ANTH.245: Summary of Middle Bronze Age Aegean and Anatolia, lectures 11-14: study guide part-3/4 (by G. Mumford; 2018 revised) (original) (raw)

“Minding the Gap”: Against the Gaps. The Early Bronze Age and the Transition to the Middle Bronze Age in the Northern and Eastern Aegean/Western Anatolia

American Journal of Archaeology, 2013

Gaps are not desirable in archaeology, whether they refer to cultural gaps or to gaps in research. When Rutter defined a "gap" between the Early Cycladic IIB and Middle Cycladic I/Middle Helladic I assemblages, it was evident that there existed a real gap in archaeological research of the prehistoric landscapes and islandscapes of the northern and eastern Aegean and of western Anatolia, to the south of Troy. This short article discusses the rich archaeological evidence of the Aegean Early Bronze Age that has accumulated over the past 30 years. It emphasizes cultural dialogues that existed between the eastern Aegean Islands and western Anatolian littoral, on the one hand, and between both of these areas and the Cyclades, mainland Greece, and Crete, on the other; these dialogues are obvious in technology (pottery, metallurgy), in the development of trade networks, in the evolution of political and social practices, in symbolic expressions, and finally in the transformation of the parallel lives of the Early Bronze Age Aegean societies.* introduction Archaeological research from the 1870s through the 1960s in the eastern Aegean Islands and western Anatolia has revealed a rich and continuous stratigraphic sequence of the Early Bronze Age (3200-2000 B.C.E.) at the extensively excavated sites of Troy, Poliochni on Lemnos, Thermi on Lesbos, Emporio on Chios, and the Heraion on Samos. 1 When Rutter recognized the Anatolianizing pottery group, which he termed the Kastri/Lefkandi I Group, and defined a "gap" between the Early Cycladic (EC) IIB and Middle Cycladic I assemblages, 2 it was evident that there existed a real gap in prehistoric research to the south of Troy as well as in the research of some islands of the northern and eastern Aegean. 3 Since the 1980s, excavations on the

Southern and Southeastern Anatolia in the Late Bronze Age

Oxford Handbooks Online, 2011

This article presents data on the Late Bronze Age of southern and southeastern Anatolia. Southern and southeastern Anatolia present three contrasting zones, differentiated by topography, elevation, climate, soils, and connectivity to neighboring regions. In the Late Bronze Age, as at other times, they offered varied options for human exploitation and settlement, and reflected different cultural and political inclinations. The Late Bronze Age cities, towns, and forts in southern and southeastern Anatolia endured various fortunes in the twelfth century BCE, but all experienced the eventual termination of this cultural, political, and economic phase. Most were destroyed and lay deserted for centuries, or their ruins were reoccupied by squatters and migrants, then abandoned.

An Overview of the Western Anatolian Early Bronze Age

European Journal of Archaeology, 2015

For a long time, assessments and evaluations of the western Anatolian Early Bronze Age (EBA) have only been based on the excavation results of Tarsus, Karatas-Semayük, Beycesultan, Demircihüyük, and Troy. However, excavations and surface surveys carried out in the last two decades have increased our knowledge enormously. In particular, the excavations of Liman Tepe, Küllüoba, and Seyitömer have made an immense contribution to the establishment of a reliable West Anatolian EBA chronology. The surface surveys have also made it possible to define better the borders of the cultural areas and pottery zones of the region. Based on these new data, new theories are presented here on the cultural and socio-political development of the region, as well as on regional and inter-regional relationships during the EBA.