Doğu Dağlık Kilikia'da (Olba Bölgesi) Erken İmparatorluk Dönemi'nde İmar Hareketliliğindeki Durgunlukve Isodom Kuleler: Dağlık Kilikia-Isauria İsyanları

Abstract

The best­preserved monuments and remains of ancient Cilicia are found in eastern Rough Cilicia, also known as the Olba Region, which extends between the rivers Kalykadnos (Göksu) and Lamos (Limonlu). This region has attracted much scholarly interest and is currently under intensive study. A group of five towers in this region has attracted our notice. These five tow­ers have isodomic masonry, which is contrary to the more conventional towers of the region with polygonal masonry. However, the most noteworthy point about these towers is the date proposed for their construction ­ the period from the regulations introduced by Pompey in 65 B.C. to the establishment of Provincia Cilicia in A.D. 72 by Vespasian. This dating is quite interesting because it points to security issues even after piracy was eradicated by Pompey in the region. As known, the imperial region encompassing eastern Rough Cilicia came into the Pax Romana with the reign of Augustus. Thus it is worth investigating why such towers were built. There is one more reason for this investigation. During the century starting with the reign of Augustus very few construction activities are observed in the major cities of eastern Rough Cilicia such as Korykos, Elaiussa Sebaste, Diokaisareia, Olba and Seleukeia. However, it is known that the Roman Empire witnessed rich construction activities during the early imperial period. The present article aims to investigate the reasons underlying the scarcity of construc­tion in eastern Rough Cilicia during the concerned period in comparison to other regions of the Empire. Actually, it is aimed at clarifying any connection between the stagnation in con­struction activities and the towers exhibiting isodomic masonry.The situation in the cities of eastern Rough Cilicia does not conform to the spirit of the period when rich construction activities were underway in order to supply the demand for public functions across the Roman Empire. Certainly the Archelaids undertook important steps with regards to urbanization and the imperial cult. However, the developments in construction activities and supplying public demand were not at a level comparable with those in other regions. Thus, we can speak of stagnation in construction activities throughout the region. However, the underlying reasons should be sought not in Archelaid rule but rather in the political­economic developments in the region.During the Archelaid period Rough Cilicia witnessed uprisings. These client kings intro­duced many innovations both to reinforce their power over the region and to realise the imperial policies. The most important of these was the effort to tax the inhabitants using the census system as per the Roman model. These royal efforts were rejected by the locals who were still more nomadic than sedentary, living in tribes and very much in love with their free­dom. They took to the Taurus Mountains, and their resistance culminated in frequent upris­ings. Three big uprisings took place against the foreign kings in 6, 36 and 52 A.D. The first of these uprisings had wide­reaching dimensions, and the Cappadocian King Archelaos I, also ruling over Korykos and Elaiussa Sebaste, had to ask for help from the Roman army. The Romans intervened with two legions commanded by M. Plautus Silvanus. In the second upris­ing Archelaos II, son of Archelaos I, had to deal with the rebels. The royal troops, who were not used to fighting in rough terrain, had difficulty against the rebels. Trebellus came to the region with 4,000 soldiers and suppressed the uprising through massacres at the fortresses of Karda and Davar inhabited by the Kietis people. In the third uprising the rebels raided the cit­ies, farmsteads, merchants and ships in western Rough Cilicia and even besieged the city of Anemurium. Furthermore, they even put to rout a Roman cavalry unit led by Curtius Severus. Finally, the Commagenian King Antiochos IV subdued the rebels by killing their leaders.That the personal efforts of Archelaos I and II to suppress the uprisings were unsuccessful must have attracted the attention of the rebels because it was the Archelaids who tried to es­tablish the imperial policies in the region. In the third uprising of A.D. 52 the rebels focussed on western Rough Cilicia, where Antiochos IV had more of an interest and had founded new cities, so they plundered the cities in the area. Based on this piece of information, it is possible to state that the Archelaids and the territory under their rule were prone to threats from the rebels during first two uprisings of A.D. 6 and 36. Thus, it is highly likely that the Archelaids were under threat of the rebels because they were the representatives and policy implement­ers of the opposing power. Any attack by the rebels would more likely target Elaiussa Sebaste, the capital of the Archelaids, and Korykos in the near vicinity. Despite the lack of numbers regarding the dimension of the threat, the fact that some Roman legions were called in for help reveals that these were more serious than ordinary bandit gangs. Thus serious measures had to be taken. For this purpose, the Archelaids must have felt a strong need to build some structures for defence and observation purposes. Therefore, the five towers with isodomic ma­sonry located right above Elaiussa Sebaste and Korykos must have been built during the client kingdom of the Archelaids. A similar example can be given from Pisidia, which was ruled by client kings in the early years of Augustus's reign. The client king in Pisidia was Amyntas, who was based at Kremna against the rebel tribes of Homonodensians. During the reign of Amyntas defence structures at Kremna were strengthened, and new towers were built in isodomic ma­sonry just like those at Korykos and Elaiussa Sebaste.The construction of isodomic towers is the only evidence that can cast some light onto the stagnation in the constructi