Open Collections

UBC Theses and Dissertations

UBC Theses Logo

UBC Theses and Dissertations

The archaeological record of the Galatians in Anatolia, 278-63 B.C. 1977

You don't seem to have a PDF reader installed, try download the pdf

Item Metadata

Download

Media
UBC_1978_A8 N59.pdf [ 5.68MB ]
UBC_1978_A8 N59.pdf
Metadata
JSON: 1.0094439.json
JSON-LD: 1.0094439+ld.json
RDF/XML (Pretty): 1.0094439.xml
RDF/JSON: 1.0094439+rdf.json
Turtle: 1.0094439+rdf-turtle.txt
N-Triples: 1.0094439+rdf-ntriples.txt
Citation
1.0094439.ris

Full Text

THE ARCHAEOLOGICAL. RECORD OF THE GALATIANS IN ANATOLIA, 278-63 B..C. by Lucia Frances Nixon A.B., Bryn Maw College, 1971 A THESIS SUBMITTED IN PARTIAL FULFILLMENT OF THE REQUIREMENTS FOR -THE DEGREE OF MASTER OF ARTS in THE FACULTY OF GRADUATE STUDIES Department of Classics s, We accept this thesis as;conforming to the required standard THE..UNIVERSITY OF BRITISH COLUMBIA August, 1977 © Lucia Frances Nixon, 1977 In presenting this thesis in partial fulfilment of the requirements for an advanced degree at the University of Brit ish Columbia, I agree that the Library shall make it freely available for reference and study. I further agree that permission for extensive copying of this thesis for scholarly purposes may be granted by the Head of my Department or by his representatives. It is understood that copying or publication of this thesis for financial gain shall not be allowed without my written permission. Department of . G l a s s i e s The University of Brit ish Columbia 2075 W e s b r o o k P l a c e V a n c o u v e r , C a n a d a V6T 1W5 Date p p h m a r y 3fi r 1 Q7ft i i ABSTRACT The G a l a t i a n s were a group of C e l t s who a r r i v e d i n A n a t o l i a from the west i n 278 B.C. According to the h i s t o r i c a l sources, they earned t h e i r l i v e l i h o o d by plu n d e r i n g and by s e r v i n g as mercenaries i n the eastern Medit- erranean. Ancient authors s t a t e that the Ga l a t i a n s c o n s t i t u t e d a d e f i n i t e t h r e a t to the c i t i e s of western A s i a Minor before they were s e t t l e d i n c e n t r a l A n a t o l i a . G a l a t i a became a Roman province i n 25 B.C.; by t h a t time, the G a l a t i a n s had been thoroughly absorbed by the l o c a l p o p u l a t i o n . The purpose of t h i s paper i s t o see what a r c h a e o l o g i c a l evidence e x i s t s f o r the presence of the G a l a t i a n s i n A n a t o l i a during the p r e - p r o v i n c i a l per- i o d , and how th a t evidence can be obtained. Three types of evidence are examined: p o t t e r y , b u r i a l s and grave goods, and f o r t s and settlements. G a l a t i a n p o t t e r y i s s t i l l a c o n t r o v e r s i a l sub- j e c t r e q u i r i n g more study and excavation. Only one b u r i a l s i t e , K a r a l a r , can d e f i n i t e l y be i d e n t i f i e d by an i n s c r i p t i o n i n Greek. The evidence from t h i s s i t e suggests t h a t the G a l a t i a n s adopted v a r i o u s types o f H e l l e n i s t i c tomb a r c h i t e c t u r e and that they placed a fundamentally H e l l e n i s t i c s e l e c t i o n of grave goods w i t h i n t h e i r tombs and graves. G a l a t i a n b u r i a l s are there- fore hard to d i s t i n g u i s h from o r d i n a r y H e l l e n i s t i c b u r i a l s i n A n a t o l i a . Three to r e s and three f i b u l a e from b u r i a l s a t K a r a l a r , Bolu, and Bogazk5y are probably C e l t i c ; t h a t there are so few of them suggests t h a t they had been imported from Europe, and that the Ga l a t i a n s were not themselves metal- workers i n the C e l t i c t r a d i t i o n . Such o b j e c t s cannot be used as the sole means of i d e n t i f y i n g G a l a t i a n b u r i a l s . The s i t u a t i o n i s l i t t l e b e t t e r f o r f o r t s and settlements. Some have been i d e n t i f i e d because they were i n h a b i t e d by l i t e r a t e people before or a f t e r the a r r i v a l o f the G a l a t i a n s ; others have been suggested because of the l i k e l i h o o d of t h e i r l o c a t i o n . Settlement seems to be more dense west of the Halys but more surveys and excavation are necessary to t e s t t h i s emerging p a t t e r n . So f a r , the p r e - p r o v i n c i a l p e r i o d has y i e l d e d l i t t l e i n the way of a r c h a e o l o g i c a l evidence f o r the presence of the G a l a t i a n s i n A n a t o l i a , d e s p i t e the s o l i d background provided by the h i s t o r i c a l sources. The Gala- t i a n s had l i t t l e connection w i t h the European C e l t s and adapted e a s i l y to l o c a l customs. This c a p a c i t y f o r adaptation makes i t d i f f i c u l t to say what i s G a l a t i a n and what i s A n a t o l i a n H e l l e n i s t i c . Only f u r t h e r work i n the f i e l d can remedy t h i s s t a t e of a f f a i r s . i v TABLE OF CONTENTS In t r o d u c t i o n 1 H i s t o r i c a l O u t l i n e 8 P o t t e r y 35 B u r i a l s and Grave Goods 44 Fo r t s and Settlements 69 Conclusion 87 Figures and I l l u s t r a t i o n s 89 B i b l i o g r a p h y 106 V LIST OF FIGURES AND ILLUSTRATIONS 1. "Galatian" pottery. Maier, J d l 78 (1963) 235, f i g . 14. 2. Shapes of "Galatian" pottery. Maier, J d l 78 (1963), pp. 221, 222, f i g s . 1, 2. 3. Map of Galatian, "Galatian", and other tombs. 4. Kurtkale. Mansel, Belleten 38 (1974), f i g . 22. Igdir. T6kg6z, TurkArkDerg 22 (1975), p. 157, f i g . 3 Gemlik. Mellink, AJA 71 (1967), p. 173, f i g . 1. 5. Mudanya. Mansel, Belleten 38 (1974), f i g . 16. Kirkagac. Mellink, AJA 67 (1963), p. 189, f i g . 1. 6. Map of Karalar. Arik, Turk Tarih A r k e o l o j i Etnografya D e r g i s i 2 (1934), p i . 2. 7. Karalar C. Mansel, Belleten 38 (1974), f i g . 21. Gordibn I. Young AJA 59 (1955), p i . 81, f i g . 4. 8. Karalar A. Arik, TTAED 2 (1934), p i . 8. 9. Karalar A. Arik, TTAED 2 (1934), p i . 14. 10. Kucucek/Aykazi. F i r a t l i , Belleten 17 (1953), f i g . 5. 11. Karalar B. Arik, TTAED 2 (1934), p i . 11. 12. Bolu East. F i r a t l i , AJA 69 (1965), p i . 94, f i g . 5. 13. Buckle from Bolu West. F i r a t l i , AJA 69 (1965), p i . 95, f i g . 7. 14. Gordion I I . Edwards, Expedition 5 (1963), f i g . 34. Besevler. Hoepfner, AthMitt 86 (1971), f i g . 4. 15. Map of possible Galatian h i l l - f o r t s and settlements, a f t e r M i t c h e l l , D.Phil, t h e s i s , Oxford, 1974. 16. Peium. M i t c h e l l , AnatSt 24 (1974), p. 67, f i g . 8. 17. Karalar. Arik, TTAED 2 (1934), p i . 19. v i ACKNOWLE DGEMENT I would l i k e to thank Professor E.H. Williams for suggesting the topic of t h i s paper, and Professors J.A.S. Evans and J. Russell for acting as thesis supervisors. A l l three have made h e l p f u l and appropriate comments, and have provided much-needed encouragement. I am p a r t i c u l a r l y g r a t e f u l to Stephen M i t c h e l l f o r helping me with r e f - erences and for making his t h e s i s on Ga l a t i a a v a i l a b l e to me. Additional thanks are due to Professors Machteld J . Mellink and Fred Winter, Peter Kuniholm, and David French for help with bibliography. David French also l e t me see the draught of the unpublished guide to the v i l a y e t of Ankara. The University of B r i t i s h Columbia provided generous f i n a n c i a l a i d i n 1971-72 and 1972-73 through the H.R. MacMillan Foundation, which made i t possible f o r me to v i s i t Galatian and "Galatian" s i t e s when I was i n Turkey i n 1973. I would also l i k e to thank my family and friends f o r a l l t h e i r help and support. 1. INTRODUCTION This paper i s concerned with c e r t a i n aspects of the archaeological record of the Galatians, a group of o r i g i n a l l y European C e l t s , from t h e i r a r r i v a l i n Asia Minor i n 278 B.C., u n t i l Pompey's eastern settlement of 63 B.C. The Galatians themselves were an i l l i t e r a t e people, but t h e i r a c t i v i t i e s i n western Asia Minor and c e n t r a l Anatolia are f a i r l y well documented i n Greek and Roman h i s t o r i c a l sources. Thus i t i s possible to use the h i s t o r i c a l evidence as a basis for archaeological i n v e s t i g a t i o n . The task, then, i s to combine both h i s t o r i c a l and archaeological i n f o r - mation, i n order to obtain some notion of the Galatian c u l t u r a l i d e n t i t y i n Anatolia. The c l o s e s t analogy for t h i s kind of problem i s probably that of the Kimmerians, who preceded the Galatians i n Anatolia by a l i t t l e over four centuries. They are mentioned i n Greek, Assyrian, and B i b l i c a l sources, although they themselves were i l l i t e r a t e . The Kimmerians may have been .. driven from t h e i r homeland i n the south Russian steppes by the Scythians; i n the e a r l y seventh century they acted as mercenaries for Urartian kings, and l a t e r they constituted one of the nuisances which led to the downfall of the Assyrians. They posed a threat i n Lydia and i n Phrygia, where they made a r a i d on Gordion. I t i s thought that u l t i m a t e l y they s e t t l e d i n Cappa- docia."'' Archaeologically, the Kimmerians are very d i f f i c u l t to detect; i n f a c t , without the evidence of the h i s t o r i c a l sources, t h e i r presence i n Anatolia might well have gone unnoticed. The Kimmerians brought with them no d i s t i n c t i v e s t y l e i n a r t or weaponry, and were not apparently the b u i l d - ers of substantial settlements. 2. The case of the G a l a t i a n s i s s i m i l a r . They were described by the h i s t - o r i a n s of other c u l t u r e s ; they had been on the move f o r long enough to have shed most of the c h a r a c t e r i s t i c c u l t u r a l t r a i t s which might have l i n k e d them w i t h t h e i r European counterparts. Thus they could e a s i l y have adapted to l o c a l customs. I t i s the evidence from h i s t o r i c a l sources, w i t h the confirm- a t i o n from i n s c r i p t i o n s and s c u l p t u r a l d e d i c a t i o n s , t h a t makes the G a l a t i a n presence i n A n a t o l i a during the two c e n t u r i e s i n question a f a c t r a t h e r than a r c h a e o l o g i c a l s u p p o s i t i o n . Nonetheless, an attempt must be made to piece together the a v a i l a b l e a r c h a e o l o g i c a l evidence. There are two main d i f f i c u l t i e s i n doing t h i s . In the f i r s t p l a c e , a great deal of work remains to be done on the archaeology of the H e l l e n i s t i c p e r i o d , e s p e c i a l l y i n areas such as A n a t o l i a which were not p a r t of the c u l t u r a l mainstream. The r e l a t i o n s h i p between general h e l - l e n i s i h g i n f l u e n c e and r e s i d u a l Phrygian elements needs to be f i r m l y estab- l i s h e d . At present i t i s hard to say how the G a l a t i a n s reacted to the t h i r d century B.C. c u l t u r e of c e n t r a l A n a t o l i a i n terms of what h a b i t s of t h e i r own were discarded or modified, s i n c e the m a t e r i a l existence of the l o c a l people of the area i s i t s e l f i l l - d e f i n e d . In the second p l a c e , i t i s d i f f i c u l t to be p r e c i s e about the c u l t u r e the G a l a t i a n s brought w i t h them to A s i a Minor, although much i s known about the European C e l t s and t h e i r r e l a t i o n s h i p s w i t h the c l a s s i c a l world i n e a r l i e r p e r i o d s . The G a l a t i a n s were among the C e l t s who had penetrated i n t o the Balkans by the mid-fourth century B.C., and who l a t e r invaded 2 Macedonia and attacked Delphi. This knowledge does not help us much, as there i s no d e t a i l e d study of the c u l t u r a l r e l a t i o n s h i p between these C e l t s and the peoples of the lower Danube on the other. I t i s not w i t h i n the 3. scope of t h i s paper to r e s o l v e the l a t t e r questions, but i t i s necessary to mention the gaps i n our knowledge which complicate the G a l a t i a n problem. Even a f t e r they had reached c e n t r a l A n a t o l i a w i t h whatever c u l t u r e they had r e t a i n e d during t h e i r wanderings, the G a l a t i a n s seem to have l i v e d from hand to mouth; i t i s p o s s i b l e t h a t such a way of l i f e was r e f l e c t e d by a correspondingly ad hoc c u l t u r e . While the Ga l a t i a n s were not p a s t o r a l i s t s w i t h a r e g u l a r p a t t e r n o f transhumance (and th e r e f o r e d i d not evolve the streamlined c u l t u r e o f the true nomad), they took a long time to adapt to a s e t t l e d l i f e which d i d not r e q u i r e sporadic f i g h t i n g and p i l l a g i n g . This may e x p l a i n the s p o t t i n e s s of the a r c h a e o l o g i c a l record, and the r e l a t i v e l a c k of obvious c u l t u r a l t r a i t s which can be l a b e l l e d G a l a t i a n w i t h c e r t - a i n t y . To sum up the d i f f i c u l t i e s i n v o l v e d i n undertaking t o e s t a b l i s h the a r c h a e o l o g i c a l c h a r a c t e r i s t i c s o f the G a l a t i a n s : we l a c k the bas i c archaeo- l o g i c a l sequence f o r the pla c e and time under c o n s i d e r a t i o n , t h a t i s , the p e r i o d between the t h i r d and f i r s t c e n t u r i e s B.C., and the area of modern Turkey from S i v r i h i s s a r to Yozgat, o r c e n t r a l A n a t o l i a . Furthermore, we are d e a l i n g w i t h a people whose c u l t u r a l i d e n t i t y had become b l u r r e d before they entered t h i s t e r r i t o r y , and who f a i l e d to produce an e a s i l y recognizable c u l t u r e o f t h e i r own before G a l a t i a was made a Roman province. By and l a r g e , the study of G a l a t i a n archaeology s u f f e r s most from never having been regarded as a problem, or r a t h e r as a subject worthy of system- a t i c i n v e s t i g a t i o n . Evidence f o r G a l a t i a n m a t e r i a l c u l t u r e has accumulated almost by acc i d e n t : few a r c h a e o l o g i s t s have set out to d i s c o v e r the Gala- t i a n s , and most, when confronted w i t h u n t i d y H e l l e n i s t i c d e b r i s on s i t e s i n c e n t r a l A n a t o l i a , i d e n t i f y i t as G a l a t i a n and remove i t i n order to 4. excavate what they are r e a l l y l o o k i n g f o r . Such a s i t u a t i o n i s understand- able i n A n a t o l i a , given the splendours of the H i t t i t e and Phrygian p e r i o d s , to say nothing of the c l a s s i c a l f r i n g e s of western A s i a Minor, but i t i s h a r d l y a good s i t u a t i o n from the p o i n t of view of p r e - p r o v i n c i a l G a l a t i a . The f i r s t attempts a t r e c o n c i l i n g h i s t o r y and archaeology were made i n the nineteenth century by s c h o l a r s such as Ramsay. He was preoccupied w i t h the Jerusalem I t i n e r a r y and Roman road systems, but he suggested s e v e r a l s i t e s as p o s s i b l e G a l a t i a n h i l l - f o r t s . Others of h i s era t r i e d to do the same but were c e r t a i n t h a t the G a l a t i a n s i n h a b i t e d magnificent c i t i e s , and o f t e n erred i n t h e i r a t t r i b u t i o n s to the detriment of H i t t i t e s and Phrygians. In the e a r l y t w e n t i e t h century, s c h o l a r s became i n t e r e s t e d i n the s i m i l a r i t i e s o f European C e l t i c p o t t e r y and " G a l a t i a n " p o t t e r y , both l o c a l o f f s h o o t s of t y p i c a l l y H e l l e n i s t i c wares. The connection between Europe and A s i a Minor seemed more d e f i n i t e . In the 1930's, Kurt. B i t t e l v i s i t e d s i t e s such as Pessinus and the newly l o c a t e d Tavium, t r y i n g t o e s t a b l i s h the nature of the G a l a t i a n occupation. C e l t i c f i b u l a e turned up a t Bogazkby and i n d i c a t e d some l i n k w i t h Europe. Al s o i n the 1930's, the K a r a l a r ex- cavations were conducted and p u b l i s h e d by Remzi Og"uz A r i k . K a r a l a r was then, and i s now, the only s i t e i d e n t i f i e d beyond doubt as G a l a t i a n . I t i s important f o r i t s three tumuli and i t s h i l l - f o r t , but u n f o r t u n a t e l y provides l i t t l e evidence f o r G a l a t i a n h a b i t a t i o n . A r i f M i i f i d Mansel was p a r t i c u l a r l y i n t e r e s t e d i n the c o r b e l l e d tomb at K a r a l a r and i t s p o s s i b l e connections w i t h Thracian and Macedonian ex- amples. Since the 1940's he has c o n t i n u a l l y t r i e d to e s t a b l i s h the degree and extent of the i n f l u e n c e of these areas on western A s i a Minor. Since then a number of tombs has been found i n B i t h y n i a ; these show t h a t Thrac-. ian'.and Macedonian i n f l u e n c e was probably f e l t i n A s i a Minor before the a r r i v a l of the G a l a t i a n s . More work i s needed i n these p e r i p h e r a l areas to determine what non-Greek peoples were l i v i n g there and to d i s c o v e r how c l o s e l y they were a f f i l i a t e d w i t h Europe i t s e l f . " G a l a t i a n " p o t t e r y continues t o nag at the conscience of a r c h a e o l o g i s t s . Having analyzed the type i n d e t a i l , Ferdinand Maier asse r t e d t h a t G a l a t i a n p o t t e r y i s G a l a t i a n only i n provenance, making i t f a r l e s s easy to c a l l the rough H e l l e n i s t i c settlements on s i t e s such as Gordion p u r e l y G a l a t i a n . F r e d e r i c k Winter, who studied the H e l l e n i s t i c p o t t e r y at Gordion, i s i n t o t a l agreement w i t h Maier and subscribes to the now p r e v a l e n t b e l i e f t h a t the G a l a t i a n s were an extremely adaptable people, and t h e r e f o r e d i f f i c u l t to p i n down i n terms of d i s t i n c t i v e types of p o t t e r y and a r c h i t e c t u r e . But B i t t e l staunchly continues to b e l i e v e t h a t " G a l a t i a n " p o t t e r y i s G a l a t i a n , and the controversy remains. More r e c e n t l y , Stephen M i t c h e l l has completed a D . P h i l , t h e s i s en- 3 t i t l e d The H i s t o r y and Archaeology of G a l a t i a . He examines the h i s t o r i c a l evidence from the p o i n t of view of the G a l a t i a n s — t h e f i r s t time t h a t t h i s has been done—and proceeds t o a d e t a i l e d i n v e s t i g a t i o n of the topography and archaeology of G a l a t i a . His study i s of immense value to students of the area, since i t combines sound h i s t o r i c a l research w i t h a w e l l - o r g a n i z e d a r c h a e o l o g i c a l survey. M i t c h e l l manages to extend our knowledge of the G a l a t i a n s without l o s i n g s i g h t of the l i m i t a t i o n s of the a v a i l a b l e evidence; he i s p a r t i c u l a r l y h e l p f u l on the subject of h i l l - f o r t s and p o s s i b l e un- f o r t i f i e d settlement s i t e s . I t i s time now to consider the scope and r e s t r i c t i o n s of t h i s paper. What f o l l o w s i s not a comprehensive study of p r e - p r o v i n c i a l G a l a t i a n arch- aeology, f o r such an opus would be f a r beyond the competence of the present 6 . writer. Rather, t h i s paper w i l l examine three types of archaeological evidence—pottery, b u r i a l s and grave goods, and f o r t s and settlements, to c l a r i f y the methods used to amass each of these types of evidence. The problems involved i n d e f i n i n g the material culture of the Galatians recur i n any attempt to focus on the archaeological i d e n t i t y of a marginal people. This i s why the Kimmerian problem, discussion of which might i n i t i a l l y have seemed i r r e l e v a n t , was mentioned at the beginning of t h i s introduction. I t may not i n f a c t be possible to abstract any general p r i n c i p l e s from the uneven evidence at hand, but i t i s necessary at l e a s t to t r y . The f i r s t step i s c e r t a i n l y c l e a r . In t h i s case, the h i s t o r i c a l evid- ence i s r e l a t i v e l y coherent, and so, before any examination of the archaeo- l o g i c a l material, a b r i e f chronological o u t l i n e w i l l be given, i n order to put the Galatians i n t h e i r h i s t o r i c a l context. This w i l l include a short note on the a r t i s t i c representations of the Galatians. Then we w i l l pro- ceed to the archaeological sections on pottery, b u r i a l s and grave goods, and f o r t s and settlements. 7. FOOTNOTES TO THE INTRODUCTION 1. E.D. P h i l l i p s , "The Scythian Domination i n Western A s i a : i t s Record i n H i s t o r y , S c r i p t u r e and Archaeology", World Archaeology 4 (1973-73) 129- 139. See a l s o Rodney Young, "The Nomadic Impact: Gordion", pp. 52-57 i n Dark Ages and Nomads c_. 1000 B.C., e d i t e d by Machteld J . M e l l i n k , Nederlands H i s t o r i s c h - A r c h a e o l o g i s c h I n s t i t u u t , I s t a n b u l , 1964. 2. T.G.E. Powell, The C e l t s , Thames and Hudson, London, 1958, pp. 22-23. See a l s o C.F.C. Hawkes' e x c e l l e n t summary, "The C e l t s : Report on the Study of t h e i r C u l t u r e and t h e i r Mediterranean R e l a t i o n s , 1942-1962", pp. 61-79 i n Le_ Rayonnement des C i v i l i s a t i o n s Grecque et Romaine sur l e s C u l t u r e s P e r i p h e r i q u e s , V I I I Congres I n t e r n a t i o n a l d1Arch£ologie (P a r i s 1963), E d i t i o n s de Boccard, P a r i s , 1965; Nora K. Chadwick and Myles D i l l o n , The C e l t i c Realms, Weidenfeld and N i c o l s o n , London, 1967, chapter 1, pp. 1-17; Jan F i l i p , C e l t i c C i v i l i s a t i o n and i t s Heritage, P u b l i s h i n g House of the Czechoslovak Academy of Sciences and A r t i a , Prague 1960 ( E n g l i s h e d i t i o n 1962); and S t u a r t P i g g o t t , Ancient Europe, A l d i n e , Chicago, 1965, chapter 6, pp. 115-266. For the a r t of the European C e l t s , see Paul J a c o b s t h a l , E a r l y C e l t i c A r t , Oxford, Clarendon, o r i g i n a l e d i t i o n 1944, c o r r e c t e d e d i t i o n 1969; and Nancy K. Sandars, P r e h i s t o r i c A r t rin.'.Europe, Penguin, Harmondsworth, 1967, chapters 8 and 9, pp. 226-284. 3. Stephen M i t c h e l l , The H i s t o r y and Archaeology of G a l a t i a , D. P h i l . : . z ' . t h e s i s , Oxford U n i v e r s i t y , 1974, h e r e a f t e r M i t c h e l l . 8. HISTORICAL OUTLINE The h i s t o r i c a l o u t l i n e t h a t f o l l o w s i s not intended to be a comprehen- s i v e account of p r e - p r o v i n c i a l G a l a t i a n h i s t o r y . ^ The i n t e n t i o n i s t o present the b a s i c h i s t o r i c a l data w i t h a view to e s t a b l i s h i n g a time-frame fo r the a r c h a e o l o g i c a l evidence c o l l e c t e d i n the l a t e r s e c t i o n s of t h i s paper. I t was mentioned i n the i n t r o d u c t i o n t h a t the G a l a t i a n s made a p r a c t i c e of l o o t i n g and p i l l a g i n g i n order to s u s t a i n themselves, and t h a t they . . seemed to f i n d s e t t l e d l i f e uncongenial. Thus t h e i r e a r l y h i s t o r y i n Ana- t o l i a i s t h a t of a people always on the lookout f o r short-term p r o f i t s , whether m a t e r i a l or p o l i t i c a l . They found i t easy to prey on the prosperous c i t i e s of A s i a Minor, and were quick to take advantage of the s h i f t s of a l l e g i a n c e among more s t a b l e populations i n the area. Their f i r s t encounters w i t h the H e l l e n t i s t i c world set the tone f o r t h e i r subsequent h i s t o r y . In the f i r s t t h i r d o f the f o u r t h century B.C., groups of C e l t s , b e t t e r known as the Gauls, were d r i v e n south..from t h e i r c e n t r a l European homeland. Some were r e s p o n s i b l e f o r the sack of Rome; others t r a v e l l e d east and followed the Danube to I l l y r i a and Pannonia. In 280 B.C., a second, and t r i p a r t i t e , m i g r a t i o n began. One group, under C e r e t h r i u s , went t o Thrace: the second, under Brennus and Acichorus, to 2 Paeonia; while the t h i r d , under B e l g i u s or B o l g i u s , went to Macedonia. Brennus and some of h i s men made an unsuccessful a t t a c k on the sanc- tuary of A p o l l o at D e l p h i , and were discouraged from f u r t h e r r a i d s on 3 Greece. Another group of C e l t s , a f t e r v a r i o u s campaigns i n Macedonia and 4 Thrace, was defeated by Antigonus Gonatas at Lysimacheia i n the P r o p o n t i s . 9. Some of the C e l t s , under Commontorius, founded the kingdom of T y l i s on the 5 west shore of the Black Sea n o r t h of Byzantium. M i t c h e l l p o i n t s out t h a t although, the sequence of events i n Greece, Macedonia, and Thrace between (roughly) 280 and 278 B.C. i s d i f f i c u l t t o e s t a b l i s h , the a c t i v i t i e s of the C e l t s were remarkably c o n s i s t e n t . As M i t c h e l l puts i t : ^ T heir aim was not land on which to s e t t l e , but money or booty, which could be acquired i n a v a r i e t y of ways: by h i r i n g out t h e i r s e r v i c e s as mercenaries, by demanding p r o t e c t i o n money from r u l e r s whose land they were i n a p o s i t i o n to ravage, by a t t a c k i n g wealthy c i t i e s or s a n c t u a r i e s , and by plundering the countryside. A l l these methods c l e a r l y a n t i c i p a t e the more widespread G a l a t i a n a c t i v i t i e s i n A s i a Minor. The next major event i n the h i s t o r y of the G a l a t i a n s was the d i a b a s i s of 278 to A s i a Minor, which presumably took place a f t e r the defeat of 7 Lysxmachexa. Under Leonnorxus and L u t a r i u s , some of the C e l t s who had been w i t h Brennus 1 and Acichorus' group had l e f t Thrace f o r the P r o p o n t i s . Perhaps i t was there t h a t they f i r s t heard of the r i c h n e s s of A s i a Minor; i n any case, L u t a r i u s and a small band obtained f i v e boats from the l o c a l Macedonia g a r r i s o n , and crossed the Hellespont independently. Leonnorius and the l a r g e r p a r t of the two l e a d e r s ' o r i g i n a l group were engaged by Nicomedes of B i t h y n i a , to help subdue h i s r e b e l l i o u s brother Zipoetes (and thereby l e s s e n the t h r e a t of B i t h y n i a n annexation by Zipoetes' a l l y A n t i o - g chus I ) , and thus obtained t h e i r passage to A s i a Minor. Whatever the p r e c i s e terms of the c o n t r a c t between Nicomedes and the 9 G a l a t i a n s were , once they had helped him to q u e l l Zipoetes' r e v o l t , they were permitted to r a i d any p a r t of A n a t o l i a outside B i t h y n i a n t e r r i t o r y . At t h i s p o i n t , the G a l a t i a n s d i v i d e d i n t o three t r i b e s , each w i t h i t s own area f o r plunder: the Trocmi took the coast of the H e l l e s p o n t , and the 10. 11 T o l i s t o b o g i i chose A e o l i s and I o n i a , w h i l e the Tectosages were t o concentrate on the i n l a n d p a r t s of A s i a M i n o r . ^ For the next f i v e years or so, the G a l a t i a n s roamed these areas a t w i l l , l e a v i n g t e r r o r and d e s t r u c t i o n i n t h e i r wake. Cyzicus was h i t i n e a r l y 277, probably by L u t a r i u s and h i s men on t h e i r way to j o i n Leonnorius. I l i u m was b r i e f l y considered as a p o s s i b l e G a l a t i a n base, but r e j e c t e d be- 12 cause i t was unwalled. An i n s c r i p t i o n a t Erythrae thanks the generals o f the f i r s t four months of the year f o r arranging "Danegeld" payments to the 13 14 15 G a l a t i a n s . M i l e t u s and Didyma a l s o s u f f e r e d a t t a c k s , nor d i d T h y a t e i r a 16 escape. An i n s c r i p t i o n from Priene describes G a l a t i a n r a i d i n g methods and records the measures taken by Sotas t o get r i d o f the c i t y ' s a t t a c k e r s . The G a l a t i a n s moved i n t o the t e r r i t o r y of P r i e n e , desecrated s a n c t u a r i e s , cap- tured c i t i z e n s l i v i n g outside the w a l l s a t random, set f i r e to houses and farms, and k i l l e d numerous people. Sotas p a i d v o l u n t e e r s t o man strong 17 p o i n t s i n the countryside, from which a t t a c k s could be made. E v e n t u a l l y Antiochus I undertook to r i d A s i a Minor o f the G a l a t i a n menace. Records o f t h i s campaign are almost e n t i r e l y l a c k i n g , except f o r mentions of a b a t t l e i n which Antiochus, w i t h the help of s i x t e e n elephants, x / 18 defeated the G a l a t i a n s and earned the t i t l e of io>T*jp. The date o f the b a t t l e has r e c e n t l y been moved from 275 t o 272, which means t h a t the Gala- 19 t i a n s had had f u l l y f i v e years i n which t o plunder and t e r r o r i z e . . 20 Ancient h i s t o r i a n s d i f f e r as t o what happened next. Appian and 21 L i v y imply t h a t because of Antiochus I , the G a l a t i a n s had t o leave west- ern A s i a Minor and take up residence i n the b a s i n of the Halys and the 22 23 Sangarius. Strabo and Pausanias suggest t h a t the G a l a t i a n s were con- 11. fined to G a l a t i a proper only a f t e r t h e i r defeat at the hands of the A t t a l - i d s some f o r t y years l a t e r . M i t c h e l l points out that Livy, Strabo, and Pausanias are t r y i n g to emphasize l a t e r s u c c e s s e s — o f Cn. Manlius Vulso on the one hand who defeated the Galatians on t h e i r own ground i n 189 B.C., and of the A t t a l i d s on the other. Other factors also have a bearing on t h i s subject. One i s Antiochus 1 reputation a f t e r the b a t t l e ; another i s the a v a i l a b l e evidence for Galatian h i s t o r y between ca 270 and ca 230. There are no f i r m l y dated attacks on the c i t i e s of western Asia Minor a f t e r 270; t h i s implies that the Galatians were using some other area as t h e i r base, probably c e n t r a l Anatolia. Then, too, f o r t y years of Galatian wandering, during, which the f i g h t i n g men would have been accompanied by t h e i r wives and c h i l d r e n seem d i f f i c u l t , u n l i k e l y and unnecessary. As M i t c h e l l says, i t i s f a r more sensible to assume that at some time a f t e r the B a t t l e o f the Elephants, the Galatians s e t t l e d on the Anatolian plateau i n the three groups mentioned by ancient h i s t o r i a n s . The t e r r i t o r y around Pessinus was inhabited by the T o l i s t o b o g i i , that around Ankara by the Tectosages, while the area east of the Halys around Tavium was populated 24 by the Trocmi. In theory, then, i t should be possible to f i n d traces of the Galatians i n G a l a t i a i t s e l f dating from ca 270 B.C. or l a t e r . I t should not be forgotten that Antiochus' v i c t o r y over the Galatians i n 272 was cemented by payments of_protection money i n order to prevent future Galatian harassment i n western A s i a Minor. The Galatians, pre- sumably established i n t h e i r new settlements i n c e n t r a l Anatolia by now, looked north and east for a d d i t i o n a l sources of income. An episode of ca 255-253 i s perhaps paradeigmatic of t h e i r approach to earning a l i v i n g . Ziaelas had been passed over as h e i r by h i s father Nicomedes of Bithynia, 12. the o l d a l l y of the G a l a t i a n s who had procured t h e i r passage to Turkey i n 278. When the c i t i z e n s o f H e r a c l e i a P o n t i c a s e t t l e d the dispute between Z i a e l a s and Nicomedes p e a c e f u l l y , the G a l a t i a n s attacked t h e i r t e r r i t o r y 25 and marched home w i t h the booty. I t i s obvious t h a t the G a l a t i a n s d i d not have ahigh regard f o r t r e a t i e s , since t h e i r r a i d on H e r a c l e i a was a d i r e c t v i o l a t i o n of t h e i r agreement w i t h Nicomedes. R e l a t i v e l y soon a f t e r the B a t t l e of the Elephants, the G a l a t i a n s had fought w i t h M i t h r i d a t e s of Pontus and Ariobarzanes of Cappadocia against a Ptolemaic e x p e d i t i o n i n the Black Sea. The G a l a t i a n s captured the anchors of the enemy sh i p s , were awarded the t e r r i t o r y around Ancyra, and named t h e i r new c i t y a f t e r t h e i r naval t r o p h i e s . Tidy a e t i o l o g i c a l myths o f t h i s type o f t e n c o n t a i n some t r u t h : M i t c h e l l says t h a t i t i s p o s s i b l e t h a t M i t h r i d a t e s I C t i s t e s was p a r t i a l l y r e s p o n s i b l e f o r s e t t l i n g the Gala- 26 t i a n s i n the Ankara r e g i o n before he d i e d i n 266. This i s a l s o another i n d i c a t i o n t h a t the G a l a t i a n s were e s t a b l i s h i n g themselves i n c e n t r a l Ana- t o l i a before the middle of the t h i r d century. The G a l a t i a n s remained on a f r i e n d l y f o o t i n g w i t h P o n t i c r u l e r s u n t i l the death o f M i t h r i d a t e s ' succes- sor Ariobarzanes i n ca 250 B.C., a t which p o i n t Ariobarzanes' son M i t h r i - dates I I , who was s t i l l a boy, succeeded to the Po n t i c throne, and the Ga l a t i a n s plundered the kingdom. When H e r a c l e i a t r i e d to help out one of the P o n t i c c i t i e s , the Ga l a t i a n s attacked i t again. In the end, the usual 27 a n t i d o t e to G a l a t i a n i n v a s i o n was employed, and they were p a i d o f f . The G a l a t i a n s became i n v o l v e d w i t h the Se l e u c i d s during the "Brothers' War" i n ca 241-239 B.C., when they were r e c r u i t e d to help Antiochus Hierax against h i s brother Seleucus I I . Seleucus had given h i s A n a t o l i a n h o l d - ings to Antiochus f o r h i s a i d i n the war against Ptolemy I I I , but a f t e r 13. peace had been made, r e g r e t t e d t h i s d e c i s i o n and t r i e d to win A n a t o l i a back. He l e d an e x p e d i t i o n a g a i n s t Antiochus' a l l y M i t h r i d a t e s of Pontus, and continued to c e n t r a l A n a t o l i a , where he was thoroughly defeated by M i t h r i d a t e s and Antiochus f i g h t i n g w i t h G a l a t i a n mercenaries near Ancyra. The Ga l a t i a n s saw t h e i r chance to get r i d of the Seleucids a l t o g e t h e r , since Antiochus could not maintain h i s a u t h o r i t y over them. They forced Antiochus t o make them h i s a l l i e s , and to give them p a r t o f the s p o i l s of the war, p l u s some of the t r i b u t e which Antiochus r e q u i r e d of the c i t i e s of A s i a . Once these terms had been agreed upon, they threatened the l i f e 28 o f Antiochus, who then f l e d t o Magnesia. Now t h a t the G a l a t i a n s had manoeuvered themselves i n t o a s u p e r i o r p o s i t i o n v i s - a - v i s the S e l e u c i d s , they could put pressure on western A s i a Minor again, p a r t i c u l a r l y on Pergamon which had r i s e n to power i n the f o r t y years since the G a l a t i a n r a i d s i n t h a t area. Pergamon under the A t t a l i d s was s t i l l paying the G a l a t i a n s money to avoid a recurrence of 29 these e a r l i e r a t t a c k s , but at t h i s p o i n t they refused to do so any longer. The T o l i s t o b o g i i set out f o r Pergamon, and were repulsed by A t t a l u s i n the 30 V a l l e y of the Caicus i n ca 241-240 B.C. The T o l i s t o b o g i i c a l l e d i n t h e i r a l l i e s , the Tectosages and Antiochus Hierax, and got as f a r as the w a l l s of Pergamon i t s e l f before being trounced by A t t a l u s . A t t a l u s contined t o f i g h t Antiochus u n t i l 229 or 228, but the G a l a t i a n s accepted the v i c t o r y 31 as a d e c i s i v e one, and i n f u t u r e l e f t Pergamene t e r r i t o r y alone. A t t a l u s l o s t no time ...in making p o l i t i c a l c a p i t a l out of t h i s v i c t o r y , which was commemorated i n monuments i n Pergamon and Athens c e l e b r a t i n g the triumph o f c i v i l i z e d H e llenism over C e l t i c b a r b a r i t y . The S e l e u c i d s , how- ever, were not so e a s i l y e l i m i n a t e d . Antiochus I I I succeeded Seleucus I I I 14. i n 223; w i t h i n a year, Antiochus 1 uncle Achaeus had s t r i p p e d A t t a l u s of h i s r e c e n t l y acquired Asian t e r r i t o r y and had r e s t o r e d S e l e u c i d r u l e i n 32 A n a t o l i a . When i n 220 Achaeus declared h i m s e l f k i n g o f t h i s Asian t e r r i - t o r y , A t t a l u s pursued the undoubtedly d i s t a s t e f u l course of e n l i s t i n g the a i d of the Aegosages, probably the He l l e s p o n t i n e refugees of the kingdom o f T y l i s which f e l l i n ca 218. A t t a l u s 1 next step was to march a g a i n s t the c i t i e s o f A e o l i s , which Achaeus had encouraged to r e v o l t a g a i n s t him. I n i - t i a l l y the e x p e d i t i o n was a success, but an e c l i p s e of the moon gave the 33 discontented C e l t s an excuse to mutiny. A t t a l u s solved t h i s dangerous problem by s e t t l i n g them as a m i l i t a r y colony i n the region of the Hellespont, under the guidance of Lampsacus, Alexandreia Troas, and I l i u m . The G a l a t i a n s almost immediately turned a g a i n s t the c i t i e s , and stormed I l i u m . The Alexandrians defeated them and drove them northeast to A r i s b a near Abydus. P r u s i a s of B i t h y n i a r e a l i z e d t h a t h i s own kingdom was i n danger; he defeated them and k i l l e d the men 34 i n the b a t t l e f i e l d , and the women and c h i l d r e n i n t h e i r encampment. For the next generation, a c e r t a i n calm prevaled among the G a l a t i a n s i n A n a t o l i a . The Aegosages had been wiped out, and i t was u n l i k e l y t h a t any r u l e r o f A s i a Minor would make the mistake o f i n v i t i n g Thracian Gauls across the Hellespont f o r a t h i r d time. Thus the G a l a t i a n migrations to A s i a Minor were at an end. At t h i s p o i n t i n h i s h i s t o r i c a l account of the Ga l a t i a n s , M i t c h e l l takes advantage of the l u l l i n G a l a t i a n a c t i v i t y a f t e r the Pergamene defeats to sum up the inf o r m a t i o n on the G a l a t i a n t r i b e s i n the t h i r d century B.C. He begins w i t h the problem of t h e i r numbers. Ac- 35 cording to L i v y , Nicomedes r e c r u i t e d only 20,000men. The f i g u r e s a v a i l - able f o r the G a l l i c e x p e d i t i o n i n t o Greece are s u b s t a n t i a l l y higher. 15. Pausanias says t h a t there were 152,000 f o o t - s o l d i e r s and 20,400 cavalrymen 3 6 each w i t h two mounted servants. Pompeius Trogus mentioned 150,000 f o o t - 37 s o l d i e r s and cavalrymen a l t o g e t h e r , while Diodorus reckons t h e i r s t r e n g t h at 150,000 f o o t - s o l d i e r s , 10,000 cavalrymen, and a baggage-train o f 2,000 38 v e h i c l e s . While these f i g u r e s are l a r g e , M i t c h e l l p o i n t s out t h a t they are c o n s i s t e n t and e x p l a i n why the Gauls caused so much t e r r o r when they • * • „ 3 9 a r r i v e d i n Greece.- There i s s t i l l some discrepancy between these f i g u r e s and L i v y ' s , which are much lower. Many of the Gauls were of course k i l l e d i n Greece and Macedonia, while others s e t t l e d i n the kingdom of T y l i s near the Black Sea. I t i s p o s s i b l e t h a t some o f the Gauls migrated to A s i a Minor a f t e r N i c o - . 40 medes 20,000 crossed the Hellespont. As f o r t h e i r s t r e n g t h i n A n a t o l i a , 41 t h i s was apparently ensured by r a p i d r e p r o d u c t i o n , mentioned by L i v y , . 4 2 and by J u s t i n : quamquam Gallorum ea tempestate tantae f e c u n d i t a t i s iuventus f u i t , u t Asiam omnem v e l u t examen a l i q u o d implerent. Danique neque reges O r i e n t i s since Mercennario Gallorum e x e r c i t u u l l a b e l l a gesserunt, neque p u l s i regno ad a l i o s quam ad G a l l o s confugerunt. M i t c h e l l c i t e s Launey's work on the armies o f the H e l l e n i s t i c p e r i o d as co n f i r m a t i o n o f J u s t i n ' s second statement. G a l a t i a n s d i d serve i n the army o f every k i n g i n the eastern Mediterranean, according to Launey, and they e n l i s t e d from A s i a Minor. Thus the numbers of the G a l a t i a n s and 43 t h e i r m i l i t a r y prowess are emphasized. M i t c h e l l next addresses h i m s e l f to the question of the e x t r a o r d i n a r y r e p u t a t i o n of the G a l a t i a n s . H e l l e n i s t i c s o l d i e r s were w e l l - t r a i n e d pro- f e s s i o n a l s , and the G a l a t i a n s who fought as mercenaries w i t h them grad- 44 u a l l y adopted standard Greek armour and equipment. When they fought on 16. t h e i r own, t h e i r m i l i t a r y methods may have been d i f f e r e n t . According to L i v y , they d i d b a t t l e naked, armed w i t h l a r g e s h i e l d s , long swords, and any Gal a t i a n s tend to show them naked or only p a r t l y c l o t h e d , f i g h t i n g without the help o f H e l l e n i s t i c weapons or equipment. Whether the G a l a t i a n s always fought l i k e t h i s , or whether these d e s c r i p t i o n s simply make them conform to the conventional image of barbarians, i t i s hard to say. In any case, M i t c h e l l concludes t h a t they had two advantages over t h e i r opponents. F i r s t was t h e i r formidable and probably exaggerated r e p u t a t i o n f o r b a r b a r i c cour- age; add to t h i s t h e i r unusual appearance—the "procera corpora, promissae 46 et r u t i l a e comae, va s t a scuta, p r a e l o n g i g l a d i i " mentioned by L i v y — and the p s y c h o l o g i c a l advantage of the G a l a t i a n s over t h e i r t e r r i f i e d opponents becomes c l e a r . 4 7 Their second advantage, M i t c h e l l says, was t h a t they d i d not f i g h t l i k e Greeks. They d i d not use the phalanx, which r e q u i r e d a f l a t and un- impeded f i e l d of b a t t l e ; r a t h e r , they used the t a c t i c s of g u e r r i l a warfare, 48 and made the most of rough ground and quick skirmishes. In the e a r l y second century B.C., the G a l a t i a n s were a c t i v e again. 49 In 197/6 they were g i v i n g the people o f Lampsacus t r o u b l e , and a t roughly the same time, they attacked H e r a c l e i a P o n t i c a yet again, i n order to gain access to the sea, and perhaps to t h e i r kinsmen i n the Danube ba s i n ; they were f o i l e d i n t h e i r a t t e m p t . S o m e G a l a t i a n a c t i v i t y i n Paphlagonia during t h i s p e r i o d may a l s o be i n d i c a t e d , i f M i t c h e l l i s co r - r e c t i n assuming t h a t a t t h i s p o i n t the C e l t i c noblemen Ge z a t o r i x , whose name i s mentioned by P o l y b i o s , h i m s e l f acquired the d i s t r i c t i n Paphla- « r X ' 51 gonia known as *j t€^e(ropi^o£. a v a i l a b l e stones. 45 Statues and re p r e s e n t a t i o n s i n other media o f the 17. The major event of the second century B.C. from the Galatian point of view was the expedition l e d against them by Cn. Manlius Vulso i n 189 B.C. One of h i s f i r s t steps a f t e r he took over the consulship and the army at Ephesus was to declare h i s i n t e n t i o n of subduing the Galatians for good, as part of a general campaign to p a c i f y Asia up to the Halys. Manlius marched up the Maeander v a l l e y , through Phrygia and P i s i d i a , south to Pamphylia, and north through eastern and c e n t r a l Phrygia to the f r o n t i e r s 52 of the T o l i s t o b o g i i , accompanied by Attalus, and aided by Eumenes. Afte r a b r i e f and f r u i t l e s s attempt at a diplomatic settlement i n which Eposognatus, one of the Galatian r e g u l i , t r i e d to persuade the Gala- ti a n s to surrender without a f i g h t , a b a t t l e was fought on Mount Olympus somewhere between the Sangarius and Ancyra. The T o l i s t o b o g i i , helped by some of the Trocmi, were badly defeated, and 40,000 captives were taken. When the Romans proceeded to Ancyra and t r i e d again to negotiate, the Galatians responded with an ambush on Manlius, which f a i l e d . The r e s u l t was another b a t t l e , t h i s time at Magaba, where the Tectosages and the r e s t of the Trocmi, aided by Ariarathes III of Cappadocia and Morzius, a Paphlagonian dynast, were defeated. 8000 Galatians were k i l l e d , and those that survived f l e d east across the Halys. Manlius marched back to Ephesus 53 with the s p o i l s before winter set i n . Manlius concluded two separate settlements, one with Eumenes i n Eph- esus, and a second with the Galatians i n Lampsacus. Although Eumenes re - ceived a l l of Antiochus 1 former possessions, G a l a t i a was not one of them. In the meeting with the Galatians, Manlius d i d not require them to become c i t i z e n s of Pergamon, nor did they have to pay an indemnity, as Ariarathes did. They were simply to keep the peace with Eumenes and to contain them- selves within the boundaries of t h e i r t e r r i t o r y . M i t c h e l l concludes from 18. t h i s evidence t h a t "the Romans were r e l u c t a n t to crush the G a l a t i a n s once and f o r a l l , but already saw them as a p o t e n t i a l counterweight to the k i n g - 54 dom of Pergamum". For the next generation, the p r i n c i p a l r o l e of G a l a t i a was i n f a c t t h a t of a b u f f e r s t a t e between Pergamon and Pontus. Ortiagon, one of the r e g u l i of the T o l i s t o b o g i i , played a l e a d i n g p a r t i n the disputes o f the 180's, which c o n s i s t e d mainly of wars between the A t t a l i d s and the kingdoms forced by Rome to y i e l d t e r r i t o r y to them. Ortiagon was p a r t i c u l a r l y i n v o l v e d w i t h P r u s i a s o f B i t h y n i a i n a war wi t h Pergamon from ca 186 to 184. M i t c h - e l l notes t h a t i n an i n s c r i p t i o n from Telmessus, P r u s i a s and Ortiagon are named as equal p a r t n e r s i n the war, and t h a t the G a l a t i a n s are c a l l e d IctfAetTrtt r a t h e r than being mentioned i n t r i b a l d i v i s i o n s . These f a c t s , M i t c h e l l says, give credence to P o l y b i o s ' statement t h a t Ortiagon had 55 managed to u n i t e the Ga l a t i a n s a f t e r the defeat a t the hands of Manlius. Eumenes was able to put a stop to the a l l i a n c e of Ortiagon and.Prusias, but he was not so luck y w i t h a c o a l i t i o n formed by Pharnaces o f Pontus and c e r t a i n eastern r u l e r s such as M i t h r i d a t e s of Armenia, formed i n 183. In 179, he d i d defeat Pharnaces, but not before a P o n t i c attempt t o ravage G a l a t i a . As M i t c h e l l p o i n t s out, even a f t e r the t r e a t y between Pharnaces and Eumenes was signed, G a l a t i a was i n a d i f f i c u l t p o s i t i o n , s i n c e she was 56 open to att a c k from both s i d e s . There f o l l o w s a ten year gap i n G a l a t i a n h i s t o r y . In the mid 160's however G a l a t i a enjoyed a temporary resurgence o f power. In 168 the Galati a n s a c t u a l l y rose against Eumenes, f o r c i n g him to ask Rome f o r help. P. L i c i n i u s was sent to A s i a Minor to n e g o t i a t e , but he f a i l e d to estab- l i s h any b a s i s f o r a l a s t i n g peace. As P o l y b i o s i n d i c a t e s , t h i s f a i l u r e was no a c c i d e n t , but the r e s u l t of the Roman d e s i r e to use the G a l a t i a n s 57 as a check on the power of Pergamon. The same s t r a t e g y i s evident i n the Roman r e a c t i o n to P r u s i a s ' (of B i t h y n i a ) accusation t h a t Eumenes was occupying G a l a t i a n t e r r i t o r y i l l e g a l l y . 58 Rome i n t h i s case was content to r e - a f f i r m G a l a t i a ' s independence. At the same time, again during the mid 160's, the Trocmi were making t r o u b l e 59 f o r A r i a r a t h e s of Cappadocia. In a d d i t i o n , M i t c h e l l dates the a c q u i s i - t i o n of much of Lycaonia by the G a l a t i a n s to t h i s p e r i o d . ^ The spread of G a l a t i a n i n f l u e n c e i n the middle of the second century B.C. can be seen i n another area as w e l l . A s e r i e s of i n s c r i p t i o n s from Pessinus preserves the correspondence between Eumenes and A t t a l u s I I , and the high p r i e s t o f the sanctuary, A t t i s . The f i r s t l e t t e r i n the s e r i e s has been dated to 163 B.C. The second mentions t h a t A i o i o r i x , the brother of the h i g h p r i e s t , was accused of some crime against the temple of the Mother Goddess. The name A i o i o r i x r e v e a l s t h a t a f t e r the e x p e d i t i o n of Manlius, the G a l a t i a n s had taken over a h i t h e r t o e x c l u s i v e l y Phrygian .- .. 61 p r i v i l e g e . A f t e r t h i s b r i e f renaissance, G a l a t i a becomes l e s s and l e s s important, as the scanty evidence f o r the next century seems to i n d i c a t e . No evidence has s u r v i v e d f o r any Pergamene t r a n s a c t i o n s w i t h the G a l a t i a n s d u r i n g the second h a l f of A t t a l u s I i ' s r e i g n , nor d u r i n g the r e i g n of h i s successor. The G a l a t i a n d e c l i n e i n t o o b s c u r i t y can be i n f e r r e d from other evidence. When A s i a was made a province i n 129, Phrygia was turned over to M i t h r i - dates V of Pontus. Since M i t h r i d a t e s could only have communicated w i t h Phrygia through G a l a t i a , Jones suggests t h a t by t h i s time the area was 62 c o n t r o l l e d by Pontus. Later i n 96 B.C., M i t h r i d a t e s VI was forced to give up h i s c o n t r o l of G a l a t i a , as w e l l as of Paphlagonia and Cappadocia, 20. when Nicomedes of Bithynia shifted his allegiance from Mithridates to Rome. In Mitchell's opinion, from this time onward the Galatians were simply the a l l i e s of Rome in the Mithridatic wars.^ The Galatians turned against Mithridates because of what he did after his defeat by Sulla. He had apparently decided to eliminate any future threats from the Galatians, so he invited the tetrarchs to Pergamon on some friendly pretext, and had a l l but one of them k i l l e d . Mithridates then sent men to Galatia to take care of the tetrarchs who had not come to Per- gamon. The three tetrarchs who survived the massacre, one of whom was Deiotarus, promptly threw out Mithridates' satrap. After this, there was no question of loyalty to Mithridates, and the Galatians went over to Rome. Mitchell makes a number of perceptive comments about second century B.C. Galatian history. During this period the description of the Galatians becomes less and less accurate, as they learned to use p o l i t i c s and diplom- acy as much as military a b i l i t y . As Galatian diplomatic activity increased, the names of individuals such as Ortiagon begin to appear. Mitchell assumes that by this time the aristocracy had learned some Greek, but he says that "there is l i t t l e evidence that the cultural aspects of Hellenic c i v i l i z a - tion were already being adopted by the Gauls. During this period, the name "Galatian" seems to be applied as a reg- ional rather than an ethnic term. Mitchell cites as evidence for this change the names of two Galatian slaves mentioned in inscriptions from Delphi: Sosias, a boot-maker, and Athenais, an artisan. The name of an- other Galatian slave, r\*i<f#TV}S, probably had an Iranian origin and implies connections with eastern Anatolia. Intermarriage of Celts with the native Phrygian p o p u l a t i o n can a l s o be assumed. 21. There i s a l s o evidence f o r G a l a t i a n a s s i m i l a t i o n i n t o l o c a l A n a t o l i a n c u l t s , p a r t i c u l a r l y the c u l t of Cybele p r a c t i s e d a t Pessinus. The high p r i e s t of the sanctuary during the r e i g n of Eumenes had a brother named A i o i o r i x , and was presumably him s e l f a C e l t , as has already been mentioned That a G a l a t i a n could hold t h i s o f f i c e proves t h a t the Ga l a t i a n s had made 6 7 a place f o r themselves i n the o r g a n i z a t i o n of the temple. This i s ad d i - t i o n a l c o n f i r m a t i o n of the gradual absorption of l o c a l t r a d i t i o n s by the 68 G a l a t i a n s i n the second century B.C. I t i s p o s s i b l e to speak of the Ga l a t i a n s c o l l e c t i v e l y , even though p o l i t i c a l l y they were not u n i f i e d . Strabo's d e s c r i p t i o n of t h e i r c o n s t i t u t i o n helps us to understand why the G a l a t i a n s found group a c t i o n d i f f i c u l t Each of the three t r i b e s , the T o l i s t o b o g i i , the Tectosages, and the Trocmi, was made up of four p a r t s , each. with, i t s own t e t r a r c h . Each t e t - rarchy had i n a d d i t i o n a judge, an army commander, and two subordinate o f f i c e r s . M i t c h e l l f i n d s i t u n l i k e l y t h a t t h i s c o n s t i t u t i o n was adhered 22. to throughout G a l a t i a n h i s t o r y ; on the other hand he sees no d i f f i c u l t y i n equating the t e t r a r c h s mentioned by Strabo w i t h the four r e g u l i who r u l e d the T o l i s t o b o g i i a t the time of Manlius' i n v a s i o n i n 189. At times the t e t r a r c h s seem to have acted independently of one another, a s i t u a t i o n which 70 would not f o s t e r G a l a t i a n u n i t y . The existence of the twelve t e t r a r c h i e s provides an explanation f o r the mention of t r i b a l names other than those of the three p r i n c i p a l t r i b e s i n the sources. These i n c l u d e the Tosiopae, who had a t e t r a r c h i n 73 B.C., the A m b i t u t i and the V o t u r i , who were connected w i t h the T o l i s t o b o g i i , and 71 the Teutobodiaci, l i n k e d w i t h the Tectosages. The meeting place known as the Drynemeton mentioned by Strabo i s a p a r t i c u l a r l y i n t e r e s t i n g G a l a t i a n i n s t i t u t i o n . .The word nemeton i s found i n other p l a c e names i n western Europe such as Nemetobriga i n Spanish G a l - a c i a , Nemetacum i n northeastern Gaul, and Nemetodurum which became the modern Nanterre; i t s i g n i f i e s the sacred grove i n which important p o l i t i c a l and r e l i g i o u s business could be t r a n s a c t e d . In the case of the G a l a t i a n nemeton, a connection w i t h oak t r e e s i s almost c e r t a i n l y i n d i c a t e d by the 72 d r y s - p r e f i x . The l a c k of a c l e a r d i s t i n c t i o n between the r e l i g i o u s and the p o l i t i c a l which the existence of t h i s i n s t i t i t i o n seems to imply i s 73 important, as M i t c h e l l notes. As he puts i t : The G a l a t i a n s had r a p i d l y taken over the s u p e r s t i t i o u s b e l i e f s and c u l t s o f t h e i r new home, but r e t a i n e d those p a r t s of t h e i r r e l i g i o n which were i n d i v i s i b l y l i n k e d t o t h e i r p e c u l i a r s o c i a l and communal l i f e . The c u l t of Rome and Augustus came as a s u b s t i t u t e f o r these p r a c t i c e s ; the indigenous c u l t s continued to be maintained as before. The Drynemeton i s a rare example of G a l a t i a n r e t e n t i o n of the C e l t i c c u l t u r a l h e r i t a g e which must have accompanied them d u r i n g t h e i r t r a v e l s through eastern Europe and i n t o A n a t o l i a . A r c h a e o l o g i c a l l y , of course, such an open-air sanctuary would be impossible to l o c a t e . We must continue to r e l y on other types of evidence f o r meeting-places l i k e these. So f a r we have been c o n s i d e r i n g the evidence from the l i t e r a r y sources f o r the p o l i t i c a l and s o c i a l background of the G a l a t i a n phenomenon. Galar- t i a n r e l i g i o u s customs have a l s o been mentioned, although- the evidence f o r these i s f a i r l y s l i m . Before plunging i n t o the h i s t o r y of the end of the p r e - p r o v i n c i a l p e r i o d , i t seems appropriate to give a very b r i e f account of 74 some of the a r t i s t i c r e p r e s e n t a t i o n s of the G a l a t i a n s . The p s y c h o l o g i c a l advantage which the appearance and demeanour of the G a l a t i a n s gave them over t h e i r enemies has already been discussed. The a t t i t u d e of the beleaguered H e l l e n i s t i c opponents toward the G a l a t i a n s may perhaps be revealed i n the remnants of two A t t a l i d s c u l p t u r a l d e d i c a t i o n s . The date of both monuments i s c o n t r o v e r s i a l , but the i d e n t i f i c a t i o n of the p r i n c i p a l f i g u r e s at l e a s t has not been challenged. The f i r s t of these two monuments was a l a r g e c i r c u l a r group of statues erected i n the p r e c i n c t of 75 Athena at Pergamon. In the centre of the composition stood a Gaul com- m i t t i n g s u i c i d e a f t e r k i l l i n g h i s w i f e , whose body he supports on h i s l e f t arm. He has s h o r t , coarse h a i r and a moustache, while she i s modestly a t - t i r e d i n a l o n g i s h dress. The man and h i s w i f e were surrounded by indiv-r i d u a l statues of dying Gauls, the most famous of which i s the Dying Gaul or Trumpeter i n the C a p i t o l i n e Museum. Bieber remarks on the t o r e around h i s neck, h i s l e a t h e r y s k i n , h i s moustache, and "the greased h a i r standing s t i f f l y around h i s forehead and cheeks" as c h a r a c t e r i s t i c of the Gala- t i a n s . ^ The Dying Gaul's to r e i s a s t r i k i n g example of a d i r e c t l i n k w i t h 77 C e l t i c Europe. There i s no agreement among scholars on the t o t a l number 78 of f i g u r e s i n t h i s monument. 24. The date of t h i s monument has a l s o been a bone of co n t e n t i o n . Schober, who d i d the o r i g i n a l r e c o n s t r u c t i o n , dated i t to the l a s t t h i r d of the t h i r d 79 century B.C. Bieber s a i d more p r e c i s e l y t h a t the monument was done i n 80 228 B.C. Carpenter thought t h a t the statues i n question came from a monu- 81 ment erected a f t e r the Great A l t a r i n 180 B.C. by A t t a l u s I I , Havelock suggested t h a t two master s c u l p t o r s , one o l d - f a s h i o n e d , one w i t h newer . . ideas, could have c o n t r i b u t e d to the o r i g i n a l monument, and proposes 200 B.C. as a compromise date. A t t a l u s * d e d i c a t i o n i n Pergamon shows the G a l a t i a n s i n a p l e a s i n g . s t a t e of subjugation. Another A t t a l i d d e d i c a t i o n was set up at the south 83 w a l l of the A c r o p o l i s i n Athens. The f i g u r e s , on a smaller s c a l e than the v a r i o u s dying Gauls discussed above, represented the war of the g i a n t s who l i v e d i n the area of Thrace, the b a t t l e of Athenians and Amazons, the c o n f l i c t w i t h the Persians at Marathon, and the d e s t r u c t i o n of the Gauls 84 i n Mysia. Modern r e c o n s t r u c t i o n s i n c l u d e a t o t a l of s i x t y to e i g h t y f i g u r e s ; the i n d i v i d u a l statues were placed on platforms or a s e r i e s of steps so t h a t they could be seen more e a s i l y . Twelve G a l a t i a n s have been 85 a t t r i b u t e d t o t h i s monument. Most of these male f i g u r e s are shown f i g h t - i n g d e f i a n t l y . Most are naked; they have the s h o r t , coarse h a i r mentioned 86 above, and moustaches. One man i s bearded and wears a short t u n i c . One of the most important aspects of t h i s d e d i c a t i o n i s the equation of the G a l a t i a n s w i t h the t r a d i t i o n a l b a r b a r i c enemies of Greece. The d e d i c a t i o n must have been the r e s u l t of an a r t i s t i c r e f l e x a c t i o n on the p a r t of the A t t a l i d s a f t e r they had defeated the G a l a t i a n s . The h a i r s t y l e and mous- taches were presumably enough to i n d i c a t e a s p e c i f i c type of b a r b a r i a n , since there are no t o r e s or other p a r t i c u l a r l y C e l t i c p i e c e s of i d e n t i f i c a - t i o n . 25, The same range of dates has been suggested f o r the Athenian monument as f o r the l a r g e c i r c u l a r composition discussed above. 228 B.C. seems e a r l y f o r t h i s monument; most sc h o l a r s favour 200 B.C. as a terminus post quern f o r the st a t u e s , since t h i s was the year t h a t the k i n g a c t u a l l y v i s i t e d Athens. Some p r e f e r a more d e f i n i t e second century date, and connect the Athenian d e d i c a t i o n w i t h the Great A l t a r i n Pergamon. Obviously t h i s i s 8 7 not a problem w i t h an.easy s o l u t i o n . I t i s time to conclude t h i s h i s t o r i c a l i n t r o d u c t i o n . We l e f t the Galar- t i a n s at the p o i n t of t h e i r abandonment of M i t h r i d a t e s . The next event of any consequence to the G a l a t i a n s was Pompey's eastern settlement of 63 B.C. Pompey determined t h a t G a l a t i a should be r u l e d by three t e t r a r c h s , one f o r 88 each t r i b e . M i t c h e l l p o i n t s out t h a t having three t e t r a r c h s i n s t e a d of the o r i g i n a l twelve would promote G a l a t i a n u n i t y , and avoid d i s p u t e s w i t h i n the t r i b e s . This was important i f the G a l a t i a n s were to be of any use i n Roman f o r e i g n p o l i c y . The three t e t r a r c h s chosen from the s u r v i v o r s of the M i t h r i d a t i c slaughter were Deiotarus, son of S i n o r i x o f the T o l i s t o b o g i i , B r o g i t a r u s son of Deiotarus of the Trocmi, and an unknown Tectosagan. As was the custom i n A n a t o l i a n r u l i n g f a m i l i e s , the G a l a t i a n a r i s t o c r a c y had i n t e r - married: B r o g i t a r u s was married to one of Deiotarus' daughters, and Castor 90 Tarcondarius, a Tectosagan leader of the 40's, married another. The t e r r i t o r y of Deiotarus and B r o g i t a r u s was increased by Pompey. Br o g i t a r u s acquired the f o r t r e s s and t e r r i t o r y of M i t h r i d a t e s which was 91 adjacent to the eastern t e r r i t o r y of the Trocmi. Deiotarus r e c e i v e d a l a r g e r area w i t h more r e s p o n s i b i l i t y , i n c l u d i n g the G a z e l o n i t i s , a p a r t of 92 e st n Paphlagonia, and the d i s t r i c t near Trapezus and Pharnacei . 26. Pompey was i n t e r e s t e d i n G a l a t i a p r i m a r i l y f r o m a m i l i t a r y p o i n t o f v i e w , and t h e G a l a t i a n s p r o v e d u s e f u l t o h i m on a number o f o c c a s i o n s . D e i o t a r u s i n p a r t i c u l a r p r o v i d e d m i l i t a r y s u p p o r t f o r S u l l a , M u r e n s , S e r v - 93 i l i u s , L u c u l l u s , and Pompey i n t h e i r A n a t o l i a n c a m p a i g n s . I n l a t e r y e a r s , 94 a s M i t c h e l l i n d i c a t e s , The G a l a t i a n s p r o v i d e t h e e s s e n t i a l e l e m e n t o f c o n t i n u i t y b e t w e e n Pompey and A n t o n y . A t b o t h p e r i o d s i t was t h e y who p r o v i d e d t h e m i l i t a r y b a c k b o n e o f Roman f o r e i g n p o l i c y i n A n a t o l i a . As f o r t h e p o l i t i c a l s i t u a t i o n w i t h i n G a l a t i a , B r o g i t a r u s d i e d some- 95 t i m e i n t h e l a t e 5 0 ' s , and D e i o t a r u s t o o k o v e r t h e T r o c m i a n t e t r a r c h y . H i s power had c e r t a i n l y i n c r e a s e d by t h e t i m e he s u p p o r t e d C i c e r o i n t h e 96 c a m p a i g n t o s t o p t h e P a r t h i a n s i n 51 B . C . The T e c t o s a g a n s were s t i l l i n d e p e n d e n t o f D e i o t a r u s and t h e T o l i s t o b o g i i , s i n c e t h e y a l s o s e n t c a v a l r y 97 t o f i g h t f o r Pompey a t P h a r s a l u s . When D e i o t a r u s f a i l e d t o w i t h s t a n d t h e i n v a s i o n o f P o n t u s and A r m e n i a M i n o r b y P h a r n a c e s , he was d e p r i v e d o f h i s T r o c m i a n l a n d s by C a e s a r a s p u n i s h m e n t . C a e s a r h i m s e l f came t o A s i a M i n o r t o d e f e a t P h a r n a c e s , and r e t u r n e d a f t e r t h e c a m p a i g n t h r o u g h G a l a t i a t o B i t h y n i a i n 47 B . C . Soon a f t e r C a e s a r ' s v i s i t , D e i o t a r u s r e o c c u p i e d t h e T r o c m i a n t e r r i t o r y , and began p u t t i n g p r e s s u r e on t h e T e c t o s a g e s a s w e l l . I n 45 B . C . , h i s g r a n d s o n C a s t o r , who was a l s o t h e s o n o f t h e T e c t o s a g a n C a s t o r T a r c o n d a r i u s , a c c u s e d D e i o t a r u s o f t r y i n g t o m u r d e r C a e s a r d u r i n g h i s v i s i t t o G a l a t i a . H i s a c c u s a t i o n was t h e r e a s o n f o r C i c e r o ' s d e f e n c e , 98 P r o Rege D e i o t a r o , a l t h o u g h D e i o t a r u s may have have b e e n t r i e d . Be tween 43 and 40 B . C . , when he d i e d , D e i o t a r u s s e i z e d t h e t e r r i t o r y o f t h e T e c t o - s a g e s , and had C a s t o r T a r c o n d a r i u s and h i s w i f e k i l l e d a t t h e i r f o r t r e s s 99 G o r b e o u s . Thus G a l a t i a was u n i t e d u n d e r one man, a l t h o u g h t h e e p i t a p h o f D e i o t a r u s ' son f o u n d n e a r Tomb B a t K a r a l a r , d e s c r i b e s h i s f a t h e r a s k i n g only of the T o l i s t o b o g i i and the T r o c m i . 1 0 0 When Deiotarus died i n 40 B.C., he was succeeded by none other than h i s accuser and grandson Castor. 1 0"*" Castor's tenure as r u l e of the Gala- 102 t i a n s was short, since Amyntas was made k i n g of G a l a t i a i n 37/6 B.C. In 25 B.C. when Amyntas was k i l l e d , the kingdom became p a r t of the Roman . u . L , 1 0 3 empire as h i s son was too young to govern i n h i s stead. The account of G a l a t i a n h i s t o r y from Pompey's settlement of 63 to the foundation of the Roman province i n 25 B.C. i s admittedly compressed, but the events of t h i s p e r i o d can be more e a s i l y seen ..as the i n t r o d u c t i o n to the h i s t o r y of the empire i n A s i a Minor, r a t h e r than the c u l m i n a t i o n of the p r e - p r o v i n c i a l p e r i o d . I t i s hoped t h a t t h i s h i s t o r i c a l o u t l i n e , d e s p i t e i t s inadequacies, w i l l provide a s u i t a b l e background f o r the a r c h a e o l o g i c a l d i s c u s s i o n t h a t f o l l o w s . The G a l a t i a n s were p a r t of the widespread C e l t i c m i g r a tions i n eastern Europe. They crossed the Hellespont and t e r r o r i z e d the A s i a Minor coast; when they were stopped, they s e t t l e d i n the area between the modern S i v r i h i s s a r and Yozgat. Many of them were mercenaries f o r eastern r u l e r s , w h i l e others were embroiled i n A n a t o l i a n p o l i t i c s . The G a l a t i a n s d i d not r e a l l y begin to a s s i m i l a t e e i t h e r Graeco-Roman or l o c a l customs i n any s i g n i f i c a n t way u n t i l they had been subdued by Manlius and by Eumenes. During the f i r s t century B.C. they became the a l l i e s of Rome, and eventual- l y t h e i r t e r r i t o r y was incorporated as a Roman province. The G a l a t i a n s e s t a b l i s h e d no l a r g e c i t i e s , and they assembled f o r worship outdoors. The h i s t o r i c a l i n f o r m a t i o n does not seem t o i n d i c a t e t h a t they r e t a i n e d much of t h e i r C e l t i c h e r i t a g e . They cannot have l e d very s e t t l e d l i v e s even a f t e r they a r r i v e d i n c e n t r a l A n a t o l i a , w i t h con- 28. stant t r i b a l d i s p u t e s , wars w i t h Pontus and Pergamon, and a c e r t a i n amount of "absenteeism" because o f the men working i n more d i s t a n t campaigns. G a l a t i a n s o c i a l o r g a n i z a t i o n seems to have been f a i r l y loose i n any case. The a r c h a e o l o g i c a l evidence w i l l perhaps e n l i g h t e n us on some of the aspects of G a l a t i a n m a t e r i a l c u l t u r e i n A n a t o l i a from the t h i r d to the f i r s t c e n t u r i e s ; B . C . FOOTNOTES TO THE HISTORICAL OUTLINE 1. Useful sources for t h i s period include F. Stahelin, Geschichte der K l e i n a s i a t i s c h e n Galater, 2nd e d i t i o n , L e i p z i g , 1907; David Magie, Roman Rule i n Asia Minor, Princeton U n i v e r s i t y Press, 1950; Roger McShane, The Foreign P o l i c y of the A t t a l i d s of Pergamum ( I l l i n o i s Studies i n the S o c i a l Sciences No. 53), U n i v e r s i t y of I l l i n o i s Press, Urbana, 1964; Esther V. Hansen, The A t t a l i d s of Pergamon, 2nd e d i t i o n , C o r n e l l University Press, Ithaca and London, 1971; A.H.M. Jones, The C i t i e s of the Eastern Roman Provinces, Oxford, Clarendon, 1971; and chapters..1 and 2 i n Stephen M i t c h e l l ' s D.Phil, t h e s i s , The History and Archaeology of G a l a t i a (Oxford University, 1974). 2. Hansen, p. 28. 3. Pausanias, X.19.5-23; Diod. S i c . XXII.9; J u s t i n XXIV.5-6. 3 4. J u s t i n XXV.102; Diog. Laert. II.141-2; SIG II no. 207 (Athens) c i t e d by M i t c h e l l , p. 483, n. 5. 5. Pomp. Trog. P r o l . XXV (Otto Seel, Pompei Trogi Fragmenta, Teubner, Le i p z i g , 1956); Polyb. IV.46, VIII.22. 6. M i t c h e l l , p. 2. 7. The p r i n c i p a l a u t h o r i t i e s for the diabasis are Livy 38.16, and Memnon, FGH I I l b no. 434.11; c f . also J u s t i n XXV.2.7f., Pausanias 1.4.5, Strabo XII.5.1, 566. M i t c h e l l points out that since Livy and Memnon considered the s i t u a t i o n from the point of view of Asia Minor, and not that of Europe, i t i s d i f f i c u l t to a l i g n t h e i r accounts c h r o n o l o g i c a l l y with the sources on the C e l t s i n Thrace and Macedonia. J u s t i n , M i t c h e l l says, implies that the crossing followed on the Lysimacheian defeat (p. 2). 8. Livy 28.16. M. Launey, "Une episode oubliee de 1'invasion galate en Asie Mineure", REA XLVII (1944) 217-234, and Hansen, p. 29. 9. Memnon, FGH I l l b , no. 434.11. 10. Livy 38..16.11. This i s the f i r s t mention of the t r i b a l names. 11. M. Launey, Recherches sur l e s armees h e l l e n i s t i q u e s I (1949), p. 217f., c i t e d by M i t c h e l l , p. 484, n. 21; c f . G.T. G r i f f i t h , Mercenaries of the Ancient World, Cambridge Uni v e r s i t y Press, 1935. 12. Hegesianax i n Strabo XIII.1.27. 13. This i n s c r i p t i o n i s i n t e r e s t i n g because Leonnorius may be mentioned i n i t ; SIG I no. 410, c i t e d by M i t c h e l l , p. 484, n. 23). 14. M i t c h e l l , p. 5 and n. 25. 30. 15. A. Rehm, Didyma I I : d i e I n s c h r i f t e n (1958), 275f., no. 426.7, c i t e d by M i t c h e l l , p. 484, n. 26. 16. Hansen, p. 30. 17. H i l l e r von Gaertringen, I n s c h r i f t e n von Priene (1906), no. 17, c i t e d by M i t c h e l l , p. 484, n. 24. 18. Appian Syr. 65 and Hansen, p. 30. 19. B. Bar-Kochva, Proc. Cam. P h i l o l . Soc. n.s. 10 (1973), p. 1, n. 5, c i t e d by M i t c h e l l , p. 484, n. 30. 20. Appian Syr. 65. 21. L i v y 38.16.8. 22. Strabo XII.5.1, and c f . IV.1.13. 23. Pausanias 1.4.5. 24. Jones, p. I l l ; M i t c h e l l , pp. 6-7, n. 39. 25. M i t c h e l l , p. 485, nn. 45, 46. 26. M i t c h e l l , p. 9; Stephanus of Byzantium, sv Ancyra; c f . Pausanias 1.4.5. 27. M i t c h e l l , p. 9. 28. J u s t i n XXVII.2. 29. L i v y 38.16.14. 30. Hansen, p. 31; Jones, p. 113. 31. McShane, p. 60. 32. Edouard W i l l , H i s t o i r e p o l i t i q u e du monde hell£nistique, I I , Nancy, 1967, pp. 10-12. 33. M i t c h e l l , p. 14. 34. M i t c h e l l , pp. 15-16. 35. L i v y 38.16.2. 36. Pausanias X.19.9. 37. J u s t i n XXIV.6.1. 31. 38. Diod. S i c . XXII.9. 39. M i t c h e l l , p. 16. I t i s possible, of course, that these sets of figures are derived from a common source. 40. M i t c h e l l , p. 17. 41. Livy 38.16.13 42. :Justin -.XXV.2.8-9. 43. Launey as c i t e d i n n. 11 above, pp. 490-534; Jones-, p. 114. 44. M i t c h e l l notes, however, that the large oval s h i e l d used by the Gauls known as the thureus was adopted by Greek and A s i a t i c p r o f e s s i o n a l s o l d i e r s (Launey, as i n n. 11, 529f.). 45. Livy 38.21. 46. Livy 38.17.3. 47. M i t c h e l l , p. 19. 48. M i t c h e l l , pp. 19-20. 3 49. SIG II no. 591, c i t e d by M i t c h e l l , p. 487, n. 94. 50. Memnon, FGH I l l b , no. 434.20. 51. Strabo XII.3.41; Polyb. XXIV.14.6; M i t c h e l l , p. 21. 52. Livy 38.12-15; M i t c h e l l , p. 22. 53. Livy 38.27.9; Polyb. XXI.37; Hansen, pp. 88-91; M i t c h e l l , pp. 22-23. 54. M i t c h e l l , p. 24. 55. Polyb. XXII.21; OGIS no. 298, c i t e d by M i t c h e l l , p. 488, n. 111. 56. Polyb. XXIII.9.1-3, XXIV.14-15, XXV.2; and Livy 40.2.6, 40.20.1-4; and c f . M i t c h e l l , pp. 25-27. 57. Polyb. XXIX.22.4, XXX.1, and e s p e c i a l l y XXX.19-12-14. 58. Polyb. XXX.30.2f. 59. Polyb. XXXI.8.2. 60. M i t c h e l l , p. 28. 32. 61. C. Bradford Welles, Royal Correspondence i n the H e l l e n i s t i c P e r i o d , Yale U n i v e r s i t y Press, New Haven, 1934, nos. 55-61. Hansen sees A i o i o r i x . ' brother the p r i e s t as the leader of the Pergamene f a c t i o n i n G a l a t i a (Hansen, p. 126 and n. 181). 62. Jones, p. 116. 63. M i t c h e l l , p. 29. 64. Appian M i t h r . 46; P l u t . De mul. v i r t . 259a-b. 65. M i t c h e l l , p. 31. 66. W.M. Ramsay, A H i s t o r i c a l Commentary on St. Paul's E p i s t l e to the G a l a t i a n s , Hodder and Stoughton, London, 1899, pp. 81-83. Ramsay sug- gests t h a t "the trades and h a n d i c r a f t s i n G a l a t i a were wholly i n the hands of the subject p o p u l a t i o n , while .the G a u l i s h a r i s t o c r a c y had war as t h e i r o n ly trade" (p. 83) . For the name MerKpcfnjy see a l s o L. Zgusta, K l e i n a s i a t i s c h e Personennamen, V e r l a g der Tschechoslovakischen Akademie der Wissenschaften, Prague, 1964, §846, p. 280. 67. M i t c h e l l , p. 353. I t i s worth n o t i n g t h a t i n the mid f i r s t century B.C. Deiotarus and B r o g i t a r u s , two G a l a t i a n t e t r a r c h s , fought over the r i g h t to appoint the high p r i e s t a t Pessinus. 68. M i t c h e l l , p. 32. 69. Strabo 12.5.1. 70. Jones, pp. 114-115; M i t c h e l l , p. 33. 71. P l u t a r c h De mul. v i r t . 259a; P l i n y NH V.146; M i t c h e l l , p. 33. 72. T.G.E. Powell, The C e l t s , Thames and Hudson, London, 1958, pp. 140- 141; and c f . Anne Ross, Pagan C e l t i c B r i t a i n , Routledge and Kegan P a u l , London, 1967, f o r B r i t i s h examples, pp. 36-37. 73. M i t c h e l l , p. 358. 74. The p r i n c i p a l sources f o r these are P. Bienkowski, Die Darstellungen der G a l l i e r i n der h e l l e n i s t i s c h e n Kunst, A l f r e d Holder, Vienna, 1908; Margarete Bieber, The Sculpture of the H e l l e n i s t i c Age, r e v i s e d e d i - t i o n , Columbia U n i v e r s i t y Press, New York, 1961; Hansen, pp. 299-314; and C h r i s t i n e M i t c h e l l Havelock, H e l l e n i s t i c A r t , Phaidon, London, 1971. Cf. Bienkowski's Les C e l t e s dans'les a r t s mineurs (Krakau 1928), e s p e c i a l l y p. 65 f o r p a i n t i n g . I was not able t o see t h i s book; the t i t l e and page reference were brought to my a t t e n t i o n by Prof. E.H.. W i l l i a m s . 33. 75. Hansen, p. 303. This monument may be contemporary w i t h a long monu- ment commemorating the successes of A t t a l u s during the f i r s t f i f t e e n years of h i s r e i g n . The v i c t o r s , on horseback, were shown triumphing over G a l a t i a n s and Persians i n the S e l e u c i d army, the f i g u r e s being arranged i n groups. Too l i t t l e of t h i s monument remains to say much more than t h a t the G a l a t i a n s were, as u s u a l , equated w i t h the t r a d i - t i o n a l b a r b a r i a n enemies of Greece (Hansen, p. 306). Pausanias mentioned (1.4.6) t h a t there was a l s o a p a i n t i n g o f the s t r u g g l e between Pergamenes and Gauls (.cf. again Hansen, p. 367). 76. Gaul and w i f e : Bieber, f i g s . 281-283, 424; Dying Gaul: Bieber, f i g s . 426-427; pp. 108-109. Diodorus says t h a t i t was customary f o r C e l t i c noblemen to grow shaggy moustaches, but th a t as a r u l e they d i d not have beards. As f o r the "greased" h a i r , Diodorus mentions t h a t i t stood away from t h e i r faces l i k e a horse's mane (Diodorus V.28). Cf. Powell, C e l t s , p. 68. 77. Powell notes t h a t t o r e s f i r s t appear i n the e a r l y La Tene p e r i o d during the mid f i f t h century B.C., and th a t they may be d e r i v e d from P e r s i a n exemplars (Powell, C e l t s , pp. 71-72). 78. Bienkowski, pp. 1-36; Bieber, p. 108; Hansen, p. 304. 79. A r n o l d Schober, "Das Gallierdenkmal A t t a l o s I. i n Pergamon", M i t t e i l - ungen des deutschen archaologischen I n s t i t u t ' s . Romische A b t e i l u n g 51 (1936) 104-124. 80. Bieber, p. 108. 81. Rhys Carpenter, Greek S c u l p t u r e , U n i v e r s i t y of Chicago Press, 1960, p. 224. 82. Havelock. pp. 145-147. 83. Bieber, p. 109; Hansen, pp. 311-314. 84. Pausanias 1.25.2. 85. Hansen, pp. 310-311. 86. Bearded man: Bienkowski, pp. 40 f f . , f i g s . 53-55; other f i g u r e s a.tv.:'.L- t r i b u t e d to t h i s group: Bieber, f i g s . 430-431, 435-436, and p. 109. 87. Hansen, pp. 311-314. 88. Strabo XII.5.1. 89. M i t c h e l l , p. 36. 90. M i t c h e l l , p. 36. 34. 91. Strabo XII.5.2. This f o r t r e s s has been i d e n t i f i e d with- Kerkenes Kale southeast of Yozgat which was i n h a b i t e d between the f i r s t millennium B.C. and the Selcuk p e r i o d ( M i t c h e l l , p. 36). 92. Strabo XII.5.2 . M i t c h e l l d i s c u s s e s the boundaries of t h i s area, pp. 37-38. See g e n e r a l l y h i s chapter 2 and e s p e c i a l l y chapter 3 f o r d i s - c ussion of the boundaries of G a l a t i a i n t h i s and l a t e r p e r i o d s ; c f . a l s o Jones, pp. 121-122, and Magie, chapter XIX, pp. 453ff. 93. Cicero P h i l . XI.33.4; M i t c h e l l , p. 44. 94. M i t c h e l l , p. 61. 95. Cf. Strabo XII.5; M i t c h e l l , p. 44. 94. M i t c h e l l , p. 61. 95. Cf. Strabo XII.5; M i t c h e l l , p. 44. 96. C i c e r o Ad A t t . VI.1.14; M i t c h e l l , p. 42. 97. The T o l i s t o b o g i i a l s o sent support; see M i t c h e l l , p. 42. 98. C i c e r o Pro Rege Deiotaro; M i t c h e l l , pp. 46-48. 99. Strabo XII.5.3; c f . Suda, sv Castor Rhodius. 100. See the s e c t i o n on b u r i a l s and grave goods, and Coupry i n A r i k , RA 6 (1935), pp. 140-151. 101. Dio 48.33.5. 102. Dio 49.32.3; 53.26.3; Strabo XII.5.1; M i t c h e l l , pp. 55-56. 103. M i t c h e l l , p. 64. 35. POTTERY The e a r l i e s t attempt to f i n d a r c h a e o l o g i c a l evidence f o r the G a l a t i a n presence i n A n a t o l i a i n v o l v e d the d e f i n i t i o n s of a s p e c i f i c a l l y G a l a t i a n type of p o t t e r y . This was only n a t u r a l , given the great d u r a b i l i t y of p o t t e r y , and the tendency f o r s t y l e s i n shape and d e c o r a t i o n , at l e a s t i n the f i n e wares, t o succeed one another i n c h r o n o l o g i c a l l y recognizable phases. I f the p o t t e r y of the G a l a t i a n s could be d e f i n e d , then G a l a t i a n s i t e s could be e a s i l y i d e n t i f i e d through f i e l d reconnaissance. The l o c a t i o n of the s i t e s thus i d e n t i f i e d could provide u s e f u l i n f o r m a t i o n on settlement p a t t e r n s , and t h i s evidence i n t u r n would f i l l i n the gaps i n the h i s t o r i c a l record. Such a way of proceeding i s p e r f e c t l y acceptable i n terms of arch- a e o l o g i c a l method: the i d e n t i f i c a t i o n of G a l a t i a n p o t t e r y , i f there were such a t h i n g , would be i n v a l u a b l e t o the a r c h a e o l o g i s t . In h i s a r t i c l e on the " G a l a t i a n " p o t t e r y from Bogazk5y, Maier has summarized e a r l i e r t h e o r i e s on the subject."'" In 1907, he r e p o r t s , Zahn n o t i c e d a s i m i l a r i t y between a l i t t l e - k n o w n A n a t o l i a n ceramic type and l a t e La Tene p o t t e r y from C e n t r a l Europe. The s i t e s i n v o l v e d were Bogazkoy and Gordion on the one hand, and Mont Beuvray and Hradischt von Stradowitz on the other. Zahn p o s t u l a t e d t h a t the C e l t s (or Galatians) made.their way to A s i a Minor, discovered H e l l e n i s t i c p o t t e r y , and l i k e d i t enough to i n - s p i r e i t s manufacture i n Europe. Their newly acquired s k i l l i n p o t t e r y - making would have been t r a n s m i t t e d over the Black Sea, up the Danube, and 2 i n t o the o l d C e l t i c homeland. There were s e v e r a l reasons which made i t d i f f i c u l t to adopt t h i s theory. F i r s t , the development and spread of the " G a l a t i a n " p o t t e r y had not been s u f f i c i e n t l y s t u d i e d . Second, evidence was l a c k i n g f o r the intermediate Balkan and Danubian connections. T h i r d , as Dechelette and Behrens have po i n t e d out, l a t e La Tene was modelled on l o c a l European wares, i n p a r t i c u l a r e a r l y La T&ne p o t t e r y of the Marne type. In a d d i t i o n , the p a i n t i n g techniques of the l a t e La T£ne could have been d e r i v e d from a 3 s i m i l a r technique used i n the l a t e r H a l l s t a t t p e r i o d of c e n t r a l Europe. B i t t e l probably came c l o s e r to the t r u t h when he suggested t h a t both' the La TSne and " G a l a t i a n " types were separately i n s p i r e d by H e l l e n i s t i c 4 models which were i n wide d i s t r i b u t i o n throughout the Mediterranean. I t i s worth n o t i n g t h a t the e a r l y t h e o r i e s concerning " G a l a t i a n " p o t t e r y were proposed a t a time when no G a l a t i a n s i t e had been i d e n t i f i e d , l e t alone excavated. Not enough was known about the p o t t e r y of the H e l l e n i s t i c age g e n e r a l l y , so t h a t the " G a l a t i a n " v a r i e t y could not have been recognized..as the l o c a l , but d e r i v a t i v e , product t h a t Maier b e l i e v e s i t to be. Furthermore, Zahn's theory assumes t h a t the G a l a t i a n s maintained contact w i t h the C e l t s i n Europe even a f t e r they s e t t l e d i n c e n t r a l Ana- t o l i a . The assumption t h a t the G a l a t i a n s s t i l l possessed a strong C e l t i c i d e n t i t y a f t e r years of m i g r a t i o n and c u l t u r a l i n s t a b i l i t y i s one t h a t needs to be challenged. Zahn's theory r e f l e c t s a tendency, which has been remarkably p e r s i s t e n t , to t h i n k i n terms of C e l t i c u n i t y , r a t h e r than to al l o w f o r G a l a t i a n a d a p t a b i l i t y . Maier i n the f i r s t d e t a i l e d study of " G a l a t i a n " p o t t e r y , deals mainly w i t h the m a t e r i a l from Bogazkoy, since i t has provided the l a r g e s t sample to date. In a d d i t i o n , he discusses s i m i l a r f i n d s from s i x other s i t e s : A l a c a Huyuk, A l i s a r , Buyuk Nefeskoy/Tavium, Gordion, K i r s e h i r Hiiyiik, and P a z a r l i . He does not mention the p o t t e r y from K a r a l a r , which had of 37. course been excavated before he wrote h i s a r t i c l e i n 1963. Since then, other s i t e s have produced a d d i t i o n a l p i e c e s . These are Y a l i n c a k o u t s i d e Ankara, A s a r c i k H u y u k / I l i c a more or l e s s e q u i d i s t a n t from Gordion and 5 Ankara, and K u l u l u , l o c a t e d south of the Halys and northeast of Kultepe, The more recent f i n d s are important i n t h a t they make i t l e s s tempting to view " G a l a t i a n " p o t t e r y as a phenomenon confined to the Halys bend. Maier h i m s e l f notes t h a t the d i s t r i b u t i o n o f t h i s p o t t e r y i s not r e s t r i c t e d to t r a d i t i o n a l G a l a t i a , but t h a t i t extends beyond those areas, p a r t i c u l a r l y i n the cases o f A l i s a r and P a z a r l i . ^ As f o r the p o t t e r y i t s e l f , the forms are broad and low f o r the most p a r t , although amphorai, k r a t e r s , and perhaps p i t c h e r s of the lagynos type have been found. The t y p i c a l shapes (see f i g . 2, p. 81) i n c l u d e bowls w i t h i n t u r n e d rims and a low base or f o o t , flat-bottomed beakers, and l a r g e p l a t e s w i t h everted rims. The p o t t e r y i s made, i n good H e l l e n i s t i c f a s h i o n , of f i n e h a r d - f i r e d c l a y which shows red or reddish-brown w i t h a grey-black centre i n the break. The surface i s l i g h t l e a t h e r brown, o f t e n burnished so as to give the appearance o f p a i n t . The broad, low v e s s e l s have p a r t - 7 l c u l a r l y t h i n w a l l s . The decoration of these pots i s c h a r a c t e r i z e d by overlapping or almost touching s t r i p e s on a p l a i n background (.see f i g . 1, p. 80) ; o f t e n the s t r i p e s d i v i d e the pot i n t o zones s u i t a b l e f o r f u r t h e r d e c o r a t i o n . Colours i n c l u d e s e p i a , red, y e l l o w , and pale brown, w i t h a l l the shades i n between, and one extremely pale shade which may be a l a t e Phrygian legacy. In t a l l e r v e s s e l s , more a t t e n t i o n was p a i d to the shoulder, while i n p l a t e s and bowls the rims were decorated. Both dark- and l i g h t -8 ground pots are found; the li g h t - g r o u n d v a r i e t y predominates. 38. Vegetal motifs were often combined with s t r i p e s . Thus as well as diagonal s t r i p e s , herringbone pattern, simple and s t r i p e - f i l l e d zigzag bands, crosses, t r i a n g l e s , and hatching, the pot-painter's r e p e r t o i r e included t e n d r i l s , sometimes with b i r d s , palms, or blossoms. One very 9 common motif i s the schematised ivy, l a u r e l , or grape l e a f t e n d r i l . That t h i s pottery i s H e l l e n i s t i c i s confirmed by two fa c t o r s , accord- ing to Maier. F i r s t , the pottery i s d e l i c a t e ; second, paint i s of three main colours applied to a burnished surface. The overlapping or almost touching s t r i p e s are apparently i n h e r i t e d from the l a t e r Phrygian period. "Galatian" ware, e s p e c i a l l y at A l i s a r or Bo§azkSy, i s found i n purely H e l l e n i s t i c and ea r l y Roman context, that i s , with broken Megarian bowls, coarse grey ware with thick rims, and a "Roman" pottery with red overglaze; t e r r a s i g i l l a t a i s sometimes found i n asso c i a t i o n with i t . " ^ Maier found i t impossible to evolve any precise chronological sequence for "Galatian" pottery, although he was able to define the upper and lower chronological l i m i t s f or the period during which i t was produced. The st y l e began at the end of the fourth century when i t absorbed a number of l a t e r Phrygian features, such as the le a f y t e n d r i l . I t continued through- out the H e l l e n i s t i c period incorporating various other features from the Lagynos Group and West Slope Ware. I t was i n f a c t "a desiccated version of the f a m i l i a r f l o r a " of the H e l l e n i s t i c p e r i o d . ^ No intimate connec- t i o n with l a t e La T^ne pottery i s imaginable, according to Maier. Maier admits that the date and o r i g i n of the sherds make i t possible that the pottery was used by the Galatians, but he cannot say that i t was made by them. He suggests that the monochrome coarse ware often found i n conjunction with "Galatian" pottery i s the true Galatian pottery; t h i s 39. 12 s t i l l awaits i n v e s t i g a t i o n . As f o r l a t e La Tene ware, Maier says t h a t European contact w i t h the appropriate H e l l e n i s t i c types could have taken p l a c e i n the Balkan p e n i n s u l a . Recent excavation has produced a small body of C e l t i c m a t e r i a l from the Woiwodina region and the area of the c e n t r a l Sava. I t i s s i g n i f i c a n t t h a t these Balkan C e l t s r e t a i n e d t h e i r European i d e n t i t y ; t h e i r p o t t e r y does not resemble t h a t of the G a l a t i a n s , but t h a t of the i n h a b i t a n t s of the south- western Slovakian p l a i n , and t h e i r metal work i s C e l t i c beyond doubt. Thus a f t e r a c e r t a i n p o i n t there was no contact between G a l a t i a n s and Europeans; any European C e l t i c contact w i t h the H e l l e n i s t i c world was e n t i r e l y inde- 13 pendent of the C e l t s m A s i a Minor. Maier has t r i e d to demonstrate t h a t on the one hand A n a t o l i a n p o t t e r y of the t h i r d t o f i r s t c e n t u r i e s followed e x t e r n a l l y imposed models, and t h a t on the other hand there i s no known p o t t e r y which can be shown to have been e x c l u s i v e l y G a l a t i a n r a t h e r than g e n e r a l l y H e l l e n i s t i c . M i t c h e l l , too, has s t r e s s e d the l i m i t a t i o n s o f the evidence. The chronology of the p o t t e r y of the H e l l e n i s t i c , Roman, and Byzantine p e r i o d s i n A n a t o l i a i s s t i l l sadly incomplete. Megarian bowls, black glazed and f i n e red s l i p wares, which were common throughout A s i a Minor, are the only 14 d e f i n i t e i n d i c a t o r s f o r dates i n the t h i r d and f i r s t c e n t u r i e s B.C. B i t t e l , however, i s determined to f i n d a d i r e c t l i n k between the G a l a t i a n s and the p o t t e r y under d i s c u s s i o n . In an a r t i c l e roughly con- temporary w i t h M i t c h e l l ' s t h e s i s and t h e r e f o r e ten years a f t e r Maier's a r t i c l e , he presents a r a t h e r d i f f e r e n t p o i n t of view."^ B i t t e l re-examines the p o t t e r y from BogazkJJy, other s i t e s east of the Halys, and the s i t e s west of the Halys mentioned by Maier, and reaches 40. the c o n c l u s i o n t h a t the p o t t e r y west of the Halys does not r e a l l y belong i n the same category. Gordion has none; n e i t h e r do Ancyra, Pessinus, or K a r a l a r . The evidence from P a z a r l i and even Alac a i s l i k e w i s e not r e l i a b l e . There i s , of course, a great d e a l of " G a l a t i a n " p o t t e r y from Tavium and Bogazkoy, and small s i t e s nearby. B i t t e l dates t h i s p o t t e r y to the second and f i r s t c e n t u r i e s B.C. and says t h a t i t might continue i n t o the f i r s t century A.D. He suggests t h a t since there are no d e f i n i t e f i n d s p o t s west of the Halys the p o t t e r y was produced east of the r i v e r , p o s s i b l e at Tavium, the Trocmian c a p i t a l . From there i t could have been d i s t r i b u t e d to east P o n t i c and Cappadocian s i t e s . He i s s k e p t i c a l of the l a t e Phrygian elements which Maier saw i n the p o t t e r y , and indeed h i s l a t e r d a t i n g precludes the absorption of such elements i n t o " G a l a t i a n " p o t t e r y . B i t t e l concludes by saying t h a t more research should be done on l a t e H e l l e n i s t i c and e a r l y • 16 Roman east G a l a t i a . To a l a r g e extent B i t t e l ' s c o n c l u s i o n s n u l l i f y Maier's, s i n c e they disagree on the p o t t e r y ' s d i s t r i b u t i o n and date. Thus the task o f the f i e l d a r c h a e o l o g i s t has i n no way been made e a s i e r , because there i s s t i l l no r e l i a b l e d e f i n i t i o n o f the p o t t e r y , e i t h e r as G a l a t i a n or as " G a l a t i a n " . In other words, we l a c k one of the p r i n c i p a l means of i d e n t i f y i n g p o s s i b l e G a l a t i a n s i t e s . One way of a l l e v i a t i n g t h i s i s to excavate Tavium, which should y i e l d a good p o t t e r y sequence. Such an excavation would a l s o t e s t B i t t e l ' s i n t e r e s t i n g theory t h a t the p o t t e r y might have been made t h e r e , and the i m p l i c a t i o n t h a t a f t e r a c e r t a i n p o i n t the Trocmi were l e a d i n g an e x i s t - ence c u l t u r a l l y independent of the other two t r i b e s . Then, too, M a i e r 1 s e a r l i e r suggestion t h a t G a l a t i a n p o t t e r y i s r e a l l y the monochrome coarse ware found w i t h the decorated wares we have been d i s c u s s i n g should be thoroughly i n v e s t i g a t e d . Thus the question of G a l a t i a n p o t t e r y i s f a r from c l o s e d . 42. FOOTNOTES TO POTTERY 1. Ferdinand Maier, "Bemerkungen zur sogenannten galatischen Keramik von BogazkCy", J d l 78 (1963) 218-255. 2. Zahn, AA 1907, pp. 225 f f . , c i t e d by Maier, p. 218. 3. J. De'chelette, Manuel d' arche'ologie p r i h i s t o r i q u e , c e l t i q u e , et g a l l o - romaine I I , 1914, pp. 1488ff.; G. Behrens, i n Beitrage zur al t e r e n europSischen Kulturgeschichte, F e s t s c h r i f t R. Egger, I. 1952, pp. 52 .'. f f . , c i t e d by Maier, p. 218. 4. Kurt B i t t e l , K l e i n a s i a t i s c h e Studien, I s t M i t t 5 (1942) 31 f f . 5. For Yalincak, see Burhan Tezcan, Yalincak V i l l a g e Excavation 1962-1963, Middle East Technical University Archaeological Publications No. 1, Ankara, 1964, pp. 18-19. I am g r a t e f u l to Sevim Buluc of the METU Museum for l e t t i n g me see the Yalincak pottery i n October 1973. For Asarcik Hiiyuk/Ilica, see Winfried Orthmann, "Untersuchungen auf dem Asarcik Huyuk b e i I l i c a " , I s t M i t t 16 (1966) 27-78. For Kululu, see Jones i n Anadolu XIII, a reference c i t e d by F. Winter, l e t t e r , December 1, 1973. Prof. Winter also mentioned that some "Galatian" pottery had been found i n Kara Samsun, but neither he nor I have been able to f i n d references; cf. Maier, p. 244, n. 38. 6. Maier, pp. 220, 223. 7. Maier, pp. 223-224; f i g s . 1 and 2; and see.figs. 1 and 2 here, pp. 80-81. 8. Maier, p. 225; f i g s . 3, 4, 8, 9. 9. Maier, pp. 226, 228. 10. Maier, pp. 230, 237. 11. R.M. Cook, Greek Painted Pottery, second e d i t i o n , Methuen, London, 1972, p. 203. 12. Maier, pp. 251-253. The monochrome coarse ware could also be a contin- uation of the l o c a l Phrygian v a r i e t y . Cf. J . Schafer's remarks on "graue p o l i e r t e a i o l i s c h e Keramik" i n H e l l e n i s t i s c h e Keramik aus Pergamon, Walter de Gruyter and Co., B e r l i n , 1968 (Pergamenischer Forschungen Bd. 2), pp. 14, 29. 13. The Woiwodina and Sava evidence comes from cremation graves i n these areas. Metal objects include brooches, f i b u l a e , chains, swords, and knives. Pots are s t r i p - p a i n t e d with, geometric designs. The cruder wares are sometimes straw-tempered, and belong to the middle and l a t e La Tene periods (Maier, pp. 253-254. 4 3 , 1 4 . M i t c h e l l , p p . 3 9 5 - 3 9 6 . 1 5 . K u r t B i t t e l , "Bemerkungen z u r s o g e n a n n t e n g a l a t i s c h e n K e r a m i k " i n Melanges M a n s e l , T u r k T a r i h Kurumu Y a y i n l a r m d a n D i z i V I I , TTK B a s i m e v i , A n k a r a , 1 9 7 4 , p p . 2 2 7 - 2 3 7 . 1 6 . B i t t e l , p p . 2 3 5 , 2 3 7 . 44. BURIALS AND GRAVE GOODS D i s t i n c t i v e b u r i a l customs, l i k e d i s t i n c t i v e s t y l e s i n pottery, can be a useful i n d i c a t i o n of the presence of a c u l t u r a l group i n a s p e c i f i c region during a s p e c i f i c time period. As we have seen, pottery so f a r i s not a r e l i a b l e index of the Galatian presence; we w i l l encounter a somewhat simi- l a r s i t u a t i o n i n the following i n v e s t i g a t i o n of Galatian b u r i a l s and grave goods. The H e l l e n i s t i c period, as Kurtz and Boardman remark i n t h e i r book on Greek b u r i a l customs, saw the introduction of monumental tombs for the e l i t e . These tombs were of two main types, chamber tombs and mausolea. In the same period, the common people continued to use the sarcophagus, c i s t , t i l e grave, or ash urn, a l l of which are types known from e a r l i e r p e r i o d s . 1 Thus while i t would normally be d i f f i c u l t to i d e n t i f y the graves of ordinary Galatians, there might be some chance of l o c a t i n g those of . important personages, such as the t r i b a l t etrarchs. As i t happens, we may have evidence for both kinds of b u r i a l among the Galatians, i n the form of unsophisticated c i s t graves and pithos b u r i a l s from BogazkSy, and more elaborate chamber tombs from western G a l a t i a , i n the area between the Sangarius and the Halys. These two broad c a t e g o r i e s — chamber tombs and humbler g r a v e s — w i l l be examined separately, on the basis of the architecture and i t s variants. This w i l l be followed by a general discussion of the grave goods found i n each type of b u r i a l , and the value of c e r t a i n objects for the i d e n t i f i c a t i o n of a Galatian tomb or grave. The map on p. 91 shows the locations of Galatian, "Galatian", and other tombs. 45. I. Chamber Tombs The evidence that the Galatians o c c a s i o n a l l y buried t h e i r dead i n chamber tombs comes p r i n c i p a l l y from Karalar, where three tombs were ex- cavated i n the 1930's. Near one of these structures was found the epitaph of Deiotarus I I ; a l l three were therefore i d e n t i f i e d as Galatian. I t i s important to remember that the i n s c r i p t i o n was the basis of the i d e n t i f i c a - t i o n , rather than the architecture of the tombs. A l l three structures are chamber tombs, one with a b a r r e l vault, one with a peaked roof, and one i n which a s p e c i a l kind of c o r b e l l i n g was used. Each of these tombs resembles others i n A s i a Minor, both because of a r c h i t e c t u r a l likenesses, and because of c e r t a i n p a r a l l e l s i n the grave goods. In the past i t was sometimes assumed that such tombs were also Galatian, although there are s t i l l no d e f i n i t e reasons for so i d e n t i f y i n g them. Rather, i t seems that the tombs i n question, i n c l u d i n g those at Karalar, should be considered a phenomenon of the H e l l e n i s t i c period. The introduction of the three a r c h i t e c t u r a l types into Anatolia, and p a r t i c u - l a r l y G a l a t i a , as well as the i n c l u s i o n of c e r t a i n types of grave goods, should not be connected with the a r r i v a l of the Galatians. With t h e i r usual a d a p t a b i l i t y to new surroundings, the Galatians at Karalar happened to use three of the a r c h i t e c t u r a l forms current i n the H e l l e n i s t i c period for the b u r i a l of some of t h e i r prosperous leaders. Once more we f i n d ourselves floundering for lack of a s o l i d background: there i s no thorough study of the H e l l e n i s t i c tombs of northwestern Ana- t o l i a , and thus there i s no chronological or t y p o l o g i c a l framework within which these examples can be placed. Nonetheless the i n s c r i p t i o n at Karalar gives us some sort of s t a r t i n g - 46. point. In the section that follows, each of the three a r c h i t e c t u r a l types at Karalar w i l l be discussed, a f t e r which there w i l l be a b r i e f d e s c r i p t i o n of the Karalar example, and any other appropriate examples from the area. 1. The c o r b e l l e d tombs Our f i r s t task i s to explain what i s meant by the term "corbelled" i n t h i s context. The c o r b e l l i n g technique under discussion consists of l a y i n g successive courses of slabs diagonally across the corners of the space to be enclosed, u n t i l one slab w i l l complete the vault. Lawrence was c e r t a i n that t h i s method of roofing a small area had been used i n wooden prototypes.' He suggested too that Karalar C derived from a type of r o y a l tomb used i n Central Asia i n the Bronze Age, and further, that the Phrygian tombs of the seventh and s i x t h centuries B.C., the c l a s s i c a l t h o l o i of Asia Minor, and Karalar "may be reproduction of l o c a l types of tomb or underground dwell- ing" . 3 This brings us to the question of the o r i g i n of the c o r b e l l e d chamber tomb. One explanation, put forward by Lawrence, i s that the type was a l o c a l Anatolian one, and that the Galatians simply adopted i t when they a r r i v e d . The a l t e r n a t i v e explanation i s of course that the corbelled chamber tomb was not a l o c a l type, and that i t was introduced from some other area, e i t h e r by the Galatians themselves, or by some other group of people. The f i r s t step toward determining the o r i g i n of the c o r b e l l e d chamber tomb i s to l i s t the known examples of the type i n Turkey, and t h e i r dates, 4 s t a r t i n g with- Karalar and proceeding (roughly) westward: Karalar C: 1st century B.C. Gordion I (Tumulus 0): 2nd century B.C.? 47. Igclir: 4th century B.C. Tepeeik/izmit: 3rd century B.C. Gemlik: 4th century B.C. Mudanya: 5th century B.C. Kepsut: no date Kirkagac: no date Pamukkale (2): l a t e Hellenistic/Roman B e l e v i : 6th century B.C. (Milas:. l a t e Hellenistic/Roman variant) An i n t e r e s t i n g pattern emerges from t h i s l i s t : most of the tombs were con- structed outside Galatia, and the e a r l i e r ones are those which l i e further away, toward the west. This suggests that the tomb type was introduced ... from some area to the west of G a l a t i a . Given the e a r l y date of the B e l e v i tomb, and the locations of Mudanya, Gemlik, and I ^ d i r , i t seems possible that the c o r b e l l e d chamber tomb might have evolved i n western Asia Minor, and that l a t e r on, s i m i l a r tombs were b u i l t i n areas to the east. I t does not seem possible that the Galatians introduced the type to A s i a Minor, since at l e a s t four of the known examples were b u i l t before they crossed the Hellespont. In an a r t i c l e on the Gemlik tomb, Mansel discussed a group of c o r b e l - l e d tombs i n Thrace, the majority of which can be dated to the fourth, century B.C. Most of the Thracian examples are c o r b e l l e d i n beehive fashion, rather than i n the i r r e g u l a r manner used i n the Turkish tombs. The tomb of Kurt Kale near Mezek combines both types; i t has an i r r e g u l a r l y c o r b e l l e d antechamber leading to a beehive tomb chamber. Builders i n Turkey seem to have preferred the i r r e g u l a r c o r b e l l i n g , although a fourth, century beehive tomb i s known at Kutluca i n the Propontis.^ There e x i s t s the p o s s i b i l i t y that the corbelled chamber tombs of Asia Minor may have in s p i r e d the c o r b e l l e d antechamber at Mezek. While there i s s t i l l work to be done on t h i s subject, the information 48. at hand can be used to c l a r i f y a few points with respect to the Galatians. The corbelled chamber tomb seems to have or i g i n a t e d i n Turkey, perhaps as e a r l y as the s i x t h century B.C. There several fourth century examples i n Bithynia, which the Galatians might have seen on t h e i r way to s e t t l e i n c e n t r a l Anatolia. One of these could have influenced the choice of a r c h i t e c t u r a l form at Karalar C. There i s c e r t a i n l y no basis for saying that any corbelled tomb must be a Galatian tomb. The only d e f i n i t e ex- ample i s Karalar C; another possible Galatian example i s the corbelled tomb at Gordion, because of i t s l o c a t i o n i n G a l a t i a . 49. FOOTNOTES TO THE CORBELLED TOMBS 1. Donna C. Kurtz and John Boardman, Greek B u r i a l Customs, Thames and Hud- son, London, 1971, chapter XVI, pp. 273ff. The chronology of H e l l e n i s t i c tombs may well be aff e c t e d by the recent discovery of the unplundered b u r i a l at Vergina, said to be the tomb of P h i l i p of Macedon. Cf. Nicholas and Joan Gage, "Treasures from a Golden Tomb", New York Times Magazine, December 25, 1977, pp. 14-19, p. 32. 2. A.W. Lawrence, Greek Architecture, Penguin, Harmondsworth, 1967, second e d i t i o n , p. 230. Cf. A.M. Mansel, "Gemlik Tumulus Mezari", Belleten 38 (1974) 181-189, and Rodney Young, "The Campaign of 1955 at Gordion: Preliminary Report", AJA 60 (1956), p. 252. 3. Lawrence, p. 302, chapter 6, n. 1. 4. References f or the cor b e l l e d tombs at Karalar and Gordion may be found i n the catalogue which follows. Ig'dir: Diindar TSkgSz, "I§dir K a z i s i Raporu", TflrkArkDerg 22 (1975) 151-153. Tepeeik/izmit: Nezih F i r a t l i , "Jewellery Found at izmit", Istanbul A r k e o l o j i Miizeleri Y i l l i g i 15-16 (1969) Gemlik, Kepsut, MilSs: A.M. Mansel, "Gemlik Tumulus Mezari", Belleten 38 (1974) 181-189. Mudanya: A.M. Mansel, "Mudanya Mezar B i n a s i " , Belleten 10 (1946) 1-12. Kirka^ag: M.J. Mellink, "Archaeology i n Asia Minor", AJA-67 (1963), p. 189. Pamukkale: Eugenia Schneider Equini, La Necropoli d i H i e r a p o l i s d i F r i g i a , Accademia Nazionale d e i L i n c e i , Monumenti A n t i c h i , Serie. Miscellanea 1.2, Rome, 1972, c i t e d by Jean Carpenter and Dan Boyd, "Dragon-Houses: Euboia, A t t i k a , Karia", AJA 81 (1977) 179-215, p. 201, n. 111. B e l e v i : Mansel as c i t e d for Gemlik, etc.; see also Hermann Vetters, "Ephesos. Vorla'ufiger Grabungsbericht 1971", AnzWien 109 (1972) 85-88, f i g s . 2-3. Cf. also the 1st century B.C. Roman tomb at Kenchreai, for which a sim- i l a r l y c o r b e l l e d roof has been restored (W. Willson Cummer, "A Roman Tomb at Corinthian Kenchreai", Hesp 40 (1971) 205-231. According to Prof. E.H. Williams, the grounds for t h i s r e s t o r a t i o n are questionable. 5. See A.M. Mansel, T r a k y a - K i r k l a r e l i Kubbeli Mezarlari ve Sahte Kemer ve Kubbe Problemi, Turk Tarih Kurumu Yaymlarindan VI S e r i , no. 2, Ankara 1943; "Gebze Yoresince Kutluca Kubbeli Mezari ve onun Trakya Kubbeli Mezarlari Arasinda A l d i g i Yer", Belleten 37 (1973) 143-158, chart a f t e r p. 158, and map, f i g . 28; and Mansel"s a r t i c l e on Gemlik, c i t e d above i n notes 2 and 4. For the tombs at Mezek, see B. F i l o v , "Die Kiippelgraber von Mezek", B u l l e t i n de 1'I n s t i t u t d'archgologie Bulgare XI (1937), and B. F i l o v , "The Bee-hive Tombs of Mezek", Anti q u i t y XI (1937) 300-304. While 50. Kurt Kale had been thoroughly p i l l a g e d , i t s neighbour at Maltepe had merely been r i f l e d i n a n t i q u i t y . According to Megaw, i t contained e i t h e r an i n t r u s i v e C e l t i c chariot b u r i a l (there were horse bones buried i n the dromos), or the trophies of l o c a l contact with C e l t i c warriors. The finds included two l i n c h - p i n s and f i v e t e r r e t rings of C e l t i c type, numerous Greek objects of the H e l l e n i s t i c period, a l o c a l bronze f i g u r i n e of a great boar, and a t h i r d century imported I t a l i c bucket. The C e l t (or possible Celts) involved here may have been a veteran of the r a i d on Delphi (J.V.S. Megaw, Art of the European Bronze Age, Adams and Dart, Bath, 1970, pp. 19, 112; f i g . 170). Megaw also mentions that i n a t h i r d beehive tomb at Kazanlik there are paintings which may depict C e l t i c warriors (Megaw, p. 112). 51. Catalogue of corbelled tombs 1. Karalar C ( f i g s . 7a and b, p.95) Karalar C i s oriented roughly north-south and consists of two square chambers and a short dromos. The b u r i a l chamber i s much larger than the anteroom; both roofs are corbelled. There were b u r i a l s i n both chambers, but robbers had disturbed and p a r t i a l l y removed the contents. Finds i n - cluded fragments of a c a l i g u l a speculatoria, pieces of i r o n mail, and sections of a gold tore set with precious stones. An a l t a r was set up toward the north, as with Tomb B; i t was f a i r l y well preserved and had a krepis of f i v e s t e p s . 1 1. Remzi Oguz Arik, "Karalar H a f r i y a t i " , Turk Tarih A r k e o l o j i Etnografya Der g i s i 2 (1934) 102-167; R.O. Arik, "Les Tumuli de Karalar et La Sepulture du Roi Deiotarus I I " , RA 6 (1935) 133-140, pp. 137, 140; there are no photographs of the tore sections. 2. Gordion I/Tumulus 0 Gordion I, or Tumulus 0, was discovered by shepherds i n 1954 and excav- ated under the d i r e c t i o n of Rodney Young i n 1955. 1 I t had already been robbed at an e a r l i e r date so there were no fi n d s , apart from some i r o n n a i l s on the f l o o r of the main chamber, and the fragments of a t e r r a cotta larnax. The tomb i s s i m i l a r i n type to Karalar C. The tomb was oriented approximately east-west with, the entrance at the east, and consists of a square inner chamber and a smaller, rectangular antechamber connected by a door. A bedding for the tomb was prepared by packing a layer of pebbles over hardpan. The f l o o r - s l a b s l i e d i r e c t l y over the pebble layer and pror- vide a platform for the walls. The blocks for the walls are of soft lime- stones (poros), neatly cut and f i t t e d on the i n s i d e , but uneven and roughly-dressed on the outside. Mortar was used to f i l l unaesthetic gaps on the i n s i d e . The i n t e r i o r was once covered with a t h i n layer of white stucco. A p l a i n moulding separates the walls from the roof. 2 Each, chamber has a c o r b e l l e d roof of hard limestone slabs. s i x cor- b e l l e d layers reduce the roof opening to an oblong small enough to be covered by a capstone. Since the courses of the chamber roof are s l i g h t l y higher, the roof i t s e l f i s s l i g h t l y higher. Cuttings were found for pivot-sockets, bolt-holes, and s i l l s for the doors to close against. No trace of e i t h e r door was found, unless the i r o n n a i l s i n the inner chamber were used i n a wooden door. Young says that the doors may never have been i n s t a l l e d , and that the stones blocking the 3 outer doorway may have seemed s u f f i c i e n t to repel robbers. P a r t i c u l a r l y i n t e r e s t i n g i s the f a c t that the tomb was l a i d out on a 4 set u n i t of measure, .165 metres or . 3 3 metres. Young suggests that a "foot" of . 3 3 m was i n use i n Phrygia during the period, and adds that t h i s u n i t may have been i n use from Persian times i n the t h i r d century. I f t h i s i s so, the builders of t h i s tomb, whether they were working for the Gala- t i a n s or for someone else, must have been f a m i l i a r with l o c a l b u i l d i n g t r a d i t i o n s . The dating of t h i s tomb i s d i f f i c u l t , since no h e l p f u l i n s c r i p t i o n s or grave goods were found. I t must have been b u i l t before the f i r s t century B.C. at the l a t e s t since there i s a p i t of t h i s date cut into i t . The terminus post quem i s much harder to e s t a b l i s h . I t i s conceivable that the tomb i s as o l d as the f o u r t h century B.C., since there are other co r b e l l e d tombs i n Anatolia of that date. The tomb might have been r e - used i n the Roman period, since other t e r r a cotta sarcophagi of that type have been dated to the Roman period. 53. 1. Information i n t h i s section i s condensed from Rodney Young, "The Cam- paign of 1955 at Gordion: Preliminary Report", AJA 60 (1956), pp. 250- 252; plan and section, p i . 81, f i g . 3. 2. Young, p i . 81, f i g s . 4, 5; p i . 82, f i g s . 6, 7. 3. Young, p i . 82, f i g s . 7, 8. 4. Young, p. 251. 5. Cf. for example the t e r r a cotta sarcophagi on view i n the Afyon Museum. 2. Barrel-vaulted Tombs Like the cor b e l l e d tombs, barrel-vaulted tombs were probably introduced from the west at a date e a r l i e r than the a r r i v a l of the- Galatians. Mace- donia i s the most l i k e l y source f o r t h i s type, although the Anatolian ex- amples are humbler than the ornate tombs found i n Greece."*" The catalogue below includes Karalar A, and the tomb at Kucucek as a comparison. 1. See Kurtz and Boardman, and Lawrence, p. 211, as c i t e d i n notes 1 and 2 on p. 49. Catalogue of Barrel-vaulted Tombs 1. Karalar A ( f i g s . 8 and 9, pp. 96 -97). Karalar A consists of a square, barrel-vaulted chamber with a dromos, b u i l t i n regular well-dressed courses. The dromos was not centred with respect to the chamber, and was f i l l e d with large stones. More stones were p i l e d outside the dromos i t s e l f . The tomb had been robbed before excavation, but there were some o f f e r i n g s l e f t . Among these were a gold necklace set with precious stones, part of a f l o r a l diadem, also gold, a 54. bronze f i b u l a , and a guttus of Pergamene s t y l e painted with flowers i n the manner of "Galatian" p o t t e r y . 1 This tomb l i e s some distance from Tombs B and C; i t s date of construc- t i o n may be d i f f e r e n t from the f i r s t century date assigned to the other two on the basis of the i n s c r i p t i o n near Tomb B. 1. See Arik, as c i t e d on p. 51, n. 1. For the f i b u l a see the e a r l i e r of the two a r t i c l e s , p i . 9, f i g . 18, and p. 122. 2. Kugucek/Aykazi ( f i g . 10, p. 98) Here the vaulted chamber and the dromos are centered.on the same axis. The tomb was apparently b u i l t i n the f i r s t century B.C. and re-used i n the second century A.D. The grave goods remaining consisted of a l e a f y gold diadem, lagynoi, and lamps. Finds of a l a t e r date included a Roman imperial coin which l e d to the o r i g i n a l i d e n t i f i c a t i o n of the tomb as a Roman struc- ture . 1 1. Nezih F i r a t l i , " B i t i n y a Arastirmalarma Birkac i l a v e " , Belleten 17 (1953), pp. 22-25. 3. Tombs with Peaked Roofs There has apparently been l i t t l e or no discussion i n p r i n t of t h i s a r c h i t e c t u r a l type; since there has been no general study of H e l l e n i s t i c and l a t e r tombs i n Ga l a t i a and nearby areas, i t i s impossible to si t u a t e these tombs properly. As i n the case of the corbelled and barrel-vaulted tombs, i t i s not possible to say that peaked roofs indicate a Galatian b u r i a l . The catalogue here includes Karalar B, the tomb with Deiotarus II' s epitaph.; another tomb at Gordion, which, could be Galatian because of i t s l o c a t i o n ; Bolu East, which i s a borderline p o s s i b i l i t y ; and Begevler, 55. which i s almost c e r t a i n l y not Galatian, but combines a peaked roof and a b a r r e l v a u l t with a r e l a t i v e l y e a r l y date and an i n t e r e s t i n g (Bithynian) l o c a t i o n . Catalogue of tombs with peaked roofs 1. Karalar B ( f i g . 11, p. 99 ) Karalar B consists of a rectangular chamber and a very short dromos. The roof of the b u r i a l chamber, which faces northwest, i s not vaulted as i n Karalar A, nor c o r b e l l e d as i n Karalar C, but peaked. The roof consists of twelve large blocks, i n c l i n e d and leaning against each other. This tomb had also been robbed, but contained a porphyry o f f e r i n g table, a glass vase with gold ornament, and mysterious traces of purple colouring, per- haps connected with the b u r i a l . On the north side of the tomb, there was a ruined white marble a l t a r , perhaps used i n a funerary c u l t . Fragments of a sculptured l i o n and of a trophy were found i n front of the tomb. The epitaph of Deiotarus II was also found i n t h i s area:'*" C & f y t o T e i p o o hkOQO/iotCov D<3*t Y<*kiTcjv T o J U r T o & o j c - Coupry restored and commented on the text. Deiotarus the elder we know 2 was a basileus; but Deiotarus, h i s son, also appears to have held the 3 t i t l e : he was declared rex by the Senate. 56. The i n s c r i p t i o n and therefore, presumably, the tomb can be dated f a i r l y p r e c i s e l y . Cicero, w r i t i n g i n March. 43, r e f e r s to Deiotarus f i l s _ as l i v i n g . ' At the b a t t l e of P h i l i p p i , Deiotarus does not appear, so that he may have died shortly a f t e r Cicero wrote h i s l e t t e r . His father d i d not die u n t i l 41/40. 5 Thus we have that rare phenomenon i n G a l a t i a , a c l e a r l y i d e n t i f i e d and securely dated monument. 1. Jacques Coupry, section on the i n s c r i p t i o n i n Arik's a r t i c l e , "Les Tumuli de Karalar et La Sepulture du Roi Deiotaros I I " , RA 6 (1935), pp. 140-151; for the tomb generally see the e a r l i e r part of Arik's a r t i c l e , and Arik, "Karalar H a f r i y a t i " , Turk Tarih A r k e o l o j i Etnografya De r g i s i 2 (1934) 102-167. 2. Strabo 12.3.13. 3. Cicero Ad Att. V.17.2. 4. Cicero P h i l . XI.12.31. 5. Coupry, p. 147. 2. Gordion II ( f i g . 14a, p.102) Like Gordion I, t h i s tumulus had also been robbed, and the tomb i t s e l f i s i n a f a i r l y ruinous s t a t e . 1 I t was a p l a i n rectangular tomb chamber set on a stone platform, s i m i l a r i n type to Karalar B. The section shows a ra i s e d area at one end. The s k e l e t a l remains of two i n d i v i d u a l s were found along the two long sides, so that the r a i s e d area may have been an o f f e r i n g table rather than a k l i n e . I t i s d i f f i c u l t to see from the pub- l i s h e d drawing what grave goods ( i f any) were buried with the dead. Ed- wards remarks that the tomb "was l a i d out on a set u n i t of measure", but does not say whether the units were the same as those used i n Gordion I. No date more s p e c i f i c than H e l l e n i s t i c was given to the tomb. 57. 1. G.R. Edwards, "Gordion 1962", Expedition 5 (JL963), pp. 47-48. The tomb i s mentioned only b r i e f l y , so that t h i s d e s c r i p t i o n i s n e c e s s a r i l y short. There i s apparently no more d e t a i l e d account of the tomb i n p r i n t . 3. Bolu East Cfig. 12, p.100) Bolu East i s one of two plundered tumuli south- of Bolu excavated i n 1964."'' Like i t s fellow, i t was set on a terraced h i l l t o p . Around the tumulus i s a krepis of l o c a l andesite blocks. The stone pavement of the rather long dromos i s now gone; i t led to a rectangular b u r i a l chamber, .. also constructed of l o c a l andesite. The blocks were c a r e f u l l y shaped and no mortar was used. Large andesite slabs formed the peaked roof. Above these were three courses of limestone and andesite blocks forming a f a l s e arch. The tumulus consisted of rocks and earth p i l e d on top of the roof. The dromos i s l i n e d with stone blocks. The upper blocks i n the side walls p r o j e c t inward so that the width of the passage i s narrowed. The walls i n the b u r i a l chamber were plastered but unpainted. No small finds remained. 3 1. Nezih F i r a t l i , "Two Galatian Tumuli i n the V i c i n i t y of Bolu", AJA 69 (1965) 365-367. 2. F x r a t l i , p. 366, p i . 94, f i g s . 3, 4, 5. 3. F i r a t l i dates both tombs to the years between 278 and 189. He theor- i z e s that since Bolu (Claudiopolis) l i e s on the northwest fr i n g e of Galatian t e r r i t o r y , the tomb must have been b u i l t f a i r l y e a r l y on, be- fore the defeat of the T o l i s t o b o g i i by Manlius i n 189. This i s f a i r l y tenuous reasoning; there i s no possible way of saying d e f i n i t e l y that the tomb was so early, even i f i t was Galatian. The dating i s at l e a s t p a r t i a l l y based on the finds from Bolu West, which was so badly destroyed that i t s a r c h i t e c t u r a l type i s no longer recognizable. The treasure hunters had uncovered a two metre section of andesite paving, beyond which- was a rough sarcophagus of p i n k i s h andesite. The grave goods handed over to the a u t h o r i t i e s included a r t i c l e s of gold, s i l v e r , and bronze; some i r o n objects had also been found but were thrown out because they were so badly oxidized. Appar- 58. ently there was no pottery. Among the gold objects was a buckle with the face of a man i n r e l i e f ( f i g . 13, p. 92), which w i l l be described i n greater d e t a i l i n the section of grave goods; there were also two gold tores, two gold brace- l e t s , and a p a i r of golden fi n g e r or ear-rings. S i l v e r objects included a bowl with r e l i e f decoration, i m i t a t i n g the shape of ceramic Megarian bowls, and a patera with l e a f ornament and omphalos. There were i n addition a bronze horse-bit and r i n g . ( F i r a t l i , pp. 366-367; p i s . 93, 94, 95, 96.) 4. Be|evler ( f i g . 14b, p.102 ) Begevler consists of a barrel-vaulted chamber, and a dromos with a peak- ed roof, b u i l t f o r the most part of s h e l l y limestone with some sandstone blocks. The roof of the rectangular chamber i s a true vault, b u i l t up over a " b a r r e l " of heaped earth. The masonry i s rather rough and no clamps were used i n the construction. I t was plundered so thoroughly that no grave goods remained. The excavator of the tomb compares i t to the tombs at Bolu, and to Karalar B; he dates i t to the t h i r d century B.C. without mentioning spec- ... 1 l f i c reasons. 1. Wolfram Hoepfner, "Kammergrab i n bithynisch-paphlagonisch Grenzegebiet", AthMitt 86 (1971) 125-139. The combination of the two roof types i s not unique, as another tomb of t h i s k i n d — v a u l t e d chamber, dromos with peaked roof—was found 6 km northwest of i z n i k . I t was b u i l t of l o c a l marble; two painted k l i n a i were found within. See M.J. Mellink, "Archaeology i n Asia Minor", AJA 75 (1971), p. 179. I t seems as i f Anatolian builders were experimenting, a l b e i t on a somewhat humble l e v e l , with the various a r c h i t e c t u r a l types imported from Macedonia and Thrace. I I . C i s t Graves and Vessel B u r i a l s A l l the evidence f o r these two types comes from Bo§azkSy. The two c i s t graves were c a l l e d Galatian because each, contained a f i b u l a ; these 59. w i l l be dealt with, i n the general discussion of the grave goods. Vessels (almost a l l pi t h o i ) were used c h i e f l y f o r c h i l d b u r i a l s ; these have been i d e n t i f i e d as Galatian because plates or bowls of the Galatian or "Galatian" type were used to cover the mouths of the vessels. I t i s suspected by the excavators that the custom of burying the dead i n p i t h o i or other vessels may have been borrowed from the inhabitants of north Cappadocia. 1 Thus the vessel b u r i a l s could be another example of the Galatian a b i l i t y to adapt to l o c a l custom. 1. Kurt B i t t e l and R. Naumann, Bogazkoy-HattuSa I, Kohlhammer Verlag, Stuttgart, 1953, pp. 120-121. C i s t Graves 1. Grave 12 i n Section 3, Area XII, of the South Area at Bo§azk"6y was b u i l t of stone slabs. I t s owner was an adult male, who was buried with a s i l v e r coin of Ariobarzanes I (95-62 B.C.), a f i n e red brown jug, a Meg-. arian bowl, a small i r o n r i n g , h i s sandals (judging from the 25 ir o n tacks found at h i s f e e t ) , an unrecognizable lump o f . i r o n , and an ir o n f i b u l a of Middle La Tene type with a high curve. The date assigned i s H e l l e n i s t i c . 1 1. Hartmut Kuhne, "Die Bestattungen der h e l l e n i s t i s c h e n b i s spat- k a i s e r z e i t l i c h e n Periode", pp. 35-45 i n Kurt B i t t e l , Bogazkoy IV. Funde aus den Grabungen 1967 und 1968, Mann Verlag, B e r l i n , 1969. For a photograph of the grave see p i s , 23 c-d, 24 a-c. For the f i b u l a see p i . 24d and f i g . 10a. Cf. also Kurt B i t t e l , "Bemerkungen zu einigen s p a t h e l l e n i s t i s c h e n Grabfunden aus den sogenannten Sudareal im Bezirk des Tempels I i n Bogazkoy", also i n BoffazkOy IV, pp. 45-49. B i t t e l says that we must hesitate on the brink of c a l l i n g t h i s the grave of one of the Trocmi. 2. The second c i s t grave was found below the r e t a i n i n g wall which i s con- nected to the gate chamber of the H i t t i t e wall to the east. Like the 60. f i r s t grave described above, i t i s b u i l t of stone slabs. The skeleton was almost completely gone. The finds included an ir o n sword, described as the only non-Hellenistic f i n d , a bronze f i b u l a of which- the upper part was shaped l i k e a dolphin, several gold leaves, a Megarian jug, and four other undistinguished pots. No further comment was made about the f i b u l a . 1 1. B i t t e l , Bogazkoy IV as above, p. 121. F i b u l a , f i g . 36a; sword, f i g . 36b. Vessel B u r i a l s 1. In the H i t t i t e residence quarter was found a broken column krater of A s i a v Minor..origin, i n which a c h i l d had been buried. I t i s s o l e l y on the basis of the krater that the b u r i a l i s c a l l e d p o s s i b l y G a l a t i a n . 1 1. Kurt B i t t e l and R. Naumann, Bogazkoy-Hattusa I, Kohlhammer Verlag, Stuttgart, 1953, pp. 120-121. 2., 3. There are f i v e l a t e r b u r i a l s from the area of the Great Temple, two of which are said to be Galatian because of the Galatian pots covering the mouths of the p i t h o i i n which the remains of children had been placed. The p i t h o i were not co n s i s t e n t l y oriented. One of these two b u r i a l s contained two s i l v e r e a r r i n g s . 1 1. Kuhne, Bo§azk'6y IV as above, p. 36. 4., -8. There are f i v e pithos b u r i a l s from the South Area, a l l with Galatian plates or bowls as covers. Again, there i s no consistent o r i e n t - a t i o n of the p i t h o i . The s k e l e t a l remains where preserved were of c h i l d - ren. Three of these f i v e b u r i a l s contained no grave goods at a l l . One 6 1 . contained a s i l v e r armband, a s i l v e r f i n g e r - r i n g , and f l a t hammered copper coins. The other contained a possible amulet c o n s i s t i n g of a small d i s c with short lead shank or handle, and a bowl."*" 1. Kuhne, Bogazkoy IV as above, p. 37. I I I . The Grave Goods There are two factors which imperil the accuracy of any discussion of the grave goods from the b u r i a l s under i n v e s t i g a t i o n . F i r s t , the lack of a general study of the b u r i a l customs i n c e n t r a l Anatolia during the Hellen- i s t i c period, which means that we have no concept of the "normal" assemblage of grave goods i n a tomb of t h i s date. The second i s that many of the . structures discussed were looted and even p a r t i a l l y destroyed; thus we have no way of knowing what may be missing from the groups of objects recovered. Nonetheless the objects can be divided into two major categories: those which might occur i n any reasonably prosperous H e l l e n i s t i c b u r i a l , and those which seem C e l t i c . The l a t t e r are of p a r t i c u l a r i n t e r e s t because of t h e i r p o t e n t i a l use i n i d e n t i f y i n g Galatian b u r i a l s . We w i l l begin with the non-Celtic grave goods. In the a r c h i t e c t u r a l section above, a number of tombs were described p a r t l y because they might be Galatian and p a r t l y because they were good comparisons both for a r c h i - tecture and for the grave goods they contained. The evidence from the chamber tombs west of the Halys suggests that the standard set of grave goods included jewellery (leafy diadems i n gold, ear-.and f i n g e r - r i n g s , bracelets) and objects i n clay (lagynoi, Megarian vessels, lamps). The b u r i a l s at Bogazkoy, although not as r i c h as the Galatian and Bithynian examples, contain objects of s i m i l a r type: leaves from a gold 62. diadem, s i l v e r earrings, f i n g e r - r i n g and armband, two Megarian vessels, the possible amulet, plus the coin of Ariobarzanes I. Thus while the He l l e n - i s t i c inhabitants of Bo§azkoy were apparently uninterested i n chamber tombs, they were s u f f i c i e n t l y i n touch with t h e i r neighbours to the west to f i n d the same sorts of grave goods appropriate. A number of tombs i n Bithynia and elsewhere Csee map, f i g . 3 , p. 9 1 ) contain s i m i l a r f i n d s . The ruinous tomb at Diizce contained two diadems, a pin, a cup, and a r i n g , a l l i n gold; two s t r i g i l s , a bracelet, a rod or pipe, and an instrument, a l l i n s i l v e r ; and a bronze mirror.'*" The c i s t grave at Yaylapinar contained a gold diadem and a fusiform unguentarium of 2 the l a t e second/early f i r s t century B.C. The barrel-vaulted tomb at Tepecik/Tersiyekoy contained fragments of a gold diadem, f i v e lagynoi, s i x fusiform unguentaria, two lamps, and a s i l v e r urn.^ In the f i r s t century barrel-vaulted tomb at Kocakxzlar near E s k i s e h i r were found fragments of a gold diadem, gold jewellery, lagynoi, unguentaria, and t e r r a cotta f i g u r i n e s . ^ Farther west, another barrel-vaulted tomb dated to the second century B.C. at KanlibagVlzm.it contained a gold diadem, a gold medallion with the impression of a Lysimachos stater, fusiform unguentaria, and lamps.^ The t h i r d century corbelled tomb named Tepecik, also i n izmit, yielded 6 several pieces of gold jewellery. And, f i n a l l y , there i s the tomb at Dardanos i n the Troad, b u i l t i n the fourth century B.C. and re-used throughout the H e l l e n i s t i c period, which, i s exceptional because i t seems not to have been robbed. I t contained a large number of grave goods including gold wreaths, diadems, necklaces, and pendants; ceramic cups, j a r s , and bowls; bronze urns, two of which bore the names of the cremated 63. ' dead; bronze mirrors, pins, and bracelets; alabaster b o t t l e s ; bone pins, spoons, and r i n g s ; a stringed instrument of wood; some s i l v e r ; and remains 7 of shoes, combs, te x t i l e s - and baskets. This quick survey of scattered tombs and b u r i a l s indicates a c e r t a i n uniformity i n funerary p r a c t i c e s i n A n a t o l i a from the fourth to the f i r s t centuries B.C., at l e a s t as far as grave goods are concerned. Jewellery, vessels, and u t e n s i l s of various kinds, often of precious materials, con- s t i t u t e the majority of the grave goods. While the material obviously deserves more attention, we can say that i f the Galatians used H e l l e n i s t i c a r c h i t e c t u r a l tomb types, they also provided t h e i r dead w i t h u t h e objects found i n other H e l l e n i s t i c b u r i a l s found i n the area, and generally i n western Anatolia. Are there any objects from the b u r i a l s i n question which are not so t y p i c a l l y H e l l e n i s t i c ? From Karalar A we have a bronze f i b u l a ; from Kar- a l a r C, pieces of i r o n mail and tore fragments. From Bolu West, we have two tores, a buckle showing a man with a beard and moustache, bracelets with animal head terminals, and a bronze horse-bit. From Bo^azkSy we have two f i b u l a e , 1 bronze and 1 i r o n , and an i r o n sword. Tores and f i b u l a e immediately remind us of European Celts; a moustachio'd man seems unusual for the h a b i t u a l l y clean-shaven Greeks; weapons and a horse-bit contrast strangely with the l e a f y diadems and unguentaria from these -burials. Tores have already been mentioned i n conjunction with the s c u l p t u r a l representations of the Galatians as obviously C e l t i c objects. The brace- l e t s with animal head terminals have p a r a l l e l s i n Iran and i n Germany, which i s i n i t i a l l y confusing. I t must be remembered, however, that one of the major influences on the a r t of the European Celts was the Near 64, East. Thus tores and animal head terminals are part of the C e l t i c reper™ Q t o i r e although, o r i g i n a l l y i n s p i r e d by Persian and Scythian models. The gold buckle from Bolu West Csee p i . 13). shows a man's face i n r e - l i e f . The man's h a i r i s flowing and curly; he wears a band or diadem. Small i n c i s e d l i n e s i n d i c a t e h i s beard and moustache. I n c i s i o n was also used for the decoration of the buckle's rim, with an i v y and bud and l e a f pattern. F i r a t l i c i t e s p a r a l l e l s f o r t h i s i vy pattern i n "Galatian" pot- tery, but does not comment on the beard and moustache, which are used i n sculpture to ind i c a t e barbarians. He does suggest that the buckle belonged 9 to "an important person buried i n the tumulus". While the bronze horse-bit resembles some from the treasury at Perse- p o l i s and others from Transcaucasia, i t should be remembered that the European Ce l t s acquired t h e i r knowledge of horse-trappings from the Near 10 East. The Bolu West horse-bit deserves further study by C e l t i c s p e c i a l - i s t s , as do the i r o n sword from Bogazkoy and the i r o n mail from Karalar C. The f i b u l a e found at Karalar A and Bogazkoy are p o t e n t i a l l y C e l t i c objects. B i t t e l discusses the i r o n f i b u l a from Bogazkoy i n conjuntion with other (bronze) fi b u l a e from Asia Minor, a l l of which lack a proper s t r a t i - graphic context; two of them have no provenance at a l l . The s i t e s rep- resented are Priene, Kayseri, Mersin, and western Asia Minor, of which Mersin i s the only s u r p r i s i n g l o c a t i o n . B i t t e l does not seem to mention the f i b u l a from Karalar, nor does he comment on the other f i b u l a from Bogazkoy, whose upper part was shaped l i k e a dolphin. Furthermore, he does not speculate on the presence of the f i b u l a e at Mersin, or at the remaining s i t e s , although, he dates them to the mid f i r s t century B.C., 11 r with one possible l a t e r exception. Doubtless these and other d e t a i l s 65. w i l l be discussed i n h i s paper on C e l t i c finds to be published with the proceedings of the Tenth International Conference of C l a s s i c a l Archaeology- held i n Ankara and Izmir i n 1973. The r e a l question here i s t h i s ; how can we use the evidence of these possible C e l t i c objects? Let us restate the terms of the problem. We know from the h i s t o r i c a l sources that the Galatians were C e l t s , and that they s e t t l e d i n ce n t r a l Anatolia. European Celts used tores and f i b u l a e . We have three tores and three f i b u l a e from three d i f f e r e n t s i t e s , one of which i s known to be Galatian from an i n s c r i p t i o n . At t h i s point a l l we can say i s that the presence of such objects at Karalar, Bolu West, and Bogazkoy makes i t possible that Galatians had something to do with these s i t e s . We have no C e l t i c objects from domestic contexts, which means that these tores and f i b u l a e were conceivably h e i r - looms or booty. In other words, they were probably not made i n Anatolia, but were perhaps brought i n at some point, e i t h e r by the Galatians them- selves when they crossed the Hellespont i n the t h i r d century B.C., or through some l a t e r i n d i r e c t contact with Europe. I f we d i d not know from the h i s t o r i c a l sources that a group of Celts had s e t t l e d i n Turkey, we would probably say that tores and f i b u l a e had somehow t r i c k l e d into Anatolia from the west and found t h e i r way into .. l o c a l b u r i a l s of the H e l l e n i s t i c period. There are other C e l t i c objects from Greece, Egypt, and Russia l e f t there by mercenaries or brought i n by 12 traders. No one would r e l y on these i s o l a t e d finds to i d e n t i f y a C e l t i c settlement or b u r i a l unless there were a d d i t i o n a l evidence. The C e l t i c objects from Karalar C, Bolu West, and Bo§azk'6y were found i n H e l l e n i s t i c b u r i a l s which resemble other b u r i a l s i n the area. H i s t o r i c a l information 66. and the Karalar epitaph suggest that they might be more than stray finds and that they might be d i r e c t l y connected with, the Galatians, an o r i g i n a l l y C e l t i c people. The tores and f i b u l a e help to confirm information supplied by ancient authors, but cannot be used by themselves to i d e n t i f y Galatian s i t e s . We are therefore forced to l i m i t our conclusions. Karalar B and C are c e r t a i n l y Galatian; Karalar A, which l i e s some distance away, probably i s too. Bolu West i s a d e f i n i t e p o s s i b i l i t y , as are some of the b u r i a l s at Bogazkoy. We can also say that there i s no such thing as a Galatian tomb type; the Galatians were happy to use l o c a l a r c h i t e c t u r a l s t y l e s and b u r i a l cust- oms. Certain objects, for example tores and f i b u l a e , r e c a l l the European o r i g i n of the Galatians. East of the Halys i t seems that l e s s elaborate preparations were made f o r the b u r i a l of the dead, but the grave goods, although fewer i n number, are the same kind as those from the tombs west of the r i v e r . 67. FOOTNOTES FOR GRAVE GOODS 1. Nezih, F i r a t l i , "The Tumulus of Tersiyekoy near Adapazarx'', Istanbul A r k e o l o j i Muzeleri Yxllxgx 9 (19601, pp, 75-76, n. 2. The grave goods are l i s t e d i n f AMY 7 ( 1 9 5 6 ) , , p. 12, nos. 6199-6216. A year a f t e r the recovery of the Duzce material, the Istanbul Museum acquired some pa i n t - ed t e r r a cottas reputed to be from the Duzce region. Other such pieces were acquired by H. Kocabas i n Istanbul, and by museums i n Brussels and Munich. There are several types: busts of Aphrodite and other females; applique"es of Medusa, heads of women; shields, flowers, rosettes, and Ionic c a p i t a l s . The colours are maroon, yellow, and white, and some pieces are gilded. See A.M. Rollas, "Terres Cuites colonies provenant de Bithynie", IAMY 13-14 (1966) 121ff. 2. Nezih F i r a t l x , " B i t i n y a Ara^txrmalarxna Birkac Ilave", Belleten. 17 (1953), pp. 16-18ff. and p i . 8. 3. Nezih F i r a t l x , "The Tumulus of TersiyekSy near Adapazarx", IAMY 9 (1960) 73-76. 4. Silmer Atasoy, "The Kocakxzlar Tumulus i n E s k i s e h i r , Turkey", AJA 78 (1974) 255-263. 5. Yildxz Mericboyu and Siimer Atasoy, "The Kanliba§ Tumulus at izmit ", IAMY 15-16 (1969) 67-95, English, summary, pp. 91-95. 6. Nezih Fxratlx, "Jewellery Found at izmit", IAMY 15-16 (1969). 7. Riistem Duyuran, "D^couverte d'un tumulus pres de l'ancienne Dardanos", Anadolu V (1960) 9-12; Zafer Taslxklxoglu, "Dardanos Jehri Yakxnxndaki Tumuliiste Yeni Bulunan Grekce Kitabeler", Tarih D e r g i s i XIII. 17-18 (1963) 160-173; J.M. Cook, The Troad, Oxford, Clarendon, 1973. 8. Jacobsthal remarked that the tore " i s the ornament of man i n Persia and Scythia: (Early C e l t i c Art, Oxford, Clarendon, o r i g i n a l e d i t i o n 1954, corrected e d i t i o n 1969, p. 156). Fourth century tore with animal head terminals from a grave near Susa: Edith Porada, The Art of Ancient Iran, Methuen, London, 1965, p i . 51 below; cf. also O.M. Dalton, The Treasure of the Oxus, o r i g i n a l l y published by the B r i t i s h Museum at the Oxford University Press i n 1926, republished by Lund Humphries, London, 1964, p i . XX, no. 137, for a penannular armlet ending i n winged goats. These references were brought to my attention by Prof. Fred Winter, l e t t e r , December 1, 1973. 9. Nezih Fxratlx, "Two Galatian Tumuli i n the V i c i n i t y of Bolu", AJA 69 (.1965) 365-367, p. 366, p i . 95. 10. Cf. Johann Potratz, "Die Pferdetrensen des alt e n Orient", Analecta O r i e n t a l i a 41 (1966), f i g . 47; Jacobsthal as c i t e d i n n. 8, p. 156. 68. 11. Kurt B i t t e l , "Bemerkungen zu einigen s p a t h e l l e n i s t i s c h e n Grabfunden aus den sogenannten Sudareal im Bezirk des Tempels I i n Bogazkoy, Bogazkoy IV, pp. 45-49. 12. J.V.S. Megaw, "Two finds of the C e l t i c Iron Age from Dodona", pp. 185- 193 i n Liber Iosepho Kostrzewski octogenario a, venatoribus dicatus, edited by Konrad Jazdzewski, Wrociaw, 1968, The two finds from Dodona are an i r o n sword and a bronze f i b u l a (p. 186, f i g s . 1, 2).. Other C e l t i c f inds from Greece are the bronze anklets from Isthmia (John L. Caskey, "Objects from a Well at Isthmia", Hesp 29 (1960) 168-176), and a f i b u l a i n the Delos Museum (p. 191). The C e l t i c f i t t i n g s from Maltepe near Mezek have already been mentioned (p. 4 9, n. 5). As well as the f i b u l a e from various s i t e s i n Turkey mentioned by B i t t e l , there are Knotenringe l i k e those from Isthmia from Cyzicus and Priene. A laminated birch-wood s h i e l d from Kasr e l H a r i t i n the Fayum and a small t e r r e t with southern B r i t i s h a f f i n i t i e s , also from the Fayum, constitute the C e l t i c finds from Egypt (pp. 191-192). B i t t e l as c i t e d i n n. 11 above mentions a f i b u l a from Gezer; t h i s i s the only piece of C e l t i c evidence from Palestine so f a r . A f o u r t h / t h i r d century grave on the Dnieper has produced an e a r l y La Tene sword (p. 192); fibulae have also been found i n Russia (p. 187). 69. FORTS AND SETTLEMENTS To speak of c i t i e s i n Ga l a t i a i s to speak almost e x c l u s i v e l y of Roman Galatia. During the p r e - p r o v i n c i a l period, the major population centres i n centr a l Anatolia were Pessinus, Gordion, Ancyra, and Tavium, which were native i n o r i g i n . Gordion, as we s h a l l see,declined a f t e r the Galatians ar r i v e d . Of the three c i t i e s that were to become the t r i b a l c a p i t a l s i n the Roman period, Pessinus was e a s i l y the most s o l i d l y established, undoubt- edly because of the shrine of Cybele which was located there. The story of the Galatian high p r i e s t and h i s brother A i o i o r i x , already c i t e d , shows that the ethos of the c i t y and i t s temple were not fundamentally af f e c t e d by the Galatian penetration of the holy o f f i c e . Of Ancyra and Tavium more w i l l be said l a t e r . That the Galatians were not great c i t y b u ilders i s obvious from the h i s t o r i c a l sources; they were too preoccupied with m i l i t a r y matters and t r i b a l disputes. Their settlements consisted mainly of " i s o l a t e d f o r t r e s s - es, usually at remote and well-protected s i t e s i n the h i l l s , chosen for st r a t e g i c purposes and not designed to act as economic, s o c i a l , or c u l t u r a l c e n t res". 1 As part of hi s i n v e s t i g a t i o n of the h i s t o r y and archaeolo.gy of Galatia, M i t c h e l l set out to locate possible Galatian s i t e s i n ce n t r a l Anatolia. Using the h i s t o r i c a l sources, the accounts of various e a r l y t r a v e l l e r s and scholars, and the techniques of f i e l d reconnaissance, he has c o l l e c t e d evidence f o r possible Galatian f o r t s and v i l l a g e s i n north Ga l a t i a . As always with the Galatians, i t i s not easy to draw up guide- l i n e s f o r the i d e n t i f i c a t i o n of s i t e s , and M i t c h e l l ' s work should be re- garded as a prelude to further surveys and above a l l excavation, rather than a serie s of hard-and-fast conclusions. 70. M i t c h e l l distinguishes two types of settlement: h i l l - f o r t s , and pos- s i b l e market towns and commercial centres. Some s i t e s , such, as Ancyra and Tavium, may have incorporated Both, these functions; where t h i s happens, the population wa.s probably not pure Galatian, but a, mixture of Galatian and Phrygian elements. For the most part, however, the f o r t s are separate from the market towns. We s h a l l discuss the h i l l - f o r t s f i r s t . M i t c h e l l describes the h i l l - f o r t s as "small f o r t i f i e d enclosures, s i t e d on e a s i l y defended h i l l tops, usually well o f f the main l i n e s of 2 communication". The f o r t s were designed for protection and defence rather than a c c e s s i b i l i t y , but supplies would have been a v a i l a b l e from farmsteads and v i l l a g e s i n the p l a i n s and v a l l e y s below. They confirm the general impression obtained from the h i s t o r i c a l sources that the Galatians, sus- p i c i o u s of each other and of outside enemies, eschewed l i v i n g together i n large groups, and that G a l a t i a from the t h i r d to the f i r s t centuries B.C. 3 was p o l i t i c a l l y fragmented. The construction of the f o r t s , with the exception of Deiotarus' f o r t s at Blucium and Peium, owes nothing to the m i l i t a r y architecture of the H e l l e n i s t i c period. There i s no consistent ground plan, nor are b u i l d i n g materials and methods ne c e s s a r i l y the same from one s i t e to another. None of the h i l l - f o r t s proper, that i s excluding Ankara and Tavium, was b u i l t 4 on an e a r l i e r settlement, as far as we know. The only f a c t o r which l i n k s the h i l l - f o r t s i s the choice of s i t e — h i g h , hard to reach, and commanding a good view of the surrounding area. Evidence for a date i n the pre- p r o v i n c i a l period i s often r e s t r i c t e d to H e l l e n i s t i c sherds v i s i b l e on the surface of the s i t e . There are grounds f o r scepticism i n a considerable number of cases; again only more f i e l d work can c l e a r up some of the 71. doubts. Ancyra and Tavium; Blucium and Peium, (the modern Karalar and Taban- lxoglu J i f t l i k ) : these are f a r and away the most d e f i n i t e candidates f o r the term "Galatian", The presence of H e l l e n i s t i c sherds at Karacakaya, S i r k e l i , and Yaraslx make t h e i r i d e n t i f i c a t i o n as Galatian f o r t s probable. M i t c h e l l has proposed that Dikmen, Tizke, andAssarlikaya be added to the l i s t of possible Galatian f o r t s by v i r t u e of the r e l a t i v e l y extensive r e - mains of walls. These ten s i t e s w i l l be discussed i n d i v i d u a l l y . There remain f i v e other s i t e s which at one time or another have been i d e n t i f i e d as Galatian: Karaviran, Cagnxk, c^anakci, Basrx, and Giizelce. Karaviran has been described by only one v i s i t o r , Ainsworth, whose account 5 Mxtchell quotes: I t was a rude and p r i m i t i v e structure, c o n s i s t i n g of a single wall, b u i l t of large stones, put together without mortar, and enclosing a space of 127 feet i n diameter. Not far dis t a n t , upon a neck of rock below, was a f o r t of s i m i l a r d e s c r i p t i o n . This i s simply not convincing enough. The reports on the next three s i t e s have not been checked since they were v i s i t e d by t r a v e l l e r s at the turn of „ 6 the century. At Cagnxk, stone foundations were noticed ; C^anakgx i s 7 s u c c i n c t l y described as "ein a l t e s (galatisches) K a s t e l l " ; only a mention Q of Basrx i s made. Giizelce i s c i t e d as a Galatian f o r t on the basis of a 9 s l o p p i l y b u i l t enclosure at the top of a h i l l ; here too the evidence seems i n s u f f i c i e n t . In addition to the s i t e s which, w i l l be described i n the catalogue below, there are three other f o r t s i t e s mentioned by Strabo for which d e f i n i t e l o c a t i o n s have not been found. Two are Mithridatium and Danala, i n the t e r r i t o r y of the Trocmi.''"0 The t h i r d i s Gorbeous, the royal 72. residence of Castor Tarcondarius, chief of the Tectosages; the fpoopiov here was p u l l e d down when Deiotarus had Castor and h i s wife k i l l e d . ^ Nineteenth, century t r a v e l l e r s Ramsay, Anderson, and von Diest placed Gorb- 12 eous near the v i l l a g e of Beynam; French, has since proposed a d i f f e r e n t 13 s i t e i n the same general area. We pass now from the h i l l - f o r t s to s i t e s which were e x c l u s i v e l y market towns and commercial centres, even i f only on a small scale. In many of these cases, i t would be impossible to prove that they were occupied only by Galatians; but obviously not a l l Galatians can have been l i v i n g i n the h i l l - f o r t s . The i d e n t i f i c a t i o n of some u n f o r t i f i e d Galatian s i t e s i s im- portant f o r the o v e r a l l settlement pattern. Of t h e • f i v e s i t e s l i s t e d below, Bo^azkoy i s perhaps the best candidate f o r a Galatian settlement, because of the two b u r i a l s containing C e l t i c f i b u l a e , and the Galatian or "Galatian" pottery found there. Gordion, where there are two possible Galatian tombs, should have had Galatians among i t s H e l l e n i s t i c inhabitants; Yalincak might have had. T o l g e r i Hiiyiik and Golhuyiik have been suggested by M i t c h e l l s o l e l y on the basis of t h e i r l o c a t i o n and the presence of H e l l e n i s t i c pottery. In terms of d i s t r i b u t i o n , these s i t e s may hold to the same pattern as the h i l l - f o r t s , i n that fewer people seem to have s e t t l e d east of the Halys. Additional f i e l d excavation may show that t h i s "pattern" i s a c c i - dental . Unfortunately, none of the f i v e p ossible settlements l i s t e d below can be d e f i n i t e l y i d e n t i f i e d as Galatian. We cannot therefore speak with con- fidence of the c h a r a c t e r i s t i c s of a Galatian habitation s i t e , and indeed the Galatian g i f t f o r a s s i m i l a t i o n may have prevented the development of such c h a r a c t e r i s t i c s . I t may never be possible to distinguish, the Galatian elements i n a H e l l e n i s t i c town or v i l l a g e i n Anatolia, although, the d i s - covery of C e l t i c objects such, as the f i b u l a e and tores known from b u r i a l s at Karalar, Bolu, and Bog'azkoy, and of i n s c r i p t i o n s unequivocally mention- ing Galatians could a l t e r t h i s s i t u a t i o n . What i s most needed, however, i s excavation. As suggested before, Tavium would be an excellent s i t e to excavate, as i t would y i e l d a good sequence from the H e l l e n i s t i c to the Roman period, and l a t e r . Good evidence could be recovered for l o c a l r e l i g i o n s , domestic and defensive architecture, and Professor B i t t e l ' s hypothesis concerning "Galatian" pottery could be tested. Once again, u n t i l more excavation has been done, most speculation about the Galatians w i l l remain exactly that. The map on p. 103 shows the locations of the various f o r t s and s e t t l e - ments under discussion i n t h i s section. 74. FOOTNOTES 1. M i t c h e l l , p. 178. See h i s chapter 6 on the c i t i e s of the Roman period. 2. M i t c h e l l , p. 34, 3. M i t c h e l l , p, 426. 4. M i t c h e l l , pp. 474-475. 5. W.F. Ainsworth, Travels and Researches i n Asia Minor, Mesopotamia, Chaldaea, and Armenia, London, 1842, v o l . 1, p. 126, c i t e d by M i t c h e l l , p. 425. 6. W. von Diest and M. Anton, "Neue Forschungen i n nordwestlichen K l e i n - asien", Petermanns Geographisches Mitteilungen, Erganzungsheft no. 116 (1895) 28-29; map. p i . I l l , c i t e d by M i t c h e l l , p. 434. 7. Mordtmann, Skizzen und Reisebriefe aus Anatolien, p. 370, c i t e d by M i t c h e l l , p. 435. 8. J.G.C. Anderson, "Exploration i n G a l a t i a c i s Halym", Part I I , JHS XIX (1899) 52-132; 280-318, p. 63. 9. Ainsworth as c i t e d i n n. 5, p. 146; G. Perrot, Exploration archeolo- . gique de l a Galatie et l a Bithynie, 1862, p. 278, c i t e d by M i t c h e l l , p. 441. For r e l a t e d problems i n determining the locations and plans of c l a s s i c a l f o r t s i t e s i n Greece, see James R. McCredie, F o r t i f i e d M i l i t a r y Camps i n A t t i c a , Hesperia Supplement XI (1966), pp. 50 and 94. I owe t h i s reference to Prof. E.H. Williams. 10. Strabo, 12.5.2. 11. Strabo, 12.5.3. 12. Anderson, JHS XIX (1899), p. 102, quotes Ramsay's opinion; W. von Diest, "Von T i l s i t nach Angora", Petermanns Geographisches Mitteilungen, Erganzungsheft no. 125 (1898), p i . I I I . 13. M i t c h e l l , p. 451. 75. HILL-FORTS 1. Ancyra, The ^bofxjav at Ancyra mentioned by Strabo 1 was undoubtedly located on the Kale, where any traces of Galatian occupation have been obscured by the Byzantine f o r t i f i c a t i o n s . Livy, speaking of Manlius' campaign i n the area 2 i n 189, c a l l s Ancyra an urbs n o b i l i s , but M i t c h e l l f e e l s that Strabo's designation of the s i t e as a f o r t i s more l i k e l y , although the settlement, which antedates the a r r i v a l of the Galatians, was c e r t a i n l y an important 3 market centre. 1. Strabo, 12.5.2 2. Livy 38.18ff.; M i t c h e l l , p. 179. For general h i s t o r i c a l summaries of the C e l t i c occupation of Ankara, see A f i f Erzen, I l k Cagcla Ankara, Turk Tarih Kurumu Yaymlarmdan, VII s e r i , no. 12 (TTK Basimevi Ankara 1946); Clemens Bosch, "Die Kelten i n Ankara", Jahrb. fur k l e i n a s i a t i s c h e Forschung 2 (1953) 283-293. 3. M i t c h e l l , p. 433. 2. Tavium Tavium, the modern Bviyuk NefeskSy, was a iffoupov and market town, l i k e Ancyra, and l i k e Pessinus, the focus of a c u l t , i n t h i s case of Zeus. 1 The combination of three settlement f u n c t i o n s - - f o r t , market, and c u l t c e n t r e — i s ^ e x c e p t i o n a l among the Galatians. The s i t e i s located on the more westerly of two natural mounds at the edge of the h i l l y country be- tween the open plateau and the p l a i n of Sungurlu. V i s i b l e remains include 2 traces of l a t e Roman or Byzantine f o r t i f i c a t i o n , and p l e n t i f u l pottery. 76, 1. Strabo, 12.5.2; M i t c h e l l p. 179., who c a l l s attention to the issue of autonomous coinage i n the f i r s t century B.C. at Tavium. 2. K. B i t t e l , K l e i n a s i a t i s c h e Studjen, Istanbuler Mitteilungen 5 (1942). ch. 1, "Beobachtungen und Funde i n Galatien", Cf, M i t c h e l l , p. 460, 3. Tabanlio§lu Kale/Peium ( f i g . 16, p. 104) Strabo, describing the topography of Gal a t i a , r e f e r s to two f o r t s of the T o l i s t o b o g i i : 1 (fQoupioi S'duruv 6<rrt To T€ Bbouuiov ml To TTijiov, &v TO £v ftxoYAeco* Av)u>rJtpooi TO t<*$°9"Ac< K I O V . Cicero also r e f e r s to the establishments of his f r i e n d Deiotarus, but owing to confusion i n the manuscripts, gives the name of both as Luceium (an obvious corruption of Blucium). I t i s probable that the name of the second f o r t was Peium. In the excavations at Karalar i n the f i r s t t h i r d o f t h i s century an i n s c r i p t i o n was found which revealed that the s i t e was the b u r i a l place of King Deiotarus, son of Deiotarus, both r u l e r s of the T o l i s t o b o g i i and the Trocmi. The elder Deiotarus was the f r i e n d of Cicero, 3 and h i s son, who died before him, was known from other ancient references. 4 Picard therefore i d e n t i f i e d Karalar with Blucium or Peium, while Coupry stated outright that-Karalar was Blucium.~* I t remained to f i n d a s i t e for Peium. During h i s i n v e s t i g a t i o n of the Pilgrim's Route between I u l i o p o l i s and Ancyra, Anderson i d e n t i f i e d a presumably Galatian h i l l - f o r t with the Ipetobroge of the Jerusalem I t i n e r a r y which describes the road from Istan- bul, through Tarsus, to the Holy Land. The road i t s e l f was probably-built i n the Hadrianic period along e a r l i e r paths.^ The s i t e l i e s 90 km west of Ankara, on the opposite side of the Girrnir â,y from Dikmen, Anderson describes i t s s i t u a t i o n as follows: 77. From the f l o o r of the canon, i n which the r i v e r flows, there r i s e s a c o n i c a l h i l l joined only by a low saddle to. the high, l e f t bank; round t h i s h i l l the r i v e r makes a bend exactly i n the shape of an A , and i t s summit i s crowned by a c a s t l e which commands a f i n e view of the v a l l e y below. The f o r t i f i c a t i o n s were n a t u r a l l y strongest on the side away from the r i v e r , where the towers s t i l l stand as - . • they were r e b u i l t i n l a t e Roman times. The southern one i s shaped l i k e an open hexagon, faced on the outer side with, o l d stones, —marble door-stones, and other rectangular b l o c k s — and backed with opus incertum (small stones l a i d i n beds of mortar). The other i s of t r i a n g u l a r shape and i n i t s higher courses contains numerous o l d blocks; but the lower h a l f of one face i s of b e a u t i f u l Greek work, b u i l t of rectangular blocks, squared along the edges and l e f t 'free' i n the middle, and l a i d i n regular courses without cement (the three or four lowest courses p r o j e c t i n g s l i g h t l y i n step fashion and being admirably f i t t e d into the rock). On the sides overhanging the r i v e r the remains are purely Byzantine. I t was disap- pointing to f i n d no i n s c r i p t i o n s exposed to view.7 M i t c h e l l agrees with Anderson that the s i t e i s Galatian and states that Anderson's Petobriga was d e f i n i t e l y Strabo's Peium, the treasury of 8 Deiotaros. He strengthens h i s i d e n t i f i c a t i o n using evidence from other ancient sources. Cicero i n the Pro Rege Deiotaro wishes to prove that Deiotaros d i d not t r y to murder Caesar. The l a t t e r was returning from 9 Zela i n 47 B.C. and stayed at Deiotarus' f o r t r e s s e s on successive nights. The f o r t s must therefore have been a day's journey apart. Dio t e l l s us that Caesar was on h i s way to B i t h y n i a ; 1 0 t h i s information i s also given i n the Bellum Alexandrinum which states e x p l i c i t l y that "per Gallograeciam Bithyniamque i n Asiam i t e r fecit"."'''1" M i t c h e l l i n t e r p r e t s t h i s i n the s t r i c t e s t sense—Caesar d i d not reach the province of Asia before he cros- sed Bithynia. Therefore he could have taken only one road as he headed west: the Pilgrim's Route from Ankara to I u l i o p o l i s through the north- western part of Galatia, Peium, says M i t c h e l l , must l i e i n northwestern G a l a t i a , one day's journey from Blucium. Blucium we know to be Karalar, and Tabanlioglu 78. C i f t l i k i s 50 km away. The two f o r t s are situated to the north, of the l a t e r main road. Further evidence comes from the l i f e of a l a t e r Galatian ( s i x t h or seventh, century A-D.1, St, Theodore of Sykeon, TTis<£v or IT̂ uv was a n 13 small v i l l a g e near the Ytoqiov SvKpcttZv t*fc Act£etvTt\/Hf - Eukraa remains obscure but the Lagantine i s the area surrounding Lagania, a town on the A n c y r a - I u l i o p o l i s route, and perhaps to be i d e n t i f i e d with Dikmen Huyuk, a s i t e south of Tabanlioglu C i f t l i k . Thus St. Theodore's TTeZtv must be the TTtfiov of Strabo and the f o r t r e s s must be situated near Lagania. 14 Tabanlioglu Kale s a t i s f i e d both these conditions. 15 M i t c h e l l gives a d e t a i l e d d e s c r i p t i o n of the construction and masonry. As the passage quoted from Anderson in d i c a t e s , f o r t i f i c a t i o n s were necessary only where the peninsula was not cut o f f by the r i v e r . Although there were subsidiary i n s t a l l a t i o n s on the north and south sides of the h i l l , e f f o r t was concentrated on the unprotected east side. There are two s t y l e s of masonry, the c a r e f u l H e l l e n i s t i c and the i r r e g u l a r Byzantine. One of the e a r l i e r terrace walls i s b u i l t of pseudo-isodomic, quarry-faced ashlar -~ blocks, l a i d as headers and stretchers, without mortar. The south tower, also of H e l l e n i s t i c construction, was not as well b u i l t , but i t i s e a s i l y d i s t i n g u i s h a b l e from the Byzantine additions which contained re-used blocks of various periods with mortar and smaller stones. M i t c h e l l reconstructs the H e l l e n i s t i c f o r t i f i c a t i o n s as follows: there was a gateway approximately 2.65 m wide, flanked by two symmetrically placed polygonal towers about 14.50 m apart. Another polygonal tower l a y 18 m to the north., with, i t s lower courses bonded in t o the terrace w a l l , so as to prevent access from a g u l l y on the north side of the h i l l . One 79, tower i s d e f i n i t e l y hexagonal and i t i s assumed tha,t a l l three were b u i l t to the same plan. The thickness of the wall, which can be measured only at the gate, i s 1.88m, The q u a l i t y of the construction i s e x t r a o r d i n a r i l y high, M i t c h e l l compares i t with the f o r t i f i c a t i o n s at Isaura i n the Taurus b u i l t by Amyntas, Deiotarus 1 successor, i n 25 B.C. Here too i s a system of polygonal towers connected by a c u r t a i n wall; the gateways are s i m i l a r i n plan: "both are single arches r e l i e v e d by a simple moulding at the point where the arch joins the upright".'''^ In both cases M i t c h e l l concludes that the construction was accomplished by Greek workmen at the command of the l o c a l Galatian r u l e r . At Tabanliog'lu Kale Deiotarus would have given the orders for the stronghold suitable for a r e l a t i v e l y small garrison to be b u i l t , sometime i n the middle of the f i r s t century B.C. 1. Strabo, 12.5.2. 2. Cicero Pro Rege Deiotaro 17.21. 3. Cicero Ad Atticum V.17.3; P h i l . XI x i i i 31; Pro Rege Deiotaro 36. 4. Picard, Comptes Rendus de 1'Academie des I n s c r i p t i o n s et B e l l e s - L e t t r e s (1935) 42-44. 5. Coupry, RAVI (1935) 142f. 6. Anderson, JHS IX (1899) 53-54. See also p l a t e IV, the map of G a l a t i a . 7. Anderson, op. c i t . , pp. 63-64. 8. M i t c h e l l , "Blucium and Peium: the Galatian Forts of King Deiotarus", AnatSt 24 (1974) 61-75,p. 73, n. 22. 9. Cicero Pro Rege Deiotaro 17,21. 10. Dio XLII.49-. 11. Cicero Bellum Alexandrinum 78. 80. 12. M i t c h e l l , AnatSt 24 (1974) , p. 72. 13. V i t a , St Theodore 118.2, ed. A.J, FestugiSre, 1970, c i t e d by M i t c h e l l , AnatSt 24 (19741, n. 17. 14. M i t c h e l l , AnatSt 24 (19-741, pp, 72-73, See also n, 22 of the same a r t i c l e , i n which M i t c h e l l discusses the possible transference of the name Peium to the s i t e a c t u a l l y on the Pilgrim's Route, a l i t t l e south of the Galatian h i l l - f o r t , which, was known as Ipetobrogen or Petobriga. 15. M i t c h e l l , pp. 4-6. 16. M i t c h e l l , p. 7. Isaura i s the modern Zengibar K a l e s i , near Bozkir, southwest of Konya. For a photograph of one of the Isaura towers, see f i g . 60 i n F.E. Winter, Greek F o r t i f i c a t i o n s , Phoenix, Supplementary Volume IX, University of Toronto Press, 1971. See also f i g s . 149 and 201 for plans of the towers, and 202 for the arch spanning the acrop- o l i s gate. 4. Karalar/Blucium ( f i g . 17, p.105 ) The i d e n t i f i c a t i o n of Karalar with Blucium was discussed above with that of Peium. Karalar has been f a i r l y systematically excavated, so that plans of the f o r t are av a i l a b l e ; the r e l a t i o n s h i p of the f o r t (Asar) to the tumuli can be seen from the map of the s i t e ( f i g . 6, p. 94 ). On the h i l l there are numerous c u t t i n g and below there i s a man-made tunnel with steps leading down to a spring. Thus water was a v a i l a b l e i f the f o r t was under siege. The palace of King Deiotarus was probably located beside h i s tomb on the opposite h i l l . 1 Arik describes the f o r t i n somewhat greater d e t a i l . The f o r t con- s i s t s of a rocky t r i a n g u l a r prominence shaped l i k e a camel's hump. In excavations at the southwest end, p i l e s of cut stone, fragments of Roman and Byzantine pottery, r o o f - t i l e s , and ashes were found. Also found were the foot and base of a female statue i n marble, of Graeco-Roman type, 2 and fragments of H e l l e n i s t i c pottery, A number of coins emerged, mostly 3 Byzantine, a few Trajanic. L i t t l e sense can be made of the confused walls 81. and cuttings, which cannot a l l belong to the same period. The underground staircase (M) i s located near a p a r t i c u l a r l y complicated set of walls (A, B, C, etc.).. I t o r i g i n a l l y had 56 steps, but 4 were eliminated to give 4 a larger landing at the foot. One thing i s c e r t a i n from the evidence of the pottery: occupation of the f o r t i s at l e a s t H e l l e n i s t i c i f not earlier.' This f a c t and the other evidence c i t e d i n the section on Peium makes the i d e n t i f i c a t i o n of Karalar with Blucium v i r t u a l l y d e f i n i t e . 1. M i t c h e l l , unpublished guide to the v i l a y e t of Ankara, pp. 33-34. 2. Remzi Og"uz Arik, "Karalar H a f r i y a t i " , Turk Tarih A r k e o l o j i Etnografya D e r g i s i 2 (1934), p. 152. 3. Arik, p. 154. 4. Arik, p. 158. 5. Arik, p. 163. 5. Karacakaya Karacakaya was f i r s t v i s i t e d by Anderson who knew i t as Soman H i s s a r . 1 The pottery from the s i t e was recognizably H e l l e n i s t i c — a worn fragment of a Megarian bowl, and a piece of black glaze. I l l e g a l excavation has r e - vealed part of a small enclosure of large roughly cut limestone blocks, set two t h i r d s of the way up the h i l l . At the top of the h i l l are the remains of a d d i t i o n a l b u i l d i n g s , including a c i s t e r n l i n e d with p l a s t e r to ensure a supply of water during any emergencies, M i t c h e l l theorises that so small a s i t e was a residence for a small group, perhaps a r u l i n g family 2 in fear of neighbourly violence. 1. Anderson, JHS 1899, p. 87. 82. 2. M i t c h e l l , p. 409. 6. S i r k e l i S i r k e l i i s known l o c a l l y as the.castle-caye or hissar magVrasi, The remains consist of traces of rock cuttings on the summit of the h i l l , and a thick s c a t t e r i n g of pottery, some of i t obviously Hellenistic."'' 1. M i t c h e l l , p. 426. 7. Y a r a s l i The p o s i t i o n of Y a r a s l i resembles those of Karalar and S i r k e l i , i n ... that a l l three of them are placed not on the highest a v a i l a b l e h i l l , but instead on the summit of a somewhat lower prominence. Y a r a s l i i s essen- t i a l l y a p l a u s i b l e f o r t s i t e covered with wall foundations and H e l l e n i s t i c 1 and Roman pottery. 1. M i t c h e l l , p. 440. 8. Dikmen Kale Dikmen i s 90 km west of Ankara, north of Dikmen v i l l a g e , i n the t e r - r i t o r y of the T o l i s t o b o g i i . I t was f i r s t i d e n t i f i e d as a "Gaulish c a s t e l - lum" by J.G.C. Anderson i n 1899.''" Anderson reported that i t s a l t i t u d e - i s 1700 f t . ; thus the f o r t at the top of the c o n i c a l h i l l provided an ex c e l - l e n t look-out post. He described the f o r t as a t r i a n g l e with an entrance at the southern apex. In addition thare a r e three semi-circular bastions i n the western wall, one i n the middle of the wa l l , and one at the north- west end.. The plan of the f o r t was p a r t i a l l y d i c t a t e d by the shape.of 83, the h i l l - t o p ; loose fragments of the outcrop provided the b u i l d i n g material. The walls are double: two separate.walls, f a i r l y well constructed, with, a rubble core seven feet wide between them. They are preserved to a maximum height of eight feet.. The f o r t i s small, measuring only t h i r t y yards across, Anderson observed no pottery; nor d i d M i t c h e l l , who has also 2 proposed the i d e n t i f i c a t i o n of Dikmen Kale as a Galatian h i l l - f o r t . An exact date i s impossible to assign. The s t r a t e g i c importance of the f o r t i s obvious from i t s p o s i t i o n , and i t i s i n v i s i b l e from below, owing to a screen of oak trees and to the configuration of the h i l l i t s e l f . 1. Anderson, 1899, p. 64. 2. M i t c h e l l , p. 417. M i t c h e l l adds that "west of the Kale i t s e l f , i s a grassy saddle enclosed by a second f o r t i f i c a t i o n , of uncertain date." 9. Tizke Tizke consists of a double c i r c u i t of rough stone walls, enclosing an area ca 28 by 20 metres. No d i s t i n c t i v e sherds were found, e i t h e r by 1 2 Anderson, who f i r s t suggested i t as a Galatian h i l l - f o r t , or by M i t c h e l l . 1. Anderson, JHS 1899, p. 63. 2. M i t c h e l l , pp. 417-418. M i t c h e l l adds that e i t h e r Dikmen or Tizke could be the 'fytppo^ejjg XtofiiOv mentioned by St. Theodore, which from i t s name must have been a Galatian s i t e (Vita St. Theod. 26a). 10. Assarlikaya While M i t c h e l l has given good reasons for thinking that Blucium and Peium should be i d e n t i f i e d with. Karalar and Tabanlio^lu £iftlik respect- i v e l y , Anderson i d e n t i f i e d Blucium and Peium with two other s i t e s , B a s r i , 84. a rather dubious Galatian s i t e mentioned above, and Assarllkaya; both are located along the road from Pessinus to Ancyra. 1 The f o r t consisted of two concentric dry-stone walls, enclosing a more or l e s s c i r c u l a r area of 45 metres across-. There were several entrances, and, as well, numerous i n t e r n a l walls d i v i d i n g the area .into small rooms. As usual, a h i l l - t o p provided the l o c a t i o n for t h i s Galatian lookout post. The double walls are reminiscent of those at Dikmen and Tizke, while the 2 i n t e r n a l d i v i s i o n s r e c a l l those at Karalar. 1. Anderson, JHS 1899, p. 94. 2. M i t c h e l l , p. 433. SETTLEMENTS L. Gordion There are traces of a possible Galatian occupation at Gordion, which by the Roman period had received the C e l t i c name V i n d i a . 1 Gordion at the 2 time of Manlius' v i s i t was an emporium "celebre et frequens"; i t declined a f t e r the Galatian defeat i n 189. Level 2 of the H e l l e n i s t i c s t r a t a has been recognized as the probable Galatian l e v e l . I t contains mostly l i g h t b u ildings suitable perhaps f o r a farming v i l l a g e . There are no monumental buildi n g s , and no structures with any conceivable p u b l i c use. The c i t y was unwalled at t h i s point, the c i r c u i t walls having been neglected and abandoned a f t e r Alexander, and i n some cases quarried for the stone blocks. Associated with, the scattered houses are grinding stones, a g r i c u l t u r a l implements, cl a y bee-hive ovens, p i t h o i , imported Greek pottery, t e r r a cotta Cybele f i g u r e s , and several coin hoards which, may have been Galatian 85. booty. There was d e f i n i t e l y a gap between the H e l l e n i s t i c settlement, 3 and the Roman road s t a t i o n . 1. M i t c h e l l , p. 435. 2. Livy 38.18. 3. Rodney S. Young, AJA 68 (19641, pp. 279-280; AJA 64 (I960), p. 232; AJA 60 (1956), pp. 249-250. Cf. the tombs discussed i n the previous section. 2. T o l g e r i Huyiik T o l g e r i Hiiyuk l i e s due west of Ankara; i t was occupied from the Bronze Age onward, and may have been a medium-sized market town used by the Gala- t i a n s . The H e l l e n i s t i c pottery found there includes a f a i r proportion of high q u a l i t y f i n e red wares, not usually found on Galatian s i t e s , with the exception. of Tavium. 1 1. M i t c h e l l , p. 418. 3. Yalincak At Yalincak near Ankara, a possible Galatian v i l l a g e s i t e has been ex- cavated. Here there was apparently no gap between H e l l e n i s t i c and Roman occupations. The pottery includes some Megarian bowl fragments, good i n - dic a t o r s of a H e l l e n i s t i c date. A r c h i t e c t u r a l remains consist of small rectangular houses and stone foundations, the mud bri c k super structure of which- i s now l a c k i n g , 1 1. Burhan Tezcan, Yalincak V i l l a g e Excavation 1964, METU Archaeological Publications, Ankara 1966, pp. 14-15. 86, 4. Golhilyuk Go'lhtiyuk, which, l i e s south, of Ankara near Garbeous, was also inhabited i n the Bronze Age, but the H e l l e n i s t i c material, covering a large area around the mound as well as on i t , i s more conspicuous. The sherds are of good q u a l i t y , and the H e l l e n i s t i c occupation i s part of a long habitation sequence. This suggests that the Phrygian elements of society may simply have absorbed some of the Galatian population into t h e i r own comfortable ex i s t e n c e . 1 1. M i t c h e l l , p. 451. 5. BogazkSy As mentioned i n the preceding chapter, there are b u r i a l s at Bogazkoy which may be t e n t a t i v e l y classed as Galatian. Evidence for p o s s i b l e Gala- t i a n habitation i s also forthcoming. The remains of H e l l e n i s t i c buildings are p l o t t e d on an e a r l y sketch map of the s i t e , and a general s t r a t i g r a p h i c table for BogazkSy published some twenty years l a t e r r e f e r s to i t as a 2 Trocmian outpost. In addition, houses with several rooms b u i l t at random on a s l i g h t slope have been found, and dated to the H e l l e n i s t i c period. 3 These may be Trocmian residences. 1. K. B i t t e l and R. Naumann, Bogazkay-Hattusa I, Kohlhammer Verlag, Stuttgart 1952, p. 28 f i g . 2, and c f . p. 34. 2. K. B i t t e l , Hattusha, The C a p i t a l of the H i t t i t e s , Oxford University Press, New York, 1970, p. i x , 3. Wulf Schirmer, Die Bebauung am unteren Buyukkale-Nordwesthang i n Bogazko'y, Gebr. Mann Verlag, B e r l i n , 1969. WVDOG 81, Bogazkoy- Hattusa VI, pp. 12-14, Beilage 3 and 4. 87. CONCLUSION At the beginning of this- paper, the problems of Galatian archaeology- were described as endemic to the f i e l d . I t i s very d i f f i c u l t to work from l i t e r a r y sources, however d e t a i l e d they may be on the subjects of h i s t o r y and p o l i t i c s , i f they give l i t t l e or no information of the ethnographic v a r i e t y . The Galatians w i l l remain an archaeological.conundrum u n t i l the evidence from the sources.is-followed up by surveys and excavation. Through the i n v e s t i g a t i o n of pottery, b u r i a l customs, and f o r t s and settlements, we have seen that c e r t a i n methods are not nec e s s a r i l y h e l p f u l i n t h i s context. I t i s not possible to count on a strong C e l t i c heritage fo r the Galatians because of t h e i r long migrations. Thus v a l i d connections with Europe w i l l always be hard to f i n d . Because so l i t t l e work has been done on the H e l l e n i s t i c period, p l a c i n g the Galatians i n the context of the H e l l e n i s t i c period i n Anatolia w i l l be v i r t u a l l y impossible u n t i l t h i s s i t u a t i o n i s resolved. The Galatians may or may not have made t h e i r own pottery; they may have buried t h e i r dead i n a v a r i e t y of ways; t h e i r settlements do not bear a d e f i n i t e a r c h i t e c t u r a l stamp which can be interpreted as e x c l u s i v e l y Galatian. I f we were dealing with a p r e h i s t o r i c period, i t i s pos s i b l e that the presence of the Galatians i n Anatolia would have gone undetected. The few fib u l a e and tores which seem d e f i n i t e l y C e l t i c do not, f o r the most part, come from s i t e s which- can d e f i n i t e l y be c a l l e d Galatian; these anomalous finds could e a s i l y be'explained as imports from outside the area. Since there are s t i l l no r e l i a b l e i n d i c a t o r s of Galatian material culture, archaeology can add l i t t l e to the evidence provided by the h i s t - 88. o r i c a l sources. This i s not for l a c k of t r y i n g ; i n some instances scholars have been too o p t i m i s t i c i n t h e i r attempts to f i n d traces of the elusive Galatians. The evidence such, as i t i s does not at the moment permit a f u l l archaeological reconstruction of the l i f e and times of the p r e - p r o v i n c i a l Galatians. The future need not be so bleak, however.. As evidence accumulates on the general nature of l i f e i n H e l l e n i s t i c Anatolia, i t w i l l become easier to situate the Galatians i n the appropriate context. A somewhat s i m i l a r case may serve as encouragement. The S c o r d i s c i were another group of C e l t s who s e t t l e d i n what i s now Yugoslavia i n the e a r l y t h i r d century B.C. They are mentioned i n the h i s t o r i c a l sources l e s s frequently than the Galatians, but i t has been possible to reconstruct sev- e r a l phases of t h e i r existence i n Yugoslavia from t h e i r a r r i v a l u n t i l the area was absorbed into the Roman Empire. Detailed information now e x i s t s on Scordiscan pottery, b u r i a l customs, settlements, and even s o c i a l organ- i z a t i o n . 1 With continuing f i e l d work, i t should be p o s s i b l e to f i l l i n some of the gaps i n our knowledge of p r e - p r o v i n c i a l G a l a t i a . For the present, i t i s hoped that t h i s paper has at l e a s t shown what the terms of the problems of Galatian archaeology are, and what obstacles must be overcome before they can be resolved. 1. Jovan Todorovic, S k o r d i s c i . I s t o r i j a i_Kultura, I n s t i t u t za IzuSavanje I s t o r i j e Vojvodine Savez ArheoloSkih. DruStava Jugoslavije, Beograd, 1974, with. English, summary. 89. 1. : ,Galatian" pottery 90. 2. Shapes of "Galatian" pottery .Belevi •I Mi l a s 4b, I§dir 4c, Gemlik 5b. Kirka§aj 6. Map of Karalar 9-5, 96. O 98.  100. 101. 13. Buckle from Bolu West 102. AJTEfc .S- .MITCHELL 0*FORD|C>.PHIL. I3>4- / / 1 0 4 . PEIUM (TABANLIOGLU K A L E ) "*(/>' "Ul •' V •' ' l'A\\'' SKETCH PLAN OF THE •! mi HELLENISTIC FORTIF ICATIONS '''''' Position of fortress ( no scale) 16. Peium 105. 106. BIBLIOGRAPHY Standard editions have been used for the ancient authors c i t e d , except where otherwise noted; s i m i l a r l y , standard abbreviations have been used for the t i t l e s of journals. J.G.C. Anderson, "Exploration i n G a l a t i a c i s Halym", Part I I , JHS XIX (1899) 52-132; 280-318. Sumer Atasoy, "The Kocakizlar Tumulus i n E s k i s e h i r , Turkey," AJA -78 (1974) 255-263. Remzi Oguz Arik, "Karalar H a f r i y a t i , " Turk Tarih. A r k e o l o j i Etnografya Dergi s i 2 U934) 102-167. , "Les Tumuli de Karalar et l a Sepulture du Roi Deiotaros I I " , RA 6 (1935) 133-151. Margarete Bieber, The Sculpture of the H e l l e n i s t i c Age, revised e d i t i o n , Columbia University Press, New York, 1970. P. Bienkowski, Die Darstellungen der G a l l i e r i n der h e l l e n i s t i s c h e n Kunst, A l f r e d HSlder, Vienna, 1908. Kurt B i t t e l , K l e i n a s i a t i s c h e Studien,. I s t M i t t 5 (1942). , BogazkOy IV. Funde aus den Grabungen 1967 und 1968, Mann Verlag, B e r l i n , 1969. , Hattusha, The C a p i t a l of the H i t t i t e s , Oxford U n i v e r s i t y Press, New York, 1970. , "Bemerkungen zur sogenannten galatischen Keramik", pp. 227-237, i n Melanges Mansel, Turk Tarih Kurumu Yaymlarindan D i z i VII, TTK Basimevi, Ankara, 1974. . and R. Naumann, Bogazkoy-Hattus'a I, Kohlhammer Verlag, Stuttgart, 1952. Clemens Bosch, "Die Kelten i n Ankara," Jahrbuch fur k l e i n a s i a t i s c h e Forschung 2 (1953) 283-293. Jean Carpenter and Dan Boyd, "Dragon-houses: Euboia, A t t i k a , Karia," AJA 81 (1977) 179-215. Rhys Carpenter, Greek Sculpture, U n i v e r s i t y of Chicago Press, 1960. John L. Caskey, "Objects from a Well at Isthmia," Hesp 29 (I960) 168-176. Nora K. Chadwick and Myles D i l l o n , The C e l t i c Realms, Weidenfeld and Nicolson, London, 1967. J.M. Cook, The Troad, Oxford, Clarendon, 1973. R.M. Cook, Greek Painted Pottery, second e d i t i o n , Methuen, London, 1972. W. Willson Cummer, "A Roman Tomb at Corinthian Kenchreai," Hesp 40 (1971) 205-231. G.M. Dalton, The Treasure of the Oxus, o r i g i n a l l y published by the B r i t i s h Museum at the Oxford U n i v e r s i t y Press, 1926; republished by Lund Humphries, London, 1964. J. De*chelette, Manuel d'arch^ologie prShistorique, c e l t i q u e , et g a l l o - romaine I I , 1914. Walter von Diest, "Von T i l s i t nach. Angora, u Petermanns Geographisches Mitteilungen, Erganzungsheft no. 125 (289-8).. 107. Rilstem Duyuran, "Decouverte d'un tumulus pre-s de l'ancienne Dardanos," Anadolu V (1960). 9-12. G.R. Edwards, "Gqrdion 1962, " E x p e d i t i o n 5 (1963). 47-48, A f i f Erzen, i l k , gagda Ankara, Turk Tarih- Kurumu Yayinlarmdan, VII S e r i , no. 12, TTK Basimevi, Ankara, 1946, Jan F i l i p , C e l t i c C i v i l i z a t i o n and i t s Heritage, Publishing House of the Czechoslovak. Academy of Sciences and A r t i a , Prague, 1960 (English e d i t i o n 1962).. B. F i l o v , "Die Kuppelgr'aber von Mezek," B u l l e t i n de 1' I n s t i t u t d'Archeologie Bulgare XI (19-37) 79-84. __, "The Bee-hive Tombs of Mezek," Anti q u i t y XI (.1937). 300-304. Nezih. F i r a t l i , " B i t i n y a Ara|tirmalarina Birkac l l a v e , " B e l l e t e n 17 (1953) 22-23. , "The Tumulus of Tersiyekoy near Adapazari," Istanbul A r k e o l o j i Muzeleri Y i l l i g i 9 (1960) 73-76. , "Two Galatian Tumuli i n the V i c i n i t y of Bolu," AJA 69 (1965) 365-367. , "Jewellery Found at izmit," Istanbul A r k e o l o j i Muzeleri Y i l l i g i 15-15 (1969) Nicholas and Joan Gage, "Treasures from a Golden Tomb," New York Times Magazine, December 25, 1977, pp. 14-19, p. 32. G.T. G r i f f i t h , Mercenaries of the Ancient World, Cambridge U n i v e r s i t y Press, 1935. Esther V. Hansen, The A t t a l i d s of Pergamon, second e d i t i o n , C o r n e l l Univer- s i t y Press, Ithaca and London, 1971. C h r i s t i n e M i t c h e l l Havelock, H e l l e n i s t i c Art, Phaidon, London, 1971. C.F.C. Hawkes, "The C e l t s : Report on the Study of t h e i r Culture and t h e i r Mediterranean Relations, 1942-1962," pp. 61-69 i n Le Rayonnement des C i v i l i z a t i o n s Grecque et Romaine sur l e s Cultures Peripheriques, VIII CongrSs International d'Archeologie (Paris 1963), E d i t i o n s de Boccard, P a r i s , 1965. Wolfram Hoepfner, "Kammergrab i n bithynisch-paphlagonischen Grenzegebiet," AthMitt 86 (1971) 125-139. Paul Jacobsthal, E a r l y C e l t i c Art, Oxford, Clarendon, o r i g i n a l e d i t i o n 1944, corrected e d i t i o n 1969. F e l i x Jacoby, Die Fragmente der Griechischen H i s t o r i k e r , v o l . I l l b , Leiden, E.J. B r i l l , 1950. A.H.M. Jones, The C i t i e s of the Eastern Roman Provinces, Oxford, Clarendon, 1971. Donna C. Kurtz and John Boardman, Greek B u r i a l Customs, Thames and Hudson, London, 1971. M. Launey, "Une Episode oublie"e de 1'invasion galate en Asie Mineure," REA XLVII (1944) 217-234. A.W. Lawrence, Greek Architecture, Penguin, Harmondsworth, 1967, second e d i t i o n . David Magie, Roman Rule i n Asia Minor, Princeton U n i v e r s i t y Press, 1950 Ferdinand Maier, "Bemerkungen zur sogenannten galatischen Keramik von Bogazkoy, J d l 78 (1963). 218-255, A r i f Mtifid Mansel, T r a k y a - K i r k l a r e l i Kubbelj Mezarlari ve Sahte Kerner ve Kubbe Problem!, Turk Tarih. Kurumu Yayinlarmdan VI S e r i , no. 2, Ankara, 1943. 108. , "Mudanyal.Mezar B i n a s i " , Belleten 10 (1946) 1-12. , "Gebze YBresince kutluca Kubbeli.Mezari ve onun Trakya Kubbeli Mezarlari Arasmda A l d i g i Yer," Belleten 37 (1973) 143-158. 't- , "Gemlik Tumiiliis Mezari", Be l l e t e n 38 (1974) 181-189.' James R. McCredie, F o r t i f i e d M i l i t a r y Camps i n A t t i c a , Hesperia Supple-. .. ment XI, 1966. Roger McShane, The Foreign P o l i c y of the A t t a l i d s of Pergamum ( I l l i n o i s Studies i n the S o c i a l Sciences No. 53), U n i v e r s i t y of I l l i n o i s Press, Urbana, 1964. J.V.S. Megaw, "Two Finds of the C e l t i c Iron Age from Dodona," pp. 185- 193 i n Liber Iosepho Kostrzewski octogenario a_ veneratoribus dicatus, edited by Konrad Jazdzewski, Wrociaw, 1968. , Art of the European Iron Age, Adams and Dart, Bath, 1970. Machteld J. Mellink, "Archaeology i n Asia Minor," AJA 65 (1961) 51-52. , "Archaeology i n Asia Minor," AJA 67 (1963) 189 , "Archaeology i n Asia Minor," AJA 75 (1971) 179. Y i l d i z Mericboyu and Sumer Atasoy, "The Kanlibag Tumulus at Izmit," Istanbul A r k e o l o j i Muzeleri Y i l l i g i 15-16 (1969) 67-95; Engl i s h summary pp. 91-95. Stephen M i t c h e l l , The History and Archaeology of G a l a t i a , D. P h i l , t h e s i s , Oxford University, 1974. , "Blucium and Peium: The Galatian Forts of King Deiotarus," AnatSt 24 (1974) 61-75. Winfried• Orthmann, "Untersuchungen auf dem Asarcik Hviyuk b e i I l i c a , " I s t M i t t 16 (1966) 27-78. E. D. P h i l l i p s , "The Scythian Domination i n Western Asia: i t s Record i n History, Scripture and Archaeology," World Archaeology 4 (1972-72) 129-139. Stuart Piggott, Ancient Europe, Aldine, Chicago, 1965. Edi t h Porada, The Art of Ancient Iran, Methuen, London, 1965. Johann Potratz, "Die Pferdetrensen des a l t e n Orient," Analecta O r i e n t a l i a 41 (1966). T.G.E. Powell, The C e l t s , Thames and Hudson, London, 1958. W.M. Ramsay, A H i s t o r i c a l Commentary on St. Paul's E p i s t l e to the Gala- t i a n s , Hodder and Stoughton, London, 1899. Anne Ross, Pagan C e l t i c B r i t a i n , Routledge and Kegan Paul, London, 1967. Nancy K. Sandars, P r e h i s t o r i c Art i n Europe, Penguin, Harmondsworth, 1967. Jorg Schafer, H e l l e n i s t i s c h e Keramik aus Pergamon, Walter de Gruyter and Co., B e r l i n , 1968 (Pergamenische Forschungen, Band 2) Wulf Schirmer, Die Bebauung am unteren Biiyukkale-Nordwesthang i n Boffazkoy. Bog*azkSy-Hattusa VI, Mann Verlag, B e r l i n , 1969. Arnold Schober, "Die Gallierdenkmal Attalo s I. i n Pergamon," Mitteilungen des deutschen archaologischen I n s t i t u t s . Romische Abteilung 51 (1936) 104-124. Otto Seel, Pompei Trogi Fragmenta, Teubner, L e i p z i g , 1956. F. Stahel i n , Geschichte der k l e i n a s i a t i s c h e n Galater, second e d i t i o n , L e i p z i g , 1907. Tadeusz S u l i m i r s k i , "The Cel t s i n Eastern Europe," pp. 182-190 i n To I l l u s t r a t e the Monuments. Essays on Archaeology presented to Stuart Piggott, ed. by J.V.S. Megaw, Thames and Hudson, London, 1976. 109. Zafer T a g l i k l i o g l u , "Dardanos gehri Yakmindaki Turauliiste Yeni Bulunan Grekce Ki t a b e l e r , " T a r i h D e r g i s i XIII.17.18 (1963) 160-173. Burhan Tezcan, Yalmcak V i l l a g e Excavation 1964, Middle East Technical University Publications, Ankara, 1966. J. Todorovic, S k o r d i s c i . I s t o r i j a i_ Kultura, I n s t i t u t za IzuEavanje I s t o r i j e Vojvodine Savez ArheoloSkih DruStava Jugoslavije, Beograd, 1974; with E n g l i s h summary. Diindar Tokgoz, "Igdir K a z i s i Raporu," TiirkArkDerg 22 (1975) 151-153. Hermann Vetters, "Ephesos. Vorlaufiger Grabungsbericht 1971," AnzWien 109 (1972) 85-88. C. Bradford Welles, Royal Correspondence i n the H e l l e n i s t i c Period, Yale U n i v e r s i t y Press, New Haven, 1934. Edouard W i l l , H i s t o i r e p o l i t i q u e du monde h e l l e n i s t i q u e , I I , Nancy, 1967. F.E. Winter, Greek F o r t i f i c a t i o n s , Phoenix, Supplementary Volume IX, University of Toronto Press, 1971. Rodney Young, "The Campaign of 1955 at Gordion: Preliminary Report," AJA 60 (1956) 249-252. , "The Nomadic Impact: Gordion," pp. 52-57 i n Dark Ages and Nomads c_. 1000 B.C., edited by Machteld J . Mellink, Nederlands Historisch-Archaeologisch I n s t i t u u t , Istanbul, 1964. Ladislav Zgusta, K l e i n a s i a t i s c h e Personennamen, Verlag der Tschechoslovak- ischen Akademie der Wissenschaften, Prague, 1964.

Cite

Citation Scheme:

    

Usage Statistics

Country Views Downloads
United States 7 1
Turkey 6 4
Germany 6 50
China 4 0
Australia 2 0
Japan 2 0
Serbia 1 0
United Kingdom 1 0
Russia 1 0
Ukraine 1 0
City Views Downloads
Unknown 10 55
Mountain View 4 0
Beijing 3 0
Bochum 3 0
Bolu 2 0
Sydney 2 0
Tokyo 2 0
Redmond 1 0
Davenport 1 0
Guangzhou 1 0
Belgrade 1 0
Ashburn 1 0

{[{ mDataHeader[type] }]} {[{ month[type] }]} {[{ tData[type] }]}

Share

Share to:

Comment

Related Items