Hadrianopolis IV: Early Byzantine mosaics and frescoes from northwestern central Turkey 9781407315263, 9781407353562

Citation preview

BAR S2928 2019

2019

‘It is important to know about the findings from Hadrianopolis. … Anyone interested in Byzantine mosaics and frescoes or in floor mosaics and wall paintings from the period will be interested in this book.’ Professor Liz James, University of Sussex

Dr Sami Patacı is a classical archaeologist at the University of Ardahan. He graduated from Ege University in 2003, and holds an MA (2007) and a PhD (2012) in Classical Archaeology from Dokuz Eylül University. He has been directing an archaeological survey in Ardahan, northeastern Turkey since 2014, and is the field director of the excavations at Ani on the Turkish–Armenian border in northeastern Turkey. Professor Ergün Laflı is a classical archaeologist at Dokuz Eylül University in Izmir, chairs the Division for Medieval Archaeology and is the director of the Center of the Archaeology of Western Anatolia (EKVAM). He holds a first degree from the University of Ankara (1996), an MA from the University of Tübingen (1999) and a PhD from the University of Cologne (2003), all in Classical Archaeology. He directed the archaeological field project in Hadrianopolis between 2005 and 2009.

Hadrianopolis IV

Hadrianopolis is located on the principal western route from the Central Anatolian plain through the mountains to Bartın and the Black Sea, 3 km west of modern Eskipazar, near Karabük, in Roman southwestern Paphlagonia. Though small, it dominated a rich agricultural and vinicultural enclave on the borders between Paphlagonia, Bithynia and Galatia. Between 2005 and 2008, four survey, excavation and restoration campaigns were conducted on the site by Dokuz Eylül University. The 2005 surveys identified the remains of at least 24 buildings, many of which were paved with extensive mosaic floors. Following the publication of the inscriptions (Hadrianopolis I), glass (Hadrianopolis II), and pottery finds (Hadrianopolis III), the present volume is devoted to these early Byzantine mosaics and frescoes from this site, dated mainly to the 6th and 7th centuries AD. The most remarkable of these is the floor mosaic of the nave of the Basilica B, which displays personifications of the four rivers of paradise: Euphrates, Tigris, Phison and Geon.

PATACI AND LAFLI

B A R I N T E R NAT I O NA L S E R I E S 2 9 2 8

B A R I N T E R NAT I O NA L S E R I E S 2 9 2 8

Hadrianopolis IV Early Byzantine mosaics and frescoes from northwestern central Turkey . S A M I PATA C I A N D E R G Ü N L A F L I

2019

B A R I N T E R NAT I O NA L S E R I E S 2 9 2 8

Hadrianopolis IV Early Byzantine mosaics and frescoes from northwestern central Turkey . S A M I PATA C I A N D E R G Ü N L A F L I

2019

Published in 2019 by BAR Publishing, Oxford BAR International Series 2928 Hadrianopolis IV © Sami Patacı and Ergün Laflı 2019 Cover image  Basilica A. Illustration of the north panel of the floor mosaic in the bema. Image by Sami Patacı. The Authors’ moral rights under the 1988 UK Copyright, Designs and Patents Act are hereby expressly asserted. All rights reserved. No part of this work may be copied, reproduced, stored, sold, distributed, scanned, saved in any form of digital format or transmitted in  any form digitally, without the written permission of the Publisher.

ISBN 9781407315263 paperback ISBN 9781407353562 e-format DOI https://doi.org/10.30861/9781407315263 A catalogue record for this book is available from the British Library

BAR titles are available from: Email Phone Fax

BAR Publishing 122 Banbury Rd, Oxford, ox2 7bp, uk [email protected] +44 (0)1865 310431 +44 (0)1865 316916 www.barpublishing.com

Books by the same authors

Statues et statuettes en bronze de Cilicie avec deux annexes sur la main de Comana et les figurines en bronze du Musée de Hatay Ergün Laflı and Michel Feugère Oxford, BAR Publishing, 2006

BAR International Series 1584

Hadrianopolis I Inschriften aus Paphlagonia Ergün Laflı und Eva Christof mit einem Beitrag von Michael Metcalfe Oxford, BAR Publishing, 2012

BAR International Series 2366

Recent Studies on the Archaeology of Anatolia Ergün Laflı and Sami Patacı with the assistance of Gonca Cankardeş-Şenol, Ahmet Kaan Şenol and Gülseren Kan Şahin Oxford, BAR Publishing, 2015

BAR International Series 2750

Hadrianopolis III Ceramic Finds from Southwestern Paphlagonia Ergün Laflı and Gülseren Kan Şahin Oxford, BAR Publishing, 2016

For more information, or to purchase these titles, please visit www.barpublishing.com

BAR International Series 2786

To Tomris Deniz Patacı who was born on April 21, 2018 and to the locals of Eskipazar, for those good years between 2005 and 2009…

Notes and Acknowledgements Unless otherwise noted, all of the figures and plates were arranged by S. Patacı between 2005 and 2018. F gs. 40, 142, 156, 161, 170, 244-245, 247-251, 253 and 257 were purchased from Alamy L m ted (Ab ngdon, UK) by S. Patacı n 2017 and 2018. We would like to thank to the Peeters Publishers (Leuven) for their kind allowance to use Fig. 42a after Drijvers 1982, fig. 1. Figs. 41, 162, 172, 235 and 252 from the archaeological museum of Şanlıurfa were documented under two authorisations granted by the Museum Directorate of Şanlıurfa on March 14, 2018 and enumerated as 12196967-155.01[155.01]-E.224966 and B.16.0.KVM.0.13.04.00-155.01. (TA10.B81)-77614 to S. Patacı. The necessary documentation was assembled in October 2018. We would like to thank to the Directorate of the Archaeological Museum of Şanlıurfa for their assistance during the study of these mosaics. Fig. 174 of the mosaic from Tepecik, Gürün in the archaeological museum of Sivas was documented under authorisation granted by the Museum Directorate of Sivas on July 3, 2018 and enumerated as 19007571-15401[154.01]-E.560721 to S. Patacı. The necessary documentation was assembled in December 2018. Figs. 254 and 256 from the archaeological museum of Konya were documented under authorisation granted by the Museum Directorate of Konya on June 8, 2018 and enumerated as 22850611-155.99(155.99)-E.500926 to Dr Gülseren Kan Şahin. The necessary documentation was assembled on July 31, 2018. We would like to thank to the Directorate of the Archaeological Museum of Konya for their assistance during the study of these mosaics from Alibeyhöyük. The authors wish to thank, in alphabetic order, Dr Hadrien Bru (Besançon), Dr Maurizio Buora (Udine), Dr Eva Christof (Graz), Dr Gülseren Kan Şahin (Sinop), Professor Guy Labarre (Besançon), Dr John Lund (Copenhagen), Professor Demetrios Michaelides (Nicosia), Dr Paweł Nowakowski (Warsaw) and Dr Özlem Patacı (Ardahan) for their revisions of the text archaeologically and for various ways of assistance. We are also grateful to the editors of British Archaeological Reports (BAR Publishing), especially to Dr Jane Burkowski (Oxford), Mr Chris Myers (Oxford) and Ms Allison Siegenthaler (Compass Rose Editing Services, London), for their critical reading, evaluation and input in our manuscript. Their detailed and searching feedback has greatly improved the text.

vi

Contents List of Figures..................................................................................................................................................................... ix List of Tables................................................................................................................................................................... xviii List of Plates..................................................................................................................................................................... xix Preface............................................................................................................................................................................... xxi Abstracts and Key Words in English, French, German, Italian and Turkish........................................................... xxii Introduction......................................................................................................................................................................... 1 I Hadrianopolis in the Early Byzantine Period................................................................................................................ 7 Hadrianopolis and Field Research in Southwestern Paphlagonia.................................................................................... 7 Hadrianopolis and Southwestern Paphlagonia in the Early and Middle Byzantine Periods............................................ 7 Find Spots of Mosaics and Frescoes in Hadrianopolis and Their Characteristics......................................................... 12 Baths A...................................................................................................................................................................... 12 Baths B...................................................................................................................................................................... 12 Basilica A................................................................................................................................................................... 13 Basilica B.................................................................................................................................................................. 13 The Apsidal Building................................................................................................................................................ 13 The Domus................................................................................................................................................................ 13 The Chora of Hadrianopolis..................................................................................................................................... 13 II Mosaics from Baths A................................................................................................................................................... 15 Baths A........................................................................................................................................................................... 15 Tesserae and Mosaic Fragments Discovered in Baths A................................................................................................ 22 The Opus Sectile Pavement in Room 8.......................................................................................................................... 24 The Mosaic Floor of Room 11....................................................................................................................................... 30 Parallels for the Mosaic of Room 11.............................................................................................................................. 30 III Mosaics from Baths B................................................................................................................................................. 51 Baths B........................................................................................................................................................................... 51 The Mosaic Floor of Room 5......................................................................................................................................... 53 The Mosaic Floor of Room 2......................................................................................................................................... 55 Evaluation of the Mosaics from Baths B and Their Parallels........................................................................................ 55 IV Mosaics from Basilica A.............................................................................................................................................. 61 Basilica A....................................................................................................................................................................... 61 The Mosaic Floor of the North Aisle............................................................................................................................. 61 The Mosaic Floor of the South Aisle............................................................................................................................. 81 The Mosaic Floor of the Nave....................................................................................................................................... 88 The Mosaic Floor of the Bema.................................................................................................................................... 105 The Mosaic Floor of the Narthex................................................................................................................................. 110 Evaluation of the Mosaics from Basilica A and Their Parallels – Border Designs...................................................... 114 Panels........................................................................................................................................................................... 119 Animal-Scenes and Iconography................................................................................................................................. 123 V Mosaics from Basilica B.............................................................................................................................................. 151 Basilica B..................................................................................................................................................................... 151 Mosaic Floor of the North Aisle.................................................................................................................................. 151 Mosaic Floor of the South Aisle.................................................................................................................................. 163 Mosaic Floor of the Nave............................................................................................................................................. 171 Mosaics in the Apse and Bema.................................................................................................................................... 181 vii

Hadrianopolis IV The Mosaic Floor of the South Aisle’s Second Phase................................................................................................. 188 Iconographic Analysis of the Mosaics of Basilica B................................................................................................... 191 VI Mosaics from the Apsidal Building.......................................................................................................................... 209 Apsidal Building.......................................................................................................................................................... 209 Apsidal Mosaic............................................................................................................................................................ 209 VII Mosaics and Frescoes from the Domus...................................................................................................................211 The Domus................................................................................................................................................................... 211 The Mosaic Floor of Room 1b..................................................................................................................................... 213 The Mosaic Floor of Room 6....................................................................................................................................... 215 Mosaic Fragments........................................................................................................................................................ 224 Evaluation of the Mosaics from the Domus and Their Parallels – Border Designs..................................................... 225 Frescoes of Rooms 3 and 5.......................................................................................................................................... 229 VIII Conclusions............................................................................................................................................................. 237 Appendix: A Lead Plate with an Inscription in the Archaeological Museum of Izmir............................................ 243 Tables................................................................................................................................................................................ 245 Plates................................................................................................................................................................................ 267 Bibliography.................................................................................................................................................................... 293

viii

List of Figures Fig. 1. Map of Turkey with some find places of mosaics and frescoes referred to in the text.............................................. 2 Fig. 2. Map of Turkey with the chronology of some find places of mosaics and frescoes referred to in the text................ 3 Fig. 3. Map of Paphlagonia, Northern and Central Anatolia with places referred to in the text.......................................... 8 Fig. 4. Site plan of Hadrianopolis with all surveyed and excavated areas in 2008.............................................................. 9 Fig. 5. Map of the surveyed areas in southwestern Paphlagonia in 2005........................................................................... 10 Fig. 6. Plan of Baths A........................................................................................................................................................ 16 Fig. 7. Chronological plan of Baths A................................................................................................................................. 17 Fig. 8. Section plan of Baths A........................................................................................................................................... 18 Fig. 9. Baths A. View from the east.................................................................................................................................... 19 Fig. 10. Baths A-Room 11. View from the northeast.......................................................................................................... 19 Fig. 11. Baths A-Room 11. View of the arches from the east............................................................................................. 20 Fig. 12. Stucco on the north wall of Room 11.................................................................................................................... 20 Fig. 13. Baths A. Floor of Room 11b.................................................................................................................................. 21 Fig. 14. Traces of the inscription of Marcus Aurelius Gallienus on the floor of Room 4................................................... 22 Fig. 15. Two views of the floor mosaic of Room 11b during the restoration in 2008........................................................ 23 Fig. 16. A mosaic fragment from Baths A........................................................................................................................... 24 Fig. 17. A further mosaic fragment from Baths A............................................................................................................... 25 Fig. 18. A mosaic fragment from Baths A........................................................................................................................... 25 Fig. 19. Drawing of the opus sectile pavement in Room 8................................................................................................. 26 Fig. 20. Opus sectile pavement in Room 8......................................................................................................................... 26 Fig. 21. Room 8. View from the northeast.......................................................................................................................... 27 Fig. 22. Opus sectile pavement of the basilica in Elaiussa Sebaste.................................................................................... 29 Fig. 23. Opus sectile pavement of the basilica in Elaiussa Sebaste.................................................................................... 29 Fig. 24. Baths A. Illustration of the floor mosaic of Room 11............................................................................................ 31 Fig. 25. Baths A. North half of the mosaic floor at Room 11............................................................................................. 32 Fig. 26. Baths A. North half of the mosaic floor at Room 11............................................................................................. 32 Fig. 27. Baths A. South half of the mosaic floor at Room 11............................................................................................. 33 Fig. 28. Baths A. A serrated and multicoloured poised square in a square on the mosaic floor of Room 11..................... 33 Fig. 29. Baths A. A detail from the north panel of the mosaic at Room 11........................................................................ 34 Fig. 30. Baths A. A detail from the south panel of the mosaic at Room 11........................................................................ 34 Fig. 31. Chessboard pattern on the mosaic of Baths A....................................................................................................... 35 Fig. 32. Border design of the mosaic of Ananeosis from Antioch-on-the-Orontes............................................................ 36 Fig. 33. A pebble mosaic from Tarsus in Turkey................................................................................................................ 36 Fig. 34. The border design of the mosaic of Psyche from Antioch-on-the-Orontes........................................................... 37 ix

Hadrianopolis IV Fig. 35. Mosaic with Megalopsychia from Antioch-on-the-Orontes.................................................................................. 37 Fig. 36. The border design of the mosaic with Megalopsychia.......................................................................................... 38 Fig. 37. Lower fragment of the mosaic of Comus from Antioch-on-the-Orontes.............................................................. 38 Fig. 38. Map of Eastern Cilicia, Commagene, Osrhoene, and Northern Syria................................................................... 40 Fig. 39. Map of ancient Edessa with find spots of the mosaic floors and the mosaic museum of Haleplibahçe in the archaeological museum of Şanlıurfa............................................................................................................................. 40 Fig. 40. The funerary mosaic of the family of Moqimu from Edessa................................................................................ 41 Fig. 41. The mosaic of Harran Kapı from Edessa............................................................................................................... 41 Fig. 42. a-b. The mosaic of Abgar from Edessa.................................................................................................................. 42 Fig. 43. The border design of the mosaic with tiger from the House of Amazons in Haleplibahçe................................... 43 Fig. 44. A band of six-strand guilloche on the mosaic of the synagogue in Sardis............................................................ 43 Fig. 45. A band of six-strand guilloche on the north nave mosaic of the church in Laodicea on the Lycus...................... 44 Fig. 46. Border design of the Maenad mosaic in Zeugma.................................................................................................. 44 Fig. 47. A detail from Sulumağara mosaic.......................................................................................................................... 45 Fig. 48. A mosaic of the drinking contest of Heracles and Dionysus................................................................................. 47 Fig. 49. A floor mosaic from the House of Psyches Boat in Antioch-on-the-Orontes........................................................ 47 Fig. 50. Plan of Baths B...................................................................................................................................................... 51 Fig. 51. Baths B. View from the northeast.......................................................................................................................... 52 Fig. 52. Ruins of a wall to the east of Baths B.................................................................................................................... 52 Fig. 53. Baths B. Plan of Room 5 and the illustration of the mosaic of Room 5................................................................ 53 Fig. 54. Baths B. Floor mosaic of Room 5a....................................................................................................................... 54 Fig. 55. Baths B. Floor mosaic of Room 5b....................................................................................................................... 54 Fig. 56. Baths B. A detail from the panel of the mosaic at Room 5.................................................................................... 56 Fig. 57. Baths B. Plan of Room 2 and the illustration of the mosaic floor......................................................................... 56 Fig. 58. Baths B. Northern piece of the floor mosaic at Room 2........................................................................................ 57 Fig. 59. Baths B. Northern piece of the floor mosaic at Room 2 with its illustration......................................................... 57 Fig. 60. Baths B. A detail from the floor mosaic at Room 2............................................................................................... 58 Fig. 61. Baths B. A detail from the floor mosaic at Room 2............................................................................................... 58 Fig. 62. Baths B. Southern piece of the floor mosaic at Room 2........................................................................................ 59 Fig. 63. Orthophoto of Basilica A....................................................................................................................................... 62 Fig. 64. Plan of Basilica A.................................................................................................................................................. 63 Fig. 65. Basilica A. View from the west............................................................................................................................. 64 Fig. 66. North wall of Basilica A........................................................................................................................................ 64 Fig. 67. The apse of Basilica A. View from the north......................................................................................................... 65 Fig. 68. Basilica A. The circular division in the eastern end of the north aisle.................................................................. 66 Fig. 69. Basilica A. The niche in the eastern end of the northern wall of the north aisle................................................... 66 Fig. 70. Basilica A. An in situ door frame separating the bema and the nave.................................................................... 67 Fig. 71. Basilica A. Illustration of the floor mosaic of the north aisle................................................................................ 68

x

List of Figures Fig. 72. Basilica A. Rectangular mosaic panel at the west edge of the north aisle............................................................. 69 Fig. 73. Aerial photo of the north aisle of Basilica A.......................................................................................................... 69 Fig. 74. Basilica A. Border design of the floor mosaic in the north aisle........................................................................... 70 Fig. 75. Basilica A. Panel I of the mosaic floor of the north aisle...................................................................................... 70 Fig. 76. Basilica A. Illustration of the panel I of the mosaic floor in the north aisle.......................................................... 71 Fig. 77. Basilica A. A partridge from the mosaic floor of the north aisle........................................................................... 72 Fig. 78. Basilica A. A duck from the mosaic floor of the north aisle.................................................................................. 73 Fig. 79. Basilica A. A spotted chicken (guinea fowl?) from the mosaic floor of the north aisle........................................ 73 Fig. 80. Basilica A. A spotted chicken (guinea fowl?) from the mosaic floor of the north aisle........................................ 74 Fig. 81. Basilica A. The poultry from the mosaic floor of the north aisle.......................................................................... 74 Fig. 82. Basilica A. A partridge from the mosaic floor of the north aisle........................................................................... 75 Fig. 83. Basilica A. Panel II of the mosaic floor in the north aisle..................................................................................... 76 Fig. 84. Basilica A. Illustration of the panel II of the mosaic floor in the north aisle......................................................... 77 Fig. 85. Basilica A. A detailed illustration of the panel II of the mosaic floor in the north aisle........................................ 77 Fig. 86. Basilica A. A partridge from the mosaic floor of the north aisle........................................................................... 78 Fig. 87. Basilica A. A duck from the mosaic floor of the north aisle.................................................................................. 78 Fig. 88. Basilica A. A spotted chicken (guinea fowl?) from the mosaic floor of the north aisle........................................ 79 Fig. 89. Basilica A. A parrot from the mosaic floor of the north aisle................................................................................ 79 Fig. 90. Basilica A. Votive inscription of the floor mosaic in the north aisle..................................................................... 80 Fig. 91. Basilica A. Aerial photo of the south aisle............................................................................................................. 81 Fig. 92. Illustration of the floor mosaic in the south aisle................................................................................................... 82 Fig. 93. Basilica A. An elephant and a peacock on the mosaic floor of the south aisle...................................................... 83 Fig. 94. Basilica A. Peacock on the mosaic floor of the south aisle................................................................................... 84 Fig. 95. Basilica A. A Lion and a gazelle on the mosaic floor of the south aisle................................................................ 85 Fig. 96. Basilica A. The lion on the mosaic floor of the south aisle................................................................................... 86 Fig. 97. Basilica A. The gazelle on the mosaic floor of the south aisle.............................................................................. 86 Fig. 98. Illustration of the gazelle on the floor mosaic of the south aisle........................................................................... 87 Fig. 99. Basilica A. Sequencing of tesserae in the gazelle on the mosaic floor of the south aisle...................................... 87 Fig. 100. Basilica A. A horse on the mosaic floor of the south aisle................................................................................... 88 Fig. 101. Basilica A. Aerial photo of the nave.................................................................................................................... 89 Fig. 102. Basilica A. Illustration of the floor mosaic in the nave....................................................................................... 90 Fig. 103. Basilica A. Border designs of the floor mosaic in the nave................................................................................. 91 Fig. 104. Basilica A. Orthophoto of the votive inscription on the mosaic floor in the nave............................................... 91 Fig. 105. Basilica A. Orthophoto of the panel I on the mosaic floor of the nave............................................................... 92 Fig. 106. Basilica A. Illustration of the panel I on the mosaic floor of the nave................................................................ 93 Fig. 107. Basilica A. An irregular concave octagon with an ivy on the mosaic floor of the nave...................................... 94 Fig. 108. Basilica A. A circle with a rosette on the mosaic floor of the nave..................................................................... 94 Fig. 109. Basilica A. Coordinate plan of the panel I on the mosaic floor of the nave........................................................ 94 xi

Hadrianopolis IV Fig. 110. Basilica A. A pigeon with a ribbon on the mosaic floor of the nave.................................................................... 95 Fig. 111. Basilica A. Illustration of the pigeon with a ribbon on the mosaic floor of the nave.......................................... 95 Fig. 112. Basilica A. A water bird inside a curvilinear square on the mosaic floor of the nave......................................... 96 Fig. 113. Basilica A. Confronted ducks on the floor mosaic of the nave............................................................................ 96 Fig. 114. Basilica A. Spotted chicken (guinea fowl?) on the floor mosaic of the nave...................................................... 97 Fig. 115. Basilica A. Confronted parrots on the floor mosaic of the nave.......................................................................... 97 Fig. 116. Basilica A. A water bird on the floor mosaic of the nave.................................................................................... 98 Fig. 117. Basilica A. The poultry on the panel I of the floor mosaic in the nave................................................................ 98 Fig. 118. Basilica A. A leopard on the panel I of the floor mosaic in the nave................................................................... 99 Fig. 119. Basilica A. A gryphon on the panel I of the floor mosaic in the nave............................................................... 100 Fig. 120. Basilica A. A deer located in the coordinate B5 on the floor mosaic of the nave.............................................. 101 Fig. 121. Basilica A. A deer located in the coordinate A2 on the floor mosaic of the nave.............................................. 101 Fig. 122. Basilica A. Aerial photo of the panel II on the mosaic floor of the nave........................................................... 102 Fig. 123. Basilica A. Illustration of the east half of the mosaic floor in the nave............................................................. 103 Fig. 124. Basilica A. Birds at both sides of a vessel on the panel II of the mosaic floor in the nave............................... 104 Fig. 125. Basilica A. A duck on the panel II of the floor mosaic in the nave.................................................................... 104 Fig. 126. Basilica A. A pigeon beside of a vessel on the panel II of the mosaic floor in the nave................................... 105 Fig. 127. Basilica A. Aerial photo of the bema................................................................................................................. 106 Fig. 128. Basilica A. Illustration of the floor mosaic in the bema.................................................................................... 106 Fig. 129. Basilica A. Orthophoto of the north panel on the mosaic of the bema.............................................................. 107 Fig. 130. Basilica A. Illustration of the north panel of the floor mosaic in the bema....................................................... 107 Fig. 131. Basilica A. A bird in a symmetrically shaded medallion on the mosaic floor in the bema............................... 108 Fig. 132. Basilica A. A ribbed vase in a circle with loops on the mosaic floor of the bema............................................. 108 Fig. 133. Basilica A. South panel on the floor mosaic of the bema.................................................................................. 109 Fig. 134. Basilica A. Illustration of the south panel on the mosaic floor of the bema...................................................... 110 Fig. 135. Basilica A. Orthophoto of the narthex................................................................................................................111 Fig. 136. Basilica A. Illustration of the floor mosaic in the narthex..................................................................................111 Fig. 137. Narthex of Basilica A. View from the north...................................................................................................... 112 Fig. 138. Basilica A. Aerial photo of the north half of the mosaic floor in the narthex.................................................... 112 Fig. 139. Basilica A. A detail from the panel of the floor mosaic in the narthex.............................................................. 113 Fig. 140. Sardis. A round-tongued double guilloche on the floor mosaic of the synagogue............................................ 115 Fig. 141. Border design of the Great Palace mosaic in Constantinople........................................................................... 116 Fig. 142. Mosaic of the Church of the Holy Martyrs Lot and Procopius in Jordan......................................................... 117 Fig. 143. Basilica A. A vine-leaf on the border design of the floor mosaic in the nave.................................................... 118 Fig. 144. Left panel of the mosaic of Eros and Psyches from Antioch-on-the-Orontes................................................... 120 Fig. 145. A detail from the mosaic of El Alia in Bardo Museum of Tunisia.................................................................... 121 Fig. 146. A detail from the mosaic of the House of Buffet in Antioch-on-the-Orontes.................................................... 122 Fig. 147. A detail from the mosaic of the House of Ge and Seasons in Antioch-on-the-Orontes.................................... 123 xii

List of Figures Fig. 148. A hunting scene on the Great Palace mosaic in Constantinople........................................................................ 124 Fig. 149. A gryphon attacking a female deer on the Great Palace mosaic in Constantinople.......................................... 124 Fig. 150. A gryphon in the Northeastern Corridor-Field B of the Great Palace mosaic in Constantinople...................... 125 Fig. 151. A gryphon in the Northeastern Corridor-Field C of the Great Palace mosaic in Constantinople...................... 126 Fig. 152. A gryphon depicted with a lizard in its mouth on the Great Palace mosaic in Constantinople......................... 127 Fig. 153. Oceanus mask in the border of the Great Palace mosaic in Constantinople..................................................... 127 Fig. 154. The struggle of a deer and a snake on the Great Palace mosaic in Constantinople........................................... 128 Fig. 155. The struggle of an eagle and a snake on the Great Palace mosaic in Constantinople....................................... 129 Fig. 156. Qasr Libya. A panel of the mosaic of the East Church...................................................................................... 129 Fig. 157. A leopard attacking a stag on the Great Palace mosaic in Constantinople........................................................ 131 Fig. 158. A leopard on the mosaic with Megalopsychia in Antioch-on-the-Orontes........................................................ 131 Fig. 159. The floor mosaic of Lydda (Lod)....................................................................................................................... 134 Fig. 160. The mosaic of Orpheus from Tarsus in Adana.................................................................................................. 134 Fig. 161. The mosaic of Orpheus from Mytilene.............................................................................................................. 135 Fig. 162. The mosaic of Orpheus from Edessa................................................................................................................. 135 Fig. 163. Illustration of the Harran Kapı mosaic from Edessa......................................................................................... 136 Fig. 164. A detail from the Harran Kapı mosaic in Edessa............................................................................................... 137 Fig. 165. A mosaic panel with two sheeps with twisted tails on both sides of a tree from northern Syria, today in the Nationalmuseet in Copenhagen.............................................................................................................................. 137 Fig. 166. A mosaic panel with a cantharus from northern Syria, today in the Nationalmuseet in Copenhagen............... 138 Fig. 167. Salkım mosaic at the mosaic museum of Zeugma............................................................................................ 140 Fig. 168. Koçlu mosaic at the mosaic museum of Zeugma.............................................................................................. 140 Fig. 169. Orthophoto of the Sulumağara mosaic at the mosaic museum of Zeugma....................................................... 141 Fig. 170. A detail from the Sulumağara mosaic at the mosaic museum of Zeugma......................................................... 142 Fig. 171. An animal chase scene in a small rectangular panel located at the left side of the Sulumağara mosaic........... 142 Fig. 172. A mosaic panel with an animal chase scene from northern Syria, today in the Nationalmuseet in Copenhagen....................................................................................................................................................................... 143 Fig. 173. A scene of the Noah’s Ark from the mosaic of Mopsuestia in the mosaic museum of Misis in Adana............ 143 Fig. 174. Bird depictions from Mopsuestia, Edessa and Hadrianopolis........................................................................... 144 Fig. 175. A detail from the mosaic of the Hunting Amazons in Haleplibahçe................................................................. 145 Fig. 176. A partridge from the mosaic of Orpheus in the Archaeological Museum of Mytilene..................................... 145 Fig. 177. Gürün-Tepecik mosaic in the Archaeological Museum of Sivas...................................................................... 148 Fig. 178. Depiction of a cypress from the section E of the Great Palace mosaic in Constantinople................................ 149 Fig. 179. Basilica B in Hadrianopolis. View from the north............................................................................................ 152 Fig. 180. A view from the excavation of Basilica B in 2003............................................................................................ 152 Fig. 181. A grave uncovered during the excavations of Basilica B in 2003..................................................................... 153 Fig. 182. Orthophoto of Basilica B................................................................................................................................... 154 Fig. 183. Plan of Basilica B.............................................................................................................................................. 155

xiii

Hadrianopolis IV Fig. 184. Basilica B. View from the west......................................................................................................................... 156 Fig. 185. A grave inscription in a marble tabula ansata................................................................................................... 156 Fig. 186. Aerial photo of Basilica B................................................................................................................................. 157 Fig. 187. Basilica B. Illustration of the floor mosaic of the north aisle............................................................................ 158 Fig. 188. Basilica B. Border design of the floor mosaic of the north aisle....................................................................... 159 Fig. 189. Basilica B. An in situ mosaic piece at the southeast corner of the north aisle.................................................. 159 Fig. 190. Basilica B. An in situ mosaic piece at the west edge of the north aisle............................................................. 160 Fig. 191. Basilica B. A detail from the mosaic panel of the north aisle............................................................................ 160 Fig. 192. Basilica B. Orthophoto of the in situ mosaic piece at the east edge of the north aisle...................................... 161 Fig. 193. A detail from the mosaic uncovered in the House of the Phoenix in Antioch-on-the-Orontes......................... 162 Fig. 194. A detail from the mosaic uncovered in the House of the Phoenix in Antioch-on-the-Orontes......................... 162 Fig. 195. Sardis. A detail from the border design of the mosaic floor of the synagogue.................................................. 163 Fig. 196. Basilica B. A mosaic inscription in a tabula ansata in the north aisle.............................................................. 164 Fig. 197. Basilica B. Aerial photo of the south aisle......................................................................................................... 165 Fig. 198. Basilica B. Illustration of the floor mosaic of the south aisle............................................................................ 166 Fig. 199. Basilica B. A detail from the mosaic floor of the south aisle............................................................................. 167 Fig. 200. Basilica B. A view from the south aisle............................................................................................................. 168 Fig. 201. A detail from the mosaic of the River Gods in Antioch-on-the-Orontes........................................................... 169 Fig. 202. A detail from the mosaic of the River Gods in Antioch-on-the-Orontes........................................................... 169 Fig. 203. Sardis. A detail from the floor mosaics of the synagogue................................................................................. 170 Fig. 204. A detail from the Mosaic of the House of Menander in Mytilene..................................................................... 170 Fig. 205. Basilica B. An inscription in the mosaic panel of the south aisle...................................................................... 171 Fig. 206. Basilica B. A bull-panel on the mosaic floor of the south aisle......................................................................... 172 Fig. 207. Basilica B. A mosaic panel decorated with a grape basket at the west edge of the south aisle......................... 172 Fig. 208. A lead plate with an inscription in the archaeological museum of Izmir.......................................................... 173 Fig. 209. Basilica B. Illustration of the floor mosaic of the nave..................................................................................... 174 Fig. 210. Basilica B. Border design of the floor mosaic of the nave................................................................................ 175 Fig. 211. An illustration of a detail from the mosaic of the Birds in a Rinceau............................................................... 175 Fig. 212. Basilica B. Border designs of the mosaic floor at the west edge of the nave.................................................... 176 Fig. 213. Basilica B. A polychrome octagon.................................................................................................................... 176 Fig. 214. A row of tangent octagons on the mosaic of the House of the Phoenix from Antioch-on-the-Orontes............ 177 Fig. 215. Basilica B. View of the nave from the south..................................................................................................... 177 Fig. 216. Basilica B. The panel of the Four Rivers of Paradise in the floor mosaic of the nave...................................... 178 Fig. 217. Basilica B. Illustration of the panel of the Four Rivers of Paradise.................................................................. 178 Fig. 218. Basilica B. Illustration of the geometric panel of the floor mosaic of the nave................................................ 179 Fig. 219. Basilica B. A Solomon knot in a square in the floor mosaic of the nave........................................................... 180 Fig. 220. Basilica B. A Square with loops in a square in the floor mosaic of the nave.................................................... 180 Fig. 221. Basilica B. A ram’s head knot in a square in the floor mosaic of the nave........................................................ 181 xiv

List of Figures Fig. 222. Basilica B. Geon from the panel of the Four Rivers of Paradise in the floor mosaic of the nave..................... 182 Fig. 223. Basilica B. A photo showing face details, illustration of the head and the sequencing of tesserae forming the head of the Geon figure................................................................................................................................. 182 Fig. 224. Basilica B. Phison from the panel of the Four Rivers of Paradise in the floor mosaic of the nave................... 183 Fig. 225. Basilica B. A photo showing face details, illustration of the head and the sequencing of tesserae forming the head of the Phison figure............................................................................................................................... 183 Fig. 226. Basilica B. Tigris from the panel of the Four Rivers of Paradise in the floor mosaic of the nave.................... 184 Fig. 227. Basilica B. A photo showing face details, illustration of the head and the sequencing of tesserae forming the head of the Tigris figure................................................................................................................................ 184 Fig. 228. Basilica B. Euphrates from the panel of the Four Rivers of Paradise in the floor mosaic of the nave.............. 185 Fig. 229. Basilica B. A photo showing face details, illustration of the head and the sequencing of tesserae forming the head of the Euphrates figure.......................................................................................................................... 185 Fig. 230. Basilica B. A detail from the panel of the rivers of paradise............................................................................. 186 Fig. 231. Basilica B. Orthophoto of the floor mosaic of the apse..................................................................................... 186 Fig. 232. Basilica B. Illustration of the mosaic of the apse.............................................................................................. 187 Fig. 233. Basilica B. Three birds in a rinceau in the mosaic of the apse.......................................................................... 188 Fig. 234. Basilica B. Orthophoto of the peacocks at both sides of a vase in the mosaic of the apse............................... 188 Fig. 235. Basilica B. A horse depiction at the south edge of the mosaic of the apse........................................................ 189 Fig. 236. Basilica B. Border design that separates mosaics of the apse and bema; and a small part from the panel of the mosaic floor of the bema............................................................................................................................... 189 Fig. 237. Mosaic of the Lady of Carthage in Tunisia....................................................................................................... 189 Fig. 238. A polychrome jewelled band in the mosaic of the Hunting Amazons from Edessa.......................................... 190 Fig. 239. A jewelled band in the Hazinedere mosaic from Edessa................................................................................... 190 Fig. 240. A jewelled band in the Mosaic of Life from Germanicia.................................................................................. 191 Fig. 241. Basilica B. In situ mosaic floor at the west edge of the bema........................................................................... 191 Fig. 242. Basilica B. A three-dimensional undulating ribbon from the mosaic floor of the second phase in the south aisle.......................................................................................................................................................................... 192 Fig. 243. Basilica B. A view of the mosaic floors of the first and the second phases in the south aisle........................... 192 Fig. 244. Basilica B. Threshold mosaic belonging to the second phase in the south aisle............................................... 192 Fig. 245. Personifications of Pyramus and Alpheus from the mosaic of the River Gods in Antioch-on-the-Orontes...... 193 Fig. 246. A detail from the mosaic of Thalassa in Antioch-on-the-Orontes..................................................................... 194 Fig. 247. Personification of Thalassa in the mosaic of the Church of the Apostles in Madaba, Jordan........................... 194 Fig. 248. World map by Cosmas Indicopleustes............................................................................................................... 196 Fig. 249. Floor mosaic of the Church of the Holy Martyrs in Tayibat Al-Imam, Syria................................................... 198 Fig. 250. Mosaic of the apse of the Basilica of San Vitale in Ravenna, Italy................................................................... 199 Fig. 251. A personification of Geon in a mosaic of the early Byzantine church in Olbia/Theodorias, Libya.................. 200 Fig. 252. The personification of Euphrates in the same mosaic in Olbia/Theodorias, Libya........................................... 200 Fig. 253. The ceiling mosaic of the dome of the Baptistery of Neon in Ravenna, Italy................................................... 201 Fig. 254. The ceiling mosaic of the dome of the Arian Baptistery in Ravenna, Italy....................................................... 202 Fig. 255. Melanippe from the mosaic of the Hunting Amazons in Haleplibahçe, Edessa................................................ 203 xv

Hadrianopolis IV Fig. 256. A detail from the mosaic of the Byzantine Baptistery in Butrint, Albania........................................................ 204 Fig. 257. A floor mosaic of confronted peacocks excavated in Alibeyhöyük by Çumra.................................................. 204 Fig. 258. A floor mosaic of confronted peacocks uncovered in Bizye, Kırklareli............................................................ 205 Fig. 259. A detail from the mosaic uncovered in the Basilica of Tatköy Monastery, Konya........................................... 206 Fig. 260. A detail from the mosaic of the Chrysopolitissa Basilica in Paphos, Cyprus.................................................... 206 Fig. 261. Mosaic of the Apsidal Building in Hadrianopolis............................................................................................. 209 Fig. 262. A detail from the mosaic of the Apsidal Building in Hadrianopolis.................................................................. 210 Fig. 263. The Domus. View from the northeast................................................................................................................ 211 Fig. 264. Plan of the the Domus in Hadrianopolis............................................................................................................ 212 Fig. 265. The Domus. Terracotta pavement of Room 3.................................................................................................... 212 Fig. 266. The Domus. Terracotta pavement of Room 5.................................................................................................... 213 Fig. 267. The Domus. In situ mosaic pieces in Room 1b................................................................................................. 214 Fig. 268. The Domus. Mosaic floor of Room 1b. View from the west............................................................................. 215 Fig. 269. The Domus. Orthophoto of the in situ mosaic piece at the southeast corner of Room 1b................................ 216 Fig. 270. The Domus. A barnyard fowl in the border design of the mosaic of Room 1b................................................. 216 Fig. 271. The Domus. Orthophoto of the second in situ mosaic piece at the southeast corner of Room 1b.................... 217 Fig. 272. The Domus. A lion (?) in the border design of the mosaic of Room 1b............................................................ 217 Fig. 273. The Domus. A detail from the mosaic of Room 1b........................................................................................... 218 Fig. 274. Room 6 in the Domus. View from the southwest.............................................................................................. 218 Fig. 275. The Domus. Mosaic of Room 6. View from the northeast................................................................................ 219 Fig. 276. The Domus. Illustration of the mosaic of Room 6............................................................................................ 219 Fig. 277. The Domus. A detail from the border design of the mosaic of Room 6............................................................ 220 Fig. 278. The Domus. A detail from the wave pattern of the mosaic of Room 6............................................................. 220 Fig. 279. The Domus. Orthophoto of the mosaic panel of Room 6.................................................................................. 221 Fig. 280. The Domus. Portraits of a man and a woman in the mosaic panel of Room 6.................................................. 221 Fig. 281. The Domus. Bird figures from the mosaic panel of Room 6............................................................................. 222 Fig. 282. The Domus. A detail from the mosaic of Room 6............................................................................................. 222 Fig. 283. The Domus. A detail from the mosaic of Room 6............................................................................................. 223 Fig. 284. The Domus. A bird figure from the mosaic panel of Room 6............................................................................ 223 Fig. 285. The Domus. Threshold mosaic consisting of an orthogonal pattern of adjacent scales in the entrance of Room 6......................................................................................................................................................................... 224 Fig. 286. The Domus. A mosaic fragment uncovered in Room 1b................................................................................... 225 Fig. 287. The Domus. A mosaic fragment uncovered in Room 1b................................................................................... 226 Fig. 288. A bird figure in the mosaic panel of Room 6..................................................................................................... 228 Fig. 289. A detail from the mosaic of the Great Palace in Constantinople....................................................................... 228 Fig. 290. The Domus. Fresco on the north wall of Room 3.............................................................................................. 229 Fig. 291. The Domus. A detail from the fresco on the north wall of Room 3................................................................... 230 Fig. 292. The Domus. The left panel of the fresco on the west wall of Room 3.............................................................. 231

xvi

List of Figures Fig. 293. The Domus. The middle panel of the fresco on the west wall of Room 3......................................................... 231 Fig. 294. The Domus. The right panel of the fresco on the west wall of Room 3............................................................ 231 Fig. 295. The Domus. The left panel of the fresco on the east wall of Room 3............................................................... 232 Fig. 296. The Domus. A detail from the left panel of the fresco on the east wall of Room 3........................................... 232 Fig. 297. The Domus. The right panel of the fresco on the east wall of Room 3............................................................. 233 Fig. 298. The Domus. Fresco on the south wall of Room 3............................................................................................. 234 Fig. 299. The Domus. Left side of the fresco on the north wall of Room 5..................................................................... 235 Fig. 300. The Domus. A detail from the fresco on the north wall of Room 5................................................................... 235 Fig. 301. An example of a 4th cent. mural painting from Laodicea on the Lycus............................................................ 236 Fig. 302. A mosaic fragment found in Kimistene............................................................................................................. 236 Fig. 303. A lead plate with an inscription in the archaeological museum of Izmir.......................................................... 243 Fig. 304. Basilica B. An inscription in the mosaic panel of the south aisle...................................................................... 243

xvii

List of Tables Table 1. Baths A - Border designs of the mosaic of Room 11.......................................................................................... 245 Table 2. Baths B - Border designs of the mosaics of Room 2 and Room 5...................................................................... 246 Table 3. Basilica A - Border designs of the mosaics of the south and north aisles........................................................... 248 Table 4. Basilica A - Border designs of the mosaic of the nave........................................................................................ 249 Table 5. Basilica A - Border designs of the bema mosaic................................................................................................. 250 Table 6. Basilica A - Border designs of the narthex mosaic............................................................................................. 250 Table 7. Basilica B - Border designs of the mosaics of the south and north aisles........................................................... 251 Table 8. Basilica B - Border designs of the mosaic of the nave....................................................................................... 252 Table 9. Basilica B - Border design of the bema mosaic.................................................................................................. 253 Table 10. Basilica B - Border design of the mosaic of the south aisle in its second phase.............................................. 254 Table 11. The Apsidal Building - Border design of the Apsidal mosaic........................................................................... 254 Table 12. The Domus - Border designs of the mosaic of Room 1b.................................................................................. 255 Table 13. The Domus - Border designs of the mosaic of Room 6.................................................................................... 255 Table 14. Baths A - Panel designs of the mosaic of Room 11.......................................................................................... 256 Table 15. Baths B - Panel design of the mosaic of Room 5.............................................................................................. 257 Table 16. Baths B - Panel design of the mosaic of Room 2.............................................................................................. 258 Table 17. Basilica A - Panel designs of the mosaics of the south and north aisles........................................................... 259 Table 18. Basilica A - Panel designs of the mosaics of the nave...................................................................................... 260 Table 19. Basilica A - Panel design of the bema mosaic.................................................................................................. 261 Table 20. Basilica A - Panel design of the narthex mosaic............................................................................................... 262 Table 21. Basilica B - Panel design of the mosaic of the north aisle................................................................................ 262 Table 22. Basilica B - Panel design of the mosaic of the south aisle................................................................................ 263 Table 23. Basilica B - Panel design of the mosaic of the nave......................................................................................... 264 Table 24. The Apsidal Building - Panel design of the Apsidal mosaic............................................................................. 265 Table 25. The Domus - Panel design of the mosaic of Room 1b...................................................................................... 266

xviii

List of Plates Plate 1. Baths A. Mosaic of Room 11. Wave pattern (normal). Baths B. Mosaics of Rooms 2 and 5. Wave pattern (normal). Basilica A. Mosaic of the nave. Wave pattern (normal). The Domus. Mosaic of Room 6. Wave pattern (simple and normal).................................................................................................................................... 269 Plate 2. Baths A. Mosaic of Room 11. Six-strand guilloche. Baths B. Mosaics of rooms 2 and 5. Six-strand guilloche. Basilica A. Mosaic of the narthex. Four-strand guilloche................................................................................ 270 Plate 3. Basilica A. Mosaics of the south and north aisles. A band of tightly braided round-tongued double guilloche. Basilica A. Mosaic of the nave. A band of polychrome three-dimensional undulating ribbon in lateral perspective on a black ground. Basilica B. Mosaic of the nave. A band of polychrome three-dimensional crinkled ribbon, depicted on a black ground in frontal perspective. Basilica A. Mosaic of the nave. A band of colourful vegetal ornaments following each other alternately on a white ground............................................................ 271 Plate 4. Basilica A. Mosaic of the bema. A row of tangent serrated and multicoloured poised squares, forming hourglasses. The Domus. Mosaic of Room 6. A row of tangent stepped crosses or poised squares with sides of broken lines, forming hourglasses. Basilica B. Mosaic of the north aisle. A row of tangent semicircles formed of two tangent spindles forming alternately inverted thorns. Basilica B. Mosaic of the north aisle. A row of tangent circles formed of four spindles forming poised concave squares and pairs of opposed thorns........................... 272 Plate 5. Basilica B. Mosaic of the south aisle. Ivy scroll. Basilica B. Mosaic of the bema. A jewelled band. Basilica B. Mosaic of the nave. A row of tangent and multicoloured octagons. The Domus. Mosaic of Room 1b. A band of polychrome shaded zigzag pattern............................................................................................................. 273 Plate 6. Baths A. Mosaic of Room 11. An orthogonal pattern of stars of eight parallelograms, squares decorated with serrated and multicoloured poised squares, and smaller poised squares between the arms of the stars................... 274 Plate 7. Baths A. Mosaic of Room 11. Contiguous repeating rows of superposed chevrons with arms of alternating colours, forming a zigzag pattern, with effect of relief................................................................................... 275 Plate 8. Baths B. Mosaic of Room 5. An orthogonal pattern of spaced swastika-meander with reverse returns, the spaces staggered and containing a square bearing a serrated polychrome poised square........................................... 276 Plate 9. Basilica A. Panel I of the mosaic of the north aisle. An orthogonal pattern of stars of eight parallelograms, squares decorated with various birds, and smaller poised squares decorated with rosettes between the arms of the stars............................................................................................................................................ 277 Plate 10. Basilica A. Panel II of the mosaic of the north aisle. A geometric and figural pattern in the ornament fields formed of repeating three adjacent squares. A band of tightly braided simple guilloche, a band of polychrome three-dimensional undulating ribbon in lateral perspective and another band of tangent inverted bells with each bell horizontally shaded, surround the squares decorated with birds, poised squares and irregular pentagons............................................................................................................................................................ 278 Plate 11. Basilica A. Mosaic of the south aisle. An orthogonal pattern of stars of eight parallelograms, squares decorated with various animals, and smaller poised squares decorated with rosettes between the arms of the stars...... 279 Plate 12. Basilica A. Mosaic of the nave. A multicoloured orthogonal pattern consisting of curvilinear squares, four large-sized squares and the circles and irregular concave octagons between these curvilinear squares and the squares. Curvilinear squares are adorned with birds and floral ornaments, and squares are decorated with various animals. There are bells with straight base at the edges of the design................................................................. 280 Plate 13. Basilica A. Mosaic of the bema. A grid-pattern of bands bearing circles and spindles interlooped tangentially in a rectangle and around a medallion with a bird figure and a looped circle with a vase depiction. The bands are consisted of simple guilloches and tangent bells with each bell horizontally shaded, forming an undulating line outlined in white...................................................................................................................................... 281 Plate 14. Basilica A. Mosaic of the narthex. An orthogonal pattern of repeating squares consisting of chevrons and triangles on a white ground. Squares of triangles have a central poised square decorated with an ivy and the squares of chevrons have a small square bearing a serrated poised square................................................................ 282

xix

Hadrianopolis IV Plate 15. Basilica B. Mosaic of the north aisle. A polychrome orthogonal pattern of circles in assymetrically shaded bands interlooped tangentially. There is a rosette at the center of each circle and a small circle with loops in the space between the four circles....................................................................................................................... 283 Plate 16. Basilica B. Mosaic of the south aisle. An orthogonal pattern of intersecting circles, consisting of spindles. There is a flower at the center of the each circle................................................................................................ 284 Plate 17. Basilica B. Mosaic of the nave. An orthogonal pattern of stars of eight parallelograms, squares with knots and smaller poised squares between the arms of the stars...................................................................................... 285 Plate 18. The Domus. Mosaic of Room 1b. A pattern of poised squares placed in intervals on a green ground and small ornaments in the spaces between the poised squares. At the red center of each square there is a green ivy... 286 Plate 19. Baths A. Mosaic of Room 11 (a threshold design). A chessboard pattern in a rectangular panel. Basilica A. mosic of the north aisle (a threshold design). Two tangent circles formed of four spindles forming poised concave squares and a pair of opposed thorns in a rectangular panel................................................................... 287 Plate 20. Basilica B. Mosaic of the south aisle (a threshold design). A lozenge (rhombus) decorated with a rosette which has a cross patée at the center and palmettes around, in a rectangular panel. The Domus. Mosaic of Room 6 (a threshold design). A polychrome orthogonal pattern of adjacent scales.................................................... 288 Plate 21. Baths A. Mosaic of Room 11. A serrated and multicoloured poised square in a square. Baths B. Mosaic of Room 5. A serrated and multicoloured poised square in a square. Basilica A. Mosaic of the bema. A serrated and multicoloured poised square. Basilica A. Mosaic of the narthex. A serrated poised square in a square. Baths A. Mosaic of Room 11. A poised square with a dot pattern. Basilica A. Mosaic of the north aisle. A poised square with a rosette. Basilica A. Mosaic of the south aisle. A poised square with a rosette. The Domus. Mosaic of Room 6. A poised square with a rosette. Basilica B. Mosaic of the nave. A poised square with a flower pattern. Basilica B. Mosaic of the bema. A polychrome poised square. Basilica B. Mosaic of the narthex. A poised square with an ivy. The Domus. Mosaic of Room 1b. A poised square with an ivy............................ 289 Plate 22. Baths A. Mosaic of Room 11. A star of eight parallelograms. Basilica A. Mosaic of the north aisle. A star of eight parallelograms. Basilica A. Mosaic of the south aisle. A star of eight parallelograms. Basilica B. Mosaic of the nave. A star of eight parallelograms. Baths A. Mosaic of Room 11. Two small poised squares and a circle in a rectangle. Basilica B. Mosaic of the nave. Two flowers in a rectangle. Basilica A. Mosaic of the north aisle. A polychrome pattern of semicircle of two tangent spindles in a rectangle. There is a concave triangle at the white grounded center of the pattern. Basilica A. Mosaic of the south aisle. A polychrome pattern of semicircle of two tangent spindles in a rectangle. There is an ivy at the white grounded center of the pattern.......... 290 Plate 23. Basilica A. Mosaic of the nave. A curvilinear square. Basilica A. Mosaic of the nave. An irregular concave octagon with an ivy inside. Basilica A. Mosaic of the nave. A circle with a rosette inside. Basilica A. Mosaic of the nave. A solomon knot in a circle. Basilica A. Mosaic of the nave. A bell with straight base. There is a looped spindle inside the pattern. Basilica B. Mosaic of the nave. A solomon knot in a square. Basilica B. Mosaic of the nave. A ram’s head knot in a square. Basilica B. Mosaic of the nave. A square with loops in a square. Basilica B. Mosaic of the nave. A triangle with loops in a square. Basilica A. Mosaic of the north aisle. A rosette............................................................................................................................................................................ 291

xx

Preface Paweł Nowakowski The scholarly world has been much looking forward to the publication of the present volume. The last decade saw a significant rise of interest in the study of early Byzantine mosaics as a social and cultural phenomenon. The systematically increasing number of finds and continuing work on known sites have prompted the creation of synthetic studies collecting new scattered evidence, and revising long-known objects in the light of these newest finds. The efforts of field archaeologists and art historians, however, have been focused by far on the mosaics of Syria, Palestine, the Roman province of Arabia, and North Africa: these have always captured the imagination of scholars by their high quality of execution, richness of figural motifs, not infrequently in narrative scenes, and by inscriptions giving a detailed account of the foundation or restorations of excavated buildings.1

several earlier works discussing the inscriptions from the site.2 The importance of this study lies in the fact that it provides not only revised texts of inscriptions, but more importantly the first detailed analysis of the non-inscribed carpet mosaics from Hadrianopolis’s baths, two basilicas, and other buildngs from the perspective of their archaeological context and history of art. The floors of Hadrianopolis have most notably yielded the personifications of the Four Rivers of Paradise, as well as images of animals, birds and plants in what was most probably a hunting scene (a rare find in early Byzantine north Anatolia). The floors are very well preserved, and the overall execution of the geometrical patterns is also surprisingly high, making the site comparable to those of southeast coastal Anatolia, heavily influenced by masterly Syrian craftsmanship. The inscriptions tell us about the involvement and contributions of local elite women: Marina, the clarissima (λαμπροτάτη, see p. 80) and Valentina, the ‘most orderly and pious’ (κοσμιωτάτη καὶ σεμνοπρεπεστάτη, see p. 168), and a member of the imperial guard (Himerios, the ‘devoted scholarius’, see p. 168). This brings to mind sites with a well documented local prosopography, such as Aphrodisias in Isauria where several generations of a merchant family recorded their donations to the church of St Panteleemon.3

This does not mean, however, that the mosaics of Anatolia have been entirely neglected. Although they are less frequent, often limited to geometrical patterns, and lacking beautiful figural depictions, the mosaics of Anatolia share many of the features of their Near Eastern counterparts, and have also been subject to detailed research. Indispensable reference works on this topic include the two volumes produced by Veronika Scheibelreiter(-Gail): Stifterinschriften auf Mosaiken Westkleinasiens (published as Tyche Supplementband 5, 2006) and Die Mosaiken Westkleinasiens: Tessellate des 2. Jahrhunderts v. Chr. bis Anfang des 7. Jahrhunderts n. Chr (in the Sonderschriften des Österreichischen Archäologischen Institutes 46, 2011). However, these cover only the western part of the peninsula. To them one can add a number of older works, e.g. Σύνταγμα των παλαιοχριστιανικών ψηφιδωτών δαπέδων της Ελλάδος by Stylianos Pelekanides and Panayota Asemakopoulou-Atzaka, for the coastal islands of western Anatolia, and others.

All these factors place the present volume at the forefront of current research, and provide us with a mass of new evidence for the history of early Byzantine Paphlagonia, which is still clouded by the lack of sources. University of Oxford 17 August 2018

The present, fourth volume of the Hadrianopolis series forms an important addition to this list. The authors, Sami Patacı and Ergün Laflı, offer us a complete overview of their four seasons of work on the early Byzantine mosaics of Hadrianopolis, an important ancient city sited in the north Anatolian province of Paphlagonia, approximately three km to the west of Eskipazar. The excavations were conducted there on behalf of the Dokuz Eylül University in Izmir, and we have gradually been allowed glimpses of the finds in

2 Especially: Laflı 2007; Patacı 2011; Laflı and Christof 2012; as well as Christof and Laflı 2013; see also Supplementum epigraphicum graecum (SEG) 58, nos. 1473-1474; SEG 62, nos. 1079, 1081-1084; and SEG 61, no. 1084. 3 Budde 1987, cf. Chroniques d’épigraphie byzantine 498 and SEG 37, no. 1293.

1 Just to name a few examples, the reader should consult Bowersock 2006; Habas 2009; Madden 2014; Hamarneh 2014; Reynolds 2017; and numerous works of Sean Leatherbury.

xxi

Abstracts and Key Words in English, French, German, Italian and Turkish Abstract Hadrianopolis is a site located on the principal western route from the Central Anatolian plain through the mountains to Bartın and the Black Sea, 3 km west of the modern town of Eskipazar, near Karabük, in what was in Roman times southwestern Paphlagonia (modern northwestern central Turkey). This site was a small but important city, controlling this major route and dominating a rich agricultural and especially vinicultural enclave on the borders between Paphlagonia, Bithynia and Galatia. Between 2005 and 2008, four survey, excavation and restoration campaigns were conducted at this Roman and early Byzantine site by Dokuz Eylül University in Izmir. As a result of the 2005 surveys of the area, it was confirmed that Hadrianopolis was indeed coincident with Viranşehir, which is located c. 3 km west of modern Eskipazar and was active between the 1st cent. BC. and the 8th cent. AD. The field surveys in 2005 identified the remains of at least 24 buildings at the site. Among them are two bath buildings, two basilicas, a domus, an apsidal building, a fortified structure of the Byzantine period, a possible theatre, a vaulted building, a domed building and some domestic buildings, most of which were paved with extensive mosaic floors. Following the publication of the inscriptions (Hadrianopolis I), glass (Hadrianopolis II), and pottery finds (Hadrianopolis III), the present volume IV of this multi-volume report is devoted to the early Byzantine mosaics and frescoes from this site, which have been dated mainly to the 6th and 7th cent. AD. The main find spots for mosaics and frescoes are Baths A, Baths B, Basilica A, Basilica B, the Apsidal Building and the Domus. One of the most remarkable discoveries was undoubtedly the floor mosaic of the nave of Basilica B, which displays personifications of the Four Rivers of Paradise: Euphrates, Tigris, Phison and Geon. Key words: Hadrianopolis, Paphlagonia, Northwestern Central Turkey, Asia Minor, Early Byzantine period, Late Antiquity, 6th cent. AD, 7th cent. AD, Mosaics, Frescoes, Four Rivers of Paradise.

Résumé Hadrianopolis est située sur la route principale de l’Ouest, allant de la plaine d’Anatolie centrale à travers les montagnes jusqu’à Bartın et la mer Noire, à 3 km à l’ouest de la ville moderne d’Eskipazar, près de Karabük, dans la partie romanisée du sud-ouest de la Paphlagonie. C’était un site modeste mais relativement important, contrôlant cet axe majeur et dominant une riche enclave agricole, surtout vinicole, aux confins de la Paphlagonie, de la Bithynie et de la Galatie. Entre 2005 et 2008, quatre campagnes d’enquête, d’excavation et de restauration ont été menées dans ce site romain et byzantin par l’Université Dokuz Eylül d’Izmir. À la suite des relevés effectués en 2005 dans la région, il a été confirmé que Hadrianopolis coïncidait effectivement avec Viranşehir, ca. 5 km à l’ouest d’Eskipazar, avec des trouvailles datant du 1er siècle av. J.-C. au 8ème siècle apres J.-C. Les enquêtes de terrain de 2005 ont identifié les vestiges d’au moins 24 bâtiments sur le site. Parmi eux, deux bâtiments de bains, deux basiliques byzantines anciennes, une domus, un bâtiment à abside, une structure fortifiée de l’époque byzantine, peutêtre un théâtre, un bâtiment voûté, une construction en dôme et des bâtiments domestiques dont la plupart étaient pavés de mosaïques. Après les publications des inscriptions (Hadrianopolis I), du verre (Hadrianopolis II) et des céramiques (Hadrianopolis III), le présent volume IV de cette série est consacré aux premières mosaïques byzantines et aux fresques datant principalement du 6ème et 7ème siècle après J.-C. Les principaux lieux de découverte des mosaïques et des fresques sont le bain A, le bain B, la basilique A, la basilique B et le un bâtiment à abside et la domus. L’une des découvertes les plus remarquables fut sans aucun doute la mosaïque au sol de la nef

xxii

Abstracts and Key Words in English, French, German, Italian and Turkish de la basilique B, qui présente des personnifications des quatre fleuves du paradis: l’Euphrate, le Tigre, le Phison et le Geon. Mot-clefs : Hadrianopolis, Paphlagonie, Turquie centre-nord, Asie Mineure, période protobyzantine, antiquité tardive, VIème siècle apres J.-C., VIIème siècle après J.-C., mosaïques, fresques, les quatre fleuves du paradis.

Zusammenfassung Hadr anopol s bef ndet s ch n der nordwestl ch zentralen Türke , n der Nähe von Karabük, 3 km westl ch der modernen Stadt Esk pazar. In röm scher Ze t gehörte d eser Ort zum Südwesten von Paphlagon a und b ldete e nen w cht gen Punkt an der Verkehrsroute, d e von Ankara und der zentralanatol schen Ebene über d e Berge von Bartın zum Schwarzen Meer führte. H er gab es e ne re che landw rtschaftl che, nsbesondere we nbaul che Enklave an den Grenzen zw schen Paphlagon a, B thyn a und Galat en. An d eser röm schen und frühbyzant n schen Stätte wurden zw schen 2005 und 2008 von der Dokuz Eylül Un vers tät n Izm r v er Vermessungs-, Ausgrabungs- und Restaur erungskampagnen durchgeführt. Als Ergebn s der 2005 erfolgten Untersuchungen wurde bestät gt, dass Hadr anopol s tatsächl ch n V ranşeh r lokal s ert werden sollte, das ca. dre km westl ch des heut gen Esk pazar l egt und für das e ne Bes edlung vom 1. Jh. n. Chr. b s zum 8. Jh. n. Chr. nachwe sbar st. Durch d e Feldforschungen m Jahr 2005 konnten d e Überreste von m ndestens 24 Gebäuden dent f z ert werden. Unter hnen bef nden s ch zwe Bäder, zwe frühbyzant n sche Bas l ken, e ne Domus, e n Aps dengebäude, e ne byzant n sche Befest gungsanlage, mögl cherwe se e n Theater, e n gewölbter Bau, e n Kuppelbau und e n ge Wohngebäude, von denen d e me sten großfläch ge Bodenmosa ken bes tzen. Nach den Veröffentl chungen der Inschr ften (Hadrianopolis I), des Glases (Hadrianopolis II) und der Keram kfunde (Hadrianopolis III) st der vorl egende Band IV d eser Ser e den frühbyzant n schen Mosa ken und Fresken gew dmet, d e hauptsächl ch aus dem sechsten und s ebten Jh. n. Chr. stammen. D e w cht gsten Fundorte der Mosa ken und Fresken s nd das Bad A, das Bad B, d e Bas l ka A, d e Bas l ka B, das Aps dengebäude und d e Domus. E ne der bemerkenswertesten Entdeckungen war zwe fellos das Bodenmosa k des K rchensch ffs der Bas l ka B, das d e Person f kat onen der v er Flüsse des Parad eses, Euphrat, T gr s, Ph son und Geon, ze gt. Schlagwörter: Hadr anopol s, Paphlagon en, Nordzentraltürke , Kle nas en, frühbyzant n sche Ze t, Spätant ke, 6. Jh. n. Chr., 7. Jh. n. Chr., Mosa ken, Fresken, d e v er Flüsse des Parad eses.

Riassunto Hadrianopolis si trova sulla principale strada occidentale che dalla pianura centrale dell’Anatolia attraverso le montagne porta fino a Bartin e al Mar Nero; sorge a 3 km a ovest della moderna città di Eskipazar, vicino a Karabük, nella Paflagonia romana sud-occidentale (attuale Turchia centro-settentrionale). Era un sito piccolo, ma importante, che controllava questo itinerario principale e dominava un ricco territorio agricolo, in particolare vinicolo, ai confini tra Paflagonia, Bitinia e Galazia. Tra il 2005 e il 2008 sono state condotte in questo sito romano e del primo periodo bizantino quattro campagne di indagine, scavo e restauro dall’università Dokuz Eylül di Izmir. Come risultato dei sondaggi del 2005 nell’area, è stato confermato che Hadrianopolis era effettivamente coincidente con Viranşehir, c. 3 km a ovest della moderna Eskipazar, con reperti risalenti dal I secolo a. C. all’ VIII secolo d. C. Le indagini di superficie nel 2005 hanno identificato i resti di almeno 24 edifici nel sito. Tra questi vi sono due edifici termali, due basiliche bizantine antiche, una domus, un edificio absidato, una struttura fortificata del periodo bizantino, un possibile teatro, un edificio a volta, un edificio a cupola e alcuni edifici ad uso abitativo, la maggior parte dei quali erano pavimentati con grandi mosaici. Dopo le pubblicazioni delle iscrizioni (Hadrianopolis I), vetro (Hadrianopolis II) e reperti ceramici (Hadrianopolis III), l’attuale volume IV di questa serie è dedicato a questi primi mosaici e affreschi bizantini di questo sito che sono datati principalmente al VI e VII secolo d.C. I principali luoghi di ritrovamento dei mosaici e affreschi sono il Bagno A, il Bagno B, la Basilica A, la Basilica B, l’Edificio Absidato

xxiii

Hadrianopolis IV e la Domus. Una delle scoperte più notevoli è stata senza dubbio il mosaico pavimentale della navata della Basilica B, che mostra le personificazioni dei quattro fiumi del Paradiso: Eufrate, Tigri, Fison e Geon. Parole chiave : Hadrianopolis, Paflagonia, Turchia centro-settentrionale, Anatolia, primo periodo bizantino, tarda antichità, VI secolo. d.C., VII secolo d. C., mosaici, affreschi, i quattro fiumi del Paradiso.

Özet Hadr anopol s, Roma Dönem ’nde Güneybatı Paphlagon a Bölges ’s nde (bugün İç Anadolu’nun kuzeybatı kısmı), Karabük İl , Esk pazar İlçes ’n n 3 km batısında, Orta Anadolu Plato’nun Bartın Dağları e Karaden z’e kadar uzanan ana güzergahın batısında yer alır. Bu örenyer , bahs geçen bu öneml yol güzergâhını kontrol eden ve Paphlagon a, B thyn a ve Galat a arasındak sınır bölges nde, başta bağcılık olmak üzere zeng n b r tarım üret m ne hak m olan küçük ancak öneml Ant k b r yerleş m yer d . 2005-2008 yılları arasında bu Roma ve Erken B zans Dönemler ’ne a t yerleş mde Dokuz Eylül Ün vers tes tarafından dört araştırma, kazı ve restorasyon sezonu gerçekleşt r lm şt r. Bölgen n 2005 yılı yüzey araştırması sonucunda, İÖ 1. yüzyıldan İS 8. yüzyıla kadar tar hlend r len buluntularla modern Esk pazar’ın 3 km batısında, Hadr anopol s’ n V ranşeh r le gerçekten eşzamanlı olduğu doğrulanmıştır. 2005’tek yüzey araştırmalarında yerleş mde en az 24 b nanın kalıntılarını tesp t etm şt r. Bunlar arasında k hamam b nası, k erken B zans baz l kası, b r domus, aps sl yapı, B zans Dönem ’ne a t b r savunma yapısı, olası b r t yatro, tonozlu yapı, kubbel b r yapı kalıntısı; ve moza k tabanlı bazı günlük kullanıma uygun b nalar bulunmaktadır. Yazıtlar (Hadrianopolis I), cam (Hadrianopolis II) ve seram k buluntularının (Hadrianopolis III) yayınlanmasından sonra, bu ser n n IV no.lu bölümü, bu alandan esas olarak İS 5. ve 7. yüzyıllar arasına a t moza k ve fresk buluntularına ayrılmıştır. Moza kler ve freskler n ana buluntu yerler Hamam A, Hamam B, Baz l ka A, Baz l ka B ve Aps sl Yapı ve Domus’dur. En göze çarpan keş flerden b r , kuşkusuz dört cennet nehr n n person f kasyonlarını konu alan Baz l ka B’n n taban moza ğ d r: Euphrates, T gr s, Ph son ve Geon. Anahtar Kelimeler: Hadr anopol s, Paphlagon a, Orta Anadolu’nun kuzey , kuzey-orta Türk ye, Anadolu, erken B zans dönem , geç ant k çağ, İ.S. 6. yy., İS 7. Yy., moza kler, freskler, cennet neh rler .

xxiv

Introduction The present monograph is the fourth volume of the series on ‘Hadrianopolis’.1 It is exclusively devoted to the early Byzantine mosaic and fresco finds at this site in southwestern Paphlagonia, today the town of Eskipazar in the province of Karabük in the northwestern part of central of Turkey. This work aims to present all the mosaic and fresco finds from Hadrianopolis in the early Byzantine period, stretching from the late 5th to late 7th cent. AD. It is our aim to contextualise the mosaics from early Byzantine Hadrianopolis within the whole eastern Mediterranean and to understand these finds as part of this whole. The fact that Hadrianopolis contains early Byzantine floor mosaics dating to this limited time period between the 6th and 7th cent. AD from such an unexpected area in northern central Anatolia makes this monograph necessary. The objects presented here were found mainly in the field seasons between 2005 and 2008 by a team from the Dokuz Eylül University (DEU) in Izmir, under the direction of E. Laflı. It also includes the dissertation thesis of S. Patacı which was submitted to the Institute of Social Sciences of the DEU in Izmir in May 2012 and defended in July 2012. Volume V of this series on Hadrianopolis will be produced in 2020 by E. Laflı, S. Patacı and G. Kan Şahin, again with British Archaeological Reports (BAR) in the International Series, and will deal with urban and settlement patterns, architecture and architectural elements as well as cemeteries. The mosaic finds of the early Byzantine period from Hadrianopolis were reported only preliminarily by E. Laflı and A. Zäh in 2008 and 20092, by S. Patacı, A.K. Öz and E. Laflı in 2012, as well as S. Patacı and S. Altun in 20143 and the early Byzantine frescoes by E. Laflı in 2014.4 Some additional photos of the mosaic finds were detailed in the field report of 20085 and the general report of the seasons between 2005 and 2008.6 This volume is a complementary, comprehensive and updated collection of these past papers concerning the mosaic and fresco finds. As the number of early Byzantine mosaics has been an important component of the DEU field projects in Hadrianopolis and as this site has a relatively high proportion of these finds, this book is the first monograph on the Turkish Black Sea area that is fully dedicated to mosaic studies, after the book of D. Şahin on the mosaics from Amisus.7

In Turkey the main sites for the study of mosaics of the early Byzantine period are Antioch-on-the-Orontes, Zeugma, Edessa, Istanbul, Muğla, Mopsuestia, Anemurium, Xanthus and Aphrodisias (Figs. 1-2). During the early Byzantine period mosaic finds are patchy, unsuccesfully documented and generally not well-known in the southern Pontic littoral, i.e. Paphlagonia and Pontus, in comparison with other countries that are located on other Black Sea coasts, namely Bulgaria, Romania, Moldova, Ukraine, Russia and Georgia. Through these scattered finds it seems that during the Roman and early Byzantine periods, i.e. 1st to mid-7th cent. AD, the architecture of Paphlagonia and Pontus was based on wooden and stone elements, and mosaic floors were not common. Previous mosaic publications from these two regions show that most of the mosaic material belongs to the period between the mid-2nd and late 4th cent. AD. The most important mosaic publications from the Turkish Black Sea area are from Amisus8, Çiftlik near Sinope9, the Balatlar church in Sinope10, Pompeiopolis11 and recent mosaic finds from Amaseia12, none of which are known in scholarly sources in detail.13 The mosaic finds from Amisus are from the 3rd cent. AD. They were found in a domestic area of the acropolis of Amisus and were transported to the museum of Samsun to be displayed. Finds from Çiftlik near Sinope are dated to the early Byzantine period and ecclestiastical in context. In the Balatlar church in Sinop, a Byzantine basilical complex with earlier finds, late Roman-early Byzantine mosaics were found, particularly a mosaic inscription in 2017. The hinterland of Sinop was studied by O.P. Doonan14 in the early 2000s, and no mosaic results were published until 2018.15 It seems that mosaic flooring was a tradition on the coastline areas of Sinope but not the hinterland. The nearest comparable site to Hadrianopolis is Pompeiopolis in eastern Paphlagonia, c. 200 km east of Hadrianopolis, in the county of Taşköprü in Kastamonu. The first systematic archaeological excavations and surveys there began in 2006, which also revealed some mosaic finds. Mosaic finds from Paphlagonian Pompeiopolis, though scattered, are mostly from the late Roman-early Byzantine period and have a mixed character in terms of their context. Neither Sinopean nor Pompeiopolitan mosaics are known in detail. In Tium, a coastal site in modern HisarönüFilyos by Zonguldak in western Paphlagonia, the few mosaic and fresco finds are currently being studied. Finds

Previous volumes: Laflı and Christof 2012 (inscriptions); Fünfschilling and Laflı 2012 (glass finds); as well as Laflı and Kan Şahin 2016 (pottery finds). 2 Laflı and Zäh 2008 as well as 2009. 3 Patacı, Öz and Laflı 2012; as well as Patacı and Altun 2014. 4 Laflı 2014. 5 Laflı 2009a, p. 62. 6 Laflı and Gürler 2012, pp. 49-63, figs. 3-23. 7 Şahin 2004.

8

Şahin 2004; Şahin 2006, pp. 139-152. Tatlıcan 1997, pp. 333-356. 10 Köroğlu and Tok 2018, pp. 121-135. 11 Musso et al. 2011, pp. 75-120. 12 Keskin 2017, pp. 36-45. 13 . For the archaeological finds of this date in the Turkish Black Sea area more generally: Belke 2017. 14 Doonan 2002, 185-198; Doonan 2004. 15 Köroğlu and Tok 2018, pp. 121-135.

1

9

1

Fig. 1. Map of Turkey with some find places of mosaics and frescoes referred to in the text.

Hadrianopolis IV

2

Fig. 2. Map of Turkey with the chronology of some find places of mosaics and frescoes referred to in the text.

Introduction

3

Hadrianopolis IV Before this book could be written, many years of fieldwork were required. Since 2005, four field seasons (i.e. the survey season in 2005, excavations in 2006 and 2007, as well as the restoration season in 2008 – all conducted between c. June and October of each year - were organized in Eskipazar, in Karabük. In the 2008 season S. Patacı joined the team and began working on the illustrations and photos done onsite by E. Laflı between 2005 and 2008. The writing of this book spanned from May 2009 to August 2018 without any interruption. In March 2017 BAR Publishing accepted our proposal to publish this book in BAR International Series. The text was finally submitted to Oxford on August 17, 2018.

from two major coastline sites in Paphlagonia, Heraclea Pontica and Amastris, seem to be few and unfortunately unpublished. However, from Kadıköy in Çaycuma near Heraclea Pontica, a clearly early 3rd cent. A.D. floor mosaic in a countryside villa, superbly composed, is a spectacular find. This floor mosaic still needs to be studied and published extensively. One last find spot is Amaseia, modern Amasya in Pontus, where a team from the local museum excavated several floor mosaics of the Roman and early Byzantine periods. In the course of field surveys of the British Institute at Ankara in Inner Paphlagonia between 1997 and 2001, almost no mosaic or fresco finds were reported. The recent field surveys at Cytorus-Cide on the Paphlagonian coast have provided no evidence in terms of mosaic. Ongoing archaeological excavations and surveys at Comana Pontica,16 Oluz Höyük in Amasya, Amastris, Sebastopolis, the Island of Giresun-Aretias/ Chalceritis, the Kurul Citadel in Ordu and Cıngırt Kaya in Fatsa have provided only fragmentary knowledge concerning mosaics in the Turkish Black Sea area. It seems that Paphlagonia has more mosaic finds than Pontus, which was a more rugged region than Paphlagonia. All of the mosaic finds from each site differ from each other. Hadrianopolis seems to be one of the very few sites in the hinterland of Paphlagonia where extensive mosaic floors of the early Byzantine period were found. The reason for this preference is still not clear: why did the people in Hadrianopolis in the early Byzantine period prefer to have such extensive mosaic floors in their dwellings, civic buildings and churches?

The recent (2010-present) Turkish excavations in Hadrianopolis by the Ondokuz Mayıs University in Samsun headed by V. Keleş and by the University of Karabük, headed by E. Çelikbaş since 2017 reported on the restoration and conservation of the mosaics and roofing of Basilica B between 2010 to 2018. At the beginning of 2018 E. Çelikbaş, the new director since 2017, reported in some Turkish newspapers a newly excavated church that they called ‘Church D’ (perhaps the Apsidal Building) and its mosaics with a three-lined inscription and depictions of a bull and a lion as well as a vine arising from a fountainvase, flanked by a pair of peacocks.17 These new mosaics and their fragments from the 2010-2018 seasons which will likely be stored at the museum of Kastamonu, could therefore not be considered here. Several scholars were involved in the production of this book: Dr Paweł Nowakowski (Warsaw) wrote the preface of this volume and assisted us in terms of Byzantine epigraphy. Dr Alexander Zäh (Hanau) and Mr Sinan Altun (Izmir) assisted us in our past manuscripts concerning the mosaic finds. Dr Özlem Patacı (Ardahan) helped us with the preparation of texts and plans. Revisions and comments on this manuscript were sent by several colleagues, especially by Professor Demetrios Michaelides (Nicosia), between September 2018 and February 2019 which helped the authors to produce a well-laid out manuscript in decent English. All these revisions were inserted by us and the new manuscript was sent to Oxford in January 2019. Because it is difficult for Turkish scholars to present their scientific results in English, this book has been written in English so that this research will be available internationally. Abstracts in English, French, German, Italian and Turkish have also been provided at the beginning of the volume.

The local museums of the Turkish Black Sea area in Samsun, Giresun, Sinop, Trabzon, Amasya, Ereğli of Zonguldak, Amasra, Tokat, Kastamonu, Ordu, DüzceKonuralp, Gökçebey-Çanakçılar and Rize, as well as Paphlagonian and Pontic materials in the museums of Çankırı, Çorum, Bolu, Ankara and Istanbul, display some mosaic finds. Particularly relevant is the museum of Sinop with its collection of late Roman-early Byzantine mosaics. The museum of Giresun also has some mosaics and frescoes of middle Byzantine period, found in the excavations of Giresun Island, and the frescoes and mosaics in the church of St Sophia in Trabzon belong to the late Byzantine period. These finds are mostly not published and the published ones are known only in a preliminary and incomplete manner. Most of the examples in the collections of the local museums in the Turkish Black Sea area differ from the ones in Hadrianopolis to a great extent. In some cases several geographically and date-wise distant parallels for some patterns of the mosaics in Hadrianopolis were discussed in the following text that are found more or less everywhere, e.g. the different types of guilloche; but, generally it is attempted to stick only to what is directly pertinent - especially date-wise – unless a pattern is so rare that it was necesseray to quote all its parallels.

The mosaic and fresco fragments dealt within this book are currently stored in two main locations: a large portion of the finds from the rescue excavations in 2003 is now held in a depot of the local Directorate of Culture and Tourism in Karabük, which we did not consider in this book. The remainder is stored in a container which was donated by the Turkish State Water Supply Administration (DSİ) in June 2007, was placed in an area close to the Domus, and

16 Erciyas 2013, p. 139, figs. 13-15; Erciyas 2006, pp. 14-15, figs. 4, 7-8 and 10; Erciyas 2010, p. 358, fig. 4; as well as Erciyas, Sökmen and Kocabıyık 2011, p. 126, fig. 12.

17 (accessed on August 17, 2018).

4

Introduction should still be there. In this container the materials from the 2006, 2007 and 2008 seasons were stored. Very few of the mosaic finds that were not diagnostic were left in batches in the field. Some further mosaic fragments found and collected during the rescue excavations at Basilica B in 2003 by the local museum of Ereğli in Zonguldak were perhaps stored in this museum, but they have never been studied. Mosaic finds in the local museums, such as those in the museums of Çankırı, Kastamonu and Amasra have also been considered for analogical purposes of the present study. Several museums were visited and their mosaic collections inspected in relation to our mosaic studies in Hadrianopolis: the local museums in Amasra, Sinop, Kastamonu, Çankırı and the Museum of Anatolian Civilizations in Ankara in 2007, Museum of Samsun in 2011 and 2015, museums of Şanlıurfa and Sivas in 2017 and 2018, the Museum of Konya in 2018 and the Museum of Byzantine Culture in Thessaloniki in 2013. Izmir 17 August 2018

5

I Hadrianopolis in the Early Byzantine Period Hadrianopolis and Field Research in Southwestern Paphlagonia

and 2007, excavations were carried out in Hadrianopolis, and in 2008 we had our restoration season at the site.

Paphlagonia (Παφλαγονία) was an ancient region on the Black Sea (classical Pontus Euxinus) coast of Anatolia, bordered by Bithynia to the west, Pontus to the east and Galatia to the south (Fig. 3). Hadrianopolis or Hadrianoupolis (Ἁδριανούπολις) is located in the southwestern part of Paphlagonia, 3 km west of the township of Eskipazar (= ‘old bazaar’), near the province of Karabük in northwestern central Anatolia (Fig. 4). It lies in an area with an elevation of 902 m, where the Central Anatolian plain in Çankırı stops and the mountain chains of northwestern Anatolia begin. It is also located within the northwestern Anatolian earthquake zone. Most of the surface remains at Hadrianopolis are from the 6th and 7th cent. AD. Its location in southwestern Paphlagonia lies along the principal route from the Central Anatolian plain through the western Black Sea mountain range through Bartın to the Black Sea, a small but important hinterland landscape controlling this major route and dominating a rich agricultural (especially viticultural) enclave. Through our field research it has been determined that the nucleus of Roman and Byzantine Hadrianopolis extended along the Eskipazar-Mengen highway for c. 8 km east-west and 3 km north-south. The core of the site extended as far as the modern villages of Budaklar and its surrounding districts of Hacıahmetler (or Hacımatlar), Çaylı and Eleler. The chora of Hadrianopolis is much more extensive (Fig. 5); but it is not rich in terms of mosaics and frescoes.

After the DEU expedition team’s four seasons, excavations and restorations were conducted between 2010 and 2014 by a new team from the Ondokuz Mayıs University in Samsun and the University of Karabük. From this point forward, so far there has been no publication concerning the mosaic or fresco finds from the site. In 2017 the excavation became an official excavation of the University of Karabük, under the direction of E. Çelikbaş. In these seasons the mosaics of Basilica B were restored and conserved, and a roofing system was built over the mosaics and ruins of Basilica B. From the scattered excavation reports and unofficial news it seems that some mosaic floors belonging to another church were excavated at the site, details of which remain unknown. During all of these field campaigns it has been shown that southwestern Paphlagonia was a transitional landscape between the classical regions of Galatia as well as Bithynia, and was settled (with some brief interruptions) at the latest from the Middle/Late Iron Age (i.e. 5th-4th cent. BC.) until the beginning of the 8th cent. AD. Hadrianopolis and Southwestern Paphlagonia in the Early and Middle Byzantine Periods As the mosaic and fresco finds belong to the early Byzantine period, a short history of the site during this period should be given. Paphlagonia first appeared as a separate province in the 4th cent. AD.19 When Theodosius I (AD 379-395) combined parts of Paphlagonia and Bithynia into a new province called ‘Honorias’, Hadrianopolis became known as ‘Hadrianopolis in Honoriade’.20 The political geography of Paphlagonia during the early Byzantine period is well known through the Συνέκδημος of Hierocles, as the Roman towns of Inner Paphlagonia survived from the 2nd cent. into the 6th cent. AD, when some new sites were added.21 During the Roman and early Byzantine periods, southwestern Paphlagonia had an agriculturebased economy with extensive land use.22 Additionally, the region was a major source of timber, which was

Until 2001, there was no systematic archaeological research conducted in Hadrianopolis, except for expeditions or journeys of a historic or epigraphic nature in the late 19th and the 20th cent. The first and only systematic archaeological fieldwork in the hinterland of Paphlagonia, in so-called ‘Inner Paphlagonia’, was led by R.J. Matthews and his team from the British Institute at Ankara (BIAA) in 2001, the results of which were published in 2009.18 In the fall of 2003 there was a rescue excavation by the local museum of Ereğli in Zonguldak at Basilica B in the city core of Hadrianopolis, the results of which have not yet been published. Between 2005 and 2008, an archaeological team from the Dokuz Eylül University (DEU) carried out archaeological field surveys, excavations and restorations. The 2005 season was a survey season and the focus of the survey was the chora of Hadrianopolis, especially Kimistene. In 2006

Belke 1996, p. 65: The name ‘Paphlagonia’ appears as one of the seven provinces of ‘Pontica’ in the so-called ‘Laterculus Veronensis’ or Verona List, a list of Roman provinces from the times of the Roman emperors Diocletian and Constantine I at AD 314/315. 20 A well-known mid-6th cent. AD inscription from the chora of Hadrianopolis clearly indicates that the city was part of the province of Honorias at the time: Mitchell 1993b, p. 121; and SEG 1985, no. 1360. 21 Honigmann 1939, Nov. 28, 29 and 31; as well as Jones 1971, p. 171. 22 Anderson 2011, p. 38. 19

18 For the pottery results of the BIAA surveys: Matthews, Metcalfe and Cottica 2009, pp. 173-177.

7

Fig. 3. Map of Paphlagonia, Northern and Central Anatolia with places referred to in the text.

Hadrianopolis IV

8

Fig. 4. Site plan of Hadrianopolis with all surveyed and excavated areas in 2008.

Introduction

9

Hadrianopolis IV

Fig. 5. Map of the surveyed areas in southwestern Paphlagonia in 2005.

10

Hadrianopolis in the Early Byzantine Period transported great distances over the sea before, during and after the Roman period.23

urban life across the entire region to change.28 Although Hadrianopolis experienced growth and transformation up to the mid-7th cent., the written sources indicate Arab invasions in the region in the AD 720s,29 which caused the site (as with the majority of the late antique Anatolian towns) to be abandoned by the mid-8th cent. AD.30 During the 7th and 8th cent. AD, the Arabs inflicted crippling damage on Constantinople and were able to conquer important cities and fortresses in Asia Minor such as Amorium, Ancyra and Dorylaeum,31 whereas they rarely found their way to Paphlagonia.32 They did, however, manage to carry out two raids in southwestern Paphlagonia, which brought the collapse of late antique life and caused demographic changes in the region around Gangra-Germanicopolis.33 Evidence for this was found in some burials from the mid8th to 9th cent. (Figs. 180-181) that were excavated in 2003 on the grounds of Basilica B in Hadrianopolis.34 The Arabs, however, did not stay in the region for long. Built after the first quarter of the 8th cent. AD, the emergence of a series of ‘fortified hilltop sites’ in several parts of Paphlagonia provide archaeological evidence of the first Arab attacks in the region, as evidenced by the BIAA field surveys.35

Hadrianopolis became a diocesan centre in the second half of the 5th cent. AD and a sudden flowering of urbanism marked its subsequent history during the first half of the 6th cent. In the late 5th and early 6th cent. AD, there was an increase in the overall number and spread of settlements in southwestern Paphlagonia, including urban centres and a number of villages and farms that dotted along river valleys, roadways and the territories of larger towns, as well as previously unsettled lands. During the early Byzantine era this landscape contained several churches in urban settings, such as two basilicas in Hadrianopolis and minor churches in rural locations. Beginning in the early 6th cent. AD Hadrianopolis became a polis with a fortification, and a building ‘boom’ began to take shape, establishing important trade routes. The site became a significant regional centre between the coastal part of Paphlagonia and Galatia. Since it was cut off from its neighbours, it was a self-sufficient city, drawing on the natural and agricultural resources of its own territory. During the reign of Heraclius (AD 610-641), St Alypius the Stylite (Ἀλύπιος ὁ Στυλίτης; AD 522-640), an ascetic and a monastic founder, lived in an ancient pagan cemetery ‘in a deserted area’ outside Hadrianopolis.24 This location must be related to Basilica A, excavated by us in 2006.25 According to the same sources, there were also a monastery and a convent, as well as a basilica for the great martyr St Euphemia ‘on the site of a dilapidated pagan temple’,26 built by St Alypius. Supposedly he erected a pillar beside Basilica A and lived atop it for most of his adult life. A monastery and a convent were built beside his pillar, of which St Alypius served as spiritual director. The literary evidence, as well as numerous religious buildings with extensive and quality mosaic floors, indicate that this site could have been an important ecclesiastical centre during the 6th and 7th cent. AD.27 In about AD 550 Hadrianopolis also became known as the birthplace of Stylianus of Paphlagonia a saint possibly confused with Alypius the Stylite, as the former shares Alypius’ birthdate and city. The attribute ‘stylite’ may have been a confusion of the cognomen ‘Στυλιανός’.

Historically and archaeologically, the middle Byzantine period in Paphlagonia after the Arab raids in the 720s is poorly understood. In this period Paphlagonia became a theme. The territory of this theme corresponded roughly to the Late Antique province of Paphlagonia, which had been subsumed within the themes of Obsequium and Bucellarian.36 Its governing ‘katepano’ (κατεπάνω), or in Latinised form ‘capetanus/catepan’ (i.e. a senior Byzantine military rank and office such as a captain or fleet commander), was first mentioned in the later 830s;37 but ‘Paphlagonia’ was definitely created after c. 815819.38 It would appear that the theme was established Mitchell 1993b, pp. 120-121; as well as Matthews, Metcalfe and Cottica 2009, p. 191. For the middle Byzantine towns in Asia Minor: Brandes 1989, pp. 38-39 and 71-88. 29 Ahrweiler 1962, pp. 9 and 28. 30 For the studies which highlight the phenomenon of late antique ruralisation in Asia Minor: Baird 2004, pp. 219-246; Foss 1979; Ivison 2007, pp. 25-60; Kirilov 2007, pp. 3-24; Müller-Wiener 1986, pp. 435475; Niewöhner 2003, pp. 221-228; Niewöhner 2007, pp. 119-158; Ratté 2001, pp. 116-147; as well as Vanhaverbeke, Martens and Waelkens 2007, pp. 611-648. 31 Brandes 1989, p. 74. 32 Brüggemann 2012, p. 50: A further, recent theory put forward by the new excavators in Hadrianopolis is that the reason why the city of Hadrianopolis disappeared and was suddenly abandoned was the  invasion of Muawiyah I – a cousin of the prophet Muhammad, reigned between AD 661 and 680, and a ruling Arab emperor on his way to conquer Constantinople in AD 674–678; this theory, however, has not been published in any scholarly works as of yet. 33 Izdebski 2012, p. 57; Cf. Ahrweiler 1962, p. 30ff. and p. 13ff.; as well as Charanis 1975, pp. 1-20. 34 Laflı and Kan Şahin 2010, p. 428. 35 Matthews, Metcalfe and Cottica 2009, pp. 190-199, figs. 6.29 and 6.35. 36 Belke 1996, pp. 69-74; Kazhdan 1991, p. 1579; Pertusi 1952, p. 136; as well as Brooks 1901, pp. 69, 71, 73 and 76-77. 37 Belke 1996, pp. 74 and 137; Constantine VII Porphyrogenitus, De administrando imperio (eds. Moravcsik and Jenkins 1985), p. 182; as well as Theophanes Continuatus (ed. Bekker 1838), pp. 122-123. 38 Theodore the Studite, Epistulae (ed. Fatouros 1992), pp. 2 and 63; Treadgold 1988/1989, pp. 140-143; and Belke 1996, p. 73f. Leo V the 28

In the 7th cent., Paphlagonia became part of the theme of Obsequium (or Opsikion), i.e. a military-civilian province of the Byzantine Empire, and, later, of the Bucellarian theme, before it was detached again to form a separate unit. A drastic shift in the government organisation caused

Anderson 2011, p. 38; Wilson 1960, p. 37; and Broughton 1938, pp. 616-617. 24 Darrouzès 1992, pp. 92-94; Saradi-Mendelovici 1990, p. 55 and n. 91; as well as Delehaye 1923, p. 193f. 25 For a recent research on the episcopal quarter of Hadrianopolis, i.e. the possible site for a martyrion of St. Alypius cf. Eichner 2018. 26 Belke 1996, p. 156. For St Euphemia cf. Halkin 1965. 27 On the early Byzantine floor mosaics from Hadrianopolis: Patacı, Öz and Laflı 2012; as well as Patacı and Altun 2014. 23

11

Hadrianopolis IV It seems obvious that Hadrianopolis was a fortified regional centre during the early Byzantine period (6th-7th cent. AD), when it could be easily defined as a polis with civic buildings. It had a fairly large urban population (c. 8.00010.000 inhabitants) as well as an extensive agrarian rural population in its chora. Numismatic finds are the major helpful benchmark for assessing the region’s chronology in combination with the pottery finds. The Byzantine coins found in Hadrianopolis point to an active city life during the 6th and 7th cent. AD46 and show clear signs of an economic boom, especially in the Domus area. Most of the visible surface remains in southwestern Paphlagonia belong to this period.

during the reign of either Leo V the Armenian (AD 813820) or Michael II (AD 820-829), simultaneously with the theme of Chaldea in c. 820.39 During this period the name of Hadrianopolis appeared in some episcopal lists40, and metropolitans of Hadrianopolis appear on some lead seals.41 More specifically, what we know about this period is that a ‘Nicetas’ from Hadrianopolis attended the Seventh Ecumenical Council of Nicaea in AD 787.42 A 10th/11th cent. seal of a certain bishop called ‘George’ likely refers to it.43 In church listings the city of Hadrianopolis was mentioned until the 12th cent., variously as being in Galatia, Honorias, Obsequium or Bucellarian-Paphlagonia.44 During the middle Byzantine period, life in the city of Hadrianopolis seems to have practically ceased. The only archaeological record are the above-mentioned burials of the 8th-9th cent. in Basilica B. No architectural features belonging to this period were identified at Hadrianopolis apart from a few possible architectural elements, probably belonging to a local church. No local epigraphic sources for the middle Byzantine period exist in southwestern Paphlagonia either.

The most important mosaic finds in Hadrianopolis are from Baths A, Baths B, Basilica A, Basilica B, the Apsidal Building and the Domus. All of these mosaic floors are dated between the early 6th and late 7th cent. AD with a concentration around AD 520-550. There is no mosaic find of the Roman period in Hadrianopolis and most of these mosaic finds are ecclestiastical. Figures and compositions on these mosaic panels are noticeable. As mentioned above, Hadrianopolis was a bishopric and perhaps also a pilgrimage centre47; but no literary phenomena related to the site were reflected in the ecclestiastical architecture as well as the mosaic pavement traditions of early Byzantine Hadrianopolis.

Find Spots of Mosaics and Frescoes in Hadrianopolis and Their Characteristics During the field campaigns between 2005 and 2008, remains of at least 25 buildings in Hadrianopolis were identified (Fig. 4). Among them were two bath complexes of the late Roman-early Byzantine periods (Baths A and B); a domus (formerly called a ‘villa’); two Basilicas (Basilica A and B; formerly called ‘churches’); a fortified structure of the middle Byzantine period known as ‘Deliklikaya’ (= ‘punctured rock’) by the locals that contains earlier rock-cut graves and described as the acropolis of the site at the end of the 19th cent.;45 an apsidal building; the socalled ‘western rock-cut tomb’; the so-called ‘monumental tomb’; a possible theatron (an auditorium); an arched building; a domed building; several single burials as well as burial groups of various periods; and some further early Byzantine domestic buildings with mosaic floors. Most of these structures are built in a spread and disconnected manner at the site, as these structures were built in a valley along Göksu Çay (stream) in the east and west direction. According to some Turkish newspapers in 2018 a further church, called ‘Church D’ by the current excavators, was found with extensive mosaic floors, details of which are still unknown.

Here is some general information on these find spots: Baths A Baths A (Fig. 4) are monumental building located in the southern part of the site, c. 130 m southwest of Basilica B. In 2006 and 2007, a large part of the structure, revealing 15 rooms, was excavated. Almost every type of architectural design was discovered here, e.g. mosaic floors, frescoes, opus sectile, hypocaust systems, tile revetments, etc. Our main benchmark for the chronology of Baths A was the Byzantine numismatic evidence. One can assume that Baths A has five archaeological phases: AD c. 475-550, c. 550-600, c. 600-650, c. 650-725 and c. 725 (i.e. the Arab invasions of Gangra-Germanicopolis and Hadrianopolis) to the 19th cent. In this latest phase Baths A must have been converted into a barn. Baths B Baths B (Fig. 4) are located c. 200 m northwest of Baths A and c. 150 m north of Basilica B on a ridge between the hamlet of Hacıahmetler and the core of early Byzantine Hadrianopolis. Although the function of this half-excavated monumental building has not been precisely determined yet, its construction belongs to the early Byzantine period. It was used either as a baths or as a domestic building between the early 6th cent. to the

Armenian was killed on December 25, 820; after him Michael II became the emperor. 39 McGeer, Nesbitt and Oikonomides 2001, p. 25; Oikonomides 1972, p. 349; Brüggemann 2012, p. 49; Winkelmann 1985, pp. 110-111; and Lounghis 1998, p. 53. 40 Ramsay 1890, pp. 194, 196 and 318. At Chalcedon, Theophilus in Honorias was represented by a presbyter called ‘Pelagius’. 41 McGeer, Nesbitt and Oikonomides 2001, p. 18, nos. 6.1-6.2. 42 Lamberz 2004, p. 65. 43 Laurent 1965, no. 1593. 44 Belke 1996, p. 156. Cf.: Riplinger et al. 1988; Naumann, Kleem and Kuhn 1988; as well as Kazhdan 1991, p. 2034 (‘Theme’). 45 Matthews, Metcalfe and Cottica 2009, p. 176.

Laflı, Lightfoot and Ritter 2016, p. 187. Anderson and Robinson 2012, p. 23; as well as Delehaye 1923, pp. 148, 154-155 and 161-162. 46 47

12

Hadrianopolis in the Early Byzantine Period mid-8th cent. AD (some earlier and later finds were also discovered). Its floors were covered with quality mosaics of the late 6th-early 7th cent. AD.

The Domus The Domus (Fig. 4), formerly called a ‘villa’, is located c. 150 m east of Basilica B. It consists of seven rooms, some with mosaics and frescoes. Recovered pottery from the Domus suggests a living room and a kitchen as well as some other rooms with different purposes. This building offers us a detailed understanding of domestic life in a provincial landscape in early Byzantine Asia Minor.

Basilica A Basilica A (Fig. 4) is located on the eastern extra-mural areas of the site, c. 4 km northeast of Basilica B and c. 2 km east of the Byzantine citadel (Deliklikaya). It belongs to a building complex, most probably with a monastery as well as a wine and/or oil production workshop, of the early 6th to the mid-8th cent. AD. It was possibly related to one of the monasteries of St Alypius the Stylite, referred to in ancient ecclesiastical sources.48 High quality mosaics were found on its floors in 2006.

The Chora of Hadrianopolis An area within a radius of c. 20 km around Hadrianopolis was surveyed extensively, and more than 15 archaeological sites with numerous functions were discovered (Fig. 5). These sites were höyüks, cemeteries, single graves or grave groups, tumuli, stone quarries, farmyards, komai, sanctuaries and other remains. During the early Byzantine period, the chora was densely populated because of the intensive agricultural activities, especially viticulture, in the area.

Basilica B Basilica B (Fig. 4) is located in the centre of Hadrianopolis on the platform where Baths A is also located. As mentioned above, it was excavated by the museum of Ereğli in Zonguldak in 2003, and extensively rich and remarkable mosaic floors were found. Its plan is almost exactly the same as Basilica A, but its mosaic programme reflects different characteristics and workmanship. A panel with the personifications of the Four Rivers of Paradise was discovered on the nave of this building.

Only few mosaic fragments were found in the chora of Hadrianopolis: a fragment in Kimistene and some fragments in Kepez, both of which should belong to the Byzantine period. Kimistene is a hilltop site c. 12 km northeast of Hadrianopolis, near the village of Deresemail (ancient Ende ra and Ottoman Emrodere) and the hamlet of Değirmenbaşı. Located on a mountain chain called “Asartepe” (= “hill of monuments”) by the locals, this site shows signs of occupation over a long period, with particularly important phases in the Hellenistic and Roman Imperial periods.

The Apsidal Building The Apsidal Building (Fig. 4), only a very restricted part of which was excavated in 2007, is located just 15 m north of Baths B. A quality early Byzantine mosaic covered its floor, leading us to believe that there must have been an organic relationship between Baths B and this building, the function of which is still unknown.

48

Kepez is a cemetery site with two rock-cut graves and two cisterns, situated c. 8 km southeast of Kimistene and c. 12 km southeast of Hadrianopolis. It is located on a hilltop in a cliffy area. Both the date and craftship of these fragments from Kimistene and Kepez differ from the ones discovered in Hadrianopolis. It is also not clear where these mosaic fragments in Kimistene and Kepez were used.

Cf. note 21 above.

13

II Mosaics from Baths A Baths A

of wood which is a rare find of a construction material in an early Byzantine bath complex in Asia Minor.59 Plaster remains used for wall bonding were identified amid stone material. In some rooms, especially on the wall surface of Room 11, which has a floor mosaic, there are stucco remains (Figs. 11-12).60

Baths A are constructed on a steep hillside 400 m north of Göksu Çay and are among the central buildings of the site (Figs. 4, 6-10). They are located nearly 140 m southwest of Basilica B. The construction was discovered for the first time in 2005 and was excavated in 2006 and 2007. In 2006, excavations were carried out in 13 different rooms of this monumental bath complex, and part of the floor mosaic in Room 11 was discovered. In 2007, it was clarified that Room 11 was divided by a wall along an east-west axis. The section to the north of this wall was called Room 11a, and the section to the south Room 11b (Figs. 6-7 and 10).49 In the 2007 season, the rest of the floor mosaic in Room 11b was discovered and within a period of two years, 15 different rooms of the baths were revealed.50

In Rooms 8 and 10, which are on the north terrace of the building, the floors consist of local yellow travertine. Five steps at the main entrance to the east of the baths – that is, in Room 6 – were also made of local yellow travertine material (Figs. 6-7). In front of the stepped section there is an entrance and at this entrance, the marks of door hinges were discovered. Rooms 3 and 4, on the south terrace, have tile flooring. In Room 4, tile has been used for insulation and in addition, the remains of a water channel were found. In the excavations in Rooms 1, 7, 9 and 14, as well as in the west half of Room 8, bedrock was reached. Moreover, a water slot of stone has been discovered just outside Room 7, which is located at the west edge of the baths, next to the west wall.

At the end of the excavations, it was concluded that Baths A were built in the last quarter of the 5th cent. AD and were in use up to the beginning of the 8th cent. AD.51 The combined evidence of coins and small finds shows that the building was in use during the period AD 475-725 in four different phases.52 The finds show clearly that the construction was used as a stable after it lost its original function.53

Room 11, which occupies a central point and has a floor mosaic, appears to be a caldarium.61 Its west wall preserves three almost intact arches made of brick (Figs. 10-11). The arched architectural unit to the north, which enables the passage between Rooms 10 and 11, also has a lintel.62 Room 11 and its floor mosaic was constructed over the furnace of the baths, as can be seen from the remains.63 We believe that the destruction to the floor mosaic in Room 11b was caused by use of this furnace in a later period (Figs. 10 and 13).64 Rooms 8 and 10, on the north terrace of the building, were possibly used as a tepidarium.65 Room 13 at the east edge of the building, is supposed to be a latrina, because of the architectural remains and the convenient position of the space.66 It is possible that the central part of the building, including Room 11, was covered with a dome.67

Baths A, which are almost 35 m long54 and 18.60 m wide, were constructed to the north of Göksu Çay Valley, on a steep slope, over two different elevations.55 Six architectural units on the south terrace of the building were numbered 1 to 6 (from left to right) by the excavators. On the north terrace, there are nine different rooms numbered 7 to 15 (Figs. 6-7). It is very possible that there may have been a thermal spring close to Baths A in antiquity, and considering also the existence of Baths B, located nearly 300 m west of Baths A, Hadrianopolis may have been a thermal centre in the early Byzantine period.56 The walls of Baths A were bonded with quality rubble; some sections of the building have alternate wall bonding consisting of three rows of brick and stone.57 Some walls of the baths are preserved to about 2 m high.58 One significant architectural feature of the building is the use

The finds related to the heating system of the baths can be observed inside Room 2 (Fig. 6). Although the archaeological data recovered from the excavations are not conclusive, it is observed that the hypocaust system in Baths A has similarity with other late Roman baths

Laflı and Zäh 2008, p. 701. Patacı 2011, p. 27. Laflı and Zäh 2008, p. 703; Laflı 2009b, p. 162. 52 Laflı and Zäh 2009, p. 641. 53 Cumalıoğlu 2011, p. 75. 54 The length of the south wall of the building except Room 6 in the southeast of the area is 28 m. 55 Laflı and Zäh 2008, p. 700. 56 Laflı 2007, p. 29. 57 Laflı and Zäh 2009, p. 641. 58 Laflı 2009b, p. 47. 49 50

Laflı 2009b, p. 162; Laflı 2007, p. 29. Laflı 2009b, pp. 47-48. 61 Laflı and Zäh 2008, p. 700. 62 Laflı and Zäh 2008, p. 700. 63 Laflı 2009b, pp. 46-47. 64 Laflı and Zäh 2009, p. 645. 65 Laflı and Zäh 2009, p. 645. 66 Cumalıoğlu 2011, p. 37. 67 Laflı 2007, p. 29.

51

59 60

15

Fig. 6. Plan of Baths A.

Hadrianopolis IV

16

Fig. 7. Chronological plan of Baths A.

Hadrianopolis in the Early Byzantine Period

17

Hadrianopolis IV

Fig. 8. Section plan of Baths A.

(Fig. 13).68 In addition, it is clear that the hypocaust system was removed at a later phase of the bath complex.69

wares and Roman sigillata fragments.70 Numerous glass finds were also recovered; the most interesting of which possibly being a glass weight referring to a ‘Theodoros’ and dating to the 6th cent. AD.71 In 2008 a tear-shaped necklace pendant, dating to the 7th cent. AD and a cobalt

A large number of objects were found in the excavations of the baths, including early Byzantine coarse cooking

Laflı and Şahin 2011, p. 427; Laflı and Zäh 2008, p. 703; Laflı 2007, p. 29. 69 Laflı 2009b, p. 162.

Laflı 2007, p. 29. Laflı 2009b, p. 163; Laflı 2009b, p. 51; Laflı and Christof 2012a, p. 105, fig. 100.

68

70 71

18

Mosaics from Baths A

Fig. 9. Baths A. View from the east.

Fig. 10. Baths A-Room 11. View from the northeast.

19

Hadrianopolis IV

Fig. 11. Baths A-Room 11. View of the arches from the east.

Fig. 12. Stucco on the north wall of Room 11.

20

Mosaics from Baths A

Fig. 13. Baths A. Floor of Room 11b.

blue double articulated glass bead of the same date were recovered.72 Yet, the most common finds recovered from the baths are lamps.73 Another interesting find is the imprint of a statue base of Marcus Aurelius Gallienus, of the 3th cent. AD. The statue base was used as spoil material on the floor of room 4 and thus the inscription on it was imprinted on the plaster of the ground (Fig. 14).74 An ambon slab has been recovered inside the west wall of Room 8, which is located to the north terrace of the construction and existed as the adjoint of Room 9 (Fig.  6). Other architectural elements recovered in Baths A are cornice fragments, architrave blocks, column fragments, bases and capitals.75

the baths are lamps.78 Another interesting find is a statue base marked with the name of Marcus Aurelius Gallienus, from the 3rd cent. AD. The inscribed side of the statue base was re-used as spoil material on the floor of room 4 and thus the lettering on the base has been imprinted on the plaster on the ground (Fig. 14).79 An ambon plate was recovered inside the west wall of Room 8, which is located on the north terrace of the construction and adjoined Room 9 (Fig. 6). Other architectural elements recovered from Baths A are geison fragments, architrave blocks, column fragments, bases and capitals.80

Numerous glass finds have been uncovered in the building; possibly the most interesting one is a glass weight referring to a ‘Theodoros’ and dating to the 6th cent. AD.76 In 2008 a tear-shaped pendant and a cobalt blue double-articulated glass bead, both dating to the 7th cent. AD, were recovered.77 Yet the most common finds recovered from

A great number of bronze coins were recovered during Baths A excavations.81 With the aid of these coins, we have been able to establish that the building was in constant use between AD 475 and 725.82 Other small finds are lead necklace pendants, lead seals, bronze weights, earrings and bracelet fragments dating between the 5th and 7th cent. AD. Numerous nails occur among metal finds, which we believe were used in wooden construction elements.83

Laflı 2009b, p. 163, figs. 8-9. Laflı 2007, p. 29. 74 Laflı 2007, p. 29. 75 Cumalıoğlu 2011, pp. 30-35. 76 Laflı 2009b, p. 163; Laflı 2009b, p. 51; Laflı and Christof 2012a, p. 105, fig. 100. 77 Laflı 2009b, p. 163, figs. 8-9.

Laflı 2007, p. 29. Laflı 2007, p. 29. 80 Cumalıoğlu 2011, pp. 30-35. 81 Nearly 20 bronze coins were discovered during the four field campaigns: Laflı 2009b, p. 51; and Laflı, Lightfoot and Ritter 2016. 82 Laflı and Şahin 2011, p. 427; Laflı 2009b, p. 162. 83 Laflı 2007, p. 29.

72

78

73

79

21

Hadrianopolis IV

Fig. 14. Traces of the inscription of Marcus Aurelius Gallienus on the floor of Room 4.

During the excavations, the remains of a wine atelier were discovered in front of the north wall of Baths A. The find spot is just to the north of Room 11, and a pithos has been found there. This wine atelier must have been built after the main building had lost its function or during its last phase. In the context of the intense wine production in Hadrianopolis, these finds in Baths A emphasise that these kind of activities took place not only in the outskirts of the site, but also in the city core.

precautions were taken for weak points of the mosaic (Fig. 15). Tesserae and Mosaic Fragments Discovered in Baths A There is a great number of tesserae among the finds uncovered in Baths A. The floors documented in this building are the mosaic of geometric design in Room 11 and the opus sectile in Room 8. However, a great many tesserae which do not belong to the mosaic of Room 11 have also been found in the excavations.

Restoration and conservation processes were undertaken by G. Dikilitaş and her staff, due to the poor preservation of the architecture and in order to exhibit the remains in situ. All of the walls of the structure and especially the three arches in the west wall of Room 11 were consolidated during the last season.84 In addition, detachment had occurred between the stucco plaster layer and the wall and consequently, consolidation was performed using fluid hydraulic mortar injections. Preservation and consolidation works were also carried out on the geometric  mosaic which decorates the floor of  Room 11, dating to the last quarter of the 5th cent. AD.85  Accordingly, first of all, cleaning work was done on the mosaic floor. Lime mortar was used to fill empty spaces in the mosaic, which lacked either plaster or tesserae; unstable tesserae were stabilised by fluid hydraulic grout injection and the joints between tesserae were strengthened; consolidating and stabilising 84 85

Some of these tesserae are made of glass material with gold leaf, proving that Hadrianopolis was decorated with wall mosaics as well as floor mosaics. However, no examples of wall mosaics have been discovered in Hadrianopolis so far. It is unclear if the glass tesserae found belong to Baths A or not; but in our opinion, these must not belong to Baths A. In Baths A, spolia have been used in various phases. Some of these are architectural fragments used in the religious buildings. We think that the examples of glass tesserae found during the excavations and supposed to pertain to the 6th cent. AD might actually have been brought, together with these spolia, from a religious building near Baths A. The walls of Baths A have been preserved to the height of 2 m in some rooms. Considering this situation and assuming that the building was decorated with wall mosaics, many more than a few glass tesserae would have been found during the excavations. Still, the discovery of golden-glass tesserae in a city like Hadrianopolis, which may be called provincial, would influence our understanding of the site

Laflı 2009b, p. 48. Laflı 2009b, p. 47.

22

Mosaics from Baths A

Fig. 15. Two views of the floor mosaic of Room 11b during the restoration in 2008.

as a whole in terms of the early Byzantine era, because the Byzantine wall decorative art performed in this technique is the most expensive and difficult in application.86 The glass tesserae discovered during the research measure 0.5 x 0.5 cm to 1.0 x 1.0 cm. The dimensions of the other tesserae generally vary between 1.0 x 1.0 cm and 1.5 x 1.5 cm.87

1.5 cm and 1.5 x 1.5 cm. The mosaic technique is opus tessellatum. The fragment shows a polychrome design with geometric and figural patterns. A bird is depicted on a white ground in a circle consisting of two rows of tesserae; an area of the bird showing the neck, chest, abdomen and legs has been preserved. The body of the bird is slightly turned to the right. This bird is similar to the bird found on the bema mosaic of Basilica A (Fig. 131); however, the species of the bird, supposed to be a pigeon or a barnyard fowl, cannot be exactly identified. The tesserae on the figure are red, grey and blue; in the mosaic fragment, dark blue, bluish grey, red, light reddish grey, light greenish grey and bluish grey tones are used.

In addition to the tesserae, small-sized mosaic fragments were also found during the excavations. Since the majority of the fragments are quite small, it is impossible to arrive at any interpretation relating to their design. One of these mosaic fragments was found in Room 11a and measures 44 x 33 cm (Fig. 16). The dimensions of the marble and serpentinite tesserae are between 1.0 x 1.0 cm, 1.0 x

Directly below the bird figure, a tiny area belonging to an ornament which appears to have been a kind of loop pattern has been preserved. The exact pattern cannot be defined given the poor preservation of the fragment. Although this was discovered in Room 11, it has no relation to the in situ mosaic of this room. When the other mosaic fragments

Lightfoot 1996, p. 363. The tesserae of 2.0 x 2.0 cm have been discovered in Baths A and Baths B. They are generally in the form of a cube but also of rectangular or triangular forms.

86 87

23

Hadrianopolis IV

Fig. 16. A mosaic fragment from Baths A.

to the 5th/6th cent. AD; however, it is not possible to say this for certain. It does not seem likely that this fragment belongs to a mosaic decorating the floor of Room 4, which has a brick and conglomerate floor. This mosaic fragment must thus have been brought into the room in a later phase.

found in Room 11 are taken into account, it becomes clear that these were brought into Room 11 after the floor was completed; but it is not possible to say for certain why the fragments were brought there. The craftsmanship and design features in this mosaic fragment show similarity with the religious building mosaics in Hadrianopolis dating to the first half of the 6th cent. AD. It is likely that the fragment belongs to a religious building near Baths A, and it must therefore date to the 5th/6th cent. AD.

A further mosaic fragment was found in the excavations of the upper levels of Baths A (Fig. 18) which belongs to a larger group of mosaic fragments without any context or chronology. Several hundreds of further fragments similar to this were collected and stored in a container on the site, the study of which has not been undertaken yet.

A larger mosaic fragment was found in Room 4 of Baths A (Fig. 17). The mosaic, measuring 42 x 30 cm, was uncovered in four small fragments. The dimensions of the tesserae, set in the opus tessellatum technique, vary between 1.0 x 1.0 and 1.5 x 1.5 cm. The mosaic is made of serpentinite and marble tesserae. Room 4, located in the south terrace of Baths A, is just to the south of Room 11 with its in situ mosaic floor. It is thought that this room is a caldarium as many brick insulation materials were found in the room. The fragment shows only a band consisting of two rows of blue tesserae set against the white tesserae forming the background. The fragment is thought to belong

The Opus Sectile Pavement in Room 8 There is a niche measuring 1.10 x 1.07 m on the south of Room 8 of Baths A. The floor of this niche is covered with an opus sectile of brick and stone, and dates to the last quarter of the 5th cent. AD (Figs. 6 and 19-20). The design consists of hexagonal and triangular crustae forming a star pattern. The opus sectile is rather small and is the only known example of this technique in Hadrianopolis. In the 24

Mosaics from Baths A

Fig. 17. A further mosaic fragment from Baths A.

Fig. 18. A mosaic fragment from Baths A.

25

Hadrianopolis IV

Fig. 19. Drawing of the opus sectile pavement in Room 8.

Fig. 20. Opus sectile pavement in Room 8.

26

Mosaics from Baths A

Fig. 21. Room 8. View from the northeast.

to a mosaic consisting of tesserae. Therefore, the opus sectile masters in antiquity had handicraft expertise greatly different to that of artists who worked in tesserae. Opus sectile was intensively preferred for the floors of public buildings of the Roman period, and it also continued to be used as a pavement in public and religious buildings in the early and middle Byzantine periods in Anatolia.88

design, triangular crustae, i.e. tiles of an opus sectile, the side length of which varies between 15 and 19 cm, are placed around the tangent hexagonal crustae. The width of the hexagons between 32/35 cm running east-west and between 27/31 cm running north-south. Since the opus sectile covers a limited, narrow area, there are only two stars which have been preserved completely. The hexagon crustae have darker tones (brick coloured) compared to the triangular crustae. The triangular fragments are yellow. There are also three adjacent rectangular crustae on the floor, and these rectangular crustae set the south boundary of the opus sectile. There are two in situ stones in the northern corners of the floor.

The pattern of hexagons and triangles forming stars is one of the commonest in opus sectile pavements, especially in the eastern Mediterranean. One of the sites embodying various examples of the opus sectile pavements is Aphrodias in Caria, where an opus sectile pavement made of marble material and dated to the beginning of the 2nd cent. AD was found in the Hadrianic Baths.89 Another opus sectile of the 2nd cent. AD decorates the orchestra floor of the odeion of the city. This pavement was renovated in the 4th and 5th cent. AD.90 In Nysa in Caria the opus sectile decorating the orchestra floor of the bouleuterion dates back to the 2nd cent. AD.91 As it turns out the decoration of buildings such as odeia or bouleuteria, etc. with opus sectile pavements became fashionable in the cities of Caria in the 2nd cent. AD.

Other than the opus sectile, there is a floor consisting of travertine stones in Room 8 (Figs. 6 and 21). This floor covers the eastern half of the room. There is a niche in the centre of both the northern and southern walls of the room; the one in the south has the aforementioned opus sectile. In the floors created in the opus sectile technique, floralpatterned or figural examples exist, but geometric design examples like the floors in Baths A are among the opus sectile designs mostly preferred in classical antiquity. These geometric designs have various patterns formed by pentagonal, hexagonal, octagonal, triangular, rhomboid and circular crustae in other geometric forms; they were created with a decorative technique which did not have a wide-ranging repertoire and were simply made compared

Kadıoğlu 1997, p. 365; Kadıoğlu 2000, pp. 11-12. Campbell 1991, p. 36, pls. 96-98. 90 Campbell 1991, p. 13, pls. 45-46. 91 Kadıoğlu 2000, pp. 10-11; İdil 1999, p. 53, fig. 45. 88 89

27

Hadrianopolis IV With the arrival of Christianity, opus sectile pavements started to be used in religious buildings also. An opus sectile with a geometric design found in the pastophorium of the basilica located in Anemurium in Cilicia, dated to the first quarter of the 6th cent. AD, is one of them.92 Even though opus sectile pavements are generally made of marble, the floor here is made of limestone. Part of the pavement has a geometric design which is in similar hexagonal form to the opus sectile of Hadrianopolis, but consisting of smaller crustae. There are lozenges around the hexagons here instead of triangular crustae.

The opus sectile has been dated to the 3rd cent. AD.99 Likewise, floor examples consisting of hexagonal and triangular crustae and with an earlier date than the opus sectile of Baths A-Room 8 have been discovered in Sardis in Lydia. The floor of the courtyard of Baths-Gymnasium date to the end of the 4th cent. AD.100 Some of the panels are decorated with small stars. In the Graeco-Roman baths of Asia Minor, another example showing the increased popularity of the opus sectile from the 4th cent. AD is the bath complex located in Sagalassus in Pisidia. In this building, in the designs of the opus sectile pavements made of limestone and marble dated to the 4th cent. AD, the star examples formed by hexagonal and triangular crustae can be seen again.101 However, in a panel in the apodyterium, each star is surrounded by lozenge crustae, creating a difference in terms of design.102

An example of star designs consisting of hexagonal and triangular crustae decorates the floor of a church with a basilical plan located in Elaiussa Sebaste in Cilicia.93 In these pavements dated to the 5th and 6th cent. AD, the triangular crustae forming the star pattern are in dark colours and hexagonal crustae are in light colours (Figs. 22-23). Marble, travertine, limestone, terracotta and very rarely granite were used in making the pavement.94

Similar examples discovered in regions near Hadrianopolis are opus sectile pavements in Ancyra. These pavements run along a street of the Roman period discovered in the excavations carried out in the Ulus district of Ankara.103 In the area, there are stars formed by triangular and tangent hexagonal crustae in various dimensions in the panels numbered 2, 6, 7, 11, 15, 19 and 23.104 The pavements are concurrent with the date of Baths A: the end of the 5th cent. and the beginning of the 6th cent. AD.105

As a result of the archeological excavations carried out in the recent years, the opus sectile pavements discovered in Soloi/Pompeiopolis emphasise that Cilicia was an important region in terms of opus sectile.95 Among the opus sectile panels of the city uncovered during the excavations of the Colonnaded Street and dated to the first quarter of the 6th cent. AD, the stars consisting of hexagonal and triangular crustae have been documented.96

It is obvious that the opus sectile of Room 8 datin back to the last quarter of the 5th cent. AD was made following a simple and plain concept in terms of craftsmanship. When looking at the p crusta late on the western edge of the rectangular crustae setting the southern boundary of the floor, it is clear that this crusta does not follow the same line as the others, it penetrates into the adjacent hexagonal crusta by breaking into the design for a few centimeteres more. This square panel does not have a uniform symmetry and the master of the pavement clearly did not pay attention to the order of the design while placing the crustae on the floor.

As an important site throughout antiquity in terms of its mosaics, Antioch-on-the-Orontes is one of the cities which must be focused on when considering opus sectile pavements. The opus sectile with a geometric design found in Room 5 of Baths D, among the buildings of the site, is a unique example of the pavements discovered in the baths. A part of this floor datedto the 4th cent. AD97 consists of hexagonal and lozenge crustae which are similar to the opus sectile found in the church in Anemurium. Two lateral naves of another bath complex with a basilical plan, called ‘Baths F’, in Antioch are covered with the opus sectile designs dated to AD 526-540.98 In these opus sectile examples, stars consisting of triangular and hexagonal crustae have been documented. Another opus sectile discovered in a topographical area in the north of the city is similar to the example of Hadrianopolis in terms of design and dimension: in this one, dark tangent hexagons and light triangles line up so as to form stars.

There are cracks and fractures in the brick and stone crustae. The fact that this opus sectile is not made of a high quality material like marble may indicate that the pavement was not regarded as an important decorative element, or that the room where it is situated was not as important as Room 11. However, when looking at the general outline of Baths A, it is clear that there is no superior craftsmanship or decorative concept anywhere in the building. The fact that no other opus sectile example has been discovered in Hadrianopolis and that the pavement covers a small area of

Campbell 1998, p. 42, pl. 182. Baratta 1999, p. 317; Schneider 1998, p. 395; Schneider 1999, pp. 387-388; Schneider 2007, pp. 562-563. 94 Akıllı 2003, p. 144; Schneider 2009, p. 181, fig. 14. 95 The proximity to Northern Syria has influenced Cilician sites and also Antioch. The floors made with the opus sectile technique have been found intensively in Northern Syria. However, the opus sectile technique generally became more widespread in the 5th-6th cent. AD: Peschlow 1983, pp. 435-436. 96 Yağcı 2007, pp. 175-176, fig. 2. 97 Campbell 1988, pp. 16-17, pl. 51-52. 98 Campbell 1988, pp. 50-51, pl. 150-151. 92 93

Campbell 1988, pp. 39. Yegül 1986, pp. xvii, 51, figs. 125-126; Hanfmann 1964, p. 31, fig. 21. 101 Waelkens and Talloen 2005, p. 425, fig. 8; Waelkens 2006, p. 274, fig. 8. 102 Waelkens and Talloen 2005, p. 434, fig. 8. 103 Kadıoğlu 1997, pp. 351, 355. 104 Kadıoğlu 1997, pp. 356-358, drawing 1-3, fig. 3a, b and 4. 105 Kadıoğlu 1997, p. 367. 99 100

28

Mosaics from Baths A

Fig. 22. Opus sectile pavement of the basilica in Elaiussa Sebaste.

Fig. 23. Opus sectile pavement of the basilica in Elaiussa Sebaste.

29

Hadrianopolis IV All of the outlines of the geometric elements on the orange ground of the panel are indicated with a line of black tesserae. There are 6 squares in the ornament zone, aligned in a north-south direction in 3 rows, with dimensions of 53 x 53 cm. Serrated and multicoloured poised squares in the centre of white grounded squares measure 40 x 40 cm (Figs. 24-26 and 28; Pls. 6 and 21a). The colours used for this ornament are black, red, orange and white. Stars made from eight parallelograms have been filled with red tesserae (Figs. 24-26 and 29; Pls. 6 and 22a). The dimensions of the parallelograms are about 22 x 13 cm. There should be 12 star patterns in the panel; yet, because of the existence of the wall which divides Room 11 in two, the squares and star patterns to the south half of the panel have not been revealed.

1.10 x 1.07 m prevents us from making any more detailed an interpretation on the opus sectile of Room 8. The Mosaic Floor of Room 11 Room 11 considered the caldarium of Baths A, has a geometric patterned floor mosaic dating to the last quarter of the 5th cent. AD (Figs. 6, 10 and 24-27).106 The floor mosaic is made of marble, serpentinite and travertine tesserae and is 9.77 m by 5.28 m. As a result of the 20062007 excavations in Room 11, it is clear that the room was divided in two by an east-west axiwall, probably during the third architectural phase.107 A part of the floor mosaic has remained covered under this wall for this reason. The room to the north of the wall is named Room 11a, and to the south Room 11b (Figs. 6, 10 and 24).108 In the same architectural phase, part of Room 11b floor mosaic was demolished to repair a breakdown in the furnace just below the surface.

The poised squares which are located between the arms of the stars measure 16 x 16 cm (Figs. 24-26 and 29; Pls. 6 and 21e). Red dot ornaments decorate the white grounded centre of these geometric elements. The rectangles, measuring 52 x 23 cm at the panel edges, have been decorated with small circles and poised squares consisting of red tesserae (Figs. 24-26 and 29; Pls. 6 and 22e). The squares measuring 22 x 22 cm at the corners of the ornament zone have been decorated with a red circle (Figs. 24-26 and 29; Pl. 6). All of the space of the panel has been filled and no deliberately blank spaces have been left. Triangles with 13 cm bases, and short edges of 9/10 cm have been placed in the spaces between the star patterns and the panel borders (Figs. 24-26 and 29; Pl. 6).

The sizes of tesserae used in Room 11 floor mosaic vary between 1.5 x 1.5 cm and 2.0 x 2.0 cm. The colours used in the mosaic are black, white, light brownish grey, red, orange, blue and yellow. However, because of the deformation in the mosaic floor, colours of some tesserae show deterioration in some areas. This deterioration can be observed especially inside Room 11b. The first edging, surrounding the mosaic of Room 11 with two geometric patterned panels from outside, is a monochrome band of orange tesserae and measures 2730 cm in width (Figs. 24-26).109 After this border, there is a band consisting of two lines of black tesserae and a band in a wave pattern.110 The colours used in the wave pattern are light brownish grey and red (Figs. 24-27; and Pl. 1a). The third border is a polychrome shaded six-strand guilloche on a black ground (Figs. 24-27; and Pl. 2a).111 This border is 75 cm in width and separates two panels of the mosaic from each other. The outlines of strands of guilloche are depicted with black tesserae and the interior part consists of four tesserae in each line.

The borders of Room 11b panel, which are in the south half of the floor mosaic, are indicated with a band consisting of two rows of white tesserae. The dimensions of the panel are 3.00 x 2.45 m. The design here consists of contiguous repeating rows of superimposed chevrons with arms of alternating colours, forming a zigzag pattern, with the effect of relief (Figs. 24, 27 and 30; Pl. 7).113 The colours in the panel are orange, red, light blue, yellow, black and white. To the southwest corner of Room 11 mosaic there is a chessboard pattern, indicated with a black band consisting of two row of tesserae (Figs. 24 and 31; Pl. 19a). This pattern is an ornament just in front of the threshold which enables passage between Rooms 11 and 8. The design measures 88 x 52 cm and contains 72 squares. Each square consists of 16 tesserae. The colours in the design are white, red and orange.114

The northern panel of the mosaic – the one in Room 11a – measures 3.36 by 2.55 m. The design of the panel consists of an orthogonal pattern of stars of eight parallelograms, small poised squares between the arms of the stars and larger squares which are decorated with serrated and multicoloured poised squares (Figs. 24-26; and Pl. 6). The spaces remaining at the edges of the panel are filled with small rectangles and squares.112

Parallels for the Mosaic of Room 11 The wave and guilloche patterns surrounding the mosaic panel of Baths A were used together as edging, as in the mosaic of Baths A. Yet the shaded six-strand examples of guilloche are rarer and examples that these designs have

Patacı 2011, pp. 27-30; Patacı et al. 2012, p. 163, drawing 1, fig. 1. 107 Laflı and Zäh 2008, pp. 700-701. 108 Laflı and Zäh 2008, p. 701. 109 Laflı and Zäh 2009, p. 642. 110 For the wave pattern: Balmelle et al. 1985, p. 156, pl. 101. 111 For the design of six-strand guilloche: Balmelle et al. 1985, p. 123, pl. 73f. 112 For similar designs: Balmelle et al. 1985, p. 267, pl. 173b; Balmelle et al. 2002, p. 237, pl. 413a. 106

For similar designs: Balmelle et al. 1985, p. 37, pl. 9g and p. 320, pl. 203f. 114 For similar designs: Balmelle et al. 1985, pp. 172-174, pl. 114-115. 113

30

Mosaics from Baths A

Fig. 24. Baths A. Illustration of the floor mosaic of Room 11.

31

Hadrianopolis IV

Fig. 25. Baths A. North half of the mosaic floor at Room 11.

Fig. 26. Baths A. North half of the mosaic floor at Room 11.

32

Mosaics from Baths A

Fig. 27. Baths A. South half of the mosaic floor at Room 11.

Fig. 28. Baths A. A serrated and multicoloured poised square in a square on the mosaic floor of Room 11.

33

Hadrianopolis IV

Fig. 29. Baths A. A detail from the north panel of the mosaic at Room 11.

Fig. 30. Baths A. A detail from the south panel of the mosaic at Room 11.

34

Mosaics from Baths A

Fig. 31. Chessboard pattern on the mosaic of Baths A.

been used together are the rarest compared to other design examples.

museum date to the 5th cent. AD. These are the mosaic of Arethusa (acc. no. 9096) and the mosaic of sunflowers (acc. no. 940). Wave patterns or simple guilloches also form the contours of the figural medallions in some of the mosaics like in the mosaic of Ktisis from the 5th cent. AD (acc. no. 836a) in the archaeological museum of Hatay. A simple guilloche band surrounds the Worcester hunt mosaic (6th cent. AD, acc. no. 1936.30) from Antioch, which is exhibited in Worcester Art Museum in MA, USA. These kind of bands became the most popular designs among the guilloche patterns in classical antiquity. In the mosaic of Achilles and Deidamia dating to the 2nd cent. AD (acc. no. 995), and the mosaic of Psyche dating to the 3rd cent. AD (acc. no. 892), three-strand guilloche are used (Fig. 34). In the Yakto (Megalopsychia) mosaic118 with a hunting scene, dating to the mid-5th cent. AD from the Yakto complex, polychrome straight-tongued double guilloche open to form eyelets on a black ground (Figs. 35-36). After simple guilloche patterns, these patterns were also popularly used as border ornaments during classical antiquity.

Twenty of the floor mosaics exhibited in the archaeological museum of Hatay have wave patterns as border ornaments. 20 of them have guilloche and 6 of these have both guilloche and wave patterns. 12 of the mosaics are dated between the 2nd and 3rd cent. AD. The rest of them are from the 4th and 5th cent. AD 10 of the wave patterns are white/yellow and red and the others are white/yellow and black; besides this, greenish-grey and grey are seen in two mosaics. The greenish-grey example is the mosaic of Ananeosis (Fig. 32) from the 5th cent. AD (acc. no. 907-912);115 the grey one is a pebble mosaic (Fig. 33) from the 1st cent. BC. (acc. no. 56). The pebble mosaic is from Tarsus in Cilicia and the earliest mosaic in the archaeological museum of Hatay.116 Fourteen of the mosaics with bands of guilloches have a simple polychrome guilloche design on a black ground.117 Three of them are dated to the 4th cent. AD. These are the sundial mosaic in two fragments (acc. no. 884-885), the mosaic of Tryphe (acc. no. 982) and the mosaic with partridges (acc. no. 986). Two of the mosaics from the

The mosaic of Comus in the archaeological museum of Hatay (acc. no. 833) is one of the mosaics in which both wave patterns and guilloches have been used together as border designs. A band of four-strand guilloche between two bands of wave patterns treated in white and red can be observed in the mosaic (Fig. 37), which dates to the

115 Levi 1947, p. 320, pl. LXXIIIa-b. This type of guilloche could also belong to an entirely different family as those in figs. 36 and 46. 116 As the wave pattern is one of the commonest motifs everywhere and througout the ancient world, we refer some parallels which are close to Hadrianopolis with repsect to date and technique. We especially concentrate on examples that are similar and close in date – or exhibit the same combination of patterns. The same is true of the guilloche, which is ubiquitous as well. 117 For simple guilloche designs: Balmelle et al. 1985, pp. 120-121, pl. 70-71.

118

35

Levi 1947, p. 323, fig. 136; Cimok 2000, p. 251.

Hadrianopolis IV

Fig. 32. Border design of the mosaic of Ananeosis from Antioch-on-the-Orontes.

Fig. 33. A pebble mosaic from Tarsus in Turkey.

36

Mosaics from Baths A

Fig. 34. The border design of the mosaic of Psyche from Antioch-on-the-Orontes.

Fig. 35. Mosaic with Megalopsychia from Antioch-on-the-Orontes.

37

Hadrianopolis IV

Fig. 36. The border design of the mosaic with Megalopsychia.

Fig. 37. Lower fragment of the mosaic of Comus from Antioch-on-the-Orontes.

38

Mosaics from Baths A 2nd cent. AD.119 In the mosaic depicting Psyche, a band of three-strand guilloche between two bands of red-and-white wave patternshas been used as an ornament element (Fig. 34). In the mosaic of Ananeosis, a band of polychrome straight-tongued double guilloche opening to form eyelets on a black ground between two bands of wave patterns can be observed (Fig. 32). Another example in which wave patterns and guilloches have been used in the same mosaic is that of drunken Dionysus (acc. no. 958), dating to the 2nd cent. AD. The wave pattern here is made of black and white and the guilloche is a simple polychrome one on a black ground. In the mosaic showing ‘two athletes and training ground’ (acc. no. 996), dating to the 3rd cent. AD, both wave and simple guilloche patterns have been used again. Finally, in a floor mosaic dating to the 2nd and 3rd cent. AD, recovered ffrom Room 3 of the Dionysus and Ariadne House, three-strand guilloche and wave patterns have been used together.120 It seems that the most popular guilloche patterns are the simple guilloche and the straight tongued double guilloche in Antioch mosaics. Patterns like the multi-strand guilloche, as in the Hadrianopolis example, were rarely used.

in Hadrianopolis.125 Another six-strand guilloche was used in the courtyard mosaic of the synagogue in Sardis in Asia Minor (Fig. 44). The mosaics of the synagogue, which is located by the gymnasium-baths complex, were designed with geometric patterns and date to the end of the 4th cent. AD.126 A six-strand guilloche was also used as a border ornament on the mosaic of the north aisle of the church of Laodicea on the Lycus (in modern Denizli, Turkey) dating to the same century as the synagogue mosaic in Sardis (Fig. 45).127 This pattern in the mosaic differs from the other examples by its loose braided strands. Zeugma in modern Gaziantep, southeastern Turkey, has numerous floor mosaics which display examples of guilloche patterns. Both simple or tongued double guilloches and multi-strand guilloches were preferred for the floors of wealthy residences in this site during the 2nd and 3rd cent. AD. The most famous example of the straight tongued double guilloche in Anatolian mosaics is seen on the Maenad mosaic, which is dated to the 2nd and 3rd cent. AD and exhibited in the mosaic museum of Zeugma in Gaziantep (Fig. 46). In the mosaic of Poseidon, Oceanus and Tethys dating to the 2nd-3rd cent. AD, which decorates the floor of the impluvium in the peristyle of the House of Poseidon, there is a four-strand guilloche between two bands of wave patterns.128 In another Oceanus- and Tethys-themed mosaic discovered in the impluvium of the atrium of the House of Oceanus, of similar date, a band of three-strand guilloche was used.129 In the impluvium mosaic of the villa of Euphrates from the same periods, four-strand guilloche was treated.130 Another floor mosaic called ‘the wedding of Dionysus’, which was discovered in 1992, has two bands of wave patterns treated in yellow and red tesserae, with a three-strand guilloche between them.131 Finally, the mosaic of Danae and Dictys, dating to the first half of the 3rd cent. AD and discovered in the interior courtyard of the House of Danae, has a threestrand guilloche pattern.132 These mosaics show that the three or four-strand guilloches were popular in Zeugma and that guilloches were used between bands of wave patterns similarly to those in Antioch-on-the-Orontes. Another border design with the same style is the Amisus mosaic dating to the 3rd cent. AD, discovered on the south coast of Black Sea. Three-strand guilloche between two bands of wave patterns were used in this floor mosaic.133

In terms of preserved mosaic examples from classical antiquity and the early Byzantine period, Edessa (modern Şanlıurfa) and its environment is also important (Figs. 3839). When Edessa is analysed, it can be observed that the simple guilloche patterns were intensively used in the floor mosaics of the site. One of those is the funerary mosaic of the family of Moqimu (Fig. 40) dating to the 3rd cent. AD and found by J.B. Segal in 1952.121 Another mosaic with a band of simple guilloche is ‘the mosaic of Harran Kapı (Harran Gate)’ exhibited in the mosaic museum of Haleplibahçe in Şanlıurfa and dated to the 5th-6th cent. AD (Figs. 41 and 163).122 In the mosaics of ‘Abgar’ (Fig. 42a-b) and ‘the Funeral Feast (Ma’na)’ which are dated to the 3rd cent. AD, three-strand guilloches were used.123 Unfortunately, the mosaics of the family of Moqimu, Abgar and the Funeral Feast were stolen from their sites, and their fate is now unknown. The most important guilloche example from Edessa, in terms of similarity with the one in Hadrianopolis, is the tiger mosaic in Room 1 of the House of the Amazons in Haleplibahçe. A polychrome shaded six-strand guilloche on a black ground (Fig. 43) surrounds the panel of the mosaic dated to the 6th cent. AD.124

Some of the floor mosaics from Anatolia which show similar wave patterns to the mosaic of Baths A include the

A floor mosaic from Perrhe (Pirun), which is today located in Adıyaman in southeastern Anatolia, has a band of sixstrand guilloche used as a border similarly to the mosaic

Salman 2007a, p. 12, fig. 11. Foss 1976, pp. 41-42, figs. 13-18; Campbell 1991, p. 9. 127 Şimşek 2015, figs. 106 and 114. 128 Başgelen and Ergeç 2000, pp. 42-43; Şahin 2008, p. 148. The design is mistakenly identified as a three-strand guilloche in Önal 2002, p. 35. 129 Başgelen and Ergeç 2000, pp. 34-35; Ergeç 2008, pp. 44-45, fig. 1-5; Şahin 2008, p. 149, fig. 4. 130 Önal 2002, p. 52; Önal 2008, p. 80, fig. 4. 131 Başgelen and Ergeç 2000, p. 18; Ergeç 2008, pp. 49-53, figs. 35-37, 43. 132 Önal 2009, p. 64, fig. 9. 133 Şahin 2004, fig. 16-23; Şahin 2006, pp. 139-152, fig. 5-8; Şahin 2007, pp. 112-115, pls. 13-14, fig. 21-24. 125 126

The usage of a guilloche band between two bands of wave patterns is observed in Zeugma mosaics too. 120 Levi 1947, pp. 149-150, pl. 27b. 121 Segal 1970. 122 Patacı 2016, pp. 429-441, figs. 1 and 2. 123 Drijvers 1982, pp. 167-189, fig. 1.; Salman 2007a, p. 89, figs. 135136. 124 Karabulut, Önal and Dervişoğlu 2011, pp. 69-70, figs. 82-83. The design is mistakenly called a four-strand guilloche in Aydemir, Çokoğullu and Dervişoğlu 2008, p. 2, fig. 1. For the detailed photos: Karaca and Rızvanoğlu 2008, pp. 3-6. 119

39

Hadrianopolis IV

Fig. 38. Map of Eastern Cilicia, Commagene, Osrhoene, and Northern Syria.

Fig. 39. Map of ancient Edessa with find spots of the mosaic floors and the mosaic museum of Haleplibahçe in the archaeological museum of Şanlıurfa.

40

Mosaics from Baths A

Fig. 40. The funerary mosaic of the family of Moqimu from Edessa.

Fig. 41. The mosaic of Harran Kapı from Edessa.

41

Hadrianopolis IV

Fig. 42. a-b. The mosaic of Abgar from Edessa (after Drijvers 1982, Fig. 1).

42

Mosaics from Baths A

Fig. 43. The border design of the mosaic with tiger from the House of Amazons in Haleplibahçe.

Fig. 44. A band of six-strand guilloche on the mosaic of the synagogue in Sardis.

43

Hadrianopolis IV

Fig. 45. A band of six-strand guilloche on the north nave mosaic of the church in Laodicea on the Lycus (after Şimşek 2015, Fig. 114).

Fig. 46. Border design of the Maenad mosaic in Zeugma.

Sulumağara mosaic (Fig. 47) exhibited at Mosaic museum of Zeugma (5th cent. AD)134, the main hall mosaic of the House of the Amazons in Haleplibahçe of Şanlıurfa (6th cent. AD)135, mosaics of the East Basilica of Xanthus in Antalya (5th-6th cent. AD)136, mosaic of Room F of a villa in Halicarnassus in Muğla (5th cent. AD)137, the mosaic of Ahmet Çavuş district in Milas of Muğla (5th and 6th cent.

AD)138 and a mosaic of a residential building in Apamea Myrlea in Bursa (4th cent. AD).139 An example of a polychrome six-strand guilloche on a black ground has been found at the east edge of the aforementioned basilica in Xanthus, namely the floor mosaic in the south annexe of its baptistery.140 During the rescue excavations held in the Ahmet Cavuş quarter of Milas (ancient Mylasa in Caria) a floor mosaic was discovered which dates to between the 5th-6th cent. AD

Patacı 2016, p. 432, fig. 11. Karabulut, Önal and Dervişoğlu 2011, fig. 47. 136 Raynaud 2009, ills. 15, 85, 89 and 99. 137 Poulsen 2008, p. 104, fig. 3. 134

Kızıl and Özcan 2009, fig. 2. Şahin and Çıtakoğlu 2016, figs. 9-10. 140 Raynaud 2009, pp. 116-118, ills. 130-131.

135

138 139

44

Mosaics from Baths A

Fig. 47. A detail from Sulumağara mosaic.

and has a polychrome treated four-strand guilloche on a black ground.141 A further example from Caria was discovered in Aphrodisias. In Room 3 of the atrium of the Priest’s House, there is a mosaic dating to the middle or end of the 5th cent. AD which decorates the north and east corridors. The interior border design of the mosaic is a polychrome four-strand guilloche on a black ground.142 An example of the three-strand guilloche can be seen on the mosaic floor of the apse of the church in Altıntepe in Erzincan in northeastern Turkey, dating to the 6th cent. AD.143 Another example of the threestrand guilloche can be found on the apsidal mosaic of the church of the necropolis in Anemurium, in Cilicia, dating to between the end of the 5th and the beginning of the 6th cent. AD.144

cent. AD, the border design of the south panel of the naos mosaic consists of a five-strand guilloche.146 Mosaics discovered in 1980, in the Shunah Al-Jabuniyah church near Livias in Jordan, are stylistically similar to both the mosaic of Baths A and other Hadrianopolis mosaics. One of the floor mosaics, which belongs to two different phases of this church, has an outer border design dating to the 6th cent. AD consisting of a wave pattern as in Baths A example, and its interior border pattern consists of a six-strand guilloche.147 In the west panel of the naos mosaic belonging to the second phase of the church, there is a geometric design consisting of stars made from eight parallelograms each, squares decorated with serrated squares and poised squares.148 Even though it dates to a later period, the existence of serrated and multicoloured poised squares in square panels is another similarity with the mosaics of Baths A and Room 2 of Baths B in Hadrianopolis. In addition, serrated squares in

One of the best examples similar in design to the mosaic of Baths A is the naos mosaic of the Beth Shean Synagogue in Israel, dating to the 5th cent. AD.145 The outer border ornament of the mosaic consists of a wave pattern and the interior border ornament consists of a six-strand guilloche. In the Hammath Tiberias synagogue, dating to the late 4th

146 However, the design is named as a four-strand guilloche in the publication of Mosaic Pavements in Israel: Ovadiah and Ovadiah 1987, pp. 63, 65, 158, pl. 179. It is thought that mosaic artist or artists might have been brought from Antioch to Hammath Tiberias, to be assisted on the spot by local artists: Ovadiah 1986, p. 123. Also see: Dunbabin 1999, pp. 189-190, fig. 202; Ovadiah 2010, p. 44; Şahin 2009, pp. 100-102, fig. 11. 147 Piccirillo 1993a, pp. 320-323, fig. 669. 148 Piccirillo 1993a, figs. 662, 665.

Kızıl 1999, p. 224, fig. 4; Kızıl and Özcan 2009, p. 24, fig. 10, 13. 142 Campbell 1991, pp. 23, 26; pls. 82, 84-85. 143 Can 2007, p. 105, fig. 6, 8; Can 2009, pp. 10-11, fig. 18; Can 2011, fig. 5. 144 Campbell 1998, pp. 47, 50, pl. 209. This church was called as ‘the  Necropolis Church’ in the report of the Canadian expedition in Anemurium. 145 Ovadiah and Ovadiah 1987, pp. 33-34, pl. 29.1. 141

45

Hadrianopolis IV Dionysos.158 The panel is surrounded by eight-lozenged stars and small squares with geometric designs inside, with poised squares filling the gaps between the stars and squares. This mosaic, which measures 5.26 m x 5.27 m is exhibited in the Art Museum of Princeton University (Fig. 48). Another example from the 2nd-3rd cent. AD was found in Room 1 of the House of Dionysus and Ariadne. In the panel to the south of the mythological composition, there is a polychrome geometric design consisting of three squares decorated with floral rosettes and eight lozenge stars.159 This mosaic, which measures 3.79 m x 5.40 m, is on display in the archaeological museum of Hatay (acc. no. 945). Two earlier examples of the same type of geometric patterned mosaic as in Room 11 of Baths A have been discovered in the central Rooms 1 and 7 of the House of the Boat of Psyches in Antioch-on-the-Orontes.160 The presence of a Medusa head in the third square from the right gives a schematic distinctness to the mosaic of Room 7, dating to the 3rd cent. AD. The right half of the mosaic (acc. no. 848), measuring 1.70 m x 0.93 m (Fig. 49), is exhibited in the archaeological museum of Hatay.

a panel to the left of the naos are similar to examples from Hadrianopolis.149 The geometric patterned mosaic discovered in Baths A dates to the last quarter of the 5th cent. AD. However, the panel designs of the mosaic were used by mosaic craftsman both in Anatolia and outside of Anatolia in earlier periods. One of the earliest examples outside Anatolia of the panel design in the floor mosaic of Room 11a is in Italy. In the sacred copse of Feronus in Etruria, in a room of a villa, the design of a black and white floor mosaic consists of stars of eight lozenges, geometric ornamented square panels and poised squares filling the gaps between these elements. This mosaic dates to between AD 10 and 20.150 The star pattern defining the design is also found in square panels as a central ornament in the mosaic art of GrecoRoman antiquity. According to A. Ovadiah, this design must have been created by local craftsmen in Pompeii; the design can be found in Pompeii in the 1st cent. AD.151 An example from Anatolia has been recovered from a Roman baths dating to the 4th cent. AD in the village of Narlıkuyu in Mersin in Cilicia (southern Turkey). There is a panel consisting of eight pointed stars next to ‘the mosaic of the Three Graces’ decorating the floor of the baths.152 Polychrome Solomon knots have been inlaid on a black ground into the squares at the corners of the panel. Another similar example is in Room 4a mosaic of the House of Danae in Zeugma. One of the three geometric designed panels of the main part of the mosaic, dating to the first half of the 3rd cent. AD, contains a star of eight parallelograms.153

Similar, though earlier, examples which resemble the mosaic of Baths A can be seen in Zeugma. The floor mosaic discovered during salvage excavations next to a Roman bath complex in 1998 is one of them.161 This mosaic consists of stars of eight parallelograms forming squares and smaller poised squares; it also has a loop pattern treated in squares, just like the examples in Antioch-onthe-Orontes. The parallelograms which make up the star pattern are alternately coloured in dark and light tones. The Maenad (Gypsy Girl) mosaic162 dating to the 2nd cent. AD was discovered in the great hall of the Maenad Domus during the 1998 season of the Kelekağzı excavations in Belkıs163; the geometric mosaics surrounding the Maenad mosaic have a similar design with the mosaic of Baths A.164 This multi-coloured mosaic shows great workmanship yet is mostly ruined. The stars made of eight parallelograms and the inner zones of black grounded poised squares are decorated with high quality rosettes.

Squares with geometric motifs, poised squares and stars of eight parallelograms surrounding these are not limited to floor mosaics only. This panel composition is also repeated on frescoes. Theharbour baths of Side in southern Turkey154, dating to the 2nd cent. AD, has slightly different interpreted fresco finds. The poised squares in the design were treated bigger comparing to other squares.155 A similar design to this is found in the geometric floor mosaics in the cathedral complex in the city of Gerasa in Jordan.156

Another floor mosaic dating to the same period (i.e. the second quarter of the 2nd cent. AD) as the Zeugma mosaic was discovered near the North Odeon of Aphrodisias, in a building with an unknown function.165 The mosaic has a design consisting of a star of eight lozenges, small square panels decorated with geometric patterns and poised squares. A chessboard pattern is also used for the borders.166

An example is the floor mosaic dating to the second half of the 3rd cent. AD, recovered from a residence in Apamea in Syria.157 Antioch-on-the-Orontes also houses earlier examples of this design. The mosaic dating to the 3rd cent. AD and decorating Room 1 in the House of the Drinking Contest shows the drinking contest detween Herakles and Piccirillo 1993a, figs. 663, 667. Dunbabin 1999, p. 58, fig. 56. 151 Ovadiah 1980, p. 138. For another evaluation about the origin of the design see: Scheibelreiter 2007, p. 70. 152 Campbell 1979, p. 289, pl. 42; Campbell 1989, p. 1639, fig. 3; Campbell 1998, pl. 100. 153 Önal 2009, pp. 56-57, fig. 2, drawing 1. 154 For an evaluation about the building see: Mansel 1978, pp. 215-220. 155 Eskici 2004, p. 37, fig. 2. 156 Piccirillo 1993a, p. 284, fig. 526. 157 Balty 1977, pp. 26-27; Balty 1981, p. 413, pl. 36; Balty 1995, p. 61, pl. III.1. 149 150

Levi 1947, pp. 156-159, pl. 30a, b and 101b; Balty 1981, p. 373, pl. 14.1; Balty 1991, p. 28, fig. 1; Dunbabin 1999, p. 164, fig. 167. 159 Levi 1947, pp. 141-142, pl. 27 and 101a; Cimok 2000, pp. 124-125. 160 Levi 1947, pp. 168 and 186, pl. 103e and 38d. 161 Abadie-Reynal and Ergeç 2000, p. 258, fig. 12. 162 Ergeç 2008, p. 46, fig. 13; Önal 2002, p. 58. 163 Ergeç 2000, pp. 261-264, Görkay 2015, pp. 78-79 and 84-86. 164 Ergeç 2000, p. 269, fig. 10; Başgelen and Ergeç 2000, p. 38. 165 Campbell 1991, pp. 10-11, pl. 29, R173b. 166 Campbell 1991, p. 10. 158

46

Mosaics from Baths A

Fig. 48. A mosaic of the drinking contest of Heracles and Dionysus.

Fig. 49. A floor mosaic from the House of Psyches Boat in Antioch-on-the-Orontes.

47

Hadrianopolis IV rainbow style reminds one of the example of the atrium mosaic of the Early Byzantine East Basilica in Xanthus.178 In the panel of the Yerkapı mosaic called the ‘Zone with Birds’, multicoloured chessboard patterns were used within lozenges.179 In addition, a multicoloured chessboard pattern is inlaid in an irregular polygon in the same panel. These mosaics in Prusa ad Olympum possibly date to the 6th cent. AD and maybe to the very beginning of the century.

In Xanthus in Lycia, mosaics from the early Byzantine East Basilica dating between the 5th-6th cent. AD, show similarities with the mosaic panel of Baths A. In a mosaic panel measuring 2.14 m x 3.00 m. in the west portico of this basilica’s atrium, there is a composition similar to the mosaic design in Bath A.167 In this mosaic there are 45-48 tesserae per dm2, and as such it has a more intense tesserae spread compared to Room 11a panel, which has 29-31 tesserae per dm2.168 The parallelograms which make up the star pattern are alternately coloured with yellow and pink tesserae.169 Besides, the stars are settled obliquely in the form of a ‘x’. There are serrated saltires, Solomon knots, diagonally coloured chessboard patterns and octagons consisting of poised squares in the square panels of the main design.170 The chessboard pattern here is in a polychrome or ‘rainbow’ style; for these reasons it is different to the threshold mosaic in Room 11b. Chessboard patterns can also be observed in different regions, including Delos, Gordion, Masada, and Pompeii; the source of the pattern is vase painting.171

Some of the mosaics discovered in two basilicas on Kos, dating to the last quarter of the 5th and the beginning of the 6th cent. AD, resemble the mosaic in Baths A. A panel decorating the west half of the mosaic of the north aisle in the Hagios Stephanos basilical complex, as well as the central panel in the naos of the smaller basilica next to the first one, include designs consisting of square panels surrounded with stars and poised squares.180 The most distinctive characteristic of this mosaic, which is of higher artistic quality compared to the one in Baths A, is that the square panels are ornamented with bird figures. Another difference is that the star pattern is obliquely placed to make a ‘x’ form, as is also seen in the basilica of Xanthus.181 The mosaic of the Hagios Ioannos Baptistery on Kos, dating to AD 500, has stars and also squares with bird figures which are treated with a similar style.182

Another example of a stars-and-squares design from Asia Minor can be seen in a villa in Sardis, Lydia. This mosaic is dated to the end of the 4th cent. AD.172 Its patterns include various rosettes in poised squares and geometric patterns rendered in squares and rectangles at the edge of the panels of the mosaic. Another version of the pattern was found in the palaestra of the bath-gymnasium complex in Sardis and dates between the 4th-5th cent. AD.173 In this mosaic, there are geometric patterns in square panels just like the aforementioned one. Small cross patterns are inlaid within poised squares.

The last example of a panel of stars of eight parallelograms outside of Anatolia is in the Heraclea Lyncestis basilica in Macedonia. The earliest research in the area, which has significant floor mosaics dating to the early Christian period, was begun before World War II, and at this time floor mosaics were discovered in a yard between two basilicas.183 One of the panels here consists of stars of eight parallelograms, square panels and geometric patterns which vary between poised squares and lozenges. Vessels, baskets and four-leafed floral patterns are inlaid in square panels.

The floor mosaics discovered in Yerkapı, to the east of Prusa ad Olympum in Bithynia in modern Bursa, also has analogous specimens to the mosaic of Baths A. These floor mosaics were discovered in the basement of a modern building and date to the 6th-7th cent. AD.174 It is believed that the building the mosaics were recovered in had been used as a church.175 The multicoloured floor mosaic in an ‘aisled field’ pattern has square panels ornamented with geometric patterns, poised squares and eight-pointed stars surrounding them.176 It is held that this mosaic belongs to the narthex of the church.177 The eight-pointed stars consist of alternately green and red parallelograms. Solomon knots are shown in squares as can be seen in preserved examples from other sites. In another preserved square panel, there is a design consisting of multicoloured diagonal lines in the rainbow style. Even though it is not a chessboard pattern, the diagonal arrangement in the

The second panel in the mosaic of Baths A resembles the zigzag designs of antiquity, yet this one is a rare example. The parallelograms comprising the design are laid in a row forming a chevron pattern and are alternately coloured. An illusion of a relief or a three-dimensional effect is generally encountered in zigzag patterns in antiquity. This effect is due to the placement and colouring of the parallelograms. The zigzag patterns are used in secondarily important ornament zones rather than panel designs, as can be seen in Room 11 mosaic; however there are examples of this pattern inside panels too. One of these examples can be seen in Pompeiopolis in eastern Paphlagonia. One of the

Raynaud 2009, pp. 43-44, figs. 29-30. Raynaud 2009, p. 44. 169 Raynaud 2009, p. 44. 170 Raynaud 2009, p. 44. 171 Ovadiah 1980, pp. 129-130. 172 Scheibelreiter 2007, p. 70 and 190, fig. 18. 173 Yegül 1986, p. 31, fig. 53. 174 Okçu 2009, pp. 32-41. 175 Okçu 2009, p. 40. 176 Okçu 2009, p. 34, fig. 1-2. 177 Okçu 2009, pp. 40-41. 167

Moreover, three squares in the floor mosaic in Xanthus are decorated with Solomon knots like the mosaic in Prusa ad Olympum: Raynaud 2009, p. 44, figs. 29-30. 179 Okçu 2009, p. 36, fig. 9. 180 Parrish 2001, pp. 342-343, figs. 20-21. 181 Star patterns in Basilica B in Hadrianopolis have also been designed in this form. The basilicas on Kos have much more common features with the mosaics of Basilica A and Basilica B than the mosaic in Baths A. 182 Parrish 2001, pp. 344-345, figs. 22-23. 183 Hoddinott 1963, pp. 159-161, pl. 36a.

168

178

48

Mosaics from Baths A panels of a floor mosaic, discovered in a frigidarium of a small bath complex which belongs to a domus, dating to the 4th-5th cent. AD, is ornamented with a multicoloured zigzag pattern.184 Yet the example which most closely resembles the mosaic in Baths A in terms of scheme is the mosaic floor of the apse of the church in Altıntepe in Erzincan, dating to the 6th cent. AD. Most of the mosaic is ruined, yet the remaining parts show that a panel similar to the panel of Room 11 mosaic decorates the floor, which is limited by a three-strand guilloche border.185 Another example of a design consisting of parallelograms that are aligned to create a relief effect can be seen in the basilical mosaics in Mopsuestia in Cilicia, dating to the 5th cent. AD.186 The last example of this pattern was once visible on a floor mosaic in Sector E of the residence on the Lycian acropolis of Xanthus, but this 6th cent. mosaic was destroyed by French archaeologists in 1956.187 Baths A’s Room 11 mosaic shows commonalities with mosaics both in Anatolia and its neighbourhood. Some patterns used in this mosaic were popular both in the Roman and early Byzantine periods, yet there are rare patterns including the shaded six-strand guilloche and the ornaments in the design of the panel in Room 11b. Similar examples of the designs in the mosaic are here collected from over a wide area by the authors of this book. Considered together with other datable material recovered during the excavation of Baths A, it is possible to date Room 11 mosaic to the last quarter of the 5th cent. AD at the earliest.

Musso et al. 2011, p. 75, tav. 3/1. In another publication this mosaic is dated to 380 AD: Summerer and von Kienlin 2009, p. 82. 185 Can 2009, pp. 10-11, fig. 18. 186 Budde 1969, fig. 11, 29, fig. 61. 187 Manière-Lévêque 2012, p. 48, ill. 52. 184

49

III Mosaics from Baths B Baths B

running in an east-west direction to be excavated (Fig. 52). Archeological excavation and assessment are needed for this wall ruin to be dated accurately and for its relation with Baths B to be better understood. Another architectural building situated 15 m north of Baths B is likely to be a church, and its apse has just been uncovered: this is another archeological problem requiring a solution.

A second bath building in Hadrianopolis is called ‘Baths B’ (Figs. 50-51).188 This building is situated 50 m east of the eastern access to the Hacıahmetler, district south of the Eskipazar-Hacıahmetler road (Fig. 4). The building is also situated 250 m west of Baths A. The architectural ruins in this area were first documented by E. Öztepe and S.H. Öztaner during their brief survey in 2001. However, it was not then known for what purpose this building had been built.189 In this area, some illegal digging was also carried out by treasure hunters between 2001 and 2004.190 Archeological excavations of Baths B were carried out in 2007.191 The excavations unfortunately could not be completed.

A part of this building was discovered which measured 16 m along its east-west axis and 11 m along its northsouth axis. Baths B was placed on a natural terrace just like Baths A. During the excavations, eight rooms of this building were uncovered.192 In the light of the archeological finds, it is understood that the building was used within the period between the last quarter of the 5th cent. AD and the beginning of the 8th cent. AD. It is also understood that most of the archeological units completely excavated in Hadrianopolis ceased their original function at the beginning of the 8th cent. AD.193

This site needs to be reviewed in detail in order to understand the architectural character of Baths B and its surroundings. There is a ruined wall of at least 40 m

Fig. 50. Plan of Baths B. Laflı and Zäh 2009, p. 653. Öztepe and Öztaner 2001, p. 9-10. 190 Laflı and Christof 2012a, p. 31; Öztepe and Öztaner 2001, p. 10. 191 Laflı and Zäh 2009, p. 653; Laflı 2009b, p. 162; Laflı 2009b, p. 40-41. 188 189

192 193

51

Laflı and Christof 2012a, p. 31. Laflı and Zäh 2008, pp. 699, 703; and Laflı 2007, p. 30.

Hadrianopolis IV

Fig. 51. Baths B. View from the northeast.

Fig. 52. Ruins of a wall to the east of Baths B.

52

Mosaics from Baths B It is clear that there are at least two different architectural phases in Baths B. The floor mosaics were uncovered inside Rooms 2 and 5 in the north of the building. The architectural changes of the building are also mentioned during the description of the mosaics.

clear that the mosaic fragments discovered in the north rooms of Baths B were originally laid in a room before the building was changed, and that the floor mosaic inside this room would have had an approximate length of 13.30 m along its east-west axis.

The Mosaic Floor of Room 5

The dimensions of the floor mosaic uncovered in Room 5a are 2.55 m x 1.78 m. The mosaic fragment of Room 5b measures 3.84 m x 3.60 m. This mosaic would originally have had a length of 8.56 m running east-west. The tesserae of the mosaics in Room 5 and Room 2 are similar to the tesserae of the mosaic in Baths A’s Room 11. In both mosaics, tesserae with a size of 2 x 2 cm were generally used. The dimensions of the tesserae change between 1.0 x 1.5 cm and 2.0 x 2.0 cm. Tesserae with rectangular, triangular and irregular forms are also seen on the mosaic. There are 28 to 31 tesserae per dm2 in the band of the wave pattern and 24 to 30 tesserae per dm2 in the main ornament zone. In the mosaic, blue, white, grey, red and orange colours were used. After the mosaic was covered with geotextile for temporary protection purposes, it was buried under a sand layer to a depth of 10 cm.

The first of the floor mosaics of Baths B is inside Room 5, which is situated in the north of the building and measures 7.43 m x 3.88 m (Figs. 50 and 53-55). It is thought that the northern half of the building consisted of a single room in the first construction phase of the mosaics, and that this room was divided into other rooms in the following phases. One of the most important reasons for this evaluation is that the mosaics of Room 2 and Room 5 exceed the limits of the rooms in which they are situated. Room 5 was divided into two by a north-south wall during a phase after the construction of the building. The western side, measuring 2.80 m x 3.52 m, was called Room 5a; the bigger eastern side, measuring 3.86 m x 3.62m, was named Room 5b (Fig. 53). The same floor mosaic can be seen in both Rooms 5a and 5b.

A monochrome (orange) border is the first design enclosing the mosaic, with a width of 30 cm. This design can be seen in the eastern side of the mosaic. The other band is a polychrome shaded six-strand guilloche on a dark ground (Figs. 53 and 55; Pl. 2b). The width of this band is 77 cm. The guilloche border can be seen in the eastern side of the mosaic, as with the monochrome border. A wave pattern, which is the innermost border ornament, has a width of 32 cm and is preserved on the north and east borders of the mosaic (Figs. 53-55; and Pl. 1b). The wave pattern border

The fact that the mosaic does not end at the northern, western and southern borders of Room 5 shows that some changes were made to the building after this mosaic was completed. Two fragments of the floor mosaic in Room 2, the western neighbour of Room 5, point out that the northern half of Baths B had a different architectural plan at the time when these mosaics were made. The mosaic fragments of Room 2 are also too big for the room in which they are situated. If this idea is correct, then it is

Fig. 53. Baths B. Plan of Room 5 and the illustration of the mosaic of Room 5.

53

Hadrianopolis IV

Fig. 54. Baths B. Floor mosaic of Room 5a.

Fig. 55. Baths B. Floor mosaic of Room 5b.

54

Mosaics from Baths B is also visible in the west side of the mosaic inside Room 5a. Because of this, the estimated width of the mosaic could be calculated. The colours used in the border are dark blue, orange and red. The wave pattern and the sixstrand guilloche are reminiscent of the border design of the geometric mosaic of Baths A.

some traces of renovation were found. It was also observed that in some parts of the mosaic, different colours were used, to the ones dictated by the existig pattern. In the mosaic piece situated in the southern side, a thick orange band, as in the border design of Room 5, and a sixstrand guilloche are seen (Figs. 57 and 62). The orange border has a width of 33 cm, while the guilloche border has a width of 78 cm. The fact that these bands do not change direction in the southeast end of the room allows us to infer that this mosaic did not actually end at the east wall of the room, but rather exceeded the room and ran further east. However, the floor mosaic supposed to be located in the south half of Room 5a, just to the east of Room 2, has not been preserved. In the light of the data available, it cannot be proven whether this mosaic has a direct association with the design of Room 5 mosaic. However, the fact that the mosaic piece from Room 2 has the same ornaments as the border designs of Room 5 supports the association between the pieces. They correspond not only in their design but also the dimensions of these designs.

The main decorative zone of Room 5 consists of an orthogonal pattern of spaced swastika-meander with reverse returns, the spaces staggered and containing a square bearing a serrated polychrome poised square (Figs. 53-55; and Pl. 8).194 The length of the ornament running east-west is 5.60 m and there are 10 ranks of patterns in this direction. Serrated and multicoloured poised squares are inlaid into the squares with dimensions of 42 x 42 cm (Fig. 56; and Pl. 21b). This pattern is reminiscent of the serrated poised squares placed in the panel of Room 11a mosaic in Baths A. The background of these small frames holding poised squares consists of orange and red tesserae. The Mosaic Floor of Room 2

The loss of a substantial part of the mosaics of Baths B unfortunately has prevented any sure judgment regarding these mosaics. Moreover, the architectural changes made to Baths B also disrupted the association between the mosaic and the architecture of the building where it is situated.

Room 2 is situated in the northwest of Baths B and measures 5.20 m x 3.58 m. An entrance with a width of 2.50 m is located in the south of the room. At the entrance, there are 3 in situ threshold stones next to each other (Fig. 57). Two fragments of mosaic were discovered in Room 2. One of these fragments is located close to the northern wall of the room and measures 4.25 m x 0.93 m. The other mosaic piece is located in the southern side of the room and measures 3.71 m x 1.20 m (Fig. 57). The number of tesserae per dm2 in the piece in the north change between 23-25, while 20-29 tesserae were used per dm2 in the southern mosaic piece. The dimensions of the tesserae are the same as in the tesserae forming the mosaic of Room 5. Blue, white, grey, red, orange, green and yellow tesserae were used. These in situ mosaic pieces were also covered with geotextile for temporary protection purposes and buried under a sand layer to a depth of 10 cm.

In the mosaics, especially in the mosaic piece with the rosette design, some traces of renovation can be seen. Different designs might have been reworked by the mosaic artist for the parts destroyed during the ancient wall-building. When examining the tesserae forming the mosaics, it is clear that the two incomplete mosaics inside Room 2 are extremely similar to the mosaics in Rooms 5a and 5b. The dimensions of the tesserae are similar in all mosaic pieces. While most of the tesserae are squares, there are also ones in rectangular, irregular tetragonal or triangular forms. In terms of the colours of tesserae, it has been observed that the rosette mosaic of the room 2 has an extra colour. In this mosaic piece, tesserae of grayish olive green tones are used. The colours of tesserae other than this one are the same as the other mosaic pieces of Baths B. The mosaics are thought to have been completed in the first architectural phase of Baths B, based on the archaeological data. It is also clear that the designs and features of tesserae are quite similar to the mosaic of Room 11 in Baths A. Therefore, we think that the mosaics of Rooms 5 and 2 belong to the last quarter of the 5th cent. AD.

There is an orthogonal pattern of adjacent rosettes as a panel design in the mosaic of Room 2: these three rosettes are composed of a combination of stylised vegetable and geometric patterns, found in the in situ mosaic piece at the north edge of the room (Figs. 57-58). In the research we have carried out, a similar design to this could not be found. In the two rosettes situated on the west and east sides, eight leaves were added surrounding an octagon (Figs. 58-59). Two leaves on the south side of the rosette located in the east corner did not survive (Fig. 60). There is a heart pattern between each leaf. The centres of the octagons are adorned with serrated polychrome poised squares. These patterns are similar to the serrated poised squares seen in the mosaic of Baths A (Fig. 28; and Pl. 21a). In the centre of the middle rosette, a circle is used instead of an octagon, differentiating it from the others (Figs. 59 and 61). This mosaic was examined in detail and

194

Evaluation of the Mosaics from Baths B and Their Parallels Those mosaics in Anatolia and beyond which are similar to the six-strand guilloche and wave pattern borders seen in the mosaics of Baths B have already been discussed during our contextualisation of the mosaic of Room 11 in Bath A. The border ornament consisting of a six-strand

For similar designs, see: Balmelle et al. 1985, pl. 194.

55

Hadrianopolis IV

Fig. 56. Baths B. A detail from the panel of the mosaic at Room 5.

Fig. 57. Baths B. Plan of Room 2 and the illustration of the mosaic floor.

56

Mosaics from Baths B

Fig. 58. Baths B. Northern piece of the floor mosaic at Room 2.

Fig. 59. Baths B. Northern piece of the floor mosaic at Room 2 with its illustration.

57

Hadrianopolis IV

Fig. 60. Baths B. A detail from the floor mosaic at Room 2.

Fig. 61. Baths B. A detail from the floor mosaic at Room 2.

58

Mosaics from Baths B

Fig. 62. Baths B. Southern piece of the floor mosaic at Room 2.

guilloche can also be seen in a mosaic discovered in Perre, Adıyaman195 and in the mosaic of Haleplibahçe (Edessa) (Fig. 43).196 Other similar designs can be observed in the synagogue of Sardis (Fig. 44)197, the Xanthus basilica198, the church of Laodicea on the Lycus (Fig. 45)199 in Turkey, in the mosaic of the synagogue of Beth Shean200 in Israel and lastly in the mosaic of the church of Shunah AlJabuniyah in Jordan.201

1b in Domus there is a border example consisting of this pattern which is also divided into various types depending on the number and positioning of the arms forming the swastika.204 A similar design is also found in Antioch-onthe-Orontes. In the mosaic panel of a house in Daphne dated to the early 5th cent. AD, swastika-meanders and squares are placed alternately. The squares between the swastika-meanders are adorned with a diagonal cuboid.205 Another example from Asia Minor is the mosaics of the basilica of Mopsuestia in Cilicia. In these mosaics, dated to the second half of the 5th cent. AD, rosettes were inlaid in the squares between the arms of a swastika-meander with reverse returns, similar to the example of Baths B.206 Another example similar to the mosaic of Room 5 is a panel on the mosaic of the north aisle of the church of Bishop Leontios in Jordan which is dated to the end of the 5th cent. AD and the beginning of the 6th cent. AD.207 In this panel, there is a swastika-meander with reverse returns with two different colour arrangements on a white background. This swastika-meander example is the same as the one from Baths B except for the colour arrangement. Inside the squares between the arms of the swastikameander, various geometric ornaments such as Solomon knots, zigzags, cuboids and chessboard patterns etc. were inlaid.

There are no mosaics identical to the rosette design discovered in Room 2 outside of Hadrianopolis. This mosaic thus exhibits a characteristic special to Hadrianopolis; however, the designs similar to those seen in the panel of Room 5 were popular in the mosaics of classical antiquity. The pattern defined as ‘swastika’ in the present monograph is generally referred to as ‘gammadion’ by Turkish researchers.202 The swastika-meander design varieties in the period mosaics were used as both border ornaments and panel design.203 In this type of designs, swastikameanders and geometric (or figural) squares alternate. Generally, even though examples similar to the mosaics of Baths B are usally seen, other varieties of swastikameander in perspective also exist: In the mosaic of Room Salman 2007a, p. 12, fig. 11. Aydemir, Çokoğullu and Dervişoğlu 2008, p. 2, fig. 1; Karaca and Rızvanoğlu 2008, pp. 3-6. 197 Foss 1976, pp. 41-42. 198 Raynaud 2009, pp. 116-118, ills. 130-131. 199 Şimşek 2015, figs. 106 and 114. 200 Ovadiah and Ovadiah 1987, pp. 33-34, pl. 29.1. 201 Piccirillo 1993a, pp. 320-323, fig. 669. 202 Sezer 2007, p. 552; Tok 2007, p. 59. 203 Tok 2007, p. 59. 195 196

For examples discussed as panel designs of a swastika-meander pattern, see: Balmelle et al. 1985, pls. 190-196. For border design examples of the pattern, see: Balmelle et al. 1985, pls. 35-42. 205 Levi 1947, pp. 315-316, pl. 128c. 206 Budde 1969, p. 52, fig. 25; figs. 116-119. 207 Nassar and Turshan 2011, pp. 57-58, fig. 20. 204

Hadrianopolis IV Mosaics from Basilica A

59

IV Mosaics from Basilica A Basilica A

column base (the fourth from the west) in the eastern side of the line separating the north aisle and the nave is in situ which is made from a local limestone material, classified as an Attic base, type 1 and dated to the beginning of the 6th cent. AD.215 Another find discovered in situ in Basilica A is a limestone door frame where the templon slabes were settled on, separating the bema from the nave; this fragment is dated to the 6th cent. AD (Figs. 63-64 and 70).

Basilica A, located 500 m north of Göksu Çay about 1.5 km east of the Byzantine city walls, was built on a hill known as ‘Yerebatan’ (Fig. 4).208 There is a small settlement to the west of this basilica, the function of which is not known, but which was most probably established for wine production.209 Basilica A was built in the first quarter of the 6th cent. AD and thought to be active until the beginning of the 8th cent. AD.210 Excavations began in 2006 under the supervision of E. Laflı; however, some illegal digging was done in its narthex before the excavations started211 and as a result the most important part of the narthex mosaic with a geometric design was destroyed. All the floor mosaics discovered in the nave, the two aisles, narthex and bema of the basilica date back to the first half of the 6th cent. AD.

The column capitals discovered in Basilica A are decorated with simple stylized palmettes. All seven examples found preserved are in this style. Moreover, another example found in the Budaklar district is similar to the finds of the basilica.216 One of the architectural remains discovered during excavations in Basilica A is a marble door lintel which is dated to the 6th cent. AD.217 This lintel, with a small Latin cross relief, must have been part of the main gate of the church or the door between narthex and naos.

The dimensions of this building, with its basilical plan of three naves extending along an east-west axis, are 20.28 m x 15.84 m (Figs. 63-65).212 The entrance to the basilica is from the western side, where the narthex is located. Other than this door, which is 2.5 m wide, the south aisle can be entered from another gate in the middle of the southern wall of the building, which is 1.45 m wide. The majority of the walls of the building were not preserved; but as understood from the northern wall, the basilica was made of brick and stone masonry in alternate order, as was Baths A (Fig. 66). Even though the apse walls in the east of the church could not survive, ruins belonging to this architectural unit were found at the foundation level (Fig. 67). In the eastern end of the north aisle, a small division with a circular form was created probably at a later stage of the building (Figs. 63-64 and 68). It is also possible that this space was used as a pastophorium or baptisterium.213 There is also a niche in the eastern end of the northern wall of the same nave, with a length of 1.20 m and depth of 15/20cm, the function of which is not understood yet (Figs. 63-64 and 69).

Other than these finds, eight cornice fragments made of limestone and used as an upper structural element belonging to Basilica A were found, as well as seven ambon fragments from the liturgical architectural group.218 The Mosaic Floor of the North Aisle The mosaic of the north aisle of Basilica A was made by means of the technique of opus tessellatum and they used smaller tesserae for the figures to give finer detail. The dimension of the mosaic is about 14.10 m x 2.70 m.219 The mosaic of the north aisle, preserved in three pieces, was made of marble, serpentinite and travertine tesserae (Figs. 63-64 and 71). The number of tesserae per dm2 in the guilloche border vary between 100 and 110. In the figural decorated areas, the number of tesserae per dm2 vary between 170 and 200. The dimensions of tessera used for geometric designs are 1.0 x 1.0 cm, and this shrinks to 0.5 x 0.5 cm for figural designs. Black, white, orange, yellow, red, green, gray, pink and brown colours and different shades of these colours were used on the mosaic. This in situ mosaic floor of Basilica A was first covered with geotextile for temporary protection purposes and then buried under sand layer to a depth of of 5-10 cm.

Basilica A is quite similar to Basilica B, situated in the central part of the site within the city walls, in terms of its plan and dimensions. However, Basilica A has more architectural finds compared to Basilica B. Some of the architectural parts discovered are in situ and allowed for an absolute evaluation of the building. The nave of Basilica A isseparated by five columns, spaced 1.5 m apart.214 One

Dimensions: 65 x 65 cm; diam. 50 cm; h. 28 cm. Laflı and Zäh 2008, p. 687. 217 W. 54 cm; l. 117 cm; h. 27 cm. Laflı and Zäh 2008, pp. 687-688; Cumalıoğlu 2011, p. 100. 218 For the cornice and ambon fragments from Basilica A, see: Cumalıoğlu 2011, pp. 12-14. 219 For another evaluation of the mosaics from Basilica A, see: Patacı 2011, pp. 30-49. 215

Laflı 2009c, p. 400; Laflı and Zäh 2008, p. 686. 209 Laflı and Zäh 2008, p. 686. 210 Laflı 2007, p. 30. 211 Öztepe and Öztaner 2001, p. 11. 212 Laflı and Zäh 2008, p. 686; Laflı 2007: p. 29. 213 Laflı and Zäh 2008, p. 687. 214 Laflı and Zäh 2008, p. 687; Laflı 2007, p. 29. 208

216

61

Hadrianopolis IV

Fig. 63. Orthophoto of Basilica A.

62

Mosaics from Basilica A

Fig. 64. Plan of Basilica A.

63

Hadrianopolis IV

Fig. 65. Basilica A. View from the west.

Fig. 66. North wall of Basilica A.

64

Mosaics from Basilica A

Fig. 67. The apse of Basilica A. View from the north.

The mosaic in the north aisle of Basilica A consists of two different panels. Apart from these panels, there is one more geometric design engraved in a rectangular frame in the west side of the mosaic. This design was made for the purpose of filling the space between two walls, which run along a north-south axis separating the north aisle from the narthex. Although the design has a similar function as the rectangle decoration just in front of the doorstep between Room 11 and Room 8 in Baths A, there is no door between the narthex and north aisle. These kind of designs were used in classical antiquity for filling in spaces left by irregular architectural features, as seen in this example in Basilica A. The designs inlaid just in front of the doorsteps are called as ‘threshold mosaics’.220 Apart from that, patterns such as those in the rectangular frame are frequently found among the border designs of 220

the floor mosaic, which is located in the west side of the north aisle and measures 80 cm x 45 cm. The design, the boundaries of which are fixed by a black band with double orders of tesserae, includes two tangent circles formed of four spindles, each with a diameter of 38 cm (Fig. 72; and Pl. 19b). Two orders of white tesserae are inlaid around the spindles, forming the circles, and along the edges of the design. Apart from that, the whole ground of the design is filled with orange tesserae. The spindles consist of alternate red and green colours and the internal edges of the spindles form a concave poised square. The field between this design and the border design of the mosaic is filled with nine orders of red tesserae. The external design surrounding the mosaic of the north aisle is a red border 15-23 cm wide. The width of this border changes depending on the position of the columns separating the north aisle and the nave (Figs. 71 and 73).

Parrish 2007, p. 22.

65

Hadrianopolis IV

Fig. 68. Basilica A. The circular division in the eastern end of the north aisle.

Fig. 69. Basilica A. The niche in the eastern end of the northern wall of the north aisle.

66

Mosaics from Basilica A

Fig. 70. Basilica A. An in situ door frame separating the bema and the nave.

75-76 and Pl. 9). This design was discussed as having a similar concept to the panel of the mosaic of Room 11a in Baths A; however, it has higher quality workmanship compared to Baths A. The fact that bird figures were used in the square frames instead of geometric ornaments is another difference.

Some parts of this border consist of white and other parts of light green tesserae. It is not understood whether this difference in tessera colours results from the design concept or a renovation belonging to a later stage. The fact that the north side of the mosaic was significantly destroyed prevents any sure interpretation of this issue. The other border decoration of the mosaic is a polychrome, tightly braided, round-tongued double guilloche on a black ground (Figs. 72, 74-75; and Pl. 3a). Between the double guilloche and monochrome borders, there are two orders of black and two orders of white tesserae. In the guilloche with a width of 30 cm, the strands consist of orange, green and red colours.

The parallelograms forming the stars of the panel (6.00 m x 1.60 m) measure between 20 x 19 cm and 17 x 18 cm. The contours of all geometric elements of the panel are defined by two orders of black tesserae. The internal parts of the stars are in green, red and orange (Figs. 75 and 76; pls. 9 and 22b) The spaces left between the stars and panel borders are filled with green triangular motifs (Fig. 75; and Pl. 9).

The main decoration area covering the west half of the north aisle has been called ‘Panel I’. This panel consists of an orthogonal pattern of squares decorated with various bird figures, poised squares decorated with rosettes, and stars of eight parallelograms surrounding them (Figs. 73,

In Panel I, which has a white background, the dimensions of the square frames which run centrally in an east-west direction are about 45 x 45 cm. A partridge is depicted in 67

Hadrianopolis IV

Fig. 71. Basilica A. Illustration of the floor mosaic of the north aisle.

68

Mosaics from Basilica A

Fig. 72. Basilica A. Rectangular mosaic panel at the west edge of the north aisle.

Fig. 73. Aerial photo of the north aisle of Basilica A.

69

Hadrianopolis IV

Fig. 74. Basilica A. Border design of the floor mosaic in the north aisle.

Fig. 75. Basilica A. Panel I of the mosaic floor of the north aisle.

70

Mosaics from Basilica A

Fig. 76. Basilica A. Illustration of the panel I of the mosaic floor in the north aisle.

71

Hadrianopolis IV

Fig. 77. Basilica A. A partridge from the mosaic floor of the north aisle.

the first square from the west (Fig. 77), a duck221 in the second square (Fig. 78) and a guinea fowl, each in the third and fourth squares (Figs. 79-80) which was often represented in such mosaics. The bird in the fifth square from the west was not preserved. In the sixth square, a cockerel222 (Fig. 81) and in the last square, a partridge is depicted (Fig. 82). The height of these birds, depicted in polychrome on a white ground, changes between 23 and 28  cm, and the figures are centred in the squares. The width of the panels on the white ground change between 22 and 37 cm. All the birds are depicted in profile; the birds placed in the first three frames from the west face southwards, that is, to the right of the scene in which they are depicted. The other birds face northwards. In the figures facing southwards, the left leg is foremost, and in the figures facing northwards the right leg is foremost. The legs and beaks are composed of red tesserae. In some figures, the eye form consists of one round and quite small red tessera, while in others the eye is formed by using black tessera. While the crest, wattle and beak of the poultry birds are depicted with orange tesserae, red

tesserae are used for the body parts of a poultry bird in the sixth square panel. The contours and some details of the figures are defined with black tesserae. Black, white, gray, red, orange, yellow, green, pink colours and light and dark shades of these colours are used on the figures. The bird figures are well-preserved in general. The bird in the fifth square from the west is destroyed; but as understood from a tessera at the back of this figure, it is possible to say that it is positioned to the north, that is, to the left of the scene where it is depicted. The dimensions of tesserae used for the birds are smaller than those used for geometric motifs. These tesserae with the dimension of 0.5 x 0.5 cm allowed the artists to depict the figures in more detail. The spaces between the stars and square panels with bird figures are filled by smaller poised squares measuring of 19 x 19 cm. There is a rosette with bi-lobed petals inlaid on a white ground and a central cross among these squares (Figs. 75-76; Pls. 9 and 21f). The arms of the green cross pattern have arrow tips. The other tessera colours used in the rosette are red, pink and white. Pink and white tesserae also form a crossed tassel.223

221 This figure looks like a duck without any palmate feet which could perhaps be a mistake of the mosaicist. 222 This figure has longer legs and a neck than most poultry, but it is defined as a cockerel because it has a crest and wattle similar to those of poultry.

For saltires of tassels, see: Balmelle et al. 1985, p. 30, pl. 4j, k and l. For tassels (triangular ornaments with serrated bases), see: Balmelle et al. 2002, p. 39.

223

72

Mosaics from Basilica A

Fig. 78. Basilica A. A duck from the mosaic floor of the north aisle.

Fig. 79. Basilica A. A spotted chicken (guinea fowl?) from the mosaic floor of the north aisle.

73

Hadrianopolis IV

Fig. 80. Basilica A. A spotted chicken (guinea fowl?) from the mosaic floor of the north aisle.

Fig. 81. Basilica A. The poultry from the mosaic floor of the north aisle.

74

Mosaics from Basilica A

Fig. 82. Basilica A. A partridge from the mosaic floor of the north aisle.

of the panel. In the subsequent ornament order, there is a square with a bird figure on both sides and a square with geometric ornaments in the middle. However, the figural square on the north edge is not preserved. The design fills the whole space alternately.

One of the geometric ornaments of Panel I is the semicircles formed of two spindles processed in the rectangle along the borders of the ornament zone (Figs. 75-76 and Pls. 9 and 22g). The rectangle have a dimension of about 45 x 23 cm. The main colour used for the spindle is either red or green. The centre of the motif is shaded with white and light green or white and pink tesserae. The bottom edges of the spindles form a concave triangle along the short edge. There is one more green or red small triangle in the centre of this white ground.

While there was originally a total of 16 or 17 square frames with bird figures in Panel II, only four of them are preserved. There is a small design difference between the geometric ornament zones in the middle of the panel and the fields on the edges of the panel. There is a small-sized pentagon on each of the four corners of the ornament zone in the geometric designs located in the middle of the panel. Irregular quadrangles take the place of the pentagons in the fields in the boundaries of the panel. Furthermore, a poised square with the dimension of 10 cm x 10 cm adorns the centre of each geometric ornament zone on the panel (Fig. 85; and Pl. 10). Irregular quadrangles, pentagons and poised squares are processed in white, black and orange colours on a black ground from outside to inside. On the panel, the surroundings of both these geometric fields and the frames with bird figures are adorned with various geometric patterns. One of these geometric patterns used on the periphery is a

The dimensions of Panel II, covering the east half of the north aisle and preserved in two pieces, appear to have been 5.95 m x 1.60 m. Panel II, with a black background, is composed of geometric and figural designs in the ornament fields, which are formed of three adjacent squares running in a north-south direction (Figs. 83-85; and Pl. 10). There is a votive inscription in the east of the panel, and we believe there were originally 33 squares in the ornament zone where this inscription is found. However, because this floor mosaic is badly damaged, only traces belonging to 16 squares are preserved. There is a square with a bird figure in the middle, and two squares with geometric designs at the starting point on the western edge

75

Hadrianopolis IV

Fig. 83. Basilica A. Panel II of the mosaic floor in the north aisle.

band of tightly braided simple guilloche with strands of three repeating colours, on a black ground (Figs. 85-87 and 89; Pl. 10). The other two geometric patterns are a band of polychrome three-dimensional undulating ribbon in lateral perspective 224 and a polychrome row of tangent inverted bells, with each bell horizontally shaded, forming an undulating line outlined in white (Figs. 8589; and Pl. 10).225

The frames of the panel with bird figures consist of a single order of black tesserae and have the dimension of 34 cm x 33 cm in average. The squares are smaller than the squares of Panel I, covering the west half of the mosaic. They are also wrapped in ribbons, simple guilloche and bell motif strips. The square-shaped ornament space reaches up to a dimension of 51 cm x 51 cm together with these geometric elements.

224 For designs of undulating ribbons, see: Balmelle et al. 1985, p. 115, pl. 65. 225 For this design, see: Balmelle et al. 1985, p. 110, pl. 60e.

The four bird figures depicted in Panel II are, from west to east, a partridge, a duck which has the same problem with feet as in the Panel I, a guinea fowl and a parrot (Alexandrine parrot?) (Figs. 86-89). All birds other 76

Mosaics from Basilica A

Fig. 84. Basilica A. Illustration of the panel II of the mosaic floor in the north aisle.

Fig. 85. Basilica A. A detailed illustration of the panel II of the mosaic floor in the north aisle.

77

Hadrianopolis IV

Fig. 86. Basilica A. A partridge from the mosaic floor of the north aisle.

Fig. 87. Basilica A. A duck from the mosaic floor of the north aisle.

78

Mosaics from Basilica A

Fig. 88. Basilica A. A spotted chicken (guinea fowl?) from the mosaic floor of the north aisle.

Fig. 89. Basilica A. A parrot from the mosaic floor of the north aisle.

79

Hadrianopolis IV

Fig. 90. Basilica A. Votive inscription of the floor mosaic in the north aisle.

A small part of a three-line votive inscription in mosaic was preserved in Panel II 1.62 m west of the eastern wall of the nave (Fig. 90).226 The width of the letters in this inscription, made of black tesserae inlaid on a white background, changes between 13 and 11 cm. The letter height in the first line of the inscription is 11 cm, in the second line 13 cm and in the third line 12 cm. This kind of evidence is among the most important factors contributing to the evaluation of mosaics; however, the major part of this inscription was destroyed. The surviving text is as follows:

than the partridge face north. The colours used in these figures, depicted on a white background, are black, white, red, green, blue, pink, brown and gray. Opus tessellatum was used inside these small squares. As in the examples involved in Panel I, Panel II uses tessera measuring 0.5 x 0.5 cm. The height of the birds changes between 26 and 30 cm, such that the birds hardly fit into their squares compared to the examples in Panel I. The best example for this is the partridge situated in the first square from the west (Fig. 86). The partridge was placed by the mosaic artist a bit carelessly. It is obvious that the tail of the animal is shown shorter than normal size so that it does not exceed the frame. The head and neck of the figure are bigger compared to the back of the body. These issues of proportional deformation and figure dimensions must result from some difficulty in the design. An inexperienced mosaic artist designing this part of the mosaic could be a possible reason for this situation. When viewing the bird figures in the other panel, no visible difference exists in terms of technical details and style; however, the dimensions of the figures are better calculated in comparison with the aforementioned bird figure. The fact that the squares in Panel II are smaller than those in Panel I must have forced the mosaic artist or artists to change their work. Another explanation for this kind of defect seen in some details of mosaic design is the limited time that the mosaic artist may have had available in creating the work, and the necessity of working fast.

ὑπὲρ [εὐχῆς] Μαρίν[ης] τῆς λα[μπρ(οτάτης)] As [a vow] of Marina, the clarissima. Another vow, ὑπὲρ εὐχῆς καὶ σωτηρίας, is inscribed in another mosaic on the nave of Basilica A (cf. p. 92). The inscription, with the epithet τῆς λα[μπροτάτης referring to a benefactress, resembles the mosaic inscription on the south aisle of Basilica B (cf. p. 168): Οὐαλεντίνας τῆς κοσμιωτ(άτης) καὶ σεμνοπρεπεστάτης. 226 Laflı and Christof 2012a, p. 41, fig. 9; Christof and Laflı 2013, p. 156, fig. 23; and SEG 61, no. 1084. We would like to express our sincere gratitude and appreciation to Dr Paweł Nowakowski for his epigraphic assistance to all of our inscriptions in this book.

80

Mosaics from Basilica A measuring 13.76 m x 2.74 m. In this colourful mosaic consisting of marble, serpentinite and travertine tesserae, tesserae measuring 1.0 x 1.0 cm were used in the geometric design areas, and tesserae measuring 0.5 x 0.5 cm and 0.4 x 0.4 cm were used in figural decorations. The density of these tesserae per dm2 is somewhat more than the mosaic of the north aisle. Looking at the geometric adornments, there are 115-123 tesserae per dm2 in the stars of eight parallelograms. There are 290 tesserae per dm2 on the figures of the gazelle and lion and 260 tesserae per dm2 on the horse figure. In the mosaic, black, white, red, yellow, orange, green, pink, brown and gray colours, as well as light and dark shades of these colours, are used.

All bird figures in the both panels of the nave were depicted as a single figure in a square frame, with a white background and not framed with any floral design. These examples do not have any background details that would indicate the figures are in a natural setting. The design of Panel II is more complicated and detailed compared to Panel I, which decorates the west side of the nave. The decorative areas are divided into square sections detailed with some geometric ornaments. These include pentagons, irregular quadrangles, poised squares, polychrome and three dimensional undulating ribbons, tightly braided simple guilloche and horizontally shaded tangent bells. All these geometric elements were depicted one within the other, thus creating a colourful and intense, busy design. Other than adornments, a votive inscription was also included. There is a division used as a pastophorium or baptisterium in the eastern side of the north aisle and a niche next to it, the function of which is not yet understood. The votive inscription is placed just in front of this niche. The eastern half of the north aisle was prized compared to the western half and Panel II was decorated with a fancier and more complex design.

There is evidence of intensive destruction, especially on the west side, of the mosaic and its eastern half is wellpreserved compared to the west. The border decoration of the mosaic is similar to the design seen on the mosaic of the north aisle. The outer border is orange with an average width of 15 cm. Within this, there are two black and two white tesserae orders. The second border of the mosaic is the polychrome, tightly braided, round-tongued double guilloche on a black ground also used on the north aisle (Figs. 74, 91 and 92; Pl. 3a). The main colours in the border, with a width of 30 cm, are red, orange and green as on the mosaic of the north aisle. After this border, there are two orders of black and two white tesserae.

The Mosaic Floor of the South Aisle The floor mosaic adorning the south aisle of Basilica A was preserved in one piece (Figs. 63-64 and 91-92)

Fig. 91. Basilica A. Aerial photo of the south aisle.

81

Hadrianopolis IV

Fig. 92. Illustration of the floor mosaic in the south aisle.

82

Mosaics from Basilica A The long sides of the parallelograms forming the stars vary between 21 cm and 23 cm and their short sides between 19 cm and 21 cm. The parallelograms running north-south are in red and orange, and those running east-west are in green and light green (Figs. 92-93; Pls. 11 and 22c). In some examples, pink tesserae are used instead of red ones. The spaces between the panel edges and stars are filled with green triangular motifs, in on the mosaic of the north aisle.

The original dimension of the main ornament zone of the mosaic, the west half and middle section of which are widely destroyed, is 12.70 m x 1.70 m. The design of the panel, on a white background, consists of an orthogonal pattern of figural squares, rosette-ornamented poised squares and stars of eight parallelograms, surrounding these elements similar to the ornaments on Panel I of the north aisle (Figs. 91-92; and Pl. 11). The rectangles on the edges of the panel are adorned with geometric and floral designs. The borders of all geometric ornaments on the mosaic consist of two orders of black tesserae.

The ornament zone originally had 32 rectangles in total, including 15 each in the north and south edges and 1 each in the east and west edges. There are traces of 17 of these, but only five rectangles were completely preserved. The dimensions of these rectangles are about 49 cm x 24 cm. The rectangles, with a white background, are adorned with semicircles formed of two spindles, as seen in the examples in Panel I of the north aisle. The spindles on the mosaic of the south aisle are treated with a design concept different from the examples on the mosaic of the north aisle and an ivy (hedera) is used for the space between two spindles instead of the triangles in the mosaic of the north aisle (Figs. 92-93; Pls. 11 and 22h).

Traces from seven figural squares (out of 15) survived; animal figures were found in five of them. These squares, with an approximate dimension of 49 cm x 49 cm, run in an east-west direction through the central ground of the panel. In the ornament zone, there were originally 46 poised squares adorned with rosettes, but only the traces of 20 of them were preserved. The average dimensions of the poised squares are 21 cm x 21 cm. The rosettes ornamenting the interiors of these squares consist of leaves with two lobes, the same as the rosettes seen in the north aisle, and have a cross in their centres (Fig. 93; Pls. 11 and 21g).

The square frames with animal figures preserved on the mosaics of the south aisle are located in the east end of the

Fig. 93. Basilica A. An elephant and a peacock on the mosaic floor of the south aisle.

83

Hadrianopolis IV nave and ordered successively. These animals are, from west to east, an elephant, a peacock, a lion, a gazelle and a horse (Fig. 92). The height of the figures except for lion varies between 35 and 41 cm. The preserved height of the lion, whose head and hind legs are destroyed, is 30 cm. All the animals are depicted as a single figure within the square frames, similar to the birds on the mosaic of the north aisle; but there are also floral ornaments around the animals here, which the mosaic of the north aisle omits. Out of five squares, only the square with an elephant figure has no floral design. The figures are depicted in profile and their bodies and heads face right, towards the east. Only the head of the gazelle is depicted turning around

of white tesserae are used. To the east of the square panel with an elephant figure, the square panel adorned with a peacock is situated (Figs. 93-94). It is a remarkable example, for the peacock is used intensively on the floor mosaics of religious building and especially in the early era of Christianity. The most outstanding element in the details of the bird is the tail. The green and red orders of tesserae on the tail are in diagonal and alternate orders. In the central part of the tail, six orange and black ‘eyes’ are depicted using a single order of tesserae lined up vertically. Contrary to the body, which is depicted in profile, the legs are shown from a slightly frontal view, running in parallel. Two floral ornaments at the right and left edges of the scene have green branches and leaves. There is an open rose motif in the design on the left. In the vegetal ornaments on the right, where rosebuds are depicted, the tips of green leaves are adorned with orange tesserae. The

There are tessera losses on the body of the elephant figure at the westernmost point, and facial details are not preserved (Fig. 93). In the figure, black, gray and a limited numbered

Fig. 94. Basilica A. Peacock on the mosaic floor of the south aisle.

84

Mosaics from Basilica A tesserae on the white ground filling the surrounding field of both the elephant and peacock are ordered by means of the opus vermiculatum technique.

successfully in terms of the tessera features, detailing and shadowing (Figs. 92, 95, 97-99; and Pl. 11). A part belonging to the back of the gazelle was not preserved. The destruction to the northwest and southeast corners of the panel also affected the floral elements adorning the surroundings of the figure. Tesserae cut in millimetric sizes form the gazelle, which is depicted in profile and looking to the right of the scene in orange and yellow shades, inlaid quite densely and uniformly. The shadowing on the gazelle is as successful as on the lion. The colours of tesserae used are black, brown, yellow, orange, white and pinkish red.

Next is a square with a lion figure, east of the peacock (Figs. 92 and 95-96). The head and hind legs of this figure, which must have been depicted in quite highquality workmanship, was not preserved. The figure is one of examples with the best workmanship among all the figures on the mosaics of Basilica A. This lion is depicted in an attacking position, similar to the leopard and gryphon figures depicted on the panels of the mosaic of the nave in Basilica A. The front feet rush forward and strike the air; three sharp claws are depicted with black tesserae on both paws. The back legs look tense due to the movement. There is a puffed chest and a tight abdomen. The contours of the figure consist of a single order of black tesserae; the tip of the tail, consisting of black tesserae, could not be preserved. The figure is skilfully shaded to give the appearance of depth: the shades of tesserae change from dark to light from the lion’s back towards its abdomen. Orange and yellow colours dominate the majority of the body. The mane of the lion is depicted linearly with black, brown and white orders of tesserae, and waves backwards due to the movement. There are also three floral ornaments in the scene: roses in bud form depicted with orange and yellow tesserae at the tips of green leaves. The tesserae on the white ground adorning around both the lion figure and these floral ornaments are ordered according to the opus vermiculatum technique.

The front legs of the gazelle are shown leaping forward into the air; the back legs are tense due to the movement. The gazelle turns back its head; there is bending due to the movement in the tesserae ordered vertically. The eye has an almond form and the iris is formed with more than one tessera. In this way, the iris is emphasised more naturally. The details in the ears and hooves of the gazelle are depicted successfully. This type of figural example is very often seen in mosaics scenes showing animal chases or hunting. The depiction of the gazelle matches the depictions of animals fleeing other animals. However, the face of the gazelle does not reflect the worry and tension of such an attack. The lion depicted in an attacking position within the square frame just to the west reminds one of scenes of animal chases. The floral ornaments filling the spaces on the white ground around the gazelle are composed of green leaves and orange, red and pink rosebuds as in the other square panels. The tesserae on the white ground surrounding both the gazelle and floral ornaments are ordered according to the opus vermiculatum technique.

After the lion comes a square with a gazelle, on the east edge of the nave. The gazelle is depicted perhaps the most

Fig. 95. Basilica A. A Lion and a gazelle on the mosaic floor of the south aisle.

85

Hadrianopolis IV

Fig. 96. Basilica A. The lion on the mosaic floor of the south aisle.

Fig. 97. Basilica A. The gazelle on the mosaic floor of the south aisle.

86

Mosaics from Basilica A

Fig. 98. Illustration of the gazelle on the floor mosaic of the south aisle.

Fig. 99. Basilica A. Sequencing of tesserae in the gazelle on the mosaic floor of the south aisle.

87

Hadrianopolis IV

Fig. 100. Basilica A. A horse on the mosaic floor of the south aisle.

The Mosaic Floor of the Nave

The last panel of the mosaics of the south aisle is located to the right of the square with the gazelle figure, in the east end of the nave. A horse is depicted on this panel (Figs. 92 and 100; Pl. 11). The figure faces to the right of the scene and rears back. The mane of the horse waves due to the movement. As in the other examples which hold a similar position, the hind legs carry the weight of the body and are tense. Its mouth is open; the eye is depicted a bit bigger than its proper size. The most outstanding detail in the figure is the tail, which is coloured alternately with orders of black and red curvilinear tesserae reminiscent of a twisted ceramic handle. The preferred red colour makes it look unnatural. The floral ornaments filling the white background have the same characters as the other examples. Although these ornaments are technically successful, in terms of their sizes or perspective the way they are placed in the scene is more formal and less natural . However, most mosaic designs of classical antiquity were created with this artistic concept.

The dimensions of the nave floor mosaic preserved in seven pieces were originally 11.23 m x 6.76 m (Figs. 101102). The west half of the floor mosaic with two main ornament zones is better preserved than the east half, but in general, more than half of the floor mosaic of the nave has destroyed. The ground mosaics are distinguished from the other floor mosaics of Basilica A by their detailed and complex geometric, floral and figural designs. This mosaic has a distinctive quality of workmanshipwhich becomes the naos, being the most important part of an early Byzantine basilica. The mosaics are created with 1.0 x 1.0 cm tesserae in the geometric ornament zone, and with tesserae with the dimensions of 0.4 x 0.4 and 1.0 x 1.0 cm in the figural ornament zones. The density per dm2 is between 85 and 115 in the borders. In the geometric designs in the main 88

Mosaics from Basilica A

Fig. 101. Basilica A. Aerial photo of the nave.

alternately on a white ground (Figs. 103-104; and Pl. 3d). These are: antithetical curved lanceolates229, ivy leaves with stems 230 and an ivy231, vine leaves and ‘a bell-shaped floral design’.232 The volutes, composed of a single order of black tesserae, run along both sides of the bell-shaped motif. At the top of the motif, there are serrated red leaves and branches with a rose at their end, which extend out of its two sides. All the patterns in the border are tied with a semi-oval chain. Another border of the mosaic is the wave pattern; the tesserae are black and white in this band (Figs. 103-104; and Pl. 1c).

ornament zone, there are 110-125 tesserae per dm2. In the bird figures, there are 175-205 tesserae per dm2 and in the animal figures situated in four square panels in the west half of the floor mosaic, 225 tesserae per dm2. The colours of tesserae used are black, white, red, green, orange, yellow, pink, gray and brown and there are tesserae in a great number of shades based on these colours. The mosaic of the nave was first covered with geotextile for temporary preservation purposes and then buried under a sand layer to a depth of 5-10 cm. The mosaic is bordered by four different designs and bands consisting of one or two orders of tesserae placed among them (Figs. 102-103). The first design encircling the mosaic externally is an orange band. After this band and two orders of black and white tesserae, a band of polychrome three-dimensional undulating ribbon in lateral perspective is situated on a black ground (Figs. 103-104; and Pl. 3b).227 Between the waves of the ribbon design, there are three branch-floral ornaments with a fruit at the end.228 The external third band of the mosaic is a row of colourful vegetal ornaments following each other

After the wave band, there is a colourful band with five orders of tesserae (Fig. 103). The contours of the band consist of one each order of black tesserae. The interior is shadowed with red, orange and white tesserae. Moreover, the contours of the curvilinear squares, square panels and

Balmelle et al. 2002, p. 47 (in French lancéolé incurvé). Balmelle et al. 2002, p. 46 (in French tige à goutte). 231 Balmelle et al. 2002, p. 46 (in French tige à hedera). 232 There are some design examples similar to the bell-shaped motif but we have not found any other examples identical to this motif. The motif is a reminiscent of both vegetal patterns and pot forms. For a similar design example, see: Balmelle et al. 2002, p. 51 (in French vase sans anse, à tigelles and in English vase without handles, with shoots). 229 230

For a similar design, see: Balmelle et al. 1985, p. 115, pl. 65d. For similars of the design, see: Balmelle et al. 1985, p. 140, pl. 88e, g; Balmelle et al. 2002, p. 46 (in French tige à baie).

227 228

89

Hadrianopolis IV

Fig. 102. Basilica A. Illustration of the floor mosaic in the nave.

90

Mosaics from Basilica A

Fig. 103. Basilica A. Border designs of the floor mosaic in the nave.

Fig. 104. Basilica A. Orthophoto of the votive inscription on the mosaic floor in the nave.

91

Hadrianopolis IV Pl. 23e).237 The interiors of the concave octagons, circles and bells are decorated with various geometric and floral motifs (Figs. 106-108). The mosaic as a whole is an affluent composition with geometric, floral and figural patterns.

bell patterns in the western ornamented zone of the nave have the same colourful arrangement. In the eastern edge of the floor mosaic of the nave, there is an inscription within the border design (Figs. 104 and 123).233 This inscription is between the monochrome band and the ribbon band, which is the first design surrounding the mosaic externally. Only a part of the inscription that is composed of black tesserae on white ground with a width of 20 cm has been preserved. Its maximum length, running north-south, is 240 cm. The transcription and translation of the inscription, the letters of which are 16 cm high on average, are as follows:

There are four figural square panels in the ornament zone, all on a white background. Traces belonging to 20 curvilinear squares, out of the original 24, were found and 4 of them were preserved without any damage. In the ornament zone, there were originally 28 concave octagons, but traces of only 20 octagons were found; 11 concave octagons are better preserved than the others. There should originally have been 48 circles in the ornament zone; Traces belonging to 24 circles were found and only 15 of these are well-preserved. A coordinate system was created by us to easily define the locations of the designs in the ornament zone. According to this system, the sequence of seven motifs ranning in a north-south direction are encoded using the letters A to G, and the sequence of eight motifs running in a west-east direction are encoded using the numbers 1 to 8 (Fig. 109).

† Ὑπὲρ εὐχῆς κ[αὶ σ]ωτηρία̣[ς As a vow and for the salvation… Panel I in the western half of the floor mosaic of the nave is preserved in two pieces and its sizes are supposed to be 5.10 x 4.90 m. The east edge and middle zone of this panel are badly destroyed; there is also some minor destruction. The panel design consists of square frames adorned with various animal figures, poised curvilinear squares234 (in other words, cushions) (Pl. 23a) adorned with bird figures, and the circles and irregular concave octagons235 between these designs (Figs. 101-102, 105-106; and Pl. 12).236 The panel edges have bells with straight bases (Fig. 103; and

All curvilinear squares on the panel have a white background. The average size of the curvilinear squares is 90 cm x 90 cm. Inside these designs, various bird figures are depicted. The spaces around the birds are adorned with floral elements. A part of these floral patterns consist of green branches with flowers (roses?) at the tips. Some roses are depicted as open blooms and some of them as closed rosebuds. The branches spread over a large area in several bunches; but there are also those depicted in smaller sizes. The green leaves reaching out from the branches, consisting of one order of green tesserae, are depicted in the form of an arrowhead with two orders of tesserae. Depending on the area that the bird figures cover within the curvilinear squares and in line with the form of the curvilinear squares, the density of floral patterns changes. Another example of vegetal ornaments depicted inside the curvilinear squares are trees. The upper part of the tree trunks consist of four vertical orders of tesserae. The trunks widen towards the base until the width of the trunk at the root increases up to 10 orders of tesserae. Brown and orange colours are mainly used in tree trunks and green tesserae are used to depict the leaves. The tree patterns cover a vertical scene from the bottom to the top of the curvilinear squares. On both sides of the tree, that is in the centre of the scene, there are birds which ‘mirror’ each other. It is not known how many birds were originally in the curvilinear squares, but 16 birds are preserved. Only 7 of these are well-preserved. As the green colour supports it, the bird situated inside the curvilinear square in the coordinate A8 is a beribbonned parrot which was often represented in mosaics of this period (Figs. 109-111). It is depicted on the left edge of the curvilinear square and there is a tree in the centre of the scene. Most probably there was a confronted parrot on the right of the scene

Fig. 105. Basilica A. Orthophoto of the panel I on the mosaic floor of the nave. 233 Laflı and Christof 2012a, pp. 40-41, fig. 8a-b; Christof and Laflı 2013, p. 155, figs. 22a-c; and SEG 61, no. 1084. 234 Balmelle et al. 2002, pls. 294a, 305d, 414a and p. 34: It is in French carré curviligne (coussin) and in English curvilinear square (cushion). 235 For an irregular octagon with four large concave sides, see: Balmelle et al. 2002, pl. 294e; Barbet 2003, p. 324, fig. 10. 236 For similar designs, see: Balmelle et al. 1985, pl. 253e, f, g, h.

237 Balmelle et al. 2002, p. 34: It is in French cloche à base rectiligne and in English bell with straight base.

92

Mosaics from Basilica A

Fig. 106. Basilica A. Illustration of the panel I on the mosaic floor of the nave.

inside the curvilinear square located in F1 (Figs. 109116). This curvilinear square is situated on the west edge of the ornament zone. The bottoms of the squares located on this edge are fragmented since they fall on the verge of the panel. In the centre of the scene, a water bird is depicted as in the curvilinear square located in E6. It is shown in profile, facing the left side of the scene. The head is turned back and looks up above its shoulders, different from all the other birds. It is known that the bird figures in the mosaics of classical antiquity are often depicted in this kind of position. The figure’s thin legs, extending parallel to each other, are 19-20 cm high and have a frontal aspect, compared to the body which is shown laterally. The total height of the figure is 50 cm and it is surrounded by floral patterns.

on the other side of the tree, but the right side of this curvilinear square is destroyed. A water bird is depicted in the curvilinear square located in E6 of the ornament zone (Figs. 109 and 112). This figure that is in the centre of the scene is surrounded by colourful leaves with roses at the tips. In the design located in G6, there are two confronted birds on either side of a tree/plant (Figs. 109 and 113) which is placed in the centre of the scene. A rose with three branches is located just underneath it. The major part of the bird situated on the right of the tree is destroyed. In the centre of the curvilinear square located in G4, a tree and two guinea fowl are depicted (Figs. 109 and 114). The major part of the body and the head of the chicken on the left are destroyed. In the curvilinear square located in F3, there are facing parrots (Figs. 109 and 115). This is the best-preserved curvilinear square in the mosaic. There are some floral ornaments with rose patterns above and below the birds. The last bird preserved without any damage is

The curvilinear squares located in D5 and E4 are widely damaged (Figs. 109 and 117). There are two birds each 93

Hadrianopolis IV

Fig. 108. Basilica A. A circle with a rosette on the mosaic floor of the nave.

Fig. 107. Basilica A. An irregular concave octagon with an ivy on the mosaic floor of the nave.

Fig. 109. Basilica A. Coordinate plan of the panel I on the mosaic floor of the nave.

94

Mosaics from Basilica A

Fig. 110. Basilica A. A pigeon with a ribbon on the mosaic floor of the nave.

Fig. 111. Basilica A. Illustration of the pigeon with a ribbon on the mosaic floor of the nave.

95

Hadrianopolis IV

Fig. 112. Basilica A. A water bird inside a curvilinear square on the mosaic floor of the nave.

Fig. 113. Basilica A. Confronted ducks on the floor mosaic of the nave.

96

Mosaics from Basilica A

Fig. 114. Basilica A. Spotted chicken (guinea fowl?) on the floor mosaic of the nave.

Fig. 115. Basilica A. Confronted parrots on the floor mosaic of the nave.

97

Hadrianopolis IV

Fig. 116. Basilica A. A water bird on the floor mosaic of the nave.

Fig. 117. Basilica A. The poultry on the panel I of the floor mosaic in the nave.

98

Mosaics from Basilica A rule between the bird figures and floral patterns. In the ‘mirrored’ figures, attention was paid to the equality of the dimensions of the figures. The height of the figures varies between 19 cm and 50 cm; the width they occupy inthe scene is between 31 cm and 54 cm.

on the right edge of two curvilinear squares. Their bodies face the left side of the scene and they are depicted in profile; their heads and the front part of their bodies were not preserved. As far as it is understood from the preserved parts, they were poultry birds. The curvilinear square in C2 is decorated with a water bird but this figure is also highly damaged. It has a long beak, legs and neck. Since the bird figures inside the curvilinear squares located in B7, D1 and E2 of the panel are destroyed to a large extent, and since the curvilinear square located in A6 needs comprehensive cleaning work, the species of the birds involved in these designs is not yet known. On the other hand, it is estimated that the bird figure inside the curvilinear square located in D1 in the west of the panel could be a poultry bird, although this not yet certain.

Other than the curvilinear squares, there are four figural squares in the mosaic. The dimensions of these square panels are 68 cm x 70 cm. In these panels, a leopard, a gryphon and two deer are depicted along with vegetal patterns. In the south half of the ornament zone, the panels with gryphon and leopard figures are situated; in the north half are the panels with deer figures (Figs. 105-106; and Pl. 12). These figures, depicted colourfully on panels with a white background, are 48-54 cm x 46-57 cm inside the panels. Semi-circles with polychromatic bands are placed at the four corners of the square panels, the boundaries of which are set by a polychromatic band consisting of five orders of tesserae. The semi-circles are filled with green and orange tesserae alternately.

Scenes in Panel I have a wider range compared to the other bird figures on the mosaic of the north aisle of Basilica A. On the other hand, there is no distinctive difference in the dimensions of the tesserae forming the birds. The fact that the curvilinear squares have a dimension of 90 cm x 90 cm allowed the mosaic artist or artists to use the ornament zone more comfortably. In the same scene, dual figures and floral patterns adorning the vicinity of the figures were also able to be used; bigger birds like water birds were able to be depicted alone. There is no perspective

There is a leopard in the panel located in G2 of the ornament zone (Figs. 106, 109 and 118; Pl. 12), a gryphon figure in the panel located in F5 (Figs. 106, 109 and 119; Pl. 12), and a deer figure each in the panels located in A2 and B5 (Figs. 106, 109 and 120-121). The bodies of all

Fig. 118. Basilica A. A leopard on the panel I of the floor mosaic in the nave.

99

Hadrianopolis IV

Fig. 119. Basilica A. A gryphon on the panel I of the floor mosaic in the nave.

deer are reminiscent of the gazelle on the mosaic of the south aisle. In the figures, red, orange and yellow colours and shades of these colours are used. The shades lighten as the tesserae move downwards from the top of the bodies. Although the deer depicted in A2 is in a calm mood, the deer situated in B5 is almost in panic: she is shown turning her head back and leaping forward to keep away from a threat that she has just noticed.

animals face to the left of the scene, to the north, except for the deer situated in the coordinate A2. The body of the deer situated in A2 faces the right of the scene, to the south. The leopard and gryphon are depicted as leaping forward, similar to the lion in the mosaic of the south aisle. The figures have a shadowing effect lightening in colour downwards from the top of the body. Both the leopard and the gryphon have a puffed chest and a tight abdomen. The tails rise up in the forms of an ‘S’. The front legs rush forward and the hind legs are tense due to the movement. The details of the sharp claws and teeth are also included in the leopard figure. While rose-patterned vegetal ornaments are present around the gryphon, the leopard is surrounded by both rose patterns and a palm tree in the background. The tree depictions in the background of the scene are also seen in the panels with deer figures. The

Scenes of hunting and animal chases were popular in the 5th and 6th cent. AD. These animal-scenes are seen in the public buildings or houses of the pagan era, popularly preferred in the churches of the early era of Christianity and adapted to the Christian belief. When viewing the mosaic of Basilica A, it is clear that the gryphon (which is an imaginary animal) and the leopard (which is a predator) 100

Mosaics from Basilica A

Fig. 120. Basilica A. A deer located in the coordinate B5 on the floor mosaic of the nave.

Fig. 121. Basilica A. A deer located in the coordinate A2 on the floor mosaic of the nave.

101

Hadrianopolis IV

Fig. 122. Basilica A. Aerial photo of the panel II on the mosaic floor of the nave.

octagons in the panel are 42 cm x 42 cm. The design is composed of white, green, light green, white and black tesserae from outside to inside. The order of black tesserae is in the form of a concave square.239 There is a green ivy in the centre with a white background (Fig. 107; and Pl. 23b). In the panel, there are also several serrated and multicoloured poised squares instead of an ivy in the centre of five concave octagons (Fig. 106). The last design of Panel I is the bell with a straight base, positioned on the south and north edges of the panel. The inside of the bell situated on the southwestern edge of the panel is adorned with a polychrome spindle with loops (Fig. 103; and Pl.  23e).240 There is a swastika-meander inside the bell situated on the northwestern edge of the panel and opposite this motif (Figs. 105-106; and Pl. 12). In the other preserved bell designs, the vegetal patterns are involved.

are depicted in the right half of the ornament zone, while the deer figures are the left half (Figs. 105-106). Although the animals are caged as a single figure in their own panels, it is remarkable that they are positioned face to face within the ornament zone. The deer figure situated in B5 turns her head to the threatening creatures across the ornament zone and rushes forward in the opposite direction. A similar situation is also seen on the mosaic of the south aisle: the lion and the gazelle in two adjacent panels on the mosaic of the south aisle. As the lion rushes forward towards the panel where the gazelle is situated, the gazelle is depicted as jumping in the opposite direction and turning his head back (Fig. 95). In Panel I, the curvilinear squares are surrounded by circles and octagons, the long sides of which are in a concave form. The circles with a diameter of 25 cm are composed of a polychromatic border consisting of five orders of tesserae. There is a polychromatic rosette in the centre of the each circle (Fig. 108; and Pl. 23c). These rosettes are similar to those on the mosaics of the south and north aisles. There is only one geometric design different from other examples, in one circle in the ornament zone. This circle is situated on the left corner of the curvilinear circle in F1 and has a Solomon knot inside it (Fig. 116; and Pl.  23d).238 The average dimensions of the concave

Panel (ornament zone) II, located in the east half of the mosaic of the nave, is nearly three-quarters destroyed. The dimension of the ornament zone, preserved in four pieces, was originally 4.00 m x 4.88 m (Figs. 101-102 and 122-123). In this zone, there are bird figures and a design consisting of geometric motifs surrounding them. In the middle of the western edge of the ornament zone, another mosaic piece belonging to a small panel with geometric Balmelle et al. 2002, p. 35: It is in French carré concave and in English concave square. 240 Balmelle et al. 2002, p. 39: It is in French fuseau à boucles and in English spindle with loops. 239

Balmelle et al. 2002, p. 42: It is in French noeud de Salomon and in English Solomon knot.

238

102

Mosaics from Basilica A

Fig. 123. Basilica A. Illustration of the east half of the mosaic floor in the nave.

motifs 1.00 m wide is also preserved. Even though the dimensions of the aforementioned panel in the east-west direction cannot be reconstructed, this panel forms a minor part of the ornament zone.

situated in the border of the mosaic of Room 1b of the Domus in Hadrianopolis in terms of design (Fig. 268). The other two bird figures mentioned have a long neck and legs as with these figures; however, these are thought to be poultry birds rather than herons, since they have crests and wattles like poultry and their beaks are small. As the heads of the antithetic birds on the nave could not be preserved, it is hard to theorise about their species. Since their long legs and necks are characteristic of water birds, there are also likely to be water birds. The two orders of tesserae on the white ground filling the vicinity of the figures are ordered according to the opus vermiculatum.

Four bird figures are preserved in the ornament zone on a white background. Borders with three different designs surround these birds by forming braids. One of them is a polychrome strap with a width of 10-11 cm consisting of serrated tesserae (Figs. 123-126). Another decorative element is a strap of polychrome bells, with each bell horizontally shaded, forming an undulating line outlined in white (Figs. 123-125). The third strap consists of polychrome, three-dimensional, undulating ribbon in a lateral perspective (Figs. 123-126). The extent of the destruction of the mosaic prevents us from fully appreciating the design and character of these ornaments ; however, it is obvious that these motifs were created by skilled and creative hands.

There is a duck figure with a height of 42 cm just in front of the wave border on the north edge of the panel (Figs. 123 and 125). On the right side of the bird, the body of which looks westward, another vessel similar to the form of the winecup situated in the middle of the birds on the northeast edge of the nave is depicted. The right half of this vessel, with a height of 32 cm, is destroyed. A duck figure which likely existed on the other side of the pot could not be preserved due to the damage on this side of the mosaic. The last bird preserved is in the northwest end of the ornament zone (Figs. 123 and 126). There is a pot with double handles and a high base with a height of 36 cm just on the left of a bird figure with a height of 25 cm. The neck, back of the body and a small part of its wings are destroyed. It is not possible to make a hypothesis about its species. As it is a small sized bird, it is likely to be a pigeon.

There are two antithetical or ‘mirrored’ bird figures on the northeast edge of the panel (Figs. 123-124). Between them is a vessel in the form of a wineglass with a height of 34 cm consisting of pink, light brown, green and black tesserae. The head and upper section of the body of the bird on the left are destroyed and its preserved height is 26 cm (Fig. 124). The head of the bird on the right is destroyed and its preserved height is 40 cm. The birds are similar to the sixth bird from the west in Panel I of the mosaic of the north aisle of the Basilica (Fig. 81) and also to the bird 103

Hadrianopolis IV

Fig. 124. Basilica A. Birds at both sides of a vessel on the panel II of the mosaic floor in the nave.

Fig. 125. Basilica A. A duck on the panel II of the floor mosaic in the nave.

104

Mosaics from Basilica A

Fig. 126. Basilica A. A pigeon beside of a vessel on the panel II of the mosaic floor in the nave.

The Mosaic Floor of the Bema

geotextile for temporary preservation purposes and then covered with a sand layer to a depth of 5-10 cm.

The bema mosaic of Basilica A is preserved in two pieces with a width of 2.20 m. The mosaic is supposed to have originally been 6.50/6.60 m long. As understood from the preserved two pieces, there are two panels with white backgrounds, one of which is in the north half of the bema and the other in the south half (Figs. 63-64 and 127-128). The same design is shown in these two panels; however, there are differences in some details. In the mosaic, tesserae made of smalti are used in addition to the marble, serpentinite and travertine; this distinguishes the bema mosaic from the other mosaics in Basilica A.241 The dimensions of the tessera vary between 0.5 x 0.5 cm and 1.0 x 1.0 cm, and there are generally 100-110 tesserae per dm2 in the mosaic. Furthermore, the dimensions of tesserae are even smaller in the bird figure, which is the only figural example depicted in the mosaic, and there are 175 tesserae per dm2 on the figure. The colours used in the mosaic are black, white, green, red, orange, yellow, pink and blue. This in situ mosaic was first coated with

The mosaic is surrounded by an orange band consisting of a few orders of tesserae. Following this band, one order of dark blue and three orders of white tesserae are placed. These orders of tesserae are followed by a band with the width of 30 cm. In the border, the boundaries of which are fixed with a single order of dark blue tesserae, a band of tangent serrated and multicoloured poised squares, forming hourglasses, is used (Figs. 128-130; and Pl. 4a).242 The north panel (Panel I) of the mosaic has a dimension of 2.30 m x 1.50 m. Here there is a grid-pattern of bands bearing circles and spindles interlooped tangentially in a rectangle, around a medallion with a bird figure and a looped circle with a vase depiction (Figs. 128 and 130; Pl. 13). The bands consist of simple guilloches and tangent bells with each bell horizontally shaded, forming an undulating line outlined in white.243 Tangent spindles and circles create two adjoining squares in the ornament zone. There is a symmetrically shaded medallion at the centre

241 Any laboratory investigations for the tesserea used in the floor mosaics of Hadrianoupolis have not been carried out yet. Therefore, the materials used and detailed features of these materials have not been widely evaluated. When mentioning of various materials such as marble, serpentinite, travertine, glass, glass gold foil glass and smalti, it is required to emphasize that a final judgment on these materials used for floor and mural mosaics should be made only based on the results of necessary scientific investigations and tests.

For similar designs, see: Balmelle et al. 1985, p. 45, pl. 15. In the researches we have carried out, any mosaic examples which wholly overlap this design could not be discovered. Nevertheless, some designs similar to the bema mosaic in Basilica A are known. See: Balmelle et al. 1985, pl. 150f, g; Balmelle et al. 2002, pl. 405a; Budde 1969, fig. 27.

242 243

105

Hadrianopolis IV

Fig. 127. Basilica A. Aerial photo of the bema.

Fig. 128. Basilica A. Illustration of the floor mosaic in the bema.

of the left square. A bird is depicted inside the medallion, which has a diameter of 50 cm (Fig. 131). In the centre of the right square there is a circle with loops (Fig. 132).244 Inside this pattern, a ribbed vase is depicted. Serrated triangles inside polygons with irregular forms occupy the

empty spaces on the white ground of the panel, so that no space is left without ornaments. There are poised serrated polychrome squares in the centres of the circles (Figs. 129-130; and Pl. 21c). The height of the bird figure in the centre of the medallion is 22 cm (Fig. 131). The figure is depicted in an almost frontal position. Nevertheless, its body looks slightly

244 For the design of circle with loops, see: Balmelle et al. 2002, p. 38: In French cercle à boucles and in English circle with loops.

106

Mosaics from Basilica A

Fig. 129. Basilica A. Orthophoto of the north panel on the mosaic of the bema.

Fig. 130. Basilica A. Illustration of the north panel of the floor mosaic in the bema.

107

Hadrianopolis IV

Fig. 131. Basilica A. A bird in a symmetrically shaded medallion on the mosaic floor in the bema.

Fig. 132. Basilica A. A ribbed vase in a circle with loops on the mosaic floor of the bema.

108

Mosaics from Basilica A zone supposed to exist between two panels based on this preserved area alone (Figs. 127-128 and 133).

rightwards of the field on which it is depicted. Its legs are turned out and in parallel. The white tail shape at the back of the figure is generally used for poultry. The way that its legs are depicted is similar to that of the duck located in Panel II of the mosaic of the nave (Fig. 125). Although the bird hardly fits in a circle composed of a single order of tesserae, vegetal patterns with green leaves and three branches are also added into this circle. The same is seen in the ribbed vase located in the right half of the panel. The vegetal boder motifs around the vase are 21 cm high (Fig. 132).

The mosaic piece belonging to the south panel (Panel II) is less well preserved than the mosaic piece where the north panel is situated. In spite of this, it is understood that both panels have the same dimensions and design (Figs. 128, 133 and 134). In the south panel, there is another ribbed vase depicted within the circle with loops. This vase depiction is mainly composed of orange and yellow tesserae (Fig. 133). As in the example in the north panel, there are small vegetal patterns around it. Since the right half of the panel is destroyed, the central pattern of this section could not be preserved. If the mosaic artist had tried to create symmetry with the other panel, there must have been a bird figure in the centre of the right half of the panel.

An ornament zone two meters high, located between Panels I and II of the mosaic, has unfortunately been destroyed to a large extent. There must have been another small-sized ornament zone between these two different panels of the bema. On the north edge of the mosaic piece located in the south half of the bema, only an area measuring 45 cm east-west and 15 cm north-south could be preserved, and it is not possible to make an evaluation about the ornament

The bema mosaic has the most complicated planned design among the mosaics of Basilica A. The design has a

Fig. 133. Basilica A. South panel on the floor mosaic of the bema.

109

Hadrianopolis IV

Fig. 134. Basilica A. Illustration of the south panel on the mosaic floor of the bema.

however, the majority of the south half of the mosaic was destroyed due to the illegal digging previously carried out (Fig. 137).

very complex character and is composed of a great number of geometric elements as on the mosaic of the nave. The design is characterised by a band of polychrome simple guilloche and a band of bells, with each bell horizontally shaded. These bands are used in the east half of the mosaic of the north aisle, which is closer to the bema, and in the east half of the mosaic of the nave. Figural and vegetal patterns are also included in the mosaic. The use of the tesserae based on the smalti technique, that is the mixture of glass and various materials in accordance with the characteristics of Byzantine art, shows that the bema mosaic was distinctively planned and carefully made. This was one of the most important parts of the basilica.245

The first design of the edging of the narthex mosaic is an orange band. There are two orders of black and two orders of white tesserae between a guilloche border and this band. The band of four-strand guilloche, processed on a black ground, is 40 cm wide (Fig. 138; and Pl. 2c).246 The strands with black contours are filled with two orders of orange and one order of white or two orders of brownish red and one order of white tesserae. The strands ramble around the mosaic in red and orange main colours alternately. Further, the strands change their colours in the north end of the east edge of the mosaic. The red strands here turn into orange and orange ones into red.

The Mosaic Floor of the Narthex The dimensions of the narthex mosaic of Basilica A, preserved in large and small pieces, was originally 13.70 m x 3.20 m (Figs. 63-65 and 135-136). The dimensions of the tesserae forming the mosaic vary between 1.5 x 1.5 cm and 2.0 x 2.0 cm. There are generally 35-44 tesserae per dm2 in the mosaic. The colours of tesserae are black, white, red and orange. This in situ mosaic floor of Basilica A was first covered with geotextile for temporary protection purposes and then with a sand layer to a depth of 5-10 cm. The north half of the mosaic is well-preserved in general;

The mosaic has a main ornament zone with a geometric design. The dimensions of the panel were originally 12.50 m x 2.10 m. In the ornament zone with a white background, there are decorative fields in the form of a square. They consist of triangles and chevrons247 alternately and measure 38 x 37 cm (Figs. 138-139; and Pl. 14).248 The geometric and vegetal patterns are included in these squares. The design is composed of five each orders of squares in the east-west direction. There must be 30 squares each in

245 Although an interpretation of the floor mosaics is made to that effect, the ornaments of an early Byzantine basilica did, of course, not only consist of floor mosaics. Factors such as patterns belonging to the architectural units, quality of the materials used or mural mosaics and frescoes also influence any evaluations relating to the religious buildings. Unfortunately, the wall masonry and possible mural ornaments of this religious building in Hadrianopolis could not be preserved.

246 For four-strand guilloches, see: Balmelle et al. 1985, p. 123, pl. 73b, c, d/e. 247 For the chevron, see: Balmelle et al. 2002, p. 37. 248 We have not found any other examples identical to the design of the narthex mosaic; but square formed design examples consisting of chevrons are known: Balmelle et al. 1985, p. 177, pl. 117d, e, f and s. 269, pl. 174.

110

111

Fig. 136. Basilica A. Illustration of the floor mosaic in the narthex.

Fig. 135. Basilica A. Orthophoto of the narthex.

Mosaics from Basilica A

Hadrianopolis IV

Fig. 137. Narthex of Basilica A. View from the north.

Fig. 138. Basilica A. Aerial photo of the north half of the mosaic floor in the narthex.

112

Fig. 139. Basilica A. A detail from the panel of the floor mosaic in the narthex.

Mosaics from Basilica A

113

Hadrianopolis IV and dates back to the 5th-6th cent. AD.251 A floor mosaic dating to the 5th-6th cent. AD belonging to the exterior narthex of the basilica in Perinthus (Heraclea) in modern Tekirdağ has a band of round-tongued double guilloche.252 The border of the mosaic from Prusa ad Olympum which is dated the 6th-7th cent. AD is also decorated with a round tongued-double guilloche.253 The motif is also seen in the mosaics of the synagogue of the end of the 4th cent. AD in Sardis in Lydia (Fig. 140).254 Another example from the same phase as Sardis is located in Aphrodisias in Caria, where the temple of Aphrodite was converted into a church in the Byzantine period. The border ornaments of the mosaic belonging to this church are similar to the one in Sardis and dates back to the later 4th cent. AD.255 Roundtongued examples of the design are also observed on the mosaic of the north aisle of the church of Laodicea on the Lycus in Denizli256 and in a floor mosaic of a residential building in Apamea Myrlea in modern Bursa.257 Both mosaics are dated to the 4th cent. AD.

the north-south direction. Although there supposed to be 150 squares in total, only traces belonging to 96 of them survive. 62 squares out of the preserved 96 are better preserved. In the centre of the squares consisting of chevrons, there is a small-sized square; in the centre of this square, there is a serrated poised square (Fig. 139; and Pl. 21d). There is a poised square inside the squares consisting of triangles and in the centre of that, there is an ivy (Fig. 139; and Pl. 21k). The opus tesselatum technique is used throughout the ornament zone excluding the tesserae surrounding this vegetal motif based on opus vermiculatum. The narthex floor mosaic has the most simple design in Basilica A. The more complicated and elaborate the bema mosaic in the east of Basilica A, the simpler the mosaic inside the narthex on the west edge of the basilica. The tesserae forming the mosaic are larger than all other mosaics in the church. Another feature showing that the mosaic has a simple concept is that only four colours are used.

An example of the motif beyond Anatolia comes from the Old Diaconicon Baptistery situated in Mount Nebo in Jordan. In a mosaic found in this building and dated to the first half of the 6th cent. AD, a round-tongued double guilloche opening to form eyelets was used as a border ornament.258 A straight-tongued example of the mosaic is found in the church of the Holy Martyrs in Syria. This church is located in Taybat al-Imam, a town which is 18 km northwest of Hamaand and owns mosaics dated to AD 442.259 The panel of the floor mosaic here is framed by a band of straight-tongued double guilloche opening to form eyelets.260 Unlike all these aforementioned examples, the pattern in the mosaic of Basilica A has no eyelet; in the pattern, only one piece of white tessera was used instead of an eyelet. As the guilloche border of the late Roman mosaic called the ‘First Bath of Achilles’, discovered in Room 40 in the Villa of Theseus on Cyprus, has smaller eyelets, it can be compared to the example of Hadrianopolis.261

Evaluation of the Mosaics from Basilica A and Their Parallels – Border Designs The border designs of the mosaics from Basilica A have a wide range. Within these designs, there are examples frequently found in Greek and Roman mosaics as well as those which are unprecedented based on our examinations. All border ornaments in the basilica are surrounded by a monochrome band in the outermost. The width of these monochrome bands vary according to the dimensions and architectural characteristics of the area. The border ornaments are distinguished from each other through black or white bands consisting of one or more than one row of tessera. Border ornaments of the mosaics of the south and north aisles were created with the same design concept. In both mosaics, a band of polychrome tightly braided roundtongued double guilloche was preferred (Figs. 74-75). These examples of guilloche were heavily used in the mosaics of classical antiquity; however, tightly braided ones, as in Basilica A, are rarely seen. In the mosaic with Megalopsychia249 exhibited in the archeological museum of Hatay and dating to the mid-5th cent. AD there is a straight-tongued double guilloche opening to form eyelets (Fig. 36). This mosaic was previously mentioned under the name of ‘the mosaic of Room 11’. In the mosaic of Ananeosis250 from Antioch-on-the-Orontes (acc. no. 907912) that is dated to the middle of the same century, there is a band of straight-tongued double guilloche opening to form eyelets (Fig. 32). A similar example of a roundtongued one as in Basilica A was found during the rescue excavations in the district of Ahmet Çavuş, Milas, in Muğla

The widest border design of Basilica A is seen on the mosaic of the nave. One of the ornaments here is a three dimensional undulating ribbon in lateral perspective (Figs. 103-104; and Pl. 3b). The pattern is a popular design used in various types in mosaic art; however, the vegetal ornament with three branches situated between the undulations of the ribbon and with fruits at the ends distinguishes the design of Basilica A from its equivalents. In our research, we have not found any vegetal ornament Kızıl and Özcan 2009, pp. 22 and 24, fig. 12. Yeşil-Erdek 2014, fig. 7. 253 Okçu 2009, pp. 34 and 37, figs. 1 and 13. 254 Foss 1976, pp. 41-42, fig. 16; Campbell 1991, p. 9, pl. 28. 255 Campbell 1991, pp. 8-9, pl. 24, R 75a. 256 Şimşek 2015, figs. 105 and 117. 257 Şahin and Çıtakoğlu 2016, figs. 105 and 107. 258 Piccirillo 1993a, p. 135 and 146, fig. 166; Trilling 1989, p. 45, fig. 62. 259 Zaqzuq and Piccirillo 1999, pp. 443-464, pl. 7-36. 260 The pattern is defined as ‘round-tongued’ by Zaqzuq and Piccirillo; however, it is an example of straight-tongued guilloche as understood from the photos in the article: Zaqzuq and Piccirillo 1999, p. 445, pl. 9, fig. 5. 261 Daszewski 1988, pp. 72-75, fig. 36. 251 252

Cimok 2000, p. 251; Levi 1947, p. 323, fig. 136. Campbell 1988, p. 27, pl. 81; Campbell 1998, pl. 172; Cimok 2000, p. 244; Levi 1947, pp. 320-321, pls. 73 and 131d. 249 250

114

Mosaics from Basilica A

Fig. 140. Sardis. A round-tongued double guilloche on the floor mosaic of the synagogue.

of the same type used with the ribbon pattern, other than the mosaic in Basilica A. An example similar to this border design was found in the House of Ge and the Seasons in Antioch-on-the-Orontes. On a border mosaic dated to the 5th cent. AD ivies and a branch with a round-shaped fruit at its end were used alternately in each undulation of the ribbon.262 However, this ornament consists of a single branch; the round-shaped fruit situated at the end of the branch is large; and the branch design is not depicted as a straight line as in the mosaic of Basilica A, but has a curvilinear form.

the 2nd-3rd cent. AD (acc. no. 961)263, in the ‘Buffet Mosaic’ from the 3rd cent. AD (acc. no. 937)264, in the mosaic of Andromeda, Perseus and Dancers from the 2nd-3rd cent. AD (acc. no. 949a-950)265 and the mosaic of Pegasus and Nymphs from the 3rd cent. AD (acc. no. 841)266. Even though these patterns show similarities with the pattern in Basilica A in terms of design, they reflect the ornamentation characteristic of different eras. Another example of the band of three-dimensional undulating ribbon found on the mosaics of Antioch-onthe-Orontes is seen in the mosaic of the House of Philia dating to the middle of the 5th cent. AD.267 As in the mosaic of Ge and the Seasons, each undulation of the ribbon has a vegetal ornament. The latest example decorated with undulate ribbons from Antioch-on-the-Orontes is the 5th cent. AD-mosaic found in the House of the Ram’s Head.

Early equivalents of the vegetal ornament with three branches used in Basilica A can be seen in some mosaics in Antioch-on-the-Orontes. In these examples, there are two branches instead of three and the fruit found at the ends of the branches is smaller. Furthermore, this ornament with two branches is not depicted alone, but stems from the leaves of another vegetal ornament with three leaves. These examples, exhibited in the archaeological museum of Hatay, include the ‘Mosaic of Iphigenia in Aulis’ from

263 Levi 1947, pp. 120-126, pl. 22; Cimok 2000, pp. 106-107. Campbell dates the mosaic back to AD 180 by a coin find: Campbell 1988, p. 56, pl. 167. 264 Levi 1947, pp. 132-136, pl. 23a, b-24a; Cimok 2000, pp. 110-111. 265 Levi 1947, pp. 150-156, pl. 29b, c; Cimok 2000, pp. 132-133. Also see: Balmelle et al. 1985, pl. 88g. 266 Levi 1947, pp. 172-175, pl. 36b; Cimok 2000, p. 154. 267 Levi 1947, pp. 318-319, fig. 133, pl. 72.

262 Levi 1947, pp. 346-347, fig. 139, pl. 81a, b; Cimok 2000, p. 276; Barbet 2004, fig. 9.

115

Hadrianopolis IV

Fig. 141. Border design of the Great Palace mosaic in Constantinople.

On the border of the mosaic, the leaves and fruits are inlaid on a dark background as in the other two examples.268

highly important for the interpretation of the mosaics in Hadrianopolis, as they are among the most important sites for Graeco-Roman and early Byzantine mosaic art.

The three-dimensional ribbon occurs in different types, not only through the patterns depicted in its undulations but also in the form of the ribbon. The ribbon ornament from on the mosaic of the Great Palace, dating to the 6th cent. AD, in Constantinople (era of Justinianus I, AD 527565)269 differs from the aforementioned examples because its ribbon is twisted (Fig. 141). This band of undulating and twisted ribbon is engraved on both sides of an acanthus border with figural ornaments. There is an ivy alternately inverted in each undulation.270 Each ivy has a short branch composed of a row of tessera. The Great Palace mosaic in Constantinople is highly instrumental in correctly interpreting the mosaics situated in Hadrianopolis. This mosaic is much closer to Hadrianopolis geographically than many others, and additionally it is contemporary with the mosaics of Hadrianopolis as well. Also, the fact that Constantinople was the capital of the Byzantine empire made it a central urban area that would set the fashion for more rural sites. Therefore, the capital Constantinople, as well as Antioch-on-the-Orontes and Edessa, are

Another example of ribbon design from Istanbul can be seen on the Mosaic of the Four Seasons, which is kept in the courtyard of the basilica of Hagia Irene and likely to date back to the end of the 4th or the 5th cent. AD. The border ornament of the mosaic is a three-dimensional undulating ribbon in lateral perspective. In each undulation of the motif, a lotus or calyx271 is depicted.272 The ribbon band design, along with the same vegetal motifs, can also be seen in the early Christian basilicas of Chrysopolitissa and Limeniotissa on Cyprus.273 Another example of a ribbon pattern decorated with a calyx is found on a mosaic in the coastal town of Tabarca, Tunisia. In the mosaic, which dates to the end of the 4th cent. AD or the beginning of the 5th cent. AD and was found in a villa here, an undulating and twisted band of ribbon is depicted.274 Another undulating and twisted band of ribbon belongs to a floor mosaic dated to AD 557 in the church of the Holy Martyrs Lot and Procopius in Jordan (Fig. 142). This design has vegetal ornaments in each undulation.275 A similar band of

Levi 1947, p. 350, pl. 133c. 269 Jobst, Erdal and Gurtner 2010, pp. 58-61; Yücel 2010, p. 85. 270 Balmelle et al. 1985, pl. 65f; Brett 1942, p. 8, a (p. 36); Cimok 1997, fig. 4; Dunbabin 1999, p. 232, fig. 244; Jobst, Erdal and Gurtner 2010, fig. 13; Trilling 1989, figs. 4-7; Yücel 2010, p. 15.

271 Balmelle et al. 1985, pl. 65g. For calyx, also see: Balmelle et al. 2002, pp. 48-49: It is in French pétales en Calice and in English calices. 272 Parrish 2008, p. 94, fig. 1. 273 Michaelides 1988, p. 105, figs. 25-26. 274 Dunbabin 1978, pp. 122, 271-272, pl. XLIV-111 and XLV-113. 275 Piccirillo 1993a, pp. 152-165, fig. 210 and 213.

268

116

Mosaics from Basilica A

Fig. 142. Mosaic of the Church of the Holy Martyrs Lot and Procopius in Jordan.

117

Hadrianopolis IV ribbon is also found in the apsidal mosaic of the church of St Paul located in Kastrom Mefa’a (Umm ar-Rasas), Jordan. This mosaic dates back to the second half of the 6th cent. AD.276 Another example from the city of Bert Shean in Israel dates back to the mid-6th cent. AD. This example was used for the outer border of the narthex mosaic of a burial chamber.277 The last example for the motif belongs to a mural mosaic found in Ravenna in Italy. This mural mosaic, dated to the 5th cent. AD, of the mausoleium of Galla Placidia has a band of undulating and twisted ribbon on a red ground.278 All ribbon designs mentioned belong to the period between the 4th and 6th cent. AD. In the late Roman-early Byzantine period they were popular in various iterations and particularly in religious buildings like Basilica A. Fig. 143. Basilica A. A vine-leaf on the border design of the floor mosaic in the nave.

Another border design of the Basilica consists of vegetal ornaments engraved on a light background (Figs. 103104; and Pl. 3d). This design has, so far, only ever been found in Hadrianopolis and we could not find any equivalents of it. However, the curved lanceolates, vineleaves and ivies used in this band are among the most wellknown designs in mosaic art. The vegetal ornaments are frequently found in the border designs of the mosaics of the classical antiquity. The ornamental fields composed of vine branches or acanthus were mainly filled with animal figures, fruit depictions, baskets full of fruits, masks, mythological or religious figures and personifications. The border decorations of the religious buildings in the Near East are particularly partial to this combination of figural and vegetal ornaments. Among the mosaics belonging to Jordan, Israel, Lebanon, Palestine and Syria, a decorative field composed of vine or acanthus scrolls was popular in both border and panel decorations (Fig. 142). The vegetal ornament seen in the border of the mosaic of Basilica A has a different design character. All the ornamental elements here are tied to each other through a half-oval chain composed of a single row of tessera and placed alternately. Some design examples arranged simply with the motifs linked in this way are already known.279 The motif in a bell form from the decorative elements of the border of the mosaic is another example from Hadrianopolis for which an equivalent could not be found. This motif shows similarity with both some vegetal ornament examples and pot forms.280 The positioning of the motif inside the band is reminiscent of the vase forms of some border designs. Pot forms such as cantharus, amphora, etc. in the mosaics of classical antiquity were mainly depicted at the corners of the bands surrounding the panels. Likewise, this motif in the form of a bell was preferred on the corners of the border ornaments in Basilica A. The typical examples of pot forms attached to the corners of the bands are attested

in the mosaics of the basilica of Mopsuestia281, dated to the third quarter of the 4th cent. AD by L. Budde, but to the 5th cent. AD by most subsequent scholars; in the Mosaic of Birds in a Rinceau282 dating to AD 526-540, from Antioch-on-the-Orontes; and in the floor mosaic283 of the church of Bishop Leontios in Jordan, dating to the end of the 5th cent. AD or the beginning of the 6th cent. AD. However, this is not a fact to pin any conclusions on, as it is also known that floral ornaments are often positioned at the corners of the mosaics and these kinds of designs can be dated to much earlier periods in classical antiquity. With its linear ornament the vine leaf motif used on the border of the mosaic of the nave in Basilica A is an unusual design (Fig. 143). This linear ornament composed of orange tessera is arranged according to the five arms forming the vine leaf. Another example of this design outside Hadrianopolis can be found at the church of Khirbat Samra (or Khirbat Es-Samra).284 On the border ornament in the nave of the church, the leaves and bunches of grapes lie on the branches running in an undulating line. The leaves are composed of five arms, as in Basilica A, and have serrated edges. Vine leaves generally show similar forms and colour features in mosaic art. The origin of this type of ornament is the vase painting art of the late 6th cent. BC. and of the early 5th cent. BC.285 Even though the leaves in Basilica A have serrated edges, the examples rendered with soft lines are seen quite frequently. The leaves can be composed of several arms: eight, ten or more. They are inlaid either in a single colour or with two tones, light and dark. The vine leaves belonging to the apsidal mosaic of Basilica B in Hadrianopolis or each leaf inlaid in the Mosaic of Birds in a Rinceau from Antiochon-the-Orontes is coloured in two different tones, one for each half.286

Piccirillo 1997, pp. 375-394, tav. 32. Ovadiah and Ovadiah 1987, pp. 30-31, pl. XXV-2. The other border ornament of this mosaic is the wrinkled ribbon. 278 Lorizzo 1976, pp. 11-15, pl. 1, 6. 279 Balmelle et al. 1985, pl. 52. 280 For this type of design features, see Balmelle et al. 2002, p. 51. It is called as pétales figurés in French and figural petals in English. 276

Budde 1969, figs. 93-96, 101-107 and 111-112. Cimok 2000, p. 305; Levi 1947, p. 366, pl. 91. 283 Nassar and Turshan 2011, pp. 41-62, fig. 3. 284 Ovadiah and Ovadiah 1987, pp. 98-99, pl. 104. 285 Ovadiah 1980, p. 167. 286 Cimok 2000, pp. 306-310. 281

277

282

118

Mosaics from Basilica A The last two examples of border designs found at Basilica A are from the narthex and bema mosaics. The early and late period equivalents of the four-strand guilloche border surrounding the narthex mosaic (Figs. 135-138; and Pl. 2c) have already been discussed in the section on the mosaic of Room 11 of Baths A above on pp. . They are the Drunken (Comus) mosaic from Antioch-on-the-Orontes (2nd cent. AD)287; the mosaic of the House of Poseidon and Euphrates from Zeugma (2nd and 3rd cent. AD)288; the mosaic belonging to Room 3, discovered during the rescue excavations carried out in Ahmet Çavuş, Milas, Muğla (5th and 6th cent. AD)289, and the atrium mosaic of the Priest’s House in Aphrodisias (5th cent. AD).290

475), all from Antioch-on-the-Orontes.295 A variation of the motif used as a panel design was also applied in the rectangular decorative fields placed on both sides of the mosaic of Eros and Psyche from Antioch (acc. no. 1021). The design in these two panels, which date to the 3rd cent. AD, is an early equivalent of the bema mosaic border ornament of Basilica A with its colour arrangement and tesserae lined up in serrated form (Fig. 144).296 Another panel which reflects the same style can be seen on a floor mosaic dating between the 3rd and 5th cent. AD in the city of Germanicia in modern Kahramanmaraş.297

The border design used in the bema mosaic of Basilica A is a row of serrated and tangent poised squares forming hourglasses (Figs. 128-130; and Pl. 4a). This geometric design is among the examples frequently seen in classical antiquity in various iterations; however, the origin of the ornament is vase painting.291 The design was preferred in public buildings or houses as well as in mosaics belonging to religious buildings. Although it is a simple design, it is one of the most fundamental and popular geometric ornaments. The reason for this is that it has a building that allows different ornament alternatives as well as simplicity. As well as being well suited for use as a border ornament, it turns into a design called a ‘grid’ when applied over wide areas and depicted linearly. The motif is inlaid with interwoven squares in some examples and is supported with a small motif or rosette in other examples. The variation of the motif in the bema mosaic in Basilica A has a typical colourisation technique and positioning of tesserae. The tesserae forming the centre of poised squares are red or pink-white, and the tesserae forming the centre of hourglass are green-white. The cluster of red tesserae in the centre of the poised squares is in the form of a cross. Further, the fact that the squares, each composed of four tesserae, are lined up in a serrated row increases the attractiveness of the design. A different version of this border design can be seen in the mosaic of Room 6 of the Domus in Hadrianopolis (Figs. 273-274; and Pl. 4b). An example of a border of poised squares forming hourglass beyond Hadrianopolis is found in the mosaic of the church of the necropolis in Anemurium, Cilicia. The motif was used on the mosaic of the north aisle of the church, which dates to the late 5th cent. AD, as interwoven squares and triangles.292 Early equivalents of the motif include the mosaic of Room 31 of House A (late 2nd cent. AD)293, in the mosaic of Perseus and Andromeda of the House of Dionysus and Ariadne (2nd-3rd cent. AD)294 and in the mosaic of Room D of the Barracks House (AD 450-

The designs preferred for the panels of Basilica A are rich in decorative concepts. These mosaics are important examples, reflecting the artistic character in Hadrianopolis in the 6th cent. AD in terms of their artistic quality and the subjects depicted. Only the apsidal mosaic of the church was not preserved; as a result, the fact that the walls of the church did not survive largely prevented us from gathering information about any mural mosaics or frescoes.

Panels

Panel I (the western panel) on the mosaic of the north aisle of Basilica A and the panel of the mosaic of the south aisle were set in square frames with animal figures, poised squares with rosettes and stars with eight parallelograms surrounding them (Figs. 75-76 and 91-92; Pls. 9 and 11). Equivalents of this design found outside of Hadrianopolis have already been discussed in the section on the mosaic of Room 11 in Baths A. Out of the mosaics previously mentioned, those most closely related to the mosaics of Basilica A are the atrium mosaic of the early Byzantine Eastern Basilica in Xanthus (5th and 6th cent. AD)298; the mosaic of the north aisle of Hagios Stephanos Basilica on Kos, as well as the mosaic of the nave of a small basilica adjacent to this building (5th and 6th cent. AD)299; the mosaic of the Hagios Ioannos Baptistery on Kos (6th cent. AD)300; the mosaic of the nave of the church of Shunah Al-Jabuniyah in Jordan (6th cent. AD)301 and the courtyard mosaic floor of the basilica at Heraclea Lyncestis in Macedonia (4th and 5th cent. AD).302 A further parallel to our mosaic of Room 11 is the mosaic of the Episcopal Basilica in Stobi in the Republic of Macedonia. The same design was used in two small panels of its mosaics, built in two different phases during the 4th and 5th cent. AD.303 A pot form is depicted in the panel belonging to the narthex mosaic, as well as vegetal and geometric ornaments inside square frames. Each of the poised squares is filled Campbell 1988, pp. 80-81, pl. 229; Levi 1947, p. 316, pl. 129c. Cimok 2000, pp. 136-137; Levi 1947, pp. 159-161, pl. 31a. 297 Eker and Ersoy 2017, pp. 101, 161-162 and 252-254. 298 Raynaud 2009, pp. 43-44, figs. 29-30. 299 Parrish 2001, p. 342, figs. 20-21. 300 Parrish 2001, p. 344, figs. 22-23. 301 Piccirillo 1993a, pp. 320-323, figs. 662 and 664-665. 302 Hoddinott 1963, pp. 159-161, pl. 36a. 303 Kitzinger 1946, p. 108, fig. 145; Kolarik 1987, p. 297, fig. 6. Besides, cf. the website of the archaeological site of Stobi: (accessed on August 17, 2018). 295 296

Levi 1947, pp. 50-54, pl. 94c. Önal 2002, pp. 35, 52; Önal 2008, p. 80, fig. 4; Başgelen and Ergeç 2000, pp. 42-43. 289 Kızıl and Özcan 2009, p. 24, fig. 10, 13. 290 Campbell 1991, pp. 23 and 26, pl. 82, 84 and 85. 291 Ovadiah 1980, p. 97. 292 Campbell 1998, pp. 45, 50, pl. 198. 293 Campbell 1988, pp. 25-26, pl. 76; Levi 1947, p. 105. 294 Cimok 2000, pp. 132-133; Levi 1947, pp. 150-156, fig. 58. 287 288

119

Hadrianopolis IV

Fig. 144. Left panel of the mosaic of Eros and Psyches from Antioch-on-the-Orontes.

exhibits a character unique to Hadrianopolis, and we could not find any equivalents for it. Here, three different geometric motifs surround the panel by interweaving and creating guilloche or spirals. The decorative fields among these motifs are filled with bird figures. Although the mosaic design decorating the western half of the nave is a rare variation, it belongs to a well-known type, with both its motifs forming the design and the entire composition (Figs. 105-106; and Pl. 12). An early equivalent of the design can be seen in the mosaics of El Alia and Chebba which are dated to the 2nd cent. AD and currently being exhibited at the Bardo Museum in Tunisia (Fig. 145).305 The design in these mosaics consists of ellipses and circles surrounding the curvilinear squares. The curvilinear squares, ellipses and circles are decorated with various animal figures and fruit baskets. The curvilinear squares placed at the edges of the panel are cut in the form of a bell and filled with vegetal ornaments. The polychrome band forming the curvilinear squares is similar to the examples in Basilica A. There is also a square figural-panel in the centre of the mosaic originally from Chebba.

by different decorative elements, some of which are equivalent to the rosettes of Basilica A. During our research, we could not find any mosaics similar to the design in Panel II (eastern panel) on the mosaic of the north aisle of Basilica A. This design is a quite complicated composition where geometric and figural ornaments are used together. The design has a very crowded and multicoloured network of ornaments consisting of bird-squares, poised squares, pentagons, irregular tetragons, threedimensional ribbons, tangent bells and simple guilloches (Figs. 83-89). As with the bird-squares belonging to panel I of the north aisle, each small square contains a bird figure. Any vegetal ornaments depicting the birds in nature were not added to the scenes. The mosaics of religious buildings belonging to the early Byzantine period have a great number of panel examples designed in this way. However, the only known figural mosaic including the aforementioned geometric motifs is the one in Basilica A. Three different geometric designs surrounding the figural-panels give the mosaic a quite embellished and coloured look. In the mosaics of the classical antiquity, the square panels with geometric motifs or figures were generally surrounded by a single geometric or vegetal design. An example to this is the mosaic of Djebel Oust in Tunisia. In this mosaic, which dates to the mid-4th cent. AD, a square panel decorated with a vegetal motif is surrounded by a polychrome threedimensional undulating ribbon on a black ground.304

Like the star of eight parallelograms used as a central motif, the designs composed of a curvilinear square placed in the centre of a panel and of four circles surrounding it are among the examples created by mosaic artists. An example to this is the mosaic of the mid-4th cent. AD at the Lullingstone villa in Britain.306 There is a scene depicting Bellerophon and Chimera in a curvilinear square in this mosaic. In the circles around the curvilinear square, the personification of four seasons is depicted.

The decorative field of the eastern half of the mosaic of the nave in Basilica A is badly damaged; however, as understood from the preserved pieces, the design here

305 304

Campbell 1998, p. 3, pl. 17.

306

120

Ben Osman 1990, p. 73, pl. 14; Gozlan 1990, p. 92, fig. 90, 93. Dunbabin 1999, pp. 97-98, fig. 97; Balmelle et al. 1985, pl. 294a.

Mosaics from Basilica A

Fig. 145. A detail from the mosaic of El Alia in Bardo Museum of Tunisia.

The Mosaic of Pentheus’ Death, unearthed in Jean-Jaures Avenue in Nimes in France and dated to the 2nd cent. AD is an earlier, but similar example, with its ‘cushions’ (curvilinear squares) adorned with figural scenes.307 Floor mosaics from Tunisia and France show that designs of curvilinear squares or cushions were chosen by mosaic artists from the beginning of the 2nd cent. AD.

Basilica on Kos (6th cent. AD)309 can provide examples for them. The rosettes depicted in the poised squares on the north and south aisles and in the circles of the nave of Basilica A have the same decorative style, except for some little differences in details (Pl. 21f and g). Many similar rosettes to these can be found in early Byzantine mosaic art, and they were among the motifs mostly preferred by mosaic artists. The rosettes could be added into various motifs, as in Basilica A, or be used as a decorative element alone without being an addition into any motif.

The panel designs of the narthex and bema mosaics at Basilica A are unique, like the eastern panels of the north aisle and mosaic of the nave. The motifs forming the narthex design (Pl. 14) are among examples already known; however there is no other mosaic which is similar to the design in its entirety. The bema mosaic panel is one of the most impressive designs among the mosaics of Basilica A with its complicated and colourful look (Figs. 128-130 and 133-134; Pl. 13). In this kind of design, the thick bands decorated with motifs like simple guilloches and tangent bells, with each bell horizontally shaded or coloured in ‘rainbow style’, form circles, ellipses or spindles and create a central medallion at the same time. Although no example exactly similar to the design has been found, some mosaics reminiscent of the bema mosaic are known. A design belonging to the mosaics of the basilica of Mopsuestia from Cilicia (5th cent. AD)308 and a panel belonging to the northern addition to the Hagios Paulos

307 308

One early example in Anatolia which is reminiscent of the rosettes in the Hadrianopolis mosaics can be seen in the mosaics of the basilica of Mopsuestia in Cilicia (5th cent. AD). In these mosaics, the rosette is used along with the swastika-meander motif.310 Some examples of rosettes from Antioch-on-the-Orontes date back to the 5th cent. AD. The first of these examples belongs to the mosaic of the House of the Buffet Supper. These rosettes engraved in the ornamental fields of a mosaic with a geometric design in the form of a square have a central fillet cross (Fig. 146).311 Parrish 2001, p. 339, fig. 11. Budde 1969, fig. 25. 311 Cimok 2000, p. 123; Levi 1947, pp. 311-312, pl. 124b. The acc. no. of the mosaic exhibited at the archeological museum of Hatay is 930a; however, the acc. no. specified on the website of the museum is 938a: (18/08/2018). 309 310

Houix et al. 2011, pp. 452-458, figs. 4-5 and 11. Budde 1969, p. 58, fig. 27.

121

Hadrianopolis IV

Fig. 146. A detail from the mosaic of the House of Buffet in Antioch-on-the-Orontes.

this mosaic were used along with the flower motifs like the mosaic with acc. no. 941.316 Another example for these types of rosettes is from northern Syria. On the mosaic of the south aisle of the Martyrium Basilica in Dipsi Faraj which is dated to the 5th cent. AD, a rosette was depicted inside each of the squares.317

The rosette designs in another floor mosaic discovered in the same building were engraved in the open floor along with the flower motifs.312 The floor mosaic discovered in Room 3 of the House of Ge and the Seasons from Antiochon-the-Orontes has rosette ornaments. The mosaic here is composed of a figural and geometric design. There is a female figure depicted inside the medallion in the centre of the mosaic. Since there is no inscription beside this figure which could identify her, she remains unknown.313 The rosettes are shown in the centre of the looped circles in two small squares. The rosette located in the upper section of the mosaic shows particular similarity with the examples from Hadrianopolis (Fig. 147).314 In the mosaic with the acc. no. 934-936 exhibited in the garden of the archeological museum of Hatay, there are two different types of rosettes inside the looped squares. These floor mosaics were discovered in the Phoenix House.315 The last example of rosettes from Antioch is seen in the Mosaic of the Lion with Ribbon (acc. no. 913). The rosettes in

The mosaics from Cyprus have some rosette designs reminiscent of the examples from Antioch and Hadrianopolis. There are important examples of rosettes in the mosaics of ‘Basilica A’ in Peyia which are dated to the 6th cent. AD. One rosette is depicted in each of the looped squares in the bema mosaic of this basilica.318 On the mosaics of the nave and baptistery of the same basilica, rosette designs are also found in the looped circles.319 Rosette designs inside looped squares are also found in the Basilica of Chrysopolitissa in Paphos which are dated to the 6th cent. AD.320 The last example from Cyprus for rosette designs can be seen in the mosaics of Shyrvallos Basilica in Ktima/Paphos. The building of the basilica dates to the 7th cent. AD; according to D. Michaelides, however, the mosaics are likely to belong

Cimok 2000, p. 123; Levi 1947, pp. 311-312, pl. 125b-126e (Archeological Museum of Hatay, acc. no. 941). 313 Levi 1947, p. 347, pl. 82a; This personification is defined as Ktisis in the publication named as’Antioch Mosaics’: Cimok 2000, p. 282. 314 The acc. no. of the mosaic named as ‘Mosaic of Birds’ in the archeological museum of Hatay is 959; however, the acc. no. specified on the website of the museum is 869: (18/08/2018). 315 Cimok 2000, p. 290; Levi 1947, pp. 351-355, pl. 83b, 135b. 312

Levi 1947, pp. 313-315, pl. 70b, 127. Harper and Wilkinson 1975, pp. 319-338, fig. 13b. 318 Megaw 1974, p. 72, fig. 19. 319 Michaelides 1988, p. 140, figs. 63-64; Michaelides 1989, pp. 195-197. 320 Michaelides 1988, pp. 105, 142, fig. 23; Michaelides 1989, pp. 195197. 316 317

122

Mosaics from Basilica A

Fig. 147. A detail from the mosaic of the House of Ge and Seasons in Antioch-on-the-Orontes.

to the 6th cent. AD.321 The apsidal mosaic of the basilica is composed of rosettes engraved on a white ground along with Solomon knots.322

the mosaic of the bema of the basilica a bird is depicted in a central medallion. Birds or other animals continued as mosaic motifs without losing their popularity in public residential buildings or religious buildings as a tradition of the pre-Christian period. This popularity remained unchanged until the Byzantine period. However, the iconography of the early figural scenes began to change with the advent of Christianity. Therefore, the Christian mosaics should be evaluated from a different point of view than the early mosaics. It is also obvious that some forms of artistic expression used in the pagan culture were transferred to Christian art, and the themes creating these scenes were re-arranged according to the new religion. The Christian scenes should therefore be analysed while considering both their traditional elements and changes pertaining to the new religion.

Rosettes are also seen in the mural mosaics as well as floor mosaics. In the 5th cent. AD mural mosaics of the mausoleium of Galla Placidia in Ravenna, polychrome rosettes are inlaid on a blue ground.323 In the vault mosaic of the Archbishop’s Chapel from the same region (AD 494-519) polychrome rosettes were used along with lilies.324 Animal-Scenes and Iconography The mosaics of Basilica A have a wide range of designs, particularly with their bird figures. Birds are depicted inside small square panels on the mosaic of the north aisle of the Basilica without any vegetal ornaments. On the mosaics of the nave and south aisle, vase forms are part of the design, along with vegetal ornaments such as trees, flowers, etc. Pigeons, parrots, ducks, chicken, waterfowl, partridges and peacocks are among the preferred bird species. In addition to birds, a leopard, a gryphon, a lion, a gazelle, two deers, an elephant and a horse are seen on the mosaics of the nave and south aisle of the basilica. On

When examining the mosaics in terms of design, there are a great number of mosaics of classical antiquity that can be compared to the animal-scenes of Basilica A. Of these, the mosaic of the Great Palace in Constantinople which is dated to the 6th cent. AD, is perhaps the most difficult one to compare with mosaics belonging to the other areas because it reflects the very characteristic art of its period and is also far superior in quality than most.325 It is thought that mosaic artists from various regions of the

Michaelides 1988, p. 90. Michaelides 1988, p. 113, fig. 33. 323 Lorizzo 1976, pp. 11-15, pl. 4. 324 Lorizzo 1976, pp. 25-27, pl. 13. 321 322

325

123

Dunbabin 1978, pp. 229-230; Jobst, Erdal and Gurtner 2010, p. 28.

Hadrianopolis IV

Fig. 148. A hunting scene on the Great Palace mosaic in Constantinople.

Fig. 149. A gryphon attacking a female deer on the Great Palace mosaic in Constantinople.

124

Mosaics from Basilica A

Fig. 150. A gryphon in the Northeastern Corridor-Field B of the Great Palace mosaic in Constantinople.

empire were brought together for the creation of the Great Palace mosaic, but also that a master led the other artists during the creation of the mosaic.326 There are 90 themes and almost 150 human and animal figures in the mosaic.327 The scenes of the Palace mosaic are not divided from each other by small square panels or geometric designs as in the mosaics of Basilica A.328 Instead, natural depictions such as trees, rocks, etc and architectural depictions were used to divide the scenes in some situations.329 Scenes of hunters or palace guards (Fig. 148), animal chase scenes, children’s games, domestic animals, pastoral and mythological scenes constitute the themes of the mosaic.330 It is believed that none of the scenes of the mosaic has any religious symbolism. Thus, the scenes depicted in the Great Palace mosaics are important in terms of their design characteristics rather than their symbolic meanings in comparison with the mosaics of Hadrianopolis.331 The

gryphon depicted in a square panel on the mosaic of the nave of Basilica A (Fig. 119) is one of the creatures rarely seen in the churches of early Christian period.332 This figure as continuation of the pagan tradition was one of the idealised figures that could be used for a public building, house or a palace like in Constantinople in the early Byzantine art. Four different gryphons are depicted in the Palace mosaic. In one of the scenes located in the ‘Northern Corridor-Field A’, a gryphon with the beak and wings of an eagle and the body of a lion attacks a deer from behind (Fig. 149).333 The second gryphon is situated in the ‘Northeastern Corridor-Field B.334 This gryphon also has the body of a lion and the head and wings of an eagle (Fig. 150). The right foot of the gryphon is lifted into the air. It moves forward carefully; at the same time, it turns its head back. This position is a very typical one frequently seen in mosaics of Greek and Roman antiquity. In mosaic art, there are many animals depicted looking back while moving forward: this position was used even for birds, not

Cimok 1997, p. 11; Jobst, Erdal and Gurtner 2010, p. 28. Jobst, Erdal and Gurtner 2010, p. 45; Yücel 2010, p. 18. 328 Trilling 1989, p. 37. 329 Cimok 1997, p. 11; Trilling 1989, p. 37. 330 Brett 1942, p. 35; Jobst, Erdal and Gurtner 2010, p. 45; Trilling 1989, pp. 69-71. 331 Generally mosaic of the Great Palace has little to do with the mosaics from Hadrianopolis except the depiction of gryphons; therefore, these mosaics in Istanbul were not described and analysed here in detail. 326 327

332 Earlier depictions of griffons on mosaics, such as the Orpheus mosaic from Shahba-Philippopolis in southern Syria or the one from Volubilis in Morocco are excluded. 333 Jobst, Erdal and Gurtner 2010, p. 41, fig. 23; Trilling 1989, fig. 2; Yücel 2010, pp. 58-61. 334 Jobst, Erdal and Gurtner 2010, p. 34; fig. 12; Trilling 1989, fig. 1; Yücel 2010, pp. 64-65 and 86.

125

Hadrianopolis IV

Fig. 151. A gryphon in the Northeastern Corridor-Field C of the Great Palace mosaic in Constantinople.

only for gryphons or deer. The other two gryphons in the mosaic are in the ‘Northeastern Corridor-Field C’. The gryphon located in the upper section of the scene has the head of an okapi and the body of a cheetah (Fig. 151).335 It has a very interesting appearance. The wings of the other gryphon, which holds a lizard in its mouth, are fully opened upwards (Fig. 152). It has the body of a tiger and two horns on its head.336

wild and ugly representations of life or death situations of the animal kingdom are not omitted. On the contrary, these scenes are reflected as naturally possible in spite of all the wildness and cruelty. When discussing the scenes showing animal struggles, hunting scenes, pastoral scenes and many others, it is not enough to describe these scenes merely in terms of craftsmanship. Some scenes have a set of particularly symbolic meanings which should be emphasised. The Palace mosaic is too complicated to describe its form and semantic representation with a single suggestion; but it is possible to recognise some details that the mosaic desires to convey to the spectator. In James Trilling’s interpretation of the scene where a gryphon is about to eat the lizard it holds in its mouth, he makes an association between the gryphon and lizard, and Apollo and the snake he killed.337 In this scene, the snake is replaced with the lizard. The link established between the myth of Apollo’s killing of a monster for the salvation of humanity and the gryphon scene in the Great Palace mosaic seems logical, for it runs parallel to the concept of protectiveness involved in the Palace mosaic. In the mosaic, the depiction of a gryphon instead of Apollo removed a figure that might be problematic from the Christian perspective.338 Nearby,

Although the gryphons of the Palace mosaic are imaginary creatures, they try to prove to the spectator that they are as real as the other animals are. These four gryphons, depicted naturally and in as much detail as possible, were rendered from a different perspective than the gryphon depicted on the mosaic of the nave in Basilica A in terms of their artistic concept. Contrary to the natural gryphons of Constantinople, the gryphon of Hadrianopolis is rather an idealised figure. Even though the quality of the craftsmanhip is fairly high, it does not appreciate the details as much as in the Palace mosaic. The mane, facial details and wings of the figure are rendered in a linear manner. The gryphons of the Palace mosaic are depicted in more vivid colours with varied tones. There is no linearity as in the example of Hadrianopolis. The wings and mane of the figures are bulky; details like beaks, teeth and claws are well formed. Another characteristic emphasising the naturalistic expression of the palace mosaics is that the Jobst, Erdal and Gurtner 2010, p. 48, fig. 33a, b. Brett 1942, p. 40, pl. 16; Jobst, Erdal and Gurtner 2010, p. 77; Trilling 1989, fig. 21; Yücel 2010, pp. 62-63.

335 336

337 338

126

Trilling 1989, p. 59. Trilling 1989, p. 59.

Mosaics from Basilica A

Fig. 152. A gryphon depicted with a lizard in its mouth on the Great Palace mosaic in Constantinople.

Fig. 153. Oceanus mask in the border of the Great Palace mosaic in Constantinople.

127

Hadrianopolis IV

Fig. 154. The struggle of a deer and a snake on the Great Palace mosaic in Constantinople.

Bellerophon and Chimera339, Pan340 and the Oceanus mask341 (Fig. 153) located on the border are attached to the other themes without being exposed to any censorship. Gerard Brett states that Oceanus loses his mythological character and becomes a decorative element here.342

referred to as ‘Basilica B’ and dated to the first half of the 6th cent. AD. In one of the panels found in the floor mosaic of this church, a struggle between a deer and a snake is depicted (Fig. 156).347 H. Maguire mentions that the deer eating the serpent was a symbol of the fight which Christ and the Christians have to conduct against the devil, according to early Christian authors.348 A similar scene is also depicted in a cathedral mosaic, dating to AD 533, in Apamea located in northern Syria.349

In the mosaic of the Northeastern Corridor-Field C, the struggle of a deer and a snake (Fig. 154)343, and in the Field B, the struggle of an eagle and a snake (Fig. 155)344 are depicted. The struggle between the eagle and the snake is known to represent the victory of light over darkness and also symbolises the victory of the Byzantine empire over its enemies.345 However, these scenes also express a certain meaning for Christianity. The hunting of the snake by the deer is an allegory of the victory of Jesus over the Devil; at the same time, the killing of the snake by the eagle is the symbol of the war between good and evil, that is, Jesus and the Devil.346 These scenes can found in the mosaics of some religious buildings. The church in the eastern part of the site in Olbia/Theodorias in Libya is

Some hunting scenes in the Great Palace mosaic are shaped with a deeply impressive artistic concept. Hunting scenes were among the themes frequently used in the Roman period and were used in mosaics with a similar artistic concept in different points of the Empire. It is known that a great many patterns with themes of hunting scenes were used by mosaic artists. These patterns were then applied to fit the religious conventions in the early Christian period. A set of patterns for animal figures in the church would have been used together with some decorative attachments in line with Christian concepts and art, and the details expressing pagan concepts would have been omitted. When thinking in terms of design, the tigers, leopards and lions depicted in the hunting scenes and animal chase scenes in the Great Palace mosaic are not so

339 Brett 1942, pl. 6; Jobst, Erdal and Gurtner 2010, p. 53, fig. 46.; Trilling 1989, fig. 23; Yücel 2010, pp. 80-81. 340 Brett 1942, pl. 7b; Trilling 1989, fig. 25; Yücel 2010, pp. 82-83. 341 Cimok 1997, pp. 22-23, fig. 11; Jobst, Erdal and Gurtner 2010, pp. 38-39, fig. 20; Trilling 1989, pl. A. 342 Brett 1942, p. 36. 343 Brett 1942, pl. 11a; Trilling 1989, fig. 39; Yücel 2010, pp. 50-51. 344 Jobst, Erdal and Gurtner 2010, pp. 42-43, fig. 26; Trilling 1989, fig. 40; Yücel 2010, pp. 52-53. 345 Jobst, Erdal and Gurtner 2010, p. 43; Yücel 2010, p. 52. 346 Trilling 1989, p. 59.

347 Maguire 1987, p. 47, fig. 59; and Alföldi-Rosenbaum and WardPerkins 1980, p. 54. 348 Maguire 1987, p. 47. 349 Balty 1995, p. 77, pl. 33.1.

128

Mosaics from Basilica A

Fig. 155. The struggle of an eagle and a snake on the Great Palace mosaic in Constantinople.

Fig. 156. Qasr Libya. A panel of the mosaic of the East Church.

129

Hadrianopolis IV separately (Figs. 95 and 106). Wild animals in the hunting Amazon scenes or other hunting scenes are seen in similar positions in the early Christian mosaics. It is also possible to see animals like leopards and lions in the animal chase scenes or hunting scenes in the early religious buildings in the Near Eastern geography. In the mosaics situated in St George Church (AD 535/536)360, the Church of the Holy Martyrs Lot and Procopius (AD 557) (Fig. 142)361 and the Old Diaconicon Baptistery (AD 530)362 in Jordan, hunting scenes were included. In Basilica A (St Demetrius Church, AD 525-575) from the city of Nikopolis on the western coast of Greece, there is a floor mosaic with a hunting scene depicted in the decorative fields composed of a vine branch and leaves like the mosaics in Jordan.363

different from the animals depicted in religious buildings (Figs. 149 and 157). The hunting scenes decorated the floors of the public buildings and houses and contributed to the nourishment of religious art. The equivalents of the hunting scenes in the Great Palace mosaics are seen in the mosaic with Megalopsychia (Figs. 35 and 158) from Antioch-on-the-Orontes (5th cent. AD)350; in the hunt mosaic in Worcester (first half of the 6th cent. AD)351; and the hunt mosaic in the Dumbarton Oaks (AD 500526).352 There are examples of hunt scenes in Apamea in north Syria. Two of these examples belong to a mosaic with a hunting scene discovered in the Villa of Triclinos and currently being exhibited in the Musée Art et Histoire in Brussels (5th cent. AD)353 and the mosaic of hunting Amazons (third quarter of the 5th cent. AD).354 Another example is the mosaic of Meleagros and Atalanta which is dated to the same century.355 The last example depicting Amazons’ hunting is from Haleplibahçe in Edessa (Fig. 175).356

In the churches of early Christianity, examples where the animals are ‘imprisoned’ alone in a geometric design, as in Basilica A, were found more frequently. One of the best examples of this in Asia Minor are the floor mosaics belonging to the Great Church of Miletus, reflecting the art of that city in the 5th and 6th cent. AD. In the baptistery and atrium mosaics of the church, an animal figure was placed inside the panels. As with the mosaics of Basilica A, the panels embodying predators and the panels with domestic animals were confronted.364 Animals like leopards and zebras in these panels and the vegetal ornaments surrounding these animals are reminiscent of the figural panels of the mosaic of the nave of Basilica A, in particular in terms of design. The iconographic meaning of the scenes in Miletus Church is the struggle between good and evil.365 In the floor mosaics in the northern addition to the church, there are a gryphon and a bear, again depicted in separate panels.366 In the floor mosaic belonging to the Hagios Ioannos Basilica of Mastichari on Kos, deers, bulls, gryphons and leopards are depicted inside the panels (AD 500s).367

The common point in these mosaics is that each Amazons wears a Phrygian cap and is depicted in a similar position to her companions. It is known from the ancient written sources that Amazons participated in the Trojan war; but in mosaics Amazons are associated with the hunting of predators. Diodorus of Sicily mentioned the connection of Amazons to hunting. According to Diodorus, an Amazon queen led the warrior Amazons to hunt wild animals and to regularly practice the arts of hunting and warfare.357 The scenes of hunting Amazons are not only seen in the mosaic art: a further one is depicted on a silver plate which is kept in Dumbarton Oaks and dated to the 5th cent. AD at the earliest.358 The scene here is a reminiscent of the mosaic of hunting Amazons (acc. no. 820) that is dated to the 4th cent. AD belonging to Yakto Complex of Antioch and exhibited in the archaeological museum of Hatay.359 Some animal figures in the mosaics of Basilica A have the same positions as those of the animals depicted in the hunting and animal chase scenes. The gryphon, leopard and deer on the mosaic of the nave (Figs. 105-106 and 118120; Pl. 12), as well as the lion and gazelle on the mosaic of the south aisle (Figs. 95-99), are depicted as single figures in te separate panels. A possible link between the scenes was investigated, although the panels were placed

In the mosaic of the nave of Basilica A, it is likely that the scenes arranged facing each other in four different square panels symbolise the struggle between good and evil, as in the church in Miletus; however, this interpretation is not enough to explain the remaining scenes of the ornament field. The design of the mosaic of the nave, composed of birds and of tree and flower depictions engraved with birds, is reminiscent of the ‘Paradise view’ scenes known in the rest of the eastern Mediterranean. On the other hand, although they are imprisoned in separated square panels related to the scenes about a possible paradise, depiction

350 Blázquez 2015, p. 5, fig. 5; Cimok 2000, pp. 251-253; Levi 1947, pp. 326-344, fig. 136, pl. 77-78; Trilling 1989, fig. 60. 351 Balty 1990, pp. 82-83, pl. 45; Brilliant 1979, pp. 63-64, fig. 13; Cimok 2000, pp. 296-297; Kitzinger 1951, fig. 23; Levi 1947, pp. 364-365, fig. 150-151, pl. 86b, 90a, 170-173, 176b and 177. 352 Campbell 1988, p. 70, pl. 196-200; Cimok 2000, p. 292; Levi 1947, pp. 358-359, pl. 86a. 353 Balty 1977, pp. 104-109; Balty 1995, pp. 54, 173, pl. 22; Trilling 1989, pp. 48-49, fig. 67. 354 Balty 1977, pp. 114-117; Balty 1995, pp. 54, 172, pl. 24.1. 355 Balty 1977, pp. 118-123; Balty 1995, p. 172, pl. 24.2. 356 Aydemir, Çokoğullu and Dervişoğlu 2008, pp. 1-7; Salman 2007a, pp. 8-9. 357 Diodorus Siculus 1935, pp. 33-35, II.46.I; Weitzmann 1960, p. 48. 358 Weitzmann 1960, p. 48, fig. 5. 359 Cimok 2000, pp. 246-247; Levi 1947, pp. 279-283, pl. 64b; Weitzmann 1960, p. 49, fig. 6.

Merrony 1998, pp. 454-455, pl. 22, fig. 3; Piccirillo 1993a, pp. 178179, fig. 244-251. 361 Merrony 1998, p. 452, pl. 25, fig. 6; Piccirillo 1993a, pp. 164-165, fig. 213. 362 Merrony 1998, p. 454; Piccirillo 1993a, pp. 134-143 and 146-147; figs. 166-169 and 182. 363 Kitzinger 1951, pp. 108-122, figs. 21-22 and 25-27; Maguire 1987, pp. 21-24; Dunbabin 1999, p. 219. 364 Dunbabin 1999, p. 219; Kitzinger 1951, pp. 108-122, figs. 21-22 and 25-27; Maguire 1987, pp. 21-24. 365 Scheibelreiter 2007, pp. 72 and 192-193, figs. 25-26. 366 These floor mosaics were removed from where they were situated and transferred to the local museum of Miletus: Parrish 2001, p. 347, fig. 34. 367 Parrish 2001, p. 344, figs. 26-27. 360

130

Mosaics from Basilica A

Fig. 157. A leopard attacking a stag on the Great Palace mosaic in Constantinople.

Fig. 158. A leopard on the mosaic with Megalopsychia in Antioch-on-the-Orontes.

131

Hadrianopolis IV early Christian sources.374 In the mosaic of the St Demetrius Basilica, a border composed of a sea and marine animals depictions surrounds the panel where trees and bird figures are depicted. Maguire thinks that the theme handled in this mosaic is an earthly representation.375 Both Maguire and Kitzinger use the terms of earth and ocean for this theme.376 Kitzinger states that the other mosaic panel with the hunting scene contains a kind of geographic symbol. He believes that the hunting scene was the symbol of a map like the bird and animal scene in the other panel, and that it was intended to symbolise paradise rather than earth.377 Of course, every theme in a hunting scene does not have a single meaning. The style of physical work on the scenes, in what section of the religious building it is depicted, the themes in the other panels in connection with the scenes and some tiny details affect interpretations of the hunting scenes. It is possible to use the theme metaphorically.378 In the early Christian belief, ‘death, evilness and bad habits’ were represented allegorically by wild animals; in hunting scenes, the victory of humans over bad passions and habits were represented through their victory over wild animals.379 The victory of good over evil was emphasised in these scenes and an allegory of human life was created through hunting depictions.380

of animal chase scenes on the mosaic of the nave is thought-provoking (Fig. 106): in depictions of paradise, animals are not supposed to struggle with each other. The floor mosaic of the church of Saints Cosmas and Damian in Gerasa, which is dated to AD 533, is composed of square panels with animal figures in a decorative field with geometric designs.368 In these small panels of the mosaic, there are a great number of bird and animal figures as in the mosaics of Basilica A. The species of birds represented are pheasants, ducks, partridges, cocks, peacocks, flamingos, hermit ibis, chicken and pigeons.369 Other animals are sheep, rabbits, gazelles, camels, wild donkeys, dogs, tigers, cattls, goats, lions, lionesses, elephants, bears, horses and mountain goats.370 This decorative field is also bordered with two designs embodying fish and waterbirds. H. Maguire states that while these figural scenes had been previously described as depicting ‘Paradise’ the depiction of dogs, lions and bears as engaging in hunting was contrary to this theme.371 The reason for this interpretation is that the animals in paradise are supposed to be in peace with each other.372 Applying the same restrictions to the mosaics of Basilica A, one comes to the conclusion that the leopard and gryphon on the mosaic of the nave are depicted in contrast with the paradise theme. Although the deer located in A2 is in a suitable position for a scene showing paradise, the deer positioned in B5 just opposite the gryphon-panel is shown in a typical position that is usually seen only in animal struggles and hunting scenes (Figs. 109, 120 and 121). In spite of this, the vegetal designs decorating the panels, along with the figures, are among the vegetal elements likely to appear in a paradise scene. For example, the panels showing deer and leopards have palm trees placed in the background. Kitzinger states that palm tree depictions and deer drinking water from rivers explicitly represent paradise.373 Although the vegetal ornaments available in Basilica A are elements that are associated closely with the paradise theme, the conflicting expressions of the figures make it hard to interpret the scenes.

The scenes of Basilica A have a special characteristic that links the figures with each other. However, instead of taking the panels as a whole, examining the figures depicted in the panels individually requires a more detailed study of the symbols of animal figures in early Christian art. Deer figures are depicted in two square panels in the west half of the mosaic of the nave. It was previously mentioned that, in a scene between a deer and a snake, the deer symbolised Jesus. Deer also suggest baptistism in Christan iconography. They represent the catechumen on the way to be baptised and at the same time take a mediating role, expressing the longing for God.381 Therefore, deer are sometimes depicted in baptisteries. They can be shown as a single figure, as well as two facing figures drinking water from a water pot. The best example of this theme is the mosaic of the baptistery at the Episcopal Church in Macedonia which is dated to the mid-5th cent. AD.382 The deer are shown standing on opposite sides of a cantharus and alternating with peacock figures. This scene also references Psalm 42:1: ‘As the deer pants for the water brooks, so my soul pants for you, O God’.383 Another example of deer standing on opposite

The mosaics in the churches of the early Christian period were frequently decorated with scenes where different species of animals were depicted together: they were shown either in a struggle with each other or, on the contrary, in a peaceful environment. The square and rectangular panels in which the animals were depicted were placed at various points of the decorative field in line with the desired design. In some circumstances, even a tiny detail in the decorative field might change the meaning of the scene. Returning back to the hunting scenes again, we should state that these scenes also reflect the rural life of society. Ernst Kitzinger and Henry Maguire state that the belief that the world is separated from Eden by an ocean was mentioned in the

Kitzinger 1951, p. 117; Maguire 1987, p. 26. ‘Christian topography’ by Cosmas Indicopleustes can be a source for the scholars; it, therefore, was mentioned under the chapter ‘Iconographic analysis of the mosaics of Basilica B’ in this book. 375 Maguire 1987, pp. 21-24. 376 Magure 1987, p. 23; Kitzinger 1951, p. 95. 377 Kitzinger 1951, pp. 117-119. 378 Kitzinger 1951, p. 117. 379 Kitzinger 1951, p. 118. 380 Levi 1947, pp. 340-341; Merrony 1998, p. 475. 381 Ovadiah 1991, p. 477. 382 Wiseman and Mano-Zissi 1972, pp. 422-424, pl. 90, figs. 41-42 and 47; Wiseman and Mano-Zissi 1973, pp. 398-399, pl. 68, fig. 14. 383 In this psalm, an analogy was drawn between the situation where the deer was involved and a faithful person. The deer escaping from the 374

Maguire 1987, pp. 34-36, figs. 38-41; Piccirillo 1993a, pp. 276-280 and 286-288, fig. 539. 369 Maguire 1987, p. 35. 370 Maguire 1987, p. 35. 371 Maguire 1987, p. 35. 372 Maguire 1987, p. 35. 373 Kitzinger 1951, p. 118. 368

132

Mosaics from Basilica A sides of a cantharus is the narthex mosaic of the basilica at Heraclea Lyncestis in Macedonia which is dated to the late 5th cent. AD.384 There are two confronted peacocks just above the deer. When Maguire discusses this mosaic, he states that the peacocks and deer, positioned centrally and symmetrically at the entrance of the church, free from the violence and imbalance of the ephemeral world, are regarded as symbols of Christian belief.385 In the mosaic of the church of Panagia Chrysopolitissa in Paphos on Cyprus, there is a deer drinking water from a water brook and an inscription which is dated to the 4th cent. AD.386 In the inscription Psalm 42:1 was mentioned.387 These kind of scenes are also found in two sites in Asia Minor: The first example is in the north aisle of the basilica in Xanthus in Lycia. On this floor mosaic, dated to the 5th and 6th cent. AD388, there are deer positioned on two opposite sides of a crater. A further example is the bema mosaic of a church from Çağlayan district in Gördes, in Manisa, northern Lydia. This scene shows similarity with the mosaic of the basilica in Xanthus and dates to 5th-6th cent. AD.389 Two deer figures on the nave of Basilica A do not reflect a scene about baptism or longing for God. These figures were likely inspired by a pattern depicting the struggle between animals. The deer figure-scene in B5 clearly shows this (Fig. 109). The attacking positions of the gryphon and leopard in the south half of the panel supports this idea. A belief that Jesus woke up by roaring after sleeping for three days led the leopard figure to be perceived as one of the symbols of Jesus; however, the leopard is also one of the symbols of the Antichrist.390 The leopard located in the square panel of the mosaic in F5 may have been inspired by a hunting scene or an animal chase scene (Figs. 109 and 118). When evaluating the deer, leopards and gryphons all together, one might conclude that they are animal figures intended to represent struggles between good and evil rather than a paradise scene. On the other hand, the likelihood that these scenes were not depicted for any symbolic purpose, or that the mosaic artist saw no harm in adding animal chase scenes to the bird and vegetal ornaments prepared for a view of paradise, should also be taken into consideration. It is also likely that the artist could have used deer, leopards and gryphons only for decorative purposes.

From the rarely seen animals such as elephants, giraffes or bears to popular examples such as leopards, tigers and lions and to the wide range of bird species, scenes where animals are depicted all together are sometimes found in the mosaics of religious buildings or other structures, but not very frequently. The designs where animals are depicted all together are among the characteristics of Hellenistic art and continued to exist in the Roman and early Byzantine periods, as well. An example with a great number of animals placed in the same scene is a floor mosaic from Lydda (Lod) in Israel which is dated to the end of the 3rd cent. and the beginning of the 4th cent. AD. In this mosaic elephants, giraffes, rhinoceroses, tigers, bulls, lions and lionesses are depicted; but it is not clear whether these mosaics were inspired by Christianity or paganism (Fig. 159).391 Another example is the floor mosaic of the ancient synagogue of Gaza Maiumas in Palestine, dated to the 6th cent. AD, where King David is shown surrounded by an elephant (?), giraffe, lioness and snake.392 This mosaic was probably inspired by the mosaics known as ‘Orpheus scenes’ from the paganic period as there were numerous examples of mosaics about Orpheus, who was a major cultic figure and was very influential in both paganism and early Christianity.393 This figure in the floor mosaic is depicted in the centre of the scene with a lyre in his hand. The numerous animals around Orpheus are depicted in a calm state of mind. An example of the 3rd cent. AD is currently being exhibited in the archaeological museum of Hatay and called as ‘the mosaic of Tarsus’ (acc. no. 10568a), as it originates from Tarsus, the metropolis of the Cilicia Pedias (Fig. 160).394 In the mosaic, an eagle, lion, bull, tiger, elephant, bear, panther, antelope and pig stand around, all very calm, while Orpheus fascinates the animals with the lyre he skillfully plays. A further depiction of Orpheus with a Phrygian cap was discovered in the House of Menander in Mytilene on Lesbos. This mosaic, exhibited in the new archaeological museum of Mytilene, is dated to the second half of the 3rd cent. AD (Fig. 161). In an Edessean mosaic of AD 194, previously exhibited at the Dallas Art Museum and now at the archaeological museum of Şanlıurfa, some of the animals are depicted on the right of Orpheus in an attacking position (Fig. 162). The antelope, horse and goat standing to the right of Orpheus are depicted in a calm state of mind. The mosaic shows that the animals of Orpheus, which are generally depicted very calmly, can also be depicted as wild and aggressive. This mosaic artist did not follow the examples of the popular scenes of Orpheus. On the mosaic panel from Mytilene the scene with Orpheus is depicted inside an octagonal medallion. Furthermore, there are some animal figures on this panel, each of which are placed in small squares around the central medallion. Although some of the animals are shown in attacking positions, the relation of Orpheus to these animals is not obvious, as on

threats in order to survive under cruel natural conditions will need a water brook eventually and water is of vital importance. For a faithful person, being wihout god signifies a disaster. Therefore, the soul of the faithful person feels a great need and longing for God. For another explanation about the psalm, see: Maguire 1987, p. 38. 384 Dimitrova 2006, pp. 179-190, fig. 2; Maguire 1987, pp. 36-40, figs. 42-43. 385 Maguire 1987, p. 40. 386 The intrados of the apse of Panagia tis Angeloktistis at Kiti on Cyprus has also pairs of deer on either side of a vessel, which symbolise the ‘Spring of Life’ together with similar pairs of beribboned parrots and ducks. 387 Michaelides 1988, pp. 92-93; Michaelides 1989, pp. 193-194. 388 Manière-Lévêque and Raynaud 2007, pp. 33-35 and 168, fig. 5; Raynaud 2009, pp. 69-72, figs. 66-68. 389 Tok 2008, pp. 157-158, fig. 6. 390 Ovadiah 1991, p. 477.

Ovadiah and Mucznik 1998, pp. 1-18, fig. 3. Avissar 1996, pp. 157160. 392 Ovadiah and Ovadiah 1987, pp. 60-62, pl. 59, 178; Ovadiah and Mucznik 1998, p. 6, Tülek 1998, pl. XXIII, fig. 45. 393 Salman 2007a, p. 50. 394 Cimok 2000, pp. 144-149. 391

133

Hadrianopolis IV

Fig. 159. The floor mosaic of Lydda (Lod) (drawn by S. Patacı after Avissar 1996 and Ovadiah and Mucznik 1998, fig. 3).

Fig. 160. The mosaic of Orpheus from Tarsus in Adana.

134

Mosaics from Basilica A

Fig. 161. The mosaic of Orpheus from Mytilene.

Fig. 162. The mosaic of Orpheus from Edessa.

135

Hadrianopolis IV

Fig. 163. Illustration of the Harran Kapı mosaic from Edessa.

danger and turns its head toward the gryphon (Figs. 106 and 120). On the other half of the panel of the mosaic from Edessa, there are a gazelle and a bull on either side of a floral arrangement (Figs. 41, and 163-164). This scene is reminiscent of themes of paradise or the Peaceable Kingdom in Isaiah.397 The purpose of the Peaceable Kingdom scenes is to emphasise peace between predators and their prey. Natural enemies become friends in the Peaceable Kingdom. However, as neither the gazelle nor the bull are predatory animals, this mosaic cannot represent the Peaceable Kingdom. When we look at the whole mosaic, it cannot represent a paradise scene either because of the scene with the lion and the wild goat. This scene emphasies violence, which is inappropriate for a paradise theme. Nevertheless, a paradise theme can be ascribed to some mosaics which seem to shown animal fights, as assumed by local archaeologists in Anatolia. In the art of mosaic during the late antique-early Byzantine period, sheep were also preferred over deer in similar designs. For instance, in a panel of the mosaic of İncirli there are two sheep with twisted tails on either side of a cantharus398 and a similar example from northern Syria is being exhibited in the Nationalmuseet in Copenhagen,399 though this latter one has a vegetable ornament representing the tree of life

the mosaic floor from Edessa, as they are not placed in the central scene. These separate squares should indicate that the existence of the animals in a wild atmosphere was more important for the mosaic artist than the details of the myth of Orpheus as specified on this mosaic floor.395 A floor mosaic referred to as the mosaic of Harran Kapı from Edessa dates to the 5th and 6th cent. AD and was unearthed near Harran Kapı (Harran Gate) in modern Şanlıurfa (Figs. 41 and 163). We have already discussed this mosaic on pp. . It is exhibited in the mosaic museum of Haleplibahçe, located in the archaeological museum of Şanlıurfa. The mosaic measures 4.7 m by 2.4 m396, and there are also two small fragments belonging to the mosaic preserved aside from the main piece. A band of shaded simple guilloche on a black ground surrounds the main ornamental field of the mosaic. The panel of the mosaic, with a white background, includes a lion, a goat, a lamb, a deer, a gazelle and a bull. There is a plant placed between each animal, separating them. The depiction is composed of two distinct scenes. There is a lion, a goat and a lamb depicted in one half of the scene, and a deer, a gazelle and a bull in the other half. In one scene a lion with a red ribbon at its neck chases a wild goat at the centre of the mosaic (Figs. 41 and 163). The wild goat turns its head toward the lion while running away. Like the wild goat in the mosaic of Harran Kapı, the deer depicted in the square at the upper left corner of the naos mosaic of Basilica A rushes forward to avoid

397 Isaiah 11:6 ‘The wolf shall dwell with the lamb, and the leopard shall lie down with the young goat, and the calf and the lion and the fattened calf together; and a little child shall lead them. 7 The cow and the bear shall graze; their young shall lie down together; and the lion shall eat straw like the ox. 8 The nursing child shall play over the hole of the cobra, and the weaned child shall put his hand on the adder’s den. 9 They shall not hurt or destroy in all my holy mountain; for the earth shall be full of the knowledge of the Lord as the waters cover the sea.’ 398 Çelik 2013, 4, fig. 5. 399 Acc. no. 15098. This mosaic panel was acquired on the art market in 1972 and its provenance is unknown. It was published on the cover of Pentz 1992 and dated into 6th cent. AD.

395 Also cf. Jesnick 1997. Also, about the compartmentalisation of the animals cf. Michaelides 1986. 396 Patacı 2016, pp. 429-441, figs. 1 and 2; Salman 2007a, 166-172.

136

Mosaics from Basilica A

Fig. 164. A detail from the Harran Kapı mosaic in Edessa.

Fig. 165. A mosaic panel with two sheeps with twisted tails on both sides of a tree from northern Syria, today in the Nationalmuseet in Copenhagen.

between two sheep (Fig. 165). Furthermore, the depiction of a cantharus on a further northern Syrian mosaic of the 5th cent. AD in the Nationalmuseet400 shows some similarities with the cantharus in the mosaic of İncirli

(Fig. 166). One of these examples is a mosaic from Antioch dating between the 5th and 6th cent. It was discovered in 1996 at İncirli a village near the Turkish-Syrian border in the province of Hatay.401 On this mosaic there are two deer

400 Acc. no. 15120. It was also acquired on the art market in 1973 and its provenance is unknown. It is most probably unpublished.

401

137

Çelik 2013, 1-7, fig. 7.

Hadrianopolis IV

Fig. 166. A mosaic panel with a cantharus from northern Syria, today in the Nationalmuseet in Copenhagen.

depicted on either side of a tree. This is similar to the a gazelle and bull on the mosaic of Edessa. The deer to the left of the scene is eating a serpent: this theme is generally allegorised as Christ triumphing over Satan402, and we have already mentioned H. Maguire’s ideas on the subject.403 On the other hand, the most important question about the theme of this mosaic is whether it can be described as a scene of paradise on the basis of the presence of Christ triumphing over Satan, as it includes a scene where the deer eats a serpent. The suggestion that the mosaic from Antioch represents a scene of paradise must be ruled out, even if the local population and publications believe it does have this significance.

agitated. This mosaic represents two different moods. Scenes where animals are chased, hunting scenes or those showing a single animal on a single panel are typical of Greco-Roman art tradition and can even be seen in later periods. However, it must be noted that scenes made in or around Edessa are usually difficult to interpret. Similar examples of this type of animal mosaic can be seen among some mosaics in Gaziantep and Erzincan in Turkey and Apamea in Syria. The authors of this book posit that the mosaics in Hadrianopolis and Erzincan were made by mosaic artists from Edessa. This is quite convenient for stylistic crosschecking. One example which can be compared to the mosaic of Harran Kapı in the museum of Haleplibahçe is the mosaic floor of the church at Altıntepe in Erzincan. There, animal figures are depicted both together in a central panel and treated as single figures in small panels between the arms of a swastika-meander which encircles

On the first half of the panel of the mosaic of Harran Kapı, the animals seem peaceful. On the other half, they look

402 403

Trilling 1989, 61. Maguire 1987, 47.

138

Mosaics from Basilica A the central panel.404 Lion, bull, tiger, deer, bear and goat figures are seen together with bird figures in a central panel. In the north half of the panel, there is a scene with a lion, a bull and a tiger lined up from left to right.405 Both the lion and the tiger are shown attacking the bull in the centre. The bull turns its head, backwards toward the lion while it retreats to the right of the scene. The other half of the panel shows a deer, a bear and a goat. In this scene, the bear lunges towards the goat at the right of the scene. These are typical animal chase scenes. The deer placed at the left side of the scene is shown calmly bending toward the plant in front of it. As in the mosaic of Harran Kapı, the panel contains two mirrored scenes. The treatment of both mosaics is quite similar. By depicting the animals both struggling and in a calm mood, a dualist theme was probably represented. Additionally, bird figures and floral designs on the mosaics at the church of Altıntepe have much in common with the bird figures and floral depictions on the mosaic of Basilica A in Hadrianopolis. The mosaic floor of the church at Altıntepe in Erzincan was interpreted as a scene of paradise and at the same time associated with scenes of the Peaceable Kingdom of Isaiah by local archaeologists.406 The key point in the scenes of the Peaceable Kingdom is the depiction of two confronted animals. In such scenes, it is also possible to see depictions of animals with dropped heads as an indicator of peace and calm. However, this is not the case with the Altıntepe mosaic. Instead, the animal figures are engaged in a wild and tense atmosphere. Although bird figures and floral elements in the mosaic are depicted in accordance with the paradise theme, the relationship between the other animal figures is unusual. It could be that the mosaic floor of the church at Altıntepe in Erzincan is either a secular composition which represents a scene from animal life, or instead the first six days of the Creation, the Hexaemeron,407 and might have been a substitute for paradise or the Peaceable Kingdom. In Genesis 1:20-25 the creation of the wild and nonpredatory animals and bird species is mentioned408; however, it is unlikely that the six days of Creation theme is used in the Altıntepe mosaic, due to reasons which we will discuss later in relation to the animal mosaic from the museum of Şanlıurfa.

Another feature of the mosaic floor of the church at Altıntepe in Erzincan, similar to the mosaic of Harran Kapı, is the medallion of the bull figure which is depicted in the little square-shaped panel between the arms of the swastika-meander design surrounding the panel.409 Medallion depictions, as well as the ribbon around the neck of the lion figure in the mosaic of Edessa, are features of Persian art. In the south aisle mosaic of Basilica B in Hadrianopolis there is a similar scene, showing a bull figure (Fig. 206). One of the bird figures in the naos mosaic of Basilica A was a beribboned parrot which is very common in Antioch and elsewhere (Figs. 110-111). What makes the Edessa, Hadrianopolis and Altıntepe mosaics interesting is that they show clear Persian influence along with the local style of the animal chase scenes which were much used in Roman art as well. The artists who made these three mosaics must have come from Edessa. Edessian mosaic artists adopted eastern and western artistic styles, particularly during the late Roman Period, and created a different style with the synthesis of the two. Further examination of mosaic art in southeastern Anatolia and northern Syria and the comparison with new mosaic fragments unearthed at other places will enrich our knowledge of Edessian mosaic art. Mosaics of the 5th cent. AD and later from northern Syria and south Anatolia show that animal figures were not only used in secular architecture, but were also popular in religious architecture as seen in churches. In addition to Şanlıurfa, mosaic examples with such scenes are also found at Gaziantep. The Salkım mosaic, dating to the 5th cent. AD and held at the Mosaic Museum of Zeugma, was excavated in 1986.410 The church from where it was recovered had three naves. The scene consists of a wild goat, a lion, a rabbit, a hound, a deer, a bull (?) and a group of birds (Fig. 167). The lion is attacking a wild goat.411 It is impossible to interpret the scene in detail because a large part of the mosaic has unfortunately been destroyed; yet a primary feature of such church mosaics are the gathering of animal figures together in one scene. The Mosaic Museum of Zeugma in Gaziantep has also two more religious mosaics, from Koçlu and Sulumağara.412 They depict animal scenes and are both dated to the 5th cent. AD. The Koçlu mosaic measures 4.2 m x 6 m. There is a white background panel with a bear, a wild boar, a dog and two gazelles. Simply designed floral ornaments were used in the spaces between the animals. The scene where the bear attacks the gazelle is very dramatic, while the dog and another gazelle (?) are represented in a peaceful environment, and are placed on the other half of the panel (Fig. 168). The Sulumağara mosaic has a more complicated scene, with 32 animal figures in a rectangular panel inscribed within a band of a wave pattern (Fig. 169). We have already discussed this mosaic on pp. . The mosaic dates to the second half of the 5th cent. AD and measures

Can 2009, pp. 6-8, figs. 8-14; Can 2011, pp. 227-229, fig. 3. Can 2009, pp. 6-9, figs. 8-10; Can 2011, p. 227, fig. 3. 406 Can 2011, p. 228. 407 See the ‘Hexaemeron’ article by Baldwin 1991, pp. 926-927. 408 Genesis 1:20 ‘And God said, ‘Let the waters swarm with swarms of living creatures, and let birds fly above the earth across the expanse of the heavens.’ 21 So God created the great sea creatures and every living creature that moves, with which the waters swarm, according to their kinds, and every winged bird according to its kind. And God saw that it was good. 22 And God blessed them, saying, ’Be fruitful and multiply and fill the waters in the seas, and let birds multiply on the earth.’  23 And there was evening and there was morning, the fifth day. 24 And God said, ‘Let the earth bring forth living creatures according to their kinds— livestock and creeping things and beasts of the earth according to their kinds.’ And it was so. 25 And God made the beasts of the earth according to their kinds and the livestock according to their kinds, and everything that creeps on the ground according to its kind. And God saw that it was good.’ 404 405

Can 2011, p. 227, fig. 3. Patacı 2016, p. 432. 411 Patacı 2016, fig. 9. 412 Patacı 2016, p. 432, figs. 10-11. 409 410

139

Hadrianopolis IV

Fig. 167. Salkım mosaic at the mosaic museum of Zeugma.

Fig. 168. Koçlu mosaic at the mosaic museum of Zeugma.

140

Mosaics from Basilica A

Fig. 169. Orthophoto of the Sulumağara mosaic at the mosaic museum of Zeugma.

the early Byzantine period, a confronted lion and zebu are depicted on either side of a bush; this scene is explained as an allegorical representation from the Peaceable Kingdom of Isaiah.413

5 m x 5.6 m. There are facing peacocks at the top of the panel with a bull and a lion at the bottom of the pavement. These peacocks and the scene where a bull and a lion are depicted present different characteristics than other animal scenes in the panel. The bull and lion were evaluated as apotropaic figures by local archaeologists. Furthermore, there is a reliquary (?) between these two animals in the mosaic (Fig. 170). But this scene also reminds one of the Peaceable Kingdom of Isaiah (Isaiah 11:7 ‘...and the lion will eat straw like the ox.’), an alternative to the apotropaic proposition. In addition to the scenes of peacocks and the bull and lion, there are also animal chase scenes in the panel. In one of these scenes which is placed just above the scene of the bull and the lion, a leopard attacks two wild goats (Fig. 169). Just below the peacocks, there is a fight between a mountain goat and a bear. There is one more small rectangular panel at the left side of the mosaic. In this panel we see again another animal chase scene between a gazelle (?) and a hound. A striking detail in the scene is a red ribbon on the neck of the dog: this is another example of depictions of animals with ribbons popularly used in the mosaic art of the east (Fig. 171).

A floor mosaic of a church from the 5th cent. AD located 15 km north of Apamea is also worth mentioning.414 It represents animal chases and is a significant example depicting animal figures all together in a scene very similar to the animal mosaics of Edessa, Salkım, Koçlu and Sulumağara in the Mosaic Museum of Zeugma in Gaziantep, or the mosaic floor of the naos at the church at Altıntepe in Erzincan. The white background of the mosaic is decorated with monochrome flowers laid out in an orthogonal pattern of adjacent scales.415 This feature is similar to the Mosaic of Salkım. The most ostentatious figure in the scene is a leopard attacking a deer. The deer turns its head back toward the leopard while it runs away, showing a parallel with the position of the wild goat in the mosaic of Harran Kapı and the deer in the mosaic of Basilica A. As is common with other animal mosaics in the region, there are various birds depicted around land

A similar scene to the bull and lion in the Sulumağara mosaic is observed in a floor mosaic of the House of Farid el-Masri at Madaba in Jordan. In this mosaic from

Leyerle 2005, p. 159; Olszewski 1995, p. 25, fig. 21. Balty 1977, pp. 128-129. 415 For the examples of the ornament: Balmelle et al. 1985, pl. 215. 413 414

141

Hadrianopolis IV

Fig. 170. A detail from the Sulumağara mosaic at the mosaic museum of Zeugma.

Fig. 171. An animal chase scene in a small rectangular panel located at the left side of the Sulumağara mosaic.

Although it is not an animal chase scene, the mosaic of the basilica of Mopsuestia in Adana, Cilicia shows many animals together in a single panel (Fig. 173). The scene of this mosaic, which can be dated to the 5th or 6th cent. AD, depicts Noah’s Ark from the Old Testament.417 One of the bird figures418 from this mosaic is similar to one from the 6th cent. mosaic of the hunting Amazons from

animals as with the Apamea mosaic. Another northern Syrian mosaic with an animal chase scene is being exhibited at the Nationalmuseet in Copenhagen, in which a lion attacks a deer in the centre of an octagonal panel with a white ground416 (Fig. 172); this panel is dated to the 5th to 6th cent. AD.

417 Budde 1969, p. 34; Hachlili 1998a, pp. 213-214 and 216; Grant 2000, pp. 130-132, fig. 33. Patacı 2012, pp. 115, 190. 418 Budde 1969, fig. 42.

Acc. no. 15101. This mosaic panel was acquired on the art market in 1972 and its provenance is unknown. It is most probably unpublished. 416

142

Mosaics from Basilica A

Fig. 172. A mosaic panel with an animal chase scene from northern Syria, today in the Nationalmuseet in Copenhagen.

Fig. 173. A scene of the Noah’s Ark from the mosaic of Mopsuestia in the mosaic museum of Misis in Adana.

143

Hadrianopolis IV

Fig. 174. Bird depictions from Mopsuestia (a), Edessa (b) and Hadrianopolis (c).

Haleplibahçe419 in Edessa. In both mosaics, partridges have their right foot up while turning their heads backwards (Figs. 174a-b). These are typical bird representations seen in the area; however, local archaeologists interpret the Haleplibahçe partridge as moving with fear, in agreement with the mood at the right where an Amazon hunts a wild animal (Fig. 175).420 Unfortunately, this idea does not reflect the evidence: bird figures could be depicted in this pose by mosaic artists not because of the drama of the scene, but simply because this is a well-known pose in mosaic art. There is no reason for the partridge of the Mopsuestia mosaic to be fearful in a Noah’s Ark scene. Another similar scene is shown on the floor mosaic of the Domus from Hadrianopolis (Figs. 174c and 288).421 The bird figure of the Domus mosaic gives another clue to the existence of Edessian type mosaics in Paphlagonia. In terms of colour design, an earlier partridge depiction similar to the one on the mosaic of the Hunting Amazons can seen on the mosaic of Orpheus from the House of Menander in Mytilene on Lesbos, although this partridge’s head faces forward (Fig. 176).

the selection, the presentation and the interpretation of some of the themes. A secular subject such as a scene from animal life or the Hexaemeron could be represented by the Edessa mosaic, but in a Hexaemeron scene there are also bird representations or sea creatures, in agreement with Genesis 1:20-25.422 We cannot see any birds or sea creatures in the mosaic of Harran Kapı. However, one of two small fragments of the mosaic have a bird figure in a small square panel in between the arms of a swastika-meandering pattern.423 A swastika-meander with square panels between the arms frames the animal mosaic, as on the mosaic floor of the church at Altıntepe in Erzincan. If we are right in relating this figure to the theme of the main mosaic, it is possible the Hexaemeron theory may not be excluded from interpretation, in respect of the bird figure used in the border decoration of the mosaic. However, we would still need more representation of sea creatures to really consider this possibility. There is no marine creature in the floor mosaic of Altıntepe either, and the same applies to this mosaic. Unfortunately, other parts of the mosaic from Edessa could not be seen. Therefore, other proposals are not possible at present.

The mosaic of Harran Kapı in the museum of Şanlıurfa is representative of 5th and 6th cent. Christian art. It is one of the few rare examples from southeastern Anatolia and northern Syria. It is understood that similar mosaics with this kind of scene were depicted by mosaic artists during the late Roman-early Byzantine period. Mosaics with full animal scenes were also used in religious architecture, not only in secular buildings. Floor mosaics with animals from Zeugma, Edessa, Apamea, Antioch-on-the-Orontes and Mopsuestia were a favourite theme of mosaic artists between the 4th and the 6th cent. However, there were differences in terms of

Brutal and peaceful scenes with different animals were shown in opposition in the main field of decoration on the mosaic of Harran Kapı. These types of scenes were intended for specific religious purposes in churches. There would have been clear artistic intentions behind the production of different narratives. Sometimes the artist might not have hesitated to show contrasting scenes, even if these were not necessarily a suitable choice for the theme of the mosaic. An earlier example of this kind of situation is a funerary mosaic of Orpheus from Edessa. One can see animals depicted in a serene environment along with wild

Karabulut, Önal and Dervişoğlu 2011, pp. 23-72; Karaca and Rızvanoğlu 2008; Aydemir, Çokoğullu and Dervişoğlu 2008, pp. 1-7. 420 Karabulut, Önal and Dervişoğlu 2011, pp. 61-62, photo 74. 421 Patacı, Öz and Laflı 2012, p. 170; Patacı 2012, p. 190. 419

422 423

144

See note 84. Salman 2007b, pp. 518-519, fig. 10.

Mosaics from Basilica A

Fig. 175. A detail from the mosaic of the Hunting Amazons in Haleplibahçe.

Fig. 176. A partridge from the mosaic of Orpheus in the Archaeological Museum of Mytilene.

145

Hadrianopolis IV The animals on the mosaic of the south aisle of Basilica A are separated from each other by small square panels. Therefore, it is not possible to suggest they represent the Noah’s Ark story originally from the Old Testament. In spite of this, it is obvious that the lion and gazelle figures in the decorative field are connected to each other. However, as this connection is reminiscent of an animal struggle, it seems unlikely to be a possible paradise scene, Isaiah’s Peaceable Kingdom scene or Noah’s Ark scene. The mosaic floor of the church of the necropolis in Anemurium is a significant example of a Peaceable Kingdom scene.425 In this mosaic, a confronted leopard and capricorn are engraved with an inscription. The heads of the figures are inclined downward as an indicator of the peace between them. Other examples from Cilicia are found in the churches at Corycus, Elaiussa Sebaste (Ayaş) and Karlık.426 In the mosaic floor of Karlık, an elephant and a male figure are depicted with no mention of Isaiah. S. Campbell explains this by positing that the mosaic artist gave priority to the decoration, rather than the text of Isaiah.427 In the Peaceable Kingdom scene on a mosaic from Elaiussa Sebaste there is an interesting detail. The peaceful state of mind of the animals including a leopard, bull, bear and goat depicted in the mosaic is a typical presentation of the Peaceable Kingdom. In spite of this, there is also a dog running after a hunt at the back of the scene. Even though it is obvious that the scenes are separated from each other, in the same decorative field, there is both an animal struggle and the Peaceable Kingdom. This situation parallels the conflicting scenes in the aforementioned mosaics.

beasts in hunting postures around the figure of Orpheus in this mosaic from Edessa. However, this is unexpected in such a theme. When there are different types of animal action or different religious themes together in one scene, what could the real meaning be? Or is it important to have a single explanation from these mosaics, as with the Sulumağara mosaic in Gaziantep? Again, we have a panel with a mixed theme, but this is the richest example: its opposing peacocks probably emphasise the resurrection or Paradise; the bull and the lion which are included to emphasise the Peaceable Kingdom of Isaiah or, less likely, used as apotropaic figures; three scenes of typical animal struggle; and finally bird figures depicted in the spaces between land animals. It is not clear whether these struggles symbolise the fight between good and evil or if they are just added to the panel as religious themes in a single mosaic. This would not have been a problem for artists from southeastern Anatolia and northern Syria in the late Roman-early Byzantine period. The artists who composed and created mosaics in nearby sites and their regions such as Mopsuestia, Antioch, Zeugma, Edessa and Apamea certainly used similar rules in their art in the 5th and 6th cent. AD. It is also understood that, as explained with examples from Anatolia, Edessian mosaic artists left their region (especially in the 6th cent. AD) and carried the style of north Syrian mosaic art into other regions, such as Erzincan-Altıntepe in eastern Anatolia or Hadrianopolis in northwestern central Anatolia. It is nearly impossible to have a clear opinion when we consider all the scenes of the mosaic of the nave of Basilica A one by one. Therefore, it is better to evaluate the animals and vegetal depictions in the square panels and curvilinear squares as parts of a single scene. Our opinion is that the ornament field covering the western half of the mosaic of the nave has an earthly theme and also a metaphorical representation of the struggle between the good and the evil must have been reflected in this scene.

With reference to the mosaic from Karlık, it is understood that the elephant figure can also be involved in a Peaceable Kingdom scene. Even ignoring the small panels separating the figures from each other, it is obvious that the mosaic of the south aisle has a meaning quite far from Peaceable Kingdom scenes. The peacock, which is the only figure likely to partner with the elephant figure on the mosaic of the south aisle, is not among the animals specified in Isaiah (Figs. 93-94). Moreover, the peacock looks at the right side of the scene, that is, the opposite side of the elephant figure. Therefore, it is clear that the theme engraved on the mosaic of the south aisle of the church is not a Peaceable Kingdom scene. The struggle between the lion and gazelle figures breaks the symbolism pertaining to the Noah’s ark or the Peaceable Kingdom (Figs. 95-99). The horse situated in the eastern edge of the decorative field rears up and has tense psychology (Fig. 100). Considering all of these characteristics, a paradise scene does not seem to likely for the mosaic of the south aisle,

If the lion and deer inside two adjacent squares on the mosaic of the south aisle of Basilica A were depicted symbolically, they are likely to reflect the struggle between good and evil. However, when including the other figures like the elephant, peacock and horse in the other square panels in the interpretation, this meaning no longer holds. Therefore this implies that the animals on the mosaic of the south aisle were not used to express a certain meaning, particularly because it is also known that animal figures decorating the mosaics of religious buildings might be used only for decorative purposes.424 The destruction of the main decorative field of the mosaic of the south aisle to a large extent prevents us from drawing any sufficient conclusions about the theme of these scenes here. Out of 15 figures originally in the decorative field, only an elephant, a peacock, a lion, a deer and a horse are preserved.

424

Campbell 1998, pp. 46-47, pl. 207; Russell 1989, p. 1632, fig. 10. Russell 1989, p. 1632; Campbell 1998, p. 49; Maguire 1987, p. 30, fig. 34; Grant 2000, pp. 131 and 133, fig. 34; Budde 1969, fig. 186-189. Another example for the scene of Kingdom of Peace, the floor mosaic of Ayias Yeoryios on Cyprus which is dated to Justinianic period: Michaelides 1988, pp. 95-97, fig. 10. An example associated with the Psalm: 25 is the mosaic of the church of St Varus in Jordan which is dated to a later period, as the second half of the 7th cent. AD: Najjar and Sa’id 1994, p. 552, fig. 1, pls. 32-33. 427 Campbell 1998, p. 49. 425 426

Scheibelreiter 2007, p. 72.

146

Mosaics from Basilica A either. We think that the animal depictions on the mosaic of the south aisle might have been used for decorative purposes or might have been the figures for an earthly scene. However, the peacock on the mosaic of the south aisle is an important symbol in Christianity all by itself and has several meanings. Even though the animals on the mosaic of the south aisle are shown only for decorative purposes, a figure like the peacock has an important place for the Christian symbolism and the use of this figure here is not a coincidence.428 A close equivalent of the peacock on the mosaic of the south aisle in terms of design is found in the mosaic of the Church of Saints Cosmas and Damian in Jordan.

the border design of the mosaic. On the borders, figural panels with swastika-meander design are also frequently documented. There is a border design reminiscent of this on the mosaic of Room 1b of the Domus in Hadrianopolis (Fig. 269).437 There are birds depicted together with vegetal ornaments in the figural panels between the arms of the swastika-meander design surrounding the main mosaic panel in the church of Altıntepe in Erzincan.438 The south aisle mosaic of the church of Küçük Tavşan Adası in Bodrum (Muğla) is a very good parallel example of bird representations in small squares from Asia Minor. Vegetal ornaments were used together with birds in this 6th cent. AD mosaic from Muğla.439

Numerous bird figures are depicted on the mosaics of the north aisle and nave of Basilica A. Each square panel of the north aisle has a single bird figure. This style of design is frequently seen on the mosaics of classical antiquity. Bird figures in any geometric form on the mosaics of both religious or secular buildings is extremely common. The most significant example that resembles the design of the bird figure on the mosaic of the north aisle of Basilica A is the mosaic of the north aisle of Hagios Stephanos Basilica on Kos.429 This mosaic is a much more important comparison than the other examples, as it resembles the mosaic of the north aisle in Basilica A with its geometric decoration and figural ornaments. In both mosaics, a bird was depicted in each of small square panels and no vegetal ornaments were shown with these birds. In the panels found in the narthex mosaic of the basilica, the vegetal ornaments and birds were inlaid together.430

Partridges, pigeons, parrots, pheasants, poultry, water birds and especially peacocks are seen in both pagan and Christian mosaics, with numerous examples. Even though the quality and dates of these mosaics are different, some general characteristics do not change. For example, in a partridge figure, the mosaic artist inlays a line of tesserae from eye level towards the neck. This line divides the neck into two and these fields are filled with tesserae in different colours (Figs. 77, 82, 86, 174a-b and 176). It is possible to see this in the partridge figures on the mosaic of the north aisle of Basilica A.440 In the pheasant figures, the feathers rising over the head were detailed by the artists as two sharp protrusions or like two round ears. Another distinguishing characteristic of a pheasant is its coloured feathers and long tails. A good example of depictions of partridges and pheasants is a Roman mosaic panel of uncertain date in the archaeological museum of Sivas. Rows of partridges, ducks, pheasants and dotted chicken are ranged from top to bottom of the mosaic panel with a white background (Fig. 177). Rosettes and ivies are also placed between each bird on the mosaic that was uncovered in the village of Tepecik in Gürün, south of the province of Sivas. As the peacock belongs to the pheasant family, there are some similarities between the two birds; it is even seen that the pheasants and peacocks are confused with each other in some cases.441 Water bird figures were designed in large sizes. A waterbird was generally depicted with white feathers, a long beak, neck and legs; however, in the floor mosaic exhibited in the archaeological museum of Hatay and referred to as the ‘Mosaic of Birds’ (acc. no. 959)442, there is a heron, the feathers of which are made from green tesserae and detailed quite well. There are two white waterbirds in the mosaic of the nave of Basilica A. Out of the figures, the one in f1, extends its head backwards and is shown in a strange position in this way (Fig. 116). The reason for this position could be the lack of a sufficient space

The mosaic of the Hagios Ioannis Baptistery on Kos resembles the mosaic of the north aisle of Basilica A in its geometric design and bird figures.431 The final example for bird figure-scenes from the island is the baptistery mosaic of the Hagios Paulos Basilica in Zipari (6th cent. AD).432 The floor mosaic belonging to the Eressos Basilica on Lesbos (5th cent. AD) has several panel examples with bird figures.433 The Gamma Basilica of Nea Anchialos on the eastern coast of Greece has a floor mosaic with similar small square panels with birds to those of the Basilica of Eressos (5th cent. AD).434 It is also possible to find related designs in the Near East: Bird figures are depicted in square panels in the Upper Chapel of the Priest John in Khirbat al-Mukhayyat in Jordan (AD 565)435 and in the church of Saints Cosmas and Damianus (AD 533).436 Small square panels in the Upper Chapel of Priest John were placed between the arms of the swastika-meander belonging to A more detailed evaluation about peacocks was made under the title of the Early Christian Basilica B. 429 Parrish 2001, pp. 342-343, fig. 20. 430 Campbell 1979, p. 290, pl. 44, fig. 14; Parrish 2001, pp. 341-342, fig. 18. 431 Parrish 2001, pp. 344-345, figs. 22-23. 432 Parrish 2001, pp. 339-340, figs. 9-10. 433 Kitzinger 1946, p. 137, fig. 209. 434 Kitzinger 1946, pp. 137-138, fig. 208. 435 Piccirillo 1993a, pp. 174-175, figs. 231-232. 436 Maguire 1987, pp. 34-36, figs. 38, 40-41; Piccirillo 1993a, pp. 288289, fig. 539; Levi 1947, p. 595. 428

Laflı and Zäh 2009, pl. 8, fig. 7. Can 2009, p. 10, figs. 16-17. 439 Andaloro and Pogliani 2011, pp. 20-21, fig. 15. 440 For another patridge example, see: Fradkin 1999, p. 235. 441 In the publication named as ‘Antioch mosaics’, the phaesant figure on the border piece of a mosaic exhibited at St. Louis Art Museum was defined as a female peacock: Cimok 2000, p. 310. 442 The mosaic was specified with the acc. no. 869 on the website of the museum; however, the acc. no. written on the information panel of the museum is 959. 437 438

147

Hadrianopolis IV

Fig. 177. Gürün-Tepecik mosaic in the Archaeological Museum of Sivas.

Hadrianopolis (Fig. 178).445 Likewise, another example is from the mosaics of the church of Saints Kosmas and Damianus in Jordan.446

in the scene where the figure is situated; however, bird examples depicted with their heads turned upwards or backwards in the mosaics of the classical antiquity are known elsewhere, and this technique is not unusual for a mosaic artist. A waterbird depicted in the Noah’s Ark scene at the basilica of Mopsuestia is an example of birds in this position.443 In the decorative field in the eastern half of the mosaic of the nave, there are two confronted bird species with long necks and legs like herons (Fig. 124). However, the heads of these birds were not preserved. Therefore, it is not possible to distinguish their species certainly. These figures are reminiscent of the figure inside the sixth square on the mosaic of the north aisle (Fig. 81) and demonstrating the characteristics of poultry.

The confronted bird figures shown on both sides of a tree remind one of a scene of paradise. Kitzinger states that the Tree of Life symbol seen in the animal depictions was quite popular in early Christian art.447 Ovadiah, however, emphasizes that the Garden of Eden is represented with certain types of trees and flowers such as the lily, the Tree of Knowledge or the Tree of Life.448 The bird may symbolise the soul of the just and of the deceased in heaven, as in the vision of St Antony.449 H. Maguire states that fish and birds were frequently used as metaphors for the Christian soul in early Christian art and literature and the birds were the symbols of the souls in heaven.450 The white pigeon which was a very common figure was generally used to symbolise the Holy Ghost.451 The relation between the Holy Ghost and pigeon appears in the baptism scenes of Jesus and this is mentioned in Luke 3:21-22.452

The birds belonging to Panel I of the mosaic of the nave are shown with tree and flower ornaments. In some tree trunks, tesserae in different colours were arranged in alternate horizontal lines. The tree trunks depicted in this technique are also seen in the mosaics of the Great Palace of Constantinople. The tree trunks of the Palace mosaic were generally formed with a chessboard pattern444; however, a cypress on Section E of this mosaic (acc. no. 22d) and a tree belonging to the bear-eating-a-lamb scene in the same section (acc. no. 22f) are reminiscent of the examples of

443 444

Jobst, Erdal and Gurtner 2010, pp. 52-53, fig. 43. Piccirillo 1993a, pp. 276-277, figs. 507-509. 447 Kitzinger 1946, p. 136. 448 Ovadiah 1991, p. 472. 449 Ovadiah 1991, p. 477. 450 Maguire 1987, pp. 29-30. 451 Maguire 1987, p. 6. 452 Luke 3:21-22: ‘21  When all the people were being baptized, Jesus was baptized too. And as he was praying, heaven was opened 22 and the Holy Spirit descended on him in bodily form like a dove. And a voice 445 446

Budde 1969, fig. 42. Cimok 1997, p. 14.

148

Mosaics from Basilica A

Fig. 178. Depiction of a cypress from the section E of the Great Palace mosaic in Constantinople.

On the mosaic of the nave, a pigeon located in the northeastern corner of Panel I is notable for the red ribbon on its neck. When D. Levi mentions the bird figures with ribbons in concert with the mosaic of the Lion with Ribbon, he states that the ribbon attached to the neck is a symbol of the Persian dynasty.453 Birds with ribbons symbolising meanings such as reputation and honor continued to be used in the Christian mosaics. This kind of depiction reflects the influence of eastern art. We must always remember, however, that such animal and bird images, represented in separate panels, ultimately delive from earlier hunting scenes, venationes and representations such as that of Orpheus and the beasts. By the time of these mosaics in Hadrianopolis, isolated figures had become standard and inoffensive vignettes that were inserted randomly in

mosaic decorations, without always hiding a message of good/evil calm/aggressive etc. Basilica A is preserved in parts and the mosaic inscriptions, very little of which are preserved, do not give any information about the themes of the scenes. The decorative character of the animal figures, depicted both on the mosaics of the south and north aisles, seems more important than their symbolic meanings. The major reason why the mosaics of Basilica A cannot be evaluated decisively is because of the animal depictions: animal figures in four panels in the western half of the nave show a different psychological expression from that of the animals depicted in square panels on the mosaic of the south aisle.

came from heaven: ‘You are my Son, whom I love; with you I am well pleased.’ Some of the baptism scenes depicted in the mosaics were mentioned under the title of Basilica B. 453 Levi 1947, pp. 313 and 358. Also see: Cimok 2000, p. 241.

149

V Mosaics from Basilica B Basilica B

According to the mosaic evidence, there were a narthex and an exonarthex at the west side of the basilica when the mosaics were originally laid. However, it is also clear that the interior narthex was narrowed along its sides, and that the north and south aisles were extended to the west when the second phase of the mosaic (probably at the beginning of the 7th cent. AD) was laid in the floor of the basilica. This in situ mosaic in the southern edge of the south aisle attests to this architectural change. It can therefore be found 35 cm above the mosaic of the first phase. (Figs. 183, 197, 200 and 242-243). The Basilica probably had a central dome in the second phase. We can suggest that Basilica B was built in the first half of the 6th cent. AD and abandoned at the beginning of the 8th cent. AD as a result of an evaluation of the finds.

Basilica B (Fig. 179) is located 3 km west of Eskipazar, where a salvage excavation was carried out in 2003 by the museum of Ereğli in Zonguldak, and where some later (mid-8th cent. AD?) simple burials were found454 (Figs. 180-181). It extends along an east-west axis and measures 14.83 m x 23.49 m (Figs. 182-183). The main entrance of the building is located at the narthex at the west edge, and there are also entrances at the eastern edge of the north and south aisles besides the short northern edge of the narthex (Fig. 182-184). Some of the early Byzantine religious buildings which have similar plans and dimensions to the basilicas in Hadrianopolis have been documented in various parts of Anatolia. One of these buildings is the Basilica of Derecik, which was uncovered at Derecik in the district of Büyükorhan in Bursa, northwestern Turkey in a rescue excavation.455 The Derecik Basilica, dating to the end of the 5th cent. AD, measures 12.5 m x 20.7 m.456 Along with two main entrances in the narthex, there is another entrance at the eastern edge of the south aisle, as in Basilica B. It is thought that this entrance was used by the members of the basilica.457 The reverends of Basilica B also probably used the doors which are at the east edges of the naves of the building.

A Christian grave inscription inside a tabula ansata was discovered in the narthex of Basilica B during the salvage excavations in 2003 (Fig. 185).459 The inscription, dating to the first half of the 6th cent. AD, measures 23 cm x 24 cm and the height of the letters is 2 cm. Its text reads: 5

Basilica B witnessed a variety of structural changes during its period of usage. It is understood from the excavations that different architectural practices were applied to the Basilica in different periods. However, there is not enough data to make a detailed evaluation of those architectural periods. The architectural finds in Basilica B are much less than those of Basilica A, which was built in the same period. There must have been two rows of stylobates between the aisles of the building, as in Basilica A, but neither a stylobate nor its columns could be uncovered in situ during the excavations. Nevertheless, a small number of columns, capitals and bases dating to the first half of the 6th cent. AD are among the preserved architectural finds of the basilica. The floor mosaics of Basilica B, which belong to two different periods, give the most important clues related to the architectural phases of the building.458

[+] ἐνθαδε κατάκητε ὁ ἐ̣ν̣ ἁγήοις : : : : : τὴν μν̣ή̣μ̣ην Ἰορδάνη[ς] ὁ μῆς (?)

Translation: [+] Here lies the one among saints : : : : : Iordanes, worthy of memory (?). Ὁ ἐν ἁγήοις = ὁ ἐν ἁγίοις, ‘the one among saints’ is a funerary formula equivalent to ‘of holy memory’, or ‘resting in peace’. Mosaic Floor of the North Aisle The geometric patterned floor mosaic, consisting of three main pieces at the east and west edges of the nave and four smaller fragments, is significantly damaged (Figs. 182183 and 186-187). This floor mosaic, which originally measured 13.80 m x 2.20 m, was made by using opus tessellatum technique. The size of the marble, serpentinite and travertine tesserae used in the mosaic varies between

This excavation was carried out between September 29, 2003 and November 6, 2003 by Mr Yunus Reyhan Taşçıoğlu after some illegal digging in the church in 2002 and 2003. During this excavation numerous mosaic fragments of the second phase found in Basilica B were collected and stored in the office of the Local Directorate of Culture and Tourism in Karabük. Anthropological finds as well as some small finds (including bronze and glass jewellery, an inscribed glass weight with a monogram and some other small finds) were brought to the museum of Ereğli in Zonguldak and remain unpublished. 455 Okçu 2007, pp. 37-44. 456 Okçu 2007, p. 39, plan 1. 457 Okçu 2007, p. 39. 458 Patacı and Altun 2014, pp. 183-208. 454

Laflı and Christof 2012, p. 48, fig. 18; Christof and Laflı 2013, p. 163, no. 38, fig. 32; Patacı, Öz and Laflı 2011, p. 167; SEG 62, no. 1079; and Nowakowski 2018, no. HON/04/01.

459

151

Hadrianopolis IV

Fig. 179. Basilica B in Hadrianopolis. View from the north.

Fig. 180. A view from the excavation of Basilica B in 2003.

152

Mosaics from Basilica B

Fig. 181. A grave uncovered during the excavations of Basilica B in 2003.

1.0 x 1.0 cm and 1.5 x 1.5 cm; 56-65 tesserae were used per dm2 in the mosaic. There were seven colours and tones of these colours used: black, white, orange, red, pink, green and blue.

and the north chapel mosaic of the church of St Stephen in Umm ar-Rasas, Jordan (8th cent. AD).466 There is a polychrome orthogonal pattern of circles in asymetrically shaded bands interlooped tangentially in the panel of the mosaic of the north aisle (Figs. 187 and 190192; Pl. 15).467 There are rosettes at each of the centres of the circles (Fig. 191; Pls. 15 and 23j). In the panel, a smaller circle decorates each space between the four circles. The circle designs used in the panel are a kind of ornament pattern which was very popular, especially in the eastern Mediterranean. A. Ovadiah also gives examples from Pompeii and Spoleto of this pattern.468 This geometrical ornament begins to be seen in the designs of floor mosaics between the first cent. BC. and the early 1st cent AD, and there is no early example that can be compared with this design in other kinds of art such as vase painting.469 The rosettes decorating the centres of the circles are seen in many Mediterranean mosaics which have a similar design to the mosaic of the north aisle of Basilica B. However, the clear difference between the panel design of the mosaic of the north aisle from other designs of the Roman and early Byzantine mosaics is its additional and smaller circle (Pl. 15).

There is a white band surrounding the mosaic of the north aisle. A second band consists of a row of tangent semicircles formed of two tangent spindles forming alternately inverted thorns (Figs. 187 and 188; Pl. 4c).460 Similar examples are seen at different sites such as Tivoli (Italy), Argos (Greece), Split (Croatia) and Saint-Rustice (France).461 Furthermore, the decoration of the band varies at two points. There is a row of tangent circles formed of four spindles forming poised concave squares and pairs of opposed thorns at the western and southeastern edges of the mosaic (Figs. 187-189; Pl. 4d). Similar examples of this design are the mosaic of East Odeon area in Aphrodisias (2nd cent. AD)462; the mosaic of Room 8 of the church of Kaoussie in Antioch-on-the-Orontes (5th-6th cent. AD)463; the mosaic of the church at Zipari and another mosaic of the apsidal room in the South Basilica at Zipari on Kos, Greece (5th-6th cent. AD)464; the chapel mosaic of the monastery at ‘Ein Ha-Shiv’ah in Israel (6th cent. AD)465;

For similar design examples see: Balmelle et al. 1985, pl. 45f-i. Balmelle et al. 1985, pp. 92-93, pl. 45f-i. 462 Campbell 1991, p. 10, pls. 29-30. 463 Campbell 1988, p. 46, pl. 139. 464 Parrish 2001, pp. 340-341, figs. 13-15. 465 Ovadiah and Ovadiah 1987, p. 57, pl. XLV. 460

466 Piccirillo 1991, pp. 327-364, figs. 27, 37 and 39. Piccirillo 1993a, pp.238-239, fig. 383. 467 For similar design examples see: Balmelle et al. 1985, pl. 235a, d. 468 Ovadiah 1980, p. 154. 469 Ovadiah 1980, p. 154.

461

153

Hadrianopolis IV

Fig. 182. Orthophoto of Basilica B.

154

Mosaics from Basilica B

Fig. 183. Plan of Basilica B.

155

Hadrianopolis IV

Fig. 184. Basilica B. View from the west.

Fig. 185. A grave inscription in a marble tabula ansata.

156

Mosaics from Basilica B

Fig. 186. Aerial photo of Basilica B.

Similar examples of the panel design of the mosaic of the north aisle are observed on two floor mosaics in Antioch-on-the-Orontes. The mosaic of Room B, which was discovered during an excavation of a house and dated to the 5th cent. AD, has an orthogonal pattern of circles interlooped tangentially in asymetrically shaded bands. 470 The circles are decorated with rosettes. The second floor mosaic, dating to the 6th cent. AD, was uncovered in the House of the Phoenix.471 Circles of the mosaic are decorated with flowers besides the rosettes, and small serrated squares were placed in the spaces which are in the form of irregular concave octagons between the four circles (Figs. 193-194). Another example is the floor mosaic of the Priest’s House from Aphrodisias, dating to the 5th cent. AD.472 A panel design decorated with circles forming of black tesserae in the centres of the four interlooped circles was uncovered in the north aisle of the East Basilica in Xanthus.473 Another parallel with this panel design can be seen in the mosaic of the basilica on the acropolis of

Iasus, dated to the early Byzantine period.474 A simpler design comparable to the mosaic of Basilica B can be seen on a floor mosaic dating to the 3rd-5th cent. AD from Germanicia near Kahramanmaraş, dating to the 3rd-5th cent. AD.475 Polychrome circles interlooped tangentially in shaded bands were used in both panel and border designs in the floor mosaics of the synagogue of Sardis, which dates to the end of the 4th cent. AD (Fig. 195).476

470

Campbell 1988, p. 34. pl. 96; Levi 1947, p. 320, pl. 130d. Campbell 1998, p. 25, pl. 120; Cimok 2000, p. 290; Levi 1947, pp. 351-352, pl. 83b, 135. The acc. no. of the mosaic exhibited in the archeological museum of Hatay is 934-936. 472 Campbell 1991, pp. 22-26, pl. 84; Campbell 1998, p. 25, pl. 121. 473 Raynaud 2009, pp. 71-73, figs. 69-70.

474

471

475

A similar example of the panel design of the mosaic of the north aisle outside of Asia Minor is the narthex mosaic of Basilica A in Nikopolis, Greece (6th cent. AD).477 There are also bird representations as well as geometrical elements inside the circles of this mosaic. Some important and similar examples of the design were also discovered in religious buildings on Cyprus. The mosaics of the nave and baptistery of Basilica A in Peyia which is dated to the 6th cent. AD are two of them.478 The centres of the circles are decorated with various vase forms and geometric ornaments in the first

Berti 1986, p. 160, fig. 9. Eker and Ersoy 2017, pp. 96, 160-161 and 246-248. 476 Foss 1976, pp. 41-42. 477 Balmelle 1990, p. 65, fig. 67. 478 Michaelides 1988, p. 140, figs. 63-64; Michaelides 1989, pp. 195196.

157

Hadrianopolis IV

Fig. 187. Basilica B. Illustration of the floor mosaic of the north aisle.

158

Mosaics from Basilica B

Fig. 188. Basilica B. Border design of the floor mosaic of the north aisle.

Fig. 189. Basilica B. An in situ mosaic piece at the southeast corner of the north aisle.

159

Hadrianopolis IV

Fig. 190. Basilica B. An in situ mosaic piece at the west edge of the north aisle.

Fig. 191. Basilica B. A detail from the mosaic panel of the north aisle.

160

Mosaics from Basilica B

Fig. 192. Basilica B. Orthophoto of the in situ mosaic piece at the east edge of the north aisle.

161

Hadrianopolis IV

Fig. 193. A detail from the mosaic uncovered in the House of the Phoenix in Antioch-on-the-Orontes.

Fig. 194. A detail from the mosaic uncovered in the House of the Phoenix in Antioch-on-the-Orontes.

162

Mosaics from Basilica B

Fig. 195. Sardis. A detail from the border design of the mosaic floor of the synagogue.

phase mosaic (4th cent. AD) of Chrysopolitissa Basilica.479 There is also a panel consisting of poised squares, curvilinear polygons and circles interlooped tangentially in shaded bands in the second phase mosaic of the basilica, which dates to the 6th cent. AD.480 Each circle is decorated with a rosette in this design. Other examples from Cyprus are the third phase mosaic (5th-6th cent. AD) of a church which was uncovered under the basilica in Soloi and the mosaic of the basilica of Kourion (5th-6th cent. AD).481

unfortunately almost the whole inscription is lost (Figs. 192 and 196). The text reads: 5

Similar versions of the design on the mosaic of the north aisle of Basilica B are also seen on mosaics found in Israel and Jordan. The circles interlooped tangentially are decorated with birds in the chapel mosaic (AD 567) of Lady Mary Monastery of Beth Shean in Israel.482 There are two different variations of the design in the middle and east aisle mosaics (5th-6th cent. AD) of the church of Bishop Leontios in Jordan.483

‘Υπ[ὲρ εὐχῆς ΠΕ[ AM[ K[ M[ Γ[ Y[

Translation: As a vow… Mosaic Floor of the South Aisle If preserved completely, the mosaic of the south aisle should have had an intact dimension of 13.50 m x 2.40 m (Figs. 182-183 and 197-198). Opus tessellatum technique was used in this mosaic. The size of the tesserae differs between 1.0 x 1.0 cm and 1.5 x 1.5 cm; 64 -79 tesserae were used per dm2. The colours of the tesserae vary between black, white, red, orange, yellow, pink, gray, and other tones of these colours.

At the east edge of the mosaic of the north aisle in Basilica B, there is an inscription in a tabula ansata484;

Michaelides 1988, p. 99, fig. 13; Michaelides 1989, pp. 193-194. Michaelides 1988, p. 142, fig. 23; Michaelides 1989, pp. 195-197. 481 Michaelides 1988, p. 140, figs. 61-62. 482 Ovadiah and Ovadiah 1987, pp. 26-30, pl. 23. 483 Nassar and Turshan 2011, pp. 54-56 and 58-59, figs. 17, 23. 484 Laflı and Christof 2012, p. 43, fig. 11, Christof and Laflı 2013, p. 159, no. 31, fig. 25; and SEG 62, no. 1079. 479 480

At the west and north edges an orange band surrounds the mosaic. The second band of the mosaic is formed of an 163

Hadrianopolis IV

Fig. 196. Basilica B. A mosaic inscription in a tabula ansata in the north aisle.

ivy scroll (Figs. 197-199; and Pl. 5a) 485 An undulating line separates the band in two and ivies are alternately inverted in each undulation. Ivy scrolls were used in various types on floor mosaics in Roman and Byzantine periods. The ivy scroll on the mosaic of the south aisle is a typical design with well-known form and features; however, the colour scheme of the design separates it from other examples. In this mosaic, ivies alternately inverted in each undulation are, unusually, two different colours, orange and white. Ivy scrolls are seen in many religious or civic buildings from many different regions. Some of these are the late Roman villa in Paphlagonian Pompeiopolis (4th-5th cent. AD)486; the church of Laodicea on the Lycus in Denizli (4th cent. AD)487; Church E in Cnidus (5th cent. AD)488; the basilica on the acropolis of Iasus (5th-6th cent. AD)489; the late Roman villa in Halicarnassus (5th cent. AD)490; the basilica of

the Torba monastery in Bodrum (5th-6th cent. AD)491; the residence on the Lycian acropolis (4th cent. AD)492 and the East Basilica in Xanthus (5th-6th cent. AD)493; the basilica at Derecik in Bursa (the late 5th cent. AD)494; the basilica of Perinthus (Heraclea) in Tekirdağ (5th-6th cent. AD)495; a building with an unknown function in Antiochon-the-Orontes (5th-6th cent. AD)496; the basilica at Stobi in Macedonia (4th-5th cent. AD)497; Basilica A (the church of St Demetrius) in Nikopolis, Greece (AD 525-575)498; the basilica at Zipari in Kos, Greece (6th cent. AD)499; the monastery of St Spyridon at Tremithus (the late 4th cent. AD)500; the baptistery of the basilica of Kourion on Cyprus (5th-6th cent. AD)501; the church 491 Özet 2002, p. 48, fig. 15; Özet 2009, pp. 75-76 and 78-79, figs. 14-15, 17-19, 21-23 and 25. 492 Manière-Lévêque 2012, p. 30-31, figs. 27-29. 493 Raynaud 2009, pp. 37, 45 and 115, figs. 20, 31 and 129. 494 Okçu 2007, pp. 43 and 170, fig. 4. 495 Yeşil-Erdek 2014, fig. 2. 496 Campbell 1988, pp. 32-33, pl. 92. 497 Kolarik 1987, pp. 298-301, figs. 1-3, 6. 498 Kitzinger 1951, fig. 32. 499 Parrish 2001, pp. 340-341, fig. 13. 500 Megaw 1974, p. 67, fig. 23; Michaelides 1988, p. 103, fig. 15. 501 Michaelides 1988, p. 96, fig. 6.

Balmelle et al. 1985, pl. 64d. Musso et al. 2011, pp. 106 and 108, pl. 8, 10/3. 487 Şimşek 2015, p. 67, figs. 64 and 102. 488 Campbell 1979, p. 290, pl. 44, fig. 18; Parrish 2001, pp. 346-347, fig. 30. 489 Berti 1986, p. 157, fig. 5. 490 Parrish 2001, pp. 347-348, fig. 33. 485 486

164

Mosaics from Basilica B

Fig. 197. Basilica B. Aerial photo of the south aisle.

in Ashkelon-Barne’a (the late 5th cent. AD)502; and the church in Sede Nahum in Israel.503 These examples show that the design was in use in many variations, especially between the 5th and 6th cent. AD.

panels related to the design were uncovered in the House of the Porticoes in Antioch-on-the-Orontes. The centres of the circles are decorated with crosses or small squares in these mosaics, which date to the 3rd cent. AD.506 One of these examples is the Mosaic of River Gods (3rd cent. AD, acc. no. 997-1002), now on display in the archaeological museum of Hatay. Two rectangular panels consisting of an orthogonal pattern of intersecting circles were placed between the square panels showing personifications of river gods (Figs. 201-202). Another is the Baptistery mosaic of the church of Kaoussie, which is also known as the martyrion of St Babylas. Mosaic fragments belonging to the baptistery were dated to AD 420-429 by D. Levi;507 however, S. Campbell finds parallels between them and the

The main ornament field on the mosaic of the south aisle is decorated with an orthogonal pattern of intersecting circles with spindles (Figs. 182-183 and 197-200; Pl. 16).504 There are three square panels at different points of the area formed by this design. Similar types of these intersecting circles were very popular in of late antique-early Byzantine mosaics. Even though some earlier examples are known, A. Ovadiah indicates that this design was used for the first time by these mosaic artists.505 Some mosaic

Ovadiah and Ovadiah 1987, pp. 13-14, pl. 3. Ovadiah and Ovadiah 1987, pp. 125-126, pl. 138. 504 For some design examples see: Balmelle et al. 1985, pl. 237-239. 505 Ovadiah 1980, p. 157. 502 503

506 507

165

Levi 1947, pp. 105-116, pl. 99a, c, d. Levi 1947, p. 285, pl. 139a.

Fig. 198. Basilica B. Illustration of the floor mosaic of the south aisle.

Hadrianopolis IV

166

Mosaics from Basilica B

Fig. 199. Basilica B. A detail from the mosaic floor of the south aisle.

motifs of the east aisle mosaic dating to AD 387.508 Other examples of the design around Anatolia can be seen in the mosaics of the synagogue of Sardis (4th cent. AD)509 (Fig. 203); another mosaic of a house from Sardis510; the mosaic of the Agora Basilica of Iasus (6th cent. AD)511; the apsidal mosaic and the mosaic of the north aisle of the monastery of Torba near Bodrum (5th-6th cent. AD)512; the mosaic of Ahmet Çavuş, Milas, Muğla (5th-6th cent. AD)513; the atrium mosaic of the East Basilica in Xanthus (5th-6th cent. AD)514; the Haraba (Aktepe) mosaic in Besni (4th-5th cent. AD);515 and a mosaic from a house in Paphlagonian Pompeiopolis (4th-5th cent. AD)516. Some examples of the same design outside of Asia Minor are the mosaic of the Basilica of Ayia Trias on Cyprus (5th cent. AD)517; the mosaics of the church of Beth Sahur (6th cent. AD)518 and

the synagogue of ‘Ein Gedi (4th-5th cent. AD)519 in Israel; and the mosaics of the Church of Apostles (AD 578)520, St Peter (AD 630)521 and St Menas (AD 635)522 in Jordan. An earlier floor mosaic from Mytilene on Lesbos, namely the one from the House of Menander, today in the new archaeological museum of Mytilene, has a common point in terms of its design with the mosaic panel of Basilica B in Hadrianopolis: in this mosaic, dated to the 3rd cent. AD, there are square panels decorated with figural scenes at some points of the main ornament field consisting of an orthogonal pattern of intersecting circles (Fig. 204). The mosaic floor of the south aisle of Basilica B is not limited to the design of the orthogonal patterns of interlooped circles. There are also an inscription523 in a square panel at the eastern edge of the mosaic (Figs. 197-198 and 205) and another panel with a bull figure in the middle of the ornamented area

Campbell, p. 46, pl. 136. For this church and its mosaics also see: Lassus 1938, pp. 5-45. 509 Foss 1976, pp. 41-42. 510 Schelbelreiter 2007, pp. 70 and 190, fig. 18. 511 Berti 1986, pp. 155-156, figs. 1-2, pl. XX. 512 Özet 2002, p. 40, fig. 14; Özet 2009, pp. 75-76, figs. 12-13, and 16-17. 513 Kızıl and Özcan 2009, pp. 21, 23-25, fig. 10, 13 and 16. 514 Raynaud 2009, pp. 40-41, ill. 25. 515 Salman 2007a, p. 22, fig. 9; Salman 2008, p. 24, fig. 9; Zeyrek 2008, p. 163, fig. 3. 516 Musso et al. 2011, pp. 103, 106 and 108-109, pl. 5, 8 and 10-11. 517 Michaelides 1988, pp. 99 and 106, fig. 16. 518 Ovadiah and Ovadiah 1987, pp. 25-26, pl. 20.2. 508

Ovadiah and Ovadiah 1987, pp. 54-56, pl. 44. Piccirillo 1993a, pp. 96-107, figs. 91-95. 521 Piccirillo 1993a, pp. 312-313, figs. 630-633. 522 Piccirillo 1993a, p. 313. figs. 634-635. 523 Laflı 2007, p. 63 fig. 5; Laflı and Christof 2012, pp. 41-43, fig. 10a; Christof and Laflı 2013, p. 157, no. 30, fig. 24; Patacı, Öz and Laflı 2011, p. 168; and SEG 58, no. 1474. Prosopographically, the name Himerios on this inscription is well documented in the 6th cent. AD, and it seems very likely that Himerios and Valentina may have been a married couple. In Byzantine texts the title of ‘scholarius’ was used for the palace warden in Constantinople who were residing in and around Constantinople: Kazhdan 1991, pp. 1851-1852 (‘Scholae Palatinae’). 519 520

167

Hadrianopolis IV

Fig. 200. Basilica B. A view from the south aisle.

(Figs. 197-198 and 206). A third square panel decorated with a grape basket is located at the western edge of the mosaic (Figs. 198 and 207). The inscription at the east edge of the mosaic floor consists of nine lines. Its text reads: 5

A lead plate in the archaeological museum of Izmir has a similar inscription (Fig. 208), which is presented as an appendix at the end of this book (on p. 243). The bull-panel in the middle of the main ornament zone measures 82 cm x 82 cm. At the centre of the panel, there is a bull figure drinking from a river or a water source depicted on an orange ground. The bull has a height of 53 cm and depicted in a calm mood. It is depicted in profile and its body faces to the left of to the scene. Although it is not an elaborate piece of art, it is depicted in a skilful manner with the colours of the water’s reflection changing from dark to light tones. The last square panel of the ornament area is situated west edge of the mosaic. This panel should have the dimensions of 82 x 82 cm, yet the left part of it is not preserved. There is a polychrome fruit basket 50 cm high depicted at the centre of the panel’s white background. Against the red inner side of the basket,

‘Υπὲρ εὐχῆς ‘Iμερίου το(ῦ) καθοσιωμένου σχολαρίου καὶ Oὐαλεντίνας τῆς κοσμιωτ(άτης) καὶ σεμνοπρεπεστάτης

Translation: As a vow of Himerios, a devoted member of the imperial guard (scholarii), and of Valentina, the most decent and most solemn-looking. 168

Mosaics from Basilica B

Fig. 201. A detail from the mosaic of the River Gods in Antioch-on-the-Orontes.

Fig. 202. A detail from the mosaic of the River Gods in Antioch-on-the-Orontes.

169

Hadrianopolis IV

Fig. 203. Sardis. A detail from the floor mosaics of the synagogue.

Fig. 204. A detail from the Mosaic of the House of Menander in Mytilene.

170

Mosaics from Basilica B

Fig. 205. Basilica B. An inscription in the mosaic panel of the south aisle.

in frontal perspective (Figs. 209-210 and 216; Pl. 3c).524 Right-angled parallelepipeds525, small cross patterns and circles are inlaid in each crinkle. The crinkled ribbon ornaments show fine craftsmanship. Designs of this type require a specific craftsmanship as they need to be rendered with elements of exactly the same size and angle, and supported with additive patterns. The most similar example to this three-dimensional crinkled ribbon can be found on a floor mosaic in the House of the Birds in a Rinceau in Antioch-on-the-Orontes, dating between AD 526-540 (Fig. 211).526 In this mosaic parallelepipeds are also seen in each crinkle. But the difference of the mosaic is the design of the ribbon, which is treated not from a frontal but lateral perspective, and this is a more compelling variation. Another crinkled ribbon in lateral perspective was used in the mosaic of Romulus and Remus (A.D. 510) at Ma’arrat al-Numan in Syria. Other similar examples can be observed in a mosaic in a burial chamber at Beth Shean in Israel (6th cent. AD)527 and in the mosaic of the Theotokos Chapel (7th cent. AD)528

rounded fruits (grapes?) are shown. There are a vine branch and its leaves and a bunch of grapes on the right side of the basket. Unfortunately, the left half of the panel is totally destroyed. Mosaic Floor of the Nave The mosaic, measuring 10.90 m x 6.80 m, is preserved almost in a single piece except for a small piece at the nave’s southeast border design, yet, an important part at the middle and south sections is heavily damaged (Figs. 182-183, 186 and 209). Marble, serpentinite and travertine tesserae were laid using both the opus tessellatum technique; their dimensions vary between 0.4 x 0.4 cm and 1.5 x 1.5 cm. In the mosaic, 43 to 66 tesserae were used per dm2 for geometric designs; in areas with figural ornament this quantity increases to 143 to 160 per dm2. Black, red, pink, blue, green, orange, yellow and tones of these colours are used in the mosaic. The first exterior band which surrounds the mosaic of the nave is a monochrome band filled with white tesserae. However, this band of the mosaic is highly damaged. After the monochrome band, there is a polychrome threedimensional crinkled ribbon, shown on a black ground

For a similar example see: Balmelle et al. 1985, pl. 66b. Balmelle et al. 2002, p. 39, solide (parallélépipède rectangle). 526 Cimok 2000, pp. 304-311; Levi 1947, p. 366, pls. 91-92b and 181d. 527 Ovadiah and Ovadiah 1987, pp. 30-31, pl. XXV-2. 528 Piccirillo 1993a, p. 151, figs. 198-199. 524 525

171

Hadrianopolis IV

Fig. 206. Basilica B. A bull-panel on the mosaic floor of the south aisle.

Fig. 207. Basilica B. A mosaic panel decorated with a grape basket at the west edge of the south aisle.

172

Mosaics from Basilica B

Fig. 208. A lead plate with an inscription in the archaeological museum of Izmir.

in Jordan. In both mosaics the ribbons were laid from a frontal perspective like the one in Hadrianopolis.

of the Phoenix dated to the early 6th cent. AD.532 The design of tangent octagons surrounds a panel consists of an orthogonal pattern of circles in assymetrically shaded bands interlooped tangentially (Fig. 194) in the mosaic of the House of the Phoenix. Three of the octagons are decorated with Solomon knots and a knot of ten loops (Fig. 214). Other counterparts of the design in Anatolia can be seen in the 4th cent. AD floor mosaic of the residence on the Lycian acropolis of Xanthus533; the 4th cent. mosaic of the synagogue of Sardis534; a mosaic dated to the 4th-5th cent. AD in Besni in modern Adıyaman, in Commagene535; and the 6th cent. AD mosaic of Hazinedere from Edessa. (Fig. 239). The last one is the closest design to the tangent octagons of Basilica B, both in date and its design of chevrons around the central rectangles in the ornament. Two similar examples of the design outside of Turkey can be observed in Syria. These are the mosaic of the south aisle of the Martyrium Basilica in Dibsi Faraj (5th cent. AD)536 and the mosaic of the church of Holy Martyrs at Tayibat al-Imam (AD 447).537 The pattern was preferred as a panel design on the mosaic of the north aisle of the church of St Paul in Jordan (second half of the 6th cent. AD)538 The last panel example decorated with this design

There are two more bands extending along the west side of the mosaic. The first one is an irregularly tessellated polychrome band, but its northern half is filled with white tesserae (Fig. 209 and 212). The other band at the western edge of the mosaic is formed of a row of polychrome tangent octagons (Fig. 212; and Pl. 5c). At the centre of the octagons, a polychrome rectangle is present (Fig. 213). Small chevrons are laid in each of the four corners of the rectangle. There are four lozenge pieces around this central rectangle.529 Octagonal patterns are used fashionably in different types for border and panel designs, such as octagons made up of small hexagons which were placed around a central square, in mosaics of classical antiquity. An example of this is found in the border design of the mosaic of Baths F in Antioch-on-the-Orontes, which is dated to AD 526-540. In this design, there are lozenges around each of the central squares; in other words lozenges were placed at the centre of each hexagon which formed the octagons.530 Other similar designs from Antioch are the border design of the Green Carpet mosaic, uncovered in a villa in Daphne, which is dated to the early 5th cent. AD531 and the mosaic of the House

532 Levi 1947, pp. 351-355, pls. 83b, 135a, c; Campbell 1998, p. 25, pl. 120. 533 Manière-Lévêque 2012, pp. 30-31, figs. 27-28 and 30. 534 Foss 1976, pp. 41-42 and 192, fig. 16. 535 Zeyrek 2008, p. 163, fig. 3; Salman 2007a, p. 22, fig. 29; Salman 2008, p. 24, fig. 9. 536 Harper and Wilkinson 1975, pp. 319-338, fig. 13a, b. 537 Zaqzuq and Piccirillo 1999, p. 444, pl. 16, fig. 17. 538 Piccirillo 1997, p. 387, pianta I, pl. 22, 31.

For some orthogonal octagons see: Balmelle et al. 1985, pl. 163. Campbell 1988, pp. 50-51, pl. 154; Levi 1947, pp. 366 and 368, pls. 92a, 140d. 531 Levi 1947, pp. 315-355, pls. 83b, 135a, c; Cimok 2000, p. 242. 529 530

173

Hadrianopolis IV

Fig. 209. Basilica B. Illustration of the floor mosaic of the nave.

174

Mosaics from Basilica B

Fig. 210. Basilica B. Border design of the floor mosaic of the nave.

Fig. 211. An illustration of a detail from the mosaic of the Birds in a Rinceau.

the mosaic (Figs. 209 and 215-217). The rest of the mosaic consists of a geometrical design. This design, measuring 7.05 m x 5.80 m, is formed of an orthogonal pattern of stars of eight parallelograms, squares and smaller poised squares between the arms of the stars (Figs. 209, 215 and 218; Pl. 17).540 There are a variety of knot patterns depicted in

can be seen on the mosaic of Room 9 of the north aisle of the basilica at Dor, which is located 30 km south of Haifa in Israel (5th cent. AD).539 The main ornament zone of the mosaic of the nave consists of two panels (Figs. 183, 186, 209 and 215-218). There is a figured scene in the rectangular panel at the east edge of 539

Dauphin 1999, pp. 400-401, fig. 1, pl. 1, photo 2.

540

175

For some similar design examples see: Balmelle et al. 1985, pl. 173.

Hadrianopolis IV

Fig. 212. Basilica B. Border designs of the mosaic floor at the west edge of the nave.

seen in mosaic art. In four of the squares, a knot is used, and we could not find any similar usage of this in our research. This ornament is a kind of a knot pattern forming a horizontal ‘T’ (Figs. 218 and 221; Pl. 23g). The pattern looks like a ram’s head, and so due to this we have identified it as a ‘ram’s head knot’. Similar to the design of stars of eight parallelograms, squares and smaller poised squares (Fig. 218; Pls. 17 and 21i) is also observed in the mosaics of Baths A and Basilica A in Hadrianopolis.543 The difference of the design in the mosaic of Basilica B is that the stars are settled obliquely in an ‘x’ form (Figs. 216 and 218; Pls. 17 and 22d). This design, which was very popular in antiquity, has its most similar examples outside of Hadrianopolis, at the mosaics of the church of Shunah Al-Jabuniyah in Jordan544 and the Hagios Stephanos Basilica and church of Hagios Ioannos on Kos, Greece.545 In another floor mosaic in Sardis546 which dates to an earlier period, various knot patterns are used in the squares. At the eastern edge of the mosaic of the nave, there is a panel measuring 5.70 m x 1.60 m. The personifications of the Four Rivers of Paradise547 are depicted in the panel (Figs. 209 and 216-217). They are laid together; at the left

Fig. 213. Basilica B. A polychrome octagon.

these squares. Solomon knotss541 are used in seven examples (Figs. 218-219; and Pl. 23f), and squares with loops542 in nine examples (Figs. 218 and 220; Pl. 23h). Yet the arms of the square with loops are shorter than the other examples

541 542

Patacı 2011, pp. 27-50; Patacı, Öz and Laflı 2012, pp. 163-172. Piccirillo 1993a, pp. 320-323, figs. 662 and 664-665. 545 Parrish 2001, pp. 342-345, figs. 20-22. 546 Scheibelreiter 2007, pp. 70 and 190, fig. 18. 547 On the literary contextualisation of the Four Rivers of Paradise cf. Radday 1982. 543 544

Balmelle et al. 2002, p. 42, noeud de salomon. Balmelle et al. 2002, p. 39, carré à boucles.

176

Mosaics from Basilica B

Fig. 214. A row of tangent octagons on the mosaic of the House of the Phoenix from Antioch-on-the-Orontes.

Fig. 215. Basilica B. View of the nave from the south.

177

178

Fig. 217. Basilica B. Illustration of the panel of the Four Rivers of Paradise.

Fig. 216. Basilica B. The panel of the Four Rivers of Paradise in the floor mosaic of the nave.

Hadrianopolis IV

Mosaics from Basilica B

Fig. 218. Basilica B. Illustration of the geometric panel of the floor mosaic of the nave.

179

Hadrianopolis IV

Fig. 219. Basilica B. A Solomon knot in a square in the floor mosaic of the nave.

Fig. 220. Basilica B. A Square with loops in a square in the floor mosaic of the nave.

180

Mosaics from Basilica B

Fig. 221. Basilica B. A ram’s head knot in a square in the floor mosaic of the nave.

Mosaics in the Apse and Bema

sides of their heads, there are inscriptions which indicate the identities of the rivers. According to this order, they are lined up from left to right as Geon (Γηῶν), Phison (Φισῶν), Tigris (Τίγρις) and Euphrates (Εὐφράτης), all depicted as male figures (Figs. 222-229). There is a water source depicted just below the Rivers of Paradise, which are filled by the cornucopiae held in their hands. Some fish are depicted in this water source, which overruns the lower part of the panel (Fig. 230). Even though each river has unique characteristics, the figures are depicted with some common features. Rivers of Paradise are located in a way which will attract the attention of visitors who enter the church from the west side, and are depicted in a frontal pose. The scene is formed with a good eye for explicit proportion. The eyes of the figures are directed to the centre of the panel and the heads lean towards this centre (Fig. 217). All of the figures wear Phrygian caps. They hold cornucopiae in their hands, which is a familiar attribute for personifications of the Four Rivers of Paradise. Furthermore, the half-naked depiction of the figures accords with the known scenes of the rivers. The mannerism of proportion is reflected with Geon and Euphrates figures, which are located at the left and right edges of the scene, raising their hands to chest level in a saluting pose (Figs. 217, 222 and 228). Phison and Tigris are placed at the middle section, raising their hand at right side of their body, about the height of their heads (Figs. 217, 224 and 226). Geon and Tigris are depicted bearded, while Phison and Euphrates are depicted beardless. There are earrings in the right ears of Geon and Phison, which are at the left side of the scene, and in the left ears of Tigris and Euphrates, which are at the right side.

Barely a third of the apsidal mosaic has been preserved (Figs. 182-183 and 231-232). Moreover, an area of 81 cm, located at the south of mosaic belongs to bema of the basilica. Opus tessellatum was used in the mosaic. The sizes of tesserae vary between 0.5 x 0.5 cm and 1.5 x 1.5 cm and 80 to 125 tesserae are used per dm2. The colours of the tesserae are black, white, grey, yellow, orange and red. At the right side of the mosaic, there are three birds depicted in a rinceau (Fig. 233). To the left of this scene, there are facing peacocks at both sides of a crater (Fig. 234). There is also a horse figure at the lower right corner of the in situ mosaic (Fig. 235). The figure is depicted in profile and its body faces to left of the scene. Damage to the head and at the backside of its body can be observed. The damaged head of the figure was probably leaned towards a water source. The dimensions of the bema mosaic must have originally been 6.70/6.80 m x 2.00 m; yet this mosaic is heavily damaged. The sizes of tesserae used in the mosaic vary between 0,5 x 0,5 cm and 1,0 x 1,0 cm. In the border of the mosaic, there are 55 to 63 tesserae per dm2; in the panel there are 111 tesserae per dm2. The colours of the tesserae used in the mosaic are black white, orange, red, pink and grey. A small part which belongs to the border design of the mosaic is preserved. There is a polychrome jewelled band of tangent poised squares and horizontal spindles in this

181

Hadrianopolis IV

Fig. 222. Basilica B. Geon from the panel of the Four Rivers of Paradise in the floor mosaic of the nave.

Fig. 223. Basilica B. A photo showing face details (a), illustration of the head (b) and the sequencing of tesserae forming the head (c) of the Geon figure.

182

Mosaics from Basilica B

Fig. 224. Basilica B. Phison from the panel of the Four Rivers of Paradise in the floor mosaic of the nave.

Fig. 225. Basilica B. A photo showing face details (a), illustration of the head (b) and the sequencing of tesserae forming the head (c) of the Phison figure.

183

Hadrianopolis IV

Fig. 226. Basilica B. Tigris from the panel of the Four Rivers of Paradise in the floor mosaic of the nave.

Fig. 227. Basilica B. A photo showing face details (a), illustration of the head (b) and the sequencing of tesserae forming the head (c) of the Tigris figure.

184

Mosaics from Basilica B

Fig. 228. Basilica B. Euphrates from the panel of the Four Rivers of Paradise in the floor mosaic of the nave.

Fig. 229. Basilica B. A photo showing face details (a), illustration of the head (b) and the sequencing of tesserae forming the head (c) of the Euphrates figure.

185

Hadrianopolis IV

Fig. 230. Basilica B. A detail from the panel of the rivers of paradise.

Fig. 231. Basilica B. Orthophoto of the floor mosaic of the apse.

186

Mosaics from Basilica B

Fig. 232. Basilica B. Illustration of the mosaic of the apse.

field (Figs. 232 and 236; Pl. 5b and 21j).548 Jewelled band examples are observed in North Africa. A similar example to this design can be seen in a Tunisian mosaic, called the ‘Lady of Carthage’549, dating to the 6th cent. AD (Fig. 237). Tangent ellipses and poised squares alternate on a red ground in this band. S. Campbell mentions that the jewelled band is believed to have entered the mosaic repertoire in North Africa in the second quarter of the 5th cent. AD.550 Similar designs in Anatolia can be seen in a mosaic fragment from Arap Deresi district in Antiochon-the-Orontes (AD 500)551; the mosaic of the south aisle

of the church of the necropolis in Anemurium (5th-6th cent. AD)552; the mosaic of hunting Amazons (Fig. 238) in the House of the Amazons (6th cent. AD)553; and the Hazinedere mosaic (6th cent. AD) in Edessa (Fig. 239). The last similar example to the border design of the bema mosaic of Basilica B is located in Germanicia (Fig. 240), and it surrounds a panel showing a scene from a daily life. It dates to between the 3rd and 5th cent. AD and nicknamed ‘the mosaic of life’ by the archaeological excavators of this mosaic, which was uncovered in a late Roman-early Byzantine villa.554 However, this dating suggestion for the mosaic must be reconsidered in our opinion. Both the geometric designs and figural scenes of the mosaic indicate a later date, such as the end of the

For similar designs see: Balmelle et al. 1985, pl. 24. Ben Abed 2006, p. 47, fig. 3.21. Dunbabin dates the mosaic to the 5th cent. AD; yet she mentions of probability of dating to the 6th cent. AD: Dunbabin 1978, pp. 146 and 251, pl. 53, fig. 135. Date given by Campbell is the 6th cent. AD: Campbell 1998, p. 50, pl. 215. 550 Campbell 1998, p. 50. 551 Balmelle et al. 1985, pp. 60-61, pl. 23; Campbell 1998, p. 50; Levi 1947, pl. 138e. 548 549

Campbell 1998, p. 48, pl. 214 ; Balmelle et al. 1985, pp. 62-63, pl. 24b. 553 Karaca and Rızvanoğlu 2008, p. 7; Karabulut, Önal and Dervişoğlu 2011, p. 56, fig. 60. 554 Eker and Ersoy 2017, pp. 114-156, 177 and 220-225. 552

187

Hadrianopolis IV both two scenes of Emperor Justinianus and Empress Theodora there is a jewelled band.555 It is not possible to understand precisely the design of the main ornament area in the bema mosaic from these fragments. There are various ornament areas created with interlooped bands constituted of five rows of tesserae (Figs. 236 and 241). At the west edge of the bema there is a small in situ mosaic fragment. The backside of a bull or a horse figure is preserved beside a row of interlooped bands on a white back ground (Fig. 241). The Mosaic Floor of the South Aisle’s Second Phase The floor mosaics of the south aisle of Basilica B belongs to its second phase. The level of the mosaic is 35 cm above the floor of the earlier period. The mosaic lies along the southern edge of the nave in pieces (Figs. 197-198, 200 and 242-243).556 The first motif here is a polychrome three-dimensional undulating ribbon in lateral perspective with a triangle motif in each undulation (Fig. 242).557 The undulating ribbon was a very popular pattern in mosaics of classical antiquity. Some similar examples of the design can be observed in the mosaic of House of Ge and the Seasons558, mosaic of the Hall of Philia559 and mosaic of the House of the Rams’ Heads560 in Antiochon-the-Orontes, the mosaic in the courtyard of the basilica

Fig. 233. Basilica B. Three birds in a rinceau in the mosaic of the apse.

5th cent. and the first half of the 6th cent. The jewelled band of the mosaic of life in Germanicia is quite similar to the bands of the 6th cent. mosaics of Edessa. Among these examples, the closest ones to the design used in the mosaic of Hadrianopolis are the mosaic in Germanicia and two floor mosaics from Edessa. The jewelled bands were also in use in wall mosaics in the 6th cent. AD. The best example of a wall mosaic with this motif is in the Basilica of San Vitale. In this mosaic, dating to AD 547, just below

555 Chatzidakis 1994, pp. 32, 36 and 228, figs. 4, 7; Grabar 1953, pp. 6263. 556 There are breakages and corruptions occured in this in situ mosaic and an important part of the mosaic must have been vanished. Restoration and conservation of the mosaics of Basilica B are recently completed: Kılavuz and Çelikbaş 2012, pp. 96-97. 557 For similar examples see: Balmelle et al. 1985, pl. 65. 558 Barbet 2004, fig. 9; Cimok 2000, p. 276; Levi 1947, pp. 346-347, fig. 139, pl. 81a, b. 559 Levi 1947, pp. 318-319, fig. 133, pl. 72. 560 Levi 1947, p. 350, pl. 133c.

Fig. 234. Basilica B. Orthophoto of the peacocks at both sides of a vase in the mosaic of the apse.

188

Mosaics from Basilica B

Fig. 235. Basilica B. A horse depiction at the south edge of the mosaic of the apse.

Fig. 236. Basilica B. Border design that separates mosaics of the apse and bema; and a small part from the panel of the mosaic floor of the bema.

Fig. 237. Mosaic of the Lady of Carthage in Tunisia.

of Hagia Irene561 and the Great Palace mosaic562 in Constantinople. Examples outside of Turkey include the mosaics of Chrysopolitissa and Limeniotissa Basilicae on Cyprus563; a villa mosaic in Tunisia-Kabarta564; the mosaic of the church of the Holy Martyrs Lot and Procopius565

and the floor mosaic of the church of St Paul566 in Jordan; a burial chamber mosaic567 in Israel; and a mural mosaic of the mausoleium of Galla Placidia568 in Italy. Another design of the second phase of the mosaic in Basilica B is located in front of the small entrance at the southeast corner of the building (Fig. 244; and Pl. 20a). This threshold mosaic is bounded by a rectangular frame.

Parrish 2008, p. 94, fig. 1. Balmelle et al. 1985, pl. 65f; Brett 1942, p. 8, a (p. 36); Cimok 1997, fig. 4; Dunbabin 1999, p. 232, fig. 244; Jobst, Erdal and Gurtner 2010, p. 34, fig. 13; Trilling 1989, fig. 4-7; Yücel 2010, p. 15. 563 Michaelides 1988, p. 105, figs. 25-26. 564 Dunbabin 1978, pp. 122, 271-272, pls. XLIV-111 and XLV-113. 565 Piccirillo 1993a, pp. 152-165, figs. 210, 213. 561 562

Piccirillo 1997, pp. 375-394, pl. 32. Ovadiah and Ovadiah 1987, pp. 30-31, pl. XXV-2. 568 Lorizzo 1976, pp. 11-15, pls. 1, 6. 566 567

189

Hadrianopolis IV

Fig. 238. A polychrome jewelled band in the mosaic of the Hunting Amazons from Edessa.

Fig. 239. A jewelled band in the Hazinedere mosaic from Edessa.

190

Mosaics from Basilica B

Fig. 240. A jewelled band in the Mosaic of Life from Germanicia (drawn by S. Patacı after Ersoy 2017, p. 177).

and even in frescoes.573 There are two more examples574 designed with the same purpose, dating to about the 5th cent. AD, in Pompeiopolis in Paphlagonia. Another design similar to the Hadrianopolis example in terms of floral ornamentation can be seen in the mosaic of the Old Diaconicon Baptistery (6th cent. AD) in Jordan.575 Similar designs to the threshold mosaic of Basilica B can be seen in the architectural ornaments of the St John Basilica in Ephesus576, dating to between the 6th-12th cent. AD; this basilica also has a templon architrave ornament similar to the threshold mosaic of Basilica B. There are two rhombuses side by side treated into a rectangular panel in the fragment. A Maltese cross has been inlaid within a circle in the centre of the ornament to the leftt and a Latin cross has been treated in the same way in the opposite direction. There are palmettes consisting of three leaves at both sides of the circles. Although this design reminds one of the threshold mosaic design in Basilica B, it is thought that the mosaic dates to the 12th cent. AD.577 Iconographic Analysis of the Mosaics of Basilica B There is a scene showing the Four Rivers of Paradise depicted in the rectangular panel of the mosaic of the nave of Basilica B. These scenes in late antiquity and following periods originate from former Roman mosaics; as a reflection of pagan culture, river personifications can be observed in various types of floor mosaics. One of these mosaics, dating to AD 227-228, has a panel decorated with a personification of the Euphrates.578 This mosaic, with an inscription in a tabula ansata, was discovered in Masudije, to the northeast of Aleppo in 1899.579 Euphrates is portrayed as an old male figure in the scene. He is bearded and naked. There is a vessel in his hand and water pours to the lower part of the scene from the vessel. There

Fig. 241. Basilica B. In situ mosaic floor at the west edge of the bema.

There is a rhombus in the centre of the rectangle and a rosette is inlaid into the rhombus.569 A cross patée570 is depicted here and a palmette pattern is added around it. Earlier similar examples of cross patée in Anatolia can be seen in Antioch-on-the-Orontes571, and a later example can be seen in a monastery mosaic572 near Jerusalem. In antiquity, threshold mosaics found a place in architectural buildings in which they were used as ornamental elements. It is possible to find geometric ornaments bounded with square or rectangular frames within the spaces between the columns, areas in front of doors

Designs of these kinds can be seen at the narthex fresco of Bishops Church in Stobi, dating to the 6th cent. AD. Kitzinger 1946, p. 109, fig. 151. 574 Musso et al. 2011, pp. 78, 103-104, pl. 5.1-6.1. 575 Piccirillo 1993a: pp. 146-147, figs. 187-189. 576 Büyükkolancı and Öztaşkın 2010, pp. 40-41, fig. 1. 577 A discussion has been held with Dr. M. Büyükkolancı about about the mosaic of the Basilica B and the templon architrave mentioned above. He claimed that the dating of this architectural fragment is not exact and the find might date to an earlier period. Hereby, we would like to thank Dr. Büyükkolancı once more. 578 Aksoy 2007, pp. 84-85 and 195, fig. 3; Balty 1981, pp. 369-371, pl. 12.1; Cumont 1917, p. 250; Drijvers and Healey 1999, pp. 200-201; Levi 1947, pp. 394-395, fig. 154; Parlasca 1983, pp. 263-267, pls. 60-61; Patacı and Altun 2014, p. 189; Salman 2007a, pp. 18-20, fig. 21-22. 579 Drijvers and Healey 1999, p. 200. 573

These are the designs derived from opus sectile; cf. Michaelides 1993 with examples from Ayios Epiphanios (fig. 13) and the Chrysopolitissa (fig. 37). 570 Balmelle et al. 2002, p. 40, croix pattée. 571 Campbell 1988, pp. 16 and 37, pls. 58 and 110; Campbell 1998, p. 5, pl. 23; Levi 1947, p. 289, pl. 118c. 572 Arav, Segni and Kloner 1990, pp. 313-320, pl. 43. 569

191

Hadrianopolis IV

Fig. 242. Basilica B. A three-dimensional undulating ribbon from the mosaic floor of the second phase in the south aisle.

Fig. 243. Basilica B. A view of the mosaic floors of the first and the second phases in the south aisle.

Fig. 244. Basilica B. Threshold mosaic belonging to the second phase in the south aisle.

192

Mosaics from Basilica B

Fig. 245. Personifications of Pyramus and Alpheus from the mosaic of the River Gods in Antioch-on-the-Orontes.

are also two female figures around the personification of Euphrates. Although their role in the scene is not clear, various conclusions about their identities have been put forward by some researchers.580 The female figure on the right of the scene holds a cornucopia in her hand.

Oceanus, Tethys or Thalassa scenes are also found in the art of mosaics as a separate category than the river personifications. Marine species were depicted in these scenes just as it is depicted in the mosaic panel of Basilica B. The Thalassa mosaic, dating to the 5th cent. AD and exhibited in the archaeological museum of Hatay (acc. no. 1017), is decorated with a variety of fishes (Fig. 246).584 A figure of Thalassa, personification of the sea, in the mosaic of the church of the Apostles in Jordan (dated to AD 578) is a well-known example of an adaptation of a pagan figure to the Christian faith. Thalassa, depicted as a portrait in a medallion, holds her hand at her chest level, just as Geon and Euphrates do on the mosaic of the nave of Basilica B (Fig. 247).585 A paddle, her attribute, is pictured on her left side; this attribute is also depicted in the mosaic from Antioch mentioned above. There is a cetus behind Thalassa in both mosaics. A half-naked depiction of Thalassa shows another similarity with the personifications of the Four Rivers of Paradise in the mosaic of Basilica B. There is a sea representation below the scene and there are marine species depicted as in the mosaic from Hadrianopolis. In the scenes which the Rivers of Paradise are depicted as four separate streams, it is considered that the fish symbolise the apostles’ teaching of the New Testament. Fishes or fishermen may certainly have many different meanings in early Christian iconography; however, the fish is mostly used as a metaphor for the Christian soul and it is also associated with baptism in Christian symbolism.586

Another personification of the River Euphrates is depicted in a rectangular panel placed at the centre of the impluvium mosaic of the villa of Euphrates in Zeugma.581 This mosaic, dating to the 2nd-3rd cent. AD, is exhibited at the Mosaic Museum of Zeugma in Gaziantep, Turkey. A kind of himation covers the lower part of the body of the halfnaked Euphrates, who reclines on a block. He is bearded and depicted as an old man. His right forearm rests on a vessel and water flows out of this vessel. He also holds a reed in his left hand. There are two more rectangular panels at both sides of the Euphrates panel in the mosaic and a naiad is depicted in both panels. A band of four-strand guilloche surrounds these three panels in the mosaic. The River Gods mosaic dating to the 3rd cent. AD and exhibited in the archaeological museum of Hatay (acc. no. 997-1002) reflects another example of this type of mosaic artwork in the Roman period.582 Busts of Pyramus, Thisbe, Arethusa and Alpheus were pictured inside four separate square panels in this Antiochean mosaic (Fig. 245). Pyramus in full-length, Thisbe and another river were also presented in a mosaic pavement of the House of Dionysos in Nea Paphos, on Cyprus.583

Aksoy 2007, p. 84; Drijvers and Healey 1999, p. 200; Salman 2007a, p. 19. 581 Görkay 2015, pp. 124-125; Önal 2002, pp. 52-53; Önal 2008, pp. 7983, figs. 4 and 7-8; Uysal and Bulgan 2016, pp. 66-67. 582 Cimok 2000, pp. 97-101; Levi 1947, pp. 109-110, pl. 18a-d. 583 Cf. Knox 1989.

Cimok 2000, pp. 248-250; Levi 1947, pp. 323-326, fig. 136, pl. 7576a. 585 Balty 1995, p. 366, pl. 34.1; Olszewski 1995, fig. 19; Piccirillo 1991, pp. 521-522, pl. 76; Piccirillo 1993a, pp. 96, 98 and 106-107, figs. 78, 80 and 95. 586 Jensen 2000, pp.84-85; Maguire 1987, pp. 29-30 and 57.

580

584

193

Hadrianopolis IV

Fig. 246. A detail from the mosaic of Thalassa in Antioch-on-the-Orontes.

Fig. 247. Personification of Thalassa in the mosaic of the Church of the Apostles in Madaba, Jordan.

194

Mosaics from Basilica B Even if pagan art styles were reflected schematically within Christian mosaics, the Four Rivers of Paradise of Christianity and the rivers of polytheistic religions cannot be seen as amicable bedfellows of the same philosophy. Christianity explicitly rejected the pagan cult of rivers and imagined that these rivers were the dwelling place of demons.587 Along with the Rivers of Paradise, the ‘River of Flame’ phenomenon came to have a different connotation. This river was considered as the punisher of sinners and the destroyer of every single creature at the end of the world.588 There is a clear description of the rivers of paradise in the Old Testament, in the Book of Genesis.589

The Christian Topography of Cosmas Indicopleustes continued to be read as a trusted textbook until the 17th cent. in Russia.599 Judging by the works of Cosmas Indicopleustes and the other Christian writers, it appears that the Earthly Paradise is somewhere in the east and the rivers originated hereabouts. As mentioned in the Book of Genesis 2:11 Phison (Pison) is located in Havilah, which has gold resources, and Geon (Gehon/Gihon) in Ethiopia. The names of Tigris and Euphrates were already known and in use in classical antiquity.600 Geon is also known as the River Nile601. Yet the location of Phison is unknown compared with the others. This river is tentatively identified with the River Ganges.602 H. Maguire also references the poet and bishop Avitus, of the 6th cent. AD, on the Rivers of Paradise and the Garden of Eden.603 Avitus explains that rivers in Paradise divided into four broad streams; the first two are Euphrates and Tigris, and the third one is Geon, also known as the River Nile.604 He also mentions that Phison is also called Ganges and that the wealth of paradise is carried by this river to the world.605 According to Avitus, there is no winter in Paradise. Summer is not scorching. Autumn with its harvest and spring with its flowers dominate for all the year.606 Trees in Garden of Eden keep producing fruit all of the year and the belief of the absence of winter in this place shows that the same season constantly continues. The comments of Avitus or explanations such as Revelation 22:2607 and Book of Genesis 2:9608 are very important for H. Maguire. Thus it is clear that some mosaics of the religious buildings have themes related to Paradise, or show earthly scenes.609

H. Maguire mentions that, with the rise of Christianity in the Roman Empire, many writers felt the need to represent pagan views of geography and natural history in order to emphasise the doctrines of the new belief.590 In consequence, between the 4th and 6th cent. AD, a serious number of sources were developed which explain the world’s geographical properties and subjects like the first six days of creation – the Hexaemeron591 – were discussed. The first Christian to use the word Hexaemeron was Theophilos from Antioch-on-the-Orontes.592 In late antiquity, many scholars surmised that the rivers of paradise exceeded the borders of the Garden of Eden; by following Genesis 2:10, they identified the four rivers as flowing from a single source.593 R.M. Grant mentions that Theophilos believed the Garden of Eden was located on earth, and that the rivers of Phison and Geon were flowing in the eastern part of the world.594 Cosmas Indicopleustes, who lived in the 6th cent. AD and was the author of Christian Topography, is an important name who should be noted. Cosmas Indicopleustes, a merchant from Alexandria,595 theorised the world as a rectangle in a box. The ocean surrounds the earth from all quarters. The Earthly Paradise is located to the east of the ocean (Fig. 248).596 Four Rivers of Paradise flow below the east branch of the ocean and emerge from the earth.597 According to C. Mango, Cosmas Indicopleustes was unable to arrive at a satisfying clarification about the Four Rivers of Paradise, but he succeeded in creating a consistent system.598

Maguire classifies the scenes of the Thyrsos Basilica mosaic, of Tegea in the south of mainland Greece, as earthly symbolisations.610 There are 16 square panels that are placed side by side in two rows in the mosaic, which dates to the late 5th cent. AD. Personifications of the Rivers of Paradise and twelve months are depicted in this mosaic. Personifications of Geon and Phison are depicted in the panels placed near the apse and Tigris and Euphrates are pictured in the panels at the west edge of the mosaic. Tigris and Euphrates are better preserved than the other personifications of the Rivers of Paradise in the mosaic. These personifications holds cornucopiae in their hands.

Kazhdan 1991, p. 1798 (‘Rivers’). Kazhdan 1991, p. 1798 (‘Rivers’). 589 Genesis 2:6 ‘but streams came up from the earth and watered the whole surface of the ground.’ 2:10 ‘A river watering the garden flowed from Eden; from there it was separated into four headwaters. 11 The name of the first is the Pishon; it winds through the entire land of Havilah, where there is gold. 12 The gold of that land is good; aromatic resin and onyx are also there. 13 The name of the second river is the Gihon; it winds through the entire land of Cush. 14 The name of the third river is the Tigris; it runs along the east side of Ashur. And the fourth river is the Euphrates.’ 590 Maguire 1999, pp. 179-180. 591 Maguire 1999, pp. 179-180; Mango 2011, pp. 183 and 186. 592 Kazhdan 1991, pp. 926-927 (‘Hexaemeron’). For Teophilos also see: Mango 2011, p. 185. 593 Maguire 1999, pp. 179-184. 594 Grant 1992, p. 109. 595 Anastos 1946, pp. 73-80; Mango 2011, p. 191; Morey 1942, p. 79. 596 Cosmas Indicopleustes 1909, pl. VII; Maguire 1987, p. 26; Maguire 1999, pp. 179-184; Mango 2011, p. 192. 597 Cosmas Indicopleustes 1909, pl. VII; Maguire 1987, p. 26; Maguire 1999, pp. 179-184; Mango 2011, p. 192. 598 Mango 2011, p. 192. 587 588

Mango 2011, p. 193. Maguire 1999, pp. 179-184; Mango 2011, pp. 184. 601 Polanski 2009, p. 177. 602 Grant 1992, p. 109. 603 Maguire 1987, pp. 25 and 28; Maguire 1999, pp. 179-184. 604 Shea 1997, p. 78. 605 Shea 1997, p. 79. 606 Shea 1997, p. 78. 607 Revelation 22:2 ‘Down the middle of the great street of the city. On each side of the river stood the tree of life, bearing twelve crops of fruit, yielding its fruit every month. And the leaves of the tree are for the healing of the nations.’ 608 Genesis 2:9 ‘The Lord God made all kinds of trees grow out of the ground--trees that were pleasing to the eye and good for food. In the middle of the garden were the tree of life and the tree of the knowledge of good and evil.’ 609 Maguire 1987, p. 25. 610 Maguire 1987, pp. 24-28; Maguire 1999, pp. 179-184. 599 600

195

Hadrianopolis IV

Fig. 248. World map by Cosmas Indicopleustes.

personifications of the Rivers of Paradise.613 The mosaic of the church is dated to the first half of the 6th cent. AD.614 The personifications were placed in the band design of the mosaic but they were destroyed by iconoclasts. One of the rivers at the southeastern edge of the band has been preserved better than the other figures but the identity of this figure is unknown. The figure holds a reed in his right hand and presumably there is a cornucopia in his left hand. He is depicted half-naked just like the other personifications of the Rivers of Paradise in mosaics from classical antiquity.

Various marine creatures are depicted inside the octagons which surround the main ornament field of the mosaic. Maguire takes the earth map of Cosmas Indicopleustes as a basis to explain that the border design of the mosaic symbolises the ocean. Details in the mosaic overlap with the drawings of Cosmas Indicopleustes; he believes that the four rivers in the mosaic were not chosen for a scene of Paradise, but that these personifications represent the earth.611 Another thing supporting this idea is the existence of personifications of the twelve months, because it is thought that there is only one season in the Garden of Eden.

The floor mosaic of the Church of the Rivers in Jordan, dating to AD 579-594, was decorated with personifications of the Four Rivers of Paradise. Due to the deformation of the figures during the iconoclasm, only one personification of the rivers, which is located in the band design surrounding the middle aisle mosaic of the church, is preserved; its identity is unclear.615 The face of the figure depicted in a vine scroll was destroyed. He is half naked and holds a reed in his right hand. There is also a vessel shown on his left.

Some further mosaics with the personifications of the Four Rivers of Paradise are mentioned in some religious buildings in the Near East. The Chapel of Theodore the Martyr in Madaba, Jordan is one of them. Personifications of Geon, Phison, Tigris and Euphrates are pictured in the octagons which are located at the corners of the main ornament field in the floor mosaic, dating to AD 562.612 The figures of the rivers are highly damaged but thanks to the inscriptions which were placed around them, it is possible to determine their identities. The mosaic of the church of Sunna in Madaba is another example of floor mosaics which are decorated with

Piccirillo 1993a, p. 132; Piccirillo 1993b, pp. 277-313. Piccirillo 1993b, p. 290. 615 Piccirillo 1993a, pp. 240-241, fig. 390. 613

Maguire 1987, p. 26. 612 Piccirillo 1993a, p. 117, figs. 109-115; Maguire 1999, pp. 179-184. 611

614

196

Mosaics from Basilica B There is another relevant mosaic floor in the church of St Paul at Kastron Mefaa (Umm Al-Rasas) in Jordan.616 We see again the personifications of the Rivers of Paradise in this mosaic dating to the second half of the 6th cent. AD. The Rivers of Paradise are depicted in looped circles inside four separate panels forming a square ornament area; these panels are separated from each other by a swastika-meander design. Geon and Phison were depicted in the upper ornament area of the mosaic and Tigris and Euphrates in the lower part. Unfortunately we witness again that these figures were disfigured by the iconoclasts. The inscriptions specifying their identities, except the inscription for Tigris, are preserved nevertheless. Additionally, there is a personification of Ge in a small square panel at the centre of the mosaic.617 The face of this figure was also destroyed during the iconoclasm. The river Phison is the best preserved personification in the mosaic. He holds a reed in his right hand. There is a vessel shown on his left and water pours to the lower part of the scene from the vessel. There are also some smaller figures which are placed around the looped circles that bears the figures of the four rivers in the mosaic. There are fish figures around Phison, amphorae around Tigris and fruit baskets around Euphrates.

It is acknowledged that the four rivers are depicted allegorically or mentioned in mosaic inscriptions in baptisteries such as the mosaic of the church of Jabaliyah. This subject is referred to in the article The Nile and the Rivers of Paradise by H. Maguire.623 An inscription belonging to a floor mosaic of an early Christian baptistery at Ostia in Italy is an example of the inscriptions which mention the Four Rivers of Paradise. We also see depictions of the rivers in the baptistery mosaic dating to the 5th cent. AD at Ohrid (Lychindos) in Macedonia.624 The rivers are represented as male masks with identifying inscriptions at the corners of the mosaic at Ohrid.625 Water pours from the mouths of the masks. Including the chapel mosaic at the east of the complex, there are scenes showing the Rivers of Paradise in two separate mosaics. Two deer drink water from four sources representing the rivers of Paradise in one of the scenes.626 Another example related to the rivers is the early Christian mosaic of the Mariana Baptistery (5th cent. AD) from Corsica.627 Similar to the mosaic at Ohrid, there are heads depicted at the corners of the floor mosaic, which are thought to be personifications of the four rivers. They are shown as bearded figures but there are not identifying inscriptions like in the mosaic at Ohrid.628 Only one river was not preserved in this mosaic.

The names of the Four Rivers of Paradise are mentioned in an inscription of a floor mosaic belonging to the Chapel of Theotokos in Jordan and dating to the 8th cent. AD.618 This chapel is in the region of Mount Nebo, 10 km from Madaba. There are inscriptions of the rivers with vessel (jug) depictions at the four corners of a small square panel, despite the fact that there is no figural scene in this part of mosaic. Beside the names of the rivers there is also a votive inscription in a circle at the centre of the panel.619

Another mosaic with the theme of the Rivers of Paradise is in the church of the Holy Martyrs in Syria.629 The Rivers of Paradise are depicted as four separate currents filling up a watercourse in the mosaic east of the middle aisle of the church, dated to AD 447 (Fig. 249).630 The rivers rise from a mountain depiction in the centre of the scene. Corresponding with the four currents the names of Phison, Geon, Tigris and Euphrates are written from left to right. The water source that the rivers fill occupies all of the long rectangular ornament area at the bottom of the scene, similar to the mosaic of Basilica B in Hadrianopolis. Various kinds of fishes and water birds are depicted inside the water source. There are four deer in the scene, standing side by side and depicted in profile above the water source. Among these figures, two deer at either sides of the mountain in the centre of the scene are shown lapping up water from the river. The symmetrical layour of the scene is quite similar to the mosaic panel of the Rivers of Paradise in Basilica B. It is clear that both mosaics have common features in terms of design. As opposed to the Hadrianopolis mosaic, the example from Syria does not demonstrate any personifications of the Rivers of Paradise; instead four deer take their place in the scene. Deer lapping up water from the source are generally linked with Psalm 42:1. Deer drinking from the Rivers of Paradise, which symbolise the elixir of life, refers to the

A floor mosaic with a scene consisting of the personifications of the Rivers of Paradise has been revealed in a church near Jabaliyah, Gaza in Palestine. The rivers are shown in the baptistery mosaic of the church, which dates to the reign of Justinianus; they are depicted in separate panels at the four corners of the ornament area.620 Geon and Phison are the preserved figures among the rivers. Geon is depicted as a dark-skinned woman and Phison is pictured as an old man. Both figures are depicted half-naked, in parallel with other personifications of the Rivers of Paradise in mosaic art. There is a jug between the arms of the personification of Phison and a stream of water pours from this jug. The Rivers of Paradise emphasise the iconography of baptism in this mosaic. It is known that personifications of rivers are related to baptism in Christianity.621 This scene in Jabaliyah both reflects a paradise theme and calls to mind the figure of Jesus, which relates to humanity’s thirst for salvation.622

Maguire 1999, pp. 179-184. Maguire 1999, pp. 179-184. 625 Grozdanova 2009, pp. 23-26; Maguire 1999, pp. 179-184. 626 Grozdanova 2009, pp. 34-35, figs. 10-11. 627 Moracchini-Mazel 1962, pp. 99-102; Maguire 1999, pp. 179-184. 628 Moracchini-Mazel 1962, pp. 100-102. 629 Zaqzuq and Piccirillo 1999, pp. 443-464; Farioli Campanati 1999, pp. 173-177; Noga-Banai 2008, p. 56, fig. 41. 630 Zaqzuq and Piccirillo 1999, pp. 445-446, pls. 9, 11, 25, figs. 5, 9, 37. 623 624

Piccirillo 1997, pp. 375-394. Piccirillo 1997, pl. 34, fig. 29. 618 Piccirillo 1994, pp. 521-538. 619 Piccirillo 1994, pp. 521-538, pl. 25, fig. 9. 620 Humbert 1999, pp. 216-218. 621 Maguire 1987, pp. 28; Maguire 1999, pp. 179-184. 622 Humbert 1999, pp. 217-218. 616 617

197

Hadrianopolis IV

Fig. 249. Floor mosaic of the Church of the Holy Martyrs in Tayibat Al-Imam, Syria (After Zaqzuq and Piccirillo 1999, Pl. 9, Fig. 5).

entrance to the kingdom of God.631 Additionally, in the centre of the scene, on top of the mountain, there is an eagle figure symbolising Jesus.632 The centrally located eagle represents the resurrection too. There is an eagle figure in the mosaic of the church of the Deacon Thomas in Jordan which symbolises the resurrection.633 The same theme is also evoked in early Christian art with a lamb figure, representing the Jesus.634 The Four Rivers of Paradise are not the only subjects chosen for the mosaic panel of the church of the Holy Martyrs. There are also depictions of Bethlehem, the birthplace of Jesus, and Jerusalem where he died and was resurrected.635

mountain.637 The names of the rivers are written in the band just below the scene: Geon, Phison, Tigris and Euphrates. There are also six sheep on each sides of the lamb. These figures may be apostles or may represent Jerusalem and Bethlehem.638 The mountain which the lamb of God stands on should be Mount Zion.639 The four rivers were also associated with the four evangelists in the early Christian sources. In the apsidal mosaic of the basilica of Nola in Campania, Italy, the four evangelists were connected with the four rivers on the inscription written by Paulinus of Nola.640 Maguire asserts the same kind of connection is present in the mosaics of the Basilica of San Vitale in Ravenna which is dated to the 6th cent. AD.641 The scenes depicting evangelists are in the choir part of the church, in the narrow ornament areas right next to the south and north triforiums.642 Maguire sees a common point between the Rivers and Evangelists

A similar example of the scene of the eagle standing on a hill and the Rivers of Paradise arising from this very hill in the mosaic of the church of the Holy Martyrs can be observed in the apsidal mosaic of the church of Saints Cosmas and Damian in Rome.636 At the lower part of the mosaic, which dates to the reign of Justinianus, there is a lamb on a mountain which is placed at the centre of the scene. There is a halo around the head of the lamb. The Rivers of Paradise flow in four branches down the

Wilpert 2007, fig. 47. Maguire 1987, p. 12. 639 Maguire 1987, p. 12. The lamb, Mount Zion and the rivers are mentioned in Revelations: Revelation 14:1 ‘Then I looked, and there before me was the Lamb, standing on Mount Zion, and with him 144,000 who had his name and his Father’s name written on their foreheads.’ Revelation 7:17 ‘For the Lamb at the centre of the throne will be their shepherd; ‘he will lead them to springs of living water. And God will wipe away every tear from their eyes.’ Revelation 22:1 ‘Then the angel showed me the river of the water of life, as clear as crystal, flowing from the throne of God and of the Lamb.’ 640 Maguire 1987, p. 28. 641 Maguire 1987, p. 77, fig. 87. 642 Demus 1976, pp. 48-49, pl. 40; Lorizzo 1976, pp. 35-41, pl. 44-45; Morey 1942, pp. 165-166 and 277, figs. 180-181. 637 638

John 3:5 ‘Jesus answered, ‘Very truly I tell you, no one can enter the kingdom of God unless they are born of water and the Spirit.’ Farioli Campanati 1999, pp. 173-177; For an iconographic evaluation of the mosaic see: Zaqzuq and Piccirillo 1999, pp. 445-446. 632 Zaqzuq and Piccirillo 1999, p. 446. 633 Piccirillo 1993a, pp. 185 and 187, fig. 259. 634 Farioli Campanati 1999, pp. 173-177. 635 Zaqzuq and Piccirillo 1999, pp. 445 and 451, pl. 28, figs. 42-43. 636 Kitzinger 1958, p. 16, ill. 12; Maguire 1987, p. 12, fig. 7; Morey 1915, p. 35, fig. 6; Morey 1942, pp. 170 and 278, fig. 185. 631

198

Mosaics from Basilica B

Fig. 250. Mosaic of the apse of the Basilica of San Vitale in Ravenna, Italy.

in this mosaic due to the depiction of a small spring with waterbirds in the lowest part of the rocky scene in which the figures are located. In addition to that, under the feet of Jesus in the apsidal mosaic of the church, four rivers flow as four seperate branches just as the scene in the church of Saints Cosmas and Damian (Fig. 250).643

personifications of the Rivers of Paradise. Water flows out of the vessel depictions at the bottom of the scenes.647 Geon holds a vessel in his right hand and a cornucopia in his left hand (Fig. 251); Euphrates holds a flower in his right hand and a cornucopia in his left hand (Fig. 252); and both Phison and Tigris hold a vessel in their right hands and a reed in their left hands. Maguire asserts that this mosaic in Libya depicts ‘the land and the waters’ and he emphasises the similarity between this theme and the symbolism in the mosaic of Tegea.648 It is commonly believed that Cyrenaican mosaics, at least the earlier ones, are believed to have been made by workshops who came from the Greek East.649

The Rivers of Paradise were also used as ornaments with liturgical functions, guiding the movements of the officiating priest.644 On the floor pavement of Hagia Sophia in Istanbul, the rivers are represented as green marble bands.645 In late antiquity, floor mosaics with a Rivers of Paradise theme also appeared in North Africa. In an early Byzantine mosaic (i.e. A.D. 539/540)646 of a church in Olbia/ Theodorias in Libya, personifications of the Rivers of Paradise are depicted. In the rectangular ornament areas of this mosaic, there are 50 square panels. Except for the personifications of the Rivers of Paradise in these panels, there are also personifications of Ktisis, Ananeosis and Castalia, and many animal scenes. The Rivers are depicted in a sitting position with a quite comfortable mood. They are depicted naked/half-naked in parallel with other

In mosaic art, other personified rivers apart from the Rivers of Paradise are the River Jordan and Nile650. A personification of the River Jordan is depicted in the mosaic of the Baptistery of the Catholic Cathedral in Ravenna, also known as the Baptistery of the Orthodox or the Baptistery of Neon and dated back to the third quarter of the 5th cent. AD.651 The subject shown in a medallion is 647 For the photographs of the mosaic cf. the website of Temehu Tourism Services: (accessed on August 17, 2018). 648 Maguire 1987, p. 48. 649 Alföldi-Rosenbaum and Ward-Perkins 1980, pp. 37-40. 650 For the personifications of the River Nile on Byzantine mosaics in Israel cf. Hachlili 1998b, pp. 106-120. 651 Demus 1976, pp. 46-47, pl. 36; Lorizzo 1976, pp. 17-20, pl. 9; Morey 1942, pp. 157 and 275, ill. 165.

643 Lorizzo 1976, p. 39, pl. 47; Maguire 1987, p. 77, fig. 93; Morey 1942, pp. 164 and 277, ill. 177. 644 Kazhdan 1991, p. 1798 (‘Rivers’). 645 Kazhdan 1991, p. 1798 (‘Rivers’); Maguire 1999, pp. 179-184. 646 Maguire 1987, p. 45.

199

Hadrianopolis IV

Fig. 251. A personification of Geon in a mosaic of the early Byzantine church in Olbia/Theodorias, Libya.

Fig. 252. The personification of Euphrates in the same mosaic in Olbia/Theodorias, Libya.

200

Mosaics from Basilica B

Fig. 253. The ceiling mosaic of the dome of the Baptistery of Neon in Ravenna, Italy.

the baptism of Jesus Christ (Fig. 253). John the Baptist and Jesus Christ are at the centre of the scene, and the River Jordan is to the right and below them. The dimensions of the River Jordan are smaller than the other two figures due to the order of importance of the characters in the scene. The inscription identifying the River Jordan is just at the right of Jesus and above of the head of the river. Another figure in the scene is a white dove representing the Holy Spirit, in accordance with Luke 3:21-22 which has been mentioned before. The Holy Spirit helps to sprinkle the water of baptism in this scene. The River Jordan is bearded and shown as an old man. He is holding a green cloth in his hand to dry Jesus Christ after his baptism. There are also a reed and a vessel in his left hand, which are usually seen in the scenes of the Rivers of Paradise. Water of the river streams thorough this vessel. The same theme is depicted in the ceiling mosaic belonging to the dome of the Arian Baptistery in Ravenna (Fig. 254).652 Both mosaics have the baptism of Jesus by John the Baptist in the river Jordan.653 The scene of the mosaic, dating to the end of the 5th cent. AD and the beginning of the 6th cent. AD, is quite similar

to the mosaic of the Baptistery of Neon. The River Jordan, Jesus Christ and John the Baptist are shown from left to right in the scene. The white dove is just above the head of Jesus. This time, the dimensions of the River Jordan are equal to the other two figures in the scene. The remarkable element in this figure is the presence of a couple of red horns made of the chelae of a crustacean on his head. The origin of these types of attachments are known in depictions of Oceanus on the mosaics dating to the 2nd and 3rd cent. AD. The common features of the personifications of the Rivers of Paradise are visible in their attributes. These are the vessel forms, cornucopiae and the reeds. Further, personifications of the rivers are depicted half naked. The four rivers are shown in the form of separate streams of water, or they are mentioned only by inscriptions in some of the mosaics of the religious buildings. Since in this mosaic the Four Rivers of Paradise are depicted in the same panel with no other theme present, the naos mosaic of Basilica B differs from all other known mosaics of the Four Rivers in the world (Fig. 217). Another difference is that the cornucopiae have water streaming from their mouths. We see that water flows out of jugs instead of cornucopiae in the other scenes of the Rivers of Paradise

Demus 1976, p. 47, pl. 37; Lorizzo 1976, pp. 21-24, fig. 8, pl. 16; Morey 1942, pp. 157 and 275, ill. 166. 653 Bockmann 2014, p. 211. 652

201

Hadrianopolis IV

Fig. 254. The ceiling mosaic of the dome of the Arian Baptistery in Ravenna, Italy.

in mosaic art. When all possibilities are considered, we can claim that the scene of the Rivers of Paradise on the mosaic of the nave of Basilica B most likely emphasises a theme from the Garden of Eden.

known that Phrygian caps have also been used in Orpheus mosaics (Figs. 160-162).657

One more detail is the Phrygian caps on the heads of the personifications of the rivers in the mosaic of Basilica B. The Phrygian cap is a subject that should also be considered. Such caps are seen in floor mosaics from southeastern Anatolia and northern Syria. In the alreadydiscussed mosaic from Apamea, dating to the third quarter of the 5th cent. AD, it is seen that each Amazon figure has a Phrygian cap.654 Again in Apamea, in the mosaic of Meleagros and Atalanta dated to the same century, Phrygian caps have been included on the figures.655 Similarly in the mosaic of hunting Amazons at Haleplibahçe from Edessa, Amazons were also depicted with Phrygian caps on, just like the examples in Apamea (Figs. 175 and 255).656 It is

Aside from the panel of the Rivers of Paradise, there are some scenes depicting animal figures on the mosaics of the apse and south aisle of Basilica B. There are two opposing peacocks depicted on both sides of a crater in the apsidal mosaic (Figs. 231-232 and 234). Peacocks are the most flamboyant figures in religious buildings. These special figures, known in the whole Mediterrenean since the Roman period, have meanings of immortality and eternal life.658 One of the reasons why the peacock is perceived in this way is that it sheds its tail feathers in winter but renews them in spring.659 Another reason why peacocks were used as religious symbols comes from the belief that their flesh is incorruptible, as verified by Saint Augustine, and because the eyespots in their tail were compared to the stars by poets in antiquity.660 Peacocks, which are depicted

Balty 1977, pp. 114-117; Balty 1995, pp. 54 and 172, pl. 24.1. Balty 1977, pp. 118-123; Balty 1995, p. 172, pl. 24.2. 656 Aydemir, Çokoğullu and Dervişoğlu 2008, figs. 6-8; Karabulut, Önal and Dervişoğlu 2011, figs. 60, 62, 64-67 and 69-71; Karaca and Rızvanoğlu 2008, pp. 7-8, 12-13, 19-20 and 24-25.

Balty 1977, pp. 114-117; Balty 1995, pp. 54 and 172, pl. 24.1. The Phrygian cap is associated with personnages coming from the Orient, such as Attis, Ganymede, Orpheus, Amazons, Mithras and even the Three Magi. 658 Maguire 1987, p. 39. 659 Habas 2015, pp. 40-41; Maguire 1987, p. 39. 660 Maguire 1987, p. 39; also see: Anđelković, Rogić and Nikolić 2011, p. 240. 657

654 655

202

Mosaics from Basilica B

Fig. 255. Melanippe from the mosaic of the Hunting Amazons in Haleplibahçe, Edessa.

popularly between vine branches and bunches of grapes in art, are essentially rooted in the period before Christianity. In paganism, depictions of vine branches and leaves and bunches of grapes are related to the cult of Dionysus and the peacock is associated with the goddess Juno.661

St George in Jordan (AD 535/36)666; the Birds in a Rinceau mosaic in Antioch-on-the-Orontes (AD 526-540)667; and another example dating to the 6th cent. AD and exhibited in the archaeological museum of Konya (Fig. 257) contain similar peacock images. This mosaic from Konya was excavated in a church on Alibeyhöyük by Çumra in 1991668 where two facing peacocks are shown on either side of a vase. Therefore, it could be an apsidal mosaic like the one in Basilica B in Hadrianopolis. Another floor mosaic from Bizye in Kırklareli in Turkish Thrace, which is heavily damaged and currently exhibited in the museum of Kırklareli, has four peacocks at its left and right edges (Fig. 258).

Peacocks, which are the most frequent animal figures seen in churches and baptisteries, were also used on carved reliefs or frescoes on sarcophagi662; it was perhaps the most appropriate animal to be depicted in order to demonstrate the baptism, resurrection and particularly the Garden of Eden theme. Scenes consisted of facing peacocks around floral ornaments or vases were popular in different types of art in Asia Minor during the Roman and early Byzantine periods. In Paradise and baptism themes, these figures are depicted drinking the elixir of life from a vessel. S. Karwiese establishes a connection between the peacock figure and the elixir of life when she evaluates the mosaics of the pastophorium of the church of St Mary in Ephesus, which is dated to AD 600.663 Likewise, the mosaic of the Butrint Baptistery (Fig. 256) in Albania (6th cent. AD)664; the mosaics of church of Naharijah in Israel (5th-6th cent. AD)665; the mosaics of the church of

The scene of a bull shown drinking water from a stream on the mosaic of the south aisle of Basilica B presents a coherent scene with the Garden of Eden theme (Fig. 206). This animal figure is depicted as calmly rejoicing in the elixir of life. This scene conforms with both the Rivers of Paradise on the nave of the Basilica and the animal figures in the apsidal mosaic in its symbolism. Bulls are also among the animals that can be found in the mosaics of churches. In mosaic art, these animals can be shown in struggle with a lion, tiger and leopard; confronted with a

Anđelković, Rogić and Nikolić 2011, p. 233. Anđelković, Rogić and Nikolić 2011, pp. 242-244. 663 Karwiese 1999, p. 609, fig. 4. 664 Koch 2007, p. 379, pl. 23. 665 Ovadiah and Ovadiah 1987, pp. 113-114, pl. 187.

666 Piccirillo 1993a, pp. 178-179, fig. 246. For the Basilica also see: Merrony 1998, pp. 454-455. 667 Cimok 2000, pp. 306-307; Levi 1947, pp. 366, pl. 181d. 668 Acc. no. 1992-15-6, l. 231, h. 145, th. 5 cm: Mertek 1994, p. 41, figs. 12-13.

661 662

203

Hadrianopolis IV

Fig. 256. A detail from the mosaic of the Byzantine Baptistery in Butrint, Albania.

Fig. 257. A floor mosaic of confronted peacocks excavated in Alibeyhöyük by Çumra (Archaeological museum of Konya, acc. no. 1992-15-6; l. 231 cm, h. 145 cm, th. 5 cm).

204

Mosaics from Basilica B

Fig. 258. A floor mosaic of confronted peacocks uncovered in Bizye, Kırklareli, museum of Kırklareli.

wild animal yet in a calm mood in the Peaceable Kingdom; or sometimes merely as an animal from earthly life. A single bull scene in a panel is also seen in the mosaic of the church at Altıntepe in Erzincan.669 This figure, which is wearing a medallion on its neck just like the bull of the mosaic of the south aisle of Basilica B, was depicted as sitting among a flower configuration. It was mentioned before that the ribbons or medallions in animal paintings were affected by Persian art, and there is another bull with a medallion on its neck in the 5th-6th cent. mosaic of Harran Kapı from Edessa.670

Just below this ornamental field, three birds within the vine scrolls and a horse were depicted in the apsidal mosaic of Basilica B (Figs. 231-233 and 235). In the scrolls formed by these vine branches, various kinds of birds and animals, hunting scenes, personifications, vessel and basket figurations were preferred by mosaic artists in classical antiquity. Figural scenes are depicted in the ornament areas formed by the vine branches and leaves in the mosaics of religious buildings such as Basilica A in Nikopolis (Greece)674, the church of the Deacon Thomas675 and the church of the Holy Martyrs Lot and Procopius676 in Jordan, the church of Shellal677 in Palestine and the church at Altıntepe678 in Erzincan in Turkey. The mosaics of these buildings are dated to the 6th cent. AD. Another example similar to the apsidal mosaic of Basilica B is the mosaic of Birds in a Rinceau from Antioch-on-the-Orontes which is dated again to the 6th cent. AD.679 Among the birds in this floor mosaic, a pheasant figure particularly resembles the one in Basilica B.680

There is a bull depicted as a single figure in a small polygon panel with concave sides on the mosaic of the south aisle of the Basilica in Perinthus (Heraclea) in Tekirdağ, Turkish Thrace.671 This mosaic is dated to the end of the 5th cent. and the beginning of the 6th cent. AD.672 Another bull figure from Asia Minor is in the mosaic pavement of the Basilica of the Tatköy Monastery located in Konya and dating to the 5th cent. AD.673 In this mosaic, the bull is shown leaping forward to the right of the scene in a hexagon consisting of bands of simple guilloches (Fig. 259). A common feature of these mosaics is that all the bulls, except the one from Edessa, are shown as a single animal figure in a panel.

As well as being symbols of the Dionysus cult, the vine and bunch of grapes are also relements of Christianity with important symbolic meanings.681 In the Chrysopolitissa Basilica in Paphos, Cyprus, there is an inscription on a mosaic panel decorated with vine leaves and a bunch of grapes (Fig. 260). This inscription references John 15:1 in Kitzinger 1951, pp. 82-122, figs. 21-22 and 25-27. Merrrony 1998, p. 454, pl. 23, fig. 4. 676 Merrony 1998, p. 452, pl. 26, fig. 7. 677 Merrony 1998, p. 452, pl. 26, fig. 7. 678 Can 2009, p. 9, fig. 15; Can 2011, p. 229, fig. 4. 679 Cimok 2000, pp. 304-310; Levi 1947, p. 366, pl. 91. 680 Cimok 2000, p. 310. 681 Jensen 2000, p. 59.

669 Can 2009, p. 9, fig. 14; Can 2011, pp. 227-228, fig. 3; Karaosmanoğlu, Korucu and Yılmaz 2014, pp. 83-84, fig. 17. 670 Patacı 2016, p. 431, figs. 1-2 and 5; Salman 2007a, pp. 166-171, fig. 83; Salman 2007b, pp. 518-520, fig. 7. 671 Işın 1994, pp. 61-67; Işın 1995, pp. 27-37; Öztürk 2009, p. 30, figs. 9-11; Yeşil-Erdek 2014, pp. 64, fig. 2. 672 Öztürk 2009, pp. 29-40; Yeşil-Erdek 2014, pp. 61-75. 673 Ermişler 1992, p. 39, fig. 17.

674 675

205

Hadrianopolis IV

Fig. 259. A detail from the mosaic uncovered in the Basilica of Tatköy Monastery, Konya.

Fig. 260. A detail from the mosaic of the Chrysopolitissa Basilica in Paphos, Cyprus.

206

Mosaics from Basilica B the New Testament: ‘I am the true vine, and my Father is the gardener.’682 The vine has many meanings in Christian art and cannot be tied to a single interpretation.683: it is the symbol of Jesus, his church, the Christian soul and the Eucharist.684 R.M. Jensen mentions some of the symbols that Hyppolytus, a 3rd cent. AD theologian, describes. According to him, the vine is the symbol of the Saviour. The vine branches stand for the saints of the Saviour and bunches of grapes stand for his martyrs.685 The vintagers are the symbols of angels; the winepress is the symbol of the church; the wine is the symbol of power of the Holy Spirit and the baskets full of grapes are the symbols of the Apostles.686

figural scenes. The quality of these mosaics are clearly seen. Some of the geometric designs in the basilica contain specific features. Although some examples similar to the scene of the Rivers of Paradise can be found in different geographical regions, this kind of panel is an unique example which has not yet been documented in another mosaic floor. Other figural scenes in the Basilica are also compatible with each other. Since they are insufficiently preserved, the apse and bema mosaics limit our iconographic evaluation. Yet it is understood that all the figural scenes were gathered in a certain composition and each scene is a significant part of the whole thing.

On the last panel of the mosaic of the south aisle in Basilica B, there is a basket of fruit which is shown along with vine leaves and a bunch of grapes (Fig. 207). The same kinds of depictions of fruit or grape baskets are seen in the mosaics of the religious structures in late antiquity. Some depictions of baskets of fruit from Anatolia can be observed on the mosaic of Birds in a Rinceau (AD 526540) in Antioch-on-the-Orontes687; on the mosaic of the naos and south aisle (5th-6th cent. AD) of the church of St Pantaleon in Aphrodisias of Cilicia modern Mersin688; in the narthex mosaic (5th cent. AD) of the Basilica of Intra Muros in Coropissus (modern Dağ Pazarı in Mersin)689, and on the mosaic of the south aisle (5th-6th cent. AD) of the Basilica of Perinthus (Heraclea)690. In the Priest John Chapel (AD 565)691 and the church of the Deacon Thomas (6th cent. AD)692 in Jordan, there are examples of fruit baskets. Again in Jordan, in the mosaic of the church of St Paul (6th cent. AD) fruit baskets are depicted around the medallion containing the Euphrates figure from the Rivers of Paradise.693 There is a personification of Egypt depicted with a basket of fruit in a scene about the Nile River in a mosaic discovered in Sepphoris, Israel.694 In the mosaics of the Khalde Basilica in Lebanon, dated to the second half of the 5th cent. AD there is a basket depiction similar to the one in Basilica B.695 It is understood that baskets of fruit were frequently shown in late antiquity mosaics. These baskets were placed in ornament areas formed by vine branches, especially in the mosaics from the Near East. The floor mosaics of Basilica B illustrate unique examples of mosaic art with both their geometric designs and their Michaelides 1989, pp. 193-194; Maguire 1987, p. 10. Maguire 1987, pp. 9-10. 684 Maguire 1987, p. 38. 685 Jensen 2000, p. 61. 686 Jensen 2000, p. 61. 687 Cimok 2000, pp. 306-307; Levi 1947, pl. XCI. 688 Tülek 2004, pp. 333-348. 689 Tülek 2004, p. 225. 690 Işın 1994, pp. 61-67; Işın 1995, pp. 27-37, fig. 6; Öztürk 2009, figs. 8-10; Yeşil-Erdek 2014, fig. 2. 691 Piccirillo 1993a, pp. 166-177, figs. 224, 229, 235, 243. 692 Piccirillo 1993a, p. 187, fig. 262. 693 Piccirillo 1997, p. 375-394, pl. 33. 694 Maguire 1999, pp. 179-184. 695 Maguire 1987, p. 33, fig. 35. 682 683

207

VI Mosaics from the Apsidal Building Apsidal Building

that the external apse wall is octagonal in shape and the interior is semicircular. Examples of churches with such a plan are known, such as the monastic complex of Torba near Bodrum with floor mosaics of the 5th and 6th cent. AD where the apse of the basilica is polygonal (heptagon) and the inner walls have a round plan.697 Another example is the church of Ioannes Prodromos built in AD 461/3 in Samatya-Istanbul. The external wall of the apse of the church is polygonal (trigon), and the inner wall has a round plan.698 This building is also known as the church of Studios Monastery or as Imrahor Mosque because it was converted into a mosque by Imrahor Ilyas Bey during the reign of Bayezid II.699

The ruin defined as an apsidal building is located 15 m north of Baths B in the centre of Hadrianopolis, and right in the north of the modern asphalt road (Fig. 4). In this area, minor excavations were carried out in 2007 in which a mosaic zone pertaining only to the apse was discovered696. Due to the interruption of the excavations, the function of the building is not definitely known yet; however, this building is highly likely to have been a church. Further excavations are required in the area to fully determine its function and its association (if any) with Baths B, located about 15 m southeast. These buildings situated very close to each other might have been built as architectural units under a complex (possibly a monastery?) in the early Byzantine period. Nevertheless, in order for the excavations to be restarted, the modern road near this building with an apse and the structure defined as Baths B need to be removed. Apart from this, it is possible to perform excavations in the areas located in the north of the Apsidal Building. For the function of Baths B to be fully understood, the excavations in this area should also be extended.

Apsidal Mosaic The dimensions of the tesserae of this floor mosaic vary between 1.0 x 1.5 cm and 1.5 x 2.0 cm. The mosaic has a border consisting of a three-strand guilloche and a main ornament zone consisting of an orthogonal pattern of polychrome adjacent scales (Fig. 261). The colours used in the mosaic are dark blue, light bluish grey, white, yellow and red, and the contours of the scales are set by

As a result of the excavations carried out around the apsidal mosaic of the Apsidal Building, it has been shown

Özet 2002, pp. 39-41; Özet 2009, pp. 74-75, fig. 10. Mango 2006, pp. 50 and 54, fig. 45; Özet 2002, pp. 39-41; Özet 2009, pp. 74-75, fig. 10. 699 Demiriz 2002, p. 58. 697 698

696

Laflı and Christof 2012, p. 31, fig. 19; Laflı and Zäh 2009, p. 654.

Fig. 261. Mosaic of the Apsidal Building in Hadrianopolis.

209

Hadrianopolis IV

Fig. 262. A detail from the mosaic of the Apsidal Building in Hadrianopolis.

dark blue tesserae (Fig. 262). The interior of the patterns is filled with white-red, white-yellow and white-light bluish grey groups of tesserae.

with another orthogonal pattern of adjacent scales. This floor mosaic dates between the 6th and 7th cent. AD.705

In the apsidal mosaic in the church of Altıntepe in Erzincan which is dated to the mid-6th cent. AD, a three-strand guilloche border is preferred, just as in the mosaic of the Apsidal Building.700 Another three-strand guilloche used as a border ornament in the apsidal mosaic is seen in the church of the necropolis Anemurium in Cilicia Tracheia (5th-6th cent. AD).701 We already know that variations of the guilloche were popularly applied by the mosaic artists in Hadrianopolis. In the research we have carried out so far, some examples of these scale patterns were specifically designed for the apses of some buildings. An earlier example of a scale pattern is found on a floor mosaic with a semi-circular form in a house in Tunisia which is dated to the beginning of the 2nd cent. AD.702 In the apsidal mosaic of the 6th cent. AD in Basilica A located in Peyia on Cyprus, another type of scale is documented.703 A further example in which this design is used is the apsidal mosaic of the basilica on the acropolis of Iasus (5th-6th cent. AD).704 Geometric designs such as scales, circles or adjacent parallelograms creating superposed chevrons, etc. were thus often used for semi-circular fields in the mosaics of the classical antiquity; perhaps this is due to the scales’ semi-circular form. The floor mosaic at the annex building of the domed church in Caunus in Asia Minor is the last mosaic example Can 2007, p. 105, figs. 6 and 8; Can 2009, pp. 10-11, fig. 18; Can 2011, p. 230, fig. 5. 701 Campbell 1998, pp. 47 and 50, pl. 209. 702 Alexander and Ennaifer 1973, p. 12, pls. 2 and 62. 703 Michaelides 1988, pp. 132 and 138, fig. 54. 704 Berti 1986, pp. 157 and 160, fig. 10. 700

705

210

Aydın 2011, pp. 31-42, figs. 3-4 and 6-8.

VII Mosaics and Frescoes from the Domus The Domus

was likely used as an atrium. Three fragments of a floor mosaic in the southeast corner of Room 1 were discovered in situ during the excavations.708 The other rooms of the Domus are respectively positioned around Room 1. In the north of the building, there are Room 2, on an east-west axis, and Rooms 3, 4 and 5 which have walls decorated with frescoes. The floors of Room 3 and Room 5 are covered with square terracotta tiles which measure 36 cm x 36 cm (Figs. 265-266). In a dwelling of the 4th-5th cent. AD a similar floor with larger tiles was discovered in Pompeiopolis in eastern Paphlagonia.709 Room 4 of the Domus in Hadrianopolis was probably used as a kitchen.710 A large number of ceramic fragments of the 7th cent. AD were found during the excavations in Room 4.711

The building referred to here as the Domus was built on a plain in the north of Göksu Valley. This building is located 150 m northeast of Basilica B as one of the buildings of the city centre (Fig. 4). Archaeological excavations of the Domus were carried out in 2007.706 In this season of excavation, the building, seven different rooms of which were discovered, had a total measurement of 30 x 15 m (Figs. 263-264). There is an entrance in the west edge of the building, the width of which is 1.80 m. The walls are made from limestone and the preserved northern walls of the building are over 2.50 m high. The building, characteristic of the late Roman-early Byzantine period in terms of its plan, is reminiscent of residences of similar type and size seen in the early Byzantine sites under the influence of Syria and in the Cilicia.707 Room 1, running centrally in an east-west direction and the largest room of the building,

There is an entrance with a width of about 1 m at the southern edge of each of the rooms located in the north of the Domus. Other than these architectural units, two more

Fig. 263. The Domus. View from the northeast. Laflı and Zäh 2009, p. 648. Musso et al. 2011, p. 116, pl. 18.4. 710 Laflı and Zäh 2009, p. 649 711 Laflı and Zäh 2009, p. 649. 708

Laflı and Zäh 2009, pp. 646-652; Laflı and Christof 2012, p. 31; Laflı 2009b, pp. 51-52. 707 Laflı and Zäh 2009, p. 651.

709

706

211

Hadrianopolis IV

Fig. 264. Plan of the the Domus in Hadrianopolis.

Fig. 265. The Domus. Terracotta pavement of Room 3.

212

Mosaics and Frescoes from the Domus

Fig. 266. The Domus. Terracotta pavement of Room 5.

rooms were discovered during the excavations in 2007. It is thought that these rooms were attached to the Domus on a date later than the construction of the building. The first of these additional architectural units is situated in the northwest end of the Domus and is called ‘Room 7’.712 The other architectural unit is situated at the southeast edge of the building and is called ‘Room 6’. The floor of this room is covered with mosaics using opus tessellatum technique.713 A water channel system consisting of terracotta pipes was discovered at a point outside of the eastern wall.

built at the beginning of the 6th cent. AD and that it was occupied until the end of the 7th cent. AD.718 The Mosaic Floor of Room 1b Room 1 is divided into two different sections called ‘a’ and ‘b’. The rectangular Room 1b located in the east measures 6.00 m x 13.50 m (Fig. 261). The floor mosaic was uncovered in three fragments in situ in the southeast of the room in 2007 (Figs. 267-268). The tesserae made from marble, serpentinite and travertine vary between 0.5 x 0.5 cm and 1.0 x 1.0 cm. In the mosaic, black, white, orange, yellow, red, green and grey colours were used. After the mosaic was covered with geotextile for temporary protection purposes, it was buried under a layer of sand to a depth of 5-10 cm.

During the excavations of the Domus, a great number of finds relating to Byzantine daily life were obtained. Various pot forms and oil lamps are the most important group of finds; the glass finds drew particular attention. In addition to the glass pots and oil lamps, numerous windowpanes were also found during the excavations714: these are mostly of a green colour.715 Among the finds of the Domus, there are also various architectural fragments. In the last phase of the building, some reused materials were found. One of these materials is the marble ambon fragment belonging to a religious building.716 Adjacent to Room 5, an Ionic capital made from limestone was found out of the northeastern wall of the building.717 In the light of the data obtained, it is thought that the Domus was

The first design surrounding the mosaic is an orange band, as seen in most of the Hadrianopolis mosaics. Following this band is a second band, consisting of a swastikameander in perspective and figural panels placed between the arms of the swastika, in bad condition (Fig. 269). In the mosaic fragment on the southeastern edge, there is a bird figure depicted on a white background inside a polychrome frame (Figs. 269-270). This bird, with a preserved height of 23 cm, is quite similar to the bird on the sixth rank from the west located on Panel I of the mosaic of the north aisle in Basilica A, as well as to the confronted birds in the ornament zone in the east half of the mosaic of the nave in the same basilica. This bird, shown in profile, has a long neck and legs. Considering its body structure, even though

Laflı and Zäh 2009, p. 646. Laflı 2009b, p. 51; Laflı and Zäh 2009, pp. 649-650. 714 Laflı 2009b, pp. 161-170. 715 Laflı 2009b, p. 167, fig. 4; Laflı 2009a, p. 53. 716 Laflı and Zäh 2009, p. 647. 717 Laflı and Zäh 2009, p. 647. 712 713

718

213

Laflı and Zäh 2009, p. 647.

Hadrianopolis IV

Fig. 267. The Domus. In situ mosaic pieces in Room 1b.

its long legs would indicate a waterfowl, in our opinion it could be a barnyard fowl due to its crest and beard. There is a pattern with swastika-meander in perspective to the left of this panel with a bird figure (Fig. 269).719 This pattern consists of white, green, grey, red and orange tesserae. There is another small fragment on the northern edge of this mosaic fragment. As understood from these fragments, vine branches and a bunch of grapes are placed in a further panel with a white background (Fig. 269). There are five grapes in the bunch of grapes. The contours of the grapes consist of black tesserae with 0.5 cm square.

719

This line is filled with a row of red tesserae and an orange tessera is located in each centre. In the other mosaic fragment right in front of the southern wall, the continuation of the border design is seen. On the white background panel in this fragment, there is a lion(?) figure, the head and front legs of which are destroyed (Figs. 271-272). The body of the lion shown in profile is facing to the right of the scene. The figure, with a preserved height of 30 cm, is in an attacking position like the leopard, gryphon and lion figures in Basilica A. It is depicted as leaping forward. On the right of this panel, there is an area belonging to the swastika-meander design, the northern edge of which has not been preserved. On the

For some examples of the design, see Balmelle et al. 1985, pl. 42.

214

Mosaics and Frescoes from the Domus

Fig. 268. The Domus. Mosaic floor of Room 1b. View from the west.

right of it, there is another panel with a white ground. Only a tiny field belonging to the southern edge of this panel has been preserved and a tail (?) belonging to an animal figure can be distinguished in this field (Fig. 271). Since nothing pertaining to the figure was preserved other than the tail, it is not possible to identify the species of this animal.

zigzags.721 In the ornament fields in the north and south halves of this row of tesserae, red, orange, green, black and white tesserae are placed in interlocking triangles. The Mosaic Floor of Room 6 The interior dimensions of Room 6, located in the southeastern end of the Domus, are 4.40 m x 3.50 m (Figs. 264-274). There is an entrance 1m wide in the north of the room. The preserved maximum height of the room is 1.22 m. As a result of the archaeological excavations, it is thought that Room 6 was built at a later phase after the initial construction of the Domus. For this reason, it is likely that the floor mosaic of Room 6 belongs to a date later than Room 1b mosaic, which dates back to the first

In the main ornament field of the third fragment situated in Room 1b, there are red poised squares placed in intervals on a green ground; this field is surrounded by a band of shaded zigzag pattern (Figs. 267-268 and 273; Pls. 5d and 18 ).720 An ivy is placed in the centre of each square in the main ornament field (Pls. 18 and 21l). One row of black tesserae located in the centre of the band creates

720

Keleş, Çelikbaş and Yılmaz 2014, fig. 20.

721

215

For a similar one to this band, see Balmelle et al. 1985, pl. 9a.

Hadrianopolis IV

Fig. 269. The Domus. Orthophoto of the in situ mosaic piece at the southeast corner of Room 1b.

Fig. 270. The Domus. A barnyard fowl in the border design of the mosaic of Room 1b.

216

Mosaics and Frescoes from the Domus

Fig. 271. The Domus. Orthophoto of the second in situ mosaic piece at the southeast corner of Room 1b.

red, green and grey. This in situ mosaic was first covered with geotextile for conservation purposes and then buried in a sand layer to a depth of 10 cm. The first design surrounding the mosaic of Room 6 is an orange band with a width of 16 cm and limited by bands of two rows of blue tesserae on each side (Figs. 276-277). The second border of the mosaic is a row of tangent stepped crosses or poised squares with broken sides, forming hourglasses (Figs. 275-277; and Pl. 4b).722 There is a cross in the centre of each poised square. In the border, orange, red, green, dark blue and white tesserae are used. The last border design of the mosaic of Room 6 is a wave pattern, one half of which is made from dark blue tesserae, and the other half made from white tesserae (Figs. 275-278; and Pl. 1d). On the northern edge of the mosaic, the form of the pattern is a simple wave723 which we often see in the floor mosaics dating to earlier periods in mosaic art (Fig. 278; and Pl. 1d). The pattern on the other edges of the mosaic is in the form of waves of an even size and shape. This difference makes us think that the mosaic might have undergone renovation at a further date following the first construction phase. But a band of wave pattern could also be made in two different forms in the same mosaic in the Roman period, even if it is a rare situation. An example of these kinds of varying wave designs is observed in an unpublished mosaic, named Söğütlü, dating to the 4th-5th cent. AD and exhibited in the Mosaic Museum of Zeugma in Gaziantep.

Fig. 272. The Domus. A lion (?) in the border design of the mosaic of Room 1b.

half of the 6th cent. AD. The earliest possible date for the mosaic of Room 6 is within the 6th cent. AD.

The panel of the mosaic has five ornament fields composed of rectangular and almost square panels running in a north-south direction (Figs. 275-276 and 279). There are

The dimensions of the mosaic of Room 6 were originally 4.40 m x 3.50 m (Figs. 275-276). The eastern part of the mosaic extending in an east-west direction is particularly badly preserved. In the mosaic, 72 to 94 tesserae were used per dm2. The tesserae are generally 1.0 x 1.0 cm. The colours used for the tesserae are blue, black, white, orange,

722 For stepped squares or squares with sides of broken lines, see Balmelle et al. 2002, p. 37, (in French carré à degrés). 723 Balmelle et al. 1985, p. 156, pl. 101a.

217

Hadrianopolis IV

Fig. 273. The Domus. A detail from the mosaic of Room 1b.

Fig. 274. Room 6 in the Domus. View from the southwest.

218

Mosaics and Frescoes from the Domus

Fig. 275. The Domus. Mosaic of Room 6. View from the northeast.

Fig. 276. The Domus. Illustration of the mosaic of Room 6.

219

Hadrianopolis IV

Fig. 277. The Domus. A detail from the border design of the mosaic of Room 6.

two portraits showing a woman and a man and 11 birds depicted in the ornament field (Figs. 279-281). In addition to these, there are also 11 rectangles and squares with geometric design. The ornament field is surrounded by a band composed of four rows of tesserae. This band also forms the squares and rectangles which are interlooped tangentially. In the centre of the geometric designed frames there are rosettes reminiscent of the rosettes in Basilicas A and B, although some of them were created with rough and simple craftsmanship (Figs. 282-283; and Pl. 21h).

rough and simplistic way when compared to the other birds in the mosaics of Hadrianopolis. The anatomical features of the birds are not considered and the details are rendered very simply. On the right of the bird figure located in the fourth frame there is a floral pattern made of green tesserae (Figs. 279 and 284). No floral pattern is placed in the other scenes. In the second frame in the north-south direction of the mosaic of Room 6 a female and a male bust who are thought to be those of the owners of the Domus are depicted (Figs. 275-276 and 279-280). The ornament field with the female portrait measures 36 cm x 28 cm. The portrait, depicted on a white background has a height of 32 cm. The shape of their faces has a heart-shaped feature

The dimensions of the bird figure ornament fields vary between 28 cm x 25 cm and 35 cm x 33 cm. These 11 birds consist of various fowl and pigeon(?) figures (Figs. 279-280). The birds in this mosaic are rendered in a more

Fig. 278. The Domus. A detail from the wave pattern of the mosaic of Room 6.

220

Mosaics and Frescoes from the Domus

Fig. 279. The Domus. Orthophoto of the mosaic panel of Room 6.

Fig. 280. The Domus. Portraits of a man and a woman in the mosaic panel of Room 6.

221

Hadrianopolis IV

Fig. 281. The Domus. Bird figures from the mosaic panel of Room 6.

Fig. 282. The Domus. A detail from the mosaic of Room 6.

222

Mosaics and Frescoes from the Domus

Fig. 283. The Domus. A detail from the mosaic of Room 6.

Fig. 284. The Domus. A bird figure from the mosaic panel of Room 6.

223

Hadrianopolis IV that gets narrower from top to bottom. Her hair, ending at the level of her mouth, is composed of orange and dark blue tesserae. A contour is set with a row of dark blue tesserae at the top of the head. White tesserae were used for the skin. For the cheekbones, orange and pink tesserae are used. The narrow forehead of the figure is composed of two rows of white tesserae. The eyebrows are formed with a thinner row of tesserae compared to others. The eyes have an elliptical form; each iris is made up from a single black tessera. The left vertical line forming the nose is laid with black and the right with orangey-red tesserae. The mouth, formed by red and black tesserae ordered one under the other, is reminiscent of the technique used in the personifications of the Rivers of Paradise in Basilica B. One half of the neck is filled with white tesserae and the other half filled with red tesserae. There is a zigzag pattern between two horizontal bands, formed by dark blue tesserae on a white background, underneath this field. The patterns in these fields might have been intended to indicate jewelry, but the simple and non-detailed mosaic prevents the object from being fully understood.

of tesserae, the lower part is processed in a semi-circular form. Again, as in the female portrait, pinky-red and orange tesserae are used for the cheeks. The cloth seen on the shoulders of the figure must be a jacket. There is a triangular object formed by orange tesserae in the neck. The orange colour is also used for the earring of the figure. Perhaps this colour was meant to indicate golden jewels which emphasise the richness and nobility of the figure. A panel with a polychrome orthogonal pattern of adjacent scales was added to the floor of the entrance measuring 80 cm x 75 cm in the north of Room 6 (Fig. 285; and Pl. 20b). This panel with a white ground is bordered with two rows of dark blue tesserae. The scales are in seven rows running in a north-south direction. Due to the lack of space, the patterns are in a semi-circular form in the south and triangular in the north. The contours of the patterns are formed by a single row of dark blue tesserae. The colours used for the interior of this line are red, green, orange as well as tones of these colours. Mosaic Fragments

The male portrait has a height of 29.5 cm. The figure, with a facial width of 18 cm, has a chin which is much longer than it is supposed to be. As in the other portrait, for the semi-circular top of the head of the figure, one row of dark blue tesserae is used. All remaining tesserae in this field are grey. The grey tesserae must have been used in order to emphasise that the man was bald. At both sides of the head, the ears are processed with red tesserae at the level of the eyes. On the right ear of the figure, a round earring draws attention. The details of the man’s eyebrow and nose have the same technical features as the woman’s. While the upper part of eyes is formed by a horizontal row

During the excavations of the Domus, small mosaic fragments were found. One of these fragments was found during the excavations of Room 1b. The dimensions of the fragment are 26 cm x 17 cm. The dimensions of the tesserae forming the mosaic, which was made using the opus tessellatum technique, vary between 0.5 x 0.5 cm and 1.0 x 1.0 cm. In the mosaic, a maximum of 162 tesserae have been used per dm2. The colours used are dark blue, white, orange, red and green. On this small fragment, a field with grapevine branches and a depiction of a bunch of grapes coming out of a vase is preserved (Fig. 286).

Fig. 285. The Domus. Threshold mosaic consisting of an orthogonal pattern of adjacent scales in the entrance of Room 6.

224

Mosaics and Frescoes from the Domus

Fig. 286. The Domus. A mosaic fragment uncovered in Room 1b.

Evaluation of the Mosaics from the Domus and Their Parallels – Border Designs

The features of the tesserae and the craftsmanship on the mosaic are in harmony with the mosaic of Room 1b. The bunch of grapes has the same style and colour as the bunch of grapes in the mosaic of Room 1b. This mosaic fragment must thus belong to the border design of the mosaic of Room 1b.

In the mosaic of Room 1b, a swastika-meander pattern with figured panels placed between the arms are among the examples of border patterns seen in the mosaics of the classical antiquity (Figs. 269 and 271). There are panels with bird figures between the arms of the swastikameander design in mosaics from Mopsuestia (5th cent. AD) in Cilicia.725 The design of the swastika-meander consists of two different bands. One of the bands is polychromeshaded. The other band is composed of simple guilloche. There are some floral ornaments in the panels with bird figures. The mosaic, in this way, is reminiscent of the birds depicted with rose patterns on the mosaic of the nave of Basilica A. In two different mosaic examples from Mopsuestia, swastika-meander and square panels alternate with geometric patterns.726

A ribbed vase with a high base is depicted on another mosaic fragment discovered in Room 1b (Fig. 287). The fragment measures 44 cm x 43 cm. The dimensions of the tesserae are 1.0 x 1.0 cm. The colours of tesserae used in the mosaic are black, white, grey, orange, green and red. The vase depiction is similar to another example in the apsidal mosaic of Basilica B. The rows of tesserae belonging to the restrictive bands on the lower, upper and right edges of the mosaic are preserved; however, it is hard to estimate whether the fragment belongs to a border design or a panel. There is no obvious common point in terms of designing between this mosaic fragment and the mosaic of Room 1b, and the tones of tesserae are a bit different from those seen in this in situ mosaic. Therefore, it has not been ascertained whether the fragment belongs to the floor mosaic of Room 1b. The mosaic fragment dates back to the first half of the 6th cent. AD.724

In the mosaics of Antioch-on-the-Orontes, there are similar border patterns. In the mosaic of Room 8 in Baths D, dated to the 4th cent. AD, swastika-meanders and small squares alternate.727 On the square panel in Room 3 of Baths D, there is a pattern with swastika-meander in perspective similar to the one in the mosaic of the Domus.728 A similar Budde 1969, pp. 50-51, fig. 24, fig. 126. Budde 1969, pp. 58, 62 and 64, figs. 29 and 31. 727 Campbell 1988, p. 16, R 39e. 728 Campbell 1988, p. 17, R 42e. 725 726

724

Laflı 2009b, p. 49, fig. 10.

225

Hadrianopolis IV

Fig. 287. The Domus. A mosaic fragment uncovered in Room 1b.

and Pl. 5d). An example that is very similar to this design can be seen in a villa mosaic in Tunisia. In this earlier mosaic of the second half of the 4th cent. AD colours applied in the ornament are black, yellow, light yellow, white and grey.733

pattern was also found in the mosaics of Bath F which are dated to the same century.729 Lastly, in another example dated to the 5th cent. AD from Daphne in Antioch, the swastika-meander ornament is formed by a polychrome shaded-band and another band with simple guilloche pattern. There are square panels with geometric patterns between the arms of the pattern.730

There are two border ornaments in the mosaic of Room 6 in the Domus. One of these ornaments is the wave pattern (Figs. 276-278; and Pl. 1d). The wave pattern was popular in the mosaics of Hadrianopolis. Other than in the Domus, borders consisting of this pattern are also seen in the mosaics found in Baths A, Baths B and Basilica A. The wave pattern in the mosaic of Room 6 is similar to the wave pattern on the mosaic of the nave of Basilica A in terms of colour arrangement. Just as one half of the wave pattern is white and the other half black in Basilica A, so blackish dark blue and white are preferred in the mosaic from the Domus. In the mosaic of Baths B, the colours used for the pattern are black, red and orange; and red and light brownish in the mosaic of Baths A. On the other hand, the forms of wave patterns in the northern edge of the mosaic of the Domus are different from the other examples of Hadrianopolis, as mentioned before in the book.

Another example of the same design is documented on the mosaic of the nave in the church at Altıntepe in Erzincan which is dated to the 6th cent. AD.731 In the mosaic border, the swastika-meander is formed by a polychrome shaded band and a simple guilloche band similar to the mosaic in Antioch. In the square and rectangular panels between the arms of the pattern, bird figures, a bull, a leopard and a deer are depicted. The swastika-meanders formed by two different bands appear to have been popularly used in both Asia Minor and Near East in the early Byzantine period. A swastika-meander processed this way is seen in the mosaic of the Chapel of the Priest John in Jordan. In this mosaic of AD 565, there are small panels with figures between the arms of the swastika-meander.732 Another border design seen in the mosaic of Room 1b is the band of polychrome-shaded zigzag pattern (Fig. 273

The other border ornament in the mosaic, the row of tangent poised squares with broken sides, forming hourglasses, is among the designs seen in the mosaics of

Campbell 1988, p. 50, pl. 146. Cimok 2000, p. 240. 731 Can 2007, p. 103; Can 2009, p. 8, fig. 8; Can 2011, p. 227, fig. 3. 732 Piccirillo 1993a, pp. 174-175, figs. 230-232. 729 730

733

226

Alexander and Ennaifer 1973, pp. 74-75, pls. 34-35.

Mosaics and Frescoes from the Domus classical antiquity (Figs. 275-277; and Pl. 4b). However, a fully identical border to this one could not be found by us so far. In this kind of ornament, the spaces between the tangent poised squares are in the form of an hourglass.734 An earlier example of a square with broken sides or, in other words, a stepped cross is depicted in a small square panel identified in a floor mosaic (AD 350-400) of Room No. 47 of Baths C in Antioch-on-the-Orontes.735 In the centre of this pattern, there is a cross with arms of equal length; the same type of cross is also seen in the ornament of the mosaic from the Domus. The ornament of Room 6 is a design composed of tangent squares (crosses).

figure in terms of its posture, which is often seen in the mosaics from the early Byzantine period (Figs. 174c, 281 and 288). One foot of the figure is in the air and leaning forward, and the head is turned backwards contrary to the body. It was previously mentioned that there is a bird example depicted in this way in the Noah’s Ark scene in the basilica of Mopsuestia.736 Another bird (partridge) with a similar position is seen on the mosaic of hunting Amazons from Haleplibahçe in Edessa. In small rectangular panels of the main ornament field in Room 6, there are also poised squares (Figs. 279 and 282). In the mosaic of the Chrysopolitissa Basilica on Cyprus which is dated to the 6th cent. AD, the poised squares formed by the bands linked to each other with loops are similar to the mosaic of the Domus.737 In a church mosaic in Mar Liyas, Jordan, known to be dated to the Byzantine period, there is an example of looped poised squares.738

Panels No similarities to the red squares placed in intervals on a green ground in the panel of the mosaic of Room 1b of the Domus have been found by us so far (Pl. 18). However, the animal figures on the border ornaments are especially similar to the mosaic of Basilica A. Due to the construction of the Domus at the beginning of the 6th cent. AD and a great number of small finds from the excavations , we think that this mosaic belongs to the first half of the 6th cent. AD.

Another geometric design of the mosaic of Room 6 in the Domus is the orthogonal pattern of adjacent scales ornament on the floor of the northern entrance of the room (Fig. 285; and Pl. 20b). These are among the most popular designs, used in so many variations during Greek and Roman antiquity. A. Ovadiah states that the scale is seen in Delos, Pompeii and Rome, among others, and that this pattern originally dates back to Mycenaean art.739 The scale as a mosaic motif stems from metalworking.740 In mosaic art, it was either used in the panels or to create a background. The Great Palace mosaics of Constantinople are an example of the scale pattern used as a background (Fig. 289).741 The mosaics discovered in Haleplibahçe district of Şanlıurfa (ancient Edessa) have a background made from scales as well (Figs. 175 and 255).742 In the ornament field around the panel with a lion figure, a flower is added to the centre of each scale which form the background. In a public building of the 6th cent. AD in Kourion on Cyprus there are flower patterns at the centre of each scale.743 The scale pattern is also documented on mosaics in Asia Minor and in different contexts beyond Asia Minor. Some architectural units where the scale pattern can be seen in the mosaic art include the bath complex (late 5th cent. AD)744 and the church of the necropolis (mid-5th cent. AD)745 in Anemurium; the basilica at Mopsuestia (5th cent. AD)746; Martyrion of St Babylas in Antioch-on-the-Orontes (6th cent. AD)747; the monastery of Torba near Bodrum (5th-6th cent. AD)748; the

In the mosaic of Room 6, an ornament field consisting of small square and rectangles can be seen. There are geometric patterns, bird figures and two portraits thought to belong to the owners of the house in these panels (Figs. 275-276 and 279-283). The production techniques of the mosaic are not high quality. There is a gap of a few mm between the tesserae. The birds and the portraits are depicted simply and without any detail. But still, it is clear that it is a mosaic that exhibits characteristics of the early Byzantine period. Moreover, the portraits belonging to the owners of the Domus are highly unique examples in terms of the mosaic art of the era. These portraits must have been created using a realist concept of art. In the male portrait, the depiction of baldness using grey tesserae is a reflection of this realist conception. The jewel depictions seen in the personifications or noble characters of the early Byzantine mosaics also exist in this mosaic. The fact that the earring in the right ear and the triangular object right below the neck of the male figure are made of orange tesserae make us think that they might be golden. The nobility of the Domus’ owners is relative in the extensive geography of the Byzantine world, but these persons, like the devoted scholarius Himerios and Valentina, mentioned in the inscription on the mosaic of the south aisle of Basilica B, must have been respected persons in their society.

Budde 1969, fig. 42. Michaelides 1988, p. 110, fig. 23; Michaelides 1989, pp. 196-197. 738 Piccirillo 1993a, p. 339, fig. 744. 739 Ovadiah 1980, pp. 154-155. 740 Ovadiah 1980, p. 155. 741 Cimok 1997, p. 11. 742 Karabulut, Önal and Dervişoğlu 2011, fot. 45-47, 53-54, 65, 67-68, 70-75; Karaca and Rızvanoğlu 2008, p. 6. 743 Michaelides 1988, pp. 131 and 138, fig. 54. 744 Campbell 1998, p. 39, pl. 164. 745 Campbell 1998, pp. 44-50, pl. 195. 746 Budde 1969, p. 44, figs. 2-3. 747 Campbell 1988, pp. 43-47, 215B. 748 Özet 2009, pp. 72-73, figs. 8-9. 736 737

It is hard to definitely identify the species of birds depicted in the small panels of the main ornament field in Room 6 (Figs. 276, 279 and 281). The mosaic artist rendered these birds in a rough style. Nevertheless, we can easily say that the most of birds are poultry. The bird is a typical For border examples, see Balmelle et al. 1985, pls. 15 and 10m. Campbell 1988, p. 37, pl. 109; Levi 1947, pp. 289-291, fig. 118, pl. 118a. 734 735

227

Hadrianopolis IV

Fig. 288. A bird figure in the mosaic panel of Room 6.

Fig. 289. A detail from the mosaic of the Great Palace in Constantinople.

228

Mosaics and Frescoes from the Domus

Fig. 290. The Domus. Fresco on the north wall of Room 3.

Eastern Basilica in Xanthus (5th-6th cent. AD)749; and the basilicas of Bishop Philip (5th cent. AD)750 and Suvodol (6th cent. AD)751 in Macedonia. The baptistery mosaic of the Bishop’s Basilica located in Macedonia is similar to the mosaic of Hadrianopolis due to the application of the ornament to the rectangular areas in accordance with the architectural features.752

are singular but important examples for comprehending the art of the 6th cent. AD in and around Hadrianopolis.753 The dimensions of Room 3 are 3.20 m x 3.20 m. The walls of the room have a thickness of 1.05 m. The entrance located in the south has a width of 1.00 m. There are window openings on the eastern and western walls, both 90 cm wide. The maximum preserved height of the northern wall is 2.53 m. The eastern wall has been preserved to a height of 1.18 m; the western wall has been preserved to a height of 1.25 m and the southern wall to a height of 1.27 m. The floor of the room is covered with tiles each of which measure 36 x 36 cm (Fig. 265). The northern wall of the room has a foundation with a depth of 30 cm.

Frescoes of Rooms 3 and 5 Room 3 and Room 5 from the architectural units located in the north of the Domus (Fig. 264) have frescoes with geometric ornaments. Other than the Domus, no building with frescoes exists in Hadrianopolis. The fact that the frescoes are only limited to two rooms of the building is unfortunately not enough to tell us anything significant about mural painting of the early Byzantine period in the site. On the other hand, it is also fortunate that a section pertaining to the upper level of the ornament field of Room 3 is preserved. In buildings of the early Byzantine period, only the fresco designs pertaining to the lower levels of the walls tend to survive. The frescoes of the Domus must belong to the 6th cent. AD at the earliest as a result of the evaluation of the available archeological data. Any similar example which might shed light on dating through comparison is not available. The frescoes of the Domus

The colours used in the frescoes of Room 3 are blue, red, orange, green, grey and cream. The walls were covered with geotextile in order to protect the frescoes from external damage. Serious conservation work should be urgently performed on the frescoes of the Domus. The northern wall fresco of the room has two separate ornament fields, that is, lower and upper levels (Fig. 290). There are three geometric designs depicted in blue colour on cream plaster in the rectangular panels in the lower ornament level. The panels measure 95 x 40 cm, 100 x 50 cm and 100 x 50 cm. The ornaments in the panels are composed of diagonal bands. The diagonal bands on the right and left panels create zigzags with soft twirls. The diagonal bands of the middle panel are, however, straight.

Raynaud 2009, pp. 73-74, figs. 74-76. Hoddinot 1963, pp. 161-167, pl. 41b. 751 Hoddinot 1963, pp. 202-204, pl. 56c. 752 Wiseman and Mano-Zissi 1972, pp. 422-424, pl. 90, figs. 41-42, and 47; Wiseman and Mano-Zissi 1973, pp. 398-399, pl. 68, fig. 14. 749 750

753

229

Laflı 2009b, p. 52.

Hadrianopolis IV

Fig. 291. The Domus. A detail from the fresco on the north wall of Room 3.

The lower parts of two panels on the eastern and western edges of the upper ornament field have been preserved, but the middle panel is destroyed. In these panels, there are green, red and orange triangles, the contours of which are set with a fine, blue band (Figs. 290-291). These patterns are created based on a more symmetrical design compared to the other ornaments. The reason for this talented craftsmanship is that the panels are located at eye level and so these are the designs appealing most directly to the viewer. There is a border ornament with a width of 20 cm in the ornament field underneath the panels with triangle patterns (Fig. 290). The design is a zigzag done in blue colour on a light ground. The gaps between the zigzag lines are filled with triangles. The rough treatment of the border ornament causes the pattern to gain the look of a chevron pattern. This zigzag band is also reminiscent of the zigzag ornament in the mosaic of Room 1b. The layout of both bands is similar to each other. Of course, the fresco of Room 3 is a more simplified design. On the eastern and western edges of the northern wall, spaces with a width of a few centimetres are reserved for the vertical border ornaments. Except for a quite small area, almost all of these border ornaments are destroyed. On the border belonging to the eastern edge, three red horizontal lines placed one under the other can be distinguished.

On the eastern wall fresco of the room, only the ornament field underneath the window level has been preserved, as in the western wall. However, three horizontal bands pertaining to the upper ornament field located just above the panel on the northern (left) edge of the wall can be distinguished on the plaster. The panel on the northern (left) edge of this fresco is composed of rows of red and black diagonal bands (Figs. 295-296).754 The central panel just underneath the window opening is badly damaged. As understood from the preserved field, we can infer that originally it had an ornament consisting of diagonal bands. In the rectangular panel located on the southern (right) edge, there is a geometric ornament created by symmetric and wavy lines in order to create the illusion of marble (Fig. 297). The colours used in the panel are grayish blue, red and cream. There is a panel consisting of the same ornament on each of the narrow walls at both sides of the entrance in the south of the room; but the fresco on the southeastern wall is badly damaged.755 There is a pattern reminiscent of the St Andrew’s cross in the centre of the fresco on the southwestern wall (Fig. 298). As understood from the preserved parts of the frescoes of Room 3, only geometric patterns are included. Apart from the transenna-like scale pattern and the grid, all the other panels imitate sheets of marble and opus sectile wall veneering. The panel on Fig. 298 imitates even the ad apertura technique, where one block of marble is sliced into several tiles, which are then assembled so as to create designs – very much like one does with the veins of the

In the lower ornament field of the western wall in Room 3, three adjacent rectangular panels are preserved. The panels measure 100 cm x 60 cm, 90 cm x 60 cm and 90 cm x 57 cm. The panel design on the southern (right) edge of the wall is composed of rows of diagonal bands, as in the panels belonging to the northern wall fresco (Fig. 292). There is a grid pattern in the panel located in the middle (Fig. 293). A dot pattern is added to the centres of each lozenge. The panel on the northern edge is decorated with an orthogonal pattern of adjacent scales (Fig. 294). These designs are depicted in grayish blue on cream ground.

754 The preserved dimensions of the panels are 120 x 60 cm, 100 x 20 cm and 70 x 67 cm. 755 The dimensions of the panel located on the southeastern wall are 100 x 70 cm. The panel of the southeastern wall measures 70 x 80 cm together with the plaster remainings.

230

Mosaics and Frescoes from the Domus

Fig. 292. The Domus. The left panel of the fresco on the west wall of Room 3.

Fig. 293. The Domus. The middle panel of the fresco on the west wall of Room 3.

Fig. 294. The Domus. The right panel of the fresco on the west wall of Room 3.

wood in furniture.756 The ornaments are created using the simplest possible concept and rough expressions. It seems that the fresco artist did not develop a specific system for the geometric patterns, but rather created the patterns by benefiting from previous experiences and handcraft. Nevertheless, these conclusions also apply to the lower ornament fields. The patterns belonging to the panels above the zigzag ornament band on the northern wall have regular dimensioning and colouring. The triangular patterns are particularly distinguished from each other with gentle emphasis. Green colours not used in the lower

ornament fields are preferred in the triangular patterns. The fresco on the southwestern wall has more attentive craftsmanship. In the non-preserved parts of the fresco of Room 3 and especially at the high points of the walls, it is likely that better craftsmanship is exhibited. Room 5, located in the northwest end of the Domus, also has frescoes; but almost all of the mural paintings in this room are destroyed. The room measures 4.04 m x 3.20 m. An entrance 1.00 m wide is located in the south of the room (Fig. 264). The preserved height of the northern wall of the room is 2.62 m. The height of the western wall is 1.60 m, the height of the eastern wall is 2.34 m and the height of the southern wall is 1.40 m. There is a window opening on the

756 On the subject of marble imitation in painting cf. (among many others) Eristov, Vibert-Guigue and Sarkis 2006-2007, pp. 152-153.

231

Hadrianopolis IV

Fig. 295. The Domus. The left panel of the fresco on the east wall of Room 3.

Fig. 296. The Domus. A detail from the left panel of the fresco on the east wall of Room 3.

232

Mosaics and Frescoes from the Domus

Fig. 297. The Domus. The right panel of the fresco on the east wall of Room 3.

cream plaster. Lastly, in Room 5, there are two horizontal bands positioned one under the other in an area of 15 cm x 10 cm on the left lower edge of the eastern wall; but these bands can hardly be distinguished on the plaster. The bands located in this small area are done in grayish blue on cream plaster.

southern wall measuring 90 cm x 65 cm. Just as in Room 3 there is a tile-grounded floor in Room 3 (Fig. 266). Each of tiles in this room measure 36 cm x 36 cm. In the Domus, only Rooms 3 and 5 have terracotta floors. The fact that the walls of these rooms are also the only ones decorated with frescoes makes us think that this might not be coincidence; and furthermore, that Rooms 3 and 5 may have a particular importance compared to the other architectural units when the structure was occupied. The walls of Room 5 have been covered with geotextile as in Room 3.

It is obvious that the frescoes belonging to these two rooms in the Domus are unique finds. For this reasons, it is understood that their artistic character is peculiar to Hadrianopolis or Paphlagonia. The frescoes discovered in Tios/Tieion located between the borders of Bithynia and Paphlagonia in Filyos/Hisarönü in Zonguldak today also contribute to our understanding of the region’s art. However, the frescoes of Tios are examples of a much later era compared to those of Hadrianopolis. The frescoes situated in the pastophorium of a church located in the acropolis of the city date back to the 10th-12th cent. AD.757 As a result of the excavations it has been discovered that some frescoes with geometric patterns were added at a later date at the parados of the theatre in Tios original structure of which is dated to the 2nd cent. AD, when the building was begun to be used for a new purpose.758

The colours used in the fresco of Room 5 are blue, red, green and cream. The fresco has been preserved at two points on the northern wall of the room and on the left lower corner of the eastern wall. The first of the fresco fragments on the northern wall covers 60 cm x 50 cm, together with the plaster remaining on the left end of the wall. The design remaining on the fresco belongs to a border ornament used for the western edge of the wall. In this vertical border, red and blue diagonal bands can be seen (Fig. 299). It is hypothesised that the fresco fragment preserved on the right edge of the northern wall is composed of a geometric ornament with the effect of marble covering (Fig. 300). Although the ornament has not been well preserved, this design can also be reconstructed in accordance with the similar panels seen in the frescoes of the eastern and southern walls in Room 3. The colours used in this part of the frescoes are red, blue and green on

757 758

233

Atasoy and Yıldırım 2011, p. 3; Yıldırım 2011, p. 42. Yıldırım 2011, p. 42.

Hadrianopolis IV

Fig. 298. The Domus. Fresco on the south wall of Room 3.

The panels consisting of the marble-effect ornaments and of the diagonal bands are the common designs preferred in the frescoes of both Room 3 and Room 5. The marbleeffect ornament is a type of design which was used in various kinds from an early period. Some early examples of the ornament, which are reminiscent of the examples in Hadrianopolis, decorate the walls of the burial chambers in Perge.759 In these examples of the 2nd-3rd cent. AD, the lines spread from a central point symmetrically in all directions and in waves.760 These lines imitate the veins on the marble plates. In the frescoes of the burial chambers located in the necropolis of Perge, there are rectangular

panels with diagonal bands creating zigzags.761 These geometric elements were used in frescoes as part of the designs which imitated marble. Some early frescoes creating a marble effect are seen in a different variation in Ephesus.762 Similar mural paintings from Asia Minor, which are dated to the 4th cent. AD, are observed on the walls of the room located at the west side of the baptistery of the church at Laodicea on the Lycus, and also on the wall of the north aisle of this church (Fig. 301).763

759

Dikilitaş 2005, p. 83, fig. 8. Özdizbay 2001, pp. 22, 44-45 and 62, pl. 28.1, 57.2, 59, 60.1 and 81.2; Özdizbay 2002. pp. 486 and 503, fig. 7.

761

760

762

Özdizbay 2001, p. 57, pl. 77. Zimmermann and Ladstätter 2010, p. 131, fig. 243. 763 Şimşek 2015, pp. 64-66, figs. 91 and 93-96.

234

Mosaics and Frescoes from the Domus

Fig. 299. The Domus. Left side of the fresco on the north wall of Room 5.

Fig. 300. The Domus. A detail from the fresco on the north wall of Room 5.

235

Hadrianopolis IV

Fig. 301. An example of a 4th cent. mural painting from Laodicea on the Lycus (after Şimşek 2015, Fig. 91).

Fig. 302. A mosaic fragment found in Kimistene.

236

VIII Conclusions Hadrianopolis proves itself to be a more important site than previously thought with its mosaic and fresco finds with representation of numerous geometric patterns, floral designs, birds and other animals as well as other figural representations. We have shown that the site has not only floor mosaics, but also mural mosaics with examples of glass tesserae. However, no in situ wall mosaics have been discovered in the buildings of the city. These generally unusual and striking mosaic finds of the site add new information to the already known range of mosaic art. The floor mosaics pertaining to the religious buildings have both an especially high level of art concept and set particularly important examples for early Christian iconography. The geometric patterned frescoes belonging to the Domus exhibit a special characteristic. The discovery of the frescoes only in a single building and their insufficient state of protection limit any interpretations that may be made regarding the art of fresco.

Inlaying of opus sectile on a narrow floor of 1m2 does not really allow for any creativity. The fact that the floor is formed by a combination of stones and bricks is not peculiar to Hadrianopolis or Paphlagonia as mixed materials are also used elsewhere. In opus sectile, generally materials such as marble and travertine are used. On the floor, the stars consisting of hexagonal and triangular tiles are the opus sectile designs that one may find in most well-known regions with mosaic examples. The stuccoes on the walls of Room 11 in Baths A have been preserved. No trace of any example of fresco is, however, found in the plaster. For the longer preservation of the stucco, it was strengthened with a hydraulic liquid grout injection in 2008. The floor mosaics of Baths A and Baths B are basically average with respect to the public buildings in the early Byzantine period. What remains unsolved is the complex structure of Baths B mosaics both among themselves, and between them and the architectural building they belong to. For a better understanding of the relations between the mosaic floors of Baths B, further archaeological excavations should be undertaken.

The floor mosaics discovered in Baths A and Baths B, which were dated to the last quarter of the 5th cent. AD, do not only have examples of known designs but also those which have not been documented before. The common points in these mosaics are seen in the characteristics of their tesserae. Marble, serpentinite and travertine tesserae are the largest tesserae, with dimensions of 2.0 x 2.0 cm, among the mosaics of Hadrianopolis. Another common point in the mosaics of both buildings is that the wave pattern and six-strand guilloche is preferred in the border design. The panel designs of Room 11 in Baths A and of Room 5 in Baths B are also seen in other floor mosaics. The rosette in the mosaic of Room 2 in Baths B has no known parallel in mosaic art (Fig. 59). The floor mosaics discovered in both baths of the site present examples of the geometric designs. Other than the rosette ornaments formed by the combination of geometric and floral designs seen in Baths B’s Room 2 mosaic, no floral ornament is used in these two baths. The geometric designs used in both buildings are of a kind that can be found in numerous mosaics of classical antiquity. On the other hand, the six-strand guilloche is rarely used compared to the other types of guilloche. Within the borders of Anatolia, similar examples are seen in the floor mosaics of Edessa, Perrhe, Sardis, Xanthus and Laodicea on the Lycus.764 The time periods to which the six-strand guilloche in Edessa and Xanthus belong match with the examples in Hadrianopolis.

Basilica A, built in the first half of the 6th cent. AD, contributes new designs to the range of mosaic art with its narthex mosaic panel (Figs. 135-139; and Pl. 14), Panel II of the mosaic of the north aisle, the main ornament field situated in the eastern half of the nave (Figs. 122123) and bema mosaic panels (Figs. 127-134; and Pl. 13). The main ornament field decorating the western half of the nave (Figs. 105-106; and Pl. 12) is the only example of its kind discovered in Asia Minor. The range of borders in the mosaics is quite wide. In the border design of the nave, there is a band with floral ornaments which is the first known type of its kind (Figs. 103-104; and Pl. 3d). Monochrome borders along with seven different border ornaments are used in the floor mosaics in this church. There are at least eight panels in five different rooms of the basilica. A total of 40 animal figures, out of which 32 are bird figures, are seen on mosaic floors. On the other hand, some figures have been destroyed to various extents, especially the figures decorating the western half of the nave. The use of tesserae of smalto in the bema mosaic of the basilica is a further feature which proves the quality of floor mosaics. A set of iconographic interpretations has been put forth by us regarding the scenes in the mosaics. It is true that the scenes depicted inside the curvilinear squares on the mosaic of the nave of the Basilica are reminiscent of a paradise scene at first sight. However, it is also seen that the animals situated inside the four square panels in this mosaic are portrayed in a manner not conducive to the

The opus sectile of Room 8 in Baths A is the only example of opus sectile known in Hadrianopolis (Figs. 19-20). 764 Salman 2007a, p. 12, fig. 11; Karaca and Rızvanoğlu 2008, pp. 3-6; Foss 1976, pp. 41-42, figs. 13-18; Raynaud 2009, figs. 130-131, Şimşek 2015, figs. 106 and 114.

237

Hadrianopolis IV In contrast to the complex planned geometric and figural designs of Basilica A, Basilica B mosaics have more simple ornaments. However, the ornaments have been made with high quality craftsmanship which does not fall short of that of Basilica A. The personifications of the Four Rivers of Paradise on the mosaic of the nave of the Basilica are the only example of this theme in Asia Minor (Figs. 216-217). In a rectangular panel, Geon, Phison, Tigris and Euphrates are depicted from left to right. This theme was known from the early Christian period in mosaic art, in various forms and in several different regions. These personifications were depicted in church mosaics from Corsica to the Near East. The personifications of the Rivers of Paradise were also used in the Thyrsos basilica in Tegea in Greece for the purpose of depicting a secular theme instead of the Garden of Eden.767 The Rivers of Paradise scene in Basilica B is likely to portray the Garden of Eden. What distinguishes this scene from other, similar ones is that the personifications of the rivers are placed in the same panel and that no theme other than the rivers is involved. The church of the Holy Martyrs in Syria, dating to the middle of the 5th cent. AD, has a common characteristic with the mosaic of the nave of Basilica B. In this mosaic, it is not possible to see the personifications of the Rivers of Paradise and instead they are depicted in the form of channels (Fig. 249). In spite of this, the symmetry between the depiction of Spring in the lower part of the scene and the four gazelle figures above it are reminiscent of the characteristic design of the mosaic of Basilica B.768 On the other hand, the mosaic dated to AD 447 is much earlier than the mosaic of Basilica B. Depiction of the personifications related to the Rivers of Paradise with Phrygian caps in Basilica B makes one think that the mosaic could have been created by mosaic artists coming from sites like Edessa or Apamea as the Phrygian cap denotes the oriental character of the rivers. In the Amazon mosaics769 in Apamea or in another mosaic770 with a hunting scene of Amazons (Fig. 175 and 255), discovered in Haleplibahçe in Edessa, figures wear Phrygian caps. A Phrygian cap is also seen on the Orpheus mosaic from Edessa (Fig. 162). Further mosaics such as the mosaic of Tarsus exhibited in the archeological museum of Hatay (Fig. 160), the Orpheus mosaic exhibited in the archaeological museums of Istanbul and known originally to be from Jerusalem, and another mosaic from Mytilene (Fig. 161) also reflect the same characteristic.771

theme of paradise. It is likely that the figures in the squares symbolise the struggle between good and evil. The fact that the mosaic artist might have seen no harm in adding animal chase scenes to a paradise scene, and thus brought together different scenes for the sake of decoration, could be one explanation for this. However, it is highly likely that this is not the case, and the interpretation of the ornamented field in the western half of the mosaic of the nave as a paradise scene does not really seem to be an accurate interpretation in general. Another possibility is that all the scenes have an earthly theme. Considering all the possibilities, the only evaluation that we can set forth is that the scene covering the western half of the mosaic of the nave has a secular theme but also reflects a metaphorical representation of the struggle between good and evil. The designs consisting of curvilinear squares on the mosaic of the nave of Basilica A are also found in the mosaics of Tunisia.765 In previous publications, the similarity between the mosaics of the North Africa – and also the mosaics of Edessa – and Hadrianopolis has been mentioned.766 However, Tunisia is geographically situated quite far from Hadrianopolis. With respect to the origin of these motifs, we believe research should focus rather on the early Christian period artists from Osroene, Cilicia, Cyprus and even the Near East. On the mosaics of the south and north aisles of the Basilica, there are figural scenes in which ornamentation comes to the forefront, which is not unusual in the mosaics of religious buildings. On the mosaic of the south aisle, small square panels, each of which contains an animal figure, are placed discontinuously between star patterns (Figs. 91-100; and Pl. 11) . In the adjacent two panels, a lion and a gazelle are depicted as if they were two characters in the same scene. Yet in the scenes with an elephant, a peacock and a horse, there is no relationship between the animals. These figural panels must thus have been used for decorative purposes. Even though the relation between the lion and gazelle evokes the struggle between good and evil in a similar manner to the animal figures placed in the square panels of the nave, the other figures situated in the ornament field do not suit this theme. Built in the first half of the 6th cent. AD, just as Basilica A, Basilica B illuminates the art of mosaics of the early Byzantine era. The floor mosaics of Basilica B are decorated with differently detailed examples of wellknown mosaic designs. The most remarkable feature of the basilica is that it has the only completely preserved mosaic inscription among the mosaics of Hadrianopolis (Fig. 205). In this inscription the ‘Loyal scholarius Himerios and honest and respectful Valentina’ are mentioned. Therefore, this mosaic inscription with prosographic data played an important role in dating Basilica B to the first half of the 6th cent. AD.

765 766

In the apsidal mosaic of Basilica B, the birds depicted among the vine branches and leaves, two confronted peacocks on both sides of a crater in the north of the scene, and a horse situated in the southwestern corner are among the figural scenes that have been preserved (Figs. 231-235). These scenes were popularly used in the early Christian mosaic art. The placement of figural Maguire 1987, pp. 24-28; Maguire 1999, pp. 179-184. Zaqzuq and Piccirillo 1999, pp. 445-446, pls. 9, 11 and 25, figs. 5, 9 and 37. 769 Balty 1977, pp. 114-117; Balty 1995, pp. 54 and 172, pl. 24.1. 770 Aydemir, Çokoğullu and Dervişoğlu 2008, pp. 1-7; Salman 2007a, pp. 8-9. 771 Cimok 1997, pp. 148-150; Cimok 2000, pp. 144-149. 767 768

Ben Osman 1990, p. 73, pl. 14; Gozlan 1990, p. 92, figs. 90 and 93. Laflı and Zäh 2008, p. 704.

238

Conclusions ivy scroll on the mosaic of the south aisle (Fig. 199; and Pl. 5a), the three-dimensional crinkled ribbon in frontal perspective on the mosaic of the nave (Fig. 210; and Pl. 3c) and a jeweled band in the bema mosaic (Fig. 236; and Pl. 5b) are designs that border the panels. The border ornaments from the mosaics of the nave and bema are designs seen more rarely. Similar examples to the border design of the bema mosaic are seen in the mosaics of Edessa774 and Germanicia in Turkey (Figs. 238-240) and in the ‘Lady of Carthage’775 mosaic of Tunisia (Fig. 237). It is thought that the origin of this kind of ornaments is North Africa.776 But the fact that a similar one to this design is also found in two mosaics in Şanlıurfa makes one think that the mosaics of Hadrianopolis were created by Edessian mosaic artists. One site with similar border ornaments in its basilicas is Antioch-on-the-Orontes. The most similar example to the crinkled ribbon found in Basilica B is from this city. An example similar to the ‘vine branches and birds’ scene in the apsidal mosaic of Basilica B can seen in the mosaic of ‘Birds in a Rinceau’ containing the aforementioned crinkled ribbon band from Antioch (Fig. 211).777 The dates of these mosaics almost match each other. In general, the figural ornaments of Basilica B are reminiscent of the art of north Syria. The medallion seen in the bull-panel (Fig. 206) on the mosaic of the south aisle of the Basilica originates from the Persian art. A similar example has been found in Edessa (Figs. 163-164).778 Another medallion example is found in the mosaic floor at Altıntepe in Erzincan. It is thought that the artists who created the mosaic floor at Altıntepe in Erzincan might have been from north Syria or Cilicia.779 Similarities have been determined between the mosaics of this church and the mosaics of Basilica A and Basilica B in Hadrianopolis in terms of their geometric and figural ornaments. Accordingly, it is quite likely that the mosaic artists might have come from the same art school.

scenes in ornament fields consisting of vine branches is a characteristic usually seen in Near Eastern mosaics, but it is possible to find this type of example in a number of regions in the early Byzantine era. The peacocks depicted flanking a crater or cantharus are among the most popular types of design in religious buildings. In all of the mosaics of Basilica B, there is no element that would spoil the harmony of the compositions. An amazing connection is achieved between the scenes, which is maintained in harmony from the Rivers of Paradise in the nave to the peacocks of the apsidal mosaic or to the basket of grapes on the mosaics of the south aisle (Fig. 207). The geometric designs in the mosaics of Basilica B are well-known examples of the mosaics of classical antiquity. However, we document some geometric elements placed among these designs for the first time. On the mosaic of the nave, it is possible to see these geometric patterns in the main ornament field consisting of stars of eight parallelograms, small square panels and poised squares. We have called a type of knot pattern in the form of a horizontal ‘T’ a ‘ram’s head knot’ (Fig. 221; and Pl.  23g). The panel of the mosaic of the north aisle has the design of a polychrome orthogonal pattern of circles in asymmetrically shaded bands interlooped tangentially (Figs. 184-189; and Pl. 15); there is a rosette at the centre of each circle. This is a well-known design in the late Roman-early Byzantine period. The difference of this design from the well-known examples is that a small looped circle is added to the field in the centre of four circles. On the mosaic of the south aisle, an orthogonal pattern of intersecting circles with spindles is preferred, which is another well-known example (Figs. 197-200; and Pl. 16). The flower pattern inlaid in the centre of each circle distinguishes the design from others. The stars of eight parallelograms decorating the panels of the mosaics of Baths A, Basilica A and Basilica B give us patterns of mosaics and frescoes originating from Italian peninsula, as the origin of this design is the frescoes of Pompeii.772 However, the mosaics of Hadrianopolis and especially the mosaics of Kos show similarity in terms of this design.773 Moreover, it is hard to determine whether the eight parallelogram stars found almost everywhere in the Mediterranean area and used for a long time were used here. As the designs of mosaics in the basilicas of Hadrianopolis have common points with the mosaics of numerous sites, so have types of patterns rarely used in classical antiquity or without any precedents been discovered. Therefore, it is understood that the mosaics of Hadrianopolis have some peculiar characteristics.

The second phase of the mosaics of the south aisle of Basilica B has both showed that the mosaic art had continued in Hadrianopolis until the end of the 6th cent. AD and the beginning of the 7th cent. AD, and also has presented important information about the second architectural phase of the basilica. It is not possible to draw any detailed conclusions based on the preserved pieces of the second phase mosaics. However, the threshold mosaic (Fig. 244; and Pl. 20a) belonging to this phase and situated in the eastern end of the nave has characteristics that could date back to the beginning of the 7th cent. AD. At the same time, the second phase mosaic proves that the northern and southern sections of the inner narthex were integrated into the naves of the building in this architectural phase.

Parallels for the border designs of the mosaics in Basilica B are found frequently in the mosaics of classical antiquity. The row of tangent semicircles formed of two tangent spindles forming alternately inverted thorns on the mosaic of the north aisle (Fig. 188; and Pl. 4c), the 772 773

Karaca and Rızvanoğlu 2008, p. 7; Karabulut, Önal and Dervişoğlu 2011, p. 56, fig. 60. 775 Ben Abed 2006, p. 47, fig. 3.21.; Dunbabin 1978, pp. 146 and 251, pl. 53, fig. 135; Campbell 1998, p. 50, pl. 215. 776 Campbell 1998, p. 50. 777 Cimok 2000, pp. 304-310; Levi 1947, p. 366, pl. 91. 778 Patacı 2016, p. 431, figs. 1-2, 5; Salman 2007, pp. 166-171. 779 Can 2009, p. 11; Can 2011, p. 232. 774

Barbet 1985, p. 141, fig. 88. Parrish 2001, figs. 20-23.

239

Hadrianopolis IV fields of the fresco in Room 3 are formed with simple, rough brushstrokes. In the rectangular panels situated in these fields, diagonal bands, orthogonal patterns of adjacent scales, grid patterns with dot motif and ornaments of symmetrically-treated marble effect are depicted. Two fresco fragments consisting of similar ornaments on the northern wall of Room 5 have been just barely preserved. The upper ornament field on the northern wall of Room 3 is formed with a higher level of craftsmanship compared to the other ornament fields. Triangular patterns in the upper panel have colours like red, orange and green and fairly uniform lines, which are not seen in the other fields. Early counterparts of the marble-effect designs can be seen in the chamber tombs in Perge783 and the baptistery of the church of Laodicea on the Lycus (Fig. 301).784 The frescoes of the Domus reflect the artistic character of Hadrianopolis and present information relating to the rural hinterland of the early Byzantine province of Honorias.

During the excavations carried out in 2007, a floor mosaic with a geometric design belonging to an apsidal building situated 15 m northwest of Baths B was discovered (Figs. 261-262). This mosaic probably must have belonged to the apse of a church. Counterparts of the three-strand guilloche bordering the mosaic are also found in the apsidal mosaics of the church at Altıntepe in Erzincan780 and the church of the necropolis in Anemurium.781 It is not possible to draw any conclusions about an archaeological unit that has not been fully excavated yet. However, this mosaic must also have belonged to the 5th-6th cent. AD at the earliest, like the mosaics in the other building of Hadrianopolis. The Domus situated in the east end of the site’s centre is among the buildings with the richest finds of Hadrianopolis in terms of its floor mosaics and mural paintings. The mosaic of Room 1b of the Domus which is dated to the first half of the 6th cent. AD, has similar craftsmanship and design concept with the mosaics of Basilica A. The bird figure in an in situ piece belonging to the mosaic is merely a copy of the bird figures situated in Panel I of the mosaic of the north aisle and also in the eastern half of the mosaic of the nave in Basilica A (Figs. 81, 124 and 270). The floor mosaic of Room 6 which is thought to have been built as an additional room at a later date than the construction of the Domus, is a product of more different craftsmanship. This mosaic must have been created at a later date than the mosaic of Room 1b, but it displays characteristics of the 6th cent. AD at the earliest. Two portraits thought to belong to the owners of the Domus are rendered in a slightly realistic style of art (Fig. 280). On the other hand, it is understood that the figural designs, including the bird figures, depicted on the mosaic are a product of simple craftsmanship (Fig. 281). The rosettes placed in the centre of the square frames with geometric designs are examples of the simplest craftsmanship among the rosette designs of Hadrianopolis (Figs. 282-283). Another characteristic of the mosaic of Room 6 is that the simple wave pattern situated on the northern edge of the mosaic has a form that does not match the waves on the other edges, or indeed, the form of normal wave patterns of all other known Hadrianopolis mosaics (Fig. 278; and Pl. 1d). The ends of these waves in the form of a question mark have sharper ends comparing to the other examples.

While trying to find counterparts of the Hadrianopolis mosaics, we have examined a great number of floor mosaics belonging to antique and early Byzantine sites in different regions in the Mediterranean. During the examinations, the most important examples for evaluation were those situated in the regions near Hadrianopolis. However, especially when looking at other Paphlagonian sites, we see that there are very few examples that are similar to the mosaic art of Hadrianopolis. The floor mosaics situated in Pompeiopolis, which is the closest city to Hadrianopolis, are a little earlier. The mosaic finds from Amisus are much earlier than the mosaics of Hadrianopolis. The mosaic of Amisus in the museum of Samsun, decorated with Achilles and Thetis, personifications of the seasons and the Nereid scenes, is dated to the first half of the 3rd cent. AD.785 Mosaic finds from Çiftlik and Balatlar in Sinop are dated to the Early Byzantine Period but these mosaic pavements have not been studied in detail by a researcher yet. The Great Palace mosaic of Constantinople, created in the same century as the mosaics from Basilica A, Basilica B and the Domus in Hadrianopolis, has proven very useful for the evaluations in this book. The Great Palace mosaic, which had and has a very significant place among the mosaics of the world, must have been created by traveling mosaic artists coming from different areas outside of Constantinople. It is not surprising that these mosaic artists influenced the art of provinces near Constantinople like Hadrianopolis.

The frescoes of Room 3 and Room 5 of the Domus form the most important group of finds of the Domus, for the reason that they are the only examples of frescoes of the city (Figs. 290-300). In our researches, we have not found any examples that may help dating of the frescoes. The frescoes from Tieion/Tios on coastal Paphlagonia date later than the frescoes of Hadrianopolis.782 The Domus frescoes, which must belong to the 6th cent. AD at the earliest, are composed of ornament fields with geometric patterns painted onto cream-colour plaster. The lower ornament 780

5.

Antioch-on-the-Orontes is one of the cities mentioned most during comparisons. The reason for this is that Antioch was one of the most important mosaic art centres during classical antiquity. When all the mosaics of Hadrianopolis are evaluated in detail, it can be seen that the mosaic artists responsible for them must have been of that region. Identification of the origin of the artists also depends on the continuation of excavations at the site. Based on all

Can 2007, p. 105, fig. 6, 8; Can 2009, pp. 10-11, fig. 18; Can 2011, fig.

Dikilitaş 2005, p. 83, fig. 8. Şimşek 2015, pp. 64-66, figs. 91 and 93-96. 785 Şahin 2004, p. 41. 783

Campbell 1998, pp. 47, 50, pl. 209. 782 Atasoy and Yıldırım 2011, p. 3; Yıldırım 2011, p. 42. 781

784

240

Conclusions the finds, it seems that the Hadrianopolis mosaics reflect the artistic character of north Syria, Edessa, Antioch and its surroundings as well as Cilicia. It is understood that the city of Edessa is the most likely candidate for the origin of the mosaic artists based on these examples. Even though details reminiscent of Near Eastern and North African mosaics are found in Hadrianopolis mosaics, according to our interpretation, the idea that the artists of these regions were the creative force behind the Hadrianopolis mosaics is less likely compared to those from other major artistic centres. It is clear that Hadrianopolis was the most important artistic centre of Paphlagonia between the 5th and 7th cent. AD judging by its frescoes and mosaics. The in situ floor mosaics presented above, the mosaic fragments discovered during excavations and not presented in this book, as well as a great number of tesserae, show that the mosaic art was in its golden age in Hadrianopolis between these centuries. The mosaic fragments discovered in Kimistene during the surveys in 2005 prove that there are examples of mosaic art not only in the city but also in its surroundings (Fig. 302). These mosaic fragments belong probably to the period later than 7th cent. AD. As archaeological researches are continued in and around Hadrianopolis, the artistic character of this region can continue to be better understood.

241

Appendix A Lead Plate with an Inscription in the Archaeological Museum of Izmir Depository and provenance: In the depot of juridical antiquities of the museum, acc. no. 2016.861.3. Given to the museum by the Second Civil Court of First Instance in Izmir in 2016, formerly in a private collection in the region of Izmir.786 Measurements: C. 11 x 11 cm, letter h. 6-7 mm. Typological description and state of preservation: Square tablet with irregular edges and a Greek inscription in six lines (Fig. 303). The inscription is not made by dots, but drawn with a pointed instrument on the tablet surface. The lines are slightly oblique and not parallel to the borders of the tablet. This aspect is more evident in the lower line. Transcription: A ὑπὲρ εὐχῆς Ἱμερίου τοῦ καθοσιομέ νου σχολαρ5 ίου καὶ Οὐα λεντίνας τ-

Fig. 303. A lead plate with an inscription in the archaeological museum of Izmir.

Translation: A: As a vow of Himerios, a devoted member of the imperial guard (scholarii), and of Oualentina [Valentina]. Epigraphic and prosopographic comments: The letters are not regular and they are not engraved according to guidelines. Some are higher and some ahve almost disappeared. The end of the line does not coincide with the word’s end, which continues on the next line. Note the lunate sigma. The text corresponds to what appears on the mosaic floor of Basilica B in Hadrianopolis, which is presented above (Fig. 304). The division of the words in the different lines is identical and therefore, it is clear that the inscription on the lead square is the model for what appears on the floor of the church. It may be a draft of the text that was given to the mosaicist laying out the panel on the floor by the person who comissioned the inscription, but no similar object has been found. Considering the distance between Izmir and Hadrianopolis, this object could also be a modern counterfeit. 786

Fig. 304. Basilica B. An inscription in the mosaic panel of the south aisle.

Cf. also Buora, Laflı and Nowakowski 2018, pp. 171-172.

243

Tables Table 1. Baths A - Border designs of the mosaic of Room 11 (Pls. 1a and 2a) Decoration Sizes of Tesserae Colours Munsell colour codes Material tesserae Per dm2 Monochrome 1,5 x 1,5 cm; 27-31 Orange Light brownish gray (pale): 2.5Y Marble, band 8/2, 2.5Y 8/4, 2.5Y 7/4 serpentinite 2,0 x 2,0 cm and travertine Red: 7.5R 3/10, 7.5R 4/14, 7.5R Wave pattern 1,5 x 1,5 cm; 27-31 light brownish gray 5/14, 10R 7/10, 10R 6/10, 10R 2,0 x 2,0 cm and red 6/12, 10R 4/12, 10R 3/10, 10R 2/8 Six-strand 1,5 x 1,5 cm; 27-31 White, black, guilloche 2,0 x 2,0 cm yellow (orange) and Orange: 5YR 7/10, 5YR 7/12, red 5YR 6/12, 5YR 5/10, 2.5YR 6/14, 2.5YR 5/12 Blue: 7.5B 8/4, 7.5B 8/6, 10B 8/4, 10B 8/6 Yellow: 10Y 9/4, 10Y 9/6, 7.5Y 9/4, 7.5Y 9/6 Comparanda for the wave pattern Turkey: Antioch-on-the-Orontes (Archaeological museum of Hatay): Mosaic of personification of Ge / 5th cent. AD, acc. no. 870. Mosaic of Psyche, 5th cent. AD? Acc. no. 892. Mosaic of Ananeosis / 5th cent. AD, acc. no. 907-912. The Lion mosaic, 5th cent. AD, acc. no. 913. The geometric mosaic / 5th cent. AD, acc. no. 957. Gaziantep (Mosaic museum of Zeugma in Gaziantep): Sulumağara mosaic / 5th cent. AD (Patacı 2016, 432, fig. 11). Hülümen mosaic / 5th cent. AD. Edessa (Mosaic museum of Haleplibahçe in the museum of Şanlıurfa): The main hall mosaic of the House of the Amazons / 6th cent. AD (Karabulut, Önal and Dervişoğlu 2011, fig. 47). Xanthus (Antalya): Mosaics of the East Basilica / 5th and 6th cent. AD (Raynaud 2009, ills. 15, 85, 89, 99). Halicarnassus (Muğla): Mosaic of Room F of a villa / 5th cent. AD (Poulsen 2008, p. 104, fig. 3) Muğla: Mosaic of Ahmet Çavuş district in Milas / 5th and 6th cent. AD (Kızıl and Özcan 2009, fig. 2). Apamea Myrlea (Bursa): A floor mosaic of a residential building / 4th cent. AD (Şahin and Çıtakoğlu 2016, figs. 9-10). Syria, Apamea: The cathedral mosaic in the museum of Apamea / 6th cent. AD (Balty 1977, pp. 140-143). Israel, Beth Shean: Nave mosaic of the synagogue of Beth Shean / 5th cent. AD (Ovadiah and Ovadiah 1987, pl. 29.1). Jordan, Livias: Naos mosaic of the church of Shunah Al-Jabuniyah / 6th cent. AD (Piccirillo 1993a, fig. 669).

245

Hadrianopolis IV Comparanda for the six-strand guilloche Turkey: Perrhe (Museum of Adıyaman): Mosaics from Perrhe (Pirun) of the late Roman period (Salman 2007, p. 12, fig. 12). Edessa (Mosaic museum of Haleplibahçe in the museum of Şanlıurfa): The mosaic of Room 1 (the tiger) of the House of the Amazons / 6th cent. AD (Karabulut, Önal and Dervişoğlu 2011, pp. 69-70, figs. 82-83). Sardis (Manisa): Atrium mosaic of the synagogue in Sardis / second half of the 4th cent. AD (Foss 1976, pp. 41-42, ills. 13-18). Xanthus (Antalya): Mosaic of the southern additional room of the baptisterium / 5th and 6th cent. AD (Raynaud 2009, ills. 130-131). Laodicea on the Lycus (Denizli): Mosaic of the north aisle of the church / 4th cent. AD (Şimşek 2015, figs. 106 and 114). Israel, Beth Shean: Nave mosaic of the synagogue of Beth Shean / 5th cent. AD (Ovadiah and Ovadiah 1987, pl. 29.1). Jordan, Livias: Naos mosaic of the church of Shunah Al-Jabuniyah / 6th cent. AD (Piccirillo 1993a, fig. 669). Table 2. Baths B - Border designs of the mosaics of Room 2 and Room 5 (Pls. 1b and 2b) Decoration Sizes of tesserae Tesserae per Colours Material dm2 Monochrome band 1,0 x 1,5 cm; 1,5 x 1,5 cm; 27-31 Orange Marble, serpentinite 1,5 x 2,0 cm; 2,0 x 2,0 cm and travertine Six-strand 1,5 x 1,5 cm; 1,5 x 2,0 cm; 27-31 Dark blue, white, guilloche 2,0 x 2,0 cm. orange, red and grey Wave pattern 1,0 x 1,5 cm; 1,0 x 2,0 cm; 28-31 Dark blue, orange and red (Room 5) 1,5 x 1,5 cm; 1,5 x 2,0 cm; 2,0 x 2,0 cm Munsell colour codes of the mosaic of Room 2: Blue: 10B 1/2, 10B 2/2, 10B 3/2, 10B 4/2, 7.5B 1/2, 7.5B 2/2, 7.5B 3/2, 7.5B; 4/2, 5B 1/2, 5B 2/2, 5B 3/2, 5B 4/2; Red: 7.5R 3/10, 7.5R 4/14, 7.5R 4/12, 7.5R 5/14, 5R 4/14; Orange: 7.5YR 6/10, 7.5YR 7/10, 7.5YR 7/12, 5YR 6/12, 5YR 6/10; Green (grayish): 2.5GY 7/4, 2.5GY 8/4; Yellow: 7.5Y 9/4, 7.5Y 9/6, 5Y 9/4. Munsell colour codes of the mosaic of Room 5: Blue: 10B 1/2, 10B 2/2, 10B 3/2, 10B 4/2, 7.5B 1/2, 7.5B 2/2, 7.5B 3/2, 7.5B 4/2, 5B 1/2, 5B 2/2, 5B 3/2, 5B 4/2; Red: 7.5R 3/10, 7.5R 4/14, 7.5R 5/14, 5R 3/10, 5R 4/14, 5R 5/14; Orange: 7.5YR 6/10, 7.5YR 7/10, 7.5YR 7/12, 5YR 6/12, 5YR 6/10.

246

Tables Comparanda for the wave pattern Turkey: Antioch-on-the-Orontes (Archaeological museum of Hatay): Mosaic of personification of Ge / 5th cent. AD, acc. no. 870. Mosaic of Psyche, 5th cent. AD? acc. no. 892. Mosaic of Ananeosis / 5th cent. AD, acc. no. 907-912. The Lion mosaic, 5th cent. AD, acc. no. 913. The geometric mosaic / 5th cent. AD, acc. no. 957. Gaziantep (Mosaic museum of Zeugma in Gaziantep): The mosaic of Sulumağara / 5th cent. AD (Patacı 2016, p. 432, fig. 11). Hülümen mosaic / 5th cent. AD. Edessa (Mosaic museum of Haleplibahçe in the museum of Şanlıurfa): The main hall mosaic of the villa of the Amazons / 6th cent. AD (Karabulut, Önal and Dervişoğlu 2011, fig. 47). Xanthus (Antalya): Mosaics of the East Basilica / 5th and 6th cent. AD (Raynaud 2009, ills. 15, 85, 89 and 99). Halicarnassus (Muğla): Mosaic of Room F of a villa / 5th cent. AD (Poulsen 2008, p. 104, fig. 3) Muğla: Mosaic of Ahmet Çavuş district in Milas / 5th and 6th cent. AD (Kızıl and Özcan 2009, fig. 2). Apamea Myrlea (Bursa): A floor mosaic of a residential building / 4th cent. AD (Şahin and Çıtakoğlu 2016, figs. 9-10). Syria, Apamea: The cathedral mosaic in the museum of Apamea / 6th cent. AD (Balty 1977, pp. 140-143). Israel, Beth Shean: Nave mosaic of the synagogue of Beth Shean / 5th cent. AD (Ovadiah and Ovadiah 1987, pl. 29.1). Jordan, Livias: Naos mosaic of the church of Shunah Al-Jabuniyah / 6th cent. AD (Piccirillo 1993a, fig. 669). Comparanda for the six-strand guilloche Turkey: Perrhe (Museum of Adıyaman): The mosaics from Perrhe (Pirun) of the late Roman period (Salman 2007, fig. 12). Edessa (Mosaic museum of Haleplibahçe in the museum of Şanlıurfa): The mosaic of Room 1 (the tiger) of the House of the Amazons / 6th cent. AD (Karabulut, Önal and Dervişoğlu 2011, pp. 69-70, figs. 82-83). Sardis (Manisa): Atrium mosaic of the synagogue in Sardis / second half of the 4th cent. AD (Foss 1976, pp. 41-42, ills. 13-18). Xanthus (Antalya): Mosaic of the southern additional room of the baptisterium / 5th and 6th cent. AD (Raynaud 2009, ills. 130-131). Laodicea on the Lycus (Denizli): Mosaic of the north aisle of the church / 4th cent. AD (Şimşek 2015, figs. 106 and 114). Israel, Beth Shean: Nave mosaic of the synagogue of Beth Shean / 5th cent. AD (Ovadiah and Ovadiah 1987, pl. 29.1). Jordan, Livias: Naos mosaic of the church of Shunah Al-Jabuniyah / 6th cent. AD (Piccirillo 1993a, fig. 669).

247

Hadrianopolis IV Table 3. Basilica A - Border designs of the mosaics of the south and north aisles (Pl. 3a) Decoration Sizes of Tesserae per Colours tesserae dm2 Monochrome band 1,0 x 1,0 cm; 70-80 Red

Material Marble, serpentinite and travertine

1,4 x 1,4 cm Band of tightly braided round1,0 x 1,0 cm 100-110 Black, orange, green, tongued double guilloche red and white Munsell colour codes of the mosaics of the north aisle: Orange: 7.5YR 7/8, 7.5YR 7/10, 7.5YR 7/12, 5YR 7/10, 5YR 7/12, 5YR 6/10; Yellow: 7.5Y 9/2, 7.5Y 9/4, 7.5Y 8/4, 2.5Y 8/8, 2.5Y 7/10, 10Y 9/2; Red: 10R 4/8, 10R 4/10, 10R 4/12, 10R 3/4, 10R 3/8, 10R 3/10, 2.5YR 5/10; Green: 5G 4/6, 5G 5/4, 5G 3/4, 7.5G 3/4, 10GY 9/2, 10GY 9/4, 10GY 8/2, 2.5G 8/2, 2.5G 9/2; Gray: 5PB 7/2, 2.5PB 6/2, 2.5PB 7/2, 2.5PB 8/2, 10B 6/2, 10B 4/2; Pink: 7.5R 8/4, 7.5R 8/2, 2.5R 8/4, 2.5R 8/2; Brown: 5YR 3/2, 5YR 4/2, 10YR 3/2, 10YR ¾. Munsell colour codes of the mosaics of the south aisle: Red: 2.5R 4/10, 2.5R 6/12, 2.5R 5/12, 2.5R 5/10, 5R 5/12, 5R 4/12, 5R 5/8, 5R 4/8, 7.5R 4/10, 7.5R 5/12; Pink: 7.5R 8/4, 2.5R 8/4, 5R 9/2, 5R 8/4, 5R 7/4; Yellow: 10Y 9/4, 10Y 9/6, 7.5Y 9/6, 7.5Y 9/4, 5Y 9/4, 2.5Y 8/6, 2.5Y 8/8; Orange: 7.6YR 7/12, 7.5YR 7/10, 7.5YR 6/10, 7.5YR 7/10, 5YR 7/10, 5YR; 7/8, 5YR 6/8; Green: 2.5G 5/4, 2.5G 4/4, 2.5G 4/4, 2.5G 3/4, 7.5G 6/8, 7.5G 5/6, 2.5G 9/2,5G 9/2, 7.5G 9/2, 10G 9/2; Brown: 7.5YR 4/6, 5YR 4/6, 5Y 5/8, 5Y 5/6, 2.5Y 5/6, 2.5Y 5/8 ; Gray: 2.5BG 7/2, 5BG 7/2, 5B 8/2, 7.5B 7/2, 10B 7/2. Comparanda for the tightly braided round-tongued double guilloche Round-tongued examples: Turkey: Muğla: Mosaic of Ahmet Çavuş district in Milas / 5th and 6th cent. AD (Kızıl and Özcan 2009, fig. 12). Prusa ad Olympum (Bursa): Mosaic of the church in Yerkapı district / 6th cent. AD (Okçu 2009, figs. 1 and 13). Perinthus-Heraclea (Tekirdağ): Mosaic of the exterior narthex of the basilica in Perinthus-Heraclea / 5th-6th cent. AD (Yeşil-Erdek 2014, fig. 7) Sardis (Manisa): Mosaic of the main hall of the synagogue of Sardis / Second half of the 4th cent. AD (Foss 1976, fig. 16). Aphrodisias (Aydın): Mosaic of the Byzantine church / 4th cent. AD (Campbell 1991, pl. 24). Laodicea on the Lycus (Denizli): Mosaic of the north aisle of the church / 4th cent. AD (Şimşek 2015, figs. 105 and 117). Apamea Myrlea (Bursa): A floor mosaic of a residential building / 4th cent. AD (Şahin 2016, figs. 9-10). Jordan, Mountain Nebo: Mosaic of the Old Diaconicon Baptistery / 6th cent. AD (Piccirillo 1993a, fig. 166; Trilling 1989, fig. 62). Cyprus: Mosaic of the first bath of Achilles in the villa of Theseus / late Roman period (Daszewski 1988, fig. 36). Straight-tongued examples: Turkey: Antioch-on-the-Orontes (Archaeological museum of Hatay): Mosaic of Megalopsychia (Yakto mosaic) / 5th cent. AD, acc. no. 1016 (Cimok 2000, p. 251; Levi 1947, p. 323, fig. 136). Mosaic of Ananeosis / 5th cent. AD, acc. no. 907-912 (Campbell 1988, p. 27, pl. 81; Campbell 1998, pl. 172; Cimok 2000, p. 244; Levi 1947, pp. 320-321, pls. 73 and 131d). Syria, Tayibat al-Imam: Naos mosaic of the Holy Martyrs Church / 447 AD (Zaqzuq and Piccirillo 1999, pl. 9, fig. 5).

248

Tables Table 4. Basilica A - Border designs of the mosaic of the nave (Pls. 1c and 3b, d) Decoration Sizes of Tesserae Per Colours Material tesserae dm2 Monochrome band 1,0 x 1,0 cm 85-120 Orange Marble, Three dimensional undulating ribbon 1,0 x 1,0 cm 85-120 White, black, red, pink, Serpentinite and in lateral perspective green and light green travertine Row of colourful vegetal ornaments 1,0 x 1,0 cm 85-120 White, black, orange, following each other alternately on a red, pink, green and white ground light green Wave pattern 1,0 x 1,0 cm 85-120 White and black Munsell colour codes of the mosaic of the nave: Red: 7.5R 5/12, 7.5R 5/10, 7.5R 5/8, 7.5R 4/8, 7.5R 3/8, 7.5R 3/10, 10R 5/10, 10R 5/12, 10R 4/10, 10R 3/10, 5R 5/8, 5R 4/6, 5R 3/6, 2.5R 4/8, 2.5R 5/8. Orange: 5YR 6/10, 5YR 6/8, 5YR 7/10, 5YR 5/8, 7.5YR 7/10, 7.5YR 7/8, 7.5YR 7/12, 2.5YR 5/12, 2.5YR 6/12, 7.5YR 8/6, 10YR 8/6. Pink: 7.5R 8/4, 7.5R 8/2, 2.5R 8/4, 2.5R 8/2. Green: 2.5G 3/6, 2.5G 4/4, 2.5G 4/6, 2.5G 5/4, 2.5G 5/6, 5G 3/2, 5G 4/2, 5G 4/4, 5G 5/4, 7.5G 3/4, 7.5G 4/2, 7.5G 4/4, 10G 4/2, 10G 4/4, 10G 5/4, 10G 6/4, 2.5G 8/2, 2.5BG 8/4, 7.5G 8/2, 7.5G 8/4, 7.5G 9/2, 10G 8/2, 10G 8/4, 10G 8/6, 10G 9/2. Comparanda for the three dimensional undulating ribbon in lateral perspective Turkey: Antioch-on-the-Orontes (Antakya, Hatay): Mosaic of the House of Ge and the Seasons / Second half of the 5th cent. AD (Levi 1947, fig. 139, pl. 81a, b). Mosaic of the House of Philia / Mid-5th cent. AD (Levi 1947, fig. 133, pl. 72). Mosaic of the House of Ram’s Head / 5th cent. AD (Levi 1947, pl. 133c). Constantinople (Istanbul): Mosaic of the Great Palace (Mosaic Museum of the Great Palace) / 527-565 AD (Balmelle et al. 1985, pl. 65f; Brett 1942, pl. 8b; Cimok1997, fig. 4; Dunbabin 1999, fig. 244; Jobst et al. 2010, fig. 13; Trilling 1989, figs. 4-7; Yücel 2010, p. 15). Mosaic of the Four Seasons (exhibited in the courtyard of the basilica of Hagia Eirene) / 4th-5th cent. AD (Parrish 2008, fig. 1). Cyprus: Mosaics of the basilicas of Chrysopolitissa and Limeniotissa / Early Byzantine period (Michaelides 1988, figs. 25-26). Tunisia, Tabarca: Mosaic of a villa of the 4th-5th cent. AD (Dunbabin 1978, pls. XLIV-111 and XLV113). Jordan: Naos mosaic of the church of the Holy Martyrs Lot and Procopius / 557 AD (Piccirillo 1993a, figs. 210 and 213). The apsidal mosaic of the church of St Paul in the city of Kastron Mefaa / Second half of the 6th cent. AD (Piccirillo 1997, pl. 32). Israel, Beth Shean: The narthex mosaic of a burial chamber / Mid-6th cent. AD (Ovadiah and Ovadiah 1987, pp. 30-31, pl. XXV-2). Italy, Ravenna: Mural mosaic of the mausoleium of Galla Placidia / 5th cent. AD (Lorizzo 1976, pls. 1 and 6). Comparandum for the row of vegetal ornaments None (unknown). Comparanda for the wave pattern Turkey: Antioch-on-the-Orontes (Archaeological museum of Hatay): Mosaic of personification of Ge / 5th cent. AD, acc. no. 870. Mosaic of Psyche, 5th cent. AD? acc. no. 892. Mosaic of Ananeosis / 5th cent. AD, acc. no. 907-912. The lion mosaic, 5th cent. AD, acc. no. 913. The geometric mosaic / 5th cent. AD, acc. no. 957. Gaziantep (Mosaic museum of Zeugma in Gaziantep): The mosaic of Sulumağara / 5th cent. AD (Patacı 2016, p. 432, fig. 11); the mosaic of Hülümen / 5th cent. AD. Edessa (Mosaic museum of Haleplibahçe in the museum of Şanlıurfa): The main hall mosaic of the villa of the Amazons / 6th cent. AD (Karabulut, Önal and Dervişoğlu 2011, fig. 47). Xanthus (Antalya): Mosaics of the East Basilica / 5th and 6th cent. AD (Raynaud 2009, ills. 15, 85, 89 and 99). Halicarnassus (Muğla): Mosaic of Room F of a villa / 5th cent. AD (Poulsen 2008, p. 104, fig. 3). Muğla: Mosaic of Ahmet Çavuş district in Milas / 5th and 6th cent. AD (Kızıl and Özcan 2009, fig. 2). Apamea Myrlea (Bursa): A floor mosaic of a residential building / 4th cent. AD (Şahin and Çıtakoğlu 2016, figs. 9-10). Syria, Apamea: The cathedral mosaic in the museum of Apamea / 6th cent. AD (Balty 1977, pp. 140-143). Israel, Beth Shean: Nave mosaic of the synagogue of Beth Shean / 5th cent. AD (Ovadiah and Ovadiah 1987, pl. 29.1). Jordan, Livias: Naos mosaic of the church of Shunah Al-Jabuniyah / 6th cent. AD (Piccirillo 1993a, fig. 669).

249

Hadrianopolis IV Table 5. Basilica A - Border designs of the bema mosaic (Pl. 4a) Decoration Sizes of Tesserae per Colours Material tesserae dm2 Monochrome band 1,0 x 1,0 cm 90-110 Orange Marble, serpentinite, travertine and smalti Row of serrated and 1,0 x 1,0 cm 90-110 White, dark blue, red, pink, tangent poised squares, orange, green and light green forming hourglasses Munsell colour codes: Green: 5G 4/4, 5G 4/6, 5G 5/4, 5G 3/2, 5BG 6/6, 5BG 5/6, 7.5BG 6/6, 7.5BG 5/6, 2.5BG 5/6, 10G 5/6, 10G 4/6, 2.5G 8/2, 5G 8/2, 7.5G 8/2, 7.5G 7/4, 5G 7/4. Red: 2.5R 5/8, 5R 4/6, 5R 5/8, 5R 4/8, 7.5R 5/10, 7.5R 5/8, 7.5R 4/8, 10R 4/10, 10R 5/10, 10R 5/12. Orange: 7.5YR 7/10, 7.5YR 7/8, 7.5YR 7/12, 7.5YR 6/10, 7.5YR 5/10, 7.5YR 5/8, 10YR 6/8, 2.5YR 6/12, 2.5YR 6/10. Pink: 2.5R 7/4, 2.5R 6/4, 5R 7/4, 5R 7/2, 5R 8/2, 7.5R 7/2, 10R 7/2, 2.5R 9/2, 5R9/2, 7.5R 9/2, 10R 9/2. Blue: 10B 2/4, 7.5B 2/4, 5PB 2/4. Comparanda for the serrated and tangent poised squares, forming hourglasses Turkey: Anemurium (Anamur/Mersin): Mosaic of the north aisle of the church of the necropolis / Late 5th cent. AD (Campbell 1998, pl. 198). Antioch-on-the-Orontes (Antakya, Hatay): Mosaic of Room D of the Barracks House / AD 450-475 (Levi 1947, pl. 129c; Campbell 1988, pl. 229). The Perseus and Andromeda mosaic of the House of Dionysus and Ariadne / 2nd-3rd cent. AD (Levi 1947, fig. 58; Cimok 2000, pp. 132-133). Mosaic of Room 31 of the House A / the late 2nd cent. AD (Levi 1947, p. 105; Campbell 1988, pl. 76). As a panel design: Germanicia (Kahramanmaraş): A floor mosaic of a villa / 3rd-5th cent. AD (Eker and Ersoy 2017, pp. 101, 161-162 and 252-254). Table 6. Basilica A - Border designs of the narthex mosaic (Pl. 2c) Decoration Sizes of tesserae Tesserae Colours per dm2 Monochrome 1,5 x 1,5 cm; 35-44 Orange band 2,0 x 2,0 cm Four-strand 1,5 x 1,5 cm; 35-46 White, black, red, guilloche 2,0 x 2,0 cm and orange

Munsell colour codes

Material

Red: 7.5R 4/8, 7.5R 5/8, Marble, 7.5R 5/10, 5R 5/8, 2.5R serpentinite 5/8. and travertine

Orange: 5YR 6/10, 5YR 6/8, 5YR 7/10, 7.5YR 7/8 Comparanda for the four-strand guilloche

Turkey: Antioch-on-the-Orontes (Archaeological museum of Hatay): Mosaic of Comus / 2nd cent. AD, acc. no. 833 (Levi 1947, pl. 94c). Zeugma (Gaziantep): Mosaic of the House of Poseidon and Euphrates / 2nd-3rd cent. AD (Önal 2002, pp. 35, 52; Önal 2008, fig. 4; Başgelen and Ergeç 2000, pp. 42-43). Muğla: Mosaic of Ahmet Çavuş district in Milas / 5th- 6th cent. AD (Kızıl and Özcan 2009, fig. 10, 13). Aphrodisias (Aydın): The atrium mosaic of the Priest’s House / 5th cent. AD (Campbell 1991, pls. 82, 84-85).

250

Tables Table 7. Basilica B - Border designs of the mosaics of the south and north aisles (Pls. 4c, d and 5a) Decoration Sizes of tesserae Tesserae per dm2 Colours Material Mosaic of the south aisle: 1,5 x 1,5 cm 56-60 White Marble, serpentinite and travertine Monochrome band 1,5 x 1,5 cm 56-60 White, black, Mosaic of the south aisle: orange and red Row of tangent semicircles formed of two tangent spindles forming alternately inverted thorns. At the western edge of the mosaic: Row of tangent circles formed of four spindles forming poised concave squares and pairs of opposed thorns. Mosaic of the south aisle: Monochrome band Mosaic of the south aisle:

1,0 x 1,0 cm; 1,5x1,5 cm

64-78

Orange

1,0 x 1,0 cm; 1,5x1,5 cm

64-78

White, black and orange

Ivy scroll Munsell colour codes of the mosaics of the north aisle: Orange: 10YR 6/8, 7.5YR 6/8, 7.5YR 7/8, 7.5YR 7/10, 7.5YR 7/12; Red: 10R 6/14, 10R 5/14, 10R 5/12, 7.5R 5/12, 7.5R 5/10. Munsell colour codes of the mosaic of the south aisle: Orange: 7.5YR 5/8, 7.5YR 6/10, 7.5YR 7/12, 7.5YR 7/10. Comparanda for tangent semicircles formed of two tangent spindles Tivoli (Italy), Argos (Greece), Split (Croatia), Saint-Rustice (France) (Balmelle et al. 1985, pp. 92-93, pl. 45f-i). Comparanda for tangent circles formed of four tangent spindles Turkey: Antioch-on-the-Orontes (Antakya, Hatay): Mosaic of Room 8 of Kaoussie church / 5th-6th cent. AD? (Campbell 1988, pl. 139). Aphrodisias (Aydın): Mosaic of the East Odeon Area / 2nd cent. AD (Campbell 1991, pls. 29-30). Greece, Kos: Mosaic of the church at Zipari / 5th-6th cent. AD (Parrish 2001, fig. 13). Mosaic of the apsidal room in the South Basilica at Zipari / 5th-6th cent. AD (Parrish 2001, figs. 14-15). Israel: The chapel mosaic of the monastery at ‘Ein Ha-Shiv’ah / 6th cent. AD (Ovadiah and Ovadiah 1987, no. 75, pl. XLV). Jordan, Umm ar-Rasas (Kastrom Mefa’a): The north chapel mosaic of the church of St Stephen / 8th cent. AD (Piccirillo 1991, figs. 27, 37 and 39; Piccirillo 1993a, fig. 383).

251

Hadrianopolis IV Comparanda for the ivy scroll Turkey: Paphlagonian Pompeiopolis (Kastamonu): Mosaic of the late Roman villa / 4th-5th cent. AD (Musso et al. 2011, pp. 106, 108, pl. 8, 10/3). Cnidus (Muğla): Mosaic of the Church E / 5th cent. AD (Campbell 1979, p. 290, pl. 44, fig. 18; Parrish 2001, pp. 346-347, fig. 30). Iasus (Muğla): Mosaic of the basilica on the acropolis / 5th-6th cent. AD (Berti 1986, p. 157, fig. 5). Halicarnassus (Muğla): Mosaic of the late Roman villa / 5th cent. AD (Parrish 2001, pp. 347-348, fig. 33). Muğla: Mosaic of the basilica of the monastery of Torba near Bodrum / 5th-6th cent. AD (Özet 2002, p. 48, fig. 15; Özet 2009, pp. 75-76 and 78-79, figs. 14-15, 17-19, 21-23 and 25). Laodicea on the Lycus (Denizli): The mosaic of the south aisle of the church / 4th cent. AD (Şimşek 2015, p. 67, figs. 64 and 102). Xanthus (Antalya): Mosaic of the East Basilica / 5th-6th cent. AD (Raynaud 2009, pp. 37, 45 and 115, ills. 20, 31 and 129). Mosaic of the residence on the Lycian acropolis / 4th cent. AD (Manière-Lévêque 2012, pp. 30-31, ills. 27-29). Bursa: Mosaic of the basilica at Derecik / the late 5th cent. AD (Okçu 2007, pp. 43 and 170, fig. 4). Antioch-on-the-Orontes (Antakya, Hatay): Mosaic of a building with an unknown function / 5th-6th cent. AD (Campbell 1988, pp. 32-33, pl. 92). Macedonia, Stobi: Mosaic of the basilica at Stobi / 4th-5th cent. AD (Kolarik 1987, pp. 298-301, figs. 1-3 and 6). Greece, Nikopolis: Mosaic of Basilica A (the church of St Demetrius) / AD 525-575 (Kitzinger 1951, fig. 32). Greece, Kos: Mosaic of the basilica at Zipari on Kos / 6th cent. AD (Parrish 2001, pp. 340-341, fig. 13). Cyprus: Mosaic of the monastery of St Spyridon at Tremithus / the late 4th cent. AD (Megaw 1974, p. 67, fig. 23; Michaelides 1988, p. 103, fig. 15). Mosaic of the baptistery of the basilica of Kourion / 6th cent. AD (Michaelides 1988, p. 96, fig. 6). Israel: Mosaic of the church in Ashkelon-Barne’a / the late 5th cent. AD (Ovadiah and Ovadiah 1987, pp. 13-14, pl. 3). Nave mosaic of the church in Sede Nahum / 6th cent. AD (Ovadiah and Ovadiah 1987, pp. 125-126, pl. 138). Table 8. Basilica B - Border designs of the mosaic of the nave (Pls. 3c and 5c) Decoration Sizes of Tesserae per Colours Munsell colour codes Material tesserae dm2 Marble, Monochrome band 1,5 x 1,5 cm 44-60 white Red: 2.5R 3/8, 2.5R 4/8, serpentinite 2.5R 3/10, 2.5R 4/10, 5R Polychrome three1,0 x 1,0 cm; 48-66 White, black, dimensional crinkled orange, yellow, 3/8, 5R 4/8, 7.5R 4/8, 7.5R and travertine 3/10. Pink: 2.5R 8/4, 2.5R ribbon in frontal 1,5 x 1,5 cm red, pink and 8/2, 2.5R 7/4, 5R 8/4, 5R perspective gray 7/4. Orange: 7.5YR 7/10, At the western edge of 1,5 x 1,5 cm 45-60 White, black, 7.5YR 7/8, 10YR 7/8, the mosaic: orange, red, 10YR 7/10, 2.5YR 5/10, pink and gray 5YR 6/10, 5YR 6/12. Polychrome tangent Yellow: 2.5Y 9/2, 5Y 9/2 octagons At the western edge of 1,5 x 1,5 cm 45-60 White, black, the mosaic: yellow, orange and red Irregularly tesselated polychrome band (Its northern half is filled with white tesserae) Comparanda for the polychrome three-dimensional crinkled ribbon in frontal perspective Turkey: Antioch-on-the-Orontes (Antakya, Hatay): Floor mosaic of the House of the Birds in a Rinceau / AD 526-540 (Cimok 2000, pp. 304-311; Levi 1947, p. 366, pls. 91-92b and 181d). Israel, Beth Shean: Mosaic of the burial chamber in Beth Shean / 6th cent. AD (Ovadiah and Ovadiah 1987, pp. 30-31, pl. XXV-2.) Jordan: The mosaic of the chapel of Theotokos / 7th cent. AD (Piccirillo 1993a, p. 151, figs. 198-199).

252

Tables Comparanda for the polychrome tangent octagons Turkey: Antioch-on-the-Orontes (Antakya, Hatay): The mosaic of Baths F / AD 526-540 (Campbell 1988, pp. 50-51, pl. 154; Levi 1947, pp. 366 and 368, pls. 92a and 140d). The Green Carpet mosaic, found in a villa in Daphne / 5th cent. AD (Levi 1947, pp. 315-355, pls. 83b and 135a, c; Cimok 2000, p. 242). The mosaic of the House of the Phoenix (exhibited in the archaeological museum of Hatay, acc. no. 934-936) / Early 6th cent. AD (Campbell 1998, p. 25, pl. 120; Levi 1947, pp. 351-355, pls. 83b and 135a, c). Adıyaman: The mosaic from Besni / 4th-5th cent. AD (Salman 2007a, p. 22, fig. 29; Salman 2008, p. 24, fig. 9; Zeyrek 2008, p. 163, fig. 3). Xanthus (Antalya): Floor mosaic of the residence on the Lycian acropolis / 4th cent. AD (Manière-Lévêque 2012, pp. 30-31, ills. 27-28 and 30). Sardis (Manisa): The mosaic of the synagogue of Sardis / 4th cent. AD (Foss 1976, pp. 41-42 and 192, fig. 16). Syria: The mosaic of the south aisle of the Martyrium Basilica in Dipsi Faraj / 5th cent. AD (Harper and Wilkinson 1975, pp. 319-338, fig. 13a, b). The mosaic of the church of Holy Martyrs at Tayibat al-Imam / AD 447 (Zaqzuq and Piccirillo 1999, p. 444, pl. 16, fig. 17). As a panel design: Jordan: The mosaic of the north aisle of the church of St Paul / Second half of the 6th cent. AD (Piccirillo 1997, p. 387, pianta I, pl. 22, 31). Israel, Haifa: The mosaic of Room 9 in the north aisle of the basilica of Dor / 5th cent. AD (Dauphin 1999, pp. 400-401, fig. 1, pl. 1, photo 2). Table 9. Basilica B - Border design of the bema mosaic (Pl. 5b) Decoration Sizes of Tesserae per Colours tesserae dm2 Polychrome jewelled 1,0 x 1,0 cm 55-63 White, black, band of tangent poised orange, red, squares and horizontal pink, gray and spindles grayish pink.

Munsell colour codes

Material

Orange: 5YR 6/10, 5YR Marble, 6/8, 5YR 5/10. Red: 5R serpentinite 4/10, 5R 4/8. Pink: 5R and travertine 6/12, 7.5R 7/4, 10R 7/4. Gray: 7.5R 7/2, 7.5R 6/2, 10R 6/2, 10R 7/2. Comparanda for the polychrome jewelled band

Turkey: Antioch-on-the-Orontes (Antakya, Hatay): A fragment of a floor mosaic from Arap Deresi district / AD 500 (Campbell 1998, p. 50; Levi 1947, pl. 138e; Balmelle et al. 1985, pp. 60-61, pl. 23). Anemurium (Mersin): Mosaic of the south aisle of the church of the necropolis / 5th-6th cent. AD (Campbell 1998, p. 48, pl. 214; Balmelle et al. 1985, pp. 62-63, pl. 24b). Edessa (Şanlıurfa): Mosaic of the hunting Amazons in the House of the Amazons in Haleplibahçe / 6th cent. AD (Karaca and Rızvanoğlu 2008, p. 7; Karabulut, Önal and Dervişoğlu 2011, p. 56, fig. 60). The mosaic of Hazinedere / 6th cent. AD. Germanicia (Kahramanmaraş): ‘The mosaic of Life’ in the early Byzantine villa / 5th-6th cent. AD (Eker and Ersoy 2017, pp. 114-156, 177 and 220-225).

The mosaic of the lady of Carthage / 6th cent. AD (Ben Abed 2006, p. 47, fig. 3.21; Dunbabin 1978, pp. 146 and 251, pl. 53, fig. 135; Campbell 1998, p. 50, pl. 215).

Tunisia:

In mural mosaics: Italy, Ravenna: The wall mosaic of the church of San Vitale / AD 547 (Chatzidakis 1994, pp. 32, 36 and 228, figs. 4 and 7; Grabar 1953, pp. 62-63).

253

Hadrianopolis IV Table 10. Basilica B - Border design of the mosaic of the south aisle in its second phase (Fig. 220) Decoration Sizes of Tesserae per Colours Munsell colour codes Material tesserae dm2 Three-dimensional 1,0 x 1,0 cm 74-81 White, black, Red: 10R 6/12, 10R 5/10, Marble, undulating ribbon in red, pink, orange, 10R 5/12, 7.5R 3/6. Pink: serpentinite lateral perspective green 7.5R 8/4, 5R 8/4. Orange: and travertine 7.5YR 7/6, 7.5YR 7/8, 7.5YR 6/8. Green: 7.5G 5/6, 10G 5/6 Comparanda for the three dimensional undulating ribbon in lateral perspective Turkey: Antioch-on-the-Orontes (Antakya, Hatay): Mosaic of the House of Ge and the Seasons / Second half of the 5th cent. AD (Levi 1947, fig. 139, pl. 81a, b). Mosaic of the House of Philia / Mid-5th cent. AD (Levi 1947, fig. 133, pl. 72). Mosaic of the House of Ram’s Head / 5th cent. AD (Levi 1947, pl. 133c). Constantinople (Istanbul): Mosaic of the Great Palace (Museum of the Great Palace Mosaics) / AD 527-565 (Balmelle et al. 1985, pl. 65f; Brett 1942, pl. 8b; Cimok 1997, fig. 4; Dunbabin 1999, fig. 244; Jobst et al. 2010, fig. 13; Trilling 1989, figs. 4-7; Yücel 2010, p. 15). Mosaic of the Four Seasons (exhibited in the courtyard of the basilica of Hagia Eirene) / 4th-5th cent. AD (Parrish 2008, fig. 1). Cyprus: Mosaics of the basilicas of Chrysopolitissa and Limeniotissa / Early Byzantine period (Michaelides 1988, figs. 25-26). Tunisia, Tabarca: Mosaic of a villa from the 4th-5th cent. AD (Dunbabin 1978, pls. XLIV-111 and XLV113). Jordan: Naos mosaic of the church of the Holy Martyrs Lot and Procopius / 557 AD (Piccirillo 1993a, figs. 210 and 213). The apsidal mosaic of the church of St Paul (located in Kastron Mefaa) / Second half of the 6th cent. AD (Piccirillo 1997, pl. 32). Israel, Beth Shean: The narthex mosaic of a burial chamber / Mid-6th cent. AD (Ovadiah and Ovadiah 1987, pp. 30-31, pl. XXV-2). Italy, Ravenna: Mural mosaic of the mausoleium of Galla Placidia / 5th cent. AD (Lorizzo 1976, pls. 1 and 6). Table 11. The Apsidal Building - Border design of the Apsidal mosaic (Fig. 234) Decoration Sizes of Tesserae per Colours Munsell colour codes tesserae dm2 Three-strand guilloche 1,0 x 1,5 cm; White, dark 1,5 x 1,5 cm; blue, red, 1,5 x 2,0 cm yellow, light bluish gray Comparanda for the three-strand guilloche

Material Marble, serpentinite and travertine

Turkey: Erzincan: The apsidal mosaic of church of Altıntepe / 6th cent. AD (Can 2007, p. 105, figs. 6 and 8; Can 2009, pp. 10-11, fig. 18; Can 2011, p. 230, fig. 5). Anemurium (Mersin): The apsidal mosaic of the church of the necropolis / 5th-6th cent. AD (Campbell 1998, pp. 47 and 50, pl. 209). Antioch-on-the-Orontes (Archaeological museum of Hatay): The earlier examples: The mosaic of Psyche / 3rd c AD, acc. no. 892. Mosaic of the Achilles and Diedemia / 2nd cent. AD, acc. no. 995. Zeugma (Mosaic museum of Zeugm): The mosaic of Hülümen / 5th cent. AD.

254

Tables Table 12. The Domus - Border designs of the mosaic of Room 1b (Fig. 242 and Pl. 5d) Decoration Sizes of Tesserae per Colours Munsell colour codes Material tesserae dm2 Monochrome Band 1,0 x 1,0 cm Orange Orange: 5YR 6/10, 5YR Marble, Swastika-meander in 1,0 x 1,0 cm White, black, 6/12, 5YR 6/8, 5YR 5/10, serpentinite 5YR 7/10, 7.5YR 7/10. and travertine perspective and figural red, orange, panels placed between yellow, green, Yellow: 2.5Y 8/4. Red: the arms of this design light greenish 2.5R 4/10, 2.5R 5/10, 2.5R gray and gray. 4/8, 5R 4/10, 5R 5/10. Green: 10G 5/4, 10G 4/4, 2.5BG 5/4, 2.5BG 5/6. Gray: 2.5BG 8/2, 10G 8/2, 5G 9/2, 5GY 8/2, 2.5PB 8/2. Band of polychrome 1,0 x 1,0 cm shaded zigzag pattern Comparanda for the swastika-meander in perspective, in lateral perspective Turkey: Mopsuestia (Adana): The floor mosaic of the basilica of Mopsuestia / 5th cent. AD (Budde 1969, pp. 50-51, fig. 24, fig. 126). Antioch-on-the-Orontes (Antakya, Hatay): The mosaics of Room 3 and Room 8 of Baths D / 4th cent. AD (Campbell 1988, pp. 16-17, R 39e and R 42e). Mosaic of Baths F / 4th cent. AD (Campbell 1988, p. 50, pl. 146). A floor mosaic from Daphne / 5th cent. AD (Cimok 2000, p. 240). Erzincan: Mosaic of the nave of the church of Altıntepe / 6th cent. AD (Can 2007, p. 103; Can 2009, p. 8, fig. 8; Can 2011, p. 227, fig. 3). Jordan: The mosaic of the chapel of Priest John / AD 565 (Piccirillo 1993a, pp. 174-175, figs. 230-232. Comparanda for the band of polychrome shaded zigzag pattern Tunisia: A floor mosaic from a villa / Second half of the 4th cent. AD (Alexander and Ennaifer 1973, pp. 74-75, pls. 34-35). Table 13. The Domus - Border designs of the mosaic of Room 6 (Pls. 1d and 4b) Decoration Sizes of Tesserae Colours Munsell colour codes tesserae per dm2 Monochrome Band 1,0 x 1,0 cm 72-90 Orange Orange: 2.5YR 5/10, 2.5YR 5/12, 2.5YR 6/12, 2.5YR 6/14, 7.5YR 7/12,

Material Travertine

5YR 7/12, 5YR 6/12. Marble, 1,0 x 1,0 cm 72-90 Orange, red, Blue: 10B 1/2, 7.5B 1/2, 5B 1/2. The row of tangent dark blue, Orange: 2.5YR 5/10, 2.5YR serpentinite poised squares with sides of broken green, white. 5/12, 2.5YR 6/12, 2.5YR 6/14, and travertine lines, forming 7.5YR 7/12, 5YR 7/12, 5YR hourglasses. 6/12. Red: 7.5R 5/12, 7.5R 4/12, 7.5R 4/14, 7.5R 3/10, 5R 4/14, 10R 3/10, 10R, 7/8, 10R 6/12. Green: 7.5G 5/6, 5G 6/8, 5G 5/8, 5G 5/6, 5G 4/6, 5G 3/6, 2.5G 8/6, 2.5G 7/6, 2.5G 4/6 Wave pattern 1,0 x 1,0 cm 72-90 Dark blue and Blue: 10B 1/2, 7.5B 1/2, 5B 1/2. Marble and white serpentinite Comparanda for the row of tangent poised square with sides of broken lines, forming hourglasses Turkey: Antioch-on-the-Orontes (Antakya, Hatay): (As an ornament in a panel): Mosaic of Baths C / 4th and 5th cent. AD (Campbell 1988, p. 37, pl. 109; Levi 1947, pp. 289-291, fig. 118, pl. 118a). 255

Hadrianopolis IV Comparanda for the wave pattern Turkey: Antioch-on-the-Orontes (Archaeological museum of Hatay): Mosaic of personification of Ge / 5th cent. AD, acc. no. 870. Mosaic of Psyche, 5th cent. AD? acc. no. 892. Mosaic of Ananeosis / 5th cent. AD, acc. no. 907-912. The lion mosaic, 5th cent. AD, acc. no. 913. The geometric mosaic / 5th cent. AD, acc. no. 957. Gaziantep (Mosaic museum of Zeugma in Gaziantep): Sulumağara mosaic / 5th cent. AD (Patacı 2016, p. 432, fig. 11); Hülümen mosaic / 5th cent. AD. Edessa (Mosaic museum of Haleplibahçe in the museum of Şanlıurfa): The main hall mosaic of the villa of the Amazons / 6th cent. AD (Karabulut, Önal and Dervişoğlu 2011, fig. 47). Xanthus (Antalya): Mosaics of the East Basilica / 5th and 6th cent. AD (Raynaud 2009, ills. 15, 85, 89 and 99). Halicarnassus (Muğla): Mosaic of Room F of a villa / 5th cent. AD (Poulsen 2008, p. 104, fig. 3). Muğla: Mosaic of Ahmet Çavuş district in Milas / 5th and 6th cent. AD (Kızıl and Özcan 2009, fig. 2). Apamea Myrlea (Bursa): A floor mosaic of a residential building / 4th cent. AD (Şahin and Çıtakoğlu 2016, figs. 9-10). Syria, Apamea: The cathedral mosaic in the museum of Apamea / 6th cent. AD (Balty 1977, pp. 140-143). Israel, Beth Shean: Nave mosaic of the synagogue of Beth Shean / 5th cent. AD (Ovadiah and Ovadiah 1987, pl. 29.1). Jordan, Livias: Naos mosaic of the church of Shunah Al-Jabuniyah / 6th cent. AD (Piccirillo 1993a, fig. 669). Table 14. Baths A - Panel designs of the mosaic of Room 11 (Pl. 6) Decoration Sizes of Tesserae per Colours Material tesserae dm2 Orthogonal pattern of stars of eight 1,5 x 1,5 29-31 Red, orange, dark Marble, parallelograms, squares and small poised cm; blue, yellow serpentinite squares between the arms of the stars. and travertine. 2,0 x 2,0 cm Contiguous repeating rows of superposed 1,5 x 1,5 29-31 Red, orange, blue, chevrons with arms of alternating colours, cm; yellow forming a zigzag pattern, with effect of relief. 2,0 x 2,0 cm Chessboard pattern 1,5 x 1,5 29-31 Red, orange, dark cm; blue, white (threshold mosaic) 2,0 x 2,0 cm Munsell colour codes: Red: 7.5R 3/10, 7.5R 4/14, 7.5R 5/14, 10R 7/10, 10R 6/10, 10R 6/12, 10R 4/12, 10R 3/10, 10R 2/8. Orange: 5YR 7/10, 5YR 7/12, 5YR 6/12, 5YR 5/10, 2.5YR 6/14, 2.5YR 5/12. Blue: 7.5B 8/4, 7.5B 8/6, 10B 8/4, 10B 8/6. Yellow: 10Y 9/4, 10Y 9/6, 7.5Y 9/4, 7.5Y 9/6.

256

Tables Comparanda for the stars of eight parallelograms, squares and small poised squares Turkey: Antioch-on-the-Orontes (Antakya, Hatay): The mosaic of Room 1 of the House of Drinking Contest / 3rd cent. AD (Levi 1947, pp. 156-159, pl. 30a, b and 101b; Balty 1981, p. 373, pl. 14.1; Balty 1991, p. 28, fig. 1; Dunbabin 1999, p. 164, fig. 167). The mosaic of Room 1 of the House of Dionysus and Ariadne / 2nd-3rd cent. AD (Levi 1947, pp. 141-142, pl. 27 and 101a; Cimok 2000, pp. 124-125. The mosaics of Room 1 and Room 7 of the House of the Boat of Psyches / 3rd cent. AD (Levi 1947, pp. 168 and 186, pl. 103e and 38d). Zeugma (Gaziantep): A floor mosaic next to a Roman bath complex / Roman period (Abadie-Reynal and Ergeç 2000, p. 258, fig. 12). Floor mosaic of the Great Hall of the Maenad villa / 2nd cent. AD (Ergeç 2000, p. 269, fig. 10; Başgelen and Ergeç 2000, p. 38.) Aphrodisias (Aydın): A floor mosaic of a building with an unknown function / 2nd cent. AD (Campbell 1991, pp. 10-11, pl. 29, R173b. Xanthus (Antalya): Floor mosaic of the early Byzantine Eastern Basilica / 5th-6th cent. AD (Raynaud 2009, pp. 43-44, figs. 29-30). Sardis (Manisa): A floor mosaic of a villa / End of the 4th cent. AD (Scheibelreiter 2007, p. 70 and 190, fig. 18). Mosaic of the palaestra of the baths-gymnasium complex / 4th-5th cent. AD (Yegül 1986, p. 31, fig. 53). Prusa ad Olympum (Bursa): Mosaic of Yerkapı /6th-7th cent. AD (Okçu 2009, pp. 32-41). Greece, Kos: The mosaic of the north aisle of the Hagios Stephanos basilical complex and the naos mosaic of the smaller basilica / 5th-6th cent. AD (Parrish 2001, pp. 342-343, figs. 20-21). The mosaic of the Hagios Ioannes baptistery / 6th cent. AD (Parrish 2001, pp. 344-345, figs. 22-23). Macedonia, Heraclea Lyncestis: Floor mosaic of the basilica in Heraclea Lyncestis / early Christian period (Hoddinott 1963, pp. 159-161, pl. 36a). Syria, Apamea: Floor mosaic of a residence / second half of the 3rd cent. AD (Balty 1977, pp. 26-27; Balty 1981, p. 413, pl. 36; Balty 1995, p. 61, pl. III.1). Comparanda for the contiguous repeating rows of superposed chevrons with arms of alternating colours, forming a zigzag pattern, with effect of relief Turkey: Paphlagonian Pompeiopolis (Kastamonu): A floor mosaic of a small bath complex which belongs to a villa / 4th-5th cent. AD (Musso et al. 2011, p. 75, pl. 3/1; Summerer and von Kienlin 2009, p. 82). Erzincan: The apsidal mosaic of the church of Altıntepe / 6th. cent. AD (Can 2009, pp. 10-11, fig. 18). Mopsuestia (Mosaic museum of Misis, Adana): Mosaic of the basilica in Mopsuestia / 5th cent. AD (Budde 1969, fig. 11, 29, fig. 61). Xanthus (Antalya): A floor mosaic in the Sector E of the residence on the Lycian acropolis / 6th cent. AD (Manière-Lévêque 2012, p. 48, ill. 52.) Comparanda for the chessboard pattern Turkey: Xanthus (Antalya): Mosaic of the early Byzantine East Basilica / 5th-6th cent. AD (Raynaud 2009, p. 44). Prusa ad Olympum (Bursa): Mosaic of Yerkapı / 6th-7th cent. AD (Okçu 2009, p. 36, fig. 9). Jordan: Mosaic of the north aisle of the church of Bishop Leontios / 5th-6th cent. AD (Nassar and Turshan 2011, pp. 57-58, fig. 20). Table 15. Baths B - Panel design of the mosaic of Room 5 (Pl. 8) Decoration

Sizes of tesserae

Tesserae per dm2

Colours

Munsell colour codes:

Material

Orthogonal pattern of spaced swastikameander with reverse returns, the spaces staggered and containing a square bearing a serrated poised square.

1,0x1,5 cm;

24-31

Red, orange, dark blue, white, gray.

Blue: 10B 1/2, 10B 2/2, 10B 3/2, 10B 4/2, 7.5B 1/2, 7.5B 2/2, 7.5B 3/2, 7.5B 4/2, 5B 1/2, 5B 2/2, 5B 3/2, 5B 4/2. Red: 7.5R 3/10, 7.5R 4/14, 7.5R 5/14, 5R 3/10, 5R 4/14, 5R 5/14. Orange: 7.5YR 6/10, 7.5YR 7/10, 7.5YR 7/12, 5YR 6/12, 5YR 6/10

Marble, serpentinite and travertine

1,5 x 1,5 cm; 1,5 x 2,0 cm; 2,0 x 2,0 cm.

257

Hadrianopolis IV Comparanda for the orthogonal pattern of spaced swastika-meander Turkey: Antioch-on-the-Orontes (Antakya, Hatay): Floor mosaic of a dwelling in Daphne / Early 5th cent. AD (Levi 1947, pp. 315-316, pl. 128c). Mopsuestia (Mosaic museum of Misis, Adana): The floor mosaic of the basilica of Mopsuestia / Second half of the 5th cent. AD (Budde 1969, p. 52, fig. 25; fig. 116-119). Jordan: Mosaic of the north aisle of the church of Bishop Leontios / 5th-6th cent. AD (Nassar and Turshan 2011, pp. 57-58, fig. 20). Table 16. Baths B - Panel design of the mosaic of Room 2 (Fig. 49) Decoration

Sizes of tesserae

Tesserae per dm2

Colours

Orthogonal pattern of adjacent rosettes

1,5 x 1,5 cm;

24

Dark blue, red, orange, yellow, green, gray, white

Munsell colour codes

Material

Blue: 10B 1/2, 10B 2/2, 10B Marble, 3/2, 10B 4/2, 7.5B 1/2, 7.5B serpentinite and travertine 1,5 x 2,0 cm; 2/2, 7.5B 3/2, 7.5B 4/2, 5B 1/2, 5B 2/2, 5B 3/2, 5B 4/2. 2,0 x 2,0 cm. Red: 7.5R 3/10, 7.5R 4/14, 7.5R 4/12, 7.5R 5/14, 5R 4/14. Orange: 7.5YR 6/10, 7.5YR 7/10, 7.5YR 7/12, 5YR 6/12, 5YR 6/10 Yellow: 7.5Y 9/4, 7.5Y 9/6, 5Y 9/4. Green (grayish): 2.5GY 7/4, 2.5GY 8/4. Comparandum for the orthogonal pattern of rosettes

None (unknown).

258

Tables Table 17. Basilica A - Panel designs of the mosaics of the south and north aisles (Pls. 9-11) Decoration Sizes of tesserae Tesserae per dm2 Colours Material Mosaic of the north aisle: 0,5x0,5 cm 110-120 Red, pink, green, Marble, orange, yellow, gray, serpentinite and Panel I: and and black and white. travertine Orthogonal pattern of stars of eight parallelograms, squares and small poised squares between the arms of the stars. Mosaic of the north aisle:

1,0x1,0 cm

170-200.

0,5x0,5 cm

112-114

Panel II:

and

and

A geometric and figured pattern of the ornament fields formed of repeating three adjacent squares. A band of tightly braided simple guilloche, a band of polychrome three-dimensional undulating ribbon in lateral perspective and another band of tangent inverted bells with each bell horizontally shaded, surround the squares decorated with birds, poised squares and irregular pentagons. Mosaic of the south aisle:

1,0x1,0 cm

170-200.

0,4x0,4 cm,

115-123;

0,5x0,5 cm

120-130;

and

and

Orthogonal pattern of stars of eight parallelograms, squares and small poised squares between the arms of the stars.

Red, pink, green, orange, yellow, brown, black and white.

Red, pink, orange, yellow, green, brown, gray, black and white.

1,0x1,0 cm 260-292. Munsell colour codes of the mosaic of the north aisle: Orange: 7.5YR 7/8, 7.5YR 7/10, 7.5YR 7/12, 5YR 7/10, 5YR 7/12, 5YR 6/10. Yellow: 7.5Y 9/2, 7.5Y 9/4, 7.5Y 8/4, 2.5Y 8/8, 2.5Y 7/10, 10Y 9/2, Red: 10R 4/8, 10R 4/10, 10R 4/12, 10R 3/4, 10R 3/8, 10R 3/10, 2.5YR 5/10. Green: 5G 4/6, 5G 5/4, 5G 3/4, 7.5G 3/4, 10GY 9/2, 10GY 9/4, 10GY 8/2, 2.5G 8/2, 2.5G 9/2. Gray: 5PB 7/2, 2.5PB 6/2, 2.5PB 7/2, 2.5PB 8/2, 10B 6/2, 10B 4/2. Pink: 7.5R 8/4, 7.5R 8/2, 2.5R 8/4, 2.5R 8/2. Brown: 5YR 3/2, 5YR 4/2, 10YR 3/2, 10YR ¾. Munsell colour codes of the mosaic of the south aisle: Red: 2.5R 4/10, 2.5R 6/12, 2.5R 5/12, 2.5R 5/10, 5R 5/12, 5R 4/12, 5R 5/8, 5R 4/8, 7.5R 4/10, 7.5R 5/12 . Pink: 7.5R 8/4, 2.5R 8/4, 5R 9/2, 5R 8/4, 5R 7/4. Yellow: 10Y 9/4, 10Y 9/6, 7.5Y 9/6, 7.5Y 9/4, 5Y 9/4, 2.5Y 8/6, 2.5Y 8/8. Orange: 7.6YR 7/12, 7.5YR 7/10, 7.5YR 6/10, 7.5YR 7/10, 5YR 7/10, 5YR 7/8, 5YR 6/8. Green: 2.5G 5/4, 2.5G 4/4, 2.5G 4/4, 2.5G 3/4, 7.5G 6/8, 7.5G 5/6, 2.5G 9/2,5G 9/2, 7.5G 9/2, 10G 9/2. Brown: 7.5YR 4/6, 5YR 4/6, 5Y 5/8, 5Y 5/6, 2.5Y 5/6, 2.5Y 5/8. Gray: 2.5BG 7/2, 5BG 7/2, 5B 8/2, 7.5B 7/2, 10B 7/2.

259

Hadrianopolis IV Comparanda for the stars of eight parallelograms, squares and small poised squares between the arms of the stars Turkey: Antioch-on-the-Orontes (Antakya, Hatay): The mosaic of Room 1 of the House of Drinking Contest / 3rd cent. AD (Levi 1947, pp. 156-159, pl. 30a, b and 101b; Balty 1981, p. 373, pl. 14.1; Balty 1991, p. 28, fig. 1; Dunbabin 1999, p. 164, fig. 167). The mosaic of Room 1 of the House of Dionysus and Ariadne / 2nd-3rd cent. AD (Levi 1947, pp. 141-142, pl. 27 and 101a; Cimok 2000, pp. 124-125. The mosaics of Room 1 and Room 7 of the House of the Boat of Psyches / 3rd cent. AD (Levi 1947, pp. 168 and 186, pl. 103e and 38d). Zeugma (Gaziantep): A floor mosaic next to a Roman bath complex / Roman period (Abadie-Reynal and Ergeç 2000, p. 258, fig. 12). Floor mosaic of the Great Hall of the Maenad villa / 2nd cent. AD (Ergeç 2000, p. 269, fig. 10; Başgelen and Ergeç 2000, p. 38.) Aphrodisias (Aydın): A floor mosaic of a building with an unknown function / 2nd cent. AD (Campbell 1991, pp. 10-11, pl. 29, R173b. Xanthus (Antalya): Floor mosaic of the East Basilica / 5th-6th cent. AD (Raynaud 2009, pp. 43-44, figs. 29-30). Sardis (Manisa): A floor mosaic of a villa / End of the 4th cent. AD (Scheibelreiter 2007, p. 70 and 190, fig. 18). Mosaic of the palaestra of the baths-gymnasium complex / 4th-5th cent. AD (Yegül 1986, p. 31, fig. 53). Prusa ad Olympum (Bursa): Mosaic of Yerkapı /6th-7th cent. AD (Okçu 2009, pp. 32-41). Greece, Kos: Mosaic of the north aisle of the Hagios Stephanos basilical complex and the naos mosaic of the smaller basilica / 5th-6th cent. AD (Parrish 2001, pp. 342-343, figs. 2021). The mosaic of the Hagios Ioannos Baptistery / 6th cent. AD (Parrish 2001, pp. 344-345, figs. 22-23). Macedonia: Mosaic of the Episcopal Church / 4th-5th cent. AD (Kitzinger 1946, p. 108, fig. 145; Kolarik 1987, p. 297, fig. 6). Heraclea Lyncestis: Floor mosaic of the basilica in Heraclea Lyncestis / early Christian period (Hoddinott 1963, pp. 159-161, pl. 36a). Syria, Apamea: Floor mosaic of a residence / the second half of the 3rd cent. AD (Balty 1977, pp. 26-27; Balty 1981, p. 413, pl. 36; Balty 1995, p. 61, pl. III.1). Jordan: Mosaic of the nave of the church of Shunah AlJabuniyah / 6th cent. AD (Piccirillo 1993a, pp. 320-323, figs. 662, 664-665). Comparandum for the Panel II None (unknown). Table 18. Basilica A - Panel designs of the mosaics of the nave (Pl. 12; and Fig. 113) Decoration Sizes of tesserae Tesserae per dm2 Colours Material 110-125 in Red, orange, Orthogonal pattern of 0,4x0,4 cm, Marble, serpentinine curvilinear squares with geometrical motifs yellow, pink, and travertine bird figures and four 0,5x0,5 cm green, gray, squares decorated with and brown, black and animal figures and the and white. circles and irregular 175-225 in figural concave octagons between 1,0x1,0 cm scenes. them. Bird figures, among 0,4x0,4 cm, 110-125 in Red, orange, pink, the bands consisting of geometrical motifs yellow, green, brown, geometric motifs. 0,5x0,5 cm and black and white and 175-225 in figural scenes. 1,0x1,0 cm Munsell colour codes: Brown: 10YR 3/4, 5YR 3/2, 7.5YR 2/2, 2.5YR 3/4, 2.5YR 4/4, 7.5YR 3/4, 2.5Y 3/2, 10YR 8/4, 7.5YR 8/4, 2.5YR 4/4, 7.5YR 4/6, 7.5YR 5/8, 10R 4/6. Red: 7.5R 5/12, 7.5R 5/10, 7.5R 5/8, 7.5R 4/8, 7.5R 3/8, 7.5R 3/10, 10R 5/10, 10R 5/12, 10R 4/10, 10R 3/10, 5R 5/8, 5R 4/6, 5R 3/6, 2.5R 4/8, 2.5R 5/8. Orange: 5YR 6/10, 5YR 6/8, 5YR 7/10, 5YR 5/8, 7.5YR 7/10, 7.5YR 7/8, 7.5YR 7/12, 2.5YR 5/12, 2.5YR 6/12, 7.5YR 8/6, 10YR 8/6. Yellow: 7.5Y 9/6, 10Y 9/6, 5Y 8/8, 2.5GY 9/2, 10Y 9/2, 5Y 9/4, 7.5GY 9/2, 10GY 8/2, 5GY 8/4, 7.5GY 9/4. Pink: 7.5R 8/4, 7.5R 8/2, 2.5R 8/4, 2.5R 8/2. Gray: 5B 7/2, 5B 6/2, 7.5B 6/2, 7.5B 7/2, 10B 7/2, 10G 7/2, 10G 6/2, 2.5YR 8/2, 5YR 8/2, 2.5BG 6/2 Green: 2.5G 3/6, 2.5G 4/4, 2.5G 4/6, 2.5G 5/4, 2.5G 5/6, 5G 3/2, 5G 4/2, 5G 4/4, 5G 5/4, 7.5G 3/4, 7.5G 4/2, 7.5G 4/4, 10G 4/2, 10G 4/4, 10G 5/4, 10G 6/4, 2.5G 8/2, 2.5BG 8/4, 7.5G 8/2, 7.5G 8/4, 7.5G 9/2, 10G 8/2, 10G 8/4, 10G 8/6, 10G 9/2.

260

Tables Comparanda for the orthogonal curvilinear squares and four squares with animal figures and the circles and irregular concave octagons between them Tunisia: The mosaics of El Alia and Chebbai exhibited at the Bardo National Museum / 2nd cent. AD (Ben Osman 1990, p. 73, pl. 14; Gozlan 1990, p. 92, figs. 90 and 93.) France: Mosaic of the Pentheus’ Death in Jean-Jaures Avenue in Nimes / 2nd cent. AD (Houix et al. 2011, pp. 452-458, figs. 4-5 and 11) Britain: Floor mosaic of a villa at Lullingstone / 4th cent. AD (Dunbabin 1999, pp. 97-98, fig. 97; Balmelle et al. 1985, pl. 294a). Comparandum for the bird figures, among the bands consisting of geometric motifs None (unknown). Table 19. Basilica A - Panel design of the bema mosaic (Pl. 13; Fig. 124) Decoration Sizes of Tesserae per dm2 Colours Material tesserae A grid-pattern of bands 0,5x0,5 cm 100-110 in Red, green, Marble, serpentinite, travertine bearing circles and geometrical motifs orange, yellow, and smalti. and spindles interlooped pink, blue, black tangentially in a and and white. 1,0x1,0 cm rectangle and around a medallion and a circle 175 in the bird with loops figure. Munsell colour codes: Green: 5G 4/4, 5G 4/6, 5G 5/4, 5G 3/2, 5BG 6/6, 5BG 5/6, 7.5BG 6/6, 7.5BG 5/6, 2.5BG 5/6, 10G 5/6, 10G 4/6, 2.5G 8/2, 5G 8/2, 7.5G 8/2, 7.5G 7/4, 5G 7/4. Red: 2.5R 5/8, 5R 4/6, 5R 5/8, 5R 4/8, 7.5R 5/10, 7.5R 5/8, 7.5R 4/8, 10R 4/10, 10R 5/10, 10R 5/12. Orange: 7.5YR 7/10, 7.5YR 7/8, 7.5YR 7/12, 7.5YR 6/10, 7.5YR 5/10, 7.5YR 5/8, 10YR 6/8, 2.5YR 6/12, 2.5YR 6/10. Yellow: 5Y 9/4, 7.5Y 9/4, 7.5Y 9/6, 7.5Y 4/4, 7.5Y 4/6, 10Y 3/4, 5Y 4/4, 5Y 4/6, 7.5Y 4/6. Pink: 2.5R 7/4, 2.5R 6/4, 5R 7/4, 5R 7/2, 5R 8/2, 7.5R 7/2, 10R 7/2, 2.5R 9/2, 5R9/2, 7.5R 9/2, 10R 9/2 Mavi: 10B 2/4, 7.5B 2/4, 5PB 2/4. Comparanda for the panel design of the bema mosaic No mosaic examples which corresponds fully to this design could be discovered. Turkey: Mopsuestia (Mosaic museum of Misis, Adana): Floor mosaic of the basilica of Mopsuestia / 5th cent. AD (Budde 1969, p. 58, fig. 27). Greece: Kos: A floor mosaic belonging to the northern additional section of Hagios Paulos Basilica / 6th cent. AD (Parrish 2001, p. 339, fig. 11).

261

Hadrianopolis IV Table 20. Basilica A - Panel design of the narthex mosaic (Pl. 14) Decoration Sizes of Tesserae per Colours tesserae dm2 Orthogonal pattern of 1,5x1,5 cm 35-44 Red, orange, black squares consisting of and white. triangles and chevrons and alternately. 2.0x2,0 cm

Munsell colour codes

Material

Red: 7.5R 4/8, 7.5R 5/8, 7.5R 5/10, 5R 5/8, 2.5R 5/8.

Marble, serpentinite and travertine.

Orange: 5YR 6/10, 5YR 6/8, 5YR 7/10, 7.5YR 7/8. Comparandum for the orthogonal pattern of squares formed of triangles and chevrons alternately

None (unknown). Table 21. Basilica B - Panel design of the mosaic of the north aisle (Pl. 15) Decoration Sizes of Tesserae per Colours Munsell colour codes tesserae dm2 Orthogonal pattern of 1,0x1,0 cm 55-65 Red, orange, Orange: 10YR 6/8, circles in assymetrically blue, green, 7.5YR 6/8, 7.5YR shaded bands and pink, black and 7/8, 7.5YR 7/10, interlooped tangentially. white. 7.5YR 7/12. Red: 1,5x1,5 cm 10R 6/14, 10R 5/14, 10R 5/12, 7.5R 5/12, 7.5R 5/10. Pink: 2.5R 7/4, 5R 7/4, 7.5R 7/4, 7.5R 6/4. Green: 10G 6/8, 10G 7/8, 7.5G 6/8, 7.5G 7/8, 7.5G 8/8. Blue: 2.5B 9/2, 5B 9/2, 7.5B 9/2.

262

Material Marble, serpentinite and travertine.

Tables Comparanda for the orthogonal pattern of circles in assymetrically shaded bands interlooped tangentially Turkey: Antioch-on-the-Orontes (Antakya, Hatay): The mosaic of Room B of a residence / 5th cent. AD (Campbell 1988, p. 34. pl. 96; Levi 1947, p. 320, pl. 130d). Mosaic of the House of the Phoenix (exhibited in the archaeological museum of Hatay with the acc. no. 934-936) / 6th cent. AD (Campbell 1998, p. 25, pl. 120; Cimok 2000, p. 290; Levi 1947, pp. 351-352, pl. 83b, 135). Aphrodisias (Aydın): Floor mosaic of the Priest’s House / 5th cent. AD (Campbell 1991, pp. 22-26, pl. 84; Campbell 1998, p. 25, pl. 121). Xanthus (Antalya): Mosaic of the north aisle of the East Basilica / 5th cent. AD (Raynaud 2009, pp. 71-73, ills. 69-70). Iasus (Muğla): Floor mosaic of the basilica on the acropolis / Early Byzantine period (Berti 1986, p. 160, fig. 9). Sardis (Manisa): Floor mosaic of the synagogue / End of the 4th cent. AD (Foss 1976, pp. 41-42). Germanicia (Kahramanmaraş): A floor mosaic of a domus / 3th-5th cent. AD (Eker and Ersoy 2017, pp. 96, 160-161 and 246-248.) Greece, Nicopolis: The narthex mosaic of Basilica A / 6th cent. AD (Balmelle 1990, p. 65, fig. 67). Cyprus: Mosaics of the nave and the baptistery of Basilica A in Peyia / 6th cent. AD (Michaelides 1988, p. 140, figs. 63-64; Michaelides 1989, pp. 195-196). The mosaic of the first phase of the basilica of Chrysopolitissa / 4th cent. AD (Michaelides 1988, p. 99, fig. 13; Michaelides 1989, pp. 193-194). The mosaic of the third phase of the church which is uncovered under the basilica of Soloi and the floor mosaic of the basilica of Kourion / 5th-6th cent. AD (Michaelides 1988, p. 140, figs. 61-62). Israel, Beth Shean: The mosaic of the chapel of the monastery of Lady Mary / AD 567 (Ovadiah and Ovadiah 1987, pp. 26-30, pl. 23). Jordan: The mosaics of the middle and east naves of the church of Bishop Leontios / 5th-6th cent. AD (Nassar and Turshan 2011, pp. 54-56 and 58-59, figs. 17, 23.) Table 22. Basilica B - Panel design of the mosaic of the south aisle (Pl. 16) Decoration Sizes of Tesserae per Colours Munsell colour Material tesserae dm2 codes Orthogonal pattern of 1,0x1,0 cm 68-78 Orange, red, Red: 2.5R 5/10, Marble, serpentinite intersecting circles, pink, black and 2.5R 4/10, 5R 4/10, and travertine. consisting of spindles. and white 5R 5/10, 5R 3/8, 5R 4/8, 7.5R 5/8, 1,5x1,5 cm 7.5R 4/10. Orange: 7.5YR 5/8, 7.5YR 6/10, 7.5YR 7/12, 7.5YR 7/10. Pink: 2.5R 8/4, 2.5R 8/2, 2.5R 7/2, 2.5R 8/2.

263

Hadrianopolis IV Comparanda for the Orthogonal pattern of intersecting circles, consisting of spindles Turkey: Antioch-on-the-Orontes (Antakya, Hatay): Mosaic of the House of the Porticoes / 3rd cent. AD (Levi 1947, pp. 105116, pl. 99a, c, d). The mosaic of River Gods exhibited in the archaeological museum of Hatay (acc. no. 997-1002). Baptistery mosaic of Kaoussie Church (St Babylas Martyrion) / AD 420-429 or 387 / (Levi 1947, p. 285, pl. 139a; Campbell, p. 46, pl. 136; Lassus 1938, pp. 5-45). Sardis (Manisa): Floor mosaic of the synagogue / 4th cent. AD (Foss 1976, pp. 41-42). Floor mosaic of a residence (Schelbelreiter 2007, pp. 70 and 190, fig. 18). Iasus (Muğla): Mosaic of the Agora Basilica of Iasus / 6th cent. AD (Berti 1986, pp. 155-156, figs. 1-2, pl. XX). Muğla: The mosaics of the apse and north aisle of the monastery of Torba near Bodrum / 5th-6th cent. AD (Özet 2002, p. 40, fig. 14; Özet 2009, pp. 75-76, figs. 12-13, and 16-17). Floor mosaic of Ahçet Çavuş district of Milas / 5th-6th cent. AD (Kızıl and Özcan 2009, pp. 21, 23-25, fig. 10, 13 and 16). Xanthus (Antalya): Atrium mosaic of the East Basilica / 5th-6th cent. AD (Raynaud 2009, pp. 40-41, ill. 25). Adıyaman: Haraba (Aktepe) mosaic in Besni / 4th-5th cent. AD (Salman 2007a, p. 22, fig. 9; Salman 2008, p. 24, fig. 9; Zeyrek 2008, p. 163, fig. 3). Paphlagonian Pompeiopolis (Kastamonu): Floor mosaic of a residence / 4th-5th cent. AD (Musso et al. 2011, pp. 103, 106 and 108-109, pl. 5, 8 and 10-11). Cyprus: Mosaic of the Basilica of Ayia Trias / 5th cent. AD (Michaelides 1988, pp. 99 and 106, fig. 16). Israel: Floor mosaic of the church of Beth Sahur / 6th cent. AD (Ovadiah and Ovadiah 1987, pp. 25-26, pl. 20.2). Floor mosaic of the synangogue of ‘Ein Gedi / 4th-5th cent. AD (Ovadiah and Ovadiah 1987, pp. 54-56, pl. 44). Jordan: Mosaic of the Church of Apostles / AD 578 (Piccirillo 1993a, pp. 96-107, figs. 91-95). Mosaic of the church of St Peter / AD 630 (Piccirillo 1993a, pp. 312-313, figs. 630-633). Mosaic of the church of St Menas / AD 635 (Piccirillo 1993a, p. 313. figs. 634-635). Table 23. Basilica B - Panel design of the mosaic of the nave (Pl. 17) Decoration Sizes of tesserae Tesserae per dm2 Colours Material Orthogonal pattern of stars 0,5x0,5 cm 43-46 Red, orange, Marble, serpentinite and of eight parallelograms, yellow, pink, squares and small poised and and gray, green, travertine. squares between the arms of blue, black and the stars. 1,5x1,5 cm 52-56 white Munsell colour codes: Red: 2.5R 3/8, 2.5R 4/8, 2.5R 3/10, 2.5R 4/10, 5R 3/8, 5R 4/8, 7.5R 4/8, 7.5R 3/10. Pink: 2.5R 8/4, 2.5R 8/2, 2.5R 7/4, 5R 8/4, 5R 7/4. Blue: 5B 8/4, 5B 8/6, 5B 6/4, 5B 4/4, 7.5B 8/4, 7.5B 6/4, 7.5B 6/2 Green: 2.5BG 4/4, 2.5BG 5/4, 7.5GY 9/2. Orange: 7.5YR 7/10, 7.5YR 7/8, 10YR 7/8, 10YR 7/10, 2.5YR 5/10, 5YR 6/10, 5YR 6/12. Yellow: 2.5Y 9/2, 5Y 9/2

264

Tables Comparanda for the stars of eight parallelograms squares and small poised squares between the arms of the stars Turkey: Antioch-on-the-Orontes (Antakya, Hatay): The mosaic of Room 1 of the House of Drinking Contest / 3rd cent. AD (Levi 1947, pp. 156-159, pl. 30a, b and 101b; Balty 1981, p. 373, pl. 14.1; Balty 1991, p. 28, fig. 1; Dunbabin 1999, p. 164, fig. 167). The mosaic of Room 1 of the House of Dionysus and Ariadne / 2nd-3rd cent. AD (Levi 1947, pp. 141-142, pl. 27 and 101a; Cimok 2000, pp. 124-125. The mosaics of Room 1 and Room 7 of the House of the Boat of Psyches / 3rd cent. AD (Levi 1947, pp. 168 and 186, pl. 103e and 38d). Zeugma (Gaziantep): A floor mosaic next to a Roman bath complex / Roman period (Abadie-Reynal and Ergeç 2000, p. 258, fig. 12). Floor mosaic of the Great Hall of the Maenad villa / 2nd cent. AD (Ergeç 2000, p. 269, fig. 10; Başgelen and Ergeç 2000, p. 38.) Aphrodisias (Aydın): A floor mosaic of a building with an unknown function / 2nd cent. AD (Campbell 1991, pp. 10-11, pl. 29, R173b. Xanthus (Antalya): Floor mosaic of the East Basilica / 5th-6th cent. AD (Raynaud 2009, pp. 43-44, figs. 29-30). Sardis (Manisa): A floor mosaic of a villa / End of the 4th cent. AD (Scheibelreiter 2007, p. 70 and 190, fig. 18). Mosaic of the palaestra of the baths-gymnasium complex / 4th-5th cent. AD (Yegül 1986, p. 31, fig. 53). Prusa ad Olympum (Bursa): Mosaic of Yerkapı /6th-7th cent. AD (Okçu 2009, pp. 32-41). Greece, Kos: Mosaic of the north aisle of the Hagios Stephanos basilical complex and the naos mosaic of the smaller basilica / 5th-6th cent. AD (Parrish 2001, pp. 342-343, figs. 20-21). The mosaic of the Hagios Ioannos Baptistery / 6th cent. AD (Parrish 2001, pp. 344-345, figs. 22-23). Macedonia: Mosaic of the Episcopal Church / 4th-5th cent. AD (Kitzinger 1946, p. 108, fig. 145; Kolarik 1987, p. 297, fig. 6). Heraclea Lyncestis: Floor mosaic of the basilica in Heraclea Lyncestis / early Christian period (Hoddinott 1963, pp. 159-161, pl. 36a). Syria, Apamea: Floor mosaic of a residence / second half of the 3rd cent. AD (Balty 1977, pp. 26-27; Balty 1981, p. 413, pl. 36; Balty 1995, p. 61, pl. III.1). Jordan: Mosaic of the nave of the church of Shunah Al-Jabuniyah / 6th cent. AD (Piccirillo 1993a, pp. 320-323, figs. 662, 664-665). Table 24. The Apsidal Building - Panel design of the Apsidal mosaic (Fig. 234) Decoration Sizes of Tesserae Per Colours Munsell colour codes tesserae dm2 Orthogonal pattern of 1,0 x 1,0 cm; Dark blue, red, adjacent scales 1,5 x 1,5 cm; yellow, light bluish gray, white Comparanda for the orthogonal pattern of adjacent scales

Material Marble, serpentinite and travertine

Turkey: Iasus (Muğla): Apsidal mosaic of the basilica on the acropolis / 5th-6th cent. AD (Berti 1986, pp. 157 and 160, fig. 10). Caunus (Muğla): Floor mosaic at the annex building of the domed church / 6th-7th cent. AD (Aydın 2011, pp. 31-42, figs. 3-4, 6-8). Tunusia: Floor mosaic of a residence / 2nd cent. AD (Alexander and Ennaifer 1973, p. 12, pls. 2 and 62). Cyprus: Apsidal mosaic of Basilica A in Peyia / 6th cent. AD (Michaelides 1988, pp. 132 and 138, fig. 54).

265

Hadrianopolis IV Table 25. The Domus - Panel design of the mosaic of Room 1b (Pl. 18) Decoration Sizes of Tesserae Colours Munsell colour codes Material tesserae Per dm2 A pattern of poised 1,0 x1,0 cm 70-90 Red, pink, green, Red: 2.5R 4/10, 2.5R 5/10, Marble, squares placed in orange, yellow, 2.5R 4/8, 5R 4/10, 5R 5/10. serpentinite intervals on a green black and white Pink: 2.5R 8/4, 2.5R 8/2, and travertine ground and small 2.5R 7/4, 5R 8/4, 5R 7/4. Green: 10G 5/4, 10G 4/4, ornaments in the spaces between the 2.5BG 5/4, 2.5BG 5/6. poised squares. Orange: 5YR 6/10, 5YR 6/12, 5YR 6/8, 5YR 5/10, 5YR 7/10, 7.5YR 7/10. Yellow: 2.5Y 8/4. Comparandum for the panel of the mosaic of Room 1b None (unknown).

266

Plates

Plates

a

b

c

d Plate 1. (a) Baths A. Mosaic of Room 11. Wave pattern (normal). (b) Baths B. Mosaics of Rooms 2 and 5. Wave pattern (normal). (c) Basilica A. Mosaic of the nave. Wave pattern (normal). (d) The Domus. Mosaic of Room 6. Wave pattern (simple and normal).

269

Hadrianopolis IV

a

b

c Plate 2. (a) Baths A. Mosaic of Room 11. Six-strand guilloche. (b) Baths B. Mosaics of rooms 2 and 5. Six-strand guilloche. (c) Basilica A. Mosaic of the narthex. Four-strand guilloche.

270

Plates

a

b

c

d Plate 3. (a) Basilica A. Mosaics of the south and north aisles. A band of tightly braided round-tongued double guilloche. (b) Basilica A. Mosaic of the nave. A band of polychrome three-dimensional undulating ribbon in lateral perspective on a black ground. (c) Basilica B. Mosaic of the nave. A band of polychrome three-dimensional crinkled ribbon, depicted on a black ground in frontal perspective. (d) Basilica A. Mosaic of the nave. A band of colourful vegetal ornaments following each other alternately on a white ground.

271

Hadrianopolis IV

a

b

c

d Plate 4. (a) Basilica A. Mosaic of the bema. A row of tangent serrated and multicoloured poised squares, forming hourglasses. (b) The Domus. Mosaic of Room 6. A row of tangent stepped crosses or poised squares with sides of broken lines, forming hourglasses. (c) Basilica B. Mosaic of the north aisle. A row of tangent semicircles formed of two tangent spindles forming alternately inverted thorns. (d) Basilica B. Mosaic of the north aisle. A row of tangent circles formed of four spindles forming poised concave squares and pairs of opposed thorns.

272

Plates

a

b

c

d Plate 5. (a) Basilica B. Mosaic of the south aisle. Ivy scroll. (b) Basilica B. Mosaic of the bema. A jewelled band. (c) Basilica B. Mosaic of the nave. A row of tangent and multicoloured octagons. (d) The Domus. Mosaic of Room 1b. A band of polychrome shaded zigzag pattern.

273

Hadrianopolis IV

Plate 6. Baths A. Mosaic of Room 11. An orthogonal pattern of stars of eight parallelograms, squares decorated with serrated and multicoloured poised squares, and smaller poised squares between the arms of the stars.

274

Plates

Plate 7. Baths A. Mosaic of Room 11. Contiguous repeating rows of superposed chevrons with arms of alternating colours, forming a zigzag pattern, with effect of relief.

275

Hadrianopolis IV

Plate 8. Baths B. Mosaic of Room 5. An orthogonal pattern of spaced swastika-meander with reverse returns, the spaces staggered and containing a square bearing a serrated polychrome poised square.

276

Plates

Plate 9. Basilica A. Panel I of the mosaic of the north aisle. An orthogonal pattern of stars of eight parallelograms, squares decorated with various birds, and smaller poised squares decorated with rosettes between the arms of the stars.

277

Hadrianopolis IV

Plate 10. Basilica A. Panel II of the mosaic of the north aisle. A geometric and figural pattern in the ornament fields formed of repeating three adjacent squares. A band of tightly braided simple guilloche, a band of polychrome three-dimensional undulating ribbon in lateral perspective and another band of tangent inverted bells with each bell horizontally shaded, surround the squares decorated with birds, poised squares and irregular pentagons.

278

Plates

Plate 11. Basilica A. Mosaic of the south aisle. An orthogonal pattern of stars of eight parallelograms, squares decorated with various animals, and smaller poised squares decorated with rosettes between the arms of the stars.

279

Hadrianopolis IV

Plate 12. Basilica A. Mosaic of the nave. A multicoloured orthogonal pattern consisting of curvilinear squares, four largesized squares and the circles and irregular concave octagons between these curvilinear squares and the squares. Curvilinear squares are adorned with birds and floral ornaments, and squares are decorated with various animals. There are bells with straight base at the edges of the design.

280

Plates

Plate 13. Basilica A. Mosaic of the bema. A grid-pattern of bands bearing circles and spindles interlooped tangentially in a rectangle and around a medallion with a bird figure and a looped circle with a vase depiction. The bands are consisted of simple guilloches and tangent bells with each bell horizontally shaded, forming an undulating line outlined in white.

281

Hadrianopolis IV

Plate 14. Basilica A. Mosaic of the narthex. An orthogonal pattern of repeating squares consisting of chevrons and triangles on a white ground. Squares of triangles have a central poised square decorated with an ivy and the squares of chevrons have a small square bearing a serrated poised square.

282

Plates

Plate 15. Basilica B. Mosaic of the north aisle. A polychrome orthogonal pattern of circles in assymetrically shaded bands interlooped tangentially. There is a rosette at the center of each circle and a small circle with loops in the space between the four circles.

283

Hadrianopolis IV

Plate 16. Basilica B. Mosaic of the south aisle. An orthogonal pattern of intersecting circles, consisting of spindles. There is a flower at the center of the each circle.

284

Plates

Plate 17. Basilica B. Mosaic of the nave. An orthogonal pattern of stars of eight parallelograms, squares with knots and smaller poised squares between the arms of the stars.

285

Hadrianopolis IV

Plate 18. The Domus. Mosaic of Room 1b. A pattern of poised squares placed in intervals on a green ground and small ornaments in the spaces between the poised squares. At the red center of each square there is a green ivy.

286

Plates

a

b Plate 19. (a) Baths A. Mosaic of Room 11 (a threshold design). A chessboard pattern in a rectangular panel. (b) Basilica A. mosic of the north aisle (a threshold design). Two tangent circles formed of four spindles forming poised concave squares and a pair of opposed thorns in a rectangular panel.

287

Hadrianopolis IV

a

b Plate 20. (a) Basilica B. Mosaic of the south aisle (a threshold design). A lozenge (rhombus) decorated with a rosette which has a cross patée at the center and palmettes around, in a rectangular panel. (b) The Domus. Mosaic of Room 6 (a threshold design). A polychrome orthogonal pattern of adjacent scales.

288

Plates

c

d

a

e

�

b

g

f

j

h

k

l

Plate 21. (a) Baths A. Mosaic of Room 11. A serrated and multicoloured poised square in a square. (b) Baths B. Mosaic of Room 5. A serrated and multicoloured poised square in a square. (c) Basilica A. Mosaic of the bema. A serrated and multicoloured poised square. (d) Basilica A. Mosaic of the narthex. A serrated poised square in a square. (e) Baths A. Mosaic of Room 11. A poised square with a dot pattern. (f) Basilica A. Mosaic of the north aisle. A poised square with a rosette. (g) Basilica A. Mosaic of the south aisle. A poised square with a rosette. (h) The Domus. Mosaic of Room 6. A poised square with a rosette. (i) Basilica B. Mosaic of the nave. A poised square with a flower pattern. (j) Basilica B. Mosaic of the bema. A polychrome poised square. (k) Basilica B. Mosaic of the narthex. A poised square with an ivy. (l) The Domus. Mosaic of Room 1b. A poised square with an ivy.

289

Hadrianopolis IV

a

b

c

d

e

f

h

g

Plate 22. (a) Baths A. Mosaic of Room 11. A star of eight parallelograms. (b) Basilica A. Mosaic of the north aisle. A star of eight parallelograms. (c) Basilica A. Mosaic of the south aisle. A star of eight parallelograms. (d) Basilica B. Mosaic of the nave. A star of eight parallelograms. (e) Baths A. Mosaic of Room 11. Two small poised squares and a circle in a rectangle. (f) Basilica B. Mosaic of the nave. Two flowers in a rectangle. (g) Basilica A. Mosaic of the north aisle. A polychrome pattern of semicircle of two tangent spindles in a rectangle. There is a concave triangle at the white grounded center of the pattern. (h) Basilica A. Mosaic of the south aisle. A polychrome pattern of semicircle of two tangent spindles in a rectangle. There is an ivy at the white grounded center of the pattern.

290

Plates

a

b

e

c

d

f

g

h

�

j

Plate 23. (a) Basilica A. Mosaic of the nave. A curvilinear square. (b) Basilica A. Mosaic of the nave. An irregular concave octagon with an ivy inside. (c) Basilica A. Mosaic of the nave. A circle with a rosette inside. (d) Basilica A. Mosaic of the nave. A solomon knot in a circle. (e) Basilica A. Mosaic of the nave. A bell with straight base. There is a looped spindle inside the pattern. (f) Basilica B. Mosaic of the nave. A solomon knot in a square. (g) Basilica B. Mosaic of the nave. A ram’s head knot in a square. (h) Basilica B. Mosaic of the nave. A square with loops in a square. (i) Basilica B. Mosaic of the nave. A triangle with loops in a square. (j) Basilica A. Mosaic of the north aisle. A rosette.

291

Bibliography ABADIE-REYNAL, C. and ERGEÇ, R. (2000) - ‘1998 Zeugma Kurtarma Kazısı’, in: 21. Kazı Sonuçları Toplantısı, 24-28 Mayıs 1999, Ankara, vol. 2, T.C. Kültür Bakanlığı Yayın No: 2344/2, Anıtlar ve Müzeler Genel Müdürlüğü Yayın No: 72-2, (Ankara 2000), pp. 249-258 (accessed on August 17, 2018).

Bizans Çağına Kadar Ikonografi, Stil ve Teknik Üzerine Sorular / 11th international colloquium on ancient mosaics, October 16th-20th, 2009, Bursa Turkey, Mosaics of Turkey and parallel developments in the rest of the ancient and medieval world, Questions of iconography, style and technique from the beginnings of mosiac until the late Byzantine era, Uludağ University Mosaic Research Center series 1, Symposium papers 3, Association internationale pour l’étude de la mosaïque antique (ed. by M. Şahin), (Istanbul 2011), pp. 15-30.

AKILLI, H. (2003) - ‘Elaiussa Sebaste Bazilikası’nda Gerçekleştirilen Opus Sectile Tabanı Restorasyonu’, in: 18. Arkeometri Sonuçları Toplantısı, 27-31 Mayıs 2002, Ankara, T.C. Kültür Bakanlığı Yayın No: 2950, Anıtlar ve Müzeler Genel Müdürlüğü Yayın No: 90, (Ankara 2003), pp. 141-152 (accessed on August 17, 2018).

ANĐELKOVIĆ, J., ROGIĆ, D. and NIKOLIĆ, E. (2011) – ‘Peacock as a sign in the late antique and early Christian art’, Archaeology and Science / Arheologija i prirodne nauke 6, 2011, pp. 231-248. ARAV, R., DI SEGNI, L. and KLONER, A., ‘An eighth century monastery near Jerusalem’, Liber annuus 40, 1990, pp. 313-320.

AKSOY, E. (2007) - ‘Severan mosaics of Antioch. A stylistic study’, in: III. Uluslararası Türkiye Mozaik Korpusu Sempozyumu Bildirileri / The proceedings of III. international symposium of the mosaic of Turkey, 8-10 Haziran / June 2006 - Bursa (ed. by M. Sahin), Uludağ Üniversitesi, Mozaik Araştırmaları Merkezi, Association internationale pour l’étude de la mosaïque antique (Bursa 2007), pp. 79-92.

ATASOY, S. and YILDIRIM, Ş. (2011) - ‘Filyos-Tios 2009 Yılı Kazısı’, in: 32. Kazı Sonuçları Toplantısı, 2428 Mayıs 2010, İstanbul, vol. 4., T.C. Kültür ve Turizm Bakanlığı Yayın No: 3267-4, Kültür Varlıkları ve Müzeler Genel Müdürlüğü Yayın No: 147-4, (Ankara 2011), pp. 1-16 (accessed on August 17, 2018).

ALEXANDER, M.A. and ENNAIFER, M. (1973) Corpus des mosaïques de Tunisie, vol. I, fasc. I: Région de Ghar el Melh (Porto Farina), Utique, Insulae I-IIIII, Institut national d’archéologie et d’arts, Tunis, Dumbarton Oaks Center for Byzantine Studies, Washington, Atlas archéologiques de la Tunisie ;  81, 1) (Tunis 1973) (accessed on August 17, 2018).

AVISSAR, M. (1996) - ‘‫ ספיספ תפצר דול‬/ Lod – mosaic floor’, ‫ תויגולואיכרא תושדח‬/ Hadashot Arkheologiyot 105, 1996, pp. 157-160 (in Hebrew) (accessed on August 17, 2018). AYDEMİR, N., ÇOKOĞULLU, S. and DERVİŞOĞLU, N. (2008) - ‘Halepli Bahçe 2007 Yılı Mozaik Kurtarma Kazısı’, in: IV. Uluslararası Türkiye Mozaik Korpusu Sempozyum Bildirileri, 6-10 Haziran 2007-Gaziantep, (ed. by M. Şahin), Uludağ Üniversitesi Mozaik Araştırmaları Merkezi Yayınları Serisi 1, (Bursa 2008), pp. 1-7.

ALFÖLDI-ROSENBAUM, E. and WARD-PERKINS, J.B. (1980) - Justinianic mosaic pavements in Cyrenaican churches, Monografie di Archeologia Libica 14 (Rome 1980).

AYDIN, A. (2011) - ‘Das Fussbodenmosaik des Annexbaus in der Kuppelkirche in Kaunos’, in: XI. Uluslararası Antik Mozaik Sempozyumu 16-20 Ekim 2009 Bursa, Türkiye, Türkiye Mozaikleri ve Antik Dönemden Ortaçağ Dünyasına Diğer Mozaiklerle Paralel Gelişimi, Mozaiklerin Başlangıcından Geç Bizans Çağına Kadar Ikonografi, Stil ve Teknik Üzerine Sorular / 11th international colloquium on ancient mosaics, October 16th-20th, 2009, Bursa Turkey, Mosaics of Turkey and parallel developments in the rest of the ancient and medieval world, Questions of iconography, style and technique from the beginnings of mosiac until the late Byzantine era, Uludağ University Mosaic Research Center series 1, Symposium papers 3, Association internationale pour l’étude de la mosaïque antique (ed. by M. Şahin), pp. 31-42.

ANASTOS, M.V. (1946) - ‘The Alexandrian origin of the Christian topography of Cosmas Indicopleustes’, Dumbarton Oaks Papers 3, 1946, pp. 73-80 (accessed on August 17, 2018). ANDALORO, M. and POGLIANI, P. (2011) - ‘The 6th century mosaic floor of the church of Küçük Tavşan Adası (Bodrum). A model for an integrated analysis between knowledge, conservation and documentation’, in: XI. Uluslararası Antik Mozaik Sempozyumu 16-20 Ekim 2009 Bursa, Türkiye, Türkiye Mozaikleri ve Antik Dönemden Ortaçağ Dünyasına Diğer Mozaiklerle Paralel Gelişimi, Mozaiklerin Başlangıcından Geç 293

Hadrianopolis IV BARBET, A. (2004) - ‘Un des programmes iconographiques des peintures de Zeugma (note d’information)’, Comptes rendus des séances de l’Académie des Inscriptions et Belles-Lettres 148, 4, 2004, pp. 1591-1605 (accessed on August 17, 2018).

BALDWIN, B. (1991) - ‘Hexaemeron’, in: The Oxford dictionary of Byzantium 2, (ed. by A.P. Kazhdan), (Oxford 1991), pp. 926-927. BALMELLE, C. (1990) - ‘Quelques images de mosaïques à xenia hors de Tunisie’, in: Recherches francotunisiennes sur la mosaïque de l’Afrique antique I, Xenia, Publications de l’École Française de Rome 125, (Rome 1990), pp. 51-66.

BAŞGELEN, N. and ERGEÇ, R. (2000) - Belkıs / ZeugmaHalfeti-Rumkale: A last look at history (Istanbul 2000).

BALMELLE, C., BLANCHARD-LEMEE, M., CHRISTOPHE, J., DARMON, J.P., GUIMIERSORBETS, A.M., LAVAGNE, H., PRUDHOMME, R. and STERN, H. (1985) - Le décor géométrique de la mosaïque romaine I , Répertoire graphique et descriptif des compositions linéaires et isotropes, (Paris 1985).

BELKE, K. (2017) – ‘Zur Christianisierung des nördlichen Kleinasiens in frühbyzantinischer Zeit: Literarische, epigraphische und archäologische Zeugnisse’, in: Die Christianisierung Kleinasiens in der Spatantike, Forschungsstelle Asia Minor im Seminar für Alte Geschichte der Westfälischen Wilhelms-Universität Münster, Asia Minor Studien 87, (ed. by W. Ameling), (Bonn 2017), 61-78.

BALMELLE, C., BLANCHARD-LEMEE, M., DARMON, J.P, GOZLAN, S. and RAYNAUD, M.-P. (2002) - Le décor géométrique de la mosaïque romaine II, Répertoire graphique et descriptif des décors centrés, (Paris 2002).

BEN ABED, A. (2006) - Tunisian mosaics: Treasures from Roman Africa, The Getty Conservation Institute, Conservation and Cultural Heritage, (Los Angeles, CA 2006).

BALTY, J. (1977) - Mosaïques antiques de Syrie, Centre belge de recherches archéologiques à Apamée de Syrie, (Bruselles 1977).

BEN OSMAN, W. (1990) - ‘Association du thème des Xenia avec d’autres thèmes dans certaines mosaïques de Tunisie’, in: Recherches franco-tunisiennes sur la mosaïque de l’Afrique antique I, Xenia, Publications de l’École Française de Rome 125, (Rome 1990), pp. 73-78.

BALTY, J. (1981) - ‘La mosaïques antiques au ProcheOrient I : Des origines à la tétrarchie’, in: Aufstieg und Niedergang der römischen Welt II.12.2 Principat. Zwölfter Band (2. Teilband), Künste (Forts.), (ed. by H. Temporini and W. Haase), (Berlin; New York 1981), pp. 347-429.

BERTI, F. (1986) - ‘I mosaici degli edifici di culto cristiano’, Studi su Iasos di Caria, Bollettino d’Arte, Supplemento 31-32, 1986, pp. 155-162.

BALTY, J. (1990) - La mosaïque de Sarrîn (Osrhoène), Inventaire des mosaïques de Syrie 1, (Paris 1990).

BLÁZQUEZ, J.M. (2015) - ‘The myth of Aphrodite and Adonis in Roman mosaics of Jordan, Arabia, Antioch, Mauretania Tingitana and Hispania’, Journal of Mosaic Research 8, 2015, pp. 1-16.

BALTY, J. (1991) - ‘La mosaïque romaine et byzantine en Syrie du nord’, Revue des mondes musulmans et de la Méditerranée 62, 1991, pp. 27-39. (accessed on August 17, 2018).

BOCKMANN, R. (2014) - ‘The non-archaeology of Arianism - What comparing cases in Carthage, Haidra and Ravenna can tell us about ‘Arian’ churches’, in: Arianism: Roman heresy and Barbarian creed, (ed. by G.M. Berndt and R. Steinacher), (London; New York 2014), pp. 201-218.

BALTY, J. (1995) - Mosaïques antiques du ProcheOrient  : chronologie, iconographie, interprétation, Centre de recherches d’histoire ancienne 140; Annales littéraires de l’Université de Besançon 551 (Paris; Besançon 1995).

BOWERSOCK, G.W. (2006) - Mosaics as history: The Near East from late antiquity to Islam, Revealing antiquity 16, (Cambridge, MA; London 2006).

BARATTA, G. (1999) - ‘Basilica all’estremità nord dell’isola’, in: Elaiussa Sebaste I. Campagne di scavo 1995-1997, Università degli Studi di Roma “La Sapienza”, Dipartimento di Scienze Storiche, Archeologiche e Antropologiche dell’Antichità, Bibliotheca archaeologica 24, (ed. by E.E. Schneider), (Rome 1999), pp. 312-318.

BRETT, G. (1942) - ‘The mosaic of the Great Palace in Constantinople’, Journal of the Warburg and Courtauld Institutes 5, 1942, pp. 34-43  (accessed on August 17, 2018). BRILLIANT, R. (1979) - ‘The imperial realm: Scenic representations’, in: Age of spirituality: Late antique and early Christian art, third to seventh century, Catalogue of the exhibition at the Metropolitan Museum of Art, November 19, 1977, through February 12, 1978, The Metropolitan Museum of Art, New York (ed. K. Weitzmann), (Princeton, NJ 1979), pp. 60-108.

BARBET, A. (1985) - La peinture murale romaine (les styles décoratifs pompéiens), (Paris 1985). BARBET, A. (2003) - ‘Les décors centrés en mosaïque et leur écho en peinture murale’, Revue Archéologique 36, 2003, pp. 319-330 (accessed on August 17, 2018).

294

Bibliography CAN, B. (2011) - ‘Technical, stylistic, iconographic evaluation and dating of mosaics of Altıntepe church’, in: XI. Uluslararası Antik Mozaik Sempozyumu 16-20 Ekim 2009 Bursa, Türkiye, Türkiye Mozaikleri ve Antik Dönemden Ortaçağ Dünyasına Diğer Mozaiklerle Paralel Gelişimi, Mozaiklerin Başlangıcından Geç Bizans Çağına Kadar Ikonografi, Stil ve Teknik Üzerine Sorular / 11th international colloquium on ancient mosaics, October 16th-20th, 2009, Bursa Turkey, Mosaics of Turkey and parallel developments in the rest of the ancient and medieval world, Questions of iconography, style and technique from the beginnings of mosiac until the late Byzantine era, Uludağ University Mosaic Research Center series 1, Symposium papers 3, Association internationale pour l’étude de la mosaïque antique (ed. by M. Şahin), pp. 225-234.

BUDDE, L. (1969) - Antike Mosaiken in Kilikien, vol. I: Frühchristliche Mosaiken in Misis-Mopsuhestia, Beiträge zur Kunst des christlichen Ostens V (Recklinghausen 1969). BUORA, M., LAFLI, E. and NOWAKOWSKI, P. (2018) ‘Due instrumenta in piombo, probabilmente contraffatti, da Izmir (Turchia) / Two probably fake inscribed lead instrumenta from Izmir, (Turkey)’, Quaderni di friluiani archaeologia 28, 2018, pp. 171-176 (accessed on August 17, 2018). BÜYÜKKOLANCI, M. and ÖZTAŞKIN, G.K. (2010) - ‘Selçuk-Efes Müzesi’nde Sergilenen St. Jean Kilisesi’ne ait Korkuluk Levhaları ve Templon Arşitravları’, Pamukkale Üniversitesi Sosyal Bilimler Enstitüsü Dergisi 7, 2010, pp. 39-49 (accessed on August 17, 2018).

CHATZIDAKIS, N. (1994) - Greek Art: Byzantine mosaics (Athens 1994). CİMOK, F. (Ed.) (1997) - Mosaics in Istanbul (Istanbul 1997).

CAMPBELL, S.D. (1979) - ‘Roman mosaic workshops in Turkey’, American Journal of Archaeology 83, 3, 1979, pp. 287-292 (accessed on August 17, 2018).

CİMOK, F. (Ed.) (2000) - Antioch mosaics: A corpus (Istanbul 2000).

CAMPBELL, S.D. (1988) - The mosaics of Antioch, Pontifical Institute of Mediaeval Studies, Subsidia mediaevalia 15, The corpus of mosaic pavements in Turkey 1 (Toronto, ON 1988).

CUMALIOĞLU, A. (2011) - Hadrianoupolis Antik Kentinin Geç Antik Dönem Mimari Plastik Unsurları, Unpublished master thesis, Dokuz Eylül Üniversitesi, Sosyal Bilimler Enstitüsü (Izmir 2011).

CAMPBELL, S. (1989) - ‘Early Christian Anemurium and her neighbours in the early Christian period: The mosaics’, in: Actes du XIe congrès international d’archéologie chrétienne, Lyon, Vienne, Grenoble, Genève, Aoste (21-28 septembre 1986), vol. II, (ed. by N. Duval), Collection de l’École française de Rome 123 (Rome 1989), pp. 1639-1645 (accessed on August 17, 2018).

ÇELİK, Ö. (2013) - ‘İncirli Köyü - I Mozaikleri / The Mosaics at İncirli Village’, Journal of Mosaic Research 6, 2013, pp. 1-7. COSMAS INDICOPLEUSTES (1909) - The Christian topography of Cosmas Indicopleustes, (ed. by E.O. Winstedt), (Cambridge 1909) (accessed on August 17, 2018). CUMONT, F. (1917) - Études syriennes (Paris 1917) (accessed on August 17, 2018).

CAMPBELL, S. (1991) - The mosaics of Aphrodisias in Caria, Pontifical Institute of Mediaeval Studies, Subsidia mediaevalia 18, The corpus of mosaic pavements in Turkey 2 (Toronto, ON 1991).

DASZEWSKI, W.A. (1988) - ‘Figural mosaics from Paphos: Subjects, style and significance’, in: Mosaic floors in Cyprus, Università degli Studi di Bologna, Istituto di antichità ravennati e byzantine, Biblioteca di “Felix Ravenna” 3 (ed. by W.A. Daszewski and D. Michaelides), (Ravenna 1988), pp. 13-76.

CAMPBELL, S.D. (1998) - The mosaics of Anemurium, Pontifical Institute of Mediaeval Studies, Subsidia mediaevalia 25, The corpus of mosaic pavements in Turkey (Toronto, ON 1991). CAN, B. (2007) - ‘Altıntepe-Mozaikli Kilise 2005 Yılı Onarım ve Restorasyon Çalışmaları’, in: III. Uluslararası Türkiye Mozaik Korpusu Sempozyumu Bildirileri / The proceedings of III. international symposium of the mosaic of Turkey, 8-10 Haziran / June 2006 - Bursa (ed. by M. Sahin), Uludağ Üniversitesi, Mozaik Araştırmaları Merkezi, Association internationale pour l’étude de la mosaïque antique (Bursa 2007), pp. 101-108.

DAUPHIN, C. (1999) - ‘From Apollo and Asclepius to Christ: Pilgrimage and healing at the Temple and Episcopal Basilica of Dor’, Liber annuus 49, 1999, pp. 397-430. DEMİRİZ, Y. (2002) - Örgülü Bizans Döşeme Mozaikleri / Interlaced Byzantine mosaic pavements (Istanbul 2002). DEMUS, O. (1976) - Byzantine mosaic decoration: Aspects of monumental art in Byzantium (New York 1976).

CAN, B. (2009) - ‘Erzincan Altıntepe church with mosaics’, Journal of Mosaic Research 3, 2009, pp. 5-13. 295

Hadrianopolis IV ERGEÇ, R. (2000) - ‘Belkıs/Zeugma 1997-1998 Kurtarma Kazıları’, in: 21. Kazı Sonuçları Toplantısı, 24-28 Mayıs 1999, Ankara, vol. 2, T.C. Kültür Bakanlığı Yayın No: 2344/2, Anıtlar ve Müzeler Genel Müdürlüğü Yayın No: 72-2, (Ankara 2000), pp. 259-270 (accessed on August 17, 2018).

DİKİLİTAŞ, G. (2005), Duvar Resimlerinin Bozulmasına Neden Olan Etkenler ve Koruma Uygulamaları, Unpublished master thesis, İstanbul Üniversitesi, Sosyal Bilimler Enstitüsü, Taşınabilir Kültür Varlıklarını Koruma ve Onarım Anabilim Dalı (Istanbul 2005) (accessed on August 17, 2018).

ERGEÇ, R. (2008) - ‘Zeugma’da 1992-1999 Döneminde Yapılan Mozaik Çalışmaları ve Düşündürdükleri’, in: The proceedings of the IV. international mosaic corpus of Turkey, ‘The mosaic bridge from past to present’ / IV. Uluslararası Türkiye Mozaik Korpusu Sempozyumu Bildirileri, ‘Geçmişten Günümüze Mozaik Köprüsü’ / 6-10 Haziran/June 2007 – Gaziantep (ed. by M. Sahin), Uludağ Üniversitesi, Mozaik Araştırmaları Merkezi, Association internationale pour l’étude de la mosaïque antique (Bursa 2008), pp. 43-54.

DIMITROVA, E. (2006) - ‘In through the inner door (the mosaic in the narthex of the Large Basilica in Heraclea Lyncestis)’, in: The days of St. Emperor Constantine and Helena, Niš & Byzantium, Fourth symposium, Niš, 3-5. June 2005, The collection of scientific works IV (ed. by M. Rakocija), (Niš 2006), pp. 179-190. DIODORUS SICULUS (1935), Bibliotheca historica, Book 2 (35-IV, 58), Diodorus of Sicily in twelve volumes, Vol. 2, (transl. by C.H. Oldfather), (London 1935).

ERISTOV, H., VIBERT-GUIGUE, C. and SARKIS, N. (2006-2007) - ‘L’art de la peinture murale dans l’Antiquité : un tombeau peint à Palmyre’, Les annales archéologiques arabes syriennes, Revue d’archéologie et d’histoire 49-50, 2006-2007, pp. 149-159.

DOONAN, O.P. (2002) – ‘Production in a Pontic landscape: The hinterland of Greek and Roman Sinope’, in: PontEuxin et commerce : la genèse de la Route de la soie : actes du IXe Symposium de Vani, Colchide, 1999 (ed. by M. Faudot, A. Fraysse and É. Geny), (Besançon 2002), pp. 185-198.

ERMİŞLER, O. (1992) - ‘Konya-Selçuklu Tatköy Manastırı Mozaik Kurtarma Kazısı’, in: II. Müze Kurtarma Kazıları Semineri, 29-30 Nisan 1991, Ankara, T.C. Kültür Bakanlığı, Anıtlar ve Müzeler Genel Müdürlüğü, (Ankara 1992), pp. 35-64 (accessed on August 17, 2018).

DOONAN, O.P. (2004) – Sinop landscapes: Exploring connection in a Black Sea hinterland (Philadelphia, PA 2004) (accessed on August 17, 2018). DRIJVERS, H.J.W. (1982) - ‘A tomb for the life of a king: A recently discovered Edessene mosaic with a portrait of King Abgar the Great’, Le Museon 95, 1982, pp. 167–189.

ESKİCİ, B. (2004) - ‘Wall paintings and plasters of Side harbour baths: Techniques, problems and conservation methodology’, Anadolu (Anatolia) 27, 2004, pp. 2743 (accessed on August 17, 2018).

DRIJVERS, H.J.W. and HEALEY, J.F (1999) - The Old Syriac inscriptions of Edessa and Osrhoene: Texts, translations, and commentary, Handbook of Oriental Studies 1: Near and Middle East – Hosnme/ Hosane 42 (Leiden 1999).

FARIOLI CAMPANATI, R. (1999) - ‘Jerusalem and Bethlehem in the iconography of church sanctuary mosaics’, in: The Madaba map centenary, 1897-1997: Travelling through the Byzantine Umayyad period, Proceedings of the international conference held in Amman, 7-9 April 1997 (eds. M. Piccirillo and E. Alliata), Studium Biblicum Franciscanum, Collectio Maior 40, (Jerusalem 1999), pp. 173-177.

DUNBABIN, K.M.D. (1978) - The mosaics of Roman North Africa, Studies in iconography and patronage (Oxford 1978). DUNBABIN, K.M.D. (1999) - Mosaics of the Greek and Roman world, (Cambridge 1999).

FOSS, C. (1976) - Byzantine and Turkish Sardis, Archaeological exploration of Sardis, Monograph 4 (Cambridge, MA; London 1976).

EICHNER, I. (2018) - ‘Das Bischofsviertel von Hadrianoupolis – Standort für ein Martyrion des heiligen Alypios?’, in: Lebenswelten zwischen Archäologie und Geschichte Festschrift für Falko Daim zu seinem 65. Geburtstag, Monographien des Römisch-Germanischen Zentralmuseums 150 (ed. by J. Drauschke, E. Kislinger, K. Kühtreiber, T. Kühtreiber, G. Scharrer-Liška and T. Vida), (Mainz 2018), pp. 679688.

FRADKIN, A. (1999) - ‘Animal figures in the basilical building mosaics at Roman Sepphoris, Lower Galilee, Israel’, Near Eastern Archaeology 62, 4, 1999, pp. 233239. FÜNFSCHILLING, S. and LAFLI, E. (2011) Hadrianopolis II: Glasfunde des 6. und 7. Jhs. aus Hadrianupolis, Paphlagonien [Türkei], Internationale Archäologie 123 (Rahden, Westfalia 2012).

EKER, F. and ERSOY, A. (2017) – Mozaikleri ile Yeniden Doğan Kent: Germanicia, (Saarbrücken 2017).

296

Bibliography GOZLAN, S. (1990) - ‘Xenia: Quelques problémes d’identification’, in: Recherches franco-tunisiennes sur la mosaïque de l’Afrique antique I, Xenia, Publications de l’École Française de Rome 125, (Rome 1990), pp. 85-105.

turk_arkeoloji/13_1.turk.arkeoloji.pdf> (accessed on August 17, 2018). HARPER, R.P. and WILKINSON, T.J. (1975) ‘Excavations at Dibsi Faraj, Northern Syria, 19721974: A preliminary note on the site and its monuments with an appendix’, Dumbarton Oaks Papers 29, 1975, pp. 319-338 .

GÖRKAY, K. (2015) - Zeugma: Geçmişten Günümüze Bir Geçit, Türkiye İş Bankası Kültür Yayınları, (Istanbul 2015).

HODDINOTT, R.F. (1963) - Early Byzantine churches in Macedonia and southern Serbia: A study of the origins and the initial development of East Christian art (London; New York 1963).

GRABAR, A. (1953) - La peinture byzantine (Geneva 1953). GRANT, M. (2000) - Roma’dan Bizans’a: İ.S. 5. yüzyıl, (transl. by Z.Z. İlkgelen), (Istanbul 2000).

HOUIX, B., BLANC-BIJON, V., BREUIL, J.-Y., DARMON, J.-P. and LINANT DE BELLEFONDS, P. (2011) - ‘Mosaïque à thèmes mythologiques récemment découvertes sous l’avenue Jean-Jaures à Nimes (France)’, in: XI. Uluslararası Antik Mozaik Sempozyumu 16-20 Ekim 2009 Bursa, Türkiye, Türkiye Mozaikleri ve Antik Dönemden Ortaçağ Dünyasına Diğer Mozaiklerle Paralel Gelişimi, Mozaiklerin Başlangıcından Geç Bizans Çağına Kadar Ikonografi, Stil ve Teknik Üzerine Sorular / 11th international colloquium on ancient mosaics, October 16th-20th, 2009, Bursa Turkey, Mosaics of Turkey and parallel developments in the rest of the ancient and medieval world, Questions of iconography, style and technique from the beginnings of mosiac until the late Byzantine era, Uludağ University Mosaic Research Center series 1, Symposium papers 3, Association internationale pour l’étude de la mosaïque antique (ed. by M. Şahin), pp. 447-465.

GRANT, R.M. (1992) - ‘Early Christian geography’, Vigiliae Christianae 46, 2, 1992, pp. 105-111 (accessed on August 17, 2018). GROZDANOVA, V.B. (2009) - ‘Lyknidos à l’époque paléochrétienne et son noyau urbain’ in: The days of St. Emperor Constantine and Helena, Niš & Byzantium, Seventh symposium, Niš, 3-5. June 2005, The collection of scientific works VII (ed. by M. Rakocija), (Niš 2009) pp. 23-36 (accessed on August 17, 2018). HABAS, L. (2009) - ‘Donations and donors as reflected in the mosaic paveents of Transjordan’s churches in the Byzantine and Umayyad periods’, in: Between Judaism and Christianity, Art historical essays in honor of Elisheva (Elisabeth) Revel-Neher, The Medieval Mediterranean 81, (ed. by K. Kogman-Appel and M. Meyer), (Leiden 2009), pp. 73-90.

HUMBERT, J-B. (1999) - ‘The rivers of paradise in the Byzantine church near Jabaliyah-Gaza’, in: The Madaba map centenary, 1897-1997: Travelling through the Byzantine Umayyad period, Proceedings of the international conference held in Amman, 7-9 April 1997 (eds. M. Piccirillo and E. Alliata), Studium Biblicum Franciscanum, Collectio Maior 40, (Jerusalem 1999), pp. 216-218.

HABAS, L. (2015) - ‘Crosses in the mosaic floors of churches in provincia Arabia and nearby territories, against the background of the edict of Theodosius II’, Journal of Mosaic Research 8, 2015, 33-60. HACHLILI, R. (1998a) - Ancient Jewish art and archaeology in the diaspora, Handbook of Oriental Studies, Section 1 The Near and Middle East vol. 35 (Leiden; Boston, MA; Cologne 1998).

IŞIN, M.A. (1994) - ‘Marmara Ereğlisi (Perinthos) Bazilika Kazısı Raporu’, in: IV. Müze Kurtarma Kazıları Semineri, 26-29 Nisan 1993, Marmaris, Kültür Bakanlığı Yayınları 1643, Anıtlar ve Müzeler Genel Müdürlüğü Yayınları 94-06-Y-0001-37, (Ankara 1994), pp. 61-67 (accessed on August 17, 2018).

HACHLILI, R. (1998b) - ‘Iconographic elements of Nilotic scenes on Byzantine mosaic pavements in Israel’, Palestine Exploration Quarterly 130, 1998, pp. 106-120. HAMARNEH, B. (2014) - ‘Geography of devotion in Byzantine Arabia and Palaestina: The epigraphic evidence’, in: Archaeological and historical essays in honour of Leah Di Segni, Publications of the Studium Biblicum Franciscanum, Collectio maior 54, (ed. by G.C. Bottini, L.D. Chrupcala and J. Patrich), (Milan 2014) pp. 121-136.

IŞIN, M.A. (1995) - ‘Marmara Ereğlisi Perinthos Bazilikası Kazısı 1993’, in: V. Müze Kurtarma Kazıları Semineri, 25-28 Nisan 1994, Didim, T.C. Kültür Bakanlığı Yayınları 1733, Anıtlar ve Müzeler Genel Müdürlüğü Yayınları Sempozyum Serisi 41, (Ankara 1995), pp. 27-37 (accessed on August 17, 2018).

HANFMANN, G.M.A. (1964) - ‘Excavations at Sardis in 1962’, Türk Arkeoloji Dergisi XII, 1, 1964, pp. 26-33 (accessed on August 17, 2018). MOREY, C.R. (1915) - Lost mosaics and frescoes of Rome of the Mediaeval period:  A publication of drawings contained in the collection of Cassiano dal Pozzo, now in the Royal Library, Windsor Castle, Princeton Monographs in Art and Archaeology 4, (Princeton, NJ; London 1915) (accessed on August 17, 2018).

MANSEL, A.M. (1978) - Side 1947-1966 Yılları Kazıları ve Araştırmalarının Sonuçları, Türk Tarih Kurumu  Yayınları, V. Seri, 33, Antalya Bölgesinde Araştırmalar 10, (Ankara 1978).

MOREY, C.R. (1942) - Early Christian art, (Princeton, NJ 1942). MUSSO, L., BERTOLOTTO, G., BRIZZI, M. and WESTWOOD, B.E. (2011) - ‘L’edificio abitativo alle pendici orientali dello Zımbıllı Tepe. Descrizione delle stratigrafie e fasi’, in: Pompeiopolis I: Eine Zwischenbilanz aus der Metropole Paphlagoniens nach fünf Kampagnen (2006-2010), (ed. by L. Summerer), Schriften des Zentrums für Archäologie und Kulturgeschichte des Schwarzmeerraumes 21 (Langenweißbach 2011), pp. 75-120.

MEGAW, A.H.S. (1974) - ‘Byzantine architecture and decoration in Cyprus: Metropolitan or provincial?’, Dumbarton Oaks Papers 28, 1974, pp. 57-88 (accessed on August 17, 2018). MERRONY, M.W. (1998) - ‘The reconciliation of paganism and Christianity in the early Byzantine mosaic pavements of Arabia and Palestine’, Liber annuus 48, 1998, pp. 441-482.

NAJJAR, M. and SA’ID, F. (1994) - ‘A new Umayyad church at Khilda – Amman’, Liber annuus 44, 1994, pp. 547-560.

MERTEK, K. (1994) – ‘1991-1992 Yılı Alibeyhöyük Kasabası Kilise Mevkii Mozaik Kurtarma Kazısı’, in: IV. Müze Kurtarma Kazıları Semineri, 26-29 Nisan 1993, Marmaris, Kültür Bakanlığı Yayınları 1643, (Ankara 1994), pp. 39-59 (accessed on August 17, 2018).

NASSAR, M. and TURSHAN, N. (2011) - ‘Geometrical mosaic pavements of the church of bishop Leontios at Ya’Amun (northern Jordan)’, Palestine Exploration Quarterly 143, 1, 2011, pp. 41-62 < https://www. t a n d f o n l i n e . c o m / d o i / a b s / 1 0 . 11 7 9 / 0 0 3 1 0 3 2 1 0X12904439984089> (accessed on August 17, 2018).

MICHAELIDES, D. (1986) - ‘A new Orpheus mosaic in Cyprus’, in: Acts of the international colloquium: “Cyprus between the Orient and the Occident”, Nicosia, 8-14 September 1985 (ed. by V. Karageorghis), (Nicosia 1986), pp. 473-489.

NOGA-BANAI, G. (2008) - The trophies of the martyrs: An art historical study of early Christian silver reliquaries, (Oxford 2008). NOWAKOWSKI, P. (2018) - Inscribing the saints in late antique Anatolia, The Journal of Juristic Papyrology 34 (Warsaw 2018).

MICHAELIDES, D. (1988) - ‘Mosaic pavements from early Christian cult buildings in Cyprus’, in: Mosaic floors in Cyprus, Università degli Studi di Bologna, Istituto di antichità ravennati e byzantine, Biblioteca di “Felix Ravenna” 3 (ed. by W.A. Daszewski and D. Michaelides), (Ravenna 1988), pp. 79-154.

OKÇU, R. (2007) - ‘Derecik Bazilikası Kurtarma Kazısı’, in: III. Uluslararası Türkiye Mozaik Korpusu Sempozyumu Bildirileri / The proceedings of III. international symposium of the mosaic of Turkey, 8-10 Haziran / June 2006 - Bursa (ed. by M. Sahin), Uludağ Üniversitesi, Mozaik Araştırmaları Merkezi, Association internationale pour l’étude de la mosaïque antique (Bursa 2007), pp. 37-44.

MICHAELIDES, D. (1989) - ‘The early Christian mosaics of Cyprus’, The Biblical Archaeologist 52, 4, 1989, pp. 192-202 (accessed on August 17, 2018). MICHAELIDES, D. (1993) - ‘Opus sectile in Cyprus’, in: The sweet land of Cyprus. Papers given at the twentyfifth jubilee spring symposium of Byzantine studies, Birmingham, March 1991 (ed. by A.A.M. Bryer and G.S. Georghallides), (Nicosia 1993), pp. 69-113.

OKÇU, R. (2009) - ‘Prusia ad Olympum Mozaikleri’, Journal of Mosaic Research 3, 2009, pp. 31-51. OLSZEWSKI, M.T. (1995) - ‘L’image et sa fonction dans la mosaïque byzantine des premières basiliques en Orient’, Cahiers archéologiques 43, 1995, pp. 9-34.

MORACCHINI-MAZEL, G. (1962) - ‘Une basilique et un baptistère paléochrétiens découverts à Mariana (Corse)’, Comptes-rendus des séances de l’Académie des Inscriptions et Belles-Lettres 106, 2, 1962, pp. 99-102. (accessed on August 17, 2018).

SCHEIBELREITER, V. (2007) - ‘Mosaics in Roman and late antique western Asia Minor’, in: III. Uluslararası Türkiye Mozaik Korpusu Sempozyumu Bildirileri / The proceedings of III. international symposium of the mosaic of Turkey, 8-10 Haziran / June 2006 Bursa (ed. by M. Sahin), Uludağ Üniversitesi, Mozaik Araştırmaları Merkezi, Association internationale pour l’étude de la mosaïque antique (Bursa 2007), pp. 63-78.

POULSEN, B. (2008) - ‘Considerations on motifs and mosaic workshops: The case of Halikarnassos’, in: The proceedings of the IV. international mosaic corpus of Turkey, ‘The mosaic bridge from past to present’ / IV. Uluslararası Türkiye Mozaik Korpusu Sempozyumu Bildirileri, ‘Geçmişten Günümüze Mozaik Köprüsü’ / 6-10 Haziran/June 2007 – Gaziantep (ed. by M. Sahin), Uludağ Üniversitesi, Mozaik Araştırmaları Merkezi, Association internationale pour l’étude de la mosaïque antique (Bursa 2008), pp. 101-110.

SCHEIBELREITER-GAIL, V. (2011) - Die Mosaiken Westkleinasiens. Tessellate des 2. Jahrhunderts v. Chr. bis Anfang des 7. Jahrhunderts n. Chr., Sonderschriften des Österreichischen Archäologischen Institutes 46 (Vienna 2011). SCHNEIDER, E.E. (1998) - ‘1996 excavations and research at Elaiussa Sebaste’, in: XIX. Kazı Sonuçları Toplantısı, vol. 2, T.C. Kültür Bakanlığı Yayın No: 2009, Anıtlar ve Müzeler Genel Müdürlüğü Yayın No: 57, (Ankara 1998), pp. 391-408 (accessed on August 17, 2018).

RAYNAUD, M.-P. (2009) - Corpus of the mosaics of Turkey, Lycia, Vol. II: Xanthos, Part I: The East Basilica, Uludağ University Mosaic Research Center Series 2, (Bursa 2009). REYNOLDS, D. (2017) - ‘Rethinking Palestinian iconoclasm’, Dumbarton Oaks Papers 71, 2017, pp. 1-64.

SCHNEIDER, E.E. (1999) - ‘1997 excavations and research at Elaiussa Sebaste, Turkey’, in: 20. Kazı Sonuçları Toplantısı, 25-29 Mayıs 1998, Tarsus, vol. 2, T.C. Kültür Bakanlığı Yayın No: 2198, Anıtlar ve Müzeler Genel Müdürlüğü Yayın No: 67, (Ankara 1999), pp. 385-402 (accessed on August 17, 2018).

RUSSELL, J. (1989) - ‘Christianity at Anemurium (Cilicia): Recent discoveries’, in: Actes du XIe congrès international d’archéologie chrétienne, Lyon, Vienne, Grenoble, Genève, Aoste (21-28 septembre 1986), vol. II, (ed. by N. Duval), Collection de l’École française de Rome 123 (Rome 1989), pp. 1621-1637 (accessed on August 17, 2018).

SCHNEIDER, E.E. (2007) - ‘Elaiussa Sebaste – Report of 2005 excavation season’, in: 28. Kazı Sonuçları Toplantısı, 29 Mayıs – 2 Haziran 2006, Çanakkale, vol. 2, T.C. Kültür ve Turizm Bakanlığı Yayın No: 3079-2, Kültür Varlıkları ve Müzeler Genel Müdürlüğü Yayın

SALMAN, B. (2007a) - Orta Euphrates Mozaikleri Isığında Edessa ve Samosata Mozaikleri, Unpublished 302

Bibliography No: 121-2, (Ankara 2007), pp. 561-574 (accessed on August 17, 2018).

Üniversitesi Mozaik Araştırmaları Merkezi Yayınları Serisi 1, (Bursa 2008), pp. 147-153. ŞAHİN, D. (2009) - ‘The Zodiac in ancient mosaics: Representation of concept of time’ Journal of Mosaic Researc 3, 2009, pp. 95-111.

SCHNEIDER, E.E. (2009) - ‘Elaiussa Sebaste – The 2007 excavation and conservation season’, in: 30. Kazı Sonuçları Toplantısı, 26-30 Mayıs 2008, Ankara, vol. 4, T.C. Kültür ve Turizm Bakanlığı Yayın No: 3171-4, Kültür Varlıkları ve Müzeler Genel Müdürlüğü Yayın No: 130-4, (Ankara 2009), pp. 177-190 (accessed on August 17, 2018).

ŞAHİN, D. and ÇITAKOĞLU H. (2016) - ‘A newly discovered mosaic from Myrleia’, Journal of Mosaic Research 9, 2016, pp. 85-94. ŞİMŞEK, C. (2015) - Laodikeia Kilisesi, Lykos Vadisi’nde Hıristiyanlık, (Denizli 2015).

SEGAL, J.B. (1970) - Edessa: The blessed city, (Oxford 1970).

TATLICAN, İ. (1997) – ‘Sinop Çiftlik Köyü, Mozaik Kurtarma Kazısı’, in: VII. Müze Kurtarma Kazıları Semineri, 8-10 Nisan 1996, Kuşadası, Kültür Bakanlığı Yayınları, Anıtlar ve Müzeler Genel Müdürlüğü Yayınları, Yayın No: 50, (Ankara 1997), pp. 333-356 (accessed on August 17, 2018).

SEZER, S.S. (2007) - ‘Başlangıcından Roma Dönemine Kadar Mozaikler Üzerinde Görülen Meander Motifleri’, in: Doğudan Yükselen Işık: Arkeoloji Yazıları, Atatürk Üniversitesi 50. Kuruluş Yıldönümü, Arkeoloji Bölümü Armağanı, (ed. by B. Can and M. Işıklı), (Istanbul 2007), pp. 551-566.

TOK, E. (2007) - ‘Bodrum Bitez Gara Kilisesi Mozaikleri’, in: III. Uluslararası Türkiye Mozaik Korpusu Sempozyumu Bildirileri / The proceedings of III. international symposium of the mosaic of Turkey, 8-10 Haziran / June 2006 - Bursa (ed. by M. Sahin), Uludağ Üniversitesi, Mozaik Araştırmaları Merkezi, Association internationale pour l’étude de la mosaïque antique (Bursa 2007), pp. 55-62.

SHEA, G.W. (transl. and ed.) (1997) - The poems of Alcimus Ecdicius Avitus, Medieval and Renaissance Texts and Studies 172, (Tempe, AZ 1997) (accessed on August 17, 2018). SUMMERER, L. and VON KIENLIN, A. (2009) ‘Pompeiopolis 2007 Yılı Çalışmaları’, in: 30. Kazı Sonuçları Toplantısı, 26-30 Mayıs 2008, Ankara, vol. 3, T.C. Kültür ve Turizm Bakanlığı Yayın No: 3171-4, Kültür Varlıkları ve Müzeler Genel Müdürlüğü Yayın No: 130-4, (Ankara 2009), pp. 77-90 (accessed on August 17, 2018).

TOK, E. (2008) - ‘Kuzey Lydia’da Bir Kiliseye Ait Zemin Mozaikleri: Manisa Gördes Çağlayan Köyü Yakınındaki Kilise Kalıntısı’, in: IV. Uluslararası Türkiye Mozaik Korpusu Sempozyum Bildirileri, 6-10 Haziran 2007-Gaziantep, (ed. by M. Şahin), Uludağ Üniversitesi Mozaik Araştırmaları Merkezi Yayınları Serisi 1, (Bursa 2008), pp. 155-159.

ŞAHİN, D. (2004) - Amisos Mozaiği, T.C. Kültür ve Turizm Bakanlığı Yayın No: 3017; Kültür Varlıkları ve Müzeler Genel Müdürlüğü Yayın No: 103, (Ankara 2004) (accessed on August 17, 2018).

TRILLING, J. (1989) - ‘The soul of the empire: Style and meaning in the mosaic of the Byzantine Imperial Palace in Constantinople’, Dumbarton Oaks Papers 43, 1989, pp. 27-72 (accessed on August 17, 2018).

ŞAHİN, D. (2006) - ‘Amisos Mozaiği Işığı Altında Karadeniz’de Akhilleus Kültü’, in: Karadeniz Araştırmaları Sempozyum Bildirileri, 16-17 Nisan 2004, Ankara / Black Sea Studies Symposium Proceedings, 16-17 April 2004, Ankara, Yerleşim Arkeolojisi Serisi, Sempozyum Bildirileri 1, (ed. by D.B. Erciyas and E. Koparal), (Istanbul 2006), pp. 139-152.

TÜLEK, F. (1998), Efsuncu Orpheus / Orpheus, The magician: The transition of Orpheus theme from Paganism to Christianity in late Roman-early Byzantine mosaics, Arkeoloji ve Sanat Yayınları, Eskiçağ Dinleri ve Mitolojileri Dizisi 3, (Istanbul 1998). TÜLEK, F. (2004) - Late Roman and early Byzantine floor mosaics in Cilicia, Unpublished Ph.D. thesis, University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign (Champaign, IL 2004)

(accessed on August 17, 2018).

ŞAHİN, D. (2007) - Roma Dönemi Mozaik Betilerine Göre Nereid İkonografisi, Unpublished Ph.D. thesis, Selçuk Üniversitesi, Sosyal Bilimler Enstitüsü, (Konya 2007) (accessed on August 17, 2018).

UYSAL, T. and BULGAN, F. (2016) - The Gaziantep mosaic museum of Zeugma / Gaziantep Zeugma Mozaik Müzesi, (Istanbul 2016).

ŞAHİN, D. (2008) - ‘Zeugma Mozaikleri Üzerinde Yer Alan Tethys Betimlemeleri’, in: IV. Uluslararası Türkiye Mozaik Korpusu Sempozyum Bildirileri, 6-10 Haziran 2007-Gaziantep, (ed. by M. Şahin), Uludağ

WAELKENS, M. (2006) - ‘Report on the 2004 excavation and restoration campaign at Sagalassos’, in: 27. Kazı Sonuçları Toplantısı, 30 Mayıs – 3 Haziran 2005, 303

Hadrianopolis IV ZAQZUQ, A.-R. and PICCIRILLO, M. (1999) - ‘The mosaic floor of the Church of the Holy Martyrs at Tayibat Al-Imam – Hamah, in Central Syria’, Liber annuus 49, 1999, pp. 443-464.

Antalya, vol. 2, T.C. Kültür ve Turizm Bakanlığı Yayın No: 3054-2, Kültür Varlıkları ve Müzeler Genel Müdürlüğü Yayın No: 115-2, (Ankara 2006), pp. 271286 (accessed on August 17, 2018).

ZEYREK, T.H. (2008) - ‘Besni Yüzey Araştırması-2006 Işığında Besni Mozaikleri’, in: IV. Uluslararası Türkiye Mozaik Korpusu Sempozyum Bildirileri, 6-10 Haziran 2007-Gaziantep, (ed. by M. Şahin), Uludağ Üniversitesi Mozaik Araştırmaları Merkezi Yayınları Serisi 1, (Bursa 2008), pp. 161-166.

WAELKENS, M. and TALLOEN, P. (2005) - ‘Report on the 2003 excavation and restoration campaign at Sagalassos’, in: 26. Kazı Sonuçları Toplantısı, 2428 Mayıs 2004, Konya, vol. 1, T.C. Kültür ve Turizm Bakanlığı Yayın No: 3029-1, Kültür Varlıkları ve Müzeler Genel Müdürlüğü Yayın No: 108, (Ankara 2005), pp. 421-438 (accessed on August 17, 2018).

ZIMMERMANN, N. and LADSTÄTTER, S. (2010) Wandmalerei in Ephesos von hellenistischer bis in byzantinische Zeit, (Vienna 2010).

WEITZMANN, K. (1960) - ‘The survival of mythological representations in early Christian and Byzantine art and their impact on Christian iconography’, Dumbarton Oaks Papers 14, 1960, pp. 27-72 (accessed on August 17, 2018). WILPERT, J. (2007) - Roman mosaics. Over 60 full-color images from the 4th through the 13th centuries, Dover Fine Art, History of Art, (New York 2007). WISEMAN, J. and MANO-ZISSI, D. (1972) - ‘Excavations at Stobi, 1971’, American Journal of Archaeology 76, 4, 1972, pp. 407-424 (accessed on August 17, 2018). WISEMAN, J. and MANO-ZISSI, D. (1973) - ‘Excavations at Stobi, 1972’, American Journal of Archaeology 77, 4, 1973, pp. 391-403 (accessed on August 17, 2018). YAĞCI, R. (2007) - ‘Soli/Pompeiopolis 2005 Yılı Kazıları’, in: 28. Kazı Sonuçları Toplantısı, 29 Mayıs – 2 Haziran 2006, Çanakkale, vol. 2, T.C. Kültür ve Turizm Bakanlığı Yayın No: 3079-2, Kültür Varlıkları ve Müzeler Genel Müdürlüğü Yayın No: 121-2, (Ankara 2007), pp. 175-184 (accessed on August 17, 2018). YEGÜL, F.K. (1986) - The Bath-Gymnasium complex at Sardis, Archaeological Exploration of Sardis, Report No. 3, (Cambridge, MA 1986). YEŞİL-ERDEK, Ş. (2014) - ‘Perinthos-Herakleia Bazilikası Taban Döşemelerinin Konservasyonu / Conservation of Floor Pavements of Basilica in Perinthos-Herakleia’, Journal of Mosaic Research 7, 2014, pp. 61-75. YILDIRIM, Ş. (2011) ‘Filyos-Tios Kazı Çalışmaları-2010’, Türk Eskiçağ Bilimleri Enstitüsü Haberler 32, Mayıs 2011, pp. 41-43 (accessed on August 17, 2018). YÜCEL, E. (2010) - Great Palace mosaic museum, Bilkent Kültür Girişimi Publications, (Istanbul 2010).

304