The citadel of Van (Tushpa) was the main settlement of the Urartian kingdom, which dominated the regions of eastern Anatolia, Caucasia and northwestern Iran between the ninth and sixth centuries BC. Lake Van borders the site on the west, while to the south is the eastern extension of the Taurus mountains, stretching east to west and reaching 3000-3500m in height. These steep mountains, rising like a natural wall between the Urartian city and its greatest enemy the Assyrian kingdom to the south, provided an advantageous defensive feature. The capital city Tushpa, which is 1.5km east of Lake Van, and the Van plain itself are bordered on the east by the 3200m high Erek mountain. Erek mountain surrounds the east of the plain like a crescent, halting the cold winds as well as providing the water supply for agriculture in the Van plain from its rich water sources. Although the soil of the Van plain, which is 1750m above sea level, is agriculturally fertile, for many crops it is barely possible to conduct successful agriculture without irrigation. The Van plain, 9km wide and 17km long, is poor in water resources, as is well known. The water sources around Erek mountain, amongst the richest in the east Anatolian region, were used effectively in the period of the Urartian kingdom for the first time. Almost all the irrigation structures built on and around Erek mountain were built in order to irrigate the Van plain to the east of Lake Van. Most of the constructed dams and reservoirs, totalling more than ten, are still in use today, with minor restoration, despite being more than 2,700 years old. If we consider that few irrigation facilities were constructed at other water sources in the east Anatolian region, it underlines the importance of these water sources at Erek mountain and its slopes for the plain of Van. It seems that the rich water sources around Erek mountain constituted another positive condition for the foundation of the capital city of the Urartian kingdom in the Van plain.

This essay seeks to rehistoricise the birth of liberalism in Turkey with the aim of bringing an alternative interpretation to its historiography and throwing some light upon its characteristics, past and present. In contrast to recent comments on liberalism in the Turkish context, it argues that there is an intellectual background of the liberal tradition in Turkey, and that understanding the characteristics of this background requires (1) the mapping out and examination of the key concepts used by liberal writers in the context of the general political lexicon of their times and (2) an intellectual excavation tracing the mostly western European origins of the ideas of Turkish liberals. This leads to the conclusion that early republicans in Turkey embraced a version of liberalism that has not been identified in previous attempts to historicise liberal Turkish thought.

This article analyses the position of the Hittites in the theoretical development of Turkish nationalism in the 20th century. The piece provides an outline of the full content of the Hittite claim in a Turkish nationalist context, particularly its promulgation as part of the so-called ‘Turkish History Thesis’. Following this, I will give full weight to the historical circumstances surrounding the emergence of the Hittite trope in Turkish writing. Basing myself on the work of Mete Tunçay, I will give proper prominence to the publication of the propaganda tract Pontus Meselesi (1922). It is my contention that the Turkish intellectual of Azerî descent, Ağaoğlu Ahmed Bey, was the sole author of the text Pontus Meselesi. The remainder of the article consists of a close reading of this geo-text. I will demonstrate that Ağaoğlu's discovery of the Hittites as worthy forebears for the Anatolian Muslims, whom he refers to as ‘Turks’ in his text, was the outcome of an ideologically motivated reading of 19th century European accounts of ancient Near Eastern history. The article shows that the propagation of the Kemalist concept of Turkish nationalism in Anatolia dates back to 1922, a year prior to the establishment of the Republic of Turkey.

“I have seen Priam's Treasure … I have held these vessels in my own hands.” This claim by Yevgenii Sidorov, the Russian Minister of Culture, in an interview in Literaturnaya Gazeta on 25th August 1993, was the first official admission that Priam's Treasure, thought lost since 1945, is now in Russia. It helps us to complete the story of this famous find, from the day of its discovery to the present. Research by David Traill, Reinhard Witte, and myself has clarified the earliest parts. Correspondence published by Joachim Herrmann, Gustav Mahr and Leslie Fitton helps illuminate the late 1870s and the 1880s. For the turbulent years of World War II we have an important publication by Mechthilde Unverzagt and intensive research by Klaus Goldmann. And finally from Russia comes documentation unearthed by Konstantin Akinsha and Grigorii Kozlov. The full story can now be told, and that is what I should like to attempt in this paper. There remains, however, the question, to whom does the Treasure properly belong?—to which I hope the outline of an answer will emerge.

Following their discovery of the “Burnt Palace” at Beycesultan in the mid 1950's, Seton Lloyd and James Mellaart drew attention to a number of features of its architecture which seemed to indicate links with the palace architecture of Minoan Crete, and discussed the possible significance of these similarities (Lloyd and Mellaart, 1956 118–123, 1965 61, 62). Whatever this may be in terms of relationships between the two areas in the second millennium B.C., however, it seems clear that they cannot throw any light on the first appearance of palaces in Crete. The problems of the origin and development of the Cretan Bronze Age palaces are complex, and though they have been much discussed since the first excavations in the early years of the century, a major obstacle to progress has always been the lack of precise evidence, or even of any evidence at all, for the early stages of the process. As they stand, most of the palaces are the product of a series of rebuildings and remodellings over a long period, and it is not always clear just what they were like when first erected. Most frustrating of all, however, is the lack of evidence bearing on the question of whether they were preceded, during the Early Bronze Age, by buildings which were in any respect analogous in form and function.

It has long been clear that the sites of some of the major Middle and Late Minoan palaces were occupied during the Early Minoan period, but at Phaistos and Knossos at any rate extensive clearing and levelling in preparation for the erection of the Middle Minoan palaces has obliterated practically all traces of the Early Minoan buildings. At Phaistos Branigan has hinted that the fragments of walls found by Pernier (1935, pl. VI) on the highest point of the hill might have belonged to a building of some consequence, possibly similar to the Early Minoan II mansion known as the House on the Hill at Vasiliki (Branigan 1970, p. 41). Branigan thinks that in addition to the rooms mentioned by Pernier, there may be traces of a corridor similar to that in the Vasiliki building. Only the bottom two courses of the walls survive, so that it is difficult to say much about their construction, though it seems to be poorer than that of the walls of some Early Minoan private houses later found by Levi on another part of the site.

The study of İznik ceramics of different periods revealed that temperatures of about 800–900°C were produced during firing. Glass fragments added to the body for strengthening resulted in the formation of fibrous minerals as clusters in the pores and protruding in the glaze together with Ca and P rich minerals in the raw materials used. The pore size distribution of the pores indicates a uniform temperature rise and fall during the production of the microstructure.

The traditional view of Troy as a kind of central site presupposes balance weights and other artefacts that attest weighing procedures among the excavated material. Indeed, already in the works of Homer it is possible to find references to premonetary aspects (for example, the gold standard τάλαντον). The main purpose of this investigation is to provide an archaeological view on the issue of trading implements and their significance in early Troy. The principal group of objects defined as balance weights was unearthed during the excavations of Heinrich Schliemann. By contrast, very little data derive from Wilhelm Dörpfeld's activities at the site. Balance weights are known also from the recent excavations of Manfred Korfmann. In two previous reports I presented the state of balance weights found in the Schliemann and Korfmann excavations (Bobokhyan 2006; 2008a). The aim of this article is to consider the main stages of the investigation of balance weights, with special reference to the excavations of Carl Blegen in Troy. The main problem related to the study of the Trojan balance weights is the lack of knowledge about the archaeological contexts for many of the finds. A considerable number of these implements has been lost or is inaccessible. However, their compilation assists in understanding the abstract way-of-thinking and value perception of the population of ancient Troy. The actual number of balance weights from Troy can be estimated at ca 100. The main period of their appearance is during Troy II–V, less in Troy VI. The principal forms represented are ellipsoid (‘sphendonoid’) and domed, and the materials used most for the weights are haematite as well as granite, basalt, marble and limestone. New research has revealed the existence of multiple weighing systems in Bronze Age Troy, a situation that was typical for mercantile centres such as Tepe Sialk, Susa or Kanes. The investigation of the Trojan balance weights and their contexts hints at the existence of Aegean and eastern Mediterranean, more precisely northern Syrian, directions of contacts.

To the north east of Balboura, on the far side of the stream-bed, lie the ruins of an imposing tomb (see Fig. 1), the largest and most elaborate so far discovered in the area. Built directly on and partly into the hillside, the building was oriented to look straight across the valley towards the city (orientation: 27° E of true north—see Fig. 2; i.e. the tomb faces approx. SSW); and apparently it stood in splendid isolation, at some distance from the other tombs of the northern necropolis, and on somewhat higher ground. The remains of another tomb of similar type, but of smaller dimensions, can be seen across the valley in the neighbouring cemetery; and a third faces the city from the slopes to the south.

Although at first sight there seems to be little of the building left in place Pl. 1 (a, b); Fig. 2), enough remains for us to be fairly sure of its original form. It was built on two levels: above, standing on a stepped podium, a monumental building designed to house large stone sarcophagi—a structure most often described in inscriptions throughout Asia. Minor as a heroön (and for convenience so designated here); and below, within the podium, a lower chamber or crypt, often referred to in inscriptions as a hyposorion, normally intended for the various dependants of those entombed above. The building was constructed from the local white limestone; and while certainly the most ambitious sepulchral monument yet known from Balboura, it shows a relatively simple design, and the same rather rough-and-ready workmanship as the other buildings of the site.

Ever since the discovery of the Palace of Kapara by Max von Oppenheim in 1911, there has been a debate—often acrimonious—with respect to its date. As late as 1934 there was a variation of some two millennia among active discussants. With the death of Ernst Herzfeld, who stood out until the end for a date in the third millennium, the debate seems to have closed, at least for the time being. In 1954 the late H. Frankfort came out explicitly for a date during the ninth century, preferably in its second half, for the age of Kapara. The same date, though with a higher upper limit, was maintained by A. Moortgat in the official publication of the sculpture of Gozan which appeared the following year. K. Galling had all along favoured such a dating, which he now espouses without reservation. The present writer has also maintained a date between 1100 and 900, concentrating for the past fifteen years on the tenth century.

In a preliminary report (Anatolian Studies, Vol. II, p. 14) we have already referred to the “Pergamene” pottery, which constituted by far the most distinctive ware both in the Hellenistic and the Roman levels at Sultantepe. This pottery was also found in large quantities at sites in North Syria and Cilicia such as Gözlü Kule at Tarsus, Dura Europos and Antioch-on-the-Orontes, and is discussed and analysed with particular thoroughness in the publication of the latter (Antioch, Vol. IV, Part I, pp. 18 ff.). We are now able to illustrate from Sultantepè examples of these wares, for which parallels can easily be found at the sites mentioned above. Such parallels are in fact indicated in the Catalogue of shapes in our Fig. 1. Features of the Hellenistic Pergamene which are more easily recognisable in photographs (Plate VII, 2) are, for instance, the rouletted or grooved circles on the floor of open dishes and the combination of the rouletted circle with imprinted leaves (cf. Antioch, Fig. 2). Fragments of Hellenistic “moulded bowls” in Pl. VII, 1 should also be compared to those from Tarsus (Tarsus, Figs. 9 ff.).

Alişar-IV ware is one of the most characteristic ceramic productions of early first-millennium BC central Anatolia and the only one characterised by painted figurative motifs besides geometric decorations. The ongoing excavations at Niğde-Kınık Höyük have uncovered a collection of fragments belonging to 42 Alişar-IV vessels, and this systematic material study of these sherds contributes much to understanding aspects of their production, use and consumption. Petrographic and chemical evidence presented in this study indicates that two-thirds of them were produced locally. Conversely, the study of Alişar-IV fragments from other regions of the Anatolian plateau has shown that they are non-local productions. We thus suggest that Alişar-IV ware is a product of a few centres within south-central Anatolia and that, from there, it circulated among and beyond these centres. Radiocarbon dating indicates that the main period of production of this ware covers the tenth and ninth centuries BC, in agreement with the evidence from Polatlı Yassı Höyük, Kaman-Kalehöyük and Böğazköy-Büyükkaya. The small number of Alişar-IV vessels found at each site is indicative of a limited, exclusive production. A combined study of their shapes and iconography might support the hypothesis that the Alişar-IV ware was primarily associated with wine circulation and consumption.

The burial customs practised at Neolithic Çatalhöyük have raised a substantial amount of interest, due to factors such as a tradition of intramural inhumation, elaborate grave goods including organic remains in an excellent state of preservation, and a posited link to scenes in wall paintings supposedly showing vultures pecking at humanoid figures. In consequence, numerous publications have discussed the burial practices of the site, and the systematic study of the burial data is one of the aims of the present excavation project at the site. Given the attention the burials of Çatalhöyük have received, it is surprising that almost no hard data have been published on the hundreds of burials excavated in the 1960s. In this paper a systematic inventory of the 1960s burial data and their drawbacks will be presented. The data for this study were obtained from the notes made by Dr Angel and Dr Ferembach, the two physical anthropologists who analysed the skeletons excavated by Mellaart and his team. The inventory presented in this paper will allow us to study the burial practices at Çatalhöyük in a more systematic manner, and will provide an interesting background for the evaluation of the data forthcoming from the new excavation project at Çatalhöyük.

This report focuses on selected aspects of the Kerkenes Dağ Survey all of which are peripheral to the main survey of the Iron Age mountain top city.

The Kerkenes Dağ Survey is sponsored by the British Institute of Archaeology at Ankara (BIAA). The survey was made possible by funds from the Leverhulme Trust (1993), the National Geographic Society (1994), the British Academy and the BIAA (1993–94). In 1993 Dr. S. Hill kindly arranged for us to borrow the Warwick University total station for a large part of the season; the British Ambassador, Mr. John Goulden, greatly added to the comfort of the expedition by arranging for the provision of furniture and, most importantly, the balloon team from the Kapadokya Lodge gave us a remarkable evening flight over the mountain top city. In 1994 Yibitaş-Lafarge very generously improved the facilities by constructing bedrooms, wash rooms and a compound wall. Special thanks are due to the Vali of Yozgat, Bay Ertuğrul Ersoy, the Kaymakam of Sorgun, Bay Necmi Kurt and the Director of the Yozgat Museum, Bay Musa Özcan for providing both help and encouragement, and to the Muhtar of Şahmuratlı Köy, Osman Muratdağı for making us welcome. Our representative for both seasons was Bay Kazım Mertek from Konya Museum; that so much was accomplished is in great part due to his energy and participation.

The cathedral complex at Nisibis sits within what is currently a large excavation site. The excavations, continuing on and off over the last 12 years, have yielded exciting discoveries. This article is not a report of the excavations as such, but, in the light of them, it revisits the cathedral complex in an attempt to reconstruct the possible cathedral on the site and to establish the building phases of the only standing structure on the site, known as the ‘Church of Mor Yaqub’, which was the baptistery of the cathedral.

A puzzling feature of a number of Lycian bath buildings is the array of holes cut in their walls at intervals of about 0·5 × 0·5 m. In size they are often about 0·12 × 0·12 m. × 0·06 m. deep, and so too large for the normal iron spikes which hold marble veneers or other wall facings in place. A chance find made during the course of the survey of Balboura in 1986 provides an explanation for these holes; they were to take spool-headed terracotta spacer pins which in turn held a series of large flat tiles with a space behind for the circulation of hot air from the hypocaust (Fig. 4), so providing the same effect as the better known tubuli and tegulae mammatae.

The Second Excavating season at Beycesultan lasted from 1st May to 6th July, 1955. As a result of a motor accident on 30th April Mr. Seton Lloyd was unable to take charge of the work until 21st May and his place was taken by Mr. James Mellaart, Institute Fellow for 1955–56. The field staff also included Mr. G. R. H. Wright as architect and surveyor, Mrs. Wright as housekeeper and registrar, Mr. T. Burton Brown as visiting adviser, Mr. Maurice Cookson, whose services as photographer were kindly lent to us by the London Institute of Archaeology, and Mr. John Carswell as draughtsman. The Turkish Antiquities Department was represented by Bayan Nihal Dönmez, who relieved the Director of much administrative work. The expedition was once more housed in tents and rented accommodation in Menteş, village: thanks are again due to the Turkish Ministry of Education for the loan of the local school building as museum and workshop.

The season's work divided itself into three distinct phases. The first part of the excavations was confined to the eastern summit of the mound, where the great Burnt Palace had been discovered in 1954 (see Fig. 1), and consisted in the successive examination and clearance of the four uppermost levels (I–IV) over an area about thirty metres square, in order to gain access to the palace beneath. This work occupied the expedition throughout the greater part of May. The second phase was concerned with the extension of the palace excavations themselves in a north-westerly direction.

The subject of this paper is a small group of cups found by Sir Leonard Woolley in his excavations at Al Mina (now in the Turkish Hatay). It has been hitherto ignored because, with some reason, the vases were believed neither to be Greek imports nor the products of Cypriot or North Syrian potters. I hope to demonstrate that they could be the work of Greek potters established at Al Mina towards the end of the 8th century B.C. by discussing their apparent relationship to contemporary Greek, Cypriot and North Syrian work. Most of the cups and fragments are in Oxford, and there are fragments in the London Institute of Archaeology and the Museum of Classical Archaeology in Cambridge which I have seen. Nos. 1–23 in Fig. 1 and Plates XXIV–XXV illustrate the shapes and all the types of decoration met in the group.

All are two-handled cups, the Greek geometric skyphos. The shape, with decoration of this type, is most common in Euboeo-Cycladic vases of the second half of the 8th century, and a considerable number of these skyphoi were carried to Al Mina by the Greeks. It was rarely imitated in Cyprus, as we shall see, and is not at home further east.

İmamoğlu Höyük was situated in the Euphrates basin, ca. 15 km. northeast of Malatya in south east Turkey (Fig. 1). On account of the construction of a dam at Karakaya on the Euphrates, salvage excavations were carried out at the site from 1980 to 1987 under the direction of Edibe Uzunoğlu of İstanbul Archaeology Museums. In the 1986 excavation season, some Early Bronze Age remains (dated between 2300–2000 B.C.) were recovered. These remains included carbonised plant material, consisting principally of barley and pea. The five samples of plant remains were collected from the floors of buildings in squares 7H and 7I.

The third survey campaign of the Pisidia Survey Project at Melli took place in September 2000. Work on the remains of the small, semi-circular theatre completed the study of the monumental city centre and allowed the suggestion of a roughly Severan construction date. In addition, the remains of the early Christian period in the ancient city and in its north necropolis area were recorded, proving that older pagan buildings were partially re-used to build them and that several basilicas had a number of construction phases. A continuation of the study of the remains in the domestic areas of the city allowed a reconstruction of their organisation and showed that richer and poorer houses occupied the same quarters. Finally, work on the monumental temple tombs in the north necropolis was also completed. In general, it has become clear that the city flourished from the Hellenistic period throughout Roman times and into the early Christian period.

At the beginning of his reign, the Hittite king Mursilis II was confronted with widespread unrest amongst the territories subject to Hittite control. One of the early challenges to his authority came from Arzawa whose king Ukha-zitis defied an order to hand over rebels from Attarimma, Huwarsanassa, and Suruta who had sought refuge in his country. Mursilis answered this challenge by conducting in person a two-season military campaign against Arzawa, the details of which are recorded in the Annals for his third and fourth years. His personal intervention indicates the importance which he attached to this particular area, and there can be little doubt that Arzawa occupied a key position amongst Hittite holdings in the south west of Asia Minor in the latter half of the second millennium B.C.