Questions, Approaches, and Dialogues
in Eastern Mediterranean Archaeology
Studies in Honor of Marie-Henriette
and Charles Gates
Edited by
Ekin Kozal, Murat Akar, Ya÷mur Heffron,
Çiler Çilingiro÷lu, Tevfik Emre ùerifo÷lu, Canan ÇakÕrlar,
Sinan Ünlüsoy, and Eric Jean
2017
Ugarit-Verlag
Book design: Sinan KÕlÕç, Alef Editorial Design
Ekin Kozal, Murat Akar, Ya÷mur Heffron, Çiler Çilingiro÷lu, Tevfik Emre ùerifo÷lu, Canan ÇakÕrlar, Sinan Ünlüsoy, and Eric Jean (Eds.):
Questions, Approaches, and Dialogues in Eastern Mediterranean Archaeology. Studies in Honor of Marie-Henriette and Charles Gates Alter Orient und Altes Testament 445
© 2017 Ugarit-Verlag – Buch- und Medienhandel Münster
www.ugarit-verlag.com All rights reserved. No part of this publication may be reproduced,
stored in a retrieval system, or transmitted, in any form or by any means,
electronic, mechanical, photo-copying, recording, or otherwise,
without the prior permission of the publisher. Printed in Germany
ISBN 978-3-86835-251-1
ISSN 0931-4296 Printed on acid-free paper
Marie-Henriette and Charles Gates at Dulles airport in Washington, DC, 2013 P H O T O B Y C A R O L IN E G A T E S
Marie-Henriette Gates sorting pottery at Godin Tepe, 1973
Charles Gates sorting pottery at Godin Tepe, 1973
P H O T O B Y A . V A N A S P H O T O B Y A . V A N A S
Contents
•• ••
Editors’ Foreword 13 Tabula Gratulatoria 16
Marie-Henriette Gates: Publications 19
Charles Gates: Publications 23
Life at Kinet Höyük 27
ROZ SCHNEIDER — SALIMA IKRAM
PART 1 NEOLITHIC AND CHALCOLITHIC
1 ••••Temples as Sacred Houses: A Case Study from Tepe Gawr••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••37
SEVİL BALTALI TIRPAN
2 ••••The Neolithisation of the Northeastern Corner of the Mediterranea• •••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••53
CÉDRIC BODET
3 ••••Some Clay Finds from PPNB Gritille: Stamps, Sealings and Toke• ••• ••77
CHRISTINE ESLICK — MARY M. VOIGT
4 ••••Negotiating Peace, Enduring Conflict:
A Diachronic View on Prehistoric Warfare in the Eastern Aegean 97
SİNAN ÜNLÜSOY — ÇİLER ÇİLİNGİROĞLU
PART 2 EARLY BRONZE AGE
5 ••••Thoughts on Houses and Households in the Early Trans-Caucasian Culture:
A View from Yanik Tepe in Northwestern Iran 127
GEOFFREY D. SUMMERS
6 ••••The Late Early Bronze Age Regional Catastrophe: A View from Cilic•••• 151
TEVFİK EMRE ŞERİFOĞLU
7 ••••Early Bronze Age Graves and Burial Customs in Mezraa Höyüƴ 179
ǁƫƫƫ CONTENTS
8 Anyone Out There?
Looking for Life in Early 3rd Millennium Central Anatolia 201
THOMAS ZIMMERMANN
PART 3 MIDDLE AND LATE BRONZE AGES
9 Late Middle Bronze Age International Connections:
An Egyptian Style Kohl Pot from Alalakh 215
MURAT AKAR
10 A White Painted Pendant Line Style Jug Fragment
from Tatarlı Höyük 229
ÖZLEM OYMAN-GİRGİNER
11 Hittite Gods Abroad: Evidence for Hittite Diplomatic Activities? 243
HERMANN GENZ
12 “A Goatherd Shall Not Enter!”
Observations on Pastoralism and Mobility in Hittite Anatolia 257
N. İLGİ GERÇEK
13 Anatolian Lead Figurines: A Stocktaking 279
YAĞMUR HEFFRON
14 Pot-marks as a Feature of Interregional Connectivity
at Tell Atchana-Alalakh: Evidence from the 2006–2012 Excavations 307
MARA T. HOROWITZ
15 The Bay of İskenderun Landscape Archaeology and Survey Project: Dutlu Tarla and Dağılbaz Höyük —
Three Millennia of Settlement in the İskenderun Plain 331
ANN E. KILLEBREW — BRANDON R. OLSON — GUNNAR LEHMANN
16 La cornaline dans les sources paléo-assyriennes 353
CÉCILE MICHEL
17 Facing Muwattalli:
Some Thoughts on the Visibility and Function of the Rock Reliefs
at Sirkeli Höyük, Cilicia 371
•••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••• CONTENTS
18 Early and Middle Bronze Age Cylinder Seal Impressions
from Salat Tepe 389
A. TUBA ÖKSE
19 Revisiting the Issue of Late Bronze II Drab Ware with Potmarks 413
REMZİ YAĞCI
20 Secondary Smelting:
The Analysis of Three Copper-Based Samples from Kinet Höyük 429
K. ASLIHAN YENER — GONCA DARDENİZ
21 Çine-Tepecik Yerleşmesine Ait Figürlü Miken Seramiği 439
SEVİNÇ GÜNEL
PART 4 IRON AGE
22 The Performance of Neo-Assyrian Prophecy in the Temple:
an Archaeological-Textual Approach 459
SELİM F. ADALI — ERKAN AKBULUT
23 Lycia and the Hatay:
Understanding Communication between Coast and Interior 485
TAMAR HODOS
24 Ritual Landscapes and Cultural Identities in Ionia:
Evidence from the Rural Cult Places of Klazomenai 501
ELİF KOPARAL
25 Eighth Century BCE Mortaria at Kinet Höyük 521
GUNNAR LEHMANN
26 Greek and Native Contact in Transcaucasian Iberia 535
JACQUES MORIN
27 Women and Music in Ancient Anatolia: The Iconographic Evidence 555
TUNA ŞARE
28 A Seal from Toprakkale:
Selective Emulation of Assyrian Elements in Urartian Art 581
•• CONTENTS
29 The Pottery of the Latest Iron IA Phase at Tell Tayinat, Amuq 601
ELİF ÜNLÜ
PART 5 HELLENISTIC AND ROMAN
30 Second-in-Rank Local Producers of Megarian Bowls
in the Aegean and Elsewhere 619
JAN BOUZEK
31 Pre-Classical Lithic Sites in Western Rough Cilicia 631
NICHOLAS RAUH
32 The “Sacrilegious, Accursed and Tomb-breaker”:
Sarcophagus Re-use at Aphrodisias 647
ESEN ÖĞÜŞ
33 Miniature Cream Vessels
from Tatarlı Höyük Dated to the Hellenistic Period 667
HAYRİYE AKIL
PART 6 LATE ANTIQUE TO OTTOMAN
34 Size Matters!
Scale and Demography of the Deli Halil Settlement 683
FÜSUN TÜLEK
35 Tracing the Hoof-prints of Byzantine History:
Horses and Horse Breeding in the Middle Byzantine Period 699
FİLİZ TÜTÜNCÜ-ÇAĞLAR
36 Getting Smashed and Ending up in the Bottom of a Pit:
The Kinet Beakers and their Tragic Fate 719
FRANCA COLE — SCOTT REDFORD
37 Bronze Surgical Instruments from Tüpraş Field
and the Islamic-Byzantine Medical Trade 735
ASA EGER
38 Ottoman Identity as Material Culture 761
ǃƫ CONTENTS
PART 7 ARCHAEOLOGICAL SCIENCE, HERITAGE AND ETHNOARCHAEOLOGY
39 Synthesis of Geoarchaeological Research
around Kinet Höyük, Hatay, Turkey 771
TIMOTHY BEACH — SHERYL LUZZADDER-BEACH — JONATHAN M. FLOOD
40 Regional and Long-Distance Movements of Animals and Animal Parts in Ancient Turkey:
the Zooarchaeological Evidence 803
CANAN ÇAKIRLAR
41 Dove Cots and Dove Towers in the Kayseri Region 821
BEN CLAASZ COOCKSON
42 Art or Artifact?
How Museum Presentation Influences Definitions 837
ERICA HUGHES
43 A New Interpretation of Beads
in their Archaeological and Cultural Context 849
SİNAN KILIÇ
10
A White Painted Pendant Line Style Jug Fragment
from Tatarlı Höyük
Özlem Oyman-Girginer 1
Abstract
Tatarlı Höyük (Fig. 1a) is located 24 km east of Ceyhan in the province of Adana. The mound, which stands out with its dimensions and its location among the ancient set-tlements in the Cilician Plain, was first discovered by M.W. Seton-Williams during the
Cilician survey in 1951. 2 During the course of the Ceyhan Survey in 2005, this mound
was visited by a team that included myself under the direction of K. Serdar Girginer. 3
The excavations of Tatarlı Höyük, 4 which began in 2007, again under Girginer’s direction,
suggest that an uninterrupted settlement from the Chalcolithic to the Hellenistic Period
existed on this mound. 5 In this paper, a fragment of a White Painted Pendent Line Style
(WP PLS) jug unearthed on a stone paved surface dating to the Middle Bronze Age (MBA) will be discussed. It is one of the earliest artifacts that show Cypro-Anatolian connections in the 2nd millennium BC. This find will be presented here with respect to interrelations between different regions in the Eastern Mediterranean and its chronological implications.
Introduction
The stone paved area (Fig. 1b), which was exposed in trenches BA 187 and AZ 187 located to the east of the Tatarlı Höyük citadel and to the west of monumental Building A, produced artifacts providing important evidence. The 25 m² portion of this stone pavement uncovered thus far was destroyed party due to Hellenistic pitting. This pavement was covered with a thin but compact soil floor. Almost 18 m² of this area was elaborately arranged by flat and bulky stones. A deep basalt
1 Çukurova Üniversitesi Arkeoloji Bölümü, Balcalı Mahallesi Sarıçam/Adana, Turkey.
2 Seton-Williams 1954, 128–129, 170, no. 39.
3 Girginer 2007, 177.
4 Girginer and Oyman-Girginer et.al. 2010; Girginer and Oyman-Girginer et al. 2011;
Girginer 2012 and Girginer and Oyman-Girginer et al. 2014.
5 Especially apart from the 2nd Millennium BC bullae, cylinders and stamp seals, for
230 ÖZLEM OyMAn-GirGinEr
offering vessel (?) was placed in the middle of the stone-paved floor. At first, the Hellenistic pits created difficulties in finding an undisturbed context to help date the architecture of Building A correctly. However, excavations of the 2013 season prove that the stone pavement in question still continues in patches under Build-ing A. So, it became clear that this pavement belongs to an earlier phase of this building. The material discovered on the stone pavement also presents evidence for the dating of these architectural remains.
On the northern part of the stone pavement in trench AZ 187, during the season of 2011, eight bird-shaped vessels, a ring-shaped vessel, a bull rhyton 6 and
a fragment of a handle with an “ankh” sign were unearthed. An associated female figurine has parallels with those from Kinet Höyük, 7 Alalakh, 8 Tilmen Höyük, 9
Sirkeli Höyük 10 and other Syrian settlements. 11 The WP PLS jug fragment from
Tatarlı Höyük, which is the focus of this paper, was found on the southern part of the stone pavement, located in trench BA 187.
The fragment in question has a round outflaring rim and a cylindrical nar-row neck. The oval-sectioned handle runs from the mouth to the neck (Fig. 2a-c). It has a fine, well-fired, cream-colored fabric, was self-slipped (5y 8/2), and the polish on the surface has been partially preserved. Painting was applied to the interior of the mouth, on the handle and on the body of the jug. The paint-ing on the handle was applied as five alternatpaint-ing oblique stripes. On the body there are six vertical stripes alternating with a wavy line. The wavy lines were painted in reddish brown (5yr 4/4), but the stripes and vertical lines have a darker color (7.5yr 2.5/1). These colors were applied in dull tones, and it seems that the colors are partly worn off. P. Åström points out that the earlier versions of this style were painted with bright red colors, but the later ones have a dull black color. 12 So, we suggest that the fragment from Tatarlı Höyük is certainly
one of the later versions of WP PLS.
6 These archeological artifacts will be published by the Tatarlı Höyük team.
7 Gates 2000, 82, 98, fig. 7, n.8.
8 Woolley 1955, 244 pl. LIV; yener-yazıcıoğlu 2010, 237, A03-r1023 (topsoil); 239,
A03-r1284+A03-r1328 (Period: MBIIC). Similar figurines were also discovered in the settlements of the Amuq Plain, Tell Judaidah and Chatal Höyük, see Pruß 2010, 20–21, 57–58, pl. 4–5.
9 Duru 2003, 26, pl. 36 n.1,3
10 novak-Kozal 2013, 417, 428, pl. 12; Kozal-novak 2013, 235.
11 Zincirli (von Luschan 1943, 62, pl.76, 34a-b), Hama H (Fugmann 1958, 90, pl. 10,
fig.110, 117, 124; Badre 1980, 164–165, pl. 1, nr. Hama 12, 19), Ebla (Matthiae 1965, 185, pl. 73.1; Marchetti 2001, 349 no. 260, 351 no. 298, pl. 114; Badre 1980, 206, pl. 12 nr. Mardikh 18, 218 pl. 14, nr. Mardikh 75), Tell Afis (Michele and Pedrosi 2012, 173, fig. 3).
231 A WHITE PAInTED PEnDAnT LInE STyLE JuG FrAGMEnT FrOM TATArLI HÖyÜK
Fig. 1a The view from the southeast of Tatarlı Höyük.
232 ÖZLEM OyMAn-GirGinEr
WP PLS examples have been discovered in Cyprus, Crete, 13 Egypt, the Eastern
Mediterranean and Anatolia. However, the number of Anatolian examples is quite limited, so this sherd of WP PLS unearthed in Tatarlı Höyük is very important in this respect. WP PLS is very common in Tell el-Dab’a in Egypt. One of the three most popular styles among White Painted Wares (WP) in Egypt is WP PLS. 14 Here,
this ware makes its first appearance in layer G and becomes more common in layer E/1, but its quantity reduces from layer D/3 onwards. The latest occurrence of the ware is in layer D/2. 15 Layers G and F of Tell el-Dab’a are dated to the 13th
Dynasty, so they were approximately contemporary with the last phase of MB II and the transitional phase to MB IIB. 16 According to M. Bietak, WP PLS makes
its first appearance in ca. 1720 BC in Tell el-Dab’a and was widespread between 1630–1600 BC, finally disappearing by 1580 BC. W. G. Dever dates layer F of Tell el-Dab’a to the first half of the 18th century BC, and layer D/3 to 1575 BC. He also suggests that layer E/1 is probably dated to 1675–1625 BC. On the other hand, S. W. Manning proposed another date for layer D/3: 1640–1600 BC. In general, it seems that the maximum timespan for the layers including the artifacts in WP PLS could be assigned to 1725–1575 BC. 17
A fragment of a jug in WP PLS was also unearthed in Kahun in Egypt. W.M.F. Petrie pointed out that it was found together with a number of ceramics from the 12th dynasty in a deep chamber. 18 This fragment with a round outflaring rim and
a cylindrical neck was partially preserved. It has an oval-sectioned handle run-ning from mouth to neck. This jug is well-fired, has light brown fine clay including sporadic medium sized grit. Its light brown outer surface was finished with a light polish, and a colored decoration including black and blackish brown designs applied to the inside of the mouth, the turning point of the handle, around the neck and on the shoulder. 19 P. Åström suggests that this fragment is not a later version of WP PLS,
so it cannot be assigned to an earlier period than the middle of Middle Cypriot II. 20
13 Maguire 2009, 47, 223, no. ZAK 817; Popham 1963, fig.1, pl. 26a. This fragment of WP
PLS was unearthed in Zakro. Museum no: Heraklion Museum Box 72 Gamma.
14 Maguire 2009, 26, 93–99, fig. 26–27 (DAB 1–34 belong to this group. It seems that
DAB 82–96 belong to WP PLS or WP Cross Line Style).
15 Maguire 2009, 41, tab. 3 (According to the table, from the G layer of Tell el Dab’a
there was 1 WP PLS, 1 from F layer, 8 from E/1 layer, 8 from D/3 layer and 1 from D/2 layer). Furthermore see: Merrillees 2002.
16 Papadimitriou 2013, 114; Hein 2009, 30, fig. 4.1; Maguire 2009, 84.
17 Merrillees 2002, 3; Dever 1997, 295, fig. 9.4; Manning 1999, 189, fig. 36.
18 Petrie 1891, 10, pl. I:18; Gjerstad 1926, 304–305.
19 Merrillees 2002, 3, fig. 1–2 (British Museum, Department of Egyptian Antiquities,
no: 50765, the neck of a jug); Maguire 2009, 173, KAH 391.
233 A WHITE PAInTED PEnDAnT LInE STyLE JuG FrAGMEnT FrOM TATArLI HÖyÜK
The ancient Syrian settlements where this ware appears are listed as fol-lows: Tell Daruk, 21 Qal at Er-rus, 22 Kassabine, 23 Majjdalouna, 24 ras Shamra, 25
21 Maguire 2009, 174, fig.13, DAr 396; Oldenburg and rohweder 1981, 32, 95, fig. 39
(Period: M/LBA Layer 26).
22 Maguire 2009, 174, fig.13, QAL 403–404; Ehrich 1939, 47, no. 7 (from Layer 2 and
Layer 3); Åström 1972, 215.
23 Maguire 2009, 175, fig. 13, KAS 410; Åström 1966, 139, and no. 2.
24 Maguire 2009, 175, fig. 13, MAJ 413; Chéhab 1940, 50, fig. 3e.
25 Maguire 2009, 175–176, fig.13, rSH 416–421; also see; Schaeffer 1949, pls. XXXIX,
XLIII.4; fig. 100.19; fig. 100.25; 131.3; fig. 108.19–20; 131.8,6; fig. 102.3; 131.9, fig. 131.10; Frankel 1974, fig. 19c; Maguire 1990, ill.65, rSH 326.
234 ÖZLEM OyMAn-GirGinEr
Sarepta 26 and Tell Sukas. 27 The WP PLS from ras Shamra was discovered in the
second layer of this ancient settlement. 28 One of the jugs 29 belongs to MB II or
early MB III. According to C.F.A. Schaeffer, MB II is probably dated to 1900– 1750 BC, and MB III to 1750–1600 BC. 30 Both jugs from Tomb LXXXV belong
to MB II or early MB III. 31 Another jug in WP PLS was discovered in a tomb in
Majjdalaouna in the northeast of Sidon. The jug in question was found next to White Slip and Base Ring wares. M. Chéhab dated this tomb, including many archeological artifacts, to a period from 16th century BC to 15th century BC, 32
but it seems that this jug is probably dated to an earlier period than 1600 BC. 33
WP PLS also appears in Achzib, 34 Ain Shems (Beth Shemesh), 35 Tell
el-Ajju-l, 36 Akko, 37 Tell Dan, 38 Dhahrat el-Humraiya, 39 Gezer, 40 Ginosar, 41 Hazor, 42 Tel
26 Maguire 2009, 182, fig. 13, SAr 469–472; Pritchard 1975, 86–87, no.2, fig. 51:2;
An-derson 1979, 791.1, pl. 29.1, 763, pl.21.7, 771, pl. 23.28, 776, pl. 24.27.
27 Maguire 2009, 183–184, fig.13 SuK 479–487; Thrane 1978, 51.10, fig. 55 context, fig.4
plan 3 (MBA), 51–52.19, fig.56, 54.170, figs. 43–44 and 62; Buhl 1983, 52.259, pl. XIV (Period H), 52.262 (Period F), 52.263, 52.264 (Period A), 52.265 (Period H), 52.266 (sur-face), pl. XVI.
28 Åström 1972, 214.
29 Åström 1972, 214–215; Schaeffer 1949, fig. 102.3, 131.10; Maguire 2009, 176, rSH 417.
30 Åström 1972, 214–215.
31 Åström 1972, 215; Schaeffer 1949, fig. 108. 19–20, fig. 131. 8,6; Maguire 2009, 176, rSH
421.
32 Åström 1972, 215; Chéhab 1940, 50, fig. 3.e; Maguire 2009, 175, fig.13, MAJ 413.
33 Åström 1972, 215.
34 Maguire 2009, 186, ACH 500; Oren 1975, fig.4: 90.
35 Maguire 2009, 186, AIS 503 (MBIIA) -504 (MBIIB); Grant 1929, 126–127, no. 649;
Grant and Wright 1938, 97, pl. XXIV:8; Åström 1972, 213.
36 Maguire 2009, 186, AJJ 506; Maguire 1990, ill.1, row 1; 121 row 2.4.
37 Maguire 2009, 201, AKK 621–624 (MBIIA); Dothan 1976, fig.8: 1–2, 6, 10.
38 Maguire 2009, 204, DAn 650–651; Biran 1986, fig. 8: top left and left middle.
39 Maguire 2009, 204–205, DHA 652–661; Ory 1948, 79, 86, pl. XXXII: 3–6, 8–9, 19–21,
24, fig.4–5.
40 Maguire 2009, 207, GEZ 676 (pre-MBIIC)-677; Macalister 1912, vol III, pl. CXLV:1,
vol II, 172; Dever et al. 1974, pl. 20:39; Åström 1972, 213.
41 Maguire 2009, 208, GIn 692 (MBIIA/B to MBIIB); Epstein 1974, fig. 15:9.
42 Maguire 2009, 208, HAZ 693–694 (MBIIB); yadin et al. 1961, pl: CCLXXXVII: 23,
235 A WHITE PAInTED PEnDAnT LInE STyLE JuG FrAGMEnT FrOM TATArLI HÖyÜK
Fig . 3 T he d ist rib ut io n o f W P P LS i n A na to lia .
236 ÖZLEM OyMAn-GirGinEr
Jerishe, 43 Tel Kabri, 44 Lachish, 45 Megiddo, 46 Tell nami, 47 Tel Megadim, 48 Atlit 49
and yiftahel. 50 One of the fragments from Gezer was ascribed to Macalister’s Second
Semitic period (ca. 1800–1400 BC). 51 Another fragment of a WP PLS jug was unearthed
in Tomb 3, later called Tomb 13, in Ain Shems; this fragment was first dated to 1900 BC, but then it was assigned to the middle or to the end of the 17th century BC. 52
Another fragment was also discovered in Ain Shems VI. E. Grant and G. E. Wright suggested that this layer is dated to the 19th–18th centuries BC. The layer in question is probably not later than the 18th century BC. 53 WP PLS examples from Megiddo were
unearthed in a number of tombs, such as Tombs 3076, 3110, 3128, and 4107. Tombs 3128 and 4107 belong to Megiddo XII, dated to 1770–1700 BC. However, it seems that Tombs 3076 and 3110 belong to Megiddo XI; these tombs are dated to 1750–1650 BC. Another fragment in the same style was found in Megiddo X and consequently dated to 1650–1550 BC. A small jug from Tomb 24 belongs to MB II/LB I. 54 Another ancient
settlement where a great deal of WP PLS vessels were discovered recently is Dhahrat el-Humraiya, 13 km south of Jaffa, in the in the coastal region of Palestine. The jugs in question are dated to MB II. 55
The ancient settlements in Cyprus, where WP PLS ceramics were discovered, are listed as follows: Kalopsidha, 56 Dhiorios Aloupotrypes, 57 Dhenia, 58
Galino-43 Maguire 2009, 209, JEr 707–709 (MBIIA); Geva 1982, fig. 32: 11–12, 14.
44 Maguire 2009, 210, KAB 718; also see; Maguire 1987, fig. 9:5; Maguire 1990, ill.2.
45 Maguire 2009, 213, LAC 736 (MBII-III); Tufnell 1958, 197–198, pl.79: 813.
46 Maguire 2009, 214–215, MEG 752–757, pl. 12:2–3, pl. 15:3; Guy 1938, pl.103:10,
48–50; Loud 1948, pl. 26:13, 17 (MBIIB), 16, pl. 34:12 (MBIIA/B), pl. 46:11 (MBIIC).
47 Maguire 2009, 220, nAMI 802 (MBIIA); Artzy and Marcus 1992, fig. 4:2.
48 Wolff and Bergoffen 2012, 421–422, fig 3:1–7 (MBIIA)
49 Mazar and Ilan 2014, 120–122, fig.10:4–5.
50 Maguire 2009, 221, yIF 811, fig. 49.2; Maguire 1990, ill.1; Barda and Braun 2003, fig. 9/3.
51 Åström 1972, 213; Macalister 1912, vol.II, 172, vol. III, pl. CXLV:1; Maguire 2009, 207,
GEZ 677.
52 Åström 1972, 213; Grant 1929, 126–127, no. 649 (tomb 3); Grant and Wright 1938,
101 (tomb 13); Maguire 2009, 186, AIS 504.
53 Åström 1972, 213.
54 Åström 1972, 214.
55 Åström 1972, 214.
56 Åström 1966, 83; Maguire 1990, 53, Tab. 2, App. III Tab. C (T.11); Gagne 2012, 184,
App. 1, fig. 927–936. The Kaopsidhaian ones were unearthed only in Trench 9. Some of them include a decoration with one wavy line between three or four horizontal lines, but a few of them were decorated with double wavy lines.
57 Frankel et al., 1976, 36, pl. VIII.2 row 3; Maguire 1990, 53, 132–133, Tab. 2.
58 Maguire 1990, 52, 165, Tab. C.; Åström and Wright 1962, 227–228. The fragments
237 A WHITE PAInTED PEnDAnT LInE STyLE JuG FrAGMEnT FrOM TATArLI HÖyÜK porni, 59 Kythrea, 60 Ayia Paraskevi, 61 Lapithos, 62 nitovikla, 63 Lambertis 64 and
yeri. 65
Besides Tatarlı Höyük, WP PLS has been discovered in only a few other Anato-lian settlements (Fig. 3). These settlements are Kültepe, Sirkeli Höyük and Alalakh. It should be pointed out that the fragmentary small jug from Kültepe Ib enables us to examine chronological links with the Eastern Mediterranean region in the MBA. 66 The Kültepe Ib layer must be assigned to a date that cannot be later than
the 10th year of the reign of Samsuiluna. This period is ascribed to 1785–1785 BC in high chronology; to 1740–1739 BC in middle chronology; or to 1676–1675 BC in low chronology. K. r. Veenhof suggested that the level in question with this find should probably be dated to a timespan between 1750/1745–1685/1680 BC. 67
According to the recent revised eponym list studies of Barjamovic, Hertel and Larsen, the destruction of Kültepe II occurred in 1835/1832 BC. Also, according to the same list, the last date for this period is 1718 BC. 68
Another example of the ware was recovered during the Sirkeli Höyük exca-vations carried out between 1992 and 1997 by B. Hrouda. E. Kozal suggests that this artifact probably belongs to the earliest group of Cypriot finds from the 2nd millennium BC in Cilicia. The one from Sirkeli Höyük was found on a stone pave-ment in Trench 16.2 associated with Amuq-Cilician and Plain Wares that date to the MB II period. 69
Alalakh is another settlement where a similar type of vessel was discovered. The sherd was defined by C. Epstein. This piece that is in the Antakya Museum was ascribed to Alalakh VIII. This well-polished sherd has a copper-red decora-tion. 70 L. Woolley described this piece as “one painted sherd, red on orange clay…
59 Maguire 1990, 53, Tab. 2; Gagne 2012, 181 App. 1, fig. 924. According to Gagne, this jug
in the Ashmolean Museum (no. 1953.832) was probably produced in Kythrea or Kalop-sidha.
60 Maguire 1990, 53, Tab. 2, App. III, Tab. C (T.1); Gagne 2012, 141, App. 1, figs. 367–377.
61 Gagne 2012, 171, App. 1, figs. 789–794, 798. Gagne points out that the decorative
combination of the straight and the wavy lines on the vessels from Ayia Paraskevi is an oriental style, but it shows different characteristics than the usual PLS.
62 Maguire 1990, 52–53, Tab. 2, App. III, Tab. C (Lapithos T.18A)
63 Maguire 1990, 53, Tab. 2, App. III, Tab. C.
64 Maguire 1990, 53, Tab. 2, App. III, Tab. C. (T.38, T.21)
65 Maguire 1990, 53, Tab. 2, App. III, Tab. C.
66 Åström 1989, 15–16, fig.1; Åström 1987, 62, fig. 2; Maguire 2009, 47, 222 no. KuL 813.
67 Merrillees 2002, 5; Veenhof 2000, 149.
68 Bajramovic, Hertel and Larsen 2012, 91–97.
69 Kozal 2013, 217, fig. 1
238 ÖZLEM OyMAn-GirGinEr
burnished after painting.” 71 However, there is no drawing of the sherd in question.
r.S. Merrillees suggested that this sherd can confirm the date of the piece from Kültepe. According to M.-H. Gates, the most probable date for Alalakh VIII is 1720–1650/1630 BC. 72 However, Bergoffen and Heinz could not locate this piece. 73
Bergoffen states that the first samples of Cypriot ceramics at Atchana come from the VI and V strata. 74 The only example of WP PLS at Atchana is a body sherd,
which belongs to a closed cup. It is made of pink (7.5 yr 7/3) fabric, burnished, with a light grey (10 yr 7/2) slip and dark grey (10 yr 4/1) paint. 75
The jug fragment from Tatarlı Höyük is a new point on the Anatolian map showing particularly the distribution of WP PLS. This fragment can be placed into the same historical period, for which the same ware has been found in various settlements. This find is from the 17th–16th centuries BC, and the other artifacts, which were discovered on the stone paving, also support this suggestion. The re-cent excavations at Tatarlı Höyük are promising, as they will provide evidence to help scholars to establish chronological connections with neighboring cultures, and thus shed light on the history of Kizzuwatna as well.
71 Merrillees 2002, 5; Woolley 1955, 313.
72 Merrillees 2002, 5; Gates 1987, 75; cf. Heinz 1992, 208.
73 Bergoffen 2005, 37.
74 Bergoffen 2005, 14.
239 A WHITE PAINTED PENDANT LINE STYLE JUG FRAGMENT FROM TATARLI HÖYÜK
REFERENCES
Anderson, W.P., “A Stratigraphic and Ceramic Analysis of the Late Bronze and Iron Age Strata of Sounding Y at Sarepta (Sarafand, Lebanon),” PhD Thesis, University of Pennsylvania, 1979.
Artzy, M. and E. Marcus, “Stratified Cypriote Pottery in MB IIa Context at Tell Na-mi,” in Studies in Honor of Vassos Karageorghis, ed. by G.C. Ioannides, 103–110. Nicosia: The Society of Cypriot Studies, 1992:
Åström, P. and G. Wright, “Two Bronze Age Tombs at Dhenia in Cyprus.” Opus Athenaium 4 (1962): 225–276.
Åström, P., Excavations at Kalopsidha and Ayios Iakovos in Cyprus, Studies in Med-iterranean Archaeology 2. Lund: Astrom Editions, 1966.
—— .
— The Swedish Cyprus Expedition, The Middle Cypriote Bronze Age. Vol. 4,
Part 1B. Lund: Berlingska Boktryckeriet, 1972. —— .
— “The Chronology of the Middle Cypriote Bronze Age” in High, Middle or
Low? Acts of an International Colloquium on Absolute Chronology Held at the University of Gothenburg 20th–22nd August 1987, Part 1, 57–66, ed. by P. Åström, Göteborg, 1987.
—— .
— “Early Connections between Anatolia and Cyprus” in Anatolia and the
Ancient Near East: Studies in Honor of Tahsin Özgüç, 15–17, ed. by K. Emre, B. Hrouda, M.J. Mellink, and N. Özgüç. Ankara: Türk Tarih Kurumu Basımevi, 1989. Badre, L.E., Les figurines anthropomorphes en tere cuites à l’age du bronze en Syrie.
Paris: Geuthner, 1980.
Barda, L. and E. Braun, “Tomb 1 of the Second Millennium BCE at Yiftah’el, Lower
Galilee.” cAtiqot 44 (2003): 67–95.
Bajramovic, G., T. Hertel and M.T. Larsen, Ups and Downs at Kanesh, Chronology, History and Society in the Old Assyrian Period. Leiden: The Netherlands Institute for the Near East, 2012.
Bergoffen, C.J., The Cypriot Bronze Age Pottery from Sir Leonard Woolley’s Excava-tions at Alalakh (Tell Atchana). Vienna: Verlag der Österreichischen Akademie der Wissenschaften, 2005.
Biran, A., “The Dancer from Dan, the Empty Tomb and the Altar Room”, Israel Exploration Journal 36 (1986): 168–187.
Buhl, M.-L., Sukas VII. The Near Eastern Pottery and Objects of other Materials from the Upper Strata. Kobenhavn: Munksgaard, 1983.
Chéhab, M., “Tombes pheniciennes, Majdalouna.” Bulletin du Musée de Beyrouth 4 (1940): 37–53.
Dever, W.G. et al. Gezer II : Report of the 1967-70 Seasons in Fields I and II. Jerusalem : Hebrew Union College/Nelson Glueck School of Biblical Archaeology, 1974. Dever, W.G., “Settlement Patterns and Chronology of Palestine in the Middle Bronze
240 ÖZLEM OYMAN-GİRGİNER
Oren, University Museum Monograph 96, 285–301. Philadelphia: University of Pennsylvania Museum Publication, 1997.
Dothan, M., “Akko: Interim Excavation Report, First Season, 1973/4.” Bulletin of the American Schools of Oriental Research 224 (1976): 1–48.
Duru, R., Tilmen, A Forgotten Capital City: The Story of a 5400 Year Old Settlement in the Islahiye Region-Southeast Anatolia. İstanbul: TURSAB, 2003.
Ehrich, A.M.H., Early Pottery of the Jebeleh Region. Philadelphia: The American Phil-osophical Society, 1939.
Epstein, C., “Middle Bronze Age Tombs at Kefar Szold and Ginosar.” Atiqot 2–6 (1974): 13–39.
Frankel, D., Middle Cypriot White Painted Pottery: An Analytical Study of the Decora-tion, Studies in Mediterranean Archaeology 42, Göteborg: Astrom Editions, 1974. Frankel, D. R. Hedges and H. Hatcher, “Chemical Analysis of Middle Cypriote White
Painted Ware Sherds in the Ashmolean Museum, Oxford.” Report of the Department of Antiquities Cyprus (1976): 35–42.
Fugmann, E., Hama. Fouilles et recherches 1931–1938 II-1, L’architecture des périodes pré-Hellénistiques. Kopenhagen: Nationalmuseet, 1958.
Gagne, L.A.C., Middle Cypriot White Painted Ware: A Study of Pottery Production and Distribution in Middle Bronze Age Cyprus. PhD Thesis, Toronto, 2012.
Gates, M.H., “Alalakh and Chronology Again” in High, Middle or Low? Acts of an Inter-national Colloquium on Absolute Chronology Held at the University of Gothenburg 20th–22nd August 1987, Part 2, 60–86, ed. by P. Åström, Göteborg,1987.
—— .
— “Kinet Höyük (Hatay, Turkey) and MB Levantine Chronology.” Akkadica
119–120 (2000): 77–101.
Geva, S., Tell Jerishe: the Sukenik Excavations of the Middle Bronze Age Fortifications, QEDEM 15, Jerusalem, 1982.
Girginer, K.S., “2005 Yılı Adana (Ceyhan) ve Kayseri (Develi) Yüzey Araştırmaları.” 24. Araştırma Sonuçları Toplantısı 2 (2007): 173–196.
—— .
— “Excavations at Tatarlı Höyük in 2011.” ANMED, News of Archaeology from
Anatolia’s Mediterranean Areas 10 (2012): 110–114.
Girginer, K.S. and D. Collon, “Cylinder and Stamp Seals From Tatarlı Höyük.” Anatolian Studies 64 (2014): 59–72.
Girginer, K.S. et al., “Tatarlı Höyük (Ceyhan) Kazısı: İlk İki Dönem.” 31. Kazı Sonuçları Toplantısı 3 (2010): 453–476.
—— .
— “Excavations at Tatarlı Höyük in 2009 and 2010.” ANMED, News of
Archae-ology from Anatolia’s Mediterranean Areas 9 (2011): 128–135. —— .
— “2012 Tatarlı Höyük Kazıları.” 35. Kazı Sonuçları Toplantısı 2 (2014): 182–196.
Gjerstad, E., Studies on Prehistoric Cyprus. Uppsala: The Swedish Cyprus Expedition, 1926.
241 A WHITE PAINTED PENDANT LINE STYLE JUG FRAGMENT FROM TATARLI HÖYÜK
Grant, E. and G.E. Wright, cAin Shems Excavation Part IV (Pottery), Haverford
Col-lection, 1938.
Guy, P.L.O., Megiddo Tombs. Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 1938.
Hein, I., “A Contribution from Tell el-Dab’a/Ezbet Helmi to the Cyprus Connection” in Egypt and Cyprus in Antiquity, Proceedings of the International Conference, Nicosia, 3–6 April 2003, 29–39, ed. by D. Michaelides, V. Karageorghis and R. Merrillees. Oxford: Oxbow Books, 2009.
Heinz, M., Tell Atchana/Alalakh: Die Schichten VII–XVII, Alter Orient und Altes Testament Band 41. Kevelaer: Verlag Butzon & Bercker, 1992.
Kozal, E., “Exploring Sirkeli Höyük in the Late Bronze Age and its Interregional Con-nections” in Across the Border: Late Bronze-Iron Age Relations Between Syria and Anatolia, ed. by K. A. Yener, Ancient Near Eastern Studies Supplement 42, 213–219. Leuven: Peeters, 2013.
Kozal, E. and M. Novak, “Sirkeli Höyük. A Bronze and Iron Age Urban Settlement in Plain Cilicia” in Anatolian Metal VI, ed. by Ü. Yalçın, 229–238. Bochum, 2013.
Loud, G., Megiddo II, Seasons of 1935–39, Plates. Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 1948.
Macalister, R.A.S., The Excavations of Gezer, 1902–5 & 1907–9, vols. I-III. London: J. Mur-ray, 1912.
Maguire, L.C., “Imported Cypriot Pottery from Middle Bronze Age Levels at Kabri” in Excavations at Kabri: Preliminary Report of 1986 Season, 44–51, ed. by A. Kempinski. Tel Aviv, 1987.
—— .
— The Circulation of Cypriot Pottery in the Middle Bronze Age.”Unpublished PhD
Thesis, University of Edinburg, 1990. —— .
— The Cypriot Pottery and its Circulation in the Levant. Tell El-Dabca XXI. Vienna:
Austrian Academy of Sciences Press, 2009.
Manning, S.W., A Test of Time: The Volcano of Thera and the Chronology and History of the Aegean and East Mediterranean in the Mid Second Millennium BC. Oxford: Oxbow Books, 1999.
Marchetti, N., La coroplastica Eblaita e Siriana nel Bronzo Medio. Materiali e Studi Ar-cheologici di Ebla 5. Roma: Arbor Sapientiae, 2001.
Matthiae, P., Missione archeologica italiana in Siria. Rappoto preliminare della campagna 1964. Roma: Centro di Studi Semitici, 1965.
Mazar, E. and D. Ilan, “A Middle Bronze Age Tomb at ‘Atlit’.” Atiqot 79 (2014): 111–130. Merrillees, R.S., “The Relative and Absolute Chronology of the Cypriote White Painted
Pen-dent Line Style.” Bulletin of the American Schools of Oriental Research 326 (2002): 1–9. di Michele, A. and M.E. Pedrosi, “Fortification and Burial Grounds in Tell Afis (Syria)
between Middle Bronze Age and Late Bronze Age” in Broadening Horizons 3, Con-ference of Young Researchers Working in the Ancient Near East, 169–182,ed. by F.B. Tema- M.B. Garcia et al. Barcelona: Universitat Autonoma de Barcelona, 2012.
242 ÖZLEM OYMAN-GİRGİNER
Novak, M. and E. Kozal, “Sirkeli Höyük 2011 Yılı Çalışmaları.” 34. Kazı Sonuçları To-plantısı 1 (2013): 413–428.
Oldenburg, E. and J. Rohweder, The Excavations at Tall Daruk (Usnu?) and cArab al-Mulk
(Paltos). Copenhagen: Munksgaard, 1981.
Oren, E., “The Pottery from the Achzib Defence System, Area D: 1963 and 1964 Seasons.” Israel Exploration Journal 25 (1975): 211–225.
Ory, J., “A Bronze Age Cemetery at Dhahrat el Humraiya.” Quarterly of the Department of Antiquities in Palestine 13 (1948): 75–89.
Papadimitriou, N., “Regional or ‘International’ Networks? A Comparative Examination of Aegean and Cypriot Imported Pottery in the Eastern Mediterranean.” TALANTA XLIV (2013): 92–136.
Petrie, W.M.F., Ilahun, Kahun and Gurob. London: D. Nutt, 1891.
Popham, M., “Two Cypriot Sherds from Crete.” Annual of the British School at Athens 58 (1963): 89–93.
Pritchard, J.B., Sarepta: A Preliminary Report on the Iron Age. Philadelphia: Museum of the University of Pennsylvania, 1975.
Pruß, A., Die Amuq-Terrakotten, Untersuchungen zu den Terrakotta-Figuren des 2. und 1. Jahrtausends v.Chr. aus den Grabungen des Oriental Institute Chicago in der Amuq-Ebene, Subartu XXVI. Turnhout: Brepols, 2010.
Schaeffer, C.F.A., Ugaritica II, Mission de Ras Shamra. Paris: Librairie orientaliste Paul Geuthner, 1949.
Seton-Williams, M.V., “Cilician Survey.” Anatolian Studies 4 (1954): 121–174.
Thrane, H., Sukas IV. A Middle Bronze Age Collective Grave on Tall Sukas. Cophenagen: Publications of the Carlsberg Expedition to Phoenicia 5, 1978.
Tufnell, O., Lachish IV. The Bronze Age. London-New York: Oxford University Press, 1958. Ünal, A. and K.S. Girginer, “Tatarlı Höyük Kazılarında Bulunan ‘Anadolu Hiyeroglifli’
Damga Mühür Baskısı” in Veysel Donbaz’a Sunulan Yazılar. DUB.SAR.E.DUB.BA.A, 275–281, ed. by Ş. Dönmez. İstanbul: Ege Yayınları, 2010.
Veenhof, K.R., “Old Assyrian Chronology.” Akkadica 119–120 (2000): 137–150. von Luschan, F., Ausgrabungen in Sendschirli 5. Die Kleinfunde von Sendschirli, ed. by
W. Andrae. Berlin: De Gruyter, 1943.
Wolff, S.R. and C. Bergoffen, “Cypriot Pottery from MBIIA Loci at Tel Megadim.” Orbis Biblicus et Orientalis 255 (2012): 419–430.
Woolley, C.L., Alalakh: An Account of the Excavations at Tell Atchana in the Hatay, 1937–1949. Report of the Research Committee of the Society of Antiquaries of Lon-don 18. LonLon-don: Society of Antiquaries, 1955.
Yadin, Y. Y. Aharoni et al., Hazor III-IV: An Account of the Third and Fourth Seasons of Excavations, 1957–1958 (Plates). Jerusalem: Israel Exploration Society, 1961. Yener, K.A. and B. Yazıcıoğlu, “Appendix B: Small Finds Catalogue” in Tell Atchana,
11
Hittite Gods Abroad: Evidence for Hittite Diplomatic Activities?
Hermann Genz 1Abstract
During the Late Bronze Age the Hittite Empire was one of the global players in the ancient Near East. Relations with neighboring political entities are mainly attested through histor-ical records, especially in the cuneiform archives from Boğazköy-Hattuša, but also from various other sources in the ancient Near East and Egypt. It is therefore quite interesting to note that the material evidence for contacts between the Hittites and their neighbors is surprisingly meagre, especially when compared to the ubiquity of Mycenaean and Cypriot pottery or Egyptian objects in the Eastern Mediterranean. One of the most prominent groups of Hittite objects attested outside Central Anatolia, besides Hittite seals, comprise small figurines of Hittite deities, often executed in precious materials. As the author finds it difficult to accept these as objects of trade, it is suggested here that these items should be interpreted as the personal protective deities of Hittites traveling abroad, most likely envoys on diplomatic missions.
Introduction
According to Late Bronze Age (LBA) texts from the Hittite realm and various other LBA political entities in the Ancient Near East, it is clear that the Hittites, throughout the second half of the 2nd millennium BC, were part of the internation-al politicinternation-al system 2; in fact during the Empire Period they were one of the global players in the Near East. On the other hand, the material evidence for contacts of the Hittites with their neighbors is surprisingly meagre. In comparison with the wide distribution of various Egyptian artifacts 3 and Mycenaean 4 or Cypriot pottery 5 in the LBA Eastern Mediterranean and the Near East, the distribution
1 Department of History and Archaeology, American University of Beirut, Riad El
Solh, Beirut, 11072020, Lebanon.
2 Bryce 1998; Klengel 1999.
3 Hasel 1998, 91–117; Higginbotham 2000, 74–128; Cline 2009, 31–47.
4 Leonard 1994; van Wijngaarden 2002.
244 HERMANN GENZ
of Hittite artifacts outside of the Hittite heartland is rather negligible. 6 In fact, the majority of Hittite artifacts found outside of the Hittite heartland consist of seals 7 and small figurines of Hittite deities (Fig. 1). It is the latter with which this paper is concerned.
Hittite Figurines
Before we actually can embark on a study of the Hittite figurines found outside Central Anatolia, first it needs to be defined how Hittite figurines differ from comparable objects from neighboring regions. This is a crucial problem, as unfor-tunately up to now no detailed catalogue of Hittite figurines has been compiled.
6 Genz 2006; Genz 2011.
7 Gorny 1993; Jablonka 2006; Genz 2011.
