|
©The Archaeological Settlements of Turkey - TAY Project
|
|
|
|
|
|
Sürük Mevkii |
|
|
For site maps and drawings please click on the picture...  |
For photographs please click on the photo...  |
|
Type:
|
Mound |
|
Altitude:
|
440 m |
|
Region:
|
Southeastern Anatolia |
|
Province:
|
Adiyaman |
|
District:
|
Samsat |
|
Village:
|
|
|
Investigation Method:
|
Survey |
|
Period:
|
Ceramic |
|
|
|
  |
|
| Location: This site lies south of the city of Adiyaman; northeast of the old town of Samsat. |
| Geography and Environment: The site; known as Sürük Mevkii; is at the border of the Atatürk Dam Lake. The mound is located on the western bank of Alikan Stream; also known as Gevrik Stream; which now empties into the dam lake but used to empty into the Euphrates River. On the western bank of this river is a terrace known as the Gazikumca Kirmalari; which is at an elevation between 450-500 m above sea-level. The site lies east of this terrace. There is a freshwater spring very near the mound. The site size; 130 m north-south and 90 m east-west; has been determined by the artifact extent. The thickness of the cultural material deposit has not been measured. The area around Samsat is rich in flint outcrops. The proximity of the site to the Euphrates River and the fertile lands around the mound may have been among the reasons why early settlers chose this location. |
| History: |
| Research and Excavation: The site was discovered in 1977 by a team from the University of Istanbul; Faculty of Letters; Prehistory Section; led by M. Özdogan; during the Lower Euphrates Survey. Initial collection on the mound yielded post-Classical; Classical and Iron Age ceramics [Özdogan 1977:124]. The research director noted that the chipped stone tools collected were mainly Neolithic. The site was revisited in 1982-1984 during the systematic surface survey funded by Bryn Mawr College and conducted by the Gritille excavation team; who were working only 2 km from this mound. The collection method used on the mound was one devised by R. Whallon for surveys on small mounds. Three rows of 10x10 m squares across the mound were carefully searched. This process; which was applied by Stein; allows one to determine the distribution of periods over sections of the mound dates. The results indicated that Neolithic chaff-tempered pottery and chipped stone tools were concentrated on the southwestern part of the mound. This process has predetermined trench locations for excavation directors and crews interested in the Neolithic [Stein 1992:fig 2]. |
| Stratigraphy: Surface surveys conducted on this mound both by Stein and Özdogan found ceramics which were assigned to the Ceramic Neolithic Period; Iron Age; Hellenistic; Roman Period; Middle Ages and the post-Medieval Byzantine Period. A more exact and certain stratigraphy will be determined after excavation. |
| Small Finds: Pottery: Stein and crew studied especially Neolithic ceramics since they were excavating at Gritille Höyük. The ceramics which were assigned to the Neolithic were hand-made; chaff and mineral tempered and burnished. Their surface colors are mostly reddish-yellow well-burnished or less frequently brown and lightly burnished. The vessels were therefore; unevenly fired in an open-fire. The cores of the clay are gray. The most common shapes are straight or slightly flaring. The lugs face upwards [Stein 1992:fig.3]. Chipped Stone: The chipped stone tools were analyzed by R. Davis and T van Zandt. The raw material; which is flint; comes from the fine grained brown flint dikes within the limestone northwest of the site. The points; like the perforators; have been made on flakes. Blades are very rare [Stein 1992:fig.4]. |
| Remains: |
| Interpretation and Dating: It has been suggested that the ceramics collected on the surface of the Sürük Mevkii mound resemble the site of Kumartepe; across the Euphrates River; in terms of unevenly fired ceramics; vessel shapes and ware/paste characteristics. Stein believes that the similarities with this site can be seen when chipped stone tools are compared; as well. He bases his claim that the sites of Sürük Mevkii and Kumartepe are contemporaneous on the apparent similarity of these two artifact categories at these sites. The ceramics from both sites show affinity with Amuq A and B phase wares and have been assigned to the first half of the sixth millennium BC. |
