geosciences

Article SARchaeology—Detecting Palaeochannels Based on High Resolution Radar Data and Their Impact of Changes in the Settlement Pattern in ()

Susanne Rutishauser 1,*, Stefan Erasmi 2, Ralph Rosenbauer 1 and Ralf Buchbach 2 ID

1 Institut für Archäologische Wissenschaften, Universität Bern, Abt. Vorderasiatische Archäologie, Länggass-Strasse 10, 3012 Bern, Switzerland; [email protected] 2 Geographisches Institut, Georg-August-Universität Göttingen, Abt. Kartographie, GIS & Fernerkundung, Goldschmidtstr. 5, 37077 Göttingen, Germany; [email protected] (S.E.); [email protected] (R.B.) * Correspondence: [email protected]; Tel.: +41-31-6318992

Received: 22 July 2017; Accepted: 16 October 2017; Published: 24 October 2017

Abstract: The fertile alluvial plain of Cilicia is bordered by the Taurus and Amanus mountain ranges to the west, north and east and the to the south. Since the Neolithic Period, Plain Cilicia was an important interface between and the Levant. The alluvial plain is dominated by three rivers: Tarsus, Seyhan and Ceyhan. The avulsion history of the lower course of the rivers Seyhan and Ceyhan during the Holocene remains an unresolved issue. The knowledge about how former river courses have changed is essential for the identification of ancient toponyms with archaeological sites. The analysis of silted up riverbeds based on high-resolution digital elevation models (TanDEM-X) and historic satellite imagery (CORONA) in this paper provide the first indications for the reconstruction of former river channels. Further evidence is given by the evaluation of the settlement patterns from 3rd to 1st millennium BC.

Keywords: Cilicia; Seyhan; Ceyhan; Puruna; avulsion; TanDEM-X; CORONA; remote sensing; archaeology

1. Introduction The changes of river courses, which have had a strong influence on the development of sites and is important for the localization of sites has not been investigated in Cilicia in detail so far. Only the development of river deltas and the changes of the river Tarsus have been studied in detail [1–4]. For the identification of toponyms known from written sources with archaeological sites, precise knowledge about the changes of river courses is essential. The aim of this paper is a first look at the development of the Seyhan and Ceyhan rivers during the late Holocene. Due to the lack of available coring data, this will be done by the analysis of remote sensing data in combination with a study of changes of the settlement cluster in Plain Cilicia. In southern , studies about ancient watercourses on which all communication moved and along which all settlement ranged itself were undertaken already in the 1960s and 1970s on the basis of archaeological data and remote sensing data (LANDSAT) [5]. Since then, much more data has become available e.g., CORONA and TanDEM-X. In this study, these archives will be analyzed for the region of Plain Cilicia. Plain Cilicia (gr. Kilikia Pedias, lat. Cilicia Campestris) covers an area of approximately 8000 km2 in the northeastern corner of the Mediterranean Sea. Like almost no other landscape in Asia Minor, this plain is defined by strong topographic contrasts: a large fertile plain surrounded by steep mountain ranges. The Middle Taurus Range (turk. Orta ), which exceeds 3700 m in elevation, borders the landscape to the west and north. In the east, the settlement cluster is confined by the Amanos (turk. Nur Da˘gları)that separates Plain Cilicia from inner and reaches elevations of up to 2200 m. The Gulf of Iskenderun and the Gulf of form its southern boundary (Figure1).

Geosciences 2017, 7, 109; doi:10.3390/geosciences7040109 www.mdpi.com/journal/geosciences Geosciences 2017, 7, 109 2 of 20

elevations of up to 2200 m. The Gulf of Iskenderun and the form its southern Geosciencesboundary2017 (Figure, 7, 109 1). 2 of 20 Natural passes through the mountains still form the main routes of access to the lowlands. The “CilicianNatural Gates” passes (turk. through Gülek the Boğ mountainsazı) at an elevation still form of the 1290 main m routesconnect of Anatolia access to with the lowlands. the plain Theand “Cilicianserve as the Gates” main (turk. passageway Gülek Bo˘gazı)at for railroad an tracks elevation and ofmajor 1290 vehicular m connect roads Anatolia up until with this the day. plain In and the servewesternmost as the main part passagewayof Plain Cilicia, for forming railroad the tracks transition and major to Rough vehicular Cilicia, roads the up Göksu until Valley this day. stretches In the westernmostnorth–south from part ofthe Plain Cilicia, Plain forming to coastal thetransition and to Roughrepresented Cilicia, an the important Göksu Valley connection stretches to north–southAnatolia in antiquity from the [6] Konya (p. 88). Plain The to coastalBahçe Pass Silifke (“Amanian and represented Gates”) anin importantthe East leads connection over the to AnatoliaAmanus inRange antiquity and [serves6] (p. 88).as a The passage Bahçe between Pass (“Amanian Cilicia and Gates”) the Islahiye in the East Plain. leads Further over the south, Amanus the RangeOrontes and Valley serves can as abe passage reached between over Ciliciathe Belen and thePass Islahiye (“Syrian Plain. Gates”). Further Access south, from the Orontes the north Valley is canfacilitated be reached by several over the tributary Belen Passvalleys (“Syrian of theGates”). Seyhan and Access Ceyhan from rivers. the north Late is Bronze facilitated and by Iron several Age tributaryrock reliefs valleys as well of the as Seyhaninscriptions and Ceyhan like Hanyeri, rivers. Lateİmamkulu, Bronze andTaşç Ironı and Age Frakt rockın reliefs[7], mark as well their as inscriptionssignificance likein antiquity. Hanyeri, Imamkulu,˙The plain itself Ta¸sçıand is divided Fraktın into [7], marka western their significance(Çukurova) inand antiquity. an eastern The plain(Yukar itselfıova) is settlement divided into cluster a western by a (Çukurova)natural border and fo anrmed eastern by (Yukarıova)the foothills settlementof the Middle cluster Taurus by a naturalRange and border the formedMisis Mountains. by the foothills The approximately of the Middle 760 Taurus m high Range Misis and Mountains the Misis [8] Mountains. (pp. 305–307) The approximatelyextend northwards 760 m from high the Misis western Mountains end of [ 8the] (pp. Gulf 305–307) of Iskenderun extend northwards(Figure 1). The from average the western height end of ofthe the Çukurova Gulf of Iskenderun is about 15 (Figurem above1). sea The level. average The heightheight of of the the Çukurova Yukarıova is varies about from 15 m 20–100 above seam above level. Thesea level. height of the Yukarıova varies from 20–100 m above sea level.

Figure 1. Map of Plain Cilicia and its neighboring regions. Topographic data based on SRTM (Shuttle RadarFigure Topographic1. Map of Plain Mission, Cilicia U.S. andGeological its neighboring Survey, regi 3ons. Arc SecondTopographic scene) data [9] ©based Susanne on SRTM Rutishauser. (Shuttle Radar Topographic Mission, U.S. Geological Survey, 3 Arc Second scene) [9] © Susanne Rutishauser. Three main rivers, originating in the , cross the lowlands and discharge into the MediterraneanThree main rivers, Sea: Berdanoriginating or Tarsus in the Çayı Taurus (gr. Mountains,Kydnos), Seyhan cross (hitt.the lowlandsŠamri/Sapara and ,discharge gr. Saros) into and Ceyhanthe Mediterranean (hitt. Puruna Sea:, gr. BerdanPyramos or Tarsus)[10] (p. Çay 6).ı (gr. These Kydnos rivers), Seyhan form the (hitt. deltaic Šamri complex/Sapara, thatgr. Saros occupies) and theCeyhan (hitt. Basin Puruna (Figure, gr.2 Pyramos). The Adana) [10] (p. Basin 6). These represents rivers the form onshore the deltaic extension complex of the that marine occupies Cilicia the Basin [11] (p. 123). The 6000 m thick sedimentary succession of the Adana Basin is spanning Miocene Geosciences 2017, 7, 109 3 of 20

Geosciences 2017, 7, 109 3 of 20 Adana Basin (Figure 2). The Adana Basin represents the onshore extension of the marine Cilicia Basin [11] (p. 123). The 6000 m thick sedimentary succession of the Adana Basin is spanning Miocene to Recent [[12]12] (p.(p. 190) and isis builtbuilt byby alluvialalluvial variablevariable grainsizegrainsize deposits [[13]13] (p.(p. 135). All rivers are braided in their upper reaches with channel gradients ranging from 1:40 to 1:400, while the channel gradients decrease to >1:2000 in the lower 35–110 km of their courses, causing them to meander [[14]14] (p. 57). The major tributaries of the 560 km long Seyhan are thethe Göksu,Göksu, Zamantı,Zamantı, ÇakıtÇakıt and KörkünKörkün Rivers [[15]15] (p. 647). Prior to construction of the first first dam in 1954 the Delta expanded its area onon averageaverage byby 2.8 2.8 ha ha per per year year [16 [16]] (p. (p. 64). 64). The The dam dam greatly greatly reduced reduced sedimentation sedimentation in the in deltathe delta [17] (p.[17] 5). (p. The 5). 510The km510 longkm long Ceyhan Ceyhan River River drains drains today today into theinto Gulf the ofGulf Iskenderun of Iskenderun and formed and formed a more a thanmore 100than km 1002 large km2 riverlarge delta. river Paleoenvironmentaldelta. Paleoenvironmental studies studies of the Iskenderunof the Iskenderun Bay show Bay a show muddy a sedimentation,muddy sedimentation, which coincides which coincides with a major with a delta major progradation delta progradation of the Ceyhan of the Ceyhan around around 2140 BP 2140 [18] (p.BP [18] 20). (p. Therefore, 20). Therefore, a drainage a drainage into the into Mediterranean the Mediterranean Sea atSea Kap at Kap Karata¸sduring Karataş during the the Iron Iron Age Age is generallyis generally accepted accepted [18 [18]] (p. (p. 20). 20).

Figure 2. Morphological and simplified tectonic map of the region with the locations of major Neogene Figure 2. Morphological and simplified tectonic map of the region with the locations of major basins and the main fault zones (FZ) (after [19] Figure1), © Susanne Rutishauser. Neogene basins and the main fault zones (FZ) (after [19] Figure 1), © Susanne Rutishauser.

The coursecourse of of the the coastline coastline underwent underwent major changes.major changes. There are There a few studiesare a few for a reconstructionstudies for a ofreconstruction the palaeoshorelines of the palaeoshorelines available [2,4,14 available,17,18,20 –[223,4,14,17,18,20–23].]. A sea level high A sea stand level around high 6000–5000stand around BP is6000–5000 generally BP accepted, is generally followed accepted, by a significantfollowed by regression a significant of the regression sea level of of the several sea level meters of asseveral well asmeters a slight as well rise toas thea slight modern rise datumto the [modern24]. A mid-Holocene datum [24]. A coastline mid-Holocene about 5–10coastline km inlandabout from5–10 km the present-dayinland from coastlinethe present-day is assumed coastline [1,4]. is assumed [1,4]. Also from a historicalhistorical perspective, Plain Cilicia is defineddefined byby contrastscontrasts betweenbetween independenceindependence and foreign influenceinfluence up to annexation. During the Chalcolithic Period, there is strong evidence for connections to the Amuq (Figure1 1)) andand otherother LevantineLevantine andand northnorth MesopotamianMesopotamian regionsregions [ [25].25]. At the beginning of the Bronze Age, end of the 4th millenniummillennium BC, an alteration is visible by a change in the ceramic assemblage and a firstfirst orientation to the Anat Anatolianolian plateau in the north [26] [26] (pp. 141–142), 141–142), [27]. [27]. However, there are stillstill parallelsparallels to thethe AmuqAmuq regionregion andand thethe NorthernNorthern Levant.Levant. At the beginning of the 2nd millenniummillennium BC, Syro-CilicianSyro-Cilician Pottery is predominantpredominant [[28]28] (p.(p. 11). When Cilicia became the Kingdom Kizzuwatna independent, mid 2nd millennium BC, there is a sudden change in the material

Geosciences 2017, 7, 109 4 of 20 GeosciencesGeosciences 2017, 7, 1092017 , 7, 109 4 of 20 4 of 20

KingdomKingdom Kizzuwatna Kizzuwatna independent, independent, mid 2nd mid mill 2ndennium mill BC,ennium there BC,is athere sudden is achange sudden in changethe in the materialmaterialevidence, evidence, evidence, with with a a strong strongwith orientationa orientation strong orientation to to the the Anatolian Anatolian to the Anatolian plateauplateau visible.visible. plateau From visible. mid-15th From to tomid-15th the the beginning to the beginningbeginningof the of the 12th 12th of century the century 12th BC, centuryBC, Kizzuwatna Kizzuwatna BC, Kizzuwatna stood stood underunder stood Hittite Hittite under or or HittiteMittani Mittani orsupremacy supremacyMittani supremacy [28] [28 (p.] (p.36). [28] 36). (p. At 36). the At the Attransition the transition from from the the from Late Late the Bronze Bronze Late toBronze to the the Early Earlyto the Iron IronEarly Age Age IronPlain Plain Age Cilicia Cilicia Plain became Cilicia became again became again independent independentagain independent as the as the askingdom the kingdom Ḫiyawa/Que Ḫiyawa/Que [29]. [29]. During During [29]. theDuring the 8th 8th century the century 8th BC century BC Plain Plain CiliciaBC Cilicia Plain was was Cilicia integrated integrated was integratedinto into the the Assyrian into the AssyrianAssyrianEmpire Empire [30 Empire [30]] (pp. (pp. 7–24).[30] 7–24). (pp. 7–24). The knowledgeThe knowledgeknowledge of the ofmaterialof the the material material culture culture ofculture Kizzuwatna of Kizzuwatnaof Kizzuwatna and Ḫ andiyawa/Que andiyawa/Que Ḫiyawa/Que is still isfragmentary. still is fragmentary.still fragmentary. Most Most informationMostinformation information come come from fromcome excavations excavations from excavations of of the the main mainof theBronze Bronze main and Bronze and Iron Iron Ageand Age sitesIron sites inAge inthe thesites plain. plain. in These the These plain. are These from are fromWestare Westfrom to East: toWest East: Mersin-, to Mersin-Yumuktepe, East: Mersin-Yumuktepe, Tarsus-Gözlükule, Tarsus-Gözlükule, Tarsus-Gözlükule, Adana-Tepeba˘g,Sirkeli Adana-Tepeba Adana-Tepebağ, Sirkeli Höyük, Höyük,ğ, Sirkeli Tatarlı Höyük, Höyük Tatarlı Höyük and Kinet Höyük (see Figure 3). Tatarland Kinetı Höyük Höyük and (see Kinet Figure Höyük3). (see Figure 3).

Figure 3. Map of Plain Cilicia and its neighboring regions with the most important Bronze and Iron Age sitesFigure as well 3. asMap modern of Plain cities. Cilicia Topographic and its neighboringdata based on regions SRTM [9] with © Susanne the most Rutishauser. important Bronze and Iron AgeFigure sites 3. asMap well of asPlain modern Cilicia cities. and Topographicits neighboring data regi basedons with on SRTM the most [9] © important Susanne Rutishauser. Bronze and Iron Since noAge archive sites as has well been as modern discovered cities. Topographicin Cilicia so datafar, basedonly littleon SRTM is known [9] © Susanneabout the Rutishauser. ruling dynasties andSince the no political archive organization has been discovered for the Late in CiliciaBronze so and far, Early only Iron little Age. is known Today, about the the ruling Çukurova isSince an important no archive agriculture has been center discovered with high in productivity. Cilicia so far, A dozen only archaeologicallittle is known surveys about the ruling dynasties and the political organization for the Late Bronze and Early Iron Age. Today, the Çukurova give somedynasties evidence and about the thepolitical distribution organization of settlements for the in Latethe Çukurova Bronze and theEarly Yukar Ironıova. Age. The Today, the is an important agriculture center with high productivity. A dozen archaeological surveys give some settlementÇukurova pattern is has an notimportant changed agriculture fundamentally center over with the high time. productivity. Mainly during A the dozen Bronze archaeological Age and surveys evidence about the distribution of settlements in the Çukurova and the Yukarıova. The settlement in the giveRoman some Period evidence there isabout a consolidation the distribution of settlement of settlements visible. inA thelack Çukurova of evidence and exist the in Yukar the ıova. The pattern has not changed fundamentally over the time. Mainly during the Bronze Age and in the Roman foothillssettlement of the Taurus pattern Mountains has not changednorth of Adanafundamentally as well in over an area the time.between Mainly the rivers during Tarsus the Bronze and Age and Period there is a consolidation of settlement visible. A lack of evidence exist in the foothills of the Seyhanin (Figure the Roman 4). Period there is a consolidation of settlement visible. A lack of evidence exist in the Taurus Mountains north of Adana as well in an area between the rivers Tarsus and Seyhan (Figure4). Thefoothills historian of andthe Taurusgeographer Mountains Abū l-Fid northāʾ (1273–1331) of Adana reports as well [31] in an(p. area465) thatbetween the river the Seyhanrivers Tarsus and The historian and geographer Abu¯ l-Fida’¯ (1273–1331) reports [31] (p. 465) that the river Seyhan and CeyhanSeyhan join (Figure after Misis: 4). “Le Syhan, au-dessous d’Adana et de Messyssa, se joint au Djyhan; tous and Ceyhan join after Misis: “Le Syhan, au-dessous d’Adana et de Messyssa, se joint au Djyhan; tous deux ne formentThe historian plus qu’un and seul geographer fleuve, qui Ab se ūjette l-Fid dansāʾ (1273–1331) la mer entre reports Ayas et [31] Tharse” (p. 465) [32] that(p. 62f). the river Seyhan deux ne forment plus qu’un seul fleuve, qui se jette dans la mer entre Ayas et Tharse” [32] (p. 62f). and Ceyhan join after Misis: “Le Syhan, au-dessous d’Adana et de Messyssa, se joint au Djyhan; tous The localization of the important classical site Mallos is not clear. It is known that the site must deux ne forment plus qu’un seul fleuve, qui se jette dans la mer entre Ayas et Tharse” [32] (p. 62f). have been close to the river mouth of the Pyramos, the ancient Ceyhan. Forlanini suggest that the site

Geosciences 2017, 7, 109 5 of 20

GeosciencesThe 2017localization, 7, 109 of the important classical site Mallos is not clear. It is known that the site 5must of 20 have been close to the river mouth of the Pyramos, the ancient Ceyhan. Forlanini suggest that the wassite knownwas known in the in Late the Bronze Late Bronze Age as theAge harbor as the town harborMLWM town. He MLWM identifies. He the identifies site at Domuztepe the site at (Seton-WilliamsDomuztepe (Seton-Williams No. 74 [26]), situatedNo. 74 [2 east6]), of situated the river east Ceyhan, of the 20 river km northeastCeyhan, 20 of thekm Kapnortheast Karata¸s[ of 10the] (p.Kap 12). Karataş [10] (p. 12).

FigureFigure 4.4.Distribution Distribution of of archaeological archaeological sites sites investigated investigated during during different different surveys surveys in the in Cilician the Cilician Plain ©Plain Susanne © Susanne Rutishauser. Rutishauser.

2.2. Materials and MethodsMethods

2.1. Settlement Database 2.1. Settlement Database ToTo analyzeanalyze changeschanges inin thethe settlementsettlement clustercluster ofof Cilicia,Cilicia, aa databasedatabase withwith thethe focusfocus onon BronzeBronze andand IronIron AgeAge sites sites was was built. built. Each Each site site has has been been documented documented with with its coordinates its coordinates and its and occupation its occupation phases (spanningphases (spanning from Neolithic from Neolithic to Ottoman to Period).Ottoman Because Period). less Because than 3% less of than the sites 3% haveof the been sites investigated have been byinvestigated excavation by it wasexcavation not possible it was to not provide possible precise to provide information precise regarding information settlement regarding size duringsettlement any particularsize during period. any particular Most information period. Most for information the settlement for database the settlement was provided database by was adozen provided surveys by a conducteddozen surveys in the conducted area (Figure in the4). area (Figure 4). HettyHetty GoldmanGoldman (Bryn(Bryn MawrMawr ExpeditionExpedition toto Cilicia)Cilicia) conductedconducted thethe firstfirst systematicsystematic surveysurvey inin PlainPlain CiliciaCilicia in 1934 [[33],33], one year later she started to excavate the site Tarsus-Gözlükule (Figure 33).). ExcavationsExcavations werewere conducted conducted in in 1935–1939, 1935–1939, 1947–1949 1947–1949 and and resumed resumed by by Asli Asli Özyar Özyar in 2001. in 2001. The The site cansite securelycan securely be identified be identified with Hittite with TaršaHittite, know Tarša in, Neo-Assyrianknow in Neo-Assyrian sources as sourcesTarzu and as as TarzuTarsos/Tarsus and as inTarsos/Tarsus Classical Times in Classical [10] (p. Times 4). The [10] Neilson (p. 4). ExpeditionThe Neilson (1936–1939, Expedition 1946–1947)(1936–1939, under 1946–1947) the direction under the of John Garstang started to excavate the site Mersin-Yumuktepe (Figure3) with a sondage in its first year

Geosciences 2017, 7, 109 6 of 20

Geosciences 2017, 7, 109 6 of 20 direction of John Garstang started to excavate the site Mersin-Yumuktepe (Figure 3) with a sondage in its first year of the survey. The work was resumed by Veli Sevin and Isabella Caneva in 1993. The of the survey. The work was resumed by Veli Sevin and Isabella Canevasite in 1993. might The be siteidentified might with be Hittite Ellipra, Neo-Assyrian Illupru [10] (p. 4). identified with Hittite Ellipra, Neo-Assyrian Illupru [10] (p. 4). Tepebağ Höyük, in the center of the present city of Adana, was first excavated with a small Tepeba˘gHöyük, in the center of the present city of Adana, was firstsondage excavated in 1936 with by a smallthe Museum Adana. Recently, excavations have been resumed first by the sondage in 1936 by the Museum Adana. Recently, excavations have beenÇukurova resumed University first by and the later by the Museum of Adana. It can be identified with hitt. Adaniya and Çukurova University and later by the Museum of Adana. It can be identifiedclassical with hitt. Adaniya on theand Saros [29] (pp. 191–195), [34] (p. 154). To gain information about routes classical Antioch on the Saros [29] (pp. 191–195), [34] (p. 154). To gain informationthrough about the routesTaurus through Helmuth Theodor Bossert and Bahadir Alkım conducted a survey in the Upper the Taurus Helmuth Theodor Bossert and Bahadir Alkım conducted a surveyCeyhan in thevalley Upper from Ceyhan 1945–1952 and in 1955 [35]. They discovered the late Hittite fortress valley from 1945–1952 and in 1955 [35]. They discovered the late Hittite fortressKaratepe-Arslanta -Arslanta¸sş (hitt. Azatiwataya) and started to excavate there in 1946 [36–38]. The first and still (hitt. Azatiwataya) and started to excavate there in 1946 [36–38]. The first andmost still comprehensive most comprehensive survey of Plain Cilicia was directed by Marjory Veronica Seton-Williams in survey of Plain Cilicia was directed by Marjory Veronica Seton-Williams in1951 1951 [26]. [26 An]. An important important site at the eastern border of the Çukurova, Yakapınar-Misis, was excavated site at the eastern border of the Çukurova, Yakapınar-Misis, was excavated fromfrom 1955–19591955–1959 byby LudwigLudwig Budde and Helmuth Theodor Bossert. In 2000, the work was resumed by Budde and Helmuth Theodor Bossert. In 2000, the work was resumed by GiovanniGiovanni SalmeriSalmeri andand AnaAna Lucia D’Agata after conducting a survey in the area. The site might be Lucia D’Agata after conducting a survey in the area. The site might beidentified identified with Zunnaḫara mentioned in Hittite sources [10] (p. 6). In classical time its name was mentioned in Hittite sources [10] (p. 6). In classical time its name was MopsuhestiaMopsuhestiaand for and a shortfor atime short time Seleucia ad Pyramum [34]. Over 400 sites mainly dating from the Seleucia ad Pyramum [34]. Over 400 sites mainly dating from the Classical toClassical the Byzantine to the Period Byzantine were Period were investigated by Friedrich Hild and Hansgerd Hellenkemper investigated by Friedrich Hild and Hansgerd Hellenkemper and published inand volume published five of in the volume Tabula five of the Tabula Imperii Byzantini [34]. Since 1990 Mustafa H. Sayar is Imperii Byzantini [34]. Since 1990 Mustafa H. Sayar is conducting an epigraphicconducting survey an inepigraphic the entire survey in the entire region. Marie-Henriette Gates in 1991 and later Ann region. Marie-Henriette Gates in 1991 and later Ann Killebrew and GunnarKillebrew Lehmann and (2006–2009)Gunnar Lehmann (2006–2009) were conducting a survey (Mopsos Survey) along the were conducting a survey (Mopsos Survey) along the eastern coast of the Gulfeastern of Iskenderuncoast of the [Gulf39,40 of]. Iskenderun [39,40]. From 1992–2011 excavations at the harbor site Kinet From 1992–2011 excavations at the harbor site Kinet Höyük under the directionHöyük ofunder Marie-Henriette the direction of Marie-Henriette Gates were undertaken. The site can be identified Gates were undertaken. The site can be identified with Hittite Izziya andwith classical HittiteIssos Izziya[41 and]. Only classical Issos [41]. Only 15 km upstream of Yakapınar-Misis is the site Sirkeli 15 km upstream of Yakapınar-Misis is the site Sirkeli Höyük located. ExcavationsHöyük started located. in Excavations 1936–1937 started in 1936–1937 by John Garstang as part of the Neilson Expedition. by John Garstang as part of the Neilson Expedition. Later ExcavationsLater were Excavations directed by were Barthel directed by Barthel Hrouda 1992–1996 and Horst Ehringhaus (1997). The Hrouda 1992–1996 and Horst Ehringhaus (1997). The work was resumedwork in 2006 was by resumed Mirko Novin 2006ák, by Mirko Novák, Ekin Kozal and Deniz Yaşin Meier [42]. There is strong Ekin Kozal and Deniz Ya¸sinMeier [42]. There is strong probability to identifyprobability Sirkeli to Höyükidentify with Sirkeli Höyük with Kummanni known from Hittite religious texts [10]. A Kummanni known from Hittite religious texts [10]. A neighboring cult cityneighboring to Kummanni cult city was to the Kummanni was the site Lawazantiya/akkad. Lusanda. The site of Tatarlı site Lawazantiya/akkad. Lusanda. The site of Tatarlı Höyük is a strong candidateHöyük for is itsa strong identification. candidate for its identification. Excavations have started in 2007 by K. Serdar Excavations have started in 2007 by K. Serdar Girginer [43]. Girginer [43]. Information from written sources have been added to the database withInformation up to 1000 from sites written sources have been added to the database with up to 1000 sites when when available. available.

2.2. CORONA Satellite Imagery 2.2. CORONA Satellite Imagery A total of 19% of the sites in the settlement database are not visible on modernA total satellite of 19% imagery of the sites in the settlement database are not visible on modern satellite imagery anymore and 76% are damaged. However, many of these archaeologicalanymore sites are and still 76% visible are damaged. on However, many of these archaeological sites are still visible on historical satellite imagery. Declassified in 1995, CORONA satellite imageshistorical (Figure5) satellite acquired imagery. by the Declassified in 1995, CORONA satellite images (Figure 5) acquired by United States from 1958–1972 [44] have been used in addition to Digitalthe Elevation United ModelsStates from to map 1958–1972 [44] have been used in addition to Digital Elevation Models to map palaeochannels in Plain Cilicia. The CORONA images are valuable becausepalaeochannels they were acquired in Plain before Cilicia. The CORONA images are valuable because they were acquired the intensification of the agriculture and the growth of urban areas. Some ofbefore the sites the wereintensification destroyed of the agriculture and the growth of urban areas. Some of the sites were due to the erecting of dams [45,46]. Images from different missions with the cameradestroyed systems due KH-4Ato the anderecting of dams [45,46]. Images from different missions with the camera KH-4B were analyzed (Figure5). The images have an average spatial resolutionsystems of 1.8KH-4A m [ 47 and] (p. KH-4B 119). were analyzed (Figure 5). The images have an average spatial resolution For images of the mission DS1107, orthorectified images of the CORONA Atlasof 1.8 of them [47] Middle (p. 119). East For were images of the mission DS1107, orthorectified images of the CORONA Atlas used (Center for Advanced Spatial Technologies, University of Arkansas/U.S.of Geologicalthe Middle Survey; East [48were]). used (Center for Advanced Spatial Technologies, University of To remove geometric distortion of the images from further missions (DS1043,Arkansas/U.S. DS1101, DS1103, Geological DS1105, Survey; [48]). To remove geometric distortion of the images from further DS1109) the CORONA software written by Irwin Scollar was used [49]. Themissions georeferencing (DS1043, was DS1101, done DS1103, DS1105, DS1109) the CORONA software written by Irwin with ArcGIS v. 10.2 (3rd Order Polynomial). The identification of archaeologicalScollar sites was and used geomorphic [49]. The georeferencing was done with ArcGIS v. 10.2 (3rd Order Polynomial). The features on CORONA imagery was performed visually. identification of archaeological sites and geomorphic features on CORONA imagery was performed visually.

Geosciences 2017, 7, 109 7 of 20 Geosciences 2017, 7, 109 7 of 20

FigureFigure 5.5. OrthorectifiedOrthorectified CORONACORONA scenes (U.S. Geological Survey, CORONACORONA SatelliteSatellite Photographs) analyzedanalyzed forfor thisthis projectproject ©© SusanneSusanne Rutishauser.Rutishauser.

2.3.2.3. TanDEM-X: TerraSAR-XTerraSAR-X Add-onAdd-on forfor Digital Digital Elevation Elevation Measurement Measurement TheThe TanDEM-XTanDEM-X systemsystem isis aa spacespace borneborne radarradar interferometerinterferometer thatthat isis basedbased onon twotwo satellitessatellites (TerraSAR-X(TerraSAR-X 3)3) orbiting in close close formation formation [50]. [50]. The The high high resolution resolution X-band X-band SARs SARs (9.65 (9.65 GHz) GHz) can can be beoperated operated in indifferent different imaging imaging modes modes (High (High Resolu Resolutiontion Spotlight, Spotlight, Stripmap, Stripmap, ScanSAR). ScanSAR). For thisthis study,study, twotwo TanDEM-X TanDEM-X acquisitions acquisitions were were made made possible possible in two in different two different imaging modesimaging at horizontalmodes at polarization.horizontal polarization. In Stripmap In (SM)Stripmap mode (SM) the mode course the of thecourse Ceyhan of the River Ceyhan was River covered was atcovered an azimuth at an resolutionazimuth resolution of 2.54 m. of The 2.54 High m. The Resolution High Resolution Spotlight Spotlight (HS) mode (HS) enabled mode enable the registrationd the registration of a smaller of a areasmaller of interest area of (approx.interest (approx. 5 × 5 km 52 )× at 5 akm nominal2) at a nominal resolution resolution of 1.13 m of in 1.13 azimuth m in azimuth (see [51] (see for a [51] detailed for a descriptiondetailed description of image processing).of image processing). In addition In to TanDEM-X,addition to otherTanDEM-X, freely available other freely DEM available products DEM from theproducts shuttle from radar the topography shuttle missionradar topography (SRTM C-band mission version (SRTM 4.1 with C-band 90 m resolution,version 4.1 SRTM with X-band 90 m withresolution, 30 m resolution) SRTM X-band as well with as 30 the m ASTER resolution) Global as DEMwell as (V.2) the wereASTER used Global to generate DEM (V.2) a high were resolution used to DEM-mosaicgenerate a high (Figure resolution6). The DEM-mosaic global spatial resolution(Figure 6). isThe 5 m. global 55% ofspatial the area resolution are covered is 5 bym. TanDEM-X55% of the dataarea dividedare covered into by 8 spotlightTanDEM-X and data 22 stripmap divided into scenes. 8 spotlight The accuracy and 22 of stripmap the height scenes. value The is 4.65 accuracy m on averageof the height with avalue standard is 4.65 deviation m on average of 3.82 mwith [45 ].a Thestandard TanDEM-X deviation DEM of mosaic 3.82 m provided[45]. The theTanDEM-X basis for DEM mosaic provided the basis for the extraction of cross sections of height values (profiles) for the detailed analysis of the topography across riverbeds and paleochannels (Figure 6).

Geosciences 2017, 7, 109 8 of 20 the extraction of cross sections of height values (profiles) for the detailed analysis of the topography Geosciencesacross riverbeds 2017, 7, 109 and paleochannels (Figure6). 8 of 20

Figure 6.6. DEM-MosaicDEM-Mosaic based based on on TanDEM-X, TanDEM-X, Aster Aster GDEM GDEM and SRTMand SRTM data withdata modern with modern river courses river ©courses Susanne © Susanne Rutishauser. Rutishauser.

InIn addition, VHR VHR (very (very high high resolution) satellite satellite images images in in GoogleEarth and and ArcGIS ArcGIS were visually analyzed.

3. Results Results

3.1. Palaeochannels Palaeochannels and and Relict Canals Palaeochannels are sections of abandoned channels [52]. [52]. They They become become fully fully or or partly partly infilled infilled by by abandoned channelchannel accretionaccretion [53 [53]] (p. (pp. 136). 136). Palaeochannels Palaeochannels are most are commonlymost commonly preserved preserved as exposed as exposedcross-sections, cross-sections, abandoned abandoned surface forms,surface or forms, buried or channelsburied channels [54]. They [54]. were They mapped were mapped based onbased the onanalysis the analysis of geomorphic of geomorphic features fe visibleatures in visible CORONA in CORONA satellite imagerysatellite fromimagery the 1960s,from the high 1960s, resolution high resolutionDEM-data DEM-data and freely availableand freely VHR available satellite VHR images satellit (Figuree images7, palaeochannels (Figure 7, palaeochannels in blue and green in blue color). and greenRelict color). canals are abandoned canals for irrigation. They can be traced by their pattern in modern fieldsRelict and thecanals remains are abandoned of ancient leveescanals [for55] irrigation. (p. 289) (Figure They 7can, relict be traced canals by in pinktheir color).pattern in modern fieldsSince and the most remains of the palaeochannelsof ancient levees were [55] found (p. 289) between (Figure today’s 7, relict river canals course in pink of Seyhan color). and Ceyhan, this areaSince will most be discussedof the palaeochannels here. were found between today’s river course of Seyhan and Ceyhan, this area will be discussed here.

Geosciences 2017, 7, 109 9 of 20 Geosciences 2017, 7, 109 9 of 20 Geosciences 2017, 7, 109 9 of 20

Figure 7. Palaeochannels (blue, green) and relict canals (pink) in the Çukurova digitized based on Figure 7. Palaeochannels (blue, green) and relict canals (pink) in the Çukurova digitized based on TanDEM-X,Figure 7. Palaeochannels CORONA and (blue, VHR-data green) © and Susanne relict Rutishauser. canals (pink) in the Çukurova digitized based on TanDEM-X, CORONA and VHR-data © Susanne Rutishauser. TanDEM-X, CORONA and VHR-data © Susanne Rutishauser. Not all palaeochannels are visible on aerial or satellite imagery. Older channels are buried beneathNotNot allallmore palaeochannels palaeochannels recent sediments. are are visible visible onHowever, aerialon aerial or satellite theor satellitemapped imagery. imagery. palaeochannels Older channelsOlder channels areshow buried aredifferent beneath buried morphologies.morebeneath recent more sediments. The recent idealized However,sediments. river course the However, mapped corresponds palaeochannelsthe tomapped a sine curve showpalaeochannels [56] different (p. 147) morphologies. (Figure show 8).different The idealizedmorphologies. river courseThe idealized corresponds river course to a sine corresponds curve [56] (p.to a 147) sine (Figure curve 8[56]). (p. 147) (Figure 8).

Figure 8. The dotted line represents an idealized river course, the continuous line a meandering river Figurecourse. 8.λ The: meander dotted line wavelength, represents A: an meander idealized amplitude, river course, r: the meander continuous radius, line A aG meandering: meander belt river© course.SusanneFigure 8.λ Rutishauser. :The meander dotted wavelength,line represents A: an meander idealized amplitude, river course, r: meanderthe continuous radius, line A Ga: meanderingmeander belt river © Susannecourse. λRutishauser.: meander wavelength, A: meander amplitude, r: meander radius, AG: meander belt © Susanne Rutishauser.

Geosciences 2017, 7, 109 10 of 20

The sinuosity ratio gives an indication how much a river meanders by measuring the length Geosciences 2017, 7, 109 10 of 20 of a channel reach and dividing this by the straight line distance [53] (p. 138). Rivers in a flat plain follow a windingThe sinuosity path ratio where gives the an meander indication amplitude how much (A)a river is highermeanders than by measuring the meander the length wavelength of a (λ) (Figurechannel8). This reach can beand seen dividing exemplary this by the in thestraight Çukurova line distance about [53] one (p. kilometer 138). Rivers east in a and flat westplain offollow the rivers Seyhana andwinding Ceyhan. path Thewhere blue the palaeochannelsmeander amplitude (Figure (A) is7) higher show thethan most the meander recent abandoned wavelength channels.(λ) (Figure 8). This can be seen exemplary in the Çukurova about one kilometer east and west of the The former Seyhan river mouth, active until 1000 AD, is clearly visible with a high sinuosity ratio rivers Seyhan and Ceyhan. The blue palaeochannels (Figure 7) show the most recent abandoned (Figurechannels.7, No. 1) The [ 1 ,21former]. A moreSeyhan recent river alterationmouth, active of theuntil Ceyhan 1000 AD, River is clearly seems visible to have with occurred a high at the beginningsinuosity of the ratio 20th (Figure century. 7, No. From 1) [1,21]. the A Middle more rece Agesnt alteration until 1935, of the the Ceyhan Ceyhan River River seems mouth to have diverted eastwardsoccurred [2] (Figure at the beginning7, No. 2), of thus the 20th its present-day century. From location the Middle is situated Ages until west 1935, of the where Ceyhan it had River been in medievalmouth times diverted [15] (p. eastwards 656). [2] (Figure 7, No. 2), thus its present-day location is situated west of Lesswhere meandering it had been structuresin medieval with times a [15] lower (p. sinuosity656). ratio show the green palaeochannels (Figure7). They are locatedLess meandering west of structures the river with Ceyhan a lower butsinuosity belong ratio to show a former the green river palaeochannels course of (Figure the Seyhan 7). as They are located west of the river Ceyhan but belong to a former river course of the Seyhan as DEM-data show. A main channel of this former river course can be traced up to 7 km before the DEM-data show. A main channel of this former river course can be traced up to 7 km before the coastlinecoastline northeast northeast of the of Akyatanthe Akyatan Lagoon Lagoon (Figure (Figure9 9).).

FigureFigure 9. High-resolution 9. High-resolution digital digital elevation elevation model model based ba onsed TanDEM-X on TanDEM-X data data (Stripmap) (Stripmap) of the of Çukurova.the Çukurova. The grey arrows point to a large palaeochannel. The location of the cross sections is The grey arrows point to a large palaeochannel. The location of the cross sections is represented by represented by black lines. The dots mark a distance of 2000 m © Susanne Rutishauser. black lines. The dots mark a distance of 2000 m © Susanne Rutishauser. The data of the high resolution TanDEM-X DEM allow the generation of cross sections (Figure The10). data The oflarge the palaeochannel high resolution is visible TanDEM-X as a positive DEM allow height the anomaly, generation which of is cross formed sections by natural (Figure 10). The largelevees. palaeochannel Deposition of is fine visible sand, as silt a positiveand clay heightalongside anomaly, and within which the ischannels formed results by natural in the levees. aggradation of levees which gradually raise the rivers until they flow several meters above the plain Deposition of fine sand, silt and clay alongside and within the channels results in the aggradation of on low ridges. As cross sections of the modern Seyhan and Ceyhan rivers show, their riverbed is leveeslocated which 2–4 gradually m above raise the plain the as rivers well (Figure until they 10). flow several meters above the plain on low ridges. As cross sections of the modern Seyhan and Ceyhan rivers show, their riverbed is located 2–4 m above the plain as well (Figure 10). The construction of canals for irrigation results in levees as well. In addition, channel excavation and cleaning operations result in the up-cast of clean-out banks alongside the canal [57] (p. 415), [58] Geosciences 2017, 7, 109 11 of 20

(p. 339). Compared to palaeochannels, (relict) canals show a less meandering course with a low sinuosity ratio. The course of presumed canals was mapped in pink (Figure7). The spoil banks are visible on optical imagery as CORONA representing white lines bordered the canal (Figure 11). Relict canals itself can be identified as darkened depressions, filled with moist sediments [59]. Water flowing Geosciencesin active 2017 canals, 7, 109 has a dark signature as well (Figure 11). 11 of 20

Figure 10. Cross sections of height values from the TanDEM-X DEM for the rivers Seyhan and Ceyhan Figure 10. Cross sections of height values from the TanDEM-X DEM for the rivers Seyhan and and the large palaeochannel. For the location, see Figure9. The blue rectangles mark the location of the Ceyhan and the large palaeochannel. For the location, see Figure 9. The blue rectangles mark the riverbed resp. palaeochannel © Susanne Rutishauser. location of the riverbed resp. palaeochannel © Susanne Rutishauser.

The construction of canals for irrigation results in levees as well. In addition, channel excavation and cleaning operations result in the up-cast of clean-out banks alongside the canal [57] (p. 415), [58] (p. 339). Compared to palaeochannels, (relict) canals show a less meandering course with a low sinuosity ratio. The course of presumed canals was mapped in pink (Figure 7). The spoil banks are visible on optical imagery as CORONA representing white lines bordered the canal (Figure 11). Relict canals itself can be identified as darkened depressions, filled with moist sediments [59]. Water flowing in active canals has a dark signature as well (Figure 11).

Geosciences 2017, 7, 109 12 of 20 Geosciences 2017, 7, 109 12 of 20

FigureFigure 11. Detail11. Detail of aof CORONA a CORONA scene scene (DS1105-2267, (DS1105-2267, DA003, 20.11.1968). 20.11.1968). The The course course of the of large the large palaeochannelpalaeochannel visible visible on theon DEMthe DEM is marked is marked with with red red arrows. arrows. Amodern A modern canal canal is followingis following its its course. The bluecourse. arrows The blue points arrows to a points recent to canal a recent from cana thel from 1960s. the The1960s. green The green arrow arrow point point to a to relict a relict canal © Susannecanal Rutishauser. © Susanne Rutishauser.

3.2. Distribution3.2. Distribution of Archaeological of Archaeological Sites Sites in in the the Area Area Even though for precise dating of palaeochannels and relict canals coring and the analysis of Even though for precise dating of palaeochannels and relict canals coring and the analysis of sediment is necessary, the location of archaeological sites give some evidence about the dating of sedimentthese is relict necessary, canals and the palaeochannels location of archaeological (Figure 12). sites give some evidence about the dating of these relict canalsFirst, and a palaeochannelsrelation between (Figurethe age 12 of). an archaeological site and its distance to the modern First,coastline a relation can be betweenobserved. the The age older of ana site archaeological the farther it siteis situated and its from distance the sea. to the In modernthis area, coastline the can beclosest observed. chalcolithic The oldersites aare site in thedistance farther of it18–20 is situated km to from the theshoreline. sea. InThese this area,are Dervisli the closest chalcolithic(Seton-Williams sites are No. in 135 distance [26]) and of 18–20Domuz km III (Seton-Williams to the shoreline. No. These102 [26]). are While Dervisli the closest (Seton-Williams Bronze No. 135Age [ 26site]) Gavur and Domuz Köy (Seton-Williams III (Seton-Williams No. 119 No. [26]) 102 is only [26]). 13 Whilekm from the today’s closest coastline Bronze located. Age site The Gavur Köy (Seton-Williamsknown Iron Age No.sites 119are located [26]) is in only a similar 13 km distance from today’s to the coastlineshoreline. located.Sites dating The to known the Roman Iron Age Period are located right behind the Akyatan Laggon and at the Kap Karataş (Magarsos [60]). These sites are located in a similar distance to the shoreline. Sites dating to the Roman Period are located right settlement distributions give an idea about shifts of the coastline. behind the Akyatan Laggon and at the Kap Karata¸s(Magarsos [60]). These settlement distributions In the area of the large palaeochannel, there is only one site (Domuz III, Seton-Williams No. 102 give an[26]) idea dating about to shiftsthe Chalcolithic of the coastline. period known. However, several sites dating to Hellenistic and InRoman the areaperiod of are the situated large close palaeochannel, to the palaeocha therennels is (Figure only 12, one mapped site (Domuz in green). III, We Seton-Williamsassume the No. 102danger [26]) of dating flooding to theduring Chalcolithic the Chalcolithic period Period known. affected However, this distribution. several sites The dating accumulation to Hellenistic of and Romansediments period and the are ideal situated slope close for irrigation to the palaeochannels were the preconditions (Figure for 12 ,sites mapped in later in periods. green). Sites We assumeon the dangernatural of levee flooding ridges duringwere first the occupied Chalcolithic after thes Periode landforms affected were this already distribution. developed The and accumulation no longer of sedimentssubject and to flooding the ideal [61]. slope for irrigation were the preconditions for sites in later periods. Sites on natural leveeSeveral ridges sites were dating first mainly occupied from after Bronze these Age landforms to the Roman were Period already are developed situated along and norelict longer canals (mapped in pink). Therefore, the canals have to be in use since the Bronze Age. subject to flooding [61]. Several sites dating mainly from Bronze Age to the Roman Period are situated along relict canals (mapped in pink). Therefore, the canals have to be in use since the Bronze Age. Geosciences 2017, 7, 109 13 of 20 Geosciences 2017, 7, 109 13 of 20

FigureFigure 12. 12.Sites Sites dating dating from from thethe ChalcolithicChalcolithic to the the Roman Roman Period Period in inthe the Çukurova Çukurova as aswell well as as palaeochannelspalaeochannels and and relict relict canals canals © © Susanne Susanne Rutishauser. Rutishauser.

4. Discussion 4. Discussion

4.1.4.1. Dating Dating of Palaeochannelsof Palaeochannels and and the the Relict Relict Canals Canals A soil survey of the Çukurova University [62] show that the palaeochannels mapped in Figure 7 A soil survey of the Çukurova University [62] show that the palaeochannels mapped in Figure7 correspond to late Holocene river terraces while the surrounding plain was built during the middle correspond to late Holocene river terraces while the surrounding plain was built during the middle Holocene (Figure 13). The late Holocene river terraces spread in the area between today’s river Holocenecourse (Figureof Seyhan 13 ).and The Ceyhan. late Holocene river terraces spread in the area between today’s river course of SeyhanAdditionally, and Ceyhan. the mapping of former river delta soils give some evidence of former location of theAdditionally, coastline (Figure the mapping 13). Fluvisols of former and Vertisols river delta of the soils delta give reach some up evidence to 20 km ofinland. former location of the coastlineBased (Figure on the13). data Fluvisols of the andsoil survey Vertisols of the of theÇuku deltarova reach University up to 20(Figure km inland.13) and the presence of BronzeBased Age on thesites data along of relict the soil canals survey (Figure of the12) Çukurovawe propose University that the river (Figure Seyhan 13 followed) and the already presence in of Bronzethe Bronze Age sites Age along (3rd and relict 2nd canals millennium (Figure BC)12) a we wester proposen course that like the today river Seyhan(Figure 14). followed The intake already of in thethe Bronze relict Age canals (3rd andmust 2nd have millennium been located BC) west a western of the course supposed like todayformer (Figure course 14 of). Thethe intakelarge of the relictpalaeochannel canals must (mapped have beenin green, located Figure west 12). of Therefor the supposede, the large former palaeochannel course of the must large date palaeochannel before the (mappedBronze in Age, green, possibly Figure in 12 the). Therefore, Neolithic (9th–7th the large millennium palaeochannel BC) mustor Chalcolithic date before Period the Bronze(6th–4th Age, possiblymillennium in the BC). Neolithic However, (9th–7th a shared millennium river mouth BC) in or previous Chalcolithic times Periodof former (6th–4th Seyhan millennium and Ceyhan BC). rivers—as authors in Antiquity like Pseudo-Scylax or in Medieval times like Abū l-Fidāʾ reported However, a shared river mouth in previous times of former Seyhan and Ceyhan rivers—as authors [31] (p. 465)—is conceivable for the time when the large palaeochannel was active. in Antiquity like Pseudo-Scylax or in Medieval times like Abu¯ l-Fida’¯ reported [31] (p. 465)—is The Late Bronze Age harbor town MLWM could have been a river harbor situated east of the conceivable for the time when the large palaeochannel was active. river Ceyhan likely identified with the archaeological site Domuztepe [10] (p. 12). Figure 14 shows a preliminaryThe Late Bronze reconstruction Age harbor of the townpalaeo-lanMLWMdscapecould from have the mid been to a the river late harbor Holocene. situated east of the river Ceyhan likely identified with the archaeological site Domuztepe [10] (p. 12). Figure 14 shows a preliminary reconstruction of the palaeo-landscape from the mid to the late Holocene.

GeosciencesGeosciences2017 2017, 7,, 109 7, 109 1414 of of20 20 Geosciences 2017, 7, 109 14 of 20

FigureFigureFigure 13. 13.13.Soil SoilSoil map mapmap of ofof Çukurova Çukurova(data (data(data collectioncollection [62]), [[62]),62]), © © Susanne Susanne Susanne Rutishauser. Rutishauser. Rutishauser.

Figure 14. Preliminary reconstruction of the palaeo-landscape of the eastern Çukurova. The FigureFigureschematic 14. Preliminary14. blackPreliminary lines reconstruction represent reconstruction former of river the of palaeo-landscape coursesthe palaeo of Seyhan-landscape ofand the Ceyhan, easternof the the Çukurova.eastern pink lines Çukurova. Theshow schematic relict The blackschematiccanals, lines © represent Susanneblack lines Rutishauser. former represent river former courses river of courses Seyhan of and Seyhan Ceyhan, and Ceyhan, the pink the lines pink show lines relictshow canals,relict © Susannecanals, © Rutishauser. Susanne Rutishauser.

Geosciences 2017, 7, 109 15 of 20 Geosciences 2017, 7, 109 15 of 20

Today, severalseveral modernmodern sitessites areare locatedlocated alongalong aa modernmodern canalcanal followingfollowing the western relict canal (Figure(Figure 1515,, No.No. 1).1). However,However, there there are are no no modern modern sites sites located located along along the the eastern eastern relict relict canal canal (Figure (Figure 15, No.15, No. 2). Therefore,2). Therefore, the easternthe eastern relict relict canal canal must must have beenhave inbeen use in during use during previous previous periods. periods. Since several Since sitesseveral dating sites to dating the Bronze to the Age Bronze are locatedAge are along located these along relict these canals relict it is canals possible it thatis possible they were that in they use fromwere thein use Bronze from Age the toBronze Roman Age Times. to Roman Times.

Figure 15.15. LocationLocation of of archaeological archaeological and and modern modern sites si intes the in Çukurova.the Çukurova. Modern Modern river coursesriver courses (grey), palaeochannels(grey), palaeochannels (blue, green) (blue, andgreen) relict and canals relict (pink) canals in (pink) the Çukurova in the Çukurova © Susanne © Susanne Rutishauser. Rutishauser.

4.2. Irrigation System The averageaverage annualannual rainfall rainfall in in the the Çukurova Çukurova is is over over 750 750 mm/year mm/year [63 [63].]. This This rate rate is highis high enough enough for rainfedfor rainfed agriculture. agriculture. Supplementary Supplementary irrigation irrigation systems systems increase increase the the productivity productivity of of rainfed rainfed areas.areas. DueDue to itsits fertilefertile alluvialalluvial soils and mildmild climate,climate, the Çukurova produce high crop yieldsyields twice a year.year. ThisThis makes the region an an important important contributor contributor to to the the gross gross value value of of Turkeys Turkeys agricultural agricultural crop crop production production of of5% 5% in 1995 in 1995 [63]. [63 In]. antiquity In antiquity the region the region was wasfamo famousus for agricultural for agricultural products products [34] (p. [34 109–111).] (pp. 109–111). A large limestone statue of a male bearded figurefigure standingstanding on a basaltbasalt basis showing a chariot pulled byby twotwo bullsbulls was was found found 1997 1997 in in Çineköy Çineköy (Figure (Figure3), a3), village a village in the in middlethe middle of the of Çukurova the Çukurova [ 64]. The[64].male The figuremale figure represents represents a god, a who god, must who be must identified be identified with the with Storm-god the Storm-god Tarhunzas. Tarhunzas. A bilingual A inscriptionbilingual inscription in Luwian in and Luwian Phoenician and Phoenician is engraved is engraved in the monument in the monument [64–66]. [64–66]. The more The than more 2.50 than m high2.50 m monument high monument is shown is shown today intoday the Museumin the Museum Adana. Adana. The inscription The inscription is formed is formed of two of main two parts:main parts: an introduction dedicated to the self-presentation of the king and a longer section describing the king’s achievements [66]. The king praise himself: “I caused the plain of Hiyawa to prosper” [66]

Geosciences 2017, 7, 109 16 of 20 anGeosciences introduction 2017, 7, 109 dedicated to the self-presentation of the king and a longer section describing the16 king’s of 20 achievements [66]. The king praise himself: “I caused the plain of Hiyawa to prosper” [66] (p. 187). He named(p. 187). the He plain named also the as plain “land also of theas “land rivers” of[ 64the] (p.rivers” 972). [64] There (p. 972). is no There large Lateis no Bronze large Late Age Bronze site in vicinityAge site known in vicinity which known would which explain would the location explain ofthe such location monument. of such However, monument. the findHowever, spot is the located find atspot a relictis located canal. at Therefore, a relict canal. it might Therefore, by possible it might that by the possible monument that the was monument erected at anwas artificial erected canal.at an Additionalartificial canal. irrigation Additional must irrigation have used must already have during used thealready Late during Bronze the and Late Iron Bronze Age. and Iron Age. The overlay of the modern canal network for irrigation with mapped relict canals and palaeochannels showshow that that the coursethe course of modern of modern canals corresponds canals corresponds to relict canals to andrelict palaeochannels canals and (Figurepalaeochannels 16). Today, (Figure most 16). canals Today, in the most Çukurova canals arein the constructed Çukurova with are concreteconstructed slabs. with Many concrete canals slabs. have aMany meandering canals have course a meandering even though course a straight even channel though network a straight would channel be more network effective would and be reduce more theeffective number and of reduce necessary the number channels. of Thus,necessary the idealchannels. slope Thus, of the the palaeochannels ideal slope of wasthe followedpalaeochannels when constructingwas followed modern when constructing canals. modern canals.

Figure 16. Modern river courses (grey), palaeochannels (blue, green) and relict canals (pink) in the Çukurova. TheThe network network of of thin thin grey gr linesey lines shows shows the modern the modern network network for canals for for canals irrigation for irrigation (mapped based(mapped on freelybased availableon freely VHRavailable data VHR in ArcGIS) data in © ArcGIS) Susanne © Rutishauser. Susanne Rutishauser.

4.3. The Advantage of High ResolutionResolution DEM Data for Archaeology Only a fewfew archaeologicalarchaeological sitessites areare publishedpublished withwith theirtheir coordinates.coordinates. Therefore, we needed additional information for the preciseprecise localizationlocalization ofof thethe sitessites forfor thethe settlementsettlement database.database. The CORONA imagery was an important source of information.information. Still, small sites were not always visible on thisthis historic historic satellite satellite imagery. imagery. For For such such cases, cases, the TanDEM-X the TanDEM-X based heightbased model height was model an important was an addition.important A addition. low elevated A low hill elevated can be stillhill visiblecan be instill a heightvisible modelin a height while model it is not while visible it is anymore not visible on opticalanymore data. on optical data. Large palaeochannels can be detected easily and even smaller palaeochannels can be uncovered with a stretched color ramp. High resolution DEM-data helps not only to detect features. It is also possible to take precise measurements. The data allows generating cross section to make small differences in height of 1 m visible. Nevertheless, it does not replace ground truthing.

Geosciences 2017, 7, 109 17 of 20

Large palaeochannels can be detected easily and even smaller palaeochannels can be uncovered with a stretched color ramp. High resolution DEM-data helps not only to detect features. It is also possible to take precise measurements. The data allows generating cross section to make small differences in height of 1 m visible. Nevertheless, it does not replace ground truthing.

5. Conclusions The combined use of remote sensing data, soil surveys and archaeological data are first indications for the reconstruction of ancient river courses, when there is only limited coring available. Based on the available data we assume a more eastern course of the river Seyhan during the early or middle Holocene/the Neolithic Period. A major avulsion took place during the late Neolithic or Chalcolithic Period. This shift of the river Seyhan to the west must have an influence to the distribution of sites. In comparison to southern Mesopotamia, where major shifts of rivers were leading to depopulation of large areas, the consequences in the Çukurova might have been less drastic. While irrigation was essential for agriculture in southern Mesopotamia farmers in the Çukurova could still rely on rainfed agriculture for their subsistence. The influence of channel avulsion on settlement must be further investigated. Today, the landscape of the Çukurova is structured from a bird’s eye view by the agricultural area as well as modern river beds, irrigation canals and channel avulsion. Despite the meandering character of palaeochannels modern irrigation canals still follow their course. The location of archaeological sites along both relict canals and modern irrigation canals demonstrate that irrigation canals are in use—maybe not continuous—over a very long period. The finding of such a big monument as the Çineköy statue close to a relict canal gives further evidence for the use of irrigation in this area at least since the Late Bronze Age. However, the limitations of this study can only be overcome by further investigations. The analysis of drilling cores along transects to get information about the past shifts of the coastline and the sedimentation history of the Ceyhan and Seyhan rivers is necessary.

Acknowledgments: All TanDEM-X data were kindly provided by German Aerospace Center (DLR) within the project “The potential of Tandem-X DEM data for archaeological prospection—case studies in Plain Cilicia, Turkey” (project ID: OTHER0340). Author Contributions: Susanne Rutishauser and Ralph Rosenbauer designed the concept for the case study. Ralf Buchbach and Stefan Erasmi performed the processing of the TanDEM-X data. Susanne Rutishauser analyzed the data and wrote the paper. All authors contributed to the discussion of the results. Conflicts of Interest: The authors declare no conflict of interest.

References

1. Gürbüz, K. An example of river course changes on a delta plain: Seyhan Delta (Cukurova plain, southern Turkey). Geol. J. 1999, 34, 211–222. [CrossRef] 2. Erol, O. Ceyhan Deltasinin Jeomorfolojik Evrimi: Geomorphological Evolution of the Ceyhan River Delta: Eastern Mediterranean Coast of Turkey. Aegean Geogr. J. 2003, 12, 58–81. 3. Mahmoud, Y.; Masson, F.; Meghraoui, M.; Cakir, Z.; Alchalbi, A.; Yavasoglu, H.; Yönlü, O.; Daoud, M.; Ergintav, S.; Inan, S. Kinematic study at the junction of the East Anatolian fault and the Dead Sea fault from GPS measurements. J. Geodyn. 2013, 67, 30–39. [CrossRef] 4. Öner, E.; Hocao˘glu,B.; Uncu, L. Palaeogeographical Surveys around the Mound of Gözlükule (Tarsus). In Field Seasons 2001–2003 of the Tarsus-Gözlükule Interdisciplinary Research Project; Özyar, A., Ed.; Ege Yayınları: ,˙ Turkey, 2005; pp. 69–82. 5. Adams, R.M. Heartland of Cities. Surveys of Ancient Settlement and Land Use on the Central Floodplain of the ; The University of Chicago Press: Chicago, IL, USA, 1981. 6. Newhard, J.M.L.; Levine, N.; Rutherford, A. Least-Cost Pathway Analysis and Inter-Regional Interaction in the Göksu Valley, Turkey. Anatol. Stud. 2008, 58, 87–102. [CrossRef] Geosciences 2017, 7, 109 18 of 20

7. Ehringhaus, H.; Starke, F. Götter, Herrscher, Inschriften. Die Felsreliefs der Hethitischen Grossreichszeit in der Türkei; Philipp von Zabern: Mainz, Germany, 2005. 8. Schiettecatte, J.P. Geology of the Misis Mountains. In Geology and History of Turkey; Campbell, A.S., Ed.; Petroleum Exploration Society of Lybia: Tripoli, Libya, 1971; pp. 305–315. 9. Jarvis, A.; Reuter, H.I.; Nelson, A.; Guevara, E. CGIAR-CSI SRTM 90 m Database. Hole-filled SRTM for the Globe Version 4. 2008. Available online: http://srtm.csi.cgiar.org (accessed on 18 October 2017). 10. Forlanini, M. How to infer ancient roads and itineraries from heterogeneous Hittite texts: The case of the Cilician (Kizzuwatnean) road system. Riv. Stor. Ambient. Cult. Vicino Oriente Antico 2013, 10, 1–34. 11. Aksu, A.E.; Calon, T.J.; Hall, C.J.; Mansfield, S.; Ya¸sar, D. The Cilicia–Adana basin complex, Eastern Mediterranean: Neogene evolution of an active fore-arc basin in an obliquely convergent margin. Mar. Geol. 2005, 221, 121–159. [CrossRef] 12. Burton-Ferguson, R.; Aksu, A.E.; Hall, C.J. Seismic stratigraphy and structural evolution of the Adana Basin, eastern Mediterranean. Mar. Geol. 2005, 221, 189–222. [CrossRef] 13. Isola, I.; Bini, M.; Ribolini, A.; Zanchetta, G.; D’Agata, A.L. Geomorphology of the Ceyhan River lower plain (Adana Region, Turkey). J. Maps 2017, 13, 133–141. [CrossRef] 14. Aksu, A.E.; Ulug, A.; Piper, D.; Konuk, Y.T.; Turgut, S. Quaternary sedimentary history of Adana, Cilicia and Iskenderun Basins: Northeast Mediterranean Sea. Mar. Geol. 1992, 104, 55–71. [CrossRef] 15. Akbulut, N.; Bayarı, S.; Akbulut, A.; ¸Sahin,Y. Rivers of Turkey. In Rivers of Europe; Tockner, K., Ed.; Elsevier: Amsterdam, The Netherlands, 2009; pp. 643–672. 16. Bal, Y.; Çetin, H.; Demirkol, C. An update on the coastline changes and evolution of the Seyhan and Ceyhan Deltas in the Northeast Mediterranean, Turkey. In Proceedings of the International Symposium on Geology and Environment, GEONEV ‘97, Istanbul, Turkey, 1–5 September 1997; p. 64. 17. Çetin, H.; Bal, Y.; Demirkol, C. Engineering and Environmental Effects of Coastline Changes in Turkey, Northeastern Mediterranean. Environ. Eng. Geosci. 1999, 5, 1–16. 18. Spezzaferri, S.; Basso, D.; Koral, H. Holocene palaeoceanographic evolution of the Iskenderun Bay, South-Eastern Turkey, as a response to river mouth diversions and human impact. Mediterr. Mar. Sci. 2000, 1, 19–43. [CrossRef] 19. Walsh-Kennedy, S.; Aksu, A.E.; Hall, C.J.; Hiscott, R.N.; Yaltırakb, C.; Çifçic, G. Source to sink: The development of the latest Messinian to Pliocene-Quaternary Cilicia and Adana Basins and their linkages with the onland Mut basin, eastern Mediterranean. Tectonophysics 2014, 622, 1–21. [CrossRef] 20. Bal, Y.; Kelling, G.; Kapur, S.; Akça, E.; Çetin, H.; Erol, O. An improved method for determination of Holocene coastline changes aroun two ancient settlements in southern Anatolia: A geoarchaeological approach to historical land degradation studies. Land Degrad. Dev. 2003, 14, 363–376. [CrossRef] 21. Evans, G. The recent sedimentation of Turkey and the adjacent Mediterranean and Black Seas: A review. In Geology and History of Turkey; Campbell, A.S., Ed.; Petroleum Exploration Society of Lybia: Tripoli, Turkey, 1971; pp. 385–406. 22. Evans, G. Recent coastal sedimentation: A review. In Marine Archaeology, Proceedings of the 23rd Symposium of the Colston Research Society, Bristol, UK, 4–8 April 1971; Blackman, D.J., Ed.; Butterworths: London, UK, 1973; pp. 89–112. 23. Kuleli, T. Quantitative analysis of shoreline changes at the Mediterranean Coast in Turkey. Environ. Monit. Assess. 2010, 167, 387–397. [CrossRef][PubMed] 24. Kelletat, D. A Holocene Sea Level Curve for the Eastern Mediterranean from Multiple Indicators. Z. Geomorphol. 2005, 137, 1–9. 25. Steadman, S.R. Prehistoric sites on the cilician coastal plain: Chalcolithic and early bronze age pottery from the 1991 Bilkent University Survey. Anatol. Stud. 1994, 44, 85–103. [CrossRef] 26. Seton-Williams, M.V. Cilician Survey. Anatol. Stud. 1954, 4, 121–174. [CrossRef] 27. Steadman, S.R. Isolation or Interaction: Prehistoric Cilicia and the Fourth Millenium Uruk Expansion. J. Mediterr. Archaeol. 1996, 9, 131–165. [CrossRef] 28. Jean, E. Sociétés et Pouvoirs en Cilicie au 2nd Millénaire av. J.-C. Ph.D. Dissertation, Univeristé Paris I Sorbonne, Paris, France, 2010. 29. Hawkins, J.D. Que, A. Reallexikon der Assyriologie; De Gruyter: , Germany, 2006–2008; pp. 191–195. 30. Kaufman, S.A. The phoenician Inscription of the Incirli Trilingual: A tentative Reconstruction and Translation. Maarav 2007, 14, 7–26. Geosciences 2017, 7, 109 19 of 20

31. Langlois, V. Voyage dans la Cilicie et dans les Montagnes du Taurus; Benjamin Duprat: Paris, France, 1861. 32. Abu¯ ăl-Fida’,¯ I.; Reinaud, J.T. Géographie d’Aboulféda; Paris Impr. Royale: Paris, France, 1848–1883. 33. Goldman, H. Preliminary Expedition to Cilicia 1934, and Excavations at Gözlü Kule, Tarsus 1935. Am. J. Archaeol. 1935, 39, 526–549. [CrossRef] 34. Hild, F.; Hellenkemper, H. Kilikien und Isaurien; Verl. der Österreichischen Akademie der Wissenschaften: Wien, Austria, 1990. 35. Bossert, H.T.; Alkım, U.B. Karatepe. Kadirli and Its Environments/Second Preliminary Report; Üniversite Basimevi: Istanbul, Turkey, 1947. 36. Çambel, H. Karatepe-Aslanta¸s.The Inscriptions: Facsimile Edition; Walter de Gruyter: Berlin, Germany, 1999. 37. Çambel, H. Karatepe-Aslantas, a many-sided Project. In ’s Contributions to Archaeology in Turkey (1932–2000); Belli, O., Ed.; Istanbul University Rectorate Research Fund: Istanbul, Turkey, 2001; pp. 195–203. 38. Sicker-Akman, M. Der Fürstensitz der späthethitischen Burganlage Karatepe-Arslanta¸s. Istanb. Mitt. 2001, 50, 131–142. 39. Özgen, I.; Gates, M.-H. Report on the Bilkent University Archaeological Survey in Cilicia and the Abu¯ ăl-Fidarthern¯ Hatay: August 1991. Ara¸stirmaSonuçlari Toplantisi 1992, 10, 387–394. 40. Lehmann, G.; Killebrew, A.E.; Gates, M.-H.; Halpern, B. The Mopsos Project: The 2004 Season of Archaeological Survey in the bay of Iskenderun, Eastern Cilicia. Ara¸stirmaSonuçlari Toplantisi 2005, 23, 79–87. 41. Gates, M.-H. The Hittite Seaport Izziya at Late Bronze Age Kinet Höyük (Cilicia). Near East. Archaeol. 2013, 76, 223–234. [CrossRef] 42. Kozal, E.; Novák, M. Sirkeli Höyük: A Bronze and Iron Age Urban Settlement in Plain Cilicia. Der Anschnitt 2013, 25, 229–238. 43. Girginer, K.S. 2013 Yılı Tatarlı Höyük Kazısı. Kazı Sonuçları Toplantısı 2015, 36, 431–446. 44. Day, D.A.; Logsdon, J.M.; Latell, B. Eye in the Sky. The Story of the Corona Spy Satellites; Smithsonian Institution Press: Washington, DC, USA, 1998. 45. Ur, J. Spying on the Past: Declassified Intelligence Satellite Photographs and Near Eastern Landscapes. Near East. Archaeol. 2013, 76, 28–36. 46. Casana, J. A Landscape Context for Paleoethnobotany: The Contribution of Aerial and Satellite Remote Sensing. In Method and Theory in Paleoethnobotany; University Press of Colorado: Boulder, CO, USA, 2015; pp. 315–335. 47. Galiatsatos, N. Assessment of the CORONA Series of Satellite Imagery for Landscape Archaeology: A Case Study from the Orontes Valley, Syria; University of Durham: Durham, UK, 2004. 48. Casana, J.; Cothren, J. The CORONA Atlas Project: Orthorectification of CORONA Satellite Imagery and Regional-Scale Archaeological Exploration in the Near East. In Mapping Archaeological Landscapes from Space; Comer, D.C., Harrower, M.J., Eds.; Springer: New York, NY, USA, 2013; pp. 33–43. 49. Scollar, I.; Galiatsatos, N.; Mugnier, C. Mapping from CORONA: Geometric Distortion in KH4 Images. Photogramm. Eng. Remote Sens. 2016, 82, 7–13. [CrossRef] 50. Werninghaus, R.; Buckreuss, S. The TerraSAR-X Mission and System Design. IEEE Trans. Geosci. Remote Sens. 2010, 48, 606–614. [CrossRef] 51. Erasmi, S.; Rosenbauer, R.; Buchbach, R.; Busche, T.; Rutishauser, S. Evaluating the Quality and Accuracy of TanDEM-X Digital Elevation Models at Archaeological Sites in the Cilician Plain, Turkey. Remote Sens. 2014, 6, 9475–9493. [CrossRef] 52. Kumar, V. Palaeo-Channel. In Encyclopedia of Snow, Ice and Glaciers; Singh, V.P., Ed.; Springer: Dordrecht, The Netherlands, 2011; p. 803. 53. Charlton, R. Fundamentals of Fluvial Geomorphology; Routledge: London, UK, 2008. 54. Knighton, A.D. Fluvial Forms and Processes: A New Perspective; Les Presses de l’Université de Montréal; Érudit: Montreal, QC, Canada, 1998. 55. Wiseman, J.; El-Baz, F. Remote Sensing in Archaeology; Springer: New York, NY, USA, 2007. 56. Zepp, H. Geomorphologie. Eine Einführung; Schöningh: Stuttgart, Germany, 2004. 57. Hritz, C.; Wilkinson, T.J. Using Shuttle Radar Topography to map ancient water channels in Mesopotamia. Antiquity 2006, 80, 414–424. 58. Rayne, L.E. Water and territorial empires. Doctoral thesis, Durham University, Durham, UK, 2014. Geosciences 2017, 7, 109 20 of 20

59. Casana, J.; Cothren, J.; Kalayci, T. Swords into Ploughshares: Archaeological Applications of CORONA Satellite Imagery in the Near East. Int. Archaeol. 2012.[CrossRef] 60. Rosenbauer, R. Topographisch-urbanistischer Survey des Ruinengeländes am Kap Karatas/Türkei. Vorbericht zur ersten Kampagne 2006. Hefte Archäol. Semin. Univ. Bern 2007, 20, 107–119. 61. Saucier, R.T. Geomorphology and Quaternary Geologic History of the Lower Mississippi Valley; U.S. Army Engineer Waterways Experiment Station: Vicksburg, MS, USA, 1994. 62. Dinç, U.; Senol, S.; Cangir, C.; Dinç, A.O.; Akça, E.; Dingil, M.; Oztekin, E.; Kapur, B.; Kapur, S. Soil Survey and Soil Database of Turkey. Eur. Soil Bur. Res. Rep. 2005, 9, 371–375. 63. Alphan, H.; Yilmaz, K.T. Monitoring environmental changes in the Mediterranean coastal landscape: The case of Cukurova, Turkey. Environ. Manag. 2005, 35, 607–619. [CrossRef][PubMed] 64. Tekoglu, R.; Lemaire, A. La bilingue royale louvito-phénicienne de Çineköy. C. R. Séances l’Acad. Inscr. Belles-Lett. 2000, 144, 961–1007. [CrossRef] 65. Lanfranchi, G.B. The Luwian-Phoenician Bilingual of Cineköy and the Annexation of Cilicia to the Assyrian Empire. In Von Sumer bis Homer: Festschrift für Manfred Schretter zum 60. Geburtstag am 25. Februar 2004; Rollinger, R., Schretter, M.K., Eds.; Ugarit-Verlag: Münster, Germany, 2005; pp. 481–496. 66. Lanfranchi, G.B. The Luwian-Phoenician bilinguals of ÇINEKÖY and KARATEPE: An ideological dialogue. In Getrennte Wege?: Kommunikation, Raum und Wahrnehmung in der Alten Welt; Rollinger, R., Luther, A., Wiesehöfer, J., Eds.; Verlag Antike: Frankfurt am Main, Germany, 2007; pp. 179–217.

© 2017 by the authors. Licensee MDPI, Basel, Switzerland. This article is an open access article distributed under the terms and conditions of the Creative Commons Attribution (CC BY) license (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/).