![\"\"](\"http:\/\/www.libridergi.org\/wp-content\/uploads\/2017\/11\/lbr.2017029.jpg\")
<\/a>\n\t\t<\/div><\/div><\/figure><\/div>\nReview: T. Hodos, \u201cLycia and Classical Archaeology: The Changing Nature of Archaeology in Turkey\u201d<\/h2>\nT. M. P. Duggan<\/h3>\n
ISBN: 9781934078471<\/strong> <\/div> \n\t\t Review: T. Hodos, \u201cLycia and Classical Archaeology: The Chang\u00ading Nature of Archaeology in Turkey\u201d. Eds. D. Haggis \u2013 C. Anto\u00adnaccio, Classical Archaeology in Context: Theory and Practice in Excava\u00adtion in the Greek World<\/em>. Berlin\/Boston (2015) 87-118, 1 map, 2 photographs and 2 figures. Walter de Gruyter, 426 pag\u00ades, 2 tables and 152 figures (maps, plans and photographs in the text).<\/strong><\/p>\n Archaeology, through employing scientific methods, as expressed for ex\u00adam\u00adple through the stratigraphy exposed in excavation, through the chrono\u00adlogi\u00adcal sequencing of the material, through the discovery and documenting of physical evidence, including artefacts, structures and other finds, pro\u00advides us with a scientific record, leading to a more chronologically informed under\u00adstanding of the past from its physical traces, the remains from hu\u00adman\u00adities\u2019 existence through the millennia, from pre-history to modernity. Archaeology is distinct from treasure hunting and is likewise distinct from the various expressions of interest and curiosity, without employing a developed scien\u00adtific method, concerning the remains of past civilisations, a wider inter\u00adest in the surviving evidence from the past, including textual sources, an antiquar\u00adian interest which was of course taken in antiquity to its past, as by Pliny the Elder, by European antiquarians from the Renais\u00adsance into the 19th<\/sup> c., as by those in the Islamic world such as Ab\u016b al-Ray\u00ad\u1e25\u0101n Mu\u1e25ammad ibn A\u1e25mad al-B\u012br\u016bn\u012b\u00a0 (973-1052) and \u2018Abd al-Latif al-Baghdadi (1162-1231), as in China by L\u00fc Dalin (1046-1092), etc. Likewise archaeology is distinct from, while providing relevant material for, those who study history in its varied aspects, religious and cultural.<\/p>\n The exercise of discrimination between different things and between different terms is the basis of the practice of science, and antiquarians, be they travellers, clergymen, surveyors, architects or artists, are not archaeol\u00adogists. They did not call themselves archaeologists or proto-archaeologists but antiquarians, they were interested in, and they studied the ancient in all its varied aspects, the remains and relics from the past, any form of writ\u00adten text, customs, architecture, coins and seals, pottery, megaliths and stone cir\u00adcles etc. The word \u201cantiquary\u201d was first used in English in 1563[1]<\/sup><\/a>, and the College of Antiquaries was established c. 1585, the Society of Anti\u00adquaries of London from 1707, established by Royal Charter in 1751, the Dilettanti Soci\u00adety was founded in 1734; of antiquarians, educated travellers who took an informed interest in, recorded and collected and, at times, published eviden\u00adce of past civilisations, including ruins, epigraphic materi\u00adal, coins and papyri, and the related recording of views of the ancient site, ob\u00adject or structure, sometimes in plan, elevation and section, work often provided by artists and architects. The word \u201carchaeologist<\/em>\u201d employed to mean a person undertak\u00ading the scientific study of ancient peoples and past civi\u00adlisations, is only recorded in English usage from 1824[2]<\/sup><\/a> onwards, with the Royal Archaeologi\u00adcal Institute (RAI) established in 1844, distinct from the related, but different research and documenting activities of antiquari\u00adans, such as those who dug at Stonehenge in the 17th<\/sup> century and the cities of Pompeii and Herculaneum in the 18th<\/sup> c., when the digging was not conducted by ordinary treasure hunters, it was not conducted by anybody who thought of themselves and described themselves as archaeologists and such work was carried out by antiquaries into the 19th<\/sup> c.<\/p>\n The first part of this review offers some corrections to some factual er\u00adrors contained in a chapter entitled, \u201cLycia and Classical Archaeology: The Changing Nature of Archaeology in Turkey<\/em>\u201d, by the Reader in Mediterra\u00adnean Archaeology at the University of Bristol, Dr. Tamara Hodos, one in a collec\u00adtion of 14 articles in book form on the subject of the theory and prac\u00adtice of archaeology in the Greek world. The publishers of Classical Archae\u00adology in Context: Theory and Practice in Excavation in the Greek World<\/em>, state: \u201cThis book compiles a series of case studies derived from archaeologi\u00adcal excava\u00adtion in Greek cultural contexts in the Mediterranean (ca. 800-100 B.C), ad\u00addressing the current state of the field, the goals and direction of Greek ar\u00adchae\u00adology, and its place in archaeological thought and practice<\/em>\u201d[3]<\/sup><\/a>. The sec\u00adond part of this review presents some of the important omissions from the history that is presented in this chapter, which may perhaps allow for a bet\u00adter understanding of the course of European research, both anti\u00adquarian and archaeological in ancient Lycia in the 18th<\/sup> and 19th<\/sup> centuries, and it concludes with some remarks on the vexed matter of the degree to which ancient Ly\u00adcia, not to mention \u00c7alt\u0131lar, can properly be said to have had a Greek cultural context and to be considered as being an integral part of \u201cthe Greek world<\/em>\u201d, which the inclusion of this chapter in this volume seems to assume. It would seem an editorial decision was taken to widen the scope of the book to in\u00adclude an article on the large h\u00f6y\u00fck by \u00c7alt\u0131lar, which is said to be in Lycia, but which for centuries was in the disputed northern border area, in an area that was only defined as being securely Lycian, within Lycian territory through the Roman-Lycian Treaty of 46 B.C., that is after the dates given in the title of this volume, ca. 800-100 B.C., indicate.\u00a0 How far a report on the archae\u00adological survey at \u00c7alt\u0131lar with its concentration on finds dating from the IIIrd<\/sup> to early Ist<\/sup> millennium B.C. can be regarded as pertinent to a book concern\u00ading, \u201carchaeological excavation in Greek cultural contexts in the Mediterra\u00adnean (ca. 800-100 B.C),<\/em>\u201d seems debateable, is there a Greek cultural context, or is there rather an Anato\u00adlian cultural context at \u00c7alt\u0131lar, with only limited finds of imported Greek ceramics?[4]<\/sup><\/a>.<\/p>\n Part One<\/p>\n The aim of the chapter is stated by the author: \u201cThis article examines the history of archaeological work in Lycia, which begins in the 18th<\/sup> century, to the present day to illustrate the changing nature of Turkey\u2019s heritage fo\u00adcus<\/em>\u201d[5]<\/sup><\/a>, and goes on to describe this history over the next three pages (91-93), in the section entitled, The Archaeology of and in Lycia.<\/em> However, it can be noted that \u201carchaeological work<\/em>\u201d in Lycia did not begin in the 18th<\/sup>, but in the 19th<\/sup> c. and so the first part of the sentence can perhaps be more accurately written, \u201cEuropean interest in the remains of ancient Lycia be\u00adgan in the last quarter of the 18th<\/sup> c. and archaeological excavations began in Lycia in 1842<\/em>\u201d. The first archaeological work undertaken in Lycia was conducted by Charles Fellows in the excavation he oversaw of what he termed the Ionic monu\u00adment (the Nereid Monument) at Xanthus in 1842, where he found and recorded that the remains of the monument had fall\u00aden down upon the late antique and Byzantine housing below the hill. He writes in his Account of the Ionic Trophy Monument Excavated at Xanthus:<\/em> \u201cAt that time <\/em>(early Vth<\/sup> c. A.D.) there were a number of small houses, occu\u00adpied by Christians, at the foot of the cliff upon which the Trophy Monument stood; into some of the walls around these houses the stones of the cella were built, but the temple-like Monument still towered above them. At this period an unforeseen and awful visitation awaited this and many neigh\u00adbouring cities of Asia Minor: earthquakes, shaking even the massive monu\u00adments of the early Lycians, threw down and destroyed every building of the Greeks and Christians and the whole city of Xanthus lay in ruins; not a mar\u00adble fragment of the super\u00adstructure mentioned in these pages remained up\u00adon its base, and the ruins bur\u00adied the houses below; these ruins have perhaps never been visited, cer\u00adtainly they were never moved, until I discovered them in 1838<\/em>\u201d[6]<\/sup><\/a>, and that, \u201cAt the assumed level, in excavating on the north side, we ceased to find the fallen fragments of the building and soon afterwards lost all trace of the chips of broken marble; we then came to a dark-col\u00adoured native earth, on the surface of which we found several bronze and bone pins, arrow-heads etc\u2026.During the whole of the excavations, although we found the limbs, feet, fingers and drapery of the statues, we never discovered a fragment of the heads,- not a curl or feature, not an ear, a nose, or any chip of the heads of the statues, notwithstanding a careful ex\u00adam\u00adination of the earth surrounding the ruins. The reason for this did not oc\u00adcur to me at the time, and I urged the men to persevere until they should lay bare the rock; thinking the heads might have first fallen, and their bro\u00adken fragments have been shaken down amongst the blocks, and that they might still lie concealed below. Instead of finding the expected pudding-stone rock, we came upon small irregular stones, artificially cemented together; and on advancing, we found regular walls forming a series of small houses; in these, near the openings left for doorways, were decayed iron hinges, bolts, rings, and numerous nails; in the houses weights, scales and broken pot\u00adtery. Upon the tiles of the floor were imprinted patterns, and amongst them the Cross of the early Christians was conspicuous; whilst upon some of the walls the Panagia of the Greek church was still to be recognised<\/em>\u201d[7]<\/sup><\/a>. And he published a plan, \u201cshewing the fallen scul\u00adptures and their position as exposed by excavation<\/em>\u201d[8]<\/sup><\/a>. He drew attention in this account to the \u201cstra\u00adtigraphy\u201d of this site, discovered through its exca\u00advation, describing the layer of small finds and the undisturbed soil beneath and the bedrock, although the scientific use by archaeologists of stratigra\u00adphy, of the natural and cul\u00adtural layers exposed through excavation, was only later adopted as archae\u00adological method from geology[9]<\/sup><\/a>.<\/p>\n The history of this European research in Lycia continues: \u201cInterest in the history and archaeology of Lycia began at the turn of the eighteenth cen\u00adtury and was led by Europeans. The English prelate Richard Pococke (1704-1765) visited the region in 1739-40 as part of a grand tour of Greece and the Near East, publishing an account of his travels in 1745 (Pococke 1745). The English classical scholar and antiquarian Dr. Richard Chandler (1738-1810), the artist and neo-classical architect James Stuart (1713-1788) and the painter William Edmund Pars (1742-1782) came in 1764 on behalf of England\u2019s Society of Dilettanti to record Lycia\u2019s ruins, search for and tran\u00adscribe inscriptions, in which Europeans were beginning to become interest\u00aded (Stuart 1769; Chandler 1775)<\/em>\u201d[10]<\/sup><\/a>. It is unfortunately the case that of the first four above named individuals: Rev. Richard Pococke, Dr. Richard Chan\u00addler, James Stuart and William Edmund Pars, who are said by the author to have visited Lycia in the 18th <\/sup>c., the four earliest modern European explor\u00aders of the remains of ancient Lycia, not one in fact did so. The closest Richard Pococke, LLD, FRS, came to visiting the region of Lycia was when he sailed past the coast of Lycia in July 1739 on his way from Alexandria to Crete, a maritime route followed and described by many pilgrim travellers before Pococke. He provides the following description of the Lycian coastline in his Description of the East, Observations on Palestine or the Holy Land, Syria, Mesopotamia, Cyprus and Candia<\/em>, recorded in Volume II, Part One, not in Volume II, Part II, the volume that is cited by T. Hodos in reference to Pococke visiting the Lycian region in 1839-40 in her bibliog\u00adraphy: \u201cIn the evening <\/em>(of the 8th<\/sup> of July, 1739) we came up with the island called Castello Rosso: This was, without doubt one of the Chelidonian is\u00adlands <\/em>(it is not), which Strabo mentions as opposite to the sacred promon\u00adtory where Mount Taurus was supposed to begin; and may be that island Rhoge of Pliny, and the present name may be a corruption from it <\/em>(it is not), as I could see no reason for their calling it the red island; it is high and rocky, and about two miles in length. There is a town and castle on the highest part of it, and the south side of this island seemed to be covered with vinyards; there is a secure harbour to the north, and they told me that it was not above half a mile from the continent, and they have plenty of good water; it is inhabited by Greeks, and is a great resort of the Maltese <\/em>(corsairs), as there is no strong place to oppose them. Proceeding on our voyage I saw two small islands at a considerable distance, which, if I mis\u00adtake not, are called Polieti, and seem to be those rocks, which are marked in the sea chart, and in the map I give of Asia Minor <\/em>(Fig. 1). We were now op\u00adposite to Lycia; a little to the north west of these islands the river Lymira <\/em>(sic.) probably falls into the sea; near it was the city Myra of Lycia, to which St. Paul came in his voyage from Caesarea to Italy, and embarked on board a ship of Alexandria bound to that country. Further to the west the river Xanthus falls into the sea; Patara was situated to the east of it, where St. Paul embarked on board a ship bound for Phoenicia, in his voyage from Miletus to Tyre. On the eleventh <\/em>(of July) we were opposite to Cape Sardeni; to the north of it is the bay of Mecari <\/em>(Macri-Fethiye), which extends a considerable way to the east, they told me there were three or four islands in this bay, which must be very small, being marked in the sea charts only as rocks. On the thirteenth we came near the east end of the isle of Rhodes, where there was so great a current coming from the north east between the island and the continent, that the sea broke in the cabin windows, even in calm weather. As the plague was at the capital town of Rhodes we did not think proper to go to it<\/em>\u201d[11]<\/sup><\/a>. After visiting Rhodes, the Rev. Richard Po\u00adcocke took ship to Candia-Crete. He did not visit Lycia in his travels, his feet never touched Lycian soil and he provided a very odd,<\/strong> error-full map of Lycia in 1743 for his publication (Fig. 1<\/strong>), but he did visit Caria, and also Laodicea on the Lycus, but both are not in Lycia and both of which are recorded in Volume II, Part II of his Description of the East<\/em>.<\/p>\n Fig. 1.<\/strong> Detail of the map published with Richard Pocock\u2019s Description of the East of 1845[12]<\/strong><\/sup><\/a> showing Richard Pocock\u2019s understanding of the topography of Lycia, from ancient sources and observation of the Lycian coastline from the sea in 1739. The dotted line on the map indicates the course of the vessel from Alexandria in July 1739 to Rhodes and Crete, past the coast of Lycia<\/em>.<\/p>\n Nor in the 18th<\/sup> c. did any Society of Dilettanti Mission or any of its mem\u00adbers visit Lycia. Dr. Richard Chandler, James Stuart and William Edmund Pars, did not come to Lycia in 1764 on behalf of the Society of Dilettanti to record Lycia\u2019s ruins. It is a matter of careful reading of the published text, as it is the case that the illustrations of Lycian views that were engraved by William Bryne (1743-1805) in the Society of Dilettanti publication entitled, Antiqui\u00adties of Ionia<\/em>, London, 1797, Vol. II, with Plates LVI and LVII of the theatre at Myra, but which in error are labelled \u201cTheatre at Patara<\/em>\u201d de\u00adscribed in the List of Plates as: \u201cViews of Patara on the Coast of Lycia, shewing the remains of the Scene, the hill above the theatre is covered with sepulchral monu\u00adments<\/em>\u201d; the view of Telmessus entitled, \u201cTheatre at Macri<\/em>\u201d Plate LIX, de\u00adscribed in the List of Plates as: \u201cA View of the theatre at the extremity of the Sinus Glaucus, near to Macri or Telmessus, in the Province of Lycia<\/em>\u201d and Plate LVIII, the view entitled \u201cTheatre at Castel Rosso<\/em>\u201d, described in the List of Plates as: \u201cView of a Theatre in the Island Cistene, now called Castell Rosso, situated near the Southern point of Asia Minor<\/em>\u201d another labelling error, as the theatre recorded in this depiction is the theatre at Antiphellus-Ka\u015f on the coast facing the island of Cistene-Castel Rosso-Meis, were not made by, nor were these illustrations made for the Society of Dilettanti, nor were these views drawn for its publication. It is clearly stated that, \u201cThe Society are indebted to Sir Robert Ainslie for the two views of the Theatre at Patara <\/em>(= Myra), that of Castell Rosso <\/em>(= Antiphellus), and of Macri or Telmessus, which are taken from drawings by Mr. Myers <\/em>(sic.)[13]<\/sup><\/a>, in his possession, and finished under his inspection<\/em>\u201d[14]<\/sup><\/a>. There was no Dilettanti Mission to Lycia in the 18th<\/sup> century. The mis-descrip\u00adtion of the theatre at Myra as the theatre at Patara in the 1797 volume was pointed out in a letter from William Wilkins R.A. to W. R. Ham\u00adilton, Treasurer and Secretary of the Society from 1830, who wrote the general articles for Part III of Antiquities of Ionia, a letter which was noted in Volume V of Antiquities of Ionia, London, 1915, \u201cThe Roman theatre<\/em> (at Myra) was first illustrated in the second part of the Antiquities of Ionia, but under the title Patara. This fact is pointed out in a letter from Wilkins to Ham\u00adilton, and he was certainly right<\/em>\u201d[15]<\/sup><\/a>. It was not however pointed out in William Wilkins\u2019 letter, nor in the 1915 Volume V, that Plate LVII depicts the theatre of Antiphellus, it had also been misla\u00adbelled, it does not depict any theatre at Cistene-Castel Rosso-Meis.<\/p>\n It can also be noted that although the author gives as a reference for this passage, (Stuart 1769), listed in the bibliography as \u201cStuart, J. 1769. Ionian Antiquities, London<\/em>\u201d[16]<\/sup><\/a>, it is the case that the first edition of Antiqui\u00adties of Ionia was published in 1769 with permission of the Society of Dilet\u00adtanti, in London, by R. Chandler, M.A. F.S.A., N. Revett architect, and W. Pars artist; Stuart, J. was not an author of Antiquities of Ionia and, sec\u00adondly, there is not one single reference to Lycia in the volume, no account of visiting Lycia, so why has it been cited? The second reference for this passage, (Chandler 1775) is also in error, listed in the bibliography as, \u201cChandler, R. 1775. Travels in Asia Minor, London.<\/em>\u201d[17]<\/sup><\/a>, but Richard Chan\u00addler\u2019s Travels in Asia Minor An Account of a Tour made at the Expense of the Society of Dilettanti<\/em>, did not include any account of Lycia, he did not visit Lycia, so why is it cited? It is worth noting that William Pars work also ap\u00adpears in the Antiquities of Ionia, Part the First, published in 1812.<\/p>\n This same group of 18th<\/sup> c. travellers is recorded earlier, in 2010 by Dr. Holger Koock, in the book, Empires of the Imagination: Politics, War and the Arts in the British World, 1750-1850, <\/em>under the subtitle \u201cTriumph at Xan\u00adthus\u201d, <\/em>where one reads the lines: \u201cAncient Lycia was a sea-girt, moun\u00adtainous area in what today is western Turkey. Richard <\/em>Pococke (1704\u201365) had visited that region in 1739-40 as part of his tour of Greece and the Near East. In 1764, the classical scholar Dr Richard Chandler together with James Stuart and the painter William Edmund Pars explored parts of Greece and Asia Minor<\/em>. (sic.<\/em>) On<\/em> behalf of the Society of Dilettanti, and following Stuart and Revett in<\/em> setting new standards of precision in documentation and representation, they drew ruins and transcribed inscriptions. The resulting publications include the first part of Ionian Antiquities<\/em> (1769) and Chandler\u2019s Travels in Asia Minor<\/em> (2 vols, 1775)\u201d[18]<\/sup><\/a>. Richard Pococke did not visit Lycia[19]<\/sup><\/a>, as is pointed out above, but Dr Holger Koock does not state in this passage, a single sentence divided by a misplaced full stop, that Chan\u00addler, Stuart and Pars visited Lycia, but parts of Asia Minor.<\/p>\n It is also quite surprising to read that it was only in the second half of the 18th<\/sup> c. that Europeans began to become interested in, to \u201csearch for and tran\u00adscribe inscriptions<\/em>\u201d[20]<\/sup><\/a>. From the birth of scholarly research into in\u00adscrip\u00adtions in the early Italian Renaissance, largely in Latin on surviving Ro\u00adman mon\u00aduments and remains in Italy, in the attempt to find the correct orthogra\u00adphy of pre-Medieval Latin, to return to an earlier Pagan Roman authenticity in language, after the variants of Medieval Latin and canis la\u00adtinicus<\/em>, and to make some sense of the remaining evidence from the Ro\u00adman past, the se\u00adarch for and the transcription of ancient inscriptions had been undertaken. By scholars such as Fra. Giocondo da Verona (c. 1433-1515), as recorded by Giorgio Vasari (1511-1574): \u201cIn his youth Fra Gio\u00adcondo spent many years in Rome, giving his attention to the study of antiquities, and not of buildings only, but also of the ancient inscriptions that are in the tombs, and the other relics of antiquity, both in Rome itself and its neighbourhood, and in every part of Italy; and he collected all these inscriptions and memorials into a most beautiful book, which he sent as a present, according to the account of the citizens of Verona mentioned above, to the elder Lorenzo de\u2019 Medici, the Mag\u00adnificent, to whom, by rea\u00adson of the great friendliness and favor that he showed to all men of talent, both Fra Giocondo and Domizio Calderino, his companion and compatriot, were always most deeply devoted. Of this book Poliziano makes mention in his Mugellane, in which he uses various parts of it as authorities, calling Fra Giocondo a profound master in antiquities<\/em>\u201d,[21]<\/sup><\/a> as also by Giovanni Marca\u00adnova (1414-1467) in his Collectio antiquitatum<\/em>. How\u00adever, the earliest Euro\u00adpean collection of Greek and Latin inscriptions was recorded in manuscript in the Anonymous Einsiedlensis<\/em> of the IXth<\/sup> or Xth<\/sup> centuries.[22]<\/sup><\/a> Cristoforus Buondelmontis (1389-1430) recorded inscriptions from antiquity in his Liber Insularum Archipelagi<\/em>, and Ciriaco de Pizzicolli\/ Cyriacus of Ancona (1391-1453\/55) transcribed and studied both Latin and Greek inscriptions and of most of the nearly one thousand Greek and Latin inscriptions that he transcribed during his travels in Italy, Greece, the Medi\u00adter\u00adranean islands, and Asia Minor, his transcriptions and copies of them, his is today the only surviving record. The first major collection of the Latin epigram\u00admata of Rome was collected by Poggio Bracciolini in manuscript (Vat. Lat. 9152) c. 1450 and the first corpus of Latin inscriptions was pub\u00adlished in 1505 by Conrad Peutinger of Augsburg, entitled, Romanae Vetusta\u00adtis Frag\u00admenta in Augusta Vindelicorum et eius dioecesi, <\/em>printed in a type cast to print in replica the antique Roman letters[23]<\/sup><\/a>. Epigrammata Urbis<\/em>, printed by Giacomo Mazzocchi in April 1521, a published a corpus of the inscriptions of Rome, including in part the late 15th<\/sup> c. collection recorded in Mss. by Francesco Albertini and this was followed by the publication of a Europe wide corpus of inscriptions compiled by Petrus Apianus-Peter Apian (1495-1552) and Bartholomaeus Amantius, entitled, Inscriptiones Sacrosanctae Vetustatis <\/em>published in Ingolstadt in 1534. These were followed by Janus Gruter\u2019s (1560-1627) Inscriptiones Antiquae Totis Orbus Romani<\/em> in two volumes, Heidelburg, 1602-3, republished in 1616 and revised in 1707, and Marmora Arundelina<\/em>, of 29 Greek and 10 Latin and 4 Hebrew inscriptions, including the so called \u201cParian Chronicle<\/em>\u201d a 93 line Greek inscription on mar\u00adble recording an account of Hellenic history, purchased by William Petty, the agent of the Earl of Arundel in Izmir 1626,\u00a0 which were edited by J. Seldon, published in Oxford in 1628. For more than 800 years before the first Dilettanti Mission to Ionia in 1764, Europeans had searched for, collect\u00aded, recorded, studied and displayed discovered Greek and Latin epigram\u00admata.<\/p>\n The history of this European research in Lycia continues: \u201cIn 1776, the Comte de Choiseul-Gouffier, the future French Ambassador to the Ottoman Empire, accompanied the Marquis de Chabert on a voyage around the Ae\u00adge\u00adan shores, which took in the Lycian coast, to chart a mathematically rig\u00adorous representation of the Mediterranean (Choiseul-Gouffier 1782)\u201d<\/em>[24]<\/sup><\/a>. If this was in fact the case, and given that French maps of the eastern Medi\u00adter\u00adranean were captured over the course of the Napoleonic wars, why would the British Admiralty charge Captain Francis Beaufort with the task of mapping this Lycian coastline again in 1811 and 1812? It is rather the case that the French hydrographic survey of 1776 only charted the North-West\u00adern corner of the Lycian coastline, only the Gulf of Macry and Macri-Telmes\u00adsus-Fethiye eastwards to the mouth of the Xanthus River, but the rest of the Lycian coastline was uncharted in 1776 and remained uncharted until 1811. The relatively accurate French chart of the Aegean and the west coast of Anatolia of 1776 was published three times in Maria Gabriel Flor\u00adent August, Comte de Choiseul-Gouffier\u2019s, \u2018Voyage Pittoresque de la Gr\u00e8ce, dans le Troade, les iles de l\u2019Archipel et sur le cotes de l\u2019Asie Mineure<\/em>\u2019, Tome 1, Paris, 1782, entitled, Carte de la Gr\u00e8ce modern<\/em>[25]<\/sup><\/a>,<\/em> Carte de la Grece An\u00adcienne <\/em>(detail Fig. 2.<\/strong>)[26]<\/sup><\/a>, showing the Glaucus Sinus-Gulf of Fethiye, a chart that stops north of the mouth of the Xanthus-Il Scamandro-Esen River, to\u00adgether with, D\u00e9taill\u00e9e de la Route de I\u2019Auteur Depuis le Golfe de Macri, jusqu\u2019au M\u00e9andre<\/em>[27]<\/sup><\/a>,<\/em> and a Plan du golfe de Macri anciennement Glaucus Sinus<\/em>, in Chapter VII[28]<\/sup><\/a>. The Lycian coastline extending to its east remaining uncharted by hydrographic survey. The location of the cities of Xanthus and Pinara, possibly from classical authorities combined with local infor\u00admation collected in 1776, are also marked in their approximate respective positions.<\/p>\n Fig. 2<\/strong>. Detail from the Carte de la Grece Ancienne in Comte de Choiseul-Gouffier\u2019s, \u2018Voyage Pittoresque\u2026\u201d of 1782[29]<\/strong><\/sup><\/a>, showing the area of coastal Lycia mapped in 1776.<\/em><\/p>\n The vision of Joseph Bernard, the Marquis de Chabert, to accurately chart through hydrographic survey the entire Mediterranean for the King of France, due to the French revolution followed by years of warfare, re\u00admained incomplete and the first scientifically accurate chart of the Mediterranean was published in London in 1826 or 1827, \u201cA New Chart of the Mediterra\u00adnean Sea Comprehending the Coasts from Cape St. Mary: in Portugal to Constantinopel; and from Rabat, In Africa, to Alexandretto or Is\u00adkenderoon, in Asia, &c. Reduced from the late Spanish and French charts ma\u00adde by Order of the respective governments. With the Recent Surveys of Capt. Wm. Hy. Symth, R. N., Capt. F. Beaufort, R. N. and other British Officers<\/em>\u201d. It was drawn up by Capt. W. H. Symth and R. H. Laurie.<\/p>\n Spratt and Forbes wrote in their introduction to their Travels published in 1847: \u201cbefore Captain Beaufort\u2019s visit, Colonel Leake, in 1800, had been turned aside from this interesting province by fever. He had, however, visited and determined Antiphellus. He had also examined Telmessus, and large ru\u00adins at Kakava, either Aperlae, or one of the cities called Cyanae<\/em>\u201d[30]<\/sup><\/a>. And the author, citing from Spratt and Forbes writes \u201cLt. Col. William Mar\u00adtin Leake (1777-1860), who was also a topographer, visited Telmessos, Antiphellos and the Kekova region in 1800 before being turned back by fever\u201d<\/em>[31]<\/sup><\/a>. <\/em>However, Leake himself writes, \u201cI was detained at Alaya <\/em>(Alanya) by illness; and while General Koehler, with his two remaining companions pursued their journey overland to Constantinople, I proceeded thither by sea, visiting the most remarkable places on the coast,..\u201d<\/em>[32]<\/sup><\/a>.<\/em> He was not turn\u00aded back by fever from the exploration of Lycia. He returned to Constantino\u00adple by sea, visiting some of the sites of coastal Lycia because it was quicker and more comfortable than travelling with General Koehler overland in a con\u00addition weakened by fever-malaria, and because it enabled two routes to be investigated, rather than one. He further wrote: \u201cOf those places which I visited on the coast and which deserve to be more thoroughly de\u00adscribed than they have yet been, the most remarkable are, 1. The ruins of a large city, with a noble theatre, at Kakava, in a fine harbour, formed by a range of rocky islands. \u2026 3. Antiphel\u00adlus, on the mainland, opposite Castel Rosso. Here I found a small theatre nearly complete, the remains of several public buildings and private houses, together with catacombs, and a great number of sarcophagi, some of which are very large and magnificent. The great\u00ader part have inscriptions, few of which are legible. In two or three, however, I read the name of the city An\u00adtiphellus. 4. Telmissus, at M\u00e9i, the port of Makri, at the bottom of the gulf anciently called Glacus. The theatre, and the porticoes and sepulchral cham\u00adbers, excavated in the rocks at this place, are some of the most remarkable remains of antiquity in Asia Minor<\/em>\u201d[33]<\/sup><\/a>. From which it seems evident that he visited Myra, described as, \u201cThe ruins of a large city, with a noble theatre, at Kakava, in a fine harbour, formed by a range of rocky islands<\/em>\u201d, rather than as Spratt and Forbes state, \u201ceither Aperlae, or one of the cities called Cy\u00adanae<\/em>\u201d. Hodos states Leake vis\u00adited \u201cthe Kekova region\u201d. <\/em>If, rather than citing from Spratt and Forbes, Leake\u2019s own account had been read, the reference to \u201ca large city with a noble theatre<\/em>\u201d would probably have identified the place he visited as being Myra, as Aperlae has no theatre and the miniature theatre in the castle at Simena-Kale would not have been described by Leake as, \u201ca noble theatre<\/em>\u201d. On a point of detail, W. M. Leake held the rank of Captain in 1800 and was a member of a military mission when he visited coastal Lycia, not Colonel as stated by Spratt and Forbes, nor, Lt. Col., as is implicit in T. Hodos\u2019s sentence. He was awarded a brevet rank of Lt. Col. in 1813[34]<\/sup><\/a> for service in Ottoman territory from 1799 onwards, and on the title-page of his book, Journal of a tour in Asia Minor, with comparative remarks on the ancient and modern geography of that country<\/em>, he is named, William Martin Leake, FRS, etc., not with his military rank, but as a Fellow of the Royal Society, etc.<\/p>\n Unfortunately the author, quoting accurately from Spratt and Forbes who wrote, \u201cMr. Hamilton, indeed, prepared to explore the country, but was prevented by rumours of plague<\/em>\u201d [35]<\/a><\/sup>, writes, without quotation marks, \u201cMr Hamilton, indeed, prepared to explore the country but was prevented by rumours of plague<\/em>\u201d. However, firstly, Hamilton did not state he prepared to explore Lycia. But rather, that he recorded he wanted to visit Adalia-Antalya and the region, as to if that included the exploration of Lycia, as well as Pamphylia, in which he did express an interest[36]<\/sup><\/a>, seems rather un\u00adclear. Secondly, William R. Hamilton was not prevented from exploring the Antalya region because of \u201crumours of plague<\/em>\u201d. These were not simply \u201crumours of plague<\/em>\u201d but \u201caccounts<\/em>\u201d of the plague outbreak at Adalia-An\u00adtalya that Hamil\u00adton received near Yalva\u00e7 on Friday, August 18th<\/sup>, 1836. He writes, \u201cThe ac\u00adcounts which I received of the state of the country towards the sea coast and Adalia<\/em> (Antalya) were not more satisfactory: the plague was raging violently throughout the whole district<\/em>\u201d
\nPage:<\/strong> 426
\nPublication Date:<\/strong>\u00a02015
\nLocation:<\/strong> Berlin\/Boston
\nPublisher: \u00a0<\/strong>Walter de Gruyter<\/p>\n
\nDOI<\/strong>:\u00a010.20480\/lbr.2017029
\nReceived Date<\/strong>: 04.10.2017 |\u00a0Kabul Tarihi<\/strong>: 25.10.2017
\nOnline Publication Date<\/strong>: 14.11.2017
\nCopyright \u00a9 Journal of Book Notices, Reviews and Translations, 2017<\/p>\n\u00a0\u00a0Get PDF<\/strong><\/a><\/p>\n\u00a0<\/strong>\u00a0View PDF<\/strong><\/a><\/p>\n\u00a0\u00a0<\/a>Citation<\/a>
\n<\/b><\/p>\n