SEXTA ETAPA DEL PROCESO DE ANÁLSIS DE FALLA: MITIGACIÓN,

Near the end of the seventh century, the Aegean city of Miletos established a

settlement on the southern Black Sea coast on the promontory of Sinop (K.6).183

Roughly half a century later, we find the coastal valleys to the south of Sinop becoming part of the Achaemenid Empire following the conquest of the Lydian lands extending to

the Kızılırmak River.184 The convergence of these two developments brings the

archaeology of the Sinop Promontory and the entire coast from the Kızılırmak River to

the Bartın River into contact with scholarship on Greek colonization in the Black Sea,

and the Achaemenid imperial presence on its southern coast. The characteristic tendency of this scholarship is towards splitting identities between inland rural Paphlagonians under Achaemenid administration, and coastal urban centers of Greek colonization. For

example, the interpretation of the Kalekapı fort and rockcut tomb as belonging to the

Paphlagonian king Korylas is very much a product of this split and derives from the assumption that Korylas’ authority derived from fortified, but otherwise rural, inland

valleys.185 On the flip side is the consideration of Sinope as essentially a Milesian colony

under the burden of paying tribute to the Achaemenid kings.186 Both interpretations

respond to a prejudicial perspective found in the Greek literary sources towards other

183 _{The earliest ceramics are dated to the late seventh century, whereas the literary sources support the} foundation of a Milesian colony in the last quarter of the seventh century (Doonan 2004b:69-71). 184 _{The capture of Sardis by Cyrus II is dated to c. 546 (Briant 2002:34-6). With his defeat of the Median}

king Astyages, Cyrus II had nominally acquired the land to the east of the Kızılırmak River in c. 560/59 (ibid.:31-4). Evidence is absent about the extent of Lydian control over Paphlagonia before c. 546. 185 _{Von Gall 1966a:54-7.}

peoples. Additionally, both interpretations are under the lingering influence of the theoretical framework of nineteenth and early twentieth century colonialism discussed in depth in the sixth chapter.

The present chapter first attempts to analyze critically the literary sources on the southern Black Sea and suggests that these are a constellation of colonial geographic

discourses through which a dialectic of urban Greeks and rural others is constituted.187

Secondly, this chapter interprets the available material evidence in the light of this critical analysis. The archaeological investigation of the southern Black Sea coast is uneven, consisting of limited excavations of settlements, chance and unprovenanced finds, and extensive and intensive regional surveys. This chapter weaves these diverse strands of evidence together to present a picture of settlement in a contested landscape. Both the literary and archaeological discourses on Greek colonization are copious; the intention of this chapter is merely to analyze the evidence for indigenous, colonial Greek, and imperial Achaemenid interaction from the point of view of mythopoetic landscapes and archaeological places.

i. Mapping Homer – _{oflPaflagÒnew}

The first references to Paphlagonia are to its people, the Paphlagones, in the Iliad.

Pylaimenes, the king/leader (basileÊw/érxÒw) of the Paphlagones, and his son Harpalion

appear twice in battle passages and once in the Trojan catalog.188 In the latter passage,

Homer describes the allies settled along the Black Sea coast: “Pylaimenes leads the Paphlagones from the land of the Enetoi, who held Kytoros and lived around Sesamos,

187 _{The fourth chapter critically assesses Achaemenid imperialism.}

188 _{Hom. Il. 5.576-590, 13.643-662 (battle references); 2.851-855 (Trojan catalog). The references to} Pylaimenes are known for his death at the hands of Menelaos occurring in the narrative (5.578-579) before appearing in battle and mourning Harpalion (13.643-662).

dwelling in famous houses around the Parthenios River, Kromna, Aigialos, and high

Erythinoi.”189 To the Greek speaking audiences of the Iliad, the Paphlagones live in the

Bartın (Parthenios) Valley and northeastward along an approximately 70 km stretch of

the southern Black Sea coast. Although not in their geographical sequence in the Iliad,

the named places belong to a maritime itinerary of natural harbors and beaches (fig. 2).

In the southwest is the sheltered mouth of the Parthenios River (Bartın Çayı); the

promontory of Sesamos (Amasra) shelters a harbor 15 km further to the northeast (L.4);

red cliffs frame a beach at Erythinoi (Çakraz) 9 km further along; Kromna (Tekkeönü,

L.3) and Kytoros (Gideros, L.2) are bays 18 km and 16 km to the east, respectively; and

lastly, in the northeast are the long beaches of Aigialos (Cide, L.2) 12 km further along.

The catalog passage is not a sequential maritime itinerary (per¤ploow), but the last three

verses clearly reflect the knowledge of Greek traders in the Black Sea.190 _Before

analyzing the passage further, however, it is necessary to respond to questions about the passage’s authenticity.

189

PaflagÒnvnd'≤ge›toPulaim°neowlãsionk∞r §jÉEnet«n,˜yen≤miÒnvng°nowégroterãvn,

o·=aKÊtvron¶xonka‹SÆsamonémfen°monto émf¤tePary°nionpotamÚnklutåd≈mat'¶naion

Kr«mnãnt'AfigialÒnteka‹ÍchloÁwÄEruy¤noËw (Hom. Il. 2.851-855).

190 _{The extant examples of maritime itineraries are lists of harbors each located one day’s sailing apart: for} example, the fourth century Periploos of Pseudo-Skylax (Counillon 2004b:24-27) and the second century CE Periplous of Arrian (Liddle 2003:27-32). A translation of Counillon’s text of Pseudo- Skylax §90 on Paphlagonia is: “Paphlagonia. After Assyria are the Paphlagonian people. There is the harbor of Stephane, the Greek city of Koloussa, the Greek city of Kinolis, the Greek city of Karambis, the Greek city of Kytoris, the Greek city of Sesamos and the Parthenios River, the Greek city of Tieion and harbor of Psylla and the Kallichoros River” (PAFLAGONIA. Metå d¢ ÉAssur¤an §st‹ Paflagon¤a ¶ynow. ÖEsti d¢ §n aÈtª Stefãnh limÆn, KoloËssa pÒliw ÑEllhn¤w, K¤nvliw pÒliw ÑEllhn¤w,Kãrambiw pÒliwÑEllhn¤w, KÊtvriwpÒliw ÑEllhn¤w,ShsamÚw pÒliw ÑEllhn¤wka‹ Pary°niow potamÒw,T¤eionpÒliwÑEllhn‹wka‹limØnCÊllaka‹potamÚwKall¤xvrow [Counillon 2004b:22]).

Although an earlier generation of scholars considered the above passages as evidence

for the Paphlagones in the eighth century or earlier,191 the last three verses of the catalog

passage present problems for an eighth century date. The references to Kytoros, Sesamos, Kromna, Aigialos, and Erythinoi belong to the period of either Greek expansion or settlement, and several scholars have argued that one or more verses are

interpolated.192 Neither the dating of the composition of the Iliad based on Gregory

Nagy’s research nor the dating of Greek expansion based on archaeological research lend any credence to comments about the catalog passage “looking like a learned

interpolation.”193 An archaeological consensus has formed around the conclusion that

Greek seafaring traders first began to appear and settle in the Black Sea at the earliest in

the last third of the seventh century.194

Nagy’s research on the evolution of the Iliad from a flexible composition contingent on the occasion of performance to the rigid epic handed down to the present complements this consensus. Based on critical analyses of the Homeric textual tradition and comparable practices of performed poetry, Nagy defines five periods in the composition of the Iliad: a period of fluidity before the middle of the eighth century followed by a “formative period” lasting down to the middle of the sixth century, a “definitive period” triggered by changes in Athenian performances, a “standardizing period” that began in

191 _{For example, in Saprykin’s ethnogenesis of the Paphlagones, the Iliad references are understood as late} second millennium evidence for the migration of the Paphlagones through the second and first millennium (1991).

192 _{Drews discusses the posited first century interpolation, and argues that the verses are genuine. He also} advocates an eighth century colonization of the Pontos Euxeinos (1976:20-2). See also Burstein 1976, Ehrhardt 1983:323 n. 368, Kirk 1985:258-9, Marek 1993:16-7, Ivantchik 1998:318-20, Counillon 2004. 193 _{Kirk 1985:259. On Nagy, see the following discussion.}

194 _{Ivantchik 1998:326-30; Tsetskhladze 1998a:15-9; Doonan 2004b:74-6, 2007a, Morin 2009. See}

J.2, K.6, L.5. For summaries of Berezan, see Solovyov 1999:28-97, 2007; Olbia, see Bujskikh 2007; and

for other Greek settlements along the Black Sea coast not in Paphlagonia, see Grammenos and Petropoulos 2003, 2007.

the second half of the fourth century, and finally a “rigid period” beginning in the middle

of the second century.195 Nagy’s proposed periods suggest that one would be mistaken in

arguing for an interpolation before the standardizing period began in the second half of the fourth century. Furthermore, Patrick Counillon, the most recent scholar to discuss the interpolation of the Paphlagonian passage of the catalog, argues that an interpolation would have to date before the fourth century when the historian Kallisthenes commented

on the passage.196

Rather than an interpolation, Counillon argues that the verses belong to another—a partly “fantastic”—Aegean landscape of the eighth century that shifted to the Black Sea after Greek settlements were founded at the end of the fourth century at the places that

bear Paphlagonian place names.197 His argument relies on the observation that neither

the verses surrounding the passage nor the place names within it situate Paphlagonia

more precisely than somewhere in Thrace or northwestern Anatolia.198 Additionally, he

assumes a four hundred year gap between the Iliad’s eighth century composition and the

appearance of Greek settlements at the named places.199 Of the following Paphlagonian

personal and place names in the Iliad, only Kytoros is not Greek:

Pylaimenes – a Greek name meaning “defender of the gate” (from _aflpÊlai “gate” and m°nv “to stand fast”)

Harpalion – a Greek name meaning “attractive” (from _èrpal°ow)200

Paphlagones – a name sometimes erroneously derived from “to stutter” (_paflãzv)201

195 _{For summaries of the periods, see Nagy 1996a:42, 1996b:110, 2003:2-3, 2004:27. On comparable} practices, see Nagy 1995.

196 _{Counillon 2004a:116-20, referring to Strabo’s critique of Kallisthenes commentary and emendation of} transposing verse 2.854 (Strabo 12.3.5 [FGrH 124 F 53]).

197 _{Counillon describes the location of Aigialos and Erythinoi as “fantaisiste” (2004a:119).} 198 _{Ibid.:109-10.}

199 _Ibid.:110-1.

200 _{The other Paphlagonian names in the Iliad, Mydon (5.580) and Atymnios (5.581), are not Greek (Kirk} 1990:117).

Enetoi – a name derived by Counillon from “to rush in” (_§n¤hmi)

Kytoros – a place name compared to the incomplete Hittite place name Hutar- and associated with a river (Devrekani) and mountain in later sources202

Sesamos – a place name of Semitic origin that also appears in Hittite, but is derived here from “sesame seed” (_tÚsÆsamon)203

Parthenios – a place name from the Greek adjective meaning “maidenly” (_pary°niow) Kromna – a place name derived by Zgusta from “river bank” (_ıkrhmnÒw)204

Aigialos – a place name meaning “coastal beach” (_{ıafigialÒw})205 Erythinoi – a place name meaning “red [cliffs]” (from _§ruya¤nv)

Counillon interprets all of the Greek place names as descriptive but without specificity, and all the Greek personal names as too common, and concludes that the passage does not indicate any real knowledge of the Paphlagonian coast.

Counillon’s proposal for the mobility of place names and their landscapes is an inadequate reading of Homer as an epic of Greek colonization, and has some misunderstandings generated by a lack of attention to a postcolonial theoretical framework. While one might question the relevance of the postcolonial framework on

the grounds that it is anachronistic to the ancient Black Sea,206 knowledge of the

framework enables us to excavate colonial theories from within our own interpretations. The proposed mobility of Counillon’s place names disregards the significance of social affiliation and place in antiquity, and he describes the place names as belonging to a

landscape of fantasy.207 Benedict Anderson’s concept of imagined communities is

founded on a critique of the interpretation that modern colonial nationalism “invents nations where they do not exist” on the grounds that invention here implies fabrication 201 _{Counillon follows this derivation (2004a:111). Paphlagonia is discussed in more depth in the following}

section.

202 _{Robert 1980:147-50, Zgusta 1984:316 §654-1, Del Monte and Tischler 1978:129 “Hutar[.” On Kytoros} as a Greek polis, see Avram, Hind and Tsetskhladze 2004:959 no. 724. See L.2.

203 _{On Sesamos as a Greek polis, see Avram, Hind and Tsetskhladze 2004:960 no. 728. See}

L.4.

204 _{Robert 1937, Zgusta 1984:303-4 §622. See}

L.3.

205 _See

L.2.

206 _{Malkin discusses the incompatibility of postcolonial theories and ancient Greek colonization (2004).} 207 _{On the significance of place in ancient colonization, see ibid.:343-50.}

and falsity.208 It is more accurate to say that if landscapes are imagined and not invented during modern colonization, as Anderson argues, we can be doubly confident in interpreting the Iliad as imagining, or reimagining, landscapes during the more variable

ancient colonial experience.209 The Iliad’s reimagination of the Paphlagonian coast is a

colonial mapping that retains a few place names, for example Kytoros, and gives

descriptive Greek names to other places.210 Similar to other colonial landscapes around

the Mediterranean and Black Seas, the Iliad’s mapping becomes a translation both in the descriptive names and their embedding in a Greek maritime and heroic mythopoetic landscape.

The translation of a landscape is beyond doubt an appropriation, but the Paphlagones as represented in the Iliad are not subject to significant prejudices. Pylaimenes shares the

epithet “hairy chest” (lãsion k∞r), which does not connote coarseness, with Patroklos

and Achilleus.211 The Iliad does, however, only describe the houses of the Paphlagones

and not their monumental buildings, and, thereby, the Paphlagones are implicitly

contrasted with their urban colonizers.212 The Iliad participates in the Milesian discourse

208 _{Gellner (1964:168, italics added) critiqued by Anderson (1991:6).}

209 _{The difference between imagination and reimagination is discussed in the following chapter. Although} ancient colonies differ from their modern counterparts in being outside of the administration of the city of origin of the settlers, and more similar to newly founded settlements contingent on the existing political landscape, ancient colonization is occasionally used in place of ancient expansion.

210 _{Malkin discusses colonial descriptive Greek names (1994:95-8). Other place names, such as Kromna} and Sesamos, may have been altered to allow Greek etymologies.

211 _{The epithet is more literally “hairy heart” (Hom. Il. 2.851 [Pylaimenes], 16.554 [Patroklos], 1.189} [Achilleus]). In the Iliadlãsiow is also used to describe a ram (24.125).

212 _{The evidence for the contrast is tenuous when limited as here to the references to the Paphlagones, but} the Argive and Trojan catalogs vary in a few striking features that hint at the broader theme of urban Greek and rural other. For example, in the catalog of Argive allies, ‘well-built city’ (§ukt¤menon ptol¤eyron) appears four times (2.501, 505, 546, 569), but not once in the admittedly shorter catalog of Trojan allies.

on their appropriation of the Paphlagonian coast, but the verses embrace the Paphlagones as Greek as much as they separate them out as non-urban.

The catalog passage is probably a sketch of the Paphlagones in the sixth century,213

when Milesian traders were familiar with the coast, but before the epic had become more

definitive.214 Although the prejudicial discourse of the urban Greek and the rural other

begins mildly at the entrance of the Paphlagones into the Iliad’s mythopoetic landscape, the discourse does influence their subsequent representation. The seventh century

Paphlagones elude us, especially their self-perception and preferred name;215 the sixth

century Paphlagones interacting with traders along the coast began to internalize the

influential Iliad references. They would have begun to refer to themselves as

Paphlagones, and understand their local practices within a wider Aegean conceptual landscape. One wonders if the mere mention of Paphlagones in the Iliad exerted enough influence for a new Paphlagonian identity to have been created. In other words, the Iliad

213 _{A close reading that supports a sixth century date finds the extant version of the Iliad to have been} cemented in the middle of Greek expansion in the Black Sea. The evidence lies in the difference in the references to Kytoros and Sesamos; the Enetoi hold Kytoros but live around Sesamos. Kytoros, a later settlement with harbor (emporion) of Sinope, is considered to belong to the Paphlagones, but Sesamos to belong to others; it was perhaps already a Milesian or Carian settlement (apoikia). Strabo mentions that Kytoros was once an emporion of Sinope (12.3.10). Ps. Scymn. 5.1001-1008 refers to Amastris, the city synoicized from Tieion, Sesamos, Kromna, and Kytoros, as a Milesian apoikia. According to the scholiast on Ap. Rhod. Argon. 2.943, Sesamos was Carian. A broader reading of the Iliad as a poem commemorating the Greek commercial expansion into the Black Sea and conflict over the Dardanelles also supports the specificity and length of the passages referring to the Paphlagones. The catalog passage is possibly too influenced by poetic patterns to carry the burden of either reading. The absence of excavated contexts relevant to the relations among Greek traders and Paphlagones in these settlements adds more hesitation.

214 _{The definitive period begins in the sixth century under the Peisistratidai when poetry started to be} possessed and performances of Iliad began to favor a preferred sequence (Nagy 1996a:65-7).

215 _{Homer’s description of the Paphlagones in the catalog passage is unclear;one cannot determine whether} he refers to elite or, more broadly, local inhabitants. His coupling of the Paphlagones and Enetoi may be a confusion of two adjacent or interspersed peoples, or the Paphlagones may be the companions of Pylaimenes and Harpalion, either drawn from the elites of the Enetoi or the elites ruling over the Enetoi. The Enetoi were an enigma to ancient commentators as much as to contemporary scholars (e.g. Strabo 5.1.4, 12.3.8, 12.3.25). Hecataeos of Miletos suggested that they were located in the Kızılırmak Valley (Strabo 12.3.25 [FGrH 1 F 199]), but most notably they become tied into the myth of the foundation of Rome with the Enetoi’s migration to the Adriatic with fleeing Trojans (e.g. Livy 1.1.2-3).

references were so influential that they constituted a reimagined poetic landscape of what existed previously. This landscape was coupled with practices that enacted and embedded the epic in the landscape. The evidence for the veneration of Homer in Paphlagonia is Roman, but the enunciation of Greek place names for settlements is an

everyday practice that began much earlier.216 The following section attempts to comment

on the Paphlagonian landscape before, and contemporary to, the Iliad. The evidence is meager, but it does offer suggestions for further research. What can be written about the contemporary practices of embedding the Iliadic place names that took place hand-in- hand with mythopoetic translation of the place names is slightly more tangible.

ii. Mythical reimagination of Sinope & other landscapes

Fortunately, continuity in place names lets us cross the silent first half of the first millennium to infer glimpses of how the landscape appeared before it was reimagined in

the Iliad’s translation of place names. Kytoros (L.2) in the catalog passage is thought to

be a Hittite place name that is retained in the Iliad, but widely separated and fragmentary evidence limits what can be said about Kytoros before the Iliad. It is noteworthy, however, that a Hittite sword was found by spelunkers in an exsurgence cave on a

tributary of the Devrekani high in the mountains to the south.217 During the Roman