Journals / Archivum Anatolicum-Anadolu Arşivleri / 2022 / Cilt: 16 - Sayı: 1

ATRIYA AND STRATONIKEIA IN THE LATE BRONZE AGE: SOME REMARKS ON CARIAN HISTORICAL GEOGRAPHY

YENİ ASUR İMPARATORLUĞU’NDA SARAY RÖLYEFLERİNİN VE ANITLARIN PROPAGANDA ARACI OLARAK KULLANIMI

Pages
185–223
Publication Date
2022-06-30
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)

When the routes followed by some Hittite Kings during their travels to the west, the arguments concerning the location of the cities within the Yatağan Plain and Çine (Marsyas) Creek Valley, and the archaeological findings combined, it is concluded that localizing Atriya within these areas is a reasonable proposal.

📌 3 Key Takeaways

🎯
Objective & Hypothesis:The evaluation of the Hittite and Luwian inscriptions that mention Western Anatolia, and the extended archaeological research on the Bronze Age have led to an increase in knowledge and arguments about the historical geography of Western Anatolia.
📊
Key Findings & Data:Among the ceramic samples of the Late Helladic III period found in the Stratonikeia territory, there has been added some other ceramic samples such as the ones found in the Tasavlu region in 2009, under the Heroon of Hierocles in the city center of Stratonikeia during the excavations in 2018, and in the Değirmendere region during the excavations by the Muğla Museum in 2018-2019.
💡
Conclusion & Impact:When the routes followed by some Hittite Kings during their travels to the west, the arguments concerning the location of the cities within the Yatağan Plain and Çine (Marsyas) Creek Valley, and the archaeological findings combined, it is concluded that localizing Atriya within these areas is a reasonable proposal.
🔬Design:Research Article
📍Scope:2009 Verileri
⚙️Variables:Yeni Asur İmparatorluğu · Propaganda · Rölyef

Abstract

The evaluation of the Hittite and Luwian inscriptions that mention Western Anatolia, and the extended archaeological research on the Bronze Age have led to an increase in knowledge and arguments about the historical geography of Western Anatolia. But the poor source of documents about Western Anatolia has made the research more challenging. It is known that one of the old names of the city of Stratonikeia, which is located on the Yatagan Plain in Muğla and is among the important cities of the region, is Idrias. It is suggested that Atriya can be localized within the territorium of Stratonikeia considering the phonetic similarity with Atriya mentioned in Hittite documents. This study aims to contribute to the arguments on this subject by evaluating some of the recent findings in Stratonikeia concerning the Late Bronze Age and the studies on historical geography. Among the ceramic samples of the Late Helladic III period found in the Stratonikeia territory, there has been added some other ceramic samples such as the ones found in the Tasavlu region in 2009, under the Heroon of Hierocles in the city center of Stratonikeia during the excavations in 2018, and in the Değirmendere region during the excavations by the Muğla Museum in 2018-2019. When the routes followed by some Hittite Kings during their travels to the west, the arguments concerning the location of the cities within the Yatağan Plain and Çine (Marsyas) Creek Valley, and the archaeological findings combined, it is concluded that localizing Atriya within these areas is a reasonable proposal.

Özet

MÖ 934-612 yılları arasında siyasi, askeri, ekonomik ve idari anlamda güçlü bir imparatorluk kuran Asurlular, başarılarını emperyalist ideolojilerini gerçekleştirmek için kullandıkları uygulamalar ve araçlara borçluydular. Bu unsurların başında propaganda araçları gelmektedir. Yazılı ve görsel materyallerden oluşan bu araçlar hâkim ideolojiyi yönetilen halka aktarmada ve düşmanlara Asur’un gücünü göstermek için etkili bir şekilde kullanmaktaydılar. Bu çalışmada etkili birer propaganda araçları olan rölyefler ve anıtlar ele alınacaktır. Yeni Asur kralları Yakındoğu’da güçlü bir devlet vücuda getirdikten sonra imar faaliyetlerini artırmış ve inşa ettikleri saraylarda bir imparatorluk ikonografyası yaratmaya önem vermişlerdir. Ayrıca askeri sefer düzenlenen uzak bölgelere ve Asur sınırlarına anıtlar dikmişlerdir. Asur nüfusunun ve düşman toplulukların büyük bir bölümünün okuma yazma bilmediği düşünüldüğünde görme duyusuna dayalı bu propaganda araçlarının mesajın tüm hedef kitleye ulaşmasında önemli bir yerde olduğu anlaşılmaktadır.

🔖

Cite This Article

TOPTAŞ, K. (2022). ATRIYA AND STRATONIKEIA IN THE LATE BRONZE AGE: SOME REMARKS ON CARIAN HISTORICAL GEOGRAPHY. Archivum Anatolicum-Anadolu Arşivleri, Cilt: 16 - Sayı: 1, 185–223. https://ajindex.com/articles/465690

📄 Full Text PDF Viewer

📄

PDF görüntüleyici hazırlanıyor...

References (16)

  1. Akyüz, Faruk. “Yeni Asur Devleti’nin Sürgün Politikası”, Eski Yakındoğu’da Sürgünler, İ. Albayrak (ed.), (Ankara: Bilgin Kültür Sanat, 2020): 129-180.
  2. Albayrak, İrfan. “Eski Yakındoğu’nun Sürgün Politikasına Genel Bir Bakış”, Eski Yakındoğu’da Sürgünler, İ. Albayrak (ed.), (Ankara: Bilgin Kültür Sanat, 2020): 1-14.
  3. Albenda, Pauline. “Asurnasirpal II Lion Hunt Relief BM124534”, Journal of Near Eastern Studies, 31/3, (1972). 167-178.
  4. Armağan, Ahsen. “Siyasal Bir İletişim Türü Olarak Propaganda”. İstanbul Üniversitesi İletişim Fakültesi Dergisi 9, (1999): 417-426.
  5. Arsev, Bektaş. Kamuoyu İletişim ve Demokrasi. (İstanbul: Bağlam Yayıncılık, 1996).
  6. Ataç, Mehmet Ali. The Mythology of Kingship in Neo-Assyrian Art. (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press,m 2010).
  7. Bahrani, Zainab, The Graven Image: Representation in Babylonia and Assyria: Archaeology, Culture, and Society. (Philadelphia: University of Pennsylvania Press. 2003).
  8. Barnett, Richard D. and Falkner, Margeret. The Sculptures of Asur-nasir-apli II (883–859 B.C.), Tiglathpileser III (745–727 B.C.) and Esarhaddon (681–669 B.C.) from the Central and South-West Palaces at Nimrud. (London: Trustees of the British Museum, 1962).
  9. Barnett, Richard D. Sculptures from the North Palace of Ashurbanipal at Nineveh (668- 627 B.C.). (London: 1976).
  10. Barnett, Richard D., Bleibtreu, Erika and Turner, Geoffrey, (1998). Sculptures from the Southwest Palace of Sennacherib at Nineveh. (London: 1998).
  11. Bedford, Peter R. “The Neo-Assyrian Empire”. in: I. Morris and W. Scheidel (eds.), The Dynamics of Ancient Empires: State Power from Assyria to Byzantium. (Oxford and New York: 2009): 30–65.
  12. Botta, Paul Emile and Flandin, Eugène. Monuments de Ninive, vols. I-II, (Paris: 1849). CDA: Black, Jeremy, Andrew George and Nicholas Postgate (eds.), A Concise Dictionary of Akkadian. (Wiesbaden: Harrassowitz Verlag, 2000).
  13. Chamaza, Galo W. Vera. Die Omnipotenz Aššurs: Entwicklungen in der Aššur-Theologie unter den Sargoniden Sargon II, Sanherib und Asarhaddon. AOAT 295. (Münster: Ugarit Verlag, 2002), 71-167.
  14. Collins, Paul “The development of the individual enemy in Assyrian art”, Notes in the History of Art, 25(3), (2006): 1-8.
  15. Collins, Paul. “The development of the Assyrian Reliefs”, MARQ Arqueologia y Museos 03, (2008): 81-91.
  16. Cooper, Jerrold S. “Divine Kingship in Mesopotamia, A Fleeting Phenomenon”, in: N. Brisch (ed.), Religion and Power-Divine Kingship in the Ancient World and Beyond, OIS 4, Chicago: Oriental Ins., 2008): 261-266. Coşku