BibTex RIS Cite

ANADOLU'DA İLK ? KENTLER KENT OLGUSU ÜZERİNE BİR TARTIŞMA

Year 2007, Issue: 10, 63 - 72, 01.01.2007

Abstract

Various ideas have been put forward by many scholars concerning the notions of urban and urba-nisation, and through these ideas some questions have been tended to be answered such as what is an urban, what are the criteria that distinguish the village and urban from another and what are the main traits and leading factors in the development of an urban? "Morphological Approach' seems to be the closest one to the archaeological view among the numerous urban theories. According to this hypothe­sis, the differences between the village and urban settlements have to be defined by some structural fea­tures in lieu of sociological definitions. It states some criteria in defining an urban such as size and den­sity, craft specialization, central management, social strafication and trade.Are there any misleading aspects of this idea? Are these criteria really adequate in defining urban that is the most complex habitation unit? Or do this idea comprise the qualitative and quantitative characteristics in explaining the real identites of the towns? In an effort to find answers to all the above questions and understand the early phases of the urbanization process in Anatolia by making use of these para­meters, this paper will be evaluating two important settlements, Çayönü and Aşıklı Höyük, both good examples of societal changes in the Neolithic period. The evaluation will thus attempt to arrive at a con­clusion about the controversial issue about whether these settlements were actually villages or towns.

T HE EARL Y TOWNS ? IN ANATOLIA A DISCUSSION ON THE URBAN CONCEPT

Year 2007, Issue: 10, 63 - 72, 01.01.2007

Abstract

Are there any misieading aspects of this idea? Are these criteria really adequate in defining uñían thai is tire most complex habitation unit? Or do this idea comprise the qualitative and quantitative characteris­ tics in explaining the real rdenfiies of the towns? In an effort to find answeis to ail the alxive questions and understand the eady phases of ¡he uriianization process in Anatolia by making use oi these para­ meters, this paper w'tli IK- evaluating two imjarrtant settlements, Çayönü and Aştkh Höyük, Ixxh gixxl exampies of societal changes in the Neolithic ¡x-riod. The evaluation writ thus attempt to arrive at a con­ clusion aİKiUl the .onimveisiai issue alxnri whether these settlements were actually villages or towns

There are 0 citations in total.

Details

Primary Language Turkish
Authors

Alev Erarslan This is me

Publication Date January 1, 2007
Published in Issue Year 2007 Issue: 10

Cite

APA Erarslan, A. (2007). ANADOLU’DA İLK ? KENTLER KENT OLGUSU ÜZERİNE BİR TARTIŞMA. TÜBA-AR Türkiye Bilimler Akademisi Arkeoloji Dergisi(10), 63-72.
AMA Erarslan A. ANADOLU’DA İLK ? KENTLER KENT OLGUSU ÜZERİNE BİR TARTIŞMA. TÜBA-AR. January 2007;(10):63-72.
Chicago Erarslan, Alev. “ANADOLU’DA İLK ? KENTLER KENT OLGUSU ÜZERİNE BİR TARTIŞMA”. TÜBA-AR Türkiye Bilimler Akademisi Arkeoloji Dergisi, no. 10 (January 2007): 63-72.
EndNote Erarslan A (January 1, 2007) ANADOLU’DA İLK ? KENTLER KENT OLGUSU ÜZERİNE BİR TARTIŞMA. TÜBA-AR Türkiye Bilimler Akademisi Arkeoloji Dergisi 10 63–72.
IEEE A. Erarslan, “ANADOLU’DA İLK ? KENTLER KENT OLGUSU ÜZERİNE BİR TARTIŞMA”, TÜBA-AR, no. 10, pp. 63–72, January2007.
ISNAD Erarslan, Alev. “ANADOLU’DA İLK ? KENTLER KENT OLGUSU ÜZERİNE BİR TARTIŞMA”. TÜBA-AR Türkiye Bilimler Akademisi Arkeoloji Dergisi 10 (January2007), 63-72.
JAMA Erarslan A. ANADOLU’DA İLK ? KENTLER KENT OLGUSU ÜZERİNE BİR TARTIŞMA. TÜBA-AR. 2007;:63–72.
MLA Erarslan, Alev. “ANADOLU’DA İLK ? KENTLER KENT OLGUSU ÜZERİNE BİR TARTIŞMA”. TÜBA-AR Türkiye Bilimler Akademisi Arkeoloji Dergisi, no. 10, 2007, pp. 63-72.
Vancouver Erarslan A. ANADOLU’DA İLK ? KENTLER KENT OLGUSU ÜZERİNE BİR TARTIŞMA. TÜBA-AR. 2007(10):63-72.

Publisher

34406

Vedat Dalokay Caddesi No: 112 Çankaya 06670 ANKARA

34047   34057   34059  34410   34061

TÜBA-AR Turkish Academy of Sciences Journal of Archaeology (TÜBA-AR) does not officially endorse the views expressed in the articles published in the journal, nor does it guarantee any product or service advertisements that may appear in the print or online versions. The scientific and legal responsibility for the published articles belongs solely to the authors.

Images, figures, tables, and other materials submitted with manuscripts must be original. If previously published, written permission from the copyright holder must be provided for reproduction in both print and online versions. Authors retain the copyright of their works; however, upon publication in the journal, the economic rights and rights of public communication -including adaptation, reproduction, representation, printing, publishing, and distribution rights- are transferred to the Turkish Academy of Sciences (TÜBA), the publisher of the journal. Copyright of all published content (text and visual materials) belongs to the journal in terms of usage and distribution. No payment is made to the authors under the name of copyright or any other title, and no article processing charges are requested. However, the cost of reprints, if requested, is the responsibility of the authors.

In order to promote global open access to scientific knowledge and research, TÜBA allows all content published online (unless otherwise stated) to be freely used by readers, researchers, and institutions. Such use (including linking, downloading, distribution, printing, copying, or reproduction in any medium) is permitted under the Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivatives 4.0 International (CC BY-NC-ND 4.0) License, provided that the original work is properly cited, not modified, and not used for commercial purposes. For permissions regarding commercial use or licensing exceptions, please contact the journal.