To My Family and Uğraş Uzun - Bilkent University

them and their parts invade some of the architectural features (Wiegartz,
1965:32).
H. Wiegartz placed his reconstructed Athens-London (Fig. 86, 115) after
Ankara A, and dated it to c.AD 215. He suggested that the main difference
between Ankara A and Athens-London fragments is the leaf work on the geison
of Athens-London as opposed to the deep tendril work on the geison of Ankara A
(Fig. 114). The next step in Wiegartz’s chronology is Istanbul A (Selefkeh) (Fig.
22, 116), dated to AD 230-35, and finally, Istanbul B (Sidemara) (Fig. 23, 117)
and Ankara E (Fig. 118) sarcophagi, assigned a date of AD 250-55 and c.AD 260,
respectively. Wiegartz’s basis for dating Istanbul B later than Istanbul A is the
more detailed carving of the leaf work around the egg mouldings and lesbian
cyma segments. For the Ankara E Sarcophagus, he proposes the latest date
among the three sarcophagi, because the lesbian cyma motif now disappears, and
is replaced by leaf work in the column capitals.
The most controversial point in Wiegartz’s chronology is that he bases his
chronology on two examples, Melfi and Istanbul G (Sarcophagus of Claudia
Antonia Sabina), which are dated according to the hair styles of the portraits on
their lids. Thus Wiegartz assumes that the portraits on the lids were produced
simultaneously with the chests of these sarcophagi. The unfinished portrait heads
on the Antakya Sarcophagus and on many other Docimeum sarcophagi prove that
this was not necessarily the case.
However, Wiegartz might be right in this assumption about the Istanbul G
Sarcophagus (Sarcophagus of Claudia Antonia Sabina). Based on the inscription
that the sarcophagus, it was argued that it was made for Claudia Antonia Sabina
Procliane, wife of the ex-consul of Rome and proconsul of Asia, Sulpicius
84