Persian Period Tombs in Western Antolia As Reflections of Social and Political Change
Total Page:16
File Type:pdf, Size:1020Kb
Mustafa Umut Mustafa Dulun PERSIAN PERIOD TOMBS IN WESTERN ANTOLIA AS REFLECTIONS OF SOCIAL AND POLITICAL CHANGE PERSIAN PERIOD TOMBS IN WESTERN ANATOLIA TOMBS ANATOLIA AS INPERSIAN WESTERN PERIOD A Master’s Thesis REFLECTIONS OF SOCIAL AND POLITICAL CHANGE REFLECTIONSAND POLITICAL SOCIAL OF by MUSTAFA UMUT DULUN Department of Archaeology İhsan Doğramacı Bilkent University Ankara July 2019 Bilkent Bilkent University 2019 To my dear niece, Masal ÜSTÜBAL PERSIAN PERIOD TOMBS IN WESTERN ANATOLIA AS REFLECTIONS OF SOCIAL AND POLITICAL CHANGE The Graduate School of Economics and Social Sciences of İhsan Doğramacı Bilkent University by MUSTAFA UMUT DULUN In Partial Fulfilment of the Requirements for the Degree of MASTER OF ARTS IN ARCHAEOLOGY THE DEPARTMENT OF ARCHAEOLOGY İHSAN DOĞRAMACI BİLKENT UNIVERSITY ANKARA July 2019 ABSTRACT PERSIAN PERIOD TOMBS IN WESTERN ANATOLIA AS REFLECTIONS OF SOCIAL AND POLITICAL CHANGE Dulun, Mustafa Umut MA., Department of Archaeology Supervisor: Asst. Prof. Dr. Charles Gates July 2019 Fourteen tombs in western Anatolia, from Hellespontine and Greater Phrygia, Lydia, Lycia, and Caria are analyzed in order to understand the social and political change in the Persian period, and to understand the relationship between the local elite and their Persian overlords. Monumental tombs such as the tumulus and temple tombs, their architectural forms and features, contents and artworks are within the scope of this study. The distinction between the burials of elites and administrators was not attested in Hellespontine and Greater Phrygia, nor in Lydia, whereas the securely identified tombs of the dynasts in Lycia and Caria, and their privileged locations separated the rulers from the other elite. The variations in the architectural features in tumulus tombs and the iconography used in these tombs are considered as indicators of identity in western Anatolia. Even though the 6th century BC tombs illustrated continuation of the pre- Persian period mortuary traditions, the conspicuous increase in monumental tomb construction seems to have been owed to the prosperity provided by the Persian Empire. The tumulus, which had been used by the Lydian royals, was now a common burial type v in the Persian period, and the wealth required to erect such monuments was now available for the western Anatolian elite. The 5th century BC illustrated a predominant Persian influence and support for the empire, and this phenomenon was considered as a response to the historical events that occurred in the region in the early 5th century BC. Caria and Lycia had freer and more original monuments because they were not satrapal centers in the 6th and 5th centuries BC. Dynast tombs of the 4th century BC were distinguished from the early Persian period tombs and symbolized the changing social and political agenda of these regions. Keywords: Architecture, Iconography, Persian Period, Tomb, Western Anatolia. vi ÖZET SOSYAL VE POLITIK DEĞİŞIMIN YANSIMALARI OLARAK BATI ANADOLU’DA PERS DÖNEMI MEZARLARI Dulun, Mustafa Umut Yüksek Lisans, Arkeoloji Bölümü Tez Danışmanı: Dr. Öğretim Üyesi Charles Gates Temmuz 2019 Hellespont ve Büyük Frigya, Lidya, Likya ve Karya bölglelerinden 14 adet mezar, Pers döneminde yaşanan sosyal ve politik olayları anlamak için, ve yerel zenginlerin imparatorlukta nasıl yer edindiğini anlamak için analiz edilmiştir. Tümülüs ve tapınak mezar gibi anıtsal mezarların mimarisi, buluntuları ve sanatsal yapıtları bu amaç içinde değerlendirilmiştir. Hellespont Frigya, Büyük Frigya ve Lidya bölgelerinde elit ve yönetici mezarları arasında kesin bir fark gözlenemezken Likya ve Karya bölgelerinde bu ayrım, çeşitli hanedan mezar tipleri ve onların ayrıcalıklı konumları sayesinde anlaşılmıştır. Tümülüs mezarlarının mimari formlarındaki varyasyonlar ve sanatsal ikonografi, bölge elitinin değişen kimliğini açığa çıkarmıştır. MÖ 6. yüzyıl mezarları, genel olarak Pers Dönemi öncesindeki geleneklerin devamı niteliğinde değerlendirilse de bu anıt mezarların inşasının Pers Dönemindeki gözle görülür biçimde artması, bölgedeki gelişen refaha ve bu zamana kadar kraliyetin elinde olan zenginliğin belli ölçüde elitlere geçmesine işaret etmiştir. MÖ 5. yüzyıl mezarları büyük oranda Pers vii etkisi ve desteği göstermiş, bu durum bölgedeki tarihsel olaylara dayandırılmıştır. Likya ve Karya, MÖ 6. ve 5. yüzyıllarda satrap merkezlerine sahip olmadıkları için daha özgür ve özgün anıtlara sahiptir. Bu bölgelerdeki hanedan mezarları, Erken Pers Dönemi mezarlarından ayrı özellikler göstermiş, gelişmekte olan bu bölgelerin tecrübe ettiği sosyal ve politik değişimleri sembolize etmişlerdir. Anahtar Kelimeler: Batı Anadolu, İkonografi, , Mezar, Mimari, İkonografi, Pers Dönemi. viii ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS I am grateful to my family for all their support during my education. I would like to thank my advisor, Charles Gates for his patience and constructive approach throughout my thesis project. I owe greatly to the Bilkent Archaeology family, Dominique Kassab Tezgör, Marie-Henriette Gates, Jacques Morin, Julian Bennett, Thomas Zimmermann, İlgi Gerçek and Müge Durusu Tanrıöver, people who do everything for students to improve in this field. I feel fortunate and proud to have been educated in this department. I would like to thank Aygül Akalın, an outstanding woman whom we lost too soon, for she believed and supported me in my studies at a difficult time. I will never forget the values and teachings she contributed, and will try to treat others in the same way she did. I also owe special thanks to İlknur Özgen, whose lectures changed the perspective I had towards archaeology. I hope to make her proud with my future contributions to archaeology. I would like to thank my friends from the department, Duygu Özmen, Andy Beard, Ece Alper, Çağla Durak, Dilara Uçar, Eda Doğa Aras, Defne Dedeoğlu, Seren Mendeş, Joseph Aversano, Emrah Dinç and Zeynep Akkuzu. Thanks to them, my journey of graduate program has been full of good memories and joy. I owe special thanks to Roslyn Sorensen for her advice and guidance in my studies, and for all our amazing casual conversations during our coffee breaks. Finally, I want to thank Tuğçe Köseoğlu, with whom I am proud to have collaborated in our project, for going out of her way to make a map for my thesis. ix TABLE OF CONTENTS ABSTRACT ................................................................................................ v ÖZET ........................................................................................................vii ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS ........................................................................ ix TABLE OF CONTENTS ............................................................................ x LIST OF MAPS ........................................................................................xii LIST OF TABLES .................................................................................. xiii LIST OF FIGURES .................................................................................. xiv CHAPTER 1: Introduction .......................................................................... 1 1.1 The Tumulus Tradition in Anatolia .................................................................. 6 1.2 Dynast Tombs in Western Anatolia ................................................................. 7 1.3 Outline of the Thesis ....................................................................................... 9 CHAPTER 2: The Tatarlı Tumulus in Greater Phrygia ............................. 12 2.1 Wall Paintings ............................................................................................... 15 2.2 North Wall .................................................................................................... 15 2.3 East Wall ....................................................................................................... 18 2.3.1 Convoy or Funeral Procession .................................................................... 18 2.3.2 Combat between the Persians and Scythians ............................................... 20 2.4 Conclusions ................................................................................................... 21 CHAPTER 3: Hellespontine Phrygia ......................................................... 25 3.1 The Kızöldün Tumulus .................................................................................. 26 3.2 The Dedetepe Tumulus .................................................................................. 32 3.3 The Çan Tumulus .......................................................................................... 34 3.4 Conclusions ................................................................................................... 39 CHAPTER 4: Lydia. ................................................................................. 41 4.1 Introduction ................................................................................................... 41 4.2 The Pyramid Tomb ........................................................................................ 42 4.3 Introduction of Tumuli to Sardis .................................................................... 43 x 4.3.1 The Lale Tepe Tumulus .............................................................................. 44 4.4 The Harta Tumulus ........................................................................................ 48 4.5 Güre Tumuli .................................................................................................. 50 4.6 The Toptepe