Azərbaycan miLLİ elmlər akademiyasi naxçivan böLMƏSİ
Yüklə 4,01 Kb. Pdf görüntüsü
|
155 In the season of 2015, our main objective was to determine the structure of the settlement, the extent of ancient Kültepe inhabitants' exploitation of natural resources (salt and copper), and communication between this settlement and other settlements of the Sirabçay valley to the North. As a result of excavation in units F and E, we found round rooms, paved by cobble-stones with heaths and numerous obsidian and bone products. In unit G, below a thin Kura-Araxes layer, lay Chalcolithic pottery. Preliminary analysis of ceramics shows that they date to the late Chalcolithic. Materials from this period were not found by O. A. Abibullayev's excavation. We think that further research at the settlement of Kültepe and nearby sites will enable us to establish connections between various periods of Chalcolithic culture, as well as understand the role of these sites in the exploitation of natural resources. In 2016, archaeological research was carried on units A, D, F, J, G and E. Units D and F were cleaned, while units A, G, J and E were studied with systematic excavation. Area A. The goal of the excavations in area A was to expose the occupation layers related to 2 buildings. The first building is situated in the southern part and only part of it is situated inside the excavated area. Its wall was already partially exposed in 2013. The second building is situated in the north of the trench and it was recognized during the cleaning of a section in 2013. Only the upper section of its wall was exposed in 2015. In 2015 we ended the excavation with a large fireplace (A165) built with stones. This fireplace was situated in an outdoor area and was chronologically posterior to the abandonment of the two buildings. In 2016 was excavated below this fireplace and we discovered that is was built on top of a thick (ca. 15 cm) clay filling. Below this thick clay fill, we exposed a new occupation layer. This occupation layer is characterized by a dark floor with ash and charcoals and several working features such as small fireplaces and storage jars. We interpret this layer as an outdoor working area. We also realized that this area was occupied during a long period and refurbished several times. This is clear from the 3 pit-like fireplaces that are cutting each other. This is also clear from the semi-buried storage jars. A jar was buried during the first occupation. Then it was partly destroyed by the 156 installation of the second jar. The second jar was also partly destroyed when they leveled the area for a new floor and they installed a third jar inside the second one. Therefore, we can say that this working area was used for a long time and experienced at least three sub-phases. Stratigraphically, this outdoor working area could have been used in the same time as the two buildings. Under this outdoor working area, we found a grave (A229) that was dug inside the clay fill anterior to the working area. This grave indicates a period of abandonment of the area before the settling of the 2 buildings. The grave belongs to a sub-adult and did not contain any grave good. In the northern part of the trench, the goal was to excavate the inside of the building. With first excavated a few occupation layers, with no trace of architecture, that were later than the abandonment of the building. We also found a grave (A192) that was dug after the destruction and abandonment of the building. The skeleton belongs to an adult and do not contain grave goods. Then, we excavated the filling of the building after its abandonment. It was composed mainly of ashy layers. We exposed the inside wall of the building. The building was heavily burnt and the inside part of the wall is red. We could show that this wall is not rounded, as we first thought, but is straight with a right angle on the western side. It is a clear evidence for a rectangular building. We also realized that the building had an entrance on the south wall. This entrance was filled after the burning of the building. The floor of the building showed several layers of ash and felt. I was very irregular. In the southern part of the trench we excavated the inside of the second building with is round. We showed that this building also had an entrance that was filled later. Filled entrance inside the wall. The door socket corresponds to a layer of occupation anterior to the filling of the door. 157 We also realized that this building had 2 building stages. The first one is made of smaller mud plaque and is finer than the second larger wall built on top. Section showing the 2 stages of the two superposed circular walls. Area G.The goal of the excavations in area G was to expose the building partly excavated in 2015. In fact, we showed that the area was deeply disturbed by later excavations made during the antique or medieval period. The Neolithic building we wanted to excavate was partly covered with fallen mud-bricks walls. Above the fallen mud-bricks, we excavated two graves that are posterior to the destruction of the building. They could be either of Chalcolithic or Kura-Araxes period. The first grave (G069) contained 3 individuals: an adult, a sub-adult and a juvenile. The adult was buried first, and its skeleton was disturbed, probably when the two other skeletons were placed. The grave doesn’t contain other grave goods than 3 obsidian flakes that were placed under the head and foot of two of the skeletons. The second grave (G107) was a bit deeper and excavated directly into the fallen mud bricks. The grave-pit was covered with stones. Inside the pit was found the skeleton of a juvenile. It was accompanied with a flint blade and a small ceramic. Part of the skeleton was covered with ochre. A small bracelet made of small white paste beads was found around the arm of the skeleton. We excavated inside the Neolithic building but it was empty of any archaeological material. We exposed the northern wall and we showed that it was a circular building. Because it is covered with later material, we can say that it is one of the last buildings of the Neolithic phase at the site. It is therefore interesting to note that the shape of the buildings (rectangular or circular) is not related to a chronological order. 158 We also discovered that this wall had two phases. It was first made of small light-color mud plaques with a darker mortar. Then a second wall was built beside and on top of the first wall. The second wall is made of larger mud plaques. The plaques have a darker color than the mortar. On site E, we have put a stratigrafichesky hole with a size of 5х5 m. During the research was revealed, the remains of streniye of the round plan, pottery, instruments of labor from a bone and a stone, the fauna remains, human skeletons. On this the site it is revealed also the remains of an obsidian workshop. During the research, it is defined that the lower layers of the settlement on structures very differ from top. As in the lower layers is tracked abundance of layers of ashes. In the lower layers the remains of fauna, architecture, the centers with a stone floor and ceramics are noted. During excavation sites, J was revealed three building periods. The buildings revealed on this the site were simultaneously with the structures revealed on sites D and F. Researches have revealed the remains of fauna, the centers of the round plan, ceramics, instruments of labor from a bone and a stone. Uçan Ağıl Uçan Ağıl is located over a promontory at the end of a canyon linking the Araxes plain to the Sirab piedmonts (Şəkil 26). This site was chosen in 2014 because of its proximity to sheep-tracks, the find of a mining tool similar to those found in great numbers at Duzdağı and the preesence of Kura-Araxes et Chalcolithic pottery : all these clues suggest that we are dealing with a pastoral camp-site, possibly in relationship with mining activities. The excavations in 2016 lasted for 10 days (12-21 September) and were concentrated in Areas 1 & 2 (Şəkil 27; Şəkil 28). Area 2 was enlarged to a 10x10m square instead of a 5 x 5m square in 2015. The hypothesis according to which Uçan Ağıl was ocupied by pastoral nomads involved in mining activities seems supported by several finds made this year in Area 2 : A large copper ore fragment (166 gr) was found in Locus 2045 (Şəkil 55), next to a hearth dating to the Chalcolithic, whereas two spheric stone tools, similar to those collected at Duzdağı in 2012, were found in the Kuro-Araxes filling 159 layers (Şəkil 56) ; which is coherent with the dating of the mining tool assemblage from Duzdağı. As for the Chalcolithic layers, the chronological attribution given after the study of the ceramic assemblage in 2015 has been confirmed by one 14C reading from a piece of charcoal from Locus 2019 : 4690-4450 BC cal. - 2 sigmas. This datation is coherent with the evidence from Ovçular Tepesi, since the pottery from Uçan Ağıl is at the same time similar to but also different from the Ovçular Tepesi assemblage. The find of early Chalcolithic occupation layers at Uçan Ağıl opens large prospects for future research, since it provides data both for studying the genesis of the Ovçular Tepesi culture and its evident links with Mesopotamia, and for unravelling the relationships between the Neolithic culture of Kültepe 1, and the Chalcolithic cultures that followed. As for the work carried out in Area 1, it confirmed the presence of a thick layer of colluvium in between the earliest occupation levels belonging to the first half of the 5th millennium and the Kura-Araxes layer at the surfacce of the mound. Under the layer of colluvium was found a filling layer with chalcolithic ceramic potsherds and obsidian. Among these potsherds, one may note the presence of four Kura-Araxes potsherds, which recalls a situation brought to light at Ovçular Tepesi : once again, we have evidence that Kura-Araxes groups were living in Nakhchivan next to other Chalcolithic groups. The 2016 excavation campaign at Uçan Ağıl has given interesting results from two points of view : 1) occupation levels belonging to the first half of the 5th milennium were brought to light both in Area 1 and Area 2.This find is of particular interest, since this period was so far was not attested in the South Caucasus ; 2) the thick colluvium layer brought to light on top of Chalcolithic layers in 2015 in Area 2 was also found this year in Area 1 ; interestingly enough this layer is thinner in Area 1 (about 50 cm). Since this situaiton is also attested at Sorsu, it seems that we are dealing with a general phenomenon related to a specific climatic episode, which is currently studied by Catherine Kuzucuoglu (CNRS-UMR 8591). These 160 results question the conclusions that we had drawn about Zirinçlik, some occupation levels of which may be located under the colluvium layer that we also had found there in 2014 : about 40 cm of this colluvium layer had been removed during the excavations but the situation at Uçan Ağıl and Sorsu show that there may be archaeological layers still underneath. CONCLUSION This research determined that the settlement of Kültepe I was one of the most ancient Neolithic sites in the South Caucasus. Archeological excavations in this settlement make it possible to date the main stages of late Neolithic culture. Research shows that ancient settlers at Kültepe were engaged in agriculture and cattle breeding. They also mastered nomadic cattle breeding. The archaeological materials revealed at Kültepe I allow us to track features of late Neolithic culture, and also observe changes in ancient life ways. The remains of copper revealed in various layers of the settlement demonstrate that ancient settlers had knowledge of their environment, including copper sources. Finding the remains of copper ore and its minerals in settlements such as Kültepe I, Uçan Ağıl, Zirincli, and Ovçular Tepesi shows that Nakhchivan was one of the ancient centers of metallurgy in the Caucasus. Nozzles and clay casting molds for casting flat axes found at Ovçular Tepesi show that copper smelting had been mastered in Nakhchivan in the fifth millennium BC. Research conducted on metal products and ores shows that ancient metallurgy in Nakhchivan developed using local raw materials. Research on Kültepe I and settlements located in the surrounding area allow us to establish connections between late Neolithic and Chalcolithic Age cultures. The recently revealed settlements also help us to understand the consecutive stages of Chalcolithic culture. Sites relating to the early period of Chalcolithic Age in the South Caucasus are revealed in the territory of Nakhchivan for the first time. Research on the settlements of Nakhchivan, Uzun Oba, and Uçan Ağıl make it possible to study early Chalcolithic Age culture. 161 We think that research on Neolithic and the Chalcolithic Age sites in the area around the settlement of Kültepe will be of great value not only for our understanding of archeology in Azerbaijan, but throughout the South Caucasus and the Middle East. 162 ƏDƏBİYYAT 1. Абибуллаев О.А. Энеолит и бронза на территории Нахичеванской АССР. Баку: Элм, 1982, 316 с. 2. Археология Венгрии (Каменный век). Ответственные редакторы: Титов В.С. и Эрдели И. Москва: Наука, 1980. 420 с. 3. Ахундов Т.И. У истоков Кавказской цивилизации. Неолит Азербайджана. Шомутепе. Баку: Наука, 2012, 386 с. 4. Амирханов Х.А. Чохская археологическая культура и проблема культурных ареалов раннего голоцена кругокаспийской области // Древние культуры Северо- Восточного Кавказа. Махачкала, 1985. 5. Badalyan S. et al. The Settlement of Akhnashen-Khatunarkh, A Neolitic Site in the Ararat Plain (Armenia): Excavation Results 2004-2009 // TUBA-AR, 2010, 13, p. 185-218. 6. Бадалян Р. С., Кикодзе 3. К., Коль Ф. Л. Кавказский обсидиан: источники и модели утилизации и снабжения (Результаты анализов нейтронной активации). Историко-филологический журнал,1996, № 1-2, c. 245-264. 7. Baxşəliyev V., Novruzov Z. Sirabda arxeoloji araşdırmalar. Bakı: Oskar, 2010, 160 s. 8. Baxşəliyev V. Sirabda eneolit dövrünə aid yeni abidələr // AMEA Naxçıvan Bölməsinin Xəbərləri, 2012, № 1, s. 107-115. 9. Baxşəliyev V. Zirincli Eneolit dövrünə aid yaşayış yerlərindən biridir // Naxçıvan Müəllimlər İnstitutunun Xəbərləri, 2012, № 1, s. 68-72 10. Baxşəliyev V. Kültəpə mədəniyyətinin sirləri açılır // Tarix, insan və cəmiyyət, 2014, № 1 (11) , s. 64-70. 11. Baxşəliyev V., Quliyeva Z., Marro C., Berthon R. Kültəpə yaşayış yerində 2015-ci ildə aparılan arxeoloji araşdırmalar. // Azərbaycan MEA-nın Xəbərləri. İctimai elmlər seriyası, 2016, №1, 2016, s. 193-211. 12. Baxşəliyev V., Marro C., Aşurov S. Ovçulartəpəsində 2009-cu ilin araşdırmaları. Azərbaycanda arxeoloji tədqiqatlar 2009. Bakı: Xəzər Universiteti, 2010, s. 324-331. 13. Baxşəliyev V.B., Aşurov S.H., Marro C. Ovçulartəpəsində 2010- cu ildə aparılan arxeoloji qazıntılar // Azərbaycanda arxeoloji tədqiqatlar 2010. Bakı 2011, s.324-331 163 14. Baxşəliyev V., Marro C., Aşurov S. Ovçulartəpəsi. Bakı: Elm, 2010, 154 s. 15. Baxşəliyev V. , Marro C., Aşurov S. Son Eneolit və Erkən Tunc dövrünə aid Ovçulartəpəsi yaşayış yeri / Azərbaycanın erkən əkinçilik dövrü abidələri. Bakı, 2012, s.78-87. 16. Connor S., Sagona A. Environment and society in the late prehistory of southern Georgia, Caucasus // Les Cultures du Caucase (VI-III millenaires avant notre ere): Leurs Relations avec le Proche-Orient / Sus la direction Bertille Lyonnet. P.: CNRS Edutions, 2007, p. 21–36 17. Kushnareva K.Kh. Southern Caucasus in prehistory: Stage of Cultural and Socioeconomic Development from the Eighth to the Second Millennium B.C. Philadelphia: University of Pennsylvania, 1997, 229 p. 18. Farhang Khademi Nadooshan, Akbar Abedi et al. Provenance of prehistoric obsidian artifacts from Kul Tepe, northwestern Iran using X-ray fluorescence (XRF) analysis. Journal of Archaeological Science, 2013, 40, p. 1956-1965. 19. Kushnareva K.Kh. Southern Caucasus in prehistory: Stage of Cultural and Socioeconomic Development from the Eighth to the Second Millennium B.C. Philadelphia: University of Pennsylvania, 1997, 229 p. 20. Кушнарева К.Х. Ранние комплексные общества Кавказа. / Древние общества Кавказа в эпоху Палеометалла (ранние комплексные общества и вопросы культурной трансформации) Санкт-Петербург, 1997, c.11-44. 21. Нариманов И.Г. Культура древнейшего земледельческо- скотоводческого населения Азербайджана. Баку: Элм, 1987, 260 c. 22. Həbibullayev O.H. Kültəpədə arxeoloji qazıntılar. Bakı: Azərbaycan SSR Elmlər Akademiyası nəşriyyatı, 1959, 134 s. 23. Гулиев Ф., Гусейнов Ф., Алмамедов Х. Раскопки неолитического поселения VI тыс. до н. э. на холме Гойтепе (Азербайджан) // Материалы международного симпозиума «Азербайджан – страна, связывающая восток и запад. Обмен 164 знаниями и технологиями в период «первой глобализации» VII-IV тыс. до н. э.». Баку: German Embassy, 2009, с. 26-30. 24. Palumbi G. A Preliminary Analysis on the Prehistoric Pottery from Aratashen (Armenia). // Les Cultures du Caucase (VI-IIIème millénaires avant notre ère). Leurs Relations avec le Proche-Orient / Sus la direction Bertille Lyonnet. P.: CNRSEditions 2007, р. 63- 76. 25. Mаrrо C., Bаkhchaliyev V. and Ashurov S. Excavations at Ovçular Tepesi (Nakhchivan, Azerbaijan). First preliminary report: the 2006-2008 seasons // Anatolia Antiqua, XVII. Paris: Institute François D / etudes Anatoliennes D / Istanbul, 2009, р. 31-87. 26. Maziar Sepideh.Excavations at Kohne Pasgah Tepesi, the Araxes Valley, the Northwest Iran: First Preliminary Report // ANES, 2010, 47, p. 165-193. 27. Mellart J. Earliest Civilizations of the Near East. London, 1965, 145 p. 28. Мустафаев И. Д. Материалы по изучению пшеницы, ржи ячменя и эгилопсов Азербайджана. Баку: Азернешр, 1961, 230 с. 29. Мунчаев Р.М. Энеолит Кавказа // Археология СССР. Энеолит СССР.М.: Наука, 1982, с. 93-131. 30. Мусеибли Н.Вопрос происхождения Шомутепинской культуры в контексте новых раскопок. Сборник материалов международной конференции «Раннеземледельческие культуры Кавказа». Баку: Элм, 2012, c. 40-50. 31. Черлёнок Е. А. Археология Кавказа (мезолит, неолит, энеолит): Учебно-методическое пособие. СПб.: Санкт- Петербургский государственный университет, 2013. 54 с. 32. Seyidov A.Q. Naxçıvan e.ə. VII-II minillikdə. Bakı: Elm, 2003, 339 s. 33. Seyidov A., Baxşəliyev V. Xələc. Bakı: Elm, 2010, 220 s. 34. Voigt M.M. Hajji Firuz Tepe, Iran: The Neolithic Settlement. Philadelphia: University of Pennsylvania, 1983, 396 p. Yüklə 4,01 Kb. Dostları ilə paylaş:
|