DOCSLIB.ORG

The Inscription at Tamrut Castle: the Case for a Revision of Armenian History1

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
The Inscription at Tamrut Castle: the Case for a Revision of Armenian History1 THE INSCRIPTION AT TAMRUT CASTLE: THE CASE FOR A REVISION OF ARMENIAN HISTORY1 Seldom has the discovery of a single inscription helped to rewrite his- tory. The dedicatory epigraph that is the subject of this study was installed over the entrance to the 13th-century baronial castle of T῾ambrowt (now Tamrut), in the heart of the Armenian Kingdom of Cilicia (Fig. 1), which was a conduit for cultural, political, and military exchanges with the Crusader kingdoms, the Byzantine Empire, the Seljuks, the Mamluks, and the Mongols. The often-stated conclusion that Cilicia was at this time a client state dependent on the Mongols for protection must be revised with the discovery of the first evidence that the Armenians were building new military strongholds during this crucial period of history. The inscription from T῾ambrowt Castle, which was photographed in 1981, and destroyed shortly thereafter, is also an historically important source for redrawing the boundaries between the spheres of influence of the two rival dynastic fami- lies in the Armenian Kingdom, the Het῾umids and Ṙubēnids. 1. TheHistoryoftheTamrutInscriptionanditsTranslation In 1987 Robert W. Edwards published his FortificationsofArmenian Cilicia, the result of many expeditions to Cilicia which began in 1973 and culminated in this voluminous, detailed study of seventy-five sites2. In this publication, he mentions, among others, a fortress that had been hitherto unattested until his survey in 1981, alternatively known as Tamrut Kale and Alişekale/ Alişe Kale3. A number of factors made this fortress stand 1 With sincere thanks to Dr. Robert W. Edwards for allowing me to study his copy of the photograph he took before the destruction of the inscription at Tamrut Castle and his many comments that improved this article, and appreciation for his years of work to ensure that the Armenian monuments of Anatolia are studied and published. I would also like to express my heartfelt appreciation to Prof. Dickran Kouymjian for his encouragement over many years to find the original photograph of this inscription, which led me to locating it in the archives of Dr. Edwards, who first published it in his monograph (EDWARDS, Fortifica- tions). Additional thanks are due to Prof. Richard G. Hovannisian for his help in accessing the images of Tamrut in the PARSEGIAN, ArmenianArchitecturemicrofiche set at the Univer- sity of California – Los Angeles. Last, but not least, I would like to express special thanks to Dr. Agnès Ouzounian, without whose expertise of medieval Armenian epigraphy and grammar, and talent for pulling words out of weathered stone this article would not have been completed in its current form. 2 EDWARDS, Fortifications, p. ix. 3 EDWARDS, Fortifications, p. 241, n. 2. LeMuséon 132 (1-2), 107-122. doi: 10.2143/MUS.132.1.3286535 - Tous droits réservés. © Le Muséon, 2019. 108 J. CHRISTIANIAN out in importance among all the sites Edwards surveyed, deserving it to be featured as the sole image on the dust jacket cover of his monograph: 1) until his first visit, its remote location had escaped the notice of modern travelers; 2) its general location made it a possible candidate for identi- fication as Barjrberd/Bardzrberd – one of the most strategic, renowned fortresses of Cilician Armenia; and 3) an extensive inscription carved in stone was preserved over its main entrance (Fig. 2). However, a few years after his visit to this site, the entrance gate was intentionally damaged, and the inscription was removed and likely destroyed (Fig. 2a). Another traveler, Mustapha Skalli, visited the site in 1982, and also photographed the fortress and inscription, although his photographs of it, taken from a distance, did not help in deciphering it (Fig. 3 and 3a). The website of the municipality of Aladağ, within the jurisdiction of which this fortress is located, mentions the presence of a six-line inscription on a limestone block on the exterior of the gate, whose content is still not fully known. Curiously, though, the third photograph displayed on the web page shows that the inscription is missing over the entrance gate (Fig. 4)4. My own visit in July 2014 confirmed the absence of this inscription (Fig. 2a). Two local youths at the site, noting my interest in the missing stones over the arch of the gate, mentioned that people had years before intentionally destroyed the inscription tabela previously present there5. Edwards, prior to publishing his book, had Virgil Strohmeyer, Jr., and Dickran Kouymjian, both experts in medieval Armenian epigraphy, exam- ine his photograph of this inscription for assistance in reading and translat- ing it. Unfortunately, the steep grade outside the gate had made it very dif- ficult to take a good picture, such that Edwards’ photo was taken at a sharp angle to the wall. That angle, and the distance from which the photograph had to be taken, made it impossible to make out the inscription fully, as many of the letters were also quite worn. Edwards reported the inscription as: 1. šinec῾oł.a .. c῾ankm . (or, c῾anks .) the builder .. circuit walls 2. bor anvani epł (or, t῾) ambrow … Lampron (or) by the famous bishopric 3. iyišatak hap . agior pr in the memory of (?) baron 4. …. b . cownoč῾i . orowt῾o ? 5. norogesc῾i ē : t῾v[….] I will renew 6. …. yišesc῾owk῾ ? We will remember6 4 http://www.aladag.bel.tr/index.php/tamrut-alise-kalesi [accessed February 5, 2017]. 5 Another recent study that references Tamrut makes no mention of the inscription: PETRE, Commonality, p. 250-251. 6 EDWARDS, Fortifications, p. 237. THE INSCRIPTION AT TAMRUT CASTLE 109 He further added that Strohmeyer included the following notes with his translation: “In the second line, the ept῾amb could stand for episkoposowt῾eamb or for episkopost῾ambrow which might be a name of a person or place (see Hubschmann’s T῾ambarak῾). If this reading is accepted, row is possibly a dialectal form of ṙowben [sic: read ṙowbēn], but I think the initial r argues against this. Finally, if we read ł for t῾ we might have the word Tambrow [sic: read Łambrow?] or Lampron. The third line is fairly clear except for the name which seems to be in the genitive. The fourth line is impossible to translate. The fifth line has a clear t῾v which may be a phonetic rendering of the more normal t῾ow.. (number) in classical Armenian.”7 Edwards also wrote: “[Kouymjian] reads a date at the end of line 5: ‘in our era 682.’ The Armenian year 682 is equivalent to A.D. 1233. […] but it should be stressed that this reading is highly speculative.”8 The year 682 would be written as ՈՁԲ in Armenian. As it stood, the unen- hanced photograph referenced in TheFortificationsofArmenianCilicia was simply too difficult to read. I was able to obtain the original 8 × 10 inch black & white enlargement from Edwards in 20169. Considering the challenges posed by the photo- graph, due to the picture-taking conditions experienced by Edwards, digi- tal manipulation of a scan of the image seemed likely to help. A high- resolution scan was made, and that image was treated with Photoshop to eliminate the perspective distortion and improve contrast and sharpness in the delineation of the letters. This final result showed much promise, and yielded the following reading, in six lines of text separated by horizontal lines, with raised letters carved in relief from the surrounding areas. The text is given below in the layout used on the stone face (Fig. 5 and 6): 7 EDWARDS, Fortifications, p. 241, n. 4. 8 EDWARDS, Fortifications, p. 241, n. 4. 9 Having failed to find the inscription on-site to confirm and complete its reading and translation, I searched for Edwards’ photograph and his extensive archive, which he had entrusted to the late Vazken L. Parsegian, Professor Emeritus of the School of Engineering at Rensselaer Polytechnic Institute (RPI) in Troy, NY. Parsegian was also Chairman of the Armenian Educational Council and Director of the Armenian Architecture Photographic Archives Project. However, while an extensive archive of photographs and other docu- ments on Armenian architecture is indeed located at RPI, I was assured by Ms. Jeanne M. Keefe, the Graphics Curator at the RPI Architecture Library (since retired), that Edwards’ files were not there. Their whereabouts remain a mystery. My search was finally rewarded when, having contacted Edwards, I was informed that he still had a copy of the image. While he did not have the original negative, he fortunately had an 8×10 inch enlargement he shared with me, as well as a duplicate of a 35 mm color slide he had taken, which unfor- tunately did not contribute any further details. 110 J. CHRISTIANIAN ± ՇԻՆԵՑԱՒ ԴՂԵԱԿՍ ՑԱՆԿԱ ԼԻ : ՈՐ Է ԱՆՎԱՆԻ ԲԵՐԴ ԹԱՄԲՐՏԻ . (. used instead of :, or : touching the Ի?) Ի ՅԻՇԱՏԱԿ ՀԱՒՐ ԹԱԳԻ : ՈՐ ՊՐ ԿՈՍՏԻՆ ԱՆՈՒՆ ԿՈՉԻ : ՈՐՈՒՄ +ՏՐ 10 Ն ՈՂՈՐՄԵՍՑԻ ԱՄԵՆ 11 : ԹՎԻՆ ՉԲ12 : + ԵՒ ԾՆ[Ո]ՂԴ ԳԼԽԱՎՈՐ ՅԻՇԵՍՑՈՒՔ Ի ՔՍ 13 A number of punctuation marks appear in the inscription, in the form of the sentence-ending period mark, the vertically-arranged two dots (:). Using this punctuation allows us to rearrange the words of the inscription as intended to be read. It is given again below in this form, with missing letters added – or abbreviated words expanded – in square brackets ([ ]); with single- or double-underlines used to differentiate juxtaposed sets of ligatures or “nested” letters – where a letter is “nested” above, below, or inside part of another. Finally, the wavy underlines are used to indicate the use of the patiw, the Armenian mark of abbreviation, above the corresponding letters. It becomes apparent that each of the first five lines ends in the letter Ի, an attempt at a simple rhyme.
Load more

Recommended publications
  • Sanherip Dönemi Kilikya İsyanları
    Sanherip Dönemi Kilikya İsyanları Cilician Rebellions in Sennacherib Period Mehmet KURT∗ Öz Kilikya; İran, Mezopotamya, Mısır, Ege, Kıbrıs, Doğu Akdeniz ve Anadolu dünyalarını birbirine bağlayan konumuyla stratejik bir öneme sahip olmuştur. Bölgenin doğal liman olanakları, ormanları ve zengin maden kaynakları sebebiyle çevre devletler için daima bir cazibe merkezi oluşturduğu görülmüştür. Bu bağlamda Yeni Asur Devleti’nin Urartu ve Phryglerle yapmış olduğu mücadelelerde, Kilikya’nın savaş alanı haline gelmesi çok sayıda problemi beraberinde getirmiştir. Kilikya’nın tanımlanan bu özelliğini en iyi yansıtan gelişmelerden birisi, hiç şüphesiz, Sanherip dönemi isyanlarıdır. Bölgenin yerel yöneticileri olan Azitawadda ve Kirua’nın Asur yönetimine karşı çıkarttıkları isyanlar, Asur Devleti için Kilikya’nın stratejik önemini ve sosyo-ekonomik değerini bir kez daha ortaya koymuştur. Bölgenin politik yapısı ve yerel güçlerin bu politik teşkilatlanmadaki etkisini bütün açıklığıyla gözler önüne sermiş olan isyanlar, Asur’un Anadolu politikası için de belirleyici olmuştur. Öte yandan birbirinin devamı olduğu anlaşılan iki isyan da Kilikya’da bölgesel bir gücün kurulmak istendiğini ve yerel güçlerin etkinliğini göstermesi açısından büyük önem taşımaktadır. Zira bölgede yapılan filolojik inceleme ve analizler, yerel güçlerle daha büyük güçler arasındaki politik ilişkiler konusunda önemli sonuçlar ortaya koymuşlardır. İşte bu makalenin amacı, Sargonidler Devri Asur kaynakları ve yerli hiyeroglif yazıtlar ışığında, söz konusu isyanların, Asur için stratejik,
    [Show full text]
  • The Latin Principality of Antioch and Its Relationship with the Armenian Kingdom of Cilicia, 1188-1268 Samuel James Wilson
    The Latin Principality of Antioch and Its Relationship with the Armenian Kingdom of Cilicia, 1188-1268 Samuel James Wilson A thesis submitted in partial fulfilment of the requirements of Nottingham Trent University for the degree of Doctor of Philosophy March 2016 1 Copyright Statement This work is the intellectual property of the author. You may copy up to 5% of this work for private study, or personal, non-commercial research. Any re-use of the information contained within this document should be fully referenced, quoting the author, title, university, degree level and pagination. Queries or requests for any other use, or if a more substantial copy is required, should be directed to the owner of the Intellectual Property Rights. 2 Abstract The Latin principality of Antioch was founded during the First Crusade (1095-1099), and survived for 170 years until its destruction by the Mamluks in 1268. This thesis offers the first full assessment of the thirteenth century principality of Antioch since the publication of Claude Cahen’s La Syrie du nord à l’époque des croisades et la principauté franque d’Antioche in 1940. It examines the Latin principality from its devastation by Saladin in 1188 until the fall of Antioch eighty years later, with a particular focus on its relationship with the Armenian kingdom of Cilicia. This thesis shows how the fate of the two states was closely intertwined for much of this period. The failure of the principality to recover from the major territorial losses it suffered in 1188 can be partly explained by the threat posed by the Cilician Armenians in the late twelfth and early thirteenth centuries.
    [Show full text]
  • Art-Sanat, 13(2020): 361–385
    Art-Sanat, 13(2020): 361–385 DOI: 10.26650/artsanat.2020.13.0015 http://dergipark.gov.tr/iuarts Başvuru: 20.05.2019 Revizyon talebi: 09.12.2019 Art-Sanat Son revizyon teslimi: 27.12.2019 Kabul: 21.01.2020 ARAŞTIRMA MAKALESI / RESEARCH ARTICLE Mersin Toroslar’da Çandır Kalesi Çandir Castle at the Taurus Mountains of Mersin Halil Sözlü* , Lale Yılmaz** Öz Mersin ili, tarih boyunca bölgenin savunma ve egemenliğinde önem taşıyan yapılar olarak tanımlanabilecek çok sayıda kale yapısının inşa edildiği bir bölgede yer almaktadır. Özellikle Ortaçağ döneminde etkin olarak yerleşme ve savunma bakımından kullanılan kale yapıları, kuzeyden güneye limanlara ulaşan ticaret yollarının güvenliğini sağlamaktaydı. Makalede coğrafi konumu ve yapısal özellikleri bakımından özgün bir nitelik taşıyan Çandır Kalesi ele alınmıştır. Kalenin yalnızca bir savunma yapısı olarak değil, geniş bir alanı kaplayan yapılardan oluşan küçük bir yerleşim birimi olarak kurulduğu anlaşılmaktadır. Çalışmada Kilikya Bölgesi’nde Ortaçağ’da Bizans döneminde Ermeni baronluğuna ait olarak tanımlanan Çandır Kalesi üzerine yapılmış tarihsel çalışmalar incelenmiş, kale alanında günümüze ulaşan yapı kalıntıları belirlenmiştir. Günümüzde Çandır Kalesi’nde görülebilen doğal ve insan eliyle gerçekleşen yıkım, kale kompleksinin yapısal özelliklerinin yeniden tanımlanmasını gerekli kılmıştır. Anahtar Kelimeler Mersin, Ortaçağ, Bizans, Paperon, Kale Abstract Mersin is located in a region where many fortress structures have been built, which can be defined as structures that are important in the defense and sovereignty of the region throughout history. Especially in the Middle Ages, the castle structures, which were used effectively in terms of settlement and defense, ensured the security of the trade routes reaching the ports from north to south. It is understood that the fortress structures were established at strategic points on the main transportation and trade routes.
    [Show full text]
  • Cilician Armenia in the Thirteenth Century.[3] Marco Polo, for Example, Set out on His Journey to China from Ayas in 1271
    The Armenian Kingdom of Cilicia (also known as Little Armenia; not to be confused with the Arme- nian Kingdom of Antiquity) was a state formed in the Middle Ages by Armenian refugees fleeing the Seljuk invasion of Armenia. It was located on the Gulf of Alexandretta of the Mediterranean Sea in what is today southern Turkey. The kingdom remained independent from around 1078 to 1375. The Kingdom of Cilicia was founded by the Rubenian dynasty, an offshoot of the larger Bagratid family that at various times held the thrones of Armenia and Georgia. Their capital was Sis. Cilicia was a strong ally of the European Crusaders, and saw itself as a bastion of Christendom in the East. It also served as a focus for Armenian nationalism and culture, since Armenia was under foreign oc- cupation at the time. King Levon I of Armenia helped cultivate Cilicia's economy and commerce as its interaction with European traders grew. Major cities and castles of the kingdom included the port of Korikos, Lam- pron, Partzerpert, Vahka (modern Feke), Hromkla, Tarsus, Anazarbe, Til Hamdoun, Mamistra (modern Misis: the classical Mopsuestia), Adana and the port of Ayas (Aias) which served as a Western terminal to the East. The Pisans, Genoese and Venetians established colonies in Ayas through treaties with Cilician Armenia in the thirteenth century.[3] Marco Polo, for example, set out on his journey to China from Ayas in 1271. For a short time in the 1st century BCE the powerful kingdom of Armenia was able to conquer a vast region in the Levant, including the area of Cilicia.
    [Show full text]
  • Cilician Armenian Mediation in Crusader-Mongol Politics, C.1250-1350
    HAYTON OF KORYKOS AND LA FLOR DES ESTOIRES: CILICIAN ARMENIAN MEDIATION IN CRUSADER-MONGOL POLITICS, C.1250-1350 by Roubina Shnorhokian A thesis submitted to the Department of History In conformity with the requirements for the degree of Doctor of Philosophy Queen’s University Kingston, Ontario, Canada (January, 2015) Copyright ©Roubina Shnorhokian, 2015 Abstract Hayton’s La Flor des estoires de la terre d’Orient (1307) is typically viewed by scholars as a propagandistic piece of literature, which focuses on promoting the Ilkhanid Mongols as suitable allies for a western crusade. Written at the court of Pope Clement V in Poitiers in 1307, Hayton, a Cilician Armenian prince and diplomat, was well-versed in the diplomatic exchanges between the papacy and the Ilkhanate. This dissertation will explore his complex interests in Avignon, where he served as a political and cultural intermediary, using historical narrative, geography and military expertise to persuade and inform his Latin audience of the advantages of allying with the Mongols and sending aid to Cilician Armenia. This study will pay close attention to the ways in which his worldview as a Cilician Armenian informed his perceptions. By looking at a variety of sources from Armenian, Latin, Eastern Christian, and Arab traditions, this study will show that his knowledge was drawn extensively from his inter-cultural exchanges within the Mongol Empire and Cilician Armenia’s position as a medieval crossroads. The study of his career reflects the range of contacts of the Eurasian world. ii Acknowledgements This project would not have been possible without the financial support of SSHRC, the Marjorie McLean Oliver Graduate Scholarship, OGS, and Queen’s University.
    [Show full text]
  • Kilikya Bölgesinin İkiz Kalesi: “Sinap” Twin Castles of the Cilicia
    Selçuk Ün. Sos. Bil. Ens. Der. 2020; (44): 151-170 - Sanat Tarihi / Araştırma - Kilikya Bölgesinin İkiz Kalesi: “Sinap” Razan AYKAÇ ÖZ Tarih boyunca Anadolu’da şehirleri, stratejik yerleri korumak ve yol güvenliğini sağlamak için askeri yapılar inşa edilmiştir. Roma ve Bizans döneminde doğudan gelen Pers ve İslam ordularının taarruzuna karşı pek çok kale yapılmıştır. Akdeniz bölgesinin Kudüs’e giden hac yolu üzerinde yer alması, senede birkaç kere ürün alınabilen verimli topraklara sahip olması ve Anadolu’nun içlerine bağlantının buradan geçen yol hatlarıyla sağlanması ayrıca başta Kıbrıs olmak üzere Mısır ve büyük denizlere açılan güvenli limanlarının bulunması bölgenin farklı devletlerce mücadelesine sebep olmuştur. Buradaki yol hatlarının güvenliğini sağlamak için de İlk çağdan itibaren savunma yapıları buralarda önem kazanmıştır. Özellikle Bizans İmparatorluğu, İslam saldırılarını (Emevi ve Abbasi) önlemek için sınır boyları tahkim etmiş, kavşak noktalara kaleler kurmuş ve ileri karakol olarak tasarlanmış savunma yapıları inşa etmiştir. Dağlık Kilikya’ya yerleşen Ermeniler burada prenslikler oluşturmuştur. Elbistan savaşından (1277) sonra bölgede Memlüklü hâkimiyetinin ağırlık kazanması Kilikya Ermeni Krallığını olumsuz etkilemiştir. 1375 yılında Memlüklerin Sis’i (Kozan) ele geçirmesiyle bu krallık son bulmuş ve bundan sonra bölgede Memlüklere bağlı Ramazanoğlu Beyliği varlığını sürdürmüştür. Memlüklü Devleti bölgenin güvenliğini sağlamak için başta Kozan olmak üzere kaleler inşa etmiş ve var olan pek çok kale bu dönemde tamir edilmiş ya da yenilenmiştir. Orta Toroslarda yer alan, günümüzde Mersin il sınırı içerisindeki Sinap kaleleri de bu özelliği gösteren savunma yapılarıdır. Mersin’in Çamlıyayla ilçesi ve Çandır köyü yakınında, Tarsus-Ulukışla arasındaki kuzey yol güzergâhında inşa edilen Sinap kaleleri sınırda, düşman hücumlarını önlemek amacıyla inşa edilmiş garnizon kaleleridir. Garnizon kaleleri sınır hattını, yol güzergâhlarını ya da stratejik öneme sahip bir beldeyi korumak için inşa edilmiş askeri yapılardır.
    [Show full text]
  • BELLETEN Cilt:LXX Nisan 2006 Sayı: 257
    TÜRK TARIH KURUMU BELLETEN Cilt:LXX Nisan 2006 Sayı: 257 L KYA M.Ö. I. BİN YIL ASUR-ANADOLU ILIŞKILERINDE Kİ İ BÖLGESI MEHMET KURT* Kilikya; Akdeniz'e uzanan dağları, ovaları, vadileri, nehirleri, geçitleri ve ca, bölgenin Anadolu yüksek platoları ile coğrafi bir çeşitliliğe sahiptir. Ayrı nda, do al zenginlik ve Suriye arasında bir köprü oluşturan konumu yanı ğ da onun sosyal, ekonomik, kültürel, askeri ve siyasal geli irnine kaynakları ş lardan itibaren, Anadolu-Mezopotamya yön vermiştir. En eski çağ anla lan Kilikya, Asurlularm Anadolu ilişkilerinde belirleyici bir rol oynadığı şı nda da, vazgeçihnez bir yere sa- politikalarmın belirlenmesi ve uygulanması zda, M.Ö. I. bin y l Asur-Anadolu hip olmuştur. İşte bu çalışmamı ı n yerini ve önemini gözler önüne sermeye çal aca z. ilişkilerinde, Kilikya'nı ış ğı K KONUMU VE SOSYO-EKONOM K KİLİKYA'NIN JEOPOLİTİ İ DURUMUNA GENEL BİR BAKIŞ Kilikya, Anadolu kökenli bir isim olup, ilk defa M.Ö. XVI. yüzyılda, yani eklinde ve Adaniya ile Hitit İnıparatorluğu döneminde, Chalaka (Hilakku) ş birlikte geçmektedir. Chalaka, Kilikia Tracheia (Dağlık Kilikya) 'yı k Kilikya) yerine kullan lm t r'. karşılarken; Adaniya, Cilicia Pedias (Ovalı ı ış ı Antik kaynaklarda ise Coracesium (Alanya)'dan Suriye geçitlerine kadar sahaya, Kilikya denildi i olan ve kuzeyden Toros dağları ile sınırlı ğ n da l k ve oval k bölümleri anlaşılmaktadır2. Tarih boyunca Kilikya'nı ğı ı * Dr. Mehmet KURT, Karaman Anadolu Lisesi Tarih Öğretmeni / 70100 KARAMAN. Ruge 1921, 385; Hild-Hellenkemper 1990, 30. (Geographika: XII, XIII, XIV), Çeviren: A. Pekman, 2 Strabon, Antik Anadolu Coğrafyası stanbul 1993, XII 1,4; XIV 5,2.
    [Show full text]
  • Savranda Kalesi Mimari Değerlendirmesi*
    Online Journal of Art and Design volume 10, issue 3, July 2022 Savranda Kalesi Mimari Değerlendirmesi* Derya Sökmen Kök1 ve Yegan Kahya Sayar2 1Adana Alparslan Türkeş Bilim ve Teknoloji Üniversitesi, Mimarlık ve Tasarım Fakültesi, Adana. [email protected] 2İstanbul Teknik Üniversitesi, Mimarlık Fakültesi, İstanbul. [email protected] * Bu çalışma İstanbul Teknik Üniversitesi Lisansüstü Enstitüsü Restorasyon Programında Prof. Dr. Yegan Kahya Sayar danışmanlığında yürütülmekte olan ‘11.-14.Yy. Kilikya Bölgesi Savunma Yapılarının Koruma Sorunları’ başlıklı doktora tezinden üretilmiştir. ÖZET Savranda Kalesi Kilikya Bölgesi’nin doğu sınırını oluşturan Amanos Dağları’nda yer almaktadır. Bölgeyi Bahçe Geçiti üzerinden Suriye ve Mezopotamya’ya bağlayan yol yapının görüş menzili içindedir. Ayrıca yakın çevresinde yer alan savunma yapıları ile bu stratejik noktaların korunması için bir savunma sistemi oluşturmaktadır. Konumunun bu ayrıcalıklı özellikleri, önemini yüzyıllarca korumasını ve işlevini sürdürmesini sağlamıştır. İnşa tarihi bilinmemekle birlikte orta çağda, Bizans, Ermeni, Haçlı ve Memluk hakimiyetine girdiği bilinmektedir. Mimarisiyle yer aldığı coğrafyada etkileyici bir siluet oluşturan yapının beden duvarı, burç, dendan, mazgal pencere gibi temel savunma elemanlarının yanında iç kalesi, giriş mekânı, şapeli ve çevresinde duvar kalıntıları bulunmaktadır. Temel olarak savunma prensiplerine uygun konumu ve mimari elemanlarıyla bölgenin ileri düzey savunma sistemine sahip olan yapılar ile benzer yaklaşımlar içerirken yere özgü
    [Show full text]
  • A Gazetteer of Medieval Sites in Cilicia
    Appendix 2 A Gazetteer of Medieval Sites in Cilicia The following section is a gazetteer of all major, archaeological position of each site by degrees and minutes in latitude (north) sites from the Armenian kingdom. The sites are presented al- and longitude (east). The fourth entry is a summary from phabetically and each site is defined by two to four categories of modern publications where more information can be found. information that will provide an immediate reference to some The goal of this gazetteer is neither to provide a historical de- basic facts. The emphasis here is on the archaeology of Cilicia scription nor analyse the historiographic veracity of the textual and thus a place is listed with * when there is some physical, evidence here. While such a study is certainly necessary, its extant evidence of medieval occupation or construction has presence here is a separate effort entirely and one which would taken place. Consequently, for instance, the city of Adana is outweigh the dissertation itself not only in new data, but in listed without *. Although we know historically that some Ar- sheer volume. The fifth entry is collection of my personal menians lived within its collapsed walls after the 10th century, observations.2 no particular medieval remains are to be found in the current city. This in contrast to the city of Misis, where a current archae- Abidye ology team of the University of Pisa are excavating the remains Toponomy: Abedi of the fortified outcrop. Typology: 9 The modern Turkish name for each site is the first entry be- History: Casale mentioned in the grant of 1212 by Levon i cause the medieval toponym, in the majority of the cases, is un- to the Teutonic Knights (Langlois, 1863: 118) known or in dispute.
    [Show full text]
  • ANAMUR FOLKLORU Fatma PINAR KUZU YÜKSEK LİSANS TEZİ Yrd
    ANAMUR FOLKLORU Fatma PINAR KUZU YÜKSEK LİSANS TEZİ Yrd. Doç. Dr. Turhan KAYA TÜRK DİLİ VE EDEBİYATI ANABİLİM DALI 2010 Her hakkı saklıdır. T. C. ATATÜRK ÜNİVERSİTESİ SOSYAL BİLİMLER ENSTİTÜSÜ TÜRK DİLİ VE EDEBİYATI ANABİLİM DALI Fatma PINAR KUZU ANAMUR FOLKLORU YÜKSEK LİSANS TEZİ TEZ YÖNETİCİSİ Yrd. Doç. Dr. Turhan KAYA ERZURUM – 2010 I İÇİNDEKİLER ÖZET .............................................................................................................................. XI ABSTRACT ..................................................................................................................XII ÖN SÖZ ....................................................................................................................... XIII KISALTMALAR ........................................................................................................ XV GİRİŞ ............................................................................................................................... 1 ÇALIŞMA İLE İLGİLİ GENEL BİLGİLER .......................................................... 1 Konu ........................................................................................................................ 1 Amaç ........................................................................................................................ 1 Kapsam ve Sınırlar ................................................................................................... 1 Yöntem ....................................................................................................................
    [Show full text]
  • Hittites at Soli (Cilicia)
    Hittites at Soli (Cilicia) Rernzi Yagcl Buca-hmir "Of what is past, or is passing or to come." W.B. Yeats Soli Hoyiik lies on the western coast of Mersin some 11 km. far away from the city center, now just middle of the modern settlement. It is a medium size mound with 22 m. altitude and 300 m. diameter. The Roman theater leans on the western slope of the mound (fig.!) on one of the main routes leading from Cilicia, from north, east and west, to the Mediterranean Sea situated in a strategic position since Soli Hoyiik is just located on the border between Cilicia Pedias and Cilicia Trachaeia (Strabo XIV. V. 1,8). The aim of this paper is to display the Hittite presence at Soli and to contribute to the Late Bronze Age archaeology of the region, i.e., Kizzuwatna and its surroundings. This paper will try to give recent archaeological evidence (1999-2005) by combining it with historical and geographical issues. These arguments will be studied mainly by focusing on ceramic assemblages, bullae, stone findings and architectural remains. However, before going through the archaeological materials, there are some questions related to location and historical geography to be discussed. Although much progress has been made in the recent years in the field of historical geography for the Cilicia, the toponmy of Soli in the Late Bronze Age is still a subject widely controversial. Moreover, there is also another problematic especially concerning the Cilician region; the toponmy cited in the Hittite sources does not overlap with the archaeological evidence yet.
    [Show full text]
  • LCSH Section L
    L (The sound) L1 algebras La Bonte Creek (Wyo.) [P235.5] UF Algebras, L1 UF LaBonte Creek (Wyo.) BT Consonants BT Harmonic analysis BT Rivers—Wyoming Phonetics Locally compact groups La Bonte Station (Wyo.) L.17 (Transport plane) L2TP (Computer network protocol) UF Camp Marshall (Wyo.) USE Scylla (Transport plane) [TK5105.572] Labonte Station (Wyo.) L-29 (Training plane) UF Layer 2 Tunneling Protocol (Computer network BT Pony express stations—Wyoming USE Delfin (Training plane) protocol) Stagecoach stations—Wyoming L-98 (Whale) BT Computer network protocols La Borde Site (France) USE Luna (Whale) L98 (Whale) USE Borde Site (France) L. A. Franco (Fictitious character) USE Luna (Whale) La Bourdonnaye family (Not Subd Geog) USE Franco, L. A. (Fictitious character) LA 1 (La.) La Braña Region (Spain) L.A.K. Reservoir (Wyo.) USE Louisiana Highway 1 (La.) USE Braña Region (Spain) USE LAK Reservoir (Wyo.) La-5 (Fighter plane) La Branche, Bayou (La.) L.A. Noire (Game) USE Lavochkin La-5 (Fighter plane) UF Bayou La Branche (La.) UF Los Angeles Noire (Game) La-7 (Fighter plane) Bayou Labranche (La.) BT Video games USE Lavochkin La-7 (Fighter plane) Labranche, Bayou (La.) L.C.C. (Life cycle costing) La Albarrada, Battle of, Chile, 1631 BT Bayous—Louisiana USE Life cycle costing USE Albarrada, Battle of, Chile, 1631 La Brea Avenue (Los Angeles, Calif.) L.C. Smith shotgun (Not Subd Geog) La Albufereta de Alicante Site (Spain) This heading is not valid for use as a geographic UF Smith shotgun USE Albufereta de Alicante Site (Spain) subdivision. BT Shotguns La Alcarria Plateau (Spain) UF Brea Avenue (Los Angeles, Calif.) L Class (Destroyers : 1939-1948) (Not Subd Geog) USE Alcarria Plateau (Spain) BT Streets—California UF Laforey Class (Destroyers : 1939-1948) La Alcudia Site (Spain) La Brea Pits (Calif.) BT Destroyers (Warships) USE Alcudia Site (Spain) UF La Brea Tar Pits (Calif.) L.
    [Show full text]