Anatolian Cultures Research Articles

ANTİK ÇAĞLARDA MEZOPOTAMYA VE ANADOLU KÜLTÜRÜNÜN ÇALGILARI

In this study, the evolution of instruments in Ancient Mesopotamian and Anatolian cultures was examined starting from the Sumerians up to the Hittite civilization. The instruments as high-ranking cultural assets are not only simple instruments in which sound, loudness, timbre, sound intensity are generated. They are the indispensable elements of rituals, conversation, communication, and more importantly art in Mesopotamia and Anatolia. The importance of instruments as high-ranking cultural assets in the Sumerian period (BC) is proven by the numerous classifications made. Cuneiform script originating from Mesopotamia has been an important type of script spreading out from Asia Minor, used in the writing of various languages from different groups and the most important source in revealing the information about the music and instrument culture of the period was undoubtedly the texts written in cuneiform, as well as the instrument finds and pictorial descriptions. Cuneiform texts give us instrument names rather than instrument types. The lexical (glossary) lists, which are available in two languages, Sumerian-Akkadian, which sometimes include descriptions of instruments, give us the Sumerian and Akkadian names of the instruments. In some cases, besides the instrument names, there are certain clues with occasional addendums regarding the material from which the instrument is made. The most important of the Mesopotamian civilizations, which started to form in the early period in the 12.000 B.C., are respectively; Sumerian, Akkad, Babylonian, Assyrian and Hittite civilizations. The cultural experiences of each of these civilizations naturally transferred influences from their cultures to the next society.

Mount Ida from the Iliad to Turkish Folk Beliefs: Some Notes on Its Origin and Mythological Continuity

This study aims to find the origin of Kazdağı, which has an important place in both Greek and Anatolian mythology. Mount Ida had a geopolitical and economic importance for the people of Anatolia in ancient times. The significance of the mountain is also reflected to the myths, epics and the legends. Ancient writers give brief descriptions of the mountain and exemplifies the reasons why it is a holy place. A well-known epic, the Iliad emphasizes the richness of Ida in terms of its natural resources. This richness also enlightens the mythological importance of the mountain. Iliad clearly indicates the importance of Ida in Greek mythology. In Anatolia, Ida is known as “Kazdağı” and there have still been some folk beliefs and legends related to it. The most common of these is Sarıkız, which is extremely famous around Balıkesir and Edremit. Sarıkız, known as a local legend in Turkish culture, is unique as it shows its importance among the local inhabitants of “Kazdağı”. Given the fact that the origin of Ida, whose mythological importance was still kept among Turks, was rooted in Anatolia, it is inevitable to examine the journey from the Iliad to Sarıkız. In this context, the ancient and modern sources are investigated and the data gathered are given in the main part of the study. In conclusion, the article aims to contribute to the researches whose purposes are mainly to compare the Greek and Anatolian cultures in terms of important places. We intend to find out whether there is an interaction between the two cultures and if there has been this intercultural connection, how and in what aspects it is going on in terms of the importance of Mount Ida.

The Veneti the Heirs to the Minoans

The article is devoted to the problem of the origin of various groups of the Veneti, known in historiography, based on data from archaeology, linguistics, and anthropology. Toponymic markers-ethnonyms use as the most important evidence of possible residence and subsequent spatial movements of tribes. It is justified that these geographical names appear, as a rule, when ethnic groups move to a new territory with an alien autochthonous population. The toponyms, ethnonyms provide an opportunity to identify areas of distribution and possible migration routes of the tribes. The article explores issues related to the migration of the Veneti during the Bronze Age disaster from the Northwestern part of the Asia Minor peninsula to Europe. It is justified that the Western Anatolian cultures created under the significant influence of the Minoan culture and the Veneti are among its successors. There is evidence that the self-name of the Minoans could be the ethnonym associated with the custom of painting the bodies of men in red. Evidence provided the trade of Ancient Egypt with the land of Rutenu (Ruzenu) could conducted with the Minoans and they could establish ports on the coast of the Levant, which became famous at afterwards.

Spatial Development Process of the Turkish Historical Dwelings (Houses) and Interior Specifications

With the start of the history of civilization, the need for shelter occurred, people living in temporary and primitive shelters started to live in open areas with the improvement of climatic conditions, and with the formation of the settled order, architectural habitats began to form and common living spaces began to form. In the light of the researches, Anatolia has been inhabited intensively since the Paleolithic period, with the first settled order and many civilizations, it came under the sovereignty of the Byzantine and later Turks and had a rich cultural and architectural accumulation. It is known that Turks lived a nomadic life before settling in Anatolia and lived in easily established and detachable living environments that can produce solutions for different climates such as summer and winter. In this study, the spatial breaks that emerged as a result of the meeting of Central Asian nomadic life culture with Anatolian cultures are examined through physical and cultural references, and the development of the residential architecture, which is a product of Anatolian design heritage, with the main lines of the traditional Turkish house, and the interior space in these traditional houses, its setup and hardware are documented. Keywords: Anatolia, The Turkish Historical Dwellings (House), material culture, cultural heritage, interior space DOI: 10.7176/JSTR/6-07-14

SULUCA KARAHÖYÜK: DEPAS AMPHIKYPELLON VE AYAK BİÇİMLİ DAMGA MÜHÜR BULUNTULARI IŞIĞINDA MERKEZİ KAPADOKYA’DA BİR TİCARİ KONTEKS

This article consists of the study of a foot shaped stamp seal and three pieces of Depas Amphikypellon findings which were discovered during the Suluca Hoyuk excavations but haven’t been published. Suluca Karahoyuk which is located in Central Cappadocia (in Halys curve) has close relationships with Western Anatolia and Aegean World as well as Central Anatolian cultures in terms of its location. Two of the Suluca Karahoyuk Depas belongs to a group observed after Troia IIg according to type definition of Christian Podzuweit and its existence continued in Troia III layer. Current findings have contributed to the increase in the number of types. Especially the distribution and types in Central Anatolia have shown that they were produced locally in different centers in the inner parts as well as in Kultepe types. The last depas is similar to the type of the Pisidia. However ware properties are closer to local groups. The foot shaped stamp seal made from terracotta is dated to the end of EBA II and mid of EBA III according to finding locations and it is in accordance with routes of “Great Caravan Road” frame of which drawn by Turan Efe. However, they consist of only a few examples between the Syrian-Cilicia region and the North Aegean. The Suluca Karahoyuk findings which are dated between late EBA II and mid of EBA III, provide new contributions to the view of Anatolia continental trade and its relations with coastal areas.

Pedasa’dan Erken Demir Çağ Başlarına Ait Mezar Platformları ve Urne Pithoslar

Recent archaeological research and excavations undertaken at Caria provide significant information regarding the transitional stage from Late Bronze Age to Early Iron Age as well as funerary architecture, burial customs and offerings of Early Iron Age. Throughout this cultural process, stone tumuli and platform-graves appear to be the major grave structures in Lelegian peninsula. Considering current information, we can safely say that rectangular platform-graves were in use starting from the beginning of 12th Century BC towards the mid-Archaic period. Platform-graves constructed on ground were encircled by a framing enclosure filled with rubble. Burial cists were small rectangular units embedded in rubble containing clusters of cremated remains. Excavated Pedasa and Asarlik platform-graves dating back to 12th and 11th centuries BC contain solely cremation burials. It seems that in some platform-graves there is a centrally placed pithos used as an urn. The arrangement of platformgrave 1 with a centrally positioned single pithos urn suggests that the structure was actually built for the deceased whose cremated remains were placed in it. However, it is not always the case since the pithos urn in platform grave 2 is not the earliest burial in the platform. Long term usage of the platform graves, ceramic grave goods placed in the rubble fill during the construction phase and ceramic sherds scattered in the fill must be the reflections of burial traditions of the community using the platform graves as family graves with strong signs of importance paid to grave cult and ancestor veneration. Among the grave goods are ceramic bowls; Carian examples of single handled bowls which is a typical form in the Aegean from late 12th to the beginning of 10th centuries BC. Asymmetrical arched fibulae with two tubular beads are among the typical fibula form common in Caria. Grave 1 must be related to an adolescent/female with its earring and grave 13 must belong to an adolescent/male with its sword/dagger. The use of pithos as cremation urn appears in Middle Bronze Age Anatolian cultures such as Demircihuyuk examples. It can also be followed in Western Anatolia (Troia, Ulucak) and Crete (Olous) along with the increase of cremation in the Late Bronze Age. Carian pithos urns attest that cremation urn practice was actually a continuous Late Bronze Age tradition without any interruption with increasing numbers observed in Western Anatolia and nearby islands starting from 10th century BC. Pedasa platform-graves containing pithos urns show close resemblance to Argos tumuli from 12th century BC, specifically Chania tumulus in regard to its arrangement with graves placed in a rubble fill. In Argos tumuli cremated remains were placed in an urn whereas in Pedasa and Asarlik they were deposited at burial cists. It is clear that the region has a strong Aegean identity in terms of material culture as Pedasa finds from 12th century BC reflect characteristic features of Late Helladic III C period. The platform-graves of Lelegian peninsula and Argos tumuli show close resemblance in terms of cremation being the main burial type and common features in ceramic finds compared to contemporary Aegean cultuRes. These similar patterns might bring new discussions on the possible routes and sources on mobility in the Aegean.

Evaluation of the desserts; which are hosmerim, cheese halva, kunafah produced in Turkish cuisine-in aspect of tourism

Turkish Cuisine is shown among the top three cuisines in the world by many sources. It is a fact that he deserves more than this title. From the beginning of 1990's Turkish cuisine has been presented to the tourists who coming to the country with the development of tourism. But some meals such as kebab, doner are on the foreground, while hosmerim (a sweet made of unsalted cheese), cheese halva, kunafah did not find the place that they deserved. On the other hand, tiramisu with cheese and cheesecake consumed by many people, in the world. In order to bring the desserts produced by the cheese into the forefront, tourists should be included from the beginning of this making process. With this method, new destination areas will be formed and at the same time the recognition of Anatolian culinary cultures will be increased.

Archaeological Evidence for an Early Second Millennium BC Potter’s Kiln at Liman Tepe

This article will focus on a pottery kiln which is dated to the transition phase between the Early Bronze Age and the Middle Bronze Age in Liman Tepe. The kiln is not only important in terms of being one of the earliest examples on the Western Anatolian coast, but also for the local pottery sherds amongst its debris. They demonstrate the continuation of relationships with Central Anatolian cultures which began in the early periods. Very few centers in Western Anatolia have levels from the Early Bronze to Middle Bronze Age phase. This transition phase is being investigated in a comprehensive manner at Liman Tepe and this will provide an important contribution to understanding the region's chronology.

Similarity in Superstitions in Anatolian and Chinese Cultures

This article aims at exploring similarity between Anatolian and Chinese prevalent superstitions, the reasons behind them and contributing to literature concerning superstitions. In this comparative study, marriage, birth, and death superstitions and their impacts on people’s life have been investigated individually in Anatolian and Chinese cultures. As a result, the study concluded that superstitions have been a tradition, which is transferred from one generation to another. In both Anatolia and China, superstitions are mostly towards expelling evil spirits, avoiding bad things, and bringing good luck. In China, the most widespread superstitions are related to homophonic numbers whereas in Anatolia, wearing an evil eye talisman against evil eye is the most popular one. However, visiting a fortuneteller is very common superstition in both cultures and the most similar superstitions appear on birth customs. Results indicated that many superstitions originated from Shamanism, which is pre Islamic Asian origin Turkic religion. It is assumed that innumerable Anatolian and Chinese superstitions come from same ancient Shamanism and have survived until nowadays.

The Consumption of Psychoactive Plants in Ancient Global and Anatolian Cultures During Religious Rituals: The Roots of the Eruption of Mythological Figures and Common Symbols in Religions and Myths

Psychoactive plants which contain hallucinogenic molecules that induce a form of altered states of consciousness (H-ASC) have been widely used during the religious rituals of many cultures throughout the centuries, while the consumption of these plants for spiritual and religious purposes is as old as human history. Some of those cultures were shaman and pagan subcultures; African native religions; Bwiti Cult; South American native religions; Amazon Cultures; Central American Cultures; Mexican subcultures; Aztec, Maya and Inca; Wiccan and witch subcultures; Satanists; American Indians; Greek and Hellenistic cultures; Sufis; Hassan Sabbah’s Hashissins; Hindu, Indian and Tibetan cultures; some of the Nordic subcultures etc. Some of the psychoactive ingredients of the plants that were used during these religious rituals were; narcotic analgesics (opium), THC (cannabis), psilocybin (magic mushrooms), mescaline (peyote), ibogaine (Tabernanthe iboga), DMT (Ayahuasca and phalaris species), Peganum harmala, bufotenin, muscimol (Amanita muscaria), thujone (absinthe, Arthemisia absinthium), ephedra, mandragora, star lotus, Salvia divinorum etc. The main purposes of the practice of these plants were: spiritual healing; to contact with spirits; to contact with the souls of ancestors; to reach enlightenment (Nirvana or Satori); to become a master shaman, pagan or witch; to reach so-called-other realities, etc. Such “psychedelic-philosophical plant rituals” changed participating persons’ psychology, philosophy and personality to a great degree. In these two successive articles, the consumption of psychedelic plants during religious rituals is reviewed and it is hypothesized that the images, Figures, illusions and hallucinations experienced during these “plant trips” had a great impact on the formation and creation of many Figures, characters, creatures, archetype images that exist not only in the mythology, but also in many religions, as well, such as angels, demons, Satan, mythological creatures, gods, goddesses etc. In the Middle East and Anatolia, within many hermetic and pagan religions, Greek and Hellenic cultures psychoactive plant use was a serious part of the religious rituals, such as Dionysian rituals or Witch’s’ Sabbaths. Although the impact of the “psychedelic experience and imagination” was enormous to the configuration of many religious and mythological characters, and archetypes, this fact has been underestimated and even unnoticed by many historians and anthropologists, because of the quasi-ethical trends of “anti-drug-brain-washed Western Societies”.

An Old Babyonian Cylinder Seal from Daskyleion in Northwestern Anatolia

This essay describes an Old Babylonian cylinder seal recovered coincidentally from a Byzantine deposit at the site ofDaskyleion in northwestern Anatolia. The figurative scene and the cuneiform inscription carved on this seal is described in detail to place this artifact in its cultural and temporal context. This seal dating to a period between the late nineteenth and early eighteenth century B. C. depicts a protector goddess/Lama in a position paying respect to the god Adad. The reasons for the arrival of this seal in such a distant location far from its homeland is also evaluated in relation to the events that occurred between Anatolian and Mesopotamian cultures. It is proposed that this seal was a heirloom from the previous millennium that was brought to Daskyleion during the establishment of the Persian Satrapy at the site.

Ethnobotanical Aspects of Some Taxa in East Anatolia, Turkey

This paper presents a list of some medicinal plants distributed in the East Anatolia region. The list was prepared during an ethnobotanical survey of the region from 1995 to 2002. East Anatolia has a rich flora due to its variable climate and its many ecological zones. This diversity in flora provides a rich source of medicinal plants that has been long utilized by Anatolian cultures; and hence, accounts for the remarkable accumulation of medicinal folk knowledge for the region. This paper provides information about 71 useful plants grown in the region, 20 of which are reported for the first time. In addition to the scientific names, vernacular names and medicinal uses are given for each plant.

Greek and Lydian Evidence of Diversity, Erasure, and Convergence in Western Asia Minor

After the Persian, Greek, and Roman conquests of Lydia, a separate Lydian culture and language gradually disappeared under the influence of the kind of socioeconomic and sociolinguistic forces that have more recently reduced the diversity of the world’s cultures and languages. There is evidence, however, that a convergence between Greek and Anatolian (particularly Lydian) cultures stretched back into the Bronze Age. This kind of convergence would explain Herodotus’ remarkable statement that Greeks and Lydians follow much the same customs.

EARLY ANATOLIAN ARCHAEOLOGY IN THE LIGHT OF RECENT RESEARCH

This papcr cxamincs thc status of Anatolia bcfore the period of tlıc Assyrian trade colonies in the light of new cxcavations and dis- coveries. Kurt Bittel published thc first general survey of thc deve- lopment of local early Anatolian culturcs in 1945 In an article dealing with thc relations bctvvcen thc Royal Tombs at Alacahö- yük, the focus of Central Anatolian Early Bronzc Age culturc, and thc Aegean, Machtcld Mellink also raised somc of the basic problems of Anatolian archacology1 2. A. Goctze and J. Mellaart studied and discussed the gcographical distribution of the various Anatolian cultures of thc period c. 4000-2300-2000 B. C.3 I have been working on some of the relevant problems since 1948 4. Agreement has been rcachcd on many important problems, but there also are poinls of difference. The differences do not affcct thc fatlual and deseriptive side of thc cvidence; they are purcly a matter of interpretation.

Uruk and Yortan

Much water, both clear and muddy, has flowed under the bridge since 1903 and we can now form some idea of Anatolian cultures in the third millennium B.c. We can recognize a Troadic area in the west, a group of pre-Hittite sites in the centre, a rather shadowy Cilician culture in the south, an equally vague culture in the Van district, and a very important group of sites in the Upper Euphrates valley and its tributary vales, a country populated in historic times by Subaraeans and other less important peoples. One of the most recent contributions to the prehistory of Anatolia is provided by certain passages in Dr. Frankfort's Archaeology and the Sumerian Question, a most valuable and stimulating book; if I criticize one section of it I trust that it will be realized that I differ from him chiefly on certain emphases and stresses, and admire the treatise in general as much as any of his readers. In his general review of Mesopotamia Dr. Frankfort notices certain peculiarities in the culture of the Uruk period for which he can find no prototypes in the preceding al 'Ubaid culture. These peculiarities he proceeds to derive from Anatolia, though he admits that they may have been derived thence indirectly. The more important of these supposedly Anatolian characteristics were the use of a slip, the use of clays of purposely different composition to obtain the red colour and muffled firing to obtain the grey, the vertical piercing of the lugs, and the occurrence of stone vases. The pottery, according to Frankfort, indicates 'migratory movements'. 'Both the grey and the red wares are in reality rooted in the black ware technique which was practised in Anatolia, whereas the Iranian Highlands and the Syrian coastal regions produced two varieties of painted pottery.' Various elements of the Uruk culture, the dress fashions, the practice of writing on clay tablets, use of stamp and cylinder seals, building with mud bricks and adorning the walls with vertical grooves or by the insertion of baked clay cones, were characteristic also of the later Sumerian culture.2 Were the Uruk folk then already Sumerians? This question must be abandoned at present, but we may remark that there are many elements in the Uruk culture, especially the pottery, that can hardly be derived from the preceding al 'Ubaid culture. The plain pottery of Uruk has been found at Tepe Gawra and Nineveh in Assyria, at Kish, Ur, Warka, and Telloh in south Mesopotamia, and in deposits Ic and Id at Susa in Persia.3