Only a couple of years ago, there were no excavated archaeological evidences of a Pottery Neolithic settlement in Cappadocia Özdo¤an, Baflgelen eds 1999; Gérard, Thissen eds , 2002 . Despite the lack of evidence, the potentialities offered by settlements like Köflk Höyük, P›narbafl› Bor, or Tepecik-Çiftlik were recognized but only discussed theoretically. Up to now, as already stressed by M. Özdo¤an Özdo¤an 1999: 9-12; 2002: 253-261 , discussions were mainly focused on the possible links between the aceramic site of Afl›kl›, which ended around 7400 BC cal., and the emergence of the Pottery Neolithic site of Çatalhöyük East in the Konya plain, where earlier known dates, disregarding the probable aceramic levels, coincide with the end of Afl›kl›. The archaeological facts were not homogeneous enough in time or space: The eastern part of Central Anatolia testified for the Aceramic Neolithic that shows evidences of local development leaning heavily back on Upper Mesopotamian influences, and the western part of Central Anatolia bore witness to the Pottery Neolithic period, to which one must add the excavated sites in the Lake District, showing a development pattern based on farmlike settlements Godon 2004 . Recent excavations at Tepecik-Çiftlik, in addition to the excavations at Köflk Höyük and Güvercinkayas› located in the same micro-region, start to fill the gap in terms of evidences that follow the ending of Afl›kl› Fig. 1 .
Birincil Dil | İngilizce |
---|---|
Bölüm | Research Article |
Yazarlar | |
Yayımlanma Tarihi | 1 Haziran 2005 |
Yayımlandığı Sayı | Yıl 2005 Sayı: 4 |