In this study, the historical process of Koranza, which is located in the territory of Stratonike... more In this study, the historical process of Koranza, which is located in the territory of Stratonikeia, is discussed. The name Koranza is one of the most common centers seen as a demotic name in the inscriptions found in the region. As a result of both the studies carried out in the past years and the data obtained from the archaeological surveys that have been continuing since 2018, it has been determined that Koranza has a history dating back to the 2nd millennium BC. In the studies carried out in Western Anatolia, the spread of the finds belonging to the last phase of the Mycenaean culture in the Aegean geography was limited to the Eastern Aegean islands and the coastline of Western Anatolia. However, the finds discovered in Çine-Tepecik Höyük in recent years and showing that the relations with the Mycenaean culture were effective, revealed that this geographical border also includes the Çine (Marsyas) region. The data obtained from the excavations carried out in Stratonikeia and its surroundings and the potteries dated to the GH IIIC period, which we identified during the surveys we conducted in the region, show that the Yatağan Plain should be included in the spread of Mycenaean potteries. The name Koranza, with its different pronunciations, begins to appear in the 4th century BC. While Koranza used to be an independent city with its own branches and ruled by an archon, it became the deme of Stratonikeia due to the establishment of Stratonikeia in the 3rd century BC and subsequently being the political ruler of the region. The name of Koranza, which has the sanctuary of Artemis and Apollo since at least the 4th century BC, is seen as a place name associated with the goddess Artemis, as we understand from the epigraphic data. The cult of Artemis was the most important cult of the region until the Temple of Hekate in Lagina was built. Although the cult of Artemis lost its importance after the cult of Hecate came to the fore, the inscriptions recovered from the region show that the cult of Artemis continued until the Roman Imperial Period.
In Knidos, one of the most important production and trade centers of the Ancient Period, two spol... more In Knidos, one of the most important production and trade centers of the Ancient Period, two spolia blocks used as threshold at the entrance of the building called “Church D” were unearthed. The first block, which is the corner block, has architectural decoration on three sides and the other block on both short sides. The profile scheme and architectural decoration consists of astragal carved with bead and reel at the bottom, double ovolo carved with egg and dart in the middle and a vertical type cavetto profile carved with a lotus and palmette pattern at the top. The shape and profile scheme of the blocks show that they were originally used as crown. In this study, these two blocks are defined, the profile scheme is examined, and the architectural decorations are tried to be dated according to their stylistic features. The corner block, with a lower length of 251 cm, allows us to determine the length of at least one facade of the podium to which the crown blocks belong. As a result of comparisons made with similar examples, the type of building with podium to which the crown blocks may belong is also examined. The most unusual application of crown blocks is the profile scheme. This scheme consisting of a double ovolo carved with egg and dart is more common on the Asiatic-ionic type anta capitals from the 6th century BC. This combination is not yet known in Hellenistic buildings in Anatolia. For this reason, Knidos crown blocks are one of the latest examples of double ovolo carved with egg and dart. The cavetto was a crowning moulding over ovolo on Asiatic-ionic type anta capitals since the 6th century BC and on the architraves, epicranitis, altars, the orthostate blocks and monumental bases since the 5th century BC. However, none of these examples have a lotus and palmette pattern carved on the cavetto. For these reasons, Knidos crown blocks are described as unique examples.
L'Asie Mineure occidentale au IIIe siècle a. C., 2021
Anatolian history was very chaotic in the IIIrd century BCE. Hellenistic kingdoms were constantly... more Anatolian history was very chaotic in the IIIrd century BCE. Hellenistic kingdoms were constantly fighting among themselves. This period, during which stability was lost, ended with the Battle of Corupedium in 281 BCE. After this date, the empire divided into four distinct territorial kingdoms. Each kingdom tried to develop itself in every area and bring its social life to the maximum level. At this time, the center of architectural revolution was transferred to the East, especially to Anatolia, because the Peloponnese was less dependent on the political patronage of the Hellenistic kings. The fact that there were a number of Doric buildings constructed in Anatolia in the IIIrd century is also evidence of this. Most of these buildings were financed by the Hellenistic kings, who wanted to impose their political superiority. The buildings were mostly public, such as stoas, and sacred architecture, such as temples. The Doric architecture of IIIrd century largely reflects the tradition of the late Classical period. Doric architectural elements with Ionic influence, which started with the buildings at Labraunda in Anatolia, was implemented especially in western Anatolian Doric buildings during this century. These can be summarized as Ionic columns, Doric capitals crowned with a cymatium, as well as architraves and friezes crowned with a cymatium. These features are specific to Anatolia and are not seen in the Doric buildings in Mainland Greece. Changes in stylistic features can be summarized as follows: In the architraves, the guttae began to lose their height. In the frieze, starting after the second half of the IVth century BCE, triglyph and metope taeniae were applied with the same height in the all Doric buildings in Anatolia in the IIIrd century, except for the Belevi Mausoleum. Triglyph ears, on the upper edge of the half glyphs, became widespread during this century. These ears are in the shape of drops, hemispheres, and, in a small number of instances, inverted S forms. It is not possible to talk about a stable change and development in the proportion between architrave height and frieze height and in the proportion between triglyph width and metope width. Until the IIIrd century, high mutuli had been applied in Doric geison; however, from the first half of the century, mutuli and guttae began to lose their height. In addition, in the triple arraying, the distance between the guttae began to close, and the viae began to narrow.
West of the ancient city of Knidos are the remains of a stoa built in the Doric order, situated o... more West of the ancient city of Knidos are the remains of a stoa built in the Doric order, situated on the southern end of the third terrace, referred to as the “Corinthian Temple Terrace”. The stoa is built a long an east-west axis facing, towards the Great Harbor. The stoa is a single story with an I-shaped plan with two-aisled. Many architectural blocks are preserved and cuttings in the bed rock are visible in the field. The stoa is part of a larger building complex probably built by the famous architect Sostratos of Knidos referred to as the “pensilis ambulatio (hanging promenade)” by Pliny (nat. XXXVI, 83), which are generally accepted as dating to the first half of the 3rd century BC. In previous studies, however, researchers have not taken the style of the architectural blocks into consideration. In this study, architectural blocks of the Doric stoa were studied in detail, and their style characteristics were identified and compared with Doric buildings in the region and in Anatolia. The Doric capitals, the arrangement of the triglyph-metope blocks, and the shape of the triglyph ears closely resemble other buildings established under the sponsorship of Ptolemies. In addition, the Ionic fluted column drums, the execution of the taenia, regulae, and guttae on the architrave blocks, the configuration of the mutulus-guttae in the geison blocks, and the style of cyma reversa type beak profile used as a geison crown are compatible with the architecture of the 3rd century BC. Based on these data we conclude that the stylistic features of Doric Stoa’s architectural elements support the traditional dating in the first half of the 3rd century, and there for could be associated with Sostratos. The remains of the stoa are in sufficient to connect this building with Sostratos’ “pensilis ambulatio” as mentioned in Pliny. It seems that Sostratos of Knidos was active from at least 323 to the 270s and spent all this time in Ptolemaic service. The data obtained from the inscriptions and the stylistic feature of the architectural blocks indicate that the building may have been built between 290-270 BC.
In this study, which discusses the anta, plaster and pier capitals found in Doric buildings in An... more In this study, which discusses the anta, plaster and pier capitals found in Doric buildings in Anatolia, the capitals have been grouped according to the form of the profiles, and each profile has been evaluated in itself. As a result of this grouping, it was determined that various profiles such as Doric cyma, cyma reversa, ovolo and Pergamene type of ovolo were used in Doric buildings. These profiles are described in detail with emphasis on their style developments. In addition to this, buildings whose dates are controversial, were evaluated and re-examined in terms of the style features of the Doric architectural blocks, and new dates were suggested for some of them. The canonical form of Doric anta capitals consists of Doric cyma (hakwsbeak). This capital type was worked in Anatolia from 4th century BC to the end of the 2nd century BC. An ovolo-type hawksbeak was used in the 4th century BC, while a cyma reversa-type hawksbeak was used in the majority examples of the 3rd century BC and all examples of the 2nd century BC. On the hawksbeak, the style development can be followed on the shape of the lower end of the beak and on the cyma reversa profiles. On the Doric anta capitals, the hawksbeak is crowned with a cavetto. However, as in the early examples, capitals crowned with a vertical fascia were also identified. The exception is the presence of the crown profile consisting of cyma recta, seen in two examples only. In the capitals, the concave curvature of the cavetto profile is well shaped and, in early examples, this profile ends with a fascia that is not too high. The height of the fascia starts to increase in the 2nd century BC examples. The capitals consisting of the cyma reversa profile, which is thought to have been inspired by Doric anta capitals, were used in the Temple of Athena at Assos in the Archaic Period. L.T. Shoe stated that the Hellenistic examples of these types of capitals belonging to the Doric order in Anatolia are limited to Priene buildings alone. However, in this study, in addition to the examples from Priene, examples were also identified from Mamurt Kale, Latmos Heracleia, Assos and Pergamon in the Hellenistic Period, as well as from Aphrodisias, Mylasa, Bargylia and Knidos in the Late Hellenistic-Augustus Period. In the anta capitals, the depth of the cyma reversa profile is generally equal to its width, and the upper curve is smaller than the lower curve. The capitals in this group are mostly crowned with cavetto, like the capitals consisting of Doric cyma. There are very few examples in which vertical fascia have been preferred. In the other type of anta capital, the ovolo is the chief moulding and has a crowning cavetto and a base apophyge, sometimes also an astragal. The earliest example is from Epidaurus in the late 4th century BC and were used in the Stoa of Attalos at Delphi in the second half of the 3rd century BC. The Hellenistic examples of these types of capitals, which are widely used in Hellenistic houses in Delos, are few in Anatolia. The capitals consisting of ovolo have become the most preferred capital type in Doric buildings since the beginning of the Early Imperial Period. While all Hellenistic examples were crowned with cavettos, Roman examples have abacus. In these examples, the use of ovolo combined with cavetto shows that the cavetto, which was a crown profile in the early examples, was moved to the capital’s main profile scheme. The capitals consisting of the Pergamene type of ovolo were especially widespread in the second half of the 1st century AD, and were used in this period together with capitals consisting of ovolo and cavetto. Different arrangements have been identified on the necking of the Doric and Ionic anta capitals used in the buildings built in the Doric order. Below the hawksbeak, the double fillet of the 5th century is revived. In a few cases, the fillets are narrow and deep and set close together, but usually they are broad and shallow and widely separated, the lower one generally cut at the bottom of the block, which forms the capital. The fact that these fillets are seen in both Doric and Ionic capitals is evidence of interaction. Some examples had a plain vertical fascia below the hawksbeak, cyma reversa or ovolo, sometimes large and sometimes small. This fascia sets the capital a little forward from the face of anta. The rosette frieze seen in a few examples shows that they were influenced by Attic-Ionic type anta capitals.
In this study, a bronze figurine found in the South Propylon in Lagina in 2011 was discussed. The... more In this study, a bronze figurine found in the South Propylon in Lagina in 2011 was discussed. The figurine is depicted from the front in an archaic style. It has polos on its head and a veil (shawl) attached to it. The arms of the figure in a narrow garment that surrounds the body are adhered to the body, and the hands are extended symmetrically by breaking from the elbow. The most characteristic part of the figurine is oval objects, clustered in the chest and abdomen, made in four rows. In the left hand of the figurine, there is an object with a broken upper part, which may be the wand. The object in her right hand is missing. Although this definition immediately brought to mind the Artemis Ephesia among the depictions of gods and goddesses with countless depictions in ancient times, comprehensive studies revealed that this depiction was not limited to Artemis Ephesia. The pectoral ornament, which we can see mainly in the area of the chest of the Lagina figurine are only seen in Artemis Ephesia and Zeus Labraundos among gods and goddesses with the same iconographic features. The object the Lagina figurine holds in her left hand, the fact that the facial details cannot be chosen and the similarities with the Zeus Labraundos relief in Stratonikeia prevent us from directly associating the figurine with the Artemis Ephesia. For this reason, it will be tried to reach a result by comparing the figurine with the depictions of Artemis Ephesia and Zeus Labraundos.
Anodos. Studies of the Ancient World 13/2013, 2019
There is a complex consisting of seven square planned chambers near the beginning of Harbor Stree... more There is a complex consisting of seven square planned chambers near the beginning of Harbor Street in Knidos. One is a heroon with an exedra style, distylos in-antis plan and Corinthian facade architecture. According to the architrave inscription, this heroon was dedicated to a reputable citizen from Knidos, whose name unfortunately has not reached us. According to its architectural characteristics, the heroon was dated to the Late Antonian Period. The heroon was transformed into a shop/atelier in the early 5th century AD and lost its function by the mid-7th century AD.
Abstract
Doric geison blocks with mutules-guttae took their place in the architecture from the b... more Abstract
Doric geison blocks with mutules-guttae took their place in the architecture from the beginning of the 6th century BC. However, different applications in early cases show that the Doric geison form has completed its development over time. One of the applications characterized as the characteristic of 6th century BC buildings is that the application of mutules-guttae placed on the metope is narrower than the mutules-guttae placed on triglyph and accordingly the number of guttae on the surface of the mutules changes. After much experimentation on mutule arrangement and guttae number, architects in the 6th century BC could only balance the width of the mutules on the metopes with the triglyphs around 530 BC and fixed the number of guttae as 3x6. The narrow application of the mutules on the metopes was reapplied from time to time in Roman period structures. In the Classical Periods, the slope of the mutules was calculated as ± 15 ° and from the second half of the 4th century BC this angle began to get smaller. In the constructions built in the 2nd century BC, the slope of the mutules was usually either very low or there was no slope at all and this implementation continued in the Early Imperial Period. From early stages, mutules-guttae in high relief are a characteristic feature in Doric geisons. In Doric structures in Anatolia, beginning from the 3rd century BC, the guttae began to lose height with the mutules. However, the application of mutule in the form of a thin plaque began in the first half of the 2nd century BC and this type of mutule continued to be used throughout the Roman period. In some of the Doric geisons, dated to the Late Hellenistic and Early Imperial Period, mutules were separated from viae by a fine line. The mutules placed in the area between the geison soffit and the drips from the early stages are also connected to these two mentioned parts. Over time mutules were disconnected from geison soffits and drips; thus a fine fascia was formed between the geison soffits and the mutules and between mutules and drips. Another change seen in guttae was found in the distributions on the surfaces of the mutules. In the early stages, especially the distance between the guttae sequences in the triple sequence is about 2 times or slightly more than 2 times of the diameter of the guttae. This distance, which is usually 1,5 times in the 4th century BC, was equalized in a few buildings in the 3rd century BC, in the 2nd century BC, the distance between guttae was narrower than the diameter of guttae. Frequently, sequenced guttae are a characteristic of the Roman Period structures. In the Early Imperial Periods, besides having mutules with the guttae leaned on the edge on the four sides, the opposite practice, pulling the guttae toward the inside on the four sides, was also used. Another change in Doric geison was found in the area between the width of the mutules and the width of the viae. The viae, which were worked at the ratio of 1:5 in the early stages, narrowed steadily later in the period and towards the end of the 1st century AD the ratio decreased to as little as 1:10.
Öz: Bu çalışmada Konya merkezde bulunan ve bezeme unsurları ile sıra dışı özelliğe sahip olan bir... more Öz: Bu çalışmada Konya merkezde bulunan ve bezeme unsurları ile sıra dışı özelliğe sahip olan bir mimari blok ele alınmıştır. Çalışma kapsamında öncelikle mimari bloğun başlık olarak mı, yoksa kaide olarak mı kullanıl-dığı sorgulanmıştır. Çünkü dört cephesi de akanthus yaprakları ile kaplı olan bu blok hem biçimi hem de cep-he dizaynı ile normal korinth başlıklarından ayrılmakta-dır. Bunun yanı sıra korinth başlıklarında görmeye alış-kın olduğumuz kaulis ile heliks gibi bölümler yerine be-zeme alanının tamamen büyük boyutlu tek akanthus yaprağı ile kaplanması da farklı bir uygulamadır. Bloğun üst kısmının büyük oranda tahrip edilmiş olması, hem volütler hem de abakus'un varlığına dair bir iz tespit edil-mesini güçleştirmektedir. Köşelere yerleştirilen alt sıra akanthus yapraklarının kavislendirilmesi suretiyle sekiz-gen bir form elde edilen bezemeli blok biçimi, bezeme şeması ve oranları bakımından korinth başlıkları ile kar-şılaştırılmış, özellikle bloğun biçimi ve bezeme şemasın-dan hareketle de bunun korinth başlığından ziyade Ana-dolu'da Hellenistik Dönem'den itibaren varlığı bilinen akanthus bezemeli paye kaidesi olduğu sonucuna varıl-mıştır. Yapılan değerlendirmeler, kaidenin Augustus Dönemi'nin ikinci yarısına ait stil özelliklerine sahip ol-duğunu göstermektedir. Abstract: This study addresses a unique decorated architectural block found in the centre of Konya. In the initial stage of this study, it was questioned if this architectural block was employed as a base or as a capital, because the block, which is decorated with carved acan-thus leaves, differs from the usual Corinthian capital both in its design and in its shape. A further difference is that it is decorated with a single and sizable acanthus leaf all over the surface, instead of the caules and helices usually employed on Corinthian capitals. As the upper side of the block is severely damaged, it is difficult to find traces of the volutes or of an abacus. The block had an octagonal shape, indicated by the curving leaves of the lower acanthus row at the corners. In this study the shape, decoration pattern, and ratios of the block were compared with other Corinthian capitals and, due to the shape and the pattern of decoration, it was concluded that this carved block was most probably a pier base with acanthus leaves, of a type found in Anatolia during the Hellenistic period. This base however has stylistic features which suggests it dates from the second half of the reign of Augustus. Anahtar Kelimeler: Ikonium • Akanthus • Kaide • Başlık • Paye • Korinth
In this study, the historical process of Koranza, which is located in the territory of Stratonike... more In this study, the historical process of Koranza, which is located in the territory of Stratonikeia, is discussed. The name Koranza is one of the most common centers seen as a demotic name in the inscriptions found in the region. As a result of both the studies carried out in the past years and the data obtained from the archaeological surveys that have been continuing since 2018, it has been determined that Koranza has a history dating back to the 2nd millennium BC. In the studies carried out in Western Anatolia, the spread of the finds belonging to the last phase of the Mycenaean culture in the Aegean geography was limited to the Eastern Aegean islands and the coastline of Western Anatolia. However, the finds discovered in Çine-Tepecik Höyük in recent years and showing that the relations with the Mycenaean culture were effective, revealed that this geographical border also includes the Çine (Marsyas) region. The data obtained from the excavations carried out in Stratonikeia and its surroundings and the potteries dated to the GH IIIC period, which we identified during the surveys we conducted in the region, show that the Yatağan Plain should be included in the spread of Mycenaean potteries. The name Koranza, with its different pronunciations, begins to appear in the 4th century BC. While Koranza used to be an independent city with its own branches and ruled by an archon, it became the deme of Stratonikeia due to the establishment of Stratonikeia in the 3rd century BC and subsequently being the political ruler of the region. The name of Koranza, which has the sanctuary of Artemis and Apollo since at least the 4th century BC, is seen as a place name associated with the goddess Artemis, as we understand from the epigraphic data. The cult of Artemis was the most important cult of the region until the Temple of Hekate in Lagina was built. Although the cult of Artemis lost its importance after the cult of Hecate came to the fore, the inscriptions recovered from the region show that the cult of Artemis continued until the Roman Imperial Period.
In Knidos, one of the most important production and trade centers of the Ancient Period, two spol... more In Knidos, one of the most important production and trade centers of the Ancient Period, two spolia blocks used as threshold at the entrance of the building called “Church D” were unearthed. The first block, which is the corner block, has architectural decoration on three sides and the other block on both short sides. The profile scheme and architectural decoration consists of astragal carved with bead and reel at the bottom, double ovolo carved with egg and dart in the middle and a vertical type cavetto profile carved with a lotus and palmette pattern at the top. The shape and profile scheme of the blocks show that they were originally used as crown. In this study, these two blocks are defined, the profile scheme is examined, and the architectural decorations are tried to be dated according to their stylistic features. The corner block, with a lower length of 251 cm, allows us to determine the length of at least one facade of the podium to which the crown blocks belong. As a result of comparisons made with similar examples, the type of building with podium to which the crown blocks may belong is also examined. The most unusual application of crown blocks is the profile scheme. This scheme consisting of a double ovolo carved with egg and dart is more common on the Asiatic-ionic type anta capitals from the 6th century BC. This combination is not yet known in Hellenistic buildings in Anatolia. For this reason, Knidos crown blocks are one of the latest examples of double ovolo carved with egg and dart. The cavetto was a crowning moulding over ovolo on Asiatic-ionic type anta capitals since the 6th century BC and on the architraves, epicranitis, altars, the orthostate blocks and monumental bases since the 5th century BC. However, none of these examples have a lotus and palmette pattern carved on the cavetto. For these reasons, Knidos crown blocks are described as unique examples.
L'Asie Mineure occidentale au IIIe siècle a. C., 2021
Anatolian history was very chaotic in the IIIrd century BCE. Hellenistic kingdoms were constantly... more Anatolian history was very chaotic in the IIIrd century BCE. Hellenistic kingdoms were constantly fighting among themselves. This period, during which stability was lost, ended with the Battle of Corupedium in 281 BCE. After this date, the empire divided into four distinct territorial kingdoms. Each kingdom tried to develop itself in every area and bring its social life to the maximum level. At this time, the center of architectural revolution was transferred to the East, especially to Anatolia, because the Peloponnese was less dependent on the political patronage of the Hellenistic kings. The fact that there were a number of Doric buildings constructed in Anatolia in the IIIrd century is also evidence of this. Most of these buildings were financed by the Hellenistic kings, who wanted to impose their political superiority. The buildings were mostly public, such as stoas, and sacred architecture, such as temples. The Doric architecture of IIIrd century largely reflects the tradition of the late Classical period. Doric architectural elements with Ionic influence, which started with the buildings at Labraunda in Anatolia, was implemented especially in western Anatolian Doric buildings during this century. These can be summarized as Ionic columns, Doric capitals crowned with a cymatium, as well as architraves and friezes crowned with a cymatium. These features are specific to Anatolia and are not seen in the Doric buildings in Mainland Greece. Changes in stylistic features can be summarized as follows: In the architraves, the guttae began to lose their height. In the frieze, starting after the second half of the IVth century BCE, triglyph and metope taeniae were applied with the same height in the all Doric buildings in Anatolia in the IIIrd century, except for the Belevi Mausoleum. Triglyph ears, on the upper edge of the half glyphs, became widespread during this century. These ears are in the shape of drops, hemispheres, and, in a small number of instances, inverted S forms. It is not possible to talk about a stable change and development in the proportion between architrave height and frieze height and in the proportion between triglyph width and metope width. Until the IIIrd century, high mutuli had been applied in Doric geison; however, from the first half of the century, mutuli and guttae began to lose their height. In addition, in the triple arraying, the distance between the guttae began to close, and the viae began to narrow.
West of the ancient city of Knidos are the remains of a stoa built in the Doric order, situated o... more West of the ancient city of Knidos are the remains of a stoa built in the Doric order, situated on the southern end of the third terrace, referred to as the “Corinthian Temple Terrace”. The stoa is built a long an east-west axis facing, towards the Great Harbor. The stoa is a single story with an I-shaped plan with two-aisled. Many architectural blocks are preserved and cuttings in the bed rock are visible in the field. The stoa is part of a larger building complex probably built by the famous architect Sostratos of Knidos referred to as the “pensilis ambulatio (hanging promenade)” by Pliny (nat. XXXVI, 83), which are generally accepted as dating to the first half of the 3rd century BC. In previous studies, however, researchers have not taken the style of the architectural blocks into consideration. In this study, architectural blocks of the Doric stoa were studied in detail, and their style characteristics were identified and compared with Doric buildings in the region and in Anatolia. The Doric capitals, the arrangement of the triglyph-metope blocks, and the shape of the triglyph ears closely resemble other buildings established under the sponsorship of Ptolemies. In addition, the Ionic fluted column drums, the execution of the taenia, regulae, and guttae on the architrave blocks, the configuration of the mutulus-guttae in the geison blocks, and the style of cyma reversa type beak profile used as a geison crown are compatible with the architecture of the 3rd century BC. Based on these data we conclude that the stylistic features of Doric Stoa’s architectural elements support the traditional dating in the first half of the 3rd century, and there for could be associated with Sostratos. The remains of the stoa are in sufficient to connect this building with Sostratos’ “pensilis ambulatio” as mentioned in Pliny. It seems that Sostratos of Knidos was active from at least 323 to the 270s and spent all this time in Ptolemaic service. The data obtained from the inscriptions and the stylistic feature of the architectural blocks indicate that the building may have been built between 290-270 BC.
In this study, which discusses the anta, plaster and pier capitals found in Doric buildings in An... more In this study, which discusses the anta, plaster and pier capitals found in Doric buildings in Anatolia, the capitals have been grouped according to the form of the profiles, and each profile has been evaluated in itself. As a result of this grouping, it was determined that various profiles such as Doric cyma, cyma reversa, ovolo and Pergamene type of ovolo were used in Doric buildings. These profiles are described in detail with emphasis on their style developments. In addition to this, buildings whose dates are controversial, were evaluated and re-examined in terms of the style features of the Doric architectural blocks, and new dates were suggested for some of them. The canonical form of Doric anta capitals consists of Doric cyma (hakwsbeak). This capital type was worked in Anatolia from 4th century BC to the end of the 2nd century BC. An ovolo-type hawksbeak was used in the 4th century BC, while a cyma reversa-type hawksbeak was used in the majority examples of the 3rd century BC and all examples of the 2nd century BC. On the hawksbeak, the style development can be followed on the shape of the lower end of the beak and on the cyma reversa profiles. On the Doric anta capitals, the hawksbeak is crowned with a cavetto. However, as in the early examples, capitals crowned with a vertical fascia were also identified. The exception is the presence of the crown profile consisting of cyma recta, seen in two examples only. In the capitals, the concave curvature of the cavetto profile is well shaped and, in early examples, this profile ends with a fascia that is not too high. The height of the fascia starts to increase in the 2nd century BC examples. The capitals consisting of the cyma reversa profile, which is thought to have been inspired by Doric anta capitals, were used in the Temple of Athena at Assos in the Archaic Period. L.T. Shoe stated that the Hellenistic examples of these types of capitals belonging to the Doric order in Anatolia are limited to Priene buildings alone. However, in this study, in addition to the examples from Priene, examples were also identified from Mamurt Kale, Latmos Heracleia, Assos and Pergamon in the Hellenistic Period, as well as from Aphrodisias, Mylasa, Bargylia and Knidos in the Late Hellenistic-Augustus Period. In the anta capitals, the depth of the cyma reversa profile is generally equal to its width, and the upper curve is smaller than the lower curve. The capitals in this group are mostly crowned with cavetto, like the capitals consisting of Doric cyma. There are very few examples in which vertical fascia have been preferred. In the other type of anta capital, the ovolo is the chief moulding and has a crowning cavetto and a base apophyge, sometimes also an astragal. The earliest example is from Epidaurus in the late 4th century BC and were used in the Stoa of Attalos at Delphi in the second half of the 3rd century BC. The Hellenistic examples of these types of capitals, which are widely used in Hellenistic houses in Delos, are few in Anatolia. The capitals consisting of ovolo have become the most preferred capital type in Doric buildings since the beginning of the Early Imperial Period. While all Hellenistic examples were crowned with cavettos, Roman examples have abacus. In these examples, the use of ovolo combined with cavetto shows that the cavetto, which was a crown profile in the early examples, was moved to the capital’s main profile scheme. The capitals consisting of the Pergamene type of ovolo were especially widespread in the second half of the 1st century AD, and were used in this period together with capitals consisting of ovolo and cavetto. Different arrangements have been identified on the necking of the Doric and Ionic anta capitals used in the buildings built in the Doric order. Below the hawksbeak, the double fillet of the 5th century is revived. In a few cases, the fillets are narrow and deep and set close together, but usually they are broad and shallow and widely separated, the lower one generally cut at the bottom of the block, which forms the capital. The fact that these fillets are seen in both Doric and Ionic capitals is evidence of interaction. Some examples had a plain vertical fascia below the hawksbeak, cyma reversa or ovolo, sometimes large and sometimes small. This fascia sets the capital a little forward from the face of anta. The rosette frieze seen in a few examples shows that they were influenced by Attic-Ionic type anta capitals.
In this study, a bronze figurine found in the South Propylon in Lagina in 2011 was discussed. The... more In this study, a bronze figurine found in the South Propylon in Lagina in 2011 was discussed. The figurine is depicted from the front in an archaic style. It has polos on its head and a veil (shawl) attached to it. The arms of the figure in a narrow garment that surrounds the body are adhered to the body, and the hands are extended symmetrically by breaking from the elbow. The most characteristic part of the figurine is oval objects, clustered in the chest and abdomen, made in four rows. In the left hand of the figurine, there is an object with a broken upper part, which may be the wand. The object in her right hand is missing. Although this definition immediately brought to mind the Artemis Ephesia among the depictions of gods and goddesses with countless depictions in ancient times, comprehensive studies revealed that this depiction was not limited to Artemis Ephesia. The pectoral ornament, which we can see mainly in the area of the chest of the Lagina figurine are only seen in Artemis Ephesia and Zeus Labraundos among gods and goddesses with the same iconographic features. The object the Lagina figurine holds in her left hand, the fact that the facial details cannot be chosen and the similarities with the Zeus Labraundos relief in Stratonikeia prevent us from directly associating the figurine with the Artemis Ephesia. For this reason, it will be tried to reach a result by comparing the figurine with the depictions of Artemis Ephesia and Zeus Labraundos.
Anodos. Studies of the Ancient World 13/2013, 2019
There is a complex consisting of seven square planned chambers near the beginning of Harbor Stree... more There is a complex consisting of seven square planned chambers near the beginning of Harbor Street in Knidos. One is a heroon with an exedra style, distylos in-antis plan and Corinthian facade architecture. According to the architrave inscription, this heroon was dedicated to a reputable citizen from Knidos, whose name unfortunately has not reached us. According to its architectural characteristics, the heroon was dated to the Late Antonian Period. The heroon was transformed into a shop/atelier in the early 5th century AD and lost its function by the mid-7th century AD.
Abstract
Doric geison blocks with mutules-guttae took their place in the architecture from the b... more Abstract
Doric geison blocks with mutules-guttae took their place in the architecture from the beginning of the 6th century BC. However, different applications in early cases show that the Doric geison form has completed its development over time. One of the applications characterized as the characteristic of 6th century BC buildings is that the application of mutules-guttae placed on the metope is narrower than the mutules-guttae placed on triglyph and accordingly the number of guttae on the surface of the mutules changes. After much experimentation on mutule arrangement and guttae number, architects in the 6th century BC could only balance the width of the mutules on the metopes with the triglyphs around 530 BC and fixed the number of guttae as 3x6. The narrow application of the mutules on the metopes was reapplied from time to time in Roman period structures. In the Classical Periods, the slope of the mutules was calculated as ± 15 ° and from the second half of the 4th century BC this angle began to get smaller. In the constructions built in the 2nd century BC, the slope of the mutules was usually either very low or there was no slope at all and this implementation continued in the Early Imperial Period. From early stages, mutules-guttae in high relief are a characteristic feature in Doric geisons. In Doric structures in Anatolia, beginning from the 3rd century BC, the guttae began to lose height with the mutules. However, the application of mutule in the form of a thin plaque began in the first half of the 2nd century BC and this type of mutule continued to be used throughout the Roman period. In some of the Doric geisons, dated to the Late Hellenistic and Early Imperial Period, mutules were separated from viae by a fine line. The mutules placed in the area between the geison soffit and the drips from the early stages are also connected to these two mentioned parts. Over time mutules were disconnected from geison soffits and drips; thus a fine fascia was formed between the geison soffits and the mutules and between mutules and drips. Another change seen in guttae was found in the distributions on the surfaces of the mutules. In the early stages, especially the distance between the guttae sequences in the triple sequence is about 2 times or slightly more than 2 times of the diameter of the guttae. This distance, which is usually 1,5 times in the 4th century BC, was equalized in a few buildings in the 3rd century BC, in the 2nd century BC, the distance between guttae was narrower than the diameter of guttae. Frequently, sequenced guttae are a characteristic of the Roman Period structures. In the Early Imperial Periods, besides having mutules with the guttae leaned on the edge on the four sides, the opposite practice, pulling the guttae toward the inside on the four sides, was also used. Another change in Doric geison was found in the area between the width of the mutules and the width of the viae. The viae, which were worked at the ratio of 1:5 in the early stages, narrowed steadily later in the period and towards the end of the 1st century AD the ratio decreased to as little as 1:10.
Öz: Bu çalışmada Konya merkezde bulunan ve bezeme unsurları ile sıra dışı özelliğe sahip olan bir... more Öz: Bu çalışmada Konya merkezde bulunan ve bezeme unsurları ile sıra dışı özelliğe sahip olan bir mimari blok ele alınmıştır. Çalışma kapsamında öncelikle mimari bloğun başlık olarak mı, yoksa kaide olarak mı kullanıl-dığı sorgulanmıştır. Çünkü dört cephesi de akanthus yaprakları ile kaplı olan bu blok hem biçimi hem de cep-he dizaynı ile normal korinth başlıklarından ayrılmakta-dır. Bunun yanı sıra korinth başlıklarında görmeye alış-kın olduğumuz kaulis ile heliks gibi bölümler yerine be-zeme alanının tamamen büyük boyutlu tek akanthus yaprağı ile kaplanması da farklı bir uygulamadır. Bloğun üst kısmının büyük oranda tahrip edilmiş olması, hem volütler hem de abakus'un varlığına dair bir iz tespit edil-mesini güçleştirmektedir. Köşelere yerleştirilen alt sıra akanthus yapraklarının kavislendirilmesi suretiyle sekiz-gen bir form elde edilen bezemeli blok biçimi, bezeme şeması ve oranları bakımından korinth başlıkları ile kar-şılaştırılmış, özellikle bloğun biçimi ve bezeme şemasın-dan hareketle de bunun korinth başlığından ziyade Ana-dolu'da Hellenistik Dönem'den itibaren varlığı bilinen akanthus bezemeli paye kaidesi olduğu sonucuna varıl-mıştır. Yapılan değerlendirmeler, kaidenin Augustus Dönemi'nin ikinci yarısına ait stil özelliklerine sahip ol-duğunu göstermektedir. Abstract: This study addresses a unique decorated architectural block found in the centre of Konya. In the initial stage of this study, it was questioned if this architectural block was employed as a base or as a capital, because the block, which is decorated with carved acan-thus leaves, differs from the usual Corinthian capital both in its design and in its shape. A further difference is that it is decorated with a single and sizable acanthus leaf all over the surface, instead of the caules and helices usually employed on Corinthian capitals. As the upper side of the block is severely damaged, it is difficult to find traces of the volutes or of an abacus. The block had an octagonal shape, indicated by the curving leaves of the lower acanthus row at the corners. In this study the shape, decoration pattern, and ratios of the block were compared with other Corinthian capitals and, due to the shape and the pattern of decoration, it was concluded that this carved block was most probably a pier base with acanthus leaves, of a type found in Anatolia during the Hellenistic period. This base however has stylistic features which suggests it dates from the second half of the reign of Augustus. Anahtar Kelimeler: Ikonium • Akanthus • Kaide • Başlık • Paye • Korinth
Uploads
Papers by Zeliha Gider Büyüközer
The name Koranza, with its different pronunciations, begins to appear in the 4th century BC. While Koranza used to be an independent city with its own branches and ruled by an archon, it became the deme of Stratonikeia due to the establishment of Stratonikeia in the 3rd century BC and subsequently being the political ruler of the region. The name of Koranza, which has the sanctuary of Artemis and Apollo since at least the 4th century BC, is seen as a place name associated with the goddess Artemis, as we understand from the epigraphic data. The cult of Artemis was the most important cult of the region until the Temple of Hekate in Lagina was built. Although the cult of Artemis lost its importance after the cult of Hecate came to the fore, the inscriptions recovered from the region show that the cult of Artemis continued until the Roman Imperial Period.
The most unusual application of crown blocks is the profile scheme. This scheme consisting of a double ovolo carved with egg and dart is more common on the Asiatic-ionic type anta capitals from the 6th century BC. This combination is not yet known in Hellenistic buildings in Anatolia. For this reason, Knidos crown blocks are one of the latest examples of double ovolo carved with egg and dart. The cavetto was a crowning moulding over ovolo on Asiatic-ionic type anta capitals since the 6th century BC and on the architraves, epicranitis, altars, the orthostate blocks and monumental bases since the 5th century BC. However, none of these examples have a lotus and palmette pattern carved on the cavetto. For these reasons, Knidos crown blocks are described as unique examples.
The Doric architecture of IIIrd century largely reflects the tradition of the late Classical period. Doric architectural elements with Ionic influence, which started with the buildings at Labraunda in Anatolia, was implemented especially in western Anatolian Doric buildings during this century. These can be summarized as Ionic columns, Doric capitals crowned with a cymatium, as well as architraves and friezes crowned with a cymatium. These features are specific to Anatolia and are not seen in the Doric buildings in Mainland Greece.
Changes in stylistic features can be summarized as follows: In the architraves, the guttae began to lose their height. In the frieze, starting after the second half of the IVth century BCE, triglyph and metope taeniae were applied with the same height in the all Doric buildings in Anatolia in the IIIrd century, except for the Belevi Mausoleum.
Triglyph ears, on the upper edge of the half glyphs, became widespread during this century. These ears are in the shape of drops, hemispheres, and, in a small number of instances, inverted S forms. It is not possible to talk about a stable change and development in the proportion between architrave height and frieze height and in the proportion between triglyph width and metope width. Until the IIIrd century, high mutuli had been applied in Doric geison; however, from the first half of the century, mutuli and guttae began to lose their height. In addition, in the triple arraying, the distance between the guttae began to close, and the viae began to narrow.
In this study, architectural blocks of the Doric stoa were studied in detail, and their style characteristics were identified and compared with Doric buildings in the region and in Anatolia. The Doric capitals, the arrangement of the triglyph-metope blocks, and the shape of the triglyph ears closely resemble other buildings established under the sponsorship of Ptolemies. In addition, the Ionic fluted column drums, the execution of the taenia, regulae, and guttae on the architrave blocks, the configuration of the mutulus-guttae in the geison blocks, and the style of cyma reversa type beak profile used as a geison crown are compatible with the architecture of the 3rd century BC. Based on these data we conclude that the stylistic features of Doric Stoa’s architectural elements support the traditional dating in the first half of the 3rd century, and there for could be associated with Sostratos. The remains of the stoa are in sufficient to connect this building with Sostratos’ “pensilis ambulatio” as mentioned in Pliny. It seems that Sostratos of Knidos was active from at least 323 to the 270s and spent all this time in Ptolemaic service. The data obtained from the inscriptions and the stylistic feature of the architectural blocks indicate that the building may have been built between 290-270 BC.
The canonical form of Doric anta capitals consists of Doric cyma (hakwsbeak). This capital type was worked in Anatolia from 4th century BC to the end of the 2nd century BC. An ovolo-type hawksbeak was used in the 4th century BC, while a cyma reversa-type hawksbeak was used in the majority examples of the 3rd century BC and all examples of the 2nd century BC. On the hawksbeak, the style development can be followed on the shape of the lower end of the beak and on the cyma reversa profiles. On the Doric anta capitals, the hawksbeak is crowned with a cavetto. However, as in the early examples, capitals crowned with a vertical fascia were also identified. The exception is the presence of the crown profile consisting of cyma recta, seen in two examples only. In the capitals, the concave curvature of the cavetto profile is well shaped and, in early examples, this profile ends with a fascia that is not too high. The height of the fascia starts to increase in the 2nd century BC examples.
The capitals consisting of the cyma reversa profile, which is thought to have been inspired by Doric anta capitals, were used in the Temple of Athena at Assos in the Archaic Period. L.T. Shoe stated that the Hellenistic examples of these types of capitals belonging to the Doric order in Anatolia are limited to Priene buildings alone. However, in this study, in addition to the examples from Priene, examples were also identified from Mamurt Kale, Latmos Heracleia, Assos and Pergamon in the Hellenistic Period, as well as from Aphrodisias, Mylasa, Bargylia and Knidos in the Late Hellenistic-Augustus Period. In the anta capitals, the depth of the cyma reversa profile is generally equal to its width, and the upper curve is smaller than the lower curve. The capitals in this group are mostly crowned with cavetto, like the capitals consisting of Doric cyma. There are very few examples in which vertical fascia have been preferred.
In the other type of anta capital, the ovolo is the chief moulding and has a crowning cavetto and a base apophyge, sometimes also an astragal. The earliest example is from Epidaurus in the late 4th century BC and were used in the Stoa of Attalos at Delphi in the second half of the 3rd century BC. The Hellenistic examples of these types of capitals, which are widely used in Hellenistic houses in Delos, are few in Anatolia. The capitals consisting of ovolo have become the most preferred capital type in Doric buildings since the beginning of the Early Imperial Period. While all Hellenistic examples were crowned with cavettos, Roman examples have abacus. In these examples, the use of ovolo combined with cavetto shows that the cavetto, which was a crown profile in the early examples, was moved to the capital’s main profile scheme. The capitals consisting of the Pergamene type of ovolo were especially widespread in the second half of the 1st century AD, and were used in this period together with capitals consisting of ovolo and cavetto.
Different arrangements have been identified on the necking of the Doric and Ionic anta capitals used in the buildings built in the Doric order. Below the hawksbeak, the double fillet of the 5th century is revived. In a few cases, the fillets are narrow and deep and set close together, but usually they are broad and shallow and widely separated, the lower one generally cut at the bottom of the block, which forms the capital. The fact that these fillets are seen in both Doric and Ionic capitals is evidence of interaction. Some examples had a plain vertical fascia below the hawksbeak, cyma reversa or ovolo, sometimes large and sometimes small. This fascia sets the capital a little forward from the face of anta. The rosette frieze seen in a few examples shows that they were influenced by Attic-Ionic type anta capitals.
Doric geison blocks with mutules-guttae took their place in the architecture from the beginning of the 6th century BC. However, different applications in early cases show that the Doric geison form has completed its development over time. One of the applications characterized as the characteristic of 6th century BC buildings is that the application of mutules-guttae placed on the metope is narrower than the mutules-guttae placed on triglyph and accordingly the number of guttae on the surface of the mutules changes. After much experimentation on mutule arrangement and guttae number, architects in the 6th century BC could only balance the width of the mutules on the metopes with the triglyphs around 530 BC and fixed the number of guttae as 3x6. The narrow application of the mutules on the metopes was reapplied from time to time in Roman period structures.
In the Classical Periods, the slope of the mutules was calculated as ± 15 ° and from the second half of the 4th century BC this angle began to get smaller. In the constructions built in the 2nd century BC, the slope of the mutules was usually either very low or there was no slope at all and this implementation continued in the Early Imperial Period.
From early stages, mutules-guttae in high relief are a characteristic feature in Doric geisons. In Doric structures in Anatolia, beginning from the 3rd century BC, the guttae began to lose height with the mutules. However, the application of mutule in the form of a thin plaque began in the first half of the 2nd century BC and this type of mutule continued to be used throughout the Roman period. In some of the Doric geisons, dated to the Late Hellenistic and Early Imperial Period, mutules were separated from viae by a fine line. The mutules placed in the area between the geison soffit and the drips from the early stages are also connected to these two mentioned parts. Over time mutules were disconnected from geison soffits and drips; thus a fine fascia was formed between the geison soffits and the mutules and between mutules and drips.
Another change seen in guttae was found in the distributions on the surfaces of the mutules. In the early stages, especially the distance between the guttae sequences in the triple sequence is about 2 times or slightly more than 2 times of the diameter of the guttae. This distance, which is usually 1,5 times in the 4th century BC, was equalized in a few buildings in the 3rd century BC, in the 2nd century BC, the distance between guttae was narrower than the diameter of guttae. Frequently, sequenced guttae are a characteristic of the Roman Period structures. In the Early Imperial Periods, besides having mutules with the guttae leaned on the edge on the four sides, the opposite practice, pulling the guttae toward the inside on the four sides, was also used. Another change in Doric geison was found in the area between the width of the mutules and the width of the viae. The viae, which were worked at the ratio of 1:5 in the early stages, narrowed steadily later in the period and towards the end of the 1st century AD the ratio decreased to as little as 1:10.
Keywords: Doric order, doric geison, mutulus, guttae, viae
The name Koranza, with its different pronunciations, begins to appear in the 4th century BC. While Koranza used to be an independent city with its own branches and ruled by an archon, it became the deme of Stratonikeia due to the establishment of Stratonikeia in the 3rd century BC and subsequently being the political ruler of the region. The name of Koranza, which has the sanctuary of Artemis and Apollo since at least the 4th century BC, is seen as a place name associated with the goddess Artemis, as we understand from the epigraphic data. The cult of Artemis was the most important cult of the region until the Temple of Hekate in Lagina was built. Although the cult of Artemis lost its importance after the cult of Hecate came to the fore, the inscriptions recovered from the region show that the cult of Artemis continued until the Roman Imperial Period.
The most unusual application of crown blocks is the profile scheme. This scheme consisting of a double ovolo carved with egg and dart is more common on the Asiatic-ionic type anta capitals from the 6th century BC. This combination is not yet known in Hellenistic buildings in Anatolia. For this reason, Knidos crown blocks are one of the latest examples of double ovolo carved with egg and dart. The cavetto was a crowning moulding over ovolo on Asiatic-ionic type anta capitals since the 6th century BC and on the architraves, epicranitis, altars, the orthostate blocks and monumental bases since the 5th century BC. However, none of these examples have a lotus and palmette pattern carved on the cavetto. For these reasons, Knidos crown blocks are described as unique examples.
The Doric architecture of IIIrd century largely reflects the tradition of the late Classical period. Doric architectural elements with Ionic influence, which started with the buildings at Labraunda in Anatolia, was implemented especially in western Anatolian Doric buildings during this century. These can be summarized as Ionic columns, Doric capitals crowned with a cymatium, as well as architraves and friezes crowned with a cymatium. These features are specific to Anatolia and are not seen in the Doric buildings in Mainland Greece.
Changes in stylistic features can be summarized as follows: In the architraves, the guttae began to lose their height. In the frieze, starting after the second half of the IVth century BCE, triglyph and metope taeniae were applied with the same height in the all Doric buildings in Anatolia in the IIIrd century, except for the Belevi Mausoleum.
Triglyph ears, on the upper edge of the half glyphs, became widespread during this century. These ears are in the shape of drops, hemispheres, and, in a small number of instances, inverted S forms. It is not possible to talk about a stable change and development in the proportion between architrave height and frieze height and in the proportion between triglyph width and metope width. Until the IIIrd century, high mutuli had been applied in Doric geison; however, from the first half of the century, mutuli and guttae began to lose their height. In addition, in the triple arraying, the distance between the guttae began to close, and the viae began to narrow.
In this study, architectural blocks of the Doric stoa were studied in detail, and their style characteristics were identified and compared with Doric buildings in the region and in Anatolia. The Doric capitals, the arrangement of the triglyph-metope blocks, and the shape of the triglyph ears closely resemble other buildings established under the sponsorship of Ptolemies. In addition, the Ionic fluted column drums, the execution of the taenia, regulae, and guttae on the architrave blocks, the configuration of the mutulus-guttae in the geison blocks, and the style of cyma reversa type beak profile used as a geison crown are compatible with the architecture of the 3rd century BC. Based on these data we conclude that the stylistic features of Doric Stoa’s architectural elements support the traditional dating in the first half of the 3rd century, and there for could be associated with Sostratos. The remains of the stoa are in sufficient to connect this building with Sostratos’ “pensilis ambulatio” as mentioned in Pliny. It seems that Sostratos of Knidos was active from at least 323 to the 270s and spent all this time in Ptolemaic service. The data obtained from the inscriptions and the stylistic feature of the architectural blocks indicate that the building may have been built between 290-270 BC.
The canonical form of Doric anta capitals consists of Doric cyma (hakwsbeak). This capital type was worked in Anatolia from 4th century BC to the end of the 2nd century BC. An ovolo-type hawksbeak was used in the 4th century BC, while a cyma reversa-type hawksbeak was used in the majority examples of the 3rd century BC and all examples of the 2nd century BC. On the hawksbeak, the style development can be followed on the shape of the lower end of the beak and on the cyma reversa profiles. On the Doric anta capitals, the hawksbeak is crowned with a cavetto. However, as in the early examples, capitals crowned with a vertical fascia were also identified. The exception is the presence of the crown profile consisting of cyma recta, seen in two examples only. In the capitals, the concave curvature of the cavetto profile is well shaped and, in early examples, this profile ends with a fascia that is not too high. The height of the fascia starts to increase in the 2nd century BC examples.
The capitals consisting of the cyma reversa profile, which is thought to have been inspired by Doric anta capitals, were used in the Temple of Athena at Assos in the Archaic Period. L.T. Shoe stated that the Hellenistic examples of these types of capitals belonging to the Doric order in Anatolia are limited to Priene buildings alone. However, in this study, in addition to the examples from Priene, examples were also identified from Mamurt Kale, Latmos Heracleia, Assos and Pergamon in the Hellenistic Period, as well as from Aphrodisias, Mylasa, Bargylia and Knidos in the Late Hellenistic-Augustus Period. In the anta capitals, the depth of the cyma reversa profile is generally equal to its width, and the upper curve is smaller than the lower curve. The capitals in this group are mostly crowned with cavetto, like the capitals consisting of Doric cyma. There are very few examples in which vertical fascia have been preferred.
In the other type of anta capital, the ovolo is the chief moulding and has a crowning cavetto and a base apophyge, sometimes also an astragal. The earliest example is from Epidaurus in the late 4th century BC and were used in the Stoa of Attalos at Delphi in the second half of the 3rd century BC. The Hellenistic examples of these types of capitals, which are widely used in Hellenistic houses in Delos, are few in Anatolia. The capitals consisting of ovolo have become the most preferred capital type in Doric buildings since the beginning of the Early Imperial Period. While all Hellenistic examples were crowned with cavettos, Roman examples have abacus. In these examples, the use of ovolo combined with cavetto shows that the cavetto, which was a crown profile in the early examples, was moved to the capital’s main profile scheme. The capitals consisting of the Pergamene type of ovolo were especially widespread in the second half of the 1st century AD, and were used in this period together with capitals consisting of ovolo and cavetto.
Different arrangements have been identified on the necking of the Doric and Ionic anta capitals used in the buildings built in the Doric order. Below the hawksbeak, the double fillet of the 5th century is revived. In a few cases, the fillets are narrow and deep and set close together, but usually they are broad and shallow and widely separated, the lower one generally cut at the bottom of the block, which forms the capital. The fact that these fillets are seen in both Doric and Ionic capitals is evidence of interaction. Some examples had a plain vertical fascia below the hawksbeak, cyma reversa or ovolo, sometimes large and sometimes small. This fascia sets the capital a little forward from the face of anta. The rosette frieze seen in a few examples shows that they were influenced by Attic-Ionic type anta capitals.
Doric geison blocks with mutules-guttae took their place in the architecture from the beginning of the 6th century BC. However, different applications in early cases show that the Doric geison form has completed its development over time. One of the applications characterized as the characteristic of 6th century BC buildings is that the application of mutules-guttae placed on the metope is narrower than the mutules-guttae placed on triglyph and accordingly the number of guttae on the surface of the mutules changes. After much experimentation on mutule arrangement and guttae number, architects in the 6th century BC could only balance the width of the mutules on the metopes with the triglyphs around 530 BC and fixed the number of guttae as 3x6. The narrow application of the mutules on the metopes was reapplied from time to time in Roman period structures.
In the Classical Periods, the slope of the mutules was calculated as ± 15 ° and from the second half of the 4th century BC this angle began to get smaller. In the constructions built in the 2nd century BC, the slope of the mutules was usually either very low or there was no slope at all and this implementation continued in the Early Imperial Period.
From early stages, mutules-guttae in high relief are a characteristic feature in Doric geisons. In Doric structures in Anatolia, beginning from the 3rd century BC, the guttae began to lose height with the mutules. However, the application of mutule in the form of a thin plaque began in the first half of the 2nd century BC and this type of mutule continued to be used throughout the Roman period. In some of the Doric geisons, dated to the Late Hellenistic and Early Imperial Period, mutules were separated from viae by a fine line. The mutules placed in the area between the geison soffit and the drips from the early stages are also connected to these two mentioned parts. Over time mutules were disconnected from geison soffits and drips; thus a fine fascia was formed between the geison soffits and the mutules and between mutules and drips.
Another change seen in guttae was found in the distributions on the surfaces of the mutules. In the early stages, especially the distance between the guttae sequences in the triple sequence is about 2 times or slightly more than 2 times of the diameter of the guttae. This distance, which is usually 1,5 times in the 4th century BC, was equalized in a few buildings in the 3rd century BC, in the 2nd century BC, the distance between guttae was narrower than the diameter of guttae. Frequently, sequenced guttae are a characteristic of the Roman Period structures. In the Early Imperial Periods, besides having mutules with the guttae leaned on the edge on the four sides, the opposite practice, pulling the guttae toward the inside on the four sides, was also used. Another change in Doric geison was found in the area between the width of the mutules and the width of the viae. The viae, which were worked at the ratio of 1:5 in the early stages, narrowed steadily later in the period and towards the end of the 1st century AD the ratio decreased to as little as 1:10.
Keywords: Doric order, doric geison, mutulus, guttae, viae