Two Tombs from Börükçü Necropolis

EUPLOIA. LA LYCIE ET LA CARIE ANTIQUES.

DYNAMIQUES DES TERRITOIRES, ÉCHANGES ET IDENTITÉS

- ausonius éditions -— Mémoires 34 —

EUPLOIA. LA LYCIE ET LA CARIE ANTIQUES

Dynamiques des territoires, échanges et identités

Actes du colloque de Bordeaux, 5, 6 et 7 novembre 2009

textes réunis par

Patrice Brun, Laurence Cavalier, Koray Konuk & Francis Prost

Ouvrage publié avec le concours de l’ANR EUPLOIA

— Bordeaux 2013 —

Notice catalographique :Brun, P., L. Cavalier, K. Konuk et F. Prost, éd. (2013) :Euploia. La Lycie et la Carie antiques. Actes du colloque de Bordeaux 5, 6, 7 novembre 2009, Ausonius Mémoires 34, Bordeaux.

AUSONIUSMaison de l’ArchéologieUniversité Michel de Montaigne - Bordeaux 3F - 33607 Pessac Cedexhttp://ausonius.u-bordeaux3.fr/EditionsAusonius

Directeur des Publications : Olivier devillersSecrétaire des Publications : Nathalie tranCouverture : Stéphanie vincent

© AUSONIUS 2013ISSN : 1283-29995ISBN : 978-2-35613-091-4

Achevé d’imprimer sur les pressesde l’imprimerie Gráficas Calima, S.A.Avda Candina, s/nE - 39011 Santander - Cantabria - Espagne

octobre 2013

PEFC/14-38-00087

Gráficas Calima ofreceproductos certificados PEFC

Sommaire

Auteurs ...................................................................................................................................................................... 7

Sommaire ...................................................................................................................................................................... 9

Patrice Brun, Dynamiques de la Méditerranée antique : le cas de la Lycie et de la Carie .................................................................................................................... 11

IDENTITÉS : UNITÉ ET DIVERSITÉ

ignasi-Xavier adiego, Unity and Diversity in the Carian Alphabet .......................................................................... 17

diether schürr, Über den Gebrauch der Schrift in Lykien: Dynasten, Familienväter und Poeten ......................................................................................................... 29

christine Bruns-Özgan, Knidos: Carian Features in a Doric City ........................................................................... 41

FaBienne colas-rannou, Circulation et production d’images : autour de la question de l’identité lycienne ............................................................................................... 51

POUVOIR, TERRITOIRE, STRUCTURES COMMUNAUTAIRES

denis rousset, Le stadiasme de Patara et la géographie historique de la Lycie : itinéraires et routes, localités et cités ........................................................................................................... 63

thomas corsten, Termessos in Pisidien und die Gründung griechischer Städte in “Nord-Lykien” ........................ 77

Pierre deBord, Hécate, divinité carienne .................................................................................................................. 85

WinFried held, Heiligtümer und lokale Identität auf der karischen Chersones ....................................................... 93

anne marie carstens, Tracing Elite Networks. A View from the Grave ..................................................................... 101

ARCHITECTURE ET POUVOIR

Frank kolB, Le pouvoir politique et son cadre architectural en Lycie antique ......................................................... 113

Poul Pedersen, Architectural Relations between Karia and Lykia at the Time of the Ionian Renaissance ............ 127

laurence cavalier & Jacques des courtils, Empreinte lagide au Letôon de Xanthos ? .......................................... 143

isaBelle Pimouguet-Pédarros, Existe-t-il un style de construction hécatomnide ? Recherche à travers l’étude des fortifications du sud-ouest de l’Asie Mineure ........................................................................... 153

Francis Prost, Retour au Mausolée et au Monument des Néréides. Identités ethniques et frontières culturelles en Lycie et en Carie ...................................................................................................................................... 175

MATÉRIEL CÉRAMIQUE

séverine lemaître, sylvie-yona Waksman, marie-camille arqué, emmanuel Pellegrino, cécile rocheron, Banu yener-marksteiner, Identités régionales et spécificités locales en Lycie antique : l’apport des céramiques culinaires ............................................................................... 189

lars karlsson, The Hekatomnid Pottery from the Recent Excavations and the Date of the Forts of Labraunda .... 213

Banu yener-marksteiner, Vorläufige Ergebnisse der Untersuchungen der Keramikfunde des Andriake-Surveys ................................................................................................................................... 225

Fede Berti, La ceramica attica a vernice nera di Iasos nel v e iv secolo a.C. ........................................................... 233

ahmet a. tirPan, mehmet tekocak, makBule ekİcİ, Two Tombs from Börükçü Necropolis .................................... 241

olivier henry, Tombes cariennes, tombes lyciennes : un processus analogue de pétrification architecturale ? .... 257

PORTS

émilie écochard, éric Fouache, catherine kuzucuoğlu, nathalie carcaud, mehmet ekmekçİ, İnan ulusoy, vincent roBert, attİla çİner, laurence cavalier, Jacques des courtils, Paléogéographie et reconstitution des dynamiques géomorphologiques à l’Holocène autour des sites archéologiques de Xanthos et du Létôon (Turquie).................................................................................... 271

thomas marksteiner, Andriakè, un port lycien ......................................................................................................... 281

HISTOIRE ET ÉPIGRAPHIE

Patrick Baker & gaétan thériault, Dédicaces de mercenaires lagides pour Kybernis sur l’Acropole lycienne de Xanthos ............................................................................................................. 293

massimo naFissi, Sur un nouveau monument de Iasos pour les Hécatomnides ....................................................... 303

roBerta FaBiani, Iasos between Mausolus and Athens .............................................................................................. 317

NOUVELLES DÉCOUVERTES ARCHÉOLOGIQUES

taner korkut, Die Ausgrabungen in Tlos.................................................................................................................. 333

kaan İren, Preliminary Report on the Archaeological Field Survey in Idyma and its Vicinity ................................ 345

aBuzer kizil, Three Chamber Tombs from Belentepe near Keramos in Karia.......................................................... 359

marc Waelkens, Euploia: Exchange and Identity in Ancient Caria and Lycia. Concluding Remarks ................... 385

Références bibliographiques ........................................................................................................................................ 439

Index des sources ......................................................................................................................................................... 463

Index des personnages ................................................................................................................................................ 465

Index des lieux ............................................................................................................................................................. 467

Index varia .................................................................................................................................................................... 471

Two Tombs from Börükçü Necropolis

Ahmet A. Tırpan, Mehmet Tekocak, Makbule Ekici

– Euploia. La Lycie et la Carie antiques, p. 241 à 256

T he site of Börükçü is located on the west slope of Aldağ in Yeşilbağcılar town on the 9 km sacred stone road connecting the ancient city of Stratoniceia, one of the important cities of Karia, to the sacred site of Hecate at Lagina (fig. 1).

Tombs are distributed on both sides of the sacred road passing through – in their local names – İdemir, Kabasakız and Aldağ sites and going from the city gate of Stratoniceia to Lagina. One of the areas where a huge number of tombs are found is the site of Börükçü in the east of the sacred road. Börükçü, which is within the exploitation area of Southern Aegean Lignite Establishment operating under the General Directorate of Turkish Coal, was discovered as a result of some marble blocks emerging after a dynamite explosion in the area in 2002. The first intervention and studies were done by Muğla Museum. Since 2003, rescue excavations at Börükçü have been carried out by the Lagina Excavation Team which signed a protocol with the General Directorate of Cultural Property and Museums and the General Directorate of Turkish Coal. Excavations have continued uninterruptedly all year round since 2004 1.

1. Tırpan & Söğüt 2005, 372-380; Tırpan & Söğüt 2006, 257-263; Tırpan & Söğüt 2007, 591-612; Tırpan & Söğüt 2008, 395-401; Tırpan & Söğüt 2009, 248-250.

| Fig. 1. Map of the sacred stone road from Stratoniceia to the sacred site of Hecate at Lagina and Börükçü.

242 – Ahmet A. tirpAn, mehmet tekocAk, mAkbule ekİcİ

Finds from Börükçü excavations show that this settlement was continuously inhabited from the mid-Geometric period to the mid-Roman period. In light of the newly collected data, it is understood that this country side area included workshop complexes 2, necropoleis and small settlements during the ancient period. This country settlement had its peak during the Hecatomnid period through the 2nd century BC. On the basis of the inscriptions found in the area, it is thought that this place was “Koliorga”, one of the five demoi 3 of Stratoniceia 4.

Tombs and other structures in Börükçü were built on terraces formed on a sloping land in east-west direction suitable to the topography of the area (fig. 2). While on some terraces there are tombs alone, on some other terraces industrial facilities and tombs are present together. Although the land is generally composed of cist, in some places the soft main rock is seen on the surface. Thus, the chamber tombs with dromos are found in these areas where the main rock is visible.

268 tombs in total have been discovered during the rescue excavations performed until today. The tombs, containing a variety of finds, also provide a rich architectural typology 5. The types of tombs that are the highest in number in Börükçü necropolis until today are walled coffin types and plate coffin types, while the type least in number is the underground chamber tombs with a dromos. The main reasons for this are the topographical features and the lay of the land in Börükçü necropolis.

In this study, an example of the underground chamber tombs with dromos and an example of the walled-plate coffin tombs that were discovered and excavated in the field search at the eastern slope of Börükçü Site in 2005 and the finds gathered in these tombs will be analysed.

UndergroUnd chamber tomb with a dromos

This tomb, discovered in the 7th terrace on the eastern slope of Börükçü site, is coded as tomb 05BM22. Carved into the natural rock, this tomb is composed of two parts; a dromos and a closed tomb chamber (fig. 3-4). In this type of tombs, the dromos would be built according to the size of the tomb. When the necessary depth and length of the dromos was obtained; first a short, flat terrace would be formed and then the entrance door to the tomb chamber, in the proper size for a person to enter, would be carved. Finally, the tomb chamber would be carved and the tomb would be ready for burial.

2. Weaving workshops, ceramics ovens and a great number of olive oil workshops are the industrial complexes discovered here.3. Other demoi of Stratoniceia are Koraia, Lobolda, Hiera Kome and Koranza. Şahin 1976, 23-24.4. Aydaş 2006, 111-112.5. For the tomb types in Börükçü and the naming of these types, see Tırpan & Söğüt 2005, 376-379; Tırpan & Söğüt 2006, 258-259; Tırpan

& Söğüt 2007, 597-606; Tırpan & Söğüt 2008, 401.

| Fig. 2. Börükçü, terraces established on a sloping land.

two tombs from börükçü necropolis – 243

Dug in east-west direction according to the slope of the land, the tomb has its dromos in the west. As a result, the entrance to the tomb chamber faces west. Almost rectangular in shape, the dromos has a width of 1.35 m, length of 2.15 m and a depth of 1.25 m measured from the terrace in front of the door (fig. 4). The sizes of the tomb chamber are 3.60 x 2.74 m and the ceiling of the tomb collapsed naturally during the clearance of the weeds in the terrace (fig. 3). Even in this condition, the cover at the top in the shape of a vault rises from the entrance to the opposite wall of the tomb. Its height is measured as 2.10 m in the entrance and 2.82 m at the end. Filled with soil when first discovered, the dromos was understood to have four steps after the excavations there. There is much erosion on the steps as the main rock is quite soft. The length of the last step and the dromos terrace (stamion) in front of the entrance of the tomb chamber is 0.92 m. In this part there is a one piece limestone plate connected to and at the same level with the threshold.

| Fig. 3. Grave 05BM22, general view from the northwest.

| Fig. 4. Grave 05BM 22, plan and cross-section.


The entrance to the tomb chamber is composed of two door frames carved out of marble with a good craftsmanship, a lintel on these, a block on which the door frames are placed and a cap stone covering this hole (fig. 5-6). The sizes of the entrance to the tomb chamber were 1.07 x 1.37 m before the door frames and the lintel were placed and 0.62 x 1.09 m afterwards. The reason why the entrance door carved into the main rock is quite high is that there is a crack at the upper part of the entrance. This part must have been destroyed by burglars in ancient times. The cap stone was found in good condition in situ and removed by us. However, it was seen that the lintel that should be on the door frames found in situ was missing and the resulting gap was filled with rubble stone and soil (fig. 6). The door frames with an average size of 1.13 x 0.52 m and 0.25 m in width were better shaped in their wide surfaces facing each other and the narrow faces facing dromos while the other faces were roughly shaped. The door frames are seated on a roughly shaped block 0.51 wide and 0.15 m deep located on the surface at the entrance. The missing lintel was found in the tomb chamber during the excavations between the door frames and leaning against the frame on the left (fig. 5, 8). The lintel is 1.15 x 0.50 m in size and 0.19 m in thickness. While the upper and narrow surfaces of the lintel are in better shape, on the both side of the surface placed on the door frames there is an anathyrosis 0.23 m in width and 0.21 m in length.

The average thickness of the rectangular cap stone 1.35 x 0.98 m in size covering the entrance to the tomb is 0.27 m (fig. 7). While the thickness of the lower part of the stone seated on the surface is 0.32 m, the thickness of the upper part is 0.18 m. The outer surface of the cap stone facing the dromos is more roughly shaped than the inner surface. The sides of the cap stone were profiled 6 so that it fit to the gap between the door frames and the lintels.

After the studies in the dromos were concluded, the cap stone was removed and excavations started in the cross rectangular tomb chamber filled with soil almost to the half. There are three klinai in the tomb chamber. Two of them are in front of the walls to the right and the left of the entrance and the third one is right in front of the opposite wall. These klinai were named as north, south and east klinai regarding their locations in the tomb chamber. The east kline opposite the entrance is 3.60 m in length and 1.06 m in width. The north and south klinai on the right and the left of the entrance are 1.90 m in length and 1.08 m in width. The north kline is in a 0.10 m lower altitude than the others. All three klinai are roughly shaped. There is a rectangular pit in the same direction with the entrance door and the dromos but at an average 0.67 m lower level than the klinai in the middle of the tomb chamber or in other words between the klinai (fig. 8). This pit with an uneven surface, which can also be called a walking area, is 2.03 m in length and 1.30 m in width. There are niches carved into the middle of the north, south and east walls of the tomb for all three klinai (fig. 4, 9). The niches, 0.61 x 0.50 m in average and 0.24 in depth, were probably aimed for placing gifts 7. However, nothing was found on these niches during excavations.

Finds in different types were discovered both in the dromos and inside the tomb chamber during the excavations. One bronze coin (05BM22-S01) and a piece of the head of two terracotta figures (05BM22-T01 and T02) were found in the studies performed in the dromos.

Skulls and bones found in the tomb chamber are quite significant (fig. 10). Bones of arms, legs, fingers and toes and some few backbones and ribs beside the skulls of 11 human were found scattered around the tomb. The reason why there is a few number of ribs and backbones is that the soil in the tomb chamber is moist and limey. Therefore, the ribs and backbones found are in a spongy form. 4 of the 11 skulls were found on the south kline and the other 7 were found in the walking area between klinai. These skulls and bones show that there were multiple burials in the tomb. Besides the skulls and the bones, terracotta and metal finds were discovered on the klinai and in the walking area inside the tomb chamber. These finds were also scattered around as with the skulls and the bones. Among these finds are ceramic wares in good condition or broken, pieces of terracotta figurines, a few bronze coins and one bronze strigilis. As the soil inside the tomb was moist and limey as a result of the water leaking from outside the tomb, most of the finds were covered in lime patina. This lime patina was mostly cleaned by the restoration crew so that the artefacts regain their original shapes.

6. The sizes are 1.09 x 0.62 m and the depth is 0.03 m. 7. For the functions of these kinds of niches in tomb chambers, see Söğüt 2003, 251-256.


| Fig. 5. Grave 05BM22, grave entrance, lintel and door frames from outside.

| Fig. 6. Grave 05BM22, cap stone, front side.

| Fig. 7. Grave 05BM22, cap stone, back side. | Fig. 8. Grave 05BM22, grave chamber, entrance, lintel and door frames from inside.


Finds

Dromos Finds:

1) 05BM22-S01 (fig. 11): Bronze Stratoniceia city coin. D: 1.5 cm

It is corroded. On the obverse there is the head of Hecate to right with a laurel wreath and, on the reverse, there is Pegasus to the left with Stratoniceia’s ethnic. There is a crescent above the head of Hecate. The letter B can be seen on the right of Pegasus and ΣΤРΑΤ can be seen above. Although this type of coins is generally dated to the 1st century BC, it is also pointed out that they mostly date after 81 BC 8.

2) 05BM22-T01 (fig. 12): Head of a terracotta figurine. PH: 3.2 cm, PW: 4.5 cm.

The face except the mouth and the front part of the crown is in good shape. The head of the figurine is slightly turned left. It is probably bent downwards a bit. The figurine has a plump face, a short narrow forehead, bloated eyes and thick eyelids. These thick eyelids cause the eyes to seem as if they were closed. It has a vine or a laurel crown. The hair under the crown flows down its forehead in wavy locks. The head of this figurine and the head of the figurine 05BM22-T06 found in the tomb chamber closely resemble each other. However, there are differences in their hair and face details. The characteristics of this figurine differ from the other example in that its face is plumper and its eyes are bloated and seem to be closed as the eyelids are thicker. All these point out that the piece of the figurine found in the dromos must be from a later date. Therefore, we think that the head of this figurine can be dated between the 1st century BC and the first half of the 1st century AD.


It was found in two pieces and then the pieces were stuck together. Only the face, neck and a small part of the head are in good shape. Its light brick red clay is hard and has no pores. The figurine has a plump and wide face, oval eyebrows, fat chin and a small mouth. The small mouth is closed; upper lip is thin while the lower is thick. Because of the thick eyelids, the eyes seem to be closed. It has a triangular forehead and on this forehead there are thick hair locks. The transition from the forehead to the nose is straight. The hair locks in the shape of sun beams are divided into two in the middle. It closely resembles 05BM22-T03. 1st century BC – 1st century AD.

8. BMC Caria, 150 with pl. XXIII, 27-30; Meadows 2002, 114, pl. 30, Stratoniceia Bronze-b; SNG Tübingen, pl. 115, no. 3479-3482.

| Fig. 9. Grave 05BM22, general view of the grave chamber and niches. | Fig. 10. Grave 05BM22, general view of finds (from the chamber).


Tomb Chamber Finds:

4) 05BM22-S02 (fig. 14): Bronze Stratoniceia city coin. D: 1.3 cm.

It was found in the walking area. Corroded. Head of Zeus to right on the obverse. Because of the high corrosion, only the quadratum incusum is visible on the reverse. There must have been an eagle figure inside it. 125-85 BC 9.

9. SNG Tübingen, pl. 115, no. 3464-3471.

| Fig. 11. 05BM22-S01, bronze coin of Stratoniceia (from the dromos).

| Fig. 12. 05BM22-T01, head of terracotta figurine (from the dromos).

| Fig. 13. 05BM22-T02, head of terracotta figurine (from the dromos).


5) 05BM22-S03 (fig. 15): Bronze Stratoniceia city coin. D: 1.3 cm.

It was found in the walking area. Corroded. Head of Hecate to right on the obverse; only the quadratum incusum is visible on the reverse while the type inside it could not be determined. Considering the similar examples, it can be said it is highly probable that there was a torch figure inside. This coin is dated 125-85 BC 10.

6) 05BM22-PT02 (fig. 16): Body-piece from the foot of a single-handle jug. PH: 34; Db.: 15; Th: 0.8 cm.

It was found in the walking area. The neck, handle and the rim are missing. The light buff-coloured, hard clay with no pores has mica in it. Most of the dark buff-coloured, thin and dull lining has fallen off. The jug has an ovoid body and a conical foot. The trace of the handle on the shoulder can be seen. Similar jugs found in Stratoniceia necropolis were dated between the 1st century BC and 1st century AD. We suggest the same date for this jug.

It was found out that the single-handle jugs in Stratoniceia and Börükçü necropolises have the same clay form. Then it is possible that these jugs were produced at a local workshop to meet the needs of the region. As it is known, ceramic workshops producing for regional or local use became popular from the Hellenistic period and especially the wares for daily use were produced in these workshops. Therefore, each region or city met their needs through the local production. In relation to this, it became usual that similar results were obtained in various regions as in this one.

7) 05BM22-PT04 (fig. 17): Amphora. PH : 33; D : 27; Dr.: 13.9; Th.: 0.6-0.8 cm.

It was found in the walking area. A part of the shoulder, lower part of the body, one handle and the foot are missing. Minor gaps were completed with plaster. Brick red clay is hard, has no pores and contains mica. It has a thickened rim slanting outwards, a long cylindrical neck and an ovoid body. It has vertical band handles connecting the neck and the shoulder. It must have had a conical or a ring foot as in the single-handle jug. Its resemblance to 05BM22-PT02 shows that this artefact is also from that date.

8) 05BM22-PT05 (fig. 18): Bowl. H: 6.9; Dr.: 11.7; Db.: 4.6; Th.: 0.3-0.5 cm.

It was found in the walking area. Some parts close to the rim are missing. The buff-coloured clay is hard, has no pores and contains mica. The thin, dull lining varying from red to reddish brown mostly disappeared. The lining was applied wholly to the interior and only to the upper body at the exterior of the bowl. Some lining leaked to the lower body. It has a straight rim slightly slanting outwards, an almost hemispherical body and a narrow ring foot. Bowls in similar form found in Stratoniceia tombs were dated between the mid-2nd century BC at the earliest and the mid-1st century at the latest. Therefore a period of 100 years was suggested for these bowls 11. These dates also comply with the other examples found in our tomb. Considering the other tomb finds, we date this artefact to the first half of the 1st century BC.

9) 05BM22-PT06 (fig. 19): Fusiform unguentarium. H: 19.6; D: 5.4; Dr.: 3.2; Db.: 2.6 cm.

Minor gaps in the body were filled with plaster. The brick red clay is hard with no pores and contains mica. The lining is buff-coloured (cream). It has a projecting rim, round mouth, long cylindrical neck, oval body and flat base. There is a brick red decoration on the rim, on the transition from the neck to the shoulder and on the body. The ones between the neck and the shoulder and on the body are one thick and one thin strap decorations. The example with the similar decoration found in Stratoniceia Akdağ necropolis is dated to the late 2nd century BC while the ones without decoration but in similar form were dated to mid-2nd century BC and mid-1st century BC 12. Similar examples discovered in Sardis, though not having any decorations, closely resemble our artefact and were dated between the 2nd century BC and mid-1st century BC 13. The ones in similar from found in Paphos were dated to 180-160 B.C and to the end of the century 14. Unguentaria in similar form from Tarsus were found in the Hellenistic layer 15. We suggest the period between the late 2nd century BC and the mid-1st century BC as an appropriate date for this artefact.

10. SNG Tübingen, pl. 115, no. 3472; SNG München, pl. 21, no. 409.11. Baldıran 1990, 23-25.12. Baldıran 1990, 18, fig. 43-45, pl. V.2, VI.1; Tozkoparan 1998, 32, fig. 43.13. Rotroff & Oliver 2003, 69-70, cat. 258, 259, pl. 44.259. 14. Hayes 1991, 68, 70, pl. XV, no. 2, 6.15. Jones 1950, 230, pl. 135, fig. 234-235.


| Fig. 14. 05BM22-S02, bronze coin of Stratoniceia (from the chamber).

| Fig. 15. 05BM22-S03, bronze coin of Stratoniceia (from the chamber).

| Fig. 16. 05BM22-PT02, a single-handled jug (from the chamber).

| Fig. 19. 05BM22-PT06, fusiform unguentarium (from the chamber).

| Fig. 17. 05BM22-PT04, amphora (from the chamber).

| Fig. 18. 05BM22-PT05, bowl (from the chamber).


10) 05BM22-PT07 (fig. 20): Bulbous unguentarium. H: 7.6; D: 5.5; Dr.: 2.5; Db. 2.9 cm.

It was found in the walking area. There is a small crack in the rim. The buff-coloured, hard clay with no pores contains mica. It has a round mouth, cylindrical neck, body shaped like a bag and flat bottom. Similar examples found in Stratoniceia necropolis were dated to the mid-1st century BC and mid-1st century AD 16. The examples from Tarsus were excavated from Roman contexts dated to the late 1st century BC and the first half of the 1st century AD 17. Glass perfume bottles in similar form are dated to the early Roman Empire period and mostly to the 1st century AD. Considering all these data, we date the Börükçü unguentarium to the early Roman Empire period and especially between the late 1st century BC and 1st century AD.


Only the front part of the head, the face and the front of the neck are in good shape. The right nostril is missing. It looks almost the same as 05BM22-T02. It was found in the walking area. The light brick red clay is hard and has no pores. The head is slightly turned right and looks upwards. The loose hair has thick locks. The face is wide. It has oval eyebrows, plump face and fat chin. The small mouth is closed; upper lip is thin and the lower is thick. Thick eyelids make it seem like the eyes were closed. It has almost a triangular forehead. The transition from the forehead to the nose is smooth. 1st century BC – 1st century AD.

12) 05BM22-T04 (fig. 22): Piece of a terracotta figurine. PH: 15.8 cm, PW: 7.9 cm.

It was found in the walking area. There are two feet from the ankles standing on a high rectangular pedestal and the piece of the dress below the knees. The cloth of the dress is quite smooth and only has straight, vertical, parallel curves on the legs. Comparing the Börükçü figurine 05BM22-T06 and this artefact, we see that there is a slight difference in the dress, the curve in the dress and the position of the left foot. Not having the rest of the figurine, we think it would be better if we suggested a more general date. So we date this artefact to the mid-1st century BC and the 1st century AD.


Only the head of the figurine was discovered and it is mostly deformed. It was found in the walking area. The light brick red clay is medium hard and has pores. Different than the empty ones made using mould, the head is completely full. The hair combed backwards was separated in the middle and put in a bun at the back. The arrangement of the hair clearly shows that this is a woman figurine. It has a triangular forehead, plump face and a fat chin. Its small mouth is closed and has thick lips. 1st century BC – 1st century AD.

14) 05BM22-T06 (fig. 24): Terracotta figurine. H: 23 cm, W : 6 cm.

It was found in the walking area. The broken part below the waist was completed through sticking the pieces together. The front of the figurine is complete except a minor gap. The back, on the other hand, has more missing parts. Nevertheless, it can be seen that the steam hole at the back is round. The brick coloured clay is hard and has no pores. This is a description of a dressed figure standing on a high rectangular pedestal and holding a quiver at its back. The head of the figure is slightly turned left, bent downwards and looks ahead. There is a laurel wreath on the head. It has a short and narrow forehead, a long face slightly plump but narrow in general form, and a small mouth. Because of the high corrosion the description of the eyes and the eyelids could not be clearly determined. However, the eyeholes are distinct and in relation to that the eyes are sunk slightly. The hair flows from the crown over the shoulders at the sides and is in firm locks at the front. The figurine has a V-neck coat was held by a round fibula on the right shoulder, a thin chiton revealing the body lines and a shawl flowing down the shoulders. The weight of the body is on the right leg. For this reason, the right foot is wholly placed on the pedestal. The left leg visible under the dress is curved slightly at the knee and projected forward while the left foot held at the back stands on the tip of its toes. Both feet are bare. The right arm hangs freely at the side while the left arm, though this part is missing, is probably bent at the elbow at the chest level. Most probably holds the strap of the quiver with its left hand. The curves of the dress are vertical. The quiver it carries at its back is visible above the right shoulder and at the left hip level. There is a curved swan head design attached to the rim and the bottom of the quiver.

16. Baldıran 1990, 19, pl. VIII, 5.17. Jones 1950, 230, pl. 203, fig. 734-735.


Deducing from the laurel wreath on its head, the long hair locks flowing down the shoulders and the slightly effeminate face, the Apollo iconography here is quite apparent. Ephebos 18 depictions carrying quiver at their back from the late Hellenistic and Augustan period closely resemble the Börükçü example in their standing position. However, our example definitely differs from these epheboi with its laurel wreath and the arrangement of the hair. The figurines depicted carrying a quiver on their back standing on a high rectangular pedestal found in the Stratoniceia necropolis are classified as

18. Mollard-Besques 1963, pl. 146 fig. a-M92, fig. e-MYR 211, pl. 147 fig. B58.

| Fig. 20. 05BM22-PT07, bulbous unguentarium (from the chamber).

| Fig. 21. 05BM22-T03, head of terracotta figurine (from the chamber).

| Fig. 22. 05BM22-T04, fragment of terracotta figurine (from the chamber).

| Fig. 23. 05BM22-T05, head of terracotta figurine (from the chamber).

| Fig. 24. 05BM22-T06, terracotta figurine (from the chamber).


Roman period terracotta 19. The arrangement of hair and the laurel wreath of the Börükçü figurine indicate that this artefact must have been from an earlier period than the other examples found in other Stratoniceia necropolises. Besides, a naked Apollo figurine depicted in a similar position on a high rectangular pedestal with rounded edges and a woman figurine discovered in Tarsus Tower were dated to the late 1st century BC and the mid-1st century AD. Considering the differences of our figurine from the figurines found in other settlements, we suggest a date between the late 2nd century BC and the 1st century BC, probably the Augustus period, for the Börükçü figurine.

The entrance to the tomb chamber and the condition of the finds in the tomb chamber suggest that the tomb might have been robbed. That the lintel fell into the tomb chamber and buried under the soil filling while the cap stone is in its original place is the first evidence that this tomb was robbed. Yusuf Boysal states that the tombs in Stratoniceia necropolis in similar condition were robbed at least twice; first in the ancient period and then in our time. The ancient period robbery was performed after the dromos was opened and the capstone, lintel and the upper part of the lintel were broken while the robbery in our time is ususally performed through a hole made in the ceiling of the tomb chamber. Considering our example in this context; we can say that although the cap stone stayed at its original place, the lintel was pushed inside and through this gap the tomb must have been robbed in the ancient period. Another point supporting our idea is the position of the finds in this chamber where multiple-burial took place. The skulls and the ones of 11 body and other artefacts were both harmed and scattered inside the tomb. This must have been caused by the raid of the tomb robbers of that period breaking in the tomb. Unfortunately, this scattered position of the finds makes it harder to determine both the number of burials in the tomb and the position of the bodies and the tomb gifts. The bronze strigilis (fig. 25) in the tomb chamber suggests that at least one of the burials can be of a sportsman. Mentioned artefacts indicate that this tomb was used for approximately two hundred years between the end of the 2nd century BC and the 1st century AD.

Underground tomb chambers with a dromos are quite common in East Mediterranean, especially in Syria and Palestine. The earliest examples were discovered in the Salamis excavations in Cyprus and it was determined that they were used until the mid-Roman period. Known to be used in different regions of Anatolia, these tombs can be seen in various regions besides Caria 20. Similar examples to the ones from Caria region were discovered in huge numbers in Akdağ Hill, one of the necropolises of the Stratoniceia ancient city right next to Börükçü 21. Other similar examples are seen in Bargasa-Haydere and Hyllarima 22.

Even though the finds from the tomb studied here date back to the late Hellenistic – early Roman periods, they are not adequate to conclude that the tomb was also dug at the same date with the finds. As it is known, either the tombs with multiple burials were emptied for the next burial or the burial was performed keeping the previous burial inside. If the tomb chamber was completely emptied for the next burial, then unfortunately the earlier data was wiped out. As a result, it is impossible to determine the exact date of the tomb. Therefore, we do not ignore this possibility and state that a similar condition may also apply to this tomb.

walled cist grave

This type is the most common type of tombs in Börükçü necropolis. The reason for this is that the land in this area is soft and has cist. As the ground can be excavated easily, walls were built around the pit to prevent collapsing and tombs were made more quickly and cheaply. The earliest finding in this kind of tombs that have been excavated until today is

19. Baldıran 1990, 48-55, cat. no: 133-134, 227, 228, 233-234, 434-438, fig. 179, 182, 183, 186, 187, 188, 205.20. It is known that this kind of tombs also exists in Kelenderis and Nagidos in Cilicia. The underground tomb chambers with a dromos

having steps found in Kelenderis necropolises closely resemble our example. The ones in Nagidos do not have a dromos with steps. For the Kelenderis examples, see Zoroğlu 1994, 33-38; Zoroğlu 2000, 121-125, pl. 22, fig. 3 a-b. In Pamphylia, it is possible to see this type of tombs in Karaçallı necropolis and Antalya eastern necropolis. The tombs in Antalya eastern necropolis resemble the Börükçü example in their dromos and tomb chamber while the tombs in Karaçallı differ in that they have a hollow dromos. Büyükyörük & Tibet 1999-2000, 116-121; Çokay-Kepçe 2006, 12-15.

21. Boysal 1998, 155-156, drawing: 1-3, Boysal & Kadıoğlu 1999, 215-221, plan 2a-b, 3.22. Henry 2009, 208-210, 222-224, fig. 79-80, 99-100. In this study analysing all tombs in Karia, the region is seen to have a tomb typology

rich in underground tomb chambers. However, considering the examples in this study, it can be said that tombs similar to the type we studied are not common in the region.


from late Geometric period and the latest from the Roman period. Considering this, it can be said that this type was first built and used in the Geometric period and continued to be used until the Roman period.

Built right under and connected to the terrace wall number 5 at the east slope of Börükçü Site, this tomb is coded as 05BM54 (fig. 26). The tomb 2.46 x 0.75 m in size is in north-south direction. Long east and west edges are built as walls, while in the short north and south edges there are vertical clear-cut plate stones (fig. 27-28). Although the cap stones of many tombs in this type in the region were found in situ, unfortunately the flat plate cap stone that should be covering the tomb could not be found. This situation can be explained in that the cap stones were removed during the construction of the terrace wall built over the eastern wall of the tomb afterwards. Although we named these tombs as walled-coffin type as the long east and west edges of the tomb were built by piling different sizes of flat stones with smooth surfaces and edges, Yusuf Boysal states that these belong to the group called “cist tomb” in archaeology resembling crates 23. It was seen that the stones were levelled using soil even though the walls were built in dry wall technique. A single plate stone 0.63 x 0.75 m in size and 0.12 m in thickness was used in the short northern edge of the tomb and a single plate stone 0.44 m x 0.80 m and 0.20 m in thickness in the short southern edge. As the plate in the southern edge is shorter than the one in the northern part, two flat stones were put on the plate side by side to increase its height. The wall creating the fifth terrace afterwards was built on the wall at the eastern side of the tomb. The depth of the tomb was measured as 0.84 m at the end of the excavations.

As a result of the excavations in the tomb filled entirely with soil; skulls and bones from different parts of the bodies of 5 people, metal and terracotta works were discovered (fig. 29-30). Unfortunately the skulls found in the above mentioned levels do not have a common location. In other words; the direction they were placed in the tomb cannot be understood clearly through examining the locations that the skulls were found. Nonetheless, this situation is not valid for the 5th body. The skull and the skeleton of the 5th body in the last level – probably the last burial of the tomb – stay unharmed indicating the lying position and direction. The body lying in north-south direction was placed on its back with its head facing north; the arms were crossed on the stomach and the legs were slightly bend from the knees and stretched. The length of the skeleton was measured approximately as 1,74 m. Skulls and bones of the other 4 bodies were scattered and disorganized at the levels they were found. This is probably because the skulls, skeletons and grave gifts of other bodies were gathered in the tomb randomly during the burial of the 5th body. This makes it impossible to determine the exact number of burials in the tomb. Still it was concluded that there were at least two burials to the tomb and the last burial was of a single body. However, it is unfortunately not possible to comment on the lying positions and the number of burials of the other 4 bodies.

Although they were few, different types of artefacts were discovered in the tomb besides the skulls and skeletons. These are respectively, a bronze spearhead (05BM54-D02), a mug (05BM54-PT02), a knife (05BM54-D03), a broken bronze needle (05BM54-B01), an Attic amphoriskos (05BM54- PT03), a disc (05BM54-AG02), a squat lekythos with black glazing (05BM54-PT04), and a bolsal (05BM54-PT05). Among these the amphoriskos and the squat lekythos with black glazing are vases from Attic workshops and must have been imported.

Finds:

1) 05BM54-PT04 (fig. 31): Squat Lekythos. H: 8.4; D: 5.6; Dr.: 2.9 cm; Db.: 4.3 cm.

Quality, hard, pure and buff coloured clay has no pores and baked well. It has quality black glazing. The mouth is in funnel-shape and it has a short and narrow cylindrical neck, globular body, broad low ring foot and a conical handle connecting the neck to the shoulder. There is a protruding fillet in the transition from the neck to the shoulder. There are some plain areas on the foot and the body that were not covered with black glazing. The plain area on the body is divided with two horizontal lines creating three red horizontal stripes. Similar examples to the Attic lekythoi were discovered in the excavations of Antalya Karaçallı necropolis, Olynthos and the Athenian agora; there is also one at the Badische

23. Boysal 1970, 76. In another publication Y. Boysal defines these tombs as “rectangular cist tombs”: Boysal 1998, 155. A. Akarca also used the term “cist tomb” a long time ago: Akarca 1971, 15.


Landesmuseum in Karlsruhe. These were dated to 425-400 BC 24. Only the example found in Olynthos was dated to the third quarter of the 4th century BC 25. We find it appropriate to date this vase to 400-375 BC.

24. Sparkes & Talcott 1970, 154, 314-315, pl. 38, no.1124 (425 BC); Stambolidis & Parlama 2000, no. 217 (425-400 BC); Hafner 1951, pl. 33, 7-8 (400 BC), Çokay-Kepçe 2006, 103, cat. no. SFr 2 (425-400 BC).

25. Robinson 1950, no. 400.

| Fig. 25. 05BM22-B01, bronze strigil (from the chamber).

| Fig. 26. Grave 05BM54, general view from the southwest (before excavation).

| Fig. 27. Grave 05BM54, plan and cross-section.


| Fig. 28. Grave 05BM54, general view from the south (after excavation).

| Fig. 29. Grave 05BM54, finds (skulls, bones, metal and terracotta works).

| Fig. 30. Grave 05BM54, finds (skeletons and other finds).

| Fig. 31. 05BM54-PT04, squat lekythos (400-375 BC).


| Fig. 32. 05BM54-PT03, amphoriskos (first quarter of the 4th century BC).

| Fig. 33. 05BM54-PT05, bolsal (400-375 BC).

| Fig. 34. 05BM54-PT05, mug (400-375 BC).

| Fig. 35. 05BM54-AG02, loom weight (c. 400-375 BC).

| Fig. 36. Grave 05BM54, bronze spearhead.

| Fig. 37. Grave 05BM54, bronze knives.

Documents

Two Tombs from Börükçü Necropolis