Troy in Recent Perspective Author(s): D. F. Easton, J. D. Hawkins, A. G. Sherratt, E. S. Sherratt Source: Anatolian Studies, Vol. 52 (2002), pp. 75-109 Published by: British Institute at Ankara Stable URL: http://www.jstor.org/stable/3643078 Accessed: 06/01/2010 13:41

Your use of the JSTOR archive indicates your acceptance of JSTOR's Terms and Conditions of Use, available at http://www.jstor.org/page/info/about/policies/terms.jsp. JSTOR's Terms and Conditions of Use provides, in part, that unless you have obtained prior permission, you may not download an entire issue of a journal or multiple copies of articles, and you may use content in the JSTOR archive only for your personal, non-commercial use.

Please contact the publisher regarding any further use of this work. Publisher contact information may be obtained at http://www.jstor.org/action/showPublisher?publisherCode=biaa.

Each copy of any part of a JSTOR transmission must contain the same copyright notice that appears on the screen or printed page of such transmission.

JSTOR is a not-for-profit service that helps scholars, researchers, and students discover, use, and build upon a wide range of content in a trusted digital archive. We use information technology and tools to increase productivity and facilitate new forms of scholarship. For more information about JSTOR, please contact [email protected].

British Institute at Ankara is collaborating with JSTOR to digitize, preserve and extend access to Anatolian Studies.

http://www.jstor.org Anatolian Studies 52 (2002): 75-109

Troy in recent perspective

D.F. Easton1,J.D. Hawkins2,A.G. Sherratf and E.S. Sherratt3 'Independentscholar, 2Universityof London, 'Universityof Oxford

Abstract1 The historic series of excavations of Hisarlik-Troyhave been continued over the last 15 years by a collaboration between teams from the universitiesof Tiibingenand Cincinnatiwith fruitfulresults. Over the year 2001 however the director,Manfred Korfmann, attracted sharp criticism from colleagues, largely throughthe medium of the press, for his methods and publications. He was accused of exaggeratingthe importanceof the site in the Late , particularlyas a political capital and tradingcentre of , and more specifically of unduly inflating the results of his investigationsof the lower city. A symposium was convened by the University of Tuiibingenin February2002 with a view to discussing these criticisms and the defence in an academicatmosphere. The four authorsof this article attendedthe Tilbingensymposium. After listening to the contributionsit seemed to us that an assessmentof the issues from our respective view-points would be timely: thus a detailed considerationof the archaeological questions, a review of the notable recent progress in Hittite sources firming up the historical geography of western Anatolia, and an evaluation of Troy's position in Late Bronze Age trade. In all these areas we conclude that the criticisms of Korfmannare themselves considerablyexaggerated.

Ozet Hisarlik-Troya'dasiirdiiriilmekte olan onemli kazilann son 15 yili Tiibingen ve Cincinnati iiniversitelerinebaghl ekiplerini?birligi ile suiirdiiruiilmekteve verimli sonu,lar elde edilmektedir. Ancak, 2001 ylllnda kazi ba?kaniManfred Korfmann,cogunlugu basin yoluyla olmak iizere, uyguladigi yontemler ve yayinlanyla ilgili olarakmeslekta?lannin keskin ele?tirilerinemaruz kalmi?tir. Korfmann,Gec Bronz (agda yerle?iminonemini abartmaklasuclanmi?tir. Bu suclamalaraozellikle Troya'yiAnadolu'nun politik ba?kentive ticaretmerkezi olaraksunmasi ve a?agi?ehirde yaptigi incelemelerinsonu9lannil haksiz olarakabartmasi neden olmu?tur.2002 yli ?ubat ayinda,bu su9lamalanntartl?ilmasi ve akademik bir ortamda savunulmasi icin Tiibingen Universitesi tarafindanbir sempozyum duiizenlenmi^tir.Bu makalenindort yazan da bu Sempozyumakatllmi?tir. Katilimcilaridinledikten sonra, herbirimizing6ri aisindan sorunlanndegerlendirilmesinin uygun oldugunuduii?undUk. B6ylece, arkeolojiksorularl detayll olarakdegerlendirdik, Bati Anadolu'nun tarihsel cografyasiyla ilgili bilgilerimizi saglamla?tiranve yeni yayminlanmi?onemli Hitit kaynaklarni yeniden inceledik ve Ge9 Bronz fag donemi ticaretindeTroya'mnin durumunu yeniden degerlendirdik. Turnbu alanlardayaptigimiz gallmalar sonucundaesasen Korfmann'iele?tirenlerin abarttigi sonucuna vardik.

T he ruins of Hisarlik/Troyare without question one of Malatya-Arslantepeand Tarsus,have not received such the great archaeologicalsites of Anatolia. With a intensive attention or yielded such results. Troy's high sequence of occupationspanning the entire Bronze Age, public recognitionis obviously due partly,but not solely, ca. 3000-1000 BC, and a history of investigation to its literaryassociations. Its first full scale excavator, extendingback to 1870, the site has few rivals, let alone Schliemann,must for all his faults be reckonedthe father equals: perhaps Bogazk6y/Hattusa investigated since of Anatolianarchaeology, and probablyremains the most 1906 for the Middle-Late Bronze Age and publicly recognised of all Anatolian archaeologists, Kiiltepe/Kaneshinvestigated since 1925 for the Middle certainlyin his native Germany.His excavationsfrom the Bronze Age. Other potential comparables, such as period 1870-1890 were extended and brought to a conclusionby D6rpfeldin 1893-1894. Thereaftera team 1 ProfessorKorfmann kindly read and commentedon the fromthe Universityof Cincinnatiunder Blegen undertook manuscript,but the opinionsexpressed here remain our own. a campaignof soberreassessment in the years 1932-1938.

75 Anatolian Studies 2002

More recently since 1988 a major international with an alternative:the reluctanceto talk up and explain expedition has resumed work at the site under the in context the significance of particularexcavations, and direction of Manfred Korfmann of the University of the failure to publicise, sometimes alas even to publish Tuiibingenwith the collaboration of a team from the the results. There can be no question as to which style is University of Cincinnatiand other specialists in the field. likely to win most support and the associated level of Korfmanncame to Troy with an establishedreputation in funding. Anatolian archaeologyand an excellent record of scien- Public interestin mattersTrojan aroused in Germany tific publication. Besides his funding received from his led to the mounting of a major exhibition under the title university and the German state, and the funds Troia, Traum und Wirklichkeit (Troia, Dream and contributed by his collaborators, Korfmann has been Reality), as a companion to which a bulky and lavishly successful in winning very substantial support from illustratedvolume has been produced. This ranges well German industry, in particularfrom the firm Daimler- beyond the limits of the present excavations on to such Chrysler. This has enabled him to run very properly mattersas Schliemann'slife and work, 'Priam'streasure' funded operations for more than 15 seasons on a scale and its eventful history, and Troy in literatureand art, which less efficacious colleagues may well envy. Classical, medieval and modem. The text consists of Korfmann'sgoals in his currentround of investiga- over 50 essays by Korfmann,members of his team and tions at Troy have been generally to apply modem other collaborators,and other specialist scholars, on the methods and techniques to old problems as left by various aspects of the subject. Blegen, and Schliemann and Dorpfeld. This has A notable featurein Korfmann'smore popularpubli- involved painstakingre-examination and reassessmentof cations has been reconstructionsof various parts of the the excavatedarea along with scientific conservationand city, often set within its landscape,painted by the artist restoration. Environmentalresearch and survey have C. Haussner. Walls and houses are reconstructedfrom also formed a prominent part of the effort. But one the surviving plans, and the appearanceof the structures specific and declared goal has from the start been the up to theirroofs and battlementsis suggested on the basis intentionto investigate the Bronze Age lower city. of archaeologicalevidence combined with a knowledge A regular,not to say predictable,reaction of tourists of traditionallocal building techniques. Thus far this is visiting the site, particularlyperhaps those knowing only regular archaeological practice, and indeed notable ,has always been: 'Oh, but it is so small!'. But it advances are being made by the introduction of has always been clear that the site as excavated by computer-generatedimages into this field. Where the Schliemann and Blegen is only the citadel. These practicemay stray on to more controversialground is in excavators themselves were well aware of this and did the additional restoration of buildings not attested by not doubt the probable existence of a contemporary survivingremains in orderto complete the picture. In the lower town, though they hardlyinvestigated this feature. case of Troy, this results from the well established fact The more that our knowledge of Middle-Late Bronze that the entire central area of the Troy VI citadel, its Age archaeologyof Anatolia has expanded,the clearerit upperpart where doubtless the most importantbuildings appears that Troy represents a typical citadel of the stood, was razed by Classical builders in order to level period, for which lower towns are a typical feature. the site for the construction of the temple of Athena. Thus, before Korfmann's operations, no Anatolian Thus the only surviving foundations within the citadel archaeologist would have doubted the presence of a enclosure are those of the large buildings immediately lower town. Its investigation then may well be under- within the citadel wall. This total destructionof the most stood as having been one of the principalgoals. important part of the Late Bronze Age citadel, both Korfmann'scampaigns of the 1990s have been very buildings and contents, is a grievous archaeologicalloss. successful and what may be termed 'high profile'. They The painted reconstructions however show a have generated substantial publications, scientific and hypothetical central palace and a tier of surrounding popular. As example of the former, the annual Studia buildings for which no evidence survives. Troica,now boasting 11 volumes, records all the yearly This is even more marked in the case of the lower work and technical reports. Korfmann and his city. The excavators have found limited evidence for lieutenants lecture widely in Europe and the United this, in the form of partsof a Late Bronze Age defensive States, meetings which are always well attended and system with a possible wall, a palisade and two ditches, popularin the best sense of the word makingscientific enough to speculate on its probable course around the results accessible to the public in interestingand intelli- settlement,and remainsof buildingsboth aroundthe foot gible form, and generatingan atmosphereof excitement of the citadel wall and furtheroff. On the basis of this and support. This archaeologicalstyle may be contrasted very limited evidence, the paintings reconstructed an

76 Easton, Hawkins, Sherrattand Sherratt

entire fortified lower city, complete with buildings. comment after each paper, but as always this depends While this may be defended as simply offering a on the speakers keeping to time, which is of course the suggestion of what may well have been the appearanceof exception ratherthan the rule. The hopes of the Rector the Late Bronze Age city, it may just as well be criticised and convenors of the symposium for a calm academic for greatly exceeding the available evidence. debate of the important questions where personalities A step further was taken in the exhibition, which and invective would be set aside were only very presented a large model or maquetteshowing the entire partially fulfilled. restoredcitadel and lower town. This seems to have had The site of Troy has the misfortune to stand on not the effect of bringing into the open a strandof academic one but two academic fault-lines, one on either side of dissatisfactionwith Korfmann'swork. This was articu- the Aegean: the Homeric problem concerned with the lated principally by a Tiibingen university colleague of historicity(or otherwise) of the ; and the problemof Korfmann, the ancient historian Frank Kolb, who in a Anatolian historical geography of the lands as book published in 1984 had characterised Troy as a reconstructable(or not) from the Hittite texts. Both 'miserable little settlement', which could not 'raise a topics have been known to evoke strong emotions from claim to the designation as a city'. Interviewed on the those involved, and anyone working at Troy will have subject of the Troy exhibition by the Berliner difficulty in keeping clear. Morgenpost,he defended his position against the impli- The authorsof this article attendedthe symposiumas cations of Korfmann'sreconstructions, describing them invited observers, and had some opportunityto make in such terms as 'fiction', 'figments of fantasy' and 'the their English voices heardamid the often heated German media hot air balloon of the Troy excavations', and exchanges. Since each of us is a specialist in one aspect accusing Korfmann of deliberately misleading the of the subject, we thought that it would be of interest to public. His remarksfound a ready audience in the same readers of this journal to see our assessment of the media at the start of a long hot summer, and Kolb was respective debates and our own views on the issues. We encouraged to sharpen his offensive and language, thus offer our presentations under the headings (with brandingKorfmann the 'von Daniken of Archaeology', authors'initials): and employing other such unacademic barbs. All this The archaeology of the site: citadel (JDH) and lower took place while Korfmannwas out of the country, on town (DFE) excavation at Troy. The historical geography of western Anatolia in the Kolb claimed to be speaking for a significantnumber Hittite texts (JDH) of German academics, who kept their views to Bronze Age trade in western Anatolia (AGS/ESS) themselves for fear of accusations of envy, clearly not a chargeto which he felt himself vulnerable. His offensive While each of us has obviously draftedone section, was joined by Dieter Hertel, Privatdozentat the Institute we have each read the others' contributionsand offered for Classical Archaeology in Munich, who had worked comments which have been incorporatedas appropriate. with Korfmann at Troy and now published a booklet, Troia. Archdologie, Geschichte, Mythos (2001). This The archaeology of the site work plays down the significance of the site of Troy and The citadel of Korfmann'soperations there. The 'prosecution'has devoted effort to denying that the Kolb's aggressive and intemperatelanguage more or site of Troy could represent a 'Residenzstadt'. Their less speaks for itself. It did not find favour with the argumentis generallyconducted by setting up criteriafor Rector of Tiibingen University who demanded a public such an entity and then demonstratingthat Troy does not retraction and apology. The university further meet these. convened a 'scientific symposium' under the title 'The The groundson which Troy is denied this status are: meaning of Troy in the Late Bronze Age', which took (1) the size and character of the walls, gates and place on 15-16 February 2002 before a large and surviving buildings; (2) the lack of finds of materials excited public audience, and was attended by consid- expected of a palatial centre, such as written documents, erable media coverage. There were 13 invited speakers, seals and sealings, luxurygoods, traces of wall paintings, approximately paired to put the cases for the 'prose- sculptureetc. This line of argumentis advancedprinci- cution' and 'defence' in the spheres of archaeology and pally by Kolb 2002b, and by Hertel in his paper at the excavation, trade and the environment, the historical- Tiibingensymposium (Hertel 2002). They are of course geographical background of the Hittite texts and the much aided in this argumentby the total disappearance Homeric problem. Theoretically at least, ample time of the greater and most significant part of the citadel, had been allowed for audience participation and which has been noted above.

77 Anatolian Studies 2002

To establish Troy's failure to qualify as a Residenz- burntpalace (Middle Bronze Age) as offered by Kolb is stadt, it is comparedwith the other palatialcentres of the the megaron complex of Beycesultan level II, the so- Late Bronze Age: Bogazkoy, Alaca, Kiiltepe, Beyce- called 'Little Palace' (fig. 4). Indeed furthercomparable sultan, and outside Anatolia with Mardikh,Ras Shamra, both in size and characteris the IronAge royal citadel of Knossos, Mallia, Phaestos, Mycenae, Tiryns. Gordion (fig. 5). Thus the comparison of these three Considerable special pleading is evident in these citadels, Troy level VI, Beycesultanlevel II and IronAge arguments. In the context we must, for example, ask Gordion, suggests what we should expect of western whether it is purely coincidental that Kolb's article royal citadels against those of central Anatolia and prints all the plans offered for comparison at a larger furthereast. scale, sometimes much larger,than that of Troy (fig. 1). Hertel's 'proof' that Troy cannot be a Residenzstadt Hertel 'cherry-picks' discoveries of the types noted relies heavily on the absence of monumentalsculpture, above as criteria,and emphasises Troy's deficiencies in wall painting traces, written documents and seals or these respects. In general this line fails to compare like sealings. Grantedthat the absence of writtenmaterial is with like. a problem, we may well consider other explanations besides lack of status and importance. We also note the similarabsence of such criteriaof rankfrom Beycesultan Troy (both levels V and III-II) and Gordion. Let us however Alaca .. persist with the Biiyiikkalecomparison. Knossos We note there that the uppermostterrace of buildings on the east side of the upper court has disappeared Ugarit I . , entirely leaving only the rock-cutbeddings for masonry. Pylos (These buildings are however restored in the wooden Beycesultan . model of Biiyiikkalecurrently in the Germanexcavation Thermi house at Bogazk6y.) Written material on Biiyiikkale comes only from the tablet archivesof buildings A, E, K, Fig. 1. Scales at which the various city plans adduced by and sealings only from the south corridorof building D. Kolb (2002b) for comparison with Troyare reproduced. We may ask, what if these four sites, a small part of the Each scale is 40m whole, had been lost? Other material finds from Biiyiikkale level 3a, the imperial period, are notably By way of some corrective, we may consider the sparse: a stele of TudhaliyaIV and other fragments of comparison of Troy with Bogazk6y, with special inscriptions, probably of the same king, and some attentionto the two citadels Hisarlik and Biiyiikkale. It fragmentsof lion sculpture,but no wall painting traces. should be hardly necessary to emphasise that this is a It would seem that the criteriaassembled to define a comparisonbetween an imperialAnatolian capital of the Residenzstadtare less a coherent group of features of late 14-13 centuriesBC and what would never have been universal application than a collection of some of the claimed to be more than a regional capital. We should finer recoveries from the Minoan-Mycenaeanworld on also bear in mind the shape and extent of Hattusathrough the one hand and the Hittite on the other,put togetherto all its second millenniumhistory until it was overlaidby deny Troy that character. Now it may well be that the this imperial expansion, i.e. the citadel plus lower city, civilization of western Anatolia did not reach the perhapsalso some of the slope between, but without the splendouror grandeurof the Minoan-Mycenaeanor the vast circuit of the upper city (fig. 2). Hittite worlds, but that is not really the point. The Rather than following Kolb's practice, we shall question actuallyis whetherthe archaeologicalsite could reproduce the plans of the imperial citadel Biiyiikkale represent the seat of an Arzawan king, as is and the Troy citadel at the same scale (fig. 3). Making recorded to have been. Here it could be that the term allowances for the contrast between imperial and 'Residenzstadt' might be taken to imply more than it regional, we note that Troy is not as inferior in size of actually means, if for example 'Residenz' conjures up walls, gates, houses etc. as has been suggested. The style the opulent display found in those palaces of the German of course is very different: construction of the walls, Lander. 'Provincial/regionalcapital' is perhaps a less layout of the gates and the Troy free-standingmegaron- heavily chargedterm and may more exactly describe the type buildings as against the Biiyiikkale building units site of Troy. For furtherconsideration of what this might grouped round a series of courts. A more appropriate mean in Anatolian terms, comparedwith the recovered comparison for Troy VI than the Beycesultan level V remainsat Hisarlik,see below.

78 Easton, Hawkins, Sherrattand Sherratt

i II

ri 1I

~~~~Js ~~~~~j

,,. J

I / I/ b , . b " ' , ,-- ...

I I A

0 500m e 0 500m e

Fig. 2. Schematic site plans of Bogazkoy showing areas of occupation in (a) pre-Hittite period; (b) Old Assyrian colony period; (c) Hittite Old Kingdom; (d) Late Empire (final Hittite phase); (e-j) early and late Phrygianperiods (fromNeve 1992: Abb. 15)

79 Anatolian Studies 2002

.

0 503 100m i a i i I i i I

Fig. 3. Plans of Troy citadel and Biyikkale reproduced at the same scale (Easton 2002. fig. 202; Neve 1992: Abb. 18)

80 Easton, Hawkins,Sherratt and Sherratt

Fig. 4. Plan of Beycesultan, east summit level II (end of Late BronzeAge). The basic plan of the individualbuilding units is the megaron. The lowerfigure, though unclear,shows theplan reducedto the same scale as fig. 3 (fromLloyd 1972: fig. 3)

81 Anatolian Studies 2002

Fig. 5. Gordion,citadelplan, reproducedat the same scale asfig. 3. Note the monumentalgate and the megaronunits which comprise the citadel (from Youngno date. 5)

The lower city idea was first developed in extenso in 1992 (Korfmann Introduction 1992b) and has since been amplified in the light of Since the discovery of the site by Franz Kaufferin 1793 excavation results. As presented in the exhibition it has been recognised that on the sloping plateau to the catalogue it supposes a settled area covering ca. south of the citadel therewere the remainsof a lower city 270,000m2 and stretchingca. 400m southwardsfrom the of Hellenistic and Roman date. Korfmann has now citadel. The population is estimated at 5,000-10,000 posited in quite concrete terms the existence also of a depending on the degree of crowding and whether the Late Bronze Age lower city on the same terrain. The houses were multi-storeyed. Haussner'sreconstructions

82 Easton, Hawkins, Sherrattand Sherratt and the model show a bustling, built-up city surrounded It is partly the disparitybetween the comprehensive by a heavy, crenellated fortification wall and, about scale of the reconstructionsand the limited size of the 100m furtherout, a defensive ditch bridged by periodic areas so far dug (2-3% of the lower city area)which has causeways. Each causeway is straddledon the inner side led Hertel and Kolb to characterisethe former as 'pure of the ditch by a short palisade with a central gate fantasy', 'a dream', 'fiction' (Hertel 2001: 44; Walter (Korfmannet al. 2001: 397, figs 23, 26, 77, 462, 465). 2001; Kolb 2002b: 8; 2002c: 3), accusationsrepeated at The reconstructions depend partly on surface and the symposium. They support this by contesting geophysical survey, and also on excavated evidence from Korfmann'sinterpretations at many points, maintaining a number of areas: several trenches immediately around that the middle part of the plateau was only sparsely the outside of the Troy VI citadel, the largestbeing on the occupied, the southernpart not at all, that the lower town west side, two trenches ca. 150m to the south (H17, IKL wall did not exist, and that the ditches and palisade were 16-17), a trench ca. 400m to the south (yz 28-9) and a not defensive (Hertel2001: 44-6; 2002: 17; Kolb 2002b: number of supplementarysoundings on that southern- 13-21; 2002c). Korfmann'spopulation estimate should, most fringe of the plateau (fig. 6; Korfmannet al. 2001: they argue, accordingly be reduced to a maximum of fig. 425; Korfmann2001 a: fig. 1). 3,000 (Kolb 2002b: 19) or even 1,000 (Kolb at the

Fig. 6. Areas excavated, 1988-2002 (plan courtesy of Dr Peter Jablonka, TroiaProjekt, TiibingenUniversity)

83 Anatolian Studies 2002 symposium). But they go beyond such discussable town not so very differentfrom Korfmann's(Schliemann matters to assert that the reconstructions represent a 1884: Plan 3). He associated it at that time with the deliberateattempt by Korfmannto inflate the importance remainsof Troy II (Schliemann 1884: 62-3). A massive of his site with the object, Hertel suggests, of ensuringa stone wall leading away from the northeastcomer of the continued flow of funding for his excavation (Walter Troy II citadel he took to be one end of a circuit wall 2001). To disguise the thinness of his evidence he has surroundingthe lower town (D6rpfeld 1902: Taf III, wall been 'confusing the layers' (Berliner Morgenpost;Kolb BC), an explanationwhich is still very plausible. After 2002a; Hertel 2002: 3, 7-8; Kolb repeatedly in the the discovery in 1890 of Mycenaeanpottery in a building symposium) and is guilty of 'misleading the public' of Troy VI, and the consequentrevision to the dating of (BerlinerMorgenpost; Kolb 2002b: 13; 2002c: 3). all the prehistoric strata, he resolved to investigate the At the symposium the attack in this area was led by lower city of Troy VI in 1891 (Schliemann 1891: 24). Dieter Hertel in his lecture. There were reasonedreplies Death robbedhim of the chance. from Peter Jablonka,who has himself excavated two of Dorpfeld and his team did, however, carry out some the critical areas in the lower city, and from Hans Peter modest investigations in 1893-1894. Soundings on the Uerpmann, who is leading the bio-archaeological westernpart of the plateau, 140m and 200m south of the researchat Troy. It was very unfortunatethat Jablonka's Troy VI citadel, produced strata of VI directly above paper,perhaps the most crucial of the whole symposium, bedrock (D6rpfeld 1902: Taf. III, points A and B. Both was allowed only 20 minutes by the organiser. Support areas have been investigated again by Korfmann). from the floor came notably from Brian Rose, who has Dorpfeld's opinion was that 'with regard to the VIth been leading the post Bronze Age researchat Troy,much stratum,... the settlementof a large partof the lower city of it in the lower city. It is evident from Kolb's website, is demonstrated' (D6rpfeld 1902: 238). G6tze felt however, that none of the argumentsput forward have justified in concluding that the extent of the Troy VI caused him to change his opinion in any materialway; lower city closely matchedthat envisaged by Schliemann indeed all such contributions are there described as in his Troja plan, if anything stretching further to the having been 'laughable' (Kolb 2002c: 7). This reaction south (D6rpfeld 1902: 236-8). A limit appearedto be set contrasts starkly with the satisfaction generally felt by by some Troy VI cremationburials found 400m to the the prehistoriansand Korfmannsupporters that the criti- south of the citadel,just beyond the Hellenistic city wall cisms had been thoroughlyanswered. Plainly there was (D6rpfeld 1894: 123; 1902: 536). no meeting of minds, and an exposition of the issues for Blegen likewise recognised the probableexistence of a wider public seems called for. a Late Bronze Age lower city of undeterminedsize, and exposed significant remains of it in areas around the Previous investigations outside of the citadel walls (in z5, A7, GH9, K6-8). According to Kolb (BerlinerMorgenpost) Korfmann has It has thus become clear that the area occupied by the been tryingto find evidence to substantiatean (irrational) inhabitantsof the site at the end of Troy VI extended conviction that Late Bronze Age Troy was a capital city. out beyond the limits of the fortress,and ... there can Since 1988 he and his colleagues have been digging be no doubtthat an extramurallower town of undeter- for traces of Bronze Age Troy. And in the meantime mined size really existed (Blegen et al. 1953: 351). they have become convinced that the city of that He did little to investigate it elsewhere, but did period, in which people also chronologically place establish that the Troy VI cemetery found in 1893 the , was a metropolis, a great trading outside the Hellenistic city wall was much more centre with everything that goes with it: a defensive extensive than D6rpfeld had been able to show. He did installationon the top of the mound(which in the first not, however, discuss the relationshipbetween the two years was further investigated) and, according to (Sperling 1991: 155). Korfmann'sown initial investiga- Korfmann,an enormous lower city (of which he has tions showed grey Minoan and Mycenaeanwares widely for the last five years been searchingfor evidence). scatteredover the plateau together with Hellenistic and This waspish accusation completely overlooks the Romanpottery. Systematictaking of cores along a north- fact that Korfmann, like all good archaeologists, is south axis producedrepeated indications of Late Bronze building on the work of his predecessors. In his earliest Age settlement just above bedrock as G6tze had seasons Schliemann made numerous soundings on the previously found (Korfmann1991: 26). Reconsideration plateauto the south of the citadel (Schliemann 1874: Taf. of Blegen's unconvincing 'crematorium'200m west of 213; 1875: Plan 1). In 1884, having studied the topog- the Troy VI cemetery suggested much more plausibly raphy and the pottery scattered across the surface, he that it might be a burntTroy VI house cut by Byzantine sketched out the possible limits of a 'Homeric' lower pits (Korfmann1992b: 128).

84 Easton, Hawkins, Sherrattand Sherratt

Thus when Korfmannbegan to excavate outside the The most plentiful results have come from the area citadel it was already established that a built-up area below the Hellenistic and Roman sanctuariesto the west surroundedthe citadel in Troy VI-VII, that soundings of the citadel (fig. 7). A full account cannot be furthersouth on the plateaurepeatedly produced material attempted here, but may be traced in Korfmann's of the same periodjust above bedrock, that Late Bronze preliminaryreports from 1994 onwards. The area was Age potterywas widely scatteredover the westernpart of already settled in Troy V. Architecturalremains show the plateau, that there was a building of Troy VI 450m that in the areas excavated all three phases of Troy VI southwest of the citadel and that the late Troy VI were represented, and late Troy VI by at least nine cemetery, if it lay outside the settlement as might be buildings, although due to later disturbance and expected, represented an outer limit. Although the overlying features none has been fully recovered eastern part of the plateau is relatively unexplored, a (Korfmann 2001a: fig. 12). All these walls had probable limit in that direction was also known in that substantial stone foundations and some remained Late Bronze Age materialhad failed to appearin excava- standingto 1.20m high. A cobbled street led throughthe tions in square O11 (Korfmann1991: 26). Only a very houses to gate VIU until the latterwas closed in VIIla. A thin deposit of TroyVI-VII materialhas since been found stratumof burning and collapse marks the end of Troy in X2 (Korfmann1999: 26). The notion that there might VI in this area, and there is evidence for seven ensuing exist a large lower city was thus far from being vain or phases of Troy VII (Korfmann 1999: fig. 14b). The irrational,but arose logically from previous observation. remains of VIIa, with their surface 1.5m above that of What then have Korfmann's researches actually Troy VI, include those of a large terracedhouse with at revealed, and how far do they justify the reconstructions least five rooms built in part on the wall stubs of the he has given us? For the area immediately around the preceding period. There are widespread signs of fire at citadel results up to 1994 can be seen in Elizabeth the end of VIIla,followed by the constructionof smaller Riorden'smagnificent plan published as a supplementto buildings, some with cellars, in VIIb2 and a provi- Studia Troica 4 (Hueber, Riorden 1994). For later sionally identified VIIb3. Ralf Becks, who has been findings and for areas furtherremoved from the citadel primarilyresponsible for the excavation of this area, has one must consult Korfmann'sannual preliminary reports put forward a sensitive and well-considered discussion and other studies in Studia Troica 1-11. In what follows of its layout in the Late Bronze Age, with suggestions as I shall examine the relevant excavation areas each in to its changing relations to the gate and citadel wall turn, outlining Korfmann's findings and evaluating the (Korfmann2000: 21-8). criticisms levelled against him. Kolb accepts that there was obviously some settlement immediately to the west of the citadel (Kolb Area immediatelyoutside the Late Bronze Age citadel 2002a; 2002b: 15), but he fails to drawattention to all the The new excavationshave hugely increasedthe evidence other points aroundthe citadel where Late Bronze Age for Late Bronze Age occupationin this area. On the east remainshave been found. In fact, whereverexcavations side, in IK8-9, work in 1991-1993 revealed a series of have been made here, they have unfailingly revealed a substantial buildings with stone foundations extending sequence of Late Bronze Age buildings, often substantial Blegen's sequence of late VI-VII back to early VI or and, where the excavated area is wide enough to show it, even perhapsV. There are associated features such as a set closely together. stone pavement, hearthand grain bin (Korfmann1992a: Kolb and Hertel both complain that, in presenting 30-1; 1993: 21; 1994: 24). The area was thus not, as the discoveries to the west of the citadel, Korfmannhas Blegen thought, first settled after the destructionof Troy fleshed out the meagre remains of Troy VI by adding in VI. On the south side, in EF9-10, small excavations those of Troy VIIa (Kolb 2002b: 15; Hertel 2002: 7-8). within the Roman odeion have produced a probable This appears to rest on the fact that in one plan in the middle VI wall set directlyon bedrock,clay-lined storage book accompanying the exhibition the buildings of late pits, a stone pavementalso of middle VI date and the wall VI, VIIal and VIIa2 are all shown in shades of red of a very substantialhouse of late Troy VI (Korfmann which are hard to distinguish (Korfmann et al. 2001: 1994: 22; 1998: 41-2; 1999: 14-15). It is truethat a little fig. 74). The basic colour scheme (red for VI, green for furtherwest, in a narrowtrench hard against the citadel VII) goes back to Dorpfeld, but here there are two wall in D9-10, there is no evidence of buildings before innovations. First, the VIIlabuildings are included in VIIbl (Korfmann 2001la: 22-7, correcting earlier the red range. The evident purpose was to highlight the reports). But the sequence here may be comparableto cultural continuity from VI into VIIa and to emphasise that in A7 and K4, where in Troy VI a road ran along the its difference from VIIb (shown in blue-green). This is face of the citadel wall and was only built over in VIIb. hardly controversial. Second, a sub-division of both

85 Anatolian Studies 2002

Fig. 7. Remains of Troy VI immediatelyto the west of the citadel (Korfmann2000: fig. 12)

colours into multiple shades has been necessary Most of the known structuresin the area do admit- because as a result of Korfmann's excavations more tedly belong to VII or later. This is because excavation building phases are known. The reds are indeed too has in most places gone no deeper. Whereit has, remains similar, and it is a pity that this was not taken up with of VI and also of earlierperiods have come to light. One the printer at proof stage. But far from conflating may confidently predict that, if the entire area were periods, the plan actually attempts a higher degree of excavated, a built-up quarterof Troy VI and VII would differentiationthan before. The known buildings of VI be exposed. The cobbled streets speak for themselves and VII in this part of the site are in any case clearly and are plainly urban. It is obvious that the same sort of distinguished elsewhere in the book (Korfmann et al. settlement probably extended all around the citadel 2001: fig. 480). except on the north side.

86 Easton, Hawkins, Sherrattand Sherratt

The middle plateau area2 keramik and wattle-impressedclay show that the area Turning now to the area ca. 150m to the south, in the was still settled. A putative street has been identified in middle of the plateau,Korfmann's work has focussed on the western half of K17. two neighbouringtrenches in squares H17 and IKL16- Kolb describes the findings from IKL16-17 as 17, in the latter investigating more closely an area first amountingat any one time in the Late Bronze Age to no tested by D6rpfeld. HI 7 produced no complete struc- more than one single buildingwith stone foundationsplus tures,but 1.5m below the surface,in soundingsin narrow some insubstantialhuts, pits and open areas (Kolb 2002b: areas between the walls of an overlying Roman glass 13). Both he andHertel argue from this thatthe middlepart factory,there were remnantsof stone walls of late VI or of the plateauwas occupiedonly sparsely,with occasional VII, scattered mud-bricks,sherds of grey Minoan ware solid buildings and outhouses set amongst gardens and and a surprising amount of Mycenaean pottery of a farms (Kolb 2002b: 13-15; 2002c: 2; Hertel 2002: 8). qualityequal to that found in the citadel. Numerouspost- They repeatedly cite with approval Korfmann's own, holes are mentioned in the report (Korfmann1993: 25- preliminarysuggestion (Korfmann 1998: 52) that the area 6). Some later proved to be animal burrows(Korfmann was thinly built with fairly large open areas between 1997: 56), but others are genuine. houses. The evidenceas we now have it, however,suggests In IKL16-17 a larger area has been opened up a degreeof development:yes, insubstantialsettlement with (Korfmann 1994: 27-30; 1997: 53-62; 1998: 49-56; agricultureand craftsin early and middleVI, but followed 1999: 20-2). Here the bedrock lies lower, and there are by a fully built-up area in late VI-VIIa, with continued 3-3.5m of overlying deposits. Prehistoric, Hellenistic settlement,but a changeof buildingmethods, in VIIb. The and even early Roman strata have all been hugely reconstructionsreflect the presentunderstanding of the late disturbed in this area by later Roman activity. Large TroyVI situation. It is worthremembering also thatin late Roman pits and foundationsreach down to bedrock, and TroyVI therewere morebuildings only 20m to the west, in it is only in between these large intrusionsthat fragments H17 - an area ignoredby Kolb and Hertel. Occupation of earlier deposits are preserved. Cut into the bedrock was certainlynot so very sparse. are the footings of a palisade originally thought to have belonged to Troy VI but now dated by sherds and C14 The southernhalf of the plateau samples from its earliest fill to Troy I-II. There must The most intriguing,and among the most disputed,discov- once have been other deposits of Troy I-II in the area, eries come fromthe southernmostfringe of the plateau,ca. but these were evidently removedin the Late Bronze Age 400m to the south of the citadel (Jablonkaet al. 1994; for it is TroyVI or laterdeposits thatnow directlyoverlie Jablonka1995; 1996). Here in 1992 a 120m long anomaly bedrock. Preceding deposits are now found only where showed up in the magnetometersurvey (Becker et al. they have been left undisturbedin man-made cuts and 1993). It was thoughtat first to indicatethe presenceof a natural depressions in the bedrock. A comparable buried,6m wide, burntmud-brick wall which, because of phenomenonwill be noted later in the southernmostpart its position and orientation,might be the defensive wall of of the plateau. Troy VI buildings have been glimpsed in the Late Bronze Age lower city. This hope was in part the northernmostquarter of the trench but lie mainly disappointedwhen excavationproved the featureto be a outside it - certainly to the north, west and east, and ditch, but the same ditch has since been traced for a quite conceivably to the south as well (Korfmann1997: distanceof ca. 400m from west to east, has been tested by fig. 54). In early and middle VI the area contained excavationat six differentpoints (Blindow et al. 2000: fig. timber and mud huts, pavements, ovens, a threshing 1; Korfmann200 la: fig. 1), and has provedjust as inter- floor, pithoi, piles of murex and other shells, concentra- esting. It was originally4m wide. As preserved,the north tions of bone needles and slag from bronzeworking. The side is now 2.5m high. It originatedat the latest at the impression is of an area where agriculture and crafts beginningof late TroyVI, for this is the date assignedafter were pursued. In late VI and VIIa, by contrast, it very careful study to the earliest fill in the ditch. (Initial contained houses with stone foundations. Remains of impressionshad placed it earlier,in middle VI.) At first these have been found throughout the area, wherever the fill accumulatedonly gradually. A higher stratumof later disturbancehas not penetrated. All have a similar fill is a burnt destructiondeposit of late VI date, after orientation(fig. 8; Korfmann1997: fig. 54). Two phases which the ditch was filled up with deposits dateable to are represented,and good quality Mycenaean pottery is TroyVI (Jablonka1996: 80). It is likely thatthe ditchwas found. In VIIb pits containing fragments of Buckel- no longer open in VIIla(Jablonka 1996: 73), but material washed in later from the surroundingarea still includes 2 sherds of VI and VII 1995: that Forclarification of someof thepoints here I ammost grateful (Jablonka 76), indicating to the excavator,Peter Jablonka. occupationcontinued in the surroundingarea.

87 Anatolian Studies 2002

8=1040

29,43 L 17 770r7O 0 7 00170 TROIA1988-96 ORIENTIERUNGSPLAN UNTERSiEDLUNG117IK17 E2 TROiAVIII/IX TROiAVI , TROAVI-STRUKTUR (inden Fels geoarbeiet) 0 PfostenlochimFelsen * Pfostenstetlung \ .< Lehmziel N

0 5m

t \l 70160 x

PrY mr

Fig. 8. Remains of Troy VI in IKL16-17 (Korfmann 1997. fig. 54)

1V0V2455x=0245,__ _ x 1 45 "2455 24.65 V 41^ 38 24.84 | 25.15 1 . | 24,55, 24 -3,65 t ~&Lr- Grube 25 oGrube 26 I | . oS;~1 ~~~~~~Palisade 24.8 Grube 27 L-- 24,92 24,62 v 23,602 9 ;s,]z.IiI e23,96 j~ i iii i t 122,18 L ------22,48l,2.<^ 2514 25I3 2V4,I/. 36 ---6r 25^04 b1 Groben Tor 24,96 Grube 15 ru e ....~~~~~~~~ ,77j 1'",1 P_Palisade ^ ! ^__\25 2416 24,57 -3 v

IL 2368 2 11 A7 n L _ - - e ------~i~~~ ?l\ 23,21 23,531 V1 Graben I 24,47: y 28/29 - Troic VI A 0 1 5m I I I N II o23,1 tS Troia-Projekt 1996 123223,92 24,40 j a 1V . - - _ 2244 _ V_ _V 4,2.L---__424,4 - x=1_jJ 0230

+x=-1oo 1 0230 --J~=10230

Fig. 9. Ditch and palisade in y28-29 (Jablonka 1996. fig. 2)

88 Easton, Hawkins,Sherratt and Sherratt

In y28-9 geomagnetic survey identified a 10m wide the plateau and suggest, on the basis of plant remains gap in the ditch. Excavation confirmed the finding, from the inner ditch, that this area was not built up at all revealing what was effectively a causeway crossing the but was used instead for the cultivationof figs and vines. ditch (fig. 9). Three and a half metres to the northof this Archaeologically it was a tabula rasa until the a second cutting in the bedrock has been found, running Hellenistic period (Kolb 2002a; 2002c: 2; Hertel 2002: parallelto the ditch. This second cutting is much smaller 9). They emphasise that no trace of the city wall has 50cm wide and sometimes as little as 14cm deep. It actually been found around the southern part of the has been traced over a length of 18m but no more, and plateau (Hertel 2001: 46; Kolb 2002b: 16). The includes a 5m wide gap positioned just north of the palisade, they say, would have been too weak to be an causeway. It is suggested that it was the foundation effective defence and could anyway have been skirted trench for a wooden fence or palisade, and that the 5m aroundat either end (Kolb 2002b: 17; Hertel 2002: 14- gap was a gate. Two post-holes on the western side of 15). Kolb points out the absence of the additionalpost- the gap and one in the middle lend supportto this, but holes which would demonstratethe presence in it of a there are no correspondingholes on the east side. An double door, and doubts whether the shallow rock axis drawnalong the centre of the causeway and through cutting represents anything other than a field drain or the middle of the putative gate, when extended north- industrialchannel (Kolb 2002b: 17). Hertel is equally wards, runs up to the south gate of the Troy VI citadel. sceptical (Hertel 2002: 15). The defensive characterof The magnetometersurvey has suggested the presence of the inner ditch is also strongly disputed. They arguethat a second, similar gap in the ditch 220m to the west, in it could have been jumped across by a foot-soldier, squaren28. bridged by planks, or filled in with earth, and that the A second ditch was identified in 1995 lying 100- causeway across it would have provided a fine highway 150m furtherto the south and beyond the limits of the for an enemy's chariots. In any case it has not been Roman lower city. This ditch was originally more than found around the east side of the lower city (Berliner 3m wide, and the cut into bedrock is about 3m high on Morgenpost; Hertel 2001: 45; 2002: 14; Kolb 2002b: the north side. Its continuationhas been found 230m to 17). They both criticise its interpretationas a defensive the southeastin squares34, and geomagnetic survey and work when the outer ditch is known to have been used additional soundings have traced it for a length of over by the Romans as a water channel (Kolb 2002a; Hertel 700m. The relative dating of the two ditches is not 2002: 15), and Kolb has positively suggested that it absolutelycertain. They seem likely to be successive, for could have been used to bring water from the cave on although the initial fill in the more southerly ditch may the west side of the site to irrigate the fields on the belong to the very end of Troy VI (scarcely distin- plateau (Kolb 2002b: 17-18). For dating the inner ditch guishable from VIIa), the remainder seems to have Kolb strangely relies on the excavators' first impres- accumulated rapidly at some point during Troy VIIa sions, ignoring the more considered judgements made (Jablonka 1996: 80). Thus the inner, more northerly later (Kolb 2002b: 17, n. 42). ditch may belong to late VI and the outer,more southerly The possible existence of a city wall will be discussed one to the ensuing period. The outer ditch was re-cut in below. What evidence is there to support the recon- Roman times, and the Roman deposits are quite distinct: struction of a built-up area in the southern half of the water-laidbands of mud and silt. plateau? Korfmannbelieves that the inner ditch and palisade, Korfmann'scritics are right to point to the absence of at least, were defensive, and that there may in addition Bronze Age strata,but this is not simply an absence of have been a more substantial city wall at some point archaeological deposits; it is an absence in almost all furthernorth. No trace of the latterhas been found on the excavated areas of any prehistoric surface at all plateau, but an upwardstep in the terrainca. 70m to the (Korfmann 1992a: 33). This is partly attributableto north has been pin-pointed as a possible location erosion. Kolb has repeatedlydismissed this as though it (Korfmann2000: 46). The model and Haussner'srecon- were a convenient excuse (Kolb 2002a; 2002b: 13; and structions show a built-up settlement extending all the orally in the symposium),but the area is indeed a tabula way south across the plateau, bordered by just such a rasa as he says- in the sense that it has been scraped wall. Beyond, and all aroundthe lower city, is shown a clean. Around the inner ditch bedrock is in places only ditch with a numberof causeways, each protectedon the 20cm below the surface, and all strataof VI and VII are inner side by a short stretchof palisade. missing (Jablonka et al. 1994: 53; Jablonka 1995: 43, Kolb and Hertel contest this entire reconstruction. 48). That there has been a process of erosion which They point out that neither cores nor soundings have explains this is positively indicated by the presence in produced Bronze Age strataacross the southernhalf of both ditch-fills of deposits, including Late Bronze Age

89 Anatolian Studies 2002

pottery, which were washed in during the Late Bronze preservedLate Bronze Age buildings on the west side of Age and after (Jablonka et al. 1994: fig. 1 nos 5, 6). the citadel to show that the Romans did not always Furthersouth, in g28, 2m of colluvium have accumulated remove earlier strata(Kolb 2002b: 15), but the situation over bedrock since it was exposed in Roman times at the south end of the plateau was different. Here (Jablonka 1996: 91). The valley to the south also erosion may already have reduced the depth of soil to contains an accumulationof erosion deposits which over such an extent that only its total removal, and that of all the centuries have been washed down from the site earlierremains, could make solid building possible. (Kayan 1997). Byzantine and earlier inhabitantsmade The absence of the Bronze Age surface is important an effort to halt the process by cutting terraces and when we come to consider the supposed palisade. One building terracewalls (Jablonka1996: 87-91). has to bear in mind that the shallow rock-cuttingswhich Late Bronze Age deposits were not always missing, have been found must representonly the very bottom of however. As far south as square s34 depressions in the what were originallymuch deeper features. The original bedrock still invariablycontain residual clusters of Troy cuts could have been made througha metre or more of VI pottery which erosion has failed to sweep away overlying earth and perhaps bedrock, all since disap- (Jablonka1996: 87). At one point just northof the inner peared. If, therefore,the two channels as we know them ditch there are the remains of a series of pits cut into peterout aftera few metres in eitherdirection (Korfmann bedrock for pithoi, with the pithos bases still present. 1997: 62) this does not mean that they never extended Thermoluminescencedating has confirmed that they are any further. It simply means that the evidence has disap- of second millennium origin. The pithoi themselves peared. Similarly if on the east side of the supposed would have been sunk into house floors which must once gateway there are two post-holes not attested,it may well have lain nearly 2m higher-a strikingindication of the be because they were not originallydug to quite the same depth of deposit which has been lost. The Bronze Age depth as the others. fill of the inner ditch (Jablonka 1994: fig. I nos 3, 4) The purpose of the feature has of course to be consists largely of refuse and destructiondebris from a inferred. Given its position parallel to the ditch, the built-up area: there are bits of stone, some burnt;burnt coincidence of the gateway with the causeway, the clay; burntmud-brick; mud-brick debris; ash; pottery of directionof the axis throughthe two, and the real possi- Troy VI; and animal bones (Jablonka et al. 1994: 60; bility that it extended far beyond the limits to which it 1995: 43; 1996: 45, 70). The fill in the outer ditch is has been traced, I think it is highly likely that it was, as similar (Jablonka 1996: 87-91). None of these earlier Korfmann believes, a part of a defensive system. A deposits in the inner ditch was washed in by rain, but all continuouspalisade of timbers 0.5m thick, set deep into were tipped in from the north. Unless we suppose them the earth and the underlyingbedrock, would not be the to have been deliberately carried from a built-up area weak defence that Kolb and Hertel claim. Nor need its 200m or more to the north,we have to conclude that they, method of constructionexactly replicatethat of its Troy as well as the botanical evidence for figs and vines II predecessoras Kolb requires(Kolb 2002b: 17). (Jablonka et al. 1994: 71), give us some indication of Equally the ditches will not have been as feeble a what was once in the vicinity. The burntTroy VI house defence as Korfmann's opponents maintain. Each is thoughtby Blegen to have been a crematoriummay be a situated at a natural drop in the terrain, so that the tangible remnant. northernside is much higher thanthe southern. We must Hertelfinds it incrediblethat all traces of Bronze Age allow, too, for the addedheight on both sides of the ditch structures should have been swept away by erosion of the earth and bedrock which has disappearedin the (Hertel 2002: 9). But one has to allow for the fact that interim. Thus an attackerwould originally have been much may also have been removed by the builders of faced with ditches 3-4m wide, perhaps2m or more deep Hellenistic and Roman times. The Classical lower city on the south side, and towering 3 or 4m high on the north extended across most of this area, as geophysical survey side, or perhaps more (Jablonka et al. 1994: fig. 1; and excavation show, and Roman buildings were placed Jablonka 1996: fig. 8). No-one could jump this, nor directlyon bedrock. They even cut right into the bedrock could any chariot easily cross it whether it were bridged which in places has had as much as 0.5m removed with planks or filled up with earth. It is quite truethat no (Jablonkaet al. 1994: 62; Jablonka1995: 43; 1996: 45). continuationof the innerditch has been found on the east Brian Rose emphasised at the symposium the extent to side of the site -yet. Laterdisturbance and the porosity which the Roman builders pillaged earlier periods for of the bedrockhave so far made it difficult to follow here stone. The result is that there are very few remainseven (Jansenet al. 1998: 276, 280). But it would be unwise to from the Hellenistic and Augustan periods when it is dependon this remainingthe case. Since the featurewas quite certainthat a lower city existed. Kolb points to the first identified by magnetometer in 1992, painstaking

90 Easton, Hawkins, Sherrattand Sherratt work with fluxgate and caesium magnetometersand with VI and certainly during Troy VIIla. A second ditch was ground-penetrating radar has nearly quadrupled its cut whose contents witness to the presence predomi- known length (Blindow et al. 2000: fig. 1). The latest nantly of VIIlaoccupation in the vicinity. This is a fair work may even show a turn northwards at its most indicationthat the areato the northof the inner ditch was easterly end (Blindow et al. 2000: 129, fig. 8) and has already filled to capacity by the end of Troy VI, and now demonstratedthe presence of a comparableditch on justifies some of the higher population estimates. The the west side of the lower city in squarep12 (Korfmann cemeterybelonging to this period may be presumedto lie 2001la: 28, 42, figs 23, 24). yet furtherto the south (Becks 2002: 299). The resulting The suggestion that the ditch was intendedas a water pictureof a crowded lower city in Troy VIIlais consistent channel, on the model of the later Roman re-use of the with what we alreadyknew of the periodfrom the citadel. outer ditch, founders decisively on two facts: (1) that it was interruptedat at least two points by causeways A lower city wall? (Korfmann2001 la: fig. 23); and (2) that it undulatesover Accepting, then, that we have quite convincing evidence its course by as much as 14m (Messmer et al. 1998). It for two successive Late Bronze Age defensive systems also overlooks the natureof the deposits. The thin strata around the lower city, we must ask: were they supple- of mud and silt in the Roman cut were laid by slow- mented by a city wall as Korfmannsupposes? moving or stagnantwater repeatedly over a long period While a city wall has not yet been identified on the (Jablonka 1996: 82). They are quite different from the plateau, possibly due to the depradations of the Bronze Age stratain the inner ditch, although of course Hellenistic and Roman occupants, Korfmann reasoned water will collect in any ditch in wet weather and this is thatremnants of such a wall might still be found nearerto reflected in the evidence here too (Jablonkaet al. 1994: the citadel. In particularthe area just east of the VI 60 stratum 3, 71). At the symposium Kolb's water citadel walls seemed promising, for here the Hellenistic channel theory was heavily criticised by Uerpmann- builders, far from removing earlier deposits, had been with, among other things, the trenchantobservation that keen to pile up as much earth as possible behind the water cannot run uphill - and Kolb now denies that he retaining walls IXN, IXM in order to support the ever advanced it (Kolb 2002c: 5). But he plainly did platformof their splendidnew temple. Korfmannfurther (Kolb 2002a; 2002b: 17-18). reasonedthat the angle set into the southeastcomer of the When we view the presumed palisade and the two northeastbastion was the most likely place for a city wall ditches together, considering the characterof each, and to have run up to the citadel itself. A wall joining at this when we take into account the extent to which infor- point would have been essential to prevent access from mation may have disappearedor be as yet inaccessible, the outside via the cisterninto the citadel itself, but would their interpretationas parts of two successive defensive have continued to leave the water supply accessible to systems seems entirely reasonable, indeed convincing. inhabitantsof the lower city. In 1995-1998 he therefore We can in fact now quite reasonablysketch out a picture dug aroundthe southeastcomer of the bastion (Korfmann of how the lower city may have grown over the centuries. 1996: 39-43; 1997: 49-53; 1998: 43-8; 1999: 16-17). It The rock-cut palisade in HIKL16-17 may representthe is a tight and complex area, still being studied, and the outerlimit of the Troy II settlement. By TroyV that same full picture is not yet available. Crucially,however, the area had been covered by the settlement itself, as traces stone footings of a very substantialwall did appear at indicate, but Troy V graves were found not very much exactly the right place, running off to the southeast as further to the south in D20 (Korfmann 1994: 31-4). might be expected (fig. 10). Probablythe limit of the Troy V settlementlay approxi- A length of 7m has been exposed, interruptedat the mately in D19. In early and middle Troy VI IKL16-17 southeastend by what is interpretedas a gateway into the was still not very heavily settled, and may perhapshave lower city. A roadruns northwards at this point, bounded lain towards the edge of the lower city. By late VI, along its west side by a wall which antedates the however, thick settlement had spread across it and the presumed city wall. A circulargroup of stones set into lower city extended in some form as far as the palisade the road is seen as a possible post-supporton the west and the inner ditch with the southernmost houses side of the gateway, and an uprightstone 2m to the north probably interspersedby gardens and orchards. A little could be a stele of the sort found outside other gates in further to the south, outside the settlement, lay the Troy I, II and VI. The east side of the gate has not been cemetery of late Troy VI (VIh) excavated by Blegen. found, nor has any continuationof the wall eastwards. After some destructionin the lower city and the filling up To the west of the road a stone fill lies behind the north- of the inner ditch, the settlement probably expanded south border wall. It is above this, on a mud-brick again furtherto the south perhapsat the very end of Troy packing, thus on a sort of platform,that the stele is set.

91 Anatolian Studies 2002

01 2345 10 mE30EZ , Meters

Northeast Bastion

VI or Vila, excavated

VI or Vila, reconstructed

VIIb,excavated

:VIIb, reconstructed

Fig. 10. Area around northeast bastion in K4 (plan courtesy of Dr Peter Jablonka, Troia Projekt, Tiibingen University)

The picture is complicatedby the presence of a 1m thick continuous, instead of a dotted, line. Kolb implies that packing of horizontallylaid mud-brickwhich covers the Korfmann did this deliberately 'in order to create the presumedcity wall, the stele and the stone fill. In VIIb impressionthat there was a gate in a supposed city wall' small houses were built over the road and around the (Hertel 2002: 13; Kolb 2002c: 2). mud-brick platform and bastion. These were in due Some of these criticisms are astute and apposite. course destroyedand filled up with rubble. Because of the area's complexity and importance, the Hertel complains that the area is selectively and preliminaryassessments have been thoroughlyreviewed unsystematicallydescribed, and that the relevantpottery in Tiibingen.3 The latest analysis of the pottery in fact has not been published (Hertel 2002: 9-10). This is confirms Hertel's view that the presumed city wall hardly a fair charge against reports which are only should be considerablylater than middle VI and should preliminary. The more substantialcriticisms are that the post-date the building of the bastion. Although the wall is too low and too weak to have served as a city ceramic data are not absolutely conclusive, it appears wall (Berliner Morgenpost;Hertel 2001: 46; 2002: 11), likely that the platformof stone fill, with the mud-brick that it never really adjoined the bastion (Kolb 2002b: n. capping into which the stele was set, was built up against 23; Hertel 2002: 10), and that it may not have been the bastion in late VI. The city wall was built across it contemporarywith the ditch and may only have been shortly afterwards. Then in VIIlathe 1m thick mud-brick built in VIIa not middle VI as Korfmann says layer was laid across the top of the whole complex. This (Korfmann 1996: 42; Hertel 2001: 46; 2002: 11; Kolb does not necessarily mean that in VIIa the wall was no 2002a; 2002b: 17-18). The gateway is dismissed since longer in use, as the mud-brick layer could belong to in Korfmann'sreconstruction it would have the unusual some local repair or modification. At all events there width of 6m and since no east side has been found was thus a centuryor two for the stones of the bastion to (Hertel 2002: 13). The post-supportis seen simply as weather before they were obscured by the mud-brick part of the paving of what Korfmann (but not Hertel) structure(Hertel 2002: 10). The change to the dating regards as the street (Hertel 2002: 11). Both Kolb and means that, if this was indeed a partof a city wall, it will Hertel take exception to a plan in the book accompa- 3 nying the exhibition in which the hypothetical eastward I am most gratefulhere to Ralf Becks for up-to-dateinfor- continuationof the wall looks as if it is drawn in with a mationand to ProfessorKorfmann for permission to publishit.

92 Easton, Hawkins, Sherrattand Sherratt probablyhave been built while the innerditch was in use, did, at some points, dig to deeper than the Troy VIII as the reconstructionsdepict, and could have survived feature. He appearsto have cut a narrow,irregular trench into the period of the outer ditch. along the face of the bastion in orderto expose the lower The reconstructedgateway is indeed unusually wide parts of its walls, in the process slicing througha part of (Korfmann 1996: fig. 33). But the photographs show IXN (Dorpfeld 1902: Taf. III; Korfmann 1997: fig. 45 that on the east side a cutting was made throughthe road top). Korfmann's excavations found that it had cut by the foundationtrench for the Hellenistic retainingwall through the mud-brickpacking and, along the east face (Korfmann 1997: figs 50, 52). Thus an east side to the of the bastion, into the stone fill beneath it. It had also gate could have been as close to the west side as 3.5m removed a part of the wall running eastwards from the and been removed. Magnificent, if indirect, confir- southeast comer of the bastion, leaving a deeper hole mation of its likely existence came when a gate in the where he had tried to trace the comer downwards to Hellenistic city wall was found a few metres to the east bedrock (for all this see Korfmann 1997: figs 45, 48). in 1996 (Korfmann 1997: 52-3; Rose 1997: 96-101). Dorpfeld's trench had filled up with loose earth and The Hellenistic operations have obliterated or made stones, and was identifiable when rediscovered. It had inaccessible any remnantthere of an earliercity wall. certainly cut through the wall in question, and it is It is unfortunatethat in two of the publishedplans the entirely proper to suppose that the wall originally hypothetical eastwardextension of the city wall beyond adjoinedthe bastion. the supposed gate looks as if it had been drawnin with a The area still presents some conundrums. In continuous line (Korfmannet al. 2001: figs 461, 480). particular,the purpose of the later mud-brickpacking is Inspection with a magnifying glass suggests that the unclear. Of the presumedcity wall we have only a short digital printing may have been to blame. At all events stretch,and one cannotyet be entirely confident that it is the criticism is over-particularsince dotted lines are used what Korfmannthinks it is. Equally one cannot say that elsewhere in the same book (Korfmannet al. 2001: fig. the existence of a gateway has been established beyond 368) and in all earlier publications (for example, all possible doubt. But the size, location and orientation Korfmann 1996: figs 33, 36, 37), making it pretty clear of the wall are all compatiblewith its being the beginning that it was unintended. of a city wall, and the later building on the same spot of As with the palisade and the ditches, Korfmann's the Hellenistic city wall may well speak for a continuity opponents dismiss too quickly the possible defensive of tradition. The paved street (if such it is) and the stele value of the feature. The presumedcity wall, where fully on the mud-brickplatform are points in favour of there preserved,is 2m thick- and that is assumingwe already being a Late Bronze Age gate at this point, and the know its full width, which we may not. Although this is presence of the later, Hellenistic gate again offers nothing like as massive as the citadel walls, even a mud- support. If some additionalpart of the Late Bronze Age brick wall of this size on a low stone footing would be a wall could be found the case would be closed. Research serious obstacle. In a stratifiedsociety it is perhapsnot is continuing on the west side of the citadel to see surprisingthat defences for the generalpopulation should whether the wall can be picked up there, but has so far not be as strong as those surroundinga royal residence. mainly met Hellenistic disturbance(Korfmann 1999: 16; It is true that at its west end the wall no longer abuts 2000: 21-5, 27). the bastion, and that there is a gap of about Im between them. Hertel is confident that this gap must be original Conclusions to the wall and was not caused when D6rpfeld exposed Everyone accepts that there was a lower settlement of the northeast bastion in 1893-1894 because, he says, some kind. The questions are: (1) is it permissible to Dorpfeld 'demonstrably'dug no deeper than the semi- reconstructit so extensively; (2) do the reconstructions circularfeature of Troy VIII which runs across the area accuratelydepict its likely characterand extent; and (3) (Hertel 2002: 10). This is a reasonable supposition to has therebeen a deliberateattempt to mislead the public? have made on the basis of D6rpfeld's records and, if he There is, as we have noted, a huge disparitybetween were right, the wall's defensive characterwould certainly Korfmann's comprehensive reconstructions and the be harderto believe in. In fact, however, the new excava- extent to which the lower city has actually been tions found otherwise although this was not made excavated. Kolb evidently feels that this raises an issue explicit in the preliminaryreports.4 D6rpfeld certainly of principle. He enunciates his own view as a binding one, that a model or picture may show nothing whose existence is not firmly attested(Kolb 2002b: 12). To this 4 I am againgreatly indebted to RalfBecks with whom I have been able to discussthis questionand who briefedme on the one may simply respond, who says? The Biiyiikkale latestfindings model alluded to above suggests that the excavators of

93 Anatolian Studies 2002

Bogazk6y feel constrainedby no such stringentcode, and Granted that the reconstructionshave a legitimate no doubt there are in the world's museums many other aim and fairly extrapolate from what is known of the models built on similar principles. It seems to me a lower town, there is little to supportthe accusationsthat perfectly valid and useful exercise to construct a well Korfmannhas deliberately been misleading the public thought out, imaginative presentationof how an entire apart from three minor printing faults in the exhibition ancient site might originally have looked. It can be book. Errorsof this kind are excusable when one takes stimulatingand educative. Childrenthese days are well into accountthe pressuresof mountingsuch an ambitious acquaintedwith such things as digital enhancementand exhibition on top of a full programme of university computer reconstructions, and know what they are. teachingand administration,not to mentionthe burdenof There is little dangerprovided the basic data are also to runninga majorinternational excavation. hand. This was the case in the exhibitionwhere therewas It is to be regretted that the accusations against a plan showing the extent of the excavations,and it is also Korfmannhave been made so publicly and so repeatedly the case in the book (Korfmannet al. 2001: fig. 425). when theirbasis is so flimsy. Kolb has indeed withdrawn Then there is the question as to the accuracy of the his earlierdescription of Korfmannas a 'von Diniken of reconstructions. There can be little doubt that the area archaeology' (StuttgarterNachrichten). Unfortunately immediatelyaround the citadelwas heavily built up on all he is now giving currency,without the slightest hint of sides. In the middle partof the plateaufurther excavation disapproval,to the opinion of Die Weltthat Troy is being in additionalareas could perhapsclarify matters. IKL16- excavated in the style of IndianaJones (Kolb 2002c: 8). 17, however, was fully built up in late Troy VI and H 17 This is possibly the most offensive of a whole series of has shown that these buildings were not isolated. In the offensive remarksin his website. That it is untruecan be southernhalf of the plateau there has been so much loss seen by anyone who reads the many preliminarystudies througherosion and Classical building activities that we in Studia Troica or who takes the trouble to visit the shall probablynever know how dense the occupationwas. excavation. But Blegen's 'crematorium', the pithos bases set in bedrockand the ditch fills show that it was by no means The historical geography of western Anatolia in the so wholly absent as Kolb and Hertel believe. One may Hittite texts (fig. 11) also reasonably ask whether the defences and the Recent developments cemetery would have lain at such a distance to the south Ever since the reading of the Hittite texts in the 1920s had there not been settlementstretching that far. opened the window on the second millenniumBC history That in late Troy VI the lower city was defendedby a of Anatolia, scholars have wrestled with the problem of palisade and ditch, and that in VIIlait was subsequently placing the towns and countriesnamed in the texts on the defended by a second ditch furthersouth, is an entirely modem map. It has been recognised that western reasonablededuction from the evidence thatwe have, and Anatolia generally was known to the as the the attemptsto deny this seem very forced. It is true that 'Arzawa lands', a political term, which in the oldest the full course of the defences has not been recovered,but edition of the Hittite laws appears under the ethno- this is not unusual in archaeology. Had there been no linguistic term 'Luwiya'. The '' too were controversy most archaeologists, one suspects, would seen as belonging to the west, but the location of the have thoughtthe 600m length of ditch so far documented individual land and city names has remained highly by Korfmannto be more than sufficient. It is less certain, uncertain,indeed controversial. We may take the map of but still arguable,that a city wall also was a part of the Garstangand Gumey (1959: map facing 1, discussion in defensive system in late VI and perhapslasted into VIIla. chaptersVI-VIII) as a startingpoint. Arzawa is placed Inclusion of the city wall in the model and the pictures in the central west, the valleys of the Meander and was certainlyvery bold, but I would say not indefensible. Hermos, Lukka down towards Classical and It is difficult to conceive of the entry into the bastion Wilusa towardsthe . Of the most importantnamed being at any time unprotectedby some such wall. cities, Apasa is at Ephesus, Millawanda at and Hertel says with some justice that all attempts at the Seha River land on the Caicus by its associationwith reconstruction(i.e. on this scale) rest on fantasy (Hertel Lazpa (= Lesbos). Troy is identified with the once 2001: 44). This has not stopped either him or Kolb from attested(land of) Taruisa. offering his own. Korfmann'sare certainly optimistic In the succeeding 30 years, a number of widely and lie at one end of a spectrumof possibilities. Those differinglocations were proposedby scholarsin different of Kolb and Hertel are decidedly minimising and lie at contexts: see, for example, the maps and accompanying the other. The truthis much more likely to lie towards articlesof Macqueen(1968: 169-85); Bryce (1974: 103- Korfmann'send. 16); Kosak (1981: 12*-16*). Notably attempts were

94 Easton, Hawkins,Sherratt and Sherratt made to find a location for the highly controversialland hieroglyphic Luwian inscription BOGAZKOY- of Ahhiyawa on the Anatolian mainland, especially by SUDBURG was discovered (Hawkins 1990: 305-14; Steiner, following the original view of Sommer (see 1995). Briefly summarised,the BronzeTablet established below). But in general the ease with which quite the size and location of the kingdom of Tarhuntassanow differentlocations could be plausibly proposedgave rise seen to extend from /PlainCilicia in the east, to a commonly expressed view that the situation was throughits borderwith Hatti in the south Konya plain, to more or less hopeless Hittitegeography as a 'guessing the city Parhaon the river Kastarayain the west, i.e. to game' (Mellaart,cited by Kosak 1981: 12*). Pergeon the Kestrosin (Otten 1988: 37; 1989: All this has changed dramaticallyin the last 15 years, 18). Beyond this lay the Lukkalands, thus occupying all 1988 being the effective turningpoint, the year in which of or more than Classical Lycia (Hawkins 1995: 54, n. the Bogazkoy Bronze Tabletwas published(Otten 1988; 194). The YALBURT inscription, narratinga Lukka recent translation,Beckman 1996: no. 18c; bibliography, campaign of TudhaliyaIV, named as conqueredplaces van den Hout 1998: 326), as was the hieroglyphicLuwian besides Lukka the cities Awama and Pinali, Patara, inscriptionYALBURT (Ozguci 1988: 172-4, pls 85-95; Talawa and Wiyanawanda, which correspond unmis- edition, Poetto 1993; Hawkins 1995: 66-85), and the takably to Classical Lycia, Xanthos (= Lyc. Amfia,

Fig. 11. Central westernAnatolia (Hawkins 1998: fig. 11)

95 Anatolian Studies 2002

Aram. 'win) and Pinara, Patara, Tlos and Oenoanda [1994]; cross referencesalso to reportsin Kazi Sonuclar (Poetto 1993: 74-82, La toponomastica;Hawkins 1995: Toplantisi).More recent are very promisingdiscoveries at 49-57). Thus suddenlythe historicalgeography of south Ephesus itself (most recently Biiyiikkolanci2000). All and southwestern Anatolia came into focus, and the these coastal sites are now producingincreasing evidence Arzawa lands with their associatedtoponyms were defin- of Mycenaeansettlement and influence, especially in the itively pushed back into the centralwest and northwest. central west area from Izmir to Bodrum, in the form of Decisive for the geography of these Arzawa lands Mycenaean pottery imported and locally manufactured, was the establishmentof the reading of the KARABEL and Mycenaeantombs. Thus a more concrete archaeo- inscriptionin the Karabelpass which carries one of the logical backgroundwith which to connect the textual two routes from Ephesus in the Caystervalley across the evidence is becoming available. Tmolus range to Sardis in the Hermos valley (Hawkins 1998: 1-31). The reading of this as an inscription of The symposium Tarkasnawaking of Mira, known also from his digraphic Symposiumpapers dealing with the textual sources were silver seal 'TARKONDEMOS', confirmed the those of Starkeand Heinhold-Krahmer,and additionally suggestion alreadyput forwardthat this was the northern that of Niemeier offered a combinationof archaeological boundaryof the land of Mira leading to the Seha River and historical data. The three scholars representrather land (Houwink ten Cate 1983-1984: 48, n. 38; Starke different approaches to the subject: Niemeier as an 1997: 451, nn. 40, 41) and that the kingdom of Mira archaeologistworking in the area,who thoughnot a Hitti- included the rump of Arzawa proper (as originally tologist himself makes full use of the recent publications argued by Heinhold-Krahmer1977: 136-47, 211-19; in the field (Niemeier 1999; Niemeier, Niemeier forth- Hawkins 1998: 15) with its capital city of Apasa, thus coming); Starke,an Anatolianphilologist specialising in Ephesus. Remarkably the almost contemporaneous Luwian studies, whose recent publicationshave concen- discovery of the HATIP inscribed rock relief southwest trated heavily on the historical geography of western of Konya provides a very similarfixed point on the Hatti- Anatolia (Starke 1997; 1998-2000: Lukka, Miletos, Tarhuntassafrontier as described on the Bronze Tablet Mira);and Heinhold-Krahmer,whose fundamentalstudy (Dinqol 1998a: 27-34, with earlierbibliography; 1998b: of the Arzawatexts remainsan indispensablehandbook to 159-66). As with Tarhuntassa,we are now in a better the subject,but now 25 years old was writtenwell before position to estimate the extent and importance of the the break-throughin our knowledge outlined above kingdom of Mira in the late Hittite Empire. It probably (Heinhold-Krahmer1977; for her more recent contribu- stretchedfrom the Tmolus range in the north to include tions, see Heinhold-Krahmer:1983; 1994a; 1994b). the Meandervalley in the south, and impingedon the city The reading of the KARABEL inscription and my of Millawanda,the identificationof which with Miletus interpretationof the historical geography of Arzawa is now hardly to be doubted. The general geographical based on it followed hardon Starke'sfirst foray into this scheme of western Anatolia by Garstang and Gumey field (I received the off-print of Starke 1997 while looks to be triumphantlyconfirmed. writing Hawkins 1998), and it is fair to say that our views In the backgroundto the textual evidence for western originatingfrom differentstandpoints broadly converge. Anatolia,archaeological knowledge of the Bronze Age of Gratifyinglythis common view is also that followed by western Anatolia has been slowly expanding since the Niemeier, with whom I have had the privilege of Second WorldWar. Before that few sites otherthan Troy discussing the question at Miletus, Karabel and had yielded significant information. The 1950s excava- elsewhere. It is thus of interest to compare Heinhold- tions of Beycesultanon the upperMeander produced good Krahmer'scurrent views on the subject. Middle-LateBronze Age levels on a site intendedto link As noted, her great contribution on Arzawa was archaeologicallythe plateauand the west (Lloyd, Mellaart published (1977) at the time when western geography 1965; Lloyd 1972; Mellaart,Murray 1995). Intermittent lacked any points of attachment beyond the easily operationssince before the war on the Bronze Age levels dismissed toponym identifications Millawanda-Miletus, at Miletus, difficult of access because of the water table, Apasa-Ephesus,Lazpa-Lesbos, Wilusa-Ilion and Taruisa- are now bearingfruit (most recentlyNiemeier 1999), as is Troia. This severe uncertaintyis well reflected in her also lasos (preliminaryreports, Momigliano 2000; 2001) book, which extraordinarilydoes not even offer a map. and the little published Turkishwork at Limantepeand She faithfully reports all previously proposed locations, Panaztepenear Izmir (short reportsin Mellink, 'Archae- but herself carefully abstains from supporting any of ology in Anatolia' and Gates, 'Archaeology in Turkey' these or attemptingto put togethereven hypotheticallya American Journal of Archaeology: Panaztepe annually coherent scheme. How in 2002 would she adjust her from AJA 91 [1987]; Limantepeannually from AJA 98 views to the new evidence, textual and archaeological?

96 Easton, Hawkins, Sherrattand Sherratt

In the context of the symposium of course, the land city names comparedwith the similarly close group question bears principally on the Wilusa-Ilion identifi- of Classical Lycian city names (Poetto 1993: 74-82; cation, since the line taken by the Kolb camp has been Hawkins 1995: 49-57) is very hard to dismiss as a pure either to deny this (the line taken by Hertel 2001: 60) or coincidence, and this too even though the absence of to talk down its significance (Kolb 2002b). But this identified Middle-LateBronze Age remains in the area certainly cannot be discussed in isolation from the has been thoughtto raise difficultyin locatingLukka here. general picture now emerging, since all identifications are more or less closely interlocking. Heinhold- Millawanda and Apasa Krahmer'scurrent attitude seems to be a continuationof These newly acquiredclusterings of toponyms, Parhaon the scepticism of her earlier work, namely that the new the river Kastarayaand the Lukka cities of Awama and overall picture remains unproved. In fact she does not Pinali, Patara,Talawa and Wiyanawanda,added to the deny the possibility that it is correct, but prefers to long known pair Adaniya and Tarsa,must surely prompt emphasise the negative points. Such scepticism is a more receptive viewing of Millawanda-Miletusand beginning to look somewhat out of place. Apasa-Ephesus, paired by Mursili's Annals, year 3, We may question whether her criteria for absolute Millawanda in a fragmentary context along with the proof and certainty are not pitched higher for the west kings of Arzawa and Ahhiyawa before the than elsewhere in Anatolia. One such criterion is the commencement of the campaign proper, and Apasa as discovery of written documents (cuneiform tablets). the royal city of the king of Arzawa, the main goal of Thus she allows certain identification for Bogazk6y- Mursili's campaign (Goetze 1933: 36-9, 46-51. Apasa Hattusa, Ma~at-Tapikka, Ortakoy-Sapinuwa and is not elsewhere attested). Both Millawandaand Apasa Ku~akli-Sarissa(identifications: Ma~at, Alp 1980: 58; are placed on the coast by the reportsthat Arzawansflee Ortakoy, Siiel 1999; Ku~akli, Wilhelm 1995: 37-42; from them by boat across the sea to 'the islands' (king of 1997: 9-15), also Adaniya-Adana and Tarsa-Tarsus, Arzawa from Apasa, Goetze 1933: 50; Piyamaradufrom although these apparently lack her criteria of definite Millawanda, Tawagalawa Letter, Keilschrifturkunden proof (see below). But one may suggest that other aus Bogazkoy XIV 3 i 61. Note that gursawananzahas criterianot fully accepted by her should be admitted. A been shown to mean 'to the islands', Starke 1981: 143). Hittite toponym apparently ancestral to a Classical or But here of course we have a greatdeal more than simply even modem one may not count for much in isolation, a pair of Bronze Age + Classical toponyms, more even but if geographical informationattaching to it supports than their location on the coast: we have the archaeo- the location, or if it is linked to one or more other such logical establishmentof Miletus as a major Middle-Late toponyms, or even if there is appropriatearchaeological Bronze Age site (Niemeier 1997; Niemeier, Niemeier evidence with which to connect it, then a combinationof forthcoming), and the recent limited but unmistakable these factors must carryweight. Absolute proof may be suggestion of a Late Bronze Age citadel and lower town lacking, but accumulationof these othercriteria may lead at Ephesus (citadel finds: Biiyiikkolanci 2000: 37-41; to a high degree of probability,which is often as much as lower city, Artemision sondages: Gates 1996: 319). studentsof antiquitycan expect. Beyond even this we have now the fixed point of the For example: Hittite Ikkuwaniya looks like the KARABEL inscription, at the northern exit from the forerunner of Ikonion-Konya, and the Bronze Tablet territoryof Ephesus, indicatingthat this is the frontierof reference to it as one of the neighbours of the land of the kingdom of Mira,which would incorporateas argued Tarhuntassasupports this (Hawkins 1995: 29-51); the the core of Arzawa proper with its capital at Apasa cities Adaniya and Tarsajuxtaposed in the hisuwa- ritual (Hawkins 1998: 22). (Keilschrifturkundenaus Bogazkoy XX 52 i 19; see There is yet more, even beyond the identified paired Goetze 1940: 54-6) are much more likely to represent city names, the archaeological evidence and the fixed Adana and Tarsusthan eithername occurringin isolation point of a rock inscription:we may add a recognisable might be; Parha on the river Kastaraya,named as the ancient topographical description, that of Mursili II boundary of Tarhuntassaon the Bronze Tablet, has (Goetze 1933: 54 [mount Arinnanda],60-7 [Puranda]). alreadybeen mentioned(Otten 1988: 37; 1989: 18)- it When Mursili enteredApasa and the king of Arzawa fled requiresa very resolute scepticism to doubt the identifi- across the sea to the islands, the population also fled, cation of this combination with Perge on the Kestros, some up mount Arinnanda,some into the city Puranda, which is in a highly suitable location, though lacking the and some across the sea with their king. Mursili turned support of archaeological evidence for Bronze Age at once to reduce mount Arinnanda,which he describes settlement. Yes, this may not be actually proved, but is in sufficient detail (Hawkins 1998: 22, with earlierrefer- this a useful approach? Likewise the cluster of Lukka- ences), that if it is to be sought in the environs of

97 Anatolian Studies 2002

Ephesus, it may confidently be identified as Classical The Seha River land, long recognised as a coter- mount Mycale, modern Samsun Dag, as scholars minous neighbour of Mira (Houwink ten Cate 1983- knowing the area have been quick to perceive. 1984: 48, n. 38), is placed to the north of Karabel,thus After withdrawingto winter quartersMursili returned identified as the Hermos (Gediz) valley. No evidence is the following spring to reduce the city Puranda, into available on the location of its capital or other cities, which a son of the Arzawan king had entered. Puranda whetherat possible Bronze Age predecessorsof Sardisor was high (people go up into it and come down out of it), one of the big coastal sites. Explicitly added to it by and Mursili was able to besiege it and cut off the water. Mursili was Appawiya, plausibly identified toponymi- After reducing it, he proceeded against the Seha River cally and geographically with Classical Abbaitis, the land to deal with its unreliableking Manapatarhunda.As headwaters of the river Macestus (modern Simav; had been suggested before, and was confirmed by the Garstang,Gurney 1959: 97; Hawkins 1998: 23). reading of the inscription, the Karabel pass probably It is perfectly possible, though evidence one way or markedthe northernfrontier of Mira on the way through the other is lacking, that the Seha River land may have to the Seha River land, the most obvious route for extended northwards to include the Caicus valley Mursili to have taken. The modem, doubtless also the (modernBakir), an actual identificationwith which was Classical road runs north from Ephesus-Selcuk to consideredby Garstangand Gurney,on the groundsof the modern Torbali,north of which it divides, the northwest interestshown by its king Manapatarhundain a letter in branchgoing to Izmir,the northeastdirect to the Karabel the land of Lazpa 'across the sea' (Hawkins 1998: 23; the pass and through to the Hermos-Gediz valley. A few Manapatarhuntaletter is the subject of a detailed recon- kilometres to the west of Torbali is a prominent hill, siderationby Houwink ten Cate 1983-1984). The same Bademgedigi tepe, the east side of which is somewhat lettershows thatWilusa was reachedfrom the Seha River cut by the new motorway. From its summit there is a land (see below). good all roundview over the plain and directly across to the Karabel pass. Investigations by Recep Meric of Wilusa IzmirUniversity have revealedthe presence of a massive The foregoing evidence on Millawandaand Apasa, and circuitwall halfway up the hill and furtherremains on the Mira and the Seha River land has been reviewed here in top, plausibly dated to the Late Bronze Age. What is this detail in orderto suggest that even in the absence of observableof the remains on the hill characterisesit as a definite proof of geographicallocations, continued total refuge rather than an actual city. Further,circling the scepticism on the political geographyof the centralwest foot of the hill to the northside are the remainsof a rock- is no longer appropriate. The approximatelocation and cut ascent road, in which ruts of chariotwheels may still extent of the two main Arzawa kingdoms as outlined be seen. This hill must surely be a convincing candidate may now be claimed to have a high degree of probability. for the site of Puranda,as proposed by Meri, (Gonnet The thirdand least prominentArzawa kingdom, , 2001; Greaves, Helwing 2001; Meric, Mountjoy 2002 is certainly inland, reached from the 'Lower Land' forthcoming). (Konya plain) and does not directly affect the present argument(placed in differentareas on the maps of Starke Mira and the Seha River land [1997: 449] and Hawkins [1998: 31] the crucial The kingdom of Mira as consitutedby Mursili after his evidence is that Hapalla was reached from the Lower defeat of Arzawahas been argued(Hawkins 1998: 21-3; Land via the city Lalanda, which could be placed at Starke 2000) to have included: (1) the core of Arzawa Classical Lalandos [Starke] or Laranda[Hawkins]; see properwith its capitalat Apasa, that is the Caystervalley Frantz-Szabo,Unal 1983). What does concern us is of and the territoryof Ephesus; (2) the inland province of course the fourth Arzawa kingdom, Wilusa, which was Mirabordering on Hattiin the neighbourhoodof the rivers not mentioned by Mursili in any of his preserved Astarpa and Siyanta, that is the western plateau in the documentation(Annals or Arzawa treaties), thus appar- neighbourhoodof modem Afyon, whence run the main ently not of direct military or political concern to him at passes to the west; (3) the land of Kuwaliya,probably the the time. A reasonable inference is that it was more headwatersof one or more branchesof the Meander,for remote than the others and beyond his Arzawa purview. which the site of Beycesultanis a good candidateas capital It becomes prominent explicitly as the fourth Arzawa or other city. I have also argued that such an extended kingdom in the reign of Muwatalli as known from his politicalentity as Mira-Arzawawould have requiredgood treaty with its king , which has a long but communicationsto hold it together, which would have damaged historical preamble giving a survey of Hatti- best been securedby the inclusion of the Meandervalley, Wilusa relations (recent translation,Beckman 1996: no. the main pass from the plateauto the west. 13, with bibliography,173).

98 Easton, Hawkins, Sherrattand Sherratt

The two principal questions to be reviewed in the you (Alaksandu) will campaign with me with your presentcontext are: (1) the identity (or not) of Wilusa and troops and horse (Beckman 1996: 84, 11). the site of Troy; (2) on the assumption of a positive The location of Lukka in northwest Anatolia goes answer,what the historicalsources on Wilusa may tell us back to Otten 1961: 112 (althoughlater given up by him; of the status of the site of Troy and its relations to the see R6llig 1988: 3). Since geographical proximity of Hittite Empire. Wilusa to the named places is only one possible expla- The inferences on Wilusa alreadynoted, that it was a nationof this provision,it would be unwise to give greater more remote Arzawa land reached through the Seha weight to this than to counter-indications. Thus it may River land, can now only point northwest to the Troad, well be that these places are named as being prominent since the locations of Lukka, Mira and the Seha River western countrieswhich are not 'Arzawa-lands',and are land hardly leave another geographically recognisable without kings and perhapswith a mobile and generally western Anatolian country. Also significant in this uncivilised population. The inference of the context is its earlierappearance as the 'land of Wilusiya' unjustified proximity of Wilusa and Lukka has led either to the beside the 'land of T(a)ruisa'among the places defeated placing of Lukka up near the Troad (for example, by /II in his campaign against the land of Macqueen 1968: 176; also Mellaart 1968: 187), or, following his Arzawa campaign (Keilschrift- especially since the firmerestablishment of Lukkain the urkunden aus Bogazkoy XXIII 11, 12; translated by directionof Lycia, to the placing of Wilusa in (for [Garstang and] Gumey [1959: 121]; see now Starke example, Hertel 2001: 55; also Steiner, at the Tiibingen 1997: 455. Note that the sword from the booty of the symposium,in a papercirculated after the proceedings). Assuwa campaign is identified as a Mycenaean type The reference cited above as showing that Wilusa [Niemeier 1999: 150]). Since Assuwa is not again was reached from the Seha River land has alternatively mentioned as a political force, its importance was been interpretedto show that Wilusa lay on the return probablyterminated at this point. It is notable that at this journey from the Seha River land to Hatti (Hertel 2001: date Wilusiya is one of the (incomplete) list summarised 56; this interpretation had already been expressly as the 'land of Assuwa' ratherthan one of the (even more rebutted by Houwink ten Cate 1983-1984: 42). The incomplete) list of Arzawa lands of the previous relevant lines from the Manapatarhuntaletter read: campaign,which includes besides Arzawa itself the Seha River land and Hapalla. 3. [Gassu ...] came and broughtthe Hittite army, Thus in the reign of TudhaliyaI/II Wilusa is regarded 4. [... wh]en they went APPA to smite the land as being partof a kingdom of Assuwa, but afterthe disso- Wilusa, lution of that power, at least by the reign of MuwatalliII, 5. (I was ill ...). is specifically categorised as an Arzawa land. A further indication of Wilusa's location is the informationthat it The understandinghinges on the sense of the preverb 'back' or either the main verb was once a bone of contention between the Hittite king appa, 'again', modifying went or the infinitive (Hattusili III?) and the king of Ahhiyawa (Tawagalawa pair, 'they (back/again)', walhuwanzi, 'to smite (back/again)'. Thus the sense Letter,Keilschrifturkunden aus BogazkoyXIV 3 iv 7-10; went back to smite the land Wilusa' is one of for the reading, Giiterbock 1986: 37). Since there is no 'they only a number and to understand went back longer any question of locating Ahhiyawa on the possible, 'they the Seha River land to to smite Wilusa', and Anatolian mainland, and it must be recognised as an (from Hatti) thus infer that to other indicationWilusa Aegean power (see below), this pulls Wilusa also into a contrary any lay western coastal location. between the Seha River land and Hatti, is to impose an on It These then are the main indicationsfor the location of improbable interpretation the passage. is much more understood,whatever the Wilusa, not it may be thoughtvery precise but significant naturally precise signifi- cance of that Gassu arrivedin the Seha River land since the clearerrecognition of the location and extent of appa, with the Hittite en route for a Mira-Arzawaand the Seha River land, especially if the army campaign against Wilusa. this is one of the few physical geography of western Anatolia is considered. Incidentally very passages to suggest that a Hittite have reached Thereis however a referencefrequently cited as evidence armymight actually Wilusa occasions: the Assuwa for the location of Wilusa, which cannot safely be (other possible campaign of I/II but the have utilised. The inference that Wilusa must be near Lukka Tudhaliya [see above], army may gone no further than Assuwa; the Milawata Letter of was drawnfrom the passage of the Alaksandutreaty. TudhaliyaIV seems to envisage a military expedition to If I, My Majesty, shall campaign from that land, restore Walmu as king, Hoffner 1982: 131, figs 40/38- eitherfrom Karkisa,Masa, Lukkaor from Warsiyalla, 46/44). Otherwise the general impression given by the

99 Anatolian Studies 2002 texts is that it lay beyond Hittite military reach though Location of Ahhiyawa within the political range. Geographically the Troad, In this discussion of the location of Wilusa, mention has protected to the south and east by the Ida massif, suits been made above of the land of Ahhiyawa,in the context this picturewell. of the hostilities over Wilusa between the Hittite and Proceeding from the evidence of the location of Ahhiyawan kings. Little furtherneed be added here to Wilusa to the question of the identity of the site of the long and controversial debate over the location of Hisarlik as the capital of Wilusa, we need only align the Ahhiwaya, beyond the observationthat with the firming textual arguments which push Wilusa into the Troad geographical locations Lukka= Lycia, Mira= Cayster with the archaeologicalpresence there of that rare item, and probably Meander valleys, Seha River land = a typical Late Bronze Age city, which can be evaluated Hermos and probably Caicus valleys and Wilusa = as a regional capital. The evidence of its citadel, Troad,no plausible geographicalspace can be proposed impressive even in its partially destroyed state (see on the Anatolian mainland for a 'great kingdom' of above), together with that of its lower city, now Ahhiyawa. Indications have always suggested that adequately if sparsely attested by the limited sondages Ahhiyawa lay 'across the sea', reached by boat via the (see also above), is sufficientto suggest the seat of a local islands, particularly in connection with the nautical ruler of the Troad of the period. While the textual escapes of Uhhaziti and Piyamaradu,both understoodto evidence points to Wilusa as a land (it is always deter- have sought refuge in Ahhiyawa. It does remain mined by KUR, except where this is replaced by other however to deal with one counter argumentto this, first logograms, INIM, DINGIRMES,as is regular),it would advancedby Steinerin 1964, and unfailingly repeatedby be normalto find the capital city with the same name. him on every possible occasion since (Steiner 1964: 371; This then leads directly on to the second question: further, for example, 1998: 170, and recently at the what would the textual sources have us expect of the Tuibingensymposium): namely that since the writer of capital city Wilusa, and are these characteristics the Tawagalawa Letter (Hattusili III?) sent Dabala- compatiblewith the archaeologicalfeatures of the site? tarhunda the charioteer (LUKARTAPPU) to fetch As one of the four Arzawa-lands ruled by men Piyamaradu from Ahhiyawa, Ahhiyawa cannot have acknowledged by the Hittites as kings, albeit vassals, been across the sea and must have been on the Anatolian Wilusa cannot have fallen below certain minimal mainland. This argument,which at best might be charac- requirementsfor the status of 'kingdom', whateverthose terised as simplistic, is without substanceand should be might have amountedto in terms of wealth, population removed from the discussion forthwith. It is well estab- and extent. Not many kings and kingdoms are attested lished that by the late Hittite Empire 'charioteers'served in Hittite Anatolia of the Empire period (see Klengel as confidential agents (Singer 1983: 3-25, esp. 9), not 1990). Of the other Arzawa kingdoms, Mira may now simply as 'drivers', and in the cited context, contraryto be recognised as having been very large, extending what the unwary may have been led to believe, there is from the Hatti frontierat the western plateau all the way no reference to Dabalatarhundabringing Piyamaradu to the coast incorporatingthe core of former Arzawa, from Ahhiyawaby chariot. This may be contrastedwith the Cayster valley with its capital at Apasa-Ephesus, an earlier passage in the same letter, where the Hittite and with Kuwaliya, the Meander valley. The Seha king observes that he sent the crown prince to fetch River land too could have been extensive, including the Piyamaradufrom Millawandawith the instructions:'Go, Hermos valley and with Appawiya the upper Macestus drive over, take him by the hand, mount him in a chariot (modern Simav), and with the probability that it with you and bring him before me' (i 68-70). stretched at least as far north as the Caicus (modern Millawandawas on the mainland,but Ahhiyawawas not. Bakir) valley. Hapalla on the other hand though poorly attested and of uncertain location, does not seem to Conclusion have been so important and could have been much The attitudes of Kolb and his supportersto the Hittite smaller. In fact the texts give also very little indication sources for Late Bronze Age western Anatolia are of where Wilusa might have ranked between Mira and mutually contradictory,thus do not add up to any co- Hapalla. But it is surely unrealistic to deny that the ordinatedcritique. Theirspokesman, Heinhold-Krahmer, Troadwith its capital city at Hisarlik could not fulfil the as noted above, emphasised the negative, 'unproven' requirementsof what we know of the Arzawa kingdom approachto western Anatoliangeography without really of Wilusa. The combined evidence of the citadel and engaging with the cumulative character of current the lower town, incomplete as each may be through evidence, though she explicitly refused to rule out the destruction and limited recovery, certainly suggests an Troy-Wilusa equation. Kolb himself, being mainly at least middle rankingregional power of Anatolia. concerned to denigrate the significance of the site of

100 Easton, Hawkins,Sherratt and Sherratt

Troy, insofar as he considered the Hittite sources at all, Krahmer), 'unimportant' (Kolb), and 'non-existent' denigrated also the significance of Wilusa, specifically (Hertel). Only the first scholar has an extensive arguingthat the Hittites concludedtreaties with a number knowledge of the subject, and she evaluates the material of insignificantplaces or populationgroups (Kolb 2002b: from an agnostic standpointwhich has been substantially 30, n. 109 - reference inaccurate, should read eroded by recent discoveries. The defence on the other Keilschrifturkundenaus BogazkayXIV 1 [ ... ] obv. 66- hand makes full use of the new informationto present a 74 [vgl. A. Goetze ..., S. 18 f.]). He supportsthis point formidablecase. The identity of Wilusa with Hisarlik- by the quite unfoundedsupposition that the Hittitesmight Troy is reaffirmed, as is its position and status as a have made a treaty with Talawa, which has not been regional capital, the seat of an Arzawa king. Our preserved. In so arguinghe displays scant regardfor the knowledge of the political geography of southern and sources, and in particularfails to addressthe implications western Anatolia has been transformedin the last 15 of recognitionof Wilusa as an Arzawa kingdom. years, even if this advancehas escaped the notice of those Hertel's views on the matter may be taken as repre- who continue to deny the possibility of constructinga sented in his booklet Troia. Archdologie, Geschichte, plausible historicalmap for the Arzawa lands. Mythos (2001). His section 'Troia und die hethitischen Quellen' (53-60), concludes definitively that Troy was The economic role of Bronze Age Troy not Wilusa (60), yet he cannot be said to take proper Much has been made, in the criticisms recently raised in account of recent developments or to demonstratemuch the wake of the popular exhibition Troia, Traum und control over the sources. While emphasising the Wirklichkeit,of two aspects of the way in which the site fragmentarynature of much of the evidence and the was presented there. The first, which has been controversial nature of the geographical locations considered in full in the preceding sections, is the (referring principally to the pre-1988 state of the degree of reconstruction involved in presenting a discussion), he nevertheless acknowledges recent realistic image of an ancient site from archaeological locations for Tarhuntassaand Lukka, and even of Mira, evidence. Little more need be said of the pioneering but withoutmention of Karabelin spite of the fact thathe use of computer-based techniques in creating a uses the map from my article (49, Abb. 7). Yet meaningful picture of Bronze Age architecture from discussing the location of Millawanda,he prefers to the archaeological traces within a long occupied and much Miletus-location that of Milyas which he explicitly altered citadel and urban settlement, except to places in Caria (!), revealing a geographical grasp that emphasise the value of the work now taking place on hardly inspires confidence. this aspect of the site (and to ponderthe irony of archae- For the location of Wilusa, he advancesfirst (55, also ologists being criticised for presenting their work in so 49, Abb. 17) the supposedproximity of Lukka(accepted immediate and attractivea form for popularexposition). as Lycia) rebutted above, which leads him to locate it More significant for current interpretationsof Bronze vaguely northof Caria(the Milyas for him!) or Lycia. He Age economic history, however, is criticism of the thenpairs this with the argument,also rebuttedabove, that second aspect, consideredby Professor Korfmannin the Wilusalay on the returnroute from the Seha River land to chapter contributed to the catalogue under the title Hatti (56). In so doing he ignores or rejects the most 'Troia als Drehscheibe des Handels' - criticism which importantrecent statementon the subjectby Houwinkten raises once again the shadow of a 'minimalist' view of Cate, though it is not clear, since he does not cite him by early tradepropagated by followers of the late Professor name, whetherhis entirelyinappropriate remarks (56, end Sir Moses Finley's views on the nature of the ancient of last complete paragraph)are directed at the distin- economy, and which sets itself against some of the more guishedDutch scholar. Perhapsprudently, Hertel does not promising currentavenues of understandingpatterns of attemptto mark his location of Wilusa north of Caria or regional development at this time. (For a recent survey Lycia and east of the Seha River land on the returnroute of such views about the ancient Mediterranean, see to Hatti on a map: he would be hardpressed to do so. In Horden, Purcell 2000, and for the Bronze Age see general, his argumentmay be not unfairly summarised Sherratt,Sherratt 1998.) from his statementsthat the identificationof Wilusa with Was Bronze Age Troy a 'hub of trade'? The answer Troy is unassured ('ungesichert') and doubtful to this question depends partly on the standard of ('zweifelhaft') (56), thereforeTroy was not Wilusa (60). comparison- whether from the standpoint of second Thus the prosecution's handling of the Hittite millennium Europe or Mesopotamia, say, or in the historical geographicaland backgroundto Wilusa-Troy context of the much larger urban installations which does not add up to a coherentcase. Theirverdicts may be emerged during the first millennium BC - but it also summed up as 'unproved and uncertain' (Heinhold- involves larger, theoretical questions about the role of

101 Anatolian Studies 2002 trade in pre-modem contexts, and its importancein the though it does warn against any claim of a wholly spread of urbanlife and economic activity. While there unique status. What is very evident is the significance is an inevitable tendency to exaggerate the significance of this maritimepassageway throughouthistory, and the of sites whose names have become famous in epic poetry prominence of Troy itself is a sensitive indicatorof this and have taken on a mythical dimension in popular traffic. imagination, and it is undoubtedlya useful exercise to This prominencearose naturallyfrom the position of look critically at the physical realities behind their later the site at the constriction point of patterns of long representation(see for instance Sherratt 2001 on the distancecontact. Like Corinth,it was located both at the nature of the Mycenaean centres), such deconstructive narrowing of a land route and between two bodies of re-appraisalshould not obscure the more general point water importantfor maritimetraffic; like Corinth,too, it that human communities do not exist in isolation, and experiencedan early prosperityand an eclipse by faster that the enlargementand elaborationof any settlement growing neighbours with locational advantages in an beyond that of its neighbours is symptomatic of a role enlargedarena and increasedvolume of trade. Fromthis within wider networks of contact and exchange. The perspective,Troy was to Constantinopleas Corinthwas to architectural prominence and material wealth of Athens (or Viking Hedeby to modem Copenhagen, to Schliemann's Troy was already evidence of an unusual take a Baltic analogy). Thereare many examplesof nodal concentrationof resources at a single site; the size of points at criticallocations, which have shifted their name Korfmann's Troy indicates that its resident population and location but fulfilled similar functions within an found employment on a scale beyond the scope of a expandingurban network. In Mesopotamia,for example, purely local economy. These two features,together with Babylon may be considered as the predecessor and the longevity of the site and the effort put into defending functionalequivalent of Seleucia/Ctesiphon-Baghdadas a its location, indicate that it played a significant role in central nodal point at the crossing of major routeways, urbanhistory; and indeed its position on the edge of the and the shift from a location on the Euphratesto one on Bronze Age urbanworld, and at a gateway to the terri- the Tigris reflects the changing importance of these tories beyond, gave it a particularprominence in the waterways(Adams 1981). Few sites retaintheir primacy skein of Bronze Age economic relations. for ever, and Bronze Age Troy shone more brightlythan its successor settlementson that spot. Understandingits The structuralposition of Troyin inter-regionalcontacts importanceduring this time requiressituating it within a In assessing how singular that role may have been, it is growing but still shifting network of contacts. Funda- advisable to look at a spectrum of undiscovered possi- mental to this is its position in relationto Black Sea and bilities. Archaeology depends in parton accident, and it Aegean traffic,as well as to intra-Anatolianlinkages. The would be naive to pretend that we know more than a Sea of Marmaraforms a corridorbetween the Aegean and fraction of the contemporary settlement network. Pontic maritimeinteraction spheres, with constrictionsat Moreover the truly international role of Byzantium/ either end which form land bridges between Europeand Constantinople/Istanbulfrom late Roman times onward . The fact that the Dardanelleswas apparentlymore may have obscured the traces of any settlement which importantthan the Bosphorus in the Bronze Age may preceded it, however substantial, so that Troy may not indicate that the Aegean links weighed more heavily in have been alone as a significant Bronze Age site on the determiningits prosperitythan Black Sea ones, though Sea of Marmara. This point is of obvious relevance to this position was reversed in the Christianand Islamic the identification of Hittite place names, not least the eraswhen the Black Sea became a gateway to trans-conti- problem raised by the apparentexistence of Wilusa and nental routes (across the Black Sea to central Asia and Taruisa as separate entities, and the possibility that Scandinavia)as well as to earlier used coastal routes to Hittite rulers may have had as close an interest in the the Danubecorridor, the Pontic steppes and the Caucasus. easternend of the Sea of Marmaraas in the western end. This wideningeastern outlook may have been responsible Two separate sites (with their own legendary histories) for the shift in emphasis from the Dardanelles to the may have been deliberately identified with one location Bosphorus,together with the military importanceof the as part of the creation of Homeric epic in the late eighth land link followed by the Via Egnatia. From the century (in which there are many other striking viewpoint of long term urbanhistory, therefore,there is examples of dual proper names, and a conspicuous every reasonto regardTroy as a prehistoricByzantium. It concern to marshal a variety of legendary names into a was the renewed importanceof Troy's location (albeit single epic tale). The possibility that Troy may not have with a religious, and touristic, as much as a secular been the only significant Bronze Age site in the region emphasis)in Hellenisticand Romantimes which resulted does not diminish its importanceat this time, however, in the degree of disturbancewhich hinders the recon-

102 Easton, Hawkins, Sherrattand Sherratt

structionof the Bronze Age lower town; thoughit was the The reasons for this early prominence were well growth of Byzantium into Constantinopleas the nodal identified by the present excavator some 16 years ago settlementon the Sea of Marmarawhich finally reduced (Korfmann 1986): the difficulty for Aegean shipping in its significance, and by preventing further build-up of penetrating the Hellespont and Dardanelles against occupation debris has thus allowed extensive archaeo- adverse currents and winds, necessitating a longer or logical access to the Greco-Romanand earlier Bronze shorter wait in a sheltered position before penetrating Age remains. In this respect the site offers a unique further.It was controlof this critical location which gave window into urbansettlement in these periods. the inhabitants of the third millennium Troad their decisive advantage. Their prosperity,therefore, was a Archaeological evidence direct reflection of the importanceof access to the Black Although Troy was a majorcentre throughout the Bronze Sea in the movementof materialsalong this corridor;and Age, the evidence for this takes different forms. In the although the absolute volume of such traffic was third millennium, it is striking for the characterof its undoubtedly small, the effects of these contacts in contents - Schliemann's 'treasures' with their fine spreading Near Eastern innovations are being increas- craftsmanshipand commandof exotic materials,and also ingly recognisedby Bronze Age archaeologistsin eastern in its early adoption of wheelmade pottery (in shapes and central Europe (Sherratt 1993). The appearanceof which often echo the metal vessels of the treasures). This tin as an alloying materialin Early Bronze Age Hungary indicates membershipof a class of elite sites, of which (O'Shea 1992), for instance, in the cemeteries at the Alaca Hiiyiik is an obvious parallel in inner Anatolia. confluence of the Maros and Tisza circa 2500 BC, falls During the second millennium the recovered artefactual within the horizon of early tin use in the easternMediter- material from Troy is less spectacular,and its external raneanand Near East (and pre-datesthe use of Bohemian links are as often shown by imported pottery forms or tin in central Europe by several hundred years), evidence of large scale production as by truly elite indicatingthat the communitiesof the middle and lower objects. While this has been read by minimalists as a Danube were linked to the Anatolian/Black Sea lessening of its importance,a more sophisticated inter- community in matters of elite technology. Similar pretation- in conjunction with its evident increase in considerationsapply to the early occurrenceof daggers size and productive capacity - is that the nature of the with arsenic enrichedsurfaces at Usatovo as early as the archaeological record changed as its economic and late fourthmillennium, or the long recognised analogies political role matured,much as the showy splendourof in the early second millenniumbetween the goldwork of Mycenae's shaft graves was succeeded by the more solid Troy and Transylvania(Kovacs 1999). prosperityof palatial architecture:the propensity to put That all these examples concern the movement of convertiblewealth in tombs, or to hide hoardsin times of small quantitiesof relatively precious items of material insecurity,leads to archaeologicalfame but is less telling or ostentatious technology is a reflection of the impor- evidence of a leading economic role than the substance tance of such long distance traffic both in spreadingnew of the site itself. The flashlight images affordedby these modes of production and consumption, and in creating early Bronze Age elite assemblages, however, give no the initial advantagewhich made possible the emergence doubt about the range of its contacts, in many directions, of complex sites such as Troy, which has no analogy already during the later third millennium: amber from (either in the third or second millennia) on the western Scandinavia, lapis lazuli from Afghanistan (which Black Sea coast or in the Danube catchment. It thus had reached northwest Anatolia via the Caucasus, perhaps the additionaladvantage of being a gateway community through Alaca where the closest similar examples are on the edge of the world of urban settlements, at the found, to judge from the typology of the battle axes from interface between the east Mediterraneanzone of urban Troy II [Treister 1996: 219-22]), silver, gold and tin economies capable of organising mass production (as from unidentifiable but distant sources, even the more shown by its wheelmade pottery) and the resource rich humble bone artefacts such as the occurrenceof a bone but less organised hinterland to which it gave access plaque of Castelluccio type, show far flung links to all (Sherratt1997: ch. 18). It is not surprisingin this context points of the compass, to the edges of the known world that its artefactualrepertoire has suggested to specialists (Korfmann2001b: 355-7). It is evident that even before (Barber1991: 54) that the site had a special role in textile 2000 BC this was an unusually well connected location, production,since this commodity is the major export in and that the crucial position which it occupied retained which such a settlement would have a decisive its strategic economic importance through the advantage, exchanging a manufacturedproduct for raw succeeding Middle and Late Bronze Age phases, down to materials. The appearanceof textile derived motifs on the last few centuriesof the second millennium. the third millennium pottery of Early Bronze Age

103 Anatolian Studies 2002 cultures of the middle and lower Danube (for example, colonies in this region, and one explanation for the Nagyrev) would fit well with such an interpretation(for eventual emergenceof the Hittite heartlandas a centre of example, Kovacs 1977: fig. 4; see Bona 1975). The political power in the middle of this economic axis. The relatively small volume of this traffic (and the inherent linkage between the Aegean and the western Black Sea difficulty of recognising both raw materialsand textiles through the Sea of Marmaraopened up a second axis in the archaeologicalrecord, for which see Sherratt1995) where this coastal traffic could be tapped. in no way diminishes its importance in the cultural The scale of Aegean maritimetransport was revolu- context of the time. tionised in the second millenniumby the introductionof It is not clear (at any stage in the BronzeAge) whether ships with sails, plying the route from the Levant along Aegean vessels passed along the Dardanellesand the Sea the south Anatoliancoast, and penetratingas far as Crete of Marmarainto the Black Sea, or whetherTroy acted as and probablyalso up the west Anatolian coast as far as a trans-shipment point or port of trade between the Hellespont. At the same time, vibrant Bronze Age independentcarriers (as Late Bronze Age Rhodes seems cultures with chariots, fortified settlements and an to have done, linkingpartly separate western Aegean and elaboratebronze metallurgyappeared in a zone from the Levanto-Cypriotcycles of shipping). Even in the second Carpathianbasin to the Pontic steppes, with related millennium,it is most unlikely that vessels the size of the groups as far as the Urals and on the steppes beyond. Uluburunwreck penetratedany furtherthan Troy itself, This markeda new scale of activity in the lands around though smaller craft may have continued the journey. the Black Sea. Troy's role at this time continued to be Alternately,goods may have been conveyed overlandto a that of a principalmaritime gateway between the urban Black Sea outlet, especially in the thirdmillennium when world and its immediatenorthern periphery. At the same quantitieswere small. This was probablyaccomplished time, its linkages within the Aegean and east Mediter- by routeson eitherside of Marmaraitself: eitheralong the raneanwere strengthenedand to some extent re-oriented, Gelibolu peninsula to reach the Black Sea coast via especially in the Late Bronze Age when the Greek Kanhgeqit,or along the southernside by way of Iznik and mainland saw a proliferationof palatial centres and an Izmit. Eitherof these routes, and the Bosphorustoo if it extension of maritime routes to Italy. The growing was used at this time, would have provided an interface volume of productionin western Anatolia is reflected in with coastal traffic aroundthe Black Sea, which even in its increase in area in Troy VI, in parallel with the the second millennium probably took place in canoes appearanceof sites of comparablesize and complexity ratherthan sailing vessels. elsewhere in the Aegean- even though only Knossos This Black Sea coastal traffic was of some antiquity, was to reach similar absolute dimensions (Whitelaw with its roots in Chalcolithic maritime exchange cycles 2001: with comparative charts figs 2.10, 2.11). Troy or even earlier littoral adaptations(Price 1993); but its continued to be a major player in the inter-regional vitality from the later fourthmillennium onward is likely exchanges of the time, a participationarising both from to have been a response to the spreadof ultimatelyNear its coastal location (like that of contemporary Easterninnovations carried to a wider culturalsphere by Millawanda-Miletus)and from its unique role in relation new routes both to the Caucasusand to centralAnatolia to Black Sea access. in the Early Bronze Age (Sherratt1997: fig. 18.1). The Nevertheless the scale of inter-Aegean exchanges location of Alaca Hiiyiik (presaging that of nearby should not be confused with the bulk transport of Bogazk6y-Hattusa) is symptomatic of north-south as processed organic liquid products- principallyoil and well as east-west links within Anatolia, and the rich wine - in the east Mediterraneanat this time, indicated cemetery at Ikiztepe near Bafra indicates one of the by the distributionin quantity of Canaanitejars in the potential points of articulation between the central Levant and Cyprus,and on the south Anatolianmaritime Anatolian and Black Sea tradingnetworks. This coastal route plied by the ship wrecked off Uluburun (Pulak trafficis likely to have precededany directAegean input, 1995). These routes articulatedwith the major artery and indeed the foundation of Early Bronze Age Troy across the Syrian saddle, which was the prime target of probably marks the beginning of a linkage between early Hittite expansionism, and whose major fortified Aegean trading networks (themselves stimulated in a centresmake Troyseem relativelyprovincial. Thereis an similar way by links from central Anatolia along the evident zonation in the volume and intensity of Bronze Meander valley route via Beycesultan) and this Black Age tradingactivity, in which Troyjoins the rest of the Sea cycle. The importance of the central Anatolian Aegean as an outer circle of participantsarrayed around north-southroute, from Cilicia or Malatyat tthenorthern a core area of more advanced economies whose semi- coast via Kiiltepe and the bend of the Halys, was both an processed productscirculated in much greaterquantities incentive for the foundation of Old Assyrian trading than in the area of their more distant trading-partners.

104 Easton, Hawkins, Sherrattand Sherratt

The apparent absence of trade in these bulk liquid These patternsevolved over the course of the second commodities at Troy, however, does not preclude the millennium- increasing in scale after the 16th century manufactureof other organicgoods there on an industrial when mainlandGreece became a more active participant, scale, and the continuingimportance of textile production growing to a peak in the 14th century, and changing (Blegen, Caskey, Rawson 1953). Part of this specialised characterduring the 13th century when less centralised production was probably exported to the Black Sea forms of trade (including a lively commerce in scrap coastal areas (since no comparableproduction centres are metal) threatenedto upset established systems of distri- known there, and where Troy retainedits advantage),and bution (Sherratt 2000). Coastal communities such as some part within the Aegean: references in Linear B Troy benefited from this enlarged scale of maritime tablets from Knossos and Pylos to female textile workers activity in the same way as the coastal cities of Cyprus, from Lemnos, Cnidos, Miletus and Aswija (Assuwa?) and the increasingly uncontrollable flows of material (Chadwick 1976) suggest that western Anatolia had a along the southernand western shores of Anatolia, form particularexpertise and reputationin this craft, and that the backgroundto Hittite military activity in the west. its productswould have been valued even in areas which One underlyingstructural change from this time onward now supportedtheir own textile industries. was the growing importanceof links to central Europe The Black Sea link gave access to other areas of via Italy and the Adriatic- an alternativeaccess route to specialist expertise: the importance of chariotry and resourcespreviously reachedby the Danubecorridor and horses is reflected in the occurrence of steppe types of partof a more direct linkage between the east and central horse gear for instance at Mycenae in the shaft grave Mediterranean. This resulted in a more pronounced period (Penner 1998), and such contacts must have been east/west axis of maritimetrade, in which the Black Sea channelled througheastern Thrace and the Troad(using played a graduallydiminishing role, until its importance land routes as well as maritimetransport in this instance). was revived with Greek penetrationof this sphere in the At the same time, Trojan consumers imported pottery seventh centuryBC. These changes in the final centuries (not in itself a valuable commodity,and thus indicativeof of the second millennium were directly mirroredin the routine exchanges which probably involved other fortunes of Troy, whose reduced importanceat this time materials as well) both from the Mycenaean area of is a sensitive barometerof this declining traffic. mainland Greece, other parts of the Aegean and from It is possible, therefore, both to exaggerate and to Cyprus. Importedwares includedboth open shapes used underestimate the role of Troy as Drehscheibe des as consumptionvessels and closed containershapes such Handels. By comparisonwith some of its Bronze Age as stirrupjars for processed commodities such as olive contemporaries, it was not metropolitan; but in the oil; and the Mycenaean painted ware was also locally context of its regional urban partnersit was a place of reproduced, in a process of import substitution substantialimportance, and in the eyes of its northern (Mommsen et al. 2001). neighbours it must have been the brightest light on the All of this testifies to regularengagement in maritime horizon. The Sea of Marmarawas not, duringthe Bronze traffic, carrying shipments which included quantities of Age, the entry point to routes which reached all the way everyday products as well as more valuable items. By across Eurasia; but it nevertheless gave access to the the later 13th century, Trojan pottery itself - small Danube, the rivers of the Pontic steppe and to the quantitiesof grey wares probablytravelling as part loads Caucasus,which providedimportant resources notably in in other cargoes- was reachingthe east Mediterranean, stone and metal. When other routes to the central including Cyprus and sites in the coastal Levant (Allen Mediterraneanand central Europe gave alternativeways 1991). Such cheap but identifiable items act as tracers of acquiringsuch resources,towards the end of the second for patterns of trade whose principal incentive was millennium, this importance slackened; and this phase undoubtedly in the movement of more valuable lasted throughthe early centuriesof the first millennium materials. Occasionalfinds in exceptionalcircumstances BC, afterwhich its significancerevived and in the seventh indicate the characterand direction of such traffic. The centuryGreek colonists penetratedalong its coasts. Uluburunwreck, with its tons of copper ingots, its glass, The economic importance of the Black Sea was ivory, tin, textiles and terebinthresin, demonstratesnot decisively enlarged in the Hellenistic period when only the volume of traffic along major maritimearteries extensive eastern contacts were opened up; and by the but also the catchment area of smaller items, which fourth century AD it had reached new heights as the include a chacteristicbronze axe of Lozovo/PobitKamyk terminus of a northern Silk Road. The sites of Troy, type otherwise known only from the lower Danube area, Byzantium and its enlarged successor Constantinople and implying transmissionvia the Sea of Marmaraand mark these three stages of growth and together form an thus most probablythrough Troy itself (Buchholz 1999). interruptedsuccession of major settlements where the

105 Anatolian Studies 2002 urban Mediterraneanmet a wider world, and where Bona, I 1975: Die MittlereBronzezeit Ungarns und ihre wealth accumulated from the encounter. Like the siidostliche Beziehungen.Budapest Venetian organisersof the Fourth Crusade in 1204, the Bryce, T R 1974: 'Some geographical and political legendary Greek warriors marshalledby Homer into a aspects of Mursilis' Arzawancampaign' Anatolian consolidatednational epic in the late eighth centuryknew Studies 24: 103-16 a site worth sacking- at the entrypoint to the Black Sea Buchholz, H-G 1999: 'Ein auBergew6hnliches and the wealth to which it gave access. Steinzepter im 6stlichen Mittelmeer' Prdhis- torische Zeitschrift74(1): 68-78 Conclusions Biiyiikkolanci,M 2000: 'Excavations on Ayasuluk Hill We have approached the questions raised at the in Sel9uk/Turkey. A contribution to the early Tiibingensymposium from our differing perspectives as history of Ephesus' in F Krinzinger(ed.), Die Agdis specialists in Anatolian or Aegean archaeology and in und das westliche Mittelmeer.Vienna: 37-41 Hittitology. Our findings, however, are entirely Chadwick,J 1976: The Mycenaean World.Cambridge congruent: that Troy in the Late Bronze Age had a Din9ol, A M 1998a: 'Die Entdeckung des Felsmonu- citadel and lower city appropriateto the capital of a ments in Hatip' TUBA-AR1: 27-35 significant regional power in western Anatolia; that it 1998b: 'The rock monument of the Great King can most probably be identified as Wilusa; and that it Kuruntaand its hieroglyphic inscription' in S Alp, occupied a position in the trading networks of its day A Suiel (eds), Acts of the Third International which, in its context, can fairly be described as pivotal. Congress of Hittitology.Ankara: 159-66 Consequentlywe think that the criticisms raised against Dorpfeld,W 1894: Troia1893. Bericht iiber die im Jahre Professor Korfmannare unjustified. 1893 in Troja veranstalteten Ausgrabungen. Leipzig Bibliography 1902: Troiaund Ilion. Athens Adams, R M 1981: Heartland of Cities: Surveys of Easton, D F 2002: Schliemanns Excavations at Troia Ancient Settlement and Land use on the Central 1870-1873. Mainz am Rhein Floodplain of the Euphrates.Chicago Frantz-Szabo,G, Unal, A 1983: 'Lalanda' Reallexikon Allen, S Heuck, 1991: 'Late Bronze Age grey wares in der Assyriologie 6: 437 Cyprus' in J A Barlow, D Bolger, B Kling (eds), Garstang,J, Gumey, 0 R 1959: The Geography of the Cypriot Ceramics. Reading the Prehistoric Record Hittite Empire.London (University Museum monograph74). University of Gates, M-H 1996: 'Archaeology in Turkey' American Pennsylvania:151-67 Journal of Archaeology 100: 319 Alp, S 1980: 'Die hethitischenTontafelentdeckungen auf Goetze, A 1933: Die Annalen des Mursilis. Leipzig dem Ma,at-h6yiik' Belleten 44: 25-59 1940: Kizzuwatna and the Problems of Hittite Barber, E J W 1991: Prehistoric Textiles. the Devel- Geography.New Haven opment of Cloth in the Neolithic and Bronze Ages Gonnet, H 2001: 'La ville hittite de Purandaa-t-elle ete with Special Referenceto the Aegean. Princeton. decouverte?'Orient-Express 2001/4: 120-1 Becker, H, Fassbinder, J, Jansen, H G 1993: Greaves, A M, Helwing, B 2001: 'Archaeology in 'MagnetischeProspektion in der Untersiedlungvon Turkey'American Journal of Archaeology 105: 506 Troia 1992' Studia Troica3: 117-34 Giiterbock,H G 1986: 'Troy in the Hittite texts?' in M J Beckman, G 1996: Hittite Diplomatic Texts.Atlanta Mellink (ed.), Troy and the Trojan War. Bryn Becks, R 2002: 'Bemerkungen zu den Bestat- Mawr: 33-44 tungsplatzenvon Troia VI' in R Aslan, S Blum, G Hawkins, J D 1990: 'The new inscription from the Kastl, D Thumm(eds), Mauerschau:Festschriftfiir Siidburg of Bogazkoy-Hattusa' Archdologischer M. KorfmannI. Remshalden-Griiunbach:295-306 Anzeiger:305-14 Berliner Morgenpost 2001: 'Traumgebilde', interview 1995: TheHieroglyphic Inscription of the SacredPool with ProfessorFrank Kolb, 17 July Complexat Hattusa (StBot Beicheft 3). Wiesbaden Blegen, C W, Caskey, J L, Rawson, M 1953: Troy: 1998: 'Tarkasnawaking of Mira' Anatolian Studies Excavations Conducted by the University of 48: 1-31 Cincinnati 1932-1938. Volume III The Sixth Heinhold-Krahmer,S 1977: Arzawa. Untersuchungenzu Settlement.Princeton seiner Geschichte nach den hethitischen Quellen. Blindow, N, Jansen, H G, Schroer, K 2000: Heidelberg 'Geophysikalische Prospektion 1998/99 in der - 1983: 'Kuwalija' Reallexikonder Assyriologie VI/5- Unterstadtvon Troia' Studia Troica 10: 123-33 6:397

106 Easton, Hawkins, Sherrattand Sherratt

- 1994a: 'Milawa(n)da' Reallexikon der Assyriologie 2002c: Website at www.uni-tuebingen.de/dekanat- VIII/3-4: 188-9 geschichte/ag-ag_aktuel,as at 21 May 2002 - 1994b: 'Mira' Reallexikonder Assyriologie VIII/3-4: Korfmann,M 1986: 'Troy: topographyand navigation' 218-20 in M Mellink (ed.), Troy and the Trojan War: a Hertel, D 2001: Troia.Archdologie, Geschichte,Mythos. Symposiumheld at Bryn Mawr College, October Munich 1984. Bryn Mawr: 1-16 2002: 'TroiaVI eine Residenz(stadt)?- Der archaol- - 1991: 'Troia - Reinigungs- und Dokumentations- ogische Befund von Burg und Untersiedlung(leicht arbeiten 1987, Ausgrabungen 1988 und 1989' veranderteFassung des beim TiibingerSymposium Studia Troica 1: 1-34 gehaltenenVortrags)' available as Anlage 8 at Kolb - 1992a: 'Troia - Ausgrabungen 1990 und 1991' 2002c Studia Troica2: 1-41 Hoffner,H A 1982: 'The Milawataletter augmentedand -1992b: 'Die prahistorischeBesiedlung siidlich der reinterpreted'Archiv fur OrientforschungBeiheft Burg TroiaVI/VII' Studia Troica2: 123-46 19: 130-7 1993: 'Troia Ausgrabungen1992' Studia Troica3: Horden,P, Purcell,N 2000: The CorruptingSea: a Study 1-38 of MediterraneanHistory. Oxford -1994: 'Troia- Ausgrabungen1993' Studia Troica4: van den Hout, T P J 1998: Der Ulmitesub-Vertrag:eine 1-50 prosopographische Untersuchung.Wiesbaden - 1996: 'Troia- Ausgrabungen1994' Studia Troica6: Houwink ten Cate, P H J 1983-1984: 'Sidelights on the 1-64 Ahhiyawa question from Hittite vassal and royal -1997: 'Troia-Ausgrabungen 1996' Studia Troica7: correspondence'Jaarbericht 'Ex Oriente Lux' 28: 1-72 33-79 - 1998: 'Troia- Ausgrabungen1997' Studia Troica8: Hueber, F, Riorden, E 1994: Plan von Troia 1994. 1-70 Published as a supplementto Studia Troica4 - 1999: 'Troia- Ausgrabungen1998' Studia Troica9: Jablonka,P 1995: 'Ausgrabungensiidlich der Unterstadt 1-34 von Troia im Bereich des Troia VI-Verteidigungs- - 2000: 'Troia Ausgrabungen 1999' Studia Troica grabens. Grabungsbericht1994' Studia Troica 5: 10: 1-52 39-80 -2001 la: 'Troia- Ausgrabungen2000' Studia Troica 1996: 'Ausgrabungenim Siiden der Unterstadtvon 11: 1-50 Troia im Bereich des Troia VI-Verteidigungs- -2001b: 'Troia als Drehscheibedes Handels im 2. und grabens. Grabungsbericht1995' Studia Troica 6: 3. vorchristlichenJahrtausend' in Troja:Traum und 65-96 Wirklichkeit.Begleitband zur Ausstellung 'Troia- Jablonka, P, K6nig, H, Riehl, S 1994: 'Ein Verteidi- Traumund Wirklichkeit'.Stuttgart: 355-68 gungsgraben in der Unterstadt von Troia VI. Korfmann, M et al. 2001: Troia - Traum und Grabungsbericht1993' Studia Troica4: 51-74 Wirklichkeit.Begleitband zur Ausstellung 'Troia- Jansen, H G, Kienlin, T, Patzelt, A 0, Waldh6r, M, Traumund Wirklichkeit'.Stuttgart Wilhelm, J 1998: 'Geophysikalische Prospektion Kodak, S 1981: 'Western neighbours of the Hittites' 1996/97 in der Unterstadtvon Troia' Studia Troica Eretz-Israel 15: 12*-16* 8: 275-86 Kovacs, T 1977: The BronzeAge in Hungary. Budapest Kayan, I 1997: 'Geomorphological evolution of the 1999: Prdhistorische Goldschdtze aus dem Ciplak valley and geo-archaeological interpreta- UngarischenNationalmuseum. Budapest tions concerning the lower city of Troia' Studia Lloyd, S 1972: Beycesultan III.1. London Troica7: 489-508 Lloyd, S, Mellaart,J 1965: Beycesultan II. London Klengel, H 1990: 'Anatolische K6nigtuimer der Macqueen,J G 1968: 'Geographyand history in western Hethiterzeit' X. Turk Tarih Kongresi. Kongreye Asia Minor in the second millennium BC' sunulan bildiriler II Cilt. Ankara:565-76 Anatolian Studies 18: 169-85 Kolb, F 2002a: 'Vor Troia sinken alle Fiktionen in den Messmer, E und Mitarbeiter 1998: 'Troia Staub' SiiddeutscheZeitung 8 January2002 TopographischerPlan' Studia Troica8: inside back 2002b: 'BEinneuer Troia-Mythos? Traum und cover Wirklichkeitauf dem Grabungshiigelvon Hisarlik' Mellaart, J 1968: 'Anatolian trade with Europe and in H-J Behr, G Biegel, H Castritius(eds), Troia:Ein Anatolian geography and culture provinces in the Mythos in Geschichte und Rezeption. Braun- Late Bronze Age' Anatolian Studies 18: 187-202 schweig: 8-40 Mellaart,J, Murray,A 1995: Beycesultan111.2. London

107 Anatolian Studies 2002

Meric, R, Mountjoy, P 2002 forthcoming: Istanbuler 1875: Troyand its Remains.P Smith (ed.), translation Mitteilungen52 D Schmitz. London Momigliano, N 2000: 'Bronze Age Carian Iasos' 1884: Troja: Results of the Latest Researches and Anatolian Archaeology6: 12 Discoveries on the Site of Homer s Troy.London 2001: 'Bronze Age Carianlasos' Anatolian Archae- 1891: Bericht fiber die Ausgrabungen in Troja im ology 7: 15 Jahre 1890. Leipzig Mommsen, H, Hertel, D, Mountjoy,P A 2001: 'Neutron Sherratt,A 1993: 'What would a Bronze Age world activation analysis of the pottery from Troy in the system look like? Relations between temperate Berlin Schliemann collection' Archdologischer Europe and the Mediterraneanin later prehistory' Anzeiger Heft 2: 169-211 Journal of EuropeanArchaeology 1(2): 1-57 Neve, P 1992: Hattusa - Stadt der Gotter und Tempel. 1995: 'Fata morgana:illusion and reality in Greek- Antike WeltSondernummer. Mainz am Rhein barbarian relations' Cambridge Archaeological Niemeier, W-D 1997: 'Milet 1994-1995' Archdolo- Journal 5(1): 139-56 gischer Anzeiger: 189-248 - 1997: 'Troy, Maikop, Altyn Depe: Bronze Age 1999: 'Mycenaeans and Hittites in war in western urbanism and its periphery' in A Sherratt (ed.), Asia Minor' Aegaeum 19: 141-55 Economy and Society in Prehistoric Europe: Niemeier, B, Niemeier, W-D forthcoming: 'Milet' ChangingPerspectives. Edinburgh:457-70 ArchdologischerAnzeiger Sherratt,A, Sherratt,S 1998: 'Small worlds: interaction O'Shea, J 1992: 'A radiocarbon-basedchronology for and identity in the ancient Mediterranean'in E H the Maros Group of southeast Hungary' Antiquity Cline and D Harris-Cline(eds), TheAegean and the 65: 97-102 Orient in the Second Millennium. Proceedings of Otten, H 1961: 'Zur Lokalisierung von Arzawa und the 50th AnniversarySymposium, Cincinnati, 18- Lukka'Journal of CuneiformStudies 15: 112-13 20th April 1999. Aegaeum 18. University of Liege: - 1988: Die Bronzetafel aus Bogazkoy. Ein 329-42 Staatsvertrag Tuthaliyas IV (StBot Beiheft 1). Sherratt,S 2000: 'Circulationof metals and the end of Wiesbaden the Bronze Age in the eastern Mediterranean'in C 1989: 'Die 1986 in Bogazk6y gefundene Bronzetafel. Pare (ed.) Metals Make The WorldGo Round. The 1. Ein hethitischerStaatsvertrag des 13. Jh. v. Chr.' Supply and Circulation of Metals in Bronze Age InnsbruckerBeitrdge zur Sprachwissenschaft42: Europe. Oxford: 82-98 7-20 Sherratt, S 2001: 'Potemkin palaces and route-based Ozgiic, T 1988: Inandlktepe.An ImportantCult Centrein economies' in S Voutsaki and John Killen (eds), the Old Hittite Period. Ankara Economy and Politics in the Mycenaean Palace Penner,S 1998: SchliemannsSchachtgrdberrund und der States. Proceedings of a Conjerence held on 1-3 europdische Nordosten. Studien zur Herkunft der July 1999 in the Faculty of Classics, Cambridge friihmykenischen Streitwagenausstattung (Saar- (Cambridge Philological Society Supplementary briicker Beitrage zur Altertumskunde; Bd. 60). Volume 27). Cambridge:214-38 Bonn. Singer, I 1983: 'Takuhlinuand Haya: two governors in Poetto, M 1993: L'iscizione luvio-geroglifica di Yalburt the Ugarit letter from Tel Aphek' TelAviv 10: 3-25 (Studia Mediterranea8). Pavia Sperling, J 1991: 'The last phase of Troy VI and Price, R P S 1993: 'The west Pontic maritime inter- Mycenaeanexpansion' Studia Troica 1: 155-8 action sphere: a long-term structure in Balkan Starke, F 1997: 'Troia im Kontext des historisch- prehistory' OxfordJournal of Archaeology 12(2): politischen und sprachlichenUmfeldes Kleinasiens 175-96 im 2. Jahrtausend'Studia Troica7: 447-87 Pulak, C 1995: 'Das Schiffswrack von Uluburun' in 1999: 'Lukka'Der neue Pauly 7: 505-6 Deutsche Gesellschaft zur F6rderung der Unter- 2000a: 'Miletos' Der Neue Pauly 8: 170-3 wasserarchaologie (eds), In Poseidons Reich. 2000b: 'Mira' Der Neue Pauly 8: 250-5 Archdologie unter Wasser.Mainz: 43-58 Steiner,G 1964: 'Die Ahhiyawa-Frageheute' Saeculum Rollig, W 1988: 'Lukka' Reallexikon der Assyriologie 15: 365-92 VII/3-4: 161-3 1998: "'Grossk6nige" in Anatolien von Labama- Rose, C B 1997: 'The 1996 post-BronzeAge excavations Hattusili I bis zu den Achaimeniden' Eothen 9: at Troia' Studia Troica7: 73-110 151-81 Schliemann, H 1874: Atlas TrojanischerAlterthiimer. StuttgarterNachrichten 2001: 'Korfmannwehrt sich' 26 Leipzig July

108 Easton, Hawkins,Sherratt and Sherratt

Suel, A 1999: 'The name of Ortak6yin the Hittiteperiod' Whitelaw,T 2001: 'From sites to communities:defining XII. Turk Tarih Kongresi. Kongreye sunulan the human dimensions of Minoan urbanism' in K bildiriler. I. Cilt. Ankara:118-28 Branigan (ed.), Urbanism in the Aegean Bronze Treister, M 1996: 'The Trojan Treasures: description, Age. Sheffield: 15-37 chronology and historical context' in I Antonova, Wilhelm, G 1995: 'Die Tontafelfunde der 2. V Tolstikov, M Treister, The Gold of Troy: Ausgrabungskampagne 1994 in Kuakli' Searchingfor Homer s Fabled City. London: 197- Mitteilungen der Deutschen Orient-Gesellschaft 234 127: 37-42 Walter, U 2001: 'Winning Helen - myth, history or 1997: Kuwakli-Sarissa,Band 1/1. Rahden/Westf. invention?' Frankfurter Allgemeine Zeitung Young, R S no date: Gordion.A Guide to the Excavations (English edition) 26 July: 7 and Museum.Ankara

109