Navigation – Plan du site

AccueilNumérosXXVIChronique des travaux archéologiq...Preliminary Report on the Fifth S...

Chronique des travaux archéologiques en Turquie 2017

Preliminary Report on the Fifth Season of the Konya Ereğli, Karapınar, Halkapınar and Emirgazi Survey Project (Keyar)1 2017

Çiğdem Maner
p. 155-164

Texte intégral

  • 1 KEYAR: Konya Ereğli Yüzey Araştırması, Konya Ereğli Survey Project.

1The fifth field season of the KEYAR survey project, which aims to locate and systematically survey the Bronze and Iron Age settlements in the southeastern districts of the Konya plain, took place from 06.09 until 22.09. 2017. The districts under investigation are Ereğli, Halkapınar, Emirgazi and Karapınar. The 2017 field season focused in particular on the Karapınar district. The representative of the Ministry of Culture Directorate of Antiquities and Museums was Yakup Ünlüer, from the Niğde Museum. The team members were Muhip Çarkı, Francesco Tessa, Melda Küçükdemirci, Coşkun Bilgi, Catherine Kuzucuoğlu, Ali Gürel and Müslüm Demir. The survey project is generously supported by Koç University College of Social Sciences and Humanities, Avis Turkey, Özkoçlar Otel and Derya Lokantası. I am grateful to the Ereğli Museum Director Mahmut Altuncan, our representative, my team, our sponsors, our driver Mrs. Sadiye Kaya and everyone who has helped and opened their doors for us.

Scope of 2017 Field Season

  • 2 Maner 2017, 2018.
  • 3 Mellaart 1954, 1955, 1958, 1963 ; Güneri 1990 : 324 ; Bahar 2002 ; Bahar and Koçak 2004 ; Bahar and (...)
  • 4 Publication in preparation.
  • 5 Publication in preparation.

2The survey of the Karapınar district had started in 2016.2 Previously the Karapınar district had been partially surveyed by Mellaart, Güneri and Bahar.3 However, the whole district was never really investigated and systematically surveyed. One of the aims of the 2017 field season was to continue the survey of Karapınar. Secondly, two mounds were chosen for GPR scanning;4 one of the aims of the KEYAR survey project is to create a database with GPR results for the most important mounds in the region surveyed. Thirdly, the paleo-environmental survey was continued in the marshes of Akgöl by Kuzucuoğlu, Gürel and Demir.5

Regions and Settlements Investigated and Surveyed in 2017

3During the 2017 field season Akören, Ovacık, Dağ Gölü (crater lake), Karacadağ Kurşuncu Manastırı, Kesmez, Kazanhöyüğü, Akçayazı, Kayacık, Tilkili and Sazlıpınar in the Karapınar district and a newly discovered settlement in Halkapınar Yeşilyurt were systematically surveyed. Eight settlements, which were in use during the Bronze and Iron Ages, one of them in Halkapınar district, were systematically surveyed (Table 1, Fig. 1-2). Tilkili Höyük has been previously investigated by James Mellaart and Hasan Bahar, and Kazanhüyüğü by Bahar; the other six sites have been surveyed for the first time. In the next section the surveyed settlements will be described in detail. The numbering system of the settlement, which was initiated during the first field season in 2013, is also applied to the newly surveyed settlements and regions.

4Table 1

Settlement Number

Settlement Name

Province and District

Altitude (m)

63

Halkapınar Höyüğü

Halkapınar, Yeşilyurt

1328

64

Kazanhüyüğü

Karapınar, Kazanhüyüğü

1016

65

Kuru Höyük

Karapınar, Hotamış

1008

66

Yelekli Höyük

Karapınar, Akçayazı

1017

67

Derbent Höyük

Karapınar, Akçayazı

1020

68

Kayacık Höyük

Karapınar, Kayacık

1007

69

Tilkili Höyük

Karapınar, Tilkili

995

70

Karacadağ Dağ Gölü

Karapınar, Ovacık

2003

Fig. 1: Systematically surveyed sites during the 2017 field season

Fig. 1: Systematically surveyed sites during the 2017 field season

No 63 Halkapınar Höyüğü (Fig. 3-4)

Fig. 4: EBA and IA pottery from Halkapınar Höyüğü

Fig. 4: EBA and IA pottery from Halkapınar Höyüğü
  • 6 Maner 2015a, 2015b, 2016, 2017a, 2017b, 2017c, 2017d, 2018.

5The survey of the Halkapınar district was conducted in 2014-2016.6 This settlement mound was indicated to us by a villager. It is located just behind the village cemetery and a farm house. The settlement mound is situated on the road to Gökçeyazı Yeşilyurt, ca. 4.5 km northeast of Tont Kalesi. The mound measures 200 x 100 m and is around 3-4 m high. The owner of the farm house is using the mound as a field and has removed major parts and accumulated the soil on the south of the site. There are several illicit excavation pits on the mound. Architectural details havent been preserved. The pottery indicates that the site was inhabited in the EBA, IA and Roman period.

No 64 Kazanhüyüğü (Fig. 5-6)

Fig. 5 : Kazanhüyüğü

Fig. 5 : Kazanhüyüğü

Fig. 6: LBA and EBA pottery examples from Kazanhüyüğü

Fig. 6: LBA and EBA pottery examples from Kazanhüyüğü
  • 7 Bahar 2002 : 258.

6Kazanhüyüğü is located 15 km west of Sazlıgeçit, left of the highway from Ereğli to Karapınar. The name of the village is also Kazanhüyüğü. The village cemetery is located on top of the settlement mound and is still in use. The cemetery is surrounded by a wall, which is built on the mound. Bahar had surveyed this mound in 2000.7 He indicates that the site bears EBA, 2nd Millennium and IA pottery. The settlement mound measures ca. 124 m (E-W) by 75 m (N-S) and is ca. 1.5 m high. The pottery was collected systematically in seven sample areas. Pottery is also distributed ca. 500 m around the höyük. Among them are EBA, LBA, IA and Roman (?) shards.

No 65 Kuru Höyük (Fig. 7-9)

Fig. 7: Kuru Höyük

Fig. 7: Kuru Höyük

Fig. 8: EBA pottery from Kuru Höyük

Fig. 8: EBA pottery from Kuru Höyük

Fig. 9: EBA and IA pottery from Kuru Höyük

Fig. 9: EBA and IA pottery from Kuru Höyük

7Kuru Höyük is located in the centre of fertile fields, a rubble road is leading to the mound. The settlement mound is located 3.5 km southeast of Hotamış and measures 214 m (N-S) by 228 m (E-W) and is ca. 4 m high. The pottery was systematically collected in five sample areas. The area around the höyük was covered with fields of sun flowers, hence couldnt be investigated. The pottery indicates that the site was inhabited during the EBA and IA.

No 66 Yelekli Höyük (Fig. 10-12)

Fig. 10 : Yelekli Höyük

Fig. 10 : Yelekli Höyük

Fig. 11: IA pottery from Yelekli Höyük

Fig. 11: IA pottery from Yelekli Höyük

Fig. 12 : IA bowl from Yelekli Höyük

Fig. 12 : IA bowl from Yelekli Höyük

8Yelekli Höyük was shown to us by the muhtar of Akçayazı. It is a large flat settlement. The site is located 5.3 km east of Akçayazı, on the left side of the highway from Karapınar to Konya. The settlement mound is ca. 1.5-2 m high and 230 m (E-W) by 120 m (N-S) large; however, pottery was discovered in a 1 km radius around the mound. The pottery was collected in five sample areas. They mostly date to Early-Middle and Late Iron Age, Roman and Byzantine periods. Since this site is located on the main road to Konya, which was an important settlement from the Neolithic onwards, it can be assumed that Yelekli was an important settlement on the road to Konya and on the way to the Mediterranean and Mesopotamia.

No 67 Derbent Höyük (Fig. 13)

Fig. 13 : Derbent Höyük

Fig. 13 : Derbent Höyük

9Derbent Höyük is located 2.6 km northeast of Akçayazı, on the road from Karapınar to Konya, on the right side of the highway. The whole area is used for farming, including the settlement mound. Currently the settlement mound measures ca. 140 m (N-S) by 130 m (E-W) and is now only around 2 m high (around 2-3 m from the top were removed). The site is covered with illicit excavation holes. The pottery from these include IA and Roman period pottery.

No 68 Kayacık Höyük (Fig. 14)

Fig. 14 : Kayacık Höyük.

Fig. 14 : Kayacık Höyük.

10The mound is located in Kayacık, 33 km southwest of Karapınar and 2.7 km west of Ortaoba. The höyük is ca. 160 m (N-S) by 170 m (E-W) large and is 2 m high. The village cemetery is situated on top of the höyük and is still in use today. The pottery was collected in three sample areas, which are located around the cemetery wall (the area inside the cemetery was not investigated). The pottery of the höyük indicates an occupation during EBA, IA and Late Antiquity.

No 69 Tilkili Höyük (Fig 15-16)

Fig. 15 : Tilkili Höyük

Fig. 15 : Tilkili Höyük

Fig. 16: EBA and IA pottery from Tilkili Höyük

Fig. 16: EBA and IA pottery from Tilkili Höyük
  • 8 Mellaart 1963 : 209 ; Bahar 2002 : 258.

11Tilkili Höyük is located 20 km northeast of Karapınar and 6.7 km northwest of Kayalı. The mound is 190 x 190 m large and ca. 4 m high. Mellaart and Bahar surveyed this mound as well.8 Mellaart indicates the occurence of EBA pottery, such as burnished, metallic and coarse wares. Bahar mentions EBA, 2nd Millennium B.C., Roman and Byzantine pottery.

  • 9 Maner 2017c, 2017d.

12The northwestern side is partially cut by the road from Kayalı to Karapınar. Pottery is spread over a radius of ca. 400 m around the mound, especially on the northern, southern and eastern sides. The settlement is located on the shore of the Sultaniye Sazlığı lake, which dried out. In 2016 we had surveyed Yağmapınar on the northeastern shore of the lake, which is a very important IA settlement in the region.9 The location of Tilkili höyük and also Kızık Höyük west of Tilkili, which will be surveyed in 2018, show that settlements were located around this lake and close to the northern slopes of Karacadağ. The pottery at Tilkili Höyük was collected in five sample units. Among them were Neolithic, EBA, LBA, IA and Roman and Byzantine (?).

Fig. 2: Systematically surveyed sites between 2013-2017

Fig. 2: Systematically surveyed sites between 2013-2017

No 70 Karacadağ Dağ Gölü (Fig. 17-18)

Fig. 17: Dağ Gölü on Karacadağ with fortress in the left corner and Kurşuncu Monastery on the peak to the right

Fig. 18: Spolia on the shore of Dağ Gölü

Fig. 18: Spolia on the shore of Dağ Gölü
  • 10 Maner 2017c, Maner 2017d, 2018.
  • 11 Gertrude Bell has not visited Dağ Gölü. See Ramsay and Bell 2008².
  • 12 It is also possible to climb up from Oymalı or Kesmez. However it is much steeper and longer.

13Dağ Gölü (or also known as Krater Gölü-crater lake) on the western hills of Karacadağ, was visited by the KEYAR team for the first time in 2016 (Fig. 17).10 This was also the first archaeological investigation of the Dağ Gölü region so far.11 However due to a shortage of water we were forced to climb back down, without finishing the investigation. During the 2017 season we hired a donkey from a shepherd in Ovacık to carry up water and equipment, which made a longer stay possible.12 The lake was dried out, and it was possible to walk through the dried marsh. On the western side of the crater lake several pens are located. The pens, wells and troughs are made from spolia, which were carried from Kurşuncu Monastery and probably they have been dismantled from structures close to the lake. There are several worked boulders lying around (Fig. 18).

14No archaeological remains were observed inside the lake. West of the lake just inside one of the pens robbers has excavated a large pit. From this pit a few pottery shards were collected, which date to the Late Iron Age and Roman Period.

15Northeast of the lake, just a few meters away, is an oval shaped structure, of which only the outer walls have been preserved, which are very likely fortification walls (Fig. 17). The walls are made of medium sized unshaped stone boulders in cyclopean masonry. Two pottery shards, which date probably to the Byzantine period have been found. This fortress is located just about the Ovacık crater, and looks over the crater and also down to the Ereğli plain to the south and to the Karapınar plain in the west. It must have been one of the control towers-forts of the western part of Karacadağ and specifically Ovacık. Keçi Kalesi, ca. 1.6 km east and Mennek Kalesi 3 km to the north of Dağ Gölü fort are all located around the Ovacık crater and it can be assumed that they were controlling the south and east, north and west.

Kesmez and Eski Kesmez

  • 13 Belke 198 Maner 2017c, 2017d.4 : 155, 174, 187, 200, 201, 232, Fig. 31, 32, 33.

16Kesmez is located 18 km south of Karapınar, on the main road from Karapınar to Ereğli. This village is new and was established by the villagers of Eski Kesmez, who lived on the southwestern slope of the Karacadağ. It is possible to drive up a rubble path to Eski Kesmez. Eski Kezmez is located 6.5 km north of Kesmez on the southern slope of Karacadağ. The small village is mostly abandoned; apparently only shephards stay here during summer. A few years ago Eski Kesmez was used as a film set, the model houses are still preserved. The original houses of Kesmez are built of stone, and several Byzantine spolia in the walls were observed. No archaeological ruins nor pottery dating to the Bronze and Iron Ages could be determined in Eski Kesmez. Eski Kesmez is generally equated with Thebasa.13 A path from Eski Kesmez leads up the Karacadağ to Segh Kalesi. From Eski Kesmez it is also possible to climb up to Dağ Gölü.

Akören and Yeni Akören

  • 14 Maner 2017c, 2017d.

17Akören is located on the southern slope of Karacadağ and 2 km southwest of Oymalı. Oymalı was investigated during the 2016 field season.14 Akören is –like Oymalı– abandoned, the inhabitants are living in Yeni Akören, which is located 8 km south of Akören, down in the plain. The houses in Akören are built of worked stones and several Byzantine spolia were noted. From Akören and Oymalı earthen paths lead up to the close vicinity of Dağ Gölü.

Ivriz Cultural Landscape On The Unesco World Heritage Tentative List

18An extensive file for the application of İvriz Cultural Landscape for the Unesco World Heritage Tentative List was prepared in 2017; in 2017 it was submitted to the Ministry of Culture and Tourism General Directorate of Antiquities and Museums.15 On April 15th 2017 İvriz Cultural Landscape was accepted onto the Unesco World Heritage Tentative List.16 The Cultural Landscape of İvriz underlines the integrity of archaeological and natural heritage and is an outstanding and a unique example of the exhibition of essential interchanges of human values from the Bronze Age until the Byzantine Period. It includes the Neo Hittite reliefs in İvriz and Ambaderesi, the Byzantine Monastery in Ambarderesi and the natural habitat of springs, canyons and caves where the reliefs are located. The reliefs are unique in their iconography, inscriptions, the applications of technologies and tools. İvriz village, with unique examples of civil architecture of mud brick buildings has maintained its rural character. The setting of this village contributes to the understanding of the ancient landscape. For the protection of the integrity and authenticity of the village and its surroundings, the continuity of the local communitys presence is a crucial issue. The protection of the İvriz and Ambardere reliefs, the Byzantine monastery and local resources are important for the sustainability of past and current traditions. To create awareness among the inhabitants, to initiate a sustainable method for the protection of the cultural and natural heritage and to work on projects related to public and community archaeology such as sustainable tourism a Landscaping Project in İvriz and a rural development project were initiated.

İvriz Landscaping Project

  • 17 Konya Ovası Projesi Bölge Kalkınma İdare Başkanlığı.

19At the same time of the Unesco World Heritage Tentative List application and due to devastating threats to the archaeological and natural heritage of İvriz a landscaping project was initiated a) to protect the site in a sustainable way, b) to manage problems such as parking, garbage and noise of large local tourist groups, who come to picnic, c) to set up visitor and education centres, paths and signboards and d) to create awareness among the inhabitants and tourists. The landscaping project was prepared by Atölye Mimarlık and approved by the Ministry of Culture and Tourism and the local protection board for cultural heritage of Konya on May 15th 2017. Financial support to built the landscaping projects is given by KOP (Konya Plain Project) Regional Development Administration.17 Construction will hopefully start in the second half of 2018.

Conclusion of the 2017 Field Season

20The systematical survey in Karapınar investigated seven settlements and one in Halkapınar. EBA pottery was found in Kazanhüyüğü, Kuru Höyük, Tilkili Höyük, Yelekli Höyük and Kayacık Höyük. MBA pottery in Yelekli Höyük, LBA in Kazanhüyüğü, Yelekli Höyük and Tilkili Höyük. IA is present in every settlement we have surveyed.

Haut de page

Bibliographie

Bahar, H., 2002: “Konya Karaman İlleri Yüzey Araştırmaları 2000”, AST 21: 257-270.

Bahar, H. and Koçak, Ö., 2008: “The Transition from Bronze to Iron Age in Lycaonia and its Vicinity”, in H. Kühne, R.M. Czichon and F.J. Kreppner (eds.), Proceedings of the 4th International Congress of the Archaeology of the Ancient Near East: 29 March 3 April 2004, vol. 2, Wiesbaden: 9-20.

Bahar, H. and Küçükbezci, H.G., 2012: “2010 yılı Konya ve Karaman İlleri ile İlçeleri Arkeolojik Yüzey Araştırması”, AST 29: 97-116.

Belke, K., 1984 : Galatien und Lykaonien, TIB 4. Wien.

Güneri, S. 1990 : “Orta Anadolu Höyükleri, Karapınar, Cihanbeyli, Sarayönü, Kulu Araştırmaları”, AST 7 : 323-340.

Maner, Ç., 2015a: “Preliminary Report on the Second Season of the Konya-Ereğli (KEYAR) Survey 2013”, Anatolia Antiqua XXIII: 249-273.

Maner, Ç., 2015b: “Konya ili Ereğli, Halkapınar, Karapınar ve Emirgazi 2013 Yılı Yüzey Araştırmaları (KEYAR)”, AST 32-1: 27-46.

Maner, Ç., 2016: “Preliminary Report on the Second Season of the Konya-Ereğli (KEYAR) Survey 2013”, Anatolia Antiqua XXIV: 225-252.

Maner, Ç., 2017a: “Konya ili Ereğli, Halkapınar, Karapınar ve Emirgazi 2014 Yılı Yüzey Araştırmaları (KEYAR)”, AST 34-1: 1-26.

Maner, Ç., 2017b: “Konya ili Ereğli, Halkapınar, Karapınar ve Emirgazi 2015 Yılı Yüzey Araştırmaları (KEYAR)”, AST 34-2: 211-26.

Maner, Ç., 2017c: “Preliminary Report on the Fourth Season of the Konya-Ereğli Survey (KEYAR) 2016”, Anatolia Antiqua XXV: 95-114.

Maner, Ç., 2017d: “From the Konya Plain to the Bolkar Mountains: The 2015-16 Campaigns of the KEYAR Survey Project”, in S.R. Steadman and G. McMahon (eds.), The Archaeology of Anatolia, Volume II: Recent Discoveries (2015-2016), Cambridge: 341-367.

Maner, Ç., 2018: “Konya ili Ereğli, Halkapınar, Karapınar ve Emirgazi 2016 yılı Yüzey Araştırmaları (KEYAR)”, AST 35-1: 303-317.

Mellaart, J., 1954: “Preliminary Report on a Survey of Pre-Classical Remains in Southern Turkey”, Anatolian Studies 4: 175-240.

Mellaart, J., 1955: “Iron Age Pottery from Southern Anatolia”, Belleten 19: 115-136.

Mellaart, J., 1958: “Second Millenium Pottery from the Konya Plain and Neighborhood”, Belleten 22: 311-345.

Mellaart, J., 1963: “Early Cultures of the South Anatolian Plateau, II: The Late Chalcolithic and Early Bronze Ages in the Konya Plain”, Anatolian Studies 13: 199-236.

Ramsay, W.M. and Bell, G.L., 2008²: The Thousand and One Churches, University of Pensylvania Museum of Archaeology and Anthropology, Philadelphia.

Haut de page

Notes

1 KEYAR: Konya Ereğli Yüzey Araştırması, Konya Ereğli Survey Project.

2 Maner 2017, 2018.

3 Mellaart 1954, 1955, 1958, 1963 ; Güneri 1990 : 324 ; Bahar 2002 ; Bahar and Koçak 2004 ; Bahar and Küçükbezci 2012 : 105-106.

4 Publication in preparation.

5 Publication in preparation.

6 Maner 2015a, 2015b, 2016, 2017a, 2017b, 2017c, 2017d, 2018.

7 Bahar 2002 : 258.

8 Mellaart 1963 : 209 ; Bahar 2002 : 258.

9 Maner 2017c, 2017d.

10 Maner 2017c, Maner 2017d, 2018.

11 Gertrude Bell has not visited Dağ Gölü. See Ramsay and Bell 2008².

12 It is also possible to climb up from Oymalı or Kesmez. However it is much steeper and longer.

13 Belke 198 Maner 2017c, 2017d.4 : 155, 174, 187, 200, 201, 232, Fig. 31, 32, 33.

14 Maner 2017c, 2017d.

15 I am grateful to Mr. Yıldırım İnan for his endless support and help.

16 http://whc.unesco.org/en/tentativelists/6244/.

17 Konya Ovası Projesi Bölge Kalkınma İdare Başkanlığı.

Haut de page

Table des illustrations

Titre Fig. 1: Systematically surveyed sites during the 2017 field season
URL http://journals.openedition.org/anatoliaantiqua/docannexe/image/636/img-1.png
Fichier image/png, 846k
URL http://journals.openedition.org/anatoliaantiqua/docannexe/image/636/img-2.png
Fichier image/png, 375k
URL http://journals.openedition.org/anatoliaantiqua/docannexe/image/636/img-3.png
Fichier image/png, 381k
Titre Fig. 4: EBA and IA pottery from Halkapınar Höyüğü
URL http://journals.openedition.org/anatoliaantiqua/docannexe/image/636/img-4.png
Fichier image/png, 411k
Titre Fig. 5 : Kazanhüyüğü
URL http://journals.openedition.org/anatoliaantiqua/docannexe/image/636/img-5.png
Fichier image/png, 373k
Titre Fig. 6: LBA and EBA pottery examples from Kazanhüyüğü
URL http://journals.openedition.org/anatoliaantiqua/docannexe/image/636/img-6.png
Fichier image/png, 104k
Titre Fig. 7: Kuru Höyük
URL http://journals.openedition.org/anatoliaantiqua/docannexe/image/636/img-7.png
Fichier image/png, 395k
Titre Fig. 8: EBA pottery from Kuru Höyük
URL http://journals.openedition.org/anatoliaantiqua/docannexe/image/636/img-8.png
Fichier image/png, 413k
Titre Fig. 9: EBA and IA pottery from Kuru Höyük
URL http://journals.openedition.org/anatoliaantiqua/docannexe/image/636/img-9.png
Fichier image/png, 53k
Titre Fig. 10 : Yelekli Höyük
URL http://journals.openedition.org/anatoliaantiqua/docannexe/image/636/img-10.png
Fichier image/png, 329k
Titre Fig. 11: IA pottery from Yelekli Höyük
URL http://journals.openedition.org/anatoliaantiqua/docannexe/image/636/img-11.png
Fichier image/png, 624k
Titre Fig. 12 : IA bowl from Yelekli Höyük
URL http://journals.openedition.org/anatoliaantiqua/docannexe/image/636/img-12.png
Fichier image/png, 98k
Titre Fig. 13 : Derbent Höyük
URL http://journals.openedition.org/anatoliaantiqua/docannexe/image/636/img-13.png
Fichier image/png, 398k
Titre Fig. 14 : Kayacık Höyük.
URL http://journals.openedition.org/anatoliaantiqua/docannexe/image/636/img-14.png
Fichier image/png, 415k
Titre Fig. 15 : Tilkili Höyük
URL http://journals.openedition.org/anatoliaantiqua/docannexe/image/636/img-15.png
Fichier image/png, 360k
Titre Fig. 16: EBA and IA pottery from Tilkili Höyük
URL http://journals.openedition.org/anatoliaantiqua/docannexe/image/636/img-16.png
Fichier image/png, 94k
Titre Fig. 2: Systematically surveyed sites between 2013-2017
URL http://journals.openedition.org/anatoliaantiqua/docannexe/image/636/img-17.png
Fichier image/png, 1,2M
URL http://journals.openedition.org/anatoliaantiqua/docannexe/image/636/img-18.png
Fichier image/png, 546k
URL http://journals.openedition.org/anatoliaantiqua/docannexe/image/636/img-19.png
Fichier image/png, 328k
Titre Fig. 18: Spolia on the shore of Dağ Gölü
URL http://journals.openedition.org/anatoliaantiqua/docannexe/image/636/img-20.png
Fichier image/png, 548k
Haut de page

Pour citer cet article

Référence papier

Çiğdem Maner, « Preliminary Report on the Fifth Season of the Konya Ereğli, Karapınar, Halkapınar and Emirgazi Survey Project (Keyar)2017 »Anatolia Antiqua, XXVI | 2018, 155-164.

Référence électronique

Çiğdem Maner, « Preliminary Report on the Fifth Season of the Konya Ereğli, Karapınar, Halkapınar and Emirgazi Survey Project (Keyar)2017 »Anatolia Antiqua [En ligne], XXVI | 2018, mis en ligne le 30 juillet 2019, consulté le 26 février 2024. URL : http://journals.openedition.org/anatoliaantiqua/636 ; DOI : https://doi.org/10.4000/anatoliaantiqua.636

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