This study delves into the comprehensive examination of an anta capital discovered during the 2008 excavations at the ancient site of Alabanda in Caria, now housed in the Aydın Archaeological Museum. Employing a typological and stylistic analysis, the research attributes the capital to the latter part of the fifth century BC, emphasising its intricate architectural ornamentation and sculptural details that reflect significant artistic and cultural developments of the period. The capital features elaborate ornament bands and mythological reliefs, including depictions of Bellerophon-Pegasus and Chimera, and a griffin attacking a horse, which are analysed for their iconographic and symbolic significance within the broader Anatolian and Mediterranean contexts. The study also explores the potential original architectural setting of the capital, suggesting its use in a monumental tomb, a hypothesis supported by its dimensions and decorative complexity. Furthermore, the article discusses the role of such imagery in asserting local identities and engaging with wider Hellenic cultural and political themes, particularly considering the complex interactions between local Carian traditions and the dominant Greek culture of the period. The findings not only contribute to our understanding of Carian art and architecture but also highlight the region’s active participation in the cultural dialogues of the Classical world.

In the major port city of Patara on the southern coast of Roman Asia Minor, excavations unearthed a pharos (lighthouse) with an inscription that referred to an antipharos (a structure ‘opposite’ the lighthouse). It is unknown where the antipharos stood in Patara’s harbour, and scholars’ brief speculations about its location all assume that the antipharos was a second lighthouse. Yet a number of factors combine to suggest that there was only one pharos at Patara, including cautious Roman nocturnal sailing practices, the norm of single lighthouses in the ancient world, evidence of the pharos’ high visibility, and the only other instance of the word antipharos referring to something other than an operating lighthouse. Instead, the antipharos was probably either an unlit tower or a beacon instead of a lighthouse. I establish six possible locations for such an antipharos, and consider their likelihood based on how they might have ameliorated dangers to sailors entering the harbour. While there is not enough evidence to be completely confident, a rock islet that was in the middle of ancient Patara’s harbour emerges as the most probable location for the antipharos. The choice to build both a pharos and an antipharos, and where to place them, can illuminate the decision processes behind Roman harbour construction and the currently little-understood meaning of the word antipharos in antiquity.

The First Hill of Byzantium, the Greek city’s Acropolis, was later the site of the Topkapı Sarayı. Within the 55ha enclosure of the Ottoman palace are the remains of the First and Second regions of the Byzantine city including the church of Hagia Eirene and the excavated traces of other churches and buildings, but commonest are the remains of at least 33 Byzantine cisterns. Based on previous documentation and more recent observations we aim to explore their topographical setting and establish how the hydraulic infrastructure evolved over more than a millennium. In particular we address the question of changing sources of water, from the external aqueducts to rainwater harvesting. Initially we present the setting and distribution of cisterns over three distinct areas: the east flanks of the First Hill down to the Sea Walls but excluding the Mangana, the level hill including the four courts of the Saray and the west slopes including Gülhane Park. The evidence then turns to a consideration of the Byzantine written sources and Ottoman accounts of the Acropolis and the Saray. Finally, there is an attempt to interpret the subsurface as a source for the urban topography of the Byzantine district, and to set the remains in the wider context of evolving water usage and technology transfer from the Byzantine to Ottoman city. Details of the individual cisterns and their location are to be found in the online Appendix together with illustrations.*