Early Bronze Age Burial Customs in Western AnatoliaAuthor(s): Tamara Stech WheelerSource: American Journal of Archaeology, Vol. 78, No. 4 (Oct., 1974), pp. 415-425Published by: Archaeological Institute of AmericaStable URL: http://www.jstor.org/stable/502755Accessed: 13/11/2008 12:41

Your use of the JSTOR archive indicates your acceptance of JSTOR's Terms and Conditions of Use, available athttp://www.jstor.org/page/info/about/policies/terms.jsp. JSTOR's Terms and Conditions of Use provides, in part, that unlessyou have obtained prior permission, you may not download an entire issue of a journal or multiple copies of articles, and youmay use content in the JSTOR archive only for your personal, non-commercial use.

Please contact the publisher regarding any further use of this work. Publisher contact information may be obtained athttp://www.jstor.org/action/showPublisher?publisherCode=aia.

Each copy of any part of a JSTOR transmission must contain the same copyright notice that appears on the screen or printedpage of such transmission.

JSTOR is a not-for-profit organization founded in 1995 to build trusted digital archives for scholarship. We work with thescholarly community to preserve their work and the materials they rely upon, and to build a common research platform thatpromotes the discovery and use of these resources. For more information about JSTOR, please contact support@jstor.org.

Archaeological Institute of America is collaborating with JSTOR to digitize, preserve and extend access toAmerican Journal of Archaeology.

http://www.jstor.org

Early Bronze Age Burial Customs in Western

Anatolia

TAMARA STECH WHEELER

PLATES 84-85

The typical western Anatolian burial custom in the third millennium B.C. was pithos burial in extramural cemeteries. General characteristics of the custom were defined by the excavations of Gaudin at Yortan,1 and Bittel2 and K6kten3 at Babak6y, as well as through surface observations of

plundered cemeteries in the Burdur and Balikesir areas. (See ill. i for locations of all sites mentioned in the text.) Results of the Bryn Mawr College excavations at Karata?-Semayiik4 in the highlands of Lycia have provided specific details on each phase of the burial procedure since over 500 tombs

BABAKOY ?YORTAN

*MIDAS CITY LAKE.

ALAKE CILAR e BEYCESULTAN * KUSURA

APHRODISIAS

0 0

ILL. I

1 M. Collignon, "Note sur les fouilles de M. Paul Gaudin dans la Necropole de Yortan en Mysie," CRAI 190o, 810-17.

2 K. Bittel, "Ein Graberfeld der Yortankultur bei Babak6y," AOF I3 (1939-194I) 1-28.

3 K. Kokten, "1949 ylll tarihoncesi ara?tlrmalar," Belleten XIII (1949) 812-I4.

4The research on which this article is based was done as part of my dissertation, The Early Bronze Age Burial Customs of Karatas-Semayuk, presented to Bryn Mawr College. I wish

to acknowledge a great debt of gratitude to Machteld J. Mel- link of Bryn Mawr College who encouraged and helped me in every phase of this work-excavations at Karata?-Semayiik and the preparation of the dissertation and this article. I also wish to thank Marie-Henriette Carre Gates, Charles W. Gates, III, Marshall J. Becker, Brunilde Sismondo Ridgway and Jonathan Wheeler for reading this manuscript and making many valuable comments.

CAN EASAN .TARSUS

cJ

TAMARA STECH WHEELER

were cleared, a number sufficient to insure a reliable statistical sampling. The Karatas evidence is com-

plemented by the continuing study of prehistoric burials found on the shores of the Gygean Lake near Sardis,5 while the cist cemetery at Iasos in Caria6 has added a new aspect to the study of west- ern Anatolian burial customs which may now be put into perspective.

THE HIGHLANDS OF WESTERN ANATOLIA

Although the settlements of Yortan, Babak6y, and the Gygean Lake shore have not been exca- vated, the known portions of their cemeteries are not located in or among houses. At Ovabaylndlr near Yortan, house foundations dating to the Early Bronze Age were investigated by Akurgal, who also discovered several infant burials in jars among the foundations.7 Pithos sherds observed in nearby fields were probably the remains of a topograph- ically separate, extramural cemetery.8 The Karata? cemetery is certifiably extramural, although certain sections of the cemetery were placed among aban- doned houses, and in one area settlement precedes and follows funerary usage; at no time however were tombs in or among occupied houses.

The Kusura cemetery slightly predates the bulk of the excavated settlement, but the distinction be- tween funerary and domestic areas is still pertinent.9 Three tombs were found in the Kusura settlement, but only one, that of a child, was contemporary with the houses among which it was placed.10 The only tombs excavated at Beycesultan were intramural jar burials of infants in Levels XXIX,1 XXII12 and XVIIa,13 the last a stratum representing a lapse in occupation of the "shrine" area. Although little of the Early Bronze Age settlement was exca- vated, it is likely that most tombs were extramural in this period. The pithos burials found in Early Bronze Age strata at Aphrodisias are isolated from

5 D.G. Mitten and G. Yiigriim, "The Gygean Lake, 1969: Eski Ballkhane, Preliminary Report," HSCP 75 (1971) 191-95.

6 D. Levi, "Le due prime campagne di scavo a Iasos," ASAtene 23-24 (196I-I962) 555-71; D. Levi, "Le campagne 1962-64 a Iasos," ASAtene 27-28 (I965-1966) 505-46.

7 E. Akurgal, "Yortankultur-Siedlung in Ovabayindir bei

Balikesir," Anadolu III (1958) I64. 8 Ibid., I57; Abb. i on I58. 9 W. Lamb, "Excavations at Kusura near Afyon Karahisar,"

Archaeologia 86 (1936) pl. I. 0 Ibid., Io.

11 S. Lloyd and J. Mellaart, Beycesultan I (London 1962) 23. 12 Ibid., 26. 13 Ibid., 33.

contemporary habitation debris. Two were in the Pekmez area,14 the other on Ku?kalesi.1 The dis- tance between them may indicate a sizable extra- mural cemetery. The Early Bronze Age cemetery of Midas City is probably extramural as it lies at the foot of the acropolis.l6

At Karatas, all children were interred in the extramural cemetery, in individual jars or in large pithoi together with adults. The rule of extramural child burial may not have been so strict at other sites. No small burial jars, which would have con- tained the remains of children, are mentioned in Collignon's report on the excavations at Yortan. Only one jar suitable for a single child burial was found at Babakoy.17 Since the settlements of Yortan and Babak6y have not been explored, no further comment can be made on the placement of chil- dren's tombs. One of the five tombs at Eski Bahk- hane on the Gygean Lake shore contained the remains of children; a second small jar held no bones but its size implies that it was used for an infant or child burial.18 Early Bronze Age settle- ments have been located around the Gygean Lake; they each seem to have separate cemeteries and the inhabitants of one large site may have used the cemetery at Eski Balikhane.l9

Although the burial of some children was intra- mural, it may be inferred that as a rule interments of adults were made in extramural cemeteries such as those of Yortan, Babakoy, Eski Balikhane and Karatas. The combined evidence from these four cemeteries can be used to describe the custom of pithos burial. The burial jars, ranging in height from 0.20 m. at Karatas to 2.00 m. at Yortan and

2.15 m. at Karatas, were placed in earth pits on their sides with rims at a slightly higher level than bases, probably to facilitate introduction of the body and its possessions and gifts (pl. 84, fig. I). The pithos rim usually opened to the east, the direction

14 B. Kadish, "Excavations of Prehistoric Remains at Aphro- disias, 1967," AIA 73 (I969) 63; B. Kadish, "Excavations of Prehistoric Remains at Aphrodisias, 1968 and 1969," AIA 75 (I971) I26.

15 B. Kadish, AJA 73 (supra n. 14) 52. 16 H. Cambel, "Frikya'da, Midas ?ehri yanlnda bulunan

prehistorik mezar," IV. Tiurt Tarih Kongresi (Ankara 1952) 228-29; A. Gabriel, Phrygie II (Paris 1952) 2; C.H.E. Haspels, The Highlands of Phrygia I (Princeton 1971) 285 n. 3.

17 K. Bittel, AOF 13 (supra n. 2) 9; Abb. 14 on 19. 18 D.G. Mitten and G. Yiigriim, HSCP 75 (supra n. 5) 192. 19 D.G. Mitten, "Prehistoric Survey of Gygean Lake and

Excavations at Ahlatli Tepecik," BASOR I91 (1968) Io.

416 [AJA 78

EARLY BRONZE AGE BURIAL CUSTOMS IN WESTERN ANATOLIA

of the sunrise.20 After the jar was placed in the cutting, the body was contracted on its side on the floor of the inclined burial jar and tomb gifts -jewellery, weapons, tools, figurines and pottery- put in an appropriate position (pl. 84, fig. 2). At Karata? and Eski Ballkhane, the deceased wore his or her jewellery to the grave and sometimes held tools or weapons; pots were placed close to the torso (pl. 84, fig. 3). The position of tomb goods is not given in the Yortan report and most of the Babak6y tombs were plundered; so similar obser- vations about the contents of the tombs cannot be made. After the body and possessions were placed in the tomb, the mouth of the burial jar was closed, usually with a single stone slab (pl. 84, fig. 4), al-

though at Karata? a preference is shown for a variety of blocking materials-sherds of both small vessels and pithoi, stones and substantial portions of other vessels (pl. 85, fig. 5) as well as stone slabs. Additional small pots were sometimes placed among the blocking materials, a practice known from Yortan21 and Karatas (pl. 85, fig. 6). The earth pit was then filled to the level of the cemetery field.

Since the cemeteries were laid out neatly, with the pithoi in rough rows and little overlapping of tombs, each tomb was probably distinguished by a marker on the field surface. Such markers, in the form of stone circles which may have enclosed low mounds, have been found only at Karata? (pl. 85, fig. 7); they were probably destroyed at other sites before any detailed observation took

place, since a cemetery is usually noticed when tombs are exposed by weathering or plowing, therefore after markers have disappeared.

At Karatas, one-quarter of the tombs contained successive multiple interments, proved by the dis- articulated yet neatly stacked skeletal remains of all individuals in the tomb except the last one buried.

Although the relationship among the inhabitants of a single tomb is now being determined by skeletal analysis, in the interim it is reasonable to view tombs containing multiple burials as family vaults

20 Cf. J.W. Gruber, "Patterning in Death in a Late Pre- historic Village in Pennsylvania," American Antiquity 36 (1971) 64-76; A.A. Saxe, "Social Dimensions of Mortuary Practices in a Mesolithic Population from Wadi Halfa, Sudan," in Approaches to the Social Dimensions of Mortuary Practices, James A. Brown, ed. (Memoirs of the Society for American Archaeology, No. 25, Washington, D.C. 1971) 48-50. Similar studies about the effect of shifts in the direction of the sunrise during the course of the year on the orientation of individual tombs have not yet been made for western Anatolian ceme-

since the individuals frequently represent several age groups and both sexes. Multiple burials in one tomb are not anomalous in a cemetery where the majority of interments were single; reuse of a tomb could have been partly a matter of convenience, given a certain span of time after each burial to allow for decomposition. Tomb markers were thus a necessity in a cemetery where tombs could be used for several burials, to direct the family to its burial jar. Successive burial is also attested at Babak6y22 and Ahlatll Tepecik on the Gygean Lake.23

This outline of burial procedure is valid for the four major cemetery complexes, with some minor variations. Although the tombs excavated at Eski Balhkhane and those observed at several other sites on the Gygean Lake shore were pithoi, some cists were dug at nearby Ahlatli Tepecik.24 Cists out- number pithoi at this site, and are certifiably of Early Bronze Age date on the basis of ceramic contents comparable to the Yortan material. At Babak6y, several cists were found in the cemetery field. Their dating is however uncertain since they were not placed among the pithoi25 and contain no tomb gifts. According to Bittel, nothing pre- vents dating them to the late Roman or early Byzantine period.26 The one stone built tomb and a few inhumations in the Karata? cemetery are

contemporary with the pithos burials; their pres- ence does not detract from the fact that the

predominant burial type was the pithos. The elab- orate built tomb may have been the result of a community effort for a special citizen, whose burial place was made distinctive in order to emphasize his unique status, while the earth burials may be viewed as the work of poor or hurried people with the desire to conform to custom insofar as possible.27 Burial types other than jars may have existed in small numbers in other western Anatolian ceme- teries; the archaeological evidence on this point is by no means complete. Pithos burial was however the dominant custom and may be called a typical trait of a western Anatolian cultural complex.

The Kusura cemetery is usually considered as

teries. 21 M. Collignon, CRAI I9oI (supra n. i) 814. 22 K. Bittel, AOF 13 (supra n. 2) Abb. 4 and 5 on 6. 23 D.G. Mitten, BASOR 191 (supra n. I9) 7-8. 24 Ibid., 7-9. 25 K. Bittel, AOF 13 (supra n. 2) Abb. 3, A and B, on 5. 26 Ibid., Io. 27 The built tomb and inhumations at Karatas will be dis-

cussed in detail in the final excavation report.

1974] 417

TAMARA STECH WHEELER

another manifestation of the western Anatolian custom of pithos burial, but it differs from Karatas, Babakoy and Yortan in that tomb types are mixed in the excavated portion of the cemetery which may have been only a small part of the whole.28 In the Kusura cemetery ceramic containers outnumber cist and earth burials, but some of the jars are unusual compared to the pithoi in other western Anatolian cemeteries. There are four true pithoi, three pseudo- pithos burials (two halves of a single jar bisected longitudinally and placed lengthwise over the body) and one sherd burial.29 The largest jar at Kusura is 1.40 m. in height and the rest around I.oo m. Pithoi at other sites in western Anatolia may be taller, over 2.00 m. at Karatas and about 2.00 m. at Yortan and Babakoy. Perhaps the potters at Kusura could not make such large jars.

In Kusura tombs in which the position of the skeleton can be determined, the head is to the west at the base of the pithos;30 such a position is never found at Yortan, Babakoy or Karatas where the head is always to the east. No multiple burials were found in the Kusura tombs. Objects in the tombs consist only of small vessels-cups, jugs and pitch- ers-while true pithos cemeteries contain a wider range of material. Tomb goods were usually placed behind the skul131 rather than in front of the torso as at Karatas, Eski Balikhane and Babakoy.

Basic similarities between Kusura and other western Anatolian cemeteries indicate that certain features were common to extramural cemeteries. At Kusura, the tombs are laid out in an orderly fashion with no overlapping,32 implying that markers were also used here. Orientation of the burial jar rims was generally to the east, in line with the custom in true pithos cemeteries.

The typological position of the Kusura cemetery is difficult to ascertain. It is probably EB I in date33 and thus precedes the Yortan-Babak6y type ceme- teries which may be assigned to EB II.34 Bisected jar and sherd burials might be early forms of pithos burial, the size of burial jars may be limited by the level of technology, and the lack of variety in tomb

28 W. Lamb, Archaeologia 86 (supra n. 9) pl. I; 55. 29 Ibid., 55. 30Ibid., 6I-63: Tombs 3, 6, 9, II, I2 and I3. 31 Ibid.: Tombs 5, 6, 8 and I4. 32 Ibid., fig. 25. 33 M.J. Mellink, "Anatolian Chronology," in Chronologies in

Old World Archaeology, R.W. Ehrich, ed. (Chicago 1965) II4. 34 Ibid. 35 D. Levi, ASAtene 27-28 (supra n. 6) 533. 36 Ibid., fig. I35.

goods a feature of contemporary fashion; but these hypotheses cannot be substantiated, since no other cemetery of EB I date has been found in the west. The alternative is to view Kusura as a cemetery intermediate between two sets of burial customs- the uniform pattern of western Anatolia and the mixed burial practices of central Anatolia in the third millennium (see Appendix I).

Results from new excavations therefore confirm that in western Anatolia burials were usually placed in pithoi in extramural cemeteries. Some child burials, although in jars, were exempt from the rule of extramural placement. Intramural burial of children at sites with known or presumed extra- mural cemeteries is documented at Kusura, Beyce- sultan, and Ovabayindlr, and might be inferred for Yortan and Babakoy.

THE AEGEAN COAST AND OFFSHORE ISLANDS

The mainland of Anatolia and the Aegean islands must have been in active contact in pre- historic times but the archaeological evidence is at present too scanty to allow much more than speculation on this point. The data now available indicate that burial customs on Anatolia's Aegean coast and offshore islands received influences from both the western highlands of Asia Minor and the Cycladic islands.

In the southern part of this geographical zone, the majority of excavated tombs are at Iasos where a uniform burial custom prevails. All the tombs are stone cists, built either of stone slabs or field stones. A rectangular box formed of four slabs placed on edge is standard, while ovoid, trapezoidal, semi- circular, polygonal, and round cists also occur.35 The appearance of the Iasos cemetery is regular; the tombs are aligned in rows with spaces between each tomb and its neighbors.36 Forty of the Iasos cists are oriented along a roughly east-west axis,37 although deviation from the usual orientation is fairly frequent and often radical. Of the eighty-five tombs excavated, sixteen contain the skeletons of

37 Ibid. The orientation of each tomb is not always given in the text. On the basis of the plan cited here, the following orientations were observed: east-west, 40 tombs; northwest- southeast, 24 tombs; northeast-southwest, I2 tombs; north- south, 2 tombs. Three (46, 54 and 64) are round so have no particular orientation and three (5, 38 and 52) are ruined. Ac- cording to the plan, two orientations are given incorrectly in the text: 5I, which the text says is east-west, should be north- east-southwest and 48 which is east-west, but called northeast- southwest in the text.

418 [AJA 78

EARLY BRONZE AGE BURIAL CUSTOMS IN WESTERN ANATOLIA

more than one person.38 That the tombs were reopened to receive a second burial rather than used for the simultaneous burial of two persons is proved by the position of the bones. Usually the skeleton of the first body buried was pushed to one side of the cist so its bones are disarticulated, but the second skeleton is found articulated in a contracted posi- tion.39 Such Iasos cists were therefore considered family vaults since all bones were left in the tomb.

The Iasos cists are similar to the cist graves of Early Cycladic cemeteries in their form, their posi- tion in an extramural cemetery, and the frequent use of a single slab for a cover,40 but several im- portant differences indicate that, in respect to burial customs as well as geography, Iasos stands in a po- sition intermediate between the islands and the Anatolian highlands. Doro Levi notes that a variety of cist shapes is not as common in the Cyclades as it is at Iasos,41 where variations may represent local adaptations. Easterly orientation of the Iasos tombs is common enough to suggest that it formed a set

part of the burial custom; Cycladic tombs have no standard orientation, but the topography of each site may have been a factor in determining align- ment.42 Cycladic tombs rarely contain multiple successive burials;43 at Iasos almost 20% of the tombs have more than one occupant.

The similarities between burial procedures at Iasos and in inland western Anatolia are striking in the face of an important basic difference-burial was made in jars in the highlands and in cists at lasos. Cemeteries in both areas were extramural and were laid out following an orderly plan, suggesting that tomb markers were also used at Iasos. Orien- tation of the Iasos tombs is not as orthodox as that of western Anatolian pithoi, but it is to a certain extent regular. Placement of the bodies in a con- tracted position and the presence of multiple suc- cessive burials also suggest that some burial pro- cedures were common to the western coast and interior of Anatolia.

Iasos is probably a typical site of the southern

38 Tombs I, 2, 3, I2, 13, i6, I7, 19, 28, 32, 36, 41, 44, 66, 83 and 85.

39 For example: ASAtene 23-24 (supra n. 6) fig. 87 on 559. 40 Ibid., 561; fig. I62. 41 Ibid., 533. 42 C. Doumas, The N.P. Goulandris Collection of Early

Cycladic Art (New York I969) 14 and n. 13. 43 Syros-- of 600 tombs excavated (Ch. Tsountas, "Kykla-

dika," ArchEph I899, 83-84); Amorgos, Paros, Antiparos and Dhespotikon-7 of I90 tombs (Ch. Tsountas, "Kykladika," ArchEph I898, I43-44); Pelos-several of 20 tombs (C.C.

coast, one which is peripheral to two well estab- lished sets of burial procedures. The burials found at several island sites strengthen this hypothesis. Four pithos burials found in the lower levels of the

Asklepieion on Kos44 are like those in western Anatolian cemeteries, in that they contain suc- cessive burials and tomb gifts. Among these burial

jars, however, was a round cist-a different tomb

type in the same archaeological context. The mix- ture of tomb types takes a different form in the

Early Bronze Age levels of the Samian Heraion. Two pithoi, each containing a child burial, are enclosed in individual pits neatly lined with flat stones45-a combination of cist and pithos to form one tomb. The burials otherwise are normal when

compared to those in western Anatolia, with jar rims covered, skeletons contracted, and tomb gifts placed inside and outside the burial jars. Rectangu- lar stone cists occur in a Troy V context in the Heraion,4 suggesting that, although mainland and island burial types were combined in an unusual manner for some child burials, the stone cist may have been the regular burial container.

Extramural cemeteries, like the one at Iasos, may have existed outside the third millennium settle- ments at the Heraion and the Asklepieion. The custom of extramural burial was strong in the

Cyclades and in western Anatolia and presumably would have been so in the intermediate area. The few tombs found at the Asklepieion are probably extramural since they are not associated with con-

temporary habitation. No systematic program of

trenching around the periphery of the Heraion was instigated, so it is possible that a cemetery might be located away from the sea on high ground, given the ancient and modern preference for ele- vated cemetery locations.

The northern section of Turkey's Aegean coast

probably shows its preference in the matter of burial types through the few child burials in jars found at Troy47 and Thermi.48 The small number of burials and the lack of adult interments found in

Edgar, "Prehistoric Tombs at Pelos," BSA 3 [I896-I897] 40); Paros-several of 5 tombs (E.A. Varoucha, "Kykladikoi Taphoi tis Parou," ArchEph 1926, Ioo).

44D. Levi, "Scavi e richerche a Coo, I935-I943," BdA 35 ( 950) 323-24.

45 V. Milojici, Samos I (Bonn 1961) 6, Io-I2. 46 Ibid., 25. 47 C.W. Blegen et al., Troy I (Princeton 1950) 37, 94-95,

130, 207 and 315. 48 W. Lamb, Excavations at Thermi in Lesbos (Cambridge

1936) II, 28.

1974] 419

TAMARA STECH WHEELER

these extensively excavated sites indicate that extra- mural cemeteries remain undiscovered nearby. At Troy, the search for an extramural cemetery was prolonged and frustrating. Schliemann and Dorp- feld found no Early Bronze Age tombs within the site, so the Cincinnati expedition organized explora- tion for the cemetery.49 Trenches were made on the lower north and west slopes of the mound and south and east of the mound on a broad plateau. Every season from I932 to I936 included a program of tomb research, a patient effort rewarded by the

discovery of the Troy VI cremation cemetery near the south edge of the plateau. Most of the area around the mound of Troy was well explored, but a

high point southeast of the mound was not exca- vated.50 A further search for an Early Bronze Age cemetery might be made in this direction.

The Aegean coast and islands reveal a mixture of Anatolian and Aegean burial customs, with each site making an independent choice of procedures and types. The pithos burials found on Kos would not be incongruous in a western Anatolian ceme-

tery, while the hybrid pithos-cists of the Samian Heraion are the most striking result of peripheral adaptation. The mixture of customs takes a dif- ferent form at Iasos where burials were made

according to western Anatolian procedures in Cy- cladic-type tombs. The north, in terms of burial customs, may have been more closely related to the interior of western Anatolia.

SKELETAL REMAINS AND CULTURAL INFERENCE

No detailed studies of the human skeletal remains found in western Anatolian cemeteries have yet appeared. The excavators of Yortan, although in- terested in the study of burial customs, were pre- occupied by the collection of objects and saved only a few skeletons discovered in the final days of excavation.51 The Babakoy skeletons were so poorly preserved that only one could be analysed.52 Since at Karatas the human skeletal remains are often well preserved, their study will contribute important

49W. D6rpfeld, Troja und Ilion (Athens I902) 535-37; C.W. Blegen et al. (supra n. 47) 8-9.

50 Blegen, ibid., fig. 416. 51 Houze, "Les ossements humains d'Yortan Kelembo," Bulle-

tin de la Societe d'Anthropologie de Bruxelles, I902, cvi-cvii. 52 J.L. Angel, "The Babak6y Skeleton," AOF I3 (I939-I941)

28-31. 53 H.H. von der Osten, The Alishar Hiuyik, Seasons of

1930-32, Part I (OIP XXVIII, Chicago I937) I37-50. 54 Ibid., 223-30.

new information on burial customs. Dr. J. Law- rence Angel of the Smithsonian Institution is in the process of analysing the ancient population of Karata?, so only tentative archaeological conclusions can be reached at present. When the archaeological and physical anthropological data are correlated, we will gain insight into the reasons for selection of certain tomb gifts (i.e. how the age and/or sex of the deceased determined what accompanied him to the tomb), into the problem of "family" tombs and

"family" burial plots, and eventually into the social structure of the Karata? village by determining if the location and equipment of the tombs reflect a social hierarchy or lack of one.

An example of the manner in which skeletal analysis may be used for cultural reconstruction is seen at Ali?ar in central Anatolia. No single burial custom was practiced by all the inhabitants of Ali?ar; although all the known tombs are intra- mural, jar burials, earth burials, and cists are repre- sented among them. Of the forty-nine tombs which date to the third millennium B.C., including those of the "Copper Age"53 and the "Early Bronze Age,"54 thirty-one are jar burials. Fourteen jars contain the remains of adult males; two, adults of undetermined sex; six, infants and children; nine, individuals of undetermined sex and age.55 Adult females were apparently never buried in jars, but rather were inhumed in cists or plain earth. Some males were also buried in cists and in the earth, but there is a difference between them and the men buried in jars. Nine men buried in jars are accom-

panied by metal pins, which were usually found by the upper torso of the skeleton,56 while none of the cist or earth burials contain pins. Ten of the re- maining pins were found in jars with skeletons of undeterminable age and sex; one was with a child. Pins may have been accessories to a special kind of costume worn by a certain group of males within the Ali?ar community. Such clothing was most likely that worn during life rather than a shroud, since there is no reason to believe that pins were

55 Results of the skeletal analysis are summarized in each entry under Copper Age and Early Bronze Age tombs. See also: W.D. Krogman, "Cranial Types of Alishar Hiiyiik and their Relations to other Racial Types, Ancient and Modern, of Eu- rope and Western Asia," in The Alishar Hiiyii, Seasons of 1930-32, Part III (OIP XXX, Chicago 1937) 213-93.

56 Pins are in Tombs 3200, 3202, 3208, bX7, bX8, bX46, cX2o, dXi4, dXi5, dXi6, dX27, dX29, dX45, dX46, dX47, dX48, eX8 and eXg.

420 [AJA 78

EARLY BRONZE AGE BURIAL CUSTOMS IN WESTERN ANATOLIA

made especially for funerary purposes.57 One group of men thus wore a costume different from that of other men at Alisar and were also buried different- ly. The inference is that the Alisar community was composed of several groups with different back- grounds or affiliations. It is interesting to note that no women were included in the jar burial group. Thus, a documented case exists at one site in Anatolia that sexual differences, and perhaps dif- ferences in group affiliations, determined the burial type of some individuals.

Although the burial practices of Alisar do not explain the burial customs of western Anatolia, where almost everyone was buried in a jar, they do indicate some of the potentials of skeletal analysis. Complete study of extramural pithos cemeteries may eventually reveal subtle differences in the treatment of the two sexes and provide information which can be compared to the Alisar data.

WESTERN ANATOLIA AND THE NEAR EAST,

EASTERN MEDITERRANEAN, AND THE AEGEAN

Jar burials are typical of western Anatolia in the

Early Bronze Age and as such are the basic units which may be used for comparison with other com-

plexes of burial customs. Central Anatolia has a mixture of burial customs, like that seen at Alisar, which requires special analysis (see Appendix I

below); the pattern of burials there is not com-

parable to western Anatolia where a single custom can be called a definitive trait. In spite of the small number of Neolithic and Chalcolithic tombs exca- vated, some precedents do exist for Early Bronze

Age burial customs in the west. At Hacilar, twenty- two individuals were interred within the site,58 a

relatively small number which indicates that an extramural cemetery may lie nearby.59 No tombs have been discovered in the Chalcolithic settlement of Can Hasan I and, although tombs were found at Beycesultan, none of them may date to the period before 3000 B.C.60 In southeastern Turkey, an extramural cemetery of jars and earth burials was found at Tarsus,61 a site not in western Anatolia but pertinent because of the type of cemetery.

57 It is interesting to note that pins were usually part of the female costume at KarataS.

58 J. Mellaart, Excavations at Hacilar (Edinburgh 1970) 88- 9i.

59 There is no need to assume that the Hacllar cemetery has been discovered and plundered, contra Mellaart, ibid., 90. See P.J. Ucko in Aitken, Moorey and Ucko, "The Authenticity of Vessels and Figurines in the Hacilar Style," Archaeometry

MESOPOTAMIA AND IRAN

In Mesopotamia and Iran,62 no well defined pattern of tomb distribution exists. No single type of tomb was ever dominant throughout the area or in any particular temporal span. Several types of tombs are usually found in a single site in any given time period. Burials in various types of ceramic containers are common, but only children were

placed in small jars. Since these household jars, never over 0.80 m. in height, were not large enough for the burial of adults, other arrangements had to be made for their interment. Composite tombs of two jars placed rim to rim, first used in Mahmur and Gawra XII, solved this problem in one way. Sometimes the corpse was arranged with arms and

legs drawn close to the torso and perhaps bound in this position, then covered with a tilted pot. Sherds were placed under and over some bodies. These methods do not however allow for complete en- closure of the body by its container. Perhaps the most practical ceramic container developed for adult burials was the sarcophagus, which is not related to household vessels in form or function, but which is a sensible means of burying adults in a land where stone is not plentiful.

The custom of pithos burial, as practiced in western Anatolia, is clearly a development separate from Mesopotamia. Pithoi in western Anatolian cemeteries, in sizes suitable for child or adult burial, may have been made especially for funerary usage rather than being appropriated from the house, a fact indicated by their good preservation in situations where they have not been subjected to human or natural abuse. The weight of the evi- dence indicates that Mesopotamia cannot be con- sidered as the site of origin for the western Ana- tolian custom of pithos burial, except perhaps for the chronological priority of the general type.

SYRIA AND PALESTINE

The best foreign parallel to western Anatolian cemeteries is found in Syria at Byblos. The Byblos cemetery is however not representative of Syria and Palestine where cave burial and inhumation were

13/2, I25-26. 60 M.J. Mellink (supra n. 33) II4. 61 H. Goldman, Excavations at Gozlii Kule, Tarsus, vol. II

(Princeton 1956) 6-7. 62 E. Strommenger, "Grab (I. Irak und Iran)," Reallexikon der

Assyriologie und vorderasiatischen Archdologie (Berlin I971) 581-93.

1974] 421

TAMARA STECH WHEELER

common through the Neolithic period.63 Collective burials, such as those found in caves, continued

through the Early Bronze Age in specially pre- pared shafts and chambers.

At Byblos, a cemetery of jar burials has been a

subject of study since I931. The cemetery is called

"eneolithique" by the excavators,64 but its use prob- ably continued through the third millennium.65 A final publication of the over 1500 tombs has not

yet appeared, so consideration of many details must be left aside for the present. The Byblos tombs are almost all jars; fewer than ten are inhumations.66 The Byblos burial jars are related to western Ana- tolian pithoi by their size, with heights as great as 1.86 m.67 Jar size is pertinent because a large jar was necessary to accommodate an adult burial; large pithoi may have been made especially for adult and multiple burials. Many of the Byblos tombs contain multiple burials,68 but it has not been stated whether they were successive. The rims of the Byblos tombs were usually covered with bowls, large sherds, jar bases, and stone slabs, although poor preservation of many tombs makes the nature of the closure uncertain.69 Gifts, as in western Anatolia, were placed close to the body. Pots often lay in front of the chest, and jewellery, tools and

weapons were in appropriate positions for symbolic use.

Although the similarities cited above are strong and numerous, certain differences between the cemeteries of western Anatolia and Byblos must also be considered. Dunand says that the tombs are

mingled with houses,70 but does not discuss the

comparative dating of tombs and associated houses; judgment on the relation of Eneolithic tombs to

contemporary houses should be reserved until the final excavation report appears. At Byblos there was no fixed orientation for the burial jars,71 al- though the publication of the complete cemetery plan may reveal some degree of internal organiza- tion. Bodies were placed in the Byblos tombs

63 B. Hrouda, "Grab (II. Syrien und Palastina)," Reallexikon der Assyriologie, 593-603.

64 This term may be equated with the more usual "Chalco- lithic."

65 E.D. Oren, "The Early Bronze IV Period in Northern Palestine and its Cultural and Chronological Setting," BASOR 2I0 (I973) 33-34.

66 M. Dunand, "Rapport preliminaire sur les fouilles de Byblos en 1949," BMBeyrouth IX (I949-I950) 68.

67 M. Dunand, "Rapport preliminaire sur les fouilles de Byblos en I955," BMBeyrouth XIII (I956) 82.

68 M. Dunand, "Rapport preliminaire sur les fouilles de

indifferently, with head toward rim or base,72 unlike the custom used in western Anatolia. The

openings of the Byblos burial jars were often found too narrow for the placement of the body; so addi- tional windows were made in the jars.73 Such alteration of the jars used for burials is seldom found in western Anatolia.

The Byblos cemetery cannot at present be con- sidered a typical Syrian burial ground of the fourth and third millennia, nor can the precise nature of its role in relation to western Anatolian pithos cemeteries be assessed. The similarities between burial customs in these two areas cannot however be discounted as separate indigenous developments. Specific elements of the custom-large burial jars, some multiple burials, uniformity of burial type in large cemeteries-are unique and are not paralleled elsewhere in the Near East, eastern Mediterranean or Aegean. Byblos and western Anatolia may have been sites in a continuous coastal series which practiced similar burial customs; the Byblos ceme- tery and contemporary settlement areas are not sufficiently published for other aspects of material culture-building types, pottery, metal objects, fig- urines, trade goods, and technological achievements -to be compared with the western Anatolian com- plex. Only when these comparisons can be made will this tantalizing evidence of prehistoric inter- action be understood.

THE CYCLADES

Cycladic cemeteries and tombs have already been discussed briefly in connection with the Iasos cemetery. Extramural cemeteries of stone cists are customary. The origin of the Cycladic-type cist is unknown, but it may have developed locally due to an abundance of easily worked stone.

Cycladic cists are now known to have local pred- ecessors of a Neolithic date. The cemetery at Kephala on Kea74 contains the earliest Cycladic stone tombs, although only two of forty are slab

Byblos en I948," BMBeyrouth IX (I949-I950) 55. 69 M. Dunand, "Rapport preliminaire sur les fouilles de Byblos

en I949," BMBeyrouth IX (1949-1950) 68, pl. 112. 70 M. Dunand, "Rapport preliminaire sur les fouilles de Byblos

en 1955," BMBeyrouth XIII (I956) 82. 71 M. Dunand, Fouilles de Byblos I (Paris I939) 365 passim. 72 M. Chehab, "Tombes de chefs d'epoque eneolithique

trouvees a Byblos," BMBeyrouth IX (I949-I950) 75-76. 73 N. Jidejian, Byblos through the Ages (Beirut I968) I2. 74 J. Coleman, The Kephala Cemetery, manuscript of final

excavation report. I thank Prof. Coleman for generously mak- ing this manuscript available to me.

422 [AJA 78

EARLY BRONZE AGE BURIAL CUSTOMS IN WESTERN ANATOLIA

sided and one of these is a triangular enclosure around a burial jar containing the remains of a child, a combination of tomb types similar to that found at the Samian Heraion. Five burial jars were found in the Kephala cemetery, the rim of each covered with a stone slab; only infants were buried in jars. Ten of the Kephala tombs contain multiple burials, unlike their Early Cycladic successors.75 The Kephala cemetery probably represents a phase in the development of typical Early Cycladic burial customs-an experimentation in the use and con- struction of stone tombs, especially slab-sided cists which were built only in small sizes for child burials. One might speculate that the Neolithic in- habitants of the Cyclades knew of the custom of pithos burial, witnessed by the few burial jars in the Kephala cemetery and perhaps by the frequency of multiple interments, but rejected it because the

pithos was not as congenial as the cist with Cycladic terrain and natural resources. The Kephala ceme-

tery is at present the only known Neolithic burial ground in the Cyclades; we must study more pre- Bronze Age cemeteries before a clear understand-

ing of the affinities of the Kephala jar burials emerges.

In the Cyclades, attempts were made at marking the location of some cists by using stones in various fashions. At Akrotiri on Naxos, one of the vertical slabs of each cist was taller than the others so that it projected above the field surface.76 Projecting piles of stones (platforms) lay above the Kephala tombs, although they may not have been visible above the ground.77 The cemetery at Aghioi Ana-

gyroi on Naxos was surrounded by an enclosure wall; Renfrew notes that flat stones were placed above each tomb,78 but Coleman reports that these markers were incorrectly described. The area of the Aghioi Anagyroi cemetery is covered with small flat stones except above each tomb where there is a layer of river pebbles.79 Markers, a neces-

sity in extramural cemeteries, are thus confirmed as existing in Cycladic cemeteries.

The appearance of extramural cemeteries con-

taining a single type of tomb is similar to that of cemeteries in western Anatolia, even though the tomb types themselves are different. Cycladic tombs in the Early Bronze Age are of a size comparable

75 Supra n. II. 76 C. Renfrew, The Emergence of Civilization-The Cyclades

and the Aegean in the Third Millennium B.C. (London 1972)

158.

to western Anatolian pithoi but, in spite of their size, were usually not used as family tombs.

CRETE

Burial jars are rarely found in an Early Minoan context80 and are frequent in the Middle Minoan

period. Most tombs in Crete-caves, rock clefts, cists, larnakes, and tholoi-show a regional pattern of distribution which is probably not related to Anatolian customs. Since burial in jars is not un- known before the Middle Minoan period, this burial type may have developed locally, perhaps with some encouragement from western Anatolia.

CONCLUSIONS

The closest known relative of western Anatolian

pithos cemeteries is the prehistoric necropolis at Byblos. These two areas may represent distant

geographical examples of a series of similar pithos cemeteries along the Mediterranean coast of Ana- tolia and the Levant, but there are not enough excavated sites in the intermediate section of this coastal zone to prove this suggestion. Only at Tarsus is some evidence relevant to western Ana- tolian and Byblite burial customs available. Al-

though the Chalcolithic cemetery, as excavated, is small and seems to contain mostly child burials, it is important because it is extramural and does con- tain jar burials. The Early Bronze Age necropolis of Tarsus has not been found, but we might assume that it is an extramural pithos cemetery. The custom of pithos burial in extramural cemeteries may have

spread to the Cyclades. The Kephala cemetery has shown that jar burials were used in the islands in Neolithic times, although their geographical extent is not known; they may have gone out of fashion because the stone cist was more practical in the environment of the Cyclades.

Much of the communication along the Mediter- ranean coast of the Levant and Anatolia and in the

Cyclades probably took place by sea; it would be natural for the people along the coasts to develop and share certain customs which may not have been those of the people inland. Pithos burial may be one of these.

SWARTHMORE COLLEGE

77 J. Coleman, supra n. 74. 78 Renfrew, supra n. 76. 79 Coleman, supra n. 74. 80 I. Pini, Beitrige zur minoische Grdberkunde (Wiesbaden

I968) II-I3.

423 1974]

Appendix I. Catalogue of Early Bronze Age Tombs in Anatolia

(Other than those in western Anatolia)

A. Between the Sangarios (Sakarya) and the Halys (Kizil Irmak)

I. Gordion-one stone cist ILN 3.I.I953: 2I, 23, fig. 6. M.J. Mellink, A Hittite Cemetery at Gordion,

(Philadelphia I956) i. 2. Polatll-one stone cist and one jar burial

S. Lloyd, "Excavations at Polatli," AnatSt I (195 I) 25-26.

3. Sanyar-two pithos burials (no dimensions given)

B. Tezcan, "Nalllhan-Beypazarl cevresinden getirilen kaplar hakkinda," Belleten XX (1956) 345-

4. Ahlatllbel-six pithoi, five stone cists, two in- humations, one stone chamber and four too damaged to discern the type

H.Z. Ko?ay, "Ahlathbel Hafriyati," TiurkTar- Derg 2 (1934) 88-Ioo.

5. Kogumbeli-one round cutting covered with slabs

M.J. Mellink, "Archaeology in Asia Minor," AJA 70 (I966) I48.

6. Karayav?an-stone cists (number not given) M.J. Mellink, "Archaeology in Asia Minor,"

AJA 70 (I966) 148. 7. Karahiiyiik-Konya-two pithoi, two cists and

one composite jar burial M.J. Mellink, "Archaeology in Asia Minor,"

AJA 70 (1966) 146; AJA 71 (1967) i6i. B. East of the Halys

I. Alisar-3I jar burials, 14 inhumations, 3 stone cists and i mudbrick cist

H.H. von der Osten, The Alishar Hiiyiik, Seasons of 1930-32, Part I (OIP XXVIII, Chicago, 1937) 135-50, 223-30.

2. Alaca Hiiyiik-13 shaft tombs, one pithos burial, one stone cist and 3 inhumations

R.O. Ark, "Les premiers Resultats des Fouil- les d'Alacah6yiik," Belleten I (1937) 226.

, Les fouilles d'Alacahoyiik 1935 (An- kara I937) 53-116.

H.Z. Kosay, Alaca Hoyiik Hafriyat: 1936 (Ankara I944) 80-88.

K. Bittel, "Beitrige zur kleinasiatischen Ar- chiologie," AOF 1I (936-I937) 48.

3. Eskiyapar-one pithos burial, 0.65 m. in height

W. Orthmann, "Beobachtungen an dem Hii- yiik in Eskiyapar," IstMitt 12 (1962) I0, Abb. 8.

4. Bogazk6y, Biiyiikkale-three inhumations K. Bittel, "Vorliufiger Bericht iiber die Aus-

grabungen in Bogazk6y 1935," MDOG 74 (I935) 9-10.

5. Yankkaya-several pithos burials K. Bittel et al., Bogazkdy IV. Funde aus den

Grabungen 1967 und 1968 (Abhandlungen der Deutschen Orientgesellschaft Nr. 14, Berlin I969) 66-69.

6. Kanlica-one stone cist H.H. von der Osten, Explorations in Central

Anatolia (OIP V, Chicago 1929) 95. 7. Hashiiyiik-more than four earth burials

L. Delaporte, "Grabung am Hashiiyiik 193I," AA I932, 230-33.

8. Kiiltepe-jar and cist tombs T. Ozgiic, Die Bestattungsbrduche im vorge-

schichtlichen Anatolien (Ankara 1948) I55. AnatSt 13 (1963) 22.

C. The Pontic area i. Horoztepe-two shaft tombs and one inhu-

mation T. Ozgiic and M. Akok, Horoztepe (Ankara

I958) 40-60. 2. Ma?athiiyiik-7 inhumations

Haberler, Belleten X (1946) 220-22. 3. Kaledorugu (Kavak)-13 inhumations

T. Ozgiic, "Samsun hafrlyatin 1941-42 yill neticeleri," III. Tiur Tarih Kongresi (An- kara 1948) 414-I5.

4. Diindartepe-one inhumation K. Kokten et al., "Samsun kazilart," Belleten

IX (i945) 398. 5. Tekek6y-I7 inhumations

K. K6kten et al., ibid. 384-86. D. Eastern Anatolia

I. Keban, Pagnlk Oreni-inhumations in pits R. Harper, "Pagnik Oreni Excavations,"

Keban Projesi 1969 9alzimalarz (Middle East Technical University Publication i, Ankara 1971) 95.

2. Pulur (Erzurum)-3 stone cists, 2 rectangular and i square; the largest 2.00 m. in length

H. Kosay and H. Vary, Pulur Kazisi (Ankara 1964) 98-I02.

3. Alaca Han-stone cists (number not given); the largest 6.60 m. by 3.25 m. by 2.80 m., with steps

AOF 21 (1966) i68.

4. Tilkitepe (?amramalti)-six inhumations and two infant burials in jars

E.B. Reilly, "Tilkitepedeki ilk kazilar, I937," TiirTarDerg 4 (1940) 151-62.

T. Ozgiic, Bestattungsbrduche, op. cit., 29. E. Syro-Cilicia

I. Gedikli-almost 200 cremation burials, in- humations and chamber tombs

U.B. and H. Alkim, "Gedikli (Karahiiyiik)

EARLY BRONZE AGE BURIAL CUSTOMS IN WESTERN ANATOLIA

kazisi birinci on-rapor," Belleten XXX (1966) 40-52.

2. Tilmen Hiiyuk-two stone cists and a cham- ber tomb of hypogaeaum type

U.B. Alkim, "Tilmen Hiiyuk call?malarl (1958-I960)," Belleten XXVI (I962) 455- 56.

, "Islahiye b6lgesinde ara?tirmalarl," Atatiirk Konferanslarz (Ankara 1964) 169- 78.

3. Carchemish-I5 stone cists; largest 2.00 m. by 1.20 m.

L. Woolley, Carchemish 111 (London 1952) 218-22.

4. Amuq-one child in a jar and one inhumation at Judeideh; one inhumation at Tainat

R. Braidwood, Excavations in the Plain of Antioch (OIP LXI, Chicago 1960) 343, 497.

1974] 425

F. 2. Karata, Trench 98, Tomb 342 FIG. 2. Karata?, Trench 98, Tomb 342

FIG. i. Karata?, southeast cemetery trench, cleared to bedrock with ancient pit cuttings excavated

FIG. 4. Karatas, Trench 98, Tomb 245 FIG. 3. Karatae, Trench 98, Tomb 322. Note that mandible has fallen on tomb gift

WHEELER PLATE 85

FIG. 5. Karatas, Trench 98, Tomb 226

FIG. 6. Karata?, Trench 98, Tomb 280

FIG. 7. Karata?, Trench 98, view of tomb markers