Le site archéologique de Meydancikkale (Turquie) ; du rovaume de Pirindu à la garnison ptolémaïque

Davesne, Alain; Lemaire, André; Lozachmeur, Hélène

doi:10.3406/crai.1987.14501

Cited by 4 publications

(2 citation statements)

References 2 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…The importance of Cyprus to the 134 Ura is best known from an Ugaritic archive, recording a desperate plea from Hattuša for a large shipment of grain via Mukis (Nougayrol et al 1968, 107, lines 20-4). The shipment was to arrive at the port of Ura, which has yet to be conclusively identified on the Cilician coast, though many associate the Hittite port with modern Silifke (classical Seleucia) (see Davesne et al 1987).…”

Section: Departurementioning

confidence: 99%

Aegean Interest on the Uluburun Ship

Bachhuber¹

2006

American Journal of Archaeology

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The inventory of elite manufactured objects and the large quantity of metal recovered from the Late Bronze Age Uluburun shipwreck mirror in many respects palatial gift exchange deliveries as they are recorded in the contemporary Amarna Letters. The excavator of the shipwreck proposes that two men of Aegean origin were on board and that the ship was sailing to the Aegean. By combining data generated from the Uluburun shipwreck with textual and archaeological evidence from the contemporary Near East and Aegean, this paper evaluates the plausibility of a diplomatic voyage en route to the Aegean tied to Mycenaean palatial enterprise.* introduction Evidence for a singular diplomatic voyage to the Late Bronze Age Aegean was first advanced by Hankey over two decades ago. In this scenario, an Egyptian delegation representing Amenhotep III visited numerous polities in the Aegean. She begins with observations on a statue base of Amenhotep III in his mortuary temple at Kom el-Hetan. 1 The statue base is inscribed with 14 place-names, listing important centers in the LH/LM III Aegean (i.e., Knossos, Boetian Thebes, Mycenae, Troy). 2 Hankey cautiously proposes that the inscribed statue base records an Egyptian voyage to the Aegean. 3 Her proposal has been taken up by Cline, 4 who suggests that the "Aegean List" is an itinerary, as the place-names follow a roughly circular pattern around the Aegean, beginning and ending with Crete. 5

show abstract

Section: Departurementioning

confidence: 99%

Aegean Interest on the Uluburun Ship

Bachhuber¹

2006

American Journal of Archaeology

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…11 There was also a Ptolemaic fortress inland at Meydan1tikkale, 15 km north of Celenderis near Gillnar. 12 The only other possible Hellenistic site inland is at Canbazh, about 10 km west of Diocaesarea where it seems likely that a sanctuary to an unknown god has been entirely lost by its rebuilding as a church; only the sanctuary wall and some reused blocks survive. 13 These examples might suggest a high degree of Hellenization, but the lack of comparable examples (beyond isolated towers), as well as the lack of features (except at the Olban temple-state at Diocaesarea) such as city walls, agorai or monumental tombs like those found in Pisidia, suggest the depth of Hellenization was limited.…”

mentioning

confidence: 99%

Romanization and some Cilician cults

Elton¹

2004

Roman Rule and Civic Life: Local and Regional Perspectives

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

This paper focuses on two sites from central Cilicia in Anatolia, the Corycian Cave and Kanhdivane, to make some comments about religion and Romanization. From the Corycian Cave, a pair of early third-century AD altars are dedicated to Zeus Korykios, described as Victorious (Epinikios), Triumphant (Tropaiuchos), and the Harvester (Epikarpios), and to Hermes Korykios, also Victorious, Triumphant, and the Harvester. The altars were erected for 'the fruitfulness and brotherly love of the Augusti', suggesting they come from the period before Geta's murder, i.e. between AD 209 and 212. 1 These altars are unremarkable and similar examples are common elsewhere, so these altars can be interpreted as showing the homogenising effect of the Roman Empire. But behind these dedications, however, may lie a religious tradition stretching back to the second millennium BC. At the second site, Kanhdivane, a tomb in the west necropolis was accompanied by a funerary inscription erected by Marcus Ulpius Knos for himself and his family, probably in the second century AD. Marcus then added, 'but if anyone damages or opens [the tomb] let him pay to the treasury of Zeus 1000 [denarii] and to the Moon (Selene) and to the Sun (Helios) above 1000 [denarii] and let him be subject to the curses also of the Underground Gods (Katachthoniai Theoi). ' 2 When he wanted to threaten retribution, Knos turned to a local group of gods. As at the Corycian Cave, Knos' actions may preserve traces of pre-Roman practices, though within a Roman framework. Both examples show Romanization in the sense that the imposition of Roman state control had led to cultural changes in the region. The use of the term 'Romanization' has been questioned recently, especially with demands for greater political sensitivity, and in particular, the need to see the process from the perspective of the administered and non-elites. This is a reflection of modem cultures and differs from the way Romanization was discussed in 1

show abstract

Between Mesopotamia and Greece: Cultural influences in Cilician Coin-iconography from the Late 5th to the Early 4th Century BC

Müseler¹

2021

Gephyra

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Our knowledge regarding Cilician coinage between the late 5th and the early 4th century BC has increased considerably in the course of the last two decades. This has made an updated and revised inventory of all the respective issues an indispensable requirement. A comparative analysis of the huge variety of contemporary series from different mints in Kilikia Tracheia and Kilikia Pedias, namely from Ura, Kelenderis, Holmoi, Nagidos, Aŋchiale, Soloi, Tarsos, Mallos and Issos, shows that the region had rather been a part of the Ancient Orient than of the Greek oikumene during the period in question. It is, therefore, not advisable to interpret Cilician coin-iconography by the simple application of a principally Greek canon. A complete understanding of the imagery on early Cilician coins requires a far more complex approach: This must take into account all the various roots, which have created this multifaceted and unique blend of symbolic representations. Such a critical endeavour may actually yield information about regional events, which are not reported by our literary tradition.

show abstract

Le site archéologique de Meydancikkale (Turquie) ; du rovaume de Pirindu à la garnison ptolémaïque

Cited by 4 publications

References 2 publications

Aegean Interest on the Uluburun Ship

Aegean Interest on the Uluburun Ship

Romanization and some Cilician cults

Between Mesopotamia and Greece: Cultural influences in Cilician Coin-iconography from the Late 5th to the Early 4th Century BC

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About