The sanctuary of Apollo at Didyma was one of the most important oracles in the Greek world. It flourished during the Archaic period. However, despite intensive research over more than a century, little is known about the sacred precinct of that time and the activities that took place there. This is mainly due to the later overbuilding and destruction of Archaic buildings and deposits. The excavation at Taxiarchis Hill yielded a ‘weitgehend ungestörten archaischen Heiligtumsbefund’ (p. 4) and thus fulfils, at least in part, a decades-long desideratum. For the first time, it allows detailed interpretations of the Archaic period at Didyma to be made on a broad quantitative basis.
This is the first of three volumes of a comprehensive publication on the excavations at Taxiarchis Hill. The second part (Archaic ‘Gefäßkeramik’) was published in 2023, while the third part, covering the remaining categories of finds and the ‘übergreifende Auswertung’, has been announced. The texts were written by the four main authors H. Bumke, E. von Gaisberg, A. von Miller and G. Pantelidis, the catalogue entries on Hellenistic to Byzantine finds by six other experts. Von Miller was also responsible for the editorial work (p. xii).
The volume has a clear structure. The description of stratigraphy and architectural remains is consistently separated from their interpretation. In the introduction Bumke provides a concise history of the excavation and the research, as well as an overview of the main results. Next, von Miller describes and interprets the stratigraphy in a meticulously considered manner. A uniform colour-coding system for the individual layers, applied consistently to all plans, profile drawings and tables, facilitates readers’ orientation in the volume. Stratigraphy and structures from the ‘nacharchaische Nutzung von der hellenistischen bis in die byzantinische Zeit’ are presented together with the finds, as they are much fewer than those from the Archaic period, which are the subject of a separate volume. Subsequently, Bumke and von Gaisberg discuss the functions of Taxiarchis Hill during antiquity and its role in the topography of the sanctuary of Didyma as a whole. This is followed by concordance lists by context and summaries in German, Turkish and English.
Taxiarchis Hill, named after a late Byzantine chapel, is located about 200m north-west of the Temple of Apollo. Excavations in 2000, 2001, 2003 and 2009 focused on the upper terrace of the hill. The stratigraphy there is uniform: the oldest cultural layer accumulated over two centuries and shows continuous use of the area until around 550/25 bce. Around 500 bce, the hilltop was extended by a terrace (p. 36). It is possible that there was a plan to erect a building on it. However, since no Archaic architectural remains have been found in situ, the purpose of this ‘Nutzungsoptimierung’ (p. 284; cf. p. 161) remains unclear. Shortly afterwards, in the first quarter of the fifth century bce, a conflagration damaged the sanctuary. Taxiarchis Hill was now repurposed and used to dump the debris from the fire.
This ‘kohlehaltige Schicht’ is the centrepiece of the three-part publication. This layer is heavily interspersed with charcoal and contains a large quantity of pottery and votives as well as broken architectural elements and roof tiles. In view of its mixing with layers of varying composition, von Miller convincingly argues that it cannot be an ‘In-situ-Befund eines Schadensfeuers’ (p. 26). Numerous matching pottery fragments attest to a primary deposition (p. 29). The question of where in the sanctuary the burnt debris originally came from remains open (p. 37). The unusually wide range of finds and the high quality of many pieces suggest a ‘sakralen Funktionshintergrund des Befundes’ (p. 29).
The deposition of the ‘kohlehaltige Schicht’ is dated to the first quarter of the fifth century bce on the basis of the ceramic finds (p. 27). Bumke convincingly associates it with the looting and pillaging of the sanctuary of Apollo during the Persian Wars, as reported by ancient authors (pp. 8 and 284). Exactly when it took place – Herodotus (6.19.3) attributes it to Darius I, Strabo (13.4; 14.1.5; 17.1.43) to Xerxes I – cannot be determined on the basis of ceramic dating. While previous excavations had found only little evidence of fire destruction (see K. Tuchelt, Archäologischer Anzeiger [1988], pp. 433–8), the excavation at Taxiarchis Hill now provides a strong argument that some areas of the sanctuary of Apollo were severely affected. The Archaic dipteros of Apollo was damaged by fire, but apparently it was possible to restore it (U. Dirschedl, ‘The Apollo Sanctuary of Didyma, the Canachus Apollo and the So-called Persian Destruction’, in: O. Palagia and E. Sioumpara [edd.], From Hippias to Kallias [2019], pp. 239–40).
The ‘kohlehaltige Schicht’ is covered by another layer, called ‘Versiegelung’, which forms a walking surface. The dating of the latter differs between von Miller (pp. 33–5) and Bumke/von Gaisberg (p. 161). In the summary, the dating of this layer is left open (p. 284).
The fire at the sanctuary was a decisive event for Taxiarchis Hill. In the centuries that followed, there was no significant activity in this area. It was only in the late Hellenistic period that it was developed with a path and a well. The upper terrace was enlarged again, while the lower terrace was used systematically for the first time. The modest Building A was constructed in the early imperial period (pp. 97–101). A larger building, Building B, was erected on the lower terrace in the late imperial period (pp. 126–32). As both structures were only partially excavated, their layout and function cannot be determined. Thus, it remains unclear whether Taxiarchis Hill was used for sacred purposes after the early fifth century bce (p. 284).
Bumke and von Gaisberg conclude that Taxiarchis Hill was probably connected to the structures on the adjacent Mosque Hill to the south-east (p. 160). There, below and to the north of the present mosque, monumental structures have been uncovered that have been briefly described in preliminary reports. According to Bumke and von Gaisberg it is highly probable that these form part of ‘ein weiteres Kultzentrum’, presumably for a different deity or deities. Unfortunately, inscriptions mentioning their name(s) are missing. A boundary wall of the Roman imperial period may have enclosed the two areas together and formed the northern boundary of the sanctuary of Didyma.
Bumke and von Gaisberg discuss, in long footnotes, hypotheses recently expressed by A. Slawisch and T.C. Wilkinson (American Journal of Archaeology 122 [2018]): on the dating of the Sacred Way (p. 162 n. 168), on the beginning of the procession of the Molpoi from Miletus to Didyma (p. 163 n. 173) and on the beginning of the activities at the so-called ‘Felsbarre’ (p. 163 n. 170). These comments contain important information about the adjacent areas of Taxiarchis Hill.
The concordance lists help to understand the archaeological contexts, but they are extensive, taking up a third of the total text. It would have been preferable to make this information available as a database that could be consulted online, as was done in the second volume Didyma III 6, 2 (2023).
The volume is richly illustrated with photos, profile drawings and plans. The high quality of the editing, layout and printing should be emphasised.
Didyma III 6, planned in three volumes, is the comprehensive publication of the results of a research project that has lasted over 20 years and involved numerous researchers. Bringing such a project to a successful conclusion is an intellectual, financial and logistical achievement for which project leader Bumke and her team are to be congratulated.
