Hostname: page-component-848d4c4894-8kt4b Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-06-16T07:38:08.397Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Regional and Local Schools of Metalwork in Early Bronze Age Anatolia Part II

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  23 December 2013

Jak Yakar
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Extract

This is one of the most eventful periods in the early history of preliterate Anatolia. Urban and rural settlements in western Anatolia, in the central Anatolian plateau including the Pontus region and in the eastern highlands show signs of conflagration. Archaeological surveys carried out in north-central Anatolia and in the Konya plain suggest that in some cases permanent settlements were abandoned at different phases of the EB III. These destructions were no doubt caused by unrecorded events such as inter-regional rivalry between city-states, intruding pastoralists, incursions by foreign armies (e.g. from Mesopotamia/N. Syria), invasions by nomadic hordes and natural catastrophes (Yakar 1981a: 106–7). On the basis of field surveys and a few excavations of limited scope alone one cannot establish a pattern of destructions which could be attributed to one particular factor described above. I prefer to refer to this period as “emerging dynasties” because monumental architecture in some of the major sites points to centrally located administrative complexes (palaces?) which, taken together with unprecedented mortuary practices (e.g. Alacahöyük Royal Tombs), may confirm the existence of ruling aristocracies in Anatolia.

Type
Research Article
Information
Anatolian Studies , Volume 35 , December 1985 , pp. 25 - 38
Copyright
Copyright © The British Institute at Ankara 1985

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

32 For slightly diverging views on the subject compare Mellaart 1981, Burney and Lang 1971:62–73, Yakar 1976 and Mellink 1956:54–8.

33 The Yerten (Korkuteli) material from southwest Turkey is made of ternary alloy with high tin content (Moorey and Schweizer 1974:113). The tin-bronze tanged flat dagger could be a good indication that some of the Yortan finds or others from cemeteries in the Balıkesir and Afyon regions could well be of EB III date.

34 For a distribution of arsenic coated copper objects see Eaton and McKerrell 1976:176–7.

35 The polymetallic copper deposits in these countries make them a likely source of tin. See also notes 20–1.

36 Personal communication.

37 The EB III metalwork from Tarsus consists of a gold nail-headed pin and four earrings (Goldman 1958:300, fig. 434:1, 3–6). The workmanship of the latter shows a certain expertise in gold casting and hammering techniques, but as no jewellery moulds were found at Tarsus one may infer that this jewellery was imported either from the northwest or north-central Anatolia (de Jesus 1980:89).

Despite the close proximity of the silver-rich deposits in Akdağ and Bulgar madeni (Yakar 1976:121; de Jesus 1980: Map 16) no silver objects were recovered from Tarsus.

38 For a thorough examination of the crescentic axeheads from the Near East see Tubb, J. N. in Iraq XLIV, 1982, 1–12CrossRefGoogle Scholar.

39 Therefore the elegant, narrow flanged-back crescentic axe from Ur could well be an “import” from Anatolia or, more likely, Syria, or at least produced from a non-Mesopotamian type in local assemblage. See Tubb 1982.

40 Two fragments of this alabaster stela were the subject of an interesting article by Mellink, M.: “An Akkadian Illustration of a Campaign in Cilicia”, Anatolia VII, 1963, 101–15Google Scholar.