Kelenderis Batı Nekropolünden Bir Mezarın Buluntuları Üzerine Değerlendirmeler

Year 2012, Issue: 27, 305 - 315, 01.02.2012

Mehmet Tekocak

Abstract

Kelenderis antik kenti, Doğu Akdeniz dünyasında yer alan ve antik çağda Kilikya Bölgesi olarak adlandırılan bölgenin, Orta Dağlık bölümündeki önemli liman şehirlerinden birisidir. 1989 yılında, kentin BatıNekropolünde, defineciler tarafından kısmen tahrip edilmişolan dromoslu bir yeraltıoda mezarıbulundu. Dromosu rampalıolan bu mezarın içerisinde iki bireye ait iskelet ele geçti. Bunlardan birinin ağzında yaprak biçimli bir altın levha bulunmaktaydı. Bu mezardaki asıl armağanlar ise, cam unguentariumlar, küresel gövdeli bir cam şişecik, Doğu SigillatalarıA gurubuna ait bir lagynos, bir Geç Rodos Ticari Amphorasıve iki parça halinde ele geçen demir strigilisin oluşturduğu konteksttir. Mezarın tipi, Kelenderis’te öteden beri tanınan bir tiptir. Ancak konteksti oluşturan bu mezar armağanları, batınekropolünde ilk kez görülen ve diğer mezarlardaki buluntulardan tamamıyla ayrılan farklıbir malzeme gurubu olarak karşımıza çıkar. Çünkü, hem Geç Rodos Amphorasının tipi, hem de lagynos ve cam ungentariumlar bu mezarın M.Ö. geç 1. yüzyıl ile M.S. 1. yüzyılın ortalarıarasında kullanıldığına işaret etmektedir. Diğer bir ifade ile mezarda ele geçen buluntular Kelenderis’in en eski mezarlarına sahip olan BatıNekropolü’nün uzun bir aradan sonra, yani geç Helenistik, erken İmparatorluk dönemde tekrar kullanılmaya başladığınıaçıkça ortaya koymuştur. İşte bu mezarın Kelenderis için olan tarihsel önemi de burada yatmaktadır. Çünkü bu buluntular Kilikya Korsanlarıdönemi sonrasına aittir. Böylece kentin, bölgede Büyük İskender’in ölümüyle başlayan ve korsanlık faaliyetleri ile doruk noktasına ulaşmışolan huzursuzluk döneminin ardından yeniden gelişmeye başladığını, diğer merkezlerle olan ilişkilerini tekrar canlandırma ve eski parlak günlerine dönme çabasıiçerisinde olduğunu, bunda da başarıya ulaştığınısöyleyebiliriz

Keywords

Kelenderis, Mersin-Aydıncık, Dromoslu YeraltıOda Mezarı

Evaluation of The Findings From A Tomb in The West Necropolis of Kelenderis

Abstract

Kelenderis is one of the important port cities in the Middle Rough Cilicia. It is now within the modern city in Aydıncık, Mersin. Although it is located on a mountainous region, it managed to form commercial, social, political and cultural relations with both inner cities and coastal cities in each period through its natural port and favourable location. It was a commonly visited city as it was on the Eastern Mediterranean trade route. It is needless to say that the significance and the period of the relations with those regions varied. The tomb presenting the findings that are the subject of our study is within the West Necropolis. This area is the necropolis that has been studied the most since the day the Kelenderis excavations started. The main reason that makes the West Necropolis more important is that the oldest tombs in the city are found here. However, the findings that are studied here completely differentiate this tomb from the others in West Necropolis as the works to be analysed here in detail are the latest examples in this necropolis. An underground tomb destroyed by treasure hunters was discovered in the West Necropolis of the city in 1989. The tomb is an underground tomb chamber with dromos. It consists of an uneven rectangular dromos with a slope and a rectangular chamber. The entrance of the tomb in southeast-northwest direction faces southeast. Unfortunately, the exact shape and the size of the door opening could not be determined as the entrance of the tomb chamber was completely destroyed by treasure hunters. The ceiling of the tomb chamber was mostly destroyed. Therefore, it is not possible to define the shape of the ceiling clearly. However; considering the similar tombs, it must be slightly concave. The walls of the tomb chamber were not built evenly like the walls of the dromos. Another significant fact about the tomb is that the dromos and the tomb chamber are not on the same axis. As can be understood from the plan, the western walls of the dromos and the tomb chamber are on the same line. Accordingly, the tomb chamber was expanded towards the right side of the entrance. Normally, as the dromos is on the same axis with the entrance of the tomb chamber, it should have centred the tomb chamber. The most important reason for this must be the difficulties encountered while digging the tomb chamber. That means the form of the main rock that the tomb chamber was to be carved into must have caused the shift in the structure Nothing other than a few pieces of ceramics that do not present a particular form has been found in the dromos during the excavations held in the tomb. An iron nail was found somewhere in the entrance close to the ground level. A commercial amphora was discovered leaning against the wall opposite the entrance of the tomb chamber. Just to the right but at a lower level, lagynos, three glass unguentaria in two different forms, an iron strigilis in two pieces and small iron rivets were found. Another finding from the tomb chamber is the skeletons of two individuals laid directly on the ground almost one on the other at the right side of the entrance, that is the larger part of the tomb chamber, parallel to the long eastern wall of the chamber. The bodies were laid on their backs and their heads face southeast. Rocks were placed at both sides of the heads preventing them from falling. One has a very thin golden plate inside his mouth. Although the age or the sex of the skeletons has not been determined yet, the fact that there are two bodies in the tomb puts forward the possibility of this being a family tomb. The iron strigilis among the tomb gifts suggests that at least one of the bodies here might be of a man and probably a sportsman. Another significant observation we had in the tomb was the small iron nails and rivets found together. The fact that these objects having no significance or value as tomb gifts were found together cannot be a coincidence. This must certainly have a meaning. These rivets and nails were most probably left behind from a wooden make-up box. The wooden part must have been destroyed in time and this nail and rivets must be left behind. The minor period gap between the ESA group lagynos which is probably the earliest work among the findings and the glass unguentaria also partly supports this view. Therefore, we would like to suggest the late 1st century B.C. and the first quarter or the first half of the 1st century A.D. as the date of this tomb. In other words, the findings from the tomb clearly show that the West Necropolis where the oldest tombs of Kelenderis are found was used again after a long period in late Hellenistic and early Empire period. Although the tomb does not offer a rich repertoire of findings, the context it belongs to and the variety of the findings increase the historical significance of this tomb for Kelenderis. The reason is that the mentioned works suggest the period after piracy and are mostly from the early Roman Empire period. Rhodes or Western Anatolia production commercial amphora, lagynos that has Tarsus or Northern Syria origins and the glass unguentaria that are Eastern Mediterranean and Aegean production all come from various centres and used as tomb gifts. If we are to analyse this result together with the history of the city and the region, the importance of the works from the context can be understood better. As known, the chaotic period Cilicia Region experienced that started with the death of Alexander went on for a long time. Moreover, the common piracy in Rough Cilicia where Kelenderis is located led to great unrest in the region. After the piracy ended, important construction works began in the city and in the region. This also had effects on Kelenderis as piracy did. This context found in this tomb and studied here, together with the other remains and findings in the region, clearly presents the fact that Kelenderis increased its relations with other regions after the piracy ended in Cilicia. However, the significance of the findings is not limited to this as there is another element adding more importance to them. It is the fact that these works were all produced in different centres and brought to the city after the piracy period. In short, we can say that ancient city of Kelenderis began to get over the chaotic period it experienced during Hellenistic period. This improvement got even better in time but never brought back the glory of the Classical period

Keywords

Kelenderis, Mersin-Aydıncık, Underground tomb chamber with dromos

References

• Akat, Y., Fıratlı, N., Kocabaş, H., Hüyesin Kocabaş Koleksiyonu Cam Eserler Kataloğu – Catalogue of Glass In The Hüseyin Kocabaş Collection, 1984.
• Arslan, M. (2003). “M.Ö. 187 Yılından M.Ö. 67 Yılına Kadar Lykia, Pamphylia ve Kilikia Trakheia Sahillerindeki Korsanlık Faaliyetleri: Nedenleri ve Sonuçları”, Adalya VI, 91-116.
• Büyükyörük, F. & Tibet, C. (2000). “1998-1999 Yılı Antalya Doğu Nekropolü Kurtarma Kazıları”, Adalya IV, 115-171.
• Canav, Üzlifat. Türkiye Şişe ve Cam Fabrikaları A.Ş. Cam Eserler Koleksiyonu, 1985.
• Crowfoot, G.M. (1957). “Terra Sigillata General List”, In: J.W. Crowfoot – G.M. Crowfoot – K.M. Kenyon (ed.), The Objects from Samaria, Samaria Sebaste III, 306-357.
• Çokay Kepçe, Sedef. Antalya Karaçallı Nekropolü, Adalya Ekyayın Dizisi 4, 2006.
• Durukan, M. (2007). “Nekropol Alanları”, In: S. Durugönül (ed.), Dağlık Kilikia’da Bir Antik Kent Kazısının Sonuçları - Nagidos, Adalya Ekyayın Dizisi 6, İstanbul, 23-42.
• Durukan, M. (2009). “The Connection of Eastern and Central Cilicia with Piracy”, Adalya XII, 77- 102.
• Erten Yağcı, E. (1990). “Hatay Müzesindeki Bir Grup Cam Eser”, I.Uluslararası Anadolu Cam Sanatı Sempozyumu - 1st International Anatolian Glass Symposium, 30-36.
• Hayes, J.W. (1985). “Sigillate Orientali”, In: Enciclopedia dell’Arte Classica e Orientale, Atlante delle Forme Ceramiche II, Ceramica Fine Romana nel Bacino Mediterraneo (Tardo Ellenismo e Primo Imperio), 1-96.
• Isings, C. Roman Glass from Dated Finds, 1957
• Jones, A.H.M. The Cities of the Eastern Roman Provinces, 1971.
• Lightfoot, C. & Arslan, M. Anadolu Antik Camları: Yüksel Erimtan Koleksiyonu – Ancient Glass of Asia Minor: Yüksel Erimtan Collection, 1992.
• Magie, D. Roman Rule in Asia Minor, 1950.
• Özet, Aynur. Dipten Gelen Parıltı, Bodrum Sualtı Arkeoloji Müzesi Cam Eserleri, 1998.
• Riley, J.A. (1979). “The Coarse Pottery from Berenice”, In J.A. Lloyd (ed.), Excavations at Sidi Khrebish Benghazi (Berenice), Vol. II, Suplements to Libya Antiqua V, 91-467.
• Stern, E.M. (1989). “Adana Bölge Müzesinde Sergilenmekte Olan Cam Eserler – The Glass Vessels Exhibited in the Bölge Museum-Adana”, Belleten 53/207-208, 583-605.
• Şenol, A.K. (1996). “Geç Rhodos Amphoralarının Batı Anadolu’daki Dağılım ve Üretim Problemleri”, SBT 96, 165-172.
• Şenol, A.Kaan. Marmaris Müzesi Ticari Amphoraları, 2003.
• Tekocak, M. (2006). “Kelenderis Roma Çağı Seramiği”. Yayınlanmamış doktora tezi, Selçuk Üniversitesi Sosyal Bilimler Enstitüsü Klasik Arkeoloji Anabilim Dalı.
• Tekocak, M. (2007). “Kelenderis Aşağı Şehir Sondajında Bulunan Kıbrıs Kırmızı Astarlı (Geç Roma D) Kapları”, İdol, Sayı: 33, 16-25.
• Tekocak, M. (2009). “African and Cypriot Red Slip Wares from Kelenderis”, In: H. Öniz (ed.), Proceedings of the XII Symposium on Mediterranean Archaeology-SOMA 2008, Famagusta, North Cyprus, 5-8 March 2008, BAR Int.Ser.1909, 132-142.
• Tekocak, M. (2010). “The Cooking Wares from Kelenderis”, In: S. Menchelli et al. (ed.), LRCW 3, Vol. II, BAR Int.Ser.2185 (II), 827-837.
• Zoroğlu, L. (1986). “Kelenderis Mezar Buluntuları”, Anadolu Araştırmaları X, 455-465.
• Zoroğlu, L. (1988). “Kelenderis 1986 Yılı Çalışmaları”, AST V.I, 409-422.
• Zoroğlu, L. (1989). “Kelenderis 1987 Yılı Kazısı”, KST X.I, 135-155.
• Zoroğlu, L. (1991). “Kelenderis 1989 Yılı Kazısı”, KST XII.II, 301-322.
• Zoroğlu, L. Kelenderis I, Kaynaklar Kalıntılar Buluntular, 1994.
• Zoroğlu, L. (1994b). “Kelenderis’in İlk Çağ Tarihi Hakkında Notlar”, TTKY 9, 437-448.
• Zoroğlu, L. (1994c). “Bir Mozaik Üzerinde Kelenderis Betimlemesi”, 1993 Yılı Anadolu Medeniyetleri Müzesi Konferansları, 31-45.
• Zoroğlu, L. (1995). “Kelenderis 1992 Yılı Kazı ve Onarım Çalışmaları”, KST XV.II, 189-209.
• Zoroğlu, L. (1999). “Kelenderis Mozaiği”, Çağlar Boyunca Anadolu’da Yerleşim ve Konut Uluslararası Sempozyumu, İstanbul, 5-7 Haziran 1996, 513-524.
• Zoroğlu, L. (2000a). “Kelenderis Nekropolü”, Olba III, 115-133.
• Zoroğlu, L. (2000b). “1998 Yılı Kelenderis Kazı Çalışmaları” KST XXI.II, 323-327.
• Zoroğlu, L. (2005). “Kelenderis 2003 Yılı Kazısı Raporu”, KST XXVI.I, 333-346.
• Zoroğlu, L. & Tekocak, M. (2008). “Kelenderis 2006 Yılı Çalışmaları”, KST XXIX.I, 515-538.
• Zoroğlu, L. (2008). “Kelenderis ve Karaçallı Nekropolleri: Klasik Çağa ait İki Mezarlık hakkında Düşüncüler”, In: İ. Delemen v.d. (ed.), Prof. Dr. Haluk Abbasoğlu’na 65.Yaş Armağanı Eurgetes - Festschrift für Prof. Dr. Haluk Abbasoğlu zum 65. Geburtstag II, 1235-1246.