You are here

ANTİK EFES TİYATROSUNUN DÜŞÜNDÜRDÜKLERİ

REFLECTIONS UPON THE GREAT THEATRE AT EPHESUS

Journal Name:

Publication Year:

Keywords (Original Language):

Author Name
Abstract (2. Language): 
Of all the archaeological remains from antiquity one of the most impressive is the Great Theatre at Ephesus (1). A view of it along the principal street of the city from what was once the harbor gate is spectacular (Figure 1). The simple sweep of its geometric form that cuts into the contour of the land accentuates the play of light across its tiers of continuously curving seats, varying from being in full shadow on its southern side to being in full reflection on its other. One cannot help but try to imagine its vacant presence at the dawn of a new day or its radiance at dusk. The view when sitting in it is equally spectacular (Figure 2). It offers a panoramic vision of the city, the level plain where the harbor once existed, a hill, the distant mountains, and the horizon beyond. There is more here than a mere theatre or arena for gladiatorial shows and animal fights. It is a spectacular communal room that endured in the very heart of the city and was actively used for possibly 1500 years, an existence that is virtually identical with the birth and death of the Hellenistic city itself.In Antiquity Ephesus, one of the twelve Ionian cities of the Panionic League founded in the valley of the Cayster River, was renowned for its prosperity, because it became the greatest trading center in western Asia Minor due to its location at the western terminus of the main Roman trading route up the Maeander Valley, and of the Persian Royal Road along which one could travel in ninety-three days to Mesopotamia (Akurgal, 1980,43). It prospered in Greek, Roman, and Byzantine times, but it also suffered significant incursions, such as the invasions by the Ostrogoths in 262 AD. and by the Persians and Arabs in the seventh century (Foss, 1979, 3-4). Another adversary was the river. Its deposits of silt gradually rendered the harbor unusable, which eventually led to the city's demise. With the exception of the Great Theatre, the history of the city's architecture is testimony to its pattern of prosperity, incursion, and decline. The most famous architectural monument at Ephesus was not the theatre, but the Hellenistic Temple of Artemis designed by Chersiphron. As one of the Seven Wonders of the Antique World, it was praised for both its size and splendor, particularly for thirty-six of its 127 columns, which had sculpted drums at their bases, but its history was tempestuous. Construction of the first temple on the site began in 560 B.C., but it only survived for 160 years. The second one lasted only fourty-four years. The Hellenistic temple itself, begun in 356 B.C., was severely damaged by the Ostrogoths in 262 A.D. and eventually totally abandoned in 401 AD. after having survived for almost 750 years (Foss, 1979,86). In 535 AD. it was pillaged by the Byzantines when they built the nearby Basilica of St.John, and some of its columns were transported to Constantinople for use in the Hagia Sophia. In later years it was pillaged by the Turks when they constructed two nearby mosques. Today little is left except for the stone paving, because the few remains that were excavated in the 19th century were relocated to the British Museum.Other buildings in the city suffered similar fates. The gymnasia and thermae fell into functional disuse and houses were built over them. The Acropolis was replaced by Byzantine fortifications and churches, which in turn were replaced by residences (Wood, 1987,165). The old market basilica, burned in 262 A.D., was transformed into the Cathedral of Ephesus, the Church of the Virgin Mary, which in turn was later destroyed probably in the seventh century (Foss, 1979, 52).The Library of Celsus with its famous facade, which was originally constructed in the early second century A.D., fell into ruin in the third century and was rebuilt as a monumental fountain in the fourth century, which in turn was destroyed in the tenth or eleventh centuries (Foss, 1979,65). In 614 AD. all the monuments in one section of the city were abandoned after an earthquake, but the Great Theatre endured (Foss, 1979,107). It was included within the seventh century Byzantine walls, and appears to have been used for as long as the city remained inhabited (Foss, 1979,144). Why this theatre endured is particularly puzzling if one recalls the fate of other ancient theatres. Typically the specific functional nature of theatres precluded their long life. Those located on the periphery of cities appear to have been abandoned. Those located in the continuously populated areas of cities were overbuilt with residences. One need only recall the Theatres of Marcellus or of Pompey in Rome, which even today are occupied by residences. Why then did the theatre at Ephesus endure, and why does any building endure? One could suggest a variety of explanations as to why a building might endure. A functional argument might suggest that a building must be designed in such a manner that it can be readily transformed and that it should not be overly prescriptive, but the explicit functional form of the Great Theatre directly contradicts this. A technological argument might suggest that a building must be constructed firmly to endure, but even the best built building will crumble over time if it is not well maintained. Therefore, this argument must be subordinated to one that stresses man's will, not only to build but to preserve. An aesthetic argument might suggest that, if a building is perceived to be beautiful enough, it will inspire men to preserve it, but the destruction of the spectacular Temple of Artemis argues against this. We are, therefore, left in a dilemma. Seeking an answer according to the categories of Vitruvius, utilitas, firmitas, and venustas, appears to have failed us on all three counts. We must look elsewhere. A more careful analysis of the theatre in its context may offer a better explanation.The excavations of the Hellenistic city of Ephesus, which have exposed approximately 5 percent of what is presumed to have been the entire city, reveal a gridded plan (Figures 3-5). Laid out around 280 B.C. by Lysimachus, one of the generals who succeeded Alexander the Great, it is located approximately 1.2 kilometers southwest of the pre-Hellenistic city, because of silting problems in the city's harbor (Bean, 1966,163). A major street, the Arcadiane, runs in an east-west direction between where the harbor was, which is marked by the remains of a gate with Hellenistic foundations, and the Great Theatre, its oldest parts also being of Hellenistic origin, which is shifted to the south slightly off axis. Perpendicular to this at the foot of the theatre runs another major street, the Street of Eutropius, with the Stadium at its north end and the Library of Celsus at the south. The agora is located to the west of this street between the library and the theatre. These streets mark what was apparently the center of the Hellenistic city.The building fabric relates to the topography as follows. The theatre is cut into the west slope of Mount Pion, a hill with two humps and a saddle between, upon which the Acropolis was located (Wood, 1987, 6). Some distance to the west beyond the harbor and on axis with the theatre along a line parallel to the Arcadiane is another small hill, the 'Hill of Astyages', on which there is the tower of 'St.Paul's Prison', a name for which there appears to be no basis. This tower is part of a Hellenistic wall that runs along the crest of Mount Coressus, forming the southern boundary of the city, and continues down the mountain running north along the eastern slope of Mount Pion. Major public buildings are located along the principal streets. Numerous msulae are set farther back, although they still conform to the orthogonal grid. Buildings and an upper agora that date from Roman times are built on the southern slope of Mount Pion. interestingly they also conform to the grid despite the direction of the topography which runs at an acute angle to them. The only reference to the topography is the direction of a street, the Embolos, which cuts diagonally through the gridded fabric, and a few Roman buildings that face directly upon it.
Abstract (Original Language): 
Efes kentinin tarihi boyunca geçirdiği dönüşümlere baktığımızda tiyatro terkedıldığım, unutulduğunu ya da yakılıp yıkıldığını görüyoruz. Kent yaşamının sürdüğü tüm dönemlerde önemini hiç yitirmeyen bu görkemli tiyatro, mimari yapıların, nasıl yüzyıllara meydan okuyup sürekliliğini koruyabildiği sorusunu tartışmak açısından son derece öğretici. Bu tarihsel süreklilik/geçerlilik sorusu karşısında Vitruvius'un üçlemesinden kaynaklanan açıklamaların (yani işlevsel, teknik ve estetik açıklamaların) yetersiz kaldığını pek güzel örnekleyen Efes Tiyatrosu, sadece işlevsel, sağlam ya da güzel olduğu için değil kent içindeki fiziksel konumu ve kültürel/törensel rolü nedeniyle ait olduğu tarihsel dönemi aşan ve adeta evrenselleşen bir niteliğe kavuşmaktadır. Tarihsel belgeler bize tiyatronun koruyucu tanrıça Artemis'in kültüründen kaynaklanan bir kutsal-törensel rol oynadığını gösterirken, tiyatronun konumlanışı ile kentin ızgara (grid) planının, Artemis'in astrolojik işaretlerine denk düşecek biçimde yönlendiğine de dikkatimiz çekiliyor. Bir başka deyişle, tiyatronun, günümüze kadar ayakta kalmayı başaramamış olan Artemis tapınağına dolaylı bir 'analog' oluşturduğunu söyleyebiliriz ki kültürel anlamın bu dolaylı/örtük aktarılmasının tarihsel sürekliliği sağlamakta en önemli paya sahip olduğu savı bu yazının ana temasını oluşturmaktadır. Öte yandan, kent dokusunun tam ortasında yer alan tiyatronun bir kamu dış mekanı niteliğine 116 METU JFA 1989 kolayca katılması da hiç kuşkusuz söz konusu sürekliliği olanaklı kılmış ve pekiştirmiştir. Modern Mimarlığın ideolojik tabanının enine boyuna sorgulandığı günümüzde Efes tiyatrosundan öğrenebileceğimiz çok önemli dersler var. Herşeyden önce, sadece çok belirli işlevlere cevap vermek üzere tasarlanmış yapıların (gymnasia ve thermae gibi), toplum bu kurumlara artık ihtiyaç duymayınca tüm geçerliliklerini yitirip unutulduğunu gözlemleyerek, dar bir işlevsellik anlayışının yetersizliğinden bir kez daha söz edebiliriz. Öte yandan, anlamını en bariz ikonografik biçimde yansıtan ve belli kültürel değerlerin sembolü olarak inşa edilen yapıların da (Celsus Kütüphanesi, Artemis Tapmağı, Efes Katedrali gibi), toplumsal/ politik/ideoîojik dönüşümler karşısında (çok tanrılıktan hıristiyanlığa geçişte olduğu gibi) terkedilmeye ya da yakılıp yıkılmaya mahkum olduğunu düşünebiliriz. Tiyatro ise, bunlardan çok farklı bir biçimde, sanki insan varoluşunun kolayca tanımlanamayacak bir gerçekliğini hayata geçirmektedir ki böyle bir evrenselliğe günümüzün çoğulcu/göreceli (pluralist/relativist) dünyasında pek kolay rastlayamıyoruz. Bundan, yazının bir nostalji ya da model arayışı ile tarihe baktığı sonucu çıkarılmamalıdır. Sözü edilen arayış, mimarlığın, toplumsal mit ya da 'gerçekleri', dolaylı ve örtük biçimde tematize ederek, yaşamla bütünleşecek biçimde konumlandırılması düşüncesidir ki bu başarıldığında (Efes Tiyatrosunda olduğu gibi) karşımızdaki yapı, kendi önemini yüzümüze bağırmaya gerek duymayacaktır.
109-116

REFERENCES

References: 

AKURGAL, E. (1980) The Art and Architecture of Turkey, Rizzoli, New York.
BEAN, G. (1966) Aegean Turkey, Praeger, New York.
BIEBER, M. (1961) The History of the Greek and Roman Theater, Princeton
University Press, Princeton.
DINSMOOR, W.B. (1939) Archaeology and Astronomy, Proceedings of the
American Philosophical Society (80) 95-173.
Encyclopaedia Brittannica, Micropaedia (1) 550-551.
FOSS, C. (1979) Ephesus after Antiquity: A Late Antique, Byzantine and Turkish
City, Cambridge University Press, Cambridge.
JEX-BLAKE, K., SELLERS, E. (1968) The Elder Pliny's Chapters on the History
of Art, Argonaut, Inc., Publishers, Chicago.
The New Testament, King James Version.
RICHTER, G.M.A. (1959) Pliny's Five Amazons, Archaeology (12:2) 111-115.
SCULLY, V. (1962) The Earth, the Temple, and the Gods, Yale University Press,
New Haven.
WOOD, J.T. (1987) Discoveries at Ephesus, Longmans, Green, and Co., London.
WYCHERLEY, R.E. (1969) How the Greeks Built Cities, Macmillan,London.

Thank you for copying data from http://www.arastirmax.com