Hostname: page-component-cd9895bd7-dk4vv Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-12-26T08:45:41.473Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false

Anatolian Kilims; New Insights and Problems

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  23 December 2013

Extract

The study of Anatolian kilims has much in common with Anatolian archaeology of the second millennium B.C. In both cases we have the evidence from the texts; place names in the Hittite texts, tribal and place names in the Ottoman ones. Whereas the bulk of the Hittite place names can not yet be securely located, but with certain exceptions belong to settled population groups, those from the Ottoman records refer to nomadic or semi-nomadic elements that can sometimes be pinpointed, but more often are vague and imprecise. Further information of relevance is sometimes supplied, but more often not. Neither set of records is perfect, nor answers such to us essential questions of dates, ancestry, arrival, affinity with others, subdivisions, size of country or territory inhabited etc. Most of the Hittite texts are religious or political; most of the Ottoman records dealing with tribal groups deal with taxation, or later with military service.

The basic prerequisite both for Hittite and Ottoman tribal studies is the reconstruction of a map or better still of a series of maps for various successive periods on which the events recorded in the texts and the material evidence derived from archaeology or textile production can be plotted. Here the aims are the same and so are the methods; basically fieldwork.

Type
Research Article
Copyright
Copyright © The British Institute at Ankara 1984

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

1 Durul, Y., Yörük kilimleri. Akbank, Istanbul 1977Google Scholar.

Balpınar, B. and Hirsch, U., Flatweaves of the Vakiflar Museum Istanbul. Uta Hülsey, Wesel 1982Google Scholar.

U., and Reinhard, V., “Türkische Webteppiche der Nomaden” in Baessler Archiv, N.F. vol. XXII, 1974, 165 fGoogle Scholar.

Powell, J., Lecture on Saçıkaralı kilims at the International Conference on Carpets, London, 9 June 1983Google Scholar.

2 Flatweaves, pls. 112–20 and Classical kilims” in Hali, 6:1, 1983, 13 ffGoogle Scholar.

3 Yücel, Y., 1640 Tarihli Eş'ar Defteri. Ankara 1982Google Scholar.

4 Flatweaves, p. 22, note 23.

5 Hali, 6:1, 1983, p. 17, fig. 7Google Scholar.

6 AS XXX, 1980, 91–9Google Scholar.

7 See note 1, on p. 00.

8 Türkay, C., Başbakanlik arşivi belgelerine göre Osmanlı Imparatorluğunda Oymak, Aşiret ve Cemaatlar. Istanbul 1979Google Scholar.

9 Sümer, F., Oğuzlar (Türkmenler) Tarihleri-Boy teşkilatı-Destanları. 3rd ed. Istanbul 1980Google Scholar.

10 Orhonlu, C., Osmanlı Imparatorluğunda Aşiretleri Iskan Teşebbüsü (1691–6). Istanbul 1963Google Scholar.

11 Oğuzlar, p. 173.

12 Flatweaves, pls. 76–9.

13 Oğuzlar, p. 184 ff.