Middle and Late Phrygian Gordion

Iranica Antiqua, vol. XXXIV, 1999 FROM PHRYGIAN CAPITAL TO ACHAEMENID ENTREPOT: MIDDLE AND LATE PHRYGIAN GORDION BY Mary M. VOIGT College of William and Mary T. Cuyler YOUNG, Jr. University of Toronto Introduction In the early Spring of 1960 David Stronach and Cuyler Young stood on the edge of the Toll-i Takht at about four in the afternoon and looked out at the Achaemenid architecture of Pasargadae. David was fully recovered from his queasy tummy of the night before, spent in a tea house in Dehbid, and his natural enthusiasm for all matters archaeological was in full cry. Max Mallowan, not yet knighted but firmly in control of the Board of Trustees of the British Institute of Persian Studies in Teheran, had sug- gested that the Institute’s first excavation in Iran be an important historical site like Pasargadae. Stronach was keen. Certainly he was well trained for the task, having dug at Nimrud with Mallowan and at Charsada with Wheeler, though his work at Ras al’Amiya in Iraq and at Yarim Tepe in northeastern Iran had equally prepared him for a major prehistoric project. Pasargadae it was. On the plain below stood the remains of the Tomb of Cyrus, Palace S and P, the Zendan-i Suleiman, and the Sacred Enclosure. Behind David was the Toll-i Takht (Takht-i Madar-i Suleiman) and to the east, north and south the barely visible walls of the fortification enclosure joining the Takht. In three seasons of excavation Stronach would clarify the nature and function of these monuments, would uncover a number of structures never seen before, and would put the Achaemenids back on the intellectual map of Near Eastern archaeology. On the drive to Shiraz the Marv Dasht plain was covered with spring flowers, much to Stronach’s delight. The experience was, perhaps, the inspiration for his later discoveries of the great gardens of Parsargadae 192 M.M. VOIGT & T. CUYLER YOUNG, Jr. Fig. 1. Sherd with an Achaemenid style figure painted in red and brown on buff found in a YHSS 4/Late Phrygian context at Gordion. — perhaps the oldest in Iran and the origin of our vision of Paradise. The latter part of the next afternoon was spent rug shopping in Shiraz. To this day David remains fascinated by rugs, gardens, and all matters Achaemenid. It has been a given of Achaemenid history that the Iranians (Persians, Medes and others) did not have any influence on the material culture of the conquered peoples of the first Iranian Empire. Recent excavations at Yassihöyük in central Anatolia have, in part, been dedicated to testing whether this “given” is in fact true. The Achaemenids did indeed have an impact on the local material culture of the subject peoples, however slightly those peoples may have been subject (Fig. 1). This Iranian influence is most easily seen in pottery, weapons, horse trappings, and other small finds from Late Phrygian Gordion, but the setting for these small finds — the architecture and the stratigraphy of that architecture — are of PHRYGIAN GORDION 193 prime importance. This is what we discuss in this article in a most prelimi- nary way, for, however exciting the small finds and pottery from Stronach’s excavations at Pasargadae may be (and they are), it is his investigations of Achaemenid architecture and the stratigraphy of Pasargadae that warrant the highest regard. Architectural traditions at Gordion were persistent, going back to the early Iron Age when the Phrygians first occupied the site, and continuing well into Hellenistic times. Late Phrygian Gordion, which corresponds roughly to the period of the Achaemenid occupation, presents us with a variety of architectural styles reflecting the international nature of the times. While we can point to nothing architecturally in this period that is distinctively Iranian (e.g. a parallel to Palace P at Pasargadae), things change and become much more eclectic than in Middle Phrygian times. Outsiders were having an impact. These outsiders, in part undoubtedly Ira- nians, were certainly having an influence on the nature and function of the site, regardless of what kinds of buildings they were living in. This, then, is the setting for a future analysis of ceramics and small finds from Late Phrygian Gordion that will identify the distinctively Iranian, which perhaps we will have ready for Stronach’s seventieth birthday. Archaeological Research at Gordion The mound called Yassihöyük was convincingly identified as historic Gordion by Alfred Körte nearly a century ago (Körte and Körte 1904:28- 35). The key elements in his argument were: 1) the match between Yassi- höyük and descriptions of the ancient city provided by historical texts, especially Strabo’s location of Gordion on the Sangarios/Sakarya river, at a point “equally distant from the Pontic and Cilician Seas” (XII 567/8); and 2) the presence of archaeological remains (architecture and tombs) that were appropriate for the first millennium Phrygian capital in scale and date (Körte and Körte 1904). This identification has never been seriously challenged, and has been supported by later discoveries including Phrygian inscriptions — none, however, bearing the name “Gordion” (see Mellink 1991). Modern archaeological research at the site began in 1950 under the direction of Rodney Stuart Young, sponsored by the University of Pennsylvania Museum of Archaeology and Anthropology. From 1950 to 1973 Young, Machteld Mellink, G. Roger Edwards, and their many talented students 194 M.M. VOIGT & T. CUYLER YOUNG, Jr. Fig. 2. Map of Gordion showing major topographic zones of the site. PHRYGIAN GORDION 195 Fig. 3. Plan of Yassihöyük showing excavated areas. cleared over 2.5 hectares on Yassihöyük,1 explored fortifications on the adjacent Küçük Höyük; and excavated rich burials placed within tumuli that dot the hills surrounding the settlement (Figs. 2-3).2 On Yassihöyük, 1 Yassihöyük has often been equated with the entire ancient city rather than with the central zone of a larger settlement. In order to distinguish it from other topographic areas archaeologists working at the site have referred to Yassihöyük as the “City Mound” (equally confusing) or the “Citadel Mound” (because of the heavy fortification walls surrounding the palace quarter for much of the site’s history). With the clear definition of two central mounds in the Middle and Late Phrygian periods (YHSS 5-4) and perhaps earlier, a shift of terminology is needed. In this article (pending discussions of terminology with other members of the Gordion Project), we will refer to the modern mound as Yassihöyük, and the two elevated areas of YHSS 5-4 as the “Eastern Mound” and “Western Mound”. 2 For a recent summary of archaeology at Gordion with key references see Voigt 1997. 196 M.M. VOIGT & T. CUYLER YOUNG, Jr. Young was primarily interested in the burned remains of a palace complex that he identified as the city of King Midas and dated c. 700 BC. Settlements overlying the Gordion “Destruction Level” were exposed and removed, but because of a highly complex stratigraphy, not well understood. Earlier phases of occupation, critical for an understanding of the emergence of the Phrygian state and the relationship of this process to the fall of the Hittite Empire, were known only from very small soundings. This phase of excavation ended with Young’s death in 1974, and for nearly 15 years the efforts of Gordion Project members were devoted to publication (e.g. DeVries 1990; Gunter 1991; Kohler 1995; Roller 1987; Romano 1995; Sams 1994; Young et al 1981). In 1988, the University of Pennsylvania resumed an active program of excavation and regional survey at Gordion under the direction of Mary Voigt.3 Voigt’s initial research goals were the definition of a detailed stratigraphic sequence for the site from the Bronze Age to the most recent occupation; the recovery of information on the Bronze Age-Iron Age transition; and a study of environment and settlement patterns through archaeological and ethnobotanical survey. These goals were achieved in 1988 and 1989 through the excavation of two soundings within and adjacent to the main area excavated by Rodney Young (Fig. 3) and the initiation of a regional surface survey (Voigt 1994, 1997; Voigt and Henrickson in press; Sams and Voigt 1990, 1991; Sumner and Dickey 1993). The definition of chronological units or phases within the Yassihöyük Stratigraphic Sequence or YHSS was based on discontinuities in depositional processes and/or architecture, as well as other aspects of material culture in the excavated sample (Table 1). The soundings not only provided ceramic markers that served as a chronological control for excavation in other areas and the regional survey (Henrickson 1993, 1994), but also yielded faunal and flo- ral remains and manufacturing debris that could be used to outline changes in the environment and subsistence system (Miller 1993; Zeder and Arter 1996). In 1993, a second cycle of research began, this time focussed on an exam- ination of changes in settlement organization, and on the impact of the Achaemenid conquest on Phrygian Gordion. Excavation was to be carried 3 Project Director since 1988 is G. Kenneth Sams who is directly responsible for site and artifact conservation programs, and for publication of research carried out between 1950 and 1973. PHRYGIAN GORDION 197 Table 1. The Yass∞ıhöyük Stratigraphic Sequence (YHSS) YHSS Phase Period Name Approximate Dates 1 Medieval 10-12th century AD? 2 Roman 1st century - 3rd century AD 3 Hellenistic 330-150 BC 4 Late Phrygian 550-330 BC 5 Middle Phrygian 700-550 BC 6 Early Phrygian 950-700 BC 7 Early Iron Age 1100-950 BC 9-8 Late Bronze Age 1400-1200 BC 10 Middle Bronze Age 1600(?)-1400 BC out within three poorly known topographic areas of the site: 1) the western half of Yassihöyük; 2) the virtually unknown Lower Town to the south; and 3) a newly discovered Outer Town located to the north and west of Yassihöyük (Fig.

Load more