• 1 “The route between Çay and Akşehir resembles a large garden landscape.” Sarre, 1896.

1When in 1890, Friedrich Sarre travelled along the slopes of the Sultandağları (or Sultan’s mountains) from Çay to Akşehir, he likened the stretch of land to a large garden landscape: “Überhaupt gleicht die Strecke von Tschai bis Akschehir einem einzigen Gartenland.”¹ Certainly, the difference between the largely dry plain and the fertile land at the feet of the Sultan’s Mountains is a stark contrast. In the summer of 1898, J. G. C. Anderson describes the landscape in more negative terms when he crossed over the hills just south of Turgut (ancient Klaneos), which separate the middle Byzantine bishopric from the plain of Akşehir (Philomelion):

• 3 Geç Antik Çağ ve Bizans Dönemi Philomelion'unu Keşfetmek: Akşehir/Konya'da bir Arkeolojik Belgeleme (...)

2In the 2024 season of our campaign, we continued to study museum objects and reused parts on various Seljuk-era buildings in order to establish the location of historical structures and urban and rural patterns, as well as a chronology for the settlement of the city and its region using inscriptions, rescue excavation reports, and GIS maps based on the museum holdings. Generous permits to study the museum holdings and the Seljuks buildings in the region of Akşehir were granted by the Kültür Varlıkları ve Müzeler Genel Müdürlüğü and the Vakıflar Genel Müdürlüğü, keeper of the Seljuk-era buildings in Akşehir, respectively.³ The campaign was generously funded by the Mary Jaharis Center for Byzantine Art and Culture and AKMED (Suna & İnan Kıraç Akdeniz Medeniyetleri Araştırmaları Merkezi).

• 4 The transliterations and translations in this chapter have been compiled by Armin Bergmeier with th (...)
• 5 Sterrett, 1888.

3Given the early onset of epigraphical explorations, the neglect and partly negative view of Akşehir and its surrounding region may have been a result of the relative dearth of inscriptions when compared to nearby centres. John Robert Sitlington Sterrett, who travelled through the region of Yalvaç, Akşehir, Koçaş, and Konya in the summer of 1884 specifically to study inscriptions, recorded only a single example from Akşehir.⁵ His publication combines a travel account with extensive transcriptions of the inscriptions. Despite the dearth of inscriptions, he praises the beauty of the region. The single inscription recorded for Akşehir was, at that point, no longer kept in the city itself and instead in the possession of a certain Dr Diamantides in Konya. Regarding the trip, he writes:

• 7 Bergmeier, Ercan Kydonakis, and Ricci, 2024.
• 8 For the early epigraphical compilations, see Jonnes, 2002, 30. See also Sarre and Petersen, 1898. F (...)
• 9 IGSK 62, Bonn 2002.
• 10 Since then, some inscriptions have been published in journal articles, such as Arslan and Gökalp, 2 (...)
• 11 Mitchell, 2023, 300.
• 12 Breytenbach and Zimmermann, 2017, 318 note 1370, 321.
• 13 Ibid., 322.
• 14 Ibid., 315.

4In our first campaign report7, we have already noted the presence of late antique and some middle Byzantine inscriptions. Several of these are preserved on the surviving Seljuk buildings. They give evidence of the complex cultural entanglements between Greek and Islamic communities in the region. Additionally, numerous inscribed objects can be found in the local museum collection. Very few of these, however, have provenances that record specific places where these objects were installed or reused. Most of them were likely found by locals buried in the soil. Scholars such as W. M. Ramsay, William Moir Calder, and Thomas Drew-Bear have repeatedly published studies on epigraphy with a focus on centres around Yalvaç and Amorium as well as localities in Phrygia and Lykaonia (the MAMA project, Monumenta Asiae Minoris Antiqua).⁸ The most comprehensive study for our region is Lloyd Jonnes' The Inscriptions of the Sultan Dağı I.9 Jonnes compiled evidence from earlier travel accounts and epigraphic studies on the towns along the northern slopes of the Sultan Mountains, including Philomelion (Akşehir), Hadrianopolis (Koçaş), Tyriaion (Ilgın), and Neapolis (Doğanhisar).¹⁰ The entire region of Phrygia is rich in (late ancient) inscriptions. By contrast, the region to the north has almost none. Mitchell observed that “Early Christian texts were an extreme rarity in the territories of Nacolea and Dorylaeum. Almost none has been found in the villages north of the middle Tembris valley or in the highland territory to the north, which extended to the sanctuary of Zeus Sarnendenos, on the boundary between Phrygia and Bithynia.”¹¹ In Philomelion, there is no epigraphic evidence for Christians before the 3^rd century, and only six Christian inscriptions predate the 5^th century.¹² One more will be added to this list below under No. 7. This relative epigraphic scarcity would suggest a negligible Christian presence. However, thanks to the mid-2^nd-century Martyrium Polycarpi, which details the martyrdom of Bishop Polykarp of Smyrna and was addressed to the Christian population of Philomelion, there is evidence of a significant early Christian presence in the town and of Philomelion’s relationship with faraway Smyrna.¹³ Later inscriptions give clearer evidence for the Christian population during late antiquity and the Byzantine period. While early epigraphers and travellers noted few inscriptions in Akşehir and the surrounding area, these have since increased to over 100.¹⁴

• 15 Körte, 1900, 443–44. See also Merkelbach and Stauber, 2001, cat. 16/55/01, 391.

5This chapter studies some thus far unedited inscriptions, particularly those Greek inscriptions surviving in Seljuk mescids and türbes. Some have been edited, but small corrections will be proposed here. Finally, another thus far unpublished funerary inscription that entered the museum collection in 2012 will be discussed at the end. Almost all Seljuk structures in the city and in the villages around preserve at least one Greek inscription. Today, none survived in the Taş Medrese; however, Alfred Körte recorded a prayer to Apollon and other Gods displayed on the façade of Taş Medrese during campaigns in 1893–95.¹⁵ Apollon and Helios are likened to the two local gods Hosios and Dikaios. Its current location is unknown. Other inscriptions survive in situ. The most stunning Byzantine inscription that has thus far not been published is walled in over the door of the Altunkalem Mescidi in the northern part of ancient, Byzantine, and Seljuk Philomelion - between the mountains and the assumed line of the city wall.

• 16 Bakırer, 2017, 73–4.

6This Seljuk mescid from the 13^th century incorporates a horizontal, centrally-placed epistyle beam with an inscription on its façade. (Fig. 1) The building inscription dates the small mosque to the year 1223.16 The reused Byzantine inscription is installed at ca. 2 meters from the ground, making it easily possible to read:

• 17 For this doorframe/lintel, see a forthcoming article publication by Ahmet Oğuz Alp.

7The inscription praises the craftsmanship of the kankela (screens or grilles), likely part of a former church and now incorporated into the mosque. Based on the paleography, it may be dated to the 11^th or 12^th century. Nothing is known about a church dedicated to Eustathios in or around Philomelion, but the presence of that name in an 11^th-century inscription from Antioch in Pisidia/Yalvaç (Inv. No. A 2975) suggests that the saint was venerated in more than one church in the region.17

• 18 Jonnes, 2002, cat. no. 52, 25.

8Several inscriptions can be found on the façade of the Ferruhşah Mescid. These have all been edited. A particularly interesting one is a two-part inscription – in Greek and Neo-Phrygian – an Indo-Germanic language spoken in the region until the end of the late antique period.¹⁸ Another interesting inscription has been edited (ICG 621) but shall be given here with slight corrections to the last – but very important – word. (Fig. 2) It is also an interesting example of reuse because before it was installed in the Seljuk building in 1224 CE, the Greek inscription had reused a middle Byzantine (10^th century?) epistyle beam or impost block. The inscription was added on the undecorated rim surrounding a braid-like motif. It reads:

• 19 Oikonomides, 1972, 296.

9This is a personal prayer inscription. The inscription misspells ἱπατισ(αν) instead of ὑπάτισσαν. Anna Plakidine is the wife of a hypatios, a local consul. This title was in use between c. 1039 and the early 12^th century.¹⁹ The presence of a Byzantine aristocratic title (Hypatissa, wife of a hypatos) and a family name (Plakindinos) suggests the commemoration of a prominent woman.

• 20 Breytenbach and Zimmermann, 2017, 330.

14The name Timotheos was very popular in the region north of Akşehir (surrounding the bishopric of Klaneos, modern Turgut) during late antiquity.²⁰

• 21 Jonnes, 2002, cat. no. 90.

15The small town of Reis lies along the Philomelion (Akşehir)–Hadrianopolis (Koçaş)–Ikonium (Konya) road. A 13^th-century türbe (1268 CE) records the importance of this waystation during the medieval period. It is the mausoleum of Emir Cemaleddin Yavaşgel and was erected using ancient spolia at the bottom and brick for the main body of the türbe in the form of an iwan, open towards the street. On the lower right front façade, just above the stairs leading into the iwan, a late ancient inscription has been placed prominently and on its side. (Fig. 6) It has been published by Jonnes and others²¹, but a small correction shall be given here: The first line reads Λεύκιος instead of Λούκιος.

• 22 On the published inscriptions from this structure, see Jonnes, 2002, cat. nos. 209–212.

17A stone with an inscription likely found during agricultural work in the fields surrounding the mosque has been put on display in front of the Yunus Emre Mosque in Koçaş.²² (Fig. 7) Traces of a plough can be seen across the surface:

• 23 Breytenbach and Zimmermann, 2017, 332.

18There may be a word missing (οἵ?) that was destroyed by a modern plough when the stone was found. There may also have been a small gap between the words. The mystic concept of living together in themselves may be echoed in the name Zotikos, which Breytenbach and Zimmermann have noted was common in the area of Klaneos/Turgut, north of Akşehir and Koçaş, and may have been given to individuals to express “participation in the new life given by Christ.”²³ Based on the paleography, the date can be assigned roughly to the 6^th–9^th century.

• 24 Bergmeier, Ercan Kydonakis, Ricci, 2024, fig. 7.

20The museum preserves a fragmentary inscription (Inv. No. 66-3) that has been published in our previous report24, but shall be repeated here to give a more complete account. It reads:

• 25 On Staurograms, see Breytenbach and Zimmermann, 2017, 13–20; Niewöhner, 2021, 65. Staurograms can b (...)

22Another inscribed tombstone (4^th century) that entered the museum in 2012 (Inv. No. 12-66) has no clear provenance, and according to the object file, it was sold to the museum by a local person. (Fig. 8) Its surface has an appearance of being newly carved, and the letters are very sharp without any traces of wear. Unless the stone has been kept in a sheltered spot for most of its existence, which cannot be established anymore, it may also be a modern forgery. The ornaments surrounding the inscription furthermore attract notice. The central motif is a staurogram, which is rare on tombstones, but parallels can be found in the region.²⁵

• 26 Özsait and Özsait, 2010, 593-612; Özsait, 1992, 377-395; Özsait, 2005, 587-607.

25Despite the large number of archaeological excavations and surveys conducted in the Lake Region in Burdur and Isparta, few have focused on the region defined as the eastern outskirts of the Sultan Mountains Range, where Akşehir is located. The archaeological survey led by Mehmet Özsait in the Isparta- Burdur Lake region was the first fieldwork to document the Bronze Age settlements in the hinterland of Akşehir in the summers of 1990, 1998 and 2003, identifying a plethora of previously unknown mounds (Fig. 9). Based on surface finds consisting predominantly of pottery shards, Özsait recorded evidence of the ‘Roman and Medieval periods’ at several sites initially identified as Bronze Age settlements. These include Eski Altıntaş (Altuntaş), Arap Tepesi (near Yaşarlar Village en route to Ortaköy), Karabulut Mound, Yazla -Mezarlık Tepe, Yuğ Tepesi, Reis- Yörük Mezarı- Evliya Mezarı, Reis Höyük, and Tuzlukçu Höyük.²⁶ Due to the absence of Bronze Age evidence, the old town of Akşehir was not included in Özsait’s survey.

• 27 İsmail Hakkı Konyalı (1945) argues for two lines of fortification with the inner citadel, which is (...)

28The accidental discovery of elaborate Seljuk-period decorative tiles in 1964 in Akşehir kindled scholarly interest in the town (Fig. 12). As one of the earliest systematically documented rescue excavations in Akşehir, the fieldwork took place on a building plot (on Afyon Sokak, within the Sarayaltı neighbourhood), located just outside the fortification line.²⁷ According to the excavation reports, an abundance of delicately decorated tiles was found in this very area, and the archaeologists associated them with palatial tradition due to their high level of craftsmanship. This interpretation led to the hypothesis that the site may have been a Seljuk-period summer palace or an imperial pavilion used for hunting—an alternative retreat to Konya, given Akşehir’s milder climate resulting from its location on the outskirts of the Sultan Mountains.

• 28 Aslanapa, 1965; Yetkin, 1964-65, 60–101; Öney, 2005, 225–240; Öney, 1976; Öney, 1978.
• 29 Öney compares the tiles found in Aksehir to the tile assemblage called ‘Antalya Saray Cinileri’, as (...)
• 30 Öney, 2005, 228.
• 31 Otto-Dorn and Önder, 1967, 237–243; Arık, 2000.

29Following their discovery, the Akşehir tiles were examined and discussed in various publications by Oktay Aslanapa, Serare Yetkin, and Gönül Öney.²⁸ One of the most intriguing conclusions came from Öney, who argued for the existence of a local tile workshop in Akşehir. Her argument was supported by the discovery of kiln shelf supports, kiln slags, and the town’s proximity to known kiln sites.²⁹ Based on the exceptional quality of the tiles, Öney also proposed that they were produced for a summer palace or hunting kiosk commissioned during the reign of Alaeddin Keykubad I.³⁰ However, the subsequent excavations at Kubadabad, led by K. Otto Dorn, shifted scholarly attention away from Akşehir, overshadowing its significance within the Seljuk realm. As a result, the town was largely neglected by archaeologists in the following decades.³¹

• 32 Fieldwork report dated to 17.09.2004, Archives of the Akşehir Nasreddin Hoca Museum, analysed with (...)

30A series of rescue excavations conducted in the early 2000s significantly contributed to a better understanding of Akşehir’s urban history. Supervised by the Archaeological Museum, the excavations took place at the eastern end of the outer citadel, in today’s Anıt Mahallesi, on several building plots (7 pafta, 104 ada, parcels 25, 26, 30, 32) located parallel to one of the town’s main public squares, Anıt (Cumhuriyet) Meydanı (Fig. 13). Between 2000 and 2004, at a depth of approximately five meters, the fieldwork uncovered several fragments of the eastern fortification, as well as a multi-phased tower structure preserved within a rich archaeological context.³² These wall fragments adjoined an earlier section of the fortification wall, which had been excavated in 1978 and subsequently registered as a protected historical monument —though the documentation from that earlier excavation remains limited.

• 33 Fieldwork report dated to 17.09.2004, Archives of the Akşehir Nasreddin Hoca Museum, analysed with (...)
• 34 Gök-Gürhan, 2007, 3; Fieldwork reports, Archives of the Akşehir Nasreddin Hoca Museum.

33The lower level featured a rectangular plan built with ashlar masonry and included marble spolia blocks used for levelling (with the highest preserved elevation at -276 cm).³³ At a later stage, the rectangular tower must have been reconstructed with a circular plan and a thinner wall (1.70 meters in width, diameter 630 cm) that sat immediately on the rectangular tower.³⁴ The wall fragment and tower display extensive use of spolia at both construction phases.

• 35 The 13^th-century date is also supported by the archaeologists who carried out the fieldwork under t (...)

34One of the marble spolia blocks bears a late antique inscription, possibly reading ‘..ΥΜΕΝΟΥC’, providing a terminus post quem for the construction after the Roman Imperial period, likely after the 2^nd or 3^rd century CE. Nevertheless, the notable similarity in masonry and construction techniques between the two phases makes precise dating difficult. Based on these findings, it can be argued that both phases fall within a relatively short time span—perhaps in the 12^th and 13^th centuries—when the town may have been destroyed by the Komnenoi and later reconstructed by the Seljuks following its reoccupation, possibly in the 13^th century.³⁵

• 36 Final report of the 2001-2004 excavations (19.09.2004) Figure 42 for Parsel 30.
• 37 LBYZ/FR 4/2 after Papanikola-Bakirtzi, Maurikiou, and Bakirtzis 1999, 193 (Vroom, 2014, 114).

35The archaeological context of the trenches opened along the eastern fortification line is notably rich in finds from the Byzantine, Seljuk, and Ottoman periods, as well as late antique ceramics. According to the excavation reports, archaeologists observed a high concentration of Late Roman-period red slip ware within the tower at a depth of 4.20 meters. The archaeological layer where most of the Byzantine-period finds were documented (between elevations -4.20 and -3 meters) yielded two bronze coins (Fig. 14) dating back to the 11^th century (both Anonymous A and C types) and various pottery shards dating to the 11^th-12^th centuries (Fig. 15–17).³⁶ A preserved fragment of monochrome sgraffito ware from this layer closely resembles Middle to Late Byzantine examples from Thessaloniki.³⁷ Based on the excavation reports, the majority of ceramic fragments found in this trench were monochrome slipped ware and sgraffito ware, alongside Seljuk-period oil lamps and conical objects whose function remains disputed. In addition to the ceramic assemblage, a collection of pharmaceutical metal tools, a glass bracelet, and kiln stilts were also discovered.

• 38 Final report of the 2001-2004 excavations (19.09.2004) Figure 57 for Parsel 30.

36At a depth of -3 to -3.20 meters, palaeobotanical remains—specifically grape and fig seeds—were discovered within Seljuk-period shards (Fig. 16).³⁸ To our knowledge, no archaeometric analysis has yet been conducted on these carbonized seeds, despite the fact that such analysis could provide a more precise date and valuable information on palaeobotanical aspects, such as grape varieties, which in turn could shed light on provenance, trade links, and related topics.

• 39 Kırmızı, Demirci, Bakırer, and Yaşar, 2005.
• 40 In Akşehir ceramics, quartz has been identified as the dominant mineral, and the presence of biotit (...)

37A comprehensive study employing archaeometric analysis is the PhD dissertation by Gök-Gürhan. As part of a project titled Archaeometric Analysis of Glazed Ceramics from Akşehir, the ceramics were examined by faculty members of the METU Department of Archaeometry.³⁹ Based on the analysis of the pottery shards, the author attributes the origin of the clay to a potential kiln located in Doğanhisar, supported by a comparison with soil samples collected from kilns in Akşehir’s hinterland.⁴⁰