The Roman trading center on the bank of Billaios River

COMMITTEE FOR PONTIC STUDIES THE BLACK SEA REGION IN THE CONTEXT OF THE ROMAN EMPIRE I N TE R N A T IO N AL S Y M PO S I U M D E D I C A TE D IN M E M O R Y O F V IC T O R I. S AR I AN ID I ( A TH E N S 5 - 8 M A Y 2 0 1 6 ) ATHENS 2022 COMMITTEE FOR PONTIC STUDIES THE BLACK SEA REGION IN THE CONTEXT OF THE ROMAN EMPIRE INTERNATIONAL SYMPOSIUM DEDICATED IN MEMORY OF VICTOR I. SARIANIDI (ATHENS 5-8 MAY 2016) EDITED BY David Braund, Angelos Chaniotis and Elias Petropoulos ATHENS 2022 1 Εικόνα εξωφύλλου: Επεξεργασία από τον πίνακα «Σινώπη, εξωτερική άποψη του περιτειχίσματος της ομώνυμης ακροπόλεως» (Αύγουστος 1847), [École Nationale des Beaux-Arts, Paris]. Εκδόθηκε από την Επιτροπή Ποντιακών Μελετών με την ευγενική χορηγία της Εργοληπτικής Γαλανίδη Α.Ε. στη μνήμη του Στέφανου Γαλανίδη © Επιτροπή Ποντιακών Μελετών Αγνώστων Μαρτύρων 73, Τ.Κ. 171 23, Νέα Σμύρνη, Αθήνα Τηλ. 210-9325521 - Fax: 210-9354333 - e-mail: info@epm.gr Ιστοσελίδα: www.epm.gr ISBN: 978-618-84868-2-9 2 CONTENTS Preface 5 Programme ‒ Πρόγραμμα 9 Christos Galanidis Opening of the works of the symposium at the Committee for Pontic Studies 15 Alexios G. C. Savvides Address by the Vice-Chairman of the Committee 19 David Braund, Angelos Chaniotis, Elias K. Petropoulos The Pontic region and Roman Oecumene: An introduction 21 Part One: Historical Geography Manolis Manoledakis The southern Black Sea in the Roman geographic texts 33 David Braund and Emzar Kakhidze Reflections on the southeastern coast of the Black Sea in the Roman period 59 Gela Gamkrelidze In search of the city of Phasis 75 Claire Barat Sinop in Roman times from Pontic capital to Roman colony 85 Alexander A. Maslennikov and Elias K. Petropoulos Hellenic traditions in the rural area of Bosporan Kingdom in Roman times 95 Part Two: Political History Pantelis M. Nigdelis The last Sappaean kings and cities in Roman Macedonia 107 Altay Coşkun The Bosporan Kings in-between the Mithradatic tradition and friendship with Rome: the usurpation of Asandros revisited 125 Victor Cojocaru The Bosporan Kingdom, Rome, and the Polemonids revisited 149 David Braund Between Crimea, Rome and Asia Minor: Dyteutus as Orestes for the princeps 159 Dan Ruscu and Ligia Ruscu Excidium Histriae once again 173 Sergey Saprykin The community of Pontus on the southern Black Sea coast 181 3 Part Three: Material Culture and Economy Eleni T. Mentesidou, Orhan Alper Şirin, Mustafa Kolağasioğlu Roman Amisos: a study on graves and grave findings 217 Е. Yu. Klenina Amphorae of the Black Sea Region as an archaeological source on trade relations in the second–third centuries AD 231 Dominique Kassab Tezgör The Roman amphorae produced in Black Sea centers and preserved in the Museums of the Black Sea coast of Turkey 257 Şahin Yıldırım The Roman trading center on the bank of Billaios River 277 Andrey Bezrukov Transit trade in the Volga and the Kama region in the late centuries BC – early centuries AD 309 Part Four: Religion Sümer Atasoy Some considerations on the remains of a Roman temple at Tios, Southern Black Sea coast 321 Alexander Minchev The local pantheon of Odessos and its environs in the Roman period: continuity and change in the first to third centuries AD 329 Bülent Öztürk Observations on religious and cultural life in Heraclea Pontica in the Roman Imperial period 355 Dimitris J. Kyrtatas Christianising the region of Pontus 371 Part Five: Epigraphy Alexandru Avram and Mihai Ionescu Three new inscriptions from Callatis of the Roman period 383 Emyr Dakin The honorary decree for Karzoazos, son of Attalos (IOSPE I² 39). A Monument for a “new man?” 395 Angelos Chaniotis Antiphon, an Olbian statesman and orator, and his values 411 Christos Galanidis End of the Symposium works 425 List of Contributors 427 4 Preface PREFACE The Committee of Pontic Studies (EPM) in 2016 ‒following a custom that was very common in the East for every important event‒ "planted a tree", the International Scientific Symposium entitled "The Black Sea Region in the context of the Roman Empire" (5-8 May 2016). With the supervision and care of three distinguished scientists, Angelos Chaniotis, Professor at the Princeton Institute for Advanced Study, David Braund, Professor at the University of Exeter and Elias Petropoulos, Professor at the Democritus University of Thrace. At the symposium were invited and participated a number of the most significant scholars-historians from Greece and abroad, engaging with the specific historical period. The symposium was dedicated to the memory of the great archaeologist Victor Sarigiannidis, honorary member of the EPM. The presentation to the scientific community and the general public of the proceedings of the Symposium, in a carefully edited special edition of the EPM, comes to fulfill the promise given during its closing ceremony. Thus, the first and rather unique edition is added to the world literature with reference to the historical period of Roman rule in the Black Sea. Future efforts for the same period will be deprived of the presence of Alexandru Avram, Professor of Ancient History at the University of Le Mans (France), who was a lecturer at the Symposium and passed away recently (4-8-2021). All the presentations of the Symposium ‒28 in total‒ were written originally in English and so this edition is presented in English. However it would be beneficial to introduce a translation in Greek language, in order to facilitate the discussion in our language. Special thanks are due to Mr. Angelos Chaniotis for editing the publication. He was assisted in the editorial work (proofreading of the texts and homogenization of bibliography and notes) by his research assistants Eric Hensley (New York University), Dr. Ioannis Linardakis (University of Thessaloniki), and Dr. Matthew Peebles (Columbia University). It is worth mentioning that this is not the first edition of E.P.M. in English, since the following have been published in the past: 1) "Black Sea" (12th Symposium on Byzantine Studies, Birmingham 1978). 2) David Bruce Kilpatrick, "Function and style in pontic dance music" (1980) and 3) Patricia Fann Bouteneff, "Exiles on Stage. The modern Pontic Theater in Greece" (2002). The efforts of E.P.M. to cover scientifically issues regarding Pontus Era are achieved with a lot of effort, passion and concerns for the future. The future, however, can be considered secure when there are solid foundations and actions, such as this Symposium. An important driving force, moreover, for new researches is the 5 Preface satisfaction that results from scientific meetings with the characteristics of the originality and the quality of the Symposium. This edition coincides with the one hundred year anniversary (1922-2022) of the Asia Minor Catastrophe and the uprooting of Hellenism from the grounds where they lived and grew up and is another project to keep alive the memory of our ancestors, who bequeathed their history and culture, which we must promote by raising awareness of the future generations. Christos I. Galanidis Chairman of the Committee for Pontic Studies 6 Preface ΠΡΟΛΟΓΟΣ Η Επιτροπή Ποντιακών Μελετών (Ε.Π.Μ.) το 2016 ‒ακολουθώντας ένα έθιμο που επικρατούσε στην Ανατολή για κάθε σημαντικό γεγονός‒ "φύτεψε ένα δέ-ντρο", το Διεθνές Επιστημονικό Συμπόσιο με τίτλο «Ο Εύξεινος Πόντος την εποχή της ρωμαϊκής κυριαρχίας» (5-8 Μαΐου 2016). Με την επιμέλεια και φροντίδα τριών διακεκριμένων επιστημόνων, του Άγγελου Χανιώτη, Καθηγητή του Ινστιτούτου Προηγμένων Σπουδών του Πρίνστον, του David Braund, Καθηγητή του Πανεπιστημίου του Έξετερ και του Ηλία Πετρόπουλου, Καθηγητή σήμερα του Δημοκρίτειου Πανεπιστημίου Θράκης, κλήθηκαν και συμμετείχαν οι σημαντικότεροι επιστήμονες‒ιστορικοί με ενασχόληση τη συγκεκριμένη ιστορική περίοδο από την Ελλάδα και το εξωτερικό. Το συμπόσιο αφιερώθηκε στη μνήμη του μεγάλου αρχαιολόγου Βίκτωρα Σαρηγιαννίδη, επίτιμου μέλους της Ε.Π.Μ. Η παρουσίαση στην επιστημονική κοινότητα και το ευρύτερο κοινό των πρακτικών του Συμποσίου, σε μια επιμελημένη ειδική έκδοση της Ε.Π.Μ., έρχεται να υλοποιήσει την υπόσχεση που δόθηκε κατά την τελετή λήξης του. Έτσι, προστίθεται στην παγκόσμια βιβλιογραφία η πρώτη και μάλλον μοναδική έκδοση με αναφορά στην ιστορική περίοδο της ρωμαϊκής κυριαρχίας στον Εύξεινο Πόντο. Μελλοντικές προσπάθειες για την ίδια περίοδο θα στερηθούν την παρουσία του Alexandru Avram, καθηγητή της Αρχαίας Ιστορίας του Πανεπιστημίου Le Mans (Γαλλία), ο οποίος ήταν εισηγητής στο Συμπόσιο και έφυγε από τη ζωή πρόσφατα (4-8-2021). Όλες οι εισηγήσεις του Συμποσίου ‒28 τον αριθμό‒ έγιναν στην αγγλική γλώσσα και έτσι η έκδοση αυτή γίνεται στα αγγλικά, αν και καλό θα ήταν να υπήρχε μετάφραση στα ελληνικά, ώστε να διευκολυνθεί η συζήτηση στη γλώσσα μας. Για την επιμέλεια της έκδοσης θερμές ευχαριστίες οφείλονται ιδιαιτέρως στον κ. Άγγελο Χανιώτη. Στην επιμέλεια του τόμου τον βοήθησαν οι επιστημονικοί συνεργάτες του Eric Hensley (Πανεπιστήμιο της Νέας Υόρκης), Δρ. Ιωάννης Λιναρδάκης (Πανεπιστήμιο Θεσσαλονίκης), και Δρ. Matthew Peebles (Πανεπιστήμιο Κολούμπια). Αξίζει να αναφερθεί ότι δεν είναι η πρώτη έκδοση της Ε.Π.Μ. στην αγγλική γλώσσα, αφού και κατά το παρελθόν εκδόθηκαν: 1) «Black Sea» (12ο Συμπόσιο Βυζαντινών Σπουδών, Birmingham 1978), 2) David Bruce Kilpatrick, «Function and style in pontic dance music» (1980) και 3) Patricia Fann Bouteneff, «Exiles on Stage. "The modern Pontic Theater in Greece"» (2002). Οι προσπάθειες της Ε.Π.Μ. να καλύψει επιστημονικά ό,τι αφορά τον Πόντο επιτυγχάνονται με πολύ κόπο, μεράκι και αγωνία για τη συνέχεια. Το μέλλον, ωστόσο, μπορεί να θεωρηθεί εξασφαλισμένο, όταν υπάρχουν θεμέλια γερά και δράσεις, όπως το συγκεκριμένο Συμπόσιο. Σημαντική κινητήρια δύναμη, εξάλλου, για νέες αναζητήσεις αποτελεί η ικανοποίηση που προκύπτει από επιστημονικές συναντήσεις με τα χαρακτηριστικά της πρωτοτυπίας και της ποιότητας του Συμποσίου. 7 Preface Η έκδοση αυτή συμπίπτει με τη συμπλήρωση εκατό χρόνων (1922-2022) από τη Μικρασιατική Καταστροφή και τον ξεριζωμό του ελληνισμού από τις εστίες που έζησε και μεγαλούργησε και αποτελεί ένα ακόμη έργο στη μνήμη των προγόνων μας, οι οποίοι μας κληροδότησαν την ιστορία και τον πολιτισμό τους, που οφείλουμε να προβάλλουμε ευαισθητοποιώντας και τις επερχόμενες γενιές. Χρήστος Ι. Γαλανίδης Πρόεδρος της Ε.Π.Μ. 8 David Braund, Angelos Chaniotis, Elias K. Petropoulos DAVID BRAUND, ANGELOS CHANIOTIS, ELIAS K. PETROPOULOS THE PONTIC REGION AND ROMAN OECUMENE AN INTRODUCTION The Greek colonists who reached the coasts of the Euxeinos Pontos in the Archaic period came to a world that hardly corresponded to their nautical experiences. They were accustomed to sailing in seas full of islands and islets, in seas, such as the Aegean, the Ionian, or the Propontis (the Sea of Marmara), where the next possible anchorage was routinely visible. In the Black Sea, they encountered a huge basin, commonly calm, but from time to time disturbed by sudden and strong storms - a sea that favors coasting and not crossing, a sea where huge rivers end. Unlike most rivers in mainland Greece, these rivers were key routes of long-distance communication.1 The Pontos is a sea of challenges, a sea that myths associated with the adventures of the Argonauts, and perhaps a sea that rewards courage with treasures. It should, therefore, not surprise that the Greek colonists on all coasts of the Black Sea would cultivate communications with the hinterland.2 And yet, the Greek colonies along all Pontic coasts also developed close relations with each other, despite the long distances and political and institutional differences. They created a network of relations, both public and private, that scholarship in recent years has labelled a ‘Pontic koine’.3 This network is a triumph of culture, politics, and economy over geography. It was significantly strengthened by Roman expansion in the Balkans and Asia Minor. When around 200 AD Theokles, son of Satyros, from Olbia died, many cities sent golden crowns to honor him, because he had offered his services to their citizens during their stays in Olbia.4 These cities represent the greater part of the Pontic coasts: Odessos, Kallatis, Tomis, Histria, and Tyras in the west, Olbia and Crimean Chersonesos in the north, as well as Pantikapaion in the Bosporan Kingdom, Byzantion, Herakleia, Amastris, and Sinope. Other foreigners who had been assisted by the Olbian man in his city came from northern Asia Minor, from places close to the Pontos, e.g. from Nikomedeia, Nikaia, Kyzikos, Tios, and Prusa, as well as Aegean Miletos, Olbia’s mother-city. In general, the sources we have from the Hellenistic era and the Imperial period confirm the impression we get from this inscription, that strong and frequent communications existed among the Black Sea cities. Such sources from the Hellenistic and Imperial periods include both inscriptions, e.g. grants of the title of proxenos and of citizenship by cities of the Black Sea to citizens of other cities in this region, 5 decrees concerning embassies, honorific 1 See the papers by Ş. Yıldırım (Billaios River) and A. Bezrukov (Volga and Kama). 2 See Mordvintseva 2016 and the papers by A. Bezrukov and A. A. Maslennikov and E. K. Petropoulos in this volume. 3 See Bresson, Ivantchik, and Ferrary (eds.) 2007. See also Sayar 2016, on the relations between the Propontis and the west coast of the Black Sea. On private networks see Dana 2013 and Ruscu 2013. 4 IOSPE I2 40. Discussed by A. Chaniotis in this volume. 5 Cojocaru 2016a and 2016b; Ruscu 2016. 21 The Pontic Region and Roman Oecumene: an introduction inscriptions, and epitaphs that document the presence of foreigners in Pontic cities (assembled now in Alexandru Avram’ Prosopographia Externa),6 and archaeological sources, e.g. the stamps of amphorae that were exported from the various cities to cities on other shores of the Pontus,7 and other evidence of material culture (glass, for example. or funerary monuments that show the diffusion of the iconographic motif of the funerary banquet.8 Equally impressive is the maintenance of strong ties, first with mainland Greece and the areas that formed the Hellenistic world, and then the eastern Roman provinces. This is easily understandable in the case of Thrace and the southern coast of the Black Sea, which were sometimes parts and sometimes natural extensions of the Hellenistic kingdoms. It also applies to the Greek colonies of Roman Moesia, with Scythia Minor and the north coast of the Black Sea. The Greek Pontic cities generally followed (and indeed were part of) the social and political developments of the Hellenistic world, as we can infer from the information provided by decrees for political culture and political institutions.9 This is also true as regards cultural activities and education in the Black Sea area.10 What changes did Roman expansion bring, from the first century BC onwards? What is the specific significance of the Black Sea region for our understanding of the Roman oecumene, its organization, its economy, and its culture? Did Roman expansion contribute to the political, institutional, social, economic and cultural integration of this region into the Roman universe? A rapidly expanding scholarship addresses these questions that concern ‘Roman Pontos’. This volume aims to contribute to ongoing research on the subject by assembling contributions on selected subjects pertaining to the historical geography of the Black Sea,11 its political history,12 its material culture and economy,13 its religious history,14 and its social and political culture15 from the Late Republic to the Late Imperial period. 6 Avram 2013. 7 See the papers by Е. Yu. Klenina and D. Kassab Tezgör in this volume. For a review of recent publications on this subject see Badoud and Avram 2019. New publications are also summarized in the Supplementum Epigraphicum Graecum. 8 Glass: Boţan and Chiriac 2016. Funerary banquet scenes: e.g. Slawisch 1996 (Thrace); SEG LVI 920 (Pantikapaion), 941 (Tyritake); LVII 734 (Pantikapaion). On material culture see also the paper by E. T. Mentesidou, O. Alper Şirin, and M. Kolağasioğlu (Amisos) in this volume. 9 Chaniotis 2017. 10 On theatrical performances, see Braund, Hall, and Wyles (eds.) 2019. On oratory see the papers by A. Chaniotis and E. Dakin in this volume. On medicine on the western coast of the Black Sea see Dana 2016. 11 See the papers by M. Manoledakis, D. Braund and E. Kakhidze, G. Gamkrelidze, C. Barat, A. A. Maslennikov and E. K. Petropoulos. 12 See the papers by C. Barat, P. M. Nigdelis, A. Coşkun, V. Cojocaru, D. Braund, D. Ruscu and L. Ruscu, and S. Saprykin. 13 Material culture: see note 8. Economy: see the papers by Е. Yu. Klenina, D. Kassab Tezgör, Ş. Yıldırım, and A. Bezrukov. See also Ejstrud 2006. 14 See the papers by S. Atasoy (Tios), A. Minchev (Odessos), B. Öztürk (Herakleia), and D. J. Kyrtatas (Christianization). For the Bosporan kingdom see now Braund 2018. 15 Society (through the lens of epigraphy): see the papers by A. Avram and M. Ionescu, and E. Dakin. political 22 David Braund, Angelos Chaniotis, Elias K. Petropoulos The specific significance of the Black Sea region in ‘Roman times’ – that is, in the period in which Rome was the dominant power in the Mediterranean, the Pontic region, and the Near East – turns on its heterogeneity. In this closed geographical region, areas that were under direct provincial administration co-existed with autonomous cities and allied kingdoms; we find traditional Greek cities, Roman colonies, and communities of indigenous populations, including a range of pastoralist and non-urban societies. It is in this particular context that the impact of Roman rule emerges as a significant historical force, accommodating and integrating variety across time and extensive (and distinctly varied kinds of) space, including steppe, sea and the mountains of the Caucasus, Crimea and Pontic Alps. What at first glance distinguishes the period of Roman rule from the earlier Hellenistic period is a gradual incorporation into an over-arching administration of areas that had been autonomous states or parts of (semi-) independent kingdoms. By the time of the Severan dynasty, almost all of the shores of the Black Sea were either directly or indirectly under Roman provincial administration, with the notable (and partial) exception of the Bosporan Kingdom. In the north-west Olbia and Crimean Chersonesos fell to the governor of Lower Moesia. On the south coast of the Black Sea, we have the province of Bithynia et Pontus, and Cappadocia, whose governor acquired responsibility for Colchis, famously visited by Arrian in the wake of Hadrian’s visit to Trapezous, with its supply-line south to the eastern frontier of the empire. What we see in the Severan years around 200 AD, is only the last phase of a long process. Roman rule reached the shores of the Black Sea at different times, in different ways, and under special conditions, sometimes with military conquests, sometimes on the basis of treaties, and sometimes after the death of allied kings. For example, Bithynia came under Roman rule in 75/4 BC on the basis of King Nikomedes IV’s bequest, while Thrace became Roman provincial territory from AD 46 after the death of its king, Rhoimetalkes III. Consequently, the impact and pace of Roman involvement can be observed at different times in the various areas. For instance, around AD 100 in Crimean Chersonesos we find civic reform in the administration of justice under the apparent influence of Roman institutions,16 Bithynia and Pontus had already been under Roman rule for more than 150 years; in Bithynia and Pontus, Roman influence on law and political institutions had already been applied very directly by Pompey, and can be seen subsequently in the correspondence of Pliny, the province’s governor, with the Emperor Trajan.17 For this reason, “Roman Pontos” is an abstraction that entails many different facets, developments, and local peculiarities. In 8 AD, Ovid’s exile in Tomis seemed to the Roman poet a journey to the end of the world; half a century later, things looked very different, even if this most urban and urbane of Rome’s poets would most likely have remained unimpressed. culture: see the papers by D. Braund, E. Dakin, and A. Chaniotis. 16 SEG LV 838. See Kantor 2012. 17 References to Pompey’s lex provinciae in Pliny, Letters 10.79, 112, and 114. See also Kantor 2020. 23 The Pontic Region and Roman Oecumene: an introduction Let us consider some of the consequences of this gradual process. The late integration of certain areas into the Roman administration had a significant impact on their exposure to dangers and wars, on the development of urban life, on the existence or non-existence of Roman colonies, on the migration of populations from Italy and Rome, and on the degree of their integration into a homogeneous culture. For instance, in Thrace, which became part of the Roman Empire about a century after Bithynia, wars continued to present a problem until the end of the first century BC – such as the conflict with the Bastarnae in 29–28 BC, the catastrophic invasion of the Scordisci in 16 BC, and a little later the revolt led by Vologases of the Bessi from 15 to 11 BC. The fact that Olbia was left unprotected in the last years of Mithridates’ reign and later by the victorious Romans, resulted in its exposure to the attack of the Getae, often linked with Burebista. According to Dio of Prusa, who claims to have visited Olbia around 100 AD, the signs of decline were very evident there, at a time when the cities of Asia Minor were experiencing a period of prosperity and general peace. A second consequence of the gradual and uneven expansion of Rome in the Black Sea region is the presence (and absence) of Roman colonies, and with them the introduction of Roman institutions.18 The establishment of colonies was usually (but not exclusively) the result of military conquest. Pompey had already settled veterans in Nikopolis and Pompeiopolis in Paphlagonia in 63 BC. A great wave of colonyfoundations followed under Caesar and Augustus - that is, at a time of limited Roman presence in the west, east and north coasts of the Black Sea, where we do not find colonies of Roman citizens. Caesar turned Sinope into a Roman colony (Colonia Iulia Felix Sinope)19 and Augustus renamed Apamea Myrleia in Bithynia as Colonia Iulia Concordia. Of course, the absence of Roman colonies in some areas was counterbalanced by the presence of numerous settlements, fortresses, and stations, especially in Dacia and Lower Moesia, and also by the settlement of Roman army veterans in cities of the Balkan provinces and in Asia Minor. This migration resulted in the presence of Latin speakers. In 9 AD, Ovid, complained that there was not a single person who spoke Latin in Tomis. However we interpret him, the fact is that three generations later he would have had no difficulty in finding people with whom he could communicate in Latin, though whether he would have found enough people appreciative of his verses is another matter. From the time of Trajan onwards, the number of Latin and bilingual inscriptions increased in the areas that joined the Roman oecumene relatively late.20 Despite such local peculiarities, there were important factors that contributed to the integration of the Pontic cities into the fairly homogeneous culture of the developing Roman oecumene. The most important among them is the movement of populations, and with them the movement of ideas, religious beliefs, art forms, 18 On Roman colonies in the Balkans and Asia Minor see more recently Brélaz (ed.) 2017. 19 See the paper of C. Barat in this volume. 20 For Lower Moesia see Loungarova 2016. 24 David Braund, Angelos Chaniotis, Elias K. Petropoulos culture, and customs. Depending on geographical and political conditions, population movements have different causes and forms.21 The most organized form is the presence of the Roman army in the Balkan provinces as far north as Dacia; mixed marriages (formal or not) with women from the local population contributed to the spread of the Latin language and Roman customs, which also offered the hope of success in life under Rome. Migration from Asia Minor to the Danubian provinces was also motivated by economic interests – e.g. for the exploitation of mines in Dacia, where settlers from Asia Minor also brought their local cults.22 The cult associations of ‘Asians’ (Ἀσιανοί) reveal the presence of such immigrants, who kept a form of local identity.23 A special form of population movement is the settlement of Jews in the cities of the Black Sea. Organized synagogues are known mainly from the epigraphic sources in the kingdom of the Bosporus, but Jewish inscriptions exist in other areas as well; 24 sometimes we recognize the presence of people of possible Jewish origin from their name (e.g. Σαμβατίων). In addition to organized population movements, large-scale periodic movements of professionals of all kinds – merchants, craftsmen, artists, actors, poets, gladiators, and athletes – contributed to the more cosmopolitan character of the Black Sea cities in the Imperial period. Apart from the phenomenon of migration, which is a general phenomenon in the Roman Empire, in some areas of the Black Sea, especially on the north coast, we may have mixed marriages with non-Greek populations of the hinterland – Scythians, Sarmatians etc. – and the naturalization of members of non-Greek population, perhaps meeting problems of demographic decline and in result of long co-existence. Much depends on the evidence and interpretation of names in inscriptions there.25 The participation of the inhabitants of the Pontic cities in cults in Panhellenic sanctuaries and in mystery cults is also a significant development, along with other innovations in the area of religion. We mention only two examples. The first is the presence of people from the Black Sea among the initiates in the cult of the Great Gods in Samothrace.26 The inscriptions that list the mystae mention several visitors from the cities of the west and north coast. The second example is the worship of the snake god Glykon Neos Asklepios. This cult was established (rather as Lucian’s satire has it) by Alexander, the ‘false prophet’, in the Paphlagonian city of Abonou Teichos (renamed Ionopolis) around 140 AD. It soon became a magnet for worshipers who came to the sanctuary for divination, cure, and initiation into a 21 See e.g. the study of Cojocaru 2009, on foreigners in the cities of the west and north coasts of the Black Sea. 22 See the recent studies on the presence of miners from Galatia in Dacia: Mitchell 2017; Piso 2018. 23 See e.g. SEG LIII 726 (Nikopolis on Istros); IGBulg I2 23 (Dioysopolis); IGBulg II 480 (Montana); IGR I 787 (Perinthos). 24 See the collection by Noy, Panayotov, and Bloedhorn 2004. 25 See Heinen 2006, 65 (on Olbia) and the onomastic studies of Cojocaru 2004 and Hupe 2005. See also the paper of E. Dakin in this volume. 26 See the publication of these texts by Dimitrova 2008. 25 The Pontic Region and Roman Oecumene: an introduction mystery cult.27 Textual sources and archaeological finds show the spread of Glykon’s worship beyond Asia Minor to the west coast of the Black Sea. Local and regional identities were constructed and displayed anew in this new stage of a Roman oecumene, but also in the context of long multicultural traditions, migrations, and both friendly and hostile contacts with non-Greek peoples. The civic identity and the local pride of citizens of Greek poleis co-existed with a sense of belonging to a broader Pontic community. Already in the early first century AD, an honorific decree of Byzantion for Orontas of Olbia provides direct evidence for such a Pontic identity, when he is characterized as “a man of principal position not only in his own fatherland but in the entire Pontic ethnos.”28 The specific bonds between colonies and mother-cities was another important form of identity. The author of the Chersonesian honorific decree for Thrasymedes of Herakleia (first or second century AD) compares his attitude in Chersonesos to that of a good father towards affectionate sons (οἵα πατέρων ἀγαθῶν πρὸς υἱοὺς φιλοστόργους [εἶχ]εν <ε>ὖνοιαν).29 He calls Herakleia “our mother”. A similar vocabulary of affection is found in a decree of Chersonesos for Herakleia (mid-second century AD), in which the Herakleiotes are called “most pious fathers” (εὐσεβέστατοι πατέρες).”30 The overlap of identities is a particularly complex phenomenon in the case of immigrants, who could develop a sense of loyalty toward two fatherlands; this idea is expressed in the epigram for Heliodoros from Amastris, who died at a young age in Pantikapaion (first century AD): “now I have two fatherlands (patrides); the one that earlier raised me, and the present one, in which I stay.”31 In this new Roman universe of multicultural contacts the traditional Hellenic identity was not forgotten, but surfaced in a variety of contexts, not only as an identity that differentiated between the inhabitants of Greek cities and non-Greek peoples but also as an identity founded in education and culture. Meanwhile, of course, it remained all too easy for Greeks of the Mediterranean heartlands - and especially in the great cities which claimed the best Hellenism, most obviously Athens – to judge their Pontic cousins in more critical fashion. As the Black Sea world became more multicultural, its forms of Hellenism were easily characterized by critics as diminished, not enhanced. Pehrpas the most striking indication of that kind of response from the centre to the Black Sea periphery is the remarkable fact that e know of no Greek city of the Euxine which was included in Hadrian’s Panhellenion, wherein proper Hellenism was key to membership. 32 27 Victor 1997; Miron 1996; Sfameni Gasparro 1996 and 1999; Chaniotis 2002. 28 IOSPE I2 79. On the Pontic koinon see the paper by S. Saprykin in this volume. 29 IOSPE I2 357. 30 IOSPE I2 362. 31 CIRB 134: ἔχω δὲ πατρίδας νῦν δύω τὴν μὲν πάλαι ἐν ᾗ τέθραμμαι τὴν δὲ νῦν ἐν ᾗ μένω. Discussed by Dana 2013. 32 On this Black Sea absence and related cultural snobbery, see Braund 1998; 2021. 26 David Braund, Angelos Chaniotis, Elias K. Petropoulos REFERENCES Avram, A. (2013) Prosopographia Ponti Euxini Externa, Leuven. Badoud, N. and A. Avram (2019) Bulletin archéologique – Amphores et timbres amphoriques grecs (2012-2016), REG 132, 129–151. Boţan, S.-P. and C. Chiriac (2016) State of the Art and Prospective Research Directions on Hellenistic and Roman Glass from the Pontus Euxinus, in Cojocaru and Rubel (eds.) 2016, 101–115. Braund, D. (1998) Greeks and Barbarians: the Black Sea Region and Hellenism under the Early Roman Empire, in S. Alcock (ed.), The Early Roman Empire in the East, Oxford, 121–36. ― (2018) Greek Religion and Cults in the Black Sea Region: Goddesses in the Bosporan Kingdom from the Archaic Period to the Byzantine Era, Cambridge. Braund, D. (2021) “Colchians Did not Like to Write”: Reflections on Greek Epigraphy in the Eastern Black Sea Region and its Hinterland, in M. Manoledakis (ed.), Peoples in the Black Sea Region from the Archaic to the Roman Period, Oxford, 131–140. Braund, D., E. Hall, and Wyles (eds.) (2019) Ancient Theatre and Performance Culture Around the Black Sea, Cambridge. Brélaz, C. (ed.), L’héritage grec des colonies romaines d’Orient: interactions culturelles dans les provinces hellénophones de l'empire romain, Paris. Bresson, A., A. Ivantchik, and J.-L. Ferrary, eds. (2007) Une koinè pontique. Cités grecques, sociétés indigènes et empires mondiaux sur le littoral nord de la mer Noire (VII e s. a.C.-IIIe s. p.C., Bordeaux. Chaniotis, A. (2002) Old Wine in a New Skin: Tradition and Innovation in the Cult Foundation of Alexander of Abonouteichos, in E. Dabrowa (ed.), Tradition and Innovation in the Ancient World (Electrum, 6), Krakow, 67–85. ― (2017) Political Culture in the Cities of the Northern Black Sea Region in the ‘Long Hellenistic Age’. The Epigraphic Evidence, in V. Kozlovskaya (ed.), The Northern Black Sea in Antiquity: Networks, Connectivity, and Cultural Interactions, Cambridge, 141–166. Cojocaru, V. (2004) Populaţia zonei nordice şi nord-vestice a Pontului Euxin in secolele VI-I a. Chr. pe baza izvoarelor epigrafice, Iaşi. ― (2009) ‘“Fremde” in griechischen Städten Skythiens und Kleinskythiens auf Grundlage der epigraphischen Quellen bis zum 3. Jh. n.Chr. Forschungsstand und Perspektive, in A. Coșkun, H. Heinen, and S.Pfeiffer (eds.), Identität und Zugehörigkeit im Osten der griechischrömischen Welt. Aspekte ihrer Repräsentation in Städten, Provinzen und Reichen, Frankfurt, 143–172. ― (2016a) Instituţia proxeniei în spaţiul pontic / Die Proxenie im Schwarzmeerraum, Cluj-Napoca. ― (2016b) Das Forschungsprojekt “External Relations of the Pontic Greek Cities in Hellenistic and Roman Times” (PN-II-ID-PCE-2011-3-0054). Ergebnisse und Perspektiven, in Cojocaru and Rubel (eds.) 2016, 21–40. Cojocaru, V. and A. Rubel, eds. (2016) Mobility in research on the Black Sea Region (Proc. Intern.Symp. (July 5-10, 2015), Cluj-Napoca. Dana, M. (2013) Ἔχω δὲ πατρίδας νῦν δύο (CIRB 134). Relaţii şi reţele între cetăţile greceşti din studi Mării Negre şi vecini lor pontici, in F. Panait-Bîrzescu, I. Bîrzescu, F. MateiPopesci, and A.Robu (eds.), Poleis in the Black Sea Area: Inter-Pontic Relations and Local Productions, Bucharest, 45–86. ― (2016) Les médecins dans les provinces danubiennes, REA 118, 99–123. 27 The Pontic Region and Roman Oecumene: an introduction Dimitrova, N. M. (2002) Inscriptions and Iconography in the Monuments of the Thracian Rider, Hesperia 71, 209–229. ― (2008) Theoroi and Initiates in Samothrace. The Epigraphical Evidence, Princeton. Ejstrud, B. (2006) Size Matters: Estimating Trade of Wine, Oil, and Fish-sauce from Amphorae in the First Century AD, in T. Bekker-Nielsen (ed.), Ancient Fishing and Fish Processing in the Black Sea Region, in 171–181. Heinen, H. (2006) Antike am Rande der Steppe. Der nördliche Schwarzmeerraum als Forschungsaufgabe, Mainz/Stuttgart. Hupe, J. (2005) Der Dedikantenkreis des Achilleus als ein Gradmesser von Akkulturationsprozessen im kaiserzeitlichen Olbia. Ein Beitrag zur olbischen Onomastik, in F. Fless and M. Treister (eds.), Bilder und Objekte als Träger kultureller Identität und interkultureller Kommunikation im Schwarzmeergebiet. Kolloquium in Zschortau/Sachsen vom 13.2.–15.2.2003, Rahden Westf., 43–52. Kantor, G. (2012) Local Courts of Chersonesus Taurica in the Roman Age, in P. Martzavou and N. Papazarkadas (eds.), The Epigraphy of the Post-Classical City, Oxford, 69–86. ― (2020) Navigating Roman Law and Local Privileges in Pontus-Bithynia, in B. Czajkowski and B. Eckhardt (eds.), Law in the Roman Provinces, Oxford, 185–209. Loungarova, P. (2016) Bilingual Inscriptions from the Province of Lower Moesia, in Monuments and Texts in Antiquity and Beyond. Essays for the Centenary of Georgi Mihailov (1915-1991) (Studia Classica Serdicensia V), Sofia, 162–172. Miron, A. V. B. (1996) Alexander von Abonuteichos. Zur Geschichte des Orakels des Neos Asklepios Glykon, in W. Leschhorn, A. V. B. Miron, and A. Miron (eds.), Hellas und der griechische Osten. Studien zur Geschichte und Numismatik der griechischen Welt. Festschrift für Peter Robert Franke zum 70. Geburtstag, Saarbrücken, 153–188. Mitchell, S. (2017) Two Galatian Cults in Dacia, Gephyra 14, 15–21. Mordvintsrva, V. (2016) Barbarians of the North Pontic Region and their Contacts with Centers of Antique Civilization from the 3rd Century BCE to the Mid-3rd Century CE (According to the Research of Elite Burials), in Cojocaru and Rubel (eds.) 206, 387–438. Noy, D., A. Panayotov, and H. Bloedhorn (2004) Inscriptiones Judaicae Orientis. Volume I. Eastern Europe, Tübingen. Piso, I. (2018) Kleinasiatische Götter und Kolonisten in Dakien, Gephyra 15, 37–70. Ruscu, L. (2013) The Relations of the Western Pontic Apoikiai with their Greek and Barbarian Neighbours in the Hellenistic and Roman Periods, F. Panait-Bîrzescu, I. Bîrzescu, F. MateiPopesci, and A.Robu (eds.), Poleis in the Black Sea Area: Inter-Pontic Relations and Local Productions, Bucharest, 11–44. ― (2016) Griechen, Römer ubd Einheimische in Poleis von Thrakien und Pontos, in Cojocaru and Rubel (eds.) 2016, 301–321. Sayar, M. (2016) Die Beziehungen zwischen der Bevölkerung der griechischen Poleis des Propontis-Gebietes und der westpontischen Küste von der hellenistischen Zeit bis zum Ende der römischen Kaiserzeit, in Cojocaru and Rubel (eds.) 2016, 289–300. Sfameni Gasparro, G. (1996) Alessandro di Abonutico, lo ‘pseudo-profeta’ ovvero come construir-si un’identità religiosa. I. Il profeta, ‘eroe’ e ‘uomo divino’, Studi e Materiali di Storia delle Religioni 62, 565–590. ― (1999) Alessandro di Abonutico, lo ‘pseudo-profeta’ ovvero come construirsi un’identità religiosa. II. L’oracolo e i misteri, in C. Bonnet and A. Motte (eds.), Les syncrétismes religieux dans le monde méditérranéen antique. Actes du colloque international en l’honneur de Franz Cumont, Bruxelles/Rome, 275–305. 28 David Braund, Angelos Chaniotis, Elias K. Petropoulos Slawisch, A. (2016) Reading the Image? Ambiguities in the Interpreation of Banquet Scenes on Grave Stelae from Roman Thrace, 591–625. Victor, U. (1997) Lukian von Samosata - Alexander oder der Lügenprophet: Eingeleitet, herausgegeben, übersetzt und erklärt, Leiden. 29 Şahin Yıldırım ŞAHIN YІLDІRІM THE ROMAN TRADING CENTER ON THE BANK OF THE BILLAIOS RIVER INTRODUCTION On August 8th, 2009, the Tios excavation team made a visit to Üçburgu-Kayıkbaşı, in the Gökçebey district of Zonguldak Province. During this visit the excavation team encountered a group of foundation ruins, with regular plans, on the banks of the Billaios River (Figs. 1, 2). Two lead weights, several fragments of pottery, often deriving from amphorae, were found by the excavation team. These remains, which are dated to the Roman period, gave rise to the hypothesis that the site might have been an emporion serving river commerce in antiquity (Figs. 3, 4). These ruins cover an area of approximately three acres. Thanks to the conversations we had with the local people, it was ascertained that this area was revealed by the floods that occurred in February and March 2009. In the same year, the site was registered to be preserved by the Directorate of Protection of Cultural and Natural Assets in Karabük. Following the discoveries of 2009, in 2012–2013, a huge team consisting of archaeologists, architects and restorators initiated salvage excavations at the site. The team was led by the scientific guidance of Karabük University and worked under the auspices of the Karadeniz Ereğli Museum. In this paper, we evaluate the studies conducted at the Gökçebey-Üçburgu site in 2012–2013. Üçburgu’s emporion was discovered on the banks of the Billaios River in Gökçebey. The ruins of the emporion are located in the territory of the ancient city of Tios, 30 km south of its center. According to Arrian (Periplus Ponti Euxini 13.5.5), Tios was founded as a Greek colonial city by the Milesians in the 7th century BC, led by the priest Tios.1 According to the ancient writer Marcian, the city was located on the banks of the Billaios River, which was accepted as a border between the regions of Bithynia and Paphlagonia (Fig. 5). However, Strabo (12.3.5) mentions a Paphlagonian tribe called the Kaukon that resided in the area before the Greeks. According to both Marcian and Arrian (Periplus Ponti Euxini 13.5.5), the city was 20 stadia away from the Billaios River. Since the city was strategically located on both a river mouth and the sea coast, and it was on a Roman trade route, it was well preserved through the centuries and maintained its importance (Figs. 6, 7). BILLAIOS RIVER The European traveler William Ainsworth, who visited Tios and its surroundings, describes the city’s vital Billaios River with impressive statements in his article The Resources of the Anatolian Shores of the Black Sea.2 Fertile agricultural lands lie all along the Billaios’ river valley, as well as in its delta where it flows into the sea. These lands 1 Magie 1950, 1193; Marek 1993, 16; Atasoy 2008, 91; Öztürk 2008, 64; Anderson 2009, 265–266. 2 Ainsworth 1855, 236–237; Öztürk 2012, 10. 277 The Roman trading center on the bank of the Billaios River considerably enriched the city of Tios. Besides, it is certain that the Billaios was a commercial river. Commercial commodities and valuable goods from the inner regions of Anatolia were transferred by the river and delivered to the Black Sea and the Mediterranean world via the port of Tios. From the ancient sources, we learn that many of Tios’ citizens made their livelihoods through maritime and river-borne trade, agriculture, fishery and viticulture.3 The Billaios and its springs supplied water to the settlements near the city centrum, in the territory, as well as in the countryside. This rich supply of water made the farmlands fertile. As a result of this, agricultural products of high quality could be grown abundantly. The regularly arranged trade network was centered in the city through the Billaios River and Tios’ harbor. This network facilitated the transportation and selling of the goods to the other regions and made agriculture a primary occupation, among the most profitable sources of income for the citizens.4 The Billaios River of antiquity (or Filyos as it is called today) emerges from the vicinity of Kretia/Flaviopolis, which is located in the Gerede district of Bolu Province and follows a very long course. At the eastern regions its name changes successively into Olgassys (Ilgaz), Ulusu, Geredeçay and Soğanlı Brook. 5 Running roughly in an east-west direction after Karabük, the Billaios River merges with the Ladon (Devrek Brook) to the west of the Gökçebey district and continues to run in a south-north direction. The lower Filyos basin is the area where the river turns to the north, after which it runs into the Black Sea. 6 From the merge point, the basin spreads to an area of 24,400 square km through a valley, passes by the Çaycuma district and flows out to the Black Sea, forming a delta. The total length of the river is 228 kilometers (Fig. 8). 7 Between Karabük and Gökçebey, Billaios (Filyos) valley has a narrow base area with some occasionally emerging bedrock and with a small amount of fertile alluvial land. However, it has a wide base area in its lower course. The lower Filyos basin has a corrugated topography formed by low ridges parallel to the river bank and valleys among these ridges. The elevation rises up toward the inner regions from east to west.8 Groves and forests in the valley constitute two thirds of the area. The upper Filyos basin is the most heavily forested area. With regard to the variety and density of the forests, it is one of the richest areas in the western Black Sea region. 9 Lying on both the north and south of the Billaios River, these forests were indispensable for the economy since they supplied the timber that was traded in antiquity. It is not difficult to anticipate that the timber and other products obtained from these forests 3 Öztürk 2013b, 487. 4 Öztürk 2012, 84; Öztürk 2013a, 150. 5 Öztürk 2012, 96; Robert 1980, 180; Küçükali 2008, 1975–1981. 6 Avcı 1997, 302. 7 Büyüksalih et al. 2005, 2. 8 Avcı 1997, 303. 9 Avcı 1998, 451–452. 278 Şahin Yıldırım most probably were collected and then transported to custom houses and depots in Gökçebey-Üçburgu or to the markets in the centrum by means of small vessels operating on the Billaios River.10 Also, some researchers have suggested that this timber could have been used in the construction of small vessels and ships. 11 Although there is not yet any research on this topic, it is useful to point out that the forests of the Black Sea region are very convenient for shipbuilding. Certainly, the first destination of the agricultural and forestry products loaded to the vessels were customs houses and depots, probably located near to the city borders, where the products were registered and weighed, and where taxes were levied upon them before they were exported to the cities of the Black Sea coast. However, since there is no written evidence about sales and taxation in this area or in its surroundings, our knowledge around this issue is lacking at present.12 RIVER-BORNE TRADE In the ancient sources, information on the river trade is very scarce. However, both archaeological and historical sources show that rivers were used for water transport since antiquity. The earliest examples are the Nile River in Africa, and the Euphrates River and the Tigris River in Mesopotamia. Considering the archaeological evidence gathered from these rivers, it can be assumed that they have been used for transportation for a very long time.13 This fact is not limited to Egypt and Mesopotamia. The River transport was also important in the Eastern Mediterranean world. Several important rivers in Asia Minor, such as the Halys, Sangarios and Billaios, also served as water routes. Regarding Greece, however, the situation is somewhat ambiguous. It is thought that in ancient Greece, river trade had less importance than sea trade, as most of the rivers were not navigable.14 Nevertheless, it is obvious that some rivers such as the Baphyras, Axios, Lydias, Strymon, Nestos and Hebros were used for transportation.15 The Roman period seems to be the time when river transportation was first systematized (Geography 4.1.2). Describing the history of his country, Gaul stated that their rivers were navigable and used in river trade. The importance of river trade in Britannia and Germania can also be inferred from the archaeological evidence. A Mediterranean-type trade ship found in Billingsgate near the Thames River during archaeological excavations, and the flat-bottomed boats found in Mainz (Germany), Pommeroeul (Belgium) and Zwammerdam (Holland) attest to the extensiveness of river transportation in the Roman world.16 This situation is the same for the Roman 10 Öztürk 2012, 88. 11 Hirschfeld 1897, 130; Öztürk 2012, 89; Robert 1977, 43–132; Robert 1980, 189. 12 Öztürk 2012, 91. 13 Casson 1995, 25. 14 Freitag 1998, 78. 15 De Boer 2010, 176, Casson 1965, 34; Bouzek 1996, 222. 16 Greene 1986, 31–33; De Weerd 1978; De Boe 1978. 279 The Roman trading center on the bank of the Billaios River mainland. The Tiber River had a paramount importance for Rome. The goods unloaded to Ostia harbor were transported to the emporion in Rome through the Tiber River.17 In the Roman period, river transportation was seen as a supplement to trade and communication and it saved in costs and manpower in the transportation of cargoes.18 In the Roman period, the costs were higher in river transport than in sea transport. However, when compared with land transport, the costs of river transport were much lower. The Edictum de maximis pretiis, issued by the emperor Diocletian in 301 AD, included price tariffs for ground, sea and river transport. This edict calculated sea transport as 1 unit, river transport as 4.9 units and land transport as 28–56 units in cost.19 Thus, it is clear that in antiquity and probably also in the medieval period, the costs of transport on the waters of the interior were 6 to 10 times lower than the other types of transportation.20 Rivers flowing out to the Black Sea were also of great importance in terms of riverborne trade with the inner regions. It was the Greek colonial movements that provided the basis for the systematical usage of the rivers in the Black Sea region. The majority of the cities founded along the Black Sea coast were located at strategically and geopolitically important spots – such as the mouths of river valleys with protected harbors, where communication with the inner regions was easy. River-borne trade has a privileged position in most of the coastal cities of the southern Black Sea. Besides the large rivers like the Sangarios, Billaios, Parthenios, Halys and Iris, small rivers also had the potential for transportation in particular seasons. Yet the evidence of river-borne trade has been found only for the Billaios River, which flows out to the Black Sea near Tios. From the ancient sources, we understand that in this era the livelihood of Tios’ people involved seaborne/river-borne trade, agriculture, fishery and wine production. Tios, like most colonial cities in the Black Sea region, conducted its transportation with the inner regions both by rivers and by land routes. Under these conditions, it seems likely that the Üçburgu emporion – sited at a junction of land and water routes – played a key role in Tios’ trade. Tios, thanks to the advanced network of land and sea routes connecting it to the other regions and cities, had become one of the most important trading centers in the area. Of particular importance was the main road to the interior, namely the road towards Klaudiupolis, which extended to the north along the Billaios River and reached the sea where Tios was located.21 In the Roman period this road was also known as one of the main destinations of the province called Provincia Pontus et Bithynia (Fig. 9). Unfortunately, very little of the road has survived since it has been 17 Casson 1965, 31; Heitland 1909, 9; Heinzelmann-Martin 2002, 5–6. 18 Greene 1986, 30. 19 Duncan-Jones 1974, 366; De Boer 2010, 176; Giacchero 1974, 45. 20 De Boer 2010, 176. 21 Akyürek Şahin – Uyar 2009, 265; Akyürek Şahin – Uyar 2012, 170; Marek 2003, 58; Öztürk 2013a, 149–150. 280 Şahin Yıldırım covered over.22 The route of the road can be reconstructed from the milestones around Tios. These milestones date to the reigns of the emperors Vespasian, Antoninus Pius, Septimius Severus, Caracalla, Geta, Constantine and Licinius, between the 3rd and 4th centuries AD. Several stones without inscriptions are dated to the reigns of Caracalla, Decius and Etruscilla, Diocletian and Maximian, Contantius I and Galerius. Most of these milestones were found alongside or in the Billaios River.23 One of the milestones from the reign of Caracalla was found in the river near the Gökçebey-Üçburgu ruins (Fig. 10). The most important evidence showing that the Billaios River was a trade route are the autonomous coins of Tios minted during the Imperial period. The reverse of some issues features the river god Billaios. The Billaios River was depicted on the coins of Tios and Kretia-Flaviopolis. On the coins of Antoninus Pius, Marcus Aurelius, Commodus, Valerian II and Gallienus, Billaois is depicted in a reclining position. In some depictions, he is resting his hand on a ship’s bow and in others he is holding a vine leaf. On the coins of Antonius Pius he is depicted in a reclining position with Sardon, the river god of Sardon Brook, modern Göbü Çay.24 These coins clearly show that the Billaios was a river-borne trade route; however, it is thought that this route was probably used in particular seasons of the year because the flow rate of the river is very low in the summer when the rain is rare. The low flow rate made the transport of goods difficult.25 The flow rate of the river increases with the melting snow after the winter months and especially in the spring. The same cycle is likely to have existed in antiquity. It is probable that merchandise from the inner regions was transported to Tios’ harbor by boats and small vessels with the help of a high flow rate during the late winter and spring. The increase in the flow rate should be the same in the southern part of the river because the Ladon River merges with the Billaios near the Üçburgu emporion in summer and autumn, thus creating the flow necessary for transportation. The observations we made at the site over three years have proven that the flow rate rises with the merging of brooks in the summer months, making the river suitable for transportation. This must have been the basis for the construction of the emporion and customs house in this area. Even during the summer drought, transportation was still possible. Probably, the transportation of goods in the summer months was conducted by land until this point and sent to Tios via the river after the customs formalities. Lead weights, amphorae, and pieces of other storage vessels found in excavations, as well as many Imperial-era coins found near the river and close to the pier, indicate the commercial importance of having an emporion at this location. 22 Belke 1996: 131–132; Marek 2003: 58. 23 Öztürk 2012, 66–68; Öztürk 2013a, 150; Öztürk 2015b, 82–85; Öztürk 2016, 83–91. 24 Altınoluk 2005, 33; Altınoluk 2010. 25 Billaios River’s total annual speed is 3213.910 hm3/year and its efficiency is averagely 201.237 m3/sec Seasonly flow rates of the Billaios River are; 135.470 m3 in spring, 31.070 m3 in summer, 67.140 m3 in autumn and 127.370 m3 in winter. 281 The Roman trading center on the bank of the Billaios River EMPORION In the ancient sources, there is almost no information about ancient settlements in Gökçebey (Tefen) and its vicinity. But there is some archaeological evidence for the existence of settlements in the area, even if they are small in scale. This includes Corinthian column capitals dated to the Roman period and found in the garden of the Gökçebey train station; a Roman tomb found at the hill across from the Üçburgu ruins; a tumulus in Örmeci village near Üçburgu; the necropolis of Pazarlıoğlu village; and the columns and column capitals encountered near Çukur village (Fig. 11).26 An inscribed tombstone was found by a sand and gravel mining company operating near the Billaios River and was submitted to the Karadeniz Ereğlisi Museum in 2015. This inscription offers a hint of the area’s ancient heritage. Especially remarkable is a defensive structure called Bodaç Fortress, set on a hilltop near Gaziler village, three kilometers south of the Gökçebey district (Fig. 12).27 This fortress is located in a strategical area at the intersection of ancient roads and the Billaios and Ladon rivers. The Billaios River flows to the north of the fortress. The fortress was constructed with oval shaped stones – probably gathered from the surrounding area – without opus caementicium; nowadays the structure is surrounded by trees. In spite of the massive buildup of trees, the east, west and south fortification walls can be traced and it is presumed that the north wall was unnecessary because of a sheer cliff. Inside of the castle, ceramics of the Roman and Late Antique period were found.28 It is significant that Bodaç Fortress is located at the nexus point of land and water routes. Thanks to its location, the fortress protected the ancient roads, the small settlements around these roads and the emporium by the Billaios River.29 During the surveys, the most important archaeological remains were found at the site of Üçburgu (Kayıkbaşı). This site is located in the Gökçebey district of Zonguldak Province. The coordinates of the Üçburgu emporion are N41. 306786°, E32. 093446°. Neither ancient sources nor the European travelers to the area provide any information about this site. ARCHAEOLOGICAL EXCAVATIONS As aforementioned, the site, which was accidentally unearthed as a result of a flood in Gökçebey and its vicinity in 2009, is thought to be an emporion. Before the flood, the archaeological site aroused the interest of locals and illegal excavators. However, 26 Karauğuz 2006, 331. 27 In 20th April, 2015; a marble inscription, which is believed to belonged to a tombstone, was found by a company which was filtering gravels in the river in Alagözler sand and gravel pit filtering facilities located around Bülent Ecevit University in Kayıkçılar village of Çaycuma district. Translation of this inscription was made by Dr. Bülent Öztürk as that: “Quintus Vetina Pallateionos Roufeinianos Onesimos had this hereon built when he is 75 years old for himself, his wife Antylle and his children who lived as ideal models. Salute you passenger!” 28 Karauğuz 2008, 107; Karauğuz et al. 2010, 151–152; Karauğuz – Özcan 2010, 135–136. 29 Karauğuz 2008, 107; Karauğuz – Özcan 2010. 282 Şahin Yıldırım the Tios excavation team made the first scientific assessment of this area in 2009. Since the location of site was beyond the legal authority of the Tios excavation, the team could not carry out an excavation in those years. Unfortunately, the locals and illegal excavators damaged the site significantly and destroyed important archaeological data. In 2012, because of the increasing amount of damage, the Karadeniz Ereğlisi Museum and Tios Excavation Team initiated the first environmental cleanup and salvage excavation as a joint project. This project occupied a two-month period in 2012 and 2013 and provided results that would contribute significantly to the archaeological knowledge of the area. The studies were expected to be continued for a few years. However, as a result of flooding during the spring and some uninformed activity by companies attempting to change the direction of the river bed, the major part of the architectural remains was destroyed in the spring of 2014. This destruction caused an irrevocable loss of significant architectural remains and objects. Although the plan of most of the structures found here were drawn, the function of most of the spaces remained unclear. The first survey and cleaning of the site was begun in the summer of 2012. The purpose of the studies was to remove obstructions like alluvium, trash, trees etc. covering the architectural remains. In the 2012 season, excavation could not proceed because of bureaucratic difficulties, and only some sondage works were executed at the site. During this work, some finds were made. Ceramic fragments, which were found densely on the surface, were dated to the Roman period. This indicates the occupation of this area at this time. In addition to this, a poorly preserved sandstone inscription with Greek letters was found (Fig. 13). This inscription is still being examined by Dr. Bülent Öztürk.30 In the excavation area, another inscription was also found in 2012.31 ARCHITECTURE Studies carried out in the emporion of Üçburgu revealed that the architectural structures of the emporion were built in three different phases. These architectural remains are spread over a vast area of 140 x 60 meters. Located about 40 meters east to this site, the remains of a wooden pier were visible in the river which survived after a flood (Fig. 14). The preserved length of this pier which came about with the meandering water of the Filyos River is 11 meters long and it has a width of 1.8 meters. Only 26 pillars of the pier have survived in good condition. The pillars of the pier on the southern part are better preserved than the ones on the north. According to our preliminary research, the wooden pillars, made of boxwood, were arranged 30 Dr. Bülent Öztürk states that this inscription written in Greek is probably about the customs process of the merchandise transported from inner regions. However, it was not possible to read the inscription because it was largely damaged. 31 A piece of an inscription which is said to be dedicated to Mater Theon and mentioned in an article was published in 2012 and written by N. Eda Akyürek Şahin and a local person who are studying the site without the permission of Ministry of Culture. Akyürek Şahin – Uyar 2012, 152 (see Fig. 5a–b). 283 The Roman trading center on the bank of the Billaios River with gaps varying between 0.65 and 1.30 meters. Almost all of the pillars have a diameter of 20 centimeters. Unfortunately, this pier which dates to the Roman era, has been destroyed during the 2014 flood. In addition to the damage caused by the flood, there has been a spectacular amount of devastation caused by illegal excavators. This devastation is especially pronounced on the riverbank. In 2009, when the site of Üçburgu emporion was newly discovered, the foundations of the buildings had their integrity. Since the first findings until 2014, however, the floods and illegal excavations destroyed the major part of the harbor and the harbor buildings near the river. During the excavation works conducted in the buildings of the emporion and in the spaces outside the buildings, some building remains lacking the full extent of their plans were found (Fig. 15). These remains have been dated to the Republican period by the excavation team. As understood from the finds such as ceramics and especially coins, the groups of structures which are classified as the site’s first phase were built around the 1st century BC. We do not have sufficient information on the plans and types of these first-phase constructions. However, the thickness of the walls is approximately 50–60 centimeters and they are made of randomly placed boulders. The main walls of the building were most probably made of mud-brick or wood, but during the excavations no evidence supporting this assumption was found (because the significant part of the foundations dated to the first phase has been damaged by floods or some other catastrophes as revealed during the excavations). Additionally, the excavators uncovered a dense clay layer, which measures up to three meters in some places. All the structural remains on site were built upon this thick layer of clay which wiped out and covered the early-stage structures. The second phase of the emporion dates to the Roman Imperial period (1st–3rd centuries AD). The second-phase buildings adhered to a more distinct, systematic plan compared to first-phase buildings (Figs. 16, 17, 18). These buildings were built in a grid-plan arrangement within a scheme that resembles a street pattern. Secondphase buildings are laid out parallel to the Billaios River, in a northeast-southwest direction. Between the buildings, there are some gaps, with a width of 2 to 5 meters, that served as streets. Some of these streets had the remains of stone pavement (Fig. 19). Buildings of this phase are larger in scale compared to buildings in other phases. In the same area, we have encountered major remains of four big structures. There were probably many more buildings in this area, but the foundations of these buildings have not survived. The second-phase buildings are not similar to firstphase buildings. The foundations of second-phase buildings were built with angular stone blocks that have been cut smoother than the stones of first-stage buildings. However, these stones were not dressed precisely. The height of these buildings’ foundations rises up to a maximum of 60 centimeters in certain spots. We do not have satisfactory knowledge about the walls of the buildings built in this phase. However, it is possible that simple walls from mud or stone may have been used on stone walls or foundations. In two of the second-phase buildings, the remains of ovens have been found. Located on grid D4, the first oven is made of terracotta. Its 284 Şahin Yıldırım circular form has enabled us to measure its diameter which is 70 centimeters. Unfortunately, only a small portion of the furnace has survived undamaged. The second oven is at the intersection of the grids E13 and F13. It is made of boulders and has a circular plan. This oven has a diameter of 80 centimeters, but unfortunately no archaeological evidence was found inside of it (Fig. 20). A thick conflagration layer is conspicuous throughout the second phase in general. The majority of the ceramics found in this layer dated to the 3rd century AD and they have been observed in almost all of the second-phase buildings. The archaeological data does not provide a satisfactory explanation as to the cause of the fire. The thirdphase buildings of the site are set just above this conflagration layer. Among the buildings of the second-phase, two relatively well-preserved warehouses located in the middle of the site are remarkable. The dimensions of these structures are nearly the same, measuring 11–13 meters in width and 29–31 meters in length. Since they were in use for a long period of time, their interior plans were modified many times according to changing needs. In light of the excavations during which many storage jars were found, it is understood that these buildings were used as warehouses. The many small amphora fragments found in the rooms of these buildings suggest that the spaces were used for the short-term storage of commercial commodities. The second-phase structures in the river bay – especially one building which is thought to be used as an administrative area to register commercial products – were devastated by illegal excavators with a bulldozer (Fig. 21). This building was probably used for the formal registration of the goods transported to the emporion. Six lead weights in total were found in one of its chambers during the 2009 excavations which suggested that the building may have had an administrative role. Dozens of coins from the Roman era were found inside and around this building located nearby the river. The aforementioned Greek inscription was also found in the vicinity of this building (see Fig. 13). Before it was damaged, this structure, which is located just by the river, had the characteristic layout of the second-phase buildings and was of the same type. The number of third-phase structures in Gökçebey Üçburgu emporion are less than those of the second phase. According to the archaeological finds collected from the inside and in the vicinity of these constructions, it is understood that they were actively in use since late 3rd century AD until the end of the 4th century AD (Fig 22). The foundations of this phase are also made of boulders, just as in the first phase. Likewise, no data is available about the upper structure of the walls. These structures are smaller in scale than the ones in the other stages. Their widths vary between 7–12 meters and their lengths vary between 15–22 meters. There are two buildings with distinctive layouts. These buildings are located in the center of the area and they have several rooms designed for storage just as in second-phase structures. The character of the third-phase structures’ remains by the river on the east suggests the existence of a dock during this period. However, the remains could not be fully identified since the walls in this area are considerably damaged. The traces of a regular stone pavement (probably part of a pier) are visible between the walls and 285 The Roman trading center on the bank of the Billaios River the warehouse structures. This pavement is particularly well preserved on grids E8 and E9. It is parallel to the river and it consists of large, regularly shaped stone slabs. The total width of this pavement is 4 meters and it is bordered by sidewalk stones to its east and west. The third-phase structures have come to an end by a massive flood. The available archaeological data suggest that a flood, which is thought to have occurred in the last quarter of the 4th century AD, devastated the structures of this phase. Subsequently, all this area has been covered by the sediments deposited by the Billaios River until they were discovered in 2009. FINDS Pottery Many finds were encountered during the archaeological studies in the Üçburgu emporion. A dedicated publication in which all these finds are detailed is soon to be published by the excavation team. In the present paper, we provide only a general overview by reference to some notable finds. Among the finds of Üçburgu, the potteries are predominant. A significant part of the potteries consists of pieces of amphorae. These were especially concentrated around the warehouses and a preliminary evaluation points to local and exported products from the Black Sea and Aegean regions. These amphorae date from the 1st century BC to the end of 4th century AD, thus covering a long time span (Figs. 23, 24). In addition, many rough kitchen vessels, jugs, and beverage cups such as kylikes and kantharoi were found. Especially inside of the buildings near the river, red slipped Roman ceramics were found. Within the site, approximately 270 pieces of thin red figure Roman potteries have been collected.32 Among these very high-quality potteries, there are local products referred to as Pontic Sigillata and exported products such as African Red Slip Ware, Eastern Sigillata B and Thin Walled Ware (Fig. 25). In addition, materials of the same type have been found in earlier studies in the vicinity of Tios’ theater.33 Local and exported potteries around the Black Sea basin are very similar, so identification of their origin is often complicated. The regional wares in question generally have the same morphological characteristics and their origins can only be determined by an advanced method practiced on clay. However, advanced chemical and petrochemical analysis are needed to differentiate the wares conclusively.34 During the studies conducted in the vicinity of the site, a fragmentary pottery oven was found approximately 500 meters south of the emporion, on the west side of the river. Unfortunately, this oven was destroyed by the bulldozer of a gravel company which trades the gravel carried by the river. This oven showed us that pottery production was centered near clay deposits, concentrated around the Üçburgu stretch 32 Fontana-Yılmaz 2015a, 427. 33 Fontana-Yılmaz 2015b, 306. 34 Fontana-Yılmaz 2015b, 306. 286 Şahin Yıldırım of the Billaios River. Because of the aforementioned devastation, an excavation could not be carried out for this oven. Coins Many coins have been collected in Üçburgu. Among these, 167 coins found during the 2012-2013 seasons were recorded (Figs. 26, 27). All of them are made of bronze, except for the silver denarii issued in names of Augustus, Domitian (3), Nerva, Trajan, Hadrian (3) and Antoniniani issued in name of Gordian. All of the bronze coins are of the region’s provincial Roman phase, with the exception of two autonomous coins dating back to the 1st century BC, from the mints of Amisos and Pessinus. The majority of the coins found in the site were minted in Tios. In addition, there are some coins that were minted in the cities of Amastris, Heraclea Pontica and Midaeum.35 Since 70% of the provincial coins discovered at the Üçburgu emporion were minted at Tios, it was clearly sited in the territorium of this polis. 36 The coins found in Gökçebey-Üçburgu are for the most part dated between the first half of the 1st century and to the first half of the 3rd century. The coins belong mainly to the 2nd and 3rd centuries; this is the period when the emporion was used most actively. Lead Weights Lead weights are among the most significant finds from the Üçburgu emporion. These weights were found in a partly sunken second-phase structure by the river and they are of different sizes and types. Two of these were found in the surface survey in 2009, whereas the other three were sold to a local private museum.37 In addition, in the excavations of 2012, one leaden weight was found in grid E7 (Fig. 28). These lead weights with inscriptions belong to the Roman Imperial period and they give us clues about the socio-economic and political life and religious beliefs of the period. On these lead weights there are depictions of gods such as Zeus, Dionysos and Hermes, as well as depictions of bells, scales and the kerykeion (which symbolizes trade). From the inscriptions, it is understood that these weights were made under the supervision of and used by the boule and the agoranomos. This fact is also informative about the political and economic life of the city. 38 The weights are categorized in three scales such as ½ mina, 1 mina and 10 minae. 39 These scales are equivalent to 210 grams, 440 grams and 4900 grams respectively. Moreover, various bronze weapons and many different Roman period pieces have been discovered in Üçburgu emporion such as spearhead, bronze barbs, oil lamps, figurine pieces (Fig. 29). One of the archeological finds are especially remarkable: an 35 Lenger – Atasoy 2015, 382–383. 36 Lenger – Atasoy 2015, 383. 37 Akyürek Şahin – Uyar 2009; Akyürek Şahin – Uyar 2012; Uyar 2012. 38 Atasoy – Yıldırım 2011; Öztürk 2012, 91; Öztürk 2013a, 150; Öztürk 2013b, 491; Öztürk 2015a, 78. 39 Öztürk 2015b, 86–87. 287 The Roman trading center on the bank of the Billaios River interesting bronze fibulae from the Phrygian era (8th–7th century BC)40 which was found on site. There is a considerable number of findings about Phrygian settlement in the interior parts of the region in the 8th–7th century BC. For this reason, it is not surprising to have found a Phrygian fibula during the excavations. During the latest excavations conducted in Tieion, many ceramics majorly related to Phrygian culture, known as gray ware, have been found. Additionally, a bronze omphalos jar (25 cm in diameter, 6 cm in length), which was added to the Çanakçılar Archaeology and Ethnography Private Museum’s inventory, has been found during the illegal excavations conducted in a tumulus, located nearby Gökçebey. Ichnographically speaking, this jar is dated to the 8th-7th century BC.41 Various Phrygian ceramics, dated to the 8th century BC, have also been found in the Great Göztepe Tumulus in Safranbolu, located 50 km southeast to Gökçebey.42 Also, many of the rock graves around Safranbolu have Phrygian patterns.43 Clearly, the region has a significant Phrygian impact. Yet, all these findings should be the subject matter of another study. As mentioned above, a comprehensive study for publishing is currently being conducted by the excavation team. CONCLUSION We have seen that the Üçburgu emporion had a well-selected, strategic location. That is to say, the emporion was located at a point where the Billaios and Ladon rivers merge and the flow rate starts to increase. Thus, the transportation of commercial goods was possible not only in a particular season but all year round. Additionally, the emporion was located at the intersection of land routes. Moreover, the Bodaç Castle enabled the protection of the area against external and internal threats. Lastly, the Üçburgu emporion was located approximately 30 kilometers south of Tios and this reveals the vastness of the city’s territory. Nowhere in the Black Sea region is there a river harbor or emporion of such great size. It is clear from both archaeological studies and ancient literary sources that trade proliferated after the Greek colonization movement; this spurred the more general use of the rivers for transportation. Many important ancient cities in the Black Sea region of Turkey were connected with the rivers directly or indirectly. As a result of archaeological excavations carried out recently in Turkey, a mound called Çattepe was investigated along the Tigris River in Upper Mesopotamia. Within the Roman-period layers of this mound, there came to light a river harbor. This harbor was mainly used in the Roman period. Additionally, there is some written evidence showing that this harbor was also used in the medieval period on the Tigris River.44 40 For similar examples see Muscarella 1964, 37; for a recent publication dealing with Phrygian fibulae see Gerçek 2013, 54-55. 41 Muscarella 1971, 59. Pl. IV, fig. 9. 42 Yıldırım 2019. 43 Von Gall, 1966, 73–82; Johnson, 2010, 353; Vassileva, 2012, 145; Vassileva 2015, 93–94; Yıldırım 2018, 1307. 44 Sağlamtimur 2012, 72–75; Sağlamtimur 2014, 34–38. 288 Şahin Yıldırım However, there are no traces of any similar harbor along Mesopotamia’s other main river, namely the Euphrates. In Pistiros, Bulgaria, another major river harbor has been revealed on the banks of a Thracian river: The Hebros. The Hebros River is the second longest river in the Balkan Peninsula, after the Danube; it is the longest river in Thrace and the widest river in the Northern Aegean.45 The Hebros River had been open to navigation until the 18th century and provided the Balkans with easy access to the Black Sea. Herodotus (7.58–59) states that a large part of the Hebros River was suitable for water transportation. Especially between Hadrianopolis and Ainos, the river course is like a water highway because of the merging of three rivers near Hadrianopolis. At the mouth of the Hebros River, where it flows out to the Aegean Sea, lies the coastal city of Ainos. The location of the city enabled it to maintain its strategic importance throughout the Middle Ages. Its location was very suitable for the transportation and delivery of goods to the interior regions by means of the river, which was the cheapest and most efficient way in antiquity.46 The coinage of Hadrianopolis featured a river god and ship during the reigns of the emperors Antoninus Pius, Septimius Severus and his wife Julia Domna, and Commodus. The Hebros River provided the export and import needs of the Balkans and Thrace throughout antiquity. However, with time, its mouth at the Aegean Sea was blocked by alluvium and the harbors here became unusable. 47 The only harbor on the Hebros River to survive until today is the harbor of the Pistiros emporion in Bulgaria.48 The river harbor revealed in Pistiros shows that the Hebros River was crucial to the commerce of the Balkans, the Aegean world and the Black Sea. Much like these comparable harbors of river-borne trade, our archaeological studies suggest that the river harbor discovered in Gökçebey-Üçburgu served as a key nexus in the region’s commerce between the 1st century BC and the late 4th century AD. Also, there were intensive commercial activities in the other ancient settlements in the vicinity. The density of the amphorae, coins and other archaeological objects found has shown us that the site was used actively. The fact that the city of Tios-Tieion is located on the mouth of the Billaios River at the Black Sea also gives us clues about the river-borne trade with the inner regions and how easily this spread to the whole Black Sea region. However, the Üçburgu emporion has been devastated immensely by the flood that occurred in 2014 and because of this, the archaeological studies planned for the site had to be terminated. This site, the only example of its kind in the Black Sea region, was thus unfortunately destroyed before proper studies were finished. On the other hand, a publication of the archaeological results obtained from the studies conducted at the site is still being developed. 45 De Boer 2002, 450. 46 Casson 2002, 144. 47 Başaran 2007, 64–65. 48 Bouzek 1996, 221–222; Archibald 2002, 309; Tsetskhladze 2000: 233–246. 289 The Roman trading center on the bank of the Billaios River BIBLIOGRAPHY Ainsworth, W. F. (1855) The Resources of the Anatolian Shores of the Black Sea, Bentley’s Miscellany 37, 235–241. Akyürek Şahin, N. E. and S. Uyar (2009) Ein neues Bleigewicht aus dem Territorium von Tios in Ostbithynien, Gephyra 6, 137–148. ― (2012) Tios Teritoryumu’ndan (Doğu Bithynia) Yeni Bir Kurşun Ağırlık, in N. E. Akyürek Şahin, B. Takmer, and F. Onur (eds.), Eskiçağ Yazıları 1 – Akron 1, 157–174. Altınoluk, Z. S. (2005) Sikkelerin Işığında Küçük Asya’da Irmak Tanrıları, Unpublished PhD Thesis, İstanbul. ― (2010) Eskiçağ’da Irmak Tanrıları (Türkiye Trakyası ve Anadolu), İstanbul. Atasoy, S. (2008) Zonguldak-Filyos (Tios/Tieion/Tion/Tianos/Tieum) Kurtarma Kazısı, in İ. Delemen, S. Çokay-Kepce, A. Özdizbay, and Ö. Turak (eds.), Prof. Dr. Haluk Abbasoğlu’na 65. Yaş Armağanı, İstanbul, 91–97. ― and Ş. Yıldırım (2011) Filyos – Tios 2009 Yılı Kazısı, Kazı Sonuçları Toplantısı 32/4, 1–16. Avcı, S. (1997) Aşağı Filyos Havzasının Planlama Sorunlarına Coğrafi Bir Yaklaşım, Türk Coğrafya Dergisi 32, 301–316. ― (1998) Filyos Çayı Havzasında (Karabük-Filyos arası) Mekansal Sorunlar ve Bazı Çözüm Önerileri, Türk Coğrafya Dergisi 33, 447–487. Anderson, W. (2009) Late Byzantine Occupation of the Castle at Tios, Anatolia Antiqua 18, 265–277. Archibald, Z. (2002) A River Port and Emporion in Central Bulgaria: An Interim Report on the British Project at Vetren, ABSA 97, 309–351. Başaran, S. (2007) Ainos (Enez), Aktüel Arkeoloji Dergisi 3, 58–66. Belke, K. (1996) Paphlagonien und Honorias. Tabula Imperii Byzantini 9, Vienna. Bouzek, J. (1996) Pistiros as a River Harbor: Sea and River Transport in Antiquity, in J. Bouzek, M. Domaradski, and Z. H. Archibald, Pistiros I: Excavation and Studies, Prague, 221–222. Büyüksalih, H., H. Akçın, U. G. Sefercik, S. Karakış, and A. M. Marangoz (2005) Batı Karadeniz Sahil Bölgesindeki Filyos Nehri ve Deltasındaki Değişimlerin Zamansal CBS ile İncelenmesi, Ege Coğrafi Bilgi Sistemleri Çalıştayı, İzmir, 1–8. Casson, L. (1965) Harbour and River Boats of Ancient Rome, JRS 55, 31–39. ― (1995) Ships and Seamanship in the Ancient World, Baltimore. ― (2002) Antik Çağda Denizcilik ve Gemiler, (G. Ergin, Trans.), İstanbul. De Boe, G. (1978) Roman Boats from a Small River Harbor at Pommeroeul, Belgium, in J. du Plat Taylor and H. Cleere (eds.), Roman Shipping and Trade: Britain and the Rhine Provinces, Hertford, 22–30. De Boer, J. G. (2002) Notes a Bronze Age Metal-Road to Eastern Thrace?, Ancient West and East 1, 443–460. ― (2010) River Trade in Eastern and Central Thrace from the Bronze Age till the Hellenistic Period, Eirene 46, 176–189. De Weerd, M. D. (1978) Ships of the Roman Period at Zwammerdam/Nigrum Pullum, Germania Inferior, in J. du Plat Taylor and H. Cleere, (ed.), Roman Shipping and Trade: Britain and the Rhine Provinces, Hertford, 15–21. Duncan-Jones, R. (1974) The Economy of the Roman Empire, Cambridge. Fontana-Yılmaz, S. (2015a) Gökçebey-Üçburgu Kırmızı Astarlı İnce Roma Seramiği, in S. Atasoy and Ş. Yıldırım (eds.), Zonguldak’ta Bir Antik Kent: Tios. 2006-2012 Tios Kazılarının Sonuçları, Zonguldak, 426–463. 290 Şahin Yıldırım ― (2015b) Tios Kırmızı Astarlı İnce Roma Seramiği, in S. Atasoy and Ş. Yıldırım (eds.), Zonguldak’ta Bir Antik Kent: Tios. 2006-2012 Tios Kazılarının Sonuçları, Zonguldak, 306–351. Freitag, K. (1998) Die schiffbaren Flüsse im antiken Griechenland, Münsterische Beiträge zur antiken Handelsgechichte 17.1, 78–89. Gerçek, A. (2013) Kuzeybatı Pisidia'da Ele Geçen Demir Çağ Buluntu Grubu, in B. Hürmüzlü, M. Fırat, and A. Gerçek (eds.), Pisidia Araştırmaları I – I. Ulusal Pisidia Araştırmaları Sempozyumu, 05-06 Kasım 2012, Isparta, 48–70. Giacchero, M. (1974) Edictum Diocletiani et collegarum de pretiis rerum venalium in integrum fere restitutum e Latinis Graecisque rragmentis, Genoa. Greene, K. (1986) The Archaeology of the Roman Economy, London. Heinzelmann, M. A. (2002) River Port, Navalia, and Harbor Temple at Ostia: New Results of a DAI-AAR Project, JRA 15, 5–19. Heitland, W. E. (1909) The Roman Republic, Cambridge. Hirschfeld, O. (1897) Aus dem Orient, Berlin. Johnson, P. (2010) Landscapes of Achaemenid Paphlagonia, Unpublished PhD Thesis, Pennsylvania. Karauğuz, G. (2006) 2005 Yılı Devrek-Gökçebey (Tefen) Yüzey Araştırması, Araştırma Sonuçları Toplantısı 24/1, 327–340. ― (2008) Çaycuma, Gökçebey (Tefen) ve Devrek İlçeleri Yüzey Araştırması 2007, Araştırma Sonuçları Toplantısı 26/1, 105–116. ― , A. Akış, and H. İ. Kunt (2010) Zonguldak Bölgesi Arkeoloji, Eskiçağ Tarihi ve Coğrafya Araştırmaları. Arkeolojik Yerleşmeler, Kalıntılar, Buluntular ile Kdz. Ereğli ve Amasra Arkeoloji Müzesi’nden Bazı Eserler, Konya. ― and A. Özcan (2010) Eskiçağda Zonguldak Bölgesi ve Çevresi, Konya. Küçükali, S. (2008) Forecasting the River Discharge, Thermal and Sediment Load Characteristics: A Case Study for Filyos River, 15th River Flow Conference Vol. 3, İzmir, 1975–1981. Lenger, S. D. and S. Atasoy (2015) Tios Kazılarında Bulunan Sikkeler, in S. Atasoy and Ş. Yıldırım (eds.), Zonguldak’ta Bir Antik Kent: Tios. 2006-2012 Tios Kazılarının Sonuçları, Zonguldak, 381–415. Magie, D. (1950) Roman Rule in Asia Minor II, Princeton. Marek, C. (1993) Stadt, Ära und Territorium in Pontus-Bithynia und Nord-Galatia, Tübingen. ― (2003) Pontus et Bithinia – Die römischen Provinzen im Norden Kleinasiens, Mainz. Muscarella, O. W. (1964) Ancient Safety Pins, Expedition Magazine 6(2), 34–40. ― (1971) Phrygian or Lydian?, Journal of Near Eastern Studies 30(1), 49–63. Öztürk, B. (2008) Kuruluşundan Bizans Devri Sonuna Kadar Tios Antik Kenti, Arkeoloji ve Sanat Dergisi 128, 63–78. ― (2012) Küçükasya’nın Batı Karadeniz Kıyısında Bir Antik Kent: Tios (Tieion), Unpublished PhD Thesis, İstanbul. ― (2013a) The History of Tieion/Tios (Eastern Bithynia) in the Light of Inscriptions, in M. Manoledakis (ed.), Exploring the Hospitable Sea. Proceedings of the International Workshop on the Black Sea in Antiquity held in in Thessaloniki, 21–23 September 2012, Oxford, 147–164. ― (2013b) Tios/Tieion (Zonguldak-Filyos) Antik Kenti Epigrafik Çalışmaları ve Tarihsel Sonuçları (Epigraphical Researches of Tios/Tieion and Historical Results), in N. Türker, G. Köroğlu, and Ö. Deniz (eds.), I. Uluslararası Karadeniz Kültür Kongresi Bildirileri, Karabük, 485–504. ― (2015a) 2007–2012 Yılları Tios Kenti Epigrafik Çalışmaları, in S. Atasoy and Ş. Yıldırım (eds.), Zonguldak’ta Bir Antik Kent: Tios. 2006–2012 Tios Kazılarının Sonuçları, Zonguldak, 72–80. 291 The Roman trading center on the bank of the Billaios River ― (2015b) 2007–2012 Tios Kazılarında ve Çevresinde Bulunan Yazıtlar, in S. Atasoy and Ş. Yıldırım (eds.), Zonguldak’ta Bir Antik Kent: Tios. 2006–2012 Tios Kazılarının Sonuçları, Zonguldak, 81–110. ― (2016) Two New Milestones from Tios -Tieion in the Karadeniz Ereğli Museum, Philia. International Journal of Ancient Mediterranean Studies 2, 83–91 Robert, L. (1977) Documents d’Asie Mineure, BCH 101, 43–132. ― (1980) A Travers L’Asie Mineure, Athens. Sağlamtimur, H. (2012) Çattepe, in A. Çilingiroğlu, Z. Mercangöz, and G. Polat, (eds.), Ege Üniversitesi Arkeoloji Kazıları, İzmir, 65–76. ― (2014) Dicle Kıyısında Geç Roma Dönemine Tarihlenen Bir Kale ve Nehir Limanı, TINA Denizcilik Arkeolojisi Dergisi 2, 8–25. Tsetskhladze, G. R. (2000) Pistiros in the System of Pontic Emporia (Greek Trading and Craft Settlements in the Hinterland of the Northern and Eastern Black Sea and Elsewhere), in M. Domaradski (ed.), Pistiros et Thasos, Opole, 233–246. Uyar, S. (2012) Gökçebey/Tefen’den (Zonguldak) Yeni Kurşun Ağırlıklar, in N. E. Akyürek Şahin, B. Takmer, and F. Onur, (eds.), Eskiçağ Yazıları 3 – Akron 3, 187–199. Vassileva, M. (2012) The Rock-Cut Monuments of Phrygia, Paphlagonia and Thrace: A Comparative Overview, in G. R. Tsetskhladze (ed.), The Black Sea, Paphlagonia, Pontus and Phrygia in Antiquity: Aspects of Archaeology and Ancient History (BAR International Series 2432), Oxford, 243–252. ― (2015) Phrygia and the Southern Black Sea Littoral, in G. R. Tsetskhladze, A. Avram, and J. F. Hargrave (eds.), The Danubian Lands Between the Black, Aegean and Adriatic Seas (7th Century BC – 10th Century AD). Proceedings of the Fifth International Congress on Black Sea Antiquities, Belgrade, 17–21 September 2013, Oxford, 91–96. Von Gall, H. (1966) Die Paphlagonischen Felsgräber: eine Studie zur kleinasiatischen Kunstgeschichte (Istanbuler Mitteilungen Beiheft 1), Tübingen. Yıldırım, Ş. (2018) Gökbel Köyü Hamas Kıranı Tümülüsü, Hitit Üniversitesi Sosyal Bilimler Enstitüsü Dergisi 2, 1295–1319. ― (2019) A Great Tumulus from Paphlagonia, in G. R. Tsetskhladze and S. Atasoy (eds.), Settlements and Necropoleis of the Black Sea and its Hinterland in Antiquity (Selected Papers from the Third International Conference ‘The Black Sea in Antiquity and Tekkeköy: An Ancient Settlement on the Southern Black Sea Coast’, 27–29 October 2017, Tekkeköy, Samsun), Oxford, 226–243. Young, R. S. (1958) The Gordion Tomb, Expedition Magazine 1(1), 3–13. 292 Şahin Yıldırım LIST OF FIGURES Figure 1: Ladon and Billaios rivers with Gökçebey-Üçburgu emporion. Figure 2: Aerial view of Üçburgu emporion. Figure 3,4: The condition of emporion when it was discovered in 2009 Figure 5: Ancient Greek Colonies on the coast of Black Sea (Merz-Menke, 1865 B). Figure 6: The master plan of Tios-Tieion. Figure 7: Aerial view of Tios-Tieion acropolis and the Billaios river Figure 8: The delta of Billaios river. Figure 9: Ancient roads in Bithynia and Paphlagonia (Karauğuz-Özcan 2010, 135). Figure 10: The Caracallan period mile stone found on the riverside. Figure 11: Corinthian capital in the garden of Gökçebey train station. Figure 12: Bodaç castle. Figure 13: The Greek inscription finding in Gökçebey-Üçburgu. Figure 14: The pier pillars dating to the Roman Period. Figure 15: First building phase dated to the 1st century BC. Figure 16: Second building phase dated to between 1st and 3rd centuries. Figure 17: The depot buildings from the second building phase in Gökçebey-Üçburgu. Figure 18: The master plan of Gökçebey-Üçburgu emporion. Figure 19: The Stone pavement between the depot buildings. Figure 20: An owen in the depot building in Gökçebey-Üçburgu. Figure 21: An illegal excavation pit on the right side of the Picture. Figure 22: Third building phase dated to Late Roman period in Gökçebey-Üçburgu. Figure 23: Aegean product amphora (Dressel 24) dated to 1st century AD. Figure 24: Northern Black Sea product amphora (Mirmekion type?) dated to 3rd century AD. Figure 25: Samples of Pontic Sigillatas from Gökçebey-Üçburgu(Fontana-Yılmaz 2015, 459. Pl. 7). Figure 26: Provincial Roman coinage in Gökçebey-Üçburgu and silver denarius Hadrianus. Figure 27: Provincial Roman coinage in Gökçebey-Üçburgu. Figure 28: The Lead weights from Gökçebey-Üçburgu. Figure 29: Some of the small findings from Gökçebey-Üçburgu emporion. 293 The Roman trading center on the bank of the Billaios River FIGURES Figure 1: Ladon and Billaios rivers with Gökçebey-Üçburgu emporion. Figure 2: Aerial view of Üçburgu emporion. 294 Şahin Yıldırım Figure 3, 4: The condition of emporion when it was discovered in 2009. 295 The Roman trading center on the bank of the Billaios River Figure 5: Ancient Greek Colonies on the coast of Black Sea (Merz-Menke, 1865 B). Figure 6: The master plan of Tios-Tieion. 296 Şahin Yıldırım Figure 7: Aerial view of Tios-Tieion acropolis and the Billaios river Figure 8: The delta of Billaios river. Figure 9: Ancient roads in Bithynia and Paphlagonia (Karauğuz-Özcan 2010, 135). 297 The Roman trading center on the bank of the Billaios River Figure 10: The Caracallan period mile stone found on the riverside. Figure 11: Corinthian capital in the garden of Gökçebey train station. 298 Şahin Yıldırım Figure 12: Bodaç castle. Figure 13: The Greek inscription finding in Gökçebey-Üçburgu. 299 The Roman trading center on the bank of the Billaios River Figure 14: The pier pillars dating to the Roman Period. Figure 15: First building phase dated to the 1st century BC. 300 Şahin Yıldırım Figure 16: Second building phase dated to between 1st and 3rd centuries. Figure 17: The depot buildings from the second building phase in Gökçebey-Üçburgu. 301 The Roman trading center on the bank of the Billaios River Figure 18: The master plan of Gökçebey-Üçburgu emporion. Figure 19: The Stone pavement between the depot buildings. 302 Şahin Yıldırım Figure 20: An owen in the depot building in Gökçebey-Üçburgu. Figure 21: An illegal excavation pit on the right side of the Picture. 303 The Roman trading center on the bank of the Billaios River Figure 22: Third building phase dated to Late Roman period in Gökçebey-Üçburgu. Figure 23: Aegean product amphora (Dressel 24) dated to 1st century AD. 304 Şahin Yıldırım Figure 24: Northern Black Sea product amphora (Mirmekion type?) dated to 3rd century AD. Figure 25: Samples of Pontic Sigillatas from Gökçebey-Üçburgu (Fontana-Yılmaz 2015, 459. Pl. 7). 305 The Roman trading center on the bank of the Billaios River Figure 26: Provincial Roman coinage in Gökçebey-Üçburgu and silver denarius Hadrianus. Figure 27: Provincial Roman coinage in Gökçebey-Üçburgu. 306 Şahin Yıldırım Figure 28: The Lead weights from Gökçebey-Üçburgu. Figure 29: Some of the small findings from Gökçebey-Üçburgu emporion. 307 Christos Galanidis END OF THE SYMPOSIUM WORKS Dear friends, Our three-day journey between the past and the present has come to its end. A past that is manifested by the numerous monuments, which, in ruins most of them, are scattered throughout the Euxinus region and which you so brilliantly documented in your presentations, monuments, which were created in a period when Hellenism constituted a dominant and decisive element among the people of this region; and the present, which is represented by us here in Greece, descendants of the people of that region and all the other peoples which, under different state entities, live in the Black Sea countries. All of us now have a duty to protect and bring to light these monuments because they are part of the world’s cultural heritage and belong to all humanity, irrespective of who manages and maintains them today. The Committee of Pontic Studies always has and is still moving along the direction of fulfilling this duty and today, with the end of the works of this Scientific Symposium, we feel the need to warmly thank you for your presence here and congratulate you for your excellent collaboration and your high standard presentations. We would also like to inform you that the proceedings of the Symposium have been recorded and filmed on DVD and that your presentations will be published in a special volume of our Committee’s journal “Archeion Pontou – Pontus Archives” both of which will be sent to you by post. Closing, alongside our respect and appreciation for your work and contribution in this field, please accept some mementos. An album for the 550 years from the fall of Trabzon (1461-2011) which was published by the Committee for Pontic Studies and is accompanied by a DVD presenting the founding history, the publishing work and the Museum of the Committee. A folder with engravings, maps and coins of Pontus in English and Greek. A gold-plated medal with the one-headed eagle, emblem of the Committee, on one side and on the other side a personalized dedication “with compliments” for your participation in the Symposium. Finally, I want to leave you with the wish to return safely to your countries and the saying in the pontic dialect «Υίαν κι Ευλο(γ)ίαν», να είμαστε ούλ καλά και να ευρίουμες σ’ άλλον μίαν. Health and Blessings. May we all be well and meet again. Christos Galanidis Chairman of the Committee for Pontic Studies 425 End of the Symposium works ΛΗΞΗ ΤΩΝ ΕΡΓΑΣΙΩΝ ΤΟΥ ΣΥΜΠΟΣΙΟΥ Αγαπητοί φίλοι, Το τριήμερο οδοιπορικό ανάμεσα στο χθες και το σήμερα έφθασε στο τέλος του. Ένα χθες που το μαρτυρούν τα άπειρα μνημεία, που, ερείπια τα πιο πολλά, ευρίσκονται διασκορπισμένα σ’ όλες τις περιοχές του Εύξεινου Πόντου και τα οποία τα παρουσιάσατε τεκμηριωμένα κατά έξοχο τρόπο στις εισηγήσεις σας, μνημεία που φτιάχτηκαν σε μία περίοδο που ο Ελληνισμός αποτελούσε κυρίαρχο και καθοριστικό στοιχείο ανάμεσα στους κατοίκους αυτής της περιοχής, και το σήμερα που το αποτελούμε εμείς εδώ στην Ελλάδα, απόγονοι των κατοίκων αυτής της περιοχής, και όλοι οι λαοί που, κάτω από διαφορετικές κρατικές οντότητες κατοικούν στις χώρες του Εύξεινου Πόντου. Όλοι εμείς λοιπόν σήμερα, έχουμε χρέος να προστατεύσουμε και να αναδείξουμε αυτά τα μνημεία γιατί αποτελούν μνημεία παγκόσμιου πολιτισμού που ανήκουν σ’ ολόκληρη την ανθρωπότητα, ανεξάρτητα ποιός τα διαχειρίζεται σήμερα. Στην κατεύθυνση αυτού του χρέους κινήθηκε και κινείται η Επιτροπή Ποντιακών Μελετών και σήμερα, με τη λήξη των εργασιών αυτού του Επιστημονικού Συμποσίου, αισθάνεται την ανάγκη να σας ευχαριστήσει θερμά για την εδώ παρουσία σας, να σας συγχαρεί για την άψογη συνεργασία σας και για τις υψηλού επιπέδου εισηγήσεις σας, και να σας ενημερώσει ότι οι εργασίες του Συμποσίου μας που έχουν ηχογραφηθεί και βιντεοσκοπηθεί, θα γίνουν DVD, όπως επίσης οι εισηγήσεις σας θα εκδοθούν σε ειδικό τόμο του περιοδικού συγγράματός μας «Αρχείον Πόντου» και θα σας αποσταλούν ταχυδρομικά. Κλείνοντας, μαζί με τη μεγάλη εκτίμηση για το έργο και την προσφορά σας, δεχθείτε παρακαλώ κάποια αναμνηστικά δώρα. Το Λεύκωμα για τα 550 χρόνια (1461-2011) από την πτώση της Τραπεζούντας που εκδόθηκε από την Ε.Π.Μ. και συνοδεύεται από DVD για το ιστορικό ίδρυσης, το εκδοτικό έργο και το Μουσείο της Ε.Π.Μ. Μία έκδοση με γκραβούρες, χάρτες και νομίσματα του Πόντου στα ελληνικά και αγγλικά. Το επίχρυσο ανάγλυφο μετάλλιο με το μονοκέφαλο αετό, έμβλημα της Ε.Π.Μ., από τη μία όψη και από την άλλη όψη ονομαστική αφιέρωση στον καθένα «Τιμής Ένεκεν» για τη συμμετοχή σας στο Συμπόσιό μας, με την ευχή να επιστρέψετε καλά στον τόπο καταγωγής σας, και το λόγο στην ποντιακή διάλεκτο «Υίαν κι Ευλο(γ)ίαν», να είμαστε ούλ’ καλά και να ευρίουμες σ’ άλλον μίαν. Υγεία και Ευλογία, να είμαστε όλοι καλά και να ξαναβρεθούμε. Χρήστος Γαλανίδης Πρόεδρος της Επιτροπής Ποντιακών Μελετών 426 LIST OF CONTRIBUTORS † Alexandru, Avram Professor of Ancient History, University of Le Mans, France Atasoy, Sümer Emeritus Professor of Classical Archaeology, Karabük University, Turkey Barat, Claire Maître de conférences en histoire ancienne et archéologie classique, Université de Valenciennes et du Hainaut-Cambrésis, France Bezrukov, Andrey Assistant Professor of Ancient History, Nosov Magnitogorsk State University, Russian Federation Braund, David Emeritus Professor of Ancient History, University of Exeter, UK Chaniotis, Angelos Professor at the Institute of Advanced Study, Princeton, USA Cojocaru, Victor PhD in Archaeology, Senior researcher at the Institute of Archaeology of the Romanian Academy, Iasi Branch, Romania Coşkun, Altay Professor of Ancient History, Waterloo University, Canada Dakin, Emyr Instructor in Classics, College of New Jersey, USA Gamkrelidze, Gela Chief Researcher at the Centre of Archaeology of the Georgian National Museum, Tbilisi, Georgia Ionescu, Mihai Researcher, Callatis Archaeological Museum, Mangalia, Romania Kakhidze, Emzar Associate Professor of Classical Archaeology, Batumi State University, Georgia Klenina, Е. Yu. Head of research department, the State Museum-Preserve "Tauric Chersonese", Russian Federation 427 Kolağasioğlu, Mustafa Amisos Museum, Turkey Kyrtatas, Dimitris J. Professor of Ancient History, University of Thessaly, Greece Manoledakis, Manolis Associate Professor of Classical Archaeology, International Hellenic University, Greece Maslennikov, Alexander A. Professor of Classical Archaeology, Institute of Archaeology, Moscow, Russian Federation Mentesidou, Eleni T. PhD candidate at Democritus University of Thrace, Greece Minchev, Alexander Dr. of Archaeology, Archaeological Museum of Varna, Bulgaria Nigdelis, Pantelis M. Professor of Ancient History, Aristotle University of Thessaloniki, Greece Öztürk, Bülent Assistant Professor of Ancient History, Sakarya University, Turkey Petropoulos, Elias K. Professor of Ancient History, Democritus University of Thrace, Greece Ruscu, Dan University of Babeş-Bolyai, Cluj-Napoca, Romania Ruscu, Ligia University of Babeş-Bolyai, Cluj-Napoca, Romania Saprykin, Sergey Professor of Ancient History, Moscow State University M.V. Lomonosov, Russian Federation Şirin, Orhan Alper Samsun Museum, Turkey Tezgör, Dominique Kassab Professor of Classical Archaeology, Bilkent University of Ankara, Turkey Yıldırım, Şahin Assistant Professor of Classical Archaeology, Karabük University, Turkey 428