Journals / Colloquium Anatolicum / 2019 / Cilt: 18 - Sayı: 18

Demirçağ Anadolu’sunda Çocuk/Çocukluk Temsilleri Üzerine

Pages
183–208
DOI
—
🏛️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 this general frame, it has been argued in here that the representations of children gathered from various parts of the region have great potential to enrich our understanding on the cultural construction of childhood in Anatolia.

📌 3 Key Takeaways

🎯
Objective & Hypothesis:Together with the sex, gender and life course studies the evaluation of childhoodhas been a growing interestamong the archaeologists in the last few decades.
📊
Key Findings & Data:These studies have explored diverse aspects of chilhood such as education, work, socialization, experience of religion etc. through the archaeological, art historical and philolocigal datas to advance our understanding of childhood in antiquity.
💡
Conclusion & Impact:In this general frame, it has been argued in here that the representations of children gathered from various parts of the region have great potential to enrich our understanding on the cultural construction of childhood in Anatolia.
🔬Design:Research Article
📍Scope:Comprehensive Sample
⚙️Variables:Yaşam Seyri · Çocukluk · İkonografi

Abstract

Together with the sex, gender and life course studies the evaluation of childhoodhas been a growing interestamong the archaeologists in the last few decades. These studies have explored diverse aspects of chilhood such as education, work, socialization, experience of religion etc. through the archaeological, art historical and philolocigal datas to advance our understanding of childhood in antiquity. Hence, the present work joins to the current studies by focusing on the Anatolian cultural sphere of pre-persian Iron Age in terms of visual records of children that have remained untouched up to date. In this general frame, it has been argued in here that the representations of children gathered from various parts of the region have great potential to enrich our understanding on the cultural construction of childhood in Anatolia.

Özet

Cinsiyet, toplumsal cinsiyet ve yaşam seyri araştırmaları gibi çocukluk arkeolojisi de geçtiğimiz birkaç on-yıl içerisinde arkeologlar arasında dinamik bir araştırma sahasının filizlenmesine olanak sundu. Bu araştırmalar, arkeolojik, sanat tarihsel ve filolojik veriler aracılığıyla çocukluk mefhumuna odaklanarak eğitim, sosyalleşme, işgücü, dinsel yaşam gibi toplumsal alanın farklı kesitlerinde çocukların topluma katılım biçimlerine dair hali hazırdaki bilgilerimizin misliyle artmasını mümkün kıldılar. Sunulan çalışma bugüne değin ihmal edilmiş olan Demir Çağ Anadolu’sunun Pers-Öncesi dönemine ait görsel kayıtlar aracılığıyla söz konusu araştırma birikimine eklemlenmektedir. Burada, erken 1. binyıl Anadolu’sunun belli başlı sanat merkezlerinde açığa çıkarılmış farklı türdeki tasvir taşıyıcılar çocukluk temsilleri bağlamında bir araya getirilerek analiz edilmiştir.

🔖

Cite This Article

TİRYAKİ, S. (2019). Demirçağ Anadolu’sunda Çocuk/Çocukluk Temsilleri Üzerine. Colloquium Anatolicum, Cilt: 18 - Sayı: 18, 183–208. https://ajindex.com/articles/142577

📄 Full Text PDF Viewer

📄

PDF görüntüleyici hazırlanıyor...

References (12)

  1. Ackerman, S. 2003 S. “Women in Ancient Near East”, S. Richard (ed.), Near Eastern. A Reader, Eisenbraun: 150-156.
  2. Akurgal, E. 1992 “Zur Entstehung der ostgriechischen Klein- und Groß-plastik”, Istanbuller Mitteilungen42: 67–81.
  3. Albenda, P. 1983 “Western Asiatic Women in the Iron Age: Their Image Revealed”, The BiblicalArchaeologist 46/2: 82-88.
  4. Angel, J. L. 1972 “Ecology and Population in the East Mediterranean”, World Archaeology 4/1: 88-105. Ariês, P. 1962 Centuries of Childhood: A Social History of Family Life (Translated from French by R. Baldick), New York. Aro, S. 2003 “Art and Architecture”, H.C. Melchert (ed.), The Luwians, Leiden-Boston: 281-337.
  5. Asher, J.M – D. Sweeny “On Nakedness, Nudity and Gender in Egyptian and Mesopotamian Art”, S. Schroer (ed.), Images and Gender. Contribution to the Hermenutics of Reading Ancient Art (Orbis Biblicus et Orientalis 220), Fribourg/Göttingen: 125-176.
  6. Bachvarova, M.R. 2016 “Wisdom of Former Days: The Manly Hittite King and Foolish Kumarbi, Father of the Gods”, I. Zsolnay (ed.), Being a Man: Negotiating Ancient Constructs of Masculinity, London: 83-111.
  7. Bahrani, Z. 2018 Babil’in Kadınları. Mezopotamya’da Toplumsal Cinsiyet ve Temsil(Çev. S. Çalcı), İstanbul.
  8. Barnett, R.D. 1976 Sculptures from the North Palace of Ashurbanipal (668-327 B.C.), London. Barnett, R.D. – E. Bleibtreu – T. Geoffrey 1998 Sculptures from the Southwest Palace of Sennacherib at Niniveh, London: Bristish Museum Press Baxter, J. E. 2008 “The Archaeology of Childhood”, Annual Review of Anthropology 37: 159-175. -2015 “The Devil’s Advocate or Our Worst Case Scenario: The Archaeology of Childhood Without any Children”, G. Coşkunsu (ed.), The Archaeology of Childhood. Interdisciplinary Perspectives on an Archaeological Enigma, SUNY Series, The Institute for European and Mediterranean Archaeology Distinguished Monograph Series, Albany:19-35.
  9. Beaumont, L. 1994 “Constructing a Methodology for the Interpretation of Chilhood Age in Classical Athenaeian Iconography”, Archaeological Review from Cambridge (Perspectives on Children and Childhood)13/2: 81-96.
  10. Beckman, G. 2016 “Birth and Motherhood among the Hittites”, S.L.Budin – J.M. Turfa (eds.), Women in Antiquity. Real Women Across the World, New York: 319-328.
  11. Bleibtreu, E. 1987-1990 s.v. “Lotos”, Reallexicon der Assyrologie und Vorderasiatischen Archäologie, Band 6: 103-106.
  12. Bonatz, D. 2000 Das syro-hethitische Grabdenkmal. Untersuchungen zur Entstehung einer neuen Bildgattung im nordsyrisch-südost