Provenance Determination of Mycenaean Iiic Vessels From the 1934–1939 Excavations at Tarsus‐gözlükule by Neutron Activation Analysis

Mommsen, Hans; Mountjoy, P. A.; Özyar, Aslı

doi:10.1111/j.1475-4754.2010.00583.x

Cited by 11 publications

(12 citation statements)

References 15 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Bağcı 2016; Goldman 1950Goldman , 1956aGoldman , 1956bGoldman , 1963Karacic 2014;Mellink 1989Mellink , 1993Manning et al 2016Mommsen et al 2011Mountjoy 2005;Özyar 2005;Slane 1987;Ünlü 2009Yalçın 2013 General Periodization…”

Section: Bibliographymentioning

confidence: 99%

A Comparative Stratigraphy of Cilicia

Novák¹,

D’Agata

Caneva

et al. 2017

Altorientalische Forschungen

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

This article presents a preliminary comparative stratigraphy of excavated sites in Plain Cilicia and one in Rough Cilicia. It is the outcome of three workshops held in 2014, 2015 and 2017. Plain Cilicia at the junction of Anatolia, Syro-Mesopotamia and Cyprus is one of the most fertile regions of the Ancient Near East. In recent years, archaeological research in the region has intensified, re-opening questions of chronology. The comparative stratigraphy discussed in the workshops is presented here in form of a gazetteer of the participating sites and a chart. This is to be understood as a first step towards a more comprehensive chronology.Keywords: Cilicia, chronology, comparative stratigraphy Introduction (Fig. 1)Plain Cilicia (gr. Kilikia Pedias, lat. Cilicia Campestris) is an alluvial fan covering approximately 8000 km 2 and one of the most fertile regions in modern-day Turkey.1 It is located at the junction of Anatolia, SyroMesopotamia and Cyprus, defined by natural borders: the Taurus Range to the west and north, the Amanus to the east and the Mediterranean to the south. The plain is divided into a western part on the coast (Çukurova) and an eastern inland part (Yukarıova). Natural passes through the mountains give access to the neighbouring regions: the Göksu (gr. Kalykadnos) Valley connects Plain to Rough Cilicia (gr. Kilikia Tracheia, lat. Cilicia Aspera) to the west, the well-known Cilician Gates (Gülek Boğazı) north of Tarsus, the route from Kozan via Feke and the Gezbel Pass (Hittite-Kizzuwatnean Caravan Route) 2 connect the region with the central Anatolian plateau, the Bahçe (Amanus Gates) and the Belen Pass (Syrian Gates) with the İslahiye Plain and the Amuq respectively. A number of rivers, originating in the Taurus Mountains, cross the lowlands and discharge into the Mediterranean: the four most important are the Göksu (gr. Kalykadnos), the Berdan or Tarsus Çayı (gr. Kydnos), the Seyhan (hitt. Šamri/Sapara, gr. Saros) and the Ceyhan (hitt. Puruna (?), gr. Pyramos). The fertile alluvial plain allows both dry-farming and irrigation agriculture which have supported a dense settlement pattern since the Neolithic period.The archaeological richness of the region has been well-known since the early excavations by Hetty Goldman in Tarsus 9 Excavation has recently intensified in the region, although few projects have focused on new sites (Fig. 1). Nevertheless, new data has been steadily accumulating, providing insights into the cultural history and archaeology of the Cilician Plain. The importance of a solid chronology based on a thorough comparative stratigraphy of all investigated sites is apparent.The purpose of a series of workshops was to initiate a dialogue among active archaeological projects in the region. The first Cilician Chronology Workshop took place in the expedition house of Sirkeli Topography and Excavation AreasExcavation in the Bronze and Iron Age levels was largely confined to the north-western corner of the mound, and to a 40 m strip trench across the centre of the mound,...

show abstract

Section: Bibliographymentioning

confidence: 99%

A Comparative Stratigraphy of Cilicia

Novák¹,

D’Agata

Caneva

et al. 2017

Altorientalische Forschungen

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Similarly, the AIAP analysed New Ohio Red, the check‐standard at MURR, allowing conversion factors to be calculated between MURR and AIAP (Grave et al , table 3). Hein et al (, table 5) analysed the same materials at Demokritos and at the Bonn laboratory, and since the Bonn laboratory is directly comparable to LBNL (Mommsen et al , 902), it is possible to calculate Demokritos/MURR conversion factors. The resulting factors allow for the statistical analysis of NAA data generated at each of the laboratories.…”

Section: Methodology and Samplingmentioning

confidence: 99%

Geochemical Analysis of the Hittite‐Period Pottery from Tarsus‐Gözlükule, Turkey

2016

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Neutron activation analysis was conducted on Late Bronze IIA pottery from Tarsus-Gözlükule and compared with archival data from contemporary sites in Cilicia and Cyprus. The results provide a model for the organization of pottery production at Tarsus-Gözlükule when the settlement was under the rule of the Hittite Empire. It is proposed that multiple contemporary pottery workshops provided the community of Tarsus-Gözlükule with both Hittite-style pottery and other wares. It is further suggested that these workshops may have differed in the extent to which they were attached to the imperial administration.

show abstract

“…The important facts for the specialists are: irradiations at the reactor of the Reactor Institute Delft, the Netherlands, ten hour irradiation, flux 5 • 10 12 neutrons/(cm 2 s), amount of sample needed: ca 80mg, standard: Bonn pottery standard (composition of the standard: Mommsen, Sjöberg 2007: 260, table 1, calibrated with the Berkeley standard, see Perlman, Asaro 1969). The samples of the first set from Tarsus (Mommsen et al 2011) were measured in 2008 at the reactor in Geesthacht. Changes in the conditions of the irradiation or the reactor result in different neutron flux properties; all flux-dependent corrections have to be determined anew.…”

Section: Provenancing Of Pottery Neutron Activation Analysis and Stamentioning

confidence: 99%

“…The choice of samples for the second set of NAA (S38-S68) was based on the results of the first set (S1-36 Mommsen et al 2011). Thus, the assignation of a single example of a one-handled conical bowl FS 242, sampled in the first set, S17/74, to the much less common chemical profile TarB had given rise to the suggestion that these bowls might have been produced primarily in this fabric and might not be local.…”

Section: Sampling Strategymentioning

confidence: 99%

“…The complete assemblage, as much of it as gives useful information, was published by one of the present authors as part of the initial phase of the current excavations undertaken by Boğaziçi University (Mountjoy 2005). Subsequently neutron activation analysis (NAA) was carried out on 30 pieces of the Late Helladic IIIC pottery to determine the local chemical profile and to isolate imports; these aims were achieved (Mommsen et al 2011). The most important of these 2011 findings included the isolation of a locally made group of Aegeanstyle pottery assigned as TarA and a second possible local chemical profile assigned as TarB.…”

mentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Neutron activation analysis of Aegean-style IIIC pottery from the Goldman excavations at Tarsus-Gözlükule

2018

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The appearance of Aegean-style IIIC pottery at Tarsus occured at a time of unrest and of movement of peoples resulting in part from the collapse of the Mycenaean palaces on the Greek mainland. Mycenaean Late Helladic IIIB pottery exports from mainland Greece to Cyprus and the Levant disappeared and were gradually replaced by local imitations. Eventually Aegean-style IIIC pottery appeared in the East Aegean-West Anatolian Interface, in Cyprus and at various sites on the southern coast of Turkey and in the Levant. It was not exported from the Greek mainland, but seems to have been locally made at each site. A first series of neutron activation analysis (NAA) was carried out on pottery from Tarsus to determine how much of the Aegean-style 12th-century BC pottery was locally produced, how much was imported and, if imported, from whence it came. The favourable results of this first analysis gave rise to a second NAA of more Aegean-style pottery from Tarsus, bringing the total number of pieces analysed to 67. It has confirmed the local production of the pottery; the chemical group TarA is the dominant local group at Tarsus, comprising a third of the samples. A smaller group, TarB, may also be local. The analysis revealed a large number of Aegean-style IIIC imports from Cyprus from several different sites; these make up a quarter of the samples. There are a few imports from other areas, including the East Aegean-West Anatolian Interface. Influence from both Cyprus and the Interface can also be seen at Tarsus in the use of some shapes and motifs. A comparison with 12th-century BC imports identified by NAA at the site of Tell Kazel (ancient Simyra) in Syria directly east of Cyprus shows imports from the same two areas.

show abstract

Provenance Determination of Mycenaean Iiic Vessels From the 1934–1939 Excavations at Tarsus‐gözlükule by Neutron Activation Analysis

Cited by 11 publications

References 15 publications

A Comparative Stratigraphy of Cilicia

A Comparative Stratigraphy of Cilicia

Geochemical Analysis of the Hittite‐Period Pottery from Tarsus‐Gözlükule, Turkey

Neutron activation analysis of Aegean-style IIIC pottery from the Goldman excavations at Tarsus-Gözlükule

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About