Research Article
BibTex RIS Cite

Claudiopolis Ganymedes Mozaiği

Year 2022, Issue: 15, 285 - 298, 09.11.2022
https://doi.org/10.26658/jmr.1143760

Abstract

Claudiopolis (Bolu), Antik Dönem’de Bithynia Bölgesi sınırları içerisinde yer alan önemli bir kentti. 2011 yılında kent merkezinde yapılan kurtarma kazısı çalışması esnasında Ganymedes mozaiği açığa çıkarılmıştır. Ganymedes mozaiği kentteki bir Roma villasının zemininde yer almış olan bir taban mozaiğidir ve dikdörtgen bir biçimde düzenlenmiştir. Mozaik tabanı 3,60 m. x 6,70 m ölçülerindedir. Ölümlülerin en güzeli sayılan Ganymedes, Dardanos soyundan ve Troya kral ailesindendir. Zeus, İda dağının yamaçlarında sürülerini otlatırken gördüğü genç Ganymedes’e aşık olmuştur. Kartalını göndererek ya da bizzat kendisi kartal kılığına girerek Ganymedes’i Olympos’a kaçırmış ve onu tanrılar sofrasına şarap sunucusu yapmıştır. Hellenistik Dönem sanatında ve edebiyatında favori bir konu olan Ganymedes’in kaçırılması olayı daha sonra Romalı mozaik sanatçıları için de popülerliğini devam ettirmiştir. Mozaik sanatçılarının repertuvarlarında Ganymedes’in efsanesine ilişkin olarak en çok tercih edilen tasvir Zeus’un kartal kılığına girerek Ganymedes’i Olympos’a kaçırması sahnesidir. Claudiopolis mozaiğinde ise bu popüler sahnenin bir sonraki aşamasında Ganymedes Olympos’da şarap sunucusu olarak devam eden hayatında kartal’a içki sunarken tasvir edilmiştir. Bu sahnenin tasvirinin oldukça az bulunmuş olması da yine Claudiopolis Ganymedes mozaiği’nin önemini arttıran diğer bir unsurdur. Dikdörtgen biçiminde düzenlenmiş olan sahnenin sol tarafına kartal, sağ tarafına ise Ganymedes yerleştirilmiştir. Bu figürlü panonun etrafında bir sıra basit örgü bandı, bir sıra düz bant ve iki sıra kesişen dairelerden oluşan bordür düzenlemesi yer almaktadır. Figürlü sahnede doğal ortamın göstergesi olan kaya, ağaç ve bitki motifleri kullanılmamıştır. Claudiopolis mozaiği, sahip olduğu stilistik ve ikonografik özellikler itibariyle MS 3. yüzyılın sonu - 4. yüzyılın başlarına tarihlendirilebilir.

References

  • Amelung 1903 W. Amelung, Die Sculpturen des Vaticanischen Museums, Band I, Berlin.
  • Bartman 2002 E. Bartman, “Eros’s Flame: Images of Sexy Boys in Roman Ideal Sculpture”, Memoirs of the American Academy in Rome, Supplementary Volumes, Vol. 1, The Ancient Art of Emulation: Studies in Artistic Originality and Tradition from the Present to Classical Antiquity, 249-271.
  • Blázquez 2011 J. M. Blázquez, “Mythology in Mosaics of Zeugma and Hispania. Similarities and Differences”, M. Şahin (ed.), 11th International Colloquium on Ancient Mosaics, Bursa, 137-162.
  • Boatwrigh 2000 M. T. Boatwright, Hadrian and the Cities of the Roman Empire, Princeton.
  • Budde 1972 L. Budde, Antike Mosaiken in Kilikien. Band II, Die Heidnischen Mosaiken, Recklinghausen.
  • Canciani 1997 F. Canciani, “Zeus / Jüppiter”, LIMC VIII, 421-470.
  • Cimok 2000 F. Cimok, Antioch Mosaics, İstanbul.
  • Dörner 1952 F. K. Dörner, Bericht über eine Reise in Bithynien, Wien.
  • Dunbabin 1999 K. M. D. Dunbabin, Mosaics of the Greek and Roman World, Cambridge.
  • Erhat 1997 A. Erhat, Mitoloji Sözlüğü, İstanbul.
  • Furtwängler 1964 A. Furtwängler, Masterpieces of Greek Sculpture, Chicago.
  • Gazda 1981 E. K. Gazda, “Ganymede and the Eagle: A Marble Group from Carthage” Archaeology 34, 4, 56-60.
  • Huskinson 2015 J. Huskinson, Roman Strigillated Sarkophagi, Art and Social History, Oxford.
  • Jiménez 2020 L. N. Jiménez, “On the Representation of Ganymede in the Roman Mosaic of the Loves of Zeus from Astigi (Baetica)”, JMR 13, 139-148.
  • Joyce 1979 H. Joyce, “Form, Function and Technique in the Pavements of Delos and Pompeii” AJA 83, 3, 253-263.
  • Kondoleon 1995 C. Kondoleon, Domestic and Divine. Roman Mosaics in the House of Dionysos, London.
  • Lavin 1963 I. Lavin, “The Hunting Mosaics of Antioch and Their Sources. A Study of Compositional Principles in the Development of Early Mediaeval Style”, DOP XVII, 179-286.
  • Levi 1947 D. Levi, Antioch Mosaic Pavements, Princeton.
  • Magie 1950 D. Magie, Roman Rule in Asia Minor, I-II, Princeton.
  • March 2014 J. March, Klasik Mitler, S. Lim (çev.), İstanbul.
  • Önal 2009 M. Önal, A Corpus Zeugma Mosaics, İstanbul.
  • Phillips 1960 K. M. Phillips, “Subject and Technique in Hellenistic-Roman Mosaics: A Ganymede Mosaic from Sicily”, ArtB 42, 4, 243-262.
  • Richter 1950 G. M. A. Richter, The Sculpture and Sculptors of the Greeks, London.
  • Ridgway 1997 B. S. Ridgway, Fourth-Century Styles in Greek Sculpture, Wisconsin.
  • Salzmann 1982 D. Salzmann, Untersuchungen zu den Antiken Kieselmosaiken, Berlin.
  • Sezer 2015 S. Sezin Sezer, “The Orpheus Mosaic of Prusias ad Hypium” JMR 8, 123-140.
  • Sichtermann 1959 H. Sichtermann, “Zeus und Ganymed in Frühklassischer Zeit”, AntK 2, H.1, 10-15.
  • Sichtermann 1988 H. Sichtermann, “Ganymedes” LIMC IV-1, 154-169; LIMC IV-2, 75-96.
  • Topçu 1986 Ç. Topçu, “Seleukeia-Kalykadnos 1984 Yılı Kazı Çalışmaları”, VII. KST, 509-517.
  • Tsakirgis 1989 B. Tsakirgis, “The Decorated Pavements of Morgantina I: The Mosaics”, AJA 93, 3, 395-416.
  • Vermeule 1968 C. C. Vermeule, Roman Imperial Art in Greece and Asia Minor, Cambridge.
  • Waywell 1979 S. E. Waywell, “Roman Mosaics in Greece”, AJA 83, 3, 93-321.

The Ganymede Mosaic of Claudiopolis

Year 2022, Issue: 15, 285 - 298, 09.11.2022
https://doi.org/10.26658/jmr.1143760

Abstract

Claudiopolis (Bolu) was a prominent city in Bithynia during the Ancient Period. The Ganymede mosaic was discovered during a rescue excavation at the city center in 2011. The Ganymede mosaic is a floor mosaic arranged in a rectangle and situated on the ground of a Roman villa in the city. The size of the mosaic base is 3.60 m. x 6.70 m. Ganymede, considered as the most beautiful of mortals, was descended from the Dardanians and belonged to the Trojan royal family. Zeus saw and fell in love with the young Ganymede while he had been tending sheep on the slopes of Mount Ida. Zeus either summoned an eagle or turned into an eagle himself to transport the youth to Mount Olympus where he was appointed as cupbearer of the gods. The story of the abduction of Ganymede became popular in Hellenistic art and literature and continued to be so among Roman mosaic artists. The most preferred depiction with regard to the myth of Ganymede in the repertoire of mosaic artists was the scene of Zeus turning into an eagle to abduct Ganymede and bring him to Olympus. The mosaic of Claudiopolis depicts the following stage of the events in which Ganymede, during his life as a cupbearer in Olympus, offers a drink to the eagle. The depiction of this scene has rarely been found, which also adds to the significance of the Claudiopolis Ganymedes mosaic. The scene arranged in a rectangle shows the eagle on the left side and Ganymede on the right side. The panel with figures is surrounded by a border consisting of a line of simple guilloche, a straight band and two lines of intersecting circles. The scene does not involve any bolder, tree or plant motifs as indicators of a natural environment. Due to its stylistic and iconographic characteristics, the mosaic of Claudiopolis is estimated to date back to the late 3th century or early 4th century AD.

References

  • Amelung 1903 W. Amelung, Die Sculpturen des Vaticanischen Museums, Band I, Berlin.
  • Bartman 2002 E. Bartman, “Eros’s Flame: Images of Sexy Boys in Roman Ideal Sculpture”, Memoirs of the American Academy in Rome, Supplementary Volumes, Vol. 1, The Ancient Art of Emulation: Studies in Artistic Originality and Tradition from the Present to Classical Antiquity, 249-271.
  • Blázquez 2011 J. M. Blázquez, “Mythology in Mosaics of Zeugma and Hispania. Similarities and Differences”, M. Şahin (ed.), 11th International Colloquium on Ancient Mosaics, Bursa, 137-162.
  • Boatwrigh 2000 M. T. Boatwright, Hadrian and the Cities of the Roman Empire, Princeton.
  • Budde 1972 L. Budde, Antike Mosaiken in Kilikien. Band II, Die Heidnischen Mosaiken, Recklinghausen.
  • Canciani 1997 F. Canciani, “Zeus / Jüppiter”, LIMC VIII, 421-470.
  • Cimok 2000 F. Cimok, Antioch Mosaics, İstanbul.
  • Dörner 1952 F. K. Dörner, Bericht über eine Reise in Bithynien, Wien.
  • Dunbabin 1999 K. M. D. Dunbabin, Mosaics of the Greek and Roman World, Cambridge.
  • Erhat 1997 A. Erhat, Mitoloji Sözlüğü, İstanbul.
  • Furtwängler 1964 A. Furtwängler, Masterpieces of Greek Sculpture, Chicago.
  • Gazda 1981 E. K. Gazda, “Ganymede and the Eagle: A Marble Group from Carthage” Archaeology 34, 4, 56-60.
  • Huskinson 2015 J. Huskinson, Roman Strigillated Sarkophagi, Art and Social History, Oxford.
  • Jiménez 2020 L. N. Jiménez, “On the Representation of Ganymede in the Roman Mosaic of the Loves of Zeus from Astigi (Baetica)”, JMR 13, 139-148.
  • Joyce 1979 H. Joyce, “Form, Function and Technique in the Pavements of Delos and Pompeii” AJA 83, 3, 253-263.
  • Kondoleon 1995 C. Kondoleon, Domestic and Divine. Roman Mosaics in the House of Dionysos, London.
  • Lavin 1963 I. Lavin, “The Hunting Mosaics of Antioch and Their Sources. A Study of Compositional Principles in the Development of Early Mediaeval Style”, DOP XVII, 179-286.
  • Levi 1947 D. Levi, Antioch Mosaic Pavements, Princeton.
  • Magie 1950 D. Magie, Roman Rule in Asia Minor, I-II, Princeton.
  • March 2014 J. March, Klasik Mitler, S. Lim (çev.), İstanbul.
  • Önal 2009 M. Önal, A Corpus Zeugma Mosaics, İstanbul.
  • Phillips 1960 K. M. Phillips, “Subject and Technique in Hellenistic-Roman Mosaics: A Ganymede Mosaic from Sicily”, ArtB 42, 4, 243-262.
  • Richter 1950 G. M. A. Richter, The Sculpture and Sculptors of the Greeks, London.
  • Ridgway 1997 B. S. Ridgway, Fourth-Century Styles in Greek Sculpture, Wisconsin.
  • Salzmann 1982 D. Salzmann, Untersuchungen zu den Antiken Kieselmosaiken, Berlin.
  • Sezer 2015 S. Sezin Sezer, “The Orpheus Mosaic of Prusias ad Hypium” JMR 8, 123-140.
  • Sichtermann 1959 H. Sichtermann, “Zeus und Ganymed in Frühklassischer Zeit”, AntK 2, H.1, 10-15.
  • Sichtermann 1988 H. Sichtermann, “Ganymedes” LIMC IV-1, 154-169; LIMC IV-2, 75-96.
  • Topçu 1986 Ç. Topçu, “Seleukeia-Kalykadnos 1984 Yılı Kazı Çalışmaları”, VII. KST, 509-517.
  • Tsakirgis 1989 B. Tsakirgis, “The Decorated Pavements of Morgantina I: The Mosaics”, AJA 93, 3, 395-416.
  • Vermeule 1968 C. C. Vermeule, Roman Imperial Art in Greece and Asia Minor, Cambridge.
  • Waywell 1979 S. E. Waywell, “Roman Mosaics in Greece”, AJA 83, 3, 93-321.
There are 32 citations in total.

Details

Primary Language Turkish
Subjects Archaeology
Journal Section Article
Authors

Sezin Sezer This is me 0000-0002-2844-0513

Publication Date November 9, 2022
Published in Issue Year 2022 Issue: 15

Cite

APA Sezer, S. (2022). Claudiopolis Ganymedes Mozaiği. Journal of Mosaic Research(15), 285-298. https://doi.org/10.26658/jmr.1143760
AMA Sezer S. Claudiopolis Ganymedes Mozaiği. JMR. November 2022;(15):285-298. doi:10.26658/jmr.1143760
Chicago Sezer, Sezin. “Claudiopolis Ganymedes Mozaiği”. Journal of Mosaic Research, no. 15 (November 2022): 285-98. https://doi.org/10.26658/jmr.1143760.
EndNote Sezer S (November 1, 2022) Claudiopolis Ganymedes Mozaiği. Journal of Mosaic Research 15 285–298.
IEEE S. Sezer, “Claudiopolis Ganymedes Mozaiği”, JMR, no. 15, pp. 285–298, November 2022, doi: 10.26658/jmr.1143760.
ISNAD Sezer, Sezin. “Claudiopolis Ganymedes Mozaiği”. Journal of Mosaic Research 15 (November 2022), 285-298. https://doi.org/10.26658/jmr.1143760.
JAMA Sezer S. Claudiopolis Ganymedes Mozaiği. JMR. 2022;:285–298.
MLA Sezer, Sezin. “Claudiopolis Ganymedes Mozaiği”. Journal of Mosaic Research, no. 15, 2022, pp. 285-98, doi:10.26658/jmr.1143760.
Vancouver Sezer S. Claudiopolis Ganymedes Mozaiği. JMR. 2022(15):285-98.

21079                 16193




22516          16207



                                                   16208                          16209



22362