A Tribute to the Ionian Renaissance

A TribuTe To The ioniAn renAissAnce Olivier HeNRy * Although there is no doubt that foreign influences played a role in the conception of the Halikarnassos’ Maussolleion, new archaeological data brings greater nuance to this picture. Previous studies presented the tomb of Maussollos as a prototype of a new kind of tomb, borrowing its char - acteristics from foreign influences and later spreading this model throughout Asia Minor. This paper aims to readdress the issue in light of new studies on Karian funerary architecture from the 6 th century BC to the mid 4 th century BC (when Maussollos started to build his tomb). These funerary buildings reveal striking similarities with the Maussolleion, and raise the possibility that this building type might have been part of a long-term tradition of Karian funerary culture. Hekatomnid Karia holds a specific place in the study of ancient architectural history. One of the main features of 4 th century Karia is its original and intensive architectural activity developed by the members of the 4 th century dynasty and defined today as the ‘Ionian Renaissance’. This ‘Ionian Ren - aissance’ is best characterized by a revival of Archaic east Greek architecture influenced by both contemporaneous mainland Greek architecture and substantial technical features introduced by the Hekatomnids and their architects. The context that led to this ‘Renaissance’ is usually explained by the period of peace and economic growth that offered the Hekatomnids the opportunity to occupy a major position in the political history of southwestern Asia Minor, positioned between Greeks and Persians. The Hekatomnid ambition behind such behavior is not easy to draw; some scholars defend the idea of a re-establishment of the Golden Age of Persian supremacy during the 6 th century BC 1, while others consider the ‘Ionian Renaissance’ to be the result of a creolization process, intended at casting a new ‘Karianness’ 2. Although it is clear that the Hekatomnids created a new approach to monumental architecture (especially monumental funerary architecture), influenced by both Greek and Persian techniques, a re-appraisal of monumental remains from late 6 th century Karia seems to point out that this was not the first occurrence of such architecture in Karia. At Beçin, 3 km south of Mylasa, under the ruins of a Seljuk fortification, lie the remains of a large structure entirely built in marble. The most visible part of this monument is a large staircase that occupies the whole southern side of a podium (Fig. 1). One can still see architectural pieces reused in the medieval walls that belonged to the superstructure that stood above the podium long ago; all of these architectural fragments (drums and capitals of Ionic order, lion protome , epistyle, etc.) date from the last quarter of the 6 th century BC (Fig. 2). These remains were first published in 1971 by A. Akarca, who dated their foundation to the Archaic period, and identified the podium as that of the temple of Zeus Karios. This identification was fully accepted by scholars and was never *) Institut Français d’Études Anatoliennes, Istanbul, USR 3131. My warmest thanks to Naomi Carless Unwin for her reading and polishing of this paper. 1) Pedersen 2001/2002, 119. 2) Carstens 2009 and see the contribution by this author in this volume. 3) Hornblower 1982, 313. 82 Olivier HeNRy Fig. 1 : General view of the beçin staircase (Photo by the author). thoroughly discussed 3. In a recent article, A. Baran proceeded to produce a more detailed analysis of the building and of the surrounding architectural pieces. Here again the author agreed with the identification of the structure as a monumental podium that once supported a large temple dedicated (probably) to Zeus Karios 4. The analysis is based on architectural characteristics and on the many blocks that supposedly belonged to the superstructure: the column and capital fragments indeed clearly indicate the presence of a frontal, if not peripteral, Ionic colonnade in front of a narrow but richly decorated building with decorated column necks with anthemion, finely cut Ionic kymation profile and Lion protome . Although the above description seems to fit perfectly the description of a temple, it could correspond to any monumental construction built from the late Archaic period to the late Classical times. One has to remember, for example, that the same general approach led the travelers who re- discovered the sanctuary of Labraunda to identify the Andron A as the temple of Zeus Labraundos 5, and more recently the Uzunyuva podium at Milas was identified as another foundation of a temple 6. There is also no doubt that the Maussolleion itself would have probably been identified as a monumental temple, were it not so well documented by literary and archaeological sources, especially because of its subterranean funerary space. 4) Baran 2004. 5) From Pückler-Muskau in 1938 until the first excavations unearthed the dedication mentioning the Andron : see Hellström 2011, on the rediscovery of Labraunda. 6) Laumonier 1958, 43; Robert 1953, 412-413. See Rumscheid 2010, 71-72 for a history of the building. A TRIBUTe TO THe IONIAN ReNAISSANCe 83 Beçİn, a temple or a tomB? In the case of Beçin, it is interesting to notice that neither literary nor epigraphic sources support the identification with the temple of Zeus Karios 7. First, it seems that the plateau supporting the structure was an old burial ground. In 2007, the Museum of Milas conducted a salvage excavation along the northern edge of the plateau, some 50 m to the north of the late Archaic building and discovered a Bronze Age tomb 8. This exca - vation, which only concerned a 5 m 2 trench, was the very first and only one ever conducted on the plateau, and raises the possibility that many other tombs might have existed in this area. Second, if the temple hypothesis is true then the orientation of the late Archaic structure is surprising. If a temple dedicated to Zeus Karios had stood at Beçin, the usual custom would have led the architects to draw its orientation toward the rising sun and not towards south-west, the direction which the present day remains of the podium and staircase are facing (Fig. 3). One should remember that the Archaic temple of Fig. 2 : An example of the reused material in Labraunda, which was dedicated to a local Zeus the wall of the castle (Photo by the author). (Labraundos) and built during the same period, was oriented “almost perfectly to the east” despite the obstructing difficulty of working on a much tougher topography for construction 9. The topography therefore did not dictate the orientation of the building even in Labraunda. Similarly at Beçin the structure is placed in a way that the staircase stood on a flat area above a small cliff, although this configuration impeded easy access (Fig. 1). The unusual orientation of the building might therefore not be connected to the difficulties raised by the topography but rather be related to its location on the plateau. The plateau of Beçin stands along a north-south crest. The northern extension of the plateau is limited on the north by a steep cliff over the plain and is separated from the rest by an escarpment, creating an upper (northern) promontory and a lower (southern) plateau (Fig. 4). The Archaic podium stands at the southern edge of this northern promontory, and its staircase was positioned above a small cliff, and turned towards the southern part of the plateau. Today the staircase is hidden behind one of the main towers of the Medieval castle (Fig. 5) but there is no doubt that it must have originally offered an impressive display which could have been seen afar from the south. The only entrance in the wall of the medieval remains stands against the Archaic podium. This might not be completely fortuitous and one might easily imagine that the access to the promontory has not changed much since ancient times, i.e. the Archaic podium was built near the main access to the promontory, so that visitors would have had to face this impressive construction. 7) Identification which is largely based on both a quote from Herodotos (I.171.6) mentioning a temple dedicated to Zeus Karios at Mylasa and the fact that Beçin was the early seat of the city: Hornblower 1982, 91, 101. 8) This discovery has not yet been published but a report should appear in 2012 in the Müze Kurtarma Kazısı Sonuçları series. 9) Hellström & Thieme 1982, 42. Other local examples are numerous, such as the temple built at Gencik Tepe, see Hellström 1997. 84 Olivier HeNRy Fig. 3 : Plan of the structure (from Akarca 1971, Lev. XXXI, the dromos has been added by the author). Fig. 4 : Aerial view of beçin (the podium is encircled). A TRIBUTe TO THe IONIAN ReNAISSANCe 85 Fig. 5 : The entrance to the castle seen from the south; the ancient staircase is located behind the main square tower at the center of the picture. Finally, the structure of the podium itself seems unusual as a foundation for a temple. Besides the already mentioned uneasy access to its staircase, Akarca described two chambers located inside the podium that were entirely built of marble. These two chambers, each of which show very fine crafts - manship, were arranged side by side (Fig. 3). These chambers were never seriously taken into account in the analysis of the podium and A. Akarca interpreted them as part of the podium’s foundation, which aimed at leveling the rough bedrock on which the podium was sitting. In his recent study, A. Baran noticed the particular roofing of the chambers, each made of a series of three transversal beams supporting the roof slabs (Fig.

Load more