Hostname: page-component-cd9895bd7-lnqnp Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-12-26T18:50:44.196Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Towards a Chronology for the Anatolian Early Bronze Age1

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  23 December 2013

D. F. Easton
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Extract

Renfrew has rightly remarked that in Anatolian Early Bronze Age chronology “the basic problem is to decide how to correlate the Trojan early bronze age periods … with the sequence of Tarsus”. It is largely to this problem that the following article is addressed.

Professor Mellink has argued that Troy I is contemporary with Tarsus EBII on the grounds that Troy II and Tarsus EBIII appear to her to be contemporary. Since she places the start of Tarsus EBI at c. 3000 B.C. this scheme places the beginning of Troy I considerably after that date, perhaps at c. 2700 B.C. Mellaart, by contrast, disputes the equation between Troy I and Tarsus EBII and argued at first that Tarsus EBIIIa must begin later than the beginning of Troy II, envisaging a period of overlap. He has subsequently suggested that it actually follows the end of Troy II. According to this correlation Troy I would be contemporary with Tarsus EBI, and not Tarsus EBII.

Type
Research Article
Information
Anatolian Studies , Volume 26 , December 1976 , pp. 145 - 173
Copyright
Copyright © The British Institute at Ankara 1976

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

2 Renfrew, C., The Emergence of Civilization: The Cyclades and the Aegean in the Third Millennium B.C. (1972), p. 216Google Scholar.

3 As in Mellink, M. J., “Anatolian Chronology”, in Chronologies in Old World Archaeology, ed. Ehrich, R. W. (1965), pp. 114–17Google Scholar (henceforward cited as Anatolian Chronology).

4 Mellaart, J., “The End of the Early Bronze Age in Anatolia and the Aegean”, AJA 62 (1958), p. 30 fCrossRefGoogle Scholar.

5 Mellaart, J., “Anatolia c. 4000–2300 B.C.”, CAH I 3 ch. xviii (1962), pp. 406 fGoogle Scholar.

6 Ibid., p. 403 f.

7 Mellaart, J., “Prehistory of Anatolia and its Relations with the Balkans”, in Studia Balcanica V (Sofia 1971), pp. 126 ffGoogle Scholar.

8 Weinberg, S., “The Relative Chronology of the Aegean in the Stone and Early Bronze Ages”, in Chronologies in Old World Archaeology, ed. Ehrich, R. W. (1965), p. 303Google Scholar.

9 French, D. H., “Late Chalcolithic Pottery in North-West Turkey and the Aegean”, AS XI (1961), pp. 118 ffGoogle Scholar.

10 Studia Balcanica V (1971), p. 125Google Scholar.

11 S. Weinberg, op. cit., p. 303.

12 C. Renfrew, op. cit., pp. 208 ff.

13 Unless otherwise specified, all calibrated radiocarbon dates given here are calculated from dates based on the 5568 half-life, using the Suess calibration curve as in Suess, H. E., “Bristlecone-pine calibration of the radiocarbon time-scale 5200 B.C. to the present”, in Radiocarbon Variations and Absolute Chronology, Proceedings of the Twelfth Nobel Symposium, ed. Olsson, I. U. (1970), pp. 303 ffGoogle Scholar. The usual conventions are observed, cf. editorial foreword in Radiocarbon 5 (1963Google Scholar).

14 For the excavations of Schliemann, H. see his publications: Trojanische Altertümer: Bericht über die Ausgrabungen in Troja, (Leipzig 1874Google Scholar) (corresponding English edition: Troy and its Remains: A Narrative of Researches and Discoveries Made on the Site of Ilium and in the Trojan Plain, ed. Smith, P. (1875Google Scholar)); Ilios: the City and Country of the Trojans (1880); Troja: Results of the Latest Researches and Discoveries on the Site of Homer's Troy (1884); Bericht über die Ausgrabungen in Troja im Jahre 1890 (Leipzig, 1891Google Scholar).

15 Dörpfeld, W., Troja 1893: Bericht uber die im Jahre 1893 in Troja veranstalteten Ausgrabungen, (Leipzig 1894Google Scholar); Troja und Ilion: Ergebnisse der Ausgrabungen in den vorhistorischen und historischen Schichten von Ilion, 1870–1894. (Athens 1902Google Scholar).

16 Blegen, C. W., Boulter, C. G., Caskey, J. L., Rawson, M., Sperling, J., Troy: Excavations Conducted by the University of Cincinnati, 1932–38, 4 vols. (Princeton, 1950–1958Google Scholar).

17 Mellaart, J., “Notes on the Architectural Remains of Troy I and II”, AS IX (1959), p. 131 ffGoogle Scholar.

18 For example Ibid. p. 146 paragraph (b). An article by Schirmer, W., “Überlegungen zu einigen Baufragen der Schichten I und II in Troja”, Ist. Mitt. 21 (1971)Google Scholar, has followed largely in Mellaart's footsteps with some additions and modifications.

19 “Recent Archaeological Research in Turkey”, AS XXV (1975), p. 27Google Scholar. Note also the tentative identification of a Vinča C-D sherd at Ilicapınar-Orhangazi. French, D. H., “Prehistoric Sites in Northwest Anatolia”, AS XVII (1967), p. 58Google Scholar.

20 Merpert, N. J. and Georgiev, G. I., “Die Siedlung Ezero und ihre Stellung in der Frübronzezeit Osteuropas”, in Symposium über die Entstehung und Chronologie der Badener Kultur, Verlag der Slowakischen Akademie der Wissenschaften, (Bratislava 1973)Google Scholar. In Russian with plates, pp. 215–54; German abstract, pp. 255–57.

21 Georgiev, G.I. and Merpert, N.J., “The Ezero Mound in South-East Bulgaria”, Antiquity XL (1966), pp. 33 ffGoogle Scholar.

22 Studia Balcanica V (1971), pp. 130 ffGoogle Scholar.

23 Quitta, H. and Kohl, G., “Neue Radiocarbondaten zum Neolithikum und zur frühen Bronzezeit Südosteuropas und der Sowjetunion”, in Zeitschrift für Archäologie 3 (1969), pp. 223 ffGoogle Scholar.

24 Average date 4250 b.p.; latest date (seed) Bln-429: 4130±100 b.p.

25 Earliest date (charcoal) Bln-424: 4575±80 b.p.; seed date Bln-524: 4460±100 b.p. The difference between these two is ironed out by the Suess calibration curve.

26 Average date 4435 b.p. But as this falls in a more complex area on the calibration curve, it could also be as early as 3220 B.C. It is possible that the seed date, Bln-524, provides the most accurate date for level I.7.

27 Bln-425, from the Karanovo VI deposits of Ezero, 5580±80 b.p. may perhaps yield a calibrated date of c. 4440 B.C. See also the table of C-14 dates in Renfrew, C., “Sitagroi, radiocarbon and the prehistory of south-east Europe”, Antiquity XLV (1971), p. 282Google Scholar.

28 GrN-5286, GrN-5287. See Radiocarbon 14 (1972), p. 51Google Scholar; van Loon, M., “Korucutepe Excavations, 1969” in Keban Projesi 1969 Calısmaları, p. 59 fGoogle Scholar. It must however be remembered that the stratigraphy at this point was apparently not very clear. Cf. also P-1928, Radiocarbon 16 (1974), p. 223 f.Google Scholar, and JNES 32 (1973), p. 359Google Scholar.

29 French, D.H., AS XI (1961), p. 120Google Scholar; cf. Mellaart, J., “Anatolian Chronology in the Early and Middle Bronze Age”, AS VII (1957), pp. 79–85Google Scholar.

30 AS XI (1961), pp. 119 ffGoogle Scholar.

31 Troy I, p. 54 fGoogle Scholar.

32 S. Weinberg, op. cit., p. 303.

33 Renfrew, C., The Emergence of Civilization, pp. 208 ffGoogle Scholar.

34 Studia Balcanica V (1971), pp. 123 ffGoogle Scholar.

35 AS XI (1961), p. 117Google Scholar.

36 Studia Balcanica V (1971), p. 121 ffGoogle Scholar. This is a revision and is an important divergence from the chronological scheme originally proposed in Lloyd, S. and Mellaart, J., Beycesultan vol. I. (1962), p. 122Google Scholar and in CAH I 3xviii (1962), p. 404Google Scholar, where Beycesultan EBI (XIX–XVII) was placed against Troy I. The revision arises from the full publication of the earlier levels at Poliochni where the dividing line between Late Chalcolithic and Early Bronze ages is deemed to fall between Poliochni Black and Blue.

37 C. Renfrew, op. cit., p. 208 f.

38 S. Weinberg, op. cit., p. 304.

39 C. Renfrew, op. cit., pp. 183–5.

40 P-306, P-307, Radiocarbon 4 (1962), p. 149Google Scholar. But certainly P-307 and possibly P-306 fall in an area of the Suess curve which would permit the dates to be as low as c. 3200 B.C.

41 P-137, Radiocarbon 4 (1962), p. 149Google Scholar.

42 Ibid., pp. 149–50.

43 Mellink, M. J., “Excavations at Karataş Semayük 1967”, AJA 72 (1968), p. 259CrossRefGoogle Scholar.

44 Uncalibrated 4186±25 b.p. Radiocarbon 8 (1966), p. 352 fGoogle Scholar.

45 Beycesultan I, pp. 179, 192 fGoogle Scholar.

46 Kadish, B., “Excavations of Prehistoric Remains at Aphrodisias, 1967”, AJA 73 (1969), p. 64 f.CrossRefGoogle Scholar; “Excavations of Prehistoric Remains at Aphrodisias, 1968 and 1969”, AJA 75 (1971), p. 138Google Scholar.

47 AJA 75 (1961), p. 138 fGoogle Scholar.

48 Ibid., p. 140.

49 Radiocarbon 13 (1971), pp. 369–71Google Scholar. P-1649, P-1650, P-1651, P-1652, P-1653, P-1654. The destruction of Complex II (= end of Beycesultan VIII) is dated to 3561±55 b.p., c. 2060 B.C. (P-1649) or to 3715±59 b.p., c. 2150 B.C. (P-1650), by seeds in both cases. The construction of Complex IV is probably best dated by the charcoal sample, P-1654, 3943±86 b.p., c. 2500 B.C. The later date P-1653 (3624±55 b.p., c. 2120 B.C.) is clearly too young when viewed in the light of other dates from Complex II. For Late Chalcolithic dates P-2029 and P-2031 see Radiocarbon 17 (1975), p. 205Google Scholar.

50 E.g. Mellink, M. J., “Archaeology in Asia Minor”, AJA 60 (1956), p. 376CrossRefGoogle Scholar.

51 Mellaart, J., AJA 62 (1958), p. 28 fCrossRefGoogle Scholar.

52 Hood, M. S. F., “Excavations at Emporio, Chios, 1952–55” in Atti del VI Congresso Internazionale delle Scienze Preistoriche E Protostoriche, Roma 1962. (Firenze 1965), vol. II, p. 224 ffGoogle Scholar.

53 Cook, J. M., “Archaeology in Greece, 1952”, JHS 73 (1953), p. 124CrossRefGoogle Scholar.

54 Cook, J. M. and Boardman, J., “Archaeology in Greece, 1953”, JHS 74 (1954), p. 162 fig. 12aCrossRefGoogle Scholar; Boardman, J., “The Island of Chios: Recent Discoveries”, Archaeology 8 (1955), p. 246 fig. 2Google Scholar.

55 Archaeology 8 (1955), p. 246 fig. 2Google Scholar.

56 Hood, M. S. F. and Boardman, J., “British Excavations–Chios”, in Archaeology in Greece, Archaeological Reports, BSA (1954), pp. 44 ffGoogle Scholar.

57 Beycesultan I, p. 164 fig. P33Google Scholar; p. 180 fig. P41.

58 Akurgal, E., Erster vorlaeufiger Bericht über die Ausgrabungen in Alt-Smyrna (Ankara, 1950) p. 54 fGoogle Scholar.

59 Lamb, W., Excavations at Thermi in Lesbos (1936), p. 73Google Scholar.

60 Ibid., fig. 29.

61 Ibid., fig. 29a.

62 Ibid., fig. 28, jug. No. 1.

63 Ibid., p. 90 f.

64 Cf. Studia Balcanica V (1971), p. 121 fGoogle Scholar.

65 Mellink, M. J., Anatolian Chronology, p. 115 fGoogle Scholar.

66 Ibid.

67 AJA 72 (1968), p. 259Google Scholar.

68 AJA 73 (1969), p. 64Google Scholar; 75 (1971), p. 138.

69 Anatolian Chronology, p. 115.

70 AJA 67 (1963), p. 177Google Scholar; cf. Mellink, op. cit., p. 113. On “metallic” ware in general see Mellaart, J., “Early Cultures of the South Anatolian Plateau, II”, AS XIII (1963), pp. 228 ffGoogle Scholar. and figs. 6, 14.

71 AJA 70 (1966), p. 147Google Scholar.

72 AJA 71 (1967), p. 161Google Scholar.

73 See J. Mellaart, op. cit., pp. 224–6, and fig. 7.

74 Goldman, H., Excavations at Gözlü Kule, Tarsus, (1956), vol. II, pp. 97, 109, 121 fGoogle Scholar.

75 Probably until II.5.(i?). One fragment, perhaps fortuitous, occurs in II.6.(i).

76 CAH3 I. xviii, pp. 363 f, 403Google Scholar. Cf. Tarsus II, p. 8Google Scholar.

77 Cf. also Mellink, , Anatolian Chronology, p. 103Google Scholar; and Watson, P. J., “The Chronology of North Syria and North Mesopotamia from 10,000 B.C. to 2000 B.C.” in Chronologies in Old World Archaeology, ed. Ehrich, R. W. (1965), p. 74Google Scholar.

78 Derricourt, R. M., Radiocarbon Chronology for Egypt and North Africa, JNES 30 (1971), p. 289Google Scholar.

79 H. E. Suess, op. cit., Table I.

80 This is now strengthened by further Dynasty I radiocarbon dates, Radiocarbon 13 (1971), pp. 159–66Google Scholar; BM-321 when calibrated yields c. 3390 B.C., and BM-322, BM-323 fall in the range c. 3380–3000 B.C.; Radiocarbon 17 (1975), p. 221 f.Google Scholar, TF-563, calibrated to c. 3400 B.C.

81 Smith, W. Stevenson, Ancient Egypt as represented in the Museum of Fine Arts (Boston 1952), p. 171Google Scholar.

82 Emery, W. B., Archaic Egypt (1961), p. 29 fGoogle Scholar.

83 E.g. Kaplony, P., Monumenta Aegyptiaca I: Steingefässe mit Inschriften der Frühzeit und des Alten Reichs (Brussels 1968), p. 33Google Scholar.

84 Our revised stratigraphy for Troy I suggests that there is not such a great disparity between the depths of deposit in Troy I and Tarsus EBI as Mellink, notes (Anatolian Chronology, p. 116Google Scholar). The Troy I deposits at the centre of the mound must be at least 5½ metres deep.

85 At Tell Judaidah, Amuq G can now be dated to c. 3670–3560 B.C., when P-1473 is calibrated. Radiocarbon 15 (1973), p. 374Google Scholar. The dates from Arslantepe provide further confirmation that the transition from Amuq F and Uruk to Amuq G and Jemdet Nasr falls in the period c. 3600–3400 B.C. Origini VII (1973), p. 179Google Scholar. Predynastic radiocarbon dates for Egypt are still unclear. C-813 may provide the date closest to the beginnings of the Late Predynastic period, calibrated c. 3650–3550 B.C., but ±310. Derricourt, op. cit., pp. 279, 289 and fig. 2.

86 P-321, P-312, P-318, P-319. Radiocarbon 4 (1962), p. 149 fGoogle Scholar. When calibrated the dates are:— P-321, 2480±68; P-312, 2350±72 (or could be as low as 2200±72); P-318, 2500±72 (or could be as high as 2720±72); P-319, 2490±66.

87 P-320.

88 P-300 (charcoal), 3870±61 b.p. has a very wide range on the calibration curve, from 2460 to 2200 B.C. P-299 (charcoal), 3750±97 b.p. appears to be easily calibrated to 2150±97 B.C. But in fact there are two other tree-ring dates in this region b.p. which have been left completely off the (hand-drawn) calibration curve, and which yield B.C. dates in the region 2350–2450 B.C. It may be that the previously cited date, P-320 gives the clue to the correct calibration of these two dates (P-300, P-299). Meanwhile it may be noted that MASCA calibration, based on the 5730 half-life, converts P-300 to 2436±61 B.C., and P-299 to 2313±97 B.C. MASCA calibration is calculated from the tables provided in Elizabeth Ralph, K., “Carbon-14 Dating”, in Dating Techniques for the Archaeologist, ed. Michael, H. N. and Ralph, E.K., 1971Google Scholar.

89 P-303A, uncorrected 3750±112 b.p. The uncorrected b.p. date is therefore the same as for the early EHIII date P-299 (see previous footnote). An identical absolute date, however, is clearly impossible so the Suess curve, as drawn, may be applicable in this case.

90 Assuming that MHI is contemporary with MMI. There are Dynasty XII scarabs in MMIa at Lebena (Weinberg, op. cit., p. 308) and possible MMIIa parallels from the reign of Amenemhet II (Kantor, Helene J., “The Relative Chronology of Egypt and its Foreign Correlations before the Late Bronze Age”, in Chronologies in Old World Archaeology, ed. Ehrich, E. W., (1965), pp. 19–22Google Scholar).

91 Dates for Sesostris II (BM-238, BM-280, Radiocarbon 11 (1969), p. 282 f.Google Scholar; UCLA-1212, Radiocarbon 9 (1967), p. 491Google Scholar) produce uncalibrated average of c. 3543 b.p. Corrected, this gives c. 2060 B.C. Add 94 years for previous Kings, thus c. 2154 B.C. for beginning of Dynasty XII. This is confirmed by the early-looking date P-11, 3710±98 b.p. (Radiocarbon 1 (1959), p. 47Google Scholar) which can be calibrated to 2150±98 B.C. The earliest Dyn. XII date is A-220 (Radiocarbon 4 (1962), p. 248Google Scholar), 3840±150 b.p. Even this, when corrected, may come out to only 2220±150 B.C.–but note both the huge deviation and the wide range on the Suess curve for this date. For the full list of C-14 dates see Derricourt, R. M. in JNES 30 (1971), p. 280 fGoogle Scholar.

92 It should be noted that MASCA calibration would put the Lerna MHI date (P-303A) even higher, to 2313±112 B.C.

93 Troy II, p. 229Google Scholar.

94 Renfrew, C., The Emergence of Civilization, p. 206Google Scholar.

95 For a summary of the position see French, D. H., “Migrations and ‘Minyan’ pottery in Western Anatolia and the Aegean”, in Bronze Age Migrations in the Aegean: archaeological and linguistic problems in Greek prehistory, ed. Crossland, R. A. and Birchall, A., (1973), pp. 51–7Google Scholar.

96 I owe this observation to Mr. Mellaart.

97 Troy III, p. 19Google Scholar.

98 Dated by first imports of LHI (Troy III, 19Google Scholar). LHI is in turn dated by its close affinities with LMI; LMI is dated by finds in the tomb of Queen Ahhetpe at Thebes. (Cf. Matz, F., “The Zenith of Minoan Civilization”, CAH3 II.1 (1973), ch. xii, p. 558Google Scholar). For once, historical dates and C-14 dates seem to agree closely, since the earliest C-14 date for the New Kingdom in Egypt is R-33, 3300±40 b.p. (Radiocarbon 7 (1965), p. 219Google Scholar) which, when calibrated on the more recent Suess chart, actually reads 1570±40 B.C. if one of the b.p. dates not on the curve is used. Using the curve itself the date stands at 1650±40 B.C.

99 AS VII (1957), pp. 74–9Google Scholar.

100 Weinberg, S. S., “The Relative Chronology of the Aegean in the Neolithic Period and the Early Bronze Age”, in Relative Chronologies in Old World Archaeology, ed. Enrich, R. W. (1954), p. 89Google Scholar. Again I am indebted to Mr. Mellaart for directing my attention to this.

101 Bln-782, see Antiquity XLV (1971), p. 277Google Scholar for list of C-14 dates.

102 BM-651.

103 Bln-877.

104 Mellink, M. J., Anatolian Chronology, p. 111Google Scholar.

105 W. Stevenson Smith, op. cit., p. 172. C-14 dates for this period have huge deviations, and so cannot be used with any precision.

106 Personal communication from Mr. Mellaart.

107 P-1628, c. 2500±64 B.C. from the penultimate building phase of EBII; P-1629, c. 2490±65 B.C.; and three other dates with wide, but compatible, ranges on the Suess curve: P-1617A, c. 2930–2540±65 B.C.; P-1617B, c. 2720–2500±64 B.C.; M-2376, c. 2500–2300±170 B.C. See Radiocarbon 14 (1972), p. 51Google Scholar; 17 (1975), p. 205; van Loon, M., Korucutepe Excavations 1969, p. 61Google Scholar; “The Excavations at Korucutepe, Turkey, 1968–70: Preliminary Report”, JNES 32 (1973), p. 359Google Scholar. MASCA calibration according to the earlier scheme (Radiocarbon 11 (1969), pp. 469 ffCrossRefGoogle Scholar.) yielded an average date of c. 2600 B.C. for the end of EBII.

108 AS XIX (1969), p. 7 f.Google Scholar; also Hauptmann, H., “Die Grabungen auf dem Norşun Tepe 1969” in Keban Projesi 1969 Calısmaları, p. 85Google Scholar.

109 M. J. Mellink, op. cit., pp. 112–13.

110 Radiocarbon 4 (1962), p. 151 fGoogle Scholar. 3980±97 b.p., uncorrected.

111 The pottery of Poliochni Yellow is not yet fully published, but two points may be noted. The depas has a Troy IV shape. The associated amphora with curled wings appears in Troy III–IV (shape C29). See Bernabo-Brea, L., “A Bronze Age House at Poliokhni (Lemnos)”, PPS 21 (1955), p. 152Google Scholar; also Illustrated London News for 3. viii. 1957, p. 197Google Scholar.

112 AS IX (1959), p. 154 ffGoogle Scholar.

113 Bernabo-Brea, L., Poliochni: Citta Preistorica Nell'Isola di Lemnos, I.i. (1964), p. 706Google Scholar.

114 CAH3 I.2. ch. xviii, p. 405Google Scholar; and W. Stevenson Smith, op. cit., p. 172 f.

115 ILN, 3. viii. 1957Google Scholar.

116 Note the contradictory C-14 dates in Radiocarbon 7 (1965), p. 191Google Scholar, and Radiocarbon 13 (1971), p. 371Google Scholar.

117 Radiocarbon 3 (1961), pp. 39–45CrossRefGoogle Scholar; Radiocarbon 7 (1965), p. 190Google Scholar. While the former dates have wide deviations, P-724 has a deviation of only ±59. Spectrographic analysis may strengthen the view that the jewellery came from West Anatolia. Boston Museum Bulletin LXX (1972), p. 9Google Scholar.

118 W. Stevenson Smith, loc. cit. C-14 dates for the following king, Neferirkare, are in the right area when calibrated, but their deviation makes them too flexible to use. Mr. Mellaart kindly informs me that the collection also included a fragment of an alabaster bowl carved with the cartouche of Neferirkare. Note also the Dynasty V cylinder seal from another tomb-group, apparently West Anatolian, Boston Museum Bulletin LXX (1972), pp. 11–13Google Scholar.

119 ILN 28. xi. 1959, p. 754 ffGoogle Scholar.

120 M. J. Mellink, op. cit., p. 111.

121 BM-653, calibrated to 2160±78 B.C.

122 AS XI (1961), p. 104Google Scholar.

123 Akurgal, op. cit., p. 54 f.

124 Studia Balcanica V (1971), pp. 119 ffGoogle Scholar. passim.

125 Hood, M. S. F., “Excavations at Emporio, Chios, 1952–55”, in Atti del VI Congresso Internazionale delle Scienze Preistoriche E Protostoriche, Roma 1962, (Firenze 1965), p. 226 fGoogle Scholar.

126 Studio Balcanica V (1971), p. 122Google Scholar

127 Ibid.

128 AJA 62 (1958), pp. 1 ff.Google Scholar; and summarized in CAH3 I, ch. xviii, pp. 406 ff.Google Scholar; CAH3 I, ch. xxiv, pp. 683 ffGoogle Scholar.

129 Sakellariou, M. B., “Linguistic and Ethnic Groups in Prehistoric Greece”, in History of the Hellenic World: Prehistory and Protohistory, ed. Christopoulos, G. A. (Eng. edition 1974, ed. G. Phylactopoulos), pp. 372 ffGoogle Scholar.

130 Renfrew, C., “Carbon 14 and the Prehistory of Europe”, in Scientific American October 1971Google Scholar; cf. also Studia Balcanica V (1971), pp. 119 ffGoogle Scholar.

131 Mellaart, J., AS XIII (1965), p. 235 fGoogle Scholar. It must be remembered that this is deduced only from surface surveys.

132 CAH3 I, xviii, p. 406Google Scholar.

133 Lloyd, S. and Mellaart, J., “Beycesultan Excavations, Fourth Preliminary Report, 1957”, AS VIII (1958), p. 97Google Scholar; Lloyd, S., Beycesultan vol. III (1972), p. 37Google Scholar; Bossert, H. Th., “Bild-Luwisches”, in Festschrift Johannes Friedrich (Heidelberg 1959), p. 80Google Scholar.

134 AJA 62 (1958), pp. 22, 24, 28 f.Google Scholar