DOCSLIB.ORG

Arslantepe Yönetim Planı 2019-2024

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Arslantepe Yönetim Planı 2019-2024 Arslantepe Yönetim Planı 0 2019-2024 Özet ........................................................................................................................................................ 3 Arslantepe ..................................................................................................................................... 3 Yönetim Yetkilisi Kurumlar ...................................................................................................... 5 Yönetim Planı ............................................................................................................................... 5 Yönetim Planının Yasal Statüsü ............................................................................................... 6 Planlama Süreci / Ekip ve Katkıda Bulunanlar ..................................................................... 7 BÖLÜM I:ALANI KAVRAMAK ...................................................................................................... 9 1. ALANIN TARİHİ VE AÇIKLAMASI ................................................................................. 9 1.1. Giriş .................................................................................................................................... 9 1.2. Coğrafi Konum ve Jeolojisi ........................................................................................... 9 1.3. Araştırmaların Tarihi .................................................................................................... 10 1.3.1. Tarihöncesi İskân: Arslantepe’de Geç Kalkolitik Dönem ................................. 11 1.3.2. Erken Bronz Çağı .................................................................................................... 20 1.3.3. Orta Bronz Döneminden Demir Çağına (Dönem V ila III). Hitit “Egemenliği” altında Yeni Gelişmeler ve Geç Hitit Melid Krallığının Yükselişi ................................... 24 2. ARSLANTEPE’NİN GÜNÜMÜZDEKİ DURUMU ........................................................ 25 1 2.1. Mevcut Yönetim ve Organizasyon ............................................................................. 25 2.1.1. Yasal Statüsü ........................................................................................................... 25 2.1.2. Mülkiyet ve Sorumluluk ........................................................................................ 28 2.1.3. Peyzaj ve Çevre ....................................................................................................... 29 2.1.4. Civardaki Yerleşimlerin Sosyo-Ekonomik Yapısı .............................................. 29 2.2. Bilgi Kaynakları ve Arkeolojik Kayıtlar ................................................................... 32 2.2.1. Buluntular ................................................................................................................ 32 2.2.2. Evrak, Fotoğraf ve Dijital Arşiv ............................................................................ 32 2.2.3. Yayınlar .................................................................................................................... 33 2.2.4. Web sitesi ................................................................................................................. 34 2.3. Alanın Hâlihazırdaki Durumu ................................................................................... 34 2.3.1. Kazıların Şu Anki Durumu ................................................................................... 34 2.3.2. Arkeolojik Alanda Koruma ve Konservasyon ................................................... 35 2.3.3. Buluntuların Restorasyonu ve Konservasyonu ................................................. 43 2.3.4. Sahada sunum ......................................................................................................... 44 2.4. Turizm ............................................................................................................................. 52 2.5. Arslantepe’nin Tanıtımı ............................................................................................... 54 2.5.1. Arslantepe Konferansları....................................................................................... 54 2.5.2. Arslantepe Öğrencilere Anlatılıyor ...................................................................... 56 2.5.3. Tur Rehberlerinin Arslantepe Ziyareti ................................................................ 56 2.5.4. Malatya’nın Mirası Arslantepe Projesi ................................................................ 57 2.5.5. Yerel Halk Arslantepe’yi Geziyor ........................................................................ 58 2.5.6. Malatya Film Festivali ve Tarhunza Heykelciği ................................................ 58 2.5.7. Arslantepe Belgeseli: Belleğin Tutkusu - Arslantepe) ....................................... 59 2.5.8. İlk Uygarlıklar Belgeseli ........................................................................................ 60 2.5.9. Yeni Malatyaspor Maçlarında Arslantepe Pankartları ..................................... 61 2.5.10. Malatya ve Kayısı ................................................................................................... 62 BÖLÜM II: ALANI DEĞERLENDİRMEK ................................................................................... 63 1. PAYDAŞLAR.......................................................................................................................... 63 2. DEĞER ANALİZİ VE ÖNEM BEYANI ............................................................................. 66 2.1. Üstün Evrensel Değer Beyanı ...................................................................................... 66 2.2. Arslantepe’nin Değerleri ............................................................................................. 67 2 3. GZFT ANALİZİ ..................................................................................................................... 69 BÖLÜM III: ALANI PLANLAMAK .............................................................................................. 74 1. VİZYON BEYANI .................................................................................................................. 74 2. YÖNETİM HEDEFLERİ ....................................................................................................... 74 3. YÖNETİM POLİTİKALARI ................................................................................................ 74 4. EYLEM PLANI ....................................................................................................................... 76 5. UYGULAMA VE İZLEME STRATEJİSİ ........................................................................... 83 5.1. Genel Yapı ...................................................................................................................... 83 5.2. İzleme Göstergeleri ....................................................................................................... 83 BIBLIYOGRAFYA ............................................................................................................................. 92 Özet Arslantepe Arslantepe, yaklaşık 4.5 hektar alan üzerinde kurulmuş, 30 metre yüksekliğinde ve bereketli Malatya Ovasının ortasında yer alan, Fırat Nehri kıyısına yaklaşık on iki kilometre uzaklıkta bir höyüktür. Alan, Asur Kralı II. Sargon tarafından M.Ö. 732 yılında son verilen Geç Hitit Devletine kadar – şehir Hitit kaynaklarında Malitiya, Geç Asur ve Urartu kaynaklarında ise Melid, Meliddu veya Meliteya olarak zikredilmektedir – M.Ö. en az 6. binyıldan itibaren birkaç bin yıl yerleşim görmüştür. Kısa süren Geç Asur işgallerinden sonra, bölge bir süre terk edilmiş, Geç Roma döneminde yeniden yerleşim görmüş ve ardından Bizans / Orta Çağ döneminde bir mezarlık olarak kullanılmıştır. Arslantepe, Malatya Ovasındaki en büyük höyüktür ve bin yıllık tarihi boyunca bölgenin merkezi olmuştur. 3 Arslantepe genel görünüm (Kaynak: MAIAO) İtalya Roma Sapienza Üniversitesi Arkeoloji Heyetince 55 yılı aşkın süredir yapılan kazılar sonucu ortaya çıkarılan uzun tarihi, tüm bölgenin tarihinin yanı sıra yaşanan gelişimini belirleyen karmaşık olguları ve Yakın Doğu’nun farklı uygarlıklarıyla olan değişken ilişkilerini açık biçimde ortaya koymaktadır. Arslantepe günümüzde, Doğu Anadolu ve civarındaki bölgelerin binlerce yıla uzanan tüm tarihini açık biçimde yansıtmaktadır. Ayrıca, yazı icat edilmeden önceki bir dönemde ortaya çıkan devletin ve ileri düzey bir bürokrasinin doğuşuna ilişkin karmaşık süreçleri ortaya koymakta ve çağdaş dünyanın temelini oluşturan bu yeni toplumun oluşumuna dair bilgiler sunmaktadır. Tarihini önemli ölçüde belirleyen yoğun ve değişken dış ilişkileri sayesinde gerçek manada coğrafi ve kültürel bir sınırda yer almış Arslantepe, Yakın Doğu’nun farklı uygarlıklarında yaşanan temel olaylar ve değişimlere de tanıklık etmektedir. Tarihinin en erken evrelerinde, yani Kalkolitik Dönemde, Arslantepe’nin birçok kültürel özellik, yapısal model ve gelişim yönünü paylaştığı Suriye-Mezopotamya dünyasıyla yakın ilişkileri bulunmaktadır. 3. binyılın ilk yüzyıllarında Arslantepe’de yaşanan büyük değişiklikler yaşanırken, bu durum Mezopotamya türünden merkezi sistemin gelişimini durdurmuş ve Arslantepe’nin dış ilişkilerini farklı bir yön olan Doğu Anadolu ve Transkafkasya’ya kaydırmıştır. Arslantepe 2. binyılda, Fırat kıyılarına kadar uzanan Hitit İmparatorluğu’nun kültürel ve siyasi yörüngesine girmiştir. Bu ise yeni bir siyasi değişime yol açmış ve Arslantepe tarihinde başka
Load more

Recommended publications
  • ASCS Newsletter 2018.2
    The Australasian Society for Classical Studies Newsletter No. 43 December 2018 President Hon. Treasurer Hon. Secretary A/Prof. Tom Stevenson Prof. Bronwen Neil A/Prof. Gina Salapata School of Historical and Philosophical Inquiry Department of Ancient History School of Humanities Faculty of Humanities and Social Sciences Faculty of Arts Faculty of Arts University of Queensland Macquarie University Massey University [email protected] [email protected] [email protected] www.ascs.org.au From the Editor This is a bumper holiday edition of the Newsletter, because it also includes the full publication list for 2017. The Executive decided that this remains a useful exercise, especially for advocacy for our disciplines. The wealth of scholarship the publications list and the University Reports below reveal is certainly impressive, and to all but confirmed troglodytes, like those recently revealed by the disgraceful government interference in the Australian Research Council grant process (see ASCS response below), should be clear evidence for the vitality of our fields. I know that collating this list puts considerable pressure on the Campus Representatives, and I thank them for their time and diligence. President’s Report Dear Everyone, It’s worth remembering sometimes that there are only 24 hours in a day. Yet somehow our members manage to contribute mightily to ASCS in addition to their day jobs. Well done to the organisers of AMPHORAE 2018 in Auckland and thanks too for all the work that is being done in preparation for ASCS 40 in Armidale next year. On that score the convenors, Bronwyn, Graeme, and Clemens, have already laid impressive groundwork.
    [Show full text]
  • English / French
    World Heritage 44 COM WHC/21/44.COM/INF.2 Paris, July/ juillet 2021 Original: English / French UNITED NATIONS EDUCATIONAL, SCIENTIFIC AND CULTURAL ORGANIZATION ORGANISATION DES NATIONS UNIES POUR L'EDUCATION, LA SCIENCE ET LA CULTURE CONVENTION CONCERNING THE PROTECTION OF THE WORLD CULTURAL AND NATURAL HERITAGE CONVENTION CONCERNANT LA PROTECTION DU PATRIMOINE MONDIAL, CULTUREL ET NATUREL WORLD HERITAGE COMMITTEE/ COMITE DU PATRIMOINE MONDIAL Extended forty-fourth session / Quarante-quatrième session élargie Fuzhou (China) / Online meeting / Fuzhou (Chine) / Réunion en ligne 16 - 31 July 2021 / 16 – 31 juillet 2021 LIST OF PARTICIPANTS LISTE DES PARTICIPANTS This list is based on the information provided by participants themselves, however if you have any corrections, please send an email to: [email protected] Cette liste est établie avec des informations envoyées par les participants, si toutefois vous souhaitez proposer des corrections merci d’envoyer un email à : [email protected] States Members of the Committee / États membres du Comité ....................................... 7 Australia / Australie ............................................................................................................ 7 Bahrain / Bahreïn ............................................................................................................... 7 Bosnia and Herzegovina / Bosnie-Herzégovine ................................................................. 8 Brazil / Brésil ....................................................................................................................
    [Show full text]
  • The Textile Revolution. Research Into the Origin and Spread of Wool Production Between the Near East and Central Europe
    Special Volume 6 (2016): Space and Knowledge. Topoi Research Group Articles, ed. by Gerd Graßhoff and Michael Meyer, pp. 102–151. Cornelia Becker – Norbert Benecke – Ana Grabundˇzija – Hans- Christian Küchelmann – Susan Pollock – Wolfram Schier – Chiara Schoch – Ingo Schrakamp – Britta Schütt – Martin Schumacher The Textile Revolution. Research into the Origin and Spread of Wool Production between the Near East and Central Europe Edited by Gerd Graßhoff and Michael Meyer, Excellence Cluster Topoi, Berlin eTopoi ISSN 2192-2608 http://journal.topoi.org Except where otherwise noted, content is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 3.0 License: http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/3.0 Cornelia Becker – Norbert Benecke – Ana Grabundˇzija – Hans-Christian Küchel- mann – Susan Pollock – Wolfram Schier – Chiara Schoch – Ingo Schrakamp – Britta Schütt – Martin Schumacher The Textile Revolution. Research into the Origin and Spread of Wool Production between the Near East and Central Europe The objective of the research group Textile Revolution is to contribute to research on the still largely unclear introduction of wool production in later Neolithic and Chalcolithic societies from Western Asia to Central Europe. Since direct evidence of wool depends on rare conditions of preservation,a multi-proxy approach based on different kinds of indirect evidence was chosen. The previous history of research on early wool production as well as the domestication history of sheep are reviewed briefly. Anthropogenic impacts on the landscape, possibly related to intensified grazing, are one kind of indirect evidence that we take into account. For the later part of the presumably long-lasting development of wool production, written sources are available, the earliest of which date to the Late Uruk and Jemdet Nasr periods (end of the 4th to beginning of the 3rd millennium BCE) in Mesopotamia.
    [Show full text]
  • Biblical World
    MAPS of the PAUL’SBIBLICAL MISSIONARY JOURNEYS WORLD MILAN VENICE ZAGREB ROMANIA BOSNA & BELGRADE BUCHAREST HERZEGOVINA CROATIA SAARAJEVO PISA SERBIA ANCONA ITALY Adriatic SeaMONTENEGRO PRISTINA Black Sea PODGORICA BULGARIA PESCARA KOSOVA SOFIA ROME SINOP SKOPJE Sinope EDIRNE Amastris Three Taverns FOGGIA MACEDONIA PONTUS SAMSUN Forum of Appius TIRANA Philippi ISTANBUL Amisos Neapolis TEKIRDAG AMASYA NAPLES Amphipolis Byzantium Hattusa Tyrrhenian Sea Thessalonica Amaseia ORDU Puteoli TARANTO Nicomedia SORRENTO Pella Apollonia Marmara Sea ALBANIA Nicaea Tavium BRINDISI Beroea Kyzikos SAPRI CANAKKALE BITHYNIA ANKARA Troy BURSA Troas MYSIA Dorylaion Gordion Larissa Aegean Sea Hadrianuthera Assos Pessinous T U R K E Y Adramytteum Cotiaeum GALATIA GREECE Mytilene Pergamon Aizanoi CATANZARO Thyatira CAPPADOCIA IZMIR ASIA PHRYGIA Prymnessus Delphi Chios Smyrna Philadelphia Mazaka Sardis PALERMO Ionian Sea Athens Antioch Pisidia MESSINA Nysa Hierapolis Rhegium Corinth Ephesus Apamea KONYA COMMOGENE Laodicea TRAPANI Olympia Mycenae Samos Tralles Iconium Aphrodisias Arsameia Epidaurus Sounion Colossae CATANIA Miletus Lystra Patmos CARIA SICILY Derbe ADANA GAZIANTEP Siracuse Sparta Halicarnassus ANTALYA Perge Tarsus Cnidus Cos LYCIA Attalia Side CILICIA Soli Korakesion Korykos Antioch Patara Mira Seleucia Rhodes Seleucia Malta Anemurion Pieria CRETE MALTA Knosos CYPRUS Salamis TUNISIA Fair Haven Paphos Kition Amathous SYRIA Kourion BEIRUT LEBANON PAUL’S MISSIONARY JOURNEYS DAMASCUS Prepared by Mediterranean Sea Sidon FIRST JOURNEY : Nazareth SECOND
    [Show full text]
  • 20162017 Directory of Seminars, Speakers, & Topics Table of Contents
    THE UNIVERSITY SEMINARS COLUMBIA UNIVERSITY 2016 2016 2017 CONFERENCES 2017 DIRECTORY OF SEMINARS, SPEAKERS, & TOPICS Columbia University | THE UNIVERSITY SEMINARS 20162017 DIRECTORY OF SEMINARS, SPEAKERS, & TOPICS TABLE OF CONTENTS Contacts 4 Introduction 5 History of the University Seminars 6 Annual Report 8 Leonard Hastings Schoff Memorial Lectures Series 10 Schoff Publication Fund 12 Annual Dinner, Tannenbaum-Warner Award, & Tannenbaum Lecture 14 2016–2017 Seminar Conferences 19 2016–2017 Seminar Meetings 39 Index of Seminars 128 ADVISORY BOARD INTRODUCTION Robert E. Remez, Chair Professor of Psychology, Barnard College George Andreopoulos Professor, Political Science and Criminal Justice, City University of New York The University Seminars are groups of professors and other experts, from Columbia and elsewhere, who gather once a month to work together on problems that cross the boundaries between university departments. Susan Boynton Professor of Music, Columbia University Each seminar elects its own officers, plans its own program, and selects its own membership: members from Columbia, Jennifer Crewe associate members from elsewhere, and any speakers or other guests it invites to its sessions. Approximately half of the Associate Provost and Director, Columbia University Press seminars admit selected graduate students as guests. Seminar participants and speakers attend by invitation and neither pay nor are paid, although a central office supports travel and hotel expenses for speakers when its endowment income Kenneth T. Jackson permits. Jacques Barzun Professor of History and the Social Sciences, Columbia University Some seminars are tight, restricted discussion groups that specialize in particular subfields; others are broad-based David Johnston leture series where eminent visitors disseminate the latest knowledge.
    [Show full text]
  • Different Types of Multiethnic Societies and Different Patterns Of
    SPECIAL FEATURE: PERSPECTIVE Different types of multiethnic societies and different patterns of development and change in the prehistoric Near East Marcella Frangipane1 Department of Antiquities, Sapienza University of Rome, 00185 Rome, Italy Edited by Linda R. Manzanilla, Universidad Nacional Autonóma de México, Mexico City, D.F., Mexico, and approved April 28, 2015 (received for review December 15, 2014) After briefly examining the forms of cultural contact in pre- and protohistoric societies in relation to the problem of the varying perception of territories and their “borders” as well as of “membership” in those societies, and after a brief reconsideration of the concept of culture and ethnicity in such archaic contexts, this paper then examines three examples of multiethnic societies in the Near East, and specifically in Upper Mesopotamia and Southeast Anatolia, in the fifth, fourth, and at the beginning of the third millennia before the common era (BCE), re- spectively. These examples are dealt with as emblematic cases of different models of society, types of interaction with alien groups, levels of integration, and development dynamics. Each of these cases is examined with respect to its socioeconomic context, the archeological evidence of “multiethnicity,” the types of interaction between different components, the degree of cultural integration achieved, and the effects on the dynamics of change and the development of the societies examined. By analyzing and comparing these examples, the paper aims to show how interethnic contact
    [Show full text]
  • AGADE Archive January 18-24, 2015
    AGADE Archive January 18-24, 2015 Contents eREVIEWS: Of "Musica, culti e riti nell'Occidente greco" NEWS: Assyrian PTSD CONFERENCES: The Mystery of Ramat Rahel (in Hebrew; TAU, March 12 ) eARTICLES: Digital resources for research in Near Eastern Studies LECTURES: "History, Politics, and Vergil's Aeneid" (NYC, January 30) eTUBES: Simulation of the Mount Vesuvius eruption CALLS FOR PAPERS: "Impacts on Transportation - costs, politics, and archaeological evidence" (Bonn, April 17-18) eBOOKS & BOOKS: Comparative Oriental Manuscript Studies. An introduction NEWS: More on damage to Tutankhamen’s Burial Mask FEATURES: Whose tomb at Amphipolis? eREVIEWS: Of "Army and Society in Ptolemaic Egypt" NEWS: Red marking at the Coliseum eREVIEWS: SBL Review of Biblical Literature 23 January 2015 eREVIEWS: Of "Walking Corpses: Leprosy in Byzantium and the Medieval West" BOOKS: Toledot Yeshu -- The Life Story of Jesus eREVIEWS: Of "The Devil: A New Biography" eARTICLES: 3 JSIJ articles CALLS FOR PAPERS: Theoretical and Anthropological Approaches to the Near East (ASOR 2015) BOOKS: Madaba Plains Project, 6 EVENTS: "Ideology, Power and Religious Change in Antiquity" (Göttingen, 20–24 July) NEWS: Irreversibly damaged King Tut's mask? JOURNALS: Intellectual Heritage of the Ancient and Mediaeval Near East, 1(2014) CALLS FOR PAPERS: Sacred Places, Sacred Spaces ... (Glasgow, Sept 2-5) OPINIONS: Oldest gospel found? JOURNALS: Semitica et Classica, International Journal of Oriental and Mediterranean Studies, vol. 7 (2014) CALLS FOR PAPERS: Ancient Inscriptions Session (ASOR 2015) eARTICLES: several, at the Cuneiform Digital Library website eTEXTS: Lamentation on the Destruction of Ur CALLS FOR APPLICATIONS: New editor-in-chief for Arabian Archaeology & Epigraphy CALLS FOR PAPERS: "Pigments, Paints and Polychromies in the ANE" (ASOR 2015) BOOKS: Reading Deuteronomy CALLS FOR PAPERS: "Quo vadis biblical archaeology?" (Jerusalem, June 17-19) JOBS: "History of the Jews in the Modern Islamic Diaspora ..
    [Show full text]
  • Different Types of Multiethnic Societies and Different Patterns of Development and Change in the Prehistoric Near East
    SPECIAL FEATURE: PERSPECTIVE PERSPECTIVE SPECIAL FEATURE: Different types of multiethnic societies and different patterns of development and change in the prehistoric Near East Marcella Frangipane1 Department of Antiquities, Sapienza University of Rome, 00185 Rome, Italy Edited by Linda R. Manzanilla, Universidad Nacional Autonóma de México, Mexico City, D.F., Mexico, and approved April 28, 2015 (received for review December 15, 2014) After briefly examining the forms of cultural contact in pre- and protohistoric societies in relation to the problem of the varying perception of territories and their “borders” as well as of “membership” in those societies, and after a brief reconsideration of the concept of culture and ethnicity in such archaic contexts, this paper then examines three examples of multiethnic societies in the Near East, and specifically in Upper Mesopotamia and Southeast Anatolia, in the fifth, fourth, and at the beginning of the third millennia before the common era (BCE), re- spectively. These examples are dealt with as emblematic cases of different models of society, types of interaction with alien groups, levels of integration, and development dynamics. Each of these cases is examined with respect to its socioeconomic context, the archeological evidence of “multiethnicity,” the types of interaction between different components, the degree of cultural integration achieved, and the effects on the dynamics of change and the development of the societies examined. By analyzing and comparing these examples, the paper aims
    [Show full text]
  • Paper Abstracts
    PAPER ABSTRACTS Plenary Address Eric H. Cline (The George Washington University), “Dirt, Digging, Dreams, and Drama: Why Presenting Proper Archaeology to the Public is Crucial for the Future of Our Field” We seem to have forgotten that previous generations of Near Eastern archaeologists knew full well the need to bring their work before the eyes of the general public; think especially of V. Gordon Childe, Sir Leonard Woolley, Gertrude Bell, James Henry Breasted, Yigael Yadin, Dame Kathleen Kenyon, and a whole host of others who lectured widely and wrote prolifically. Breasted even created a movie on the exploits of the Oriental Institute, which debuted at Carnegie Hall and then played around the country in the 1930s. The public was hungry for accurate information back then and is still hungry for it today. And yet, with a few exceptions, we have lost sight of this, sacrificed to the goal of achieving tenure and other perceived institutional norms, and have left it to others to tell our stories for us, not always to our satisfaction. I believe that it is time for us all— not just a few, but as many as possible—to once again begin telling our own stories about our findings and presenting our archaeological work in ways that make it relevant, interesting, and engaging to a broader audience. We need to deliver our findings and our thoughts about the ancient world in a way that will not only attract but excite our audiences. Our livelihoods, and the future of the field, depend upon it, for this is true not only for our lectures and writings for the general public but also in our classrooms.
    [Show full text]
  • Re-Orienting Ancient Near-Eastern Studies
    RE-ORIENTING ANCIENT NEAR-EASTERN STUDIES An Event in Honour of Emeritus Professor Tony Sagona Saturday, 27 October 2018 Symposium 10 am – 5:30 pm The Forum Theatre (Room 153), Arts West Reception 6 pm – 8 pm The Atrium, Arts West UNIVERSITY OF MELBOURNE | School of Historical and Philosophical Studies TABLE OF CONTENTS WELCOME 2 SCHEDULE 3 LOCATION 5 LUNCH 6 ABSTRACTS 7 SPEAKERS 13 Page | 1 RE-ORIENTING ANCIENT NEAR-EASTERN STUDIES An Event in Honour of Emeritus Professor Tony Sagona This symposium has as its theme an emerging shift in Ancient Near Eastern Studies that is in part a result of the current turmoil in the Middle East and in part a reflection of growing interest in new approaches to longstanding problems concerning borders and frontiers, routes and roads, and more. This development has witnessed a change of geographical emphasis away from more traditional areas of study (for example, Mesopotamia, Persia, Anatolia) to places that have previously been misinterpreted as less significant northern and eastern peripheries (Caucasia, Central Asia, China, et cetera). In this context, Tony Sagona’s early and enduring focus on Eastern Turkey and the Southern Caucasus now seems especially prescient. A major driving force for Tony was to ensure the continuation of Ancient Near Eastern Studies at the university, having himself been the inheritor of a long tradition of teaching, research and writing in the area at Melbourne. An intensified emphasis on new geographical focal points—particularly the Southern Caucasus, Central Asia and China—represents a positive future direction and area of differentiation for Ancient Near Eastern Studies as offered by the School of Historical and Philosophical Studies.
    [Show full text]
  • (MA and Phd, University of Florence) Teaches Semitic Epigraphy and Philology at the Sapienza University of Rome
    Alessio Agostini (MA and PhD, University of Florence) teaches Semitic Epigraphy and Philology at the Sapienza University of Rome. His main interests focus on the archaeology and ancient languages of the pre-Islamic Arabian Peninsula. Since 2002, he has been member of the Italian Archaeological Mission in Yemen, directed by the late Alessandro de Maigret (IsIAO – ‘Orientale’ University of Naples), where he has been field director and epigraphist at the sites of Baraqish, Tamna‘ and at the necropolis of Hayd ibn ‘Aqil. He has been Marie Curie Fellow at the French CNRS (UMR 8167 “Orient & Méditerranée”, Paris) and collaborator to the Corpus of South Arabian Inscriptions (direction of A. Avanzini, University of Pisa). In recent years he also conducted excavations and field surveys in the Sultanate of Oman (2013) and Ethiopia (Tigray, 2017). Francesca Balossi Restelli graduated at the Sapienza University of Rome (1998) in Prehistory of the Near East, she took a master’s course at the University of Michigan, USA (1999). PhD at the University of Rome La Sapienza. Aggregate professor since 2008 at the same university. Alexander von Humboldt fellow in 2016-18. Habilitation for Associate Professor in Prehistory and in Ancient Near Eastern Cultures, in 2012. She teaches Prehistory of the Near East for the BA, Ma and graduate school. She is member of the Doctoral School in Archaeology and Associate Editor of the Journal “Origini”. Field research activities: yearly, since 1993, in Europe, Central America and the Near East. Vice-Director of the excavations at the site of Arslantepe, Turkey. She is part of the working group for the construction of a site management plan for Arslantepe and is involved in community programs for the enhancement of the knowledge on the site of Arslantepe.
    [Show full text]
  • From the Prehistory of Upper Mesopotamia to the Bronze and Iron Age Societies of the Levant. Volume 1
    Changes in Upper Mesopotamian societies from the Halaf to the Late Chalcolithic period. A comparative analysis of different Neolithic and Chalcolithic developmental models in the Near East MARCELLA FRANGIPANE Sapienza Università di Roma, Dipartimento di Scienze dell’Antichità Abstract The paper tries to apply a developmental and comparative approach to the analysis of the processes bringing to the first hierarchical societies in Upper Mesopotamia by focusing on their Neolithic roots and analysing the structural similarities and differences with the contemporary societies in two other regions of the Near East: South Mesopotamia and Central Anatolia. This comparison is aimed at evidencing, on the one hand, similari- ties and differences with an area – South Mesopotamia– whose features differed widely in the sixth millennium BCE but with which the Upper Mesopotamian communities were closely related for millennia. On the other hand, the author examines the profound structural differences with Central Anatolian communities, where the subsistence strategies, environmental contexts, and the resulting economic, social, and political organiza- tion seem to have differed substantially from the Mesopotamian ones. Whereas the comparison with Cen- tral Anatolian developments therefore essentially focused attention on structural features and differences, the analysis of the relationship with Southern Mesopotamia also considered the nature and effects of the intensive “contacts” that linked together the two Mesopotamian regions and were relevant to the
    [Show full text]