Journals / Anadolu / 2013 / Sayı: 39

The transversal arrow heads

Keski ağızlı - yatay ok uçları

Journal
Anadolu
Pages
1–12
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)

Second, in recent years, despite the increase in the number of excavations that contain the Neolithic and Chalcolithic cultural layers in Turkey, the archaeologists should be aware of the fact that these layers and the pertinent assemblages are confined to a few excavation sites because of the existing applications of excavation strategies (e.g. sieve size and sieving systems).

📌 3 Key Takeaways

🎯
Objective & Hypothesis:The transverse (transversal) arrow heads which starting from the Epi-palaeolithic period and continued to Early Bronze Age I are one of the substantially interesting types of chipped stone tools.
📊
Key Findings & Data:This paper has two aims.
💡
Conclusion & Impact:Second, in recent years, despite the increase in the number of excavations that contain the Neolithic and Chalcolithic cultural layers in Turkey, the archaeologists should be aware of the fact that these layers and the pertinent assemblages are confined to a few excavation sites because of the existing applications of excavation strategies (e.g. sieve size and sieving systems).
🔬Design:Research Article
📍Scope:Comprehensive Sample
⚙️Variables:Domain Parameters

Abstract

The transverse (transversal) arrow heads which starting from the Epi-palaeolithic period and continued to Early Bronze Age I are one of the substantially interesting types of chipped stone tools. This paper has two aims. First, the transversal arrow heads that are not recognized very well even by most of the archaeologist in our country are to introduce a general sense. Second, in recent years, despite the increase in the number of excavations that contain the Neolithic and Chalcolithic cultural layers in Turkey, the archaeologists should be aware of the fact that these layers and the pertinent assemblages are confined to a few excavation sites because of the existing applications of excavation strategies (e.g. sieve size and sieving systems).

Özet

Keski ağızlı/yatay ok uçları Epi-Paleolitik Dönem’den başlayarak Erken Bronz Çağı I’e kadar devam eden oldukça ilginç yontmataş alet tiplerinden biridir. Bu makalenin iki amacı bulunmaktadır. Bunlardan birincisi, ülkemizde çoğu arkeolog tarafından dahi çok iyi tanınmayan keski ağızlı/yatay ok uçlarını genel anlamda tanıtmaktır. İkincisi, Türkiye’de son yıllarda Neolitik ve Kalkolitik kültür katlarını içeren kazılar sayıca artmasına rağmen, bu tür buluntuların bir iki kazı yeri ile sınırlı kalmasının uygulanan kazı sistemlerinden (örneğin; elek boyutu ve eleme sistemi) kaynaklandığına arkeologların dikkatini çekmektir.

🔖

Cite This Article

TAŞKIRAN, Z. F. (2013). The transversal arrow heads. Anadolu, Sayı: 39, 1–12. https://ajindex.com/articles/144103

📄 Full Text PDF Viewer

📄

PDF görüntüleyici hazırlanıyor...

References (1)

  1. Ambrose 2002 S. H. Ambrose, “Small Things Remembered: Origins of Early Microlithic Industries in Sub – Saharan Afri- ca”, Thinking Small: Global Perspectives on Microlithization, (Eds. Robert G. Elston – Steven L. Kuhn), Archeologi- cal Papers of the American Anthropological Association 12, 2002, 9-30. Aydın 2010 Y. Aydın, “Karain Mağarası B Gözü Holosen I-II-III Seviyelerinin Yontmataş Endüstrileri”, Ankara Üniver- sitesi, Yayınlanmamış Yüksek Lisans Tezi (2010). Barkai – Gopher 1999 R. Barkai – A. Gopher, “The Last Neolithic Flint Industry: A Sudy of the technology, typology and so- cial implications of the Lithic Assemblage from Nahal Zehora I, A Wadi Raba (Pottery Neolithic) Site in the Menashe Hills, Israel”, Journal of The Israel Prehistoric Society 29, 1999, 41-122. Bar - Yosef ve diğ. 1971 O. Bar – Yosef – F. Burian – E. Friedman, Transversal Arrowheads from the Coastal Plain, Mitekufat Haeven 10, 1971, 22-24. Bernbeck ve diğ. 2002 R. Bernbeck – S. Pollock – A. G. C. Gessner – R. Costello – S. K. Costello – S. K. M. Foree – M. Gleba – M. Goodwin – P. Horan – S. Lepinski – C. Nakamura – S. Niebuhr – R. Shoocongdej, “Preliminary Report on the 2000 Season at Fıstıklı Höyük”, Ilısu ve Kargamış Baraj Gölleri Altında Kalacak Arkeolojik ve Kültür Varlıklarını Kurtarma Projesi 2000 Yı- lı Çalışmaları, (Eds. N. Tuna – J. Öztürk – J. Velibeyoğlu) (2002) 1-40. Bjerck 2008 H. B. Bjerck, “Norwegian Mesolithic Trends: A Re- view”, Mesolithic Europe (2008) 60-106. Blankholm 2008 H. P. Blankholm, “Southern Scandinavia”, Mesolithic Europe (2008) 107-131. Bostancı 1959 E. Y. Bostancı, “Researches on the Mediterranean Coast of Anatolia a New Palaeolithic Site at Beldibi Near Antalya”, Anadolu/Anatolia 4, 1959, 129-178. Ciccone 1993 A. Ciccone, “L’industria Mesolitica Della Grotta Azzura Di Samatorza: Scavi 1982”, Atti Della Società Per La Preistoria e Protostoria Della Regione Friuli-Venezia Giulia VII, 1992, 1993, 13-45. Clark 1975 J. D. Clark, “Interpretations of Prehistoric Technology from Ancient Egyptian and Other Sources. Part II: Prehistoric Arrow Forms in Africa as Shown by Sur- viving Examples of the Traditional Arrows of the San Bushmen”, Paléorient 3, 1975, 127-150. Ferrari – Pessina 1992 A. Ferrari – A. Pessina, “Considerazioni Sul Primo Popolamento Neolitico Dell’area Friulana”, Atti Della Società Per La Preistoria e Protostoria Della Regione Friuli- Venezia Giulia VI, 1987-1991, 1992, 23-59. Franco 2003 C. Franco, “Il Sito Castelnoviano Di Fontana de La