Anatolia Antiqua

Cultural connections between Anatolia and Caucasus-Central Asia

during the Late Bronze-Early Iron Age (in the light of the Sos Höyük
excavations, 1987 and north-eastern Turkey Surveys, carried out
between 1985-1997)
Semih Güneri

Citer ce document / Cite this document :

Güneri Semih. Cultural connections between Anatolia and Caucasus-Central Asia during the Late Bronze-Early Iron Age (in
the light of the Sos Höyük excavations, 1987 and north-eastern Turkey Surveys, carried out between 1985-1997). In: Anatolia
Antiqua, Tome 10, 2002. pp. 11-77;

doi : https://doi.org/10.3406/anata.2002.973

https://www.persee.fr/doc/anata_1018-1946_2002_num_10_1_973

Fichier pdf généré le 06/04/2018

Anatolia Antiqua X (2002), p. 11-77.

A. Semih GUNERI

CULTURAL CONNECTIONS BETWEEN ANATOLIA

AND CAUCASUS-CENTRAL ASIA DURING
THE LATE BRONZE-EARLY IRON AGE1
(In the Light of the 1987 Sos Hoyiik Excavations and north-eastern Turkey Surveys,
Carried out Between 1985-1997)

The archaeological excavations, at Sos Hoyiik
located in Sos (Yigitta§i) village near Hasankale,
Erzurum, carried out in 1987 by a group of scholars
from the Atatiirk University, Department of
Archeology, under the leadership of Erzurum
Museum Directorate and sponsored by the
administration of Atatiirk University, and surface surveys
carried out in the ancient Hayasa land (Erzurum,
Erzincan, Kars regions) since 1985, have provided
some archaeological material which enlightens the
Late Bronze-Early Iron Age of Eastern Anatolia
(Map 1).
Surface surveys were expected to deliver some
knowledge about the second half of the second
millennium B.C. All data and discoveries about that
period were discovered in Karaz, Pulur, and
Giizelova excavations 40 years ago; this scattered
material was the only available base when we
started the excavations. Discoveries, descriptions and
confirmation were all directly related to Karaz
culture. During the surface surveys in that year, we
identified a group of black- surfaced, decked out
and relief-decorated, incised in geometrical design,
well-polished hand-made pottery showing a perfect
craftsmanship. Similar findings had also occurred
at Karaz, Pulur, Giizelova, most of which
displaying characteristics belonging to the Erzurum
region. At the same time, by means of the
strongholds, inscriptions and vessels bought and seized
by the museum, it was possible to prove that
Urartian culture had also existed in this region.
However, in those days, most scientists had almost
no interest about the time span between the above-
mentioned "cultural periods", i.e. the second
millennium B.C. (at least the second half of it). A.
Erzen — the first researcher who worked in the East
and to whom we owe so much— expressed his
interest on this topic as follows: ". . .The population
had moved into higher plateau because of the wars
and the chaos. . ." This may be true. However, the
written sources do not confirm this interpretation.
Many proofs indicate indeed that the Kingdom of
Hayasa (which is mentioned in King Mursili II's
records, and was so powerful in that period, i.e.
during the second half of the second millennium
B.C.), and the Kingdom of Dayaeni (which is
mentioned in the assyrian records of the twelfth
century B.C. as the richest3, most powerful and political-

*) Dokuz Eyliil University, Department of Classical Archaeology, Kaynaklar, 35160 Buca Izmir, TR.
1) With the exception of the introduction and a few supplement, this study is formed by the one of the chapter of my doctorate
thesis (Hacettepe University, 1995). I am particularly indepted to my professors F. I§ik, A. Ûnal, A. Erkanal, H. Erkanal, E. Ôzgen,
A. Çilingiroglu, V. Sevin and my colleague T. Ôkse and other friends of mine from Atatiirk University (1984-1988) : M.
Karaosmanoglu, N. Koçhan, C. Ba§aran, A. Diler, who provided me with the scientific support and who also gave me encouragement.
I thank especially V.P. Balakhchin, Director of Archaeological Affairs of the Ministry of Culture of the Khakassian Republic, and N.A.
Bokovenko and M.L. Podol'skiy from the Russian Academy of Sciences, Intitute of the History of Material Culture, for their
scholarly cooperation and for their sharing with us the "excavation meals" in the tent when we were studying in Shalgino, Kara-Kôl and
other spots of the Yenisei Valley in August 2001. 1 would also like to thank other Russian and Khakas colleagues for their kind
assistance.
2) Erzen, 1986:20-21.
3) Diakonov, 1984: 75.
Map 1 : Eastern Anatolia and neighbouring cultures.
 CULTURAL CONNECTIONS BETWEEN ANATOLIA AND CAUCASUS-CENTRAL ASIA
ly well- organized dynasty in the region) were
founded in this territory. Thus, A. Erzen's
hypothesis had to be confirmed by further surveys high-
lightening what has happened during those periods.
Archaelogical documents do not point out to the
same claim either. Actually, a lot of archeological
material belonging to the second half of the second
millennium B.C. was discovered at hôyiiks and on
low hills near the valleys. Although not numerous,
they still were there. The period corresponds to the
transition from the Bronze Age to the Iron Age,
around the twelfth century B.C. Several events
generated chaos in the region : cultural changes in the
Caucasus, migration of ethnic groups in central
Asia through Caucasus, the rise of newly-formed
political groups in eastern Anatolia. As a result,
local people, who had experienced the Karaz
culture, moved to other places in the same region. This
new phase was thus quite painful. It was a period of
hard-tempered, conservative warriors who built up
local dynasties, fought for "holding the power" or
for "independence", made agreements and
assimilated cultures. It was not a weak period; on the
contrary, every cycle of life marked the period fully.
Therefore, we think illogical to look for the
archaeological remains of those days up on the " bald
hills" of the Dumlu Mountains (2500 m high).
Our surveys around Erzurum started in such an
atmosphere. At the beginning, we faced various
difficulties about the classification of the pottery
which seemed to resemble one another in terms of
firing, color, technique, embellishment. However,
the descriptions and definitions of the material,
which basically consisted of the ware that was
supposed to belong to the period between the Karaz
and the Urartian periods, were completed due to the
scientific support of our instructors I. I§ik, A.
Çilingiroglu, V. Sevin, and other colleagues. A
distinctive group of pottery — other than the rest of
the"pre-Urartian" material represented — is called
hereafter, the "Proto-Urartu" material4.
These discoveries being significant, we pursued
on looking for further concrete traces about the
formation of the Proto-Urartu period in northeastern
Anatolia. Moreover, these discoveries were
4) For the terms of pre-urartu and/or dourartu, see van Loon, 1966: 6; Salvini, 1967: 32; Tarhan, 1978: 85 ff; Tarhan, 1982: 69
ff; Çiligiroglu, 1986a: 155; Sevin, 1986: 289; Sevin, 1988: 40; Guneri, 1985: 12 ff; Guneri, 1987: 1 ff; Belli, 1986: 370
5) Guneri, 1987; Guneri, 1988; Guneri, 1992.
6) Guneri, 1992: 160.
13
lighting a period which hardly appears in historical
records and had never received any attention nor
investigation before. Exhibiting the archeological
remains of the above-mentioned period for the first
time, they were of the utmost importance. Surveys
were performed over the whole Erzurum region in
1985 and in 19865. All the hôyiiks, including Karaz,
Pulur and Giizelova, were investigated with the
maximum care and painstaking. In 1987, an
excavation started under the leadership of the Erzurum
Museum. This one month excavation ended with
the discovery of hints and traces, which were
unable to imagine before. The excavation did not
continue on the following year. Today, the
excavations are carried out by A. Sagona.
I also attended the excavations at Sos Hôyiik
for a season in 1987. The results of this 1987
excavation are discussed hereafter, together with the
material of the surveys which have been carried out
since 1985.
SOS HÔYÛK EXCAVATIONSIN 1987
The Directorate of Erzurum Museum organized
a one-season excavation at Sos Hôyiik, sponsored
by the Atatiirk University. The team consisted of
scholars from that university, namely Mehmet
Karaosmanoglu, Nurettin Koçhan, Cevat Ba§aran,
Adnan Diler, and A. Semih Guneri. The
archaeological findings and the information6 obtained
during this excavation are presented here in detail for
the first time.
Sos Hoyiik is located on the highway to
Erzurum-Hasankale and near the Sos village (today
called Yigitbas,). The hoyiik is on the eastern side of
the Pasinler river valley which runs through the
Gavur and Dumlu mountains (3200 m high) to the
North, and the Eregli-Palandôken mountains to the
South. Sos Hoyiik is one of many other hôyiiks
located on a very fertile but limited land which is
watered by small tributaries of the main Karasu
river. These hôyùks are located on a very busy and
ancient crossroad where paths from Central Asia
and Caucasus to Anatolia, Mesopotamia, and
Aegean meet.
14 SEMÎH GÙNERI
In the fall of 1987, a 50 m x 60 m area was
excavated. There was almost no construction nor
structure on the northern slope of the hôyiik. The
hôyiik is 15 m high and is located on a rock arising
from 1765 m to 1780 m. Sos Hôyiik was first found
by H. Z. Ko§ay during his investigations7 in
Erzurum between 1942 and 1943. It was never
mentioned afterwards until our surveys, with the
exception of the doctorate dissertation of a friend
of mine Mahmut Pehlivan (rest in peace) (Plan 1).
STRATIGRAPHY
Three architectural layers were revealed in four
trenches of 5 m x 5 m each (1-12, J-12, J-13, J-14).
According to the pottery the first (I) and second (II)
layers belong to the Middle Ages, while the third
(III) belongs to the Early Iron Age. The trenches I-
12 and J-12, and J-13 and J-14 were joined later on,
and were named as the "first" and "second" main
trenches. The remains of the ruins (stone, mud-
brick, plaster, rubble) were pursued from the top to
1.5 m below. The remains of the third layer, which
started to be seen at this level, were observed only
in the first and second trenches. Although the
second trench descended to nearly 2-2.5 m further
down, no clear finds of the third layer could be
interpreted as having been destroyed by the
structures of the Middle Ages. Consequently, all the
finds from the third layer were obtained from the I-
12 wide trench.
The first (I) layer
The first trench (1-12), descended from 1795 m
altitude and reached a 0.45-0.50 m depth. It
delivered the remains of destroyed foundation stones
and mudbricks. In the 1-12 square, the remains of a
floor plaster appeared. The width of the rough
stones used in the base is no more than 0.20 m in
average. Those weak wall remains were based on
the walls of a house belonging to the lower layer.
No certain architectural remain could be
recognized in the first layer. Findings consisted of
unslipped, coarse, wheel-made sherds, of rusted
iron and bronze artefacts, of animal bones remains,
and of ruins of ovens.
7) Ko§ay and Turfan, 1959: 34.
8) Pehlivan, 1984:46.
The second (II) layer
At 1794.98 m above sea-level, the remains and
ruins of walls were not clear-cut. Therefore, it was
difficult to pursue architectural structures in both
wide trenches. Foundation stones were bigger than
those of the first layer. These stones destroyed
partly the structure of the third layer in the first trench;
in the second trench the destruction was complete.
At 1794.98 m, uncorrupted remains of the floor
were found. Countless wheel-made coarse ware
sherds are characteristic of the second layer,
together with some ruins of ovens.
The third (III) layer
Remains belonging to this layer were found
only in the first trench (I-J/12) (Plan 2) where it is
a fire layer. A wall consisted of three mudbrick
rows, laying from East to West and 1.20 m wide.
This wall was intersected perpendicularly from
North to South by another wall of the same width.
The floor of Room 1 in the South of the first trench
was completely unearthed and cleaned (Plan 2).
The thick walls of the room were constructed with
mudbrick blocks of 0.40 x 0.20 x 0.10 m
dimensions (height, length, width) and were thickly
plastered. The white floor plaster was thicker but of the
same quality as the one on the walls. The plaster on
the floor and on the walls was grey-like coloured as
the result of the fire. The 1 cm thick floor plaster
was transformed into distinct sherds by curling,
turning into sherds of clinkers. Large quantities of
sherds were found in this room. Room 2, which was
adjacent to the wall laying East- West, was 4.20 m
long, with a mudbrick section of 1.0 x 0.75 x 0.20
m in the western corner. The wall on the West,
which was adjacent to the pedestal, laid on a South-
North direction for 1.75 m and then drew a
perpendicular line in an East- West direction. Under these
conditions it was hard to interprète Room 3 (a
room? a place?), structured by the continuation of
the thick walls towards West and the walls of Room
2. Probably, the building of the structures in the
first and second layers destroyed what was bellow.
Therefore, the extension of the remains of the third
layer could hardly be recognized, in a similar way
to what had occurred in the first and second trenches.
CULTURAL CONNECTIONS BETWEEN ANATOLIA AND CAUCASUS-CENTRAL ASIA 15

ABCDE FGH JK LMNOPRSTUVYZAAAB

I
4- 4- -4-
T SOS
+ HÛYÙK

1987 Excavations

J25M

Plan 1 : Sos Hôyùk 1987 Excavations.

 1795.82 J
12
1795.32
Plan 2 : Sos Hôyùk, Trench I-J/12.
 CULTURAL CONNECTIONS BETWEEN ANATOLIA AND CAUCASUS-CENTRAL ASIA
ARCHITECTURE
There were no clear architectural traces other
than untidy rows of stone and mudbrick ruins. On
the second layer appeared only piles of mudbricks
and ruins of stone walls which were made of bigger
and tidier stones when compared to those in layer I;
their extension could be clearly pursued. Three
adjacent rooms discovered in the first trench are
considered to be the basis of an architectural
structure belonging to the third layer. The walls of the
first room, which is known to be the widest (Plan
2), and the walls of the two other rooms, of which
three rows of mudbricks are adjacent to the North
are 1.20 m long, are covered with a thick plaster,
and painted in white as are also their floors. It has
not been understood whether these two small
rooms have a direct connection to the wider one.
The plaster of the walls and floors was almost
roasted by a huge fire.
POTTERY
Both wide trenches (I-J/12 and J/13-14) (Plan
1) delivered countless numbers of sherds, but only
two vessels which we were able to complete. This
work does not include the sherds of the vessels
belonging to the first two layers. The majority of
the sherds from the third layer have no rim. We
made use of these sherds, as will be examined
below, only to classify pottery groups. Here, only
the sherds which have rims or base forms will be
described. Consequently, only a few sherds with
rims belong to the third layer of Sos Hoyiik, as will
be seen below. Classification of the pottery groups
from the third layer of Sos Hoyiik, the
interpretation of their interaction with the neighbouring
cultures and the dating of the sherds (with the
exception of the two complete vessels) have been
realized in comparison with the other vessels
discovered during the excavations.
Sample I: Jar (PI. 24/2).
Place of discovery: I-J/12 trench.
9) Ko§ay and Vary, 1964: 29, PI. XC/P. 256.
10) Muncayev and Smirnov, 1958: 87-92, Fig. 26/1-4.
1 1) Smirnov, 1951: 266, Fig. 10/5, 6.
12) Smirnov, 1951: Fig. 2a.
13) Caferov and Kesamanh, 1979: PL 111/11.
17
Height: 47.6 cm.
Rim diameter: 17 cm.
Width: 9 cm.
Pedestal diameter: 5.5 cm.
Diameter of the hole in the pedestal: 1 cm.
Although some parts of the body are missing,
the vessel is in a condition allowing identification.
It is hand-made. Rim is everted in the exterior part
and becomes slightly thick towards the interior. A
slight transition from the rim forms a narrow neck.
Transition from the narrow neck to the flattened
body is made by slope lines. Transition from the
body to the pedestal has dominant straight lines.
The pedestal is straight and its diameter (5.5 cm) is
narrower than that of the protuberant body of the
vessel. Although it is a hand-made product, it
possesses regular lines. Its colour is light brown and
has a thick slip. The slip is applied from the rim to
where the neck ends. However, it is not
well-burnished. The thick slip, particularly around the body
and the pedestal, is exfoliated in flakes.
Examination of the broken parts shows that the
fabric includes fine grit. Although it is not well-fired,
black points are visible in the core. Fabric is soft.
Several points look grey-like due to the firing
conditions. Around Erzurum this kind of vessel (the
pedestal of which carries holes) was first
discovered in the Pulur graves (PI. 25)9.
Similar jars, in terms of their colour, production
techniques and shapes, are found in South
Caucasus. Some examples10, representing
Kayakent-Horoçoyev culture, possess pedestal
with narrower diameters when compared to those
found in the Pulur graves. These examples exhibit
almost a concave transition from the flattened body
to the pedestal. The diameters of the pedestals of
similar examples11 at Tarki cemetery in Dagestan
are lowered to 5 cm (remember that these pots are
45-55 cm high). One of the examples12 at Tarki,
exhibiting some slight differences with the
previous one, carries incized ornaments on its shoulder.
Caferov and Kesamanh13 discovered hand-made
pots characteristic of the Hocah-Gedebey culture,
18 SEMÎH GUNERI
which were dated to the first centuries of the first
millennium B.C.14. These examples have a narrow
neck, a flattened body, a narrow pedestal and a
thick slip; as such, they closely match the ones
found at Sos Hôyiik. Other similar examples15 can
be found as well in the Solomenka kurgans in
northern Caucasus where they are dated to the
second half of the second millennium B.C. The
flattened body of these examples is closer to the
pedestals. Other vessels16 from the Gabardinko-
Balkarya graves in the same region differ from the
Sos Hôyiik ones with respect to some geometrical
incised decorations on their shoulders17.
The jar belonging to Sos Hôyiik differs from
the above-mentioned ones because of the hole on
its pedestal. No finds recorded exhibiting such a
hole on its pedestal have been found in the
Caucasus. Obviously, the Sos Hôyiik jars, which
are similar to those of the Caucasus in terms of
design, colour, techniques, are distinctive on the
base of the holes on their pedestals which are a
marked regional significance. According to Ko§ay
and Vary18, such jars (with holes on their pedestals)
excavated either complete or scattered in the Pulur
graves, belonged only to these graves and to
nowhere else. Today, Ko§ay and Vary's claim has to
be disgarded in the light of the finds from the third
layer of Sos Hôyiik.
However, it should be remembered that those
pots had close relations with the cult of the deads.
They were also closely related to identical types of
Urartian vessels whose holes, however, were not on
the pedestals but on the shoulders. This may be
considered a tradition link from Proto-Urartu to
Urartu. One of these vessels, found at Giizelova, is
exhibited in the Erzurum Museum. This example
(with no definition nor description) is only
identified on a photograph where it is exposed among
other vessels discovered during the Giizelova
excavations19. It has accidentally been noticed, while
being exhibited in the Museum, that its pedestal
14) See, Eliyev, 1977: PI. 3/4.
15) Markovin, 1960: Fig. 11/2.
16) Markovin, 1960: Fig 24/1.
17) Markovin, 1960: Fig 24/1.
18) Ko§ay and Vary, 1964: 29.
19) Ko§ay and Vary, 1967: Lev. XXXV/G.291.
20) Kuftin, 1941: PI. XLVII/1; LI/2.
21)Gtineri, 1992: Fig. 40.
carries a hole. In spite of its cylinder-like neck and
low body, this Giizelova vessel is quite similar to
those from Pulur and Sos, in terms of production
techniques, surface and fabric colour, flattened
body, narrow pedestal holed while wet. Pots
closely matching20 the vessels from Giizelova have been
found in the Safar-Harab inhumation burials in
Bestaseni, south-western Caucasus. These vessels
possess incised ornaments in various forms on their
shoulders. Another close match to the holed Sos
Hôyiik pot is visible in the Atatiirk University
collection. This sample (of unknown origin) is yellow
brownish, with a thick and well-burnished slip, the
slip being peeled at certain sections. Its surface is
mottling. It possesses also a flattened body and a
narrow pedestal with a hole. Sherds of such vessels
were also collected during our surveys around
Erzurum21. The in situ holed pot from the third
layer of Sos Hôyiik belongs to the same tradition as
the ones discovered in the Pulur graves, and belong
certainly to the same period. It is thus the most
significant element for the dating of Sos Hôyiik Layer
III.
Sample 2: Bowl (PL 7/1)
Place of discovery: I-J/12
Height: 7.5 cm.
Rim diameter: 14.5 cm.
Pedestal diameter: 4 cm.
This bowl was found broken, and completed
later on. It is wheel-made. The inverted simple rim
is flattened. Transition from the rim to the pedestal
has circular lines. Below the rim are two knobs side
by side. The pedestal becomes concave towards the
centre. The vessel surface is pinkish yellow and
thickly slipped. The inner part is of the same
colour, the fabric being dependant of the firing
conditions. The exterior, beginning from the knobs, is
black. Although the exterior surface is irregularly
burnished, the burnishing is almost perfect. On
broken sections, the fabric is soft with fine grit and a
 CULTURAL CONNECTIONS BETWEEN ANATOLIA AND CAUCASUS-CENTRAL ASIA
dark grey core. The pot was badly fired. Vessels
with similar forms have also been found in the
Pulur excavations where one example carries two
knobs side by side22. Ko§ay and Vary23 point out
that some of these pots were discovered 2-2.5 m
deep in the hôyûk. The bowls mentioned here,
including the one from Sos, are undoubtedly
related to groups attributed to the middle of the second
millennium B.C., either in the Caucasus or in Iran.
SURVEYS
Between 1985-1997, we carried out several
surveys in eastern Anatolia. The names and
information about the ancient sites which were discovered
during these surface surveys have been previously
published24. I would like to emphasize that our
surveys aimed at locating and collecting Late Bronze-
Early Iron Age material which had never been
investigated before, rather than preparing an
excellent inventory of the sites existing there. I believe
that new surveys in this region will undoubtedly
help us discover other ancient sites.
Ancient settlements in Erzurum, Erzincan and
Kars regions consist mostly of hoyiiks. In average,
hoyiiks in the Erzurum region have 50-60 m in
diameter and 8-10 m in height. When in villages
(such as Sos or Cinis) they have been severely
destroyed. When away from the settlement centres,
they were better preserved. For instance, Erzurum-
Cinis Hoyiik25 was once located at the very centre
of the village. Today, almost nothing is left from the
hoy ilk which stands as ruins. Karaz, Pulur, and
Giizelova hoyiiks are totally unlike those of
Çatalhôyûk or Canhasan, which were partly
excavated in the past but still stands on the ground.
These hoyiiks vanished and are "gone with the
wind" for they underwent destruction since 1985.
Unlike Konya and Amik plains the region is short
of farm land. Here, farming development and soil
extraction are the main causes of the destruction of
hôyiiks. In recent years local authorities have
extracted and are still extracting huge amounts of
22) Ko§ay and Vary, 1964: PI. XXII/P.68.
23) Ko§ay and Vary, 1964: 41.
24) Giineri, 1987; Giineri, 1988; Guneri, 1992; Gtineri, 1995.
25)Guneri, 1992: Fig. 39, 40
26) I am very grateful to the ARIT which provided me with financial support in 1990.
27) I have to thank M.K.§ahin who was the representative of the Ministry of Culture, General Directorate of Museum and
Antiquity, during the 1990 Erzurum, Erzincan and Kars surveys.
19
soil in this region. Since our surveys in 1987 and
onwards and in spite of our warnings, local
authorities let the soil from Bulamaç Hoyiik be carried
away although they forbid this activity. Today, a
few remaining hoyiiks still deserve excavation.
Among these, only one hoyiik delivers the most
precious traces of the Late Bronze and the Early
Iron Ages : Bulamaç Hoyiik, where excavations
started finally in July 2001.
The peak of our survey activities was
sponsored by the American Research Institute in Ankara
(ARIT) 6. It concerned the centrum of Erzincan,
Refahiye and Tercan27. Kildirik and Saz Tepe sites
are located on the Altmtepe plateau near Uzumlii
village, they are continuously being mutilated.
Surveys within the borders of Kars occured in the
centrum, in Ardahan and Hanak whereas the
districts along the national borderline could not be
explored (particularly after 1991) because of
national security reasons. Settlements in this
region, as in Erzurum, consist of hoyiiks and
natural hills. The hoyiiks are as small in size as those in
Erzurum.
The proportion of the archaeological finds
belonging to the Early Iron Age in the Erzurum
region differs with regard to each settlement
characteristics. In Alaca, the largest hoyiik in the region,
only a few finds are supposed to belong to that
period. Smaller samples from Bulamaç Hoyiik rise in a
higher proportion in this survey. It is surprising that
such Urartian hills as Uzunahmet and §irinkale also
possess sherds which belong to the Early Iron Age.
This reveals undoubtedly that these districts rich in
hills and castles have been occupied at least since
the Early Iron Age (12th c. B.C.) on.
The vessels from Kars representing the Early
Iron Age have close matches with the ones from
Erzurum in colour, shape, and techniques.
However, it is difficult to ascertain such claims
regarding the finds gathered from the settlements in
Erzurum. The finds from Tercan-§irinkale,
20 SEMÎH GUNERÎ
Kildirik, Saz Tepe and Tombul Tepe near Altintepe
have almost no sherds of pots representing the
Early Iron Age; therefore, it is difficult to match
them to the Caucasian ones. This observation did,
in a sense, put an ending point to our surveys on the
western borders. The pottery finds in Erzincan are
undoubtedly related to the ones in Erzurum and
even in Kars. However, it must be noted that the
traditional characteristics of these pots are
gradual y showing traditional properties belonging to
Central Anatolia. This is particularly obvious for
the ceramics of the third millennium B.C.
THE POTTERY GROUPS
GROUPA
BLACK SURFACED BURNISHED WARE
(Pis. 1-2)
Sites
SosIII(Pls. 1/1,2, 4, 5; 2/10)
Ardahan-Kalecik (Pis. 1/3; 2/7,8)
Pulur (PL 2/6)
Kars-Azat (PL 2/9)
Paste
Clay is not well-refined. The grit tempering
quality varies from fine to coarse; a little mica may
some times be added.
Colour
Most examples have black colour, as the
prehistoric Karaz Ware (Early Transcaucasian Ware);
however dark grey and dark purple surfaces also
occur.
Firing
Fabric is not so hard and not well-fired through,
so that grey and black cores are common. The
sections of the sherds generally show a dark grey to
black core.
Burnishing
All vessels are generally covered by thin slip.
Highly glossed surfaces are rare. All together the
burnishing quality of these vessels is lower than
that of highly burnished Karaz Ware. Burnishing
traces on the surfaces are coarse and irregular;
generally, the rim is not burnished. Exterior surfaces
are always polished while the interiors are only
slightly burnished.
Shape
Carinated and rounded bowls with slightly
thickened rim on the exterior (PL 1/1) and simple
rim (Pis. 1/2; 2/6-10), pot with rounded body (PL
1/3), bowl with thickened rim on the exterior (PL
1/4), fragment of base (PL 1/5).
GROUP B
BLACK FACED COARSE WARE (PL 3)
Sites
Tuy (PL 3/1)
Sos III (PL 3/2, 5)
Pulur (PL 3/3)
Ardahan-Çataldere (PL 3/4)
Paste
The clay used for the majority of the sherds is
always well-refined. Fine to coarse and moderate to
abundant grit together with much less mica is the
most usual tempering material. Rare coarser grit
may points out that the paste was not well-worked.
Colour
The interior and exterior surfaces are black
throughout.
Firing
All sherds exposed in Group B are not well-
fired, so that black or dark grey cores often occur.
Burnishing
The surfaces are wet-smoothed. Either deep
wheel-marks and strokes or coarser tempering
material caused rough and uneven surfaces.
Shape
Carinated and rounded bowls with either
everted rim (PL 3/1,3), thickened on the exterior (PL
3/5), inverted simple rim (PL 3/2, 4). Three of them
(PL 1/1, 3, 5) were probably made on a "slow"
wheel since the slow wheel signs are visible on the
exterior and interior of everted rims.
GROUP C
GREY-BLACK MOTTLED FACED
COARSE WARE (PI. 4)
Sites
Ardahan-Çataldere (PL 4/1)
Sos III (PL 4/2)
Bulamaç (PL 4/3, 4)
Erzurum-Tuy (PL 4/5)
 CULTURAL CONNECTIONS BETWEEN ANATOLIA AND CAUCASUS-CENTRAL ASIA
Paste
The clay quality varies. Thick-walled
examples have coarse grit tempering, others have fine
grit. Rarely does coarser grit, seen on the surfaces
and/or on the sections, cause rough surfaces.
Colour
The interior and exterior surfaces of the sherds
examined in Group C, show mottling grey and
black colours.
Firing
Mottling occurs on the surfaces, in relation with
fire conditions; it can also be noticed on the
sections. Grey core is common.
Burnishing
All sherds are wet-smoothed, some of them
being slightly burnished.
Shape
Rounded bowls with flattened rim (PL 4/1, 2);
carinated bowl with rim thickened along the
exterior (PL 4/3); deep bowl (PL 4/4); pot sherd (PL 4/5).
GROUP D
RED-GREY-BLACK MOTTLED FACED
WELL-BURNISHED WARE (Pis. 5-6)
Sites
Uzunahmet (Pis. 5/1; 6/7)
Sos (Pls.5/2; 6/6, 9, 10, 11)
Alaca(Pls. 5/3; 6/5)
Ardahan-Kalecik (Pis. 5/4; 6/8)
Paste
Clay is not well-worked. Tempering material
used is rare mica, fine to coarse grit, usually in
large quantities; mica tempering seems to
predominate in the Erzurum region.
Colour
Only the exterior surfaces are red slipped. Red
colour changes from light red (2.5 YR 5/6) to dark
(10 R 3/6) or pinkish red (7.5 YR 7/4). Black colour
stopped and mottled on the backround colour of
red, turning from grey to its own colour.
Firing
Firing is soft and black and grey cores are often
visible in sections as well as on the surfaces.
21
Burnishing
Generally, all sherds examined during the
surveys and presented here are well-burnished. No
trace of burnishing on the surfaces. An example
exhibits a mirror-like polish. This kind of polish
associates the high burnishing technique of old
Karaz Ware. On the other hand, it may be related to
a long-time use of the vessels.
Shape
Carinated bowl with everted rim (PL 5/1),
rounded bowls with rim thickened along the
exterior and interior (PL 5/3, 4), bowls with flattened rim
(PL 6/5,6, 8) and slightly body carination with rims
are of a simple inverted type (Pis. 5/2; 6/7, 9, 10,
11). All are wheel-made, with the exception of two
vessels.
GROUP E
WELL-BURNISHED WARE WITH
INTERIOR AND EXTERIOR
CONTRASTING COLOURS (PI. 7)
Sites
Sos III (PL 7/1, 3)
Ardahan-Çataldere (PL 7/2)
Bulamaç (PL 7/4)
Paste
Generally fine to coarse fabrics tempered with
grit; coarser examples are also present.
Colour
The exterior surfaces are always black, while
the interior surfaces are yellowish red, pink or
pinkish-yellow.
Firing
The fabric is not so hard and not well-fired
throughout, so that grey and black cores are
common. The vessels of Group E are associated with
the Karaz Ware; interior and exterior contrasting
colours, from Karaz, Pulur, Giizelova in Erzurum
and other sites in Altinova plain, Elazig.
Burnishing
Exterior surfaces are well-burnished. A bowl
with a concave base shows a mirror-like polish;
however, highly glossed surfaces are frequent. The
rims may be burnished while the interior is rarely
burnished (or wet- smoothed).
22 SEMÎH GÙNERÎ

Shape Paste
Rounded bowls with flattened rim. Clay is well-worked. Grit tempering is used
while a little amount of very fine mica may have
GROUP F been added to the tempering material of Sos and
BUFF-GREY HOARY MOTTLED WARE Pulur sherds.
(PI. 8)
Colour
Sites Both the interior and exterior surface colours
Sos(Pl. 8/1,4,5) are homogeneously slimly mottled buff-grey. Two
Bulamaç (PL 8/2) colours, buff and grey, are in thin horizontal,
Pulur (PL 8/3) intermingled lines on the surfaces. Earliest examples of
this ware were found at the prehistoric sites of
Paste Altinova, Elazig and at the prehistoric settlements
Clay is well-worked. Grit tempering is used; a of Karaz, Pulur and Giizelova.
little very fine mica may be added to the tempering
material of Sos and Bulamaç sherds. Firing
Fabric is generally hard, nearly always well-
Colour fired throughout, so that no black and grey cores
Both the interior and exterior surface colours occur.
are homogeneously slimly mottled buff-grey. Two
colours, buff and grey, are in thin horizontal, Shape
intermingled lines on the surfaces. Earliest examples of Carinated bowls with rim thickened on the
this ware were found in prehistoric sites in exterior (PL 9/1, 2, 3); rounded bowls with everted
Altinova, Elazig. rim (PL 9/4, 5); flattened rim (9/6). All are
handmade, with the exception of one sample (PL 9/6).
Firing
Generally, fabric is hard. It is nearly always GROUP H
well-fired throughout; black and grey cores are WELL-FIRED DARK BROWN FACED
absent. BURNISHED WARE (PI. 10)

Burnishing Sites
Surfaces have thick slip and are well-burnished. Sos III (PL 10/1,3,5)
This kind of mottling is rather caused by polish Sos (PL 10/2)
application: burnishing traces lie on the surfaces Uzunahmet (PL 10/4)
with the same orientation as horizontal
intermingled lines of grey and black colours. Paste
Clay is well-refined and worked. Tempering
Shape matter used is a fine grit, usually in large quantities.
Rounded bowls with thickened rim along the
exterior (PL 8/1, 2, 3, 5) and simple bowl with wide Colour
mouth (PL 8). All are hand-made. The colour of the surfaces, both at the interior
and at the exterior, ranges from dark brown to
GROUP G blackish-brown.
DARK RED-GREY HOARY MOTTLED
WARE (PI. 9) Firing
Fabric is generally hard, nearly always well-
Sites fired throughout.
Pulur (PL 9/1)
Uzunahmet (PL 9/2) Burnishing
Sos III (PL 9/3, 6) All sherds have a thick slip. Both interior and
Saztepe (PL 9/4) exterior surfaces are well-burnished. Especially, the
Alaca (PL 9/5) example from Sos III are more glossed than the oth-
 CULTURAL CONNECTIONS BETWEEN ANATOLIA AND CAUCASUS-CENTRAL ASIA 23

ers; burnishing traces are not visible. Some of them GROUP J

present a mirror-like polish. WELL-FIRED PINK SURFACED
BURNISHED WARE (Pis. 12-13)
Shape
Deep bowls with rim thickened on the exterior Sites
(PI. 10/1, 2) and the interior (PI. 10/3), carinated Agn-Toklucak (PL 12/1)
bowls with rim flattened (PI. 10/4) and rounded Sos (PL 12/2)
bowl with thin wall (PL 10/5). All are wheel-made, Ardahan-Kalecik (Pis. 12/6; 13/9-14)
with the exception of one (PL 10/2). Sos III (Pis. 12/6; 13/15)
§irinlikale (PL 12/7)
GROUP I
WELL-FIRED LIGHT BROWN FACED Paste
BURNISHED WARE (PI. 11) Clay is quite well-refined and worked.
Tempering material used is fine to coarse grit and
Sites sometimes white mineral; coarser grit is rare.
Saztepe(Pl. 11/1)
Karaz(PL 11/2) Colour
Ardahan-Kalecik (PL 11/3) Interior and exterior surfaces are pink,
Bulamaç(PL 11/4) yellowish-red or buff.
SosIII(PL 11/5)
Firing
Paste Generally, fabric is hard; it is always well-fired
Clay is quite well-refined and worked. throughout, but sometimes the core can be grey.
Tempering material used is a fine to coarse grit; a
white mineral coarser grit is rare. Burnishing
All sherds are thick slipped and slightly
Colour burnished. Sometimes, there is some sign of random
Interior and exterior surface colours are most burnishing on the surfaces. In some wheel-made,
frequently light buff to pink. Colour is rims and shoulders are not burnished.
homogeneous on every section.
Shape
Firing Carinated bowls with rim thickened along the
The fabric is fired quite hard; nevertheless, core exterior (PL 12/1, 2, 3); rounded bowls inverted (PL
can occasionally be light grey. 12/4, 5); everted (PL 12/6, 7) and flattened (PL
13/8, 13, 14, 15). All are wheel-made, with the
Burnishing exception of three samples (PL 12/2, 3, 7).
Interior and exterior surfaces with thick slip are
slightly burnished; hand-made ones show coarse GROUP K
traces of burnishing. Rims and shoulders of some YELLOWISH-RED COARSE WARE
of the wheel-made sherds are not burnished. (Pis. 14-15)

Shape Sites
Rounded bowls with flattened rim (PL 11/1, 2, Bulamaç(PL 14/1,2,3,4)
3), bowls with rim thickened on the exterior (PL Uzunahmet (PL 15/6)
11/4) and everted rim (PL 11/5, 6). All are wheel- Sos III (PL 15/7,9, 11)
made, with one exception (PL 11/6). Pulur (PL 15/8, 10)
24 SEMÏH GÛNERÎ

Paste Burnishing
The fabric is not well-refined nor worked. Thin and thick slipped surfaces are slightly
Tempering material used is coarse grit with a few burnished, but a few vessels have a mirror-like polish.
bright mica particles. Mica slip itself has a natural brightness. On some
sherds, thick slip is peeled.
Colour
Interior and exterior surface colours are Shape
pinkish-yellow to reddish-yellow. Carinated bowls with everted rim (PI. 14/1, 2,
3, 4, 5). All are made on "slow" wheel.
Firing
The fabric is soft; it is not well-fired, but a few GROUP M
examples are hard fired and heavily tempered with BULAMAÇ TYPE MICA TEMPERED
coarse grit. It is generally lightly fired to leave a COARSE WARE (PI. 17)
thin grey core.
Site
Burnishing Bulamaç(Pl. 17/1,2,3,4,5)
The surfaces are neither slipped nor burnished.
Vessels walls are smooth but are often clearly Paste
wheel-marked. The charateristic marks of coarse The fabric is as GROUP C.
grit are not regularly .
Colour
Shape The surface colours range from pink to
Slightly carinated bowls with simple rim (PI. yellowish-red.
14/1) and everted rim (Pis. 14/2, 3, 4; 15/6, 7, 8);
rounded bowls with inverted rim (PI. 15/5, 9, 10) Firing
and bowls with grooved rim (PI. 15/11). All bowls Firing is as GROUP C.
are hand-made.
Burnishing
GROUP L The surfaces are neither slipped nor burnished.
BULAMAÇ TYPE "MICA SLIPPED" Vessels walls are smooth but are often clearly
WARE (PI. 16) wheel-marked. The charateristic marks of coarse
grit are not orderly.
Site
Bulamaç(Pl. 16/1,2,3,4,5) GROUP N
RED SLIPPED WARE (Pis. 18-19)
Paste
Fabric is not well-refined nor worked; fine and Sites
coarse grit, white minerals and fine particles of Sos(Pl. 18/1)
mica in moderate quantities are used as tempering Uzunahmet (PI. 18/2)
material. Generally, the fabric colour is pink, but it Ardahan-Kalecik (PI. 18/3, 4)
can also change from pink to red. Alaca(Pl. 18/5)
SosIII(Pls. 18/6,7; 19/8, 11)
Colour Cinis (PI. 19/9)
The surface colours range from pink, Ardahan-Çataldere (PI. 19/10)
yellowish-red, red (10 R 5/6). Kars-Azat (PI. 19/12)

Firing Paste
The vessels are generally well-fired throughout. Generally, the fabric is pink. Fabric of most
Firing of some sherds is soft; grey and black cores sherds is well refined and hard. Tempering
are often visible on sections. material used is fine to coarse grit and a few mica.
 CULTURAL CONNECTIONS BETWEEN ANATOLIA AND CAUCASUS-CENTRAL ASIA 25

Colour Groups
The vessels have often a red slip. 22/1 - Group K
22/2 - Group I
Firing 22/3 - Group I
Generally fabric is well-fired. A few examples 22/4 - Group K
have grey cores. 23/5 - Group I
23/6 - Group K
Shape 23/7 - Group K
Carinated (PI. 18/1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6; 19/10 11) and 23/8 - Group K
rounded (PI. 18/7; 19/8, 9, 12) bowls.

GROUP O CATALOGUE OF ILLUSTRATED

INCISED WARE (Pis. 20-21) POTTERY

Sites GROUPA
Sos III (Pis. 20/1,5; 21/12)
Pulur (PI. 20/2) 1/1 Sos III, WM, 0: 18 cm, black core,
Bulamaç (PL 2/3; 21/7) horizontal burnishing lines, interior and exterior black,
Karaz (PI. 20/4; 21/6) fine grit tempering.
Ardahan-Kalecik (PI. 21/8, 10)
A§kale (PI. 21/9) 1/2 Sos III, WM, 0: ?, black core, horizontal
Uzunahmet (PI. 21/11) burnishing lines, interior and exterior black,
Azat (PI. 21/13) exterior wheel-marked, grit tempering.
Erzurum-Tuy (PI. 21/14)
1/3 Ardahan-Kalecik, WM, 0: ?, black core,
Groups vertical burnishing lines, interior and exterior
20/1 - Group K black.
20/2- Group M
20/3- Group N 1/4 Sos III, HM, 0: 26 cm, well-fired, black
20/4- Group N core, grit tempering, horizontal burnishing lines,
20/5- Group N interior and exterior black.
21/6- Group N
21/7- Group D 1/5 Sos III, HM, 0: ?, black core, grit
21/8- Group N tempering, interior and exterior black, burnished.
21/9- GroupD
21/10 - Group F 2/6 Pulur, HM, 0: 21 cm, black core, grit
21/11 - Group N tempering, horizontal burnishing lines.
21/12 - Group M
21/13 - Group A 2/7 Ardahan-Kalecik, WM, 0: 24 cm, grey
21/14 - Group N core, grit tempering, interior and exterior black,
burnished.
GROUP P
GROOVED WARE (Pis. 22-23) 2/8 Ardahan-Kalecik, WM, 0: ?, black core,
grit tempering, interior and exterior black,
Sites burnished.
Cinis (Pis. 22/1; 23/7)
Pulur (PL 22/2) 2/9 Kars-Azat, WM, 0: ?, grey core, grit
Karaz (PL 22/3) tempering, interior and exterior black, burnished.
;

§irinlikale (PI. 22/4)

Sos III (PL 23/5, 8) 2/10 Sos III, HM, D. 20.2 cm, black core, grit
Uzunahmet (PL 23/6) tempering, interior and exterior black, burnished.
26 SEMÎH GÛNERÏ

PI. 1
c

0' j10 CM
CULTURAL CONNECTIONS BETWEEN ANATOLIA AND CAUCASUS-CENTRALASIA 27

PI. 2

10

0l J L J10CM
28 SEMÎH GÛNERÎ

PL 3

LZ

Ol j i1O CM
i

i
 CULTURAL CONNECTIONS BETWEEN ANATOLIA AND CAUCASUS-CENTRAL ASIA
GROUP B
3/1 Erzurum-Tuy, WM, 0: 21 cm, black core,
coarse grit tempering, interior and exterior black,
wet- smoothed.
3/2 Sos III, WM, 0: 23, black core, coarse grit
tempering, interior and exterior black, wet-
smoothed.
3/3 Pulur, WM, 0: 14 cm, black core, coarse
grit tempering, interior and exterior black, wet-
smoothed.
3/4 Ardahan-Çataldere, WM, 0: ?, black core,
coarse grit tempering, interior and exterior black,
wet- smoothed.
3/5 Sos, WM, 0: ?, black core, coarse grit
tempering, interior and exterior black, wet-smoothed.
GROUP C
4/1 Ardahan-Çataldere, WM, 0: 20 cm, grey-
black core, coarse grit tempering, interior and
exterior grey-black mottled, wet-smoothed.
4/2 Sos III, WM, 0: 18 cm, grey-black core,
coarse grit tempering, interior and exterior grey-
black mottled, wet-smoothed.
4/3 Bulamaç, HM, 0: ?, black core, coarse grit
tempering, interior and exterior grey-black mottled,
wet-smoothed.
4/4 Bulamaç, WM, 0: ?, black core, coarse grit
tempering, interior and exterior grey-black mottled,
wet- smoothed.
4/5 Erzurum-Tuy, WM, 0: ?, black core, coarse
grit tempering, interior and exterior grey-black
mottled, wet-smoothed.
GROUP D
5/1 Uzunahmet, WM, 0: 22 cm, black core,
coarse grit tempering, interior and exterior red-
grey-black mottled, burnished.
5/2 Sos, WM, 0: 22 cm, pink-grey core, coarse
grit tempering, interior and exterior red-grey-black
mottled, well-burnished.
29
5/3 Alaca, WM, 0: 15 cm, grey core, coarse grit
tempering, interior and exterior red-grey-black
mottled, well-burnished.
5/4 Ardahan-Kalecik, WM, 0: 22 cm, grey
core, coarse grit tempering, interior and exterior
red-grey-black mottled, well-burnished.
6/5 Alaca, HM, 0: 12 cm, pink-grey core, fine
grit tempering, interior and exterior red-grey-black
mottled, burnished.
6/6 Sos III, WM, 0: ?, grey core, coarse grit
tempering, interior and exterior red-grey-black
mottled, well-burnished.
6/7 Uzunahmet, WM, 0: ?, black core, coarse
grit tempering, interior and exterior red-grey -black
mottled, well-burnished.
6/8 Ardahan-Kalecik, WM, 0: ?, grey core,
coarse grit tempering, interior and exterior red-
grey-black mottled, well-burnished.
6/9 Sos III, WM, 0: ?, grey core, coarse grit
tempering, exterior red-grey-black mottled, well-
burnished.
6/10 Sos III, WM, 0: ?, grey core, coarse grit
tempering, interior and exterior red-grey-black
mottled, well-burnished.
6/11 Sos III, WM, 0: ?, black core, coarse grit
tempering, interior and exterior red-grey-black
mottled, well-burnished.
GROUP E
7/1 Sos III, WM, 0: 15 cm, black core, grit
tempering, exterior black, interior pinkish-yellow,
smoothed or slightly "burnished", two knobs on the
exterior of rim, concave base.
7/2 Ardahan-Çataldere, WM, 0: 20 cm, black
core, fine grit tempering, exterior black,
well-burnished, interior red, smoothed.
7/3 Sos III, WM, 0: 25 cm, black core, fine grit
tempering, exterior black, well-burnished, interior
pink, smoothed.
7/4 Bulamaç, WM, 0: 21 cm, black core, fine
30 SEMÎH GÙNERÎ

PI. 4

0- L j1O CM
CULTURAL CONNECTIONS BETWEEN ANATOLIA AND CAUCASUS-CENTRAL ASIA 31

PI. 5

i10 CM
32 SEMÎH GÙNERÎ

PI. 6

w
8

10
11

Ol -1 L j10 CM
1

I
CULTURAL CONNECTIONS BETWEEN ANATOLIA AND CAUCASUS-CENTRAL ASIA 33

PI. 7

j10 CM
34 SEMÎH GÙNERÎ

PI. 8

n 10 CM
 CULTURAL CONNECTIONS BETWEEN ANATOLIA AND CAUCASUS-CENTRAL ASIA
grit tempering, exterior black, well-burnished,
interior pinkish-yellow, wheel-marked, smoothed.
GROUP F
8/1 Sos, HM, 0: 17 cm, brown core, fine grit
and mica tempering, interior and exterior buff-grey
mottled, well-burnished.
8/2 Bulamaç, HM, 0: 18 cm, brown core, fine
grit tempering, interior and exterior buff-grey
mottled, well-burnished.
8/3 Pulur, HM, 0: 11 cm, dark brown core, fine
grit tempering, interior and exterior buff-grey
mottled, well-burnished.
8/4 Sos, HM, 0: ?, grey core, fine grit and mica
tempering, interior and exterior buff-grey mottled,
well-burnished.
8/5 Sos, HM, 0: ?, grey core, fine grit and mica
tempering, interior and exterior buff-grey mottled,
well-burnished.
GROUP G
9/1 Pulur, WM, 0: 15 cm, well-fired, fine grit
tempering, interior and exterior red-grey mottled,
well-burnished.
9/2 Uzunahmet, HM, 0: ?, well-fired, fine grit
tempering, interior and exterior red-grey mottled,
well-burnished.
9/3 Sos III, HM, 0: ?, well-fired, fine grit and
mica tempering, interior and exterior brown-grey
mottled, well-burnished.
9/4 Saztepe, WM, 0: ?, well-fired, fine grit
tempering, interior and exterior red-grey mottled,
well-burnished.
9/5 Erzurum-Tuy, WM, 0: ? well-fired, fine
grit tempering, interior and exterior red-grey
mottled, well-burnished.
9/6 Sos III, WM, 0: ?, well-fired, coarse grit
tempering, interior and exterior light brown-grey
mottled, well-burnished.
35
GROUP H
10/1 Sos III, WM, 0: 17 cm, well-fired, fine
grit tempering, interior and exterior dark brown
well-burnished.
10/2 Sos, HM, 0: ?, well-fired, fine grit
tempering, interior and exterior dark brown,
well-burnished.
10/3 WM, 0: ?, well-fired, fine grit tempering,
interior and exterior dark brown, well-burnished.
10/4 Uzunahmet, WM, 0: 14 cm, well-fired,
fine grit tempering, interior and exterior dark
brown, well-burnished.
10/5 Sos III, WM, 0: 13 cm, well-fired, fine
grit tempering, interior and exterior dark brovn,
well-burnished.
GROUP I
1 1/1 Saztepe, WM, 0: 26 cm, well-fired, coarse
grit tempering, interior and exterior light brown,
burnished.
11/2 Karaz, WM, 0: 18 cm, well-fired, coarse
grit tempering, interior and exterior light brown,
burnished.
11/3 Ardahan-Kalecik, 0: 18 cm, well-fired,
fine grit tempering, interior and exterior light
brown, burnished.
1 1/4 Bulamaç, WM, 0: ?, well-fired, coarse grit
tempering, interior and exterior light brown,
burnished.
11/5 Sos, WM, 0: ?, well-fired, dark brown
core, coarse grit tempering, interior and exterior
light brown, burnished.
1 1/6 Sos HM, 0: ?, well-fired, coarse grit
tempering, interior and exterior light brown, burnished.
GROUP J
12/1 Agn-Toklucak, WM, 0: 19 cm, well-fired,
coarse grit tempering, interior and exterior pink,
burnished.
36 SEMÎH GÙNERi

PI. 9

JO CM
CULTURAL CONNECTIONS BETWEEN ANATOLIA AND CAUCASUS-CENTRAL ASIA 37

PI. 10

j10 CM
38 SEMÎH GÙNERi

PI. 11

Oj CM
i
CULTURAL CONNECTIONS BETWEEN ANATOLIA AND CAUCASUS-CENTRAL ASIA 39

PL 12

Ol L j i10 CM
I
40 SEMIH GUNERI

PI. 13

11 12

13 14 15

0l L j10 CM
I
 CULTURAL CONNECTIONS BETWEEN ANATOLIA AND CAUCASUS-CENTRALASIA
12/2 Sos, HM, 0: ?, well-fired, coarse grit and
white mineral tempering, interior and exterior pink,
burnished.
12/3 Ardahan-Kalecik, HM, 0: ?, well-fired,
core pink-grey, coarse grit tempering, interior and
exterior pink, burnished.
12/4 Ardahan-Kalecik, WM, 0: ?, well-fired,
fine grit tempering, interior and exterior pink,
burnished.
12/5 Ardahan-Kalecik, WM, 0: ?, well-fired,
coarse grit tempering, interior and exterior pink,
burnished.
12/6 Uzunahmet, WM, 0: 17 cm, well-fired,
fine grit and white mineral, tempering, interior and
exterior pink, burnished.
12/7 §irinlikale, HM, 0: ?, well-fired, core
grey, coarse grit tempering, interior and exterior
pink, burnished.
13/8 Ardahan-Kalecik, WM, 0: 28 cm, well-
fired, coarse grit tempering, interior and exterior
pink, burnished.
13/9 Ardahan-Kalecik, WM, 0: ?, well-fired,
coarse grit tempering, interior and exterior pink,
burnished.
13/10 Ardahan-Kalecik, WM, 0: ?, well-fired,
fine grit and white mineral tempering, interior and
exterior pink, burnished.
13/11 Ardahan-Kalecik, WM, 0: ?, well-fired,
coarse grit tempering, interior and exterior pink,
burnished.
13/12 Ardahan-Kalecik, WM, 0: ?, well-fired,
coarse grit tempering, interior and exterior pink,
burnished.
13/13 Ardahan-Kalecik, WM, 0: ?, well-fired,
light grey core, coarse grit and white mineral
tempering, interior and exterior pink, burnished.
13/14 Ardahan-Kalecik, WM, 0: ?, well-fired,
coarse grit and white mineral tempering, interior
and exterior pink, burnished.
41
13/15 Sos III, WM, well-fired, fine grit
tempering, interior and exterior pink, burnished.
GROUP K
14/1 Bulamaç, WM, 0: 27 cm, grey core,
coarse grit and very fine mica tempering, interior
and exterior yellowish-pink, rough and uneven.
14/2 Bulamaç, WM, 0: 17 cm, grey core,
coarse grit and very fine mica tempering, interior
and exterior yellowish-pink, rough and uneven.
14/3 Bulamaç, WM, 0: 19 cm, grey core,
coarse grit and very fine mica tempering, interior
and exterior yellowish-pink, rough and uneven.
14/4 Bulamaç, WM, 0: 21 cm, grey core,
coarse grit and very fine mica tempering, interior
and exterior yellowish-pink, rough and uneven.
15/5 Bulamaç, WM, 0: 21 cm, grey core,
coarse grit and very fine mica tempering, interior
and exterior reddish-yellow, rough and uneven.
15/6 Uzunahmet, WM, 0: ?, grey core, coarse
grit and very fine mica tempering, interior and
exterior yellowish-pink, rough and uneven.
15/7 Sos III, WM, 0: ?, grey core, coarse grit
and very fine mica tempering, interior and exterior
yellowish-pink, rough and uneven.
15/8 Pulur, WM, 0:1, grey core, coarse grit and
very fine mica tempering, interior and exterior
yellowish-pink, rough and uneven.
15/9 Sos III, WM, 0: ?, grey core, coarse grit
and very fine mica tempering, interior and exterior
reddish-yellow, rough and uneven.
15/10 Pulur, WM, 0: ?, grey core, coarse grit
and very fine mica tempering, interior and exterior
pinkish-yellow, rough and uneven.
15/11 Sos III, WM, 0: ?, grey core, coarse grit
and very fine mica tempering, interior and exterior
pinkish-yellow, rough and uneven.
42 SEMIH GÙNERÎ

PI. 14

,10 CM
CULTURAL CONNECTIONS BETWEEN ANATOLIA AND CAUCASUS-CENTRAL ASIA 43

PI. 15

I
10 11

jIO CM
44 SEMIH GÙNERi

PI. 16

Oi u_ j1O CM
■
CULTURAL CONNECTIONS BETWEEN ANATOLIA AND CAUCASUS-CENTRAL ASIA 45

PI. 17

,m CM
,

■
46 SEMÎH GÛNERÎ

PI. 18

» 1Q CM
■

i
 CULTURAL CONNECTIONS BETWEEN ANATOLIA AND CAUCASUS-CENTRAL ASIA
GROUP L
16/1 Bulamaç, WM, 0: 23 cm, grey-black core,
coarse grit and fine mica tempering, interior and
exterior pink mica slipped, slightly burnished.
16/2 Bulamaç, WM, 0:19 cm, grey-black core,
coarse grit and fine mica tempering, interior and
exterior pink mica slipped, slightly burnished.
16/3 Bulamaç, WM, 0: 25 cm, grey-black core,
fine grit and mica tempering, interior and exterior
pink mica slipped, slightly burnished.
16/4 Bulamaç, WM, 0: ?, grey-black core,
coarse grit and fine mica tempering, interior and
exterior pink mica slipped, slightly burnished.
16/5 Bulamaç, WM, 0: ?, grey-black core,
coarse grit and fine mica tempering, interior and
exterior pink mica slipped, slightly burnished.
GROUP M
17/1 Bulamaç, WM, 0: 21 cm, black core,
coarse grit and fine mica tempering, interior and
exterior pink, rough and uneven.
17/2 Bulamaç, WM, 0: 15 cm, grey core,
coarse grit and fine mica tempering, interior and
exterior yellowish-red, rough and uneven.
17/3 Bulamaç, WM, 0: ?, grey core, coarse grit
and fine mica tempering, interior and exterior pink,
rough and uneven.
17/4 Bulamaç, WM, 0: ?, black core, coarse
grit and fine mica tempering, interior and exterior
pink, rough and uneven.
17/5 Bulamaç, WM, 0: ?, black core, coarse
grit and fine mica tempering, interior and exterior
pink, rough and uneven.
GROUP N
18/1 Sos, WM, 0: 15 cm, well-fired, fine grit
and mica tempering, interior and exterior red
slipped, burnished.
18/2 Uzunahmet, HM, 0: 17 cm, well-fired,
fine grit and mica tempering, interior and exterior
red slipped, burnished.
47
18/3 Ardahan-Kalecik, WM, 0: ?, well-fired,
fine grit and mica tempering, interior and exterior
red slipped, burnished.
18/4 Ardahan-Kalecik, WM, 0: ?, well-fired,
fine grit and mica tempering, interior and exterior
red slipped, burnished.
18/5 Alaca, WM, 0: ?, well-fired, fine grit and
mica tempering, interior and exterior red slipped,
well-burnished.
18/6 Sos III, WM, 0: ?, well-fired, fine grit and
mica tempering, interior and exterior red slipped,
well-burnished.
18/7 Sos III, WM, 0: ?, well-fired, fine grit and
mica tempering, interior and exterior light red
slipped, well-burnished.
19/8 Sos III, WM, 0: 14 cm, well-fired, fine
grit and mica tempering, interior and exterior red
slipped, well-burnished.
19/9 Cinis, WM, 0: 24 cm, grey core, coarse
grit and mica tempering, interior and exterior red
slipped, well-burnished.
19/10 Ardahan-Çataldere, WM, 0: ?, grey core,
fine grit and mica tempering, interior and exterior
red slipped, burnished.
19/11 Sos III, WM, 0: ?, fine grit and mica
tempering, interior and exterior red slipped,
burnished.
19/12 Kars-Azat, WM, 0: ?, well-fired, fine
grit and mica tempering, interior and exterior red
slipped, well-burnished.
GROUP O
20/1 Sos III, WM, 0: 27 cm, grey core, coarse
grit tempering, interior and exterior brown, wet-
smoothed.
20/2 Pulur, WM, 0: 23 cm, grey core, coarse
grit tempering, interior and exterior brown, wet-
smoothed.
20/3 Bulamaç, WM, 0: ?, grey core, coarse grit
tempering, interior and exterior brown, wet-
smoothed.
48 SEMÎH GÛNERÎ

PI. 19

\
10

12

O j1O CM
CULTURAL CONNECTIONS BETWEEN ANATOLIA AND CAUCASUS-CENTRAL ASIA 49

PI. 20

OL I j1O CM
i
50 SEMÎH GUNERI

PI. 21

ir \

10

11

12 13

14
Oi no CM
i
CULTURAL CONNECTIONS BETWEEN ANATOLIA AND CAUCASUS-CENTRAL ASIA 51

PI. 22

i1O CM
52 SEMÏH GÛNERÎ

PI. 23

o j1O CM
 CULTURAL CONNECTIONS BETWEEN ANATOLIA AND CAUCASUS-CENTRAL ASIA
20/4 Karaz, WM, 0: ?, black core, coarse grit
tempering, interior and exterior red slipped, well-
burnished.
20/5 Sos III, WM, 0: ?, fine grit tempering,
interior and exterior red slipped, burnished.
21/6 Karaz, HM, 0: ?, coarse grit tempering,
interior and exterior red slipped, well-burnished.
21/7 Bulamaç, HM, 0: ?, grey core, coarse grit
tempering, interior and exterior red-black mottled,
wet-smoothed, rough and uneven.
21/8 Ardahan-Kalecik, 0: ?, fine grit
tempering, interior and exterior light red slipped,
burnished.
21/9 A§kale, WM, 0: ?, grey core, coarse grit
tempering, interior and exterior brown-black
mottled, wet-smoothed.
21/10 Ardahan-Kalecik, WM, 0: ?, black core,
coarse grit tempering, interior and exterior buff,
coarse burnishing traces.
21/11 Uzunahmet, HM, 0: ?, grey core, coarse
grit tempering, interior and exterior red slipped,
burnished.
21/12 Sos III, HM, 0: ?, fine grit tempering,
interior and exterior grey, wet-smoothed.
21/13 Kars-Azat, HM, 0: ?, black core, coarse
grit tempering, interior and exterior black, well-
burnished.
21/14 Erzurum-Tuy, HM, 0: ?, grey core,
coarse grit tempering, interior and exterior red
slipped, burnished.
GROUP P
22/1 Cinis, WM, 0: 27 cm, grey core, coarse
grit tempering, interior and exterior yellowish-red,
wet-smoothed.
22/2Pulur, WM, 0: 15 cm, coarse grit
tempering, interior and exterior pinkish-yellow, wet-
smoothed.
28) Ko§ay and Vary, 1964: 49.
53
22/3 Karaz, WM, 0: 13 cm, coarse grit
tempering, interior and exterior red, burnished, wet-
smoothed.
22/4 §irinlikale, WM, 0: 19 cm, grey core,
coarse grit tempering, interior and exterior
yellowish-red, wet-smoothed.
23/5 Sos, WM, 0: 18 cm, coarse grit tempering,
interior and exterior red, burnished.
23/6 Uzunahmet, WM, 0: 15 cm, coarse grit
tempering, interior and exterior yellowish-red, wet-
smoothed.
23/7 Cinis, WM, 0: 15 cm, coarse grit
tempering, interior and exterior yellowish-pink, exterior
burnished,
23/8 Sos III, WM, 0: 12 cm, coarse grit
tempering, interior and exterior red, wet-smoothed.
AN OVERALL EVALUATION
OF THE POTTERY
AND OF ITS INTERRELATIONS
WITH THE NEIGHBOURING CULTURES
(Maps 2-3)
The archaeological material obtained from the
surface surveys and Sos Hoyiik excavations
represent Group A (Pis. 1; 2). The vessels with black
surfaces obtained during the surveys and excavations
(classified as Group A) are more numerous than the
other groups. They reveal the survival of prehistor-
ical Karaz ware (so called Early Transcaucasian
Ware and/or Kura-Aras Ware) with the same
traditional characteristics lasting for hundreds of years.
According to Ko§ay and Vary28, this kind of pot
(i.e. the well-burnished ones with black surfaces)
was found in the Pulur graves. These pots were
indispensable for the craftsmen's daily lives around
Erzurum. As in the case of "the masters from
Kazvin and Herat" who continued to paint
(miniatures) in the same tradition for hundreds of years,
those vessels were produced continuously over a
long period of time. This implies that the Karaz
tradition of pottery has not been abandoned between
the fifth millennium B.C. (may be earlier) and the
 54 SEMÎH GÛNERi

^ MEHClS TSALKA *>* GEDEBEY

KIROVAKAN

Map 2 : Caucasian cultural regions during the Early Iron Age.

early first millennium B.C.29. It is doubtless that the
characteristics which made the Karaz pottery very
specific (e.g. the pictorial reliefs on the surface)
were lost completely during the second half of the
second millennium B.C. on. However, some
characteristics such as shaping it obstinately by hand,
attempting to optimize the polishing of the vessel,
the curiosity to create the ideal beauty, and the
constant habit to use "black colour" were not easily
abandoned. Today, visitors to the Erzurum region
will observe that the local people still produce
black- surfaced well-burnished vessels such as
gùveç or gudul.

29) Today, pottery is still being made in a similar manner (black and/or dark red, reddish-brown faced, well-burnished and
always hand-made) by villagers in the countryside of Erzurum.
 CULTURAL CONNECTIONS BETWEEN ANATOLIA AND CAUCASUS-CENTRAL ASIA 55

A group of ware excavated at Karmir-Blur .30 on
the western side of the Sevan Lake is similar to the
Group A vessels with black surfaces. Sorokin31
excavated there from the Proto-Urartian layers
(dourartu= Karmir-Blur IV) a black faced
burnished pottery similar to Group A pots. Sorokin33
dated them to the 12tn c. B.C. . The most striking
discovery, confirming this date, was a stone-made
tool for mill35. This item is unique in terms of its
date (12th c. B.C.) and place (southern Caucasus) 36
The vessels in Ezurum and Van Museums
obtained by buying and seizing, include some
examples that can be dated to the second half of the
second millennium B.C. Çilingiroglu37 published
an article about the ones belonging to the Van
Museum. Moreover, a group of Turkish
archaeologists excavating at Ernis on the north-eastern shore
of the Van Lake in 1 962 discovered a great number
of pots including black surfaced ones" . According
to their publication, there are nearly 200 pots
including the black surfaced ones. On the base of
their decoration and other characteristics (similar to
their analogues in southern Caucasia), the author
states that some of the Ernis finds belong to the
period between the 13rd c. B.C. and 11th c. B.C.
The grey-black, red-black mottled vessels
analyzed in Groups C and D (Pis. 4; 5; 6) show some
similarities with the early burials of Tarki cemetery
in the northern Caucasus39. These vessels can
easily be compared with the wheel-made ones of the
second half of the second millennium B.C. Some of
their characteristics are close to some pots from
Hacbulak kurgans which present typical traits of
the Kayakent-Horocoyev culture (Caferov and
Kesamanh state40).
The samples in Group E (PI. 7) whose ware
shows contrasting colours, have totally black
exteriors, while the colour of their interior parts is
fabric-like. These samples present traits of the Early
Iron Age inherited from the old Karaz tradition. In
Tepecik excavation in Elazig-Altinova, many
vessels obtained41 from layers 9 to 14 are black in the
exterior and brownish red, pinkish fabric-like in the
interior42. They represent the Early Bronze Age I. It
is doubtless that these examples are the earliest
representatives of Group E vessels. However, the
published material from southern Caucasus displays no
similarity with that of the Early Iron Age Group E
which was discovered around Erzurum.
The red-buff-grey hoary mottled colour of
Group F vessels (PI. 8) and G (PI. 9), represents the
continuation of a tradition43 which lasted from the
third millennium B.C. to the second millennium
B.C. in eastern Anatolia.
An additional relation can be noticed between
some of the brown, light brown and pink, slipped,
burnished pots in Groups H-J (Pis. 10; 11; 12; 13)
and the ceramic groups 4 which were discovered in
Elazig-Malatya region and dated to the 8th c. B.C.
(or later).
The majority of the ceramics in Groups I and
J45), which are common around Erzurum and Kars
but rarely found in Sos III, can be dated to a period
after the 10th c. B.C.

30) Piotrovskii, 1969: 69-72.

31) Sorokin, 1958: 149 ff, Fig. 2/1-3; 3; 6/1-6; 7/1-3; 8/1-9; 9; 10/1-5.
32) Martirosyan, 1964b: 32; Sulimirski, 1967: 66.
33) Sorokin, 1958: 163; see proposed dates of Karmir-Blur IV (1100 B.C.) Sulimirski, 1967: 66; Martirosyan, 1964b: 32.
34) Muncayev and Smirnov, 1958: Fig. 3/3-5; Smirnov, 1960: Fig. 10/3, 5; Stankeviç, 1960: PI. LXX/3; LXXXIV/6; Fig,
72/1,3; Gureviç, 1960: 406, Fig. 18/1-3.
35) Sorokin, 1958: 149 ff.
36) Krupnov, 1951: Fig. 10/1, 2; 27/ VII/1; Markovin, 1960: Fig. 12/99; 46/90; 50/37; Deopik and Krupnov, 1961: Fig. 9/12;
Markovin, 1964: Fig. 1/90, PI. 109.
37) Çilingiroglu, 1984: 25-26.
38)Sevin, 1987b: 37-39.
39) Smirnov, 1951: 22 ff, Fig. 19/2, 5; 20/1, 2, 10, 12; 22/3.
40) Caferov and Kesamanh, 1979: 75 ff.
41) See Arsebuk, 1974: 41, 108, PI. 64 and 65.
42) Arsebuk, 1974: 44, n. X.
43) Arsebuk, 1974:43.
44) Hauptmann, 1972: PI. 67/1, 2; Sevin, 1987a: Fig. 14/69, 13, 16; Sevin, 1988: Fig. 5/2, 5, 3; 6/3; 19/3; 22/3; 27/4-6, 11, 15;
43/6, 7; Sevin, 1989a: Fig. 33/3; 39/3-5, 7, 21; 40/7, 10, 11; 41/3.
45) Çilingiroglu, 1988: Fig. 20/883.
56 SEMÏH GÛNERÎ

500 KM

MIDDL
DNYEPFK4T

Map 3 : Eurasian cultural regions during the Bronze Age.

 CULTURAL CONNECTIONS BETWEEN ANATOLIA AND CAUCASUS-CENTRAL ASIA
The vessels in Group K (Pis. 14; 15) resemble
the pottery as categorized by Russel46 in Group
GG, from Malatya, Elazig, Mu§, Van, which are
dated to the late second millennium B.C. and the
early first millennium B.C.
Groups K and L (PL 16) include pots with
mica-rich fabric and slip. This ware displays certain
characteristics similar to those from Bulamaç
Hoyiik. Most of these pots probably date to the 10
c. B.C., or perhaps the 11th c. B.C., for they possess
similar characteristics with those in Dilkaya
cemetery47 with regard to their shapes and production
techniques.
Red, thickly slipped, well-burnished vessels in
Sos III (Group N) (Pis. 18-19) represent a group of
ceramics very common around Erzurum and Kars.
During excavations in Kars, Azat, Diindartepe
Hoyiik in 1947, K. Kôkten48 discovered a layer
beneath the Urartian layer. These vessels, which
were found in the Hittite layer as the author called
it, are closely similar to those which were found
around the same centre and Ardahan by our team
during surveys, and grouped as Group N.
Typical Early Iron Age samples are the carinat-
ed bowls. They are common around Erzurum and
are included in the group of pots obtained from
Pulur and Sos excavations. Similar monochrome
examples were found out at Haftavan Tepe in
western Iran. Plenty of bowls49 dated to the mid-second
millennium B.C. at Haftavan Tepe VIB (Fig. 1/1
and 3/3) present samples whose rims thickened on
the exterior. These samples are reminiscent of the
thoses from Haftavan Tepe in Fig. 96/16 and
121/150. In this article, the sherds introduced in Pis.
1/4, 3/5, 4/4, 8/2, 5, 9/2, 10/1, 12/3, 15/9, 10, 16/4,
17/3, 17/7, 19/12, have thickening rims in the form
of a line along the exterior. These examples show
46) Russell, 1980: 36-37, 87-90.
47) Çilingiroglu, 1987: 85, Fig. 14/3, 4; 15/5, 7, 10.
48)K6kten, 1953: 177.
49) Edwards, 1983: Fig. 83; 87; 96; 98; 121.
50) Edwards, 1983.
51) Edwards, 1983: Fig. 103/1-5; 104/1-13; 105/2, 15, 16; 107/1-5.
52) Edwards, 1983: Fig. 83/2, 3; 96/8, 15.
53) Çilingiroglu, 1986: 155; Çilingiroglu, 1987: Fig. 14/3, 4; 15/5-10; Çilingiroglu, 1988: Fig. 20/180, 307, 112.
54) Young, 1965: Fig. 6/2, 4, 6; 7/8; 8/8; Medvedskaya, 1982: Fig. 2/ Grup Hlal, b3/ Hasanlu V; 4/8, 12; 6/1, 2, 7, 8.
55) Young, 1965: Fig. 6/2, 4, 6; 7/8.
56) Çilingiroglu, 1988: Fig. 20/180, 307, 112.
57) Edwards, 1983: Fig. 121/1,4; 125/10.
57
close links with those from the VIB of Haftavan
Tepe51.
The carinated bowls with inverted rim (Pis.
2/10; 3/4; 6/9; 10; 13/12; 14/1) which are rarely
found around Erzurum, are similar in shape with
the monochrome ones of the VIB of Haftavan
Tepe52. The carinated and rounded bowls, whose
rims open towards the outside (Pis. 5/1; 16/2, 3;
17/2, 5; 18/1, 2), everted (Pis. 2/6, 8; 9/15; 11/5, 6;
12/6, 7; 14/2, 4; 15/7, 8; 16/1, 5; 17/1, 4) closely
match material dated to the 13th-9th c. B.C. in the
Van region53 and western Iran54. The samples from
Bulamaç may have the same age as the samples of
Hasanlu IV
Dilkaya56 to 10th
(Iron
c. B.C.
II)55 onwards
and as (with
those the
dated by
exception of the vessels from Sos III and several other
examples in the same group). The quality of the
samples compared above resembles much that of
the coarse ware from Bulamaç (Groups L and M).
It is impossible to compare wheel-made pots
having sharp profiles (groups L and M) with
handmade, slipped, well-burnished carinated bowls;
however, using a shape-based comparison, the
bowls from Sos III and other places are considered
to resemble those of the 12th c. B.C. from the Pulur
graves, and those from Bulamaç (which are dated
by Dilkaya to the 10th c. B.C.).
Dating the vessels with flattened rims parallel
to the ground in Sos III to a period later than the
12th c. B.C., does not seem correct, if ever they are
not an "intrusion". These bowls, which do not have
precise matches in southern Caucasus and western
Iran57, do not present any analogies with other
vessels from the Van region.
Another typical aspect of pottery in eastern
Anatolia during the Early Iron Age is the technique
of ornamenting the surface of the vessels with
58 SEMIH GUNERÎ
incised groove. The engravement on the body of
the vessel appears as ears (PL 20/1, 2, 5); the
incised decoration on the body and the shoulders
appears as hatched rods (PI. 21/6-8), rows of
hatched triangles (Pis. 20/3-4; 21/9-11) and other
geometrical motifs (PI. 21/12-14). The incision
technique is an indispensable part of pottery in
western Iran in the second half of the second
millennium B.C., and in Caucasus a little earlier58.
This technique becomes, as will be discussed later,
an integral part of decorating monochrome vessels
in Central Asia, particularly in the Yenisei valley
(Khakassia and Tuva) and southern Mongolia, the
steppes of Kazakhstan, and Fergana valley (where
Uzbekistan-Kazakhstan-Tajikistan borders
correspond to limited settlements and fertile soil) since
the beginning of the second millennium B.C. In the
second half of this millennium, the vessels were
extremely enriched from an aesthetical point of
view by using a hatched triangles pattern. The
museums in Erzurum, Van, and other regional
museums possess many of such vessels. However,
the knowledge we have in hand about incised
ornament tradition in eastern Anatolia is not strati-
graphical.
Among the material from the Pulur excavation,
the shoulder of the vessel with concave pedestal
has engraved ornamentations with rods whose
interior is hatched59 (this pot is dated to the Early Iron
Age, or perhaps to the middle of the second
millennium B.C.). Other than the ones in PI. 21/6, 8,
another vessel was discovered60 in a smooth area
100-150 m near Sos Hôyiik. This pot has a broken
rim and is decorated by the same technique. It is 35
cm high with a rim diameter of 15 cm; its body is
34 cm wide, and the pedestal diameter is 10 cm. Its
rim is everted. Transition from the neck to the body
is concave, whereas it has rounded lines from the
body to the pedestal. One of its sides shows that the
vessel is slipped and well-burnished, fired
yellowish pink with the same colour as its fabric. Its
58) See.Kuftin, 1941: PI. LXXV; LXXXVI, PI. 110.
59) Kuftin, 1941: PI. LXXXVI.
60)Guneri, 1988: Fig. 2/1.
61) Kuftin, 1941: 230, PI. CXXII/3.
62) Kuftin, 1941: 227, PI. LXXXV/4-7.
63) Kuftin, 1941: PI. LXXV/1.
64) Sulimirski, 1970: 305.
65) Krivtsova-Grakova, 1955: 152-160, PI. V/26-32; Sulimirski, 1967: 78-79.
66) Krivtsova-Grakova, 1951: Fig. 18/15.
67) Martirosyan, 1964b: 32.
ric is almost soft, not well-fired, and tempered grit.
Almost half of the surface is grey-black due to the
firing conditions. The whole of the oxidized side
and some parts of the unoxidized side are covered
with a corrosion layer. Two rows of lines are
parallel and the interior is hatched under the neck. The
geometrical decorations under the flattened body
reach the lower case through these lines. The white
patches in the engraved lines were first thought to
be due to corrosion. V. Sevin having drawn out
attention on them, these white remains were re-
interpered as parts of the ornamentation. A sample
from Karaz (PI. 21/6) also has engraved lines filled
with white paste. This type of engraving technique
being quite rare, we have to be cautious in
distinguishing it from white layers of corrosion densely
affecting other vessels.
This kind of engraved samples is met in the
burials (which belong to the first and the second
halves of the second millennium B.C.) in Trialeti
kurgans. A sample61 from the layer called eneloit in
Bestaseni has a surface with two rows of zigzag
rods whose interiors are hatched. The samples
dated to the second half of the second millenium
B.C., possess also this kind of rods and geometrical
patterns. Another vessel63 of the same age carries
geometrical patterns moving from the shoulders to
the lower parts of the body; those patterns are
shaped by rods whose interiors are hatched. This
kind of incised vessels is often found together with
other pottery groups and even bronze items
belonging to the Andronovo and Karasuk cultures. The
latter, which has very typical characteristics,
appeared all of a sudden as a strange ethnic group64
in the Yenisei valley during the second half of the
second millennium B.C. within the Andronovo
culture65. The same material is also found in central
Kazakhstan and Fergana valley66, as well as in
southern Caucasus67 where it appeared towards the
end of the second millennium B.C.
 CULTURAL CONNECTIONS BETWEEN ANATOLIA AND CAUCASUS-CENTRAL ASIA 59

One (PI. 21/10) of the three vessels whose
exterior surface is hatched with triangles row, is a cari-
nated bowl; the other two are big jars (PL 21/9, 11).
It may be confusing that we were able to collect
very few of them. However, plenty of this kind of
decorated bowls and jars are displayed in the Van
and other regional museums. Although the
conditions of their discovery were not scientific, they
represent one of the most common traditional
wares in this region.
The triangles were obtained by incising the
pottery clay while it was still wet68. Their sharp
corners are directed either upwards or downwards, and
placed on the shoulders, body, or neck of the
vessels. The rows of hatched triangles are one of the
most adorned decoration patterns in the forest and
steppe zones of Asia. The earlier samples appear in
the late third millennium B.C. and the early part of
the second millennium B.C. One unique sample,
which was dated to the first quarter of the second
millennium B.C. was discovered in the Tarki
graves, Dagestan, in northern Caucasus69. The
vessel body is flattened and its shoulder presents a
pattern engraved coarsely and arbitrarily. This kind of
decoration spread over Caucasus only after the
second half of the second millennium B.C. Vessels70
which were discovered in Piatigorsk and Stavropol,
central Caucasus, have triangles with slightly
incised lines on their shoulders. Corners of
triangles are downwards. These vessels have wide
rims71 and are grouped within the material which
belonged to the middle of the same millennium.
Nal'cik culture in northern Caucasus produced
vessels with double small handles and a wide rim.
Kislovodosk72 and Konstantinopol plateau73 in the
East of the same region also delivered examples
with wide rims which carry rows of hatched
triangles on their shoulders and around their bodies. The
edges of the triangles look downwards. Both
groups of vessels are dated to the mid-second
millennium B.C. as well74. The pottery discovered in
1 1 kurgans in the Kuibisevska region (Lower Volga
basin) displays remarkable characteristics in terms
of its ornaments. Generally, these pots have sharp
and round profiles with rims, shoulders and the
parts beneath the shoulders decorated with triangles
whose interior parts are either dotted or engraved75.
Merpert76 calls the triangles whose interiors are
hatched, fork decorated and dates them to the
second half of the second millennium B.C. Absevo
culture, also dated to the same period, delivered in
Bykovo I kurgans carinated bowls77 whose
shoulders are embellished with triangles possessing
irregular and knitted lines. The vessels7 with
flattened bodies and narrow pedestals typical of the
Kayakent-Horocoyev culture, carry similar
triangles with knitted lines on their necks and on the part
between chevron bands beneath their body (as in
the case of the previous samples). Other examples
in the Caucasus, dated to the end of the second
millennium B.C., show similar engravings. Vessels are
either jars with neck, jars and storage vessels
without any neck79, or deep bowls80. A large amount of
pottery discovered in the Tasty-Butak burials
(Andronovo culture) in central northern
Kazakhstan, has been embellished with various
forms of the above-mentioned triangles81. Most of
the triangles rows have been engraved on the rims
or on the bodies of the deep bowls and the small
pots83. These patterns generally consist of irregular

68) Martirosyan, 1964b: 32.

69) Krupnov, 1951: 229, Fig. 2a; Markovin, 1960: Fig. 50/128.
70) Markovin, 1960: Fig. 9/47, 49, 54.
71) Markovin, 1960: Fig. 13/86.
72) Markovin, 1960: Fig. 40/5, 9.
73) Markovin, 1960: Fig. 50/79.
74) Markovin, 1960: 31 pp.
75) Merpert, 1954: Fig. 7/6: Kurgan 7., burial 5.; 12: Kurgan 5., burial 11.; 11/1: Kurgan 5., burial 11.; 6: Kurgan 5., burial 15.;
11: Kurgan 5., burial 23.; 12/1, 4, 7: Kurgan 5., burial 27.; 17/4: Kurgan 1., burial 5.; 20/7: Kurgan 1., burial 5.; 28/1, 3: Kurgan 5.,
burial 2.; 29/1: Kurgan 5., burial 12., 12: Kurgan 5. burial 21.; 35/ 2: Kurgan 7., burial 1.
76) Merpert, 1954: 150.
77) Smirnov, 1960: Fig. 8/6; see Efimenko and Tret'yakov, 1961: Fig. 41/9.
78) Muncayev and Smirnov, 1958: Fig. 14/3.
79) Markovin, 1960: 45, Fig. 13/122, 123; 40/13, 35; 46/12, 24; Martirosyan, 1964b: Fig. 3/40; Martirosyan, 1964a: Fig. 51/6.
80) Martirosyan, 1964b: Fig. 3/34, 42; Martirosyan, 1964a: Fig. 48/9, 10
81) Sorokin, 1962: 55,89.
82) Sorokin, 1962: Fig. 1/2; PI. LVII/107; LIX/111.
83) Sorokin, 1962: Fig. 11/1; 12/1, 2; PI. XLVI/19; XLIII/28; LV/83; LVI/91, 97; LXI/128; LXII/129, 130; LXIII/139.
60
lines which are not parallel to each other. On some
vessels, rows of triangles have been engraved as
bands of multi-rowed, parallel ornaments84. Most
of the pots discovered in the burials of Alakul kur-
gans85 have been engraved with triangles around
their pedestals86 as well as on their rims and
bodies87. This ornamentation tradition was very
popular in the forests and steppes of central Kazakhstan,
Ural, southern Siberia. It plays a significant role in
the vessels decoration of, for example, the
Srubnaya , Komarov , Ozera , Absevo cultures
in Eurasia and the Ktakomb92, and Koban93 cultures
in the Caucasus.
The sample (Pis. 26-28) which will be
described here, has incised ornamentation and has
been purchased from the villagers of Tepeli, Patnos,
by the scholars of Atatiirk University, Department
of Archaeology during a scientific travel to Agn. It
is hand-made and is 13 cm high. Its rim diameter is
8.3 cm; its pedestal diameter is 4.2 cm.; its body is
14 cm wide. Although the structure is irregular in
shape, the transition from the short neck to the body
and the pedestal is provided by round lines. Its
fabric is thin and mixed with fine grit. The interior of
the rim and the body are clay-coloured burnished.
Its surface is black-grey mottled and the core is
black. It has been fired badly. Irregular and
arbitrary zigzags have been incised on the wide gap
between the two knobs facing each other on the
shoulder. Another pot from Patnos-Tepeli is 8 cm
high and its body is 11 cm wide, with a pedestal
diameter of 3.8 cm and a rim diameter of 7.6 cm. It
is hand-made and has two knobs (Pis. 29-30). Two
couples of knobs (in total four) face each other on
the body. These knobbed vessels appeared in the
Caucasus and western Iran during the second half
of the second millennium B.C. These, and their
matches which probably have the same age as well,
84) Sorokin, 1962: PI. XLVII/27; XLVIII/28; LVI/91.
85) Sulimirski, 1970: 319; Sal'nikov, 1952: 51.
86)Sal'nikov, 1952: Fig. 9/1, 7, 24; 10/1,7,9; 11/1,3; 12.
87) Sal'nikov, 1952: Fig. 9/2, 4, 6, 17, 19, 23, 25; 10/5, 8; 1 1/2.
88) Sulimirski, 1970: 256 pp; Alihova, 1960: 96 pp, Fig. 1/11.
89) Alihova, 1958: 162, Fig. 5/2, 5; 7/3.
90) Trubnikova, 1958: 181, Fig. 13/3.
91) Efimenko and Tret'yakov, 1961: 15-26, Fig. 41/9.
92) Popova, 1955: 21 ft", Fig. 6/9; 8/1, II, V.
93) Deopik and Krupnov, 1961: 18-27, Fig. 3/2; 4/1.
94) Sevin, 1989b.
95) Sevin, 1989b: 54-56.
96)Guneri, 1995: 269 ff
97) Ko§ay and Vary, 1964: PL XXI/P.3.
SEMIH GUNERI
were purchased and seized by the Van and Erzurum
Museums. These rarely-found samples (at the end
of our systematic surveys) and the others
(mentioned above as belonging to the museums)
carrying such rows of triangles with hatched interiors on
their bodies, exhibit a central Asian type of
ornamentation. It is doubtless that this tradition came
through the Caucasus. These pots belong to the
nomadic cultures of southern Siberia which spread
over the steppes of central Kazakhstan, and to the
Adronovo, Karasuk and other northern cultures.
Grooved Ware
The vessels in this group are related to Proto-
Urartu (perhaps more to Urartian) period. They are
dated to the second half of the second millennium
B.C. and discovered in Van, Erzurum, and Elazig
regions. All the pottery from these three regions
were studied and analyzed by Sevin94. In his
study95, he claims that the pottery is connected to
the migration of Indo-European tribes to this region
in the 12th c. B.C., particularly to the Elazig-
Malatya region. This ware is fired usually pink-
light red, reddish, brown, dark red clay, slipped in
the same colours, and burnished. There is no unity
(according to the data from the catalogues) in the
ways they were fired. They are slow-wheeled
products and have sharp profiles. The vessels in this
region have regular multi-rowed grooves.
The vessels from Erzurum were discovered in
Sos Hoyiik excavations and surveys in 1987. These
pots are hand-made or wheel-made, ornamented
with rows of groove below the rims. In Pulur and
Giizelova excavations in the 1960's, they were
dated erronously to the third millennium B.C.96.
The Pulur bowl97 (PL 31) is 13 cm high; its rim
diameter and pedestal diameter are respectively 19
CULTURAL CONNECTIONS BETWEEN ANATOLIA AND CAUCASUS-CENTRAL ASIA 61

PI. 24
62 SEMÎH GÙNERi

PI. 25

O —i -x__, ,10 CM
i

i
CULTURAL CONNECTIONS BETWEEN ANATOLIA AND CAUCASUS-CENTRAL ASIA 63

PI. 26

j10 CM
64 SEMÎH GÛNERi

PI. 27

j10 CM
CULTURAL CONNECTIONS BETWEEN ANATOLIA AND CAUCASUS-CENTRAL ASIA 65

PI. 28

Jl L. j10 CM
66
cm and 9 cm. Its shoulder is 21 cm wide. It is
probably hand-made and has a high pedestal, the inner
and outer surfaces of which are brown-black
mottled. Its rim carries only two rows of grooves. The
example from Guzelova (PI. 32) was not
described and has no inventory number; its rim
shows two rows of grooves. The body is round with
two knobs handle facing each other on the shoulder.
The second sample from Giizelova" (PI. 33) is 14.5
cm high. Its rim and pedestal diameters are
respectively 17 cm and 8 cm. Its shoulder is 19 cm wide.
It is probably hand-made and the grooves on the
shoulder are in two rows as in the other two
samples. It does not have any inventory number nor
description. The material in Group P (Pis. 22, 23)
includes samples which (except for the number of
groove rows and production techniques) do not
resemble the samples from Pulur and Guzelova in
terms of their shapes and techniques. Therefore,
they do not compromise with the samples from
Pulur and Guzelova completely in terms of style.
However, they cannot be totally considered seper-
ately since they were discovered in the same
region. The techniques used differ because the
periods they belong to are different. These periods are
included within the second half of the second
millennium B.C. The samples from Pulur and
Guzelova discovered at a 1.00-0.70 m depth100. Yet
their matches in southern Caucasus (dated to the
end of the second millennium B.C.) help us clarify
the issue to a certain extent, as will be discussed
below.
In the Van region, these vessels occupy a
significant proportion in a group of material which is
dated to the end of the Early Iron Age101. These Van
samples are wheel-made, simple looking, generally
without slip. The fabric is pink-brown and the
98) Ko§ay and Vary, 1967: PI. XXXV.
99) Ko§ay and Vary, 1967: PL XLI/G. 330.
100) See Ko§ay and Vary, 1964: PL XXXI/P. 3; Ko§ay and Vary, 1967: PL XLI/330.
101) Çilingiroglu, 1984: 25-26, 2-12; Çilingiroglu, 1986: 155; Çilingiroglu, 1987: Fig. 14/2, 15/2-4; Çilingiroglu, 1988: Fig.
19/629, 927, 445.
102) Hauptmann, 1976: 51.
103)Sorokin, 1958: Fig. 2/1-3.
104) Sorokin, 1958: 149-150.
105) Krupnov, 1951: 47, Fig. 11/4; 16/1,4; 27/23, 27.
106)Anfimov, 1951: 149, Fig. 15/11; 16/5,6.
107) Cf. Krupnov, 1960: Fig. 13/121; 40/18; 50/122; Caferov and Kesamanh, 1979: Fig. 1/5.
108) Eliyev, 1977: 72 ff, PL 10/3, 9; 14/1.
109) Smirnov, 1951: 266, Fig. 20/2.
110) 1989b: 52 ff
SEMÎH GÙNERI
teries have sharp profiles. The grooves are
engraved on the shoulders in 2 or 3 rows. Most of
them resemble the pots from Dilkaya in Group P
(which are dated to 10th c. B.C. and have sharp
profiles) on the basis of the styles of the groove and
their rows. However, it should be emphasized that
they differ from those of Pulur and Guzelova in
terms of their forms and production techniques.
Rows of groove on the rims of the Caucasus
vessels also refer to some characteristic of
decoration pattern in the Early Iron Age (the two first
centuries of the first millennium B.C.)102. Some bowls
with rims carrying groove appear within the
ceramic material discovered from the Proto-Urartu
(dourartu, in Russian) layer in Karmir-Blur IV103.
These samples display characteristics similar with
the black- surfaced ware in our Group A104 which is
common around Erzurum in terms of
colour-production and techniques. Several hand-made and
black- surfaced deep bowls105 from central southern
Caucasus are typical of the Verkhnyaya-Rutkha
culture in addition to those106 from the Prikuban
region. They have not been defined in detail, but
according to description records, their shoulders
obviously
bowls 1 OK with
carry grooved
horizontalrims
rows and
of groove107.
pedestalsThe
in
Azerbaijan (which are dated to the 10' c. B.C.) can
be compared109 to the high pedestaled ones from
Pulur in terms of their shapes. However, the fact
that their grooves are not engraved but drawn
requires utmost attention.
This kind of vessels, which is present in the
Elazig-Malatya, Van Lake and Erzurum regions,
were first studied and analyzed by Sevin11 . He
claims that these pots are closely related to the
Muski people whose names appear for the first time
CULTURAL CONNECTIONS BETWEEN ANATOLIA AND CAUCASUS-CENTRAL ASIA 67

PI. 29

JO CM
68 SEMÏH GÙNERi

PI. 30

j1O CM

I,
•

i1O CM
CULTURAL CONNECTIONS BETWEEN ANATOLIA AND CAUCASUS-CENTRAL ASIA 69

PI. 31

j6 CM
70 SEMIH GUNERI

PL 32
CULTURAL CONNECTIONS BETWEEN ANATOLIA AND CAUCASUS-CENTRAL ASIA 71

PI. 33

;. •■■-■•...
■■•'■•■:.sV-'a.v.-:-
-1" '".•; ... ; ":•;•'■
... ','. "'■■'*,-.'>y^>-- ■••'• ■ ■■ ••■••.•-•■-•-■-- -...^vs,.- '*■"*'••-;-■■•:■•:« <-:■■-:'
'•■■•••«:%
■

'

•■

Bmm
72 SEMÎH GUNERI

in the records of Tiglatpileser I (1114 B.C.). Sevin
believes that the Muski people is probably a branch
of the immigrants passing to Iran through Caucasus
in the Early Iron Age111. He tries to explain the start
of the Iron Age in eastern Anatolia giving examples
from §eytandagi, Karmir-Blur, Giizelova, Dilkaya
and Geoy Tepe A Phase112. According to him, these
samples (which carry groove, a Malatya-Elazig
tradition) should originate from the Caucasus.
Therefore, we will focus on three points: First, the
periods during which the grooved vessels appear in
Elazig-Malatya must be verified precisely. Second,
unity between "traditions" should be checked.
Third, we have to identify the ordinary use of
engraving grooved vessels.
ered grooved vessel ware which is certainly dated
to a period not earlier than the 9th c. B.C.
V. Sevin also compiled material from systemic
surface surveys. All the material in this group
belongs to the Early Iron Age. However, this
terminology might be confusing. It should be noticed
that each repetition of the term Early Iron Age
creates ambiguity, for the term itself is ambiguous. It
is not clear whether the term implies Euphrates
Basin, eastern Anatolian highlands, western Iran or
Caucasus where there is no consensus for
terminology. In any case, most of the pottery discovered in
this region generally belongs to the first quarter of
the first millennium B.C.

Let us have a brief look to where and how these
grooved vessels were discovered during
excavations in the Elazig-Malatya region. According to
Hauptmann113, Nor§un Tepe II (O/P 19 area), a site
dated between 1000 B.C. and 800 B.C. called the
Early Iron Age, possesses lots of grooved ware.
However, a group of pottery with groove and relief
lines discovered in Q 18 area in the southern terrace
of the ho'yiik, are dated to a transition period ( 1 200-
1000 B.C.) before the First Iron Age, when Hittite
traditions were still dominant114. This transition
period is contemporary with Korucutepe K (H
17/18)115 and Tepecik 2a3116. Most of this grooved
ware was found in Nor§un Tepe (O/P 19 area)
where it is dated 1000-800 B.C. by Hauptmann117,
which corresponds also to the age of Korucutepe K
(late phase, CXXXIV-CXXXV). According to
Esin11 , Tepecik 1 b-c layer is dated to a later
period (Iron Age). Also, Ko§kerbaba IV119, Imiku§agi
6120 (another center in the Euphrates Basin)
It should be emphasized that the dates of the
ware from the Caucasus can be compared only with
ware from the Erzurum region in eastern Anatolia.
The dates of the pots from Karmir-Blur IV,
including their matches from Pulur and Giizelova, and
others from southern Caucasus, are no earlier than
the middle of the 12th c. B.C. Sos III, Karaz, Pulur
and Giizelova samples in Group P should belong to
a period in the middle or at the end of the 12 c.
B.C. The rest of Group P (like their matches from
Dilkaya) should be dated to the 10th c. B.C. or later.
Samples from Geoy Tepe A in western Iran are
dated to the early first millennium B.C. However,
the earliest dates for the samples from the
Euphrates Basin are 1160-1150 B.C.121. The date of
emergence of these vessels being a little bit earlier
in the Euphrates Basin than in Caucasus, the claim
that they may originate from the Caucasus becomes
illogical. In addition, such a chronology does not
let any time span to the "tradition" to pass from the

111) "Eskinin çok hizli dônen çarkimn aksine, hemen daima elde ya da agir dônen bir çarkta yapilmis, çogu kez koyu kirmizi ya
da kahverenginde kahn bir astarla kaplanmis olan bu seramiklerin en belirgin ôzelligi keskin profilli çanaklar ve çômleklerin agiz
kenarlanndan boyun ya da omuzlanna degin uzanan kesimlerinin yatay yivlerle bezenmis olusudur. Bôlgede ilk kez karsilasilan ve
kimi degisimlere ugrayarak M.Ô. 8. Yiizyil içlerine dek kullanilacak olan bu fur seramigin yukanda sôzûnu ettigimiz Hitit Impara-
torluk çagimn çok hizh dônen bir çarkta biçimlerdirilmis ve ince astarh kaplariyla teknik ve biçim açisindan kiyaslamaya olanak yok-
tur. Firat irmaginin bâti kiyisindan uzaklastikça giderek azalan ve Orta Anadolu'ya tumùyle yabanci olan bu tùrùn Elazig bôlgesinde
yogun olarak kullamldigi anlasilmaktadir. Gôrùliiyor ki, hem yazih belgeler hem de arkeolojik bulgular sôz konusu tarihlerde Elazig
yôresinin bôlgeye yabanci bir halkin gôçlerine sahne olduguna isaret etmektedir" (Sevin, 1989b: 52).
112) 1989b: 54-55
113) 1972:91
114) Hauptmann, 1972:91
115) Van Loon, 1971: 55, n. 24, 26
116) See Esin, 1972: 140
117) 1972:91
118) 1972: 140
119) Bilgi, 1987: Fig. 147/1
120) Sevin, 1983: Fig. 7
121) Sevin, 1989b: n. 43
 CULTURAL CONNECTIONS BETWEEN ANATOLIA AND CAUCASUS-CENTRAL ASIA
Caucasus to the Euphrates Basin, develop and gain
there a wide popularity of use.
From the technical and structural points of
view, the style of hand-made examples with 2-3
rows of regular grooves from Sos III, Pulur,
Giizelova (including those from southern Caucasus
in the 12th c. B.C.) differ from the wheel-made style
associated with multi-rowed grooves which were
discovered in Elazig-Malatya. All the samples from
Karmir Blur IV seem to be a continuation of the
ancient tradition of southern Caucasus and eastern
Anatolia; they are black-surfaced and
well-burnished122. In addition, other finds from southern
Caucasus have black or black-like surfaces as well.
On the other hand, the surfaces of those from
Elazig-Malatya are (according to descriptions in
catalogues) light red or dark red. Finds from Pulur
and Giizelova as well as their hand-made matches
in southern Caucasus and some of the samples in
Group P cannot be compared with the ones in
Elazig-Malatya because there is no similarity nor
unity of style between them. Thus, it becomes
impossible to claim that the tradition of pottery
carrying grooves in the Elazig-Malatya region is
directly linked to Caucasus and, therefore, to Muski
people.
It is still debatable whether the pots with
grooves are familiar or unfamiliar with local
pottery tradition in Anatolia. However, the term
"groove" itself is a very common tradition in
primitive ornament of pottery in many cultures,
including the Anatolian civilizations. Making a groove is
as simple as its outlook appearance. In its simplest
terms, the wheel revolves and the groove is
engraved. When hand-made, the groove should be
treated with the utmost care due to the tradition of
engraving groove (no matter how the wheel
revolved, either slow or fast) in a very wide range
of areas in central Anatolia. Those samples belong
to second discovered
vessels123 millenniuminB.C.
Afyon-Yanarlar
cultures. For(ofinstance,
various
122) Sorokin, 1958: 150
123) Emre, 1978: Fig. 4-6, 9-10, 51-58, 65, 71, 73-74, 81-90, 95, 96
124) Goldman, 1956: PI. 186/770
125) Ko§ay, 1966: PI. 8/h.72; 15/J.199; 18/h.45; 106/Alg. 325; Ko§ay, 1973: Pl.XVIII/Al.t. 63; LXXX/Al.t. 63
126) 1972:91
127) 1994: 246-247
128a) Summers, 1994: 246-247
128b) Lazaretov, 1997: 63, PL XXII/6, XXIII/ 1,5; Khavrin, 1997: PI. VI/3, 6, 7; Bokovenko and Legrand, 2000: Abb. 13/B,
73
types and sizes), carinated bowls124 from Tarsus,
rounded jars (dated to Hittite Age) and bowls from
Alaca Hoyiik125, all carry many grooves in rows
around their rims and necks. We do not intend to
make an inventory of such cups, which existed
commonly in Anatolia. Those grooves on these
cups compromise with grooves from Q 18, Nor§un
Tepe (which, according to Hauptmann126, are a
continuation of Hittite tradition). The ones in the
Euphrates basin are perhaps representative of one
of the significant and common tradition branches
existing in Anatolia during that period.
In conclusion, the grooved ware from Elazig-
Malatya cannot originate from the Caucasus in
terms of its dates, styles, and tradition. Therefore, it
is impossible to relate this ware to Muski People.
Summers127, who knows both the finds and the
region very well, strongly opposes Sevin's
hypothesis of a correlation between the grooved ware and
the Muski People. His main reason to oppose it is
that the grooved ware in the Caucasus is not earlier
than those from the Euphrates basin. He also
mentions in his study, that these vessels cannot be
related to minor ethnic groups in the Euphrates basin.
The author128a believes that the ware, which V.
Sevin had evaluated as surface finds, belongs to the
Early Urartian period (9th-8th c. B.C.).
Finally, I would like to state that the grooved
vessels such as those we collected in our surveys in
central and northern Kazakhstan (where their
number increased after the mid- second millennium
B.C., i.e. during the Andronovo Period) and
southern Siberia (13f century B.C. - 2nd century A.D., i.e.
from Early Karasuk Period to Tashtik Age)128b
resemble their matches in Caucasus and Erzurum in
terms of date, style, and other properties. This
resemblance results from the expression of cultures
migrating from remote regions to various other
parts of the world.
74 SEMÎH GUNERÎ
CONCLUSION
The archaeological material, classified as the
results of the 1987 Sos Hoyiik excavations, is the
most vivid trace of the Proto-Urartu period during
which the whole of eastern Anatolian people had
close links to and lived at the very heart of the
Karaz Culture. Those remains, reveal a transitory
period from the Bronze Age to the Iron Age which
lasted a hundred year129 between Tukulti-Ninurta I
(1244-1208 B.C.) and Tiglatpileser I (1115-1077
B.C.) in eastern Anatolia. Regarding this transition
period, the archaeological finds help us to decipher
the dimensions of the cultural interaction at that
time, and to study the events which took place in
that region.
We claim that the hand-made pottery in this
region and the ones from Karaz, Pulur, Giizelova
(these items will be presented in scientific literature
soon) represent a period of a hundred year (around
the 12th century B.C.) which was at the same time
transitional to the Iron Age. During this period:
— written sources in eastern Anatolia had
total y vanished130,
— hybrid Late Bronze-Early Iron Age items
started to emerge as a result of the effects of
nomadic dominant Asian cultures (Srubnaya,
Andronovo, Karasuk) in the Caucasus131,
— some bronze weapons spread along Kars,
Erzurum, Artvin, Ordu, Çorum, Tokat, Amasya
(southern coast of the Black Sea); their origin is
Caucasus and central Asia132,
— the tradition of pottery in southern Siberia
and central northern Kazakhstan in the second half
of the second millennium B.C. shows close
matches in the Pulur graves as well,
— with these improvements, political union
based on the kingdom of Dayaeni in north-eastern
Anatolia, gained power133,
C, 16/A-F; Savinov, Bokovenko and Zuyev, 1995: 44, Fig. 3.1, 82, Fig. 3 and 4; Bokovenko and Savinov, 1998: 27, Fig. 21, 81 ff;
Aleksandrov, Paul's and Podol'skiy, 2001: 40, Fig. 13, 46, 83, Fig. 57; and special samples dated Okunyevo Period from Uybat,
Savinov and Podol'skiy, 1997: 62-64, Fig. 21-23.
129) Guneri, 1995: iv
130)Giineri, 1995: 208
131) Sulimirski, 1970: 358 ff; Guneri, 1995: 289, 22.
132) Bittel, 1933; Przeworski, 1935, 1936; Ko§ay, 1938: PI. LI/Al.a. 101; Ko§ay, 1966: PI. 133 and 134/1, 2, 5, 6, 7; Kosay
and Vary, 1964; H. Erkanal, 1977: PI. 13/35; T. Ôzgiiç, 1978: PL 70; T. Ôzgiiç, 1982: PI. 567 1 and 3; Fig. 9; Guneri, 1995: 100 pp;
Siiel, 1998: 45, Fig. 22; Ôzgiiç, 1978: PI. 70/ 4
133) Guneri, 1995:201 ff.
134) Sorokin, 1958: 149 ff; Sulimirski, 1967: 66; Martirosyan, 1964b: 32.
— finally, iron gradually became a part of daily
life in the Caucasus 34.
These are what we can conclude from the study
of archaeological material which appears to be the
most common trace of a "silent" period. In eastern
Anatolia as in the whole of the Caucasus, a new
period is about to start. This "transitional period" is
a period of pain, suffer, and chaos, while the "Iron
Age" is approaching..
In this transitional period, we can say via
archaeological documents and finds that the
cultural relations between Erzurum and Van regions are
very weak. This is almost the same in Erzurum-
Elazig and Elazig-Van regions. In the next period
(as during the Urartian period) connections occur in
the archaeological material and items of three
centres, namely Erzurum, Elazig, and Van. The same
connection had been established for the Karaz ware
during the Karaz period. So, the claim for the
absence of connection (in opposition to the written
sources record) appears to be related to the lack of
sufficient excavations and available archaeological
material.
Cultural improvements in eastern Anatolia can
be explained by cultural connections in the
Caucasus and Central Asia mainly, while various
forms of cultures realize syntheses among
neighbouring settlements. Data from Sos III is
insufficient to prove such cultural interrelations. It is only
possible to estimate how "commercial activities"
increased as the cultural interrelations developed.
"Traditions" is an extremely abstract notion;
tradition transfer from one region to remote parts of the
world cannot be caused only by limited capacities
of commercial interactions. In this sense, the
observed development of such cultural interrela-
 CULTURAL CONNECTIONS BETWEEN ANATOLIA AND CAUCASUS-CENTRAL ASIA
tions must represent the effect of migrations of
central Asian ethnic groups. We believe that, in the
near future, further surveys-excavations, will
strengthen the reliability of our conclusions, as did
already the discovery, by V. Sevin and his team in
Hakkari-eastern Anatolia, of incredibly beautiful
stells picturing Asian warriors — or smiths.
The ceramic material exposed here includes
pottery which was made by use of incise technique
and which exhibits "rows of triangles whose
interiors are hatched". This motif was commonly used in
Central Asia, Urals, forests and steppes of southern
Siberia, where it became the symbol of the
Andronovo-Karasuk culture. This pattern never
was a tradition in Anatolia, with the exception of
eastern and northern Anatolian regions. Interesting
is the fact that our samples show close relations
with the cultures of the Late Bronze-Early Iron
Age, particularly with the traditions of the nomadic
cultures in Central Asia. The idea that the
nomadic/semi-nomadic cultures arrived in Anatolia
through the Caucasus in the second millennium
B.C. seems, perhaps, strange. However, we should
keep an eye on the Caucasus and beyond, as we did
for the Proto-Urartu period in spite of a very
limited group of ceramic material. The Central Asian
nomadic cultures in those "remote" regions and the
impact upon Anatolian cultures should, in one way
or another, be examined and discussed in more
detail.
S. G.
ABBREVIATIONS AND REFERENCES
Aleksandrov, S.V., Paul's, E.D., Podol'skiy M.L.,
2001 : Drevnosti Askizskogo rayona Khakasii.
Alihova, E.A., 1954 : "Muranskii mogil'nik i
selise", MIA 42: 257-301.
Alihova, E.A., 1958 : "Komarovskoye poseleniye u
meocnogo Ozera", MIA 61/ 2: 157-180.
Alihova, E.A., 1960 : "Pamyatniki Srubnoï kul'tury
Sarmatskoï Luki", MIA 80/ III: 96-119.
Anfimov, N.V., 1951 : "Meoto-Sarmatskih
mogil'nik u stanitsy ust'-Labinskoï ", MIA 23: 155-207.
AST : Arastirma Sonuçlan Toplantisi. Kiiltiir
Bakanhgi Yayinlan.
75
Arsebiik, G., 1974 : Atinova'da Koyu Yu'zlu Açkih ve
Karaz Tûrii Çanak-Çômlek Arasindaki îliskiler Sorunu
(unpublished PhD thesis), Istanbul University.
Belli, O., 1986 : "Dogu Anadolu Bôlgesinde Antik
Demir Metaliirjisinin Ara§tinlmasi", AST III: 365-378.
Bilgi, Ô., 1987 : "Ko§kerbaba Hoyuk Kazisi, 1979",
A§agi FiratProjesi 1 978-1 979 Çalismalan: 217-231.
Bittel, K., 1933 : "Artvin'de Bulunan Tunçtan
Mamul Asan Atika", Turk Tarih Arkeologya ve
Etnografya Dergisi I: 150-156.
Bokonevko, N.A. and Smirnov, Yu.A., 1998 :
Arheologiceskie Pamyatniki Doliny belogo iyusa na
Severe Khakasii.
Bokonevko, N.A. and Legrand, S., 2000 : "Das
karasukzeitlische Graberfeld Ancil Con in Chakassien",
Deutsches Archaeologisches Institut Eurasien-
Abteilung, Band 6: 209-248.
Bokonevko, N.A. and Mitjayev, P.E., 2000 :
"Malionovyj Log. Ein Graberfeld der Afanas'yevo-
Kultur", Deutsches Archaeologisches Institut Eurasien-
Abteilung, Band 6: 13-33.
Caferov, H.F. and Kesamanh, H.P., 1979 :
"Haçbulak Kentinde Dagilmi§ Kurgan Kebirleri", AIAH
Tarih, Felsefe ve Hukuk Seriyasi 1979/ 2: 75-82.
Çernih, E.N., 1967 : "Iz Istorii Metallurgii Piemen
Epohi Bronzy v Povolje i Priuralie", Pamyatniki Epohi.
Bronzy luga Evropeyskoi Çasti SSSR: 195-213
Çilingiroglu, A. A. 1984 "Van Gôlii Havzasinda
M.Ô. 2. Bin Kultiirlerine Ait Bazi Veriler" /. AST: 25-
29.
Çilingiroglu, A. A., 1986 : "Van Dilkaya Hôyiïgiï
1984 Kazilan", KST VII: 151-162.
Çilingiroglu, A. A., 1987: "Van Dilkaya Hôyûgii
Kazilan, 1985", KST VIII- 1: 81-94.
Çilingiroglu, A. A., 1988 : "Van Dilkaya Hôyiigii
Kazisi", KST IX-l: 229-247.
Deopnik, D.V. and Krupnov, E.I., 1961 :
"Zmyeiskoye poseleniye Kobanskoï kul'tury".
Arheologiçeskiye raskopki v raïone Zmyeiskoï severno
Osetii. Trudy arheologiçeskoï ekspeditsii 1953-1957 gg.
So ASSR: Severo-Osetinskii Naucno-issledovanteVskii
Institut prisovyete ministrov, 11-36.
Diakonov, L.M., 1984 : The Pre-History of the
Armenian People.
Edwards, M. R., 1981 : "The Pottery of Haftavan
VIB (Urmia Ware)", Iran XIX: 101-104.
Eliyev, V, 1977 : Azerbaycan da Tunç Dôvrunun
Boyah Kablar Medeniyyeti.
Emre, K., 1978 : Yanarlar, Afyon Yoresinde Bir Hitit
Mezarhgi.
Erkanal, H., 1977 : Die Axte und Beile des 2.
Jahrtausends in Zentralanatolien.
76 SEMÎH GÙNERi
Erzen, A., 1984 : Dogu Anadolu ve Urartular.
Esin, U., 1970 : "Tepecik Kazisi, 1968", Keban I:
147-158.
Esin, U., 1971 : "Tepecik Kazisi, 1969", Keban II:
107-115.
Esin, U., 1972 : "Tepecik Kazisi 1970", Keban III:
99-120.
Gelb, L, 1944 : Hurrians and Subarians.
Goetze, A., 1946 : "Hurrians and Subarians", JNES
V: 165-168.
Goetze, A., 1957 : Kleinasien.
Goldman, H., 1956 : Excavations at Gozlti Kule,
Tarsus, Volume II. Text and Plates, From the Neolithic
through the Bronze Age.
Griaznov, M.P., 1956 : Istoriya drevnih piemen
Vehneï obi po raskopkam bliz s. Bolsdya recka {MIA
48).
Gureviç, ED., 1960 : "Iz istorii yugo-vostoçnï
Pribaltiki I. Tysyaçeletii do. n.e.", MIA 76: 328-451.
Giineri, A.S., 1987 : Erzurum Çevresinde On-Urartu
Yerlesim Birimleri ve Seramigi (unpublished MA thesis),
Erzurum: Atatiirk University.
Giineri, A.S., 1988 : "Erzurum Çevresindeki
Hoyiiklerin Yiizey Ara§tirmalan", AST V-2: 45-76.
Giineri, A.S., 1992 : "Dogu Anadolu'de Yeni
Gozlemler", TAD XXX: 149-195.
Giineri, A.S., 1995 : Erken Demir Çaginda Dogu
Anadolu He Transkafkasya Arasinda Gelisen Kulturel
iliskiler (unpublished PhD thesis) Ankara: Hacettepe
University.
Giineri, A.S., 1999 : "Protourartu", Bilim ve Ùtopya
65: 57-61.
Hauptmann, H., 1970 : "Nor§un Tepe 1968 Kazilan
On Raporu", Keban I: 103-113.
Hauptmann, H., 1971 : "Nor§un Tepe Kazisi 1969",
Keban II: 71-79.
Hauptmann, H., 1972 : "Nor§un Tepe Kazilan,
1 970", Keban III: 87-101.
I§ik, E, 1987 : "SJrinlikale", Belleten 200: 497-553.
Ko§ay, H.Z., 1938 : Turk Tarih Kurumu Adina
Yapilan Alaca Hoyiik Hafriyati. 1936' daki Çahsmalara
ve Kesiflere Ait Ilk Rapor.
Ko§ay, H.Z. andTurfan, K., 1959 : "Erzurum-Karaz
Kazisi Raporu", Belleten, XXIII: 349-413.
Ko§ay, H.Z. and Vary, H., 1964 : Pulur Kazisi. I960
Mevsimi Çalismalan Raporu.
Ko§ay, H.Z., 1966 : Alaca Hoyiik Kazisi, 1940-
1948'deki Çahsmalara ve Kesiflere Ait Ilk Rapor.
Ko§ay, H.Z. and Vary, H., 1967 : Guzelova Kazisi.
Ko§ay, H.Z., 1973 : Alaca Hoyiik Kazisi 1963-1967
Çahsmalara ve Kesiflere Ait Ilk Rapor.
Krivtsova-Grakova, O.A., 1951 : "Sadcikovskoye
Poselenie Raskopki 1948 g.", MIA 21/11: 25-98.
Krivtsova-Grakova, O.A., 1955 : "Stepnoye Povolje
i Pricernomore v. Epohu Pozdnei Bronzi", MIA 46: 162-
185.
Krupnov, E.I., 1951 : "Novyï pamyatnik drevnih
kul'tur Dagestane. Opym pervego issledovaniya
Tarkinskogo mogilnika 1947 godo", MIA 23: 208-225.
KST : Kazi Sonuçlan Toplantisi. Kiiltiir Bakanhgi
Yayinlan.
Kuftin, B.A., 1941 : Arheologiçeskiye raskopki v
Trialeti.
Khavrin, S.V., 1997 "Mogil'nik Verkhniy Askiz I,
:
Kurgan 1", Okunyevskiy Sbornik: 65-79.
Kizlasov, L.R., 1986 : Drevneiseya Khakasiya.
Lazaretov, I.P. : "Okunsyevkie mogil'niki v doline
reki Uybat", Okunyevskiy Sbornik: 19-64.
Markovin, V.I., 1960: "Kul'tura piemen severnogo-
Kavkaza v epohu bronzy II. Tys. do.n.e" {MIA 93).
Markovin, V.I., 1964 : Dagestan i gornaya Çeçniya
v Drevnosti.
Martirosyan, A. A., 1964a : Armenia v epohu bronzy
i rannego jeleza.
Martirosyan, A. A., 1964b : "O periodizatsii arhe-
ologiçeskih pamyaknikov Armenii epohi bronzy i
rannego jeleza", SA 3: 21-36.
MIA : Materialy i issledovaniya po Arheologii SSSR.
Medvedskaya, I.N., 1982 : Iran: Iron Age.
Merpert, N.Y., 1954 : "Materialy po arheologii
srednogo zavolj'ya", MIA 42/1: 39-156.
Muncayev, R.M. and Smirnov, K.F., 1958 :
"Arheologiçeskiye pamyatniki bliz sela Karabudakkent
Dagestanskaya ASSR", MIA 68: 147-175.
Ôzgùç, T., 1978 : Masat Hoyiik Kazilan ve
Çevresindeki Arastirmalar.
Ôzgùç, T., 1982 : Masat Hoyiik II. Bogazkôy' u'n
Kuzeydogusunda Bir H itit Merkezi.
Pehlivan, M., 1984 : En Eski Çaglardan Urartu' nun
Yikihsina Kadar Erzurum ve Çevresi (unpublisher PhD
thesis) Erzurum: Atatiirk University.
Piotrovskii, B.B., 1969 : Urartu.
Popova, T.B., 1955 : "Etapy razvitiya lokal'niye
varianty Katakombï kul'tury", SA XXII: 21-60.
Przworski, S., 1935, 1936 : "Der Grottenfund vo
Ordu", ArchivOrientalny VII: 390-414; VIII: 46-68.
RA : Rossia Arheologiya.
Russel, H.F., 1980 : Pre-Classical Pottery of
Eastern Anatolia. Based on a Survey by Charles Burney
of Sited Along the Euphrates and Around Lake Van.
Sal'nikov, K.V., 1952 : "Kurgany na Ozera Alakul",
MM 24: 51-71.
 CULTURAL CONNECTIONS BETWEEN ANATOLIA AND CAUCASUS-CENTRAL ASIA
Salvini, M, 1967 : Nairi e Ur(u)atri.
Savinov, D.G., Bokovenko, N.A. and Zuyev, V.Yu.
(Eds.), 1995 : Yuzhnaya Sibir' v Drevnosti.
Savinov, D.G. and Podolskiy, M.D. (Eds.), 1997 :
Okunyevskiy Sbornik, Kultura, Iskusstvo, Antropologiya.
Schaeffer, C, 1948 \_Strati graphie comparée et
chronologie de V Asie Occidentale.
Sevin, V., 1983 : "îmikugagi Kazilan, 1982", KST V:
137-142.
Sevin, V., 1986 "Van Bôlgesi Yiizey Ara§tirmasi,
:
1984", AST 111:287-295.
Sevin, V., 1987a : "Elazig-Malatya-Bingôl ïlleri
Yiizey Aragtirmasi, 1985", ASTIV: 279-300.
Sevin, V., 1987b : "Urartu Oda-Mezar Mimarisinin
Kôkeni Ùzerine Bazi Gôzlemler", in : A. Çilingiroglu
(Ed.), Anadolu Detnir Çaglan : 35-55.
Sevin, V., 1988 : "Elazig-Bingôl Yiizey Ara§tirmasi,
1986", AST V-2: 1-44.
Sevin, V., 1989a : "Elazig-Bingôl Yùzey
Ara§tirmasi, 1987", AST VI: 451-500.
Sevin, V, 1989b : "Elazig Yôresi Erken Demir Çagi
ve Musjdler Sorunu", Hôyuk I: 51-64.
Smirnov, K.P., 1951 : "Arheologiçesmiye issle-
dovaniya v raïone Dagestanskogo seleniya Tarki v
1948-1949 gg", MIA 23: 226-272.
Smirnov, K.P., 1952 : "Voprosu izuceniya
S arm atskih piemen i kul'tury v Sovyetskoï arheologii",
in: D.B. §elov (Ed.), Voprosu Skifo Sarmatskoï
arheologii po materialam konferentsii. AN SSSR: 195-219.
Smirnov, K.P., 1957 : "Jeleznyï vek Baskirii", MIA
58:5-113.
Smirnov, K.P., 1960 : "Bykovskie kurgani", MIA:
78/11: 168-268.
Sorokin, VS., 1958 : "Sledy drevneï§ego poseleniya
u Karmir-Blura", SA 2: 149-163.
Sorokin, VS., 1962 : "Mogil'nik bronzoboï epohi
Tasty-Butak 1 v zapadnom Kazakstane {MIA 120).
SA : Sovyetskaya Arheologiya.
Sulimirski, T., 1967 "The Bronze Age of the
:
USSR. A Guide to the Recent Literature on the Subject",
Bulletin of the Institute of Archaeology VII: 42-83.
77
Sulimirski, T., 1970 : Prehistoric Russia. An
Outline.
Summers, G.D., 1994 : Tille Hôyùk. The Late
Bronze Age and the Iron Age Transition.
Siiel, A., 1998 : "Ortakôy-Çapinuwa: Bir Hitit
Merkezi", Tiirkiye Bilimler Akademisi Arkeoloji Dergisi
1: 37-61.
Tarhan, M.T., 1978 : M.Ô. XIII. Yuzyilda "Uruatri"
ve "Nairi" Konfederasyonlan (unpublished "doçentlik"
thesis) Istanbul University.
Tarhan, M.T., 1982 : "Urartu Devleti'nin 'Kurulus/
Evresi ve Kurucu Krallardan 'Lutipri: Lapturi'
Hakkinda", Anadolu Arastirmalan VIII (1980) 1982:
69-114.
Tihonov, B.G., 1960 : "Metalliçeskie ïzdeliya Epohi
Bronzy na Srednem Urale i v Priurale", MIA 90: 5-15.
Trubinkova, N.V., 1958 : "Nyekotorye itigo arhe-
ologiçeskih issledovaniya po r. Use", MIA 61/11: 181-
202.
Ûnal, A., 1997 : "Hurriler, Hurri Tarihi, Kiilturu ve
Arkeolojisiyle Ilgili Yeni Buluntular ve Geligmeler",
7996 Yih Anadolu Medeniyetleri Muzesi Konferanslan,
Ankara: 11-35.
Ùnal, A., 1999 : The Hittites and Anatolian
Civilizations.
.
Van Loon, M.N., 1966 : UrartianArt. Its Distinctive
Traits in the Light of New Excavations.
Van Loon, M.N., 1971 : "Korucutepe Kazisi, 1969",
Keban II: 47-56.
Young, T.C. Jr., 1965 : "A Comparative Ceramic
Chronology for Western Iran, 1500-500 B.C.", Iran III:
53-85.
Young, T.C. Jr., 1967 : "The Iranian Migration into
the Zagros", Iran V: 11-43.
Young, T.C. Jr., 1969 : Excavation at Godin Tepe.
First Progress Report (Royal Ontario Museum 17).