The Lantern-Roofed Tombs in Thrace and Anatolia: Some Evidence ...

Proceedings of the 10th International Congress of Thracology.
The Lantern-Roofed Tombs in Thrace and Anatolia:
1
Athens 2006 (forthcoming)
Some Evidence about Cultural Relations and Interaction
in the East Mediterranean *
Nikola Theodossiev
The lantern (or diagonal) roofing is specific technique applied in the
ancient architecture, well attested in a number of rectangular chambers of
tumular tombs in Thrace and Anatolia. Several scholarly works deal in
details with this particular technique, 1 which is perhaps best described in
English by Janos Fedak: ‘This type of roof is made up of long flat slabs
forming a series of superimposed ‘frames’ of more or less square shape; the
slabs of each ‘frame’ were laid diagonally across the corners of the ‘frame’
below. The squares gradually decreased in size from one course to the next,
until the remaining opening was small enough to be closed without
difficulty.’ 2
However, the different publications related to such monuments usually
give various accounts of the lantern roofing and very often, those
descriptions do not provide clear idea on the architectural features of the
constructions. In fact, this specific technique became widely known to the
scholars with the excavation of tumulus C near Karalar in Galatia, where a
Late Hellenistic lantern-roofed tomb presumably built for a burial of some
Gaulish chieftain was discovered in 1933. 3 Shortly after, the lantern-roofed
tomb at Karalar was designated as ‘Galatisches Kuppelgrab’ 4 and later, the

diagonal roofing was even described as ‘a “Galatian” corbeled roof system’ 5
or ‘voûte «galate»’ 6 . Actually, the lantern roofing was applied in the
Anatolian funerary architecture much earlier than the Karalar example and
was first attested in the Archaic tumular tomb at Belevi 7 , while many
scholars consider that this type of stone roof originated in timber
construction of Anatolian houses contemporary to the earliest monumental
tombs 8 . Therefore, any terminology bearing particular ethnic or strict
regional implications, such as ‘a “Galatian” corbel’, may not be correct
when referring to this technique.
Three approximately synchronous tombs with lantern roofing are known
in ancient Thrace so far. The first one was discovered in 1931 in Kurtkale
locality near Mezek. 9 The funerary monument is situated on the ground level
in the eastern part of a big tumulus and consists of façade, rectangular
lantern-roofed antechamber and beehive tholos burial chamber. The
Kurtkale tomb dates to the last decades of the 4th or first decades of the 3rd
century B.C. Another similar tomb was excavated in 1976 in Zhaba Mogila
tumulus, which is about 20 m in height and 80-90 m in diameter, and is
located near Strelcha. 10 The monument is situated in the southeastern
periphery of the mound on the ground level and consists of façade,
rectangular lantern-roofed antechamber and beehive tholos burial chamber.
It is dated to the last decades of the 4th century B.C. The third Thracian
tomb with lantern roofing was excavated in 1952 in a tumulus in Golemiya
Aigar locality near Plovdiv (ancient Philippopolis). 11 The monument is
situated on the level of the ancient terrain in the central part of the mound
and displays a ground-plan different from the previous funerary
constructions, consisting of façade, rectangular antechamber and rectangular
2

lantern-roofed burial chamber. The Plovdiv tomb comes from the end of the
4th or first decade of the 3rd century B.C.
However, while in Thrace only three monuments displaying such
technique are known, this kind of roofing seems to be widely used in
Anatolia. The tumular tomb at Belevi near Ephesos, first noted in 1827,
dates to the 6th century B.C. and provides the earliest example of lantern
roofing in the ancient world known so far. 12 The funerary monument is
situated in the southern half of a big tumulus surrounded with krepis and
consists of long dromos, rectangular antechamber, a second rectangular
lantern-roofed antechamber and rectangular burial chamber. The finds from
the mound clearly indicate that the Archaic monumental tomb was
presumably a heroon and was used for secondary ritual activities during
extended period – until the Early Hellenistic Age. Actually, in Anatolia, the
lantern-roofed tombs became widespread only during the Late Classical and
Hellenistic Age and the architects who built these funerary monuments were
presumably inspired from some early remarkable constructions, such as the
tumular tomb at Belevi.
Hellenistic lantern-roofed tombs were discovered in several parts of
Anatolia. The closest region to Thrace appears to be Bithynia where four
funerary monuments of this type are known, thus forming the most
significant regional group of lantern-roofed tombs in Anatolia. Two of them
are located on the southern shore of Propontis. The tomb at Mudanya
(ancient Myrleia) was unearthed in 1926 during digging of Alçakbayir
tumulus, about 30 m in height. 13 The monument consists of long dromos and
rectangular lantern-roofed burial chamber. It dates to the second half of the
4th century B.C. Another tomb was accidentally uncovered in Küçük Çukur
locality near Gemlik (ancient Kios) in a tumulus, which was destroyed
3

during construction works in the middle of 1960s. 14 The funerary monument
consists of short dromos and rectangular lantern-roofed burial chamber, and
comes from the second half of the 4th century B.C. Two other tombs were
discovered in the inland of Bithynia – towards the border with Phrygia and
Galatia. The first one was investigated in 1974 in a tumulus close to Iğdir
Köyü. 15 The monument consists of short dromos and rectangular lantern-
roofed burial chamber. It dates to the 4th century B.C. and most probably to
the second half of the century. The other tomb was excavated in 1989 in
Yalacik tumulus close to Yukari Bağdere. 16 The monument consists of long
dromos, rectangular antechamber and rectangular lantern-roofed burial
chamber. It is dated to the 2nd – 1st century B.C., but an earlier date in the
Hellenistic Age could be also considered.
Close to the West of Mudanya and Gemlik, in Propontic Mysia, another
tomb of this type was excavated in Közemtüg tumulus at Daskyleion during
the 1990 campaign. 17 The monument consists of long dromos, rectangular
antechamber and rectangular lantern-roofed burial chamber. It is proposed
that the tomb comes from the first half of the 4th century B.C., but a
presumable later date to c. 330 B.C. should not be excluded, too. Another
tomb with lantern-roofed burial chamber was unearthed in the middle of
1950s near Kepsut, located in the inland of Mysia. 18 The brief information
on this discovery allows supposing that the monument could be dated to the
Late Classical or Hellenistic Age. A third similar tomb was excavated in the
beginning of 1960s at Musahocaköy in the southern part of Mysia – close to
the border with Lydia. 19 It is situated in a tumulus and consists of long
dromos, rectangular antechamber and rectangular lantern-roofed burial
chamber. The tomb most probably comes from the Late Classical or
Hellenistic Age. In fact, among all other Anatolian tombs of this type, the
4

monument at Musahocaköy is located closest to the Archaic Belevi chamber
tomb, which presumably was one of the significant funerary constructions
that exercised impact on architects to begin widely applying the lantern
roofing during the Late Classical and Hellenistic Age.
Close to the East of Mysia, in Phrygia, three lantern-roofed tombs are
known. The first one was discovered in 1954 under tumulus O at Gordion. 20
It consists of rectangular lantern-roofed antechamber and rectangular
lantern-roofed burial chamber. The funerary monument dates to the 2nd –
1st century B.C. Two other tombs are situated at Hierapolis. 21 Unless almost
all lantern-roofed funerary monuments known in Anatolia and Thrace, the
Hierapolis tombs are constructed in rectangular pits under the ground level –
not within tumuli. The monuments consist of rectangular lantern-roofed
burial chambers and are approximately dated to the 1st century BC, although
an earlier dating may be considered, too.
As mentioned above, in 1933, a lantern-roofed tomb was excavated at
Karalar in Galatia, to the East of Phrygia. 22 The monument is situated under
tumulus C and consists of rectangular lantern-roofed antechamber and
rectangular lantern-roofed burial chamber. The tomb comes from the 1st
century B.C.
Finally, quite unusual example of lantern roofing is attested in
Paphlagonia, to the East of Bithynia and to the North of Galatia. This is the
rock-cut tomb in Gerdek Boğazi locality near Karakoyunlu. 23 The monument
consists of impressive façade, rectangular antechamber, two rectangular side
chambers – one of them with lantern-roofed ceiling, and rectangular burial
chamber. The rock-cut tomb is approximately dated to the second half of the
4th century B.C.
5

Obviously, the lantern-roofed tombs in Thrace and Anatolia provide a
welcome opportunity of studying the exchange of ideas and the various
interrelations in the tomb architecture between these parts of the ancient
world. Moreover, the monuments allow exploring the level of multilateral
interaction between different ethnic groups who inhabited both areas.
The limit of the present article does not allow studying in details all these
important topics. However, it is clear that while during the Late Classical
and Hellenistic Age the barrel-vaulted rectangular tombs became most
spread in Macedonia 24 and the beehive tholos tombs became widespread in
Thrace 25 , the lantern-roofed tombs appeared in Anatolia already in the 6th
century B.C. and were typical of this particular area. Therefore, the
appearance of the lantern roofing in Thrace during the end of the Late
Classical and Early Hellenistic Age was a result of Anatolian influence on
the Thracian funerary architecture. In this particular case, the process of
cultural interaction and adaptation of new architectural design happened
most probably in the region of Propontis inhabited by neighbouring Thracian
and Bithynian tribes, besides other ethnic groups. In fact, a number of
ancient records reveal well the close ethnic relationship between Thracians
and Bithynians, and give information on multifarious contacts between both
ethnic communities. 26 Undoubtedly, these circumstances resulted in
similarity of the funerary constructions and mortuary practices in Thrace and
Bithynia.
Just on the contrary, some scholars believe that the lantern roofing may
have been an original Thracian design, which was introduced to Anatolia by
the Galatians on their military routes in early 3rd century B.C. 27 However,
considering the fact that the lantern-roofed tombs appeared in Anatolia and
are much earlier than the Celtic settlement in the region, such hypothesis
6

may not be accepted. Moreover, having only a single 1st century B.C.
lantern-roofed tomb in Galatia is not enough to suppose that the Galatians
borrowed the lantern-roofing from the Thracians on their military passage
trough the East Balkans in the 270s B.C. Actually, the Galatians became
influenced from the native Hellenistic civilizations and adopted some
complex architectural traditions from the local ethnic groups in a later
period, only after their settlement in Anatolia. 28
Although the lantern roofing seems to be confined to Anatolia and Thrace,
several monuments may reveal more contacts and interaction further to the
West. On the first place, one should consider the late 4th century B.C.
mosaic in room A of ‘The House of Dionysos’ in Pella, whose design
resembles a lantern roof. 29 While the Pella mosaic may indeed reflect
Anatolian or Thracian influence, no any lantern-roofed tombs are currently
known in Macedonia. 30
In Italia, several Etruscan tombs at Chiusi, dated to the 5th century B.C.,
have ceilings that resemble the lantern roofs known in the East: Tomba della
Scimmia, 31 Tomba del Colle Casuccini, 32 Tomba del Pozzo a Poggio
Renzo, 33 and Tomba del Leone a Poggio Renzo 34 . A later variant of such
roofing is attested in two chambers of Ipogeo dei Volumni in Perugia, which
was built in the end of the 3rd century B.C. but was used up to the 1st
century A.D. 35 However, there is a clear structural difference in the Etruscan
pattern – the visible sides of superimposed rectangular ‘frames’ were laid
perpendicular to the visible sides of the rectangular ‘frames’ below (not
diagonally across the corners like in the Thracian and Anatolian examples),
while the rectangles alternate in width as they go up into the roof. 36 In this
particular case, one may only speculate about possible relations and
interaction that reflected in resemblance of the tomb designs.
7

However, when discussing the lantern roofing, two tombs in Thrace and
Etruria may indeed provide better possibility to consider any presumable
interrelations. The Thracian example is the monumental heroon in Ostrusha
tumulus near Shipka, which dates to c. 330-320 B.C. 37 The ceiling of the
sarcophagus-like burial chamber consists of coffers with painted decoration,
while the central part imitates a lantern roof. Almost identical imitation of
diagonal roofing is attested on the ceiling of one of the side chambers of the
already mentioned Ipogeo dei Volumni in Perugia, dated to the end of the
3rd century B.C. 38 Although a significant chronological gap of more than
hundred years divides the two monuments, such resemblance may indeed
testify to exchange of ideas and interaction in the tomb architecture between
Thrace and Italia during the Hellenistic Age. 39 Further archaeological
discoveries may provide us with more options to consider the various topics
discussed in the present article.
Department of Archaeology
Sofia University St. Kliment Ohridski
bul. Tsar Osvoboditel 15
Sofia 1504
Bulgaria
E-mail: nikolatc@poshta.net
8

Footnotes
* I am deeply grateful to the Andrew W. Mellon Foundation and the Council
of American Overseas Research Centers for continuosly supporting my
studies as well as the various fellowships, which have enabled me to do
research on Thracian tomb architecture and art at the American School of
Classical Studies at Athens, the American Academy in Rome, the Institute
for Advanced Studies in the Humanities at the University of Edinburgh and
the Netherlands Institute for Advanced Study in the Humanities and Social
Sciences in Wassenaar. I am also very grateful to the Center for Advanced
Study in the Visual Arts at the National Gallery of Art in Washington D.C.
where I was appointed Podhorsky Scholar to work on my projects. I would
like to thank warmly the staff of these institutions for their responsiveness
and help and also to thank all colleagues who gave me advice and support.
1 Among earlier publications, commenting lantern-roofed monuments and
discussing this technique, one may refer to the works of Schachermeyr
(1929, 104-5), Mansel (1943, 47-8, 53; 1946; 1974), Lawrence (1996, 173),
and Orlandos (1968, 189-94). Recent comprehensive studies were provided
by Fedak (1990, 170-2), Ginouvès (1992, 148, 154-5), Ginouvès and
Guimier-Sorbets (1994), and Hellmann (2002, 268-9). Brief comments in:
Young (1956, 250-2), Demus-Quatember (1958, 68-71), von Gall (1966, 81-
2), Schneider Equini (1972, 132), Waelkens (1982, 431), Archibald (1998,
283-4) and Theodossiev (2004, 353-4).
2 Fedak 1990, 170-1.
3 Oğuz (1934, 134-46) provides a comprehensive publication of the
Karalar tombs; cf. also Oğuz and Coupry (1935, 136-40), and recently
Mitchell (1993, 55-7).
9

4 Bossert 1942, 86-7, 296, figs. 1123-6.
5 The designation was used by Mellink (1967, 173) in her report on
Gemlik tomb. However, in earlier publication Mellink (1963, 189) described
the Musahocaköy lantern-roofed tomb as having ‘a pseudo-vaulted roof of
the type also known in Phrygia and Galatia’, and more recently Mellink
(1992, 148) cited a report by Tomris Bakir where the tomb at Daskyleion is
described as ‘roofed in the manner of Thracian vaulted tombs’.
6 Used by Ginouvès and Guimier-Sorbets (1994), and Hellmann (2002,
268-9). In a similar way, the Late Classical and Hellenistic barrel-vaulted
tombs widespread in Macedonia and Thrace are often called ‘Macedonian
tombs’ and this terminology originates in some early scholarly publications,
such as Perdrizet (1898, 335-45) where the barrel-vaulted tomb at
Amphipolis is attributed to ‘type «macédonien»’. However, barrel vaulting
applied in the funerary architecture is attested in the Near East, Levant and
Egypt during the late 2nd and early 1st millennia B.C., and also, this
technique is well known in tombs of Archaic Lydia, Cyprus and Etruria –
many centuries before being applied in the chamber tombs of Macedonia
and Thrace. Cf. discussion on barrel vaulting technique in Fedak (1990, 166-
7 with op. cit.).
7 Kasper (1975; 1976-1977; 1978) and Vetters (1971-1972, 42-6; 1972, 3-
6) provide recent detailed studies on the tumular chamber tomb at Belevi.
8 Suggested by Mansel (1943, 53 with op. cit.; 1946, 8-9; 1950, 478;
1974, 189 with op. cit.), Young (1956, 252), von Gall (1966, 81-2), Fedak
(1990, 171 with op. cit.), and Ginouvès and Guimier-Sorbets (1994 with op.
cit.), who provide a number of mediaeval and modern examples of diagonal
roofing in stone or wood applied in cult and house architecture of East
Turkey, Armenia, Afghanistan, Turkmenistan and elsewhere in Asia.
10

9 The tomb was accidentally unearthed and first published by Filov (1937,
5-7, 79-83, 91). Cf. later discussions in Mansel (1943, 39-41; 1974, 188),
Orlandos (1968, 190, 210), Fedak (1990, 171), Ginouvès and Guimier-
Sorbets (1994, 316), Archibald (1998, 283, 339-40) and Rousseva (2002,
149-50, no. 47).
10 Excavated and published by Kitov (1977a; 1977b; 1979, 2-7; 1989).
Later comments are provided by Archibald (1998, 288-9, 343) and Rousseva
(2002, 147-8, no. 46).
11 Published in details by Botousharova and Kolarova (1961). Additional
comments by Mansel (1974, 188-9), Fedak (1990, 171), Ginouvès and
Guimier-Sorbets (1994, 316), Archibald (1998, 283, 296-8, 338), and
Rousseva (2002, 113-6, no. 25).
12 The tomb was first published by Weber (1878-1880, 91-2, 96-104), and
soon after discussed by Perrot and Chipiez (1890, 280-4). Later study was
provided by Keil (1935, 107-16). More recent explorations conducted by the
Austrian expedition were published by Vetters (1971-1972, 42-6; 1972, 3-6),
and by Praschniker and Theuer (1979, 170-2). Kasper (1975; 1976-1977;
1978) publishes the most detailed studies on the tumulus and the funerary
monument, and discusses the very complex question of the tomb
chronology. The Belevi chamber tomb is also commented by Schachermeyr
(1929, 104-5), Mansel (1943, 46, 48; 1946, 7; 1974, 186), Demus-
Quatember (1958, 68-71), Orlandos (1968, 190, 206), Kurtz and Boardman
(1971, 282), Fedak (1990, 81, 171), Ginouvès and Guimier-Sorbets (1994,
316), and Archibald (1998, 284), among others.
13 Published in details by Mansel (1946; 1950). The tomb is commented in
Mansel (1943, 47-8; 1974, 185), Fedak (1990, 171), Ginouvès and Guimier-
Sorbets (1994, 312), and Archibald (1998, 283-4).
11

14 The tomb is published in details by Mansel (1974). Cf. brief reports in
Firatli (1966-1967, 229) and Mellink (1967, 173). Later comments are
provided by Fedak (1990, 171), Ginouvès and Guimier-Sorbets (1994, 312),
and Archibald (1998, 283-4).
15 Published in details by Tokgöz (1975-1976). Commented by Waelkens
(1982, 431), Fedak (1990, 171), and Ginouvès and Guimier-Sorbets (1994,
312).
16 Detailed publication by Mermerci, Yağci and Güleç (1990). Brief report
in Mellink (1992, 148).
17 Brief publication of the tomb in Bakir and Gusmani (1991, 157, 159).
Reported by Mellink (1992, 148).
18 Mentioned by Mansel (1974, 187) who provides a photograph.
Discussed in Fedak (1990, 171).
19 Brief report by Mellink (1963, 189). Comments in Mansel (1974, 186-
7), Fedak (1990, 171), and Ginouvès and Guimier-Sorbets (1994, 312).
20 Detailed publication by Young (1956, 250-2). Later, the tomb is
discussed by Schneider Equini (1972, 132), Winter (1988, 64), Fedak (1990,
171-2), Ginouvès and Guimier-Sorbets (1994, 312), and Sams and Temizsoy
(n.d., 90-1).
21 Published by Schneider Equini (1972, 132). Commented by Fedak
(1990, 171), and Ginouvès and Guimier-Sorbets (1994, 312).
22 Detailed publication by Oğuz (1934, 134-46), and Oğuz and Coupry
(1935, 136-40). The tomb is widely commented in later studies, e.g. in
Bossert (1942, 86-7), Mansel (1943, 48; 1946, 8; 1974, 187), Young (1956,
252), Lawrence (1996, 173), Orlandos (1968, 193-4), Schneider Equini
(1972, 132), Fedak (1990, 171-2), Mitchell (1993, 55-7), and Ginouvès and
Guimier-Sorbets (1994, 312).
12

23 Detailed publication and study is provided by von Gall (1966, 73-82).
Some earlier publications also give information on this tomb: Leonhard
1915, 269-77; Bossert 1942, 85; Gökoğlu 1952, 110-3. Recent comments in
Fedak (1990, 171).
24 Pandermalis 1972; Gossel 1980, passim; Miller 1993, passim.
25 Archibald 1998, 282-303; Rousseva 2002, passim; Theodossiev 2002;
2004.
26 The written sources are collected in Detschew (1976, 63-65), who
specifies Bithynoi as a Thracian tribe who immigrated in Anatolia. Cf. the
main records: Herodotus I 28, 1 et VII 75, 1-2 (eds. Stein-Hude),
Thucydides IV 75, 2 (ed. Smith), Xenophon, Anab. VI 3, 1-9 et 4, 1-2, et
Hell. III 2, 2-5 (ed. Marchant), Strabo VII 3, 2 et XII 3, 3 (ed. Meineke),
Diodorus XIV 38, 3, 6-7 (ed. Vogel), Plinius Secundus, Nat. hist. V 32, 145
(ed. Mayhoff), Arrianus, Bith. frg. 20 (ed. Roos). The Thraco-Bithynian
relationship is discussed in details by Fol (1972). A recent study on the
history and culture of Bithynia is provided by Hannestad (1996). The most
detailed study on Propontic Thrace is provided by Loukopoulou (1989,
passim), cf. also Archibald (1998, passim).
27 Such speculation is proposed by Young (1956, 252), Schneider Equini
(1972, 132) and Fedak (1990, 171).
28 Cf. Winter 1988, 64; Cunliffe 1992, 83-5, 176-80; Mitchell 1993, 51-8.
Cf. a recent study on Celts who settled in the Balkans: Megaw 2004.
29 Ginouvès and Guimier-Sorbets 1994, 319-21 with op. cit.
30 Cf. Pandermalis 1972; Gossel 1980, passim; Miller 1993, passim.
31 Steingräber, Ridgway, and Serra Ridgway (1986, 273-4, no. 25);
Steingräber (1993).
13

32 Steingräber, Ridgway, and Serra Ridgway (1986, 266-8, no. 15);
Steingräber (1993).
33 Steingräber, Ridgway, and Serra Ridgway (1986, 272, no. 24);
Steingräber (1993).
34 Colonna (1986, 494, fig. 351); Steingräber (1993).
35 Presented and discussed in various publications: Durm (1905, 133-4),
Gurrieri (1963, 13-9), Boëthius and Ward-Perkins (1970, 66-7, 81), Boitani,
Cataldi, and Pasquinucci (1975, 68-9), Steingräber (1993), and Nielsen
(2002, 100-1).
36 Professor Nancy de Grummond kindly drew my attention to the
Etruscan examples.
37 Kitov (1994); Barbet, Kitov, and Valeva (1995); Kitov, Barbet, and
Valeva (1997); Valeva (2002).
38 Cf. various publications by Durm (1905, 133-4), Gurrieri (1963, 13-9),
Boëthius and Ward-Perkins (1970, 66-7, 81), Boitani, Cataldi, and
Pasquinucci (1975, 68-9), Steingräber (1993), and Nielsen (2002, 100-1).
39 The interrelation and interaction in the funerary architecture between
the Balkans and Italia during the Late Classical and Hellenistic Age are
discussed in details by Oleson (1982, passim), Steingräber (1999; 2000,
passim; 2001). Cf. Fedak (1990, passim).
14

Works Cited
Archibald, Z.H. 1998. The Odrysian Kingdom of Thrace. Orpheus
Unmasked. Oxford: Clarendon Press.
Bakir, T., and R. Gusmani. 1991. “Eine neue phrygische Inschrift aus
Daskyleion.” EpigAnat 18: 157-64.
Barbet, A., G. Kitov, and J. Valeva. 1995. “Tombeau-mausolée
d’Ostroucha.” Archéologia 313: 62-6.
Boëthius, A., and J.B. Ward-Perkins. 1970. Etruscan and Roman
Architecture. Baltimore – Ringwood: Penguin Books.
Boitani, F., M. Cataldi, and M. Pasquinucci. 1975. Etruscan Cities. New
York: G P Putnam’s Sons.
Bossert, H.T. 1942. Altanatolien. Kunst und Handwerk in Kleinasien von
den Anfängen bis zum völligen Aufgehen in der griechischen Kultur. Berlin:
Verlag Ernst Wasmuth.
Botousharova, L., and V. Kolarova. 1961. “Kupolna grobnitsa pri
Plovdiv.” In Studia in memoriam Karel Škorpil, 279-97. Sofia: Éditions de
l’Académie des Sciences de Bulgarie.
Colonna, G. 1986. “Urbanistica e architettura.” In Rasenna. Storia e
civiltà degli Etruschi, 369-530. Milano: Libri Scheiwiller.
Cunliffe B.W. 1992. The Celtic World. London: Constable.
Demus-Quatember, M. 1958. Etruskische Grabarchitektur. Typologie und
Ursprungsfragen. Baden-Baden: Bruno Grimm.
Detschew, D. 1976. Die thrakischen Sprachreste. 2nd ed. Wien: Verlag
der Österreichischen Akademie der Wissenschaften.
Durm, J. 1905. Die Baukunst der Etrusker. Die Baukunst der Römer. 2nd
ed. Stuttgart: Alfred Krömer Verlag.
15

Fedak, J. 1990. Monumental Tombs of the Hellenistic Age: A Study of
Selected Tombs from the Pre-Classical to the Early Imperial Era. Toronto –
Buffalo – London: University of Toronto Press.
Filov, B. 1937. “Kupolnite grobnitsi pri Mezek.” BIABulg 11: 1-116.
Firatli, N. 1966-1967. “Brief Archaeological News.” IstArkMüzYill 13-
14: 225-9.
Fol, A. 1972. “Thrako-bithynische Paralellen im vorrömischen Zeitalter.”
Thracia 1: 197-212.
von Gall, H. 1966. Die paphlagonischen Felsgräber. Eine Studie zur
kleinasiatischen Kunstgeschichte. Tübingen: Verlag Ernst Wasmuth (=
IstMitt-BH 1).
Ginouvès, R. 1992. Dictionaire méthodologique de l’architecture grecque
et romaine. T. II. Élements constructifs: supports, couvertures,
aménagements intérieurs. Roma: École Française d’Athènes – École
Française de Rome.
Ginouvès, R., and A.-M. Guimier-Sorbets. 1994. “Voûte «galate» et
charpente macédonienne.” RA: 311-21.
Gökoğlu, A. 1952. Paphlagonia. Kastamonu: Doğrusöz Matbaasi.
Gossel, B. 1980. Makedonische Kammergräber. Berlin: Monath’s Kopie
Druck.
Gurrieri, O. 1963. L’Ipogeo dei Volumni. La necropoli del Palazzone,
L’Ipogeo di San Manno, L’Ipogeo di Villa Sperandio. Perugia: Azienda
Autonoma di Turismo.
Hannestad, L. 1996. “This Contributes in no Small Way to One’s
Reputation: The Bithynian Kings and Greek Culture.” In Aspects of
Hellenistic Kingship, edited by P. Bilde, T. Engberg-Pedersen, L. Hannestad
and J. Zahle, 67-98. Aarhus: Aarhus University Press.
16

Hellmann, M.-C. 2002. L’Architecture grecque. 1. Les principes de la
construction. Paris: Éditions de A. et J. Picard.
Kasper, S. 1975. “Der Tumulus von Belevi.” AA: 223-32.
Kasper, S. 1976-1977. “Der Tumulus von Belevi (Grabungsbericht).” ÖJh
51: 129-80.
Kasper, S. 1978. “Der Tumulus von Belevi”. In The Proceedings of the
10th International Congress of Classical Archaeology. Vol. I, 387-97.
Ankara: Türk Tarih Kurumu Basimevi.
Keil, J. 1935. “XVIII. Vorläufiger Bericht über die Ausgrabungen in
Ephesos.” ÖJhBeibl 29: 103-52.
Kitov, G. 1977a. “A Newly Found Thracian Tomb”. Obzor 39: 85-93.
Kitov, G. 1977b. “Trakiiska grobnitsa-mavzolei krai grad Strelcha.”
Vekove 6:1, 12-21.
Kitov, G. 1979. Trakiiskite mogili krai Strelcha. Sofia (= Prouchvaniya –
NEK 1).
Kitov, G. 1989. “Strelchanskite grobnitsi.” Arhitektura 36:3-4, 69-70.
Kitov, G. 1994. “Trakiiski grobnichno-kultov kompleks v mogilata
Ostrusha krai Shipka.” Problemi na Izkustvoto 27:4, 13-20.
Kitov, G., A. Barbet, and J. Valeva. 1997. “Plafond peint du tombeau de
Chipka dans le tumulus Ostrucha (Bulgarie).” In I temi figurativi nella
pittura parietale antica (IV sec.a.C. – IV sec.d.C.). Atti del VI Convegno
Internazionale sulla Pittura Parietale Antica, edited by D. Scagliarini
Corlàita, 221-4. Bologna: University Press Bologna (= Studi e Scavi 5).
Kurtz, D.C., and J. Boardman. 1971. Greek Burial Customs. London:
Thames and Hudson.
Lawrence, A.W. 1996. Greek Architecture. Revised by R.A. Tomlinson.
5th ed. New Haven – London: Yale University Press.
17

Leonhard, R. 1915. Paphlagonia. Reisen und Forschungen im nördlichen
Kleinasien. Berlin: Dietrich Reimer.
Loukopoulou, L. 1989. Contribution à l’histoire de la Thrace propontique
durant la periode archaique. Athènes: Diffusion de Boccard (= Meletemata
9).
Mansel, A.M. 1943. Die Kuppelgraeber von Kirklareli in Thrakien.
Ankara: Türk Tarih Kurumu Basimevi (= Türk Tarih Kurumu Yayinlarindan
6:2).
Mansel, A.M. 1946. “Mudanya mezar binasi.” Belleten 10:37, 1-12.
Mansel, A.M. 1950. “Das Grabmal von Mudanya (Bithynien).” In Atti del
I° Congresso Internazionale di Preistoria e Protoistoria Mediterranea, 472-8.
Firenze – Napoli – Roma: Leo S. Olschki Editore.
Mansel, A.M. 1974. “Gemlik tümülüs mezari.” Belleten 38:150, 181-9.
Megaw V. 2004. “In the Footsteps of Brennos? Further Archaeological
Evidence for Celts in the Balkans.” In Zwischen Karpaten und Ägäis.
Neolithikum und ältere Bronzezeit. Gedenkschrift für Viera Nĕmejcová -
Pavúková, edited by B. Hänsel and E. Studenikova, 93-107. Rahden/Westf.:
Verlag Marie Leidorf.
Mellink, M.J. 1963. “Archaeology in Asia Minor.” AJA 67:2, 173-90.
Mellink, M.J. 1967. “Archaeology in Asia Minor.” AJA 71:2, 155-74.
Mellink, M.J. 1992. “Archaeology in Anatolia.” AJA 96:1, 119-50.
Mermerci, D., R. Yağci, and E. Güleç. 1990. “Yukari Bağdere, Yalacik
tümülüsü 1989 kurtarma kazisi.” In I Müze Kurtarma Kazilari Semineri,
163-76. Ankara: Ankara Üniversitesi Basimevi.
Miller, S.G. 1993. The Tomb of Lyson and Kallikles: A Painted
Macedonian Tomb. Mainz am Rhein: Verlag Philipp von Zabern.
18

Mitchell, S. 1993. Anatolia. Land, Men, and Gods in Asia Minor. Vol. I.
The Celts in Anatolia and the Impact of Roman Rule. Oxford: Clarendon
Press.
Nielsen, M. 2002. “…stemmate quod Tusco ramum millesime ducis…
(Persius Sat. 3.28): Family Tombs and Genealogical Memory among the
Etruscans.” In Images of Ancestors, edited by J.M. Højte, 89-126. Aarhus:
Aarhus University Press (= ASMA 5).
Oğuz, R. 1934. “Karalar hafriyati.” TTAED 2: 102-67.
Oğuz, R., and J. Coupry. 1935. “Les tumuli de Karalar et la sépulture du
roi Déiotaros II.” RA 6: 133-51.
Oleson, J.P. 1982. The Sources of Innovation in Later Etruscan Tomb
Design (ca. 350-100 B.C.). Roma: Giorgio Bretschneider Editore.
Orlandos, A.K. 1968. Les matériaux de construction et la technique
architecturale des anciens grecs. Seconde Partie. Paris: Éditions E. de
Boccard.
Pandermalis, D. 1972. “Ο νεος μακεδονικος ταφος της Βεργινας.”
Makedonika 12: 147-82.
53.
Perdrizet, P. 1898. “Voyage dans la Macédoine Première.” BCH 22: 335-
Perrot, G., and C. Chipiez. 1890. Histoire de l’art dans l’antiquité. T. V.
Perse – Phrygie – Lydie et Carie – Lycie. Paris: Librairie Hachette et C ie .
Praschniker, C., and M. Theuer. 1979. Das Mausoleum von Belevi. Wien:
Österreichisches Archäologisches Institut (= Ephesos 6).
Rousseva, M. 2002. Trakiiska grobnichna arhitektura v bulgarskite zemi
prez V-III v.pr.n.e. Yambol: Izdatelstvo Ya.
Sams, K., and I. Temizsoy. n.d. Gordion Museum. Ankara: Dönmez
Offset.
19

Schachermeyr, F. 1929. Etruskische Frühgeschichte. Berlin – Leipzig:
Walter de Gruyter & Co.
Schneider Equini, E. 1972. “La necropoli di Hierapolis di Frigia.”
MonAnt 48 (Serie Miscellanea 1:2): 93-142.
Steingräber, S. 1993. “L’architettura funeraria chiusina.” In Atti del XVII
Convegno di Studi Etruschi ed Italici Chianciano Terme, 171-82. Firenze:
Leo S. Olschki Editore (= La Civiltà di Chiusi e del suo Territorio).
Steingräber, S. 1999. “Grabarchitektur und Grabmalerei in Thrakien und
im vorrömischen Italien – eine vergleichende Studie.” Problemi na
Izkustvoto 32:4, 53-68.
Steingräber, S. 2000. Arpi – Apulien – Makedonien. Studien zum
unteritalischen Grabwesen in hellenistischer Zeit. Mainz: Verlag Philipp von
Zabern.
Steingräber, S. 2001. “Gab es eine Koinè in der Mediterranen
Grabmalerei der frühhellenistischen Zeit?” In La peinture funéraire antique
IV e siècle av. J.-C. – IV e siècle ap. J.-C. Actes du VII e Colloque de
l’Association Internationale pour la Peinture Murale Antique, edited by A.
Barbet, 201-6. Paris: Éditions Errance.
Steingräber, S. (ed.), D. Ridgway, and F.R. Serra Ridgway (English
language edition eds.). 1986. Etruscan Painting. Catalogue Raisonné of
Etruscan Wall Paintings. New York: Johnson Reprint Corporation.
Theodossiev, N. 2002. “The Beehive Tombs in Thrace and Their
Connection with Funerary Monuments in Thessaly, Macedonia and Other
Parts of the Ancient World.” Ancient Macedonia 7 (forthcoming).
Theodossiev, N. 2004. “The Origin of the Thracian Beehive Tholos
Tombs.” In Praktika 11th Diethnous Synedriou Klassikon Spoudon. T. 3,
20

348-67. Athenai: Ethnike Organotike Epitrope tou 11th Diethnous Synedriou
Klassikon Spoudon tes F.I.E.C.
Tokgöz, D. 1975-1976. “Iğdir tümülüs kazisi raporu.” TürkArkDerg 22-
23: 151-7.
Valeva, J. 2002. “Tombeau mausolée du Tumulus Ostroucha près de
Chipka (Bulgarie).” In La pittura parietale in Macedonia e Magna Grecia.
Atti del Convegno Internazionale di Studi in ricordo di Mario Napoli, edited
by A. Pontrandolfo, 53-6. Paestum: Pandemos.
Vetters, H. 1971-1972. “Ephesos.” Österreichisches Archäologisches
Institut. Grabungen: 32-62.
Vetters, H. 1972. Ephesos. Vorläufiger Grabungsbericht 1971. Wien –
Köln – Graz: Hermann Böhlaus Nachf. (= AnzWien 109:4).
Waelkens, M. 1982. “Hausähnliche Gräber in Anatolien vom 3. Jht.v.Chr.
bis in die Römzeit.” In Palast und Hütte. Beiträge zum Bauen und Wohnen
im Altertum von Archäologen, Vor- und Frühgeschichtlern, edited by D.
Papenfuss and V.M. Strocka, 421-45. Mainz am Rhein: Verlag Philipp von
Zabern.
Weber, G. 1878-1880. “Tumulus et Hiéron de Bélevi sur l’ancienne route
d’Ephèse à Sardes.” Mouseion kai Bibliotheke tes Euangelikes Scholes 3:1-
2, 89-104.
Winter, F.A. 1988. “Phrygian Gordion in the Hellenistic Period.” Source.
Notes in the History of Art 7:3-4, 60-71.
Young, R.S. 1956. “The Campaign of 1955 at Gordion: Preliminary
Report.” AJA 60:3, 249-66.
21