Videos by Kalin Porozhanov
Underwater and Coastal Archaeology, Ancient Maritime History and Culture on the Black Sea Coast o... more Underwater and Coastal Archaeology, Ancient Maritime History and Culture on the Black Sea Coast of Bulgaria.
Thracia Pontica - Thracia Maritima. Thracians and Greеks. Apollonia Pontica, Sozopol. 84 views
Summer University Strandzha mountain and its role for the transference of civilizations East-West... more Summer University Strandzha mountain and its role for the transference of civilizations East-West, organized from Prof. Al. Fol Institute/Center of Thracology at BAS, in the hinterland and on the seacoast of Bulgarian and Turkish Strandzha mountain – lecturing and terrain investigations with the Students from South-West University of Blagoevgrad (SWU), Sofia University, New Bulgarian University, University for Library Science and Information Technologies /Летен университет Странджа планина и нейната роля за преноса на цивилизации Изток-Запад, организиран от Института/Център по тракология при БАН, в хинтерланда и крайбрежието на Българска и Турска Странджа – лекции на терен и изследвания със студенти от ЮЗУ, СУ, УниБИТ 4 views
Books by Kalin Porozhanov
Kalin Porozhanov. Society and State Organization of the Thracians mid-2nd - early 1st millennium BC (in the context of the Palaeo-Balkan and Western Asia Minor community-2nd edition IN BULGARIAN, ENGLISH SUMMARY), 2023
The SUMMARY presents the most significant results achieved in the monograph.
The Thracian onomast... more The SUMMARY presents the most significant results achieved in the monograph.
The Thracian onomastic presence from the second half of the 2nd millennium BC in the area around the Aegean Sea – proved to be a part of a Paleo-Balkan (Southeast-European) and Western Asia Minor Indo-European community, defined also as Circum-Aegean. This onomastic presence was discovered in three clearly outlined centers:
a) the island of Crete and the Peloponnese peninsula;
b) Northwestern/Western Asia Minor, best represented by the area of Troas;
c) the European part of Thrace.
The existence of the Thracian language in the second half of the 2nd millennium BC not only “enclosed” the Sea of Marmara as an inner–Thracian sea, comprising also the culture of Troas, but it was a part of the population of Mycenaean Greece – of course, together with other Indo-European peoples. This is supported by the sources on the European Southeast and the northwestern areas of Asia Minor.The stationarity and the mobility 0f the communities of the three best-studied areas – Thrace, Troas, and Mycenaean Greece – show certain dynamics, as follows. From the beginning of the 2nd millennium BC up to its middle approximately, mobility was inherent in all the three historical and geographical regions considered so far. It was more active in Thrace and less intensive in Troas and pre-Mycenaean Greece, Obviously, this was the mobility of the peoples from the Paleo-Balkan and Western Asia Minor Circum-Aegean Indo-European cultural and historical community.From the second half of the 2nd millennium BC, up to the 13th/12th century BC mobility as a characteristic feature, is inherent in the studied ancient civilizations, as follows:
-it remained preserved to a certain extent in Thrace, Thracian civilization
showed a relatively low development of stationarity and, respectively, a comparatively low accumulation of “surpluses”;
-its intensity decreased in Troas at the expense of the higher stationarity
which went through a more intensive development and a respectively greater accumulation of “surpluses” in this part of the Thracian space – the Trojan civilization;-it was last active in Mycenaean Greece where stationarity was decisive and accumulation of “surpluses” showed relatively high levels.
Stationarity was again associated with the features of the civilization in
European Thrace after the active mobility from the end of the 2nd and the beginning of the 1st millennium BC. This could be seen first in the fortresses, and then in the “royal cities” from the 1st millennium BC. Actually, the process of settlement of the Thracians was most intensive in Antiquity and was expressed in the “re-Mycenization” of the material culture. This “re-Mycenization” repeated, though in another period, but on the same Paleo-Balkan and Western Asia Minor cultural and historical basis, most conservatively preserved among the Thracians because of their most lasting mobility throughout the millennia, what had occurred by the mid-2nd millennium BC with the rise of the Mycenaean civilization. This however did not happen with all Thracian ethnoses. Many of them – farther to the north – remained on the level of mobility which was close in manifestation to nomadism.
The proper social, economic, and political pattern of the Thracian society
in Southeastern Europe from the mid-2nd and the early 1st millennium BC
demonstrates an underdeveloped market economy and a two-partite social structure. The state system of the Thracian society in its development into a class state was an estate and class organization in the studied period. It became an early class state in Antiquity, at the time of the re-Mycenization in Thrace. It was just then when the first written monuments appeared in the Thracian language proper but in Phrygian or Greek letters. The phenomenon was similar to what had occurred with Linear A in pre-Mycenaean Greece. These Thracian written monuments remained, however, on a cult level – the level of Linear A from the 18th – 16th century BC. Thus, the mid-1st millennium BC Thracian society, as a material and spiritual expression proved to be the most archaic and most similar to the Paleo-Balkan and Western Asia Minor Circum-Aegean Indo-European cultural and historical community of the (3rd) 2nd and the early 1st millennium BC.
The stable and lasting mobility and the low level of stationarity of the
Thracian society from the 2nd and the early 1st millennium BC is that sure
characteristic which allows us to perceive, behind its estate and class estate system and the early class state organization, behind the extreme conservatism, the old patter standing most closely to that of the Paleo-Balkan and Western Asia Minor community. A community that was one of the centers of early Indo-European history.
Bookmarks Related papers MentionsView impact
Studia Thracica , 2022
Bookmarks Related papers MentionsView impact
THRACIA XXIII, 2018
ALL TEXTS IN HONOR OF K. POROZHANOV'S 65TH ANNIVERSARY
Bookmarks Related papers MentionsView impact
Porozhanov, Kalin. The Odrysian Kingdom, the Poleis along its Coasts and Athens from the End of the 6th Century until 341 BC. 2nd revised and supplemented edition. Publishing Hous “Ral-Kolobar”, 371 p. Sofia, 2021. In Bulgarian, English Summary. ISBN 978-954-2948-67-4, 2021
All rulers from Oloros until Kersebleptes concluded treaties with Athens for dividing the spheres... more All rulers from Oloros until Kersebleptes concluded treaties with Athens for dividing the spheres of influence and for ruling over the coasts of the Odrysian kingdom. If for Oloros, Teres I and Sparadokos there is indirect evidence of such pacts, for the remaining kings – Sitalkes, Seuthes I, Medokos/Amadokos I, Hebryzelmis, Kotys I and Kersebleptes – the written sources and the epigraphic monuments are categorical and unambiguous proof of that.
The motivation for such a conduct of all kings – a conduct consisting in targeted pursuit of the vitally important policy of the Odrysian basileia for taxation and utilisation of the markets of Greek cities along its coast – can be seen in the numerous dynastic residences, as well as those adjacent to the Greek poleis, above all along the coasts of the Sea of Marmara, the Thracian Sea and the Black Sea, as well as those located in their not too distant rear on the mainland. In minimum concrete terms, the levying of taxes only from the Greek poleis and emporia looks as follows:
Teres І – 7-11 talents;
Sparadokos – 17 (27?) talents;
Sitalkes – 77-78 talents;
Kersebleptes – 230 or 330 talents, only from its emporia and from the Thracian Chersonesos.
Added taxes from other subordinate poleis and ethnoses:
Sitalkes – 1000 talents
Seuthes І – 400 talents;
Metokos/Amadokos І – 400 (?) talents;
Hebryzelmis – 400 (?) talents;
Kotys І – 400, 600, 900, and probably much more than 1,000 talents;
These data reveal an intensive increase of the taxes coming into the treasury of the Odrysian basileia, especially under Sitalkes, Seuthes I and Kotys I. The sums of these receivables by the Odrysian kings are comparable to the sums collected by the Athenian arché.
Bookmarks Related papers MentionsView impact
Thracia Antiqua 12, 2017
The title of the book The THRACIAN CIVILIZATION IN THE BEGINNINGS OF TWO CONTINENTS AND ON THE CO... more The title of the book The THRACIAN CIVILIZATION IN THE BEGINNINGS OF TWO CONTINENTS AND ON THE COASTS OF THREE SEAS (in ten studies) the suggests unusual, for the traditional thinking, presentation of Thracian antiquity. It certainly is related to maritime history and culture of the Thracians. The reading was formed in ten studies, but substantially interlinked scientific narrative. No coincidence they are called study, because, by their nature, are real crucial research.
In THE FIRST STUDY (Main Factors and Periods in the Emergence and the Development of the Thracian Civilization in South-East Europe and North-West Anatolia) indicating the importance and the role of the main factors for the emergence and development of the Thracian civilization, which allow the History of Thracians to scale of periods and along with that of Ancient Greece, for example, and to be entered in the History of the Old World. Particular attention will be given to the impact of natural conditions and their changes over time on the ancient society of the Thracians, which allows for new views and interpretations of their early history.
THE SECOND (The Thracians in the Paleobalkan-Westanatolian Indo- European Community in the 2nd-1st mill. BC) and THE THIRD (Ancient Literature for Ethnocultural Communities in South-East Europe and West Asia Minor at the end of the 2nd and the beginning of 1st mill. BC) STUDIES presented the earliest written and linguistic data for the Thracians, which place them among the first Indo-Europeans not only in South-Eastern Europe, but also in West Anatolia. Underlined the early belong of the Thracians in the Indo-Europeans, but not only those of South-Eastern Europe, but definitely the Thracians from the West-Northwestern Asia Minor, and in connection with the earliest known Indo-Europeans the Hittites in Anatolia and Mycenaean Greeks. For the first time a reading of ancient authors, such as Apollonius and Xenophon, for example, in THE FOURTH (Relicts from the Paleobalkan- Westanatolian Ethnocultural Community in the Littorals of the Thracian, Marmara Seas and Anatolian Black Sea Coast, according to Apollonius Rhodius) and THE FIFTH (The Thracians on the Northern Marmara Sea Coast and on the Anatolian Black Sea Coast in Xenophon) STUDIES, depicts, characterized and compared the Thracians in Europe, with the Thracians in Anatolia.
THE SIXST (The Thracian Rulers Residence of Fineus – FINEONFINOPOLIS
at the Mouth of the Bosporus – Entrance of the Black Sea), THE SEVENTH (The Basileyon SALMYDESSOS and the Rulers Residence-Sanctuary of Apollo Karsenos of the South-West Black Sea Coast) and THE EIGHTH (The Seas of the Thracians – Thrace Maritime/Thracia Pontica) STUDIES highlighting the specificities in maritime history and culture of the Thracians. And here are the Thracians submitted not only from Europe, but also from Asia Minor.
THE NINTH study (The Ancient Heritage in Bulgarian History and Culture) deals with the Problems of ancient Thracian cultural heritage in Bulgarian history and culture.
THE TENTH study (The Expeditions on the Track of the Thracians of the Black, Thracian and Marmara Seas in the Beginning of 21st Century) submit primary results from the eight-year field research on the shores of the author with his colleagues at the beaches of Thracian Sea, the Sea of Marmara and the Black Sea. In this book everything looks particularly interesting and with the contributions, because point of view is based on the interpretation of all possible sources from the perspective of the own Thracian history and culture, which inevitably and invariably associated with the sea. In fact, the Thracian civilization, lying in the start of two continents (Europe and Asia) and coastlines of three seas – Black, Marmara and North Aegean, is presented as the Northern contact zone of the Eastern Mediterranean, called in the scientific literature Thracia Pontica or Maritime Thrace.
Bookmarks Related papers MentionsView impact
As can be gathered from the title, the book is devoted to ethnographic materials about the mariti... more As can be gathered from the title, the book is devoted to ethnographic materials about the maritime culture of the population along Bulgarian Black Sea Coast during the last quarter of the 20th century and the beginning of the 21st century, namely, between 1979 and 2004, gathered by the above mentioned authors in 16 settlements. The latter are: Krapets, Tyulenovo, Kamen Bryag, Bulgarevo, Kavarna, Kranevo, Obzor, Emona, St. Vlas, Nessebur, Pomorie, Sozopol, Primorsko, Kiten, Tsarevo and Achtopol.
The idea to study maritime ethnography came upon simultaneously with the founding of the Center for Maritime History and Underwater Archaeology in 1978, then known as Base for Maritime Studies. In order one not to be confused by the different names of the Center, its history in dates follows below, compiled by its Director, Christina Angelova.
The material from Sozopol is the largest in quantity. On the one hand, that is because the head office of the Center is situated here, but, on the other hand, objectively, Sozopol’s population maritime tradition and culture is best preserved and still alive.
It is worth noting that the population of the big cities and ports like Varna and Bourgas were excluded from the filed surveys on purpose. The scholars used to believe that those, being megapoleis, preserved less of the so-called ‘live antiquity’. This is something, which we do not believe in any more. Obviously, one should regret the missed opportunities during all these past years.
Balchik, however, being the third biggest port along Bulgarian Black Sea coast and an old sea town, is unjustly missing from the list. Objective and subjective factors played role in this fact. We feel that we should present our apologies to the inhabitants of this city of millennia-old history and tradition, and we do hope that it will be included in the study of the maritime culture, although at a later time. Similar is the case with the town of Shabla, Byala…
During the last 30 years the authors have worked for developing the Underwater Archaeology Center. That is why they decided to dedicate this volume to its 30th anniversary. That will be best served by the National Commission for Maritime History series, whose institutional member the Center is.
We acknowledge the gratitude we feel we should express to hundreds of people interviewed, coastal workers, local fishermen, etc., whom we interviewed in the last decades of the 20th and the beginning of the 21st century.
This book is dedicated to them too!
Bookmarks Related papers MentionsView impact
Conference Presentations by Kalin Porozhanov
Anchors and Ingots from Antiquity Black Sea Coast Котви и слитъци от Античността по Анатолийското Черноморско крайбрежие Black Sea Coast/, 2024
Several interesting finds related to maritime archaeology from the museums in the cities of Amasr... more Several interesting finds related to maritime archaeology from the museums in the cities of Amasra (ancient Amastris) and Sinop (ancient Sinope) are presented. In the exposition of the museum in Amasra, 3 stone anchors with holes and 4 copper ingots are exhibited, and in the courtyard of the museum in Sinop there is a stone anchor of the Eastern Mediterranean type with two holes and an inscription-a monogram, and a lead Roman-type stock for a wooden anchor. The anchors and ingots are evidence of shipping along the Anatolian Black Sea Coast in the period from the 2 nd till the early 1 st millennium B.C. and from the 2 nd century B.C. till the 3 rd century A.D.
Bookmarks Related papers MentionsView impact
Kalin Porozhanov - Thracia 24, 2019
Thracia Pontica – 40 Years Later
Kalin Pororzhanov
The Thracia Pontica range of issues was perc... more Thracia Pontica – 40 Years Later
Kalin Pororzhanov
The Thracia Pontica range of issues was perceived and named by Professor Alexander Fol in the 1979s as a result of the complex expedition Apollonia – Strandzha and Mesambria – Haemus, organized by the Institute of Thracology of the Bulgarian Academy of Sciences. During subsequent decades, the following important results were obtained.
A national Centre of Underwater Archaeology was established with seat in the town of Sozopol (1978). Eight international symposia Thracia Pontica have been organized, as well as annual national and international expeditions.
The view on the Thracian maritime culture along the coasts of the Aegean Sea, the Sea of Marmara and the Black Sea as an integral part of the history and culture of the Eastern Mediterranean is substantiated.
Thracia Pontica constitutes part of the issues connected with Mycenaean Thrace (mid-second – mid-first millennium BC) because the Mycenaean religious, political and cultural models penetrated from the south to the north by sea. The Thracia Pontica range of issues comprises also the Thracians from the Northwestern Asia Minor and its coastal areas, including the Aegean islands Thasos, Samothrace, Imbros, Lemnos and Naxos.
The setting and the development of the Greek apoikiai along the Thracian coasts proved to be a process in which the two sides – the Thracian ethnos-related and the Greek polis-related sides – were mutually complementary and they interacted, playing hence the role of contact zones.
The Summer University Strandzha Mountain and Its Role for the East-West Transfer of Civilisations was created on Alexander Fol’s initiative in 2002 and functioned until 2015. Between 2009 and 2018, the Neophyte Rilski Southwestern University in Blagoevgrad implemented research projects every year, connected with the range of Thracia Pontica issues along the Black Sea, Sea of Marmara and Aegean coasts.
Bookmarks Related papers MentionsView impact
La Cavalerie Thrace, 1997
Appearance of the Horseman in Thrace and the Ancient World
Bookmarks Related papers MentionsView impact
Bookmarks Related papers MentionsView impact
THE EARLY BRONZE AGE SUNKEN SETTLEMENT BY URDOVIZA
(1986-1988 Archaeological Campaigns)
(Summ... more THE EARLY BRONZE AGE SUNKEN SETTLEMENT BY URDOVIZA
(1986-1988 Archaeological Campaigns)
(Summary)
Kalin Porozhanov
Introducing the first three underwater trial digs of the site, covering about 450 sq. m of the sea bottom. The first trial dig dates from 1986 and covers 50 sq. m, at 8/10 m under the sea level; the second - from 1987 - lying 50-60 m to the north-east of the first one, covers 300 sq. m at 5/6 m depth and the third - to the south-south-east of the second, covers 100 sq. m. The findings belong to a stratum lying 2 m above the actual sea bottom.
Here were discovered about 300 wooden poles, 85 of which have undergone dendrochronological analyses, with diameters from 8.5/10 up to 40 cm and 13 horizontal beams.
Altogether over 3000 entire and fragmented earthenware were collected, belonging to the first/the beginning of the second phase of the EBA and thus dating the site about the beginning of the 3rd mill. BC.
The results of the explorations show that the inhabitants of this site lived off hunting wild animals, using vessels in the hunt for birds, fishing in the sea as well as in the freshwater around; cattle- and especially horse-breeding and using of horse power, a peculiarity of Thrace of that period, dominated over the small stock; hoe agriculture and crafts related to metallurgy and leather-dressing.
One SHRINE was located at 5/6 m under the sea level, marked by: 2 schematized clay female figurines; 1 bone idol-amulet (?); a fragment of a clay cult table; three incised crosses on the bottom of three earthenware; 1 clay model of a vessel; 1 stone cult ax; 1 very large scull of a wolf; 5 large pairs of Bos primigenius horns, advisedly cut and arranged in a pattern; 20 intentionally preserved horse sculls (15 whole and 5 fragmented); 1 metal knife made of arsenic bronze; 2 stone casts for metal axes, parts of horse bridles (psalia); different utensils and utensil prefabs.
The dendrochronological analyses testify to 4 certain and 1 probable phases of development of this settlement that extend over almost the entire 28th century BC: phase I=the year 2778 BC ± 10; phase II=the year 2771 BC ± 10; phase III= the year 2751 BC ± 10; phase IV=the year 2737 BC ± 10. Most of the poles used in buildings that can be traced through all phases were uncovered in trial dig-87. Even the probable phase V yielded poles only in this dig. Undoubtedly this fact must be related to the SHRINE that had functioned for centuries there and which occupies the highest point of the land the settlement has developed upon throughout the 28th century BC as an EBA sea and riverside settlement by Urdoviza and which is representative of the maritime culture of the proto-Thracians of that time.
Bookmarks Related papers MentionsView impact
THE ODRYSIAN KING KERSEBLEPTES
(359-341 BC) –
RULER OF THE THRACIAN CHERSONESE AND THE HELLES... more THE ODRYSIAN KING KERSEBLEPTES
(359-341 BC) –
RULER OF THE THRACIAN CHERSONESE AND THE HELLESPONT
Kalin Porozhanov
Abstract
It was the Odrysian king Kersebleptes (Cersobleptes) [359-341 BC],
backed up by Charidemus, who managed to impose once again in 358/357 BC, after the rule of Cotys I, the levy of all kind of duties and tithe from the ships passing through the Hellespont whose annual income exceeded 30 talents.
So the above-mentioned period turned out to be the culmination in the semi-centennial struggle of the Odrysian Kingdom, begun as early as 407 BC by Seuthes I, continued later under Medoc/Amadocus I and Hebryzelmis, and finally brought to an end by Cotys I and his son Kersebleptes (Cersobleptes): It was all about the domination over the entire Thracian Chersonese and (about) the control of the navigation through the Hellespont by means of imposing duties and taxes to the ships sailing along and harboring (mooring) at the eastern/southeastern shores of the Peninsula.
It seems beyond doubt that this fact (event) needs (is) to be regarded as a peak in the political development of the Odrysian Kingdom, the latter being the greatest empire in Southeast Europe at the time, matching in a whole and unity the interests of a big territorial [in this very case – Thracian) state with those of smaller states [in this given case – the ones from the Hellenic polis world].
This act (move) may prove to have been the pattern to follow in the development of not just the European Southeast, but also of the entire Eastern Mediterranean during the subsequent centuries of the millennium, in the Age of Hellenism.
Bookmarks Related papers MentionsView impact
Articles in scientific journals by Kalin Porozhanov
Balkani / Балкани 11, 2022 ISSN 1314-4103, 2022
Written sources indicate the appearance of the cavalry in the 9th – 8th century BC in Asia Minor ... more Written sources indicate the appearance of the cavalry in the 9th – 8th century BC in Asia Minor (Assyria and Urartu), and in Southeastern Europe (Scythia and Thrace) in the 6th – 5th century BC. Archaeological data show that the bridle for riding in Southeast Europe was widespread in the 8th – 7th century BC (Ancient Thrace). In the 7th century BC horse burials are also more common. This leads to the conclusion that in the 8th – 7th century BC there is a cavalry in Southeast Europe. Hellenic written evidences of cavalry in Southeast Europe (Scythia and Thrace) coincides with images of king-riders and culminates in the practice of ritual burial of horses. This set of source data coincides with the peak manifestations in the state-building activity of the Odrysians, Getae, Scythians and other ethnic states in Southeastern Europe in the 5th – 4th centuries BC. The findings of the reins here show that cavalry in these lands was not created as an external loan, but a local phenomenon.
The appearance of cavalry in antiquity was a polycentric phenomenon. It has been attested since the beginning of the first millennium BC, both among West Asian and Southeastern European societies. In essence and purpose, cavalry is the new weapon of the ruling elites, which replaces the chariot drawn by horses and becomes a universal phenomenon in Antiquity.
Bookmarks Related papers MentionsView impact
Orpheus 18, 2011
The ancient ports of Sozopol and the impact of the sea-leval oscilliation on the pre-Greeck Thtac... more The ancient ports of Sozopol and the impact of the sea-leval oscilliation on the pre-Greeck Thtacian settlement 2nd - 1 st mill. BC
Bookmarks Related papers MentionsView impact
THRACIA 20, 2012
Bookmarks Related papers MentionsView impact
Thracia 22, 2017
During the 3rd century BC – first half of the 1st century AD, Thrace and its
Black Sea coast cont... more During the 3rd century BC – first half of the 1st century AD, Thrace and its
Black Sea coast continued the tradition established in the 5th-4th century BC, consisting in mutually beneficial coexistence and cooperation between polis and ethnos states, with definite domination of the Thracian rulers over the Greek poleis.
However, the Greek states preserved their autonomy to a great extent. That line of
behaviour in the relations between polis and ethnos, which had become traditional,
was to end with the liquidation of the Thracian states by Rome and their transformation into Roman provinces.
Bookmarks Related papers MentionsView impact
Thracia 22, 2017
During the centuries of pre-Hellenism (mid-6th century BC until the ’thirties
of the 4th century ... more During the centuries of pre-Hellenism (mid-6th century BC until the ’thirties
of the 4th century BC), the two most important characteristics of the period developed, namely those of polis and of empire. Both state forms – polis and ethnos – tried
to act as empires.
The picture of Thracian society in Southeastern Europe during the period of
Hellenism (the ’thirties of the 4th century BC until 27 BC) and post-Hellenism (late
1st century BC – end of 2nd century AD) was different compared to known pictures
in Macedonia and Hellas. The main difference consists in the fact that in Thrace – in
addition to the monarchic early class empires like the kingdoms of the Odrysae and
of the Getae – there were many more ethnic communities (of the Bessi, Dardanioi,
Maidoi, etc.), who tried to be an integral part of the historical period by constantly
trying to become early class monarchic empires. The transition of Thrace from Antiquity to Middle Ages was facilitated because despite the existence of free people and
slaves, the prevalent part of its population had various forms of dependences. The
transformation of society occurred in the 4th and 5th centuries, when free men and
slaves became dependent and that marked the end of the history of ancient Thrace as
a part of the history of the Old World.
Bookmarks Related papers MentionsView impact
Балкани/Balkans, 2020
In the 5th – 4th century BC the data are about a tradition of mutually beneficial coexistence and... more In the 5th – 4th century BC the data are about a tradition of mutually beneficial coexistence and cooperation between the Odrysian kingdom - empire and poleis on its shores of the Marmara and Aegean Seas. For the period 3rd century BC – 1st century AD, the data for mutually beneficial coexistence and cooperation are only for the Western Black Sea coast. In the second period there was no Odrysian empire, but there were Thracian ethnic states, with the greatest manifestation again of the Odrysian kingdom, now called Thracian, which is represented by a certain domination of its rulers over the Hellenic poleis of the Western Black Sea coast. This complements the picture of the three Thracian coasts of the Thracian, Marmara and Black Seas, albeit partially.
Bookmarks Related papers MentionsView impact
Uploads
Videos by Kalin Porozhanov
Thracia Pontica - Thracia Maritima. Thracians and Greеks. Apollonia Pontica, Sozopol.
Books by Kalin Porozhanov
The Thracian onomastic presence from the second half of the 2nd millennium BC in the area around the Aegean Sea – proved to be a part of a Paleo-Balkan (Southeast-European) and Western Asia Minor Indo-European community, defined also as Circum-Aegean. This onomastic presence was discovered in three clearly outlined centers:
a) the island of Crete and the Peloponnese peninsula;
b) Northwestern/Western Asia Minor, best represented by the area of Troas;
c) the European part of Thrace.
The existence of the Thracian language in the second half of the 2nd millennium BC not only “enclosed” the Sea of Marmara as an inner–Thracian sea, comprising also the culture of Troas, but it was a part of the population of Mycenaean Greece – of course, together with other Indo-European peoples. This is supported by the sources on the European Southeast and the northwestern areas of Asia Minor.The stationarity and the mobility 0f the communities of the three best-studied areas – Thrace, Troas, and Mycenaean Greece – show certain dynamics, as follows. From the beginning of the 2nd millennium BC up to its middle approximately, mobility was inherent in all the three historical and geographical regions considered so far. It was more active in Thrace and less intensive in Troas and pre-Mycenaean Greece, Obviously, this was the mobility of the peoples from the Paleo-Balkan and Western Asia Minor Circum-Aegean Indo-European cultural and historical community.From the second half of the 2nd millennium BC, up to the 13th/12th century BC mobility as a characteristic feature, is inherent in the studied ancient civilizations, as follows:
-it remained preserved to a certain extent in Thrace, Thracian civilization
showed a relatively low development of stationarity and, respectively, a comparatively low accumulation of “surpluses”;
-its intensity decreased in Troas at the expense of the higher stationarity
which went through a more intensive development and a respectively greater accumulation of “surpluses” in this part of the Thracian space – the Trojan civilization;-it was last active in Mycenaean Greece where stationarity was decisive and accumulation of “surpluses” showed relatively high levels.
Stationarity was again associated with the features of the civilization in
European Thrace after the active mobility from the end of the 2nd and the beginning of the 1st millennium BC. This could be seen first in the fortresses, and then in the “royal cities” from the 1st millennium BC. Actually, the process of settlement of the Thracians was most intensive in Antiquity and was expressed in the “re-Mycenization” of the material culture. This “re-Mycenization” repeated, though in another period, but on the same Paleo-Balkan and Western Asia Minor cultural and historical basis, most conservatively preserved among the Thracians because of their most lasting mobility throughout the millennia, what had occurred by the mid-2nd millennium BC with the rise of the Mycenaean civilization. This however did not happen with all Thracian ethnoses. Many of them – farther to the north – remained on the level of mobility which was close in manifestation to nomadism.
The proper social, economic, and political pattern of the Thracian society
in Southeastern Europe from the mid-2nd and the early 1st millennium BC
demonstrates an underdeveloped market economy and a two-partite social structure. The state system of the Thracian society in its development into a class state was an estate and class organization in the studied period. It became an early class state in Antiquity, at the time of the re-Mycenization in Thrace. It was just then when the first written monuments appeared in the Thracian language proper but in Phrygian or Greek letters. The phenomenon was similar to what had occurred with Linear A in pre-Mycenaean Greece. These Thracian written monuments remained, however, on a cult level – the level of Linear A from the 18th – 16th century BC. Thus, the mid-1st millennium BC Thracian society, as a material and spiritual expression proved to be the most archaic and most similar to the Paleo-Balkan and Western Asia Minor Circum-Aegean Indo-European cultural and historical community of the (3rd) 2nd and the early 1st millennium BC.
The stable and lasting mobility and the low level of stationarity of the
Thracian society from the 2nd and the early 1st millennium BC is that sure
characteristic which allows us to perceive, behind its estate and class estate system and the early class state organization, behind the extreme conservatism, the old patter standing most closely to that of the Paleo-Balkan and Western Asia Minor community. A community that was one of the centers of early Indo-European history.
The motivation for such a conduct of all kings – a conduct consisting in targeted pursuit of the vitally important policy of the Odrysian basileia for taxation and utilisation of the markets of Greek cities along its coast – can be seen in the numerous dynastic residences, as well as those adjacent to the Greek poleis, above all along the coasts of the Sea of Marmara, the Thracian Sea and the Black Sea, as well as those located in their not too distant rear on the mainland. In minimum concrete terms, the levying of taxes only from the Greek poleis and emporia looks as follows:
Teres І – 7-11 talents;
Sparadokos – 17 (27?) talents;
Sitalkes – 77-78 talents;
Kersebleptes – 230 or 330 talents, only from its emporia and from the Thracian Chersonesos.
Added taxes from other subordinate poleis and ethnoses:
Sitalkes – 1000 talents
Seuthes І – 400 talents;
Metokos/Amadokos І – 400 (?) talents;
Hebryzelmis – 400 (?) talents;
Kotys І – 400, 600, 900, and probably much more than 1,000 talents;
These data reveal an intensive increase of the taxes coming into the treasury of the Odrysian basileia, especially under Sitalkes, Seuthes I and Kotys I. The sums of these receivables by the Odrysian kings are comparable to the sums collected by the Athenian arché.
In THE FIRST STUDY (Main Factors and Periods in the Emergence and the Development of the Thracian Civilization in South-East Europe and North-West Anatolia) indicating the importance and the role of the main factors for the emergence and development of the Thracian civilization, which allow the History of Thracians to scale of periods and along with that of Ancient Greece, for example, and to be entered in the History of the Old World. Particular attention will be given to the impact of natural conditions and their changes over time on the ancient society of the Thracians, which allows for new views and interpretations of their early history.
THE SECOND (The Thracians in the Paleobalkan-Westanatolian Indo- European Community in the 2nd-1st mill. BC) and THE THIRD (Ancient Literature for Ethnocultural Communities in South-East Europe and West Asia Minor at the end of the 2nd and the beginning of 1st mill. BC) STUDIES presented the earliest written and linguistic data for the Thracians, which place them among the first Indo-Europeans not only in South-Eastern Europe, but also in West Anatolia. Underlined the early belong of the Thracians in the Indo-Europeans, but not only those of South-Eastern Europe, but definitely the Thracians from the West-Northwestern Asia Minor, and in connection with the earliest known Indo-Europeans the Hittites in Anatolia and Mycenaean Greeks. For the first time a reading of ancient authors, such as Apollonius and Xenophon, for example, in THE FOURTH (Relicts from the Paleobalkan- Westanatolian Ethnocultural Community in the Littorals of the Thracian, Marmara Seas and Anatolian Black Sea Coast, according to Apollonius Rhodius) and THE FIFTH (The Thracians on the Northern Marmara Sea Coast and on the Anatolian Black Sea Coast in Xenophon) STUDIES, depicts, characterized and compared the Thracians in Europe, with the Thracians in Anatolia.
THE SIXST (The Thracian Rulers Residence of Fineus – FINEONFINOPOLIS
at the Mouth of the Bosporus – Entrance of the Black Sea), THE SEVENTH (The Basileyon SALMYDESSOS and the Rulers Residence-Sanctuary of Apollo Karsenos of the South-West Black Sea Coast) and THE EIGHTH (The Seas of the Thracians – Thrace Maritime/Thracia Pontica) STUDIES highlighting the specificities in maritime history and culture of the Thracians. And here are the Thracians submitted not only from Europe, but also from Asia Minor.
THE NINTH study (The Ancient Heritage in Bulgarian History and Culture) deals with the Problems of ancient Thracian cultural heritage in Bulgarian history and culture.
THE TENTH study (The Expeditions on the Track of the Thracians of the Black, Thracian and Marmara Seas in the Beginning of 21st Century) submit primary results from the eight-year field research on the shores of the author with his colleagues at the beaches of Thracian Sea, the Sea of Marmara and the Black Sea. In this book everything looks particularly interesting and with the contributions, because point of view is based on the interpretation of all possible sources from the perspective of the own Thracian history and culture, which inevitably and invariably associated with the sea. In fact, the Thracian civilization, lying in the start of two continents (Europe and Asia) and coastlines of three seas – Black, Marmara and North Aegean, is presented as the Northern contact zone of the Eastern Mediterranean, called in the scientific literature Thracia Pontica or Maritime Thrace.
The idea to study maritime ethnography came upon simultaneously with the founding of the Center for Maritime History and Underwater Archaeology in 1978, then known as Base for Maritime Studies. In order one not to be confused by the different names of the Center, its history in dates follows below, compiled by its Director, Christina Angelova.
The material from Sozopol is the largest in quantity. On the one hand, that is because the head office of the Center is situated here, but, on the other hand, objectively, Sozopol’s population maritime tradition and culture is best preserved and still alive.
It is worth noting that the population of the big cities and ports like Varna and Bourgas were excluded from the filed surveys on purpose. The scholars used to believe that those, being megapoleis, preserved less of the so-called ‘live antiquity’. This is something, which we do not believe in any more. Obviously, one should regret the missed opportunities during all these past years.
Balchik, however, being the third biggest port along Bulgarian Black Sea coast and an old sea town, is unjustly missing from the list. Objective and subjective factors played role in this fact. We feel that we should present our apologies to the inhabitants of this city of millennia-old history and tradition, and we do hope that it will be included in the study of the maritime culture, although at a later time. Similar is the case with the town of Shabla, Byala…
During the last 30 years the authors have worked for developing the Underwater Archaeology Center. That is why they decided to dedicate this volume to its 30th anniversary. That will be best served by the National Commission for Maritime History series, whose institutional member the Center is.
We acknowledge the gratitude we feel we should express to hundreds of people interviewed, coastal workers, local fishermen, etc., whom we interviewed in the last decades of the 20th and the beginning of the 21st century.
This book is dedicated to them too!
Conference Presentations by Kalin Porozhanov
Kalin Pororzhanov
The Thracia Pontica range of issues was perceived and named by Professor Alexander Fol in the 1979s as a result of the complex expedition Apollonia – Strandzha and Mesambria – Haemus, organized by the Institute of Thracology of the Bulgarian Academy of Sciences. During subsequent decades, the following important results were obtained.
A national Centre of Underwater Archaeology was established with seat in the town of Sozopol (1978). Eight international symposia Thracia Pontica have been organized, as well as annual national and international expeditions.
The view on the Thracian maritime culture along the coasts of the Aegean Sea, the Sea of Marmara and the Black Sea as an integral part of the history and culture of the Eastern Mediterranean is substantiated.
Thracia Pontica constitutes part of the issues connected with Mycenaean Thrace (mid-second – mid-first millennium BC) because the Mycenaean religious, political and cultural models penetrated from the south to the north by sea. The Thracia Pontica range of issues comprises also the Thracians from the Northwestern Asia Minor and its coastal areas, including the Aegean islands Thasos, Samothrace, Imbros, Lemnos and Naxos.
The setting and the development of the Greek apoikiai along the Thracian coasts proved to be a process in which the two sides – the Thracian ethnos-related and the Greek polis-related sides – were mutually complementary and they interacted, playing hence the role of contact zones.
The Summer University Strandzha Mountain and Its Role for the East-West Transfer of Civilisations was created on Alexander Fol’s initiative in 2002 and functioned until 2015. Between 2009 and 2018, the Neophyte Rilski Southwestern University in Blagoevgrad implemented research projects every year, connected with the range of Thracia Pontica issues along the Black Sea, Sea of Marmara and Aegean coasts.
(1986-1988 Archaeological Campaigns)
(Summary)
Kalin Porozhanov
Introducing the first three underwater trial digs of the site, covering about 450 sq. m of the sea bottom. The first trial dig dates from 1986 and covers 50 sq. m, at 8/10 m under the sea level; the second - from 1987 - lying 50-60 m to the north-east of the first one, covers 300 sq. m at 5/6 m depth and the third - to the south-south-east of the second, covers 100 sq. m. The findings belong to a stratum lying 2 m above the actual sea bottom.
Here were discovered about 300 wooden poles, 85 of which have undergone dendrochronological analyses, with diameters from 8.5/10 up to 40 cm and 13 horizontal beams.
Altogether over 3000 entire and fragmented earthenware were collected, belonging to the first/the beginning of the second phase of the EBA and thus dating the site about the beginning of the 3rd mill. BC.
The results of the explorations show that the inhabitants of this site lived off hunting wild animals, using vessels in the hunt for birds, fishing in the sea as well as in the freshwater around; cattle- and especially horse-breeding and using of horse power, a peculiarity of Thrace of that period, dominated over the small stock; hoe agriculture and crafts related to metallurgy and leather-dressing.
One SHRINE was located at 5/6 m under the sea level, marked by: 2 schematized clay female figurines; 1 bone idol-amulet (?); a fragment of a clay cult table; three incised crosses on the bottom of three earthenware; 1 clay model of a vessel; 1 stone cult ax; 1 very large scull of a wolf; 5 large pairs of Bos primigenius horns, advisedly cut and arranged in a pattern; 20 intentionally preserved horse sculls (15 whole and 5 fragmented); 1 metal knife made of arsenic bronze; 2 stone casts for metal axes, parts of horse bridles (psalia); different utensils and utensil prefabs.
The dendrochronological analyses testify to 4 certain and 1 probable phases of development of this settlement that extend over almost the entire 28th century BC: phase I=the year 2778 BC ± 10; phase II=the year 2771 BC ± 10; phase III= the year 2751 BC ± 10; phase IV=the year 2737 BC ± 10. Most of the poles used in buildings that can be traced through all phases were uncovered in trial dig-87. Even the probable phase V yielded poles only in this dig. Undoubtedly this fact must be related to the SHRINE that had functioned for centuries there and which occupies the highest point of the land the settlement has developed upon throughout the 28th century BC as an EBA sea and riverside settlement by Urdoviza and which is representative of the maritime culture of the proto-Thracians of that time.
(359-341 BC) –
RULER OF THE THRACIAN CHERSONESE AND THE HELLESPONT
Kalin Porozhanov
Abstract
It was the Odrysian king Kersebleptes (Cersobleptes) [359-341 BC],
backed up by Charidemus, who managed to impose once again in 358/357 BC, after the rule of Cotys I, the levy of all kind of duties and tithe from the ships passing through the Hellespont whose annual income exceeded 30 talents.
So the above-mentioned period turned out to be the culmination in the semi-centennial struggle of the Odrysian Kingdom, begun as early as 407 BC by Seuthes I, continued later under Medoc/Amadocus I and Hebryzelmis, and finally brought to an end by Cotys I and his son Kersebleptes (Cersobleptes): It was all about the domination over the entire Thracian Chersonese and (about) the control of the navigation through the Hellespont by means of imposing duties and taxes to the ships sailing along and harboring (mooring) at the eastern/southeastern shores of the Peninsula.
It seems beyond doubt that this fact (event) needs (is) to be regarded as a peak in the political development of the Odrysian Kingdom, the latter being the greatest empire in Southeast Europe at the time, matching in a whole and unity the interests of a big territorial [in this very case – Thracian) state with those of smaller states [in this given case – the ones from the Hellenic polis world].
This act (move) may prove to have been the pattern to follow in the development of not just the European Southeast, but also of the entire Eastern Mediterranean during the subsequent centuries of the millennium, in the Age of Hellenism.
Articles in scientific journals by Kalin Porozhanov
The appearance of cavalry in antiquity was a polycentric phenomenon. It has been attested since the beginning of the first millennium BC, both among West Asian and Southeastern European societies. In essence and purpose, cavalry is the new weapon of the ruling elites, which replaces the chariot drawn by horses and becomes a universal phenomenon in Antiquity.
Black Sea coast continued the tradition established in the 5th-4th century BC, consisting in mutually beneficial coexistence and cooperation between polis and ethnos states, with definite domination of the Thracian rulers over the Greek poleis.
However, the Greek states preserved their autonomy to a great extent. That line of
behaviour in the relations between polis and ethnos, which had become traditional,
was to end with the liquidation of the Thracian states by Rome and their transformation into Roman provinces.
of the 4th century BC), the two most important characteristics of the period developed, namely those of polis and of empire. Both state forms – polis and ethnos – tried
to act as empires.
The picture of Thracian society in Southeastern Europe during the period of
Hellenism (the ’thirties of the 4th century BC until 27 BC) and post-Hellenism (late
1st century BC – end of 2nd century AD) was different compared to known pictures
in Macedonia and Hellas. The main difference consists in the fact that in Thrace – in
addition to the monarchic early class empires like the kingdoms of the Odrysae and
of the Getae – there were many more ethnic communities (of the Bessi, Dardanioi,
Maidoi, etc.), who tried to be an integral part of the historical period by constantly
trying to become early class monarchic empires. The transition of Thrace from Antiquity to Middle Ages was facilitated because despite the existence of free people and
slaves, the prevalent part of its population had various forms of dependences. The
transformation of society occurred in the 4th and 5th centuries, when free men and
slaves became dependent and that marked the end of the history of ancient Thrace as
a part of the history of the Old World.
Thracia Pontica - Thracia Maritima. Thracians and Greеks. Apollonia Pontica, Sozopol.
The Thracian onomastic presence from the second half of the 2nd millennium BC in the area around the Aegean Sea – proved to be a part of a Paleo-Balkan (Southeast-European) and Western Asia Minor Indo-European community, defined also as Circum-Aegean. This onomastic presence was discovered in three clearly outlined centers:
a) the island of Crete and the Peloponnese peninsula;
b) Northwestern/Western Asia Minor, best represented by the area of Troas;
c) the European part of Thrace.
The existence of the Thracian language in the second half of the 2nd millennium BC not only “enclosed” the Sea of Marmara as an inner–Thracian sea, comprising also the culture of Troas, but it was a part of the population of Mycenaean Greece – of course, together with other Indo-European peoples. This is supported by the sources on the European Southeast and the northwestern areas of Asia Minor.The stationarity and the mobility 0f the communities of the three best-studied areas – Thrace, Troas, and Mycenaean Greece – show certain dynamics, as follows. From the beginning of the 2nd millennium BC up to its middle approximately, mobility was inherent in all the three historical and geographical regions considered so far. It was more active in Thrace and less intensive in Troas and pre-Mycenaean Greece, Obviously, this was the mobility of the peoples from the Paleo-Balkan and Western Asia Minor Circum-Aegean Indo-European cultural and historical community.From the second half of the 2nd millennium BC, up to the 13th/12th century BC mobility as a characteristic feature, is inherent in the studied ancient civilizations, as follows:
-it remained preserved to a certain extent in Thrace, Thracian civilization
showed a relatively low development of stationarity and, respectively, a comparatively low accumulation of “surpluses”;
-its intensity decreased in Troas at the expense of the higher stationarity
which went through a more intensive development and a respectively greater accumulation of “surpluses” in this part of the Thracian space – the Trojan civilization;-it was last active in Mycenaean Greece where stationarity was decisive and accumulation of “surpluses” showed relatively high levels.
Stationarity was again associated with the features of the civilization in
European Thrace after the active mobility from the end of the 2nd and the beginning of the 1st millennium BC. This could be seen first in the fortresses, and then in the “royal cities” from the 1st millennium BC. Actually, the process of settlement of the Thracians was most intensive in Antiquity and was expressed in the “re-Mycenization” of the material culture. This “re-Mycenization” repeated, though in another period, but on the same Paleo-Balkan and Western Asia Minor cultural and historical basis, most conservatively preserved among the Thracians because of their most lasting mobility throughout the millennia, what had occurred by the mid-2nd millennium BC with the rise of the Mycenaean civilization. This however did not happen with all Thracian ethnoses. Many of them – farther to the north – remained on the level of mobility which was close in manifestation to nomadism.
The proper social, economic, and political pattern of the Thracian society
in Southeastern Europe from the mid-2nd and the early 1st millennium BC
demonstrates an underdeveloped market economy and a two-partite social structure. The state system of the Thracian society in its development into a class state was an estate and class organization in the studied period. It became an early class state in Antiquity, at the time of the re-Mycenization in Thrace. It was just then when the first written monuments appeared in the Thracian language proper but in Phrygian or Greek letters. The phenomenon was similar to what had occurred with Linear A in pre-Mycenaean Greece. These Thracian written monuments remained, however, on a cult level – the level of Linear A from the 18th – 16th century BC. Thus, the mid-1st millennium BC Thracian society, as a material and spiritual expression proved to be the most archaic and most similar to the Paleo-Balkan and Western Asia Minor Circum-Aegean Indo-European cultural and historical community of the (3rd) 2nd and the early 1st millennium BC.
The stable and lasting mobility and the low level of stationarity of the
Thracian society from the 2nd and the early 1st millennium BC is that sure
characteristic which allows us to perceive, behind its estate and class estate system and the early class state organization, behind the extreme conservatism, the old patter standing most closely to that of the Paleo-Balkan and Western Asia Minor community. A community that was one of the centers of early Indo-European history.
The motivation for such a conduct of all kings – a conduct consisting in targeted pursuit of the vitally important policy of the Odrysian basileia for taxation and utilisation of the markets of Greek cities along its coast – can be seen in the numerous dynastic residences, as well as those adjacent to the Greek poleis, above all along the coasts of the Sea of Marmara, the Thracian Sea and the Black Sea, as well as those located in their not too distant rear on the mainland. In minimum concrete terms, the levying of taxes only from the Greek poleis and emporia looks as follows:
Teres І – 7-11 talents;
Sparadokos – 17 (27?) talents;
Sitalkes – 77-78 talents;
Kersebleptes – 230 or 330 talents, only from its emporia and from the Thracian Chersonesos.
Added taxes from other subordinate poleis and ethnoses:
Sitalkes – 1000 talents
Seuthes І – 400 talents;
Metokos/Amadokos І – 400 (?) talents;
Hebryzelmis – 400 (?) talents;
Kotys І – 400, 600, 900, and probably much more than 1,000 talents;
These data reveal an intensive increase of the taxes coming into the treasury of the Odrysian basileia, especially under Sitalkes, Seuthes I and Kotys I. The sums of these receivables by the Odrysian kings are comparable to the sums collected by the Athenian arché.
In THE FIRST STUDY (Main Factors and Periods in the Emergence and the Development of the Thracian Civilization in South-East Europe and North-West Anatolia) indicating the importance and the role of the main factors for the emergence and development of the Thracian civilization, which allow the History of Thracians to scale of periods and along with that of Ancient Greece, for example, and to be entered in the History of the Old World. Particular attention will be given to the impact of natural conditions and their changes over time on the ancient society of the Thracians, which allows for new views and interpretations of their early history.
THE SECOND (The Thracians in the Paleobalkan-Westanatolian Indo- European Community in the 2nd-1st mill. BC) and THE THIRD (Ancient Literature for Ethnocultural Communities in South-East Europe and West Asia Minor at the end of the 2nd and the beginning of 1st mill. BC) STUDIES presented the earliest written and linguistic data for the Thracians, which place them among the first Indo-Europeans not only in South-Eastern Europe, but also in West Anatolia. Underlined the early belong of the Thracians in the Indo-Europeans, but not only those of South-Eastern Europe, but definitely the Thracians from the West-Northwestern Asia Minor, and in connection with the earliest known Indo-Europeans the Hittites in Anatolia and Mycenaean Greeks. For the first time a reading of ancient authors, such as Apollonius and Xenophon, for example, in THE FOURTH (Relicts from the Paleobalkan- Westanatolian Ethnocultural Community in the Littorals of the Thracian, Marmara Seas and Anatolian Black Sea Coast, according to Apollonius Rhodius) and THE FIFTH (The Thracians on the Northern Marmara Sea Coast and on the Anatolian Black Sea Coast in Xenophon) STUDIES, depicts, characterized and compared the Thracians in Europe, with the Thracians in Anatolia.
THE SIXST (The Thracian Rulers Residence of Fineus – FINEONFINOPOLIS
at the Mouth of the Bosporus – Entrance of the Black Sea), THE SEVENTH (The Basileyon SALMYDESSOS and the Rulers Residence-Sanctuary of Apollo Karsenos of the South-West Black Sea Coast) and THE EIGHTH (The Seas of the Thracians – Thrace Maritime/Thracia Pontica) STUDIES highlighting the specificities in maritime history and culture of the Thracians. And here are the Thracians submitted not only from Europe, but also from Asia Minor.
THE NINTH study (The Ancient Heritage in Bulgarian History and Culture) deals with the Problems of ancient Thracian cultural heritage in Bulgarian history and culture.
THE TENTH study (The Expeditions on the Track of the Thracians of the Black, Thracian and Marmara Seas in the Beginning of 21st Century) submit primary results from the eight-year field research on the shores of the author with his colleagues at the beaches of Thracian Sea, the Sea of Marmara and the Black Sea. In this book everything looks particularly interesting and with the contributions, because point of view is based on the interpretation of all possible sources from the perspective of the own Thracian history and culture, which inevitably and invariably associated with the sea. In fact, the Thracian civilization, lying in the start of two continents (Europe and Asia) and coastlines of three seas – Black, Marmara and North Aegean, is presented as the Northern contact zone of the Eastern Mediterranean, called in the scientific literature Thracia Pontica or Maritime Thrace.
The idea to study maritime ethnography came upon simultaneously with the founding of the Center for Maritime History and Underwater Archaeology in 1978, then known as Base for Maritime Studies. In order one not to be confused by the different names of the Center, its history in dates follows below, compiled by its Director, Christina Angelova.
The material from Sozopol is the largest in quantity. On the one hand, that is because the head office of the Center is situated here, but, on the other hand, objectively, Sozopol’s population maritime tradition and culture is best preserved and still alive.
It is worth noting that the population of the big cities and ports like Varna and Bourgas were excluded from the filed surveys on purpose. The scholars used to believe that those, being megapoleis, preserved less of the so-called ‘live antiquity’. This is something, which we do not believe in any more. Obviously, one should regret the missed opportunities during all these past years.
Balchik, however, being the third biggest port along Bulgarian Black Sea coast and an old sea town, is unjustly missing from the list. Objective and subjective factors played role in this fact. We feel that we should present our apologies to the inhabitants of this city of millennia-old history and tradition, and we do hope that it will be included in the study of the maritime culture, although at a later time. Similar is the case with the town of Shabla, Byala…
During the last 30 years the authors have worked for developing the Underwater Archaeology Center. That is why they decided to dedicate this volume to its 30th anniversary. That will be best served by the National Commission for Maritime History series, whose institutional member the Center is.
We acknowledge the gratitude we feel we should express to hundreds of people interviewed, coastal workers, local fishermen, etc., whom we interviewed in the last decades of the 20th and the beginning of the 21st century.
This book is dedicated to them too!
Kalin Pororzhanov
The Thracia Pontica range of issues was perceived and named by Professor Alexander Fol in the 1979s as a result of the complex expedition Apollonia – Strandzha and Mesambria – Haemus, organized by the Institute of Thracology of the Bulgarian Academy of Sciences. During subsequent decades, the following important results were obtained.
A national Centre of Underwater Archaeology was established with seat in the town of Sozopol (1978). Eight international symposia Thracia Pontica have been organized, as well as annual national and international expeditions.
The view on the Thracian maritime culture along the coasts of the Aegean Sea, the Sea of Marmara and the Black Sea as an integral part of the history and culture of the Eastern Mediterranean is substantiated.
Thracia Pontica constitutes part of the issues connected with Mycenaean Thrace (mid-second – mid-first millennium BC) because the Mycenaean religious, political and cultural models penetrated from the south to the north by sea. The Thracia Pontica range of issues comprises also the Thracians from the Northwestern Asia Minor and its coastal areas, including the Aegean islands Thasos, Samothrace, Imbros, Lemnos and Naxos.
The setting and the development of the Greek apoikiai along the Thracian coasts proved to be a process in which the two sides – the Thracian ethnos-related and the Greek polis-related sides – were mutually complementary and they interacted, playing hence the role of contact zones.
The Summer University Strandzha Mountain and Its Role for the East-West Transfer of Civilisations was created on Alexander Fol’s initiative in 2002 and functioned until 2015. Between 2009 and 2018, the Neophyte Rilski Southwestern University in Blagoevgrad implemented research projects every year, connected with the range of Thracia Pontica issues along the Black Sea, Sea of Marmara and Aegean coasts.
(1986-1988 Archaeological Campaigns)
(Summary)
Kalin Porozhanov
Introducing the first three underwater trial digs of the site, covering about 450 sq. m of the sea bottom. The first trial dig dates from 1986 and covers 50 sq. m, at 8/10 m under the sea level; the second - from 1987 - lying 50-60 m to the north-east of the first one, covers 300 sq. m at 5/6 m depth and the third - to the south-south-east of the second, covers 100 sq. m. The findings belong to a stratum lying 2 m above the actual sea bottom.
Here were discovered about 300 wooden poles, 85 of which have undergone dendrochronological analyses, with diameters from 8.5/10 up to 40 cm and 13 horizontal beams.
Altogether over 3000 entire and fragmented earthenware were collected, belonging to the first/the beginning of the second phase of the EBA and thus dating the site about the beginning of the 3rd mill. BC.
The results of the explorations show that the inhabitants of this site lived off hunting wild animals, using vessels in the hunt for birds, fishing in the sea as well as in the freshwater around; cattle- and especially horse-breeding and using of horse power, a peculiarity of Thrace of that period, dominated over the small stock; hoe agriculture and crafts related to metallurgy and leather-dressing.
One SHRINE was located at 5/6 m under the sea level, marked by: 2 schematized clay female figurines; 1 bone idol-amulet (?); a fragment of a clay cult table; three incised crosses on the bottom of three earthenware; 1 clay model of a vessel; 1 stone cult ax; 1 very large scull of a wolf; 5 large pairs of Bos primigenius horns, advisedly cut and arranged in a pattern; 20 intentionally preserved horse sculls (15 whole and 5 fragmented); 1 metal knife made of arsenic bronze; 2 stone casts for metal axes, parts of horse bridles (psalia); different utensils and utensil prefabs.
The dendrochronological analyses testify to 4 certain and 1 probable phases of development of this settlement that extend over almost the entire 28th century BC: phase I=the year 2778 BC ± 10; phase II=the year 2771 BC ± 10; phase III= the year 2751 BC ± 10; phase IV=the year 2737 BC ± 10. Most of the poles used in buildings that can be traced through all phases were uncovered in trial dig-87. Even the probable phase V yielded poles only in this dig. Undoubtedly this fact must be related to the SHRINE that had functioned for centuries there and which occupies the highest point of the land the settlement has developed upon throughout the 28th century BC as an EBA sea and riverside settlement by Urdoviza and which is representative of the maritime culture of the proto-Thracians of that time.
(359-341 BC) –
RULER OF THE THRACIAN CHERSONESE AND THE HELLESPONT
Kalin Porozhanov
Abstract
It was the Odrysian king Kersebleptes (Cersobleptes) [359-341 BC],
backed up by Charidemus, who managed to impose once again in 358/357 BC, after the rule of Cotys I, the levy of all kind of duties and tithe from the ships passing through the Hellespont whose annual income exceeded 30 talents.
So the above-mentioned period turned out to be the culmination in the semi-centennial struggle of the Odrysian Kingdom, begun as early as 407 BC by Seuthes I, continued later under Medoc/Amadocus I and Hebryzelmis, and finally brought to an end by Cotys I and his son Kersebleptes (Cersobleptes): It was all about the domination over the entire Thracian Chersonese and (about) the control of the navigation through the Hellespont by means of imposing duties and taxes to the ships sailing along and harboring (mooring) at the eastern/southeastern shores of the Peninsula.
It seems beyond doubt that this fact (event) needs (is) to be regarded as a peak in the political development of the Odrysian Kingdom, the latter being the greatest empire in Southeast Europe at the time, matching in a whole and unity the interests of a big territorial [in this very case – Thracian) state with those of smaller states [in this given case – the ones from the Hellenic polis world].
This act (move) may prove to have been the pattern to follow in the development of not just the European Southeast, but also of the entire Eastern Mediterranean during the subsequent centuries of the millennium, in the Age of Hellenism.
The appearance of cavalry in antiquity was a polycentric phenomenon. It has been attested since the beginning of the first millennium BC, both among West Asian and Southeastern European societies. In essence and purpose, cavalry is the new weapon of the ruling elites, which replaces the chariot drawn by horses and becomes a universal phenomenon in Antiquity.
Black Sea coast continued the tradition established in the 5th-4th century BC, consisting in mutually beneficial coexistence and cooperation between polis and ethnos states, with definite domination of the Thracian rulers over the Greek poleis.
However, the Greek states preserved their autonomy to a great extent. That line of
behaviour in the relations between polis and ethnos, which had become traditional,
was to end with the liquidation of the Thracian states by Rome and their transformation into Roman provinces.
of the 4th century BC), the two most important characteristics of the period developed, namely those of polis and of empire. Both state forms – polis and ethnos – tried
to act as empires.
The picture of Thracian society in Southeastern Europe during the period of
Hellenism (the ’thirties of the 4th century BC until 27 BC) and post-Hellenism (late
1st century BC – end of 2nd century AD) was different compared to known pictures
in Macedonia and Hellas. The main difference consists in the fact that in Thrace – in
addition to the monarchic early class empires like the kingdoms of the Odrysae and
of the Getae – there were many more ethnic communities (of the Bessi, Dardanioi,
Maidoi, etc.), who tried to be an integral part of the historical period by constantly
trying to become early class monarchic empires. The transition of Thrace from Antiquity to Middle Ages was facilitated because despite the existence of free people and
slaves, the prevalent part of its population had various forms of dependences. The
transformation of society occurred in the 4th and 5th centuries, when free men and
slaves became dependent and that marked the end of the history of ancient Thrace as
a part of the history of the Old World.
In other inscriptions from the Black Sea region is used Mother of the Gods (Bizone, Istros/Histria, Tomis, Olbia), Pantikapaion – Phrygian Mother, Mesambria – Kybele Mother, Marcianopolis – Heavenly Mother of the Gods.
The concept of Pontic is found in inscriptions for Aphrodite from Histria and Olbia, from Tiristasis, Kyzikos/Cyzicus and the island of Kos, where it is a protector of sailors. Obviously, in the case of the Pontic goddess of the Temple of Dionysopolis, it is a protector from and into the sea. It is certain that behind the term Pontic lies the meaning of the sea, and this characteristic as the Sea Mother of the Gods, according to the use of forms of the Ionic dialect, probably originates in Asia Minor
In the traditional culture of the town of Sozopol (ancient poleis Apollonia Pontica) and in the others towns of Bulgarian Southern Black Sea coast, the Sea Mother (Greek Kiratalassa = mistress, lady soveraign, ruler of the sea) is the Goddess of the Sea. Its strength and power is so great that it can both break the sea and the worst storm to make it subsided. To express their esteem to her, fishermen portray her as a bust of a female figure made of wood. It is placed at the front of the boat's nose to protect them in the sea.
The comparability of the deities of the Sea Mother of the Gods from Antiquity in Dionysopolis (now town of Balchik) on Bulgarian Northern Black Sea Coast and the Sea Mother of the Twentieth Century in the town of Sozopol on Bulgarian Southern Black Sea Coast – allows for the problem situation to come up with a working hypothesis that would say it is for the Great Goddess Mother as a Thracian-Anatolian Deity, honored in Thracian environment in Hellenic poleis on the Thracian coasts.
Текстът разглежда появата на
виното в най-дълбока древност и прави
историографски преглед на хипотезите
за датировка на най-старите вина и
географското разположение на лозови-
те насаждения. Най-сигурен белег за
съхранение и употреба на вино е нали-
чието на остатъци от винена киселина
по съдовете или останки от семена и
ципи на грозде.
Коментира се употребата на
виното през палеолита и неолита, в
Древен Египет, Древна Месопотамия и
Древна Гърция. Прегледът включва
първите известни днес „винарни“ –
Хаджи Фируз Tепе и Годин Tепе в Иран
и пещерата Арени 1 в Армения.
Разглежда се значението на виното
като икономически, религиозен и общо-
културен феномен в гробниците на
фараоните и в градовете на Месопо-
тамия, проникването му в Гърция и на
Балканския полуостров и първите опи-
ти за смесването му с дървесни смоли.
Традицията превръща виното едновре-
менно в най-сакралната и най-масово
употребявана напитка в древния свят.
Ключови думи: Вино, винарство,
Древен Египет, древна Месопотамия,
древна Гърция, неолитно шато,
свещена напитка
This text reviews the appearance of
wine in the deepest antiquity, and makes
a short historiographical review of the
dating of the oldest wines and the
geographical location of the vineyards.
The most convincing mark for the storage
and use of wine is the presence of tartaric
acid residues on the vessels or remnants
of grape seeds and grains.
The use of wine through the
Paleolithic and the Neolithic ages, in the
Ancient Egypt, Ancient Mesopotamia and
Ancient Greece is commented, too. The
review includes the first known “wineries” –
Hajji FiruzTepe and Godin Tepe in Iran
and the cave Areni 1 in Armenia. The
paper considers the importance of wine
as an economic, religious and cultural
phenomenon in the tombs of the
Pharaons and in the cities of
Mesopotamia, its penetration into Greece
and the Balkan Peninsula, and the first
attempts to mix it with wood resins. A very
old tradition turns the wine into the most
sacred and most widely used beverage in
the ancient world.
Key words: Wine, viticulture,
Ancient Egypt, Ancient Mesopotamia,
Neolithic shateau, sacred drink
Докладът разглежда сведенията
за отглеждането на лоза и произ-
водството на вино в Древна Тракия,
които черпим от Омир, Херодот,
Ксенофонт, Платон, Аполоний Родоски,
Аполодор и Помпоний Мела. Повечето
сведения за Балканския полуостров са
били коментирани и по-рано, но тук се
добавят данните и за траките (фриги,
долиони и др.) в Мала Азия, незаслу-
жено подценявани досега.
Доказва се много древното обредно
зарязване на лозите, както и други
традиционни дейности, останали
непроменени и до днес в българската
традиционна култура.
Ключови думи: древно вино,
Древна Тракия, траки, фриги, долиони,
Мидас, Силен, зарязване на лозите
The hereby presented paper gives
an overview of the information on vine
growing and wine production in Ancient
Thrace, which we take from Homer,
Herodotus, Xenophontus, Plato,
Apollonius Rhodius, Apollodorus and
Pomponius Mela. Most of the information
about the Balkan Peninsula has been
commented earlier, but here are added
evidences about the Thracians (Phrigians,
Dolionias, etc.) in Asia Minor,
undeservedly underestimated long time.
Also there is information about very
ancient ritual of the pruning of the vines,
as well as other traditional activities,
which have remained unchanged until
now in the Bulgarian traditional culture.
Key words: Wine, Ancient Thrace,
Thracians, Phrygians, Dolionians,