GREEKCOLONISATIONNew Data, Current ApproachesProceedings of the Scientific Meeting held in Thessaloniki (6 February 2015)

37

The Dorian Colony of Chersonesos in Taurica: historical and Economic Aspects of the Development in the hellenistic Period

Dr Elena KleninaHead of Research Department, National Preserve “Chersonesos of Taurica”, Sevastopol, UkraineVisiting Professor, Adam Mieckiewicz University,Poznan, Poland

ΠΕΡΙΛΗΨΗΗ δωρική αποικία της Ταυρικής Χερσονήσου. Ιστορικές και οικονομικές πτυχές της ανάπτυξης κατά την ελληνιστική περίοδο

Η Χερσόνησος Ταυρική, πρώην δωρική αποικία στο νοτιοδυτικό τμήμα της Κριμαϊκής χερσονήσου, ιδρύθηκε από Έλληνες αποίκους της Ηράκλειας Ποντικής το 422/421 π.Χ.

Η Χερσόνησος, η οποία ξεκίνησε ως μία μικρή ελληνική αποικία, μετατράπηκε ήδη από τον 4ο αιώνα π.Χ. σε ένα μεγάλο οικονομικό κέντρο που κάλυπτε ολόκληρο το δυτικό τμήμα της Κριμαϊκής χερσονήσου. Την περίοδο που μεσολάβησε ανάμεσα στα τέλη του 4ου και στον 3ο αιώνα π.Χ. η μητρόπολη της Χερσονήσου αναπτύχθηκε με ταχείς ρυθμούς.

Κατά τον 3ο αιώνα π.Χ. η πόλη περιελάμβανε τρία διαδοχικά επίπεδα. Ολόκληρη η επικράτειά της, που περιβαλλόταν από αμυντικά τείχη, ήταν διαιρεμένη σε ορθογώνια τμή-ματα διαστάσεων 24,20/27,75 x 65,00 μ. (74/85 x 199 δωρικοί πόδες) ή 51,00 x 53,90 μ. (156 x 165 δωρικοί πόδες). Η αγροτική γη που περιέβαλλε τη Χερσόνησο (χώρα) ήταν διαμοι-ρασμένη σε κλήρους που ανήκαν στους πολίτες.

Στα τέλη του 4ου αιώνα π.Χ. η ευρύτερη περιοχή της αγροτικής ενδοχώρας (η χώρα) πήρε την τελική της μορφή, καθώς διαιρέθηκε σε περισσότερους από 440 κλήρους των 26,4 και 17,6 εκταρίων, καθένας από τους οποίους περιβαλλόταν από τείχος και διαιρείτο σε μικρότερα τμήματα των 4,4 εκταρίων. Κατά τα ελληνιστικά χρόνια η Χερσόνησος ήταν από τους κύριους παραγωγούς και προμηθευτές οίνου στη δυτική Κριμαία. Στα τέλη του 4ου αιώνα π.Χ. ξεκίνησε στην περιοχή και η κατασκευή αμφορέων για τη μεταφορά του οίνου.

Ταυτόχρονα, στα τέλη του 4ου και στις αρχές του 3ου αιώνα π.Χ. καλλιεργήθηκαν εντατικά και οι εκτάσεις στο βορειοδυτικό τμήμα της Κριμαίας. Αυτή η οικονομική εξέλιξη είχε ως αποτέλεσμα να προσφέρονται στους κατοίκους της πόλης βασικά είδη διατροφής. Επιπλέον, οι βασικοί αγοραστές του οίνου της Χερσονήσου ήταν οι αρχαίες πόλεις στα βό-ρεια παράλια της Μαύρης Θάλασσας, αλλά και όσοι κατοικούσαν στις στέπες και στα δάση της Σκυθίας. Το διαμετακομιστικό εμπόριο άρχισε να ανθεί ενισχύοντας την οικονομική ανάπτυξη της πόλης.

Το τελευταίο τέταρτο του 2ου αιώνα π.Χ. ο συνεχής ανταγωνισμός με τη Σκυθία κατέ-ληξε σε έναν βίαιο πόλεμο, που είχε ως αποτέλεσμα η Χερσόνησος να παραχωρήσει στους Σκύθες τα εδάφη της στη βορειοδυτική Κριμαία και να τεθεί υπό την εξουσία του βασιλιά του Πόντου Μιθριδάτη ΣΤ΄ Ευπάτορος.

ELENA KLENINA

38

The study of antiquities in the Crimea spans more than 185 years of history. The ruins of several ancient cities attracted the attention of researchers in the late 18th century. Cher-sonesos occupies a special place in the investigations of the 19th century due to the per-fectly preserved archaeological sites and legends related to the process of the adoption of Christianity by Vladimir I the Great. At present, investigations focus on the architecture of the churches and residential buildings dating back to the 6th-14th centuries, while informa-tion about the topography of the Ancient Chersonesos may be found principally in studies by earlier authors. Most recent publications tend to draw more general conclusions from the collected data and to establish patterns concerning the expansion of the territory of the city during antiquity.1

Initially it was thought that the city held the entire territory of the “Heraclean” peninsula, where numerous buildings and roads were traced (fig. 1). Later it turned out that the city occupied a small area of about 30 hectares between the “Quarantine” and “Sand” bays. The agricultural area of Chersonesos occupied the whole “Heraclean” peninsula (fig. 2).

The Dorian Greek city of Chersonesos, situated in the southwestern part of the Crimean Peninsula on the shore of “Quarantine” bay, was founded in 422/421 BC2 at the site of an earlier Greek settlement of the late 6th century BC. Economic interests of the mercantile and manufacturing elite of Heraclea Pontica and intersocial tensions were the motives for the foundation of Chersonesos. The Greeks selected a sheltered harbour situated at a cross-roads of maritime routes connecting colonies on the northwest coast of the Black Sea with the Eastern Crimea and South Pontos.

A text attributed to Pseudo-Scymnus,3 tells that people from Heraclea and the island of Delos jointly founded the city, following a prophecy by an oracle. Most researchers maintain the traditional view about the time of foundation of Chersonesos in Taurica.4 There is also a view that the residents of Heraclea Pontica founded the colony not with the inhabitants of Delos, but with the residents of Delion city (Δήλιον) in Boeotia around 423 BC.5

M.I. Zolotarev and Yu.G. Vinogradov suggested a new date of foundation of Chersonesos in Taurica, i.e. 528/527 BC.6 An insignificant amount of Archaic pottery of the late 6th and the first part of the 5th centuries BC was found in the northeastern, northern and central part of the city7 (fig. 3). The earliest burials at the Chersonesos necropolis appeared at the end of the 6th and the first half of the 5th centuries BC. There were ten graves, most of them with children’s remains, dated to the Archaic Period8 (fig. 4). According to some researchers, the fact of the existence of the polis is confirmed by the presence of fragments of vessels of the 5th century BC with graffiti inscriptions, which can be interpreted as ostraca9 (fig. 5). Nevertheless, an overwhelming majority of scientists believe that these graffiti were dedica-tory and of private nature and that they were drawn on the vessels in the 4th century BC10. These data do not contradict the fact that this place served as an emporium or anchorage

1 Marchenko 1998, 80-82; 1999, 101-106; Nikolaenko 1999, Nikolaenko 2001; Bujskich - Zolotarev 2001, 111-132; Zolotarev 2003, 603-644; Bujskich 2007, 58-77.

2 Tyumenev 1938, 245-275; Zolotarev 2005, 13-44.3 Diller 1952, 826-8314 Zolotarev 2005, 13-44; Kutaysov 2013, 178.5 Dem’yanchuk 2012, 29-33.6 Vinogradov - Zolotarev 1998, 36-44.7 Zedgenidze 1979, 27; Zolotarev 1993; Zolotarev 2003, 635-639; Vdovichenko - Ryzov - Zhestkova 2012, 19-

24; Shevchenko 2014, 61-68.8 Monachov - Abrosimov 1993, 140-141.9 Vinogradov - Zolotarev 1998, 37-38.10 Solomonik 1976, 121-124; Turovskij 1997, 98-100.

39

THE DORIAN COLONY OF CHERSONESOS IN TAuRICA: HISTORICAL AND ECONOMIC ASPECTS OF THE DEVELOPMENT IN THE HELLENISTIC PERIOD

for Ionian sailors for approximately 100 years before the foundation of Chersonesos. On the territory of the city no objects of the Archaic Period have remained besides fragments of pottery and a few terracottas.

The recent excavations on the isthmus of the Mayachny Peninsula have revealed another Archaic Greek settlement, contemporary with early Chersonesos. Early settlements were lo-cated also in the Berman Ravine and in the upper part of an elevated plain above the western shore of Streletskaya Bay.11

In the last quarter of the 5th century BC, the colonists from Heraclea Pontica founded the settlement that occupied the eastern part of the cape and the northeastern slope of the terrace along the shore of “Quarantine” bay, where the Greeks moored their ships (fig. 6). In the late 5th-early 4th centuries BC, a defensive wall was built around the city. At the beginning, the city was about 12 hectares in area. It was established in a carefully selected lo-cation with a favourable topography: the area chosen for sacral and residential buildings was on a hill (in the northeastern section), and the commercial district and the port (the section of the port) were at its foot. While virtually no archeological data on the layout of the city in the Classical Period are available, it may be assumed that the ancient architects followed the general principles of the arrangement of a Greek polis, with an acropolis and the area around it. The remnants of buildings in the northeastern section turned out to be residential houses with their foundations inserted into rock. unfortunately, it is not possible to determine the exact nature of the urban buildings in Chersonesos in the Classical Times, because of the intensive construction activity during later periods. In this author’s opinion, the layout of the blocks of houses changed due to objective reasons resulting from the topography of the early section.12

The polis had generally developed by 390-380 BC. It was about the time that Chersone-sos started minting its own coins.13 Initially Chersonesos had a democratic administrative system, but around the mid-4th century BC it was replaced by an oligarchic regime.

Chersonesos’ economy was based on agriculture. Only citizens of the polis had rights to land ownership. At first they owned parcels of the land just outside the walls of the city and near fortified settlements on the isthmus of the Mayachny Peninsula and the Berman Ravine (fig. 7). On the Mayachny Peninsula a system of fortifications, land parcels and rural houses appeared in the late first-early second quarters of the 4th century BC. The fortification of the isthmus ensured that it functioned simultaneously as a fortress, a settlement and an ag-ricultural area (fig. 8). The fortress ceased to exist as a result of military activities in the late 4th century BC.14

G.M. Nikolaenko identified the traces of the early land parcelling system around the set-tlement in the “Quarantine” Ravine15 (fig. 7). They reveal a network of small plots adjoining the settlement on its northwest and southwest sides, as well as evidence of limestone quarries on the slopes of the “Quarantine” Ravine. Plotting of boundary roads and fences visible on the aerial photographs points to land parcels measuring 50 x 50 metres or 2 plaetra, 100 x 50 metres or 4 plaetra, 100 x 100 metres or 8 plaetra and 150 x 100 metres or 12 plaetra.16

Chersonesos was also a trading centre that exported both locally produced handicrafts and goods imported from other Greek cities. Heraclea Pontica was among the most import-

11 Nikolaenko 2006, 155-156.12 Klenina 2008, 44513 Turovskij 1997a, 42.14 Nikolaenko 2006, 165.15 Nikolaenko 1999, 27-28.16 Nikolaenko 1999, 29.

ELENA KLENINA

40

ant trading partners of the city, especially in its early phases. Chersonesos also maintained trade relations with the ancient centres in the Pontic region (Sinope) and the Eastern Med-iterranean (Athens, Chios, Thasos, Mende, Peparethos, Knidos).17 It exported grain, fish, and especially salt. In exchange Chersonesos imported wine, olive oil, black-glaze and other pot-tery, terracottas, marble statues, and various luxury commodities.

In the Early Hellenistic Period, the layout of Chersonesos assumed its complete form, when the city was some 29 hectares in area (fig. 9). The fortifications of the town bear wit-ness to a high level of military engineering skills and thorough planning in erecting each cur-tain wall and tower and indicate that the complex terrain of the cape was taken into account. The main territory of the city was located on three terraces placed one above another. The lowest level (some 0-2 metres above sea level) was at the “Quarantine” or “Chersonesos” bay, in the southwestern part of the city. Above it, there was a terrace of the northwestern section of the city (10-12 metres above sea level), where buildings were put up as early as the first period of the history of Chersonesos. Finally, the northeastern part of the city joined the highest terrace through the narrow watershed between two gently sloping ridges, one of which (“the Theatre Ridge”) descends southward, and the other goes down to the northern shore. The entire area within the city walls was divided into rectangular blocks. In allocating land for the Chersonesos development, architects used the Hippodamean system. This regu-lar grid of blocks hinges on two baselines, intersecting in the centre of the city. The main axis of the grid was the first longitudinal street, which was traced along the ridge of the watershed from the northeast to the southwest, rising gently toward the latter direction. The blocks of houses on the two sides of the street had the dimensions of 24.20 x 65 metres, or 74 x 199 Doric feet. On the northern shore, the division into blocks took the shape of the shore into account, and thus these had a smaller length of 51-53.9 metres (156-165 Doric feet). In all the sections of the city, the blocks had a fixed width of between 24.20 and 26.80 metres (re-spectively 74 and 82 Doric feet). Public and residential buildings with peristylar courts have been identified in blocks which adjoin the main axis of the city, insofar as the blocks could fit such buildings.18 Streets were laid according to the lie of the land and a wind rose, and divided the territory of the city into rectangular blocks. Bearing in mind that northwesterly and northeasterly moisture-bringing winds, cold and stormy weather prevail on the peninsula in autumn and winter, the city’s builders oriented the thoroughfares in such a way that the winds could penetrate only into narrow cross streets, where they would soon subside.19

Many public buildings were constructed during this period. The principal centre of public political and commercial activity in a Greek city was certainly its agora. Most specialists on Chersonesos subscribe to the established opinion that the agora in that city was located at the site of the 19th-century cathedral of St. Vladimir, and that its layout was regular.20 Agorae of a regular layout are characteristic of cities established or flourishing in the Hellenistic Era.21 Conversely, the exploration of the area of the cathedral of St. Vladimir has not yielded any archeological material demonstrating that this essential public facility was located there.22 In any discussion on the location of the agora in Chersonesos, the tradition of the topographical position of this facility in Greek cities must be taken into account. As a rule, it was set up in the geographical centre of the city, in a site that was easily accessible from all directions.

17 Monachov 1999, 315, 418-420.18 Klenina 2008, 445-446.19 Marchenko 1997, 6420 Bujskich - Zolotarev 2001, 126.21 Müller-Wiener 2004, 172.22 Biernacki - Klenina 2006, 219-220.

41

THE DORIAN COLONY OF CHERSONESOS IN TAuRICA: HISTORICAL AND ECONOMIC ASPECTS OF THE DEVELOPMENT IN THE HELLENISTIC PERIOD

unlike in big Greek cities, where the central marketplace took up a substantial area (e.g. 250 x 230 metres in Pella or 150 x 125 metres in Philippoi), it must have been much smaller in Chersonesos. under the ideal spatial design of a city, the agora was assumed to take up an area of 171.36 x 65.30 metres.23 Obviously, I understand clearly that both hypotheses are equally plausible, and that only an archaeological excavation may settle this point. In 2008, the joint Polish-ukrainian International Interdisciplinary Archaeological Expedition headed by Dr A.B. Biernacki (Adam Mickiewicz university in Poznan, Poland) and Dr E. Klenina (Na-tional Preserve “Chersonesos of Taurica”) conducted the excavation on the territory to the west of the Ancient Theatre, and northwest of the 1st longitudinal street. In the 1930s, S.F. Strzheleckij and G.B. Belov also proposed the hypothesis that it was in this area that the marketplace was located.24 However, the hypothesis of the existence of the agora in this place was not confirmed (fig. 10). A new place of exploration was selected southwards to-wards the ruins of the theatre. In this part of town, the central square of the ancient city – the agora – was probably located. During the excavations in the years 2010-2013 we uncovered the remains of the agora in block 45 (fig. 11). The agora took up a considerably smaller area of 130.7 x 65.35 metres (400 x 200 Doric feet). Its area was surrounded by walls on three sides and opened towards the theatre and the south gate. The fragment of the σήκωμα or mensa pondiraria was found during the research (fig. 12).

Another extant important public structure of Chersonesos is the theatre. This is the only facility of this type on the northern coast of the Black Sea. It was erected at the turn of the 3rd century BC on the slope of the so-called “Theatre Ridge”, which, prior to the west-ward expansion of the city, was outside the defensive walls, at the site of the necropolis and the Nymphaeum.25 To build the orchestra, the ground was levelled at the foot of the slope (fig. 13/1). Throughout the existence of the theatre (from the end of the 4th century BC to the end of the 4th century AD), the location of the orchestra did not change. Although the theatre was substantially demolished in the Byzantine Period, the lower part of the central section, with stairways on both ends, is partly extant and therefore one may venture a recon-struction of the theatre. In the Hellenistic Period, the theatre consisted of two tiers, divided into seventeen sections by radial stairs of a width of 0.80 metres. Each row of seats was 0.75 metres wide and approximately 0.30 metres high. In the Hellenistic Period, the theatre could hold 3,000 spectators or a maximum of some 3,500 spectators26 (fig. 13/2-4).

The preserved northeastern part of the stylobate of the proscenium bears traces of inci-sions made to accommodate four attached columns. The explorer suggested a reconstruc-tion of the proscenium with sixteen attached columns of the Doric order. There were two cellars under the stage. One was in the southwest (at the left-hand parodos a lighting window preserved in situ and a threshold stone feature). In this process, the first three or four rows of seats were pulled down and the Hellenistic parodoi were walled up; the entrances to the theatre were now closer to the stage. In Roman Times, the theatre also served as an arena for gladiatorial contests and fights with savage animals. During such shows, the spectators were protected by a grille fastened to the barrier of the theatre, as evidenced by the recesses cut out for the poles supporting the grille. In the 4th century AD, after the Christianisation of the city, the theatre was used as a quarry, and afterwards the cruciform church and residential buildings were erected on its ruins.27

23 Bujskich - Zolotarev 2001, 128, fig. 9; Bujskich 2008, 175-179.24 Klenina 2008, 447, fig. 1, 3.25 Zedgenidze - Savelja 1981, 4-5; Dombrovskij 1997, 85.26 Dombrovskij 1997, 87-88; Rozpędowski 2015, in print.27 Klenina 2008, 448.

ELENA KLENINA

42

It is now obvious that a temple complex or temenos existed in the northeastern section of Chersonesos, of a total area of 100 x 30/40 metres.28 The so-called main street led directly to the temenos. All ancient buildings at this site were pulled down during the construction of the early-Christian Byzantine basilica. The only remnants of the original structures on this plot of land are the limestone paving leading to the façade of the temple, as evidenced by the recesses in the rock cut out for its foundations, the stylobate of the minor temple and the foundations of the main altar. The central temple of the sacral complex apparently had a façade with a six-column portico of the Doric order. In the western part of the square, the remains of stylobates with width along the main façade of about 4.8 metres and with reconstructed length of about 10.5 metres were uncovered.29 The order of the temple was reconstructed on the basis of column socles of Ionian order which were uncovered there. In the course of the excavation works, entablements inscribed with dedications to the goddess Athena Parthenos were identified at this site. The entire complex of the sacral buildings of the temenos is dated to the first half of the 3rd century BC.30

All the other uncovered buildings of the Hellenistic Times are residential buildings. Two types of residential buildings have been encountered in Chersonesos: houses with pastades and houses with peristyle courts. Houses of the first type were discovered on a plain on the northern shore of Chersonesos (fig. 14/5-6). In one block of houses there are two buildings with a surface area of, respectively, 146.64 and 149 square metres. In the neighbouring block, in an area of about 24 x 27 metres, four houses were identified. In another block, three houses were unearthed in an area of 23.20 x 26.20 metres; one of these has an untypical layout, extending along a transversal street. Residential buildings with pastades were espe-cially common in Olynthos (Macedonia) in the Hellenistic Period.31

The other type of residential houses is large buildings with inner peristyle courts. One house of this type with a surface area of approximately 661 square metres was excavated on the northern shore (fig. 14/1). unfortunately, the bad condition of preservation does not allow us to determine the purposes of most interior rooms. The floor is only preserved in one room; it is decorated with a pebble mosaic and dates back to the first half of the 3rd century BC32 (fig. 13/6). This room was apparently an andron.

Most of the houses with peristyle courts were located in the blocks between the main street and the first longitudinal street, as well as in the area of the theatre. One of them was uncovered at the eastern temenos in block 2 (fig. 14/2). It was built on a plot of a size of approximately 634 square metres (26.20 x 24.20 metres). It was erected in the late 4th-ear-ly 3rd centuries BC. Another residential house with a peristyle court was identified to the north of the ancient theatre; its northwestern side faced the main street (fig. 14/3). The total surface area of the structure is approximately 649 square metres (26.80 x 24.20 metres).33 The remnants of an ancient residential building were discovered in block 55 in the western section of Chersonesos (fig. 13/5, 14/4). This structure took up an area of 26.80 x 26.80 metres (718 square metres), being the largest residential house uncovered in Chersonesos. unfortunately, the structures of the house which were above the ground were entirely de-stroyed when a church was erected at its site in Byzantine Times. On the basis of a study of the archaeological material, the house may not have been built earlier than at the turn of the 4th century BC.34

28 Bujskich 2008, 171-174.29 Zolotarev 2003, 619.30 Zolotarev - Bujskich 1994, 81-88.31 Biernacki - Klenina 2010, 390.32 Salzmann 1982, 89.33 Biernacki - Klenina 2010, 390.34 Biernacki - Klenina 2010, 391.

43

THE DORIAN COLONY OF CHERSONESOS IN TAuRICA: HISTORICAL AND ECONOMIC ASPECTS OF THE DEVELOPMENT IN THE HELLENISTIC PERIOD

The expansion of the city occurred due to population increase and growth of the econo-my. Perhaps some residents moved to Chersonesos from Heraclea Pontica, which was going through a new spate of social conflicts at that time. It is also possible that the increase in population resulted from a “demographic explosion”.35

Population growth stimulated the development of new agricultural areas in the mid-4th century BC. In this period, Chersonesos began to implement a model of land arrangement in the chora that was a combination of parcelled and non-allotted plots. As a result, the axial roads divided the area to be parcelled into a certain number of plots measuring 26.4 hect-ares and 17.6 hectares, which were further subdivided into fields of 4.4 hectares (fig. 15). The entire chora of Chersonesos is characterised by regularity in land parcelling. Each square of 4.4 hectares was divided into fields of sides equal to 52.5 metres (1/4 stade) and 105 me-tres (1/2 stade).36 The direction of the trenching walls of vineyards, which later occupied the parcelled territory, can be seen in the fields. Parts of the early chora fitted well into the new system of land parcelling, which preserved some roads that had played an important role in the life of the territory’s population. Buildings fortified with towers and farmsteads were erected in the parcelled area (fig. 16). In the majority of farms, coins of Chersonesos, dating to 350-330 BC and 330-320 BC, were found. There is evidence on the chora of the exis-tence of 2,360-2,380 fields of the Hellenistic Period, each measuring 4.4 hectares, in which about 200 different structures have been identified.

As early as the late 5th-early 4th centuries BC, along with the colonisation of the Hera-clean Peninsula, inhabitants of Chersonesos reached the Northwest Crimea and built forti-fied settlements. By that time, the Ionian Greeks from Olbia had already colonised a part of the region and founded the city of Kerkinitis (modern Yevpatoria) in the 6th century BC.37 Chersonesos and its metropolis, Heraclea Pontica, showed particular interest in the region, not just from the standpoint of trade but because the littoral zone of the Northwest Crimea had fertile red soils, good for growing grapes. Chersonesos took advantage of the sparse occupation of the region and, by the mid-4th century BC, it built there a number of small fortresses, fortified stations and settlements and proceeded with the regular parcelling of land38 (fig. 17).

Whereas viticulture and wine-making dominated the economy on the Heraclean Penin-sula, the population of the Northwest Crimea grew both grapes and wheat.39 Large yields of these crops raised their commercial value, which in turn stimulated the development of handicraft production and trade. The existence of favourable conditions for the export of local produce from Chersonesos led in turn to an increased minting of its own coinage and an increased circulation of coins from other Hellenistic centres, from the second half of the 4th century BC.

In the third quarter of the 4th century BC, Chersonesian potters started to produce the amphorae of the IA, variants 1 and 2.40 Craftsmen from Chersonesos also produced terra-cottas, as well as tableware and tiles, which were both used in the domestic life of the citi-zens and exported to small rural settlements of the Northwestern Crimea and other ancient Greek cities on the north coast of the Euxine Pontos.

During the last quarter of the 4th and the beginning of the 3rd centuries BC, significant

35 Zolotarev 2003, 611.36 Nikolaenko 2006, 160.37 Kutaysov 2013, 168.38 Kutaysov 2006, 141-150; Kutaysov 2013, 34-37, 183-185.39 Nikolaenko 2006, 160-171; Kutaysov 2006, 146.40 Monachov 1989, 42-47.

ELENA KLENINA

44

changes in the directions and dynamics of economic relations in the northern Black Sea coast took place. Commodity circulation of Chersonesos greatly increased. The city carried out the large-scale supply of wine in the Black Sea region. Chersonesian potters produced a significant amount of the amphora types: pithos-shaped amphorae variants IA-3, IA-4, IБ, IB, IГ and conical amphorae variants II-A, II-B, III-A, III-B.41

The Bosporan Kingdom, which was striving to take the lead in the external trade among Greek cities in the Peninsula of Tauris, was a major commercial rival of Chersonesos. In spite of the economic rise of Chersonesos, it yielded to the Bosporos in terms of economic power and political influence. This motivated Chersonesos to seek alliance with the Bosporan King-dom, which contracted during the reign of Eumelus. Mutual interests in the struggle against the Scythians and in establishing trade with the barbarians as well as the realisation of the fact that the states could play a more important role in “world” politics if they joined their forces were the principal reasons for friendly relations between them.

In the last quarter of the 4th-early 3rd centuries BC, Sinope became the main trade part-ner of the Black Sea cities. The deliveries of wine were carried out in amphorae of several types (IE, II-B, II-C, II-D, II-E).42 Thasos maintained its position in the market of the Black Sea basin and continued to be a reliable trading partner. Trade with Rhodes and Knidos rose.43

In the mid-4th century BC certain changes occurred in the political regime in Chersone-sos. From 350 to 330 BC an oligarchic system of government prevailed. This was connected with an influx of new colonists, in response to which descendants of the first settlers estab-lished an oligarchy in order to secure their rights and protect their privileges as landowners. The fundamental principles of the body politic were written down in a document known today as the Civic Oath of Chersonesos 44 in the early 3rd century BC. Due to the text of the Oath we are aware of the difficulties in supplying the inhabitants with grain. The state even had to introduce export restrictions on grain outside the polis.

By the mid-3rd century BC the Scythians had adopted a sedentary way of life and had started searching for lands suitable for both stock-raising and agriculture. In addition to colo-nising new lands in the foothills of the Crimean Mountains and the middle of the Alma River basin, they also tried to seize areas in the Northwest Crimea that were already occupied by the Greeks. During the first decades of the 3rd century BC the Scythians destroyed a series of Greek settlements on the Tarkhankut Peninsula and then occupied the properties abandoned by the Greeks.45 Even the area of the Heraclean Peninsula just outside the city of Chersonesos suffered Scythian attacks. This led to a decrease in the volume of agricultural production by almost three-quarters, which in turn caused a decline in handicraft produc-tion and a substantial drop in trade. These developments brought changes in the monetary system of the polis, which were manifest in the reduced weight of silver coins, the smaller quantity of coins minted and the domination of foreign issues in the market.

At the end of the second quarter of the 3rd century BC, the wine trade and the produc-tion of amphorae were reduced in Chersonesos. However, in the third quarter of the 3rd century BC, Chersonesos began to increase production of containers due to the growth of wine production. Amphorae of the type I completely disappeared from the markets. They were replaced with the egg-shaped body amphorae. The production of amphorae continued until the mid-2nd century BC in Chersonesos.46

41 Monachov 1989, 47-64, 93-95; Monachov 1999, 529.42 Monachov 1992, 169-171, 172-176; Monachov 1999, 529.43 Monachov 1999, 530-531.44 Latyschev 1916, no. 401.45 Kutaysov 2013, 196-197.46 Monachov 1989, 94.

45

THE DORIAN COLONY OF CHERSONESOS IN TAuRICA: HISTORICAL AND ECONOMIC ASPECTS OF THE DEVELOPMENT IN THE HELLENISTIC PERIOD

In the second half of the 3rd and the first half of the 2nd centuries BC, Sinope, Knidos and Thasos continued to supply wine to the northern Black Sea region, including Chersonesos. However, products from Thasos appeared much less frequently than wine from other cen-tres. Rhodes became a leader in the exchange of goods in the northern Black Sea coast in this period.47

In the late 3rd-early 2nd centuries BC, Chersonesos was forced to seek help from the Pontic King Pharnaces. The two states signed an agreement in which Pharnaces promised to help the city.

By the end of the 2nd century BC, the Scythians were ante portas of Chersonesos. The citizens, having revoked their earlier treaty of friendship and mutual assistance signed with the Pontic King Pharnaces, sought help from his successor, Mithridates VI Eupator, who re-garded their recourse as a good opportunity to implement his ambitious plans of creating a new state that would help him in his struggle against Rome and immediately sent his general Diophantus to Tauris. Following the defeat of the Scythians, the Northwest Crimea nominally passed to Chersonesos. In reality, however, the city did not succeed in consolidating its pow-er over the region, which remained under barbarian rule.

Chersonesos itself came within the political ambit of the Pontic Kingdom and took part in Mithridates VI Eupator’s long-term military campaigns against Rome. The city housed a Pon-tic garrison intended to protect it and to ensure that it paid tribute to the king. Chersonesos proclaimed Mithridates as its patron. Since payment of tribute is incompatible with freedom, it can be said that the people of Chersonesos had lost their independence. After Mithri-dates’ death, Chersonesos remained under the suzerainty of his successors for some time.

47 Monachov 1999, 568-571.

ELENA KLENINA

46

REFERENCES AND INDICATIVE BIBLIOGRAPhy

Biernacki - Klenina 2006: A.B. Biernacki - E. Klenina, “The topography of Tauric Cher-sonesus. The water cistern of the dwelling house in the quarter VII (IX-XI centuries)”, Chersonesskij Sbornik, Supplement I.

Biernacki - Klenina 2010: A.B. Biernacki - E. Klenina, “Chersonesus Taurica in the 4th cent. B.C.-1st cent. A.D.: urban Living Build-ings, House Architecture and Daily Life”, Archäologische Forschungen 18, 389-401.

Borisava 1958: V.V. Borisova, “Goncharnye mas-terskie Chersonesa (The pottery workshops of Chersonesos)”, Sovetskaya Archeologiya, 144-153.

Bujskiсh 2007: A.V. Bujskikh, “K probleme ob’emnogo resheniya antichnych domov v Severnom Prichernomor’e (na primere Chersonesa)”, Bosporos Studies XVII, 58-77.

Bujskiсh 2008: A.V. Bujskiсh, Prostranstven-noe razvitie Chersonesa Tavricheskogo v antichnuyu epochu, Simferopol.

Bujskiсh - Zolotarev 2001: A.V. Buiskjkh - M.I. Zolotarev, “Gradostroitel’nyj plan Chersone-sa Tavricheskogo (The city-building plan of Tauric Chersonesos)”, Vestnik Drevnej Isto-rii (Journal of Ancient History) 1, 111-132.

Dem’yanchuk 2012: S.G. Dem’yanchuk, “Za-bytaya gipoteza” ob osnovanii Chersonesa Tavricheskogo”, Sugdejskij Sbornik V, Ki-ev-Sudak, 29-33.

Diller 1952: A. Diller, The tradition of the Minor Greek Geographers, Oxford.

Dombrovskij 1960: O.I. Dombrovskij, “An-tichny teatr v Chersonese (raskopki 1954-1958 gg.)”, Soobscheniya Chersonesskogo Muzeya 1, 29-36.

Dombrovskij 1997: O.I. Dombrovskij, “Raboty na uchastke Chersonesskogo teatra v 1991-1994 gg.”, in Archeologicheskie issledovani-ya v Krymu. 1994 god, Simferopol, 85-88.

Klenina 2008: E. Klenina, “Some Remarks on the Topography of the Ancient Chersonesus Taurica” in Ch. Franek - S. Lamm - T. Neuhau-ser - B. Porod - K. Zöhrer (eds.), THIASOS,

Festschrift für Erwin Pochmarski zum 65. Geburtstag, Wien, 445-456.

Kutaysov 2006: V.A. Kutaysov, “ The Chora of Kerkinitis”, in P.I. Bilde – V. Stolba (ed.), Sur-veying the Greek Chora. The Black Sea Re-gion in a comparative perspective, Aarchus, 141-150.

Kutaysov 2013: V.A. Kutaysov, The Antique Po-lis of Kerkinitis, Simferopol.

Latyschev 1916: B. Latyschev, Inscriptiones antique orae septentrionalis Ponti Euxini, Graecae et Latine, Petropoli, I².

Marchenko 1998: L.V. Marchenko, “Zapodnyj rajon Chersonesa v ellinisticheskij period”, Chersonesskig Sbornik 9, 80-82.

Marchenko 1997: L.V. Marchenko, “Topografiya i planirovka Chersonesskogo gorodiszha”, Chersonesskig Sbornik 8, 62-67.

Marchenko 1998: L.V. Marchenko, “Zapodnyj rajon Chersonesa v ellinisticheskij period”, Chersonesskig Sbornik 9, 80-82.

Marchenko 1999: L.V. Marchenko, “Ellinis-ticheskij kompleks u perekrestka glavnych magestralej goroda”, Chersonesskig Sbornik 10, 101-106.

Monachov 1989: S.Yu. Monachov, Amfory Cher-sonesa Tavricheskogo (Amphorae of Tauric Chersonesos), Saratov.

Monachov 1992: S.Yu. Monachov, “Dinamika form i standartov sinopskich amfor (Dynam-ics of forms and standards of Sinopean am-phorae)”, in Grecheskie amphory, Saratov, 163-204.

Monachov 1999: S.Yu. Monachov, Grecheskie amfory v Prichernomor’e: kompleksy keram-icheskoj tary VII-II vv. do n.e. (The Greek am-phorae in the Black Sea: the assemblages of ceramic containers of the 7th-2nd centuries BC), Saratov.

Monachov - Abrosimov 1993: S.Yu. Monachov, E.N. Abrosimov, “Novoje o starych mate-rialach iz chersonesskogo nekropola”, An-tichny Mir i Archeologiya 9, Saratov, 118-159.

Müller-Wiener 2004: W. Müller-Wiener, Grie-chisches Bauwesen in der Antike, Warszawa.

Nikolaenko 1999: G.M. Nikolaenko, Chora Chersonesa Tavricheskogo. Zemel’myj ka-dastr IV-III vv. do n.e. Chast’ 1, Sevastopol.

47

THE DORIAN COLONY OF CHERSONESOS IN TAuRICA: HISTORICAL AND ECONOMIC ASPECTS OF THE DEVELOPMENT IN THE HELLENISTIC PERIOD

Nikolaenko 2001: G.M. Nikolaenko, Chora Chersonesa Tavricheskogo. Zemel’myj ka-dastr IV-III vv. do n.e. Chast’ 2, Sevastopol.

Nikolaenko 2006: G.M. Nikolaenko, “The Cho-ra of Tauric Chersonesos and the Cadastre of the 4th-2nd century BC”, in P.I. Bilde - V. Stolba (ed.), Surveying the Greek Chora. The Black Sea Region in a comparative per-spective, Aarchus, 151-174.

Rozpedowski 2015: Antichny teatr v Cher-sonese Tavricheskom, in A.B. Biernacki - E. Klenina (ed.), Topografiya Chersonesa Tav-richeskogo. Kvartal nr. 55 s pyatiapsidnym chramom (IV/III vek do n.e. – XIV vek n.e.) (in print).

Saltzman 1982: D. Saltzman, untersuchungen zu den antiken Kieselmosaiken, Archäologi-sche Forschungen 10, Berlin.

Shevchenko 2014: A.V. Shevchenko, Kryshka chernofigurnoj lekany izh Chersonesa Tavri-cheskogo, Vestnik Drevnej Istorii (Journal of Ancient History) 1, 61-68.

Solomonik 1976: E.I. Solomonik, “Nekotorye gruppy graffiti iz antichnogo Chersonesa”, Vestnik Drevnej Istorii (Journal of Ancient History) 3, 121-124.

Talbert 2000: R.J.A. Talbert, Barrington atlas of the Greek and Roman world, Princeton.

Turovskij 1997: E.Ya. Turovskij, “Tri novych graf-fiti iz Chersonesa i ego blizajshej okrugi”, Drevnosti 1996, Charkov, 98-100.

Turovskij 1997a: E.Ya. Turovskij, Monety neza-visimogo Chersonesa IV-II vv. do n.e., Sevas-topol.

Tuymenev 1938: A.I. “Chersonesskie etudy (Chersonesian sketches)”, Vestnik Drevnej Istorii (Journal of Ancient History) 2, 245-270.

Vdovichenko - Ryzov - Zhestkova 2012: I.I. Vdovichenko - S.G. Ryzov - G.I. Zhestkova, “Antichnaya raspisnaya keramika VI-IV vv. do n.e. iz severnogo i severo-vostochnogo rajonov Chersonesa (raskopki S.G. Ryzova v 1976-2010 gg.) (Ancient painted ceramics of the 6th-4th cent. BC from the northern and northeastern parts of Chersonesos (S.G. Ry-zhov excavations in 1976-2010)”, Cherso-nesskiy Sbornik 17, 19-36.

Vinogradov - Zolotarev 1998: Yu.G. Vinogradov - M.I. Zolotarev, “God rozhdeniya Chersone-sa Tavricheskogo (The year of birth of Tauric Chersonesos)”, Chersonesskiy Sbornik 9, 36-46.

Zedgenidze 1979: A.A. Zedgenidze, “O vremeni osnovanija Chersonesa Tavricheskogo”(On the date of foundation of Tauric Chersone-sos), Kratkie Soobscheniya Instituta Arche-ologii AN SSSR 159, 26-34

Zedgenidze - Savelya 1981: A.A. Zedgenidze - O.Ya. Savelya, “Nekropol’ Chersonesa V-IV vv. do n.e.”, Kratkie Soobscheniya Instituta Archeologii AN SSSR 168, 3-9.

Zolotarev 1993: M.I. Zolotarev, Chersonesska-ya archaika (Chesonesean Archics), Sevas-topol.

Zolotarev 2003: M.I. Zolotarev, “Chersonesus Tauricus. The foundation and the develop-ment of the polis”, in D.V. Grammenos - E.K. Petropoulos (eds.), Ancient Greek Colonies in the Black Sea, Vol. I, Archaeological Insti-tute of Northern Greece, Thessaloniki, 603-664.

Zolotarev 2005: M.I. Zolotarev, Chersones Tavricheskij: osnovanije i stanovlenije polisa. Chersonesskiy Sbornik 14, 13-44.

Zolotarev - Bujskikh 1994: M.I. Zolotarev - A.V. Bujskikh, Temenos antichnogo Hersonesa. Opyt architekturnoj rekonstkukcii. Vestnik Drevnej Istorii (Journal of Ancient History) 3, 78-101.

ELENA KLENINA

48

Figure 1Map of the “Heraclean” peninsula of 1786 which shows Greek roads dividing the chora into farm plots (National Preserve “Chersonesos of Tau-rica” = NPCT archives).

Figure 2Aerial photograph of Chersonesos in Taurica (photo by E. Klenina, 2005).

49

THE DORIAN COLONY OF CHERSONESOS IN TAuRICA: HISTORICAL AND ECONOMIC ASPECTS OF THE DEVELOPMENT IN THE HELLENISTIC PERIOD

Figure 3Fragments of black figure lekanis lid of the mid-6th century BC (1-4) and its reconstruction (5) (NPCT archives, photo by K. Chvalkova, 2014).

ELENA KLENINA

50

Figure 4Pottery from Chersonesos, end of the 6th-5th century BC: 1: amphora from Abdera, end of the 6th - early 5th century BC, 2: amphora from Thasos, mid-5th century BC, 3-4: table jugs, second half of the 5th century BC, 5-6: table cups, second half of the 6th - mid-5th century BC (drawing by Monachov - Abrosimov 1993, photo by K. Chvalkova, 2014).

51

THE DORIAN COLONY OF CHERSONESOS IN TAuRICA: HISTORICAL AND ECONOMIC ASPECTS OF THE DEVELOPMENT IN THE HELLENISTIC PERIOD

Figure 5Fragments of black-gloss vessels of the 5th - early 4th century BC identified by several scholars as “ostraka” (NPCT archives, photo by K. Chvalkova, 2014).

ELENA KLENINA

52

Figure 6Map of Chersonesos of the late 5th - late 4th century BC (drawing by E. Klenina).

Figure 7Areas of the early land division of the “Heraclean” peninsula (according to Nikolaenko 2006).

Figure 8Land divisions of the Mayachnyj peninsula (according to N. Pechenkin).

Figure 9Map of Chersonesos of the late 4th - 3rd century BC (drawing by E. Klenina).

53

THE DORIAN COLONY OF CHERSONESOS IN TAuRICA: HISTORICAL AND ECONOMIC ASPECTS OF THE DEVELOPMENT IN THE HELLENISTIC PERIOD

Figure 10Plan of the northern district in Chersonesos and results of the geophysical and archaeological researches (according to E. Klenina, A.B. Biernacki, M. Nikolaenko, 2008).

ELENA KLENINA

54

Figure 11Central district of Chersonesos, quarter no. 45 with the building’s remains of the agora (according to E. Klenina, A.B. Biernacki, 2013).

Figure 12Fragments of mensae ponderaria (drawing and photo by E. Klenina, A.B. Biernacki).

55

THE DORIAN COLONY OF CHERSONESOS IN TAuRICA: HISTORICAL AND ECONOMIC ASPECTS OF THE DEVELOPMENT IN THE HELLENISTIC PERIOD

Figure 13Aerial photograph (1), plan (2) and computer reconstruction (3-4) of the Ancient Theatre in Chersonesos. Computer reconstruction of the Hellenistic House in the quarter no. 55 (5). Mosaic of small pebbles from the early 3rd century BC (6).

ELENA KLENINA

56

Figure 14Plans of houses with peristylar courts (1-4) and houses with pastada (5-6) in Chersonesos Taurica.

Figure 15The nearest chora of Chersonesos in the 4th - 2nd centuries BC (according to Nikolae-nko 2006).

57

THE DORIAN COLONY OF CHERSONESOS IN TAuRICA: HISTORICAL AND ECONOMIC ASPECTS OF THE DEVELOPMENT IN THE HELLENISTIC PERIOD

Figure 16Bild’s-eye view of farmhouse ruins in plot no. 193 (1), ruins of “Farmhouse of Grinevich” in Bermana Ravine (2), plan section reconstruction of the tower of farmhouse no. 151 (3) (after N.P. Andrushenko), ruins of farmhouse no. 151 (4), ruins of a settlement on the Mayachnyj peninsula (5-6) (photo by E. Klenina).

Figure 17Map of the Western part of the Crimean peninsula with land division of Chersonesos (after Talbert 2000).