Abstract :
Lycian Civilization, considered to be “Hellenic”, has been an issue in prehistoric science and archeology since the 19th century. This foreign identity attributed to Lycia was first based on the art of the region (and the artists), called “Hellenic”; then the ‘Hellenization’ of Lycia was deemed complete when the Greek script and language was adopted in the Hellenistic period. However, neither the Anatolian sources of the art and artist, nor the Anatolian sources of the writing were taken into consideration in this thesis. Moreover, the fact that the Greek script and language was disseminated in this territory by the Macedonian Alexander the Great was ignored. Although culture and art in Archaic Ionia were endemic to Anatolia, Archaic Ionia was deemed Hellenic because the script and language was Greek. On the other hand, in Archaic and Classical Lycia, although the writing and language was local, Hellenic identification was ascribed due to the art, deemed to be ‘Hellenic’. “Which identifies origin, writing or art?” This question was never raised. It has been considered that “where the writing was in Greek, then the language should also be Greek”. This induction (of the Greek language) by a noble minority was disseminated to all the people of Lycia. However, there were contradictions, such as the fact that the Phrygian and Luvian languages were spoken for centuries without usage of writing, and this was ignored. All this “evidence” was deemed satisfactory to make Lycian civilization “Hellenic”; no discussion took place about the “thought” of the Lycian people or their works of art. However, “thought” is the main identifier of origin and it formulates art according to its content. In the context of this article, it will be seen that there is no “Hellenism” either in the themes selected for the works of art, or the historical content, natural and realistic description of Lycia, but that there is the “Anatolian” and there is the “truth” in an oriental way. Further, a Lycian noble may also be said to be ”un-Hellenic” in that, his tomb may be located in the city, in the Agora and not separated from the people’s lives, and because when he dies, he will become a god, not a “hero”. His beliefs are of Anatolian source, thus it should not be surprising that the local cults flourish even at the beginning of the Christianity. The Lycian worshipped in nature; his altars were the rock. His temples and tombs were formed in an Anatolian fashion. As documented on the “Inscribed Pillar”, the Hellenic names of the gods and goddesses in inscriptions should be because of the requirement of the writing and translation into Greek. Even if the name of the king was Pericles, he became a god, unlike Pericles. His portrait does not reflect the ideal beauty of Hellenic art. On the contrary, it describes a “barbarian”, in a non-Hellenic, but a realistic oriental manner. In other words, he has taken the name, but not the thoughts of the Athenian. Finally, classical studies have not converted the notion of “influence”, which refers to the impact on artistic forms between cultures, to “acculturation”, when the subject matter is the Hellenes. There is no place for dogma, or resistance in science, but there should be intelligent questioning and examination. This is what we have been doing in Lycia for 20 years… We, the “School of Patara”, have raised awareness of the consequence of “Anatolian” sources, and this is a consequence which researchers are now writing about, as if we have never written before, in view of the orthostat relief in the vein of late-Hittite art, which came to light at our neighbor, Xanthos.
