تیوس/تیئون در دریای سیاه جنوبی در زمینه وسیع‌تر باستان‌شناسی پونتیک

Tios/Tieion was intended to be a publication of the proceedings of a conference held at Filyos (ancient Tios/Tieion) in 2020. The conference had to be cancelled in common with other events due to Covid 19, though with the hope that it might take place eventually, a hope undermined by the sudden and premature death of Gocha Tsetskhladze, the co-organiser. Instead, we have a volume of ‘Precedings', written when thoughts of the conference had not yet been abandoned. Several of the papers focus on aspects of Tios itself (the Acropolis, the Lower City and Coin Finds, written by scholars involved in the excavation). Its place in ancient geography and cartography is considered before we move on to the indigenous inhabitants of the surrounding area, the immediate and greater region (Paphlagonian Hadrianopolis, Hadrian's visit to the region, the nature of the Phrygian kingdom), then the Turkish Black Sea region (rock-cut tunnels, Roman Heraclea Pontica, St John Chrysostom's Monastery), and outwards to the western, northern and eastern shoreb /nb /nbs of the Black Sea, their inhabitants and hinterlands (monumental architecture in the temenos of Apollonbbn/ ia Pontica; Archaic Greek transport amphorae in the Getic hinterland; early Greek pottery in settlements and burials of the northern Black Sea region; the house of Pythes at Berezan; the Sindoi; religious customs at Tarasova Balka; the Mordvinovskii Barrow; and finally Greeks and locals in Pichvnari in Colchis). Overall, there are 21 chapters and 27 authors, drawn from Turkey, Russia, Georgia, Bulgaria and beyond. Cover Title Page Copyright Page Table of Contents Preface and Acknowledgments List of Illustrations Master plan of Tios/Tieion Introduction: Tios (Tieion) in the Context of Black Sea Colonisation* Figure 1. Map of the Black Sea showing major Greek cities and local peoples (map. G.R. Tsetskhladze). Figure 2. Map of northern Anatolia (after Summerer 2014, 190, fig. 1). Figure 3. Roman theatre (photograph courtesy of Ş. Yıldırım). Figure 4. Aqueduct (photograph courtesy of Ş. Yıldırım). Figure 5. Aqueduct (drawing courtesy of Ş. Yıldırım). Figure 6. Roman port, dock and sea walls (photograph courtesy of Ş. Yıldırım). Figure 7. Acropolis of Tios (photograph courtesy of Ş. Yıldırım). Figure 8. Acropolis of Tios (photograph courtesy of Ş. Yıldırım). Figure 9. Acropolis of Tios (photograph courtesy of S. Atasoy). PLD 3. Figure 10. Acropolis of Tios (after Yıldırım 2022, 858, fig. 2). OLD 4. Figure 11. Excavation area on the acropolis of Tios (photograph courtesy of Ş. Yıldırım). Figure 12. Roman temple (photograph courtesy of Ş. Yıldırım). Figure 13. Temple at Tios, view from the north-east (photograph courtesy of S. Atasoy). Figure 14. Temple at Tios, view from the west (photograph courtesy of S. Atasoy). Figure 15. Plan of the temple at Tios (after Baran 2013, 10, fig. 7). Figure 16. East Greek pottery from Tios (after Atasoy and Erpehlivan 2012, 2, fig. 2). Figure 17. Attic pottery from Tios (photograph courtesy of S. Atasoy). Figure 18. Attic pottery from Tios (photograph courtesy of S. Atasoy). Figure 19. Attic pottery from Tios (photograph courtesy of S. Atasoy). Figure 20. Pit-houses on the acropolis (after Yıldırım 2022, 858, fig. 3). Figure 21. Pit-houses of circular plan (after Yıldırım 2022, 860, fig. 4). Figure 22. Plan of pit-houses P2 and P3 and the iron workshop (after Yıldırım 2022, 860, fig. 5). Figure 23. Archaic iron workshop (after Yıldırım 2022, 862, fig. 6). Figure 24. Slag fragments from iron workshop (after Yıldırım 2022, 862, fig. 7). Figure 25. Pottery sherd inscribed in Old Phrygian (after Yıldırım 2022, 866, fig. 13). Figure 26. Terracotta horse figurines from the first layer of structure P1 (after Yıldırım 2022, 867, fig. 14). Figure 27. Example of Middle Wild Goat II pottery from first layer of structure P2 (after Yıldırım 2022, 864, fig. 8). Figure 28. Ionian bowl from the Archaic houses (after Yıldırım 2022, 864, fig. 9). Figure 29. Archaic eyed kylix from second layer of structure P1 (after Yıldırım 2022, 864, fig. 10). Figure 30. Piece of Archaic Ionian bowl (after Yıldırım 2022, 865, fig. 11). Figure 31. Aerial photograph of the burial grounds at Tios (after Atasoy 2022, 55, fig. 2). Figure 32. Tile-covered grave (after Atasoy 2022, 56, fig. 3). Figure 33. Sarcophagus burial (after Atasoy 2022, 56, fig. 4). Figure 34. Lekythos (after Atasoy 2022, 57, fig. 5). Figure 35. Lekythos (after Atasoy 2022, 57, fig. 6). Figure 36. Acropolis of Tios, remains of the church and the temple (after Atasoy 2022, 58, fig. 7). Figure 37. Grave from the Sefercik district (after Atasoy 2022, 61, fig. 11). Figure 38. Grave in Hıdırlık/Ören Tepesi (after Atasoy 2022, 62, fig. 12). Figure 39. Grave in Hıdırlık/Ören Tepesi (after Atasoy 2022, 63, fig. 13). Figure 40. Grave with two chambers at Öteyüz (after Atasoy 2022, 64, fig. 14). Figure 41. Grave with two chambers at Öteyüz (after Atasoy 2022, 65, fig. 15). Tios in Ancient Geography and Cartography Figure 1. Fragment of the reconstructed map of Ptolemy with the names of the South Pontic cities (after Stückelberger and Graßhoff 2006, 846). Figure 2. Fragment of Peutinger’s map with stations Heraclea, Scylleum and Tium. Figure 3. Fragment of the map with a reconstruction of the Roman roads (after Andrei Nacu). The Acropolis Temple of Tios (Tieion) Figure 1. General view of the acropolis. Figure 2. Pit-houses on the first terrace in the acropolis. Figure 3. Remains of iron workshop. Figure 4. East Greek pottery samples from the first terrace of the acropolis. Figure 5. Local Phrygian pottery samples from the first terrace of the acropolis. Figure 6. Old Phrygian language inscriptions on pottery sherds. Figure 7. Late Bronze Age pottery sample from the first terrace of the acropolis. Figure 8. The Roman temple on the second terrace of the acropolis. Figure 9. West terrace wall of the acropolis. Figure 10. Part of prohedria seat from the Roman theatre. Figure 11. Part of the northern temenos wall. Figure 12. Roman temple of Tios. Figure 13. Plan of the Roman temple on the acropolis. Figure 14. Roman temple from the south. Figure 15. Toichobat blocks. Figure 16. General view of podium remains from the south. Figure 17. Metal clamp from the temple. Figure 18. Marble architectural fragments of temple. Figure 19. Temple crypt. Figure 20. Drawings of crypt walls. Figure 21. Archaic Doric capitals. Figure 22. Drawings of Archaic Doric capitals. Figure 23. Anthropomorphic vessel from the temple excavation. Figure 24. Hellenistic Doric capitals. Figure 25. Drawings of Hellenistic Doric capitals. Figure 26. The early and late phases of the Roman temple. Figure 27. Attic pottery from the temple area. Figure 28. Proposed reconstruction of the Roman temple. Figure 29. Proposed reconstruction of the podium, column and Corinthian capital of the temple. Figure 30. A bronze coin of Tios from the reign of Alexander Severus. The Lower City of Tios: Finds in the Firebrick Factory Area Figure 1. Lower City of Tios. General view from the acropolis (illustration by S. Atasoy). Figure 2. Vaulted cistern (illustration by S. Atasoy). Figure 3. Water pipe next to cistern (illustration by S. Atasoy). Figure 4. Factory area in 1930s (illustration by S. Atasoy). Figure 5. Factory area in 2012 (illustration by S. Atasoy). Figure 6. Archaeological park of Tios (illustration by S. Atasoy). Figure 7. Two pithoi burried side by side (F2) (illustration by S. Atasoy). Figure 8. Two rubble walls (F4) (illustration by S. Atasoy). Figure 9. Wall and terracotta pipes (F6) (illustration by S. Atasoy). Figure 10. Brick barrel vault (F14) (illustration by S. Atasoy). Figure 11. Mosaic floor (F17) (illustration by S. Atasoy). Figure 12. Mosaic floor (F18) (illustration by S. Atasoy). Figure 13. Brick wall and marble revetment (F26) (illustration by S. Atasoy). Figure 14. Semi-circular wall of a church (apse and altar?) (F49, 50, 53) (illustration by S. Atasoy). Figure 15. Terracotta lamp (cat. no. 1) (illustration by S. Atasoy). Figure 16. Terracotta lamp (cat. no. 2) (illustration by S. Atasoy). Figure 17. Terracotta lamp (cat. no. 3) (illustration by S. Atasoy). Figure 18. Terracotta lamp (cat. no. 4) (illustration by S. Atasoy). Figure 19. Spoon probe (cat. no. 5) (illustration by S. Atasoy). Figure 20. Open lamp (cat. no. 6) (illustration by S. Atasoy). Figure 21. Spatula probe (cat. no. 7) (illustration by S. Atasoy). Coin Finds and a Partial Tetrarchic Coin Hoard from Tios (2015–16)* Figure 1. Uncertain Greek AE, 18.0 mm; 4.16 g; 12h. Figure 2. Tios Civic Issue AE (400–200 BC), 10.0 mm; 1.25g; 12h. Figure 3. Valens (AD 363–375) AE, 18.0 mm; 3.05 g; 12h. Figure 4. Arcadius (AD 383–408) AE, 13.0 mm; 0.95g. Figure 5. Leo VI (AD 886–912) AE 40 Nummi, 27.0 mm; 4.2 g; 6h. Figure 6. Uncertain Byzantine AE, 28.0 mm; 8.5 g; 12h. Figure 7. Uncertain Islamic AE Fals, 16.0 mm; 1.61 g. Figure 8. Trajan (AD 98–117), Heraclea Pontica, AE, 20.0 mm; 4.73 g; 6h. Figure 9. Gordian III (AD 238–244), Tios, AE, 27.5 mm; 8.45 g; 1h. Figure 10. Constantine II (as Caesar AD 317–337), AE, 17.0 mm; 1.43 g; 6h. Figure 11. Constantine X (AD 1059–1067), Anonymous Class E AE Follis, 28.0 mm; 10.04 g; 12h. Figure 12. Romanus IV (AD 1068–1071), Anonymous Class G AE Follis, 27.5 mm; 10.87 g; 6h. Figure 13. Nicophorus III (AD 1078–1081), Anonymous Class I AE Follis, 21.0 mm; 4.45 g; 6h. Figure 14. Manuel Comnenus (AD 1143–1180), AE Half-Tetarteron, 18.5 mm; 1.48 g; 6h. Figure 15. Andronicus II Palaeologus (AD 1282–1295), BI Tornese, 14.5 mm; 0.77 g; 6h. Figure 16. Uncertain Byzantine AE Follis, 27.0 mm; 7.48 g. Figure 17. Uncertain Byzantine AE Trachy, 19.0 mm; 1.81 g; 6h. Figure 18. Uncertain Byzantine AE Half-Follis, 23.0 mm; 4.43 g; 6h. Figure 19. Genoese AR Tornese, n/a; 0.65 g. Figure 20. Kaykhaushraw II (Ghiyath al-Din) (AH 634–644/AD 1236–1245), AR Dirham, 22.0 mm; 2.79 g. Figure 21. Uncertain Ilkhan AR Half-Dirham, 11.0 mm; 0.48 g; 9h. Figure 22. Uncertain Islamic AE, 21.5 mm; 1.92g. Figure 23. Diocletian, AE (#1; C81), 25.0 mm; 8.04 g; 12h. Figure 24. Diocletian, AE (#10; C44), 27.5 mm; 9.61 g; 11h. Figure 25. Diocletian, AE (#46; C348), 27.0 mm; 10.32 g; 6h. Figure 26. Diocletian, AE (#73; C136), 27.5 mm; 8.40 g; 12h. Figure 27. Diocletian, AE (#76; C80), 28.0 mm; 9.99 g; 1h. Figure 31. Maximianus, AE (#132; C59), 26.5 mm; 9.49 g; 11h. Figure 32. Maximianus, AE (#144; C289), 27.0 mm; 11.44 g; 11h. Figure 33. Maximianus, AE (#159; C52), 27.5 mm; 7.96 g; 6h. Figure 34. Maximianus, AE (#162; C85), 28.0 mm; 7.99 g; 6h. Figure 35. Maximianus, AE (#182; C257), 29.0 mm; 11.68 g; 12h. Figure 36. Maximianus, AE (#183; C193), 26.0 mm; 9.24 g; 1h. Figure 37. Maximianus, AE (#202; C16), 28.5 mm; 9.31 g; 11h. Figure 43. Galerius, AE (#322; C313), 27.0 mm; 9.34 g; 12h. Figure 44. Galerius, AE (#340; C240), 26.0 mm; 11.09 g; 6h. Figure 45. Constantius, AE (#356; C208), 25.0 mm; 9.31 g; 12h. Figure 46. Constantius, AE (#362; C233), 28.0 mm; 9.68 g; 1h. Figure 47. Constantius, AE (#387; CNK16-05), n/a; n/a; n/a. Table 1. A First Consideration of Roman Traces in Paphlagonian Hadrianopolis according to the Data of 2018–2021 Figure 1. City Plan of Hadrianopolis (Excavation Archive). Figure 2. Location of Hadrianopolis (Excavation Archive). Figure 3. Locations of cities named Hadrianopolis (Excavation Archive). Figure 4. Aerial photograph of Circular Building under The Northwest Acropolis Church (Excavation Archive). Figure 5. Aerial photograph of South Necropolis (Excavation Archive). Figure 6. Autonomous coin of Hadrianopolis (Excavation Archive). Figure 7. Sandal pins from Hadrianopolis South Necropolis (Excavation Archive). Figure 8. Square Structure (Excavation Archive). Figure 9. Aerial photograph of castle wall with horseshoe-shaped bastion (Excavation Archive). Figure 10. Road networks of Paphlagonian cities (Excavation Archive). Restitutori Bithynia et Paphlagonia: Chasing Hadrian in the North Anatolian Fault Zone. An Overview* Figure 1. Map of the North Anatolian Fault Zone and the main ancient settlements (by İ. Elalmış and A. Bora). Figure 2. Reconstruction of the Lefke Gate (East) at Nicaea (after Schorndorfer 1997, fig. 60). Figure 3. Stele from Nicomedia. 2nd century AD. Louvre, Paris (after Marek 2003, fig. 183). Figure 4. Restitutori Nicomediae. Hadrian AD 137. Rome (after Bekker-Nielsen 2008, fig. 30). Figure 5. Restitutori Bithyniae. AD 134–138 Hadrian. Rome (after von Hoerschelmann 1986, fig. 7). Figure 6. Adventi Avg Bithyniae. AD 134–138 Hadrian. Rome (after von Hoerschelmann 1986, fig. 5). Figure 7. Koinon Bithynias, Hadrian, AD 117–138 (after Burrell 2004, fig. 111). Figure 8. Architrave fragment from the nymphaeun in Nicomedia (after Fıratlı 1971, fig. 30). Figure 9. Frieze fragment thought to belong to the temple of Antinous in Bithynium (after Yalman 1986, fig. 13). Figure 10. Stadium of Bithynium (after Güneş 2010, fig. 5). Figure 11. Theatre of Tieium (after Yıldırım 2013, fig. 7). Figure 12. Port of Tieium (after Yıldırım 2021b, fig. 16). Figure 13. Cuirassed statue atrributed to Hadrian from Amastris (after Karanastas 2012–13, taf 8.1). Figure 14. Monumental building (Bedesten) from Amastris (after Hoffman 1989, fig. 2). The Phrygian Kingdom: A Local Power or a Regional State?* Figure 1. Migrations to Anatolia at the end of the Late Bronze Age (Nurcan Koç). Figure 2. Sultanahmet–Hagia Sophia plain, where the pre-Byzantium settlement was established (Ahmet Hamdi Bülbül). Figure 3. Late Bronze Age/Early Iron Age, terracotta fragment, Istanbul Archaeological Museums Annex Building. Figure 4. Thrakion, Byzantium and Chalcedon in Istanbul topography (Nurcan Koç). Figure 5. Pottery with horn protrusions, Troy VIIb2, Early Iron Age. Istanbul Archaeological Museums (Şevket Dönmez). Figure 6. Structures of Gordion (Yassıhöyük) layers 7B and 7A (redrawn from Voight and DeVries 2011, fig. 2.8a). Figure 7. Plan of Gordion layer 6A. Figure 8. General view of Hacıtuğrul (Yenidoğan) Höyük, Polatlı, Ankara (Şevket Dönmez). Figure 9. The Phrygian kingdom and its environs (Nurcan Koç). Figure 10. Phrygian architectural decorative plates, Pazarlı. Ankara, Anatolian Civilisations Museum (Ayşegül Deniz Dönmez). Figure 11. Old Phrygian inscription, stone, Seyitömer Höyük, Kütahya (Serdar Ünan). Figure 12. Potsherds from Tios (redrawn from Yıldırım 2021, figs. 12 and 13). Figure 13. Potsherds from Samsun surveys by Uluğ Bahadır Alkım. Figure 14. Potsherds from Samsun surveys by Uluğ Bahadır Alkım. Figure 15. Midas-Yazılıkaya Monument and Sanctuary, Eskişehir (Şevket Dönmez). Figure 16. Kubaba sculpture, stone, Boğazköy, Phryg Dönemi (Ayşegül Deniz Dönmez). Figure 17. Altar of Kubaba, Oluz Höyük, architectural layer 4, Late Phrygian period (Oluz Höyük Excavation Archive). Figure 18. Reconstruction plan of Kubaba Altar, Oluz Höyük, architectural layer 4, Late Phrygian period (Oluz Höyük Excavation Archive). Figure 19 a–b. Fragment of Kubaba statuette, Oluz Höyük, architectural layer 4, Late Phrygian period (Oluz Höyük Excavation Archive). Some Thoughts on Coarse-Ware Pottery of the Early Iron Age found in the Inönü Cave Figure 1. South-western view of the İnönü Cave (photograph: Archive of the İnönü Cave Project). Figure 2. C-14 analysis of the samples collected from level II contexts. Figure 3. Architectural finds of Level II (photograph: Archive of the İnönü Cave Project). Figure 4. Architectural finds of Level II (photograph: Archive of the İnönü Cave Project). Figure 5a, b. Pot 1 (İn.20/4) (photograph: Archive of the İnönü Cave Project). Figure 6. Drawing of Pot 1 (İn.20/ 4) (drawn by archaeologist Burak Kader). Figure 7a, b. Pot 2 (İn.20/52) (photograph: Archive of the İnönü Cave Project). Figure 8. Drawing of Pot 2 (İn.20/52) (drawn by archaeologist Burak Kader). Table 1. Stratigraphy of the İnönü Cave Revisiting the Rock-Cut Tunnels in the Black Sea Region of Turkey* Figure 1. Distribution map of the fortresses on rocky outcrops with rock-cut tunnels. Figure 2. Histogram of distances from fortresses to the closest river. Table 1. Updated list of the rock-cut tunnels distributed in the Black Sea region of Turkey. Some Aspects of the Socio-Cultural Life of Roman Heraclea Pontica in the Light of the Epigraphic, Numismatic and Literary Evidence* Figure 1. Map of Bithynia – Paphlagonia (after Barrington Atlas of the Greek and Roman World [Princeton 2000]: Paphlagonia). Figure 2. Map of Heraclea Pontica (after von Diest 1889: Blatt II: Itinerare in Phrygien und Bithynien). Figure 3. Cehennemağzı Caves in Karadeniz Ereğli (courtesy Zonguldak İl Kültür ve Turizm Müdürlüğü). Figure 4. A votive offering for Heracles Alexikakos (courtesy Karadeniz Ereğli Museum, inv. no. 2001.940). Figure 5. A votive offering of Heracleans from Callatis for Heracles Pharangites (courtesy Muzeul de Istorie Nationala si Arheologie Constanta, inv. no. 1483). Figure 6. A coin of Heraclea depicting Heracles, Gallienus, AD 253–268 (Museumlandschaft Hessen-Kassel, inv. no. Mü 613; https://www.wildwinds.com/coins/greece/bithynia/herakleia_pontika/i.html). Figure 7. A coin of Heraclea depicting Heracles as carrying Erymanthian boar, Septimius Severus, AD 193–211 (https://www.wildwinds.com/coins/greece/bithynia/herakleia_pontika/i.html). Figure 8. A coin of Heraclea depicting Heracles as leading Cerberus behind him, Gordian III, AD 238–244 (https://www.wildwinds.com/coins/greece/bithynia/herakleia_pontika/i.html). Figure 9. A Votive stele for/of Cybele with Hermes and Hecate(?) (courtesy Karadeniz Ereğli Museum). Figure 10. A votive offering for/of Hecate (after Erichsen 1972, Tafel 4a). Figure 11. A coin of Heraclea depicting Poseidon, Salonina, AD 254–268 (http://educators.mfa.org). Figure 12. Grave stele of Pates, son of Diliporis, and his wife Philumena (courtesy Karadeniz Ereğli Museum, inv. no. E. 28). Figure 13. Dedication to a god by hieropoios Aurelius Zeuxios (courtesy Karadeniz Ereğli Museum, 2011.13). Figure 14. An honorary inscription on a statue base for the Roman emperor Claudius (courtesy Karadeniz Ereğli Museum, inv. no. A.99.1.81). Figure 15. A coin of Heraclea depicting a price-crown with two palm branches on table, Gallienus, AD 253–268 (http://www.asiaminorcoins.com). Figure 16. Grave stele of ephebarchos and paraphylax Aurelius Artemonianos Menios (courtesy Karadeniz Ereğli Museum, inv. no. A.2010/38). Figure 17. Grave monument of Pantomime Crispus from Alexandria of Egypt (courtesy Karadeniz Ereğli Museum, inv. no. A.99.1.53). Figure 18. Sarcophagus of bouleutes Heracleides and his family (courtesy Karadeniz Ereğli Museum, inv. no. A.99.1.22). Figure 19. Ostotheke of Tryphon, his wife Kale and his son Domestichos (courtesy Karadeniz Ereğli Museum, inv. no. 2013/1A). Figure 20. Grave stele of the family of Timothes: his son Timotheos, his wife Demetria and his daughter Tryphosa (courtesy Karadeniz Ereğli Museum, inv. no. A.95.3.1). Figure 21. Grave stele of Claudius Eurotas and his wife Claudia Chara (courtesy Karadeniz Ereğli Museum, inv. no. A.99.1.65). Figure 22. Grave stele of Alexandros and his wife Basilissa (courtesy Karadeniz Ereğli Museum, inv. no. 2002/47A). Figure 23. Grave stele of ...teas son of Pisandros and his wife Parthenos (courtesy Karadeniz Ereğli Museum, inv. no. A.2007/7). Figure 24. Grave stele of oikonomos Tertius and his wife oikonomissa Auge (courtesy Karadeniz Ereğli Museum, inv. no. 2003.2A). Figure 25. Ostotheke of Clodius and his wife Dionysia (courtesy Karadeniz Ereğli Museum, inv. no. 2013/6A). Figure 26. Ostotheke of Diomedes and his wife Cotta (courtesy Karadeniz Ereğli Museum, inv. no. 2012/29A). Figure 27. Grave stele of Dionysios and his wife (daughter?) Cleopatra (courtesy Karadeniz Ereğli Museum, 2010/40A). Figure 28. Honorary inscription for Iulia Pythia, daughter of philosophos Iulius Pythagoras (courtesy Karadeniz Ereğli Museum, inv. no. 2002/52A). Figure 29. Grave stele of Olympichos, son of Olympichos (courtesy Karadeniz Ereğli Museum, inv. no. A.2001.895). Figure 30. A name list of damiourgoi on a building stone (courtesy Karadeniz Ereğli Museum, inv. no. A.99.1.83). Local Memory and Archaeological Surveys in Turkey’s Black Sea Region: The Case of St John Chrysostom’s Monastery in Bizeri near Comana Pontica* Figure 1. Map showing Comana, Bizeri and the Byzantine sites recorded during the surveys conducted between 2004 and 2009. New Evidence about the Monumental Architecture in the Temenos of Apollonia Pontica in the Archaic and Classical Periods Figure 1. Aerial view of the Late Archaic (to the left) and the Early Classical temples in the temenos on the island of St Kirik, Apollonia Pontica. Figure 2. Plan of the Late Archaic temple. Figure 3. Plan of the Early Classical temple. Figure 4. Reconstruction of an Archaic pantile, Type 2. Figure 5. Fragments of Archaic cover tiles, Type 2. Figure 6. Fragments of eaves tiles with guilloche. Figure 7. Reconstruction of an eaves tile with guilloche. Figure 8. 1. Fragment from an antefix with Gorgoneion and graphic reconstruction (photograph after Baralis et al. 2019); 2. Fragment from an antefix with Gorgoneion (photograph after Baralis et al. 2019). Figure 9. 1. Marble spira from an Ionic column base. 2. Fragment of the torus of an Ionic column base and graphic reconstruction. Figure 10. Joining fragments from a relief plaque with marching warriors from the rubble layer to the west of the Late Archaic temple. Figure 11. Pottery from the rubble layer to the west of the Late Archaic temple. A Breakthrough of Archaic Greek Transport Amphorae within the Getic Hinterland: The Case of Beidaud Figure 1. Beidaud among the Getic and Greek sites of the northern Dobrudja. Figure 2. General view of the Beidaud site. Figure 3. Amphorae of Chian type (1). Figure 4. Amphorae of Chian type (2). Figure 5. Amphorae of Chian type (3). Figure 6. Amphorae of Lesbos: 24–25. Grey ware; 26–32. Red Lesbian. Figure 7. Amphorae of Lesbos: red colour type. Figure 8. Amphorae of Lesbos: red colour type. Figure 9. Amphorae of Lesbos: red colour type. Figure 10. Amphorae of Clazomenae: red and brawn colour banded decoration. Figure 11. North Ionian Amphorae: Zeest’s ‘Samian’ type. Figure 12. North Ionian Amphorae (Zeest’s ‘Samian’ type: 68–70; Chian: 71). Figure 13. North Aegean containers. Figure 14. Amphorae of Chian type: variant Lambrino A1. Figure 15. Amphorae of Chian type: variant Monakhov’s ‘funnel-necked’. Figure 16. Amphorae of Chian type: variant swollen-necked. Figure 17. Amphorae of Chian type: variant swollen-necked. Figure 18. Grace’s ‘Samian’ or Zeest’s ‘Protothasian’ type. Figure 19. Amphora of Lesbos: Clinkenbeard’s ‘Fractional red’ type. Figure 20. Amphora of Lesbos: Clinkenbeard’s ‘Fractional red’ type. Figure 21. Amphora of Lesbian type: Dupont’s Methymna group. Figure 22. Stamped amphora from Demetrias(?). Figure 23. Vişina: diagram of Archaic amphorae frequency (after Mănucu-Adameșteanu 2008, 181, fig. 9c). Figure 24. Beidaud: diagram of Archaic amphorae frequency. Table 1. Distribution of Chian amphorae on the site. Table 2. Other Chian finds. Table 3. Lesbian amphorae distribution on the site. Table 4. Grey ware. Lesbian. Table 5. Red Lesbian amphorae. Table 6. Clazomenian amphora distribution on the site. Table 7. Other Clazomenian finds. Table 8. Samian ‘Zeest’ amphora distribution on the site. Table 9. Other Samian/North Ionian amphora finds. Table 10. North Ionian body sherds. Table 11. North Aegean amphora distribution on the site. Table 12. Other North Aegean Finds. Early Greek Pottery in the Context of Settlements and Burials: The Northern Black Sea Region* Figure 1. Archaeological sites of Eastern Europe mentioned in the article. 1 – Sabangia; 2 – Cioburciu; 3 – Chotyniec; 4 – Zalissia; 5 – Ivane-Puste; 6 – Severynivka; 7 – Nemyriv; 8 – Khotiv; 9 – Trakhtemyriv; 10 – Pastyrske; 11 – Repyahovataya Mogila; 12 Figure 2. Greek pottery from the Nemyriv and Trakhtemyriv city-sites. 1–21 – Nemyriv city-site (after Vakhtina 2018, table 6.1.1–2, 5, 6; 6.3.1; 6.4.1, 3; 6.5.3, 9; 6.8.2; 6.9.5–6; 6.10.1; 6.12.1–3; 6.13.1–5; 6.15.1–2; 6.16; 13 – photograph by Y.M. Boyko) Figure 3. Early Greek pottery from the Bilsk city-site. 1–26 – Bilsk city-site (after Zadnikov 2021, fig. 1.1–2, 6; 2.1–2, 5; 3.4, 9–10; 4.1–3; 5.1–6, 9–10). Figure 4. Early Greek pottery from the forest-steppe settlements of the northern Black Sea region. 1–3 – Motronino city-site (after Bessonova and Skoryi 2001, fig. 54.2–3, 9); 4–5 – Pastyrske city-site (after Farmakovskii 1914, table ІІ.1–2); 6–22 – Khoti Figure 5. Early Greek pottery from the forest-steppe settlements of the northern Black Sea region and the foothills of the northern Caucasus. 1–5 – Zhabotyn settlement (1 – after Pokrovskaya 1973, fig. 8.7; 2–5 – after Daragan, Podobed 2019, fig. 9.5, 12– Figure 6. Early Greek pottery in the burial complexes of the northern Black Sea region. 1 – Kolomak, kurgan 1 (after Radzievskaya 1985, fig. 1.1; figs. 2–4); 2 – Krasnogorovka ІІІ, kurgan 14, burial 5 (after Parusimov 2007, fig. 1; Monakhov 1999, table 2) Figure 7. Early Greek table pottery in the burial complexes of the northern Black Sea region. 1 – Boltyshka (after Vakhtina and Ryabkova 2020, fig. 6.1); 2 – Temir-Gora, burial 81 (after Vakhtina and Ryabkova 2020, fig. 6.2; Vakhtina 2016, fig. 1.2–9); 3 Figure 8. Burial complexes of the northern Black Sea region with early Greek pottery. 1 – Pervyi Razmennyi (Kostromskoy) (after Ryabkova 2013, fig. 1; Ryabkova and Loginova 2013, figs. 1, 4, 7; Alekseev 2012, fig. on p. 64; Otchet 1900, figs. 45, 47–48); Figure 9. Burial complexes of the northern Black Sea region with early Greek pottery. 1 – Aleyeksevskii (sloboda Krivorozhye) (after Kastananian and Arsen’eva 1984, table 139.5; Smirnov 1909, table 5.16; table 6: fig. 1); 2 – Khoperskiy okrug (after Kopyl Figure 10. Burial complexes of the northern Black Sea region with early Greek pottery. 1 – Sabangia (after Simion 1994, fig. 1.3–9); 2 – Bilsk, Skorobir, kurgan 1(1965) (after B. Shramko 1966, fig. 24.18–21; 1994, fig. 1.1–2; fig. 3.1–6; I. Shramko 2021, Figure 11. Burial complexes of the northern Black Sea region with early Greek pottery. 1 – Khapry, kurgan 1, burial 25 (after Maksimenko 1983, fig. 9; Monakhov 2003, table 33.4); 2 – Lebedi V, kurgan 11 (after Piankov, Ryabkova and Zelenskii 2019, figs. 4 Figure 12. Burial complexes of the northern Black Sea region with early Greek pottery. 1 – Kytaihorod, kurgan 4164-15 (after Romashko, Skor and Filimonov 2014, figs. 2–3); 2 – Bushuyka, kurgan 2, burial 10 (Korenyako and Lukiashko 1982, fig. 6.12–15, 20, Figure 13. Burial complexes of the northern Black Sea region with early Greek pottery. 1 – Repyahovataya Mogila, burial 2 (after Ilinskaya, Mozolevskii and Terenozhkin 1980, figs. 9–11, 13–21, 24; Monakhov 2003, table 17.2); 2 – Verkhnia Gyivka (Liubotyn) Table 1. Settlements with Greek Pottery of the Second Half of the 7th–First Half of the 6th Century BC Table 2. List of burial sites with Greek pottery from the second half of the 7th–first half of the 6th century BC. The House of Pythes, son of Pericles, in the North-Eastern Area of the Archaic Berezan Settlement Figure 1. Possible reconstruction of the street network of the Berezan settlement (in accordance with the data of 2018). Numbers of excavation sectors on plan: 1 – Necropolis. 2 – Sector ‘S1’ (Northern-1). 3 – Sector ‘S2’ (Northern-2). 4 – Sector ‘North-w Figure 2. Scheme of the designation of city streets and blocks of the Archaic Berezan settlement. Figure 3. Plan of building remains within the urban block ‘I’. Figure 4. Plan of the early structures dated to the first half–middle of the 6th century BC on the territory of the ‘House of Pythes’. Figure 5. House I-1 (‘House of Pythes’), plan of phase II-A. Second half of the 6th century BC. Figure 6. Presumed 3D reconstruction of house Ι-1 (‘House of Pythes’) of phase II-A with adjoining houses Ι-2 and Ι-3. View from the north-east. Pit no. 238 is marked by an arrow. Figure 7. Panoramic view of the eastern part of house I-1 (excavations of 2005–06). View from the south-west. Figure 8. Western part of house I-1 (excavations of 2015). View from the south-east. Figure 9. Room no. 5. View from the south-west. Figure 10. 1 – Rectangular hearth with two stoves in room no. 5. 2 – Reconstruction of a section of a portable adobe barrel-cooker. 3 – Fragments of portable cookers with traces of wicker frame on the inner surface. Figure 11. Room no. 6, view from the east. In the centre of the room in the stratigraphic section thick layers of fire could be seen. From the left on the photo graph – walls nos. 26–27 of the later building 6A–6B of phase II-B. Figure 12. Room no. 6: amphorae toes dug into the floor in the south-west (1) and south-east (2) corners of the structure. Figure 13. ‘Semi-basement’ room no. 7. Well-preserved mud-brick northern and western walls (view from the south). Figure 14. Room no. 26. View from the north. Figure 15. Open space in the north-east corner of the plot. View from the west. Figure 16. House I-1 (‘House of Pythes’), plan of phase II-B. Late 6th–first half of the 5th century BC. Figure 17. Masonry of late room no. 3 walls (phase II-B), built on top of the plinths of the walls of early room no. 5 (phase II-A). View from the north-east. Figure 18. ‘Semi-basement’ room no. 8, phase II-B. View from the west. Behind it -– room no. 6, phase II-A. Sindoi: Written Tradition and Archaeological Data* Figure 1. Map of the Cimmerian Bosporus. Figure 2. A pedestal with a dedicatory inscription of Leukon I. Figure 3. Silver coin with legend ΣΙΝΔΩΝ (Andrey Tereshchenko). Figure 4. View to the Seven Brothers barrows from the west edge of Labrys (photograph by author). Figure 5. Excavations of the Seven Brothers barrows. View from the east (drawing by Fedor Gross, 1875). Figure 6. Plan of mud tomb in the Seven Brothers barrow No. 2 (drawing by Vladimir Tizengauze, 1875). Figure 7. Some finds from the Seven Brothers barrow No. 2: 1–2. Silverware (phiale and gilded plate of a gorytos); 3–4. Golden objects (grivna and necklace). Figure 8. Necropolis of Artyuszczenko 2, burials with horse skeletal remains (plan and section): 1–2. Burial 32; 3–4. Burial 40; 5–6. Burial 64 (by Sergey Kashaev). Tarasova Balka in the Trans-Kuban Region as a Nomadic Sanctuary Figure 1. Map of the northern Black Sea region and East Greece. Figure 2. Tarasova Balka. The geomagnetic schema with designation of excavation sites of different years. Figure 3. Tarasova Balka. Local ceramics. Figure 4. Tarasova Balka. Items of warrior equipment: 1 – crosshair of a sword-akinakes; 2–8 – armour scales; 9–11 – belt hooks; 12–18 – knives; 19–22 – whetstones. Figure 5. Tarasova Balka. Arrowheads: 1–19, 35 – iron; 20–32, 34 – bronze; 33 – bone; 36 – flint. Figure 6. Tarasova Balka. Horse furnishings: 1–6 – horn/bone; 7–10 – iron. Figure 7. Tarasova Balka. Amphora fragments. Figure 8. Tarasova Balka. Tableware fragments: oinochoai and bowls. Figure 9. Tarasova Balka. Fragments of hearth-altar. New Material about an Old Archaeological Discovery: The First Mordvinovskii Barrow Figure 1. View of the First Mordvinovskii barrow before excavations. View from the south (Scientific Archive of IIMK RAN, Q 434–3). Figure 2. Excavations of the First Mordvinovskii barrow. View from the south (Scientific Archive of IIMK RAN, Q 437–11). Figure 3. Excavations of the secondary mound of the First Mordvinovskii barrow. View from the south (Scientific Archive of IIMK RAN, Q 438–6). Figure 4. Part of the mound covering the central tomb of the