By z antine Small FindS in archaeological contextS oFFPrint / ayriBaSim deUtScheS archäologiScheS inStitUt aBteilUng iStanBUl By zaS 15 Veröffentlichungen des deutschen archäologischen instituts istanbul By zantine Small FindS in archaeological contextS editors Beate Böhlendorf-arslan alessandra ricci gedruckt mit Fördermitteln der gerda henkel Stiftung Byzantine Small Finds in archaeological contexts editors Beate Böhlendorf-arslan alessandra ricci ByzaS 15 Veröffentlichungen des deutschen archäologischen instituts istanbul herausgegeben von Felix Pirson und martin Bachmann © 2012 ege yay›nlar› iSBn 978-605-5607-82-1 certificate no. 14641 Umschlaggestaltung (Kreuz aus raum 2 des gehöft 4 von Boğazköy. Foto: Boğazköy-archiv). Jürgen Seeher redaktion Beate Böhlendorf-arslan druck maS matbaacılık a.Ş. hamidiye mah. Soğuksu cad. no. 3 Kağıthane - İstanbul / türkiye tel: +90 (212) 294 10 00 Fax: +90 (212) 294 90 80 info@masmat.com.tr zertifikat-nr.: 12055 Produktion und Vertrieb zero Prod. ltd. abdullah Sokak. no: 17 taksim 34433 istanbul-turkey tel: +90 (212) 244 75 21 Fax: +90 (212) 244 32 09 info@zerobooksonline.com www.zerobooksonline.com/eng/ contents / İçindekiler Vorwort (F. Pirson / m. Bachmann) Preface (S. redford) ...................................................................................................................................................... ix ................................................................................................................................................................................................. xi Preface / Önsöz (z. S. Kızıltan) .............................................................................................................................................................. xiii editor’s Preface (B. Böhlendorf-arslan / a. ricci) .......................................................................................................... xVii rome-Byzantium affinity and difference in the Production of luxury goods marco ricci ................................................................................................................................................................................................................. 1 mapping Byzantine trade and culture: an introduction to the artefacts from Salento, Southern italy Paul arthur ............................................................................................................................................................................................................. 17 the Working and Use of metals in the Salento Peninsula (apulia, italy) from Byzantine to angevin times. Preliminary results luciano Piepoli .................................................................................................................................................................................................. 27 zur materiellen Kultur des byzantinischen Sizilien Susanne metaxas .............................................................................................................................................................................................. 39 early Byzantine glass from athens (5th–8th centuries) e. marianne Stern ........................................................................................................................................................................................... 49 considerations on Some Bronze Buckles from Byzantine messene nikos tsivikis ........................................................................................................................................................................................................ 61 holy Bread Stamps from early Byzantine delphi Platon Petridis ..................................................................................................................................................................................................... 81 early Byzantine iron helmets from novae (the diocese of thrace) andrzej B. Biernacki .................................................................................................................................................................................... 91 zur identifizierung «byzantinischer» Feinschmiedearbeiten mithilfe herstellungstechnischer Studien unter besonderer Berücksichtigung von Funden aus dem awarischen Siedlungsgebiet Birgit Bühler ....................................................................................................................................................................................................... 105 middle and late Byzantine Jewellery from thessaloniki and its region anastassios c. antonaras ...................................................................................................................................................................... 117 VI Contents / İçindekiler Kleinfunde aus der Basilikagrabung am Kalekapı in marmara ereğlisi (herakleia Perinthos) Stephan Westphalen .................................................................................................................................................................................. 127 yenikapı Kazısı ahşap Buluntuları m. metin gökçay ............................................................................................................................................................................................ 137 left Behind: Small Sized objects from the middle Byzantine monastic complex of Satyros (Küçükyali, istanbul) alessandra ricci .............................................................................................................................................................................................. 147 Ören (adramytteion antik Kenti) Kazılarında ele geçen Bizans Küçük Buluntular tülin Çoruhlu ................................................................................................................................................................................................... 163 Byzantinischer Schmuck und trachtbestandteile aus Pergamon andrea Pirson ................................................................................................................................................................................................... 173 grave goods from the necropolis in the agora of iasos Fede Berti .............................................................................................................................................................................................................. 187 Byzantinische Kleinfunde und trachtbestandteile aus ephesos andrea m. Pülz ................................................................................................................................................................................................ 213 Kuşadası, Kadıkalesi/anaia Kazısı: Bizans döneminden Birkaç Küçük Buluntu zeynep mercangöz ...................................................................................................................................................................................... 223 Byzantine lead Seals from the Kadıkalesi/anaia excavations Vera Bulgurlu .................................................................................................................................................................................................... 233 a Byzantine lead amulet from Samos evangelia dafi ................................................................................................................................................................................................... 241 Placing ‹contexts› in a context: minor objects from medieval andros nikos d. Kontogiannis / Smaragdi i. arvaniti ............................................................................................................. 249 Small Finds from the early christian Settlement of Kefalos in cos, dodecanese evangelia militsi .............................................................................................................................................................................................. 263 «the Building with mosaics» in olympos: a comparative evaluation of Finds and Building construction muradiye Öztaşkın / gökçen Kurtuluş Öztaşkın ...................................................................................................... 277 Byzantine Small Finds from elaiussa Sebaste adele Federica Ferrazzoli .................................................................................................................................................................... 289 medieval Small Finds from the yumuktepe excavations 1993-2008 gülgün Köroğlu .............................................................................................................................................................................................. 309 Small Finds from the early 9th century destruction at amorium oğuz Koçyiğit .................................................................................................................................................................................................... 319 Small Finds for the dating of a tomb at amorium hüseyin yaman ................................................................................................................................................................................................ 331 middle Byzantine textile Finds from amorium Petra linscheid ............................................................................................................................................................................................... 343 das bewegliche inventar eines mittelbyzantinischen dorfes: Kleinfunde aus Boğazköy Beate Böhlendorf-arslan ...................................................................................................................................................................... 351 Contents / İçindekiler VII der gegenstand im Bild. zur Kontextualisierung von realien in der byzantinischen Wandmalerei Kappadokiens rainer Warland ............................................................................................................................................................................................... 369 a twelfth Century iron Workshop at Kinet, turkey Scott redford .................................................................................................................................................................................................... 385 Small Finds from zeytinli Bahçe - Birecik (Urfa) Francesca dell‘era ....................................................................................................................................................................................... 393 early Byzantine military Fibulas with returned Foot from South-Western Crimea alexander aibabin ....................................................................................................................................................................................... 407 early medieval Crosses from the South-Western Crimea elzara a. Khairedinova ........................................................................................................................................................................... 417 Byzantine Bone Wares from Chersonesos in taurica: interpretation and Chronology elena Klenina .................................................................................................................................................................................................... 441 metal Small Finds from Sinai. Preliminary remarks dionysios mourelatos ............................................................................................................................................................................... 457 ein hochzeitsring aus der Bucht von abuqir (Ägypten) yvonne Petrina ................................................................................................................................................................................................. 463 Context, Stratigraphy, residuality. Problems of establishing a Chronology of early Byzantine glass in Southern egypt daniel Keller ...................................................................................................................................................................................................... 477 Contributors to the volume / Sempozyum Kitabının yazarları ............................................................................. 489 Vorwort im Juni 2008 fand in istanbul mit großzügiger Unterstützung der gerda henkel Stiftung der internationale Workshop zu «Byzantinischen Kleinfunden im Kontext» statt, der gemeinsam vom research Center for anatolian Civilizations der Koç Universität, dem archäologischen museum istanbul und der abteilung istanbul des deutschen archäologischen instituts ausgerichtet worden war. die so genannten Kleinfunde byzantinischer zeit sind lange durch das netz etablierter Fächerkulturen gefallen. in vielen Fällen ist es erst der interdisziplinären zusammenarbeit von Byzantinischer archäologie und Frühgeschichte zu verdanken, daß die häufig unscheinbaren und in der regel kunsthistorisch unbedeutenden objekte endlich eine erhöhte aufmerksamkeit erfahren. Wie groß der Bedarf an einem wissenschaftlichen austausch zu dem thema ist, zeigte die sehr positive resonanz auf die einladung zu dem istanbuler Workshop, der 46 Kolleginnen und Kollegen aus deutschland, Österreich, italien, griechenland, Polen, der türkei, Ukraine, USa, den niederlande und israel gefolgt sind. Während der tagung entwickelten sich zahlreiche fruchtbare diskussionen und es wurden Kontakte geknüpft, auf deren Basis der diskurs bis heute weitergeführt wird. dementsprechend groß war der Wunsch der teilnehmer, die Beiträge der tagung zu publizieren. der vorliegende Band umfasst 38 Beiträge und kann damit als aktuelles Kompendium zu den byzantinischen Kleinfunden und ihrem auftreten in archäologischen Kontexten gelten. in diesem zusammenhang gilt unser besonderer dank wiederum der gerda henkel Stiftung, die den druck des tagungsbandes in der reihe ByzaS mit einer substantiellen Förderung ermöglicht hat. danken möchten wir auch unseren istanbuler Partnern, d. h. dem research Center for anatolian Civilizations der Koç Universität und dem archäologischen museum istanbul, für die wie immer ausgezeichnete zusammenarbeit. hier hat sich mittlerweile eine schlagkräftige troika etabliert, die 2011 gemeinsam mit weiteren institutionen die internationale tagung «häfen und hafenstädte im östlichen mittelmeerraum von der antike bis in byzantinische zeit» ausgerichtet hat, die gleichfalls in der reihe ByzaS publiziert wird. Schließlich danken wir den organisatorinnen Vorwort X der tagung und zugleich herausgeberinnen dieses Bandes Beate Böhlendorf-arslan und alessandra ricci für ihre initiative und ihren unermüdlichen einsatz, ohne die das Projekt «Kleinfunde» nicht hätte realisiert werden können. Felix Pirson und martin Bachmann istanbul, mai 2012 Preface on June 2-4, 2008, the research Center for anatolian Civilizations of Koç University was pleased to play co-host, along with the german archaeological institute (dai) in istanbul to a symposium entitled «Byzantine Small Finds in archaeological Context», and supported by the gerda henkel Stiftung. this symposium was organized by Beate Böhlendorf-arslan, then of the dai, and alessandra ricci of Koç University. the rCaC is indebted to drs. Böhlendorf-arslan and ricci for organizing and running this highly successful symposium, and, in addition, for editing the papers present in this volume. it is hoped that the contextualization of small finds will shed new light on objects displayed in museum collections that have no such context, and give us clues as to their use in Byzantine societies. Scott redford director, rCaC Koç University Preface / Önsöz held 2-4 June 2008, in collaboration with the german archaeological institute istanbul, Koç University’s research Center for anatolian Civilizations, and the istanbul archaeological museums, the «Byzantine Small Finds in archaeological Contexts» Workshop provided us with an analysis of the Byzantine art and craftsmanship that developed within the economic, social, cultural and religious systems of the Byzantine empire, which spanned eleven centuries; and also shed light on the daily life and systems of thought of the period through various remains from the quotidian sphere. Comprised of both fairly simple and artistically significant artefacts, this collection of objects was crafted to serve a variety of purposes, including to impress, display social status, adorn, protect from evil, or plead for god’s grace; and all of the objects were a reflection of the skilful craftsmanship of the period that is available to us through items made of ivory, silver (although rare), gold, bronze and other metals, glass, various precious stones, terracotta, wood, and wool and silk. the ostentatious court life of the Byzantine empire; the customary gifts of emperors; the rich material culture created by wealthy families; the feasting habits, personal care and adornment practices of individuals, as well as their daily life and religious practices – all of these factors contributed to the rich diversity of production by Byzantine artists and craftsmen. the importance of the symposium is emphasized by the range of topics discussed by experts in the field: the scarcity of the number of surviving small finds; the re-use of gold and silver artefacts by means of smelting; the long periods of time during which glass and terracotta materials remained unearthed; the conservation of wood and textiles in geographical regions with suitable conditions; and the loss of the majority of rich liturgical resources that we know of from written texts and the scarcity of materials. Participants to the symposium were presented with an important set of data with regard to cultural relationships and their location through the consideration of specific materials, including bronze, affordable and extensively used in daily life and liturgical contexts to manufacture small objects; gold, popular both during the medieval period and the Byzantine empire as well as in the West, especially in liturgical contexts; silver, necessary for the production of civil and liturgical artefacts; ivory, an expensive material Preface / Önsöz XIV used to produce objects for eminent members of society; and glass, to make necklaces and amulets. also discussed were bronze, silver and gold coins and medallions that are significant sources of our understanding of their respective period; and ampullae that blessed and protected their owners. Furthermore, reports presented at the symposium allowed us to trace representations of Byzantine culture and art outside Constantinople: burial gifts found in the iasos agora; weapons and jewellery in elaiussa Sebaste; ceramic, glass, metal and other artefacts used in jewellery production found in the harbour city of Kadıkalesi; objects found in Bergama, important for our understanding of Byzantine handicrafts; primarily bronze and iron but also silver, gold and bone objects from the rich collection of ephesus; textiles unearthed in amorium; the pilgrim flask and other small finds from the yumuktepe medieval mound; and small finds and crosses from Boğazköy and the zeytin Bahçe mound. Similarly, the lifestyles, arts, religious practices and technology of areas outside the Byzantine capital were explored through numerous types of objects, including regional bronze and glass jewellery from the middle Byzantine period excavations carried out in thessalonica, greece; Byzantine objects from terra d’otranto, italy; military helmets from thracia novae, Bulgaria; traditional glass objects from the late antique period of southern egypt; objects from crimea that are representations of personal faith; bone tools from chersoneses, taurica; objects from Sicilia and liturgical objects found in the early christian settlements of Kos; medieval metal objects from Salento; and glass objects from Byzantine athens. the collection of papers presented in the «Byzantine Small Finds in archaeological contexts» Workshop, will represent a significant resource for those who pursue research in the field. i would cordially like to thank each participating institution and individual for their efforts during the preparation of this book. zeynep S. Kızıltan director, istanbul archaeological museums Preface / Önsöz XV İstanbul alman arkeoloji enstitüsü, Koç Üniversitesi anadolu medeniyetleri araştırma merkezi ve İstanbul arkeoloji müzeleri işbirliğinde, 2-4.06.2008 tarihleri arasında, gerçekleştirilen «arkeolojik Kazılarda ele geçen Bizans Küçük Buluntuları» konulu sempozyum, 11 yüzyıl boyunca varlığını sürdürmüş, Bizans İmparatorluğunun ekonomik, sosyal, kültürel ve dini sistemleri içinde gelişen, sanat ve zanaatı ile birlikte, günlük hayatta kullandıkları çeşitli nesneler, dönemin yaşam tarzını ve düşünce sistemlerinin incelenmesini sağladı. Bu nesnelerin etki yaratma, sahiplerinin toplumsal statüsünü gösterme, süslenme, kötülüklerden korunma veya tanrıya sığınma, onun inayetini çekme gibi çeşitli amaçlarla yapılan ve sempozyum bildirilerinde yer alan fildişi, gümüş, azda olsa altın, tunç ve diğer metaller, cam, çeşitli değerli taşlar, pişmiş toprak ve ahşap, yün veya ipek kumaştan yapılmış, bir kısmı oldukça sade, kimi sanatsal açıdan değerli eserler dönemlerinin usta işçiliklerini günümüze yansıttı. Bizans İmparatorluğu’nun gösterişli saray hayatı, imparatorların hediye dağıtma geleneği, varlıklı ailelerin yarattığı zengin maddi kültür, halkın yeme içme, kişisel bakım ve süslenme gibi günlük yaşantıları ile ibadet biçimleri Bizans’daki sanat ve zanaat üretiminde zengin çeşitliliğe yol açmıştır. Küçük buluntulardan günümüze ulaşan eser sayısının azlığı, gümüş ve altından yapılmış nesnelerin daha sonra eritilerek kullanılması, cam ve pişmiş toprağın yüzyıllarca toprağın altında kalması, ahşap ve dokuma ürünlerinin ise iklim koşullarının uygun olduğu coğrafyalarda korunması, yazılı kaynaklarda belirtilen zengin kilise malzemelerinin çoğunun kaybolmuş olması ve az sayıdaki örneğin konunun uzmanlarınca tartışılması, bu sempozyumun önemini vurgulamaktadır. Ucuz maliyetli olması nedeniyle, her dönemde, sivil ve dini alanda küçük nesne yapımında kullanılan tunç, orta Çağ’da hem Bizans İmparatorluğu hem de Batı’da özellikle liturjik eşyaların yapımında kullanılan altın, sivil ve dini eselerin yapımında kullanılan gümüş, toplumun ileri gelenleri için yapılan nesnelerde kullanılan ve pahalı bir malzeme olan fildişi, kolye ve amulet yapımında kullanılan cam, her dönemin tarihsel gelişimini açıklamada önemli bir kaynak olan ve başta tunç olmak üzere gümüş ve altın kullanılarak yapılan sikkeler ile zafer ya da diğer özel nedenlerle kıymetli madenden yapılan kabartmalı madalyonlar, kutsayan, kötülüklerden koruyan, ampullalar buluntu yerleri kültürel ilişkiler açısından sempozyum katılımcılarına önemli bilgiler sundu. ayrıca sempozyumda sunulan bildirilerden, iasos agora’sındaki mezar hediyeleri, elaiussa Sebaste’deki takılar, silahlar, Kadıkalesi liman kentindeki seramik, cam, maden ve kuyumculuk üretimine ait eserler, Bizans el sanatları açısından özel bir önem taşıyan Bergama buluntuları, genelde bronz ve demirin yanı sıra gümüş, altın ve kemikten yapılmış zengin efes buluntuları, amorium’da gün ışığına çıkartılan tekstil parçaları, yumuktepe orta Çağ höyüğün’deki hacı matarası ve küçük buluntular, Boğazköy ve zeytin Bahçe höyük’teki küçük buluntu ve haçlar Bizans Kültür ve Sanatının Konstantinopolis dışındaki izlerini takip etmemizi sağladı. Preface / Önsöz XVI yine anadolu dışında Selanik’te yürütülen orta Bizans dönemi kazılarında bulunan cam ve bronzdan yapılan yerel takılar, İtalya terra d’otranto’daki Bizans dönemi’ne ait eserler, Bulgaristan – trakya novae deki askeri miğferler, güney mısır’daki geç antik Çağ geleneksel camlar, kişisel inancın sembolleri olan Kırım buluntuları, Kersonesos, taurıca kemik aletleri, Sicilya buluntuları ile Kos adasında, erken hristiyanlık yerleşmelerinde ele geçen dini amaçlı buluntular, Salento, orta Çağ metalleri, atina Bizans cam buluntuları, bizlere Bizans başkenti dışında, diğer coğrafyalardaki, yaşam tarzı, sanatı, inanç sistemi ve teknolojileri ile ilgili ayrıntılı bilgiler verdi. «arkeolojik Kazılarda ele geçen Bizans Küçük Buluntuları» konulu sempozyumda sunulan bildirilere ait bu kitap, bu alanda çalışan araştırmacılar için önemli bir kaynak olacaktır. Sempozyum ve kitabın hazırlanmasında emek harcayan ve katkı veren tüm kurum ve kişilere yürekten teşekkür ederim. zeynep S. Kızıltan İstanbul arkeoloji müzeler müdürü editor’s Preface the concept of the «Byzantine Small Finds in archaeological Contexts» Workshop (istanbul 2-4 June, 2008) grew out of the conveners’ active engagement in fieldwork centering on the late antique and Byzantine periods. regardless of the geographical location of fieldwork, the nature of specific sites and areas, and the implications of investigations carried out, a recurring archaeological condition seems to emerge: moveable finds, particularly those not fitting within the known categories of typologies, still lack a reliable documentary and comparative base grounded in archaeological contextualization – in spite of the fact that archaeological investigations comprising materials from the late antique and Byzantine periods have traditionally yielded and continue to produce conspicuous percentages of small-sized objects. these encompass a highly diversified spectrum of objects and mediums, including jewellery and dress ornaments; portable objects of worship; amulets and items that shaped the world of magic in Byzantine society; lead seals; bread stamps; small containers; luxury goods; and much more. these objects also represent a broad range of contexts and functions, spanning across the borders of consumption and utilitarian goods: from domestic to funerary, from rural to urban, and from institutional and ritual spaces to civic and more intimate ones, to name but a few. overall, these small-sized objects reveal shared sociological habits, social groupings, rituals and practices while also providing subtle insights into individual inclinations and social status as well as more personal interactions. they also contribute to the identification of various forms of diversity otherwise difficult to detect. more importantly, small-sized objects can support a clearer retrieval of patterns of movement and exchange. the network of movement associated with commerce, trade, military undertakings and pilgrimage as well as migration and dispossession can, through the study of contextualized small-sized objects, contribute toward the definition of a fuller picture of the worlds that made late antiquity and Byzantium. at the same time, accurate analysis of small finds may also represent a welcome addition to the rapidly growing study of social networks broadly conceived in terms of the spaces, times and interpreters with which they intersected. in more general terms, networks are also to be understood as complex systems of dialogue and exchange that Byzantium established with worlds at close or more remote distances. From the re-orientation of mediterranean societies in late antiquity to the expanding crossroad territories of the Byzantine period, the circulation of small-sized objects in spaces beyond its limits offers the opportunity for further reflections on the notions of neighboring cultures and their interactions. XVIII editor’s Preface the accurate retrieval and study of small finds from archaeological contexts broadens the spectrum of mediums that may fall under this grouping, which include not only metal, wood and bones but also textiles, glass, shells and lead. at the same time, there appears to be a growing effort on the part of late antique and Byzantine archaeologists to enhance on-site retrieval and conservation techniques through projects that include the creation of on-site conservation laboratories employing specialists. this new and very welcome development allows for a larger percentage of small finds to be retrieved and undergo initial on-site conservation and study, a step crucial to their survival. more-accurate analysis and observations will follow in the post-excavation phases, with ever more promising perspectives on the deciphering of technologies and their transformation in Byzantine times. the workshop was therefore designed to serve as a forum aimed at bringing together colleagues whose work in the field yielded small finds from archaeological contexts and whose study and analysis, combined with archaeology, brought new insights. Papers presented previously unpublished materials ranging from the 5th to the 13th centuries. Whereas similar workshops centering on other contextualized finds – with ceramics being the most notable example – have led to substantial progress in research, small finds seem to have lagged behind. Consequently, as excavations progress, advances are made in the archaeological sciences, and more finds are documented, processed and published – thus comprising a growing range of finds – the «unimpressive» or hard-to-pin-down small-sized object, when retrieved, continues to be at risk of languishing in excavations or museum deposits for longer than deserved. the workshop attempted to begin filling this gap by encouraging contributions on small finds as defined broadly, in addition to wide-ranging discussion of archaeological contexts and methods. the papers in the volume reflect the contributors’ diverse approaches to their fieldwork and research along with the wide variety of finds discussed. one goal of the workshop was to observe whether studies of small finds from archaeological contexts may help to establish accurate chronologies, that is, whether small finds may contribute toward the definition of chronological frameworks, as other finds do. moreover, the results of the workshop may help to answer the question of how, in the absence of other finds, small finds may guide the archaeologist in the periodization of context and action. the editors and organizers of the workshop hope that the publication of this volume represents a contribution to the growth of studies of small finds in connection with archaeology, and that it will be seen as a comprehensive collection of information not only for those working in the field but also for those at a distance from the sites and archaeology. the transition from the idea of the workshop to its actual accomplishment was possible thanks to the help and support of a number of individuals, colleagues and institutions. We are pleased that the directors of the german archaeological institute in istanbul (dai), Koç University’s research Center for anatolian Civilizations (rCaC) and the istanbul archaeological museums offered support. We would like to extend our special thanks to the director of the dai, Prof. dr. Felix Pirson, who, together with the workshop’s organizers, put forth a request for financial editor’s Preface XIX support from the gerda henkel Foundation. to the gerda henkel Foundation goes our unconditional gratitude for having provided the means for the gathering to take place as well for this publication. the dai and the rCaC kindly made available their facilities both for the preparation of the workshop and for its sessions. in particular, our thanks go to the two assistants, oya demirci at the dai and esra erol at the rCaC, who helped to coordinate innumerable practicalities. one of the workshop’s sessions was generously hosted by the istanbul archaeological museums, and to its director, zeynep S. Kızıltan, we would like to extend sincere thanks on our behalf as well as on behalf of all the participants. We also would like to thank gülbahar Baran-Çelik for organizing the display of small finds from the museums’ collections, including objects that have rarely been shown. the flyer and poster for the Workshop were designed by hüseyin yaman and oğuz Koçyiğit and generously printed by ahmet Boratav, ege yayınları. Finally, thanks are due to the directors of the dai, Prof. dr. Felix Pirson and dr. martin Bachmann, for having encouraged publication of the workshop’s papers in the ByzaS series, where we believe they have found an ideal home. We thank the gerda henkel Foundation for the generous publication grant. also, we would like to extend our warm thanks to hülya tokmak of zero publishing house who worked on the volume's layout and to ahmet Borotav. mary cason and Johanna Witte helped with the editing of some of the english papers. the editors were responsible for the editing of the papers and organization of the volume, while each author took responsibility for the scientific content of his or her own research. Preparation of this book benefited from the turkish translations and editing generously undertaken by nilden ergün and Prof. dr. nurettin arslan, whom we thank with gratitude. Beate Böhlendorf-arslan alessandra ricci römisch-germanisches zentralmuseum Forschungszentrum für archäologie mainz department of archaeology & history of art Koç University, istanbul B. Böhlendorf-Arslan – A. Ricci (eds.), Byzantine Small Finds in Archaeological Contexts, BYZAS 15 (2012) 241-247 a Byzantine lead amulet from Samos evangelia daFi abstract the paper discusses a Byzantine lead amulet from Pythagoreion at Samos with moulded apotropaic motifs and inscriptions, which was found in salvage excavations. on the reverse the head of medusa is depicted «en face» with seven rays ending in snakes or animal heads radiating from it. an eight-pointed star is represented on the poorly preserved obverse. medusa or gorgon heads were used as an apotropaic symbol since antiquity. the same design was also found in rings that have been thought to be amulets against diseases. in particular, it has been connected with fertility and womb conditions, often bearing the inscription «ΥΣΤΕΡΙΚΟΝ ΦΥΛΑΚΤΗΡΙΟΝ». the medusa head continued to be used in the middle Byzantine period in a rather stylized way, which stylistically dates the Samos amulet to this period. the amulet is dated to the middle ages and most probably between the 9th and 11th centuries, as the closest parallels from the Saraçhane and Corinth excavations suggest. Keywords: Byzantine, amulet, lead, medusa, Samos Özet Bu makale Sisam Adası’ndaki Pythagoreion yerleşmesindeki kurtarma kazılarında bulunan ve üzerinde apotropeik motif ve yazıtlar olan kalıp yapımı kurşun bir amulet hakkındadır. Arka yüzünde yılanlar ve hayvan başlarıyla sınırlandırılmış yedili ışık demeti içinde ışık yayan ve önden betimlenmiş Medusa başı yeralmaktadır. Ön yüzünde iyi korunmamış durumda olan sekiz noktalı bir yıldız bulunmaktadır. Medusa ve Gorgo başı antik dönemden beri apotropeik bir sembol olarak kullanılmaktadır. Aynı betimler amuletler gibi hastalığa karşı koruyucu olarak kullanılan yüzüklerde de kullanılmıştır. Özellikle üreme ve rahim durumuyla bağlantılı olan «ΥΣΤΕΡΙΚΟΝ ΦΥΛΑΚΤΗΡΙΟΝ» yazıtını içermektedir. Medusa başı Orta Bizans Dönemi’nde daha stilize bir halde kullanılmaya devam edilmiştir ve Sisam Adası’nı stilistik olarak bu döneme tarihler. Bu amulet Saraçhane ve Korinth kazılarındakilerle paralellik göstererek muhtemelen 9.–11. yy.’lara tarihlenmektedir. Anahtar Sözcükler: Bizans, Amulet, Kurşun, Medusa, Sisam Adası 242 evangelia dafi Byzantine amulets drew scholars’ attention already in the first half of the 19 th century mostly in connection to ancient gems and for their continuation of ancient religion and beliefs of magical powers. amulets and magical objects usually have the same fate as other minor objects of some value for collectors or dealers, such as jewellery; they are usually published in exhibition catalogues, usually missing their excavation contexts and often even the place and sometimes even the country of origin. the lead amulet from Samos (fig. 1a and 1b), decorated with moulded apotropaic motifs and inscriptions, was found in salvage excavations in Pythagoreion at Samos. Pythagoreion was the ancient and probably Byzantine capital of the island on its a b southern coast. the late 5th century Fig. 1 a: obverse and; b: reverse. basi li cae on top of the hill to the south of the settlement represent the first traces of early Christian settlement in the hill area. the ancient walls of the city were reused by the Byzantines and restored by theophilus, as stated in a large inscription, which praises the emperor theophilus and theodora, for they had rebuilt the walls of the city1. this renovation did probably take place after the destructive arab attack of 830. the mural inscription is the first written evidence of building activities on the city walls. a later inscription, incorporated in one of the castle’s towers, the so-called logothetis tower, refers to a renovation of the walls dating to 10892. in the last few decades the greek archaeological Service has conducted salvage excavations in the area of Pythagoreion and also close to the Byzantine castle. the salvage excavations (fig. 2) where the amulet was found are situated to the north of the castle and have revealed «roman buildings in three overlapping phases… apart from the pottery, a small stone mould was found, intended for the construction of small bronze objects»3. the amulet was found in the upper layers of the excavation, above the late roman remains of walls that probably belonged to houses. the excavations have not yet been fully published, therefore further dated pottery or coinage are not yet available. description the amulet is disc-shaped, with a diameter of 4 cm. there are traces of a suspension hook, which is now missing. on both sides there are moulded motifs and inscriptions. obverse (fig. 1a): the decoration is barely visible, due to the poor condition of the object. it is possible to discern: a star with six or eight rays on the top right, lines forming 1 the inscription is on display at the tower of logothetis-museum in Pythagoreion. 2 inscription dated after drosogianni 2003. 3 Viglaki 1988, 471 f. a Byzantine lead amulet from Samos 243 Fig. 2 ground plan of the salvage excavation in Pythagoreion, Samos, where the amulet was found. a rhomboid design which encloses a cross made of four dots down to the left and a rectangular design below to the right; there is an unintelligible inscription around the edge. only the letters NHC could be read below to the right and reading clockwise. reverse (fig. 1b): a head «en face» in the centre is surmounted by a design and surrounded by six or seven radiating double lines that end in designs resembling snakes or animal heads. the round edge inscription is poorly preserved. a cross on top of the amulet can be seen and it is possible to discern the letters «A» to the right and the letters «NAO» down to the left, reading clockwise. evangelia dafi 244 the oval-shaped head depicted on the reverse is most probably a medusa or gorgon head, used as an apotropaic symbol since antiquity. gorgo or medusa is already known from homer in the iliad as depicted on athena’s shield: «ἐν δέ τε Γοργείη κεφαλὴ δεινοῖο πελώρου δεινή τε σμερδνή τε» as a battle companion4. depiction of the medusa head was used in antiquity as an apotropaic symbol for any case of disease or other troubles (fig. 3). in late antiquity, it was identified with the female demon with seven heads in «gnostic» fig. 3 Gnostic amulet from a private amulets. the demon appears in Solomon’s testament collection in London. and symbolizes the evil’s trapments 5. the medusa design was also found in rings, which have long been thought as amulets against diseases. the medusa head continued to be used in the middle Byzantine period in a rather stylized manner (fig. 4)6. fig. 4 Lead amulet «obtained in Constantinople» from the Schlumberger collection. fig. 5 Lead amulet from the Saraçhane excavations. 4 Homer iliad, V v.741; West 1998-2000. 5 King 1872, 47 pl. iX. 6 Schlumberger 1892, 7 amulet no. 5. 7 Gill 1986, 268. 621 fig. 421 621B. the closest middle Byzantine parallel from dated excavation contexts is a lead disc from the Saraçhane excavations in istanbul (fig. 5), with a slightly larger diameter of 5 cm, better preserved than our example 7. On the obverse, a nimbed horseman is depicted holding a spear on his right. The inscription round edge reads: +AΓΙΟC AΓΙΟC KΥΡΙΟC CA [ΒΑΩΘ]… ΕΘΗ. On the reverse, a head «en face» in the centre is surmounted by a trifurcated sign and surrounded by seven radiating animal heads. The inscription around the edge: +OCO […] CEHΛHM. […]ΛΕωΝΟΡΟVME. a Byzantine lead amulet from Samos 245 the find comes from an undisturbed level at Saraçhane excavations, with coins ranging from the 6th to the 9th century, the latter dated to 830/31–42 ad, consequently dating the level to the reign of theophilus. another close parallel from greece comes from the excavations at Corinth, where a number of Byzantine rings was found, dating to the 10th–11th centuries, with an apotropaic nature, their bezels bearing the grotesque medusa-like face surrounded by a ray pattern. the closest parallel to the Samos find from stratified levels in Corinth is a lead amulet (fig. 6), dated to the 12th century, that depicts a medusa head surrounded by a simple spiral line and by the inscription in relief: ΗCTE/ ΡΙΚΟΦΙ/ΛΑ+ΚΤV/ΡΙΟ (ΥΣΤΕΡΙΚΟ ΦΥΛΑΚΤΗΡΙΟ) or amulet against hysterica 8. this type of amulets in the Fig. 6 lead amulet from the Corinth excavations. middle Byzantine period was connected with the word ΥΣΤΕΡΑ, and was often associated with female fertility ailments, or hysterika 9. Hysterika is a general term or characterisation of a disease having to do with the womb. the depiction of the womb as a pear-shaped object with ligaments resembling tentacles emerging from it is common in «gnostic» amulets. the almost pear-shaped medusa face with usually seven or ten rays emerging from it leading to the «seven serpents» or animal heads or «evil eyes» is not far from this depiction. it is probable that the resemblance of the primitive depiction of the pear-shaped womb with the depiction of the slightly elongated medusa shows a connection between the two types of amulets and lead authors to making a direct connection of medusa head as an uterine symbol10. it has been argued that similar medusa amulets were used for the protection of pregnant women against an evil demon that was believed to inflict premature birth pains, and for the provision of easy delivery11. Fig. 7 Cloisonné enamel brooch from south england dated to the 10th–11th centuries. the head of medusa on amulets dated to the early and middle Byzantine period, usual even in medieval northern europe and Britain12 (fig. 7) probably also indicates a late reflection of the myth of Perseus against medusa, who, looking at herself in the mirror, was turned into a stone. a symbol of horror and dismay, 8 davidson 1952, 231 no. 2102. 9 Bonner 1950, 92 f. 10 Bonner 1950, 92 no. 61. 11 markov 2002; published a similar amulet from a private collection. 12 Buckton 1986, 10 fig. 2. 246 evangelia dafi a hideous bugbear or αποτρόπαιον13 seems to have been the ideal companion of sufferers of diseases, unrelated to the Christian beliefs. the depiction of a nimbed horseman on the obverse of the Byzantine amulets of this type, possibly also depicted on the Samos find, keeps the relation of the person bearing the magical object to the Christian religion. the saint depicted is often identified by inscriptions as St george. in place of his enemy pierced by his spear, a female figure is usually depicted, symbolizing the malign power or the disease. this female demon in early Christian art was alavasdria, a demon of ancient egypt that appears as lilith in hebrew, abizou in Solomon’s testament and gillou or gello, in the early Byzantine period 14. according to michael Psellos, gillou was responsible for the death of newborns15. the amulet from Pythagoreion, in comparison with published amulets found in dated contexts, is definitely dated to the Byzantine period, and, based on the dating of the closest parallels it can be ascribed most probably between the 9th and 11th centuries, a period of building activities on the castle, clearly testified by the in situ inscriptions, indicating that the city of Samos was an active community at the time. this later date is also supported by stylistic criteria, in particular by the inept representation of the medusa head and the seven rays emerging from it; this peculiarity proves that by this time the ancient and early medieval prototype had already become a vague representation for the amulet maker. Finally, the use of lead for the manufacture of an amulet is not infrequent in the Byzantine period. the most probable explanation for using this material comes from the fact that lead, which was quite usual in antiquity as a material for inscriptions of everyday use, like wax, as well as for magical inscriptions, in the medieval ages took an air of mystique as it was a material coming from earlier times16. Credits: Fig. 1: Photo by the author. Fig. 2: Viglaki 1988, 1. Fig. 3: King 1872, pl. 9, 3. Fig. 4: Schlumberger 1892, 7 amulet no. 5. Fig. 5: gill 1986, fig. 421, 621 B. Fig. 6: davidson 1952, 231 no. 2102. Fig. 7: Buckton 1986, 10 fig. 2, 4. 13 reinach 1886, 314-317. 14 Vikan 1984, 79. 15 m. Psellos, Περί ενεργείας δαιμόνων, in: J.-P. migne (ed.), Patrologiae cursus completus. Series graeca 161 (Paris 1857-1866) 122, 857, 861, 884, cited in Kambanis 2001, 95 no. 26. 16 a discussion at some length on the use of different materials in magic is given by graf 1996, 155-157 (greek translation). a Byzantine lead amulet from Samos 247 Bibliography Bonner 1950 C. Bonner, Studies in magical amulets, Chiefly graeco-egyptian (ann arbor/ london 1950). Buckton 1986 d. Buckton, late l0th– and 11th– century cloisonné enamel brooches, medieval archaeology 30, 1986, 8-18 pls. 3-4. davidson 1952 g. davidson, the minor objects, Corinth 12 (Princeton 1952). drosogianni 2003 Ph. drosogianni, Μια παραναγνωσθείσα επιγραφή στη Σάμο, deltChra, 2003, 45-53. gill 1986 m. V. gill, the Small Finds, in: r. m. harrison (ed.), excavations at Saraçhane 1 (Princeton 1986) 226-277. graf 1996 F. graf, gottesnähe und Schadenzauber. die magie in der griechisch-römischen antike (münchen 1996). Kambanis 2001 P. Kambanis, Παλαιοχριστιανικά φυλακτά της Συλλογής Γ. Τσολοζίδη, in: Αφιέρωμα στη μνήμη του Σ. Κίσσα (thessaloniki 2001) 91-100. King 1872 C. W. King, antique gems and rings (london 1872). markov 2002 n. markov, a mediaeval amulet with a representation of the gorgon medusa (abstract in english, article in russian), arheologija 43, 4, 2002, 46-48. reinach 1886 S. reinach, marble heads in the tchinly-Kiosk museum in Constantinople, aJa 2, 3, 1886, 314-317. Schlumberger 1892 g. Schlumberger, amulettes byzantins anciens destinés à combattre les maléfices & maladies (Paris 1892). Viglaki 1988 m. Viglaki, Ανασκαφικές εργασίες, adelt 43, 1988, 129-131. Vikan 1984 g. Vikan, art, medicine and magic in early Byzantium, doP 38, 1984, 65-86. West 1998-2000 m. l. West, homeri ilias (munich/leipzig 1998-2000).