See discussions, stats, and author profiles for this publication at: https://www.researchgate.

net/publication/311457333

The Paleolithic and Epi-paleolithic of Anatolia

Article · November 2016

CITATIONS READS

7 4,541

1 author:

Harun Taskiran
Ankara University
41 PUBLICATIONS 384 CITATIONS

SEE PROFILE

All content following this page was uploaded by Harun Taskiran on 07 December 2016.

The user has requested enhancement of the downloaded file.

 Anatolian Metal VII
Z e i t s c h r i f t f ü r K u n s t u n d K u l t u r im B e r g ba u

Beiheft 31

Anatolian
Metal VII
Hrsg.: Ünsal Yalçın

Beiheft
31
Anatolian Metal VII
 Anatolian Metal VII
Anatolien und seine Nachbarn vor 10.000 Jahren
Anatolia and neighbours 10.000 years ago

Herausgeber
Ünsal Yalçın

Bochum 2016
Montanhistorische Zeitschrift

Der ANSCHNITT. Beiheft 31

= Veröffentlichungen aus dem Deutschen Bergbau-Museum Bochum, Nr. 214

Die Tagung wurde durchgeführt mit freundlicher Unterstützung von

Gefördert vom Land NRW

Titelbild:

Alacahöyük gehört zu den wichtigsten prähistorischen Städten in Anatolien. Besonders berühmt sind die
frühbronzezeitlichen Fürstengräber mit ihren zahlreichen Grabbeigaben aus Gold, Silber und Bronze,
darunter die frühesten Eisenfunde Anatoliens. Zum Grabinventar zählten auch zahlreiche bronzene Son-
nenstandarte und Tierfiguren. Im Vordergrund (links oben) ist eine dieser Sonnenstandarte zu sehen. Sie
dient heute als Symbol des Kultur- und Tourismusministeriums der Türkei.
Im Hintergrund sieht man Aşağı Pinar. Überblick über die Grabungsfläche im Nordosten der Siedlung
(Foto S. Dereli, 2011). Im Vordergrund (links unten) eine menschengestaltige Figuralplastik der Phase
AP 7 aus Aşağı Pinar (Foto S. Dereli).

Bibliografische Information der Deutschen Nationalbibliothek

Die Deutsche Nationalbibliothek verzeichnet diese Publikation in der Deutschen Nationalbibliografie;
detaillierte bibliografische Daten sind im Internet über http://dnb.d-nb.de abrufbar.

Redaktion
Ünsal Yalçın
H. Gönül Yalçın

Satz, Layout, Titelgestaltung

Oliver Stegemeier
Mitja Musberg

Druck
Blömeke Druck SRS GmbH, Herne

ISBN 3-937203-81-8
ISBN 978-3-937203-81-2
Dieser Band ist Mehmet Özdoğan gewidmet
Inhaltsverzeichnis

Vorwort 9

Harald Hauptmann
Mehmet Celal Özdoğan und die Prähistorische Archäologie Anatoliens 11

Hermann Parzinger
Anatolien und die Neolithisierung Alteuropas 19

Trevor Watkins
Anatolia as a Microcosm of the Neolithic Process 35

Harun Taşkıran
The Paleolithic and Epi-paleolithic of Anatolia 43

Oliver Dietrich, Jens Notroff, Lee Clare, Christian Hübner, Çiğdem Köksal-Schmidt & Klaus Schmidt (†)
Göbekli Tepe, Anlage H.
Ein Vorbericht beim Ausgrabungsstand von 2014 53

Clemens Lichter
Burial Customs of the Neolithic in Anatolia – An Overview 71

Svend Hansen
Early Neolithic Figurines in Aşağı Pınar, Turkish Thrace 85

Ivan Gatsov & Petranka Nedelcheva

Earliest Lithic Material from Keçiçayırı Site, central NW Anatolia and Barcın Höyük, NW Anatolia 95

Ünsal Yalçın
Beton vor 10.000 Jahren?
Zu den neolithischen Fußböden von Aşıklı Höyük und Musular, Kappadokien 99

Yutake Miyake
Origins of Pottery as Technological Innovation in Southwest Asia 115

Nerissa Russell
Anatolian Neolithic Bone Tools 125
Eylem Özdoğan
Neolithic Beads of Anatolia: An Overview 135

H. Gönül Yalçın
Neolithische Stempel aus Anatolien 153

Jak Yakar
Symbols and Abstract Motifs in Neolithic Art: More than Just Fanciful Aesthetic Designs? 165

Stephan Kroll
Neolithisation in North-Western Iran 179

Nigel Goring-Morris & Anna Belfer-Cohen

The Appearance of the Neolithic in the Levant: Sudden? Gradual? And Where From? 185

Özlem Çevik & Eşref Abay

Neolithisation in Aegean Turkey
Towards a More Realistic Reading 199

Fokke Gerritsen & Rana Özbal

Barcın Höyük and the pre-Fikirtepe Neolithisation of the Eastern Marmara Region 211

Necmi Karul
Die Entwicklung des Prähistorischen Siedlungsschemas in der südlichen Marmara-Region 221

Juraj Pavuk
Das balkanische Neolithikum als autonome Kultureinheit 233

Alexander Gorelik, Andrej Cybrij & Viktor Cybrij

Kaukasisch-Vorderasiatische Elemente im Frühneolithikum des Unteren Dons 255

Jens Lüning
Geburt aus dem Widerspruch: Die Entstehung der Bandkeramik aus ihrer Mutterkultur Starčevo 273

Mehmet Özdoğan 290

CV
Publikationen Mehmet Özdoğan

Autorenliste 319
Harun Taşkıran
The Paleolithic and Epi-paleolithic of Anatolia
Recently, our knowledge about Anatolian Neolithic is
increasing rapidly with data which was obtained from
the new excavations and research in Turkey1. Anatolia
is not only very rich in terms of Neolithic but also in
terms of Paleolithic cultures. Based on the rich and
various Neolithic cultures in Anatolia we can also
deduce a strong cultural Paleolithic tradition. As it is
well known Anatolia is located at the intersection
point of three continents and a very rich land in terms
of Paleolithic cultures. Although the reasons of this
richness may be numerous, I would like to mention
four of the most important ones:
• Anatolia was not under the direct impact of the
glaciers in Pleistocene.
• The environmental and climatic condition in
Anatolia in Pleistocene was very suitable for
Paleolithic man and the environment provided
plenty of game.
• Anatolia was rich in terms of caves and rock-
shelters used as shelters by Paleolithic man.
• Anatolia has rich raw material sources such as
silex, basalt and obsidian used for the tool-mak-
ing by Paleolithic man.
Even these four points that I tried to explain above
would be sufficient to show us that Anatolia was rich
in Paleolithic cultures.
The first Paleolithic find in Anatolia is a biface. This
Acheulian biface was found by J.E. Gautier in old
terraces of Euphrates in Birecik district, in the province
of Şanlıurfa in South East Anatolia in 1894 (Chantre
1898: 132). This biface is very significant in terms of
being the first find that was attested to the Paleolithic
Ages of Anatolia.
Since 1894, nearly 120 years has passed. During these
120 years the pace of Paleolithic excavations and the
surveys in Anatolia have been rather slow. It is
necessary to evaluate these 120 years in consideration
of three different periods.
1st Period (between 1894 and 1940)2
This period can be summarized in 10 steps:
1. This is the stage of crawling for Paleolithic of
Anatolia.
2. Etiyokuşu was the first and only Paleolithic exca-
vation of this period.
3. There were no cave excavations except from
Kızılkaya (Haymana-Ankara), Ellice (Felahiye-
Kayseri) and İnönü (Eskişehir) caves.
4. In this time only surveys were made.
5. There was not a specific goal nor a system for
excavations and surveys.
6. Even if some Turkish researchers were active at
the the end of this period, it is obvious that
generally it was foreign researchers who were
engaged.
7. Most of them are professionals such as geologists,
anthropologists and geographers. You may not
come across a real prehistorian except some of
them.
8. The collected tools are survey finds. Most of them
belong to Lower Paleolithic and only a few belong
to Middle and Upper Paleolithic period.
9. Most of the research is limited to some big
provinces of Anatolia and their environs.
10. As a summary, researches for this first period have
never passed beyond the finds of chipped stone
tools dated to the Paleolithic period in Turkey.
2nd Period (between 1940 and 1980)
The Second Period can be summed up in 10 steps
too:
1. Researches have been widened in all parts of
Anatolia.
2. Not only the surveys but also the excavations in
caves and rock shelters have been started.
3. The significance of cave excavations especially
in Paleolithic studies has been recognized.
43
Harun Taşkıran

4. Cave excavations have objectives but still far

away from modern excavation systems.
5. Excavations have been executed mostly as test
pits or with the aim of a first exploration.
6. Excavation data is mostly insufficient.
Documentation is incomplete.
7. Cave excavations are mostly observed in
Mediterranean Region, especially around Antalya
and Hatay provinces.
8. In cave excavations, analysis regarding the abso-
lute dating is incomplete.
9. The absence of interdisciplinary studies in
excavations is also a crucial insufficiency.
10. The effectiveness of the foreign researchers and
the non-professionals have been decreased;
Turkish researchers start to act, among them Prof.
Dr. İ. Kılıç Kökten is in particular prominent.

3rd Period (1980-2013)

In this period Paleolithic excavations and surveys in
Anatolia start in real terms. Some of the significant
studies made in this third period are as follows:

Actually we can say that the first systematic surface

investigations or surveys started with Keban (Kökten Fig. 1: Cordiform biface which found on the old terraces of Euphra-
1971a; 1971b; 1974; 1976) and Lower Euphrates tes in Karkamış Dam Lake Area (Foto H. Taşkıran).
Projects and in Euphrates Basin. In addition to the
contributions of Mehmet Özdoğan to Neolithic, it is
undeniable that he had also made important
contributions to Paleolithic.In the scope of Lower
Euphrates in 1977, Mr. Özdoğan conducted extensive
surveys, thus numerous Paleolithic open-air sites and
finding spots have been identified (Özdoğan 1977).
Most of these finding spots yielded Lower and Middle
Paleolithic finds and a few of them presented finds
belonging to Upper Paleolithic.

In 1979, another surface survey was conducted both

in the area of Karakaya and Atatürk dams with the
partnership of Ankara and Tübingen University within
the framework of Lower Euphrates Project (Yalçınkaya
et al. 1987). As a result of these surveys, it was decided
to conduct excavations in Şehremuz Tepe determined
by Mehmet Özdoğan in 1977. The excavations in
Şehremuz Tepe carried out with the corporation of
the same universities in 1982 illustrate the first
Paleolithic excavations in Anatolia where modern
methods have been used and interdisciplinary studies
have been performed (Albrecht et al. 1984).

In this context we may emphasize that the Middle

Euphrates in southeastern part of Turkey, where an
Acheulian biface tool also has been found in 1894, is
the richest region in terms of Paleolithic cultures in
Anatolia. Of course dams settled on Euphrates and Fig. 2: Micoquian biface which found in the Karkamış Dam Lake
the surveys conducted in the flood zone of the dams Area (Foto H. Taşkıran).

44
 The Paleolithic and Epi-paleolithic of Anatolia

have contributed much to identifying the richness of

the Paleolithic cultures. Moreover, Paleolithic surveys
that I carried out in the flood zone of Karkamış dam
that is recently established on Euphrates has once
again confirmed the richness of Euphrates Basin in
terms of Paleolithic Age. Within the scope of this
project, nearly 70 Paleolithic finding spots have been
detected. Most of these spots belong to the Lower
(Fig.1-2) and Middle Paleolithic Periods. Finds that
may belong to Epipaleolithic period have also been
found in some of these finding spots. However, no
finds or finding spots belonging to the Upper
Paleolithic have been noticed (Taşkıran 2002a; 2002b;
Taşkıran & Kartal 1999; 2001).

Despite the richness of Euphrates Basin, the Paleolithic

potential of the Tigris Basin has not been known until
recently. Paleolithic survey carried out under my
supervision in Ilısu Dam lake area between 2001 and
2008 has shown that, considering the Paleolithic ages,
Tigris Basin is also as rich as Euphrates Basin. Hereby
nearly 100 Paleolithic finding spots have been
identified (Taşkıran 2006; 2007; 2008; 2013; Taşkıran
et al. 2005; Taşkıran & Kartal 2003; 2004a; 2004b;
2008; 2009; 2010; 2011). Most of them belong to the
Lower (Fig.3) and Middle Paleolithic periods, as in the
Euphrates basin.There is not a clear Upper Paleolithic
in Tigris Basin either. The latest surveys undertaken
in Tigris Basin have once again shown that in terms
of Paleolithic cultures the southeastern part is the
richest region of Anatolia.

A very significant center is Dursunlu not because of

the methods used for the excavations but due to their
results. Dursunlu, near Konya Akşehir in Central
Anatolia is the oldest Lower Paleolithic site in Anatolia
providing a date in nearly 1 million years BP (Güleç
et al. 1999). Rich faunal remains have been found in
an old lignite pit. Among them thousands of bones
belonging to birds are evident. On these bones cut-
marks have been observed. In addition to faunal
records, basic lithic artifacts / chipped stone tools
made mostly from white quartz are dated to the Lower
Paleolithic Period that are attested to Homo erectus
(Güleç et al. 2009). The dominance of flake industry
has been observed here. Industries including biface
tools cannot be seen.
One of the oldest settlements of Anatolia Kaletepe
Stream 3 is located on the eastern hillside of a
volcanic mountain called Göllüdağ near Kömürcü in
Niğde (Central Anatolia). It has been discovered during
a survey conducted by L. Slimak in 2000. During the
archeological excavations conducted between the
years of 2000 and 2006, XII archeological layers with
a total thickness of 8 m have been discovered in two
section called lower and upper trenches. Kaletepe
Stream 3 is one of the oldest sites, displaying an in-
Fig. 3: The amygdaloid biface from Tigris Basin (Foto H. Taşkıran).
situ sequence from Acheulian to Mousterian Period
dating back about 1.000.000-160.000 BP in Central
Anatolia (Slimak et al. 2008).
In the Marmara Region the most significant Paleolithic
site is Yarımburgaz cave where excavations have also been
carried out. It is located 22 km west of İstanbul, 1,5 km
north of Küçükçekmece Lake. It consists of two cavities
called lower and upper caves.
The cave was introduced to the scientific world
because of its geology and speleological importance
for the first time in mid-19th century. The significance
of the cave in terms of prehistoric archaeology has
been identified during an exploration conducted by
Ş. Aziz Kansu in 1959. Here excavations have been
carried out within three cycles. The first phase of the
excavations was carried out by I. Kılıç Kökten in the
entrance of the lower cave in 1963 (Kökten 1963).
Later on, the cave has been investigated more
systematically by dividing it into several plan squares.
The excavations were conducted by Ş. A. Kansu, I. K.

45
Harun Taşkıran

Kökten and N. Dolunay between 1964 and 1965

(Kansu 1972). According to the excavations, it has been
stated that the cave was settled during Byzantine,
Chalcolithic and Middle Paleolithic periods.

The second phase of the excavations have been

carried out under the supervision of Prof. Dr. Mehmet
Özdoğan in 1986 (Özdoğan et al. 1991). The
stratigraphy of Özdoğan has yielded Byzantine,
Chalcolithic, Upper Paleolithic/Epipaleolithic, Middle
Paleolithic and Lower Paleolithic periods respectively.
The third phase of the excavations has been conducted
by Prof. Dr. Güven Arsebük and Prof. Dr. F. Clark Howell
between the years of 1988-1990 (Kuhn et al. 1998).
In this last cycle, the stratigraphy of the second period
has not been significantly changed. The Uranium- Fig. 5: The general view of Karain Cave from east (Archive of Karain
Thorium dating yielded 392.000 BP (Arsebük & excavation).
Özbaşaran 1999).

Turkish Thrace is much poorer than Anatolia in terms

of Lower Paleolithic sites and finding spots. However,
some uncertain sites of the Lower Paleolithic period
such as Balıtepe, Kuştepe and Yatak have been
discovered in recent years (Dinçer & Slimak 2007).
The pebble tools are dominating at these finding
spots (Fig.4). The only and definitive site dated to the
Lower Paleolithic Period in Thrace stays Yarımburgaz
Cave. The finds of the Lower Paleolithic consist of
pebble tools/choppers and chopping tools on one
side, denticulated and notched tools on the other side.
Bifaces and Levallois flaking are not evident in
Yarımburgaz Cave (Kuhn et al. 1996).
The first place that comes to mind, when the subject
is Paleolithic of Anatolia, is Karain Cave (Fig.5). Karain
Cave plays a crucial role in the establishment of the
Paleolithic chronology of Anatolia. This cave provides
a cultural sequence of Lower, Middle, Upper and
Epipaleolithic Ages that appear in deposits of a
thickness for nearly 11. Moreover, there is a continuous
settlement during the Late Neolithic, Chalcolithic,
Early Bronze Age and Roman Periods. Therefore Karain
Cave is not only very significant for Anatolia but also
for the whole world.

Fig. 4: Chopper from Balıtepe in Thrace Region (Foto B. Dinçer). Fig. 6: The entrance of Karain E cavity (Archive of Karain excavation).

46

Fig. 7: The Holocene and Pleistocene deposits of Karain B cavity
(Archive of Karain excavation).
The cave was found by Prof. Dr. İ. Kılıç Kökten in the
second period defined above in 1946 and excavated
until 1973 by himself as well (Kökten 1953; 1955).
Since 1985 the excavations have been continued in
E and B cavities (Fig.6-7) under the supervision of
Prof. Dr. Işın Yalçınkaya with the participation of
several international teams. The aim of the excavations
is to identify the techno-cultural and chrono-
statigraphic structure of the cave by using new
methods with the help of interdisciplinary studies,
thus laying the foundation of chronology for the
Paleolithic of Anatolia. In the new excavations, Lower
Paleolithic Tayacian, Clactonian, Acheulian, Middle
Paleolithic Proto-Charentian, Charentian (Fig.8) and
Karain Type Mousterian (Fig.9), Upper Paleolithic
Aurignacian (Fig.10) and Epipaleolithic cultures have
Fig. 8: Massive side scrapers, Charentian Type Mousterian (Archive
of Karain excavation).
The Paleolithic and Epi-paleolithic of Anatolia
Fig. 9: Mousterian point and side scraper, Karain Type Mousterian
(Archive of Karain excavation).
been identified (Yalçınkaya et al. 1993; Otte et al.
1995). The continuous archaeological sequence of
Karain is put between 500.000 and 15.500 BP. Middle
Paleolithic levels yielded also some fossil remains of
the Neanderthal man.
Üçağızlı Cave is the best site reflecting Upper
Paleolithic Period in Anatolia. This cave was discovered
and first excavated by A. Minzoni-Déroche in the late
1980s (Minzoni-Déroche 1992). Located in the borders
of Hatay Province in Southern Anatolia, the cave lies
near the sea with an altitude of 18 m. It is situated
very close to the border of Syria.
The oldest Upper Paleolithic layers found in Üçağızlı
cave show a tendency to Initial Upper Paleolithic
Fig. 10: The carinated end scrapers, Aurignacian (Archive of Karain
excavation).
47
Harun Taşkıran
which is well known from Ksar Akil in Lebanon. The
lithic technology presents the combination of Middle
and Upper Paleolithic assets. Upper Paleolithic forms
such as end scrapers, burin and retouched blades,
Levallois flake and points have been observed all
together. Bone tools and decorated objects have also
been found at this level dated in 41.000-39.000 BP.
Early Upper Paleolithic layers are similar to Ahmarian.
The lithic assemblage has been characterized by
bipolar prismatic blade technology. Bone tools and
shells processed as decorative objects are highly
predominant at this level dated in 33.000 and 28.000
BP (Kuhn et al. 2009).
In the southwestern corner of the cave, in a very small
area, micro-Gravette points have been observed at
the Epipaleolithic level. The lithic industry dating back
to 17.530±140 BP is similar to Early Kebaran phase
of the central and southern Levant3.
The only place providing all stages of Anatolian
Epipaleolithic Chronology is Öküzini Cave (Fig.11). It
is located 1,5 km northeast of Karain Cave. This cave
was discovered and excavated by Kökten in 1956.
During the excavations of Kökten (1959) a stratigraphy
covering the Upper Paleolithic, Neolithic, Chalcolithic,
and the Early Bronze Age was identified.
Between 1989 and 1999, modern and systematic
excavations have been conducted under the
supervision of Prof. Dr. Işın Yalçınkaya with the
contribution of an international team (Yalçınkaya et
al. 1995). In Öküzini 60 14C samples provided new
absolute dates thus the stratigraphy of Kökten has
been completely changed (Otte et al. 2003). In recent
excavations four archaeological phases have been
identified. Three of them belong to th Epipaleolithic
period (Fig.12). In the fourth and last phase, in addition
to Epipaleolithic period finds belonging to the Late/
Early Neolithic and Roman Period have been brought
into the light. The cave was used as a cemetery after
the Epipaleolithic period. According to C14 results the
Fig. 11: The general view of Öküzini Cave (Archive of Öküzini exca-
vation).
48
tombs can be dated between 7000- 5000 BC (Kartal
& Erek 2002).
Another Epipaleolithic settlement excavated recently
is Direkli Cave located in the vicinity of Kahramanmaraş.
It was discovered and excavated by Prof. Dr. İ. Kılıç
Kökten (1961) in 1958 for the first time. New and
systematic excavations have been conducted under
the supervision of Dr. C. Merih Erek since 2007. The
5th and the 7th layers of Direkli Cave yielded a similar
culture like Epipaleolithic Early Natufian. 90% of the
lithic industry is composed of lunates. The calibrated
radio carbon dating of the level 7 provides 10.730±42
and 8915±149 BC (Erek 2012). This absolute date is
corresponding to Late Natufian phase of the Near
East.
Fig. 12: The microlithic tools from Epipaleolithic layers of Öküzini
Cave (Archive of Öküzini excavation).
As a summary, the excavations and investigations of
the third period made a great contribution to the
establishment of the Paleolithic chronology in
Anatolia. Today most of the Paleolithic cultures seen
and defined in Europe, the Near East and Taurus-
Zagros Mountains have also been discovered in
Anatolia. Especially Lower and Middle Paleolithic
cultures are widespread in Anatolia and can be
detected mostly in every region of Anatolia. In Anatolia,
we can see both Lower Paleolithic including flake
cultures such as Tayacian and Clactonian and cultures
of biface tools such as Acheulian and Micoquian.
Middle Paleolithic Mousterian culture has been
observed especially in Mediterranean, South East,
Central and Western Black Sea Regions of Anatolia
both at the open-air sites and in caves.
Recent excavations have also shown that Epipaleolithic
cultures are both rich and common in Anatolia.
Moreover in Southeastern Anatolia, Epipaleolithic
marks have been observed in the lowest layer of pre-

pottery Neolithic settlements such as Hallan Çemi
and Körtik Tepe. Despite the abundance in terms of
Lower, Middle and Epipaleolithic Periods, we cannot
state the same richness for the Upper Paleolithic
Period in Anatolia.
Upper Paleolithic cultures have only been observed
in the deposits of Karain B and Üçağızlı cave. It is
difficult to recognize the Upper Paleolithic industries
on the surface at the open air sites. On the other hand,
Runnels and Özdoğan had pointed out the existence
of Aurignacien of the Upper Paleolithic Period in the
coastline of the Black Sea (Runnels & Özdoğan 2001).
The general features of this industry are similar to
the Bacho- Kirian (Proto-Aurignacien) industry dated
in 45.000 and 28.000 BP. Karain B Upper Paleolithic
Industry shows common characteristics with some of
the Aurignacian industries in Europe, the Upper
Paleolithic industries in Taurus, Zagros and Caucasia.
Upper Paleolithic of Üçağızlı Cave is totally matching
with the Upper Paleolithic cultures of the Levant. As
a conclusion, it is not possible to recognize Upper
Paleolithic cultures that are peculiar to Anatolia at
this stage.
At this point it is necessary to bring some questions
to the agenda here: What is the part of Anatolia for
people who tried to reach this stage of knowledge?
Of course these people have also created a couple of
Anatolian originated cultures in the upcoming PPN
and PN Periods which is the main subject of this
symposium.
Did they get this fund of knowledge in Anatolia?
Or did they move to Anatolia from somewhere else?
The problem of Upper Paleolithic in Anatolia should
be solved in order to give the right answers to these
questions. It is necessary to increase the number of
cave excavations in order to solve this problem.
Therefore it is essential to investigate caves rather
than open air sites thus we would expect to find Upper
Paleolithic cultures. The reason for preferring caves
for prehistoric investigations can be ascribed to the
climatic conditions during the Upper Paleolithic
Period, because in this period Anatolia was under the
impact of very though and cold continental climate
conditions. We hope that the number of cave
excavations for Paleolithic archaeology in Anatolia
will rise and for that purpose we welcome our foreign
colleagues and their cooperation in Anatolia.
The Paleolithic and Epi-paleolithic of Anatolia
Notes
1 This paper was presented at the symposium of “Anatolian
Metal VII” which held on the Deutsches Bergbau-Museum
(Germany) on November 28, 2013. Hereby, I would like
to thank Mr. Ünsal Yalçın and the organization committee
for inviting me to the Symposium of “Anatolian Metal VII”
devoted to the 70th Birthday of Prof. Dr. Mehmet Özdoğan.
I would also like to celebrate the 70th birthday of my dear
friend and my colleague, Prof. Dr. Mehmet Özdoğan, who
made important contributions to the Neolithic of Anatolia,
an experienced academician in the field of Neolithic Age in
Turkey. I wish him a very happy and a healthy birthday. There
is still a lot to learn about Neolithic of Anatolia from him. His
theories about Neolithic of Anatolia have always guided us.
We are looking forward for his new theories.
2 See to previous studies from 1940, Pfannenstiel 1941.
3 Epipaleolithic Deposits in Üçağızlı I cave
<http://web.arizona.edu/~hatayup/epipaleolithic.htm>,
20.02.2015.
Editors note: I would like to express my sincerest
gratitude to Prof. Dr. Kathleen James Chakraborty for
editing the text of this paper.
Bibliography
ALBRECHT, G., ENGELHARDT. H., MULLER-BECK, H., UNRATH, G.,
& YALÇINKAYA, I.:
1984 Vorbericht Über die Untersuchungen an der
Faustkeilstation Şehremuz in der Südöstlichen
Türkei. Eiszeitalter u. Gegenwart 34, 43-86.
ARSEBÜK, G & ÖZBAŞARAN, M.:
1999 Pleistocene Archaeology at the Cave of Yarımburgaz
in Eastern Thrace/Turkey: Preliminary Results. In:
G.Bailey, E. Adam, E. Panagopoulou & C. Perlès
(eds.), The Palaeolithic Archaeology of Greece and
adjacent areas, London: British School at Athens
Studies 3, 59-72.
CHANTRE, E.:
1898 Mission en Cappodoce, 1893-1894, Paris.
DİNÇER, B. & SLIMAK, L.:
2007 Trakya’nın Paleolitik Çağ Kültürleri. Arkeoloji ve
Sanat Dergisi 124, 1-12.
EREK, C.M.:
2012 Güneybatı Asya Ekolojik Nişi içinde Direkli Mağarası
Epi-paleolitik Buluntularının Değerlendirilmesi.
Anadolu/Anatolia 38, 53-66.
GULEÇ, E., CLARK HOWELL, F. & WHITE, T.D.:
1999 Dursunlu – a new lower Pleistocene faunal and
artifact-bearing locality in southern Anatolia. In H.
Ulrich (ed.), Hominid Evolution: Lifestyles and
Survival Strategies, Edition Archaea, Schwelm, 349-
364.
GÜLEÇ, E., WHITE, T., KUHN, S., ÖZER, İ., SAĞIR, M., YILMAZ, H.
& HOWELL, F.C.:
2009 The Lower Pleistocene lithic assemblage from
Dursunlu (Konya), central Anatolia, Turkey. Antiquity
83,11-22.
KANSU, Ş.A.:
1972 Ya r ı m b u r g a z ( K ü ç ü k ç e k m e c e - İ s t a n b u l )
Mağarasında Türk Tarih Kurumu Adına Yapılan
Prehistorya Araştırmaları ve Tuzla Kalkolitiğinde
Yeni Gözlemler. VII.Türk Tarih Kurumu Kongresi,
Kongreye Sunulan Bildiriler I, 22-32.
49
Harun Taşkıran
KARTAL, M., & EREK, M.C.:
2002 The Burials in Öküzini Cave (SW Anatolia). In:
I.Yalçınkaya, M. Otte, J. Kozlowski & O. Bar-Yosef
(eds.), La Grotte d’Öküzini: Evolution du
Paléolithique final du sud-ouest de l’Anatolie-
Öküzini: Final Paleolithic evolution in southwest
Anatolia, ERAUL 96, 347-351.
KÖKTEN, İ.K.:
1953 1952 Yılında Yaptığım Tarihöncesi Araştırmaları
Hakkında. Dil ve Tarih Coğrafya Fakültesi Dergisi
XI/2-4, 177-209.
1955 Antalya’da Karain Mağarasında Yapılan Prehistorya
Araştırmalarına Toplu Bir Bakış. Belleten XIX/75,
271-293.
1959 Tarsus-Antalya Arası Sahil Şeriti Üzerinde ve
Antalya Bölgesinde Yapılan Tarihöncesi
Araştırmaları. Türk Arkeoloji Dergisi VIII/2, 10-16.
1961 Anadolu Maraş Vilayetinde Tarihten Dip Tarihe
Gidiş. Türk Arkeoloji Dergisi X/1, 42-52.
1963 İstanbul Batısında Eskitaş (Paleolitik) Devrine Ait
Yeni Buluntular. Dil ve Tarih-Coğrafya Fakültesi
Dergisi XX/3-4, 277-278.
1971a Keban Baraj Gölü Alanında Taş Devri Buluntuları.
Atatürk Konferansları IV(1970), 125-131.
1971b Keban Baraj Gölü Alanında Taş Devri Araştırmaları,
1969. Keban Projesi 1969 Çalışmaları 1/2, 13-21.
1974 Keban Baraj Gölü Alanında Diptarih Araştırmaları
1971. Keban Projesi 1971 Çalışmaları 1/4, 1-11.
1976 Keban Baraj Gölü Alanında Taş Devri Araştırmaları
1972. Keban Projesi 1972 Çalışmaları 1/5, 1-8.
KUHN, S.L., ARSEBÜK, G. & CLARK HOWELL, F.:
1996 The Middle Pleistocene Lithic Assemblage From
Yarımburgaz Cave, Turkey. Paléorient 22/1, 31-49.
KUHN, S.L., STINER, M.C. & CLARK HOWELL, F.:
1998 Middle Pleistocene Hominids and Bears at
Yarımburgaz Cave (Thrace, Turkey). In: M. Otte (ed.),
Préhistoire D’Anatoli: Genèse de deux mondes.
Eraul 85/II, 579-598.
KUHN, S.L., STINER, M.C. & GÜLEǸ E.:
1999 Initial Upper Paleolithic in South-Central Turkey
and Its Regional Context: A Preliminary Report.
Antiquity 73, 505–517.
KUHN, S.L., STINER, M.C., REESE, D. & GÜLEǸ E.:
2001 Ornaments in the Earliest Upper Paleolithic: New
Perspectives from the Levant. Proc Natl Acad Sci
98, 7641–7646.
KUHN, S.L., STINER, M.C., GÜLEÇ, E., ÖZER, I., YILMAZ, H.,
BAYKARA, I., AÇIKKOL, A., GOLDBERG, P., MOLINA,
K.M., ÜNAY, E. & SUATA-ALPASLAN, F.:
2009 The Early Upper Paleolithic Occupations at Üçağızlı
Cave (Hatay, Turkey). Journal of Human Evolution
56, 87-113.
MINZONI-DÉROCHE, A.:
1992 Üçağızlı Mağara, un Site Aurignacien dans le Hatay
(Anatolie): Premiers Résultats. Paléorient, 18/1, 89-
96.
OTTE, M., YALÇINKAYA, I., TAŞKIRAN, H., KOZLOWSKI, J., BAR-
YOSEF, O. & NOIRET, P.:
1995 The Anatolian Middle Paleolithic: New Research At
Karain Cave. Journal Of Anthropological Research
51/4, 287-299.
OTTE, M., LOPEZ-BAYON, I., NOIRET, P., BAR-YOSEF, O.,
YALÇINKAYA, I., KARTAL, M., LÉOTARD, J.-M. & PETTITT, P.:
2003 Sedimentary Deposition Rates and Carbon-14: the
Epi-paleolithic Sequence of Öküzini Cave
(Southwest Turkey). Journal of Archaeological
Science 30, 325-341.
ÖZDOĞAN, M.:
1977 Lower Euphrates Basin 1977 Survey, Middle East
Technical University Lower Euphrates Project
Publications, Series I, No.2, İstanbul.
50
ÖZDOĞAN, M., MIYAKE, Y. & ÖZBAŞARAN-DEDE, N.:
1991 An Interim Report on Excavations at Yarımburgaz
and Toptepe in Eastern Thrace. Anatolica 17, 59-
122.
PFANNENSTIEL, M.:
1941 Die Altsteinzeitlichen Kulturen Anatoliens,
İstanbuler Forschungen Band 15, Berlin.
RUNNELS, C., & ÖZDOĞAN, M.:
2001 The Palaeolithic of the Bosphorus Region, NW
Turkey. Journal of Field Archaeology 28, 1/2, 69-92.
SLIMAK, L., KUHN, S.L., ROCHE, H., MOUREALIS, D.,
BUITENHUIS, H., BALKAN-ATLI, N., BINDER, D.,
KUZUCUOĞLU, C. & GUILLOU, H.:
2008 Kaletepe Deresi 3 (Turkey): Archaeological Evi-
dence for Early Human Settlement in Central Ana-
tolia. Journal of Human Evolution 54, 99-111.
TAŞKIRAN, H.:
2002a Karkamış Baraj Gölü Alanında Yapılan Paleolitik
Çağ Yüzey Araştırması Üzerine Genel Bir
Değerlendirme. İdol 13, 8-10.
2002b 2000 Yılı Karkamış Baraj Gölü Alanı Paleolitik Çağ
Yüzey Araştırması, The Palaeolithic Survey in the
Carchemish Dam Reservoir Region: 2000 Season.
In: N. Tuna & J. Velibeyoğlu (eds.), Ilısu ve Karkamış
Baraj Gölleri Altında Kalacak Arkeolojik Kültür
Varlıklarını Kurtarma Projesi 2000 Yılı Çalışmaları,
ODTÜ TAÇDAM Yayınları, 383-412;413-429.
2006 Ilısu Baraj Gölü Alanında Paleolitik Çağ 2004 Yılı
Yüzey Araştırması. 23. Araştırma sonuçları Toplantısı
I, 205-218.
2007 Dicle Havzasının Paleolitik Potansiyeli. In: E. Öztepe
& M. Kadıoğlu (eds.), Patranvs Coşkun Özgünel’e 65.
Yaş Armağanı; Festschrift für Coşkun Özgünel zum
65. Geburtstag, Homer Kitabevi, İstanbul, 351-359.
2008 Réflexions sur l’Acheuléen d’ Anatolie –Thoughts
about the Acheulean in Anatolia. L’Antropologie
112/1, 140-152.
2013 Başlangıcından Günümüze Ilısu Paleolitik Çağ
Yüzey Araştırmaları-Ilısu Paleolithic Survey Since
the Beginning. Ilısu Barajı ve Hes Projesi Arkeolojik
Kazıları 2004-2008 Çalışmaları-The Ilısu Dam
Project Excavations Season 2004-2008, Kültür ve
Turizm Bakanlığı, Kültür Varlıkları ve Müzeler Genel
Müdürlüğü Yayınları, 435-441; 442-455.
TAŞKIRAN, H. & KARTAL, M.:
1999 Karkamış Baraj Gölü Alanında Yapılan Paleolitik Çağ
Yüzey Araştırması: İlk Gözlemler. Palaeolithic Survey
in the Carchemish Dam Reservoir Region: Preliminary
Observations. In: N. Tuna & J. Öztürk (eds.), Ilısu ve
Karkamış Baraj Gölleri Altında Kalacak Akeolojik
Kültür Varlıklarını Kurtarma Projesi 1998 Yılı
Çalışmaları, ODTÜ TAÇDAM Yayınları, 45-56; 57-62.
2001 1999 Yılı Karkamış Baraj Gölü Alanı Paleolitik Çağ
Yüzey Araştırması. Palaeolithic Survey in the
Carchemish Dam Reservoir Region: 1999 Season.
In: N. Tuna, J. Öztürk & J. Velibeyoğlu (eds.), Ilısu ve
Karkamış Baraj Gölleri Altında Kalacak Arkeolojik
Kültür Varlıklarını Kurtarma Projesi 1999 Yılı
Çalışmaları, ODTÜ TAÇDAM Yayınları, 487-514;
515-528.
2003 2001 Yılı Ilısu Baraj Gölü Alanı Paleolitik Çağ Yüzey
Araştırması. 20. Araştırma Sonuçları Toplantısı II,
191-202.
2004a 2001 Yılı Ilısu Baraj Gölü Alanı Paleolitik Dönem
Yüzey Araştırması. 2001 Palaeolithic Survey in the
Ilısu Dam Region. In: N. Tuna, J. Greenhalgh & J.
Velibeyoğlu (eds.), Ilısu ve Karkamış Baraj Gölleri
Altında Kalacak Arkeolojik Kültür Varlıklarını
Kurtarma Projesi 2001 Yılı Çalışmaları, ODTÜ
TAÇDAM Yayınları, 695-724;725-737.
2004b Ilısu Baraj Gölü Alanı Paleolitik Çağ Yüzey
Araştırması 2002 Yılı Çalışmaları. 21. Araştırma
Sonuçları Toplantısı II, 295-304.
2008 Ilısu Baraj Gölü Alanı Paleolitik Çağ Yüzey
 The Paleolithic and Epi-paleolithic of Anatolia

Araştırması-2006. 25. Araştırma sonuçları Toplantısı

III, 439-452.
2009 2007 Yılı Ilısu Baraj Gölü Alanı Paleolitik Çağ Yüzey
Araştırması. 26. Araştırma sonuçları Toplantısı 2,
397-410.
2010 2008 Yılı Ilısu Baraj Gövdesi Alanı Yüzey Araştırması.
27. Araştırma sonuçları Toplantısı 3, 233-244.
2011 2002 Yılı Ilısu Baraj Gölü Alanı Paleolitik Dönem
Yüzey Araştırması. Palaeolithic Survey in the Ilısu
Dam Reservoir Area: The 2002 Season. In: N. Tuna
& O. Doonan (eds.), Ilısu ve Karkamış Baraj Gölle-
ri Altında Kalacak Arkeolojik ve Kültür Varlıklarını
Kurtarma Projesi 2002 Yılı Çalışmaları, ODTÜ TA-
ÇDAM Yayınları, 871-896; 897-909.
TAŞKIRAN, H., KARTAL, M. & SEVENCAN, B.C.:
2005 2003 Yılı Ilısu Baraj Gölü Alanı Paleolitik Çağ Yüzey
Araştırması. 22. Araştırma Sonuçları Toplantısı I,
335-340.
YALÇINKAYA, I., MULLER-BECK, H.-J. & ALBRECHT, G.:
1987 Fırat Vadisinde, Adıyaman-Samsat ve Malatya-
Kuruçay Çevrelerinde Paleolitik Gözlemler, 1979.
Beobachtungen zum Paläolithikum des
Euphrattales bei Adıyaman-Samsat und Malatya-
Kuruçay, 1979. Aşağı Fırat Projesi 1978-1979
Çalışmaları-Lower Euphrates Project 1978-1979
Activities, Ankara. Series I, No.3, 29-33; 35-39.
YALÇINKAYA, I., OTTE, M., BAR-YOSEF, O., KOZLOWSKI, J.,
LEOTARD, J-M. & TAŞKIRAN, H.:
1993 The Excavations At Karain Cave. Southwestern
Turkey: An Interim Report. The Paleolithic Prehistory
Of The Zagros-Taurus V, 101-117.
YALÇINKAYA, I., LEOTARD, J-M., KARTAL, M., OTTE, M.,
BAR-YOSEF, O., CARMI, I., GAUTIER, A., GILOT, E., GOLDBERG, P.,
KOZLOWSKI, J., LIEBERMAN, D., LOPEZ-BAYON, I.,
PAWLIKOWSKI, M., THIEBAULT, S., ANCION, V., PATOU, M.,
EMERY-BARBIER, A. & BONJEAN, D.:
1995 Les Occupations Tardiglaciaires du site d’Öküzini
(sud-Quest de la Turquie) Résultats Préliminaires.
L’Anthropologie 99/4, 562-583.

51
 Harun Taşkıran

52

View publication stats