Honorific Practices and the Politics of Space on Hellenistic Delos: Portrait Statue Monuments Along the Dromos

Dillon, Sheila; Baltes, Elizabeth P.

doi:10.3764/aja.117.2.0207

Cited by 10 publications

(2 citation statements)

References 10 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Although there is no indication that desirable lots were becoming scarce, these newly introduced ostothekai still clustered near the older ones. In a similar manner to how honorific monuments often cluster into epiphanestatoi topoi or particularly prominent and distinguished locations (Dillon, Baltes 2013;Ma 2013: 113-18), funerary monuments can accumulate based on pre-existing monuments as well (for example, Yasin 2016: 127-28). In such a way, each new monument affects and is affected by how older ones are understood, and (re)defines future potential.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 88%

Where to put them? Burial location in middle Hellenistic to late Roman Sagalassos, southwest Anatolia

Cleymans

Beaujean

2022

Anatol. Stud.

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

In classical archaeology the spatial aspects of deathscapes and associated funerary phenomena are often taken at face value. Beginning from a relational understanding of space, this article examines the necropoleis of middle Hellenistic to late Roman Sagalassos (second century BC to fifth century AD) within the wider context of the city. To facilitate this methodologically, four spatial aspects are investigated for the Hellenistic, Roman Imperial and late Roman periods: the relations between the spaces of the living and dead, landscaping practices, visibility and accessibility. These four aspects offer insight into the funerary and non-funerary relations from which the necropoleis emerged, developed, expanded and eventually disappeared. A whole range of funerary phenomena are included, ranging from cinerary urns, rectangular and vase-shaped ostothekai, aediculae, naiskoi, arcosolia and sarcophagi to larger sepulchral structures like temple tombs. In addition to being compared with urban developments, the observed patterns are further evaluated within the larger framework of Asia Minor. Ultimately, the enunciated archaeological patterns facilitate multicausal answers to where the Sagalassians placed their dead, if and how this changed and became more varied, and why these developments occurred in particular (re)configurations of time-space.

show abstract