You are on page 1of 49

Tumulus as Sema

Bereitgestellt von | De Gruyter / TCS


Angemeldet
Heruntergeladen am | 26.04.16 09:43

Topoi
Berlin Studies of the Ancient World
Edited by
Excellence Cluster Topoi

Volume 27

De Gruyter

Bereitgestellt von | De Gruyter / TCS


Angemeldet
Heruntergeladen am | 26.04.16 09:43

Tumulus as Sema
Space, Politics, Culture and Religion
in the First Millennium BC

Edited by

Olivier Henry
Ute Kelp
Part 1

De Gruyter

Bereitgestellt von | De Gruyter / TCS


Angemeldet
Heruntergeladen am | 26.04.16 09:43

ISBN 978-3-11-025990-2
e-ISBN (PDF) 978-3-11-026750-1
e-ISBN (EPUB) 978-3-11-038545-5
ISSN 2191-5806
Library of Congress Cataloging-in-Publication Data
A CIP catalog record for this book has been applied for at the Library of Congress.

Bibliographic information published by the Deutsche Nationalbibliothek


The Deutsche Nationalbibliothek lists this publication in the Deutsche Nationalbibliografie;
detailed bibliographic data are available in the Internet at http://dnb.dnb.de.

2016 Walter de Gruyter GmbH, Berlin/Boston


Typesetting: Drlemann Satz GmbH & Co. KG, Lemfrde
Printing and binding: Hubert & Co. GmbH & Co. KG, Gttingen
o Printed on acid-free paper
Printed in Germany
www.degruyter.com

Bereitgestellt von | De Gruyter / TCS


Angemeldet
Heruntergeladen am | 26.04.16 09:43

Contents

VII

Susan Alcock
Time Traveling Tumuli. The Many Lives of Bumps on the Ground.
A General Introduction . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

Alessandro Naso
Tumuli in the Western Mediterranean, 800500 BC. A Review
before the Istanbul Conference . . . . . . . . . . .

Foreword .
Abbreviations

Southern Mediterranean: Cyrene and Cyprus


Natascha Kreutz
Two Tumuli for Battus in the Agora of Cyrene .

35

Anne Marie Carstens


Tumuli as Power Political Statements. On Tumuli in Cyprus
in an East Mediterranean and Anatolian Context . . . .

43

Maria Grazia Amore


The Complex of Tumuli 9, 10 and 11 in the Necropolis
of Apollonia (Albania). A Time Span from the Early Bronze Age
to the Early Hellenistic Period . . . . . . . . . . . .

57

Lorenc Bejko
Social Landscape and Tumuli Burials in Late Bronze and Early Iron Age
Southeastern Albania . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

75

Samantha L. Martin-McAuliffe
Defining Landscape. The Prehistoric Tumulus at Lofknd, Albania .

89

Barbara Schmidt-Dounas
Macedonian Grave Tumuli .

101

Greece, Albania and Macedonia

CONTENTS
Bereitgestellt von | De Gruyter / TCS
Angemeldet
Heruntergeladen am | 26.04.16 09:44

IX

Athanasia Kyriakou
The History of a Fourth Century BC Tumulus at Vergina. Definitions
in Space and Time . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

. 143

Elizabeth McGowan
Tumulus and Memory. The Tumulus as a Locus for Ritual Action
in the Greek Imagination . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

. 163

Maria Stamatopoulou
Forging a Link with the Past. The Evidence from Thessalian Cemeteries
in the Archaic and Classical Periods . . . . . . . . . . . .

. 181

Annie Schnapp-Gourbeillon
Tumuli, Sema and Greek Oral Tradition

. 205

. 221

Thrace
.
Inci Delemen
Tumuli in Southeastern Thrace: On the Periphery?

Daniela Agre
On the Untraditional Use of Mounds in Thrace during the Late Iron Age . 233

Maria Chichikova
The Hellenistic Necropolis of the Getic Capital at Sboryanovo
(Northeastern Bulgaria) . . . . . . . . . . . . .

. 243

Dejan Dichev
The Commemorate Ritualism at Thracian Dolmens .

. 261

Rumyana Georgieva
Riders Burials in Thrace .

. 269

Kostadin Rabadjiev
The Thracian Tomb as Ritual Space of the Beyond .

. 281

Totko Stoyanov, Daniela Stoyanova


Early Tombs of Thrace. Questions of Chronology and Cultural Context .

. 313

Milena Tonkova
A Fifth Century BC Tumulus with a Wooden Sarcophagus
of the Upper Mesta Valley . . . . . . . . . . .

. 339

CONTENTS
Bereitgestellt von | De Gruyter / TCS
Angemeldet
Heruntergeladen am | 26.04.16 09:44

Sahin Yildirim
The Emergence and the Development of Tumuli in Eastern Thrace .

359

Asia Minor, from Aegean Coast to Cappadocia


C. Brian Rose, Reyhan Krpe
The Tumuli of Troy and the Troad .

373

387

Christina Luke, Christopher H. Roosevelt


Memory and Meaning in Bin Tepe, the Lydian Cemetery of the
Thousand Mounds . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

. 407

Nicola Zwingmann
Tumuli as Points of Interest in Greek and Latin Sources

Olivier Henry
Marking Karian Soil. Lydian Tumuli in Karia, Sixth to Fourth Century BC . 429
Orhan Bingl
A Door between Two Worlds. A Reflection on Tumuli .

. 445

Adnan Diler
Stone Tumuli in Pedasa on the Lelegian Peninsula.
Problems of Terminology and Origin . . . . . .

455

Oliver Hlden
Tumuli in Lykien. Ein berblick ber den Forschungsstand

475

. 491

Latife Summerer, Alexander von Kienlin


Roofing the Dead. Architectural Allusions in Anatolian Tumuli .

501

Donatella Ronchetta
The Significance of the Tumulus Burial among the Funeral Buildings
of Hierapolis of Phrygia . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

513

Giuseppe Scardozzi
Tumuli in the Ancient Territory of Hierapolis in Phrygia

. 589

Ute Kelp
Some Remarks on Tumuli of Late Hellenistic and Early Roman Times
in Phrygia and the Development of Provincial Art . . . . . . .

. 601

Bilge Hrmzl
Display of Power. The Mortuary Landscape of Pisidian Tumuli

CONTENTS
Bereitgestellt von | De Gruyter / TCS
Angemeldet
Heruntergeladen am | 26.04.16 09:44

XI

Taciser Tfekci Sivas, Hakan Sivas


Tumulus Tombs in Western Phrygia . .

. 613

Richard F. Liebhart, Gareth Darbyshire, Evin Erder, Ben Marsh


A Fresh Look at the Tumuli of Gordion . . . . . . . . . . . . 627
Maya Vassileva
Royal Tombs in Balkan-Anatolian Context. Representations of Status
in Phrygian Tumuli . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

. 637

Nicole Thierry
Le Tumulus dAvanos et la ville sainte du grand Zeus Ouranos .

. 649

Owen Doonan
Tumuli and the Expression of a Colonial Middle Ground
in the Hinterland Landscape of Greek Sinope . . . .

. 657

Marina Daragan
The Use of GIS Technologies in Studying the Spatial and
Time Concentration of Tumuli in the Scythian-time
Lower Dnieper Region . . . . . . . . . . . .

. 669

Leon van Hoof, Marlen Schlffel


Kurgans in the Northeastern Azov Sea Region.
Proposals for a Geo-archaeological Research Program

. 677

Anton Gass
Archologische und geoarchologische Untersuchungen
im Siebenstromland . . . . . . . . . . . . .

. 705

W. Gheyle, A. De Wulf, E.P. Dvornikov, A.V. Ebel,


R. Goossens, Jean Bourgeois
Early Iron Age Burial Mounds in the Altay Mountains.
From Survey to Analysis . . . . . . . . . . .

. 719

Northern Black Sea

Eurasia

XII

CONTENTS
Bereitgestellt von | De Gruyter / TCS
Angemeldet
Heruntergeladen am | 26.04.16 09:44

Indices
Index of Names .

735

Index of Places .

738

Index of Tumulus Names .

. 748

Index of Ancient Sources .

751

CONTENTS
Bereitgestellt von | De Gruyter / TCS
Angemeldet
Heruntergeladen am | 26.04.16 09:44

XIII

Contents Part 2

Authors .

XIV

VII

Illustration Credits .

XV

Plates

CONTENTS
Bereitgestellt von | De Gruyter / TCS
Angemeldet
Heruntergeladen am | 26.04.16 09:44

Totko Stoyanov, Daniela Stoyanova


Early Tombs of Thrace. Questions of Chronology and Cultural Context
(Plates 129141)

Abstract
In the last decades many monumental tombs under tumuli have been unearthed in the lands of ancient
Thrace. Besides an impressive architecture revealing new patterns of design, construction and architectural decoration, the tombs in the Kazanlak valley and the region of the village of Starosel raise questions within the scientific community in regard to their early date of construction and use as proposed
by some scholars. These new tombs are also significant for approaching the development of residential
and settlement centers as they might indicate cultural interactions between Thrace and neighboring regions. The present paper proposes a new analysis of these new tombs, as well as already known ones
said to be of an early date, which is not only based on their architecture but also on their inventory and
context.

Keywords
Ancient Thrace, tomb architecture, context

In the last decades a series of new monumental tombs under tumuli have been unearthed
in the lands of ancient Thrace across the territory of modern Bulgaria. The number of these
monumental funerary complexes exceeds two hundred.
The majority of the newly discovered tombs have already been plundered either in
ancient or in modern times, which hinders the accurate dating of their construction and
periods of use. On the other hand, some of the tombs illustrate the development of architectural design and/or decoration, indicating an use over a considerable period of time,
which is confirmed by the presence of many successive burials. Another difficulty in the
analysis of these tombs is the lack of comprehensive publications of the recently excavated
funeral complexes.
Questions regarding the design of both new and already known tombs considered to
be of an early date require an innovative analysis which takes all the components including
the inventory and context of these structures into account.
The paper presented here reviews two groups of monuments:
I. Tombs providing enough data to outline a relatively precise early chronology on the
basis of architectural peculiarities and archaeological finds.
II. Tombs with a supposedly early date of construction and use, but without certain
architectural and inventory evidence.

EARLY TOMBS OF THRACE


Bereitgestellt von | De Gruyter / TCS
Angemeldet
Heruntergeladen am | 26.04.16 10:33

313

I.
The tomb at Rouzhitsa, near Bolyarovo (Fig. 1)
The tomb consists of an antechamber and a burial chamber built of well-hewn limestone
blocks as well as a long dromos constructed in mud bricks. The flat covering is made of granite blocks. The walls, from the dromos to the inner chamber, are plastered with fine clay and
the door-frame to the burial chamber is lavishly decorated with various incised motifs
(meanders, lozenges and spirals as well as palmettos, ivy leaves, etc.) painted in red, ochre
and white. The observations of the excavators indicate that the tomb had been accessible for
a couple of decades. The date of construction and use in the first half of the 5th century BC
is established by a Chian amphora of an earlier type found in front of the entrance of the
tomb.1 The pattern of the multicoloured door-frame as well as such an early use of mudbrick in the construction of graves are quite unusual for Thrace and could be associated
most successfully with the rock-cut faades as well as the wooden furniture, painted pottery
and metal belts of Phrygia.2 Flat covering is well attested in Lydia and NW Anatolia as
shown by recently published Archaic and Early Classical tombs.3

The tomb at Tatarevo, near Parvomay (Figs. 1 and 3)


The tomb comprises an asymmetrically connected short dromos, an antechamber and a
burial chamber. The dromos has a flat roof while the two chambers have a corbelled vault
starting after the second row of pseudo-isodomic well-hewn blocks of the sidewalls.4
In the famous book of I. Venedikov and T. Gersimov, the Tatarevo tomb was given a
date in the first half of the 5th century BC.5 Nonetheless, according to the inventory which
includes a bronze cuirass of the archaic bell type,6 a hydria, a balsamary and (the handles

1 Agre 2005 and forthcoming. The dating of the complex in the first half of the 5th century BC on the basis of a
Chian amphora was determined in the discussion following the report by D. Agre at the Workshop Monumental
tombs and grave constructions in Thrace documentation, interpretation, socialization, held in December 2006.
In fact, the precise date of the complex is to be fixed after the final complete publication.
2 Akurgal 1961, fig. 53 (Cybele on the faade). Naumann 1983, 18, pl. 5.2; Young 1981, 19 (belt TumP 35 fig. 9),
3536 (jugs TumP 5657, pl. 17 DE, F), 6267 (inlaid screen TumP 151 fig. 33); zgen/ztrk 1996, 25, fig. 23;
Vassileva 2005 and 2007.
3 Hanfmann et al. 1967, 3237, figs. 2729, 32, 34, 36; Ramage 1972, 1115 figs. 12; Greenewalt/Freedman
1979, 911, figs. 78; Hanfmann 1980, 100101, fig. 7; zgen/ztrk 1996, 3639, 5758.
4 Mikov 1955, 38, 3941, figs. 3b, 12, 12a; Rousseva 2002, 129130.
5 Venedikov/Gerassimov 1979, 66.
6 Nat. Arch. Museum Sofia, Inv No 33333334. Ognenova-Marinova 1961, 504, 506, 509, figs. 13; cf. Type I bell
cuirass, after Jarva 1995, 20, 24, note 119, fig. 3.

314

TOTKO STOYANOV, DANIELA STOYANOVA


Bereitgestellt von | De Gruyter / TCS
Angemeldet
Heruntergeladen am | 26.04.16 10:33

of) a podanypter,7 the date of the interment can be no later than the final quarter of 5th century BC when compared with all other grave complexes known so far from Thrace comprising the bell as well as other archaic cuirass types (Svetlen, Gorski Izvor, Cernozem, Svetitsa Tumulus near Kran etc.) (Fig. 4).8 This is one of the earliest monumental tombs of
Thrace with the basic components of the developed type already present; the dromos, antechamber and burial chamber are built into the southern periphery of the mound to allow
for multiple activities. The asymmetrical layout, the uncommon longitudinal position and
covering of the burial chamber, the irregular proportions and workmanship probably support an early date too.

The tomb at Rouets, Targovishte district (Figs. 1 and 5)


The tomb is a one-chamber rectangular building placed in the eastern part of the mound. It
has a gabled roof, made of two oblique stone slabs standing longitudinally. The construction shows a high quality of workmanship with well-dressed ashlar blocks arranged in rows
of alternating high and low pseudo-isodomic blocks. Its faade has been carefully arranged
with an Ionic door-frame between two antae crowned by a pediment. The interior ornamental program includes rows of Ionic cymatia and crosses, carved and painted in red, on the
upper row of blocks of the walls.9
The material saved from robbery is quite representative: bronze armour (Fig. 4),
weapons, bronze and clay table vases, an iron bridle, bone and glass artefacts.10 The redfigured hydria fragment (Fig. 5.5), dated in the second half of the 5th century BC,11 and the
close parallels with the material from the grave at Dalboki dated in the late 5th century BC,12
provide a plausible date for the tombs construction and the initial burial at Rouets in the
late 5th century BC.13 Such a date seems to be confirmed by comparison with other remarkable grave monuments from the Mediterranean.14

7 Vassilev 1993. The author was the first one to relate the inventory listed here with the tomb in question. Cf.
Mikov 1957, 225226, 228.
8 Svetlen, former Ayazlar: Velkov 1928/1929, 5053, figs. 7879 and Ognenova-Marinova 1961, 509, 511512,
figs. 46; Gorski Izvor: Petrov 1993, 918, figs. 212; Cernozem: Kisyov 2005, 1659, figs. 133, pl. IXX; Svetitsa
Tumulus: Kitov 2005b, 4767, figs. 67, 6971, 75, 8198. The cuirass from Tarnichene is a chance find, probably
from the same type of grave: Ognenova-Marinova 1961, 512, 516, figs. 78, 9. 3.
9 Velkov 1928/1929, 3738, figs. 4647.
10 See in general Velkov 1928/1929, 3848, figs. 4850, 5255, 58, 6365, 6771; more on the cuirass: OgnenovaMarinova 1961, 519, 522, fig. 14 ab; the helmet Ognenova-Marinova/Stoyanov 2005, 524, cat. no 1, table II.13.
11 Reho-Bumbalova 1990, 54, no 51.
12 Vickers 2002, 5675.
13 Stoyanov 1990, 123.
14 Stoyanov 1990, 124125; Akurgal 1961, 129, 294295, figs. 20, 259261; Fedak 1990, 4546, fig. 38; Valeva
2005, 283.

EARLY TOMBS OF THRACE


Bereitgestellt von | De Gruyter / TCS
Angemeldet
Heruntergeladen am | 26.04.16 10:33

315

The tomb at Eriklice, near Krklareli (Figs. 1 and 6)


The tomb comprises a short dromos connected asymmetrically to the burial chamber. The
chamber, circular in plan, is covered by a dome, starting from the fourth row of blocks of
the wall. The inner faces of the blocks in every row are divided into two horizontal bands:
the lower being concave and the upper straight and vertical. A simple faade frames the
entrance. Above the lintel of the doorway, which has a simple cornice, one notices a huge
block reminding one of a pediment.15
The material retrieved from the tomb, probably belonging to a noble warrior, includes
a bronze gilt helmet, a silver harness protompedion, a silver phiale, a silver jug with lotus
blossom ornament on the body, a silver oinochoe, a bronze oinochoe and the shaft of a bronze
candelabrum.16 On the basis of these artefacts, M. Pfrommer proposed a date of ca. 350 BC
as the terminus ante quem for the construction of the tomb (most probably the second
quarter of the 4th century BC).17

The tomb at Karako, near Krklareli (Figs. 1 and 7)


This tomb is very similar to the one from Eriklice, but of smaller dimensions. The only differences are the symmetry of the plan and the sidewalls which are added to the faade in
order to define a porch. An intact inhumation burial was excavated in the chamber.18 On the
grounds of three clay phialai retrieved from the excavation, M. Pfrommer proposed an interment date in the first third of the 4th century BC.19 A new analysis of the other clay
vessels found in the tomb, a jug and an askos, compared with well known material, leads us
to propose a later date for the burial, in the second half of the 4th century BC.20

The tomb in Slavchova mound, near Rozovo, Kazanlak Valley (Figs. 1 and 8)
The tomb is located in the southern periphery of the mound. It is rectangular in plan with
a porch and an almost quadrangular chamber with a common corbelled semi-circular
ceiling.21 This kind of roofing is unique in Thrace for the time being, but has an excellent

15 Hasluck 1911, 7679, pl. 20; Filov 1937, 9293, figs. 104107; Mansel 1943, 37, 39, figs. 4, 9.
16 Hasluck 1911, 77, no 163, 164, 175, 195, 267, 273, after Joubin 1898. In the latest study of the tomb the candelabrum is not included in the tomb inventory, see Theodossiev 2011, 7073.
17 Pfrommer 1987, FK 35 and 1993; Stoyanov 2005b, 236237, fig. 1.2; Theodossiev 2011, 7375.
18 Fratl 1964, 211212.
19 Pfrommer 1987, FK 30.
20 Stoyanov 2007, 562, n. 8.
21 Kitov 1996a, 17 and 1999, 1213.

316

TOTKO STOYANOV, DANIELA STOYANOVA


Bereitgestellt von | De Gruyter / TCS
Angemeldet
Heruntergeladen am | 26.04.16 10:33

parallel in the monumental tomb of Labraunda in Caria, also dated in the 350s BC.22 The
walls of the tomb are pseudo-isodomic, with alternating high and low rows of blocks. The
entrance to the chamber has an Ionic door-frame.23 According to the excavator, the building,
designed and performing as a mausoleum, had been left open for some time for visits and
rituals. On the basis of a horse gear application found in the tomb G. Kitov proposed a terminus ante quem in the middle of the 4th century BC. The tomb had already been plundered
in ancient times and suffered serious destruction in later periods. Therefore, the material
retrieved from the chamber was relatively poor: parts of iron weapons, a cuirass, pottery
sherds and a gilt wreath.24 Fortunately, the fragments of two stamped amphorae were recovered from the porch: a Thasian of the eponymous Kleitos, datable in the 350s BC, and an
Herakleian one bearing the stamp of Euporos Lysitheos (with a kantharos as an emblem),
dated currently to ca. 350345 BC.25 Judging by the excavators record, there were no traces
of reconstruction works, so the amphorae might confirm a probable date of construction
and of the first burial around the middle of the 4th century BC, while the gilt wreath indicates a later phase of use in the Early Hellenistic times.26

The tomb of Mal-tepe Tumulus at Mezek, near Svilengrad (Figs. 1 and 9)


It is one of the most impressive examples of burial cult in Thrace from the time of its cultural flourishing in the 4th and 3rd centuries BC. The investigations conducted onsite and
the initial publications of the tomb have complicated its analysis. Many points of debate and
questions still remain open after several decades of attempting to place the complex within
a balanced chronological framework and cultural outline.27 The Mal-tepe Tumulus is fairly
huge with a diameter of ca. 90 m and a height of ca. 14 m.28 At least three periods of building activities in the eastern part of the mound are to be distinguished:
1. The construction of the circular, domed burial chamber (3.3 m in diameter and 4.3 m
high), two rectangular corbelled antechambers and the ca. 10 m long corbelled dromos;29 in
this phase, one or more burials were performed in the chamber.
2. The second phase saw the extension of the dromos to a total length of 21 m and (probably) the construction of a monumental entrance which was engaged in an extremely
monumental crepis wall built of well-hewn blocks with a thickness of ca. 5 m.30
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
29
30

Henry 2006, 522.


Stoyanova 2005, 662 (Group V. 2), figs. 1415 and 2007a, 540 (var. B) and n. 68.
Kitov 1996a, 57.
Tzochev 2009, 58, fig. 2.
Domaradzki 1998, 46 and the references.
For the latest general overview see Stoyanov 2005a, 123126.
Filov 1937, 7, obr. 3, 4.
Rousseva 2002, 165 notes a different treatment of the basic row of blocks in the second half of the dromos.
Filov 1937, 714, figs. 39.

EARLY TOMBS OF THRACE


Bereitgestellt von | De Gruyter / TCS
Angemeldet
Heruntergeladen am | 26.04.16 10:33

317

3. The third and final phase of the building saw the construction of two chambers on
either side of the entrance for ritual activities and the erection of a bronze statuary group
representing a boar hunt.31 From this moment on, the complex certainly acted as a heroon.
Within the second or the third stage, burials took place in both antechambers while the
floor in the antechambers and the corridor was laid out with thick slabs.32
During the research conducted by B. Filov in 1931 in the chambers and the corridor,
a large amount of impressive material was retrieved from the tomb.33 According to Filov
there had been pillage both in antiquity and in modern times. The analysis of M. Domaradzki has revealed that the allocation of the items in the dome chamber and the other
parts of the tomb depending on their function reveals that they have been uncovered as they
had been left at the last using of the tomb34.
B. Filov dated the erection of the tomb and the initial burial to about the middle of the
4th century BC but did not distinguish between other burials or phases. Since then, different opinions about the initial date of the complex have been presented, from the late 5th to
the late 4th century BC.35
The date of the first inhumation (i.e. the first stage of the development of the heroon)
can be established on the basis of two Thasian amphorae found in the main burial chamber.
According to the latest studies in Thasian amphorology both are to be dated by stamp chronology and shape to the beginning of the 280s BC.36 In general, we support a construction
date for the first stage at the very end of the 4th or the very beginning of the 3rd century BC.
Such a chronology finds additional support when compared to the Kurt-kale tomb discovered not far from Mezek.37 It has a lantern-roof in the antechamber and the manner of
fixing the stone doors to the lintel is similar to that in the dome tomb in the Zhaba mogila
mound at Strelcha.38

The tomb in the Golyamata Kosmatka Tumulus, near Shipka, Kazanlak Valley
(Figs. 2 and 10)
This is another amazing monumental burial complex in Thrace which came to light in recent
years. The tumulus has a diameter of ca. 90 m and a preserved height of ca. 14 m. According
to G. Kitov, the piling of the mound most probably took place between the beginning and
the middle of the 5th century BC. According to the author, the monumental temple was
31
32
33
34
35
36
37
38

318

Stoyanov 2005a, 125126, fig. 2; Kostadin Rabadjiev in the present volume.


Filov 1937, 1619; Domaradzki 1998, 5053; Stoyanov 2005a, 125; Emilov/Megaw 2012; Tzochev 2014.
Filov 1937, 3079.
Domaradzki 1998, 51.
Stoyanov 2005a, 126127 with a review of the dates proposed so far.
Tzochev 2008, 25, fig. 4.1, annex , No 105.
Filov 1937, 7983, 91; Theodossiev 2007b, 603, and the text in 10.
Stoyanova 2005, 657659; Theodossiev/Stoyanova 2010. Cf. infra for the Strelcha tomb.

TOTKO STOYANOV, DANIELA STOYANOVA


Bereitgestellt von | De Gruyter / TCS
Angemeldet
Heruntergeladen am | 26.04.16 10:33

erected later, probably in the second half of the 5th century BC, inside a pit dug into the
southern part of the mound.39 It was later used as a tomb, at the very beginning of the 3rd
century BC, for the interment of Seuthes III.40
The tomb consists of a 13 m long flat roofed dromos, followed by a rectangular corbelled
antechamber flanked by a monumental faade, a circular beehive chamber and finally a
monolithic burial chamber. The entrance to the complex was completed by another monumental faade. In contrast to the dromos and the exterior faade, both the chamber and the
interior faade are built of well-dressed ashlars.41 In G. Kitovs publication, it is not clear to
which stage the burial of Seuthes is related, and whether it is the only interment ever made
in this tomb.
The monolithic chamber, shaped as a monumental sarcophagus with a gabled lid, revealed a remarkably rich inventory of funerary material.42 The floor and the bed were
covered with a thick carpet interwoven with gold.43 On the carpet one found the belongings
of the dead (Fig. 11): a gold oak wreath on a piece of the east wing of the door (Fig. 11 no.
109), nearby a gold bowl-kantharos (Fig. 11 no. 100; Fig. 15.4), a silver gilt shell-like vessel
(Fig. 11 no. 126), and in the south-east corner a silver jug (Fig. 11 no. 127; Fig. 15.1), a silver
kalyx bowl (Fig. 11 no. 128; Fig. 15.3), a set of bronze tableware items such as an askos-like
jug (Fig. 15.5) placed in a bronze patera (Fig. 11 nos. 138139),44 a gold trimming for horsetrappings (Fig. 11 nos. 112, 113, 117, 129, 130), a bronze helmet with a gilt application on the
front (Fig. 11 no. 135),45 a pair of bronze greaves with exquisite embossed decoration representing the head of Athena (Fig. 11 nos. 136137), leather chain armour, a leather pectoral
39 It is to be emphasized that the authors do not accept the concept of G. Kitov of identifying some monumental
tombs in Thrace with temples (Kitov 2007, 41, 158). It is incorrect concerning strictly the architectural form of the
faade, and the other basic features of the tomb building. Even if there were temple-like elements, the artifacts
found so far do not reveal anything different than burial and post-burial practices and rituals. In the cases of
temple-like funerary buildings such as the Nereids Monument in Xanthos and others in Lycia, the term applies to
the architectural design but not the function. Cf. on that matter Lawrence 1983, 247; Jenkins 2006, 154, 158, 186.
40 Kitov 2005a, 41 and 2005b, 68.
41 Kitov 2005a, 4244 and 2005b, 6870.
42 More than 70 pieces. Cf. Kitov 2005b, figs. 115116, 123, 126 and 2008, figs. 347348: plan of the chamber and
photos of the chamber with the finds. Unfortunately, many are still not published while most of the objects published so far are mentioned only briefly without catalogue information (for example, six items are included in the
Basel Exhibition Catalogue: Die alten Zivilisationen 2007, 158162, cat. no. 118 ae). This does not allow a discussion on a more precise chronology of the complex.
43 Kitov 2005a, 46 and 2005b, 76.
44 Kitov 2005a, 4450, figs. 910, 1416 and 2005b, 7688, figs. 115122, 124125, 140. See Kitov 2006, ill. on
pp. 172173 and 2008, figs. 350 for the restored oak wreath. The shell-like vase (Kitov 2005b, 7980, figs. 121122
and 2006, 178, ills. on pp. 176177) has a good parallel in the Berlin Museum (a silver Muschelgef , from a
group of silver vessels from Paterno, Sicily, dated to the end of the 4th / beginning of the 3rd century BC: Heilmeyer 1988, 344345, no 15). Since G. Kitov points out that the artefact must have been in use for a long time as
it bears traces of wearing out this is an additional indication for a date of the interment after the beginning of the
3rd century BC.
45 By its formal peculiarities the helmet reveals strong local trends; cf. Ognenova-Marinova/Stoyanov 2005, 527,
cat. no. 13, tabl. III. 23.

EARLY TOMBS OF THRACE


Bereitgestellt von | De Gruyter / TCS
Angemeldet
Heruntergeladen am | 26.04.16 10:33

319

with stitched gold lamellas (Fig. 11 no. 132) similar to those from Derveni46 and Starosel47,
other armour pieces and weapons such as a sword with gold incrustation on the handle and
gold applications on the scabbard, iron spearheads, etc. (Fig. 11 no. 160).48 Three intact amphorae were found in the south-east corner. One of them (Fig. 11 no. 72) has a stamp of the
so called Herotimos Class, found in Thrace (Seuthopolis and Kabyle) and the Pontic
basin.49 Many other artefacts of gold, bronze and iron, glass, alabaster, etc. were found in
different spots of the burial chamber.50
In addition, four bronze coins of Seuthes III were found in the corridor.51 The identification of the burial is based mainly on the Greek inscriptions, with letters made of embossed dots, found on the handle of a silver jug (Fig. 15.2), on the silver kalyx-cups and on
the front of the helmet, giving the name of Seuthes,52 and the discovery of a head of a lifesize bronze statue in front of the entrance of the tomb clearly resembling the portraits of
Seuthes III on bronze coins.53
The date of the burial, as established by G. Kitov in his initial publications, at the very
beginning of the 3rd century BC (the supposed time of death of the Seuthes III) is based primarily on the stamped amphora, which dates back to the first half of the 3rd century BC.54
On the other hand, the author insisted on placing the burial at the beginning of the period,55
while replacing the time of Seuthes death in the 280s BC, instead of the late 4th century
BC, without any arguments.56 Such a chronological arrangement clearly questions the
scholarly community and further analysis is therefore needed here, particularly on the rest
of the funerary material.
As far as the date of the construction of the tomb is concerned, the evidence is to be
drawn from the analysis of the medallions on the marble door (Figs. 1214). Among the
best parallels for the Medusa on the left wing is the representation on the door in the newly
discovered tomb at Veroia, dated to ca. 280 BC. The Helios head on the right wing can be
compared to Helios on the metope of the Early Hellenistic Athena temple at Ilion.57 There is
no single piece of evidence that the two wings of the door leading to the domed chamber
were assembled after the construction of the earlier part of the tomb. In this context we sup46 Themelis/Touratsoglou 1997, 8485 B46, color plate 19 B46.
47 Kitov 2003b, 32.
48 Kitov 2005a, 4650, figs. 1113, 2224 and 2005b, 8188, figs. 126139, 142.
49 Getov 1995, 9798; Stoyanov 2011, 196, fig. 6.
50 Kitov 2005b, 7688, figs. 115166, 141.
51 Coins of type 1 by the classification of K. Dimitrov 1984.
52 Basic publication and comment in Manov 2006. Cf. Kitov 2005b, figs. 125, 144145, 149.
53 Kitov 2005b, 8994, figs. 100, 146148, 151. On the Seuthes bronze-head portrait and the tomb complex see
lately Saladino 20122013.
54 Getov 1995, 9798. Cf. Balkanska/Tzochev 2008, 189: the first quarter of the 3rd century BC.
55 Kitov 2005b, 9091.
56 Kitov 2007, 44: [] Goljama Kosmatka [] als Grabsttte-Mausoleum des groen thrakischen Knigs
Seuthes III. (330280? v. Chr.).
57 Webb 1996, 4751.

320

TOTKO STOYANOV, DANIELA STOYANOVA


Bereitgestellt von | De Gruyter / TCS
Angemeldet
Heruntergeladen am | 26.04.16 10:33

pose that the tomb in the Golyama Kosmatka Tumulus was built ca. at the very end of the
4th or in the first quarter of the 3rd century BC58 whereas the dromos and the exterior faade
were constructed afterwards.
Some pieces of the material inventory could indicate a more precise date of the burial.
One of the most important pieces of information is given by the inscription on the handle
of the silver jug. It shows the name of Seuthes in the genitive, EY)OY, and uses the lunar
sigma character (Fig. 15.2),59 a script which is known to appear around 285 BC on stamped
amphorae.60 As for the date of the so-called Herotimos Class amphorae, the stamps as well
as the type of stamp design show clear relations to a group of four emissions in the so-called
Parmeniskos Group, most probably produced in workshops of Mesambria Pontica around
the end of the first or beginning of the second quarter of the 3rd century BC.61 The golden
bowl-kantharos (Fig. 15.4) is also among the items which can be dated in or after the first
decade of the 3rd century BC. It is a well known type in Athenian early Hellenistic pottery
and the closest parallels are dated by S. Rotroff to 285275 BC.62 The incised palmette decoration inside the vessel reveals the correlation between the development of ceramic and
metal vases of this shape as it is also known from some silver examples dated ca. to and
after 300 BC.63 The askos-like jug (Fig. 15.5) is almost identical in shape and decoration to a
vase recorded in the inventory of the Mal-tepe tomb and dated to the secondary phase of the
Mezek complex, i.e. after the 280s BC and most probably in the second quarter of the 3rd
century BC.64 The four bronze coins of Seuthes III from the corridor contradict neither a
burial date in the second nor the third decade of the 3rd century BC.65
In sum, the above analysis confirms a date of ca. 280 BC, at the earliest, for the material found in the tomb complex. Nonetheless, this chronology seems to contradict the
identification of the buried individual with Seuthes III. It is accepted almost with un58 Stoyanova 2008, 95101, figs. 58.
59 Manov 2006, 3334, fig. 20.
60 Avram 1996, 31: vers 275; Garlan 20042005, 315320: vers 280; Balkanska/Tzochev 2008, 189 lit.:
285280 BC; Getov 2008, 316: after 280 BC.
61 On the probable origin of this subgroup: Stoyanov 2003, 3841 and 2011; Balkanska/Tzochev 2008.
62 Rotroff 1997, 93, 256, no 134135, fig. 11, pl. 13. Such vessels are known from the necropolis of Olbia and the
North Pontic area and are dated earlier than in the monograph of S. Rotroff, namely after the beginning of the 3rd
century BC: Parovich-Peshikan 1974, 72, 74, figs. 71, 72.1, 3.
63 From Prusias, see Strong 1966, 93, pl. 22B; from Athens, see Bothmer 1984, No 80; Sideris 2000, 1718, figs.
2223.
64 See the discussion above.
65 According to K. Dimitrov, it is among the earliest coin types struck in Seuthopolis, ca. 326316 BC (Dimitrov
1984), but one might note that the lack of other coin types in the tomb points to a dating of these coins not before
the reign but after the death of Cassander in 297 BC. See also Tacheva 2006a, 287 with ref. and 2006b, 194198,
fig. 27.1: that type 1 has to be among the latest and for the time being the closest terminus post quem for the
death of Seuthes III. Another argument can be the unique coin issue of this type, found in the hoard from Mogilovo along with 103 coins of Philip II and Alexander III, as well as a Macedonian coin minted in 288277 BC. The
coinage of this type is to be outlined as the latest one represented at the moment most close to the terminus post
quem for the death of the Seuthes III.

EARLY TOMBS OF THRACE


Bereitgestellt von | De Gruyter / TCS
Angemeldet
Heruntergeladen am | 26.04.16 10:33

321

animity that the period of the death of this king should be estimated between 301/300 and
295 BC (at the latest).66 It has also been stated that Seuthes III would have been hundred
years old in 280 BC, which is impossible.67
So, the date given by the inventory gives rise to a group of questions:
1. Was it a solitary burial?
2. When was Seuthes III buried? Is it possible that Seuthes III was re-buried some
20 years after his death?
3. Is it possible to identify the deceased with Seuthes III? If not, could it be another
Seuthes considering the ancient sources relate to many Thracian rulers and nobles bearing
the name of Kotys, Seuthes, Dromihaetes etc.? On the faade of a tomb near Smyadovo,
Shumen district, the name of Gonimasedze, the wife of a certain Seuthes, was engraved on
the architrave.68 In recent years, information accumulated from epigraphic monuments,
stamps, graffiti and other kinds of record has shown that the so-called Odrysian royal
names like Kotys, Seuthes, Teres, or the Getic Dromichaites were not so rare in fact and had
been born by people of different social status craftsmen, mercenaries etc. So, for instance,
stamps on roof-tiles from Pheres in Thessaly tell us about a certain fabricant Kotys;69 from
an Athenian inscription we learn that among the Thracian soldiers of a cavalry unit there
was one named Seuthes and another one named Dromichaites;70 and we read the name of
Teres in a graffito from the Getic city at Sboryanovo.71

II.
The tomb at Krklareli, Mound B (Figs. 1 and 16)
This tomb is among the largest domed monuments in Thrace. It has the largest known
chamber with a diameter of 6.80 m and a reconstructed height of 6.60 m. Beside its dimensions, the quality of its workmanship, showing finely dressed limestone blocks, is also
impressive. The walls of the burial chamber are plastered with thin white lime-coating, but
the main feature of the chamber decoration consists in ten red pilasters (0.350.40 m wide)
made out of mortar. Unfortunately, the monument was plundered and destroyed to a con66 Manov 1998 and 2006, 27, 33; Tacheva 2006a, 287 and 2006b, 184, 194198; Dimitrov 2008, 67. On the date
of Seuthes death and on the chronology of the tomb, see lately Saladino 20122013, 176178.
67 Elvers 1994, 248249; Dimitrov 2008, 67.
68 Atanassov/Nedelchev 2002, 550557, figs. 45, 89. Cf. Kostadin Rabadjiev in this volume. In our opinion,
the tomb is to be dated in Hellenistic times on the basis of the architecture and the palaeography of the inscription.
69 Doulgeri-Intzesiloglou 1998, 609613, fig. 1b dated as early as the second half of 4th century BC. On the
name Kotys and a ruler under the name of Kotys in a later period cf. Tacheva 2006b, 145, with notes 1415. Cf. also
Pfrommer 2004, 54.
70 Launey 1987, 371, n. 1. The inscription is dated to ca. 300 BC.
71 Domaradzka 2005, 298, 304305, figs. 3; 11. 1, 2, 5.

322

TOTKO STOYANOV, DANIELA STOYANOVA


Bereitgestellt von | De Gruyter / TCS
Angemeldet
Heruntergeladen am | 26.04.16 10:33

siderable degree, which does not allow precise dating. Because of the impressive dimensions of the antechamber (5.53 4.83 m) and the similarity of the stone dressing and wall
construction to that of the barrel vaulted tombs in mounds A and C of the same area,
A.M. Mansel proposed a similar reconstruction of its cover.72 Such a hypothesis probably
requires more arguments.73 Nonetheless, it is supposed that mound B belongs to the same
chronological frame as mounds A and C, i.e. the late 4th century BC.74 Such a date is supported by the employment of elements of the Plastic style.75

The tomb in the Zhaba mogila mound, near Strelcha (Figs. 1 and 17)
The huge mound (20 m high) shelters two monumental tombs.76 The one on the southeastern periphery of the tumulus has a monumental faade with a well-preserved, finely
carved Ionic door-frame (Fig. 18). The door leads to a rectangular antechamber with a lantern-roof. The circular burial chamber is domed. The monument is made of very carefully
dressed blocks of green volcanic tuff.77
G. Kitov reckons that the tomb was built at the end of the 5th century BC.78 Z. Archibald has proposed a correction of the date toward the end of the 4th century.79 We would
support such a later date on the basis of the design of the Lesbian kymation of the doorway,
which has exact parallels in the tholos at Epidaurus80 and seems to appear between 330 and
320 BC.81

The tomb in the Chetinyova mound, at Starosel, near Hisarya (Fig. 1 and 19)
This architectural complex is one of the most striking Thracian sepulchral monuments discovered recently in Bulgaria. The mound is ca. 80 m in diameter, embedded in a monumental crepis with a preserved height of 3.5 m.82 From the south, one first reaches a monumental propylon with a stairway leading to a broad, open vestibule through which one enters

72 Mansel 1943, 3839, 51.


73 There are no known or published domed tombs with antechambers covered by a barrel-wedged vault. Cf.
Stoyanova 2007b. For the possible kind of cover of the antechamber cf. note 84 below.
74 Mansel 1943, 51.
75 Valeva 1999, 7172.
76 Kitov 1977a, 8593 and 1977b, 1221 and 1979, 414, figs. 115.
77 Vassileva/Stoyanova 2005, 8590, 173, fig. 38.
78 Kitov 1977a, 87 and 1979, 13.
79 Archibald 1998, 289; Theodossiev 2007b, 603.
80 Seiler 1986, 84; Salzmann 1982, 17, Anm. 166.
81 Stoyanova 2005, 657659, figs. 16.
82 Kitov 2003a, fig. 4 and 2003b, 9, figs. 12, 10.

EARLY TOMBS OF THRACE


Bereitgestellt von | De Gruyter / TCS
Angemeldet
Heruntergeladen am | 26.04.16 10:33

323

into the antechamber. The entrance is framed by two pilasters emphasizing the central
Ionic doorway.83 The rectangular antechamber has a truncated corbelled vault closed by a
series of slabs laid crosswise and supported by transversal beams.84 The main chamber is a
tholos (5.40 m in diameter), with vertical walls showing 10 half-engaged Doric columns. The
half columns support a complete Doric entablature with architrave, frieze and cornice
crowned by the dome (Fig. 20). The intrados of both the antechamber and the dome display
the same technique with rows of blocks adopting two different profiles: a lower concave
band and an upper flat vertical face. Such a feature is also known from tombs at Eriklice and
Karako.85 It is worth noting that the same layout, with smaller dimensions and no imposing vestibule or propylon, was used in the tomb at Manyov dol near Starosel.86 According
to the excavator, the monument in the Chetinyova mound was built at the end of the 5th
century BC as the tomb of the Odrysian King Sitalkes (ca. 444?424)87 and was used for
almost the whole 4th century BC88.
Nonetheless, it seems clear that even a quick analysis of the architectonic details of
the tomb points to a much later date. The slender design of the Doric columns, the profile
of the capitals and the enlarged intercolumniation certainly establish an Early Hellenistic
date of construction, i.e. the last decades of the 4th century BC.89

Golyama Arsenalka Tumulus, near Shipka, Kazanlak Valley (Figs. 2 and 21)
The tomb consists of a monumental faade opening to an antechamber with triangular roof
followed by a beehive chamber. The whole building is made of very well dressed granite
blocks. According to Kitov, the piling of the mound took place in the late 5th century BC, the
monumental tomb used as a mausoleum was constructed in a pit dug into the southern
part of the mound at a later date. The author also says that the tomb had been accessible
throughout the 4th century BC.90 Kitov gives a construction date of the tomb after the last
quarter of the 4th century BC, based on the analysis of the few pieces of retrieved material:
the wreath, the pectoral (found fragmented) and 4 golden applications91 with excellent par-

83 Kitov 2003b, 1314, figs. 13, 15; Stoyanova 2005, 660; Valeva 2005, 284285.
84 Kitov 2003a, 509, figs. 7.1, 8 and 2003b, 15. Similar roofing could be suggested for the antechamber of the
tomb in Tumulus B at Kirklareli.
85 See above. Kitov 2003a, 509511, fig. 7 and 2003b, 1516, fig. 19.
86 Kisyov 2001, 2023, 26, figs. 35, 1320.
87 Archibald 1998, 118120, fig. 4.1; cf. Tacheva 2006b, 6274.
88 Kitov 2003a, 511; Kitov 2003b, 18.
89 The straight gradient of the echinus is a peculiarity of the Early Hellenistic period too. The employment of
2 triglyphs and 3 metopes in a single intercolumniation is another phenomenon from the Hellenistic period. See
Lawrence 1983, 129, 132, fig. 94.
90 Kitov 1996b, 3142 and 1999, 1617.
91 Kitov 1996b, 3940, fig. 15 and 1999, 17 and 2008, 97, fig. 105.

324

TOTKO STOYANOV, DANIELA STOYANOVA


Bereitgestellt von | De Gruyter / TCS
Angemeldet
Heruntergeladen am | 26.04.16 10:33

allels in several Early Hellenistic burials (Dolna Koznitsa, Kralevo etc.).92 As M. Domadzki
has already commented, the tomb in this mound bears no traces of reconstruction(s), i.e.
it was built to enshrine the relics of the deceased whose burial was plundered several centuries later on.93

The Griffins Tomb at Shipka, Kazanlak Valley (Figs. 2 and 22)


It was built on the southern periphery of an already existing mound. The tomb consists of
a large dromos leading to a monumental faade, a rectangular antechamber with triangular
roof and a beehive chamber. The entrance to the antechamber was given the shape of an
aedicula including an Ionic door-frame and pediment with two side acroteria and a crowning palmette.94 According to Kitovs observations, based on the two floor levels in the main
chamber and the stenosis of the dromos, there were (at least) two stages in the construction of
the tomb. The excavator considers the similarities in layout and construction between the
tomb in the Golyama Arsenalka Tumulus and this one as an argument for a similar dating,
i.e. in the late 5th or the early 4th century BC.95 Although we agree that both tombs might
belong to the same time span, the above analysis of the Golyama Arsenalka tomb context
indicates that one should consider an Early Hellenistic date for both tombs.96

The Shushmanets Tumulus tomb, at Shipka, Kazanlak Valley (Figs. 2 and 23)
This impressive monument has not been published in detail to date (dimensions, inventory, etc.), although the unique design and its implementation are unusual.
Access to the structure is granted through a very large dromos, the sidewalls of which
are made of rough hewn stones. The dromos leads to a large entrance porch. This porch,
crowned by a large pediment (destroyed and now missing), has a corbelled vault supported
by an Ionic column. Behind the column stands an Ionic doorframe, surmounted by a pediment decorated with palmettos,97 leading to the main chamber. The main chamber is a tholos with vertical walls in which seven Doric columns are engaged. The columns carry an
architrave crowned by a dome. Half engaged pilasters stand above the architrave, aligned
92 At Dolna Koznitsa: Staikova 1997, 30, 34 and 1998, 104, cat. no. 23. At Kralevo: Ginev 2000, 31, figs. 26, 32, 34;
Fol 2004, 168169, cat. no. 224 i. The date of the closed burial complex at Kralevo has a clear terminus post quem
given by the stamped Thasian amphora (Ginev 2000, 17, figs. 1415) dated ca. 269 BC by Garlan 20042005, 325.
See also Avram 1996, 55: ca. 263 BC.
93 Domaradzki 1998, 61.
94 Kitov 2003c, 307310, figs. 19; Stoyanova 2005, 663664.
95 Kitov 2003c, 310311.
96 For this date cf. Nehrizov/Parvin 2010.
97 Stoyanova 2005, 662663, figs. 1617. For detailed pictures of the palmettos cf. Kitov et al. 2001, figs. 131133.

EARLY TOMBS OF THRACE


Bereitgestellt von | De Gruyter / TCS
Angemeldet
Heruntergeladen am | 26.04.16 10:33

325

with the lower semicolumns. The top construction of the dome consists of 15 radial blocks
supported by a monumental Doric column standing at the centre of the chamber.98 The columns, the walls and the floors of both the chamber and the porch are plastered with a thick
layer of lime, not well preserved now. According to the excavator, it had been coated three
times, which indicates at least three building periods in the use of the complex. The excavation conducted in the tomb revealed the remains of animals (4 horses and 2 dogs sacrificed on the antechamber floor) but no datable material. G. Kitov assumes that the tomb
was built at the end of the 5th century BC and was used throughout the 4th century BC.99
Regardless of the archaizing architectural elements (for instance the Ionic capital in
the porch) there are no indications of such an early date. As is well known, the appearance
of semi-columns in the interior of Greek temple is no earlier than the third quarter of the
4th century BC.100 No less important is the obviously eclectic combination of different
architectonic elements (for instance the Doric columns in the chamber, with clumsy proportions), which is a common trend in Hellenistic architecture.101 In our view, the combination of the Ionic door-frame with the pediment points to a later date.

The tomb in the Helvetia Tumulus, at Shipka, Kazanlak Valley (Figs. 2 and 24)
The tomb is built on the southern periphery of the mound. It is accessed through a large
and long dromos made of differently sized stones bound by clay. It was built against the faade of the porch. The chamber and the porch are rectangular with corbelled vaults made of
large, well-hewn blocks joined by iron clamps fixed with lead. The walls of both the chamber
and the porch are plastered with a thick layer of lime, moulded in relief to imitate pseudoisodomic construction with rows of alternating height. The floors are covered with thick
lime plaster. The plaster is chipped and crumbling, multicoloured walls are visible, which
indicates at least two periods of use. A horse skeleton (in anatomic order) has been recovered in situ in the porch. Another one lay in front of the eastern flank of the dromos.
A bronze cheek-piece was found in situ. Considering parallels with similar artefacts from
Orizovo, Chirpan district, Kitov proposed that the burial took place around the end of the
5th and the very beginning of the 4th century BC, while suggesting that the complex was
built several decades earlier.102
The decoration system in the monument under discussion embraces, in our opinion,
elements of the third type (in the porch) and the sixth type (in the burial chamber) of the
98 Kitov 1999, 1516, figs. 17ac, 18; Dimitrov 2000, 4448, figs. 15.
99 Kitov 1999, 1516, figs. 17ac, 18.
100 The Philippeion at Olympia for example. Cf. Lawrence 1983, 244; Hellmann 2002, 158, fig. 214.
101 The Doric order here reveals common Hellenistic features such as the missing frieze and the archaizing profile of the echinus.
102 Kitov 1999, 1112, fig. 1314; Dimitrova 2000; Kitov et al. 2001, 7879, 143146.

326

TOTKO STOYANOV, DANIELA STOYANOVA


Bereitgestellt von | De Gruyter / TCS
Angemeldet
Heruntergeladen am | 26.04.16 10:33

The Style of Zones, according to A. Andreus typology.103 This gives us reason to support
the opinion of Y. Valeva of a much later date, in the last quarter of the 4th century BC.104
Having in mind that most of the monuments of the sixth type, as defined by Andreu, are
known from the south-east Aegean and date from the 3rd century BC on, the Helvetia tomb
might be of an even later date.

The tomb at Brestovitsa, Plovdiv district (Figs. 1 and 25)


The tomb consists of a long corridor followed by a burial chamber with an irregular, almost
quadrangular plan. Both are built of rough-hewn stones of different size with clay binder.
The dome construction covering the burial chamber is considered to be unique. The
sidewalls lean inwards to ca. 1.45 m above ground level and the corners curve into roughly
shaped pendentives.105 The tomb has been dated to in any case, the early 5th century BC,
though without any serious arguments.106 Indeed, a comparison with the tomb in the Fartunova mound (Fig. 26) near Maglizh (the Kazanlak valley) indicates a much later date in
the 4th century BC.107

Conclusion
The analysis above reveals that:
1. The appearance of monumental tombs in Thrace during the 5th century BC (Rouzhitsa, Tatarevo, Rouets) seems uncommon in the context of more numerous ashlar
graves. Therefore, the study of the monumental graves in Thrace should be supplementary to reveal the emergence and development of the early tombs.108
2. The later development of the tombs is well datable from the second quarter of the 4th
century BC to around the middle of the 3rd century BC.
3. In this chronological frame, the application of various layouts, materials, construction
and covering techniques as well as architectural elements of different Greek orders can
be observed.

103 Andreu 1989, 197198, 202205, 265, 268.


104 Valeva 1999, 7172.
105 Gerasimova et al. 1992, 6370, figs. 1, 37; Rousseva 2000, 119122.
106 Theodossiev 2007a, 436, n. 60; cf. Rousseva 2000, 122.
107 Kitov 2005b, 3839, figs. 4446.
108 On Thrace: Vassileva/Stoyanova 2005, 5766, 171, figs. 1428; Kisyov 2005; Kitov 2005c, 2337, fig. 35;
Reho 2008, 113. On the Aegean region: Kurtz/Boardman 1971, 105108, 310; Greenewalt/Majewski 1980, 138,
fig. 6; Themelis/Touratsoglou 1997, 135141 with bibliography.

EARLY TOMBS OF THRACE


Bereitgestellt von | De Gruyter / TCS
Angemeldet
Heruntergeladen am | 26.04.16 10:33

327

4.

The analysis and interpretation of early tombs in Thrace with a certain or less certain
chronology, seen against the regional background, sheds light on local specifics that
were most probably determined by the regional development of certain areas within
Thrace and the sporadic or long-term influence of foreign architectural schools.109

Bibliography
Agre 2005
Agre, D. (2005), Arheologieski prouvani na nadgrobna mogila kra s. Ruica,
obina Bolrovo prez 2004 g, in: HHV srea na muzeite ot goiztona Blgari,
Kiten 2005, Sofia, 8687.
Agre (forthcoming)
Agre, D. (forthcoming), Grobnicata pri s. Ruica, mbolska oblast, in: T. Stonov /
K. Rabadiev (eds.), Monumentalni grobnici i grobni soreni v Traki dokumen
taci, interpretaci, socializaci. Diskusionna rabotilnica Drugata gledna toka,
Gleica, dekemvri 2006 g.

Akurgal 1961
Akurgal, E. (1961), Die Kunst Anatoliens, Berlin.
Die alten Zivilisationen 2007
van der Meijden, E. / Nikolov, V. (eds.) (2007), Die alten Zivilisationen Bulgariens. Das Gold der
Thraker, 15. Mrz1. Juli 2007, Basel.
Andreu 1989
Andreu, A. (1989), Griechische Wanddekorationen, Diss. Mainz.
Archibald 1998
Archibald, Z. (1998), The Odryssian Kingdom of Thrace. Orpheus Unmasked, Oxford.
Atanassov / Nedelchev 2002
Atanasov, G. / Nedelev, N. (2002), Gonimasedze enata na Sevt i nenata grobnica,
in: R. Gieva / K. Rabadiev (eds.), P
. Izsledvani v est na prof. Ivan Marazov,
Sofia, 550557.
Avram 1996
Avram, A. (1996), Les timbres amphoriques. 1. Thasos. Histria VIII. Les rsultats des fouilles,
Bucarest/Paris.
Balkanska / Tzochev 2008.
Balkanska, A. / Tzochev, Ch. (2008), Amphora stamps from Seuthopolis revised, in:
D. Gergova (ed.), Phosphorion. Studia in honorem Mariae Cicikova, Sofia, 188205.
Bothmer 1984
Bothmer, D. von (1984), A Greek and Roman Treasury, New York.

109 Tsetkhladze 1999.

328

TOTKO STOYANOV, DANIELA STOYANOVA


Bereitgestellt von | De Gruyter / TCS
Angemeldet
Heruntergeladen am | 26.04.16 10:33

Dimitrov 1984
Dimitrov, K. (1984), Antinite moneti ot Sevtopolis, Sevtopolis 2, Sofia, 5136.
Dimitrov 2008
Dimitrov, K. (2008), Sevtopolskata carska dinasti v drevnite tekstove: fakti i
spekulacii, Problemi i izsledvani na trakiskata kultura 3, Kazanlak, 6487.
Dimitrova 2000
Dimitrova, D. (2000), Religioznata doktrina v arhitekturnite pametnici ot Balkanite i Mala Azi, Starini, 4460.
Domaradzka 2005
Domaradzka. L. (2005) Greek Classical and Hellenistic Graffiti from Thrace (6th/5th3th c.
BC), in: Stephanos Archaeologicos in honorem Professoris Ludmili Getov, Studia Archaeologica
Universitatis Serdicensis, Suppl. 4, Sofia, 296307.
Domaradzki 1998
Domaradski, M. (1998), Trakiskata kultura v prehoda km elinistieskata epoha, in:
M. Domaradski / V. Taneva (eds.), Emporion Pistiros, II, Trakiskata kultura v prehoda
km elinistieskata epoha, Sofia, 1176.
Doulgeri-Intzesiloglou 1998
Doulgeri-Intzesiloglou, A. (1998) Quelques artisans ponymes de lindustrie de largile
Phres (Thessalie), Topoi. Orient-Occident 8.2, Lyon, 607623.
Elvers 1994
Elvers, K.-L. (1994), Der Eid der Berenike und ihrer Shne: eine Edition von IGBulg 2,
1731, Chiron 24, 241266.
Emilov/Megaw 2012
Emilov, J. / Megaw, V. (2012), Celt in Thrace? A Re-examination of the Tomb of Maltepe,
Mezek with Particular Reference to the La Tne Chariot Fittings, Abulg 16.1, 132.
Fedak 1990
Fedak, Y. (1990), Monumental Tombs of the Hellenistic Age: A Study of Selected Tombs from PreClassical to the Early Imperial Era, Toronto.
Filov 1937
Filov, B. (1937), Kupolnite grobnici pri Mezek, IBAI 11, 1116.
Fratl 1964
Fratl, N. (1964), Short Report on Finds and Archaeological Activities Outside the Museum, IstanbAMzY
l 121.12, 207215.
Fol et al. 2004
Fol, A. / Lichardus, J. / Nikolov, V. (eds.) (2004), Die Thraker. Das goldene Reich des Orpheus,
Mainz.
Garlan 20042005
Garlan, Y. (20042005), En visitant et revisitant les ateliers amphoriques de Thasos, BCH
128129, 269329.

EARLY TOMBS OF THRACE


Bereitgestellt von | De Gruyter / TCS
Angemeldet
Heruntergeladen am | 26.04.16 10:33

329

Gerasimova et al. 1992


Gerasimova, V. / Ruseva, M. / Kisov, K. (1992), Nepublikuvani trakiski pametnici ot
zemliata na selata Brestovica i Prvenec, Plovdivsko, IMB XVIII, 6378.
Getov 1995
Getov, L. (1995), Amfori i amforni peati ot Kabile (IVII v. pr. n.e.), Sofia.
Getov 2008
Getov, L. (2008), Za grafita ot Aleksandrovskata grobnica, in: D. Gergova (ed.), Phos-

phorion. Studia in honorem Mariae Cicikova, Sofia, 316318.

Ginev 2000
Ginev, G. (2000), Trakiski mogili pri selo Kralevo, Trgoviko, Varna.
Greenewalt / Freedman 1979
Greenewalt Jr. C.H. / Freedman, E. E. (1979), The Sardis Campaign of 1977, BASOR 233,
132.
Greenewalt / Majewski 1980
Greenewalt Jr. C.H. / Majewski, L. J. (1980), Lydian Textiles, in: K. De Vries (ed.), From
Athens to Gordion, The Papers of a Memorial Symposium for Rodney S. Young, Held at the University Museum, the third of May, 1975, Philadelphia, 134147.
Hanfmann 1963
Hanfmann, G.M.A. (1963), The Fifth Campaign at Sardis (1962), BASOR 170, 165.
Hanfmann 1980
Hanfmann, G.M.A. (1980), On Lydian Sardis, in: K. De Vries (ed.), From Athens to Gordion,
The Papers of a Memorial Symposium for Rodney S. Young, Held at the University Museum, the
third of May, 1975, Philadelphia, 99131.
Hanfmann et al. 1967
Hanfmann, G.M.A. / Swift, Jr. G.F. / Greenewalt, Jr. C.H. (1967), The Ninth Campaign at
Sardis (1966), BASOR 186, 1752.
Hasluck 1911
Hasluck, F.W. (19101911), A Tholos Tomb at Kirk Kilisse, BSA 17, 7679.
Hellmann 2002
Hellmann, M.-Chr. (2002), Larchitecture grecque. 1. Les principes de la construction, Paris.
Heilmeyer 1988
Heilmeyer, W.D. (1988), Antikenmuseum Berlin: Die ausgestellten Werke. Staatliche Museen
Preuischer Kulturbesitz, Berlin.
Henry 2006
Henry, O. (2006), Remarques sur le propritaire de la tombe monumentale de Labraunda,
REA 34, 522.
Jarva 1995
Jarva, E. (1995), Archaiologia on Archaic Greek Body Armour, Roovaniemi.

330

TOTKO STOYANOV, DANIELA STOYANOVA


Bereitgestellt von | De Gruyter / TCS
Angemeldet
Heruntergeladen am | 26.04.16 10:33

Jenkins 2006
Jenkins, I. (2006), Greek Architecture and its Sculpture in the British Museum, London.
Joubin 1898
Joubin, A. (1898), Bronzes et bijoux; Catalogue sommaire, Constantinople.
Kisyov 2001
Kisov, K. (2001), Trakiski mogilen nekropol kra Starosel, obina Hisar,
GAMP H, 2050.
Kisyov 2005
Kisyov, K. (2005), Thrace and Greece in Ancient Times. Classical Age Tumuli in the Municipality
of Kaloyanovo, Plovdiv.
Kitov 1977a
Kitov, G. (1977), A Newly Found Thracian Tomb, Obzor 39, 8593.
Kitov 1977b
Kitov, G. (1977), Trakiska grobnica mavzole kra grad Strela, Vekove, 1221.
Kitov 1979
Kitov, G. (1979), Trakiskite mogili kra Strela, Sofia.

Kitov 1996a
Kitov, G. (1996), Slavova mogila kra Rozovo, Arheologi, fasc. 1, 19.
Kitov 1996b
Kitov, G. (1996), Mogilata Golma Arsenalka, Arheologi, fasc. 4, 3142.
Kitov 1999
Kitov, G. (1999), Royal Insignia and Tempels in the Valley of the Thracian Rulers, ABulg 1,
120.
Kitov 2003a
Kitov, G. (2003), A Thracian Cult Complex Near Starosel, in: L. Nikolova (ed.), Early Symbol
Systems in Prehistory, Oxford, 505518.
Kitov 2003b
Kitov, G. (2003), Thracian Cult Center Starosel, Varna.
Kitov 2003c
Kitov, G. (2003), The Griffin Tumulus, Tracia XV, In honorem annorum LXX Alexandri Fol,
Sofia, 303312.
Kitov 2003d
Kitov, G. (2003), Dolinata na trakiskite vladeteli (), Arheologi, fasc. 1, 1328.

Kitov 2003e
Kitov, G. (2003), Dolinata na trakiskite vladeteli (I), Arheologi, fasc. 2, 2842.

EARLY TOMBS OF THRACE


Bereitgestellt von | De Gruyter / TCS
Angemeldet
Heruntergeladen am | 26.04.16 10:33

331

Kitov 2005a
Kitov, G. (2005), The Newly Discovered Tomb of the Thracian Ruler Seuthes III, ABulg 2,
3954.
Kitov 2005b
Kitov, G. (2005), The Valley of the Thracian Rulers, Varna.
Kitov 2005c
Kitov, G. (2005), Thracian Tumular Burial with Gold Mask near the City of Shipka, Central
Bulgaria, ABulg 3, 2337.
Kitov 2006
Kitov, G. (2006), Golyama Kosmatka Tumulus, in: M. Reho / P. Petrova (eds.), Thracian
Treasures from Bulgaria, Sofia, 167178.
Kitov 2007
Kitov, G. (2007), Das goldene Zeitalter der thrakischen Kultur, in: E. van der Meijden /
V. Nikolov (eds.), Die alten Zivilisationen Bulgariens. Das Gold der Thraker, 15. Mrz1. Juli
2007, Basel, 3950.
Kitov 2008
Kitov, G. (2008), Mogili, hramove, grobnici. Zapiski na edin mogilar, Sofia.
Kitov et al. 2001
Kitov, G. / Zarev, K. / Dimitrova, E. (2001), The Valley of the Thracian Rulers, in: G. Kitov /
K. Zarev (eds.), The Valley of Roses and Thracian Rulers, Plovdiv, 73166.
Kurtz/Boardman 1971
Kurtz, D. / Boardman, J. (1971), Greek Burial Customs, London.
Launey 1987
Launey, M. (19872), Recherches sur les armes hellnistiques [rimprim avec additions et postface par Y. Garlan, Ph. Gauthier, Cl. Orrieux], Paris, 12.
Lawrence 1983
Lawrence, A.W. (1983), Greek Architecture [revised with additions by R.A. Tomlinson], New
Haven / London.
Mansel 1943
Mansel, A.M. (1943), Trakya Kirklareli Kubbeli mezarlari ve sahte kubbe ve kemer problemi.
(Kuppelgrber von Krklareli in Thrakien), Ankara.
Manov 1998
Manov, M. (1998), Golemit nadpis ot Sevtopolis, Arheologi, fasc. 12, 815.

Manov 2006
Manov, M. (2006), Die Inschriften auf den Silbergef ssen und dem Bronzehelm von
Seuthes III aus den Grabhgel Goljama Kosmatka, ABulg 10.3, 2734.
Mikov 1955
Mikov, V. (1955), Proizhod na kupolnite grobnici v Blgari, IAI XIX, 1548.

332

TOTKO STOYANOV, DANIELA STOYANOVA


Bereitgestellt von | De Gruyter / TCS
Angemeldet
Heruntergeladen am | 26.04.16 10:33

Mikov 1957
Mikov, V. (1957), Nadgrobnite mogili v Blgari, in: Arheologieski otkriti v
Blgari, Sofia, 217241.
Nauman 1983
Nauman, Fr. (1983), Die Ikonographie der Kybele in der Phrygischen und der Griechischen Kunst,
Tbingen.
Nehrizov / Parvin 2010
Nehrizov, G. / Prvin M. (2010), Nadgrobna mogila ss zidana grobnica pri s. Dolno
Izvorovo, obina Kazanlk, in: Arheologieski otkriti i razkopki prez 2009, Sofia,
232234.
Ognenova-Marinova 1961
Ognenova-Marinova, L. (1961), Les cuirasses de bronze trouve en Thrace, BCH 75,
501535.
Ognenova-Marinova/Stoyanov 2005
Ognenova-Marinova, L. / Stoyanov, T. (2005), The Chalkidian Helmets and the Origin of the
North Thracian Ceremonial Armour, in: Stephanos Archaeologicos in Honorem Professoris
Stephcae Angelova, Studia Archaeologica Univesitatis Serdicensis, Suppl. 4, Sofia, 519539.
zgen/ztrk 1996
zgen, I. / ztrk, J. (eds.), Heritage Recovered. The Lydian Treasure, Istanbul.
Parovich-Peshikan 1974
Parovi-Peikan, M. (1974), Nekropol Olvii llinistieskogo vremeni, Kiev.
Petrov 1993
Petrov, I. (1993), Trakiski mogilen nekropol kra s. Gorski izvor, Haskovsko,
IMIB HV, 736.
Pfrommer 1987
Pfrommer, M. (1987), Studien zu alexandrinischer und grossgriechischer Toreutik frhellenistischer Zeit, Berlin.
Pfrommer 1993
Pfrommer, M. (1993), Ein Grab Drei Kulturen. Betrachtungen zu einem thrakischen
Grabfund aus Kirklareli, IstMitt 43, 339449.
Pfrommer 2004
Pfrommer, M. (2004), Persischer Luxus fr thrakische Frsten. Von edlen Trinkgef ssen
und Trinkgewohnheiten, AW 35.2, 5456.
Ramage 1972
Ramage, A. (1972), The Fourteenth Campaign at Sardis (1971), BASOR 206, 939.
Reho 2008
Reho, M. (2008), Herakl i satiri: Za scena izobrazena vrhu atiesko ervenofigurno onohoe ot Kazanlkata dolina, Problemi i izsledvani na trakiskata kul
tura 3, Kazanlak, 108115.

EARLY TOMBS OF THRACE


Bereitgestellt von | De Gruyter / TCS
Angemeldet
Heruntergeladen am | 26.04.16 10:33

333

Reho-Bumbalova 1990
Reho-Bumbalova, M. (1990), La ceramica Attica a figure nere e rosse nella Tracia Bulgara,
Rome.
Rotroff 1997
Rotroff, S.I. (1997), Hellenistic Pottery. Athenian and Imported Wheelmade Table Ware and
related Material [The Athenian Agora XXIX], Princeton.
Rousseva 2000
Rousseva, M. (2000), Thracian Cult Architecture in Bulgaria, Jambol.
Rousseva 2002
Ruseva, M. (2002), Trakiska grobnina arhitektura v blgarskite zemi prez VIII v. pr.
n. e., Jambol.

Saladino 20122013
Saladino, V. (20122013), Il ritratto di Seuthes III, JDAI 127128, 125206.
Salzmann 1982
Salzmann, D. (1982), Untersuchungen zu den antiken Kieselmosaiken von den Anf ngen bis
zum Beginn der Tesseratechnik [Archologische Forschungen 10], Berlin.
Seiler 1986
Seiler, F. (1986), Die griechische Tholos. Untersuchungen zur Entwicklung, Typologie und Funktion kunstmiger Rundbauten, Mainz am Rhein.
Sideris 2000
Sideris, A. (2000), Les tombes de Derveni: quelques remarques sur la toreutique, RA,
336.
Staikova 1997
Stakova, L. (1997), Aplikacii km konska sbru ot mogilno pogrebenie pri s. Dolna
Koznica, Kstendilsko, PrI, fasc. 3/4, 3035.
Staikova 1998
Staikova, L. (1998), A Fourth-Century-BC Burial from Dolna Koznitsa, in: I. Marazov (ed.),
Ancient Gold: The Wealth of the Thracians. Treasures from the Republic of Bulgaria, New York,
104111.
Stoyanov 1990
Stonov, T. (1990), Grobninata arhitektura v Severoiztona Traki v svetlinata na
kontaktite s Mala Azi (VIIII v. pr. n. e.), TAB 4, 122133.
Stoyanov 2003
Stoyanov, T. (2003), The Parmeniskos Amphora Group New Data and Reflections on the
Production Centres and Chronology, ABulg 7.1, 3543.
Stoyanov 2005a
Stoyanov, T. (2005), The Mal-tepe Complex at Mezek, in: J. Bouzek / L. Domaradzka (eds.),
The Culture of Thracians and their Neighbours, Proceedings of the International Symposium in
Memory of Prof. Mieczyslaw Domaradzki, with a Round Table Archaeological Map of Bulgaria,
Kazanlak 1999, Oxford, 123128.

334

TOTKO STOYANOV, DANIELA STOYANOVA


Bereitgestellt von | De Gruyter / TCS
Angemeldet
Heruntergeladen am | 26.04.16 10:33

Stoyanov 2005b
Stoyanov, T. (2005), The Balkan Group of White Lotus Jugs (or the so-called Derveni type
jugs). Some notes on the origin and distribution, in: T. Stoyanov / M. Tonkova / H. Preshlenov / H. Popov (eds.), Heros Hephaistos, Veliko Tarnovo, 235245.
Stoyanov 2007
Stoyanov, T. (2007), Late Classical and Early Hellenistic Pottery Imitations of Metal Tableware from Thrace, in: A. Iakovidou (ed.), Thrace in the Greco-Roman World, Proceedings of the
X. International Congress of Thracology. Komotini-Alexandroupoli 18.23. October 2005, Athens,
561574.
Stoyanov 2011
Stoyanov, T. (2011), New Evidence of Amphorae Production in Early Hellenistic Mesambria
Pontica, in: Ch. Tzochev / T. Stoyanov / A. Bozkova (eds.), PATABS II. Production and Trade of
Amphorae in the Black Sea, Acts of the International Round Table held in Kiten, Nessebar and Sredetz, Bulgaria September 2630, 2007, Sofia, 191201.
Stoyanova 2005
Stonova, D. (2005), oniski ramki za vrati ot elinistieskata epoha v Traki, in:
Stephanos Archaeologicos in honorem Professoris Ludmili Getov, Studia Archaeologica Universitatis Serdicensis, Suppl. 4, Sofia, 654670.
Stoyanova 2007a
Stoyanova, D. (2007), The Greek Door in the Tomb Architecture of Macedonia, Thrace and
Asia Minor, in: Ancient Macedonia VII, Thessaloniki, 531550.
Stoyanova 2007b
Stoyanova, D. (2007), Barrel-Wedged Vault in the Tomb Architecture in Thrace. Models
and Vogue in: A. Iakovidou (ed.), Thrace in the Greco-Roman World, Proceedings of the 10th
International Congress of Thracology. Komotini-Alexandroupolis 18.23. October 2005, Athens,
575587.
Stoyanova 2008
Stonova, D. (2008), Za hronologita na grobnicata v mogila Golma Kosmatka,
Problemi i izsledvani na trakiskata kultura 3, Kazanlak, 92107.

Strong, 1966
Strong, D. (1966), Greek and Roman Silver Plate, London.
Tacheva 2006a
Tacheva, M. (2006), Reflections on the Coinage of Seuthes III, in: In Honorem Verae Bitrakova-Grozdanova, Folia archaeological Balcanica I, Skopje, 285291.
Tacheva 2006b
Taeva, M. (2006), Carete na drevna Traki, Sofia.

Themelis / Touratsoglou 1997


Themelis, P.G. / Touratsoglou, G. (1997), Oi taphoi tou Derveniou, Athens.

EARLY TOMBS OF THRACE


Bereitgestellt von | De Gruyter / TCS
Angemeldet
Heruntergeladen am | 26.04.16 10:33

335

Theodossiev 2007a
Theodossiev, N. (2007), The Beehive Tombs in Thrace and Their Connection with Funerary
Monuments in Thessaly, Macedonia and Other Parts of the Ancient World, in: Ancient Macedonia VII, Thessaloniki, 423444.
Theodossiev 2007b
Theodossiev, N. (2007), The Lantern-Roofed Tombs in Thrace and Anatolia. Some Evidence
about Cultural Relations and Interactions in the East Mediterranean, in: A. Iakovidou (ed.),
Thrace in the Greco-Roman World, Proceedings of the 10th International Congress of Thracology.
Komotini-Alexandroupolis 18.23. October 2005, Athens, 602613.
Theodossiev 2011
Theodossiev, N. (2011), The Thracian tholos tomb at Eriklice reconsidered, in: V. Jotov /
I. Lazarenko (eds.), Miscellanea in Honour of Alexander Minchev. Terra Antiqua Balcanica et
Mediterranea. International Conference, Varna, February 23th, 2007 [Acta Musei Varnaensis
8.1], Varna, 6784.
Theodossiev/Stoyanova 2010
Theodossiev, N. / Stoyanova, D. (2010), The Beehive Tomb at Kurt Kale Reconsidered, in:
Stephanos Archaeologicos in Honorem Professoris Stephcae Angelova [Studia Archaeologica Univesitatis Serdicensis Suppl. 5], Sofia, 179198.
Thracian Treasures 2008
Thracian Treasures from Bulgaria. Exhibition Catalogue, Tokyo, 2008.
Tsetkhladze 1999
Tsetkhladze, G. (1999), Who Built the Scythian and Thracian Royal and Elite Tombs, Oxford Journal of Archaeology 17.1, 5592.
Tzochev 2008
Coev, . (2008), Tasos i Traki. Problemi na ikonomieskite otnoeni V v. pr.
Hr. (po danni ot amfornata tara), Diss. Sofia.
Tzochev 2009
Tzochev, Ch. (2009), Notes on the Thasian Amphora Stamps Chronology, ABulg 13, 5572
Tzochev 2014
Tzochev, Ch. (2014), "The Hellenistic tomb of Maltepe in Thrace. A Reconsideration of Burial
Sequence", AWE 13, 4962.
Valeva 1999
Valeva, J. (1999), Les dcors thraces et le style zones (IVeIIIe sicle av. J.-C.), Problemi na
iwkustvoto (= Art Studies Quarterly) 32-A, n.4, 6975.
Valeva 2005
Vleva, . (2005), Prilagane na grckite orderi v ukrasata na trakiskite grobnici, in: T. Stoyanov / M. Tonkova / H. Preshlenov / H. Popov (eds.), Heros Hephaistos,
Veliko Tarnovo, 281301.

336

TOTKO STOYANOV, DANIELA STOYANOVA


Bereitgestellt von | De Gruyter / TCS
Angemeldet
Heruntergeladen am | 26.04.16 10:33

Vassilev 1993
Vasilev, V. (1993), Nahodkite ot grobnicata pri Tatarevo i nkoi problemi okolo datiraneto na inventara v rannite bogati grobove ot Traki, in: Prvi medunaroden
simpozium Sevtopolis. Nadgrobnite mogili v goiztona Evropa, Kazanlk 1993
Rezmeta, Kazanlak, 60.
Vassileva/Stoyanova 2005
Vassileva, D. / Stoyanova, D. (2005), The Thracian Tombs. Architectural-metrical Study, in:
Studia Archaeologica Universitatis Serdicenis Suppl. 3, Sofia, 167181.
Vassileva 2005
Vassileva, M. (2005), The Belt of the Goddess. Phrygian Tombs versus Greek Sanctuaries,
in: Stephanos Archaeologicos in Honorem Professoris Stephcae Angelova [Studia Archaeologica
Universitatis Serdicenis, Suppl. 4], Sofia, 91101.
Vassileva 2007
Vassileva, M. (2007), First Millennium BC Ritual Belts in Anatolian and Balkan Context,
in: A. Iakovidou (ed.), Thrace in the Greco-Roman World, Proceedings of the 10th International
Congress of Thracology. Komotini-Alexandroupolis 1823 October 2005, Athens, 669679.
Velkov 1928/1929
Velkov, I. (1928/1929), Novi mogilni nahodki, IBAI V, 3753.
Venedikov/Gerassimov 1979
Venedikov, I. / Gerassimov, T. (1979), Thracian Art Treasures, Sofia.
Vickers 2002
Vickers, M. (2002), Scythians and Thracian Antiquities in Oxford, Oxford.
Webb 1996
Webb, P. (1996), Hellenistic Architectural Sculpture. Figural Motifs in Western Anatolia and the
Aegean Islands, Madison, Wisconsin.
Young 1981
Young, R.S. (1981), Three Great Tumuli. The Gordion Excavations. Final Reports I, Philadelphia.

EARLY TOMBS OF THRACE


Bereitgestellt von | De Gruyter / TCS
Angemeldet
Heruntergeladen am | 26.04.16 10:33

337

338

TOTKO STOYANOV, DANIELA STOYANOVA


Bereitgestellt von | De Gruyter / TCS
Angemeldet
Heruntergeladen am | 26.04.16 10:33

Fig. 1 (Stoyanov/Stoyanova) | Map of the tombs discussed in this paper.

PLATE 129
Bereitgestellt von | De Gruyter / TCS
Angemeldet
Heruntergeladen am | 26.04.16 10:32

Fig. 2 (Stoyanov/Stoyanova) | Map of the tombs in the Kazanlak valley.

Fig. 3 (Stoyanov/Stoyanova) | Plan and cross-sections of the tomb near Tatarevo, Parvomay area.

PLATE 130
Bereitgestellt von | De Gruyter / TCS
Angemeldet
Heruntergeladen am | 26.04.16 10:32

Fig. 4 (Stoyanov/Stoyanova) | Map of some built graves containing archaic cuirass types within the territory of
Thrace.

Fig. 5 (Stoyanov/Stoyanova) | 13) Front view, plan and section of the tomb at Rouets,
Targovishte district; 4) Detail of the painted decoration on the upper row of the tombs walls;
5) Fragment of red-figured hydria discovered in the tomb.

PLATE 131
Bereitgestellt von | De Gruyter / TCS
Angemeldet
Heruntergeladen am | 26.04.16 10:32

Fig. 6 (Stoyanov/Stoyanova) | 14) Plan, sections and front view of the entrance of the tomb at Eriklice, near
Krklareli; 5) Bronze gilt helmet from the tomb at Eriklice; 6) Silver jug from the tomb at Eriklice.

Fig. 7 (Stoyanov/Stoyanova) | Plan and section of the tomb at Karako, near Krklareli.

PLATE 132
Bereitgestellt von | De Gruyter / TCS
Angemeldet
Heruntergeladen am | 26.04.16 10:32

Fig. 8 (Stoyanov/Stoyanova) |
14) Position in the mound,
front view, plan and section of
the tomb in the Slavchova
mound, near Rozovo, Kazanlak
Valley; 5a) Thasian amphora
with stamp of the eponymous
Kleitos; 5b) Heraclean amphora
with stamp of Euporos
Lysitheos.

Fig. 9 (Stoyanov/Stoyanova) |
1) Section of the Mal-tepe
tumulus at Mezek; 2) Part of the
monumental crepis; 34)
Thasian amphorae from the
inventory of the tomb; 5) The
entrance of the tomb; 6) Plan
and section of the tomb.

PLATE 133
Bereitgestellt von | De Gruyter / TCS
Angemeldet
Heruntergeladen am | 26.04.16 10:32

Fig. 10 (Stoyanov/Stoyanova) | Plan of the tomb in the Golyama Kosmatka tumulus, near Shipka.

Fig. 11 (Stoyanov/Stoyanova) | Plan of the funeral chamber of the tomb in the Golyama Kosmatka
tumulus, near Shipka.

Fig. 12 (Stoyanov/Stoyanova) | The marble door to the beehive


chamber of the tomb in the Golyama Kosmatka tumulus, near
Shipka.

PLATE 134
Bereitgestellt von | De Gruyter / TCS
Angemeldet
Heruntergeladen am | 26.04.16 10:32

Fig. 13 (Stoyanov/Stoyanova) |
Relief medallion on the marble
door with Helios.

Fig. 14 (Stoyanov/Stoyanova) |
Relief medallion on the marble
door with Medusa heads
Medusa.

PLATE 135
Bereitgestellt von | De Gruyter / TCS
Angemeldet
Heruntergeladen am | 26.04.16 10:32

Fig. 15 (Stoyanov/Stoyanova) | 12) Silver jug;


3) Silver kalyx-cup;
4) Golden bowl-kantharos; 5) Bronze askos.

Fig. 16 (Stoyanov/Stoyanova) | Plan and section


of the tomb at Krklareli,
Mound B.

PLATE 136
Bereitgestellt von | De Gruyter / TCS
Angemeldet
Heruntergeladen am | 26.04.16 10:32

Fig. 17 (Stoyanov/Stoyanova) | Plan and section of the tomb in the Zhaba mogila mound, near Strelcha.

Fig. 18 (Stoyanov/Stoyanova) | Ionic door-frame of the tomb in the Zhaba mogila


mound, near Strelcha.

PLATE 137
Bereitgestellt von | De Gruyter / TCS
Angemeldet
Heruntergeladen am | 26.04.16 10:32

Fig. 19 (Stoyanov/Stoyanova) |
1) Section of the tomb in the
Chetinyova mound, at Starosel;
2) Ionic door-frame of the
ante-chamber of the tomb; 3) Crosssection of the ante-chamber of the
tomb; 4) Western pillar base from
the monumental propylon of the
tomb; 5) Plan of the tomb.

Fig. 20 (Stoyanov/Stoyanova) | Detail of Doric semicolumns and the Doric


entablature of the tholos
chamber of the tomb in the
Chetinyova mound.

PLATE 138
Bereitgestellt von | De Gruyter / TCS
Angemeldet
Heruntergeladen am | 26.04.16 10:32

Fig. 21 (Stoyanov/Stoyanova) | 13) Plan, section and faade of Golyama Arsenalka tumulus, near
Shipka

Fig. 22 (Stoyanov/Stoyanova) | 13) Plan, section and front view of the entrance to the ante-chamber of
the Griffins Tomb, at Shipka.

PLATE 139
Bereitgestellt von | De Gruyter / TCS
Angemeldet
Heruntergeladen am | 26.04.16 10:32

Fig. 23 (Stoyanov/Stoyanova) | 13) Plan, section and faade of Shushmanets tumulus


tomb, at Shipka.

Fig. 24 (Stoyanov/Stoyanova) | 13) Plan, section and front view of the entrance to the
ante-chamber of the tomb in the Helvetia tumulus, at Shipka.

PLATE 140
Bereitgestellt von | De Gruyter / TCS
Angemeldet
Heruntergeladen am | 26.04.16 10:32

Fig. 25 (Stoyanov/Stoyanova) | 14) Plan and sections of the tomb at Brestovitsa.

Fig. 26 (Stoyanov/Stoyanova) | Plan of the tomb in the Fartunova mound near Maglizh, Kazanlak valley.

PLATE 141
Bereitgestellt von | De Gruyter / TCS
Angemeldet
Heruntergeladen am | 26.04.16 10:32

You might also like