Hostname: page-component-586b7cd67f-2plfb Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-11-28T01:19:20.165Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

A Mausoleum at Ariassos, Pisidia

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  23 December 2013

Sarah Cormack
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Extract

The funerary architecture of the Imperial period in south-west Anatolia has long been recognized as deserving of attention due to its variety, complexity, and the sheer number of extant tombs. Recently, a preliminary survey at the Pisidian site of Ariassos has revealed the presence of an extensive necropolis containing a large number of well-preserved tombs. One of the best-preserved and most interesting of these tombs is a large funerary monument, a mausoleum, on a tall podium. An analysis of the mausoleum's type, and its probable antecedents, enables us to reconstruct the architectural climate of this provincial city during the Roman Imperial period.

The site of Ariassos, in Pisidia, is located approximately 3 km. south-west of the village of Bademaǧacı, 50 km. north of Antalya, and is today clearly signposted off the main road. The identification of the site has been known since the late nineteenth century, when Ariassos was visited in around 1885 by an Austrian team, under the guidance of K. Lanckoronski; however, the ruins were identified as those of the city of Cretopolis. Using inscriptional evidence, a French epigraphic expedition to Asia Minor correctly identified the site in a publication of 1892.

Type
Research Article
Information
Anatolian Studies , Volume 39 , December 1989 , pp. 31 - 40
Copyright
Copyright © The British Institute at Ankara 1989

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

1 The survey was conducted with the permission of the Turkish Archaeological authorities and under the direction of Dr. Stephen Mitchell (Univ. College, Swansea); other participants were Dr. E. J. Owens (Univ. College, Swansea), Miss Yvonne Day and Mr. Tony Millard (Univ. College, Swansea), Mr. Armin Schultz and Miss Daniela Pohl, University of Münster. I am indebted to all of these, and in particular Miss Pohl, who worked with me unflaggingly in the necropolis. I am most grateful to Yale University Department of Classics for a summer grant from the Berkeley, Biddle and Woolsey fund, and to the British Institute of Archaeology at Ankara for a summer travel grant. I would also like to thank Prof. D. E. E. Kleiner for her helpful comments and advice.

2 Lanckoronski, K. and Niemann, G., Die Städte Pamphyliens und Pisidiens II (1892) 123–6Google Scholar; pl. XXII (Hadrian's Gate, and the grave building or “heroon” inside the city).

3 Bérard, V., “Inscriptions d'Asie Mineure”, BCH XVI (1892) 427–34Google Scholar, esp. p. 427, no. 16 for the identification of the site. Bérard also restores Strabo XIII.7.2 “Aarassos” to “Ariassos”. Bérard's account describes the well-preserved monumental gate constructed during the Hadrianic period (Lanckoronski, pl. XXII) and numerous sarcophagi and funerary monuments. Also, G. Bean, in PECS, “Ariassos”; IGR III.422Google Scholar.

4 Unfortunately, these marble chips were too fragmentary to be attributed to any particular sarcophagus type or date; some of them, indeed, may have come from broken statuary. The only remotely recognizable piece appears to represent a hand holding a scroll, perhaps part of a seated figure from a “Philosopher sarcophagus”.

5 These limestone sarcophagi almost without exception have a tabula ansata on the façade, flanked by wreaths or undecorated shields; although some of the tabulae were originally inscribed, they are all illegible now. The sarcophagus type appears throughout Pisidia, e.g. at Selge: Machatschek, A. and Schwarz, M., Bauforschungen in Selge (Denkschr., Österr. Akad. d. Wiss., Band 152, Wien 1981Google Scholar, = TAM Erg. Band 9) 101–3Google Scholar, fig. 5 a–b, Abb. 74 and 77, for a variation of the type, with abstract garlands flanking a tabula ansata; the type also occurs in Rough Cilicia: cf. Alföldi-Rosenbaum, E., The Necropolis of Adrassus (Balabolu) in Rough Cilicia (Isauria) (Denkschr., Österr. Akad. d. Wiss., Band 146, Wien 1980Google Scholar = TAM Erg. Band 10) 61, no. 19Google Scholar; plate XXXII no. 3.

6 A variation of the “shield in gable” motif appears on some Cilician tomb buildings, where the shield becomes a clipeus containing one or more portrait busts of the deceased, e.g. at Dösene, Cilicia: Keil, J. and Wilhelm, A., Denkmäler aus dem Rauhen Kilikien (MAMA III, 1931)Google Scholar pl. 12, nos. 34, 37. A similar motif of a shield, this time undecorated and flanked by two eagles, appears in the gable of the so-called Tomb of Solon at Kümbet (near Afyon), Phrygia; Roman Imperial period: Akurgal, E., Die Kunst Anatoliens (Berlin 1961)Google Scholar fig. 76.

7 The drafted masonry technique is attested throughout Asia Minor in the Roman Imperial period, and seems to represent a conscious archaism invoking Hellenistic masonry techniques. Drafted masonry at entry to eastern parodos of theatre at Selge, probably mid second century A.D.; Machatschek and Schwarz, (1981), supra n. 5, pp. 72–80; Abb. 43, contra De Bernardi Ferrero, who dates the theatre to the third quarter of the third century A.D.; Ferrero, D. De Bernardi, Teatri Classici in Asia Minore I (Rome 1966) pp. 43–53Google Scholar. Further afield, the technique appears at Pergamon, in the gymnasium: Roman period treatment of terrace walls, with narrow drafted borders. Schazmann, P., Altertümer von Pergamon VI: Das Gymnasion (1923) 16Google Scholar.

8 Measurements of the cuttings (distances from the N.E. corner of the podium): 2·20 m., 2·98 m., 4·00 m., 5·17 m., and 5–92 m. The cuttings are approximately 2–4 cm. deep.

9 The presence of a sarcophagus is assumed from the evidence of numerous white marble chips and fragments; all too fragmentary, however, to be of use in determining the type of sarcophagus from which they may have originated. For the location of a marble columnar sarcophagus inside the burial chamber of a limestone temple-tomb, cf. Machatschek and Schwarz, (supra n. 5), 97.

10 For tomb architecture in S.W. Asia Minor in general, cf. Bossert, H. T., Altanatolien (Berlin 1942) 28–32Google Scholar; Akurgal, E., Die Kunst anatoliens (Berlin 1961) 122–49Google Scholar; Waelkens, M., “Hausähnliche Gräber in Anatolien vom 3. Jht. v. Chr. bis in die Römerzeit”, in Papenfuss, D. and Strocka, V. M., eds., Palast und Hütte. Beiträge zum Bauen und Wohnen im Altertum von Archäologen, Vor- und Frühgeschichtlern (Mainz 1982) 421–45Google Scholar; idem., Antike Welt 11, Heft 4 (1980) 3–13. Waelkens suggests two categories for Asia Minor tombs: tholos/chamber tombs, and those which represent or are influenced by domestic house architecture. Although the existence of these categories is not disputed, the Ariassos mausoleum seems to stem from a different tradition.

11 Kjeldsen, K. and Zahle, J., “A Dynastic Tomb in Central Lycia: New evidence for the study of Lycian Architecture and History in the Classical Period”, Acta Archaeologica XLVII (1976) 29–46Google Scholar; for the date, p. 44.

12 Tomb of Cyrus the Great (d. 529 B.C.): a rectangular grave chamber with gabled roof, on a 6-stepped podium, surrounded by free-standing columns; cf. Stronach, D., Pasargadae (Oxford 1978) 24–43, 302–4Google Scholar; Kleiss, W., “Der Takht-i-Rustam und das Kyros Grab”, AA (1971) 157–62Google Scholar. In an article published in 1928, (Matz, F., “Hellenistische und Römische Grabbauten”, Die Antike 4 [1928] esp. 278–9Google Scholar) F. Matz argued that the striking similarity between the tomb of Cyrus at Pasargadae and the Lycian podium tombs of the late classical and hellenistic periods must indicate that the Cyrus tomb is derived from Lycian tombs; overcoming the chronological problem that this argument presented, Matz suggested that there must have been sixth century Lycian podium tombs on which the Cyrus tomb was dependent. Although this argument at first appears circular, recent archaeological evidence has supported Matz's theory about the existence of sixth century Lycian tombs (cf. Kjeldsen and Zahle, supra n. 11); the question of the direction of the influence has recently been clarified by Cahill, N., “Taş Kule: A Persian Period Tomb near Phokaia”, AJA LXXXXII (1988) 481–501CrossRefGoogle Scholar (regarding a sixth century tomb in western Anatolia).

13 N. Cahill, (supra n. 12), esp. 493, 499–501. Greek and Persian elements in Lycian funerary art: Jacobs, B., Griechische und Persische Elemente in der Grabkunst Lykiens zur Zeit der Achämenidenherrschaft (SIMA vol. LXXVIII, 1987)Google Scholar.

14 i.e. at Apollonia (supra, n. 8); and the Heroon at Limyra: Borchhardt, J., Die Bauskulptur des Heroons von Limyra (Ist. Forsch. XXXII, 1976)Google Scholar Abb. 23 and 24 for the reconstructed elevation of the heroon. For Lycian tombs in general, cf. Kjeldsen, K. and Zahle, J., “Lykische Gräber: Ein vorläufiger Bericht”, AA (1975) 312–50Google Scholar.

15 Nereid Monument: Coupel, P. and Metzger, H., Fouilles de Xanthos 3: Le monument des Nereids: L'architecture (Paris 1969)Google Scholar; Martin, R., “Le monument des Nereids et l'architecture funéraire”, RA (1971) 327–37;Google Scholar see now Bommelaer, J. F., “Sur le monument des Néréides et sur quelques principes de l'analyse architecturale”, BCH CX (1986) 249–71CrossRefGoogle Scholar. Halicarnassus: van Breen, J., Het Reconstructieplan voor het Mausoleum te Halikarnassos (Amsterdam 1942)Google Scholar; Dinsmoor, W. B., The Architecture of Ancient Greece (New York, 3rd ed. reprinted 1975) pp. 257–61, and p. 357Google Scholar for extensive bibliography; Jeppesen, K., “Neue Ergebnisse zur Wiederherstellung des Maussolleions von Halikarnassos”, Ist. Mitt. XXVI (1976) 47–99Google Scholar; id., “Zur Gründung und Baugeschichte des Maussolleions von Halikarnassos”, Ist. Mitt. XXVII/XXVIII (1977/78) 169–211; for a brief survey of Asia Minor mausolea and their sculptural programmes, cf. Waywell, G., “Mausolea in South-West Asia Minor”, Yayla 3 (1980) 4–11Google Scholar. That the mausoleum building with pyramidal roof was still influential in the Roman Imperial period is evidenced by the fact that it was chosen as the architectural type for the cenotaph of Gaius Caesar at Limyra: Ganzert, J., Das Kenotaph für Gaius Caesar in Limyra (Ist. Forsch. XXXV, Tübingen 1984)Google Scholar, Beilage 21 and 22 for the reconstruction.

16 Roos, Paavo, The Rock-cut Tombs of Caunos (SIMA XXXIV, 1972)Google Scholar; id., South-Eastern Caria and the Lyco-Carian Borderland (SIMA LXXII, 1985).

17 For example, at Dösene in Rough Cilicia: MAMA III (1931) 23 ffGoogle Scholar. (supra n. 6); Machatschek, A., “Die Grabtempel von Dösene im Rauhen Kilikien”, in Mélanges Mansel ( = Turk Tarih Kurumu , 7 Series, No. 60, Ankara 1974) 251–61Google Scholar. Elaiussa Sebaste and Korykos in Rough Cilicia: Machatschek, A., Die Nekropolen und Grabmäler im Gebiet von Elaiussa Sebaste und Korykos im Rauhen Kilikien (Denkschr., Österr. Akad. d. Wiss., Band 96, Wien 1967Google Scholar = TAM Erg. Band 2) 85–100Google Scholar; Selge in Pisidia: Machatschek and Schwarz, (supra, n. 5) 97–101.

18 Esquini-Schneider, E. S., La necropoli di Hierapolis di Frigia (Mon.Ant., Serie Miscellanea 1.2, Rome 1972)Google Scholar; including such “hybrid” tomb types as the flat-roofed grave chamber situated on a stepped podium, in which there is an additional grave-chamber (hyposorion); for this type, cf. Machatschek (1967) (supra n. 17) “Sarkophage auf Unterbau mit Grabkammer” 42 f., taf. 15, 16; and abb. 20.

19 This information is known from inscriptions; from Iconium, inscription recording the construction of a tomb by Gaius Aponius Firmos, in the upper storey of which only he and his wife may be buried, with provisions made in his will for other burials in the lower chamber: . MAMA VIII (1962) 58Google Scholar, no. 327.

20 References for information concerning burial in Lycian tombs given in Cahill (supra n. 13) 486, n. 16.

21 Borchhardt, J. et al. , Myra. Eine Lykische Metropole in antiker und byzantinischer Zeit (Ist. Forsch. XXX, Berlin 1975) 61–3Google Scholar. The grave temple at Myra consists of a cella building decorated with interior niches, on a stepped podium; contained in the foundations of the building are two vaulted chambers, not connected with each other, and assumed to have contained wooden sarcophagi. The niches in the cella above would have contained the marble sarcophagi of the tomb's founder and his immediate relatives. The grave temple is dated, on the basis of the style of its architectural decoration, to the Antonine–Severan period.

22 Hadrian visited Asia Minor in 123/124 (Pontus, Bithynia, Cappadocia and Phrygia), and 129 (Ephesos, Laodicea, Pamphylia, Cilicia and on to Syria); the itinerary suggests that the southern and coastal cities would have erected monuments in honour of his second visit.

23 For Imperial building projects in Asia Minor, see now Mitchell, S., “Imperial Building in the Eastern Roman Provinces,” in Macready, S. and Thompson, F. H., eds., Roman Architecture in the Greek world (Soc. of Antiquaries, Occasional Papers (New Series) X, London 1987) 18–25Google Scholar.

24 Cremna: temple tomb on the south cliff (unpublished; sketched by Lanckoronski II (1892) 172), early second century A.D. Selge: tomb building in the north (Machatschek and Schwarz, supra n. 5, 97–8), late second century A.D. At Elaiussa Sebaste in Cilicia, despite the absence of secure dating criteria, Machatschek [1967] (supra n. 17) sees a development from simple rock-cut tombs of the first century A.D., through larger house-type tombs, some with vaulted or gabled roofs, of the mid-second century and continuing through the third century A.D., and elaborate temple-tombs of the late second and third centuries A.D. Termessos: numerous built tombs of the second and third centuries A.D.: Heberdey, R. and Wilberg, A., “Grabbauten von Termessos in Pisidien”, ÖJh III (1900) 177 ffGoogle Scholar. Myra (Lycia): grave temple/temple tomb, supra n. 21, Antonine–Severan period. These are just a few of the well-published tomb buildings in the S.W. of Asia Minor; many more exist.

25 It is noteworthy that tombs built on a podium are known from the Imperial west. For example, at Rome, the tomb of Bibulus, now dated to c. A.D. 60, consisting of a podium, two-stepped krepis, and upper building decorated with pilasters and a false door: Eisner, M., Zur Typologie der Grabbauten im Suburbium Roms ( = Röm. Mitt. Ergänzungsheft 26, 1986) 225Google Scholar; pl. 1. Many of the tombs located outside Pompeii, although clearly constituting a separate tradition, are raised up on high podia, sometimes containing a chamber: e.g. the tomb of A. Umbricius Scaurus (?), consisting of an altar-tomb resting on a podium and lower chamber. Kockel, V., Die Grabbauten vor dem Herkulaner Tor in Pompeji (Beiträge zur Erschliessung hellenistischer und kaiserzeitlicher Skulptur und Architektur, Band 1, 1983) 70–5Google Scholar; pls. 15–17. These western tombs may be seen as adopting elements from the architectural vocabulary of the Greek east; Matz (supra n. 12) 285.