Latène-Artefakte im hellenistischen Kleinasien: ein problematisches Kriterium für die Bestimmung der ethnischen Identität(en) der Galater

Abstract

This paper seeks to revisit the significance of Latène artefacts in determining the ethnic identity of 3^rd century B.C. Galatian immigrants to Anatolia as well as of their descendants. Although only few such objects have so far been found in Asia Minor, they have commonly been understood as indicative of Galatian presence in central Anatolia, and at times even of continued cultural exchange with the Celts from Europe. However, a closer look at the evidence speaks against this view. First, the term ›Galatian Ceramics‹ can be shown to be misleading, since this ware does not show any traces of Latène culture, so that it should better be labelled ›Phrygian Hellenistic‹ or ›Pontic-Hellenistic Ceramics‹. Second, not a single Latène fibula can be attributed to an individual bearer from among the three major Galatian tribes; geographical and chronological implications rather point to mercenaries recruited from eastern Europe by Attalus I (ca. 240–197 B.C.) or later Hellenistic kings. Third, the architecture of Galatian tumuli stands in an Anatolian Phrygian tradition, and while Latène-style burial gifts are entirely absent from among the Trocmi and Tectosages, alleged attributions of such objects to Tolistobogian tombs could not yet be substantiated. In conclusion, none of the three Galatian tribes seems to have been regular users, let alone producers, of Latène objects. If this is true, we also have to reconsider the origin of the Galatian iconography of the famous victory monuments of Pergamum.