Liman Tepe and Bakla Tepe

ANKARA UNIVERSITY
RESEARCH CENTER FOR MARITIME ARCHAEOLOGY (ANKÜSAM)
Publication No: 1
Proceedings of the International Symposium
The Aegean in the Neolithic,
Chalcolithic and the Early Bronze Age
October 13th – 19th 1997, Urla - İzmir (Turkey)
Edited by
Hayat Erkanal, Harald Hauptmann,
Vasıf Şahoğlu, Rıza Tuncel
Ankara • 2008
ANKARA ÜNİVERSİTESİ / ANKARA UNIVERSITY
SUALTI ARKEOLOJİK ARAŞTIRMA ve UYGULAMA MERKEZİ (ANKÜSAM)
RESEARCH CENTER FOR MARITIME ARCHAEOLOGY (ANKÜSAM)
Yayın No / Publication No: 1
Ön kapak: İzmir - Höyücek’de ele geçmiş insan yüzü tasvirli bir stel. M.Ö. 3. Bin.
Front cover: A stelae depicting a human face from İzmir - Höyücek . 3rd Millennium
BC.
Arka kapak: Liman Tepe Erken Tunç Çağı II, Atnalı Biçimli Bastiyon.
Back cover: Early Bronze Age II horse-shoe shaped bastion at Liman Tepe.
Kapak Tasarımı / Cover Design : Vasıf Şahoğlu
ISBN: 978-975-482-767-5
Ankara Üniversitesi Basımevi / Ankara University Press
İncitaşı Sokak No:10 06510 Beşevler / ANKARA
Tel: 0 (312) 213 66 55
Basım Tarihi: 31 / 03 / 2008
CONTENTS
Abbreviations …………………………………………………………………………………............
Preface by the Editors …………………………………………………………………………………
Opening speech by the Mayor, Bülent BARATALI …...…………………………………………….........
Opening speech by Prof. Dr. Ekrem AKURGAL ……………………………………...............................
Opening speech by Prof. Dr. Christos DOUMAS………………………………………………………..
xi
xiii
xxiii
xxv
xxvii
LILIAN ACHEILARA
Myrina in Prehistoric Times …..…………………………………………………………….
1
VASSILIKI ADRIMI – SISMANI
Données Récentes Concernant Le Site Prehistorique De Dimini: La Continuité
de l’Habitation Littorale depuis le Début du Néolithique Récent jusqu’à la Fin du
Bronze Ancien ………………………………………………………………………………
9
IOANNIS ASLANIS
Frühe Fortifikationssysteme in Griechenland ……………………………………………….
35
PANAGIOTA AYGERINOU
A Flaked-Stone Industry from Mytilene: A Preliminary Report ……………………………
45
ANTHI BATZIOU – EFSTATHIOU
Kastraki: A New Bronze Age Settlement in Achaea Phthiotis ……………………………..
73
MARIO BENZI
A Forgotten Island: Kalymnos in the Late Neolithic Period ………………………………..
85
ÖNDER BİLGİ
Relations between İkiztepe by the Black Sea Coast and the Aegean World
before Iron Age ……………………………………………………………………………...
109
TRISTAN CARTER
Cinnabar and the Cyclades: Body modification and Political Structure in the
Late EB I Southern Cyclades ……………………………………………………….............
119
CHRISTOS DOUMAS
The Aegean Islands and their Role in the Developement of Civilisation …………..............
131
ANTHI DOVA
Prehistoric Topography of Lemnos: The Early Bronze Age ……………………………….
141
NIKOS EFSTRATIOU
The Neolithic of the Aegean Islands: A New Picture Emerging …………………..............
159
HAYAT ERKANAL
Die Neue Forschungen in Bakla Tepe bei İzmir ..………………………………………….
165
HAYAT ERKANAL
Liman Tepe: A New Light on the Prehistoric Aegean Cultures ……………………………
179
JEANNETTE FORSÉN
The Asea Valley from the Neolithic Period to the Early Bronze Age ……………..............
191
DAVID H. FRENCH
Chalcolithic and Early Bronze Age Pottery of Southwest Anatolia ……………….............
197
viii
Contents
NOEL GALE
Metal Sources for Early Bronze Age Troy and the Aegean ……………………….............
203
BARTHEL HROUDA
Zur Chronologie Südwestkleinasiens in der 2. Hälfte des 3. Jahrtausends v. Chr ...............
223
HALİME HÜRYILMAZ
1996 Rettungsgrabungen auf dem Yenibademli Höyük, Gökçeada / Imbros ……………..
229
ERGUN KAPTAN
Metallurgical Residues from Late Chalcolithic and Early Bronze Age
Liman Tepe …………………………………………………………………………..........
243
ANNA KARABATSOLI and LIA KARIMALI
Etude Comparative Des Industries Lithiques Taillées Du Néolithique Final Et
Du Bronze Ancien Egéen : Le Cas De Pefkakia …………………………………………..
251
NECMİ KARUL
Flechtwerkgabäude aus Osttrakien ………………………………………………………..
263
SİNAN KILIÇ
The Early Bronze Age Pottery from Northwest Turkey in Light of Results of a
Survey around the Marmara Sea …………………………………………………………..
275
OURANIA KOUKA
Zur Struktur der frühbronzezeitlichen insularen Gesellschaften der
Nord- und Ostägäis: Ein neues Bild der sogenannten “Trojanischen Kultur”……………..
285
NINA KYPARISSI – APOSTOLIKA
Some Finds of Balkan (or Anatolian) Type in the Neolithic Deposit of
Theopetra Cave, Thessaly ………………………………………………………………….
301
LAURA LABRIOLA
First Impressions: A Preliminary Account of Matt Impressed Pottery in the
Prehistoric Aegean …………………………………………………………………………
309
ROBERT LAFFINEUR
Aspects of Early Bronze Age Jewellery in the Aegean ……………………………………
323
KYRIAKOS LAMBRIANIDES and NIGEL SPENCER
The Early Bronze Age Sites of Lesbos and the Madra Çay Delta:
New Light on a Discrete Regional Centre of Prehistoric Settlement and Society
in the Northeast Aegean ……………………………………………………........................
333
YUNUS LENGERANLI
Metallic Mineral Deposits and Occurences of the Izmir District, Turkey …………………
355
EFTALIA MAKRI – SKOTINIOTI and VASSILIKI ADRIMI – SISMANI
Les Sites Du Neolithique Recent Dans Le Golfe Pagasetique : La Transformation
Des Sites De L’age De Bronze En Sites Urbains (Le Cas De Dimini) …………………….
369
ELSA NIKOLAOU, VASSO RONDIRI and LIA KARIMALI
Magoula Orgozinos: A Neolithic Site in Western Thessaly, Greece ………………………. 387
EMEL OYBAK and CAHİT DOĞAN
Plant Remains from Liman Tepe and Bakla Tepe in the İzmir Region …………………….
399
ix
Contents
DEMETRA PAPACONSTANTINOU
Looking for ‘Texts’ in the Neolithic Aegean: Space, Place and the
Study of Domestic Architecture (Poster summary) …………………………………..........
407
ATHANASSIOS J. PAPADOPOULOS and SPYRIDOULA KONTORLI – PAPADOPOULOU
Some thoughts on the Problem of Relations between the Aegean and
Western Greece in the Early Bronze Age ………………………………………………….
411
STRATIS PAPADOPOULOS and DIMITRA MALAMIDOU
Limenaria: A Neolithic and Early Bronze Age Settlement at Thasos ………………………
427
DANIEL J. PULLEN
Connecting the Early Bronze I and II Periods in the Aegean ……………………………….. 447
JEREMY B. RUTTER
Anatolian Roots of Early Helladic III Drinking Behaviour …………………………………. 461
VASIF ŞAHOĞLU
New Evidence for the Relations Between the Izmir Region, the Cyclades
and the Greek Mainland during the Third Millennium BC …………………………………. 483
ADAMANTIOS SAMPSON
From the Mesolithic to the Neolithic: New Data on Aegean Prehistory ……………………. 503
EVANGELIA SKAFIDA
Symbols from the Aegean World: The Case of Late Neolithic Figurines
and House Models from Thessaly …………………………………………………………... 517
PANAGIOTA SOTIRAKOPOULOU
The Cyclades, The East Aegean Islands and the Western Asia Minor:
Their Relations in the Aegean Late Neolithic and Early Bronze Age ……………………..
533
GEORGIA STRATOULI
Soziale une ökonomische Aspekte des Chalkolithikums (spätneolithikum II)
in der Ägäis aufgrund alter und neuer Angaben …………………………………………….. 559
GEORGE TOUFEXIS
Recent Neolithic Research in the Eastern Thessalian Plain, Greece:
A Preliminary Report ……………………………………………………………………….. 569
RIZA TUNCEL
IRERP Survey Program: New Prehistoric Settlements in the Izmir Region ……………….. 581
HANNELORE VANHAVERBEKE, PIERRE M. VERMEERSCH, INGRID BEULS,
BEA de CUPERE and MARC WAELKENS
People of the Höyüks versus People of the Mountains ? …………………………………… 593
KOSTAS VOUZAXAKIS
An Alternative Suggestion in Archaeological Data Presentations:
Neolithic Culture Through the Finds from Volos Archaeological Museum ……………….. 607
Closing Remarks by Prof. Dr Machteld J. MELLINK ………………………………………………. 611
Symposium Programme ……………………………………………………………………………… 615
Memories from the Symposium……………………………………………………………………… 623
Liman Tepe and Bakla Tepe: New Evidence for the Relations
between the Izmir Region, The Cyclades and the Greek Mainland
during the Late Fourth and Third Millennia BC
Vasıf ŞAHOĞLU
ABSTRACT: Recent excavations carried out within the framework of the Izmir Region Excavations and
Research Project (IRERP) around the Gulf of İzmir have gradually began to provide us with new evidence
for the cultural interaction within the Aegean region. Until recently, solid evidence for contacts between
coastal Western Anatolia and the rest of the Aegean was mainly limited to a few sauceboat sherds from
Troy and the parallelisms drawn from evidence at Iasos cemetery.
Excavations at Bakla Tepe revealed an extensive Late Chalcolithic settlement yielding important
information regarding the daily life and the character of this period in the Izmir region. Excavations at
Liman Tepe have revealed monumental architecture in the form of fortifications with horse-shoe shaped
bastions and a central complex belonging to the Aegean Early Bronze Age II period. The importance of
the maritime contacts of the settlement is strongly supported by artifactual evidence retrieved from well
stratified archaeological deposits.
Urfirnis sauceboat sherds have been unearthed within the same archaeological context as the
“Anatolianising assemblages” in the Aegean at sites such as Raphina, Pevkakia, Ayia Irini and Palamari.
Some elements of this “Anatolianising assemblage” (bell shaped cup, incised pyxis, depas and tankards)
were found alongside sauceboat sherds for the first time in their homeland – Anatolia - at Liman Tepe.
The strong presence of this assemblage at Liman Tepe and Bakla Tepe supports the idea that this
assemblage has a more southernly distribution in Western Anatolia. When the evidence is considered as a
whole, the intensity of contacts between the İzmir region and the rest of the Aegean world is apparent.
Although the settlements at Liman Tepe and Bakla Tepe have been investigated within a limited area,
further research will undoubtedly shed more light on the dynamics of interaction within the Aegean and
the associated chronological problems including the distribution of the “Anatolianising” ceramics.
The Aegean is the name given to a part of
the Meditterranean Sea surrounded by Crete on
the south, mainland Greece on the west, and
Anatolia on the east, the Cycladic islands being
situated in the middle (Fig. 1). The term
“Aegean Cultures” is often used by scholars
basically to define the cultures of these 4
different geographical areas. The Bronze Age
cultures of Crete are termed Minoan, those of
mainland Greece, Helladic and those of the
Cyclades, Cycladic. Western Anatolian cultures
have no special term within the Bronze Age
Aegean.
Archaeological research into the Aegean
Bronze Age started in the 19th century and the
level of interest has been increasing ever since 1 .
Investigations focused on the Bronze Age
of Western Anatolia started at Troy (Fig. 1, No.
4) at roughly the same time as the rest of the
Aegean. What makes this geographical area
different from the rest of the Aegean is the fact
that although Troy had been a focus of interest
since the 19th century, later archaeological
activities concentrated on the Classical periods
of this region, neglecting its prehistoric
potential and importance.
During the first half of the 20th century,
which can be called the “Dark Ages” of
prehistoric research in Western Anatolia, Early
Bronze Age cemeteries like Yortan (Fig. 1, No.
9), Babaköy (Fig. 1, No. 8) and Ovabayındır 2
were scientifically investigated only after they
had first been disturbed by illegal excavations.
Excavations of prehistoric sites like Kumtepe 3
(Fig. 1, No. 5) and Kusura 4 (Fig. 1, No. 15) also
took place in this period, however these
investigations were quite limited in extend. The
third quarter of the century evidenced an
2
3
1
Fitton 1995,
4
Akurgal 1958.
Koşay & Sperling 1936; Sperling 1976.
Lamb 1938.
484
Vasıf ŞAHOĞLU
increase in interest in this region and the
extensive surveys of D. H. French took place
and enhanced our knowledge of the settlement
history of this region during prehistoric times 5 .
Investigations of prehistoric levels at the
famous Classical sites like Bayraklı 6 (Fig. 1, No.
20) Sardis 7 , Miletos (Fig. 1, No. 18), Ephesos
(Fig. 1, No. 19), Aphrodisias 8 (Fig. 1, No. 16)
and Iasos 9 (Fig. 1, No. 17) were also
undertaken during this period. Excavation of
three important Bronze Age mounds Elmalı –
Karataş 10 (Fig. 1, No. 22), Beycesultan 11 (Fig.
1, No. 14) and Demircihöyük 12 (Fig. 1, No. 10)
contributed greatly to our knowledge of the
prehistory of Western Anatolia and provided us
with the important fact that Troy was not alone.
The 1980’s and especially the 90’s have
been the “Golden Age” of prehistoric research
in Western Anatolia. New excavations that
focused on prehistoric sites like Panaztepe 13
(Fig. 1, No. 2), Liman Tepe 14 (Fig. 1, No. 1),
Bakla Tepe 15 (Fig. No. 3), Ulucak 16 (Fig. 1, No.
21), and Yenibademli Höyük 17 (Fig. 1, No. 33),
on the Aegean coast and Harmanören 18 ,
Küllüoba 19 (Fig. 1, No. 11), Kaklık Mevkii 20
(Fig. 1, No. 13) further inland, have attracted
attention and helped reactivate interest in the
prehistory of Classical sites like Ephesos 21 ,
Miletos 22 and Kyme.
The Izmir Region Excavations and
Research Project (IRERP) includes excavation
of three prehistoric sites all located around the
Gulf of İzmir namely, Liman Tepe, Bakla Tepe
and Panaztepe 23 (Fig. 2). The Project also aims
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
French 1961; 1967; 1968.
Akurgal 1950.
Mitten 1968; Mitten & Yüğrüm 1969.
Joukowsky 1986.
Pacorella 1984.
Eslick 1992; Warner 1994.
Lloyd & Mellaart 1962.
Efe 1988.
Erkanal A. 2000; 2002.
Erkanal H. 1996; 1998; 1999a; 1999b.
Erkanal & Özkan 1997; 199a; 1999b; 2000.
Derin et al. 2002.
Hüryılmaz 1998; 1999.
Özsait 2000.
Efe 2000; Efe & Ay-Efe 2001
Topbaş et al. 1998.
Evren 1996; 1999.
Von Greave & Niemeier 2002.
The Izmir Region Excavations and Research Project is
generously supported by the Ministry of Tourism and
to carry out systematic surveys to achieve a
wider perspective and a better understanding of
the prehistoric societies of the Izmir region and
their contribution to the Anatolian and Aegean
cultures.
This paper aims to reconstruct some
aspects of the Late Chalcolithic and Early
Bronze Age in the Izmir region and define its
chronological correlations with the cultures of
the Western Aegean based on archaeological
evidence from Bakla Tepe and Liman Tepe.
Bakla Tepe may be the most extensively
investigated settlement on the Western
Anatolian coastline. The site is located in the
Cumaovası Plain, south of İzmir and has
recently been partly inundated by the newly
constucted Tahtalı Dam (Fig. 2 ). Thanks to the
removal of the modern structures on top of the
mound – due to the dam project – it had been
possible to excavate small test trenches to
clarify the extent of the settlement. As a result
of these investigations, the views about the
character of the settlement had to be
reformulated. At least five different phases of
this period were attested at the site. The Late
Chalcolithic remains spread to an area c. 300m
in diameter (Fig. 3).
Late Chalcolithic and Early Bronze
Age I at Bakla Tepe
Wattle and daub is the characteristic
building material in the Late Chalcolithic
settlement of Bakla Tepe. Grill planned
structures are the most common building type
and some of these structures have apsidal
ends 24 (Fig. 4). Circular structures are the other
architectural forms that has been attested at the
site 25 . Due to the rather small size of the latter
type of structures (1-1.5m), we would like to
interprete them as possible storage areas. The
presence of pebble paved streets among the
24
25
Culture, Turkey; Ankara University Scientific Research
Fund Project No. 2006 - 0901024; TÜBITAK, Project
No. 104K014; INSTAP, Ankara University, Dil ve
Tarih Coğrafya Fakültesi; INSTAP-SCEC; the Urla
Municipality; and the Turkish Historical Society. For
brief information on IRERP see www.irerp.org and
www.geocities.com/irerp_tr.
See Erkanal this volume.
See Erkanal this volume.
Liman Tepe and Bakla Tepe: New Evidence for the Relations between the Izmir Region, The Cyclades and the
Greek Mainland during the Late Fourth and Third Millennia BC
houses were also discovered during the course
of the excavations.
The small finds from the site give us a
clue about the daily lives of the inhabitants. The
lithic industry includes both obsidian and chert
blades. Carbonised grains were found
throughout the site, sometimes in large
concentrations. A large number of grinding
stones and hearths were also associated with
these contexts. Pieces of metallic slag were
recovered under the fallen roof remains of
almost every burned structure. A tuyère found
in the later Chalcolithic levels and metal finds
such as small chisels and pins further
demonstrate the production of metal artifacts on
the site itself. Textile implements were fewer in
number when compared with the following EB
I finds at the site. The botanical and faunal
assemblages are currently under study 26 .
Preliminary interpretation of the small
finds from the site reflects the presence of an
agricultural village with an intensive local metal
production.
Our knowledge of the burial habits of this
period relies on child burials, placed under the
floors of the houses (Fig. 4). There were jar
burials often with a bowl used as a cap. The
buried infants were in all cases in a contracted
position. In most cases, no grave goods were
associated with these burials except for some
with stone beads. The graves – without
exception – contained single burials. Almost no
sign of an adult burial was found except for
some curious inhumations lined with stones
forming a trapezoid shape on the outskirts of
the settlement. The dating of these graves is yet
to be clarified. The available data suggests an
extramural burial tradition for the adults during
the Late Chalcolithic Period at Bakla Tepe.
Almost all phases of the Late
Chalcolithic at Bakla Tepe ended with a fire
whose cause remains unanswered so far.
Whether these destructions were caused by
intercommunal strife among the communities
present within the area - perhaps in competition
for the resources available - or caused by
accidental fires which quickly spread due to the
highly flammable building material, is not clear
26
See Oybak & Doğan, this volume.
485
at the present. Both remain a possibility but the
first theory is perhaps further supported by the
presence of in situ material in almost all of the
burned structures which point to a sudden
destruction. Although the settlement does not
seem to have been fortified at this time, this
need not reflect peaceful conditions in the
region. Clearly more detailed analysis and
comparative material from other settlements in
the region is necessary to solve this problem.
The transition from Late Chalcolithic to
EB I period reflects a radical change in the
daily life and the organization of the society.
The size of the settlement at Bakla Tepe
decreases from a diameter of c. 300m to c.
90m(Fig. 3). The settlement structure is totally
different and the tradition of “wattle and daub”
architecture is totally replaced by a stronger
system namely the use of stone foundations and
mudbrick walls. The houses used common
walls unlike the independent structures of the
Late Chalcolithic, and rows of houses were
built on top of the mound surrounded by a
strong fortification wall again with a stone
foundation whose superstructure must have
been mudbrick (Fig. 3, No. 1; 4).
The external reason behind this radical
reformation of the site must have been so strong
that even the presence of the fortification was
not enough and the inhabitants built a second
protection feature, namely a ditch, outside the
fortification to protect their lives and their
settlement (Fig. 3, No.1; 4).
The Early Bronze Age I Cemetery at
Bakla Tepe
The extramural cemetery of Bakla Tepe
is found in the eastern part of the settlement just
outside the ditch. This burial ground yielded
burials of three different grave types which all
seems to be contemporary 27 (Fig. 3, No. 2).
The first type is the pithos graves. These
are usually big pithoi of more than 1.50m high.
Their mouths in all cases face the east and were
always closed with a big pithos sherd or a big
bowl. The deceased were in a contradicted
27
cf Erkanal & Özkan 1999b.
486
Vasıf ŞAHOĞLU
position with the head on the east and grave
goods were present in all cases 28 .
The second grave type is the cist graves.
These burials had a rectangular lined cist and
flat capstones. An interesting aspect of these
graves was the vertically placed pithoi standing
on the edge of these burials. These big pithoi
were in all cases filled with stones. Their
function must have had something to do with
the ceremonies taking place after the burial of
the dead. They could have also been used as
grave markers in the cemetery area 29 .
The third grave type is the simple
inhumations. These burials were – in some
cases - bordered with rows of stones. The dead
were placed exactly as their contemporaries in
pithos and cist graves. What makes this grave
group more special is the fact that they were
used only once in contrast to the other grave
types. As a result, they form the richest grave
group and supply us with an objective picture of
a range of grave goods associated with one
single burial.
Forthcoming detailed case analysis on the
re-use of the burials and the amount of respect
shown to the previous burials in the cemetery –
that is re-use or stealing of the grave goods and
deposition of the previous burial remains could supply us with more information on the
socio-economic conditions of the area during
this period 30 .
The fact that different grave types were
present at the site contemporary with each other
could be interpreted as a further indication of
the
changing
political
and/or
social
environment of the region during the Early
Bronze Age I.
28
29
30
See Erkanal this volume.
See Erkanal this volume.
The number of metal finds in the pithos burials and cist
graves seem to be much smaller than the simple
inhumations. This must be an indication of the stealing
of metals from the re-used graves. Stealing metal is a
clear indication of its importance in the society and this
is a further indication for the role of early metallurgy in
the shaping of the EB I society, at least in the eastern
Aegean. The changing social structure of the settlement
at Bakla Tepe, building of the fortifications and further
safety procedures, all seem to be pointing to the “real”
introduction of this new and important material into the
lives of the EBA communities.
The Late Chalcolithic period at Liman
Tepe, to the northwest of Bakla Tepe, is limited
to a small trench since these levels are all water
logged in the southern part of the settlement.
This is due to a rise of sea level or alternatively
to subsidence of the land. Future work on the
topographically higher northern part of the
settlement is expected to give beter results
regarding these early periods.
Future investigation of a possible Late
Chalcolithic cemetery in the region will prove
to be of great importance. Comparanda of such
a cemetery with the “International” character of
the Early Bronze Age I burial traditions could
supply us with further information regarding the
change in social life during the Early Bronze
Age I.
Development of Pottery and Stratification of
the Early Bronze Age in the Izmir Region
It is interesting to follow a change in the
pottery assemblage during the transition from
Late Chalcolithic to the EB I. Whereas the
pottery of the five Late Chalcolithic phases
reflect similarities and a development of
ceramic tradition, with the beginning of the EB
I, new shapes start to dominate the ceramic
assemblage. Thickened rimmed bowls with red
– brown and darker slip seem to be the
characteristic of this earliest EB I phase. These
bowls were in some cases painted with white
geometric designs on the apex of the rim. This
aspect seems to be the only strong link one can
draw with the preceding period. “Troy A6” type
bowls dominate the following phases of the EB
I. The number of the painted examples
decreases in the developing stages.
The presence of early EB II period at
Bakla Tepe still remains to be solved. There
seem to be a possible “gap” on the site between
the end of the EB I and the Late EB II period.
There is also no single find of the typical
“Western
Aegean”
urfirnis
sauceboats.
Presence of a nearby EB II site called Altıntepe
(Fig. 2) could also be an indication of a
temporary movement of the inhabitants of
Bakla Tepe during the earlier EB II period. The
reason behind this event is again to be clarified.
Perhaps geomorphological research in this area
could be helpful in this respect.
Liman Tepe and Bakla Tepe: New Evidence for the Relations between the Izmir Region, The Cyclades and the
Greek Mainland during the Late Fourth and Third Millennia BC
If we accept the fact that there is a “gap”
at Bakla Tepe during the earlier part of the EB
II, then the presence of two interesting finds
from the site becomes even more interesting.
One of these is a silver amphoriskos headed
pin 31 c. 6cm high whose almost exact parallels
are known from cemeteries in Naxos 32 . The
Cycladic examples are dated to the EC II period
(Keros – Syros Culture). The second group of
finds is “frying pan” fragments. These
examples are the first of their kind on the
Anatolian mainland to date. Bakla Tepe
examples have dark burnished surfaces with
incised and kerbschnitt decorations including a
sun motif and hatched triangles 33 . Since exact
parallels for its design are not found elsewhere,
these frying pans could well be examples
reflecting the artistic milieu of the eastern
Aegean potters – inspired by, but not exact
copies of, Western Aegean examples.
In light of the archaeological setting of
these finds at Bakla Tepe, it can be argued that
what we call Late EB I on the Western
Anatolian coastline could be at least partly
contemporary with the earlier part of the EC II
period in the Cyclades.
Additional
data
supporting
this
correlation comes from the stratigraphic trench
behind the fortification wall at Liman Tepe
(Fig. 6, No. 2). This stratigraphical trench forms
the southern part of House 2 at Liman Tepe.
The levels explained below reflect the
preliminary results of the chronological
development of this structure.
Preliminary Results of the Early Bronze Age
Stratigraphy at Liman Tepe
The Early Bronze Age I settlement at
Liman Tepe includes insulae of long houses
attached to and surrounded by a strong fortification wall (Fig 6, No. 1). The fortification
system was built using slab limestone and has
small rectangular projections on the outer face
with an interval of c. 1.5m. The lower part of
the outer façade of the fortification was covered
487
with a ramp like construction using big volcanic
Stones (Fig. 6, No. 1). This impressive
construction must have had a mudbrick
superstructure raised on top of the stone
foundation.
Small test trenches dug right next to the
fortification wall into the water logged levels
yielded some rolled rim bowls and very shallow
bowls like the poliochni fruit stands. Some of
this pottery had a matt face which forms a link
with some Bakla Tepe examples.
The earliest non-waterlogged level in this
area was a burned level and yielded some
highest quality sauceboats 34 and painted
“Cycladic Type” pottery (Fig. 7) found in
association with a dominant presence of brown
and dark burnished bowls with thickened inner
rim and carinated bowls.
This level was succeeded by a fill which
included almost purely Late Chalcolithic
pottery! This deposit must have been brought to
this area in order to level the land for the
construction of a new floor belonging to a small
rectangular room in this area. In situ pottery
related to this structure includes “early looking”
black burnished horned bowls and large number
of bowls with inner thickened rims 35 , jugs and
jars. It should be noted that not a single sherd of
an urfirnis ware or a painted import sherd was
found in this level.
This level was suceeded by a phase
where an oven with 16 different floors were
built on top of each other and used. Many
bowls, jugs and tripod jars were associated with
this level. The number of bowls with inner
thickened rim decreases in this phase. This
phase was also the last period of use for the EB
I fortification wall. This monumental structure
was then covered with mud-brick fill which
must have been contemporary with the reorganization of the site where the earlier
fortification system was cancelled and the new,
even more monumental fortification system
with a horseshoe shaped bastion was erected.
31
Şahoğlu (in press-a)
Cf. Doumas 1977, pl. L,d and Marangou 1990, 62, No.
35.
33
Şahoğlu (in press-b)
32
34
35
Şahoğlu in (press-a).
These examples can be compared to Troy A6 type
bowls.
488
Vasıf ŞAHOĞLU
The mudbrick fill yielded carinated bowl
fragments typical of EB II pottery. A composite
carinated bowl from this context is worth a
mention (Fig. 8).
material was unearthed just outside the bastion.
Part of an earlier “apsidal structure” was also
spotted underneath this house and dates to the
earlier part of the EB II.
The mudbrick fill was covered by an ash
layer which had a relatively large extent in
House 2. This ash layer included urfirnis
sauceboats with the same high metallic quality
(Fig. 9), which was also the case in the earlier
examples. Bowls with inner thickened rims are
totally absent in this phase.
Architecture inside the citadel can be
characterised as “multiroomed structures with
rectangular forms” (Fig. 6, No. 4). These
structures reflect a completely new perspective
when compared with the earlier EB I settlement
model of Liman Tepe. The structures within the
citadel seem to have functioned for communal
use rather than being simple dwellings.
Contemporary material was also found in
the area of the central complex (Fig. 6, No.3).
This earlier EB II material was associated with
the earlier phases of the central complex. This
period, which can be placed in the first half of
the EB II in the Aegean, saw important
developments in terms of political organization
and the beginning of some sort of
administrative formation and possibly the rise
of some chiefdoms.
A complete re-organization of the
settlement at Liman Tepe took place during this
period. A new monumental fortification system
with horseshoe shaped bastions was built. This
structure probably surrounds the settlement in
an oval shaped citadel whose northern part
today lies under the Aegean Sea.
Examples of fortifications with horseshoe
shaped bastions were also found at Kastri –
Syros 36 and Naxos – Panormos 37 in the
Cyclades, Skyros – Palamari 38 in the Northern
Aegean, at Aegina 39 and at Lerna 40 in the
Peleponnese. Liman Tepe is the only example
of this kind – so far – on the Western Anatolian
coastline. It should be noted that the Liman
Tepe bastion is also the most monumental of
all. It is for example, more than four times as
big as the bastions at Lerna.
During the time when Liman Tepe was a
citadel surrounded by a fortification wall, there
were people living both in and outside the
citadel. A rectangular structure with late EB 2
36
37
38
39
40
Bossert 1967, plan 2; Marthari 1998, figs 15 and 16, 26
– 27.
Doumas 1972, figs. 17-18.
Theochari & Parlama 1997, figs. 1-2, pic. 5.
Felten 1986, figs. 12-13.
Caskey 1958, fig. 1, pls. 33a, 34a-b.
The central complex which is situated at
a central part within the settlement, consists of
two long rectangular storage rooms, an open
courtyard and another, multiroomed structure
opening to the courtyard (Fig. 6, No. 3). This
complex of structures is situated topographically at the lowest part of the settlement. This
area is a depression at the core of the settlement
and the topography rises towards the north. The
central complex reflects a long period of use.
The thick, southern wall of the storerooms was
built first and also acted as a terrace wall
protecting and also limiting the southern end of
the complex.
The store rooms were built after the
construction of additional walls attached to this
terrace wall. Two rectangular rooms have no
doorways and it became clear that they were
subterranean structures with floor levels much
lower than the courtyard. The fact that these
rooms have no doorways and the in situ finds
placed on the eastern parts of the rooms points
out to an entrance at their northwestern ends.
Stairs of a perishable material must have been
used while entering these rooms from above.
The open area to the north of the
storerooms must have been used as an open
courtyard (Fig. 6, No. 3). Archaeological deposits, including thin layers of sand and worn
ceramic sherds, indicate that this area must have
been used as an area without a roof and open to
natural weather.
The in situ presence of the finds in the
compartments and the burned remains,
especially in the eastern compartment, suggest a
sudden end to this period at Liman Tepe whose
extent still remains to be clarified.
Liman Tepe and Bakla Tepe: New Evidence for the Relations between the Izmir Region, The Cyclades and the
Greek Mainland during the Late Fourth and Third Millennia BC
The western storeroom contained lids,
jars, tripods, jars of typical EB II coarse wares
along with fine black slipped and burnished and
fine red slipped wares which are characteristic
ware groups for this period and have been
attested for the first time in Western Anatolia
during this period. A bell shaped cup (LMT
6286/3) and one handled cups are good
examples of these wares. A composite version
of an incised pyxis (LMT 6298) and a stone
sauceboat fragment are worth a mention among
the inventory of this room.
The eastern room yielded none of the
typical “Western Anatolian Fine Wares”, except
for a badly preserved piece of a bull rhyton but
instead had storage jars and big bowls. It can be
argued that, judging from the inventories, these
two rooms might have served different
functions. Better comments will be able to be
made following the publication of the full
assemblages from these rooms.
Some small finds associated with the
central complex supply us with some clues
regarding the function of these structures. A
group of phallic objects, one with a monkey’s
head 41 , forms an interesting find group whose
function could have been cultic. The one with a
monkey’s head exhibits high artistic features
and is also one of the earliest monkey
representations in the entire Aegean. This
example clearly reflects far distance contacts of
Liman Tepe, probably with the southern or
eastern Mediterranean. The bull rhyton
fragment from the eastern storeroom is another
important discovery regarding the cultic
activities
related
to
this
complex.
Unfortunately, only a small part of its head is
preserved and it is very difficult to make a
suggestion about the real shape of this piece.
Some marble and clay idols were also found in
this central complex.
Another important find is a little green
serpantine bell-shaped stamp seal which fits
well with the horizon of the first administrative
use of the seals in the Aegean 42 . The Liman
Tepe example has a simple hatched geometric
design in contrast to the contemporary
examples from Greek mainland which reflect
complex motifs.
The association of this seal with the finds
related to religious activities and storage
facilities designed to serve more than a simple
household, clearly supplies us with important
clues regarding the function of this complex of
structures. This complex is definitely a non
domestic feature and probably functioned as
some sort of an administrative and religious
place within the settlement.
Early Bronze Age II – especially the later
half of this period - is a special period in
Aegean prehistory with the emergence of the
first regional chiefdoms and the rise of the elite
which is a reflection of social stratification
within the communities. This is a period when
long distance trade routes have been created
and administrative control has been applied for
the first time to serve the needs of the
hierarchically high status people. This
phenomenon can be followed on the Greek
mainland with the appearence of a special kind
of building called “Corridor Houses”. These
structures have a special plan with the presence
of rectangular rooms at the center and
compartment like rooms on the sides 43 . They
are in most cases two storied buildings.
Presence of roof tiles is also a characteristic
feature of these structures. There is a great
controversy regarding their function and
different views such as an administrative center
or a religious center are among the many
suggestions raised by scholars. The “House of
the Tiles” 44 and “Building BG” 45 at Lerna is the
most famous “corridor house”. The presence of
these structures have also been attested at
Akovitika (Megaron A and B) 46 , Thebes
(Fortified Building) 47 , Aigina (Hause am
Felsrand and Weisses Haus) 48 , Tiryns
(Rundbau) 49 and most recently as a result of the
re-interpretation of the data, Zygouries (The
House of the Pithoi) 50 .
43
44
45
46
47
48
41
42
See Erkanal, Liman Tepe article, this volume.
Cf Erkanal – Öktü 2004, 656, 660, Kat. No. 457.
489
49
50
Shaw 1987; 1990.
Caskey 1958, fig. 1, pl. 31.
Wiencke 1986, 41-45, fig. 33.
Themelis 1970, figs. 1-2.
Aravantinos 1986, 57-63, figs. 53-54, pls. Id, IIa-c.
Felten 1986, 21-28, figs. 7-11.
Kilian 1986, 65-71, figs. 57-59.
Pullen 1986, 73-78, figs. 71-73.
490
Vasıf ŞAHOĞLU
Although no such central complexes or
structures have been found in the Cyclades yet,
Western Anatolia shows a different perspective
regarding this matter. Monumental structures
have been found in Western Anatolia at sites
like Liman Tepe 51 , Küllüoba 52 and Troy 53 .
Although these structures do not correspond to
a special plan, they all yielded important
archaeological data to be regarded as
administrative or religious structures. In this
respect, the central complex of Liman Tepe
should be interpreted in the same way as the
“Corridor Houses” of the Western Aegean, in
terms of its function.
The use and destruction of the central
complex at Liman Tepe, must be during the
Late Early Bronze Age II – the “Anatolian
Trade Network Period”..The reflection of these
phenomena in the Cyclades are in the “Kastri
Group” and, on the Greek Mainland, in
“Lefkandi I” assemblages 54 . These assemblages
are characterised by the presence of certain
Anatolian type ceramics namely the depas,
tankard, bell shaped cup, cut away spouted jugs,
incised pyxides and wheel made plates.
The “central complex” phase at Liman
Tepe came to an end with a severe fire whose
extent within the settlement remains unknown
to date. Following this phase, a totally new reorganization took place and a new terrace wall
dating to the beginning of the EB III was
erected partly covering the area of the central
complex. This level was associated with a depas
fragment, some tankard fragments and an
imported fine gray burnished tankard fragment.
This level is also the phase where wheel made
pottery appears for the first time at Liman Tepe.
Until the end of this phase, one can follow a
local pottery development at the site with the
introduction of new shapes and wares along
with the continuous presence of the earlier local
shapes and wares.
51
52
53
54
Erkanal 1996, 77-78.
Efe 2000, 121, figs. 4–6; Efe and Ay-Efe 2001, 48–50,
figs. 2–3.
For buildings reflecting a political and / or economic
significance in the northeastern islands, cf Kouka 2002,
295-296.
J. B. Rutter 1979; Sotirakopoulou 1993, Manning
1995; 1997; Maran 1998, Wilson 1999
The Early Bronze Age II (Late) Period at
Bakla Tepe
Bakla Tepe on the other hand, reflects the
end of the Early Bronze Age II Period from a
different angle. Unlike Liman Tepe with its
monumental features, Bakla Tepe reflects a
scattered settlement character but supplies us
with important information regarding the burial
habits of the period.
The scattered settlement remains were
investigated in two different trenches. The first
trench, which is on the eastern slope of the EB I
mound (Fig. 3, No. 1), yielded no architectural
features but many ceramics of the finest quality,
contemporary with the Liman Tepe central
complex. The Western Anatolian fine ware
tankards, bell shaped cups, two handled cups,
beak spouted jugs and tea-pots were found in a
context with dark burnished coarser carinated
bowls and large numbers of bronze needles and
small sized idols (Fig. 10). The dominant
number of fine ware pouring shapes and the
small sized idols point to the “special character”
of this context which may have to do with some
feasting activities. But the limited area
investigated supplies us with no other
inormation regarding this case. Perhaps detailed
study of the material in the future would be
helpful in this matter.
The second area to yield material dating
to the end of the EB II – Early EB III, was
investigated in the eastern end of the Late
Chalcolithic mound (Fig. 3, No. 3). A thin layer
of occupation is found succeeding a Late
Chalcolithic level. Part of a rectangular
structure with stone foundations (perhaps a
megaron) was unearthed under the surface soil.
The material related with this architecture
displays a puzling character since it includes the
typical dark burnished EB II wares together
with the wheel made plates (Fig. 11a-b) along
with later looking wheelmade gray wares and a
trefoil mouthed jar which is a reminiscent of the
early Middle Bronze Age examples - all in the
same context.
The fact that there is no sign of the
presence of this period in any other part of the
mound, except for the “special deposit”, is an
Liman Tepe and Bakla Tepe: New Evidence for the Relations between the Izmir Region, The Cyclades and the
Greek Mainland during the Late Fourth and Third Millennia BC
indication of a small scattered settlement at
Bakla Tepe during this period.
The Early Bronze Age II (Late) – Early
Bronze Age III Cemetery at Bakla Tepe
The cemetery of this period was also
found next to the settled area (Fig. 3, No. 4).
The cemetery consists of pithos burials all
facing east (Fig. 12-14). The mouths of the
pithoi were closed with stones and some stones
were also placed at the sides of the pithoi (Fig.
13-14). These features and the fact that almost
every pithos included multiple burials (Fig. 14),
support the idea that the graves were at least
partly visible on the surface or the capstones
were also used as gravemarkers (Fig. 14). The
anthropological investiga-tion of the cemetery
is still continuing.
The presence of a single type of burial
tradition- namely the pithos burials – in contrast
to the earlier cemetery of the site, must be a
reflection of the nature of the new inhabitants.
The new homogeneous character of the burial
traditions may point out to a distinct change in
the social and / or political structure of the
possible “new” settlers of Bakla Tepe.
The grave goods included bronze and
silver jewellery, bronze pins, needles, small
daggers and pottery. Pottery shapes include face
pots, well known types like depas, all three
types of tankards, beak spouted and cut away
spouted jugs and pyxides. The wide range of
pottery also includes the Western Anatolian red
slipped wares, black slipped and burnished
wares and fine gray burnished wares. Wheel
made examples were present especially in the
gray wares. The cemetery included pottery of
both Late EB II and early EB III periods.
Detailed analyses of this material and the
association of shapes with each other is
expected to shed more light on the chronology
of this problematic period of the Aegean.
The End of the Early Bronze Age III and the
Transition to the Middle Bronze Age in the
Izmir Region
The end of the Early Bronze Age reflects
a transitional phase to the Middle Bronze Age.
Pots made in the Early Bronze Age tradition
491
were found together with Middle Bronze Age
wares. Evidence for this period is again attested
at Liman Tepe and the settlement seems to have
a scattered habitation following its glorious
past. Later EB III levels include simple
structures with a domestic character and the
pottery tradition of the Middle Bronze Age had
already started to be introduced during this
phase. Just like all the transitional periods, the
transition to the Middle Bronze Age must have
been a period of re-formation and reorganization, preparing life for the next
important period of Western Anatolia namely
the Middle Bronze Age.
VASIF ŞAHOĞLU
Ankara University
Dil ve Tarih Coğrafya Fakültesi
Department of Archaeology
Protohistory and Near Eastern Archaeology
06100, Sıhhiye – Ankara
TURKEY
Vasıf ŞAHOĞLU
492
Bibliography:
Akurgal, E. 1950, "Bayraklı Kazısı Ön Rapor", A.Ü. DTCF Dergisi VIII/1, 1-97.
Akurgal, E. 1958, “Yortankultur-siedlung in Ovabayındır bei Balıkesir”, ANADOLU / ANATOLIA III, 156 – 164.
Aravantinos, V. L. 1986, The EH II Fortified Building at Thebes: Some Notes on its Architecture”, in Hägg, R. & D.
Konsola (eds.) Early Helladic Architecture and Urbanization. Studies in Mediterranean Archaeology vol. LXXVI,
Göteborg, 57-63.
Bossert, E. M. 1967, “Kastri auf Syros”, AD 22, 53–76.
Caskey, J. L. 1958, “Excavations at Lerna 1957”, Hesperia 27, 125-144.
Derin, Z. et al. 2002, “Kemalpaşa – Ulucak Höyük Kazıları, 1999–2000”, 23. KST - 1: 341–50.
Doumas, C. 1972, “Notes on Early Cycladic Architecture”, AA 87, 151-170.
Doumas, C. 1977, Early Bronze Age Burial Habits in the Cyclades. Studies in Mediterranean Archaeology 48, Göteborg.
Efe, T. 1988, Demircihöyük III, 2: Die Keramik 2. C Die Frühbronzezeitliche Keramik der Jüngeren Phasen (ab PhaseH),
Mainz am Rhein.
Efe, T. 2000, “Seyitgazi / Küllüoba Kazısı” in Belli, O. (ed.), Türkiye Arkeolojisi ve İstanbul Üniversitesi (1932-1999)
İstanbul, 18-122.
Efe, T & D. Ş. M. Ay-Efe 2001, “Küllüoba: İç Kuzeybatı Anadolu’da bir İlk Tunç Çağı Kenti: 1996 - 2000 Yılları Arasında
Yapılan Kazı Çalışmalarının Genel Bir Değerlendirmesi”, TÜBA-AR 4, 43-78.
Erkanal, A. 2000, “1998 Panaztepe Kazı Sonuçları”, 21. KST – I, s. 279-286.
Erkanal, A. 2002, “2000 Yılı Panaztepe Kazı Sonuçları”, 23. KST - I, 305-312.
Erkanal, H. 1996, “Early Bronze Age Urbanization in the Coastal Region of Western Anatolia / Erken Tunç Çağı’nda Batı
Anadolu Sahil Kesiminde Kentleşme”, in Sey, Y. (ed.), Habitat II: Housing and Settlement in Anatolia: A Historical
Perspective, İstanbul, 70-82.
Erkanal, H. 1998, “1996 Liman Tepe Kazıları”, 19. KST – I, 379-398.
Erkanal, H. 1999a, “Early Bronze Age Fortification Systems in the Izmir Region”, in Betancourt P.P., V. Karageorghis, R.
Laffineur, and W. D. Niemeier, (eds.), MELETEMATA. Studies in Aegean Archaeology Presented to Malcolm H.
Wiener as he enters his 65th Year. Aegaeum 20, 237-242.
Erkanal, H. 1999b, “1997 Liman Tepe Kazıları” 20. KST – I, 325-336.
Erkanal, H. & T. Özkan 1997, "1995 Bakla Tepe Kazıları", 18. KST - I, 261-279.
Erkanal, H. & T. Özkan 1999a, "1997 Bakla Tepe Kazıları" 20. KST-I, 337-355.
Erkanal, H. & T. Özkan 1999b, "Bakla Tepe Kazıları", in Özkan, T. & H. Erkanal (eds.), Tahtalı Barajı Kurtarma Kazısı
Projesi / Tahtalı Dam Area Salvage Project, İzmir, 12-41, 108-137.
Erkanal, H. & T. Özkan 2000, “1998 Bakla Tepe Kazıları”, 21. KST-I, 263-278.
Erkanal – Öktü, A. 2004, “Liman Tepe”, in Pini, I & Müller, W. (eds.), CMS V, Kleinere Griechische Sammlungen,
Supplementum3,2. Naphlion – Volos und Westliche Türkei (Mainz Am Rhein), 656.
Eslick, C. 1992, Elmalı - Karataş I: The Neolithic and Chalcolithic Periods: Bağbaşı and Other Sites, Bryn Mawr.
Evren, A. 1996, "Selçuk - Efes'in Prehistoryası", Selçuk Gazetesi Sayı 4, 5.
Evren, A. 1999, "Efes Çukuriçi Höyüğü 1996 Yılı Kazısı", Arkeoloji ve Sanat 92, 22-32.
Felten, F. 1986, “Early Urban History and Architecture of Ancient Aegina” in Hägg, R. & D. Konsola (eds.) Early Helladic
Architecture and Urbanization. Studies in Mediterranean Archaeology vol. LXXVI, Göteborg, 21-28.
Fitton, L. 1995, The Discovery of the Greek Bronze Age. London.
French, D. H. 1961, "Late Chalcolithic Pottery in Northwest Turkey and the Aegean", AS XI, 99-141.
French, D. H. 1967, "Prehistoric Sites in Northwest Anatolia I: The İznik Area", AS XVII, 49-100.
French, D. H. 1968, Anatolia and the Aegean in the Third Millennium B.C., Unpublished PhD Thesis, Cambridge.
Hüryılmaz, H. 1998, "Gökçeada - Yenibademli Höyük 1996 Yılı Kurtarma Kazısı", 19. KST – I, 357-378.
Hüryılmaz, H. 1999, “1997 Gökçeada – Yenibademli Höyük Kazıları”, 20. KST – I, 311-324.
Joukowsky, M. S. 1986, Prehistoric Aphrodisias: An Account of the Excavations and Artifact Studies, Louvain.
Kâmil, T. 1982, Yortan Cemetery in the Early Bronze Age of Western Anatolia, BAR International Series 145, Oxford.
Kilian, K. 1986, The Circular Building at Tiryns”, in Hägg, R. & D. Konsola (eds.) Early Helladic Architecture and
Urbanization. Studies in Mediterranean Archaeology vol. LXXVI, Göteborg, 65-71.
Koşay, H. Z. & J. Sperling 1936, Troad’da Dört Yerleşme Yeri, İstanbul.
Kouka, O. 2002, Siedlungsorganisation in der Nord-und Ostägäis während der Frühbronzezeit (3. Jt. V.Chr.)
Liman Tepe and Bakla Tepe: New Evidence for the Relations between the Izmir Region, The Cyclades and the
Greek Mainland during the Late Fourth and Third Millennia BC
493
Rahden / Westf.
Lamb, W. 1938, “Excavations at Kusura Near Afyonkarahisar: II”, Archaeologia LXXXVII, 218-273.
Lloyd, S. & J. Mellaart 1962, Beycesultan vol. 1: The Chalcolithic and Early Bronze Age Levels, London.
Manning, S. 1995, Absolute Chronology of the Aegean Early Bronze Age: Archaeology, Radiocarbon and History Sheffield.
Manning, S. 1997, “Cultural Change in the Aegean c. 2200 BC”, in Dalfes, H. N., G. Kukla, & H. Weiss (eds.), Third
Millennium BC Climate Change and Old World Collapse, Berlin, 149-171.
Maran, J. 1998, Kulturwandel auf dem griechischen Festland und den Kykladen in späten 3. Jahrtausend v. Chr., Bonn.
Marangou, L. (ed. ) 1990, Cycladic Culture: Naxos in the Third Millennium BC., Athens.
Marthari, M. 1998, Syros Chalandriani, Kastri: From the Investigation and Protection to the Presentation of an
Archaeological Site, Athens.
Mitten, D. G. 1968, "Prehistoric Survey of Gygean Lake and Excavations at Ahlatlı Tepecik", BASOR 191, 7-10.
Mitten, D. G. & G. Yüğrüm 1969, "Excavations at Ahlatlı Tepecik the Gygean Lake 1968", TAD XVII-1, 125-127.
Özsait, M. 2000, "1998 Yılı Harmanören (Gündürle Höyük) Mezarlık Kazısı", 21. KST - I, 371-380.
Pacorella, P. E. 1984, La Cultura Preistorica di Iasos in Caria, Roma.
Pullen, D. 1986, “A House of Tiles’ at Zygouries? The Function of the Monumental Early Helladic Architecture”, in Hägg,
R. & D. Konsola (eds.) Early Helladic Architecture and Urbanisation. Studies in Mediterranean Archaeology vol.
LXXVI, Göteborg, 73-84.
Rutter, J. B. 1979, Ceramic Change in the Aegean Early Bronze Age. The Kastri Group, Lefkandi I and Lerna IV: A Theory
Concerning the Origin of Early Helladic III Ceramics. Institute of Archaeology, University of Carolina.
Şahoğlu, V. (in press - a), “Interregional Contacts around the Aegean during the Early Bronze Age: New Evidence from the
Izmir Region” ANADOLU / ANATOLIA, 27.
Şahoğlu, V. (in press – b), Crossing Borders: Izmir Region as a Bridge between the East and the West during the Early
Bronze Age”, in Gillis, C. et al. (eds.), Trade and Production in Premonetary Greece VIII: Crossing Borders, 12-13
December 1998, Athens.
Shaw, J. W. 1987, "The Early Helladic II Corridor House: Developement and Form", AJA 91, 59-79.
Shaw, J. W. 1990, "The Early Helladic II Corridor House: Problems and Possibilities", in Darcque, P. & R. Treuil, (eds.)
L’habitat égéén prehistorique. Actes de la table ronde internationale, BCH Supplement No. XIX, Athens, 183-194.
Sotirakopoulou, P. 1993, “The Chronology of the Kastri Group Reconsidered”, BSA 88, 5-20.
Sperling, J. W. 1976, “Kum Tepe in the Troad”, Hesperia 45 (4), 305 – 364.
Themelis, P. 1970, “Early Helladic Megaron at Akovitika in Messenia”, AAA 3, 303-311.
Theochari, M & L. Parlama 1997, “Palamari Skyros: The Early Bronze Age Fortified Settlement” in Doumas, C. & V. La
Rosa (eds.) Poliochni e L’Antica età del Bronzo Nell’ Egeo Settentrionale, Athens, 344-356.
Topbaş, A., T. Efe & A. İlyaslı 1998, “Salvage Excavations of the Afyon Archaeological Museum, Part 2: The Settlement
of Karaoğlan Mevkii and the Early Bronze Age Cemetery of Kaklık Mevkii”, Anatolia Antiqua VI, 21-94.
von Graeve, V. & W. D. Niemeier 2002, “1998 – 2000 Yılı Milet Çalışmaları”, 23. KST – 2, 75-88.
Warner, J. L. 1994, Elmalı - Karataş II: The Early Bronze Age Village of Karataş, Bryn Mawr.
Wiencke, M. H. 1986, “Building BG at Lerna”, in Hägg, R. & D. Konsola (eds.) Early Helladic Architecture and
Urbanization. Studies in Mediterranean Archaeology vol. LXXVI, Göteborg, 41-45.
Wilson, D. E. 1999, Keos IX. Ayia Irini: Periods I-III, the Neolithic and Early Bronze Age Settlements. Part 1: Pottery and
Small Finds, Mainz am Rhine.
494
Vasıf ŞAHOĞLU
List of Illustrations:
Fig. 1: Map of the Aegean showing the location of sites mentioned in the text.
Fig. 2: Map of Izmir region.
Fig. 3: Topographical map of Bakla Tepe.
Fig. 4: Late Chalcolithic Graves No. 69 and 70 - Bakla Tepe.
Fig. 5: Aerial photo of Bakla Tepe showing the Late Chalcolithic grill planned structures, EB I fortification and the ditch.
(Photograph by Jan Driessen).
Fig. 6: Aerial photo of Liman Tepe showing the Early Bronze Age architectural remains. (Photograph by Jan Driessen) .
Fig. 7: Imported painted pottery from the Cyclades – Liman Tepe. (Photograph by Chronis Nikolopoulos, INSTAP-SCEC).
Fig. 8: Composite vessel – Liman Tepe. (Photograph by Chronis Nikolopoulos, INSTAP - SCEC)
Fig. 9: Imported urfirnis sauceboat fragment – Liman Tepe. (Photograph by Chronis Nikolopoulos, INSTAP – SCEC)
Fig. 10: Late EB II fine ware pottery from the “special deposit” – Bakla Tepe (Photographs by Chronis Nikolopoulos,
Drawings by Douglas Faulmann, INSTAP - SCEC)
Fig. 11: Wheel made plates – Bakla Tepe. (Photograph by Chronis Nikolopoulos, INSTAP – SCEC)
Fig. 12: Late EB II – Early EB III Cemetery - Bakla Tepe.
Fig. 13: Grave No. 322 - Bakla Tepe.
Fig. 14: Grave No. 275 – Bakla Tepe.
Liman Tepe and Bakla Tepe: New Evidence for the Relations between the Izmir Region, The Cyclades and the
Greek Mainland during the Late Fourth and Third Millennia BC
495
496
Vasıf ŞAHOĞLU
Liman Tepe and Bakla Tepe: New Evidence for the Relations between the Izmir Region, The Cyclades and the
Greek Mainland during the Late Fourth and Third Millennia BC
497
498
Vasıf ŞAHOĞLU
Liman Tepe and Bakla Tepe: New Evidence for the Relations between the Izmir Region, The Cyclades and the
Greek Mainland during the Late Fourth and Third Millennia BC
499
500
Vasıf ŞAHOĞLU
Liman Tepe and Bakla Tepe: New Evidence for the Relations between the Izmir Region, The Cyclades and the
Greek Mainland during the Late Fourth and Third Millennia BC
501