T. Emre Şerifoğlu and Caner Bakan
9 The Cide-Şenpazar Region during the Hellenistic
Period (325/300 - 1 BC)
Greek colonies were established along the Turkish Black Sea coast during the
Archaic and Classical periods. The toponym of Kytoros,1 probably the cove
of Gideros located to the west of the modern town of Cide, is first mentioned in
Homer’s Illiad (Hom. Il. 2. 853). This could potentially point to an even earlier Greek
presence in the region (Drews 1976: 18; de Boer 2006), even if the interpretation of
the Homeric epics, their chronology and the accuracy of geographical and other
information, is wrought with difficulties and the subject of an ongoing debate (e.g.
Tsetskhladze 1997). There is also as yet no archaeological evidence to corroborate
Greek colonial settlement prior to ca. 800 BC in the Black Sea or a Late Bronze Age
Mycenaean connection with the southern shores (Carpenter 1948: 1; Bouzek 1990:
13; also chapter 7, this volume). In the Cide and Şenpazar region, elements of Greek
cultural traditions are attested for the first time in the late first millennium BC. In
this chapter, we present the Hellenistic period finds recorded in the course of the
Cide Archaeological Project (CAP) and their wider archaeological and historical
context.
9.1 The Hellenistic Period on the Turkish Black Sea Coast
The Hellenistic period in Paphlagonia and northwestern Anatolia is still very much
a ‘dark age’ with regards to our knowledge of the region’s history and cultural
traditions.
From historical sources we know that the army of Alexander the Great never
marched north of Ancyra to conquer Paphlagonia or the Black Sea coast, but left
these areas under the control of Achaemenid satraps, who eventually accepted
Alexander’s authority (Ashley 2004: 215-6; Bosworth 2006: 805). At the same
time, Greek sources indicate that the coast and its colonial settlements, as well as
the maritime trade network that tied them together, were firmly in Greek hands,
and that Greek had established itself as the main language of the coastal region
(Tsetskhladze 2002: 86-7, note 35). However, the situation in areas further inland,
which would have been under the control of local dynasts, must have been rather
different (Mitchell 2010: 102-6).
1 The toponym is attested in several different forms: Ps-Skylax, Arr. peripl. m. Eux. 90: Kytoris; Arr.
peripl. m. Eux 20: Kytoros; Anonymi, Arr. peripl. m. Eux 17: Kytoros; Ptolemy 5. 1. 7: Kytoron; Pom. Mel.
de situ orbis 19. 8: Cytoros; Apollon. 2. 942: Kytoros; Steph. Byz. PeriPoleon 41: Kytoros.
Unauthenticated
Download Date | 6/17/17 11:33 AM
Hellenistic Settlement Patterns 247
With Achaemenid control over northern Anatolia fading in the wake of
Alexander’s campaign, Dionysius, the ruler of Heraclea and husband to Amastris,
Darius III’s niece (Heckel and Yardley 2004: 183), seized this opportunity to expand
his realm as far as Kytoros (Strab. 12. 3. 10; Burstein 1976: 74, 79). After his death in
305 BC, Amastris married Lysimachos, one of Alexander’s generals, and following
the end of a short-lived marriage, she became the sole ruler of Heraclea. Amastris
had coins struck under her name in a Persian style (Mørkholm 1991: 95-6; Mitchell
2004: 145). During this period she founded the polis of Amastris by uniting the
towns of Sesamus, Cromna, Kytoros and Tieum (Mitchell 2010: 93).
After queen Amastris was killed by her sons in 284 BC, Lysimachos re-took
control of the city and gave it to his wife Arsinoe, appointing Eumenes as the acting
ruler (McGing 1986a: 18; Cohen 1995: 383; Stolba 2003: 280).
Mithridates I (281-266 BC), who might have been a descendent of a royal Persian
satrap family, founded the kingdom of Pontus after a rebellion that he started in
Paphlagonia against the Hellenistic kingdoms (McGing 1986b; Bosworth and
Wheatley 1998). The Cide and Şenpazar region would have formed the western
most part of Pontus, although much of the coast remained under Greek authority.
Following the battle of Corupedium in 281 BC, Mithridates successor, Ariobarzanes,
expanded the realm of Pontus to include the city of Amastris, and with it, control
over the Black Sea coast (McGing 1986a: 18; Cohen 1995: 383).
After its conquest by Pharnaces in 183 BC, the capital of the kingdom of Pontus
was transferred from Amaseia to Sinop, strengthening the latter’s central position
in the trade networks of the second and first centuries BC (McGing 1986a: 23-7, 39),
which, however, also attracted Roman imperial attention and military presence
(Koromila 1991: 198-9).
Nicomedes V of Bithynia invaded Pontus in 89 BC with Roman military support
but was defeated by Mithridates VI Eupator, who proceeded to enlarge his territories
after his victory (McGing 1986a: 68-109). The Romans, who saw Mithridates as
a threat to their interests in Anatolia, attempted to subjugate him, but Sulla
and Lucullus could not achieve a decisive victory. Only after Pompey defeated
Mithridates in 65 BC could the Romans achieve some degree of control over the
Black Sea coast (Magie 1950: 341; Wellesley 1953; McGing 1986a: 79-169; Koromila
1991: 199; Cohen 1995: 383; Højte 2006: 22; Arslan 2007: 340-88). Mithridates VI
Eupator’s successor, Pharnaces II, revolted against Roman rule, but was defeated
by Julius Caesar in the battle of Zela in 47 BC (Adcock 1937; McGing 1986a: 166-78;
Goldsworthy 2006: 446-7).
9.2 Hellenistic Settlement Patterns
Ancient Greek sources focus almost exclusively on Greek settlements along the Black
Sea coast and largely lack information about native communities and settlements.
Unauthenticated
Download Date | 6/17/17 11:33 AM
248 The Cide-Şenpazar Region during the Hellenistic Period (325/300 - 1 BC)
Greek colonists involved in maritime trade favoured coastal and urban locations,
while local Anatolian communities may well have preferred sheltered positions in
the coastal hinterland, which could be more easily defended, and from where local
resources could be exploited and traded (Hind 1984; 1993).
Based on Greek sources, the Black Sea trade route which started from Amastris/
Sesamos passed along the harbour towns of Eryt(r)inoi, Kromna, Kytoros, Aigialos,
Klimax, Thymena/Teuthrania, Timolaion, Karambis, Marsylla/Kallistratia,
Zephyrion, Garios, Abonouteichos/Ionopolis, Aiginetes, Kinolis, Antikinolis,
Koloussa, Stephane, Potamoi and finally reached Sinop (Talbert 2000: 86). During
the Hellenistic period, Sesamos, which became Amastris, modern Amasra (Cohen
1995: 383) functioned as the acropolis of Amastris following the unification of the
polis (Strab. 12. 3. 10; Avram et. al. 2004: 960).
Kytoros, which can be equated with the natural harbour of Gideros, according
to Strabo, was a Sinopean marketplace and trading zone (emporion) (Strab. 12.
3. 10; Burstein 1976: 76, 79; Cohen 1995: 383; Mørkholm 1991: 95-6; Avram et. al.
2004: 925-6). As a result, some scholars see Kytoros as a Sinopean foundation
(Doonan 2006: 49), but it may well have been founded earlier by Milesian colonists
(Boardman 1973: 236-53; Tsetskhladze 1994; 1998a: 9-68; Avram et. al. 2004: 955;
Greaves 2002; Whitmarsh 2010: 93). Strabo lists Kytoros as one of four katoikiai or
colonial settlements in the area, which were united to form the polis of Amastris
(Strab. 12. 3. 10). There is some disagreement about whether or not Kytoros was a
polis already before this unification (Strab. 12. 3. 10; Ps-Skylax 90), but based on its
earlier relations with Sinop, this would seem to be the case (Avram et. al. 2004: 959).
9.3 Trade and Economy
Hellenistic Kytoros would have been oriented primarily towards the sea and tied
into the extensive maritime trade networks of the time (for an illustration of their
extent, see Archibald 2004: 1-2; 2007: 253-4) rather than the Anatolian interior,
whose mountainous character would have further hindered communication.
Kytoros and other small coastal settlements would have been closely connected
with the major trading centres of Amastris and Sinop, and would have brought into
circulation their own local products through these networks. Although the southern
and eastern Black Sea coast was an important source of metals, including iron,
silver and copper, the main commodity traded from the emporion of Kytoros was
boxwood, and even today the mountains of Cide are covered with these trees (Smith
1870: 739; Rostovtzeff 1941: 572-3; De Jesus 1978; Griffith 1983: 124-6; Ersal 1994:
28; Avram et. al. 2004: 959; Koçak 2006; Hannestad 2007). Strabo, for instance,
mentions that the boxwood trees of Amastris were of the highest quality and that
Kytoros was an important source for this popular material for furniture and tools
(Strab. 12. 3. 10; Texier 1862: 622-3; McGing 1986a: 1; Şenol 2006: 40; Arslan 2007:
Unauthenticated
Download Date | 6/17/17 11:33 AM
Archaeological Evidence from Cide and Şenpazar 249
52, note 232). Apollonius of Rhodes (Apollon 2. 294) also mentions that Kytoros was
well-known for its trees.
Slave trading may have been another important part of the local economy
during the Hellenistic period (Finley 1999: 70-79; Avram et al. 2004: 959; Gabrielsen
2005: 391). A slave market is attested at Tanais on the northern coast of the Black
Sea, and an increase in piracy in the Aegean and the eastern Mediterranean
suggests a heightened demand for slaves in this period (Strab. 11. 2. 3; Tsetskhladze
1998b: 67-8). The degree to which the Turkish Black Sea coast partook in this slave
trade is hard to gauge, but a stele from the second half of the fourth century BC of
a Paphlagonian slave, who worked at the Laurion mines in Attica, suggests some
involvement (Avram 2007: 245; Gabrielsen 2007: 315; Tsetskhladze 2008).
Stamped amphorae and coins can provide information about the economic and
political importance of Hellenistic settlements. Stamped amphorae were produced
in Heraclea, Amastris and Sinop between the fourth and the second century BC
(Tezgör Kassab 1995, 1996; Şenol 2006: 35-47). No workshops manufacturing these
amphorae have been located to date in the region of Amastris, and there is no
evidence that Kytoros produced its own stamped amphorae (Şenol 2010: 126). We
do know, however, that the nearby towns of Sesamos, Cromna and Tieum minted
their own coins during the fourth century BC and - enjoying some level of autonomy
- continued to do so after unification under Amastris (Smith 1870: 118; Mørkholm
1991: 95-6; Erciyas 2006a: 34). Kytoros did not mint its own coins, which suggests
that the settlement was of a rather modest size and economically closely tied to
Amastris (Smith 1870: 118; McGing 1986a: 1; Hill 1990: 82).
9.4 Archaeological Evidence from Cide and Şenpazar
As for the preceding Iron Age (chapter 8), evidence for the Hellenistic period in
the Cide region is very limited (Düring and Glatz 2010; Glatz et al. 2011; Düring
et al. 2012). Hellenistic pottery and other materials were found mainly around
Okçular Kale (S22) and the neighbouring Abdulkadir valley in the immediate
coastal hinterland (Fig. 9.1). There are hints of a Hellenistic presence also inland at
Çamdibi (S95) and Aybasan. Along the coast, locations near Kalafat, Gideros and
the Gökçekale promontory have yielded evidence for a Hellenistic presence (section
10.3.2).
Diagnostic pottery types include bowls, jars, pithoi and amphora fragments
(Fig. 9.2). Just over half of this assemblage is made up of medium fine fabrics, the
remainder is split between fine and coarse wares. Most are well fired and fabric
colours range from light red to brown, and beige or grey (Fig. 9.3).
The fabrics and the quality of the Hellenistic pottery from Cide are quite distinct
from those common in the Aegean and the Mediterranean. During the Hellenistic
period, very fine table-wares were in use at settlements along the Black Sea coast
Unauthenticated
Download Date | 6/17/17 11:33 AM
250 The Cide-Şenpazar Region during the Hellenistic Period (325/300 - 1 BC)
0
5
10 Km
Kuşçu
(Kurucal Tepe)
Gideros Kalesi
Abdulkadir
Okçular
Fig. 9.1: Map showing the locations of Hellenistic-period finds. Produced by Toby C. Wilkinson.
and their hinterlands (Domżalski 2007: 161-81). Aegean and Mediterranean table
wares or local imitations are reported from sites in the lower Dnieper (Bylkova
2006: 217-47; Karjaka 2007: 133-41) and the lower Dniester regions (Ochotnikov
2006: 81-98), settlements in the Crimea, such as Chersonesos (Zolotarev 2006: 193216) and Panskoe I (Hannestad 2006: 179-92), and Scythian Neapolis near modern
Simferopol (Zajcev 2006: 259-73), and at Olbia on the Bug estuary in Ukraine
(Krapivina 2006: 249-57). Such table wares are not attested in the CAP survey record.
There are, however, several examples of Hellenistic to Roman period amphorae
(section 10.2.2), which suggest the region’s participation in Circumpontic maritime
networks of interaction.
Based on their formal characteristics and fabrics, several roof tiles can also be
assigned a tentative date in the Hellenistic period (Fig. 9.4). Some of these were found
at Kuşçu2 (S10), which is located approximately 15km northeast of the modern town
of Cide, some at Kuruçalı Tepesi3 (S16) in the near-coastal location of the Abdulkadir
valley and close to the Gideros bay (see chapter 14), and one4 comes from Okçular
valley (U89).
2 C5, C7 and C50 (Fig. 9.3).
3 C62 and C63 (Fig. 9.3).
4 C506 (Fig. 9.3).
Unauthenticated
Download Date | 6/17/17 11:33 AM
Archaeological Evidence from Cide and Şenpazar 251
Fig. 9.2: Hellenistic pottery from Cide-Şenpazar.5 Produced by Lorraine McEwan.
5 C1222, C2852, C2853 and C3292 were found in the Okçular valley, C929, C1774, C1893, C2204 and
C2207 were found in the vicinity of Okçular Kale, C2172 and C2244 were found at the northern edge of
Abdulkadir valley.
Unauthenticated
Download Date | 6/17/17 11:33 AM
252 The Cide-Şenpazar Region during the Hellenistic Period (325/300 - 1 BC)
Fig. 9.3: Hellenistic pottery from Cide-Şenpazar. Produced by Caner Bakan.
In the light of historical sources, which connect the Turkish Black Sea region, and
Kytoros/Gideros more specifically, with the Greek and Hellenistic worlds of the first
millennium BC, as well as abundant archaeological evidence from neighbouring
regions, the scarcity of archaeological materials from Cide is rather striking. As with
other underrepresented periods and materials in the survey region, poor ground
visibility caused by dense vegetation may well have prevented the collection of a largeenough surface sample to identify more confidently Hellenistic period settlement and
activity. In addition, the thick layer of alluvium, which accumulated along the coast
over millennia, may have buried Hellenistic settlements along the littoral. However,
Unauthenticated
Download Date | 6/17/17 11:33 AM
Archaeological Evidence from Cide and Şenpazar 253
Fig. 9.4: Possible Hellenistic roof tiles from Cide-Şenpazar. Produced by Lorraine McEwan.
the low quantities of Hellenistic material, could equally be reflective of a real scarcity
of settlement in the Cide region, or, more likely, low numbers of individuals partaking
in behaviours and the use of material culture, which we have come to recognise as
‘Hellenistic’ in the archaeological record. Again, as in many other periods, we know
little about local cultural traditions and their long-term development (chapters 7 and
14). Surveys along the Turkish Black Sea region have recorded numerous settlements
dating to this period, but the quantities of unequivocal Hellenistic pottery finds are
consistently low even at sites where Iron Age and Roman ceramics are abundant
(Dönmez 2000; Doonan et. al. 2000, 2001, 2008; Bilgi et. al. 2002; Özsait 2004;
Doonan and Bauer 2005). All this may mean that pottery from the Cide region, and
from elsewhere along the Turkish Black Sea coast, which are assigned dates in the
Iron Age or the Roman period, or indeed have gone unrecognised altogether, may
actually date to the final third of the first millennium BC. Clearly more research is
needed to better understand the Cide assemblage.
Unauthenticated
Download Date | 6/17/17 11:33 AM
254 The Cide-Şenpazar Region during the Hellenistic Period (325/300 - 1 BC)
9.5 Conclusion
Historical sources would suggest that during the final centuries of the first
millennium BC, the areas surrounding the Black Sea underwent a process of cultural
transformation that is referred to as ‘Hellenisation’ in much of the literature,
and that denotes the adaptation and incorporation by local populations of Greek
practices and elements of material culture (Bouzek 1990: 10; Tsetskhladze 2002:
83). For instance, Hellenistic-period finds unearthed at the city of Vani, ancient
Colchis, in modern Georgia, and at many other settlements around the Sea of Azov,
in the lower Don region and in Thrace, testify to the popularity of Greek artistic
styles (Kern 1955; Tsetskhladze 1999: 469-96; 2002: 86; Cholakov 2006). Another
example of this process is the incorporation of Greek stylistic elements into Scythian
anthropomorphic gravestones and graves (Tsetskhladze 2002: 87, note 38; Erciyas
2006b: 229).
Cide, and more specifically Kytoros - at least according to historical sources
- became increasingly tied into the wider political and economic networks of
the Black Sea when it was unified with several other coastal towns to form the
polis of Amastris and became an important source of boxwood. However, unless
important Hellenistic-period settlements lay now buried in the coastal plains, the
archaeological evidence from Cide suggest only limited settlement and activity
of a recognisably Greek or Hellenistic character during this period. As might be
expected, the evidence that we do have, points to a focus of activity in the coastal
region and its immediate hinterland. Important questions concerning local cultural
and social developments, the relationships of native populations with colonial
settlements and settlers, and the region’s involvement in Black Sea trade await
future investigations.
Catalogue of Illustrated Artefacts
Ceramics
C929. U521. Rim. Brownish red fine vessel with black and red grit and limestone inclusions, and
some voids. Light reddish brown burnished on the exterior. Oxidised firing. Wheelmade.
Exterior surface 5 YR 5/4, interior surface 5 YR 5/6. D= 24cm.
C1222. G6F15. Rim. Buff orange fine vessel with white, black, and red grit. Smoothed on both sides.
Oxidised firing. Wheelmade. Exterior surface 5 YR 7/8, interior surface 5 YR 7/8. D= 7cm.
C1774. G1A9. Rim. Light red coarse vessel with a well sorted paste and black mineral inclusions up
to 1mm in size. No surface treatment. Oxidised firing. Wheelmade. Exterior surface 2.5 YR 7/8,
interior surface 2.5 YR 7/8. D= unknown.
C1893. G1D16. Rim. Red medium quality vessel with a well sorted powdery paste and quartz
inclusions smaller than 0.5mm. No surface treatment. Oxidised firing. Wheelmade. Exterior
surface 2.5 YR 5/6, interior surface 2.5 YR 5/6. D= 20cm.
Unauthenticated
Download Date | 6/17/17 11:33 AM
Bibliography 255
C2172. U288. Rim. Reddish yellow very coarse vessel with dense small mineral inclusions. No
surface treatment. Oxidised firing. Handmade. Exterior surface 5 YR 6/8, interior surface 5 YR
6/8. D= 38cm.
C2204. U593. Rim. Light red fine vessel with a grey core, very small grey mineral inclusions,
calcareous specks, and few grit. No surface treatment. Oxidised firing. Wheelmade. Exterior
surface 2.5 YR 6/6, interior surface 2.5 YR 6/6. D= 18cm.
C2207. U593. Rim. Light red very coarse vessel with dense very small mineral inclusions, calcareous
specks, grit, and chaff temper. No surface treatment. Oxidised firing. Handmade. Exterior
surface 2.5 YR 6/6, interior surface 2.5 YR 6/6. D= 40cm.
C2244. U325. Base. Light beige medium quality vessel with small white mineral inclusions. No
surface treatment. Oxidised firing. Handmade(?). Exterior surface 5 YR 6/6, interior surface 5 YR
6/6. D= unknown.
C2852. U609. Rim. Light red medium to fine quality vessel with small mineral inclusions. No surface
treatment. Oxidised firing. Wheelmade. Exterior surface surface 2.5 YR 7/8, interior surface 2.5
YR 7/8. D= 8cm.
C2853. U655. Rim and handle. Light red fine vessel with small black mineral inclusions. No surface
treatment. Oxidised firing. Wheelmade. Exterior surface 10 R 6/8, interior surface 10 R 6/8. D=
34cm.
C3292. U554. Rim. Pinkish buff medium to fine vessel with small limestone inclusions, grog and grit.
No surface treatment. Oxidised firing. Wheelmade. Exterior surface 7.5 YR 7/4, interior surface
7.5 YR 7/4. D= 10cm.
Roof Tiles
C5. S10. Tile. Light reddish brown coarse tile with small to large red grit and vegetable temper. Light
reddish brown slipped. Oxidised firing. Handmade. Exterior surface 7.5 YR 8/3, interior surface
7.5 YR 8/3.
C7. S10. Tile. Orange coarse tile with medium size grit and vegetable temper. No surface treatment.
Oxidised firing. Handmade. Exterior surface 5 YR 6/8, interior surface 5 YR 6/8.
C50. S10. Tile. Orange very coarse tile with medium to large size red and black grit. No surface
treatment. Oxidised firing. Handmade. Exterior surface 5 YR 6/8, interior surface 5 YR 6/8.
C62. S16. Tile. Light red coarse tile with medium to large size red grit and limestone specks. No
surface treatment. Oxidised firing. Handmade. Exterior surface 10 YR 6/8, interior surface 10 YR
6/8.
C63. S16. Tile. Light red coarse tile with medium to large size red grit, limestone specks and grog.
No surface treatment. Oxidised firing. Handmade. Exterior surface 10 R 7/6, interior surface 10
R 7/6.
C506. U89. Tile. Pale red very coarse tile with large dark brown grit and grog. No surface treatment.
Oxidised firing. Handmade. Exterior surface 10 R 6/8, interior surface 2.5 YR 7/6.
Bibliography
Greco-Roman sources
Anonymi, Periplus Ponti Euxini. [Edited by H. Dodwell, F. Osanni, and A.G.R. Naumann: Periplus
ponti Euxini: Anonymi Periplus ponti Euxini, qui Arriano falso adscribitur. Anonymi Periplus
ponti Euxini et Maeotidis paludis. Anonymi Mensura ponti Euxini. Agathemeri Hypotyposes
geographiae. Fragmenta duo geographica.] Leipzig, C.L. Fritzsche, 1842.
Apollonius of Rhodes, Argonautica. [Translated by G.W. Mooney: The Argonautica of Apollonius
Rhodius.] Dublin, Hodges, Figgis, & Co., 1912.
Unauthenticated
Download Date | 6/17/17 11:33 AM
256 The Cide-Şenpazar Region during the Hellenistic Period (325/300 - 1 BC)
Arrian, Periplus Ponti Euxini. [Edited by A. Liddle: Arrian: Periplus Ponti Euxini.] Bristol, Bristol
Classical Press, 2003.
Homer, Iliad. [translated by A.T. Murray: The Iliad.] Cambridge / London, Harvard University Press /
William Heinemann, 1924.
Pomponius Mela, De Situ Orbis. [Edited by K.H. Tzschucke: De Situ Orbis.] Leipzig, Siegfried
Lebrecht Crusius, 1807.
Pseudo-Scylax, Periplus Ponti Euxini. [Translated by G. Shipley: Pseudo-Skylax’s Periplous: The
Circumnavigation of the Inhabited World - Text, Translation and Commentary.] Liverpool,
Liverpool University Press, 2011.
Ptolemy, Geographia. [Edited by C. Müller and C.T. Fischer: Claudii Ptolemaei Geographia.] Paris,
Alfred Firmin-Didot, 1901.
Strabo, Geographia. [Translated by H.L. Jones: The Geography of Strabo.] Cambridge / London,
Harvard University Press / William Heinemann, 1924.
Stephanus of Byzantium, Peri Poleon. [Edited by J. Gronow and T. De Pinedo: De Urbibus.]
Amsterdam, Rud. & Gerh. Wetstenios, 1725.
published sources
Adcock, F. E. 1937. Lesser Armenia and Galatia after Pompey’s settlement of the east. The Journal of
Roman Studies 27: 12-7.
Archibald, Z. H. 2004. In-groups and out-groups in the Pontic cities of the Hellenistic age. In: C.J.
Tuplin, ed., Pontus and the Outside World, Studies in Black Sea History, Historiography and
Archaeology. Leiden, Brill: 1-15.
— 2007. Contacts between the Ptolemaic kingdom and the Black Sea in the early Hellenistic age. In
V. Gabrielsen and J. Lund, eds., The Black Sea in Antiquity: Regional and Interregional Economic
Exchanges. Aarhus, Aarhus University Press: 253-71.
Arslan, M. 2007. Roma’nın Büyük Düşmanı Mithradates VI Eupator. Istanbul, Odin Yayınları.
Ashley, J. R. 2004. The Macedonian Empire: The Era of Warfare Under Philip II and Alexander the
Great, 359-323 B.C. Jefferson, McFarland.
Avram, A. 2007. Some thoughts about the Black Sea and the slave trade. In V. Gabrielsen and
J. Lund, eds., The Black Sea in Antiquity: Regional and Interregional Economic Exchanges.
Aarhus, Aarhus University Press: 239-51.
Avram, A., Hind, J., and Tsetskhladze, G. 2004. The Black Sea area. In M.H. Hansen and T. H. Nielsen,
eds., An Inventory of Archaic and Classical Poleis. Oxford, Oxford University Press: 924-73.
Bilgi, Ö., Atasoy, S., Dönmez, Ş., and Summerer, L. 2002. Samsun (Amisos) Bölgesinin Kültürel
Gelişimi Projesi ile İlgili Yüzey Araştırması 2000. Araştırma Sonuçları Toplantısı 19/1: 279-96.
Boardman, J. 1973. The Greeks Overseas: The Archaeology of Their Early Colonies and Trade.
Harmondsworth, Penguin.
Bosworth, A. B. 2006. Alexander the Great part I: The events of the reign. In D.M. Lewis, J.
Boardman, S. Hornblower, and M. Ostwald, eds., The Cambridge Ancient History, IV, The Fourth
Century B.C. Cambridge, Cambridge University Press: 791-845.
Bosworth, A. B. and Wheatley, P. V. 1998. The origins of the Pontic house. The Journal of Hellenic
Studies 118: 155-64.
Bouzek, J. 1990. Studies of Greek Pottery in the Black Sea Area. Prague, Charles University.
Burstein, S. M. 1976. Outpost of Hellenism: The Emergence of Heraclea on the Black Sea. Berkeley,
University of California Press.
Bylkova, V. P. 2006. The chronology of settlements in the Lower Dnieper region (400-100 BC). In V.F.
Stolba and L. Hannestad, eds., Chronologies of the Black Sea Area in the Period c. 400-100 BC.
Aarhus, Aarhus University Press: 217-47.
Carpenter, R. 1948. The Greek penetration of the Black Sea. American Journal of Archaeology 52:
1-10.
Unauthenticated
Download Date | 6/17/17 11:33 AM
Bibliography 257
Cholakov, I. M. 2006. Bronze bust of Maenad from southeast Bulgaria. Journal of the Serbian
Archaeological Society 22: 265–80.
Cohen, G. M. 1995. The Hellenistic Settlements in Europe, the Islands, and Asia Minor. Berkeley /
Oxford, University of California Press.
de Boer, J. G. 2006. The Greek colonies in the Pontic area during the 5th century BC, Athens, the rise
of the ‘barbarian’ kingdoms and the Ionian revolt: An economic approach. Talanta: Proceedings
of the Dutch Archaeological and Historical Society 36-7: 269-87.
de Jesus, P. S. 1978. Metal resources in ancient Anatolia. Anatolian Studies 27: 97-102.
Domżalski, K. 2007. Changes in Late Classical and Hellenistic fine pottery production in the eastern
Mediterranean as reflected by imports in the Pontic area. In V. Gabrielsen and J. Lund, eds.,
The Black Sea in Antiquity: Regional and Interregional Economic Exchanges. Aarhus, Aarhus
University Press: 161-81.
Dönmez, Ş. 2000. Sinop-Samsun-Amasya İlleri 1998 Yüzey Araştırması. Araştırma Sonuçları
Toplantısı 17/2: 229-44.
Doonan, O. 2006. Exploring community in the hinterland of a Black Sea Port. In P.G. Bilde and V.F.
Stolba, eds., Surveying the Greek Chora: The Black Sea Region in a Comparative Perspective.
Aarhus, Aarhus University Press: 47-58.
Doonan, O., and Bauer, A. 2005. Sinop province archaeological project: Report on the 2003 field
season. Araştırma Sonuçları Toplantısı 22/2: 275-84.
Doonan, O., Casson, A., and Gantos, A. 2008. Sinop province archaeological project: Report on the
2006 field season. Araştırma Sonuçları Toplantısı 25/2: 133-50.
Doonan, O., Gantos, A. J., Hiebert, F. J, Besonen, M., and Watters, M. 2001. Sinop ve Çevresi
Arkeolojik Yüzey Araştırması. Araştırma Sonuçları Toplantısı 18/1: 137-48.
Doonan, O., Gantos, A. J., Hiebert, F. J., Yaycıoğlu, A., and Besonen, M. 2000. Sinop Bölgesel
Arkeoloji Araştırması 1998: Karasu Vadi Araştırması. Araştırma Sonuçları Toplantısı 17/2:
345-56.
Drews, R. 1976. The earliest Greek settlements on the Black Sea. The Journal of Hellenic Studies 96:
18-31.
Düring, B. S., and Glatz, C. 2010. The Cide Archaeological Project 2009: First results. Anatolia
Antiqua 18: 203-13.
Düring, B. S., Glatz, C., and Şerifoğlu, T. E. 2012. The Cide Archaeological Project 2011: Third
preliminary report. Anatolia Antiqua 20: 167-75.
Erciyas, D. B. 2006a. Wealth, Aristocracy and Royal Propaganda Under the Hellenistic Kingdom of
the Mithradatids in the Central Black Sea Region of Turkey.Leiden, Brill.
— 2006b. The Black Sea region in the Hellenistic period: The Pontic kingdom, its settlements,
monuments and coins. In D.B. Erciyas and E. Koparal, eds., Karadeniz Araştırmaları Sempozyum
Bildirileri. Istanbul, Ege Yayınları: 219-30.
Ersal, Y. 1994. Antik Çağdan Günümüze Karadeniz Ekonomisi. Ankara, Türkiye Odalar ve Borsalar
Birliği.
Finley, M. I. 1999. The Ancient Economy. Berkeley, University of California Press.
Gabrielsen, V. 2005. Piracy and the slave-trade. In A. Erskine, ed., A Companion to the Hellenistic
World. Oxford, Blackwell: 389-404.
— 2007. Trade and tribute: Byzantion and the Black Sea straits. In V. Gabrielsen and J. Lund, eds.,
The Black Sea in Antiquity: Regional and Interregional Economic Exchanges. Aarhus, Aarhus
University Press: 287-324.
Glatz, C., Düring, B. S., Şerifoğlu, T. E. 2011. The Cide Archaeological Project 2010: Second
preliminary report. Anatolia Antiqua 19: 279-88.
Goldsworthy, A. 2006. Caesar: Life of a Colossus. New Haven / London, Yale University Press /
Weidenfeld and Nicolson.
Greaves, A. M. 2002. Miletos: A History. London, Routledge.
Unauthenticated
Download Date | 6/17/17 11:33 AM
258 The Cide-Şenpazar Region during the Hellenistic Period (325/300 - 1 BC)
Griffith, J. G. 1983. Catullus, poem 4: A neglected interpretation revived. Phoenix 37(2): 123-28.
Hannestad, L. 2006. The dating of the monumental building U6 at Panskoe I. In V.F. Stolba and
L. Hannestad, eds., Chronologies of the Black Sea Area in the Period c. 400-100 BC. Aarhus,
Aarhus University Press: 179-92.
— 2007. Timber as a trade resource of the Black Sea. In V. Gabrielsen and J. Lund, eds., The Black
Sea in Antiquity: Regional and Interregional Economic Exchanges, Aarhus, Aarhus University
Press: 85-99.
Heckel, W. and Yardley, J. C. 2004. Alexander the Great: Historical Texts in Translation. Oxford,
Blackwell.
Hill, S. J. 1990. Preliminary survey at Amasra, Zonguldak. Araştırma Sonuçları Toplantısı 7: 81-6.
Hind, J. G. F. 1984. Greek and barbarian peoples on the shores of the Black Sea. Archaeological
Reports (The Society for the Promotion of Hellenic Studies) 30: 71-97.
— 1993. Archaeology of the Greeks and barbarian peoples around the Black Sea (1982-1992).
Archaeological Reports (The Society for the Promotion of Hellenic Studies) 39: 82-112.
Højte, J. M. 2006. From kingdom to province: Reshaping Pontos after the fall of Mithridates VI. In T.
Bekker-Nielsen, ed., Rome and the Black Sea Region: Domination, Romanisation, Resistance.
Aarhus, Aarhus University Press: 15-30.
Karjaka, A. V. 2007. Amphora finds of the 4th century BC from the settlements of the Lower
Dnieper Region. In V. Gabrielsen and J. Lund, eds., The Black Sea in Antiquity: Regional and
Interregional Economic Exchanges. Aarhus, Aarhus University Press: 133-41.
Kern, J. H. C. 1955. Three relief-plaques from Olbia (South Russia). Mnemosyne, Fourth Series 8(3):
219-21.
Koçak, Ö. 2006. Mining at the central Black Sea region in the ancient period. In D. B. Erciyas and E.
Koparal, eds., Karadeniz Araştırmaları Sempozyum Bildirileri. Istanbul, Ege Yayınları: 39-62.
Koromila, M. 1991. The Greeks in the Black Sea from the Bronze Age to the Early Twentieth Century.
Athens, Panorama.
Krapivina, V. V. 2006. Problems of the chronology of the Late Hellenistic strata of Olbia. In V.F. Stolba
and L. Hannestad, eds., Chronologies of the Black Sea Area in the Period c. 400-100 BC. Aarhus,
Aarhus University Press: 249-57.
Magie, D. 1950. Roman Rule in Asia Minor to the End of the Third Century After Christ. Princeton,
Princeton University Press.
McGing, B. C. 1986a. The Foreign Policy of Mithridates VI Eupator King of Pontus. Leiden, Brill.
— 1986b. The kings of Pontus: Some problems of identity and date. Rheinisches Museum für
Philologie, Neue Folge 129(3/4): 248-59.
Mitchell, S. 2004. Doğu ve batı arasında Anadolu Hellenistik çağ’da Attalos ve Mithridates
krallıklarının paralel yaşamları. Anadolu Araştırmaları 17: 140-53.
— 2010. The Ionians of Paphlagonia. In T. Whitmarsh, ed., Local Knowledge and Microidentities in
the Imperial Greek World. Cambridge, Cambridge University Press: 86-110.
Mørkholm, O. 1991. Early Hellenistic Coinage from the Accession of Alexander to the Peace of
Apamea (336-186 B.C.). Cambridge, Cambridge University Press.
Ochotnikov, S. B. 2006. The chorai of the ancient cities in the Lower Dniester area (6th century BC3rd century AD). In P.G. Bilde and V.F. Stolba, eds., Surveying the Greek Chora: The Black Sea
Region in a Comparative Perspective. Aarhus, Aarhus University Press: 81-98.
Özsait, M. 2004. 2002 Yılı Samsun-Amasya yüzey araştırmalarının: İlk sonuçları. Araştırma Sonuçları
Toplantısı 21/2: 273-84.
Rostovtzeff, M. 1941. The Social and Economic History of the Hellenistic World. Oxford, Oxford
University Press.
Şenol, G. C. 2006. Klasik ve Hellenistik Dönem’de Mühürlü Amphora Üreten Merkezler ve Mühürleme
Sistemleri. İstanbul, Ege Yayınları.
Unauthenticated
Download Date | 6/17/17 11:33 AM
Bibliography 259
— 2010. Amphora üretim merkezleri ışığında Hellenistik dönemde Anadolu’da şarap üretiminin
izleri. In Ü. Aydınoğlu and A. K. Şenol, eds., Antik Çağda Anadolu’da Zeytinyağı ve Şarap
Üretimi. Istanbul, Ege Yayınları: 123-34.
Smith, W. 1870. Dictionary of Greek and Roman Geography I: Abacaenum-Hytanis. Boston, Little and
Brown.
Stolba, V. F. 2003. Some reflections on the amphora stamps with the name of Amastris. In P.
Guldager Bilde, J.M. Højte and V.F. Stolba, eds., The Cauldron of Ariantas. Studies Presented to
A.N. Sčeglov on the Occasion of his 70th Birthday. Aarhus, Aarhus University Press: 279-301.
Talbert, R. J. A. 2000. Barrington Atlas of the Greek and Roman World. Princeton, Princeton
University Press.
Texier, F. M. C. 1862. Asie Mineure: Description géographique, historique et archéologique des
provinces et des villes de la Chersonnèse d’Asie. Paris, Didot.
Tezgör Kassab, D. 1995. Sinop’ta seramik ve anfora atölyelerinin incelenmesi. Araştırma Sonuçları
Toplantısı 12/2: 177-90.
— 1996. Demirci-Sinop anfora atölyelerinin kazısı. Kazı Sonuçları Toplantısı 17/2: 277-91.
Tsetskhladze, G. R. 1994. Greek penetration of the Black Sea. In G.R. Tsetskhladze and F. De Angelis,
eds., The Archaeology of Greek Colonisation: Essays Dedicated to Sir John Boardman. Oxford,
Oxford University School of Archaeology: 111-35.
— 1997. Argonautica, Colchis and the Black Sea: Myth, reality and modern scholarship. Thracia
Pontica 6(1): 337-47.
— 1998a. Greek colonisation of the Black Sea area: Stages, models, and native population. In G. R.
Tsetskhladze, ed., The Greek Colonisation of the Black Sea Area: Historical Interpretation of
Archaeology. Stuttgart, Franz Steiner Verlag: 9-68.
— 1998b. Trade on the Black Sea in the Archaic and Classical periods: Some observations. In H.M.
Parkins and C.J. Smith, eds., Trade, Traders and the Ancient City. London, Routledge: 52-74.
— 1999. Between west and east: Anatolian roots of local cultures of the Pontus. In G.R. Tsetskhladze,
ed., Ancient Greeks West and East. Leiden, Brill: 469-96.
— 2002. Ionians abroad. In G.R. Tsetskhladze and A.M. Snodgrass, eds., Greek Settlements in the
Eastern Mediterranean and the Black Sea. Oxford, Archaeopress: 81-96.
— 2008. Pontic slaves in Athens: Orthodoxy and reality. In P. Mauritsch, W. Petermandl, R. Rollinger
and C. Ulf, eds., Antike Lebenswelten. Konstanz- Wandel- Wirkungsmacht. Festschrift für
Ingomar Weiler zum 70. Geburtstag. Wiesbaden, Otto Harrassowitz Verlag: 309-19.
Wellesley, K. 1953. The extent of the territory added to Bithynia by Pompey. Rheinisches Museum für
Philologie, Neue Folge 96(4): 293-318.
Whitmarsh, T. 2010. Local Knowledge and Microidentities in the Imperial Greek World. Cambridge,
Cambridge University Press.
Zajcev, J. P. 2006. Absolute and relative chronology of Scythian Neapolis in the 2nd century BC. In V.F.
Stolba and L. Hannestad, eds., Chronologies of the Black Sea Area in the Period c. 400-100 BC.
Aarhus, Aarhus University Press: 259-73.
Zolotarev, M. I. 2006. A Hellenistic ceramic deposit from the north-eastern sector of Chersonesos. In
V.F. Stolba and L. Hannestad, eds., Chronologies of the Black Sea Area in the Period c. 400-100
BC. Aarhus, Aarhus University Press: 193-216.
Unauthenticated
Download Date | 6/17/17 11:33 AM