equate to old age.

The construction of the elaborate funeral chamber, as mentioned above, was planned and built between 130 and 125 BC: at the same time as a general reconstruction of the Southern Palace (Zaytsev 1997, 43). There was no evidence of any external military threat: this is indicted by the exterior of the Mausoleum and by the device of its external door. The erection of anti-ram defences, which spoiled the external look of the Mausoleum, could have been the result of potential enemies threatening to use battering rams. Such enemies at that time could only have been the armies of Pontos, hence the construction of these anti-ram defences is chronologically close to the beginning of the Crimean military campaign of Mithridates Eupator (Koltukhov 1990, 187). The time of the death of Skiluros is reliably set at between 114 and 113 BC, corresponding to the first stage of the war, before the arrival of Diophantos (Vinogradov 1989, 249). Then there was an interval (c. 113/112 BC) during which about 8 coffin burials appeared within the chamber.

M.M. Gerasimov approximated the age of the buried man in the stone crypt as approximately 40–45 years (Gerasimov 1955, 576) and a modern examination of the bones of the skeleton and the analysis of field photos confirmed such a conclusion (Ponomaryov 2001). If he lived until his forties and died in 114–113 BC, these dates would give an interesting historical coincidence in terms of the Southern Palace. If the date of the severest fire were in 130 BC then this man would have been around 19–24 years old. Immediately after the fire the development of this architectural complex and the strengthening of the defensive walls of Neapolis began. The first stage of this reconstruction took place right away after the fire, and the second stage corresponds to the most active years of Skiluros’ rule – when he was between 25 and 32 years old.

Directly comparable to the events of autumn/winter 112– 111 BC is the emergency that happened soon after. Only the unexpected and complete defeat of the ScythianSarmatian army of Palakus made the enemy presence within the walls of Neapolis inevitable, hence intensifying the risk of profaning the royal grave – the state’s sacred heart (Schultz 1953, 50–51). The immediate reaction was the instantaneous and secret reburial of the royal body, the complete external isolation of the chamber, and the additional strengthening of the defences.

The unique situation with the main burial of the Mausoleum demonstrates a paradoxical case, when an archaeological dating can add nothing to the reconstruction offered. The burial goods can be widely dated from the middle of the 2nd to the middle of the 1st century BC, and a narrower date could be objectively set to the second half of the 2nd century BC (Zaytsev, 2001).

It is necessary to try and answer the question why the body of the king not buried in a posture that corresponded to the dimensions and construction of the stone crypt. The answer might be related to the social status of the dead. As is known, the high-status individuals were often mummified [Herodotus, Hist., IV, 71]. The simplest method of this, which required no special knowledge or preparation, was to immerse the body in pitch or wax solutions and extract the internal organs (Polos’mak 1996, 165). It is very probable, that the body of Skiluros had also been partially mummified, and it was then difficult to change the position in which it had been fixed on the throne-bed/bier (Fig. 5, 6) without damaging it.

7. Architecture. Building techniques8 Fortifications The various fortifications of the Neapolis were studied in the works of S.G. Koltukhov (1990; 1999, 31–38) and are discussed here with slight corrections (Zaytsev, 2004, fig. 30). The first building period (after Koltukhov 1999) correlates with sub-horizon E2 and is represented by the earliest walls. The total extent of its excavated area is 103 m.

The partial robbery of some of the burials was the final part in the first phase in the history of the Mausoleum. The total destruction of the buildings of the Skiluros Palace could have resulted from either natural causes, the conditions of the peace treaty (Vinogradov 1987, 75), or the deliberate actions of the Pontos army. The particular interest is the age of the burial within the stone crypt.

After the reconstruction suggested by S.G. Koltukhov (1999), the wall was made of stone and had no marked parapet. The upper part of the wall could have been made of stone on a clay mortar. The fighting platform was probably of wooden planking, supported by logs inserted into the masonry and resting on pillars. The wall was approximately 5 – 7 m high (Koltukhov 1999, 31).

In the literature the opinion prevails that Skiluros died at a venerable age. However, there is no indication in the written sources of the age of Skiluros, and the writings of Posidonius and Appolonides give different

8

806

Zaytsev, 2004, p. 21-23, fig. 22,23.

YURIY PAVLOVITCH ZAYTSEV: THE SCYTHIAN NEAPOLIS AND GREEK CULTURE OF THE NORTHERN BLACK SEA REGION

Megarons (Fig. 3,2)

It is possible that the wall on the first stage was either a temporary construction or was intended for protection against barbarian troops not accustomed to besieging and storming cities (Koltukhov 1990, 183–185).

Megarons are associated with high-status constructions (Kryzhitsky 1982, 132–135). This type of construction in the 2nd c. BC was represented by buildings N and E, which were rebuilt from earlier buildings with similar functions. In period D both megarons were evidently multi-functional – fulfilling a role both as high-status dwellings and cult/civil buildings (Kryzhitsky 1993, 226– 227; Zaytsev 1995). Both megarons were of a regular rectangular shape and had a single main apartment (naos) and a portico (pronaos) formed in antis.

In the second building period the wall, over its total extent, was strengthened by a defensive zone 2 m thick and by several towers. Now the thickness of the wall at its base reached 5–6 m. In the same period courses of bricks were laid along the stone bases of the walls and towers. It was from this time that Neapolis was to get fortifications worthy of capital status, at least in terms of their design and height (Koltukhov 1990, 185).

This type of construction is characterized by a clear, geometrical layout, an occupied area of between 30 and 130 sq. m, and several rooms either aligned or otherwise arranged. Unlike the farmsteads, the absence of joined apartments (and consequently internal courtyards) characterizes these constructions. Two such constructions were discovered in section D.

In the third building phase, the second and third defensive zones further strengthened the main wall. The tower investigated in section 6 was transformed into a bastion. Frontal walls and towers appeared near the central gate. The second defensive zone was constructed on the city side as a sequence of interrupted sectors, but only in those areas where repairs to the walls were required. The third zone strengthened the wall from the outside with a series of curtain walls 0.8–1 m thick. Pylons 4 m long were found near the main gate and adjoining the defensive zone – these most likely formed the base of a square tower (Koltukhov 1990, 185–186). Above the eastern gate a tower was also erected. Eastwards, the peribola was closed with a new defensive zone.

Ground level, single-roomed buildings The main features of ground level, single-roomed buildings are a single apartment, often of irregular layout, with an occupied area up to 40 sq. m. Such constructions are reliably identified in section B (x 2), Zh (x 1), 6 (x 1), 7 (x 1), and in the trenches dug in 1955–1956 (x 3).

All this gives the impression that at this stage the builders of Neapolis attempted Hellenistic fortification techniques to create a defensive system that could successfully hold out against a long siege. This might indicate a real threat at that time of an invasion of an army from Pontos (Koltukhov 1990, 186). The second and the third building phases of the defensive wall (after Koltukhov) can be equated with sub-horizons D4–D2.

Ground level constructions - conical wooden huts

In the fourth building period, the peribola in the area of the central gate was developed with new defensive zones. The eastern tower and the Mausoleum were also encircled with additional walls (Zaytsev, 2004, figs. 94, 95, 98). Such walls found in section E created a projection convenient for side shooting. There are reasons to accept P.N. Schultz’s opinion on the intensive strengthening works in the period of the Diophantos Wars and to date the fourth building period to 110–107 BC (Koltukhov 1990, 187).

These are generally identified by a dug-out area of up to 8–9 sq. m, with benches/shelves constructed along the walls. Primitive clay hearths were also found either inside or nearby. Occasionally postholes exist – either central or offset. In some cases an entrance and the remains of brick masonry are found around the foundation pit (feature No. 4 in section B and one in section 7v). So far 22 round and 9 rectangular structures of this type have been found at Neapolis.

They were identified from small circular clay platforms – up to 2 m in diameter. In some cases they were circled by stones and slightly dug into the earth. More than 10 such features have been discovered to date. Dug-out structures

The purpose of these constructions is unclear. The larger examples, with a floor area of over 4 sq. m, are probably dwellings of some sort. However the majority of them a smaller in size – up to 2 sq. m in diameter. It is possible that in Neapolis nearly all the dug-out structures were short-term (seasonal?) constructions. It is also possible that they were initially structures attached to dwellings that have not left any archaeological traces and so could have been used as ‘utility’ areas – kitchens, storerooms, etc.

Farmsteads Six farmsteads have been recognized but none have been extensively excavated. Their suggested features are as follows: a rectangular layout; an occupied area of around 500–700 sq.m; walls and a gate aperture; adjoining rooms off an internal courtyard. In some cases the layout possibly included towers with internal apartments, supposedly for dwelling/household use.

807

ANCIENT GREEK COLONIES IN THE BLACK SEA 2 The Southern Palace (Fig. 2,1,2).

8. Inscriptions, sculpture and reliefs of the Southern palace of the Scythian Neapolis9

The Southern Palace is a distinctive phenomenon within the architecture of the Scythian Neapolis. This unique complex, from different historical stages, consisted of a very wide range of features – a megaron, single- and multi-room houses, dug-out dwellings, walls, mausoleums, a pool, and altars.

The Southern Palace was identified as a result of a long period of investigation of the Scythian Neapolis. The feature is the supposed residence of Skiluros and the centre of the official royal cult. Among the large volume of finds, there is a special group of epigraphic documents and artistic monuments – reliefs, pedestals of statues and their fragments.

Building techniques was relatively primitive. Most of the buildings were constructed without elaborate planning. Among the building materials were limestone, clay, unfired bricks and wood. Ground level buildings had stone plinths and brick walls. The upper storeys of the dug-out houses were probably made completely of clay. Walls were made of raw, roughly cut stones and rubble, with elements of orthostatic technique. The floors in all cases were of clay. It is supposed that the round dug-out constructions had conical roofs, whereas the other buildings had span and lean-to roofs.

This area was first discovered by the inhabitants of Simferopol, who found three pedestals with Greek inscriptions and a large limestone relief with the image of a horseman. A small excavation made by I.P. Blaramberg in early 1827 uncovered a fragment of a marble (?) relief with images of two men, and A.S. Uvarov found four fragments from three pedestals with inscriptions (Schultz 1962, 35–40). Between 1945 and 1950 this area was investigated by the Simferopol group of the Tauro-Scythian expedition. They found a few remains of a number of ‘buildings with porticos’, which were accompanied by finds of small fragments of several reliefs and statues (Schultz 1957, 71).

The building techniques used for the defensive walls were the same as those employed for the dwelling/household constructions. It is clear that the labourers were unskilled and that the main walls were not well planned in advance. This is evident from the uneven surfaces, the haphazard courses of stone, the use of poorly selected materials, etc. As a result, this massive and important construction was often in need of attention. Later attempts to repair the defences of Neapolis were hampered by the problems caused by the mistakes of earlier building phases.

In section D in 1958 a further pedestal with an inscription was found (Dashevskaya 1960). In 1959, and later between 1989 and 1993, there was a detailed excavation of the northern part of the Southern Palace (Zaytsev 1994). During the investigation of the palace megaron fragments of two statues were found.

The exception in terms of build quality was the fortress’s Southern Palace. From the outset, its main building – Megaron N – was outstanding in terms of its size, regular geometric layout, thick walls (1.35 m at the base), and the construction of its tiled roof. Its layout suggested that was a 2-storeyed edifice.

Lastly, as a result of minor fieldwork in 1999, I.P. Blaramberg and A.S. Uvarov found very small remains of pedestals, a piece of a bronze statue, a male torso (marble) and numerous fragments of slabs with reliefs and an inscription. In total, the area of the Southern Palace of the Scythian Neapolis revealed six fragmentary limestone statue pedestals, the fragments of four sculptures, one marble relief, a limestone herm, more than 50 fragments of one or several statues made of bronze, and four limestone reliefs.

Other stages of the Palace reconstruction used such materials as well-processed limestone slabs and blocks. Some Palace buildings – the Heroon of Argotus, the Southern Facade, the Mausoleum of Skiluros – were skilfully built, even by Greek architectural standards. The surviving part of the stone plinth of the Southern Façade was made of carefully fitted stone blocks, which, despite the uneven sub-stratum rock, were laid precisely horizontally. Other features of the complex were also supplemented with elements of typical Greek building – tile roofs, frescoes, etc.

The Sculpture 1. Herm (Fig. 2,5). The limestone sculpture is in the shape of a tetrahedral pillar with a female head. It is restored from six fragments with a reconstructed height of 0.75 m. From the few paint traces remaining, the drapery was green and the head reddish-brown (ochre) (Zaytsev 1997, 40; 1999, 146; 2004, fig. 46–48).

Thus the architecture of the Scythian Neapolis in the Hellenistic period is represented by a mixed Greek/barbarian building tradition (Kryzhitsky 1993, 220).

9

808

Zaytsev, 2004, p. 49-52.

YURIY PAVLOVITCH ZAYTSEV: THE SCYTHIAN NEAPOLIS AND GREEK CULTURE OF THE NORTHERN BLACK SEA REGION

7. A statue fragment.

2. Hekataion (Fig. 2, 4). A fragment (17.5 x 14 x 7 cm) of a sculpture (fine-grained white marble) represents three draped female figures touching hands. The obverse surface is carefully polished. The general composition can be restored as a ‘prismatic draped herm of Hecate’ (Kraus 1960; Akimova 1983). The estimated height of the sculpture is 70–90 cm (the estimated height of the dancing group is 35–40cm (Zaytsev 1997, fig. 6; 1999, fig. 8; 2004, fig. 45).

The fragment is made of white marble and represents perhaps a right hand holding an object, round in section (spear, sceptre?). It was found during the excavations of 1950. The surface is carefully polished; the fingers and surface of the palm are worked in detail. The delicate lines of the hand suggest a fragment of a female statue (Schultz 1957, fig. 6v; Zaytsev 1997, fig. 7, 15). There is a possible connection between this fragment and the pedestal of Athena.

3. Pedestal (Fig. 7, 8) (108 x 102 x 16 cm). Found during the excavations of 1827. A flat, almost square, roughly dressed limestone slab. One corner is missing. The obverse side bears the remains of a two-line Greek inscription with the name of King Skiluros.

8. A statue pedestal (Fig. 7, 7). Made of limestone and carved with a dedication to Achilles on behalf of Posideos, son of Posideos, in which the pirating Satarkhae are mentioned. Found during the excavations of 1853 (Solomonik 1962, 38–39; Treister 1999, 138).

Βασιλευς Σκιλουρος βασι ... ς το λεαυ του βασιλισας ...

Άχιλλεί νήσου Ποσίδεος Ποσιδέου Σαταρχαίους πειρατεύσαντας[]

On the upper face there are five indentations intended for pins to support a statue (Solomonik 1962, 34; Treister 1999, 136). 4. Pedestal (Fig. 7, 6). Found during the excavations of 1827. Made of a marble-like limestone with a dedication to Zeus Atabirium on behalf of Posideos.

Dimensions: 24 cm high; reconstructed width: 60 cm. The upper plane is carelessly worked, with a preserved cutting from its previous lengthened form, 15 cm long and 3 cm deep. Using the standard proportional correlation of foot size to the whole figure, a height of 110 cm for the statue (standing) can be estimated.

Διί Αταβυρίωι Ποσίδεος Ποσιδέου χαριστήριον The upper face has two round sockets and a hollow in the shape of a human foot, 16 cm long (Solomonik 1962, 363; Treister 1999).

9. A pedestal fragment (Fig. 7, 10). The bottom right part of a pedestal, made of white dense fine-grained marble. There are the remains of an inscription, understood as being a dedication to Zeus, Achilles, and all gods (Solomonik 1962, 40). Found during the excavations of 1853.

5. Torso (Fig. 7, 11). Fragment (23 x 24 x 14 cm) of a male statue made of fine-grained white marble, found during the excavations of 1999. The piece is extensively damaged, particularly the front. The surface of the sculpture is carefully smoothed, the back and chest are worked in detail. The bend of the back and muscle features suggest a seated pose, with the left hand risen. The proportions of this fragment and the beforementioned pedestal with dedication correspond, suggesting they might be associated. If this is the case, the overall height of the statue and pedestal approximates at 1.3–1.4 m.

... ...βασιλεία... ...λεί καί θεοίς ...ιν[] 10. A pedestal fragment (18 x 10 cm) (Fig. 7, 9). The upper part of a pedestal made of white fine-grained marble, with part of a two-line inscription. Found during the excavations of 1853. The surfaces are carefully polished. Restoration of the text: ‘Achilles (son to) Khodarz...Ompsalak’ (Solomonik 1962, 35).

6. A limestone pedestal fragment (Fig, 7, 5), 25 x 22 cm, with a dedication to Athena Lindia on behalf of Posideos, son of Posideos (Solomonik 1962, 37–38; Treister 1999, 137). A find of 1827.

...λλεύς Χωδ... ...καλάκου...

Άθη]νάι Λινδίαι Ποσίδεος Ποσιδέου χαριστήριον

11. A marble statue fragment, representing part of a horse’s leg (?), with hoof, traces of a human leg (?), bent at the knee and in trousers (Zaytsev 1997, fig. 7, 19). The work is rather good, but there are tool marks and the surfaces are unpolished. From the fragment size (12 x 8 cm), and if accurately identified, the representation could be from a battle scene.

The pedestal is very damaged. On the upper face there are two hollows to support a statue.

809

ANCIENT GREEK COLONIES IN THE BLACK SEA 2 The metric eight-line inscription on the top left corner, and is limited on the right by the relief image of a spear with a long tip. A further fragment belongs to the same work, on which has survived the representations of a male head in a headdress, a shield (?), a horse’s head, and a vertically held spear shaft. Other fragments are even more damaged and cannot be restored.

12. Statue fragments. Fragments of one or several bronze statues were found during the excavations of 1945, 1949– 1950, 1999. At the present time more than 60 pieces are known, but the majority are very small in size – none more than 1.5 x 1.5 cm. A few larger fragments can be identified as the representation of locks of hair and various parts of the human body, showing muscles and skin (Schultz 1957, fig. 6b; Zaytsev 1997, fig. 7, 16). The Reliefs

The average distance between the lines is 1.5 cm. The letters are precisely carved, to a uniform depth, with an average height of 1.2–1.5 cm.

13. Fragment of a relief. Limestone, 25 x 16 cm. The subject matter is not identifiable (Vysotskaya 1979, 181). Found during the excavations of 1948.

The restored text reads: 1 Λαΐνεον τόδε σημα μεγαυχ[ήτοι]ο έ[στησεν] 2 [’Α]ργοτου ó Σκυθίης κοίρανος ίπποβό[του], 3[αί]ζηοις δέ λιπόντα ποθην προσ[ηκοντα] άγευς 4 [εί]νεκεν Ελλάνων στέργε φιλο[φροσύνης], 5 [π]ολλά δέ κ[αί ί]σχΰσι [προ]καμών [πάτρης έπί πλήθη] 6 Θραικών Μαιω[τών τ’’´ Αρει] όπιν κίδα[σεν], 7 υίεις δ[έ έξήκο]ντα κόρας ϊσας τε [έφυσεν] 8 θρέψα[ς δ’ άντί] νυ τοϋ παιδός’ ’Ιδ[ανθέμιδος ?]

14. Fragment of a relief (Fig. 1, 1). Marble, 0.38 x 0.22 cm. Found during the excavations of 1827. The original now lost, and only known now from gypsum copies. It represents the figures of a bearded man and a beardless in matching headdresses with diadem. P.N. Schultz reconstructed these images as Kings Skiluros and Palakus, and identifying the lower break in the fragment as contours of a horse’s neck and head (Schultz 1946, 55– 56). However, there is another variant of reconstruction – a multi-figured composition with several standing figures, for example a scene of adoration.

The translation10: 1. This stone tomb was erected to many-gloried 2. Argotus by the governor of Scythia, (which is) rich in horse pastures. 3. (Who) instructed the valorous warriors to miss the near relation in a respectful fear of the gods 4. for the sake of Hellenes love and friendliness. 5. (Who) by many forces coming forward in defence (of the Motherland on hordes of) 6. has stretched the Thracians (and) the Meaotae on the god’s (Ares) punishment and dispersed them, 7. (who gave birth to) (six)ty sons and the same number of daughters, 8. and brought up them alike the son of Id(anthemidos).

15. A limestone bas-relief of a horseman (Fig. 1, 2), identified as a relief of ‘Palakus riding’ (Schultz 1946; Vysotskaya 1979, 180). The main fragments were found in 1827 and a further piece – a right hand holding a spear shaft – in 1949. The dimensions of the slab are 2.05 m long x 1.33 m wide, with the thickness varying between 7 and 13 cm. The lower face a projection 54 cm wide; the reverse is unfinished. The upper and lower edges have longitudinal grooves, 10–12 cm wide and 3 cm deep. The surface of the relief is well smoothed and the details are carefully worked. Of special interest are the grooves on the elements of the harness, which obviously served for fastening of metal details. The relief represents a young man holding a spear in his right hand. His clothes and headdress are identical to those shown in relief No. 14.

18. A pedestal (Fig. 7, 4). The pedestal with a dedication to the goddess Rhodes on behalf of Posideos is made of limestone. It is broken into two parts, and was found during the excavations of 1958 in section D, Megaron A, in a layer of horizons B-A. On the upper face there are two round hollows, and a further in the form of schematic human foot, 16 cm long (Dashevskaya 1960; Solomonik 1962, 36–37; Treister 1999). Despite the fact that the pedestal was found far from the main accumulation of the inscriptions and reliefs, it derives from the same location (with the same personage who dedicated the statue; the style of inscription, etc.) (Solomonic 1962, 43).

16. A relief fragment. I.P. Blaramberg’s excavations in 1827 revealed a further limestone relief, on which survived some parts of an image of a human figure and back leg of an animal, under which there is a dog with bared teeth (Tunkina 2002, fig. 143). 17. A slab with a relief and inscription (Fig. 7, 3) mentioning Argotus (Zaytsev 2000; Vinogradov, Zaytsev 2002). The excavations of 1999 revealed more than 200 fragments of a relief, not less than 50 of which featured parts of inscriptions. The size of the reconstructed part of the relief is 78 x 64 cm and it is made of a dense limestone. The upper part is shaped as a profiled cornice with traces of painting. A band with inscription is carefully polished.

Ρ[ό]δωι Ποσίδεος Ποσιδέου χαριστήριον

10 The text was translated into English after the Russian version made by Yury G. Vinogradov.

810

YURIY PAVLOVITCH ZAYTSEV: THE SCYTHIAN NEAPOLIS AND GREEK CULTURE OF THE NORTHERN BLACK SEA REGION

constructed earlier than 133–130 BC – a date determined by the Rhodian amphora stamps that were found directly under the rubble spoil extracted during the cutting of the pit. Similar cult constructions are known from Asia Minor and the Hellenistic East (Fedak, 1990, fig. 62, 70, 91, 101, 238; Pichikyan 1991, 232–238).

19. A fragment of a small marble. The upper face has a circular hollow. Both sides of the corner have the remains of a Greek inscription. It was found during the excavations of 1949 (Solomonic 1958, 310-312). Μντρι Ευμην[…

This recent research into the territory in front of the central gate of the Scythian Neapolis, near the facade of the Southern Palace, seems to question the validity of the hypothesis concerning the ‘building with porticos’ and its decoration. The fragments of well-dressed blocks enable a reconstruction of at least part of the monumental facade of the palace – in particular a small, frontal sanctuary/heroon, to which the majority of monuments and inscriptions are associated.

Up to now it was usually believed that the statues with dedications and the reliefs decorated the so-called ‘building with porticos’ – a facade of the Oalace complex (Solomonic 1952; Schultz 1953; 1957, 70–71; Vysotskaya 1978, 58–59; Zaytsev 1990; 1997, 41–43; 1999, 131). The development of this assumption is of interest. In 1949 A.N. Karasev discovered foundation masonry of processed stone blocks, and near which were found a limestone capital, fragments of bronze and marble statues, and a fragment of a limestone relief. Based on his own idea about the architectural layout of the site and its relation to the axis of the central gate, the director of the excavations assumed that he had discovered the eastern half of a building, which was defined at once as a portico. The excavations in 1950 produced a few insignificant traces of the supposed western part of what they called the ‘Solemn Building’ (Karasev 1953, 82; Schultz 1953, 50; 1957, 70–71). The former finds of inscriptions and sculptural monuments were confidently connected with the ‘Western portico’ but they were actually found to the south.

9. Material culture11 Economy The material finds of the Scythian Neapolis of the Hellenistic period present only indirect traces of agriculture and cattle breeding. The farmsteads of subhorizon E3 may be compared with analogous constructions of Greek settlements at Olbia, Chersoneses and Bosporos (Kryzhitsky 1993, 161–165; Kryzhitsky et al. 1989, 120–123; Puzdrovsky 1988). The farmsteads are connected to the large reservoirs and dams situated in the neighbouring gullies, which already existed at the time of the appearance of the first burials in the eastern necropolis (Symanovich 1983, 10, 14).

Close to the ‘Western portico’, again in the 1950 excavations, a foundation pit was also partially uncovered. It had been cut into the rock and filled later with layers of mixed soil. At the time this pit attracted little attention, although it was marked on the settlement plan as having been investigated by I.P. Blaramberg and A.S. Uvarov (Schultz 1957, fig. 4z). In 1959 there were further attempts to explore the pit but no new results were forthcoming.

Many features of the material culture of sub-horizon E2 testify to its non-settled or semi-settled way of life; these include: the absence of building remains in most areas of the settlement, the temporary character of the majority of semi-dug-out houses, and the abundance of bones of domestic animals. However, at the same time some of the earlier farmsteads continued to exist and more permanent buildings began to appear. The burnt grains of wheat and rye were found several times within the stratum of Fire 1 (Yanushevich 1983, 67).

In 1979 T.N. Vysotskaya, based on the conclusions of A.N. Karasev and P.N. Schultz, was the first to suggest an alternative reconstruction of the so-called ‘Building with porticos L’ (Vysotskaya 1979, fig. 17) (Fig. 57, 1A); this reconstruction has been periodically corrected (Zaytsev 1990, fig. 9; 1997, fig. 1, fig. 7, 1; 1999, fig. 2, 8) (Fig.57, 1B, 1C).

The status of the main royal fortress and the presence of the Southern Palace in period D are unlikely to be associated with the agricultural production from the territory of fortress. Some distinctive features from the Palace itself – the rich warrior burials of the Mausoleum, the images of horsemen on the artefacts, the animal bones found among the food waste – suggest the mounted and nomadic propensities of its inhabitants.

Recent re-examination of all the information on this site has shown that, in fact, all finds of sculptures and reliefs (and a few architectural details as well) seem to have associations with the rock-cut pit (Fig. 7, 1). Following the fieldwork of 1999 this feature was interpreted as the foundations of a monumental cult building, or Heroon (Zaytsev 2000; Vinogradov, Zaytsev, 2003). As well as other objects, the monument with the inscription in honour of Argotus was located to this site. It was not

11

811

Zaytsev, 2004, p. 23-24.

ANCIENT GREEK COLONIES IN THE BLACK SEA 2 they testify to the appeal of this game within the Hellenistic Neapolis.

Crafts Period E has revealed only what appears to be professionally made pottery. In the settlement there have been found defective examples of ceramics and comparable items. Tiles, jugs and cups, lamps and altars, and terracotta figurines were made in small amounts for internal use (Zaytsev, 2004a, ριν. 355–356). There are also traces of bone processing, as well as spinning and weaving, but these are not of commercial quality.

Sacrificial sites, cult objects, and amulets In the territory of the settlement one constantly finds hollows with animal bones. Three were discovered in the north-eastern part of palace megaron N, near the clay altar. In megaron E a similar hollow was investigated; it contained the bones of 5 sheep, sherds from 9 very small ceramic vessels, 4 anthropomorphic and 3 zoomorphic figurines (Malikov 1961; Vysotskaya 1979, 164–165). An anthropomorphic figurine identical to the one found in megaron E was discovered not far from the megaron, in household pit No. 16.

In period D many crafts were concentrated within the Southern Palace. Apart from the professionally made pottery, stone processing (mainly sculptures) can also be mentioned, as well as the crafting of wooden artefacts (including those of high artistic quality). During the excavations of the palace numerous traces of metallurgy were found, e.g. casting moulds.

The distribution of the ritual ceramic items is very significant – both territorially and chronologically. In horizon E single finds were made of terracotta figurines of Demetra, Kybela, Aphrodite, and Tyche (Zaytsev, 2004, fig. 33). Ceramic altars (Fig. 3, 3) were taken from the farmsteads of sub-horizon E3 and the houses of subhorizon E2. Fragments of round incense burners were found in the dug-out features or near the remains of the small conical huts.

Trade The leading trade imports from period E were amphorae from Rhodes, Sinopa, Chersonesos, Knidos, and other centres. In addition, there were finds of some simple items of slip-coated tableware, mould-made cups, and other single objects.

The Southern Palace was the centre of ritual life and most of the associated features and artefacts derive from – royal mausoleums/heroons, altar and ritual pool, sculptures of Greek and barbarian deities (see Appendix 1), terracottas, ceramic altars, and incense burners.

In period D the main accumulations of imported objects were in the Southern Palace; these included amphorae, slip-coated pottery, luxury items, ornaments, weaponry, and other objects.

The hall of megaron N was most likely intended for meals and ritual ceremonies related to the royal cult (Zaytsev 1997, 39). A marble herm of Hecate (Fig. 2, 4) and a limestone herm of another female deity were placed there (Fig, 2, 5) (Zaytsev 1997, fig. 3, 4; Zaytsev, 2004, fig. 45–48). According to the reconstruction (Fig. 3, 2, 4,) the second sculpture was put in a prominent niche opposite the central hearth, thus underscoring its significance for the inhabitants of the megaron.

Life The living standards in most dwellings were rather low. An open fire was used for preparing food and heating the rooms. There are no traces of furniture apart from the splendid throne bed/bier found in the Mausoleum. Closed ceramic lamps were used for lighting in the Southern Palace (Zaytsev, 2004, fig. 81; 119, 4). Handmade pots of various shapes were used for cooking and tableware was also mainly handmade (Dashevskaya 1958). The use of imported tableware was limited. Materials from the necropolis show the widespread use of toiletry items (mirrors, ungventaria, tweezers, etc.) and tools (knives, spinning-wheels, needles, awls, etc.).

An attribution for the herm within the sanctuary on the acropolis of Panticapaeum is of some importance. An altar was found with a dedication to Ditagoia on behalf of Senamotis, daughter of King Skiluros (Vinogradov 1987). V.P. Tolstikov, the researcher of Panticapaeum, suggests that it was a rich cult complex of ArtemisHecata, belonging to a very high status family in the Bosporan capital (Tolstikov 1987, 107–108). He also concludes that Ditagoia was the main barbarian goddess, particularly worshipped by members of the clan of Skiluros (Tolstikov 1987, 111–112). This goddess appears so closely linked to Artemis and Hecate, that in this case they could have merged into a single deity – Arthemis-Hecate-Ditagoia.

Life in the Southern Palace was somewhat different. Here a diverse range of Greek ceramics was in use – lagynoi, cathharoi, fish-dishes, mould-bowls, pelikoi, etc. (Zaytsev, 2004a, ριν. 347–356). Bone casket hinges and carved bone bed ornaments, wooden combs, and imported bronze mirrors. Dice seem to have been popular in the palace: on the floors of megaron N more than 30 astragali (from sheep) were found, including drilled and polished examples. Such finds appeared in several other locations as well and

This might in turn lead to a hypothesis that the limestone herm from Neapolis might well be a representation of Ditagoia – the principal female deity worshipped in the 812

YURIY PAVLOVITCH ZAYTSEV: THE SCYTHIAN NEAPOLIS AND GREEK CULTURE OF THE NORTHERN BLACK SEA REGION

30 ha. In several cases the accumulations of buildings consisted of several dug-out dwellings and small ground level houses. The central building of one of these complexes was located in the southern part of the settlement. It was a ‘proto-megaron’ – a building with lengthened proportions and with a central hearth. The material culture of the E2 horizon developed but still retained its mixed Graeco-barbarian character.

palace of the Scythian Neapolis. This can be supported by the situation of this sculpture inside the palace megaron and by its cultural context (it was located near the hecataion). The general structure of the palace reflects the probability that this was the favoured cult of the king. Mausoleums of Argotus and Skiluros, as burial sites of divine kings, also correspond to this cult. Evidently some ceremonies were connected to the ritual reservoir (pool). The symbols found on its bottom surface (Zaytsev 1997, 37, 39) suggest astral-calendar holidays related to fertility cults.

As far as it is possible to judge from the available data on the history of Neapolis, around 130 BC there took place certain important events that were radically to alter the look and function of this settlement. The ‘proto-megaron’ became a new megaron with unusually large dimensions and in the Greek style. From this time it formed the heart of a new complex – the Southern Palace. The southern defensive wall was built at approximately the same time, transforming the greater part of the settlement into a fortress, with an area of not less than 18 ha. The wall and its central gate were oriented to the main megaron N (Fig. 2, 1).

10. The Scythian Neapolis and historical events of the 2nd c. BC12 Distinctions in terminology do not allow us unequivocally to determine whether the Scythian Neapolis was a city or not, and if it was, in which periods and to what degree. In this connection the evolution of Neapolis is of great interest. It can be compared to those cases when the basic structural kernel of a proto-city, from the moment of its occurrence, was a uniform palace-temple complex. In many cases such constructions preceded a proto-city in the form of isolated ritual-administrative centres (perhaps a possible variant of Neapolis) (Andreev 1987, 16).

Immediately after these events the fortress was engulfed in a catastrophic fire, in which all the known complexes and features of Neapolis were lost (period E1). It is not known what events were possibly connected with this conflagration. There have been attempts to explain it as the result of a Sarmatian attack (Zaytsev 1999, 143–144; Puzdrovsky 2001, 93) but the evidence is extremely thin.

Period E In the second quarter/middle of the 2nd c. BC (E3), a group of strengthened farmsteads of the Greek type functioned here. Their state of preservation does not allow us to reconstruct in detail the initial stages of the history of the Scythian Neapolis. It is only possible to assume that there was a settled agricultural basis to this phenomenon, and to ascertain the original Graecobarbarian culture of the first settlers who appeared in the location that was to become the site of the future fortress.

The question of the initial period in the history of the Scythian Neapolis is directly linked to development of Late Scythian culture. At present there are some common hypotheses. The traditional point of view (Grakov 1947; Artamonov 1948; Vysotskaya 1992; Khrapunov 1995, 50) puts forward very plausible associations between the cultures of the Late Scythians and the Steppe Scythians of between the 7th to 4th centuries BC. According to this opinion, the existence of Scythia in the Crimea of the 2nd century BC to the 3rd century AD is represented as the last stage of the ‘millennial history of the Scythians of the northern Black Sea region’ (Olkhovsky, Khrapunov, 1990, 64–67).

The causes of the appearance of such a phenomenon in the central Crimea are not clear. There must have been several factors: it is possible that there was a link with the migration processes of neighbouring regions (Puzdrovsky 1988), the increasing Sarmatian threat (Polin 1992, 116– 117), and/or events within the zone of the La Tène cultures (Schukin 1994, 95–119). It is interesting that the reservoirs and dams appear to be associated to the horizon of these farmsteads: the earthen necropoli that were to appear later are unknown in this phase.

A.N. Scheglov writes that: ‘The formation of the Late Scythian kingdom should be explained first of all by sharp and sudden changes in the demographic and political situation in the northern Black Sea region as a whole, instead of an evolutionary internal development of Late Scythian society’ (Scheglov 1988, 32). Thus, this scholar dates the event to the 1st half of the 3rd c. BC, and then to the third quarter/middle of the 2nd c. BC (Scheglov 1998, 150).

Around the middle of the 2nd century BC the haphazard growth began here of what was to become a large settlement, in the northern part of which there probably existed a small fortification, or ‘acropolis’ (E2). Various structures were distributed over an area of not less than 12

To this idea, in many respects, is linked the theory that there was no continuity between the Scythian monuments of 700–400 BC and earliest monuments of the Late Scythian culture. In between there was a break of a minimum of 100 years. The material culture of the Late

Zaytsev, 2004, p. 35-37.

813

ANCIENT GREEK COLONIES IN THE BLACK SEA 2 not earlier than 130 BC, immediately after the catastrophic Fire 1.

Scythians has no well-expressed signs of the classical Scythian culture (Zaytsev, Puzdrovsky 1994, 232; Zaytsev 1995, 87; Puzdrovsky 1999, 100-101; 2001, 87).

The attribution of the monument is based on an inscription found here mentioning Argotus (Fig. 7, 3) (Vinogradov, Zaytsev 2003). The anonymous poet of the Neapolis inscription was well versed in Homer and early Greek lyrics; in the surviving part of the text there are no less than 10 homerisms, including Homeric grammar. The features of its contents, combined with the context of the find, allow the assumption that governor of Scythia mentioned in the inscription, on behalf of whom the epitaph was made and the monument erected, was King Skiluros. The absence of his name from the text suggests that either on the right of the plaque just behind the relief of the horseman, or on the other side of the monument, there could have been a carved inscription recording the full details of both the deceased and the person who erected the tomb. Two possible chains of events are further suggested.

The products of the Neapolis Scythian confirm the hypothesis of the independent origin of the Late Scythian culture. On the one hand, its formation probably represented a process of synthesis of various cultures of the northern Black Sea region – the north Pontic Greeks, representatives of La Tène cultures, barbarian tribes of the lowland and mountainous areas of the Crimea, and the populations of the pre-Caucasus region and the Asian Bosporos (Scheglov 1998, 150–151; Zaytsev 1995, 86– 87; Puzdrovsky 1999, 101–102; 2001, 88–89; Koltukhov 2001, 61). On the other hand, the short-term formation of a barbarian Crimean culture in the middle of the 2nd c. BC might be a consequence of an eastern impulse, based on a localized ‘Tauro-Scythian’ stimulus (Zaytsev 1999, 142–143). Period D After the catastrophic fire the fortress was transformed into a powerful stronghold, lacking any capital building. Over the next two decades the only major complex within the territory of the fortress was the Southern Palace at the central gate of the Scythian Neapolis.

Argotus could have been killed during this catastrophe; he was then buried then in the monumental tomb. Alternatively he could have died earlier and was buried somewhere else, and then, after the fire, his body was transferred to an especially prepared memorial mausoleum.

After several major repairs it became an isolated complex with a complicated structure, the centre of which was a megaron with a closed courtyard, surrounded by houses of the Greek type. In front of the palace façade, in consecutive order, were the Mausoleum-Heroon of Argotus, the monumental altar, and the Mausoleum of Skiluros – already situated outside the fortress. From today’s perspective it is possible to conclude that this unique architectural object can be viewed as a royal residence and as a sanctuary of a royal cult (Zaytsev 1997) – similar to palaces of the Creto-Mycenaean culture (Lindgren 1987, 39–42; Zois 1987, 43–44).

In any case the location of the Mausoleum/heroon itself – inside the fortress, behind the central gate, directly in front of the entrance to the royal Palace – unequivocally testifies that Skiluros gave exclusive significance to this monument. The name of Argotus mentioned in such a context recalls another known inscription from the Panticapaeum (KBN75), in which are mentioned Perisad IV Philometr, his mother Kamasaria (daughter of King Spartok and widow of the deceased Perisad III), and Argotus – the husband of Kamasaria. There is a further opinion, according to which the widowed Bosporean queen subsequently married a representative of the royal family of one of the neighbouring barbarian tribes. The date of this rumoured event is put between 170 and 150 BC (Vinogradov 1997, 531–537; Stolyarik 1998, 66–67; Tolstikov, Vinogradov 1999, 295–296). On the basis of the two mentioned inscriptions, the name of Argotus’ father can be restored as Idantemidos or Idant.

By virtue of its funtion the Southern Palace was a place for the concentration of the main features of Late Scythian culture. Within its confines was a special ‘palace’, characteristic of the aristocracy and with a strongly expressed Graeco-barbarian appearance. This combination of attributes also allows one to view the Southern Palace as the main headquarters of King Skiluros, determining the function of Neapolis as a royal fortress and a political and military administrative state centre (Koltukhov 1999, 92). The Olbian citizen Posideos, son of Posideos, on whose behalf were made the dedications to Zeus, Athene, Achilles, and the deity of the Rhodes, is seen as an ‘entrepreneur’ of some significance and counsellor to Skiluros (Latyshev 1887, 133; Solomonik 1962, 44; Vinogradov 1989, 241–245; Saprykin 1986, 204; Zubar 1996).

In the inscription from the Panticapaeum the name of Argotus is mentioned without a title. At the time of his marriage to Kamasaria he might have been a young man, and by so doing, his entry into the ruling dynasty of the Bosporos was an important political act. The event obviously launched the political career of Argotus: a career that was to end with his state funeral by the Southern Palace of the Scythian Neapolis.

At the Solemn gate of the Scythian Neapolis in front of the Southern Palace the heroon of Argotus was erected

Another mausoleum adjoined to the front defensive wall can be recognized as an ancestral crypt of King Skiluros, 814

YURIY PAVLOVITCH ZAYTSEV: THE SCYTHIAN NEAPOLIS AND GREEK CULTURE OF THE NORTHERN BLACK SEA REGION

1950, 89; Vysots’ka 1992; Khrapunov 1992; Zubar 1992; Puzdrovsky 1992). Among the modern points of view are various definitions of the realm of Skiluros as a barbarian monarchy of the Hellenistic type (Scheglov 1988, 37–38), or as a state formation combining elements of Hellenistic monarchy and much earlier systems of the Palace/Temple type, characteristic of the Mediterranean (Zaytsev 1999, 147).

buried here on the eve of the wars with Diophantos, not later than 114/113 BC (Vinogradov 1989, 249). With the new details connected to the burial in the stone crypt of the Mausoleum, it is interesting to compare the basic stages in the development of the Southern Palace to the age of its ruler – King Skiluros. If he had lived until his forties and died in 114–113 BC, the comparison of these figures with the history of the Southern Palace demonstrates an interesting coincidence. At the time of the most destructive fire (130 BC), this man would have been between in his early twenties. The development of this architectural complex and the strengthening of the defensive walls of Neapolis began immediately after the disaster. The first stage of this reconstruction took place after the fire and the second stage corresponds to the most active age of Skiluros – when he was between 25 and 32 years old. These largescale activities are a direct reflection of Skiluros’ influence and his rule can be dated from 130 to 114/113 BC. These 15 years probably witnessed the setting up of the Olbian protectorate, the capture of the Chersonesian chora, and the strengthening of dynastic connections with Bosporos (Vinogradov 1987, 249–250; Zaytsev 1999, 144; Koltukhov 1999; Puzdrovsky 2001, 91–92). The mention in the inscription of the defeated Maeots and Thracians probably points to other, unknown, military victories of Skiluros. However, different versions of the restoration of the ancient text could attribute these hypothetical victories to Argotus.

The recent research of V.M. Zubar argues against earlier opinions, concluding that the realm of Skiluros was an early, stratified society, with nothing in common with Hellenistic monarchies (Zubar 2002, 515). The characteristics of Neapolis reveal the stages of its historical evolution. In period E several farmsteads developed into a settlement. Subsequently (period D) the settlement became a royal fortress with a Palace/Temple complex. ABBREVIATIONS IOSPE

Latyschev B. Inscriptiones antiquae orae septentrionalis Ponti Euxini Graecae et Latinae (1885—1916). Petropolis. VDI – ВДИ Вестник древней истории. Москва. (In Russian). KBN – КБН Корпус боспорских надписей. МоскваЛенинград. (In Russian). VLGU - ВЛГУ Вестник Ленинградского государственного университета. (In Russian). IADK - ИАДК История и археология древнего Крыма. (In Russian). ITOIAE - ИТОИАЭ Известия Таврического общества истории, археологии и этнографии. (In Russian). ITUAK – ИТУАК Известия Таврической ученой архивной комиссии. (In Russian). KSIA - КСИА Краткие сообщения Института археологии АН СССР. (In Russian). KSIIMK - КСИИМК Краткие сообщения Института истории материальной культуры АН СССР. (In Russian). MAIET - МАИЭТ Материалы по археологии, истории и этнографии Таврики. (In Russian). MIA - МИА Материалы и исследования по археологии СССР. (In Russian). NE - НЭ Нумизматика и эпиграфика. (In Russian). RA - РА Российская археология. (In Russian). SA - СА Советская археология. (In Russian). SAI - САИ Свод археологических источников. (In Russian). ChS - ХС Херсонесский сборник. (In Russian).

It looks probable that there was a transition of power in Scythia from Argotus to Skiluros, although in the inscription there is no indication of their blood relationship. Perhaps in this particular case there is an indication of alternative and more complicated ways of succession to the throne. The death of Skiluros and the accession to the throne of his preferred son Palakus coincided with the initial stages of the triumphant military campaign of Diophantos – a general of Mithridates VI Eupator – against the barbarians to protect Chersonesos. Obviously, the new governor undertook major projects to strengthen the fortifications of the Scythian Neapolis (Koltukhov 1999, 35; Zaytsev, 2001, 44–45; Puzdrovsky 2001, 95). The course and results of the military campaigns of Diophantos are well known [IOSPE I2, 352] (Saprykin 1986, 218–215; Vinogradov 1987, 74–75; Koltukhov 1999, 91–94; Zaytsev 2001, 43–45; Puzdrovsky, 2001, 95–97). The utter defeat of the united army of Palakus and the leader of the Sarmatian tribe Roksolanae Thasius resulted in the final destruction of the barbarian realm of Skiluros.

BIBLIOGRAPHY Abramov 1993. - Абрамов А.П. 1993. Античные амфоры. Периодизация и хронология. In: Боспорский сборник. Вып. 3. Москва. (In Russian).

The state system of Crimean Scythia in the time of Skiluros and Palakus has been much discussed (Schultz 815

ANCIENT GREEK COLONIES IN THE BLACK SEA 2 Akimova 1983. - Акимова Л.И. 1983. Новый памятник скульптуры из Пантикапея (К проблеме гекатейонов) In: ВДИ № 3. (In Russian). Andreev 1987. - Андреев Ю.В. 1987. Ранние формы урбанизации. In: ВДИ № 1. (In Russian). Anokhin 1977. - Анохин В.А. 1977. Монетное дело Херсонеса (IV в. до н.э. -XIII в.н.э.). Киев. (In Russian). Anokhin 1986. - Анохин В.А. 1986. Монетное дело Боспора. Киев. (In Russian). Artamonov 1948. - Артамонов М.И. 1948. Скифское царство в Крыму In: ВЛГУ, №8. (In Russian). Babenchikov 1957. - Бабенчиков В.П. 1957. Некрополь Неаполя скифского In: ИАДК. К. (In Russian). Babkov 1956. - Бабков А.А. 1956. Природные условия Неаполя скифского. Рукопись. Научный архив КФ ИА НАНУ. Инв. Р ¹ 21. (In Russian). Badal’yants 1976. - Бадальянц Ю.С. 1976. Хронологическое соответствие имен эпонимов и фабрикантов на амфорах Родоса. In: СА. 4. (In Russian). Badal’yants 1982. - Бадальянц Ю.С. 1982. Опыт хронологической классификации родосских амфорных клейм. In: НЭ. - 1982. - Т. XIII. (In Russian). Becker 1856. – Becker P. 1856. Die Herakleotische Halbinsel in archäologischer Beziehung. Leipzig. Blaramberg 1889. - Бларамберг И.П. 1889. О местоположении трех крепостей тавро-скифов. In: ИТУАК. 7. (In Russian). Blaramberg 1931. Blaramberg J. de. 1931. De la position de Trois fortresses Tauro-Scythes, dont parle Strabon, avec cartes, plans, copies d’inscroptions et dessins d’après des mabres antiques. Odessa. Braun 1879. - Браун Ф.К. 1879. Черноморье: сборник исследований по исторической географии Южной России. Одесса. (In Russian). Burachkov 1881. - Бурачков П.О. 1881. Опыт соглашения открытой в Херсонесе надписи с природою местности и сохранившимися у древних писателей сведениями, относящимися ко времени войн Диофанта, полководца Митридата со скифами. In: ЗООИД. т.7-12. (In Russian). Dashevskaya 1958. - Дашевская О.Д. 1958. К вопросу о локализации трех скифских крепостей, упоминаемых Страбоном. In: ВДИ. 2. (In Russian). Dashevskaya 1960. - Дашевская О.Д. 1960. Четвертая надпись Посидея из Неаполя скифского. In: СА № 1. (In Russian). Dashevskaya 1968. - Дашевская О.Д. 1968. Лепная керамика Неаполя скифского. In: МИА.64. (In Russian). Dashevskaya 1991. - Дашевская О.Д. 1991. Поздние скифы в Крыму. САИ (Д1-7). М. (In Russian). Debets 1948. - Дебец Г.Ф. 1948. Палеоантропология СССР. М.-Л. (In Russian). Dombrovsky 1961. - Домбровский О.И. 1961. О технике декоративной живописи Неаполя скифского. In: СА № 4. (In Russian). Dubois de Montpéreux F. 1843. Voyage autour du Caucase, chez les Tcherkesses et les Abkases, en Colchide, en Géorgie, en Arménie, en Crimée. Paris. Ernst 1927. - Эрнст Н.Л. 1927. Неаполь скифский (к столетию со дня первых раскопок). In: Вторая конференция археологов СССР в Херсонесе. Севастополь. (In Russian). Fedak J. Monumental Tombs of the Hellenistic Age: A Study of Selected Tombs from the Pre-Classoical to the Early Imperial Era. Toronto, London, 1990. Filimonov 1880. - Филимонов Г.Д. 1880. Антропологическая выставка 1879 г. Т. 3. Ч. 2. Вып. 2. М. (In Russian).

Finkielsztejn G. 2000. Amphores importées au Levant Sud à l’époque hellénistique // Е’ еπιστημονικη συναντεσε για τεν ελληνιστικη κεραμικη. Χρονολογικα προβληματα κλειστα συνολα - εργαστηρια.. Αθηα. Finkielsztejn G. 2001. Chronologie d’etaillée et révisee des éponymes amphoriques Rhodiens, de 270 à 108 av. J.-C. environ. BAR International Series 990.Oxford. Frolova 1997. - Фролова Н.А. 1997. Монетное дело Боспора. Ч. 1. М. (In Russian). Gerasimov 1955. - Герасимов М.М. 1955. Восстановление лица по черепу . М. (In Russian). Golentsov, Golenko 1979. - Голенцов А.С., Голенко В.К. 1979. Из керамической эпиграфики Неаполя. In: КСИА.159. (In Russian). Grace V. 1952. Timbres amphoriques trouvés à Délos. In: Bulletin de Correspondance héllenique. LXXVI. Grakov 1947. - Граков Б.М. 1947. Скiфи. Киïв. (In Ukrainian). Grakov 1971. - Граков Б.Н. 1971. Скифы. М. (In Russian). Højte J.M. 2003. The date of the alliance between Chersonesos and Pharnakes (IOSPE I/2, 402) and its implications. In: Proceedings of the Conference on chronology of the Black Sea Area in the period c. 400-100 BC. Aarhus. Imhoof-Blumer F. 1912. Die Kupferprägung des Mithradatischen Reiches und andere Münzen des Pontos und Paphlagoniens. In: Numizmatische Zeitschrift. Bd. 45. Karasev 1951. - Карасев А.Н. 1951. Раскопки Неаполя скифского в 1949 г. In: КСИИМК Вып. 37. М. (In Russian). Karasev 1953. - Карасев А.Н. 1953. Раскопки Неаполя скифского в 1950 г. // КСИИМК Вып. 49. М. (In Russian). Kats 1994. - Кац В.И. 1994. Керамические клейма Херсонеса Таврического. Каталог-определитель. Саратов. (In Russian). Kharko 1961. - Харко Л.П. 1961. Монетные находки ТавроСкифской экспедиции 1946-1950 и1957. In: МИА.96. (In Russian). Kharko 1961a. - Харко Л.П. 1961а. К вопросу о производстве золотых бляшек из мавзолея Неаполя скифского. In: МИА.96. (In Russian). Keppen 1837. - Кеппен П.И. 1837. Крымский сборник: о древностях Южного берега Крыма и гор Таврических. СПб. (In Russian). Koltukhov 1990. - Колтухов С.Г. 1990. Новые материалы к периодизации и реконструкции оборонительных сооружений Неаполя Скифского. In: СА.2. (In Russian). Koltukhov 1994. - Колтухов С.Г. 1994. Заметки о военнополитической истории Крымской Скифии. In: Древности степного Причерноморья и Крыма. Вып. 4. Запорожье. (In Russian). Koltukhov 1999. - Колтухов С.Г. 1999. Укрепления Крьмской Скифии. Симферополь. (In Russian). Koltukhov 2000. - Колтухов С.Г. 2000. К вопросу о времени основания Неаполя скифского. In: Пантикапей-БоспорКерчь - 26 веков древней столице. Материалы международной конференции. Керчь. (In Russian). Koltujhov, Makhneva, 1988. - Колтухов С.Г., Махнева О.А. 1988. Новый участок оборонительной стены Неаполя скифского. In: ААИК. К. (In Russian). Konduktorova 1964. - Кондукторова Т.С. 1964. Населення Неаполя скiфського за антропологiчними данними. In: Матерiали з антропологiï Украïни. вып. З. (In Ukrainian). Konduktorova 1972. - Кондукторова Т.С. 1972. Антропология древнего населения Украины. М. (In Russian).

816

YURIY PAVLOVITCH ZAYTSEV: THE SCYTHIAN NEAPOLIS AND GREEK CULTURE OF THE NORTHERN BLACK SEA REGION

Kraus Th. 1960. Hekate. Studien zu Wesen und Bild der Göttin in Kleinasien und Griecheland. Heidelberg. Kryzhitsky 1982. - Крыжицкий С.Д. 1982. Жилые дома античных городов Северного Причерноморья. К. (In Russian). Kryzhitsky 1993. - Крыжицкий С.Д. 1993. Архитектура античных государств Северного Причерноморья. К. (In Russian). Kryzhitsky and others 1989. - Крыжицкий С.Д., Буйских С.Б., Бураков А.В., Отрешко В.М. 1989. Сельская округа Ольвии. Киев. (In Russian). Kulakovsky 1889. - Кулаковский Ю.А. 1889. Карта Европейской Сарматии по Птолемею. Киев. (In Russian). Lashkov 1890. - Лашков Ф.Ф. 1890. 3-я учебная экскурсия в Симферопольской мужской гимназии. Симферополь. (In Russian). Latyshev 1887. - Латышев В.В. 1887. Исследования об истории и государственном города Ольвии. СПб. (In Russian). Lindgren M. 1987. The function of the Minoan Palaces - Myth and reality // The function of the Minoan Palaces. Proceeding of the Fourth International Symposium at the Swedish Institute in Athens, 10-16 June, 1984. Stokholm. Makhneva 1967. - Махнева О.А. 1967. Эллинистический сосуд из Неаполя скифского. In: СА № 2. (In Russian). Maksimova 1979. - Максимова М.И. 1979. Артюховский курган. Ленинград. (In Russian). Malikov 1961. - Маликов В.М. 1961. Жертвенник из пригородного здания Неаполя скифского. In: КСИА АН УССР. Вып. 11. (In Russian). Markevich 1928. - Маркевич А.И. 1928. К столетию исследований на городище Неаполя у Симферополя. In: ИТОИАЭ. вып.З. (In Russian). Murzakevich 1837. - Мурзакевич Н.И. 1837. Поездка в Крым в 1836 г. In: Журнал Министерства народного просвещения № 1. СПб. (In Russian). Pichikyan 1991. - Пичикян И.Р. 1991. Культура Бактрии. Ахеменидский и эллинистический периоды. М. (In Russian). Pogrebova 1947. - Погребова Н.Н. 1947. Мавзолей Неаполя Скифского. In: КСИИМК, вып. 21. (In Russian). Pogrebova 1947a. - Погребова Н.Н. 1947а. Находки в мавзолее Неаполя Скифского. In: Памятники искусства. Бюлл. ГМИИ, вып. 2. (In Russian). Pogrebova 1957. - Погребова Н.Н. 1957. Золотые лицевые пластины из погребений мавзолея Неаполя скифского. In: История и археология древнего Крыма. Киев. (In Russian). Pogrebova 1961. - Погребова Н.Н. 1961. Погребения в мавзолее Неаполя Скифского. In: МИА. 98. (In Russian). Polin 1992. - Полин С.В. 1992. От Скифии к Сарматии. К. (In Russian). Polos’mak 1966. - Полосьмак Н.В. 1996. Погребение знатной пазырыкской женщины. In: ВДИ № 4. (In Russian). Puzdrovsky 1988. - Пуздровский А.Е. 1988. К проблеме формирования Неаполя скифского. In: Тезисы докладов крымской научной конференции «Проблемы античной культуры» Симферополь. ч.З. (In Russian). Puzdrovsky 1988a. - Пуздровский 1988а. К интерпретации захоронений в мавзолее Неаполя скифского. In: Проблемы исследований античного и средневекового Херсонеса (1888 - 1988). Тезисы докладов. Севастополь. (In Russian).

Puzdrovsky 1989. - Пуздровський О.Е. 1989. Сармати в Неаполi скiфському. In: Археологiя. № 3. (In Ukrainian). Puzdrovsky 1992a. - Пуздровський О.Е. 1992а. Кримська Скiфiiя в кiнцi II ст. до н.е. - перш. пол. III ст.н.е. In: Археологiя. 2. (In Ukrainian). Puzdrovsky 1999. - Пуздровский А.Е. 1999. Этническая история Крымской Скифии (II в. до н.э. - III в.н.э. In: ХС. X. Севастополь. (In Russian). Raevsky 1973. - Раевский Д.С. 1973. К истории грекоскифских отношений (II в. до н.э. - II в.н.э. In: ВДИ.2. (In Russian). Raevsky 1976. - Раевский Д.С. 1976. Неаполь или Палакий. In: ВДИ. 1. (In Russian). Rostovtseff 1925. - Ростовцев М.И. 1925. Скифия и Боспор. Ленинград. (In Russian). Saprykin 1986. - Сапрыкин С.Ю. 1986. Гераклея Понтийская и Херсонес Таврический. М. (In Russian). Saprykin 1996. - Сапрыкин С.Ю. 1996. Понтийское царство. Москва. (In Russian). Scheglov 1988. - Щеглов А.Н. 1988. Позднескифское государство в Крыму: к типологии эллинизма. In: Древний Восток и античная цивилизация. Л. (In Russian). Scheglov 1998. - Щеглов А.Н. 1998. Еще раз о позднескифской культуре в Крыму (к проблеме происхождения. In: История и культура древних и средневековых обществ. Проблемы археологии. Вып.4. СПб. (In Russian). Schukin 1994. - Щукин М.Б. 1994. На рубеже эр. СПб. (In Russian). Shelov 1975. - Шелов Д.Б. 1975. Керамические клейма из Танаиса III - I вв. до н.э. М. (In Russian). Shultz.1946. - Шульц П.Н. 1946. Скульптурные портреты скифских царей Скилура и Палака. In: КСИИМК. вып. 12. М. (In Russian). Shultz 1946a. - Шульц П.Н. 1946а. Тавро-скифская археологическая экспедиция. In: Сов. Крым. 2. (In Russian). Shultz 1947. - Шульц П. Н. 1947. Раскопки Неаполя Скифского. In: Краткие сообщения Института истории материальной культуры. Вып. XXI. М. (In Russian). Shultz 1947a. - Шульц П.Н. 1947а. Работа Тавро-скифской экспедиции (1945-1946 гг.). In: Памятники искусства. Бюллетень Государственного музея изобразительных искусств им. А.С. Пушкина. Вып. 2. М. (In Russian). Shultz 1949. - Шульц П.Н. 1949. Работа Тавро-скифской экспедиции. In: КСИИМК Вып. XXVII. М. (In Russian). Shultz 1953. - Шульц П.Н. 1953. Мавзолей Неаполя Скифского. М. (In Russian). Shultz 1957. - Шульц П.Н. 1957. Исследования Неаполя Скифского (1945 - 1950). In: ИАДК. К. (In Russian). Shultz 1971. - Шульц П.Н. 1971. Позднескифская культура на Днепре и в Крыму. In: Проблемы скифской археологии // МИА.177. (In Russian). Sokolsky 1976. - Сокольский А.И. 1976. Таманский толос и резиденция Хрисалиска. Москва. (In Russian). Solomonik 1952. - Соломоник Э.И. 1952. 0 скифском государстве и его взаимоотношениями с греческими городами Северного Причерноморья. In: Археология и история Боспора. Симферополь. (In Russian). Solomonik 1958. - Соломоник Э.И. 1958. Четыре надписи из Неаполя и Херсонеса. In: СА. Т. XXVIII. (In Russian). Solomonik 1962. - Соломоник Э.И. 1962. Эпиграфические памятники Неаполя Скифского. In: Нумизматика и Эпиграфика. вып. 3. (In Russian).

817

ANCIENT GREEK COLONIES IN THE BLACK SEA 2 Solomonik 1977. - Соломоник Э.И. 1977. Сравнительный анализ свидетельства Страбона и декрета в честь Диофанта о скифских царях. In: ВДИ, № 3. (In Russian). Stolba V.F. 2003. Hellenistic Chersonesos: results and perspectives of establishing a local chronology. In: Proceedings of the Conference on chronology of the Black Sea Area in the period c. 400-100 BC. Aarhus. Symanovich 1983. - Сыманович Э.А. 1983. Население столицы позднескифского царства. К. (In Russian). Tolstikov 1987. - Толстиков В.П. 1987. Святилище на некрополе Пантикапея. In: ВДИ № 1. (In Russian). Tolstoy, Kondakov 1889. - Толстой И., Кондаков Н., 1889. Древности времен переселения народов. In: Русские древности в памятниках искусства. Вып. 2. С.-Пб. (In Russian). Treister M.Yu. 1988. Bronze Statuary in the Towns of North Pontic Area. In: Griechische und römische Statuetten und Großbronzen. Akten. Wien. Treister 1999. - Трейстер М.Ю. 1999. Материалы к корпусу постаментов бронзовых статуй Северного Причерноморья. In: Херсонесский сборник. Вып. Х. Севастополь. (In Russian). Tsalkin 1954. - Цалкин В.И. 1954. Домашние и дикие животные из Неаполя скифского. In: СА. Т. ХХ. (In Russian). Tsalkin 1960. - Цалкин В.И. 1960. Домашние животные Северного Причерноморья в эпоху раннего железа. In: МИА. 53. (In Russian). Tunkina 2002. - Тункина И.В. 2002. Русская наука о классических древностях юга России (XVIII - середина XIX в.). СПб. (In Russian). Uvarov 1954. - Уваров А.С. 1954. Несколько слов об археологических разысканиях близ Симферополя и Севастополя. In: Пропилеи. Кн. 4. М. (In Russian). Veselovsky 1891. - Веселовский Н.И. 1891. Скифский всадник (поясная пряжка). In: Известия Таврической ученой архивной комиссии Вып. 14. Симферополь. (In Russian). Veselovsky 1894. - Веселовский Н.И. 1894. Раскопки в Симферопольском уезде. In: Отчет императорской археологической комиссии за 1889, 1893. СПб. (In Russian). Vinogradov 1987. - Виноградов Ю.Г. 1987. Вотивная надпись дочери царя Скилура из Gантикапея и проблемы истории Скифии и Боспора во II в. до н.э. In: ВДИ. 1. (In Russian). Vinogradov 1989. - Виноградов Ю.Г. 1989. Политическая история Ольвийского полиса VII - I вв. до н.э. Историко-эпиграфическое исследование. М. (In Russian). Vinogradov Ju. G. 1997. Pontische Studien. Mainz. Vinogradov, Zaytsev 2003. - Виноградов Ю.Г., Зайцев Ю.П. 2003. Новый эпиграфический памятник из Неаполя скифского (предварительная публикация). In: Археологiя № 1. (In Russian). Vysotskaya 1979 - Высотская Т.Н. 1979. Неаполь - столица государства поздних скифов. (In Russian). Yanushevich 1983. - Янушевич З.В. 1983. Культурные растения Северного Причерноморья. Кишинев. (In Russian). Yaschurzhinsky 1989. - Ящуржинский Х.П. 1989. Разведки о древнем скифском укреплении Неаполисе. In: ИТУАК № 7. (In Russian). Yurgevich 1881. - Юргевич В. 1881. Псефизм древнего города Херсонеса о назначении почестей и наград Диофанту, полководцу Митридата Евпатора. In: ЗООИД. т. 12. (In Russian).

Zaytsev Yu.P., 2002. Skiluros and His Realm: New Discoveries and New Problems. In: Ancient civilization. N 1. Zaytsev Yu.P. 2002a. Light and fire in the Palace of Scythian King Skilur // Fire, Light and Light Equipment in the Graeco-Roman World. BAR. International Series 1019. Zaytsev Yu.P. 2004. The Scythian Neapolis (2nd century BC to 3rd century AD). Investigations into the Graeco-Barbarian city on the northerh Black Sea coast. BAR. International Series 1219. Zaytsev Yu.P. 2004a. The Ceramic Complex of Neapolis Scythian (Crimea, Northerh Black Sea) In. ΣΤ΄ ΕΠΙΣΤΗΜΟΝΙΚΗ ΣΥΝΑΝΤΗΣΗ ΓΙΑ ΤΗΝ ΕΛΛΗΝΙΣΤΙΚΗ ΚΕΡΑΜΙΚΗ. ΠΡΟΒΛΗΜΑΤΑ ΧΡΟΝΟΛΟΓΗΣΗΣ ΚΛΕΙΣΤΑ ΣΥΝΟΛΑ – ΕΡΓΑΣΤΗΡΙΑ. ΑΘΗΝΑ 2004. Zaytsev 1990. - Зайцев Ю.П. 1990. До питания про грецьке населения Неаполя Скiфського. In: Археологiя. 1. (In Ukrainian). Zaytsev 1992. - Зайцев Ю.П., 1992. Мавзолей Неаполя Скiфського. In: Археологiя. N 1. (In Ukrainian). Zaytsev 1995. - Зайцев Ю.П. 1995. Хронология Неаполя скифского. In: Древности Степного Причерноморья и Крыма. Запорожье. Вып.V. (In Russian). Zaytsev 1995a. - Зайцев Ю.П. 1995а. Мегарони Неаполя скiфського. In: Археологiя. 1. (In Ukrainian). Zaytsev 1996. - Зайцев Ю.П., 1996. Памятники скульптуры из мегарона Южного дворца Неаполя скифского. In: Крымский музей. No. 2. С. 16-23. (In Russian). Zaytsev 1997. - Зайцев Ю.П. 1997. Южный дворец Неаполя скифского. In: ВДИ. 3. (In Russian). Zaytsev 1998. - Зайцев Ю.П. 1998. Керамика с лаковым покрытием из слоя пожара 1 Южного дворца Неаполя скифского. In: Эллинистическая и римская керамика в Северном Причерноморье. Труды ГИМ. Вып. 102. (In Russian). Zaytsev 1999. - Зайцев Ю.П. 1999. Скилур и его царство. (Новые открытия и новые проблемы). In: ВДИ. 2. (In Russian). Zaytsev 2000. - Зайцев Ю.П. 2000. Два сюжета из эллинистической хронологии Неаполя скифского. In: ХС. Севастополь. Вып. X. (In Russian). Zaytsev 2000a. - Зайцев Ю.П. 2000а. Аргот - супруг царицы Комосарии (к реконструкции династийной истории Боспора и крымской Скифии. In: Таманская старина. Греки и варвары на Киммерийском Боспоре (VII-I вв. до н.э.). Тезисы докладов международной конференции. СПб. (In Russian). Zaytsev 2001. - Зайцев Ю.П., 2001. Мавзолей царя Скилура: факты и комментарии. In: Поздние скифы в Крыму. Труды ГИМ. Вып. 118. (In Russian). Zaytsev 2002. - Зайцев Ю.П. 2002. Скульптура и рельефы Южного дворца Неаполя скифского. In: Боспорский феномен. Погребальные памятники и святилища. СПБ. (In Russian). Zaytsev, Puzdrovsky 1994. - Зайцев Ю.П., Пуздровский А.Е. 1994. Неаполь скифский в эпоху Диофантовых войн. In: Северо-Западный Крым в античную эпоху. К. (In Russian). Zeest 1954. - Зеест И.Б. 1954. К вопросу о торговле Неаполя скифского и ее значении для Боспора. In: МИА. 33. (In Russian). Zeest 1960. - Зеест И.Б. 1960. Керамическая тара Боспора. In: МИА № 83. (In Russian). Zois A.A. 1987. The function of the Minoan Palace: A contribution to the definition of the main problem or a model for future research (outline). In: The function of the Minoan Palaces. Proceeding of the Fourth International

818

YURIY PAVLOVITCH ZAYTSEV: THE SCYTHIAN NEAPOLIS AND GREEK CULTURE OF THE NORTHERN BLACK SEA REGION

Symposium at the Swedish Institute in Athens, 10-16 June, 1984. Stokholm. Zubar 1992. - Зубар В.М. 1992. Про пiзньоскiфську державнiсть. In: Археологiя. 1. (In Ukrainian). Zubar 1996. - Зубарь В.М. 1996. Ольвия и Скилур. In: РА. 4. (In Russian).

Zubar 2002. - Зубарь В.М. 2002. Еще раз по поводу позднескифской государственности. In: МАИЭТ. Вып. IX. Симферополь. (In Russian).

Figure 1. Scythian Neapolis: 1 – Fragment of the relief representing two male figures. 2 – Relief with representation of a horseman. 3 – Plan of the settlement with sites marked by numbers. 819

ANCIENT GREEK COLONIES IN THE BLACK SEA 2

Figure 2. Southern Palace of the Scythian Neapolis: 1 – Plan of the Southern Palace. 2 – Reconstruction of the Southern Palace by chronological layers. 3 – Stone reservoir (pool). 4 – Fragment of the marble herm to Hecate and its graphical reconstruction. 5 – limestone herm of a local deity. 820

YURIY PAVLOVITCH ZAYTSEV: THE SCYTHIAN NEAPOLIS AND GREEK CULTURE OF THE NORTHERN BLACK SEA REGION

Figure 3. Southern Palace of the Scythian Neapolis: 1 – Megaron N and surroundings. 2 – Reconstruction of Megaron N. 3 – Ceramic altars and fragments. 4 – Reconstruction of frescos from Megaron N.

821

ANCIENT GREEK COLONIES IN THE BLACK SEA 2

Figure 4. Southern Palace of the Scythian Neapolis. Stratigrafy columns: on the right – floors of Megaron N, on the left – Palace layers. 822

YURIY PAVLOVITCH ZAYTSEV: THE SCYTHIAN NEAPOLIS AND GREEK CULTURE OF THE NORTHERN BLACK SEA REGION

Figure 5. Mausoleum of the Southern Palace of the Scythian Neapolis: 1 – ceramic altar. 2 – stone crypt. 3 – plan of the Mausoleum and of graves of lower level. 4 – reconstruction of the throne bed/bier. 5 – preserved details of the throne bed in situ. 6 – possible positions of the body on the throne bed.

823

ANCIENT GREEK COLONIES IN THE BLACK SEA 2

Figure 6. Mausoleum. Stone Crypt. 1 – plan of the lower part of the grave. 2 – iron La Tène sword. 3, 4 – iron helmet. 5 – golden brooch. 6 – iron arrowheads. 7, 8 – bronze details of belt equipment. 9 – iron knife. 10 – silver tip of sheath. 11 – silver top. 12 – silver fibula. 13 – bronze brooch. 14 – glass bead.

824

YURIY PAVLOVITCH ZAYTSEV: THE SCYTHIAN NEAPOLIS AND GREEK CULTURE OF THE NORTHERN BLACK SEA REGION

Figure 7. Southern Palace of the Scythian Neapolis. 1 – limestone capitals from the Mausoleum of Argotus. 2 – graphical reconstruction of the Mausoleum of Argotus. 3 – inscription mentioning Argotus. 4-10 – pedestals of statues with dedicative inscriptions. 11 – fragment of marble statue.

825

ANCIENT GREEK COLONIES IN THE BLACK SEA 2

Figure 7 (contd). 4-10 – pedestals of statues with dedicative inscriptions. 11 – fragment of marble statue.

826

Tyritake Viktor Nikolaevitch Zinko*

conserving and museum organization of this Bosporan town.

The ancient Greek town of Tyritake is located in the southern part of the modern Kerch, 11 km from Panticapaeum, on the northern coast of an ancient bay near the Kwine-pressesh-Burun Cape. The foundation of this Bosporan town, as well as the majority of ancient Greek colonies on the western (European) coast of Kimmerian Bosporos (modern Kerch Channel) is dated to the second third of the 6th century BC. Unfortunately, there are no written sources on which Greek polis led the colony to the northern suburb of the Hellenic oecumene. The name of the town was mentioned by Pseudo-Arian (SC, 1,2), Ptolemy (III, 6,3,) and Stephan of Byzantine (SC, 1,2). Pliny set the town Diya between Nymphaeum and Panticapaeum when describing the Kimmerian Bosporos (IV, 86). No other ancient writer described this Bosporan town. It started a discussion among scholars. V.Gaidukevich supposed that either ‘Diya’ was simply a name for a town in Roman time (Gaidukevich, 1941, p.91), or ‘Diya’ was located in the territory of one of the three big known settlements nearby (Gaidukevich, 1958, p.185). According to V.D.Blavatsky, ‘Diya’ is a Greek name of the town, and ‘Tyritake’ is a local name of the ancient settlement that had been founded earlier before the Greek town was built (Blavatsky, 1954, p.22-23). The location of the town of Tyritake near the Kwine-presseshBurun Cape is firm in two versions and it is the main theme.

The town has the form of an improper quadrangle, its acute angle pointing to the south. It is located at the fairly high coastal terrace, going down smoothly to the south and to the southwest. The territory of the town on its southern and southwestern steppe side was protected by the river flowing into the gulf. Its western and northern parts were separated from the other coastal terrace by deep ravines. The choice of the settlement on the high seashore with natural defense boundaries followed the ancient Greek colonization practice in the best possible way (Winter, 1971). The total area of the town was less than 9 ha and there were several stages of its building. It is possible to reconstruct the history of its foundation, the development and dying away on the grounds of archaeological researches spent on 26 sectors of that ancient Greek town. The earliest buildings dated to the second half of the 6th century BC were found on the upper plateau of Tyritake in the western (sector 14) and eastern (sector 17) outskirts (Gaidukevich, 1952, p.74-86; 1958, p.178-179), and in the southern lowland part of the town. The remains of two ground buildings were discovered in the western part. One house had three rooms and looked schematically like stretching rectangular with west and east oriented short sides. Its total area was 70.5sq m. The masonry 0.7m high served as a plinth, on which raw brick walls were raised. In the last western room A of 23.5sqm, there were remains of two hearths on the clay floor. In the middle of the room there was an open type hearth with fire placed directly on the floor. The second hearth located on the south-western corner of the room was surrounded by few flat thin limestone slabs and coated with clay inside. A lot of finds were found in the layer of charred ruins covering the floor. Few archaic terracottas lay near the first hearth – a mask with traces of paint; three statuettes depicting a goddess sitting on a throne (two of them were coloured) and also a painted statuette of a standing woman. Close to the terracotts a painted amphora decorated with a scaly ornament was found. The letters ‘ΑΦ’ were scratched outside the bottom of the amphora. Two Corinthian

Systematic researches of the town started only in 1932 by Y. Marti and were continued by L. Slavin. The excavations of the necropolis were carried out under the direction of V.Blavatsky and Y. Marti. Neither the town or the necropolis of Tyritake had been explored before. Only in 1859 and 1861 A. Lyutsenko researched few small tumuli near the Kwine-pressesh-Burun Cape due to the means of the Imperial Archaeological Commission (1859, p.20; 1861, IV). In 1946-1957 the large-scale excavations were carried out under the direction of V.Gaidukevich. In the 1970s – 1980s the scholars of the Kerch Historical-Archaeological Museum investigated some parts of the town. O. Chevelyov worked at the big areas of the Tyritake necropolis doing restricted area Archaeological investigations. In 2000, V.N. Zin’ko started the all-round program of researching, temporary

* Dr. Viktor Nikolaevitch Zinko has graduated from the Leningrad State University with ‘a historian–archaeologist’ diploma (1982), post graduate study at the Leningrad State University (1991). A specialist in ancient archaeology of North Pontic, a senior research worker of the Crimean department of the Institute of Oriental Studies of the Ukrainian National Academy of Sciences. Publications: more then 85 scholarly works and several monographs on ancient history and archaeology of North Pontic published in different European languages. Since 1989 he is the director of the archaeological expedition, researching old monuments of the Kimmerian Bosporos. He is the chief of the archaeological excavations of Bosporan towns and the necropolis of Panticapaeum (1991-1994), Nymphaeum (1995-1998) and Tyritake (2002). Each year from 1989 he investigates the countryside of Bosporan town Nymphaeum. In 2002 he started a new long-term project, the research of the Bosporan town Tyritaka. He is the editor in chief of a scientific collection ‘Bosporan Studies’ (BS, vol. I, Simferopol, 2001; BS, vol. IX, Simferopol-Kerch, 2005). He is also the organizer and the supervisor of several international archaeological projects for preservation of ancient historical monuments in Crimea. E-mail: [email protected]

827

ANCIENT GREEK COLONIES IN THE BLACK SEA 2 It is necessary to mark the finding of a barbarian modelled ‘Scythian’ cup. The overwhelming majority of finds from the building represents Greek outputs and meets the requirements of Greek cultural practice. The finding of the cup shows that the objects of local culture started to pass into the use of Bosporan Greeks in earliest times. In that way, we can see that the process of crosscultural interaction that ran all through the social-political and cultural history of Kimmerian Bosporos appears in miniature.

cotillas, black-lacquered vessels, amphorae, a clay altar and a modelled ‘Scythian’ cup have been found here. One could enter the next room B of 25sq.m through the doorway. The next room C is 22sq.m large and remained fragmentary. Outside, the doorways in the preserved walls have not been found. Very likely they were on the southern side. The prevailing number of finds from archaic building belong to the 6th century BC, chiefly to its second half. A terracotta statuette of a goddess with a high head-dress (polos) and a mask are a little bit earlier and can be dated to the middle of the 6th century. Other terracotts are dated to the third quarter of the 6th century. The Klazomenian amphora is dated to the second half of the 6th century BC. At the same time a number of objects – amphorae fragments and black-lacquered vessels – are dated to the beginning of the 5th century BC. All this made V. Gaidukevich suppose that the building had existed from 540 to 480 BC. It is the oldest dwelling house of Hellenic colonists who have settled at the Kimmerian Bosporos in the middle of the 6th century. The building construction of the house is analogous to the archaic house building of Miletus. It is possible to suppose that they are the remains of the building inhabited by colonists-Milesians, who settled in Tyritake.

The remains of another archaic building were discovered at a distance of 10.8m to the northeast from the building described above. Only one western room, 5.90m wide, was not ruined. The entrance into that room was found in the southern wall. Judging by the not numerous finds this building could be dated to the second half of the 6th century BC. The researches of the eastern side of the upper plateau of Tyritake (sector 17) give the opportunity to determine that it was built over in archaic times. The building remains of the house of the end of the 6th century are analogous to the buildings of the western side. This 5.25m-wide house looked like a rectangle, stretching from the northwest to the southeast. There were two to three rooms in it. Excavations of cultural layers in the southern sector 17 gave considerable finds of archaic material. All the previous buildings had been deconstructed before the winery was built. Thus, however fragmental the building remains are, we can determine that the eastern side of the upper plateau was built over with adobe houses in the last third of the 6th century BC. Taking into account the existence of archaic houses in the western outskirts of the town, we can make the conclusion of a wide settling of the whole upper plateau of Tyritake by the end of the 6th century BC. If we judge by the orientation of the houses, all of them were built according to a common building plan. The remains of one more archaic house consisting of two rooms were found in the lower southern part of the town (sector 5-6). It was built at the end of the 6th century BC (Knipovich, Slavin, 1941).

In architectural respect the building is unpretentious. The main walls were raw brick based on stone plinths. No sign of tiled roof has been found. The roof was probably covered by wood and clay scorched pieces which were found in great quantities inside the rooms in the process of excavations. The complex of objects consists of imported things. They are ceramics from Rhodes, Samos, Corinth, Athens, Naukratis and other Greek cities. There are objects made in the ceramic studios of Bosporos. Simple finds from the archaic building – clay weaving staff and terracotta plummets for a loom are worthy of special attention. They serve as evidences of weaving and wool spinning closely connected with housekeeping in the early period of the Tyritake’s existence.

At the end of the 6th - early 5th century BC a new wave of Scythian nomads appeared in the Black Sea coast steppes. It led to armed conflicts between the Bosporan polis and barbarians. Bosporan Greeks started building fortification walls around their towns. Now they have been found in Panticapaeum, Myrmekion, and Porthmeus. The remains of archaic fortifications in Tyritake have been revealed. They have been found in the western and southwestern outskirts of the archaic town. Nomads’ attacks were expected in the first place from the steppe side.

The finds of cult terracottas are very important. They are of great interest as the art works of Greek coroplastics of archaic times. At the same time these terracottas enlighten the principles of a religious ideology of the first Ionic colonists in Bosporos. The main element of it was the cult of a goddess, the goddess of fertility. During the whole period of the following history of Bosporos this cult of the female divine being personified as Demetra, Aphrodite, Cybele and Artemis played a very important role in the religion of ancient Bosporans, because it was ideologically close to the beliefs of the local barbarian population. The earliest Bosporan cult complex, connected with the worship of the Greek goddess is presented in the archaic building in Tyritake. The goddess was worshipped as the settlers’ patroness.

The early fortification wall of Tyritake in the western sector was probably built in a hurry. Builders included western walls of two archaic houses in the curtains while building the fortification walls. This method was used in 828

VIKTOR NIKOLAEVITCH ZINKO: TYRITAKE

repeated rebuilding after which the walls were thickened with crude rubble.

building an early fortification wall in Panticapaeum. The width of the western fortification walls was 1.7-2m. The remains of a tower leaving the curtain line have been found. A part of an early enclosure wall of about 1-2 masonry rows high, 1.7-1.8m wide and 7m long was uncovered in the southern side (sector 1) of the town (Marti, 1941). The wall is two bonded made of huge well rough-hewed slabs of an irregular shape. The building of these walls is dated to the first quarter of the 5th century BC. The extension of the wall, 10m long, was discovered in the southwestern part of the town at the sector 5-6 (Knipovich, Slavin, 1941, p.38-39). Its width in that section was more than 2m. Greek builders set two stone statues dated to the third millenium BC on the base of this wall. They are 1.40m and 1.28m high. The statues are crudely made with images of human bodies, masculine and feminine ones.

The tower 4 ended the northwestern side of the curtain wall and ran 3m out of the curtain line. The tower as well as the attached part of the wall, was made of big limestone slabs. The wall forms a lug facing the west. Its northern side joins the faceplate of curtain 2 and forms the common front together with it and a sidewall of the tower 4. Very likely, the southern town gates were situated behind curtain 2, and the lug placed behind tower 4 is connected with such embrasure in the fortification wall. Stone slabs of paving lying in several consistent layers were found behind the lug. It is an evidence of the use of this town gate during several ages. The fortification wall of the 4th-3rd centuries BC that had to defend Tyritake from the western steppe side has not been ascertained yet. Only a short section of it at the northwestern angle tower has been found as well as a considerable part of the northern wall with the approach and a small tower.

The builders of the early fortification wall had no task of creating a massive defense barrier, which could stand a long siege of their enemy. They did not apply special artificial devices. The early wall served as a barrier against the steppe nomads’ cavalry. The defensive effect of such wall was strengthened because of its location. It ran over the upper western side of a pretty steep slope. Certainly, such walls could not serve the effective mean of defense. After the excavations of the southern part of Tyritake it is known that the wall built in the 5th century BC was replaced by more massive fortification walls in the 4th-3rd centuries BC. Other walls in other parts of the town were rebuilt.

In 1948-1949 V. Gaidukevich explored the western fortification wall at the sector 19-20 along the length of 17m (Gaidukevich, 1958). This wall was built in several stages and its width reached 2.30m. The western wall adjoined the remains of a big quadrangular tower that played an important role, because it was the angle tower on the turn of the western fortification wall and the northern wall of Tyritake. The northwestern angle tower had thick walls and was hollow inside. The width of the chamber was 4.53m, the length of it was 6.05m. There is a quadrangular through the embrasure (0.15m high, 0.24m wide) in the most well preserved part of the northern wall of the tower. It is a rare detail to be found in the fortifications of the Northern Black Sea coast ancient towns. The southeastern projection towards the town corner of the tower escaped the destruction; its remained intact height is 2m. Its coating consists of blocks with rustic slabs among them. It is not an original masonry; everything points to the fact of its construction anew in the connection of the tower reconstruction.

A big fragment of the fortification walls of the 4th-3rd centuries BC was uncovered in the southern low-lying part of Tyritake (sector 1,2). The curtain 1 starts from the tower 1 and runs from the southeast to the northwest to the tower 2. The length of the fortifications, including the two towers, is about 41m. The wall changes its direction roughly after tower 2 and runs upwards the slope. Then, the wall turns again and runs gradually over the slope from the south-southeast to the north-northwest. This 50m-long section of the fortification wall, curtain 2, has a quadrangular tower 4, facing west. There are drains in two places under curtain 2. The drainage system served for taking atmospheric precipitation out of town. After the building of new walls the most vulnerable parts were tiled with rustic slabs for strengthening and magnificence. The new curtain 1 was 3.40m wide and practically became twice as massive as the early wall of the 5th century BC.

The opening of the wall protecting the northern part of Tyritake is very important. This wall judging by the discovered section in sector 20 ran from the northwestern angle tower to the east-southeast. The northern fortification wall and the southern wall found in 1932 are absolutely identical in their construction. It consists of the main part of the wall 2.30m wide with coating armour 1.35m wide. It was built dry of carefully finished limestone blocks, rustic outside. The discovered part of the front of the northern wall remained up to 2.5m high. The cultural strata complying with the low layers of the wall and tower masonry, contained black-lacquered ceramics of the 4th-3rd centuries BC and fragments of amphorae with stamps. It helps to date the building of the northern fortification wall to the first half of the 3rd century BC (Gaidukevich, 1958, p. 157).

The tower 1 is the most monumental of the four towers, found in the southern part of Tyritake. Its outward walls were made of massive slabs, some of them decorated with rusts on its front. The tower was reconstructed and rebuilt many times during its use. This explains why the rust slabs make only the fragments of outside coating. The less monumental tower 2 was built very close to the fortification wall. Its walls are indicative of thrice-

829

ANCIENT GREEK COLONIES IN THE BLACK SEA 2 excavations it is possible to contend that in the second half of the 6th century BC the upper and lower parts of the town were built by small (about 70-sq. m) adobe houses with several rooms. The excavated remains of those buildings give arguments to suppose the presence of a certain town plan. We know nothing about the look of the earliest houses of the first Greek settlers of Tyritake. We have to determine if they looked like mud huts of Panticapaeum, Nymphaeum and other towns of the Kimmerian Bosporos or if they were made of stone right away.

V.Gaidukevich excavated the eastern part of the northern fortification wall of the town in sector 21 in 1952. The section was 23m long including one more tower. In general, the length of the northern fortification wall from the northwestern to the new tower must be 145m in a straight line. The tower was not the last angle one, though. The fortification wall ran further in a southeastern direction. There is no information how far away it ran. Taking into account that the length of a curtain between the two towers could hardly be less than 25m, the eastern end of the northern fortification wall is to concur with the utmost point of the upper plateau, directly at the steep slope.

Tyritake was a politically independent Greek city state with a wide enough chora in this early period of its history. The town started to build up after the ordeals of the war with Scythians in the first third of the 5th century BC. The citizens of Tyritake erected fortification walls in a hurry even attaching houses to them. Tyritake was included in the Bosporan symmachia in which the biggest city of Panticopaeum played the leading role. It was probably a sacred union of the independent city-states of Bosporos around temple of Apollo in whose name they minted common silver coins. Autocratic tendencies gathered momentum though and the new process of invading former independent territories of Bosporan citystates and neighboring barbarian tribes started in 438 BC with Spartakids’ coming to power. To all appearances the Bosporan tyrants, while other Bosporan towns – Nymphaeum, Theodosia were fighting for their independence, took up the city-state of Tyritake. Written original sources give no information whether the expansion had a peaceful character and how long the citystates institute retained after the annexation to Panticapaeum.

The northern tower was rectangular (length-5.45m, width-3.90m) and had a spacious inner room paved with slabs and the entrance on the side of town. Outward in front of the tower a dry wall of big rectangular limestone blocks was built. Their surface is furnished with rustics. The width of the tower walls is 1.30-1.40m and the highest remained section is 2.10m. The tower runs 3.10m out of the fortification wall. The fortification wall was excavated along the whole length of 13.90m. It runs from the western side of the tower in the northwestern direction. The wall consists of two belts – outward coating armour and inner massive part. The outward coating armour is compounded of rustic blocks and its width is 1.50-1.60m. The fortification wall to the west from the tower was rebuilt in the first centuries AD. This new wall was twice thinner than the original one. D. Kirilin excavated a considerable section of the northern fortification wall at the northwestern angle tower in 1972 in the sector 23. As in other sectors, the wall consists of rustic outward coating armour and inner massive part, built of crude limestone blocks. At a distance of 25m from the northwestern tower it approached the northern fortification wall. The width of this road is unknown though because there were no further excavations to the east. However, we can consider ascertained the existence of at least of two fortification gates – the southern gate and the northern gate. Apparently, there is the western gate that will have to be excavated in future time. Nothing is known about the eastern fortification wall of the town. The town territory extended over the eastern steep side of the plateau that comes abruptly to an end and meets a swamped lowland. However, a barrier of some type had to be here.

The reconstruction of the town in its classical age is still very difficult. That period strata as well as Hellenistic strata were destroyed before the building of household edifices of the first centuries AD. Only small wall sections remained. They do not give any plan of public or dwelling houses. At the same time a lot of blacklacquered vessel fragments and broken pieces of amphorae from the islands of Chios and Thasos and other Hellenic centres have been found. The finds of fragments of painted ancient craters, hydriae, kylikes, fish dishes and various terracottas are to be particularly noted. A big building process began in Tyritake in the second half of the 4th–beginning of the 3rd century BC. Fortification walls were strengthened, streets were equipped with modern amenities, and houses were built. There was a paved road along the southern fortification wall (sector 1). It was made of big rectangular slabs (Marti, 1941, p.18). The slabs were set on the way they make declivity towards the fortification wall. Rainwater could flow into the drainpipe built in the wall.

In general during the millenium, from the beginning of the 5th century BC to the 6th century AD fortification walls of Tyritake protected the citizens of the town from enemies. Walls were reconstructed and rebuilt frequently spreading over new town territories, as one can see in the western and northern parts of the town.

A street 4.80-5.30m wide paved with fragments of ceramic tiles and crushed stone was found in the central part of the southern sector of the town. At the same place,

Far less is known about the town planning of Tyritake, especially in early times of its history. According to 830

VIKTOR NIKOLAEVITCH ZINKO: TYRITAKE

natural catastrophes aggravated the situation. The citizens of Tyritake and the rural neighbourhood of the town and other Bosporan towns left their settlements (Zin’ko, 2003, p.180). Archaeologists, though, have not found any destruction connected with barbarian attacks in the territory of the town.

in sector 15 the remains of a building have been explored. There were fragments of two rooms (Gaidukevich, 1952, p.108-109). The width of one of them is 2.85m and the highest remained wall is 1.70m. The floor was made of stone slabs. The cultural stratum of this room contained a lot of ceramics. They were fragments of Heraclean amphorae, a crashed black-lacquered vessel with a stamped palmette at the bottom, fish dishes and lekyth. In general all finds are dated from the last quarter of the 4th to the beginning of the 3rd century BC.

A small building with its northwestern side bordering the street with a clay pavement road excavated in the southern part (sector 5-6) of Tyritake gives and idea of city buildings of the second half of the 3rd-1st centuries BC (Gaidukevich, 1952, p.43). The discovered house consisted of two adjacent rooms with nearly 40-sq.m of space. The walls are 0.65-0.70m wide and made of crude limestone blocks on clay. The inner wall, dividing the house, had a doorway through which two rooms communicated. One room was a living room and the other one served for keeping household equipment. A round millstone and a big broken pythos have been found in that room. Debris of vessels and bronze coins have also been found in those rooms. Four coins are dated to the 3rd century BC, 2 coins to the 2nd century BC and 3 coins to the 1st century BC including one coin from the town of Wine-pressesos and one coin from the town of Sinope, minted by Mithridates VI Eupator.

The remains of another big destroyed house of the 4th century BC with paved inner yard were excavated in the western part of Tyritake in sector 14 (Gaidukevich, 1952, p. 89-90). The remained fragments of the room walls were located at the northern and eastern sides of a big yard paved with stone slabs. There is a drain canal, which was made of limestone blocks with a curved gutter. A slab with the remains of Greek inscription was found among them. There are letters on both sides of the slab, the main inscription is destroyed. The inscription contained 9 lines and the form of the letters is dated to the 5th century BC. The gutter is covered by thin small rectangular limestone slabs. Fragments of a different black-lacquered and simple vessel, broken pieces of terracotta, amphorae, roofing tile and bronze Bosporan coins have been found here.

A small household yard paved with stone slabs bordered the eastern side of the house. Three pits for household needs have been found in the eastern part of the yard. They contained ceramic finds of the Roman and Hellenic periods. One pit served as a granary. Vertical stone slabs form its quadrangular orifice. A bronze mould for making gold platelets with the bust of Aphrodite has been found here in the yard near the pits. The goddess is pictured with a diadem and two reliefs can be seen by both sides of her head. There are reasons to suppose two frayed images of Eros that are frequently met on the Bosporan gold platelets depicting Aphrodite in an identical graphic picture stem from the mould from Tyritake. The surface of the mould relief is badly frayed. It is rubbed sore because of long use over a long period of time.

A small marble statue of Dionysos was found in the western outskirts of the town. Its remained height is 0.36m. Dionysos is represented with long curly locks covering the shoulders and the back. He wears a tunic fitting tightly with a panther fell laid over his right shoulder and the bosom. The fell embraces his back and ends with a head spread over in the front. The fell is tightly clasped to the torso with the belt on the waist level. The details of the panther’s head – eyes, jaws, and ears are shown quite vividly. A cloak laid over his left shoulder makes rows of folds. Its side dangles loosely down the left side of his figure. The upper side of the cloak is rolled up and runs slantwise to the right hip, and then it nicely drapes the figure in front and ends under the left hand, clasping the end of the cloak to the left hip. The glove side of the tunic is depicted at the left hand wrist. The right (lost) arm of the figure was attached to the torso with an iron dowel, the remains of which are in the vertical cut off cavity of the right shoulder. The statuette is dated to the first half of the 3rd century BC and gives a wonderful example of ancient sculpture of the early Hellenistic period (Ernshtedt, 1950, p. 186). This image of Dionysos probably originates from a temple of Tyritake, but Archaeologists have not found any cult buildings of that period in Tyritake to date.

One should consider the find of the bronze mould, which was used by Bosporans who lived at the end of the 3rd beginning of the 2nd century BC in Tyritake to be very important in its meaning. Indeed, if the stamping was used in making gold decorations in such a small town of Tyritake it is possible to suppose that this branch of art in big centres like Panticapaeum, Theodosia, Phanagoria was highly developed. One more interesting production complex of the second half of the 3rd – beginning of the 2nd century BC was excavated in the southern part of the city. It was a winery (Gaidukevich, 1952, p. 27). The winery was a rectangular building stretched in its plan from the northwest to the southeast. It consisted of at least two rooms. The northwestern wall is preserved best of all. Its height reaches 1.60m. The remains of all the other walls are in a worse condition. There was a doorway in the

The Bosporan Empire went through great upheavals. This period in the history of the Northern Black Sea coastal ancient states and towns is determined as the period of the destabilization connected with Great Scythian collapse and expansion of a new wave of nomads – Sarmatians from the east and Celts from the west. Some 831

ANCIENT GREEK COLONIES IN THE BLACK SEA 2 this winery of Tyritake. There are no wine-presses in other Bosporan wineries in the early centuries of our era. A stone deck in the pressing area is usual. In the beginning both pressing areas could be used for pressing grapes by feet. Then grape remains were pressed with the help of a lever-screw press at the smaller area. This invention was made in the 1st century BC and was attributed to Greeks, according to Pliny (Plin.,N.h.,XVIII, 317). He wrote: ‘During the last 100 years Greek press has come in use. This press consists of a vertical rod with spiral chutes, some people fix handles to it, others make it a box of stone that can be lifted together with the body of the screw, which is confessed to be the handiest.’ The finding of the stone weight in the winery of Tyritake proves the use of a lever-screw press there.

southwestern wall, whose highest point is 1m. The inner width of the winery is 5.25m. It had the length of not less than 8m. The arrangement of the winery is not complicated, in general. The main area occupies a winepress in the form of the cement floor of room’s width. It has a declivity toward a reservoir bordering the side of the press in its middle part. The winepress area is 2.30m long and 5.25m wide. The length of the reservoir is 2.06m, its width is 1.75m and its depth is 1.55m. The walls of the reservoir were made of stones and plastered with the cement of the same mixture as the cement plaster of the ground. In the middle of the northwestern wall of the reservoir at the winepress ground level there is a slab with a curved gutter. It is a sink where grape juice was flowing from the winepress into a cistern. Grapes were trodden down on the winepress area. There are no other devices for extracting grape juice in this winery. It should be mentioned that it is simpler in its equipment in comparison with other Bosporan wineries in which there was usually a press used for the final squeezing.

The Tyritake buildings of the early centuries of our era have been studied much better. The town stayed within the borders of Hellenistic walls but it was being intensively rebuilt. Big fish processing and wine production complexes were built in its territory. This specialization of the city economy appeared in the period of Bosporan cities joining The Panticapaeum Kingdom. The Lord of Pontus, Mithridate VI Eupator, waged constant wars against Rome and kept a big army. Bosporos Kimmerian supplied Mithridate with considerable provisions necessary for his troops. Tyritake became the centre of salt fish and to some extent wine production. This tendency continued in the early centuries during Iulii and Tiberius, who carried out a policy of strengthening the boundaries of The Bosporan Kingdom.

The building of the winery had a tiled roof. Numerous fragments of Bosporan tile are an evidence of it. Some of tile pieces have marks. One can point to Bosporan bronze coins of the 3rd - 2nd centuries BC, fragments of a ceramic vessel, amphorae. In 1936 one more winery (T2) dated to the 1st century BC was excavated in Tyritake. It was a stone building in a form of irregular quadrangle with its long axis stretched from the northwest (Gaidukevich, 1958 a, p.396-405). The inner dimensions of the winery are: length 8.108.60m, width 4.75-5.30 m. The street side entrance was placed near the northern corner of the building. There are the remains of stone stairs, which had to be there because of the floor level that was lower than the street. Two adjacent wine-pressing platforms (A, B) are situated at the southwestern half of the room and two reservoirs bordering them. A stone weight for a lever press was situated on a specially enclosed place at the northeastern half of the room with an earthen floor. The wine-pressing areas are separated with a short partition with a through opening. Each area was supplied by a stone discharge directed to a reservoir. The bigger reservoir with 4185 l capacity complied with the larger area B. The smaller reservoir with the capacity of 1137 l complied with the area A. A round cavity was made at the bottom of each reservoir. Pressing areas were inclined towards the sink. Their sides were fenced in a slab side more than 0.5m high.

A street up to 5m wide was excavated in the southern part of the town of that period. A sector with tubs for salting fish was found to the northwest of that street. This part of the town territory was located on the upper terrace, supported by a retaining wall. There was a stone pavement road made of big stone slabs. It ran from the north to the south. To the west of the street there was a dwelling house of the 1st century AD. Four rooms and a yard with a slab pavement were excavated (Knipovich, Slavin, 1941, p.47). The paved yard occupies the central part of the building and is flagged with limestone slabs of different sizes. It was rectangular and stretched 14.5m from the north to the south and 7.1m from the west to the east. Very likely a sheltered portico ran the perimeter. Small pits for supporting posts standing at the equal distance point to it. An aisle 4m long and more than 2m wide linked the yard and the street. The aisle is also flagged with big stone slabs. A big pithos was situated in the northwestern part of the yard. The remains of three more pithoi have been excavated in the southeastern part of the yard. One of them was broken when used and bolted with lead cramps.

The smaller pressing area A had an interesting peculiarity. In its middle part there is a deck formed by level of a few slabs with the surface of the ground into which they were fixed. Since there is the stone weight for the lever press opposite this area it is obvious that the process of grape juice extracting took place there at the ground with the stone deck. There was no wine-press in

The biggest room of the building is room A, bordering the northern side of the yard. It is a common thing for ancient Greek buildings where dwelling houses were situated in the northern part of the town and country 832

VIKTOR NIKOLAEVITCH ZINKO: TYRITAKE

the slab. Their sides were fenced with stone slabs, signs of which can be clearly seen: a flat cement surface with prints of slabs remained on the top masonry of the reservoirs.

manors. An apartment nearly 13m long and 4.7m wide was joined to the yard with an aisle 1.18m wide and, possibly, was divided into two rooms. The floor in the apartment was paved with stone slabs and there was an enclosure made of big stone slabs put edgewise in the northern part. Just at the entrance of the apartment A there was a square stove. A small refuse pit was next to it with stove ashes, broken plates and pieces of dishes, a lightning device and fragments of a glass vessel.

Middle pressing floor is originally made in winery T3. It has a considerable incline towards the central cistern. The wine pressing floor sharply raises at some distance from the front edge of a stone slab, which served as a platform for grape pressing, fixed into the floor. Then, the wine pressing floor comes to a quadrangular trough made of cement. There is a small hole inside its southeastern side, which leads to the inclined canal running to the chute of a stone sink inclined to the central cistern. So, the must did not run from the middle pressing ground to the sink and the reservoir. Firstly, it accumulated on the ground near the cement trough. As the accumulated grape juice level rised, it ran over the trough brim, got into its inner space and then ran to the sink through the appropriate opening and then into the reservoir.

Three household buildings occupied the southeastern part of a manor. Apartment B of more than 20sq.m exactly adjoined the eastern wall of the dwelling house. It had a trapezoid form. Apparently it was a storehouse for household provisions. Four pythoi dug into the ground floor are the evidences of it. The entrance was in the southern wall. Apartment C 4.5 x 3.5m was situated to the south of the apartment B. The next two apartments, D and E, were situated to the south of the corridor entrance of the manor and were preserved in a worse condition. This city estate subsisted for few centuries and was destroyed at the end of the 3rd century AD.

It gave grape juice, accumulating in a lower part of the ground at the trough, an opportunity to settle a bit, and then more pure juice ran into the trough over its towering edges. Then juice flew to the chute of a stone sink. Eight to ten coatings of cement covering up to 0.10m wide in some places have remained on the inner walls of cisterns of the winery T3. Total capacity of all three cisterns is equal to almost 6 thousand liters.

Two wineries (T3 and T7) of the 2nd-3rd centuries AD were excavated in the eastern part of Tyritake. They are situated 60m from each other. Some interesting details point to the fact that some improvement changes were made in their construction. It is especially important that the wineries T3 and T7 allow to determine the exact type of winemaking presses in the early centuries of our era.

A stone weight of a lever screw press was found at the distance of 1.80m from the reservoirs in the southeastern part of the room just opposite the middle pressing ground. It lies on the earthen floor of the winery. The place designed for the weight was fenced with a stone lying out. In contrast to winery T2 the weight consists of not one but two stones lying one on to another. Curves in the block and on the upper slab are cut out to make a wooden carriage including the two stones. Therefore, the weight worked when combined with two stones – the lower block and the upper slab, in one carriage. The carriage joined the lower end of a wooden screw rod, the upper part of which supplied with a thread, got into a screw nut at the end of the lever. The last was a log with its back end stopped in the wall, enclosing pressing grounds from the northwest. The length of the lever was 8m.

The winery T3, as well as similar buildings, looked like a quadrangular building with overhead covers and a tiled roof (Gaidukevich, 1958 a, p. 416-421). Nothing has remained – the walls of the building have been completely demolished. The width of the placement of the winery is reconstructed by the size of wine pressing floors remaining in the northwestern part. It measures 5.50m and its probable length is about 10m. Three wine pressing floors situated next to each other with three cisterns-reservoirs bordering them occupy the central place there. One peculiarity should be especially marked. One reservoir has a stone sink and besides it another one, which ran out from one side. The winery T3 gives the only example of two sinks in one reservoir at the same time. It is the only Bosporan device of such type.

Winery T7 was situated nearby. It is of great interest for the studying of the Bosporan wineries that were built in the early centuries of our era. Not much of it has remained (Gaidukevich, 1958 a, p. 422-432). In spite of the bad condition of walls they allow to determine that the winery was an indoor building, fenced with stone walls, built on a pretty solid base. The building was oblong. The width of the winery was 5.67m, the length of it was about 10m.

The wine pressing floors consist of many layers of cement, 0.22m of overall thickness. The middle wine pressing floor is separated from the others with slots for insertions of wooden partitions. The cement floors have a quite considerable incline towards the sinks. As usual the top floors served for pressing grapes by feet. The press worked on the middle floor. A big quadrangular slab is fixed into the floor of this floor and there are some cracks formed under pressure. The whole surface of the slab is covered by incisions. This was probably done to improve gluing of stone with cement that covered the surface of

There are three wine-pressing floors. A small floor 2m long and 1.70m wide was in the middle. The winery wall bordered it on the northwestern side. Slots made in the 833

ANCIENT GREEK COLONIES IN THE BLACK SEA 2 remains of this winery were excavated in the area of about 60sq.m in the sector XIV (Gaidukevich, 1947, p. 193-194). The low rows of its northern and western walls, 0.65m wide, remained. That is why it seems impossible to ascertain the dimensions of the whole building, inside which there were pressing devices and cisterns for gathering grape juice.

cement floor set off three other walls. Cement coats, which formed the pressing floors, were set near the slots to make them deeper. Wood marks can be seen clearly in some places on the inner walls of slots. Wooden partitions were in the side slots; all of full length. The middle part had no wooden partition and a special opening was made for the must flowing off into a wide gutter, by which it ran into the cistern.

The northwestern corner of the inner room of the winery is occupied by the remained fragment of the pressing area A, set aside for pressing grapes out by feet. The unusual arrangement of this area attracts special attention. It consists of good stone slabs, covered by a thin layer of cement. As it is known, the base of pressing grounds in Bosporos of the early centuries of our era was made of a pebble layer and small stones, which were coated with cement. As a rule, the floors of these areas were multilayered. The structure of the wine pressing area of winery T4 is absolutely different. The cement coat is slight, but the stone base of the ground is very firm – slated.

Unlike the flank grounds covered all over by cement, the big part of the floor of the central pressing area was made of stone slabs. This slab deck covers the central part of the ground. Its four side borders are filled with multilayered cement. A stone deck lies a bit lower than the cement floor of other parts. It is a kind of pressed in the ground. This stone deck became deeper because it was strongly pressed. Grape juice from the central wine-pressing area could be turned either to the side reservoir or to the middle one or to both simultaneously. Side wine-pressing areas are made so that they had an unequal width and length because of the central ground. In the place of bordering to the central area the side areas are narrower. Beyond the bounds of it they widen considerably and only a gutter separates them. The opportunity of not only the direct flow of must into the opposite reservoir but also the side direction of the must into the adjoining reservoir was foreseen in the construction of wineries.

It is impossible to ascertain the connection of the pressing area with the cisterns because of its destruction. Undoubtedly, the area ran to the south along cistern II, into which there was a gutter. It is easy to suppose that grape juice flowed from area A into the reservoir III. Because of its condition it is much more difficult to explain the functions of the reservoir IV, from where and what way juice ran into it. These questions are hardly to be answered until the discovery of another similar winery.

Three cisterns were added to the wine-pressing areas. Their bottoms and walls are covered by several coats of plaster. Grape juice ran from the wine-pressing areas through three stone sinks into the cisterns. The sinks have an ordinary form and limestone slabs are cut out.

A pressing section occupied the northeastern compartment of the winepress. Two reservoirs (I, II) bordered its southern side. Section B is separated from the pressing area A with a low side made of two slabs. The central part of the compartment B is occupied by a stone platform on which grapes for pressing were laid. The floor around the platform is covered with cement. The walls of the sides and stone slabs forming the platform are coated with it too.

In the southeastern part of the winery on the earthen floor a completely preserved stone weight of a lever screw press was found. It worked at the central area. The weight is situated opposite it. The disparity of pressing area level and the floor, where the weight is situated reaches nearly 1.5m. The weight of a lever press lied on the stone deck and consisted of two slabs lying one on to another. The cuts on their surface made a wooden carriage take them. The length of the lever can be determined as 9m.

At first sight on the plan of winery T4 the peculiar arrangement of the cisterns is striking. It has never been met before. Two adjoining cisterns (I and II) border the pressing compartment B with their narrow sides. The second pair of analogous cisterns (III, IV) is located separately at the right angles to the first group of the reservoirs. The bottom of the cisterns is made slantwise and ends in deep round hollows-precipitation tanks. The general capacity of all four reservoirs was approximately 6000 l.

Finds from the fills of the cisterns have a very important meaning in the dating of the winery. Broken pieces of Bosporan big amphorae of the 3rd-4th centuries AD, tile fragments, probably of the roof tiling of the winery have been found there. Tiling types, flat-ceramids and calliptors, are typical for the buildings of the early centuries of our era. Red-lacquered ceramics is represented by debris of bowls, which can be dated to the 3rd-4th centuries AD. To all appearances the winery T7 worked in the 3rd-4th centuries AD.

The drain system of the given winery differs in its originality. It is necessary to point the complete absence of stone gutters, which are indispensable attributes of inner winery devices of Bosporos. We were used to see stone drains running out over reservoirs and their absence may seem to be inharmoniously odd. Grape juice ran into cisterns I and II through three holes, made of slabs

Among the other wineries of the early centuries of our era excavated in Tyritake there is winery T4 that is unique. It can not be compared with any other known wineries. The 834

VIKTOR NIKOLAEVITCH ZINKO: TYRITAKE

fencing the southern side of the pressing compartment B. Besides, the juice could be overtaken from the pressing compartment to the reservoirs III, IV.

fishing nets, ivory sewing needles for netting and plenty of stone anchors for fishing boats are met constantly in excavations.

The construction of the winepress of winery T4 is similar to other Bosporan wineries of the early centuries AD. The arranging of the pressing compartment B with a quadrangular stone deck is close in its general characteristics to the similar pressing areas where a leverscrew press was used. In spite of the fact that a stone weight has not been found in winery T4, we can suppose the usual lever-screw press here. Although some comparisons of some details of Tyritake winery with other wineries of the 2nd-3rd centuries AD can be made, the construction of winery T4 is extremely original.

In 1932, in the southern lower part of Tyritake next to the fortification wall, 16 fish salting tubs were excavated (Marti, 1941, p.20-24). The tubs formed the group of four in one line. The average capacity of one tab was just over 13 cubic meters and the general capacity of all tubs was more than 210 cubic meters. Marti calculated that 16000 centres of fish could be salted in those tubs simultaneously. The annual productivity of the salting centre was 12800 centres (Marti, 1941a, p.94). This number shows the significant productive capacity of this manufacturing complex of Tyritake with its staff of not less than 12-15 people.

In 1933, eight cement-coated cisterns that could be a part of winery T5 were excavated in Tyritake (Gaidukevich, 1952, p.53). It cannot be reconstructed because of the lack of even remote analogies among the excavated wineries. There are wineries with two cisterns. The type of winery with three cisterns located abreast is well known. In conclusion, we know of winery T4 with four cisterns, placed in pairs. There are no wineries with eight adjoining cisterns. The matter is complicated with the condition of the complex T5. Only small remains have reached our days.

The walls of fish salting tubs are built of medium stones and coated with cement inside. During clearing, compressed layers of small fish bones and scales were found. They were remains of Kerch herrings (Caspialosa). Most likely there was no shed or roof over the tubs. The finds of tab fills were mostly ceramic fragments, terracotta objects and glass of the 1st-2nd centuries AD. There were far fewer objects of the 3rd century AD. It is interesting to note the abundance of stucco ceramic moulding in the upper earth layers of the tubs. According to all available data the complex was founded in the first century AD. It functioned until the 3rd century AD, which is confirmed by the find of a coin of the Bosporan king Pharsanzes of 253 AD in the layer with fish remains.

Do these cisterns really have a place in winemaking? The character of their construction is beyond any doubt. Slanting bottoms with round hollows-precipitation tanks were used only in wineries of the early centuries AD. Exactly the same bottoms are represented in the complex T5. According to the level of their deposition in the cultural bedding of the town the complex T5 can be dated to the 3rd-4th centuries AD. Despite its fragmentariness the complex T5 is important because it points to the existence of a special type of wineries, considerably different in their construction from the well-known wineries of Tyritake and Bosporos.

A big well adjoining the fish-salting complex on the southeastern side was surely a component of its equipment. The well was built of big stone slabs. A longitudinal arch blocked up with small rubble stones was found on the northwestern corner of the well at the height of the fourth row of stones in the depth of 1.50 m. The bottom of the well in the depth of 3.50m was paved with big stone slabs. Water ran into the well through the arch, which was probably the mouth of a water-supply canal.

V. Gaidukevich supposed that these cisterns could be used for wine storage (Gaidukevich, 1958, p. 444). Such solitary cisterns are known in Myrmekion and Olbia. Wine storage of such type is not known in Greece or in any of the west-Mediterranean regions of the Greek oecumene. They are known in the east and in Asia Minor. Xenophon when describing the travel of Greek army across the region populated by Karduhs informed that Greeks had found abundance of provision and ‘there was so much wine that it was stored in plastered cisterns’ (Xenoph. Anab, IV, 2, 22). At the same time we know about intensive links of the Bosporan Kingdom and Asia Minor trade centres. Thus, the example of cisterns of the winery T5 can convince us that some techniques of winemaking close to the Asia Minor ones can be found in Bosporos.

When fish-salting tubs stopped working the redundant well-pool was used as a refuse pit. The canal was destroyed and the hole at the height of the fourth row of stones was blocked. Much waste was found during the excavations: fish and animal bones, shells and a fair amount of dark grey ashes. There was a stone paving of big slabs around the well. Such stone decks surround other ancient wells excavated in Tyritake. They were necessary to prevent swamping of the ground near the source of water. A small building made of trimmed stone slabs with a partition in the middle, was excavated in the sector between fish-salting tubs and the well. A lot of Bosporan tiling fragments point to the overhead cover. A small yard paved with slabs was near. This building was in an

One of the main branches of the Tyritake economy was fishing industry and fish processing. Stone plummets for 835

ANCIENT GREEK COLONIES IN THE BLACK SEA 2 It is necessary to note particularly the finding of two human bones among the bone remains. Probably, while the desolated tubs were being covered with earth, the human remains got into the town refuse pits and some of them got into the fish-salting tubs. As the excavations of other sectors of Tyritake show such finds are not isolated instances. To all appearances Tyritake experienced some violent events, which entailed serious consequences: human victims and destruction of buildings. Most probably it was connected with the usurpation of the Bosporan port cities by Barbarian tribes. Goths that robbed the Greek cities in Asia Minor on the Bosporan sailing vessels led them. When life returned to its normal course and the population began to put the town in order, human bones got into the tubs together with rubbish of different kind.

immediate proximity to the fish-salting tubs and the well. It makes us think that fish processing works took place there on that ground and in the building with following fish salting in the tubs. The building is dated to the 1st3rd centuries AD. Eventually, the remains of two big pithoi were found to the southwest of the well. The remains of fish bones and scales were found in one pithos that definitely signify their belonging to the fishing industry complex. Thus, the excavations allowed to nearly reconstruct a clear picture of the manufacturing complex belonging to big fish industry works. Some objects were located with expediency: the well-pool with water and big pithoi – tanks for washing fish; the building for making fish ready for salting or, probably, for preserving; and, at last, the tubs for fish-salting.

A fish salting manufacture of the early centuries AD was excavated in the eastern outskirts of the town in sector X (Gaidukevich, 1952, p.48-49). It consists of six tubs, a paved yard and household buildings. The tubs are situated in pairs in three lines from the southeast to the northwest. The walls of the tubs are built of limestone slabs 0.150.27m thick. Each tub is almost square (1.70 x 1.80 m). Their remained depth is 1.80 m.

A big scale of trade line excavated in this area and calculations of the annual herring catch make us think that the organization of the fishing trade in Tyritake had a state character and the satisfaction of the state requirements was a state aim. We should suppose that in the early centuries AD salted fish was exported to numerous fortification observation posts on the Crimean and Caucasian shores, where Roman military garrisons demanding regular provision billeted. The broad activity of the Roman Empire in the fortifying Crimean and Caucasian coastal fortifications began in the middle of the first century AD. There is a possibility of special intensity of the fishing trade to be connected with that very period.

The walls and bottoms of the tubs are covered with several coats of whitewash inside. There was a tiled roof over the tubs. Stone masonry remains along the northeastern and southwestern sides of the tubs are seemingly the remains of the walls on which the tiled roof was fixed. A stone box made of limestone slabs and a stone floor inside joins the tubs with its northwestern side. Its inner sizes are: length 2.50m, largest width 0.75m, height 0.55 m. There was a lot of sand in the box. Evidently, this building served as a salt storage place.

One more big fish salting complex was excavated in the southern part of the town in the sector V-VI (Gaidukevich, 1952, p.30-33). It consists of five tubs, four of them set in pairs and the fifth one attached at the northern side to the first four ones. The preserved depth of the tubs is 1.80 m. Four tubs were built originally and somewhat later, when there was the necessity to enlarge the production, the fifth tub was built in addition to them.

The time when the tubs were built was very likely the 2nd century AD. On the basis of the ceramic finds from the tub fill we should consider that the fish-salting complex was destroyed at the end of the 3rd century AD. In the eastern part of the town in sector XIII, four big groups of fish-salting tubs (A, B, C, and D) were excavated. To all appearances this region of Tyritake bordering the sea was widely used in the process of fishing.

The walls and the bottoms of the tubs are coated with multi-layer plaster of whitewash with addition of crushed ceramics. The remains of a big stone building and a household yard with a dug in pithoi were found to the west from the tubs. All these buildings belonged to the fish-processing complex.

The fish-salting complex A (Gaidukevich, 1952, p.57-61) consists of six tubs set in pairs in three rows as well as the tubs excavated in the tenth sector. Outside the walls are built of big well-trimmed stone slabs. Each tub represents a container that has a form of a square 2.10 x 2.10m and the depth of no less than 1.60 m. The tubs were plastered inside. The remains of the fallen tiled roof by the way of numerous tile fragments were found in the tubs.

The tubs were filled with a number of animal bones and a lot of ceramics starting with the tile fragments, pithoi, moulded vessels, kitchen pots, table red-lacquered vessels, fragments of glass vessels and coins. A quantity of tile fragments in the tubs is evidence of a tiled roof over the tubs in ancient times. All the material from the tubs are dated to the 2nd-3rd centuries AD. Several bronze coins of Bosporan kings were found. The lack of coins and ceramics of the 4th century provokes the supposition that the tubs stopped working and were covered with earth ar the beginning of that century.

Six pithoi situated near the tubs on the northeastern side belong to the same fish industry manufacture. Ready salted fish was taken from the tubs and put into the pithoi. The quantity of pythoi agrees with the tubs. 836

VIKTOR NIKOLAEVITCH ZINKO: TYRITAKE

walls made of big stones on the southeastern and northwestern sides near the tubs were found. They served for the arrangement of the roof over the tubs.

The second group of fish-salting tubs (B) was excavated to the northwest from the first complex at the distance of 3.5 m. It consists of four tubs set in one row stretching from the northeast to the southwest. The tubs are not similar in their plan. The outermost northeastern tub is the biggest one and has a trapezoid form. The next three tubs have nearly the same dimensions.

On the western side 2.50m away the tubs the ruins of an oven with clay cone-shaped plummets inside was excavated. There were 39 ceramic objects of 12-15 cm high found altogether. The finding of clay objects of this kind in an immediate proximity to the fish salting tubs and furthermore inside the fireplaces can be a proof of the theory that they are fishing plummets found directly in the place of their baking. They differ from the usual widely spread ancient weaving plummets in their considerably bigger mass. Besides, they have very big holes for a thick rope located low enough. Judging from the finds of ceramic vessels the complex of tubs C was used up to and during the 4th century.

The tubs are made of trimmed stone slabs and do not differ technically from the tubs of the complex A. Each tub is covered with usual waterproof plaster inside. The remained depth of the tub is 1.70m, the deepest one found there. A great number of broken and intact roof tiles of Bosporan production was found at the bottom of the tubs. It is the evidence of a tiled roof over the tubs. In addition to tiles there a lot of earthenware fragments: red earthenware plates, a small red earthenware jug of the 2nd century AD decorated with a white ornament made in white paint and other things were found.

In the southwestern part of sector XIII the fourth complex of fish salting tubs (D) was excavated. Primarily it consisted of four tubs and was built according to the same plan as the complex C in two rows. The dimensions of the tubs: length 1.80m, width 1.40m and the depth was about 2.30 m. A bit later, the fifth tub – the biggest one in the occupied area, but with a smaller depth if compared to others – was added to the northern corner.

A big wall 0.80m wide joins the biggest trapezoid tub on its southeastern side. Small remains of the similar masonry were excavated on the northeastern side. These walls run along some length farther from the complex of the tubs. Evidently, the masonry built close to the tubs, are the remains of the walls on which the tiled roof was based on over the tubs.

A number of fragments of amphorae, ceramic vessels, ivory needles for netting was found in the fill of the tubs. Besides, a lot of fish scales and fish bones of herrings and gray mullets were found at the bottom of one tub.

Near the tub of the complex B on its southern side there was a big destroyed fireplace faced with stones and fragments of crude ceramics. A number of big clay coneshaped plummets with a through hole was found in it. In this southern sector a limestone relief of the 2nd-3rd centuries AD with the image of Kybele was discovered.

Judging from the finds of pottery the fish salting tubs of the complex D, which appeared in the early ages AD, were evidently used later. The finding of early medieval ceramics at the bottoms of the tubs proves that these tubs were not covered with earth in the 4th century, as it happened to other fish-salting complexes of Tyritake.

To the north and northeast from the tubs of complex B several stone walls were excavated in a bad condition. The fragment of a marble slab with an inscription of two lines was found in the masonry. Obviously it is a fragment of a statue base with an honorary inscription. The statue was apparently erected in honour of a Bosporos king of the 1st -2nd centuries AD. The buildings, to which these walls belonged, are almost entirely destroyed. Undoubtedly, they were parts of the fish processing industry complex. The construction of fish-salting tubs of the complexes A and B is dated to the 1st-2nd centuries AD, but they had to be used until the end of the 3rd century.

In the central part of the town closer to its eastern border in sector XV, one more fish-salting complex consisted of three tubs was researched (Gaidukevich, 1958, 173-175). These tubs and stone paving adjoining it were situated on the terrace set off with a stone wall with its remaining height of 1.80m. All the building remains located to the west and north-west from the retaining wall lie much lower than the fish-salting tubs. Here the terrace character of planning is clearly seen. The eastern outskirts of the town occupied by household – producing buildings lie higher than the middle dwelling part of the settlement located along the arterial road running from the south to the north.

Two metres away the group of tubs B to the northwest, complex C made of four rectangular tubs was excavated. They are set in pairs in two rows and are built of limestone slabs. The dimensions of each tub: length 2.50m, width 1.50m, and the depth was 2.90 m. The walls and the bottoms were plastered inside. A layer of sea sand and fish scales was at the bottom. Two grounds covered with mortar bordered the upper side of two tubs. They were intended for some fish processing operations. It is quite possible that fish was preliminary washed there; pickle was made and so on. The remains of the

Two of the fish-salting tubs were built nearby and the third one is situated a little further away. The walls of the tubs are made of stone slabs and covered inside with plaster up to 12 cm wide. The inner dimensions of the tubs: length 2.50m, width 1.20m, and the depth is 0.70 cm. The tubs were filled with plaster fragments and pieces of ceramic vessels, which were evidences of 837

ANCIENT GREEK COLONIES IN THE BLACK SEA 2 There are stone stairs on the first floor near the entrance of room 1. There are remains of five footsteps 0,15m high each. The construction of the stairs suggests the idea that it led upstairs to the room of the first floor, situated above room 1.

functioning of the fish-salting complex until the 4th century AD. Just recently in the centre of Tyritake in sector XXVI one fish processing manufacture complex has been excavated (Zin’ko, Ponomaryov, Zin’ko, 2004, p. 132). It consisted of three big tubs located in the eastern part of a big town manor. Judging from the remains of walls bordering the eastern and the western sides of the tubs there was a roof over them. In contrast to the tubs described earlier they were much deeper (3.80m). Judging from the ceramics from the fill, two tubs stopped functioning in the second half of the 3rd century AD and one tub was used even in the 4th century AD. A layer up to 0.20m thick formed by the fish bones and fish scales of Kerch herring was found at the bottom of the northern tub.

Room 1 was rectangular in its plan and had the length of 7.25-7.50m and the width of 3.10-3.25 m. The walls of the building, 0.80m wide, were built of clay and carelessly trimmed flat limestone slabs. Only the corner parts and the doorway are carefully made of good big slabs. The walls inside were covered with clay coating still partly visible. The floor was paved with stone slabs. In the middle part of room I on the floor deck there was a heavily fired stone oven with a round cleared space. Probably the oven was a base for a wooden pole, supporting the ceiling. This was supporting the room on the first floor.

Judging from the great depth of the tubs they could have been used for preparing a special Bosporan fish sauce, which was highly rated in the ancient world. It is necessary to mark a number of ceramic vessels, lightning devices and terracotta statuettes among other finds from the tub fill.

The doorway, 0.90m wide, has a threshold in a way of a deck of medium flat stones. The threshold is situated much higher than the floor of room 1. That is why two steps were made in front of it. The edge of the threshold on the yard side is set off three flat thin slabs, inclining to the room. Carbonized wood, pieces of iron and iron nails were found along the thin slabs in the breadth of the doorway. They represent the remains of burnt doors and wooden threshold lying on the stone deck.

A yard paved with stone was located to the west of the tubs. Some household and probably dwelling houses were situated along its western side. In household buildings and directly in the yard some pythoi were found. They were evidently set for keeping the fish. The manor entrance was on the northern side bordering the street paved with fragments of ceramics. Judging from the finds of the fragments of vessels and bronze coins this town manor with fish-salting tubs was built in the early centuries AD and existed for a long period of time. In the second half of the 3rd century AD two fish-salting tubs stopped functioning and were covered with earth. Most likely the whole manor was desolated. Then the buildings situated in the western part of the complex were partially reconstructed and rebuilt in the 4th century AD. One of the tubs was used then, and only in the first half of the 5th century AD this household and producing complex was destroyed.

An interesting peculiarity of room 1 is the presence of a cult niche. It is situated at the distance of 1.50m to the southeast away from the entrance directly above the floor. A big stone with the cavity of 0.56m circumference and diameter of 0.24m was included in the masonry row. When the clay covering the hollow was removed, a layer of sea sand covered with fragments of amphora sherds was revealed. A gray clay lightning device stood on the amphora crocks. Animal bones were found under the sand layer. Undoubtedly they were the remains of sacrificial offering made at the beginning of the house building. The aim of this ‘building sacrifice’ is evident: it had to provide success in the house building and well being of its inhabitants.

In this connection, one more household and producing complex excavated in Tyritake is interesting. It acquired the name ‘fisherman’s house’ (Gaidukevich, 1952, p. 109-125). This town manor was located in the southern part of the town in sector XV. The rooms of the building were on the four sides of a wide yard paved with slabs. There were 7 rooms in all. The remained walls are up to 3m high. In front of building 1 entrance there is one more layer of slabs over the main stone paving in order to prevent accumulation of atmospheric precipitation. The paving is planned in a way that it declines slightly to the northwest where the gutter running from the southeast to the northwest begins. Evidently, the gutter ran to the town street, which was on the northwestern side of the house. The gutter is made of stone slabs set edgewise and protecting the sides of the gutter and of horizontally lying slabs covering it from above.

A big clay pythos was dug in the floor opposite the entrance of room 1. There were many wheat and barleycorns between the entrance and the pythos. Obviously the pythos was used for keeping grain. When it was cleaned and the earth was removed, flat-bottomed jug, a moulded pot with one handle, and a moulded lightening device were found. Two Bosporan bronze coins of the King Rheskuporis VI and Phorphorus were found near the pythos. The excavations of room 1 revealed the signs of a big fire. A number of charred pieces of wood, ashes, and pottery sherds were covered with soot. Big Bosporan amphorae typical for the 3rd-4th centuries AD on the floor of the room predominated. Some amphorae served for keeping fish. Other ceramics is represented mainly by 838

VIKTOR NIKOLAEVITCH ZINKO: TYRITAKE

A clay distaff, an iron knife and a bronze Bosporan coin of Phorphorsus of 289 AD was found in the middle part of the room. A great quantity of big broken amphorae lay in the southwestern half of the room. Directly at the entrance of the room there was a limestone tetrahedral mortar vessel with rounded corners. The coin of the Bosporan king Rhoemetalkus of 131-140 AD was also found there. There were a lot of ashes, the significant number of ceramics had signs of soot but there were no so clear signs of a fire as in room 1.

moulded pots. There are few red lacquered vessels; there are mainly fragments of plates. Besides some clay spinning objects, pieces of glass stems, and a bronze mirror were found. A lot of stone fishing plummets of various sizes lay on the floor. Plenty of these plummets for big nets confirm that the inhabitants of this house were engaged in fishing. A cistern, 1.80m long, 1.35m wide and 1.90m deep, was built in building 1, on its southwestern exit. There are five layers of pink plaster up to 0.10m thick on the walls inside the cistern. There are signs of dark red paint on the plaster walls inside the cisterns. Ground fill of the cistern contained a number of remains. They are pieces of ceramic vessels and a lot of fragments of amphorae of the early centuries AD. Besides there were fragments of moulded vessels, red lacquered plates, glass vessels, iron and bronze nails. A yellow stratum at the bottom of the cistern particular to fish-salting tubs was found. Obviously the cistern was used for salting fish and the flat-bottomed cistern type points to it. The fish-salting tub in the vicinity of the house where people who were fishermen lived by trade, is quite natural.

Rooms 3 and 4 are situated northeast of room 2. The entrance, 1m wide, goes from the yard. The remaining walls are 1.50 – 2.45m high. Room 3 and the following room 4 were household rooms and were probably used as larders. There were few finds here. Clearing the floor of room 3 showed that it was covered with yellowish clay and a sand layer was under it. During the excavations grape stones, fragments of amphorae and moulded vessels of the 3rd century AD were found. Big pieces of burnt wood and a few iron nails, evidently the remains of big wooden doors, were found in the room 4. Room 4 has a trapezoidal plan. Its length is 4.15-4.50m and its width is 2.75-3.10m. At the entrance there are two niches in the wall separated by one slab. The floor of room 4 was covered with a layer of scorched ruins. A retained straw layer was found in one place on the floor. Twenty-three broken amphorae of the 4th century, fragments of moulded vessels, seven stone fishing sinkers and an ivory knife for scaling were found in the scorched ruins.

Mentioning the close connection of the household activity of the inhabitants of this Tyritake house, it is necessary to point to an ivory object found in room 4. In experts’ opinion, it was a knife for scaling fish. Besides, ivory pins for netting were found in other rooms of the building. Room 2 bordered the southeastern side of room 1 and communicated with the yard by means of the doorway 0.95m wide. The room was 4.20m wide and 8.65m long. Next to the entrance, in the yard along the wall, there was an enclosure three sides of which were formed by stone slabs set edgewise. There is a doorway on the northwestern side of this enclosure, a kind of an entrance with a low threshold. Could it be a place for a watchdog? It should be mentioned that after clearing the entrance of room 2 a skeleton of a dog was found under the heap of small stones.

The entrance to room 5 was just opposite the entrance of room 1. Room 5 with its width of 6.20m was situated across the yard. It was nearly 7m long and 0.05m wide. Its residual walls are 1.12-3.33m wide. In the latest period of its existence room 5 had an earthen floor, and a little bit earlier the southeastern part of the room had a stone deck. There is no paved floor in the southern part of the room. There was a big pit, which was used for keeping grain. As the floors in the rooms were lower than the yard level there were stairs consisted of five stone steps.

Some remaining walls of room 2 are up to 2.76m high. There was a niche in one of the walls and a remained 0.55m wide and 0.40m high in the other one. The window was situated above the fireplace occupying the northern corner of the room. Evidently fireplace smoke passed through the window to the yard. After clearing the window opening, a clay moulded lamp on high leg and two terracotta pyramid-shaped weaving plummets were found.

The walls of room 5 were coated with clay mixed with cut straw. The signs of clay plaster can be noticed in the other rooms of the fisherman’s building. The coating was preserved especially well in room 5, 2-3 layers in some places. The clay wall plastering was whitewashed; the signs of it can be seen here and there. Two stone benches coated with clay as the walls were found along one of the walls. Near the northwestern wall of room 5 is a fireplace fenced with stone slabs. Near and inside, massive clay cones with longitudinal holes were found. They were the same types as found in one of the fish-salting complexes of Tyritake. It is curious that there is a marble altar decorated with a profiled cornice directly below the fireplace. The cavity is carved in the upper surface of the altar. The altar is obviously dated to the earlier period of

The fireplace, 1.25m long and 0.80m wide, had a rectangular form. It was fenced with big stone slabs set edgewise. It was used for cooking food. So, a number of earthen pots with predominance of moulded vessels were found around it.

839

ANCIENT GREEK COLONIES IN THE BLACK SEA 2 the second half of the 4th century AD in a lesser scale that it had been thought. The researches of the ruins of the fisherman’s house force us to come to the conclusion that the building was partially used soon after the catastrophe.

time if compared to the fisherman’s building where it turned to be under the fireplace. It follows that it was used a second time and was not used for its original purpose. A number of objects were found in room 5 on the level of the later, high floor. A thick layer of scorched ruins informs expressively of the circumstances of the destruction of the building. Components of the layer of scorched ruins are quite indicative. Together with a huge amount of burnt overhead coverings charcoal there was a lot of sea sand and sea grass. The finds were predominantly ceramic. They are mainly pieces of massive Bosporan amphorae. There was a smaller quantity of fragments of imported narrow neck amphorae with ribbed handles.

Room 6 was facing the street with one of its sides bordering the room 5 on the southwest. This room had a trapezoid shape with the length of 3.15m and width of 2.35-2.95 m. The remained walls are up to 1m high. The room entrance was 0.80m wide and led to the yard. A disk-shaped clay sinker with a scribbled drawing of a branch was found inside. Room 7 in was situated in the northern corner of the manor. It was 4.45m long and 4m wide. The remaining walls of this room are 1.55-2.40m high. There are two small niches on the southeastern corner of the room. They bear traces of smok inside. The fireplace was fenced with some stone slabs set edgewise on the western corner of the room and a round stone millstone was placed in its middle. On the floor were two round hand mill millstones. Pieces of red-lacquered dishes with crosses imprinted at the bottoms were found in room 7 and are dated to the 5th century AD when the half-destroyed fisherman’s house was inhabited again and the dwellers started to use this building partially. As it was mentioned, this big manor, named ‘a fisherman’s house’ appeared in the 3rd century AD. It experienced the Huns’ massacre in the second half of the 4th century AD and then in the 5th century AD some insignificant building took place on the ruins of the house.

Moulded vessels obviously dominated in everyday life, household of the inhabitants of the house are widely represented. There were less red-lacquered ceramics. They are mainly pieces of Asia Minor plates and cups of one type. A series of clay distaff found on the floor and finds of some pyramidal clay sinkers is evidence that the weaving production was a part of the household activities of the inhabitants of this manor. A bone casket box decorated with a ring of incised lines and curved circles on the outside has is connected with the everyday life of women who lived in the house. The remains of rouge are seen on the inner surface of the casket box, which was used for its keeping. The most interesting find in room 5 was the treasure of Bosporan coins of a late period. The coins were found in a moulded pot broken under the weight of a stone heap. The pot with coins was found in the fireplace and was covered with a thick layer of ashes. Beside the coins, there were two silver earrings, a bronze seal ring and a bronze container for keeping amulets. Such amulets are known in the Bosporan necropolises of the early centuries AD and some of them contained spells written on the golden or silver plate. There are facts, which can help to conclude that the treasure was hidden at the moment of a great danger when the population of the town was leaving their houses, which then fell a pray to fire.

Based on the archaeological excavations, the foundation of the Greek town of Tyritake should be dated to the middle of the 6th century BC. The excavations in the northwestern part in sector XIV are of great interest for the clarification of the life conditions in the settlement of Tyritake in that ancient period. A number of finds are an evidence of the important role of the foreign trade of the new Bosporan settlements-colonies of Tyritake in the 6th century BC. A rate of imported objects in the total quantity of finds is very high. The totality of all finds at the same time does not allow us to define the main economy functions of the Bosporan town even in their early period as imported goods are only bartered. The analysis of the material of the archaic stratum of Tyritake defines the early development of an independent household and manufacture activity, the development of different trades: ceramics, weaving and others.

The treasure contained 227 Bosporan rulers’ coins, the earliest of which are dated to 276 and the latest ones to 332 AD. The treasure is an evidence that house was inhabited until the 330s AD. We do not know exactly for how long the preserved money had been kept. It is very likely that the savings the value of which increased greatly with the interruptible inflow on the Bosporan market had been kept by the early 370s when invading Huns delivered to the Bosporan Kingdom a shattering blow. One may assume the destruction of the fisherman’s house excavated in sector XV took place in connection with the Huns’ intervention which temporarily stalled the life in some Bosporan towns and settlements. Evidently, the life in Tyritake resumed in spite of the devastation in

The following matter is important. However high the totality of Greek material – imported and local –it is necessary to see these finds in combination with the objects of the local barbarian production. The presence of moulded Scythian and Kyzil-Coban ceramics is especially characteristic. The early stages of the cultural interference between the Greek and barbarian population are showed vividly.

840

VIKTOR NIKOLAEVITCH ZINKO: TYRITAKE

press in the middle room, with three reservoirs appropriate for the pressing areas and a stone weight for the lever press. Parallels to the wineries of such type in Tyritake are known in Myrmekion, Patraeus and Panticapaeum. This type of winery has no close analogies in the ancient Greek barbarian world though. It is quite possible that we deal with the formed Bosporan tradition and not the introduced one.

Taking view of the results of the archaeological investigations of Tyritake in the 20th and the beginning of the 21st centuries it is necessary to recognize that the material, which is on disposal and is dated to pre-Roman times, is still insufficient. That is why one cannot outline the general picture of the town’s structure and the main peculiarities in its cultural and economic life. Tyritake was rebuilt heavily in the early centuries AD when it occupied one of the leading places in Bosporos as the capital of fishing trade and fish processing. This reconstruction was at the expense and the wide utilization of the remains of old buildings. So, the building remains of the 5th-2nd centuries BC were met sporadically in the excavated parts of the town and moreover in fragments with rare exceptions. Only some finds of marble statues, altars, and architectural details can help to indicate the existence of Tyritake temples devoted to ancient Greek Gods.

The excavations of Tyritake have brought to light rich and manifold materials of the first centuries AD vividly depicting the image of the town and everyday life of its citizens because fortification walls, streets and a number of dwelling houses of that period have been excavated. Unfortunately, we know practically nothing about the public and cult buildings. Tyritake became a big centre of the Bosporan fishing trade. Judging from the found remains of fish manufacture building for fishing trade in Tyritake in the 1st to 3rd centuries AD was grandiose for the ancient time’s trade conditions. Suffice to remind that the complex of 16 tubs near the southern fortification wall had the capacity to salt 200 tons simultaneously. The main concentration of fish processing buildings in a kind of complexes of tubs took place mainly in the southern port part and the southeastern part of Tyritake. However these complexes have been excavated in the central and the northern parts of Tyritake as well. Nearly 700 fish salting tubs dated mainly to the 1st to 3rd centuries AD have been excavated in the territory of the town. Such a great scale of fish stock was connected with the development of export trade of the Bosporan Kingdom when the provision supply for the Roman Army, which was situated in different regions of the Black Sea coastal territories especially in Asia Minor on the border of Parthia, played an important role. At the same time there were large-scale supplies to the Greek towns.

However it is necessary to mention some important discoveries dated from the pointed period. We shall point to the winery of the 3rd-2nd centuries BC excavated on the part V-VI. The well-preserved winery is a vivid evidence of the beginning of an independent development of Bosporan winemaking in the industrial extent. Evidently a number of global reasons typical for that period stimulated a wide development of winemaking in the Bosporan Kingdom. The winery in Tyritake was not the only object of such industry in the 3rd century BC. Wineries of early Hellenistic time in Myrmekion and its outskirts are known. All this taken together sheds light on the economic history of the Bosporan Kingdom of Spartocids’ time. The finding of a bronze mould – an instrument of a craftsman has not a lesser meaning. It is the most precious archaeological document in investigating the question of the Bosporan role in the production of toreutic goods. It confirms a branch of artistic trade in Bosporan towns. Finds from Tyritake wineries of the Hellenistic epoch give an opportunity to trace the technical development in the Bosporan winemaking. The winery excavated in the sector V-VI is well preserved and has many residual technical details. It is dated to the first century BC and represents a new type of manufacturing buildings where the lever press worked with the use of stone weights. The closest analogies of the weights for presses of such types situated in wineries and oil pressing places are known first of all in Greek towns of Asia Minor. The last circumstance makes us think that the technique of the Bosporan winemaking in the Hellenistic time was formed under the influence of economic and cultural relations with Asia Minor trade-manufacturing towns.

The examined town buildings-manors of the 3rd-4th centuries AD introduce a way of life of the citizens of Tyritake, who probably belonged to the local fish processing workers class. At the same time these complexes show a sharp cutting down of the Bosporan foreign trade starting with the second half of the 3rd century and a quick rate of naturalization growth in the economy of Bosporan towns in its declining period. A number of moulded ceramics of this period is an evidence of a high rate of non-Greek population in Tyritake. The intensive immigration inflow of this population to Bosporan towns precipitated the process of the Barbarian influence on the Bosporan Kingdom and its culture and furthered the destruction of the state system from within.

The wineries of the early centuries AD excavated in Tyritake represent a standard type of building in its construction, which was formed in Bosporos and was widely spread and became the most widely used in the Bosporan winemaking practice. First of all, they are the wineries with three adjoining pressing areas with a lever

The finds of two coin treasures are of great importance for the description of the late periods of the history of Tyritake. Both are connected with the disastrous moments of the Bosporan Kingdom in Tyritake – Goths’ 841

ANCIENT GREEK COLONIES IN THE BLACK SEA 2 campaign of the second half of the 3rd century AD and Huns’ invasion at the end of the 4th century AD. The excavations showed that the catastrophe led to the town ruin is dated to the 370s and was connected with the Huns’ incursion. At the same time other Bosporan towns were ruined. Some of them like Nymphaeum, Myrmekion and others were terminated.

BIBLIOGRAPHY Blavatsky V.D. 1954. The Archaic Bosporos // MIA. - 33.- M.L. Gaidukevich V.F. 1941. About Ancient Tyritake Site // MIA. 4.- M.-L. Gaidukevich V.F. 1952. The Excavations of Tyritake in 19351940 // MIA. -25 Gaidukevich V.F. 1958. The Excavations of Tyritake and Myrmekion in 1946-1952 yrs // MIA. -85.- M.-L. Ernshtedt E.V. 1950. The Statuette of Dionysos from Tyritake //SA. -VII. Zin’ko V.N. 2003. The Chora of the Bosporan City of Nymphaeum // BI. –IV Zin’ko V.N., Ponomarev L.Ju., Zin’ko A.V. Issledovanie khory Nimfeja I gorodizja Tiritaki //Archaeolodicheskie otkrytija v Ukraine 2002-2003 gg. – Kiev. – 2004. Knipovich T.N., Slavin L.M. 1941 The Excavations of the Southwestern Part of Tyritake // MIA. – 4- M. – L. Marti Y.Y. 1941. The Town Fortification Walls of Tyritake // MIA. -4.- M.-L. Marti Y.Y. 1941 a. Rybozasolochnye vanny Tiritaki //MIA. – 4.- M.-L. Winter F. 1971 Greek Fortifications. London, Toronto

Very soon, the life in Tyritake as well as in Panticapaeum was resumed, but under new social and political conditions of dependence. Those towns depended on nomadic Hunan tribes, which became the masters of Crimean steppes by the end of the 4th and beginning of 5th centuries AD. The Bosporan history in the 5th century and especially its first half baffles description and complete reconstruction and causes great disputes among the scientists. Judging from the excavations, Tyritake resumed the life at the end of the 4th-5th centuries AD. There can be no doubt about the serious significance of this town in the 5th-6th centuries AD when the Byzantine Empire aimed at its strengthening on the coasts of Kimmerian Bosporos. That was the beginning of a new historical epoch.

842

VIKTOR NIKOLAEVITCH ZINKO: TYRITAKE

Figure 1. The plan of the town of Tyritake. I-XXVI – excavated parts.

843

ANCIENT GREEK COLONIES IN THE BLACK SEA 2

Figure 2. View of the central part of the town.

Figure 3. View of the eastern part of the town, on the seaside.

844

VIKTOR NIKOLAEVITCH ZINKO: TYRITAKE

Figure 4. Sector XIV of western outskirts of the town. 1- 6th century BC buildings; 2- the fortification wall of 5th century BC; 3- 5th-6th centuries BC buildings; 4- the buildings of the early centuries of our era.

Figure 5. Terracotta from the 6th century BC building. 1- the statuette of a goddess; 2- the statuette of a goddess; 3- the statuette of a goddess; terracotta of Samos.

845

ANCIENT GREEK COLONIES IN THE BLACK SEA 2

Figure 6. Vessels from room A. 1- Clazomenae painted amphora; 2- a big open vessel.

Figure 7. Amphorae. 1- The neck of Chios amphora of the end of the 6th century BC; 2- the amphora of the borderline of the 6th-5th centuries BC; 3- the neck of Chios amphora of the 5th century.

Figure 8. Plan of the southern part of fortification walls of the 4th-3rd centuries BC.

Figure 9. Southern fortification wall and the tower I.

846

VIKTOR NIKOLAEVITCH ZINKO: TYRITAKE

Figure 10. Tower II and a part of the southern wall.

Figure 11. Plan of the western wall part and the northwestern angle tower.

Figure 12. Plan of the part of the northern wall and a tower.

847

ANCIENT GREEK COLONIES IN THE BLACK SEA 2

Figure 13. Western fortification wall on the town side.

Figure 14. Tower on the northwestern angle.

Figure 15. Northwestern tower from the West.

848

VIKTOR NIKOLAEVITCH ZINKO: TYRITAKE

Figure 16. The northern tower.

Figure 17. Northern fortification wall.

Figure 18. Rustic blocks of the northern fortification walls.

849

ANCIENT GREEK COLONIES IN THE BLACK SEA 2

Figure 19. Statue of Dionysos.

Figure 20. Plan of winery T1 of the 3rd-2nd centuries BC.

Figure 21. The wine pressing platform and a cistern of the winery of the 3rd-2nd centuries BC.

850

VIKTOR NIKOLAEVITCH ZINKO: TYRITAKE

Figure 22. Reconstruction of winery T1.

Figure 23. Reconstruction of winery T2.

851

ANCIENT GREEK COLONIES IN THE BLACK SEA 2

Figure 24. Plans of wineries: 1- T2; 2- T3; 3- T4; 4- T7.

852

VIKTOR NIKOLAEVITCH ZINKO: TYRITAKE

Figure 25. Plan of a dwelling house of the 1st-3rd centuries BC.

Figure 26. Plan of a ‘fisherman’s house’.

Figure 27. Fish salting tubs of sectors V-VI on the northwestern view.

Figure 28. Plan of a fish salting complex of the sector V-VI.

853

ANCIENT GREEK COLONIES IN THE BLACK SEA 2

Figure 29. Fish salting tubs of the sector XXVI. Figure 30. A town street of the sector XXVI.

Figure 31. Ceramic finds of the early centuries of our era.

854

Small and Poorly Studied Towns of the Ancient Kimmerian Bosporos Alexander Alexandrovitch Maslennikov*

The title* of this paper contains some conventionality. To be exact, this review should be preceded by a number of specifications. The fact is that it is customary to classify a number of ancient settlements as the so-called ‘small towns’ of the Bosporos, presumably associated with various towns mentioned in written sources. Meanwhile, the concept itself, a ‘small town’, needs an explanation. Evidently it is small in size and specifically urban, but by the group of external features and status, a settlement in Greece or even in some district of the Hellenic oecumene and the comparative one on the Kimmerian Bosporos are not the same. I think this difference could lie specifically in the content of the already mentioned factors-features. We will add the factor that, firstly, by no means were all such archaeological monuments poleis in ancient times. As is known, ‘town’ and ‘polis’ in the ancient world are very closely connected notions, but not identical. Secondly, in the course of their history, they were inevitably changing, changing their image, size, demographic properties and status within the economic and administrative system of the given state. In other words, a certain fairly large Greek settlement in one period could become a centre of urban type, but then, having degraded, became temporarily or permanently a small settlement with a quite different status and mode of life for its inhabitants. The (very scarce) information from ancient authors (mainly geographers) which is available to us, sometimes provides us with a varying picture, calling the same communities cities, towns or simply rural villages/settlements (Krouglikova, 1966, p. 22-26; idem, 1975, p. 146; Maslennikov, 1998, p. 35-36). These changes in the terminology, undoubtedly, are historical and social realities recorded mostly by accident.

Myrmekion, Kytai and Kepoioi appear to be so complex in terms of the stratigraphy, planning and construction level, and the volume of discoveries and archaeological objects, it is more appropriate to single them out as a special group of ‘medium-sized’ towns. Practically all of them were described in the previous volumes of the present publication, which also includes some of the really small and poorly studied towns of the Bosporos, namely Akhileion, Porthmeus and Kimmerion. Meanwhile, quite a number of others were left out of our review, although, in some cases they deserve the attention. It is about them that we are going to speak further. First of all, it should be said, that all the settlements described below have been mentioned in writing once, in some rare cases, two or three times and only as toponyms, almost without any more or less lengthy commentaries. Meanwhile, the authors that referred to them belong to ‘Roman’ and even late ancient times, and, with the rare exception, in the best case used certain information from the early Hellenistic epoch. So far, we do not have any epigraphic confirmation of some place names, which, among various controversial questions of the paleography of the region under consideration, (and it should be pointed out this is very difficult) still makes the localization of many of these towns problematic (from the recent studies of this topic we will mention only some of the articles by V.G. Zubarev, N.I. Sudarev and Yu.V. Gorlov). In the last decades some of these settlements, have been, at last, discovered by archaeologists and have become places of quite considerable and long-term excavation. At the same time, examinations have been made of the territory of other settlements. Moreover, it is necessary to specify one more point. Namely, the degree of archaeological knowledge about chora, at least, in the European part of the Bosporos is already so great, that, in some cases, the size of some so-called rural settlements, some features of their fortification, planning, as well as the character of finds raises a question about their higher administrative status.

It should be said that until as recently as about fifty years ago our knowledge about almost all such monuments was limited only to their names and their presumed location, but at present there is considerable progress in the sphere of their archaeology. Meanwhile, considering the size of the Bosporos, such so-called ‘small’ towns as Tyritake, * Prof. Alexander Alexandrovitch Maslennikov was born in 1948. He is a Professor of Classical Archaeology and the Head of the Field Research Department of the Institute of Archaeology of the Russian Academy of Scienses (IA RAS). Since 1975, he has been the Head of the East-Crimea Mission of IA RAS; author of over 160 scholarly works, 7 monographs (including ‘The Hellenic Chora on the Edge of Oekumene’ M., 1999; ‘The Ancient Greeks on the North Euxeinos Pontos littoral’ Thessaloniki, 2000 (in Greek, translated by Elias K. Petropoulos); ‘Ancient earth frontiers and defensive structures in the East Crimea’ M., 2003). Subjects developed: Classical States of the North Black Sea Region, the Bosporos Chora, economy, culture, religion and ethnic composition of the Bosporos rural population. Address: Alexandr A. Maslennikov, Moscow 117036, Dm.Ulyanova Str. 19, Institute of Archaeology, Russian Academy of Sciences. E-mail: [email protected]

This, primarily, refers to a number of settlements mentioned in the Crimea, and, most likely, in its eastern part, by Claudius Ptolemaeus, which cannot be found in any other written sources. Maybe, it is not accidental at all that he calls them towns, although it is not quite clear on the basis of concrete features or any other information. (It is quite possible that ancient, or to be more exact, Greek written tradition simply did not have corresponding terms to describe settlements clearly in terms of status and origin, particularly outside the ancient area). It should be mentioned that the greatest part of these new names are obviously of a non-Greek origin and 855

ANCIENT GREEK COLONIES IN THE BLACK SEA 2 the 5th century AD adds that between Kazeka and the next much more famous town of Kimmerikon there are 180 stages or 24 miles (Anon. рeripl Pontos. Eux., 77). Since Kimmerikon was certainly situated near the western slope of the mountain of Opuk, and the given distance is approximately equal to 36 kilometres, then Kazeka, using coastal navigation, should be found somewhere (approximately within 2-3 kilometres) to the north-west of Cape Chauda – the eastern point of the gulf of Theodosia. No traces of ancient settlements have ever been registered here. According to the author of the anonymous periplous there are two variants of the localization of this small village. The first is in the vicinity of the abovementioned Cape. The second is near Cape Tash-Kachik, i.e. near a small salt-water lake, about 8-9 kilometres to the east of the Cape Chauda. In ancient times, the lake could have been a sea gulf, and hence, it could have served as a harbour (Gajdukevich, 1949, p. 191-192).

it causes a lot of arguments among linguists about their concrete etymology and origin. Most experts connect those names with the Iranian languages of the local ancient population, but recently there have also been opinions about an Indo-Arian and Thracian substratum. The sites of the largest settlements in the Bosporos of this particular period (first centuries A.D.) really corresponded to those geographic coordinates which were used by Ptolemaeus. We can name, for example, such famous and illustrative examples as the site of the ancient settlement near the village of Ivanovka – probably Ilurat; the site of the ancient settlement near the village of Belinskoye – Taphr and the site of the ancient settlement near the village of Tasunovo – Bion, etc. (Zubarev, 1998, p.115). In some cases, there may be a kind of correction of our information received from several (various) sources. Such is the situation in relation to the ‘cities’ of Herakleion and Zenonos Chersonesos. At the same time, among all the other names in which we are interested, or, to be exact, mention, there are such that, so far, cannot be certainly or even approximately localized. Nevertheless, we ought to mention them.

It seems that it is here that in the 19th century people saw the ruins of some ancient settlement being destroyed by coastal erosion and sculpted rocks tombs. Later, these places were not visited by specialists. Cape Chauda has been inspected more than once, including by the author of this paper. Here, you can find remains of a small ancient settlement, very much destroyed both as a consequence of coastal erosion, and as a result of the World War II. The date of the great majority of the finds from here lies in the first centuries AD, but there are also some materials from the Hellenistic period. It is not difficult to note in both cases a real unconformity with the directions of the periploi. In the second case this is especially great (more than 10 kilometres out). In practice ‘the mistake’ of Pseudo-Arrian in defining the distance between the towns of Kimmerikon and Kytai on the Black Sea coast is obvious. The figure which he gives, 60 stades (about 12 kilometres), cannot correspond to the real distance between these well-known ancient settlements, which is several kilometres further. This means that both sources cannot be well grounded when speaking about this region. Let us return to the archaeological characteristics of Kazeka.

So, let us begin our excursion around the small towns of the Bosporos, following the direction of all periploi, i.e. from the west to the east, in the beginning along the Black Sea coast of the Eastern Crimea, then up the Azov Sea coast, and finally along the Taman peninsula. Such a route was largely due to the currents dominating near the northern shores of the Black Sea. This factor had inevitably been taken into consideration by ancient navigators from Greece (whatever their particular goals or professions were), at least, until they developed the shortest routes running immediately through the Euxeinos Pontos and Maiotis. The latter seems to have taken place approximately at the end of the 5th century BC. However, such coastal ‘waymarks’ were always important for local routes. The farthest settlement in the west is probably Athinion, mentioned by the famous author of the periplous of the Euxeinos Pontos as a deserted harbour, the border of the Scythian’s habitation and, evidently, of the Taurians, a coastal fortification or a port, somewhere to the west of Theodosia (Anon. periplous Pont. Eux., 76, 78). At present, owing to successful and long term excavations of the Crimean archaeologist S.B. Lantsov, it is possible to identify it with a strong Bosporos fortress from the turn of two eras which is located near the modern village of Vesyoloye in the eastern part of the Kutlakskaya harbour and was almost completely explored (Lantsov, 1999, p.121-136). Since the interpretation of this monument as a town is specifically rejected, we are not going to pay special attention to its characteristics.

It is quite unclear why a suggestion was put forward that this used to be one of the points of disposition of the Roman troops that appeared on the north of the Black Sea Coast in the period of the Emperor Nero (Katushin, 1998, с.49). Instead, aerial photographs of the coastal area between the Cape Chauda and Cape Tash-Kachik, which were made in the early 1970s, suddenly revealed a quite curious ‘detail’. It appeared that all this area is covered with a network of identical squares, strictly facing certain directions. Their area, excluding of course, the coastal areas, is about 10-11 hectares. One can even count their approximate quantity: not more than seventy. In other words, we are most probably dealing with the regular demarcation of agricultural lands – a chora of a settlement. It was done in the best ancient classical traditions, and the areas of the lots closely correspond to

Following Theodosia eastwards we come across a settlement with a strange, obviously non-Greek, name: Kazeka (Fig. 1). Arrian Periplous says that there are 240 stages between it and Panticapaeum – the capital of Bosporos (Arr., Periplous, 30). An anonymous author of 856

ALEXANDER ALEXANDROVITCH MASLENNIKOV: SMALL AND POORLY STUDIED TOWNS

Among black-lacquer ceramics there were occasionally pieces of black and red shaped vessels. Among modelled ceramics, there were pieces with distinctive incised geometric ornamentation, plainly of barbaric origin. It is striking that there are no terracotta statues (even their fragments) or graffiti. Nevertheless, it is the opinion of the archaeologist who excavated here that it was not just a refuse dump. In all probability, this notable and picturesque place was a site of some kind of a village sanctuary like an ash-pit – eschara. It remains unclear what god or gods it was devoted to, as well as its connection with a nearby settlement or small town (Moleva, 2002, p. 9-16). It is not improbable that here in the place of an important geographic landmark (a turn of the shore and the entrance to the Kerch strait) was some local sacral centre, but whether it was really Zephyrion one cannot so far say.

them. Inspection on the ground confirmed the presence of low ridge-like earth mounds that served as borders, as well as the absence of any trace of manors. Thus, if our supposition is correct, the people working on this land lived somewhere nearby, i.e. in Kazeka, no matter where the latter (directly to the east or west of the demarcated territory) was situated. It is not likely that people from Theodosia could walk or travel such distances, this would happen only if Kazeka was their common ‘settlement’ in a distant chora, like the ‘Beautiful harbour’ of the Chersonesites. Who knows? Maybe, all the aforesaid is a sign that Kazeka, at least, during some period of its history, was a tiny civil community and, theoretically, could lay claims to the status of a polis. By the times of Arrian this settlement had completely declined, and he (or those who informed him) saw only a small village. As has been already mentioned, Accra is followed by small towns: Kimmerikon and Kytai. The first one will be treated separately in this volume. As for the second one, it was reviewed in detail by Е.А. Molev in one of the previous volumes of this edition.

The next and much more notable point – the town of Akra will be described in this paper separately, while we continue the characterization of small towns with Hermesion. Two authors mention it as a town: Pomp. Mela (Mela, II,1) and Pliny the Elder (Plin., NH, IV, 87). The first, listing the towns on the coast of Kimmerian Bosporos, strangely enough, mentions Theodosia too (probably as a town of the Bosporos state), and after it, Panticapaeum, Myrmekion, and Hermesion. Pliny seems to be more exact. This settlement was mentioned by him among the towns in the strait, together with Myrmekion. In fact, this brief information does not prove that these two towns were in close vicinity, as a number of experts in ancient geography earlier thought. The Kerch strait is quite a long artery. Hermesion has also been placed on the southern shore of the salt-water lake Tobechik, and even on the site of contemporary Kerch (Latyshev, 1909, p. 61; Gaidukevich, 1959, p. 213).

Zephyrion should be apparently considered as the next little town (Fig. 1). It was mentioned only by Pliny the Elder, between the settlement called Akra and the town of Kytai (Plin., NH, IV, 86). Pliny also calls them ‘former towns’. There is no consensus about the location of this settlement, as well as its existence. V.F. Gajdukevich supposed that Pliny was mistaken and the order of the towns following Kytai is the reverse: first Akra, then Zephyrion (Gajdukevich, 1949, p.180; idem., 1959, p. 213). Probably, such a decision can be explained by the fact that the name Akra suggested that this town would be situated on a high, large cape or rock. In that case, the most appropriate place is the south-eastern point of the Kerch peninsula, Cape Takil’, a quite high and abrupt part of the coast; moreover, it is a very important geographical landmark. It looks as if it fitted more the corresponding place in Strabo’s description (Strab., XI, 2, 8). However, Akra had also been placed there earlier by one of the first explorers of Bosporos, I. Blaramberg, and then by some other specialists (Blaramberg, 1848, p.8; Marti, 1912, p.14). V.D. Blavatsky, leaving this matter open, was inclined to support the same location: Akra is on the Cape Takil’, and Zephyrion is a little to the north, on the shore of the Kerch strait (Blavatsky, 1954, p. 2425). Much later it was suggested returning to Pliny’s version and looking for Zephyrion in the vicinity of Cape Takil’, and Akra to the north, near the village of Zavetnoye (Maslennikov, 1979, p.35-37). It should be said that of late this opinion has become the firmly established one. As for archaeological remains, numerous explorations of the area near the above-mentioned Cape showed that it seems as if there are no traces of any large settlement and the main ‘place of interest’ is a small ashpit at a sea cliff. It contained various finds, especially pieces of amphoras and other dishes, dating back to the period between the beginning of the 6th and the end of the 4th, maybe, the beginning of the 3rd centuries BC.

In all these cases, some archaeological proof was found in the form of small, very ruined and practically unexplored ancient settlements. Until recently, the most reliable was the viewpoint, according to which Hermesion should be identified with the site that is situated several kilometres to the north of Myrmekion (the so-called Cape Zmeiny). There is even a small fragment of an inscription from there. However, a justified suggestion has recently been put forward that one should look for this town to the south-east of Kerch, in the area of the famous Cape Ak-Burunsky (Shestakov, 1999, p. 103-112) (Fig. 1). Ruins of substantial constructions were found here as early as the second half of the 19th century, including mounds, walls and towers. The father of archaeology in the Kimmerian Bosporos, P. Du Brux, identified them by mistake as the remains of Nymphaeum (Du Brux, 1848, p. 3-5). Later, this ancient settlement was somehow forgotten, although in the vicinity there were explorations of two necropoleis, one on a hill, dating to the Hellenistic and early medieval periods, and a few more settlements were discovered. The area was really very important and 857

ANCIENT GREEK COLONIES IN THE BLACK SEA 2 hill with a scarp slope in the east and quite deep ravines approaching it from the south and north. From the west it slips into the surrounding lowland. The area is not large, about 150 х 85 metres, i.e. about 1.3 hectares, but some of it had been completely ruined by that time. The archaeological work that was carried out there in 1949 was very limited (a small stratigraphic shaft on the cliff: 2.5 х 2.5 metres). Later, the site of this ancient settlement was frequently visited by many explorers. Some initial data was collected. The present-day condition of the monument is deplorable, although it is still possible to excavate in some small sectors.

advantageous for a large city to be situated, particularly because most probably in ancient times, between the above-mentioned cape protruding deeply into the strait and the neighbouring cape on the Taman peninsula, one of the two or three ferries across the Kimmerian Bosporos would have been located. In S.A. Shestakov’s opinion, the town we are looking for should be identified with the ancient settlement Ak-Burun II, located in the southwestern part of the cape, undoubtedly next to an ancient mound. It is from here and not from the outskirts of Tiritaka, that one of the inscriptions of the period of the King of Bosporos Savromat II (the end of the 2nd– beginning of the 3rd century AD) comes (KBN, 1965, No.902; Shestakov, 1999, p.107; idem., 2000, p.123125). In fact, it is a pedestal of a statue, which was probably set up to commemorate some event on behalf of this ruler. The text itself remains incomplete, difficult to translate and does not help elucidate the location of Hermesion.

The earliest find on the site of this settlement is the stem of a Klazomenian amphora dating back to the second half of the 6th century and the first quarter of the 5th century BC. The fragment of the occupation layer that was studied proved to be very rich with finds and quite thick. Five strata of different periods were found: from one which had very few finds dating to the 5th–4th centuries B.C., to one containing materials of the first two centuries AD. Most of the finds are fragments of amphoras, mainly of the 4th–3rd centuries BC. There seems to be no stratum dated to the late Hellenistic period. Probably the zenith of this settlement came during the previous period (Kastanayan, 1958, p. 254-265). Whether this place was populated or only visited in the 6th century BC is not known. There is no possibility of discussing anything about all the other aspects characterising this settlement either. Only its special location and the name may lead to some suggestions. For example, it is noteworthy that there were two settlements in the narrowest part of the strait, and their names had an obvious sacral motif, namely: Parthenion and Akhilleion. We do not know what particular goddess ‘maiden’ is meant here. As for the temple in Akhilleion, it definitely existed. Such a tradition in the location of Hellenistic temples was quite typical (See Herod., VII, 176). Probably, it was explained by the special role of some sea routes and the importance of their sacral protection. Maybe, both towns and their temples had a nationwide (for the Bosporos) importance.

Unfortunately, to verify this hypothesis, as well as to explore this monument (ancient settlement) is practically impossible, due to its almost complete destruction by relatively recent modern constructions. However, the localization of Hermesion is partially confirmed by numerous findings of fragments of ancient dishes, including black-lacquer, in the area of the now deserted Russian fortress from the end of the 18th–beginning of the 20th centuries (Pavlov’s Battery). Also, the chain of the above-mentioned burial hills also brings us to the mentioned ‘point’ of the given cape. Among them there are some quite large and famous burials of the 4th–3rd centuries BC. There are a lot of contradictions and uncertainty in relation to the two ‘twin’-towns: Parthenion and Porthmeus. Both are mentioned as neighbouring. The distance that was really between them is unknown, and the exact location is still problematic. There is one article dealing with Porthmeus in the first volume of this edition. We will only point out that its identification with a relatively well-explored ancient settlement of the 6th–1st centuries BC, near a present-day ferry crossing is more likely, and is conventionally and generally accepted. However, quite recently there has been the first attempt to dispute this (see below). Thus, Parthenion, as a hamlet or a village, was mentioned by Strabo for the first time (Strab., VII, 4, 5; XI, 2, 6), and then by Claudius Ptolemaeus (Ptol., III, 6, 4). This is what Strabo wrote about it: ‘twice farther from Myrmekion/which was 20 stades from Panticapaeum – А.М. /is the village of Parthenion, near the narrowest part of the strait, only 20 stades; opposite, on the Asian shore, there is a village called Akhilleion’.

Quite a recent find in the territory of the neighbouring site (Porthmeus) – a dedicatory graffito referring to a Maiden (‘Parthenos’) – leads to the suggestion that the worship of some of the goddesses (Artemis, Athena or Hera) in the hypostasis of the Maiden existed here as early as in the first half of the 5th century BC. It is not unlikely that the settlement named after her was situated in that very place, not in the above-mentioned area (Tohtasiev, 1993, p. 74-75). Where was Porthmeus situated in that case? There is an opinion that it ought to be a settlement situated in the area of the beacon Enikalsky or Cape Phanar (Du Brux, 1858, p. 3-84; Grinevitch, 1927, p. 44-46; Fedoseev, 1999, p. 62-65). The settlement here is almost completely ruined, which occurred fairly recently. In general, the situation with the localization of these two towns remains as uncertain as it was more than fifty years ago.

According to explorations in the early 1950s, this settlement (Parthenion) is presumably located on the northern outskirts of the settlement Opasnoye (Veselov, 1952, p. 227-231) (Fig. 1). There is a small, but very high

858

ALEXANDER ALEXANDROVITCH MASLENNIKOV: SMALL AND POORLY STUDIED TOWNS

Is should be remembered that Claudius Ptolemaeus mentions that Parthenion and two more towns were situated on Maiotis (Ptol., III, 6, 4), or to be more exact on the Crimean coast of the Azov Sea, which is nearer to the strait. If one follows this, then the first significant archaeological site here is a quite large settlement near Cape Varzovka (eastern outskirts of the village of Osovina) (Fig. 1). The first large-scale and impressive ruins here were described by Du Brux and Blaramberg (Du Brux, 1858, p. 75-78; Blaramberg, 1848, с.8-10). Archaeological survey was conducted only during a few years at the turn of the 1980 and 1990s. The settlement is situated on two natural terraces and occupies a large area of about 5 hectares. The occupation layer is destroyed by abrasion and is partly built up. Excavations covered the area of about 600 square kilometres. Most of the finds were of the Hellenistic period and the first centuries AD, up to the early Byzantine epoch. The remains of dwelling houses and household outbuildings of the 1st–2nd centuries AD were found with a big ash hill northwestwards dated back to the 3rd century BC–3rd century AD. On the edge of the second terrace there is another ash dump with a more limited dating. The thick deposits of the occupation layer and remains of constructions are in a quite good condition (Zin’ko, 1992, p.153-158; idem., 1993, p. 124-129), and along with the epigraphic documents originating from here (KBN, 1965, No. 897), testify that we are dealing with quite a significant archaeological site, which could be a small town. Which one then?

although, it was most likely just a well-fortified place on a distant sea boundary zone of the Bosporos (Fig. 1).

Much simpler is the situation with the localization of two other towns: Zenonos Chersonesos and Herakleion. Both names, as we see, are quite Greek and very common, besides, of course, the mention of a Zenon, probably the oikistes of this settlement. Strabo already knew Herakleion and he placed it somewhere in the vicinity of Myrmekion, i.e. in the strait (Strab., VII, 4, 5). Ptolemy, on the other hand, places it next to Zenonos Chersonesos (to the west of it). As for the latter settlement, in the 19th century they were inclined to place it on the Kazantip peninsula (Muller, p. 416, 439). Then, Yu. Koulakovsky suggested that Zenonos Chersonesos should be moved to the cape Zyuk, i.e. westwards along the coast of Maiotis (Koulakovsky Yu., 1894, p. 9). V.V. Latyshev thought that this was the place where Herakleion was situated (Latyshev, 1894, p.37). I.T. Кrouglikova placed these two ‘towns’ in the following order: Cape Zyuk – Zenonos Chersonesos; Cape Kazantip – Herakleion (Кrouglikova, 1959, p. 233). The author of this work is inclined to agree with the opinion about Cape Zyuk and Zenonos Chersonesos. As for Herakleion, it should be identified with one of the largest settlements of the first centuries A.D. on the Karalar coast, in the area of the eastern point of the so-called Generlskaya harbour, in the same place on the Azov Sea coast in the Crimea (Maslennikov, Cheveliyov, 1981, p. 84; Zubarev, Maslennikov, 1987, p. 44-46). As for Kazantip, then, perhaps, ‘The New Fortress’, mentioned by Claudius Ptolemaeus should be left there (Ptol., III, 5, 4; Maslennikov, 1998, p. 249),

All its internal space was filled with quarry stone and earth, with finds dating back to the turn of two millennia. There were apparently some wooden or stone fortifications, maybe even a tower, above this construction. As a result, the entrance to the citadel of this settlement was a rather long (up to 10 metres) and a narrow corridor, to the right of which there were the strongest defensive fortifications, which was the most advantageous solution from the point of view of those defending the settlement. Such a building method (a rough ‘platform’ instead of high quality masonry of walls) was repeated in the local barbaric fortification in the Crimea of the first centuries AD in particular.

Now we will break the sequence of narration a little, and pay attention to the archaeological characteristics of the presumed Herakleion. The central part of this settlement is situated on top of quite a large rocky hill on the coast, a little more than 1 hectare in size (Fig. 11). From the seaside, from the north and north-east it ends in a high cliff. The southern and southwestern slope of the hill is relatively steep. This part, naturally strong, the so-called citadel, was additionally strengthened by separating the trench and embankment from the valley. The trench is a widened natural ravine at the foot of the hill, which was preceded by a low and short embankment. Their length was about 70-80 metres. The trench was 5-6 metres wide and 1.5-2 metres deep; the embankment was 5-7 metres wide and 1.5 metres high. In the upper, eastern part of these fortifications there was a passage up to 5 metres wide. At the end of the passage there were gates – an entrance to the citadel, which were 4 metres wide between the end of the defensive wall (in the west) and a monumental construction, flanking these gates (in the east). The latter was a sort of base of some bastion, jutting to the southwest of the wall. The outside walls of this trapezoidal construction were made of irregular masonry with large and very large uncut blocks and stones of local limestone and in some places they still stand to up to 3 metres.

The width of the defensive wall of the citadel of this settlement was 2 metres, with the defined length (along the southern and south-western slope of the hill) 130-135 metres. Its base, which is now 1.5 metres, was constructed of large, uncut limestone and blocks in the irregular, two-chain technique. The initial height of the wall would have reached at least 6.5 metres. There were two narrow sub-rectangular projecting bastions in the wall on the outside (not more than 1 metre), up to 2.5 metres wide. Thus, the whole defensive line was divided into three parts, each one about 45 metres long. This distance was a little long, although permissible for aiming (and killing) range when shooting from bows, slings and darts. The thickness of this looping wall near the cliff, in the north of the hill is noticeably smaller: 1.5 metres. The 859

ANCIENT GREEK COLONIES IN THE BLACK SEA 2 complexes of the 3rd–4th centuries AD. On the whole, the constructions remains, the rooms’ interior and a lot of materials that were excavated, testify that the way of life and welfare of the local population was quite modest, at least at the end of ancient times. Except for the relatively strong fortification constructions, nothing here indicates the urban character of this settlement, though we do not know what it looked like in the times of Claudius Ptolemaeus or earlier reporters.

adjacent slope of the above-mentioned valley was also built up, but it remains unclear whether it had its own fortification line and what its features and characteristics were. However, the adjacent rocks and other features of the relief in the area, along with possible remains of small fortifications on tops of the hills near the valley created quite real natural obstacles for those who dared to attack. Besides, it is necessary to point out that immediately to the south-west of the foot of the hill with the citadel, in the coastal area of a small harbour sheltered from the stormiest north-eastern winds, were found the remains of two stone-dressed wells (Maslennikov, Cheveliyov, 1985, p. 50-51; Маslennikov, 1998, p. 249-25). Their cleaning showed that they were dug in ancient times.

We know very well various objects accompanying the following ancient settlement, i.e. those that are simultaneous and situated in close proximity. Every large ancient settlement had necropoleis, temples, roads, manors of nearby chora, refuse dumps, wells, etc. It should be said that due to a number of reasons, not much attention is usually paid, even when really large and important city centres are concerned. So, all this should be taken into consideration when analyzing the so-called little towns. In this particular case we really have something to say.

Archaeological studies of this very significant site have been very limited so far. Excavations of the area a little more than 80 square metres in the north-east of the ‘citadel’ revealed occupation layers and construction remains of the ‘Roman period’, mainly dated back to the 3rd–4th centuries AD. However, people constantly came across traces of habitation here in the previous centuries, at least from the Hellenistic epoch. The thickness of the layer here was not more than 1.5 metres. The constructions were parts of residential buildings on one of the natural terraces, which occupy the whole gently sloping surface of the eastern side of the hilltop. In some places these elevation changes were reinforced and finished with special retaining walls of large stones. The terrace width in the place of the excavation was at least 10 metres, and the length 40 metres. One building of a rectangular shape with dimensions of 5.4 х 8 metres was fully excavated, and those areas that adjoin it were partly excavated: a stone-paved yard with several household pits and a neighbouring room. Relatively not very broad (up to 0.86-1.2 metres), but very accurate walls survived 0.61.1 metres high. Quite numerous finds mainly present fragments of amphoras dated back to the aforesaid period and of various modelled vessels of very good quality. Furthermore, there are fragments of red-lacquer and even glassware, modelled lamps of different forms, distaffs and Bosporos bronze coins dating back to the period between the 3rd century BC and the first quarter of the 4th century AD. Four of the latest period were standing in a column in the ashes inside the stove, which occupied the corner of the room.

Firstly, the necropolis is of great interest, which presumably belongs to Herakleion. This is a whole series (a few dozen) of special burial constructions – ground crypts. Despite some differences in size and peculiarities of the ‘interior’, nearly all of them are roughly singletype constructions, dug and sculpted in the rocks on the slope of a lengthy chain of rocky hills, stretching not far from the coast to the west and south-west of the settlement. As well as being situated over a long distance (up to 1-1.5 kilometres), they were separated by a small steppe river. This circumstance splendidly corresponded to the idea customary to Hellenes about the Afterworld, separated by the river from the world of living. Each crypt has a reclining terraced entrance – dromos – up to 4 metres deep. The short arched entrance was closed from the outside with a massive flagstone, which was periodically pushed off during visits. Then followed a chamber, usually sub-rectangular or trapezoidal with an area between 4 and 20 square metres. The arch at the height of 1.5-2.2 metres was straight (horizontal or reclined) or, more seldom, semi-cylindrical. Along all or some of the walls there were special niche-benches used for dead bodies. When all the niches were occupied, dead people were buried in the floor of the chamber. Sometimes the walls were decorated with simple relief details, but nearly every time they had small recesses for lamps. All the crypts were robbed, evidently as early as in ancient times. The few finds that were found during the excavations help to date these, undoubtedly, multiple (family?) burial complexes to the late antiquity (3rd–4th centuries AD) (Маslennikov, 1997, p. 3-63). It should be said that similar ground crypts in this epoch were mainly characteristic of necropoleis of the cities in the European Bosporos. They are known to be in the outskirts of Nymphaeum, Kytai and, especially, the capital, Panticapaeum. Such sepulchres are well-known in

A special mention should be given to the ritual burial of a dog on the south-eastern corner. It was made in a small niche, built at the base of one wall, which was later covered with a flagstone. The ‘floor’ of the niche was filled up with a layer of seashells, where the dog’s skeleton was found, it was covered by a layer of ashes up to 0.3 metres thick. The following things were found: a closed modelled lamp, a modelled cup and a pot made of grey clay (Маslennikov, Cheveliyov, 1985, p. 52). Similar altars are known at the present time in many settlements on the Azov Sea coast in the layers and 860

ALEXANDER ALEXANDROVITCH MASLENNIKOV: SMALL AND POORLY STUDIED TOWNS

temenos, falling into the category of the so-called temples on hilltops, so characteristic of various regions of Greece and frequently mentioned in the famous ‘Description’ by Pausanias. I think it could have been some sacred centre of the local community (Маslennikov, 1997a, p. 150172).

different places on the Eastern Mediterranean coast, whence the tradition of their erection, evidently, came to the Bosporos, including the shores of Maiotis. The second ‘component’ deserving our attention in the outskirts of the supposed Herakleion is situated still closer. On a relatively flat plateau on top of a dominating rocky hill, within only 250-300 metres to the south, south-east from the settlement, a very notable, obviously hieratic, complex was excavated. (Fig. 11) It consisted of four constructions standing close to each other (in a row) in differing conditions. These are rectangular constructions with the maximum area of 62 square metres, extended axially east-west and consisting of one, two or even three rooms, most likely, corresponding to pronaos, naos and opithodomus of a classical temple. The entrance was from the east. A distinguishing feature of almost all the main rooms was the presence of walladjacent benches, sub-rectangular separated by flat standing edgewise ‘chests’, filled with ashes, seashells and soil and the same or round in plan sub-altar elevations in the centre of the rooms. (Fig. 12) In one case, there was a slab stone on an elevation with a votive relief image of four figures: two female and two children. All personages (Demeter, Core, Triptolem and Plutos?) are depicted in full-face, waist-high, in the same postures and clothes. On the chests and near them on the floor of the rooms were found many whole and fragmented terracotta statues, depicting various female and male personages, occasionally animal figures and terracotta masks. There are quite a few fragments of the so-called Megara bowls, simple thin-walled (including red-lacquer) vessels (jugs, cups), fragments of crocks and basins. Several copper coins, lamps, over ten modelled infundibular censers on thin tall legs were found.

Now let us turn to the historical and archaeological characteristics of the settlement, which was luckier in terms of exploration. The name itself – Chersonesos, i.e. peninsular – helps in its localization. There is also a very essential amendment in the coordinates given by Claudius Ptolemaeus. He marks out that point as the northernmost on the Azov seacoast of the Eastern Crimea. One may argue and doubt the real position of the names he mentioned, on the basis of correction of the coordinates considering present-day distances. Their position with regard to each other and the concepts of ‘top-bottom’, i.e. north-south was altogether correct. Particularly, Cape Zyuk meets all these requirements, which is situated 12 kilometres to the north-west of Kerch, ancient Panticapaeum (Figs 1 & 3) This is how this place was described more than 100 years ago by the first explorer of the Azov Sea coast, in the Crimea, a local landowner and antiquarian А.A. Dirin. ‘Cape Zyuk is a small hilly peninsula about 30-25 dessiatines, which probably was an island in the proximal past …’ (Dirin, 1896, p. 121). The shore of the cape, especially the eastern, is being ruined seriously and intensively. There is a present-day cemetery on a high hill in the centre, in the north-east the cape ends with a group of steep, high residual mountains, which add certain fairytale shapes to the whole landscape. (Figs 2 & 3) The area of lowland between the cape and the ‘mainland’ has become much broader during the past. The extremely convenient location of the cape with its inaccessible shores in some paces, and little cozy inlets in other places, especially at the beginning of the strip joining it with the mainland, and closed off from northeastern and other winds, as well as a broad view of the coast, made this place highly attractive for ancient navigators and settlers. Nearby there were lands appropriate for farming, and there were probably springs of fresh water. The sea itself and a shallow bay nearby must certainly have had the attraction of their fish, oysters and mussels. All this excellently corresponded to optimal conditions, formulated by Xenophon, for Greeks to choose places for settlements (a harbour, a cape and land for farming lots) (Xen., Anab., VI, 4, 3-6).

At the same time, there are practically no animals’ bones or graffiti. The latter are very incomprehensible. All this obviously indicates a non-household purpose of the constructions and, most likely, they served for purely Hellenic worshipping, connected with the worship of goddesses of fertility and life-bearing forces of nature (first of all Demeter and Core) and their male paredras. The analysis of all artefacts leads to a suggestion that people performed rites here close to the celebrations of the Eleusinian circle. The dating of each of the complexes (buildings) of this local religious centre had its own peculiarities. On the whole, it embraces the period between the second half of the 3rd century BC and the middle of the 3rd century AD or even much later. However, it is quite obvious that some of the buildings were deserted at the turn of the millennia, others, probably, changed their ‘personal worship’ orientation, or to be more precise, specific hypostasis of the same gods. The good condition of the most notable objects of this complex and some archaeological studies allow us to admit that these ‘temples’ were not just deserted, but this was done on purpose and they were ‘preserved’ – covered with soil and stones. With all the numerous questions one thing is obvious: we are dealing with a special rural

The ancient settlement has been known here, as it was just said, since the 19th century, but some ruins, taken by mistake for a ‘Genoese fortress’, were marked on maps in the first half of the 19th century. The settlement was intensively destroyed by the dwellers of a village of Old Believers founded in the middle of the 19th century near the cape, who used the stone for construction. Excavations were carried out here, probably for the first time over a short period by А.A. Dirin. Due to a number of reasons the materials are mostly lost. It is not even 861

ANCIENT GREEK COLONIES IN THE BLACK SEA 2 century BC, but it is more typical for the first centuries AD (КBN, 1965, p. 869).

clear which sectors on the site of the monument were affected by his work. Very few findings from the excavations of the nearby necropolis later found their way to the Kerch museum and the State Historical Museum in Moscow. The cape and the monument were frequently visited in the 1950s–1970s by members of expeditions, I.T. Krouglikova in particular, but systematic excavations were carried out by the author of this article in 1978-1984. In the north-east of the cape, where, as a matter of fact, the main part of the settlement was, the excavated area was about 3000 square metres (Figs 3-5).

It should be said that this cape (or an island in very ancient times), apparently, was frequently visited or even populated as early as in the middle of the Bronze Age. Although, no signs of any permanent settlement have been found here so far, archaeologists have come across corresponding finds many times. They are all from different layers and complexes, but out of archaeological contexts, which is basically quite natural for the sites of this kind. Among these finds there are pieces of seven polished stone axes of the first half-middle of the 2nd millennium BC. Although some of them could belong to much earlier and later periods. The same goes for some tools (a knife, a pike, scrapers, insets) of dark-grey or dark-brown-grey silicon. There are also flint stone pieces and nuclei (Fig. 7). No fragments of ceramics contemporary with them were found. Of course, part of the slivers and insets could have had ancient origins (cresala etc.). Other findings, especially stone axes, often served as amulets and charms, although one of them, the most archaic in form (Fig. 7, 10), was used as a stone in a wall of the first centuries AD, as backfill material. The destiny of each of such objects could be very bizarre.

On the whole, the area of the continuous spread of the occupation layer is a little more than 0.6 hectares, but separate massifs were found in other areas of the cape. The strata thickness is mostly not larger than 1.5-3 metres, but in the area of the south-eastern and northern cliff it is 9-12 metres. In other areas of the cape it is thinner and contained practically no construction remains. The condition of the latter, in general, may be considered reasonable or even moderate. They and especially, the surface were significantly harmed as a consequence of the aforesaid exploitive ‘excavations’ and during the military operations of 1941-1944. In some places fire trenches and pits disturbed occupation layers. The whole north-eastern part of the cape was separated by an ancient wall and a trench, which was up to 72 metres long. They came to be now correspondingly 0.7-1 metres high, up to 6-7 metres wide, and up to 1 metre deep, 4.5-5 metres wide. They, and the stone wall, were clearly seen on the surface in the time of A.A. Dirin (Dirin, 1896, p. 121). The trench and the embankment existed till the 1980s (Fig. 2).

Hellenes paid attention to this notable cape, evidently, during their first coastal navigations in Maiotis. We do not know when this took place. Considering the newest finds in the region of the Azov Sea coast (at Taganrogskoye), it could already have happened at the end of the 7th century BC. So far no objects have been found or the layer of the 7th century–the third quarter of the 6th century BC on the cape. The only exception is the stem of, apparently, a Klazomenian amphora. Numerous analogies, including those from the northern coast of the Black Sea, make it possible to date it to the middle of the 6th century BC (Маslennikov, 1992, p. 129; Rouban, 1983, p.285-291; Onayko, 1980, p. 122; Monahov, 2003, p. 53, fig. 33.1). ‘Our’ stem is a little larger and probably older, although it does not come from a layer, but from a rockslide in the south-east of the cape.

The south-eastern coast of the cape, subject to intensive abrasion, demonstrates large exposure of the occupation layer, very rich with various finds of different periods. There is no doubt that the greatest part of the settlement has already been ruined by these destructions. Strangely enough, the top and the gentle slope of the central hill reveal practically no signs of ancient life. The features of rocks bedding (sometimes low) in many ways explain the peculiarity of the occupation levels formation. In some places they were periodically moved or even removed during subsequent large-scale reconstruction and rearrangements. Earlier layers and finds survived in natural cavities, and their sequence only in the areas of the so-called ash dumps. As a rule, all this is illustrative of a permanent and multi-layered archaeological site of urban type. As for the paleography of the region and its ancient topography, the name itself of the town, Zenonos Chersonesos, demonstratively proves that at the moment of the foundation of the ancient settlement (or apoikia) it was a cape, and not an island. As for its oikistes, the founder, his name most likely was eternalized in the name of this town, but it is unlikely we will ever know about it. There is no information about it. It can be only pointed out that the following name (Zenon) appears in Bosporan onomatology only after the end of the 4th

We do not know at all what the first buildings on the cape looked like, since the earliest layer was found only in the same area where a large dump of ash and refuse was found. As is known, it has some peculiarities in its formation. The soil came here both as a result of constant living activity and because of one time clearings or rebuildings. Nevertheless, the ash dump presents quite a significant part of the discovered objects and is very important in terms of general chronology of the site. Its most ancient horizons lie on sub-rock broken stone and bedrock, filling the crevices and spaces between large fragments of rocks. Thus, it is unlikely that initially this place was suitable for living. Instead it was easy and natural to dump waste and probably combustion products here and other used objects and ‘inventory’ of a temple, situated above, at the foot of rocks on the edge of the

862

ALEXANDER ALEXANDROVITCH MASLENNIKOV: SMALL AND POORLY STUDIED TOWNS

with a light coloured slip, straight and zigzag stripes of paint. Such ornament was widely spread in a very large area of the ancient world in the second half of the 6th century–first half of the 5th century BC, but it was also spread later, up to the beginning of the 4th century BC. We will select from the following group large fragments of oenochoe, the handle and the body of which are ornamented in the given manner with stripes of orange lacquer. A combination of straight and wavy stripes may be characteristic of the last quarter of the 6th century–first quarter of the next century (Маslennikov, 1992, p. 130). Fragments of several goblets with thin stripes of lacquer under the handles have the same dating. The upper limit of their prevalence is the first quarter of the 5th century BC (Маslennikov, 1992, p.130; Alexandrescu, 1978, p.106, No. 696, pl.71).

cape. In that case, deep interstices served as a sort of escharas. We will return to the matter of the most ancient shrine in the settlement later. Anyway, this place was used in this way for quite a long time, until ashy ground covered all the crevices, stones and other irregularities. As a matter of fact, the soil of this early layer is a golden loamy soil from dark grey to yellowish-brown, mildly dense, more humid and dark in the crevices. The layer thickness is 0.1-1 metres. It lies in the depth of between 3.8 metres (in the part of the cliff) and 9.5 metres (below). Among the impurities there are stones, small fragments of animal bones and of course, numerous fragments of amphoras, simple thin-walled dishes of red and grey clay, and also crocks and basins. It was covered by a quite thick (on average up to 1.3 metres) layer of dirty, golden, mildly loose loamy soil of grey, grey and brown colour, with practically the same assortment of found objects.

To the second early layer belong the fragments of the upper part of calpida from Ionia and almost the whole askos with horizontal stripes of red lacquer. Both vessels are dated back to the 5th century–the very beginning of the 4th century BC. We will also mention the crown of a miniature Corinthian kotyle of the end of the 6th– beginning of the 5th century BC. The upper limit of its dating is confirmed by numerous objects from a number of complexes on the northern coast of the Black Sea that stopped existing at the end of the first quarter of the 5th century BC (Маslennikov, p. 130). In these layers of remnants there are relatively few samples of simple dishes without ornaments of red and grey clay. The surface of the latter is covered with a high-quality glaze. We will point out the upper part of a large oenochoe of grey clay with broad stripes of vertical and horizontal glazing, analogies of which are found in the layers of the same period on the sites of many ancient monuments.

Among the amphoras, Chios amphoras with plump necks prevail. The earliest ones have a painted coronet or broad and narrow stripes of grey-brown and red paint on the body and handles. Occasionally there are marks with paint in the form of crosses and circles on the necks. Sometimes these circles and even symbols (swastika) are embossed, i.e. it is already a brand. The dating of amphoras of this type is between the end of the 6th century and the first quarter of the next century BC. More numerous are the fragments of Chios amphoras with plump necks of the succeeding types, already without painting, brands and marks, but with more bulging necks. There are amphoras with a grip on the neck. They are all dated back to the second-third quarter of the 5th century BC. One apparently comes across the fragments of Samian amphoras of the second quarter–middle of the same century much more rarely. But there are almost no amphoras with tumbler-shaped stems, characteristic of the second half of the 6th century–first quarter of the 5th century BC and the so-called Protaphos amphoras of early types. There is a large proportion of fragments of dishes from early Thasos and the so-called Thasos circle, the oldest of them dated back to the second quarter of the 5th century BC or a bit later. However, we have not found branded handles among them. Very few fragments of Lesbos amphoras are represented only by the types of the third quarter and the end of the same century. (Маslennikov, 1992, p. 127-129). In general, among the amphora imports, those from Chios and Ionia prevail and while some centres are present all the time, others appear from the second quarter–middle of the 5th century BC.

Black-lacquer dishes are not numerous. There is a stem of a kylix from the first layer, about 525 BC (Sparkes, Talcott, 1970, Nos 398-399). The next layer has more. Fragments of skyphoi, kylikes, salt cellars, and amphorisks of the middle- last quarter of the 5th century BC should be mentioned. Among the painted ceramics there are no imports from Ionia at all (Chios, Samos, Klazomenai, Phicellura group, Rhodes-Ionia of various techniques), or Corinthian. Most likely this fact registers certain chronological lines. Painted dishes are represented almost exclusively by imports from Attica, but only in the second layer, including black-figured fragments of kylikes, lekythoi, and lecans. The latter, with a common ornament on the lid in the form of a ‘basket of rays’, is dated back to about 480 BC or wider range, i.e. the second half of the 6th century–beginning of the 5th century BC (Маslennikov, 1992, p. 131; Sparkes, Talcott, 1970, р. 233, No. 122; Sidorova, 1984, p.81-82, fig. 7в). On one of the fragments of a lekythos you can still see the meander stripe, and radial ornament on the ‘shoulders’. By its proportions and the character of painting this vessel belongs to a class of lekythoi made by the craftsman Chaimona in the second quarter of the 5th century B.C. (Gorbounova, 1983, p. 156, No. 128).

Thick-walled earthenware ceramics are represented by fragments of several louteria, probably of Corinthian production. They are dated by the nearest Bosporos analogies to the end of the 6th century–beginning of the 5th century BC (Маslennikov, 1992, p. 129). Simple thin-walled dishes are represented by numerous fragments of red clay jugs, oenochoai and cups, covered 863

ANCIENT GREEK COLONIES IN THE BLACK SEA 2 dump presents the greatest interest (Fig. 8, 1). If we accept its translation and interpretation, then it talks about some contributions in the form of grain, probably made by the people of this settlement. Judging from them, these people had plough land lots of different sizes. On the assumption of known norms of contribution, in the form of first harvests in Attica, the average wheat capacity in the Bosporos and general sum of contribution of ‘Zenonites’, it is possible to calculate that seven given persons farmed fields with the total area of a little less than 92 hectares. While the areas of their plough land varied: 21 hectares (three people), 10.5 hectares (one), 7.9 hectares (two), 2.6 hectares (one). The approximate estimation of the crop capacity showed that in terms of present-day calculation it was a little more than 7 centres per hectare. First harvests (about 60 kg) were gathered, most likely for a contribution to some famous temple (sanctuary) of a patron (patroness) of farming. Maybe, it was situated right here on the cape.

Four fragments belong to a cup-skyphos on a low stand with a sketchy, loose picture, of which only rather rough palmettes are left. In one of the fragments one can discern a painting of horses’ legs. Its crown is slightly profiled and covered with a broad stripe of good lacquer. The supposed theme – a chariot man on a quadriga framed by high palmettes – is rather widespread, particularly on vessels by the craftsman Khaimon of the first quarter of the 5th century BC (Маslennikov, 1992, p. 132; Gorbounova, 1983, p. 171, No. 147). A deep kylix (cupskyphos) on a low stem is in a better condition. It is covered with shining lacquer of a good quality and clear painting. There are two similar scenes of a Satyr pursuing a maenad. The handles have high palmettes. There is a vine over the figures. (Fig. 9, 1) Close analogies are found in vessels of the Lancut group, about 480 BC (Маslennikov, 1992, p.132; Gorbounova, 1983, p. 152153, No. 154). Red-figured dishes are represented by a few unimpressive fragments: the wall of a skyphos of the third quarter of the 5th century BC with a partially preserved image of an owl (Fig. 9, 2) (Маslennikov, 1992, p. 132; Loseva, 1962, p. 178, fig. 5,3; Brashinsky, 1980, p. 129, No. 174); the wall of a lekythos (?) with an image of a woman in draped clothes with her left hand raised. The fragment is much scuffed, but the painting is nevertheless quite neat, the lines are thin, minute details were thoroughly elaborated. The head is in a hood or scarf, and underneath one lock can be seen the temple. These features are characteristic of paintings in the style of craftsman Providance on the vessels of the second quarter of the 5th century BC (Маslennikov, 1992, p. 132; Ancient painted ceramics 1985, No. 44). Finally, near the room, which will be described further, we found a small piece of Kantaros crown with a geometric ornament and white paint of the third quarter of the 5th century BC (Маslennikov, 1992, p. 132; Alexandrescu, 1978, p. 81, No. 493).

However, no graffiti with a devotion to Demeter or Core has been found in the layers in the area of the settlement. By the character and features of the script, spelling and accompanying finds, this graffito can be dated to the end of the 5th century BC. Assuming that each of the persons mentioned in it was a land owner and head of a family living on the cape and also that the building area in this settlement was at the given time about 0.3-0.4 hectares with an average density of population in Greek cities (up to 300-500 people per one hectare), it means that there were 100-120 people in it, and this list embraced half of its ‘citizens’. There could be 15-18 families. Out of 9 names in this graffito we can fully discern seven: Targely, Aphes, Phiat, Nymphagor, Sparopad, Naocl and Angaph. They are mostly of Ionian origin, but there is one Dorian and one or two Iranians. The lot belonging to the Dorian seems to be the smallest. As for the Iranian names, their owners could be both local, barbarian Scythians very much assimilated with Hellenes, and representatives of purely Greek ‘surnames’ of Asianic (Miletus) origin, that used such names (Blavatskaya, Rozov, 1985, p. 115-137; Маslennikov, 1985, p. 138148; Маslennikov, 1992, p. 136-138).

In the early layers there are less than 2-3% of fragments of modelled dishes. These are mainly pots of grey clay; some of them are ornamented with hollows and indentations along the edge of a crown and stripes of dark glazing. Two fragments are dark glazed crocks (pots) with incised geometric ornament. Their form cannot be restored, the glazing is sketchy. All the ornamented dishes come from the second layer. Here, were also found a few trigonal bronze arrow heads; a round brass plate of a horse’s helmet of Scythian type; fragments of open lamps; a bone needle; little fragments of three terracottas and a glass vessel (Маslennikov, 1992, p. 132, fig. 9). We will also mention a few graffitis and dipinti (Маslennikov, 1987, p. 53-63), and a terracotta head of a Negro with some traces of painting (Fig. 10, 1-3). In these layers there are quite a lot of animal bones, mainly of cattle, pigs, sheep, dolphins, sturgeon.

The second variant seems to us more probable. The signs of any barbarian presence in this particular settlement during the early period are minimal and uncertain. Thus, this finding allows us, though very hypothetically, to judge the approximate sizes of the chora of this settlement, or, to be more exact, the ploughland at the end of the 5th century BC. Since that time the Greeks used a two-field system of crop rotation, the area of the whole ploughland of the people mentioned in the graffito was about 180 hectares, and, probably, about 360-380 hectares of all the citizens. Some more land was left out of cultivation; the other was wasteland, pastures, kitchen gardens, roads, a necropolis, disused land, and probably vineyards. It helps outline the approximate borders of the lands belonging to Zenonites within 3-4 kilometres to the east, south and west of the cape. However, no

An ample graffito on the wall of Thasos amphora, found in the vicinity of a special room on the territory of the ash 864

ALEXANDER ALEXANDROVITCH MASLENNIKOV: SMALL AND POORLY STUDIED TOWNS

floor is very burnt, there is an even layer of clay 0.030.04 metres thick. Somewhere in the centre of the room there were three round pits with a diameter of 8 centimetres, and 11 centimetres deep, possibly, because of the poles supporting an obviously not tiled roof. On the eastern corner of the room some remains of a fireplace were found. On the floor two jugs of red clay (lekythoi?) were found with broad bodies and a very narrow neck; a bronze arrowhead; a bracelet of brass wire; fragments of amphoras, simple and dishes of red and grey clay.

reconnaissance or air photography revealed any signs of land lots and estates, but for such a small, on the whole, territory such borders and constructions were probably unnecessary. Taking into account all the findings and observations, one can say that the base of the economy for the population of this town in that period was farming. Most of the domestic animals were cattle. The people also caught fish and did other offshore operations; they took part in trade of the region and shipping in Maiotis. The harbours of the cape could be used as a transfer point, for anchorage, but it is not likely to be a trade centre, even for a small territory. The general characteristics of amphoras and foodware from the same centres, types and schools of painting, testify to this. It was only 18 kilometres from Panticapaeum, i.e. one hour and a half – two hours’ trip in a cart.

The bottom of a black-lacquer kylix with a graffito deserves special attention: АП[ ]. From the inside, the southern corner of the house was joined by a semicircular fence inaccurately laid of medium-sized and small stones. The strange location of this construction, as if lowered into the crevice and coming onto the shore of the harbour at the same time, to a great extent protected it from northeastern winds. Right in this area the above-described graffito of ‘Zenonites’ was found. At first it seemed natural to interpret this construction as an ordinary, but in a very good condition, dwelling house. Later, considering all the aforesaid, there was a supposition that we are dealing with quite a primitive structure of sacral purpose. Could it be a local temple in honour of Apollo or Demeter? The above-mentioned graffito and the arrowhead make us incline to the first version, but another graffito and the very location of the ‘sacral place’ speak more in favour of the second.

As for the legal status of this settlement or town in relation to its neighbours, Greeks and barbarians, and if it can be called a polis at that time, or whether it was a small public community or an estate of some rich citizen of Bosporos (?) Zenon – we do not know it for sure. The last version seems the least probable. This man appeared here not before the end of the 6th century and the beginning of the 5th century BC. On the basis of the general historical situation in the Bosporos it is even more preferable to choose the first quarter of the 5th century BC, i.e. the period of the third stage of the colonization of the Kimmerian Bosporos (Коshеlеnkо, Кuznetsov, 1992, p. 6-28). It may have been one of the episodes of the ‘secondary’, internal colonization. Who was its organizer and participants? The polis of Panticapaeum, regulating in this way the flow of unnecessary (or) newly arrived population from the metropolis?

Some insignificant remains of the layer and very few findings of the 5th century BC were registered in some other places on the so-called main area of the settlement. Besides, approximately 40 metres to the south of the settlement protection embankment on a gentle slope of the central hill we found much more recent stratifications. They are of the same type, ‘dome’ shape with oval orifices 1.8-2.3 х 1.6-1.8 metres and gradually widening to the bottom walls. Their depth ranges between 0.8 and 1.45 metres. The pits were half-full with grey, loose, ashy ground with a mixture of waste containing fragments of plum-necked amphoras from Chios, amphoras from Thasos and Mende of the second half of the 5th century, beginning of the 4th century BC, simple thin-walled and black-lacquer dishes. The last-mentioned included fragments of ‘striped’ Ionian ceramics, a bottom of a cup with a graffito: ]TН[ (votive to Zeus Soter?), small fragments of a black-figured kylix of the second quarter of the 5th century BC, numerous fragments of wellmodelled pots with a very grimy surface, pieces of burnt clay, sheep and birds’ bones and an open lamp of red clay.

Let’s continue characterizing the settlement of Cape Zyuk during the first period of its history. Approximately on the turn of the 5th-4th centuries BC, in the area of the above-mentioned ash dump, near the coastal cliff the oldest construction was discovered. It is different by its unusual location and, partly, by some other ‘features’. It was a separate, relatively small (2.6 х 3.7 metres) rectangular room, squeezed in between the rocks, and attached to a more or less vertical rock in the east. The horizon on which this ‘house’ stood presented a kind of small terrace, formed by a flattened and compacted layer of the ash dump that had already covered all natural irregularities in the rocks, but was still lying considerably lower than the adjoining area, occupied by the settlement in the immediate vicinity of the cliff. The walls, at least their lower part, were of mostly uncut small stones, in the technique of two-row, double-layer masonry, which was not very accurate. The walls thickness was about 0.7-0.8 metres; the present-day height is 0.5-0.9 metres. The southern wall had an entry of 0.7 metres wide. Two sub-rectangular limey blocks formed a threshold. The external stone has very clear scabbing – traces of corresponding long-lasting use. The

Below there could be traced everywhere a thin layer of ashes, and near the bottom there was a yellowish, loose or yellow-grey ground with a great number of finds. First of all, were fragments of various amphoras, mainly from Chios and Thasos from the same period. Simple thinwalled dishes, including those with stripes of lacquer, are 865

ANCIENT GREEK COLONIES IN THE BLACK SEA 2 Spartakides, and, hence, they are not likely to be guilty of attacking towns and other settlements in relative proximity to Panticapaeum. Though, during any war, even in ancient times, there was always a possibility of tragic cases and sudden turns.

represented by cups, bowls and an askos. Among the black-lacquer dishes there are fragments of a ‘bolsaltype’ cup, a skyphos, a ‘stemless’ cup, amphoriskos with an embossed ornament of palmettes, a kylix, lekythoi, an askos – all dated to the second half of the 5th century BC (Sparkes, Tolcott, 1970, No. 471, 541, 849). We will specially mention a fragment of a large red-figured vessel with an image of an athlete’s or ephebe’s figure, most probably from the first-second quarters of the 4th century BC (Fig. 9, 6) (Brashinsky, 1980, p.129-130, No.175177; Alexandrescu, 1978, р.81, No.495-500). There was kitchenware – saucepans, modelled pots with various ornaments – and we should also mention a sink-stone, a distaff made of clay, a piece of an iron knife, fragments of open red-clay lamps, burnt barley corns, birds, fish and sheep’s bones. The pits served for household needs till about the beginning of the 4th century BC and then, after a fire, they came into disuse and were filled up very compactly.

The next period of life of the settlement is the second quarter of the 4th century–beginning of the 3rd century BC. The occupation layer of this period discovered in many places is quite thick (between 0.5 and 2 metres) and rich, especially in the area of the ash dump. It is a grey or dark-grey-brown, ashy, in some places light, dry loamy soil containing a lot of fragments of various ceramics, mussels shells and a piece of burned clay. On the territory of the settlement it is thinner and more homogeneous. The majority of amphoras of that period was represented by those from Heracleia (up to 60%), then Thasos, Chios (with the so-called caps), Proto-Thasos, Mende, Sinope, Peparet, Chersonesos and of red-clay with dual handles (Маslennikov, 1992, p.142; see also Моnahov, 2003). There are many (about a hundred) amphora brands, the majority from Heracleia, then Sinope and Thasos.

Thus, the material of the first layer of the settlement is strictly dated to the turn of the 6th–5th centuries–the first quarter of the 5th century BC. The time ranges of the first two layers and the third, maybe not by accident, fall in the second quarter of that century and the beginning of the following century. Considering the absence of painted dishes from the eastern Ionian centres even in the first layer, the time of the settlement’s foundation should be carefully dated back to the period after 494 BC.

There are many fragments of simple red-clay and less numerous grey-clay dinnerware and kitchenware vessels (jugs, cups, pots, saucepans, dishes for fish, bowls), as well as louteria and lamps. Quite common are discoveries of fragments of black-lacquer vessels: kylikes, kantharoi, skyphoi, salt cellars, dishes for fish, cups and plates, which correspond to this time in form and lacquer. Of course there are earlier samples too. There are fragments of black-figured vessels, but the majority are those with red-lacquer painting (Fig. 9, 3,5) (Маslennikov, Rozov, 1990, p. 66-73). They are all commonplace Attic imports. We will mention several graffiti and dipinti, pointing out one of them which was, apparently, a curse or bad words written by somebody ‘in hot blood’ and addressed, probably, to a local hetaera named Nana (Fig. 8, 2) (Маslennikov, 1987, p. 43-53). Terracotta samples are not numerous and most of them are not very significant (Маslennikov, 1992, p. 142, fig.10).

Judging from a number of features, there were some mass-scale destructions here about one hundred years later, accompanied by fire. It is not improbable that with this fire can be connected to the discoveries of the abovementioned arrowheads, as well as a man’s skeleton, found in the ash dump near the cliff, not far from the above-mentioned sacral place, in the stratigraphy close to it horizon. Its unnatural position (prone, facedown, the head is lower than the feet, the legs and arms are unnaturally reversed) and the absence of any traces of a grave exclude any notion of burial. There is an impression that somebody was thrown from the cliff or fell from it, and was soon covered with ashes and rubbish. We do not know what caused these events or destructions. Maybe a long war between Bosporos rulers among the first Spartocides and unsubmissive Theodosia. In the course of this war the latter, for some time, relied on the help of ‘overseas’ Heracleia. Particularly, some time at the final stage of this conflict (most probably, on the turn of the first and the second quarters of the 4th century BC) Heracleia devastated a number of settlements on the coast belonging to the enemy.

We will mention only one small, carefully made figure of a standing woman in long draped clothes with her face partly covered with a cloak. It preserved traces of pink and white paint (Fig. 10,7). The statue portrayed the sad, hiding Demeter, who was roaming, as the legend says, in search of her daughter. It should be mentioned that this terracotta was found in the area of that very ash dump and the shrine in the split at the cliff and is dated to the 4th century BC (Terracotta statues 1974, IV, fig. 42,2). There were fragments of the so-called Colchis pythoi, bronze arrowheads, flintstone pieces, one silver and some copper coins of Panticapaeum of the 4th century BC, fishermen’s weights of stone and clay, distaffs, pieces of ceramides made of red (from Bosporos) clay, bone needles for making fishing nets and iron nails. The proportion of pottery is relatively small: 3-5%. Those pots and bowls were made of grey clay, without

However, this hypothesis still seems improbable, for it is not likely that access to the waters of Maiotis through the strait, past the capital Panticapaeum was completely open and safe during the hostilities. Besides, the local barbarian-Scythians, according to Polyaen’s report (Polyaen., VI, 9, 4), came over to the side of the

866

ALEXANDER ALEXANDROVITCH MASLENNIKOV: SMALL AND POORLY STUDIED TOWNS

The distinct stratigraphy of the layers near the wall and especially the discoveries with the well-determined age (particularly fragments of a black-lacquer Kantaros with appliqué decorative flowers, made in the technique of slurry at the turn of the 4th–3rd or first third of the 3rd centuries BC (Brashinsky, 1980, p. 64-65; Alexandrescu, 1978, p.88, No.578), that came immediately under the wall base and the space adjoining it, suggest that the construction of the wall took place not later than in the first third of the 3rd century BC (Маslennikov, 1992, p.144). It should be mentioned that the period under study was in many ways crucial and anxious in the history of the Bosporos. Fortifications were being made around many towns and settlements.

ornament. Judging from the remains of bones, the local herd consisted mainly of small cattle. Again, there were dolphin and sturgeon bones, and mollusk shells. Of the constructions of this period in the excavated area it was only possible to discover remains of two walls of a dwelling house in the south-eastern part of the settlement, rather carefully made of medium-sized and small uncut stones. About the first quarter of the 3rd century BC the settlement experienced large alterations. First of all was the construction of the first defensive fortifications of the town, which are dated without any doubts. These walls survived only in some places and in bad condition, but it is absolutely clear that the defensive line stretched along the edges of the rock mass, where most of the dwelling houses and facilities were situated (Fig. 5). In the southeast they had to build the wall on the territory occupied by the above-mentioned ash dump. By that time, the level of the ground had risen closely to the horizon of the main surface of this ancient site and the initial relief in the area of the cliff had changed. Besides, this area was no longer used as a refuse dump or a sort of altar – eschara. It is not clear whether this was connected with the forthcoming construction or happened by itself in due course. By all appearances at that time the refuse dump moved to the northern slope of the cape. Coming back to the wall, in that area we managed to detect a part of it in very good condition, or rather, its base, and determine the approximate date of the construction. The wall began from the rocky part of the cape protruding into the harbour, which was natural, and stretched to the west– north-west. The part that survived was 9 metres long and 3-3.2 metres wide, while the height was only 0.3-1 metre (i.e. two-three courses of masonry). It was built in typical two-course, three-layered irregular, but accurate masonry of medium-sized and small stones with a clay matrix.

Apparently, a strong line of defence was built on the western frontiers: the so-called embankment and trench of Uzunlar (Маslennikov, 2003, p. 196-250). The already existing constructions of this kind were being modernized. Almost everywhere one notices traces of destruction testifying to serious hostilities. Cape Zyuk is not an exception in this respect. We will point out that most of the arrowheads, found in the settlement, are just from the area near the wall and the corresponding strata of the occupation layer. They all (bronze, three-flange, bush ones) belong to the types and variants which are usually dated to the 4th–3rd centuries BC, and are probably suggestive of some battles that took place here at that time. Who the attackers were particularly and how it ended for the defenders is not known for certain. Maybe this time the recently built walls saved the population of this town on the cape. From the south-west, the settlement was guarded by another sector of the wall, discovered to be as long as only 4.2 metres (from the south-east to the north-west). The width was 3.2-3.3 metres, and the condition was even worse: one course of masonry. Large uncut blocks of limestone made up the ‘armour’ of the wall, small ones presented the backup. It is easy to see that the following sector guarding the settlement from the so-called groundlevel side had to have and had much stronger fortifications. Farther, in the north-west, this section of the wall joined end-to-end a sort of square ‘platform’: the base of a tower or a bastion. The construction dimensions are: 5.7 х 5.8 х 6 х 4.5 metres. The inside rows of the masonry also presented solid limestone blocks and pieces of rocks. To the north-east the wall continued, and it is only 4.5 metres long. Its width has not changed, but the condition is far from good. Such a sharp turn in the defensive line was first of all due to the peculiarities of the local landscape in ancient times. Making, evidently, another sharp turn the wall reappears after some interval in the western part of the settlement, where it was discovered to stretch from the south-east to the northwest as far as 10 metres.

At first, there, in the ashy soil appeared a little wider trench, where they put some pure ash, followed by fine broken-stone, 0.1-0.15 metres thick each. Then they put a layer of small and medium-sized stones, then large flat stones. This layer was 0.15-0.2 metres thick and comprised the base of the wall. The initial length of the given part of the wall was, considering the local relief features, not less than 18-20 metres. In the west–northwest, nearly at right angles, it was joined by another section of the wall. It also guarded the settlement from the side of the cliff, but stretched to the north-east, southwest. The wall base there rested on a flattened continental rock almost exclusively, and now its condition is poor. The length of this sector is 16 metres and the width is 3.2-3.3 metres. It is noteworthy that both these ‘segments’ were joined ‘end-to-end’, while the horizon of the first was 0.4 metres lower than the second. This construction strategy was due to the difference in thickness of the ground under the wall, and hence, different subsidence of the wall.

Then the wall turns again to the south-west, and, evidently, its small section stretches to the north-west. Here its width is 2.5 metres and 3.1 metres at the base. 867

ANCIENT GREEK COLONIES IN THE BLACK SEA 2 east. A section of a narrow street 28 metres long was discovered (up to 1.8 metres wide), passing as if along a precipice from the north-east to the south-west. Becoming wider to the south-west, it passes into a small square up to 8 metres wide with a small hole.

Thus, it is the only place where we can judge about the width of the masonry of the wall itself. Its base here consists of very large uncut blocks of limestone lying flat and rather large stones comprising two ‘armours’ with a backup. On the average the wall is 1-1.4 metres high. Here its base rests on the edge of a continental rock mass, which is interrupted abruptly to the north and north-east. Then the wall makes one more, and very probably, abrupt turning and, now above a steep slope of the hill stretches in the south-west, north-east, finally joins high rocks at the end of the cape. We will never know the way the main masonry of the wall looked, and whether it had entrances or gates.

The street and the square were paved – a compacted, flat and horizontal layer of small stones, fragments of ceramics, broken stone and clay. This layer is 0.1-0.15 metres thick. There are holes and pot-holes after long usage, that is why, in due course, the whole area was ‘restored’ by means of laying the second layer. Among the fragments of amphoras used here, there are no characteristic types of the 1st century BC–1st century AD, but mainly the types and forms characteristic of the 3rd–1st centuries BC and earlier. Immediately on the surface of the first and second layers of the ‘pavement’ of the street and the square were found several small Bosporos coins dated back to the 3rd century–beginning of the 1st century BC, as well as fragments of the socalled ‘Megara’ cups, including the latest types.

Dirin may have meant just the remains of these fortifications, when he described the breakdown of some wall by the local population, made of quadras fixed with iron bars the ends of which were poured with lead (Dirin, 1896, p.121). Such a complex and, at the same time, classic construction technique, which was well known by fortifications of the metropolis during the Hellenistic period, were seldom found on the Bosporos, and never on its rural territory. To some extent it is further proof of the quite high status of the settlement under study.

Both sides of the street were occupied by houses. The latest destructions, holes, diggings, reconstructions make it very difficult to define certainly the planning and functional purpose of each (Figs 4-5). Perpendicular to this street, to the north-west, were other streets, also narrow and with the same covering. Thus, appeared a type of small blocks consisting of small adjacent houses, or rather, dwelling block-houses consisting of several rooms and a yard. An entrance 1.1 metre wide, with a sill plate from a fragment of some architectural element with slots for a single door, led from a corner, south-eastern room of one of these houses into the street. Two smaller stones formed the second step of the threshold. Probably, the other houses had similar entrances. The probable floor space of this ‘house with a threshold’ was about 13.6 х 11.2 metres (152.3 sq.m). It consisted of six tiny rooms, each: 3.4 х 5 metres and 4.2 х 5 metres and a small yard. Fragments of local Bosporos clay lead to a suggestion that the house had tiled roof. To the north-east, there was probably another similar house. Only part of the house adjoining the street was excavated. One of the rooms had a broken amphora from Rhodes from the first half– middle of the 2nd century BC. Unlike the first house that was used, though with major alterations, for a long period of time, the second house was much destroyed. The walls were demolished almost to their base and the ruins are covered with a layer of dirt and partly with a later pavement.

In this connection we will mention another wall, a part of which was discovered in the central part of the settlement. Its length south-westwards, northwards and westwards turned out to be 9.4 metres. The width is 1.5 metres and the height is 1 metre. The wall rests on precontinental rock debris and is made of large stones with analogical masonry. It differs from the walls of standard buildings in its thickness. The dating is also close to the above-mentioned fortifications. Probably, it was a part of ‘internal’ fortifications of the settlement, a sort of ‘citadel’, embracing the territory in the immediate proximity to the foot of rock mass at the end of the cape, and, of course, the top of it. Simultaneously, as has been mentioned, the ash dump (refuse dump?) of the settlement changes its location. This time it is situated near the northern–north-western shore of the cape, right behind the ‘city’ wall, on the site of a natural ravine and a cliff. Looking ahead, we may say that the thickness of occupation layers here is 10 metres, and the earliest discoveries are dated back to the second half of the 3rd– 2nd centuries BC. The layer of this period was found in many places of the settlement. As a rule, it is thin, contains a few objects and can be found in crab holes and pits, covered by constructions and layers of later periods. Probably, simultaneously with defensive fortifications, general redevelopment work was carried out here, resulting in the system of site development that existed for several centuries. Due to the bad condition of construction the appearance of these constructions remains more or less clear only in the south-eastern part of this archaeological site. We should point out the quite thorough masonry of the walls and the general axial orientation of the constructions: north-west, south-east; south-west, north-

As for the square, it seems that it came close to the defensive wall. Here it appeared completely destroyed, but it is not impossible that there was an entrance or gate through which you could descend to the bay in the southeast, where there may have a small harbour or even a the town’s port. Excavations in this area revealed remains of at least four more rooms. It is possible that three of them belonged to one house. The entrance –1.1 metres wide – was also from the street and presented a high threshold 868

ALEXANDER ALEXANDROVITCH MASLENNIKOV: SMALL AND POORLY STUDIED TOWNS

well as the whole lifestyle, changed, which naturally affected the archaeological characteristics of this site. First of all, we will point out that the occupation layers from the turn of the millennium until the 6th century AD were discovered practically everywhere. With the exception of the ash dump and the layer of the settlement itself, according to expectations they are not very pronounced. It is a proof of quite a stable lifespan for the town, which was Kepoit clean, and also, it is very likely that the main construction and redevelopment works were carried out at the beginning of this period and subsequent constructions were not very serious. In some places, as has been already mentioned, the walls of old constructions were used, but on the whole, the planning of the buildings and of the whole town looked different. The houses that existed at the time of the town’s final ruin are in a better condition. One may reasonably gather that their appearance did not take shape all at once.

with three steps. The room ‘with the entrance’ was at least 4.8 metres long, and only 3 metres wide. On the northern corner there are remains of a square fireplace (stove) with the dimensions: 0.8 х 1 metres, where a redclay and sooty lamp of the 2nd–1st centuries BC was found and a small Bosporos silver coin of the first half, middle of the 2nd century BC (Bernhardt, 1955, fig. 24, No. 120). There was a broken square grinding mill, a Bosporos copper coin of the same period and fragments of several ‘Megara’ cups on the eastern corner. The floors in this and the neighbouring rooms were mostly covered with flat stones that bear marks of a fire. In the rooms to the north-east of the above-mentioned buildings we found on the stone floor the second part of the same mill, and a closed lamp of brown lacquer with a screen which has embossed ornamentation (the 2nd–1st centuries BC) near the wall under a large fragment of a modelled bowl (Bernhardt, 1955, fig. 24, No. 119; Arsen’eva, 1970, fig. 5.1).

Therefore, it is very difficult for us to judge about the houses of the first decades and even of the first two centuries of that period. One can certainly state that several pits and wall sections disassembled or covered by other constructions belong to it. For example, in the south-western part of the settlement practically all the previous constructions and layers were removed and cleaned down to the bedrock (which was done more than once.) You will not even find many objects of the 1st–3rd centuries AD. We will emphasize that this area was completely redeveloped. The old defensive wall was not used any more, but some new houses were added to some of its remaining sections.

Marks of a large fire and destructions, most prominent in this part of the settlement, were noticed in other places too. Discoveries of the abandoned things, arrowheads and stone cannon balls, in the layer that covered these constructions testify that at the turn of the 2nd–1st centuries BC, or slightly later, the town came under attack and was probably destroyed. However, it is very difficult to associate this disaster with some specific event. There is one more noteworthy fact. In the north-west of the settlement very large pieces of rocks lying on the remains of the buildings and occupation layers with discoveries of the late Hellenistic period were discovered. It is not improbable that this is proof of a violent earthquake that occurred in 63 BC. A special survey by palaeoseismologists confirmed the supposition that these pieces split off the frequently-mentioned rock mass at the end of the cape and then rolled here. Later, pieces were removed, except the large ones lying in the lowland areas. They were left where they were, to be covered with rubbish and used for new buildings. It is very likely that at that point the shores of the cape collapsed, particularly in the south-east. Correspondingly, this resulted in a collapse of the defensive walls, which were never restored.

In the south-east, the stratum from the turn of the millenniun is a light-grey golden loamy soil, quite thin, in some places only as thick as 0.4 metres. There was a small winery on the site of the defensive wall at the turn of the 1st–2nd centuries AD. Now only a winepressing platform is left, which is at least 2.5 metres wide. It was covered with four layers of pink cement. The bottom had a noticeable inclination to the north-east, in the direction of discharge into cisterns. Positioned in a row, they were made of thin limestone plates, covered with pink cement several times. The cisterns were approximately equal: 1.1-1.2 х 0.7-0.8 metres and 0.5-0.6 metres deep. This winery must have existed till the middle of the 3rd century AD.

In general, there is an impression that only in the Hellenistic period did the settlement on Cape Zyuk acquire the characteristics of a small rural town. Here, the houses of Hellenistic type with tiled roofs, formed blocks, divided by paved streets. On the whole, the pattern of discoveries is usual for occupation layers in town.

The remains of constructions and several pits found in the eastern part of the excavated area of the settlement should be dated to the 2nd–3rd centuries AD. There was an almost unbroken costal amphora of that period made of brown clay. It was dug into the clay burnt floor at the corner of the walls and was later under the pavement.

Turbulent events in the history of the Bosporos of the 1st century BC completely changed the appearance of this tiny town. As for the destructions, they have been mentioned. What is more important is that during the next centuries the building pattern, types of constructions, as

We will start the description of the building complexes that existed here till the 6th century AD at the southeastern part of the settlement (Figs 4-5). Here the previously ruined buildings and streets had been partly covered with two layers of quite a good pavement as 869

ANCIENT GREEK COLONIES IN THE BLACK SEA 2 early as the 1st century BC–1st century AD. This pavement, in turn, was cut by a rubbish-dump of the 5th6th centuries AD. It contained fragments of various dishes including the bottom of a red-lacquer plate with a brand in the shape of a cross and part of a large edged red clay, round-bottomed amphora with a graffito with the name of a Paulinus (Маslennikov, 1987, p. 50). There were apparently no constructions near the shore, although the occupation layer containing objects of the late ancient period was present.

with a layer of light-pink, almost white cement and had a general incline to the south-east in the direction of a discharge and cisterns. Judging by the thin single layer of cement this winery existed for a relatively short period of time. Only one of the cisterns was dug out, its dimensions are 0.98 х 1.3 metres wide and 1.3 metres deep. Its walls were made of square limestone slabs, and specially scabbed rock served as the bottom. The cistern contained, along with fragments of burnt dishes and amphoras of the 3rd–6th centuries AD, a piece of a deformed human skull.

Further to the south-west was found the entire complex of constructions that existed for some time. Some of the walls of the previous period were built over, the floor level was raised, and some new walls were built, the purpose of the buildings changed, new rubbish-dumps were dug out, while the old ones were filled up. The general direction of the planning and the wall orientations remained the same. In the middle there was a yard 4.8 by 6 metres (its borders in the south-western direction remain unclear). The ground of the yard is padded earth. In the northern corner, there was a pythos closed with a limestone lid, sunk into the earth almost to its neck. It was practically empty, but there was a Bosporos bronze coin on the lid (by chance?) in a very bad condition, and the wall had a graffito. It was again a personal name quite rare or misspelt (Asup?) (Маslennikov, 1987, p. 51).

The room and the winery were very much destroyed by a later pit for stone picking. Here were found seven round convex bronze plates with relief ornament (see below). Apparently, the buildings in this area were small houses, consisting of one or two rooms with small yards adjoining them or rooms opening onto the common yard thus forming a closed block. The quality of the masonry and other characteristics of the walls are such that it is unlikely that there were second floors here. The same can be said about the buildings that were excavated further to the south-west. The whole appearance of the buildings changes noticeably here. The orientation of the walls is different here and their condition is worse. Probably, here we are dealing with another block, consisting of rooms or houses, not built at the same time. In the south-western corner of one of the rooms there was a chest made of slab stones (0.92 х 1.4 metres), and a broken amphora near the wall (Zeest, 1960, No. 86), next to this amphora there was a copper coin in bad condition and a square stone burr broken into two pieces. In the north-eastern corner there are several iron nails, a multiple-jet lamp, a piece of a large grey clay pot with glazed stripes and a red clay rim of an amphora of Zeest’s type No. 98. There are traces of a large fire everywhere.

Near the eastern corner of the yard there was a sort of a small chest (0.72 х 0.51 metres) made of flat stones. The second camp, a larger one, was near the terminating wall of the yard from the north-west. It contained a broken pythos, similar to the first, but without a graffito. Almost in the middle of the yard there was a rubbish-dump, the opening of which was thoroughly laid around with small stones. It was 1.9 metres deep; most of the rubbish was pieces of amphoras dated to the 4th-6th centuries AD.

To the north of this room there was a completely paved yard with a small rubbish dump and a grain-bin made of large flat stones. The width of the yard is 3.6 metres, the length remains unclear. It was separated from the adjoining yard (with pythos, already described) by a thin partition.

To the south-east of this yard were found the remains of a room of the same period. Its floor appeared to be partly paved with flat stones with a noticeable layer of ashes and fire. Here were found fragments of a red clay amphora, an almost unbroken red clay jug, a copper key and a coin of the King of Bosporos, Cotis II. To the north-east of the yard there was one more room with a similar floor. In the western corner of the room were found the remains of a fireplace, and there was an amphora of Panticapaeum production dug into the earth almost completely in the eastern corner. Here, were found two Bosporos bronze coins of the first quarter of the 3rd century AD and a grey clay lamp on a foot. This room is 4.7 х 4.4 metres. To the south-west there were two more rooms smaller in size, but also with a partly paved floor. On one of the corners after cleaning there was found a heap of fragments of similar amphoras.

The constructions to the north-west of the abovementioned are in an even worse condition. It is most likely that their character was the same. Here was found part of a paved yard with fragments of pythoi. This yard adjoined the yard of another house, which is further to the north-west and has not been excavated. One can only say that the main walls were built up and reconstructed many times according to the evidence of walled-up doorways and entrances. The masonry here is noticeably better and the walls themselves are thicker. Their orientation is south-west, north-east; north-west, south-east. At the corner of two walls there was a whole Panticapaeum amphora of pink clay (Zeest’s No. 96), and there was a large bunker for grain in another. Since its construction is the most notable and to some extent is characteristic of this monument and epoch, we will give it a full description. The round opening of the bunker with a

The space in the north-east was used in quite a different way. There was a winery here. Its pressing ground, which was 1.7 metres wide and more than 3.2 metres long, joined the wall of the Hellenistic period. It was covered 870

ALEXANDER ALEXANDROVITCH MASLENNIKOV: SMALL AND POORLY STUDIED TOWNS

AD particularly (besides Cape Zyuk, we can mention such settlements as Cape Zelyony, GeneralskoyeVostochnoye, Salachik, Zolotoye-Vostochnoye in the harbour, Belinskoye).

diameter of 0.4-0.44 metres was covered with an oval plate (0.63 х 0.64 х 0.05 metres) and it was surrounded by a fence made of flat stones standing edgewise and partly sunk in the earth. The height of this fence was 0.30.38 metres, the diameter 1.05-1.13 metres.

In the given context the fact that the stoves and altars were not likely to be in the same room is important for us. It is most likely that there were two rooms, but with similar ‘interiors’. In this case they were located in line, from the south-west to north-east, and were of almost equal sizes (4-4.8 х 5.2-5.3 metres). Apparently, two neighbouring yards were to the north-west of them. Their width is about 4 metres, and the total length (from the south-west to the north-east) is about 8.5 metres. Here, were found two bunkers for grain, similar to the abovementioned, not so deep and spacious, but also empty and carefully closed. However, there is no doorway in the wall separating these yards from the first room in the south-west, which had altars and was in a good condition. The discovery of a red lacquer cup with ashes, animal bones and pieces of modelled dishes (and one more ruined altar) in a place above the dismantled wall means that there was a dwelling room here too.

The cylindrical throat of the bunker was 0.5 metres deep and like the whole bunker was carved in rock. The walls gradually expanded to the flat bottom, the diameter of which was 2.5-3 metres. The total depth of the bunker was 4.45 metres and it was absolutely empty. There was a ‘path’ made of flat stones leading to the bunker from the south-east. The position, careful masonry, cleanliness and a large volume of the bunker testify that it was used for grain storage, probably for several owners. Bunkers similar in dimensions and construction are well known from excavations of a number of urban and rural settlements and monuments of the first centuries AD in the Bosporos. (Krouglikova, 1966, p. 46). It is notable that this and other bunkers on this site not only fully preserved the corresponding traditions in late antiquity, but were obviously ready to receive a new harvest, which never happened due to the death of the settlement.

Thus, there could be up to four blocks in this part of the settlement. At the southernmost corner (near the coastal cliff) of the excavated area were found the remains of another winery in a good state of preservation. Its pressing ground had suffered much under the influence of coastal erosion and holes which were dug out later on. The winery stood right above the ruins of the old defensive wall and was about 2.8 metres wide. Its four cisterns were eastwards. As usual, they were made of thin flat stones and covered with three-four layers of pink cement. Their dimensions vary within: 0.7-0.87 х 2.172.3 metres and the depth is 1.1-1.4 metres. By some features of construction it can be dated not earlier than the 4th century AD and it existed until the end of the settlement.

The complex of houses in the south-western and southern sectors of the settlement resembles the above-mentioned in many ways. It had the same blocks of dwelling houses with small yards. The only difference is that they stretch more from the north-west to the south-east. There is practically nothing left from the walls parallel to them, limiting the houses to the north-east. One can only say that the breadth of the space between them was at least 44.8 metres. The orientation of the cross walls had an apparent deflection to the east. All this made more varied and complex the design of the settlement development. It is completely impossible to determine what was a dwelling room or a yard and in which order they were situated in this complex. In the southern corner of one of the rooms was excavated the remains of a stove made of flat stones and clay (0.7 х 1 metre). To the north-west there is an oval (0.6 х 0.8 metres), not very deep (0.33 metre) hole, full of ashes. Further, on the south-western wall there was a sort of altar. Resting on a large flat stone there was a ‘hopper’ made of small slabs covered with a similar stone (0.4 х 0.52 metres). Inside, under the layer of ashes, clay and sea scallop shells, there were pieces of a skull and ribs of a small dog (?), a sooty dish-lamp of grey clay and a pot.

The constructions of this period in the western part of the settlement are in the best state of preservation, though in some parts they are seriously damaged. The most notable objects here are the remains of a drainage and sewage system for the town. It was built, apparently, at the very beginning of the chronological period under study, at any rate not later than the 2nd-3rd centuries AD, and functioned until the 6th century AD. It is by no means certain that all its possible ‘constituent parts’ have been found, however, it is obvious that it served that very elevated area, whence natural drainage was undesirable for building areas below. The whole system consisted of the ‘external’ section of drainage, conventional covered or open ditches of various sizes and collection pits.

Approximately 4.4 metres to the north-east there was one more stove situated in a similar manner, a hole with ashes, a similar altar and another stove. Besides ashes, shells and sea sand this altar contained a skull and ribs of another dog, a small pot and a red lacquer lamp of the 5th-6th centuries AD (Bernhardt, 1955, No. 355, 366). It should also be mentioned that a few other similar altars, in different conditions, but with approximately the same ‘set’ of objects were found in this settlement. They are found practically in all settlements of the Azov Sea coast in Crimea, as a rule in complexes of the 3rd-6th centuries

The first section is a narrow covered gallery, made of large limestone slabs with an average size of 1.6 х 0.7 х 0.3 metres, standing edgeways and firmly attached to each other. The plates of the coverings are a little smaller (1.08 х 0.9 х 0.22 metres). The slots between the stones 871

ANCIENT GREEK COLONIES IN THE BLACK SEA 2 of charred wood, a lot of fragments of various dishes, ashes and two copper coins of Rescuporid VI.

are thoroughly filled with a greenish clay and small stones. The drain is 0.75-0.85 metres wide (outside) and 0.45-0.5 metres (inside). The height (inside) is about 1 metre. This substantial construction, which a grown person could get into, is excavated for the length of 5.6 metres. It started right under the corner of the walls of the westernmost house, and, making a small turn, went on almost strictly to the west, in the direction of the sea, gradually lowering in the level. The bottom of the drainage was first a ledge rock, then a very compact layer of clay and ashes. The plates of the cover lay at the depth of 1.02-1.25 metres from the modern surface. The inner space was partly filled with very loose wet grey ground with some fragments of amphoras and other dishes. We should mention a small pot made of grey clay.

The second stove was in the western corner of the room. The construction was the same, but the size even bigger: 2 х 1.6 metres. It was full of burnt earth and ashes. It contained a narrow-necked amphora of light clay dated to the II-III centuries AD (Zeest, 1960, No. 91) with a broken bottom, a Bosporos copper coin of Rescuporid VI and the bones of a small dog or cat. On the floor near the stove there was a red lacquer closed type lamp of the 5th century AD (Szentlelesky, 1969, p.125-127, No. 232234) and a long iron knife with a narrow blade. Here the traces of a fire were more obvious than anywhere else. To the south-east of this house there was a yard with an area of 5.4 х 3.6 metres, it was carefully paved with flat stones of medium size. There were also obvious traces of a fire in the form of soot and grime on its even surface. Its level was 0.5 metres above the floor of the room with stoves. They were separated by a thin partition with a doorway in the south-east 1.2 metres wide. It is notable that in the masonry was used a large fragment of limestone tombstone, typical for Bosporos sites of this kind in the 1st–2nd centuries AD. On a relief, topped with three crowns, there was an image of a woman sitting on an armchair and two little figures in front of her. Probably, either a pressing necessity or a simple availability of this already ‘deserted’ stone, together with the lack of strict rules and traditions with respect to the burial of ancestors, made some inhabitants of the settlement in late antiquity period use this type of stone.

From the south-east this construction is joined by a regular drain in the form of a ditch, whose length was found to be 6 metres. It is 0.4-0.45 metres wide, and 0.230.31 metres deep. Some small plates covering it remained in a few places. The ditch walls were also faced with stones in some places, but mostly it was dug in rocky ground and rock. Inside was found a copper coin of the Bosporos King Rescuporid VI (first third of the 4th century AD). The pit, performing the function of a sewer of sorts for waste water and dirt, was almost in the centre of this ditch. The opening diameter was 0.56-0.68 metres, the depth was 2.45 metres, the diameter at the bottom was 3.4-3.5 metres. Greenish-grey clay filled the pit approximately by one third, next came loose grey ground with fragments of ceramics from the 3rd-6th centuries AD and the small bones of gnawing animals.

Quite thick walls of the above-mentioned construction, 11.1 metres wide, some burial of the residential section with stoves, the abundance of burned charred wood and stones in the ruins suggest the presence of a second floor in this particular case.

There was a block of structures, consisting of a large house and a paved yard and a large paved area of excellent quality consisting of very big flagstones in the centre of this part of the settlement. All the main walls here are oriented axially: south-west–north-east, northwest–south-east, and made more or less accurately of uncut limestone in a double-chain, three-layer fashion with a clay matrix. From the rock pillar in the north-east, rising above the ground in several limestone blocks of large size, three almost parallel walls, interrupted from time to time, stretch to the south-west. The present length of the north-western wall is 14 metres; the length of the south-eastern one is 18 metres. The width of the space enclosed by them is 4.8-5.4 metres. Immediately at the rock there was a house within an area of 7.4 х 5.4 metres. Its floor was of clay, flat and obviously burnt. Closer to the eastern corner were found the remains of a large stove 1.4 х 1.1 metres. The walls are made of flat stones coated with a thick layer of clay. Among the pieces of the hearth there was found a Bosporos coin of the end of the 1st– beginning of the 2nd century AD, which was unlikely to correspond with the date of its construction. In the middle of the stove, in the ashes, there was a Bosporos amphora without a bottom of the 2nd–3rd centuries AD (Zeest, 1960, No. 83), which was used as a sort of condenser of warm air. Next to the wall there was a broken pythos of pink clay. In many places on the floor were found pieces

Further to the south-west there was another yard, also provided with a grain pit similar to the above-mentioned one. There was drainage under its stones. Whether the yard was followed by a dwelling house remains unclear. To the south-east we have excavated incompletely a rather large area (10 х 7.2 metres), paved with thoroughly fitted very large flagstones (1.4 х 1.5 х 0.2 metres) and medium-sized flat stones. The surface of this pavement is smooth, almost horizontal. There are not many discoveries here, but among them one should mention a bronze fibula of the second half of the 5th century AD (Маslennikov, 1992, p.158, fig. 17, No. 16). From the north-east and south-west, as if limiting this area, there were two thin walls, at least 4.6 and 9.6 metres long. The north-eastern wall separated from it a small yard, probably for household needs, paved with small and medium-sized stones. Its surface level is 0.3-0.35 metres lower than the space joined to it via an entrance in the wall, 1 metre wide with two steps. The breadth of this yard is 5.6 metres, the excavated length is 4.4 metres.

872

ALEXANDER ALEXANDROVITCH MASLENNIKOV: SMALL AND POORLY STUDIED TOWNS

The entrances of these houses opened onto one common street, leading from the south-west to the north-east. This one, as well as the whole northern section of the excavated area of the settlement, is in a poor state of preservation. There is only one room (house?), the condition of which is not so bad, with an area of 4.2 х 3.6 metres and the masonry is of poor quality. The northeastern part was destroyed as a result of a hole that appeared later on. The smooth earthen floor showed signs of a fire. There was a round limestone millstone with a diameter of 0.4 metres, and there was a square fireplace (0.8 х 1.2 metres) in the northern corner. There was a rubbish hole approximately in the centre. It was dug in the occupation layer of the previous time period and partly faced with stones round the edges. Inside, besides ashes and pieces of amphoras, there was a lamp (Fig. 10, 5).

Two small holes for posts supporting a roof were found. In the layer of the burnt ground was found a copper coin of the Bosporos King Phophors (end of the 3rd– beginning of the 4th century AD); a modelled lamp on a stem; a closed brown lacquer lamp with the image of an eagle on the lid (Fig. 10, 6) (for an approximate analogy see Perlzweig, 1961, p.173, No. 2368); a fish hook; a bronze fibula of the second half of the 5th century AD (Маslennikov,1992, p.158, fig.17, No. 18); and two burnt fragments of red lacquer vessels with graffiti, one of which is, most probably, a tamgo shaped sign (Маslennikov, 1987, p. 53). It is possible that this yard belonged to the house, only the western corner of which was excavated. The wall’s orientation here is the same as of the other houses in this part of the settlement. The masonry is thorough, the walls are 0.74-0.78 metres thick. By means of a doorway, 0.9 metres wide, the house was joined to the yard. The floor is very smooth and burnt. In the compact layer of the ground covering it, were discovered pieces of two lamps and a copper coin of Phophors.

A few similar rubbish holes are dated back to the first centuries AD. After all, the layers of this epoch, as was already stated, are all presented successively in the western ash dump of the settlement. Incidentally, here in an oval hole, was found a grave of two women with deformed skulls, in a contracted state, and, together with them, a child in a large fragment of amphora. Judging by the accompanying objects, though not very impressive, they are most likely to belong to the period not earlier than the 3rd century AD. The very fact of a grave of this kind is quite notable and gives rein to various suggestions and fantasies.

To the south-west of the large paved area several holes of the 2nd–1st centuries BC were cleaned, but no constructions of the first centuries were found. Remains of the walls of some houses and a pit of the 4th-6th centuries AD were discovered to the north-west. Also, a section of paved area and the beginning of the second ash dump of the settlement were found. The same main directional and planning concepts were preserved in the north-western part of the settlement (Fig. 5). Although here, the houses and yards were situated axially north-west, south-east. They are built in a row along the edge of a steep coastal cliff, joining the outcrops of rocks from the north-west, and, at least twice, they were rebuilt during the period under consideration. There is one complex which is in a better condition. Its total area is 3.5 х 8 metres. There was a partition dividing it into a dwelling space (in the north-eastern part) with an area of 3.5 х 3.2 metres and a yard for household needs. In the northern corner we cleaned the remains of a stove. Near it there was a small pythos (up to 1 metre) dug into the ground. The floor is compacted earth with chicken grit. There is a visible layer of ashes on it. Three Bosporos copper coins of the 3rd century–the first third of the 4th century AD, a copper buckle and a ring, a modelled dish-luminaire, fragments of amphora and at least eight modelled vessels were also found. The yard was partly paved with flat stones and had two pits. The main walls, which are 0.82-0.86 metres thick are in quite a good condition. There is a foot of a stone staircase near one of the walls facing the yard, which may also suggest there was a second floor. Similar blocks of buildings existed next to the above-mentioned contructions, to the north-east of it. There are walls, remains of a stove, a stone chest for food and a clay floor as evidence of these.

A question of the defensive fortifications of the settlement in the first centuries AD presents a certain interest. The protective embankment and the trench have been mentioned above. The excavation showed that the trench stretching from the south-east to the north-west was partly dug in solid rock and partly in the ground of the ash dump. Wedge-shaped in section, it was 4.5 metres wide and about 2.5 metres deep. The preserved height of the embankment is 0.7-1 metres and the breadth is 6-7 metres. The base of the embankment consists of chipped stone and the earth from the trench. On the excavated area, near the cliff, the embankment is much eroded. Several rubbish holes with materials from late antiquity were discovered here. Other observations show that the embankment covered pits and remains of some constructions of the 1st century BC–2nd century AD. Approximately in the centre of the embankment there was an entrance about 3.5 metres wide. These were not the only fortifications of the settlement. We have already mentioned above Dirin, who wrote that at the end of the 19th century that the local inhabitants, cutting stones on the cape, ruined a wall. We will also add that his mentioning of the pink cement in this connection suggests that this wall was of the ‘Roman’ period. Dirin did not write anything about its width, but he wrote about an entrance in it – gates that were one fathom wide (2.14 metres). Moreover, even the gates have remains of some wooden bars, which is a very rare occurence (Dirin, 1896, p. 121). 873

ANCIENT GREEK COLONIES IN THE BLACK SEA 2 For example, on top of the repeatedly mentioned rock mass at the north-eastern end of the cape there is a relatively flat space with an area of not more than 180 sq.metres. There is a path leading here from the settlement. One notices here traces of scabbed rocks and a thin occupation layer. Remains of the walls of two rooms were found that existed during the 3rd–4th centuries AD, but there were fragments of dishes from earlier times. The rooms had the following dimensions: 4.6 х 4.9 and 5.8 х 3.9 metres. Excavations revealed a broken fireplace and a small stone food chest with fragments of a pythos. The purpose of the rooms is not clear. The convenient and safe location, as well as a wide panorama of the outskirts suggests that there was a watchtower, maybe a lighthouse on top.

The wall of Hellenistic period went through the same area, but, as we saw, with many twists and was taken to pieces almost to its base as early as in antiquity. Are there any walls of the first centuries AD still existing? Actually, a wide trench for stone mining was found in the south-westernmost part of the excavated area, at the depth of 1-1.5 metres, about 5-7 metres to the north-east of the embankment top. It stretches from the south-east to the north-west with a little deviation to the north, almost parallel to the embankment. Its width is the same everywhere: 1.5-1.6 metres, the length is at least 30 metres. The trench was full of light pink chicken grit, broken stone and pieces of the pinkish matrix of cement. There are medium-sized and small pieces of limestone left in some places. All more or less suitable, regularlyshaped blocks and cut stones were taken out. This picture corresponded to Dirin’s description. Unfortunately, the most interesting part – the area near the entrance and the gates – remains unexcavated. Judging by the small width of this wall, one should think that its height was not more than 3.5 metres. One may assume that there was either an earth bank inside, which was used during defence or a wooden platform. Both variants are well known in ancient fortifications (Fig. 7).

In the northern part of the cape, by the sea, under the above-mentioned rock mass on a small relatively flat area there were buildings excavated in a good state of preservation having an unusual form. There were two rooms separated by strongly-built semicircular walls that remained to a height of 1-1.5 metres and were joined to an almost sheer cliff and to each other. One, 2.9 х 2.6 metres inside, had an entrance of 0.9 metres wide with four steps from the north-west. The floor was sunk as deep as 1 metre. There are almost no discoveries here. The second room was larger and had the form of an elongated oval: 5.4 х 2.7 metres. The entrance, 1 metre wide, was also situated in the west, but it had a more orderly facing with cut stone blocks. On the sunken floor (0.9-1 metres) there were found piles and fragments of at least 18 amphoras. Almost all of them belong to the kind of the so-called Panticapaeum red lacquer, wide-necked ones (Zeest’s No. 96).

Some stratigraphic observations in the area of the defensive wall let us determine the approximate time of its erection. Firstly, the trench for stone mining, where there is no ledge rock, is buried in occupation layers dated back to the period not later than the 2nd–3rd centuries AD. Secondly, in the western part of the settlement it passes through a yard and covers some walls, a grain bunker and the external section of a large water drain. Meanwhile, the above-mentioned walls were being ruined. The neighbouring houses of the same period and yards existed from the 1st century BC–1st century AD until at least the 6th century AD. The fortifications under study were built due to increased external threats, much later than the global reconstruction and replanning of the settlement, which took place on the turn of the millennium, i.e., most probably at the end of the first third of the 3rd century AD or even a bit later. There are other, quite hypothetical arguments, in favour of this date. Thus, among the fragments of inscriptions found in the settlement, there is one probably describing some construction work (see below). As is known, texts concerning the large fortification work being carried out at this anxious time were found in Tanais, Gorgippia and some other settlements in the Bosporos. If ‘our’ inscription belongs to the same period and range, then the construction of a new wall of the settlement looked quite logical in the common system of work to strengthen the defence of the Bosporos, and the area of Maiotis coast particularly.

Moreover, there were fragments of amphoras of different types of the 4th-6th centuries AD of simple red clay, red lacquer and modelled dishes, a copper fishhook, a copper buckle, a fragment of a five-jet lamp and two indistinct graffiti on amphora walls. The whole complex must have been a warehouse by the sea for storing supplies or salted fish. It is not impossible that due to its special location and construction this building served as a sort of cool house. Buildings of the same kind and in an even better condition were discovered later by the sea near another settlement of the Azov sea coast (‘Sirenevaya Bukhta’). The discoveries and their dating were identical. This ‘warehouse’ perished along with the settlement and was covered with earth and broken stone. Practically everywhere on the site of the settlement there is a layer of large-scale destruction, accompanied by fire (traces of ashes and cinders up to 0.1 metres thick, burnt stones and fragments of dishes, pieces of stoves and charcoal). This fire explains piles of stones from the walls that collapsed. In some places there are human bones. The destruction was total and catastrophic. The ruins were not cleared, the buildings were not restored, and the population disappeared. This layer (loose, grey and light-

Archaeological description of the settlement on Cape Zyuk would not be complete without a description of other, though not so notable, excavations and exploration shafts, as well as some information about its necropolis.

874

ALEXANDER ALEXANDROVITCH MASLENNIKOV: SMALL AND POORLY STUDIED TOWNS

well known, they stopped minting coins in Bosporos about 340 AD, but money circulation existed for quite a long time. The coins made during the last period of minting, along with the ones of the early Byzantine period, circulated on the local market. Thus, these discoveries, to some extent, may serve only to determine the ‘lower’ boundary of the stratum under study. It should be mentioned that this layer, among other things, contained quite a large amount (the largest of all the layers) of bones of large and small cattle, pigs, dolphins, birds and fish.

grey, occasionally ashy loam soil with numerous stones) revealed many varied finds. Since they allow us to determine the time of the end of the settlement, and, generally, have a principal significance for the late ancient period of Bosporos history, we will talk about them in detail. First of all, are the pieces of various amphoras. Naturally, there are samples of the 1st–3rd centuries AD among them, but types and forms of the 4th–6th centuries AD prevail. Especially numerous are those that were already mentioned several times, large amphoras of red and pink clay with wide necks broadening at the top, a ribbed surface and massive handles, probably of local Panticapaeum production (Zeest’s type No. 96). Next come the red clay amphoras with a distinctive, subrectangular in section crown (Zeest’s type No. 100 or the so-called ‘Delakey’). There are also a few practically unbroken amphoras of this or that type. The first, being especially massive were often set into the ground or floor. Both of these types were usual in the late antiquity occupation layers of many sites on a vast territory and are well-known. Each one of them has several variants, differening among other things in dating (Маslennikov, 1992, p. 164-165). Other late antiquity amphoras are mainly the following: light clay narrow-necked ones, (of the type ‘incoming wave’ or type ‘E’) or amphoras of the so-called brown clay with waists and thin-walled red clay amphoras, like the Inkerman type and round-bottomed earthenware pots. There are some new or unusual forms.

Discoveries of lapidary texts are very exceptional for the monuments in the depths of the Bosporos. During the long years of study of all rural settlements and fortified towns in the depth of the Bosporos, and in the region of the Azov coast only seven small fragments of such texts were found. Six of them are from Cape Zyuk. They are all small fragments of marble slabs that also came mostly from the layer of ruins (Fig. 8, 4-8) We will speak about them in detail. All the inscriptions belong to different documents and are not associated with each other. The first fragment was discovered on the cape as early as in 1894 and it had a list of names (9 of them could be read) of some local residents, most probably, members of some thiasos. Judging by the character of this writing, it is from the 3rd century AD (КBN, 1965, No. 898). The next fragment found in 1981 contained the beginning of an inscription, probably the name of a king’s ethnarch, who ruled this town, or a king’s authorized representative living in it. It could be also a petition of the local community or a thiasos to the King of Bosporos, most likely, to Cotis III (227-233 AD). We do not not know its contents, the fragment is too small (Маslennikov, Saprykin, 1999, p.193-194).

Late red lacquer dishes are also found in several types and centres. They are mainly various variants and forms of bowls of the group ‘Late Roman C’, characteristic of the 4th–6th centuries AD. Their late chronological group often had brands in the form of various crosses (Маslennikov, 1992, p. 166).

One more fragment (discovered in 1983) was an inscription broken on all sides with a list of names. It is a traditional document for Bosporos of the ‘Roman’ period – it is a resolution of a synod headed by leading ranks. Only one name and the title ‘father of the synod’ could be defined with any degree of certainty. It is impossible to establish the exact date when the text was written (Маslennikov, Saprykin, 1999, p. 194-195).

Naturally, quite demonstrative, though, not so numerous, are the lamps of late antiquity, especially of red lacquer, with relief ornamentation. There are differences in their forms and sizes. They are mostly imported objects, dating back to the second half of the 3rd–6th centuries AD (Маslennikov, 1992, p.166). Simple, modelled lamps of grey clay or censers have a lot of analogies in other synchronous or earlier rural settlements of the Azov coast.

The next fragment is also part of a list of names, where only five can be read. It is obvious that they are all Thiasites. The date of the list is the first half of the 3rd century AD (Maslennikov, Saprykin, 1999, p. 195-196).

The general overview of this layer of destruction would not be complete without clay, mainly biconical distaffs; fishing and weavers’ pyramidal clay weights; bone needles for mending fishing nets; and fragments of glass jars. We will also mention an iron knife for grapes; an iron share; a piece of an iron pitchfork (?); an addice and knives. Fibulas are very rare and all of them are from late antiquity. There are fragments of terracotta statues of later types and themes. We should also mention a bone stalked arrowhead, very characteristic of this time, and more than two dozen copper Bosporos coins of the end of the 3rd century–first third of the 4th century AD. As it is

The fourth fragment found in 1981 is a left side of a large list of names, with the names of some officials and members of a union, thiasos or synod. Judging by the script, this inscription can be dated to the 2nd–3rd centuries AD (Idem., p. 196-197). Finally, the last and the smallest fragment (discovered in 1980) had only three letters left. It is very likely that it was the beginning of a name.

875

ANCIENT GREEK COLONIES IN THE BLACK SEA 2 the remains of some building on the rock, sparse discoveries of fragments of dishes, characteristic of the 7th–9th centuries AD and a burial of a child in a grave with a tombstone of the same date, found in the area to the south of the main part of the settlement. It contained a copper ring and a small bell (Maslennikov, 1992, p.152, fig. 17, 12-13). Even more illustrative for the early Khazar period are the above-mentioned seven attachable copper plaques with relief deoration (Maslennikov, 1992, fig. 17, 1-7). According to the experts in east European decorations of the early medieval period, such attached rosettes became widely spread from the second half of the 6th century AD, when they were brought here as a result of another invasion of nomadic tribes: the Avars and the Turks. The decorations in question are dated back to the last decades of the 7th century AD, and their appearance here is connected with the occupation of Bosporos by the Khazars (Gavritouhin, 2002, p. 109).

Thus, even such fragmentary texts show that this tiny town, in the first centuries AD, had church and religiousprofessional unions, such as a thiasos and synod. Before that, they had been recorded only in large settlements of the Bosporos. In most cases, these organizations/unions, as it seems from the inscriptions, included the local Hellenic population, which is proven by the typical Greek personal names. There are also barbarian names among them. Perhaps in this particular case they are the names of natives, or rather their descendants among the Sarmatians or later Scythians. The latter seems more probable. Religious union-thiasoi and their leading body, synods, performed not only religious and hieratic functions (connected with Hellenic traditions and ideological concepts), but also had some administrative duties for the supreme power of the crown. For example, they helped form local military units, carry out trade operations and promote tax collection. Therefore the crown was interested in their existence and normal functioning. High ranking members of the synods probably became members of the king’s administration in these towns. The whole system, one way or another, but particularly in the new historical conditions of the first three centuries AD, helped preserve ancient traditions, and, partly, the ideology of polis. They (synods and thiasoi) undertook, at least partly, the functions of city authorities. All this among the surrounding barbarian environment and constant influx of non-Greek population into the towns and rural settlements of the Bosporos had a certain importance. The existence of such unions for such a small town as Zenonos Chersonesos is another proof of its special, higher social status than that of the neighbouring settlements, the status of a city, maybe with some previous traditions of a polis. However, the presence of barbarian names in those lists meant that the local community periodically increased from outside, due to Hellenized immigrants from alien ethnic groups. We do not yet know any specific conditions, duties and other fundamentals of this process. At any rate, it seems to largely explain the strength and viability of all the ancient traditions in regions so remote from the ancient centres.

After that the territory of the cape finally becomes deserted for a long time. There are no real traces of visits to this cape by Genoese sailors or settlers. Let us make a summary of our historical and archaeological excursion. It seems as if the planning and the defence system of Zenonos Chersonesos in the first centuries AD were simpler, but not uniform. Its starting point was blocks or quarters consisting of several (but not many) sections: a house (a room) and a small yard. Rows of these blocks were constructed both along the perimeter of the walls and fortifications, and one by one, in lines. The size of the living quarters was not large, and their ‘interiors’ have much in common (a square or rectangular stove on the corner, often with an empty amphora standing in the ashes without a bottom and with the almost obligatory presence of a coin in the hearth of a stove; a hole for ashes next to the stove; a domestic altar, containing more or less the same set of cult objects; a burr and a large amphora or pythos sunk into the floor). On the whole, judging by the discoveries, people’s income was relatively small. No objects of any value were found on the site of the settlement, except some Bosporos copper coins. However, this is expected taking into account the probable circumstances of the town’s destruction. Some of the houses had two floors. The yards were partly or completely paved, and, probably, were partly under sheds.

Coming back to the archaeological characteristics of Zenonos Chersonesos, we will stop with the dating of its destruction. Taking into consideration the aforesaid, the end of its life should be considered the second, maybe, the third quarter of the 6th century AD. It might be connected with two very important events in the history of the Bosporos: the so-called Hun mutiny of the King Hord (528-534 AD) or – much more realistic considering the traces of destruction at all sites of the Azov coast – the invasion of Bosporos by the Turkomen (Turkyuts) in the 570s AD.

There were pits for household needs in the yards and pythoi sunk into the earth. They were very often separated from the living quarters by a very thin fence. We have already mentioned the large volume and uniformity of the type of grain bunkers. They could have been public grain stores belonging to several kin families that lived in one quarter. In all probability, the settlement perished shortly before a new harvest, when the old supplies were finished. Otherwise it is difficult to explain why these pits were clean and so thoroughly closed. The streets between the blocks were narrow and paved. On the whole the town was Kepoit quite clean with the help

However, it should be stressed that about 150-200 years later Cape Zyuk became populated again for a short period of time. Evidently this area was repopulated by representatives of the so-called Saltov-Mayatsk culture (ancestors of some Bulgarian tribes). This is proven by 876

ALEXANDER ALEXANDROVITCH MASLENNIKOV: SMALL AND POORLY STUDIED TOWNS

us return to the description of the town during the ‘Roman’ period of its history.

of the well-designed system of drains and collectors. Waste and rubbish did not accumulate within the area of buildings, but was carried away into one ash dump. However, the latter could have performed some cult role as well, since it was largely replenished by ashes from home hearths. For Hellenes (and not only them) ashes had some sacral functions. No wells have been found so far in the settlement or on the cape. Perhaps, water was brought and stored in pythoi and amphoras, but still, every settlement tried to simplify the problem of water supply, which was extremely important in many respects.

On the whole, neither the buildings nor the discoveries on the site of the settlement reflect any significant wealth amongst the population. There were evidently very few tiled roofs. Nothing of any value has been found (or they did not survive). There are no buried treasures – a common feature of all disturbed epochs. We have not found any remains of public buildings, including temples and sanctuaries. The number of graffiti and dipinti that were found in the occupation layers of the first centuries AD is not larger than at any ordinary, contemporary rural settlements (Маslennikov, 1987, p. 43-54). Neither Roman nor other ‘foreign’ coins have been found (Маslennikov, 1998a, p. 202-215). At the same time, there are obviously imported lamps, red lacquer ceramics, and glassware. However, foreign trade could hardly have played a substantial role in the economic life of the town. Besides, it is almost certain that, as before, most foreign goods arrived here indirectly, i.e., most likely, via Panticapaeum. It is not clear to what extent Zenonites themselves were involved in the local transit trade. It is most probable that farming remained the basis of their economy and welfare. Spacious granaries and domestic millstones speak for themselves (it should be noted incidentally that more primitive limestone pounders were characteristic of the neighbouring rural settlements, at least, for the 3rd–4th centuries AD).

Therefore, we can suppose that in ancient times people were looking for water on the cape but without a positive result. Wine production within the town limits is a new feature of life and quite usual for this area in the period under study. It is not quite clear whether it served the entire population or simply one or several hosts. The fortifications seem to have appeared not immediately, but only in the 3rd century AD. It seems that for quite a long time the natural defences of the town were considered sufficient for its safety. The neighbouring area was also quiet. The wall and the embankment with a trench, which were built late on, cannot be considered as a completely solid and perfect defence either. It is not clear, whether the population could have survived behind their walls during periods of disturbance and barbarian invasions in the middle–third quarter of the 3rd century AD, but, unlike the rural settlements in the middle of the peninsula and the western part of the Azov coast, they seem to have managed. We have not found the serious alterations that would follow considerable destructions here. On the contrary, all the traditions and experience of urban construction, economic activity, as well as the cultural and religious spheres, appear to have been preserved. Of course, this does not mean that there were no changes during the late ancient period of the history of Zenonos Chersonesos.

The importance of viniculture had certainly grown. There is no doubt that they took up fishing and, maybe even in a larger scale than before, a mollusk fishery. They might have been producing salt from the shallow dryed up lake nearby and, they certainly hunted the local game and other living creatures. So-called handicrafts went on playing their role: weaving of coarse fabric, modelling kitchen utensils, making simple utensils from bones and horns, primary stone treatment, making nets and mats. As for other things, we have no grounds to speculate about them. Concerning tableware, it should be mentioned that there are practically no types and forms that are distinctly specific, connected with anything other than GreekBosporos traditions and manners of decoration. However, the few new things that are found here have analogies on the sites of the neighbouring settlements of the Azov coast.

The strange burials of people with deformed skulls on the territory of the ash dump, who were certainly newcomers and most probably natives of the late Sarmatian-Alan area, have already been mentioned. Besides traditional Hellenic names, the above-described inscriptions have names from Asia Minor and Iranian names. However, it is not possible to relate them to any definite barbarian ethnos known to us to be living in the vicinity of the Bosporos in the first centuries AD. Very illustrative and original are the altars that have been mentioned many times, in which can be seen a recollection of old Hellenic traditions and beliefs, as well as the manifestation of a powerful innovative impulse in the field of ‘everyday’ sacral practice. However, one cannot say anything certain except that this had common Indo-European roots (Маslennikov, Emets, 1992, p. 32-42). This list could probably include some graffiti with tamgo-shaped symbols. Furthermore, the absence of any traces of early Christian ideology must be pointed out. All these ‘pagan’ altars existed safely particularly during late antiquity. Let

On the whole, there is an impression that the standard of culture, wealth and mobility of the population in this epoch was lower, simpler and less obvious than during the Hellenistic period. There is no proof of any substantial property or any other differentiation in the town. Although, of course, ‘the fathers of the synod’, known to us from inscriptions, must have been superior in some aspects to the common mass of people. Everything, if it may be put this way, bears signs of levelling and modest uniformity. In this connection, and taking into consideration all the aforesaid, we will turn to the relatively difficult question of what the settlement 877

ANCIENT GREEK COLONIES IN THE BLACK SEA 2 years ago the local population while building their huts frequently came across sepulchres and devastated them (‘in the most merciless way’ he writes). Some of the tombstones had inscriptions, probably epitaphs. (Two such tombstones, probably of the 1st century AD with Hellenic and barbarian names are in the Kerch Museum. See КBN, 1965, Nos 899-900.) The fate of the finds from these graves is also sad. Dirin described one case. A native ‘found a lacquered vessel with different paintings, but, having realized that it was a Tatar vessel for ablutions, smashed it against a stone immediately’ (Dirin, 1896, p. 122).

under study can be classified as, with all the facts now available. In other words, how justifiable is it to call it a town, like Claudius Ptolemaeus does? What is characteristic of a town in the far away provinces of the Greek and Roman oecumene in general and in the first centuries AD particularly? I think we will be right to answer this question in the following way. Firstly, despite all the aforesaid, this settlement was always distinct from its neighbours on the coast and in the remote districts of the Bosporos. And new materials and data that are constantly uncovered in the course of regular and quite large-scale excavations of various sites of the ancient chora in the Eastern Crimea only strengthen our belief. Referring to the ancient written tradition, we will remember, first of all, Pausanias, who, among the attributes of a town (but not a polis, i.e. a certain organization of civil group), as well as defensive walls (probably not by chance he mentions walls in particular, not just fortifications), also mentioned government buildings, a gymnasium, a theatre, a square (agora), and public water pools (Paus., X, 4, 1). In other words he mentions everything that was the idea of normal life in a town community particularly, unlike typical rural settlements with their way of life, for the Greeks.

Only a very small part of these objects came to Dirin. In this connection it will be of interest to give a full description of one of the sepulchres discovered near the cape in the presence of the above-mentioned dilettante. ‘In this sepulchre, oriented from the north to the south, there was one skeleton of a man, one of a woman and one of a child. Because it was full of wet loamy soil and through my inexperience in such things, it was not thoroughly inspected, and the glass vessels and lachrymal vases that lay there were broken by inexperienced workers, so much so that it was impossible to restore them in order to have a notion of their form. The vessels had massive handles. As for earthenware we found a lamp of common form with a simple pressed ornament. There was a silver bracelet of simple work on the hand of the female skeleton. Next to the male skeleton there was a large broadsword and several silver buckles. Near the skulls there are gold leaves, two golden indications depicting Constantine the Great and a badly preserved copper coin’ (Dirin, 1896, 122).

Without elaborating on each of these conditions in relation to Zenonos Chersonesos, we will only stress that the whole collection of the materials from archaeological excavations does not contradict its attribution as a small town. At least this can be said about its most successful and intensive period of habitation: the epoch of Hellenism and the first centuries AD. Earlier, as well as later, its difference from a normal, though quite permanent (which is a rare exception) settlement of the Bosporos chora, decreased and became less significant. However, this difference was still somehow felt at the time of Claudius Ptolemaeus, or rather his informers. Maybe, it was one of the smallest towns of the Bosporos, and was typical for this remote ancient State. So far, we know almost nothing about the way other towns looked. That is why the following historical and geographical example may prove to be extremely illustrative.

Judging by Dirin’s further description, the necropolis of Zenonos Chersonesos was situated not only near the cape, on the territory of the village Mama-Russkaya (now Mysovoye or Kurortnoye), but 1-3 miles to the south-east and south-west of it. The types and dating of the graves could be different. He found at least 60 simple ground graves, with a stone covering and stone slab sepulchres on the so-called near necropolis. The earliest graves (containing black lacquer dishes?) appeared to be the deepest. Most of them had been robbed in ancient times. Nevertheless, fragments of terracottas, beads, earrings and vessels of ‘Phoenician’ glass were found. Other graves presented burials in wooden coffins with finds of the first centuries AD. Some of the graves have skeletons with deformed skulls. The third type was graves with a grotto. He also found simple graves and crypts (‘catacombs’) on the slope of the hill near the cape, which are most likely to be similar to the above described. The latter had two chambers.

It is quite possible that Zenonos Chersonesos was really a kind of colony, a settlement, a ‘product’ of internal colonization. In this connection, one cannot but recall Strabo’s suggestion that the chief city for the entire population of the European Bosporos was Panticapaeum, and Phanagoria for Asian Bosporos (Strab., XI, 2, 10). However, it is not quite clear whether Panticapaeum was the principal city of all the so-called small towns of the Eastern Crimea, or whether its power and influence (administrative and economic) made the surrounding towns subordinate to be more exact.

Here is another description of a preserved burial in one of the chambers: ‘The room, which had not been plundered, had three wooden coffins, made of a wood very much resembling pine; there were adult women in two coffins (near the heads there were two copper earrings of slovenly workmanship made of wire, copper bracelets on

In the end we will briefly describe the necropolis of this town. Unfortunately, unlike the settlement, it was not so lucky in terms of archaeological study. During all the expeditions we have not found any ancient burials on Cape Zyuk. According to Dirin, more than a hundred 878

ALEXANDER ALEXANDROVITCH MASLENNIKOV: SMALL AND POORLY STUDIED TOWNS

As a matter of fact, this could be the end of the story of the small Bosporos town in Maiotis, Zenonos Chersonesos, allowing us to continue our excursion up the coast of the Kimmerian Bosporos. First, we think appropriate to describe one more settlement in the east of Crimea. Its location distinguishes it from most of the other small and little known towns and makes interesting for us. It is situated practically in the centre of the Kerch peninsula, immediately along the line of the famous Uzunlarsky earth bank (Fig. 1). The chief thing which makes this quite large (according to local standards, about 1.5 hectares) settlement remarkable is a discovery of a fragment of a marble slab more than one hundred years ago with the remains of quite an interesting inscription. It has already been mentioned that this kind of document, infrequent on the urban sites of the Bosporos, are very rare on its rural territory. There are literally only a handful of them known. The text that was restored appears (though not without uncertainty) to say that the King of Bosporos ‘…being a benefactor of the empire, built the town and named it Savromateion (?) in the year… and month Artemisy, 20th day’ (КBN, No. 970, p. 550-551. See also VDI, No. 1,1961, p. 51).

the hands, and a copper fibula near each shoulder). Judging by the skeleton size, there was a girl of 11-12 in the third coffin, and the same things. A part of the head up to the bridge of the nose was in good condition with hair … The hair had wonderfully preserved its dark chestnut colour; it is curly, 3-4 vershoks long; there was a cap or a bandage on it, of which now there are only some small pieces sticking in different places to the head … you can see a thin fabric, very much resembling a silk glossy material of a nice ashen colour. This skull (deformed, dolichocephalic)…’ (Dirin, 1896, p. 124). The bones in other coffins of the crypt were in a worse condition, but there were chippings, Volozhsky nuts, chestnuts, bay leaves, and cushions under the heads made of coarse black woolen fabric, with a similar filling. There were also glass vessels in the chamber, and there was а skeleton of a man with an iron knife, a copper buckle and a glass tumbler in a special niche covered with flagstones (Dirin, 1896, p. 125). As far as we now know, everything that Dirin found and described is quite in tune with city (and very much rural) necropoleis of the ‘Roman’ period. Most of the graves had relatively modest, although quite numerous materials, common for mass burials of Bosporos citizens and the population of chora of the given period. As in the case with the above-mentioned burial in the ash dump of the settlement, all the skeletons with deformed skulls belong to women. One should think that it is not an accident, but a consequence of certain (and very close) ethnical contacts that took place in the late Ancient period (let us recall the indications on the coins of Constantine the Great). However whether the same can be said about a much earlier period remains unclear and it is not likely to become clear judging by the materials from the necropolis of this ancient settlement.

According to a very convincing interpretation by the first person who studied the inscription, A.I. Dovatur, it refers to Savromat II (173-211 AD). This combination of place, time of reign and the name of the ruler was not accidental. It was during the reign of Savromat II that the Bosporos achieved its highest success in foreign policy for the last time in its long history – it strengthened the borders, had sound finance and, probably, quite good military and economic opportunities. However, either the necessity to consolidate progress or the increasing military danger made the King make this rare and extraordinary decision (there are almost no other similar instances in the history of Bosporos). Basically, the King acted in accordance with ancient Hellenistic traditions strengthening his own position and the position of the state by building new towns and, one should think, populating them with people dependent on him personally, probably with paramilitary cohorts. Still, before speaking about the ‘initial’ or the ‘secondary’ colonization, it is always the organizers that were the strongest community (or communities) of citizens. It is not quite clear, whether the representatives of the Spartocides dynasty acted in manner.

Apparently, the most distant section of the necropolis in Zenonos Chersonesos included a stone crypt of a queer beehive-shaped form about 1.5 km to the south-east of the cape, which was further inspected by the expedition in 1978. It was situated on top of quite a large coastal hill and was fully sunk into the ground, but has been partly destroyed by coastal erosion. However, it was possible to investigate the remains of several burials on the stonepaved floor. They contained red lacquer dishes of a very good quality, a Bosporos coin and some decorations that allowed the dating of these burials to the 1st century BC– 1st century AD (Маslennikov, Chevelyov, 1981, p. 8384).

We do not have any direct evidence. Besides, all the cities and small towns were situated on the coast, which was natural for many reasons and corresponded with Greek practice. In the Roman period, the imperial epoch in particular, such activities also took place, but discoveries on the territory of the Bosporos had not been supported by written sources before this particular find. For the sake of accuracy one should remember that some time ago an expert in the field of epigraphy of the northern Black sea coast V.P. Yailenko, based on a new interpretation of one of the Bosporos inscriptions (КBN, 1965, No. 44), proposed that the document under study

Nearby, on the southern slope of the same hill were found several stone slab graves, surrounded by ring fences of uncut stones. One of them had the remains of a cremation in an amphora-shaped urn with three handles. The other was much larger in size and as well as the corpse, among other insignificant objects, it contained a terracotta statue of Aphrodite-Anadiomena of the 4th century BC (Fig. 10, 4) (Маslennikov, 1992, p. 169).

879

ANCIENT GREEK COLONIES IN THE BLACK SEA 2 consisting of quite large uncut limestone blocks standing edgewise survived. That is why it is easy to determine the tower’s base diameter of 7.5 metres. The walls’ width (a little more than 1 metre) can be established by the hole where the stones were picked up. The height could have been 8-10 metres (Winter, 1971, p. 172, 194; Lawrence, 1979, p. 221-223). It should be stressed that round towers, both the most complex in terms of construction technique and most appropriate in terms of defence and the ability to withstand attack, are extremely rare in fortification practices of the Bosporos (and the whole northern coast of the Black sea), even in towns. As for the chora, there are no such examples known at all (Маslennikov, 1998, p. 254).

talks about the King Savromat I. He ruled between the end of the 1st century and the beginning of the 2nd century AD, won many wars and even built the town of Nikeya, the location of which cannot be exactly established. The building of Savromateion should be considered perhaps in connection with this town (Yaylenko, 1987, p. 45-47). Until the 1980s the large settlement situated not very far from the village of Novo-Nikolayevka (the previous village Pialy-Sarai or Natashin khutor was near it), had largely not been excavated, though visited by archaeologists from time to time. It occupies a large natural hill with gentle southern and eastern slopes and a quite steep northern one. In the west, as it has already been said the settlement joins and partly overlaps a more ancient earth bank. Almost from all sides it is surrounded by five ash hills (Fig. 13). Despite the relatively small height of the hill itself, it is one of the highest points of the Kerch peninsula, and in fair weather there is a view from it of vast spaces from the Azov sea in the north to Opuc mountain on the Black sea coast. There is no doubt that such an advantageous and even strategic factor could not escape observation by those who were making another defensive line on the Bosporos border.

Judging from an accidental discovery on the outside, the tower was fronted, at least partly, with rusticated blocks of light, almost white, limestone. It joined a defensive wall which stretched almost exactly to the east. It was also taken to pieces almost completely, but the position of some stones and the contours of the hole of stone picking help restore its length and width. The latter was 2.1-2.2 metres. The wall’s base was sunk into the ground to the bedrock, for which purpose a shallow trench was dug. The masonry is double-row and three-layered, probably a simple orthostat with the use of quadras, as well as large and medium-sized slabs. It is possible that a part of them was decorated with a rusticated joint. The relatively small width of the wall of such an important settlement, in our opinion, only accentuates the fact that it was a high quality construction with the most thorough selection, placement and fixture of the main blocks and slabs. This, naturally, helped achieve the necessary results no necessarily guaranteed by simply widening the wall.

The first excavations of this site, or rather one of its ash hills were attempted in 1962 and revealed the presence of materials of the 2nd–3rd centuries AD. Much more interesting data were obtained as a result of excavations in 1978-1980. Immediately to the east of the assumed border of the settlement they explored a winery in a good state of preservation. It consisted of a pressing ground (partly ruined): 2.73 х 1.1 m with two layers of cement and a cistern joining it from the east (0.5 х 0.4 х 0.63 m). The latter was partly cut into the bedrock and built over with stone slabs. It had a ‘decanting tank’ and was covered with three layers of cement. Discoveries in the cistern, covered with stones and earth, were small in number and insignificant (amphora fragments of the 2nd– 3rd centuries AD). Along the northern side of the cistern and to the south two limestone drains were found. From the east, probably later, they added two more cisterns, a bit larger, but destroyed almost to the foundations. They were covered only with one layer of cement. Thus, there can be distinguished two construction periods in the ‘life’ of this isolated facility.

26 metres to the east of the corner tower in the defensive line were found remains of another, apparently, smaller ‘intermediate’ square tower, or, most likely, a bastion. The state of preservation is very poor, but the possible dimensions were 4.3 х 4.3 metres. Then the direction of the wall does not change for 92-94 metres, comprising at least 3-4 similar towers or bastions. Finally, in the northeast it ends in the second corner tower, and the curtain wall makes an abrupt turn to the south. This tower is square: 6 х 6.1 m (Fig. 14). The walls, 1 metre wide, are laid in two-row, two-layered masonry of well cut and partly rusticated (on the base) quadras. The walls are oriented to the four compass points, their bases lie on specially scabbed bedrock. The tower stands out of the curtain wall as far as 2.2 metres. Probably, it was also surrounded by anti-battering belt made of slabs standing edgewise and crushed stone. The construction width is 0.6-1.2 metres at the base. It is notable and somewhat strange that the walls of this tower and curtains are built in an entangled fashion. The length of the curtain walls, the size of the towers and bastions and the walls’ width do not afford grounds to suppose that there were catapults (Маslennikov, 1998, p. 254-256).

Other research was conducted on the site of the settlement itself and helped to give a partial answer to the question about its chronology and site development. First of all, it was established that there were remains, although very poor, of defensive constructions (Fig. 14). Partly excavated in the north-western and north-eastern parts of the monument, they demonstrate quite a close abidance to the basic ancient principles of fortification and quite a high quality of work, for example a round corner tower in the north-west. Though the walls were taken to pieces, the so-called ‘anti-ram belt’ surrounding the base and

880

ALEXANDER ALEXANDROVITCH MASLENNIKOV: SMALL AND POORLY STUDIED TOWNS

cases, the information of the Greek and Roman writers and geographers are quite difficult to align with a map of the present day. Furthermore, the extent to which the sites of ancient times have been studied here leaves much to be desired. While very large settlements, associated to some degree of certainty with famous cities of the Bosporos, have been more or less studied and are still being studied, less important settlements have not undergone any serious excavations at all. Moreover, some of them (in some degree like some larger cities) disappeared completely or partially, primarily due to intensive coastal erosion. Nevertheless, something can be said about the so-called small towns of the Asian Bosporos.

The main gates of the settlement were, most probably, somewhere in the centre of the western wall, where there was a noticeable driveway and a passage in the line of the defensive bank and trench. It seems that it was here that the above-mentioned inscription was found. It would be quite natural to place it above the town gates. Finally, the inner layout, as far as the excavated area permits judgement, was based on the so-called linear principle. Side quarters consisting of similar dwelling houses and partly paved yards were linked to the defensive wall, but sort of ‘from the back side’, leaving street-passages up to 2 metres wide, probably leading to the towers and bastions. Judging by quite numerous discoveries, though not very varied or valuable, the houses interiors were very unvaried and simple (the same holes with ashes and stoves, chests and stalls for animals made of flat stones standing edgewise, stone pounders and millstones.) The ceramics are represented by fragments of amphoras, red-lacquer and simple red clay dishes, and modelled vessels. There are clay distaffs, pyramidal sink stones and even bone needles for mending nets. We should mention single discoveries of Bosporos coins, modelled lamps and fragments of terracotta statues; according to the existing dating, they all limit the life of the settlement to quite a short period: from the middle–last quarter of the 2nd century until about the middle–third quarter of the 3rd century AD (Маslennikov, Cheveliyov, 1983, p. 93-95; Маslennikov, 1998, p. 84-96), although there might be some corrections to be made to this.

Let’s begin in the area of the Kerch strait – the Kimmerian Bosporos and the town Korokondame (Fig. 1). According to Strabo, this settlement is situated within 130 stades from the town of Patraeus on the edge (near the entrance) of the strait. Opposite, on the coast of the Eastern Crimea there is a village called Akra, and they are separated by 70 stades from each other. The strait is frozen in winter and you can get over the ice to the opposite shore. Above (i.e. to the north) Korokondame there is a large lake with the same name. Within 10 stades from Korokondame the lake joins (flows into) the sea. One of the arms of the Antikita (Cuba) flows into this lake, forming an island, washed by the Maiotis and the river (Strab., XI, 2, 8-9). Further: ‘From Korokondame the sea route goes straight to the east’ (Strab., XI, 2,14). It is also mentioned by the anonymous author of the periplous of Euxeinos Pontos (Anon., periplous Pontos. Eux., 23). M.I. Rostovtsev was inclined to place this settlement in the vicinity of the village of Krotenko, a place of some ancient settlement where a necropolis with graves of the 6th–3rd centuries BC was excavated (Rostovtsev, 1925, p. 285; Shkorpil, 1914, p. 1-14).

Thus, if our dating is correct, which seems quite justified, the present settlement really existed (or maybe appeared) in the time of Savromat II’s reign and perished in a fire (which is also confirmed archaeologically) in the 260s– 270s AD. So far, it is difficult to say whether it was really a town, at least in terms of the local concept. Except for quite strong fortifications and the already-mentioned inscription, there seems to be nothing but the discovery of a large fragment of a tile of dense local chalkstone, the size of which suggests an important building, to confirm the given status. However, this is quite enough. Thus, perhaps in this case we are dealing with a very rare example of a small Bosporos town of almost late antiquity, and with its original name.

V.F. Gajdukevich, one of the acknowledged experts of Bosporos antiquities, thought that this name was obviously of non-Greek origin, probably Kimmerian, and he placed the settlement itself in the area of the cape Tuzla, near the so-called Yuznaуa spit, where the abovenamed archaeological objects were situated (Gajdukevich, 1949, p. 30, 196, 179, 203-204, 281, 512). Another famous specialist in the archaeology of the Bosporos, V.D. Blavatsky, appears to have hesitated on this point between Cape Tuzla and the area closer to Cape Panagiya (the village of Krotenko – ancient settlement Pyatikolodeznoye) (Blavatsky, 1954, p. 14, 20, 24). Later researchers mainly chose the localization near Cape Tuzla. The materials of previous excavations of this necropolis in the middle of the 19th century–beginning of the 20th century (including 1913 and 1916) and later on in the early 1950s, were processed and published by N.P. Sorokina (Sorokina, 1957). It appeared that it contained the burials dated to the period between the 6th century BC and the 4th century AD in graves of various construction: simple ground pits with stone covers, stone slab graves, and crypts. Part of them were under burial mounds.

Now we are going to move to the opposite side of the strait, to the Taman peninsula – the Asian part of the Bosporos. Due to the specific palaeographic character of this territory, the search and localization of ancient towns here is an even more difficult task, than in the Eastern Crimea. According to the testimonies of ancient authors, confirmed by corresponding contemporary studies, in ancient times this region presented a complex geographical and topographical structure consisting of islands, peninsulas, several arms of the Kuban river which occasionally changed their route, swamps, marches and tongues of sand. It is not always possible to determine their exact location. That is why in a number of 881

ANCIENT GREEK COLONIES IN THE BLACK SEA 2 thereupon (‘a little further’) mentions Stratokleia, Phanagoria and, almost deserted, Apatouron (Plin., NH, VI, 6). There are no other references to it in the written sources. There is no clarity among the authors about the circumstances of Stratokleia’s origin and its localization. The only, and quite old, work on this theme remains an article by A.A. Sibirsky published back in 1878.

177 graves were registered at that time. The earliest burials dating back to as early as the 6th century BC always presented the greatest interest (Sorokina, 1957, p. 5-7). Despite some barbarian, local features in the burial ceremony it is mainly, and most probably, a necropolis of a Hellenistic or assimilated population. It is about 6-8 kilometres from the nearest large town of Heromonassa, and, in N.P. Sorokina’s opinion, it belonged to Korokondame, which was not near the village Krotenko (ancient settlement Pyatikolodeznoye), but near the today’s Cape Tuzla (Sorokina, 1957, p. 48-50). However, she left the question sort of open and even admitted that the ruins of Korokondame were completely or partly washed away by the sea. Some time later some more graves of various periods were excavated in this area, but none of them dated to a very early period.

The author, on the basis of only general historical schemes, put forward a hypothesis attractive in its own way, according to which the town in question was founded by Athenians in the days of the archon-eponym Stratocles in 425 BC; or that the Athenian clergy was brought here, to a settlement existing on the territory of apoikia, conquered by them at that time (i.e. Hermonassa). The town was in a strategically and economically important place (near the estuary, or the arm of the Antikita river), opposite the more famous Nymphaeum, which was also subordinate to Athens. Later, after their defeat, the Athenians lost control of these towns. Stratokleia could have been temporarily under the reign of the King of Sind (Hecataios), and then Bosporos dynasts from the family of Spartok (Satyr I). Theoretically speaking, the town ought to be searched for somewhere in the area of one of the large firths near Bugaz or the village of Stebliyevskaya. Sibirsky associated the appearance of one of the types of a local Sind silver coin with an owl image with these events (Sibirsky, 1878, p. 121-131). As far as we know, nobody specially referred to this subject afterwards. There were no critical publications either, including from numismatists specializing in the ancient epoch (Shelov, 1949, p. 115).

One can say that during the latest decade the centre of Korokonadama research has moved into the field of underwater archaeology and other prospecting. Thus, it is considered an established fact that due to the rise of the sea level the coastal configuration has changed a lot during the past 2-2.5 thousand years, and many settlements attached to old harbours and ports simply disappeared. Meanwhile, underwater reefs in the area of Capes Tuzla and Panagiya prove the existence of the latter. Thorough investigations revealed large agglomerations of old anchors, including ancient ones, stone ballast, pieces of lead, and, what is important, numerous amphora fragments. All this quite definitely indicates that there were ancient moorages. This various material belongs to the period between the 6th century BC and the Middle Ages. The ancient anchors are mainly stone and lead plungers, and there are already dozens of them in the collection. The greatest density of such discoveries is on the territory which was probably the central area of the harbour of this town. At the present, it is about 800 metres from the shore, in the depth between 5.5 and 6.5 metres. Ships of a larger tonnage had their anchorage a little farther out, where many pieces of ancient amphoras and parts of heavy anchors were also found, in depths up to 8-9 metres (Kondrashov, 2000, p. 159-160; Taskaev, 2001; Shamray, 2003, p. 19-20). This is a partial confirmation of the ancient authors that there was an important marine trade route here and a port with a settlement, most likely Korokondame.

Now it is time to look at some archaeological and numismatic observations and discoveries. It is difficult to say, to what extent Pliny was accurate, or rather sure, in enumerating his sequence of the towns in the Asian Bosporos. If we assume that Phanagoria is the largest ancient settlement situated to the south-east of the settlement of Sennaya, and Kepoi is an object situated on the other edge of the same present-day settlement (‘Peskokariyer’), then there is no room left between them for another even small settlement. It can be assumed that the search should be concentrated either on the west, north-west of Kepoi, or on the east, south-east of Phanagoria. In the latter case, there are several known settlements of the same period between two major ancient settlements on the eastern coast of the present-day Taman Gulf (Hermonassa and Phanagoria). Among them there is one situated on the site of Primorskoye (5 km to the south-west of the ancient settlement Phanagoria), which is singular. It is the place where all sorts of ‘accidental’, but sometimes very interesting, discoveries occur from time to time.

Let’s go deeper into the strait, or, as it was during the time of the ancient Bosporos, Korokondamit Lake. It should be mentioned that its relation to the main sea area – the strait between the Asian and European parts of the Bosporos – is not quite obvious. Apparently, one should look for another settlement somewhere here notable in its own way. It is a town with quite a Greek name, Stratokleia (Fig. 1).

These are, first of all, ancient coins, mainly of the Bosporos, including some quite early and rare examples. There are some Panticapaeum silver coins of the 6th–5th centuries BC, and cyzikins and coins of the ‘Sinds’

It was mentioned only by Pliny the Elder. Having enumerated the towns Hermonassa and Kepoi, he 882

ALEXANDER ALEXANDROVITCH MASLENNIKOV: SMALL AND POORLY STUDIED TOWNS

complex very notable in all respects from the 4th–2nd centuries BC, which he excavated near the settlement ‘Za Rodiny’. As we do not have full or even relative certainty about it, we will refrain from citing any characteristics of this site, and will refer the reader to the corresponding publication of its researcher (Sokol’sky, 1976). Amongst other things it remains unclear when and why this notable sacral centre decayed and became almost deserted. By the way, Strabo does not tell us anything about it. It is most likely, but only theoretically again, that it happened after some barbarian invasions and disturbances in the Bosporos, which were very frequent at the end of the 2nd–1st centuries BC. It is not impossible that Apatouron, like other towns in the Bosporos, suffered greatly after the well-known earthquake of 63 BC.

(Rozov, 1983, p.112-113; Golenko К.V., 1977, p. 37-41). There is also information about interesting subjects such as fragments of architectural details, an inscription from the days of Mithridates 6th and Pharnaces (Vinogradov, 1991, p.15-36), and, what is more important, about the presence in this place of quite thick and rich occupation layers, although very much destroyed as a result of economic activity and coastal erosion. Next to this place there is also a coulee of an ancient river, or rather an arm of the Kuban River. It is noteworthy that the things from here belong to the ‘pre-Roman’ period in general (Abramov, Paromov, 1993, p. 55). This does not contradict Pliny’s words, since he must have obtained information about this region from sources of the Hellenistic era, particularly Eratosthenes. All that remains is to hope that some day excavations in ‘Primorskoye’ will commence and we will get proof of our assumptions.

Kimmerion and Akhilleion are most likely to be a part of the small towns of the Asian Bosporos. They were already described in the first volume of the present edition. There are remains of the last settlement but one deserves attention – ancient Tyrambe. This apparently non-Greek name was first mentioned by Strabo, who wrote: ‘There are 600 stades from small Rombit to Tyrambe and the Antikita river; then 120 stades to the village of Kimmerian …’ (Strab., XI, 2, 4). Tyrambe on the shore of Maiotis is also mentioned by Ptolemy (Ptol., V, 8, 4; VIII, 18, 6). There were a lot of attempts to locate this settlement (see the full summary of opinions: Sudarev, 1998, p. 238). For quite a long time V.D. Blavatsky’s opinion was favoured, who thought that this town was the settlement immediately to the west of present-day Peresypsky girl – a coulee of the KubanAntikita. He studied this settlement, very much ruined by coastal erosion, and the nearest necropolis in 1940 and 1951. These excavations resulted in finds of archaeological material from the 5th and 6th centuries BC (Blavatsky V.D., 1954, p.23).

Coming back to Pliny’s text we will mention one more interesting settlement, which, to tell the truth, was really a local sacral place or even one for the whole Bosporos rather than a town. We mean a certain Apatouron, which was nearly fully abandoned or deserted (Plin., NH, IV, 18). It is not clear how old this data is, i.e. should it be dated to the 1st century AD or a much earlier period? Strabo places this settlement somewhere near Hermonassa (Strab., XI, 2, 10), Pliny next to Phanagoria and before Kimmerion, and Claudius Ptolemaeus places it on the coast of Maiotis, to the east of the village of Akhilleion (Ptol., VI, 8, 5). Stephan Byzantine also mentions this name (Steph. Byz.). All these suggest, as does the information of Hecataios from Miletus, that this sanctuary (?) was in Phanagoria and there was a Gulf of Apatouron in ‘Asia’ (Hecat., fr. 165) with which this sacral place and the settlement were associated in some way, but are difficult to correlate with each other. The versions, including the most recent ones, of Apatouron’s location are questionable (Rostovtsev, 1925, p. 280; Gajdukevich, 1949, p. 196-197, 201, 208, 211214, 432, 513, 570; Rozanova, 1951, p. 211-213; Blavatsky, 1954, p.24; Sokolsky, 1976, p.115-116; Marchenko, 1974, p.31; Yaylenko, 1977, p.22; Tahtas’ev, 1986, p.144-145; Zubarev, 1999, p.134-136). The lattermost, by the way, places Apatouron on the site of the above-mentioned Primorsky. Theoretically speaking, we think that V.D. Blavatsky’s opinion is the most accurate, who thought that Apatouron was a settlement on the shore of the Tsukursky firth to the west of the village of Vyshestebliyevskaya, since it was there in a burial hill in the first half of the 19th century that the famous votive on a double marble herm of the 4th century BC mentioning Aphrodite Urania, the mistress of Apatouron, was found (IOSPE, II, No. 343 = КBN, 1965, No. 1111; Blavatsky, 1954, p. 24). This text sort of cements the famous lengthy commentary of Strabo dedicated to this particular religious personage (Strab., XI, 2, 10).

Later some other variants of Tyrambe’s location were put forward. For example, V.G. Zubarev places it near the present-day town of Temryuk (Zubarev, 1999, p. 125) and N.I. Sudarev near the village of Golubitskaya, coming back to the earliest versions of its location (Sudarev, 1998, p. 245). At the present, his point of view appears to be the most reasonable. However, paying tribute to historiographic tradition, and what is more important, to quite illustrative archaeological material obtained after several seasons of excavations on the site of the Peresypskoye settlement and the necropolis at the end of the 1950s and the 1960s (Korovina А.К., 1968, p.54-84; idem., 1987, p. 3-70), we will give a brief description of this particular site. The preserved part of the settlement is relatively small (about 0.3 ha). Judging from the earliest discoveries, the settlement appeared here at the turn of the 6th–5th centuries BC, most probably as a result of the ‘secondary’ colonization’, with the centre in Phanagoria (Korovina А.К., 1968, p. 54-57). The necropolis was situated to the west of it and is also very much ruined by coastal erosion.

As for archaeology, it would be very tempting, following N.I. Sokolsky, to associate with Apatouron a sacral 883

ANCIENT GREEK COLONIES IN THE BLACK SEA 2 The excavated area on the site of the settlement is small, only 150 square metres. However the thickness of the layers is quite considerable: up to 3.9 metres. There are five chronological periods (layers) of construction: from the turn of the 6th–5th centuries BC to the 3rd century AD. The small scope of the work, unfortunately, does not say much about this interesting object. Nevertheless, we will give some results. The layer of the 6th–5th centuries BC contained almost no construction remains, except three holes, and the number of discoveries – fragments of various ceramics – is not large. The second layer, separated from the first by a streak of fire, contained a section of tiled paving and a lot of ceramic fragments of the end of the 5th–4th centuries BC. The majority was dishes, probably of Phanagorian production and quite a lot of modelled vessels, close to Kuban forms and types.

rite leads to a suggestion that even in early times there were representatives of local barbarian tribes among the inhabitants of this settlement.

The third layer contained stone pediments of several adobe walls and the remains of paving (including sections of the streets) of marine rubble, and also a section of a gutter. Amphora and ceramic materials relate this layer to the end of the 4th–3rd centuries BC. There are amphora types, mostly from Sinope and Rhodes, and several Bosporos coins. The most interesting architectural object of the next layer is the remains of a defensive construction including a wall laid of adobe bricks and a trench preceding it. This layer and the corresponding discoveries, ceramic objects, mainly belong to the 1st century BC–1st century AD, and are connected, apparently, with the construction of some of the fortresses on the Fantalovsky peninsula. This layer and particularly the upper-most, fifth layer are seriously damaged by later holes. It did not contain construction remains, and there were not many fragments of amphoras and dishes in it (2nd–3rd centuries AD mainly). Judging by all these discoveries, the prime period of this settlement was between the 4th–3rd centuries BC. In ‘Roman’ times even the quality of modelled ceramics had become worse, to say nothing of a noticeable reduction of imports.

Apparently, there were some towns somewhere on the shores of Maiotis – Antissa and Pirra – which, according to Pliny the Elder, were swallowed by the sea (Plin., NH, II, 94, 206). Indeed, the Azov coast, in some parts of the Taman peninsula, is prone to erosion, especially intensive during the periods of earthquake activity. Who knows, if Pliny’s information is true (since towns with such names are known on the coast of Asia Minor, where they could be also ruined, and Pliny could have been confused), and could this disaster have happened in 63 BC? Certainly, they could be localized in any point on the coast, but the area of the Bosporos is preferable. Besides, according to some linguistic studies, the name Antissa means ‘near’ (Troubachov, 1977, p. 19). Near what? The strait, other towns or a large centre? Since all these towns have disappeared we are unlikely ever to.

In all probability, this settlement (like, however, the other, more likely to be Tyrambe) was one of the most important agricultural centres in the area and played a certain role in sea trade, as well as being part of a certain integrated defence system in this part of the Asian Bosporos. As for the settlement near Golubitskaya, there have never been systematic or large-scale excavations. Periodic collections of material from underground and insignificant prospecting drillings tell us only that it is quite large and complex in terms of stratigraphy, and existed for a long time at least between the 5th century BC and the 3rd century AD.

Different ancient authors mention a few more names of settlements that were definitely in the Asian Bosporos. It is not clear whether they were proper cities, or rather towns or barbarian settlements, even if quite large and important. Their names are quite obviously of non-Greek origin. They are Horgaza, Aborake, Baty, Torik and Labris or Labrit. Baty and Torik will be mentioned separately in this edition. Very little can be said so far about the others. The first two names without any commentary are mentioned by Diodorus Siculus (Diod., XX, 24) and Strabo respectively (Strab., XI, 2, 10). We do not know anything definite about their location, except that Horgaza might have been situated on a large river (Kuban?), and Aborake seemed to be on the coast of the sea or a gulf. Obviously, there has been a keen interest in the name of the last settlement in the list.

This site is known more by the materials from the excavations of the necropolis, where, in the area of about 1400 square metres, 163 graves dating between the end of the 6th century BC and the 3rd century AD were studied. Very few burials of the earliest period are characterized by the staple eastern or western orientation of corpses in earth graves and the frequent presence of weapons. The other finds are local and imported ceramics and small inexpensive bronze decorations. The largest number of burials belongs to a chronological period between the 4th–1st centuries BC. There are also the cremated remains оf children in amphoras and large pots. From the 3rd century BC they started making crypts, and from the next century graves with grottos, the number of which grew significantly at the turn of the millennium. Among the things found in the graves are many cheap decorations and beads. There are terracotta statues of Phanagorian production, some imported goods and coins. To the last period of the settlement just a few graves belong with very modest assortment of finds. Analysis of the burial

The point is that, owing to good luck, experts in antiquity found an extremely complex and interesting epigraphic monument, which has caused perpetual arguments and a fair amount of attention to the place of its discovery. It is the so-called Sebibratnoye settlement. This settlement, one of the largest ones, is situated near the western boundary of the village of Varennikovskaya, in the middle course of the Kuban river, about 35 884

ALEXANDER ALEXANDROVITCH MASLENNIKOV: SMALL AND POORLY STUDIED TOWNS

including fragments of black- and red-figured dishes of black lacquer, terracottas, Bosporos coins and roof tiles. This building existed till the middle of the 1st century AD, while the settlement itself existed until the 3rd century AD, although its appearance had become signally barbarian.

kilometres to the north-east of present-day Anapa, i.e. ancient Gorgippia. It should be mentioned that it has been known and partly studied since the second half of the 19th century. At that time, were found several large burial hills in the neighbourhood with many interesting objects dated to the 5th–4th centuries BC (Rostovtsev, 1925, p. 388-392). They are some of the richest and well-known Greek-barbarian burials (according to the finds) in the neighbourhood of the Kimmerian Bosporos, which for a long time were thought to belong to the Kings of Sind. Attention was paid to their closeness to other well-known burials of ‘barbarian’ type in a burial hill in one of the towns of European Bosporos – Nymphaeum. A large number of beautiful things from the burial hills in Semibratnevo became the theme of separate studies. Let us return to the settlement. It was studied more than once in the 1920s–1930s, with excavations immediately before the Great Patriotic War (1941-45) and right after it (Anfimov, 1941, p. 258-267; idem., 1953, p.110-131; АGSP, 1984, p. 87-88).

In 1985 a small limestone pedestal for a small statue was found on the outskirts of the settlement. The pedestal had an inscription. It probably presented a poetic dedication (votive). It is difficult to translate and the translation caused (and is still causing) a lot of disputes. According to the first version, proposed by T.V. Blavatskaya, the inscription says that the ruler of Bosporos Leukon (the King and the first archon of their dynasty of Spartocides – Leukon I, who ruled in 389-349 BC) erected (a monument?) to Phoebus Apollo ex voto in Labrit. It was followed by a recommendation that he made after the victory over Theodosia to the ruler of the town of Labrit (Labris?) (the Labrit population) to a certain Oktamasad about his relations with the Sind King, who was obviously their common enemy (Blavatskaya, 1993, p.34-47). After a short period of time Vinogradov offered his own version of this text, which said that Leukon erected a statue to Apollo Phoebus, as the ruler of the town of Labrit. When King of Bosporos and Theodosia, he (Leukon) won a battle and drove out of the land of Sinds the son of the Sind king Hecataios-Oktamasad, who had taken power from his father and attacked this town (Vinogradov, 2002, p. 3-22). As for the name itself of the town, Vinogradov thought it could be possible to associate it with Aborake, mentioned by Strabo, which was not on the coast (Vinogradov, 2003, p. 17).

It has been established that here, sometime at the turn of the 6th–5th centuries BC, probably at the site of a small native settlement, a very unusual (for such an early time and a remote territory) settlement appeared with some external characteristics that give us reason to call it a town. First of all, there was a powerful defensive wall surrounding the settlement, built after a heavy fire in the first quarter of the 4th century BC in full conformity with ancient fortification requirements of that period. It was 2.65 metres thick and in some sections even more. It is made up of quite large chalky stones and blocks, and is very thoroughly built, which is not characteristic at all for local barbarian tradition. Every 15-18 metres there were square, at least three-storey high towers 3.25 metres wide, but, naturally, with thinner walls. Each of them had stone staircases built along the walls (Fig. 15). Such complex constructions could be constructed and defended only by a professional ancient architect and military commander (Tolstikov, 1986, p. 170-171, fig.195).

Then S.R. Tokhtasiyev, having considered the arguments of all specialists and the written source, published his translation, it being very close to the one given above. According to it, Leukon, the son of Satyr erected a statue to Phoebus Apollo ex voto in Labrit (?), the ruler of the town of Labryt, when he, himself was the ruler of Bosporos and Theodosia and having ousted by force from the land of Sinds the son of Sinds King Hecataios, Oktamsad, who attacked this town and took the power from his father (Tohtas’ev, 1998, p. 287-301). Finally, V.P. Yaylenko joined this dispute, accepting Tokhtasiyev’s translation and making some corrections in the text, suggested by the first publisher (Yaylenko, 2004). Of course, each of the authors could not refrain from more or less lengthy historical commentaries, putting forward their own interpretation of events and even clarifying and disputing the name of the settlement in question (Labrit, Labris?). It should be mentioned that in this inscription the settlement is mentioned particularly as ‘polis’, which, with all natural reservations, means a great deal.

However, at the end of the 4th or the beginning of the 5th century BC the settlement (about the appearance, layout and development of which we have practically no information) was partly ruined. The old fortifications became dilapidated and were replaced by new ones made of massive stone blocks of crude work. There are special substructures of compacted clay under the wall foundations. The wall thickness was only 1.9 metres now. Probably, at the same time they constructed quite a large rectangular building in the north-eastern part of the settlement with the dimensions 22.3 x 19.5 metres, consisting of five rooms. The external walls were wide and could have supported a second floor. Inside there was a small yard with a well. The entrance was from the south. This clearly was a typical building and emphasized the high status of the settlement. The same can be said about the discoveries made here and in other parts of the settlement. They are numerous and various and, besides fragments of amphoras, simple and modelled ceramics,

Thus, the inscription caused much interest both for part of the history of the Bosporos in the 4th century BC and in the settlement itself. After a pause, archaeologists resumed studying the site. It turned out that the site 885

ANCIENT GREEK COLONIES IN THE BLACK SEA 2 outpost in the remote part of the half-barbarian territory. It subsequently served as an outpost, having survived several disasters and reconstructions.

topography was very complex. According to interpretations of aerial photographs it looks as if it consisted of two parts partly overlapping each other: one oval and one square, which probably reflects two chronological stages and different period planning systems. The first (northern) part had the abovementioned fortifications of the 4th century BC. In the second half of the 5th century they were preceded by other fortifications, destroyed, as was mentioned, as a result of a fire at the beginning of the 4th century. Traces of an ancient road were found, leading from this early town in the direction of the Bosporos town Gorgippia, and remains of probable estates of the 5th–3rd centuries BC in the neighbourhood. It most likely that the basis of the planning of this ‘oval’ city was the corresponding old Greek practice, which presupposed the existence of one or several public squares and dwelling quarters adjoining them. However, at the same time, there were no axial plans in the town’s make-up. The southern section of the town, which appeared much later (with dimensions of 350 х 150 metres), apparently, already had a regular plan, which was more in accordance with Roman traditions. It is very probable that these alterations took place at the turn of the 1st–2nd centuries AD, after another destruction of this settlement. In fact, now it was a large citadel, with other buildings of the settlement around it (Gorlov, Lopanov, 1999, p. 170-175).

ABBREVIATIONS AIB

Археология и история Боспора (Arhaeologiya i istoriya Bospora - The archaeology and history of ancient Bosporos ) Kerch. BS Боспорский сборник (Bosporsky sbornik - Bosporos collection) Moscow. DB Древности Боспора (Drevnosty Bospora – Bosporos antiquities) Moscow. IKAM История и культура античного мира (Istoriya i koul’toura antichnogo mira- The history and culture of the ancient world). Moscow. IAK Известия Императорской археологической комиссии (Izvestiya Imperatorskoy arheologicheskoy komissii – News of the Imperial archaeological committee) St.-Petersburg. KBN Корпус боспорских надписей (Korpous Bosporskih nadpisey - The body of Bosporos inscriptions) Moscow-Leningrad. KSIIMK Краткие сообщения Института Истории Материальных культур (Kratkiye soobzheniya Institouta Istorii Material’noy koul’toury- Brief reports of the Institute of Material Cultures) Moscow. KSIA Краткие сообщения Института Археологии (Kratkiye soobzheniya Institouta arhaeologii-Brief reports of the Institute of Archaeology) Moscow. Материалы и исследования по археологии СССР MIA (Materialy I issledovaniya po archaeologii SSSR – Materials and research of the archaeology in the USSR) Moscow. OAK Отчёты Императорской археологической комиссии (Otchiyoty Imperatorskoy arhaeologicheskoy komissii- Reports of the Imperial archaeological committee) St.-Petersburg. OAIB Очерки археологии и истории Боспора (Ocherky arheologii i istorii Bospora – Outline of Bosporos archaeology and history) Moscow. PIFK Проблемы истории, филологии культуры (Problemy istorii, fililogii , koul’toury- Problems of History, Philology, Culture) Moscow-Magnitogorsk. RA Российская Археология (Rossiyskaya arhaeologiya – Russian archaeology) Moscow. SA Советская Археология (Sovetskaya Arhaeologiya – Soviet archaeology) Moscow. SGMII Сообщения Государственного Музея изобразительных искусств им А.С. Пушкина ( Soobzheniya Gosoudarstvennogo Mouzeya izobrazitel’nyh iskousstv - Reports of A.S. Pushkin State Fine Arts Museum) Moscow. TSP Терракоты Северного Причерноморья (Terrakoty Severnogo Prichernomoriya- Terracotta of Northen Black sea coast) Moscow. VDI Вестник Древней Истории (Vestnik Drevney Istorii – Bulletin of the ancient history) Moscow. VYa Вопросы языкознания (Voprosy Yazikiznaniya Linguistics Issues) Moscow. ZOOI Zаписки Императорского Одесского общества истории и древностей (Zapisky odesskogo Imperatorskogo obzhestva istorii i drevnosteyProceedings of the Impaerial Society of history and antiquities) Odessa.

Archaeological excavations of the settlement have started quite recently and have already provided some interesting material. According to the latest research, the dating of the main stages of the history of this settlement now look different. For instance, if archaeologists’ opinions about the earliest period of its life (at the end of the 6th century–first quarter of the 5th century BC) remain the same, then the fortifications of the first construction period were associated with the second quarter of the 5th century BC, and the second construction period began at the beginning of the 3rd century BC. Between these two periods the town experienced at least two great disturbances accompanied by destructions and fires. There are remains left of a round corner tower about 5 metres in diameter of the defensive constructions of the Hellenistic period. It may be possible that these structures and the whole settlement existed till the middle of the second half of the 1st century BC. Later on life practically came to a standstill here and there was no significant settlement here in the 1st–3rd centuries AD (Gorontcharovsky, 2004, p. 56-59). Still the information about the Semibratskoye settlement is not enough for a more accurate and detailed characterization of this unusual site with a complicated and contradictory history. It is not impossible that initially it had been the capital of some local ethnos, allied to the Greeks of the Bosporos. That was the reason it was fortified and, maybe, partly populated with Greeks that were natives of the Kimmerian Bosporos. Then, after a full submission of the Low and Middle regions of Kuban to the rulers of the Bosporos, it became their 886

ALEXANDER ALEXANDROVITCH MASLENNIKOV: SMALL AND POORLY STUDIED TOWNS

-------------------., 1959 – Гайдукевич В.Ф., Некрополи некоторых боспорских городов (Nekropoly nekotorih bosporskih gorodov – Necropoleis of some Bosporos towns) // MIA, 69. Gavritouhin I. O., 2003 – Гавритухин И.О., Хронология «среднеаварского» периода (Hronologiya «sredneavarskogo» perioda – Chronology of ‘midbarbarian’ period)// Stepi Evrazii v aepohou srednevekov’ya. Troudy po arhaeologii. V.2. Donetsk. Golenko K. V., 1977 – Голенко В.К., Кизикский статер, найденный на Таманском полуострове (Kizikskiy stater, naydenniy na Tamanskom polouostrove – Kiziksky stater found on the Taman peninsula)//Istoriya i koultoura antichnogo mira. M. Gorlov Yu. V., Lopanov Yu. A., 1999 – Горлов Ю.В., Лопанов Ю.А., Опыт предварительной дешифровки аэрофотоснимков Семибратнего городища (Opit predvaritel’noy deshifrovki aerofotosnimkov Semibratnego gorodizha – Experience of preliminary deciphering aerial photos of Semibtratnevo settlement // PIFK , No.VIII. Gorontcharovsry V. A., 2004 – Горончаровский В.А., Семибратнего городища Проблемы хронологии (Problemy khronologii Semibratnego gorodizha – Problems of chronology of Semobratnevo settlement) // Bosporsky Fenomen, Spb. Gorbounova K. S., 1983 – Горбунова К.С., Чёрнофигурные аттические вазы в Эрмитаже (Tchornofigourniye atticheskiye vazy v Aermitazhe – Black-figured Attic vases in the Hermitage) L. Grinevitch K., 1927 – Гриневич К., Археологические разведки в северо-восточной части Керченского полуострова (Arheologicheskiye razvedki v sevsrovostochnoy tchasty Kerchenskogo polouostrova – Archaeological reconnaisance in the north-east of the Kerch peninsula)// ITOIAE, No.1. Kastanayan E. G., 1958 – Кастанаян Е. Г., Археологическая разведка на городище Парфений (Arheologicheskaya razvedka na gorodizhe Parfeniy – Archaeological reconnaissance on the territory of ancient settlement Parthenion) // МIA, 85. Katushin E. A., 1998 – Катюшин Е.А., Феодосия, Кафа, Кефе (Theodosia, Kaffa, Kefe - Theodosia, Kafa, Kefe) Theodosia. Korovina A. K., 1968 – Коровина А.К., Тирамба (городище и некрополь) итог археологических работ экспедиции государственного музея изобразительных искусств им. А.С. Пушкина (Tyrambe (gorodizhe I nekropol’) itog arheologicheskih rabot aexpeditsii gosoudarstvennogo mouzeya izobrazitel’nyh iskousstv im A.S. Poushkina – Tyrambe (the settlement and the necropolis) the results of archaeological expedition of A.S. Puskin Fine Arts museum) // SGMII,. No. IV. -----------------., 1987 – Коровина А.К., Раскопки некрополя Тирамбы(1966-1970) (Raskopky nekropoliya Tiramby – Excavations of the necropolis in Tyrambe) // SGMII, No.8. Krouglikova I. N., 1958 – Кругликова И.Т., Новые данные об исторической географии Крымского побережья Азовского моря (Noviye danniye ob istoricheskoy geografii krymskogo poberezh’ya Azjvskogo moriya – New data about historical geography of the Crimean coast of the Azov sea) // SA., No.28. -----------------., 1966 – Кругликова И.Т., Боспор в позднеантичное время (Bospor v pozdneantichnoye vremiya – Bosporos in the late ancient time)M.

BIBLIOGRAPHY Abramov A. P., Paromov Ya. M., 1993 - Абрамов А.П., Паромов Я.М., Раннеантичные поселения Таманского полуострова (Ranneantichnie poseleniya Tamanskogo polouostrova – Early ancient settlements of the Taman peminsula) // BS, 2. Anfimov N. V., 1941 – Анфимов Н. В., Новые данные к истории Азиатского Боспора (Novie Dannie k istorii Aziatskogo Bospora – New data about the history of the Asian Bosporos) // SA, v.VII. ----------, 1953 - Анфимов Н. В., Исследования Семибратнего городища (Issledovaniya Semibratnego gorodizha – Studies of Semibratnego settlement) // KSIIMK, 51. Arsenieva T. M., 1970 – Арсеньева Т.М., Могильник у деревни Ново-Отрадное (Mogilnik ou derevni NovoOtradnoye – Burial site near the village of NovoOtradnoye) // MIA, 155. Blavatsky V. D., 1954 – Блаватский В, Д., Архаический Боспор (Arkhaitchesky Bospor – Archaic Bosporos) // MIA, No. 33. Blavatskaya T. V., Rozov V. N., 1985 – Блаватская Т.В., Розов В.Н., Граффито зенонитов (Graffito zenonitov – The Zenonites grafitto) // Aepigrafitcheskiye pamiatniki drevney Maloy Azii i antichnogo Severnogo I Zapadnogo Pritchernomoriya kak istoritcheskiy i lingvisticheskiy istochnik. M. Blavatskaya T.V., 1993 – Блаватская Т.В., Посвящение Левкона I (Posvyazheniye Leukona I – Leukon I votive) // RA, 2. Blaramberg I., 1848 – Бларамберг И., Замечания на некоторые места древней географии Таври (Zametchaniya na nekotoriye mesta drevney geografii Tavrii – Remarks on some places of the ancient geography of Taurida) // ZOOID, No.IV. Brashinsky I. B., 1980 – Брашинский И.Б., Греческий керамический импорт на Нижнем Дону (Gretchesky keramitcheskiy import na Nizhnem Donou – Import of Greek ceramics to the region of the low Don) L. Dirin A . A., 1896 –Дирин А.А., Мыс Зюк и сделанные на нём археологические находки (Mys Zyuk I sdelannye na niom arheologicheskiye nahodki - Cape Zyuk and archaeological discoveries made here) // ZOOID, No.19. Du Broux P., 1858 – Дюбрюкс П., Описание развалин и следов древних городов и укреплений некогда существовавших на европейском берегу Боспора Киммерийского от входа в пролив, близ Еникальского маяка до горы Опук включительно при Чёрном море (Opisaniye razvalin I sledov drevnih gorodov i oukrepleniy nekogda souzhestvovavshih na evropeyskom beregou Bospora Kimmeriyskogo ot vhoda v proliv, bliz Enikal’skogo mayaka do gory Opouk vklutchitel’no pri Tchornom more – Descriptions of ruins, traces of ancient towns and fortifications, which existed on the European coast of Kimmerian Bosporos from the strait entrance, near Enikalsky beacon, to Mountain Opuk near the Black sea) // ZOOID, IV. Fedoseev N. F., 1999 – Федосеев Н.Ф., Переправы через Боспор Киммерийский (Perepravy cherez Bospor Kimmeriysky – Ferries across Kimmerian Bosporos) // AIB, No.3. Кerch. Gajdukevich V.F., 1949 – Гайдукевич В.Ф., Боспорское царство (Bosporskoye tzarstvo – The Kingdom of Bosporos) M-L.

887

ANCIENT GREEK COLONIES IN THE BLACK SEA 2 -----------------., 1975 – Кругликова И.Т., Сельское хозяйство Боспора (Sel’skoye hoziaystvo Bospora – Agriculture in Bosporos ) M. Koulakovsky Yu., 1894 – Кулаковский Ю., Отчёты Императорской археологической комиссии (Otchoty Imperatorskoy arheologicheskoy Komissii – Reports of the Imperial archaeological committee) // OAK. Koshelenko G.A., Кuznetsov V.D., 1992 – Кошеленко Г.А., Кузнецов В.Д., Греческая колонизация Боспора (Grecheskaya kolonizatsiya Bospora - Greek colonization of Bosporos) // OAIB. Kondrashov A. V., 2000 – Кондрашов А.В., Карабельная стоянка у мыса Тузла в Керченском проливе (Karabel’naya stoyanka v Kerchenskom prolive – Moorage near cape Tuzla in Kerch strait) // Tamanskaya starina. No.3, Spb. Lantsov S. B., 1999 – Ланцов С.Б., Краткие сведения о боспорской крепости Кутлаке – Афинеоне (?) ПсевдоАрриана (Kratkiye svedeniya o bosporskoy kreposty Koutlake-Afineone(?)Psevdo-Arrian – Brief information about Bosporos fortress Kutlak-Aphineon (?) PseudoArrian) // VDI, No.1. Latyshev V. V., 1909 – Латышев В.В., Заметки по древней географии северного и восточного побережья Чёрного моря (Zametky po drevney geografii severnogo i vostochnogo poberezh’ya Tchornogo moriya – Notes on ancient geography of northern and eastern coast of the Black sea) // PONTIKA, Spb. Loseva N. M., 1962 – Лосева Н.М., Аттическая краснофигурная керамика Пантикапея (Atticheskaya krasnofigournaya keramika Panticapaeuma – Attic redfigured ceramics of Panticapaeum) // MIА, 103. Marchenko I. D., 1974 – Марченко И.Д., Терракоты из святилища на Майской горе (Terrakoty iz sviyatilizha na Mayskoy gore – Terracotta from the sanctuary on mountain Maiskaya) // TSP, No. 3. Maslennikov A. A., 1979 – Масленников А.А., О локализации некоторых городов европейского Боспора первых веков н.э.(O lokalizatsii nekotoryh gorodov evropeyskogo Bospora pervyh vekov n.e. – About localization of some towns of European Bosporos in the first centuries A.D.) // Voprosy istochnikovedeniya i istoriografii istorii dosovetskogo perioda. М. ---------------, 1985 – Масленников А.А., Новые данные о боспорских землепашцах (Novye dannye o bosporskih zemlepashtsah – New information about ploughmen in Bosporos) // Aepigraficheskiye pamiyatniki drevney Maloy Azii i antichnogo Severnogo i Zapadnogo Prichernomoriy kak istoricheskiy i lingvisticheskiy istochnik. М. -------------- , 1987 – Масленников А.А., Граффити с мыса Зюк (Graffiti s mysa Zouk – Graffito from cape Zyuk ) // KSIА ,No. 191. --------------, 1992 – Масленников А.А., Зенонов Херсонесгородок на Меотиде (Zenonov Hersones – gorodok na Meotide – Zenonov-Chersonesos – a town on the coast of Maiotis) // OAIB. --------------, 1997 – Масленников А.А., Семейные склепы сельского населения позднеантичного Боспора (Semeynye sklepy sel’skogo naseleniya pozdneantichnogo Bospora – Family crypts of the rural population of Bosporos in the late ancient period) M. ---------------, 1997a – Масленников А.А., Сельский теменос (?) в Восточном Крыму (Sel’skiy temenos v Vostochnom Krymou – Rural temenos in the Eastern Crimea) // VDI, No.3.

---------------, 1998 – Масленников А.А.,, Эллинская хора на краю Ойкумены (Aellinskaya hora na krayu Oykoumeny – Hellenic chora on the outskirts of oecumene) M. --------------, 1998a – Масленников А.А., Монетные находки и денежное обращение в Крымском Приазовье в античную эпоху (Monetnye nahodky i denezhnoye obrascheniye v Krymskom Priazovie v antichnouu aepohou – Discoveries of coins and money circulation on the Azov sea coast of the Crimea in the late ancient period) // DB, No.1. Maslennikov A.A., Cheveliyov O. D., 1981 – Масленников А.А., Чевелёв О.Д., Новые памятники античного времени на северном побережье Керченского полуострова (Noviye pamiyatniki antichnogo vremeny na severnom poberezhie Kerchenskogo polouostrova – New monuments of the ancient time on the northern coast of the Kerch peninsula) // KSIA, No.168. --------------, 1983 – Масленников А.А., Чевелёв О.Д., Охранные раскопки на Ново-Николаевском городище (Ohrannye raskopky na Novo-Nikolaevskom gorodizhe – Protective excavations on the territory of NovoNikolayevskoye settlement) / /KSIА, No. 178 --------------, 1985 – Масленников А.А., Чевелёв О.Д., Разведочные раскопки на городище Генеральскоезападное (Razvedochnye raskopki na gorodizhe General’skoye-Zapadnoye – Reconnaisance excavations on the territory of General’skoye-Zapadnoye settlement) // КSIA,. No.182. Maslennikov A. A., Rozov V.N., 1990 – Масленников А.А., Розов В.Н., Расписная керамика с мыса Зюк (Raspisnaya keramika s mysa Zuk – Painted ceramics from cape Zyuk) // KSIA, No.197. Maslennikov A.A., Emets I.A., 1992 – Масленников А.А., религиозных Емец И.А., Новые данные о представлениях сельского населения античного Боспора (Noviye danniye o religioznyh predstavleniyah sel’skogo naseleniya antichnogo Bospora – New data about religious beliefs of the rural population in ancient Bosporos) // RA, No.4. Maslennikov A. A., Saprykin S. Yu., 1999 – Масленников А.А.. сапрыкин С.Ю., Греческие надписи с мыса Зюк (Gretcheskiye nadpisi s mysa Zuk – Greek inscriptions from cape Zyuk) // DB, No. 2. Moleva N. V., 2002 – Молева Н.В., Археологические исследования на мысе Такиль в Восточном Крыму, святилище в скалах (Arheologicheskiye issledovaniya na myse Takil’ v Vostochnom Krymou, sviyatilizhe v skalah – Archaeological studies on cape Takil’ in the Eastern Crimea, a sacral place in the rocks) // Ocherky sacral’noy zhizni Bospora. Nizhniy Novgorod. Monahov S. Yu., 2003 – Монахов С.Ю., Греческие амфоры в Причерноморье (Grecheskiye amfory v Prichernomor’e – Greek amphoras on the territories of the Black sea coast) M. Onayko N. A., 1980 – Онайко Н.А., Apхаический Торик (Arhaicheskiy Torik – Archaic Torik) M. Rostovtsev M .I., 1925 – Ростовцев М.И., Скифия и Боспор (Skyfiya i Bospor – Scythia and Bosporos) P. Rozov V. N., 1983 – Розов В.Н., Боспорские монеты VI-V вв. до н.э. из случайных находок на Таманском полуострове (1975-1980гг) (Bosporskiye monety VI-V vv. do n.e. iz slouchaynyh nahodok na Tamanskom polouostrove (1975-1980) – Bosporos coins of the VI-V centuries B.C. from the accidental discoveries on the Taman peninsula (1975-1980)) // SA. No.2. Rouban V. V., 1983 – Рубан В.В., Керамика Ягорлыцкого поселения из собраний Херсонского музея (Keramika

888

ALEXANDER ALEXANDROVITCH MASLENNIKOV: SMALL AND POORLY STUDIED TOWNS

Yagorlytskogo poseleniya iz sobraniya Hersonskogo mouzeya - Ceramics of Yagorlytskoye settlement from the collection of Kherson museum) // SA, No.1. Sibirsky A. A., 1878 – Сибирский А.А., Боспорский город Стратоклея и новая монета синдов (Bosporsky gorod Stratokleia i novaya moneta cindov - Stratokleia of Bosporos and the new coin of the Sinds) // Troudy arheologicheskogo s’ezda. No. 1. Kiev. Sidorova N. A., 1962 – Сидорова Н.А., Aрхаическая керамика из Пантикапея (Arhaicheskaya keramika iz Panticapaeuma – Archaic ceramics from Panticapaeum) // MIA, 103. Sokol’sky N. I., 1976 – Сокольский Н.И., Таманский Толос и резиденция Хрисалиска (Tamansky Tolos I rezidentsiya Hrisaliska – Taman Tolos and Khrisalisk residence) M. Sorokina N. P., 1957 – Сорокина Н.П., Тузлинский некрополь (Touzlinsky nekropol’ – Tuzla necropolis) M Soudarev N. I., 1998 – Сударев Н.И., К вопросу о Тирамбе Страбона и Птолемея (K voprosou o Tyrambe Strabona i Ptolemeya To the study of Tyrambe by Strabon and Ptolemaeus) // DB, No.1. Shamray A. N., 2003 – Шамрай А.Н., Гавань и якорная стоянка Корокондамы (Gavan’ i yakornaya stoyanka Korokondamy – The harbour and the anchorage of Korokondame) // Mezhdounarodniye otnosheniya v basseyne Tchiornogo moray v drevnosti i sredniye veka. Rostov na Donou. Shelov D. B., 1949 – Шеллов Д.Б., Монеты синдов (Monety sindov - Coins of the Sinds) // KSIIMK, No. 30. Shestakov S. A., 1999 – Шестаков С.А., К вопросу о локализации боспорского города Гермисия (K voprosou o lokalizatsii bosporskogo goroda Germisiya – To the study of localization of Bosporos town Hermesion) // AIВ, No. 3. Kerch. ----------------, 2000 – Шестаков С.А., Дополнительные данные для локализации боспорского города Гермисия (Dopolnitel'nye danniye dlya lokalizatsii bosporskogo goroda Germisiya – Additional data for localization of Bosporos town Hermesion) // Panticapaeum, Bospor, Kerch. Kerch. Shkorpil V. V., 1912 – Шкорпил В.В., Отчёт о раскопках в Керчи и на Таманском полуострове в 1911г.(Otchiot o raskopkah v Kerchi i na Tamanskom polouostrove - Report about excavations in Kerch and on the Taman peninsula) // IAK, No. 56. Тaskayev V. N., 2001 – Таскаев В.Н., Древние якоря Северного Причерноморья (Drevniye yakoriya Severnogo Prichernomorya – Ancient anchors of the northern Black sea coast) M. Tohtas’ev S. R., 1986 – Тохтасьев С.Р., Апатур. История боспорского святилища Афродиты Урании (Apatour. Istoriya bosporskogo sviyatilizha Afrodity Ouranii – Apatouron. The history of Aphrodite Urania’s sanctuary in Bosporos) // VDI, No.2. ---------------, 1998 –Тохтасьев С.Р., К чтению и интерпретации посвятительной надписи Левкона I (K chteniyu i interpretatsii posviytitel’noy nadpisi Leukona I – The reading and interpretation of Leukon I dedicatory inscription) // Hyperboreus, No.4.

Troubachov V. V., 1977 –Трубачёв В.В., Лингвистическая периферия древнего славянства: Индоарийцы в Северном Причерноморье (Lingvisticheskaya periferiya drevnego slaviyanstva: Indoariytsi v Severnom Prichernomorie – Linguistic periphery of the ancient Slavdom: the Indo-Arians on the northern Black sea coast) // VYa. No. 6. Veselov V.V., 1952 – Веселов В.В., Древние городища в районе Синягино (к вопросу о местоположении Парфения и Порфмия) (Drevniye gorodizha v rayone Sinyagino, k voprosou o mestopoloshenii Parfeniya I Porfmiya – Ancient settlements in the vicinity of Sinyagino (on the problem of Parthenion and Porthmeus location) // АIB, I. Vinogradov Yu. G., 1991 – Виноградов Ю.Г., Фанагорийские наёмники (Fanagoriyskiye nayomniki - Mercenary soldiers of Phanagoria) // VDI, No.4. --------------------., 2002 – Виноградов Ю.Г., Левкон, Гекатей, Октамасад и Горгипп (Leukon, Gekatey, Oktamasad i Gorgipp – Leukon, Hecataios, Okamasad and Horhipp ) // VDI , No.3. Yaylenko V. P., 1977 –Яйленко В.П., Заметки по греческой лексике и ономастике (Zametky po grecheskoy lexike i onomastike – Notes on Greek lexicon and onomastics) // IKAM, M. ----------------., 1987 –Яйленко В.П., Материалы по боспорской эпиграфики (Materialy po bosporskoy aepigrafike – Materials on Bosporos epigraphy) // Nadpisi i yaziki drevney Maloy Azii, Kipra i antichnogo Severnogo Prichernomoriya. M. ----------------., 2004 – Яйленко В.П., Вотив Левкона I из Лабриса (Votiv Leukona I iz Labrisa – Leukon I votive from Labris)//DB,7. Zeest I. B., 1960 – Зеест И.Б., Керамическая тара Боспора (Keramitcheskaya tara Bospora – Ceramic containers of Bosporos) // MIA, 83. Zin’ko V. N., 1994 – Зинько В.Н., Oхранные археологические исследования в г. Керчи (Ohranniye Archeologitcheskiye issledovaniya v g. Kertchi – Protective archaeological research in the town of Kerch) // Archeologitcheskiye issledovaniya v Krymou v 1993. Zoubarev V. G., Maslennikov A. A., 1987 – Зубарев В.Г., Масленников А.А., Историческая география Восточного Крыма по Клавдию Птолемею (Istoricheskaya geografiya Vostochnogo Kryma po Klavdiyu Ptolemeyu – Historical geography of the Eastern Crimea according to Claudius Ptolemaeus) // SА, No.3. Zoubarev V. G., 1998 – Зубарев В.Г., Античная география Восточного Крыма по Клавдию Птолемею (Antichnaya geografiya Vostochnogo Kryma po Klavdiyu Ptolemeyu – Ancient geography of the Estern Crimea according to Claudius Ptolemaeus) // DB, No.1. ------------------., 1999 – Зубарев В.Г., Азиатский Боспор (Таманский полуостров) по данным античной письменной традиции (Aziatskiy Bospor (Tamanskiy polouostrov) po dannym antichnoy pis’mennoy traditzii – Asian Bosporos (the Taman peninsula) according to the data of ancient written tradition) // DB , No.2.

889

ANCIENT GREEK COLONIES IN THE BLACK SEA 2

Figure 1. Map of Kimmerian Bosporos with the settlements mentioned in the text.

Figure 2. Cape Zyuk. View of the settlement before the excavations.

890

ALEXANDER ALEXANDROVITCH MASLENNIKOV: SMALL AND POORLY STUDIED TOWNS

Figure 3. Cape Zyuk. Schematic plan with places of excavations.

Figure 4. Cape Zyuk (Zenonos Chersonesos). The main excavations area, view from the north-east. 891

ANCIENT GREEK COLONIES IN THE BLACK SEA 2

Figure 5. Cape Zyuk. Scematic plan of construction remains of different chronological periods on the site of the main excavations.

Figure 6. Zenonos Chersonesos. The area of the settlement entrance in the first centuries A.D. (Author’s reconstruction)

Figure 7. Bronze Age discoveries from the cape Zyuk.

892

ALEXANDER ALEXANDROVITCH MASLENNIKOV: SMALL AND POORLY STUDIED TOWNS

Figure 8. Epigraphic discoveries from the site of excavations of Zenonos Chersonesos.

Figure 9. Discoveries of painted and relief ceramics from cape Zyuk.

Figure 10. Terracotta and lamps from the excavations on cape Zyuk.

893

ANCIENT GREEK COLONIES IN THE BLACK SEA 2

Figure 11. Topographical plan of ‘Generalskoye-Vostochnoye’ settlement – Herakleion.

Figure 12. Demeter and Kore’s sanctuary near ‘Generalskoye-Vostochnoye’ settlement. 894

ALEXANDER ALEXANDROVITCH MASLENNIKOV: SMALL AND POORLY STUDIED TOWNS

Figure 13. Topographical plan of Novo-Nikolayevka settlement (Savromateion).

Figure 14. Schematic plan of the construction remains found on the territory of the settlement near Novo-Nikolayevka.

895

ANCIENT GREEK COLONIES IN THE BLACK SEA 2

Figure 15. Early fortifications of Semibratnevo settlement (Labrit?). V.P. Tolstikov’s reconstruction.

896

Iluraton: A Fortress of the 1st- 3rd centuries AD on the European Kimmerian Bosporos1 Vladimir Anatolyevitch Gorontcharovskiy*

fetched, but the main service of Dubrux was to carefully locate and describe the fortifications and other building remains, including those in the adjoining territory. In particular, he carried out the first minor excavations of the necropolis (Gajdukevič V.F., 1950, p. 177, 182; Tunkina I.V., 1999, p. 16; idem, 2002. Fig. 54). In any case his observations have facilitated the work of subsequent generations of archaeologists working on the site.

In the first centuries AD a number of fortresses were constructed to the west of Panticapaeum, the capital of the Bosporan kingdom. Iluraton is the best known and best preserved archaeological of them all. It is located 17 km to the southwest of Kertch near modern village of Ivanovka (former Kermesh-Kelechik) and covers about 3 hectares. The thickness of strata on the site is not uniform. Near the defensive walls they reach 3,5 m, but in the centre of fortress the thickness lessens to 0,6 m. The excavation trenches on the site of the fortress have traditionally been designated in Roman numerals (Fig. 1).

The second stage in the research of Iluraton is constituted by the systematic exploration of the site by the Bosporan expedition of the IIMK (Institute of History of Material Culture, later called the Leningrad Branch of the Institute of Archaeology) of the Russian Academy of Sciences. It began after the Second World War and continued up to 2000. The first regular excavations started with V.F.Gajdukevič as the director (Kublanov M.M., 1948, p. 27-54; Gajdukevič V.F., 1950, p. 188-190). This outstanding scientist carried out excavations at Iluraton during the years 1948 to 1960 and then in 1966 (Gajdukevič V.F., 1958, p. 6 ff.; idem, 1981, p. 76). During the years 1968-1981, with short intervals, the excavations of the Bosporan expedition were continued with I.G.Šurgaja’s acting as a director (Šurgaja I.G., 1970, p. 61 ff.; idem, 1974, 109 ff.; idem, 1975, p. 102 ff.; idem 1984, p. 70-71). From 1982 to 2000 the expedition was headed by V.A. Goroncharovski (Goroncharovski V.A., 1984, p. 251 ff.; idem, 1987, p. 83 ff.; idem, 1991, p. 14 ff.; idem, 1993, p. 23 ff.; idem, 1993а, p. 49 ff.; idem, 1993b, p. 547 ff.; idem, 1994, p. 84). At the same time the upper and lower necropoleis of Iluraton were explored by M.M.Kublanov, V.A.Goroncharovski and V.A.Khrshanovski (Kublanov M.M., 1983, p. 104-128; Goroncharovski V.A., 1991, p. 14–16; idem, 1994, p. 85-86; Khrshanovski V.A., 2003, p. 270-275). Since 2001 only Iluraton’s upper necropolis has been excavated by V.A. Khrshanovski.

Owing to the extraordinary condition of all elements of the fortification system and building complexes, this small town deserves special attention, because it allows to explore not only the problems of fortifications of this date, but also various aspects of its inhabitants’ life. The name of the town, undoubtedly of Barbarian origin, is first given to us in the work of Greek geographer Claudius Ptolemeus (Ptolem. Geogr., III, 6). The first person to identify the settlement at Ivanovka as Iluraton was V.F.Gajdukevič (Gajdukevič V.F., 1950, p. 203). This identification is accepted by the majority of scholars (See: Zubarev V.G., 1998, p. 117), though no confirmatory inscription has been found yet. The History of Excavations of the site Archaeological exploration of the site of Iluraton has a long history. One may divide it into two stages. The first stage began in 1827 and was mainly the work of the well-known amateur-archaeologist Paul Dubrux (17701835). He was the first to describe the ancient ruins near the Tatar village of Kermesh-Kelechik (Fig. 2). He was fascinated in collecting the classical antiquities of the eastern Crimea, which formed a basis of the Kertch museum. Sometimes he would walk along the coast of the peninsula, making plans of the remains of the ancient settlements. In this way the hill-fort identified as Iluraton was discovered. Dubrux thought that it might be the acropolis of some ancient city, or a palace once belonging to the Bosporan kings (Dubrux P., 1858, p. 5463; Gajdukevič V.F., 1950, p. 173 ff.; Tunkina I.V., 1999, p. 16). Such assumptions were certainly far-

More than 50 years of intensive excavation have unearthed a quarter of the territory of the hillfort and about 250 graves. Today, due to efforts of many scientists, Iluraton can be considered one of the best excavated archaeological sites of the Bosporan Kingdom, providing us with unique information about life and

1

The research was carried with the support of the grants of Russian Scientific Foundation of Humanities (№ 04-01-00141a and № 04-01-000164a). Vladimir Anatolyevitch Gorontcharovskiy is a senior researcher at the Department of the History of Classical Culture and head of Bosporan archaeological expedition. Excavations: Ukraine: Bosporan cities Iluraton (1972, 1976, 1978-1994, 1999-2000) and Porthmeus (1973, 1975), Greek settlement on the island of Berezan (1986-1987, 1996), rural settlement Geroevka 1 near Nymphaeum (1986-1992); Russia: Seven Brothers fortified settlement (2001-2004), Gorgippia (2002-2003). Address: Institute of the History of Material Culture, Dvortsovaya nab. 18, Saint-Petersburg 191186, Russia Fax: 007 (812) 5716271 E-mail: [email protected]

*

897

ANCIENT GREEK COLONIES IN THE BLACK SEA 2 height between these two features is about 15 m. This has caused a particular system of urban spatial organization, which features several artificial terraces of heights from 0.6 up to 2m high. The stone extracted during the construction of these terraces was used for construction on the site.

culture of this small Bosporan city during the Roman period. Topography of the site Excavations have shown that Iluraton was founded in the second third of the 1st century AD as one of main strongholds in the system of roads and fortifications of the European side of Bosporos (Zubarev V.G., 1998, p. 118. Fig. 4). From a strategic point of view, Iluraton overlooked the routes leading to the Panticapaeum area from the southwest. The well considered choice of location of the fortress, as well as the full use made of natural defences testify to the high level of professionalism of the Bosporan military engineers. The ruins of Iluraton are located on a flat rocky plateau about 45 m high, near a small river, which flows into the Churubash salt-lake 5 km further on. In antiquity this lake was probably a gulf of the sea (Zenkevich V.P., 1958, p. 175,194). Near Iluraton the river valley is narrow with steep slopes. It has narrow flood plain and the remains of two terraces. The depth of the river valley differs greatly from place to place, up to about 12 m over a kilometer. This rules out navigation on the river. During pouring rain all water instantly flows down to the salt-lake, and in summer the water in the stream almost dries up. The rocky plateau consists of powerful horizontal layers of limestone and waterproof layers of clay, due to which fresh-water springs are to be found in the slopes of the valley. In antiquity the valley was probably covered by a mixed forest providing the population of fortress with wood and fuel.

Stages of construction and basic elements of the fortifications The long lasting archeological excavations at Iluraton have revealed the basic elements of the fortifications and the stages of construction of the fortress, which was a military-administrative centre for the adjacent agricultural district (Goroncharovski V.A., 1989, p. 36 ff.; idem, 1995, p. 60; idem, 2002, p. 68 ff.). It needs to be stressed that it is almost impossible to determine the initial appearance of the fortifications, because the earliest layers have practically been destroyed during subsequent construction works on the site, when the terracing was carried out. Iluraton in the 1st century AD The size of early Iluraton is unknown, but it most likely complies with what we know for the later periods. The presence of finely carved rusticated facing of the blocks at the front of the base on the inside of the south-west defensive wall attracts our attention (Gajdukevič V.F., 1981, p. 133. Fig. 50). Here, alongside a stretch of wall next to tower V, up to four rows of limestone block have survived. This section of wall differs from the usual appearance of the fortifications at Iluraton so strikingly, that V.F.Gajdukevič initially assumed quite naturally a secondary use of these rusticated slabs taken from some earlier fortification work, situated, perhaps, exactly in this same place (Gajdukevič V.F., 1981, p. 135). The question was finally clarified by the discovery of remains of fortifications from an earlier period on the opposite side of the settlement: a small tower measuring 4.4 x 2.8 m and an adjoining section of defensive wall with rusticated stretchers on the outer face (Fig. 3, 1). It had been assumed earlier that it was pointless to search for the remains of a defensive wall here on account of the natural destruction of the rock. Nevertheless, the tower was discovered by chance exactly where it had been seen by P. Dubrux, who had marked it on his plan with the letter N (Gajdukevič V.F., 1958, p. 13. Fig. 3; Tunkina I.V., 2002. Fig. 53). Remains of the early defensive wall were preserved at a length of 27 m. The wall was 2.5 m wide with a three-part structure: two masonry faces, where the blocks had been laid with their broken sides facing inwards, with a fill of rough-stones in between them. The durability of such masonry was not only assured by its own weight, but wooden beams were also laid width-wise in the wall. Cuts for them were discovered both in the tower, and in the curtain wall. Taking into account the relatively high seismic activity in this area of the Crimea, this construction detail seems to be well thought out.

Study of the topography of the northeast slope (Fig. 4, 1) has revealed a quite wide ramp by the eastern corner of the fortress. Most likely of natural origin, the ramp has apparently been adapted by the local inhabitants to rise in easy stages from the valley up to the plateau. Carriages or horsemen could easily reach the plateau thanks to this feature. Gradually moving away from the defensive wall, the road approaches the northern corner tower, where the river makes an abrupt turn. Probably there was a ferry here, for on the opposite side of the valley there is convenient access to a gorge rising upwards. The road leading along the northeast part of the settlement was marked on the plan of P. Dubrux (Gajdukevič V.F., 1958, p. 12-13). It was vital to the inhabitants of the fortress as it led to the plots of arable land, which were located to the north of the river. The southern bank of the river valley has a large rocky surface covered with wormwood steppe - ideal pasture for sheeps. It would have been possible to graze cows and horses in the floodplain of the river. The slope of the valley under the northwest wall of the fortress is also of interest from a topographic point of view. It consists of a high terrace of the flood-plain. Its summit has no constant height and lowers appreciably to the north. The rocky plateau on which the fortress lies also lowers away to the northeast. The difference in 898

VLADIMIR ANATOLYEVITCH GORONTCHAROVSKIY: ILURATON the hard native rock in the courtyards of many houses and even in the main street. The especially thorough trimming of the mouth of the cistern is distinctive. Normally a square slab with a round hole about 0.6 m in diameter cut in it was put over the top of the opening. The hole was closed with a round stone lid, which exceeded the mouth in size just a bit. Slightly to one side an enclosure formed by limestone slabs up to 0.5 m in height mounted sideways is usually found. In one case an empty pythos about 1.5 m deep, closed up with the same type of lid, was found in line with the street. Quite possibly, it had also acted as a cistern. Certainly, such constructions could not have entirely satisfied the needs of Iluraton’s population for drinking water in case of hostilities.

According to the in-vogue principles at the time, the fortifications were constructed on a basis of trimmed stones consisting of well carved limestone stretchers. The measurements of the front face of these blocks are between 0.9 x 0.45 m and 1.2 x 0.42 m, and they bear signs of cutting and trimming by a saw. They also bear signs of later working by an instrument such as a chisel or adze, with a working edge measuring between 4 and 10 cm. The masonry on the front face is stepped, and bears no sign of any bonding mortar. The blocks were then trimmed to an even height. Consequently, considering the fact that the rustication at the edge of the blocks is only 1-2 cm wide, this trimming was a technical method available for the best adjustment of the variously sized limestone stretchers. The application of such methods in Iluraton’s south-west and north-east defensive walls allows us to state that the traditions of late Hellenistic building technique were still preserved in the Bosporan fortifications of the earliest centuries AD. Hereupon, Iluraton is by no means out of the ordinary. In the Black Sea region rusticated stretchers can also be found in the Roman period defensive walls at Tiritaka (Gajdukevič V.F., 1958, p. 162), and also at Abritus and Philippopolis in Thrace (Ivanov T., 1980, p. 49, 91, 118, 208. Fig. 39, 101, 136, 230).

P.Dubrux had, however, passed the following remark: ‘A little bit lower than the northern corner tower at the foot of a rock there is a cavity now filled with earth, which in former times probably constituted a secret passage through which the defenders of the fortifications could leave and return to the fortress’ (Dubrux P., 1858, p. 56). V.F. Gajdukevič also thought the feature to be the exit from a tunnel cut down into the rock. In his opinion a long ditch-like cavity which runs down the slope near the northern corner of the fortress could have been formed as a result of earth sinking into the line of a collapsed underground passage. This depression comes to an end with a big funnel-shaped hollow at a depth of 1.5 m. The presence of such a construction in this place is explained by the location of water sources nearby in a gully (Gajdukevič V.F., 1958, p. 20).

The space between the hill slope and the wall in this part of the fortifications was leveled with debris up to a height of 3.5 m, which constituted the difference in height between the tower base and the higher pavement of the latter inhabited complex of the 2nd-3rd century AD. The dated material comes from the layer at the foot of the north-eastern defensive wall, which mainly consists of red-lacquer ceramics dating from a period not later than the second third of the 1st century AD. The date is confirmed by the find of an ass struck by queen Gipepiria ass in the wall’s fill. Material from the sockets cut in the rock along the line of the Big Longitudinal street, from the lower layers of an ash pit beyond the south-eastern gate of the fortress, and from grave assemblies in the necropolis do not conflict with such an inference. We also note, that the earliest coin discovered at the site so far is an ass of King Aspurgus dated to AD 37/38.

The water-bearing strata cause springs to appear at the bottom of the rocky plateau. Therefore it was possible to assume that the inhabitants of Iluraton would have dug a well in a low-lying place to guarantee a constant source of water in case of a prolonged siege. And indeed in 1981 at a depth of 2.5 m from the contemporary surface, the massive masonry of a secret siege well with almost square mouth – 1.85 х 1.8 m (Goroncharovski V.A., 2001, p. 31 ff.) was discovered (Fig. 3, 2). It has been excavated at a depth of 7.85 m. When the fill was removed, it was found to consist of fitting calcareous blocks fixed in place by a limy solution with an admixture of sand. The height of the rows varied from 0.45 to 0.67 m. The special care taken over the work points at the significance, which was given to this construction. Excavation of the well yielded insufficient dating material. We may nevertheless conclude that its construction is dated to the 1st century AD, as without such a construction the fortress could not exist.

The problem of the water supply was probably also resolved during this earliest phase on construction. The topography of the site, however exploited, had one major disadvantage: there was no source of water within the defensive walls, which would assure the surrender of the place when under siege. The only remedy was to construct a system of cisterns for collecting the rainwater (Arist. Pol. VII. 10. 2), which in ancient times was considered even more salubrious than spring water (Vitr. VIII. 2.1). In Hellenistic cities astynomoi were quite often charged to count all cisterns situated within houses, and to produce a list of them to the strategoi, to ensure that the owners kept the cisterns clean and closed them with appropriate lids. Apparently, such requirements occurred in Iluraton as well. Bell-shaped cisterns with a capacity of from 7 to 10 cubic metres have been cut into

Some interesting technological details were revealed while cleaning up the walls of the well. At a distance of 2.05 and 2.2 m from each other three lines of grooves had been cut in advance into the calcareous blocks. These grooves were located alongside a joint between the rows of blocks. When the perimeter of the construction settled down, the grooves were left varying about 7 cm in level 899

ANCIENT GREEK COLONIES IN THE BLACK SEA 2 The line of an underground passage also passes near to corner tower IX, near its southeast wall. A round hollow some 1.25 m in diameter was noticed here, and excavation has shown that it was formed by washing in of rocks. It gradually narrows down at a depth of 1.5 m where it dips downwards. Cracks and holes were noticed to the right and left from which came cold air. So it seems that the top part of the passage, which was sited directly under the defensive works, has been cut into the rock and, obviously, led to the courtyard of a nearby house. Taking into account the location and size of this underground passage, in which two persons could hardly pass alongside one another, it was possible to assume, that it was not a unique feature in the water-supply system of the fortress. In 1999-2000 in the same place, on the northeast slope of the settlement, a hollow about 5 metres in diameter was excavated, located on the same horizontal level as the well found earlier, some 80 metres to the southeast of it. A trench 3.6 meters in width was found cut down into the base clay. At a depth of 5.1 m part of the masonry construction was found: two blocks of sawn limestone assembled in a line. They seem to come from the mouth of a second well, which most probably connected the fortress to the area of the Big Longitudinal Street by an underground passage. From there it would have been possible to deliver water easily to any of the city housing blocks.

from one another. The grooves, which occur on opposite walls, lie opposite to one another. They were probably used for keeping beams in place during the construction process. These would have formed a rigid support on which boards would have been laid to form a temporary floor. The successive layers of the stonework would have been laid working from this base. A piece of a wooden beam 0.12 x 0.1 m in section was found in one of these grooves, which lay under the water table. It was made of the trunk of an old pine tree of a large diameter. When the well was on operation, the grooves were probably used to construct a system of floors and ladders along which it was possible to move up and down in order to clean out the bottom of the well. There was undoubtedly also some mechanism for drawing water built alongside it. As a whole, give its significant dimensions, the well should have provided a system effective enough, for gathering the water carried along water-bearing strata. The remains of a stone construction were removed from the bottom of the well, which once covered its mouth. It consisted of blocks of sawn limestone, 0.7 х 0.25 x 0.22 m in size even in fragments, the total number of which would have reached 142. As some of the surviving blocks had rectangular grooves carved in them, it is likely that wooden joists were also used in the construction. It is also possible, however, that there was a floor in the construction. There is no reason to misbelieve that they may have been used to cover an underground passage about 40 meters long, running from the line of the defensive wall down to the well in a number of flights, each with a pisé floor.

The early fortress probably did not exist for long and underwent destruction about the end of the 1st century AD. The still existing threat of attack from Sarmatians and the Crimean Scythians upon the western boundaries of the kingdom caused a full reconstruction of the entire defensive system and inhabited quarters of Iluraton some decades later.

This one, as well as similar constructions on the Bosporos can probably be linked to the influence of architectural traditions derived from the Pontic Kingdom and used by Mithridates VI and his successors. Staircase descents of this type, cut into rock and leading to underground water tanks, are widely known in Cappadocia, Pontos, Paphlagonia, Armenia Minor and Phrygia. Fortified settlements in these areas were as a rule situated on remote tops of hills or rocky plateaus, which were usually waterless. Therefore a paramount problem was to cut such descents down to the water, at times comprising up to two hundreds steps. Two types of tunnels are commonly found: one leading to a source of water located beneath the rock, while others led to an underground reservoir cut into the rock itself (von Gall H., 1967, p. 509; Saprykin S. Ju., 2002, p. 186-190). Iluraton’s underground passage is related to the first group. It had a rather simple structure, as the shaft has been cut down from the surface through clay. Its walls have been strengthened with stone masonry which remain up to a height of 1.8 metres, and for which huge limestone joist slabs were used. The width of the underground passage is 1.4 metres, whereas three stone slabs from the collapsed covering structure found inside had lengths of 1.05-1.1 m. Consequently they must have been laid in at least two or three ledges no each side.

Iluraton in the 2nd century AD A large-scale reorganization of the fortress was carried out not earlier than the second quarter of the 2nd century AD, judging from a fragmentary building inscription carved on a thin marble slab (Fig. 4, 2): [‘Αγαθήι τύχηι Βασιλεύοντος βασιλέως Τι]βερίου [‘Ιουλίου ‛Ροιμητάλκου φιλοκ]αίσα[ρος καί φιλορωμαίου¸ εύσεβούς κτλ]. (KBN № 966) Another inscription on the limestone stele, which was discovered among the masonry of a wall of one of buildings, is dated to the same period, i.e. the second quarter of the 2nd century AD or a bit earlier: --------ουσαν τω’ιδ[ίω ‘α]δε(λ)φο Ματριδώρω στήλην μνήμης χάριν χαίρ(ε)τ(ε). (KBN № 967) 900

VLADIMIR ANATOLYEVITCH GORONTCHAROVSKIY: ILURATON a narrow entrance with a length of 1.65 m and width of 0.77 m. The internal room measures about 9 m² (2.97 x 3.1 m). The tower protruded beyond the curtain wall for a distance of 4m. The length of its southeast side is 13.8 m, and that of the northeast side 10.5 m, including the additional external masonry of up to 6 m. Tower II was preserved up to a height of 3.5 m. The length of its frontage is 14.5 m. Here too there was a doorway of 11.2 m width, leading to an internal chamber measuring 2.85 х 3.4 m (Gajdukevič V.F., 1958, p. 22 ff.).

The absence of coins from the reign of King Sauromates I (92/93-123/24) in the archaeological strata also supports our assumption about the date of the beginning of the second building period at Iluraton. The lower rows of rusticated blocks in the northeast defensive wall are built over with huge limestone blocks measuring up to 1.5 х 1.1 х 1.1 m laid in completely different techniques. The same picture is found in the southwest wall, which was obviously constructed in haste, likewise the northwest and southeast lines of defence, which are completely rebuilt. It is only possible to explain the use of any suitable building materials which lay to hand in the most vulnerable parts of the defences, such as stone feeding troughs for animals and anthropomorphous gravestones, by the great haste in which the defences were constructed in the face of a real military threat (Gajdukevič V.F., 1981, p. 110 ff.). After re-building the fortress walls had a thickness of 2.4 m on three sides, and only 1.8 m on the northwest side. Even so, noting the carelessly closed up breach near the southern tower V (Gajdukevič V.F., 1981, p. 111), we may conclude that they did not provide reliable protection for the city. The breach may have been caused by an attack of the Crimean Scythians using batteringrams. One notes that the image of battering ram, shown as a vehicle with a shed roof, has been preserved on the plaster in one of buildings at Neapolis Scythica (Dashevskaja O.D., 1962, p. 182. Fig. 10). Furthermore, one has to consider why an additional amplification of all of Iluraton’s defensive system, accompanied with reorganization of some of the inhabited quarters, took place. This determined the layout of the site uncovered by excavation.

Near Tower II, where a side street opens on the southeast wall, masonry 2.1 m in width was attached to it from the inside. The length of it which has been excavated reaches 8 m at a height of up to 1.4 m. It is probably the remains of a ramp - a flat ramp for the raising of mechanical stone-throwers onto the wall (Gajdukevič V.F., 1981, p. 78. Fig. 2). Near to the ramp, in house № 3, a well produced limestone spherical missile some 7 cm in diameter and about 450 g in weight was found (Gajdukevič V.F., 1958, p. 71. Fig. 63, 2). It is thought that balls of such calibre had a universal character and were intended to be used against human targets (Sokol’ski N.I., 1962, p. 246; Akopyan A.M., 1986, p. 233). The absence of any damage to the surface of the ball makes it highly unlikely that it had been shot into the city, and, almost certainly, it had been intended to be used by stone-throwing artillery located in one of the towers of the fortress. Calculation of the calibre of ballista to which this ball corresponds can be made using the formula: C (calibre in inches) = 1,1 √³ 100 M (weight in minas) (Ellenisticheskaja tekhnika 1948, p. 288). This gives us С=0.13 m. According to classical authors the minimal sizes of the area necessary for the installation of a ballista constituted 13.5 calibres in width and 16-21 in depth (Ellenisticheskaja tekhnika 1948, p. 291). Hence, platforms of 1.75 m width and 2-2.73 m depth were necessary for the installation of Iluraton’s ballista. This conclusion corresponds to the size of the fortress towers.

The third building phase relates to the end of the 2nd century AD when vigorous measures to strengthen the state defences were undertaken by King Sauromates II. At this time, three of the defensive curtains were additionally strengthened. External masonry, acting as an extra defence against battering rams and strengthening the curtain by a thickness of 4 m, was added to the southeast defensive wall, preserved to a height of 3.15 m, along its entire length of 200 m approximately. It consisted of five rows of masonry up to 1.7 m high, built at an angle of 67° from the base. Along the curtain between tower I and the gate anti-battering ram masonry was attached directly to the defensive wall (overall thickness 6.4 m). Beyond the gate and on the southwest line of defence the space between the main wall and the external anti-battering ram masonry is filled with densely stamped rubble and a limy fill. Thus thickness of the foot of the walls reached 8.2 m here. Masonry of 1.35 m thickness was also added to the northwest wall. Four towers were placed along the line of the southeast defensive wall at intervals of about 31 m, including an opening for a gate. Three of them, practically identical in structure, have been excavated. All of them are rectangular in form with internal rooms and are connected to adjoining domestic complexes. Tower I had

The gate in the southeast wall has not survived. P.Dubrux marked, that ‘gate Т’ in this place had a width of 3-4 sazhens (Gajdukevič V.F., 1950, p. 188), i.e. about 8 m. This impression was caused by the destruction and robbing out of the adjacent wall, causing the opening to seem wider than it actually was in ancient times. No traces of stone masonry were found during excavation of this site in 1977. The width of the gate, however, could naturally not be wider than the Main Transverse Street, i.e. 4.5 m. At the right angle meeting of the southeast and southwest walls, lays the most powerful corner tower of the fortress (IV). Its external size is 10 x 14 m, with the internal room size measuring 3.3 x 4.5 m. An opening, about 1.6 m high was set in the tower, topped by two massive limestone blocks (Fig. 4, 4). A stretcher with a groove for a joist found in the northwest wall allows us to determine the height of the tower floor as 2.6 m. There were probably not less than four such floors connected 901

ANCIENT GREEK COLONIES IN THE BLACK SEA 2 of an extended gate chamber 10.2 m in length and 3.75 m in width. An important detail in their construction is a rectangular incision (0,32 x 0,28 m) 5.3 m in depth for a wooden beam locking the inside gate. It was found at a height of 1.4 m. When the gates were closed, the beam was moved forward from the incision and, obviously, inserted into another one in the opposite wall, which has not been preserved (Gajdukevič V.F., 1981, p. 113). Undoubtedly, there was also an external gate system, not flanked by towers as it was a usual practice, but by pylons, extending beyond the line of the wall by 2 m. Probably, they were once joined by linked by an opening for an arch and defended by an arch over the tower. It is possible that the gate defence system also originally featured a portcullis (Tolstikov V.P., 1992, p. 44-45). Thus, the usually extremely complex structures found to defend the gate have been reduced to a minimum. On the one hand these features limited the opportunity of shooting from the adjoining curtains, while on the other hand overlapping the arcs in the area of the gate on the line of the ditch so as to create additional difficulties for the attacking enemy. Similar gate structures have been noted at Neapolis Scythica (Vysotskaja T.N., 1979, p. 44-45. Fig. 10) and in the Roman fortress of Augusta Traiana in Thrace dated to the 2nd-3rd centuries AD (Ivanov T., 1980, p. 204. Fig. 226). The ancient designers perhaps designed these elongated internal gate structures rather than reinforcing the external structures of the gates.

by internal stairs. In such case the total height of the tower, including the merlons whose usual size is 1.5-1.7 metres, would have reached about 12 meters. Defensive walls ending in rectangular merlons are repeatedly represented on Bosporan coins of the 1st-2nd centuries AD (Zograf A.N., 1951, p. 201. Tabl. XLVII, 3, 18; Anokhin V.A, 1986, p. 101. Tabl. 14, 381; 16, 416; 18, 461). The question, whether the towers and curtains of the fortress were roofed is difficult to resolve. Taking into account the character of their masonry, laid on a clay solution, which progressively collapses as a result of the direct influence of rain, such a feature cannot be completely ruled out. Tower IV was destroyed by fire. Its internal chamber was filled with a quantity of burnt wood (pine) and the remains of cane or straw, obviously used for arson (Gajdukevič V.F., 1981, p. 111). The fire was so strong it coloured the masonry stones a reddish shade and cracked them on the inside. Outside of the tower the remains of a ditch, dug into the rock at a depth of 1.5 m was found. It has the form of an inverted trapeze in section. The width on top is 6.2 m and 3.5 m at the bottom. The ditch was dug along the complete length of the external face of the southwest wall with a crossing place left opposite the gate. It could have been filled by water only when it rained. Apparently its purpose was to hinder to forward movement of battering rams. The southwest curtain has been excavated along its internal face in it entirely from Tower IV to Tower V at a length of 94 m. A staircase (Fig. 4, 3), 1.2 m wide, of which seven steps set at an angle of about 45° were preserved, allow us to determine its original height (Gajdukevič V.F., 1981, p. 129). Based on the face that the bottom of the staircase lay some 10.95 meters near the wall, and given that the stairs would have met the wall walk with a platform no less than 1.5 m along the parapet, the wall must have been about 8.5-9 m high. If we count in its merlons, the total height would have been not less than 10 m. This corresponds to the standards of classical fortification (Philon. Byz. III. 2).

Tower V was situated where the southwest and northwest defensive walls met. It was entered from the courtyard of a house (Fig. 5, 1), from which it was possible to climb up to a walkway on the curtain by a staircase. The structure of this tower differed from the one described above, in that its ground floor was completely filled by rough stones, and a course of limestone blocks carefully trimmed and fitted to each other was built facing the yard. Adjacent was a stone box with clinker filling set into the pavement of the yard. Taking into account the fact that such boxes were usually placed under stairs (Gajdukevič V.F., 1958, p. 49. Fig. 35-37), it seems highly likely that the stack was used to support a wooden staircase which once led to the walkway.

The approach to the outside of the wall at the southwestern gate was of more simple construction. The structure here was not attached to the defensive wall as it was customary. There is an interval of 1.3-1.7 metres between the two. It was packed to a height of 1.1 m by densely packed earth with an admixture of rough stones. The total length of this ramp is 18 m, rising gently to the gate on the wall (Gajdukevič V.F., 1981, p. 115). It probably looked more like an earthen embankment with an angle of about 30°, with several stone steps added to the bottom part. In the centre of the southwest line of defences, some 43 m from the corner tower, lies the only remaining gate of the fortress. The main street of the city runs from it and forms the planning axis of the city. From here the worked surface of the rock goes down in the direction of city centre for 0.88 m. The entrance to the gate is in the form

The northwest defensive wall follows the contours along its length of 240 m. As it has already been noted, the curtain was rather thin, 3.15 m even after its reinforcement with additional masonry. It seems probable that the initial line of fortification had been hastily erected and demanded repeated repair. The remaining structures suggest the presence of a retaining wall about 10 m in length on its northeast section and a similar construction under the northern corner tower number IX. In total, there are five towers2 on the northwest wall, 2 Tower VI is marked on the plan of P.Dubrux, but it has not been located yet.

902

VLADIMIR ANATOLYEVITCH GORONTCHAROVSKIY: ILURATON led directly to the slope of the foot of the tower, entering it by a small gate. The corner tower, of which only the base remains, with external dimensions of only 9 x 7.5 m, is built on the rocky ground table, levelled by large limestone slabs. A gateway 1.4 m wide leads from its ground floor to a house attached to it.

including the corner towers. Only two of them - VIII and IX - have been excavated. They defended the northern corner of the fortress and were sited immediately alongside one another. The distance between the other towers varies from 26 to 93 m depending on the demands of defence made by the natural conditions. The only opening in the defences here is a postern about 1.2 m wide. It is flanked on the southwest by tower VII, the remains of which were seen by P.Dubrux (Gajdukevič V.F., 1958, p. 27. Fig. 11). Nearby was a guardroom with two exits, one into a courtyard and then into a lane, allowing the postern to be kept under observation (Gajdukevič V.F., 1958, p. 29). On the other side of the lane there was a house (№ 1) from which it was possible to ascend to the wall. Between the wall and the domestic room 4 the remains of another staircase were found. The top step of the staircase rested on a stone platform 6.4 x 1.8 m in size. A staircase with five steps 0.65 was once built against it at a right angle (Gajdukevič V.F., 1958, p. 29). Thus, we have sufficient data which allows us to attempt an initial estimation of the height of the wall in this section of the defences. The steps of the bottom flight of steps rose at an angle of 60° to an intermediate platform at a height of 2.2 m. Most likely its size, as well as that of the platform joining it to the wall, did not exceed 1.5 m in length. Then, if the top flight was at the same angle, the height of the northwest wall would be about 7 m (or with merlons ≈ 8,5 м). Hence, it was at least 2 m lower than walls on the lower side of the fortress, which corresponds well to its location and strength.

Iluraton in the 3rd century AD – The final stage of the fortress’ existence and its destruction The last stage in the development of Iluraton’s defensive system was the construction of a built-up area outside the northwest defensive wall in the first third of the 3rd century AD. This probably represented an attempt to solve the problem of lack of space inside the fortress. It also eliminated the opportunity for the enemy to concentrate his forces on the terrace located there so as to storm the relatively weak section of the defences there. It is interesting to note that construction work in this area did not begin earlier that the reign of King Ininthimaios (234/5-239/40), whose coins were found among the ash and household waste dumped in this area down at the beginning of the 3rd century AD. During this period significant fortification works were undertaken elsewhere in the Bosporan Kingdom: new fortifications were under construction and existing ones were repaired. Undoubtedly, they were undertaken in preparation to repel new Barbarian attacks. The external face of the multi-level inhabited complexes found out on the slope runs approximately 30 m from the defensive wall. In case of attack the narrow entrance corridors and the alleys between the houses could be blocked, creating an additional obstacle in the way of the enemy, forming a kind of proteichisma, as it is marked on the plan of P.Dubrux (Gajdukevič V.F., 1958, p. 13. Fig. 37). So, the front of an alleyway in one of the houses 1.3 m wide has been blocked by the several carefully assembled large limestone slabs (Fig. 5, 2), apparently at some moment of military danger. It would have been easy to block the entrance to the building, which was located nearby. Its excavated length was 19 m, and its width was 2.5 m at one end and 0.87 m at the other, apparently reached by a postern. This part of the corridor was constructed as a nine-stepped descending staircase. In case of serious threat the defenders could withdraw into the internal part of the fortress through a postern in the northwest wall.

Tower VIII marked on the plan of P.Dubrux is located in 62 m from the postern. Its external dimensions are 7.6 x 5.5 m. The tower is not well preserved, but even its remains give us the impression of extreme negligence of construction. Probably it was built during the reorganization of (at least) the northern corner of the fortress during the 3rd century AD. The necessity of repeated repair of the walls and towers in this section of the fortifications was caused by the fact that they were partly built over a layer of ash refuse which caused the defensive works to slide. The masonry of the walls near the northern tower also changes as a result of the reconstruction, and two phases can be distinguished. The defensive line has a thickness of only 1.4 m between Tower VIII and the top of a retaining wall lying to the southwest. An extensive domestic complex was located next to it at a sharp angle, the interval of which was packed with densely stamped earth mixed in with small rough stones. Thus, it forms part of the internal masonry, widening the overall thickness of the defensive wall to 2.7 m. To the northeast of tower VIII the defensive wall has a thickness of 1.8 m, being strengthened on its external side at its base by rough stone masonry built on clay up to 2 m in width, put together extremely carelessly. Between the wall and northern tower IX ran a corridor 1.2 m wide. On one side, it was connected to the domestic complex mentioned above, on the other side it

As far as its defensive capabilities are concerned, Iluraton remained one of the most strongly fortified settlements on the Bosporos for more than two centuries. It is enough to compare the thickness of its walls, sometimes exceeding 8 m, to those of other Bosporan cities: Panticapaeum – 4.5 m, Tiritaka – 3.4 m, Myrmekion – 2.5 m (Gajdukevič V.F., 1952, p. 17; idem, 1952а, p. 136; Tolstikov V.P., 1977, p. 158). Only the walls of Neapolis Scythica stand comparison, with their thickness varying from 5.4 m up to 7.35 m (Vysotskaja T.N., 1979, p. 44. Fig. 8, 9). Thus, the fortifications of 903

ANCIENT GREEK COLONIES IN THE BLACK SEA 2 central city’s quarters began to be used by the inhabitants who remained here, at their own risk, during the restless period of the Gothic campaigns (Gajdukevič V.F., 1958, p. 73). After AD 267, when Barbarian pressure suddenly grew on the borders of the Bosporan state, the last inhabitants of Iluraton did not fight for their city but abandoned it hastily.

Iluraton can be studied as a benchmark for Roman times on the Bosporos, evidently showing their evolution during this period, and all the elements, which are characteristic for the period. Iluraton ceased to exist during the Gothic campaigns. The attack on the fortress probably happened quite suddenly. Fires broke out in a number of the housing blocks. Owners of some of the houses were not able to lead out their animals, which were all lost in the fire (Šurgaja I.G., 1970, p. 63). In the corner room of a house near the crossroads of the main streets a hoard of 66 staters was found dated to the reign of King Rheskuporis V (AD 242-267) (Frolova N.A., Šurgaja I.G., 1982, p. 91-96.). All coins in the hoard were of the same type, with the king’s head turned right on the obverse, and the head of the Roman emperor on the reverse with an additional symbol (club, wreath, star, sword or trident). Seemingly, many of the coins had never been in circulation. They had therefore belonged to a relatively wealthy man, able to put them aside over a quarter century.

Planning of fortress, house-building, occupations and religious beliefs of its population The two main streets, crossing at right angles and leading to the gate, form the basis of the regularly planned city, which was evidently laid out initially. They have been provisionally named the Main Longitudinal and Transverse Streets and have a width of about 6 m and 4.5 m respectively. The Main Longitudinal Street is crossed by ten transverse streets from 1 to 1.8 m in width, forming separate blocks, which lodged several apartment houses. Such a system of planning allowed for the swift redeployment of troops inside the fortress. A pavement made out of large blocks of limestone was partially preserved along the Main Transverse Street (Fig. 5, 3). Streets, paved with stone or rubble, run frequently along the artificially created terrace. A sufficiently wide staircase leads down to the courtyard of the houses located below. This overall structure of the internal buildings was not substantially modified during all the whole time Iluraton functioned as a fortress: changes only occurred in individual building complexes. All 26 houses at Iluraton which have been completely excavated can be divided into four groups, according to their size: 1) from 45 to 100 m²; 2) from 120 to 180 m²; 3) from 215 to 285 m²; 4) from 400 to 600 m² (Goroncharovski V.A., 1983, p. 31-33.). The majority of the houses in the first group probably belonged to common soldiers. They lie in the northwestern quarter of the city. The absence of large courtyards and domestic rooms, and the prevalence of hand-made pottery in the ceramics deposited are typical features. The houses embraced by the second group should be ascribed to the middling social stratum of the population. As a rule, they are situated along two main streets. The large housing plots of the third and fourth groups are concentrated in the northeast and central quarters and were apparently intended for representatives of the military authorities and the wealthiest strata of the population of the fortress. Consequently, it is possible to explain their proximity to the southeast gate and the rather high level of comfort associated with them, including pavements and a well thought-out system of drains for water.

The hoard was unearthed in the corner of a room used for housing animals. Many coins were found in a dense mass projecting from the wet ground. They were preserved in some form of knapsack made from skin or cloth (Fig. 9, 1). Evidently the owner had pushed it under stone slab in a hurry, in a place where no one would be likely to look for them, but he was unable to return for it. Taking into account that no coins were minted on the Bosporos between 267 and 275, the destruction of the fortress, left by its garrison without a fight, should fall around this time. The results of the recent excavations in northeast area of the settlement help explain why to a certain extent. Here, house № 8 was excavated. It had been so thoroughly destroyed as a result of an earthquake about the middle of the 3rd century AD that a stone tumbled up to 1.2 m in height was not removed. Directly on its leveled surface the old walls were strengthened or, perhaps, new walls were erected. Few years had passed between the earthquake and the end of use of the house, since there had not been sufficient time to re-pave the courtyard. Traces of damage caused by a serious seismic wave coming from northeast can be observed in a number of other monuments of the European Bosporos lying on terraced slopes of the same date (Vinokurov N.I., Nikonov A.A., 1998, p. 101-103; idem, 2004, p. 95103). Even if the walls and towers of Iluraton were at least partially damaged as a result of these tremors, then it had been hardly possible to restore them in circumstances of state instability and lack of funds in the state treasury. Therefore it becomes understandable why, as it has already been observed by V.F.Gajdukevič, the normal life of the fortress only went down to the middle of the 3rd century AD. After the beginning of the second half of that century Iluraton ceased to be an important feature in the Bosporos’ defensive system. The garrison’s command element left the city. Their large houses in the

A number of observations allow us to conclude that the overwhelming majority of the inhabitants of Iluraton comprised barbarian people, brought to the place as military settlers. It is possible to try to establish the population of the fortress at the final stage of its existence thanks to a technique developed by S.D.Kryzhitski (Kryzhitski S.D., 1985, p. 94-103). 904

VLADIMIR ANATOLYEVITCH GORONTCHAROVSKIY: ILURATON Taking into account the maximal use of space inside the fortifications and on the northwest terrace (about 2.6 hectares), and the total area of the streets and lanes (about 0.4 hectares), the percentage of the city area allocated for housing comprises about 73 % - no less than 2.2 hectares. Since, on average area an Iluraton house covers an area of about 180 m², there should be about 120 houses in total. With 8-10 people per family including servants or slaves, this suggests that about 9001200 people lived in Iluraton. The garrison of the fortress may have numbered no less than 150 warriors. They seemed to be military settlers and served the king in return for land. A small part of them came from a Greek cultural background. The rest of the population was mainly of barbarian origin retaining many features of their original culture. The richest of the citizens served as heavy cavalrymen or ‘cataphracts’. A graffito of a horseman of this type has survived on a fragment of plaster (Fig. 5, 4). He wears long body armour made of small metal plates and holds a heavy spear atilt in his hands (Šurgaja I.G., 1983, p. 98-99. Fig. 4; Goroncharovski V.A., Nikonorov V.P., 1987, p. 201212).

lilac tinge (Petrun’ V.F., 1965, p. 126-128) and are characterized by their fine condition. The size of the top millstone is standard enough: 0.56 х 0.5 m and 0.12-0.14 m high. Slanting grooves are cut on the bottom sides. The presence of two semicircular cuts shows that wooden handles were once fitted in order to rotate the millstone (Gajdukevič V.F., 1958, p. 88. Fig. 82, 132).

All Iluraton’s houses relate to the group of non-canonical constructions (Kryzhitski S.D., 1982, p. 104-107. Fig. 38, 39; idem, 1993, p. 201-202. Fig. 142). They have a strong economic character and lack inhabited cellars (Fig. 5, 5, 6). Dwelling houses had reed or tiled roofs. In the latter case flat and semi-cylindrical tiles of local manufacture were used. Iluraton’s houses formed city blocks from which blind walls only looked out onto the streets. The overall plan was almost completely adhered to, and corresponds quite closely to the traditions of classical house-building (Fig. 6). A corridor, usually narrow, closed by a door or wicket, led into a paved courtyard, which took up from 14 to 43 % of the total area of the house. It led out into the ground floor rooms. In one case we even know its height, which was 2.2 m. The masonry of the walls generally comprised roughly cut flattened pieces of limestone set in clay. In most cases their thickness is about 60-70 cm. Well-trimmed stone blocks were also used, mainly at the corners of houses and rooms. The doorways were also built out of stone blocks, and incisions in the threshold blocks show that wooden doorframes were originally set in them. The design of stone thresholds shows that the doors were hung on hinges. (Kryzhitski S.D., 1982, p. 107). Numerous finds of forged iron nails up to 15 cm in length suggest that there were plenty of other wooden constructions inside Iluraton’s houses.

In most of the rooms the floors were covered with clay. Rooms with pavements and fences made of stone slabs with holes for tethering animals were intended for accommodating and feeding of young grazing stock during the winter period. In each of houses pits for grain and other household items were cut in the rock, closed by stone lids. On the walls of pits sometimes remained traces of clay daub applied for protection from insects and rodents.

A large oven was built against one of walls from vertically set slabs with one, two or three small stone columns inside (Gajdukevič V.F., 1958, p. 77. Fig. 69). A wrought brazier plate was put on them with the sides projecting some 3-4 cm above. It is obvious that flat cakes of grain were baked on the heated surface of such braziers. Judging by the ashes, straw served as the basic fuel. Smoke escaped through the door or a special hole in the wall. A carelessly cut female name, Δικαλία (KBN № 968), was found on one of the slabs making up the lateral face of the furnace found during the excavation of plot IV. According to the character of the letters, this inscription is dated to a time not earlier than the 3rd century AD. Quite often were the wall niches near the oven used for household purposes.

Usually, above the northern part of the house there was a second inhabited floor where a wooden ladder led up from the courtyard. Rich owners could afford to decorate their best rooms with red plaster or marble decorative tiles. In one case it was possible to observe a section of the burnt flooring fallen from above lying in a row, and consisting of beams of pine, considered to be the best species of tree used for construction. We have also found items lying on the floor which originally came from the second floor, for example small loom weights of pyramidal shape fallen in a line. Besides weaving on a small scale, the production of ceramics, especially amphorae and cooking pots, probably took place in Iluraton. This is suggested by the finds of muff-shaped ceramic supports with round air holes. These were intended to support vessels with pointed bottoms while they were being fired in pottery kilns (Gajdukevič V.F., 1958, p. 55. Fig. 42; Kruglikova I.T., 1966, p. 145-146). As a rule, objects of such a specific use would be found near to the potters’ workshops. Naturally, on account of the fire hazard we should expect these to be found outside city boundaries, and they have not so far been located. Part of the need for domestic utensils may have been satisfied by production

As a rule, one of the rooms on ground floor was intended for cooking. In such cases there is usually a stone mortar for processing grain, about 0.5 m high, near to the entrance. Hand mills with rotating circular millstones were used for grinding flour. Quadrangular millstones are much more widely distributed over the Greek world (Blavatskiy V.D., 1953, p. 135.). Usually they are made of an imported stone of a gray colour, with a greenish or 905

ANCIENT GREEK COLONIES IN THE BLACK SEA 2 (Fig. 7, 3-5) and the variety of its decoration, testifies that it functioned as tableware, rather than cooking ware. In the life of common inhabitants of the fortress handmade pottery was obviously used more frequently than imported wares.

of primitive hand-made ceramics burnt in the furnace or by the fireside by each family for its own needs. The ceramic complex is basically represented by fragments of pithoi, amphorae of Bosporan and SouthPontic production, red-clay (less often gray-clay) table and cooking vessels, red-glaze and hand-made pottery dated to the final period of the fortress’ life, the end of the 2nd straight the first half of the 3rd century AD. Bulky pithoi with flattened bottoms had height of up to 1.5 m and a capacity of up to 600 litres were used for the storage of wine or grain (Gajdukevič 1958, 86-87). Sometimes their function was carried out by big pots, up to 0.8 m in height, reminiscent in their form of the type of vessel, which has two vertical handles on its shoulders (Gajdukevič V.F., 1958, p. 39, 101, 103. Fig. 23, 98, 102; Kruglikova I.T., 1966, p. 152).

Ironworks also existed in Iluraton, using the iron ores found in the Kertch peninsula (Krug O.Ju., Ryndina N.V., 1962, p. 254-258; Kruglikova I.T., 1966, p. 161). Finds of small iron blooms and ferrous slag inform us that the puddling technique was used to extract iron. Thus, it is quite possible that forges and weapon workshops existed in Iluraton. This may have constituted one of the household activities of the fortress population, faced with constant military danger. They had the necessary raw materials to hand and the capacity to work it. The find of a stone crucible with traces of copper oxides also attests to a flourishing bronze-founding activity (Vinogradov Ju. A., 1983, p. 229-231). It was made of a small sandstone plate 19 х 17,5х 6 cm in size. It has a round depression with three grooves on top, and in the back three parallel fillets for sharpening arrows. It was possible to smelt about 350 ml of metal in the crucible, and then the extracted metal would be poured directly into moulds. The Iluraton crucible was probably used in a small workshop, or even in a domestic context to produce fine ornaments and various hand-made articles to satisfy the day-by-day requirements of the fortress population. High quality craft could, indeed, be obtained nearby Panticapaeum.

There are plenty of massive amphorae of Bosporan production represented by several types: 1) ‘Myrmekian’ amphorae with a high cylindrical neck and elongated cone-shaped body with a ribbed surface; 2) red clay amphorae with a wide neck and handles which are round in section (Gajdukevič V.F., 1958, p. 56, 119. Fig. 43, 122); 3) pink clay amphorae with a conical foot. The most numerous categories of imported ceramic containers were light clay narrow-necked amphorae of types A-D, dated from the second quarter of the 1st century AD to the first half of the 3rd century AD (Shelov D.B., 1978, p. 16-21). Among them the most widespread are small vessels such as type D dated to the first half of the 3rd century AD. Less frequently occur amphorae dated to the same period with a funneled neck and an egg-shaped body: variant 3 in the classification of V.B.Uzhentsev and V.Ju. Jurochkin (Uzhentsev V.B., Jurochkin V.Ju., 1998, p. 101-109).

Besides military service the main occupations of the inhabitants were pastoralism and agriculture. I.M.Gromov has analyzed the osteological material (period 1948-1953) for the final stage of fortress’ existence (Gajdukevič V.F., 1958, p. 143).3 The proportion of large horned quadrupeds stood at 37.3 %, and that for small horned quadrupeds at 45.3 %. Horse bones accounted for 7.5 % and pigs for 9.9 %. Thus, the prevalence of small quadrupeds and relatively high ratios for horse and domestic pig bones is evident enough. The majority of the small quadruped bones belonged to goats, rather than sheeps. Breeding animals were exploited for both meat and milk, to judge from the ratio of adult and young individuals. Among the horses, individuals with a medium height of up to 144 cm at the withers predominate. The especially valuable tall riding horses could have been kept in special premises on the ground floor, which had provision for tethering, a high drinking trough, and a drain for the removal of sewage (Šurgaja I.G., 1983, p. 100).

The majority of simple wheel-made ceramics, such as pot-shaped vessels, jugs, and bowls, are of Bosporan production. The red-glaze ceramics group (bowls, cups, dishes) with a dark red cover, made of clay of a brown or flesh-colored shade with an admixture of lime particles, is also connected (Silant’eva L.F., 1958, p. 303-309. Fig. 17-19). Imported red-lacquer ceramics of the 1st century AD originating in Asia Minor are represented by a small number of fragments: side plates with vertical edges, cups of conical or globular form and small flat dishes. Forms of red-glazed ceramics dated to the 2nd century AD, which include also deep bowls, cups, kantharoi, two-handle pots and plates, are more various. More than half of the recovered fragments, and the whole vessels that form a prominent feature, which are covered by an almost colorless varnish (Fig. 7, 1), relate to the later period of city existence, i.e. the first two thirds of the 3rd century AD (Silant’eva L.F., 1958, p. 290-303. Fig. 516). Various closed lamps (Fig. 7, 2), either flat on top or with relief ornament, are frequently found (Gajdukevič 1958, 58-59. Fig. 47). Similar hand-made lamps have an open boat-shaped form, or resemble a small cup on a high leg. The large quantity of hand-made pottery finds

Probably, the specific structure of the herd kept was influenced by such factors as climatic conditions, the quality of pasture and water supply. Cattle, for example, prefer juicy meadow grasses. Their quantity depends, to a large extent, on the size of the hay meadows, which, in 3 Finds of subsequent years have not necessitated any essential changes to the percentage ratios noted for the earlier seasons.

906

VLADIMIR ANATOLYEVITCH GORONTCHAROVSKIY: ILURATON Wine production was less developed. The only winery known so far is situated in one of the central city blocks (Goroncharovski V.A., 1985а, p. 89-92). The building consists of three rooms and a small yard. In the part of the winery devoted to production are the bases of four presses and two cisterns, covered by several layers of a special lime solution with an admixture of crushed ceramics have been found (Fig. 8). The grape mash extracted was drained into cistern tanks through special stone drains. The overall capacity of the tanks, which have an inclined bottom for the deposit to accumulate, amounts to about 3.5 thousand litres. This would be adequate to deal with the harvest of a vineyard of 1.5 square hectares, equivalent to an allotment of an average size (Gajdukevič V.F., 1958а, p. 450).

the region of Iluraton, would probably have been small. The structure of the herds kept would also have been governed by social factors. So, the prevalence of small quadrupeds, characteristic for nomadic herding, is possibly best explained by the presence of a nomadic group, of Alan origin, within the population of Iluraton. A change has been noticed in the materials deposited in a necropolis from about the middle of the 2nd century AD onwards. On the basis of the available data it is possible to conclude that the population of Iluraton combined grazing on distant pastures and keeping their animals in stalls during the short winter period, when the snow cover is light and variable (Podgorodetskiy P.D., 1988, p. 59). Butter and cheese would probably have been produced with the aid of special ceramic churn and cupfilters.

A lever and screw press were used for extracting the grape juice. A beam 5 m long was attached with a stone weight (1,4 t). In a small courtyard three bell-shaped pits were discovered, including one with a layer lying at the bottom, approximately 0.5 m thick, consisted of grape stones of both table and wild varieties (Šurgaja I.G., Janushevich Z.V., 1983, p. 102). It seems probable that at one time they would have been filled by the pressed grape skins. In another pit a vine-grower’s knife was found. The building complex also contained a warehouse with a pisé floor where wine had once been stored in three pithoi, each with a capacity of about 600. The wine production was most likely intended for the inhabitants of the nearby house to which the winery belonged, and was only partly intended for sale.

The presence of deposits of non-carbonate and carbonate ‘chernozem’ soils to the northwest of the fortress was of significance for the development of agriculture in the outskirts of Iluraton, despite the presence of rather large rocky outcrops there. Such soils were quite suitable for the cultivation of both grain crops and grapes. It would have been possible to store a significant amount of grain in the numerous storage pits in the houses of Iluraton, sufficient not only to fully meet their day-by-day requirements, but also to provide adequate stocks in case of siege. Charred grains of various cereals, among which barley and wheat predominate, found during excavation are of importance for determining the breakdown of agricultural crops grown (Gajdukevič V.F., 1981, p. 76, 101; Kruglikova I.T., 1975, p. 109).

Fishing was also important for the inhabitants of Iluraton. The small river flowing near the fortress was no deep at all, taking into account the steep fall of the river, of some 12 m per kilometre. They must, therefore, have made use of the sea gulf, which lies some 5 km on the east. Fishscales though are not a significant find in the houses of Iluraton, but objects connected with fishing are. Pyramidal or globular clay weights are found, and bone needles for weaving nets are found frequently (Gajdukevič V.F., 1958, p. 131. Fig. 140, 2). Some inhabitants of the fortress produced fishing weights for their own needs, baking them in furnaces or fires. In one case some dozens of unfinished round net-weights had been paced in a small niche under a small stone table in the corner of a room before baking. A small anchor with three flukes and a fishing hook was found nearby.

Archeological finds connected with agriculture are not numerous in Iluraton, but indicative enough. First of all the iron tip of a plough was found in one of the houses leading to the crossroads of two main streets. It is shaped out from a flat extended ingot and has a length of 24 cm and a maximum width of 5 cm. Its cutting edge is nearly semi-oval in shape, and the end is sharpened. Such a tip would have been convenient for processing both firm soils and virgin land (Kruglikova I.T., 1975, p. 164-167). It could have been attached to ploughs of various constructions. An iron scythe with a narrow, thin edge 26 cm in length and an overall length of about 45 cm (Gajdukevič V.F., 1958, p. 116. Fig. 96) could have been used for mowing meadows, and also for wheat and barley fields. Sickles could also have been used for harvesting, similar to an example found with the end of its blade broken off. The other end was in the shape of a hook, which would have been driven into a handle, and could have been additionally secured in place by a leather thong or a metal ring. Thus, the tang for the handle is a continuation of the blade, by which it forms an angle of about 150˚, which closely resembles that of the scythe (Kruglikova I.T., 1966, p. 118).

Despite its proximity to the state capital, trade in Iluraton was not developed, although it was not limited predominantly to barter as it had been supposed by V.F. Gajdukevič (Gajdukevič V.F., 1958, p. 144). To date, a single square-shaped lead weight has been found on the site (Goroncharovski V.A., 1982, p. 236-238). On one of its sides the sign of an octahedron has been imprinted, probably designating a weight standard of one mina. Consequently, with a weight of 402.7 g, the Iluraton weight standard would be a relatively heavy one, lying

907

ANCIENT GREEK COLONIES IN THE BLACK SEA 2 of Aphrodite also appears on a well-preserved golden medallion of the middle of the 3rd century AD (Fig. 9, 4), discovered in the destruction layer of the house adjoining the western tower of the fortress (Goroncharovski 1993c, 80 ff). This image itself is a plate 2.85 cm in diameter with the schematic bust of the goddess whose hair, arranged in large curls around her head, falls down onto her shoulders. Her headdress takes the form of a cylinder with five vertical projections. Above her shoulders are two six-ray rosettes, which are symbolized stars alluding to the heavenly nature of this deity. We know of golden and electrum medallions of the same size and the same technique of manufacture from other sites within the territory of the Bosporan kingdom. These pieces come from the settlement of NovoOtradnoye and by chance were found in the Lower Kuban region.

close to the late Attic weight system with a mina of 390409 g (Grach N.L., 1976, p. 198-199). Finds of coins in the strata are rare enough, but one of them is of completely unique character. It is of a type previously unknown: a double denarius of the Bosporan king Sauromates II (AD 174-210) found in the central district of fortress, in the wall of house (Goroncharovski V.A., 1984a, p. 90-93). Maybe the coin was deliberately deposited during the time of construction for good fortune. It is a massive copper coin weighing about 15 gr. On the obverse side of the coin is a fine profile image of the king with a diadem on his head, on reverse the fifth Labour of Hercules, the cleaning of the Augean stable is shown (Fig. 9, 2). The hero is pictured nude with a mattock in his hands. The lion’s skin and club are shown behind him. The double denarius is an addition to the not so numerous series of Bosporan coins showing the Labours of Hercules, which was first known one hundred years ago (Frolova N.A., 1977, p. 150-180; Maslennikov A.A., 1986, p. 175-183. Fig. 1). Not all of Hercules exploits are shown on these coins, but only the following subjects: the Nemean lion, the Hydria, the Stymphalian birds, the Cretan bull, the horses of Diomedes and a few others. Bearing in mind the infrequency with which the cleaning out of manure is shown in classical art, it seems likely that coins showing other labours of Hercules will be shown in the future. Perhaps the series had a purely commemorative significance, because the Bosporan kings were descended from the legendary Hercules. There is an obvious parallel between the martial victories of the Sauromates II over the Scythians, the Siraces, and the pirates of the Black Sea and the exploits of his divine ancestor. Such coins could have been awarded to the participants in these military operations.

Products of a workshop are most likely in Panticapaeum. The images on these medallions are influenced by sculptural images of Aphrodite Urania, whose cult had assumed a national dimension on Bosporos since the end of the 2nd century AD. The medallions probably played some role in the ceremonies connected with the cult of the goddess, and were only worn for religious ceremonies. It is not by mere chance that this ornament is depicted as being worn on the breast on four of Iluraton’s terracotta figurines (Fig. 9, 4), obviously meant to represent the very same Aphrodite Urania (Denisova V.I., 1984, p. 127. Tabl. XXIV, a). She sits on a throne with a high footstool on her feet. Her narrow face with a large nose has been deliberately stylized. The main emphasis has been put in depicting the attributes shown in the hands of the goddess, roughly moulded bowls, fruit or round cakes. The syncretism of the religious beliefs of the inhabitants of Iluraton is reflected in terracotta busts in which the draped figure of the goddess is represented as projecting at the bosom, symbolizing pregnancy (Denisova V.I., 1984, Tabl. XXIV, c). Thus, Aphrodite acquires the features of a deity with natural creative forces.

The religious preferences of the inhabitants of Iluraton, mainly involving Greek deities with cults and ceremonies going back to the early age of agriculture, was determined both by their engagement in pastoralism and by their mixed ethnic structure. Consequently, the first place in the archaeological record is taken by the cults of female deities whose images differ to each other appreciably in artistic style. Some objects were made according to traditions of ancient art, for others a more generalized appearance is characteristic. A rare find from Iluraton is a marble head of Aphrodite with a hairstyle consisting of freely falling ringlets divided in the middle by a parting (Gajdukevič V.F., 1981, p. 135. Fig. 55). It was a part of a small statue about 40 cm high, which once decorated the interior of a wealthy citizen’s house. A fragment of the foot of a statue approaching life-size suggests the existence of monumental marble statuary in the city (Gajdukevič V.F., 1958, p. 117-118. Fig. 121). Some finds of art works have no analogies elsewhere in the territory of Bosporan kingdom. For instance, one might mention the imported terracotta figurine of a halfnaked Aphrodite before an altar (2nd century AD). She has diadem and shawl on the head. White plaster patches are preserved on its surface in various places. The image

Another terracotta from Iluraton reproduces the image of the Great Goddess shown without ‘a Greek veil’. On a round clay stamp used in making the flat cakes for cult use, we see the so-called Great Goddess, the mistress of fauna and flora (Gajdukevič V.F., 1958, p. 79-84. Fig. 76), appearing in a long garment extending from top to bottom as a personification of the world tree with open hands as branches (Fig. 10, 1). They serve as a border between the upper heavenly world marked by the schematic image of a star or a flying bird, and the lower underground world represented by winged griffins. The shape of the head of the goddess, with its twelve shoots, is reminiscent of an ear of grain. The clay stamp has been found near a large building near the southeast defensive wall, which apparently functioned as a public sanctuary. Remains of human sacrifice have been found there (Gajdukevič V.F., 1958, 908

VLADIMIR ANATOLYEVITCH GORONTCHAROVSKIY: ILURATON figures of this type were moulded, although only two remain, probably in order to strengthen the magical force of the contents of the vessel.

p. 43-46. Fig. 29-31), which suggest that the inhabitants of the fortress resorted to bloody rituals immediately prior to its fall. In a cult room, on a raised platform of rectangular form, there was a funnel-shaped depression. Nearby the remains of a substantial fire were found, in the layer of ashes of which part of a goat skeleton was found. In the eastern corner of the room there was a stone altar built from several calcareous slabs. In the in-fill of this construction were found the skeleton of a cock, and on the topmost slab the skull of a 30-35-years-old man, most probably a captured enemy, with a straight cut on the bottom vertebra, were found. He had witnessed a great deal in his lifetime. Long before his death he had suffered a strong blow to the right side of his head, perhaps in battle, which had left a mark on his cranium. To which bloodthirsty deity had the priests of this sanctuary brought such a sacrifice? Perhaps it was to the same Great Goddess, personifying the powerful forces of nature. We may presume that this sacrifice had probably been provoked by quite extraordinary circumstances, and was carried out not on the initiative of a single person or family, but rather by a substantial and powerful group of the citizenry.

The special attitude of city dwellers to ashes is attested in the way that they were poured in specially allocated places. Hills of cinder have been discovered near the defensive walls. It is possible that they formed an additional line of protection in the imagination of the inhabitants of Iluraton. The largest ash-hill (5.2 m in height) rises up behind the southeast gate. Judging by materials recovered from it, it was formed from the second half of the 1st down to the middle of the 3rd centuries AD. Besides a purely household function, the hill of ash may have played a role in agrarian magic rituals. Indeed, at the top of the hill a platform constructed from stones and burnt clay has been partly excavated, above which a layer of pure ash up to half a metre in thickness was recorded. A small marble figurine (Fig. 10, 5), almost fully complying with the female clay figurines described above (Goroncharovski V.A., 1987, p. 320), was found nearby. It was probably intended for repeated use in ceremonies of importance to the city as a whole. Next to the ritual area a pit with two dogs buried in it, which had apparently been sacrificed.

A small domestic sanctuary was also uncovered in one of the central quarters of Iluraton (Šurgaja I.G., 1986, p. 217-222). In the middle of the sanctuary there was an altar built of three vertically set limestone slabs. It was covered by a heap of ashes about a metre high, at the bottom of which the skeletons of a dog and a goat were found still in proper anatomic order. In the ash layers and near to it, figurines carelessly moulded from clay were found, with emphasized attributes of gender (Fig. 10, 4). All of them are slightly burnt, with traces of ochre remaining in places. The heads of the male figurines are conical, while those of the female ones are more rounded. The nose is pinched out, the eyes are rounded in shape, and the hands and legs project forward like ledges. A terracotta bed corresponding to the figurines in size, and painted red in colour, the ‘colour of life’, leave no doubt that these figurines were used in ceremonies imitating the ‘sacred marriage’ carried out on the ash altar. This ceremony may have been carried out to ensure fertilization and good harvests. The figurines would have been thrown down into the ash after use. The ritual flat cakes with the image of the goddess of flora and fauna were probably baked in the firs lit on this altar. If so, as in many other cases, we witness a belief in the influence of ritual fire on weather, vegetation, plentiful crops and fauna, as the fire was a reflection of sunlight.

Thus during the Roman period, within the territory of the Bosporan Kingdom the religious beliefs of the rural inhabitants were largely based upon traditional Greek cults. The Necropoleis of Iluraton The ‘Upper’ necropolis The necropoleis of Iluraton were situated along the roads leading to the city. The so-called ‘Upper’ necropolis, located 200 m on the southeast of Iluraton, has been quite well uncovered. In its present state the necropolis occupies about 3 hectares. Alongside the erection of funerary monuments, the intensive working of stone to be used in place, was carried out here. In a number of places holes for the breaking off of excess stone, or roughly trimmed blocks which they had no time to remove, are still visible. Up to date, in the area of the rocky channel found here, and along slopes of the small gully, more than 210 funerary complexes and funeral constructions of several types have been found. These include tombs dug into the earth and underground chamber tombs (Fig. 11, 1), ordinary tombs made of stones, catacombs with an open dromos and stone benches, one or two chambered tombs constructed from well-trimmed blocks of limestone, and chamber-tomb with the remains of a semi-cylindrical or stepped vault (Khrshanovski V.A., 1997, p. 265-267; idem, 1998, 7787; Zakharenkov N.V., 1999, p. 315-319). In the latter case the upper courses of stones making up the masonry of the walls frequently tower above the present day land surface. In their original state the tumuli would have had an earth mound of up to 3 m in height (Kryzhitski S.D.,

Special attention must be given to a fragment of a handmade cult vessel found near the domestic sanctuary. On an internal surface of the vessel there is a relief in the shape of female figure with her head in the shape of an ear of grain, with her hands stretched out, swollen breasts and a protruding stomach. A background of lines drawn in parallel symbolize a ploughed field (Fig. 10, 3). It, thus, represents a plea for a plentiful harvest conveyed by graphic means. It is interesting to note that a number of 909

ANCIENT GREEK COLONIES IN THE BLACK SEA 2 high, was found among deposits of this type in the ‘Upper’ necropolis (Kublanov M.M., Khrshanovski V.A., 1989, p. 18-20. Fig. 6; Goroncharovski V.A., 2000, p. 255-257). It was found near the entrance to Chamber Tomb N 52 in 1984. Here, at the site of the funeral feast, the statue had been broken into a great number of pieces. The terracotta shows a person in a relaxed, slightly turned, pose. She wears a diadem on her head and a cloak thrown over her left arm, its edge rolled into a plait. She wears a chiton underneath, falling in intricate folds, fastened by a narrow belt tied under the breasts. The elongated oval face of the goddess is absolutely symmetrical. The nose is straight, and there is no additional treatment to the pupils of the eyes. The reverse side of terracotta has traces of smoothing on the surface. It was hollow inside, and open at the bottom. The joints of the separate parts, which come from different moulds, have been carefully smoothed.

Kublanov M.M., 1972, p. 46; Kublanov M.M., 1983, p. 101-103). Sometimes niches for lamps are found in the funeral chambers of the tombs. Inhumation with a westward orientation is characteristic. The earliest of the funeral complexes, dated from the 1st to the beginning of the 2nd century AD, are situated in the northern necropolis, which adjoins the city. Re-used materials of Hellenistic date have been found here. There are fragments of Heraclean and Thasian amphorae, a black-glaze kylix, and terracottas of the 4th and 3rd centuries BC. The double-stemmed handles of amphorae of the 2nd and 1st centuries BC have also been found, as well as Megarian bowls and a Pontic copper coin of 8070 BC (Goroncharovski V.A., Khrshanovski V.A., 1994, p. 85-86; Khrshanovski V.A, 2003, p. 272). Thus the assumption that a Hellenistic settlement had once occupied the site of the later Iluraton, once stated by V.F.Gajdukevič, is confirmed (Gajdukevič V.F., 1958, p. 17-18). Comparison of the funerary constructions, funeral assemblages, and anthropological data from the northern and southern parts of the necropolis suggests not only chronological, but also ethnic and cultural differences (Khrshanovski V.A., 2003, p. 273). Earth tombs and tombs with accompanying sacrificial pits are earlier. In some cases samples of red slip ceramics of the first half of the 1st century AD have been found here. To the south stone tomb-boxes and tomb-chambers of various types with the prevailing westward orientation of the body predominated.

Judging by the clay it is the product of a Bosporan workshop, but its mould was imported. Unfortunately the arms of the figure and other details are missing. Nevertheless we can find parallels for this image of a goddess among Roman art of the Imperial period. Particularly close are the 2nd century AD representations of Fortune with a horn of plenty from Rome and Ostia (Amelung W., 1903, p. 79, 101-103. Taf. 9, № 59; 13, № 86). Perhaps these works of art had a much earlier prototype. This is suggested by the distinctive coiffure with a middle parting and two curled locks on both sides of neck. This hair-style was in fashion for a very short time, because otherwise it appears only in sculptural portraits of the mother of the Emperor Caligula (AD 3741), Agrippina the Elder, who died in exile (West R., 1933, Taf. XLIV, № 191; Wood 1988). Apparently, the mother of the Emperor, was idealized as Fortune with horn of plenty, as her daughters were on coins (Wood S., 1995, p. 458. Fig. 1). Taking into consideration the dimensions of the tomb, the graves of horses found near it and the burial ritual, the owner of the statue was a welloff Sarmatian by the birth. Evidently, he regarded Fortune above all as the goddess who bore war booty, fertility and prosperity.

Frequently enough there are traces of lifetime deformation of the skull. This confirms the presence of persons of Sarmatian (or Alanic stock) in the garrison of the fortress. Some types of weapons and the cast ‘Sarmatian’ mirrors absent in the funerary assemblages of graves of the 1st and the beginning of the 2nd centuries AD. Red-slip, red clay and hand-made pottery are represented in the ceramic assemblage. There are several ornaments: rings, bracelets and earrings, mostly of bronze, but in some cases of gold and silver. A gold ring is of special note, on the wide bezel of which the inscription Μάδας ψυχή has been punched out. Quite often burials of dogs and the entire skeletons of horses have been found near the tombs. At least in one case (catacomb № 37) it is possible that human sacrifice had also taken place (Khrshanovski V.A., 2000, p. 241-242). The occurrence of this new ethnic-cultural tradition in about the middle of the 2nd century AD, is probably due to the radical reorganization of the fortress, and the inclusion of some groups of Sarmatians in the structure of Iluraton’s garrison.

The ‘Lower’ necropolis The presence of another necropolis (which has received a name ‘Lower’) to the northwest of the settlement was discovered only in the 1930s, when finds from graves in the territory of the modern village of Ivanovka began to arrive in Kertch museum. V.F. Gajdukevič, who carried out minor excavations here, having discovered two pillaged slab tombs, assumed that this was the main necropolis of Iluraton (Gajdukevič V.F., 1958, p. 138139). Further regular excavation of the necropolis was not carried out.

Traces of ritual sites for commemorative funeral feasts all over the area of the necropolis have been found near to the remains of the burial complexes. They consist of areas of ash rich in fragments of pottery, terracottas, melted glass, and bronze and iron goods. It is worth mentioning a unique terracotta statue of a female deity (Fig. 11, 2), dated to the 1st century AD and some 62cm

In 1968 M.M. Kublanov excavated three of eighteen burials found by local residents on personal plots in the eastern part of the village (Kublanov M.M., 1971, p. 84910

VLADIMIR ANATOLYEVITCH GORONTCHAROVSKIY: ILURATON DB

Древности Боспора (Drevnosti Bospora Antiquites of the Bosporos). Moskva (in Russian). KBN Корпус боспорских надписей (Korpus Bosporskih nadpisej - Corpus of Bosporan inscriptions). Moskva- Leningrad. 1965 (in Russian). KHS Херсонесский сборник (Khersonesskiy sbornik Chersonesus collected articles). Sevastopol’ (in Russian). KSIA Краткие сообщения Института археологии АН СССР (Kratkie soobszczenija Instituta archeologii AN SSSR - Short notes of the Institute of archeology of Academy of Sciences of USSR). Moskva (in Russian). KSOGAM Краткие сообщения Одесского Государственного Археологического музея (Kratkie soobszczenija Odesskogo Gosudarstvennogo Archeologicheskogo muzeja Short notes of the Odessa State Archaeological Museum). Odessa (in Russian). NS Нумизматический сборник (Numizmaticheskiy sbornik - Numismatic collected articles of State Historical Museum). Moskva (in Russian). SA Советская археология (Sovetskaya archeologija Soviet archaeology). Moskva (in Russian). SGMII Сообщения Государственного музея изобразительных искусств (Soobszczenija Gosudarstvennogo muzeja izobrazitel’nykh iskusstv - Notes of the State Museum of Fine Arts). Moskva (in Russian). SIITA Сообщения Института истории и теории архитектуры СССР (Soobszczenija Instituta istorii i teorii arhitektury SSSR - Notes of Institute of the History and Theory of Architecture of USSR). Moskva (in Russian). TGE Труды Государственного Эрмитажа (Trudy Gosudarstvennogo Ermitazha - Transactions of State Hermitage). Sankt-Petersburg (in Russian). TGIM Труды Государственного Исторического музея (Trudy Gosudarstvennogo Istoricheskogo muzeja Transactions of State Historical Museum). Moskva (in Russian). VDI Вестник древней истори (Vestnik drevney istorii Bulletin of the ancient history). Moskva (in Russian). ZfA Zeitschrift für Archäologie. ZfN Zeitschrift für Numizmatik. ZOOID Записки Одесского общества истории и древностей (Zapiski Odesskogo obszczestva istorii i drevnostey - Notes of the Odessa society of the History and Antiquites). Odessa (in Russian).

85). After a long break, in 1988-1990, rescue excavations were carried out in the area under the supervision of V.A. Goroncharovski prior to the laying of a waterpipe and the construction of a school were carried out. Twenty nine burials were excavated which allowed a summary picture of this necropolis, that was in use from the first century till the first half of the 3rd century AD (Goroncharovski V.A., 1991, p. 14-16). The standard type of tomb dug into the clay soil was a stone box covered by several limestone slabs (Fig. 11, 3). Sometimes, they overlap the ditch cut into the natural clay. A westward orientation, sometimes with small deviations, is characteristic for the inhumations. The structure of the grave assemblage is similar enough. For male burials a long sword, dagger, and spear (Fig. 11, 4) together with a set of pottery for drinking wine are characteristic (Goroncharovski V.A., 1998, p. 85-89). In female burials, as a rule, there are beads of glass paste, cornelian, chalcedony or agate, a bronze mirror of Sarmatian type with a broken or a cracked reflector, sometimes bronze needle case, and about the legs glass vessels (Fig. 12, 2,3) and a red-slip bowl, or bowl of gray clay. Out of the ordinary are the finds of gold earrings (Fig. 12, 4); a silver ring with a garnet insert on which the image of Athena has been carved (Fig. 12, 5), and a glass ring made from twisted filaments yellow and white in colour (Fig. 12, 6). There are also more complex constructions, for example, a robbed chamber tomb made of carefully joined, welltrimmed slabs (Fig. 12, 1). A small stepped dromos led to the burial chamber 3х3 m in size with the remains of a stepped vault. The chamber itself is generally rectangular in plan. On the corners and along the walls of the chamber the remains of not less than five human skeletons were found, which confirms the multiple use of the tomb. The uppermost courses of the chamber walls of the burial chamber walls stood above the contemporary level of the surface. So it is no doubt that the tomb would have originally had a tumulus mound above it. Taking into account the size of the lower necropolis, the similarity of the greater part of the funerary constructions to one another, as well as the accompanying tomb assemblage, it is possible to assume that this site served as a place of burials not only for the inhabitants of Iluraton, but also for those of the nearby rural settlements.

BIBLIOGRAPHY Akopjan A.M., 1986 - Акопян А.М., Каменные ядра из Арташата (Kamennye jadra iz Artashata - Stone balls from Artashat) // Проблемы античной культуры (Problemy antichnoy kultury - Problems of Classical Culture). Moskva. Amelung W., 1903 - Die Sculpturen des Vaticanischen Museums, I. Berlin. Anokhin V.A., 1986 - Анохин В.А., Монетное дело Боспора (Monetnoe delo Bospora - Monetary system of the Bosporos). Kiev. Blavatskiy V.D., 1953 - Блаватский В.Д., Земледелие в античных государствах Северного Причерноморья (Zemledelie v antychnykh gosudarstvakh Severnogo

ABBREVIATIONS AJA AIU

AO AV

American Journal of Archaeology. Археологические исследования на Украине (Archeologicheskie issledovanija na Ukraine Archaeological investigations in Ukraine). Kiev (in Russian). Археологические открытия (Archeologicheskie otkrytija - Archaeological discoveries). Moskva (in Russian). Археологические вести (Archeologicheskie vesti Archaeological news). Sankt-Petersburg (in Russian).

911

ANCIENT GREEK COLONIES IN THE BLACK SEA 2 Prichernomorja - Agriculture in the States of Black Sea Coast). Moskva. Denisova V.I., 1984 - Денисова В.И., Коропластика Боспора (Koroplastika Bospora - Terracotta figurines of the Bosporos). Leningrad. Dashevskaja O.D., 1962 - Дашевская О.Д., Граффити на стенах здания в Неаполе Скифском (Graffiti na stenakh zdanija v Neapole Skifskom - Graffiti on the walls of building in Neapolis Scythica) // SA, № 1. Dubrux P., 1858 - Дюбрюкс П. Описание развалин и следов древних городов и укреплений, некогда существовавших на европейском берегу Босфора Киммерийского от входа в пролив близ Еникальского маяка до горы Опук включительно на Черном море (Opisanie razvalin i sledov drevnikh gorodov i ukreplenij, nekogda suszczestvovavshih na evropejskom beregu Bosfora Kimmerijskogo, ot vhoda v proliv bliz Enikal’skogo majaka do gory Opuk vkluchitel’no pri Chernom more - Description of ruins and traces of ancient cities and fortifications, which once existed on European shore of Cimmerian Bosporos from entrance to the strait near Enikale lighthouse inclusive to Opuk mountain at Black Sea) // ZOOID, IV. Эллинистическая техника, 1948 - (Ellenisticheskaja tekhnika - Hellenistic technology), Moskva-Leningrad. Frolova N.A., 1977 - Фролова Н.А., О причинах реформы денежного обращения на Боспоре в правление Савромата II (O prichinah reformy denezhnogo obraszczenija na Bospore v pravlenie Savromata II - About causes of currency reform on the Bosporos during of reign of Sauromates II) // NS, 5 (1). Frolova N.A., Šurgaja I.G., 1982 - Фролова Н.А., Шургая И.Г., Илуратский клад монет Рискупорида V (Iluratskiy klad monet Riskuporida V - Iluraton’s hoard of coins of Rhescuporis V) // VDI, № 1. Gajdukevič V.F., 1950 - Гайдукевич В.Ф., Боспорский город Илурат (Bosporskiy gorod Ilurat - Bosporan town Iluraton) // SA, XIII. ______, 1952 - Раскопки Тиритаки в 1935-1940 гг. (Raskopki Tiritaki v 1935-1940 gg. - Excavations of Tiritaka in 19351940) // MIA, № 25. ______, 1952а - Раскопки Мирмекия в 1935-1938 гг. (Raskopki Mirmekija v 1935-1938 gg. - Excavations of Myrmekion in 1935-1938 // MIA, № 25. ______, 1958 - Илурат. Итоги археологических исследований 1948-1953 гг. (Ilurat. Itogi archeologicheskih issledovaniy 1948-1953 gg. - Iluraton. Results of archaeological investigations in 1948-1953) // MIA, № 85. ______, 1958а - Виноделие на Боспоре (Vinodelie na Bospore - Vinemaking of the Bosporos) // MIA, № 85. ______, 1971 - Das Bosporanische Reich. Berlin-Amsterdam. ______, 1981 - Илурат: раскопки 1954-1960 гг. (Ilurat: raskopki 1954-1960 gg. - Iluraton: excavations 19541960) // Боспорские города (Bosporskie goroda- Bosporan cities). Leningrad. Gall von H., 1967. Zu den kleinasiatischen Treppentunneln // AA, 82. Goroncharovski V.A., 1982 - Горончаровский В.А., Свинцовая гиря из Илурата (Svintsovaja girja iz Ilurata Lead weight from Iluraton) // SA, № 1. ______, 1983 - Домостроительство и социальная структура Илурата (Domostroitel’stvo i sotsial’naja struktura Ilurata Housebuilding and social structure of Iluraton) // Новые экспедиционные исследования археологов (Novye

ekspeditsionnye issledovanija arheologov - New expeditional investigations of archaeologists). Leningrad. ______, 1984 - Раскопки Илурата (Raskopki Ilurata Excavations of Iluraton) // АО, 1982. ______, 1984a -Новый тип двойного денария Савромата II (Novyj tip dvojnogo denarija Savromata II - New type of double denarius of Sauromates II) // VDI, № 3. ______, 1985 - Илуратская винодельня (Iluratskaja vinodel’nja - Iluraton’s winery) // KSIA, 182. ______, 1987 - Исследование городища и некрополя Илурата Issledovanie gorodiszcza i nekropolja Ilurata Investigation of hillfort and necropolis of Iluraton) // AO, 1985. ______, 1989 - Оборонительные сооружения Илурата (Oboronitel’nye sooruzhenija Ilurata - Fortifications of Iluraton) // Проблемы исследования античных городов (Problemy issledovanija antichnyh gorodov - Problems of investigation of Classical Cities). Moskva. ______, 1991 - Нижний некрополь Илурата (Nizhniy nekropol’ Ilurata - Lower necropolis of Iluraton) // Проблемы археологии и истории Боспора. Тезисы докладов юбилейной конференции - Problemy archeologii i istorii Bospora. Tezisy dokladov jubilejnoy konferentsii - Problems of archaeology and history of the Bosporos. Abstracts of papers of jubilee conference). Kertch. ______, 1993 - О полевых исследованиях Илуратского отряда Боспорской экспедиции ИИМК РАН (O polevykh issledovanijakh Iluratskogo otrjada Bosporskoy ekspeditsii IIMK RAN - About field investigations of the Iluraton’s detachment of Bosporan expedition IHMK) // AIU, 1991. ______, 1993а - Исследования Илуратского отряда Боспорской экспедиции ИИМК в 1992 г. (Issledovanija Iluratskogo otrjada Bosporskoy ekspeditsii IIMK RAN v 1992 g. - Investigations of the Iluraton’s detachment of Bosporan expedition IHMK in 1992) // AIU, 1992. ______, 1993b - Iluraton. In: Treister M.J., Vinogradov J.G. y on the Northern Coast of the Black Sea // AJA, 97 (3). ______, 1993c - Золотой медальон III в. н.э. из раскопок Илурата (Zolotoy medal’on III v. n.e. iz raskopok Ilurata Gold medallion of the 3rd century AD from excavations of Iluraton) // AV, № 2. ______, 1994 - Раскопки верхнего некрополя Илурата (Raskopki verkhnego nekropolja Ilurata - Excavations of the Upper necropolis of Iluraton) // Археологические исследования в Крыму в 1993 (Archeologicheskie issledovanija v Krymu v 1993 godu - Archaeological investigations in Crimea). Simferopol’. ______, 1995 - Крепость Илурат в системе обороны западной границы Боспорского царства в I-III вв. н.э. (Krepost’ Ilurat v sisteme oborony zapadnoy granitsy Bosporskogo tsarstva v I-III vv. - Fortress Iluraton in the system of defence of west border of Bosporan kingdom in the 1st-3rd centuries AD) // Фортификация в древности и средневековье (Fortifikatsija v drevnosti i srednevekov’e Fortification in the Antiquity and Dark Ages). SanktPetersburg. ______, 1998 - Погребения с оружием в некрополе Илурата (Pogrebenija s oruzhiem v nekropole Ilurata - Burials with weapons in the necropolis of Iluraton) // Военная археология (Voennaja archeologija - Military archeology). Sankt- Petersburg. ______, 2000 - Терракотовая статуя женского божества из раскопок некрополя Илурата: Афродита или Фортуна? (Terrakotovaja statuja zhenskogo bozhestva iz raskopok

912

VLADIMIR ANATOLYEVITCH GORONTCHAROVSKIY: ILURATON nekropolja Ilurata: Afrodita ili Fortuna? – Terracotta statue of female deity from excavations of necropolis of Iluraton: Aphrodite or Fortune?) // ΣΥΣΣΙΤΙΑ. Sankt-Petersburg. ______, 2001 - К вопросу о водоснабжении крепости Илурат (K voprosu o vodosnabzhenii kreposti Ilurat - To the question about watersupply of the fortress Iluraton) // Bospor Kimmerijskiy i Pont v period antichnosti i srednevekovja. Materialy II Bosporskih chteniy Cimmerian Bosporos and Pontos in the Classical and Dark Ages period. Materials of the 2nd Bosporan readings). Kertch. ______, 2002 - Крепость Илурат: итоги изучения (Krepost’ Ilurat: itogi izuchenija - Fortress Iluraton: results of the study) // Боспор Киммерийский и Понт в период античности и средневековья. Материалы III Боспорских чтений. Bospor Kimmerijskiy, Pont i varvarskiy mir v period antichnosti i srednevekovja. Materialy III Bosporskih chteniy - Cimmerian Bosporos, Pontos and Barbarian World in the Classical and Dark Ages period. Materials of the 3rd Bosporan readings). Kertch. ______, 2003 - Между Империей и варварами. Военное дело Боспора римского времени (Mezhdu Imperiey i varvarami. Voennoe delo Bospora rimskogo vremeni Between the Empire and Barbarians: Warfare of the Bosporan kingdom in Roman times). Sankt-Petersburg. Goroncharovski V.A., Khrshanovski V.A., 1994 Горончаровский В.А., Хршановский В.А., Раскопки верхнего некрополя Илурата (Raskopki verhnego nekropolja Ilurata - Excavations of the Upper necropolis of Iluraton) // Археологические исследования в Крыму в 1993 г. (Arkheologicheskie issledovanija v Krymu v 1993 g. – Archaeological investigations in Crimea in 1993). Simferopol. Goroncharovski V.A., Nikonorov V.P., 1987 Горончаровский В.А., Никоноров В.П., Илуратский катафрактарий (Iluratskij katafraktariy - Iluraton’s cataphract) // VDI, № 1. Grach N.L., 1976 - Грач Н.Л., Свинцовые гири из Нимфея и некоторые вопросы боспорской весовой метрологии (Svintsovye giri iz Nimfeja i nekotorye voprosy Bosporskoy vesovoy metrologii - Lead weights from Nymphaeum and some problems of the Bosporan weight system) // TGE, XVII. Ivanov T., 1980 - Иванов Т., Абритус (Abritus). Sofia. Kaufman S.A., 1947 - Кауфман С.А. Об уступчатых склепах Боспора (Ob ustupchatyh sklepah Bospora - About ledged vaults of the Bosporos) // SIITA, № 6. Khrshanovski V.A., 1998 - Хршановский В.А., Погребения III вв. н.э. с краснолаковой керамикой из некрополя Илурата (Pogrebenija I-II vv. n.e. s krasnolakovoy keramikoy iz nekropolja Ilurata – Graves of the 1st-2nd centuries AD with Red-Glaze Pottery from the necropolis of Iluraton) // Эллинистическая и римская керамика в Северном Причерноморье (Ellinisticheskaja i rimskaja keramika v Severnom Prichernomorje - Hellenistic and Roman Pottery in the North Black Sea Coast) // TGIM, № 102. ______, 2003 - Некрополь Илурата: топография, хронология, этнокультурная характеристика (Nekropol’ Ilurata: topografija, khronologija, etnokul’turnaja kharakteristika - Necropolis of Iluraton: topography, chronology, etnocultural characteristic) // Боспор Киммерийский в период античности и средневековья (Bospor Kimmerijskiy v period antichnosti i srednevekovja. Materialy IV Bosporskih chteniy - Cimmerian Bosporos in

the Classical and Dark Ages period . Materials of the 4th Bosporan readings). Kertch. Kryzhitski S.D ,1982. Крыжицкий С.Д.- Жилые дома античных городов Северного Причерноморья (Zhilye doma antichnykh gorodov Severnogo Prichernomorja Dwelling houses of Classical Cities of the Black Sea Coast). Kiev. _______, 1985 - К вопросу об определении количества населения в греческом эллинистическом городе (K voprosu ob opredelenii kolichestva naselenija v grecheskom ellinisticheskom gorode - To the question about definition quantity in Greek Hellenistic city) // Причерноморье в эпоху эллинизма. Материалы III Всесоюзного симпозиума по древней истории Причерноморья (Prichernomorje v epokhu ellinizma. Materialy III Vsesojuznogo simpoziuma po drevney istorii Prichernomorja - Black Sea Сoast in the Hellenistic epoque. Materials of the 3rd All-Union symposium on antique history of Black Sea Сoast). Tbilisi. ______, 1993 - Архитектура античных государств Северного Причерноморья (Arkhitektura antichnykh gosudarstv Severnogo Prichernomorja - Architecture of Classical States of the Black Sea Coast). Kiev. Kryzhitski S.D., Kublanov M.M.,1972 - Крижицький С.Д., Кубланов М.М., Склеп № 18 некрополя Илурата (спроба реконструкцii) (Sklep № 18 nekropolja Ilurata (sproba rekonstruktsii) - Burial vault № 18 of the necropolis of Iluraton (experience of reconstruction) // Археологiя (Archeologia - Archaeology), № 7. Kiev. Krug O.Ju., Ryndina N.V., 1962 - Круг О.Ю., Рындина Н.В., К вопросу о железной металлургии Пантикапея (K voprosu o zheleznoy metallurgii Pantikapeja - To the question about iron metallurgy of Panticapeum) // IA, № 103. Kruglikova I.T., 1966 - Кругликова И.Т., Боспор в позднеантичное время (Bospor v pozdneantichnoe vremja - The Bosporos in the Late Classical time). Мoskva. ______, 1975 - Сельское хозяйство Боспора (Sel’skoe hozjajstvo Bospora - Agriculture of the Bosporos). Мoskva. Kublanov M.M., 1948 - Кубланов М.М., Итоги археологических разысканий в районе деревни Ивановки (Керченский полуостров) в 1947 г. (Itogi archeologicheskih razyskaniy v rajone derevni Ivanovki (Kerchenskiy poluostrov) v 1947 g. - Results of archeological investigations in the region of village Ivanovka (Kertch peninsula) in 1947) // Ученые записки Ленинградского педагогического института (Uchenye zapiski Leningradskogo pedagogicheskogo instituta Scientific transactions of Leningrad Pedagogical Institute), 68. ______, 1971 - Исследование некрополя Илурата (Issledovanie nekropolja Ilurata - Investigation of the necropolis of Iluraton) // KSIA, № 128. ______, 1972 - Раскопки некрополя Илурата в 1969 г. (Raskopki nekropolja Ilurata v 1969 g. - Excavations of the necropolis of Iluraton in 1969) // КСИА, № 130. ______, 1976 - Новые памятники некрополя Илурата (Novye pamjatniki nekropolja Ilurata - New monuments of the necropolis of Iluraton) // KSIA, № 145. ______, 1979 - Новые погребальные сооружения некрополя Илурата (Novye pogrebal’nye sooruzhenija nekropolja Ilurata - New burial constructions of Iluraton) // KSIA, № 159. ______, 1979 - Раскопки некрополя Илурата. Итоги и проблемы (Raskopki nekropolja Ilurata. Itogi i problemy Excavations of the necropolis of Iluraton. Results and

913

ANCIENT GREEK COLONIES IN THE BLACK SEA 2 problems) // Научно-атеистические исследования в музеях (Nauchno-ateisticheskie issledovanija v muzejahScientific and atheistic investigations in museums). Leningrad. Kublanov M.M., Khrshanovski V.A., 1989 - Кубланов М.М., Хршановский В.А., Некрополь Илурата: раскопки 1984-1988 гг. (Necropol’ Ilurata: raskopki 1984-1988 godov - Necropolis of Iluraton: excavations in 1984-1988) // Проблемы религиеведения и атеизма в музеях (Problemy religievedenija i ateizma v muzejah - Problems of religious history and atheism in museums). Leningrad. Maslennikov A.A., 1986 - Масленников А.А,, Геракл Савромата II (Gerakl Savromata II - Hercules of Sauromates II) // Проблемы античной культуры (Problemy antichnoy kultury - Problems of Classical Culture). Moskva. ______, 1990 - Население Боспорского государства в первых веках н.э. (Naselenie Bosporskogo gosudarstva v pervykh vekah n.e. - The population of the Bosporan state in the first centuries AD). Мoskva. ______, 1998 - Эллинская хора на краю Ойкумены. Сельская территория европейского Боспора в античную эпоху (Ellinskaja hora na kraju Oikumeny. Sel’skaja territorija evropejskogo Bospora v antichnuju epohu hellenic chora at the Far Side of the Oikumene. Rural territory of European Bosporos in Classical epoque). Moskva. Mielczarek M., 1993 - Cataphracti and clibanarii. Studies on the heavy armoured cavalry of the Ancient World. Lodz. Mielczarek M., 1999 - The Army of the Bosporan kingdom. Lodz. Petrun’ V.F., 1965 - Петрунь В.Ф., О двух интересных горных породах в зернотерках античного времени из Северного Причерноморья (O dvukh interesnykh gornykh porodakh v zernoterkakh antichnogo vremeni iz Severnogo Prichernomorja - About two interesting rocks in graingraters of Classical time from Black Sea Coast) // KSOGAM for 1963. Podgorodetskiy P.D., 1988 - Подгородецкий П.Д., Крым: природа (Krym: priroda - Crimea: nature). Simferopol’. Saprykin S.Ju., 2002 - Сапрыкин С.Ю., Был ли на Боспоре храм Асклепия (Byl li na Bospore hram Asklepija? Whether was on the Bosporos a temple of Asclepios?) // Северное Причерноморье в античное время (Severnoe Prichernomorje v antichnoe vremja - North Black Sea Coast in Classical time). Kiev. Shelov D.B., 1978 - Шелов Д.Б., Узкогорлые светлоглиняные амфоры первых веков нашей эры (Uzkogorlye svetloglinjanye amphory pervykh vekov nashey ery. Klassifikatsija i khronologija - Narrow-necked bright-clay amphorae of the first centuries AD Classification and chronology) // KSIA, № 156. Silant’eva L.F., 1958 - Силантьева Л.Ф., Краснолаковая керамика Илурата (Krasnolakovaja keramika Ilurata Red-glaze ware of Iluraton) // MIA, № 85. Sokol’ski N.I., 1962 - Сокольский Н.И., Каменные ядра из Пантикапея (Kamennye jadra iz Pantikapeja - Stone balls from Panticapeum) // MIA, № 103. Šurgaja I.G., 1970 - Шургая И.Г., Раскопки в юго-западном районе Илурата в 1966 - 1968 гг. (Raskopki v jugozapadnom rajone Ilurata v 1966-1968 gg. - Excavations in the south-west district of Iluraton in 1966-1968) // KSIA, № 124. ______, 1974 - Ilouraton // Zeitschrift für Archäologie, 8 (1). ______, 1975 - Центральный район Илурата (Tsentral’nyj rajon Ilurata - Central district of Iluraton) // KSIA, № 143.

______, 1983 - Изображения всадника и коня из Илурата (Izobrazhenija vsadnika i konja iz Ilurata - Images of horseman and horse from Iluraton) // KSIA, № 174. ______, 1984 - Нимфей, Мирмекий, Тиритака, Порфмий, Илурат (Nimfey, Mirmekiy, Tiritaka, Porfmiy, Ilurat Nymphaion, Myrmekion, Tyritace, Iluraton) // Археология СССР. Archeologia SSSR. Antichnye gosudarstva Severnogo Prichernomorja - Archaeology of USSR. Classical states of North Black Sea Coast). Moskva. ______, 1986 - Agrarnaja magija v Ilurate - Agrarian magic in Iluraton) // Проблемы античной культуры (Problemy antichnoy kul’tury - Problems of Classical culture). Moskva. Šurgaja I.G., Janushevich Z.V., 1983 - Шургая И.Г., Янушевич З.В., О виноделии в Боспорском царстве (O vinodelii v Bosporskom tsarstve - About wine-production in the Bosporan kingdom) // Природа (Priroda - Nature), № 11. Tolstikov V.P., 1977 - Толстиков В.П., К вопросу об оборонительных сооружениях акрополя Пантикапея (K voprosu ob oboronitel’nyh sooruzhenijah akropolja Pantikapeja v IV-I vv. do n.e. - To the question about defencive constructions of acropolis of Panticapaeum in the 4th - 1st centuries BC) // VDI, № 3. ______, 1992 - Неизвестные страницы истории Боспорского царства (Neizvestnye stranitsy istorii Bosporskogo tsartstva - Unknown pages of the history of Bosporan Kingdom) // SGMII, 10. Trillmich W., 1988 - Familienpropaganda der Caiser Caligula und Claudius. Berlin. Tunkina I.V., 1999 - Тункина И.В, О судьбе рукописного наследия Павла Дюбрюкса (O sud’be rukopisnogo nasledija Pavla Dubrjuksa - About the fate of manuscript heritage of Paul Dubrux) // Боспорский феномен: греческая культура на периферии античного мира. Материалы международной научной конференции (Bosporskiy fenomen: grecheskaja kul’tura na periferii antichnogo mira. Materialy mezhdunarodnoy nauchnoy konferentsii - Bosporan phenomenon: Greek culture at the periphery of Classical world. Materials of International Scientific Conference). Sankt-Petersburg. _______, 2002 - Русская наука о классических древностях юга России (XVIII - середина XIX вв.) (Russkaja nauka o klassicheskih drevnostjah juga Rossii (XVIII - seredina XIX v.) - Russian science about Classical antiquities of the south of Russia (the 18th - middle of the 19th centuries). Sankt-Petersburg. Uzhentsev V.B., Jurochkin V.Ju., 1998 - Уженцев В.Б., Юрочкин В.Ю., Амфоры с воронковидным горлом из Причерноморья (Amphory s voronkovidnym gorlom iz Prichernomorja - Amphorae with funnel-shaped neck at the Black Sea Coast) // KHS, IX. Vinogradov Ju.A., 1983 - Виноградов Ю.А., Тигель из Илурата (Tigel’ iz Ilurata - Crusible from Iluraton) // SA, № 2. Vinokurov N.I., Nikonov A.A., 1998 - Винокуров Н.И., Никонов А.А., О следах землетрясений античного времени на западе Европейского Боспора (O sledah zemletrjaseniy antichnogo vremeni na zapade Evropejskogo Bospora - About traces of earthquakes of Classical time at the West of European Bosporos) // RA, № 4. ______, 2004 - Тотальные разрушения второй половины III в. н.э. на Боспоре как хронологический репер (Total’nye razrushenija vtoroj poloviny III v. n.e. na Bospore kak khronologicheskij reper - Total destructions of the second half of the 3rd century AD on the Bosporos as

914

VLADIMIR ANATOLYEVITCH GORONTCHAROVSKIY: ILURATON chronological bench-mark) // Боспорский феномен: проблемы хронологии и датировки памятников (Bosporskiy fenomen: problemy khronologii i datirovki pamjatnikov. Materialy mezhdunarodnoy nauchnoy konferentsii, 1 - Bosporan phenomenon: Problems of chronology and dating. Materials of International Scientific Conference, 1). Sankt- Petersburg. Vysotskaja T.N., 1979 - Высотская Т.Н., Неаполь Скифский - столица поздних скифов (Neapol’ - stolitsa pozdnih skifov - Neapolis - the capital of Late Scythians). Kiev. West R., 1933 - Römische Porträtplastik. München, I. Wood S., 1988 - Memorial Agrippina, Agrippina the Elder in Julio-Claudian art and propaganda // AJA, 92 (3). Wood S., 1995 - Diva Drusilla Panthea and the Sisters of Caligula // AJA, 99 (3). Zaharenkov N.V., 1999 - Захаренков Н.В., Грунтовый склеп I в. н.э. на некрополе Илурата (Gruntovyj sklep I v. n.e. na nekropole Ilurata - Subterranean burial vault of the 1st

century AD on the necropolis of Iluraton) // Боспорский феномен: Греческая культура на периферии античного мира. Материалы международной научной конференции (Bosporskiy fenomen: Grecheskaja kultura na periferii antichnogo mira. Materialy mezhdunarodnoy nauchnoy konferentsii - Bosporan phaenomenon: Greek culture on the periphery of Classical world. Materials of international scientific conference). Sankt-Petersburg. Zenkevich V.P., 1958 - Зенкевич В.П., Берега Черного и Азовского морей (Berega Chernogo i Azovskogo morey Coasts of Black and Azov Seas). Moskva. Zograf A.N., 1951 - Зограф А.Н., Античные монеты (Antichnye monety - Classical coins) // MIA, № 16. Zubarev V.G., 1998 - Зубарев В.Г., Античная география Европейского Боспора по Клавдию Птолемею (Antichnaja geografija Evropejskogo Bospora po Klavdiju Ptolemeju - Classical geography of the European Bosporos according to Claudius Ptolemeus) // DB, 1.

915

ANCIENT GREEK COLONIES IN THE BLACK SEA 2

Figure 1. Plan of the site of Iluraton (excavations 1947-2000).

916

VLADIMIR ANATOLYEVITCH GORONTCHAROVSKIY: ILURATON

Figure 2. Plan of Iluraton by P. Dubrux (1833).

1

2 Figure 3. 1. Northeastern defensive wall with small tower (plan and facade). 2. Section of the northeastern slope of Iluraton with well and underground passage.

917

ANCIENT GREEK COLONIES IN THE BLACK SEA 2

Figure 4. 1. View of the northeast slope of Iluraton. 2. Fragment of building inscription. 3. Remains of a ladder near southwest defensive wall. 4. Entrance opening of tower. 918

VLADIMIR ANATOLYEVITCH GORONTCHAROVSKIY: ILURATON

Figure 5. 1. View of courtyard of house near tower V. 2. House on the northwest terrace of site. 3. Remains of pavement near crossroads of main streets. 4. Graffito with image of cataphract. 5-6. Interiors of Iluraton houses.

919

ANCIENT GREEK COLONIES IN THE BLACK SEA 2

Figure 6. 1-4. Reconstructions and plans of Iluraton houses (2 - with two possible reconstructions).

920

VLADIMIR ANATOLYEVITCH GORONTCHAROVSKIY: ILURATON

Figure 7. 1-2. Red-slip pottery: 1 - cup; 2 - lamps. 3-5. Hand-made pottery: 3 - filter; 4 - lid of vessel; 5 - beaker with zoomorphic handle.

921

ANCIENT GREEK COLONIES IN THE BLACK SEA 2

Figure 8. Industrial site of winery: 1 - view; 2 - plan and sections.

922

VLADIMIR ANATOLYEVITCH GORONTCHAROVSKIY: ILURATON

Figure 9. 1 - Hoard of King Rheskuporis IV staters. 2 - Unique double denarius of King Sauromates II. 3 - Golden medallion with image of Aphrodite.

923

ANCIENT GREEK COLONIES IN THE BLACK SEA 2

Figure 10. 1 - Clay stamp for producing cult cakes. 2 - Stone altar with skull of man. 3 - Fragment of a hand-made cult vessel. 4 - hand-made clay figurines from domestic sanctuary. 5 - Marble figurine from ash-hill near southeast gate.

924

VLADIMIR ANATOLYEVITCH GORONTCHAROVSKIY: ILURATON

Figure 11. 1-2. ‘Upper’ necropolis: 1 - two-chambered tomb; 2 - unique terracotta statue of female deity. 3-4. ‘Lower’ necropolis: 3 – warrior’s stone cist grave; 4 - offensive weapons from warrior graves.

925

ANCIENT GREEK COLONIES IN THE BLACK SEA 2

Figure 12. ‘Lower’ necropolis: 1 - chamber with stepped dromos; 2-3 - glass vessels; 4- gold ear-rings; 5 - silver ring with intaglio; 6 - glass ring.

926

Torikos and the South-Eastern Periphery of the Bosporan Kingdom (7th C. BC – 3rd C. A.D.)1 Аlexey Аlexandrovitch Malyshev*

Introduction1

terracotta figurines, etc), evidence of commodity – money relations, burial grounds according to Greek customs (construction peculiarities of the burial grounds, the rite ‘Chairon’s obol’), etc.

This article is an attempt to systematize the present data about the scale and peculiarities of the great Greek (7th – 6th c. BC) and inner-Bosporan colonization of the region located at the south–east of the Bosporan kingdom, as well as to estimate the significance of this factor for the history and culture of the local population.

Greeks and aboriginal population (Toreti and Kerkerti) during the Archaic and Early Classic Periods

The territory of the foothills is a single geomorphologic region that got the name of Abrau peninsula: in the north it is bordered by the valley of the Katlama river, in the east by the Markhotkh ridge, in the south and in the west by the Black Sea. On the peninsula we can distinguish a relatively elevated area in the southwest (heights – 200500 m), changing into lower lands near the continent (heights – 50-100 m), and also a hilly area (heights – 50200 m) (Fig. 1). Nature has done a lot to isolate the region from the rest of the world from the seaside as well as from the continent. Nevertheless, the facts we possess now enable us to speak about the existence of Greekbarbarian contacts from the Archaic epoch.

The finds from the Greek settlement in the estuary of the Bay of Gelendzhik on the Cape Tonky give us the most vivid evidence of the beginning of the assimilation on the Caucasian coast by the Greek colonists in the second quarter – middle of the 6th c. BC. From the beginning of the 19th c. a large number of researchers localize the classical town of Torikos, according to Pseudo-Scylax (Ps.-Scyl., 76) a town with harbor, on the Bay of Gelendzhik (Dubois de Montpereux Fr., 1839, p. 57, 64, 106; Ashik F.B., 1848, p. 15). In 1965 I. B. Brashinsky conducted some research of the northwestern part of the Bay of Gelendzhik and revealed a deposit of Hellenistic times. Following his assumption, the classical Torikos should be looked for on the Cape Tonky (Brashinsky I.B., 1968, p. 70).

The first attempts of the Greek migrants to settle down in this region can be dated no later than to the second quarter of the 6th c. BC. What circumstances could attract Greek migrants to this region? Mineral and human resources are scarce; grain production and transit trade are difficult in the local physiographic conditions (relief, harsh climate (high humidity and violent winds)). Obviously, the relationships with the local aboriginal population did not develop favourably. The lack of raw materials, inefficient economy, and difficulties in establishing barter-trade relationships stimulated the growth of piracy.

In 1971 during trial excavations N.A. Onaiko discovered a classical settlement that was conventionally named Torikos (Onaiko N. A., 1980, p.101-119). The settlement was located on a small cape-shaped rocky plateau (Fig. 1, II; 2, I). In the north-west the built-up area was bordered by a stream, in ancient times – by a river. A significant part of the site, estimated by N. A. Onaiko, was destroyed by the coastal abrasion. The surviving part of the settlement has been thoroughly investigated. The most vivid peculiarity of the site is the total scale of the construction, which is not typical of archaic household sites of the Northern Pontic region. The characteristic feature of the Greek colonization of this region was that, because of a colder climate of this region, colonists used dug-outs and semi-dugouts (pithouses). The appearance of above-ground stone buildings and regular planning is dated to the third quarter of the 6th c. BC. (Solov’yev S.L., 1997, p.17-24). Dwelling constructions comparable to this one became widely spread in the Mediterranean and the Black Sea regions in Hellenistic times. The uncovered complex (total area 1540 m2, size approximately 30 x 50 m) comprises 21 buildings situated around the courtyard with the size of 24 x 38 m (Fig. 2, II).

The assimilation of this area of the coastline in the 6th – 5th centuries BC had been done primarily to provide a safe sea navigation to rapidly developing centers in the Asian Bosporos, which is impossible without setting up strongholds. The archaeological evidence for a prolonged dwelling of Greeks in this area is, as a rule, quite specific. There is a whole set of features characteristic of the classical life style: traditional stone and adobe houses, regularlyplanned built-up areas (Hippodamean scheme), specific items of classical daily routine (finds of lamps, cult 1 The author is grateful to I.A. Spiridonova for helping with the translation of this article, A.N. Gei and E.I. Savchenko for kindly agreeing to contribute their unpublished data, and A.V. Dmitriev for valuable remarks. * E-mail: [email protected]

927

ANCIENT GREEK COLONIES IN THE BLACK SEA 2 The walls are almost entirely made of local rocks: sandstone and erodible clay marl. The building stone did not undergo any treatment. The most solid blocks served as a foundation, whereas smaller stones formed a backfill and also filled gaps between bigger stones. Clay mortar was also used. In some cases the floors inside the buildings and some passages in the courtyard were paved with stone tiles.

carelessness of construction mentioned by the author of excavations enables us to doubt the correctness of such assumption. The second period of building is represented by restoration and partial rearrangement of the complex, which resulted in a slight reduction of its total area. The necessity of the works might be related to either some miscalculations while building at the beginning or to demographic changes or changes in the economic specialization of the population. Judging from our data, this phase existed for only a short period and was destroyed by fire resulted from a catastrophe. Alluvial deposits covering the burned surface are indicative of a long period when the area was unpopulated.

The state of the remaining walls varies, but in some cases one-meter and even higher walls are preserved. We can identify three types of stonework, the use of which depended on the skills of a master or the purpose of the building. The first type represents middle- and large-sized constructions of quarry stone, which predominate in the walls of Torikos, according to the observations of the author, and probably reflects a hasty nature of the erection of the whole complex.

New inhabitants of Torikos, in Onaiko’s opinion, were small in number and were not-wealthy Greeks. They used only rooms located in the south-eastern part of the building. Many rooms were reorganized and rebuilt: rooms ‘И’, ‘Ш’, ‘Ф’ were divided in two parts (Fig. 2, II).

The second type of stonework, consisting of greatly stretched triangular blocks between which smaller flat stones were laid, is typical of outer walls. Evidently, outer walls were blank. Their thickness (about 1.2 m) and quality considerably exceed those of inner walls (about 0.5 m). The alternation of large blocks with fillings of smaller prolonged stones is characteristic of the third type of stonework, identified by the author of excavations as an analogue of the stonework in constructions in Olynthos. This type of stonework had been episodically recorded in the buildings of Torikos.

Further building activities of new inhabitants were aimed at fortifying the outer walls in order to protect them from enemies. N.A. Onaiko mentions a wide use of sea boulders in the restoration and building, which is the evidence of difficulties in getting construction materials, in other words of limited access to the continental area. This stage in history of the settlement was short, judging from few artifacts related to this level.

The absence of roof tile and great amounts of coating excludes the availability of tiled or wattle roof. The analyzed samples of coal show that the following trees were used for construction and heat-insulation of the building: ash – tree (Frakimus), poplar – aspen (Populus), elm (Ulmus), maple (Acer) and less frequently pine (Pinus).

The rooms of Torikos are often of moderate size with an area of about 17 m2. In some cases the area of the rooms used to be far larger: room ‘B’ (over 30 m2 and the largest room ‘E’ (over 40 m2). Their doorways 1.2-1.4 m wide practically always led to courtyards and were provided with stone thresholds.

Three building periods have been traced. During the first period 16 rooms and one corridor were built (Fig. 2, II).

Depending on the plan and the set of the finds inside the room and its vicinity we can speak of its function. The author distinguishes between living, household, production and the so-called combined rooms. Hearths and ovens are of great importance for identifying the ways the rooms were used. They are rather wide-spread objects within this site, which testifies a year-round living. Practically all hearths and ovens are related to either the first or second period of the site existence. Most frequently they are preserved as a rather solid layer of baked clay coating, thus making it sometimes impossible to tell household hearths from production rooms.

Traditionally Greek adobe and dug-in-earth buildings are absent here. The studied constructions have a distinctive design characterized by the geometrical imprecision of room planning and the absence of strict orientation. The geological factors seem to have been neglected: buildings were placed without any foundation right on the uneven surface of bedrock. All this indicates that, even at the initial stage, the construction work was performed in a great hurry. Probably, crucial principles of building were consciously neglected for the sake of meeting deadlines. Erecting walls by jointing and twining, according to N. A. Onayko, can be explained by a craving to create an earthquake-resistant construction,2 but the general

and magnitude of earthquakes are registered here within the last hundred of years, and weak earthquakes happen quite often here. It is believed that epicenters of earthquakes with force 8 and more at the Richter scale are connected with this fracture. The farther from the epicenter, the weaker is the seismic disturbance. The analysis of tectonic conditions allows forecasting earthquake force 8 along the coastal strip of several kilometers wide, from Anapa to Myskhako, and less strong earthquakes (force 7) in the interior part of the country.

2 Generally the region is characterized as seismic: Utrish geological fracture extends along the coastline to the recent hollow in the Black Sea (Fig. 1, I). In the late neogen, a large massif shifted south-west and west of the modern coastline (Ostrovskiy A.V., 1965, p.334) along this fracture. That resulted in a high seismicity of the region. The frequency

928

АLEXEY АLEXANDROVITCH MALYSHEV: TORIKOS Following definitions of N.A. Onaiko, the rooms with ‘tables’ can be called combined rooms. Their purpose could vary, depending on their size, shape and location. Semicircular paved table located in room ‘E’ near the hearth, according to N. A. Onaiko, could have served for ritual purposes. In room ‘A’ besides household tables, some kind of a stove-bench and a stone chest can be recognized.

Large wattle ovens with flues and smaller hearths performed a warming function. Usually, they were located closer to the centre of the room, but in some cases they seemed to guard the entrance. The hearth 66 was situated opposite the entrance into room ‘B’ and, being built of stones, and is ‘П’-shaped. A fence, constructed of thin slabs put on the edge, is recognizable near it. On the fence and the hearth small, middle and large flat slabs were registered lying on the bedrock. Apparently, they are the remains of the courtyard paving (Fig. 2, II).

The importance of Torikos is evidenced by the amount of labour spent on its building and by the estimated number of inhabitants of this building. Judging from practical experience, one specialist-mason can build 1.5 m2 of stonework in one work-day. It is necessary to take into account the labour inevitably spent on stone mining and transporting. Therefore, stone walls of this complex could reach the height of 2 m within 6 months of continuous work of 10 people. This estimate does not take account of the roof building, possible fluctuations in weather conditions, and also problems connected with food provision to the workers, defence of the building site from possible attacks of aboriginal tribes, etc.

Room ‘И’ in this sense is of special interest. It is situated in the southern corner of the building and stretches beyond the limits of adjoining rooms (Fig. 2, II). In plan it is almost quadrangle with the dimensions of 4.5 x 4.5 m, the walls on the whole are notable for thoroughness of stonework, while three outer walls exceed the inner north-western one twice. The author of the excavations believes that this construction used to be a tower, like a medieval donjon: the thickness of the walls could carry the weight of the upper floors, and the stones on the southern corner of the room could be remains of the lower step of a stone staircase leading to the upper level.

On the basis of the aforesaid, it is possible to suggest that the building process began most likely with the erection of the room-tower (?) ‘И’ and then continued with the block and its associated rooms ‘Д’, ‘Е’ and ‘Л’. The concentric type of building is a characteristic feature of rural constructions. Such examples are well known in the Olbian chorae, for instance, building on the site ‘Didova Khata’ (Kryzhitskiy S.D., 1982, Fig. 17), buildings in the western Crimea (AGSP, 1984, Taf. XXV), and also in the Bosporus area (Masslennikov A.A., 1998, Fig. 10).

Room ‘Д’ (13 m2) is one of the typical household rooms. The character of pottery and presence of an oven makes it possible to assume that a kitchen used to be here. The remains of the oven 22 were found on the southern corner of the room; it occupied the area of 1.35 x 1 m. A part of the foundation is preserved. It is the foundation of an oven rising above the stone floor of the room, and also the remains of the upper part of the oven, evidently the chimney. A thick layer of ashes 0.1m thick is recognizable at the entrance to the room. Room ‘У’ apparently had a similar purpose. There were also revealed remains of an oven and a great number of handmade pottery. Repositories used to be equipped in small compartments there. For example, in room ‘E’ numerous fragments of amphorae were found.

An equally interesting question is the number and selection of inhabitants of the estate. During the initial period of the complex existence, at least 24 rooms were used. They could house, in the opinion of N.A. Onaiko, at least 100 people. Undoubtedly, that was a united group of people interconnected by administrative-economic, cultural-ethnic and, probably, family liaisons (Onaiko N.A., 1980, р.112). Since the settlement was closely connected with the sea, it is possible to suggest that the composition and size of the group could significantly vary depending on the season and specific historical factors.

The peculiarity of Torikos is the absence of any household structures beyond the complex. Even the vivid production of rooms ‘M’, ‘E’ and especially ‘П’ with a wattle oven (9 1.8 x 3.7 m) that occupied the major part of the room were included into the general system of the build-up area, which is far from being fire-safe.

Chronological data on this settlement are provided by ceramic materials. Fragments of amphorae prevail among the finds in this building. The total number of vessels can be estimated to 200, judging from the number of amphora bases (Onaiko N.A., 1980, p.66).

The size of the courtyard of the building is impressive, it is over 900 m2. The main entrance was located closer to the western corner of the building. It consisted of a long (8 m) 2.2-meter-wide corridor (room ‘T’) leading to the river. Undoubtedly, the entrance to the complex was envisaged from the coastal side in order to provide access to the sea moorage. In the courtyard N.A. Onaiko traced remains of light structures, functioning during the first and second building periods which were interpreted by the author as feeding-racks, hearths, cattle premises and storerooms.

The earliest vessels are represented mostly by Ionian ceramics (amphorae and tableware3). The earliest date – not later than the first third of the 6th с. BC – belongs to a 3 According to what was estimated by N.A. Onaiko, more than 1000 fragments of black-glazed tableware, including about 125 foots, were found on the settlement (Onaiko N.A., 1980, p.80).

929

ANCIENT GREEK COLONIES IN THE BLACK SEA 2 closed vessel (jug?) with a fragment of the image of a grazing goat that is typical for the widespread North (?) Ionian ‘Wild Goat Style’ or, to a lesser degree, for Fikellura (Cook R.M., 1998, p. 77-79). Certain details of the image have analogies in painted decorations of Clazomenian sarcophagi (Cook R.M., 1977, Fig. 31,d) (Fig. 4, 2-3). They are synchronous to rather scarce fragments of Clazomenian amphorae (Dupont, P. 1998, Fig.23.3, b, c, g).

and a find of bronze arrow-head on the wall 18 in the room ‘Б’ (II chronological group – 6th-5th c. BC): Mel’ukova A.I., 1964, p.21). The question about the presence of aboriginal KerketToretian population in the settlement can be hardly answered on the basis of numerous fragments of handmade ceramics discovered here. The morphology of such handmade vessels as pots and bowls is quite similar. In late Archaic levels of neighbouring Gorgippia we can find direct parallels to shapes spread in ceramic sets of Torikos, which tells us that Greeks used handmade tableware in their every day life (Alexeyeva E.M., 1991, tabl. 21,23).5

The third and forth quarters of the 6th с. BC are characterized by amphora finds in the cultural layers of Torikos: Chian amphorae ‘Lambrino A1’ (Dupont, P. 1998, fig. 23.2, b; Monakhov S.Yu., 2003, p.15-16), Lesbian grey amphorae (Dupont, P. 1998, fig. 23.4, c), ‘Samian’ amphorae (Dupont, P. 1998, fig. 23.12, d) and Clazomenian amphorae (Dupont, P. 1998, Fig.23.3, c; Monakhov S.Yu., 2003, p.52-53, Fig.32.4) (Fig. 3, 1,3,5,6,7,9,15-17).

Important facts in the history of relationships between the inhabitants of Torikos and local dwellers could be given by the finds in necropolis, which however has not been found yet. It is either destroyed by the sea waves or located in some hidden place for the sake of saving it from robbers.

Tableware of nearly all periods is represented mostly by the production of Ionian craftsmen: Ionian cups (Cook R.M. 1998, Fig. 18.1, d-f), banded and plain ware (Cook R.M. 1998, p. 132-133) (Fig. 3, 12-14, 19, 20). The fragments of Little Master cups are dated to the third quarter of the 6th с. BC (Cook R.M. 1998, p. 92-93) (Fig. 4, 9). The collection of archaic lamps is large (Type 16: Howland R.H., 1958, p. 31-35, Pl. 32) (Fig. 4, 7-8).

The author of the excavations N.A. Onayko has distinguished different levels of prosperity and clear changes in the number of population of Torikos in different periods of its existence. In the economy of the settlement we can emphasize two constituents: a lifesupport system and possible sources of income. Among rather few bones of domestic animals and fish in the rooms, sheep and goats6 bones are predominant. Pig bones, horse bones, cattle and bird bones had been also found here quite often. Sea hunting was one of the main sources of food, judging from dolphin bones, crab claws, seashells found here.

Finds of the last quarter of the 6th с. BC – first half of the 5th с. BC are less numerous and are represented by the fragments of ‘protothasian’ amphorae (Monakhov S.Yu., 2003, Fig. 23-24; Dupont, P. 1998, Fig.23.11, e-g),4 red clay Zeest’s ‘tumbler-bottomed’ amphorae (Dupont P. 1998, Fig. 23.5, c; Monakhov S.Yu., 2003, p. 47-48, Fig. 31, 3,4), Chian amphorae - early swollen-necked painted and unpainted (Dupont P. 1998, fig. 23.2, e,f; Monakhov S.Yu., 2003, p.16-17, Fig. 3-5, 1-3) and Zeest’s ‘Thasian’ broad-bellied and ovoid bellied amphorae (Dupont P. 1998, Fig. 23.13, a,b; Monakhov S.Yu., 2003, p.60-61, Fig. 34, 1-4). In the last quarter of the 6th с. BC blackglazed attic pottery and attic tableware (mostly cups and less numerous lekythos) was widespread (Fig. 4, 1, 7, 10, 11). Some of black-glazed pottery were Ionian imitations of Attica products (Cook R.M. 1977, p. 116).

The household specialization of Torikos inhabitants as their source of income can be hardly characterized in one way. Their household was complex: it included such constituents as trading (wood, honey, wax, slaves) and production (metal processing,7 perhaps repair and equip ships passing by the shore with everything necessary). The importance of this settlement, originally a stop on the way of Greek ships to Kimmerian Bosporos, had been changing throughout a quite long period of its existence: the second quarter of the 6th - middle of the 5th c. BC. Thus, there are practically no facts of occupations of its dwellers during the last period.

Thus, Torikos existed for at least a century, which accounts for the interest of Greeks and local aboriginal tribes in this town. At the same time, obviously hurried building and an urgent need of Torikos inhabitants for isolation (evidenced by the presence of flammable objects within the studied construction and the absence of household facilities) is indicative of tensions in relationships with the local inhabitants. There is a direct evidence for the conflict situations: a fire that happened in the settlement during the second stage of its existence

The settlement, founded at the same time with the first Greek settlements of the European and Asian part of Bosporos, existed for over a century. Undoubtedly, 5 A clear predominance of ‘tumbler-bottomed’ amphorae among amphora-type ceramics is a common feature of Gorgippia and Torikos (Malyshev A.A., 1986, p. 97-98). 6 Most of them were discovered in the south-western part of the courtyard. 7 One of the brightest pages of the history of the economic development of the settlement was written thanks to discovered traces of metalworking here. Particularly, the major part of the rooms ‘М’ and ‘Г’ was occupied by ovens. Also, metal slag, traces of metal production and drops of bronze were found here.

4 They are usually confined to the first and second (late) strata of the cultural layer in Torikos, as mentioned the author of excavations (Onaiko N.A., 1980, p. 71).

930

АLEXEY АLEXANDROVITCH MALYSHEV: TORIKOS specific traditions and legal regulations formed here during that time; the settlement was incorporated in the system of diplomatic relations with the north Black Sea region and probably with ancient Mediterranean centres. However Torikos did not become a classical town. That can be hardly explained by the influence of physiographic factors and violent north-easterly wind (bora), because these could not be a serious impediment. Explanations related to the aggressive behaviour of local tribes, changes in sea routes (from coastal waters directly to the Black Sea) and even remoteness from Bosporan centres seem to be more realistic, as show some indirect observations (Onayko N.A., 1980, p.94).

3rd c. BC, was found there. One had a double stamp with the inscription Βασιλ[ική] δια Βατά(κου) on it. A stamped amphora was found near the tomb (Gaydukovich V.F., 1949, p.220-221). One more stamped Heraclean amphora of the beginning of the 3nd c. BC was discovered during construction works on the Oktyabrskaya square (Monakhov S.Yu., 1999, p.457-459, table 198) (Fig. 8, 7). Apparently, the instability of weather conditions, and primarily violent north-easterly autumn-winter wind (bora), made impossible the year-round use of this bay, which is unusual for the north Black Sea region on the whole. Rather scarce artifacts, mainly occasional finds in the Tsemes estuary and near the fish-breeding factory, allow to assume that one or several relatively small settlements existed on the coast of Tsemes Bay, rather than a sizable classical city similar to Gorgippia. N. A. Onaiko regarded the finds of the Late Archaic ceramics inaboriginal sites in the Tsemes valley as the evidence of existence of a Greek settlement in Tsemes Bay (Bata) (Onaiko N. A., 1970b, p. 83).

Another Greek settlement in this region is Bata (Strabo., XI, 2,14; Ptol., V, 8.8). The problem of identifying the location of the settlement has significant historiography. Most authors identify it with Batus and place it in the region of Novorossiysk (Tsemes Bay) (Dubois de Montpereux Fr., 1839, p. 167; Ashick A.B., 1848, p. 13; Zabelin I.E., 1874, p. 27; Sizov V.I., 1889, p. 56; Ponochevny V.M., 1891, p. 39-41; Gaidukevich V.F., 1949, p. 220; Zebel’ov S.A., 1953, p. 264; Brashinskiy I.B., 1968, p. 62; Onaiko N. A., 1976, p.114-176).8

Thus, rather poor and sometimes controversial information in classical written sources, scattered archaeological finds, and rare finds of inscriptions serve for an indirect evidence for low interest in this centre and in the whole area during Archaic and Classical Periods.

M.O. Ponochevny and then V.F. Gaydukevich placed the settlement in Myskhako and the harbour - in the place of current Tsemes Bay (Ponochevny M.O., 1891, p. 39; Gaidukevich V.F., 1949, p. 220). I.B. Brashinskiy placed Bata on the opposite end of the Tsemes Bay, near the mountain Doob, in the place of the present settlement Kabardinka (Brashinskiy I.V., 1968, p. 65). N. A. Onaiko believed that the ruins of the town had been concreted while building the port of Novorossiysk (Onaiko N. A., 1976, p.113, 116) (Fig. 8, 7).

A small Late Archaic settlement Balka (Myskhako 5) is very itneresting. It was located at a considerable (1.5 km) distance from the shore, in a canyon, on the foothills of the Koldun Mountain (Fig. 1, 16). This settlement was dated by the finds of fragments of Greek ceramic containers (Chian and Clazomenian amphorae) to the late Archaic Period. Despite the remoteness from the sea, which is a typical for Greek settlements, remains of stone structures (walls and pavements) were discovered on different levels. Remains of stonework, 0.8-0.9 m wide and 0.3 m high, made of mortared shapeless marl slabs have been traced up to 4 m down. The base of the stonework was found on different levels, thus the levelling of the surface had not been done. Remains of the paving of sandstone slabs, numerous coals and fragments of Late Archaic amphorae are related to this level of the stonework.

Finds of classical anchors and amphorae at the bottom of Tsemes Bay originate from ancient Greek ships moored here. Particularly, in 1965, two Heraclean amphorae collected from the sea bottom have the following stamps on them: 1. Σατυρισκο (έπι) Βάκχο(υ) a cluster of grapes (Monakhov S.Yu., 1999, p.341: 50-40 ss of the 4th c. BC)

Archaeological data, such as classical import items collected from the monuments of aboriginal culture, suggest the existence of Greek-barbarian contacts from the second quarter of the 6th c. BC The first descriptions of this region, and, subsequently, the appearance of its inhabitants on the historical arena are directly connected with the occupation of the Caucasian coast of the Black Sea by ancient Greeks. Greek colonists established the closest relations with more peaceful Sindians (Anon., PPE, 65; Blavatsky V.D., 1985, p. 55-58) that lived on the plains and seacoast, particularly, on the Taman Peninsula and in Sindice.

2. έπι Μολ[όσο(υ) Κέρκιν[ος (Monakhov S.Yu., 1999, p.267: 80-70ss of the 4th c. BC) During the construction works on the Sobornaya (Cathedral) square (later - Lenin Garden) a tomb, made of Gorgippian (according to V.F. Gaydukevich) tiles of the 8 Brun F.K. following Neumann K. (Neumann K., 1855, p.573) placed Bata in the valley of the river Ozereyka (Dirzoye canyon-?) (Brun F.K., 1875, p. 425, Brun F.K., 188, p. 220), where Dubois de Montpereux found earlier ancient ruins (Dubois de Montpereux Fr., 1839, p.6). Latyshev V.V. located the settlement in Shirokaya Balka (SC.II. map).

931

ANCIENT GREEK COLONIES IN THE BLACK SEA 2 Further to the south, on the coast and on the foothills, from Gorgippia (Anapa) to Torikos (Gelendzhik), the lands were inhabited by Kerketian and Toretian tribes in the 6th-1st c. BC (Ps.-Skyl. 72-75; Strabo., XI, 2, 1; Plin., NH, VI. 17). Titulatures of Bosporan rulers in the 4th c. BC gives the evidence of the geographical closeness of this territory to Bosporos (Shilov V.P., 1950, p. 111; KBN 6, 6a, 39, 40, 1014, 1037, 1038, 1042). The fact that Kerketians are not mentioned there is probably explained by a note from an anonymous Periplus saying that Kerketians and Toretians belonged to a single ethnic group (Anon., PPE, 63,65). Imitations of classical amphorae and oinochoai, found in the handmade ceramics set of the inhabitants of this region, confirm long Greek-barbarian contacts.

Greek ceramics are found in kurgan complexes, situated both on the coast and on the mouth of gullies opened to the sea (Lobanova Shchel’, Raisky Ugolok, Shirokaya Balka) and remote burial grounds (Bolshiye Khutora, Tzemdolina, Vladimirovka). Among the Greek pottery one can trace the vessels made in Bosporan cities workshops (Marchenko I.I., 1967, fig. 2-4). Finds from not numerous household sites appear to confirm these observations. The complex of Late Archaic amphorae (Chian, Clazomenian and the red clay ‘tumbler-bottomed’ is found in the household pit on the settlement ‘Shkrumov Khutor’ (Durso river valley) and also according to A.V. Shishlov, the debris of amphorae ceramics are uncovered in the cultural layer on the aboriginal settlement Glebovskoe (Fig. 1, II, 13).

The burial grounds are the most studied monuments of the aboriginal population. Their dates fall within the period from 6th to 4th c. BC, which indirectly confirms the hypothesis about a rather high population density (Fig. 1, II, b,c). Burials were made either on the ancient level, usually in big boxes made of sandstone slabs,9 or in shallow soil pits. The stone boxes – mainly family burial vaults-used to be surrounded with tower-shaped structures, built without bonding adhesive of large unprocessed stones and sea boulders (Dmitriev A.V., Malyshev A.A. 1999, 17-52, 9 Pl.).

The settlements of the other side of the MakortkhNavagir mountain ridge are known: on the Raevskoe Hillfort (Hillfort), the settlement Raevskoe 4 – fragments of hales and stems of Chian plump neck amphorae (Fig. 5, I, 5; VI). Not later than in the 5th c. BC various objects of toilet and decoration – production of Greek craftsmen (i.e., bronze mirrors, classical rings with engravings on the shields, bracelets etc.) became current among the local population.

The most known aboriginal settlements were located on steep slopes that allowed fast run-off after abundant rainfalls and were sheltered from ravaging the northeastern wind (bora) and covered by loamy deposits. Loams are necessary for making turluk (clay-coated wattle) that was a typical building material in the NorthCaucasus (Lavrov L.I, 1951, p.56; Kobychev V.P., 1995, p.142-166). Loams are also convenient for digging foodstorage pits.

Thus our finds do not allow to suggest that the colonization of the coastal zone in the 6th c. BC was a success, i.e., the basis for a further economic and political development of the interior lands was established, and consequently the aboriginal population, like their neighbours Sindians, were greatly influenced by Greeks.

Archaeological data evidence for the fact that the economy and the lifestyle of the aboriginal population of Shirokaya Balka as well as other coastal micro regions (Durso, Lobanova shchel’, Sol’onoe Ozero (Salt lake) etc.) were controlled by physiographic conditions and cultural traditions formed through centuries.

The secondary, Bosporan, colonization of coastal areas developed at the beginning of the 4th c. BC, when the Asian and European Bosporan centres united into a single state (Vasil'ev A.N., 1992, p. 125 etc.). The Bosporan movement to the East was induced by their need of grain, which was the basis of the Bosporan economic and political power during the whole 4th c. BC.

Bosporan colonization as the final stage of the Greek colonization

The earliest find (the neck and the bottom of Clazomenian amphora is dated to the first quarter of the 6th c. BC (Dupont P., p. 152, Fig. 23.3, e, g) comes from the Vladimirovka burial ground (mouth of the Tsemes valley) (excavation by A.V. Shishlov/N.V. Fedorenko: Shishlov A.V., Kolpakova A.V., Fedorenko N.V., 1999, p. 398-400). The artifacts of Greek import (ceramic container (amphorae) and tableware of the last quarter of the 6th - first half of the 5th c. BC) collected from the sites of foothill aboriginal population make a more numerous group.

Labrys (or city-site Semibratnee) was the Bosporan outpost in the Trans-Kuban region (left bank of the Kuban river) and served as a conductor of the Bosporan influence for a long time. In the second half of the 4th c. BC the Bosporan basic points (trading stations) moved far to the East.10 As far as we can judge by a scanty evidence in written sources (Diod., XX, 22-24) the increase of Bosporan state power at the end of the 4th c. BC brought to essential border enlarging to the East and South-East.

9

10

In very rare cases stonework formed walls of burial chambers.

932

See the details in the section ‘The Greeks in the North Caucasus’.

АLEXEY АLEXANDROVITCH MALYSHEV: TORIKOS Nominally the Kerketi and the Toreti were subjected to Bosporos even under Levkonos I in the second quarter of the 4th c. BC, but according to the coinage finds, close economic ties were established only in the last third of the 6th c. BC In this connection it seems reasonable to remind of the Toretians being mentioned as a population (KBN, №. 6, 6a, 39, 40, 1014, 1037, 1038, 1042) in full titulatures of Bosporan rulers Levkon I (389/8 – 349/8 BC) and Perisades I (344/3 – 311/0 BC) that proves that the foothill population was involved into the orbit of Bosporan influence at the end of the 5th – 4th c. BC.

As it was mentioned above, stone was not a popular building material in this region, which is explained rather by ecological and economic reasons than by the absence of tradition (Gei A.N. and etc., 2002, p. 102). Stone building with the regular planning on the Hillfort is connected with the appearance of Bosporans there. According to N.A. Onaiko, it is underlain by the horizon of buildings made of shell rock. Most finds (coins, amphorae) from the Hillfort and its vicinity are dated to the 3rd – beginning of the 2nd c. BC (Fig. 8). The study of the Hellenistic building complex on the Hillfort is divided into two periods. The first one is connected with N.A. Onaiko’s discovery and study of the monumental building with the area of more than 400 m2 12 (Fig. 7, II, a) on the north-northwest corner of the Hillfort in the 1950’s – 1960’s.

It is not a secret that the titulature also reflects the fact that the system of interrelations between the Bosporans and the Toretians, on whose land the Greek settlement Torikos was founded in the Archaic epoch, differed greatly from that of Kerket-bosporan relations. The practice of burying in a narrow frontal part of a stone box appears in the aboriginal burial grounds in the Hellenistic Age. The entrance hole of the box was usually framed by long thin slabs or more massive plates. Most probably this custom may be regarded as the influence of Hellenic burial tradition which was developed in this region at the time of the Hellenistic epoch on the evolution of local customs. The number of aboriginal burial complexes and their area decrease sharply, which is probably indicative of considerable changes in the demographic situation. The habit of burying in stone boxes inside the stonework in the Shirokoya balka necropolis and probably in the South Ozereika survived till Roman times (Dmitriev A.V., Malyshev A.A., 1999, p.48, fig. 26) (Fig. 9, 2,3).

This building is found on the slope, hence its northern part is placed on clay deposit covering the bedrock, and its southern part rests directly on the bedrock. Buildings are strictly orientated according to the four cardinal points. The main entrance opens to the west, to Gorgippia.

The character and targets of the colonization also changed: instead of developing coastal areas, colonizers went up on foothills northwards the Navagir Ridge.

Inside the room ‘B’, the walls were covered by two-layer plaster which shows polychromic fresco fragments. The wall painting consisted of vertical alternating red painted strips. The floor of the room was paved by crushed shell rock. A fragment of plaster decoration in the form of a palmet was also found.

The surviving fragments are different. The walls in the northern part of the building, where the rooms ‘A’ and ‘B’ are situated, have been preserved to the height of up to 1.6 m, but in the southern part only 1-3 layers of stonework have remained. The thickness of walls and their solid foundations in the rooms ‘A’ and ‘B’ allow to suggest that the building was two-storied in its northern part.

Thus, large parts of the foothills (basins of the Katlama and Maskaga Rivers) were taken under the Bosporan control. These lands were intensively used, and the regional development depended much on physiographic factors (relief, water resources, prevailing winds and the amount of precipitation) and the distribution of aboriginal settlements.

The southern part of the building according to N.A. Onaiko’s supposition was fully dismantled during the defence wall construction. The investigation of 2004 showed that the Hellenistic building was destroyed by a modern ditch.

The most important monument of that time is the architectural complex of the Raevskoe Hillfort. The fortified settlement is situated on the surface of a cape having a gentle south-western slope. The cape is formed at the mouth of a gully opened to the Maskaga River and has an irregular polygonal shape. The internal area of the Hillfort is about 4 ha11.

The peristyle yard is partially preserved: there is a portico stylobate made of shell rock blocks with 2 m spacing between them. Some of them have pillar bases. The stylobate details are well-preserved: rustic masonry on some blocks and hewing on the side facing the portico. Fragments of decorative plaster allow to suggest that the yard walls were decorated by polychromous painting. The traces of one-layer plaster are found on the exterior side of the southern wall.

11 Ceramics and other finds allow to distinguish 7 chronological intervals covering a long historical period from the Neolithic epoch to the Late Middle Ages: 1. IV-III thousand BC (Neolithic – Early Bronze); 2. 8th-5th c. BC (Early Iron Age); 3. 3th-2nd c. BC; 4. 1st B.C – 1st centuries A.D.; 5. 1st-3th centuries A.D.; 6. 7-10 centuries; 7. 7-14 centuries A.D. The construction remains of three chronological horizons

(3th – 2nd c. BC; 1st BC – 1st centuries A.D.; 18-19 centuries) are testified. 12 According to N.A. Onaiko the total area of the building could reach 700 m2.

933

ANCIENT GREEK COLONIES IN THE BLACK SEA 2 The second stage of studying the Hellenistic building began in 2002. To the west of the above-described building we found foundations of walls of several buildings that were apparently connected with the main one, judging from their similar orientation (according to the four cardinal points) and synchronous finds. Stone foundations of two small rooms of about 16 m2 (№1) and at least 12 m2 (№2) were distinguished. On the northern and eastern sides, foundations of long walls were found; they do not form a closed contour. Nevertheless the outer walls are not very thick (about 0.5 m), hence they cannot be considered as defence walls (Fig. 7, II, b).

over the stonework of the wall №5 of room 2 and also by large blocks from foundations of walls 9, 10 and 11. The dates of finds – primarily, coins – range within the period of two centuries (3rd-2nd c. BC). Materials of early Hellenistic period -late 4th c. BC- are not large (Fig. 5, V). For the present time, we have studied the Hellenistic constructions within the area of 600 m2 to the west of the rampart-like and identified the western and northern boundaries of that area. Thus, the total area of the Hellenistic Bosporan settlement reached at least 1 500 m2.

Unfortunately not all the building remains found in the archaeological excavations of 2002–2004 may be connected with domestic, dwelling or household complexes.

Like in Torikos, the use of adobe walls in that period is questionable. Several finds of fire places are especially interesting. They can be indicative of a seasonal character of the complex use and not for housing purpose. This hypothesis is proved by a very poor selection of finds in the cultural layer (ceramics and animal bones) and low content of phosphorus, the latter being the indicator of human residence. The lifestyle at the settlement in the Hellenistic Age is not quite clear.16

Judging from the different levels of building remains, the surface at the moment of the Bosporan appearance was very uneven. The only building material used was sandstone. Small debris of obviously imported shell rock is found on the excavation sites everywhere but it is very rare in the stonework. The administrative construction has architectural details (for example, base of column) made of it.

N.A. Onaiko did not answer the question about the purpose of the building (Onaiko N.A., 1967, p. 168); S.D. Kryzhitsky identified it as a palace type ‘dwelling complex’ (Kryzhitsky S.D., 1982, pp. 67-68).

The stonework style rather varies: the foundation consists of large stone blocks of 1 m and even longer; walls are made of two-faced stonework of stone blocks of different size. The spaces between blocks are filled with sandstone and clay. The analysis of clay proved that a large amount of organic materials was added into clay mortar.13

As a result of the palynological analysis of the finds from the Raevskoe Hillfort and Tsemdolina settlement, the climate of foothills in that period can be classified as relatively favourable for the economy development. The arid climate of the 2nd millennium BC that favoured the expansion of steppe had changed to more humid, which induced the growth of forests. Pollen and seeds of cereals from the cultural layer indicate that the aboriginal population as well as Bosporans were engaged in cereal farming.17

According to N.A. Onaiko’s opinion the debris found in both rooms may be identified as roof tiles from Gorgippia stamped ‘ΕΥΜΕΛΟΥ‘ and prove the fact of tiling. A regular (in the excavations of 1955-1964 and 2002-2004) distribution of finds of fallen tiles indirectly points to the synchronous character of the building. In its western part, tiles were apparently covering rooms 2 (relatively elevated) and 1 (a bit down the slope).14 The pieces of charcoal found inside the rooms 1 and 2 (Fig. 7, b) belong to coniferous tree (pinus L)15 used probably as a building material. The purpose of other walls (№ 9-21) can be hardly guessed because of their fragmentation and very few remains of roof tiles. Undoubtedly some reconstruction works were performed west of the rampart-like mound already during the Hellenistic Age. This is evidenced by the foundations of the wall 4 placed

The emergence of new Bosporan population did not seem to bring any radical changes in the established system of cereal farming. Traditionally one of the leading crops in the study region was millet (Panicum miliaceum) (Pm 40,4%). Its proportion in the harvest composition was the same for more than one thousand years. The role of wheat in the aboriginal population farming is essential. Its share in the classical complex was about 30%. Those cultivated were not exported sorts but seed-coated wheat which was adapted to local conditions.18

16 The author of excavations believes that the materials indicative of the industrial potential of the population are connected with the Roman Period (Onaiko N.A., 1959, p.56, Fig. 22). Evidences of metal production and processing (slags and moulds) found in the northwestern part suggest the absence of fundamental housing and administrative buildings here; they were located in the north-eastern part of the hillfort. 17 Data from Dr. Ye.A. Spiridonova. 18 Data from Dr. E.Yu. Lebedeva.

13

Data from Dr. O.Ye. V’azkova. 14 Besides clear differences in wall levels, it is confirmed by the fact that in the room 1 the south-western corner, which was not fixed deep enough in the ground, undergone significant subsidence under the pressure of loams, and stonework of the wall №1 was strongly deformed. 15 There are no coniferous wood found on the neighbouring sites, outsides (2002 excavation).

934

АLEXEY АLEXANDROVITCH MALYSHEV: TORIKOS Palaeozoological data on the cultural layer of the Hellenistic Hillfort Raevskoe demonstrate the absolute predominance of remains of domestic animals: cattle (approximately 25%), sheep and goats (about 50%), pigs (about 18%), and horses (only 7%).

complex system of fortifications was erected. The height of the rampart under the wall was increased about 3-4 m, and more towers along the fortification system were built. The eastern part of the rampart (about 200 m long) is the highest (up to 4 m near the tower 4), which can be probably explained by the natural surface level. It is strengthened by three tower-like constructions. Tower 3 on the east (4.7 m high), tower 4 on the south-western corner (4.5 m high). The tower and adjacent defence walls were studied using magnetic survey (conducted by Dr. T.N. Smekalova). There were two rectangular rooms (5.5 by 6.0 m and 5.0 by 6.0 m) inside the tower. The significant positive anomaly can be explained by magnetization of the rooms as a result of a strong fire (Fig. 6, V). On the ground surface we found fragments of changed clay daub, which originates probably from the internal part and roof of the tower.

Bones of small cattle (sheep and goats) and pigs make more than half of the food remains (60-70%). By the size of animals we can estimate the proportions of various types of meat in the ration of the inhabitants of the Raevskoe Hillfort in the Hellenistic Age: beef – 56%, horse – no more than 15%, lamb and goat – 21%, pork – 8%.19 A resent research confirm N.A. Onaiko’s observations about the limited trading opportunities of the settlement: ‘The foundation of the settlement was necessitated by general fortification policy towards the Bosporos eastern borders. The military, strategic importance of the Raevskoe Hillfort is proved by its size, walls thickness and the geographic position: the river Maskaga, flowing into the Anapa estuary could have been the connective link between the fortified town Gorgippia and this outpost’ (Onaiko N.A., 1959, p. 59).

The southern part of the rampart-like embankment (about 150 m long) is lower and strengthened by four tower-like constructions (Fig. 6, II): tower 5 on the south (about 6 m high), tower 6 on the south (about 4.5 m high), tower 7 on the south-western corner (4.5 m high). The western part (about 15 m long) is strengthened by four tower-like constructions (Fig. 6, II): tower 8 in the west (about 5.5 m high), which was excavated in 2003 and dated to the 17th–18th centuries; tower 9 in the west (about 2.4 m high). The height of the embankment here is about 4 m. According to V.I. Sizov, both entrances to the Hillfort were in the western part of the embankment (Sizov V.I., 1889, p. 112).

Our knowledge of the defence system of the Hellenistic complex in the Raevskoe Hillfort is insufficient. The absolute heights within the Hillfort territory vary from 50 to 61 m a.s.l. The relative heights above the Maskaga River vary from 25 to 30 m; the river bank is steep (45°, sometimes reaching 60-70°). This was beneficial for the defence organization in the northern and eastern parts, where the remains of wall (or rampart that formed its foundation) are minimal (not higher than 0.5 – 0.6 m).

The C14-dating of buried soil from under the rampartlike embankment in the south-western part of the Raevskoe Hillfort21 together with some observations on the tower 4 (Fig. 6, II) allow to establish the fact rampart construction began already in the Hellenistic Age.

The plan of the hillfort published by V.I. Sizov (Sizov V.I., 1889) shows a complicated system of the Hillfort fortification, which is confirmed by the results of topographic survey carried out by A.N. Gei in 2001. The studies have revealed that the fortification system of the Hillfort acquired their modern shape in the course of numerous reconstructions that lasted for 2.5 thousand years. The final reconstruction of the system took place probably in the late 18th century (Sizov V.I., 1889, p.112; Veselovskii N.V., 1914, p.14).20

The excavations destroyed a part of the embankment, where, in N.A. Onaiko’s opinion, the defence wall was built in the 2nd – 1st c. BC Buildings in the north-northwestern part of the Hillfort (studied by N.A. Onaiko) are covered by the rampart-like embankment; and buildings associated with them (discovered in 2002 – 2003) are located west of the embankment.

The Hillfort is surrounded by a rampart-like embankment. Its northern part (about 150 m long) has tower-like constructions at both ends (Fig. 6, I, II). Tower I on the north-western corner is 4.5 m high from the foundation to the top. Tower 2 on the north-western corner (allegedly, a watch-tower) differs from the other towers in its position on the natural elevation.

The finds from necropolis can tell us about the ethnopolitical situation on the foothills in the Hellenistic Age. The research of the Bosporan necropolis on the Raevskoe Hillfort, where a stone vault was found, began in 1998. The building extends from the northeast to southwest. The walls are built of sandstone blocks (0.4 by 0.8 m in average) placed on the bedrock surface. In some parts of the north-western facade two layers of stonework

The other sides of the Hillfort (western, southern and partially, south-eastern) have no natural fences, hence a 19

21 The ground buried under the rampart embankment was dated to the end of the 5th c. BC (CAL BC 758 (403) 372 CAL BP 2708 (2352) 2322).

Data from Dr. E.E. Antipina. The western sector of the rampart embankment seems to have exceeded the Hellenistic building remains and the fortress Roman wall. 20

935

ANCIENT GREEK COLONIES IN THE BLACK SEA 2 grey-clay tableware is represented mainly by two-handled kantharos. ‘The Chairon’s Obol’ is not widespread, though Greek handicraft objects (ceramics, beads, signet rings) are various and numerous. It speaks about the constant contacts with the Bosporans.

survived. The blocks have the same size as those in the stonework of classical age found in the Raevskoe Hillfort. The stones are untreated but tightly adjusted to one another. The spaces between blocks in the south-eastern and north-western facades are filled with small stones (Fig. 6, IV).

The burials of warriors on the horseback, numerous horsemen long swords of Sind-Maiotian type and other types of attack weapons (arrow-heads and spear-heads, swords and axes) are known. The existence of a large burial ground a far from the Raevskoe Hillfort allows to suggest that the ethnic group that owned the necropolis wished for separation. The specific orientation, the custom of putting the plaster bowl under the head and a number of other signs make this burial mound comparable with the monuments in the Trans-Kuban Region (left side of the Kuban River), e.g., NovoVochepshskii burial ground: Noskova L.M., Kozukhov S.N., 1989, p.119-139). The abundance of weapons (axes – the local peculiarity, the typical weapon of the foothill population since the Scythian times in the burials evidence for the professional occupation of population.

The entrance to the vault opens to the south-west, down the slope. It is formed by two vertical slabs (0.5 by 0.9 m) strongly damaged by plough and two blocks-steps: the larger one (0.2 by 1 m) outside and the smaller one (1 by 0.5 m) between the vertical slabs. There are numerous analogies from the Northern Pontic area that prove that in ancient time this building was under a kurgan mound (Parovich-Peshikan M., 1974, p.43; Savostina E.A., 1986, p.85). The studied vault had probably the same type of cover (stepped) as in most burial vaults in the Asian Bosporos (Savostina E.A., 1986, fig. 11). It is less probable that it was flat or gable (Savostina E.A., 1984, p. 6, ParovichPeshikan M., 1974, p.43, fig. 49-56). Outside the vault, near the entrance, we found two blocks that are most likely the remains of a threshold. We can classify this building as group A, type III, according to E.A. Savostina (Savostina E.A., 1986, p.92, fig.9).

Thus, in order to develop new lands and ‘pacify’ the aboriginal population the Bosporans had to call up the military detachment from the Cis-Kuban area (right side of the Kuban River). Elements of Greek burial customs were also found near the hillfort Raevskoe. Firstly, there is the find of a half-destroyed stone vault and, secondly, the established fact that cremation was relatively widespread in Greek burial practice.

The finds from the burial vault (three bronze Bosporan coins dated to the period of ‘money’ crisis (first half – middle of the 3th c. BC) (Shelov D.B., 1956, tabl. VI, 66, 69), clay bottle (Parovich-Peshikan M., fig. 94-95, p. 110-111), fragmented iron fibula of Latin type, and a bead (Alekseeva E.M., 1975, type 118, p. 71, tabl 15:14) allow to determine the period of its functioning from the 3rd to the 1st c. BC The classical finds (Greek coins, cult terracotta, lamps etc.) give the information about the Bosporan traditions in the culture and economy of the population of the Raevskoe Hillfort. If terracotta and lamps are known only in the cultural layers of the Raevskoe Hillfort; the finds of coins and treasures dated to the 3rd c. BC are quite numerous in the whole region. The absence of lapidary monuments within the settlement as well as in the whole region is a very important fact. The finds of graffiti are very rare too.

South-East Periphery of the Bosporan Kingdom in the Roman Period The ethno-political conflicts that occurred in the north of the Black Sea in the Late Hellenistic–Early Roman time (Saprykin S.Yu., 2002) led to dramatic changes. Bosporans who migrated to this region and most probably people from other regions of the Northern Black Sea became champions of the classical culture. Objects peculiar for the classical way of life as well as traditions to label ceramic ware (graffiti) make one feel their presence (Fig. 10, III). Archaeological finds confirm the increasing interest of the Bosporan rulers to this region. Taking into account the rather poor economical potential of this region one should confess that the central authorities supported a further expansion of the Bosporan presence. It was an exceptional political measure undertaken with the aim of protecting main strategic approaches to the cities of the Asian Bosporos (first of all to the city Gorgippia) (Onaiko N.A. & Dmitriev A.V., 1982). As a result of the aforementioned measures, the system of fortified structures was partially coordinated with a more ancient system of settlements (Raevskoe city-site, settlements Tsemdolina, Vladimirovskoe, Dubki etc.) (Fig. 9, 5,6,7,10). Partly, this system was located in the sites of purely strategic importance (Sapun, Limanchik,

In 1984-1985 A.V. Dmitriev found and studied a burial ground (98 graves) in the vicinity of the Raevskoe Hillfort (0.9 km to the west) (Dmitriev A.V., 1998). The shape of grave pits is usually strongly changed, but the stone constructions (stonework) and the position of burial inventory make possible to guess the structure of lining (undercut-grave). The orientation in the eastern sector prevails on the burial ground Raevskoe. It is typical for the Maiotian burial grounds of that time in general (Kamenetskii I.S., 1989, p.240). Besides, more than 40% burials with bowls under the head are found here. Red-clay tableware of classical age is absolutely prevailing on this monument. Handmade tableware constitutes 20-30% of those finds; 936

АLEXEY АLEXANDROVITCH MALYSHEV: TORIKOS the territory of Bosporos, in the Crimea and on the Cape Sunion in the times of the king Asandrоs (Onaiko N. A., Dmitriev A.V., 1982, p.121).

Kozlyatnick, Pivni etc. (Fig. 9, 12, 13, 14)). The settlements in the Raevskoe Hillfort and Myskhako became important centres of the Bosporan influence in that period (Bata-country: Strabo., XI, 2, 14; Ptol., V, 8, 8).

Despite the difference in size (one-chamber, twochamber, or three-chamber), these constructions usually have similar structure and planning. The angles of the rectangular constructions are directed towards the cardinal points, and thick blocks of untreated sandstone and clay mortar are used as building materials. The larger stones were used for constructing the outer faces of the walls, especially, for strengthening the angles.

These measures caused a total reorganization which was going on in the Raevskoe city-state during the Late Hellenistic – Early Roman Periods. As a result, some of the Hellenistic constructions left outside of the fortifications were demolished and covered up with earth. Some of them (rooms ‘A’ and ‘Б’) were included into the system of defence constructions. Apparently during that period the Hillfort acquired a shape of parallelogram. On the rampart 1.4-m-wide walls were erected. The contours of the rampart and towers were observed by V.I. Sizov (Sizov V.I., 1889, p.113-114, T.XI) (Fig. 6, I). While investigating the monumental construction from the north-north-west side of the Hillfort, N.A. Onaiko examined the remains of the fortresses (Onaiko N.A., 1984, p.92; see also: Idem, 1965, p.128-129, Fig. 44 (wall 19). According to N.A. Onaiko, the fortress was erected in the 2nd-1st BC In 2000-2001 investigation of a part of the defence wall adjoining the tower 4 (south-east, corner) revealed some construction features (Fig. 6, IV,V). The spaces between the large sandstone blocks were filled with clay, stones of different size and crushed brick. The lower part of the stonework reaches the width of 1.4 m. Two lower layers of the stonework stick out to 0.1–0.5 m from the exterior side of the wall. Nevertheless, for such width of the foundation the height of the wall could be hardly more than 2 m. Judging from the fragments of daub and clay crust covering the stonework, we can suppose that the upper part of the wall was made up of adobe with inclusions of small stones resembling modern bricks in form and size. We studied a part of the defence wall of the Hillfort up to the southeastern corner tower. This part is deeper than the walls on the rampart. This can be explained by the fact that the wall had been erected on the rampart earlier in the Hellenistic Age.

Apparently, this is the largest tower-bearing construction in the south-eastern periphery of Bosporos. It can be compared to the constructions on the Semibratnee Hillfort (Gaidukevich V.F., 1949, fig.35) and in the mansion of Khrisalisk (Sokol’sky N.I., 1976, Fig. 5). The walls were more than 1.5 m wide and could support the construction consisting of several levels. Thus, the ancient builders demonstrated a good knowledge of local conditions: the quality of ground and the dimensions of the building were taken into consideration. The thick foundation of the Vladimirovskoe building was deepened into the eluvium of marl. A looser loamy ground under the Tsemdolina construction made it necessary for the builders to make a 2-m-wide foundation with a protruded margin of 0.4-0.6 m. The foundation is underlain by several layers of thin slabs without mortar and coarse pebbles. The entrance to the construction was located in its wide south-west part. In the Tsemdolina construction and in the Raevskoe Hillfort the entrance was protected by an apsidal annex. The life in these settlements stops in the second part of the 1st A.D. Traces of fires and destruction in the Raevskoe Hillfort (buildings and defence walls), Tsemdolina construction and Pivni let us assume that they were destroyed during some large-scale battle. The appearance of a Bosporan fortified settlement on the Black Sea coast south-west of Tsemes Bay, on the foot of the Koldun Mountain (Myskhako), was caused by economic reasons (Fig. 10, 8; 11). The settlement was situated on two small hills (west hill and east hill) divided by a natural hollow and forming a crescent-shaped levee along the coast of a small bay. In ancient times the settlement was called Bata (Gaidukevich V.F., 1949, p.220; V’azkova O.E., Dmitriev A.V., Malyshev A.A., 2001, p.205). One of these hills (the East hill) once in the past was projected far into the sea22 and served as a landmark for navigators. Therefore, during the classical age it could have been called Toretian Cape (Dmitriev A.V., 2003, p.70-72).

Two phases of the wall destruction can be distinguished. Excavations in the western and south-western parts of the city-site (2000-2001) revealed that the upper layers of stonework were destroyed: stones were found on the foot of the embankment and at the very foundation of the wall. According to N.A. Onaiko, this happened at the beginning of the 1st c. A.D. In the 1st – 2nd c. A.D. these layers were restored (Onaiko N.A., 1984, p.92), though later excavations did not confirm this suggestion. At the highest point of the Hillfort, on its north-northeastern corner (Fig. 6, III), there is a building with three rooms (‘M’, ‘Н’, ‘Р’) and an apsidal projection (Sizov V.I., 1889, p.113-117). The stonework reaches the height of 0.7 m and the width of more than 1.5 m in the exterior walls faced by stone from both sides. Planning and techniques used in this construction are comparable to those used in tower-shaped buildings that were erected in

The excavations on the East hill revealed that the classical monument in Myskhako began its existence in the 1th c. BC Stone buildings and stone foundations on 22

937

Unfortunately, only the 3rd part of the site has been kept safe.

ANCIENT GREEK COLONIES IN THE BLACK SEA 2 the East hill were made following the Hippodamean principles with the orientation by cardinal points (Gei A.N. etc., 2001, p.88) (Fig. 11, II).

Myskhako and Shirokaya Balka and burials of aboriginal Kerket-toretian tribes consist in the following: people had worn teeth with a characteristic arch-like shape,24 and burials were made in stone boxes inside the ring-shaped stonework.

N.A. Onaiko initiated investigations of the West hill in 1965-1966 (Onaiko N. A. 1970a, p.73-74; Onaiko N. A., 1973, Fig. 38). The excavations in the upper part of the hill revealed a 1-m-thick cultural layer. Most of the cultural layer was destroyed during the excavations. There were almost no stone constructions in this part of the settlement; the remains of the stone-work were found only in its coastal part. A 2-m-wide and 14-m-long wall was found in the cultural layer of the Roman Period (1st – 3rd c. A.D.). It was constructed of big stones, mostly sea boulders, and was classical in form.

Thus, synchronous finds from different monuments (mostly burial grounds) within the study area are indicative of considerable ethno-political changes that reached even the most remoted places. These changes were induced by different factors. On the one hand, there is a solid evidence for systematic actions aimed to strengthening the Bosporan military and political influence in this region. On the other hand, the coastal centres were obviously connected with Pontus, which accounts for a spontaneous development of ethnic processes. Therefore, the Myskhako settlement was probably the most international centre.

The excavations conducted in 2001-2002 revealed that the remains of other constructions (hearths, pavements, household pits) in the 1st c. A.D. settlement were beneath this cultural layer. Burial places of the early Roman Period were discovered among the constructions. Burials of that time and of later periods (judging from different orientation and inventory) are scattered to the foot of the hill, which allows to suggest that rather drastic changes took place during the period of the settlement’s existence.

For the chronological characteristic of the Myskhako settlement, finds of coins have vital importance. Most of the finds originate from burial complexes (e.g., ‘Chairon’s obol’). The earliest coin (109–63 BC) comes from the cultural layer of the East hill. Half of the coins of that period were found in burial complexes dated to the middle of the 1st c. A.D. (Fig. 10, II).

Household pits dug in the loamy ground are the most typical objects on the West hill. The distribution of these pits within the investigated area is irregular: some are close together, and others are widely spaced. The pits must have been connected with certain dwelling and household structures. The forms and filling of the pits are different. Household pits are pear-shaped or bell-shaped in cross-section. Many of them have lids ― heavy sandstone plates with dimensions 0.5 by 0.6 by 0.15 m and edges worn smooth by sea water.

The quantitative distribution of different types of coins of the 1st–2nd c. A.D. found in the Myskhako settlement is comparable with coin assemblages in Gorgippia and its environs (Alekseeva E.M., 1997, p.194 -195; Krushkol Yu.S., 1965, p.55). This demonstrates a close economic relationship between Myskhako and Bosporos. Among the coins of the first-third quarters of the 1st c. A.D. (22 finds), many were issued in the middle of the century by the Bosporan rulers Kotis I (7 Ex.) and Aspurgos (6 Ex.). Most coins originate from Bosporos, and only one is Roman.

Another find from the West hill ― burnt clay with imprints of twigs (1.8-2 mm in diameter) and flat wooden blocks that can be identified as remains of buildings made of turluk (clay-coated wattle).

The most common find in this settlement is pottery.25 Ceramic containers are the most important source of information on the chronology and economy of the Myskhako settlement in the Roman Period. Finds of the 1th – 2th c. A.D. are not numerous. Colchian brown-clay amphorae are found in almost all complexes and make up about 30-60% of all amphora fragments. Amphorae with a ‘rib’ between the upper roots of handles prevail. They became widespread in the beginning of the 1st c. AD (Tsetshladze G.R., 1992, p.110) (Fig. 12, 1). Such amphorae are untypical in synchronous monuments in the Tsemes valley, Raevskoe Hillfort and Shirokaya balka.

The Myskhako necropolis, as well as burial grounds of the early Roman Period in Shirokaya balka in the valley of the Tsemes and the Ozereika Rivers (Fig. 10, 5,6,8) reflected the change of cultural traditions as a result of people’s migration. The number of the Early Roman burials in the classical necropolis of Myskhako is rather small. They are scattered along the coast at the bottom of the West and East hills, which is indicative of a considerable size of necropolis at that time23. The early burial complexes are usually characterized by the orientation in the eastern sector. The western orientation appears in the Myskhako burials from the middle or late 1st c. A.D., like in other necropolises in this region, e.g., in the Tsemes valley and Shirokaya balka (Malyshev A.A. et.al., 2004, p. 277). Similarities between burials in

24 According to Dr. M.B. Mednikova, these people had worn teeth with a characteristic arch-like shape on the front teeth (incisors) and molars of the lower jaw. Such wearing down of teeth could be caused by either mechanical work or by specific modes of bite-action. 25 The most numerous ware after amphora pottery is moulded ware which is greater in number than grey clay and red clay ware.

23 Separate burial grounds were found higher up the slope (Dmitriev A.V., Malyshev A.A., Shishlov A.V., Fedorenko N.V., 1994, fig.2,1).

938

АLEXEY АLEXANDROVITCH MALYSHEV: TORIKOS other – a woman holding a torch (Onaiko N. A., 1970а, P. 73)) and three other bronze statuaries of classical style. The East hill in Myskhako is famed by the following finds: a statuette of Jupiter Capitolinus (Treister M.Ju., 1992, S.39-71), a statuette of a lad in a lion’s scalp, and the bronze statuette of an eagle. There is a little rod fixed under the eagle’s legs, which allows to suggest that it was a part of a larger statuette of a Roman god, most likely, Jupiter26 (Fig. 11, a,b,c).

The location of the settlement on the sea coast determined the main tendencies of its economy. According to N.A. Onaiko, fishing was one of the principal activities among the population (Onaiko N. A., 1970b, p.80). The evidence of advanced sea-hunting was discovered: sinkers made of sea pebbles, clay and lead (Fig. 12, 3) as well as bits of pumice stone (fishing floats), shells, dolphins’ bones, and fish scales. According to N.A. Onaiko, such activity as cattle-breeding was also developed in the settlement (Onaiko N. A., 1970b, p.80).

In this settlement, as well as in the whole region, no lapidary monument has been discovered. However, one can get some idea of the ethnic pattern, household system and spiritual life of the settlement inhabitants with the help of graffiti collection.

Seeds of cereals found in the household pits, mainly of the later period of the settlement’s existence, evidence for a wide variety of cereals used for food. However, no considerable amount of grain was found in any of the pits. This points to the fact that grain was either imported or destroyed by fire which could outbreak in the springsummer period, when the settlement was running short of grain supply. An argument in favour of the first assumption is the diversity of grain sorts. According to ethnographical data, plant cultivation in this area requires a strict selection of crops, especially, cereals. In spite of the abundance of grape pits, necessary devices for the wine production, well-known in Bosporos and neighbouring Gorgippia (Vinokurov N.I., 1999; Alekseeva E.M., 1997, Tabl. 252-255) were not found here.

The next episode in the history of the region, the Roman Period (the 1st-3rd c. AD), began with events that accompanied the destruction of the fortified estate in Tsemdolina, which occurred in the second half of the 1st c. AD Many other rural estates in the Asian Bosporos were destroyed, too (Onaiko N. A., Dmitriev A.V., 1982, p.119, 121). This destruction is synchronous with the second chronological group of the Tsemdolina burials connected with a new wave of militant immigrants (horsemen burials) that came from the Kuban region (Fig. 13). A comparative investigation of the anthropological finds discovered in the burial grounds in Tsemdolina and Shirokaya balka gives answers to many questions concerning the origin, every day life and demography of the population. In contrast with Shirokaya balka, in the Tsemdolina male burials prevail over female ones. In Shirokaya balka men lived longer. The ancient population of Tsemes valley could not exist without a steady inflow of foreigners. There was a military detachment that stayed in the Tsemes valley for a long time (Malyshev A.A., Mednikova M.B., 1995, p. 125-135; Malyshev A.A., Rozanova L.S., Terekhova N.N., 1997, p. 203217).

In general, recent data make it possible to judge people’s nutrition rather than the settlement’s economy. It is hardly possible to define which of the plants and domestic animals were cultivated by the inhabitants of the settlement and which of them were native to the area. The finds of the excavations reveal some peculiarities of people’s spiritual culture and their beliefs which quite differed from those of Bosporos inhabitants. A complex of terracotta statuettes found in the Myskhako settlement is very curious. Most of the statuettes are dated to the beginning of the 1st c. AD, e.g., Men-Attis with a dog, goddess Venus (?), and a bird (Fig. 9, c). It is essential to mention the absence of roughly-made anthropomorphic statuettes, like those spread in the rural settlements of Bosporos and adjacent barbaric lands. Such statuettes prove the existence of agricultural cult of fertility (Kruglikova I.T., 1970, p.109, Fig. 2, T.50). Moreover, no clay lamps or their imitations typical for Greek household were found in the Myskhako settlement and necropolis over several decades of investigation (cfg: Kruglikova I.T., 1970, Fig. 13, 14, 2; 18, 2, 3; 21, 9;22, 9, 10, 13, 14; 41, 12, 13; 44; Arsen'eva T.I., Naumenko S.A., 1992, Fig. 75, 4; 76; 102, 4; Alekseeva E.M., 1997, fig.245-247).

Probably, that military detachment formed of the inhabitants of the internal Cis-Kuban lands participated in civil strife in the Asian Bosporos in the middle – second part of the 1st c. AD. That civil strife weakened the control of the centre and, consequently, affected the economic and cultural aspects of life. However, these lands remained under the Bosporan influence till the late classical period, judging from finds of coins and Bosporan pottery (primarily, vessels). At the same time, this period was rather favourable for the political and economic development of the region. A relative stabilization of the political situation at the end of the 1st c. AD provided for the growth of population within this micro region, which is demonstrated by the fact that 60% of the burials are dated to the second half of the 1st – first half of the 3rd c. AD.

The number and quality of bronze statuettes found on the West hill attract the attention. These finds are comparable with those from the large Bosporan centres (Alekseeva E.M., 1997, P.206, Fig. 173-177). Finds of the last decade include two extremely valuable bronze statuettes (one of Roman-Egyptian style – goddess Isis; and the

26 Cfg.: Reinach S., 1897, p.186, 188, 190. About the spread of the eagle’s image on Bospor. See: Frolova N.A., 1997, p.84-86.

939

ANCIENT GREEK COLONIES IN THE BLACK SEA 2 Rich and diverse burial inventory of the Roman Period is indicative of close connections between the study area and other parts of the world and of well-being of local inhabitants during the Roman and Early Medieval Periods. They earned their living mainly by providing various services to sea travellers that navigated along the coastline. Other traditional sources of income were piracy and seizing goods in accordance with the so-called ‘coastal law’, which implied that the coastal residents captured all goods from the ships that ran aground or wrecked.

Moreover, in 1996 on the West hill, we found pits with human skeletons at the bottom (10) (mostly 30-year-old women and children) (Fig. 12). The position of bodies in the pits helps one reconstruct the different situations connected with the collapse of the settlement. In the pit (№83), we obviously see buried dead people, as their bones lie in several layers mixed with stones, broken tableware and burned daub. The human remains (6 skeletons) are covered by a thick layer of big stones, which saved the bodies from wild animals. Thus, this pit became the so-called ‘communal grave’, where survived local inhabitants (or some new owners of these lands - ?) buried the dead after the tragic events immediately (the bodies were not decomposed; the bones lie in anatomical order).

As different from the Hillfort Raevskoe, where finds of that period are very rare, the settlement Myskhako played an important role in the historical development of this region and in its political and economic life. In spite of weakening connections with the Bosporan centres, there is a lot of evidence for the remarkable role of this settlement in the regional economy. In particular, among the pottery items of the 2nd c. – the first half of the 3rd c. AD, a proportion of amphorae increases. Though Colchian amphorae prevailed (Fig. 12, 1), the proportion of various ‘Bosporan’ types was also high (Zeest I.B. 1960, p.113, T.XXXI, 75; p.113-114, T.XXXII, 76; p.117, T.XXXIV, 83; T.XXXVI, 89) (Fig. 12, 1).

There is another reconstructed situation. There are groups of bodies or separate bodies found at the bottom of some pits under stones and broken tableware. The arrangement of the bodies makes it possible to assume that those people were hiding here at the moment of attack and died during the fire. A high temperature inside the pits 29 and 80 had been documented by glass beads that normally are preserved very well, but heat-affected beads here are fragile and crush into powder in the process of clearing.

In household pits of the west hill, rather uninteresting fragments of terracotta were found. In our opinion, they could be the figurines of Tykhe-Fortuna that were quite widespread in Bosporos (Korovina A.K., 1974, p.12, Tabl.5, 1; Silantieva P.F., 1974, fig. 27). The figurines are made roughly and imprecisely and are dated back to the 1st–3rd c. A.D.

No traces of stabs and chopped wounds on bones and lost weapons (arrow-heads, spear-heads, etc.) were found. Thus, Dr. M.B. Mednikova (Mednikova М.B., 1999) assumed that those people could have died as a result of some epidemic disease. However, the traces of fire in different parts of the site, the distribution and poses of the dead bodies, the prevalence of women and children as well as finds of separate human bones in some archaeological objects (pits, cultural layers, etc.) make possible to connect this event with a violent assault of the Myskhako settlement. The bodies of most men must have remained somewhere in the approaches to the settlement. Only in one of the pits called ‘communal grave’ (see above), the remains of 4 men were found.

All coins of the 1st –3rd c. AD were made in Bosporos. We observe a gradual decrease in the inflow of coins: from 25 finds of the end of the 1st – first half of the 2nd c. AD27 to 7 finds of the second half of the 2nd – beginning of the 3rd c. AD Probably, this implied dramatic changes in the life of local inhabitants at that time.28

The presence of Bosporan coins of a rather high nominal value in the burial complexes of the 3rd c. A.D in Shirokaya balka can be explained by the inflow of refugees escaped chiefly from open lands subjected to military disturbance, and primarily, from the destroyed settlement Bata.

The latest coin among the finds in this site is a silver stater of the Bosporan ruler Sauromatos III (230). This find allows to determine the terminus post quem of the settlement’s collapse. The abundance of burned daub and also burned and deformed ceramics in the cultural layer of the settlement and in household pits is the evidence of a big fire which destroyed all the structures on the East and West hills. Under the masses of daub we found crushed and burnt tableware – mostly hand-made pots and other containers, occasional grey-clay ceramic and red-glazed jars. Among those artifacts separate human’s bones were also found.

Conclusions The first contacts between the aboriginal Kerket-Toretian population and the classical world are dated back to the beginning of the 6th c. BC In that time on the coasts of Kimmerian Bosporos the first Greek apoikiai appeared: a settlement connected with classical Torikos, a settlement or maybe settlements on the western coast of Tsemes Bay. The economy of these apoikiai was closely connected with the passage of Greeks along the Mediterranean coasts and southern coasts of the Black Sea to Bosporos. None of these settlements, as far as we

27 The 1st – beginning of the 2nd AD coins, especially Savromat I coins (16 finds) prevail. 28 In other centres of the Bosporos area, more coins appeared during this period: a settlement in the Semenovka village: Kruglikova I.T., 1963, p.119; Tanais: Shelov D.B. 1960, p.135).

940

АLEXEY АLEXANDROVITCH MALYSHEV: TORIKOS Arsen'eva T.I. and Naumenko S.A., 1992. – Арсеньева Т.М., Науменко С.А., Усадьбы Танаиса (Usad’by Tanaisa Tanais manors). Moscow. Ashik A.B., 1848 - Ашик А.Б., Боспорское царство (Bosporskoe tsarstvo - Bosporan kingdom). II. _____________, 1959 - Блаватский В.Д. Исследования Раевского городища в 1954 году (Issledovaniya Rayevskogo gorodisha - Studies on Raevskoe Hillfort). // KSIIMK. 77. _____________,1985 - Блаватский В.Д., Древнейшее свидетельство o Синдике (Drevneyshee svidetel’stvo o Sindice - Most ancient testament about Sindice) // Classical Archaeology and History. Moscow. Brashinskii I.B., 1968 - Брашинский И.Б., К истории Северовосточного Причерноморья в античную эпоху (K istorii Severo-vostochnogo Prichernomorya v antichnuyu epokhu The history of Northeast Black Sea region during the classical age). // The Classical history and culture Mediterranean and North Pontic area. Leningrad. Brun F.K., 1875 - Брун Ф.К., Восточный берег Черного моря по древним периплам и компасным картам (Vostochnuy bereg Chernogo mor’a po drevnim periplam i kompasnym kartam - The eastern Coast of the Black Sea according to ancient Periples and Maps). // ZOOID. 9. Brun F.K., 1880 - Брун Ф.К., Черноморье (Chernomorye - The Black Sea region). II. Odessa. Dmitriev А.V., Malyshev A.A., 1999 - Дмитриев А.В., Малышев А.А., Могильник VI-II вв. до н.э. в устье Лобановой Щели (Mogilnik VI-II vv. do n.e v ustye Lobanovoy Scheli - The burial ground of the 6th-2nd c. BC in the mouth of the Lobanova Shchel). // Historical and archaeological almanac of the Armavir Natural History Museum. 5. Dmitriev A.V., Malyshev A.A., Vyazkova O.E., 1999. Die Siedlung von Myskhako. Ein suedostlicher Vorposten des Bosporanischen Reiches // Eurasia Antiqua. Zeitschrift fuer Archaeologie Eurasiens. 5. Mainz. Dmitriev A.V., 1998 - Дмитриев А.В. Греки и варвары побережья Северо-Западного Кавказа (Greki i varvary poberezhya Severo-Zapadnogo Kavkaza - Greeks and Barbarians on the coast of Northwest Caucasus). // Classical civilization and the Barbarian world. (Materials of the 6th archaeological Seminar). 1. Krasnodar. Dubois de Montpereux Fr., 1839. Voyage autour du Caucase. I. Paris. Cook R.M. 1977. Greek painted pottery. London. Cook R.M. 1998. East Greek Pottery. // Cook R.M.&Dupont P. East Greek Pottery. London&New York. Dupont, P. 1998. Archaic East Greek trade amphorae. // Cook R.M.&Dupont P. East Greek Pottery. London&New York. Frolova N.A., 1997 – Фролова Н.А., Монетное дело Боспора (Monetnoye delo Bospora - Bosporan coinage). I. Moscow. Gaidukevich V.F., 1949 - Гайдукевич В.Ф., Боспорское царство (Bosporskoe tsarstvo - Bosporan kingdom). Leningrad. Gei A.N. and etc., 2002 - Gei A.N., Antipina Yek.Ye., Bogatenkov D.V., Vazkova O.Ye., Golyeva A.A., Drobyshevskii S.V., Kozlovskaya M.V., Lebedeva Ye.Yu., 2001 - Гей А.Н., Малышев А.А., Антипина Ек.Е., Богатенков Д.В., Вязкова О.Е., Гольева А.А., Дробышевский С.В., Козловская М.В., Лебедева Е.Ю., Палеоэкология Северо-Западного Кавказа (работы Северо-Кавказской археологической экспедиции в 2001 г.) (Paleoekologia Severo-Zapadnogo Kavkaza (raboty Severo-Kavkazskoy arkheologisheskoy ekspeditsii v 2001 g. - The palaeoecology of the Northwest Caucasus (works of the North-Caucasian archaeological expedition in 2001).

can judge, grew into a large trade or handicraft centre. For Greeks, the presence of this aboriginal population caused some degree of instability (military threat), haltering normal economic activity. Physiographic factors (climatic conditions and mountainous landscape) accounted for natural isolation of the Kertet-Toretian aboriginal tribes. Their primitive form of economy hindered the establishment of barter relationships and favoured piracy as the main source of income. Despite the fact that Toretians and Kerketians in the titulature of Bosporan rulers were treated as subjects from as early as the 4th c. BC, the real subjection of these territories (incorporation into the Bosporan economic and political systems) began from the 3rd c. BC. The colonization process lasted for three centuries until the Early Roman Period. In the 1st c. BC, when commercial, financial and political links within Pontus strengthened (Mithridatos Eupator the Pontian was in power), the strategically importance of this territory increased. The Maiotian population from the Kuban region took an active part in all stages of colonization of the region. A striking fact in the history of the region and the whole Bosporan state is the abundance of barbaric copies of Marcus Aurelius denarius with the image of Mars, the Roman god of war. Judging from the area of finds of these coins, the southwestern boundaries of the Bosporan kingdom were established during the first half of the 3rd c. BC Other numerous finds on the Taman Peninsula (Asian Bosporos)29 indicate, on the one hand, the peaceful relations between Bosporos and this political system, and on the other hand, the use of these coins in the Asian Bosporos (Fig. 14). The area of the greatest concentration of those coins (numerous coins of the 2nd group) probably existed as a single political and economic region. The wide occurrence of imitations of Roman coins was rather caused by political reasons. The coins of powerful but distant Rome were deliberately used as prototypes to emphasize the political independence from the Bosporan kingdom. BIBLIOGRAPHY Alekseeva E.M., 1975 – Алексеева Е.М., Античные бусы Северного Причерноморья (Antichnye busy Severnogo Prichernomor'ya - Classical necklace in the north of Black Sea region) // SAI, G1-12. __________, 1997. - Алексеева Е.М., Античный город Горгиппия (Antichnyi gorod Gorgippia - Classical town Gorgippia). Moscow. 29 It should be mentioned that there are almost no finds of this kind in the carefully studied numismatic materials from Gorgippia (Frolova N.A., 1997, p. 149,168).

941

ANCIENT GREEK COLONIES IN THE BLACK SEA 2 // Historical and archaeological almanac of the Armavir Natural History Museum. Armavir-Moscow. Howland R.H. 1958. Greek Lamps and their survivals. // The Athenian Agora. Princeton. New Jersey. Vol. IV. Kamenetskii I.S., 1989 – Меоты и другие племена СевероЗападного Кавказа в VII в. до н.э. - III в. н.э. (Meoty i drugiye plemena Severo-Zapadnogo Kavkaza v VII v. do n.e. - III v. n.e. - Maiotians and other tribes in the Northwest Caucasus in the 7th c. BC–the 3rd c. A.D.). // Steppe in the European part of the USSR at the Scythian-sarmatian time. (Archaeology of USSR). Moscow. KBN, 1965 - (Korpus bosporskikh nadpisey - Corpus of Bosporan inscriptions). Kobychev V.P., 1995 – Кобычев В.П., Жилище. Формирование основных типов народного жилища (Zhilishe. Formirovaniye osnovnykh tipov narodnogo zhilisha - House. The formation of main types of common people's houses). // Caucasian peoples. Vol. 4. Material culture. Food and house. Moscow. Korovina A.K. 1974. – Коровина А.К. Терракота из Тирамбы (Teracotta iz Tiramby - Terracotta of Tiramba). // Terracotta statuettes. Part IV. Pridon and Taman peninsula // SAI. G111. Moscow. Kruglikova I.T., 1963 – Кругликова И.Т., Монеты из поселения у дер.Семеновка (Monety iz poseleniya u derevni Sem’onovka – Coins from the settlement at Semenovka village. // Numismatics and Epigraphy. Vol. IV. Кругликова И.Т., 1970. Терракоты из сельских поселений европейской части Боспорского государства (Terracotty iz sel’skikh poseleniy evropeyskoy chasti Bosporskogo gosudarstva - Terracotta from rural settlements in the European part of the Bosporan kingdom). // Settlements and cemeteries of the Kerch Peninsula at the beginning of the 1st c. A.D. Moscow. Krushkol Yu.S., 1965 – Крушкол Ю.С., Находки античных монет в Анапском районе (Nakhodki antichnykh monet v Anapskom rayone - Findings of classical coins in the Anapa district). // Numismatics and Epigraphy. V. Kryzhitskii S.D., 1982 - Крыжицкий С.Д., Жилые дома античных городов Северного Причерноморья (Zhilye doma antichnykh gorodov Severnogo Prichernomorya Houses in classical towns in the North Black Sea region). Kiev. Lavrov L.I., 1951 – Лавров Л.И., Формы жилища у народов Северо-Западного Кавказа (Formy zhilischa u narodov Severo-Zapadnogo Kavkaza – The forms of peoples houses in the Northwest Caucasus). // Sovetskaya etnografia. 4. Malyshev A.A., 1986 – Late Archaic Amphorae from Gorgippia // Husbandry and culture pre- and early class societies. Materials of the III Conference young scientists. Proceedings. Moscow. Malyshev, A.A., Treister M.Yu. 1994, Eine Bestattung des Zubovsko-Vozdvizenski-Kreises aus der Umgebung von Noworossisk // Bayerische Vorgeschichtsblaetter. 59. Malyshev, A.A., Mednikova M.B., 1995 – Малышев А.А., Медникова М.Б., Население Цемесской долины в римское время по данным археологии и палеодемографии (Naseleniye Tsemesskoy doliny v rimskoye vrem’a po dannym arkheologii i paleodemografii – Population of the Tsemes valley in the Roman Period according to archaeological and palaeodemographic data). // RA. 4. Malyshev, A.A., Rozanova, L.S., Terekhova, N.N., 1997 – Малышев А.А., Розанова Л.С., Терехова Н.Н., Наступательное вооружение из погребений (I-III вв. н.э.) Цемдолинского могильника Nastupatelnoye vooruzhenie iz pogrebenii (I-III vv. n.e.) Tsemdolinskogo

mogilnika – Attack arms from burials of the 1st-3rd c. A.D. in Tsemdolina). // RA. 1. Malyshev A.A., Dmitriyev A.V., Mednikova M.B., Ravitch I.G., Rozanova L.S., Terekhova N.N., 2004 – Дмитриев А.В., Малышев А.А., Медникова М.Б., Равич И.Г., Розанова Л.С., Терехова Н.Н. Широкая балка в античную эпоху: итоги и перспективы исследования (Shirokaya balka v antichnuyu epokhu: itogi i perspektivy issledovaniya – Shirokaya Balka at the Classical Age: results and prospectives of the study) // Antiquity of Bosporos. №7. Marchenko, I.D., 1967 – Местная расписная керамика Пантикапея VI-V вв. до н.э. (Mestnaya raspisnaya keramika Pantikapeya VI-V vv. do n.e. − Local painted ceramics in Pantikapaeum). // SA. 2. Maslennikov A.A. 1998. – Масленников А.А., Эллинская хора на краю ойкумены. Сельская территория европейского Боспора в античную эпоху. (Ellinskaya khora na krayu oykumeny. Sel’skaya territoriya evropeyskogo Bospora v antichnuyu epokhu - ). Moscow. Mednikova М.B., 1999 − Die menschlichen Skelettreste aus den Wirtschaftsgruben der antiken Siedlung Myskhako. Beitrage zu: Dmitriev A.V., Malyshev A.A., Vyazkova O.E., 1999. Die Siedlung von Myskhako. Ein suedostlicher Vorposten des Bosporanischen Reiches // Eurasia Antiqua. Zeitschrift fuer Archaeologie Eurasiens. 5. Mainz. Mel’ukova A.I., 1964 − Вооружение скифов (Vooruzheniye skyfov - Weaponry of Scythians). // SAI. Vol.Д1-4. Moscow. Monakhov S.Yu., 1999. − Монахов С.Ю., Греческие амфоры в Причерноморье. Комплексы керамической тары (Grecheskiye amfory v Prichernomorye. Komplexy keramicheskoy tary − Greek amphorae in North Pontic area. Komplexes of ceramic containers). Saratov. Monakhov S.Yu., 2003 − Монахов С.Ю., Греческие амфоры в Причерноморье. Типология амфор ведущих центровэкспортеров товаров в керамической таре. Каталогопределитель. (Grecheskiye amfory v Prichernomorye. Tipologia amfor vedushich tsentrov-eksporterov tovarov v keramicheskoi tare. Katalog-opredelitel’ − Greek amphorae in North Pontic area. Tipology the leaders centers-importer in ceramic container. Catalogue-determinant). Saratov. Neumann K., 1855 − Die Hellen im Skythenlande. Berlin. Noskova L.M., Kozukhov S.N., 1989 − Носкова Л.М., Кожухов С.П. 1989. Меотские погребения НовоВочепшийского могильника (по материалам раскопа 1985-1986 гг.). // // Maiotians - ancestry of Adygi. Maykop. Onaiko N.A., 1959 − Онайко Н.А., Раскопки Раевского городища в 1955-1956 годах (Raskopki Rayevskogo gorodischa v 1955-1956 godakh − Excavations on Raevskoe Hillfort in 1955-1956). // KSIIMK. 77. __________, 1965 − Онайко Н.А., О раскопках Раевского городища (O raskopkakh Rayevskogo gorodischa − Excavations on Raevskoe Hillfort). // KSIA. 103. __________, 1967 − Онайко Н.А., Эллинистическое здание Раевского городища и его место в архитектуре Боспора (Ellinisticheskoye zdaniye i ego mesto v arkhitekture Bospora - Hellenistic construction of Raevskoe Hillfort and its place in the architecture of Bosporos). // SA. 2. ___________, 1970a − Онайко Н.А., Раскопки поселения на Малой Земле (Raskopki na poselenii Malaya Zemlya − Excavations on the settlement in Malaya Zemlya) // KSIA. 124. ____________, 1970b − Онайко Н.А., Разведка античных памятников в районе Новороссийска и Геленджика (Razvedka antichnykh pam’atnikov v rayone Novorossiyska

942

АLEXEY АLEXANDROVITCH MALYSHEV: TORIKOS Berezan Settlement of the Late Archaic Period). // TGE. XXVIII. Tetbu-de-Marinyi, 1853 − Тетьбу-де-Мариньи Э., Цемесская бухта (Tsemesskaya Bukhta − Tsemes Harbour). // ZOOID. III. Saprykin S.Yu., 2002 - Сапрыкин С.Ю., Боспорское царство на рубеже двух эпох. (Bosporanian tsarstvo na rubezhe dvukh epokh − Bosporan kingdom at the beginning of the 1st c. A.D.). Мoscow. Shelov D.B., 1956 − Шелов Д.Б., Монетное дело Боспора VIII вв. до н.э. (Monetnoye delo Bospora VI-II vv. do n.e. − Bosporan coinage in the 6th-2nd c. BC). Мoscow. Shelov D.B., 1978 – Шелов Д.Б. Узкогорлые светлоглиняные амфоры первых веков нашей эры (классификация и хронология) (Uzkogorlye svetloglin’annuye amfory pervykh vekov nashey ery – Narrownecked light clay amphorae of the first centuries A.D. (Classification and Chronology)). // KSIA. 156. Shishlov A.V., 1999 - Шишлов А.В., Могильник античного времени у с. Южная Озерейка (Mogilnik antichnogo vremeni u s. Yuzhnaya Ozereyka - Burial ground of the classical age near the village Yuzhnaya Ozereika). // Historical notes. Investigations and materials. 3. Shishlov, A.V., Kolpakova, A.V., Fedorenko, N.V., 1999 – Некрополь VII-V вв. до н.э. близ г. Новороссийска (Nekropol VII-V vv. do н.э. bliz g.Novorossiyska − Necropolis of the 7th-5th c. BC near town Novorossiisk.). // Problems of History, Philology, Cultury. Collected papers. Vol.VII. Sizov V.I., 1889 − Сизов В.И., Восточное побережье Черного моря. Археологические экскурсии (Vostochnoye poberezhye Chernogo moray. Arkheologicheskiye ekskursii − The eastern Coast of the Black Sea. Archaeological excursions). // MAK. II. Treister M.Ju., 1995 − A Bronze Statuette of Jupiter Capitolinus from Myskhako // Acta of the 12th Intern. Congress on Ancient Bronzes, Nijmegen 1992 (Nederlandse Archeologische Rapporten, 18). Nijmegen. Tsetskhladze G.R., 1992 − Цецхладзе Г.Р., Производство амфорной тары в Колхиде (Proizvodstvo amfornoi tary v Kolkhide − The production of amphora container in Kolkhida). // Greek amphorae. Problems of evolution craftsmanship and trade in Classical World. Collected papers. Saratov. Veselovsky N.V., 1914 – Веселовский Н.В., Военноисторический очерк города Анапы (Voenno-istoricheskiy ocherk goroda Anapy – Military-historical essay about town Anapa). Petrograd. Vinokurov N.I., 1999 – Винокуров Н.И. Виноделие античного Боспора (Vinodeliye antichnigo Bospora Viticulture in Classical Bosporos). Moscow. Zabelin I.E., 1874 − Забелин И.Е., Объяснения Страбоновых свидетельств о местностях Боспора Киммерийского (Ob’yasneniya Strabonovykh svidetel’stv o mestnost’akh Bospora Cimmeriyskogo − Explanations of Srabo's reports about the lands of Kimmerian Bosporos). // Works of III Archaeological Meeting.

i Gelendzhika − Prospecting of classical monuments in the areas of Novorossiisk and Gelendzhik). // SA. 1. ____________, 1973 − Онайко Н.А., Новые данные о поселении на Малой Земле (Novye dannye o poselenii na Maloy Zemle - New facts on the settlement in Malaya Zemlya). // KSIA. 133. ____________, 1976 − Онайко Н.А., К истории Бат (K istorii Bat − On the history of Bata). // VDI. 4. ____________, 1980 − Онайко Н.А., Архаический Торик – античный город на северо-востоке Понта (Arkhaicheskii Torikos – antichnyi gorod na severo-vostoke Ponta − Archaic Torikos – classical town in the northeast of Pontus). Moscow. ____________, 1984 − Онайко Н.А., Юго-восточная окраина Боспора (Yugo-vostochnaya okraina Bospora − The southeast margin of Bosporos). // Classical states of North Pontic area. Moscow. Onaiko N.A.&Dmitriev A.V., 1982 − Онайко Н.А., Дмитриев А.В., Сторожевые посты в окрестностях Бат и некоторые вопросы социально-экономической и политической истории юго-восточной окраины Боспора на рубеже н.э. (Storozhevye posty v okrestnost’akh Bat i nekotorye voprosy sotzial’no-ekonomicheskioi i politicheskoi istorii yugo-vostochnoy okrainy Bospora − Sentry posts in the environs of Bata and some aspects of social-economic and political history of the southeast margin of Bosporos at the beginning of the 1st century AD). // VDI. 2. Parovich-Peshikan M., 1974 − Парович-Пешикан М., Некрополь Ольвии эллинистического времени (Nekropol’ Ol’vii ellinisticheskogo vremeni − Necropolis of Olbia at the Hellenistic Age). Kiev. Ponochevny M.O., 1891 − Поночевный М.O., Географический очерк Боспорского царства (Geograficheskiy ocherk Bosporskogo tsarstva − Geographical essay on Bosporan kingdom) // Collected papers from Kuban’. 11. Reinach S., 1897 − Repertoire de la statuaire grecque et romaine. T. I. Paris. Savostina E.A., 1986 − Савостина Е.А., 1986. Типология и периодизация уступчатых склепов Боспора (Tipologia i periodizatsiya ustupchatykh sklepov Bospora - Typology and periodization of stepped vaults in Bosporos). // SA. 2. Shelov D.B., 1960. - Шелов Д.Б., Денежный рынок Танаиса (Denezhny rynok Tanaisa - Coins market of Tanais). // ZOAO. I (34). Silantieva P.F., 1974. Терракотты из Пантикапея. (Teracoty iz Pantikapeya - Terracotta statuettes. Terracotta of Pantikapaion). // Терракотовые статуэтки. SAI. G1-11. Moscow. Sokol'sky N.I., 1976 - Сокольский Н.И., Таманский толос и резиденция Хрисалиска (Tamansky tolos i rezidentsiya Khrisaliska - Tamanian Tolos and the residence of Khrysaliskos). Мoscow. Solovev S.L., 1997 − Соловьев С.Л., Жилые дома Березанского поселения в позднеархаическое время (Zhilye doma Berezanskogo poseleniya v pozdnearkhaicheskoye vremya − Dwelling Houses of the

943

ANCIENT GREEK COLONIES IN THE BLACK SEA 2

Figure 1. Abrau Peninsula. I - Abrau geological fracture. II - Archaeological sites of the Archaic-classical Age: a Greek settlement, b - Aboriginal settlement; c - Cemetery.

Figure 2. Hellenic Torikos. I – The sketchy plan; II - The plan of buildings of the 1st period. Reconstructions (2nd and 3rd periods) are marked by black contour. 944

АLEXEY АLEXANDROVITCH MALYSHEV: TORIKOS

Figure 3. Hellenic Torikos. Amphorae and tableware.

Figure 4. Hellenic Torikos. Objects used in Greek household: pottery, lamps, fishing sinkers.

945

ANCIENT GREEK COLONIES IN THE BLACK SEA 2

Figure 5. Raevskoe Hillfort. I - Plan of the outskirts Raevskoe Hillfort area: 1 - Raevskoe Hillfort; 2 - necropolis of Raevskoe Hillfort, 3 - settlement Raevskoe 3, 4 - settlement Raevskoe 4, 5 - settlements of aboriginal population of the 6th–5th c. BC II – Necropolis Raevskoe. The base of classical vault of the Hellenistic Age. III – Hellenistic amphora stamps and fragments of Megarian bowls from the cultural layer of Raevskoe Hillfort and settlement Raevskoe 4. IV – Raevskoe Hillfort. Hand-modelled tableware of aboriginal people at the Early Iron Age. V – Raevskoe Hillfort. The Early Hellenistic pottery from Bosporan cultural deposit. VI – Raevskoe Hillfort. Foot of Chian amphora of the Late Archaic Period.

Figure 6. Raevskoe Hillfort. I - The plan (by V.I. Sizov); II - The plan (by A.N. Gei); III – Plan of the Early Roman building (excavations by V.I. Sizov); IV – A part of classical fortress wall; V – Plan of tower 4 (magnetic survey by T.N. Smekalova).

Figure 7. I - The plan of Hellenistic buildings in the south-western part of Raevskoe Hillfort (excavations by N.A. Onaiko (a) and A.A. Malyshev (b)); II – Bosporan coins from Hellenistic cultural layers.

946

АLEXEY АLEXANDROVITCH MALYSHEV: TORIKOS

Figure 8. Abrau Peninsula. Archaeological sites of the Hellenistic Age: a - Greek settlement and necropolis; b Aboriginal settlement and cemetery; c - The distribution of finds of Hellenistic bosporan coins.

Figure 9. Abrau Peninsula. Archaeological sites of the Early Roman Period. I - The distribution of bronze and terracotta statuettes finds: a. outskirts stanitsa Rayevskaya; b. Shirokaya Balka (bronze); c. Myskhako (bird - excavation by A.N. Gey and Ye.I. Savchenko) (terracottas); d. Vladimirovskoye settlement; II - Finds of classical coins of the Early Roman Period; III - Plan of classical fortified estate in Tsemdolina. 947

ANCIENT GREEK COLONIES IN THE BLACK SEA 2

Figure 10. Abrau Peninsula. I-II - Archaeological sites of the Roman Period. The distribution of coin finds of the Roman Period; III – Graffiti on the ring foot of gray bowl

Figure 11. Settlement Myskhako. I – Plan of the settlement and necropolis; II – Remains of stone buildings on the East hill; III – Studied area on the East hill. a, b, c - Finds of bronze statuettes. 948

АLEXEY АLEXANDROVITCH MALYSHEV: TORIKOS

Figure 12. Settlement Myskhako. Pit 99 (dated to the 240s): 1 – Colchian amphorae and stamp on a Colchian amphora, 2 - tableware. Elements of household of local population: 3 - Ceramic details of fishing tackle, 4 - Censer.

949

ANCIENT GREEK COLONIES IN THE BLACK SEA 2

Figure 13. The graves of warrior-horseman from the burial ground Tsemdolin.

Figure 14. Abrau Peninsula. Archaeological sites of the Late Roman Period. The distribution of coin finds: a. Barbarian imitations of Roman denarius; b. Bosporan coins.

950

Greeks in the North Caucasus1 Аlexey Аlexandrovitch Malyshev*

Introduction1

Sea coast. Maiotian tribes (Psessi, Yaхamati, etc.) also dwelled in the Trans-Kuban area (the left bank of the Kuban river) until Hellenistic times, judging from characteristic finds related to Maiotian burial customs (Kamenetskii, I.S., 1989, p. 224-251). When describing the inhabitants of the North Caucasus, Strabo characterized everyday life as follows: ‘...Sarmatians (Scythians), Aorses, and Sirakos, spreading south of the Caucasus, are partly nomads and partly settled in tents and engaged in agriculture.’ (Strabo, XI, 2, 1)

The North Caucasus is a large area north of the main range of the Caucasus Mountains and south of the Don and Volga basins, bordered by the Black Sea to the west and the Caspian Sea to the east. The distribution of Greek cultural traditions over the North Caucasus during Antiquity is connected to the occupation of the Black Sea coast by Greek colonists. The people dwelling on the foothills of the north-western Caucasus and Kuban river basin (Gipanis-Anthikit) were primarily subjected to antique Hellenic influences over a long historical period.

Pre-colonial contacts between North Caucasus and Greeks

Most of the Azov Sea coast and the Kuban basin in the Early Iron Age were populated by tribes known collectively as Maiotian, after the nearby body of water of the same name (Azov Sea) (Strabo, X.2.11). From the written records and epigraphic material we know the names of the most important Maiotian tribes: Dandarii, Psessii, Tarpetii, Phatei, Dosxi, Sindians, Toreti and Kerketi.2 The eastern Maiotian region (central CisCaucasus) is bordered by the area occupied by settled tribes that created the Kobanian archaeological culture (Kozenkova, V.I., 1982; idem, 1989) (Fig. 1; 6, III).

From the Early Bronze Age the beneficial geographical location of the North Caucasus favoured the establishment of close connections with the cultural centres of the Middle East and Mediterranean regions. The clearest evidence for this is the occurrence of megalithic constructions, the presence of eastern toreutic materials, and elements of weapons and armour within the North Caucasus (Munchaev, R.M., 1994, p. 199, Tab.49; Petrenko, V.G., 1980; Belinsky, A.B., 1990, p.194-195; Ivanchik, A.I., 2001, p.228-262, etc.). At the time of Homer, and until the 6th c. B.C., the North Caucasus was familiar to Greeks from numerous myths: particularly the Caucasian prisoner, Prometheus, the adventures of Odysseus in the ‘dark lands of the Kimmerians,’ and the Argonauts, who sailed in search of the Golden Fleece. For a long time the Caucasus were considered ‘the end of the inhabited world’ (Latyshev, V.V., 1947, p. 53).

A significant role in the political history of the North Caucasus in general was played by nomadic tribes ― at the early stage (from the middle of the 7th to the 4th c. B.C.) by Scythians3 returning from Asia (Petrenko, V.G., 1989, p. 216; Galanina, L.K., 1997b, p. 130) and Sauromatians (mostly from the Don: Ps.-Scyl. 70; Maximenko, V.E., 1983; Kopylov, V.P., 2000, p. 157167). Later (3rd–1st c. B.C.) Sarmatian tribes, called Siraki, were also dominant players (Vinogradov, V.B., 1965, p. 108-121; Marchenko, I.I., 1996) and later (the beginning of the 1st century AD) by the Aorsi (Shilov, V.P., 1983, p.34-48).

At the early stages of Greek colonization, the history of the North Caucasus and North Pontic regions is represented by finds of artefacts made by Greek craftsmen of the late 7th to 6th centuries B.C. in the burial mounds (kurgany4) of Scythian aristocrats within the areas of the Kuban (Kelermes: Galanina, L.K., 1997a) and Stavropol rivers (Novozavedennoye: Petrenko, V.G., Maslov, V.Ye., Kantorovitch 2000, p.238-239, Fig. 1, 1). They probably mark one of the most ancient Scythian routes of the Black Sea region, from the lower reaches of the Bug and Dnieper rivers to the North Caucasian steppe (Vakhtina, M.Yu., Vinogradov, Yu.A., and Rogov, E.Ya., 1980); in this case the North Caucasian finds come from the first Greek colonists who dwelled in the Berezanskoe settlements.

The Maiotian tribes in the Azov and Kuban areas were of peasant stock (SC. I. p.193); they lived a half-nomadic lifestyle before the appearance of the Greeks on the Black 1 The author would like to thank I.A. Spiridonova for translating this article, and V.E. Maslov for kindly agreeing to contribute the data of his studies. * E-mail: [email protected] 2 Associations of various tribes with the Maiotes, as well as the definition of Maiotes (one ethnos or a multiethnic group living within a certain area (Galanina, L.K., 1997b, p. 126-127), are still uncertain. 3 The presence of Scythians is documented on the left bank of the Kuban River and in the Stavropol region (Petrenko V.G., 1989, p. 216). Some researchers believe that at the end of the 7th c. B.C. a significant body of ‘Tsar’ Scythians moved to the forest-steppe lands around the Black Sea (Galanina, L.K., 1997b, p.135). Other sources, particularly Xenophon, tell of Scythian rule in the Cis-Kuban region (SC. I. p. 358).

4

951

Kurgan is the word for a mound or tumulus burial.

ANCIENT GREEK COLONIES IN THE BLACK SEA 2 Because of their scarcity, irregular distribution, and location far from the Black Sea coast, the appearance of such unique objects dated to the Early Iron Age is indicative of episodic migrations of relatively small nomadic tribes into the countries of the Middle East and Asia Minor, where they could survive by raiding or becoming mercenaries: Herodotus describes the Caucasus as the Scythian way to Asia (Herod, IV, 12). Unfortunately, the available material from that period is rather inconsistent and by no means provides a complete picture (for more details, see Tsetskhladze, G.R., 1998, p. 11-12).

now suggest a less extensive development of Greek/barbarian contacts within this region. Much research is being carried out on the numerous coin finds from the Kuban river basin (Anfimov, N.V., 1966, pp.157-164, 1988, pp. 138-145; Anfimov, I.N., 1991, pp. 70-76 etc.), which are without parallel within the Don basin.7 The numismatic sources are intimately connected with the third group of materials, the archaeological evidence. This material is the most abundant and diverse (including finds imported into the regions lying east and south-east of the Bosporan kingdom8) and provides evidence for Greek, and primarily Bosporan, influences on different aspects of the lives of local people (pottery, building, household, etc.). The finds not only reveal aspects of everyday life; they also tell about diplomatic contacts, military and commercial matters, the presence of foreigners, etc. (Brashinsky, I.B., 1984, pp. 22-23).

Sources Colonization of the North Pontic area by Greeks and peoples of Asia Minor progressed significantly during the 6th c. B.C., and from that time inhabitants of the Caucasus were mentioned in many historical records.5 The relationships between the Greeks, as they founded their many colonies along the coast of the Bosporan kingdom, and the aboriginal tribes can be understood on the basis of three groups of materials.

Taking the above finds, the main stages of the regions’ historical, political, commercial, and cultural developments can now be described, taking into consideration in the Greek colonists settled along the coast of the Asian sector of the Bosporan kingdom, direct descendants of the Bosporan Greeks, and those peoples inhabiting the Kuban basin and adjacent areas. Special consideration is given to when, and how this region evolved into one of the key sources of the Bosporan state’s economic power.9

Apparently the written evidence is the rarest and best studied (Gaidukevich, V.F., 1949, pp. 34-36, 60-64; Blavatskaya, T.V., 1959, pp. 84-113; ShelovKoved’ayev, F.V., 1985, pp. 89-136, 149-152, 168-169). Herodotos’ (5th c. B.C.) information on Maiotian lands is inconsistent, and regions beyond the Tanais are only described in general terms, except for Sindian tribes (Herod., IV, 123). More thorough and substantial information can be found in Pliny, Polyaen, Strabo, and Diodoros (NH, VI, 20; Polyaen and Strateg., VIII, 55; Strabo, VIII, IV, 4-6; Diod., XX, 22-25). Epigraphic material: titulatures of Bosporan rulers (Zhebelev, S.A., 1934, p. 19; Shilov, V.P., 1950, pp. 102-123), an inscription from the city-state of Semibratneye (Seven Brothers) (Blavatskaya, T.V., 1993, pp. 34-47; Vinogradov, Yu.G., 2002, p.3-22; Tokhtas’ev, S.R., 2004, p.144-180), and an Azov tombstone (KBN, 180) have also added to our knowledge of some events in the region’s political and, to a lesser extent, economic history. The second group of material — numismatic sources — has been extensively studied over recent decades and the appearance of the first catalogues of antique coins found in the North Caucasus (Pakhomov, E.V., 1926-1966; Zograf, A.N., 1945, pp. 29-86) has been of considerable value.

Greek appearance in the North Caucasus: the Archaic period According to Strabo (XI, 2, 4) and Pliny (NH, VI, 20), the settlements of the Karians and Clazomenians in the North Caucasus region began on the Taman Peninsula and around the mouth of the Tanais (Don). Archaeological evidence confirms the appearance of Greek settlements in the first half of the 6th c. B.C., within the Kuban basin, on the Taman peninsula (Hermonassa, Kepoi, and others) (Kuznetsov, V.D., 1992,

1994, p. 46). Discussions on the epigraphic finds from the Semibratnee settlement (Vinogradov, Yu.G., 2002, p.2-22; Tokhtas’ev, S.R., 2004, p.175-179), as well as the classification of Sindian coins by N.A. Frolova (Frolova, N.A., 2002, p.231-233), support the historical existence of Greek/Barbarian Sindian state. 7 Finds of Bosporanian coins from the Don basin are associated with the two Greek emporia of the Don delta: the hill-fort at Elizavetovskoye (Goroncharovskii, V.A., 1987, pp. 15-18), and the ancient city of Tanais (Shelov, D.B., 1960, p. 134). 8 The literature on the history of the Bosporian state is now very extensive now; most of the general works were written in the 1950s and 1960s (Anfimov, N.V., 1952, pp. 84-87; Zeest, I.B., 1951, pp.107-118, 1960, pp. 52-55, 60-65, etc.), and since then the data has grown very significantly. 9 It is generally accepted that the beginning of the submission of tribes in the Kuban region, and the annexation of Sindice, occurred in the early years of the reign of Leukon I, i.e., the early 4th c. B.C. (Zhebelev, S.A., 1934, p. 19; Gaidukevich, V.F., 1949, p. 64; Blavatskaya, T.V., 1959, p. 109; Shelov-Kovedyaev, F.V., 1985, p. 133).

New interpretations of Sindian coins (Fig. 4), which were once considered as primary evidence for a Sindian state,6 5

One of the earliest references to the local toponym is found in Hypponax of Ephesos (Blavatsky, V.D., 1985, p. 55-58) (Fig. 1, I). 6 For the present time, three hypotheses on their origins have been put forward: coins from the Sind kingdom (Shelov-Kovedyaev, F.V., 1985, p. 128; historiography: see footnote 123), coins from one of the Greek cities — Sind, Sindice, or Sindian Harbour (Shelov, D.B., 1981, pp. 241-243), and the joint coinage of the towns of Sindice (the Asian sector of the Bosporanian kingdom) (Zavoikin, A.A./Boldyrev, S.,

952

АLEXEY АLEXANDROVITCH MALYSHEV: GREEKS IN THE NORTH CAUCASUS Items made by Ionian masters are also known (for example from the burial ground near the River Psekups (Lovpache, N.G., 1985, p. 21, table XVI, 6). There is also a cylix with typical eastern Greek decorations (Fig. 2) from the burial ground of Ul’yap (burial mound 15, grave 51) (Alexandrescu, P., 1966, Tab. 10, № 136; Tab. 12, № 186, 187; Tab. 13, № 223; Tab. 64, № 283). Most of these items were found in graves of warriors and, therefore, they could be interpreted as trophies seized during raids on the Bosporan Greeks. Such a symbolic meaning can be assigned to the painting of a blackfigured oinochoai found in a Scythian warrior’s grave mound in the environs of Armavir (Fig. 3, 1-3).

p. 31-37), and on the slopes near modern Anapa (‘the harbour of Sindians’ – Σινδικής λιμήν). There are reasons for suggesting that the islands, where Greeks were settling during the second half of the 6th c. BC, were practically devoid of aboriginal tribes. There are only occasional traces of the local population at the mouth of the Kuban, for example, the burial complex in the Tsukur-Liman (estuary) with Ionian oinochoai (Vakhtina, M.Yu., 1989, p.52-53). The first contacts between the inhabitants of the continental parts of the Kuban basin and the Greek colonists are documented by finds of Greek ceramics (Clazomenian and ‘tumblerbottomed’ amphorae from eastern Greece) (Dupont, P., 1998, fig.23.2, d-f; 23.3, e-g; 23.5, a-b), their scarcity could be indicative of the irregular nature of such contacts (Fig. 2, II).

Despite the poor preservation of the image on the front part of the body, analyzing the preserved elements of the image allows us to discern a scene from the life of Heracles, which is the most widespread subject for Attic black- and early red-figure ware (Boardman, J., 1993a, p. 221; Boardman, J., 1993b, pp. 226-227). In the scene painted on the oinochoai from Armavir, Heracles is being chased by Apollo. According to the legend, this happened after the sequence of Heracles’ victories. Suffering from terrible memories and recurring nightmares, Heracles appealed to the Delphic oracle, but any help was refused. Indignation aroused by this injustice led him to seize the treasures and the oracular seat from Apollo’s sanctuary, with the intention of founding a new sanctuary. However, Apollo, defending his oracle, eventually persuaded Heracles to return the stolen property. It is clear that nomads became interested in any vessel with such painting – without knowing the legend they would only see a rough, bearded barbarian wrapped in leather and fur and armed with a cudgel, who had just stolen something from an elegantly dressed effeminate Greek.

Judging from the location of these finds, nomadic tribes took a leading role in establishing connections between Greek settlements and the central and eastern areas of the Kuban basin. The relationships between the aboriginal population of the foothills along the lower course of the Kuban and the inhabitants of newly-founded Gorgippia (the harbour of the Sindians) were different. It is not excluded that the early Hellenization of the Sindians, which implied the acceptance of more tolerant and peaceful behaviour, according to written sources (Anon., PPE, 65), can be explained by the longer (pre)history of Greek-Sindian contacts. The find of a fragment of an archaic east Greek cylix with a bird image (Kharaldina, Z.E./Novichikhin, A.M., 1994, p.200, fig. 2) at the Alexeevka settlement (Salov A.I., 1986, p.188-195), makes it possible for us to suggest that their contacts were established as early as the late 7th c. BC (Cook R.M. 1998, p.26, Fig. 6.1).

The other route for Greek imports associated with the development of trade and commerce is documented by finds of black figured and amphoral ceramics from the settlements in the Trans-Kuban area (Borisenkov, Liman, Ventsy, Tenginskoe, etc.) (Kamenetsky, I.S., 2001, p. 12; Malyshev A.A., 1996, p.110-111), and also Maiotian centres within the Cis-Kuban area (e.g., fortified settlement (Hillfort), Stanitsa, Starokorsunskaya, etc.) (Limberis, N.Yu., 1994, p. 30-52; Limberis, N.Yu., Marchenko, I.I., 2001, p.32-123, Figs. 2,5; 5,5; 7,6; 12,7; 13,7; 17,6; 34,3). Finds of Greek amphorae are very infrequent, which can be explained either by a limited use of wine and oil by the local population, or by carrying these products in wineskins more adapted for transporting on a horseback or in a small boat. As a rule, archaeological materials do not include such components of Greek import as clothes and tissues.

During the last quarter of the 6th c. BC, when the Kuban waterway apparently acquired great importance, GreekMaiotian contacts developed widely within the Kuban basin and became regular. This is evidenced by numerous finds within this region of pottery containers (amphorae), and other painted Greek pottery, around the monuments of the nomadic and settled agrarian Maiotian populations. A greater amount and diversity of Greek imports came from the Trans-Kuban area. Black-glazed pottery from Attica (various types of cup) were found in burial complexes of the Late Archaic Period (the end of the 6th/first half of the 5th c. BC) at Adygea, near the aul(es) (villages) of Necherzii, Ul’, and Ul’ap (Sparkes, B.A. and Talсott, L., 1970, №617, с.109-112; 532-561). Objects atypical of native complexes that were found in Kurgan 12, the burial ground of Ul’ap, were essential elements of ancient Greek households – a black-glazed lekythos (grave 100) (Sparkes, B.A. and Talсott, L., 1970, p.153, № 1115-1116), and also a black-glazed attic lamp (grave 82) (Howland, R.H., 1958, type 16b).

Thus, the commercial relationships between the Greeks and people settled along the Kuban, far from the Black Sea, began to develop before the 4th c. BC A significant role in this process belonged to Greek forts founded during the Archaic Period within the Trans-Kuban area, on the banks of its numerous tributaries. 953

ANCIENT GREEK COLONIES IN THE BLACK SEA 2 Deep in the barbarian lands, on the bank of a left-hand tributary of the Kuban, an emporion (trading port) (Polanyi, K. 1963, p.30-45) was opened and took the same functional role as the city-state (fortified settlement) of Elizavetovskoe in the Don delta (Marchenko, K.K., Zhitnikov, V.G., Yakovenko, E.V., 1988) (Fig. 4, 5). Judging from the finds of handmade pottery in the lower part of the cultural layer, that trading port was established on the site of an aboriginal settlement. Soon, by the end of the 6th c. BC, this trading port grew into a typical Greek town: Labrys (Semibratneye city-state). It was Labrys that served as the Greek outpost in the Kuban basin for a period of about two centuries. This outlying settlement was independent of the Bosporan kingdom, therefore, it can be suggested that it was not founded by Bosporan citizens, but colonists from the Mediterranean region. It is not excluded that Labrys continuously kept in touch with the metropolis.

political power of the Bosporan kings (rulers) (Gaidukevich, V.F. 1949, pp. 94-95; Blavatsky, V.D., 1954, pp. 7-44; Shelov-Kovedyaev, F.V., 1985, p. 159 etc.). The submission of those lands to the rule of Bosporan Greeks was not a smooth process. Who was in opposition? Polyaen’s ‘novel’ and the inscription at the Hillfort of Semibratneye mention warriors that vigorously resisted the advance of the Greeks and made it necessary to build the huge fortification constructions around the settlement. There was a conglomeration of tribes that inhabited the vast Trans-Kuban area and controlled the import of wheat from the Cis-Kuban lands. Apparently, they benefited from the military and diplomatic aids provided by Scythian kings, whose nomadic tribes wandered within this region in the 6th/first half of the 5th c. BC (Vakhtina, M.Yu., Vinogradov, Yu. A., and Rogov, E.Ya., 1980, p.155-161).

The Greek cultural layer of the Semibratnee city-state (with an area of 9 ha) contains Late Archaic and Classical amphorae, painted and black-glazed, terracotta statuettes (Anfimov, N.V., 1951, p. 263; Anfimov, N.V., 1987b, p.177-198). The selection of finds is similar to that in the synchronous layers of the classical cities of Phanagoria and Hermonassa. In the 5th c. BC, Labrys was surrounded by huge defence constructions – stonework walls, 3–4 m thick, fortified by rectangular towers made of shell rock brought from Taman and/or the Crimea, where it was quarried at that time. This fact demonstrates, on the one hand, the riches and power of the city’s government, and, on the other, a tense ethno-political situation over the whole region.

Sudden changes of events during the struggle for political influence in the Kuban region were pictured by Polyaen in his novel about the Sindian king, with the Greek name of Hekataeus. The king was caught in the maelstrom of events that reflected all the main elements of state politics: dynastic marriages, betrayal, military conflicts and professional killers. Everything began from his coronation under the auspices of the Bosporan ruler, Satyros. In response to that favour, Hekataeus should have put to an end his relationships with Maiotian society, including his own wife, Tirgatao, and join the dynasty by marrying the former wife of the Bosporan king. Tirgatao was pursued by the king, but escaped and found protection in the residence of her relatives, the rulers of Yaxamatians. A strong army had gathered in her support and made many assaults upon Sindice.

Greek (Bosporan) penetration in the North Caucasus in the Classic and Early Hellenistic Periods The early period of the history of the Bosporan kingdom (end of the 5th–4th c. BC) repeatedly became an issue of detailed research. Almost all specialists were particularly interested in the situation at the eastern frontiers of the Asian part of the Bosporan kingdom – in Sindice10 and its environs within the Kuban basin (Blavatskaya, T.V., 1959, pp. 84-114; Shelov-Kovedyaev, F.V., 1985, pp. 124-136). All researchers agree that the lands adjoined to the Bosporan kingdom within a century-long period had a crucial economic-political importance throughout its entire history. This region was fairly regarded as a major exporter of wheat11 – which was a basis of economic and

The aforementioned burial ground by the village of Ul’yap (Adygea) has remained from one of the Yaxamatian tribes (Leskov, A.M. etc., 1985, p.70-126; Beglova, Ye.A., 1989, p. 140-151). It should be mentioned that the most valuable objects of Greek craft (Panathenaea amphorae and items made of non-ferrous and precious metals at the end of the 5th/beginning of 4th c. BC) were found within the so-called ritual sites having no connection with the burials (Хenofontova, I.V., 1992; Хenofontova, 2000) (Fig. 4, a). This fact implies that social inequality was prevented due to some customs that were probably connected with the institution of military democracy.

10 Some ancient authors identified Sindice with the whole area of the Asian part of the Bosporan kingdom (Anon., PPE, 65; Ps.-Arr., 65/24; Steph.Byz. s.v.); therefore, Sindians could reside also in the Taman Peninsula. However, other authors described Sindice as a smaller area south-east of the Taman Peninsula (Polyaen, VIII, 55; Diod. XX, 25; Strabo., II, 1, 10). 11 That is evidenced by the image of wheat grain on Sindian coins of the last third of the 5th c. B.C. (Zograf, A.N., 1951, p. 168, table XXXIX, 40, 42; Abramzon, M.G., 1997, p. 79) and also by Strabo’s speculation that the main wheat producers in the northern Black Sea region were the area of Chersonesos and Asian lands of Bosporos (Sindice) (Strabo. VII, IV, 6).

Many researchers believe that the strengthening of Bosporan positions in the Trans-Kuban region was accompanied by the expulsion of their rival tribes, which explains the move of the Yaxamatians. The economic and political situation in this region at the end of the 5th c. BC is reflected by the finds of Greek imported objects within a vast area of the north-west Caucasus, including the Stavropol Upland.

954

АLEXEY АLEXANDROVITCH MALYSHEV: GREEKS IN THE NORTH CAUCASUS (currency used in the Black Sea region), can be explained by barter trading with this outlying region, and, probably, there was no need for Sindian leaders to issue their own coins.12

There are 22 sites with such finds, which are usually single ones. Pottery containers (20%) are represented by amphorae from two Mediterranean centres – Thasos and Chios. The greatest numbers (68%) of items are feasting vessels (cups, rhytons, hydria), and they are usually found in elite burial complexes along the lower reaches of the Kuban.

The aforementioned finds of Panathenaean amphorae are especially important for understanding the balance of power in different parts of the Kuban basin. These amphorae can be interpreted as diplomatic gifts from the Bosporan leaders to the local nobles (Skrizhinskaya, M.V., 1999, p.103). Such donations unmistakably point to those political centres, which were essential supporters and benefactors of the new Bosporan dynasty of the Spartakides, who came to power in the year 438 BC (Vasil’ev, A.N., 1992, p. 125, etc.). In the Cis-Kuban area archaeologists found exactly half of the total number of vessels of this type collected from the region of the North Caucasus (cfg: Asian part of Bosporos and the Don area). They came from the Elizavetinskaya burial complex (1 finds) and Ul’ap kurgans (2 finds). Judging from the context of these finds, the leaders of these centres were on different terms with the Bosporan governors.

The most curious things were found in the large Semibratniye (Seven Brothers) kurgans (tumuli), located in the vicinity of the site of the ancient town of Labrys. The excavations performed by V.G. Tizengauzen in 1875–1876 revealed that the kurgan mounds, from 11 to 15 m high, concealed graves that were faced from the inside with adobe brick or stone. Kurgan 7 contained such a grave, surrounded by low stone walls. The bodies buried in these graves were lying on a special platform or, occasionally, in a gable-roofed sarcophagus made of wood and adorned with carving and woollen tissue. In Kurgan 2, which had the highest mound (18 m), the burial vault was situated inside a large pit faced with adobe and covered with wood. Three-quarters of the burial vault was filled with horse bones. The dead man was lying in his full armour on a special platform within a separate north-east corner of the vault.

Specifically, in the Trans-Kuban area, Panathenaean amphorae were found on ritual plots, while their finds on the right bank, in the Cis-Kuban area, were associated with kurgan burial complexes, having many similarities with the rich burials of the Semibratniye (Seven Brothers) kurgans (tumuli). The Elizavetinskaya complex (near the stanitsa (village) of Elizavetinskaya), known also as Mayskaya Gora (May Hill)), contained nine pointed wine amphorae, one Panathenaean amphora, and a casket decorated with bronze animal figures that gave a date to this burial of the first quarter of the 4th c. BC.

Despite the fact that the burial complexes were seriously damaged by illegal excavations, archaeologists can still admire the traces of burial customs and luxurious inventory – a mixture of Greek and aboriginal traditions. Burying saddle-horses in the separate compartment of the vault is interpreted as a barbarian custom. The inventory of items represents not only Greek but also Achemenidian and Thracian traditions; it is further evidence for the wealth and political connections of the local nobility (Bilimovich, Z.A., 1978, p.128-135; Gertsiger, D.S., 1973, p.98; Gorbunova, K.S., 1971, p. 18-38; Perevodchikova, E.V., 1987, p.54; Peredol’skaya, E.A., 1973, p. 62-70).

The Mayskaya Gora kurgan is comparable to the Semibratniye kurgans in terms of its scale. More than 200 horse skeletons were found in the mound. A rectangular vault made of stone, having its entrance on the east and covered with wood, was placed under a wooden structure, inside a large rectangular hollow that was dug into the subsoil (Rostovtsev, M.I., 1925, pp. 320-321).

Obviously, there was a competition for richness of burials between Sindian nobles (Kurgans of the ‘Seven Brothers’, 5th/early 4th c. BC) and Bosporan nobles (burial complexes: Rostovtsev, M.I., 1925, pp. 320-324, 351-363). This is indicative of a rapid development of the social classes in Maiotian tribes and progressive Hellenization of aboriginal aristocrats, i.e. their merging with the Bosporan governing elite, on a financial basis, and even via mixed marriages (Polyaen, VIII, 55). Thus, the zone of Greek-Maiotian contacts established at the time of colonization (the 6th c. BC) evolved into the zone of synthesis in different social-political, administrative, and cultural aspects by the second half of the 5th c. BC (Arut’unova-Fidanyan, V.A., 1999, p. 8).

In the beginning of the 20th c., N.I. Veselovsky studied 30 kurgans near the Hillfort of Elizavetinskoe. The largest kurgans had the same type of burial construction: a hollow faced with wood, or, occasionally, a stone vault. A similar construction was reported near Mar’evskaya (Rostovtsev, M.I., 1925, p.324-325). This is indicative of the rapid growth of social equality within the Kuban area at the end of the 5th c. BC (Fig. 8, I). After the 5th c. BC, when the Scythians abandoned the Cis-Kuban area (Galanina, L.K., 1997, p.135), the tradition of grand burial constructions was maintained

This process was set off by the rapidly growing demand for Bosporan wheat, exported from the Cis-Kuban lands to the Mediterranean region. The absence of numismatic evidence, and primarily Kyzikene Electrum coins

12 The distribution of Kyzikene coins in the Bosporan region in the 5th c. B.C. is evidenced not only by their finds; there are also certain elements of the Kyzikene coin type on one of the series of Sindian coins (Shelov D.B., 1949, p. 95).

955

ANCIENT GREEK COLONIES IN THE BLACK SEA 2 only for the governors of Labrys. It is very likely that the Semibratnie kurgans were their creation. However, the Sind-Maiotian nobles satisfied their need for displaying power under new historic-cultural conditions: in place of the Scythian kings, the Bosporan dynasts were their source of income. A long-lasting alliance between Bosporan royalty and Sindo-Maiotian aristocracy was based on trade in corn. In the light of this, there is symbolic meaning in that at all the Panathenaea festivals, that were held once every four years during the 4th c. BC, the Bosporan kings were heralded as the ‘possessors of Bosporan corn’ and were awarded with golden wreaths ‘for valour and benevolence towards the Athenian people’ (Skrizhinskaya, M.V., 2002, p. 137, 142-143). The volume of Bosporan corn exportd to Athens is indeed impressive: written documents specify an amount of 400,000 medimnes (21,012 tons) (Marinovitch, L.P., 2003, p. 232-233). Apparently, the majority of Bosporan wheat exports originated from the Cis-Kuban area.

significant part of these highly artistic objects was exchanged for tribute (grain, leather, wool, slaves), paid for by their subjects. In this way a steady demand for the production of highquality toreutics and jewellery was assured, which stimulated the development of these arts in the Black Sea area. More than a century ago M.I. Rostovtsev expressed an opinion that most of the artistic, toreutic objects were produced in Panticapaeum. Subsequent researchers confirmed that the main workshops were concentrated in Panticapaeum (Gaidukevich, V.F. and Kaposhina, S.I., 1951, p. 179 ff; Prushevskaya, E.O., 1955, p. 339 ff; Gaidukevich, V.F., 1971, p.133).14 This was developed over a period of two decades by N.A. Onaiko. She studied further objects made of precious metals found in the Cis-Kuban area (Onayko, N.A., 1970, pp. 22-54). In her opinion, large centres producing tableware and ornaments existed in the Asian part of the Bosporan kingdom, in Cis-Kuban (Onayko, N.A., 1966, p. 160). The masters varied in craftsmanship, judging from some finds from Cis-Kuban (a gold plate from Karagodeuakhsh, a cap from Kurdzhips, bronze stamps from the Yl’yap burial ground, etc.) (Fig. 7, 1-3), some of these masters could well have been Sindo-Maiotian in origin.

The reconstruction, at least hypothetical, of the routes and terms of trading corn produced in the Cis-Kuban area is possible owing to the finds of Greek imports. The luxury items prevailing in the selection of imported goods in the 5th c. BC, when trade relationships began to be established, can be interpreted as diplomatic gifts or goods exchanged in lieu of taxes collected by the SindoMaiotian nobility from the local people who were their subjects. In the 5th c. BC, the Bosporan need for corn was satisfied by Sindice. Later, with the development of corn exports to the Mediterranean region, a larger area was involved with corn production.13

Likewise in Olbia, Greek workshops in the Asian Bosporos produced numerous objects of highly artistic bronze work (primarily decorations for horse-harness in the Scythian ‘animal’ style). The Cis-Kuban interpretation of Scythian ‘animal’ style with low-relief images and the wide use of engraving, was probably designed in direct co-operation with the Bosporan masters of toreutics (Perevodchikova, E.A., 1973) (Fig. 7, 4).

The location of the producers of the luxurious golden objects, prized by the Scythian, Sind-Maiotian, and Sarmatian aristocrats, still remains a subject of heated discussion. This is well illustrated by the extensive historiography referring to the ‘Kelermes mirror’ (including the production technique, stylistic and morphological analogues, dating, etc.). The decoration of the inaccurately moulded mirror of Scyth-Siberian type has clear similarities with those of the Rhodian-Ionian type. Such a mixture of absolutely different traditions allows the suggestion that the mirror was moulded by an artisan in the Cis-Kuban area, and, later, decorated by a master in Asia Minor (Kisel, V.A., 2003, p.85-99).

Finds of Greek-style arms used for defence and attack are equally informative about the amount and assortment of elaborate works imported into the Cis-Kuban area in the past (Fig. 4, c, d). To a considerable extent they are connected with the regular participation of the aboriginal population in armed conflicts in Bosporos and its peripheral areas. The archaeological materials represent better quality arms (helmets, armour, certain types of weapon, and occasionally shields) (Rabinovich, B.Z., 1941, p. 99-171; Galanina, L.K., 1965, № 25, 26-28, 69-70; Pavlovich, G.A., 1995). The appearance of single-blade swords and riveted helmets in the Cis-Kuban area is explained by the ingenious Greek influence (Erlikh, V.R., 1992, p.5-18).

As mentioned above, the favourable attitudes of the powerful Scythian and Sind-Maiotian nobility were supported to a considerable degree by regular ‘diplomatic gifts’, with expensive, highly artistic objects. ‘Gift’ offerings to the Scythians was practised by the Bosporans until the 2nd c. BC (Strabo., XII, 4, 6). Undoubtedly, a

The majority of these finds originates from the burials of the Sind-Maiotian nobility. Their dates range from the 5th

13

Unfortunately, Greek texts give us only very brief descriptions of the selection of traded goods. Concerning Tanais (Lower Don area), the trade port between Greeks and Barbarians, Strabo reports that the latter brought slaves, leather, and other fruits of nomadic cattle-raising, and the Greeks offered in exchange clothes, wine (the most important item of Greek trade with the Barbarians from the Black Sea area), and other ‘attributes of civilized life’ (Strabo, XI, II, 3).

14 Specialists believe that these objects were commissioned from the craftsmen of Olbia (Kaposhina, S.I., 1956, p.183), and even Thracia (Mantsevich, A.P., 1949, p.196-220).

956

АLEXEY АLEXANDROVITCH MALYSHEV: GREEKS IN THE NORTH CAUCASUS to the beginning of the 3rd c. BC. Allegedly, the earliest artefact, a coat of scale armour, originates from one of the Semibratnie (Seven Brothers) kurgans. As in other parts of the northern Black Sea area, the most active period for importing arms into the deeper regions of Cis-Kuban occurred in the 4th c. BC (Chernenko, E.V., 1968, p. 161162).

the experience of the first Greek colonists, they always counted on the waterways and settled their strongholds on the banks of the Kuban river and its tributaries. One of the most important Bosporan centres that functioned for the next two centuries in the Trans-Kuban area was the Hillfort Batareynoe. Unfortunately, the evidence on this Greek settlement is rather poor. However, it was most probably established in the place of the former Maiotian settlement, as was the case of the Greek town Labrys. Judging from the finds of import ceramics, the Bosporans already reached this area back in the 5th c. BC, but had seriously established here only in the 4th c. BC. The Hillfort Batareynoe has a complex topography (fortress ‘A’ surrounded by a moat, plot ‘B’ adjacent to the fortress, and elevation ‘C’ slightly to the west, closer to the estuary) and occasional remains of stone buildings, which all together are indicative of a great economic and strategic significance of this centre during a long period of time. The numerous buildings including huge fortification constructions and stone houses are undoubtedly connected with the presence of a great number of Bosporan inhabitants here.

A less numerous group of arms finds mainly consists of helmets originating from the burials of nomads in the 2nd/beginning of the 1st c. BC. The area of these finds increases with earlier rather than later ones. Among the earlier finds, most of the objects were made in Attica, and later the geographic range of producers quickly expanded (Thrace, Etruscan-Italian workshops, etc.) (Raev, B.A., Simonenko, A.B., Treister, M.Yu., 1991, p.117-136). Judging from the amount and distribution of Greek imports into the Bosporan region, there was an important progress in the development of trade at the end of the 5th/early 4th c. BC. The range of imported goods had considerably grown (up to 31 items), and the gross amount of imports had sharply increased (more than five times). The majority (88%) of all imports within the first half of the 4th c. were transported in amphora-type containers, most of which were made in the second quarter of the 4th c. BC and, primarily, Mendean (Fig. 5).15

The appearance of ethno-political problems in the TransKuban region, mainly, as a result of the advance of Bosporans to the east is confirmed by written sources and archaeological data. Particularly, the deserting of interior lands of the Trans-Kuban region coincides with the time of migration of Yaxamatians and probably also Dandarians down the Kuban River to the Azov Sea area (Kamenetsky I.S., 1971, p.166-168; Galanina L.K., 1997, p.126-127).

This fact sets the right bank of the River Kuban apart from the other areas of the northern Pontic region (Brashinsky, I.B., 1980b, pp. 94-95; Monakhov, S.Yu., 1999, pp. 247, 315-316). Judging from the available materials, almost half (45%) of the products transported in amphorae came to the right bank of the Kuban during the period between the 4th and first half of the 3rd c. BC (Fig. 5).

As mentioned above, the Elizavetinskoe Hillfort represents the largest political and economic centre in the Middle Cis-Kuban area (right bank on the middle reaches of the Kuban river) in the 4th c. BC. The total area of the fortified settlement (11 ha) consists of two unequal parts: western (smaller) and eastern (Fig. 8, I). At the edge of the latter, N.I. Veselovsky performed excavations on the aforementioned kurgan complex. A rampart and a moat were protecting both parts of the settlement along the field side; a similar rampart and a moat divided these two parts. According to V.A. Gorodtsov, the western part was built earlier. The elevations ‘A’ and ‘B’ within this part of the settlement were separated from the rest of the area by a fosse (up to 10 m wide) formerly filled by water from the Kuban river.

Changes in the topographic distribution of finds give us the following information. A massive amount of import income spread along the right bank of the Kuban up to its middle reaches. The former outpost of the Bosporan kingdom, Labrys, had become a substantial city, whereas other outposts had shifted to the east (according to materials obtained by N.V. Anfimov, and, very recently, by V.A. Goroncharovsky). Labrys had a specific organization of social16 and religious life, which is indicated by the finds of cult terracotta from the end of the 5th c. BC (Anfimov N.V., 1987, p. 177-198).

The eastern part was added to the settlement in the 3rd c. BC, when a lot of new buildings were constructed here as well (Gorodtsov, V.A., 1935, p. 182). The cultural layer is practically absent within this part of the monument, hence it was suggested (Shilov, V.P., 1955, p. 228-249) that this fortified area was used as a refuge in case of assault (similar practices are known in fortified settlements along the Dnieper river - Bel'skoe, Nemirovskoe, etc.). The rampart also protected the sacred place, i.e. the burial ground.

Judging from the total amount and topographic distribution of finds, more Greek settlements appeared at that time in Cis-Kuban (right bank). The Bosporans also continued to occupy Trans-Kuban (left bank). Following 15 Dating Mendean amphorae is often difficult (because of significant fragmentation, etc.) and offerd only a wide interval: from the first half, to the third quarter of the 4th c. B.C. 16 The city centre was planned in accordance with the Greek tradition. Another important fact is the find of an inscription (Blavatskaya T.V., 1993, p. 34-47).

957

ANCIENT GREEK COLONIES IN THE BLACK SEA 2 Beside the topographic features and finds in the kurgans, the Hillfort Elizavetinskoe has impressive burial complexes of common Maiotians. The latter normally contain amphorae and, occasionally, fragmented roof tiles and Greek tableware. The fact that Greek goods were generally available to common Maiotians in the first half of the 4th c. BC is very important. Numerous finds of monotype Mendean amphorae are indicative of the import of large consignments of goods.

Dated finds of Greek imports indicate that these sites were used as burial grounds from the early 4th c. BC till the early 3rd c. BC. Among the objects of Greek import that are present in nearly all the burial complexes, amphora containers prevail. While the production from Heraklean and Mendean prevails in the burial complexes of Lebedi-3, Heraklean and Thasian amphorae predominate in the Prikubanskii burial ground (Marchenko I.I., Limberis N.Yu., Bochkovoy V.V., 2001, p.94, fig.1-2). It should be mentioned that most Thasian and Heraklean amphorae were collected and ‘deposited’ within this area, and only smaller numbers of them were carried farther to the east, up to the middle reaches of the Kuban.

The neighbouring sites of the Hillforts (near the khutor (village) in honour of Lenin, near the stanitsa Starokorsunskaya and stanitsa Pashkovskaya) are not so rich in finds of synchronous materials. This can be explained by the delivery of goods primarily to the site Elizavetinskoye that some researchers associate with Gargaza mentioned by Diodoros (Diod. XX. 24).

The presence of settled population18 in this region could be favoured by the absence of war threats and available means needed to provide the necessities of people’s lives. The abundance and assortment of Greek imports (especially, black-glazed pottery) make it possible to suggest that the people who created the studied monuments were deeply involved in the Bosporan economy as consumers of Greek imports and also as producers of goods and/or services needed for the Bosporan kingdom. These needs could hardly be satisfied by fishery and corn production in this area. Besides, no evidence for such occupations of the local population were found in the studied monuments. However, more than 50% of the burial complexes contained weapons (spear-heads and, occasionally, swords).

In the beginning of the 4th c. BC, the Lower Cis-Kuban area (right bank on the lower reaches of the Kuban river) became densely populated, according to ancient authors, by the Maiotian tribe of Dandarii (Strabo XI. II. 11). This area has a levelled topography typical for river deltas, since most of it represents the ancient delta of the Kuban that is bordered to the north by the River Kirpili. Absolute heights within the area are not significant; hence the Black Sea coastline and the shape of land can quickly change in response to the slightest fluctuation in sea level. People’s occupations in this area are connected with its specific climatic and geographic factors (particularly its location close to the sea). Before the Greek colonization, nomadic cattle-breeding developed similar to that in the Don delta; reed-covered flats were used by the nomads as a shelter for cattle in winter.17

Therefore, it can be suggested that the local men worked mostly as trade agents, for example, engaged in the carriage of corn from the right bank of the Kuban to the Bosporos, and delivery of Greek goods to the settlements along the Kuban.

A sudden appearance of a great number of people in the Lower Cis-Kuban area is evidenced by data obtained from a series of burial grounds situated within a little space: by the stanitsa (village) Krasnoarmeiskaya, Lebedi-3, and Prikubanskii. The latter two monuments – Lebedi-3 and Prikubansky – are better studied. Together they comprise more than 600 burial complexes. By the burial custom, these monuments undoubtedly belong to the Maiotian culture: orientation in the east and southeast sectors, a bowl near or under the head, diverse funeral inventory. Within the burial ground of Lebedi-3 (about 200 burial complexes) the total number of interred was estimated by I.S. Kamenetsky at about 17,000 people (Gei A.N./Kamenetskii I.S., 1986, p. 35-50; Kamenetsky I.S., 1989, map 21, 11, pp. 235-236). Within the burial ground at Prikubansky (about 400 burial complexes), groups of tombs belonging to different social classes were distinguished. Less detailed studies were performed on the burial site of similar size located south-west of the village of Krasnoarmeiskaya, on the left bank of Kazachii Erik (Anfimov N.V., 1952b, p. 74).

By the amount of imported objects, features of burial customs, and also by chronological intervals, the burial complexes within the Lower Cis-Kuban area are comparable with the Elizavetinskaya burial ground №2 and, to a certain extent, with other necropolises in the Middle Cis-Kuban area. It is not excluded that numerous Maiotian tribes migrated from the middle to the lower reaches of the Kuban in the early 4th c. BC, which accounts for the sudden increase in the human population in the Lower Cis-Kuban. Thus, at the beginning of the 4th c. BC, the Lower CisKuban area located at the periphery of the Bosporan kingdom acquired a great importance in the economic 18 It is difficult to restore the demographic situation in this region. Some studied monuments dated to the Bronze and Early Iron Ages were overlain by a thick layer of sediment. In particular, the fact that monuments of the Early Iron Age were not found within the area between the right arm of the Kuban and Protoka rivers and the Azov Sea coast (Kamenetsky I.S., 1989, maps 20-22) can be explained either by a complete or partial submerging of this area under water for that period, or by the burial of these monuments under the layers of sediments more than 1 m thick (the level of the Azov Sea in the 6th-4th c. B.C. was about 5-7 m lower).

17 See: Scythian seasonal raids into the Asian part of the Bosporos in the 5th c. B.C. (Herod. IV, 28).

958

АLEXEY АLEXANDROVITCH MALYSHEV: GREEKS IN THE NORTH CAUCASUS infrastructure due to the system of waterways and roads that linked principal ports of trade.

steamships covered the distance from Ekaterinodar (modern Krasnodar) to Temryk in 16 hours, whereas the way back took them 60 hours (Apostolov L.Ya., 1897, p. 107).

There is a quite curious fact to be mentioned here. On the one hand, there are a great diversity and amount of finds of black-glazed pottery in the Lower Cis-Kuban (e.g. in Lebedi-3) and, on the other hand, a quite insignificant amount of black-glazed pottery from monuments in the Middle Cis-Kuban19 (Fig. 5).

In these conditions, numerous oxbow lakes within the Kuban estuary acquired great importance. These waterways were already used in the Archaic Age by Greeks who moved to the east. They founded several strong points along the Kuban estuary (Semibratneye city-state and Hillfort Batareynoye, settlement Borisenkov Liman etc.).

Considering the Cis-Kuban region in general, one can see the beginning of its economic submission to the Bosporos region. This process reached its apogee in the second quarter of the 4th c. BC, as concluded on the basis of estimating the inflow of Greek imports. Undoubtedly, that was primarily associated with the military and political achievements of the Bosporan ruler Leukon I.

In the Lower Cis-Kuban area, the use of numerous branches within the Kuban delta for the shipment of goods began only in the 4th c. BC. It was probably convenient to connect certain branches by artificial channels. Such a channel was described by Strabo in connection with certain events in the Early Roman Period (Strabo XI, II, 11). The channel functioning was maintained by a team of workers who were permanently employed and had certain professional skills. They cleaned the channel from alluvial deposits after floods in spring and autumn and from reeds in summer, guarded reed-covered flats, and assisted with the transportation of goods.

The fact that the advance of the Bosporans to the east was accompanied by battles is evidenced by the tombstone inscription dated to the 4th c. BC that refers to a Paphlagonian citizen engaged in Bosporan military service and who fought in the land of the Maiotians (IPE, II, 296). The process of submission of Maiotian tribes to the Bosporan rule is reflected in the changes of the titulatures of the Bosporan rulers. While Leukon I (389/388 – 349/348 BC) is named as ‘the landlord of Bosporos and Theodosia, king of Sindians, Toreti, Dandarii and Psessii’, his successor Perisades I (349/348 – 310/309 BC) extends his reign also to Phatei and Doskhians. Moreover, his titulatures is the first one that includes ‘all Maiotians’. One of the inscriptions about Perisades I says that he owns the whole territory ‘from Tauros to the edge of the Caucasus land’ (IPE, II, 9): on the Asian continent his realm was spread from the mouth of the Tanais (Don) (the hill fort near the stanitsa of Elizavetinskaya), to the latitude of modern Novorossisk.

The problems connected with the delivery of goods by waterways caused an extensive development of ground transportation. In the Cis-Kuban area the situation remained the same in Medieval time. At that period, in spite of the existence of the branched river network, almost all goods were transported in carts drawn by camels, horses, and bulls. In the Trans-Kuban lands, during the period of Genoese control over the northern Black Sea region (second half of the 13th–15th c. A.D.), there was a ground route of trade connecting Anapa (Mapa) with the Central CisCaucasus (stanitsa (village) Kholmskaya, Saratovskaya and Kingskaya) (Felitsyn E.D., 1899, p. 24).

Naturally, the forms of submission significantly varied: from only formal recognition of authority (Kerketi, Toreti, and other tribes) and the establishment of tribute and other forms of feudal lord–vassal relationships (Phatei, etc.), to the direct control realized through appointed deputies (Sindice). The finds from the Elizavetinsky kurgans confirm that the Bosporans’ experience in founding dependent colonies was successfully applied in Sindice.

The medieval transportation network over the left and right banks of the Kuban had firstly appeared as a whole in the Classical period (Kozhin P.M., 1995, pp. 247, 257), and in our opinion, precisely in the 5th–4th c. BC. Most essential roads were established back in the Early Archaic period: main trade routes in Scythia and the northern Caucasus coincide with the routes of nomad migrations (pers. comm. T.M. Kuznetsova). Consequently, the CisKuban area was crossed by trade routes leading to the Trans-Caucasus and Volga basin (Fig. 12).

The second factor that favoured the establishment of economic relationships, primarily, with the Middle CisKuban was the organization of safe and economic transport routes. One may logically suggest that using the system of waterways within the Kuban River basin is the best decision. However, navigating in the rapidly flowing Kuban and its tributaries, which have upper reaches in the foothills, is quite difficult. Even in the late 19th century,

It is not excluded that water and ground transportation of goods had a seasonal character, which was accompanied by certain changes in the assortment of carried goods. It was necessary to deliver corn to the Mediterranean market before the beginning of autumn storms. Slaves, leather, wool, honey, etc. were delivered by ground roads.

19 The almost total absence of Greek tableware is characteristic also of materials from the local settlements of the 4th c. B.C., along the lower reaches of the Don (Brashinskу I.B., 1980, p. 88).

959

ANCIENT GREEK COLONIES IN THE BLACK SEA 2 The development of wheeled transport in this region can be guessed from only occasional finds of chariots (Elizavetinsky kurgan (Rostovtsev M.I., 1925, pp. 321322) and kurgan ‘Karagodeuakhsh’ (Lappo-Danilevskii A.S., Mal’mberg V., 1894, p. 8)) and votive wheels (burial complex Ul’yap (Leskov A.M. etc., 1985, pp. 9293, № 231, Fig. 46) and kurgan ‘Zolotaya Gorka’ (Golden Hill) (Lunin B.V., 1939, pp. 214-220)).

wide selection of forms of ceramic vessels (Gaidukevich V.F., 1949, p. 145). Imitations of the black-glazed kantharos of the second half of the 4th c. BC are the commonest examples (Anfimov N.V., 1986, p. 127, tables 2,1) (Fig. 8, IV). It should be specified that many of these vessels were modelled without using a wheel, but there was a diversity of forms with mechanically copied morphological features and decorations. Therefore, the appearance of these forms was not connected with the introduction of the wheel, but it was due to the import of black-glazed ware, which was prestigious among the local people in the Cis-Kuban area.

The greatest volume of freight carried from the deep corners of the northern Caucasus came down to Phanagoria, which was the largest centre in the Asian part of the Bosporan kingdom. According to Strabo, Phanagoria played a key role in the commercial relationships with the Cis-Kuban area, being used as the staging post for goods brought from Maiotian lands and other barbarian territories (Strabo IX, 2, 10; Anfimov N.V., 1952a, p. 84-87 etc.).

It should be also mentioned that no coins circulated in the Cis-Kuban area – neither golden staters (Bosporan currency), nor Kyzikene electrum coins (money used within the Black sea region), although the turnover of Bosporan production held the leading position in foreign trade (Shelov D.B., 1949, p. 95). The non-use of coins can be explained by the barter trading that occurred within this region, and its economic and political autonomy in general.22

The dimensions of objects of Greek imports were not always a decisive factor of their distribution over the barbarian territory. There is a quite curious fact to be mentioned here. On the one hand, there is great diversity in the volumes of finds of black-glazed pottery in the Lower Cis-Kuban (Lebedi-3 and Prikubansky) and, on the other hand, a quite insignificant amount of blackglazed pottery from the monuments in the Middle CisKuban.20

Lland management was precisely defined by ancient authors as the main occupation of Maiotians, and this is also supported by archaeological data. Crop production within the Cis-Kuban area in the 5th–4th c. BC created the basis for the steep rise of population. However, much is still unknown about the crop production itself.

This fact can be explained primarily by the high prestige and cost of black-glazed pottery, which is indirectly evidenced by numerous finds of small, probably, ritual vessels made of feet from a broken black-glazed cylix, kantharos. Such practice was widespread in the CisKuban area.

Studies initiated by N.V. Anfimov are in progress today (Fl’axberger K.A., 1940; Anfimov N.V. 1977, p. 6-12; see also: Lisitsyna G.N., Preshepenko L.V., 1977, p.5991). Numerous cultural layers of Maiotian settlements in the Cis-Kuban area are comparable with the so-called tell deposits in the Near East. The amount of cereal grains preserved in them until the present time exceeds that in the cultural layers of Bosporan towns.

The attention of archaeologists was many times focused on the numerous and diverse forms of Maiotian ceramics with some elements copied from Greek master works. The leading expert of archaeology in the Cis-Kuban area, N.V. Anfimov, believed that Greek influences had, at the turn of the 5th c. BC inspired the production of wheelmade pottery in the deep continental parts of the CisKuban area. There were plenty of imitations of Greek vessels. From that time on, typical Maiotian gray ware21 was daily used and probably also produced in all fortified settlements of the Maiotians. The best imitations of Greek pottery shapes appear a bit later, from the middle of the 4th c. BC (Anfimov N.V., 1986, p. 125).

A series of field and laboratory studies revealed the distinct predominance of wheat species in paleobotanical spectra from cultural layers of fortified settlements (Hillforts) on the right bank of the Kuban. In 2002, a team headed by I.S. Kamenetskii collected and studied paleobotanical samples from Maiotian settlements in the central Cis-Kuban area. The results of their analysis confirmed the conclusions drawn in the 1950s: crops grown in the Cis-Kuban area in the Early Iron Age were represented mostly by wheat (about 60%) and millet (30%); barley constituted an insignificant portion (about 3.5%) of the total yield; the same as the volumeof rye.

According to V.F. Gaidukevich, pottery production using the wheel was set up in many Cis-Kuban settlements by Bosporan potters who moved into this region because of the growing demand for pottery. This accounted for the

20

The almost total absence of Greek tableware is characteristic also of materials from local settlements of the 4th c. B.C. along the lower reaches of the Don (Brashinsky I.B., 1980, p. 88). 21 This concept usually implies not only the colour obtained by a special firing technique, but also certain traditional forms of ceramic vessels.

22 The east and north-east outskirts of the Bosporan kingdom in the 5th– 4th c. B.C. were abandoned because of political tensions associated with the adjoining of the Cis-Kuban area at the time (Kamenetsky I.S., 1998, p. 66) (Fig. 10, 1).

960

АLEXEY АLEXANDROVITCH MALYSHEV: GREEKS IN THE NORTH CAUCASUS The carpologist E.Yu. Lebedeva determined the shares of soft wheat (Triticum vulgare), spelt wheat (Triticum monococcum), and emmer wheat (Triticum dicoccum).23 It was established that the share of soft wheat increased in the eastern direction. Emmer wheat was grown mostly in Greece. Theophrastus (VIII, 4, 5) described the Pontic wheat species as T. vulgare sown in autumn and T. durum in spring.

doubled; however most of it was still consumed in the Lower Cis-Kuban area.

When were land management practices firmly established among the Maiotian tribes in the Middle Cis-Kuban area? As mentioned above, the Maiotian economy was multifaceted and well-balanced before the beginning of Greek colonisation. Then, the growing demand for cereals, which could be exchanged with food and useful things, induced the development of a specialized economy biased towards the production and export of corn.24

The fluctuations in trade, typical of Greek-barbarian trade within the North Pontic region (Brashinsky I.B., 1980a, pp. 98-99), can be explained, on the one hand, by the seasonal delivery of goods, and, on the other, by the existence of quotas regulated through a system of agreements between the Bosporan dynasts and the governing Maiotian elite.

At the same time, the share of amphorae pottery in the composition of imports decreased twice and reached 44%. The presence of significant numbers of similar amphorae indicates that goods carried in the amphorae were regularly delivered to the Cis-Kuban area.

An important event in the history of trade relationships in the Cis-Kuban area, particularly, along the middle and upper reaches of the River Kuban, is the introduction of Bosporan coins in 330 BC (Zograf A.N., 1951, Tab. XL, 18-20).25 A significant portion of them was a part of the treasure (Fig. 6, III), which could mean that the coins were already used for savings. However, since the use of copper coins was compulsory, their circulation depended much on the Bosporan market.

Specialists recognize that the agricultural technology in the Cis-Kuban area was rather primitive. Tools used for ploughing were made probably of a single piece of wood and could only cut, but not turn, the topsoil; the depth of ploughing did not exceed 10 cm. Then the soil was cultivated by hand using mattocks and hoes. Fertile chernozem soils provided for stable and high crop yields, about a ton per hectare, which was good for that level of agricultural technology. Very likely, more advanced soil management technologies were adopted later by the Bosporans, like as was the case with pottery. Apparently, Maiotians accepted some Greek agricultural traditions and cults: primitive figurines of goddesses of fertility were found in the central Cis-Kuban area (Fig. 8, 3).

Other sites of numismatic finds are located in the Lower and Middle Cis-Kuban areas. Judging from their small number and chaotic distribution, they can be connected with the Bosporan visitors here (potters, jewellers, blacksmiths, builders, etc.). A large amount of the Bosporan copper coins were found in the displaced cultural layer of elevation ‘A’ in the Hillfort Elizavetinskoe (Gorodtsov V.A., 1936, p. 172). For a period of three centuries, this monument represented an excellent example of another, equally important, fact about Greek-barbarian trade in the North Pontic region: it influenced the contact zones of the Greek and Maiotian societies and on the ports of trade (Brashinskii I.B., 1980a, pp. 98-99). Excavations revealed that elevation ‘A’ used to be under the buildings made of adobe and turluk (clay-coated wattle), some with Bosporan traditional tiled roofs (Gorodtsov V.A., 1936, p. 173). The lower part of the cultural layer was the richest one in terms of finds, and, in particular, such specific objects as red-clay amphorae, tableware, and lamps, which set this site apart from other hillfort sites in the Cis-Kuban area, with the sole exception of the fort at Semibratneye (Shilov V.P., 1955, pp. 235-242, figs. 8,9; Khachaturova Е.А., 1987, p. 17).

Thus, the process of the wide Hellenization of the Maiotian society implied the assimilation of some Greek tools, skills and customs. Archaeological materials give us information on the distribution of traditions connected with labour, diet, some elements of clothing, and jewellery. In our opinion, it was at this time that the daily contact of the two cultures allowed the formation of a new character of Bosporan people, as they absorbed Greek traditions that combined well with the moral code and customs of their Kuban predecessors. In the second half of the 4th c. BC, the scale of imports into the Cis-Kuban area reached its peak level, accounting for about 40% of all finds. The diversity of imported goods increased to 34 different types of vessel. The volume of imported black-glazed pottery almost

The finds of fragmented lamps are especially important. Judging from their imperfect form and occasional use of grey clay material that was traditionally Maiotian, those

23 Because of poor preservation, it was impossible to identify the species in 13% of the total number of the studied wheat seeds. Average percentages of wheat species were determined in specimens richest in seed material. 24 There are different estimates of the importance of Cis-Kuban grain for the Bosporan Kingdom in the 4th century B.C. Most authors agree that the Cis-Kuban region was the main granary at that time. There is other opinion that most of the grain was produced in the area around the Bosporos straits (Tsetskhladze G.R., 1998, p.66).

25 According to D.B. Shelov, the role of copper coins on the Bosporan financial market sharply increases precisely at the end of the 4th c. B.C. (Shelov D.B., 1956, p. 122).

961

ANCIENT GREEK COLONIES IN THE BLACK SEA 2 lamps were made locally. Red clay lamps in the cultural layers of the Elizavetovskoe Hillfort (on the Don) are considered among the clearest evidence for a prolonged presence of Bosporans in that area26 (Brashinsky I.B., 1980b, pp. 75-76).

In a fierce battle by the Phata River the mutineers were beaten. The sudden death of Satyros during the siege gave Eumelos his chance. Very soon his rule extended over a significant part of Cis-Kuban tribes, and the Bosporan frontier coincided with the line of fortified settlements (Hillforts) Raevskoe – Batareinoye – Elizavetinskoe. The wrongful seizure of royal sovereignty made it necessary for Eumelos cruelly to execute his brothers’ supporters, who included representatives of the Maiotian nobility, old commercial and political partners of Spartakides. This may explain why the building of the impressive Elizavetinskie kurgans (tumuli) stopped at the end of the 4th c. BC (Zhdanovskii A.M., 1990, p. 41).

Finds of pottery kilns and ceramic rejects, and also the diversity of pottery products are confirmation of the pottery production at the Hillfort Elizavetinskoe. This fortified settlement was among the main local centres that produced Greek-style pottery. The everyday life and customs of the former inhabitants of the Elizavetinskoe Hillfort is well illustrated by material from the settlement’s necropolis. There are plenty of ceramics of various household purposes (primarily tableware) and only occasional items of armament. All these suggest a peaceful settled life here in the second half of the 4th c. BC. Finds of iron sickles in burial complexes emphasize the importance of grain production for local populations.

At the same time, Eumelos was compelled to maintain a flexible policy towards different ranks of Bosporan society, primarily, nobles and merchants. He actively fought against pirates, particularly against those on the coast of the northern Caucasus (Diod. XX. 25), and protected his domestic producers by limiting imports of foreign goods.

The presence of Greeks, who apparently lived within a separate part of the settlement, on elevation ‘A’, is confirmed by finds from the burial complexes of Greek tradition (‘Charon’s obol’, occurrence of balsamaria in burials). The importance of this city-state as a Bosporan administrative, commercial and trade centre (Anfimov N.V., 1966, p. 157-164) increased with the growing influence of Bosporan Spartakides in the Cis-Kuban area.27

Eumelos established a favourable relationship with his subjects through his colonization campaign. For example, he accepted thousands of refugees from Kallatis and provided them with shelter and lands, probably somewhere in the Asian part of the Bosporan kingdom. Near the village of Raevskaya, we studied a cemetery of military people from the Cis-Kuban region which was probably connected with such a campaign, undertaken either by Eumelos or by his successors.

As follows from Strabo’s comment concerning the shifts of Bosporan frontiers in the northern Caucasus (Strabo XI. II. 11), the process of establishing the Bosporan rule did not always progress smoothly. From time to time, one or other tribe sought independence and even tried to benefit from local conflicts with the aim of seizing power. On one occasion Eumelos, the younger son of the deceased Bosporan king Perisades I, plotted a mutiny against his older brother, Satyros, who was the legal heir. The mutiny broke out in the Cis-Kuban region, where Eumelos was strongly supported by the Maiotian tribe of Fateians, governed by Aripharnes. The strength of that tribe can be illustrated by the fact that their armed forces successfully opposed the ‘regular’ Bosporan army, which traditionally included units of professional troops and Scythians. The latter were the best warriors, as was shown in time.

Greeks in the North Caucasus during the Hellenistic Age The beginning of the Hellenistic Age was marked by a series of events in the history of the northern Caucasus and Bosporan kingdom. On the one hand, a gradual change in the Mediterranean grain market finally resulted in a significant decrease in exports of grain, which was, in part, apparently responsible for the economic crisis in the Bosporos area (Gaydukevitch V.F., 1949, p. 77-78). On the other hand, the focus of Bosporan trade steadily transferred to the Black Sea partners. At the turn of the 4th c. BC, dramatic changes in the ethno-political situation took place practically in all parts of the northern Caucasus and affected all aspects of life (economic and cultural). Primarily this was connected with the beginning of the Sarmatian invasion in east Europe. Crowds of nomads appeared on the north Caucasian steppe, which, as a result, was called the Sarmatian Plains (τα των Σαρματων πεδία) (Strabo XI, 2, 15). This is confirmed by written documents as well as by archaeological excavations in the Cis-Kuban (Smirnov K.F., 1952; Zhdanovskii A.M., 1990, p. 41; Marchenko I.I., 1996), Central Cis-Caucasus (Abramova M.P., 1993, p. 272) and eastern Caucasus regions (Abramova M.P.,

26

In the mythological tradition, lit lamps represented gods (Losev A.F., 1957, p. 53). Hence for Greeks and later Romans these were apotropaic symbols. They were often included in the burial inventory with the intention of warding off evil and providing light on the way to the other world (Bailey D.M., 1963, p. 12). Finds of such lamps in two burials of Maiotian nobles (near the village of Mar'evskaya and in the kurgan at Karagodeuakhsh) can point to a certain degree of the Hellenization of the local tribe leaders (Brashinskу I.B., 1980b, p. 68). 27 There is recent epigraphical data proving that Bosporans dwelled in this centre over a long period of time (Ternavskiy N.A., 2004, p. 186188).

962

АLEXEY АLEXANDROVITCH MALYSHEV: GREEKS IN THE NORTH CAUCASUS Krasilnikov K.I., Pyatykh G.G., 2000 etc.). The consequences of this migration of people cannot be accurately assessed. On the one hand, the customary established lifestyle was destroyed, previously lively regions became deserted, and refugees escaped into the mountainous regions. On the other hand, formerly separate human populations merged together: settled people (inheritors of the Koban culture and the Maiotians) with nomads (Sirakos, Aorsos from the 1st c. A.D., Sarmatians and Alans) (Strabo XI, 5, 7-8).

between the Bosporan and Cis-Kuban regions was not discontinued. The finds of Greek import dated to the end of the 4th – beginning of the 3rd c. BC constitute only the one fifth of the total of the registered finds in the Cis-Kuban area, which is indicative of a certain reduction of the quantity of imported articles. However, the proportion of amphorae among the imported goods had grown since the second half of the 4th c. BC from 44% up to 79%. For a long time the archaeological knowledge about the containers used in certain Mediterranean centres only on the basis of finds from the Cis-Kuban area, which accounts for naming the vessel types after the sites located in that area: Nekrasovskaya and Yablonovskaya, Ust-Labinsk type etc. (Zeest I.B., 1960, p.107., Tabl.XXV, 54; p.92-94, Tabl.XVI, 33).

Regarding the situation between the nomads (Scythians and Sarmatians) and the rural population, Strabo reports that the wars between them were connected with tribute payments: the peasants retained their farmlands and were obliged to pay the nomads a modest amout in tribute – just to support their daily needs. If the peasants refused to pay, the nomads unleashed war. This tribute was left unpaid by those who were sure of their strength and ability to ward off the enemy (Strabo VII, 4, 6). Gerry Gradually the nomads were spoiled by sweet fruits of antique civilization and increased the size of the tribute, which consisted of useful goods – grain, leather, wool, etc.28 (Gaidukevich V.F., 1949, p. 152).

As in other parts of the North Pontic region at that time, an important change in the suppliers of goods in amphora containers here occurred. The import of Chian amphorae gradually cut down. They were relatively rare among all the amphorae brought in the Cis-Kuban area within the Late Archaic period (‘swollen-necked’) as well as the Classic period (‘straight-necked’). A sharp increase in the number of Chian amphorae (with conical foot) occurred in the 4th c. BC. It is not excluded that another type of Chian amphorae (with narrow ring foot) of the late 4th c. may have been preserved in the Cis-Kuban burial complexes till the present time (Fig. 10, 8).

The nomads also controlled major caravan routes, which was another way to earn their living. For example, Sarmatian tribes of Aorses possessed of the major part of the Caspian Sea coast and developed caravan trade of goods from India and Babylon acquired through Armenians and Midians (Strabo, XI, 5, 8). The risks connected with trade business are reflected in the inscription in Kerch (Crimea) that tells us about the Bosporan merchant (έμπορος) Kristianos, son of Aziatikos, who perished in the foreign country, land of Sirakos (Gaydukevitch V.F., 1949, 373).

Considering the Mediterranean exporters, it should be mentioned that amphorae from Thasos, Mende, Pepharethos and Corinth were replaced by Rhodian, Knidian and Koan amphorae. A long trend in trade development was connected with its gradual focusing on the North Pontic area. The place of nearly disappeared Heraclean import was taken by the Sinopean production and, to a lesser degree, from the Heracleans colony on the northern coast of the Black Sea – Chersoneos (cfg.: Zeest I.B.., 1960, №34, а).

Many specialists believe that the occupation of the CisKuban area by Sarmatians (Sirakos) already began in the end of the 4th c. BC (Marchenko I.I., 1996, p 114 etc.). The first Sirakos appeared on the historic arena in connection with the events described by Diodoros (Diod., XX, 22-24). The Cis-Kuban economic system formed at the end of the 4th – beginning of the 3rd c. BC was quite durable, in spite of the difficulties in the ethno-political situation in the north Caucasus and even some factors that terminated the functioning of the Elizavetinskoe Hillfort (Don river) (Marchenko K.K., Zhitnikov V.G., Yakovenko E.V., 1988; Goroncharovsky V.A., 1987, p. 15-18). In spite of hostilities that accompanied the Sarmatian occupation of the North Caucasus in the 3rd c. BC, which can account for hiding treasures with Panticapaion bronze coins (Zograf A.N., 1951, Tab. XLI,3), the development of economic relationships

The assortment of imported articles did not change much, according to archaeological data (37 articles of goods). However, there were also new tendencies, and firstly, an abrupt (three-fold) decrease in the amount of imported tableware, which was connected with the end of the use of burial grounds in the Lower Cis-Kuban (Lebedi-3, Prikubansky, and others) and the mass production of pottery in the whole Cis-Kuban area. Secondly, there is a significant increase in the frequency of numismatic finds and also an expansion of the area of finding mass import articles on the monuments located near the Cis-Kuban area, in the Stavropol region and the foothills of the Central Caucasus.

28

A curious historic note on the Medieval Cis-Kuban area was taken by a French Consul in Crimea in the middle of the 15th century. He reported that Cis-Kuban Nogay nomads lived on beef, milk products and millet, and they sold all other cereals collected as a tribute from common people (Felitsyn E.D., 1924, pp. 14, 18).

963

ANCIENT GREEK COLONIES IN THE BLACK SEA 2 The area of the Greek cultural influence at the end of the 4th – beginning of the 3rd c. BC had considerably expanded due to solid connections established with the Central Cis-Caucasus lands. An important position in that process was taken by the centers on the Tatarskoe Hillfort, which is one of the largest archaeological complexes in the Stavropol region (Okhon’ko N.A. and Belinskii A.B., 1989).

The numismatic finds of that period are especially important. Bosporan copper coins become more numerous, and most of their finds are associated with treasures. There is a group of five treasures with coins (Fig. 6, III) within a rather small area in the environs of Krasnoarmeisk and Slavyansk (Anfimov N.V., 1988, pp. 139-140; Anfimov I.N., 1991, pp. 70-76). They are comparable (by dates, typological composition and number of coins) with a larger group of treasures in the asian part of the Bosporan Kingdom. Apparently, their hiding was connected with some common events ― the occupation of Cis-Kuban steppe areas by nomadic Sarmatian tribes.

The heads of tribes that lived in the two regions, CisKuban and Cis-Caucasus, were apparently in contact, which is evidenced by the finds of a fragment of redfigured vessels dated to 400 BC) in the burial inventory at the Hillfort Tatarskoe (Kudr’avtsev A.A./Galaeva V.N., 1998, p. 76; Kudryavtsev A.A., Prokopenko Yu.A., and Rudnitskii R.R., 1999). Among the accepted Greek customs were the building stone vaults (found in burial complexes Verbovka, Besputskii, and Tatarskii 2) that came into practice at the end of the 4th – beginning of the 3rd c. BC.29

The sole type of golden coins reported in the Cis-Kuban area is a stater of Alexander the Great. As it is known, at the end of the 4th c. BC, this coinage replaced Kyzikene Electrum coins on the Black Sea market (Shelov D.B., 1949, p. 98). The recognition and prestige of Greek golden ornaments among the local population of the North Caucasus are indicated by the distribution of ornaments made of terracotta and gold. Similar finds in other parts of the Black Sea region (Kallatis) and also in the burial complexes of the kurgan Kurdzhips and near the village Voronezhskaya allow to suggest that there were complete suites of these ornaments.

There are convincing evidences not only for the existence of close barter-trade relationships, but also for the permanent residence of Bosporans in the Cis-Kuban region, which is indicated by the distribution of Greek burial customs. Unfortunately, the brightest proofs were dug up at the beginning of the 20th c., and materials that survived till nowadays are often incomplete. The best example is the vault of the Sultan kurgan by the Bryk mountain (excavations by I.A. Vladimirov in 1890). This burial was situated near an ancient trade route (Kuznetsov V.A., 1993, p. 36). The vault was made of square stone plates held together by leaden and wooden brackets and adorned with fluting pylon. These elements, together with genuine Hellenic components of the burial inventory (ivory statuette of a lion, golden bowl, necklace), allow to establish the fact that the Greek burial customs spread far to the east of the Hillfort Elizavetinskoye. Moreover, the burial custom ‘Charon’s obol’, with a golden coin in the mouth of the dead, was discovered in the necropolis ‘Varvarinskii’ in Stavropol (Minaeva T.M., 1965, p. 41).

The appreciation of such ornaments by people in the North Caucasus was connected with semantic criteria. The relative weight of terracotta ornaments in the composition of finds reported in the North Caucasus varies by the type of ornament. Medallions with the head of Medusa Gorgon predominate; medallions with the head of Athena are relatively rare (P'yankov A.V., 1998, p. 3-12; Prokopenko Yu.A., 1998b). The most eastern finds of Gorgoneions originate from burial complexes in the foothills in the Central Cis-Caucasus. These ornaments are less widespread in the Greek centres in the North Pontic area (Malyshev A.A., 1992). In the Cis-Kuban area, locally made imitations of Gorgoneions are known. The image of a Gorgon head is rather sketchy, although its essential elements are precise enough. Yellow slip is used for gilt imitation.

The finds of Greek pottery in the Central Cis-Caucasus indicate the scale of the Bosporan trade activities within that period.30 The sporadic character of the barter-trade relationships with the considered region can be illustrated by finding under a fallen wall of the Grushevskoe fortified settlement the set of Early Rhodian amphorae that infrequently occur in the North Pontic region (Gadlo A.V./Naidenko A.V., 1988, pp. 304-313; Katz V.I., 2002, p. 248-256).

The finds of Phanagorian coins on the Elizavetinskoe city-state confirm that Phanagoria played a leading role in trade with the Cis-Kuban region (Strabo., XI, 2, 10). The simultaneous stop of using burial grounds Lebedi 3, Prikubansky, and other sites does not seem to be accidental. On the one hand, they could be abandoned because of war threats that existed in the Lower CisKuban area at that time. On the other hand, that could be beneficial for the Bosporans that established an absolute control over the flows of goods in the Cis-Kuban region, with the assumption that its inhabitants Dandarii sold their grain abroad by-passing Phanagoria.

29 The importance of Greek traditions in burial customs of people that lived at that time in Central Cis-Caucasus was explained in detail by M.P. Abramova (Abramova M.P., 1979; Idem, 1990, Idem, 1993). 30 There are many evidences that in the 4th c. B.C. and later objects made by Greek craftsmen reached the area of the Volga river (ceramics: (Rykov P.S., 1925, p. 19; Shilov V.P., 1959, p. 452, Fig. 48, 4,6; Dvornichenko V.V., Malinovskaya N.V., and FedorovDavydov G.A., 1977, p. 67); coins: (Zaikovskii B.V., 1926, p.41; Shelov D.B., 1970, p.178)).

964

АLEXEY АLEXANDROVITCH MALYSHEV: GREEKS IN THE NORTH CAUCASUS p. 38-39). Among the finds, objects from Ionia and Aeolia prevail.

In the 4th–3rd c. BC ancient Greek coins appeared in the Central Cis-Caucasus, and most of them were golden (a gold Stater of Panticapaeum, a coin of the city Kyzik) (Prokopenko Yu.A., 1995, p. 25-26).

A distinguishing feature of that period is a broad distribution of Bosporan red clay tableware (primarily, jugs and table amphorae) (Shevtchenko N.F., 1993, p. 3144). It is found almost everywhere ― in nomadic burials, in maiotian burial complexes, and in necropolises of peoples that lived in the Central Cis-Caucasus. These finds are especially numerous within the Stavropol Upland and occur less frequently on the foothills of the Central Cis-Caucasus (burial grounds ‘Chegem’ and ‘Zamankul’ (Abramova M.P., 1993). The absence of suitable waterways made it difficult to transport products in amphora containers.

A.N. Zograf has created a catalogue of Greek coins made of precious metals that circulated in the North Caucasus (Zograf A.N., 1935; Idem, 1945). On the basis of these data he established that the finds of golden coins (Stater of Alexander the Great), as opposed to those of silver coins, are concentrated in the western parts of the North Caucasus and the main range of the Caucasus Mountains. In Armenia and Azerbaijan no finds were reported (Zograf A.N., 1945, p. 40). Silver coins were also less important than staters of Lysimachos type. Their numerous imitations in the local Barbarian coinage point to a high intensity of their circulation and their wide recognition (Zograf A.N., 1945). Later, D.B. Shelov revealed that the interlocal silver coins (of Alexander and Lysimachos) issued by courts in the East and in Asia Minor came to Caucasus not from the northwest Bosporos, but from the south and southwest. In the Kuban basin, precious-metal coins of that time concentrate mostly in the foothills (TransKuban). In the 2nd c. BC. Hellenistic coins of Seleucid coinage (Antiochos IV ‘Epiphanes’) appear in the east of the North Caucasus.

Among the goods brought to the Central Cis-Caucasus, an important position was taken by maiotian grey clay pottery having elements copied from Greek forms. Singular finds of black-glazed tableware and maiotian grey polishing kantharos occur even in Dagestan, which is probably a result of transit trade (Markovin V.I., 1984, pp. 181-182; Gadzhiev M.S., 1997, p. 24). In the Hellenistic Age, maiotian copies from Greek forms underwent certain metamorphoses. For example, in imitations of a Greek kantharos, all the proportions of the body became vertically elongated, which resonated with certain aspects of the evolution of this form in the Greek tradition (Anfimov N.V., 1986, table 2,2; p.128, table 2,3; Limberis N.Yu./Marchenko I.I., 1999) (Fig. 8, IV). A defective kantharos found in the burial ground near the stanitsa (village) Ust’-Labinsk (Middle Cis-Kuban) points to the local production of this form.

The finds of copper coins are only singular. A Bosporan copper coin of 375–340 BC from the burial ground Chegem (Central Cis-Caucasus) and a Pontic coin of the 1st c. BC (Kerefov B.M., 1985, p. 203) have holes, which suggests their using as ornaments. These finds can be interpreted as evidences of sporadic and indirect connections of this region with Bosporos. Within the Stavropol Upland coins of Panticapaeum (first half of the 3rd c. BC) and Olbia (end of the second – beginning of the 1st c. BC) are also known.

At the same time, this form is characterized by a high degree of standardization, which evolved in the course of the local mass production: it was made with more handles (up to three and four) and spouts and with relief grooves. This modified form of kantharos survived in the complex of maiotian pottery till the 2nd c. A.D. However, on the deep corners of Cis-Kuban, where the Greek influences were weak, this form lost its popularity much earlier (Anfimov N.V., 1986, p. 129).

The importation of Greek pottery to the North Caucasus continued in the 3rd–2nd c. BC. As it was mentioned above, this complex of amphorae was formed at the end of the 4th c. BC (approximately 300 BC). Their numerous finds indicate that purchasing large consignments of amphorae continued in the 2nd c. BC.

The almost sole point, where the Bosporan presence lasted till the end of the 2nd c. BC, was the Elizavetinskoe Hillfort. In the Late Hellenistic period, the trade orientation for the south of the Pontic region reached its final phase, which was reflected in the selection of import.

The amphorae complex of this period is formed by the Rhodian and Knidian production, to a lesser degree Koan and Knidian, and also unidentified locations (amphorae unknown in other regions). However, the largest area of finds is associated with imported ceramic tableware (moulded ware, unguentaria).

Conclusions

The area of sporadic finds of mouldmade pottery (‘Megarian bowls’) corresponds mostly with the CisKuban ― maiotian settlements (primarily, Elizavetinskoe) and also the burial complexes of Sarmatian nomads (Lopatin A.P./Malyshev A.A., 2002,

Because of its specific geographical location, North Caucasus served as a form of «bridge» connecting distant regions (mainly, Eastern Europe and the Near East), different ethnic groups and cultural traditions. This is evidenced by the distribution of finds of early Greek

965

ANCIENT GREEK COLONIES IN THE BLACK SEA 2 VAA VDI ZOAO

imports (5th–4th c. BC) that are connected with the migration of nomads, and primarily, with their invasions into the lands bordering the states in the Near East and Asia Minor.

ZOOID

It is not excluded that the first Greeks (that came from Asia Minor) in the North Caucasus actually moved there, according to the nomadic custom, as jewellers and blacksmiths.

Questions of Archaeology of Adygea, Maikop Bulletin of Ancient History, Moscow Transaction of Archaeological society of Odessa, Odessa Transaction of society History and Antiquity, Odessa

BIBLIOGRAPHY Abramova M.P., 1979 − Абрамова М.П., К вопросу о связях населения Северного Кавказа сарматского времени (K voprosu o svyazyakh naseleniya Severnogo Kavkaza sarmatskogo vremeni - To the problem of contacts of North Caucasian population at the Sarmatian times). // SA. 2. _____________, 1990 − Абрамова М.П., Некоторые особенности взаимоотношений ираноязычных кочевников и оседлых племен Предкавказья (Nekotorye osobennosti vzaimootnosheniy iranoyazychnykh kochevnikov I osedlykh plemen Predkavkazya - Some aspects of the relationship between Iranian-speaking nomads and settled tribes in the Cis-Caucasus). // SA. 2. _____________, 1993 − Абрамова М.П., Центральное Предкавказье в сарматское время (III до н.э − IV в. н.э.) (Tsentral’noye Predkavkazye v sarmatskoye vrem’a (III do n.e − IV v. n.e.) - Central Cis-Caucasus at the Sarmatian times (the 3rd c. B.C.–the 4th c. A.D.). Moscow. Abramova M.P., Krasilnikov K.I., Pyatykh G.G., 2000 − Абрамова М.П., Кроасильников К.И., Пятых Г.Г., Курганы Нижнего Сулака (Kurgany Niznego Sulaka – Burial ground in Low Sulak). Moscow. Abramzon M.G., 1997 − Абрамзон М.Г., Хлебная торговля и ее символы на античных монетах (по поводу ‘коммерческой теории В. Риджвэя’) (Chlebnaya torgovl’a I eyo simvoly na antichnykh monetakh (po povodu ‘kommercheskoy teorii V. Ridzhveya’ - Wheat trade and its symbols on antique coins (Re: ‘Commerce theory by Ridgway’)). // Trade and merchant in the ancient world. Moscow. Alexandrescu P., 1966 − Necropola tumulara // Histria. II. Alexeeva E.P., 1971 − Алексеева Е.П., Древняя и средневековая история Караево-Черкессии (Drevn’aya i srednevekovaya istoriya Karachayevo-Cherkessii - Ancient and medieval history of Karachay-Cherkessia). Moscow. Anfimov I.N., 1991 − Анфимов И.Н., Клад пантикапейских медных монет начала III в. до н.э. из Восточного Приазовья (станица Старонижестеблиевская) (Klad pantikapeyskikh mednykh monet nachala III v. do n.e. iz Vostochnogo Priazovya (stanitsa Staronizhestebliyevskaya) - Treasure with Panticapaion copper coins of the early 3rd c. B.C. east of the Azov Sea (stanitsa Staronizhesteblievskaya)). // VDI. 1. Anfimov N.V., 1951 − Анфимов Н.В. Раскопки Семибратнего городища (Raskopki Semibratnego gorodisha - Excavations of Hillfort Semibratnee (Seven Brothers)). // KSIIMK. XXVII. ____________, 1952a − Анфимов Н.В., К вопросу о внутренней торговле Прикубанья с Фанагорией (K voprosu o vnutrenney torgovle Prikubanya s Fanagoriyey To the problem of domestic trade between Cis-Kuban area and Phanagoria). // VDI. 4. ____________, 1952b − Анфимов Н.В., Новые материалы по меото-сарматской культуре Прикубанья (Novye materially po meoto-sarmatskoy culture Prikubanya - New materials to the Maiot-sarmatians Cultury in Kuban area). // KSIIMK. XLVI.

A real growth of the Hellenic influence accompanied the establishment of colonies along the Black Sea coast of Caucasus and the formation of the Bosporan kingdom that managed to preserve Greek traditions throughout its nearly thousand year long history (in the form of the language, elements of state organizational and cultural traditions). The greatest and most rapid influence was associated with the infiltration of Greek merchants into the distant corners of the North Caucasus and, maybe, with military expeditions undertaken during the latter part of the 4th–early 3rd c. BC. The antique state situated on the coasts of Bosporos Kimmerian stimulated the rapid social-economic development of the Cis-Kuban region in the 4th c. B.C., which resulted in a rapid growth of the local population. The further course of events can be characterized as a steady movement of the North-Caucasian, primarily, Maiotian tribes towards the frontiers of the Bosporan kingdom, which resulted in a closer contact between these cultural-ethnic groups and, finally, in the establishment of a local Maioto-sarmatian dynasty in Bosporos during the 1st c. B.C. ABBREVIATIONS AGSP ASGE

Classical state of North Pontic area, Moscow Collected papers for Archaeology of State Hermitage, Leningrad DG Ancient states on the territory UdSSR, Moscow IGAIMK Transaction of State Academy of History of Materialen Culture, Moscow IP Inscriptiones antique orae septentrionales Ponti Euxini Graecae et Latinae. KBN Code of Bosporan insriptiones. Moscow. Leningrad. 1965. KSIA Short report of Archaeological Institut, Moscow MAK Materialen for Archaeology of Caucasus, Moscow KSIIMK Short report Academy of History of Material Culture, Moscow MIA Materialen and Studies of Archaeology, Moscow НГИМЗ State Historic Museum-Reserve of Novorossisk RA Russian archaeology, Moscow SA Soviet archaeology, Moscow SC Latyshev V.V. Scifica et Caucasica. Vol.I.-II. SanctPetersburg. SAI Code of archaeological Quellen, Moscow TGE Works of State Hermitage, Leningrad TONGE Works of Departement of Numismatik of State Hermitage, Leningrad

966

АLEXEY АLEXANDROVITCH MALYSHEV: GREEKS IN THE NORTH CAUCASUS ____________, 1966 − Анфимов Н.В., Денежное обращение на Елизаветинском городище - эмпории Боспора на Средней Кубани (Denezhnoye obrasheniye na Elizavetinskom gorodische – emporia Bospora na Sredney Kubani - Money circulation in the Hillfort Elizavetovskoe Bosporanean emporia in the Middle Kuban region). // VDI. 2. Anfimov N.V., 1977, − Анфимов Н.В., Сельское хозяйство у синдов (Selskoye khozyastvo u sindov − Agricultury of Sindians) // History and Cultury of Ancient World. Moscow. ____________, 1986 − Анфимов Н.В., Античное влияние в меотской керамике (Antichnoye vliyaniye v meotskoy keramike - Classical influences in Maiotian ceramics). // Problems of Classical culture. Moscow. ____________, 1987а − and Анфимов Н.В., Древнее золото Кубани (Drevnee zoloto Kubani - Ancient gold of Kuban area). Krasnodar. ____________, 1987b − Анфимов Н.В., Терракоты Семибратнего городища (каталог) (Terracotty Semibratnego gorodisha (catalog) - Terracottas from Hillfort Semibratnee (catalogue)). // Mysteries of terracotta. Antique terracotta statuettes from the museums of Krasnodarskiy region. Krasnodar. ____________, 1988 − Анфимов Н.В., Клад пантикапейских монет из г. Славянска-на-Кубани (Klad pantikapeyskikh monet iz g. Slav’anska-na-Kubani - Treasure with Panticapaion coins from town Slavyansk-na-Kubani). // SA. 4. Apostolov L.Ya., 1897 – Апостолов Л.Я., Географический очерк Кубанской области (Geograficheskiy ocherk Kubanskoy oblasti – Geographical essay of Kuban area). Tiflis. Arut’unova-Fidanyan V.A., 1999 − Арутюнова-Фиданян В.А., Контактные зоны и зоны контакта: сходство и различия (Kontaktnye zony i zony kontakta: skhodstva i razlichiya Contact zones and zones of contact: similarities and differences). // Eastern Europe in the Ancient times and Middle Ages. Contacts, zones of contacts and contact zones. The 11th readings to commemorate Corresponding Member V.A. Pashuto. Proceedings. Moscow. Bailey D.M., 1963 − Greek and Roman Lamps. London. Beglova Ye.A., 1989 − Беглова Е.А., Погребальный обряд уляпских грунтовых могильников в Красногвардейском районе (Pogrebal’nyi obr’ad Ul’apskikh gruntovykh mogilnikov v Krasnogvardeyskom rayone - Burial customs of OUl’ap burial grounds in Krasnogvardeyky region) // Maiotians - ancestry of Adygi. Maykop. Belinsky A.B., 1990 − Белинский А.Б., К вопросу о времени появления шлемов ассирийского типа на Кавказе (K voprosu o vremeni poyavleniya shlemov assiriyskogo tipa na Kavkaze - The time of appearance of helmets of Assyrian type in the Caucasus) // SA. 4. Boardman J., 1993a − Athenian black figure vases. London. Boardman J., 1993b − Athenian red figure vases. The archaic period. London. Bilimovich Z.A., 1978 − Билимович З.А. 1978. Два бронзовых таза из Семибратних курганов (Dve bronzovykh taza iz Semibratnikh kurganov - Two bronze bowls from the Semibratniye kurgans ). // SA. 3. Blavatsky V.D., 1985− Блаватский В.Д., Classical archaeology and history. Moscow. Blavatskaya T.V., 1959 − Блаватская Т.В., Очерки политической истории Боспора в V-IV вв. до н.э. (Ocherki politicheskoy istorii Bospora v V-IV vv. do n.e − Essays on the polytical history of Bosporos in the 5th – 4th c. B.C.). Moscow.

Blavatskaya T.V., 1993, - Блаватская Т.В., Посвящение Левкона I (Pocvasheniye Leykona I - Consecrating of Leukon I ). // RA. 2. Brashinsky I.B., 1980а − Брашинский И.Б. Основные черты греко-варварской торговли в античном Причерноморье и ее особенности в Колхиде (Osnovnye cherty grekovarvarskoy torgovli v antichnom Prichernomorie i ee osobennosti v Kolkhide - Main characteristics of Greekbarbarian trade in the Epoch of Antiquity within the Black Sea region, particularly in Kolkhida). // Caucasus and Mediterranean. Tbilisi. Brashinsky I.B., 1980b − Брашинский И.Б. Греческий керамический импорт на Нижнем Дону (Grecheskiy keramicheskiy na nizhnem Donu - Greek pottery import in the lower reaches of Don). Leningrad. Brashinskii I.B., 1984 − Брашинский И.Б., Методы исследования античной торговли (Metody issledovaniya antichnoy torgovli - Methods for studying the antique trade). Leningrad. Chernenko E.V., 1968 - Черненко Е.В., Скифский доспех (Ckifskiy dospekh - Scythian defence armour). Kiev. _____________, 1973 − Черненко Е.В., Оружие из Семибратних курганов (Oruzhiye iz Semibratnikh kurganov - Arms from the kurgans in the Hillfort Semibratnee (Seven brothers)) // Scythian antiquity. Kiev. Cook R.M. 1998. East Greek Pottery. // Cook R.M./Dupont P. East Greek Pottery. London/New York. Dupont, P. 1998. Archaic East Greek trade amphorae. // Cook R.M./Dupont P. East Greek Pottery. London/New York. Dvornichenko V.V., Malinovskaya N.V., and Fedorov-Davydov G.A., 1977 − Дворниченко В.В., Малиновская Н.В., Федоров-Давыдов Г.А. Раскопки курганов в урочище Кривая Лука в 1973 г. (Raskopki kurganov v urochishe Krivaya Luka v 1973 - Excavations of burial mounds in Krivaya Luka in 1973). // Antiquity of Astrakhan Kray (region). Moscow. Erlikh V.R., 1992. – Эрлих В.Р., Вооружение и конское снаряжение в культуре населения Закубанья в скифское время (Vooruzheniye i konskoye snar’azheniye v kul’ture naseleniya Zakubanya v skifskoye vrem’a - Arms and horse harness in the culture of Trans-Kuban inhabitants during the Scythian Period). Author's abstract of cand. diss. Moscow. Felitsin E.D., 1899 - Фелицын Е.Д., Некоторые сведения о средневековых генуэзских поселениях в Крыму и Кубанской области (Nekotorye svedeniya o genuezskikh poseleniyakh v Krymu i Kubanskoi oblasti - Some information on medieval Genoese settlements in Crimea and the Kuban area). // Collected articles from Kuban’. V. Yekaterinodar. Felitsin E.D., 1924. Фелицын Е.Д., М. Пейсонель. Исследования торговли на черкесско-абхазском берегу Черного моря в 1750-1762 годах (M. Peisonell. Issledovaniya torgovli na cherkessko-abkhazskom beregu Chernogo moray v 1750-1762 godakh - M. Peisonell. Research on the trade along the Cherkess-Abkhaz coast of the Black Sea in 1750-1792). // Materials on the history of Cherkes people. 2. Krasnodar. Fl’axberger K.A., 1940 − Фляксбергер К.А., Археологические находки хлебных растений в областях, прилегающих к Черному морю (Arkheologicheskiye nakhodki khlebnykh rasteniy v oblast’akh, prilegayushikh k Chernomu mor’u - ). // KSIIMK. VIII. Frolova N.A., 2002 − Corpus of the Sindian Coins (first half of the Vth – late Vth century BC). // Ancient civilization from Scyrhia to Siberia. An International Journal of Comparative Studies in History and Archaeology. Vol. 8. №3-4.

967

ANCIENT GREEK COLONIES IN THE BLACK SEA 2 Gadlo A.V., Naydenko A.V., 1988 − Гадло А.В. Найденко А.В., Исследования Грушевского городища под Ставрополем в 1973 г. (Issledovaniya Grushevskogo gorodisha pod Stavropole v 1973 g. − Research on the Hillfort Grushevskoe near Stavropol in 1973). // Materials of the study of Stavropol Kray (region). 15-16. Stavropol’. Gadzhiev M.S., 1997. − Гаджиев М.С., Между Европой и Азией. Из истории торговых связей Дагестана в албаносарматский период (Mezhdu Yevropoy i Aziyey. Iz istorii torgovykh svazey Dagestana v albino-sarmatskiy period Between Europe and Asia. From the history of trade relationships of Dagestan in the Albano-sarmatian Period). Makhachkala. Gaidukevich V.F./Kaposhina S.I., 1951 − Гайдукевич В.Ф., Капошина С.И., К вопросу о местных элементах в культуре античных городов Северного Причерноморья (K voprosu o mestnykh elementakh v culture antichnykh gorodov Severnogo Prichernomor’a - To the question about local elements of the culture of Antique towns in the North Black Sea area). // SA. XV. Gaidukevich V.F., 1949 − Гайдукевич В.Ф., Боспорское царство (Bosporskoye Kingstvo - Bosporan kingdom). Moscow-Leningrad. Galanina L.K., 1965 − Галанина Л.К., О греческих поножах Северного Причерноморья (O grecheskikh ponozhakh Severnogo Prichernomorya - Greek knemis in the North Black Sea region). // ASGE. 7. Galanina L.K., 1980 − Галанина Л.К., Курджипский курган (Kurdzhipskiy kurgan - The burial ground Kurdzhips). Leningrad. ___________, 1997a. Die Kurganen von Kelermes // Steppenvoelker Eurasiens. 1. ____________, 1997b. К вопросу о кубанском очаге раннескифской культуры (K voprosu o kubanskom ochage ranneskiskoy kultury - To the problem of the Kuban centre of the Early Scythian culture). // VDI. № 2. Gertsiger D.S., 1973 − Герцигер Д.С., Античные ткани в собрании Эрмитажа (Antichnye tkani v sobranii Ermitazha - Classical tissues in the Hermitage collection). // Monuments of the Classical applied arts. Leningrad. Gei A.N. and Kamenetskii I.S., 1986 − Гей А.Н. Каменецкий И.С. 1986. Северо-Кавказская экспедиция в 1979-1983 гг.// КСИА, Вып.188. Gorbunova K.S., 1971 − Горбунова К.С., Серебряные килики с гравированным изображениями из Семибратних курганов (Serebrannye kiliki s gravirovannymi izobrazheniyami iz Semibratnikh kurganov - Silver cylix with engraved images from the Hillfort Semibratnee (Seven brothers). // Culture and art of the Classical World. Leningrad. Gorodtsov V.A., 1935 − Городцов В.А, О результатах археологических исследований Елизаветинского городища и могильника в 1934 г. (O rezultatakh arkheologicheckikh issledovaniy Elizavetinskogo gorodisha i mogilnika v 1934 g − To the results of archaeological studies on Elizavetinskoe hillfort and burial ground 1934). // Sovetskaya ethnografia. 3. Gorodtsov V.A., 1936 − Городцов В.А., Елизаветинское городище и сопровождающий его могильник по раскопкам 1935 года (предварительное сообщение) (Elizavetinskoye gorodishe i soprovozdayushiy yego mogilnika po raskopkam 1934 goda (predvaritel’noye soobshenye) - Elizavetinskoe Hillfort and its burial ground exposed by excavations in 1935 (preliminary report)). // SA. 1. Goroncharovskii V.A., 1987 − Горончаровский В.А., К вопросу о времени существования Боспорского эмпория

в дельте Дона (по нумизматическим данным) (K voprosu o vremeni sushestvovaniya Bosporskogo emporiya v del’te Dona (po numizmaticheskim dannym) - To the question about the time of existence of Bosporan emporium in the delta of Don (numismatic data). // Classical civilization and the Barbarian world in the areas of Don river and Azov Sea. Novocherkassk. Howland R.H., 1958. Greek lamps and their survivals // The Atheninan Agora. Vol. IV. Princeton: New Jersey. Ivanchik A.I., 2001 – Иванчик А.И., Киммерийцы и скифы (Kimmeriytsy i skify – Kimmerians and Scythians). // Steppenvoelker Eurasiens. II. Moscow. ____________, 2001 – Каменецкий И.С., О язаматах (O Yazamatakh – About Yazamatians). // Problems of skythian archeology. MIA. 177. _____________, 1989 - Каменецкий И.С., Меоты и другие племена Северо-Западного Кавказа в VII в. до н.э − III в. н.э. (Meoty i drugiye plemena Severo-Zapadnogo Kavkaza VII v. do n.e − III v. n.e − Maiotians and other thribes in the northwest Caucasus in the 7th c. B.C. – 3rd c. AD.). // Steppe in the European part of the USSR at the Scythiansarmatian time. (Archaeology of UdSSR). Moscow. ____________, 2001 – Каменецкий И.С., У границ Азиатского Боспора (U granitz Aziatskogo Bospora - By the borders of Asian Bosporos). // Materials and studies on the archaeology of the Kuban region. 1. Krasnodar. Kaposhina S.I., 1956 – Капошина С.И., О скифских элементах в культуре Ольвии (O skifskikh elementakh v culture Ol’vii - Scythian elements in the culture of Olbia). // MIA. №50. Khachaturova Ye.A., 1997 − Хачатурова Е.А., Елизаветинское городище №1: история исследования (Yelizavetinskoye gorodishe №1: istoriya issledovaniya Hillfort Elizavetinskoe no.1: history of the study). // Antiquity of Kuban. Decemeber. Krasnodar. Kharaldina Z.V. / Novichikhin A.M., 1994 – Харалдина З.В., Новичихин А.М., 1994. Античные коллекции Анапского музея (Antichnye kollektsii Anapskogo muzeya - Antique collections of the Anapa museum). // VDI. 2. Kisel’ V.A., 2003 – Кисель В.А., Шедевры ювелиров Древнего Востока из скифских kурганов (Shedevry yuvelirov Drevnego Vostoka iz skyfskikh kurganov Ancient East jewellery masterpieces from Scythian kurgans). Sankt-Petersburg. Kopylov V.P., 2000 – Копылов В.П., Население дельты Дона в V-IV вв. До н.э. (Naseleniye del’ty Dona v 5-4 vv. do n.e. – The population of the Lower Don in the 5th-4th c. B.C.). // Skythians and Sarmatians in the 7th – 3nd centuries. BC: Palaeoecology, anthropology and archaeology. Collected papers. Moscow. Kozenkova V.I., 1982. – Козенкова В.И. Типология и хронологическая классификация предметов кобанской культуры. Восточный вариант. (Tipologia i khronologicheskaya klassifikatsia predmetov kobanskoy kultury. Vostochnyi variant − Typology and chronological classification of the objects of Kobanian culture. Eastern version) // SAI. В2-6. _____________, 1989. – Козенкова В.И., Кобанская культура. Западный вариант. (Kobanskaya kultura. Zapadnyi variant - Kobanian culture. Western version). // SAI. В2-6. Kozhin P.M., 1995. Колесный транспорт Кавказа (Kolesnyi transport Kavkaza – Wheel Transport of Kaukasus) // Caucasian peoples. Vol. 4. Material culture. Food and house. Moscow. Kudryavtsev A.A./Galaeva V.N., 1998. – Кудрявцев А.А., Галаева В.Н., Склеповый могильник Татарского

968

АLEXEY АLEXANDROVITCH MALYSHEV: GREEKS IN THE NORTH CAUCASUS городища (Sklepovyi mogilnik Tatarskogo gorodisha Burial vaults on the hillfort Tatarskoe) // Jubilee International 20th ‘Krupnov readings’ on archaeology of the North Caucasus. Proceedings. Zheleznovodsk. Kudryavtsev A.A., Prokopenko Yu.A., and Rudnitskii R.R., 1999 – Кудрявцев А.А., Прокопенко Ю.А., Рудницкий Р.Р., Склеп №2 Татарского I могильника (Sklep №2 Natarskogo i mogilnika - Vault no.2 in the burial ground Tatarskoe I). // Ancient and medieval civilizations in the Barbarian world. Stavropol’. Kuznetsov V.D., 1992 – Кузнецов В.Д., Ранние апойкии Северного Причерноморья (Ranniye apoykii Severnogo Prichernomorya – Early apoikiai in the North of Pontic area). // KSIA. 2. Kuznetsova T.M., 1991 – Кузнецова Т.М., Этюды по скифской истории (Etudy po skifskoy istorii - Etudes on Scythian history). Moscow. Latyshev V.V., 1947 − Латышев В.В., Известия древних писателей о Скифии и Кавказе (Izvestia drevnikh avtorov o Skifii i Kavkaze – Reports of ancient authors about Scythia and Caucasus) // VDI. 1 (XIX). Limberis N.Yu., 1994 − Лимберис Н.Ю., Раннемеотские погребения у хутора имени Ленина (Rannemeotskiye pogrebeniya u khutora imeni Lenina - Early Maiotian burials near the khutor (village) in honour Lenin). // Archaeological and ethnographic research in the North Caucasus. Krasnodar. Lovpache N.G., 1985 − Ловпаче Н.Г. , Могильник в устье реки Псекупса (Mogil’nik v ust’ye reki Psekups – Cemetery in mouth Psekups river) // VAA. Maykop. Limberis N.Yu./Marchenko I.I., 1999 − Лимберис Н.Ю., Марченко И.И., Меотские реплики древнегреческих канфаров (Meotskiye repliki drevnegrecheskikh kanfarov Maiotian replicas of ancient Greek kantharos). // Bosporan Phenomenon: Greek culture at the periphery of the Antique world. Materials of the International Research Conference. Proceedings. Sankt-Petersburg. Limberis N.Yu., Marchenko I.I., 2001 − Лимберис Н.Ю., Марченко И.И., Погребения VI-V вв. до н.э. из городищ грунтовых могильников меотских Правобережья Кубани (Pogrebeniya VI-V vv. do n.e. iz gruntovykh mogil’nikov meotskikh gorodisch Pravoberezh’a Kubani − Burials of the 6th-5th c. B.C. from burial grounds of maiotian Hillforts at the right bank of the Kuban river). // Materials and researches of archaeology of Kuban area. Collected papers. Krasnodar. Lisitsyna G.N./Preshepenko L.V., 1977 − Лисицына Г.Н., Прищепенко Л.В., Палеоэтноботанические находки Кавказа и Ближнего Востока (Paleoetnobotanicheskiye nakhodki Kavkaza i Blizhnego Vostoka – Palaeetthnobotanical finds from Caucasus and Near East). Moscow. Lopatin A.P./Malyshev A.A., 2002 ― Лопатин А.П., Малышев А.А., К вопросу об античном керамическом импорте в Закубанье в VI-II вв. до н.э. (K voprosu ob antichnom keramicheskom importe v Zakubanye v VI-II vv. do n.e. ― In reference to antique ceramic import in TransKuban region in the 6th-2nd c. B.C.). // Историкоархеологический альманах (Армавирского краеведческого музея). Losev A.F., 1957 − Лосев А.Ф., Античная мифология в ее историческом развитии (Antichnaya mifologiya v eye istoricheskom razvitii - Antique mythology in its historical development). Moscow. Lunin B.V., 1939 − Лунин Б.В. 1939. Археологические находки 1935-1936 гг. в окрестностях станиц Тульской и Даховской близ Майкопа (Arkheologicheskiye nakhodki

1935-1936 gg. V okrestnost’akh stanits Tul’skoy i Dakhovskoy - Archaeological finds in the 1935-1936 in the environs of villages Tulskaya and Dakhovskaya near Maikop). // VDI. 3. Maximenko V.E. 1983 − Максименко В.Е. Савроматы и сарматы на Нижнем Дону (Savromaty i sarmaty na nizhnem Dony – Sauromatians and Sarmatians in the lower reaches of Don). Rostov-on-Don. Malyshev A.A., 1992 − Малышев А.А., Позолоченные терракотовые медальоны с изображением Медузы Горгоны в Прикубанье (Pozolochennye terrakotovye medal’ony s izobrazeniyem Meduzy Gorgony v Prikubanye - Gilded terracotta medallions with the image of Meduse Gorgon in the Cis-Kuban region). // Grakovskii readings at the Archaeology Department of the Moscow State University, 1989-1990. Moscow. Malyshev A.A., 1996 − Малышев А.А., Античный импорт (VI-IV вв. до н.э.) в Закубанье. По материалам раскопок Тенгинского II городища (Antichny import (VI-IV vv. do n.e.) v Zakubanye. Po materialam raskopok Tenginskogo II gorodischa). // Actual problems of archaeology of the North Caucasus (the 19th Krupnov readings). Proceedings. Moscow. Mantsevitch A.P., 1949 − Манцевич А.П., К вопросу о торевтике в скифскую эпоху (K voprosu o torevtike v skifskuyu epokhu - In reference to toreutics during the Scythian Period). // VDI. 2. Marinovitch L.P., 2003 − Маринович Л.П., Об одном источнике по проблеме афино-боспорской торговли (Ob odnom istochnike po probleme afino-bosporskoy torgovli The data source on the problem of Athens-Bosporan trade). // Scripta Gregoriana. Collection of articles in honour of the seventies anniversary of academician G.M. Bongard-Levin. Moscow. Marchenko I.I., 1996 − Марченко И.И., Сираки Кубани (по материалам курганных погребений Нижней Кубани) (Siraki Kubani (po materialam kurgannykh pogrebeniy Nizhney Kubani - Sirakos of the Kuban region (on the basis of materials from kurgans in the lower reaches of Kuban river). Krasnodar. Marchenko I.I., Limberis N.Yu., Bochkovoy V.V., 2001. − Марченко И.И., Лимберис Н.Ю., Бочковой Н.Ю., Новый меотский могильник у хут.Прикубанский (Novyi mogilnik u khut.Prikubanskiy – New necropolis near khutor Prikubanskiy). // 3rd Kubanian archaeological conference. Proceedings. Krasnodar-Anapa. Marchenko K.K., Zhitnikov V.G., Yakovenko E.V., 1988 − Марченко К.К., Житников В.Г., Яковенко Э.В., Елизаветинское городище – греко-варварское торжище в дельте Дона (Elizavetinskoye gorodische – grekovarvarskoye torzhische v del’te Dona − Elizavetinskoe Hillfort – Greek-Barbarian trade port in Don delta). // SA. 3. Markovin V.I., 1984 − Марковин В.И., О некоторых находках скифо-сарматского времени с территории Северо-Западного Прикаспия (O nekotorykh nakhodkakh skifo-sarmatskogo vremeni s territorii Severo-Zapadnogo Prikaspiya – Some finds of the Scythian-sarmatian time in the northwest of the Caspian area). // Eurasian Antiquity at the Scythian-sarmatian time. Moscow. Minaeva T.M., 1965 – Минаева Т.М., Очерки по археологии Ставрополья (Ocherki po arkheologii Stavropolya – Essays on the archaeology of Stavropol'e.). Stavropol’. Monakhov S.Yu., 1999 − Монахов С.Ю., Греческие амфоры в Причерноморье. Комплексы керамической тары VII-II вв. до н.э. (Grecheskiye amfory v Prichernomorye. Kompleksy keramicheskoy tary VII-II vv. do n.e − Greek

969

ANCIENT GREEK COLONIES IN THE BLACK SEA 2 amphorae in the Black Sea area. Complexes of ceramic vessels of the 7th–2nd c. B.C.). Saratov. _______________, 2004 − Монахов С.Ю., Греческие амфоры в Причерноморье. Типология амфор ведущих центров-экспортеров товаров в керамической таре. Каталог-определитель (Grecheskiye amfory v Prichernomorye. Tipologia amfor vedushich tsentroveksporterov tovarov v keramicheskoi tare. Katalogopredelitel’ − Greek amphorae in Black Sea region. Typology of amphorae from leading centres-exporters of goods in ceramic containers. Catalougue). Saratov. Munchaev R.M., 1994 – Мунчаев Р.М., Майкопская культура (Maykopskaya kultura – Maykop culture). // Archaeology. Bronze Age of Caucasus and Central Asia. Moscow. Okhon’ko N.A. and Belinskii A.B., 1989 − Охонько Н.А., Белинский А.Б., Археологические памятники Ставропольской возвышенности в системе связей Центрального Предкавказья и Кубани (Arkheologicheskiye pamatniki Stavropol’skoy vozvyshennosti v sisteme svazey Tsentral’nogo Predkavkaz’a i Kubani - Archaeological monuments of the Stavropol Upland in the system of links between the Central Cis-Caucasus and Kuban region). // The 1st Kuban archaeological conference. Proceedings. Krasnodar. Onayko N.A., 1966 − Онайко Н.А. Античный импорт в Приднепровье и Побужье в VII - V вв.до н.э. (Antichnyi import v PriDnieperovye i Pobuzhye v VII - V vv. do n.e − Antique import in the Dnieper basin) and the Bug basin in the 7th–5th c. B.C.). // SAI. D1-27. Moscow. ___________, 1970 − Онайко Н.А., Античный импорт в Приднепровье и Побужье в IV-II вв.до н.э. (Antichnyi import v PriDnieperovye i Pobuzhye v IV - II vv. do n.e. − Antique import in PriDnieperov'e (the Dnieper basin) and Pobuzh'e (the Bug basin) in the 7th–2nd c. B.C.). // SAI. D1-27. Moscow. ___________, 1976 − Онайко Н.А., O воздействии греческого искусства на меото-скифский звериный стиль (К постановке вопроса) (O vozdeystvii grecheskogo iskusstva na meoto-skifskiy zverinyi stil’ (K postanovke voprosa - The influence of Greek art on Maiotian-Scythian animal style (posing the problem). // SA. 4. Pavlovich G.A., 1995 − Павлович Г.А., Греческий шлем эллинистического времени из Ставропольского края (Grecheskiy shlem ellinisticheskogo vremeni iz Stavropolya - Greek helmet of the Hellenistic Age from Stavropol region). // RA. 3. Pakhomov E.A., 1926-1966 − Пахомов Е.A., Монетные клады Азербайджана и других республик, краев и областей Кавказа (Monetnye klady Azerbaydzhana i drugikh respublik, kraev i oblastey Kavkaza - Treasures with coins in Azerbaidzhan and other republics and regions of Caucasus). III. Baku. Peredol'skaya E.A., 1973 – Передольская А.А., Аттический лекиф из VII Семибратнего кургана (Atticheskiy lekif iz VII Semibratnego kurgana - Attic lekythos from the burial mound no.7 in the Hillfort Semibratneye (Seven Brothers). // Monuments of ancient applied art. Leningrad. Perevodchikova E.A., 1987 – Переводчикова Е.А., Локальные черты скифского звериного стиля Прикубанья (Lokal’nuye cherty skufskogo zverinogo styl’a Prikuban’a - Local features of Scythian animal style in CisKuban region). // SA. 4. Petrenko V.G., 1980 – Петренко В.Г., Изображение богини Иштар из кургана в Ставрополье (Izobrazheniye bogini Ishtar iz kurgana v Stavropolye - The image of goddes Ishtar from kurgan in the Stavropol area). // KSIA. 162.

____________, 1989 – Петренко В.Г., Скифы на Северном Кавказе (Skify na Severnom Kavkaze - Scythians in the North Caucasus). // Steppe in the European part of the USSR at the at the Scythian-sarmatian time. (Archaeology of the USSR). Moscow. Petrenko V.G., Maslov V.Ye., Kantorovitch A.R., 2000 – Петренко В.Г., Маслов В.Е., Канторович А.Р., Хронология центральной группы курганов могильника Новозаведенное-II (Khronologiya tsentral’noy gruppy kurganov mogil’nika Novozavedennoye-II – The Chronology of the central kurgan group at the Novozavedennoye-II cemetery). // Skythians and Sarmatians in the 7th – 3nd c. B.C.: Palaeoecology, anthropology and archaeology. Collected papers. Moscow. Polanyi K. 1963 − Ports of trade in Early Societies // Journal of Economic Histories. 23. Prokopenko Yu.A., 1995 − Прокопенко Ю.А., Клады и находки единичных монет на территории Ставропольского края и Карачаево-Черкессии (к вопросу о древних путях в Центральном Предкавказье) (Klady i otdel’nye nakhodki edinichnykh monet na territorii Stavropol’skogo kraya I Karachayevo-Cherkessii (k voprosu o drevnikh put’akh v Tsentral’nom Predkavkazye Treasures and the finds of single coins in Stavropol region and Karachay-Cherkessia (to the problem of ancient roads in the Central Cis-Caucasus). // The history of Stavropol’ region. 1. Stavropol’. ____________, 1996 − Прокопенко Ю.А., К вопросу о находках античных монет в Центральном Предкавказье (K voprosu o nakhodkakh antichnykh monet v Tsentral’nom Predkavkaz’ye - About the finds of antique coins in the Central Cis-Caucasus). // Actual problems of archaeology of the North Caucasus (the 19th Krupnov readings). Proceedings. Moscow. ____________, 1998a − Прокопенко Ю.А., 1998. О культурной принадлежности Султановского кургана, исследованного И.А. Владимировым в 1900 году у горы Брык (O kulturnoi prinadlezhnosti Sultanovskogo kurgana, issledovannogo I.A. Vladimirovym v 1900 godu u gory Bryk - About the cultural origin of the Sultan kurgan studied by I.A. Vladimirov in 1990 near the Bryk mountain). // The newsletter of Stavropol State University. Social-humanitarian sciences. Vol. 15. Stavropol’. ____________, 1998b − Прокопенко Ю.А., История северокавказских торговых путей по нумизматическим материалам IV в. до н.э − IX в. н.э. из памятников Центрального и Восточного Предкавказья (Istoria severokavkazskikh torgovykh putey po numizmaticheskim materialam IV v. do n.e − IX v. n.e. – The history of North Caucasus trade ways on the basis of numismatic data on the 4th c. B.C. – 9th c. A.D. from monuments in the central and eastern Cis-Caucasus). Author's abstract of cand. diss. Stavropol’. Prushevskaya E.O., 1955 – Прушевская Е.О., Художественная обработка металла (торевтика) (Khudozestvennaya obrabotka metalla (torevtica) - Artistic processing of metal (toreutics)). // Classical states of the North Pontic area. Moscow-Leningrad. P'yankov A.V., 1998 − Пьянков А.В., Керамические украшения с позолотой с cеверного берега Краснодарского водохранилища (Keramicheskiye ukrasheniya s pozolotoi s severnogo berega Krasnodarskogo vodokhranilisha - Gilded ceramic ornaments from the northern coast of the Krasnodar water reservoir). // Antiquity of Kuban. 6. Krasnodar.

970

АLEXEY АLEXANDROVITCH MALYSHEV: GREEKS IN THE NORTH CAUCASUS Rabinovich B.Z., 1941 − Рабинович Б.З., Шлемы скифского периода (Shlemy skyfskogo perioda - Helmets of Scythian Period). // TOIPKGE. 63. Raev B.A., Simonenko A.B., Treister M.Yu., 1991 − Раев Б.А., Симоненко А.В., Трейстер М.Ю., Этрусско-италийские шлемы в Восточной Европе (Etrussko-italiyskiye shlemy v Vostochnoy Yevrope - Etruscan-Italian helments in Eastern Europe).// Ancient monument of Kuban area. (Materials of seminaire). Krasnodar. Rostovtzev M.I., 1925 − Ростовцев М.И., Скифия и Боспор (Skufia i Bospor - Scythia and Bosporos). Leningrad. Rykov P.S., 1925 − Рыков П.С., Сусловский могильник (Suslovskiy mogilnik - Suslovskii burial ground). Saratov. Salov A.I., 1986 − Салов А.И., Архаическое поселение на окраине Анапы (Arkhaicheskoye poseleniye na okraine Anapy – Archaic settlement on outskirts of Anapa). // Problems of Classical culture. Moscow. Savenko S.N., 1998 − Савенко С.Н., Бронзовый шлем типа «Монтефортино» из фондов Кисловодского музея (Bronzovyi shlem tipa ‘Montefortino’ iz fondov Kislovodskogo muzeya - Bronze helmet of the ‘Montefortino’ type from the funds of the Kislovodsk museum). // Classical civilizations and the Barbarian world (materials of the 6th archaeological seminar). 1. Krasnodar. Salikhov B.M., 1996 − Салихов Б.М., Керамические канфары из Зеленоморского кургана-кладбища (Keramicheskiye kanfary iz Zelenomorskogo kurgana-kladbischa - Ceramic kantharos from the kurgan-cemetery Zelenomorskoe). // Actual problems of archaeology of the North Caucasus (the 19th Krupnov readings). Moscow. Shilov V.P., 1983 − Шилов В.П., Аорсы (Aorsy – Aorses). // History and Culture of Sarmatians. Collected papers. Saratov. Skrizhinskaya M.V., 1997 − Скржинская М.В., Боспорский купец Формион в Афинах (Bosporskiy kupets Formion v Afinakh - Bosporan merchant Formion in Athens). // Trade and merchant in the classical world. Moscow. ____________, 2002 − Скрижинская М.В., Ольвиополиты и боспоряне в Афинах (Olbiopolites i Bospor’ane v Afinakh - Olboipolites and Bosporans in Athens). // VDI. 2. Shevtchenko N.F., 1993 − Шевченко Н.Ф., Некоторые аспекты боспоро-сарматских отношений в Восточном Приазовье (III в. до н.э − II в. н.э.) (Nekotorye aspekty bosporo-sarmatskikh otnosheniy v Vostochnom Priazovye (III v. do n.e − II v. n.e.) - Some aspects of Bosporosarmatian relationships in the east of the Azov Sea area (the 3rd c. B.C. – the 2nd c. A.D.). // Collected papers of Krasnodar museum. 1. Krasnodar. Shelov D.B., 1949 − Шелов Д.Б., Кизикские статеры на Боспоре (Kizikskiye statery na Bospore - Stateres of Kyzicus in Bosporos). // VDI. 2. __________, 1956 − Шелов Д.Б., Монетное дело Боспора VI-II вв. до н.э. (Monetnoye delo Bospora VI-II вв. до н.э − Coinage in Bosporos 6th-2nd c. B.C.). Moscow. __________, 1960 − Шелов Д.Б., Денежный рынок Танаиса (Denezhny rynok Tanaisa - Financial market of Tanais). // ZOAO. I (34). __________, 1970 − Шелов Д.Б., Танаис и Нижний Дон в III-I вв. до н.э. (Tanais i Nizniy Don v III-I vv. do n.e − Tanais and the lower reaches of Don river in the 3rd - 2nd c. B.C.). Moscow. Shelov-Kovedyaev F.V., 1985 − Шелов-Коведяев Ф.В., История Боспора в VI-IV вв. до н.э. (Istoria Bospora v VI-IV вв. до н.э − The history of Bosporos in the 6th-4th c. B.C.). // DG - 1984 г. М.

Shilov V.P., 1950 − Шилов В.П., О расселении меотских племен (O rasselenii meotskikh plemen - The settling of Maiotian tribes). // SA. XIV. __________, 1955 − Шилов В.П. Новые данные об Елизаветинском городище по раскопкам 1952 г. (Novye dannye ob Elizavetinskom gorodische po raskopkam 1952 g. − New data on the Hillfort Elizavetinskoe obtained in excavations 1952). // SA. XXIII. __________, 1959 − Шилов В.П., Калиновский курганный могильник (Kalinovskiy kurganny mogilnik - Kalinovskii complex of burial mounds). // MIA. №60. Smirnov K.F., 1952 − Смирнов К.Ф. Основные пути развития меото-сарматской культуры Среднего Прикубанья (Osnovnye puti razvitiya meoto-sarmatskoy kultury Srednego Prikubanya - Main trends of the development of Maioto-sarmatian culture in the Middle CisKuban region). // KSIIMK. XLVI. Sparces B.A., Talcott L., 1970 − Black and plain pottery of the 6th, 5th and 4th c. B.C. // The Athenian Agora. XII. Princeton: New Jersey. Ternavskiy N.A., 2004 − Две новые археологические находки из Елизаветинского городища (Dve novye arkheologicheskiye nakhodki iz Elizavetinskogo gorodischa − Two new finds from Elizavetinsi Hillfort). // Ancient Caucasus: backward glance of cultures. Jubilee International ‘Krupnov readings’ on archaeology of the North Caucasus. Moscow. Tokhtas’ev S.R., 2004. − Тохтасьев С.Р., Боспор и Синдика в эпоху Левкона I (Обзор новых эпиграфических публикаций) (Bosporos i Spartokidy v epokhu Levkona I (obsor novykh epigrficheskikh publikatsiy) − Bosporos and Sindice at the time of Lukonos I (Review of epigraphic publications) // VDI. 3. Tsetskhladze G.R., 1998 – Цецхладзе Г.Р., The Greek Colonisation of the Black Sea // The Greek Colonisatsion of the of the Black Sea area. Historical Interpretation of Archaeology. Stuttgart. Leskov A.M. etc., 1985, − Лесков А.М., Сокровища курганов Адыгеи. Каталог выставки. (Sokrovisha kurganov Adygei. Katalog vystavki - Treasures from kurgans of Adygea. Exhibition catalogue). Moscow. Maslov V.I., 2003 − The Finds of North Ionian Pottery from a Scythian Barrow at the Northern Caucasus // Griechische Keramik im kulturellen Kontext. Akten des Internationalen Vasen-Symposions. Muenster. Vasil'ev A.N., 1992 − Васильев А.Н., К вопросу о времени образования Боспорского государства (K voprosu o vremeni obrazovaniya Bosporskogo gosudarstva Concerning the time of formation of the Bosporan state). // Etudes on the classical history and culture in the North Black Sea region. Sankt-Petersburg. Vakhtina M.Yu., Vinogradov Yu. A., and Rogov E.Ya., 1980 − Вахтина М.Ю. Виноградов Ю.А. Рогов Е.Я., Об одном из маршрутов военных походов и сезонных миграций кочевых скифов (Ob odnom iz marshrutov voennykh pokhodov i sezonnykh migratsiy kochevykh skifov - One of the routes of military expeditions and seasonal migrations of nomadic Scythians). // VDI. 4. Vakhtina M.Yu., 1989 − Вахтина М.Ю. Скифское погребение у Цукурского лимана на Тамани (Skifskoye pogrebeniye u Zukurskogo limana na Tamani - Scythian burial near the Tsukur estuary in Taman). // The 1st Kuban archaeological conference. Proceedings. Krasnodar. Vinogradov V.B., 1965 − Виноградов В.Б., Сиракский союз племен на Северном Кавказе (Sirakskiy soyuz plemen na Severnom Kavkaze - The union of Sirakos tribes in the North Caucasus). // SA. 3.

971

ANCIENT GREEK COLONIES IN THE BLACK SEA 2 ______________, 1981 − Виноградов В.Б., Монетные находки и клады на территории Чечено-Ингушетии (до конца XVIII в.) (Monetnye nakhodki I kladu na territorii Chechenj-Ingushetii − The finds of coins and treasures within the territory of Chechen-Ingushetia (the late 18th c.). Vinogradov B.V., 1991 − Виноградов В.Б., К изучению находок античных монет в Центральном Предкавказье (K izucheniyu nakhodok antichnykh monet v Tsentral’nom Predkavkaz’ye - The study on antique coins in the Central Cis-Caucasus). // Caucasus and the Eastern civilization in Ancient times and Middle Ages. Vladikavkaz. Vinogradov Yu.V., 2002 − Виноградов Ю.В., Левкон, Гекатей, Октамасад и Горгиппп (Процесс интеграции Синдики в Боспорскую державу по новелле Полиэна (VIII, 55) и вотивной эпиграмме из Лабриса) (Levkon, Gekatey, Oktamasad i Gorgipp (Protsess integratsii Sindiki v Bosporskuyu derzhavu po novelle Poliena (VIII, 55) i votivnoy epigramme iz Labrysa − Leucon I, Hecataius, Oktamasodus und Gorgippos (The Integration of Sindica into the Kingdom of Bosporos according to the Novel Polyaenus (VIII, 55) and the Votive Epigram from Labrys). // VDI. №3 Хenofontova I.V., 1992 − Ксенофонтова И.В., Античные художественные бронзы из Уляпских (Ульских) курганов (Antichnye khudozestvennye bronzy iz Ul’apskikh (Ul’skikh) kurganov - Antique artistic bronzes from Ul’ap (Ul'skie) kurgans). // RA. 4. ________________, 2000 − Ксенофонтова И.В., Панафинейские амфоры из коллекции Государственного музея Востока (Panafineyskiye amfory iz kollektsii Gosudarstvennogo muzeya Vostoka − Panathenaic amphorae from collection State museum of Orient). // VDI. №4. Zavoikin A.A. and Boldyrev S.I., 1994. − Завойкин А.А., Болдырев С.И., Третья точка зрения на монеты с легендой ‘ΣΙΝΔΩΝ‘ (Tret’ya tochka zreniya na monety s legendoy ‘ΣΙΝΔΩΝ‘ − The third opinion concerning the coins with the legend ‘ΣΙΝΔΩΝ‘). // Bosporan collected papers. 4. Moscow.

Zaikovskii B.V., 1926 − Зайковский Б.В., Из монетной летописи Нижне-Волжской области (Iz monetnoy letopisi Nizhne-Volzhskoy oblasti - From the numismatic annals of the Lower Volga region). // Works of the Nizhnevolzhskii regional nature research society. Saratov. Zeest I.B., 1951 − Зеест И.Б., К вопросу о внутренней торговле Прикубанья с Фанагорией (K voprosu o vnutrenney torgovle Prikubanya s Fanagoriyei − To the problem of domestic trade between Cis-Kuban area and Phanagoria). // MIA. №19. Zeest I.B., 1960 − Зеест И.Б., Керамическая тара Боспора (Keramicheskaya tara Bospora − Ceramic pottery container of Bosporos). // MIA. №83. Zhdanovskii A.M., 1990 − Ждановский А.М., К истории сиракского союза племен (по материалам курганных погребений Среднего Прикубанья) (K istorii sirakskogo soyuza plemon (po materialam kurgannykh pogrebeniy Srednego Prikubanya − To the history of Sirak union of tribes (on the basis of materials from kurgans in the central Cis-Kuban area) // Don area and North Caucasus area in antiquity and in Medieval Ages. Rostov on Don. Zhebelev S.A., 1934 − Жебелев С.А., Боспорские этюды. Образование Боспорского государства (Bosporskiye etudy. Obrazovaniye Bosporskogo gosudarstva − Bosporos etudes. The formation of Bosporan state). // IGAIMK. 104 Zograf A.N., 1935 − Зограф А.Н., Античные золотые монеты Кавказа (Antichnuye zolotuye monety Kavkaza - Antique golden coins in the Caucasus). // IGAIMK. Archaeological works of the academy in newly developed lands. II. Moscow-Leningrad. ___________, 1945 − Зограф А.Н. Распространение находок античных монет на Кавказе (Rasprostraneniye nakhodok antichnukh monet na Kavkaze − The distribution of finds of Classical coins in the Caucasus). // TONGE. I. ___________, 1951 − Зограф А.Н. Античные монеты (Antichnye monety − Classical coins). // MIA. №16.

Figure 1. North Caucasus in the 7th–6th c. B.C. and Bosporos Kimmerian in the Archaic period. I − Sindice (by V.D. Blavatsky) II – The earliest Greek import in North Caucasus: 1 – Mirror from Kelermes Scythian burial mound; 2 Fragment of a bird bowl from settlement Alekseevka; 3 - Oinochoe from Scythian burial mound (Novozavedennoye) (materials of V.Ye. Maslov); 4 – Clazomenian amphorae from burial ground Lebedi V. 972

АLEXEY АLEXANDROVITCH MALYSHEV: GREEKS IN THE NORTH CAUCASUS

Figure 2. I − Archaeological sites of the Early Maiotian time (by I.S. Kamenetskii). II − Greek pottery of the 6th c. B.C. from Kuban region (tableware and amphorae).

Figure 3. 1-3 - Image on Armavirian oinochoiae (the late 6th c. B.C.). 4 – Scene of fighting Apollo with Heracles for tripod on the amphorae (master Tarqinia RC 6847 by J. Boardman).

973

ANCIENT GREEK COLONIES IN THE BLACK SEA 2

Figure 4. Sind-maiotian nobility. Political centres in Cis-Kuban region in the 5th–4th c. B.C.: 1 – city-state Semibratnee (Seven Brothers); 2 - Hillfort Elizavetinskoe, 3 - Trans-Kuban region (areas of villages Ul’ and Ul’ap). a Panathenaean amphorae (kurgans of Ul’ap); b - Silver cylix from the kurgans Semibratniye; Defence arms from the kurgans Elizavetinskoe (c) and Semibratny 4 (d). 4 – Fanagoreia; 5 – Elizavetovskoye Hillfort.

Figure 5. Archaeological sites of the Middle I Maiotian time (by I.S. Kamenetsky). Greek pottery of the 5th c. B.C. from Kuban region (tableware and amphorae). Greek amphorae of the first half of the 4th c. B.C. from Kuban region. 974

АLEXEY АLEXANDROVITCH MALYSHEV: GREEKS IN THE NORTH CAUCASUS

Figure 6. Cis-Kuban region ― the eastern boundary of Bosporan kingdom (a). I - Area of finds of Bosporan coins of the 4th–3rd c. B.C. II - Dynamics of the delivery of Greek import to the Cis-Kuban region. III - The set of ceramic vessels from the burial ground Prikubanskii (materials of I.I. Marchenko, N.Yu. Limberis, V.V. Bochkovoy).

Figure 7. Objects of toreutics made in Asian Bosporos and Cis-Kuban region: 1. Cap from Kurdzhips; 2. Golden plate from Karagodeuakhsh; 3. Stamps from the burial ground Ul’ap; 4. The pattern of the CisKuban animal style (bronze check-piece from burial ground Ul’ap).

975

ANCIENT GREEK COLONIES IN THE BLACK SEA 2

Figure 8. I - The Plan of Hillfort Elizavetinskoe. II − Mould and plaster copy of Greek terracotta statuette (protoma of goddess) (materials of M.M. Kobylina). III − Images of aboriginal goddess (materials of M.M. Kobylina). IV – Maiotian imitations of Greek kantharos.

Figure 9. Hillfort Elizavetinskoye: I - The burial of a peasant in the necropolis; II – Grains of Wheat Triticum aestivum. 976

АLEXEY АLEXANDROVITCH MALYSHEV: GREEKS IN THE NORTH CAUCASUS

Figure 10. Archaeological sites of the Middle II Maiotian time (by I.S. Kamenetsky). The Greek import at the second half of the 4th – the beginning of the 3rd c. B.C. (tableware and amphorae).

Figure 11. I - Area of Gorgoneion finds. II - Greek import in North Caucasus at the late 3rd – early 2nd c. B.C. 977

ANCIENT GREEK COLONIES IN THE BLACK SEA 2

Figure 12. Trade routes in North Caucasus in the 4th – 1st c. B.C. Votive Wheel from Oulap burial ground.

978

The Necropolis of Kul Oba Nikolay Fyodorovitch Fedoseev*

It is possible that no* other place on Northern Black Sea littoral abounds as much barrows as Bosporos. According to the evidence of the Kerch town governor F.Wiegel, the number of barrows in Kerch environs was greater than 1200. The enumeration of these barrows stopped and even half of them have not been counted. On the map of topographer Litvinenko of the year 1830, 1359 barrows were represented.1 The connection beween Crimea and Russia in 1783 caused genuine burst of interest in Kerch – in history and antiquities of these lands, of which the educated minds of Russia had been aware only through ancient authors. However, many of the barrows, at the moment of the connection of Crimea with Russia, had already been plundered. Only their names - Gold, Imperial – give evidence of their monumentality and richness of finds made here.

On the 20th of September 1830 captain Darovskiy and senior lieutenant Akula were present at works and noticed in the depth of the barrow a building built of big stone plates, informing about that town governor and battalion commander. Kerch town governor I. Stempkovskiy charged French emigrant P.Dubrux to direct the research of the crypt. Earlier, closeby, two stone tombs had been found (1.8 m length, 0.7 m width and as much by depth). In each of them, there were bones of several deceased people with many fragments of simple clay vases. For a long time, this hill attracted the attention of local inhabitants, as the place where it was possible to extract stone easily. Barrow’s embankment consisted of cobblestones, the size of which decreased towards the top, where, according to Dubrux, they were not bigger than a walnut. Especially intensive destruction of Kul Oba started at the beginning of the 19th century, a period of Kerch reconstruction. It is known, that Genoese P.Skassi, established in Kerch an office for exchange-trade with Caucasian highlanders, took from Kul Oba for the construction of his garden fencing 400 cub. sazhen. (853 cub. m) of stone. In spite of all this, Kul Oba, covered by a huge stone cap, continued majesticly to tower the steppe.

The greatest popularity achieved Kul Oba barrow and Juz Oba necropolis (Fig. 1), which furthered a lot the development of classical archaeology in the south of Russia. The grandiose structure of Kul Oba barrow is an independent section in the history of Scythian and Bosporos. During more than one hundred and fifty years, separate components of Kul Oba complex were objects of study the native and foreign researchers (DBK, 1, p.

II;forAshik  ., 1848, p. 29;  inns, 1913,  . 196; Peredol’skaya A. A., 1945; Artamonov M. I., 1968 etc.). In spite of its fame, this monument, alas, is not completely studied.

For construction of the sailor’s houses it was ordered to be delivered to Kerch from 300 up to 400 cub. sazhen. of stone. The work began on 1st of September, before the winter houses should be built.

In 1829 in Sevastopol, a plague riot flared up among the sailors. The Emperor Nikolai I ordered to dismiss 108 of participants and move them to Kerch, where houses were to be built for them. In order to obtain stones, the soldiers of the 3rd Voronezh battalion infantry regiment chose a barrow, located on one of the rocky ledges in the northwestern outskirts of Kerch, 2 kms along Theodosian road. The local population named this hill Kul Oba, which in Tatar means ‘a hill of ashes’ (Fig. 2.1-2).

On 22nd at 4 o’clock, the researchers got into the crypt through the hole above the doors, closing the entrance into the crypt. The crypt was covered by double embankment of stones, absolutely barren, but darkened by time. Embankments (about 160 m in diameter) touched each other on the bases and the crypt was in the middle of the eastern embankment. In the western part of the hill the crepidas’ remains testify that there were barrows as well (Fig. 2.1-2).

*

Dr. Nikolay Fyodorovitch Fedoseev was born in 1961 in the city of Saratov, Russia. He has an extensive educational and professional history in the study of ancient civilizations and has many publications in these areas of research. He is a member of the Odessa Society of History and Antiquity. He has published 66 scientific works and numerous articles in popular journals and other publications. 1989 Present: Vice Chief of Archaeological Expeditions, Kerch HistoricalCulture Reserve in the Lapidarium department. Conducted scientific research. Chief, Department of Monument Protection, Kerch HistoricalCulture Reserve. 1993 –Present: Senior Researcher, Crimean Branch Archeology Institute National Academy of Sciences of Ukraine. E-mail: [email protected] 1 ‘The Topographical map of the neighborhoods of Kerch, has been removed in 1835 with a designation of ancient barrows’ // Archive of the Kerch museum (KMTI-2475).

Several descriptions of the opening of the crypt remain (Shevelev Ye., 1850, p. 725-738; Zenkevich H., 1894. p. 133-1342; Tolstoj I., Kondakov N., 1889-1890. p. 25; Minns, E. H., 1913; Spasskij G., 1850. p. 49-51). However the main one belongs to P. Dubrux, saved for science and described in detail everything seen by him in DBK (DBK, I, Introduction, p, XXXII), from where it was reprinted by S. Reinach an abridged form (Reinach S., 1892). The independent description, given by  .  shik, asserts that he has made it on behalf of 2

979

The author wrongly names the other barrow - Melek-Chesme.

ANCIENT GREEK COLONIES IN THE BLACK SEA 2 Stempkovskiy. Unfortunately, the description of  .  shik is not as exact as the description of P. Dubrux, and consequently it can hardly serve in addition to the Dubrux report (see: Ashik A. B., 1848. II, p. 29). On autopsia grounds a notice of Kareisha was written (Karejsha D. 1830), and also a review of . Shevelev of Ashik’s work (Shevelev Ye., 1848, p. 738). . Shevelev specifies, that at the opening of the barrow were present: Dr. Lang, Dubrux,  shik,
 reisha and Shevelev himself, escorted by Stempkovskiy. Two more descriptions remain of the Kul Oba opening – an unpublished note of the Kerch Uezd State college inspector F.Burdunov, dated to September 29, 1830 to the colleges director of the Tauric province F. Zastavskiy,3 and an address to the Imperial Kharkov University (Kravtsov D., 2001, p. 34).

In the deepening of the southern wall there were bones of a horse, badly preserved bronze greaves and a bronze helmet. Close to this deepening laid a skeleton ‘of a big man’ named by the openers of the crypt ‘King’s Groom’. His clothes were covered with golden plates (Fig. 5). Opposite the door laid a skeleton of a woman with the head to the south. On the place of the skull, which was not kept, there was a golden diadem (Fig. 6.4). Near the neck was a necklace, weighing 473 g. and a gold neck ring with lion’s ornaments on the ends (Fig. 6.3). Near the waist were two medallions of Athena (Fig. 6.12) and two pairs of golden pendants (Fig. 6.1, 5). On these medallions, as well as on the necklace, amphora-form pendants were fastened. Lower down laid a golden vessel with the image of a Scythian (Fig. 6.8). From both parts there were two bracelets with reliefs depicting a lion tearing a deer (Fig. 6.6, 10). Between the head the woman and bones of the man laid 6 knives with long hafts of ivory and crooked blades which prompted the openers to consider them as surgical tools (Fig. 6.9). The seventh knife had the broken haft plated with gold reliefs depicting griffins (Fig. 6.7). Among the stock, a distaff of ivory4 and a bronze mirror with a handle of gold was found.

The description of the crypt (Fig. 2.3-4). The chamber almost square in plan, had seven ledges. A wall from east to west was 4.6 m long, and the northsouth one 4.2m and 5.35 m high; the walls consisted of 5 stone rows and were 2.5 m high. The ledge of the first stones row was 13 cm. At the height of 3.5 m beams supported the ceiling, crashed down by time. In the southern wall, five large nails had been driven at the height of 2.3 m.

The woman was buried on a kline, destroyed by the fallen ceiling. It stood on round legs 0.7 m high wiht side boards more than 2 m long and decorated by figures (Fig. 6.13).

A short dromos was connected with the chamber not in the centre, but more to the east. The door of the chamber was blocked from below for half of the height by stones. This shows that the burials in the barrow were not carried out once. The door (1.6 m wide and 2.5 m high) was not in the centre. The door’s straight arch was of wooden, thick beams.

Two thirds of the space of the crypt was occupied by a cypress or juniper box without legs, each side measuring 2.85 m 26 cm high. The box was made of four large beams, two positioned by the legs and two by the head. The head of the deceased was turned to the south. On top, bottom and the sides of the beams three boards were cut in each, with the thickness of 4.5 cm. When the top boards have been removed, a skeleton of a man with two parts of a diadem on his head was revealed (Fig. 7.1). The top part of the diadem -9 cm wide- had a form of a cone; both parts of the diadem had been sewed on a cap of Persian form. Judging by the thickness of the cap, it fell. Few pieces of the clothes remained. A massive neck ring ended by the mounted Scythians (Fig. 7.9). On the hands and legs of the warrior there were gold bracelets of the finest work. On the right hand, higher elbow, there was a gold ring decorated with bas-reliefs (Fig. 7,8). Below the elbows, on both arms were smooth electrum rings about 5 cm wide (Fig. 7.4, 5). Below, on the wrists, were open bracelets with Sphinxes at the endings holding a thick gold lock (Fig. 7.6).

The crypt was paved with stone plates 26-35 cm thick. From the southern part, on the right corner there was a hollow 0.7 meter deep and more than 2 m long (Fig. 2.4). The researchers were impressed by the abundance of objects in the crypt (Fig. 3). In the right corner from the entrance, along the western wall, there were four clay amphorae, on one of which was the stamp of Thasos, the Arethon town council. A large bronze vase (Fig. 4.3), containing mutton bones stood not far from the door, near the northern wall. Along the western wall was a silver gilt vessel (46 cm in diameter), which, as well as other similar ones, was lost. It contained 4 silver vessels: a round vase without handles, smooth cup and two rhyta (Fig. 4.6, 8). In the second dish with two handles, there was a silver vase with the gilt reliefs depicting birds swallowing fish (Fig. 4.4); the second one with reliefs of a lion fighting a wild boar, and griffin fighting deer (Fig. 4.5), a similar vase, and also a silver cup with the inscription  

(Fig. 4.7). Behind this dish, 53 cm from the western wall were laid two spear-heads 40 cm long.

To the left of the burried, on the part where the woman laid, was an iron sword (Fig. 7,2). There was a handle of his leather whip with a gold tape plaited into the lash.

4

Object, which till now was interpreted as a scepter, hairpin or knitting hook. According to E.Yakovenko, it was a spindle (Yakovenko E. V., 1973). She is corrected by A. Vonsovich, considering it as a distaff.

3

The State Archive of Autonomous Republic Crimea, F.100. Inv.1. T.300. L.140-142.

980

NIKOLAY FYODOROVITCH FEDOSEEV: THE NECROPOLIS OF KUL OBA

Near the weapon stood a magnificent golden cup5 (Fig. 7.12), and a gorytos. Here as well there were silver gilt greaves, others laid on the right of the dead man. The name of Pornax was engraved on the sheath of the sword (

) (Fig. 7,3).

including bangle, decorated with lion’s heads (Fig. 5.34). The robbers had divided it into three parts. As was mentioned, one of them had been returned by Dmitriy Bavro, and much later the second, which is completely similar to the first one was as well; besides, completely corresponding to the Dubrux description, a third one was bought from a French numismatist in Russian service and taken to Hermitage. In the burial were a gorytus, plenty of arrow- and spear heads. By the statement of D. Koreisha there was a gold warder winded by three snakes, whose heads at the ends faced different sides.

Nearby was a hone of green colour (Fig. 7.7). Above the king’s head were five electrum statuettes (Fig. 7.10), four of which are similar to those found in Pationiti barrow. The fifth depicted two Scythians with a horn in their hands (Fig. 7.11).

The robbers smelted gold objects, receiving some pounds of weight (Tunkina I. V., 2002, p. 165). During sifting of the ground some rather fine fragments of boxwood were found decorated with drawings of a quadriga, a woman with a helmet, a child, giving a horse to drink out of a large vessel, and also a sitting woman (Fig. 6.13).

The burried, usually called a king, was 170-172 cm tall (Vlasova Ye. V., 1999; idem, 1999a, p. 40). In the report of Dubrux it is specified, that the length of his thighbone was 10.5 versh (=46 cm). The low jaw-bone remained. According to it, his age was 35-40 years (Rohlin D. G., 1965, p. 248-250, Fig. 115). In his ‘Report’ Dubrux wrote: ‘In the low jaw-bone of the king were two radical teeth missing, and the third one, near them, was bad, and that is why the jaw-bone at this place got swollen; this last tooth laids much deeper than the others, which are very good, are completely healthy and belong to the man 30 to 40 years old’.

In 1831, I.Stampkovskiy sent a deputy of his office – Damian Kareisha – to St. Petersburg for presenting to tzar Nikolai I. the antiquities of Kul Oba. According to the evidence of the contemporaries, Damian Kareisha knew the language and, spoke in detail to tzar on the conditions of the finds and made a favorable impression; for that, he received a diamond ring and the task to continue the excavation in the vicinity of Kerch at the expense of government. The true researcher, P. Dubrux, stayed in shadow.

By the legs of the king, outside the box, were three bronze vessels (Fig. 4.1-3), two of them filled with mutton bones. The third vessel is a copy of the transport amphora. Near the threshold was a bronze plate 22 cm in diameter.

In 1875, A. Lutsenko undertook the new excavation of Kul Oba barrow. At this time Dubrux’s report was published, in which he expressed an opinion that under the untouched embankment one more burial place was to be found, which Dubrux could not investigate because the walls of the crypt collapsed. The Kul Oba crypt opened again and was cleaned of obstractions. Its walls appeared half disassembled. The whole floor consisted of huge broken stone plates, which were brought away. Under the floor Lyutsenko found some holes in the rocky soil, but there were no traces of burials (OAK, 1875. p. XXXI). It is possible, that after 1830 investigations and extractions of stone, the neighbouring inhabitants found here many valuable things... However, we have no information about the finds, which could be connected with Kul Oba. No new burial was found in trenches dug through in the barrow. Small gold plates were found, same as those in 1830 (Rostovtsev M. I., 1925. p. 377). In honour of town governor I. Stempkovskiy who was officially supervising the excavation, a performance of ‘Mithridates’ by I. Rasin was staged in Kerch, during which the ladies struted around in gold adornings from Kul Oba.6

Except these objects, everywhere in the crypt were scattered gold plates, few hundreds of bronze arrowheads, iron spears and javelin. There were also few gold vessels, buttons, a lot of smooth and convex triangles and rosettes of various sizes. These plates were from clothes, which hung on the walls of the crypt. Two days after the opening of the crypt, southern wall settled and 3 days later the northern wall came down, a fact that caused wounds to the legs of two ‘curious’ persons who were searching for gold. On 24th of September, after sunset, a part of 2.13m in width along the southern and east walls remained uninvestigated. During the night the robbers had time to clear an unexplored part of the crypt, broadened the entrance and pooled out the floor. Not earlier than in winter Dubrux could take a look at the stolen part and he managed to persuade one of the thieves – the Greek Dmitriy Bavro – to give over to the governor of the town a gold deer with the inscription  (Fig. 5.33). This massive plate was, probably, the central ornament of a leather shield.

For an extention of thirty years it was possible to buy things from the crypt Kul Oba in Kerch. So, in 1859 18 gold plates had been bought (OAK, 1859, p. XI). In 1848, P. Sabatie visited Kerch and obtained some things from Kul Oba (Sabat’e P., 1851, p. 105). A part of the plates

The robbers managed to open a tomb dug in clay of the mountain, 2.13 m deep and wide, and also more than 6.4 m long. In the tomb some things of electrum were found, 5

In DBK she is named ‘a small board which carried on a right shoulder’.

6

981

The letter from Kerch // Bulletin of Odessa, 1831.



10, p. 43-44.

ANCIENT GREEK COLONIES IN THE BLACK SEA 2

went into private collections, for example, in the collection Lemme in Odessa (Collection Lemme a Odessa. Odessa, 1884), and to count Stroganov (in 1926 plates got into Hermitage). Some copies appeared abroad. Today, in particular, west German assemblages contain gold plates, which almost certainly stem from Kul Oba. They were originally in the collection of the privy councilor Merle de Massone, assembled in 1890-1894. (Greifenchagen A., 1970, Bd. I, taf. 16). Kul Oba plates are available also in the British Museum (Marshall P. H., 1911, pl. 40).

-

-

7 ‘pressed’ depictions: 2 - griffins, 1 -dragon (?), 1 – Scythian on the horse, 1 - four-coal arabesque, 2 female figures surrounded by snakes and holding in the left hand a cut head; 3 small masks; 2 buttons with enamel.

Practically all of them were gone after the armed robbery of Kerch Museum in 1922 (Bykovskaya N. V. 2004, p. 503). Date

According to the evidence of Dubois de Montpere authorities got only 15 pounds (6,15 kg) from 3 poods (49,141 kg) gold7 (Dubois de Montpere F., 1842, p. 218). The basic weight of the finds from Kul Oba has been taken to Hermitage, the other part from private collections is stored in the State Historical Museum (Moscow) (At the Edge of Oikoumene, 2002). Of the finds made in Kul Oba only two copper cauldrons, two damaged cups, fragments of the iron weapon and wooden things had been permitted to stay in Kerch. Subsequently, they had been transported to Hermitage as well. In Kerch only copies remained. In the catalogue of antiquities of Kerch Museum of 1848 among the Kul Oba finds ‘gold and silver things’ 24 had been registered as well. Moreover, as A. Ashik confirmed, ‘numbers from 3 to 24 served as ornaments of imperial clothes’ (Tunkina I. V. 2002, p. 298), i.e. plates. It is also known, that some golden objects bought by A. Ashik were presented to Kerch Museum.

The date is traditionally defined according to the stamp of a Thasos amphora. The date of the last burial place is 345-335 BC, but according to modern chronology it was moved to 325 BC. (Avram A. 1996). S. Monahov dates amphora with stamp of Areton to 330s BC. (Monahov S. Yu. 2003, tab. 46-1). Earliest burials date to 5th century BC. Finds The finds from Kul Oba were a subject of study for different researchers more than once. However, giving a complete catalogue of the finds from Kul Oba, even stored in museums, is out of the question. For this purpose, it is necessary to determine things coming out of Kul Oba. The given catalogue is made according to various publications and cannot be considered final: for example, from four transport amphorae only one had been published, there is no publication of bronze vessels – cauldrons and amphora (DBK, Tab. XLIV.11 and 13; tab. XLIV.7 and 12), of several hundreds of arrow-heads, iron spears and javelins; only a sword with the gold hilt was published.

According to tradition objects from Kul Oba were boted right at the beginning of the catalogues of Kerch Museum. Here is their list: -

-

-

7

Whetstone (?) With the gold decorative bush (length 17.3 cm, height of the gold bush 5.8 cm, weight 102.57 g No KO - 36), (Fig. 7.7).

Two bracelets, ring type of electrum, found in situ and from one of the bracelets only half was kept; Rough work electrum statuette of a Scythic warrior; Two pendants with ears; One plate with a depiction of mounted Scythian; 7 plates with the depiction of a sitting woman with a mirror in her hand; in front of her there was a boy drinking out of the vessel; Square plate with the depiction of two female figures; 5 plates with depiction of Athena; 6 small round plates with depiction of Heracles-baby with an apple in his hands and adult Heracles, fighting against a lion (one of them subsequently was lost); 4 four-coal plates with fantastic animals; 4 four-coal plates with the same fantastic animals, eating fish; 6 small plates with a depiction of a running hare; 2 small plates with depictions of a lying lion; Square plate with a depiction of a labyrinth;

The object was made of a smooth black stone and was inserted into ornamented handle – bush of sheet gold. The top part of the bush is decorated with nine petaled rosette with granules between the petals. The decoration of the cylindrical surface is divided into two wide friezes. On one of them rosettes and double lotus flowers with tiny masks by their foundations were placed. The second frieze is decorated with pairs of palmettes. On the upper part of the hone there is a hole for hanging. In ancient times, the stone was repaired, the handle is appreciably worn out, the traces of enamel, even if there was an enamel covering, have not been kept. The gold has numerous inclusions of metals of platinum group. Some analogies to this object are known. The reference of similar subjects to a category of whetstones is rather relative. In earlier literature they were usually called hone, however the hardness and fine-grained structure of

In my opinion obvious exaggeration.

982

NIKOLAY FYODOROVITCH FEDOSEEV: THE NECROPOLIS OF KUL OBA

the black stone specifies that it did not intend to a point. This is common with the so-called ‘Lidyan stone’, which received popularity in antiquity for the properties allowing it to test for gold. (DBK, Tab. XXX.7; Artamonov M. I., 1969. pl. 212, Piotrovsky, . ., Galanina L.
., Grach, N. L., 1987, pl. 176; Williams D., Ogden J. 1995, N 84).

Chertomlyk Barrow, a pair of bracelets from Great Bliznitsa and probably the whetstone from Taloevskiy Barrow, Kul Oba and Small Bliznitsa) were made, if not by the hands of one foreman ‘Chertomlyk foreman’, then by the same workshop, named ‘Chertomlyk workshop’ (Rudof W., 1993, p. 85-90=Rudof W., 1991. P. 30-36). (DBK. Tab. VIII, 1; Artamonov M. I., 1966, pl. 201- 2; Piotrovsky, , Galanina L
, Grach, N L, 1997, pl. 126-7, Williams D., Ogden J., 1995, N 81).

Gold diadem with the depiction of palmettes and winged deities (Height 4,0 cm, length 37,5 cm, weight 61,66 g No KO 1), (Fig. 6.2).

Gold bracelets with protomes of Sphinxes (Width 10.0 cm, height 11.0 cm, weight 176.22 g; weight of bracelet forming a pair with the first bracelet 174,71 g; No KO 20, second KO - 19), (Fig. 7.6).

Diadem, the detail of headgear, is made of a wide gold tape with a reliefed design in the form of palmettes, fruits, birds and three winged bearded figures in high headgears and is decorated with rosettes planted along the top edge. Instead of legs deities have vegetative runaways passing in figures of sea monsters. A male deity is a twin of a similar female, known in numerous depictions.

Figures of Sphinxes were made of several parts and executed of sheet gold. The images are complemented by the smallest details from a wire and of reliefed sheet gold. Especially precisely were executed feathering of wings, between which there are supports of two kinds – a small strap with the head of Sphinx and a core on the back. The legs of both sphinxes are connected to themselves as follows: under each pair of legs there are straps’ loops, through which passed a wire, decorated at the endings with the snake heads. This fastener had been broken in antiquity. On the bush of sheet gold a decorative frieze with palmette-form ornament (covering pale green) and lotuses (covering white or light-blue) is present.

Along the top edge twenty eight rosettes with dark blue and green enamel in petals are attached. From both sides of the diadem between the reliefed design and cross edge there are smooth fields of about 2.5 cm wide (DBK. Tab. II, 1 and 2; Artamonov M.I., 1969. pl. 199; Williams D., Ogden J. 1995. N 85). Gold necklace with mounted Scythians (Width 26.6 cm, height 24.0 cm, height of figures 3.0 cm, weight 460 g, diameter 25.8 cm; No KO - 17), (Fig. 7.9).

On the bracelet the traces of an ancient deterioration and breakages are clearly visible.

The hoop consists of six gold cores, round in section. Magnificently made figures of horses and riders strengthen the volume effect. Decorative bushes attached to a hoop with smooth pins, covered refined filigree ornament and coloured enamel. By the two friezes are located palmettes, half-palmettes and lotus leaves, which are serially filled with dark blue and green enamel.

(DBK, Tab. XIII, 1; Ashik A. B. 1848-1849, Fig. 123; Artamonov M. I., 1969. pls. 200 and 205; Piotrovsky, . ., Galanina L.
,., Grach, N. L., 1987, pl 182; Williams D., Ogden J., 1995, N 83). Gold bracelet with mythological depictions and rosettes (No KO - 18; an external diameter 10.3 cm, height of a relief with Peleus and Thetis 4.0 cm, height of a relief with Eos and Kephal 2.0 – 2.5 cm, weight 108.61g), (Fig. 7.8).

Scythians are represented bearded, with long hair, assembled on the neck in bunches, lowered on shoulders. On the riders there are lengthened belted jackets, spacious trousers and soft boots. On the right hand of the left Scythian, there were no objects. Judging by two wires going down along the right leg of the rider and shoulder of the horse, it is possible to assume, that there was a whip. On the left hand a hole for the reins, now lost, was drilled. The reins survive on the second rider. The front legs of the horses are bent, cut manes are stacked into separate locks.

The bracelet has no pair. It is made of sheet gold stripe, whose both longitudinal edges are bent outside and decorated with the ribbed wire, laid along the edge. On the bracelet are also soldered reliefs, cut out from sheet of gold. The first composition represents a stage of struggle between Peleus and Thetis. On the second relief we see the winged goddess in tunic, with the naked boy on hands shown in prompt movement to the right. In all probability, this image of the goddess is the morning dawn goddess Eos, kidnapping the young man – either Kephal or Titon.

The preservation of the necklace is magnificent, in comparison with some other things from this burial, the traces of a deterioration are almost imperceptible. V.Rudolph considers, that a lot of objects found in Northern Black Sea littoral (the Kul Oba’s necklace, a comb from Solokha barrow, a pectoral from Great Bliznitsa, a pectoral from Big Barrow, amphora from

Reliefed plates had been pressed in form with subsequent partial outer working. The places of attachment are partly latent in pairs of rosettes of sheet gold allocated by 983

ANCIENT GREEK COLONIES IN THE BLACK SEA 2

smooth wire rims around the petals. Some rosettes are filled with a brown resinous substance.

Small gold pendants - original masterpieces of ancient jewellery. The depictions can be viewed only through a strong magnifying glass. On one of them was a scene from ‘Iliad’. The sea goddess Thetis and the sea deities Nereids bring the weapon to Ahilles, forged for him by the god of fire and forge art Hephaestus. The goddesses’ figures and weapon had been manufactured so realistically and is so accurate, that one is simply amazed by the human genius who made them. (DBK, tab. XIX. 4 and 5).

The bracelet which was on the forearm of the buried man, was, undoubtedly, a family value. By a pale shade of dim gold, it is dated rather to an early time, but stylistically the reliefs can be dated to the second quarter of the 5th century BC. On bracelet the obvious traces of a deterioration are visible. (DBK, tab. XIII, 3; Artamonov M. I., 1966, pl. 206; LIMC III, si Eos, no 279; Piotrovsky . ., Galanina L.
., Grach N. L., 1997, pl 180; Williams D., Ogden J., 1995, 82).

A pair of gold earrings with a disk and boat-form pendants (Height 10,0 cm, diameter of a disk 3,5 cm, weight 55,26 g; No KO - 6), (Fig. 6.1). The disk earrings are flat with raised edges, on the outside surface of which a goffered goldstripe was laid, and the edge is decorated in a circle with balls. From the inside along the edges of decorative concentric circles are settled down: a thick ribbed wire, wicker, braided wires and border, filled by dark blue and green enamel. There follows a frieze, decorated with spirally twisted filigree locks, between which are groups of three balls on stems and the places of attachment of spirals to the disk are covered with leaves. At the centre of the disk there is a flower colax with stamens fastened deepest of all. They end through one crowned with four-petal rosettes (petals with alternating dark blue and green enamel) and cut out from gold sheet figures of Nereids and dolphins. There are four such figures; each has in their hands a part of armours, which Hephaestus forged for Ahilles on Thetis’ request: a shield, helmet, greaves and a coat of mail. In the flower colux there is a rosette with long petals. Nowadays, the central element, halo, is lost.

Gold pendants with the depiction of Athena’s head (Height 18.0 cm, diameter of a disk 7.0 cm, weight 85.34 g, No KO - 5), (Fig. 6.12). On a slightly convex disk the head of a famous statue ‘Athena Parthenos’ by Phidius is depicted. On Athena’s helmet with a threefold comb (Sphinx between two Pegasus) are heads of deer and griffins, fastened along the top edge of the peak, which in its form reminds of a diadem and is decorated spirally the bent locks, made of spot pricks. On upwards turnes cheek-plates are depictions of griffins and on the helmet’s neck – a braided ornament. The earrings of the goddess consist of disks and pyramidal pendants, around the neck – trilayers necklace. On both shoulders she has twisting snakes, and on the upper left shoulder the attribute of Athena – an owl. The disk is bordered by the plane rim with winding sprouts of smooth and ribbed wires as well as ivy leaves, covered by dark blue and green enamel. In the inner circle of the disk there are rosettes alternated with larger ivy leaves (on one of them remained the filling of green enamel). Underneath rosettes hanged a complicated garland, consisting of chains of double interlacing, heavy wire spirals, disks (alternate dark blue with a green middle and green with dark blue middle), rosettes and four versions of seed-form pendants. Pendants in two top rows are corrugated and decorated by granular zigzags. In the following row pendants are decorated with catches covered by dark blue and green enamel. The pendants of the lower row are also corrugated and are complemented by three rows with a depiction of feathers, granulated at the endings, from which stripes with slanted notching are lowered.

The ‘body’ of the boat is decorated with two friezes with filigree spiral locks and omegas. Friezes are divided by a finishing wire (ribbed and smooth) and borders, serially filled by dark blue and green enamel. On both ends of the boat there are large four-layer rosettes and the petals of the smallest central rosette on the top circle are also painted through one by dark blue and green enamel. On the bend of the boat a double rosette of upper layer with the pointed petals and three acanthus leaves near the centrum is located. On petals of the four rosettes there is the same enamel covering, as in the previous cases. At the endings of the boat, on its back side, two thick wires with disks (they were filled with enamel before) and six sharp end leaves and arelieved vein in the middle are attached. Décor of back sides of boats is simpler.

On the back side of the large disk a loop for hanging was connected. In the burial place, pendants were not placed by the head, but on the body of the buried, from which it is possible to assume, that they were probably breast ornaments. (DBK, Tab. XIX, 1; Ashik A. B. 1848-1849, Fig. 121; Artamonov, 1969. pl. 214 -15; Gorbunova K. S., Saverkina I. I. 1975 Williams D., Ogden J. 1995. N 87, 198).

Along the bottom edge, from the face sheet eleven rosettes are placed and singles alternate with two-layer. The petals of single rosettes are filled with dark blue and green enamel. Underneath rosettes is a garland of chains and pendants. Under each socket one smooth pendant of seed form is attached; under every double one, a disk (the centre of the disk is covered with dark blue enamel and rim around it - with green). On both sides of each of these pendants settled chains, on which the same two-layer 984

NIKOLAY FYODOROVITCH FEDOSEEV: THE NECROPOLIS OF KUL OBA

sockets, and below - large big seed-form pendants with sepals of another type are fastened: three rows of petals are executed in form of feathers, on which granules in four rows were soldered. The pendant itself is reliefed and smooth flutes alternate with decorated by slanting notches. Previously on each earring were five small, four medium and five large, pendants. On one of the earrings three large pendants were replaced late on.

(DBK, tab. XXVI, 1; Polidovich Yu. B., 1998, p.172174; Kantorovich A. R. 1996; Korol’kova Ye. F., Alekseyev A. Yu. 1994; Alekseyev A. Yu. 2003, p. 177). Gold bracelet with the depiction of griffins attacking deers (diameter 8.0 cm, height 5.5 cm, weight 83.12 g, No KO - 3), (Fig. 6.6, 10). The bracelet is made of a wide tape of matt, pale sheet gold. Top and bottom edges are elated. In the middle, throughout the length of the bracelet, is a narrow convex rib. It divides two friezes, on which are reliefs of griffins tearing deer into pieces. On both ends of each frieze there are two pressed reliefs of lion’s scalps. In the burial ten more bracelets were found, similar in form, but without reliefs.

Original earrings should look really superb with a juicy green background of the central flower, finer colour shades of dark blue and green enamel and figures of Nereides, sitting on the backs of dolphins. (DBK, tab. XIX, 5; Ashik A. B. 1848-1849, Fig. 122b; Artamonov M.I., 1969. pls. 221-5; Gorbunova K. S., Saverkina I. I., 1975, Piotrovsky . ., Galanina L.
., Grach N. L., 1997, pl. 133 Williams D., Ogden J., 1995. N 88).

(DBK. Tab. XIII, 2; Artamonov M. I. 1966, pl. 237-8; Mantsevich A. P., 1962, p. 112, Fig. 9; Grach N. L., 1994, p. 135-141; Williams D., Ogden J. 1995, N 86).

Unpaired gold earring with boat-form pendant (Height 9.0 cm, diameter of a disk 2.8 cm, weight 22.35 g No KO- 7), (Fig. 6.5).

Necklace (length 41.5 cm, length of the tape 35.8 cm, width of the tape 1 cm, No KO - 8), (Fig. 6.3).

The disk in the form of a flat frying pan with raised low edge is covered on its external surface with flat and goffered stripes of gold, and on top, along the circle in two layers soldered large gold balls, each one of them crowned with small balls. Along the edges in the internal part there is a border, surrounding a frieze, decorated with filigree spiral winded sprouts. At the centre, there is a multilayer flower head, fastened on tube.

The necklace was found on the neck of the buried woman along with pendants with Athena’s depiction. At present, only the base of the necklace consisting of a double tape, plaited with thin gold strings and coming to an end by bushes with sculptural heads of lions and loops remains. At the bottom edge of a tape there is a row of alternate tiny rosettes and convex plates. The necklace suffered the destruction of sarcophagus and the reconstruction offered by N. Grach.

Topside the endings a sheet of gold figures of binding up sandals of Nike are attached. One wing makes a single unit with the figure, the other one is made separately and is soldered on the back.

How was the Kul Oba’s necklace packed? From the details, which have remained on a tape, it is obvious, that the first row of pendants – buds on chains of two parts, is more correct – were on a wire, in windings forming 8, with one part hooked for ring, soldered to plate, covering a place of fastening on a tape and, accordingly, missed through it. Under each rosette on specially led through a tape rings three chains were fastened, from which on average, shorter, the pendants of the second row, and on two extreme, connected in pairs from the next rosettes – pendant of the third row kept. However, as it was already stated, these pendants do not exist. On the tape of Kul Oba’s necklace 20 suspension brackets are kept in the first and third rows and 21 –in the middle.

Along the lower edge of the boat there are eight twolayer rosettes, to which a garland from chains and pendants is fastened. From each rosette a chain with a smooth pendant in form of a seed and disk above it, is hanged. The earring, forming a pair to the given one, was not found in the burial. I. Saverkina dated this earring approximately to 4th century BC. (Ashik A. B. 1848-1849, Fig. 122; DBK, pl. 19,4; Artamonov M. I., 1966, pl. 304; Piotrovsky . ., Galanina L.
., Grach N. L., 1997, pl. 130; Zurich, no 52; Williams D., Ogden J. 1995, N 89; Saverkina I. I., 2000). Golden plate in form of a deer (16x31cm, weight 266g; No KO - 120), (Fig. 5.33) represents a figure of a lying deer with bent legs. On his trunk is a depiction of a lion, a sitting griffin and a jumping hare. Under the neck of the deer is a lying dog; one of the horns of the deer comes to an end by the head of the ram; there is a bird’s head instead of a tail. It is the most ancient object, among those found in Kul Oba, which is dated to the beginning of the 5th century BC.

From the given calculations it is possible to conclude, that amphora-form pendants of the bottom row in this case should measure 1.6-1.7 cm, because, as the analogies show, at an arrangement of the tape on direct line of pendants of the bottom row usually concern each other. It is remarkable, that such pendants are available among isolated, to anything yet not adapted details of ornaments in the complex of Kul Oba barrow. They are seven large amphora-form pendants of filigree work of different preservation, but identical in the form and decor. 985

ANCIENT GREEK COLONIES IN THE BLACK SEA 2

Their neck is closed by the original fuse consisting of long bush (rolled in tube plate), round plate-cover and soldered to the ring of the wire for suspension. Thus, these pendants could simultaneously serve as bottles, maybe, for scent.

On basis of depictions, Kul Oba plates are divided into 25 types. Some types, as for example, Athena in a helmet (Fig. 5.26), a boy in a pose of ‘knied running’ (Fig. 5,12), Medusa-Gorgona (Fig. 5.22, 23) are represented in several variants. Besides, the objects can be sorted in three basic groups. The first group stands for the plates with Scythic images. A number of plates depicting the animals and fantastic essences also adjoin to it. Other most numerous group, contains plates with Greek objects. A lot of plates are decorated only with ornamental motives such as triangles with granules, rosettes and with geometrical ornamentation.

Now, almost all kinds of decorative elements of the necklace are available. In the offered reconstruction the shading designates existing components, with contour the missing ones (Fig. 6.3). The gold necklace from Kul Oba barrow is related to a number of rare copies of jewellery products of the first half of the 4th century BC. The closest analogy is the necklace from Great Bliznitsa, of a later time.

Scythic motifs are represented by depictions of mounted Scythians, stages of hares’ hunt, Scythians shooting from a bow, a sitting goddess with a mirror in her hand and the so-called snake legs goddess (Fig. 5.2, 8, 9). The sense of these images is not always clear.

The necklace, the pendants with the head of Athena, as well as the earrings belong to the series of imported objects.

On a stage of the plate from Kul Oba barrow, in D.Raevskiy’s opinion what is represented is not a fraternization ceremony, as is was believed earlier, but an oath, which was taken by two brothers-losers. The similar stages are always connected with Scythic epos, mythology; hence, separated plates represent the reduced variant of the story about the origin of Scythic people and morphological history of the first Scythic kings. Many of these plots in completely identical recurrence or in another execution are found in Scythic and GreekBarbarous burial places of the 4th-3rd centuries BC.

Plates (Fig. 5.1-32). Another type of golden ornaments are pressed plates, which. They are original objects of art of that time. In complex with other finds they make a very important material for understanding the religion and culture of the Greek-barbarous population on Northern Black-Sea littoral. Pressed plates represent the most massive and extensive group of ornaments of gold, which are found in the burial places of Scythian and Greek aristocracy in Crimea, Dnepr region and Taman peninsula. They occur in burials of Bosporos aristocracy, from the 5th century BC, and become especially numerous in the burial places in the 4th-3rd centuries BC.

Thematically they are in a way connected with HeraclesTargitay. It is the plates with the depiction of Heracles battling with the lion (Fig. 5.19), a boy in the pose of ‘knied running’. It is possible to identify Athena in a helmet with a lion’s muzzle, probably, with a deity of the Scythic Pantheon, also connected with Heracles-Targitay.

In the Hermitage collection, 828 gold plates from Kul Oba barrow are stored, which were described in detail by L.Kopeikina. However, it is probabe that not all plates were found in the barrow. Many of them were already gone during excavation, in private (individual) collections and foreign museums. It is necessary to note, that all plates, nowadays existing in foreign collections, typologically belong to variants, which can be found in the Hermitage collection.

Some plates with animal motives and with the image of fantastic depictions are closely adjoined to Scythian themes. Some animals and fantastic depictions on the plates are represented in the tradition of Greek art (Fig. 5.3, 4, 18), others – in the tradition of Scythic art (Fig. 5.1, 32). The images, undoubtedly play a decorative role and have a deep symbolic sense as well. In some cases, they symbolize boldness, force, courage, in others they personify the forces of nature. The depiction of ‘the eagle on a fish’is connected with ancient beliefs of Scythians. In Greek-Barbarous art of the Northern Black Sea littoral there are frequently images of an eagle’s and lion’s head in combination with the image of the so-called snake-leg goddess.

As the burial place was kept insufficiently well and the place of the found plates is not precisely fixed, it is impossible to reconstruct their initial arrangement. Holes on corners of the plates, loops on the back side, the bent edges specify that some were fastened on clothes, others, probably, decorated a belt or any firm objects. The traces of iron oxide can be found on reverse side. However, the authentic reconstruction now is hardly possible.

Another series of plates reflects various plots from Greek mythology, which has not managed yet to find associations with Scythic religion and art. It is the masks of Gorgon-Medusa, which are submitted in three variants, the mask of Dionysus (Fig. 5.21), three types of the image of a human head – in profile and full face (Fig. 5.27, 28, 29), and also an image of a sea dragon (the myth

L.Kopeikina considers that the plates could have been used for an ornament of rich Scythian clothes in any religious - customary ceremony and were not necessarily made for the burial moment. 986

NIKOLAY FYODOROVITCH FEDOSEEV: THE NECROPOLIS OF KUL OBA

reapiting the wonderful weapon of Ahilles) (Fig. 5.6), Pegasus (the myth of Bellerophontes) (Fig. 5.10), dancing Maenads (Fig. 5.7), two variants of the image of a sitting Sphinx with two trunks and one head (Fig. 5.24, 25), a winged boar (Fig. 5.13). Separate types of these plates and many plots are distributed in art of the Northern Black Sea littoral and met in Greek-Barbarous and Scythic burial places of the 4th-3rd centuries BC. It is peculiar, that from the end of the 5th century BC they become very popular in the art of Greece. For example, almost all these plots are met on red figure vases, and also on Olynth mosaics of the first half of the 4th century BC. This similarity forces one to think, that the occurrence of such themes in the art of Northern Black Sea littoral and in particular, in applied art serving burial rituals, was not caused by features of its development as much as by the all-Greek tendencies in art development.

shooting a bow (Fig. 5.5). Plates with image of dragons belong most likely to the same series (Fig. 5.6). Stylistic features of their execution, and also the similarity of techniques and sizes allow to think, that the figures of dragons are cut out from the plates of rectangular forms, too. Each of these plates is a perfect sample of old Greek toreutics and also the art of old Greek reliefs. Many of these plates while photographed and enlarged give the impression of monumental reliefs executed in marble. Among them there are images of both Greek and Scythic plots, but stylistically they are very close, as, for example, the image of a mounted Scythian and Pegas, and there is no doubt, that they were executed by one worker. Judging by artistic features, the time of their manufacturing can be dated to the end of the 5th century BC. The question regarding the place of their manufacture seems rather problematic. First of all, it is necessary to note, that these samples have neither prototypes, nor imitations. At the same time some similarity is observed with the rectangular gold plates, which were found in the excavation of Delphian sanctuary. At one time they decorated the clothes of the chryselephantine statue, which fragments were found there. Delphian and Kul Oba plates are more than a century apart. However it is possible to assume, that the tradition of manufacturing of such ornaments did not stop. The foremen could have seen samples of earlier time and imitated them. It seems that Kul Oba plates were also made by foremen of the Ionian school. But was it in Greece or in workshops of Panticapaeum? This question still remains open. All of them were probably executed simultaneously at the end of the 5th century BC.

In art and technical features of execution, Kul Oba plates are very different. As the stylistic analysis shows, their rather large group almost precisely copies monetary types. It is Heracles with the lion, a boy in a pose of ‘knied running’, Athena in Heracle’s helmet, a winged boar, Gorgon-Medusa with short hair, small plates with the depiction of a man’s head. The affinity between the plates and coins was marked by many researchers. The tradition of copying monetary samples still occurs in the 5th century BC. The comparison of monetary type plates from Kul Oba with coins shows that the coins of Ionian or Asia Minor region were taken as a base of the late Archaic and Classical time. This enables us to assume, that these types of plates developed in the 5th - beginning of the 4th centuries BC. Sometimes, as a sample, an image on carved stones was probably used. For example, the image of a sitting Sphinx with a double trunk (Fig. 5.24) or the figure of a lying lion (Fig. 5.18).

Kul Oba barrow’s plates were not made simultaneously. Beside many types, the stylistic features are still very closely connected to the traditions of the art of the 5th century BC. It is possible to explain a divergence in time between the manufacturing of plates and the date of a burial place or existence of earlier burial place.

Kul Oba’s plates of monetary type differ in the perfect workmanship, clearness of the images and affinity to their prototypes. It allows to think, that almost all of them were made not later than the first half of the 4th century BC.

Bronze mirror with a gold handle (Height 31.5 cm, diameter of a disk 15.5 cm, No KO - 9), (Fig. 6.11).

Beside two types of plates, which are found in a large distribution in other Scythic barrows (the mask of Dionysus (Fig. 5.20, 21) and a square plate with the depiction of the goddess entrusting authority (Fig. 5.8)), all the other plates from Kul Oba barrow carry a very individual character. They differ from others not only in complexity or originality of the art and representations on them, but also in great technical skill and subtlety of study of all details. The especially high art advantages a series of rectangular plates with the image of mounted Scythians, Pegasus and dancing Maenads (Fig. 5.7-10). A plate with the image of a mounted Scythian is adjoined to them (Fig. 5.9), whose figure, undoubtedly, was cut out from the same rectangular plate, as well as the aforementioned, and also the image of a Scythian,

Mirror – middle of the 5th century BC, facing of the handle – 4th century BC. The bronze bilateral mirror in the form of a flat disk is decorated on the base with carved palmettes, half-palmettes, and by two reliefed volutes. The disk of the mirror, with decorative ornament was executed in an Attic workshop. The handle of the mirror was fitted by a gold sheet, fastened to the disk by two gold rivets, one of which is lost. Through an aperture of the missing rivet a gold wire is passed. The flat handle of the mirror comes to an end by an oval expansion. The gold facing of the handle is decorated by the relief images of three schematical animals, one of which is a griffin; the image of one more animal is placed into oval.

987

ANCIENT GREEK COLONIES IN THE BLACK SEA 2

The form executed in Scythic style decor of the handle of the mirror testifies to the secondarity of this detail of a product, that proves true an arrangement of apertures for its attachment to the mirror directly on the ornament of the disk partially closed by a gold facing. (DBK, Tab. XXXI.7; Reinach S., 1854, pl. XXXI, 7 Artamonov M. I. 1966, tab. 213; Bilimovich Z. A. 1973. N 35; Kuznetsova T. M. 1991. p. 58).

assumption that various episodes from the life of the king buried in Kul Oba are shown here. A number of researchers (M. Rostovtsev, B. Grakov, D. Raevskiy) believe, that these are stages from various legends and heroic epos of Scythians. D.Raevskiy, tried to prove, that on Kul Oba vessel the episodes from legends telling about the transfer of authorities by Heracles-Targitay to one of the three brothers are represented (Herod IV, 9-10). (DBK. Tab. XXXIII; Artamonov, M. I., 1970, Taf. 226, 229 232, 233; Rayevskij D. S., 1977).

Golden vessel with the image of a Scythian (Height 13 cm, No KO - 11), (Fig. 6.8). A round-bottom vessel is on a footring, which was partially closed and with the ornament of petals. Except for forty eight petals, the bottom part of the vessel is decorated with the eight-beam rosette. At the bottom of the vessel there is the inscription

 , probably meaning the weight of the vessel.

Among the numerous stocks which have been found out in the burial, four round-bottom silver vessels attract the attention. All of them are spherical, without pallet, with a short cylindrical neck and a slightly flanged rim. One of them, completely smooth (height 12.3 cm, No KO - 99), was together with two rhytas and a cup in silver gilt lutherium (?). The other three are covered with an engraved pattern.

The frieze consists of three groups, two figures each, and one figure of a Scythian, pulling the bowstring of an arch. What amazes is the reliability of the reproduction by a Greek foreman of the external shape of the Scythian with their characteristic hairdresses, clothes richly decorated with plates, arms of Scythian warriors. At first a sitting commander is represented, leaning by both hands to the spear and attentively listening to the report of the warrior. Warrior reports either on what was seen in the camp of the enemy, or on the results of the fight... On the next stage, the warrior is pulling the bowstring of the bow. Next to him a Scythian, on his knees, examines a mouth of another one. This stage is of great interest: the assumption, that one Scythian treats (pulls out) a tooth to another one belongs to P.Dubrux. Modern stomatologists judge, that given scene represents the procedure of shaking of the tooth before its extraction. The patient sits on bent legs, his left hand rests on his knee, while on the right hand he has clasped the forehand of the doctor, standing by in case of increased pain. On the last stage a warrior is represented, bandiging the leg of his wounded comrade.

N.Grach investigated in detail a series of silver roundbottom vessels from Kul Oba barrow, including 4 objects; she has joined the opinion of other experts considering the round-body vessels of precious metals as ritual utensils (Grach N. L., 1984. p. 101). Silver vessel with images of ducks (Height 12.5cm, No KO - 96), (Fig. 4.4). The basic frieze is decorated with the relief image of floating fish and birds. From above and beneath it is surrounded by wide strips with vertical convex petals and ornaments. In the socket at the bottom a complex of eight petals rosette is placed (Grach N. L., 1984). Silver vessel with stages of struggle of animals (Height 10.3 cm, No KO - 97), (Fig. 4.5). The surface of the body is divided into five horizontal decorated parts. The top half is decorated with a wide relief belt with three stages of struggle of animals: a lion and a lioness attack a deer; two griffins on a goat; a lion tearing a boar. At the bottom part a narrower belt is placed with a reliefed garland of flowers, buds and runaways of plants. Both belts are decorated by three strips with vertical convex petals. At the bottom – there is a multi-petal rosette (Grach N. L., 1984).

Dubrux also marks, that ‘it is most remarkable that on the vessel of electrum a man is represented who, it seems, is having a tooth extracted, and that the bottom jaw of the king [from the barrow] there two radical teeth were missing, and a third one was the cause that the jaw at this place got swollen; this last tooth lay much deeper than others, which were very good, completely healthy and belonged to the man of thirty to forty years of age’. This has allowed to assume, that the stage on the vase transfers a real episode from the life of the king, which suffered from an illness of teeth. If this is the case than on the Kul Oba electrum vessel all images relate to the life of the king, and are his original ‘biography in pictures’.

Silver vessel with the image of a lion and a lioness, a cat predator (Height 10.1 cm, No KO - 98), (Fig. 6.9). The bottom part of the vessel is filled with an engraved rosette from the vertical upward inverted petals. On the throat there is a narrow belt with reliefed ornament. The bottom is smooth (Grach N. L., 1984).

There is an opinion that on the Kul Oba vase a military camp after the fight is represented. For the benefit of such understanding all four described stages speak. Presenting the find of a vessel, however, E. Shevelev stated the

Fragments of ivory (Fig. 8) were found after a research of the chamber and sifting of the ground and, hence, are 988

NIKOLAY FYODOROVITCH FEDOSEEV: THE NECROPOLIS OF KUL OBA

not fixed properly. Originally they were wrongly determined as wooden ornaments of the musical tool (lyre-Stempkovskiy, Kareisha), and such interpretation appear in first publications. At the same time, in style and plots of engraving, the presence of two art directions was always marked. The basic stages – court of Paris, kidnapping of Leucippids and others – are executed on thin ivory in a manner of Greek vase-painting. On other fragments Athena and Aphrodite are represented. From the other fragments the great popularity was achieved by the images of a chariot harnessed with four horses. The chariot is followed by a young man-coachman with a floating raincoat behind his back. Ahead of the chariot is another young man in a short tunic and short raincoat pursuing a woman who is escaping from him. The woman is dressed in peplos with a short lapel. The similar figures are represented on boards of the sarcophagus. In both cases the stages of kidnapping of Leucippids are depicted – the myth about the sons of Leda – Castor and Pollux, stealing the daughters of king Leucippus as the brides.

undoubtedly, were placed on horizontal rods of the frame. The chiseled legs, mentioned by P.Dubrux, could not belong to the wedge, decorated with the plates of ivory, which legs should be rectangular, i.e. in the Kul Oba barrow were two wedges. The magnificent Kul Oba barrow’s wedge was undoubtedly imported (Sokol’skij N. I., 1971, p. 89-90). Crest (Fig. 8.32). On their background, a pair of small plates of a different structure with Scythic theme was obviously allocated. Besides, it cannot find its place in décor of the catafalque in any way. The plates are completely identical in form and sizes – rectangular, narrow, with the pointed ends on the basis and rounded corners from above. The side face of them is polished and covered with engraved drawings (1.8x9.1 cm, No KO - 118, DBK, Tab. LXXIX and LXXX) and the back side with fine notching. The identity and originality of the outlines of the plates assume their functional unity, i.e., they decorated a bilateral object, which was undoubtedly a crest.

On the following insignificant fragments depicted is the figure in the eastern costume with a cup in hands; breasts and hands from another figure conducting the ram. It is probably an illustration of the most ancient legend about the sacrifice before the race between Pelops and Oenomaus.

On one plate, a dog pursues a hare; on another a skipping horse pulls the rider fallen off the horse. It is clear, that in two stages one theme is represented: the hunting of the hare. This plot was popular in art since the deep antiquity.

Of the other images it is necessary to note: a bearded herm, a young man dressed with greaves, some figures of sitting women, a figure of winged Gorgon and thuimiaterium – a censer on a high support.

The figures are executed by laconic representational means without detailed study of the figures’ details. At the same time they are extraordinary expressive, dynamical and realistic. It is characteristic, that all characters are inverted in one part – on the left and by that the purposefulness and semantic unity of the composition is emphasized.

The engraving of the figures was underlined with red paint, in some places still visible. For a long time they were considered to belong to the sarcophagus. P.Dubrux, making an excavation, informs that ‘above the skeleton of the woman towered catafalque, absolutely broken at that time’ and that ‘this catafalque consisted of four chiseled round legs in one arshyn long’. On the sifting ground in the crypt many engraved plates of ivory were revealed. N.Nikolskiy came to the conclusion that the plates are in disharmony with the sarcophagus’ walls and that Kul Oba sarcophagus in design could not have chiseled legs.

The theme of the pursuit of a hare frequently varies in art of Greek-Barbarian toreutic of the post-Herodotus period. It occurs on golden products found in the Kul Oba barrow. Such are the rectangular plates with the running hare; the rather large plate with the image of a mounted Scythian, under whose horse sits a hare; at last, the famous shield plate with a lying deer, on whose body, among the symbolical images of animals, appears a hare. The find of crests in imperial burials or in burial places of the local aristocracy, and thus, as a rule, among man’s accompanying stock, testifies that these crests should not be considered as usual objects of luxury. More likely, they were cult objects, that played a significant role among symbols. A confirmation to that are also objects of the images, either connected with ‘animal’ style, or with Scythian heroic epos (Grach, 1983; 1985). It is characteristic, that on antique monuments of the Northern Black Sea littoral, crests of such type have not been found; this allows to make a conclusion that these crests were specially made for the Barbarians (Chernenko E.,1994, p. 210; idem, 1998).

On plates of ivory from the Kul Oba barrow there are basically 4 types: 1) two wide with the image of volutes, where in the centre were convex circles of greenish glass (Fig. 8.1); 2) a wide one with the image of a stage of the court over Paris, which should be attached to a wide vertical plane; 3) a long, narrow one, which, according to an arrangement of figures, should be attached to the horizontal narrow surface; 4) small plates, filling free intervals. The position of the plates is well explained by figures on a vase with the image of a wedge. Two plates with volutes decorated a pair of forward legs, creating a basis of heading. Narrow plates and separate figures, 989

ANCIENT GREEK COLONIES IN THE BLACK SEA 2

Silver Rhyton (Height 12.3 cm (No KO - 104), (Fig. 4.8). A horn for drinking with a tip in form of a half-figure of a lying ram with bent legs. The edge of the vessel is slightly everted. The body, bent almost under a direct corner, is covered with horizontal flutes. The tip is smeldered of two parts of the horn and nowadays the lost. Ears were made separately, inserted into the apertures, made in the head, and soldered. The wool of the animal is designated by engraved circles with a point inside. The outside surface of the vessel was gilt, but now gilding is lost. There are holes on the nostril and knee of the ram.

However, in literature has prevailed the point of view, that the Kul Oba barrow is a burial place of either a Scythic king or a Scythic commander. However, in comparison with Scythic burial places of the Central Crimea, where whole hulks of horses were buried, in the Kul Oba barrow only some parts of them were deposited. The opinion is that the Scythian was most likely disgraced from the steppe region of Dnepr, with barrows of which there are much common in stock (Troitskaya T. N., 1957). The clothes of the buried (a hood on the head of the warrior, neck bangles, a lot of plates), amount of arms, including characteristicly Scythian weapons (whip, gorytos etc.), plenty of objects, on which Scythians are represented, besides quite often in ritual stages (pressed plates with the image of a Scythian sworn brotherhood etc.), and also things decorated with Scythian and the animal images, – all this with complete definiteness specifies a belonging of Kul Oba barrow to the representative of Scythic aristocracy.

Products of clay Four transport amphorae were found, the authentic information is present only for one of them – Thasos amphora with the stamp 
  

   (Hermitage, No 1830/327) (Brashinskiy I.B., 1965, p. 102-104). The question about who was buried in the Kul Oba barrow is not clear to date. The first researchers (Dubrux and Stempkovskiy) considered that the barrow contained remains of a Scythian king with his wife, and a groom (orhenchman (Artamonov, 1966, p. 62)), Peredolskaya A., 1945, p. 70; Mantsevich A. P. 1950, p. 225). B. Grakov, considered the burial as imperial (Grakov B. N. 1950). V. Gaidukevich consideres the Kul Oba barrow as one of the burials of the kings in the Scythic territory (Gaidukevich V., 1949. p. 276).

The truth is that, in the Kul Oba barrow, Scythic burial ritual carries obvious traces of the Greek cultural influence (monumental burial crypt, and instead of a burial of horses – a burial only of some parts of horse hulks). The crypt of this barrow functioned for a long time and in which is visible on the datings of separate finds. A part of them is referred by the experts to the end of the 5th century BC, and some to middle and even to the last quarter of the 4th century BC. Probably, these extreme dates also define a chronological range of time of the functioning of the Kul Oba family burial. Researchers suppose that in this tomb not less than five burials occured in different times within the limits of the end of 5th century - last quarter of the 4th century BC.

Most likely, the Kul Oba barrow is a family burial; on the western part of a hill there were similar round walls, which surrounded the barrow on its eastern part, as well. The authors of DBK stated, that the buried one in the crypt could be the Bosporan king Leucon I or in the burial under the floor of the crypt Paerisades II, and in the crypt one the sons of Paerisades, killed by their younger brother Eumelus (DBK, p. XLIII-XLIV). Besides, the authors of DBK did not exclude the assumption that under the floor Paerisades I had been buried, and in the crypt Leucon I or Satyrus I, killed during the siege of Theodosia.

E. Yakovenko sections the burial stock in three conditional groups on the origin and utilizational purpose. One of the basic groups - the objects specifically of Scythic use consisted of weapons, instruments of work, details of clothes, ornaments, objects of toilette and cult vessels.

This hypothesis was maintained by the researchers of the 19th century (Dubua, Neumann etc.). Later A. Peredolskaya stated the opinion, that in the Kul Oba barrow one of the Bosporan governors was buried with his servant and wife (Peredol’skaya A. A. 1945. p 70). V. Gaidukevich has acted against it; as a proof he compared the images of Bosporan governors with the Athenian relief. In his opinion, if Spartacus in personal use kept so much non Greek, barbarous elements, as it is drawn in the complex of the Kul Oba barrow, Athenian, certainly, noted no characteristic attributes of ‘barbarity’ in shape of the Leucon I’s sons. There is no slight hint on it that is especially important, as Athenian in the 4th century certainly knew well the Bosporan archons-kings’ (Gajdukevi V. F., 1949. p. 274-275).

The basic objects ‘of the Scythic group’ are: swordsacinaces (one with a gold overlay on the sheath), iron spear-heads, quiver sets, details of protective armours (iron and gold plates of a shirt set and a belt), knives of Scythic type, whetstone with gold setting, headgear of a king, whip, neck bangles, bronze mirror with golden handle, bronze boiler, details of bronze decoration (conical bells on a chain). The second group comprises typically Greek objects – antique ornaments, toilette accessories and various vessels of clay and precious metals. It is possible to relate here the ivory cover of a wooden bed, decorated by an excellent groove (Artamonov M. I., 1966, tab. 257-262). 990

NIKOLAY FYODOROVITCH FEDOSEEV: THE NECROPOLIS OF KUL OBA

It is possible to name the third group taking some conditionally intermediate place between the two first, Greek-Scythic. The ornaments and vessels from precious metals made in the traditional Greek manner, but on account of Scythic tastes and customs are represented. There are numerous plates with the images of household and ritual stages from the life of Scythians, their deities, various animals, birds, fish. Very interesting are four metal vessels with perfect images in technique of a relief and stamping. The basic place among them occupies a vessel with images of a Scythian, resting after a fight (Yakovenko Ye. V., 1085. p.325-326).

up to Taman. These barrows have much in common with Juz Oba barrows in the way of the burial and in the design of the tomb crypts (Grinevich K. E. 1952, p. 131). It is quite probable, that these barrows entered into one common necropolis located along the roads. About the belonging of its necropolis to the top of the Bosporan Kingdom wrote P. Dubrux (Dubrux P. 1858, p. 54). It is possible, that the place of the necropolis of Bosporan aristocracy has been selected by the most important road of Bosporos, and such a road was undoubtedly the way connecting the European coast with the Asian one. [Fedoseyev N. F., 1999]. Under the remark of
. Begichev, the barrows (on the crest of Juz Oba) are located almost in the chess order one to another and go at various distance, raising, being lowered on the surface of the crest, being seldom lowered on its slopes.

A. Alekseev considers, that in the burial under the floor of the crypt of Kul Oba the Scythic king Octomasades (440-400 years BC.) had been buried (Alekseev A. 2003. p 230), while the burial place in the crypt should be dated to 330 BC (Alekseyev A. Yu. 2003. p 262).

On the maps of 19th century the chain of the barrows is lowered to the coast of the strait of Kerch in two places – in the area of Pavlovskiy’s cape and the cape of 
Burun (Fig. 1). There is no doubt, that the Ak-Burun group of barrows makes a single unit with the Juz Oba necropolis, as well as the chain of barrows crossing the Juz Oba ridge from south to north. In some places the barrows form a double chain that is undoubtedly the certificate of the presence of the road. The southern group consists of 26 barrows, passing through the ‘farm Taranenka’ and conducted in natural boundary of TyulOba. The information on research of these barrows, as well as of the northern part, where 3 barrows are fixed, was not kept. All circuit of Juz Oba with its numerous barrows can be divided into 3 sections: the eastern section reaches from the Ak-Burun cape and Pavlovskaya battery up to the large highway, which goes from Kerch to Arshintsevo. The second, middle section, reaches west from the aforementioned highway, and we shall consider its western border as a road going from Kerch on the lake of Churubash. It cuts the circuit of Juz Oba and goes to the southwest direction. The third site of the crest represents its western section from the Churubash road up to the last barrow in steppe.

As a whole, the question on who was buried in the Kul Oba barrow cannot be solved – the dominant point of view about the Scythic belonging of the buried does not explain a number of artifacts, which suppose hypotheses about the burial place in the Kul Oba barrow of the Bosporan king. In my opinion, disputable is also the statement, that the burial place under the floor is the most ancient. According to the stratigraphy, this burial place should be the latest. The answer to this and other questions can give only detailed publication of all finds and archival materials. Juz Oba barrows In the Kerch peninsula major structural elements of a natural relief in the area of ancient Panticapaeum are three rocky crests of a latitudinal direction: the Yenikale ridge, the Mithridates ridge and Juz Oba ridge, peninsulas, extending from internal areas, to the coast of the strait in Kerch. Mithridates ridge and Juz Oba represent the wings uniform mountain layer, in which the axial part descends to the valley of the river Jerjava. As well as the Mithridates one, the Juz Oba ridge throughout antiquity was used for the building of burial monuments. The distance between the mountain of Mithridates and Juz Oba is 7-8 kms on average. The space between them is now engaged by a wide valley and small height, on which the Jerjava village is situated. The barrows were constructed on a rocky crest of an ancient reef. The basic burial was at the centre of the barrow on a rock, or let into the continent. Kurgan is surrounded by krepidas, more often from the raw stone. In most cases under the barrow embankment the traces of a burial funeral feast were revealed. In modern time this mountain ridge got the name ‘Hundred hills’ (in Tatar ‘Juz Oba’).

The majestic ridge attracted the attention of tomb diggers long ago. According to the map of Litvinenko of 1830, on the ridge, 10 barrows were already dug out (Fig. 1).8 Making a start from the chronology of Juz Oba barrows research, we shall begin their description from the west. The first documentary evidence of Juz Oba excavation comes from 1838, when the director of the Kerch Museum A. Ashyk found the latest barrow in the Juz Oba circuit, which was located away in the steppe. This barrow at one time was on ‘the land of Mirza Kekuvatskij’, and under this name it is known in the

Today, there is no doubt, that the barrows were erected along the roads (Tsvetayeva G. A., 1957, p. 229; Fedoseyev N. F., 1999, p.66). The circuit of Juz Oba barrows proceeds on the coast of the Taman peninsula by the Vasyurinskaya Mountain and especially from Tuzla

8

‘The topographical neighborhoods map of Kerch which was removed in 1835 with a designation of the ancient barrows’ // Archive in the Museum of Kerch (KMTI-2475). The dug out barrows are marked red.

991

ANCIENT GREEK COLONIES IN THE BLACK SEA 2

Bosporan archaeology of Kekuvatskij (Fig. 9) (DBK, 1854, p. LXVIII, IV, XIX; Rostovtsev M. I., 1925. p. 192; Artamonov M. I., 1966. p. 66). ‘Kekuvatskij Barrow’ was dug out by A.  shyk in 1839. Inside of the barrow, the crypt with dromos was found; the burial chamber was covered with the stone ledged vault of a usual type. At the centre of the crypt on the special scaffold of large stones there was a large coffin of a cypress tree like a box, instead of a temple.

completely plundered. To the south, the traces of a funeral feast were found. The most numerous fragments belonged to transport amphorae from Sinope, Heraclea, Thasos and Cnid (?). On two fragments the stamps of Sinope were found:


        "!# %$"& '  ( !& #  *)+ , . -

The boards were inserted into the long walls of this coffin and decorated on a red background with the gilt images of griffins attacking various animals (Fig. 9.1-2). In the coffin laid a man’s skeleton with a gold wreath on the head made from two olive branches with fruits, weighting 342 g (Fig. 9.8). On an index finger of the right hand there was a gold ring with 4 images of lying lions of excellent workmanship (Fig. 9.3). In each hand of the dead man there was a bunch of 150 arrows, from which were kept bronze gilt arrow-heads (Fig. 9.5). On the legs of the skeleton laid an excellently made bronze Attic helmet with cheek-shields (Fig. 9.7) and a pair of bronze gilt greaves (Fig. 9.6). Here laid a whetstone and a remarkable iron sword with the handle, decorated with gold in animal style; it was of the same type known to us from Scythic kings’ burials (Fig. 9.4). In the crypt, a transport amphora from Thasos with a stamp, and also a known red-figured pelike with the image of Apollo and Marsia on one side and toilette stage on the other were found. This pelike belongs to the best samples of the socalled Kerch style and is dated to 380-360 BC (Luk’yanov S. S., Grinevich Yu. G., 1915), and that is the date of the whole burial (Yakovenko Ye. V., 1974. p. 65).

 /10 ' 243 5 0687&2 9/   :*; ? 3 Both brands are dated to the beginning of fourth quarter of the 4th century BC, that defines the time of the burial. Black-glazed ceramics were submitted by fragments of five fish dishes, red figure kylikes, plates, salt-cellar, 0A@ vessels, red-figured pelike. Two graffiti were found: )CB on a fish dish and at the bottom of a black-glazed plate. Fragments of pelikes include a rim with a representation of a figure leaning on a spear, which belonged to a pelike ‘of Kerch style’. It is necessary to note the fragments of two red figure kylikes (Fig. 10.3, 4). The plot of both – Satyr and Maenad. In composition, both kylikes were made in one workshop and had pairs. B.Sparkes and L.Talkott carry the vessels of such type to the Delicate class (Sparkes B.A., Talcott L., 1970). Analogies: Wursburg 492; ARV2, 1512,18; CVA Great Britain, 16, pl.122; CVA Deutschland, Leiden, B.4, t.190,8. Oinohoiya, 1922/4,23).

The majority of the barrows were dug out in the 19th century. To some extent – 20th century – only V.Shkorpil investigated a barrow with an already open crypt (Shkorpil Barrow). In 1938, in one of the barrows (a settlement not far from the 2nd Serpent Barrow – Nikolay Fedoseev) a marble plate of the 1st century AD was found by N.Kivokurtsev. (Kerch lapidary, 1074=CIBR 519; VDI, 1939, 2, p. 133).

From the complex of simple utensils, it is necessary to note numerous fragments, red clay plates and cups (Fig. 060 10.5). One of these cups had graffiti D (Fig. 10.5). In the form the majority of them copy lacquer vessels (Fedoseyev N. F. 1997).

In 1940, in connection with the civil works which have touched Juz Oba ridge, on the site, where it is crossed by the road towards Churbash, a monumental crypt without dromos was opened by the employee of Kerch Museum N.Kivokurtsev. The overlappings in form of 4 ledges, from two longitudinal parts appeared half destroyed, and the crypt plundered. From the finds in the crypt there were some gold plates and fragmented alabasters of a very large size. Unfortunately, the drawings were lost in Leningrad during a blockade (Gajdukevi V. F., 1981. p. 22, 47).

Serpent Barrow (Zmeinyj Kurgan) (Fig. 11) (Ashik A. B. 1848-1849. II, p. 42; OAK 1882-1888, p. XXXI; LXXXIII and CCXIII, EFE XIV; OAK 1889, p. 11). One height is more than 7.5 m. About the localization of this barrow, which was dug by Ashyk, Kondakov and Borbinskiy, there are some dark points. The researches of  .Rostovtsev and
.Grinevich, unfortunately, have not brought to clearness. As a result there was an opinion, that from the different sides of Juz Oba there are 2 barrows, first Serpent Barrow in east and second Serpent Barrow from the western part of the ridge. The final localization of the Serpent Barrow will be possible only after the new analysis of all data.

In 1994, in connection with the destruction of embankment of a small barrow (height about 2 m) west of the Serpent Barrow, a survey excavation was carried out by N. Fedoseev (Fig. 1, N12, 10). The crypt was represented by a stone box made of limestone and was 992

NIKOLAY FYODOROVITCH FEDOSEEV: THE NECROPOLIS OF KUL OBA

It is considered, that in 1839 A.Ashyk researched the first Serpent Barrow (eastern), however the instructions of A.Ashyk and barrow’s embankment characteristics, do not allow this assumption. Moreover, on the map of Litvinenko this barrow is specified as already dug out (1835).

The top part of the wall strip above the frameworks was decorated in the same technicque, but by different figures. Ivory strips created here a pattern similar to a meander, and in the centre of a rectangular peepholes of amber were attached. The places of all strips of ivory were strictly determined and are marked by the letters; so, in the narrow part of sarcophagus the following letters were applied: ,N,M,X.

The research by A.Ashyk and .Kondakov concern the same barrow, included into the system of the so-called ‘Tyritake swell’. This is a big barrow from the western part of the ridge, which is used to name the second Serpent Barrow barrow. It is, actually, the last in a row of large barrows. Further chain of barrows is represented by small embankments, among which only two stand out ‘myrza Kekuvatskiy’ barrow’ and ‘Barrow in the land of Bager’.




The walls of the narrow parts, according to the one remaining, differed to longitudinal ones, in that instead of caissons with rhombs and scales three name-plates with carved reliefs covered with gilding and having a red background were inserted. In the middle there was a name plate with a vegetative ornament, and on each side, plates with the images of Hera and Apollo. These plates were made of another, dark tree (box-tree) and, certainly, by another workman of groove art. Apparently, another, not surviving narrow wall, was decorated with figures of gods.

 . shyk began to excavate this barrow several times, but its embankment, which consisted of stones with a set of amphora fragments, required many efforts for the opening of the crypt. Only in 1839, from the southern part, in depth of 7.5 m near the centre, the plate tomb was opened, inside of which was a cypress coffin (Fig. 11.14), which broke up a slightest touch. By the legs was an attic red-figured pelike of the late fine style with gilding (Fig. 11.7).

The sarcophagus had two sloping covers. The riches of scenery were supplemented by sculptural carved figures. A.  shyk informs: ‘on the corners of the coffin there were four gilt caryatides of excellent work; unfortunately, they got rotten so much, that I could keep only some fragments of them. These caryatides are represented by nude female figures’.

The most detailed description and the reconstruction of the sarcophagus is given by N.Sokolskij (Sokol’skij N. I., 1969. p. 32, tab. 15). From the sarcophagus two longitudinal and one cross wall of the case, bottom boards and legs remained partially. The general length of the sarcophagus was 2.40 m, width 1.10 m, height (without the lost cover) together with the legs, about 1.10 m; the complete height up to the peak of the cover should be about 1.40 m.

It was considered, that all parts of caryatides, are lost. However, in Louvre, among a small collection of the antique wooden objects which have been taken out from Kerch during the Crimean war, a damaged wooden statuette of box-tree is kept, which .Sokolskiy was sure were sarcophagus’ caryatides of second Serpent Barrow. The statuette represents a draped female figure with her left leg a bit forward. Unfortunately, the head, the hands and the feet are broken off; the height without the head and foot is 0.35 m. The general height of the statuette, should be approximately 0.40 m.

One of the most essential features distinguishing this sarcophagus from others of the 4th century BC., is the arrangement of the middle strip of the walls (Fig. 11.6) in technique of real slats, in contradistinction to all other Bosporan sarcophaguses, on which the middle strip was represented by false slats. All the smooth surfaces of sarcophagus’ walls were adorned by amazingly rich and complex ornament in the inlay-intarcional technique. The traces from an attachment of stripes and cells from inserts, holes from wooden pins allow to present the whole system of the disappeared ornaments.

The sarcophagus had no less than 10 handles for transporting, located three from each of the longitudinal sides and two from the narrow sides. On the basis of the pelike ‘of free fine style’, found together with sarcophagus, and dated slightly before the middle of the 4th century BC the most probable date of burial is the second quarter of the 4th century BC.

Thin name-plates of the middle strip, similar to metopes, had serially inlaid patterns of three sorts: one name-plate had scaly inserts of ivory, a small number of which reached us; the next name-plate had inserts in from of rhomboids of ivory, mounted with the strips of a strong tree; the third kind of name-plates furnish was represented by lengthened rhomboids, apparently, having inserts not of ivory, but of a tree of another shade. According to the message of  . shyk the sarcophagus ‘was covered with different ornaments of ivory’.

N. Sokolskij considered that the sarcophagus is imported to Bosporos from the Mediterranean, more probably from Attica. As a proof that the sarcophagus was not made in a Panticapaeum’s workshop, can serve the fact, that it was found in the crypt with the legs cut off. This was quite possible for one of the richest Bosporan families, a representative of which was buried in the sarcophagus, where the other stock, mainly Attic in origin was also found.

993

ANCIENT GREEK COLONIES IN THE BLACK SEA 2

In 1883, N. K ndakov had undertaken a new excavation of the barrow. The investiogation of the northwest part, had shown, that almost the whole barrow was put together in pieces of wild stone and that its embankment consists of five layers of large wild blocks. In 96 m from a sole between two ledges of natural rocks, under a blockage of stones found 2 skeletons lying across were found, one onto another; by them was a cup of rough clay and fragments of an iron knife. In the soil of this place there was a rich layer of amphora fragments. Then, 32 m in the centre an extensively burnt reservoir covered with the same blockage and containing many bones of bulls, fish etc., broken amphorae, small pathers and 20 cups with a palmette at the bottom had appeared. In especially dug trenches there were broken black-glazed vessels with very beautiful depictions, heavily damaged by fire. Two vessels were found separately between stones. They were laid vertically, obviously in protection of the burial fire, but, unfortunately, they were in pieces. One of them is an oinohoe and the other one is a large lekythos, with figures executed in a bas-relief and painted in different colours, and partly gilted. The first of the vases represents a stage among
Adonis,   Aphrodite and Peitho, and also the young  man  , standing before the woman E P.. AKH (inv. 108 K=  .34; Is issued: Schefold K. 1930. Fig.41-42).

Amphorae collection from the embankment of this barrow, assembled in the 19th-20th centuries, gives a date of the barrow. All the found fragments belong to amphorae of Chios, Pepareth and Thasos. The stamps fixed here are dated to the beginning of the second quarter of the 4th century BC. In # .Grinevich’s opinion, the excavation of N. # ondakov was continued by " . Bobrinskiy in 1888. This localization follows from a phrase in the report: ‘the Chairman of the commission " . Bobrinskiy took on the research of the last barrow in Juz Oba’ (OAK 1882-1888, p. 213). However, I should notice, that the Serpent Barrow does not absolutely approach this definition; as further in the circuit there are more barrows. Hence, the barrow described below, I offer to name ‘Barrow of Bobrinskiy’.

" . Bobrinskiy opened a large monumental crypt combined from regular blocks of large size in the centre of the barrow. The masonry was made similarly to other crypts of Juz Oba, a dry-way as it was done by the Greeks in classical and Hellenistic epoch. The top is shown, as the report speaks, by a ‘dome’ and is focused from east to west. ‘The entrance from the east, looks like the so-called Egyptian stage arch; outside it is closed up with special stones masonry’. The dimensions of the crypt were: length 5 m, width 3.5 m, height is a bit higher than 4 m. The earth rock makes the bottom: on it four very large and high, accurately cut stones, on which, apparently, stood the sarcophagus, were located; from the last one different fragments remained, such as pieces of a carved tree with traces of red paint and numerous remains of gilding, allowing to assume, that this sarcophagus was very magnificent. On a wall of the crypt, in a known height, were hammered in iron, very rusty nails, on which, maybe, the weapon of the dead man was hung. This burial is dated, except for yet unpublished fragments of this magnificent sarcophagus and fragments of the weapon, by the fragments of late red figure krater found under side the arch of the crypt (OAK 1889, p. 12, Fig. 5). In the burial, were also found bones of a goat and a dog, which represent the remains of a burial ritual, certified in some barrows of the Taman peninsula. The burial itself appeared plundered.

The second vase (Fig. 11.5) represents barbarians on a hunt for fallow deers – the plot is close to the theme of a composition to a famous vase of Athenian Xenophantos, found in Kerch in 1837. The figures of the first and the second lekythos were made in the same form. The distinctions are only in size, the lekythos from the Serpent Barrow is smaller (24.2 cm) and the figures are not placed on a straight line. It is interesting to note, that on a small lekythos it was kept a relief designation of ground painted in bright green colour. As well as the large small lekythos, 
 a  lekythos   has  the  signature , executed with a fine font of red paint. The date of vessels by Xenophantos is the beginning of the 4th century BC (Peredol’skaya A. A. 1945. p 54). On the basis of this find, the barrow is usually dated to the 4th century BC. (Tsvetayeva G. A., 1957, p. 240; Yakovenko Ye. V., 1974, p. 66).

The investigation made in the north-western part of a small barrow, opened nearest to the east from the Serpent Barrow, combined with stones, tombs were perfectly saved. One of them, also of good construction, contained, except for 4 skeletons, only a simple amphora, put on the legs two lekythos, an iron knife and an iron spear-head – these are the obvious things from the fourth burial. In the second tomb, the woman and a child were found with a clay vase, covered black; along them was found, a necklace of glass and a wooden cup (OAK 1882-1888).

In 1885 professor N. K! ndakov continued the research of the barrow. From a former excavation, the existence of a large fire place with a broken bas-relief vase was found. The investigation of the east floor was undertaken, where the rich layer of stone prints, gone from the centre to the east, allowed to hope for the opening the lateral tomb. For this purpose they removed at first a part of the barrow’s top, consisted of continuous layers of stone and threatened by fall. Thus, a small broken amphora was found. However, the excavation has not resulted in opening the supposed tomb (OAK, 1867, p. 83). As well as " shyk, #$! ndakov marked the presence in the embankment of a huge number of amphora fragments.

At a near distance from this barrow, near the Churubash road crossing the Juz Oba crest, in 1909 V. Shkorpil made an excavation of the barrow. Though in this barrow 994

NIKOLAY FYODOROVITCH FEDOSEEV: THE NECROPOLIS OF KUL OBA

only at already opened and emptied crypt was found, the excavation by V. Shkorpil, was perhaps the most scientific of all former.

The exact date of the catacomb in the Serpent Barrow is uncetain. In fact, a find of alabaster is a typical detail of burial stock in Bosporos, including Juz Oba barrows. Thus, the Serpent Barrow can be totally dated to the time of functioning of the Juz Oba necropolis, i.e. 4th century BC.

V. Shkorpil gives the detailed and careful description of the structure of barrow’s embankment, and in this respect his excavation deserves attention. ‘At a distance of 8 m from the edges of the barrow, in direction towards the centre, there was a stone obstacle, a ring covering the whole barrow. The obstacle represents a wall combined of pieces of local dense limestone’. Furthermore, the author gives the sizes of this barrow’s krepis: height 0.67 m, thickness 0.49 m. Embankment of the barrow consisted of two varied layers: the bottom consisted of pure stamped soil of black and brown colour (only occasionally there are stones), thickness of 1.6 m, and the top was combined with pieces outlined by soft yellow limestone, brought, probably, from an ancient quarry, taking place here in the southwest slope of the barrow. Thickness of the top layer was 1.7 m.

In July 1859, a barrow was dug out by the director of Kerch museum " . Lyutsenko, which was designated by him with the letter ‘I’, and crypt, found out in it, 50. It is the first barrow west of the road leading to Old Quarantine (OAK 1859, p. IX; Rostovtsev M. I., 1915, tab. XXXII, 1 - 3; Shkorpil V. V., 1918). Kurgan by a circle of about 100 m and height 6.5 m was combined with stone and black earth. In the barrow there was only one crypt, at the centre of the embankment (Fig. 12.1). This crypt consisted of one burial chamber without dromos. A special descent led to the crypt (length 2.13 m, width 3.2 m, depth 1.5 m), cut down in a rock and then carefully filled up with the blocks of wild stone. The entrance into the crypt was carefully incorporated by pieces of plates of local stone. A ledged arch was executed from three lines put forward inside of cut plates, and from above, the crypt was closed by six cross put fixed plates of local stone. The length inside was 3.2 m, width 5.3 m, height from the floor to the beginning of the covering 1.6 m, from the beginning of the covering up to final plates 4.3 m. (Fig. 12.2).

Ostry barrow (OAK 1861. p. VI; OAK 1862. p. 5; "# , 1863), (Fig. 14.4). It was researched in 1861, 1862, 1863 and 1882. It occupies the central place in the circuit if Juz Oba, and from the external parameters comes nearer to the famous Imperial barrow (height - 17 m, diameter - 80 m, in a circle 243 m). This allows already to assum the special situation of the given monument in the context of other barrows. The Ostry barrow, first of all, is interesting because of the open burial structure; it has no analogies in Bosporos of the 4th century BC. In the barrow a catacomb, cut down in a rock, whose the entrance was closed with stone masonry was revealed. The burial was completely plundered. The researchers of the barrow marked, that on the floor of the catacomb there was a weight of boards from broken sarcophagus, some overturned plates, a heap of sifted ashes and dust, more than 20 copper nails and one alabaster (OAK 1861. p. VI). The carefulness of the robbery, in all visibility, allows to assume riches of the burial (burials?).

The burial chamber, especially constructed for one dead man, was totaly filled with the well preserved double coffin described in detail by Lyutsenko. ‘In the crypt on four legs, height of 1.6 m, there was a simple wooden coffin, as a box, length 7.4 m, width 2.7 m and height about 2.66 m without legs, with the plank floor. Inside of it there was another wooden box of length 4.86 m, width 2.45 m and height 2.22 m covered from the sides and from above by a violet fabric, from which were kept on a tree hardly appreciable rests near the copper nails. The box which did not have a bottom, served for coach instead of a roof, it was paved from above by boards, which, having begun to rot, have fallen off into its middle. From the outside ornaments of the coach and roof remained only two simple columns, one small fragment of wooden eaves with a remarkable groove and 24 buttons of mountain crystal from angular racks.

All undertaken attempts to find out the crypt were terminated in failure. At the same time, marble prints found here, allow to assume the presence of a sarcophagus. The Ostry barrow, ended in the embankment of a fencing of several lines of huge cut plates, which formed a regular octagon around the barrow; the next barrow was surrounded with two concentric walls combined with cut plates.

Bones were thoroughly decayed – on the blanket floor there were only some hardly appreciable traces left. On the sifted ground of the crypt following was revealed: 1. A perfect gold suspension bracket or earring, representing a draped female figure (maybe Bacchante) with a fallow deer behind the back and with a thyrsos on the left hand lying on her breast. This suspension bracket was attached to filigree socket with a hook. 2. A small ring with a gold carving, representing a grasshopper, sitting on a pomegranate flower.

G. Tsvetaeva having researched the Panticapaeum’s barrow necropolis, noted an originality of the Ostry barrow and assumed that this monument with its catacomb can be the prototype for later Bosporan catacombs (Tsvetayeva G. A. 1957, p. 242. Note 80).

995

ANCIENT GREEK COLONIES IN THE BLACK SEA 2

3. The same gold ring without a groove. 4. A torn gold lace of filigree work with oval chalcedony stone, as a seal, on which Gorgon is excellently cut out with six wings holding in stretched hands two snakes – together with the lace (Fig. 12.3). 5. Nine beads of gold (2 filigree work). 6. 2 gold candlestick as arrows and one plate with an image. 7. A bone spindle. 8. Fragments of bone handles with a carving. 9. A tiny clay fixture. 10. Three iron pieces, very rusted, probably sacrifice knives.

In the nearest neighbourhood of that group of barrows, to which belongs the considered barrow with the crypt 50, there are two barrows, dug out by Lyutsenko in 1860 (OAK 1860, p. III, Atlas, tab. VI, Fig. 1 and 2; Rostovtsev M. I. 1915, tab. XXXIII and XXXIV); in both were found undisturbed burials and a number of highly artistic objects of Greek art. These barrows carry a numbering given to them by the excavator " . Lyutsenko: barrow 5 with the crypt 48 and barrow 6 with the crypt 47. Barrows 5 and 6 represented before the excavation large earthen embankments, constructed, as other barrows’ embankments of Juz Oba, on a natural rock. The general view of both barrows is represented in pencil drawing of K. Begichev, where both barrows are shown separately.

From the finds in the crypt it is necessary to examine two Attic red-figure vases found behind the long side of the coffin. One of them – a pelike with plentiful gilding and many depicted polychrome elements, the other – a famous lekanis with the image of a stage in gynaecea (Fig. 12.4). Both vases were made by Stephanius (OAK 1860. Tab. 1; Reinach S., 1892, p. 2, Fig. 3-42; Tolstoj I., Kondakov N., 1889, Fig. 106-107). Both vases belong to the late ‘Kerch style’ and are dated to the second half of the 4th century BC. The lekanis represents a brilliant sample of highly artistic skill. The handles and lateral part of lekanis are excellently covered by ornament of palmettes and ! ves, on the body is the multifigured stage from the life of a female of a Greek house. The plot is realistically treated; it represents the home life of Greek women. Limits of a reality leave winged Eros’. Twenty figures in total are represented, not considering a dog and numerous accessories, down to a brazier. The main group consists of a standing naked young man, who just brought the young woman, sitting in a rich armchair, a casket with expensive dresses. On the crook of the young man a small Eros is hung. The girls around them are engaged in the business: some of them are engaged in toilette, quite often through wingederots, others play on a small round table, one crowns herma of Priap, because of which a dog rushes towards Eros. Furthermore, a servant washes his hands in a large luterio and so on. All figures are decorated with gold wreathes and bands, tunics on shoulders fastened with gold plates. The numerous accessories give us representation of internal furniture of a rich house in Athens of the 4th century BC.

Barrow 5 with the crypt 48 (height about 8.5 m, in circle 160 m) was completed to be dug out on 14th November 1860, though it can be hardly considered finished, as " . Lyutsenko was limited by researching the central crypt (Fig. 13.2), leaving floors of the barrow undug, in which burials and traces of funeral cult could have been. Therefore, it is not proper to speak about the burial ceremony: it can be restored only in analogy to others, fully dug barrows. In barrow’s embankment under a layer covered by stones at depth of 1.07 m from the barrow’s surface many fragments from three large clay red figures vases with traces of plentiful gilding were found: two of them are also dated to the second quarter of the 4th century BC, and a third one is a krater with the image of Paris’ court, related to products of the potter Kadm from the end of the 5th century BC (OAK 1861. Atlas, tab. 3, 4 and 5). In the barrow a monumental crypt was found, made of local cut stone. The view of the open barrow crypt is given in pencil drawing of Begichev (Fig. 13.3). This crypt is remarkable with its monumental dromos, incorporated outside by plates of local limestone. After the dromos there is the first burial chamber. As well as dromos, it is blocked by ledged arch from four approaching against each other piece plates, which are blocked by cross locking plates. However, the first chamber was large in size. In this chamber stood only one double coffin. Behind first burial chamber was the second one, to which led a narrow and low entrance. The second chamber was much smaller. In this chamber also stood one double coffin (Fig. 13.5).

On the other side of the coffin a small stone stele of an unclear purpose was leaning to a wall of the burial chamber. The author of the report names it ‘a burial board’. Except for these finds, inside the tomb, in the embankment of the barrow, the fragments of graceful utensils with plentiful gilding similar to those found in the crypt, were found. Undoubtedly, the traces of the funeral feast, during which, as we already saw, bloody sacrifices were made, was arranged and all utensils were broken and burnt. This funeral feast took place before final filling pf the barrow; that is why they are always found in the embankment of the barrow.

The burial appeared partially plundered by the robbers, who got into crypt through a breach in a ledged arch. At the centre of the crypt, on a stone scaffold, stood a large wooden sarcophagus on legs with two pediments and double-slope roof, decorated with gilt eaves of carved and turning work, and with rectangular inserts painted in red colour on the walls. Its legs were fastened in specially hollowed deepenings in the floor.

996

NIKOLAY FYODOROVITCH FEDOSEEV: THE NECROPOLIS OF KUL OBA

In the middle part of the sarcophagus, on narrow rectangular inserts painted in red colour, wooden reliefs were fastened. In one longitudinal part were four reliefs, while those from other three are completely lost. Only groups of jacks for their fastening remained. The characteristic and interesting feature in the Juz Oba Sarcophagus is the presence of an internal box without a bottom. It was made of rough cut boards of casual width and it was all covered by a woolen fabric. The fabric was fixed on the top and bottom edges of the box, and its ends were connected with one of the edges. The richly decorated internal box mattered usual burial coach, which was intended for a morning ceremony. The image of this stage is possible to see on the vases. After the fulfillment of the mourning ceremony ‘tray’ with the body of the deceased was probably taken out and carried to the burial place on hands (Vaulina M. P., 1971).

dated by the vases found in both chambersto the the second half of the 4th century BC. 6 with the crypt 47 (height 7.5 m, circle Barrow more than 100 m) was next to the previous one. Because this barrow was not investigated thoroughly, it is impossible to speak of the burial ceremony. In his report Lyutsenko states that ‘in the embankment from the east part of the central excavation, in depth of 7.5 m from the surface of the burial’ was found the so-called ‘burnt place’; i.e. the place of funeral feast, where ‘remains of ordinary alabasters and clay patterns without pictures’ were found. The centre of the barrow occupied carefully made burial crypt of local stone (Fig. 14.1-3). Crypt 47 appeared untouched. The original connection of a rectangular burial chamber with a half-cylindrical arch, usual type of dromos, having the so-called lancet covering, more correctly, covering as a false lancet arch were all preserved. It had straight walls made of thick plates of limestone, lowered in rocky ground at 5.3 m, and was covered with a cylindrical arch. Its internal dimensions were: length from north to south 4.75 m, width from east to west 3.35 m, height from the basis of the walls up to the beginning of the arch 5.3 m, from the beginning of the arch up to the lock 4.8 m, the general height if of 10.5 m. The arch consists of 15 rows of stones. The floor is rocky, levelled and covered by a layer ! f plates. To the tomb from the east part adjoins a conducting dromos with the length of 4.65 m, width of 1.7 m, with the lancet arch, having in height from the level of walls about 7 quarters and consisting of 9 rows of stones. The corridor terminates with the entrance into the burial, incorporated to the top with 9 rows of plates.

Near the sarcophagus was a black-glazed ribbed pelike with gilt garland on the neck, red-figure lekanis and a black-glazed dish with graffiti. On each side of the skeleton laid alabasters. On the left hand there were two gold rings, one smooth, the other with the carved image of a snake pulling the bowstring of a bow. By the head there was a black-glazed cup, strigil fragments and a knife. On the legs were pieces of leather. Between the walls the remains of a wooden cane were found. Above the burial fragments of vessels, used during the funeral feast, three red figure vases were assembled. The sarcophagus from the second chamber of the crypt 48, according to the evidence of " . Lyutsenko, differed only in presence of the carved gilt images of griffins, tearing deers to pieces ‘... Receptacle for the deceased had the form of an ordinary four-coal box inserted into another smart box or a cover on four legs, with a triangle roof, which had fallen off inside...’ (Fig. 13.5).

It is interesting that the dromos was attached to the crypt not from the face part, but sideways, and that is why the longitudinal axis of the dromos is perpendicular to the longitudinal axis of the chamber.

In the sarcophagus gold rings and some vessels were found: black-glazed amphora, a black-glazed cup, alabaster and a bronze gilt mirror with a carved pattern near the handle. One of the rings is especially interesting, decorated by a spinning oval chalcedony, on which a flying crane is cut with great skill, under which there is an inscription ‘made by Chiote Dexamenos’.

In the burial room, on the right side of the corridor, was a half-rotted cypress coffin with reamins of gilding on it. Its legs were on the stone floor of the tomb; boards belonging to the bottom, on two stone plates, lent to its northern wall. However, almost all parts of this coffin were found overturned on the floor, which was filled up with their fragments: on the plates, with the length of 3.4 m each, width and height about 1.6 m, only the bottom one kept its position with hardly visible ashes of the corps on it, lying, as it should be believed, the head to the east. The left half of the crypt appeared empty.

Whether both burial places were simultaneous or one preceded another is not clear. It is obvious that the initial burial should be the burial in the second chamber, as it would be impossible to carry the coffin through the narrow passage. Obviously, only after the burial in the second chamber it was possible to use the first one. It is also certain that between the first and second burials a short time passed, because the buiral offerings are simultaneous. It is necessary to specify, that the covering of all parts of the burial structure is identical and the corner ledges of the last (second) chamber were cut off, as well as in the crypt of the first barrow with the crypt 50, and in the barrow of ‘Great Bliznitsa’. The burials are

In the space between the coffin and the wall of the crypt, on the northwest corner, stood: a clay vase with two handles without figural decoration and a large pattern with a picture and gilding on the cover. Unfortunately, the cover of this patter appeared broken into three parts, because of the coffin’s board, which fell on it. Besides, 997

ANCIENT GREEK COLONIES IN THE BLACK SEA 2

on the floor of the burial room laid two large alabasters in fragments, probably rolled from the cover of the coffin. The research of the described tomb began after the removal of a picture from it and disassembling of the fallen parts of the coffin. At first the mentioned vessels were taken out. The vase appeared decorated with a gutting and gilt garland around the neck. The pattern was also kept, except for the cover, which, however, can easily be restored. The cover of the pattern was decorated by 13 female figures in different poses and 4 geniuses. Of the female figures are remarkable: one with the face covered and a blindfold on the eyes, and another one with a butterfly on the shoulder – a symbol of the departing soul. The relief parts of the picture are gilted. Near the described vase a clay dish was found, decorated inside with the carving and covered with the brilliant blackglaze. At the bottom of the coffin there was nothing; in the small dust assembled on the parts of the plates and sifted through the sieve, were found: between the coffin and the northern part of the crypt a fragmented iron strigil; on the north-eastern corner a golden olive branch, and from the southern part of the coffin a gold ring with the fine engraving, representing Nike.

hollow was made, in order to explain whether it was formed as a result of the former excavation. Five meters below the hollow a big crypt construction was opened, or more exact the remains of it as the only bottom parts of the walls were left. In the embankment the copper nails and pieces of the decayed wood from the coffin, bones and remains of utensils were scattered. The plans of excavations show all procedures of works, and at the same time the road for exporting the embankment. Barrows on the cape Ak-Burun The most eastern group of barrows forms the so-called Ak-Burun group of the Juz Oba necropolis. The barrows on this section form two chains, one of which leads to the sea on the cape Ak-Burun, and the second, which is lowered to the Pavlovskaya battery. Initially, on the cape Ak-Burun more barrows than those kept at the period of their study existed. According to the information by E. Muralt on ‘cape Bely’ up to 30 coffins, mean barrows, thus ledged crypts were open here (Mural’t, E. G., 1850, p. 311). The active study of this area is connected to the construction of military structures. In the end of the 18th century on the Pavlovsky cape the artillery battery was established, a place, for which installation approved " .Suvorov. From 1857 on cape the Ak-Burun began the construction of a new fortress (from 1859 grounds were handed to the Military Department), which received the name ‘Kerch’. The fortress was under intense construction for twenty years. The construction was accompanied by the destruction of the barrows. P. Dubrux described an ancient settlement on the cape AkBurun, which was considered the ancient Nymphaeum (Dubrux P., 1858). It was obvious, that the settlement arose after the termination of the functioning of the necropolis.

An excavation was made from the south-eastern part of the barrow at the length of 6.4 m, width of 4.3 m and depth of 10.8 m, where disassembled stones blocked the entrance into the corridor about 13.3 m. Entering into the tomb while sifting once again the ashes, a small Panticapaeum silver coin with the image on its face side of the head of Pan, and on the reverse the head of a bull with the letters -A-N was found. The crypts of ‘the Small Kamenisty’ and ‘Great Kamenisty’ barrows were found destroyed. ( "# of 1858 and 1859) and on the drawing of K.Begichev they appear to have been dug. They are placed east of the road to Old Quarantine.

The Fifth Ak-Burun barrow was dug out by " .Lyutsenko in 1862, located on an extremity of the cape Ak-Burun. The height of the embankment was 9 m, and the circle was 170 m. Before the complete publication of a little-known complex of finds from this barrow (Yakovenko E. V. 1970) the information about it was given by .Rostovtsev, mentioning ‘a rich bronze set’ from the horse tomb of this barrow (Rostovtsev M. I., 1925, p. 25 ). Details concerning the excavation were found in a field register of " . Lyutsenko. At the centre of the barrow Lyutsenko opened a plate burial with flat overlapping, which was completely plundered in antiquity. Two horse tombs accompanied the burial, in one of which was a skeleton of a horse with a complete bridle set with two iron bits, four half spherical bronze plates and three bronze plates in animal style (Fig. 15.8, 9). E. Yakovenko who devoted to this complex special research, considers that it can be dated not later than the middle of the 5th century BC. (Yakovenko E., 1974. p. 105). Bridle set from Ak-Burun has no analogies among the mass production of similar assignments. It was

The Great Kamenisty barrow was constructed from large wild stones with dust. The diameter of the basis is about 154 m. Before the beginning of the investigation its middle formed a hollow, which is difficult to consider as a former excavation, because its south-eastern part made a separate embankment, up to 12.8 m high, and this part was chosen for the research.






The first excavation was made in the south-western part, 19 m long, 12 m wide and deep. It brought only few clay remains of Greek vases, but noticed were blocks of building stones. Following the blocks, hoping, that they will lead to the barrow’s construction, the excavation was directed at first to the north-eastern part and demolished embankment in the length of 30 m, width of 19 m and depth of 8.5 m. Then abruptly turned south-west, passed at the length of 19 m, width of 13 m, at depth 8.5 m. Not finding the crypt, separate excavation in the middle of the mentioned

998

NIKOLAY FYODOROVITCH FEDOSEEV: THE NECROPOLIS OF KUL OBA

probably made to a special order (Yakovenko E. V., 1970).

the local aristocracy. This burial, carelessly blocked by six tiles, is so simple for any archons or commander of such rich metropolis, as was ancient Panticapaeum. Facing about a fire, the award vase for gymnastic feats (Fig. 15.1), as the inscription on it says, testifies the evidence, that we meet here the face with ashes of an ancient gymnast-warrior, a defence counsel of the fatherland, being notable during Panathenaic games, contemporary of Alexander the Great’. A sportsman was buried here – a warrior who became famous by feats in struggle with a Scythian, as well on sports arenas. Thus a gold ‘helmet’ (Fig. 15.7), a gold olive wreath, two cups and, maybe, a ring. The brother of " . Lyutsenko, E. Lyutsenko assumed, that ‘a crown, remarkable on massivity, graceful simplicity and beautiful figure... makes the maximum degree of difference in Panathenaic games’ in Athens. As an occasion for such assumption served a Panathenaic amphora with the image of a race (Vdovichenko I. I., 1999, p. 242 5; Beazley J. D., 1943, .462; Stefani L., 1879, l. 1,1-3; Gardiner E. R., 1912, . 283 Smets A., 1936, .39-40; Neverov O. Ya., 1981, p.109; Bent M., 1998, 4.114).

Ak-Burun barrow 1874. In 1874 at the barrow’s opening in a kind of necessity to plan a district under the construction of the fortresses, two bronze burial urns, one of which contained ashes of the deceased man with gold objects, belonging to him, weaponry and so on, and in another bones of the animals were found. The official report of the main engineering administration informed, that they were found in the tomb, constructed by stones. Referring to the words of the general Sederholm, the builder of the fortress, the official of administration wrote, that the antiquities were found in a bronze vessel. This vessel was in a so shabby condition, that the general did not risk to send it by mail, and prefered to transfer it to the director of Kerch museum. In fact, the urn was handed to the museum, and even its figure was kept.9







In the applied inventory the following subjects were listed:



In his slip . Lyutsenko marked the impudence of actions of the military authorities, in that the workers took pieces of pottery for themselves or brought them in bags to the earthen wall, built in the fortress. 

1. 2. 3. 4.

A massive gold fastening, decorated by two pearls. A small gold overlay as the double handle. A gold round fastening with insert paste of glass. A gold tip from a sheath of a dagger or a knife decorated with filigree, two garnets and four emeralds. 5,6. A pair of gold beads of filigree work. 7. Pieces of gold burial wreath. 8. A gold coin (stater of Thracian king Lysimachos).

The official report by F. Gross contains a number of curious details: in particular he gives the brief characteristic of the condition of the excavation at the moment of his arrival to the fortress. The archaeologist notices, that ‘the workers who dug the ground, in ignorance made it excessively deep in some parts of the fire place; they found fragments from iron breastplate, fragments of scorched bronze and pieces of broken utensils’. F. Gross paid attention to the most curious feature of the burial, a cremation, in which the objects did not strongly suffer from the fire. F.Gross collected all the fragments from the Panathenaic amphora, which he subsequently stuck together.

The finds were handed to the Imperial Hermitage, the information about this appeared in the Report of the Archeological commission (OAK 1874: XXI-XXII), and we know nothing more about the listed things (Vinogradov, Yu. A., 2001). Ak-Burun barrow 1875. ( "# 1875. p. XXXII; "# . 1876. p. 5; Rostovtsev M. I., 1925. p. 388). In 1875 on the territory of the building on the cape Ak-Burun the fortress, a tile burial with cremation was found. The history of this is described in detail by Y. Vinogradov (Vinogradov, Yu. A., 2001. p. 311-315): On 11th of August, F. Gross informed the director of the Museum " . Lyutsenko, that general Sederholm, the builder of the fortress, has notified the Museum, that the burial was found burnt. He immediately went to the place of works. In the official report of " . Lyutsenko complains, that at the moment of the arrival of F. Gross the tomb was blocked by six roofing tiles, was perfectly crushed by the weight of the embankment and legs of the soldiers, brought the ground from the barrow. " . Lyutsenko wrote: ‘Despite of a rich head ornament similar to a crown and other gold things found in this burnt burial, I do not think, that it consists ashes of any of the important persons of 9

See figure: Archive IIMK, Fund . I. File


566. A sheet


A burial stock included a gold stater of Alexander, gold ornaments, a gold burial wreath, a gold pylos, two large gold vorvorks, a gold ring with iron plate, fragments of a wide iron sword, a zone hook covered with gold, iron details of a board, five iron tips of copies, iron tips of arrows (Fig. 15.3), fragments of silver vessels, and also fragments of fabric and leather. L. Stephany in ‘Explanations of some art products opened in the south of Russia’ has measured the size of sword, found in the burial, which - without several fragments was 0.87 m long. Certainly, it is a long enough sword of Meothian type (Vinogradov, Yu. A., 1993, p. 45). The Ak-Burun barrow, based on the Panathenaic amphora (Fig. 15.4), dated to 320/19 BC (Maksimova M. I. 1961, p. 18), and a stater of Alexander the Great

27.

999

ANCIENT GREEK COLONIES IN THE BLACK SEA 2

(Zograf A. N., 1945, p. 90-93) can be dated to the end of the 4th, beginning of the 3rd century BC. The prevailing opinion on Ak-Burun was that it was Scythian (see: Rostovtsev M. I., 1925. p. 388; Artamonov M. I. 1966, p. 66; Yakovenko E. V., 1972. p. 267); however some pointed to its Sarmation character (Tolstoj I., Kondakov N. 1889, p. 47; Tsvetayeva G. A. 1957, p. 242; Maslennikov A. A. 1981, p. 55). Special ceremonial features and burial finds allow this barrow to be placed to the circle of the Meothian-Sarmatian culture (Vinogradov, Yu. A. 1993, p. 38). The character of the tile overlapping the tomb, the presence of many Greek objects, rather specific Greek customs, as gold wreath, testify to the obvious Hellenization of the buried. Chronologically, the burial in the Ak-Burun barrow is very close to the events of the inside struggle of the sons of Paerisades I. (310/9 BC), as was mentioned above. Let us remind that as a result, Bosporos came under rule of Eumelus, who in the struggle for the authority, leaned on the Sarmatian tribe of Syracs. In this respect the assumption of V. Gaidukevich is rather probable, that in Ak-Burun one of the barbarous associates of Eumelus was buried (Gajdukevi V. F., s.142). Pavlovsky barrow. It is possible to identify only this barrow, while the site of other barrows is unknown. (OAK 1859, p. 5-15; Atlas, tab. V, Fig. 1-4 Tolstoj I., Kondakov N. 1889, p. 21) (Fig. 16). This barrow lays on high ground prevailing above the Pavlovskaya battery and all its vicinities, witin the main barrows’ chain, which stretches in the north-west direction from Pavlovskoye. It is the second barrow from the mentioned battery. Its base is rocky; the top is cut off like a truncated cone, and represents an oblong platform 21.3 m long, 8.5 m wide, on which there is a breastwork of the former French battery; the height above the sea level is 112 m, from the rocky sole 10.5 m, from the basis of the embankment 8.5 m; the diameter is 70 m. Around the base of the embankment, from its northern part, a trench was laid in 1855 by the French. An ancient wall, serving probably, for the maintenance of its stony embankment was found. The wall remained only in places at an extent of no more than 26 m. It comprises 4 rows of cut stones. The sides of the barrow from the eastern and western part are rocky. During the research of the barrow some excavations were directed to the centre. The left part of embankment was not touched, and on the right it was already rummaged. A layer of wild stone was found hashed with black earth, in which occasionally a wood coal, pieces of clay utensils and slices of soft Kerch stone lay; in its top layers the remains of black-glazed utensils were found.

Against the ledges, found from the right part of the first excavation, one more attempt was undertaken to make the way to the centre. The ledges led to rocky soil, on which burial 1 with cremation was found, at length from east to west of 3.2 m; width 1.8 m. After the opening of this burial coal, bones and ashes were hashed with the ground and rubble; hence, it was plundered. Between the bones the significant number of pieces of broken clay utensils were found: from the Greek vase, patterns, amphorae and others black-glazed vessels. On some parts the fragments of figural decoration remained. On one of them with attributes to a former gilding, the boldly grape brush is represented; on another, from the bottom of a small pattern, the letters " ... were inscribed; on the handle of the transport amphora was a brand with an unclear image and an inscription, which it is possible  in
. Copper to disassemble the word of nails, fragments of fused iron and copper, slices of wood with gilding and pieces of alabaster were found as well. In this excavation appeared no deepenings in the soil. In a layer of black soil the following were found: a fragment from a large clay pattern, covered with blackglaze and knocked off from ordinary amphorae throat and three handles with stamps and inscriptions, which are difficult to read. In the embankment some fragments of Greek vases figural decoration, on which two sitting figures were represented were found. Going deeper with the help of picks, the workers suddenly noticed that the ground under their legs changes, and only having time to jump aside, as the embankment, former under them, fell and they found the burial construction 2 about 12.8 m long, 6.4 m wide and up to 8.5 m deep. This construction was made of 6 rows of cut stones and was covered with five stone plates 8.5 m long, 2.4 m wide, 26 cm thick. Two extreme plates lying up to the half of width on three walls of the burial, remained on the place; the middle fell inside of the burial together with the left embankment and suppressed a magnificent wooden sarcophagus (the kept parts of sarcophagus are represented in "# 1859. p. 29; Watzinger C., 1905, s. 45, abb.81-85), standing on its stone floor. Falling of the roof, probably, took place from the former cracks in it which were inside and in extreme plates, kept their position. The burial 2 appeared lowered into the ground for 5.4 m and put from sides, on its top part, with large plates. The skeleton lying at the bottom of the coffin was found almost completely decayed; only some parts of it, as for example: the skull, the jaw, the fingers of the hands and the legs kept their form; others collapsed thoroughly. From above it was covered with boards, apparently, from the ceiling inside of the sarcophagus, irrespective of the roof, and, by the remains of fabric, which on some places was left on the boards, atop of the coffin, was thrown the coverlet from a thin woolen matter, decorated by a

1000

NIKOLAY FYODOROVITCH FEDOSEEV: THE NECROPOLIS OF KUL OBA

pattern. The bottom of the coffin was arranged from thin cross boards supported from below by three longitudinal wooden bars. Though many of its components were disorganized from rot and so much broken, that it was impossible to determine with accuracy either the size of them, or the form, some of the boards of a cypress tree were kept rather well. From its carved ornaments the most remarkable were the columns, which stood in the corners and on the parts of the sarcophagus, with capitals of Ionic order, in which locks of the amber stones are inserted. The length of the coffin was approximately 7.5 m, the width 4.3 m, the height is unknown. The interval between the coffin and walls of the burial on the head lateral parts is about 1 m, on the legs is greater. At head of the corps on eastern part 3 fragments of alabasters were found. The heading was covered with wooden shavings: on them laid a crushed skull of a young woman overturned to the right, near which was found: a pair of gold suspension brackets representing winged female figures (one figure without a wing) (Fig. 16.5) (Atlas "# to 1859, tab. III, Fig. 3; Gadatschek K., 1903, s. 38, abb. 66) and a gold diadem, pressed out in form of a female hair dress with rings in the middle and in the ends); furthermore, a necklace from most thin gold wirings with suspended tripartite arrows (Fig. 16.7) (Atlas "# for 1859., tab. III, Fig. 2). To the right of the skull there were two large alabasters, one whole, and the other broken, the remains of perfectly decayed wooden wum basket and also decayed ladies’ toilette box painted with a pattern. Here, in the interval from the left part were fragments of alabaster from a multi-coloured glass and fragments of ordinary alabaster. Near the left hand was a large metal mirror decorated with gold and a pattern. On fingers of the left hand were three gold rings: one with a spinning enamel stone, inside which were two dancing female gold figures, a gold dragon and around it floating dolphins and fish (Fig. 16.6); the other with a spinning cornelian, representing a scarab with wngraving of a nude Aphrodite, and third with a carving of gold, representing a dove. Then, in the intervals from the left and right part were again two small alabasters in fragments and two pieces of Greek sponge. Near the right hand fragments of an excellent vase with pictures decorated with gilding and various paints (Atlas to "# for 1859, tab. I and II; Tolstoj I., Kondakov N. 1889, p. 72, Fig. 104; Reinach S., 1892, p. 75; Furtwangler A., Reinhold K., 1904, tab. 70; Luk’yanov S. S., Grinevich Yu. G., 1915, p. 38. "# 1859, p. 31-118). These precious fragments were carefully assembled and the all the soil was sifted through the sieve. Furthermore, on the legs, between the boards of the coffin, a pair of violet morocco boots was found, the top part of which was preserved, whereas the soles had decayed. The legs of the dead woman were wrapped up in violet fabric, on which the remain traces of patterns; it was possible to notice a figure of a rider, over a horse (the parts of this fabric were represented in the work by E. Minns (Fig. 16.8) (Minns E. H., 1913. p. 337). Near the legs two large alabasters

with broken necks and a piece of Greek sponge were found, badly reserved. Near the coffin, on the legs there were two broken alabasters, a clay vase similar to hydria, decorated with grooves, and a vase, made as a statuette, painted with red and green colour. At last, on sifting of the soil which was taken out from the burial, was found: a tiny gold button with enamel and silver, strongly oxidized Panticapaeum coin with the image on the face side of the head of beardless Pan en face, and on the reverse a lion’s head, en face, too. The given coin is now dated to the middle – beginning of the second half of the 4th century BC (Kulikov A. V. 2002, p. 265). In layers of the embankment two copper arrow tips and some pieces of a broken clay vase were found, among which the fragments of an urn with representation of several figures, sitting beside are remarkable. Unfortunately, many parts of it were not found. A simple clay jug with two handles was found in the sole of the barrow; on the wall, traces of the ruined cremation tomb 3 were found. Among the ashes, coal and other dust belonging to this tomb were: burnt remains of simple clay vessels, fragments of an iron strigil, nails and fine slices from clay ornaments with gilding. Judging by the burnt walls of this burial the dimensions of the tomb were approximately 2.13 m long, 0.7 m wide and 0.5 m deep. In the embankment of the barrow several handles of transport amphorae were found: according to the description most of them were from Thasos. By the description nine of the fifteen belonged to the city council of Nymphon. The activity of this city council is defined precisely enough to the middle of the 4th century BC. Only one stamp of Sinope council Forbas is dated to the end of the 4th BC, and it obviously belongs to the latest in the barrow. On the basis of the pottery, coins and ceramic stamps, the complex of the Pavlovsky barrow is reliably dated to the beginning of the second half of the 4th century BC. A few words on the chronology of Juz Oba necropolis should be said. .Rostovtsev considered that the Juz Oba necropolis was generated for a rather short interval of time determined by him to the end of the 4th – beginning of the 3rd century BC. (Rostovtsev M. I. 1915, p. 101). In Roman times, in his opinion, burials were not made here (Rostovtsev M. I., 1925, p. 217). # . Grinevich gives another date. On his supervision, all the Juz Oba barrows were arranged in the period between 360-330 BC and, as a whole, they represent a single complex, brightly revealing the originality of the Bosporan culture of the 4th century BC (Grinevich K. E. 1952, p. 147). It was the time of economic and political bloom of Bosporos, the time of close communications with Athens and Thasos, and also with other poleis of ancient Greece, in the epoch of Leucon and Paerisades.

1001




ANCIENT GREEK COLONIES IN THE BLACK SEA 2

The date of the necropolis can be firmly specified through the special study of materials, though it is hardly possible to expect, that it will reach the 3rd century BC. Finds of glass vessels in earthen tombs at the Pavlovskaya battery and materials of Roman times from the Juz Oba barrow found as a result of the works by N. Kivokurtsev (Tsvetayeva G. A., 1957, p. 244), can only testify that in this later time separate earth burials took place in existing barrows. Barrows of the late Hellenistic and Roman periods were not erected here. The Juz Oba necropolis was a burial place for aristocracy and even dynasts. The powerful barrows, their monumental crypts, and also the first class art monuments found in these barrows speak for it. The lack of proper excavation techniques, pursuit for the first class monuments ignoring the details of the excavation process, resulted in that much remained for us obscure and, most annoying, cannot be found, so as all these barrows, in their majority are broken by unsystematic excavations and not researched completely. Our total digression requires a lot of additions: the new detailed analysis of finds kept in museums and specification of the archival data are necessary, which should be verified with the modern condition of Juz Oba on site.

IAK

IRAIMK

ITUAK

JHS KIAM

KSIA

LIMC MAR

MIA

OAK

ABBREVIATIONS

SA


     
  
 (Arheologiya i istoriya Bospora - Archeology and history of Bosporos) Simferopol - Kerch, (in Russian). AJA - American Journal of Archaeology. The Journal of the Archaeological Institute of America (Princenton, N.J.). Antike Kunst Antikemuseum (Basel). AUSSR 
    
     "! (Arkheologiya Ukrainskoy SSR – The Archaeology of Ukranian SSR), Kiev. BI (Bosporskiye 
    # $  issledovaniya - Bosporos Studies), SimferopolKerch, (in Russian). CIBR Corpus inscriptionum regni Bosporani. MosquaeLeninopoli. CVA Corpus Vasorum Antiquorum. DBK %&  ' ( . . )
$ * +,
 -. /0/,
    , 
12   $  /"
 
 / /034 5,
/"  6 (#
 # . 7 .5 . "  +, ). (Zhil’ F.A. Drevnosti

Bosfora Kimmerijskogo, hranyashchiyesya v imperatorskom muzeye Ermitazha (Ed. L.E.Stefani) - The antiquities of Cimmerian Bosporos stored in imperial museum of the Hermitage), St. Petersburg, 1854, (in Russian). Etude et travaux Travaux du Centre d’archeologie mediterraneene de l’Academie polonaise scences (Warszawa). Hesperia Hesperia. Journal of the American School of Classical Studies at Atthens (Cambridge, Mass./Baltimore)

84 $ *  !    /, 
  '*  3 '3
:

  # /" 

 
 

(Izvestiya Rossijskoj Akademii istorii material’noj kul’tury - News of the Russian Academy of a history of material culture), Moscow, (in Russian).

Thus, we considered almost all issued results of the longterm researches of Juz Oba.

AIB

84 $ *  
   9    /"   (Izvestiya arheologicheskoj komissii - News of the Archeological Commission), St. Petersburg, (in Russian).

SAI

SGE

TGE

VDI ZOOID

84 $ *  ;
 . -=    $:. $ . (Antique art silver - An exhibition catalogue). Leningrad. Artamonov M. I. 1966 – 
 /,  $ @ . 8 .   
 $ 1?

1002

 +,  3
 $ $ >
  C 3#
 *$  5,
/"  6 (Sokrovishcha skifskih kurganov v sobranii

Gosudarstvennogo Ermitazha - Treasures of Scythian

NIKOLAY FYODOROVITCH FEDOSEEV: THE NECROPOLIS OF KUL OBA

barrows in assembly of the State Hermitage). PragaLeningrad. _____, 1969 - Treasures from Scythian Tombs in the Hermitage Museums, Leningrad. London. _____, 1970 - Goldschatz der Skythen inm der Eremitage. Prague, 1970. Ashik A. B. 1848-1849 –
2  .  . E=
  
 *$     
+" 9 /"  #
> :,/"  /0*   /" ,
 :,/" $ 4 /" ,   /" ,  
 /" $ # /" (Vosporskoye tsarstvo s yego paleograficheskimi i nadgrobnymi pamyatnikami, raspisnymi vazami, planami, kartami i vidami – The Bosporan Kingdom with his paleographic and gravestone monuments, painted vases, plans, maps and kinds). Odessa. Avram A. 1996 - Les timbres amphoriques. 1. Thasos. // Histria, VIII. 1996. Beazley J. D. 1943 – Panathenaica. // AJA, 47. 1943. Bentz M. 1998 - Panathanaesche Preisamphoren. Basel. Bilimovich Z. A. 1973 – D  /, $ 9 F . . C
 9  >
 4 $:. 4
   
/"  6  >
  (Grecheskiye bronzovyye zerkala ermitazhnogo sobraniya - The Greek bronze mirrors in assembly of Hermitage). // TGE. XVII. 1973. Brashinskij I. B. 1965 - 
2   8 . .   $:. /, 
  : 

# * 
 $  3
 $  +,     /,  4  *  $
  
 9
/,
' (Noviye materialy k datirovke

kourganov skifskoy plemennoy znati Severnogo Pritchernomorya - New materials to dating barrows Scythian breeding Aristocracy Northern Black Sea Coast) // Eirene, IV. _____, 1975 - 
 2   8 .  . (?    /,+,
   /,/ 4 3
 - 3 ' -B> (Fasosskaya amfora s klejmom iz kurgana Kul’-Oba - Thasian amphora with a stamp from a barrow Kul-oba). // SGE, 40. _____, 1979 - 
2   8 .  . E      +,   
 $ 1 (V poiskah skifskih sokrovishch - In searches of Scythian treasures). Leningrad. Bykovskaya N. V. 2004 - D:   $    . E . -=  


 #/,  $ 4 #
:, /,   $ -=
9   /034  #
$  (Kollektsiya predmetov iz dragotsennyh

metallov Kerchenskogo muzeya drevnostej - Collection of subjects from precious metals of a Kerch museum of antiquities). // BI, V. Chernenko O. 1998 - .
  B . 
 #  *  
> i$  i+,   9 3 (Pro odin tip grebeniv skifskogo chasu About one type Crests Scythian time). // Muzejni chitannya. Kiev. (In Ukrainian). J . J . C
>  3  +, $ Chernenko Ye. Ye. 1994 - .
  (Grebni u skifov - Crests at Scythians). // Drevnejshiye obshchnosti zemledel’tsev i skotovodov Severnogo Prichernomor’ya V tys. do n.e. - V v. n.e. Tiraspol. Culican, W., 1965 - The Medes and Persians// Ancient Peoples and Places, 42. New York and Washington. Dubrux P. 1858 - ) 2>
   . B  
 4 $    # $ 
# $ 3 
   ,    #  3 1? *$ $$ 2   $*
  / >
J  3 +,
 -. /0/,
    ,  $*#

$ 
 $ > 4    '   /,   # 
: B3  $  9  '* , 
 .
/ /,
 (Opisaniye razvalin i

sledov gorodov i ukreplenij, nekogda sushchestvovavshih na yevropejskom beregu Bosfora Kimmerijskogo, ot vhoda v proliv bliz Yenikal’skogo mayaka do gory Opuk vklyuchitel’no, pri Chernom more - The description of ruins and traces of cities and the strengthenings once existing on the European coast of Bosporos Cimmerian, from an entrance in a passage near a beacon Enicale up to mountain Opuk inclusive, at Black Sea). // ZOOID, 4.

Fedoseyev N. F. 1997 - (? #$  . ( . 8   # $  3
  
   G 4 –B> (Issledovaniya kurgana na nekropole Juz Oba - Researches of a barrow on a necropolis Juz Oba). // Arheologicheskiye issledovaniya v Krymu. 1994 god. Simferopol. _____, 1999 - (? #$  . ( . J 1?
 4  

$ 9
 4 
-. /0/,
   (Yeshche raz o pereprave cherez Bospor Kimmerijskij - Once again about a ferry through Cimmerian Bosporos). // AIB, III. Furtwängler A., Reinhold K. 1904 - Griechische Vasenmalerei. Berlin. Gadatschek K. 1903 - Der Ohrschmuck der Griechen und Etrusker. Wien. Gajdukevi V. F. 1971 - Das Bosporanische Reich. Berlin– Amsterdam. _____, 1949 - C#3  $ 9 E . ( . 
  
 *$ (Bosporskoye tsarstvo –Bosporan Kingdom). MoscowLeningrad. _____, 1981 - C#3  $ 9 E . ( . 
  
# . (I 3 9 *:.  : . 5   * 9   3 #'> . 8I 3
  ) (Bosporskiye goroda. (Ustupchatyye sklepy. Ellinisticheskaya usad’ba. Ilurat) – Bosporan Cities. (Ledged crypts. Hellenistic settlement. Iluration). Leningrad. Gardiner E. R. 1912 - Panathenaic Amphorae// JHS, 32. 1912. Gorbunova K. S., Saverkina I. I. 1975 - C
>3  $ - .  .,  $
  8 .8 . 8 3 *$ #
$ C
  !D /, $ >
  5,
/"  6 (Iskusstvo drevnej Gretsii i Rima v sobranii Ermitazha - Art of ancient Greece and Rome in assembly of the Hermitage). Leningrad. Grach N. L. 1983 - C
 9  . 7 . C
>' 4 3
 - 3 ' – > (Greben’ iz kurgana Kul’-oba - Crest from a barrow KulOba// Etude et travaux, 26. XIII. _____, 1984 - C
 9  . 7 . -
3  # :. 
>
:.  3#: 4 3
 - 3 ' –B> ( $ 
 3  /, 
  ) (Kruglodonnyye serebryanyye sosudy iz kurgana Kul’-Oba (k voprosu o masterskih) - Round bottom silver vessels from a barrow Kul’-oba (to a question on workshops). // TGE, XXIV. Kul’tura i iskusstvo antichnogo mira. Leningrad. _____, 1986 - C
 9  . 7 . C
>' 6
 ' 4 3
 - 3 ' -B> . ().$
   
3   ) (Greben’ i ozherel’e iz kurgana Kul’-Oba. (Dve rekonstruktsii) - Crest and necklace from a barrow Kul-Oba. (Two reconstructions). // Antichnaya torevtika. Leningrad. _____, 1994 - C
 9  . 7 . I  * 9 *:. >
  *: 4 3
 - 3 ' -> (Plastinchatyye braslety iz kurgana Kul’-oba Lamellar bracelets from a barrow Kul-Oba). // VDI, 1. Grakov B. N. 1950 - C
  $  .  . , +,  C
 (Skifskij Gerakl - Scythian Herkales). // KSIIIMK XXXIV. Greifenchagen A. 1970 - Schmuckarbeiten in Edelmetal. Berlin, 1970. Grinevich K. E. 1952 - C
 $ 9 - . 5 . G 4 – B> (
  /,   '*  IV $  #  . .) (Juz Oba (Bosporskij mogil’nik IV veka do n.e.) – Juz Oba (Bosporan a burial ground of IV century BC). // Arheologiya i istoriya Bospora. 1. Simferopol. Hoffmann, H. 1961 - The Persian Origin of Attic Rhyta// Antike Kunst, Bd. 4. Il’yinskaya V. A., Terenozhkin A. I. 1983 - 8I '*    E . ., ; 2 4 3
 - 3 ' -B> (Zolotyye blyashki iz kurgana Kul’-Oba - Gold plaques from a barrow Kul-Oba). // Antichnaya torevtika. Leningrad. J Korol’kova Ye. F., Alekseyev A. Yu. 1994 - -=
 '*  $ . ( .,   $ .G . B ' 4 3
 - 3 ' -B> (Olen’ iz kurgana Kul’-Oba - Deer from a barrow Kul-oba). // Pamyatniki drevnego i srednevekovogo iskusstva. (Problemy arheologii. 4). St. Petersburg. Kravtsov D. 2001 - -
 $  $ ) . -=
9'*  
>   (Kerchens’ka grobnitsya - Tomb from Kerch). // Pam’yatki Ukraini. 3. (In Ukrainian). Kulikov A. V. 2002 - - 3   $ . E . B>4
/,  *:,  #   
# 1? 
 (1981-2001) $ 
: 
 # 4  # 6  >
1?  
 (Obzor monetnyh nahodok s gorodishcha Akra (1981-2001) i voprosy periodizatsii denezhnogo obrashcheniya Bospora - The review of coin findings from the ancient site of Akra settlement (1981-2001) and the problems of division monetary circulation in Bosporos into periods). // BI, II. Simferopol. Kuznetsova T. M. 1991 - - 34    $ ; . @ . 5, #:   +,    
  (Etyudy po skifskoj istorii - Etudes on a Scythian history). Moskow. Luk’yanov S. S., Grinevich Yu. G. 1915 - 7.3 ' $  .  ., C
 $ 9 G . C . -=
9      # 1906  . 4 # 
+"  3
  6 $  ' (Kerchenskaya kalpida 1906 g. i pozdnyaya krasnofigurnaya zhivopis’ (Kalpida from Kerch (1906) and late red-figured painting). // MAR, 35. Maksimova M. I. 1961 - @A  /, $ @ . 8 .  +"     /,+,
 4 F    3
 (Panafinejskaya amfora iz Zelenskogo kurgana - Panathenaic Amphora from Zelensky a barrow). // KSIA, 83. Mantsevich A. P. 1950 - @A $ 9 .  . C
>' +"   4 3
    (Greben’ i fiala iz kurgana Soloha - Crest and Phile from barrow Solocha). // SA, XIII. _____, 1962 - @A $ 9 .  . F   9? 4 (Zolotaya chasha iz -= 
/,   3
 Kelermesskogo kurgana - Gold bowl from Kelermess a barrow). // Omagiu lui George Oprescu. Bucuresti. Marazov I. 1974 - @A
 4 $ 8 . F  6  J 
 4 #  >+,
 
        
/"  6 (Za syuzheta i proizhoda na bosforskiya riton ot kollektsiyata na Yermitazha - Plot and origin bosporan rhyta from the Hermitage). // Arheologiya. 1. (In Bulgarian). _____, 1978 - @A
 4 $ 8 . !D    $ #
$ ;D
  (Ritonite v drevna Trakiya – Rhytas in ancient Thrace). Sofia. (In Bulgarian). Marshall P. H. 1911 - Catalogue of the Jewellery Greek, Etruscan and Roman in the Departments of Antiquities British Museum. London, 1911. Maslennikov A. A. 1981 - @A    $ . .     >
    3#
 *$ $ VI–II $$ . #  . . (Naseleniye bosporskogo gosudarstva v VI-II vv. do n.e. - The population the Bosporan State in VI-II centuries BC). Moscow. Minns E. H., 1913 - Scythians and Greeks A Survey of Ancient History and Archaeology on the North Coast of the Euxne from the Danube to the Caucasus, Cambridge. Monahov S. Yu. 2003 - @A   $  . G . C
 9   /,+,
: $ 
 9
/,
' (Grecheskiye amfory v Prichernomor’e -

The Greek amphorasamphorae in Black Sea Coast). Moscow-Saratov. Montpéreux, Dubois. de F. 1838–1843 - Voyage autour du Caucase, ches les Tcherkesses et les Abkhases, en Colchide, Géorgie, Arménie et en Crimée i avec un atlas georaphique, pittaresque, acheologique, geologique etc. T.1–6. Paris. Mural’t, E. G. 1850 - @ 3
 ' , 5 . C . HI
    9  >4
  #
$  /,   ,  #12    >  
 : +,
 -. /0/,
    (Hronologicheskoye obozreniye drevnih mogil, nahodyashchihsya po obe storony Bosfora Kimmerijskogo - A chronological review of the ancient tombs which are taking place on both sides of immerian Bosporos). // Zapiski Sankt-Peterburgskogo arheologichesko-numizmaticheskogo obshchestva, II. Na krayu ojkumeny. Greki varvary na severnom beregu Ponta Evksinskogo. Katalog vystavki.   
  3/,: . C
 $
$
:  $
/ >
 3    5 $     . -=    $:. $ – On the edge Oikoumene. Greeks and Barbarians on the Northern Coast of the Pontus Euxinus. An exhibition catalogue. Moscow. Neverov O. Ya. 1981 -  $
 $ B . . - 3 '3
 3 *$ * 9  /" 
 . -=    . (Kul’tura i iskusstvo antichnogo mira. Katalog - Culture and art of a classical antiquity. The catalogue). Leningrad. Otroshchenko V. V. 1984 - B=
 1?  E .E .  
 #:  /, 9 4 3
 3  .E=     4
  (Paradnyj mech iz kurgana u s.Velikaya Belozerka - Smart sword from a barrow at village Great Beloserka). // Vooruzheniye skifov i sarmatov. Kiev. Peredol’skaya A. A. 1945 -  
 # '   . . E= 4 : -=+, (Vazy Ksenofanta - Vases of Xenophantus). // Trudy otdela antichnogo mira Gosudarstvennogo Ermitazha. T.1. Leningrad. _____, 1945 -  
 # '   . . ,   $    *' 4 3
 - 3 ' –B> (Slonovaya kost’ iz kurgana Kul’-Oba - Ivory from a barrow Kul-Oba). // Trudy otdela antichnogo mira Gosudarstvennogo Ermitazha. T.1. Leningrad. Piotrovsky, . ., Galanina L. ,., Grach, N. L., 1987 Scythian Art. Oxford and Leningrad. Polidovich Yu. B. 1998 -   # $ 9 G . . -=/"4      / 4 - 3 ' -B> : (Kompozitsiya s olenem iz Kul’-Oby - Composition with a deer from the Kul-Oba). // Muzejni chitannya. Kiev. Rayevskij D. S. 1977 - !$  ) .  . B=9
 #     +, -     /, . B:,
   
3     +,   /" +,    . (Ocherki ideologii skifo-sakskih plemen. Opyt rekonstruktsii skifskoj mifologii - Sketches of ideology Scythian and Sakes tribes. Experience of reconstruction of Scythian mythology). Moscow. _____, 1981 - !$  ) .  . - 3 ' ->  39  (Kul’obskiye luchniki – Bowless from Kul-oba). // SA. 3. Reinach S. 1892 -Antiquités du Bosphore Cimmérien. Paris, 1892. Rohlin D. G. 1965 - !  ) .C .   4  #
$   # (Bolezni drevnih lyudej - Illnesses of ancient people). Moscow-Leningrad. Rostovtsev M. I. 1915 - ! 

$ $ @ .8 . * 9  # 
 * $  6 $  '   !  (Antichnaya dekorativnaya zhivopis’ na yuge Rossii - Antique decorative Painting in the South of Russia). // Istoricheskoye obozreniye. T.20. St. Petersburg. _____, 1916 - !  $ $ @ .8 . - $ 
 3  # * 
 $   
>  - 3 ' –B> : , .
/" :      (K voprosu o datirovke pogrebenij Kul’-Oby, Chertomlyka i Solohi - To a question on dating burials Kul-Oba, Chertomlyk and Soloha). // IAK, 60.

1004












NIKOLAY FYODOROVITCH FEDOSEEV: THE NECROPOLIS OF KUL OBA

, +"  
. -
 * 9  >4
   /0*   $ 
 3
:, 
   9  (Skifiya i

_____, 1925 -

Bospor. Kriticheskoye obozreniye pamyatnikov literaturnyh i arheologicheskih - Skythia and Bosporos. A critical review of monuments literary and archeological). // IRAIMK, VI. Rotrof S. I., S. I., John McK. Camp John. 1996 - The Date of the Third Period of the Pnyx// Hesperia, 1996. Vol.65, N3. Rudolf W. 1991 - The Great Pectoral from the Tolstaja Mogila. A Work of the Chertomlyk Master and his Studio// Metalsmith, Vol.11. N4. _____, 1993 -  ' ?  
 ' 4 ; ‘ .
/" :     /, 
 ’  2  : (Bol’shaya pektoral’ iz Tolstoj mogily: rabota ‘Chertomlykskogo mastera’ i yego shkoly - The Great Pectoral from the Tolstaja Mogila. A Work of the Chertomlyk Master and his Studio). // Arheologicheskiye vesti, 2. St. Petersburg. Sabat’e P. 1851 -  > *'  . -=
9' E=
(Kerch’ i Vospor – Kerch and Bosporos). St. Petersburg. Saverkina I. I. 2000 -  $
  8 .8 . !  2:. 
'* $ 5,
/"  6 $ #
3   /034  (Roskoshnyye ser’gi v Ermitazhe i v drugih muzeyah - ‘Splendid’ Earrings in the Hermitage and in other Museums). // Antichnoye Prichernomor’e. St. Petersburg. Schefold K. 1930 - Die Kertscher Vasen. Berlin. Shevelev Ye. 1848 $ $ J . [!4     3 . .
2   ‘E=
  
 *$ ...’] ([Retsenziya na knigu A. B. Ashika ‘Vosporskoye tsarstvo...’] - The review of A.B.Ashik’s book ‘ Bosporan Kingdom…// ZOOID, 2. Shkorpil V. V. 1918 -  
  E .E . 84 
 $ -=
9   /034  #
$  . VII.  $  $  3
 . VIII. @A  – . /,  3
 . IX. - 3
  
> 
: G 4 –>   / 1895  . X. ).$ 3
  
> 
: G 4 – >   / 1860  . (Iz arhiva Kerchenskogo muzeya drevnostej. VII. Pavlovskij kurgan. VIII. MelekChesmenskij kurgan. IX. Kurgan na hrebte gory Juz Oba so sklepom 1895 g. X. Dva kurgana na hrebte gory Juz Oba so sklepom 1860 g. - From archive a Museum of Kerch of antiquities. VII. A Pavlovskij barrow. VIII. A Melek-Chesne barrow. IX. Kurgan on a ridge of mountain Juz Oba 1895 with crypt X. Two barrows on a ridge of mountain Juz Oba 1860 with a crypt). // ITUAK, 55. Skrzhinskaya M. V. 1999 - ,
6    @ .E . I+"   /, 
-=+, (Afinskij master Ksenofant - Athenian master Xenophantus). // VDI, 3. Smets A. 1936 - Groupes chronologiques des amphores Panathenaiques inscrites// L’Antiquite Classique. 5. 1936 Smirnov K. F. 1980 - "/" 
 $ - . ( . B /, 9   # /,   *  (O mechah sindo-meotskogo tipa - About swords type of Syndos and Meotus). // KSIA. 162. Sokol’skij N. I. 1969 -     '   .8 . * 9:.

#
$*:.


 +,

 $
 


 9
/,
'

(Antichnyye derevyannyye sarkofagi Severnogo Prichernomor’ya - Antique wooden sarcophagi of Northern Black Sea Coast). // SAI G1-17. Moscow. _____, 1971 -     '   .8 . )=
$>
> *: $ 1?


 /,  $ * 9:,  3#
 *$   $
  
 9
/,
' (Derevoobrabatyvayushcheye remeslo v

antichnyh gosudarstvah Severnogo Prichernomor’ya - Craft of processing of a tree in the antique states of Northern Black Sea Coast). // MIA, 178. Moscow. Sparkes B.A., Talcott L., 1970 - Black and Plain Pottery of the 6th, 5th and 4th Cenuries B.C. // The Athenian Agora. Voll.XII. Princenton, New Jersey.

Spasskij G. 1850 - ,  >
  , #
612 

C . 
   -3/" 4 /, * 9  $ > 9   
$#: *  '* ; 1? +,
 -. /0/,
    9 * (Arheologo-numizmaticheskij

sbornik, soderzhashchij v sebe sochineniya i perevody otnositel’no Tavridy voobshche i Bosfora Kimmerijskogo chastno – The archaeological-numismatic collection containing in of the composition and translations concerning Taurida in general and Cimmerian Bosporos). Moscow. Stefani L. 1879 - "+, 7 . B>
    
:,  3#6 *$:, 
 4 $ #  , *
:,*:, $ G 6  !  $ 1875  . (Ob’yasneniye nekotoryh hudozhestvennyh proizvedenij, otkrytyh v Yuzhnoj Rossii v 1875 g. - Explanation of some works of art open in Southern Russia in 1875). // OAK za 1876. St. Petersburg. Tolstoj I., Kondakov N. 1889 - ; (Derevyannyj sarkofag iz kurgana Juz Oba - Wooden sarcophagus from a barrow Juz Oba). // Kul’tura i iskusstvo antichnogo mira. Leningrad. Vdovichenko I. I. 1999 - E # $ 9  8 .8 . P              // AIB, III. Vinogradov, Yu. A. 1993 -  !#"$ , % . & . '( )!) & * + (,( (1875  .)- Kurgan the -. -burun (1875). // Skifiya i Bospor. Novocherkassk. _____, 2001 -  !#"$ % .& . / 0 1#23  !#,4 567,# 8561)* 4 !61)*9* ! : – H =,! (Pol’ Dyubryuks. Raskopki kurgana Kul’-Oba - Paul Dubrux. Excavation of a barrow

1005

ANCIENT GREEK COLONIES IN THE BLACK SEA 2

Kul-Oba). // Ermitazhnyye chteniya pamyati V.F.Levinsona-Lessinga. Abstracts. St. Petersburg. _____, 2000 - 7,!616$! @ . . H2 *3 ; 2 5 *3( )!)! '(7> – H =,! (Otkrytiye kurgana Kul’-Oba - Opening of a barrow Kuloba). // Pantikapej-Bospor-Kerch’ - 26 vekov drevnej stolitse. Materialy mezhdunarodnoj konferentsii. Kerch. Watzinger C. 1905. Griechische Holzsarkophage. Leipzig,
Williams Ogden J. 1995 - 7>6F3: 1 C ., H "5)  C  .  5#8561)D., *,5 0)7,23 . % $5)7  ,5 1)*3(,161#2 $ *7,!6161) 8561)*  94, V—IV $ . "  . . (Grecheskoye zoloto. Yuvelirnoye iskusstvo klassicheskoj epohi V-IV v. do n.e. - The Greek gold. Jeweler art of classical epoch V-IV of century). St. Petersburg.
Yakovenko E. V. 1970 - *$5)* .  . 0 "5#8  ;  !6=, V $ .  "  . .  0 ,1#238 ) ' ; : ! (Uzdechnyj nabor V v. do n. e. iz Vostochnogo Kryma - Set of bridle of V century BC from East Crimea). // KSIA, 124. _____,. 1972 -’ * i95#26 !#   i’ 0 '(7> – H = (‘Skipetr tsaritsi’ z Kul’-Obi - ‘Scepter of tsarina’ from the Kul-Oba). // Materiali 13-j konferentsii IA AN URSR (1968). Kiev. (In Ukrainian). _____,. 1973 - *$5)* @ . . ‘ * i95#26 !#   i’ 0 '(7> – H =; (‘Skipetr tsaritsi’ z Kul’-Oby - ‘Scepter of tsarina’ from the Kul-Oba). // AUSSR, 2. (In Ukrainian). _____, 1974 - *$5)* @ . . * i