g.tsetskhladze-secondary colonisation-italy.pdf

7/25/2019 G.Tsetskhladze-SECONDARY COLONISATION-Italy.pdf

1/27

ffi

Atti

del

Convegno

M rNrsrERo

orLL'l

srRUz

roN E

oeLL'UNrvrRsrrA

E

DELLA

Rtcrncn

Urutvrnsrn

orl

SalrNro

Drpnnnuemro or BrHr

Culrunnu

Colonie

di colonie:

le fondazi

oni sub-coloniali

greche

tra

colonizzazi

one

e

colonialismo

Lecce

22-24

Giugno

2006

A

cura

di

Mario Lombardo

e

Flavia Frisone


2/27

UI{IVERSITA

DEL

SALtrNTO

DIPARTIMtrI{TO

DI

BENI CULTURALI

Collana

del

Dipartimento,

16

Ltr

FOI{DAZIONI

SUB.COLONIALI

GRECHE

TRA

COLONIT-,ZAZIO}TE

E COLOI{IALISMO

Atti

del

Convegno

Internazionale

(Lecce,

22-24

giugno

2006)

a cura

di

MARIO LOMBARDO

e

FLAVIA

FRISONE

ESTRATTO

COLONIE

DI

COLONIE

Tpgntvfo*

Le(LL'

CONGEDO

trDITORE

2oog


3/27

Gocne

R. TsnrsxsLADZE

SECONDARY

COLONISERS

IN

THE BLACK SEA:

SINOPE

AND

PANTICAPAEUM

Iltroduction

Ancient Greek

colonisation

has long

been the

subject

of scholarly

attention and

endeavour,

but

much remains to be

donel. Greek colonial

activity

in

the Archaic and

Classical

periods

produced

about

230 colonies

and settlements

outside

East

Greece

and the Greek

mainland2,

between

75 and

90

of them around

the

Black Sea3. Black Sea

colonisation

is

ofrather

late

date

and

is

connected

mainly

with

Ionia and

its

main city,

Miletusa.

Be-

fore examining

the two

parbicular

cases

of

Sinope

in the southern

and

Panticapaeum

in

the

norbhern

Black

Sea,

I shall address some

general

considera-

tions

and

methodological

problems.

In

recent

years,

the terminology

to

be

used,

especially

for

describing

the

colonisation

process

itself,

has

become one

of

the

most keenly debat-

ed

topicss.

This

has

implications

for our

under-

standing

of secondary

colonisation

and

what

we

mean by

it.

Without

going

into detail,

terms

such

as

migrationo, Greek

overseas settlement7,

apoikisations,

kleroukhisatione,

etc.

have

been

proposed

in

place

of, or

in

partial

substitution

I

would

like to express

my

gratitude

to

Prof. M. Lombardo

for inviting

me

to

participate

in

this

most

stimulating

con-

ference and

for the hospitality

he

and

his colleagues

extend-

ed to me.

My thanks also

go

to

Prof. Sir John

Boardman and

Dr. J.G.F.

Hind for

their

comments on

this

paper.

1

For the

latest summary of the state

of our

knowledge

on Greek colonisation,

see

TsntsxutADzn

2006a;2007b;

see

also

Dp Axcnlrs 2007 and

2009.

I

am

most

grateful

to F.

De

Angelis for allowing

me sight and use

of the

manuscript of

his forthcoming

article.

z

llwsoN, Nrni-spN

2004,

p.

152.

The inventory contains aI-

together

279

colonies,

50 of

which

were situated

in Hellas. Dif-

ferent

publications

give

different

numbers of

Greek colonies or

overseas settlements.

John Graham

listed

139 founded be-

tween 800

and 500

BC

(Gnerreu

1982,

pp.

160-62); R. Osborne

(OssoRNr

1996,

pp.

1.2L-25) lists

146

from the beginning ofthe

Dark Age to the

end of the

Archaic

period;

G.R.

Tsetskhladze

(Tsnrsrcr-qlzo

2006a,

pp.

lxvii-bL{iii)

has

149,

all from the

Ar-

chaic

period.

T.

Figueira's chapter on Classical

colonisation

lists

25

Athenian Classical colonies,

7 Athenian

kleroukhies and

47

instances

ofAthenian

re-colonisation

(FIGLTIRA

2008, tabls.

1-

3).

3

The number 75

is

given

by

Seneca

(.He|u.,7,2);90

by

for,'colonisation'.

There is no

general

agreement

about

which term(s) to

use

and what

meaning to

impute to

it. How

far

any

term

may adequately

reflect

reality

has

also

been doubted.

Maybe

we

are

spending

too

much time examining

words

and

not enough considering

the

actual

evidence.

It

is

more

important to

understand

the

process

that

all

have

called

colonisation,

even if we

are

somewhat

unsatisfied

with

the term.

It

seems

to

be

the best

we havelo.

Further

effort

has

been

devoted

to

classifiring

the

initial colonies

-

were

Lhey

poleis,

or

emporia,

or

just

simply

apoilziaill?

Anachronistically,

we

continue

to

use sources

ofthe Classical

period

and

later to do

this.

There are exactly the

same

prob-

lems in classifying secondary

colonies.

Some

be-

lieve

that

secondary colonies

were always

poleis,

but

in reality

many

were

(jtrst)

emporial2.

The earliest colonial

foundation

in

the

Mediterranean

was

Pithekoussai

(in

about the

middle of

the

Sth century BC

or

soon

after-

wards), and

within

another

50-75

years

all

ma-

jor

colonies were

establishedl3. But this

was

not

Pliny

(NI/,

V, 112).

These numbers are

most

probably

exag-

gerations

and

include Hellenistic and

later foundations

(see,

for

example,

Hwo 1999).

In

the Copenhagen

Inventory, 53

Archaic and Classical

foundations are

listed.

Another

24 are

given

as

pre-Hellenistic

settlements

not attested as

poleis

(Arnau.

HrNo,

TsrrsrHreozn 2004).

a

On Greek

colonisation of the

Black Sea and Greek

set-

tlements

around

it,

see

TsnrsxHLADZE

1994;1998;2002;

2003; forthcoming a;

Awau, Htwn,

TsersxHLADzE 2004.

5

See,

for example,

Tsprsxnletzo 2006a,

pp.

xxv-xxviii,

with bibliography.

6

See,

for

example,

Tsptsxnr,elzo

2003,

p.

130.

7

As in the title of

Tsrrsxnulzo

2006b.

8

DE ANGELIS

2009.

s

Dn ANcor,rs

2009.

10

Wurrr-sv

2001,

p.

I25.

11

TsrtsxHlanzn 2006a,

pp.

xxxviii-xlii, with

bibliogra-

phy.

On

thepoljs

for

the

latest, see

H-qNSsN

2006a; 2006b.

12

For

the

latest

on

the

meaning of emporion,

see

HANSEN

2006c.

13

For a brief conspectus

of Greek

colonies and settle-

ments

in

the

Mediterranean and

the Black Sea,

see Tsot-

sKHLADZE

2006a,

pp.

lxiilxvi.

On Greeks

in Itaiy and Sicily,

see GRrco

2006; n'AcosrINo

2006; DoMiNcuEZ

2006a.


4/27

230 Gocha R. Tsetskhladze

the end of colonisation.

Many

further

colonies ap-

peared

in

the

first

half

to

middle

of

the 7th century

and

later.

These

were

often

what

we

call

'sec-

ondary

colonies'- which

means

that the earlier

colonies

had

expanded

and were now establishing

their

own colonial

off-shoots.

The

reasons

for this

were many and various: through

natural

growth

or

the

arrival

of a

new

wave of settlers,

the

origi-

nal

colony

might

no longer

be able

to

support

its

population;

alternatively

a

colony,

from

a

combina-

tion

of

economic

and

political

reasons,

might

seek

to

expand

its influence

through

a

gradual penetra-

tion

of

the

lands of the local

population,

whether

peaceable

or

forcible.

In

other

instances,

particular

local

circumstances

may have

produced particular

local responses.

Much of our attempt

to

understand

secondary

colonisation

has focused

on developments

in

south-

er"n

Italy

and Sicilyla.

This is not

surprising:

these

are the

most intensely

studied

regions

of

the

colo-

nial

world, and a broad spectrum of

evidence ex-

ists.

Other

areas

witnessed

secondary colonisation

as well,

but

here much

work

remains to

be done.

The

work

and

results

of

our

Italian colleagues can

provide

an instructive model15.

The

Black

Sea

As

I

noted

above,

up

to

75-90 colonies

were

es-

tablished here, mainly by Ionians

(fig.

1).

Of

these

only about

15 were

major

primary

settlements;

the

others were

small

towns, villages,

fortresses

or

harbours

whose

names

are

known to

us

principal-

ly

from

various

written sources,

about which

we

seldom

have

archaeological data,

or

whose

loca-

tions

remain

unknown

(as

is

the

case,

for

example,

of

the

southern

Black

Sea

where 85

places

are

named,

many

of them

mentioned in connection

with the

voyage of the

Argonauts

to Colchis)16.

It

is

obvious that

not

all

of

these

small

settlements

were the

results

of

initial

colonisation.

It is

incon-

ceivable that

Ionia,

especially

Miletus,

could

estab-

1a

See, for

instance, DouiNcupz 2006a,

pp.

283-311.

ls

See

the

papers published

in the

present

volume.

r6

For

a discussion of written sources, see

Avnelt, HINI,

Tsprsxnleozn

2OO4,

pp.

924-31.

r7

See,

for

example, LoMeeRoo

1999;

Monrl

2006;

Dol,riNcusz 2006b.

18

For

the

establishment of these

cities,

see Tsnr-

SKHLADZE 19941 Avnanr, Hrso, Tsr:rsrnLADz,E 2004.

re

See A. Avram's

paper

in the

present

volume and HtNo

1998; SaenrxrN 1998; Avnau, HrNo, Tsnrsxnmnze 2004,

pp.

933-34; 941-44; 955-58.

20

Mentioned

in

Hdt.,

I,76,1; Xen., An.,

Y, 5,7-8;

Aen.

lish

so

many. We should remember that Ionian

colonies existed

in

the West

as well1?.

We

need

to

explain

how

these

other

settlements

came to

exist. The major initial

colonies around

the

Black

Sea

were,

starting

in

the west

and mov-

ing clock-wise, Apollonia

Pontica,

Odessos,

Histria,

Olbia,

Theodosia, Nymphaeum, Panticapaeum,

Phanagoria,

Hermonassa, Dioscurias,

Gyenos,

Phasis,

Amisus, Sinope and Heracleia

Ponticals.

Chersonesus

in

the

Crimea and

Callatis in

the

west

became

major

colonies

from

the

Classical

pe-

riod,

but they

were secondary colonies of

Heracleia

Ponticale.

I

shall

concentrate on

two important

colonies, Sinope

in

the

south and

Panticapaeum

in

the north,

and on

their

own secondary colonies.

Sinope

Sinope20 was not

just

one of

the major

colonies

of

the southern

Black

Sea but of

the whole

Pontic

region

(fiqg.

l-2).

There is

little evidence

about

it,

at

least for

the

Archaic

period.

What we have

in

written sources comes mainly

from

the Classical

period

and

later21. All

sources name Miletus as its

mother

city

(Xen.,

An.,

YI,7,75;

D.

S., XIV, 31,2;

Str.,

XII,

3,11,

etc.)

but

do

not

agree about

its

date

of foundation. According

to one

it

was before

756

BC, others

give

631/30

BC. There

is

the

same con-

tradiction

in

modern

writings

too22. Some scholars

consider

that Sinope

was

founded

by Corinthians

in

the

frrst half

of

the

8th

century, others

that

it

was founded in

the

second

half

of

the 7th

century,

and a

third

group

that

it

was

not

until

the

end

of

7th centr"rry.

In

modern

literature

one

can

find

Sinope

I

and

Sinope

II

mentioned -

which

reflects

the

supposed

founding

of Sinope

in two

stages,

be-

fore

and after the Cimmerian

campaign

in Anato-

lia23.

And

that

campaign

is

also

a matter

of debate,

especially now

in

view of the new

chronology

ap-

plied

to

Gordion and

its

'Cimmerian

destruction

level'-

which

has

implications for

the

whole

of

Anatolia2a.

Tact.,40.4;

Arist., fr.

599;

Ps.

Scymn., r'v. 981-97; Plrt., Luc.,

23;

Str., XII,3,11; D. S., XI,3,8; and many others.

21

For

a

discussion ofthe

written

sources, see HIwI 1988;

IvaxrcHrx 1998; Awanr, HrNn, TsnrsxHuqozn 2004,

pp.

960-

61.

22

See, for example, HrNo 1988

and

Ivewrcslx

1998, and

the

literature

they cite.

23

For

the

latest

discussion, see AvRel,r, Hrno, Tsor-

SKHLADZE 2004,

pp.

960-61

(with

literature).

2a

DrVnrns,

Seus,

Vorct

2005;

K-oeluoron

2005,

pp.

10-

55: MUSCARELLa 2003: KEENAN 2004.


5/27

Secondary

colonisers

in the

Blach

Sea:

Sinope and

Panticapaeum

ZJ\

TICAPA;UM

. PORTHME

ILUR,AT

THEODOSIA

li4-$,fSilloo'"'

irl'13^-cocctPPra

'\l

h.roerc

ll

-\

HERMONASSA

\

MYRMEKION

KEPOI

KRA

CHERSONESUS

NYMPHAEUM

5EA

gVNCK

HERAKLEA

KERASOS

tJ

/{

7

BYZANTION

a

CHALKEDON

Fig. 1

-

Map of the

Black Sea showing

major

Greek

colonies and

local tribes

(after

Tsrr-

sKHLADZE

1998a,

p.23,

fig. 1).

Fig.2

-

Map

of

Sinop

promontory

(aJter

Doo-

NAN

2004,

p.

5,

fig. 1.4).

rr'b'?rb$9rltt

5

prcHVNARl

-,?

t

TsrKHrSDZrRr.

.t

sr

NoPt

*%"F*i*",;$J,ib1,6


6/27

232

Fig.

3

-

Plan

of

Sinop

town

showing approximate

positions

of

some ofthe 1951-53 excavations and later research in Sinop

town: 1.

Early citadel

atea;2. Sinop

kale north-west,

site of

precolonial

port;

3. Kumkapi cemetery; 4. Classical houses

(sth-4th

centuries BC) founded on

bedrock. Roman

homes

with lavish mosaics; 5. Heilenistic

(earliest)

domestic occu-

pation;

6.

Hellenistic

(earliest)

and Roman domestic

habita-

tion; 7.

Hellenistic

temple, earlier deposits

(sacred?)

as early

as 7th century BC; 8. Archaic and later refuse disposal

(after

DooNaN 2004,

p.77,

fig. 4.3).

Unfortunately,

archaeology is not

much help

either2s. Excavation

of

Sinope is

practically

im-

possible

because

it

lies underneath

the

modern

city

(frg. 3).

Rescue

excavations

in

the

city

cen-

tre

in

1951-53

discovered

a

cemetery

-

the

pot-

tery from the

graves

is largely from East

Greece, with a

little

Corinthian,

and

the earliest

dates

from the late 7th

century. Only very

brief

information

has been

published

about

this,

whilst

the material

itself

remains largely

un-

published.

From

the earliest

archaeological ma-

terial so far

found,

Sinope

would

seem

to

have

been

established

in

the

late

7th century.

This

would be

quite

consistent:

the

earliest

Greek

settlements around

the

Black Sea

were

indeed

established in

the

last

third ofthe

7th century26.

For

the

Classical

period

our main

source for

Sinope

is

Xenophon's

Anabasls. From

his

evi-

dence,

taken

in

conjunction

with other sources

25

See, with bibliography, HrNo 1988; DooNaN 2003;

2004;

Avnan, HtNo, TsprsxnLADzE 2004,

pp.

960-63; Tsrt-

SKHLADzE 2O07,

pp.

165-68. In

this

article

I

cite varrous

chapters from GnalrunNos, Pnrnoeoulos 2003;

one should

be aware. however. that most of the contributors were not

fluent

in

Western European languages, and

their

(barely

edited) writings are often opaque.

26

See TsotsrsLADzE 1994,

pp.

115-18.

and inscriptions27,

Sinope

looks

to

be a

typical

Greek

polis,

in

terms of

its

constitution,

after

the

tyrant

Timesileos

was expelled

in

436

BC

by

Athenian

intervention2s,

and

its

political

insti-

tutions,

and

had

very

strong

connections

with

other

Greek Black Sea colonies and

with

cities

in

the

Mediterranean

and elsewhere. The clear-

est

evidence

ofthese connections

is

proxeny

and

honorary

decrees

and

funerary inscriptions.

Sinopeans were

present

in

Panticapaeum,

Cher-

sonesus,

Olbia, Histria,

Tomis,

etc. in

the

pre-

Roman

period.

Beyond the Black

Sea

they were

known

in

Athens

(about

60 Sinopeans

recorded

between the

4th

century BC and

the 3rd century

AD, most

of them between the

4th

and 2nd

cen-

turies

BC),

Chios, Halicarnassus, Rhodes, Tha-

sos,

Eretria,

Histiaea,

Claros and even Egypt.

The number

of

foreigners in

Sinope

(from

Athens,

Cos

and

Callatis)

appears

to

have

been

significantly

less

than the

number

of

Sinopeans

living

abroad,

but this

may

be explained, at

least

in

part,

by the

comparatively

small

num-

ber of inscriptions

so

far

recorded

in

Sinope

-

overall

2232s.

According

to

Strabo

(XII,3,11),

Sinope

built a

naval port

and

this

enabled her to

rule

the local

waters and even

participate

in many

of the

struggles

of the

Greeks beyond

the Black Sea.

Sinope also

helped

the

Persians

and

provided

Xerxes

with

some

ships

(D.

S.,

XI,3,8).

In

the written tradition

(Xen.,

An., IY,

8,22;

Y,3,2;

V4-8),

Sinope

founded

at

least

three of

her own colonies: Cotyora,

Cerasus

and

Trapezus,

eastward of

the

mother

city on the

500

km

of coast

stretching

towards

Colchis.

Cotyora was established,

probably

sometime

in

the 6th century

BC,

in

the land

of

the

local

Tibarenoi,

about 20 km west of

Cape

Carambis,

the shortest crossing of

the Black

Sea

to

the

Crimea

(fig.

1).

According

to Strabo

(XII,3,10):

Cytorum was

once the

emporium

of the Sino-

peans;

and

it

was named after C1'torus, the son

ofPhryxus, as

Ephorus

says. The most and the

27

Xen., An., IY, 8,22; Y,3,2; V,4-B; Polyaen., YII,21.,2;

PhL., Per.,

20;

I

nsc

rip

tio ns of

S

inope, 1-7

;

etc.

28

The only

source

is Phtt., Per.,20. There is

no corrobo-

rating source. The interpretation

ofthis

passage

is

a

matter

of disagreement, as

is

the

reality

of Pericles'

Black

Sea expe-

dition

(see

Tsrrsxnleozn 1997a, with

bibliography).

2e

On

Sinopeans abroad and foreigners in Sinope,

see

Ruscu 2008.

Gocha R.

Tsetskhladze


7/27

Secondary colonisers in the

Blach

Sea: Sinope

and Panticapaeum

Fig. 4

-

Map of Colchis with

major

sites

(after

Tsnrsxnu.ozo, Vxut


8/27

,aA

is the

case

with

nearly

all

Greek

settlements

along the southern

Black Sea, we

do

not

have

archaeological

materials2.

Thus, the three sub-colonies

mentioned

above

were

probably of 6th-century

date; from

the 5th century they

were

p

oleis

but

paying

trib-

ute to

Sinope,

which could

place

them in the

cat-

egory

of

'dependent

poleis'3s.

Sinopean

expan-

sion continued beyond

the

Archaic period.

Step

by step,

the

Sinopeans extended

their

influence,

certainly

their economic

influence, towards the

eastern

Black

Sea

(Colchis) (fig.

4). During exca-

vation

of

Colchian settlements,

large

quantities

of Sinopean

coins and

pottery

have been

foundsa. One site,

Pichvnari

(on

the outskirts

of

modern-day Kobuleti,

not

far

from

Batumi)35,

yielded the largest number of

Sinopean coins

as

well

as hoards

containing

them36.

Although a

few coins date from the 5th century

BC37, most

are from

360-320

BC38.

Thanks

to the

excava-

tion

of

a

large number of Greek

graves

of

the be-

ginning

of

the 5th

century

BC

and

after,

we

know

that

a

Greek

quarter

existed

within

this

local

settlement.

Whilst

frnds

of

coins or

pottery

alone

are

not sufficient

grounds

for

supposing

that Sinopeans

lived

here

(or

in other

Colchian

or

Greek settlements

in

Colchis)

from the

mid-

dle

ofthe

4th

century,

one

particular

category of

pottery

-

find

indeed

suggests

that

they

did

-

Colchian

amphorae

(previously

described

in

the

literature as

brown-clay

amphorae)3e.

The

shape

of the earliest

Colchian

amphorae,

which

date

from the

mid-4th

to

the

late

3rd century

BC,

echoes

that

of

Sinopean amphorae,

and not only

32

TSETSKHLADzF,

2007

,

pp.

173-76.

33

In

the

terminology introduced by

the Copenhagen

Po-

Iis

Centre

(for

the

latest,

see

HaNsnN, Ntnlsru

2004,

pp.

87-

94).

3a

On the Greek colonisation of

Colchis and trade

rela-

tions between Greeks and

locals,

see

Tsptsxslalzn 1998c,

pp.

5-109.

See

also Avnau, HINn,

Tsnrsxulaozn

2004,

pp.

952-53.

35

On

Pichvnari,

see

Tsorsrglenzr

1999; VIcKERS,

Kexntozn 2004. On a Syracusan

silver coin of co. 340

BC

from Pichvnari,

see

VelsualoMIDZE

2005.

:16

On Sinopean coins

from Pichvnari and other Colchian

sites,

see

DUNDUA,

Durvoue 1999,

pp.

108-10; 2006,

pp.

43-

44;

DuNoue 2004,

pp.

160-61.

37

KaxHrozr, Iesnvru, Vlcxnns

2001,

pp.

283-84.

38

Tsnrsxnlelzu

1999,

pp.

39-40;

109.

3s

On

Colchian amphorae

and amphora stamps,

see

Tsnrsr


9/27

Secondary

colonisers

in

the Blach Sea:

Sinope

and

Panticapaeum

235

o12

o5

I

n

Fig. 5

-

Colchian

amphorae:

I.

4th century

BC; II.

Late 4th-3rd

century

BC

(after

Tsntsrcl-mzo,

VNut


10/27

v

lr

T

I

lt".r

1

01

6--0q

LYO4J

'

F

p

ol

(\

$

(

0

X

n

/

^

ll5

n

$

'S:w8S

rJi,ry

236

Gocha R.

Tsetskhladze

Fig. 6

-

Colchian amphorae:

I.

Spikes of late 4th-Srd century BC;

II.

Stamps and marks on

Colchian amphorae

(after

Tsrr-

SKHLADZE,

VNuxov

1992,

p.364,

fig.6;

p.3?1,

fig. 13).


11/27

Secondary colonisers in

the

Black

Sea:

Sinope and Panticapaeum

Fig.

7

-

Map of the northern

Black

Sea littoral

showing locations

of

finds

of Coichian

amphorae: 1. Panticapaeum;

2.

Nymphaeum;

3.

Patraeus;

4. Chersonesus;

5. Scythian

Neapolis; 6. Kara-Tobe;

7. Chaika;

8.

Zaozernoe;9.

Yuzhno-Donu-

zlavskoe;

10.

Belyaus;

11.

Novo-Fyodorovka; 12. Elizavetovskoe;

13. Myrmekion

(after

TssrsxHLADZE,

VNUKov

1992,

p.

361,

fig.2).

qcn

the

southern

Black

Sea

coast.

It is nearly

1000

km

from

Byzantium

to

Colchis. Despite

this

huge

distance,

there

are few Greek

settlements

and only three major

ones:

Heracleia

Pontica,

Sinope and

Amisus

(frg.

1).

Much

of

the

area

is

unsuited

to

coastal settlements,

with

high

cliffs

falling

straight

into

the sea,

and, as ancient

written

sources

underline

(Xen.,

An.,

YI, 4,2-6),

some

habitable

areas were already

populated

by

locals

hostile towards

the

Greeks. Thus,

the

ar-

eas

for

establishing

chorai

and

agriculture were

limited.

OnIy

one

city, Amisus,

had

access

to the

hinterland

of Central

Anatolia

-

along the

River

Halys.

Sinope and Heracleia Pontica

lacked

anything comparable45.

Strabo

(XII,3,11)

gives

a detailed

description

of

the

geographical

situation of Sinope:

Sinope is

beautifully

equipped

both by nature

and by human foresight,

for

it

is situated

on

the neck of a

peninsula,

and has on either

side

of the isthmus

harbours

and roadsteads

and wonderful

pelamydes-fisheries...

Further-

more,

the

peninsula

is

protected

all round by

a5

On the

geography,

Greek cities and local

population

of

the southern Black

Sea, see Tsotst


12/27

238

Gocha

R.

Tsetskhladze

Fig. 8

-

Plan of Panticapaeum.

I. Top Plateau

of

Mount Mithridates;

II. Western Plateau of Mount Mithridates;

III.

'Rock

top'

of

Mount Mithridates;

IV.

'Sec-

ond Armchair' of Mount Mithridates; V Round

tower of western iine of city fortifications, investigated

archaeologically;

VI.

Section ofnorthern

city wall; VII. Church ofJohn the Baptist.

1. Tower

N1 of the acropolis; 2. Basileia

-

the

palace

ensemble of

the Spartocids; 3. Citadel atop the 'FirstArmchair'of

Mount

Mithridates;4. Section ofsouthern

wall ofthe acropolis, investigated archaeologically;5.

Section

offortifications

separating

the Western Plateau from

the

Top Plateau

of Mount Mithridates.

Key: 1. Section of fortifrcations, investigated archaeologically; 2.

Hypothetical section of fortifications;

3. Supposed ancient

coastline

(afber

Tolsrrrov

2002,

p.

40,

frg. 2).

and other

pottery

were

produced4T.

At

the same

time, the

chora

of

Sinope was

not

at all exten-

sive.

Many

years

of investigation by

an Ameri-

can survey

project

have

found

practically

no

rur-

al

settlement of the

Archaic, Classical

or

even

Hellenistic

periodsa8.

In these circumstances,

es-

pecially

before Sinope developed

as a

Pontic

eco-

a7

Genr-qN, TkrucAN 1999; GAH-AN 2004; K\iiqqe TEZ,oR 1999.

48

DooNAN 2004:2006

nomic

power

from

the

4th

century BC,

the

best

means

of

her

securing

economic

and other

devel-

opment

was

to establish her own

sub-colonies

beyond

Amisus

(such

as Cotyora, Cerasus

and

Tlapezus)

-

in

the other direction lay Heracleia's

area of

influenceae.

Later

Amastris

joined

the

competition,

and

we

know

of a

treaty

of

sym-

ae

Sinope was situated not

far

from

Cape Carambis, the

southern

end ofthe shortest crossins ofthe Black

Sea

to the

F-4,9

{fi;2,

g'E-'[:-,


13/27

mdchia

concluded between

Sinope

and

Hera-

cleia

Pontica sometime between

35312-346/5

BC,

which

Amastris and

Cromna

are

mentioned

as

being

able to

join

if

they so wish5o.

Panticapaeum

Another colony

to found

its own sub-

colonies

was

Panticapaeumsl, situated

on

the

Cimmerian

Bosporus

in

the northern

Black

Sea

(fig.

1)52, established

by Miletus

in the

570s

BC53.

It was

the

largest settlement

in the

area

(fig.

8). Many ancient

authors

describe

Panticapaeum

but

Strabo

(VII,A,4)

provides

the

fullest

account of

both

the

citv and

events

connected with

it:

Panticapaeum

is

the

metropolis of the

Bospori-

ans and is

situated

at

the

mouth

of

Lake

Maeotis.

... the district

is

everywhere

produc-

tive

of

grain,

and

it

contains

villages,

as well

as

a city

called Nymphaeum,

which

possesses

a

good

harbour.

Panticapaeum

is a hill

inhabit-

ed on

all

sides

in

a

circuit

of

twenty

stadia.

To

the

east

it

has a

harbour, and docks

for

about

thirty ships; and

it

also

has an acropolis.

It is a

colony of

the

Milesians.

For a long time

it was

ruled

as a monarchy by

the

dynasty of

Leuco,

Satyrus,

and

Parisades, as

were

also

all the

neighbouring settlements

near the mouth of

Lake Maeotis

on both

sides,

until

Parisades

gave

over sovereignty

to

Mithridates.

They

were called

tyrants, although

most

of

them be-

Crimea

(Str.,

\rII,4,3),

which was an

important trade

route.

Sinope sought

to control this

traffic through establishing

vil-

Iages not far from the Cape:

'After

Carambis

one comes to

Cinolis, and

to Anticinolis, and

to Abonuteichus,

a small

town, and

to Armene...

It is a village of the Sinopeans

and

has a harbour'(Str.,

XII,3,10).

50

Inscriptions of Sinope,1.

Amastris

is mentioned by

its

former

name, Sesamos. Cromna

was one of

four katoihiai

(the

others

were Sesamos,

C1'torum and

Tieions) which united

as tt'e

polis

Amastris

in

ca. 300-290

BC

(see

Str.,

XII,3,10;

Ai,nq,u,

Hir{r,

Tsorsxut

lltze 2004,

pp.

959-60).

51

Mentioned by

Dem., )OO(V, 31-34;

Ps. Skyl., 68; Str.,

YII,

4,4; Plin.,

NII,

IV

26; IVB6; Amm. Marc.,

XXII, 8,36;

D. S.,

)Oq 24,2;St.Byz., s.u.;

and many others.

52

There is a large literature

on the Greek cities

of the

Cimmerian

Bosporus,

the vast majority of

it

in

Russian and

Ukrainian.

In this article

I

shall cite

mainly the

latest writ-

ings,

particularly

those

in Western European

languages. For

summaries of the

archaeological

investigations containing

comprehensive

bibliographies,

see Ge.rouKEVIa

1971; Kosuo-

r,rNxo, KnuclrKovA,

DoLGoRUKov 1984,

pp.

58-152; Kossr-

LENKo

1992;

TsprsrHr,lnzr

1997b; Avn.lrr.t,

HtNo,

Tsrr-

sKHr-ADZE

2004,

pp.

944-52.

53

On

Panticapaeum,

see

Tolsrrxov 2002;

2003; TnusroR

2002; Ar,nav,

HrNo, TsorsxHL^Dzu2004,

pp.

948-50.

239

ginning

with

Parisades and

Leuco

proved

to be

equitable

rulers.

In

the Cimmerian

Bosporus

there

were five

other major

colonies

(fig.

1):

Nymphaeum5a,

Theodosia55, Phanagorias6,

Hermonassas7 and

Kepoi58.

They are very often

mentioned in

writ-

ten sources,

which

describe

them as

poleis

and

name

their

mother

citiesse.

Various

written

sources

name

a

further

20

urban

settlements

as

situated

hereabouts,

without

providing

any

in-

formation

on their

status and

seldom naming

those who established

them; several

of them

have

not

been

located archaeologically6o.

Not

far from

Panticapaeum are

three

settle-

ments, mentioned several

times

in written

sources

but

also

known

from

archaeological evi-

dence

-

Myrmekion,

Tlritake

and

Porthmeus.

No ancient

author

identifies their

mother cities

or

provides

any

information which

would

allow

us to consider

these settlements

as

independent

poleis.

Myrmekion6l is situated

4

km east of

Panticapaeum

and

covered

an

area

of

about

6

tra

(figg.

1; 9).

It was established

soon

after

Pan-

ticapaeum.

Regular

planning

and temples

date

from the 5th century, and

the city walls

from

the

beginning

of

the

4th, but there was an'acropolis'

with

fortifrcation walls

dating from the second

half of

the 6th

century62.

Tlritake6s

is

11

km

west of

Panticapaeum,

founded

at the

same time as

Myrmekion

(figg.

1;

5a

On Nymphaeum, see Sorolove

2000/0I;2003;

Avnqu,

HrNr, Tsrrsxur,ADZE

2OO4,

p.948.

55

On

Theodosia, see Kervusnrx

2003; Avnarra, HtNo,

TsErsKirLADzE

2004,

pp.

951-52.

56

On

Phanagoria, see KuzNntsov

2001;20O2;2003;

Tsnrsxnlenzp 2002;

Avneu, HrNo, TsnrsxuLADzE

2004,

pp.

650-51.

57

On Hermonassa, see

FrNocpNove 2003;

Avnela, HINI,

Tsrrsxnr-erzn

2004,

p.

945.

58

On Kepoi, see

KuzNntsov 2001; 2002; 2003;

TsBr-

sKHLADzE,

KuzNnrsov 2000; Avnelt,

HIt'to, Tsnrsr


14/27

tw

,w

3N

trffi

t3

Fig.9

-

Plan

of

Myrmekion:

1. 6th-5th centuries

BC;2.4tln century

BC; 3.

1st-3rd

centuriesAD;4.

Stone

- paved;5.3rd-1st

centuries

BC

(after

KosHolonxo et

Atn 1984,

p.

128).


15/27

24r

econdary

colonisers

in

the Black Sea: Sinope

and

Panticapaeum

\1'

)L'--

l----J

,4

t

t'- :

'r

f)'r

\Y/

n

i\

I

.,,/)

>-.-)s

.v

;r71,

'

/l'

\l

//

7

4

SK

F;\

I

w

,/-)

,

z

tl

\1\

i\1

6,\

Fig. 10

-

Plan of Tlritake:

1. Excavated

area.2. Number

of trenches; 3.

City wall of the 5th

century BC; 4. City

wall of the

Hellcnistic

period;

5.

Walls of buildings

(after

Kossot tlxxo et

Atrr 7981,

p.

129).

'r'l

I

,

.:::si.w

ti"',i*,2

u''4

e'

c.:

r,-- i

i.

. ..-.

I

@

N

wkl

g


16/27

9A'

Gocha

R. Tsetskhladze

t'

r

_,_

luj

t

Fig.

11

-

Plan

of

Porthmeus

(aftcr

KosttpLttNt


17/27

Secondary colonisers

in

the

Black

Secr: Srnope and

Pan.ticapaeum

^

r

oV

St'.N

OF

'\"

243

Fig. 12

-

Map

of the Kerch

Peninsula

showlng cities

(1),

'small

towns'(2),

rural

settlements

(3),

and earth-

works

and

ramparts

(4)

of

the

European Bosporus

rn

the 6th-5th centuries BC.

Principal

rural settlements:

1. Mys

Zynk;2.

Chokrak-

skii Mys

and

Chokrakskii

Rodnik; 3. Kazantip

(wcst);

4. Andreevka-Yuzhnaya;

5.

Yuzhno-Churubashskoe;

6.

Ceroevka l; 7. Kimmeris-

Kholm;

8.

Chebakskava

Balka: 9. Mys Takil: 10. Zu-

vetnoe;

11.

Kostyrino;

12.

SJyusarevka: 13. Ogonki:

14. Mikhailovkal

15.

Chelyadinovo;

16.

Kras-

naya Gorka;

17. Vasilevka;

18. Aivazovskoe;

1

9.

Tarkhan

(after

MesLrN-

NIKov 2001,

p.248,

fig.

1).

ts

THfoD(xil*

tr=--

|-

o_J

c*fu

a-z

'7-

Ll

caF

r*

g

,'

a.

,

N?.O\

SLA

i

a4

Fig. 13

-

Map

of the

Kerch

Peninsula

showing

local burial

mounds

and

graves

of'thc 6th-5th

cen-

turies

BC:

1. Barrow-

type

burials

of the

early

Scythians: 2.

Burial

grounds

con-

sisting of stone

cists

surrounded by round

stones; 3. Burial

ground

containing

flat

gravcs

at Fron-

tovoe

I

(

afler

M.rsr,nNNrxor,

2001

,

p.250,

fig.2l.

I

g,

a

Kl-


18/27

Gocha

R.

Tsetskhladze

13).

In

the

4th

century the

number

increased

dramatically

to

200.

In

these circumstances,

the

three

abovementioned

settlements

might

also

have been

agricultural

and

trading

off-shoots of

Panticapaeum.

For instance,

excavation of

Myrmekion has

revealed several

wine-making

complexes

and, most recently,

a

hoard

of

99

Cyz-

icene electrum coins

found

in a bronze olpe,

all

dating

from

the

Sth century

BC

but

most

proba-

bly buried

in

the earliest

part

of the

4th

century6E.

In the Classical

period

the development

of

the

Cimmerian

Bosporus

took

on

a

completely

differ-

ent

aspect, marked

by

Panticapaeum's

rise to

prominence

as

the central city

of

the region,

exer-

cising expanded

political

and

economic

influence.

The

academic

literature

suggests

that

the

politi-

cal situation

in

the Cimmerian

Bosporus changed

dramatically

from

the

end of

the 6th-beginning of

the 5th

century,

leading

to the

formation

of the

Greek

Bosporan kingdom

under the

leadership

of

Panticapaeum

in

about

480 BC6e.

For

the

first 42

years

it

was

ruled

by

tyrants

of the

Archaeanac-

tid

dynasty,

probably

of

Milesian

origin.

This

was

the

period

when Panticapaeum

tried to incorpo-

rate other Greek cities situated

on

the Kerch

and

Taman Peninsulas.

Despite

almost universal

acceptance

of this

version of

events

and

the

supposed

creation

of

the

Bosporan kingdom

in

co. 480 BC,

things

are

not

as

clear

as

they

seem.

The

only

source

for

all

of

this

is

Diodorus

(XII,

31,1), and his

informa-

tion

invites

a different

interpretationTo. Com-

bined

study of

all

available

evidence

gives

us

grounds

to

question

accepted

opinion;l; it looks

that the

Bosporan kingdom came

into existence

only when

a

new dynasty, the Spartocids,

proba-

bly

of

Thracian

origin,

came

to

power

in Panti-

capaeum

in 436 BC

and

ruled for

over

300

years,

calling themselves

archons

(a

few

ancient

authors describe them

as tyrants

-

Str., VII,4,4,

for

example).

They

consolidated

the

primacy of

Panticapaeum and

the

creation

of

the

kingdom,

but the

process

was

not

completed

until

the

middle-second

half

of

the 4th

century BC

when

Theodosia,

Nymphaeum and Phanagoria, the

cities

most

strongly

opposed

to the

power

of

Panticapaeum,

were

gradually

incorporated,

though only by

force.

Panticapaeum

continued to

establish

sub-

colonies, expanding

its

colonising

activity to

ar-

eas not

far from

the

Taman Peninsula,

known

as the

Asiatic

Bosporus.

First

was Gorgippiat2,

established

on

the

site of

a previous

colony

(Sindice/Sindic

Harbour)

in

the

first

half

of the

4th

century BC

in

the land of the local Sindi

(.fig.

l4);

Gorgippos, brother of

the Bosporan

king,

became its

governor.

This city

was vital

for

Bosporan

rulers:

it

had access to

fertile lands

populated

by

locals. It

started to

mint its

own

coinst3.

In

the

European Bosporus

(eastern

Crimea), Cytaiia,

Akra

and Cimmericum75 were

founded

(figg.

1; 12).

All

were

small,

never

ex-

ceeding 5

ha in

extent;

all

situated

at

35-50

km

from Panticapaeum. These

settlements are very

often mentioned

in

ancient

written

sources

but

their

political

status is never described.

Excava-

tion

has shown

that

they

had

stone

buildings

and

fortification

systems,

the

latter

from the

4th-3rd

centuriesT6.

Another kind

of settlement,

established by

the

Bosporan kings

in

the

lands

of

the

local

pop-

ulation in

the

Kuban

area, deserves

our

atten-

tion. The Kuban is not far from the

Taman Penin-

68

Myrmehion. Hoord 2004.

6e

On

the

Bosporan kingdom, see

G.tlltrxnvrc

1971,

pp.

32-169; HrNl 1994; Tsnrsxsr,eozs 1997b,

pp.

77-80.

i0

See,

for

example, Vestlrv

19921 ZAvolKrN 2001.

;1

I shall not

provide

a icngthy discussion of thc dctails

here. I am

preparing

a

paper,

'The

Greek

Bosporan Kingdom:

Regionalism and Globalism in the Black Sea', which address-

es

this

matter. It will

appear

in F. Dr Arcn,ts

(ed.),

Regional

i,sm an,cJ Globalism in An.tiquitl,

(the

Proceedin.gs of an in.ter-

national cortference hekl

in

Van.couuer

in

Morch

20071

. See al-

so

HIsl

1994,

pp.

488-502 and Sepnrr


19/27

Seconclary

colonisers

in the

Black Sect: Sinope

and

Panticapaeum

o-()o

'qr

,^tr,

f

o

oo8o

,

I

1

I

l'

I

I

I

I

I

I

- -

--:=:>

I

f

u

a

Fig. 14

-

Plan ofGorgippia.

I.

PIan of

trench'City':

1.

Remains

of

4th-3rd centuries

BC; 2. Remains

of

2nd

century

BC;

3.

Remains of

1st centuryAD;

4.

Remains

of

2nd-Srd centuries

AD; 5.

Tiled

paths.

II. Situation

ofthe

excavated

trenches

in the territory

oi'the

modern-day city

ofAnapa

(after

Kossrr-ENKo

e,

Attt

1984,p.

139).

&

FiR

@

te

[f,

II

to"?

6a

o

t'::

i"i

_

4,,

J08x

o

{,

l"i

tt'a

-'o

''

I

i 'a

.7s

a'.

1ri/tolt

i

;)

,,,

:

o


20/27

246

Gocha R.

Tsetskhladze

sula;

a

very

fertile area, especially

for

growing

grain,

inhabited

by a

settled

local

population77.

From

the

end of

the 5th century,

it

was

a

policy

of

the

Bosporan kingdom

to

incorporate

these

local

peoples

and

their territory.

By the beginning of the

4th

century

this

had

been achieved,

peacefully

in

the main. This

marked,

for the

Classical

period,

the

end of expansion

by the

Bosporan Greeks

into

local

territory

(figg.

15-16),

which had, in reality,

started

from

the

first half

of the Sth century,

frrst

by

the

insertion

of

so-called

Bosporan

emporia

into

local

settlements, and then,

from

the

4th

century,

by the

establishment of

administrative centres

by

the

Bosporan

kings. An example

of the

first is

Elizavetovskoe

city-site,

on

the

borders

of

the

Bosporan

kingdom

and

the

lands

ofthe Scythians,

Maeotians and

the

Sauromatians7s.

In

reality this

settlement was divided

in

two:

one

part

populated

by

Greeks,

the other by

locals.

The

Greek

quarter

has

given

us

Greek-t1pe stone

buildings;

in

the

lo-

cal

quarter

we

find subterranean dwellings.

Later,

a

wall

was erected

to divide the two

parts.

For

the

later

period

we

have

exactly the

same

kind

of set-

tlement

and

division at

Tanais7e.

established

in

the

later

3rd century

BC,

according to Strabo

(X1,2,3)

by'the Greeks

who held

the

Bosporus':

On

the river

and

the

lake

is

an

inhabited

city

bearing the

same

name, Tanais; it was founded

by

the

Greeks

who held

the

Bosporus.

Recent-

ly, however, it was sacked by

King

Polemon

be-

cause

it

wouid

not

obey

him.

It was

a common

emporium,

partly

of the

Asiatic

and

the

Euro-

pean

nomads, and

partly

of those who navigat-

ed

the

lake

from

the

Bosporus,

the

former

bringing

slaves,

hides,

and such

things

as

no-

mads

possess,

and

the latter

giving

in ex-

change

clothing, wine, and the other things

that

belong to civilised

life.

Semibratnee

(about

35 km

north

of Gorgippia)

is an

example of a Bosporan

administrative

centre

established

in

local

territory.

Until

1985

we

had

only the

archaeological evidence of

this

site,

which

demonstrated the

existence of a Greek-t5,pe

fortifi-

cation

system

and

stone

architecture

from

the 5th

i?

On the

local

population

ofthe

north-eastern Black Sea

littoral.

sce

Tnnnxnol.e et Attt 2OO6.

i8

On Elizavetovskoe,

see

MlRt

ttxx,

r,

ZI't'NIKo\-, Kopvl,rtr'

2000.

ie

On

Tanais,

scc Arsoxvnl-.q.

2003; BorrclER,

FonxesrnR,

ARsRr'Rlr

2002; KosHrr-r:Nxo, MeRtNot'rrcrl 2000.

so

GoRoNcH,qnovsKrr

2004.

sr

SEG XL\TII,

p.

1027; XLIII,

p.

515; Gnuu.u

2002,

pp.

95-99.

centurys0.

Then an

inscription

\Mas

found

which

proved

what had long

been suspected

-

the

settle-

ment

was

re-founded

by

the

Bosporan

king

Leucon

I

in

the early

4th

century after the incorporation of

the

area

populated

by

the

Sindi

into

the

Bosporan

kingdom. The

settlement's ancient

name was

Labrys/Labry.ta:

In

accordance with

his

vow,

Leucon,

son

of

Satyrus, archon

of

Bosporus

and

Theodosia,

set

up

this

statue for

Phoebus Apollo-in-

Labrys,

the

guardian

of

the city

of

the

Labry-

tans,

having

driven out by battle and

force

from the land of the

Sindians Octamasades,

the son of Hecateus, king of

the Sindians, who,

after expelling his father from his

ancestral

rule.

confined

r?r

him

in this city"r.

Sinope,

Panticapaeum

and Heracleia

PonticaE2

are

not

the only

secondary colonisers

but they

are

the

most

significant

ones.

Apollonia

Pontica estab-

lished

afew

emporia, as did

Histria,

etc.83

Conclusions

As

this

survey demonstrates, the vast majori-

ty

of the

75-90 colonies

around the Black

Sea

were

the result

of secondary colonisation

by the

first wave of major colonies.

In

many

cases

it

is

difficult

to

identify

the nature

of

these

secondary

colonies

-

independent

poleis,

dependent

poleis,

emporia, etc.

-

and

also

the

reasons

for

their

es-

tablishment.

We

can

conclude that Sinope estab-

lished

colonies

and settlements

for

economic

rea-

sons,

as too,

it

seems

most

likely,

did

Pantica-

paeum

in

the Archaic

period.

From

the later 5th

century, when

the

tyrants

of

Panticapaeum

es-

tablished the Bosporan kingdom,

expansion

was

a

political

as

much

as

an

economic concern, a

re-

sponse

to its own

political

development

and

to

lo-

cal

political

and ethnic circumstance

(secondary

colonisation,

like

primary,

depended

much

on

lo-

cal conditions).

The inclusion

in

the

kingdom

of

the

local populations

living

near

the

Taman

Peninsula

was achieved

through the

establish-

ment

of

Bosporan

emporicr

or

political

and ad-

ministralive

centres in

Lheir

territorvEa.

52

See A. Avram's

paper

in

the

present

volume.

83

On emporia around Black Sea, see HINo 1995/96;

1997;

rrr.;

Bonn 2002; Tsnrsxnr.anzn

1998a,

pp.

40-41; Tsnr-

SKHLADZE 2000.

Ea

The expansion of Panticapaeum in the Classical

peri-

od has some resemblance

to Syracuse and

its

expansionist

politics

(see,

lbr

example, DourNcuoz 2006a,

pp.

269-75;284-

92. 324-42:

Du ANc+ELrs,

G.tnslal

2006).


21/27

Secondary

colonisers

itt the

Black

Sea:

Sinope ctnd

Panticapaeum

ROYAL SCYTHIANS

247

Fig.

15

-

Ethnic

map of the

north-

eastcr-n

Black Sea

region

in the 6th-

5th

centuries

BC:

1. Greek

cities;

2.

Population of thc

coastal arca

of'the

Kerch Peninsula

identified

with

burials

in

stone;

3.

Dandarii;

4. Tauri;

5. Sindi;

6. Scythi-

ans

(adapted

from

MeslnNNrKC)\'

1981,

p.

41).

Fig.

16

-

Ethnic

map

of

the

north-

eastern

Black Sea

region

in

the

4th

century

BC:1.

Bosporan cities;

2.

Population

of

some

coastal ar-

eas

of the

Kerch

Peninsula;

3.

Agrarian Scythi-

ans;

4. Sindi;

5.

Nomadic

Scythi-

ans;

6. Direction

of Sarrnatian

pen-

etration; 7.

Bor-

ders of the

Bospo-

ran kingdom

(adapted

from

Mesr,r.;NNIKo\r

1981,

p.

64).

m

m

m

-]

g

N

mm

2

SEA

OF

AZOV

SLACK

SEA

MAEOTAT

TARP

?HATEI

KERKETI

K ERKETI

TORFTI

SARMATIA

TAiFd

\[f

psa

rir

q

,

rt

w

N

m

N

mm

w

I

1

o

7

q

?

\

I

I

i,

a{$\

Dosx

t?

f

-t

,

t

,

/

I

I

"-:.

>

z

v)

ELACK

SNA

TO

R

ETI


22/27

248

Gocha R. Tsetskhladze

BIBLIOGRAPHY

Aenauov,

ZavoyxrN

2003

Ar,nxsnnvr

2002

Ar,nxssnva

2003

A_nsnuypve 2003

Ar,nan,

Hrul,

TsnrsxHlelzq

2004

BOtrcon, FoRNa.srnn,

AnssN'ove

2002

CoNolrcr 1998

Corvovrcr 2005

o'AcosrrNo

2006

Do ANcnr,rs

2007

Dn

ANcor,rs

2009

Dn Arcnr,rs,

Gansrat

2006

DE

BOER 2OO2

A.P.

AenaMov,

A.A.

Zavovrurv,

Patraeus

-

Cimmerta

-

Ac hilleion, in

Gnelrr'rotvos,

Pnrnopour,os

2003,

pp.

1103-

R/

E.M.

Arexser.ve.

Gorgippi a.

in FonN,A.srpn,

BOrrcsn

2002,

pp.

92-112.

E.M. Are

rstwn.

Gorgippia.

in GneMNrnNos,

PETRopouLos

2003,

pp.

957-1006.

T.M. Ansntveve.

?anars,

in

GnauunNos,

Pntnoeour,os

2003,

pp.

1047-1102.

A. Avnau,

J.

HrNn,

G. Tsnr-

SKHLADZE,

The

Bla,ch

Sea

Area, in

HANSEIT,

Nrnr,spN

2004,

pp.924-73.

B.

BorrcEn.

J.

Fonruaslen,

T.

AnsnN'nva,

Tanais ctm Don,

in

FonNasrnn,

BorrGER

2002,

pp.

69-85.

N. Colvovrcr, Histria

VIII.

Les

Timbres

Amphoriques

2:

Sinope,

Bucharest

1998.

N. CoNovrct,

The

Dynomics

of

Tlctde

in

TYansport Amphoras

from

Sinope,

Thasos

and

Rho-

dos on the

Western

Blaclz

Sea

Coast:

a, Compctratiue Ap-

proach,

in

V.F. SroLea, L.

HervNnstal

(edd.1,

Chronolo-

gies

of

the

Black

Sea

Arect

in

the

Period

c.

400 100 BC,

Aarhus

2005,

pp.

97-118.

B. r'Acosrmo,

The

First

Greeks in

Italy

,

in Tsnr-

SKHLADZE

2006b,

pp.

201-38.

F. Dn

Aucnlrs,

Greek and

Phoenician

Colonization,

in D.

Burssnnnr

(ed.'),

The

Oxford

Companion

to

World

Explo-

ration,

vol.1,

Oxford

2007,

pp.

357-60.

F. Dp

ANcor,s,

Colonies and

Colonization,

in G.

Boys-

SroNns,

B.

Gnazrosr, P. Vesu-

Nr.q.

(edd.),

The

Oxford Hand-

book of

Hellenic

Studies, Ox-

ford 2009,

pp.

48-64.

F.

Dn

Axcnr,rs, B.

Gansrao,

Euhemerus

in

Context,

ClAnt,

25,2,2006, pp.27I-42.

J.

rn Bonn,

Apollonia Pontica

DnVRins,

Seus,

Vorcr

2005

DouiNcunz

2006a

DouiNcunz

2006b

DooNAN

2002

DooNaN

2003

DooueN

2004

Doorver 2006

DuNoul

2004

DuNlua,

DuNlu.q,

1999

and

its

emporia,

ports

ctf

trade?,

in

M. Feulor,

A.

Fn.qyssn,

E.

Gnrw

@dd.),

Pont-

Euxin

et

Commerce, Besanqon

2002,

pp.125-38.

K. DaVnrns,

G.K.

S,qr'rs, M.M.

Votcr, Gordion re-dating,

in

A.

QrlrNcrnodr,u,

G.

DaReysHrnn

Gdd.),

AnatolicLn

Iron

Ages

5:

Proceedings

of the

Fifth

Anato-

lian

lron

Ages

Colloquium

held

cfi Van, 6-10 August

2001,

London 2005.

pp.

45-46.

A.J.

Dcrnirvcunz,

Greeks

in

Sicily, in

TsnrsKHr,llzs

2006b,

pp.

253-357.

A.J. Dor'tilvcusz,

Greeks

in

the

Iberian Peninsulo,

in Tspr-

SKHLADZE

2006b,

pp.

428-50e.

O.P. Doorurtr,

Production

in

a

Pontic

landscctpe:

the

hinter-

land

of

Greek

and

Roman

Sinope,

in M.

Faulor,

A.

Fnrvssn,

E. GoNv

Gdd,.l,

Pont-

Euxin

et Commerce, Besanqon

2002,

pp.185-98

O.P. DooNen,

Slnope, in

GRaulrrnNos,

Pnrnoeour,os

2003,

pp.

1379-1402.

O.P. DooNaN,

Slnop

Lctnd-

scapes.

Exploring

Connection

in

the Blaclz

Sea,

Philadel-

phia

2004.

O.P. DooNer, Exploring

Com-

munity

in

the

Hinterland

of

a

Blaclz

Sect

Port,

in

P.G.

Bn nn,

V.F.

Srolen

tedd.r.

Surucying

the

Greeh

Chora.

The

Black

Sea Region in

a

Comparatiue

Perspectiue,

Aarhus

2006,

pp.

47-58.

G. Durvoue, Hoards

of Foreign

Coins

of

the

Classical Period

lrom

Colchis

4th

century B.C.-

lth

century A.D.),

Journal of

Georgian Archaeology,

7,

2004,

pp.

160-69.

G.

Duuoua.,

T. DuNoua,

Zes

relations

dconomiques

de

la

Colchide

aux

dpoques

ar-

chcttque

et classique

d'aprds le

matdriel

numismatique, in

O.

LoRoxrpANlDZE,

P.

Laveque

(edd.),

Za

Mer

Noire. Zone

de


23/27

Secondary

colonisers

in the

Black

Sea.

Contacts,

Besangon

1999,

pp.

107-16.

S

ino

p

e and P anticap aeum

DuNDUA, Duxlur,2006

G.

Dullue, T.

DuNnua., Geor-

GnatuunNos,

gian

Numismatics

I, Tbilisi

Pprnopoul,os 2003

2006

tin

Georgian:

summary in

English).

Fplospnv

1999

N.F.

Fnlospnv,

Classification

des timbres

astronomiques

de

Gnnco

2006

Sinope,

in

Y.

Ga.nlaN

(ed.),

Production

et

Commerce

des

Amphores

Anciennes en

Mer

Noire,

Aix-en-Provence

1999,

HeNsnN 2006a

pp.27-48.

Frcunrna 2008

T.

FrcunlR.t, Greeh

Colonisa-

tion

in

the Classical

Period,

in

G. R.

TsB'TsKHLADZE

(ed.),

Greek

Colonisation.

An

Ac-

count of

Greeh Colonies

and

Other

Settlements

Ouerscas,

vol.

2, Leiden/Boston

2008,

pp.427-523.

S.I. FINocnNovl,

Hermonassa,

in GneulmNos,

PETRoPouLos

2003,

pp.

1007-46.

J. FonNasmn,

B.

Boncnn

(edd.),

Das

Bosporanische

Reich,

Mainz2002.

V.F. Ga.louxEVIC,

Das Bospo-

ranische Reich,

Berlin

1971.

Y. GanLaN

(ed.'),

Production

et

commerce

des amphores

a.n-

ciennes

en Mer Nolre, Aix-en-

Provence

1999.

Y.

Ganr,aN,

2004:

Les timbres

cdramiques Sinopeens

sur

am-

phores

et

sur tuiles

trouuds d.

Sinope:

Prdsentation

et cata-

logue,Paris

2004.

Y. GanlaN,

I. TnrlrcaN,

Pre-

midres

fouilles

de

I'atelier am-

phorique

de

Zeytinlilz

1 d Si-

nope,

in GelleN

1999,

pp.

21-

25.

HeNspN,

NrplsnN 2004

GenuN,

TxntceN

1999

GonoNcHanovsKrl

2004 V.A. GonoNcHARovsKII,

Prob-

Htm

1995/96

lems

of the

Chronology

of

Semibratnee City-Site,

in

V.Y

Zunv

et

Azli

(edd.),

Bosporan

Phenomenon:

Problems of

the

Chronology

ct,nd

Dating

of

HINo

1997

Monuments,

part

2, St

Pe-

tersburg

2004,

pp.56-60

(in

Russian).

A.J.

GneH.qv,

The colonial

ex-

pansion

of

Greece,

in

Cam-

bridge

Ancient

History III.3,

2nd

ed., Cambridge

1982,

pp.

83-162.

A.J. Gnarrav,

Thasos

and

the

249

FINOGENOVA

2OO3

FoRN.+srEn,

BOTTGER

2002

Ga.rluxpvri

1971

Genr,aN

1999

G.qnr,eN

2004

Gneruu

1982

Har,{snN 2006b

HaNspN 2006c

HrNl

1988

Hrr,ID

1994

Bosporan Kingdom,

AWE I,1,

2002,

pp.87-101.

D.V. Gn,cMMENos,

E.K.

Pnrnopout

os

(edd.),

Ancient

Greeh

Colonies

in

the

Black

Sea,

2

vols.,

Thessaloniki

2003.

E.

Gnnco, Greelz

Colonisation

in Southern

ltaly:

A

Method-

ological

Essay.

in Tser-

SKHLADZE

2006b,

pp.

169-200.

M.H. HaNspN,

Polis. An Intro-

duction

to the

Greek City-

Srate,

Oxford

2006.

M.H.

HaNsnN, The Shotgun

Method. The

Demography of the

Ancient

Greek

City-State Cul-

t ur e,

C olttlrrbia,

Mis souri.rlon-

don 2006.

M.H.

HaNsprv,

Emporion.

A

Study

of the Use

and Meaning

of

the

Term

in

the

Archaic

and

Classical

Periods,

in

Tsptsxnl.q.lzn

2006b,

pp.

1-

39.

M.H.

HausaN,

T.H. Ntelsex

(edd.),

An

Inuentory of

Archa'

ic

and Classical

Poleis: An In-

uestigcttion Conducted

by

The

Copenhagen

Polis

Centre

for

the

Danish

l{ational

Research

Foundation,

Oxford

2004.

J.G.F.

HrNl,

The

Colonisation

of

Sinope

and

the

South-East

Blach Sea

Area,

in

O.D. Lonn-

KTPANIDZE Gd.),

Local Ethnopo-

litical

Entities of the

Blach

Sea

Littoral in

the

7th-4th

Centurtes

BC,

Tbilisi

1988,

pp.

207-23.

J.G.F.

HrNn, The Bosporan

Kingdom. )n

Cambridge

An-

cient

History

VI,

2nd

ed.,

Cambridge

1994,

pp.

476-517.

J.G.F.

HINI,

Traders

and

P

o

r

ts

-

of- Tl ade

(Ernp

or

oi

and

Emporia)

in

the

Black

Sea

in

Antiquity,

MN, II,

1995/96,

pp.

113-126.

J.G.F. HINI,

Colonies and

Ports-of-Tfade

on

the

North-

ern

Shores

of

the

Black Sea:

Borysthenes,

Kremnoi

and

"Other

Pontic

Emporia" lz

Herodotus,

in T.H. Ntrlspt'l

(.ed.),

Yet More

Studies

in

the

Ancient

Greek Polis,

Stuttgart

1997,

pp.

107-16.

J.G.F.

Htwo.

Megorian

nasal'r 2002

Hrr,rl 1998


24/27

250

HrNo 1999

HrNl

2005

Inscriptions of Sinope

2004

IvaNrcsrN

1998

KAC 2003

I(a,xailzo,

Iasuvrlr,

Vrcxrns 2001

Kaxurlzr,

Taverrl,q.rsuvrr,r

2005

K,q,ssae

Tnzcon

1999

Colonisct.tion

in the

Western

Half of

the

Black

Sea

(Sister-

and

Dctughter-Cities of Herak-

leia),

in

TsersxHleoze

1998,

pp.

131-52.

J.G.F.

HrNl,

?he Dates

and

Mother Cities of the Blach Sea

Colonie

s

(

P

s e udo

-

S

cy mnus

and the

Pontic Contact Zone),

in

O.D.

LonoKrpeNrnzi,, P.

L6vreus

(edd.),.Lo

Mer Noire.

Zone

de

Contacts,

Besanqon

1999,

pp.25-34.

J.G.F.

Hrr'rl, The Tltpes on the

Phasian Siluer Coins of

the

Fifth-Fourth

Centuries

BC

(The

"Kolkhidki"

of Western

Georgia,),

NC,

165, 2005,

pp.

r-74.

D.H.

FnoNcH

(ed.),

Inscrt,p-

tions of Sinope

I, Bonn 2004.

A.I.

IvaNrcHrx, Die Grtindung

uon Sinope

und

die

Probleme

der

Anfangsphase der

griechischen

Kolonisation

des

Schwarzmeergebieles,

in

TsnrsxnlalzE

1998b,

pp.

297

-

330.

V.I.

Kec,

A

New

Chronology

for

the Ceramic Stamps

of

Herakleia

Pontihe, in

P.G.

Brlro,

J.M.

Ho;ro,

V.F.

Sror,-

ea

(edd.),

The

Cauldron of

Ariantes.

Studies

prese.nte,d to

A.N.

Sceglou

on

the

occasion

of

his

70th birthday,

Aarhus

2003,

pp.

261-78.

A.

Kaxgrlzn, I.

Ilsnvrlr, M.

VICxoRS, Siluer Coins

of

Blach

Sect

Coastal

Cities

from

the

Fifth

Century

BC

Necropolis

at

Pichunari, NC,

767,

2007,

pp.252-57.

A. K.qrcrrozn, G. Tavavarsrnrylr,

Coins

of

the

Bosporan King-

dom

from

the

Pichunari

Greeh

Necropolis,

in

V.Y.

Zunv et

Ar,tt

(edd.),

Bosporan

Phenom-

enon:

Problems of Correlation

of

Written

ctnd

Archaeological

Sources,

St

Petersburg 2005,

pp.

371-75

(in

Russian).

D.

Kasser

Tnzcon, TJ,pes am-

phoriques

fabriquds

d Demirci

prds

de Sinope,

in

GlnlRN

1999,

pp.

777-24.

Y.A. KervusutN

Theodosia, in

GRelrunNos, Pornolout

os


Kner,sornn 2005

KrnNaN 2004

KOSHELENKO 1992

KosHolnxxo,

Knuclrxova,

Dolconuxov

1984

Kosuor-oNxo,

KuzNnrsov

1996

Kosuor-oNxo,

KuzNprsov

1998

Kosuor-oNxo,

M-mwovrrcu 2000

KuzNorsov 2001

Kuzrqnrsov 2002

KUZNETSOV 2OO3

LolrnARlo 1999

2003,

pp.

645-706.

L. Kpar,Hopnn

(ed.),

The

Ar-

chaeology

of

Midas and

the

Phrygians.

Recent Work at

Gordion,

Philadelphia

2005.

D.J. KnnNaN,

Radiocarbon

Dates

from

lron

Age

Gordion

Are

Confounded,

AWE, 3, 1.,

2004,

pp.100-03.

G.A.

KoSHnLENKo

(ed.),

Es-

says on the Archaeology ctnd

History

of the

Bosporus,

Moscow 1992

(in

Russian).

GA

I{rsrm,urxo,

LT Knucr,u


25/27

M.qslnxNrxov 1981 A.A. Mesr,pNNrKov, Popula-

tion of

the

Bosporctn

State

in

the 6th-2nd

Centuries BC,

Moscow 1981

(in

Russian).

1\[A.sr,nNNrxov

2001

A.A.

Mesr,nNNixov,

Some

Questions

Concerning

the

Early

History

of the

Bosporan

State

in the

Light

of Recent

Arc

h aeo lo

g

ic al I nu

e

s

tig atio n s

in lhe Eastern

Crimea,

in

Tsnrsxnlalzn

2001,

pp.

247

-

60.

Masl,nNNrxov 2003 A.A. MaslpNNIKov,

Rural

ter-

ritory

of

Ancient

Cimmerian

Bosporus,

in

GneultnNos,

Pnrnopour,os 2003,

pp.

1155-

1274.

Mornv2003 Y.A. MotBv, Kyta, in

Gneu-

MENos, Pprnopour-os 2003,

pp.

841-94.

MoNercrov 2003

S.Y.

MorveNuov,

Greek

Am-

phorae

in the

Black

Sea

Lit-

toral, Saratov 2003

(in

Russ-

ian).

Monnr 2006 J.-P. Monnr,, Phocaean

Colo-

nisation,

in

TsnrsxnLADZE

2006b,

pp.

358-428.

MUScARELLA 2003 O.W. MuscaRELLA, The Date

of the

Destruction

of the

Early

Phrygian Period

ctt Gordion,

AWE 2, 2, 2003,

pp.

225-52.

MsnnnnoN

Hotnn

2004

The

Myrmekion

Hoard

(E'xhi-

bition catalogue),

St

Peters-

burg 2004.

OSBoRNE 1996 R.

OseonNo,

Greece in the

Mahing,

1200-479

8.C.,

Lon-

don

1996.

Parr,rcnNro 1999

N.

Pavr,rcpNr


26/27

252


Tsnrsxnlalzn

1991a

Tsorsxsllnzn

1997b

Tsnrsxsulzo

1998a

Tsrrsxslanzn

1998b

Tsnrsrcrlanzn

1998c

TsorsxHlanzn 1999

Tssrsxnlarze 2000

Tsprsxnlalzn

2001

Tsorsxulalzn 2002

ogy of Greek Colonisation.

Es-

says

Dedicated to

Sir

John

Boardmcr,n,

Oxford

1994,

pp.

111-36.

G.R.

TsnTsNHLADZE,

Plutarch,

Pericles

and

Pontus:

Some

Thoughts,

in

C. ScHnqlnR,

V.

Ruu6N, J. Vpr,e Gdd.),

Plutar-

co

y

la

Historia,

Zaragoza

1997,

pp.

46r-67.

G.R.

TsorsrcrLADZE,

A

Suruey

of

the

Major

(Irban

Settle-

ments

in t

he

Ki

m merian

Bosporos

rwilh

o

Discussion

of their Status as

Poleis),

in

T.H.

Nror,snN

(ed.),

Yet More

Studies

in the

Ancient Greek

Polis,

Stuttgart

\997,

pp.

39-

81.

G.R.

TSnTSKHLADZE,

Greek

Colonisation

of the Black Sea

Area:

Stages,

Models, Natiue

Populations,

in Tsprsxslalzn

1998b,

pp.

9-68.

G.R. Tsnrsxsuozn

(ed.),

The

Greeh

Colonisation

of the

Black

Sea

Area:

Historical In-

terpretation of

Archaeology,

Stuttgart

1998.

G.R.

TSETSKHT-.rlzn,

Die

Griechen in

der

Kolchis

(his-

t o

r

i

s c

h

-

a

r

c

h

ci

o I

o

g

i

s

c

h

e

r

Abri/3),Amsterdam

1998.

G.

R.

TsnrsrcrLADZE, Pic hu

nct

ri

ctnd its Enuirons, 6th Century

BC-4th

Century AD,

Paris

1999.

G.R. TsnrsxHLADZE,

Pistiros

in the System

of Pontic Empo-

ria

(Greek

Tlading and

Craft

Settlements

in

the

Hinterland

of

the

Northern and

Eastern

Blach Sea. and

Elsewhere), in

L.

DorularzKA

et

ALil

(edd.),

Structures

dconomiques dans

la

pdninsule balhanique

VIIe-

IIe sidcle

auant

J.-C., Opole

2000,235-46.

G.R.

TsnTsKHLADZE

(ed.),

North

Pontic Archaeology: Re-

cent Studies

and

Discoueries,

Leiden

/Boston

rKitln

200

1.

G.R.

TsnrsrcrLADZE,

Phanago-

ria:

Metropolis of

Asiatic

Bosporus,

in

Archaeology

Witho

ut

F rontie

r

s,

Athens

2002,

pp.

129-50.

G.R.

TsnrsrHLADZE, Greehs

TsprsxHlalzn

2006a

Tsprsxnuqlzn

2006b

Tsnrsxslalzn

2007a

Tsntsxttlalzp

2007b

Tsnrsrctlalzp

forthcoming

a

Tsptsxnuozn

forthcoming b

Tsorsxnlalzn,

Korvnnassov 2001

Tsnrsrnlalzp,

KuzNprsov

2000

TSETSKHumzn,

VNuxov 1992

beyond the Bosporus,

in

V.

K-q.Racponcurs,

(ed.),

7he

Greeks beyond the

Aegean:

from

Mcr,rseilles

to Bactria,

NewYork

2003,

pp.

129-66.

G.R. TsnTsNHLADZE, Reuisit-

ing

Ancient

Greeh Colonisa-

tion,

in

TssrsxHt,.qrzn 2006b,

pp.

xxiii-lxxxiii.

G.R. TSnTSKHLADZE

(ed.),

Greek Coloniscttion.

An

Ac-

count

of

Greek Colonies and

Other

Settlements Ouerseas,

vol.

i,

Leiden4Boston 2006.

G.R.

TssrsxHLADZE, Greeks

cLnd

Locals

in

the

Southern

Blctch

Sea

Littoral: A

Re-Ex-

amination,

in G.

Hnnu.q.N, I.

SHarzMeN

(edd.),

Greeks

be-

tween EcLst

and

West.

Essays

in Greek

Literature

and

His-

tory in

Memory of Dauid

Ash-

erl,

Jerusalem 2007,

pp.

160-

95.

G.R.

TsnrsxHLADZE, Mediter-

ranean: Greek Colonies,

in D.

Pnansau

Gd.),

Encyclopedict,

of

Archaeology, San Diego/Lon-

don

2007,

pp.

568-590.

G.R. TsnrsrHLADZE, Greeks

in

the Blach

Sea,

in

Tsnr-

SKHLADZE

forthcoming

b.

G.R. TSnTSKHLADZE

(ed.),

Greek

Colonisation.

An

Ac-

count of

Greek Colonies and

Other

Settlements

Ouerseas,

vol. 3,

Leiden/Boston forth-

coming.

G.R.

TSnTSNHLADZE,

A.V. KoN-

DRASHEV, Notes

on the

Rescue

Excauation

of the

Tuzla

Necropolis

(1995

1997),

in

Tsnrsxnl.qnzn

2001,

pp.

345-

64.

G.R.

TSoTSKHLADZE,

V.D.

Kuzmersov.

On the

Cult of

Aphrodite

in

Kepoi, in

G.R.

Tsnrsxnlalzn,

A.J.N.W. Pnec,

A.M. Suolcness

(

edd.

),

Periplous. Papers on Cla,ssical

Art and

Archaeology Present-

ed

to Sir John

Boardman,

London 2000,

pp.

353-60.

G.R. TSnTSKHLADZE, S.Y.

VNUKov, Colchian

Amphorae:

Typology, Chronology o.nd

As-

pects

of

Production,

ABSA,

87,1992,

pp.357-86.

ssrsxnlelzE

2003


27/27

Vacurrxe

2003

Vlxurrua,

VINOGRADOV

2OO1

Va.nsnq.lourlzq

2005

Vesrr,nv

1992

M.J.

VacHrtNe,

Archctic

Buildings

oI Porthmion.

in

P.G.

Brr,rn, J.M.

Ho;rn,

V.F.

SroLeA.

(edd.),

The Cauldron

of

Ariantes.

Studies presented

to

A.N. Sceglou

on the

occcL-

sion of

his

70th

birthday,

Aarhus

2003,

pp.

37-54.

M.Y. VaxHrrNe,

Y.A.

VrNo-

clRADov,

Once

Again

on the

Ear-

ly Fortificati

g.tsetskhladze-secondary colonisation-italy.pdf

Documents