DOCSLIB.ORG

New Considerations and Revelations Regarding the Anthropomorphic Clay Figurines of Alişar Höyük

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
New Considerations and Revelations Regarding the Anthropomorphic Clay Figurines of Alişar Höyük ANATOLICA XL, 2014 NEW CONSIDERATIONS AND REVELATIONS REGARDING THE ANTHROPOMORPHIC CLAY FIGURINES OF ALIŞAR HÖYÜK Shannon Martino Abstract The site of Alişar Höyük in north central Anatolia has long been known to be one of great importance as well as a site riddled with chronological issues, especially regarding its early periods. Given recent reconsiderations regarding the dating of the site as well as my own examination of the site’s fi nds in the collection of the Oriental Institute new insights about the site’s place in interregional networks have come to light. A classifi cation of the fi gurines from Alişar Höyük and their relationship to contemporary fi gurines forms the basis of this work.1 Several fi gurines that have never before been published or in some cases even inventoried are included in this analysis. Because so many sites have been excavated in Turkey and neighboring countries since the excavation of Alişar Höyük, this reconsideration of the site’s fi gurines is due. We can now illustrate the extensive nature of networks that ran through Alişar Höyük from its earliest levels. These networks spanned from southeast Europe to central Anatolia and beyond and seem to show that, culturally, Alişar Höyük was initially oriented to the west and north, particularly to southeast Europe and northern Anatolia, and only later began to develop traditions unique to the site and/or central Anatolia. INTRODUCTION Alişar Höyük is a large tell site about 45 km from Yozgat, located near the source of the Konak and Delice Su, rivers that join the Kızılırmak to the west. A creek fl ows past the site and into the Konak Su.2 As one of two large tells in the region it is composed of two terraces, one measured 520 x 350 meters at the base with an average elevation of 5-8 meters above the valley and the other, Mound A measured at 245 x 145 meters at the base with the highest elevation at 24.25 m. Three other mounds were named, B-D, and several tumuli are found in the surrounding region. Excavations fi rst began at the site in 1927 with the work of H.H. von der Osten and E.F. Schmidt continuing until 1936. The excavations were published in several volumes as well as in several articles, though after 1932 much went undocumented. Research at the site of Alişar Höyük currently falls under the purview of the Alişar Regional Project which was directed until recently by Ronald Gorny, from the University of Chicago, and is now led by Gregory McMahon. Within the Alişar Regional Survey project area there are a few other mounds, which are, or possibly are, also the location of Early Bronze Age and earlier settlements: Çadır Höyük (currently being excavated), Büyük Ören 1 The classifi cation of the fi gurines presented in this paper is as defi ned in the author’s 2012 dissertation, which created a typology of almost 2000 fi gurines from Chalcolithic and Early Bronze Age Anatolia and the Balkans. 2 Von der Osten & Schmidt 1932 (1927 I): 44; see image on page 45. 112 SHANNON MARTINO Höyük, Salur Höyük, Küçük Höyük, Orta Höyük, and Otlu Höyük;3 yet besides Yarıkkaya4 and probably Alişar Höyük, no sites on the north-central plateau are known to have been occupied during the fi fth millennium or earlier. Confusion over the conclusions of the 1927 to mid-1930s excavation of Alişar Höyük,5 and biases caused by the resulting relative dates established in relation to Mesopotamia led to major diffi culties with the stratigraphy and typological schemes in north-central Anatolia which many have since tried to clarify.6 As the fi rst major excavation in north-central Anatolia to have levels assigned to the Late Chalcolithic, the fi ndings at Alişar Höyük unavoidably skewed the dating of later excavated sites in the region. For example, those who worked in central Turkey assumed that the absence of Late Chalcolithic Mesopotamian cultures in central Anatolia, as observed in the sequence of Alişar Höyük, meant that there were no sites with habitations earlier than 3000 BC in central Anatolia.7 This was despite the fact that beneath the Early Bronze II (dated c. 2500 BC at the time) levels at Alişar Höyük there were twenty meters of other occupational layers. Given the proliferation of excavation both in Turkey and in countries neighboring Turkey since Alişar Höyük’s excavation the time is overdue for a reevaluation of Alişar Höyük’s stratigraphy and fi nds. This can be done with a view to the site’s role in regional and interregional networks during prehistory. My recent work with the anthropomorphic fi gurines from Alişar Höyük made it clear how far reaching those networks were, from southeast Europe to central Anatolia during the Late Chalcolithic. Delving into the collections of the Oriental Institute alerted me to previously unpublished and, in some cases, uninventoried fi gurines from Alişar Höyük necessitating their reevaluation and publication. The 115-20 anthropomorphic clay fi gurines that were excavated at Alişar Höyük are essential to the story of communication in the region.8 Part of the diffi cultly in understanding Alişar Höyük’s role in regional networks is due to the nomenclature for the site’s levels, for it has had both Chalcolithic and Copper Age levels, as well as several levels renumbered and renamed in the course of excavations (Table 1). Sharon Steadman has noted that, von der Osten’s ascription of Copper Age to levels 11-10M was due more to the fact that copper objects fi rst appeared in these levels than to an impression or conclusion about the date of these levels.9 Later, the term Chalcolithic was used to apply to levels thought to be Neolithic because copper traces were found in level 18M.10 In fact, the pottery styles do not change from level 15-11M and there just is not a large enough well-stratifi ed sample size from each level to compose a ceramic sequence. 3 Gorny, McMahon, Paley, Steadman & Verhaaren 1999: 161. 4 Hauptmann 1969. 5 Steadman, Ross, McMahon & Gorny 2008: 73. 6 Van den Hout 1984; Steadman & McMahon 2011; Schoop 2005. 7 Özdoğan 1996. 8 Five of the fi gurines are too fragmentary to determine if they are fi gurines, a rhyton, or perhaps some other fi gural object, but they do have some of the characteristics of fi gurines. 9 Steadman, Ross, McMahon & Gorny 2008: 73. 10 Von der Osten 1937 (1930-2 I): 30. ANATOLICA XL, 2014 113 Many people have suggested, in fact, that Alişar Höyük’s Copper Age levels belong to the Middle to Late Chalcolithic11, though more often they are assigned to the Early Bronze Age. The excavation process itself was hindered by the depth of the Chalcolithic and Copper Age levels from the surface of the tell; it was as much as 30.4 meters in some places.12 The oldest layers had to be excavated using a basket and pulley system. Levels 19-15M, belonging to the Late Chalcolithic, were excavated in a smaller than 5 x 5 meter excavation area. Levels 14-12M, also belonging to the Late Chalcolithic, came from a small trench of less than 20 x 10 meters. Defi ning the beginning of the Early Bronze Age levels at Alişar Höyük is also not without its diffi culties.13 Though generally heavily red slipped handmade vessels are thought to belong to the Early Bronze Age, Von der Osten had insisted that they were fi rst found in the Copper Age levels, 11-10M, of Alişar Höyük. Thus they are not a good marker of chronology. Were these levels instead to date to the Early Bronze Age, the black burnished ceramics, which were also found in these levels, would make drawing any distinction between the Chalcolithic and the Early Bronze Age almost impossible. By correlating the levels of Alişar Höyük and the more recently excavated Çadır Höyük, for which radiocarbon dates are available, we can begin to unravel the confusion surrounding Alişar Höyük and in the region in general. Since the material from the Chalcolithic levels 19-15M at Alişar Höyük and the Chalcolithic levels at the more recently excavated Çadır Höyük seem to be well correlated, the excavators of Çadır Höyük suggest that Alişar Höyük’s Chalcolithic levels 14-12M be re-dated to the Transitional/Early Bronze I sequence defi ned by Çadır Höyük, placing them c. 3300/3100 BC-3000 BC.14 This date is based on calibrated radiocarbon dates taken by the Çadır Höyük team and is generally supported by Ulf Schoop’s extensive relative chronology of the regional Anatolian Chalcolithic, but Schoop’s work on the chronology of sites within the bend of the Kızılırmak shows that level 12M material from Alişar Höyük is better dated prior to 3400 BC.15 The simultaneous presence of unburnished and unpainted coarse wares, painted and incised decoration and black burnished wares in these levels, wares also found in the Chalcolithic, would seem to corroborate the assertion that there is a transitional phase between the Chalcolithic and the Early Bronze Age proper, perhaps elucidating the problems of overlapping ceramic forms and decoration fi rst noted in von der Osten’s work. Alişar Höyük levels 11-10M would then be pushed to the later Early Bronze I or Early Bronze II. The work of Schoop shows that none of the material from Alişar Höyük should be dated earlier than 5000 BC, based on the correlation of the site’s material with others in the region.16 My own analysis of the ceramics at Alişar Höyük has so far been limited to the collection at the Oriental Institute in Chicago, but does potentially confi rm the suggestions of other scholars noted above that indicates an earlier date for many of the levels.
Load more

Recommended publications
  • Monuments, Materiality, and Meaning in the Classical Archaeology of Anatolia
    MONUMENTS, MATERIALITY, AND MEANING IN THE CLASSICAL ARCHAEOLOGY OF ANATOLIA by Daniel David Shoup A dissertation submitted in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the degree of Doctor of Philosophy (Classical Art and Archaeology) in The University of Michigan 2008 Doctoral Committee: Professor Elaine K. Gazda, Co-Chair Professor John F. Cherry, Co-Chair, Brown University Professor Fatma Müge Göçek Professor Christopher John Ratté Professor Norman Yoffee Acknowledgments Athena may have sprung from Zeus’ brow alone, but dissertations never have a solitary birth: especially this one, which is largely made up of the voices of others. I have been fortunate to have the support of many friends, colleagues, and mentors, whose ideas and suggestions have fundamentally shaped this work. I would also like to thank the dozens of people who agreed to be interviewed, whose ideas and voices animate this text and the sites where they work. I offer this dissertation in hope that it contributes, in some small way, to a bright future for archaeology in Turkey. My committee members have been unstinting in their support of what has proved to be an unconventional project. John Cherry’s able teaching and broad perspective on archaeology formed the matrix in which the ideas for this dissertation grew; Elaine Gazda’s support, guidance, and advocacy of the project was indispensible to its completion. Norman Yoffee provided ideas and support from the first draft of a very different prospectus – including very necessary encouragement to go out on a limb. Chris Ratté has been a generous host at the site of Aphrodisias and helpful commentator during the writing process.
    [Show full text]
  • Continuity of Architectural Traditions in the Megaroid Buildings of Rural Anatolia: the Case of Highlands of Phrygia
    ITU A|Z • Vol 12 No 3 • November 2015 • 227-247 Continuity of architectural traditions in the megaroid buildings of rural Anatolia: Te case of Highlands of Phrygia Alev ERARSLAN [email protected] • Department of Architecture, Faculty of Architecture, Istanbul Aydın University, Istanbul, Turkey Received: May 2015 Final Acceptance: October 2015 Abstract Rural architecture has grown over time, exhibiting continuities as well as ad- aptations to the diferent social and economic conditions of each period. Conti- nuity in rural architecture is related to time, tradition and materiality, involving structural, typological, functional and social issues that are subject to multiple interpretations. Tis feldwork was conducted in an area encompassing the villages of the dis- tricts of today’s Eskişehir Seyitgazi and Afyon İhsaniye districts, the part of the landscape known as the Highlands of Phrygia. Te purpose of the feldwork was to explore the traces of the tradition of “megaron type” buildings in the villages of this part of the Phrygian Valley with an eye to pointing out the “architectural con- tinuity” that can be identifed in the rural architecture of the region. Te meth- odology employed was to document the structures found in the villages using architectural measuring techniques and photography. Te buildings were exam- ined in terms of plan type, spatial organization, construction technique, materials and records evidencing the age of the structure. Te study will attempt to produce evidence of our postulation of architectural continuity in the historical megara of the region in an efort to shed some light on the region’s rural architecture. Te study results revealed megaroid structures that bear similarity to the plan archetypes, construction systems and building materials of historical megarons in the region of the Phrygian Highlands.
    [Show full text]
  • NEO-LITHICS 2/03 the Newsletter of Southwest Asian Neolithic Research Contents
    Editorial Field Reports Schmidt, Göbekli Tepe 2003 Simmons, Kritou Marottou Ais Yiorkis 2003 Contributions Neef, Botanical Remains from Göbekli Tepe Abay, Figurines from Ulucak Höyük Nieuwenhuyse, Connan, van As & Jacobs, Bitumen-Painted Pots at Tell Sabi Abyad Pustovoytov & Taubald, Stable Carbon and Oxygen Isotope Composition of Pedogenic Carbonate at Göbekli Tepe Supra-Regional Concepts I Hole, Centers in the Neolithic? Watkins, Developing Socio-Cultural Networks Projects Dennis, Experimental Archaeology at Beidha New Publications and Theses Calendar NEO-LITHICS 2/03 The Newsletter of Southwest Asian Neolithic Research Contents Field Reports K. Schmidt: The 2003 Campaign at Göbekli Tepe (Southeastern Turkey). 3 A. Simmons: 2003 Excavations at Kritou Marottou Ais Yiorkis, an Early Neolithic Site in W. Cyprus: 8 Contributions R. Neef: Overlooking the Steppe-Forest: A Preliminary Report on the Botanical Remains 13 from Early Neolithic Göbekli Tepe (Southeastern Turkey). E. Abay: The Neolithic Figurines from Ulucak Höyük: Reconsideration of the Figurine Issue 16 by Contextual Evidence. O.P. Nieuwenhuyse, J. Connan, A. van As and L. Jacobs: Painting Pots with Bitumen at Late 22 Neolithic Tell Sabi Abyad (Syria). K. Pustovoytov and H. Taubald: Stable Carbon and Oxygen Isotope Composition of Pedogenic 25 Carbonate at Göbekli Tepe (Southeastern Turkey) and Its Potential for Reconstructing Late Quaternary Paleoenvironments in Upper Mesopotamia. Supra-Regional Concepts I B. D. Hermansen: Introductory Remarks 32 F. Hole: Centers in the Neolithic? 33 T. Watkins: Developing Socio-Cultural Networks 36 Projects S. Dennis, The Use of Experimental Archaeology to Explain and Present Pre-Pottery 37 Neolithic Architecture at Beidha in Southern Jordan New Publications and Theses 38 Calendar 5th Workshop on PPN Chipped Stone Industries, Fréjus, March 1-5, 2004 (Preliminary Programme) 39 Editorial Neo-Lithics tries to keep its finger on the pulse of Near gether, over an unfocused and confusing research peri- Eastern Neolithic research developments so that we can od.
    [Show full text]
  • Çatalhöyük 2006 Archive Report
    ÇATALHÖYÜK 2006 ARCHIVE REPORT Çatalhöyük Research Project CONTENTS i LIST OF FIGURES iii & TABLES vii INTRODUCTION – Ian Hodder 1 RAPORU GIRISI – Ian Hodder 9 ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS/ TEŞEKKÜRLER 13 THE FIELD TEAM 2006 15 EXCAVATIONS Introduction – Shahina Farid 17 4040 Area Post-Neolithic activity / Neolitik Sonrası Aktiviteler – Doru Bogdan, LisaYeomans, Shahina Farid 22 Neolithic Sequence Space 60 & Space 90 / Alan 60 & 90 – Lisa Yeomans 26 Space 279 / Alan 279 – Lisa Yeomans 27 Space 280 & Building 66 / Alan 280 ve Bina 66 - Richard Turnbull 30 Space 306 & Space 309 / Alan 306 & 309 – Lisa Yeomans 33 Building 64 / Bina 64 – Lisa Yeomans 35 Building 60 / Bina 60 – Mike House 39 Building 59 / Bina 59 – David Brown, Lisa Yeomans 47 Building 58 / Bina 58 - Maria Duggan, Shahina Farid 54 Building 67 / Bina 67 – Mike House 58 Buildings 51 & 52 / Bina 51& 52 - Doru Bogdan, Dan Eddisford 64 Building 49 / Bina 49 - Daniel Eddisford 71 SOUTH Area Building 53, Spaces 257 & 272 /Bina 53 – Simon McCann 79 Space 261/Alan 261 – David Brown 84 Buildings 56 & 65 / Bina 56 ve 65 - Roddy Regan 89 TP Area /TP Alanı – Lech Czerniak, Arkadiusz Marciniak 104 IST Area / İST Alanı - Mihriban Özbaşaran, Güneş Duru 115 West Mound /Batı Höyük - Peter F. Biehl, Burcin Erdoğu, Eva Rosenstock 122 SEL Area / SEL Alanı - Asuman Baldiran, Zafer Korkmaz 134 CULTURAL AND ENVIRONMENTAL MATERIALS REPORTS Animal Bones - Nerissa Russell, Katheryn Twiss, Kamilla Pawlowska, Liz Henton 141 Worked Bone - Rebecca Daly 153 Human Remains - Başak Boz, Lori D. Hager, Scott Haddow with contributions by Simon Hillson, Clark S. Larsen, Christopher Ruff, Marin Pilloud, Sabrina Agarwal, Patrick Beauchesne, Bonnie Glencross, Lesley Gregorika 157 Human Remains Research Projects 2006 169 Macro Botanical Remains - Amy Bogaard, Mike Charles 172 Phytoliths - Philippa Ryan, Arlene Rosen 174 Pottery - Nurcan Yalman 181 FigurineS- Carolyn Nakamura, Lynn Meskell 226 Chipped Stone Report - Tristan Carter, Nurcan Kayacan, Marina Milić, Marcin Waş, Chris Doherty 241 Bead Technology - Katherine I.
    [Show full text]
  • A Balkan-Aegean-Anatolian Glyptic Koine in the Neolithic and EBA Periods a Paper Read at the Vith International Aegean Symposiu
    A Balkan-Aegean-Anatolian Glyptic Koine in the Neolithic and EBA Periods a paper read at the VIth International Aegean Symposium, Athens, Greece, 31 August-5 September 1987 (meant to have been forthcoming: G. Korres, ed.; slightly cleaned up, 4 January 2009) John G. Younger Duke University Abbreviations The references to excavation reports in the footnotes are, I hope, self-explanatory, abbreviations here follow the standards established by the AJA 90 (1986) 381-394. The plain citation of Roman numerals followed by Arabic numerals refers to the volumes, fascicles, and catalogued seals in the Corpus der minoischen und mykenischen Siegel (= CMS; Berlin 1964 ff.); e.g., II 1.243 refers to seal number 243 in fascicle 1 of CMS vol. II. Numbers preceded by the letter M (e.g., M 249) refer to the catalogue in Makkay's Early Stamp Seals in South-East Europe (Akadémiai Kiadó; Budapest, 1984). Text After a long absence, I have begun turning my attention once more to the seals and other decorated stamps of the Neolithic, Early, and Middle Bronze Ages in the Aegean. In doing so, I think it is valuable to consider equally the products of the Mainland, Crete, and the Islands for thrce major reasons: 1) There are distinct differences between the seals of these three regions, differences of seal- shape, iconography, and style; for instance, the quadripartite designs of the Lerna sealings and the concentric circles of the Cycladic seal impressions. 2) Though there are indeed these distinct differences in the seals from the three regions, there are also many instances where seal shapes, motifs, and styles are shared between regions, either by influence or by actual importing of seals; for instance, the considerable number of quadripartite motifs found both at Lerna and on contemporary (or nearly contemporary) seals from the Messara.
    [Show full text]
  • Biblical World
    MAPS of the PAUL’SBIBLICAL MISSIONARY JOURNEYS WORLD MILAN VENICE ZAGREB ROMANIA BOSNA & BELGRADE BUCHAREST HERZEGOVINA CROATIA SAARAJEVO PISA SERBIA ANCONA ITALY Adriatic SeaMONTENEGRO PRISTINA Black Sea PODGORICA BULGARIA PESCARA KOSOVA SOFIA ROME SINOP SKOPJE Sinope EDIRNE Amastris Three Taverns FOGGIA MACEDONIA PONTUS SAMSUN Forum of Appius TIRANA Philippi ISTANBUL Amisos Neapolis TEKIRDAG AMASYA NAPLES Amphipolis Byzantium Hattusa Tyrrhenian Sea Thessalonica Amaseia ORDU Puteoli TARANTO Nicomedia SORRENTO Pella Apollonia Marmara Sea ALBANIA Nicaea Tavium BRINDISI Beroea Kyzikos SAPRI CANAKKALE BITHYNIA ANKARA Troy BURSA Troas MYSIA Dorylaion Gordion Larissa Aegean Sea Hadrianuthera Assos Pessinous T U R K E Y Adramytteum Cotiaeum GALATIA GREECE Mytilene Pergamon Aizanoi CATANZARO Thyatira CAPPADOCIA IZMIR ASIA PHRYGIA Prymnessus Delphi Chios Smyrna Philadelphia Mazaka Sardis PALERMO Ionian Sea Athens Antioch Pisidia MESSINA Nysa Hierapolis Rhegium Corinth Ephesus Apamea KONYA COMMOGENE Laodicea TRAPANI Olympia Mycenae Samos Tralles Iconium Aphrodisias Arsameia Epidaurus Sounion Colossae CATANIA Miletus Lystra Patmos CARIA SICILY Derbe ADANA GAZIANTEP Siracuse Sparta Halicarnassus ANTALYA Perge Tarsus Cnidus Cos LYCIA Attalia Side CILICIA Soli Korakesion Korykos Antioch Patara Mira Seleucia Rhodes Seleucia Malta Anemurion Pieria CRETE MALTA Knosos CYPRUS Salamis TUNISIA Fair Haven Paphos Kition Amathous SYRIA Kourion BEIRUT LEBANON PAUL’S MISSIONARY JOURNEYS DAMASCUS Prepared by Mediterranean Sea Sidon FIRST JOURNEY : Nazareth SECOND
    [Show full text]
  • From PPN to Late Neolithic (Part II Is Refering to Copper Age) We Start
    Acta Terrae Septemcastrensis, XVIII, 2019 DOI: 10.2478/actatr-2019-0002 Are there cities and fairs in the neolithic? Part I – from PPN to late Neolithic (Part II is refering to Copper Age ) Gheorghe Lazarovici Cornelia-Magda Lazarovici Keywords: fortifications, defensive ditches, palisades, fairs, proto-urban, bastions, temples, sanctuaries, conclaves Abstract: In this study we have resumed the problem of Neolithic settlements with a complex architecture (defense systems with ditches, palisades, towers, bastions; residential buildings; cult constructions; social constructions) which support the idea of a proto-urban organization since the PPN. We have analyzed current definitions of cities and fairs, which mainly reflect situations from classical antiquity and the Middle Ages, but they cannot be applied to prehistoric realities, which, according to interdisciplinary research, offer another perspective. We also believe that religion too has played an important part in these sites, some of them being real centers of worship. We start our study with some definitions from Dexonline. CITY, cities, 1. A complex form of human settlement, with multiple municipal facilities, usually with administrative, industrial, commercial, political and cultural functions. An important human settlement with a large population, with businesses and institutions, which is an industrial, commercial, cultural, political and administrative center. City (Hung. város, Bg. Serb. varoš, city; Turk. varoš, suburb, alb. varróš, ngr. varósi). The association of a large number of houses and courtyards lined up along the streets. Fair, 1. once city: villages and fairs. From the above definitions, an important function has been forgotten, the religious function. We consider it important, because in Prehistory, and especially in the Pre-Pottery Neolithic (PPN), just as the first “cities” appeared, there were monumental temples and sanctuaries (Schmidt 1995; 2000; Hauptmann, Schmidt 2000; Schmidt K.
    [Show full text]
  • Hacilar-Kayseri
    THE TALE OF INDUSTRIALIZATION IN A SMALL TOWN IN TURKEY: HACILAR-KAYSERİ A THESIS SUBMITTED TO THE GRADUATE SCHOOL OF SOCIAL SCIENCES OF MIDDLE EAST TECHNICAL UNIVERSITY BY KURTULUŞ CENGİZ IN PARTIAL FULFILLMENT OF THE REQUIREMENTS FOR THE DEGREE OF DOCTOR OF PHILOSOPHY IN THE DEPARTMENT OF SOCIOLOGY SEPTEMBER 2012 i Approval of the Graduate School of Social Sciences Prof. Dr. Meliha Altunışık Director I certify that this thesis satisfies all the requirements as a thesis for the degree of Doctor of Philosophy. Prof. Dr. Ayşe Saktanber Head of Department This is to certify that we have read this thesis and that in our opinion it is fully adequate, in scope and quality, as a thesis for the degree of Doctor of Philosophy. Assoc. Prof. Dr. Mustafa Şen Supervisor Examining Committee Members Assoc. Prof. Dr. Ceylan Tokluoğlu (METU, SOC) Assoc. Prof. Dr. Mustafa Şen (METU, SOC) Prof. Dr. Recep Varçın (AU, SBF) Prof. Dr. Ayşe Gündüz Hoşgör (METU, SOC) Assist. Prof. Dr. Burak Özçetin (AU, COM) ii I hereby declare that all information in this document has been obtained and presented in accordance with academic rules and ethical conduct. I also declare that, as required by these rules and conduct, I have fully cited and referenced all material and results that are not original to this work. Name, Last name: Kurtuluş Cengiz Signature : iii ABSTRACT THE TALE OF INDUSTRIALIZATION IN A SMALL TOWN IN TURKEY: HACILAR-KAYSERİ Cengiz, Kurtuluş Ph.D., Department of Sociology Supervisor: Assoc. Prof. Dr. Mustafa Şen September 2012, 357 pages This dissertation analyses the industrial transformation of Turkey by focusing on the history of Kayseri’s small town Hacılar which has been showed an extraordinary performance in industry and economic development in the last 40 years.
    [Show full text]
  • Chapter 4.1 the HUMAN CLAY FIGURINES and ANCIENT NEAR EASTERN MAGIC Denise Schmandt-Besserat
    Chapter 4.1 THE HUMAN CLAY FIGURINES AND ANCIENT NEAR EASTERN MAGIC Denise Schmandt-Besserat Abstract: The chapter analyses the forty-nine Pre-Pottery Neolithic B and Yarmoukian anthropomorphic clay figurines. The first part of the study documents the collection: the number of artifacts, their types, style, material, manufacture, surface treatment, and firing. The figurines are then related to their context: their spatial distribution and place in the stratigraphy, their relation to the remainder of the assemblage, and their parallels elsewhere in the Near East. The second part addresses the possible function of the figurines. The objects are shown to match the criteria denoting the perennial ancient Near Eastern magical practices, as described in the cuneiform literature. Key words: clay, figural, female, apotropaic, magic THE HUMAN CLAY FIGURINES COLLECTION Forty-nine whole or fragmentary human figurines were recovered in the course of seven out of the eleven campaigns of excavations conducted at ‘Ain Ghazal (Rollefson 2008b: 387-416; McAdam 1997: 115-145). The number of human figurines collected at each campaign is as follows: • 4 in the 1982 season (salvage excavation) (Rollefson 1983: 11; Simmons and Rollefson 1984: 391- 392, Fig. 8) • 24 in the 1983 season (Rollefson and Simmons 1984: 18-20, Figs. 3-4; 1985b: 40-42, Figs. 3-5; Rollefson, Simmons and Donaldson, et al. 1985: 82-87, Figs. 5-8) • 8 in the 1984 season (Rollefson and Simmons 1985a: 16, 25, Table 7; 1986: 150, 152) • 6 in the 1985 season (Rollefson and Simmons 1986: 50-51; 1987: 103-104, Figs. 8-10) • 1986 (no excavation) • 0 in the 1987 season (survey) (Simmons and Kafafi 1988: 27-39) • 2 in the 1988 season (Simmons, Kohler-Rollefson and Rollefson 1988: 36; Rollefson, Kafafi and Simmons 1989: 15-16, Table 8; 1991: 103) • 3 in the 1989 season (Kafafi, Rollefson and Simmons 1990: 21, 25, Pl.
    [Show full text]
  • Acta Archaeologica--Dendro
    The full citation of this article is "The Prehistoric Aegean: Dendrochronological Progress as of 1995," published in Acta Archaeologica vol. 67, 1996, pp. 327-335. The Prehistoric Aegean: Dendrochronological Progress as of 1995 Peter Ian Kuniholm 1. General Nature, Significance, and History of this Project: The work of the Aegean Dendrochronology Project has been for 23 years and continues to be the building of long tree-ring chronologies for the eastern half of the Mediterranean with the aim of helping to bring some kind of rational order to Aegean and Near Eastern chronology from the Neolithic to the present (Kuniholm 1993, 1996); Kuniholm and Kromer (in press (Sofia)); Kuniholm and Newton 1990; Kuniholm and Striker 1983, 1987). See the summary bar graph (Fig. 1), map (Fig. 2), and crossdating grid (Fig. 3) of the Project's achievements as of Autumn 1995 for reference throughout this narrative. The numbers, whether for sites visited, sites dated, or length of chronologies built, speak for themselves. The net 6500 years of tree-ring chronologies shown on the bar graph are a composite of over eight million microscope measurements made by 400 Project participants in well over 50,000 hours of lab time. Figure 1: Bar-graph of Aegean tree-ring chronologies as of Fall 1995. Figure 2: Sites sampled and dated by the Aegean Dendrochronology Project as of Fall 1995. 1 Figure 3: Quality of Crossdating among Aegean Trees Species t-score (parametric) Years of overlap (n=) Trend Coefficient (non-parametric) D-score [t-score + (trend% - 50%)] Oak vs. Pine 11.62 841 64.4% 167.3 Pine vs.
    [Show full text]
  • Neolithic Plasters of the Near East: Catal Hoyuk Building 5, a Case Study
    University of Pennsylvania ScholarlyCommons Theses (Historic Preservation) Graduate Program in Historic Preservation 2003 Neolithic Plasters of the Near East: Catal Hoyuk Building 5, a Case Study Burcum Hanzade Arkun University of Pennsylvania Follow this and additional works at: https://repository.upenn.edu/hp_theses Part of the Historic Preservation and Conservation Commons Arkun, Burcum Hanzade, "Neolithic Plasters of the Near East: Catal Hoyuk Building 5, a Case Study" (2003). Theses (Historic Preservation). 326. https://repository.upenn.edu/hp_theses/326 Copyright note: Penn School of Design permits distribution and display of this student work by University of Pennsylvania Libraries. Suggested Citation: Arkun, Burcum Hanzade (2003). Neolithic Plasters of the Near East: Catal Hoyuk Building 5, a Case Study. (Masters Thesis). University of Pennsylvania, Philadelphia, PA. This paper is posted at ScholarlyCommons. https://repository.upenn.edu/hp_theses/326 For more information, please contact [email protected]. Neolithic Plasters of the Near East: Catal Hoyuk Building 5, a Case Study Disciplines Historic Preservation and Conservation Comments Copyright note: Penn School of Design permits distribution and display of this student work by University of Pennsylvania Libraries. Suggested Citation: Arkun, Burcum Hanzade (2003). Neolithic Plasters of the Near East: Catal Hoyuk Building 5, a Case Study. (Masters Thesis). University of Pennsylvania, Philadelphia, PA. This thesis or dissertation is available at ScholarlyCommons: https://repository.upenn.edu/hp_theses/326 UNivERsmry PENN5YL\^\NIA. UBRAKIE5 ! NEOLITHIC PLASTERS OF THE NEAR EAST: CATAL HOYUK BUILDING 5, A CASE STUDY Burcum Hanzade Arkun A THESIS in Historic Preservation Presented to the Faculties of the University of Pennsylvania in Partial Fulfillment of the Requirements for the Degree of MASTER OF SCIENCE 2003 V\MIax) Reader Susanna C.
    [Show full text]
  • ANCIENT NEAR EASTERN CHRONOLOGY MESOPOTAMIA (South) MESOPOTAMIA (North) [RAN LEVANT ANATOLIA EGYPT
    ANCIENT NEAR EASTERN CHRONOLOGY MESOPOTAMIA (South) MESOPOTAMIA (North) [RAN LEVANT ANATOLIA EGYPT 3500 B.c. Late Uruk period Proto-urban period Chalcolithic period Troy I 3500-3100 Susa II Jemdet Nasr period 3100-2900 Archaic period Early Dynastic period Proto-Elamite period 3000 B.C. c. 3000-2575 2900-2334 Susa III Sumero-Elamite period Early Bronze Age Troy II SUA IV Old Kingdom 2575-2134 Akkadian period Akkadian rule 2334-2154 in Susa Alaca Höyük royal Neo-Sumerian period tombs Gudea of Lagash ca. 2100 First Inrermediate Third Dynasty of Ur period 2112-2004 2134-2040 2000 B.c. Isin-Larsa period Middle Bronze Age Middle Kingdom 2017-176} Old Assyrian period Old Elamite period Assyrian Colony 2040-1640 1920-1750 1900-1500 period 1920-1750 Old Babylonian period 1894- 1595 Old Hirtite period Hammurabi 1650-1400 Second Intermediate period (Hyksos) 1792-1750 1640-1532 Kassite period Mitannian period Late Bronze Age Hittite Empire period New Kingdom 1595-1157 1500-1350 1400-1200 1550-1070 Middle Assyrian Middle Elamire period Second Dynasty of Isin Iron Age Neo-Hirtite and Third Intermediate 1000 B.c. period 1350-1000 period 1070-712 1156-1025 Hasanlu V-IV Kingdoms of Aramaean states Neo-Assyrian period Iron Age I-II Israel and Judah Urartian period 883-612 1500-800 850-600 Phoenician city states Late Dynastic period Neo-Eiamite period Phrygian period 712-332 Neo-Babylonian 775-690 period 625-539 Median period Iron Age III \chaemenid dynasty 550-331 Achaemenid rule Achaemenid rule Achaemenid rule 525-404;343-332 Alexander the Great 331-323 Capture of Tyre by Alexander the Great Capture of Babylon Burning of Persepolis Alexander the Grear crosses rhe Hellespont Alexander the Great by the Greeks 331 331 332 334 Macedonian period Seleucid dynasty Seleucid dynasry Seleucid dynasty 332-304 31 2- 129 B.c.
    [Show full text]