SavedAdd your journal

Journals / Anadolu Araştırmaları / 2026 / Issue: 24

Understanding the Urbanization Process in Çine-Tepecik’s Cultural Development

Çine-Tepecik’in Kültürel Gelişiminde Kentleşme Sürecini Anlamak

Sevinç Günel(HACETTEPE ÜNİVERSİTESİ)0000-0001-9455-5135
Pages
—
Publication Date
2021-09-20
🏛️Bibliographic metadata and full text access for this article are provided via DergiPark.
DergiPark Record ↗
✨

AI Summary & Key Takeaways

AI Insight
⚡ TL;DR(Too Long; Didn't Read)

In light of archaeological data and philological evidence, Çine-Tepecik contributes to the region’s archaeology with its strong position dominating natural roads in the south of Arzawa/Mira Land in Western Anatolia’s historical geography

📌 3 Key Takeaways

🎯
Objective & Hypothesis:With its location on the Çine plain south of the Greater Meander (Büyük Menderes), Çine-Tepecik is a settlement that sheds light on the region’s early cultural history.
📊
Key Findings & Data:According to the mound’s stratigraphy, the settlement model with a defense system in the 2nd millennium BC, on the one hand, highlights Çine-Tepecik as a strong city in its region, but on the other hand, shows that cultural and commercial activities with Anatolia, the Aegean, and the Eastern Mediterranean are active.
💡
Conclusion & Impact:In light of archaeological data and philological evidence, Çine-Tepecik contributes to the region’s archaeology with its strong position dominating natural roads in the south of Arzawa/Mira Land in Western Anatolia’s historical geography
🔬Design:Modeling & Simulation
📍Scope:Comprehensive Sample
⚙️Variables:Western Anatolia · Çine-Tepecik · settlement process

Abstract

With its location on the Çine plain south of the Greater Meander (Büyük Menderes), Çine-Tepecik is a settlement that sheds light on the region’s early cultural history. Its earliest cultural remains date to the Chalcolithic Period (Late Neolithic in the Aegean chronology), and the settlement process extends to the end of the Late Bronze Age. In this chronological development, the pottery tradition, the art of depiction, and chipped stone technology are prominent lines of evidence characterizing Tepecik’s social life. Archaeological data show cultural and chronological development associated with Western Anatolia and the Aegean world. This interregional communication and cultural dynamism can be followed through vessels’ decoration style, cult items, and raw material sources since the Chalcolithic Period. Among raw materials sources, obsidian and flint were used in Chalcolithic, Early, Middle, and Late Bronze Periods. Obsidian in Tepecik was obtained from the Aegean islands and Central Anatolia, thus shedding light on the earliest interregional trade relations. Architectural remains of the settlement and its graves, which provide understanding of the Early Bronze Age’s burial tradition, evidence a society that has reached a certain sociocultural level. According to the mound’s stratigraphy, the settlement model with a defense system in the 2nd millennium BC, on the one hand, highlights Çine-Tepecik as a strong city in its region, but on the other hand, shows that cultural and commercial activities with Anatolia, the Aegean, and the Eastern Mediterranean are active. This communication reflects the art of figurative depictions, Mycenaean painted vessels, metal artifacts, and philological evidence from seal impressions in the Middle and Late Bronze Ages. In the Late Bronze Age settlement, the Mycenaean painted pottery tradition, with a rich group of finds, demonstrates that Tepecik played an important role in the Aegean region’s cultural network. In contrast, seal impressions with Anatolian hieroglyphs belonging to the Hittite Empire Period carry communication of the Tepecik settlement with the Hittites to official dimensions. In light of archaeological data and philological evidence, Çine-Tepecik contributes to the region’s archaeology with its strong position dominating natural roads in the south of Arzawa/Mira Land in Western Anatolia’s historical geography

Özet

Çine-Tepecik Büyük Menderes’in güneyinde Çine ovasındaki konumuyla, bölgenin erken dönem kültür tarihine ışık tutan bir merkezdir. Tepecik’in en erken kültür kalıntıları, Kalkolitik döneme (Ege kronolojisinde Geç Neolitik) tarihlenmekte ve yerleşim süreci, Geç Tunç Çağı sonuna değin takip edilmektedir. Bu kronolojik gelişimde, seramik geleneği, tasvir sanatı ve alet teknolojisi, Tepecik’te yaşayan toplumların sosyal yaşamının belirlenmesinde öne çıkan kanıtlardır. Arkeolojik veriler, Batı Anadolu ve Ege dünyasıyla bağlantılı bir kültürel ve kronolojik gelişimi göstermiştir. Tepecik’in bölgelerarası iletişimindeki bu yakınlığı ve kültürel hareketliliği, Kalkolitik dönemden itibaren kapların bezeme stilinde, figürinlerde ve hammadde kaynaklarında görmek mümkündür. Hammadde kaynakları arasında obsidiyen ve çakmaktaşı Kalkolitik, Erken, Orta ve Geç Tunç Çağı’nda kullanım görmüştür. Obsidiyen, Ege adaları ve Orta Anadolu’dan temin edilmiş olup, en erken bölgelerarası ticari ilişkilere ışık tutmaktadır. Erken Tunç Çağı’nda, yerleşime ait mimari ve ölü gömme geleneklerinin anlaşılmasını sağlayan mezarlar, belli bir sosyo-kültürel düzeye ulaşmış toplumlara ait kanıtları vermektedir. Höyüğün stratigrafik ayrımına göre, MÖ 2. Binyılında savunma sistemine sahip yerleşim modeli, bir taraftan Çine-Tepecik’i bulunduğu coğrafyada güçlü bir kent olarak öne çıkarmakta diğer taraftan ise, Anadolu, Ege ve Doğu Akdeniz’e değin takip edilen kültürel ve ticari faaliyetlerin aktif olduğunu göstermektedir. Bu iletişimi, Orta ve Geç Tunç Çağı’nda, tasvir sanatına ait eserler, Miken boya bezeli kaplar, metal eserler ve filolojik anlamda mühür baskıları yansıtmaktadır. Özellikle Geç Tunç Çağı yerleşmesinde Miken seramik geleneği, Ege dünyasıyla olan kültürel birlikteliğini zengin bir buluntu grubuyla göstermektedir. Öte yandan Hitit İmparatorluk dönemine ait Anadolu hiyeroglif yazılı mühür baskıları ise, Tepecik’in Hititlerle iletişimini resmi boyutlara taşımaktadır. Arkeolojik ve filolojik veriler ışığında Çine-Tepecik, Batı Anadolu’nun tarihi coğrafyasında Arzawa/Mira ülkesinin güneyinde, doğal yollara hakim, güçlü bir merkez konumuyla bölge arkeolojisine katkı sağlamaktadır.

🔖

Cite This Article

Günel, S. (2021). Understanding the Urbanization Process in Çine-Tepecik’s Cultural Development. Anadolu Araştırmaları, Issue: 24. https://doi.org/10.26650/anar.2021.24.945531

📄 Full Text PDF Viewer

📄

PDF görüntüleyici hazırlanıyor...

References (79)

  1. J. (2015). Textile tools from Thebes, mainland Greece. E. Andersson-Strand & M.-L. Nosch (Ed.) Tools, Textiles and Contexts, Investigating Textile Production in the Aegean and Eastern Mediterranean Bronze Age, (p. 279-292). Oxford: Oxford Books. google scholar
  2. Andersson-Strand, E. & Nosch, M.-L. (2015). Introduction to the CTR database. E. Andersson-Strand & M.-L. Nosch (Ed.) Tools, Textiles and Contexts, Investigating Textile Production in the Aegean and Eastern Mediterranean Bronze Age, (p. 145-151) Oxford: Oxford Books. google scholar
  3. Âstrom, P. (1966) Excavations at Kalopsidha andAyioslakovos in Cyprus, 1966. google scholar
  4. Âstrom, P. (1988). A Cypriot Cult Scene, Journal of Prehistoric Religio. II, 5-11. google scholar
  5. Aykurt, A. (2013). An Updated Assessment on Western Anatolian Middle Bronze Age Chronology in Light of Excavations of the Izmir Region. Colloquium Anatolicum XII, 37-77. google scholar
  6. Bevan, A. (2003). Reconstruction the role of Egyptian culture in the value regimes of the Bronze Age Aegean: stone vessels and their social contexts. R. Matthews & C. Roemer (Ed.), Ancient Perspectives on Egypt, (p. 57-73) London: UCL Press. google scholar
  7. Bevan, A. (2004). Emerging Civilized Values? The Consumption and Imitation of Egyptian Stone Vessels in EMII-MMI Crete and its Wider Eastern Mediterranean Context. J. C. Barrett & P. Halstead (Ed.), The Emergence of Civilisation Revisited, Sheffield studies in Aegean Archaeology, 6, (p. 107-126) Oxford: Oxbow Books. google scholar
  8. Bevan, A. (2007). Stone vessels and Values in the Bronze Age Mediterranean. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. google scholar
  9. Blegen, C. W., Caskey, J. L. & Rawson, M. (1953). Troy III. The Sixth Settlement. Princeton: Princeton University Press. google scholar
  10. Bruun-Lundgren, M., Andersson-Strand, E. & Hallager, B. P. (2015). Textile tolls from Khania, Crete, Greece. E. Andersson-Strand & M.-L. Nosch (Ed.) Tools, Textiles and Contexts, Investigating Textile Production in the Aegean and Eastern Mediterranean Bronze Age, (p. 197-206) Oxford: Oxford Books. google scholar
  11. Carter, E. & Campbell, S. (2000). Preliminary Report on the 1998 Season of Excavations at Domuztepe. 21. Kazı Sonuçları Toplantısı, Ankara: Kültür Bakanlığı Yayınları, 133-142. google scholar
  12. Carter, E., Campbell, S. & Gauld, S. (2003). Elusive Complexity: New Data from Late Halaf Domuztepe in South Central Turkey. Pale orient 29, 117-133. google scholar
  13. Carter, T., Contreras, D. A., Campeau, K. & Freund, K. (2016). Spherulites and Aspiring Elites: The Identification, Distribution, and Consumption of Giali Obsidian (Dodecanese, Greece). Journal of Mediterranean Archaeology, 29.1, 3-36. google scholar
  14. Carter, T. & Kilikoğlu, V. (2007). From Reactor to Royalty? Aegean and Anatolian Obsidians from Quartier Mu, Malia (Crete). Journal of Mediterranean Archaeology 20.1, 115-143. google scholar
  15. Christakis, K. S. (1999). Pithoi and food storage in Neopalatial Crete: A domestic perspective, World Archaeology 31, 1-20. google scholar
  16. Christakis, K. S. (2011). Pithoi and economy in LM IB state societies, T. M. Brogan & E. Hallager (Ed.), LM IB pottery relative chronology and regional differences, (p. 241-253) Athens: The Danish Institute at Athens. google scholar
  17. Crouwel, J. H. (2006). Late Mycenaean Pictorial Pottery a Brief Review. E. Rystedt ve B. Wells (Ed.), Pictorial pursuits. Figurative painting on Mycenaean and Geometric pottery (p. 15-22) Stockholm. google scholar
  18. Crouwel, J. H. (2007). Pictorial Pottery of LH III C Middle and its Antecedents. S. Deger - Jalkotzy & M. Zavadil (Ed.), LH III C Chronology and Synchronisms II LH III C Middle (p. 73-88) Wien. google scholar Dikaios, P. (1932). Les Cultes Prehistoriques Dans L’ile de Chypre. Syria 13, 345-354. google scholar
  19. Dikaios, P. (1938). The Excavations at Vounous-Bellapais in Cyprus, 1931-2. Archaeologia 88, 1-168. google scholar
  20. Erkanal, H. ve Şahoğlu, V. (2019). Liman Tepe (1992-). V. Şahoğlu, M. Şevketoğlu ve Y. H. Erbil (Ed.) Anadolu, Kültürlerin Bağlantısı. Başlangıcından Roma Dönemi Sonuna Kadar Eski Yakın Doğuda Ticaret ve Bölgelerarası İlişkiler / Connecting Cultures. Trade and Interconnections in the Ancient Near East from the Beginning until the End of the Roman Period, (s. 219-230) Ankara. google scholar
  21. Furumark, A. (1941). The Mycenaean Pottery. Analysis and Classification, Stockholm. google scholar
  22. Guzowska, M., Becks, R., Andersson-Strand, E., Cutler, J. & Nosch, M.-L. (2015). Textile tools from Troia, western Anatolia. E. Andersson-Strand & M.-L. Nosch (Ed.) Tools, Textiles and Contexts, Investigating Textile Production in the Aegean and Eastern Mediterranean Bronze Age, (p. 309-328) Oxford Books: Oxford. google scholar
  23. Günel, S. (1999a). Panaztepe II. M.Ö. 2. Bine Tarihlendirilen Panaztepe Seramiğinin Batı Anadolu ve Ege Arkeolojisindeki Yeri ve Önemi / Die Keramik von Panaztepe und ihre Bedeutung für Westkleinasien und die Âgais im 2. Jahrtausend, Ankara: Türk Tarih Kurumu Yayını. google scholar
  24. Günel, S. (1999b). S. Günel, “Vorbericht über die mittel- und spatbronzezeitliche Keramik vom Liman Tepe” Istanbuler Mitteilungen 49, 1999, 41-82. google scholar
  25. Günel, S. (2006). Çine-Tepecik Höyüğü 2004 Yılı Kazıları, 27. Kazı Sonuçları Toplantısı 1, Ankara: Kültür ve Turizm Bakanlığı Yayını, 19-28. google scholar
  26. Günel, S. (2007). Çine-Tepecik Höyüğü 2005 Yılı Kazıları, 28. Kazı Sonuçları Toplantısı 1, Ankara: Kültür ve Turizm Bakanlığı Yayını, 231-246. google scholar
  27. Günel, S. (2008). Çine-Tepecik Höyük 2006 Yılı Kazıları, 29. Kazı Sonuçları Toplantısı 1, Ankara: Kültür ve Turizm Bakanlığı Yayını, 73-90. google scholar
  28. Günel, S. (2009). Çine-Tepecik 2007 Yılı Kazıları, 30. Kazı Sonuçları Toplantısı 1, Ankara: Kültür ve Turizm Bakanlığı Yayını, 227-240. google scholar
  29. Günel, S. (2010a). Mycenaean cultural impact on the Çine (Marsyas) plain, southwest Anatolia: the evidence from Çine-Tepecik, Anatolian Studies, 60, 2010, 25-49. google scholar
  30. Günel, S. (2010b). 2008 Yılı Çine-Tepecik Kazıları, 31. Kazı Sonuçları Toplantısı 1, Ankara: Kültür ve Turizm Bakanlığı Yayını, 459-473. google scholar
  31. Günel, S. (2011a). Ein Terrakotta-Modell aus Çine-Tepecik, Istanbuler Mitteilungen 61, 7-20. google scholar
  32. Günel, S. (2011b). Çine-Tepecik 2009 Yılı Kazıları, 32. Kazı Sonuçları Toplantısı 1, Ankara: Kültür ve Turizm Bakanlığı Yayını, 69-80. google scholar
  33. Günel, S. (2012). Çine-Tepecik 2010 Yılı Kazıları, 33. Kazı Sonuçları Toplantısı, Ankara: Kültür ve Turizm Bakanlığı Yayını, 19-37. google scholar
  34. Günel, S. (2013). Çine-Tepecik 2011 Yılı Kazıları, 34. Kazı Sonuçları Toplantısı, Ankara: Kültür ve Turizm Bakanlığı Yayını, 377-386. google scholar
  35. Günel, S. (2014a). New Contributions regarding Prehistoric Cultures in Meander Region: Çine-Tepecik, B. Horejs ve M. Mehofer (Ed.), Western Anatolia before Troy. Proto-Urbanisation in the 4th millennium BC?, (s. 83-103) Wien. google scholar
  36. Günel, S. (2014b). Çine-Tepecik 2012 Yılı Kazıları, 35. Kazı Sonuçları Toplantısı, Ankara: Kültür ve Turizm Bakanlığı Yayını, 111-123. google scholar
  37. Günel, S. (2015a). Çine-Tepecik: New Contributions on Late Bronze Age Cultures in Western Anatolia. N. Chr. Stampolidis, Ç. Maner & K. Kopanias (Ed.), NOSTOI. Indigenous Culture, Migration, Integration in the Aegean Islands, Western Anatolia during the Late Bronze Age-Early Iron Age, (p. 607-626) İstanbul: Koç Üniversitesi Yayınları. google scholar
  38. Günel, S. (2015b), Ein Zentrum mit interregionalen Beziehungen in Westanatolien in der Bronzezeit: Çine-Tepecik/Bronz Çağında Batı Anadolu’da Bölgelerarası Bağlantıları Gösteren Bir Merkez: Çine-Tepecik. Ü. Yalçın & H. D. Bienert (Ed.), Anatolien-Brücke der Kulturen. Aktuelle Forschungen und Perspektiven in den deutsch-türkischen Altertumswissenschaften, (p. 205-216) Bonn: Grafisches Centrum Cuno GmbH&Co.KG. google scholar
  39. Günel, S. (2017a). The West: Archaeology. M. Weeden ve L. Z. Ullmann (Ed.), Hittite Landscape and Geography, Koninklijke BRILL, (p. 119-133) Leiden/Boston. google scholar
  40. Günel, S. (2017b). Çine-Tepecik Yerleşmesine Ait Figürlü Miken Seramiği. E. Kozal, M. Akar, Y. Heffron, Ç. Çilingiroğlu, T. E. Şerifoğlu, C. Çakırlar, S. Ünlüsoy & E. Jean (Ed.), Questions, Approaches, and Dialogues in Eastern Mediterranean Archaeology, Studies in Honor of Marie-Henriette and Charles Gates, (p. 439-455) Münster: Ugarit-Verlag. google scholar
  41. Günel, S. (2018a). The Prehistoric Culture in Çine-Tepecik and Its Contribution to the Archaeology of the Region. S. Dietz, F. Mavridis, Z. Tankosic & T. Takaoğlu (Ed.), Communities in Transition: The Circum-Aegean Area During the 5th and 4th Millennia BC, (p. 538-547) Oxford: Oxbow Books. google scholar
  42. Günel, S. (2018b). Die Beziehungen der agaisch-westanatolischen Kulturen im 2. Jt.v. Chr. Ü. Yalçın (Ed.), Anatolian Metal VIII, Eliten-Handwerk-Prestigegüter, (p.157-167) Bochum. google scholar Günel, S. (2018c). Çine-Tepecik 2016 Yılı Kazıları, 39. Kazı Sonuçları Toplantısı, 1. Ankara: Kültür ve Turizm Bakanlığı Yayını, s. 101-112. google scholar
  43. Günel, S. (2019a), Çine-Tepecik Kilia Tipi Figürinleri, F. Kulakoğlu, T. Yıldırım, T. Sipahi, V. Şahoğlu, H. L. Keskin (Ed.), Uğur Silistreli Anı Kitabı: Anadolu Arkeolojisi Üzerine Yazılar / In Memoriam Uğur Silistreli: Studies on Anatolian Archaeology, (p. 149-158).Ankara, google scholar
  44. Günel, S. (2019b). Batı Anadolu-Ege İlişkilerinin Çine-Tepecik Merkezine Yansımaları, Anadolu, Kültürlerin Bağlantısı. V. Şahoğlu, M. Şevketoğlu, Y. H. Erbil (Ed.), Başlangıcından Roma Dönemi Sonuna Kadar Eski Yakın Doğuda Ticaret ve Bölgelerarası İlişkiler / Connecting Cultures. Trade and Interconnections in the Ancient Near East from the Beginning until the End of the Roman Period (p.187-204), Ankara. google scholar
  45. Günel, S. (2020a). Karia Bölgesi’nin Kentleşme Sürecinde Çine-Tepecik Höyüğü/The Process of Urbanization in Caria in Light of Çine-Tepecik Mound. O. C. Henry & A. Belgin-Henry (Ed.), Karialılar Denizcilerden Kent Kuruculara / The Carians from Seafarers to City Builders, (p. 28-41) İstanbul: Yapı Kredi Yayınları. google scholar
  46. Günel, S. (2020b). Çine-Tepecik Tasvir Sanatında ‘Boğa Kültü’ Yansımaları. H. Gönül Yalçın ve O. Stegemeier (Ed.), MetallurgicaAnatolica, Festschrift für Ünsal Yalçın anlasslich seines 65. Geburtstag/ Ünsal Yalçın 65. Yaşgünü Armağan Kitabı, (s. 163-170) İstanbul: Ege Yayınları. google scholar
  47. Günel, S. & Herbordt, S. (2010). Ein hethitischer Siegelabdruck aus Çine-Tepecik. Archaologischer Anzeiger, 1-11. google scholar
  48. Günel, S. & Herbordt, S. (2014). Mykenische Kraterfragmente mit figürlichen Darstellungen und ein Siegelabdruck eines hethitischen Prinzen aus der spatbronzezeitlichen Siedlung von Çine-Tepecik. Archaologischer Anzeiger, 2014/1, 1-14. google scholar
  49. Güntner, W. (2000). Figürlich Bemalte Mykenische Keramik aus Tiryns, Tiryns XII. Mainz am Rhein. google scholar
  50. Hawkins, J. D. (1998). Tarkasnawa King of Mira ‘Tarkondemos’, Boğazköy Sealings and Karabel. Anatolian Studies 48, 1-31. google scholar
  51. Karageorghis, V. (1970). Two Religious Documents of the Early Cypriote Bronze Age, Report of the Department ofAntiquities. Cyprus, 10-13. google scholar
  52. Karageorghis, V. (1971). Chronique des fouilles et Decouvertes Archeologiques  Chypre en 1970. Bulletin de CorrespondanceHellenique 95, 335-432. google scholar
  53. Karageorghis, V. (1991). The Coroplastic Art ofAncient Cyprus I. Chalcolithic-Late Cypriote I. Nicosia. google scholar
  54. Kolankaya-Bostancı, N. (2018). Çine-Tepecik 2016 Yılı Yontmataş Endüstrisi. 33. Arkeometri Sonuçları Toplantısı 2, (s. 145-160) Ankara: Kültür ve Turizm Bakanlığı Yayınları. google scholar
  55. Kolankaya-Bostancı, N., Carter ve Weir, T. E. (2020). Çine-Tepecik Höyük Obsidiyen Tedarik ve Takas Sistemi. Hacettepe Üniversitesi, Edebiyat Fakültesi Dergisi, 37 (1), 83-95. google scholar
  56. Kouka, O. (2002). Siedlungsorganization in der Nord-und Ostagais wahrend der Frühbronzezeit (3. Jt. V.Chr.). Raden Westfalia. google scholar
  57. Lloyd, S. & Mellaart, J. (1955). Beycesultan Excavations: First Preliminary Report. Anatolian Studies 5, 39-92. google scholar
  58. Lloyd, S. & Mellaart, J. (1965). Beycesultan II: Middle Bronze Age Architecture and Pottery. London: The British Institute of Archaeology at Ankara. google scholar
  59. Maner, Ç. (2019). “Du sollst für die Ewigkeit bauen!” Untersuchungen zu hethitischen und mykenischen Befestigungen. Bonn: Verlag Dr. Rudolf Habelt GmbH. google scholar
  60. Mârtensson, L., Nosch, M.-L. & Andersson-Strand, E. (2009). Shape of Things: Understanding a Loom Weight. Oxford Journal ofArchaeology, 28:4, 373-398. google scholar
  61. Meiberg, L. G. (2011), Figural Motifs on Philistine Pottery and their Connections to the Aegean World, Cyprus and Coastal Anatolia. Ph. D. Dissertation, Pennsylvania: University of Pennsylvania. google scholar
  62. Meiberg, L. G. (2018). Decorative Motifs on Philistine Pottery and their Connections to Crete. I. Shai, J. R. Chadwick, L. Hitchcock, A. Dagan, C. McKinny & J. Uziel (Ed.), Âgypten undaltes Testament 90, Tell it in Gath Studies in the History and Archaeology of Israel, (p. 322-335) Münster: Zaphon google scholar
  63. Meriç, R. (2020). The Arzawa Lands. The Historical Geography of Izmir and Its Environs during Late Bronze Age in the Light of new Archaeological Research. TÜBA-AR 27, 151- 177. google scholar Mountjoy, P. A. (1999). Regional Mycenean Decorated Pottery. Rahden. google scholar
  64. Olofsson, L., Andersson-Strand E. & Nosch, M.-L. (2015), Experimental testing of Bronze Age textile tools. E. Andersson-Strand & M.-L. Nosch (Ed.) Tools, Textiles and Contexts, Investigating Textile Production in the Aegean and Eastern Mediterranean Bronze Age, (p. 75-100) Oxford: Oxford Books. google scholar
  65. Peltenburg, E. (1994). Constructing Authority: The Vounous Enclosure Model. Opuscula Atheniensia 20 (10), 157-162. google scholar
  66. Podzuweit, C. (1979). TrojanischeGefafformen der FrühbronzezeitinAnatolien, derÂgaisundangrenzenden Gebieten, Mainz am Rhein: Verlag Philipp von Zabern. google scholar
  67. Rahmstorf, L. (2005). Ethnicity and changes in weaving technology in Cyprus and the eastern Mediterranean in the 12th century BC. V. Karageorghis, H. Matthaus & S. Rogge (Ed.), Cyprus: Religion andSociety from the Late Bronze Age to the end of the Archaic Period. Proceedings of an International Symposium on Cypriote Archaeology, (p. 143-169) Erlangen. google scholar
  68. Rahmstorf, L., Siennicka, M., Andersson-Strand, E., Nosch, M.-L. & Cutler, J. (2015). Textile tools from Tiryns, mainland Greece. E. Andersson-Strand & M.-L. Nosch (Ed.) Tools, Textiles and Contexts, Investigating Textile Production in the Aegean and Eastern Mediterranean Bronze Age, (p. 267-278) Oxford: Oxford Books. google scholar
  69. Sarpaki, A., Weingarten, J., Macgillivray, J. A., Sackett, L. H., Driessen, J., Bridges, R. & Smyth, D. (1989). Excavations at Palaikastro, 1988, Annual of the British School at Athens, 84, 417-445. google scholar Schachner, A. (2012). Orta Anadolu’da Coğrafya ve Ekonomi: Hititlerin Bıçak Sırtındaki İmparatorluğu, Colloquium Anatolicum 11, 25-54. google scholar
  70. Shaw, J. W. & Shaw, M. C. (1993). Excavations at Kommos (Crete) during 1986-1992, Hesperia, 62, 129190. google scholar
  71. Slenczka, E. (1974). Figürlich Bemalte Mykenische Keramik aus Tiryns, Tiryns VII. Mainz am Rhein. google scholar
  72. Sowada, K. N. (2009). Egypt in the Eastern Mediterranean during the Old Kingdom: An Archaeological Perspective. Switzerland: Academic Press Fribourg. google scholar Süel, A. (1998). Ortaköy-Şapinuwa: Bir Hitit Merkezi, TÜBA-AR 1, 37-61. google scholar
  73. Şahoğlu, V. (2007). Çeşme-Bağlararası: A New Excavation in Western Anatolia, F. Felten, W. Gauss & R. Smetana (Ed.). Middle Helladic Pottery and Synchronisms. (p. 309-322) Vienna. google scholar
  74. Thumm-Doğrayan, D., Pavuk, P. & Pieni^zek, M. (2019). Economy and Storage Strategies at Troy, Country in the City. Agricultural Functions in Protohistoric Urban Settlements (Aegean and Western Mediterranean), D. Garcia, R. Orgeolet, M. Pomadere & J. Zurbach (Ed.), (p. 169-187) Archaeopress Archaeology. google scholar
  75. Vermeule, E. (1964). Greece in the Bronze Age. Chicago: The University of Chicago Press. google scholar
  76. Vlachopoulos, A. (2003). The Late Helladic III C,Grotta Phase' of Naxos. Its Synchronisms in the Aegean and Ist Non-Synchronisms in the Cyclades. S. Deger-Jalkotzy & M. Zavadil (Ed.). LH III C Chronology google scholar
  77. and Synchronisms. Proceedings of the International Workshop Held at the Austrian Academy of Sciences at Vienna, (p. 217-234) Wien. google scholar
  78. Voskos, I. & Knapp, A. B. (2008). Cyprus at the End of the Late Bronze Age: Crisis and Colonization or Continuity and Hybridization? American Journal of Archaeology, 112, 659-684. google scholar
  79. Vlachopoulos, A. (2003). The Late Helladic III C,Grotta Phase' of Naxos. Its Synchronisms in the Aegean and Ist Non-Synchronisms in the Cyclades. S. Deger-Jalkotzy & M. Zavadil (Ed.). LH III C Chronology google scholar