1. Location

Theangela was a city of Caria, one of the most important cities in the peninsula of Halicarnassus during the Hellenistic period. Thanks to epigraphic evidence, the city was identified with a site on a hill above the modern village of Etrim, approximately 20 km E-NE of Halicarnassus. The city was given its name by its founders, whether they were Greeks or Carians. In case the Greeks founded the city, the name probably derived from the Greek words theos and angelos.¹

2. History

Opinions are divided over the foundation of the city. At first, it was considered a colony of Troezen, the Doric city of the Peloponnese, as it happened with the neighbouring Halicarnassus, which was founded in the 11^th c. BC.² However, in subsequent times the city was allegedly identified with Syangela, a Lelegian city of Caria reported in the Athenian tribute lists and today identified with either Alazeytin or Kaplan - Dağ. More specifically, this view has two versions: the first supports that Syangela was refounded in the first half of the 4^th c. BC by Mausolus at Etrim and was renamed Theangela as part of the policy of Hellenisation adopted by the satrap of Caria.³ According to the second version, the inhabitants of Syangela were chased off by the Persians around the mid-6^th c. BC. They transferred their city to the east, to the neighbouring mountainous location of Εtrim. This view supports that Syangela remained there from the 5^th c. BC until the first half of the 4^th c. BC, when Mausolus rebuilt the city and renamed it Theangela.⁴

Modern research makes a completely different proposal based on finds from Etrim⁵ and supporting that a settlement existed in Theangela already from the Late Protogeometric period and was still there in the Archaic period. As a result, Theangela cannot be identified with the city of Syangela as it was a pre-existing settlement, according to chronological evidence. Moreover, the city must have been founded by local Leleges or Carians rather than by a Doric metropolis. In addition, when Mausolus refounded Theangela, he probably wanted to expand and redesign the old city by transferring the population from Syangela and the smaller neighbouring settlements. Despite the mountainous setting, Mausolus’ project turned Theangela into a very important city considered as one of the three greatest cities of the peninsula of Halicarnassus.⁶

3. Literary and Epigraphic Sources

The city is first reported by Pliny, who says that Theangela was among the six cities that Alexander III unified to found Halicarnassus.⁷ However, this must be wrong because Pliny attributes the union of Halicarnassus to Alexander rather than to Mausolus, and wrongly includes Theangela into this union.⁸ Stephanus Byzantius believes that the city was in Caria and distinguishes it from Syangela, while he also hands down the ethnic name Theangeleus.⁹

According to inscriptions from Etrim, dated to the late 4^th, 3^rd and the early 2^nd c. BC, the site is identified with Theangela, which without doubt was an independent city in that period. An inscription dated from around 315 BC mentions an attack against the city launched for unspecified reasons by Eupolemus, satrap of Caria. Although he did not conquer the city, Theangela “and its fortresses” came to terms with him and surrendered.¹⁰ The city was supposedly absorbed by Halicarnassus in the 2^nd c. BC, which is a disputed opinion, while it was also supported that Theangela maintained its independence until the Early Imperial period.¹¹

4. Economy

Theangela possibly never minted its own coins. However, it must have been a prosperous city as long as the valley of Çiftlik to the south and the vast plain of Karaova to the north were part of its chora, as presumed. As far as agricultural production is concerne, inscriptions from the Hellenistic period certify the production of honey, which was particularly famous in nearby areas and was even exported to Egypt.¹²

5. Figurines and Religion

A large number of figurines (13-16 cm high) were found in a depository at the north side of the east acropolis. They are dated from between 560 BC and 270 BC. The discovery of these significant finds contributed remarkably not only to the research of the city's local production but to the Carian coroplastic art in general.

The study of these figurines reveals that the Late Geometric and the Archaic production of Caria were influenced by the great eastern Ionic workshops, such as those of Samos, Miletus and mainly Rhodes, while the Early Classical production was influenced by Rhodes and Attica. The kore carrying a hydria, who became a widespread theme of the Carian coroplastic art, first appears in this period. The kore wears a chiton and a himation worn slantways or a peplos. The influence of Attica dominates the second half of the 5^th c. BC and lasts until the end of the century. Towards the late 5^th and early 4^th c. BC a new type appears, the man holding a phiale, who is either bearded or beardless, with a himation worn slantways or a mantle, and frequently a polos on the head. Although they follow the standards of Rhodes and Attica, the Carian figurines of this period present such a great variety that give the impression of an independent local artistic creation.

There is limited information about the cult character of these figurines. Although inscriptions from the Hellenistic period report the name of a priest of Aphrodite (who probably had a sanctuary in the city) and the fact that the main sanctuary of the city was devoted to Athena, the figurines are not related to the cult of these two goddesses. The themes and typology shared with the figurines found in other Carian cities led to the conclusion that they must have been of a votive character, connected with a chthonic deity, probably Demeter and Kore.¹³

6. Topography and Buildings

Theangela was situated to the south of the modern village of Etrim. The settlement was built on the three tops of a hill and occupied an oblong area approximately 1500m long and 250m wide, with an E-W oreintation. Although the site has not been systematically excavated, the remains of the following structures have been identified:

Fortifications: the city walls surround the entire settlement and can be discerned all along its length; it is up to 5 to 6m high and about 2.50m thick. Both the isodomic and the polygonal systems have been used in the masonry, while the Lelegian type of construction is obvious at some points. Towers are interposed at regular intervals along the south side of the wall, where the hillside is quite smooth, which proves that this was the most vulnerable side of the fortification. On the other hand, the north side has fewer towers. The main entrance to the city was in the SW corner and is 2.80m wide and flanked by towers. A road starts from this gate running to the eastern part of the city. Smaller gates might have also existed on the north side of the wall.

Each of the three hilltops is separately fortified. A powerful rectangular fortress with towers in the corners, thus named "four-towered", was formed at the western hilltop. The interior of these towers was divided by walls into smaller spaces, while access from the city was secured through a narrow passage approximately 1 m wide to the east of the "four-towered" structure. The remains of a crooked wall of unspecified masonry, seemingly belonging to an earlier fortification, are preserved to the southwest, exactly below the fortress.

The top of the middle hill had also a fortified enclosure, though no buildings have been found inside. The top of the eastern hill is a separately fortified acropolis surrounded by a ring-shaped wall and connected with the enclosure of the city through a thin wall directed N-S. The ruins of a rectangular tower, two reservoirs and a mosaic floor were found in this acropolis.

Almost in the middle of the settlement, a separative wall 2.25m thick directed N-S divided the city into two parts. The eastern part of the city includes almost all the important buildings, unlike the western part, which is rather empty even of houses, with the exception of two building complexes.

Opinions have been divided over the chronology of the walls. Because Mausolus was the founder of the city and the walls are very sophisticated, scholars used to believe that the fortification walls were built in the period of the Hecatomnid dynasty.¹⁴ According to a more recent view, the city walls should be dated before 315 BC, when the aforementioned inscription found there and referring to a treaty between Eupolemus and the city was made, as the “ends” of the city reported in the inscription could be identified with the above fortresses. An additional argument supporting this view is the highly sophisticated construction of the fortifications, particularly the four-towered structure, which reveals a date after the death of Alexander the Great (323 BC).¹⁵

Stadium: a building resembling a stadium was found in the eastern part of the city. It measures 50Χ10 m (50m long, 10m wide) and is surrounded by a wall 1.10m thick, although no traces of seats have been found.

Tombs: a tholos tomb 3 m high and 7 m long has been preserved on the west side of the eastern elevation. It consists of a small ante-chamber and the main burial chamber. The roof is made of large horizontal slabs forming a kind of vault. Bones and fragments of vessels of the late 5^th c. BC were found in this tomb, which was initially attributed to the satrap of Caria, Pikres (or Pigres), who was still in power in 427/6 BC. But this assumption requires the identification of the city of Syangela with Theagela, which has been disputed.¹⁶

A group of chamber tombs built of squared stones was found to the NE of the settlement. They all have vaulted roofs and are dated to the Hellenistic period.

House: a house was found near the middle elevation. It has been considered of Lelegian origin, although no chronology has been suggested. It consists of three rooms communicating with each other.