THE FOURTH MILLENNIUM B. C. Proceedings ofthe I nternational Symposium Nesscb ur, 28-30 A ugust 1992 Edited by Pctya Georgicva EDITION OF NEW BULGARIAN UNIVERSITY SOFIA, 1993 THE FOURTH MILLENNIUM B. C. Proceedings ofthe I nternational Symposium Nesscb ur, 28-30 A ugust 1992 Edited by Pctya Georgicva EDITION OF NEW BULGARIAN UNIVERSITY SOFIA, 1993 The Chalcolithic Period in Central Anatolia G. D. SUMMERS British Institute of Archaeology at Ankara Between 1964 and 1966 Dr. Ian Todd! carried out a survey in Central Anatolia (Todd 1980 with references). A comprehensive selection of the pottery from Todd's survey that should probably be dated to the chalcolithic period is presented (Figs 3-4, PIs 1-16) and some corn- 1110n diagnostic features are described. In the absence of a clearly published excavated sequence it would be premature, in my view, to do more. It is not possible, given the present meagre state of knowledge, to identify the pottery (and thus settlements) specifically belonging to the fourth millennium B. C. The widely used chronology established by Orthmann (1963) is too conservative in that all the chalcolithic pottery has been squashed into the Early Bronze Age (EBA) and I am in broad agreement with the views on chronology expressed by Dr. Ozdcgan (forthcoming)." Rather than lay yet another false trail I have thought it more useful to present groups of pottery from surface survey under the broad heading of chalcolithic. The area. under consideration (Figs 1-2) lies within and to thc south of the great bend in the Kizihrrnak (the Red River), i.c. in the modern Turkish provinces of Kirsehir, Ncvschir and Nigde, It is a large area that lies to the east of the Tuz Golu basin and the Konya Plain, north of the Taurus mountains and south of the Pontic foothills. Ian Todd (1980: 9-12) has described his aims and survey methods. Essentially he followed the more accessible roads and examined the more readily recognizable sites which were, of course, mainly mounds but included some flat sites. Heavily dissected and hilly terrain was largely avoided. Todd's intention of carrying out more thorough and intensive survey in selective areas was not realized. No criticism of Todd's methods or results is intended here, only a re-emphasis of the point that Todd himself made: the negative evidence is extremely unreliable. Todd also published such of the pottery as he thought was neolit hie (1980: 45-56) but more recent evidence suggests that it would be prudent to reserve judgement on the date until a secure excavated sequence is available. I f it is not easy to distinguish between neolithic and chnlcolit hic pottery it is even harder to distinguish late chnlcolit hic sherds from those of EB 1. Only with EB II is it possible to be more confident. Ell II pottery is prolific and much of it easily identified. Most distinctive are a range of hand-made, red slipped and burnished wares. to Or. Ian Todd for generously entrusting me with the publication of his survey pottery and for his kindness in passing over all his notes and records. Iwould also like to thank Or. Petya Georgieva for extending an invitation to the symposium in Nessebur and the British Instirutc of Archaeology at Ankara for contributing towards the costs of attendance. This paper has benefited greatly from discussion with Dr. Mehrnet Ozdogan and Dr. David French who cannot, however, be held responsible for the views expressed. The photographs were prepared by Tugrul Cakar, the maps were drawn by Francoise Summers and Richard Bavliss, I I 3111 grateful 2Dr. Ozdogan has kindly made his unpublished paper available to me. One of these has been termed Nevsehir Ware by David French (1968a: 43-44, Fig. 109: 3) to distinguish it from its contemporaries, known for example from Polaih in the Ankara region (Lloyd and Gokce 1951; French 1968~: 42) and from the Konya Plain (Mellaart 1963: 210-220; French 1968a: 40-41). In the area under discussion here it is not possible to define an EB I assemblage. It may be possible, however, to pick out some diagnostic Ell I pottery. Sites with occupation dating to the cha lcolit h ic period were rarely found during Todd's survey. Those that were will be described in the order of their (perceived) importance. KO$KHOYOK Kosk Hoyuk or Kosk Pmar near Nigde (Fig.2) W<lS first discovered, so far as I have been able to ascertain, by Michael Ballance in 1961. It was subsequently visited by Richard Harper and Margaret Ramsden in 1964. Ramsden collected sherds of a largely complete bowl (Fig. 3, PI. 7). In 1965 Ian Todd was able to collect a large quantity of sherds where there had been recent terracing for fruit trees and channels cut by rain. These sherds, along with the rest of the survey material, are now housed in the British Institute of Archaeology at Ankara. Two large vessels, restored from sherds collected by Ramsden and Todd (Figs 3-4; Pis 7-8), are now in the Nigde Museum. In 1980 Prof. Dr. U. Silistreli began excavations and had started to reveal a succession of levels with exciting finds before his untimely death early in 1992. According to Dr. Silistreli there were three levels at Kosk Hoyuk but until a definitive report is forthcoming it is not possible to use the sequence for the comparative study of cerarrucs. As an interim measure a comprehensive selection of the sherds housed in the nIAA is presented here. A few of these sherds were previously published by Todd and these have been indicated in the catalogue. The prehistoric site of Kosk Hoyiik is situated on a natural hill or tepe from the base of which flows a copious spring. In the Roman period the spring fed the city of Tyana and the Roman settling pool at the head of the aqueduct has long drawn the attention of archaeologists. Excavations on the mound have reportedly revealed three levels in approximately three meters of occupational deposits. Dcndrochronological studies of timbers from Levels I and 1I (i.e. the two latest levels) suggests that Level I postdates Level II by more than 32 years. How much more is an open question. Todd suggested that the latest occupation belonged to the Early Bronze Age and that the Heavy Black Burnished ware was EB 1. If this attribution is correct and if the dendrochronology can be relied upon then, Level II must span at least part of the late chalcolithic period. The date 29 30 G. D. SUMMERS of Level III is unclear. If Level III is as early as the late neolithic period there is either a gap (or gaps) in the sequence or the dates just suggested for Levels I and II are too low. It has not been possible to cross-match the rings in the Kosk Hoyuk timbers with those from Can Hasan lID (Kuniholm 1991 and pers. comm.). It might be, therefore, that Kosk Hoyuk Level II is later than Can Hasan TIB. So far only a few of the more interesting finds f"om the excavations have been published. Bibliography Todd 1980: passim with earlier references. Silistreli 1984a-b: 1985a-b: 1986: 1987: 1989a-d: 1990ab: 1991a-b. Kuniholm 1991. PINARBA$I (BOR) Pmarbai lies on the small high Bor plain between the Kenya Plain and Nigde. It too has a copious spring that today feeds a small pond at the base of the mound. The mound itself is largely Iron Age in date. It is c. 100 m; in diameter and approximately 8 m high. Some, perhaps a considerable amount, of the early occupation lies below the present day level of the plain. Furthermore, the area of early occupation may have been more extensive than that covered by the mound. The size and depth of the early deposits are difficult to estimate but there would seem not to be sufficient depth of occupation to represent a continuous sequence throughout the whole of the neolithic and chalcolithic periods. There is also EBA and later occupation. The site was first reported by Gaul (1939: 33-34) and has appeared in the literature many times since. Sherds in the BIAA were collected by Michael Ballance in 1961, David French in 1962 and Ian Todd in 1964 (twice) and 1967. In 1982 Dr. Silistreli made a test excavation in the lower levels and amongst other discoveries found evidence for red plaster floors of the (? acerarnic) neolithic period. The pottery from the sounding remains unpublished. Bibliography Todd 1980: passim with earlier references Silistreli 1984a TEPECiK c;:iFTLiK This mound is located in a high, well watered intermountain plain in the Melendiz Dag range. The altitude is approximately 1,450 m. The extant mound is some 200m in diameter and 4-5m high. It seems probable that a substantial amount of occupational deposits lie below the present day plain level. The site was discovered by Todd in 1966. Bibliography Todd 1980: passim with earlier references. From three sites, Kosk Hoyuk, Pmarbai and Tepecik Ciftlik, substantial numbers of sherds were collected (now housed in the BIAA), thus making it possible to identify groups of pottery (Pis. 1-16) with some confidence that the available material does not contain any substantial bias, for the chalcolithic period. Ceramic neolithic occupation, however, is probably under-represented because it lies buried beneath later occupation and alluvium. The other sites discussed here that produced evidence of settlement in the chalcolithic period yielded few sherd.'>, thus the negative evidence from these sites is most unreliable. There are four sites with chalcolithic occupation that is apparently restricted in both depth and area: Kabakulak, Sapmaz Koy, Tasli Burun and Degirrnen Ozu. The site at Gelveri (modern Guzelyurt) is apparently somewhat larger. Finally there is the excavated site at Can Hasan on the edge of the Konya Plain. Recently a survey carried out by the Japanese under Dr. Omura has found a number of new chalcolithic sites, including some with pottery ornamented by painted spirals. It has not been possible to include the results of this new work here but I understand that they generally repeat and expand the results obtained by Todd. KABAKULAK Kabakulak is a small and apparently shallow site, perhaps on the slope of a terrace above a perennially strong stream at an altitude of c. 1,300m. It was discovered by Todd in 1966. Bibliography Summers 1991 with earlier references. SAPMAZKOY Sapmaz Koy, also known as Yastorcn, is a low mound on a slopping ridge. The size and depth of the deposits are difficult to judge. It was found by Todd in 1965 and recently visited by the Japanese team led by Dr. Omura, Bibliography Todd 1980: passim with earlier references. Omura 1991: 71, 77 Fig 3 nos 1-6, 82 Figs 9-10,83 Figs 11-12. TA~LI BURUN Tash Burun, near the village of Kozakli, is an apparently shallow site on a natural hill. There are springs nearby. It was surveyed by Todd in 19116. DEGiRMEN ozu Degirrnen Ozu is a flat or shallow site on the slope of a hill immediately above a stream. Little pottery W(lS found during Todd's visit in 1966. Bibliography Todd 1980 passim GELVERi The site at Gelveri lies on the top and slopes of a low but prominent hill. The hill is crowned by a church (locally Yusekli Kilise) that has destroyed part of the early settlement. It is difficult to judge the area and depth of the archaeological deposit. The restricted number of pottery fabrics, shapes and methods of surface finish and decoration might be taken to suggest that occupation was / . ,,THE CHALCOLITHIC PERIOD IN CENTRAL ANATOLIA limited to part of the (? late) chalcolithic period. The site was first reported by Burhan Tezcan and more recently pottery found during restoration of the church was assembled by Dr. Mehmet Ozdogan. In 1991 Prof. Ufuk Esin made a small sounding at the site. Bibliography Tezcan 1958: 520-521, P1.5. S.chachermeyr 1962: 328,338 Fig.81. Ozdogan forthcoming. Esin forthcoming. CANHASAN Excavations at Can Hasan are known through a number of interim reports which provide a reliable overview of the ceramic evidence. Bibliography French annually 1962-1968. THE POTTERY Patterning There is a small quantity of patterned pottery amongst the surface collections. The percentage of patterned sherds is very small and the majority have been included in the illustrations. The most common form of decoration is incision, sometimes accompanied by punctation. Some of the incised pottery would seem to be related to the Gelveri material and some, especially that from Kabakulak, is closer to but not the same as that from Buyuk Gullucek. It would seem that there was a long tradition of incised decoration during the chalcolithic period. Relief decoration on heavy red slipped and burnished ware, including depictions of animals has been found at both Kosk Hoyuk and Tepecik Ciftlik. Human figures in relief have also been found during the excavations at Kosk Hoyuk (Silistreli 1989a, 1989b; 1989c). The heavy red slipped and burnished relief decoration is difficult to date, it could perhaps be as early as the late neolithic period but is more probably later. Other relief decorated ware, e.g. the dark slipped and burnished bucranium (PI. I no. 8), is probably later. Applied relief decoration is found on one of the large jars from Pinarbai with a distinctive groove at the base of the neck. White paint on a dark background (PI. I no. 3) is uncommon in the region. Chronologically it would seem to fall into the middle or late chalcolithic. Scored ware, common on the Konya Plain (Mellaart 1963: 224-26) but rare in Central Anatolia, spans a long period from at least the middle chalcolithic into the EBA. Plain Wares Black burnished wares fall into three categories, fine. medium and heavy. Fine Black Burnished ware is usually grit tempered. often with white grits. and may occasionally also contain some vegetable temper. The finer pieces are slipped and highly burnished. It occurs at Kosk Hoyuk (PI. 2) and Pmarbai. Shapes at the former site include simple bowls. straight-sided carinated bowls. concave disc bases. small jars and large jars. Bead rims occur 31 at Pmarbai. The chronological span is long. Medium Black Burnished ware is not particularly distinctive but the shapes and the handles (PI. 5 nos I. 2. 4. 5. 7) suggest a late chalcolithic and EBA date. Heavy Black Burnished ware (F~gs 3-4. Pis 7, 8. 16 nos 4-7) would also appear to be late 111 the sequence with some. if not all. falling into E~ ~. Black Topped ware (Fig. 16 no. I). from Ko~k Hoyuk and Pinarbai would also seem to be an indicator for EB 1. Fine Red Slipped and Burnished ware with bead rims is distinctive. Superficially these bead rim bowls resemble those from Hacilar VI but the Central Anatolian fragments are coarser. less well finished and have a different feel (the two may be compared in the BIAA). Red Slipped and Burnished and Heavy Red Burnished wares (Pis I nos 6.7; 3; 10 nos 5-9; 11-13). sometimes with relief ornamentation. also seem to be fairly homogeneous. with the exception of the large jars with a wide and shallow groove at the base of the neck (e. g. PI. lIno 3). Some vessels have been excavated at Kosk Hoyuk (Level IIl). The date is uncertain. Purple Slipped and Burnished ware (PIs 4. 10 no 4, 13 nos 7-9) is distinguished from the red slipped only by the surface colour. Likewise, Buff Burnished pottery is distinguished by colour but also by the distribution which is restricted to Tepecik <;iftlik (PI. 14). Coarse Buff Topped and Buff sherds from Kosk Hoyuk (PI. 6) are soft and porous; shapes are invariably hole-mouth. Somewhat different are the very coarse Buff Burnished open bowls and platters from Tepecik Ciftlik (pl.l5) which contain a mixture of very coarse grit and vegetable temper. The Table The Table (Fig. 5) is an attempt to display the distribution of selected diagnostic ceramic traits by site. The sites have been tabulated in descending order according to their (apparent) length of occupation. those with the longest occupation at the top and those with the shortest at the bottom of the left hand column. The diagnostic traits of the pottery have been set out from left to right in a very approximate chronological order. Some of the diagnostic traits (e.g. relief. incision) were in existence for a long period(s). CONCLUSIONS It is not yet possible to present a ceramic chronology for the chalcolithic period in Central Anatolia (east of the Konya Plain). There are. however. some observations that can be made. The existence of 11111 of occupation below the alluvium on the plain at Alisar Hoyuk should serve as a warning against using negative evidence. Nevertheless, chalcolithic (and earlier) sites with such a depth of occupation appear to be unusual in the area under discussion and. if it was indeed on an island in a lake, Alisar may be untypical. Only. it seems. in the EB II period were there numerous mound sites in the plains and valleys. A few of these EB II sites reached urban proportions (if not urban complexity). Most and perhaps all of the neolithic and chalcolithic sites were. if the available evidence is reliable. small and the majority seem 32 QD. SUAfAfERS to have been shallow (? i.e. short lived). Settlements seem to have been constantly shifting. Some were situated on slopes (Kabakulak, Sapmaz Koy and Gelveri). Others were perhaps on high hilltops, like those in the Ankara region (Ahlatlibel and Buyuk Gullucek), it comes as no surprise, therefore, that surface survey concentrating on plains and valley floors failed to reveal much evidence for early occupation. It is too soon to formulate a detailed explanation for the different settlement pattern before EB II but one important factor, one that has not yet been comprehensively studied, is the destruction of forest and woodland. Removal of tree cover and the consequent erosion has changed the landscape to a very considerable but as yet unquantified degree. What we see in the region today, open rolling treeless crop-land, perhaps looked very different in the chalcolithic period and the pattern of human settlement may thus have been adapted to a different environment. DESCRIPTIONS OF THE POTTERY PLATES KO~KHOYOK PI.] Patterned pottery 1 Grey burnished, curvilinear incision with a band of punctation. 2 Sligthly out-turned rim, red slip and burnish, curvilinear incision. 3 Purple slip and burnish, matt white paint. 4-5 Exterior: dark mottled slip and burnish, white filled incision. Interior: grey burnish with individual stroke marks of the burnishing tool clearly visible. 6-7 Jar neck, heavy red slip and burnish with relief decoration. 8 Simple open bowl, black burnished, bucranium in relief. Kb~KHbYUK PI. 2 Fine Black Burnished Pottery. 1 and 3 Simple rounded bowls. 2 Bowl with low carination, Todd 1980 Fig.l l no.8. 4 Bowl with concave disc base. 5 and 7 Small jars. 6 Large jar. Generally, dark fabric with fine grit or grit and vegetable temper. KO~KHOYOK PI. 3 Red Slipped and Burnished Bowls. 1 and 2 Simple bowls. 3-8 Bowls with bead rims. 9 Large shallow bowl. All with grit and vegetable temper, buff with thick grey cores, red slipped, sometimes mottled, burnished. KO~KHOYOK PIA Purple Slipped and Burnished Pottery. 1,5, and 6 Open bowls. 2-4 Jars. 7 Jar with groove at base of rim. All with heavy vegetable and grit temper and occasional large grits. KOSKHOYUK PI.5 Coarse Black Burnished (1-5,7) and Fine Black Burnished (6) Pottery. These sherds are of the same fabric as the Coarse Buff Burnished and Duff Topped. Porous with heavy vegetable temper and large grits, generally black burnished outside and buff burnished inside. I Horizontal lug just below the rim of a hole-mouth jar. 2 Vertical (broken) lug just below the rim of a hole- mouth jar. 3 Circular knob. 4 Horizontal handle, cf.FigA and P1.7. 5 One handled cup. 6 Fine black burnished bowl sherd. 7 Vertical handle on large open bowl. KOSKHOYOK PI.6 Coarse Buff Topped (1-5) and Coarse Buff (6-7) Pottery. Large hole-mouth jars, soft porous fabric with vcgctable and grit temper; one or both sides poorly burnished. Kb~KHOUYK PI. 7 and Fig.3 Heavy Black Burnished Bowl. Found in pieces in rain-cut channels just below the surface, presumably from what subsequently became the excavator's Level I. Perhaps to be dated to ED I. Now in the Nigde Museum. A large simple bowl with two vertical handles. KO~KHOYOK PI.8 and Fig.s Heavy Black Burnished Jar. As above. A large simple jar with a ridge at the base of the neck and two horizontal handles. PINARBA~I PI.9 Patterned Pottery. l Grey burnished, curvilinear incision. 2 Brown burnished, incised. 3 Large jar, relief ornamentation, red slipped, burnished. 4 Jar rim and neck with sharp shoulder, very coarse punctation, burnished. 5 Relief decoration, red slipped and burnished. 6-7 Heavy Brown (? red) slipped jars with a groove at the base of the neck and relief decoration. PINARBA~I PI.JO Scored Ware (1-3), Fine Red Slipped and Burnished Bead Rims (4-8), Purple Slipped and Burnished (9) Pottery. PINARBA~I PI. 11 heavy Red Burnished Pottery. 1-3 Large jars with groove at base of neck. 4 Open bowl. THE CHALCOLITHIC PERIOD IN CENTRAL ANATOLIA TEPECiK C;iFfLiK Pl.I2 Relief decorated Red Slipped and Burnished Pottery. TEPECiK C;iFTLiK Pl.I3 Fine Red Slipped and Burnished (1), Red Slipped and Burnished (2-6), purple Slipped and Burnished (7-9) Pottery. TEPECiK C;iFfLiK PI. 14 Buff Burnished Pottery (Todd 1980 Fig. 11 nos 1416). TEPECiK C;iFfLiK PI.i5 Coarse Buff Burnished Pottery. TEPECiK C;iFfLiK Pl.i6 Black Topped Ware (i), Fine Grey Burnished (23), Heavy Black Burnished (4-7) Pottery. CAPTIONS TO FIGURES Relief map of Anatolia. 2 Map of Central Anatolia showing sites mentioned in the text. 3 Heavy Black Burnished bowl from Kosk Hoyuk. 4 Heavy Black Burnished jar from Kosk Hoyuk. 5 Table showing the distribution of diagnostic ceramic traits by site. CAPTIONS TO PLATES Kosk Hoyuk patterned pottery. 2 Kosk Hoyuk Fine Black Burnished pottery. 3 Kosk Hoyuk Red Slipped and Burnished bowls. 4 Kosk Hoyuk Purple Slipped and Burnished pottery. 5 Kosk Hoyuk Coarse Black Burnished pottery. 6 Kosk Hoyuk Coarse Buff Topped and Buff pottery. 7 Kosk Hoyiik Heavy Black Burnished bowl. 8 Ko~k Hi:iyiik Heavy Black Burnished jar. 9 pmarbasi patterned pottery. 10 Pinarbasi Scored Ware (1-3), Purple Slipped and Burnished (4), Red Slipped and Burnished (5-9). 11 Pinarbasi Heavy Red Burnished pottery. 12 Tepecik <;:iftlik Relief Decorated Red slipped and Burnished (I), Red Slipped and Burnished (2-6), purple Slipped and Burnished (7·9). 14 Tepecik Ciftlik Buff Burnished pottery. 15 Tepecik Ciftlik Coarse Buff Burnished pottery. 16 Tepecik <;:iftlik Black Topped ware (1), Fine Grey Burnished (2-3), Heavy Black Burnished (4-7). BIBLIOGRAPHY ESIN, U. forthcoming Anato/ica (1991 symposium held in Istanbul). FRENCH, D. H. 1962. Excavations at Can Hasan, 1961, Anato/ian Studies 12: 27-41. FRENCH, D. H. 1963. Excavations at Can Hasan, 1962, Anato/ian Studies 13: 29-42. 33 fRENCH, D. H. 1964. Excavations at Can Hasan, 1963, Anotolian Studies 14: 125-34. fRENCH, D. H. 1965. Excavations at Can Hasan, 1964, Anatolian Stu dies 15: 87-94. fRENCH, D. H. 1966. Excavations at Can Hasan, 1965, Anatolian Studies 16: 113-24. fRENCH, D. H. 1967. Excavations at Can Hasan, 1966, A natolian Studies 17: 165-78. fRENCH, D. H. 1968a. Anatolia and the Aegean in the Third Millennium B. C. (Ph. D. Thesis, Cambridge). fRENCH, D. H. 1968b. Excavations at Can Hasan, 1967, Anato/ian Studies 18: 45-56. GAUL, J. H. 1939. Note on Some Huyuks in Central Anatolia, Bulletin of the American School of Prehistoric Research 15: 28-45. (Kraus reprint). KUNIHOLM, P. 1. 1991. Aegean Dendrochronology Project: 1989-1990 Results, V!. Arkeometri Sonuclari Topiantisi: Ankara 28 Mayis - 1 Haziran 1990: 127-38. LLOYD, S. AND GoKCE, N. 1951. Excavations at Polath, Anatolian Studies 1: 21-52. MELlAART, J. 1963. early Cultures of the South Anatolian Plateau, Il, Anatolian Studies 13: 199-236. OMURA, S. 1991. 1989 Yili Kirsehir, Yozgat, Nevsehir, Aksaray illeri sinirlari icinde yurutulen yuzey arastirmalari, VIII. Ar ast irrna Sonuciari Toplantisi, Ankara 28 Mayis - 1 Haziran 1990: 69-89. ORTI-iMANN, W. 1963. Die Keramik der Fruhen Bronzezeit aus lnneranatolian. Berlin. OZJ)()(;AN, M. forthcoming. Pre-Bronze Age sequence of Central Anatolia: an alternative approach, in T. Beran Jest. SCHACHER.,"IEYR, F. 1962. Forschungsbericht iiber die Ausgrabungcn und Ncufunde zur Agaischen Fruhzeit 1957-1960, Arcltiigisclter Anzeiger: 106-382. SILlSTRELI, U. 1984a. Pmarbasi ve Kosk Hoyukleri, V. Sonuclart Toplanttst. Istanbul 23·27 Mayis 1983: 81-85. SILlSTRELI, U. 1984b. Kosk Hi:iyiik, 1983, Anatolian Studies 33: 223-24. SILlSTRELI, U. 1985a. Kosk Hi:iyiigii, VI. Kazt Sonuclart Top/all/ISI. lzmir 16-20 Nisan 1984: 31-36. SILlSTRELI, U. 1985b. Kosk Hoyiik, 1984, Anatolian Studies 34: 199-200. SILlSTRELI, U. 1986. 1984 Ko~k Hoyiigii, VII. Kazl Sonuclart Toptanust. Ankara 20-24 Mayis 1985: 129-42. SILlSTRELI, U. 1987. 1985 Kosk Hoyiigii, VIII. Kazi Sonuelari Top/alltlSl. Ankara 26-30 Mayis 1986: 73-80. SILlSTRELI, U. 1989a. Les fouilles de Kosk Hoyuk, in Emre, K., Hrouda, B., Mellink, K. and Ozguc, N. (eds) Anatolia and the Ancient Near East: Studies in Honor of Tohsin OzgiJ,: 461-63, Pis 133-35 (Ankara). SILlSTRELI, U. 1989b. Kosk Hoyuk'te Bulunan Kabartma insan ve Hayvan Figiirleriye Bezeli Vazolar, Belleten 53: 361-374, Pis I-XIII. SILISTRELI, U. 1989c. Ko§k Hoyuk Figiirin ve Heykelcikleri, Belleten 53: 479-504, Pis I-Y. SILlSTRELI, U. 1989d. 1987 Kosk Hoyiik, X. Kazi Sonuclari Top/alltlSl. Ankara 23-27 Mayis 1988: 61-66. SILlSTRELI, U. 1990a. Ko~k Hoyuk, X. Tiirk Tarih Kongresi: 43-46, Pis 23-31 (f. T. K. Ankara). SILlSTRELI, U. 1990b. 1988 Kosk Hoyiik Kazisi, XI. Kazt Sonuclart Toplannsi. Ant alya 18·23 Mayis 1989: 91-98. SILlSTRELI, U. 1991 a. 1988 Ylh Ko~k Hoyiik Kazrsi Raporu, Hoyiik 1: 79, Pis 1-6 (f. T. K. Ankara). SILlSTRELI, U. 1991b. 1989 Kosk Hoyuk Kazisi, XII. Kazt SOllw;iar, Toplanttst. Ankara 28 Mayis - 1 Haziran 1990: 95-104. SUMMERS, G. D. 1991. Chalcolithic Pottery from Kabakulak (Nigde) collected by Ian Todd, Anatolian Studies 41: 125-31, P1.20. TEZCAN, B. 1958. Aksaray Cervesinden Derlenen Escr ler, Belleten 22: 517-26. TODD, 1. A. 1980. The Prehistory of Central Anatolia I: The Neo/ithic Period. (Studies in Mediterranean Archaeology 50) Gi:iteborg. 3..; zOll l( ! ~ ~ -. .. ~ 1 ~ E ~ ~ er. 8 ~ •.. c::i g .• u u ~ ~ c E ~ 0 ;; 'g . . J 0 . ~ 2 E . ; 8 i .i 3 , I ". ;, '( -: :"1' ;- ,;,' .~ , ':·t "; .. , tnt: CIIAI.C()UTllfC P1~'RI()/) IN C/:'NJ'RAI. ANATOI.IA 35 l . r: / , \ , Hun T A k 5 a I' ay, .,", I" '" , v~ l~~'U" 0:4 , , u k Y,a Ia y K.de T. ':.,", Chalcolithic site * Town Historical monument ~ Mine 10 20 40 30 36 G. /) .• '·;UMMJ..'R S ' o 6 ____ 10o", I Fig. 3 10 d rIJI.: cnsi.cot.nutc Pl·.RIOf) IN Cl:NIRAI. A.i\'A.TOUA. o L- -10 d 20 cm ! Fig. 4 37 3X ~ @ Uo.... «0-. ......lO COf- ~ . Cl I.l-l ~ ::::r: • • ~ ~ ::::r: I.l-l • • ......l 0.... c:::::o. ... • ::J:J o....Vl • Cl I.l-l c::::: 0 u Vl ~ c::::: • I.l-lf-« t:ZCl ::::r:-Z ~~O Cl 0 I.l-l • • I.l-lOVl >I.l-lVl OC/lLLl O-C::::: c:::::Uo... • • •• • •• • a~~ Cl 0... I.l-l- ~v5 • •• •• • ('.. LJ... t.LJ - • •• • ('.. ......l LLl ~ Cl(/) «:E • •• • t.LJCO~ ~ .- :::J eo ......l ~ N t - :0 >- ~ Z •....• - .•.... Z Z :0 « ::J Z o» V <' I.l-l ~ ......l :0 -c ~ (/) N ::J :r:: c:o .•.... ~ :::J >- ~ o» :0 ~ ~ u -c I.l-l Z 0... :E -c :r: ~ « ~ .~ 5 co t.LJ •..... .- :E « > ......l « (/) < :r:: 0... Z la 0... c:o ......l o» t.L.l <' t.L.l « « I.l-l « Z -c I- U Cl Vl :::G a f- U tnt: ClIAICOI.lnlle· })/-.RI()J) /.\ e I:.\ 1/\.-1 I /I,\AFOI.I/l 7 ••• PI. 1 .N PI. 2 5 8 3 2 6 ••• 411 ( •.. /J .• \/.'.II.III.R.\ 1 . :~,. e'·"···_· ~j. II!"~ 1 . t·~ ~. '> 2 5 7 PI. 3 v , .. PI. 4 • • • • • • t; rill:' CIIAI.C()UI1IlC pr.RIO/) 1,\ C/:SIRA/. As.nD/.//1 '". ~. ;&y' 2 ••• PI. 5 3 4 41 ••• PI. 6 7 ~: ". I) .. 'iL:\I\f1.R.\ 1'1. 7 nil:' ClIAI.C()J.lrIIIC PrIUO/) I.\, CFNTRAI. A:\'ATOI./A PI. 8 ~ .•••.••••• ~~.t ._ ';11«""''' __ -(_ ....•. -~ 4 7 • • PI. 9 5 • ) , ? I ;. ~. ~~ . . •••• _..! 3 6 5 • • 1111: C1IAI.COUrJIIC Pr.RIO/) IS Cf:SiRAI. A.\'AIDI!.1 -I:' 1 • ' .... • .,.. ,i • .' ., .-..: r ~-"".#'~ ._ 4 2 I 6 I J 9 8 PI. 10 "" :\1.'''~ •. : •.•• " -', ;".,~ .•. ", '~~"~/'1 • PI. 11 1'1 12 _;t.-.--~ .•... ~./ -;' .. -{~::/ . . • 1 I;, \ 2 • • • 2 4 1 TlIF CIIAI_COUTlIIC " 2 • PI. 13 n.uton IN CF.""IRAI. ANAF()J.IA 47 2 .~ .. " . tj"l, ' ,; 3 .. ' ••• PI. 14 9 6 4X ! '. • • • G. J>. .\·UM!If t.n: • • • 1'1. 15 1'1. 16 2 3 7 6 4X ! '. • • • G. J>. .\·UM!If t.n: • • • 1'1. 15 1'1. 16 2 3 7 6