Rhys F. TOWNSEND - Michael C. HOFF
rapor etmifllerdir (G. E. Bean - T. B. Mitford, “Sites Old and New in Rough Cilicia,” AnaSt 12, 1962; ayr›ca
“Journeys in Rough Cilicia 1964-1968”, Österreichische Akademie der Wissenschaften, Philosophisch-Historis-che Klasse Denkschriften, Band 102, Ergänzungsbände zu den Tituli Asiae Minoris, Nr. 3 [1970]). Bean ve Mitford bu ziyaretleri s›ras›nda, yaklafl›k teras›n orta hatt› boyun-ca dizilmifl üçü in situ durumda heykel kaideleri sapta-m›fllard›. Olas›l›kla iç kolonad›n sütunlar› aras›nda yer alan bu kaidelerin bugün hiçbiri yoktur. Son olarak da, muhtemelen tüm bunlardan günümüze sadece üst k›sm›nda bugün okunamayan yaz›tl› bloklar bulunan 1.34 m. geniflli¤indeki iki basamakl› tek bir platformun ulaflabildi¤ini belirtelim.
Terasa nas›l eriflildi¤i anlafl›lamamaktad›r. Kuzeyden herhangi bir girifl, Geç Antik Ça¤’da buraya infla edilen, yaklafl›k 14x4.60 m. ebatlar›nda tek nefli kilise taraf›n-dan iptal edilmifl olmal›d›r. Yap›n›n bugün en göze çar-pan yeri, güney duvar›na ait 3 m.’den fazla yüksekli¤e sahip devflirme kap› söveleridir. Kilisenin terastan daha sonra infla edildi¤i, kal›n do¤u duvar›n›n içine giren apsisten anlafl›lmaktad›r. Teras›n güney ucunda bugün korunmufl haliyle yaklafl›k 10 m2’lik tek odal› bir yap›
yer almaktad›r. Arka, yani bat› duvar›, teras›n kendisidir.
Bu yap›n›n terasla ilgili bir ifllevi olup olmad›¤›, yoksa yaln›zca oraya m› yap›ld›¤› sorusuna aç›kl›k kazand›r›-lamam›flt›r. Yap›, bu yönde komplekse ait baflka kal›nt›
görülmedi¤inden teras›n güney ucunu teflkil ediyor ola-bilir.
between front and back wall there is a line of blocks that may define an interior colonnade. Set into the back wall of the terrace are a series of arched niches for statuary, three of which are preserved; one still held a statue base when G. E. Bean and T. B. Mitford visited Kestros in the 1960s, and another base lay directly below and in front of its niche. (For accounts of Bean and Mitford’s work at Kestros, see G. E. Bean and T. B. Mitford, “Sites Old and New in Rough Cilicia,” AnSt 12 (1962), and idem, Journeys in Rough Cilicia 1964-1968, Österreichische Akademie der Wissenschaften, Philosophisch-Histori-sche Klasse Denkschriften, Band 102, Ergänzungsbände zu den Tituli Asiae Minoris, Nr. 3 (Vienna 1970). Bean and Mitford also observed a line of statue bases running roughly down the middle of the terrace, three of which were in situ at the time of their visit. None are preserved today; probably they originally stood between the col-umns of the interior colonnade. Finally, Bean and Mit-ford noted that the front edge of the terrace was also embellished with honorific statues. Of these, all that remains today is a single two-stepped platform, 1.34 m wide, on top of which are inscribed blocks (today illeg-ible).
How the terrace was approached is uncertain. Any entry from the north was interrupted in later antiquity by a single-aisled church, measuring ca. 14x4.6 m. The most prominent feature of the building today are the two reused door jambs belonging to the south wall which still stand to a height of over three meters. That the Har. 1 Kestros’un plan› / Map. 1 Plan of Kestros
Kare yap›n›n hemen afla¤›s›nda, teras›n do¤u ucunda, iyi korunmufl durumda bir “Grabhaus” yer almaktad›r.
10.98x7.18 m. ebatlar›ndaki dikdörtgen yap›, kuzeye bakmakta olup, in antis ön mekana basamakl› bir podyum ile ulafl›lmaktad›r. Ancak sütunlara ait hiç bir iz yoktur.
Ön mekan ile mezar odas› tonozla örtülüdür. Ana odaya aç›lan kap›n›n iki yan›nda birer küçük, yar›m daire biçimli nifl yer almaktad›r. Mezar›n kendisi üç seviyeye bölünmüfl olup bunlardan iyi korunmufl olan alt ikisinin yan ve arka duvarlar›nda üçer tane, kemerli arkosolium’
un varl›¤› anlafl›lmaktad›r. Üst seviyede de üç arkosolium’
un varl›¤›n› kabul edersek toplam say› dokuza ulafl›r.
Podyumun do¤u kenar›nda tonozlu krypta’lara girifli sa¤layan kemerli iki girifl yer almaktad›r (Res. 2). Mezar yap›s›, kal›n harç içinde yumruk büyüklü¤ünden kafa büyüklü¤üne kadar de¤iflen moloz tafllarla infla edilmifl-tir. Yerli kireçtafl›ndan yontulmufl ön mekan›n zemin döflemesine ait bir parça ile parça halindeki bir ante kaidesi devflirme malzemedirler.
Ören yerinin güney ucunda yer alan binalar grubu, kamu, imalat ve konut amaçl› yap›lar›ndan oluflan bir kar›fl›md›r. Bu grubun kuzey ucunda, küçük bir belin iki yan›nda birbirine bakan iki tap›nak yer almaktad›r (Res.
3). Bean ve Mitford taraf›ndan bulunan yaz›tlara dayan›-larak, bunlardan kuzeydeki Antoninus Pius’a (Plan 1A) ve güneydeki de Vespasianus’a (Plan 1B) ithaf edilmifltir.
Her iki tap›nak da, basamaklarla ç›k›lan bir pronaos ve cella’dan oluflmaktad›r. Bean ve Mitford’un sözünü etti¤i Antoninus Pius Tap›na¤›’na ç›k›fl› sa¤layan sekiz basamak günümüze ulaflamam›flt›r. Benzer flekilde, Vespasianus Tap›na¤›’n›n da ön k›sm› kötü durumdad›r.
Önde ve altta kayaya oyulmufl basamak izleri, girifle ulafl›m› sa¤layan bir merdivenin varl›¤›n› kan›tlamak-tad›r. Her iki tap›nak da içerde harçl› moloz tafl mal-zeme ile, d›flta ise daha büyük kare veya kareye yak›n
church is later than the terrace is demonstrated by the construction of the apse that intrudes into the fabric of the thick eastern terrace wall. At the southern end of the terrace as preserved is a single-roomed structure, ap-proximately 10 m square. Its rear or west wall is formed from the terrace itself. Whether this structure somehow served a function in connection with the terrace or was simply built against it, is not certain. It may mark the end of the terrace at the south, since no further trace of the complex is preserved in this direction.
Immediately below the square structure at the south end of the terrace stands a well-preserved tomb of the
“Grabhaus” type. This structure is rectangular, measur-ing 10.98 by 7.18 m; it faces north and is approached by means of a stepped podium leading to an in-antis porch; there are no indications of any columns. Both porch and tomb chamber proper were vaulted. To either side of the door leading into the main chamber are small semi-circular niches, one on each side. The tomb itself is divided into three levels, the lower two of which are well preserved enough to show that they each con-tained three arched arcosolia set into the flank and rear walls; assuming the third level held the same number, there would have been nine arcosolia in all. On the east side of the podium are two arched entryways into vault-ed crypts (Fig. 2). The tomb is made up of rubble, ran-ging from fist sized to head sized stones, placed in a thick mortar. The only exceptions to this material are a paving slab from the porch and a fragmentary anta base, both of which are carved from the local limestone.
The complex of buildings that is situated at the southern end of the site appears to consist of a mixture of public, industrial, and domestic structures. At the north-ern limit of this complex, two temples face each other YÜZEY ARAfiTIRMA RAPORLARI SURVEY REPORTS
Res. 2 Mezar, do¤udan bak›fl / Fig. 2 Tomb, from the east Res. 1 Teras, kuzeyden bak›fl / Fig. 1 Terrace, from the north
across a small saddle (Fig. 3). They were noted by Bean and Mitford who identified that at ihe north (Plan 1A) as dedicated to Antoninus Pius on the basis of the inscrip-tions found within, and that to the south (Plan 1B) as dedicated to Vespasian, again on the basis of inscrip-tions found in its cella. Each temple consists of a cella and pronaos which was approached from the front by a flight of stairs. Bean and Mitford report eight steps lead-ing to the temple of Antoninus Pius; these are no longer preserved. The front of the temple of Vespasian is likewise very badly damaged today, but traces of rock steps in front and below the temple provide evidence for a stairway of several steps leading up to the en-trance. Both temples are built of rubble masonry set in mortar on the interior; on the exterior the masonry is more substantial, with larger square or nearly square cut stone blocks. The construction of the temple of Antoni-nus Pius is both more careful and more monumental than that of Vespasian.
In the saddle between these two temples are a number of structures, one of which was used as a pressing com-plex, from the evidence of slots for two press frames found in situ that were built into the interior face of one wall of the building. Numerous other buildings, either domestic or light industrial, crowd the area immediate-ly south of the Temple of Vespasian; indeed one such structure even abuts against the temple itself. Bean and Res. 3 A. Pius Tap›na¤›, kuzeyden Vespasianus Tap›na¤›’na do¤ru bak›fl
Fig. 3 Temple of A. Pius from north looking towards the Temple of Vespasian
Plan 1 Tap›naklar›n plan flemalar› / Plans of the Temples
kesme tafllarla infla edilmifltir. Antoninus Pius Tap›na¤›, Vespasianus Tap›na¤›’na göre hem daha an›tsal hem de daha dikkatli bir iflçilik sergilemektedir.
‹ki tap›na¤›n aras›ndaki bel üzerinde yer alan yap›lardan biri, duvar›n›n iç yüzüne infla edilmifl ve in situ durum-daki iki adet pres yuvas›ndan anlafl›laca¤› üzere presle-me iflli¤idir. Vespasianus Tap›na¤›’n›n hepresle-men güneyinde, evler ve küçük imalathaneler yer almaktad›r. Bunlardan biri de do¤rudan tap›na¤a yaslanm›flt›r. Bean ve Mitford bir çevre duvar› tasvir etmelerine karfl›n, bugün ayr› bir kent suruna ait iz görülmemektedir. Ören yerinin güney ucundaki yap›lar birbirine yaslanmakta ve d›fl duvarlar›
uçurumun kenar›na kadar uzanmakta olup adeta bir kent suru izlenimi yaratmaktad›r. Belki de Bean ve Mitford bu düzenlemeden söz etmektedir. Ve nihayet Bean ve Mitford’un “Grabhaus”un 100 m. kadar güneyinde yer ald›¤›n› belirttikleri mezarl›ktan bugün yaln›zca belli belirsiz izler seçilebilmektedir.
Mitford describe a circuit wall, but no trace of a sepa-rate city wall remains today. The structures at the south-ern end of the site abut each other, their outer walls extending right up to the edge of the cliff, and in this manner produce the effect of a circuit wall. It may be that it is to this arrangement that Bean and Mitford refer.
Finally, Bean and Mitford mention a cemetery that extends for about 100 m to the south of the Grabhaus.
Only bare traces of the concentration of small tombs that Bean and Mitford mention can today be located.
YÜZEY ARAfiTIRMA RAPORLARI SURVEY REPORTS
ODTÜ Sualt› Toplulu¤u Bat›k Araflt›rmalar› Gurubu (SAT-BAG) ve Sualt› Araflt›rmalar› Derne¤i Sualt› Arkeolojisi Araflt›rma Gurubu (SAD-SAAG), 1992 y›l›ndan bafllaya-rak Roma Dönemi’nde Kilikya olabafllaya-rak adland›r›lan ve Anadolu’nun Do¤u Akdeniz sular›n› içine alan bölgede (Har. 1) sualt› yüzey araflt›rmalar› yapm›flt›r. Kilikya Arafl-t›rmalar› süresince, de¤iflik bölgelerde ve de¤iflik derinlik-lerde yüzlerce dal›fl yap›lm›fl, sualt›nda pek çok alan taranm›fl ve önemli görülen de¤erler çizim ve foto¤raflarla belgelenmifltir. Araflt›rmalar süresince Antakya-Samanda¤
ve Mersin-Ayd›nc›k’ta olmak üzere iki adet bat›k, onlar-ca tafl ve metal çapa ve kayda de¤er pek çok arkeolojik de¤er tespit edilmifltir. Elde edilen bilgiler ve belgeler, ulusal ve uluslararas› pek çok bilimsel yay›n ve konfe-ransta sunulmufltur.
Kilikya Araflt›rmalar› 3 aflamal› bir yöntemle uygulan-maktad›r: Bilgi Toplama, Keflif Gezileri ve Sualt› Araflt›r-malar›.
ODTÜ-SAT ve SAD Üyeleri bir araflt›rma esnas›nda s›ra-s›yla:
1. Eskinin ve bugünün bilgi ve belgelerini kütüphaneler-den, internet’ten ve kitaplardan toplamakta;
2. Dal›fl yap›lacak potansiyel alanlar› belirlemekte;
3. Bölgeye keflif gezileri yaparak yerinde incelemelerde bulunup, o bölgedeki kültür, altyap› ve co¤rafya hak-k›nda bilgi toplay›p, yerel halkla, bal›kç›larla ve yerel dalg›çlarla konuflmakta;
4. Yetkili makamlardan araflt›rma yapmak için yetki ve izinlerini almakta;
5. Dal›fl organizasyonunu (bütçe, malzeme, etkinlik vs.) yapmaktad›rlar.
Bu kapsamda, 1992-1993 y›llar›nda Antakya bölgesinde Suriye s›n›r›m›zdan bafllayarak Arsuz’a kadar uzanan k›y›
fleridinde keflif dal›fllar› yap›lm›flt›r. Bu bölgede Samanda¤
k›y›s›nda ‹.S. 2-4 yy.’lara ait bir bat›k tespit edilmifltir.
A series of underwater surveys were conducted by the METU - Subaqua Society Underwater Wreck Research Group (SAT-BAG) and the Underwater Research Society - Underwater Archaeology Research Group (SAD-SAAG) along the eastern Mediterranean coasts of Anatolia, from 1992 in the region termed Cilicia in the Roman period.
During these Surveys, after hundreds of dives in various regions and depths, a vast area has been surveyed and the archaeological features of immediate importance were drawn and photographed. Resulting from these surveys, two wrecksites, at Antakya-Samanda¤ and Mer-sin-Ayd›nc›k (ancient Kelenderis), many stone and metal anchors and other archaeological features were ob-served. The findings from these campaigns have been presented and widely published in domestic and inter-national symposia and academic journals.
The Cilicia Surveys are based on a three-tiered system:
Collecting Information, Exploratory Trips and Underwa-ter Surveys.
METU-SAT and SAD members apply the following steps in a typical research campaign:
1. Collecting information concerning the targeted research area from primary and secondary sources, from libraries and the internet,
2. Deciding on potential diving spots,
3. Making exploratory trips to the targeted region to acquire first-hand experience and knowledge of the culture, infrastructure and geography of the area, and talking to the local inhabitants, to local fishermen and divers,
4. Obtaining an official permit for research from admin-istrative authorities,
5. Organizing the diving expedition (budget, supplies, the scope of activity, etc.).