The Mal-Tepe Tomb at Mezek

and the Problem of the Celtic

Kingdom in South-Eastern Thrace
Totko Stoyanov

The subject of this colloquium raises the question of the interpretation of the burials uncovered in
the monumental tomb in the huge tumulus Mal-tepe near the village of Mezek in SE Bulgaria. It
is among the most representative of Thracian monuments in respect of its architecture and burial
inventory ( 1937, 1-79, 90-107). It reveals at least three stages of development as a memorial
complex. In the final one, ca. the middle of the 3rd c. BC, when it developed the characteristics of
a heroon (most recent analyss Stoyanov 2005; Stoyanov / Stoyanova forthcoming, . .7), artifacts
unusual for Thrace appeared in the inventory (fig. 1/1-9) ( 1937, 55, 61, 63, ##15-16, 2931, . 23, 52-53, 69)1.
In 1941 P. Jacobsthal identified these as fittings of a Celtic chariot, made in the Plastic style2,
and posed the question of the existence of a Celtic (princely?) burial in the complex attributed to
a Celtic chieftain of Tylis ( Jacobsthal 1941). This article was subsequently included in Jacobsthals
major work on Celtic art ( Jacobsthal 1969, 151-152). Since then this opinion has prevailed in the
literature on the Celtic presence in Thrace3. We can add the opinion presented by R. Hoddinott
(1981, 100, 126-127) in his general book on Thrace, that the fortress in the vicinity of Mezek can
be identified as the capital Tylis, because of the Mal-tepe chariot burial. It is odd that regardless of
the progress of archaeological research and general studies of the Thracian culture of Classical and
Hellenistic times in recent decades, Jacobstahls opinion is more or less repeated even by authors
well acquainted with the matter (Archibald 1998, 246, 287; Bouzek 2005, 105). The exceptions are
the more balanced interpretation of these materials in the studies of M. Domaradzky (
1983, 40; 1984, 7, 87, 125-126, 146; / 1998, 50-53).
In the paper mentioned above I associated the execution of the tomb in the Mal-tepe tumulus
as an impressive heroon, with a boar hunt sculptural group at the entrance, with Adaios, strategos
or epistates of Antigonos Gonatas, residing in Thrace. If so, the fittings from a Celtic chariot, found
in the tomb, might have been war spoils from his contribution to Antigonos defeat of the Celts in
277 at Lysimacheia (Stoyanov 2005, 127).
I shall begin my further critical notes on the La Tne artifacts in question within the context
of the whole tomb-complex, the necropolis and the settlement nearby, starting with the statement
of M. Domaradzki: There are cases, when the Celts use the dwellings and earlier tombs, left by
the local population, like that in Canosa. But, in such burials besides objects of indigenous origin
many materials of proper Celtic character are recorded (swords, metal belts, fibulae, torques etc.).
Despite being looted in Antiquity, the tholos tomb at Mezek has revealed many archaeological
artefacts, among which except for the aforementioned chariot fittings there are none of La Tne
1 B. Filow has not defined the function of most of the artifacts in question.
2 V. Megaw (2005, 213) prefers to call it the Disney style.
3 For a review of the different nuances of interpretations cf. Emilov 2007, 59.

116

totko stoyanov

Figure 1. Chariot fittings and a buckle from the Mal-tepe tomb at Mezek (photo K. Georgiev): 1-5
Bronze bridle rings (NAIM Sofia, inv. #6411-6412); 6 Bronze rosette on a stalk (NAIM
Sofia, inv. #6413); 7 Bronze forked ornament (NAIM Sofia, inv. #6413); 8-9 Bronze
linchpins (NAIM Sofia, inv. #6413); 10 Bronze buckle (NAIM Sofia, inv. #6418).

provenance. The metal chariot fittings show that it was deposited as a grave gift. In the period to
which the chariot belongs first half of the 3rd c. BC or even later, the custom of chariot deposit
as a grave gift does not yet exist in Celtic Europe. It is found only in Northeastern France, where
it lasts till the 3rd c. BC. All of the above allows us to suggest that the tomb at Mezek was reused
in the 3rd c. BC by the Thracians as in other similar instances (cf. Seuthopolis). The Celtic chariot
was a grave gift for a Thracian noble. Maybe it was a spoil of war or a gift from the ruler of the
nearby Celts living at Tyle. ( 1984, 126).
It is to be underlined that B. Filow accurately described the place of discovery of the artefacts
where known, and the opposite where the find site was unknown. This is the case with all the chariot fittings. So, if it is noted that some of the finds were discovered by the villagers and after that
by the Filows excavations outside the tomb ( 1937, 1-5), I am not sure that it is appropriate
to consider these artifacts as part of the finds in the burial or in the dromos (by assumption?)
as is evident from the texts of Jacobsthal (1941, 394-96; 1969, 151) and many of the later authors
(cf. Fol 1991, 384; Archibald 1998, 246). In the review of the information on the circumstances of
the discoveries in the Mal-tepe tomb B. Filow does not give any information on wooden and metal
(bronze or iron) remains from the two/four wheels of the cart or chariot, its axles, poles etc. In the
last few decades exhaustive information has been published on the remains of such vehicles in the
context of three different rich Thracian burials from the 4th c. BC those from Vratsa (
2005, 12-13, 71-72, I/1-7, V), Peretu (Moscalu 1990, 138, 141, 155-158, Abb. 3, 5-6, 1718, Taf. 62-63) and Strelcha ( 1979, 5-6, . 5, 26, 29). In my opinion, it is more adequate
to assume that the fittings in question are parts of a chariot which were deposited already dismantled. The fact that peasants found remains of horse skeletons in the dromos encouraged P. Jacobthal
to assume a chariot burial ( Jacobsthal 1941, 396-97; Jacobsthal 1969, 151). However, there are no
iron or bronze La Tne horse-bits, which are quite different from the Thracian ones from the 4th3rd c. BC (cf. Werner 1988, types V-VII, X for Thrace and type XIV of La Tne provenance). On

the mal-tepe tomb at mezek and the problem of the celtic kingdom

117

the contrary, the buckle (fig. 1/10) ( 1937, 65, #70, . 70), which P. Jacobsthal proposes
to be added to the chariot fittings (1969, 151), is a common and well known element of the horse
trappings in Thrace in Classical and Hellenistic times (cf. Kisyov 1997, 3, pl. 4; 1995,
#100) and it is not related to the La Tne culture. Similar buckles, but with semicircular silhouette,
are known from a series of rich Thracian burials of the 4th-3rd c. BC with typical horse trappings.
The closest complex comes from a rich grave from the Chervenata prast site at Mezek (
1937, 133-36, #8, . 136). Several are known from rich elite burials with riding horses with silver
applications such as Vratsa, Peretu, Agighiol, Panagyurishte (Berciu, 1971, 214-15, 228, Abb. 9.
6-8; 1979, 220, . 47/1-10; Moscalu 1989, 151, #29, Abb. 10/10, Taf. 61/5;
2005, 70, V/4).
On the grounds of our present knowledge of common Thracian harness adornments it is
not possible either to favour the opinion of P. Jacobsthal (left almost without comment by modern scholars) that two groups of gold beads found in the Mezek complex, could be identified as
probably Celtic by comparison with gold finds from Central Europe such as the gold ring from
Herczegmrok, the armband from Schwarzenbach and the golden torque from Drkheim (cf.
1937, 32, 34, #5, 7, . 30/8-11, 32; Jacobsthal 1941, 397-98, Abb. 5-6; Jacobsthal 1969,
98, 152, #61, 248a). At present, beads of similar form and dimension made of gold are a well established element of ceremonial horse equipment recorded at the appropriate parts of the horses
skeletons in the context of most extant elite Thracian burials from the 4th-3rd c. B. C. On the basis
of the observations it is proposed they were threaded on the reins or the smaller straps of the headstall ( 1994, 51, . 10 -; Tonkova 1997, 28, fig. 23). These are just a few examples
Kavarna (Minev 1983, 310, Abb. 1-2, 319, #6, Abb. 20; cf. Tonkova 1997, 28-29), Golyama
Arsenalka Tumulus, near Shipka, Kazanlak Valley (Kitov 1999, 17), Dolna Koznitsa, Kyustendil
district (Staikova 1998, 104, cat. #23), Kralevo, Targovishte district ( 2000, 31, . 26, 32,
34; Fol et al. 2004, 168-69, cat. #224i). More importantly, such applications of the horse harness
have been produced in Thracian workshops as is evident from the punch with the same pattern in
positive, discovered in the context of a toreutic workshop in the big fortified Thracian settlement
at Dragoevo, Shumen district, NE Bulgaria. At the same place a golden appliqu of the kind was
discovered as well ( 2004, 49, 54, . 4-5; the stamp Shumen Museum, inv. #3732).
Since the appliqus in question and some other golden parts of the headstalls reveal a distinct floral
style ( 1937, 30-31, ##1-3, . 27-29; ##1, 2 of these were found in the corridor), and on
account of the fine execution in repousse, filigree and granulation, such artifacts could have been
manufactured by highly skilled Greek goldsmiths and designed for Thracian aristocrats (Tonkova
1997, 28-29, fig. 24).
The bronze statue of a boar drawn by P. Jacobsthal (152, pl. 260g) as another sign of Celtic
influence in the tomb has been taken into consideration by some modern authors as well (cf. V.
Megaw 2005, 213). I would add to previous analysis of the complex and of parallels of the statuary
representations of the boar hunt (cf. Stoyanov 2005, 125-27) the boar and deer hunt scenes on the
upper frieze in the main chamber of the tholos tomb discovered in 2000 at Alexandrovo, just ca. 30
km to North-West of Mezek. In one of them the posture of the beast, attacked by two hunters, is
similar to the Mezek boar (Kitov 2001, 25-27, front page, figs. 8-9, 12-13; 2009, 58, 61-63,
. 55, 60-61). The wall-paintings of the Alexandrovo tomb are to be dated to the early 3rd c. B.C
( 2008, 59) and are a new display of the adoption of the key patterns of royal propaganda
in the Early Hellenistic world hunts, symposia and military deeds as an expression of the heroic
status of the deceased.

118

totko stoyanov

In conclusion I would praise the undoubted contribution of P. Jacobsthal in identifying the

fittings of a Celtic chariot and recognizing them as an indication of the relations between the Celts
and the Thracians (and probably the Macedonians) in that part of the Balkans in the first half of
3rd c. BC. Because of the uncritical use of his supposition of a Celtic burial in the Mal-tepe tomb
by many modern scholars, the role of these artifacts has been overestimated. We should also note
the lack of any archaeological information on Celtic (resp. La Tne) materials from the excavations
of B. Filow (1937, 79-90) and I. Welkov (1937) in the necropoleis in the area of Mezek, the excavations of D. Aladzhov and I. Petrov some 50 years later inside the Medieval fortress at Mezek, along
the north Wall ( / 1985, 49, 58)4, as well as the trench excavations in 1994 at the
North-Western end of the village of Mezek5. Hence, for the time being, it is reasonable to conclude
that the area of Mezek, where a residential seat of a local ruling family is supposed, is far away from
the political territory of the Celtic kingdom of Tylis. As far as I am informed on the results of the
surveys and excavations of Bulgarian and Greek colleagues in the last decades in the area of the
Eastern Rhodopi mountains, no clear evidence of Celtic presence has been found. If so, the Celtic
domain is probably to be found to the East of the left bank of the lower reaches of the Hebros
river.
BIBLIOGRAPHY

, . / . 1985.
.
8, 49-67.
, . 2004.
V- . . .
12, 45-66.
, . 1995.
. In:
, . (.).
. . . 29-91.
, . 1937.
1932-33 .
11, 11770.
, . 1994.
(V-III
. . .). 1, 45-59.
, . 2000.
, . .

, . 1984. . .
, . 1983. . 4,
37-42.
, . / . 1998.
. II.
. .
, . 2009. .
.
, . 1979. .
.
, . 1979. .
.
, . 2002. .
. .
, . 2008.
. 1-4,
57-67.

4 In the excavated ca. 275 sq. m a clear layer from the 4th-3rd c. BC was revealed. The Thracian settlement over
which the Early Byzantine stronghold was later built is to be related to the remains of an architectural complex from the
5th-3rd c. BC, detected by the small scale excavation of I. Welkow (1937, 120-23, . 112/1-2, 7-11, on the Northern
slopes of the fortress hill.
5 Unpublished rescue excavation results from the Sofia University expedition. Some ritual pits, common for Iron
Age Thrace, have been recorded. Besides the local pottery and household artifacts, imported pottery from the 5th-3rd
c. BC has been uncovered.

the mal-tepe tomb at mezek and the problem of the celtic kingdom

, . 2005. .
.
, . 1937. .
11, 1-107.
Archibald, Z. 1998. The Odrysian Kingdom of
Thrace. Orpheus Unmasked. Oxford.
Berciu, D. 1971. Das thrako-getische Frstengrab von
Agighiol in Rumnien. Bericht der RmischGermanischen Kommission 50, 209-265.
Bouzek, J. 2005. Thracians and their neighbours.
Their destiny, art and heritage. (= Studia Hercynia
9). Prague.
Emilov, J. 2007. La Tne finds and indigenous communities in Thrace. Interrelations during the
Hellenistic period. Studia Hercynia 11, 57-75.
Fol, A. 1991. The chariot burial at Mezek. In: Moscat
S. (ed.) The Celts. Milano. 384-85.
Fol, A. / Lichardus, J. / Nikolov, V. (eds.) 2004.
Die Thrakr. Das goldene Reich des Orpheus.
Ausstellungskatalog. Bonn.
Hoddinott, R. 1981. The Thracians. London.
Jacobsthal, P. 1941. Kelten in Thracien. In:
. . 391-400.
Jacobsthal, P. 1969. Early Celtic art. Oxford.
Kisyov, K. 1997. Late Iron age grave finds from the
Archaeological museum in Plovdiv. Archaeologia
Bulgarica 2, 1-7.
Kitov, G. 2001. A newly found Thracian tomb with
frescoes. Archaeologia Bulgarica 2, 15-29.
Kitov, G. 1999. Royal insignia and temples in the valley of the Thracian rulers. Archaeologia Bulgarica
1, 1-20.
Megaw, J.V.S. 2005. Celts in Thrace? A reappraisal.
In: The culture of Thracians and their neighbours.
Proceedings of the International Symposium in
Memory of M. Domaradzki, Kazanlak 1999.

119

Oxford, BAR Archaeopress, International Series

1350. 209-214.
Moscalu, E. 1989. Das thrako-getische Frstengrab
von Peretu in Rumnien. Bericht der RmischGermanischen Kommission 70, 129-190.
Pfrommer, M. 1990. Untersuchungen zur Chronologie
des frh- und hochhellenistischen Goldschmucks.
(= Istanbuler Forschungen Bd. 37). Tbingen.
Staikova, L. 1998. A fourth-century-BC burial from
Dolna Koznitsa. In: Marazov, I. (ed.). Ancient
Gold: The Wealth of the Thracians. Treasures from
the Republic of Bulgaria. (Exhibition Catalogue).
New York. 104-11.
Stoyanov, T. 2007. Late Classical and Early Hellenistic
pottery imitations of metal tableware from Thrace.
In: Iakovidou, A. (ed.) Thrace in the GraecoRoman World. Proceedings of the X. International
Congress of Thracology. Komotini-Alexandroupoli
18.-23. October 2005. Athens. 561-74.
Stoyanov, T. 2005. The Mal-tepe complex at Mezek.
In: The culture of Thracians and their neighbours.
Proceedings of the International Symposium in
Memory of M. Domaradzki, Kazanlak 1999.
Oxford. BAR Archaeopress, International Series
1350, 123-28.
Stoyanov, T. / Stoyanova, D. forthcoming. Early
tombs of Thrace Questions of the chronology
and the cultural context. In: Tumulus as Sema.
International Conference on Space, Politics,
Culture and Religion in the First Millennium BC.
Istanbul 1.-3. June 2009.
Tonkova, M. 1997. Traditions and Aegean influences
on the Jewellery of Thracia in Early Hellenistic
Times. Archaeologia Bulgarica 2, 18-31.
Werner, W. 1988. Eisenzeitliche Trensen an der unteren und mitleren Donau. (= PBF, Abt. XVI, Bd.
4). Mnchen.