Hostname: page-component-848d4c4894-cjp7w Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-06-30T13:37:07.689Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

The Anatolian Middle Bronze Age kingdoms and Alalakh: Mukish, Kanesh and trade

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  23 December 2013

K. Aslıhan Yener
K. Aslıhan Yener
Affiliation:
Oriental Institute, University of Chicago
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

The comparisons at the heart of this article concern the varying roles of cuneiform texts, instrumental analysis and artefacts at the Bronze Age capital of Alalakh, located in the northeastern Mediterranean region of southern Turkey. The production of fine artefacts, such as sophisticated metallurgy, glass, faience, ivory carving and, especially, bronze, was under palace patronage, while trade and the networks of inter-regional relations facilitated the transport of materials across great distances in the ancient Near East. Several lines of evidence suggest that exchange relationships between Alalakh and the Middle Bronze Age central Anatolian kingdoms, such as Kanesh, were established prior to the arrival of Hattusili I. One category of artefact, ivory and bone with metallic embellishments, is emphasised here since the crafting of ivory and bone entails the use of local resources, while the plating with precious metals reflects artistic expression and exploitation that is international in scope. Several analytical techniques are presented, such as lead isotope ratios, scanning electron microscopy and polarizing light microscopy, which have aided in defining the artistic expression of Alalakh and the production of artefacts of power and prestige.

Özet

Bu makalenin özündeki değerlendirme, Güney Anadolu'nun Kuzeydoğu Akdeniz kesiminde yer alan ve bir Bronz Çağ başkenti olan Alalakh'ta bulunan çiviyazılı metinlerin, buluntu analizleri ve insan yapısı nesnelerin değişik rolleri ile ilgilidir. Cam, fayans yapımı, fildişi oymacılığı, gelişmiş madenlerden ve özellikle bronzdan yapılan malların üretimi sarayın tekelindeydi. Diğer yandan bölgeler arası ticaret ve iletişim ağları malların tüm Yakın Doğu'da çok geniş bir coğrafyaya yayılmasını kolaylaştırmaktaydı. Bir dizi kanıt, Alalakh ile Kanesh gibi Orta Anadolu'nun Orta Bronz Çağı krallıkları arasındaki takas ilişkisinin, I. Hattusili döneminden önce kurulduğunu göstermektedir. Burada özellikle, üzeri madeni süslemeli fildişi ve kemik buluntu grubu üzerinde durulmaktadır. Fildişi ve kemik işçiliği yerel kaynakların kullanımını gerektirirken, değerli maden kaplama işi daha uluslararası ölçekte bir sanatsal bakış ve işçilik gerektirir. Alalakh'taki sanatsal bakış aşısı ile güç ve itibara yönelik nesnelerin üretimini tanımlamamıza yardımcı olmak üzere kurşun izotop oranları, taramalı elektron mikroskobu ve polarize ışık mikroskobu gibi çok sayıda analitik yöntem kullanılmıştır.

Type
Research Article
Information
Anatolian Studies , Volume 57 , December 2007 , pp. 151 - 160
Copyright
Copyright © The British Institute at Ankara 2007

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

Alp, S. 1968: Zylinder-und Stempelsiegel aus Karahöyük bei Konya. AnkaraGoogle Scholar
Appadurai, A. 2000: The Social Life of Things: Commodities in the Cultural Perspective. New YorkGoogle Scholar
Baines, J., Yoffee, N. 1998: ‘Order, legitimacy and wealth in ancient Egypt and Mesopotamia’ in Marcus, J., Feinman, G.M. (eds), Archaic States. Santa Fe: 199–260Google Scholar
Barnett, R.D. 1982: Ancient Ivories in the Middle East JerusalemGoogle Scholar
Bourgeois, B. 1992: ‘An approach to Anatolian techniques of ivory carving during the second millennium BC’ in Fitton, J.L. (ed.), Ivory in Greece and the Eastern Mediterranean from the Bronze Age to the Hellenistic Period. London: 61–66Google Scholar
Braidwood, R. 1937: Mounds in the Plain of Antioch. An Archaeological Survey. ChicagoGoogle Scholar
Braidwood, R.J., Braidwood, L.S. 1960: Excavations in the Plain of Antioch I: The Earlier Assemblages Phases A–J. ChicagoGoogle Scholar
Bryce, T. 1998: The Kingdom of the Hittites. OxfordGoogle Scholar
Çağatay, A.I., Sayılı, S., Ulutürk, Y., Ateş, M.Z. 1991: ‘Kisecik (Hatay) hydrothermal gold veins’ Bulletin of Mineral Research and Exploration 112: 17–38Google Scholar
Caubet, A., Poplin, F. 1987: ‘Les objets de matiere dure animale: etude du materiau’ in Yon, M. (ed.), Ras Shamra-Ougarit III. Paris: 273–306Google Scholar
Collon, D. 1977: ‘Ivory’ Iraq 39/2: 219–22CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Deniz, E., Sunguroğlu, K., Canpolat, O., Akpoyraz, M. 1991: ‘Acemhöyük kazılarında çikan ve türü tükenmekte olan bir Hint fili (Elephus Maxima) disi üzerinde arkeobiyolojik-arkeometrik etüdler’ Arkeometri Sonuçları Toplantısı 6: 13–20Google Scholar
Feldman, M. 2005: Diplomacy by Design. Luxury Arts and an ‘International Style’ in the Ancient Near East, 1400–1200 BCE. ChicagoGoogle Scholar
Gates, M-H. 2006: ‘Dating the Hittite levels at Kinet Höyük: a revised chronology’ in Structuring and Dating in Hittite Archaeology (BYZAS 4). Istanbul: 293–309Google Scholar
Güterbock, H.G. 1971: ‘Ivory in Hittite texts’ Anatolia 15: 1–7. Reprinted in Hoffner, H.A. Jr, Diamond, I.L. (eds) 1997: Perspectives on Hittite Civilization: Selected Writings of Hans Gustav Güterbock. Chicago: 147–50Google Scholar
Haldane, C. 1993: ‘Direct evidence for organic cargoes in the Late Bronze Age’ World Archaeology 24: 348–60CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Helms, M. 1993: Craft and the Kingly Ideal. Art, Trade and Power. AustinGoogle Scholar
Kantor, H. 1956: ‘Syro-Palestinian ivories’ Journal of Near Eastern Studies 15: 153–74CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Lauinger, J. 2007: Archival Practices at Old Babylonian/Middle Bronze Age Alalakh (Level VII). PhD thesis, University of ChicagoGoogle Scholar
Lehner, J.W., Burton, J. (in preparation): ‘Lead isotope analysis on five metalliferous artifacts from southern Anatolia’ to be submitted to Journal of Archaeological ScienceGoogle Scholar
Liverani, M. 1990: Prestige and Interest: International Relations in the Near East ca 1600–1100 BC. PadovaGoogle Scholar
Magness-Gardiner, B. 1994: ‘Urban-rural relations in Bronze Age Syria: evidence from Alalakh level VII palace archives’ in Schwartz, G.M., Falconer, S.E. (eds), Archaeological Views from the Countryside. Village Communities in Early Complex Societies. Washington DC: 37–47Google Scholar
Matthiae, P. 1989: ‘Jugs of the north Syrian/Cilician and Levantine painted wares from the Middle Bronze II royal tombs at Ebla’ in Emre, K., Hrouda, B., Mellink, M., Özgüç, N., (eds), Anatolia and the Ancient Near East. Studies in Honor of Tahsin Özgüç. Ankara: 303–13Google Scholar
Mellink, M.J. 1969: ‘The Pratt ivories in the Metropolitan Museum of Art’ American Journal of Archaeology 73: 285–87CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Miller, R. 1986: ‘Elephants, ivory and charcoal: an ecological perspective’ Bulletin of the American Schools of Oriental Research 264: 29–43CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Moorey, P.R.S. 1999: Ancient Mesopotamian Materials and Industries: The Archaeological Evidence. Winona LakeGoogle Scholar
Müller-Karpe, A. 1994: Altanatolisches Metallhandwerk. NeumünsterGoogle Scholar
Newton, M.W., Kunhiolm, P.I. 2004: ‘A denrochronological framework for the Assyrian Colony period in Asia Minor’ TÜBA-AR 7: 165–71Google Scholar
Özgüç, N. 1980: ‘Seal impressions from the palaces at Acemhöyük’ in Porada, E. (ed.), Ancient Art in Seals: Essays by Pierre Amiet, Nimet Özgüç and John Boardman. Princeton: 63–85Google Scholar
Özgüç, N. 1966: ‘Excavations at Acemhöyük’ Anatolia 10: 29–52Google Scholar
Özgüç, T. 1986: Kultepe-Kanis II: New Researches at the Trading Center of the Ancient Near East. AnkaraGoogle Scholar
Özgüç, T. 1999: The Palaces and Temples of Kültepe-Kanis/Nesa. AnkaraGoogle Scholar
Özgüç, T. 2003: Kültepe Kaniš/Neša: The Earliest International Trade Center and the Oldest Capital City of the Hittites. TokyoGoogle Scholar
Özten, A. 1997: ‘Acemhöyük Gümüş Hazinesi’ Belleten 61/231: 233–71CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Özyar, A. 2005: Field Seasons 2001–2003 of the TarsusGözlükule Interdisciplinary Research Project. IstanbulGoogle Scholar
Sayre, E.V., Yener, K.A., Joel, E.C., Barnes, I.L. 1992: ‘Statistical evaluation of the presently accumulated lead isotope data from Anatolia and surrounding regions’ Archaeometry 34: 73–105CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Sayre, E.V., Yener, K.A., Joel, E.C., Blackman, J.M., Özbal, H. 2001: ‘Stable lead isotope studies of Black Sea Anatolian ore sources and related Bronze Age and Phrygian artefacts from nearby archaeological sites’ Archaeometry 43: 77–115CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Semon, A. 2002: ‘Middle Bronze Age bone and ivory artifacts from Alalakh’. Unpublished paper presented at Archaeology of Technology Seminar held at the Near Eastern Languages and Civilizations Department, University of ChicagoGoogle Scholar
Sherratt, A., Sherratt, S. 1991: ‘From luxuries to commodities: the nature of Mediterranean Bronze Age trading systems’ in Gale, N.H. (ed.), Bronze Age Trade in the Mediterranean. Jonsered: 351–86Google Scholar
Starr, R.F.S. 1939: Nuzi: Report on the Excavations at Yorghan Tepa near Kirkul Iraq. 1927–1931. CambridgeGoogle Scholar
Stein, D.L. 1997: ‘Alalakh’ in Meyers, E.M. (ed.), The Oxford Encyclopedia of Archaeology in the Near East, Vol. 1. New York: 55–59Google Scholar
Veenhof, K. 2003: The Old Assyrian List of Year Eponyms from Karum Kanish and its Chronological Implications. AnkaraGoogle Scholar
Winter, I.J. 1976: ‘Phoenician and north Syrian ivory carving in historical context: questions of style and distribution’ Iraq 38: 1–22CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Wiseman, D.J. 1953: The Alalakh Tablets. LondonGoogle Scholar
Woolley, C.L. 1939: ‘Excavations at Atchana-Alalakh, 1938’ The Antiquaries Journal 19: 1–37CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Woolley, C.L. 1948: ‘Excavations at Atchana-Alalakh, 1939’ The Antiquaries Journal 28: 1–19CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Woolley, C.L. 1955: Alalakh. An Account of the Excavations at Tell Atchana in the Hatay, 1937–1949. LondonGoogle Scholar
Yener, K.A. 2000: The Domestication of Metals: The Rise of Complex Metal Industries in Anatolia (c. 4500–2000 BC). Leiden, Boston, KölnCrossRefGoogle Scholar
Yener, K.A. 2002: ‘Tell Atchana’ The Oriental Institute 2001–2002 Annual Report 13–19Google Scholar
Yener, K.A., 2005: The Amuq Valley Regional Projects Volume One. Surveys in the Plain of Antioch and Orontes Delta from the Years 1995–2002. ChicagoGoogle Scholar
Yener, K.A. 2006: ‘Transformative impulses in Late Bronze Age technology: a case study from the Amuq valley, southern Turkey’ in Stone, E. (ed.), Settlement and Society: Essays Dedicated to Robert McCormick Adams. Los Angeles: 360–85Google Scholar
Yener, K.A. in press: ‘A zoomorphic vessel from Alalakh: diplomatic emblems in three dimensional form?’ in Umurtak, G. (ed.), Festschrift for Professor Refik DuruGoogle Scholar
Yener, K.A., Sayre, E.V., Joel, E., Özbal, H., Barnes, I.L., Brill, R.H. 1991: ‘Stable lead isotope studies of central Taurus ore sources and related artifacts from eastern Mediterranean Chalcolithic and Bronze Age Sites’ Journal of Archaeological Science 18: 541–77CrossRefGoogle Scholar