Araştırma Makalesi


DOI :10.26650/anar.2022.1169698   IUP :10.26650/anar.2022.1169698    Tam Metin (PDF)

İzmir-Bayraklı Höyüğü’nde Bulunan Antropomorfik Kap Parçaları ve Batı Anadolu Tunç Çağ Arkeolojisindeki Yeri

Gülnur EroğluAylin Ümit Erdem

Bayraklı Höyüğü (Eski Smyrna) kazıları çerçevesinde 2017 yılından itibaren “Batı Açmaları”nda yürütülen çalışmalarda Erken Tunç Çağ sonu ve Orta Tunç Çağ başlangıcına tarihlenen veriler açığa çıkarılmıştır. Başlıca 3 mimari yapı katıyla temsil edilen alanın, Erken-Orta Tunç Çağ geçiş dönemine tarihlenen I. Tabaka’sından ele geçen seramik bulguları içinde antropomorfik (insan yüzlü) kap parçalarına rastlanmıştır. Söz konusu tabakadan elde edilen seramik repertuvarı içinde az sayıda örnekle temsil edilen insan yüzlü kapların, farklı tipte ve özellikteki kaplardan oluştuğu dikkati çekmektedir. Bu makalede, Bayraklı’nın I. Tabakasında bulunan antropomorfik kaplar, form, mal ve bezeme özellikleri açısından değerlendirilerek Batı Anadolu’daki diğer Tunç Çağ merkezlerinde bulunan örneklerle karşılaştırma yoluna gidilmiştir. Buna göre Bayraklı’daki örnekler, form ve bezeme açısından ele alınarak Batı Anadolu arkeolojisindeki yeri üzerine bir değerlendirme yapılmıştır.

DOI :10.26650/anar.2022.1169698   IUP :10.26650/anar.2022.1169698    Tam Metin (PDF)

Anthropomorphic Vessels from the Old Smyrna Bayraklı Mound and Their Meaning in the Bronze Age of the West Anatolia Region

Gülnur EroğluAylin Ümit Erdem

Archaeological excavations since 2017 of Bayraklı Mound in Old Smyrna in the western trenches have presented significant evidence of the period between the end of the Early Bronze Age and the beginning of the Middle Bronze Age. The trench is characterized by three archaeological layers, with Layer I providing some sherds related to anthropomorphic vessels containing stylized human faces and dating back to the transition from the Early to the Middle Bronze period. The anthropomorphic samples are represented by a small number of sherds with different forms and features. This article discusses the anthropomorphic vessel sherds from Layer I of the Bayraklı Mound in terms of their forms, decorations, and features and makes some comparisons with other Bronze Age sites in the West Anatolia Region. Accordingly, general interpretations have been made about the location of the Bayraklı samples in the West Anatolia Region.


GENİŞLETİLMİŞ ÖZET


The Bayraklı Mound of Smyrna (Ancient İzmir) is located in the Bayraklı District of Turkey’s İzmir Province. The first systematic excavations were conducted by J. Cook and E. Akurgal between 1948-1951. Afterwards, E. Akurgal directed the excavations between 1966- 1992 and M. Akurgal between 1993-2013. Most recently, the area has been excavated since 2014 under the direction of C. Tanrıver from Ege University.

Although Bayraklı Mound has been excavated since 1948, the layers dating to the Bronze Age settlement are less known. The only excavation from the Early Bronze Age layer was carried out in “Trench E” in 1949, the findings of which E. Akurgal later published as a short report. According to this report, the earliest settlement of Bayraklı was dated to 3000 BC based on architectural remains and pottery finds. The new period of excavations has been conducted in the area of the western trenches in order to understand the Early Bronze Age layers in a wider framework. Layer I has been dated to the transition period from the Early to the Middle Bronze Age and is represented by rectangular structures with stone foundations. The pottery obtained from this layer have presented different wares and forms related to the period and are also known to come from Bronze Age layers of other sites in the West Anatolia Region. A group of anthropomorphic vessel sherds in the pottery collection constitute the main theme of this article.

A total of six anthropomorphic vessel sherds were found in Layer I and dated to the transition period from the Early to the Middle Bronze Age. As is well known, anthropomorphic vessels can be divided into two main categories based on whether their decorations bear only a human face or a human body and face. The best examples with a human face and body together are known to have come from Troy, Limantepe, and Seyitömer. Because no complete vessel has yet been found, whether the Bayraklı Mound samples are decorated with a human body that includes the chest and arms or not remains unclear. The sherds that have been found are solely decorated with stylized human faces, including the eyes and nose. The eyes were made as circular reliefs, while the noise had been made as a vertical line relief before the firing of the vessels. The two main ware groups are observed as brown slipped wares and red slipped wares. The clay inclusions consist of sand, small pebble, mica, and lime. The burnishing has been observed to be of a low quality, with most sherds generally being unburnished. Similar anthropomorphic vessels are known to have come from settlements in the West Anatolia Region such as Troy, Aphrodisias, Karataş-Semayük, Seyitömer, Kumtepe, Bakla Tepe, Limantepe, Kocabaş Tepe, Çeşme-Bağlararası, Laodikeia/Asopos Tepesi, and Beycesultan (see map).

The stratigraphic results from the settlements in West Anatolia indicate anthropomorphic vessels to have been especially common during the end of the Early Bronze Age to the Middle Bronze Age. They continued to be used during the Late Bronze Age, but with a sharp decrease. According to the analysis of the anthropomorphic vessels found in West Anatolia, some chronological differences can be suggested based on vessel form and design. Anthropomorphic vessels with stylized human faces dating to the Early Bronze Age generally consist of small- and/or medium-sized vessels, as seen in Troy and Kumtepe. However, the size of the anthropomorphic vessels dating to the Middle Bronze Age at Limantepe and Çeşme-Bağlararası are larger than the Early Bronze Age ones. When taking the size of the vessel into consideration, the anthropomorphic vessel fragments from Bayraklı Mound reflect both Early and Middle Bronze Age traditions.

The stylized human face decorations on vessels from the Early and Middle Bronze Ages also differ from each other. The Early Bronze Age figures from Troy and Kumtepe were made more round, while the Middle Bronze Age ones are more detailed.

The meanings in the anthropomorphic vessel traditions in Anatolia, which date back to the Neolithic period, are explained as a reflection of the belief system related to female symbolism and fertility. Similar perceptions would likely have continued during the Bronze Ages as well. Although the meanings of anthropomorphic vessels are not yet known with certainty, this tradition clearly survived in Anatolia from the Neolithic to the end of the Bronze Ages. The Bayraklı Mound sherds reflect the continuation of the same tradition and/ or belief system during the Early and Middle Bronze Ages. 


PDF Görünüm

Referanslar

  • Akurgal, E. (1993). Eski Çağ’da Ege ve İzmir, İzmir. google scholar
  • Akurgal, E. (1997). Eski İzmir I. Yerleşme Katları ve Athena Tapınağı, Ankara. google scholar
  • Aykurt, A. (2013). İzmir Bölgesi Araştırmaları Işığında Batı Anadolu Orta Tunç Çağı Kronolojisi’nin Güncel Değerlendirmesi. Colloquium Anatolicum XII, 58-78. google scholar
  • Arda, G. (2002). Limantepe, Baklatepe ve Kocabaştepe İnsan Yüzlü Kapları, (Yüksek Lisans Tezi). Çanakkale 18 Mart Üniversitesi, Sosyal Bilimler Enstitüsü, Çanakkale. google scholar
  • Becker, V. (2017). Face Vessels and Anthropomorphic Representations on Vessels from Neolithic Italy. In H. Schwarzberg & V. Becker (Eds.) Bodies of Clay On Prehistoric Humanised Pottery (pp. 63-82). OxfordPhiladelphia. google scholar
  • Bilgi, Ö. (2005). İslam Öncesi Kütahya Yöresi Seramik Sanatı. Toprak, Ateş, Sır, İstanbul. google scholar
  • Blegen, C. W. (1935). Excavation at Troy 1934. AJA 39-1, 6-34. google scholar
  • Blegen, C. W., J. L. Caskey., M. Rawson & J. Sperling. (1951). Troy II, The Third, Fourth and Fifth Settlements, Princeton. google scholar
  • Blegen, C. W. (1963). Troy and the Trojans, Thames and Hudson. London. google scholar
  • Cook, J. M. (1958). Old Smyrna, 1948-1951, BASOR Vol.53/54. Athens: 1-34. google scholar
  • Çilingiroğlu, A., Derin, Z., Abay, E., Sağlamtimur, H. ve İ. Kayan. (2002). Ulucak Höyük: Excavations Conducted Between 1995-2002. Louvian. google scholar
  • Çilingiroğlu, Ç. (2012) Ulucak Höyüğü. Çilingiroğu. A., Mercangöz, Z. ve Polat, G. (Ed.). 2012. Ege Üniversitesi Arkeoloji Kazıları Kitabı içinde. (s. 426-436). İzmir: Ege Üniveristesi. google scholar
  • Duru, R. (1996). Kuruçay Höyük Kazıları II, 1978-1988 Yılı Kazıları Sonuçları, Geç Kalkolitik İlk Tunç Çağ Yerleşmeleri. Ankara: TTK. google scholar
  • Efe, T. ve İlaslı, A. (1997). Potter links between the Troad and inland northwestern Anatolia during the Trojan Second Settlement, In Chr. G. Doumas & V. La Rosa (Eds.), Poliochni e l’antica età del Bronzo nell’Egeo sellenırionale. (pp. 596-609). Athens: Scuola archeologica italiana di Atene. google scholar
  • Erdem, Ü. A., Erdem K. G. ve Ongar, B. (2019). Bayraklı Höyüğü Erken Tunç Çağ Tabakalarına Dair İlk Bulgular. H. Göncü, A. Ersoy ve D. S. Akar Tanrıver (Ed.), Smyrna/İzmir Kazı ve Araşlırmaları III, İçinde. (s. 39-48) İstanbul. google scholar
  • Erdem, Ü. A. (2021). İzmir-Bayraklı Höyük’te Bulunan Gümüş Takılara Dair İlk Gözlemler [First Observations on Silver Jewelry from İzmir-Bayraklı Mound]. ADerg XXVI, 83-90. google scholar
  • Erkanal, A. & Aykurt, A. (2017). Thoughts on the Anthropomorphic Pot Found in Liman Tepe, In Ç. Maner, M.T. Horowitz &A.S. Gilbert (Eds.), Overlurning Cerlainlies in Near Easlern Archaeology: A Feslschrifl in Honor of K. Aslıhan Yener, (pp. 171-185). Brill, Leiden. google scholar
  • Erkanal, H. ve Özkan, T. (2000). 1998 Bakla Tepe Kazıları. Kazı Sonuçları Toplanlısı 21(1), 263-278. google scholar
  • Gimbutas, M. (1989). The Language of lhe Goddess. San Francisco: Harper and Row. google scholar
  • Günel, S. (1999). Vorbericht über die mittel-und spätbronzezeitliche Keramik vom Liman Tepe. Islanbuler Millelungen 49, 41-82. google scholar
  • Hamilakis, Y., Pluciennik, M. & Tarlow, S. (2002). Thinking through the Body. In Y. Hamilakis, M. Pluciennik & S. Tarlow (Eds.), Thinking through the Body: Archaeologies of Corporeality (pp. 1-21). New York: Kluwer Academic/Plenum Publishers. google scholar
  • Işıklı, M. (2011). Doğu Anadolu Erken Transkafkasya Kültürü: Çok Bileşenli Gelişkin Bir Kültürün Analizi. İstanbul: Arkeoloji ve Sanat Yayınları. google scholar
  • Joukowsky, M. S. (1986). Prehistoric Aphrodisias, An Account of the Excavations and Artifact Studies Volume I. Excavation and Stusies. USA. google scholar
  • Konakçı, E. (2012). Büyük ve Küçük Menderes Havzalarındaki MÖ 2. Binyıl Kültürlerinin Yeni Veriler Işığında Değerlendirilmesi. (Doktora Tezi). Ege Üniversitesi, Sosyal Bilimler Enstitüsü, İzmir. google scholar
  • Mellaart, J. (1963). Early Cultures Of The South Anatolian Plateau, II: The Late Chalcolithic And Early Bronze Ages In The Konya Plain. Anatolian Studies XIII, 199-236. google scholar
  • Mellaart, J. (1970). Excavations at Hacılar. Edinburg: Edinburg University Press. google scholar
  • Mellaart, J. & Murray, A. (1995). Beycesultan Vol III-Part II, Late Bronze Age and Phrygian Pottery and Middle and Late Bronze Age Small Objects, Ankara, 1995: 43, Fig.P21/7, 45, Fig.P23/7. google scholar
  • Melink, J. (1968). Excavation at Karataş Semayük in Lycia 1967, American Journal of Archaeology 72(3), 243-263. google scholar
  • Nanoglou, S. (2008). Qualities of Humanness: Material Aspects of Greek Neolithic Anthropomorphic Imagery. Journal of Material Culture 13(3), 311-334. google scholar
  • Naumov, G. (2008). G. The Vessels as a Human Body: Neolithic Anthropomorphic Vessels and their Reflection in Later Periods. In I. Berg (Eds.), Breaking the Mould: Challenging the Past through Pottery. (pp. 93101). BAR S1861. Prehistoric Ceramics Research Group Occasional Paper 6: Oxford: Archaeopress. google scholar
  • Özdoğan, M ve Dede, Y. (1998). An Anthropomorphic Vessel from Toptepe-Eastern Turkey. In M. Stefanovic, H. Todorova & H. Hauptman (Eds.), James Harvey Gaul in Memorium (pp. 143-152). Sofia: The James Harvey Gaul Foundation. google scholar
  • Özdoğan, M. (2000a). Toptepe Kazısı. O. Belli (Ed.) Türkiye Arkeolojisi ve İstanbul Üniversitesi1932-1999 Kitabı İçinde, (s. 77-79). Ankara: İstanbul Üniversitesi. google scholar
  • Özdoğan, M. (2000b). Kırklareli Kazıları: Aşağıpınar ve Kanlıgeçit. O. Belli (Ed.) Türkiye Arkeolojisi ve İstanbul Üniversitesi1932-1999 Kitabı İçinde, (s. 69-76). Ankara: İstanbul Üniversitesi. google scholar
  • Özgüç, T. (1979). Assur Ticaret Kolonilerine Ait İnsan biçimli Kap. Belleten XLIII (170), 261-266. google scholar
  • Özgüç, T. (2005). Kültepe. Kanis/Nesa. İstanbul: Yapı Kredi Yayınları. google scholar
  • Schliemann, H. (1880). Ilios, the City and Country of the Trojans: The Results of Researches and Discoveries on the Site of Troy and throughout the Troad in the Years 1871, 72, 73, 78, 79: including an autobiography of the author. London: J. Murray. google scholar
  • Silistreli, U. (1989a). Köşk Höyük Figürin ve Heykelcikleri. Belleten LIII (207-208), 497-504. google scholar
  • Silistreli, U. (1989b). Köşk Höyük’te Bulunan Kabartma İnsan ve Hayvan Figürleriyle Bezeli Vazolar”, Belleten LIII (206), 361-374. google scholar
  • Schmidt, H. (1902). Heinrich Schliemann’s Sammlung Trojaniescher Altertümer. German: Berlin. google scholar
  • Sperling, J. W. (1976). Kumtepe in the Troad: Trial Excavations, 1934. Hesperia 45(4), 305-364. google scholar
  • Şahoğlu, V. (2007). Çeşme-Bağlararası: A New Excavation in Western Anatolia. In F. Felten, W. Gauss & R. Smetana (Eds.), Middle Helladic Pottery and Synchronisms (pp. 309-322) Proceedings of the International Workshop held at Salzburg, October 31st - November 2nd, 2004. Wien: Verlag der Österreichischen Akademie der Wissenschaften. google scholar
  • Tilley, C. Y. (1996). An Ethnography of the Neolithic: Early Prehistoric Societies in Southern Scandinavia. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. google scholar
  • Türktüzün, M., Ünan, S., ve Ünal, S. (2014) Çiledir Höyük Erken Tunç Çağ II bulguları-Early Bronze Age II Findings At Çiledir Höyük. TÜBA-AR 17, 49-72. google scholar
  • Umurtak, G. (1996). Anadolu’nun Batı Bölgelerinde ve Trakya’da Tunç Çağ Öncesi Yerleşmelerde Bulunmuş olan Ayrışık Kaplar. AnAr XIV, 479-517. google scholar

Atıflar

Biçimlendirilmiş bir atıfı kopyalayıp yapıştırın veya seçtiğiniz biçimde dışa aktarmak için seçeneklerden birini kullanın


DIŞA AKTAR



APA

Eroğlu, G., & Erdem, A.Ü. (2022). İzmir-Bayraklı Höyüğü’nde Bulunan Antropomorfik Kap Parçaları ve Batı Anadolu Tunç Çağ Arkeolojisindeki Yeri. Anadolu Araştırmaları, 0(27), 31-49. https://doi.org/10.26650/anar.2022.1169698


AMA

Eroğlu G, Erdem A Ü. İzmir-Bayraklı Höyüğü’nde Bulunan Antropomorfik Kap Parçaları ve Batı Anadolu Tunç Çağ Arkeolojisindeki Yeri. Anadolu Araştırmaları. 2022;0(27):31-49. https://doi.org/10.26650/anar.2022.1169698


ABNT

Eroğlu, G.; Erdem, A.Ü. İzmir-Bayraklı Höyüğü’nde Bulunan Antropomorfik Kap Parçaları ve Batı Anadolu Tunç Çağ Arkeolojisindeki Yeri. Anadolu Araştırmaları, [Publisher Location], v. 0, n. 27, p. 31-49, 2022.


Chicago: Author-Date Style

Eroğlu, Gülnur, and Aylin Ümit Erdem. 2022. “İzmir-Bayraklı Höyüğü’nde Bulunan Antropomorfik Kap Parçaları ve Batı Anadolu Tunç Çağ Arkeolojisindeki Yeri.” Anadolu Araştırmaları 0, no. 27: 31-49. https://doi.org/10.26650/anar.2022.1169698


Chicago: Humanities Style

Eroğlu, Gülnur, and Aylin Ümit Erdem. İzmir-Bayraklı Höyüğü’nde Bulunan Antropomorfik Kap Parçaları ve Batı Anadolu Tunç Çağ Arkeolojisindeki Yeri.” Anadolu Araştırmaları 0, no. 27 (Jul. 2024): 31-49. https://doi.org/10.26650/anar.2022.1169698


Harvard: Australian Style

Eroğlu, G & Erdem, AÜ 2022, 'İzmir-Bayraklı Höyüğü’nde Bulunan Antropomorfik Kap Parçaları ve Batı Anadolu Tunç Çağ Arkeolojisindeki Yeri', Anadolu Araştırmaları, vol. 0, no. 27, pp. 31-49, viewed 23 Jul. 2024, https://doi.org/10.26650/anar.2022.1169698


Harvard: Author-Date Style

Eroğlu, G. and Erdem, A.Ü. (2022) ‘İzmir-Bayraklı Höyüğü’nde Bulunan Antropomorfik Kap Parçaları ve Batı Anadolu Tunç Çağ Arkeolojisindeki Yeri’, Anadolu Araştırmaları, 0(27), pp. 31-49. https://doi.org/10.26650/anar.2022.1169698 (23 Jul. 2024).


MLA

Eroğlu, Gülnur, and Aylin Ümit Erdem. İzmir-Bayraklı Höyüğü’nde Bulunan Antropomorfik Kap Parçaları ve Batı Anadolu Tunç Çağ Arkeolojisindeki Yeri.” Anadolu Araştırmaları, vol. 0, no. 27, 2022, pp. 31-49. [Database Container], https://doi.org/10.26650/anar.2022.1169698


Vancouver

Eroğlu G, Erdem AÜ. İzmir-Bayraklı Höyüğü’nde Bulunan Antropomorfik Kap Parçaları ve Batı Anadolu Tunç Çağ Arkeolojisindeki Yeri. Anadolu Araştırmaları [Internet]. 23 Jul. 2024 [cited 23 Jul. 2024];0(27):31-49. Available from: https://doi.org/10.26650/anar.2022.1169698 doi: 10.26650/anar.2022.1169698


ISNAD

Eroğlu, Gülnur - Erdem, AylinÜmit. İzmir-Bayraklı Höyüğü’nde Bulunan Antropomorfik Kap Parçaları ve Batı Anadolu Tunç Çağ Arkeolojisindeki Yeri”. Anadolu Araştırmaları 0/27 (Jul. 2024): 31-49. https://doi.org/10.26650/anar.2022.1169698



ZAMAN ÇİZELGESİ


Gönderim01.09.2022
Kabul01.09.2022
Çevrimiçi Yayınlanma30.12.2022

LİSANS


Attribution-NonCommercial (CC BY-NC)

This license lets others remix, tweak, and build upon your work non-commercially, and although their new works must also acknowledge you and be non-commercial, they don’t have to license their derivative works on the same terms.


PAYLAŞ




İstanbul Üniversitesi Yayınları, uluslararası yayıncılık standartları ve etiğine uygun olarak, yüksek kalitede bilimsel dergi ve kitapların yayınlanmasıyla giderek artan bilimsel bilginin yayılmasına katkıda bulunmayı amaçlamaktadır. İstanbul Üniversitesi Yayınları açık erişimli, ticari olmayan, bilimsel yayıncılığı takip etmektedir.