A ‘living’ necropolis: change and reuse in the cemeteries of Cyrene

Abstract

The four cemeteries of Cyrene were a living archaeological landscape whose life continued far beyond antiquity. The habit of using monumental tombs was a long-lasting one in Cyrene, starting in the Archaic period and continuing until Roman times. The concept of ‘reuse’ is in itself a problematic one since, from a semantic point of view, it implies the presence of a clear-cut division between an original ‘phase of use’ and of a later ‘phase of reuse’. This approach could have sense when a clear hiatus is present, for example when speaking of modern reuse of ancient Greek tombs. However, the main problem is the use of the term ‘reuse’ when describing two ancient phases, such as a Hellenistic phase and a Roman phase of the same tomb, implying a clear hiatus between them even if one often lacks the elements for identifying the existence of such a hiatus. In particular, the Southern and Northern Necropolises have been analysed here to investigate this subject, basing the hypotheses on data coming from field research and previous studies. However, the topic of reuse for the tombs of Cyrene would need far more space than this paper, so this work should be considered an introduction to a matter that needs a far deeper and a far wider analysis. Given these limits, an ‘anthological’ approach is here proposed, with a sequence of various subjects connected to the ‘reuse’ topic and some new data coming from recent research (such as the surveys in the Northern and Southern Necropolises and the excavation of Tomb S1 by the Chieti University team, and of a tomb in the Northern Necropolis by a team of colleagues from the local Department of Antiquities).

The Western Necropolis of Cyrene: the Wadi Belghadir road

“…As for the acroteria, Stucchi proposed an eastern origin resulting from the stylization of Upper and Lower Egypt's joint crowns, although this hypothesis has no evidence base. Challenges to Stucchi's hypothesis and chronology came from both Thorn (2005, 338–342, figs 215–217) and Cherstich (2008a, 129–130, no. 7).…”

“…They often use secondary or remaining spaces, fitting in between two already existing tombs, or leaning either on the lower or higher level of the main road. Sometimes, especially from the third and fourth centuries AD, the new tombs reuse existing monuments, altering or erasing evidence of those monuments, almost completely, as in the numerous examples which have been published recently by Cherstich, Menozzi and Antonelli (Cherstich et al 2018, in particular the contribution of Antonelli and the appendices).…”

“…Other examples of painted tombs in the area are W16 and W20 (which are badly preserved), and tombs W122 and W97–98 in Haleg Stawat (Cherstich I. 2008). These wall paintings find parallels in the necropolis of Alexandria (Fabbricotti 2006).…”

“…Apart from these few examples of new Roman tombs, most of the Roman funerary monuments reuse earlier tombs or are tombs that have been in constant use since earlier phases (Cherstich et al 2018). These phenomena of the transformation of the necropolis are more evident from the middle and late imperial period, especially because the façades change their appearance with the insertion of the funerary portraits.…”

A proposal for the use of Core and Buffer Zones to protect the heritage of the Cyrenean landscapes

“…The necropolis suffered from the development of New Shahat during the twentieth century (Thorn 2005, 13–15) which devoured important parts of the Southern and Eastern cemeteries, but the scale and speed of today's destructions is astonishing. In the past the local communities had an intense cultural relationship with the ancient necropolis (Cherstich I. in Cherstich, Menozzi et al 2018, 141–3), but nowadays many landowners ignore the value of the ancient heritage. Exploiting the chaotic situation following 2011, many locals, who have previously respected the antiquities, have started destroying the ancient monuments, clearing areas to get more space for building.…”