The document summarizes an archaeological study of a shipwreck found off the coast of Turkey near Kizilburun. The ship was carrying marble from the quarries on Proconnesos Island and was bound for the Temple of Apollo at Claros. Archaeologists analyzed the marble artifacts recovered from the wreck and determined they included unfinished column drums and a capital matching the dimensions of columns at the Temple of Apollo. This provides evidence that the Kizilburun ship was transporting marble from Proconnesos specifically for construction of the temple, offering insights into ancient maritime trade and building practices.

1. Sydney Quarm

2.  The entire article was an interesting piece, proving and
explaining the process and transportation of marble from
Proconnesos to Claros.
 “At some point in the Late Hellenistic period, an ancient
marble carrier sank off the western coast of Asia Minor
near the promontory called Kizilburun. The ship had set
out from Proconnesos Island laden with a freshly quarried
cargo of architectural parts intended for the Temple of
Apollo at Claros, but the vessel sank before reaching its
destination.”
 “The discovery provides a unique snapshot of quarrying
processes, long-distance transport by sea, and monumental
construction in marble in Late Hellenistic Asia Minor.”
(Carlson, 145)

3.  “It is conceivable that a builder from
Claros made the trip to Proconnesos
with specifications for the peristyle
and perhaps even accompanied the
shipment of marble back to the
temple.” (Carlson, 156-157)
 The marble quarries at Proconnesos
produced widely famous exported
white marbles and has been known as
a source since at least the Sixth
Century B.C.E.
 Marble from Proconnesian also
ranked least expensive.
 The marble was not prefabricated and
cut into large blocks, but rather
custom ordered to each costumer’s
wishes.
(Carlson, 154)

4.  “Isotopic and metrological data indicate Proconnesos as
the source of the marble…found in the Kizilburun
shipwreck.” (Carlson, 145)
 Five samples were sent out to get petrographically,
isotopically, and spectroscopically analyzed and confirmed
that Proconnesos is the very place the marble was probably
quarried from.
 Another feature is the distinct blue-gray lines that is often
associated with Proconnesian marble, but this banding is
also found on other marbles of western Asia Minor.
 Kizilburun was not the first time Proconnesian marble was
found with in a wreck, but it is now the earliest known
wreck to date.
(Carlson 146, 155)

5.  “Kizilburun is exposed to strong
winds and treacherous sea
conditions that may well have
been responsible for the
numerous shipwrecks in the
area.” (Carlson, 145)
 The total weight of the cargo that
the small cargo ship was carrying
was at least 50 tons.
 It was one of many small ships to
transport the entire cargo, what
was found in the wreck is only a
fraction of the entire cargo
shipment. (Carlson 145, 156, 157)

6.  Every since the 1980s The Institute of Nautical Archaeology
(INA) at Texas A&M University has been carrying out
underwater surveys of shipwrecks off the Turkish Coast.
 In 1993, five ancient shipwrecks were discovered, by a team
led by Cemal Pulak, at Kizilburun.
 Only one of the wrecks was a Late Hellenistic stone carrier,
but this is the one ship that gives the greatest insight into
how the entire marble cargo operation was carried out in
the Late Hellenistic period.
 In 2005, a team lead by Donny Hamilton and Deborah
Carlson began excavation on the unknown stone carrier.
(Carlson, 145)

7.  There was a huge amount of cargo uncovered and
discovered on the shipwreck. Cargo including:
 Eight unfinished drums and a Doric Capital
 Two large basins with separate pedestal bases
 Two large table like slabs
 Four rectangular blocks that may have been set aside as pillar
or steps
 Nearly a dozen grave stellae.
 Pottery include a wide range of typical shapes in many fabrics
 Lagynoi, kylikes, fish plates, cooking pans, echinus bowls,
moldmade bowls, and lamps.
 Transport Amphoras, dozens from the Adriatic, East Greece,
the Black Sea, and Egypt.
(Carlson, 145)

8. Slab of marble from the wreck, with
the blue gray banding.

9.  The Drums and Capital found on the wreck are the biggest and
most influential part of the proof that links the shipwreck and the
route between Proconnesos and the Temple of Apollo at Claros.
 The Drums each weigh around 6 to 7 tons.
 The Drums each have neat little bevels carved around the edges of
each drum. Their average height would have been around 0.90 m ,
which means the total shaft of the drums combined would be
around 7.8 m tall.
 Drum 4 also has four handling bosses around its base, which would
make sense for this drum to be the bottom of the Doric shaft.
 The other seven drums exhibit characteristics, such as the
diminution characteristics, that are clearly Doric.
 The wreck obviously contained the lowest and highest drums for
the column, which goes with the theory that these drums belonged
in the middle of the shaft of the column and were shipped
separately from the rest of the column.
(Carlson 148, 150)

10.  Although the drums were unfinished the capital is ruled out
to be Doric.
 The capital includes the echinus and abacus and with the
echinus being about the same match to the abacus in width
clearly supports the argument that the capital Doric.
 The echinus of the capital also has a steep slate which
suggested it was created no earlier than postclassical.
 The capital, height wise, would have been about 0.7 m,
unfinished.
 Together with the drums, the height of the column would
have been about 7.8m, which is well below the other
postclassical examples, unless the column itself of shipped
separately. This seems to be the running theory.
 “The deficiency in the height of the Kizilburun column makes
sense if other drums were shipped separately.” (Carlson, 150)
(Carlson 148, 150)

11. Photos of the drums from the wreck, and the
capital dimensions.

13.  To fully examine the drums and cargo of the ship, everything
inside the wreck had to be removed from the archaeological site.
 The team used thee Lift-All Tuflex lifting lings rigged in a triple
choker hitch assembly which was then assembled to four 4,000
pound Subsalve lift ballons, to lift, relocate the drums and other
cargo of the ship about 25 m away onto the seabed.
 Then the team used a single lifting sling and balloon to flip each
drum and exposed any surfaces that were clear and free of
marine crustation.
 After the relocation, each drum was applied with high-contract
mapping putty, to form a accurate 3-dimensional scale of the
drums, physically and technologically.
(Carlson 146-147)

14. ^^ Drum 3 flipped on
the seafloor using
balloon and sling.

15. ^^ Wire-frame image of Drum 3 with finished 3-D digital model
vv Drum 3 after removal showing reference points on mapping putty.

16.  “The form of the architectural elements and the date of the wreck
suggest they were destined for a site were a monumental Doric
building in white marble was under construction in the late second
or early first century B.C.E. The location of the wreck at Kizilburun is
also key, as is the presumed direction of travel away from the
quarries at Proconnesos. This rules out Thrace, and the northern
Aegean but allows for anywhere south of the
shipwreck...Metrological analysis of the quarry-finished
architectural parts helps narrow the field of potential buildings
because of the large size of the drums and capitals rules out a
portico, propylon, or theater facade—these pieces had been quarried
for nothing smaller than a temple.” (Carlson, 147)
 Another requirement is active construction in white marble during
the first century B.C.E.
 A finished lower-column diameter of about 1.73m is another
requirement, which leaves only one destination that fits all criteria.
 The Temple of Apollo at Claros.
(Carlson 151)

18.  “Construction of the Temple of Apollo at
Claros began no later than the third
century B.C.E.” (Carlson, 151)
 Hadrian was named the dedicator due to
the inscription on the architrave
meaning construction cannot date
before December 135 C.E.
 Therefore construction was ongoing
when the cargo ship sank around
Kizilburun.
 The original plan called for a 6-column x
11-column peristyle, but no more than 14
columns were erected. 6x4 was the final
dimensions.
 The columns also included around 11 or
12 drums for a total height around
10.425m or 11.315m
 Both reconstructions are consistent with
other postclassical examples.
(Carlson, 151)

20.  The finished peristyle drums at Claros are consistent in height, around
0.805-0.945 m, which including the date of the wreck and the dimensions
of the drums found at Kizilburun make Claros a strong candidate as the
destination of the small cargo ship.
 The peristyles also contain the same blue-gray banding as the Kizilburun
cargo and identifies it as Proconnesian marble.
 A partially finished drum was founded at Claros with the dimensions of
0.82m high and 1.88m wide where masons began to carve Doric flutes into
one end.
 The flutes match other flutes carved around the temple.
 “The partially finished drum represents an important intermediate stage of
processing between the roughly finished, unfluted drums found at
Kizilburun and the finished, fully fluted drums at Claros.” (Carlson, 153)
 There are also lewis holes on the drums at Claros, except for the bottom
drums, which were used to lift and place the drums one on top of the other.
 The lewis holes and the handling bosses on the bottom drums imply that
there was detailed communication about the drum specifications from
Claros to Proconnesos.
(Carlson 151-153)

21. vv Unfinished drums from Kizilburun
compared with finished drums at Claros. Inner
black lines are the finished drums dimensions.
^^ Partially finished drum at the
Temple of Apollo at Claros.

23.  “The Kizilburun shipwreck provides new evidence for the
maritime transport of marble between the quarry and the
construction site.” (Carlson 156)
 The cargo was also separated because Kizilburun was just in its
beginning stages of quarrying and shipping, and therefore not as
experienced.
 The match in size and shape of the capital and drums intended
for Claros support the theory that there was close contact
between masons at Proconnesos and builders at Claros.
 This is the first time that a shipwreck has provided evidence for
both the destination of the ship and the origin of travel.
 The wreck also suggests that Claros received columns in small
shipments, no more than one at a time.
 This wreck also marks the first time a construction phase of a
monument or temple had been dated by shipwreck.
(Carlson 156, 157)

24.  This article was well cited and stated.
 It was easy to follow, and understand.
 Every piece of evidence was used completely and fully to come up
with the destination and origin of the route of the cargo.
 There is very little room for criticism. The entire article was well
stated and proof was infallible at best.
 Each theory was provided with more than enough evidence to be
proven.
 The only thing I can really think to comment on is why would a
temple choose Proconnesos as the origin. I would think a temple
would pick a pricey quarry, especially since this seems to be one
of the first quarry purchases at Proconnesos, which means it was
relatively new and probably not advertised well.
 Also, the article mentioned other places with the blue-gray
banding marked on the marble, throughout Asia Minor. They
should have looked into those other quarries also. There wasn’t
much evidence against those quarries.

25.  Carlson, Deborah N., and William Aylward. "The
Kizilburun Shipwreck and the Temple of Apollo at
Claros." American Journal of Archaeology (2010): 145-
59. Web.
 All pictures, and information came from the article as
cited above.