Telmessos / Makre (Byzantium)

1. Telmessos / Makre

Telmessos was a city of Lycia, 44 km to the southwest of Oenoanda, on the site of the modern Turkish city of Fethiye. It was a harbour built in the bay of Makre, while the city also included the settlement of the island of Makre, which controlled the access to the harbour of Telmessos. In antiquity Telmessus was one of the most important and wealthiest cities of Lycia thanks to the commercial activity of the harbour and the nearby fertile plain.

However, very little information is provided about the history of the city in the Byzantine period. In the years of Constantine I (306-337) the city was included in the province of Lycia, which was separated from the united province of Lycia and Pamphylia. Nothing is known about the development of the city until the 8th century, when the city was renamed Anastasioupolis, possibly in honour of Emperor Anastasios II (713-715).1 During his short reign, Anastasios launched Byzantine counterattacks against the Arabs and the harbour of Telmessos possibly played an important role as a naval base during war operations.2 It was in that period that the city came under the theme of Kibyrrhaiotai.

2. Monuments of the City

The scant evidence provided by the sources about the history of Telmessos is completed with the findings of the archaeological research. Archaeologists underline that in the Early Byzantine period the city extended over a large area, as it happened in antiquity, which means that Telmessos was still a thriving city.

However, the modern development of the Turkish city impedes the systematic study of monuments, with the exception of the fortifications. More specifically, a wall possibly built in the 8th century, mainly from ancient architectural members in second use, enclosed a vast area and is a testimony of the role of the city in the struggle against the Arabs under Anastasios II (713-715).3 The wall also encircled the harbour, which remained important and commercially active even in the Middle Byzantine period. It seems that in the same period the population of Makre abandoned the island and escaped to the settlement within the wall.4 From the late 9th century, the name Makre actually prevailed over the name Telmessos before finally replacing it.5

Towards the late 11th century the Seljuk began to attack the city, which in the early 13th century was captured by the Türkmen. As for the 12th century, the archaeological evidence is once again valuable. A new wall was built enclosing an area smaller than that of the 8th century, which indicates that the city and its harbour were still important.

3. The Ottoman Conquest

The city remained a key position during the dominion of the emirate of Menteshe thanks to its strategic harbour, as it was used as a naval base of the emirate’s fleet. Moreover, Makre was the main harbour conducting the commercial transactions of Venice with the emirate of Menteshe, with Venetian merchants settled there. The goods carried from Asia Minor to Venice, Crete and Egypt through Makre were mainly timber, soap, horses and slaves. However, the commercial activity of Makre was often disturbed by the attacks of Byzantine pirates.

Telmessos / Makre was captured by Ottoman Turks temporarily in 1390 and permanently in 1426. In the meantime, the city suffered an unsuccessful attack from the Knights Hospitaller of Rhodes in 1411. The Ottoman conquest marked the beginning of a new era for the city, which maintained its key role in the Ottoman period.




1. Tituli Asiae Minoris II (Vienna 1920), inscription no. 2.

2. Foss, C., “The Lycian Coast in the Byzantine Age”, Dumbarton Oaks Paper 48 (1994), pp. 1-52, esp. p. 4.

3. Foss, C., “The Lycian Coast in the Byzantine Age”, Dumbarton Oaks Paper 48 (1994), pp. 1-52, esp. p. 5.

4. Foss, C., “The Lycian Coast in the Byzantine Age”, Dumbarton Oaks Paper 48 (1994), pp. 1-52, esp. p. 4.

5. The reference to Telmessos by Constantine Porphyrogenitus [Pertusi, A. (ed.), Constantino Porphyrogenito, De Thematibus (Studi e Testi 160, Città del Vaticano 1952), p. 78], is considered an anachronism; see Foss, C., “The Lycian Coast in the Byzantine Age”, Dumbarton Oaks Paper 48 (1994), pp. 1-52, esp. p. 4, n. 14.