Navigation – Plan du site

AccueilNumérosXXIXPreliminary Results of Archaeomet...

Preliminary Results of Archaeometric Analyses Conducted on the Ceramics of Burgaz (Palaia Knidos)

Asuman Günal Türkmenoğlu, E. Hale Göktürk, Numan Tuna, Bekir Özer, Abdullah Zararsız et Füsun Gökalp
p. 93-105

Résumés

Les recherches archéologiques effectuées depuis 1993 au site de l’Ancien Burgaz, ont mis en évidence les strates d’occupation du site de Knidos aux époques archaïque et classique, et remontant au 10e siècle av. J.C. Parmi les découvertes les plus courantes de cette période, on retrouve des bols en céramique typiques de la région dits Burgaz. Les pièces sélectionnées pour cette étude ont été classées en fonction de la forme des bords et des bases et constituent onze groupes distincts qui datent entre la fin du 7e et le début du 4e siècle av. J.C. Des analyses en coupe mince ont montré que le corps des tessons était principalement constitué de matériaux de nature argileuse comportant des fragments rocheux et minéraux qui leur étaient incrustés. Les fragments rocheux les plus abondants sont principalement le quartz poly cristallin d’origine métamorphique, mais on retrouve également des fragments de verre volcanique. Concernant les matières premières, les analyses chimiques suggèrent deux sources différentes et le degré de vitrification observé par les analyses MEB, indique une cuisson insuffisante. Ainsi, l’étude a permis de constater que la matière première utilisée pour la production de la poterie, ainsi que la technologie utilisée pour leur fabrication ont très peu évalué dans le temps. Les données indiquent une production locale des bols Burgaz au cours de la période étudiée.

Haut de page

Texte intégral

Introduction

1The archaeological site at Burgaz is situated about 2 km NE of modern Datça which is the principal urban centre of the Datça peninsula at the very SW extension of the Anatolian mainland (Fig. 1). The salvage excavations by the Middle East Technical University since 1993, at the site proposed by Bean and Cook (1952) to be preceded for the Hellenistic Knidos, recovered extensively domestic quarters and paved roads with sequences dating to the Archaic and Classical periods, and a perimeter of fortification walls constructed ca. 400 BC. Extensive potsherd scatters from eroded deposits of habitation layers extended the site’s history back to the Geometric period/10th century BC (Tuna, Atıcı, Sakarya, & Koparal, 2009; Tuna, 1997, pp. 255ff.). The excavations at Burgaz have provided the evidence that the Classical settlement had probably been abandoned before the last quarter of 4th century BC. In later periods, the settlement took on a non-residential character with sporadic uses of agricultural processing workshops, industrial activities and storage facilities that would have supplemented the facilities in a northern harbour, L4 (Tuna & Atıcı, 2010).

  • 1 Also referred to as Kameros cups (Boardman & Hayes, 1966, pp. 112-113) and Karian bowls (Özer, 2017 (...)

2Among the Archaic period assemblages, forms of Burgaz cups1 (Özer, 1998, pp. 55-67) seem to be very popular (Tuna, 1998, pp. 445ff.). In the literature, this group is considered as a subgroup of the Ionian kylix which shows wide spread use throughout the known centres of coastal Aegean region and Mediterranean littoral areas (Cook & Dupont, 1998, pp. 129ff.; Cook, 1997, pp. 109ff.). However, the large abundance of these cups may also suggest that they were manufactured in the Burgaz area for the local use (Özer, 2017).

3In this study, the goal was to determine the characteristics of the raw material used and the manufacturing technology of Burgaz/Kameros cups that are well-known ware types found in the Archaic-Classical Burgaz assemblages through an archaeometric approach. The results are expected to contribute to the understanding of social and economic capacity of this area.

Fig. 1 Location map of Burgaz archaeological site

Fig. 1 Location map of Burgaz archaeological site

Burgaz Excavation Archives

Geology of the Area

4The rock units outcropping in the Datça area are grouped into two as basement and cover rock units. The basement units from the pre-Lower Eocene consist of ophiolite and ophiolitic melange, carbonates and blocky flysch. Ophiolitic and carbonate units are mostly exposed towards the south of the area. Ophiolitic units are represented by massive peridotite and serpentinized peridotite masses. Whereas the carbonates present a sort of massive or cherty limestone varieties. The blocky flysch units are also found in the south and are formed of marl, clayey limestone intercalated with calcarenite, conglomerate and siltstone. Its uppermost levels are characterized by highly deformed slate and metacalcarenite. The cover units from the late Pliocene include marine and continental units and Quaternary-aged alluvium, beach sand and conglomerate. Associated with quaternary deposits mostly valley-filling tuffs, ash and pumice may reach at the thickness of 40 meters. They are the products of volcanic activities originated around the Kos Island at about 160 000 years ago (Şengör & Yılmaz, 1981; Ersoy, 1990; Allen & Cas, 2001; Dirik, 2007).

Sampling Methodology

  • 2 Excavation inventory numbers and samples numbers of the selected potsherds are given in Table 1.

5The potsherds of Burgaz cups analysed in this study were recovered in the course of excavations carried out in the NE and SE domestic sectors of Burgaz during the 1995-1997 working seasons. The archaeological contexts of Burgaz indicate that the cups under examination began to appear in the 7th century BC with examples consisting mostly of imported cups, but soon afterwards in the 6th century BC, the production of local imitations commenced. The pottery assemblages from the Archaic-Classical contexts present a gradual evolution of the Knidian cup types. One of the main concerns of Burgaz pottery studies is to understand the level of local production capacity of Burgaz cups specifically. To determine the local capacity of Archaic-Classical pottery production in the Burgaz area, a sampling strategy has been developed on the sub-types of the Burgaz cups represented in the Burgaz assemblages of the archaeological deposits from primary contexts. 80 potsherds are selected and grouped based on visual classification of base and rim forms into 11 distinct cup types (grouped from a to k) within the context of Burgaz cups2. However, this paper is not concerned with detailed analysis of typological aspects of these types, but rather clay characteristics of the material. These potsherds dated through the late 7th - early 4th century BC are described in Table 1.

Table 1 The potsherd samples analyzed in the study

Sample No.

Inventory No.

Brief Description

Comments

a1

BZ.95.NE.3.7.C7.2.6

Rim fragment of a cup

630-550 BC), red-yellow-pinkish fabric in general, short vertical lipped, thin groove at junction of rim and shoulder, deep body

a2

BZ.96.SE.7.6.C9.10

Rim fragment of a cup

a3

BZ.96.NE.4.7.D3.3

Rim fragment of a cup

a4

BZ.96.NE.3.7.C.A.8.6

Rim fragment of a cup

a5

BZ.97.SE.10.7.D8a.1

Rim fragment of a cup

a6

BZ.97.SE.10.7.D8a.2

Rim fragment of a cup

a7

BZ.96.NE.4.7.D10.12

Rim fragment of a cup

b1

BZ.95.NE.3.7.C5.15

base fragment of a cup (conical)

The base fragments of group a, flaring ring foot, 630-550 BC (Fig. 2)

b2

BZ.95.NE.3.7.C5.14

base fragment of a cup (ring base)

b3

BZ.96.NE.3.7.B14.6

base fragment of a cup (ring base)

b4

BZ.96.NE.3.6.A9.20

base fragment of a cup (ring base)

b5

BZ.96.SE.6.7.D8a.15

base fragment of a cup (conical)

b6

BZ.96.NE.3.7.D10.35

base fragment of a cup (ring base)

b7

BZ.97.SE.8.6.6.b3

base fragment of a cup (ring base)

c1

BZ.95.NE.3.7.C7.47

base fragment of a cup (conical)

Conical bases, 6th century BC (Fig. 3)

c2

BZ.95.SE.8.6.A5.47

base fragment of a cup (ring base)

c3

BZ.95.SE.8.7.C7b.11

base fragment of a cup (ring base)

c4

BZ.96.SE.6.7.D6.4

base fragment of a cup (conical)

c5

BZ.96.SE.6.7.B6.7

base fragment of a cup (ring base)

c6

BZ.95.SE.8.7.C7b.6

base fragment of a cup (ring base)

d1

BZ.95.NE.3.7.C5.91

base fragment of a cup (ring base)

Dipped bases, continues into the 6th-5th centuries more commonly, named as that due to the slip technique

d2

d3

d4

BZ.96.NE.3.7.B12.5

BZ.96.NE.4.7.D7.67

BZ.96.NE.6.4.A.22

base fragment of a cup (ring base) base fragment of a cup (ring base) base fragment of a cup (ring base)

d5

BZ.96.SE.7.7.D6.94

base fragment of a cup (ring base)

d6

BZ.96.NE.3.7.B10.95

base fragment of a cup (ring base)

d7

BZ.96.SE.10.7.D8.10

base fragment of a cup (ring base)

e1

BZ.95.SE.8.7.C5.58

Rim fragment of a cup

Rim fragments with carinated shoulder, shoulder part left reserved, rest is slipped, Mid-6th century BC

e2

e3

BZ.96.SE.8.6.D13.7

BZ.96.NE.6.4.A.21

Rim fragment of a cup Rim fragment of a cup

e4

BZ.96.NE.4.7.A12.7

Rim fragment of a cup

e5

e6

BZ.97.SE.10.7.D7.3 BZ.97.SE.7.7.D9.5

Rim fragment of a cup Rim fragment of a cup

e7

e8

BZ.97.NE.2.8.B13.36 BZ.97.SE.7.7.D9.3

Rim fragment of a cup Rim fragment of a cup

e9

BZ.97.SE.7.7.C6a.12

Rim fragment of a cup

f1

BZ.95.SE.8.7.C5.90

Rim fragment of a cup

Rim fragments with less carinated shoulder, second half of the 6th, early 5th century BC

f2

BZ.95.SE.8.7.C5.107

Rim fragment of a cup

f3

BZ.95.SE.8.7.C5.94

Rim fragment of a cup

f4

BZ.96.NE.3.7.D11.12

Rim fragment of a cup

f5

f6

BZ.97.SE.10.7.D7.5

BZ.96.NE.6.4.A.12

Rim-handle fragment of a cup

Rim fragment of a cup

f7

BZ.97.SE.6.8.B10c.1

Rim fragment of a cup

f8

BZ.96.NE.4.7.D12.8

Rim fragment of a cup

g1

BZ.97.NE.2.8.B13.37

Rim fragment of a cup

Rim fragments, 5th century BC examples, common during the second half of the 5th century BC, continues later on

g2

BZ.96.SE.7.7.D6.88

Rim fragment of a cup

g3

BZ.97.SE.7.7.C6.20

Rim fragment of a cup

g4

BZ.97.NE.2.8.B15.14

Rim fragment of a cup

g5

BZ.97.NE.2.8.B15.15

Rim fragment of a cup

g6

BZ.97.SE.7.7.C9a.2

Rim fragment of a cup

Methods of Analyses

6For petrographic investigations, thin sections with 0.03 mm thickness were prepared from each sherd and examined with a Nikon Labophot-Pol optical microscope. Photographs were taken with an Ortholux II- Pol –BK Vario Orthomat model microscope camera.

7Types of minerals in the clay were determined by X-Ray powder diffraction (XRD) as a complement to petrographic analysis. Powder samples were prepared by grinding and sieving below a 170 mesh sieve. X-Ray traces of the randomly oriented powdered samples were obtained by using a Huber Model diffractometer operated by CuK radiation at 30- 40 kV and 10- 20 mA.

8Scanning electron microscopy (SEM) and energy dispersive X-Ray analyses (EDX) were carried out by using a JEOL JSM 6400 SEM equipped with an energy dispersive NORAN instrument (model series II). Gold coated polished samples were prepared for the analyses.

9FTIR Analyses were carried out using both a Nicolet 510 FTIR and an IR Schmadzu model 470 spectrophotometers. Samples were grounded and dried at 50°C to remove the moisture prior to the measurements. 0.1 gram of the dried samples were mixed with spectroscopic grade KBr in an agate mortar and pressed into pellets under 10 tons/cm2 pressure via Graseby Spesac model press.

10Petrographic investigations, XRD, EDX-SEM and FTIR analyses were carried out at the research laboratories of the Middle East Technical University.

11X-Ray fluorescence analyses were performed at Ankara Nuclear Research and Training Center by using a multi-element analyser (in the range from 11Na to 92U) high performance Oxford XRF system. The spectra were acquired and analysed by using Oxford Xpert Ease software. The tube power was 50W and maximum current was 1000

Results and Discussion

Visual Classification

12Collected sherd samples from the late 7th century to early 4th century BC (Archaic to Classical periods) were visually classified based on their shapes and decorations. In general, Burgaz cups have short lips, horizontal handles, deep bodies and short rings or conical bases. In terms of their decorations, the cups belonging to earlier periods are distinguished by reserve bands on their lips while for those of later periods this band appear between the handles (Özer, 1998, pp. 55-67; Özer, 2017). Other parts of the body are dark in colour or reddish yellow or pink (Fig. 2-7).

13The characteristics of the subtypes of the cups in groups a-k are briefly presented as follows:

14Sub-type a1-7 were selected from primary contexts of the Archaic deposits at Burgaz, which could be dated to the first half of the 6th century BC. This group completely consists of rim/shoulder fragments. The colour is red-yellow-pinkish fabric in general.

15Sub-type b1-7 were grouped as bases (flaring ring foot), probably the base fragments of group a.

16Sub-type c1-6 were grouped as bases (conical base), which could be dated to a second half of the 6th century BC.

17Sub-type d1-7 were also grouped of bases, which continue into the 6th-5th centuries BC. They are so called “dipped bases” due to the slip-technique.

18Sub type e1-9 were mainly rim fragments with shoulder. Shoulder part is left reserved, rest is slipped. This group is dated between 550-540 BC.

19Sub-type f1 8 were also rim fragments, but less carinated shoulder. The group could be dated to the second half of the 6th century BC.

20Sub-type g1-6 were all rim fragments; these types were very popular during the second half of the 5th century BC, continues later on.

21Sub-type h1- 6 were all grouped as bases (ring foot), that are dated to the end of the 5th century BC.

22Sub-type i1-8 were grouped as handled rims, that are thin sectioned and totally black slipped. The group is dated to the end of the 5th century BC, continues into the 4th century BC.

23Sub-type j1-8 were grouped as rims, which are thin-sectioned and white-band decorated with black slipped metallic look. The group is probably dated between 500-450 BC.

24Sub-type k1-9 could be assigned to a likely Ionian kylixes, which were grouped as rims, bases and body fragments. The group are dated to the third quarter of the 6th century BC.

25The sub-types of cups in groups of a-g which were described above have been found numerously in Tocra, Naukratis, Tell Sukas, and elsewhere in Mediterranean Archaic sites, as well as neighbouring sites of Burgaz, such as in Kamiros, Vroulia (For the comparison, see Boardman-Hayes, 1966, pp. 112-113, fig. 55: 1200; Petrie, 1886; Plough, 1973, pp. 32-33, fig.c: 128c.4-8; Kinch, 1914, pp. 23-24, 148. Fig. 12. Pl. 27: 4, 18, 20; Petrie, 1886, Pl. X: 10; Villard-Vallet, 1955, pp. 27-29, Type B3, Pl. XI:B). Whereas the sub-type k is well known as the Ionian kylix and very commonly found in most sites of the Black Sea and Mediterranean littoral (For the comparison, see Hanfmann, 1956, pp. 165-184; Boardman-Hayes, 1966, pp. 114, fig.57:1288; Plough, 1973, pp. 30-31, pl.VI: 120-121; Isler, 1978, pp. 71-84). This sub-group probably had been produced not only in Ionia but locally imitated by various other centres of the Mediterranean; Burgaz possibly would be one of these local centres.

Fig. 2 Flaring ring foot samples, Group b

Fig. 2 Flaring ring foot samples, Group b

Fig. 3 Conical base samples, Group c

Fig. 3 Conical base samples, Group c

Fig. 4 Handled rim fragments, Group i

Fig. 4 Handled rim fragments, Group i

Fig. 5 Thin sectioned rims, white band, black slip samples, Group j

Fig. 5 Thin sectioned rims, white band, black slip samples, Group j

Fig. 6 The cup forms sampled, Group a-e

Fig. 6 The cup forms sampled, Group a-e

Fig. 7 The cup forms sampled, Group f-k

Fig. 7 The cup forms sampled, Group f-k

Mineralogical Analyses

26Thin section analyses showed that, the body parts consist of mainly clay-size material with very few and fine grained, embedded rock fragments. Recognized minerals, in the order of decreasing abundance are plagioclase, quartz, K- feldspar, hematite, ferromagnesian minerals, muscovite, micritic calcite and opaques. Feldspar crystals are mostly fresh but some show alteration (Fig. 8). Plagioclases are distinguished by their characteristic polysynthetic twinning. Hematite has large or small grain sizes and in some sherd samples it is very abundant. Ferromagnesian minerals are pyroxene, talc, chlorite and biotite. Monoclinic pyroxene grains partly show alterations to iron oxides, like biotites. Talc and chlorite show fibrous habit. Sherds commonly have micritic calcite which is recognized as filling the pores within the body or sometimes deposited close to the sherd surface. Radiating crystals of gypsum are detected in few samples. The most abundant rock fragments are mainly polycrystalline quartz of metamorphic origin and chert. Volcanic glass which is either in the form of pumice (Fig. 9) or glass sherd also show common occurrence. Remnants of original clay are observable within the body.

Fig. 8 Thin section microphotograph of a coarse feldspar crystal embedded in the matrix (10x, crossed nicols)

Fig. 8 Thin section microphotograph of a coarse feldspar crystal embedded in the matrix (10x, crossed nicols)

Fig. 9 Thin section microphotograph of a pumice fragment in the matrix (10x, crossed nicols)

Fig. 9 Thin section microphotograph of a pumice fragment in the matrix (10x, crossed nicols)

27The most common minerals in the sherds such as quartz, plagioclase and calcite are also identified in FTIR traces. Well-developed Si-O stretching bands (1050 cm-1) and quartet of bands at 800-700 cm-1 belong to quartz and plagioclase in all samples. Calcite detected by means of the bands at 1400- 1450 cm-1 in some samples (Fig. 10).

Fig. 10 FTIR patterns of the samples belonging to different groups (b, c, f, i, j)

Fig. 10 FTIR patterns of the samples belonging to different groups (b, c, f, i, j)

28In thin sections, the body of the sherds has grey, red and pink matrix and is highly porous. Pores are mostly filled by micritic calcite. The matrix is partly vitrified as observed by SEM (Fig. 11). However, there are remaining clayey matrix, which are due to inhomogeneous heating during firing (Fig. 12).

Fig. 11 SEM microphotograph of a ferromagnesian mineral embedded in vitrified matrix

Fig. 11 SEM microphotograph of a ferromagnesian mineral embedded in vitrified matrix

Fig. 12 SEM microphotograph of remnant clay material, surrounded by the vitrified matrix

Fig. 12 SEM microphotograph of remnant clay material, surrounded by the vitrified matrix

XRF Analyses

29XRF Results of nine representative samples belonging to cups of the different time span (from group a to k, Table 1) are listed in Table 2. In this table, the concentration of major elements is given for their oxide forms while the rest of the constituents are expressed with respect to their elemental forms. Ceramic samples studied mainly consist of SiO2 (50- 57%), Al2O3(13- 18%), Fe2O3 (total iron, 7- 9%), K2O (2-4%) and CaO (6-9%).

Table 2 Results of XRF analysis (-: not detected)

Sample

No

C4

K7

D4

E2

F6

G6

J4

I2

H3

Oxide

Unit

SiO2

%

52,26

50,90

55,38

56,48

56,78

56,10

53,10

55,40

54,79

Al2O3

%

17,79

15,73

13,62

14,14

14,25

14,67

13,53

14,60

13,42

TiO2

%

0,81

0,80

0,83

0,84

0,82

0,87

0,80

0,83

0,77

Fe2O3

%

7,71

8,82

7,51

7,38

7,39

8,01

7,47

8,18

7,45

MnO

%

0,10

0,11

0,17

0,13

0,12

0,17

0,15

0,14

0,14

MgO

%

1,75

-

0,02

0,83

0,91

-

-

-

-

Na2O

%

0,84

-

-

-

-

-

-

-

-

K2O

%

3,81

3,04

2,70

2,87

2,73

2,07

2,68

2,94

2,61

P2O5

%

0,18

0,08

0,10

0,08

0,08

0,14

0,07

0,06

0,05

S

%

0,02

0,02

0,03

0,04

0,04

0,04

0,03

0,02

0,03

Cl

%

0,06

0,07

0,03

0,04

0,03

0,03

0,06

0,03

0,04

CaO

%

8,45

11,43

7,03

6,48

8,07

7,10

8,17

8,34

8,98

Cr2O3

%

0,08

0,12

0,11

0,11

0,11

0,11

0,10

0,11

0,11

NiO

%

-

0,03

0,04

0,04

0,03

0,05

0,04

0,05

0,04

BaO

%

-

0,03

0,03

0,03

0,03

0,03

0,02

0,03

0,02

V

ppm

123

122

118

124

113

123

119

135

114

Co

ppm

14

36

69

48

42

69

56

51

52

Cu

ppm

50

45

52

49

62

50

51

59

60

Zn

ppm

116

73

95

100

95

109

89

126

108

Ga

ppm

19

17

17

18

16

18

19

19

17

As

ppm

13

43

-

10

2

5

6

10

1

Se

ppm

0,04

0,07

0,04

0,02

0,05

0,01

0,05

0,05

0,08

Rb

ppm

156

150

109

122

121

97

121

147

117

Sr

ppm

164

259

122

117

140

137

137

134

143

Y

ppm

-

30

28

39

27

31

34

33

28

Zr

ppm

-

124

156

167

168

162

149

160

158

Pb

ppm

-

21

21

17

23

27

20

26

22

Th

ppm

-

11

12

8

11

13

13

13

8

Nb

ppm

-

51

11

23

28

19

22

14

19

Mo

ppm

-

3

3

3

3

3

3

4

4

Sn

ppm

-

1

0,5

2,6

2,7

2,3

1,1

3,2

3,1

La

ppm

-

14

2,3

23,3

8

12

-

33

32

Ce

ppm

-

35

44

46

16

-

32

18

29

30In order to compare the raw material composition of the ceramic samples belonging to different periods of time, trace element diagrams are plotted and are given in Figures 13 and 14. In the Sr versus Nb plot all samples except K7, of the Ionian kylix, are clustered in the same area.

Fig. 13 Biplot (Sr- Nb) showing the variability in the chemical composition of the chronological groups studied

Fig. 13 Biplot (Sr- Nb) showing the variability in the chemical composition of the chronological groups studied

Fig. 14 Triplot (Zn- V- Sr) of the samples belonging to different groups (symbols are the same as in Fig. 13)

Fig. 14 Triplot (Zn- V- Sr) of the samples belonging to different groups (symbols are the same as in Fig. 13)

31Similar distribution of the samples is also observed in the V-Zn-Sr diagram. Although Ionian kylix samples were visually dated to the same time interval as those belonging to the groups c, d, e and f, the significantly different behaviour of the Ionian kylix sample implies a different source of raw material used (Özer, 1998, pp. 50-54). Then, they must be either imported or manufactured in situ but by using a completely different clay source.

32Results of investigations based on the chemical analyses suggest at least two different sources for the raw materials. Firing techniques appeared to be insufficient to obtain the complete vitrification of the raw material, leaving minute quantities of clay and micrite unfired as revealed by SEM analyses.

33In conclusion, while the formal evolution of the Burgaz cups with various types continuously takes place in time, the raw material used and the technology applied for the production of ceramics appeared to change very little. This indicates that most of the Burgaz cups were produced locally.

  • 3 Pottery samples contain quartz, plagioclase, biotite, hematite, calcite, K-feldspar and dolomite re (...)

34This conclusion obtained from the present study is supported by the previous investigations related to the provenance studies of Burgaz ceramics. Empereur & Picon (1986) investigated the mineralogical and chemical characteristics of Knidian amphorae and their probable raw material sources in the Datça plain, through various projects since late 1980s. The results of provenance studies of amphorae and fine ceramics revealed that the potsherd and clay samples had similar mineralogical and chemical compositions, which provides evidence for the supply of raw material by the pottery workshops in the nearby localities in the Datça plain (Dirican, 2002).3 The latter author also mentioned that some raw materials, other than clay, from local sources are also used to make mixtures especially for amphora productions. In fact, the detected glass sherds in ceramics indicated that tuffs were used as additive or temper material in these mixtures.

35Since the Knidian territorium has revealed many ceramic production-settlements active from the 6th century BC to the 6th century AD (Sakarya, Atıcı, & Tuna, 2019), the similar archaeometric investigations on the Burgaz pottery for provenance analysis are expected to contribute also for our understanding of ancient trade in Eastern Mediterranean and Aegean antiquity.

Haut de page

Bibliographie

Allen, S. R., & Cas, R. A. F. (2001). Transport of pyroclastic flows across the sea during the explosive, rhyolitic eruption of the Kos Plateau Tuff, Greece. Bulletin of Volcanology, 62, 441-456. DOI: 10.1007/s004450000107.

Bean, G. E., & Cook, J. M. (1952). The Cnidia. The Annual of the British School at Athens, 47, 171-212. DOI:10.1017/S0068245400012338.

Boardman, J., & Hayes, J. (1966). Excavations at Tocra 1963-1965: The Archaic Deposits I. The British School at Athens. Supplementary Volumes, 4, i-170. URL: https://www.jstor.org/stable/i40038232.

Cook, R. M. (1997). Greek Painted Pottery. London: Routledge.

Cook, R. M., & Dupont, P. (1998). East Greek Pottery. London and New York: Routledge.

Dirican, M. (2002). Geoarchaeometrical study of the Burgaz area, Datça Peninsula, Turkey (Unpublished master thesis). Middle East Technical University, Ankara, Turkey. URI: https://hdl.handle.net/11511/13172.

Dirik, K. (2007). Neotectonic characteristics and seismicity of the Reşadiye peninsula and surrounding area, Southwest Anatolia. Geological Bulletin of Turkey, 50(3), 130-149. URL: https://dergipark.org.tr/tr/download/article-file/289319.

Empereur, J.-Y., & Picon, M. (1986). À la recherche des fours d’amphores, BCH Suppl., 13, 103-126. URL: CEFAEL.

Ersoy, Ş. (1990). Stratigraphy and tectonics of the neotectonic units in the Reşadiye (Datça) peninsula, In M.Y. Savasçın & A.H. Eronat (Eds.), SW Turkey. International Earth Sciences Congress on Aegean Regions (IESCA-1990), İzmir, Turkey, 1-6 October 1990 Proceedings, Vol.-I, Izmir, Dokuz Eylül University Dept. Of Geology, 116-127. URL: http://iesca.deu.edu.tr/ocs/public/conferences/1/archive/web/iesca_archive/IESCA-1990-v01.pdf.

Hanfmann, G. M. A. (1956). On Some Eastern Greek Wares Found at Tarsus. In S. S. Weinberg (Ed.), The Aegean and the Near East. Studies Presented to Hetty Goldman on the Occasion of her Seventy-fifth Birthday (pp. 165-184). New York: J. J. Augustin.

Isler, H. P. (1978). Samos: la ceramica arcaica. In Centre Jean Bérard & Institut Français de Naples (Eds.), Les Céramiques de la Grèce de l’Est et leur diffusion en Occident (pp. 71-84). Naples : Publications du Centre Jean Bérard.

Kinch, K. F. (1914). Fouilles de Vroulia (Rhodes). Berlin: G. Reimer. URL: https://hdl.handle.net/2027/mdp.39015011577866.

Özer, B. (1998). Datça-Burgaz Kazılarında Ele Geçen Arkaik Dönem Bezemeli Seramikler (Unpublished master thesis). Ege University, Izmir, Turkey.

Özer, B. (2017). Kıyı Karia Arkaik Seramiği: Karia Kaseleri ve Denizaşırı Dağılımları. Arkeoloji ve Sanat, 156, 61-76. URI: https://hdl.handle.net/20.500.12809/6902.

Petrie, W. M. F. (1886). Naukratis I, 1884-85, Third Memoir of the Egypt Exploration Fund, London: Trübner and Co.

Ploug, G. (1973). Sukas II: The Aegean, Corinthian and Eastern Greek Pottery and Terracottas. Copenhagen: Munksgaard.

Sakarya, I, Atıcı, N., & Tuna, N. (2019). Knidian amphorae of the Hellenistic and Late Roman periods at Burgaz (Palaia Knidos). Journal on Hellenistic and Roman Material Culture, 8, 317-339. DOI: 10.1400/276585.

Şengör, A. M. C., & Yılmaz, Y. (1981). Tethyan evolution of Turkey: a plate techtonic approach. Techtonophysics, 75, 181-241. DOI: 10.1016/0040-1951(81)90275-4.

Tuna, N. (1997). Burgaz Arkeolojik Kazıları 1996 Yılı Çalışmaları. Kazı Sonuçları Toplantısı 18(2), 255-271. URL: http://www.kulturvarliklari.gov.tr/sempozyum_pdf/kazilar/18_kazi_2.pdf.

Tuna, N. (1998): Burgaz Arkeolojik Kazıları 1997 Yılı Çalışmaları, Kazı Sonuçları Toplantısı, 19(2), 425-438. URL: http://www.kulturvarliklari.gov.tr/sempozyum_pdf/kazilar/19_kazi_2.pdf.

Tuna, N., Atıcı, N, Sakarya, İ, & Koparal, E. (2009): The preliminary results of Burgaz excavations within the context of locating Old Knidos. In F. Rumscheid (Ed.), Die Karer und die Anderen, internationales Kolloquium an der Freien Universitat Berlin, 13-15 Oct. 2005 (pp. 517- 532). Bonn: Habelt. URL: https://www.academia.edu/41369679/The_preliminary_results_of_Burgaz_excavations_within_the_context_of_locating_Old_Knidos.

Tuna, N., & Atıcı, N. (2010). Burgaz yerleşimindeki İ.Ö. 4.-3. yüzyıl zeytinyağı ve şarap atölyeleri üzerine değerlendirmeler. In A. K. Şenol, & Ü. Aydınoğlu (Ed.), Olive Oil and Wine Production in Anatolia during Antiquity (pp. 199-212). International Symposium Proceedings 06-08 November 2008, Mersin, Turkey. Istanbul: Ege Yayınları. URL: https://www.academia.edu/41458931/Burgaz_yerle%C5%9Fimindeki_M_%C3%96_4_3_y%C3%BCzy%C4%B1l_zeytinya%C4%9F%C4%B1_ve_%C5%9Farap_at%C3%B6lyeleri_%C3%BCzerine_de%C4%9Ferlendirmeler.

Villard, F., & Vallet, G. (1955). Megara Hyblaea, Lampes du VIIe siècle et chronologie des coupes ioniennes. Mélanges d’archéologie et d’histoire, 67, 27-29.

Haut de page

Notes

1 Also referred to as Kameros cups (Boardman & Hayes, 1966, pp. 112-113) and Karian bowls (Özer, 2017).

2 Excavation inventory numbers and samples numbers of the selected potsherds are given in Table 1.

3 Pottery samples contain quartz, plagioclase, biotite, hematite, calcite, K-feldspar and dolomite revealed by thin section and XRD analysis.

Haut de page

Table des illustrations

Titre Fig. 1 Location map of Burgaz archaeological site
Crédits Burgaz Excavation Archives
URL http://journals.openedition.org/anatoliaantiqua/docannexe/image/1858/img-1.jpg
Fichier image/jpeg, 305k
Titre Fig. 2 Flaring ring foot samples, Group b
URL http://journals.openedition.org/anatoliaantiqua/docannexe/image/1858/img-2.jpg
Fichier image/jpeg, 24k
Titre Fig. 3 Conical base samples, Group c
URL http://journals.openedition.org/anatoliaantiqua/docannexe/image/1858/img-3.jpg
Fichier image/jpeg, 25k
Titre Fig. 4 Handled rim fragments, Group i
URL http://journals.openedition.org/anatoliaantiqua/docannexe/image/1858/img-4.jpg
Fichier image/jpeg, 31k
Titre Fig. 5 Thin sectioned rims, white band, black slip samples, Group j
URL http://journals.openedition.org/anatoliaantiqua/docannexe/image/1858/img-5.jpg
Fichier image/jpeg, 18k
Titre Fig. 6 The cup forms sampled, Group a-e
URL http://journals.openedition.org/anatoliaantiqua/docannexe/image/1858/img-6.jpg
Fichier image/jpeg, 79k
Titre Fig. 7 The cup forms sampled, Group f-k
URL http://journals.openedition.org/anatoliaantiqua/docannexe/image/1858/img-7.jpg
Fichier image/jpeg, 81k
Titre Fig. 8 Thin section microphotograph of a coarse feldspar crystal embedded in the matrix (10x, crossed nicols)
URL http://journals.openedition.org/anatoliaantiqua/docannexe/image/1858/img-8.jpg
Fichier image/jpeg, 39k
Titre Fig. 9 Thin section microphotograph of a pumice fragment in the matrix (10x, crossed nicols)
URL http://journals.openedition.org/anatoliaantiqua/docannexe/image/1858/img-9.jpg
Fichier image/jpeg, 47k
Titre Fig. 10 FTIR patterns of the samples belonging to different groups (b, c, f, i, j)
URL http://journals.openedition.org/anatoliaantiqua/docannexe/image/1858/img-10.jpg
Fichier image/jpeg, 47k
Titre Fig. 11 SEM microphotograph of a ferromagnesian mineral embedded in vitrified matrix
URL http://journals.openedition.org/anatoliaantiqua/docannexe/image/1858/img-11.jpg
Fichier image/jpeg, 72k
Titre Fig. 12 SEM microphotograph of remnant clay material, surrounded by the vitrified matrix
URL http://journals.openedition.org/anatoliaantiqua/docannexe/image/1858/img-12.jpg
Fichier image/jpeg, 102k
Titre Fig. 13 Biplot (Sr- Nb) showing the variability in the chemical composition of the chronological groups studied
URL http://journals.openedition.org/anatoliaantiqua/docannexe/image/1858/img-13.jpg
Fichier image/jpeg, 59k
Titre Fig. 14 Triplot (Zn- V- Sr) of the samples belonging to different groups (symbols are the same as in Fig. 13)
URL http://journals.openedition.org/anatoliaantiqua/docannexe/image/1858/img-14.jpg
Fichier image/jpeg, 46k
Haut de page

Pour citer cet article

Référence papier

Asuman Günal Türkmenoğlu, E. Hale Göktürk, Numan Tuna, Bekir Özer, Abdullah Zararsız et Füsun Gökalp, « Preliminary Results of Archaeometric Analyses Conducted on the Ceramics of Burgaz (Palaia Knidos) »Anatolia Antiqua, XXIX | 2021, 93-105.

Référence électronique

Asuman Günal Türkmenoğlu, E. Hale Göktürk, Numan Tuna, Bekir Özer, Abdullah Zararsız et Füsun Gökalp, « Preliminary Results of Archaeometric Analyses Conducted on the Ceramics of Burgaz (Palaia Knidos) »Anatolia Antiqua [En ligne], XXIX | 2021, mis en ligne le 15 mars 2022, consulté le 12 juin 2024. URL : http://journals.openedition.org/anatoliaantiqua/1858 ; DOI : https://doi.org/10.4000/anatoliaantiqua.1858

Haut de page

Auteurs

Asuman Günal Türkmenoğlu

Department of Geological Engineering, Middle East Technical University, Ankara
asumant@metu.edu.tr

E. Hale Göktürk

Department of Chemistry, Middle East Technical University, Ankara

Numan Tuna

Department of Settlement Archaeology, Middle East Technical University, Ankara
tnuman@metu.edu.tr

Articles du même auteur

Bekir Özer

Department of Archaeology, Muğla Sıtkı Koçman University, Muğla
ozer73@hotmail.com

Abdullah Zararsız

Nuclear Research and Training Center, Ankara
abdullah.zararsiz@gmail.com

Füsun Gökalp

Department of Archaeometry, Middle East Technical University, Ankara

Haut de page

Droits d’auteur

CC-BY-SA-4.0

Le texte seul est utilisable sous licence CC BY-SA 4.0. Les autres éléments (illustrations, fichiers annexes importés) sont « Tous droits réservés », sauf mention contraire.

Haut de page
Rechercher dans OpenEdition Search

Vous allez être redirigé vers OpenEdition Search