iron age ceramics from southwestern paphlagonia

The first pottery report from the field campaignsat southwestern Paphlagonia has been published inAnatolia Antiqua XX, 2012 as well as in Naturwis-senschaftliche Analysen vor- und frühgeschichtlicherKeramik II1. In this article concentration will begiven to the Iron Age ceramic finds from the sameregion.

Paphlagonia was an ancient region on the BlackSea coast of north central Anatolia, bordered byBithynia to the west, Pontus to the east, and Galatiato the south (Map 1). Between 2005 and 2008 an ar-chaeological team from the Dokuz Eylül Universityin Izmir carried out archaeological field surveys(Map 2) and excavations in the southwestern part ofPaphlagonia, focusing on the site of Hadrianopolisnear the town of Eskipazar in the Turkish Provinceof Karabük and on its surrounding area, on its so-called chora2. The location of Eskipazar providesthe principal route from the Central Anatolian Plainthrough the western Black Sea mountain rangethrough Bartın to the Black Sea, a small but importanthinterland landscape controlling this major routeand dominating a rich agricultural enclave. Thus itlies on an exact location to transformation of geo-graphical changes between Central Anatolia andwestern Black Sea region of Turkey. During thesefield campaigns it has been shown that southwesternPaphlagonia was a transitional landscape betweenPaphlagonia, Galatia and Bityhnia that was settledwithout interruption from the Iron Age until the 8th

cent. A.D. The earliest pottery from southwesternPaphlagonia originates, however, from the chora ofHadrianopolis and not from the site of Hadrianopolisitself.

Almost no historical source exists for under-standing the situation of southwestern Paphlagoniaduring the Iron Age (Map 3). Regarding the IronAge of the hinterland of Paphlagonia, so-called‘Inner Paphlagonia’, the only systematic archaeo-logical field work carried out to date was led byR. J. Matthews of the British Institute of Archaeologyat Ankara between 1997 and 2001. The Hittite worldin central and northern Anatolia collapsed in 1180B.C. and after the Hittites, the first known people inthis region are the Phrygians, whose capital atGordion is not far to the south-west of Paphlagonia.According to Matthews’s survey the Middle IronAge has been dated to 950-550 B.C. and the LateIron Age to 550-330 B.C. The British surveys showedthat the only Iron Age site in the area of Eskipazarwas İnceboğaz Tepesi which is indicated by them asa ‘fortified site’3. Beside this sole Iron Age sitethere are also some tumuli (Fig. 1-5) in the region ofEskipazar and Karabük whose dates are difficult tojudge without any systematic excavations4. In ourarchaeological field surveys in 2005 we examinedKimistene (Map 4), a hilltop site ca. 12 km northeastof Hadrianopolis, near the village of Deresemail,and collected some Iron Age sherds. Kimistene islocated on a mountain chain, called Asartepe by thelocals, and it consists of four main peaks: Acropolis(Fig. 6), cistern, and two necropoleis. According toMatthews, many of the hilltop sites may have beenconstructed in the Late Iron Age period and re-usedin the Late Byzantine period.

At the end of 4th century B.C. Paphlagoniapassed under the control of the Macedonian kings,and after the death of Alexander the Great it was as-

*) Dokuz Eylül Üniversitesi, Edebiyat Fakültesi, Arkeoloji Bölümü, Tınaztepe/Kaynaklar Yerleşkesi, Buca, TR-35160 Izmir,Turkey; <[email protected]>; <[email protected]>.

**) Ardahan Üniversitesi, İnsani Bilimler ve Edebiyat Fakültesi, Arkeoloji Bölümü, Ardahan, Turkey; <[email protected]>.1) Laflı and Kan Şahin 2012a and b. For a preliminary Iron Age and Hellenistic pottery report of southwestern Paphlagonia: Laflı

and Kan Şahin 2011 as well as Laflı and Kan Şahin in press.2) Laflı and Christof 2012a: 28-31 as well as Fünfschilling and Laflı 2012, 5.3) Matthews 2009: 151, table 5.2; map of distributions of Iron Age sites in Inner Paphlagonia: Matthews 2009: 150, fig. 5.1.4) Cf. Laflı and Christof 2012b.

Anatolia Antiqua XXI (2013), p. 33-68

Ergün LAFLI*, Gülseren KAN ŞAHİN* and Sami PATACI**

IRON AGE CERAMICS FROM SOUTHWESTERN PAPHLAGONIA

signed, together with Cappadocia and Mysia, toEumenes. However, it continued to be governed bynative princes until it was absorbed by the encroachingpower of Pontus. The rulers of that dynasty becamemasters of the greater part of Paphlagonia as earlyas the reign of Mithridates Ctistes (302-266 B.C.),but it was not until 183 B.C. that Pharnaces broughtthe Greek city of Sinope under their control. Thefunction of Kimistene in the Iron Age and Hellenisticperiods is unclear5. At this site traces of foundationsof a Roman temple (of Zeus Kimistenos?), locatedon the northern artificial edge of its Acropolis andon the southwestern flank of the site should havebeen built during the 3rd century A.D. and shouldhave been in use until the 4th cent. A.D. This templeis an indication of some unknown religious activitiesat the hilltop sanctuary6. As understood from theillegal trenches (Fig. 7-8) opened up in its temenos,the foundations of this temple lay in the Iron Age/Hel-lenistic fill where we have found numerous sherdsof Iron Age grey ware, especially open forms, butno painted ware or Hellenistic and Roman pottery.In the illegal excavation trench we documented atleast three settlement layers of ca. 2 m in height,going deeper than the foundation level of the Romantemple. This is perhaps an indication that this area

was a cultic area much earlier than the arrival of theRomans. According to some scholars, Kimistenewas a base for the Pontic operations of MithridatesCtistes as he founded and expanded his kingdom inthe years around 300 B.C.7. During our survey wewere not able to discover any architectural indicationof Iron Age or Hellenistic period. The existing forti-fication on the Acropolis of Kimistene is datable tothe Middle and Late Byzantine periods whereassome earlier finds, among others a Pre-Iron Ageserpentine axe (Fig. 9), were encovered.

During the four seasons of field research carriedout between 2005 and 2008 in southwestern Pa-phlagonia a wide range of ceramics was collectedfrom field surveys and excavations; a total of ca .1525 fragments were examined. From these, 36sherds are classified as ‘Pre-Iron Age’ and 92 sherdsas ‘Iron Age’ (30 of which are Iron Age coarseware). In this article survey finds in particular willbe presented, because most of the Iron Age materialwas found in the course of 2005 field survey. Amajor problem is that Iron Age and Hellenisticcoarse wares are difficult to distinguish in this land-scape.

Through the quantification of material and ex-amination of clay there is a strong evidence to

5) For Hellenistic Kimistene: Matthews, Metcalfe and Cottica 2009: 174-177; for Kimistene: Laflı and Christof 2011.6) Cf. hilltop sanctuaries in Paphlagonia: Matthews, Metcalfe and Cottica 2009: 174-177.7) Matthews, Metcalfe and Cottica 2009: 177.

34 ERGÜN LAFLI, GÜLSEREN KAN ŞAHİN and SAMİ PATACI

Map 1 : Map of Paphlagonia, Northern and Central Anatolia with the quoted places in the text.Underlined places indicate cities with local museums.

IRON AGE CERAMICS FROM SOUTHWESTERN PAPHLAGONIA 35

Map 2 : Map of the surveyed areas in southwestern Paphlagonia in 2005.


Map 3 : Map of Iron Age find spots in southwestern Paphlagonia in 2005.


Fig. 1 : Tumulus 1 in İstasyon Districtin Eskipazar.

Fig. 2 : Tumulus 2, ca. 3 km east ofEskipazar.

Fig. 3 : A tumulus in the VillageTamışlar near Eskipazar.

Fig. 4 : Two tumuli ca. 2 km southeast of Karabük town center.

assume that the great majority of these vessels weremanufactured in southwestern Paphlagonia. Thelocal origin of the material, however, has not beenproven by mineralogical analysis of the clay.

In our pottery study we have classified all thesherds earlier than the Roman period into a ‘Pre-Roman’ category, forming 12 main groups frompre-Iron Age, Iron Age, Hellenistic and Late Hellenisticperiods. Most of these pre-Roman groups are fromKimistene. Definable wares of Pre-Hellenistic periodsare as follows: Pre-Iron Age sherds (from höyüks inthe area), Iron Age grey ware, Iron Age paintedware and Iron Age coarse ware. Finds in local mu-seums such as those in the Museum of Çankırı,which are mostly from graves in the area, have alsobeen considered for our study.


Map 4 : Map of Iron Age finds from Kimistene in 2005.

Fig. 5 : A tumulus at the citadel of Safranbolu; in 2011 excavations were begun here.


Fig

. 6 :

Th

e Acropolis

of K

imis

ten

e.V

iew

ing

dir

ecti

on f

rom

th

e n

orth

east

.

Fig

. 7 :

Ill

egal

ly e

xcav

ated

are

a at

th

e te

mp

le’s

ter

race

on

th

eAcropolis

of K

imis

ten

e in

200

5.

Fig

. 8 :

Ill

egal

ly e

xcav

ated

are

a at

th

e te

mp

le’s

ter

race

in 2

005.

I. PRE-IRON AGE POTTERy

In the area surrounding Hadrianopolis, especiallyin the southern part of Eskipazar, there are somehöyük sites on the plain where we have collectedChalcolithic and Bronze Age sherds. A few prehistoricsherds were also found in Hadrianopolis. These fewpieces show a very different character than the laterIron Age sherds. They have a coarse fabric withoutany distinctive forms and they were used for dailykitchen function. Their characteristics are similar tothose of pottery in Central Anatolia.

Our surveys were not able to provide a detailedand full presentation of the Pre-Iron Age materialin Paphlagonia. Some general conclusions, howe-ver, can still be made. No Paleolithic or Neolithicmaterial was recognized among the finds, and thisis more or less consistent with the rest of the northernAnatolia: this may be due to the mountainouscharacter of the north and its relatively harsherclimatic conditions. Two höyük sites in our survey

region in Eskipazar, Tamışlar as well as KutlukuyuHöyük (Fig. 10) near Ortaköy (Kuzupınar District),might be interpreted as small villages, hamlets, orisolated farmsteads. Sedimentologically the höyüksites in Eskipazar locate at the most northwesternborders of the Central Anatolian Plateau; this is alsothe exact location of genesis of the western BlackSea mountain range.

19 of 36 sherds belong to open and 17 to closedforms; dimensions of forms should be very large.Their clay is yellowish red (5YR 5/6-4/6), reddishbrown (5YR 4/4-5/4), brown (7.5YR 5/4-4/4-4/3,10YR 5/3), red (2.5YR 4/6-5/6), very dark grey(7.5YR 3/1, 10YR 3/1, 2.5Y 3/1), light brown(7.5YR 6/4), reddish yellow (5YR 6/6), greyishbrown (10YR 5/2), black (10YR 2/1), light yellowishbrown (10YR 6/4), dark brown (7.5YR 3/2) andgrey (10YR 5/1). Because of the low firing technique,there are some multicoloured samples in black (Gley1 2.5/N, 7.5YR 2.5/1) and grey (7.5YR 3/1, 5YR3/1, Gley 1 3/N). Most of them were underfired.


Fig. 9 : A serpentine axe found inthe Acropolis of Kimistene in

2005 (Museum of Amasra).

CATALOGUE

Fig. 10 : Kutlukuyu, a höyük site by Ortaköy, ca. 15 km southeastof Eskipazar. Viewing direction from the north.

8) Alkım, Alkım and Bilgi 2003: 66, pl. CXXXIII, no 205.9) Omura 2007, 48: fig. 47:12.10) Omura 2006, 70: fig. 82:11.11) Omura 2007, 49: fig. 62:13.


Sand, lime, grit and mica are the main inclusions.Most of them have a thick wall, were made on aslow wheel and are unslipped. Their surfaces wereroughly shaped with hands. The determined slipcolours are red (2.5YR 5/6-4/6-5/8, 10R 4/6), brown(7.5YR 4/2-4/3-4/4-5/2-5/3-5/4), reddish brown(2.5YR 4/4, 5YR 4/4-4/3-5/4), black ( Gley 1 2.5/N),yellowish red (5YR 5/6), light brown (7.5YR 6/3-6/4), very dark grey (7.5YR 3/1, 10YR 3/1), palebrown (10YR 6/3), dark reddish grey (5YR 4/2) anddark greyish brown (10YR 4/2). Same slip techniquehas been determined at a hollow bowl from theMount II of İkiztepe8 which is an Early Bronze Agevessel.

On few sherds there is some external stamped,grooved and ridge decoration, as seen on nos 9 and19 with grooved decoration. On no 16 there is a two-rowed ridge decoration. Parallels to no 16 are knownfrom Gence Höyük near the village of Bezirhane inthe Gölbaşı District of Ankara Province and datedto the Middle Bronz Age9. Similar ones are a MiddleBronz Age sherd from Höyük-Durupınar10 and aLate Bronz Age sherd from Külhöyük, both inAnkara11.

OPEN FORMS

Rim Fragments (pl. 1, nos 1-2)

An open form with a thickened and roundedslightly outcurved rim. There are some burningtraces on its exterior surface. Both external andinterior surfaces were burnished.

pl. 1/1 and pl. 5/1.1. (No 1212): Rim fragment; Kimistene, summit of

the Acropolis, southern slope, found in 2005.Max. h 3.4 cm, d of rim 23.0 cm, max. w 7.9 cm,

max. th 0.9 cm.Brown (10YR 5/3) slip on exterior; yellowish red

(5YR 5/6) slip on interior. All of the surface is burnished.Hard, non-porous, yellowish red (5YR 5/6) and brown(10YR 5/3) fabric with frequent sand and tiny lime inclu-sions.

pl. 1/2 and pl. 5/2.2. (No 723): Rim fragment; Kimistene, Acropolis,

temple’s terrace, illegally excavated area under the temple’spodium, surface find, found in 2005.

Max. h 5.7 cm, max. w 5.5 cm, max. th 1.0 cm.Pale brown (10YR 6/3) and dark grey (10YR 4/1)

slip on exterior and interior rim, brown (7.5YR 5/2) slipon lower interior. Exterior surface is burnished. Hard,very sparsely porous, fired to brown (7.5YR 4/3) anddark grey (Gley 1 4/N) fabric with frequent lime andsand inclusions.

Parallels: Özdoğan, Marro and Tibet 1999: 223, 225,drawing 1:6, drawing 2: Eylekderesi (1-2) and Gavurevleri(4).

Base Fragments of Open Forms (pl. 1, nos 3-4)

Two fragments in plain and low base form.

pl. 1/3 and pl. 5/3.3. (No 1296): Base fragment; Kimistene, Acropolis,

temple slope, illegal excavation area, found in 2005.Max. h 4.0 cm, max. w 7.8 cm, max. th 1.3 cm.Black (Gley 1 2.5/N) slip on exterior; light brown

(7.5YR 6/3) slip on interior. Average hardness; verysparsely porous, light brown (7.5YR 6/4) and black (Gley1 2.5/N) fabric with frequent lime and large grit inclu-sions.

pl. 1/4 and pl. 5/4.4. (No 663): Base fragment; Kimistene, Cistern,

eastern slope, found in 2005.Max. h 1.7 cm, d of base 10.4 cm, max. w 5.2 cm,

max. th 1.1 cm.Red (2.5YR 4/6) slip on exterior; reddish yellow

(5YR 6/6) unslipped surface on interior. Average hardness;non-porous, red (2.5YR 4/6) and black (7.5YR 2.5/1)fabric with frequent lime and large grit inclusions.

Body Fragments of Open Forms (pl. 5, nos 5-19)

Some pieces (nos 6, 12 and 18) were polished onthe exterior. In some fragments the interior face isflattened.

pl. 5/5.5. (No 675): Body fragment; Kimistene, Cistern,

eastern slope, found in 2005. Max. h 2.2 cm, max. w 2.6 cm, max. th 0.9 cm.Red (10R 4/6) slip on exterior; red (2.5YR 4/6) slip

on interior. Average hardness; very sparsely porous, red(2.5YR 4/6) and very dark grey (7.5YR 3/1) fabric withfrequent lime inclusions.

pl. 5/6.6. (No 730): Body fragment; Kimistene, Acropolis,

temple’s terrace, illegally excavated area under the temple’spodium, found in 2005.


Pl. 1 : Nos 1-20 : Pre-Iron Age pottery; nos 1-2: Rim fragments of open forms; nos

3-4: Base fragments of open forms; no 20: A rim fragment of a closed form; andnos 37-44: Iron Age grey ware, rim fragments of open forms.


Max. h 2.5 cm, max. w 2.4 cm, max. th 0.7 cm.Dark reddish grey (5YR 4/2) slip on exterior; very

dark grey (7.5YR 3/1) slip on interior. Exterior surface isburnished. Average hardness; non-porous, fine, reddishbrown (5YR 4/4) fabric with some micaceous inclusions.


eastern slope, found in 2005.Max. h 3.0 cm, max. w 3.9 cm, max. th 1.2 cm.Reddish brown (2.5YR 4/4) slip on exterior and

brown (7.5YR 4/3) slip on interior. Average hardness;very sparsely porous, fired to reddish brown (5YR 4/4)and very dark grey (7.5YR 3/1) fabric with frequent limeand some micaceous inclusions.


eastern slope, found in 2005.Max. h 3.5 cm, max. w 4.1 cm, max. th 1.0 cm.Red (2.5YR 5/6) slip on exterior and interior. Average

hardness; non-porous, fired to yellowish red (5YR 5/6)fabric with frequent lime inclusions.


eastern slope, found in 2005. Max. h 4.5 cm, max. w 4.0 cm, max. th 1.1 cm. Red (2.5YR 5/6) slip on exterior and interior. Average

hardness; non-porous reddish yellow (5YR 6/6) and black(7.5YR 2.5/1) fabric with some lime inclusions.


southern slope, just below the summit, up to Deresemailcreek, found in 2005.

Max. h 3.4 cm, max. w 5.1 cm, max. th 0.9 cm.Brown (7.5YR 4/3) slip on exterior; reddish brown

(5YR 4/4) slip on interior. All of the surface is burnished.Hard, non-porous, reddish yellow (5YR 6/6) and verydark grey (Gley 1 3/N) fabric with frequent lime andmedium grit inclusions.


eastern slope, found in 2005. Max. h 3.2 cm, max. w 4.5 cm, max. th 1.5 cm.Yellowish red (5YR 5/6) slip on exterior and interior.

Average hardness; very sparsely porous, brown (7.5YR4/3) fabric with frequent lime and grit inclusions.


eastern slope, found in 2005. Max. h 4.5 cm, max. w 4.0 cm, max. th 1.2 cm.Reddish brown (5YR 4/4) slip on exterior; brown

(7.5YR 5/4) slip on interior. Exterior surface is burnished.Average hardness; non-porous, fine, brown (7.5YR 5/4)fabric with some tiny lime and sand inclusions.


eastern slope, found in 2005. Max. h 4.5 cm, max. w 3.6 cm, max. th 1.1 cm.Red (2.5YR 4/6) slip on exterior; red (2.5YR 5/6)

slip on interior. Average hardness; non-porous, red (2.5YR5/6) and black (7.5YR 2.5/1) fabric with frequent limeinclusions.


eastern slope, found in 2005. Max. h 4.7 cm, max. w 3.4 cm, max. th 1.1 cm.Red (2.5YR 5/8) slip on exterior and interior. Average

hardness; very sparsely porous, fine, reddish brown (5YR5/4) fabric with frequent lime and sand inclusions.


found in 2005. Max. h 5.5 cm, max. w 4.7 cm, max. th 1.4 cm.Reddish brown (5YR 4/4) slip on exterior; red (2.5YR

5/6) slip on interior. Soft, non-porous, fine, yellowish red(5YR 4/6) fabric with frequent tiny lime and large grit in-clusions.


found in 2005. Max. h 4.8 cm, max. w 6.7 cm, max. th 1.3 cm.Reddish brown (2.5YR 4/4) slip on exterior; brown

(7.5YR 4/3) slip on interior. Soft, very sparsely porous,reddish brown (5YR 4/4) and very dark grey (7.5YR 3/1)fabric with frequent lime and large grit inclusions.


eastern slope, found in 2005. Max. h 8.1 cm, max. w 4.4 cm, max. th 1.7 cm.Light brown (7.5YR 6/4) unslipped surface on exterior;

brown (7.5YR 5/4) slip on interior. Average hardness;non-porous, fine, reddish brown (5YR 4/4) fabric withfrequent tiny lime and large grit inclusions.


eastern slope, found in 2005. Max. h 7.5 cm, max. w 7.3 cm, max. th 1.4 cm.Reddish brown (5YR 4/3) slip on exterior; brown

(7.5YR 5/4) slip on interior. Exterior surface is burnished.Average hardness; non-porous, fine, brown (7.5YR 4/4)fabric with frequent tiny lime and some sand inclusions.


eastern slope, found in 2005. Max. h 8.3 cm, max. w 7.4 cm, max. th 1.1 cm.Red (2.5YR 5/6) slip on exterior and interior. Average

hardness; non-porous, fired to reddish yellow (5YR 6/6)and light yellowish brown (10YR 6/4) fabric with frequentlarge grit inclusions.


Pl. 2 : Nos 45-56 : Iron Age grey ware; nos 45-46: Rim fragments of open forms; no 47: A base fragmentof an open form; nos 52-55: Rim fragments of closed forms; no 56: A base fragment of a closed form;

and nos 74-78: Iron Age painted ware, rim fragments of a bowl form.

Pl. 3 : Nos 79-98 : Iron Age painted ware; nos 79-80: Rim fragments of a bowl form;no 85: A body fragment of an open form; no 86: A rim fragment of a closed form;

nos 87-88: Handle fragments of closed forms; and nos 89-98: Body fragments of closed forms.



CLOSED FORMS

Most of these forms could be cooking wares.

Rim Fragment of a Closed Form (pl. 1, no 20)


found in 2005. Max. h 5.0 cm, max. w 4.4 cm, max. th 1.1 cm.Black (Gley 1 2.5/N) slip on exterior; black (Gley 1

2.5/N) unslipped surface on interior. Exterior surface isburnished. Average hardness; very sparsely porous, fine,black (10YR 2/1) fabric with frequent large grit andsome lime inclusions.

Similar decoration: Marro, Özdoğan and Tibet 1998,328, pl. 1, 512.

Body Fragments of Closed Forms (pls. 6-7, nos 21-36)

Some sherds (nos 23, 25-26, 29, 33 and 34) werepolished on the exterior. On some fragments interiorface is flattened.


temple slope, illegally excavated pit of the altar, found in2005.

Max. h 3.0 cm, max. w 3.2 cm, max. th 1.0 cm.Brown (7.5YR 4/2) slip on exterior; pale brown

(10YR 6/3) unslipped surface on interior. Exterior surfaceis burnished. Average hardness; non-porous, brown (10YR5/3) and very dark grey (Gley 1 3/N) fabric with somesand, minor grit and lime inclusions.


eastern slope, found in 2005. Max. h 4.4 cm, max. w 4.5 cm, max. th 1.3 cm.Red (2.5YR 4/6) slip on exterior; grey (10YR 5/1)

unslipped surface on interior. Average hardness; non-porous, yellowish red (5YR 5/6) and very dark grey(7.5YR 3/1) fabric with some lime and sand inclusions.


temple slope, eastern part, found in 2005.Max. h 4.3 cm, max. w 4.0 cm, max. th 1.2 cm.Light brown (7.5YR 6/4) slip on exterior; reddish

yellow (7.5YR 6/6) unslipped surface on interior. Hard,non-porous, fine, reddish yellow (5YR 6/6) fabric withfrequent tiny lime inclusions.



Max. h 4.6 cm, max. w 5.0 cm, max. th 1.3 cm.Very dark grey (Gley 1 3/N) unslipped surface on

exterior; pale brown (10YR 6/3) slip on interior. Averagehardness; non-porous, greyish brown (10YR 5/2) somesand, large grit and lime inclusions.



Max. h 4.5 cm, max. w 5.3 cm, max. th 1.2 cm.Brown (7.5YR 4/3) slip on exterior; brown (7.5YR

5/4) unslipped surface on interior. Exterior surface isburnished. Soft, non-porous, fine, brown (7.5YR 4/3)fabric with frequent tiny lime inclusions.


temple slope, eastern part, found in 2005.Max. h 4.8 cm, max. w 5.2 cm, max. th 1.3 cm.Brown (7.5YR 4/4) slip on exterior; light yellowish

brown (10YR 6/4) unslipped surface on interior. Exteriorsurface is burnished. Soft, non-porous, fine, yellowishred (5YR 5/6) fabric with frequent medium grit and limeinclusions.


eastern slope, found in 2005. Max. h 5.7 cm, max. w 4.5 cm, max. th 2.1 cm.Reddish brown (2.5YR 4/4) slip on exterior; brown

(7.5YR 5/4) unslipped surface on interior. Soft, non-porous, reddish brown (5YR 4/4) and very dark grey(5YR 3/1) fabric with frequent tiny lime and medium gritinclusions.


found in 2005. Max. h 6.3 cm, max. w 4.4 cm, max. th 1.0 cm.Brown (7.5YR 5/3) slip on exterior; dark grey (Gley

1 4/N) unslipped surface on interior. Average hardness;very sparsely porous, very dark grey (2.5Y 3/1) fabricwith some sand and lime inclusions.


temple slope, illegally excavated area under the temple’spodium, found in 2005.

12) Marro, Özdoğan and Tibet 1998, 323: “Seuls deux tessons permentent de reconstituer le profil des vases attestés sur ce site :I’un est extrémenent banal, puisqu’il s’agit du bord d’un vase fermé à lévre simple; l’autre provient d’une marmite à décor en relief etincisé linéaire, pourvue d’un tenon”.


Pl. 4 : Nos 99 and 104: Iron Age coarse ware; no

99: A rim fragment of an open form;no 104: A rim fragment of a closed form.

Max. h 5.5 cm, max. w 5.5 cm, max. th 1.3 cm. Black (Gley 1 2.5/N) slip on exterior; light brown

(7.5YR 6/4) unslipped surface on interior. Exterior surfaceis burnished. Average hardness; very sparsely porous,fired to light brown (7.5YR 6/4) and black (Gley 1 2.5/N)fabric with infrequent tiny lime and medium grit inclu-sions.


eastern slope, found in 2005. Max. h 5.3 cm, max. w 6.3 cm, max. th 1.6 cm.Reddish brown (2.5YR 4/4) slip on exterior; yellowish

red (5YR 5/6) unslipped surface on interior. Averagehardness; sparsely porous, fired to yellowish red (5YR4/6) and yellowish brown (10YR 5/4) fabric with frequenttiny lime, some large grit and sand inclusions.


eastern slope, found in 2005. Max. h 5.8 cm, max. w 5.5 cm, max. th 1.1 cm.Red (10R 4/6) slip on exterior; grey (7.5YR 5/1) un-

slipped surface on interior. Average hardness; very sparselyporous, fired to very dark grey (10YR 3/1) fabric withfrequent lime and medium grit inclusions.


eastern slope, found in 2005. Max. h 6.7 cm, max. w 5.5 cm, max. th 1.0 cm.Red (2.5YR 4/6) slip on exterior; brown (7.5YR 5/4)

unslipped surface on interior. Soft, non-porous, darkbrown (7.5YR 3/2) fabric with some medium grit andlime inclusions.



Max. h 6.5 cm, max. w 5.2 cm, max. th 0.9 cm.Dark greyish brown (10YR 4/2) slip on exterior;

brown (7.5YR 5/4) unslipped surface on interior. Exteriorsurface is burnished. Soft, non-porous, fired to very darkgrey (7.5YR 3/1) fabric with frequent large grit, micaceousand lime inclusions.


eastern slope, found in 2005. Max. h 6.0 cm, max. w 8.0 cm, max. th 1.0 cm.Very dark grey (10YR 3/1) slip on exterior; brown

(7.5YR 5/3) unslipped surface on interior. Exterior surfaceis burnished. Hard, very sparsely porous, grey (10YR5/1) fabric with some sand and lime, rare micaceous in-clusions.


found in 2005. Max. h 8.1 cm, max. w 7.8 cm, max. th 1.4 cm.Reddish brown (5YR 5/4) slip on exterior; brown

(7.5YR 4/3) unslipped surface on interior. Soft, non-porous, fired to very dark grey (7.5YR 3/1) fabric withfrequent large grit, micaceous and lime inclusions.


found in 2005. Max. h 6.9 cm, max. w 10.0 cm, max. th 1.3 cm.Red (10R 4/6) slip on exterior; light yellowish brown

(10YR 6/4) unslipped surface on interior. Hard, non-porous, fired to red (2.5YR 4/6) and black (7.5YR 2.5/1)fabric with some large grit and tiny lime inclusions.

II. IRON AGE GREy WARE

Iron Age grey ware is often associated with aPhrygian presence in Central Anatolia. The majorconcentration of ‘Phrygian’ grey ware is west-central Anatolia. This fabric endures through theMiddle and Late Iron Ages and into the Hellenisticand even Roman periods. A sample of grey vesselsfrom the new excavations at Gordion has been sub-jected to chemical analyses, which confirmed thatthe same clay was used for virtually all of thevessels in the Iron Age corpus, and perhaps this sit-uation did not change in the Hellenistic period13.

Grey ware is the most distinctive Iron Age groupamong the southwestern Paphlagonian finds. Theirgrey or blackish fabric is fine, with mineral inclusionsin medium sizes and a burnished soapy texture to

13) Stewart 2010: 147; Henrickson 2005: 125.


the surface, often with a ‘silvery sheen’. Matthews’ssurveys produced numerous examples of grey warefrom Inner Paphlagonia, for instance from PS 178,Höyük Tepesi, in the Eldivan Plain14. The presenceof this ware in Inner Paphlagonia was associated byMatthews with the northern limits of the distributionof Phrygian heritage15.

Its clay is mostly dark grey (7.5YR 4/1, 10YR4/1, 2.5Y 4/1, Gley 1 4/N), grey (2.5Y 5/1-6/1, Gley1 5/N-6/N), black (2.5Y 2.5/1, 10YR 2/1, Gley 12.5/N) and very dark grey (2.5Y 3/1, Gley 1 3/N).Grey fabric and polished black slip are both firmlyin the Phrygian ceramic tradition16.

Lime, mica, sand and grit were used as inclusionsin minor proportions, in some samples at a dimensionof 10-20 mm. It has a hard and non-porous claywith a very dark grey (2.5Y 3/1, Gley 1 3/N), darkgrey (Gley 1 4/N, 2.5Y 4/1), black (Gley 1 2.5/N),grey (2.5Y 5/1-6/1, Gley 1 5/N) and light grey (5YR7/1) slip. In some fragments their surface is polished.Their thickness differs between 4 and 10 mm. Onsamples nos 37-38, 40, 51, 57 and 63 polishingtechnic provided a metallic sheen on the surface.Almost no ornamentation has been applied.

Functionally they should be serving vessels, butthey could also be associated with some religiouspurposes and used as ritual vessels. One majorvessel form is a bowl of ca. 20 cm diameter whichis clearly an imitation of metallic forms.

In 2005 around 37 fragments were collected, 15of which belonged to open and 22 to closed forms.Most of the sherds are from the hilltop sanctuary atKimistene: 22 fragments from the illegally excavatedarea in the temenos of Kimistene, 3 of them fromthe Acropolis, 7 from the southern slope, 2 from thewestern slope, 1 from the northwestern slope, 1from the eastern slope, and 1 from the Cistern.Sherds found in the illegal pit at the temenos couldbe indications of a fire that occured in the stratifiedlevels beneath the temple’s podium.

The date of Iron Age grey ware should be lateMiddle Iron Age and Late Iron Age, i.e. from thebeginning of the 7th to mid 4th centuries B.C. G. D.Tetova’s analysis of the material at Gordion revealsthat the Early Phrygian ceramic tradition continuedwell into the 4th century B.C., with about 90% of thevessel forms based on prototypes established in the9th century or earlier17. Thus forms remain unchanged

for many centuries. That is the reason why greyware from southwestern Paphlagonia is difficult todate through analogy with some other sites. Radio-carbon dates at Boğazköy put the Büyükkaya-Stufeinto the 9th century B.C., while the Büyükkale IIa-blevels appear to date to the 8th century B.C. andhave material comparable to that from Maşat III-II,Kültepe Iron Age and Kaman-Kalehöyük IIc-a18. Itis interesting to note that the whole-mouth jars andcraters found in Matthews’s surveys were not re-covered at Kimistene.

OPEN FORMS

Most of them were polished in their interior sur-face.

Rim Fragments of Open Forms (pls. 1-2, nos 37-46)

Most of them have straight walls with outcurvedrims. Whole surfaces of nos 37-38, 40, 42-43, and45, interior surface of no 44 and exterior surface ofnos 46 and 57 are polished.



Max. h 1.4 cm, max. w 2.1 cm, max. th 0.5 cm.Very dark grey (Gley 1 3/N) slip on all of surface.

Exterior and interior surface are burnished. Average hard-ness; thin paste, non-porous, fine, dark grey (Gley 1 4/N)fabric with frequent tiny lime inclusions.



Max. h 1.7 cm, max. w 2.9 cm, max. th 0.4 cm.Very dark grey (Gley 1 3/N) slip on exterior; grey

(Gley 1 5/N) slip on interior. Exterior and interior surfaceare burnished. Average hardness; thin paste, non-porous,fine, grey (Gley 1 5/N) fabric with some tiny lime inclu-sions.

pl. 7/39.39. (No 717): Rim fragment; Kimistene, Acropolis,


14) Matthews 2009: 153, fig. 5.3, no. 5, site PS 178 and 155, fig. 5.5, PS 052-Kızılca Tepe.15) Matthews 2009: 154.16) Stewart 2010: 210.17) Stewart 2010: 49-50; Toteva 2007: 53, 59.18) Matthews 2009: 153; and Genz 2004: table 6.


Pl. 5 : Nos 1-19: Pre-Iron Age pottery; nos 1-2: Rim fragments of open forms;nos 3-4: Base fragments of open forms; and nos 5-19: Body fragments of open forms.

Pl. 6 : Nos 20-34: Pre-Iron Age pottery; no 20: A rim fragment of a closed form;and nos 21-34: Body fragments of closed forms.



Max. h 2.1 cm, max. w 2.7 cm, max. th 0.8 cm.Very dark grey (Gley 1 3/N) slip on exterior and

interior. Hard, very sparsely porous, fine, black (10YR2/1) fabric with frequent tiny lime and some sand inclu-sions.




Exterior and interior surface are burnished. Average hard-ness; non-porous, fired to very dark grey (2.5Y 3/1)fabric with tiny lime and rare micaceous inclusions.


southern slope, found in 2005. Max. h 1.2 cm, d of rim 10.4 cm, max. w 4.3 cm,

max. th 0.5 cm.Light grey (5YR 7/1) slip on exterior and interior.

All of surface is burnished. Hard, non-porous, fired toreddish grey (5YR 5/2) and dark grey (7.5YR 4/1) fabricwith some tiny lime inclusions.


the Acropolis, southern slope, found in 2005. Max. h 3.8 cm, d of rim 26.6 cm, max. w 6.0 cm,

max. th 1.2 cm.Very dark grey (Gley 1 3/N) slip on exterior and

interior, hard, non-porous, fine, dark grey (Gley 1 4/N)fabric with frequent tiny lime inclusions.

Parallels: Matthews 2009: 162, fig. 5.14/10 (from PS015; its paste is pale brown, 10 YR 6/3, and its exterior isburnished); and Marro, Özdoğan and Tibet 1998, 329, pl.V, 7. (from Gavurevleri; C31/16).


found in 2005. Max. h 2.7 cm, d of rim 15.0 cm, max. w 3.5 cm,

max. th 0.9 cm.Black (Gley 1 2.5/N) slip on all of surface. Exterior

and interior surface are burnished. Hard, non-porous,fine, black (10YR 2/1) fabric with frequent lime inclu-sions.

A parallel: Özdoğan, Marro and Tibet 1999: 223,Gavurevleri drawing 5/3 [from the Village Yazıcımeydanı(Meydanköy), Gavurevleri-Höyük and Gavurevleri/OrtaboyHöyük in Province Kastamonu].


southern slope, underground cave, surface find, found in2005.

Max. h 2.8 cm, d of rim 33.6 cm, max. w 6.1 cm,max. th 1.1 cm.

Light brownish grey (2.5Y 6/2) unslipped surface onexterior, dark grey (2.5Y 4/1) abrasion slip interior rim.Interior surface is burnished. Hard, very sparsely porous,fine, grey (Gley 1 6/N) fabric with occasional sand inclu-sions.

Parallels: Matthews 2009: 153, 168, fig. 5.17/6 (fromthe site PS178); Özdoğan, Marro and Tibet 1997, 309,drawing 6/6 (from the Village Samanlıören, Yüklütepe,Yamaç Settlement in Taşköprü); and Omura 2008, 51,fig. 106/5 (from Devecigeçidi, in District Çelebi, VillageKarabucak, Province Kırşehir; Late Iron Age).




Very dark grey (Gley 1 3/N) slip on exterior andinterior. All of surface is burnished. Hard, non-porous,fine, grey (2.5Y 5/1) fabric with some large grit inclu-sions.


temple terrace, northwestern slope, found in 2005. Max. h 4.2 cm, d of rim 23.4 cm, max. w 8.2 cm,

max. th 1.1 cm.Black (Gley 1 2.5/N) slip on exterior, grey (2.5Y

5/1) slip on interior. Exterior surface is burnished. Hard,very sparsely porous, fired to grey (2.5Y 5/1) and black(2.5Y 2.5/1) fabric with some tiny lime and sand inclu-sions.

Base Fragment of an Open Form (pl. 2, no 47)

This group contains rounded flat bases.

pl. 2/47 and pl. 7/47.47. (No 1359): Base fragment; Kimistene, Cistern,

eastern slope, found in 2005. Max. h 2.6 cm, d of base 8.2 cm, max. w 7.8 cm,

max. th 0.8 cm.Reddish brown (2.5YR 4/4) slip on exterior; brown

(7.5YR 4/4) slip on interior. All of surface is burnished.Hard, very sparsely porous, grey (Gley 1 5/N) fabricwith frequent lime and micaceous inclusions.

Body Fragments of Open Forms (pl. 7, nos 48-51)




Exterior surface is burnished. Average hardness; non-porous, dark grey (10YR 4/1) fabric with some tiny lime,sand and medium grit inclusions.

Pl. 7 : Nos 35-36: Pre-Iron Age pottery, body fragments of closed forms; nos 37-51: Iron Age grey ware;nos 37-46: Rim fragments of open forms; no 47: A base fragment of an open form;

and nos 48-51: Body fragments of open forms.





Max. h 3.3 cm, max. w 2.7 cm, max. th 0.7 cm.Very dark grey (2.5Y 3/1) slip on exterior and interior.

All of the surface is burnished. Average hardness; verysparsely porous, fine, very dark grey (Gley 1 3/N) fabricwith some tiny lime inclusions.



Max. h 2.8 cm, max. w 3.6 cm, max. th 0.9 cm.Black (Gley 1 2.5/N) slip on all over the surface. Ex-

terior surface is burnished. Average hardness; non-porous,black (2.5Y 2.5/1) fabric with frequent tiny lime, sandand medium grit inclusions.


southern slope, underground cave, found in 2005. Max. h 4.0 cm, max. w 4.7 cm, max. th 1.1 cm.Dark grey (2.5Y 4/1) slip on exterior and interior. All

over the surface is burnished. Hard, non-porous, darkgrey (Gley 1 4/N) fabric with some tiny lime and rare mi-caceous inclusions.

CLOSED FORMS

Rim Fragments of Closed Forms (pl. 2, nos 52-55)

Most of them belong to the wider forms withfolded rim.

pl. 2/52 and pl. 8/52.52. (No 1247): Rim fragment; Kimistene, western

slope of the temenos; found in 2005.Max. h 3.2 cm, d of rim 10.0 cm, max. w 5.3 cm,

max. th 0.8 cm.Dark grey (Gley 1 4/N) slip on exterior; grey (2.5Y

5/1) unslipped surface on interior. Hard, very sparselyporous, fine, dark grey (2.5Y 4/1) fabric with some sandinclusions.

A parallel: Omura 1996: 245, 260, fig. 2, 1 (fromKarakaya Höyük in Kaman County, Province Kırşehir).


the Acropolis, southern slope, found in 2005. Max. h 2.2 cm, d of rim 14.4 cm, max. w 3.8 cm,

max. th 0.8 cm.Very dark grey (2.5Y 3/1) unslipped surface on

exterior and interior. Soft, non-porous, black (2.5Y 2.5/1)fabric with frequent lime and sand inclusions.

A parallel: Omura 1996: 247, 263, fig. 5, 1 (fromBoz Höyük in Polatlı County, Province Ankara).


found in 2005. Max. h 3.6 cm, d of rim 29.6 cm, max. w 6.7 cm,

max. th 0.9 cm.Grey (2.5Y 5/1) unslipped surface on exterior; grey

(2.5Y 6/1) unslipped surface on interior. Soft, non-porous,fine, dark grey (2.5Y 4/1) fabric with occasional sandand tiny lime inclusions.


found 2005. Max. h 3.2 cm, d of rim 24.0 cm, max. w 5.6 cm,

max. th 0.6 cm.Dark grey (2.5Y 4/1) slip on exterior and interior.

Soft, very sparsely porous, reddish brown (5YR 4/3) anddark grey (2.5Y 4/1) fabric with rare micaceous and largegrit inclusions.

Base Fragment of a Closed Form (pl. 2, no 56)

pl. 2/56 and pl. 8/56.56. (No 720): Base fragment; Kimistene, Acropolis,

temple’s terrace, illegally excavated area under the temple’spodium.


Very dark grey (Gley 1 3/N) slip on exterior; darkgrey (10YR 4/1) unslipped surface on interior. Averagehardness; very sparsely porous, reddish brown (5YR 4/4)and very dark grey (2.5Y 3/1) fabric with frequent limeand rare grog inclusions.

Body Fragments of Closed Forms (pl. 8, nos 57-73)

The exterior surface of nos 57, 59, 63, 65, 67 and69-73 were polished.



Max. h 2.4 cm, max. w 2.0 cm, max. th 0.6 cm.Black (Gley 1 2.5/N) slip on exterior; grey (Gley 1

6/N) unslipped surface on interior. Exterior surface isburnished. Hard, very sparsely porous, fine, grey (Gley 15/N) fabric with some lime inclusions.




exterior; reddish brown (5YR 5/4) unslipped surface oninterior. Average hardness; very sparsely porous, fired to


Pl. 8 : Nos 52-73: Iron Age grey ware; nos 52-55: Rim fragments of closed forms;no 56: A base fragment of a closed form; and nos 57-73: Body fragments of closed forms.

dark reddish grey (5YR 4/2) and very dark grey (Gley 13/N) fabric with frequent tiny lime and sand inclusions.

pl. 8/59.59. (No 1333): Body fragment; Kimistene, summit of

the Acropolis, southern slope, found in 2005. Max. h 2.3 cm, max. w 2.1 cm, max. th 0.9 cm.Very dark grey (Gley 1 3/N) slip on exterior; dark

grey (Gley 1 4/N) unslipped surface on interior. Exteriorsurface is burnished. Average hardness; very sparselyporous, fine, dark grey (Gley 1 4/N) fabric with frequentlarge grit and some lime inclusions.



Max. h 1.6 cm, max. w 2.8 cm, max. th 0.7 cm.Dark grey (2.5Y 4/1) slip on exterior; black (Gley 1

2.5/N) unslipped surface on interior. Soft, non-porous,fine, black (2.5Y 2.5/1) fabric with some minor grit inc-lusions.



Max. h 2.8 cm, max. w 3.2 cm, max. th 0.9 cm.Very dark grey (2.5Y 3/1) slip on exterior; dark grey

(2.5Y 4/1) slip on interior. Average hardness; non-porous,black (2.5Y 2.5/1) fabric with some lime and mediumgrit inclusions.


western slope, found in 2005. Max. h 2.3 cm, max. w 2.8 cm, max. th 0.9 cm.Dark grey (Gley 1 4/1) unslipped surface on exterior

and interior. Hard, non-porous, fine, dark grey (Gley 14/N) fabric with no visible inclusions.


temple slope, illegally excavated pit, found in 2005. Max. h 2.9 cm, max. w 3.5 cm, max. th 1.2 cm.Black (Gley 1 2.5/N) slip on exterior; very dark grey

(Gley 1 3/N) unslipped surface on interior. Exteriorsurface is burnished. Average hardness; very sparselyporous, fine, black (Gley 1 2.5/N) fabric with frequenttiny lime and some large grit inclusions.




exterior and interior, Average hardness; non-porous, fine,very dark greyish brown (10YR 3/2) fabric with somesand and micaceous inclusions.



Max. h 3.9 cm, max. w 3.9 cm, max. th 0.5 cm.Very dark grey (Gley 1 3/N) slip on exterior; light

grey (2.5Y 7/1) unslipped surface on interior. Exteriorsurface is burnished. Average hardness; very sparselyporous, grey (2.5Y 5/1) fabric with frequent sand inclu-sions.



Max. h 4.1 cm, max. w 3.3 cm, max. th 1.1 cm.Grey (2.5Y 6/1) slip on exterior; grey (2.5Y 5/1) un-

slipped surface on interior. Hard, non-porous, dark greyishbrown (2.5Y 4/2) and grey (2.5Y 6/1) fabric with frequentlime inclusions.


temple slope, illegally excavated pit, layer no 3, found in2005.

Max. h 5.3 cm, max. w 4.8 cm, max. th 0.6 cm.Very dark grey (Gley 1 3/N) slip on exterior; grey

(2.5Y 5/1) unslipped surface on interior. Exterior surfaceis burnished. Average hardness; non-porous, fine, verydark grey (2.5Y 3/1) fabric with frequent sand and raremica inclusions.



Max. h 4.2 cm, max. w 5.2 cm, max. th 1.0 cm.Very dark grey (2.5Y 3/1) unslipped surface on

exterior; dark grey (Gley 1 4/N) unslipped surface on in-terior. Average hardness; very sparsely porous, fine, darkgrey (2.5Y 4/1) fabric with frequent mica and tiny limeinclusions.



Max. h 4.0 cm, max. w 6.1 cm, max. th 0.7 cm.Very dark grey (Gley 1 3/N) slip on exterior, grey

(2.5Y 5/1) unslipped surface on interior. Exterior surfaceis burnished. Hard, non-porous, fired to dark grey (2.5Y4/1) and brown (7.5YR 5/4) fabric with frequent tinylime, sand and rare micaceous inclusions.


temple slope, first eastern slope, found in 2005.Max. h 6.7 cm, max. w 6.6 cm, max. th 0.7 cm.Dark grey (2.5Y 4/1) slip on exterior; greyish brown

(10YR 5/2) unslipped surface on interior. Exterior surface


is burnished. Hard, very sparsely porous, greyish brown(10YR 5/2) and grey (2.5Y 5/1) fabric with frequent sandinclusions.



Max. h 6.0 cm, max. w 6.8 cm, max. th 1.1 cm.Very dark grey (Gley 1 3/N) slip on exterior; dark

grey (2.5Y 4/1) unslipped surface on interior. Exteriorsurface is burnished. Average hardness; non-porous, fine,dark grey (2.5Y 4/1) fabric with frequent tiny lime inclu-sions.



Max. h 6.6 cm, max. w 6.3 cm, max. th 1.1 cm.Grey (2.5Y 5/1) slip on exterior; grey (10YR 5/1)

unslipped surface on interior. Exterior surface is burnished.Average hardness; non-porous, brown (7.5YR 4/3) andvery dark grey (2.5Y 3/1) fabric with frequent micaceousand occasional lime inclusions.



Max. h 8.5 cm, max. w 11.5 cm, max. th 0.9 cm. Very dark grey (2.5Y 3/1) slip on exterior; very dark

grey (10YR 3/1) unslipped surface on interior. Exteriorsurface is burnished. Average hardness; very sparselyporous, fine, dark grey (10YR 4/1) fabric with frequentsand, lime and large grit inclusions.

III. IRON AGE PAINTED WARE

Iron Age painted wares characterise Middle andLate Iron Age surface assemblages from surveyedsites to the south and southeast of Inner Paphlagonia,as at Gordion, Pazarlı, Kaman Kalehöyük, ÇadırHöyük, sites in Tokat and Sivas in Central Anatoliawhereas looking northwards, the Late Iron Agepainted pottery of İkiztepe near the Black Sea coastfinds no clear parallels in the Paphlagonia surveymaterial. Also in the surveys at Kastamonu no IronAge painted ware were recorded. The small-scaleexcavations at Sinope brought to light a number ofexamples of local Anatolian Iron Age pottery19,which, in some literature, has been wrongly named

‘Phrygian pottery’. It is remarkable that no suchpottery sherds have been found during the intensivesurveys of the hinterland of Sinope20.

During the Iron Age brown-on-buff decorationis most common21. Brown-on-buff styles include arange of decorative elements: hatched triangles,wavy lines, bands, concentric circles, geometricshapes, pendants and combinations of these22. Insouthwestern Paphlagonia Iron Age painted warehas a heterogenous nature; their chronological andethnic classification is very difficult. The sole dis-tinctive characteristic is their painted (mostly geo-metric) decoration of two or three colours, frequentlyon their exterior surface. 25 sherds were collected,12 of which belong to open and 13 to closed forms.Open forms could be assigned to a single bowlform.

Generally, closed forms have thick walls, andopen forms have thin walls. Their paste differsbetween reddish yellow (5YR 6/6-6/8-7/6-7/8, 7.5YR6/6-7/6), light brown (7.5YR 6/4), light red (2.5YR6/6-6/8), light yellowish brown (10YR 6/4), brown(7.5YR 5/2), dark greyish brown (10YR 4/2), verypale brown (10YR 7/3), red (2.5YR 5/6) and pink(5YR 7/4). Lime, sand, grog and micaceous inclusionsare not visible on the surface. The paste is hard andof good quality with soapy slip in very pale brown(10YR 8.5/2-8/2-8/3- 8/4-7/3-7/4), pink (7.5YR 7/4-7/3-8/4), reddish yellow (5YR 7/8-7/6, 7.5YR 7/6),pale brown (10YR 6/3), white (10YR 8/1, 7.5YR8/1), reddish brown (5YR 5/4), red (2.5YR 4/6) andstrong brown (7.5YR 5/8) colours at the interior orexterior surfaces. Non-slipped surfaces are pink(7.5YR 7/4), reddish yellow (5YR 6/6-7/6, 7.5YR7/6-6/6), light brown (7.5YR 6/4) and light red(2.5YR 6/6). Fine and non-porous clay is well-firedwith lime, sand, grog and mica inclusions. Black,brown or a very dark grey painted decoration wasapplied to mostly light or unslipped surfaces. Colourof decoration changes from red (10R 4/6, 2.5YR5/6), reddish brown (2.5YR 4/3-4/4-5/4, 5YR 4/3),dark reddish grey (2.5YR 3/1, 5YR 4/2), verk darkgrey (5YR 3/1, 7.5YR 3/1, 10YR 3/1), weak red(10R 5/4-4/2-4/3, 2.5YR 4/2), brown (7.5YR 4/2-4/3-4/4), reddish black (2.5YR 2.5/1), dark reddishbrown (5YR 2.5/2), light red (2.5YR 6/6), yellowishred (5YR 4/6-5/6), strong brown (7.5YR 5/6), darkbrown (7.5YR 3/2), dark greyish brown (10YR 4/2),to black (7.5YR 2.5/1).

19) Akurgal and Budde 1956: 49, pl. 320) Summerer 2007: 30; and Doonan 2004: 88. 21) Kealhofer et al. 2010: 84.22) Kealhofer et al. 2010: 84.



Fig. 11-13 : Three Iron Age painted vessels from the Museum of Çankırı.


On closed vessels decoration was applied to thebelly and shoulder, in open vessels to their base.Painted decoration consists of mostly linear orna-mentation; no figures or scenes were noted, as atAlişar IV. The most distinctive decorative pattern isthe triangular hatch. Other decoration patterns areconcentric circles, horizontal and vertical lines aswell as combed triangles23. In most cases decorationwas made without any care. The painting style,colors, and decorative patterns are similar to thoseof Phrygian pottery. In the Museum of Çankırı thereare some vessels with similar forms and decorationwith careless brush strokes (Fig. 11-13).

10 fragments were found on the southern slopesof the Acropolis at Kimistene, 7 from Kepez 4 fromthe Cistern, 1 from southeastern slope, 1 fromwestern slope, and at the temple’s terrace on theAcropolis of Kimistene. It is noteworthy that nopainted sherds were found in the temple’s temenosat Kimistene. Some similar examples were found inthe British survey24; they resemble the finds fromKimistene in terms of outer slip, surface treatment,paste color and decorative patterns.

A large number of ceramic imports would notbe expected in Paphlagonia during the Iron Age;this highlights the importance of reproduction andemulation by local Iron Age producers.

They belong to the Late Iron Age, most probablyto the 6th-4th cent. B.C.

OPEN FORMS

Rim Fragments of a Bowl Form (pls. 2-3, nos 74-80)

It consists of rim fragments of straight walled,incurved and slightly outcurved bowls.



Max. h 2.1 cm, max. w 2.4 cm, max. th 0.4 cm.Very pale brown (10YR 8/2) slip on exterior; reddish

yellow (5YR 7/6) unslipped surface on interior. Red(2.5YR 5/6) band on exterior rim; its below part boundedwith very dark grey (10YR 3/1) thin horizontal band.Traces of same paint at elsewhere on the exterior. Hard,thin paste, very sparsely porous; fine, reddish yellow(5YR 7/8) fabric with no visible inclusions.




yellow (5YR 7/8) slip on interior. Red (2.5YR 5/6) bandon exterior rim. It is bounded with very dark grey (2.5YR3/1) thin horizontal band on exterior. Immediately belowsemicircles; between them straight and wavy lines. Hard,thin paste, very sparsely porous, fine, reddish yellow(5YR 6/8) fabric with no visible inclusions.

A parallel: Özsait and Özsait 1996: 365, 381, pl. I,no, 18, 21 (from Şeref Höyük).

pl. 2/76 and pl. 9/76.76. (No 1084): Rim fragment; Kepez, found in 2005. Max. h 3.1 cm, max. w 1.6 cm, max. th 0.4 cm. Very pale brown (10YR 8/4) slip on exterior. Interior

surface slipped very pale brown (10YR 7/4). Weak red(10R 5/4) band on exterior rim; its below part boundedwith very dark grey (7.5YR 3/1), thin horizontal band onexterior. Immediately below two weak red (10R 5/4)circles are side by side. Hard, thin paste, non-porous,fine, reddish yellow (7.5YR 6/6) fabric with some limeinclusions.

pl. 2/77 and pl. 9/77.77. (No 1098): Rim of a bowl; Kepez, found in 2005. Max. h 2.7 cm, max. w 2.5 cm, max. th 0.5 cm.Very pale brown (10YR 8.5/2) slip on exterior; very

pale brown (10YR 7/3) slip on interior. Reddish brown(5YR 4/3) decoration on exterior rim. Vertical andhorizontal lines in dark reddish brown (5YR 2.5/2) asdecoration patterns. Average hardness; thin paste, verysparsely porous, dark greyish brown (10YR 4/2) fabricwith some tiny lime inclusions.

pl. 2/78 and pl. 9/78.78. (No 1089): Rim fragment of a bowl; Kepez,

found 2005. Max. h 2.6 cm, d of rim 14.4 cm, max. w 3.1 cm,

max. th 0.3 cm.Very pale brown (10YR 7/4) slip on exterior; very

pale brown (10YR 7/3) slip on interior. Red (2.5YR 5/6)band on exterior rim; other part is very dark grey (7.5YR3/1). A thin horizontal band and immediately below isthe upper part of the two inner circles, side by side. Hard,thin paste, non-porous, fine, very pale brown (10YR 7/3)fabric with no visible inclusions.

pl. 3/79 and pl. 9/79.79. (No 1097): Rim fragment; Kepez, found in 2005. Max. h 2.3 cm, d of rim 16.4 cm, max. w 2.8 cm,

max. th 0.5 cm.

23) For triangular hatches: Polat 1993: 43, fig. 14; 45, fig. 15; 51, fig. 18; Dönmez 2011: 127, fig. 29; Bilgi 1999: 156, fig. 11.24) Matthews 2009: 153, fig. 5.2, no. 5, site PS 156; and 166, fig. 5.16, nos. 6-7, site PS 170.


Very pale brown (10YR 8.5/2) slip on exterior; red(2.5YR 4/6) slip on interior. Red (2.5YR 5/6) band onexterior rim. Horizontal and vertical lines in form of asquare below the rim. Dark reddish grey (2.5YR 3/1)decoration on exterior. Average hardness; thin paste, non-porous, fine, reddish yellow (7.5YR 6/6) fabric withfrequent tiny lime inclusions.

pl. 3/80 and pl. 9/80.80. (No 1171): Rim fragment of an open vessel form;

a surface find from the Cistern in Kepez, found in 2005. Max. h 2.4 cm, d of rim 24.2 cm, max. w 5.4 cm,

max. th 0.4 cm.Very pale brown (10YR 8/2) slip on exterior; red

(2.5YR 5/6) slip on interior. Reddish brown (2.5YR 5/4)band on exterior rim. Applique decoration on exteriorrim. At lower part two red (2.5YR 5/6) lines. Averagehardness; thin paste, very sparsely porous, fine, light yel-lowish brown (10YR 6/4) fabric with infrequent limeinclusions.

A parallel: Dönmez 2010b: 48, draw. 18, fig. 76(from Oluz Höyük, dated to the Late Iron Age).

Body Fragments of Open Forms (pl. 3, no 85)

Their typologies are difficult to judge.



Max. h 1.8 cm, max. w 1.7 cm, max. th 0.4 cm.Pink (7.5YR 7/4) slip on exterior; reddish yellow

(5YR 7/6) slip on interior. Reddish black (2.5YR 2.5/1)and light red (2.5YR 6/6) lines may belong to circle.Hard, non-porous, thin paste, fine, reddish yellow (5YR6/6) fabric with no visible inclusions.

pl. 9/82.82. (No 1065): Body fragment; Kepez, found in 2005. Max. h 2.3 cm, max. w 1.9 cm, max. th 0.5 cm.Very pale brown (10YR 8.5/2) slip on exterior;

reddish brown (5YR 5/4) slip on interior. Reddish brown(5YR 4/3) and yellowish red (5YR 4/6) decoration onexterior surface. Average hardness; thin paste, verysparsely porous, fine, light brown (7.5YR 6/4) fabricwith no visible inclusions.


the Acropolis, western slope, found in 2005.Max. h 2.0 cm, max. w 2.5 cm, max. th 0.5 cm.White (7.5YR 8/1) slip on exterior; reddish yellow

(7.5YR 7/6) slip on interior. Thin and straight line is withreddish brown (2.5YR 4/4) on interior surface. Hard, thinpaste, very sparsely porous, fine, reddish yellow (7.5YR7/6) fabric with no visible inclusions.

pl. 9/84.84. (No 1033): Body fragment; Kepez, found in 2005. Max. h 4.0 cm, max. w 2.6 cm, max. th 0.6 cm.Very pale brown (10YR 8/2) slip on exterior; pink

(7.5YR 7/4) slip on interior. Brown (7.5YR 4/4) andstrong brown (7.5YR 5/6) ornaments on exterior surface.Hard, thin paste, very sparsely porous, fine, reddishyellow (5YR 6/6) fabric with some tiny lime inclusions.

pl. 3/85 and pl. 9/85.85. (No 920): Body fragment of an open form; Kimis-

tene, on southeastern slopes to the Cistern, surface find,found in 2005.

Max. h 1.4 cm, max. w 3.9 cm, max. th 0.9 cm.Reddish yellow (5YR 6/6) unslipped surface on ex-

terior; pink (7.5YR 7/4) slip on interior. Black (7.5YR2.5/1) geometric ornaments on exterior surface. On interiorface triangular with horizontal and vertical ornamentations.Hard, non-porous, thin paste, fired to reddish yellow(5YR 6/6) and light red (2.5YR 6/8) fabric with rare tinylime inclusions.

CLOSED FORMS

A Rim Fragment (pl. 3, no 86)

A closed form with a short neck.


temple’s terrace, found in 2005.


Pink (7.5YR 8/4) slip on exterior; pink (7.5YR 7/4)unslipped surface on interior. Three bands and geometricornaments in very dark grey (7.5YR 3/1) and yellowishred (5YR 5/6) paint on exterior. Hard, non-porous, thinpaste, fine, reddish yellow (7.5YR 7/6) fabric with sometiny lime inclusions.

A parallel: Dönmez 2010a: 306, fig. 37 (from OluzHöyük, dated to the Late Iron Age).

Handle Fragments of Closed Forms (pl. 3, nos 87-88)

Vertical handles

pl. 3/87 and pl. 9/87.87. (No 914): Handle fragment; Kimistene, Acropolis,

on the southeastern slope, in a rugged area to Sarpın Çay,surface find, found in 2005.

Max. h 3.2 cm, max. w 4.4 cm, max. th 1.8 cm.Very pale brown (10YR 8/2) eroded slip all of surface.

Hard, thin paste, very sparsely porous, fine, reddishyellow (5YR 7/6) fabric with rare sand and lime inclu-sions.

Pl. 9 : Nos 74-98: Iron Age painted ware; nos 74-80: Rim fragments of a bowl form; nos 81-85: Bodyfragments of open forms; no 86: A rim fragment of a closed form; nos 87-88: Handle fragments of

closed forms; nos 89-98: Body fragments of closed forms; nos 99-102: Iron Age coarse ware;no 99: A rim fragment of an open form; and nos 100-102: Body fragments of open forms.



pl. 3/88 and pl. 9/88.88. (No 1323): Handle fragment; Kimistene, summit

of the Acropolis, southern slope, found in 2005.Max. h 5.2 cm, max. w 5.4 cm, max. th 0.7 cm.Th. of hand 1.7 cm, w of hand 2.9 cm.Very pale brown (10YR 8.5/2) slip on exterior; white

(10YR 8/1) slip on interior. Light brown (7.5YR 6/4) un-slipped surface on interior handle. Dark reddish grey(5YR 4/2) and brown (7.5YR 4/2) geometric ornamentson exterior surface. Hard, sparsely porous, thin paste,fired to light brown (7.5YR 6/4) and brown (7.5YR 5/2)fabric with some micaceous, sand and rare lime inclu-sions.

Parallels: Dönmez 2010a: 290, 306, fig. 37 (fromOluz Höyük, Level 3, 5th-3rd cent. B.C.); and Kealhoferet al. 2010: 83, Group 5, no e (G5 Ç 3412).

Body Fragments of Closed Forms (pl. 3, nos 89-98)

pl. 3/89 and pl. 9/89.89. (No 843): Body fragment; Kimistene, Cistern,

eastern slope, found in 2005. Max. h 1.6 cm, max. w 1.5 cm, max. th 0.7 cm.Pale brown (10YR 6/3) slip on exterior and interior.

Reddish brown (2.5YR 4/3) geometric ornaments on ex-terior surface. Hard, non-porous, thin paste, fired to lightbrown (7.5YR 6/4) and light red (2.5YR 6/6) fabric withrare sand inclusions.

Parallels: Dönmez 2010a: 306, fig. 37 (from OluzHöyük, dated to the Late Iron Age).


the Acropolis, southern slope, found in 2005.Max. h 2.1 cm, max. w 1.6 cm, max. th 0.4 cm.Light red (2.5YR 6/6) unslipped surface on exterior

and interior. Horizontal and vertical lines on exteriorsurface. They are painted in weak red (10R 4/3). Hard,thin paste, non-porous, fine, light red (2.5YR 6/6) fabricwith no visible inclusions.

pl. 3/91 and pl. 9/91.91. (No 1437): Body fragment; Kimistene, Acropolis,


Max. h 1.9 cm, max. w 3.1 cm, max. th 0.6 cm.Pink (7.5YR 7/3) slip on exterior; reddish yellow

(5YR 6/6) unslipped surface on interior. Weak red (2.5YR4/2) geometric decoration on exterior surface. Hard, thinpaste, non-porous, fine, light red (2.5YR 6/6) fabric withrare grog and some sand inclusions.

pl. 3/92 and pl. 9/92.92. (No 550): Body fragment of a closed form; Kimis-

tene, Acropolis, southern slope, just below the summit,up to Deresemail creek, found in 2005.

Max. h 2.7 cm, max. w 3.3 cm, max. th 0.6 cm.

Strong brown (7.5YR 5/8) slip on exterior; reddishyellow (7.5YR 6/6) unslipped surface on interior. Brown(7.5YR 4/3) geometric ornaments on exterior slip. Hard,thin paste, very sparsely porous, fine, red (2.5YR 5/6)fabric with frequent tiny lime and some sand inclusions.



Max. h 2.3 cm, max. w 4.0 cm, max. th 0.6 cm.Very pale brown (10YR 8.5/2) cracked slip on exterior;

very pale brown (10YR 8/2) slip on interior. Dark reddishgrey (2.5YR 3/1) vertical lines on upper exterior. Thisdecoration bounded with two weak red (10R 4/2) anddark reddish grey (2.5YR 3/1) horizontal bands on exterior.At the lower part has brown (7.5YR 4/3) surface onexterior. Hard, thin paste, non-porous, fine, light yellowishbrown (10YR 6/4) fabric with no visible inclusions.


southern slope, underground cave, surface find, found in2005.

Max. h 4.4 cm, max. w 4.6 cm, max. th 0.8 cm.

Pink (7.5YR 8/4) slip on exterior; light brown (7.5YR6/3) unslipped surface on interior. Hard, non-porous, thinpaste, fired to light brown (7.5YR 6/4) fabric withoccasional sand inclusions.


slope, found in 2005. Max. h 4.2 cm, max. w 5.6 cm, max. th 1.1 cm.Pink (7.5YR 7/4) unslipped surface on exterior and

interior. Some lines as decoration pattern. It is with verydark grey (5YR 3/1). Hard, thin paste, non-porous, fine,pink (5YR 7/4) fabric with rare tiny lime and sand inclu-sions.




yellow (7.5YR 7/6) unslipped surface on interior. Red(2.5YR 5/6) horizontal band and dark brown (7.5YR 3/2)geometric ornaments on exterior slip. Hard, thin paste,very sparsely porous, fine, reddish yellow (7.5YR 6/6)fabric with frequent tiny lime and rare sand inclusions.

pl. 9/97.97. (No 974): Body fragment; Kimistene, the surface

find of the Cistern, eastern slope, found in 2005. Max. h 5.2 cm, max. w 6.3 cm, max. th 1.3 cm.Very pale brown (10YR 8/3) slip on exterior; pink

(7.5YR 7/4) unslipped surface on interior. Dark greyish

brown (10YR 4/2) line on exterior. Hard, thin paste, verysparsely porous, fine, reddish yellow (5YR 6/6) fabricwith some tiny lime and rare sand inclusions.

pl. 3/98 and pl. 9/98.98. (No 1284): Body fragment of a closed form;

Kimistene, on southeastern slopes to the Cistern, foundin 2005.

Max. h 6.2 cm, max. w 6.6 cm, max. th 1.0 cm.Pink (7.5YR 7/4) unslipped surface on exterior; pink

(7.5YR 7/4) unslipped surface on interior. Very dark grey(5YR 3/1) geometric ornaments on exterior surface whichis bounded with very dark grey (5YR 3/1) horizontalband. All of the surface of the lower part has a red (10R4/6) paint. Hard, thin paste, non-porous, fine, reddishyellow (5YR 6/6) fabric with rare micaceous inclusions.

Parallels: Dönmez 2005b: 68, pl. 4/10=fig. 19(from Köyiçi, Province Samsun); and <http://oi.uchicago.edu/pdf/ar/01-10/08-09/08-09_AnnualReport.pdf>, fig.20 (from Çadır Höyük; Middle Iron Ages).

IV. IRON AGE COARSE WARE

This group consists of very small sherds, mostly(25 fragments) from the illegally excavated areaunder the temple’s podium on the Acropolis ofKimistene. They belong to thick-walled forms withan extremly coarse fabric. The assemblage includesjugs, jars and cooking pots. 30 sherds in total werecollected, 5 of which belong to open and 25 toclosed forms. The clay is reddish brown (5YR 4/3-5/4), reddish yellow (5YR 6/6-7/6, 7.5YR 7/6), pink(5YR 7/4, 7.5YR 7/4), brown (7.5YR 4/3-4/4-5/4-5/3), very pale brown (10YR 7/3-7/4), light brown(7.5YR 6/4), light brownish grey (10YR 6/2), yel-lowish red (5YR 5/6-4/6), red (2.5YR 5/6) and lightred (2.5YR 6/8). Most of them are badly fired;therefore their surfaces have grey (5YR 4/1, 7.5YR4/1-3/1, 10YR 5/1-4/1, 2.5Y 3/1) or brown (10YR5/2, 6/3, 7/4, 6/2) variations. Major inclusions aresand, micaceous, lime and plants. The clay is mediumor very hard. Surfaces are not very porous.

Their slip is reddish yellow (5YR 6/6-6/8, 7.5YR7/6-6/6), pale brown (10YR 6/3), brown (7.5YR5/2-5/3-5/4), very pale brown (10YR 7/3), pink(7.5YR 7/4-8/3), light grey (10YR 7/2), light reddishbrown (5YR 6/4) and grey (10YR 6/1). All of themare wheel-made, except for no 111. Most of thesurfaces have traces of burning.

OPEN FORMS

Rim Fragment of an Open Form (pl. 4, no 99)



Max. h 2.5 cm, max. w 4.0 cm, max. th 1.0 cm.Brown (7.5YR 5/3) slip on exterior rim; brown

(7.5YR 5/2) slip on interior. Soft, non-porous, reddishbrown (5YR 5/4) and dark grey (5YR 4/1) fabric withsome sand and micaceous inclusions. Traces of burningon the exterior surface.

Body Fragments of Open Forms (pls. 30-31, nos 100-103)


found in 2005. Max. h 1.7 cm, max. w 1.6 cm, max. th 1.0 cm.

Light grey (10YR 7/2) unslipped surface on exterior;pale brown (10YR 6/3) slip on interior. Average hardness;very sparsely porous, fine, light brownish grey (10YR6/2) fabric with frequent tiny lime and medium grit inc-lusions.



Max. h 2.2 cm, max. w 2.1 cm, max. th 1.1 cm.Grey (10YR 6/1) slip on exterior; brown (7.5YR

5/2) slip on interior. Average hardness; non-porous,reddish brown (5YR 4/3) and grey (10YR 5/1) fabricwith frequent tiny lime and sand inclusions. Traces ofburning on the exterior surface.



Max. h 3.3 cm, max. w 3.2 cm, max. th 1.1 cm.Reddish yellow (5YR 7/6) unslipped surface on ex-

terior; reddish yellow (7.5YR 7/6) slip on interior. Averagehardness; sparsely porous, very pale brown (10YR 7/4)and reddish yellow (5YR 7/6) fabric with frequent somesand large grit inclusions.



Max. h 3.2 cm, max. w 3.4 cm, max. th 1.0 cm.Light grey (10YR 7/2) slip on exterior; pale brown

(10YR 6/3) slip on interior. Average hardness; non-


porous, dark grey (10YR 4/1) fabric with occasional limeand rare micaceous inclusions. Traces of burning on theexterior surface.

CLOSED FORMS

Rim Fragments (pl. 4, nos 104-105)

No 104 is a outcurved rim form.

pl. 4/104 and pl. 10/104.104. (No 844): Rim fragment; Kimistene, Cistern,

eastern slope, found in 2005. Max. h 1.6 cm, d of rim 9.6 cm, max. w 3.1 cm, max.

th 0.7 cm.Brown (7.5YR 5/4) unslipped surface on exterior

and interior. Soft, non-porous, fired to brown (7.5YR4/4) and black (Gley 1 2.5/N) fabric with frequent limeand small grit inclusions.



Max. h 2.8 cm, max. w 3.9 cm, max. th 1.0 cm.Pink (7.5YR 7/4) unslipped surface on exterior and

interior. Hard, non-porous, fine, reddish yellow (7.5YR7/6) fabric with frequent large grit inclusions.

Body Fragments of Closed Forms (pls. 10-11, nos 106-128)

There are burning traces on interior surface atnos 106 and 110-111, at exterior surface at nos 107-108, 126 and on whole surface at no 128. Nos 117,120-121 and 128 have strong wheel-marks in theinterior surface. On no 122 exterior surface is extremlymicaceous.



Max. h 1.8 cm, max. w 1.9 cm, max. th 0.8 cm.Light brown (7.5YR 6/3) unslipped surface on exterior;

brown (7.5YR 5/4) unslipped surface on interior. Averagehardness; very sparsely porous, fine, reddish brown (5YR4/3) fabric with frequent sand, medium grit and rare mi-caceous inclusions.



Max. h 2.8 cm, max. w 2.9 cm, max. th 0.9 cm.Greyish brown (10YR 5/2) unslipped surface on ex-

terior; brown (7.5YR 5/2) unslipped surface on interior.

Average hardness; non-porous, fired to brown (7.5YR4/3) fabric with frequent tiny lime, some medium gritand micaceous inclusions.



Max. h 2.6 cm, max. w 3.5 cm, max. th 0.8 cm.Light brownish grey (2.5Y 6/2) unslipped surface on

exterior; pale brown (10YR 6/3) unslipped surface on in-terior. Average hardness; very sparsely porous, fired tobrown (7.5YR 5/4) and greyish brown (10YR 5/2) fabricwith frequent medium grit inclusions.



Max. h 2.6 cm, max. w 4.6 cm, max. th 1.1 cm.Reddish yellow (5YR 6/6) slip on exterior; pink

(7.5YR 7/4) unslipped surface on interior. Hard, non-porous, fine, pink (7.5YR 7/4) fabric with frequent sandand rare micaceous inclusions.



Max. h 3.1 cm, max. w 3.4 cm, max. th 1.0 cm.Brown (7.5YR 5/4) slip on exterior; greyish brown

(10YR 5/2) unslipped surface on interior. Average hardness;very sparsely porous, fired to yellowish red (5YR 4/6)and greyish brown (10YR 5/2) fabric with frequent tinylime, some medium grit inclusions.


found in 2005.Max. h 2.3 cm, max. w 3.4 cm, max. th 0.6 cm.Pale brown (10YR 6/3) slip on exterior; light brownish

grey (10YR 6/2) unslipped surface on interior. Exteriorsurface is burnished. Hard, non-porous, fired to lightbrownish grey (10YR 6/2) and very dark grey (2.5Y 3/1)fabric with some tiny lime and large grit inclusions.



Max. h 3.6 cm, max. w 3.8 cm, max. th 1.2 cm.Very pale brown (10YR 7/3) slip on exterior; light

reddish brown (5YR 6/4) slip on interior. Hard, non-porous, fine, pink (7.5YR 7/4) fabric with frequentmedium grit inclusions.




Pl. 10 : Nos 103-124: Iron Age coarse ware; no 103: A body fragment of an open form;nos 104-105: Rim fragments of closed forms; and nos 106-124: Body fragments of closed forms.


Max. h 3.8 cm, max. w 4.0 cm, max. th 1.2 cm.Light brown (7.5YR 6/4) unslipped surface exterior;

light grey (10YR 7/2) unslipped surface on interior.Average hardness; non-porous, fired to light brown (7.5YR6/4) and pale brown (10YR 6/3) fabric with some sandand lime inclusions.



Max. h 4.0 cm, max. w 5.0 cm, max. th 1.4 cm.Very pale brown (10YR 7/3) unslipped surface on

exterior, pink (7.5YR 7/3) unslipped surface on interior,hard, very sparsely porous, fired to brown (7.5YR 5/3)fabric with some tiny lime, small grit and sand inclu-sions.



Max. h 4.1 cm, max. w 5.1 cm, max. th 1.4 cm.Light grey (10YR 7/2) slip on exterior; very pale

brown (10YR 7/3) unslipped surface on interior. Exteriorsurface is burnished. Hard, very sparsely porous, fired togreyish brown (10YR 5/2) and reddish brown (5YR 5/4)fabric with some lime and micaceous inclusions.



Max. h 4.6 cm, max. w 4.8 cm, max. th 1.4 cm.Reddish yellow (7.5YR 7/6) slip on exterior; light

red (2.5YR 6/6) painted on exterior slip. Very pale brown(10YR 7/4) unslipped surface on interior. Hard, non-porous, fired to pink (7.5YR 7/4) and very pale brown(10YR 7/4) fabric with some sand and large grit inclu-sions.



Max. h 5.1 cm, max. w 3.3 cm, max. th 1.9 cm.Pink (7.5YR 7/4) unslipped surface exterior and

interior. Hard, non-porous, fine, reddish yellow (5YR7/6) fabric with frequent sand, lime and large grit inclu-sions.


eastern slope, found in 2005. Max. h 4.7 cm, max. w 5.3 cm, max. th 1.3 cm.Reddish yellow (5YR 6/8) slip on exterior; reddish

yellow (5YR 6/8) unslipped surface on interior. Hard,non-porous, fine, light red (2.5YR 6/8) fabric with somemedium grit and tiny lime inclusions.



Max. h 4.4 cm, max. w 6.9 cm, max. th 0.9 cm.Pink (5YR 7/4) unslipped surface on exterior; light

reddish brown (5YR 6/4) unslipped surface on interior.Hard, very sparsely porous, fine, reddish brown (5YR5/4) fabric with frequent medium grit and lime inclu-sions.



Max. h 4.9 cm, max. w 5.1 cm, max. th 1.7 cm.Reddish yellow (7.5YR 6/6) slip on exterior; very

pale brown (10YR 7/4) unslipped surface on interior.Hard, very sparsely porous, fired to light brownish grey(10YR 6/2) and very pale brown (10YR 7/4) fabric withfrequent large grit inclusions.



Max. h 4.8 cm, max. w 5.5 cm, max. th 1.4 cm.Pink (7.5YR 8/3) slip on exterior; pink (7.5YR 7/4)

unslipped surface on interior. Hard, non-porous, fine,reddish yellow (5YR 6/6) fabric with some medium gritand sand inclusions.



Max. h 5.8 cm, max. w 4.2 cm, max. th 1.1 cm.Very pale brown (10YR 7/4) unslipped surface on

exterior and interior. Hard, very sparsely porous, fine,very pale brown (10YR 7/3) fabric with frequent lime,micaceous and some medium grit inclusions.



Max. h 5.9 cm, max. w 5.8 cm, max. th 1.2 cm.Pink (5YR 7/4) unslipped surface on exterior; reddish

yellow (5YR 6/6) unslipped surface on interior. Hard,very sparsely porous, fine, reddish yellow (5YR 6/6)fabric with some large grit and lime inclusions.


temple slope, illegally excavated pit, found in 2005. Max. h 6.0 cm, max. w 4.2 cm, max. th 1.1 cm.Pink (7.5YR 7/4) slip on exterior, light grey (10YR

7/2) unslipped surface on interior. A red (2.5YR 5/6)


Pl. 11 : Nos 125-128: Iron Age coarse ware, body fragments of closed forms.

band on exterior. Exterior surface is burnished. Soft, thinpaste, non-porous, pink (5YR 7/4) and very pale brown(10YR 7/4) fabric with infrequent medium grit inclusions.




yellow (5YR 7/6) unslipped surface on interior. Hard,sparsely porous, red (2.5YR 5/6) fabric with frequentlime, sand, large grit inclusions.



Max. h 6.4 cm, max. w 6.2 cm, max. th 1.6 cm.Pink (5YR 7/4) unslipped surface on exterior; pink

(7.5YR 7/4) unslipped surface interior. Hard, very sparselyporous, reddish brown (5YR 5/4) and dark grey (7.5YR

4/1) fabric with frequent sand, tiny lime and some largegrit, plant inclusions.


temple’s terrace, illegally excavated area under the temple’spodium, in 2005.

Max. h 6.6 cm, max. w 9.8 cm, max. th 2.1 cm.Light brown (7.5YR 6/4) unslipped surface on exterior;

very pale brown (10YR 7/3) unslipped surface interior.Hard, very sparsely porous, light brown (7.5YR 6/4)fabric with frequent large grit and sand inclusions.



Max. h 9.8 cm, max. w 9.8 cm, max. th 1.2 cm.Light brown (7.5YR 6/4) unslipped surface on exterior

and interior. Average hardness; non-porous, fired to yel-lowish red (5YR 5/6) and very dark grey (7.5YR 3/1)fabric with frequent sand and large grit inclusions.


CONCLUSIONS

In our surveys it was difficult to distinguish thecharacteristics of Middle and Late Iron Age sherdsas well as their differences to each other. The lackof architectural evidence in the region is also makingthe characterization of Iron Age settlements in south-western Paphlagonia difficult. Kimistene is one ofvery few places in Paphlagonia where we have bothlocally manufactured Iron Age painted and greyware with a limited typological repertory. It is, how-ever, interesting to note that both wares do not occurin the same find spots: grey ware has a concentrationin the stratified levels of the temple terrace, butpainted ware was only found on the slopes of Kimis-tene’s Acropolis. One of the very few stratified datafor our ceramics comes from beneath the Romantemple’s podium on Kimistene’s Acropolis wherewe have at least three strata of ca. 2 m deep,including mudbrick architecture and numerous greyware sherds. This is a looting trench that has beendug out illegally in 1999. During the Roman periodKimistene was a hilltop sanctuary, with a templepossibly dedicated to Zeus Kimistenos; perhaps thisRoman temple had an Iron Age and Hellenisticpredecessor in wooden form at the same location onthe Acropolis of Kimistene. The elaborate and orna-mented character of some Iron Age painted waremakes us to think that these vessels could had beenused as urns for cremation burials and were perhapsburied in this Iron Age hilltop sanctuary site.

As the similarity of the ceramic evidence ofsouthwestern Paphlagonia with that of Boğazköy,Gordion, Oluz Höyük, İkiztepe, Alişar IV, Kaman-Kalehöyük and Çadır Höyük shows, in the Iron Agesouthwestern Paphlagonia had definitely a relationshipwith the ceramic traditions of the Central AnatolianPlateau and the Central Black Sea area. The LateIron Age is often associated with the Achaemenid

presence in Paphlagonia25. In our surveys we havealmost no indication for the physical existence ofthe Achaemenids in southwestern part of the region,as the Achaemenid rule is hard to discern throughits material culture. Neither in Iron Age, nor in Hel-lenistic period any imported pottery exists; most ofthe products should be locally manufactured. Itseems that during the Iron Age this part of Paphlagoniahad almost no communication with other parts ofthe Black Sea area. Our Iron Age and Hellenisticsurface material shows a continuity of form anddecoration from the preceding Iron Age into theHellenistic era, as it is also attested on the Konyaplain and in the Amasya region26. However, not allthe common Iron Age forms are available in south-western Paphlagonia; perhaps this is due to morepopular use of wooden crockery during this period.

NOTES AND ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS

All the plates were drawn by G. Kan Şahin whoalso took all the photographs with C. Şahin(Çanakkale); the maps were produced by S. Patacı(Ardahan). In the catalogue section numbers inbrackets indicate find numbers of the field project.Abbreviations in the catalogue: th: thickness; h:height; w: width; d: diameter; and max.: maximum.For this article The Munsell Soil Color Charts (2009)has been used. These sherds are being stored todayin the Museum of Amasra as well as at the containerof the excavation site in Eskipazar.

We would like to thank to following colleaguesfor their help with various aspects of this paper (al-phabetically): Chris Lightfoot (New York), RogerJ. Matthews (Reading) and Aksel Tibet (Istanbul).

E.L., G.K.Ş. and S.P.

25) Matthews 2009: 155-156; and for Achaemenid presence in Paphlagonia: Johnson 2010.26) Matthews 2009: 173; and Dönmez 2005a: 69.

ABBREVIATIONS AND REFERENCES

Akurgal, E. and Budde, L., 1956: Vorläufiger Berichtüber die Ausgrabungen in Sinope, Türk Tarih Kurumu5.14, Ankara.

Alkım, U.B., Alkım, H. and Bilgi, Ö., 2003: İkiztepeII. Üçüncü, Dördüncü, Beşinci, Altıncı, Yedinci DönemKazıları: 1976-1980, Türk Tarih Kurumu Yayınları, V.Dizi, Sayı 39, Ankara.

Bilgi, Ö., 1999: “Samsun-İkiztepe Arkeolojik KazılarıTepe III Çalışmaları. 1993 ve 1994 Dönemi Sonuçları”,

Anadolu Araştırmaları/Jahrbuch für KleinasiatischeForschung XV: 137-165.

Doonan, O., 2004: Sinop Landscapes, ExplorationConnection in a Black Sea Hinterland, Philadelphia, PA.

Dönmez, Ş., 2005a: “Amasya Province in the IronAge”, in Çilingiroğlu, A. and Darbyshire, G. (eds.), Ana-tolian Iron Ages 5, British Institute at Ankara Monograph31, London: 65-74.

– 2005b: “Orta Karadeniz Bölgesi’nde Önemli BirDemir Çağı Yerleşmesi: Ladik-Köyiçi Tepesi/İkizarı”,


Anadolu Araştırmaları/Jahrbuch für KleinasiatischeForschung XVIII/1: 65-109.

– 2010a: “Oluz Höyük Kazısı Üçüncü Dönem (2009)Çalışmaları: Değerlendirmeler ve Sonuçlar”, CollAn IX:275-306.

– 2010b: Kašku Ülkesi’nin Önemli Kenti Amasya-Oluz Höyük 2007 ve 2008 Dönemi Çalışmaları GenelDeğerlendirmeler ve Ön Sonuçlar, T.C. Amasya ValiliğiYayın No: 48, Ankara.

– 2011: “Oluz Höyük Kazısı Dördüncü Dönem (2010)Çalışmaları: Değerlendirmeler ve Sonuçlar”, CollAn X:103-128.

Fünfschilling, S. and Laflı, E., 2012: HadrianopolisII: Glasfunde des 6. und 7. Jhs. aus Hadrianupolis, Pa-phlagonien [Türkei], Internationale Archäologie 123,Rahden/Westf.

Genz, H., 2004: Büyükkaya I, Die Keramik der Eisen-zeit, Funde aus den Grabungskampagnen 1993 bis 1998,Boğazköy-Hattuša 21, Mainz on the Rhine.

Gorny, R.L., 2009: “Çadır Höyük, The 2008 Season,Oriental Institute 2008-2009 Annual Report”, 18-35, in<http://oi.uchicago.edu/pdf/ar/01-10/08-09/08-09_AnnualReport.pdf> (02/10/2012).

Henrickson, R.C., 2005: “The Local Potter’s Craft atPhrygian Gordion”, in Kealhofer, L. (ed.), The Archaeologyof Midas and the Phrygians, Recent Work at Gordion,Philadelphia, PA: 124-135.

Johnson, P., 2010: Landscapes of Achaemenid Pa-phlagonia, Publicly Accessible Penn Dissertations, Paper273 (Online Diss.; University of Pennsylvania), in<http://repository.upenn.edu/edissertations/273>(11/01/2012).

Kealhofer, L. et al., 2010: “Patterns of Iron Age In-teraction in Central Anatolia: Three Sites in YozgatProvince”, Anatolian Studies 60: 71-92.

Laflı, E. and Christof, E., 2011: “Der kaiserzeitlicheTempel von Asartepe/Kimistene in der Chora des pa-phlagonischen Hadrianopolis - Ergebnisse der Prospektionvon 2005”, Istanbuler Mitteilungen 61: 233-285.

– 2012a: Hadrianopolis I: Inschriften aus Paphlagonia,BAR, Int. Ser. 2366, Oxford.

– 2012b: “Drei neu entdeckte Phallossteine aus derChora von Hadrianopolis”, in Tsetskhladze, G.R., Laflı,E., Hargrave, J. and Anderson, W. (eds.), The Black Sea,Paphlagonia, Pontus and Phrygia in Antiquity. Aspectsof Archaeology and Ancient History, BAR, Int. Ser. 2432,Oxford: 163-170.

Laflı, E. and Kan Şahin, G., 2011: “Iron Age andHellenistic Ceramics from Southwestern Paphlagonia”,Arheologija i prirodne nauke/Archaeology and Science7: 9-165 (Belgrade; ISSN 1452-7448).

– 2012a: “Terra Sigillata and Red-Slipped Ware fromHadrianopolis in Southwestern Paphlagonia”, AnatolicaAntiqua XX: 45-120.

– 2012b: “Pottery from southwestern Paphlagonia I:Terra Sigillata and Red-Slipped Ware”, in Ramminger,B. and Stilborg, O. (eds.), Naturwissenschaftliche Analysenvor- und frühgeschichtlicher Keramik II. Dritter undvierter internationaler Workshop für junge Wissenschaft-lerinnen und Wissenschaftler in Hamburg am 9. Februar2010 und 7. Februar 2011. Universitätsforschungen zur

prähistorischen Archäologie aus der Abteilung Vor- undFrühgeschichtliche Archäologie der Universität Hamburg,Bonn: 171-208.

– in print: “A Preliminary Report on the Iron Ageand Hellenistic Ceramics from Southwestern Paphlagonia”,in Drougou, S. et al. (eds.), Η΄ Επιστημονική Συνάντησηγια την Ελληνιστική Κεραμική (Ιωάννινα 2009) / H’Scientific Meeting on Hellenistic Pottery, Ioannina 2009.Proceedings, Athens (for 2013 in print).

Matthews, R., 2009: “A Dark Age, Grey Ware andElusive Empirs: Paphlagonia through the Iron Age, 1200-330 B.C.”, in Matthews, R. and Glatz, C. (eds.), AtEmpire’s Edge: Project Paphlagonia. Regional Survey inNorth-Central Turkey, British Institute of Archaeology atAnkara, Monograph 44, London: 149-171.

Matthews, R., Metcalfe, M. and Cottica, D., 2009:“Landscapes with Figures: Paphlagonia through the Hel-lenistic, Roman and Byzantine Periods, 330 B.C.-A.D.1453”, in Matthews, R. and Glatz, C. (eds.), At Empire’sEdge: Project Paphlagonia. Regional Survey in North-Central Turkey, British Institute of Archaeology at Ankara,Monograph 44, London: 173-199 and 216-226.

Marro, C., Özdoğan, A. and Tibet, A., 1998: “Prospec-tion archéologique franco-turque dans la région de Kas-tamonu (mer Noire). Troisième rapport préliminaire”,Anatolia Antiqua VI: 317-335.

Polat, G., 1993: A Group of Phrygian Pottery fromthe Archaeological Museum of İstanbul, Istanbul.

Omura, S., 1996: “1994 Yılı İç Anadolu’da YürütülenYüzey Araştırmaları”, in AST 13, Vol. 2, Ankara: 243-272.

– 2006: “Preliminary Report of the 2005 GeneralSurvey in Central Anatolia”, Kaman-Kalehöyük 15, Ana-tolian Archaeological Studies XV, Ibaraki: 63-102.

– 2007: “Preliminary Report of the General Surveyin Central Anatolia (2006)”, Kaman-Kalehöyük 16, Ana-tolian Archaeological Studies XVI, Ibaraki: 45-84.

– 2008: “Preliminary Report of the General Survey(2007)”, Kaman-Kalehöyük 17, Anatolian ArchaeologicalStudies XVII, Ibaraki: 63-102.

Özdoğan, A., Marro, C. and Tibet, A., 1997: “1995Yılı Kastamonu Yüzey Araştırması”, AST 14-2, Ankara:303-330.

– 1999: “Kastamonu Yüzey Araştırması 1997 YılıÇalışmaları”, AST 16-2, Ankara: 219-244.

Özsait, M. and Özsait, N. 1996: “Şeref Höyük: Ko-mama”, Anadolu Araştırmaları/Jahrbuch für Kleinasi-atische Forschung XIV: 361-389.

Summerer, L., 2007: “Greeks and Natives on thesouthern Black Sea Coast in Antiquity”, in Erkut, G. andMitchell, S. (eds.), The Black Sea: Past, Present andFuture, Proceedings of the International, InterdisciplinaryConferance, Istanbul, 14-16 October 2004, British Instituteof Archaeology at Ankara, Monograph 42, London: 27-36.

Stewart, S.M., 2010: Gordion after the Knot: HellenisticPottery and Culture (Unpubl. Diss.; University of Cincin-nati).

Toteva, G.D., 2007: Local Cultures of Late AchaemenidAnatolia (Unpubl. Diss.; University of Minnesota).


TABLE DES MATIERES

Veli BAKHSHALIYEV et Abbas SEYIDOV, New findings from the settlement of Sadarak (Nakhchivan-Azerbaijan) 1

A. Semih GÜNERİ, Three flange hilted bronze daggers from Konya Karahöyük 23

Ergün LAFLI, Gülseren KAN ŞAHİN et Sami PATACI, Iron Age ceramics from Southwestern Paphlagonia 33

Dominique LANGIS-BARSETTI, Results of the 2011 geophysical survey at Kerkenes Dağ, Central Anatolia 69

Olivier CASABONNE, Stéphane LEBRETON et René LEBRUN, Notes Ciliciennes 87

Anton BAMMER, Luc MOENS et Ulrike MUSS, The geological background of the architecture in the Artemision of Ephesus 93

Guy LABARRE, Mehmet ÖZSAİT, Nesrin ÖZSAİT et İlhan GÜCEREN, Trois sites pisidiens : Kapıkaya, Sivritaş, Damla Asarı 103

Catherine SALIOU, La Porte des Chérubins à Antioche sur l’Oronte et le développement de la ville 125

Martine ASSENAT et Antoine PEREZ, Amida 2 . Un forum à Amida 135

Martine ASSENAT et Antoine PEREZ, Amida 3. “ ’Επιφάνεια… κατÜ Τßγριν ” : une fondation hellénistique à Amida ? 159

Oğuz TEKİN, Weights of Cyzicus in Athens Numismatic Museum 167

Oğuz TEKİN, Weights in the collection of Anamur Museum 175

Michela ZANON, Tyana/Kemerhisar (Niğde): Glass bracelets of the Byzantine and Islamic period 181

CHRONIQUES DES TRAVAUX ARCHEOLOGIQUES EN TURQUIE, 2013

Dominique BEYER, Françoise LAROCHE-TRAUNECKER, Julie PATRIER et Aksel TİBET, Zeyve Höyük – Porsuk : rapport préliminaire sur la campagne 2012 201

Jean-Charles MORETTI, avec la collaboration de Nicolas BRESCH, Isabel BONORA et Olivier RISS, Claros, le Temple d’Apollon : travaux réalisés en 2012 235

Stéphane VERGER, Rosella PACE et Vincent JOLIVET, La fouille du Kelebek Tepe, un grand tumulus tardo-archaïque dans la nécropole nord de Kymè d’Eolide. Activités de la Mission archéologique française en Eolide en 2012 245

Abdülkadir BARAN, 2012 Survey of Thera in Karia 261

Olivier HENRY, Lars KARLSSON, Jesper BLID, Ragnar HEDLUND, Baptiste VERGNAUD, Pontus HELLSTRÖM, Thomas THIEME, Agneta FRECCERO, Elifnaz DURUSOY, A. Gülriz BİLGİN-ALTINÖZ, Fatma BAĞDATLI-CAM, Axel FREJMAN and Pascal LEBOUTEILLERLabraunda 2012 – Rapport préliminaire 285

iron age ceramics from southwestern paphlagonia

Documents