Bilkent University
The Department of Archaeology & History of Art
Newsletter No. 3 - 2004
THE ANTAKYA SARCOPHAGUS:
ASPECTS OF DECORATION, TRANSPORTATION AND DATING
The
so-called
Antakya
Sarcophagus, an example of
the
richly
decorated
Docimeum
columnar
sarcophagi, was found in
1993, south of the city
centre of the modern city
Antakya, ancient “Antiochia
ad
Orontes”.
It
was
discovered
on
Harbiye
Street (Kışlasaray District),
lot no. 487, while the
foundation for an apartment
building was being dug. The
sarcophagus
and
its
contents were excavated by
the
Hatay
Museum
archaeologists, and are now
exhibited in the Museum in a
special room designed for
them.
This article aims to highlight
the basic aspects, questions
and controversies related to
this sarcophagus; about its
sculptural decoration; its
transportation to Antioch;
and its dating, with the
intention that this basic
review becomes a primary
reference for future studies.
Description and Sculptural
Decoration
The Antakya Sarcophagus
is
an
extremely
well
preserved chest and a lid
with total dimensions of
approximately 250 cm (l.),
125 cm (w.), and 233 cm
(h.). The contents of the
sarcophagus were found
intact:
three
skeletons
belonging to one male and
two
females;
some
jewellery: a black amber
bracelet, a pair of gold
earrings and a gold ring
inlaid with coloured stones;
remains of a purple clothing;
gold button accessories; and
three gold coins issued for
Gordian III, Gallienus, and
Cornelia Salonina.
The
chest
of
the
sarcophagus
is
richly
decorated
with
human
figures placed among the 17
columns on all four sides,
and with other sculptural
ornamentation like putti and
felines on the architrave.
The lid is also decorated
with putti, erotes and sea
28
Fig. 1. The Antakya
phagus, front side 1
Sarco-
animals. On the front side
(Fig. 1), there are five
figures among the columns
(from left to right in
sequence):
one
seated
female; a standing bearded
male; a nude heroized
youth; a standing female;
and a seated bearded male.
The right lateral side (Fig. 2)
has a tomb portal carved in
the middle in front of which a
thymiaterium
stands;
a
standing female on the left
of the portal with a sacrificial
animal; and a bearded male
on the right holding a scroll
in the left hand and a
paterna on the right. The
rear side (Fig. 4) represents
a lion-hunt scene with five
hunters. The two hunters at
each corner are quite similar
in composition, both holding
the reins of a horse with one
hand. The hunter on the left
holds a lagobolon, and the
one on the right holds a
spear with their other hands.
The hunter in the middle of
the composition is mounted
on a rearing horse and is
Bilkent University
The Department of Archaeology & History of Art
Newsletter No. 3 - 2004
about to pierce a lion with
his spear. He is surrounded
by two more hunters on
each side, the one on the
left holding a horn, and the
one on the right holding a
lagobolon. Finally, the left
lateral side (Fig. 3) has three
standing figures, one female
in pudicitia pose placed in
the middle of two males. On
the lid (Fig. 5), two people
(probably husband and wife)
are reclining on their left
sides, male behind the
female with his right hand on
the female’s right shoulder.
The portrait head of the
female is unfinished, and the
head of the male is missing,
but there is no indication
that his portrait was ever
finished either.
Fig. 2.
The Antakya
Sarcophagus, right lateral side
2
The symbolic meaning and
the origins of the sculptural
decoration on the columnar
sarcophagi have long been
disputed.
The
most
significant decoration on the
Antakya Sarcophagus are
the seated and standing
human figures on the chest;
the
hunt
scene;
the
banqueting couple on the
lid; and the erotes, putti, and
the sea animals decorating
the lid.
The seated and standing
male and female figures on
the columnar sarcophagi
have Hellenistic prototypes.
The male figures with untidy
long beards and hair, and
wearing himatia
represent
a
“man of intellect”
image,
derived
from
the Hellenistic
philosophers or
poets.
The
philosopher
image is related
to the Roman
religion, which
assumes that
the
philosophers
symbolise the
cultural pursuits
by which the deceased
might gain immortality or
celestial
wisdom3.
The
female figures, some of
which are in pudicitia pose
also
have
Hellenistic
counterparts and have
affiliations with the
matronly
draped
women
of
the
Hellenistic
age,
representing
dignity
and discretion4.
The lion hunt scene
on the rear side of the
Antakya sarcophagus
is typical for the third
century AD Roman
sarcophagi,
and
derives from the boar
hunt of Meleager,
Hippolytus
and
Adonis.
However,
the
lion-hunt
theme is quite rare on the
Docimeum
sarcophagi
although the boar hunt
theme is frequent. The lionhunt is depicted only on a
few Docimeum sarcophagi:
one is on the Sidemara
(İstanbul B), the other is on
the Antakya Sarcophagus.
This feature gives the
Antakya Sarcophagus a
distinct place among the
other columnar sarcophagi.
The practice of placing a
banqueting couple on the
lids of columnar sarcophagi
has a tradition going back
29
Fig. 3. The Antakya
Sarcophagus, left lateral side
5
to Etruscan ossuaries and
Julio-Claudian
kline
monuments of freedmen6.
The banqueting couple are
thought to serve double
purposes, one is to be the
effigies of the deceased
people and to eternalise
their faces; the other is to
represent the funerary meal
eaten at the graveside7.
The
erotes
and
putti
decorating the architrave
and
the
lid
probably
represent the soul, and its
playfulness and happiness
in the other world. Finally,
the sea animals decorating
the
lids
of
columnar
sarcophagi (dolphins and
capricorns on the Antakya
Sarcophagus) are thought to
be carved with the belief that
they would accompany the
deceased soul to the “Isles
of the Blessed”8.
Transportation to Antioch
The Antakya Sarcophagus
is the first Docimeum
columnar
sarcophagus
found in Antakya. Other than
the
symbolic
meaning
conveyed
by
its
rich
sculptural decoration, one
immediate question arises
related to the findspot of the
artefact: How was the
Bilkent University
The Department of Archaeology & History of Art
Newsletter No. 3 - 2004
Fig. 4. The Antakya
Sarcophagus, rear side 9
Fig. 5. Lid of the Antakya
Sarcophagus10
sarcophagus conveyed to
Antakya from Docimeum,
the
generally
accepted
production centre of the
columnar sarcophagi in
Anatolia?
Although some scholars
have claimed that the
production centre of the
columnar sarcophagi is in
Pamphylia, Docimeum is
today generally believed to
be both the supplier of the
raw
marble
and
the
producer
of
columnar
sarcophagi11. A “multiple
production centres” theory is
also likely, but it needs more
evidence to be proven yet.
Having been carved in
Docimeum, the sarcophagi
must have been transported
from there in a mostly- but
not totally- finished state.
Several theories have been
offered
concerning
the
transportation of Docimeum
sarcophagi.
According
to
one
suggestion,
the
marble
blocks
and
the
other
products from Docimeum
were brought down the river
Sangarios (Sakarya), which
runs into the Black Sea, as
far as the modern Lake
Sapanca (Fig. 6). From
there, the marble was
transported overland and
loaded onto ships at the port
of Nicomedia, and exported
Fig. 6. Map of Roman Asia and
Central Phrygia12
30
from there. One evidence
presented
for
this
suggestion is Pliny the
Younger’s letter to Trajan,
suggesting that a canal be
cut linking Nicomedia with
Lake Sapanca to transport
marble, farm produce and
timber much more easily
and cheaply13.
Another suggestion is that
the marble was shipped
down the river Meander
(modern Büyük Menderes)
to Miletus. According to this,
the marble blocks and the
finished sarcophagi were
first transported to Synnada
(Şuhut), the administrative
centre of the quarries, then
to Apamea (modern Dinar),
and then down the Meander
valley to Miletus14 (Fig. 6).
As it is not known to what
extent the rivers Sangarios
and
Meander
were
navigable in antiquity, it is
unfortunately not possible to
prove
either
argument,
whether the marbles were
transported from Nicomedia
or from Miletus.
The Antakya Sarcophagus,
in particular, must have
been transported to Antioch
in a half-finished state by a
sea journey after having
been loaded from either
Miletus or Nicomedia or
perhaps Pamphylia (where
agencies probably controlled
Bilkent University
The Department of Archaeology & History of Art
Newsletter No. 3 - 2004
the
distribution
of
sarcophagi15).
There
is
evidence from Pausanias16
that the Orontes river was
navigable in ancient times
from its outlet up to Antioch.
Dating of the Sarcophagus
The dating of the Antakya
Sarcophagus has to be
“stylistic”, since there are
neither portrait heads carved
on the chest, nor other
absolute dating indications.
The coins found in the chest
also do not give any clue
about the dating, since the
earliest coin (that of Gordian
III) dating to c. AD 240 does
not provide a terminus ante
quem. The sarcophagus
could have been produced
later than that date, and the
deceased could have been
offered an aureus kept
under the possession of
his/her family for years after
it was issued, as it was a
common practice to keep
aurei as prestige objects in
the 3rd century17. Likewise,
the latest dated coin, that of
Gallienus, dating to AD 2601, only shows that the
sarcophagus could not have
been finally closed before
this date. Hence, the stylistic
comparison of the artefact
with other previously dated
Docimeum sarcophagi is a
must for its dating. This
approach, however, is not
entirely satisfactory, since
the prevailing chronology of
the Docimeum sarcophagi
prepared by H. Wiegartz is
controversial18.
According to this rather
outdated chronology and
some other sources, the
Istanbul
B
(Sidemara)
Sarcophagus (Fig. 7) was
dated to AD 250-519. This is
the sarcophagus that is
“stylistically” the closest one
to
the
Antakya
Sarcophagus, so it could be
taken as a comparanda
material.
Fig. 7. Drawing of the Sidemara
Sarcophagus
in
Istanbul
Archaeological Museum 20
The Antakya Sarcophagus
could be dated a few years
later than the Sidemara
Sarcophagus based on the
following
criteria21:
The
proportions of the figures on
the Antakya Sarcophagus
are more slender than those
on
the
Sidemara
Sarcophagus which is an
indication of a later date. An
example could be the left
short side female figure in
the
middle
with
unrealistically
slender
proportions related to the
architectural
background
(Fig. 4). A second evidence
is that the figures of the
Antakya Sarcophagus are
unrealistically large related
to
the
architectural
background formed by the
short columns. Likewise,
they
decomposed
their
relationship
with
their
niches. They are protruding
from the chest and look as if
they do not fit in the space
reserved for them. On the
Sidemara
Sarcophagus,
however, the figures are
more an integral part of the
architectural
background
and are closely fitted within
the columns (Fig. 7). This is
31
also a feature of the late 3rd
century Roman sculpture. A
final evidence is the stiffness
and unnatural tidiness of the
clothes of the figures on the
Antakya
Sarcophagus
compared to those on the
Sidemara. The deep folds
on the mantle of the female
figure reclining on the lid is a
perfect example of the
exaggerated regularity of the
clothes.
This
regularity
diminishes the sense that it
is a soft fabric that the
figures wear, instead it gives
the impression that the
clothes are from a bulky,
hard material like metal.
This bulkiness and mouldlike effect increases as time
proceeds
in
the
3rd
22
century , hence we have
the later date of the Antakya
Sarcophagus.
The above summarised
stylistic
comparisons
between the two sarcophagi
date
the
Antakya
Sarcophagus a few years
later than the Sidemara
Sarcophagus, AD 255-6023.
This date could also explain
why the portrait head(s) on
the lid were never carved.
The sarcophagus could
have been brought to
Antioch just before or after
the Persian conquest of the
city in AD 256, and could
have been left unattended
Bilkent University
The Department of Archaeology & History of Art
Newsletter No. 3 - 2004
due to the turmoil and
distress in the city, which
further continued with the
second conquest at about
AD 26024.
Conclusion
There are, of course,
several other stylistic and
non-stylistic
issues
that
need to be addressed about
the Antakya Sarcophagus
and
the
columnar
sarcophagi in general. The
stylistic issues include the
symbolism reflected by the
figured
decoration;
the
perception
and
the
recognition of the figures by
the ancients; and most
importantly, the chronology
of the columnar sarcophagi.
The non-stylistic
issues
include the question of
multiple production centres,
how the sarcophagi were
conveyed
to
their
destinations, how the orders
were collected, and by
whom the portrait heads
were later completed. If
studied properly in the
future,
the
Antakya
Sarcophagus is an example
of the Docimeum columnar
sarcophagi that could clarify
some of these unknowns.
Photo from F. Kılınç,
Sarcophagus
of
Antioch.
Antakya: A Turizm Yayınları.
2 Photo by E. Öğüş and J.
Bennett.
3 Toynbee, J. M.C. 1965. The
Art of the Romans. London:
Thames and Hudson, ff.104.
4
Smith,
R.R.R.
1991.
Hellenistic Sculpture. London:
Thames and Hudson Ltd, ff. 84.
5 Photo by E. Öğüş and J.
Bennett.
6Kleiner, D.E.E. 1992. Roman
Sculpture. New Haven: Yale
University Press; Cormack, S.
1997. “Funerary Monuments
and Mortuary Practice in
Roman Asia Minor”. In S.E.
Alcock (ed.) Early Roman
1
← Previous article
Empire in the East. Oxford:
Oxbow Books, 137- 156.
7
Elderkin, W. 1939. “The
Sarcophagus of Sidemara”,
Hesperia 8: 101-115; Strong,
D.1978. “The Early Roman
Sarcophagi of Anatolia and the
West”. In E. Akurgal (ed.) The
Proceedings
of
the
Xth
International
Congress
of
Classical Archaeology (Vol II.).
Ankara: Türk Tarih Kurumu
Basımevi, 677-83.
8 Nock, A.D. and J.D. Beazley
1946.
“
Sarcophagi
and
Symbolism“, American Journal
of Archaeology 50 (1): 140176.
9 Photo by E. Öğüş and J.
Bennett,
photographic
reconstruction by B. Claasz
Coockson.
10
Photo from F. Kılınç.
Sarcophagus
of
Antioch.
Antakya: A Turizm Yayınları.
11 Coleman, M., and S. Walker
1979.
“Stable
Isotope
Identification of Greek and
Roman Marbles”, Archaeometry
21 (1): 107- 112; Walker, S.
1984. “Marble Origins by
Isotopic Analysis”, Archaeology
16 (2): 204- 217.
12
Drawing by B. Claasz
Coockson.
13 Pliny, The Letters of Pliny
Book X, XLI. B. Radice (ed.)
1997.
Cambridge,
Massachusetts and London,
England; Ward-Perkins, J.B.
1980. “The Marble Trade and
Its
Organization:
Evidence
From Nicomedia”, Memoirs of
the American Academy in
Rome 36: 325- 338; Dodge, H.
1991. “Ancient Marble Studies:
Recent Research”, Journal of
Roman Archaeology 4: 28-50.
14 Röder, J. 1971. “Marmor
Phyrygium. Die Antiken
Marmorbrüche von Işçehisar in
Westanatolien”, Jahrbuch Des
Deutschen Archäeologisches
Instituts (86): 253- 312.
15 Ward-Perkins, J.B. 1980.
“The Marble Trade and Its
Organization: Evidence From
Nicomedia”, Memoirs of the
American Academy in Rome
36: 325- 338
16 Pausanias, Description of
Greece Book VIII, XXIX, 3. W.
H. S. Jones (ed.) 1965.
Cambridge, Massachusetts and
London, England; Downey, G.
1963.
Ancient
Antioch.
32
Princeton, Princeton University
Press.
17
Bland, R.F. 1996. “The
Development of Gold and Silver
Denominations A.D. 193- 253”.
In C.E. King and D.G. Wigg,
(eds.) Coin finds and Coin Use
in the Roman World. The
Thirteenth Oxford Symposium
on Coinage and Monetary
History,
1993.
A
NATO
Advanced Research Workshop.
Berlin: Gebr, Mann Verlag, 63101.
18
Wiegartz,
H.
1965.
Kleinasiatischen
Säulensarkophage.
Berlin:
Verlag Gebr. Mann.
19
Wiegartz,
1965:143;
Waelkens, M. 1982. Dokimeion:
Die
Werkstaat
der
Reprasentation Kleinasiatichen
Sarkophagi. Berlin, Mann.
20
Drawing by E. Öğüş and B.
Claasz Coockson.
21
Özgan,
R.
2000.
“Säulensarkophage
und
danach…”,
Istanbuler
Mitteilungen 50: 365-387.
22 See footnote 21.
23 See footnote 21.
24 Bouchier, E.S. 1921. A Short
History of Antioch. 300 B.C.A.D. 1268. Oxford: Basil
Blackwell.
Acknowledgement: I give
many thanks to B. Claasz
Coockson, who spent a
great
deal
of
time
processing my illustrations.
Fig. 8 The Antakya
Sarcophagus, rear side, detail
Esen Öğüş
Next article →