Past and Future Heritage in the Pipelines Corridor: Azerbaijan, Georgia, Turkey” – BTC/SCP. Asian Cultural History Program, Smithsonian Institution, 2011.

Vakhtang Shatberashvili; Nino Erkomaishvili; Museibli Najaf

Past and Future Heritage in the Pipelines Corridor Azerbajan Georgia Turkey kulturuli memkvidreobis ZeglebiPmilsadenebis derefanSi, warsuli da momavali azerbaijani saqarTvelo TurqeTi Paul Michael Taylor Christopher R. Polglase Najaf Museyibli Jared M. Koller Troy A. Johnson pol maikl teilori qristofer r. folgleisi najaf museibli jared m. qoleri TroiAa. jonsoni Past and Future Heritage in the Pipelines Corridor Azerbajan Georgia Turkey kulturuli memkvidreobis ZeglebiPmilsadenebis derefanSi, warsuli da momavali azerbaijani, GsaqarTvelo, TurqeTi Past and Future Heritage in the Pipelines Corridor Azerbajan Georgia Turkey kulturuli memkvidreobis ZeglebiPmilsadenebis derefanSi, warsuli da momavali azerbaijani, GsaqarTvelo, TurqeTi Paul Michael Taylor Christopher R. Polglase Najaf Museyibli Jared M. Koller Troy A. Johnson New discoveries from excavations by the Institute of Archaeology and Ethnography (Baku, Azerbajan), the Georgian National Museum (Tbilisi, Georgia), and Gazi University (Ankara, Turkey) Asian Cultural History Program Smithsonian Institution pol maikl teilori qristofer r. folgleisi najaf museibli jared m. qoleri Troi a. jonsoni arqeologiis institutis (baqo, azerbaijani), saqarTvelos erovnuli muzeumisa (Tbilisi, saqarTvelo) da gazis universitetis (ankara, TurqeTi) axali arqeologiuri aRmoCenebi A aziis kulturis istoriis programa smiTsonis instituti (vaSingtoni, aSS) This publication is the irst product of grant number G-08-BPCS-151448 from BP Exploration Caspian Sea Ltd to the Smithsonian Institution, entitled “Provision of the Cultural Heritage Public Outreach and Capacity Building Programme in the AGT Pipeline Corridor Regions.” An online publication on this topic with the title “AGT: Ancient Heritage in the BTC-SCP Pipelines Corridor, Azerbajan - Georgia - Turkey” accompanies this book and may be found at htp://www.agt.si.edu. Visitors to this website will ind archaeological site reports and a more extensive bibliography. Copyright © 2011, Smithsonian Institution Asian Cultural History Program, Washington, D.C. Design by KI Graphics, Inc. This book is simultaneously issued in two bilingual editions: English-Azerbajani and English-Georgian. ISBN: English-Azerbajani: 9780972455749 (sotcover); 9780972455763 (hardcover), English-Georgian: 9780972455756 (sotcover); 9780972455770 (hardcover). Second printing (April 2011) es publikacia BP Exploration Caspian Sea Ltd- is mier smiTsonis institutisaTvis gacemuli grantis (G-08-BPCS-151448) “sazogadoebisaTvis kulturuli memkvidreobis gacnoba da azerbaijani – saqarTvelo – TurqeTi milsadenebis derefnis regionSi “SesaZleblobaTa ganviTarebis” programis pirveli produqtia. G am Temasve Seexeba eleqtronuli publikacia, romlis saTauria: “azerbaijani, saqarTvelo, TurqeTi - kulturuli memkvidreoba BTC/SCP-is derefanSi “. igi wignTan erTad gamoqveyndeba da misi naxva SesaZlebeli iqneba saitze: htp://www. achp.si.edu/agt. saitis meSveobiT SesaZlebeli iqneba arqeologiuri Zeglebis gaTxrebis angariSebisa da sruli bibliografiis gacnoba. saavtoro ufleba © 2011, smiTsonis institutis aziis kulturis istoriis programa es wigni erTdroulad inglisur – azerbaijanul da inglisur - qarTul, orenovan gamocemad gamodis. ISBN: inglisur – azerbaijanuli: 9780972455749 (rbili yda); 9780972455763 (magari garekani), inglisur - qarTuli: 9780972455756 (rbili yda); 9780972455770 (magari garekani). Cataloging-in-Publication Data (U.S.A.) Past and future heritage in the pipelines corridor : Azerbajan, Georgia, Turkey = Kulturuli emkvidreobis żeglebi milsadenebis derep‛anši, carsuli da momavali : Azerbajani, Sak‛art‛velo, T‛urk‛et‛i / Paul Michael Taylor … [et al.]. p. cm. English and Georgian. Includes bibliographical references. ISBN-13: 978-09724557-5-6 (sotcover); 978-09724557-7-0 (hardcover) 1. Excavations (Archaeology)—Azerbajan. 2. Excavations (Archaeology)—Georgia (Republic). 3. Excavations (Archaeology) —Turkey, Eastern. 4. Azerbajan—Antiquities. 5. Georgia (Republic)— Antiquities. 6. Turkey, Eastern—Antiquities. 7. Silk road— Antiquities. 8. Petroleum pipelines— Caucasus, South. 9. Petroleum pipelines—Turkey, Eastern. I. Taylor, Paul Michael, 1953- II. National Museum of Natural History (U.S.). Asian Cultural History Program. DS56.P372 2010 Smithsonian Institution Table of Contents CHAPTER 1 From the Caspian to the Mediterranean 14 CHAPTER 2 Cultural History at the Crossroads 42 CHAPTER 3 Archaeological Sites along the Pipeline • Dashbulaq (Azerbajan) • Zayamchai / Tovuzchai (Azerbajan) • Hasansu Kurgan (Azerbajan) • Saphar-Kharaba (Georgia) • Klde (Georgia) • Orchosani (Georgia) • Güllüdere (Turkey) • Ziyaretsuyu (Turkey) • Yüceören (Turkey) 128 136 140 150 152 156 162 166 172 176 CHAPTER 4 Nurturing a Shared Heritage 180 Acknowledgements 212 Site Report Citations 216 Recommended Readings 224 sarCevi Tavi 1 Fkaspiidan xmelTaSuazRvispireTamde 14 Tavi 2 kulturaTa istoria gzajvaredinze 42 Tavi 3 Aarqeologiuri Zeglebi milsadenis derefanSi • daSbulaqi (azerbaijani) • zaiamCai / TovuzCai (azerbaijani) H • hasansus yorRani (azerbaijani) • safar-xaraba (saqarTvelo) • klde (saqarTvelo) O • orWosani (saqarTvelo) Gü • guludere (TurqeTi) • ziareTsuiu (TurqeTi) • ieqeioreni (TurqeTi) 128 136 140 150 152 156 162 166 172 176 Tavi 4 vufrTxildebiT saerTo memkvidreobas 180 madloba gaweuli samuSaosaTvis 212 arqeologiuri gaTxrebis citirebuli angariSebi 216 rekomendebuli sakiTxavi 224 Rock art displaying two human igures interlocking hands at the Gobustan National Historical-Artistic Preserve. gobusTanis istoriul-arqeologiur nakrZalSi, kldeze gamosaxulia ori adamiani, romelTac xelebi erTmaneTisken aqvT gawvdili. A view of excavation activities along the Baku-Tbilisi-Ceyhan (BTC) pipeline in Georgia. saqarTvelo, Bbaqo-Tbilisi-jeihanis navTobsadenis (BTC) maxloblad mimdinare arqeologiuriAgaTxrebis xedi The Sultanahmet Mosque (also known as the Blue Mosque) in Istanbul was commissioned by Sultan Ahmet I and completed during the early 17th century AD. sulTan ahmedis meCeTis (cnobilia, rogorc lurji meCeTi) mSenebloba stambulSi sulTan ahmed I-is mmarTvelobis dros daiwyo da XVII saukuneSi damTavrda. An artisan crafting beautiful traditional metal wares in Azerbaijan. azerbaijaneli xelosani amzadebs liTonis tradiciul nivTebs. An Azerbaijani woman baking latbread (chorek) in a wood-ired tandir. azerbaijaneli qali acxobs purs ToneSi. The famous defensive walls and Maiden’s Tower of Ichari Shahar (Baku’s “inner city”) were constructed in the 12th century AD. Zveli baqos damcavi galavani da saxelganTqmuli `qalwulis koSki” XII saukuneSia agebuli. Tbilisi, a city of roughly one and a half million people, is the capital and largest city of Georgia, gracing the banks of the Mtkyvari (Kura) River in the eastern part of the country. Tbilisi, daaxloebiT milionnaxevriani qalaqi, saqarTvelos dedaqalaqia da mdebareobs qveynis aRmosavleT nawilSi, md. mtkvris napirebze. Magniicently spanning the Bosporus Strait, the First Bosporus Bridge in Istanbul connects Orakoy (in Europe) and Beylerbeyi (in Asia). Completed in 1973, the bridge embodies Turkey’s historic role linking Europe and Asia. bosforis sruteze gadWimuli pirveli xidi, romelic stambulis or nawils _evropulsa (oraqoi) da aziurs (beilerbei) aerTebs, 1973 wels aSenda da TurqeTis - evropisa da aziis damakavSirebeli saxelmwifos istoriul rols usvams xazs. – BTC Route – SCP Route A map of the Baku-Tbilisi-Ceyhan (BTC) and South Caucasus (SCP) pipelines, from the Caspian to the Mediterranean. baqo-Tbilisi-jeihanisa (BTC) da samxreT kavkasiis milsadenebis (SCP) ruka kaspiidan xmelTaSuazRvispireTamde. CHAPTER 1 Tavi 1 From the Caspian to the Mediterranean kaspiidan xmelTaSuazRvispireTamde The Purpose of This Project Pproeqtis mizani T he Caucasus and Anatolia, including the present-day nations of Azerbajan, Georgia, and Turkey, are home to some of the world’s most ancient cultures. Throughout the region, prehistoric and historic cultures let a vast wealth of archaeological treasures that fascinate archaeologists and historians. In Azerbajan, the majestic rock faces of Gobustan that project high above the shore of the Caspian Sea form the “canvas” on which hundreds of generations of artists inscribed their ancient rock art, beginning perhaps 20,000 years ago. 22 Past and Future Heritage in the Pipelines Corridor s amxreTi kavkasia da anatolia moicavs dRevandel azerbaijans, saqarTvelosa da TurqeTs. regioni msoflios uZvelesi kulturebis erT-erTi samSobloa. aq aRmoCenilma preistoriulma da istoriulma kulturebma udidesi arqeologiuri saganZuri datova, rac arqeologebisa da istorikosebis did dainteresebas iwvevs. azerbaijanSi, gobusTanis kldeebze, romelic kaspiis zRvas gadahyurebs, daaxloebiT 20000 wlis winandeli navebis, cxovelebisa da adamianebis gamosaxulebebia. Images of boats, animals, and people from Azerbajan’s ancient past can be found among the rock art. The earliest traces of humankind’s prehistory in this ancient land were found at Dmanisi, Georgia, where the remains of humanity’s 1.8 million-year-old ancestors were discovered. In Turkey, an intriguing repository of potery at Ziyaretsuyu that can be traced to the 2nd century BC raises absorbing questions about travelers and setlers in the region. For thousands of years, silk, gold, ivory, spices, and perfumes were transported across trade routes through the region that connected East Asia, Africa, the Middle East, and Europe. The peoples of the region are justly proud that today its historic status as a crossroad of trade and culture is being revived. This revival is partly a result of national independence since the dissolution of the Soviet Union and partly due to the relatively recent discovery of new large Caspian Basin hydrocarbon reserves. The construction of the massive pipelines system that carries both crude oil and natural gas through Azerbajan, Georgia, and Turkey to world markets spurred an unparalleled period of archaeological research in the region, which led to extraordinary inds along the pipelines route from the Caspian to the Mediterranean, and generated knowledge about the history and cultures of the region. In this and in many less tangible ways, the pipelines are a new gateway to the region’s past, and open a promising window to its future. isini azerbaijanis warsuls warmogvidgens. adamianis preistoriuli warsulis uadresi nimuSia saqarTveloSi, dmanisSi, 1,8 milioni wlis hominidebis naSTebi. TurqeTSi, ziareTsuius Zv.w. II saukuniT daTariRebuli Tixis WurWlis sacavi am periodis mosaxleobisa da mogzaurebis Sesaxeb gviambobs. aTaswleulebis ganmavlobaSi am mxareze gadioda Sua aziis, axlo aRmosavleTis, afrikisa da evropis damakavSirebeli savaWro gzebi, romlebiTac abreSumi, oqro da nelsacxeblebi gadaqondaT. sabWoTa kavSiris daSlis, saqarTvelosa da azerbaijanis mier damoukideblobis mopovebisa da kaspiis zRvaSi navTobis didi maragis aRmoCenis Semdeg regionma savaWro gzajvaredinis funqcia xelaxla SeiZina. navTobisa da gazis milsadenebis mSeneblobasTan, romelic regionis qveynebs: azerbaijans, saqarTvelosa da TurqeTs msoflio bazarTan akavSirebs. milsadenebis mSeneblobasTanavea dakavSirebuli uprecendento masStabis arqeologiuri gaTxrebi, ramac uaRresad saintereso masala mogvca istoriuli da kulturuli suraTis Sesavsebad. amrigad, milsadenebis mSeneblobam warsuli ufro xelSesaxebi, momavali ki saimedo gaxada. The city of Baku, the capital of Azerbaijan, overlooks the Caspian Sea. Today, Baku is a thriving metropolis of over two million people. It is the inancial center of Azerbaijan, as well as the nucleus of the country’s artistic, musical, and theatrical activities. azerbaijanis dedaqalaqi baqo kaspiis zRvas gadahyurebs. es ormilioniani, ayvavebuli qalaqi qveynis ekonomikuri da kulturuli centricaa. warmodgenil wignSi Tavmoyrili masala kulturuli memkvidreobis ZeglebiPmilsadenebis derefanSi, warsuli da momavali 23 The Azerbaijan Government House is an imposing structure. After formally declaring independence from the Soviet Union in 1991, Azerbaijan’s irst elected Parliament oficially adopted a constitution in 1995. azerbaijanis mTavrobis sasaxle didi Senobaa. 1991 wels aq gamocxadda azerbaijanis damoukidebloba, pirvelma parlamentma ki qveynis konstitucia 1995 wels miiRo. 24 Past and Future Heritage in the Pipelines Corridor The Ateshgah “Fire Worshipers” Temple near Baku has its origins among Zoroastrians. A continuous lame on the site was once fed by natural gas deposits. cecxlTayvanismcemlebis taZari aTeSga, romelic baqos maxlobladaa, zoroastrizmis mimdevarTa salocavi iyo. “maradiuli cecxli”, romelic am salocavze iyo danTebuli, gazis sabadodan ikvebeboda. To highlight the rich cultural heritage of the region, this book presents indings of a collaborative research initiative among archaeologists in Azerbajan, Georgia, and Turkey and their colleagues from the Smithsonian Institution’s Asian Cultural History Program, Oice of Policy and Analysis, and Oice of the Chief Information Oicer. The recovery, collection management, and interpretation of the archaeological data presented here were inanced by BP and its coventurers in the Caspian projects as part of their eforts to protect the cultural resources uncovered during the construction of the Baku-Tbilisi-Ceyhan (BTC) crude oil and adjacent South Caucasus (SCP) natural gas pipelines. The archaeological surveys of the pipeline route began in 2000, before construction commenced. The construction, which began in 2003, was accompanied by teams of Azerbajani, Georgian, Turkish, British, and American archaeologists who traveled the entire length of the pipelines, a journey that contributed to the story of known archaeological sites in addition to discovering hundreds of previously unknown and unexcavated sites. warmodgenil wignSi Tavmoyrili masala warmoaCens regionis mdidar kulturul memkvidreobas, romelic qarTvelma, azerbaijanelma da Turqma arqeologebma aRmoCenes. aqve aseve SesaZlebelia gavecnoT am qveynebis warmomadgenlebis TanamSromloba smiTsonis institutis aziis kulturis istoriis ganyofilebasTan, politikisa da analizis ganyofilebasa da mTavar sainformacio samsaxurTan. restavracia, koleqciebis marTva da mopovebuliAarqeologiuri masalis interpretacia BP-isa da misi partniorebis mier dafinansda, raTa baqo-Tbilisijeihanis navTobsadenisa da samxreT kavkasiis gazsadenis mSeneblobisas aRmoCenili kulturuli memkvidreobis naSTebi kargad yofiliyo daculi. milsadenis marSrutis Seswavla 2000 wels daiwyo, samSeneblo samuSaoebi ki 2003 wels. am procesSi Tavidanve iyvnen Cabmulebi azerbaijaneli, qarTveli, Turqi, britaneli da amerikeli arqeologebi. isini mSeneblobis paralelurad muSaobdnen da maT milsadenebis gaswvriv gaTxares aramarto ukve cnobili Zeglebi, aramed aqamde ucnobi asobiT arqeologiuri Zegli aRmoaCines da Seiswavles. kulturuli memkvidreobis ZeglebiPmilsadenebis derefanSi, warsuli da momavali 25 The tomb sanctuary of King Antiochus I at Mount Nemrud was built on a mountaintop in what is now southeastern Turkey in 62 BC. Antiochus I forged an alliance with Rome during the war between Rome and the Parthians. samxreT-aRmosavleT TurqeTSi, mTa nemrudze, Zv.w. 62 wels aRmarTes komagenes mefe antioqos I-is samlocvelo. romaelebma igi aiZules maTi mokavSire gamxdariyo da parTielebis winaaRmdeg ebrZola. The salamuri, a Georgian reed instrument made of apricot wood, is often played at festivals by boys wearing traditional costumes. saqarTveloSi gamarTul saxalxo dResaswaulebze xSirad naxavT erovnul samosSi gamowyobil ymawvilebs, romlebic salamurze ukraven. 26 Past and Future Heritage in the Pipelines Corridor The Smithsonian team continues its international collaborative research eforts in this area. Partners in the region include Azerbajan’s Institute of Archaeology and Ethnography, Gobustan National Historical-Artistic Preserve and the Georgian National Museum. The Gobustan Preserve, located about 40 miles southwest of Azerbajan’s capital city of Baku, was declared a UNESCO World Heritage Site in 2007. This book and its associated website (www.agt. si.edu) are examples of the public education and museum capacity-building eforts associated with this project. BP’s support parallels its commitment to increasing awareness of biodiversity and protecting natural habitats, including initiatives that have mobilized tangible environmental changes throughout the region. smiTsonis institutis gundi, romelic moicavs aziis kulturis istoriis programas, politikisa da analizisa da mTavar sainformacio samsaxurebs, agrZelebs regionis kvlevas da TanamSromlobs gobusTanis arqeologiur nakrZalTan, azerbaijanis arqeologiisa da eTnografiis institutsa da saqarTvelos erovnul muzeumTan. gobusTanis nakrZali, romelic baqodan samociode kilometriTaa daSorebuli, 2007 wlidan iuneskos mier msoflio kulturuli memkvidreobis Zegladaa gamocxadebuli. A baker in Georgia uses a modern-day tandir-shaped oven to bake bread. The dough is pressed against the walls of the oven to bake. saqaTveloSi puris gamosacxobad dRevandeli xabazebi Tones iyeneben. comi Tones kedels ekvreba da ise cxveba. es wigni da masTan dakavSirebuli vebsaiti (www.agt.si.edu) samSeneblo proeqtis mimdinareobisas ganxorcielebuli sazogadoebrivi ganaTlebisa da samuzeumo SesaZleblobaTa ganviTarebis samuSaoebis kargi magaliTia. da misi partniorebi xels uwyoben biomravalferovnebisa da garemos dacvis TviTSegnebis amaRlebis mizniT nakisri valdebulebebis ganxorcielebas, maT Soris regionSi bunebriv garemoze mniSvnelovani zemoqmedebis Serbilebis iniciativebs. kulturuli memkvidreobis ZeglebiPmilsadenebis derefanSi, warsuli da momavali 27 Rock art panels at the Gobustan National Historical-Artistic Preserve date from as early as the Paleolithic period. gobusTanis erovnul istoriularqeologiur nakrZalSi daculiKkldis mxatvroba paleoliTis xaniT TariRdeba. Petroglyphs of a hunter and a possible shaman are a part of the legacy of the early past discovered at the Gobustan National Historical-Artistic Preserve. gobusTanis erovnul istoriularqeologiur nakrZalSi daculi petroglifebi, romlebzec monadire da Samania gamosaxuli, kulturuli memkvidreobis nawilia. 28 Past and Future Heritage in the Pipelines Corridor Rock art panels at the Gobustan National Historical-Artistic Preserve often contain a variety of elegant igures, sometimes superimposed over each other. gobusTanis erovnul istoriularqeologiur nakrZalSi daculKkldis mxatvrobaze araerTi figuraa gamosaxuli. zogierTi naxati sxvadasxva drosaa Seqmnili da erTmaneTzea dadebuli. kulturuli memkvidreobis ZeglebiPmilsadenebis derefanSi, warsuli da momavali 29 During Stages 1 and 2 of the project from 2000 to 2003, potentially important archaeological sites were identiied through ield walks and aerial photography. This view from the Tsalka district in central Georgia shows the type of surface clearing that preceded excavations. pirveli da meore etapis ganmavlobaSi, 2000-2003 wlebSi dazverviTi samuSaoebisa da aerofotografirebis saSualebiT gamovlinda potenciuri arqeologiuri Zeglebi. es foto walkis raionSi (samxreTi saqarTvelo) niadagis aRebis procesis Semdgom mdgomareobas asaxavs. 30 The Pipelines milsadenebi The pipeline route—which runs through widely divergent climatic, geological, and geographic regions that have long been populated by numerous peoples—was not selected for its potential to facilitate archaeological excavations or spur the discovery of new cultural heritage in previously unexplored regions. Rather, it resulted from the practical considerations of bringing a vast new supply of crude oil and natural gas from the Caspian Sea to world markets in a way that both avoids the ecological risks posed by huge tankers passing through the Bosporus Strait and provides the newly independent post-Soviet states of the Caucasus control over the export of Azerbajan’s most valuable commodity. The pipelines construction has, nonetheless, given the region and the world a rare opportunity to increase our understanding of the past. milsadenebis marSruti sxvadasxva xalxiT dasaxlebulsa da erTmaneTisagan mkveTrad gansxvavebul klimatur, geografiulsa da geologiur da regionebze gadis. es marSruti adre Seuswavlel regionebSi arqeologiuri gaTxrebis an kulturuli memkvidreobis axali Zeglebis aRmoCenis xelSewyobis mizniT ar SerCeula. misi mizani iyo kaspiis zRvis sabadoebis nedli navTobisa da bunebrivi airis msoflio bazrebze gatana, rac maqsimalurad Seamcirebda rogorc bosforis sruteSi uzarmazari tankerebis moZraobis Sedegad gamowveul ekologiur safrTxeebs, aseve gazrdida kavkasiis postsabWoTa sivrceSi axladSeqmnili damoukidebeli saxelmwifoebis kontrols Azerbaijanis am uZvirfasesi nedleulis eqsportze. amave dros, milsadenebis mSeneblobam regionsa da msoflios warsulis ukeTesad Seswavlis iSviaTi SesaZlebloba misca. Past and Future Heritage in the Pipelines Corridor The BTC pipeline starts at the Sangachal Terminal on the Caspian Sea in Azerbajan, passes through the territory of Georgia, and ends at the Ceyhan Terminal on the Turkish coast of the Mediterranean, from which “Azeri light” crude oil of the Azeri-Chirag-Deep Water Guneshli ield is delivered to international markets. The length of the BTC pipeline is 1,768 kilometers (1,099 miles): 443 kilometers (275 miles) in Azerbajan, 249 kilometers (155 miles) in Georgia, and 1,076 kilometers (669 miles) in Turkey. Its diameter varies from 1.07 to 1.17 meters (42 to 46 inches), and it is currently transporting close to one million barrels of oil per day, with plans to increase capacity to handle additional volume. baqo-Tbilisi-jeihanis milsadeni (BTC), azerbaijanSi kaspiis zRvis terminal sangaCalSi iwyeba, gaivlis saqarTvelos teritorias da TurqeTis xmelTaSua zRvis sanapiroze, jeihanis terminalTan mTavrdeba, saidanac nedli navTobi saerTaSoriso bazrebs miewodeba. Mmilsadenis sigrZe 1,768 kilometria; aqedan 443 kmAazerbaijanis teritoriaze gadis, 249 km saqarTvelos teritoriaze da 1,076km ki_TurqeTisaze. milis diametri 1,07 metridan 1,17 metramde meryeobs da yoveldRe masSi TiTqmis 1 milioni bareli navTobi gaedisneba samomavlod ufro didi odenobiT navTobis gatanac igegmeba. The SCP transports natural gas from the Shah Deniz ield on the Caspian Sea to Turkey. It follows the route of the BTC pipeline through Azerbajan and Georgia into Turkey, where it connects with the Turkish gas distribution system. The total length of this pipeline is 691 kilometers (429 miles), divided between Azerbajan and Georgia in the same proportions as the BTC pipeline, and measures 1.07 meters (42 inches) in diameter. samxreTkavkasiuri milsadenis (SCP) saSualebiT kaspiis zRvis Sahdenizis sabadodan bunebrivi airi TurqeTSi gaaqvT. saqarTvelosa da azerbaijanis teritoriaze igi BTC–is paralelurad miuyveba, xolo TurqeTSi - Turqul gazgamanawilebel sistemas uerTdeba. am milsadenis sigrZe 691 kilometria da BTC milsadenis analogiuri proporciiTaa gayofili azerbaijansa da saqarTvelos Soris. misi diametric 1,07 metria. In addition to initial archaeological surveys, the impacts that the pipeline project would have on local communities such as this village located on the Kodiana Pass in Georgia, were examined. Preventive measures were taken so as not to permanently disrupt the lives of villagers. winaswaruli arqeologiuri dazvervebis garda, Seswavlil iqna is SesaZlo zemoqmedebebi, rac milsadenis proeqts adgilobriv mosaxleobaze, mag., saqarTveloSi, kodianis uReltexilze mdebare am sofelze SeeZlo moexdina. amis aRsakveTad miiRes prevenciuli zomebi. kulturuli memkvidreobis ZeglebiPmilsadenebis derefanSi, warsuli da momavali 31 Excavation leader Dr. Goderdzi Narimanishvili and Cultural Heritage Monitor Nino Erkomaishvili discuss their strategy at the Saphar Kharaba site in Georgia. The AGT Pipelines Archaeology Program milsadenebis arqeologiuri programa The AGT (Azerbajan, Georgia and Turkey) Pipelines Archaeology Program represents one of the most signiicant commitments to cultural heritage ever made by an international pipeline project. It was initiated as a result of the requirements of the international inancial community that inanced the pipelines, guidelines of the host countries, and BP’s internal standards for environmental and cultural protection. The project will continue over the next several years through the implementation of archaeological and ecological projects in the three host countries. saerTaSoriso navTobkorporaciebma AGTisMmilsadenis arqeologiuri programis farglebSi kulturuli memkvidreobis dacvis TvalsazrisiT umniSvnelovanesi valdebulebebi aiRes. am ideis iniciatorebi is saerTaSoriso finansuri jgufebi iyo, romlebic mSeneblobas afinansebdnen da maspinZeli qveynebisa da BP-isaTvis qmnidnen garemosdacviT da kulturuli memkvidreobis standartebs. proeqti samive qveyanaSi kidev ramdenime wels gastans da mis farglebSi muSaoba ekologiuri da arqeologiuri mimarTulebiTac gagrZeldeba. eqspediciis xelmZRvaneli goderZi narimaniSvili da kulturuli memkvidreobis monitori nino erqomaiSvili ganixilaven safar xarabas samarovanze Casatarebeli samuSaos. 32 Past and Future Heritage in the Pipelines Corridor In western Azerbaijan, a group of side booms travel along the pipeline corridor. dasavleTi zerbaijani. mZime teqnika milsadenebis dedefanSi. An archaeologist from Azerbaijan’s Institute of Archaeology and Ethnography records one of the earliest kurgans (burial sites) in the region at an excavation site near the village of Soyuqbulaq. azerbaijanis Aarqeologiisa da eTnografiis institutis arqeologi afiqsirebs uZveles yorRans sof. soiuqbulaqTan. kulturuli memkvidreobis ZeglebiPmilsadenebis derefanSi, warsuli da momavali 33 Site Locations, Excavation, and Analysis Zeglebis mdebareoba, gaTxrebi da analiziP In coordination with national cultural heritage authorities, a staged program of archaeological research and excavation was developed in each of the host countries along the pipelines. The four initial stages occurred before and during the pipeline construction. Over the course of the irst four stages, dozens of archaeological sites were found and sampled. maspinZeli qveynebis kulturuli memkvidreobis samsaxurebTan erTad BP-m da misma partniorebma etapobrivi programa SeimuSaves. is moicavda, rogorc mSeneblobis wina, ise misi mimdinareobisas milsadenebis arealSi aRmoCenili arqeologiuri Zeglebis kvlevisa da gaTxrebis gegmas. igi oTx samuSao etapad iyo dayofili. misi ganxorcielebisas mravali aTeuli arqeologiuri Zegli gamovlinda. • Baseline surveys, stafed in part with local experts, comprised Stage 1. The results of these surveys led to alteration of the proposed pipeline route, as part of an overall strategy to work around areas of environmental and cultural sensitivity. • Stage 2 began once the route was determined and the inancial lenders approved it. This stage involved testing selected sites through limited excavations to identify cultural heritage resources of suicient signiicance to warrant avoidance or mitigation initiatives, such as restricting construction areas or using protective measures such as fencing. • Stage 3, which also began before the AGT pipeline construction began, involved a irst round of excavations. They were planned well in advance with BP’s national partner organizations so as to have clear research designs and protocols in place to maximize the data collected. Several methods of record keeping were employed during this stage, including drawings, photographs, and writen documentation. 34 Past and Future Heritage in the Pipelines Corridor • sabazo kvlevebma, romlebic adgilobrivma eqspertebma Caatares, gamokveTa pirveli etapis amocanebi. Sedegebma cxadyo, rom dagegmil marSrutSi garkveuli cvlilebebis Setana iyo aucilebeli, raTa garemosa da kulturis Zeglebs safrTxe ar Seqmnoda. • me-2 etapi marSrutis sabolood dadgenisa da damfinanseblebis mier misi damtkicebis Semdeg daiwyo. igi moicavda SerCeul ubnebze mcire masStabis dazverviTi gaTxrebis Catarebas, raTa dadasturebuliyo mniSvnelovani kulturuli memkvidreobis Zeglebis arseboba da, amavdroulad, gansazRvruliyo samSeneblo teritoriebis SezRudvisa da dacvis zomebi. • me-3 etapi, romelic aseve samSeneblo samuSaoebis dawyebamde Catarda, moicavda pirvelad gaTxrebs. es gaTxrebi kompaniam adgilobriv partnior organizaciebTan erTad dagegma, raTa miRebul monacemebze dayrdnobiT SemuSavebuliyo momavali gaTxrebis realuri gegma. am etapze gamoyenebul iqna dafiqsirebis sxvadasxva meTodi, kerZod; Canaxatebi, fotosuraTebi da werilobiTi wyaroebi. This frieze in the Old City in Baku captures images from the rock art in the Gobustan National Historical-Artistic Preserve. Zvel baqoSi daculi es frizi gobusTanis erovnuli nakrZalidanaa. kulturuli memkvidreobis ZeglebiPmilsadenebis derefanSi, warsuli da momavali 35 36 Past and Future Heritage in the Pipelines Corridor The pipeline construction activities. milsadenis mSenebloba. kulturuli memkvidreobis ZeglebiPmilsadenebis derefanSi, warsuli da momavali 37 • Stage 4 involved excavations of new sites found during the actual construction process. A vital task was the development of policy and procedures for dealing with previously unknown archaeological sites found ater construction commenced. These “late inds,” generally consisting of scaterings of artifacts, also yielded unique and important discoveries. In many cases, BP, in consultation with national regulatory bodies, developed measures to avoid or abate damage to these late inds. Mitigation usually involved restricting impacts through the use of narrower construction zones combined with archaeological excavation. A Muslim tombstone in Azerbaijan has been standing since the middle ages. es muslimuri saflavis qva azerbaijanSi Sua saukuneebisaa. 38 Past and Future Heritage in the Pipelines Corridor • me-4 etapi iTvaliswinebda TviT samSeneblo procesis dros aRmoCenili arqeologiuri Zeglebis gaTxras. umniSvnelovanesi amocana iyo am ucnobi Zeglebis mimarT swori strategiisa da meTodikis SemuSaveba. es “gviani aRmoCenebi” mniSvnelovan monapovrad SeiZleba CaiTvalos. umetes SemTxvevebSi, kompaniis kulturuli memkvidreobis samsaxuri iseT RonisZiebebs mimarTavda, romlis Sedegad Zeglis dazianeba minimumamde iqneboda dayvanili. amisTvis ki samSeneblo zonis areali mcireboda da mSeneblobis paralelurad, arqeologiuri gaTxrebi tardeboda. Mud lows from volcanoes in Azerbaijan dating back to ancient times indicate geothermal activity in the Caspian region. vulkanuriLlavis gaqvavebuli nakadi Soreul warsulSiAazerbaijanis teritoriasa da kaspiis zRvis sanapiroze geoTermul aqtivobaze miuTiTebs. kulturuli memkvidreobis ZeglebiPmilsadenebis derefanSi, warsuli da momavali 39 The Davit Gareji Monastery in East Georgia was founded in the 6th century by Saint Davit (David), who once lived in a cave at this location. The complex grew over the centuries following his death and remains in use today. daviT garejis samonastro kompleqsi wm. daviT garejelma aRmosavleT saqarTveloSi VI saukuneSi daarsa. igi am adgilas erT-erT gamoqvabulSi cxovrobda. es kompleqsi misi gardacvalebis Semdegac farTovdeboda da dResac moqmedi monasteria. 40 Upon completion of the excavation eforts, archaeological teams in the three countries turned their atention to Stage 5, which entailed the preparation of technical reports and monographs pertaining to the excavations. “Capacity-building” studies (described in more detail in Chapter 4) focused on the treatment and preservation of artifacts recovered during the project. This work was followed by the preparation of general public outreach materials, including this book, museum exhibits and a website that chronicles aspects of the archaeological project itself, as well as the lives and cultures of the ancient inhabitants of the region who created the artifacts. This stage will continue on, expanding what is known of the region’s history: The pipeline project’s exploration, interpretation, and stewardship is not yet inished, just as the region’s human story continues to unfold. Past and Future Heritage in the Pipelines Corridor gaTxriTi samuSaoebis damTavrebis Semdeg samive qveynis arqeologiurma jgufebma mTeli yuradReba me-5 etapze gaamaxviles, momzadebuliyo teqnikuri angariSebi da monografiebi da dadgeniliyo artefaqtebis Senaxvis pirobebi. am samuSaos mohyveboda mopovebuli masalis sazogadoebis samsjavroze gamotana. amisaTvis ki unda Seqmniliyo specialuri vebgverdi da mowyobiliyo rogorc samuzeumo, aseve moZravi gamofenebi, sadac aisaxeboda arqeologiuri proeqtis sxvadasxva aspeqti da aseve am artefaqtebis Semqmneli uZvelesi mosaxleobis sulieri da materialuri kultura. es etapi amJamadac grZeldeba da emsaxureba regionis istoriis Seswavlas. The Turkish site Ziyaretsuyu, as seen from atop a nearby hill. When archaeologically signiicant sites such as this one were discovered, the pipeline route was diverted to minimize impacts on the sites. Turquli arqeologiuri Zeglis, ziareTsuis xedi axlomdebare mTidan. aseTi mniSvnelovani arqeologiuri Zeglis aRmoCenisas kompania cdilobda milsadenis marSruti Seecvala, raTa Zegls safrTxe ar damuqreboda. This statue in the heart of Baku commemorates Nizami Gyanjavi the great epic poet. baqos centrSi mdebare es Zegli didi poetis, nizami ganjelis sapativcemodaa aRmarTuli. kulturuli memkvidreobis ZeglebiPmilsadenebis derefanSi, warsuli da momavali 41 A portion of the 12th century AD citadel wall surrounding the storied Ichari Shahar, or “Inner City,” is preserved within Baku, Azerbaijan’s capital. UNESCO listed the Ichari Shahar as a World Heritage site in 2000. azerbaijanis Tanamedrove dedaqalaqSi, baqoSi dRemde SemorCenilia XII saukunis galavani, romelic gars ertymis Zvel qalaqs (`iCari Sahars”). iuneskom igi 2000 wels msoflio kulturuli memkvidreobis Zeglad aRiara. The inspiring Jvari Church sits atop a ridge overlooking Mtskheta, the ancient capital of Georgia; the remains of the timeworn town are dated earlier than 1000 BC. jvris monasteri, romelic maRal goraze dgas, saqarTvelos Zvel dedaqalaqs, mcxeTas gadahyurebs. The lavish Topkapi Palace complex in Istanbul, Turkey, was the primary residence of Ottoman sultans from 1465 until the mid-19th century. 1465 wlidan XIX saukunis Suaxanebamde Tofqafis mdidruli sasaxle stambulSi otomani sulTnebis rezidencia iyo. CHAPTeR 2 Tavi 2 Cultural History at the Crossroads kulturis istoria gzajvaredinze T aqo-Tbilisi-jeihanisa da baqo-Tbilisi-erzerumis milsadenebis mSeneblobam regions misi uZvelesi, savaWro gzajvaredinis funqcia daubruna. arqeologiurma samuSaoebma, romlebic azerbaijanisaqarTvelo-TurqeTis milsadenebis arqeologiuri programis farglebSi ganxorcielda, maspinZeli qveynebis kulturisa da istoriis Seswavlis saqmeSi mniSvnelovani wvlili Seitana, amasTan kidev erTxel daadastura, rom es regioni bolo oTxi aTaswleulis ganmavlobaSi dasavleTisa da aRmosavleTis urTierTgadakveTisa da Serwymis adgili iyo. regionSi socialuri da kulturuli kavSirebis bolodroindeli gamococxleba kidev erTxel miuTiTebs am istoriul kavSirebze. he construction of the BTC and SCP pipelines reinvigorated the region’s historic role as a crossroads of world trade. Archaeological work undertaken as a part of the AGT Pipelines Archaeology Program has contributed greatly to understanding the individual cultures and histories of the host nations, and has documented their long record of interconnectedness over the past four millennia. The recent rebuilding of social and economic relationships in the region is one reoccurrence in this long history of connections. 1 48 Past and Future Heritage in the Pipelines Corridor b This chapter presents a brief narrative of each country’s cultural history, with selected examples of how the indings from along the pipelines’ route have increased knowledge of them. The pipelines corridor covers only a small percentage of the total land area of the three nations, and the indings from the excavations are only a part of the data from which understanding of the past derives. Nonetheless the results of the AGT Pipelines Archaeological Program have expanded what is known about almost every time period in the history of the countries. The following chapter discusses the archaeological sites within each of the countries. am TavSi mokled aris gadmocemuli TiToeuli qveynis kulturis istoria da SerCeul magaliTebze dayrdnobiT naCvenebi, Tu rogor Seuwyo xeli mSeneblobisas aRmoCenilma arqeologiurma masalam arsebuli codnis gaRrmavebas. milsadenebis derefani sami qveynis teritoriis mxolod mcire nawilze gadis da gaTxrebis Sedegad mopovebuli masalac, ra Tqma unda, mxolod mciredi nawilia im didi masalisa, romlebic Cven warsulis kvlevaSi gvexmareba. miuxedavad amisa, azerbaijani-saqarTvelo-TurqeTis milsadenebis arqeologiurma programam xeli Seuwyo am qveynebis istoriuli warsulis TiTqmis yvela periodis Sesaxeb dagrovili codnis gaRrmavebas. Semdeg TavSi aRwerilia am programis dros Seswavlili arqeologiuri Zeglebi. 1 This mosaic, created by the Azerbaijani artist Huseyn Hagverdi, depicts the unifying nature of the pipeline that links Azerbaijan, Georgia and Turkey, including the resultant economic and cultural beneits. Each country is represented by images of historical monuments located in their respective capitals. The mosaic is located at the Caspian Enegry Centre at the Sangachal oil and gas terminal, 55km from Baku. azerbaijaneli mxatvris, husein hagverdis mier Seqmnili es mozaika azerbaijanis, saqarTvelosa da TurqeTis kulturisa da ekonomikis damakavSirebeli milsadenis mniSvnelobas asaxavs. TiToeuli qveyana warmodgenilia maT dedaqalaqebSi daculi istoriuli ZeglebiT. mozaika baqodan 55 km-Si, sangaCalis terminalis teritoriazea ganTavsebuli. kulturuli memkvidreobis ZeglebiPmilsadenebis derefanSi, warsuli da momavali 49 Azerbajan azerbaijani by Najaf Museyibli 2 (avtori najaf museibli 2) Paleolithic/Epipaleolithic Period (2 million years BC – circa 8000 years BC) paleoliTi da epi paleoliTi (2 milioni – Zv.w. 8000) Archaeological excavations at Azikh cave in the Garabagh region of Azerbajan demonstrate that ancient people populated this territory circa 2 million years ago. Discovered within the cave was a mandible fragment belonging to an Azikhantrop human that dates to 350,000-400,000 years ago in addition to one of the world’s oldest discoveries: the remains of a ireplace dating to 700,000 years ago. The Middle Paleolithic Period, dating to approximately 150,000 years ago to 35,000-40,000 years ago, was the era of the Neanderthals. Rich artifact inds that were discovered in Azikh cave and neighboring Taghlar cave relect the daily lifestyles and technological progresses (such as stone tool development) fostered by Middle Paleolithic people. Modern humans continually developed new technologies as they expanded geographically. Presently, modern human origin scholarship focuses on cave and shelter sites. azerbaijanSi,Aazixis gamoqvabulSi Catarebulma arqeologiurma gaTxrebma gamoavlina, rom es mxare 2 milioni wlis winaT iyo dasaxlebuli. gamoqvabulSi aRmoCenili qveda ybis Zvali azixanTrops miekuTvneba, romelic 350,000-400,000 wlis winandeli droiT TariRdeba. aqvea 700 000 wliT daTariRebuli, msoflioSi erT erTi uadresi kera. Sua paleoliTi (150,000-40,000/35,000 ww) neandertaleli adamianis arsebobis periodia. azixisa da mis mezoblad mdebare TaRlaris gamoqvabulebSi Catarebulma arqeologiurma gaTxrebma informacia mogvawoda imdroindeli adamianis cxovrebis wesisa da qvis iaraRis teqnologiuri ganviTarebis Sesaxeb. amJamad, Tanamedrove mecniereba adamianis warmoSobis Sesaxeb mimarTulia mRvimeebisa da Ria sadgomebis Seswavlisaken. The Upper (Late) Paleolithic Period in the Caucasian and Anatolia regions commenced circa 35,000-40,000 years ago and progressed until the 14th millennium BC. This was followed by the Mesolithic-epipaleolithic Period, which spanned from the 13th through the 8th millenniums BC. Technology continued to improve in the form of more complicated stone tools and the creation of some of the irst examples of ine art. The germs of later forms of production developed during the Mesolithic Period. 3 50 Past and Future Heritage in the Pipelines Corridor zeda paleoliTi kavkasiasa da anatoliaSi 35,000-40,000 wlis winaT daiwyo da Zv.w. XIV aTaswleulamde gagrZelda. mas mosdevs mezoliTi (XIII-VIII aTaswleulebi). daixvewa qvis iaraRi da ganviTarda xelovnebac. 3 Upper Paleolithic and Mesolithic period-related sites have been discovered in the Caucasus, such as that located on the Gobustan Reserve in Azerbajan. Most notably, Gobustan features rock art inscriptions that relect the lifestyle of Upper Paleolithic and Mesolithic people in addition to buried archaeological material. Gobustan became especially important to Azerbajan’s own history when archaeologists discovered Mesolithic burials. Anthropological analysis has shown that the skull traits of humans found in these burials are linked to today’s Azerbajani population. 4 Neolithic Period (ca. 7000 – 4500 BC), Eneolithic/Chalcolithic Period (ca. 4500 – 3500 BC), and Early Bronze Age (ca. 3500 – 2200 BC) The transition from the hunting-and-gathering societies of the Paleolithic era to farming-based communities—a shit commonly known as the Neolithic Revolution—culminated in the Neolithic Age. One hallmark of the Neolithic Revolution was the development of farming and catlebreeding strategies based on sedentary societies. A new cultural patern developed in the Kura basin of western Azerbajan and southeastern Georgia known as the Shumatapa culture. examples of this culture were found during excavations in the AGT pipelines corridor. The emergence of early copper metallurgy alongside traditional stone tools marked the subsequent period, known as the eneolithic or Chalcolithic Age. During this age, much of western Asia saw the expansion of isolated villages into regional trade systems, a hallmark of incipient civilizations. zeda paleoliTisa da mezoliTuri xanis Zeglebi kavkasiaSicaa aRmoCenili: magaliTad, azerbaijanSi, gobusTaniSi. aRsaniSnavia gobusTanis gamosaxulebebi, romlebic arqeologiur masalasTan erTad imdroindeli adamianebis yofaze mogviTxrobs. gobusTanSi arqeologebma mezoliTur samarxebs miakvlies. anTropologiurma kvlevebma aCvena, rom micvalebulebis Tavis qalebiAazerbaijanis dRevandel mosaxleobas ukavSirdeba. 4 neoliTi (Zv.w. 7000 – 4500ww.), eneoliTi (Zv.w. 4500 – 3500ww) da adre brinjaos xana (Zv.w. 3500 – 2200ww) paleoliTuri samonadireo-Semgrovebluri meurneoba TandaTanobiT samiwaTmoqmedomesaqonle, mwarmoeblurma meurneobam Secvala, rac neoliTuri revoluciis saxeliTaa cnobili. dasavleT azerbaijansa da aRmosavleT saqarTveloSi am droisaTvis SulaverSomuTefes adresamiwaTmoqmedo kultura Camoyalibda. milsadenebis arealis arqeologiuri Seswavlisas ramdenime Zegli aRmoCnda, romlebic am kulturas miekuTvneba. qvis iaraRis warmoebasTan erTad eneoliTur xanaSi adamianma spilenZis damuSaveba daiwyo. am droisaTvis dasavleT aziaSi daiwyo mcire, izolirebuli dasaxlebebis gafarToeba da maTi regionalur savaWro sistemaSi CarTva, rac civilizaciis warmoSobas moaswavebda. am istoriul periods eneoliTs an qalkoliTis periods uwodeben. XX saukunis 80-ian wlebSi, azerbaijanSi, leilaTefeze Catarebulma arqeologiurma gaTxrebma eneoliTuri xanis axali monacemebi gamoamzeura. kulturuli memkvidreobis ZeglebiPmilsadenebis derefanSi, warsuli da momavali 51 This petroglyth from the Gobustan National Historical-Artistic Preserve depicts several human igures, and possibly a representation of a boat. es petroglifi gobusTanis xelovnebisa da istoriis erovnuli nakrZalidan warmogvidgens ramdenime adamianisa da navis gamosaxulebas. 52 Past and Future Heritage in the Pipelines Corridor Archaeological excavations in the early 1980s at the old Leylatapa residential area in the Garadagh region of Azerbajan revealed novel traces of the eneolithic Period. It was later discovered that the architectural indings (ironware, infant graves in clay pots, earthenware prepared using poter’s wheel and other features) signiicantly difer from the archaeological complexes of the same period in the South Caucasus. From these indings, a new archaeological culture (the Leylatapa) was discovered. Research indicates that this culture was genetically connected with the Ubeid and Uruk cultures, which were archaeological complexes in Northern Mesopotamia that date to the irst half of the 4th millennium BC. It has been determined that the Leylatapa residential area was built by ancient tribes migrating from the Northern Mesopotamia to the South Caucasus during the eneolithic Period. In western Azerbajan, a number of Leylataparelated archaeological sites were uncovered within the BTC and SCP pipelines corridor, which created tremendous opportunities for critical scientiic research concerned with archaeology in the Caucasus. Relevant sites include the Boyuk Kasik (438km), Poylu II (408.8km), Agılıdara (358km) setlement sites and the Soyuqbulaq burial mounds (432km). These monuments are critical for the investigation of ethnic, economic and cultural relationships within the Caucasus and Middle east, which has resulted in scientists from europe, Russia and Georgia all showing immense interest in these sites. For example, a relationship between the North Caucasian Maykop sites and those of Mesopotamia was suspected by the scientiic community for many years, however it wasn’t until archaeological excavations were conducted at the above-mentioned sites that a link was conirmed. aRmoCnda, rom arqiteqturuli detalebi, liTonis warmoeba, bavSvTa samarxebi da keramikuli morgvis gamoyeneba am Zegls mniSvnelovnad ganasxvavebda samxreT kavkasiis Tanadrouli Zeglebisagan. am aRmoCenam safuZveli daudo leilaTefes kulturis Seswavlas. leilaTefes kultura ukavSirdeba Crdilo mesopotamiur ubeidisa da uruqis kulturebs, romlebic Zv.w. IV aTaswleulis pirveli naxevriT TariRdeba. irkveva, rom eneoliTis xanaSi, leilaTefeze mesopotamiidan samxreT kavkasiaSi wamosuli tomebi dasaxlebulan. dasavleT azerbaijanSi energoderefnis mSeneblobisas leilaTefes kulturis araerTi saintereso Zegli gamoavlina, ramac kavkasiis arqeologiis sakiTxebis kritikulad gaazrebas Seuwyo xeli (buiuq qaSiqis, foilo II-sa da agilidaras namosaxlarebi, soiuqbulaqis samarxebi). maTi monacemebi axal masalas gvawvdis kavkasiisa da axlo aRmosavleTis eTnikuri, ekonomikuri da kulturuli urTierTobebis Sesaxeb da evropeli, rusi da qarTveli specialistebis dainteresebas iwvevs. maikopis kulturisa da mesopotamiuri Zeglebis savaraudo urTierTdamokidebulebis Sesaxeb azrebi adrec gamoTqmula, magram aRniSnuli Zeglebis Seswavlam es mosazrebebi daadastura. kulturuli memkvidreobis ZeglebiPmilsadenebis derefanSi, warsuli da momavali 53 The Kura-Araxes civilization of the Early Bronze Age replaced the eneolithic Period in the middle of the 4th millennium BC in the southern Caucasus. The main features of this society were the production of bronze, black, and dark gray glazed pots with hemispherical handles, the rapid development of a catle-breeding economy, and the spread of mound-type graves. The Kura-Araxes culture extended from the South Caucasus to what is now the Republic of Dagestan to the eastern coast of the Mediterranean Sea. It came to an end in the third quarter of the 3rd millennium BC. Three kurgan (burial mound) monuments referring to the Kura-Araxes culture have been discovered and excavated in the western side of Shamkirchai river along the pipeline route on 332333 km in Azerbajan. Excavation of these kurgans has provided valuable information about the burial traditions, economic and cultural relations of the early Bronze Age population of the region. 54 Past and Future Heritage in the Pipelines Corridor Zv.w. IV aTaswleulis Sua xanebSi samxreT kavkasiis eneoliTuri kulturaAadrebrinjaos mtkvar-araqsulma kulturam Secvala, romlisaTvis damaxasiaTebelia brinjaos warmoeba, Tixis Savi da ruxi feris naprialebi keramika, mesaqonleobis ganviTareba da gorasamarxebis gavrceleba. igi vrceldeboda daRestnidan da samxreT kavkasiis aRmosavleTi nawilidan xmelTaSua zRvis aRmosavleT sanapiromde. misi dasasruli Zv.w. III aTaswleulis mesame meoTxedSi ivaraudeba. azerbaijanSi, md. SamqirCais dasavleT napirze, milsadenis gaswvriv sami mtkvararaqsuli yorRani gaiTxara. maTma Seswavlam mniSvnelovani informacia mogvawoda regionis adrebrinjaos xanis mosaxleobaze. Smaller inds from Boyuk Kasik in Azerbaijan include the clay human and animal igurines shown above. buiuq qaSiqis arqeologiuri monapovarSi gvxvdeba Tixis anTropomorfuli da zoomorfuli figurebi. kulturuli memkvidreobis ZeglebiPmilsadenebis derefanSi, warsuli da momavali 55 56 Middle Bronze Age (ca. 2200 – 1500 BC), Late Bronze Age and Early Iron Age. (ca. 1500 – 500 BC) Suabrinjaos xana (Zv.w. 2200 – 1500ww.), gvianbrinjaos xana (Zv.w. 1500 – 1200ww.), rkinis xana (Zv.w. 1200 – 500ww.) During the Middle Bronze Age, an early urban culture appeared in Azerbaijan marked by glazed pottery. Similar urban residential areas were discovered and excavated in the Nakhchivan and Garabagh regions. Also during this period the Uzarliktapa and Tazakand archaeological cultures were wide spread throughout Azerbaijan. It was also a time when local populations strengthened their economic and cultural ties with Middle eastern civilizations. Several graves were found in Ganja-Gazakh region before the construction of the pipelines, specifically graves were discovered at the Babadervish site in the Gazakh region and near the Garajamirli village in the Shamkir region. The most extensive archaeological excavations conducted along the pipelines route were those settlements that date to the Late Bronze and early Iron Ages. A sample of sites that are located in the Ganja-Gazakh region, Garabagh region, southeastern Georgia and area northeast of present-day Armenia are associated with the Khojali-Gadabay culture dating to the second half of the 2nd millennium and beginning of the 1st millennium BC. The Borsunlu burial mound (272km) in the Goranboy region, the Zayamchai necropolis (365km) in the Shamkir region, the Tovuzchai necropolis (378km) in the Tovuz region, and the Hasansu necropolis (398.8km) in the Agstafa region excavated within the pipeline corridor all reflect this culture. Sua brinjaos xanaSiAazerbaijanis teritoriaze adreurbanuli kultura yalibdeba. urbanuli dasaxlebebi yarabaxisa da naxWevanis teritoriazea Seswavlili. am dros azerbaijanSi uzalrikTefesa da tazakentis kulturebi iyo gavrcelebuli. adgilobriv mosaxleobas am droisaTvis gacxovelebuli kulturul-ekonomikuri urTierTobebi qonda axlo aRmosavleTis civilizaciebTan. am periodis ramdenime samarxi milsadenis mSeneblobamdec iyo Seswavlili yarajamirlisa (yazaxis raioni)da babaderviSis samarovnebze (Samqoris raioni). milsadenebis teritoriaze yvelaze meti gvianbrinjaosa da adrerkinis xanis Zegli aRmoCnda. Zv.w. II aTaswelulis dasasrulsa da Zv.w I aTaswleulis dasawyisSi azerbaijanis ganja-yazaxisa da yarabaxis raionebSi, agreTve mis mosazRvre teritoriebze saqarTvelosa da somxeTSi gavrcelebuli iyo xojali-gebadeis kultura. borsunlus yorRani goranbois raionSi, ziamCais (Samqoris raioni), TovuzCais (Tovuzis raioni) da hasansus (aRstafis raioni) samarovnebi swored am kulturas miekuTvneba. Past and Future Heritage in the Pipelines Corridor Rectangular Muslim gravestones with ornaments ascribed to the early medieval times discovered during the construction and archaeological excavations on the south-western part of Icheri Sheher (Old city) in Baku. adre Suasaukuneebis, marTkuTxa, ornamentirebuli muslimuri saflavis qvebi aRmoCnda samSeneblo samuSaoebisas da arqeologiuri gaTxrebisas Zveli baqos samxreTdasavleT nawilSi. kulturuli memkvidreobis ZeglebiPmilsadenebis derefanSi, warsuli da momavali 57 Overall, more than 200 grave monuments related to the Upper Bronze-early Iron Age have been excavated in the pipeline corridor. The deceased were positioned on their right or left sides with their arms and legs folded. They typically adorn trinkets, weapons, earthenware among other items displayed around the deceased’s body. The excavation of these rich monuments has provided ample material for investigating the ancient funeral traditions of the region. Also of note during this time are the ancient kingdoms of Manna (Azerbaijan) and Urartu (eastern Anatolia), which were contemporaries of the KhojaliGadabay culture during the early Iron Age. 58 Past and Future Heritage in the Pipelines Corridor milsadenebis arqeologiuri programisas, sxvadasxva Zeglze gvianbrinjaosa da adrerkinis xanis orasze meti samarxi gaiTxara. samarxTa umravlesobaSi, gverdze, kidurebmokecilad dakrZaluli micvalebulebis garSemo aRmoCnda keramikuli nawarmi, iaraRi da samkauli. aq mopovebuli nivTebi dakrZalvis ritualis kvlevisaTvis mniSvnelovan masalas gvawvdis. aRsaniSnavia, rom adrerkinis xanaSi, xojali-gadabais kulturis paralelurad manasa (azerbaijanSi) da urartus (aRmosavleT anatoliaSi) samefoebi arsebobda. Pots from the Hasansu site in Azerbaijan were coated with black polish, or burnished (polished to a shiny surface) during production. The white paint on this 17th-16th century BC pot, which is 26 centimeters wide and 24 centimeters tall, forms a striking pattern that, according to Najaf Müseyibli, symbolizes the sun. Ancient peoples often considered the sun as a source of fertility and used its image to decorate house wares and jewelry. The pot’s rich color and decoration, and the absence of traces of ire on its bottom, indicate that it was used to serve guests on special occasions. hasansus yorRanis keramika Savad gamomwvari da naprialebia. XVII – XVI saukunis WurWelze (sigane 26 sm., simaRle 24 sm.) TeTri saRebaviT datanili ornamenti mzis simbolos warmoadgens. uZveles xalxebs miaCndaT, rom mze nayofierebis wyaroa da sxvadasxva nivTebs xSirad amkobdnen misi gamosaxulebebiT. WurWlis mdidari ferebi da dekori, agreTve cecxlis kvalis ararseboba imaze migvaniSnebs, rom am nivTs gansakuTrebuli SemTxvevebisaTvis iyenebdnen. kulturuli memkvidreobis ZeglebiPmilsadenebis derefanSi, warsuli da momavali 59 60 Past and Future Heritage in the Pipelines Corridor This handsome ceramic pot, which is 28.5 centimeters high and 31 centimeters wide, was found in the Tovuzchai necropolis in the Tovuz region of Azerbaijan in 2004. It dates from the 12th-11th centuries BC. A highly stylized zoomorphic ornament on its upper side represents either a snake or a horse. Many scholars in the Caucasus today interpret zoomorphic images such as these to be linked to magic or fertility rituals or decorations. Zv. w. XII-XI saukuneebis es WurWeli (simaRle - 28,5 sm, diametri - 31 sm.) TovuzCais samarovanze aRmoCnda. mis zeda nawilze datanilia stilizebuli, zoomorfuli ornamenti romelic gvels an cxens gamosaxavs. aseTi zoomorfuli gamosaxulebebi, savaraudod, nayofierebis magiur ritualTan unda iyos dakavSirebuli. kulturuli memkvidreobis ZeglebiPmilsadenebis derefanSi, warsuli da momavali 61 This single strand of alluring carnelian beads found at the Zayamchai necropolis in the Shamkir district of Azerbaijan in 2003, dates from the Late Bronze Age to the Early Iron Age. Beads like these were painstakingly crafted by hand. Najaf Müseyibli suggests that they were not only worn for their beauty, but also sometimes for the magical and spiritual protection they were thought to provide the wearer, or for their curative value. ziamCais samarovanze 2003 wels aRmoCenili sardionis mZivebi gvianbrinjao - adrerkinis xaniT TariRdeba. mZivebi xeliT, guldasmiTaa damuSavebuli. doqtor najaf museiblis azriT, am lamaz mZivebs, romlebic samkaulad gamoiyeneboda, magiuri daniSnulebac hqonda da samkurnalo Tvisebebsac miawerdnen. 62 Past and Future Heritage in the Pipelines Corridor This symmetrical bronze pendant, found at the Zayamchai archaeological site in the Shamkir district of Azerbaijan in 2003, dates from the 13th-12th centuries BC, the Bronze Age. It has a diameter of 10.5 centimeters. The design may symbolize the sun according to scholars in the Caucasus, a symbol of warmth and fecundity. ziamCais samarovanze 2003 wels aRmoCenili da Zv. w. XIII-XII saukuneebiT daTariRebuli brinjaos, simetriuli sakidi 10,5 santimetris diametrisaa. igi, savaraudod, mzis – siTbosa da nayofierebis simboloa. kulturuli memkvidreobis ZeglebiPmilsadenebis derefanSi, warsuli da momavali 63 Early Antique (Hellenistic) Period (ca. 500 – 200 BC) Excavations near the Girag Kasaman sites (called Girag Kasaman II) revealed several burials from the Antique Period, which in Azerbaijan is considered to span from the 4th century BC to the 7th century AD. The grave offerings included a variety of pottery vessels. girag qasaman II ze Catarebulma gaTxrebmaantikuri xanis (azerbaijanSi Zv.w. IV – ax.w VIIss). ramdenime samarxi gamoavlina. Samarxebi mravalferovan masalas, maT Soriskeramikas Seicavda. 64 Several of the sites along the pipeline route in Azerbajan date from what archaeologists call the early Antique Period. During this period, Azerbajan had close economic-trading and cultural-political relations with the Near east and Greco-Roman world. The archaeological excavations conducted inform us of the high level of these relations. During this period, the kingdoms of Caucasian Albania and Iberia (Kartli) occupied the territories of present-day Azerbajan and Georgia, respectively. To the west and north lived the Scythians, Sarmatians, and inhabitants of the Kingdom of Colchis. The Medes, Assyrian, and neo-Babylonian empires located to the south and southwest were eventually replaced by the Persian empire. Past and Future Heritage in the Pipelines Corridor adreantikuri xana (Zv.w. 400 – 200ww.) azerbaijanSi, milsadenebis arealSi Seswavlili Zeglebis erTi nawils arqeologebi adreantikuri xaniT aTariReben. Aam drois azerbaijans axlo politikur-ekonomikuri urTierTobebi qonda axlo aRmosavleTTan da berZnulromaul samyarosTan, rac arqeologiuri gaTxrebiTac dasturdeba.Aazerbaijanisa da aRmosavleT saqarTvelos teritoriaze am droisaTvis albanelebi da iberebi saxlobdnen, romlebsac dasavleTidan kolxeTis samefo, CrdiloeTidan skviTebi da sarmatebi emezoblebodnen, samxreTiT asureTis, midiisa da babilonis samefoebi am droisaTvis iranis aqemenidurma imperiam Caanacvla. Albanian alphabet, consisting of 52 letters was created in the 5th century. albanuri anbani V saukuneSi Seiqmna da 52 asos Seicavda. kulturuli memkvidreobis ZeglebiPmilsadenebis derefanSi, warsuli da momavali 65 Cyrus the Great, King of Persia, defeated the Medes in 553 BC. The Persian Achaemenid empire, which began with Cyrus, encompassed a vast area from Afghanistan to Thrace (in what is today Bulgaria and northern Greece). This empire established the critical role the Persians played in the historical development of southwest Asia and inluenced all the countries of the South Caucasus and Anatolia. Following his victory over Darius Achaemenid of Persia at the Batle of Gaugamela in 331 BC, Macedonian King Alexander the Great occupied Media, an event that contributed to the spread of Greek culture in the South Caucasus. Ater Alexander’s death in 323 BC, his empire was divided among several successors. eastern Anatolia and portions of the South Caucasus (southern portions of Caucasian Albania and Caucasian Iberia) went to Seleucus (Salavki), a Macedonian general who established the Seleucid dynasty, which continued the Hellenization of the region and strengthened connections with the Mediterranean world. The expansion of Roman power into the region during the last century BC, and the incorporation of much of it into the Roman empire during the irst three centuries AD, reinforced the Mediterranean inluences in the region. To establish its authority, Rome initially dispatched some of its most famous generals, such as Lucullus, Pompey, to counter the burgeoning power of the Parthians from south and east of the Caspian, and later kept legions stationed in the area to consolidate its control. The stability provided by Roman authority helped strengthen economic and social connections in the region. 66 Past and Future Heritage in the Pipelines Corridor iranis mefe kiros didma Zv.w. 553 wels midielebi daamarcxa da Seqmna aqemeniduri imperia, romelic moicavda uzarmazar teritorias avRaneTidan Trakiamde (Tanamedrove bulgareTi da Crdilo saberZneTi).Aam sparsulma imperiam uzarmazari roli iTamaSa axlo aRmosavleTis ganviTarebaSi da didi gavlena moaxdina kavkasiisa da antoliis saxelmwifoebze. 331 wels aleqsandre makedonelma gavgamelas brZolaSi iranis mefe dariosi daamarcxa da midia daikava, ramac kavkasiaSi berZnuli kulturis gavrcelebas Seuwyo xeli. aleqsandrem Camoayaliba axali - elinistur-sparsuli aristokratia, romlis saSualebiT unda emarTa uzarmazari imperia - Sua azias, iransa da indoeTsac rom moicavda. 323 wels, aleqsandres gardacvalebis Semdeg imperia misma TanamebrZolebma dainawiles. aRmosavleTi Aanatolia da kavkasiis nawili ergo makedonel general selevkoss, romelmac safuZveli daudo selevkidebis dinastias, ganagrZo regionis elinizacia da xmelTaSuazRvispireTTan ganamtkica urTierToba. Zv.w. dasasrulisaTvis regionSi romis eqspansia daiwyo. ax.w I_III saukuneebSi ki samxreT kavkasiis didi nawili ki mis SemadgenlobaSi Sevida, ramac xmelTaSuazRvispireTis gavlena gaaZliera. sakuTari Zalauflebis gansamtkiceblad da kavkasiaidan parTielebis gansadevnad romi Tavis cnobil sardlebs, lukulussa da pompeuss agzavnida. SemdgomSi misi legionebi regionSi kontrolis SesanarCuneblad rCebodnen. romaelTa yofnam regions ekonomikuri socialuri mdgradoba moutana. This small vessel, from a jar grave near Yevlakh, Azerbaijan, may have been a grave offering. The decorations, burnishing (polishing), and small feet are relective of a non-utilitarian vessel. It is likely the pot had a lid, as suggested by the small holes in the laring handles. es patara WurWeli azerbaijanSi, evlaxSi, aRmoCenili qvevrsamarxidanaa. misi mxatvruli gaformeba, naprialebi zedapiri da mcire zomis fexi miuTiTebs, rom igi yoveldRiuri moxmarebis nivTi ar iyo. mas, savaraudod, sarqveli unda hqonoda. kulturuli memkvidreobis ZeglebiPmilsadenebis derefanSi, warsuli da momavali 67 The state of Caucasian Albania was established in the 4th century BC. Caucasian Albania covered the territory of the present day Azerbajan Republic and the territories up to Goyja (Sevan) lake and South Dagestan. Its capital was Gabala and starting from the 5th century, the city of Barda. Derbend, Shamakhi, Shabran, Baylagan were other big cities of this state. Strabo, Ptolemy, Pliny, Cassius, Plutarch and other antique period authors have provided information about Caucasian Albania. Diverse religious traditions, including Zoroastrianism and Christianity, were practiced from the irst years of AD. At the beginning of the 4th century, a certain segment of the Alban society (including political elites), accepted Christianity. The existence of diferent religions in Albania is shown at burial sites, including pots, wooden boxes, catacombs and Christian graves. All of these graves were encountered in the pipelines corridor. The aforementioned graves of the Caucasian Albany were discovered and excavated at 200, 204, 241, 316, 335,.336, 406, 408.8, 409.1 kms of the pipeline route. Rich domestic items, trinkets and weapons were found in these graves; they proved that diferent types of cratsmanship were highly developed in Caucasian Albania. Jewelry brought from the Near east provides information on Albania’s vast economic and cultural relations. Remains of one residential area dating from the 5th-3rd centuries BC and several burial sites were discovered during archaeological excavations conducted near the Girag Kasaman village in the Agstafa region. In spite of the rural nature of this setlement, the remains of a metal-working kiln and numerous spindle whorls indicate the presence of local metal-working and weaving industries. 68 Past and Future Heritage in the Pipelines Corridor albaneTis samefo Zv.w IV saukuneSi daarsda da Tanamedrove azerbaijanis, samxreT daRestanisa da sevanis tbis mimdebare teritoriebs moicavda.Mmisi dedaqalaqi yabala, V saukunidan ki bardavi iyo. darubandi, Samqori, Sarbani da bailagani misi mniSvnelovani qalaqebi iyo. albaneTis Sesaxeb Semonaxulia strabonis, ptolemeusis, pliniusis, kasiusisa da plutarqes cnobebi. IV saukunis dasawyisSi albaneTma qristianoba miiRo. mravalreliguroba kargadaa asaxuli samarovnebze, sadac qvevrsamarxebs, xis kuboebs, katakombebsa da qristianul samarxebs vxvdebiT. yvela CamoTvlili saxeobis samarxebi milsadenebis derefanSic agdaSis, evlaxis, iadilis, seidlaris, Cafarlis, giragqasaman II-is, foilosa da foilo II-is samarovnebze gamovlinda. samarxebSi aRmoCenili sxvadasxva daniSnulebis nivTebis mdidruli asortimenti albaneTSi xelosnobis ganviTarebis maRal doneze migviTiTebs. axlo aRmosavleTidan Semotanili samkauli ki ganviTarebul ekonomikur da kulturul urTierTobebze metyvelebs. sainteresoa aRstafas raionSi, sof. girag-hasamanSi aRmoCenili, V-III saukuneebis namosaxlari da samarxebi. miuxedavad imisa, rom Zegli aSkarad sofluri dasaxlebis ti pisaa, masze dafiqsirda rkinis sadnobi Rumelis naSTi da bevri kvirisTavi, rac aq rkinis metalurgiisa da rTvis ganviTarebaze miuTiTebs. Antique Period-Early Medieval Period (ca. 200 BC – 650 AD) antikuri xana da adre SuasaukuneebiA (Zv.w. 200 – ax.w. 650ww.) The later Antique Period is identiied with the Roman Empire and the irst centuries of the Byzantine empire. The end of this Period is generally dated, by archaeologists in Azerbajan, to coincide with the rise of Islam. This period saw Rome’s expansion into southwest Asia, as well as the subjugation of the uniied Caucasian Albanian Kingdom of the South Caucasus by the Persian Sassanid empire. The Sassanians strove to subjegate the South Caucasian states, while simultaneously atempting to limit incursions from northern tribes originating from the south Russian steppes. In pursuit of the later, they built a series of walls near Derbent, Azerbajan. Imposing remains still stand, forming one of the region’s largest extant fortresses. In 5th century Albanian alphabet, consisting of 52 leters was created. gvianantikuri xana azerbaijanSi romis imperiis Zlierebis xaniTa da bizantiis imperiis pirveli saukuneebiT ganisazRvreba.Aazerbaijaneli arqeologebis azriT, am periodis dasasruli islamis SemoRebas emTxveva. am drois ganmavlobaSi regionSi jer romi batonobda, Semdeg sasanurma imperiam albaneTis samefo daimorCila. sasanuri saxelmwifo cdilobda samxreTkavkasiur saxelmwifoebs Soris arsebuli dapirispirebebi gadaelaxa da aq samxreT ruseTis stepebSi mobinadre momTabare tomebis SemoWra aRekveTa.Aam miznebisaTvis maT derbentSi im droisaTvis erTerTi mniSvnelovani TavdacviTi sistema aages, romlis nawilic dRevandlamdea SemorCenili. V saukuneSi Seiqmna albanuri anbani, romelic 52 asos Seicavda. Inscriptions at Gobustan and near Derbent document the Roman presence in the Caucasus. Rome’s 12th legion, which was based at diferent times in Cappadocia and the highlands east of Anatolia, may have exercised Roman dominion over the greater Kura Valley and placed forces at the Derbent Gates. From this strategic location, the Romans could have controlled movement between the North Caucasus Mountains and the Caspian Sea, thus restricting the migration of Goths and Huns from the Russian steppes. Azerbajani archaeologists and historians believe that the community of Ramany on the Absheron Peninsula north of Baku may have begun as a Roman encampment. gobusTansa da derbentSi aRmoCenili warwerebi romaelTa kavkasiaSi yofnas adasturebs. ivaraudeba, rom romis me-12 legionis erTi nawili, romlis ZiriTadi dislokaciis adgilebi kapadokia da aRmosavleTi anatolia iyo, derbentSi idga, saidanac mtkvris xeobas akontrolebda. garda amisa, kavkasiis mTebsa da kaspiis zRvas Soris arsebuli gadasasvlelis dapyrobiT igi xels uSlida goTebisa da hunebis migracias samxreT kavkasiisaken. azerbaijaneli istorikosebisa da arqeologebis azriT, baqos CrdiloeTiT, afSeronis naxevarkunZulze arsebuli ramanis dasaxleba, SesaZloa, Tavdapirvelad romauli banakidan warmoSobiliyo. kulturuli memkvidreobis ZeglebiPmilsadenebis derefanSi, warsuli da momavali 69 The AGT Pipelines Archaeological Program found a few examples of Antique period and later Medieval sites. The Seyidlar II residential area in the Samukh district (316 km) and the setlement and graveyard near the Chaparli village in the Shamkir district (335/336 km) are two such examples. The Chaparli site in particular is noteworthy because it contains early Medieval graves and architectural remains. The carved limestone decorations in the area, one of which appears to depict a cross, led the excavators to interpret the structure as an early Christian chapel, belonging to a local Albanian community. Members of the 12th Roman Legion (“Fuminata”) carved this important rock-art panel from Gobustan, Azerbaijan, during the reign of Emperor Domitian, ca. 75 AD. The legion, stationed in Cappadocia, was tasked with guarding Eastern Anatolia and the South Caucasus. romis me-12 legioni “fuminatas” jariskacebma, imperator domicianes zeobisas, 75 wels, gobusTanis kldeze warwera amokveTes. legionis dislokaciis adgili kapadokia iyo, misi mizani ki - samxreT kavkasiisa da aRmisavleT anatoliis dacva. 70 Past and Future Heritage in the Pipelines Corridor milsadenebis teritoriis arqeologiuri kvlevisas aRmoCenilia gvian antikuri da Sua saukuneebis ramdenime Zegli. seidlar II (samuxis raioni) da Cafarli (Samqoris raioni) am periodis Zeglebia. Cafarli, umniSvnelovanesi Zeglia da am periods saukeTesod warmogviCens. masze adre Suasaukuneebis arqiteqturuli detalebia warmodgenili. rogorc Cans, igi albanur sazogadoebas ekuTvnoda. arqiteqturul detalze SemorCenil jvarze arsebuli warwera gamTxrelebs aq qristianuli samlocvelos arsebobas avaraudebinebs. This historic caravansaray (inn) in Sheki, Azerbaijan, has been refurbished as a contemporary hotel complex, with brick-lined corridors opening onto a courtyard. es istoriuli qarvasla SaqSi (azerbaijani) Tanamedrove sastumrodaa gadakeTebuli, romlis aguriT nagebi derefnebi Sida ezoSi gadis. kulturuli memkvidreobis ZeglebiPmilsadenebis derefanSi, warsuli da momavali 71 72 Medieval Period (ca. 650 – 1800AD) Sua saukuneebi (650 – 1800ww.) The Medieval Period in Azerbajan saw the arrival and growth of Islamic culture, continuation of political upheaval, economic gains, and a lourishing intellectual environment whereby advances were made in the sciences and arts. In the middle of the 7th century, prior to Arabian advancement, the Mihranid Dynasty of Caucasian Albania dominated in Azerbajan. This dynasty also reported to the Iranian Shahs – Sasanian overloards. The Mihranids supported the Sasanians in ights against the Arabian conquerors during the 7th century. This support continued when the Arabian conquerors defeated the Sasanians completely and put an end to the dictatorship of the Sasanians over Iran and the South Caucasus. Finally, the Mihranids formed a military alliance with the Arab Islamic Caliphate. In the 9th century in Azerbajan under the leadership of Babek, the Mihranids started a great struggle to break free from Arab rule which lasted for 20 years. During this period certain portions of Azerbajan began to be recognized as Arran. Yet during this period many Arabs also setled in Azerbajan and became part of the ruling elite. Many of the local Christian and Zoroastrian populace slowly converted to Islam, although Christian communities are thought to have survived well into the Medieval Period. Upon the elimination of Arabian domination, local state authorities were established in Azerbajan. Of them, the State of Sajiler connected all the historical lands of Azerbajan for the irst time. The State of Shirvanshahs, the center of which was Shamakhi, existed circa 1,000 years AD. Sua saukuneebis azerbaijanSi TandaTanobiT gamoCnda, xolo Semdeg ki damkvidrda islami, romelic jer arabebma Semoitanes, Semdgom ki Turanuli modgmis tomebma gaavrceles. islamurma kulturam xeli Seuwyo ekonomikis, mecnierebisa da xelovnebis ganviTarebas. VII saukunis SuaxanebisaTvis azerbaijans, savaraudod, albanuri mihranidebis dinastia marTavda, romelic iranel sasanian Sahebs emorCileboda. mihranidebi VII saukuneSi, sasanidebis saboloo damarcxebamde, maT arabTa winaaRmdeg brZolaSi exmarebodnen. mihranidebi islamur xalifats daemorCilnen, samagierod ki xelisufleba IX saukunemde SeinarCunes. azerbaijanis zogierT nawilSi, babeqis meTaurobiT daiwyo antiarabuli ajanyebebi, romelic 20 weli grZeldeboda. janyebis dros damoukidebeli qveynebi gaCnda, romelTa saerTo saxelwodeba cnobilia, rogorc arani. TandaTanobiT qveyanaSi mravali arabi dasaxlda da mmarTveli elitis nawilad iqca. adgilobrivi qristianuli da zoroastruli mosaxleoba TandaTanobiT islams Rebulobda, Tumca, Suasaukuneebis ganmavlobaSi ramdenime qristianuli Temi mainc SemorCa. azerbaijanSi arabTa batonobis damTavrebis Semdeg sajebis dinastiam pirvelad gaaerTiana azerbaijanis istoriuli miwebi. SirvanSahebis samefom iarseba ax.w. 1000 wlamde. Past and Future Heritage in the Pipelines Corridor During the 10th and 11th centuries AD, the Shaddadids and Ravvadids dominated portions of what is now Azerbajan. Over time, the Seljuk empire, which expanded from Central Asia to the Aegean Sea, subjegated Iran and the southern Caucasus as well. Under the local sway of atabegs (governors) who ruled from their capital of Shamakhi, Azerbajan played signiicant cultural and economic roles during the Seljuk period. For example, the great poets Khaghani and Nizami gained fame well beyond Azerbajan, and continue to be revered for their eloquence and skill. Large cultural and commercial centers such as Ganja, Beylagan, Tabriz, Nakhchivan, Shamakhi, and Shamkir, each with populations in the tens of thousands, were developed during this period. Seljuk domination of the territory of Azerbajan came to an end during the early 13th century AD, under pressure from Mongols who were moving in from Centra l Asia. In 1235, they and the Tartars destroyed many of the key cities in Azerbajan, such as Ganja and Shamkir, and incorporated Azerbajan into the Mongol Empire. Subsequent unrest followed an invasion by the forces of Amir Timur (Tamerlane) in the late 14th century. It was at this time that the Garagoyunlu and Aghgoyunlu states managed to subjugate surrounding regions. At the beginning of the 16th century, Shah Ismayil established the Azerbajan Safavid State and Tabriz became its capital. Developing rapidly, this state connected all political bodies from Central Asia to the Mediterranean Sea and evolved into a mighty empire. 5 X da XI saukuneebSiAazerbaijanis sxavadasxva nawilebs ganagebda Sadadidebisa da ravadidebis dinastiebi. XI saukunidan seljukebma, romelTa imperia Sua aziidan egeosis zRvamde iyo gadaWimuli irani da samxreT kavkasia daimorCiles. azerbaijans, romelic mniSvnelovan kulturul da ekonomikur rols asrulebda seljukur samyaroSi, qalaq Semaxiadan aTabagi marTavda. Aaq moRvaweobdnenDdidi poetebi xagani da nizami. am periodSi ganviTarda kulturuli da komerciuli centrebi: ganja, Tavrizi, Samqori, Samaqia, romlebSiac aTiaTasobiT adamiani cxovrobda. azerbaijanis teritoriaze seljukebis batonoba XIII saukunis pirvel naxevarSi monRolebis SemoWriT dasrulda. 1235 wels maTAazerbaijanis mniSvnelovani qalaqebi - ganja da Samqori daarbies da qveyana monRolur imperias miuerTes. XIV saukunis bolos Temur lengis Semosevebma qveyanas didi ziani miayena. mogvianebiT aRyoinlusa da yarayoinlus tomebma mimdebare teritoriebze gaavrceles Tavisi Zalaufleba. XVI saukuneSi Sahma ismailma azerbaijanSi sefianTa dinastia gabaatona da dedaqalaqad Tavrizi gamoacxada. qveyana swrafad ganviTarda da uZlieres imperiad Camoyalibda, romelmac Sua azia da xmelTaSua zRva daakavSira erTmaneTTan. 5 kulturuli memkvidreobis ZeglebiPmilsadenebis derefanSi, warsuli da momavali 73 Archaeologists from the Institute of Archaeology and Ethnography and Azerbajan’s National Academy of Sciences, have conducted archaeological excavations in a number of villages dating back to the Medieval Period, including Girag Kasaman in the Agstafa district, Dashbulag in the Shamkir district and Fakhrali in the Goranboy district. These archaeological sites create opportunities for understanding the economic activity, burial and domestic practices, inter-regional trade networks, and historical understanding of the Islamic period in Azerbajan. They also augmented understanding of domestic activities and burial practices, as well as economic relations and transportation routes along the Silk Road, as revealed by the trade goods and ine crats recovered. The continuity of occupation at many of these sites may relect an unusual degree of cultural stability, in spite of the political turmoil of the period. extensive excavations dating to the Medieval Period were conducted in cities of Azerbajan during the second half of the twentieth century, but there were no thorough investigations of villagetype setlements. That gap was addressed to some extent by the archaeological excavations conducted within the pipelines corridor. Chapter 3 reviews some of these sites in detail. 74 Past and Future Heritage in the Pipelines Corridor azerbaijanis mecnierebaTa akademiis arqeologiisa da eTnografiis institutis mecnierebma Sua saukuneebis araerTi arqeologiuri Zegli -girag qasamani (aRstafis raioni), daSbulaqi (Samqoris raioni) da faxrali (geranbois raioni) Seiswavles. am samuSaoebma naTeli mohfina imdroindeli meurneobis, dakrZalvis wesebis, savaWro urTierTobebis, azerbaijanis islamuri periodis istoriisa da abreSumis gzis funqcionirebis sakiTxebs. am ZeglTa umravlesoba did xans funqcionirebda, rac miuxedavad mZime politikuri mdgomareobisa, kulturuli cxovrebis mdgrad ganviTarebaze migvaniSnebs. XX saukunis meore naxevarSiAazerbaijanis Sua saukuneebis qalaqebis teritoriaze intensiuri arqeologiuri gaTxrebi mimdinareobda, magram sasoflo dasaxlebebi kargad ar iyo Seswavlili. es nakli milsadenis mSneblobisas Seivso. wignis mesame TavSi am periodis zogierTi Zeglis detaluri aRwera iqneba warmodgenili. In 2004, these gold earrings, 3.4 centimeters in diameter and dating from the 5th-4th centuries BC, were found in Azerbaijan’s Samux region in a woman’s grave, placed near her ears. The ends of the earrings are in the shape of the head of a snake, which in ancient times may have represented wisdom, a sense of unity, and protection. The snake image has also been associated with medicine and the underworld. 2004 wels azerbaijanSi, samuxis raionSi, gaiTxara Zv.w. V-IV saukuneebis qalis samarxi, sadac oqros es sayureebi (diametri - 3,4 sm) aRmoCnda. sayureebis boloebi gvelis Tavis formisaa. warsulSi gveli sibrZnis simbolod miiCneoda.Mmisi gamosaxulebebi ukavSirdeba medicinas, qvesknels, sieSmakesa da intuicias da agreTve gaaxalgazrdavebasac ki. kulturuli memkvidreobis ZeglebiPmilsadenebis derefanSi, warsuli da momavali 75 76 Georgia saqarTvelo Paleolithic/Epipaleolithic Age (ca. 1.8 million years – 8000 BC) paleoliTi da epi paleoliTi (1.8 milioni – Zv.w. 8000 w.) The native name for the country of Georgia is Sakartvelo, named ater the ancient Georgian tribe Kartli, which played the central role in the long process of ethnogenesis of the Georgian nation. The territory of modern-day Georgia has been inhabited since the Paleolithic Age. The earliest remains of human ancestors outside of Africa were unearthed at the Dmanisi archaeological site, which dates from approximately 1.8 million years ago. The site has yielded the remains of at least ive pre-human hominids, and examples of some of the earliest tools associated with human ancestors. Later prehistoric remains (Paleolithic, Mesolithic, and Neolithic) have been discovered in numerous caves and open-air sites in Georgia. No sites from these periods were, however, found along the pipeline route in Georgia, even though surface indings indicated that there should be Stone Age or other pre-Chalcolithic sites in the area. qveynis saxeli - saqarTvelo ukavSirdeba erT-erT qarTvelur toms, qarTs, romelmac qarTveli eris CamoyalibebaSi umniSvnelovanesi roli iTamaSa. jer kidev qveda paleoliTidan qveynis teritoria mudmivad iyo dasaxlebuli. dmanisSi Catarebuli arqeologiuri gaTxrebisas aRmoCenili adamianis winaprebis asaki 1,8 milions wels aRwevs. aqauri hominidebi afrikis gareT dasaxlebuli adamianis uZvelesi winaprebi arian. saqarTvelos teritoriaze qvis xanis SedarebiT gviandeli periodebis araerTi Zeglicaa mikvleuli. milsadenebis gaswvriv am drois dasaxlebebi ar aRmoCenila, Tumca, zedapirulad mikvleuli qvis xanis iaraRebi imaze migviTiTebs, rom am teritoriis maxloblad qvis xanis sxvadasxva periodis arqeologiuri Zeglebia sagulvebeli. Past and Future Heritage in the Pipelines Corridor Chalcolithic/Eneolithic (ca. 5500 – 3000 BC) eneoliTi (Zv.w. 5500 – 3000ww.) The early agricultural culture of the Caucasus developed during the 6th millennium BC, and by the second half of the 4th millennium BC, it had evolved into the Kura-Araxes culture that extended across the Caucasus, northern Iran, and eastern Anatolia. adresamiwaTmoqmedo kulturebi saqarTveloSi Zv.w. VI aTaswleulSi warmoiqmna da ganviTarda. Zv.w. IV aTaswleulis meore naxevridan ki maT mtkvar-araqsis kultura Caenacvla, romlis gavrcelebis areali aRmosavleT kavkasias, Crdilo iransa da anatolias moicavda. The AGT Pipelines Archaeological Program involved excavations at several archaeological sites from the Chalcolithic/eneolithic and the early Bronze Age periods along the pipeline route in Georgia. One of these, Nachivchavebi, located in the Tetritskaro District and believed to date from approximately 3,700 to 3,200 BC, contained artifacts from both the early agricultural and Kura-Araxes cultures. The excavations revealed storage pits and several burial sites. The artifacts, including ceramics and obsidian and bone tools, suggest that the population was mainly occupied with agriculture, stock-breeding, and small-scale handicrats. The burial sites have contributed to understanding the evolution of burial practices in the Chalcolithic and early Bronze Ages. ethnobotanical remains suggest that crop cultivation, horticulture, and wine production were well-developed by that time and that barley, hazelnut, chestnut, millet, mushrooms, grapes, buckwheat, and common wheat were likely foodstufs. Faunal materials from wild species (horses, boars, noble deer, and elk) and domestic animals (goats, cows, oxen, and sheep) point to a combination of animal husbandry and hunting. milsadenebis gaswvriv saqarTveloSi Catarebulma arqeologiurma gaTxrebma ramdenime eneoliTuri da adrebrinjaos xanis Zeglic moicva. TeTriwyaros raionSi mdebare Zegli naWivWavebi, romelic Zv.w. 3700 - 3200 wlebiT TariRdeba, Seicavs, rogorc adresamiwaTmoqmedo kulturebis, ise - mtkvar-araqsuli kulturis fenebs. gaTxrebma aq sameurneo ormoebi da samarxebi gamoavlina. mikvleul arqeologiur masalaze dayrdnobiT gairkva, rom aqauri mosaxleoba misdevda miwaTmoqmedebasa da mesaqonleobas, ganviTarebuli iyo xelosnobac. samarxebidan mopovebuli masala garkveul warmodgenas qmnis eneoliTuri da adrebrinjaos xanis dakrZalvis ritualebis msgavseba-gansxvavebaze. eTnobotanikuri monacemebis mixedviT irkveva, rom am droisaTvis kargad iyo ganviTarebuli memindvreoba, mebaReoba da meRvineoba. sakvebad gamoiyeneboda qeri, Txili, wabli, fetvi, soko, yurZeni, xorbali. mesaqonleobis ganviTarebaze migvaniSnebs Sinauri cxovelebis _ Txis, Zroxis, xaris, cxvris naSTebi. ganviTarebuli iyo nadirobac. kulturuli memkvidreobis ZeglebiPmilsadenebis derefanSi, warsuli da momavali 77 The Tiselis Seri setlement and cemetery in the Borjomi District provide valuable data about the next stage of development of the Kura-Araxes culture. The site contains a village and a cemetery from the second quarter of the 3rd millennium BC. The most important artifacts from the excavations here are potery. The vessels are handmade, not wheel-thrown, and the larger ones are decorated with relief spirals or other curvilinear motifs. The site also yielded ibers of wool and lax, and the presence of multi-colored threads indicates that weaving was practiced. There is evidence of connections to northeastern Anatolia during the time the site was active. Tiselis seris nasaxlari da samarovani, romelic borjomis raionSi mdebareobs da milsadenebis teritoriaze gaiTxara, mtkvar-araqsuli kulturis ganviTarebis Semdgomi etapia da Zv.w. III aTaswleulis meore meoTxediT TariRdeba. mniSvnelovania aq aRmoCenili keramikuri nawarmi, romelic xeliTaa damzadebuli. mozrdili WurWlebi Semkulia reliefuri da amokawruli ornamentiT. aq mopovebuli selisa da Salis feradi boWkoebis arseboba safeiqro ostatobaze miuTiTebs. Zeglze aRmoCenili masalis nawili Crdilo-aRmosavleT anatoliis arqeologiur masalasTan avlens kavSirs. Early Bronze Age (ca. 3000 – 2000 BC) adre brinjaos xana (Zv.w. 3000 – 2000ww.) early Bronze Age societies seemed to have been relatively stable socially and economically. In the middle of the 3rd millennium BC the Culture of Early Bronze Age Kurgans developed in the eastern Caucasus. It co-existed with the later stage of the Kura-Araxes culture in the Southern Caucasus and was situated between between the Kura (Mtkvari) and Araxes rivers. Both cemeteries and setlements have been uncovered in this area. Typically, houses were single story, mud and stone brick that were reinforced with wood frames. The primary new element of this culture was a distinctive burial ritual: the deceased were buried in kurgans, graves deined by stone or soil mounds; in some cases, the kurgans exceeded 100 meters in diameter and 8-10 meters in height. The Culture of Early Kurgans persisted through the end of the 3rd millennium BC. The KuraAraxes culture also characterized with special ceramic decorative traits and the bronze smelting technology in the mid-fourth millennium BC. 78 Past and Future Heritage in the Pipelines Corridor adrebrinjaos xanis sazogadoeba stabilurobiTa da socialuri cvlilebebis neli tempiT xasiaTdeba. Zv.w. III aTasweulis SuaxanebSi samxreT kavkasiaSi warmoiSva adrebrinjaos yorRanebis kultura, romelic Tavdapirvelad mtkvararaqsis kulturasTan Tanaarsebobda. Mmtkvar-araqsul kulturas axasiaTebda erTsarTuliani, marTkuTxa formis, aliziTa da qviT nagebi Senobebi, romlebic xiT iyo gamagrebuli. es kultura gamoirCeva ornamentirebuli keramikiTa da brinjaos damuSavebiTac. adrebrinjaos yorRanebis kulturis mTavari niSani dakrZalvis rituali iyo. micvalebulebs krZalavdnen yorRanebSi _ samarxebSi, romlebic maRali qva-miwayriliT iyo daculi. zogjer yorRanebis simaRle 8-10 metrsac ki aWarbebda, diametri ki - 100 metrs. adreuli yorRanebis kultura Zv.w. III aTaswleulis bolomde arsebobda. Without doing harm to the artifacts found along the pipeline, archeologists used white caulk to recreate broken pots. All restorations must be reversible so that the artifacts can be returned to the original state in which they were found should further study be required. This pot from Tkemlara demonstrates the technique. arqeologebi gaTxrebisas aRmoCenili Tixis WurWlis aRsadgenad TabaSirs xmaroben, riTac WurWlis naklul nawilebs aRadgenen da mas Tavdapirvel saxes ubruneben. es WurWeli tyemlaridan swored asea aRdgenili. kulturuli memkvidreobis ZeglebiPmilsadenebis derefanSi, warsuli da momavali 79 Two kurgans, both dated to the mid-3rd millennium BC, were excavated in diferent parts of Georgia— Tori and Kvemo Kartli—during the pipelines project. The Tori site, known as the Kodiani Kurgan, is located on a ridge dividing two drainages of the Kodiana Mountain in the Borjomi district. A rockilled mound measuring 14 meters in diameter with a pit (burial chamber) deines the kurgan at this site. Fragments of the burned human remains of a woman of about 50 in the burial chamber suggest that the deceased was cremated. The items buried with her included pots with black polished surfaces, one of which was decorated with incised and grooved ornaments. Generating the most interest, however, was evidence of apiculture (honey making) in the burial’s ceramic vessels. Previously, the earliest archaeological evidence of apiculture was found in Asia Minor and egypt, but the Tori site now appears to represent one of the earliest honeymaking locations. The Tremlara Kurgan was found at the Kvemo Kartli site in the Tetritskaro district. It lies on the slope of the Bedeni Mountain and is characterized by a circular, rock- and soil-illed mounds 23m in diameter that encompassed two human graves (both 3rd millennium BC). The irst grave, which did not have human remains inside of it, occupies a main central chamber cut in the bedrock and illed with stones, and contained a polished stone axe, bronze dagger, several small pots, and carbonized fragments of four wooden chariot wheels. The second grave is cut into the northwest side of the main chamber, and contained the remains of a woman. Both graves date to the mid-3rd millennium BC. 80 Past and Future Heritage in the Pipelines Corridor saqarTvelos or mxareSi - Torsa (borjomis raionSi) da qvemo qarTlSi (TeTriwyaros raionSi) milsadenis mSeneblobisas gaiTxara Zv.w. III aTaswleulis Suaxanebis ori yorRani. kodianis yorRani mdebareobs borjomis raionSi, kodianis mTaze. samarxi dafaruli iyo 14 metris diametris qvayriliT. dasakrZalavi kamera miwaSi iyo amoRebuli. samarxSi 50-iode wlis qalis kremirebuli naSTebi iyo SemorCenili. samarxSi Catanebuli iyo Tixis ramdenime Savpriala WurWeli, romelTagan erTi ornamentirebuli iyo. uaRresad saintereso aRmoCnda erTi WurWlis SigTavsi, romlis analizis Sedegad dadginda, rom qoTanSi Tafli inaxeboda. am aRmoCenamde iTvleboda, rom mefutkreoba mcire aziasa da egvi pteSi gaCnda, Tumca, Toris masala qronologiurad oriveze adreulia. tyemlaras yorRani (Zv.w. III aTaswleulis Sua xanebi) mdebareobs qvemo qarTlSi, TeTriwyaros raionSi, bedenis mTis samxreT-dasavleT ferdobze. yorRani qva-miwayriliani, wriuli formisa iyo (diametri 23 m.). masSi ori samarxi dafiqsirda. ZiriTadi samarxi yorRanis centrSi, TixnarSi, iyo amoWrili, meore samarxi ki misgan Crdilo-dasavleTiT aRmoCnda gamarTuli. orive samarxis iatakze aRmoCenilia danaxSirebuli etlis RerZisa da borblis fragmentebi, naprialebi qvis culi da brinjaos satevari, agreTve Tixis Savpriala WurWeli. Middle Bronze Age (ca. 2000 – 1600 BC) Sua brinjaos xana (Zv.w. 2000 – 1600ww.) The Middle Bronze Age corresponds to Trialeti Culture (2000-1500 BC) in Georgia. The culture is named for the Trialeti Plateau, the area of southcentral Georgia traversed by the pipeline. The culture is best known for large and elaborate tombs and kurgans and cobbled access roads. These kurgans are famous for their brilliant grave goods that contain ceramic and bronze objects, which include ine jewelry. saqarTveloSi Suabrinjaos xana “TrialeTur kulturas” ukavSirdeba. es saxeli am kulturas qveynis samxreTiT mdebare TrialeTis zeganis gamo daerqva. am zegans milsadeni did zolze kveTs. TrialeTis kultura yvelaze metad didi da sagangebod gamarTuli samarxebiT _ yorRanebiT, aseve maTken mimavali mokirwyluli saritualo gzebiT, ornamentirebuli keramikiTa da brwyinvale saiuveliro nakeTobebiTaa cnobili. Although these elaborate burial rituals suggest a complex social structure, almost nothing is known about the domestic life of Trialeti people because to date very few examples of Trialeti setlements have been found. During the pipeline construction, a setlement from the Middle Bronze Age was excavated in the historical province of Georgia Trialeti, Tsalka District, on the plain north of Jinisi village, on the let bank of Gumbatistskali River. The Jinisi setlement consisted of two construction layers. Some of the earliest artifacts also came from the Mousterian or Middle Paleolithic. The most important discoveries, however, were the houses and artifacts from the Middle Bronze Age. Four houses dating back to the end of the Middle Bronze Age featured a semi-dugout design. Stone walls were built in single-row bond masonry, and the loors were leveled with clay. Stone bases that ixed the wooden columns were situated in front of the walls and at the center of the interior. The columns supported lat roofs, and each house contained an oven and a hearth. The construction technique was similar to that used in the burial chambers of kurgans of the Trialeti Culture. The potery discovered on the loors of the houses was black-burnished and ornamented with imprinted triangles, again typical of the potery found in kurgans of the Trialeti Culture. dakrZalvis rTuli ritualebisaTvis Sesabamisi mdidari socialuri struqturis miuxedavad, TrialeTis mosaxleobis yofa-cxovrebis Sesaxeb TiTqmis araferia cnobili, radgan am kulturisadmi mikuTvnili mxolod ramdenime namosaxlaria cnobili. milsadenebis mSeneblobisas saqarTvelos istoriul mxareSi, TrialeTSi (walkis raioni), sof. jinisis maxloblad gaiTxara Sua brinjaos xanis namosaxlari. aq zedapirulad akrefilia Sua paleoliTis, mustieuri qvis iaraRi, romelic Tavdapirveli adgilidan daZruli unda iyos. umniSvnelovanesia Sua brinjaos xanis fenaSi mikvleuli nivTebi. aq Seswavlili oTxi saxli TixnarSi CaWrili naxevradmiwuri nagebobaa, romlis kedlebi riyis qviTaa nagebi, iataki TixiT iyo motkepnili. saxlebis gadaxurva banuria; brtyeli saxuravi dabjenili iyo qvis baliSebze dadgmul xis boZebze. saxlebSi gamarTuli iyo kera da Rumeli. saxlebis konstruqcia garkveulwilad TrialeTuri kulturis yorRanebSi gamoyenebul samSeneblo teqnikas emTxveva. nagebobebSi aRmoCenili keramikis nawili Savprialaa da Semkulia StampiT datanili samkuTxa ornamentiT, rac TrialeTis kulturisaTvisaa damaxasiaTebeli. kulturuli memkvidreobis ZeglebiPmilsadenebis derefanSi, warsuli da momavali 81 Jinisi is the irst setlement where this type of potery has been uncovered. Other artifacts found at the site—a variety of querns, mortars, chopping tools—along with the results of pollen studies indicate the advanced development of agricultural crop production in the 18th-17th centuries BC, with wheat and rye the major crops. Bones of wild animals discovered on the loors of the houses demonstrate the importance of hunting and well-developed experience with farm animals, including horse breeding. jinisi dReisaTvis erTaderTi namosaxlaria, sadac amgvari keramikaa aRmoCenili. Zeglze mikvleuli sxva nivTebi da palinologiuri masala Zv.w. XVIII - XVII saukuneebSi miwaTmoqmedebis ganviTarebaze mianiSnebs.Aaqaurebs qeri da xorbali mohyavdaT. nadirobis mniSvnelobasa da mecxoveleobis ganviTarebas xazs usvams saxlebSi aRmoCenili cxovelTa Zvlebi, maT Soris cxenis naSTebi, romelTa arsebobac Sinauri cxovelebis moSenebaze migviTiTebs. Late Bronze-Early Iron Age (ca. 1600 – 600 BC) The Late Bronze Age in Georgia saw the start of the historical distinction between eastern and western Georgia. Assyrian and then Urartian writen sources contain the irst references to proto-Georgian tribes and states. The protoGeorgian state of Diauehi (Diauhi or Diaokhi) was formed in the 12th century BC at the sources of the Chorokhi and Euphrates Rivers. It is irst identiied with the state of Daiaeni and with an inscription dating from Assyrian King Tiglath-Pileser I’s third year (1118 BC). Ater centuries of batling for independence from the Assyrians, in the irst half of the 8th century BC Urartu annexed a large part of Diauehi. extremely weakened by these wars, in the mid 8th century BC Diauehi was inally destroyed by another proto-Georgian kingdom, Kulkha (Colchis in Greek sources). Colchis was formed in the 13th century BC on the eastern shore of the Black Sea. According to Greek mythology, it was a wealthy kingdom situated in the mysterious periphery of the heroic world. Here, in the sacred grove of the war god Ares, King Aeetes hung the Golden Fleece until Jason and the Argonauts seized it. Colchis was also the land where Zeus punished the mythological Prometheus for revealing the secret of ire to humanity by chaining him to a mountain. Colchis disintegrated ater the invasion of Cimmerians and Scythians in the last quarter of the 8th century BC. 82 Past and Future Heritage in the Pipelines Corridor gvianbrinjao-adrerkinis xana (Zv.w. 1600 – 600ww.) gviani brinjaos xana erTiani qarTveluri enis aRmosavlur da dasavleT qarTul enebad gamijvnis sawyis periods emTxveva. protoqarTveluri tomebisa da saxelmwifoebrivi gaerTianebebis Sesaxeb uZvelesi cnobebi asurulsa da urartul wyaroebSi moi poveba. erT-erTi maTgani iyoDdiaoxi, romlis Camoyalibeba Zv.w. XII saukunisaTvisaa navaraudevi. igi pirvelad ixseniebaAasureTis mefe tiglaTfileser I-is warweraSi (Zv.w. 1118ww). Zv.w. VIII saukuneSi urartum ramdenjerme ilaSqra diaoxSi da misi nawilis dapyrobac moaxerxa. amave saukunis Sua xanebSi omebisagan dasustebuli diaoxi mezobelma, aseve protoqarTvelurma saxelmwifom, kulxam (kolxeTma) daimorCila. kolxeTis samefo Savi zRvis aRmosavleT sanapiroze Zv.w. XIII saukuneSi warmoiSva. berZnuli miTebis mixedviT, es mdidari qveyana gmiruli samyaros ganapiras mdebareobda. kolxeTis mefe aieti aresis WalaSi oqros sawmiss inaxavda, romelic Semdeg argonavtebma gaitaces. miTi promeTes Sesaxeb gviambobs, rom man xalxs cecxlis saidumlo gaacno, zevsma ki igi dasaja da kolxeTis mTebSi kldes miajaWva. Zv.w. VIII saukuneSi kolxeTSi kimirielebi da skviTebi SeiWrnen, ramac qveynis dacema gamoiwvia. These necklaces are made of carnelian and glass paste beads. The white and green ones, called domino-like beads, are characteristic of the 7th-6th century BC. All were found at the Eli Baba Cemetery near Tsalka, Georgia on the necks or hands of human remains. Because the graves had previously been looted, the individual beads had been displaced, so it was impossible to identify which objects were parts of necklaces and which of bracelets. es yelsabamebi sardionisa da miniseburi pastisagan Sedgeba. TeTri da mwvane mZivebi cnobilia, rogorc dominoseburi mZivebi da Zv.w. VII– VI saukuneebiT TariRdeba. yvela aRmoCenilia saqarTveloSi, walkis raionSi, eli babas samarovanze, micvalebulebis yelisa da mkerdis areSi. kulturuli memkvidreobis ZeglebiPmilsadenebis derefanSi, warsuli da momavali 83 84 Past and Future Heritage in the Pipelines Corridor A number of bronze pendants similar to the circular ornament on the right were found in graves of the Eli Baba Cemetery near Tsalka, Georgia. The unidentiied bronze object on the left, which was found in a location adjacent to the pendant, may have also been worn as a decorative item. Several other bronze artifacts such as pins and bracelets were discovered at this site. eli babas samarovanze (saqarTvelo, walkis raioni) sxvadasxva formis brinjaos samkaulia aRmoCenili (sakinZebi, sakidebi, samajurebi da sxva). marjvniv gverdebamoWrili wriuli formis sakidia, marcxena fotoze aseve sakidia gamosaxuli. orive nivTi erT samarxSia mopovebuli. kulturuli memkvidreobis ZeglebiPmilsadenebis derefanSi, warsuli da momavali 85 Several of the circular stone graves in the Eli Baba Cemetery were marked by a menhir (vertical stone). An unfortunate consequence of the use of menhirs was to signal the presence of the necropolis for later grave looters. eli babas samarovnis zogierTi samarxze vertikalurad aRmarTuli qva -menhiri idga. mogvianebiT mZarcvelebi samarovnebs am niSnis mixedviT agnebdnen. Excavations of the Late Bronze Age graves in the Eli Baba Cemetery generally yielded few burial artifacts, perhaps because of looting. eli babas samarovnis gaTxrebisas arc Tu ise bevri arqeologiuri masala gamoavlina, ragan samarovani gaZarcvuli iyo. 86 Past and Future Heritage in the Pipelines Corridor This necklace of bone and ivory was one of several found at the Eli Baba site. mZivebis es asxma eli babas samarovnis mcireodeni masalis erTi nawilia. kulturuli memkvidreobis ZeglebiPmilsadenebis derefanSi, warsuli da momavali 87 There are no writen sources about the territory of eastern Georgia in the Late Bronze-early Iron Age. However, several rich archaeological sites provide information about the cultural and political situation. One of the most interesting sites of the Late Bronze Age, the Saphar-Kharaba cemetery (discussed more extensively in Chapter 3), was excavated as a result of the pipeline construction. 88 gvianbrinjao – adrerkinis xanis aRmosavleT saqarTvelos Sesaxeb werilobiTi wyaroebi ar arsebobs, Tumca, am periodis Sesaxeb mniSvnelovani informacia arqeologiuri Zeglebis Seswavlam mogvca. erT-erTi aseTi Zeglia milsadenebis mSeneblobisas gaTxrili safar-xarabas samarovani, romelic mesame TavSi iqneba ganxiluli. Early Classical (Early Antique) Period (ca. 600 – 300 BC) adreantikuri xana (Zv.w. 600 – 300ww.) Toward the mid-6th century BC, the tribes living in southern Colchis were incorporated into the 19th Satrapy of Persia. The advanced economy and favorable geographic and natural conditions of the area atracted Greeks, who colonized the Colchian coast, establishing trading posts at Phasis, Guuenos, Dioscurias, and Pitius during the 6th-5th centuries BC. According to archaeological discoveries, Colchis emerged as an economically and culturally advanced state during this period, with evidence of key elements of a strong civilization: civic structure (territorial-administrative divisions) and central state authority (the royal dynasty of the Aeetids); intensive urban life; a complex taxation system; and cultural manifestations, including architecture. The eastern part of Georgia is believed to have been partially under the Achaemenid empire. During this period various eastern Georgian tribes struggled for leadership, with the Kartlian tribes eventually prevailing. At the end of the 4th century BC the Kartli (Iberia) Kingdom, the irst eastern Georgian state, was founded. Zv.w. VI saukunis SuaxanSi kolxeTis samxreTiT mosaxle tomebi aqemeniduri iranis XIX satrapiaSi Sevidnen. kolxeTis ganviTarebulma ekonomikam, xelsayrelma geografiulma mdebareobam da klimatma Savi zRvis kolxeTis sanapiroze berZnul kolonizacias Seuwyo xeli. Zv.w. VI-V saukuneebSi berZnebma TavianTi axalSenebi fazisSi, gienosSi, pitiuntsa da dioskuriaSi daaarses. am drois kolxeTi unda yofiliyo ekonomikurad da kulturulad dawinaurebuli qveyana, romelsac saxelmwifoebriobis ZiriTadi niSnebi _ teritoriul-administraciuli dayofa, centralizebuli mmarTveloba (aetidebis samefo dinastia), intensiuri saqalaqo cxovreba da sagadasaxado sistema hqonda. saqarTvelos aRmosavleTi nawili - qarTli nawilobriv emorCileboda aqemenidur imperias.Aaq mimdinareobda saxelmwifos warmoSobis rTuli procesi, romelic IV saukunis dasasruls qarTlis samefos CamoyalibebiT dasrulda. Past and Future Heritage in the Pipelines Corridor This particular object, the head of a bull made of clay mixed with straw, was found in one of the structures of the Ktsia Valley settlement dating from the 6th-4th centuries BC. The bull is believed to have been a holy animal associated with fertility and the moon. Depictions of the bull are found at sites of various periods. alizisagan damzadebuli xaris Tavi qciis velis namosaxlaris erT-erT saxlSi aRmoCnda. xari wminda cxoveli iyo, romelic mTvaresa da nayofierebas ganasaxierebda. xaris gamosaxulebebi saqarTveloSi araerT Zeglze gvxvdeba. kulturuli memkvidreobis ZeglebiPmilsadenebis derefanSi, warsuli da momavali 89 One of the important early Antique Period sites excavated during the pipeline construction is Ktsia Valley, located in the Borjomi District. The site, which sits on a bank of the Ktsia River at 2,000 meters above sea level, contains older layers dating from the Kura-Araxes culture, as well as the remains of a much larger setlement dating from the 6th-4th centuries BC. milsadenebis mSeneblobisas aRmoCnda da gaiTxaraAadreantikuri xanis mniSvnelovani Zegli - qciis velis namosaxlari. Zegli mdebareobs borjomis raionSi, sof. tabawyuris maxloblad, zRvis donidan 2000 metris simaRleze. misi qveda fena adrebrinjaos xanisaa, xolo zeda Zv.w. VI-IV saukuneebiT TariRdeba. Most of the structures at the site were built of lat stones ixed with clay, with evidence of structures that apparently supported lat roofs. An altar made of clay mixed with straw, and the head of a bull (an animal thought to have had ritual signiicance and associated with fertility and the moon) made of the same material, were also found. Generally, potery was wheel-thrown; handmade items were rare. Ornaments were either engraved or embossed. One fragment of a polished red ceramic vessel seems to have been imported. Agricultural activity was somewhat restricted, perhaps because of the elevation, although catle-breeding was important. Barley and oats (species well-adapted to the local environment) were cultivated. During the inal stages of the setlement’s existence, it was destroyed by ire several times, possibly as a result of conquests. namosaxlarze aRmoCenili nagebobebis umetesoba brtyeli qvebiTa da TixiT iyo naSenebi da banuri gadaxurva hqonda. erT saxlSi dadasturda alizis sakurTxeveli da xaris Tavis (xari wminda cxoveli iyo, romelic mTvaresa da nayofierebas ganasaxierebda) qandakeba. Tixis WurWeli sameTuneo morgvze iyo damzadebuli, iSviaTia xeliT damzadebuli nimuSebi. ornamenti reliefuri an amoRarulia. wiTeli feris, naprialebi WurWlis erTi fragmenti, rogorc Cans, importirebulia. miwaTmoqmedeba, simaRlis gamo SedarebiT SezRuduli iyo da aq klimatis Sesaferi marcvleuli _ qeri da Svria mohyavdaT. mecxoveleobas wamyvani roli hqonda. namosaxlari ramdenjerme, savaraudod, saomari moqmedebebisas gadamwvara. Hellenistic Period (ca. 300 BC – 0 AD) elinisturi xana (Zv.w. IV saukunis bolo – Zv.w. I saukunis dasasruli) The Hellenistic period is usually said to extend from the accession of Alexander the Great to the throne of Macedonia in 336 BC to the death of Cleopatra VII of Egypt in 30 BC. During the late 4th-early 3rd centuries BC, the eastern Georgian Kartli Kingdom emerged as a powerful force and created a single Georgian civilization. According to writen sources from medieval Georgia, 90 Past and Future Heritage in the Pipelines Corridor elinisturi xana, zogierTi mosazrebiT, Zv.w. 336 wels aleqsandre makedonelis taxtze asvlidan iwyeba da Zv.w. 31 wels, egvi ptis dedofal kleopatra VII-is gardacvalebiT, mTavrdeba. Zv.w IV-III saukuneebis mijnaze qarTlis samefo mniSvnelovan regionalur Zalad Camoyalibda da saTave daudo erTian qarTul civilizacias. Parnavaz, the representative of the aristocracy in Mtskheta, the ancient capital of Georgia, defeated his rival Azo and declared himself King of Kartli. Parnavaz created a system of military, iscal, and administrative units, subdividing the country into several counties, called saeristavos, which paid tributes to the king. Parnavaz also established a single national cult around the supreme deity, Armazi, who personiied the supreme ruler of the state. During the 3rd century BC, the Kartli (Iberia) Kingdom grew in power and expanded to the west. Incessant warfare characterized the following two centuries, with the kingdom forced to defend itself against numerous invasions. When the close association between Armenia and Pontus (currently located in north Turkey) resulted in an invasion by Pompey in 66-65 BC, King Artag of Kartli was forced to become a subordinate ally of Rome. Numerous important sites in Georgia dating from this time have been excavated, including cities, temples, and cemeteries. However, until the pipeline project, no setlements had been found in this location. The project conducted the excavation at Skhalta, which included both a setlement and a cemetery. The structures there were quadrangular, built of stone and possibly mud brick. The population mostly engaged in animal husbandry, along with gardening, viticulture, and cultivation of wheat and lax. Sixty graves were excavated at Skhalta, including square stone tombs and pit burials. There were bones of sacriicial sheep and goats on the surface of the graves, and human remains inside them. qarTuli werilobiTi wyaroebis Tanaxmad, mcxeTeli aristokratiis warmomadgenelma farnavazma brZolaSi daamarcxa Tavisi metoqe azo da Tavi qarTlis mefed gamoacxada. man Seqmna samxedro, fiskaluri da administraciuli sistema. qveyana daiyo saerisTaovebad, sadac samefo xarki ikrifeboda. farnavazma aseve Seqmna erTiani saxelmwifo religia, romlis saTaveSi mefesTan gaigivebuli RvTaeba – armazi idga. Zv.w. III saukuneSi qveyana Zlierdeboda da sazRvrebs afarToebda. Semdgomi ori saukune omianobis xana iyo. Zv.w 66-65 wlebSi, pontosa (Tanamedrove CrdiloeT TurqeTi) da armeniis mokavSire romaelma sardalma pompeusma qarTlSi gailaSqra. mefe artagma mas winaaRmdegoba ver gauwia da igi iZulebuli gaxda Tavi romis “mokavSired da megobrad” gamoecxadebina. saqarTveloSi elinisturi xanis araerTi Zeglia gaTxrili. miuxedavad amisa, qvemo qarTlSi kargad Semonaxuli namosaxlari ar iyo Seswavlili. milsadenebis teritoriis arqeologiuri Seswavlisas TeTriwyaros raionSi gaiTxara am periodis nasaxlari da samarovani - A sxalTa. aq mikvleuli Senobebi qviTa da aliziT iyo nagebi. dadginda, rom mosaxleoba eweoda mebaReobasa da mevenaxeobas, agreTve mohyavdaT xorbali da seli. samarovanze 60 samarxi (ormosamarxebi da qvayuTebi) gaiTxara. samarxebis Tavze Sewiruli cxvrebisa da Txebis Zvlebi aRmoCnda. kulturuli memkvidreobis ZeglebiPmilsadenebis derefanSi, warsuli da momavali 91 This well-preserved wooden comb (on the right) from Skhalta, Georgia, is a rare ind for a Hellenistic site. Curly locks were the style of both women and men, and combs were created to secure hair accessories made of lowers, myrtle, and ivy, often in the shape of wreaths. The ear cleaner (left) is a rare example of one made from bone; most ear cleaners found from the Hellenistic period were made of bronze. es patara, xis savarcxeli (marjvniv) sxalTidan (saqarTvelo) kargadaa Semonaxuli. aseTi nivTebi elinisturi xanis Zeglebze Zalze iSviaTad gvxvdeba. ilari (marcxniv) yuris gasawmendad gamoiyeneboda. igi Zvlisaganaa damzadebuli, rac didi iSviaTobaa. rogorc wesi, am nivTebs liTonisagan amzadebdnen. 92 Past and Future Heritage in the Pipelines Corridor These three tools from Skhalta are made of iron. The battle axe (left) and the spear head (middle) were placed next to the face or arms of deceased male warriors. The rarely found adze (right) was used to shape and trim wood and may have belonged to a woodworker. sxalTaSi aRmoCenili iaraRi rkinisaganaa damzadebuli. sabrZolo (marcxniv) culi da Subispiri (SuaSi) meomrebis samarxebSia aRmoCenili. rkinis eCo (marjvniv) xis dasamuSavebeli instrumentia da, savaraudod, durgals ekuTvnoda. kulturuli memkvidreobis ZeglebiPmilsadenebis derefanSi, warsuli da momavali 93 Extraordinary artistic ability and craftsmanship are evident in these fragments of a ceramic lamp found at a site in Klde, Georgia. It features a relief of Pegasus, the winged horse supposedly sired by Poseidon. Tixis Wraqis es natexebi saqarTveloSi, kldis namosaxlarzea aRmoCenili da xelosnis maRal ostatobaze migviTiTebs.Mmasze mfrinavi raSi pegasia gamosaxuli. 94 Past and Future Heritage in the Pipelines Corridor This silver coin is believed to have been issued by the Parthian King Gotarzes I, who ruled the Parthian Empire from 95-90 BC. The Empire at its greatest extent included portions of Georgia, as well as most of what is today the Middle East. saqarTvelos teritoriaze gavrcelebuli parTiis mefe gotarzes vercxlis draqmebi (aRmoCenilia kldis namosaxlarze) am qveynis did gavlenaze metyvelebs. parTiis imperia Sua aziisa da iranis teritorias moicavda da kavkasiazec avrcelebda Tavis gavlenas. kulturuli memkvidreobis ZeglebiPmilsadenebis derefanSi, warsuli da momavali 95 This carnelian stone from a silver ring found at Klde, Georgia, depicts three standing igures wearing long chitons or mantles folded at the waist with ribbons. The igure on the right might be Demeter, goddess of the seasons, while the central igure might be Nemesis, the spirit of divine retribution. kldis namosaxlarze napovni vercxlis beWdis sardionis intalioze gamosaxulia fexze mdgomi, grZel qitonebSi gamowyobili sami figura. marjvena gamosaxuleba weliwadis droebis RvTaeba demetra unda iyos, centrSi ki - RvTaebrivi SurisZiebis suli nemezida. 96 Past and Future Heritage in the Pipelines Corridor Kartli (Iberian) Kingdom to the Late Classical Period (ca. 0 – 400 AD) qarTlis (iberiis) samefo gvianantikur xanaSi (I – IV saukuneebi) In the irst century AD the Kartli (Iberia) Kingdom was under the cultural inluence of Rome and the Parthian empires, later replaced by the Sassanian empire in 226 AD. evidence of close political and cultural relationships between Rome and Kartli are well represented on a noteworthy stone inscription discovered at Mtskheta, which notes that the Roman Emperor Vespasian supported Mithridates, “the friend of the Caesars” and king “of the Roman-loving Iberians,” in reconstructing the fortiication of Mtskheta in 75 AD. During this period, a trade road running from India to Greece crossed the territory of Kartli. Kartli controlled the most important passes of the Central Caucasus, which meant it protected the central Asian domains of Rome from the invasion of aggressive nomadic tribes from the northern Caucasus. Consequently, the Romans proited from a strengthening of Kartli. The importance of the Kartli Kingdom to Rome grew in the 2nd century. During the reign of the Roman emperor Antoninus Pius in the 2nd quarter of the 2nd century AD, King Pharsman II of Kartli visited Rome, where a statue was erected in his honor. axali welTaRricxvis pirvel saukuneSi qarTlis samefo romisa da parTiis imperiebis kulturuli gavlenas ganicdida. 226 wels parTiis nacvlad Tanamedrove iranis teritoriaze sasanuri irani Caenacvla. romisa da qarTlis politikursa da kulturul urTierTobaze metyvelebs mcxeTis maxloblad aRmoCenili, 75 wliT daTariRebuli, warwera, romlis mixedviT irkveva, rom imperator vespasianes Tavisi “megobrisaTvis”, qarTlis romaelTmoyvare mefe miTridatesaTvis mcxeTis galavani ganuaxlebia. am droisaTvis indoeTidan saberZneTisaken mimavali gza qarTlis teritorias kveTda. qarTls epyra kavkasiis mniSvnelovani uReltexilebi da Crdilo kavkasiis momTabare tomebis moZraobis gakontroleba SeeZlo. Sesabamisad, romi dainteresebuli iyo qarTlTan kargi urTierTobebiT, rac misi aziuri samflobeloebis CrdiloeTidan dacvas niSnavda. meore saukuneSi qarTli kidev ufro angariSgasawevi Zala gaxda. II saukunis meore meoTxedSi qarTlis mefe farsmani imperator antoninus piusis miwveviT roms estumra, ris aRsaniSnavad marsis velze misi qandakeba daidga. kulturuli memkvidreobis ZeglebiPmilsadenebis derefanSi, warsuli da momavali 97 During the following two centuries, the new Persian empire led by the Sassanid dynasty made control over the South Caucasus a main objective of its expansion. Kartli stood irmly with Rome and opposed the Persian empire. An impressive expression of its Roman orientation was the declaration of Christianity as the state religion. During the 1st century AD, the Apostle Saint Andrew brought Christianity into Georgia, a small part of the population adopted it. Finally, in 326 AD, during the reign of King Mirian, a Cappadocian woman, Saint Nino converted Kartli to that religion. Many scholars argue that the Georgian alphabet was created in the 4th or 5th century AD to make religious scripture more accessible to Georgians. The oldest examples of Georgian writing are from two 5th century AD inscriptions, one found in a church in Bethlehem, and the second in the church of Bolnisi Sioni, currently in the southern part of Georgia. Although Georgian historical tradition atributed the invention of the Georgian alphabet to Parnavaz I of Kartli in the 3rd century BC, there is no clear evidence of it prior to these inscriptions from the 5th century AD. 6 mesame saukunis ocian wlebSi warmoSobilma axalma iranulma saxelmwifom - sasanurma imperiam Tavisi eqspansiis erT-erT samizned kavkasia SearCia. Semdgomi ori saukunis ganmavlobaSi qarTli ZiriTadad romaul orientacias inarCunebda, ris magaliTad 326 wels, mefe mirianis zeobisas, qristianobis saxelmwifo religiad gamocxadebac kmara. qristianoba saqarTveloSi jer kidev I saukuneSi Semovida, rodesac andria pirvelwodebulma aqauri mosaxleobis nawilis moqceva SeZlo. kapadokieli qalwulis, wminda ninos qadagebas ki mirian mefis gaqristianebac mohyva. mecnierebis azriT, qarTuli anbani IV-V saukuneebSi Seiqmna. misi uZvelesi nimuSebi cnobilia V saukunis Zeglebidan – beTlemidan da bolnisis sionidan. 6 miuxedavad imisa, rom qarTuli istoriuli wyaroebi qarTuli damwerlobis SemoRebas Zv.w. III saukunis mefes, farnavaz I-s ukavSireben, jer-jerobiT am mosazrebis dadastureba ar xerxdeba da V saukuneze adreuli damwerlobis nimuSi ar Cans. Early Medieval Period (ca. 400 – 1000 AD) adre Suasaukuneebi (V – IX saukuneebi) Georgia’s medieval culture was greatly inluenced by eastern Christianity and the Georgian Orthodox Apostolic Church, which promoted and oten sponsored the creation of many works of religious devotion. During the 5th century AD, Peter the Iberian (or Peter of Iberia), a Georgian Orthodox saint and prominent igure in early Christianity, founded Bethlehem, the irst Georgian monastery outside Georgia. During this period, Sassanian kings conquered the neighboring countries and appointed a viceroy in Kartli who promoted the teachings of Zoroaster. However, eforts to convert the common Georgian people were generally unsuccessful. 98 Past and Future Heritage in the Pipelines Corridor Sua saukuneebis qarTul kulturaze didi gavlena moaxdina qarTulma marTlmadideblurma samociqulo eklesiam, romlis wiaRSic warmoiSva araerTi religiuri da saero naSromi. V saukuneSi moRvawe wmindanis, petre iberielis mier beTlemSi daaarsebuli monasteri saqarTvelos gareT arsebuli pirveli qarTuli monasteri iyo. am droisaTvis iranis sasanianma Sahebma mezobeli qveynebi dai pyres da qarTlSi TavianTi moxele gamoagzavnes, raTa mas aq cecxlTayvanismcemloba gaevrcelebina. miuxedavad maTi didi survilisa, es mcdeloba warumatebeli aRmoCnda. Table showing ancient and modern Georgian alphabets. cxrilSi warmodgenilia Zveli da axali qarTuli anbanebi. kulturuli memkvidreobis ZeglebiPmilsadenebis derefanSi, warsuli da momavali 99 The Svetitskhoveli (“Living Pillar”) Cathedral in Mtskheta, Georgia, was built in the 11th century AD on the site of an earlier church. Legend holds that Jesus’s robe was buried at this site. sveticxovelis sakaTedro taZari mcxeTaSi XI saukuneSi aigo adreuli taZris adgilze. aq macxovris kvarTia dakrZaluli. 100 Past and Future Heritage in the Pipelines Corridor In the second half of the 5th century AD, King Vakhtang Gorgasali successfully uniied the people of the Transcaucasus against the Sassanid dynasty. He is associated with the founding of Tbilisi. In the early 6th century AD, Vakhtang Gorgasali was killed in the struggle against the Persians; by the end of the century Sassanian kings abolished the monarchy in Kartli, making it a Persian province. From the beginning of the 7th century AD, Byzantium predominated in western and eastern Georgia, until the Arabs invaded the Caucasus. Arab invaders reached Kartli in the mid-7th century AD and forced its prince to recognize the Caliph as his suzerain. At the beginning of the 9th century AD, Prince Ashot Bagrationi, the irst of a new, local Bagrationi Dynasty, established himself as hereditary Prince of Iberia. 7 Throughout the early Medieval Period, Georgian Christian literature and architecture, mainly religious, lourished. Commendable examples of the cultural life of Georgia in this period are the Holy Cross Church in Mtskheta (6th century AD), the monastic complex of Davit Gareji, and the oldest surviving work of Georgian literature, “The Passion of Saint Shushanik” by Jakob Tsurtaveli, writen between 476 and 483. In the 9th century AD, a prominent Georgian ecclesiastic, St. Grigol Khanzteli (Gregory of Khandzta) founded numerous monastic communities in Tao-Klarjeti in southwest Georgia. These monasteries and their scriptoria functioned as centers of knowledge for centuries and played an important role in the formation of the Georgian state. V saukunis meore naxevarSi qarTlis mefe vaxtang gorgasali, romelsac Tbilisis daaarseba miewereba, saTaveSi Caudga transkavkasiur antiiranul ajanyebas, romelmac sruliad qarTli da somxeTi moicva. VI saukunis dasawyisSi vaxtang gorgasali iranelebis winaaRmdeg brZolaSi daiRupa. amave saukuneSi sasanianebma qarTlis samefos gauqmeba moaxerxes, igi sparseTis provinciad aqcies da aq marzpani daniSnes. VII saukunis ocian wlebSi bizantiam saqarTvelos dasavleTsa da aRmosavleT mxareebSi nawilobrivi kontrolis daweseba SeZlo, magram amave saukunis Sua xanSi kavkasiaSi arabebi SemoiWrnen da qarTlis erismTavari aiZules maTi qveSevrdomi gamxdariyo. IX saukunis dasawyisSi aSot bagrationma samxreT saqarTveloSi damoukidebeli samTavro daaarsa da bagrationTa samefo dinastias daudo safuZveli. 7 adre Sua saukuneebi qarTuli qristianuli literaturisa da xuroTmoZRvrebis arnaxuli ayvavebis peiodia. am kulturuli cxovrebis magaliTia sayovelTaod cnobili jvris taZari da daviT garejis monasteri. amave periods miekuTvneba qarTuli mwerlobis uZvelesi, Cvenamde moRweuli nawarmoebi, iakob curtavelis “SuSanikis wameba”, romelic 476-483 wlebs Soris daiwera. IX saukuneSi moRvaweobda didi qarTveli sasuliero moRvawe wminda grigol xanZTeli, romelmac saqarTvelos samxreT-dasavleT nawilSi - tao-klarjeTSi (amJamad TurqeTis nawili) araerTi monasteri daaarsa. saukuneebis ganmavlobaSiAam monastrebSi iqmneboda mniSvnelovani sasuliero da saero literatura. am monastrebs saganmanaTleblo funqciac hqondaT. kulturuli memkvidreobis ZeglebiPmilsadenebis derefanSi, warsuli da momavali 101 Excavations for the SCP project produced this inscribed cross from the Atskuri winery. Archaeologists believe the inscription stands for Tsminda and Giorgi (Saint George). awyuris marnebis gaTxrebisas aRmoCenil am jvarze amokveTilia warwera “wminda giorgi”. 102 Past and Future Heritage in the Pipelines Corridor Georgia from 1000 to 1300 AD saqarTvelo X – XIII saukuneebSi In the late 10th and early 11th centuries AD, King Bagrat III brought the various principalities of Georgia together to form a united Georgian state. In 1121, near Didgori, King David IV defeated the coalition of Seljuk Turk troops. King David, oten referred to as David the Builder, spared no efort to strengthen the country. He reformed the army, regenerated the economy, altered the activities of the church, and strengthened the governmental system. When he died in 1125, he let Georgia as a strong regional power. X saukunis dasasrulsa da XI saukunis dasawyisSi mefe bagrat mesamem saqarTvelos samefo-samTavroebi gaaerTiana. 1121 wels, mefe daviT meoTxem, romelic aRmaSeneblis saxeliTaa cnobili, didgoris maxloblad seljukTa koaliciuri armia gaanadgura. man samxedro da administraciuli reforma Caatara, eklesiis roli CarCoebSi moaqcia, gaajansaRa ekonomika da ganamtkica saxelmwifiebrioba. gardacvalebis (1125) Semdeg ki man STamomavlobas Zlieri saqarTvelo dautova. A partially reconstructed jar or cup recovered from a site near the Chivchavi Gorge in southern Georgia. nawilobriv aRdgenili Tixis WurWeli WivWavis xeobidan. kulturuli memkvidreobis ZeglebiPmilsadenebis derefanSi, warsuli da momavali 103 The most glorious sovereign of Georgia was Queen Tamar (1184-1213), and in Georgia the period from the 12th-13th centuries AD is known as “The Golden Age.” The country’s militarypolitical strength relied on a diverse economy. The main centers of trade and handicrat were cities, including Tbilisi, where approximately 100,000 people lived at the beginning of the 13th century. Centers of education, including the celebrated Gelati and Ikalto monasteries, created academies that taught philosophy, astronomy, mathematics, rhetoric, and music. A collection of Georgian historical essays entitled Kartlis Tskhovreba, created in the 12th century, chronicles the lives of authors from the 8th-12th centuries AD and became the authoritative description of the history of Georgia until the time when new essays were added to the original volume. One masterpiece of Georgian medieval literature is the romantic epic by Shota Rustaveli called “Knight in the Panther’s Skin.” Completed at the end of the 12th century, Rustaveli’s poem is imbued with humanistic thoughts and feelings. saqarTvelos erT-erT saxelovan da gamorCeul mefed Tamar mefe (11841213 ww.) iTvleba. XII-XIII saukuneebi ki saqarTvelos istoriaSi oqros xanadaa cnobili. qveynis samxedro-politikuri Zliereba ganviTarebul ekonomikas eyrdnoboda, hyvaoda vaWrobisa xelosnobis centrebi – qalaqebi, maT Soris Tbilisic, sadac XIII saukunis dasawyisisaTvis 100000 adamianze meti cxovrobda. saganmanaTleblo centrebSi - iyalTosa da gelaTis monastrebis saxelganTqmul akademiebSi religiis garda iswavleboda filosofia, astronomia, maTematika, ritorika da musika. XII saukuneSi Seiqmna qarTuli istoriuli wyaroebis krebuli “qarTlis cxovreba”, romelic momdevno xanebSi axal-axali naSromebiT ivseboda. humanisturi idebiT gamsWvaluli, qarTuli literaturis Sedevri, SoTa rusTavelis poema “vefxistyaosani”, swored XII saukunis dasasrulsaa Seqmnili. saqarTvelo XIV – XVVII saukuneebSi Georgia from the 1300 to 1800 AD Following the invasion of Mongols in the middle of the 13th century AD, the Georgian Kingdom began to disintegrate, coming under the domination of the Mongols by 1240. Although King Giorgi V reuniied the kingdom in the 14th century, his success was short-lived. During the subsequent century, the country sufered economic and political decline. In the end of the 14th century and in the beginning of the 15th centuries with ruthless violence, the Tatars of Tamerlane invaded Georgia eight times. In the 1460s the kingdom fractured into several states: the Kingdom of Kartli, the Kingdom of Imereti, Kingdom of Kakheti and the Principality of Samtskhe. In the 16th century Georgia became a batleground between the Otoman and Safavid Empires. Prey to a succession of invaders at the turn of the 104 Past and Future Heritage in the Pipelines Corridor XIII saukunis 30-ian wlebSi saqarTveloSi monRolebi SemoiWrnen da qveyana daimorCiles. monRolTa batonobas qveynis dayofac mohyva. XIV saukuneSi giorgi brwyinvalem misi xelaxla gaerTianeba da gaZliereba moaxerxa, magram misi warmateba xanmokle aRmoCnda; qveyana politikuradac da ekonomikuradac dasustebuli iyo. XIV saukunis bolosa da XV saukunis dasawyisSi saqarTveloSi rvajer ilaSqra Temur lengma, romelmac sastikad aaoxra qveyana. XV saukunis 60-ian wlebSi saqarTvelo sam samefod (qarTli, kaxeTi da imereTi) da erT samTavrod (samcxe) daiSala, rasac XVI saukuneSi osmaleTisa da iranis imperiebs Soris saqarTvelosaTvis brZola mohyva. XVII saukuneSi osmalebTan da iranTan 17th century, the population of Tbilisi fell to no more than 10,000 people. By the 17th century, both eastern and western Georgia had sunk into poverty as the result of the constant warfare, which mainly involved batles for supremacy between the Otoman and Safavid Empires. Georgian culture likewise sufered in the 15th-17th centuries. Nevertheless, there were distinguished examples of wall paintings, miniatures, embroidery, literature, and scientiic discovery. It was against this backdrop that Georgian kings sought an ally in Russia, which annexed the Georgian states in the 19th century. Wine production and consumption have held an important place in Georgian culture and history for centuries. Writen sources and archaeological material conirm that viticulture was an integral part of life during the Classical Period, at which time the god of the vine, Dionysus, was a popular focus of worship. The myth of Dionysus relates that he travelled to strange lands where he taught men the culture of wine. The excavations uncovered jars dating to the 6th millennium BC at Shulaveri in southeastern Georgia, with a residue of wine still present on their inner surfaces. These jars provide some of the earliest evidence of the consumption of wine in ancient societies. Grape pips dating from the 7th-5th millennia BC found at the same site also suggest the very early cultivation of vineyards in ancient Georgia. The tradition of viniculture continued even during the continuing clashes of armies during this period in Georgia. Wineries were some of the most interesting archaeological sites of the Medieval Period to be excavated along the pipeline route in Georgia. In the vicinity of the village of Atskuri in Samtskhe, where viticulture historically has been a major activity, archaeologists excavated seven wine cellars dating from the 10th-16th centuries AD. Their construction and elements are similar to those found today in Georgian villages. gauTavebeli omianobis gamo qarTuli samefo-samTavroebi gaRaribda, Tbilisis mosaxleoba ki 10000 adamianamde Semcirda. qarTulma kulturam Zveli simaRleebi ver SeinarCuna, magram, miuxedavad didi gaWirvebisa, mainc iqmneboda gamorCeuli freskebi da miniaturebi, iwereboda mniSvnelovani mxatvruli da samecnierebo naSromebi. qarTveli mefeebi mZime mdgomareobidan gamosavals erTmorwmune ruseTTan kavSirSi xedavdnen, magram XIX saukuneSi am qveyanam qarTuli saxelmwifoebi dai pyro da gaauqma maTi damoukidebloba. Rvinis warmoeba da moxmareba saukuneebis ganmavlobaSi qarTuli kulturis mniSvnelovani komponenti iyo. arqologiuri masalisa da werilobiTi wyaroebis mixedviT, aq meRvineoba uZvelesi droidan iyo ganviTarebuli. samxreT saqarTveloSi, Sulaveris namosaxlarze, aRmoCenili qvevrebi da yurZnis wi pwebi Zv.w. VII-VI aTaswleulebiT TariRdeba, rac aq kulturuli jiSis - vazis moyvanaze migviTiTebs.Aantikuri xanis saqarTveloSi ki erT-erTi yvelaze gavrcelebuli Rvinis RvTaeba - dionises kulti iyo. meRvineobis tradiciebi xangrZlivi saomari moqmedebebis drosac ar wydeboda. milsadenebis teritoriaze warmoebuli arqeologiuri gaTxrebidan sayuradReboa samcxeSi, sof. awyurTan gamovlenili Sua saukuneebis marnebi. samcxeSi mevenaxeoba kargad iyo ganviTarebuli. aq aRmoCnda X-XVI saukuneebis marnebi, romelTa msgavs nagebobebs qarTul soflebSi dResac ki SexvdebiT. kulturuli memkvidreobis ZeglebiPmilsadenebis derefanSi, warsuli da momavali 105 This grooved clay vessel uncovered at the Büyükardıç site contained iron residue and the two holes in its shoulder. The vessel, an artifact commonly found at Bronze and Iron Age sites in eastern Anatolia, was likely used for heating and creating metal objects. buiuqardiCSi aRmoCenili Tixis es WurWeli rkinis widas Seicavs. mis mxarze ori xvrelia datovebuli. rogorc Cans, igi liTonis nivTebis dasamzadeblad gamoiyeneboda. Turkey TurqeTi Late Bronze Age to Iron Age (ca. 1500 – 400 BC) gvianbrinjaodan rkinis xanamde A (Zv.w. 1500 – 400ww.) Anatolia was known as the “Land of the Hati” by the Akkadians as early as the third millennium BC, ater the Bronze Age people who dominated the region. The Hitites, an Indo-European-speaking people, replace the Hatis as rulers of Anatolia early in the second millennium BC. The Hitites adopted cuneiform writing from Assyrian traders and assumed control of the trading colonies spread throughout Anatolia. At its height, the Hitite Kingdom extended to Syria and Upper Mesopotamia, with its capital at Hatusa. Zv.w. III aTaswleulSi anatolia regionSi uZlieresi xalxis - aqadelebisaTvis, xaTis qveyanad iyo cnobili. indoevropeli xeTebi meore aTaswleulis dasawyisidan Caenacvlnen xaTebs da TavianTi Zalaufleba anatoliaze gaavrceles. xeTebma lursmuli damwerloba asureli vaWrebisgan gadaiRes da kontroli daaweses anatoliis savaWro qalaqebze. Zlierebis zenitSi myofi xeTebis samefo siriasa da zeda mesopotamiamde vrceldeboda, maTi dedaqalaqi ki xaTusa iyo. By the second half of the 13th century BC, the Hitite Kingdom was in decline and being pressured economically and politically by its neighbors. It fought the egyptians in the Levant under Ramses II, saw the Assyrians defeat its vassal state of Mitani in northern Syria, and faced incursions by the Sea Peoples (a confederacy of seafaring raiders). In 1180 BC the Kingdom collapsed and devolved into a number of neoHitite city states, including Tabal in southeast Anatolia and the Mushki Kingdom in Cappadocia (both now part of Turkey), Carchemish (on the frontier between Turkey and Syria), and Kammanu (in south-central Anatolia). The end of the Hitite Kingdom caused established political, military, economic, and social relations to change throughout eastern Anatolia, leading to the political and economic instability of the early Iron Age. An Early Iron Age Setlement at Büyükardıç Hill presented diicult conditions for setlers. Agriculture in this mountainous area was diicult due to the high altitude (2,050m), and long distance from the creek valley below. Yet within this context of a hilltop overlooking a key transportation corridor in northeastern Anatolia, a successful setlement appears to have lourished. This intriguing setlement yields insights into what was happening in this period of political unrest. 106 Past and Future Heritage in the Pipelines Corridor Zv.w. XIII saukunis meore naxevarSi xeTebis samefo dasustda da mezoblebma Seviwroeba dauwyes. levantSi igi ebrZoda ramzes III-is egvi ptes, asureTma daamarcxa Tavisi vasaluri qveyana miTani, mas ganuwyvetlad Tavs esxmodnen e.w zRvis xalxebi. Zv.w. 1180 wels xeTebis samefo daiSala ramdenime neoxeTur qalaqsaxelmwifod, Tabalebis (axlandeli samxreT-aRmosavleTi TurqeTi), musxebis (axlandeli kapadokia), qarxemiSisa (TurqeTisa da siriis sazRvarze) da qamanus samefoebad (samxreTi centraluri antolia). xeTebis samefos dacemam anatoliaSi arsebuli politikuri, samxedro, ekonomikuri da socialuri cvlilebebi gamoiwvia da adrerkinis xanis ekonomikur arastabilurobas daudo safuZveli. buiuqardiCis mTaze, sadac adrerkinis xanis dasaxleba aRmoCnda, sakmaod mkacri pirobebi iyo. didi simaRlis (zRvis donidan 2050 metri) gamo soflis meurneoba aq ver ganviTarda. igi mdebareobda mTis mwvervalze, romelic Crdilo-aRmosavleTi anatoliis mniSvnelovan satransporto arterias gadmohyurebda, rasac dasaxlebis These classical-era pieces are part of the collection of the Istanbul Archaeology Museum. ntikuri xanis WurWlis es natexebi stambulis muzeumis koleqciidanaa. kulturuli memkvidreobis ZeglebiPmilsadenebis derefanSi, warsuli da momavali 107 These cave dwellings, built into “fairy chimneys” near Goreme in Cappadocia in central Turkey, appear to have been occupied in the Late Bronze Age, around the time of the Hittite Empire. kldeSi nakveTi es sacxovrisebi, romlebic centralur TurqeTSi, kapadokiaSi, goremes maxloblad, mdebareobs, gvianbrinjaos xanaSi, xeTebis imperiis dros iyo dasaxlebuli. 108 Past and Future Heritage in the Pipelines Corridor Colak Abdi Pasha, the bey of the then-Bayazit Province, constructed the Ishak Pasha Palace during the late 17th century AD. The location is now known at Agri Province, Turkey, not far from Mount Ararat (Ağrı Dağı). baiazeTis provinciis beim, abdil faSam ishak faSas sasaxle XVII saukunis dasasruls aago. igi Tanamedrove TurqeTSi, mTis araratis maxloblad mdebareobs. kulturuli memkvidreobis ZeglebiPmilsadenebis derefanSi, warsuli da momavali 109 110 Past and Future Heritage in the Pipelines Corridor The Library of Celsus at Ephesus, Turkey, was completed in 135 AD. celsusis biblioTekis mSenebloba efesoSi (TurqeTi) 135 wels damTavrda kulturuli memkvidreobis ZeglebiPmilsadenebis derefanSi, warsuli da momavali 111 even though this region was a great crossroads for trade and culture, in some historic periods those relationships declined very signiicantly, and there was a pronounced shit in focus to self-suiciency in preference to trade. Büyükardıç Hill would have been strategically signiicant to any ambitious King because it was situated at the center of crucial east-west trading routes that extended from the Araxes and Karasu valleys of the Caucasus, connecting Persia to eastern Anatolia. Passing through this territory, given its high altitude would have only been possible from spring to autumn, as snowpacks blocked winter travel. As the forces holding the region together (primarily the power of the Hitite Empire) collapsed, as major trade and population centers were abandoned or ruined in warfare, and as the movement of goods and people became a perilous undertaking, self-suicient setlements like Büyükardıç emerged in easily defended mountainous areas. evidence of this change were uncovered in Büyükardıç: the discovery of a possible early Iron Age metal working shop suggests that an atempt at a measure of self-suiciency, and the ceramics found at the site appear to be mainly of local origin. The setlement’s location on a hilltop and the discovery of several metal arrow points also suggest its occupants were very concerned with defense, even though the site itself was unfortiied. Yet despite Büyükardıç’s residents apparent desire for selfsuiciency, the turbulent political climate of the region forced smaller communities to occasionally form alliances in order to survive threats. This riton, a metal wine vessel uncovered at the site of the Tasmasor Hill excavation in northeastern Turkey, depicts a camel, which highlights the trade connections between the Middle East and Central Asia. es ritoni (liTonis yanwi) tamasoris mTaze, Crdilo TurqeTSia aRmoCenili. masze gamosaxuli aqlemi, savaraudod, axlo aRmosavleTsa da Sua azias Soris arsebuli savaWro urTierTobebis amsaxvelia. 112 Past and Future Heritage in the Pipelines Corridor ganviTarebisaTvis unda Seewyo xeli. arqeologiuri Zegli politikuri arastabilurobis periodis Sesaxeb gvawvdis informacias. kulturebis gzajvaredinsa da vaWrobis ganviTarebisaTvis xelsayreli mdebareobis miuxedavad, zog periodSi savaWro urTierTobebi Zalian mcirdeboda da sazogadoeba TviTkmar cxovrebaze gadadioda. buiuqardiCi mniSvnelovani iyo TiToeuli ambiciuri mefisaTvis, radgan igi ganTavsebuli iyo aRmosavleT_ dasavleTis savaWro gzis centrSi, romelic araqsisa da yarasus xeobebidan iwyeboda da sparseTsa da aRmosavleT anatolias erTmaneTTan akavSirebda. am gzis gavla didi simaRlis gamo zamTarSi SeuZlebeli iyo. rogorc ki regionis centaluri xelisufleba (savaraudod, xeTebis samefosi) moiSala, didi savaWro dasaxlebebi dacarielda da omianobisas daingra, saqonlis savaWrod gadatana ki saxifaTo gaxda, buiuqardiCis msgavsi TviTkmari dasaxlebebi kargad gamagrebul adgilebze gaCnda. es cvlileba kargad aisaxa buiuqardiCzec. adrerkinis xanis rkinis samWedlosa da keramikuli masala swored TviTkmarobaze migvaniSnebs. miuxedavad imisa, rom dasaxlebas galavani ar hqonda, mTis mwvervalze misi mdebareoba da saisre wertilebis arseboba migvaniSnebs, rom adgilobrivi mosaxleoba Tavdacvas yuradRebiT ekideboda. politikurma situaciam mcire Temebi aiZula Tavdacvis mizniT mokavSireebi eZebnaT da ufro didi gaerTianebebi SeeqmnaT. The abundance of coarse, handmade potery without surface treatment found at Büyükardıç is typical of the early Iron Age. However the 6,650 potsherds categorized into nineteen distinct ware groups uncovered at this site establishes the diverse range of stylistic and developmental atributes present onsite. Functionally, archaeologists have determined that some Büyükardıç poters used wheellooms, while others were hand-made. In terms of design, Büyükardıç potery displays red-slip, burnished, grooved, notched, incised, concentric circular impressions, rosete stamps, and painted decorations. Many of these features share commonalities with vessels found in Northwestern Iran, Georgia, Armenia, and eastern Thrace. Thus providing further evidence that trade was prevalent at Büyükardıç. Findings at Büyükardıç represent the transitional period from Late Bronze to early Iron Age that occurred in Anatolia during the 12th century and was probably built soon ater the collapse of the Hitite capital. Most Early Iron Age setlements of the region were fortiied and resetled following the collapse. The site is unique in that respect because it was not resetled, and thus provides crucial material evidence that has not been disturbed as drastically as related sites that were resetled. During the 6th and 5th centuries BC, the Persian Achaemenid empire had spread outwards with increasing power from its capital at Susa. In the middle of the 1st millennium BC, the empire came to include all of Anatolia and the southern Caucasus highlands. Sites excavated during the pipelines project at Tetikom and Tasmasor, situated along one of the ancient roads connecting central Anatolia with the highlands to the east and the Araxes River valley, have vastly enriched knowledge of the region under Achaemenid rule during the Late Iron Age. buiuqardiCze aRmoCenili xeliT naZerwi, zedapirdaumuSavebeli, uxeSi keramika adrerkinis xanisaTvisaa damaxasiaTebeli. Tixis WurWlis 6650 natexi, romelic 19 jgufad daiyo, sxvadasxva stilursa da teqnikuri TaviseburebebiT xasiaTdeboda. gairkva, rom zogi meTune keramikul morgvs iyenebda, zogi ki WurWels xeliT amzadebda. buiuqardiCis mTaze aRmoCenil keramikaSi gvxvdeba wiTlad naprialebi nimuSebi. zogierTi moxatuli iyo. gvxvdeba nakawri, amoRaruli ornamenti, varduliani Stampi, koncentruli amoRaruli xazebi. bevr WurWels saerTo aqvs Crdilo iranis, saqarTvelos, somxeTisa da aRmosavleT Trakiis keramikasTan, rac gare samyarosTan vaWrobis dasturad gamodgeba. buiuqardiCis gaTxrebisas mopovebuli arqeologiuri masala Zegls gvianbrinjaodan, vidre adrerkinis xanaze gardamavali periodiT, Zv.w. XII saukuniT aTariRebs. es dasaxleba xeTebis imperiis dedaqalaqis dacemis Semdeg swrafadve augiaT. adre rkinis xanis dasaxlebebis umetesoba galavanSemortymuli iyo da imperiis dacemis Semdegaa dasaxlebuli. Zegli imiTaa mniSvnelovani, rom aq mopovebuli masala saSualebas iZleva adrerkinis xanaze gardamavali mTeli periodis uwyvet cxovrebas misi meSveobiT gavadevnoT Tvali. The front side of this coin, found at Minnetpinari (where remains of a church with a basilica design were uncovered), shows a lightly crowned and draped bust facing right. On the reverse side, a soldier with helmet and armor is standing with his head also facing right. He holds a lance in his right hand and a shield resting on the ground in his left hand. mineTfinarSi, sadac bazilikuri eklesiis naSTebi aRmoCnda, napovni monetis Sublze, marjvena profilSi, gvirgviniani adamianis portretia gamosaxuli. monetis zurgze marjvniv mimarTuli, muzaradiani meomris gamosaxulebaa datanili, romelsac marjvena xelSi Subi uWiravs, marcxenaSi ki – fari. Zv.w. VI-V saukuneebSi aqemenidurma iranma, romlis dedaqalaqi suza iyo, Tavisi Zalaufleba kidev ufro ganamtkica da samxreT kavkasiasa da antoliaSic gabatonda. milsadenis teritoriis Seswavlisas telikonsa da tasmasorSi aRmoCenilma Zeglebma, romlebic anatoliisa da araqsis xeobaze gamavali uZvelesi gzebis maxloblad iyo, regionis aqemenidebis droindeli yofis Sesaxeb arsebuli codna mniSvnelovnad gaamdidra da gaaRrmava. kulturuli memkvidreobis ZeglebiPmilsadenebis derefanSi, warsuli da momavali 113 The Hagia Sophia in Istanbul contains examples of the inest mosaic art, including this famous mosaic depicting Jesus Christ. stambulis aia sofias taZarSi brwyinvale mozaikuri panoebia daculi, maT Sorisaa macxovris sayovelTaod cnobili gamosaxulebac. 114 Past and Future Heritage in the Pipelines Corridor Perhaps the longest continuously inhabited site found during the archaeological excavations during this project was Tasmasor. Discovered at Tasmasor Hill, and located on the erzurum Plain of Northeastern Turkey, Tasmasor was of great geopolitical importance as competing empires vied for dominance in the ancient world. The erzurum and Pasinler Plains separated by the Kargapazari mountain range form a natural pass just south of Tasmasor connecting two important regions of Northeast Anatolia, as well as allowing access from Anatolia into the Caucasus and Iranian steppe. Control of this gateway, known as the Deveboynu pass, was crucial for east-west trade connections in Anatolia, and was one of the few passable routes available for Iron Age empires. Guided by Assoc. Prof. S. Yücel Şenyurt, the excavation of Tasmasor Hill initially uncovered a medieval housing complex dating to the 12th century AD, which contained minimal material remains. In the midst of unearthing this structure, Şenyurt’s team chanced upon two pit burials that displayed characteristics common to this region during the Iron Age. Soon ater structural foundations made from river stones were found accompanying the previously discovered graves. Unfortunately the original provenance of artifacts discovered at Tasmasor has been lost as the natural stratigraphy of this site was unsetled from continuous reoccupation. This hindered the ability for Şenyurt and his team to accurately cross-reference material found at Tasmasor with that of neighboring sites believed to share cultural characteristics. samSeneblo proeqtis mimdinareobisas Seswavlili ZeglTa Soris uwyveti da xangrZlivi arsebobiT tamasori gamoirCeva. igi mdebareobs Crdilo-aRmosavleT TurqeTSi, erzrumis vakeze, tamasoris mTaze. erTmaneTTan dapirispirebuli imperiebisaTvis mas mniSvnelovani geopolitikuri mdebareoba hqonda. erzrumisa da fasinleris vakeebs hyofs yarafazaris qedi. swored tamasoris maxlobladaa devenbois uReltexili, romelic anatoliis am or mniSvnelovan mxares akavSirebs. am gziT anatoliidan SesaZlebelia kavkasiaSi da iranis stepebSi gadasvla. karibWis kontroli gadamwyveti iyo anatoliis aRmosavleTsa da dasvleTs Soris vaWrobaSi. rkinis xanaSi arsebuli mcirericxovani gadasasvlelebTagan igi erT-erTi mniSvnelovani iyo da mis dasaufleblad imperiebi ibrZodnen. P prof. iusuf senuirTis xelmZRvanelobiT Catarebulma arqeologiurma gaTxrebma tamasoris mTaze Sua saukuneebis, kerZod XII saukunis, sacxovrebeli kompleqsi gamoavlina. igi mcire raodenobis arqeologiur masalas Seicavda. erTi nagebobis Seswavlisas rkinis xanis samarxebi gamoCnda, mogvianebiT ki, amave periodis nagebobebic gamovlinda. These Byzantine coins found at Tasmasor Hill, located in the historically strategic Erzurum Plain of northeastern Turkey, were likely in circulation until 1070-1080 AD, when the Seljuk Empire assumed political authority of the region. The coins show Jesus Christ with a cross on his head and a nimbus of single-point ornaments on his arms, raising his right hand as if sanctifying, and holding the Bible in his left hand. es bizantiuri monetebi aRmoCenilia tamasoris mTaze, romelic CrdiloaRmosavleT TurqeTSi, erzurumis vakeze mdebareobs. am adgils istoriulad strategiuli mniSvneloba hqonda. monetebi mimoqcevaSi unda yofiliyo 1070-1080 wlebamde. monetebze gamosaxulia ieso qriste. mas Tavze Saravandi adgas, romelsac jvris ornamenti amkobs; marjvena xeli kurTxevad aqvs apyrobili, xolo marcxena xelSi biblia uWuravs. tamasorSi aRmoCenili artefaqtebi metwilad maTi Tavdapirveli adgilidan daZruli iyo. imis gamo, rom teritoriis xangrZlivi periodis dausaxleblobam stratigrafiuli monacemebi ar gamoavlina, amitom senuirTis gundma maxloblad arsebuli arqeologiuri Zeglebis masalebi safuZvlianad Seiswavla. kulturuli memkvidreobis ZeglebiPmilsadenebis derefanSi, warsuli da momavali 115 The Hellenistic Greek, Roman, and Byzantine Periods (ca. 400 BC – 700 AD) The Hellenistic period that began around the time of Alexander the Great greatly inluenced the regions of Anatolia lying along the pipeline corridor. The Batle of Issus—the second of three great batles between the Alexander’s Macedonian army and the Persian Achaemenids—was fought in 333 BC on a plain approximately 30 kilometers from Ceyhan, the terminus of the BTC pipeline. emperor Darius III personally led the Persian forces at Issus. Although the Macedonians were heavily outnumbered and cut of from their supply lines, they crushed the Persians, forcing Darius to lee. He consolidated his army for the subsequent Batle of Gaugamela, where the Achaemenids experienced their inal, crucial defeat. Within a few years of these triumphs, Alexander was dead, and Macedonian General Seleucus established his own dynasty in the parts of Alexander’s domain he then acquired. The Seleucid empire lasted for several hundred years and established control over much of the South Caucasus and eastern Anatolia. It proved to be a fascinating melting pot of leadership from the Macedonian and Greco-Mediterranean worlds, of indigenous cultures, and of political hierarchies inherited from the Achaemenids. The resulting Hellenistic culture combined elements from east (Persian/Achaemenid) and west (Greco/ Mediterranean). It was expressed in new forms of art and architecture, an expanding pantheon of gods, and the spread of a culturally distinctive style in ceramics and other crats. Powerful Mediterranean inluences also spread throughout eastern Anatolia and the South Caucasus during the Hellenistic Period. Roman control of the region reinforced economic and social connections there. elinisturi, berZnuli, romauli da bizantiuri periodebi (Zv.w. 400 – ax.w.700ww.) elinisturi xana aleqsandre makedonelis mier aziaze gavlenis damyarebis droidan daiwyo. 333 wels ifsusis vakeze, romelic jeihanidan 30 kilometriTaa daSorebuli, aleqsandre makedonelisa da aqemeniduri imperiis armiebs Soris brZola gaimarTa. imperatori darios III Tavad xelmZRvanelobda sparsTa jars. miuxedavad imisa, rom makedonelebi damxmare jars mowyvetilebi iyvnen, maT sparselebi gaanadgures, dariosma ki gaqceviT uSvela Tavs. dariosma kvlav Seagrova jari da momdevno brZola gavgamelasTan gamarTa, rasac sparselTa saboloo damarcxeba mohyva. didi gamarjvebebidan ramdenime weliwadSi aleqsandre gardaicvala da makedonelma generalma selevkosma sakuTari dinastia daaarsa. selevkidebis imperia ramdenime aswleulis ganmavlobaSi arsebobda da Zalauflebas kavkasiis did nawilsa da anatoliaze avrcelebda. es saxelmwifo makedonuri, berZnul-makedonuri da aqemeniduri samyaroebis tradiciebs aerTianebda, ris Sedegad warmoSobili elinisturi kultura aRmosavluri da dasavluri kulturebis nazavs warmoadgenda. es siaxle gamoixateboda mxatvrobasa da arqiteqturaSi, RmerTebis mravalferovan panTeonSi, agreTve keramikis warmoebisa da sxva xelobebis ganviTarebaSi. elinistur xanaSi xmelTaSuazRvispireTis gavlena aRmosavleT anatoliasa da samxreT kavkasiazec gavrcelda. romis dapyrobebma regionSi ekonomikursa da socialur sferoSi ZalTa axali gadanawileba warmoSva. milsadenebis proeqtis mimdinareobisas Seswavlili ori Zegli - ieqeroni da ziareTuiu elinistursa da romaul xanebs 116 Past and Future Heritage in the Pipelines Corridor Two Turkish sites researched during the pipelines project, Yuceoren and Ziyaretsuyu, represent the Hellenistic and the Roman Periods respectively. The necropolis of Yuceoren, located near the pipeline terminus at Ceyhan, contains numerous tombs cut into the bedrock, where portions of a sarcophagus and articles used to treat the dead were found. The setlement site of Ziyaretsuyu, near Sivas in northeastern Anatolia, contains the remains of a few domestic structures, painted ceramics and amphorae (large storage vessels), and a terracota igurine that provides a ine example of classical traits. (Both sites are discussed in greater detail in the next chapter.) During the 3rd century AD, the Roman empire began to encounter a range of challenges that led to its decline. These challenges included economic decline, invasions by “barbarians,” and a general decay of the social fabric that had been a major source of the empire’s appeal to its inhabitants. By the last decades of the century, the leadership in Rome was desperate for a way to maintain control of its sprawling empire. To this end, emperor Diocletian divided rule of the empire’s western and eastern parts between himself and a coemperor, Maximian. Less than a decade later, they added two additional, junior emperors. These four rulers, the Tetrarchy, held court in diferent parts of the empire. Ater Diocletian’s death in the early 4th century AD, years of conlict erupted as various aspirants vied to rule the empire. By 312 AD, Constantine emerged as the most powerful, although the conlicts lasted until 324, when he gained complete authority over the empire. miekuTvneba. ieqeronis samarovani jeihanis terminalTan axlos mdebareobs. aq dedaqanSi CaWrili akldamebia aRmoCenili. Crdilo-aRmosavleT anatoliaSi, sivasiis maxloblad mdebare ziareTuius namosaxlarze mikvleulia Senobebis naSTebi, moxatuli keramika, amforebi da terakotis figura. momdevno TavSi orive Zegli ufro detaluradaa aRwerili. ax.w. III saukuneSi romis imperia didi gamowvevebis winaSe idga, ramac mogvianebiT misi dacema ganapiroba. saxelmwifo mmarTvelobis krizisi, ekonomikis daqveiTeba da barbarosebis Semosevebi am procesis umniSvnelovanesi nawili iyo. saukunis bolo aTwledSi romis xelmZRvaneloba TavganwirviT cdilobda win aRdgomoda imperiis daSlas. am mizniT imperatorma diokletianem Tavis TanammarTvel maqsimians gaunawila Zalaufleba da imperia or nawilad _ aRmosavleTad da dasavleTad gahyo. aTi wlis Semdeg maT kidev ori, umcrosi Tanaimperatori daemataT. oTxi mmarTveli (tetrarqia) imperiis sxvadasxva mxaridan ganagebda qveynis saqmeebs. IV saukunis dasawyisSi, diokletianes gardacvalebis Semdeg, taxtisaTvis brZola wlebis ganmavlobaSi grZeldeboda, romelSiac sabolood, 312 wels, konstantinem gaimarjva. miuxedavad amisa, konfliqti sabolood mxolod 324 wels amoiwura, rodesac man Tavisi Zalauflebis gavrceleba mTeli imperiis teritoriaze SeZlo. The excavation of this small room at the Roman-era bath site of Kayranlıkgözü revealed the heated loor system known as a hypocaust. romauli abanos (kariranlikgozi) am mcire nawilSi hi pokausti, anu iatakis gaTbobis sistema aRmoCnda. kulturuli memkvidreobis ZeglebiPmilsadenebis derefanSi, warsuli da momavali 117 118 Past and Future Heritage in the Pipelines Corridor The Hagia Sophia was built in Constantinople under the direction of Emperor Justinian during the 6th century AD. It became a mosque after Ottoman Sultan Mehmet II conquered Constantinople. After serving for nearly 500 years as Istanbul’s principal mosque, it was converted into a museum in 1935. aia sofias taZari konstantinopolSi imperator iustinianes uSualo xelmZRvanelobiT VI saukuneSi aigo. rodesac qalaqi otomanebma aiRes, sulTan mehmed II–is brZanebiT igi meCeTad gadakeTda. 500 wlis Semdeg, 1935 wels, aq muzeumi gaixsna. kulturuli memkvidreobis ZeglebiPmilsadenebis derefanSi, warsuli da momavali 119 Constantine was one of the pivotal igures of the irst millennium AD. A convert to Christianity, he eventually established the precedence of this religion within the empire. He also moved the seat of his rule from Rome to Byzantium on the Bosphorus and renamed it Constantinople (now Istanbul), thus shiting the Empire’s center of gravity to the eastern Mediterranean. Over time, the eastern part of the Roman empire came to be known as the Byzantine empire. During the 5th and 6th centuries AD, the eastern empire grew in power and splendor, reaching its height during the 6th century AD under the reign of emperor Justinian, who introduced the Justinian Code, atempted to reestablish his authority over the western parts of the empire, and presided over great artistic achievements such as the construction of the Hagia (or Aya) Sophia (Church of the Holy Wisdom). The Byzantine empire dominated much of the eastern Mediterranean for several centuries, at its height controlling territory from Saudi Arabia to the Balkans, including all of Anatolia, and spreading the Christianity of the Byzantine Orthodox Church throughout the region. This partially broken cigarette holder, discovered at Akmezer, Turkey, is made from meerschaum, a soft white mineral. TurqeTSi, akmezarSi aRmoCenili es yalioni TeTri mineralisaganaa damzadebuli. 120 Past and Future Heritage in the Pipelines Corridor konstantine I aTaswleulis umniSvnelovanesi mmarTveli iyo. mis dros imperiis oficialur religiad qristianoba gamocxadda. man dedaqalaqi romidan bizantiumSi gadaitana da mas konstantinopoli uwoda. amgvarad, imperiis centrma aRmosavleTisaken gadmoinacvla. droTa ganmavlobaSi romis imperiis aRmosavleT nawils bizantia daerqva. V-VI saukuneebSi aRmosavleTi imperia Zlierdeboda da VI saukuneSi, imperator iustinianes zeobaSi, zenits miaRwia. iustinianem gamosca kanonTa krebuli, romelic iustinianes kodeqsis saxeliTaa cnobili, man scada Tavisi Zalufleba dasavleTiTac gaevrcelebina. mis dros aigo aia sofiis (wminda sibrZnis) brwyinvale taZaric. ramdenime saukunis ganmavlobaSi bizantiis imperia aRmosavleT xmelTaSuazRvispireTis udides nawils flobda da saudis arabeTidan balkaneTamde teritorias akontrolebda. imperiam mTel regionSi qristianoba gaavrcela. Eventually, however, the Empire lost ground, irst to the incursions of the Arabs and later the Turks. Islamic armies poured out of Arabia in the 7th century AD, capturing the Levant, Mesopotamia, and egypt within a few years. By late in the century, a boundary between the Byzantine empire and Arab world was established that lasted well into the 11th century AD, running from west of Ceyhan through eastern Anatolia to the highlands west of Azerbajan. By the 8th century AD, the Abbasid Caliphate had established a powerful capital at Baghdad, from which it led the Muslim world. Archaeological excavations along the pipeline corridor provided several glimpses into the world of eastern Anatolia during the Byzantine empire. Most of the sites are domestic in nature— simple villages and communities of ordinary people who probably went about their daily lives knowing litle about the Byzantine Empire or the emperor in Constantinople. Two sites however at Kayranlikgözü (a public bath complex) and Minnetpinari, provide glimpses of the more public side of the empire. One of the more fascinating sites along the pipeline corridor is the Roman period bath complex located at Kayranlıkgözü of Turkey’s Andırın district. Tucked in between the Kayranlık mountain range on one side and 12th century AD Geben Castle on the other, this complex likely dates from the 2nd to 5th centuries AD doesn’t appear to have many structural relatives. Two notable exceptions exist in the archaeological record from this period however, one in Greece and the other in Istanbul. Yet despite similar architectural elements with other contemporary sites in Italy, Greece, North Africa, Europe and Anatolia, Kayranlıkgözü’s design and construction appears to be unique with respect to baths constructed in Roman-controlled areas. This raises some interesting questions regarding the nature of Roman rule, especially surrounding the apparent allowance for local inluences in architecture at sites such as Kayranlıkgözü. Furthermore, how did aspects of local customs and transregional trade interact? miuxedavad Tavisi siZlierisa, droTa ganmavlobaSi bizantiis imperia teritoriebs kargavda. VII saukuneSi, arabebma sul ramdenime weliwadis ganmavlobaSi levanti, siria da egvi pte daikaves. VII saukunis dasasruls bizantiasa da arabeTs Soris sasazRvro xazi jeihanis dasavleTiT, aRmosavleT anatoliasa da azerbaijanis mTianeTze gadioda, rac XI saukunemde SenarCunda. VII saukuneSi abasidebis saxelmwifos dedaqalaqi baRdadi gaxda, saidanac islamuri samyaro imarTeboda. E milsadenebis gaswvriv warmoebuli arqeologiuri gaTxrebisas warmoCinda bizantiis imperiis nawilis - aRmosavleT anatoliis mosaxleobis yofis ramdenime mniSvnelovani aspeqti. Zeglebis umravlesoba dasaxlebaa – esaa ubralo soflebi, sadac ise cxovrobdnen, rom bizantiis imperiisa da imperatoris Sesaxeb TiTqmis araferi icodnen. ori arqeologiuri Zegli – qairanliqgozu (abanos kompleqsi) da mineTfinari gacilebiT met informacias iZleva imperiis sazogadoebrivi cxovrebis Sesaxeb. milsadenebis derefanSi arsebul ZeglTagan erT-erTi mniSvnelovania romauli xanis abanos kompleqsi, romelic ardinis raionSi, qairanliqgozuSi, mdebareobs. igi erTi mxridan qairanliqis mTebiT, meore mxridan ki XII saukunis cixesimagriTaa garSemortymuli. Zegli II-V saukuneebiT TariRdeba da mSeneblobis teqnikiTaa gansxvavebuli. arqeologiuri gaTxrebisas msgavsi nagebobebi mxolod organ - saberZneTsa da konstantinopolSia aRmoCenili. miuxedavad imisa, rom italiaSi, saberZneTSi, Crdilo afrikaSi, evropasa da anatoliaSi aRmoCenil, amave periodiT daTariRebul, msgavsi daniSnulebis Zeglebze analogiuri arqiteqturuli detalebi gvxvdeba, qairanliqgozus dizaini da konstruqcia kulturuli memkvidreobis ZeglebiPmilsadenebis derefanSi, warsuli da momavali 121 As is common at bath sites, Kayranlıkgözü lacked substantial material remains necessary for a concise archaeological analysis. Otentimes bath complexes will not uncover material remnants, however in the case of Kayranlıkgözü two coins were discovered. Inscriptions observed on these coins suggest that the initial construction of this complex dates to the early 4th century AD. Additionally further metal and glass inds corroborate this estimate. Minnetpinari, a Roman Period church located near the Turkish village of Başdoğan, provides some evidence of religious practice in eastern Anatolia. Only the western portion of the basilica church was excavated, yet the church appears to have been built in three distinct phases. Initially the church was constructed atop a three nave loor plan. The ceiling, supported by large cylindrical pillars, magniicently displayed connecting archways around the church. A second, lesser phase of construction elevated the basement up to the same level as the main church loor. Finally a small chapel was atached to the southern nave to complete the church renovations. The excavations at Minnetpinari uncovered a total of 65 tomb burials. The majority of these burials contained adult males, and with the exception of two graves, no artifacts were found in Minnetpinari’s tombs. Most tombs had a very distinctive arrangement, where two or more small stones were situated around the head of the deceased. Gender and Age also factored into the position of the body. Skeletons laying on their backs was ubiquitous to all of the honored dead, however the hands of male skeletons were crossed at their waist with their hands cupping their elbows. Conversely, female skeletons crossed their hands on top of their chests. Children were positioned with their right hand on their chest with the let hand supporting the right hand’s elbow. The elderly also had their own style as their let hand held the right hand close to the shoulder and right hand supports the let hand’s elbow (pudicita type). These distinctive burial positions were quite common in Christian communities not exclusive to eastern Anatolia. 122 Past and Future Heritage in the Pipelines Corridor romaul samyaroSi unikaluria. Zeglze Catarebulma gaTxrebma arqeologebis winaSe ramdenime mniSvnelovani kiTxva gaaCina. daisva sakiTxi regionSi romauli mmarTvelobis xasiaTisa da adgilobrivi arqiteqturuli tradiciebis gavlenis Sesaxeb; Sesaswavlia adgilobriv tradiciebze transregionaluri vaWrobis Sedegebis gavlenac. abanoebis Seswavlisas, rogorc wesi, arc Tu ise bevri arqeologiuri masala vlindeba. asea qairanliqgozuSic, magram aq mopovebuli ori monetis saSualebiT moxerxda Zeglis mSeneblobis TariRis – IV saukunis dasawyisis gansazRvra. aq aRmoCenili arqeologiuri masala aRniSnul TariRs ar ewinaaRmdegeba. romauli xanis abano mineTfinari mdebareobs sofel baSdoRanis maxloblad. aq arsebuli bazilikis mxolod erTi, dasavleTi, nawili gaiTxara. gamoirkva, rom taZari orjeraa gadakeTebuli. Tavdapirvelad, igi samnaviani eklesiis gegmiT aSenda. TaRovani Weri did cilindrul svetebs eyrdnoboda. Semdgom saZirkveli mTavari eklesiis iatakamde amaRlda. dasasrul, samxreT navs mcire samlocvelo miuSenes. mineTfinaris gaTxrebisas 65 samarxi gamovlinda. dakrZalulTa umetesoba zrdasruli mamakaci iyo. samarxeuli inventari mxolod orSi aRmoCnda. samarxTa umetesobaSi micvalebulebis TavebTan ori-sami patara qva ido; dakrZalulTa pozas ki maTi asaki da sqesi ganapirobebda. yvela micvalebuli zurgze iwva, mamakacebs idayvebi hqondaT gadajvaredinebuli da xelebi welze edoT. qalebs xelebi mkerdze hqondaT gadajvaredinebuli, bavSvebs ki marjvena xeli mkerdze edoT, marcena - marjvenis idayvze. moxucebs marcxena xeliT marjvena mklavi eWiraT, marjvena xeliT ki - marcxena idayvi. dakrZalvis es wesebi Numismatic material found at Minnetpinari has helped to piece together the political history and trade networks of eastern Anatolia at this time. In Anatolia during the early Medieval Period, local kings and rulers habitually reissued new coins in their own honor during both their political inauguration and sometimes throughout their reign. Minnetpinari is an interesting site in that it contains coins from multiple empires and time periods. Of the 46 total coins found at the site, 28 belonged to the 13th century Kilikia Kingdom, 4 to the later Islamic period and 4 to the Christian Roman empire (contemporary to the occupation of the church). All point to the longevity of Minnetpinari and the diverse political climate of Anatolia through time. The Turkish World ater 700 AD In the early 12th century AD, the Seljuk Turks began their incursions into central Anatolia. Turkic peoples had come from Central Asia, where they were the dominant cultural group by the 6th century AD. By the mid-7th century AD, the Göktürks (a nomadic confederation of Turks) built an empire that included the South Caucasus, but dynastic infighting led to its collapse. The Seljuks, a clan within the nomadic Oghuz peoples of the Aral steppes, established a dynasty that came to dominate the tribes that had moved into the Abbasid Caliphate during the 9th and 10th centuries AD. At first employed by the Caliphate as slaves and soldiers, the Seljuks gradually assumed greater authority as they adopted Islam, which they injected with new energy. By the 11th century AD, the Seljuks had wrested control of Mesopotamia and eastern Anatolia from the Caliphate and advanced to Persia, before turning their attention to the Byzantine empire to the west. mxolod aRmosavleT anatoliisaTvis ar iyo damaxasiaTebeli, igi aseve farTod iyo gavrcelebuli mTel qristianul samyaroSi. mineTfinaris numizmaturi masala aRmosavleT anatoliis politikuri istoriisa da vaWrobis Sesaxeb damatebiT informacias iZleva; adreuli Sua saukuneebis anatoliis mefeebi da mmarTvelebi axal monetebs xan mefed kurTxevisas, zogierT SemTxvevaSi ki, mTeli zeobis ganmavlobaSi, sakuTar saxelze Wridnen. mineTfinari am mxriv saintereso Zeglia, sadac sxvadasxva imperiisa da sxvadasxva drois monetebia mopovebuli. aq aRmoCenili 46 monetidan 28 kilikiis samefos XIII saukunis monetaa, 4 islamuri periodisaa, oTxic - eklesiis Tanadrouli, romis qristianuli periodisa. yvela maTgani mineTfinaris dasaxlebis xangrZliv arsebobasa da gansxvavebul politikur mdgomareobaze migviTiTebs. Turanuli samyaro VII saukunis Semdeg XII saukunis dasawyisidan Turqseljukebma anatoliaSi damkvidreba daiwyes. Turanuli modgmis xalxebi Sua aziidan daiZrnen, sadac isini VI saukuneSi umravlesoba iyo. VII saukunis Sua xanebSi momTabare Turqebis gioqTurqebis konfederaciam Seqmna imperia, magram igi dinastiuri dapirispirebebis gamo daiSala. Turq oRuzebis Sto - seljukebi Tavdapirvelad aralis stepebSi cxovrobdnen. maT Camoayalibes Zlieri dinastia, romelic IX-X saukuneebSi saTaveSi Caudga abasidebis saxalifoSi macxovrebel Turanul tomebs. Tavdapirvelad isini saxalifoSi monebisa da jariskacebis movaleobas asrulebdnen, islamis miRebis Semdeg ki dawinaureba daiwyes. XI saukuneSi maT mesopotamiasa da aRmosavleT anatoliaze daamyares kontroli, mogvianebiT ki bizantias daupirispirdnen. kulturuli memkvidreobis ZeglebiPmilsadenebis derefanSi, warsuli da momavali 123 124 In 1071, at the Battle of Malazgirt, the Seljuks, led by Alp Arslan, defeated a Byzantine army in eastern Anatolia and captured the emperor, Romanos IV Diogenes. (Although freed soon thereafter, he was deposed.) Within a few decades, the Seljuks had driven the Byzantine forces to the Sea of Marmara, and exerted Turkic dominance across much of Anatolia. 1071 wels maT alf arslanis winamZRolobiT, manaskertTan, bizantiuri armia daamarcxes da imperatori romanoz diogene Sei pyres (man tyveobidan gaqceva moaxerxa, magram taxtidan gadaayenes). ramdenime weliwadSi seljukebma bizantia marmarilos zRvamde Seaviwroves da anatoliaSi Turquli batonoba daamyares. The Seljuk empire had an important historical role in the dissemination of the Islamic faith and in its defense against anti-Islamic crusaders from europe. It lost its dominance over Anatolia, although it remained a force in Mesopotamia and Anatolia until its final collapse under pressure from the Mongols in 1243. The Seljuk Sultanate of Rûm, a fragment of the dismembered empire, controlled a large part of central and eastern Anatolia as far as Lake Van until the end of the 13th century—in its latter years, as a vassal state to the Mongol empire. The Sultanate, which ruled for over 200 years, helped to establish the Turkish character of the region, and created a system of han or caravanserai (roadside commercial buildings along trade routes) that fostered commerce from central Asia to the Mediterranean. jvarosnulma laSqrobam da seljukebs Soris dawyebulma dinastiurma omebma bizantiis imperias amosunTqvis saSualeba misca; seljukebma anatoliaSi pirveloba dakarges, Tumca, kvlavac rCebodnen angariSgasawev Zalad. 1243 wels monRolTa Semosevam seljukTa saxelmwifo sabolood gaanadgura. daSlili Turquli imperiis nawils - rumis sasulTnos, XIII saukunis dasasrulamde aRmosavleT anatoliis mniSvnelovani nawili eWira, magram Semdeg igi monRolebis vasaluri saxelmwifo gaxda. rumis sasulTnom, romelic 200 wlis ganmavlobaSi arsebobda, regionSi Turquli cxovrebis wesi daamkvidra qarvaslebis sistema Seqmna, rac Sua aziidan xmelTaSua zRvamde vaWrobis ganviTarebas uwyobda xels. For 350 years, the Byzantines managed to fight off the Seljuk Turks. By the 14th century AD, however, a new force among the Seljuks’ successors had emerged, marking the beginning of a new era. Anatolian beyliks (Turkic states ruled by beys) gained power as the Sultanate of Rûm declined. One of the beyliks, led by Osman I of the Osmanoğlu, spread its power across western Anatolia, forming the basis for the Ottoman empire. During the 14th century, Osman’s descendants gained greater control of Anatolia. After their victory against the Byzantines at the Battle of Adrianople in 1365, they moved their capital to Adrianople in what is now the european part of Turkey. This defeat isolated Constantinople from the rest of europe and positioned the Ottomans to move against Greece and the Balkans. 350 wlis ganmavlobaSi bizantia seljukTa Semotevebs uZlebda, magram XIV saukuneSi gaCnda axali Zala, romelmac anatoliis beiliqebi (Turquli samTavroebi, romlebsac beebi marTavdnen) Seqmna. anatoliurma beiliqebma Zalaufleba rumis sasulTnos dacemisTanave moi poves. erT-erTma beiliqma, romelsac osman I meTaurobda, dasavleT anatoliis nawili Caigdo xelSi, riTac otomanTa imperias daudo safuZveli. XIV saukuneSi misma STamomavlebma anatoliis didi nawili daimorCiles. 1365 wels, adrianopolTan bizantielebis damarcxebis Semdeg, maT dedaqalaqi Tanamedrove TurqeTis evropuli nawilSi, adrianopolSi, gadaitanes. am marcxma konstantinopoli danarCeni evropisagan izolaciaSi moaqcia da otomanebs saberZneTisa da balkaneTisaken gauxsna gza.O Past and Future Heritage in the Pipelines Corridor Within two decades, the Ottomans took control over much of the southern Balkans. This Ottoman expansion was halted in 1402, following defeat at the hands of the Mongol warlord Tamerlane at the Battle of Ankara, and for a time, the Ottomans were vassals of the Mongols. The expansion of the Ottoman empire resumed under the Sultans Mehmet I, Murad II, and Mehmet II. It was under Mehmet II, known as the Conqueror that Constantinople finally fell to the Ottomans in 1453 AD, bringing the Byzantine empire to a close. Mehmet II continued the expansion into the Balkans. At the time of his death in 1481, the Ottomans had an army in Italy marching on Rome. Under Selim I and Suleiman I (known as the Magnificent), the empire came to include much of the Middle east and the Levant, egypt, and North Africa. In 1529, Suleiman pushed westward and laid siege to Vienna. Although Vienna’s defenders held out against the Ottomans, the attack underscored the threat that a powerful Ottoman empire posed to europe, a threat that lasted for three more centuries, as the rising powers of the West faced off against the Ottomans in numerous battles from Gibraltar to the Black Sea. The result is the patchwork of numerous Christian and Islamic communities that co-exist in the region today. The Ottomans were dominant over a vast area and continued to control much of the Mediterranean region until World War I. Today Turkic peoples can be found from Anatolia through central Asia to western China. In Anatolia, Turkish society combined elements of the classical and Byzantine worlds with eastern cultural influences. Two archaeological sites found along the pipelines corridor in Turkey relate to the Ottoman Period. Cilhoroz and Akmezar are located near erzincan in northeastern Anatolia, not far from the great trade routes that passed through erzurum. Both sites date from the final years of Byzantine control of the region and illustrate the simple, rural side of Anatolian life during the Middle Ages. oc weliwadSi otomanebma samxreT balkaneTis mniSvnelovani nawili daikaves. otomanebis winsvla 1402 wels SeCerda, rodesac isini Temur lengis jarebma ankarasTan daamarcxes. mcire drois ganmavlobaSi isini monRolebis vasalebi gaxdnen. sulTan mehmed I-is, murad II-isa da mehmed II dampyrobels zeobisas otomanTa eqspansia isev ganaxlda. 1453 wels konstantinopoli daeca da bizantia ganadgurda. mehmed II-m eqspansia balkaneTisaken gaagrZela. 1481 wels mehmeT II-is gargacvalebisas, otomanTa armia italiaSi iyo da romisaken miiwevda. selim I-sa da suleiman II-is mmarTvelobis dros imperiis SemadgenlobaSi axlo aRmosavleTis didi nawili, levanti, egvi pte da Crdilo afrika Sedioda. 1529 wels suleimanma venas Semoartya alya. marTalia, venis damcvelebma Setevis mogerieba SeZles, magram evropisaTvis naTeli gaxda, rom isini mzardsa da agresiul Zalas daupirispirdnen. es dapirispireba sami saukunis ganmavlobaSi grZeldeboda. am drois ganmavlobaSi Savi zRvidan gibraltaramde araerTi brZola gaimarTa. Sedegad ki miviReT is religiurad da eTnikurad Wreli sazogadoeba, romelic dRes am regionSi cxovrobs. pirvel msoflio omamde otomanebi xmelTaSua zRvis sanapiros TiTqmis mTlianad flobdnen. Turanuli modgmis xalxebs dRes anatoliidan Sua aziasa da dasavleT CineTamde SexvdebiT. Tanamedrove Turquli sazogadoeba anatoliaSi antikuri, bizantiuri da aRmosavluri gavlenebis kvals atarebs. kulturuli memkvidreobis ZeglebiPmilsadenebis derefanSi, warsuli da momavali 125 The fertile lands of the Erzincan-Çayırlı region, where the Akmezar settlement was located, were well suited for irrigation and also on transportation routes. Ceramics dating from the 11th to the 14th centuries AD, found at Akmezar, displayed a limited number of sgraffito glazed and other decoration techniques. A large number of practical containers typically used for storage and transportation were present, indicating a settlement of modest size and regional influence. Both the Erzincan and Çayırlı regions during the 11th though 14th centuries were densely populated, yet seem to have had a highly mobile population. Many of the structures uncovered in this area were crudely built and could be abandoned easily. Ram sculptures were also found at Akmezar, Başköy and other villages. 126 Past and Future Heritage in the Pipelines Corridor milsadenebis mSeneblobisas mimdinareOarqeologiurma samuSaoebma otomanuri periodis ori Zegli gamoavlina. Cilhorozi da aqmezari erzinkanis maxloblad, CrdiloaRmosavleT anatoliaSi, erzrumze gamavali savaWro gzis maxloblad mdebareobs. orive bizantiuri mflobelobis bolo periodiT TariRdeba da Sua saukuneebis sasoflo dasaxlebaa. erzinkan-Cairlis mxareebis nayofieri miwebi, sadac akmezaris nasoflari mdebareobda, kargad irwyveboda da savaWro gzebTanac axlos iyo. aq mopovebuli XI– XIV saukuneebis keramika moWiqulia an sxvadasxva ornamentiTaa Semkuli. didi zomis WurWeli, romelic transportirebisa da sxvadasxva produqtis Sesanaxavad iyo damzadebuli, vaWrobis ganviTarebaze migvaniSnebs. XI–XIV saukuneebis erzinkanCairlis mxareebi mWidrod ar iyo dasaxlebuli. mosaxleoba erT adgilze ar Cerdeboda. aq aRmoCenil nasoflarebze Cans, rom Senobebi naCqarevad Sendeboda da maT maleve tovebdnen. akmezarze, baSqoisa da sxva soflebSi xSirad gvxvdeba verZis qandakebebi. 1 It should be noted that the dates assigned here to archaeological periods vary for each country, relecting each country’s historical context. In light of national historiographic traditions, and out of respect for the works of the many historians from whom this volume drew, the authors of the present work decided to cite and retain some alternative or divergent perspectives on the past, as applied to speciic regions. Further, given some of the methodological challenges of archaeology, this diversity of views can contribute to understanding of events and places about which active research on archeological inds, documents, inscriptions, and literary records continues. 2 This section on “Azerbajan” is authored solely by Dr. Najaf Museyibli of the Institute of Archaeology and Ethnography, Baku, Azerbajan. 3 М.М.Гусейнов. Ранние стадии заселения человека в пещере Азых. Ученые записки Аз.Гос.Универ., сер. истории и философии, № 4. Баку,1979; М.М.Гусейнов. Древний палеолит Азербайджана. Баку, 1985; Mənsur Mənsurоv. Qafqazda ilk paleоlit abidələri. Azərbaycan arхeоlоgiyası və etnоqraiyası jurnalı. № 2, 2003; Мансуров М. Палеолит Азербайджана. Международная научная конференция «Археология и этнология Кавказа», Тбилиси, 2002; С.С.Велиев, М.М.Мансуров. К вопросу о возрасте древнейших слоев Азыхской пещерной стоянки. Доклады Академии Наук Азербайджана, 1999, № 3-4). 4 P.M. Касимова. Первые палеоаптропологические находки в Кобыстане Журн. «Вопросы антропологии» вып 46. Москва – 1974). 5 O.Эфендиев. Азербайджанское государство Сефевидов в начале XVI века, Баку, 1981. 6 The writing of the Georgian language has progressed through three distinct forms; Asomtavruli, Nuskhuri, and Mkhedruli. At times these graphic forms were used together and shared some of the same leters. The most recent alphabet, Mkhedruli, contains more leters than the two earlier versions, although those extra leters are no longer needed for writing modern Georgian. 7 The Bagrationi Dynasty ruled Georgia until the 19th century AD, when the Russian empire annexed Georgia 1 unda aRiniSnos, rom zemoT aRniSnuli arqeologiuri periodizacia sxvadasxva qveynisaTvis gansxvavebulia da maT istoriul ganviTarebas asaxavs. es wigni istorikosebis naSromebisa da erovnuli istoriografiebis tradiciebis pativiscemiT daiwera.Aamitom, naSromis avtorebma gadawyvites daecvaT regionebis warmomadgenelebis Sexedulebebi. viTvaliwinebT ra arqeologiuri meTodologiis problemebs, azrTa es sxvadasxvaoba, SesaZloa Zeglebis SeswavlisaTvis xelSemwyobi faqtori gaxdes. 2 es Tavi _ “azerbaijani”, baqos arqeologiisa da eTnografiis institutis TanamSromlis, najaf museiblis mieraa dawerili. 3 М.М.Гусейнов. Ранние стадии заселения человека в пещере Азых. Ученые записки Аз.Гос.Универ., сер. истории и философии, № 4. Баку,1979; М.М.Гусейнов. Древний палеолит Азербайджана. Баку, 1985; Mənsur Mənsurоv. Qafqazda ilk paleоlit abidələri. Azərbaycan arхeоlоgiyası və etnоqraiyası jurnalı. № 2, 2003; Мансуров М. Палеолит Азербайджана. Международная научная конференция «Археология и этнология Кавказа», Тбилиси, 2002; С.С.Велиев, М.М.Мансуров. К вопросу о возрасте древнейших слоев Азыхской пещерной стоянки. Доклады Академии Наук Азербайджана, 1999, № 3-4). 4 P.M. Касимова. Первые палеоантропологические находки в Кобыстане Журн. «Вопросы антропологии» вып 46. Москва – 1974). 5 O.Эфендиев. Азербайджанское государство Сефевидов в начале XVI века, Баку, 1981. 6 qarTuli damwerloba sam etaps moicavs, romelTaTvisac damaxasiaTebelia gansxvavebul grafikuli forma. esaa: asomTavruli, nusxuri da mxedruli. Tanamedrove qarTul damwerlobas mxedruli ewodeba. am anbanSi SemorCenilia Zveli qarTulisaTvis damaxasiaTebeli zogierTi aso-niSani, Tumca igi dRes aRar ixmareba. 7 bagrationTa dinastia saqarTvelos XIX saukunemde, ruseTis mier mis aneqsiamde ganagebda. kulturuli memkvidreobis ZeglebiPmilsadenebis derefanSi, warsuli da momavali 127 This small pot with lid from Yevlakh, located in central Azerbaijan, may have held a grave offering. A cord passed through a hole at the top may have secured the lid. azerbaijanSi, evlaxSi, mopovebuli WurWeli samarxSia aRmoCenili. WurWlis zeda nawilze datovebul xvrelSi Toki iyo gatarebuli, riTac xufi magrdeboda. The friezes on this terracotta plaque from the Georgian site of Klde were carved rather than pressed. The style of the animals on both the upper and lower levels is characteristic of Persian reliefs. saqarTveloSi, kldis nasaxlarze, napovn Tixis filaze datanili cxovelebis gamosaxuleba sparsul reliefebTan poulobs paralelebs. This iron ring with a carnelian stone was found at Yuceoren in a double-chambered tomb that yielded numerous other inds, including the remains of 22 individuals, of whom 14 were adults and 8 were children. sardionis Tvliani rkinis beWedi ieqeronis organyofilebian akldamaSia aRmoCenili. aq dakrZaluli iyo 22 adamiani, romelTa Soris 14 zrdasruli, 8 ki bavSvi iyo. 0 0.5 1cm CHAPTeR 3 Tavi 3 Archaeological Sites along the Pipeline arqeologiuri Zeglebi milsadenis derefanSi P aterialuri kultura TiToeuli adamianisa da sazogadoebis gansxvavebulobasa da gansakuTrebul xasiaTze metyvelebs. tansacmeli, samkauli, iaraRi, monetebi, Sromis iaraRisa da WurWlis dekoratiuli elementebi da sxva nivTiebi misi mesakuTris religiur rwmena-warmodgenebze, kulturul tradiciebsa da socialur statusze gviambobs. igive informacias atarebs arqiteqturuli nagebobebi, samarxebi da dakrZalvis wesebi, religiuri simboloebi, agreTve materialuri kulturis sxva formebi. eople and societies throughout history have used material culture to portray what they considered their distinctive characteristics that set them apart from others. Clothing, jewelry, weaponry, coins, and the form and decorative elements of utilitarian objects such as tools and vessels all bespoke something about their owners’ cultural heritage, family or personal status, religious beliefs, and group memberships. The use of material culture to proclaim something distinctive about their creation or use is also found in architecture, monuments, burial sites and practices, religious symbols, and other forms of material culture. 134 Past and Future Heritage in the Pipelines Corridor m The South Caucasus and eastern Anatolian regions have seen much inluence from external cultures, oten because of trade connections and invasions. Material evidence of diverse cultures lies hidden under the soil until disturbed by later generations. Such was the case with the pipelines project. Excavations of sites discovered during the pipelines construction unearthed many exciting inds that have deepened and enriched understanding of the peoples and societies that created them, as well as raising intriguing questions that only further excavations and research will resolve. The archaeological sites described in this chapter, each unique in terms of age, function, and inds, are only a small fraction of the hundreds found during the course of the pipeline project. The primary aim in this chapter is to give an account of the material evidence uncovered from them, encourage further study, and foster appreciation of the regional peoples and their environments. The irst three sites are located in Azerbajan, the second three in Georgia, and the inal three in Turkey. saukuneebis ganmavlobaSi samxreT kavkasiam da anatoliam garesamyaros kulturebis didi gavlena ganicada, rac vaWrobas an Semosevebs ukavSirdeboda. sxvadasxva kulturebis warsuli xSirad miwiT ifareba da xeluxlebeli rCeba iqamde, sanam mas Semdgomi Taobebi ar pouloben. ase iyo milsadenebis mSeneblobis drosac, rodesac arqeologebma am proeqtis mimdinareobisas gamovlenili araerTi mniSvnelovani Zegli Seiswavles. Aaxalma aRmoCenebma gaaRrmava da gaafarTova codna Zveli adamianebisa da sazogadoebebis Sesaxeb, gamoiwvia didi interesi da axali kiTxvebi dabada, romlebzedac mxolod momavalma gaTxrebma SeiZleba gasces pasuxi. am TavSi ganxiluli arqeologiuri Zeglebi erTmaneTisagan Tavisi asakiT, daniSnulebiTa da mopovebuli masaliT gansxvavdeba. milsadenebis mSeneblobisas samive qveyanaSi aseulobiT Zegli gaiTxara. qvemoT aRwerili aRmoCenebi maTi mcire nawilia. Aam Tavis mizania gavecnoT am Zeglebs, xeli SevuwyoT maTs Semdgom kvlevas da regionis mosaxleobas gavacnoT isini. pirveli sami Zegli azerbaijanidanaa, momdevno sami saqarTvelodan, bolo sami ki TurqeTidan. kulturuli memkvidreobis ZeglebiPmilsadenebis derefanSi, warsuli da momavali 135 Azerbajan azerbaijani Dashbulaq daSbulaqi Dashbulaq is one of a series of Medieval sites found in the Shamkir region in northwest Azerbajan. Additional sites from the same period are located at the Faxrali village in the Goranboy region and at the Lak and Hajiali villages in the Samukh region, also in the northwest. Ganja was one of the largest cities in the Caucasus during the late Middle Ages, before an earthquake in 1139 killed thousands of people. Shamkir was an important fortress on the Shamkir River and the scene of several batles during the early Middle Ages. These various sites provide examples of distinctive, localized examples of medieval society in the area. The remains of historic bridges on the Zayamchai and Shamkirchai Rivers relect the engineering of the time. Caravans following the greater Silk Road would likely have crossed these bridges as they passed through this portion of Azerbajan. daSbulaqi AazerbaijanSi, Samqoris raionSi, aRmoCenili Sua saukuneebis erTerTi Zeglia. amave droisaa faqsarlis (goranbois raionSi), lakisa da hajialis (orive samuxis raionSi) nasoflarebi. 1139 wlamde, rodesac miwisZvram aTasobiT adamiani imsxverpla, ganja kavkasiaSi erT-erTi didi qalaqi iyo. Samqoris cixesimagre mniSvnelovani punqti iyo, romlis maxloblad araerTi brZola momxdara. md. zaiamCaisa da Samqorze arsebuli istoriuli xidebi sainJinro xelovnebis nimuSebia. abreSumis gzaze mimaval qaravnebs maTze unda gadaevloT, rodesac azerbaijanis am monakveTs gadiodnen. erTmaneTisagan gansxvavebuli Zeglebi Sua saukuneebis sazogadoebis ganviTarebas asaxavs. The Dashbulaq site is notable for the number of its archaeological layers, which speak of sequential periods of occupation, destruction, and rebuilding. The village at Dashbulaq was most active between the 9th and 11th centuries AD. Because only a small part of the village site was uncovered excavations took place only where the pipeline route passed directly through the village—it is only possible to speculate about what else might be there. A permanent setlement or town from the period might have contained a bazaar, caravanserai (inn), mosque, and madrasah (school). The excavations at Dashbulaq did, however, reveal numerous features that archaeologists would expect to see in permanent villages and setlements. These features, which also have ethnographic parallels today, include 136 Past and Future Heritage in the Pipelines Corridor daSbulaqi mravalfeniani arqeologiuri Zeglia da am dasaxlebis sxvadasxva periodis, ngrevisa da aRmSeneblobis Sesaxeb mogviTxrobs. arqeologiuri gaTxrebi mis mxolod mcire nawilze, milsadenis viwro arealze Catarda. amitom SeiZleba gamovTqvaT mxolod varaudi, Tu ra nagebobebi SeiZleba arsebuliyo mis gareT. dasaxlebul punqtSi, rogorc wesi, unda yofiliyo qarvasla, sastumro, meCeTi da medrese. daSbulaqis gaTxrebisas gamovlenilma mravalma nagebobam aq namosaxlaris arseboba daadastura. mopovebul masalas dRevandelobasTanac aqvs eTnografiuli paralelebi, magaliTisaTvis gamodgeba Zeglze mopovebuli Toneebi, didi qvevrebi, sameurneo ormoebi, WurWeli (maT Tandirs (ovens) such as the two above are a common feature at sites from the Medieval Period. They were constructed from coiled clay and ired in place. Tandirebi (Toneebi) Sua saukuneebis ZeglebisaTvis damaxasiaTebelia. isini Tixisagan mzaddeboda da adgilze gamoiwveboda. kulturuli memkvidreobis ZeglebiPmilsadenebis derefanSi, warsuli da momavali 137 Zoomorphic images of birds, goats, dogs, and wild animals were stamped into the shoulders of several pots from Dashbulaq. Citebis, Txebis, ZaRlebisa da gareuli cxovelebis gamosaxulebebi daSbulaqSi aRmoCenili WurWlis mxrebzea datanili. 138 Past and Future Heritage in the Pipelines Corridor tandirs (clay-formed ovens), massive storage pits, and burial sites. Among the recovered artifacts are typical domestic items such as utilitarian ceramic cooking vessels and iner serving vessels (including a well-preserved stamped pot with an animal motif and glazed potery in a typical Islamic style). Personal items included fragments of several glass bracelets. The stratigraphy of the material evidence also seems to indicate an initial Christian community followed by a later Islamic one. This transition seems to have occurred at some time in the middle of the 9th century. The pipeline-related excavations found six Christian graves- a relatively small amount of material relecting this seemingly earlier Christian community at Dashbulaq. However, it is not entirely clear whether these graves belong to the same period. Soris, kargad daculi moWiquli qoTani, romelzedac islamuri samyarosaTvis damaxasiaTebeli ornamentia datanili), piradi moxmarebis nivTTagan sayuradReboa minis samajurebi. Zeglis stratigrafia IX saukuneSi qristianuli sazogadoebis islamuriT Canacvlebas gviCvenebs. milsadenis teritoriaze mikvleul Zeglebze qristianuli periodis Zeglebis arqeologiuri masala bevrad naklebi raodenobiTaa aRmoCenili, vidre islamuri kulturis materialuri naSTebi. kulturuli memkvidreobis ZeglebiPmilsadenebis derefanSi, warsuli da momavali 139 140 Zayamchai and Tovuzchai zaiamCai da TovuzCai Multiple graves at Zayamchai and Tovuzchai, two closely related necropoli excavated along the pipeline corridor in Azerbaijan, yielded extensive insights into the burial practices in the Late Bronze Age and Early Iron Age (approximately 1,400-700 BC). zaiamCaisa da TovuzCais erTmaneTTan axlomdebare gvianbrinjao-adrerkinis xanis (Zv.w. 1,400-700) samarovnebze gamovlenda araerTi samarxi, ramac am periodis dakrZalvis wesebis Sesaxeb saintereso masala mogvca. In 2002, archaeologists of the Institute of Archaeology and ethnography first recorded the Zayamchai necropolis (or “city of the dead”), located on the east banks of the river of the same name, during baseline surveys carried out during Stage 1 of the project. Subsequent excavations conducted in 2003 uncovered over 130 graves that yielded hundreds of intact pottery vessels, many unique bronze artifacts (including daggers, javelin points, and various decorative pieces), and other ritual objects. The findings indicate that advanced Late Bronze Age (Xojali-Gedabey) cultures were present in the Kura Valley at the end of the second millennium BC. The variety and skilled workmanship reflect a highly coherent, structured local society. baqos arqeologiisa da eTnografiis institutis arqeologebma jer zaiamCais samarovani (“micvalebulTa qalaqi”) Seiswavles. igi amave dasaxelebis mdinaris napirze mdebareobs da arqeologiuri programis I, sabazo kvlevebis etapze gaiTxara. gaTxrebi 2002 wels mimdinareobda. 130 samarxSi aseulobiT dauzianebeli Tixis WurWeli, brinjaos satevrebi, Subispirebi, samkauli da sxva saritualo nivTi aRmoCnda. samarovnis gaTxrebisas mopovebuli masala gviCvenebs, rom ganviTarebuli gvianbrinjaos xanis xojali-gedabeis kultura Zv.w. meore aTaswleulis dasasruls mtkvris xeobaSic vrceldeboda. masalis mravalferovneba da daxvewiloba kargad ganviTarebul sazogadoebaze migvaniSnebs. Past and Future Heritage in the Pipelines Corridor Archaeologists will be working for years to come to interpret the markings scratched on the bottom of this pot before it was ired. am WurWlis Zirze gamosaxuli niSnebis gasaSifrad arqeologebs albaT wlebi dasWirdebaT. kulturuli memkvidreobis ZeglebiPmilsadenebis derefanSi, warsuli da momavali 141 This distinctive three-legged shallow footed vessel is decorated across its top and bottom. es gansakuTrebuli samfexa WurWeli mTlianadaa ornamentirebuli. 142 Past and Future Heritage in the Pipelines Corridor kulturuli memkvidreobis ZeglebiPmilsadenebis derefanSi, warsuli da momavali 143 The project’s planning team rerouted the pipelines in this area to avoid impacting two other significant cultural heritage sites located nearby. One was a large and complex settlement that seems to date from the Late Bronze Age, and the second was a historic bridge crossing the Zayamchai that likely dates from the Middle Ages. The Tovuzchai necropolis, uncovered on the west bank of the river of the same name, was similar to the necropolis at Zayamchai. The 80plus graves excavated at this site during 2004 and 2005 similarly revealed a rich burial culture. Particularly noteworthy were the complete pots with the remains of the deceased; in some cases over 20 complete pots had been buried at the same time. Other items from the graves included bronze daggers and arrowheads, bronze bosses (a circular bulge or knoblike form protruding from a surrounding flatter area), and hundreds of beads made from carnelian, agate, and glass paste. The internments at the sites seem to have taken place over several hundred years without notable interruption. 144 Past and Future Heritage in the Pipelines Corridor milsadenis daproeqtebisas dacvis mizniT or Zegls auares gverdi. erTi unda iyos gvianbrinjaos xanis didi nasaxlari, meore ki Sua saukuneebis xidia, romelic md. zaiamCaizea gadebuli. TovuzCais samarovani, romelic amave dasaxelebis mdinaris napirasaa, zaiamCais samarovnis msgavsia. 2004-2005 wlebSi gaTxrilma 80-ze metma samarxma mdidari masala mogvca. aRsaniSnavia, kargad Senaxuli, micvalebulebis naSTebis Semcveli, Tixis WurWeli. zogan TiTo samarxSi 20 aseTi WurWelia daculi. samarxeuli masala warmodgenilia satevrebiTa da isris pirebiT, sardionis aqatisa da miniseburi pastis aseulobiT mZiviT. samarovans, rogorc Cans, ramdenime aseuli wlis ganmavlobaSi uwyvetad iyenebdnen. These bronze decorations likely were worn on the chest and may have been designed to represent snakes. brinjaos am samkauls, romelzedac, savaraudod, gvelebia gamosaxuli, albaT mkerdze atarebdnen kulturuli memkvidreobis ZeglebiPmilsadenebis derefanSi, warsuli da momavali 145 146 The Tovuzchai graves were of two general types: shallow ones covered by rounded river stones, and deeper earthen ones. There is no clear patern with respect to grave depth and composition of the items placed in them; some burial chambers were large but modestly furnished, while others were small but illed with rich arrays of burial items. In some, the skeletal remains were disarticulated; in others, the individuals were buried with animals. The head of the skeleton in one grave rested on a number of polished and painted ceramic plates and pots. This arrangement may relect speciic spiritual or religious beliefs. A bronze bracelet, bronze earring, and seashell and agate beads were found on or near the skeleton. TovuzCais samarovanze samarxebis ori ti pi gamoiyofa. pirveli Rrma ar aris da riyis qviTaa SemosazRvruli, meore ki Rrma ormosamarxebia. maT Soris socialuri gansxvaveba ar Cans, radgan zogierT did samarxSi ar iyo bevri masala, xolo ramdenime momcro zomis samarxSi mdidruli inventaria. zogierT samarxSi ConCxebi danawevrebulia, sxvagan ki cxovelebi adamianebTan erTad daumarxavT. erT samarxSi micvalebuls Tavi ramdenime moxatulsa da naprialeb WurWelze edo. es wesi, rogorc Cans, religiur warmodgenebs asaxavs. aq aRmoCnda brinjaos samajuri, zRvis niJara da aqatis mZivebi. Several large storage vessels found in the nearby village may have been part of the same complex as Tovuzchai necropolis. Archaeological material recovered from the Tovuzchai necropolis indicates that a setlement had existed near this site for six or seven centuries. miuxedavad imisa, rom gaTxrebisas namosaxlari ar aRmoCenila, unda vivaraudoT, rom igi axlos mdebareobda. am namosaxlaris nawili unda iyos Zeglis maxloblad, erTi kilometris manZilze aRmoCenili didi qvevrebi. TovuzCais samarovnis masala gviCvenebs, rom dasaxlebas 6-7 saukunis ganmavlobaSi unda earseba. Past and Future Heritage in the Pipelines Corridor Bronze adornment, found at Zayamchai that dates to the Bronze age. 5cm x 5.5cm. zaiamCais samarovanze aRmoCenili es brinjaos samkauli brinjaos xaniT TariRdeba (zomebi 5X5,5sm). kulturuli memkvidreobis ZeglebiPmilsadenebis derefanSi, warsuli da momavali 147 The head of the deceased in this grave was positioned on top of several ceramic serving and storage vessels, in the Tovuzchai necropolis. Carnelian beads were found below the jaw. TovuzCais samarovnis am samarxSi micvalebuls Tavi ramdenime WurWelze edo. ybisAqveS aRmoCnda sardionis mZivebi. 148 Past and Future Heritage in the Pipelines Corridor This highly decorated vessel found from the Zayamchai necropolis was a churn and used to produce butter from milk. Similar vessels are still used in parts of Azerbaijan today to produce homemade butter. es ornamentirebili WurWeli zaiamCais samarovnidan sadRvebeli iyo da mas karaqis misaRebad xmarobdnen. aseTive WurWels iyeneben Tamnamedrove azerbaijanSi Sinauri karaqis asadRvebad. kulturuli memkvidreobis ZeglebiPmilsadenebis derefanSi, warsuli da momavali 149 This photograph demonstrates the upright positioning and semi-symmetrical arrangement of the pottery vessels uncovered. es foto gviCvenebs, Tu rogor iyo gamwkrivebuli Tixis WurWeli hasansus yorRanis dasakrZalavi kameris kedlebTan. 150 The Hasansu Kurgan hasansus KyorRani The remains of a kurgan found near Hasansu in western Azerbajan relect Middle Bronze Age cultures in the region. The kurgan is similar to those of the Tazakand and Trialeti cultures that spanned Azerbajan and Georgia from approximately 2,200 to 1,700 BC. It is notable for the fascinating orientation of 71 potery vessels, adjacent to a deceased juvenile, arranged in distinct parallel lines along two walls inside an excavated kurgan. The shoulders of many of the pots were decorated with etched bands of chevrons and other formal designs. A scatering of domestic animal bones may be from food provided for the deceased in the aterlife. Skulls and leg bones of bulls had been placed in two corners of the burial chamber, a deliberate arrangement dasavleT azerbaijanSi, hasansus maxloblad, aRmoCenili yorRani Suabrinjaos xaniT TariRdeba. igi tazakendisa da TrialeTis kulturebis (azerbaijanisa da saqarTvelos Suabrinjaos xanis kulturebi, 2700-1700 Zv. ww.) nimuSia. sayuradReboa aq mopovebuli Tixis 71 WurWeli, romlebic yorRanis kedlebis paraleluradaa Camwkrivebuli. maTi nawili SevronebiTa da sxva ornamentiTaa Semkuli. aq aRmoCenili Sinauri cxovelebis Zvlebi micvalebuls im qveyanaSi unda gamodgomoda. xaris Tavfexi dasakrZalavi kameris oTxive kuTxeSi ido, rasac, savaraudod, xarebSebmuli urmis STabeWdileba unda Seeqmna. aqvea Past and Future Heritage in the Pipelines Corridor Seventy-one ceramic vessels from the Hansansu kurgan highlight the technical skill of potters during the Middle Bronze Age in the South Caucasus. Some of the vessels may have been manufactured speciically for use in this burial. hasansus yorRanSi mopovebuli Tixis 71 WurWeli Suabrinjaos xanis kavkasieli meTuneebis maRal ostatobaze migviTiTebs. zogierTi WurWeli am samarxisaTvis unda damzadebuliyo. perhaps intended to represent a bull-drawn chariot or cart. Other inds included bronze pins, baskets, and perforated beads. Several kurgans excavated at Hasansu are similar to others discovered in the 1980s in the Shamkir region of western Azerbajan. The discovery of this kurgan in the AGT Pipelines corridor illustrates the burial practices of the Middle Bronze Age, which had previously been poorly documented in this area. Some archaeologists view the introduction of burials in the style of Hansansu to this region as evidence of foreign populations moving into the region, or of an internal evolution in burial practices. mopovebuli brinjaos sakinZebi da mZivebi. hasansuSi gaTxrili ramdenime yorRani dasavleT azerbaijanSi, Samqoris raionSi 1980 wels aRmoCenili yorRanebis msgavsia mkvlevarTa erTi nawilis azriT, aseTi yorRanebi regionSi ucxotomelTa Semosvlaze, an dakrZalvis wesis adgilobriv ganviTarebaze migviTiTebs. Rows of pottery vessels lined both sides of the burial chamber in the Hasansu kurgan. The excavators speculate that the pattern seen in the center of the chamber might have been a symbolic representation of a cart pulled by oxen or bulls. es foto gviCvenebs, Tu rogor iyo gamwkrivebuli Tixis WurWeli hasansus yorRanis dasakrZalavi kameris kedlebTan. Zeglis gamTxrelebi varaudoben, rom aq aRmoCenili xaris Tavi xarebSebmuli urmis simbolo iyo. kulturuli memkvidreobis ZeglebiPmilsadenebis derefanSi, warsuli da momavali 151 The triangular bronze blade of this Near Eastern type of dagger, found at the Saphar-Kharaba site, has low ridges along both sides and is set with luted frame lines. Both sides of the shaft had residue from wood plates. This type of dagger was common in the Transcaucasus in the 15th-14th centuries BC. safar-xarabaSi aRmoCeniliEes samkuTxapiriani satevari axloaRmosavluri ti pisaa. taris orive mxareze xis kvalia SemorCenili. aseTi satevrebi kavkasiaSi Zv.w. XV-XVII saukuneebSi gvxvdeba. Georgia saqarTvelo Saphar-Kharaba safar-xaraba Archaeologists found more than 100 burial chambers encircled by basalt at the SapharKharaba necropolis in the historic region of Trialeti (Tsalka District) of southern Georgia. Analysis suggests that the site was used in the 15th-mid14th centuries BC. With only a few exceptions, the rectangular graves were uniform. each contained skeletons in crouched positions oriented north to south, a pattern that indicates well-established funerary practices. The graves also contained several distinctive artifacts. For example, a cylindrical seal depicting a figure kneeling at an altar with a rod in its hand is a common motif of the Mittani or Hurrian art that was widespread in the Levant and Mesopotamia. Other objects include bronze daggers and surgical scalpels of a type not common elsewhere in the Caucasus. TrialeTSi, safar-xarabas samarovanze, arqeologebma 100-ze meti samarxi Seiswavles. Zegli Zv.w. XV saukuniTa da XVI saukunis SuaxanebiT TariRdeba. samarxebi, mcire gamonaklisis garda, oTxkuTxa formisa iyo. adamianebi imdroindeli dakrZalvis wesis mixedviT iwvnen gverdze, xelfexmokecilad, CrdiloeT–samxreTis RerZze. samarxebSi mniSvnelovani artefaqtebi aRmoCnda. aRsaniSnavia cilindruli sabeWdavi, romelzedac sakurTxevlis win daCoqili adamiania gamosaxuli. es nivTi axlo paralelebs poulobs miTanur, agreTve levantursa da mesopotamiur xelovnebasTan. samarovanze gvxvdeba rogorc adgilobrivi warmoSobis, ise Semotanili nivTebic. One of the graves contained a poorly preserved wooden cart with the remains of an axle, wheel, and yoke. Two clay vessels were positioned on what remained of the cart’s bed. Under these vessels, human remains were found. 152 Past and Future Heritage in the Pipelines Corridor erT samarxSi aRmoCenilia cudad SemorCenili urmis uRlisa da RerZborblis nawilebi. masze Tixis ori WurWeli ido. WurWlis qveS adamianis Zvlebi aRmoCnda. Unfortunately, archaeologists did not discover this grave until after the pipeline construction had disturbed much of the contents, making it difficult to reconstruct this particular burial. samwuxarod, samarxi mxolod samSeneblo samuSaoebisas, misi dazianebis Semdeg gamovlinda, ramac misi mTliani rekonstruqcia gaaZnela. A skeleton of a man believed to have been 40-50-years-old has particular significance because samples of fabric were attached to it that provided clues to the type of fabrics produced in Georgia during this period. The samples were linen, cotton, and wool dyed with pigments that at the time could only have been extracted from mollusks along the Mediterranean coast. Because the raw dye was highly perishable, these textiles must have been produced and dyed near the Mediterranean before they were imported into the Caucasus. This suggests connections between the South Caucasus and surrounding regions, and perhaps the presence of early trade networks. samarxSi dakrZaluliMmamakaci 40-50 wlisa unda yofiliyo. samarovnis masala mniSvnelovania imiTac, rom aq aRmoCenili selis, bambisa da Salis qsovilebis SesaRebavad unda gamoeyenebinaT pigmentebi, romlebic xmelTaSua zRvis moluskebisagan mzaddeboda. saRebavi advilad fuWdeboda da misi transportireba gaZnelebuli iqneboda, amitom, savaraudoa, rom qsovilebi xmelTaSua zRvispireTidanaa Semotanili, rac samxreT kavkasiasa da gare samyaros Soris arsebul savaWro urTierTobebze metyvelebs. This sketch illustrates the remains of an ox-drawn cart, measuring 2.1 meters long and 1.1 meters at the widest point, found in one grave. The cart’s triangular shape was common during the later Bronze Age. At least two ceramic vessels were placed on or with the cart. am grafikul tabulaze samarxSi aRmoCenili 2,1 metris sigrZisa da 1,1 metris siganis etlis naxatia. aseTi etlebi gvianbrinjaos xanisaTvisaa damaxasiaTebeli. etlze, savaraudod, ori WurWeli ido. kulturuli memkvidreobis ZeglebiPmilsadenebis derefanSi, warsuli da momavali 153 This sketch shows the coniguration of a typical burial, which generally contained several clay vessels placed behind the head of the deceased and weapons placed in front. Bronze pins were frequently found near the neck, beads and pendants in the chest area, and cornelian beads on the wrists and feet. am grafikul tabulaze ti puri samarxia gamosaxuli. igi Seicavs micvalebulis TavTan dawyobil Tixis ramdenime WurWelsa da brinjaos iaraRs. sakinZebi, mZivebi da sakidebi micvalebulis gulmkerdisa da xelebis areSia aRmoCenili. 154 Past and Future Heritage in the Pipelines Corridor This cylindrical seal, believed to have originated in the Hurrian Kingdom of Mittani in northern Mesopotamia, depicts a man kneeling and possibly holding a staff and a goat. Seals such as this were common in Mesopotamia and were sometimes used to oficially mark clay records. es cilindruli sabeWdavi miTanuri (Crdilo mesopotamia) warmoSobisa unda iyos. masze gamosaxulia sakurTxevlis win muxlmodrekili adamiani, romelsac kverTxi uWiravs. aseTi sabeWdavebi mesopotamiaSiac gvxvdeba. kulturuli memkvidreobis ZeglebiPmilsadenebis derefanSi, warsuli da momavali 155 156 Klde klde The Klde setlement is situated on a terraced slope at the conluence of the Mtkvari and Potskhovai Rivers near the Turkish border in southwestern Georgia, along a major trade route that once linked the South Caucasus and eastern Anatolia. The site, encompassing a large multi-layer setlement and a cemetery, extends over 3,486 square meters and includes structures, graves, and storage pits. The excavations yielded excellent and extensive cultural material from the irst millennium AD. The setlement appears to have been destroyed by ire and rebuilt several times. The last ire in the 7th century AD, possibly during the campaign of Byzantine Emperor Flavius Heraclius or during an Arab invasion, led to the abandonment of the site. The structures excavated during the pipeline project appear to have been domestic and were constructed from stone with tile roofs. All the dwellings possessed hearths for cooking, generally located either in the center or corner of the structure. The setlement’s layout leads archaeologists to believe that the structures also had a defensive purpose. Several stone sling bullets of diferent shapes and sizes may have been a means of defense against atackers. arqeologiuri Zegli, romelic kldis namosaxlaris saxeliTaa cnobili, mdebareobs samxreT-dasavleT saqarTveloSi, istoriul provincia samcxeSi, TurqeTis sazRvris maxloblad, mdinareebis - mtkvrisa da focxovis SesarTavTan, samxreT kavkasiisa da anatoliis damakavSirebeli gzis piras. arqeologiuri Zegli, romelic moicavs mravalfenian samarovansa da namosaxlars, 3486 m2-is farTobzea gavrcelebuli. aq warmodgenilia nagebobebi, samarxebi da sameurneo ormoebi. gaTxrebma ax.w. I aTaswleulis saintereso da mniSvnelovani masala mogvca. dasaxleba, rogorc Cans, ramdenjerme gaanadgura xanZarma. ukanaskneli xanZari VII saukuneSi momxdara, savaraudod, bizantiis imperator herakles an arabTa Semosevisas, ris Semdegac dasaxleba gaukacrielda. aq aRmoCenili nagebobebi saxlebia. isini qviTaa aSenebuli, zogierTi maTgani ki kramitiT iyo gadaxuruli. yvela saxlSi, oTaxis centrSi an kedelTan gamarTuli iyo kera. arqeologTa azriT, zogierT nagebobas TavdacviTi funqcia hqonda. Zeglze aRmoCenili, sxvadasxva zomis qvis Wurvebi, SesaZloa, TavdacviTi funqciisaTvisac gamoiyeneboda. Past and Future Heritage in the Pipelines Corridor The clothing worn by the igure on this small altar found at the Klde site exhibits Parthian inluences, including long sleeves and a wide knee-length skirt. The raised right hand suggests a gesture of adoration to gods and kings commonly found on Parthian rock reliefs. kldeSi aRmoCenil Tixis patara sakurTxevelze gamosaxul figuras grZelsaxeloebiani, muxlebamde daSvebuli parTuli samosi mosavs. misi zeapyrobili xeli ki RmerTebisa da mefeebis gandidebis parTul scenebs waagavs. kulturuli memkvidreobis ZeglebiPmilsadenebis derefanSi, warsuli da momavali 157 158 Interment at some of the burial sites at Klde, which were concentrated in three separate areas, occurred in stone-lined pit graves, some of them edged with stone, while others were in wine jars. Many of the skeletons were lying on their backs, but others were on their sides in crouched positions. These diferences mean the burials took place in at least three cultural periods and may relect broad religious and other cultural changes over time. Indeed, in the region under the Kartli (Iberia) Kingdom, diferences between pre-Christian and Christian funerary cultures shed light on the shit to Christianity, with some graves manifesting both Christian and pre-Christian funerary traditions. kldeSi aRmoCenili samarxebi sam ubanzea gadanawilebuli. gvxvdeba qvasamarxebi, ormosamarxebi da qvevrsamarxebi. zogierTi micvalebuli zurgze iyo dakrZaluli, sxvebi _ gverdze, xelfexmokecilad. dakrZalvis ritualSi arsebuli gansxvavebebi, SesaZloa, am drois ganmavlobaSi mimdinare did cvlilebebs davukavSiroT. samcxe qarTlis samefos nawili iyo da aqac kargadaa asaxuli qristianobamdeli da qristianuli xanis dakrZalvis ritualis Taviseburebebi. sainteresoa is samarxebi, sadac dakrZalvis orive wesia dadasturebuli. A particularly interesting ind at the Klde site, dating to the 3rd-4th centuries AD, is a platform that contained 15 ritual vessels along with human bones. However, a clay altar in a corner suggests that the site was a place of cult worship rather than a burial site. The altar bears both Roman and Persian reliefs. The right hand of one igure is raised in a way similar to a gesture of adoration of kings and gods found in the Parthian artistic tradition. Burned areas on the altar, along with the decorative motifs, suggest traditions associated with Zoroastrian altars. Zalze sayuradReboa arqeologiur Zeglze aRmoCenili III-IV saukuneebis moedani, romelzec 15 ritualuri WurWelia dafiqsirebuli. aq mikvleuli mcire zomis Tixis sakurTxeveli romaulsa da parTul gavlenas atarebs. masze gamosaxul erT figuras parTuli xelovnebisaTvis damaxasiaTebeli niSnebi aqvs. misi dekori zoroastrul sakurTxevlebze gamosaxuli Semkulobis msgavsia. Past and Future Heritage in the Pipelines Corridor This bronze deer amulet relects the relationship of Late Classical and Early Christian Georgian society with the natural world. brinjaos es sakidi, romelic irmis gamosaxulebas warmoadgens, gvianantikuri da adreqristianuli sazogadoebis bunebasTan damokidebulebas asaxavs. kulturuli memkvidreobis ZeglebiPmilsadenebis derefanSi, warsuli da momavali 159 The site contained other interesting artifacts, such as a Roman lamp and a Parthian silver drachma (coin) of King Gotarzes I. The later suggests that the Kartli (Iberian) Kingdom was actively involved in Roman-Parthian political and economic relationships connected with the Silk Road. A small fragment of red terracota with animal igures— some standing, others in light—was among the inds at this site. Finally, three glass intaglios (made of glass or jewels, with carved decorations) probably date to the second half of the 1st century AD, judging by their shapes and styles. All were similar, suggesting they may have been produced in the same workshop. This ring set with a carnelian stone illustrates the continued use of carnelian for personal decoration, a practice that extended from the Bronze Age into the Middle Ages. Of 11 rings found at the Klde burial site, two are Sassanian, eight are Roman, and one bears Christian symbols. sardions samkaulad brinjaos xanidan iyenebdnen. kldes samarovanze aRmoCenilia sardionis Tvliani 11 beWedi; maTgan ori sasanuria, rva - romauli, erTze ki qristianuli simboloebia gamosaxuli. 160 Past and Future Heritage in the Pipelines Corridor Zeglze aRmoCenilia araerTi mniSvnelovani da saintereso nivTi _ magaliTad, romauli Wraqi da vercxlis parTuli moneta (gotarzes draqma). am monapovrebidan kargad Cans, rom qarTlis samefo abreSumis gzasTan dakavSirebul, romaul-parTul politikursa da ekonomikur urTierTobebSi iyo CarTuli. sainteresoa terakotis, wiTeli filis fragmenti, romelzedac cxovelebia gamosaxuli. minis sami intalio (qvis an minis Tvalze amokveTili gamosaxuleba), stilis mixedviT, savaraudod, albaT, erT saxelosnoSia damzadebuli. Excavations of this grave at the Klde site revealed a pair of ceramic vessels and simple bronze hoop earring. Burials from the site are associated with both pre-Christian and early Christian societies. kldeSi gaTxrili am samarxSi Tixis ori WurWeli da brinjaos rgolia mopovebuli. arqeologiur Zeglze aRmoCenili samarxebis nawili qristianulia, nawili - warmarTuli. kulturuli memkvidreobis ZeglebiPmilsadenebis derefanSi, warsuli da momavali 161 Orchosani orWosani The archaeological site near the Orchosani village, located in the Akhaltsikhe region of southern Georgia (historically referred to as Samtskhe), is an excellent example of one of Georgia’s longest continuously inhabited sites. It seems to have been in use since the Lower Palaeolithic Auchelian period. Surface inds include tools made of andesite and basalt (hand axes, scrapers and lakes). Its history spans from at least the Early Bronze Age (perhaps as early as the 4th millennium BC) right up to the early 17th century AD, when the setlement sufered a violent end. Only three structures remain: one from the Bronze Age Kura-Araxes culture, and two from the Medieval Period. Aerial views reveal a large fortiied wall around the village dating to the Early Medieval Period. samxreT saqarTveloSi, axalcixis raionSi, istoriul provincia samcxeSi, sofel orWosanTan aRmoCenili mravalfeniani arqeologiuri Zegli erT adgilze xangrZlivi da uwyveti cxovrebis mniSvnelovani magaliTia. am adgilze adamiani jer kidev qveda paleoliTis, aSelur, xanaSi saxlobda, rac aq akrefilma zedapirulma masalam (qvis xelculebi, safxekebi da saxokebi) daadastura. am adgilas cxovreba adrebrinjaos xanaSi ganaxlda (savaraudod, Zv.w. IV aTaswleulSi) da mcire pauzebiT XVII saukunemde, soflis ganadgurebamde grZeldeboda. milsadenebis arealSi Seswavlilia sami nageboba: erTi mtvar-araqsis kulturas ekuTvnis, ori ki - Sua saukuneebisaa. aerofotoebze kargad Cans, rom sofels Sua saukuneebSi galavani hqonda Semortymuli. The 4th-3rd millennium BC was a vibrant time at the Orchosani setlement, which seems to have gone through three distinct cultural phases. The irst, that of an early agricultural society, let behind only fragments of potery, black or grey in color, similar to vessel types discovered at cave setlements in western Georgia. The Kura-Araxes culture came next, around 3,500 BC, with its distinct mud brick homes, elaborately polished black exterior and red interior potery, and blend of agriculture and pastoralism. Orchosani yielded many artifacts in the Kura-Araxes style, including an anthropomorphic terracota igurine. Litle is known of the third culture to inhabit the site, the Bedeni. Jewelry and other metallic objects from this and earlier periods of the Bronze Age were probably imported from Anatolia, as evidenced by a bronze matock that with a higher ratio of nickel than is found in Georgia. 162 Past and Future Heritage in the Pipelines Corridor orWosanis dasaxlebaze, Zv.w. IV-III aTaswleulebis fenebSi sami kulturuli periodia dafiqsirebuli. pirveli, adresamiwaTmoqmedo sazogadoebaa, romelmac dasavleT saqarTvelos amave periodis Zeglebze mopovebuli keramikis msgavsi, ruxi da Savi feris WurWlis fragmentebi Semoinaxa. amas mohyveba mtkvar-araqsuli fena, romelsac Savad naprialebi zedapiri da wiTeli Sidapiri aqvs. am periods ganviTarebuli mesaqonleoba da miwaTmoqmedeba axasiaTebs. orWosanis mtkvar-araqsulma fenam mravali saintereso artefaqti Semoinaxa: maT Soris aRsaniSnavia terakotis anTropomorfuli figura. Semdgomi fena bedenis kulturis periods emTxveva. Zeglze mopovebuli samkauli da iaraRis nawili anatoliuri warmoSobisa unda iyos. magaliTad, brinjaos Toxis qimiur SemadgenlobaSi ufro meti nikelia, vidre saqarTvelos teritoriaze mopovebul brinjaos nivTebSi. This silver cross-dating to the 6th or 7th century AD is the irst of its kind to be found in eastern Georgia. vercxlis es jvari VI-VII saukuneebisaa da aRmosavleT saqarTveloSi mopovebul adreul jvarTagan erT-erTi pirvelia. kulturuli memkvidreobis ZeglebiPmilsadenebis derefanSi, warsuli da momavali 163 Although the Orchosani cemetery produced few artifacts, the surrounding setlement yielded objects spanning many time periods. The most stunning were the large 500-600 liter wine storage jars known as pithoi (a Greek term describing large storage jars of a particular shape) dating to the 12th century AD. Stone, metal, and bone objects that served a variety of purposes, from culinary to military, were also recovered. Religious art from many eras was well-represented in the form of statuetes, inscriptions, and jewelry. The impressive materials discovered at this site are all the more remarkable considering that Orchosani was completely destroyed twice. The irst time was in the 10th century AD, most likely during the Seljuk Turk invasions of Georgia. Orchosani was again destroyed in the 17th century AD during the Otoman expansion of the area, causing its inal demise. This ired red ceramic drinking vessel, dating to the 1st-3rd centuries AD, was found inside a pit burial next to the deceased. wiTlad gamomwvari I-III saukuneebis es sasmisi ormosamarxSi, micvalebulis gverdze ido. 164 Past and Future Heritage in the Pipelines Corridor orWosanis samarovanze arcTu bevri artefaqtia mopovebuli, magram namosaxlarze mravali nivTia aRmoCenili. sainteresoa Tixis 500600 litriani qvevrebi, romlebic XII saukuniT TariRdeba. Zeglze sxvadasxva daniSnulebisa (sameurneo, sabrZolo da sxv.) da masalis (qvis, liTonis, Zvlis) nivTebia aRmoCenili. mcire zomis qandakebebi, samkauli da ramdenime warwera sxvadasxva drois religiur warmodgenebs asaxavs. orWosnis namosaxlari Sua saukuneebis ganmavlobaSi orjeraa ganadgurebuli. pirveli ngreva, rogorc Cans, seljukTa Tavdasxmas ukavSirdeba da X saukuniT TariRdeba. meore ki - samcxeSi otomanTa dapyrobebis Sedegi unda iyos da igi XVII saukuneSi unda momxdariyo. Molded terracotta igurines like this one were used in religious practices during the second half of the 3rd millennium BC. terakotis aseTi figurebi Zv.w. III aTaswleulSi, savaraudod, religiuri miznebisaTvis mzaddeboda. kulturuli memkvidreobis ZeglebiPmilsadenebis derefanSi, warsuli da momavali 165 Turkey TurqeTi Güllüdere guludere Located in the commercially vital region known as the Erzurum Plain in Turkey, Güllüdere reveals two distinct periods of habitation. The first, dating from the Iron Age (900-300 BC), provides evidence (especially similarities in pottery styles) that the inhabitants had cultural and commercial connections with the nearby sites of Tetikom and Tasmasor. The second period occurred during the early Medieval Period. Findings from both habitation periods include multiple structural foundations, indicating a settlement and a cemetery either nearby or inside the settlement boundary. The burial practices observed at this cemetery allow archaeologists to link Güllüdere to well-established surrounding settlements in eastern Anatolia. TurqeTSi, ekonomikurad mniSvnelovan erzerumis vakeze mdebare guluderes namosaxlarze, Cans, rom dasaxleba or sxvadasxva periodSi arsebobda. pirveli, rkinis xaniT (Zv.w. 900-600) TariRdeba da axlomdebare tetikonisa da Tamasoris dasaxlebasTan mWidro urTierTobas adasturebs. meore dasaxleba adre Sua saukuneebSi funqcionirebda. orive periodis fenebi sxvadasxva nagebobis naSTebsa da samarovans Seicavs. samarxebSi aRmoCenili artefaqtebi aRmosavleT anatoliis masalasTan avlens paralelebs. Of the 44 graves excavated at Güllüdere, 10 were definitively Iron Age. The deceased were buried in two distinct manners, the more elaborate of which involved placing the remains in a large ceramic or terracotta jar. While the exact reasons for this practice have not been determined, it is similar to the burial styles at neighboring sites, indicating a religious link. Following the normal pattern for jar burials in this region, grave goods accompanied the bodies. Those from the Iron Age are believed to have consisted only of the deceased’s personal belongings. (The burial sites at Tetikom or Tasmasor included elaborate gifts, whose absence at Güllüdere could be the result of grave robbing rather than different spiritual practices.) Despite the general absence of grave goods in the Güllüdere cemetery, archaeologists discovered some stone, ceramic, and metallic objects. A few were wellpreserved, such as a stone seal depicting a horse, a symbolically important animal in eastern Anatolia. 166 Past and Future Heritage in the Pipelines Corridor guluderes samarovanze Seswavlili 44 samarxidan 10 rkinis xanisaa. aq dakrZalvis ori wesi dafiqsirda. Uumeteswilad, adamianis naSTebi Tixis did WurWelSi Tavsdeboda. dakrZalvis am wesis axsna aqamde ar mogvepoveba da Tu gaviTvaliswinebT, rom maxlobel Zeglebzedac aseTive ritualia dafiqsirebuli, igi religiur rwmenasTan unda davakavSiroT. am samarxebSi, ise, rogorc regionisaTvis damaxasiaTebel qvevrsamarxebSi, micvalebulebs Tan sxvadasxva nivTs atandnen (guluderes samarovanis masalisagan gansxvavebiT, Tamasorisa da telikonis samarxebSi mdidruli inventaria). miuxedavad imisa, rom guluderes samarovanze cotaa samarxeuli inventari, rac Zarcvis Sedegi unda iyos, arqeologebma mainc moi poves qvis, Tixisa da liTonis nivTebi. zogierTi nivTi kargadaa Semonaxuli, magaliTad, qvis sabeWdavi, romelzec cxenia gamosaxuli. A Medieval Period grave stone with a clover-decorated cross was unearthed at Güllüdere. Sua saukuneebis samarxis qvaze, guludereSi, jvris gamosaxulebaa amokveTili. kulturuli memkvidreobis ZeglebiPmilsadenebis derefanSi, warsuli da momavali 167 These jar burials most commonly involved children. While adults were buried this way to a lesser extent, no evidence of this was discovered at the Güllüdere cemetery. The more common practice for adults was a simple soil burial, with the deceased placed on one side in a crouching, fetal position. Notably, all but one Iron Age burial site was situated with a north-south orientation, providing more evidence that the residents of Güllüdere at this time had an organized belief system and specific understanding of an afterlife. This stone seal depicting a horse was found on the chest of a skeleton in an Iron Age grave in Güllüdere. A hole on the reverse side could have been used to suspend the stone. es qvis sabeWdavi, romelzedac cxenia gamosaxuli, guludereSi, rkinis xanis samarxSi micvalebulis mkerdze aRmoCnda. sabeWdavis meore mxares datanili xvreli mis dasamagreblad iyo gakeTebuli. 168 It was difficult to analyze Güllüdere’s habitation during the Medieval Period. The foundations of a few Hellenistic structures were discovered but were so damaged that meaningful conclusions were impossible to draw. The graves from this period yielded even less information than those from the Iron Age. A few Christian tombstones were, however, found at the site, implying that Byzantine Christian influences were present at the time of the burials. Past and Future Heritage in the Pipelines Corridor qvevrsamarxebSi, rogorc wesi, bavSvebi iyvnen dakrZaluli. marTalia, qvevrsamarxebSi mozrdilebsac marxavdnen, magram maTTvis ufro ormosamarxebia damaxasiaTebeli. ormosamarxebSi micvalebulebi gverdze, xelfexmokecilad, embrionis msgavs mdgomareobaSi iwvnen. erTi micvalebulis garda, rkinis xanis yvela micvalebuli samxreTidan CrdiloeTisaken iyo damxrobili, rac rkinis xanaSi guluderes mosaxleobis Camoyalibebul religiur rwmenawarmodgenebze migvaniSnebs. Znelia vimsjeloT guluderes Sua saukuneebis mosaxleobis Sesaxeb. marTalia, aq elinisturi xanis ramdenime nagebobis saZirkveli aRmoCnda, magram isini imdenad dazianebulia, rom praqtikulad, informacias ar iZleva. Sua saukuneebis samarxebma rkinis xanis samarxTa monapovarTan SedarebiT mcire masala mogvca. ramdenime qristianuli saflavis qvis aRmoCenam daadastura, rom aq bizantiuri gavlena Zlieri iyo. This drawing shows a utilitarian Medieval terracotta jug with a folded mouth and incised decorations around its shoulder. It was thrown on a potters wheel and then burnished or polished. naxatze gamosaxulia Sua saukuneebis, morgvze damzadebuli da terakotis gaprialebuli WurWeli, romelsac ornamentirebuli mxari aqvs. kulturuli memkvidreobis ZeglebiPmilsadenebis derefanSi, warsuli da momavali 169 This site plan depicts a large Iron Age complex of domestic structures, with associated courtyards. There is at least one hearth and one burial site in the complex. Excavators concluded that the structures’ walls were probably made of stone, given the apparent absence of mud brick. Zeglis es gegma rkinis xanis nagebobebis kompleqsia. kompleqsSi erTi Rumeli da erTi samarxicaa. gaTxrebis Sedegad damtkicda, rom Senobebi qviTaa nagebi da alizi mSeneblebs ar gamouyenebiaT. 170 Past and Future Heritage in the Pipelines Corridor This fragment of a terracotta handle has been interpreted as the head of an eagle. Believed to date from the Iron Age, it was part of either a free-standing igurine or a ceramic vessel. terakotis saxeluris es fragmenti arwivis Tavis gamosaxuleba unda iyos. igi rkinis xanisaa da WurWlis an raime figuris nawili unda iyos. kulturuli memkvidreobis ZeglebiPmilsadenebis derefanSi, warsuli da momavali 171 This terracotta statuette of a woman is characteristic of Hellenistic igurines in the region. The woman appears to be wearing a cloak over her left shoulder, a common fashion for married women. terakotisagan damzadebuli es qandakeba elinisturi kulturis gavleniTaa Seqmnili. mas marcxena mxarze gadakidebuli mosasxami aqvs mocmuli, rac gaTxovili qalisaTvis iyo damaxasiaTebeli. 172 Ziyaretsuyu ziareTsuiu The Romans were famous for their paved roads and intricate trade systems, concepts that seem elementary today but were truly innovative 2000 years ago. The roads were crucial to Rome’s military eiciency and commercial prosperity. In 2003, at the Ziyaretsuyu setlement, which was along one such Roman road in what is now the Sivas Province of central Turkey, a team from Gazi University unearthed two distinct and likely related structures. The sheer abundance of ceramics recovered from the two buildings suggests that the team uncovered only a fraction of what is likely a larger setlement. While the poor condition of the buildings’ structures suggests that the people who lived within them were not wealthy, the site was probably densely populated. romaelebi ganTqmulni iyvnen mokirwyluli gzebiTa da ganviTarebuli savaWro sistemiT, Erac dReisaTvis gasakviri araa, magram 2000 wlis win es didi siaxle iyo. gzebi romaelTaTvis rogorc samxedro, ise ekonomikuri TvalsazrisiT umniSvnelovanesi iyo. 2003 wels centralur TurqeTSi, romauli gzis maxloblad mdebare ziareTsuius namosaxlarze, gazis universitetis eqspediciam ori erTmaneTTan dakavSirebuli nageboba Seiswavla. aq mopovebuli keramikuli masala miuTiTebs, rom eqspediciam Zeglis mxolod mcire nawili Seiswavla. aq mcxovrebi xalxi mdidari ar iyo, Tumca dasaxleba sakmaod mWidro aRmoCnda. Although archaeologists date the site primarily to the Roman Period, there is evidence it was active slightly earlier, in the 2nd century BC. Architectural and ceramic elements there display some Hellenistic characteristics, and a coin found in the same cultural stratigraphic layer as the excavated buildings and dated from between 105 BC and 70 BC portrays the image of Hercules. Unfortunately, the coin was so damaged that vital information such as the location of the mint was not recoverable. The coin also indicates that Ziyaretsuyu was a place of commerce linked to Roman and Greek societies. If so, why were there so few architectural and metallic remnants? Historians suggest that the answer lies in the geographical position of the setlement. Past and Future Heritage in the Pipelines Corridor marTalia, Zegli romauli xaniT TariRdeba, magram zogierTi detali migvaniSnebs, rom aq cxovreba Zv.w. II saukuneSi daiwyo. keramika da arqiteqturuli detalebi elinistur elementebze migvaniSnebs, xolo amave fenaSi mopovebuli herakles gamosaxulebiani moneta Zv.w. 105-70 wlebiT TariRdeba. samwuxarod, moneta iseTi dazianebuli iyo, rom misi moWris adgili ver gairkva. monetaze dayrdnobiT SeiZleba iTqvas, rom ziareTsuiu savaWro adgili da berZnul-romauli samyaros nawili iyo. Tuki es asea, maSin ratomaa aq ase mcire raodenobis arqiteqturuli detalebi da liTonis nivTebi? istorikosebis azriT, es Zeglis mdebareobiTaa ganpirobebuli. This display shows a sample of the diverse pottery types found at Ziyaretsuyu. The sheer volume and variety of the ceramic vessels suggest a densely populated settlement along a trade route. am suraTze ziareTsuiuSi mopovebuli sxvadasxva ti pis Tixis WurWelia warmodgenili. WurWlis simravle da mravalferovneba mWidro dasaxlebasa da savaWro gzasTan siaxloveze miuTiTebs. kulturuli memkvidreobis ZeglebiPmilsadenebis derefanSi, warsuli da momavali 173 Ziyaretsuyu was situated in a region neighboring the highland Galatians to the west and Cappadocians to the south. Consistent pillaging by these advanced societies likely afected the residents of Ziyaretsuyu and could explain the scarcity of prestige items, such as jewelry and other metallic objects, along with construction styles consistent with a simple seasonal (hence poor) setlement. With warfare continuously destroying their structures, the residents might have had less incentive or economic ability to rebuild lavish homes. These theories are, however, speculative, and will surely beneit from additional research and excavation at Ziyaretsuyu and related sites. A few ceramic vessels discovered at Ziyaretsuyu were decorated with the ivy heart-shaped motif are shown here. This rare style is a remnant of an Iron Age ceramic tradition that persisted into the Roman Period in some areas. ziareTsuiuSi mopovebuli Tixis zogierTi WurWeli gulis formis suros ornamentiTaa Semkuli. es motivi rkinis xanidanaa SemorCenili da romauli xanis keramikaSic iCens Tavs. 174 Past and Future Heritage in the Pipelines Corridor ziareTsuiu dasavleTiT galaTielebiT dasaxlebuli mTebis maxloblad, samxreTiT ki kapadokielebis teritoriis siaxloves mdebareobda. am ganviTarebuli sazogadoebebis mier dasaxlebis xSir Zarcvas Sedegad unda gamoewvia ziareTsuius mosaxleobis gaRaribeba da aq fufunebis sagnebis (samkaulisa da liTonis sxva nivTebis) ararseboba. amave dros, Sendeboda droebiTi (e. i. Raribuli) Senobebi. dausrulebeli brZolebis Sedegi ngreva da axali nagebobebis asaSeneblad saxsrebis uqonloba unda yofiliyo. es mxolod Teoriaa, pasuxi ki Zeglis damatebiTma Seswavlam unda mogvces. Note the eagle head tips on this bronze object, possibly a broken handle from a metallic vessel. The lower portion of the object (not seen in this image) displays the face of a helmeted soldier. brinjaos WurWlis gatexil saxelurze arwivis Tavia gamosaxuli. nivTis qveda nawilze (fotoze ar Cans) muzaradiani jariskacis gamosaxulebaa. kulturuli memkvidreobis ZeglebiPmilsadenebis derefanSi, warsuli da momavali 175 Yüceören ieqeioreni The necropolis of chamber tombs at Yüceören, Turkey, dating from the Hellenistic and Roman periods (approximately 3rd century BC to 4th century AD), is located near Ceyhan, not far from the Mediterranean terminus of the pipelines. Excavated by archaeologists from Gazi University as part of the pipeline project, the chamber tombs relect considerable investment in the inal disposition of the dead. Large spaces were cut into the bedrock, there were passageways, oten with steps, and stone doors closed of the burial chambers. The chambers in most cases contained one or more niches to hold the dead. It appears that the deceased were oten placed in coinlike terracota sarcophagi. The discovery of an antechamber with the disturbed remains of nearly two dozen people suggests that, over the long history of use of the tombs, individuals’ remains were moved in order to reuse the burial niches. This antechamber appeared to be the only one of the 16 excavated tombs that had not been robbed in antiquity. TurqeTSi, xmelTaSuazRvispira jeihanis navTobterminalis maxloblad, ieqeiorenSi aRmoCenili samarovani elinisturi da romauli xaniT (Zv.w. III – ax.w. IV saukuneebi) TariRdeba. gazis universitetis eqspediciam milsadenebis mSeneblobisas aq akldamebi gaTxara.Aakldamebis asagebad dedaqanSi amokveTili yofila didi zomis farTobi. aqve iyo kibeebiani gasasvlelebi; dasakrZalav kamerebs ki qvis karebi hqondaT Sebmuli. kamerebSi, rogorc wesi, erTi an meti niSa iyo, romelic micvalebulis dasasveneblad iyo gankuTvnili. micvalebulebs Tavdapirvelad awvendnen kubosmagvar, terakotis sarkofagebSi. damatebiTi kameris Seswavlam gamoavlina or aTeulze meti, erTmaneTSi areuli, adamianis Zvlebis naSTebi, rac akldamis xangrZliv funqcionirebaze migviTiTebs. rogorc Cans, garkveuli drois Semdeg adamianebis naSTebi am sivrceSi gadahqondaT da niSebs axali micvalebulebisaTvis aTavisuflebdnen. Zeglze Seswavlili 16 akldamaTa Soris mxolod es damatebiTi kamera iyo gauZarcvavi. This winged youth depicted on a carnelian stone set in a ring from the 1st century AD is Eros, the Roman Cupid and son of Aphrodite. Eros was associated with love, lust, and fertility. ax.w. I saukunis beWdis sardionis Tvalze amokveTili es frTosani ymawvili erosia (romauli kupidoni). igi afrodites Svilia da siyvarulis, vnebisa da nayofierebis RvTaebad iTvleboda. 176 Past and Future Heritage in the Pipelines Corridor The necropolis at Yüceören is comprised of a series of tombs cut into the soft bedrock. In each tomb, a set of steps led down into a burial chamber. ieqeiorenis samarovani Sedgeba rbil qanSi amokveTili akldamebisagan. TiToeuli akldamis dasakrZalavi kamerisaken kibeebi Cadioda. The opening to each burial chamber was closed by massive stones in antiquity. Tomb robbers moved most of the stones hundreds of years ago. akldamebi masiuri qviT iyo gadaxuruli. samarxTa mZarcvelebma es qvebi aseulobiT wlis win gadawies. kulturuli memkvidreobis ZeglebiPmilsadenebis derefanSi, warsuli da momavali 177 Despite the extensive looting, the team from Gazi University recovered an interesting range of objects. They included coins dating from the Hellenistic Period (late 3rd century BC) to the Roman Imperial Period (early 2nd century AD). The coins may have been placed in the graves to pay for passage into the underworld. Other inds included glass and ceramic unguentaria (jars for oils and lotions), which may have been let in the graves ater inal treatment of the bodies, and small portable lamps that family members who placed the bodies in the tombs may have let behind. One of two clay igurines depicts a child riding a horse and wearing a headdress of ivy leaves; it may have been made in the Turkish city of Tarsus during the late 2nd century BC. Near the Yüceören site, the BTC pipeline bringing oil from the Caspian ends at the Mediterranean coast, the terminus of this massive engineering feat that has transformed the region’s economic landscape, and has contributed so greatly to our understanding of the cultural history of the countries through which the pipeline passes. This photograph shows a kline, which is a niche cut into the walls of a burial chamber where the remains of individuals were placed, instead of in a sarcophagus. am fotoze naCvenebia akldamis kedlebSi amokveTili dasakrZalavi niSa. aq xdeboda micvalebuliTa sarkofagebidan gadmosveneba. 178 Past and Future Heritage in the Pipelines Corridor miuxedavad imisa, rom Zegli gaZarcvuli iyo, gazis universitetis eqspediciam saintereso nivTebis gamovlena mainc SeZlo. maT Sorisaa monetebi elinisturi xanidan (Zv.w. III s.) romis imperiul periodamde (ax.w. II s.). monetebi micvalebulis im qveyanaSi gasamgzavreblad aucilebeli atributi iyo. akldamebSi aRmoCenilia minis sanelsacxebleebic, romlebsac samarxebSi micvalebulTa gapatiosnebis Semdeg tovebdnen, aqve iyo patara Wraqebic, romlebic cxedris dakrZalvis Semdeg ojaxis wevrebs unda daetovebinaT. sainteresoa Tixis ramdenime figura, romlebic cxenze amxedrebul bavSvs gamosaxavs. ivaraudeba, rom maT Zv.w. II saukunis dasasruls qalaq tarsusSi amzadebdnen. baqo-Tbilisi-jeihanis navTobsadeni, romlis saSualebiT kaspiis zRvis navTobi xmelTaSua zRvis sanapiros ukavSirdeba, ieqeiorenis maxloblad mTavrdeba da jeihanis terminals uerTdeba. am giganturi sainJinro nagebobis mSeneblobam regionis ekonomikuri cxovreba Secvala da didi wvlili Seitana im qveynebis istoriis SeswavlaSi, romelTa teritoriazec navTobsadeni gadis. This terracotta igurine depicts a child riding a horse and wearing a cape and possibly an ivy garland. The igurine probably dates from the period of Roman burials at the site, beginning in the 2nd century AD. terakotis am figuraze cxenze amxedrebuli bavSvia gamoxatuli, romelsac Tavze suros gvirgvini adgas. qandakeba ax.w. II saukuniT, samarovanze romaelTa dakrZalvis dawyebis xaniT, TariRdeba. kulturuli memkvidreobis ZeglebiPmilsadenebis derefanSi, warsuli da momavali 179 The remains of a large jar are lifted carefully from an excavation block in Georgia. saqarTvelos teritoriaze aRmoCenili mozrdili WurWeli gaTxrebis adgilidan frTxilad amoaqvT. The site of Ziyaretsuyu in Sivas Province, Turkey, painstakingly excavated, was one of the sites in the pipeline corridor that yielded important discoveries. TurqeTSi, sivaSis provinciaSi, ziareTsuius ubanze Catarebulma skrupulozurma gaTxrebma milsadenis mSeneblobis am monakveTze mniSvnelovan aRmoCenebs daudo safuZveli. St. George’s Church at Tadzrisi Monastery, restored as part of BP’s cultural heritage program in Georgia, continues to play an important role for worshippers in the local community. This ceremony took place after restoration of the sacred monument was completed. saqarTveloSi milsadenebis mSeneblobis kulturuli memkvidreobis programis farglebSi aRdgenili taZrisis wminda giorgis eklesia adgilobrivi mosaxleobisaTvis udidesi mniSvnelobis mqonea. sazeimo ceremonia am wminda salocavis aRdgenis Semdeg Catarda. CHAPTeR 4 Tavi 4 Nurturing a Shared Heritage vufrTxildebiT saerTo memkvidreobas A a rchaeology allows people to learn more about past civilizations and the story of humankind. It provides a sense of identity and understanding not just of human diversity, but also of the interconnectedness of societies over time. It can be used to mobilize tourism and economic development. And it can be used to advance the discovery and application of scientiic techniques. rqeologiuri gaTxrebis saSualebiT gardasuli civilizaciebisa da, zogadad, kacobriobis istoriis Sesaxeb umniSvnelovanesi informaciis moZieba xdeba. ikveTeba sxvadasxva xalxis mravalferovnebis suraTebi, warmoCindeba sruliad gansxvavebul sazogadoebebSi arsebuli msgavsebebi da kavSirebi. arqeologiuri kvlevebi turizmisa da ekonomikuri ganviTarebis stimuladac SeiZleba iqces da samecniero teqnologiebis danergvas Seuwyos xeli. 184 Past and Future Heritage in the Pipelines Corridor Najaf Museyibli (left) and Fikret Orujov explain the Azerbaijani archaeological recovery process to a local reporter. najaf museibli (marcxniv) da fiqreT orujovi azerbaijanel Jurnalists gaTxrebis process acnoben. kulturuli memkvidreobis ZeglebiPmilsadenebis derefanSi, warsuli da momavali 185 The pipeline project marks a signiicant advance in archaeology in the Caucasus, and has helped cast new light on the region’s past. Through exemplary excavation, multi-disciplinary analysis of indings, and dissemination through a wide range of media, most notably exhibitions and publications, the project has increased understanding of the region’s archaeological record. Equally important, through the AGT Pipelines Archaeology Program, the project is playing a critical role in building capacity by nurturing institutions in the host countries so that they are beter able to work on their own consistent with international standards. The project has gone beyond the immediate requirements speciic to the archaeological work to undertake, as well, longterm engagement to strengthen local institutions that deal with the environment, cultural heritage, material culture, scientiic, educational, and other areas relevant to the project. Local professionals have been able to extend their knowledge in many areas, such as project management; analyses and syntheses of indings; and conservation of the artifacts found. Azerbajan, Georgia, and Turkey are now positioned to approach archaeological projects with greater creativity and lexibility. Increased commitment will enable them to fully utilize the talents of well-trained professionals to uncover more of their fascinating pasts. The AGT Pipelines Archaeology Program will continue to emphasize capacity-building of organizations in the cultural heritage sector. This chapter reviews the speciic eforts developed for each country and the wider public outreach initiatives. 186 Past and Future Heritage in the Pipelines Corridor milsadenebis samSeneblo proeqtma mniSvnelovnad Seuwyo xeli samxreT kavkasiaSi arqeologiur kvlevebsa da regionis warsulis axleburi kuTxiT warmoCenas. misi mimdinareobisas gaTxrebis, mopovebuli masalis multidisci plinuli analizis, media-saSualebebis gamoyenebis, gamofenebisa da publikaciebis saSualebiT regionis arqeologiuri memkvidreobis ukeT Seswavla moxerxda. BP-sa da misi partniorebis mier SemuSavebuli kulturuli memkvidreobis programis farglebSi mniSvnelovan rols TamaSobs e.w. “SesaZleblobaTa ganviTarebis” programa, romelic kulturuli memkvidreobis adgilobriv organizaciebs saerTaSoriso standartebis danergvaSi exmareba. programa uSualod arqeologiuri miznebis farglebsac gascda da grZelvadiani kontaqtebi daamyara garemosdacviT, kulturuli memkvidreobis, materialuri kulturis, samecniero, saganmanaTleblo da sxva dargebSi momuSave organizaciebTan. adgilobriv kadrebs saSualeba miecaT SeeZinaT da gaemdidrebinaT codna sxvadasxva sferoSi: proeqtis marTvaSi, mopovebuli masalis analizsa da artefaqtebis konservaciaSi. azerbaijanSi, saqarTvelosa da TurqeTSi miRebuli gamocdilebis Sedegad, specialistebi meti kreatiulobiT moekidebian arqeologiur proeqtebs da met moqnilobas gamoiCenen. amavdroulad, gazrdili pasuxismgeblobis wyalobiT isini TavianTi niWisa da codnis ukeT gamoyenebas SeZleben. milsadenebis arqeologiuri programa kvlavac gaagrZelebs kultutuli memkvidreobis seqtorSi momuSave organizaciebis mxardaWeras. am TavSi mimoxilulia is specifiuri mcdelobebi da iniciativebi, romlebic TiToeuli qveynisaTvis SemuSavda. David Maynard, an archaeologist from Wales, assisted BP with the administration of the cultural heritage program in Azerbaijan from the start of pipeline planning through the preparation of technical reports. uelseli arqeologi devid meinardi BP-is exmareboda azerbaijanSi kulturuli memkvidreobis programis administrirebaSi mSeneblobis dasawyisidan mis damTavrebamde. kulturuli memkvidreobis ZeglebiPmilsadenebis derefanSi, warsuli da momavali 187 Azerbajan azerbaijani In Azerbajan, BP and its coventurers have sponsored scientiic eforts to study the archaeological inds of the project and undertaken capacity-building measures to strengthen local institutions in the region. For example, over 100 scholars from Azerbajan and the broader Caucasus region atended a 2005 Conference on Archaeology, ethnology, and Folklore. Other eforts have deepened the capabilities of the institutions responsible for long-term preservation of artifacts and their presentation to the public. The refurbishment of the Museum of History and Local Studies located in the Goranboy District, which preserves and displays inds from the nearby excavation site of Borsunlu Kurgan, is an example. This initiative was part of a broader efort to facilitate the establishment of standards for collections management at the Institute of Archaeology and ethnography in Baku, which manages numerous collections from project excavations. The Institute also received equipment and expertise needed to properly maintain the collections: a conservation laboratory was established and outited; protocols for long-term conservation of collections developed; and ive archaeologists given conservation training. azerbaijanSi BP-m da misma partniorebma daafinanses arqeologiuri kvlevebi da adgilobrivi dawesebulebebis “SesaZleblobaTa ganviTarebis” programa. Amis magaliTad SeiZleba movixmoT 2005 wels gamarTuli arqeologiis, eTnografiisa da folkloristikis kongresi, romelSic azerbaijanisa da kavkasiis sxva qveynebis 100-ze meti warmomadgeneli monawileobda. BPis Zalisxmeva agreTve mimarTuli iyo im dawesebulebebis SesaZleblobebis gasazrdelad, romlebic artefaqtebis dacvasa da sazogadoebisaTvis wardgenaze arian pasuxismgebeli. amis magaliTia goranbois raionis mxareTmcodneobis muzeumis rekonstruqcia, sadac amave raionSi gaTxrili borsunlus yorRanis masala inaxeba. es iniciativa nawilia ufro farTo mcdelobisa, raTa baqos arqeologiisa da eTnografiis institutSi koleqciebis marTvis ufro maRali standartebi danergiliyo. institutma miiRo aRWurviloba da koleqciebis Sesenaxaad saWiro gamocdileba. amave dros, Seiqmna da aRiWurva konservaciis laboratoria, ganisazRvra konservaciis wesebi. xuTma arqeologma gaiara specialuri treningi konservaciis sferoSi. education and public outreach—making information about the excavation sites in Azerbajan available to the public—were other important areas of activity. This book and the associated website are two examples of this efort. The Caspian energy Center in the Sangachal oil and gas terminal at the edge of the Caspian Sea provides visitors, including thousands of school children, with engaging exhibition and educational activities that explain the signiicance of the pipelines and the cultural heritage unearthed during its construction. 188 Past and Future Heritage in the Pipelines Corridor ganaTleba da sazogadoebaze orientirebuli programebi erTerTi mniSvnelovani mimarTulebaa, romelic xels uwyobs gaTxrebze informaciis sajarobasa da xelmisawvdomobas. es wigni da masTan dakavSirebuli vebgverdi aRniSnuli Zalisxmevis kargi nimuSia. “kaspiis energiis centri” sangaCalis navTobisa da gazis terminalis mnaxvelebs sTavazobs gamofenebsa da saganmanaTleblo RonisZiebebs. maT aTasobiT skolis moswavle stumrobs. programebis monawileebs saSualeba aqvT, miiRon informacia milsadenis mniSvnelobaze, agreTve, misi mSeneblobisas aRmoCenil kulturul memkvidreobaze. Recovery of large storage vessels from a site near Tovuz, Azerbaijan, required painstaking extraction and preservation. azerbaijanSi, Tovuzis maxloblad, aRmoCenili didi zomis WurWlis amoReba garkveul siZneleebTan iyo dakavSirebuli. Excavations near Gyrag Kasaman, Azerbaijan, exposed several burial sites from the Antique Period. azerbaijanSi, girag qasamanis maxloblad antikuri xanis samarxebi aRmoCnda. kulturuli memkvidreobis ZeglebiPmilsadenebis derefanSi, warsuli da momavali 189 190 Past and Future Heritage in the Pipelines Corridor The Nizami Museum of Literature in Baku, Azerbaijan, is named for the 12th century poet from Ganja, considered the greatest romantic epic poet. azerbaijanSi, baqos literaturis muzeumi XII saukunis didi sparsi poetis nizami ganjelis saxels atarebs. kulturuli memkvidreobis ZeglebiPmilsadenebis derefanSi, warsuli da momavali 191 192 Past and Future Heritage in the Pipelines Corridor Archaeologists from Georgia’s Center for Archaeological Studies record a site along the BTC pipeline. saqarTveloSi BTC –is milsadenze arqeologiuri centris TanamSromlebi arqeologiur Zegls afiqsireben. kulturuli memkvidreobis ZeglebiPmilsadenebis derefanSi, warsuli da momavali 193 194 Past and Future Heritage in the Pipelines Corridor Azerbaijani and Georgian cultural heritage specialists observe CAT scanning equipment with Dr. Bruno Frohlich, Smithsonian Institution, during meetings at the Smithsonian Institution in October 2008. smiTsonis institutSi, 2008 wlis oqtomberSi gamarTul Sexvedraze qarTveli da azerbaijaneli specialistebi doqtor bruno frolixTan erTad CAT- is ti pis skaners aTvaliereben. kulturuli memkvidreobis ZeglebiPmilsadenebis derefanSi, warsuli da momavali 195 Archaeologist Lali Akhalaia, Cultural Heritage Coordinator Dawn Alexander, Cultural Heritage Monitor Nino Erkomaishvili, and Project Director and Senior Architect Merab Bochoidze discuss the next steps during the restoration of Tadzrisi Monastery in Georgia. 196 arqeologebi lali axalaia, kulturuli memkvidreobis koordinatori don aleqsanderi, kulturuli memkvidreobis monitori nino erqomaiSvili da proeqtis avtori, merab boWoiZe ganixilaven taZrisis monastria aRdgeniTi samuSaoebis Semdgom etapebs. Past and Future Heritage in the Pipelines Corridor The main fortress wall at Sakire in Georgia is tied by an archway to the wall that encircles the courtyard. sakireSi (saqarTvelo) cixesimagris mTavari kedeli TaRiT ukavSirdeba Sida ezos kedels. kulturuli memkvidreobis ZeglebiPmilsadenebis derefanSi, warsuli da momavali 197 Georgia saqarTvelo Georgian scholars, scientists, and preservationists had many of the same needs as their counterparts in Azerbajan, but also some unique ones. For example, the project supported extensive architectural studies to minimize the impacts on standing monuments and furthered the restoration of speciic historical structures on or near the pipeline route. The Georgian Cultural Heritage Protection Department played a large role in determining a route that would ensure that the most signiicant sites near the project right-of-way were avoided. Most eforts focused on planning protective measures for at-risk sites, and speciic protection or mitigation measures were developed for each of them. qarTvel mecnierebs TavianTi azerbaijaneli kolegebis msgavi problemebi hqondaT, Tumca, maT Soris sakmao gansxvavebac arsebobda. kulturuli memkvidreobis proeqtis farglebSi mSeneblobis dawyebamde, intensiuri samuSaoebi Catarda milsadenebis siaxloves arsebuli arqiteqturuli Zeglebis dacvis mizniT. saqarTvelos ZeglTa dacvis departamentma didi roli iTamaSa milsadenis iseTi marSrutis amorCevaSi, rom mas mniSvnelovani ZeglebisaTvis gverdi aevlo. gansakuTrebuli Zalisxmeva moxmarda sarisko arqiteqturuli Zeglebis SeZlebisdagvarad dacvas. amisTvis SemuSavda specialuri dacviTi RonisZiebebi. An excellent example is the approach taken to ensure conservation and preservation of the Tadzrisi Monastery complex. The complex consists of two churches standing side by side, St. George’s (a three-nave basilica) and St. Mary’s, as well as the ruins of a monastery building. The monastery was the most important ecclesiastic center in the 10th-15th centuries AD in Georgia; its origin is associated with eminent Georgian religious leaders in the early Middle Ages. It was temporarily abandoned following an invasion by the Otoman Turks in the 1550s. St. George’s Church is the most prominent remnant of the monastery and a pilgrimage site for Georgians to this day. Although the ruins of the Monastery are not directly on the pipeline route, BTC/SCP funded conservation and restoration of both churches and the monastery’s courtyard. 198 Past and Future Heritage in the Pipelines Corridor amis TvalsaCino magaliTia is midgoma, romelic taZrisis samonastro kompleqsis dacvisa da aRdgenisaTvis SemuSavda. kompleqsi gverdi-gverd mdgari wminda giorgisa (samnaviani eklesia) da wm. mariamis monastris nangrevebisagan Sedgeboda. es monasteri X-XV saukuneebSi saqarTvelos erT-erTi mniSvnelovani sulieri centri gaxldaT. misi daarseba adre Sua saukuneebis saqarTvelos udides religiur moRvaweTa saxelebs ukavSirdeba. 1550 wels otomanTa imperiis Semosevis Sedegad monasterma arseboba Sewyvita. wminda giorgis eklesia samonastro kompleqsis mTavari nagebobaa, romelSic momlocvelebi dRemde dadian. marTalia, kompleqsis nangrevebi uSualod milsadenis marSrutze ar mdebareobs, magram BP-im da misma partniorebma orive eklesiis aRdgena daafinansa. The result is an aesthetically pleasing and historically accurate site with two fully operational historic churches. In a leter of gratitude to BP, local residents wrote, “This was a sign of great respect towards Georgian cultural heritage… [which] strengthened our positive atitude towards pipeline construction.” In addition to these preservation eforts, the project has supported two museum exhibitions of some of the exciting inds unearthed along the pipeline route. In 2005 the Janashia State Museum (now part of Georgian National Museum) hosted the “First Oil Celebration,” where the Company presented an exhibition of outstanding archaeological inds. On July 2, 2009 the Georgian National Museum, together with BP and its partners, inaugurated the exhibition, “Pipeline Construction and Archaeological Finds” at the Samtskhe-Javakheti History Museum in Akhaltsikhe, in southern Georgia. The exhibition contains up to 800 artifacts from the Paleolithic to the Middle Ages that were unearthed during the pipeline construction. The museum itself was partially renovated for the occasion. Sedegad miviReT esTetikurad sasiamovno da pirvandeli saxiT aRdgenili, ori moqmedi eklesia. BPsadmi miweril samadlobelo werilSi adgilobrivi mosaxleoba aRniSnavs, rom “es iyo saqarTvelos kulturuli memkvidreobisadmi gamoCenili didi pativiscema, ramac milsadenis mSeneblobisadmi Cveni dadebiTi damokidebuleba kidev ufro ganamtkica”. amas garda, proeqtis farglebSi ganxorcielda axalaRmoCenili arqeologiuri masalis saintereso gamofeebi. 2005 wels s. janaSias saxelobis saxelmwifo muzeumSi (romelic dRes erovnuli muzeumis nawilia) gaimarTa “pirveli navTobisadmi” miZRvnili arqeologiuri gamofena. 2009 wlis 2 ivliss, saqarTvelos erovnulma muzeumma BP-sa da mis partniorebTan erTad axalcixis samcxe-javaxeTis istoriis muzeumSi moawyo gamofena “milsadeni da arqeologiuri aRmoCenebi”. Ggamofenaze gamotanili iyo milsadenis mSeneblobisas aRmoCenili sxvadasxva periodis 800 eqsponati, paleoliTidan – Suasaukunebamde. am movlenasTan dakavSirebiT moxda muzeumis nawilobrivi ganaxlebac. Specialists from Georgia’s Center for Archaeological Studies clean and conserve artifacts from excavations in that nation. saqarTvelos arqeologiuri centris TanmSromlebi asufTaveben da konservacias ukeTeben aRmoCenil artefaqtebs. kulturuli memkvidreobis ZeglebiPmilsadenebis derefanSi, warsuli da momavali 199 200 Past and Future Heritage in the Pipelines Corridor Restoring the domed roof of St. Mary’s Church at Tadzrisi in Georgia involved replacing missing stones and securing loose ones. taZrisSi (saqarTvelo) wm. mariamis eklesiis TaRovani gadaxurvis aRsadgenad moryeuli qvebi gaamagres. Interior of the restored St. George church in Tadzrisi Monastery. taZrisis wminda giorgis aRdgenili eklesiis interieri. kulturuli memkvidreobis ZeglebiPmilsadenebis derefanSi, warsuli da momavali 201 Prior to restoration work, the small St. Mary’s Church in Tadzrisi in Georgia, although overgrown with vegetation and in ruins, was still visited by local Georgians. mcenareuli safariT dafarul da nangrevebad qceul taZrisis wm. mariamis eklesias aRdgenamdec ar aklda momlocvelebi. 202 Past and Future Heritage in the Pipelines Corridor kulturuli memkvidreobis ZeglebiPmilsadenebis derefanSi, warsuli da momavali 203 204 Past and Future Heritage in the Pipelines Corridor This cross was inscribed into the sandstone above a lintel of St. George’s Church in Tadzrisi in Georgia. es jvari taZrisis wm. giorgis eklesiis sarkmlis zRudarzea amokveTili. kulturuli memkvidreobis ZeglebiPmilsadenebis derefanSi, warsuli da momavali 205 Yüceören site report published by Gazi University in 2006. ieqeronis gaTxrebis angariSi gazis universitetma 2006 wels gamosca. 206 Past and Future Heritage in the Pipelines Corridor Archaeologists from Georgia’s Center for Archaeological Studies review data gathered along the pipeline. saqarTvelos arqeologiuri centris TanmSromlebi milsadenis teritoriaze mopovebul masalas akvirdebian. kulturuli memkvidreobis ZeglebiPmilsadenebis derefanSi, warsuli da momavali 207 Turkey TurqeTi Cultural heritage eforts in Turkey under the pipeline project have focused mainly on capacity building at the regional museums where most of the collections from the excavations were deposited. The museums are located in the provinces of Kars, erzurum, Sivas, Kahramanmaras, and Adana, which lie along the route. The project began with needs assessments developed by the directorates for the museums, and has involved investment in equipment, training, and publications. The project undertook the capacity-building work in Turkey in conjunction with the Association of Archaeologists, Gazi University, and the British Institute of Archaeology, all in Ankara. TurqeTSi milsadenebis samSeneblo proeqtis kulturuli memkvidreobis programa ZiriTadad mimarTuli iyo im regionaluri muzeumebis SesaZleblobaTa gazrdaze, sadac milsadenis arealSi mopovebuli masala inaxeboda (yarsis, erzrumis, sivaSis, yaramanmarisa da adanas muzeumebi). proeqti daiwyo im saWiroebaTa da moTxovnaTa SefasebiT, romlebic muzeumebis direqtorebma SeimuSaves. analizis Sesabamisad, gamoiyo investiciebi muzeumis aRsaWurvad, TanamSromelTa treningebisa da publikaciebisaTvis. “SesaZleblobaTa gazrdis” es proeqti ankaris arqeologTa asociaciis, gazis universitetisa da britaneTis arqeologiis institutis erToblivi ZalisxmeviT ganxorcielda. An additional result of the archaeology program in Turkey has been an internationally recognized series of illustrated publications on the sites excavated along the pipeline. The Smithsonian Institution’s AGT project website (htp://www.agt. si.edu ) has posted original Azerbajani, Georgian and Turkish excavation site reports. 208 Past and Future Heritage in the Pipelines Corridor TurqeTSi arqeologiur ZeglTa aRmoCenisa da gaTxrebis kvaldakval ilustrirebul publikaciaTa mTeli seria gamoqveynda. smiTsonis institutis azerbaijanulqarTul-Turquli proeqtis farglebSi internetSi ganTavsda gaTxrebis sainformacio vebgverdi htp://agt.si.edu., romelSiac azerbaijanSi, saqarTvelosa da TurqeTSi Catarebuli gaTxrebis angariSebia motanili. Conclusion daskvna As they wind their way through Azerbajan, Georgia, and Turkey, the pipelines stand as symbols of a more prosperous and integrated future for the South Caucasus and eastern Anatolia. But the planning and construction of the pipelines have also had a major impact on understanding the past of the region, which has long been recognized as a heartland of ancient history. The cultural heritage component of the BTC and SCP pipelines project continues to ill, gaps in our knowledge of the civilizations that occupied these ancient lands. The project will have a lasting impact on archaeological science and institutions in the host countries. It will surely continue to encourage cooperation in understanding and appreciating this region’s common heritage that is such an important part of the shared heritage of people everywhere. azerbaijanis, saqarTvelosa da TurqeTis teritoriebze gamavali milsadenebi samxreT kavkasiasa da aRmosavleT anatoliaSi ufro warmatebuli da integrirebuli momavlis simboloebad iqcnen. milsadenebis daproeqtebam da mSeneblobam aseve xeli Seuwyo im regionis warsulis kvlevas, romelic uZvelesi civilizaciebis erT-erT akvnad iTvleba. BTC da SCP proeqtebis wyalobiT mdidrdeba Cveni codna im civilizaciaTa Sesaxeb, romlebic am uZveles miwebze arsebobda. proeqti kidev moaxdens gavlenas maspinZeli qveynebis arqeologiuri mecnierebis da institutebis ganviTarebaze, xels Seuwyobs am regionis saerTo kulturuli memkvidreobis Seswavlasa da TanamSromlobis iniciativebs. kulturuli memkvidreobis ZeglebiPmilsadenebis derefanSi, warsuli da momavali 209 210 Past and Future Heritage in the Pipelines Corridor “Pipelines awaken ancient history” archaeological exhibition in the Caspian Energy Centre at BP operated Sangachal oil and gas terminal. arqeologiuri gamofena “navTobsadenebi da gamoRviZebuli istoria” kaspiis energetikis centrSi, BP-is mier marTul sangaCalis terminalSi.A kulturuli memkvidreobis ZeglebiPmilsadenebis derefanSi, warsuli da momavali 211 Acknowledgements T he volume presents information on some of the extraordinary treasures discovered during of the construction of the BTC and SCP pipelines and celebrates the new archaeological contributions uncovered during ield work beginning in 2003 in Azerbajan, Georgia, and Turkey. The volume is part of a larger cultural heritage program, sponsored by BP and its coventurers in the Caspian projects. The authors thank BP for its support of this publication, which provides examples of the historic sites and artifacts unearthed during the excavations and underscores the cultural connections among peoples from the region. We extend our sincere gratitude to BP staf: Ismail Miriyev, elnara Huseynova and Nino erkomaishvili for their advice and patience during the production of this book. They provided continuing encouragement as well as invaluable access to site materials and introductions to pertinent scholars, images, and ideas. Their cooperation and substantive comments greatly enriched and improved the book. We also thank Gunesh Alakbarova and Turkhan Ahmadov for proofreading the Azerbajani text. 212 Past and Future Heritage in the Pipelines Corridor madloba gaweuli samuSaosaTvis a m wignSi Sesulia informacia azerbaijanSi, saqarTvelosa da TurqeTSi 2003 wels dawyebuli BTC da SCP milsadenebis mSeneblobisas aRmoCenili mdidari arqeologiuri masalis Sesaxeb. wigni im kulturuli memkvidreobis programis nawilia, romelic BP-m da misma partniorebma daafinanses. avtorebi misi gamocemis xelSewyobisaTvis BP-is did madlobas uxdian. publikaciaSi uxvadaa mocemuli informacia arqeologiuri gaTxrebis Sedegad aRmoCenili arqeologiuri masalebisa da Zeglebis Sesaxeb, agreTve gamaxvilebulia yuradReba regionis xalxTa kulturul kavSirebze. wignze muSaobisas gaweuli daxmarebisaTvis gvsurs didi madliereba gamovxatoT BP-is TanamSromlebis: ismail mirievis,Eelnara huseinovasa da nino erqomaiSvilis mimarT. isini Tavdauzogavad gvedgnen mxarSi da yvelanairad gviwyobdnen xels, raTa CvenTvis xelmisawvdomi gamxdariyo ara marto masalebi, aramed, maT Sesaxeb mecnierTa mier gamoTqmuli mosazrebanic. maTma daxmarebam, saqmis koordinaciam da profesiulma SeniSvnebma didwilad gaaumjobesa am wignis Sinaarsi da xarisxi. The Smithsonian’s preparation of the AGT archive database (used for the development of this book and its website, and shared with our counterpart institutions in Azerbajan, Georgia, and Turkey) has beneited from the support and expertise of Dr. Najaf Museyibli and Ziya Hajili at the Azerbajan National Academy of Sciences Institute of Archaeology and Ethnography; Dr. Malahat Farajova, Director of the Gobustan National Historical-Artistic Preserve; Dr. David Lordkipanidze, General Director of National Museum of Georgia and Dr. Mikheil Tsereteli of the Georgian National Museum; and Dr. Vakhtang Shatberashvili of the Georgian Archaeological Research Center; and many others. For help with Georgian archaeological data, visiting researcher Irakli Pipia (Tbilisi State University) brought to the Smithsonian in Washington his helpfulness, good humor and tireless translations of Georgian archaeological site reports. Guram Kvirkvelia, an esteemed Georgian archaeologist, also provided assistance. Besarion Maisuradze, the Deputy General Director for Science and Head of the Archaeological Research Center, was always supportive. Mrs. Nino Nadaraia helped edit the Georgian texts. Chingiz Samadzada, an Azerbajani photographer, and Gabriel Salinker, photographer at the Georgian National Museum, supplied many of the images for this book. The embassies of Azerbajan, Georgia, and Turkey in Washington, D.C., also furnished outstanding photographs. Mikheil Tsereteli, Tamara Kokochashvili, Giorgi Mindorashvili, and Teimuraz Gotsadze, all from Georgia, along with Najaf Müseyibli, Malahat Farajova, and Ziya Hajili from Azerbajan, visited Washington, D.C. for two weeks in October 2008 to participate in our international museum capacity building program. each also had a role in helping to prepare this volume. Continuing correspondence with David Maynard also helped the project from its initial conceptualization to its completion.its completion. smiTsonis institutSi Tavmoyrili masalis (romelicAam wignisa da vebgverdis mosamzadeblad azerbaijanis, saqarTvelosa da TurqeTis Sesabamisi dawesebulebebis daxmarebiT Segrovda) damuSavebaSi didi wvlili Seitanes: doqtorma najaf museiblim da zia hajilim (azerbaijanis arqeologiisa da eTnografiis instituti), gobusTanis erovnuliHistoriuli nakrZalis direqtorma, doqtorma malahaT farajovam, saqarTvelos erovnuli muzeumis generalurma direqtorma profesorma daviT lorTqifaniZem, aseve, mixeil wereTelma, (saqarTvelos erovnuli muzeumi), doqtorma vaxtang SatberaSvilma (saqarTvelos arqeologiuri kvlevis centri) da mravalma sxvam. saqarTvelos arqeologiuri masalis gaazrebaSi dagvexmara irakli fifia, romelmac qarTuli arqeologiuri Zeglebis gaTxrebis angariSebis Targmanze dauRalavi muSaobisas SesaSuri iumoris grZnobac gamoamJRavna. daxmarebisaTvis madlobas vuxdiT pativcemul qarTvel arqeologs, doqtor guram kvirkvelias, agreTve saqarTvelos erovnuli muzeumisAarqeologiis centris xelmZRvanels, doqtor besarion maisuraZes. qarTul teqstze gaweuli muSaobisas stilisturi Sesworebebi Seitana doqtorma nino nadaraiam. fotografebma, Cingiz samadzadem (azerbaijani) da gabriel salnikerma (saqarTvelos erovnuli muzeumi) wignSi Sesuli fotoebis didi nawili gadaiRes. fotoebi agreTve mogvawodes saqarTvelos, azerbaijanisa da TurqeTis saelCoebma vaSingtonSi. 2008 wlis oqtomberSi SesaZleblobaTa gazrdis orkvirian saerTaSoriso SexvedraSi monawileoba miiRes: mixeil wereTelma, Tamar kokoCaSvilma, giorgi mindoraSvilma, Teimuraz gocaZem (saqarTvelo), najaf museiblim, malahaT farajovam da zia hajilim (azerbaijani).Yyvela maTganma sagrZnobi wvlili Seitana am wignis gamocemaSi. konceptualuri sakiTxebis SemuSavebasa da mis saboloo srulyofaSi gansakuTrebuli roli iTamaSa devid meinardTan mimoweram. kulturuli memkvidreobis ZeglebiPmilsadenebis derefanSi, warsuli da momavali 213 All the authors sincerely thank Dr. Süleyman Yücel Şenyurt of Gazi University for his detailed and helpful comments as a peer reviewer for the Turkish sites and text and Dr. Vakhtang Shatberashvili for his careful review of the entire text. The Smithsonian team (Paul Michael Taylor, Christopher R. Polglase, Jared M. Koller, and Troy A. Johnson) extend our thanks to Dr. Najaf Museyibli of Baku’s Institute of Archaeology and ethnography, who joined us as co-author. This co-authorship is even more appropriate since the synthesizing eforts of all the authors derive, in the case of the Azerbajani data, from largely unpublished ield reports prepared by the institute represented by Dr. Najaf Museyibli. This book’s content relects our collegial understanding that, even though the periodization of history and the interpretation of speciic archeological facts may vary within each country’s traditions of scholarship, we all gain much from atempting to share and synthesize data across borders in ways that relect and build our shared understanding. Within the Smithsonian Institution, many merit our gratitude. Gregory P. Shook, Samantha Grauberger, and Lance Costello helped organize the October 2008 international museum capacity building program. Michael Tutle, Webmaster of the Smithsonian Institution, along with Jared M. Koller, developed the website associated with this volume, a process that elicited numerous ideas later incorporated into this book. Christopher Lotis and Whitney Watriss meticulously copyedited the text. We beneited from the assistance of numerous other colleagues including Yeonkyung Bae, Delores Clyburn, Catherine Fletcher, Halina Izdebska, Daniele Lauro, Mat McInnes, Mark Mulder, Ian Parker, Zaborian Payne, Robert Pontsioen, Michelle Reed, Nancy Shorey, William Bradford Smith, Karen Sulmoneti, Saw Sandi Tun, and Janet Yoo. 214 Past and Future Heritage in the Pipelines Corridor avtorebi did madlobas uxdian doqtor suleiman iusel seniurTs (gazis universiteti) Turquli Zeglebis Sesaxeb teqstis detaluri redaqtirebisa dakomentirebisaTvis, aseve doqtor vaxtang SatberaSvils, romelmac teqstis redaqtirebaSi miiRo monawileoba. smiTsonis institutis gundi (pol maikl teilori, qristofer r. folglesis jared m. koleri, Troi a. jonsoni) gansakuTrebul madlobas uxdis doqtor najaf museiblis TanaavtorobisaTvis. marTalia, am sami qveynis mecnierebis Sexedulebebi specifiur arqeologiuri sakiTxebis interpretacia sakmaod gansxvavebulia, magram Cven SevecadeT es monacemebi garkveulwilad Segvejerebina, raTa am wignSi Cveni saerTo midgomebi asaxuliyo. G gvinda didi madliereba gamovxatoT smiTsonis institutis TanamSromlebis mimarT. 2008 wels, muzeumebis “SesaZleblobaTa zrdis” saerTaSoriso Sexvedris programis momzadebaSi didi wvlili Seitanes gregori p. Sukma, samanta grauberma da lans kostelom. smiTsonis institutis vebmasterma, maikl TuTlma jared kolerTan erTad am publikaciis vebgverdi Seadgina, romelze muSaobisas am wignSi Sesuli araerTi ideis avtoric aRmoCnda. qristofer loTisi da uitni uorisi dauRalavad muSaobdnen teqstis redaqtirebasa da koreqturaze. ieon-kung bai,Ddelores kliberni, qeTrin fletCeri, halina izdebska, Daniel lauro, meT makinsi, mark mulderi, ian parkeri, zaborian peini, robert pontsioeni, MmiSel ridi, nansi Sori, uiliamBbredford smiTi,Kkaren sulmoneti, sav sandi Tuni da janetYio – es is xalxia, romelTaganac Cven fasdaudebeli daxmareba miviReT. Finally, appreciation and thanks go to Dr. Carole Neves, director of the Smithsonian’s Oice of Policy and Analysis, who played a vital role in introducing many of us to the Caucasus and who edited the text. Her commitment to the project and her comments, insights, and suggestions were of particular importance to the book’s successful completion. da bolos, gansakuTrebuli madloba gvinda vuTxraT smiTsonis institutis politikisa da analizis ofisis xelmZRvanels, doqtor qerol nevess, romelma bevr Cvengans gaacno kavkasia da romelic am wignis redaqtoria. proeqtisadmi misma erTgulebam, xedvam, winadadebebma da SeniSvnebma wignis warmatebiT gasrulebis saqmeSi umniSvnelovanesi roli Seasrula. Photo credits fotomasala Unless otherwise noted, all photographs in this book were provided by BP exploration Caspian Sea Ltd., whose extensive photographs of cultural heritage eforts form a major portion of the photographic archive assembled under the Smithsonian’s Azerbajan-Georgia-Turkey (AGT) project, along with contributions from the Institute of Archaeology and ethnography (Baku, Azerbajan), Gobustan National HistoricalArtistic Preserve (Baku, Azerbajan), and the Georgian National Museum (Tbisili, Georgia). The Embassies of the Republic of Georgia (pp. 26, 40, 44-45, 80-81, 100, 104-105), and the Republic of Turkey (pp.10-11, 18-19, 26, 46-47, 107-111, 114, 118-119), the Smithsonian Institution (p. 194-195), Azerbajan National Academy of Sciences Institute of Archaeology and Ethnography (p. 65) and Christopher R. Polglase (pp. 35, 41{on let}, 148) also contributed photographs. am wignSi Sesuli yvela foto, Tuki mas specialuri niSani ar axlavs, BP exploration Caspian Sea Ltd–is mieraa mowodebuli. Ekulturuli memkvidreobis amsaxveli fotomasalaPam fotoarqivis ZiriTadi fondia da smiTsonis institutis proeqtis – AGT-is (azerbaijani – saqarTvelo – TurqeTi) Semadgeneli nawilia. am masalas erTvis baqos eTnografiisa da arqeologiis institutis gobusTanis xelovnebisa da istoriis erovnuli nakrZalisa da saqarTvelos erovnuli muzeumis mier gadmocemuli fotoebi. aqvea saqarTvelosa (gv. 26, 40, 44-45, 106) da TurqeTis respublikis (gv. 10-11, 18-19, 27, 46-47, 104, 113, 115, 117, 120, 122-123) saelCoebis, smiTsonis institutis, vaSingtonis kongresis biblioTekisa da qristofer r. folgleisis mier mowodebuli fotomasalac (gv 35, 41, 146, 188-189). kulturuli memkvidreobis ZeglebiPmilsadenebis derefanSi, warsuli da momavali 215 Site Report Citations Agdash (Azerbajan, KP 194/200) Mustafayev, Mikayil. 2006. Agdash: Excavations of an Antique Period Jar Grave. Baku. Agili Dere (Azerbajan, KP 358) Huseynov, Fuad. 2007. Excavations of Agili Dere Setlement Site. Baku. Akmezer (Turkey, KP 429) Görür, Muhammet; Ekmen, Hamza. 2005. Akmezer: A Hellenistic and Medieval Setlement in Cayirli. Ankara: Gazi University Research Center for Archaeology. Amirarkh (Azerbajan, KP 204) Huseynov, Muzafar; Jalilov, Bakhtiyar. 2006. Amirarkh: Excavations of an Antique Period Wooden Coin Grave. Baku. Ashagi Kechili (Azerbajan, KP 332.5) Dostiyev, Tarikh. 2007. Archaeological Work at Ashagi Kechili Setlement Site. Baku. Asrikchai (Azerbajan, KP 377) Museyibli, Najaf; Jalilov, Bakhtiyar; Agayev, Gahraman. 2007. Excavations of Asrikchai Setlement Site. Baku. Atskuri Winery (Georgia, KP 211/212) Licheli, Vakhtang ; Rcheulishvili, Giorgi; Kasradze, Merab; Rusishvili, R.; Kalandadze, Nino; Papuashvili, Nana; Kazakhishvili, L.; Gobejishvili, Gela. 2007. Archaeological Investigation at Site IV266/320, KP211/212, Atskuri Village, Akhaltsikhe Region. Tbilisi, Otar Lordkipanidze Centre of Archaeology of the Georgian National Museum. Borsunlu Kurgan (Azerbaijan, KP 272) Qoşqarli, Qoşqar; Müseyibli, Nəcəf; Aşurov, Səfər. 2003. Borsunlu Kurqani. Baku, elm Press. Boyuk Kasik (Azerbajan, KP 438) Müseyibli, Nəcəf; Huseynov, Muzafar. 2008. Boyuk Kasik Report: On Excavations of Boyuk Kasik Setlement at Kilometre Point 438 of Baku-TbilisiCeyhan and South Caucasus Pipelines Right Of Way Baku. 216 Past and Future Heritage in the Pipelines Corridor arqeologiuri gaTxrebis angariSebi agdaSi (azerbaijani, KP 194/200) Mustafayev, Mikayil. 2006. Agdash: Excavations of an Antique Period Jar Grave. Baku. agili dere (azerbaijani, KP 358) Huseynov, Fuad. 2007. Excavations of Agili Dere Setlement Site. Baku. aqmezeri (TurqeTi, KP 429) Görür, Muhammet; Ekmen, Hamza. 2005. Akmezer: A Hellenistic and Medieval Setlement in Cayirli. Ankara: Gazi University Research Center for Archaeology. amirarxi (azerbaijani, KP 204) Huseynov, Muzafar; Jalilov, Bakhtiyar. 2006. Amirarkh: Excavations of an Antique Period Wooden Coin Grave. Baku. aSagi qeCili (azerbaijani, KP 332.5) Dostiyev, Tarikh. 2007. Archaeological Work at Ashagi Kechili Setlement Site. Baku. asrikCai (azerbaijani, KP 377) Museyibli, Najaf; Jalilov, Bakhtiyar; Agayev, Gahraman. 2007. Excavations of Asrikchai Setlement Site. Baku. awyuri (saqarTvelo, KP 211/212) Licheli, Vakhtang ; Rcheulishvili, Giorgi; Kasradze, Merab; Rusishvili, R.; Kalandadze, Nino; Papuashvili, Nana; Kazakhishvili, L.; Gobejishvili, Gela. 2007. Archaeological Investigation at Site IV266/320, KP211/212, Atskuri Village, Akhaltsikhe Region. Tbilisi, Otar Lordkipanidze Centre of Archaeology of the Georgian National Museum. borsunlus yorRani (zerbaijani, KP 272) Qoşqarli, Qoşqar; Müseyibli, Nəcəf; Aşurov, Səfər. 2003. Borsunlu Kurqani. Baku, elm Press. biuq qaSiqi (zerbaijani, KP 438) Müseyibli, Nəcəf; Huseynov, Muzafar. 2008. Boyuk Kasik Report: On Excavations of Boyuk Kasik Setlement at Kilometre Point 438 of Baku-TbilisiCeyhan and South Caucasus Pipelines Right Of Way Baku, Nata Press. Büyükardıç (Turkey, KP 270) Şenyurt, S. Yücel. 2005. Büyükardıç: An Early Iron Age Hilltop Setlement in Eastern Anatolia. Ankara: Gazi University Research Center for Archaeology. buiuqardiCi (TurqeTi, KP 270) Şenyurt, S. Yücel. 2005. Büyükardıç: An Early Iron Age Hilltop Setlement in Eastern Anatolia. Ankara: Gazi University Research Center for Archaeology. Chaparli (Azerbajan, KP 335/336) Aşurov, Səfər. 2008. Chaparli Report: On Excavations of Late Antique and Early Medieval Period Chapel, Setlement and Burial Site at Kilometre Points 335/336 of Baku-Tbilisi-Ceyhan and South Caucasus Pipelines Right Of Way. Baku. Caparli (azerbaijani, KP 335/336) Aşurov, Səfər. 2008. Chaparli Report: On Excavations of Late Antique and Early Medieval Period Chapel, Setlement and Burial Site at Kilometre Points 335/336 of Baku-Tbilisi-Ceyhan and South Caucasus Pipelines Right Of Way. Baku. Chivchavi Gorge Site (Georgia, KP 087) Heritage Protection Department of Georgia. 2003. Study of the Monuments within Baku-Tbilisi-Ceyhan Pipeline Route Corridor: Phase III. Report. Tbilisi, Otar Lordkipanidze Centre of Archaeology of the Georgian National Museum. WivWavis xeoba (saqarTvelo, KP 087) Heritage Protection Department of Georgia. 2003. Study of the Monuments within Baku-Tbilisi-Ceyhan Pipeline Route Corridor: Phase III. Report. Tbilisi, Otar Lordkipanidze Centre of Archaeology of the Georgian National Museum. Dashbulaq (Azerbajan, KP 342) Hajafov, Shamil; Huseynov, Muzafar; Jalilov, Bakhtiyar. 2007. Dashbulag Report: On Excavations of Dashbulag Setlement at Kilometre Point 342 of Baku-Tbilisi-Ceyhan and South Caucasus pipelines Right Of Way. Baku. daSulaqi (azerbaijani, KP 342) Hajafov, Shamil; Huseynov, Muzafar; Jalilov, Bakhtiyar. 2007. Dashbulag Report: On Excavations of Dashbulag Setlement at Kilometre Point 342 of Baku-Tbilisi-Ceyhan and South Caucasus pipelines Right Of Way. Baku. Eli Baba (Georgia, KP 116) Narimanashvili, Goderdzi. 2004. Preliminary Report on Field Excavations of Tsalka – Trialeti Archaeological Expedition for the Season 2003 on Eli-Baba (Sabechdavi) Cemetery.Tbilisi, Otar Lordkipanidze Centre of Archaeology of the Georgian National Museum. eli baba (saqarTvelo, KP 116) Narimanashvili, Goderdzi. 2004. Preliminary Report on Field Excavations of Tsalka – Trialeti Archaeological Expedition for the Season 2003 on Eli-Baba (Sabechdavi) Cemetery.Tbilisi, Otar Lordkipanidze Centre of Archaeology of the Georgian National Museum. Fakhrali (Azerbajan, KP 289) Jalilov, Bakhtiyar; Kvachidze, Viktor. 2007. Excavations of Fakhrali Setlement. Baku. faxrali (azerbaijani, KP 289) Jalilov, Bakhtiyar; Kvachidze, Viktor. 2007. Excavations of Fakhrali Setlement. Baku. Garajamirli I & II (Azerbajan, KP 321/323.57) Agayev, Gahraman. 2006. Excavations of Garajamirli I Setlement Site. Baku. yarajamirli I & II (azerbaijani, KP 321/323.57) Agayev, Gahraman. 2006. Excavations of Garajamirli I Setlement Site. Baku. Dostiyev, Tarikh. 2007. Excavations of Garajamirli II Setlement. Baku, Dostiyev, Tarikh. 2007. Excavations of Garajamirli II Setlement. Baku. Girag Kasaman (Azerbajan, KP 405/406) Dostiyev, Tarikh; Kvachidze, Viktor; Huseynov, Muzafar. 2007. Girag Kasaman Report: On Excavations of Girag Kasaman Setlement at Kilometre Point 405 of Baku-Tbilisi-Ceyhan and South Caucasus pipelines Right Of Way. Baku. girag qasamani (azerbaijani, KP 405/406) Dostiyev, Tarikh; Kvachidze, Viktor; Huseynov, Muzafar. 2007. Girag Kasaman Report: On Excavations of Girag Kasaman Setlement at Kilometre Point 405 of Baku-Tbilisi-Ceyhan and South Caucasus pipelines Right Of Way. Baku. kulturuli memkvidreobis ZeglebiPmilsadenebis derefanSi, warsuli da momavali 217 Müseyibli, Nəcəf; Kvachidze, Viktor; Najafov, Shamil. 2008. Girag Kasaman II Report: On Excavations of Girag Kasaman II Site at Kilometre Point 406 of Baku-Tbilisi-Ceyhan and South Caucasus pipelines Right Of Way. Baku. Müseyibli, Nəcəf; Kvachidze, Viktor; Najafov, Shamil. 2008. Girag Kasaman II Report: On Excavations of Girag Kasaman II Site at Kilometre Point 406 of Baku-Tbilisi-Ceyhan and South Caucasus pipelines Right Of Way. Baku. Güllüdere (Turkey, KP 354) Şenyurt, S. Yücel; İbiş, Resul. 2005. Güllüdere: An Iron Age and Medieval Setlement in Askale Plain. Ankara: Gazi University Research Center for Archaeology. guludere (TurqeTi, KP 354) Şenyurt, S. Yücel; İbiş, Resul. 2005. Güllüdere: An Iron Age and Medieval Setlement in Askale Plain. Ankara: Gazi University Research Center for Archaeology. Hajialili I, II & III (Azerbajan, KP 300.98/301/302) Dostiyev, Tarikh. 2006. Excavations of Hajialili I Setlement. Baku. hajialili I, II & III (azerbaijani, KP 300.98/301/302) Dostiyev, Tarikh. 2006. Excavations of Hajialili I Setlement. Baku. Mammadov, Arif; Agayev, Gahraman. 2006. Excavations of Hajialili II Setlement. Baku. Mammadov, Arif; Agayev, Gahraman. 2006. Excavations of Hajialili II Setlement. Baku. Dostiyev, Tarikh; Mammadov, Arif. 2008. Excavations of Hajialili III Setlement. Baku. Dostiyev, Tarikh; Mammadov, Arif. 2008. Excavations of Hajialili III Setlement. Baku. Hasansu Kurgan (Azerbajan, KP 398.8) Müseyibli, Nəcəf; Huseynov, Muzaffar; Jalilov, Bakhtiyar. 2007. Hasansu Necropolis Report: On Excavations of Hasansu Necropolis at Kilometre Point 398.8 of Baku-Tbilisi-Ceyhan and South Caucasus pipelines Right Of Way. Baku. hasansus yorRani (azerbaijani, KP 398.8) Müseyibli, Nəcəf; Huseynov, Muzaffar; Jalilov, Bakhtiyar. 2007. Hasansu Necropolis Report: On Excavations of Hasansu Necropolis at Kilometre Point 398.8 of Baku-Tbilisi-Ceyhan and South Caucasus pipelines Right Of Way. Baku. Müseyibli, Nəcəf. 2007. Hasansu Kurgan Report: On Excavations of Hasansu Kurgan at Kilometre Point 399 of Baku-Tbilisi-Ceyhan and South Caucasus pipelines Right Of Way. Baku. Müseyibli, Nəcəf. 2007. Hasansu Kurgan Report: On Excavations of Hasansu Kurgan at Kilometre Point 399 of Baku-Tbilisi-Ceyhan and South Caucasus pipelines Right Of Way. Baku. Jinisi (Georgia, KP 136) Kavavdze, eliso. Report on the palynological study of the material revealed as a result of the ield works by the tsalka (kp 107-119; 136) archeological expedition. jinisi (saqarTvelo, KP 136) Kavavdze, eliso. Report on the palynological study of the material revealed as a result of the ield works by the tsalka (kp 107-119; 136) archeological expedition. Narimanishvili, G.; Amiranashvili, J. 2005. Report of the Trialeti Archaeological Expedition of 2004 2-36. Tbilisi, Otar Lordkipanidze Centre of Archaeology of the Georgian National Museum. Narimanishvili, G.; Amiranashvili, J. 2005. Report of the Trialeti Archaeological Expedition of 2004 2-36. Tbilisi, Otar Lordkipanidze Centre of Archaeology of the Georgian National Museum. Kayranlıkgözü (Turkey, KP 922) Görür, Muhammet. 2005. Kayranlık: A Roman Bath in Eastern Kilikia. Ankara: Gazi University Research Center for Archaeology. yairanlikgozli (TurqeT, KP 922) Görür, Muhammet. 2005. Kayranlık: A Roman Bath in Eastern Kilikia. Ankara: Gazi University Research Center for Archaeology. Khojakhan (Azerbajan, KP 361) Huseynov, Muzafar; Jalilov, Bakhtiyar. 2007. Excavations of Khojakhan Setlement. Baku. xojaxani (azerbaijani, KP 361) Huseynov, Muzafar; Jalilov, Bakhtiyar. 2007. Excavations of Khojakhan Setlement. Baku. 218 Past and Future Heritage in the Pipelines Corridor Klde (Georgia, KP 225) Gambashidze, Irine; Mindiashvili, Giorgi. 2006. Archaeological Excavations at the Klde Setlement and Cemetery, Report. Tbilisi, Otar Lordkipanidze Centre of Archaeology of the Georgian National Museum. klde (saqarTvelo, KP 225) Gambashidze, Irine; Mindiashvili, Giorgi. 2006. Archaeological Excavations at the Klde Setlement and Cemetery, Report. Tbilisi, Otar Lordkipanidze Centre of Archaeology of the Georgian National Museum. Khunan (Azerbajan, KP 380) Museyibli, Najaf. 2007. On Excavations of Khunan Setlement Conducted within BTC and SCP ROW at KP 380. Baku. xunani (azerbaijani, KP 380) Museyibli, Najaf. 2007. On Excavations of Khunan Setlement Conducted within BTC and SCP ROW at KP 380. Baku. Kodiana Kurgan (Georgia, KP 193) Gambashidze, Irine; Gogochuri, Giorgi. 2004. Report on Archaeological Excavations Carried out by an Archaeological Expedition of Borjomi District in July-August. Tbilisi, Otar Lordkipanidze Centre of Archaeology of the Georgian National Museum. kodianas yorRani (saqarTvelo, KP 193) Gambashidze, Irine; Gogochuri, Giorgi. 2004. Report on Archaeological Excavations Carried out by an Archaeological Expedition of Borjomi District in July-August. Tbilisi, Otar Lordkipanidze Centre of Archaeology of the Georgian National Museum. Ktsia Valley Site (Georgia, KP 165) Gambashidze, Irine. 2005. Ktsia Valley Ancient Setlement Site KP 165, Report. Tbilisi, Otar Lordkipanidze Centre of Archaeology of the Georgian National Museum. qciis veils namosaxlari (saqarTvelo, KP 165) Gambashidze, Irine. 2005. Ktsia Valley Ancient Setlement Site KP 165, Report. Tbilisi, Otar Lordkipanidze Centre of Archaeology of the Georgian National Museum. Lak I & II (Azerbajan, KP 298/300) Dostiyev, Tarikh. 2007. Excavations of Lak I Setlement. Baku. lak I & II (azerbaijani, KP 298/300) Dostiyev, Tarikh. 2007. Excavations of Lak I Setlement. Baku. Agayev, Gahraman. 2007. Excavations of Lak II Early Medieval Setlement. Baku. Agayev, Gahraman. 2007. Excavations of Lak II Early Medieval Setlement. Baku. Minnetpinari (Turkey, KP 986) Tekinalp, V. Macit. 2005. Minnetpinari: A Medieval Setlement in Eastern Kilikia. Ankara: Gazi University Research Center for Archaeology. minetpinari (TurqeTi, KP 986) Tekinalp, V. Macit. 2005. Minnetpinari: A Medieval Setlement in Eastern Kilikia. Ankara: Gazi University Research Center for Archaeology. Nachivchavebi Site (Georgia, KP 085) Shatberashvili, Zebede; Amiranashvili, Juansher; Gogochuri, Giorgi; Mindorashvili, David; Grigolia, Guram; Nikolaishvili, Vakhtang. 2005. Works of Tetritsqaro Archaeological Expedition in 2003-2004. Tbilisi, Otar Lordkipanidze Centre of Archaeology of the Georgian National Museum. naWivWavebi (saqarTvelo, KP 085) Shatberashvili, Zebede; Amiranashvili, Juansher; Gogochuri, Giorgi; Mindorashvili, David; Grigolia, Guram; Nikolaishvili, Vakhtang. 2005. Works of Tetritsqaro Archaeological Expedition in 2003-2004. Tbilisi, Otar Lordkipanidze Centre of Archaeology of the Georgian National Museum. Narimankand (Azerbajan, KP 234/237) Agayev, Gahraman; Ashurov, Safar. 2007. Narimankand: Excavations of Earth Graves of Developed Iron Age Date. Baku. narimankandi (azerbaijani, KP 234/237) Agayev, Gahraman; Ashurov, Safar. 2007. Narimankand: Excavations of Earth Graves of Developed Iron Age Date. Baku. Mustafayev, Mikayil. 2006. Narimankand: Excavations of Antique Period Jar Graves. Baku. Mustafayev, Mikayil. 2006. Narimankand: Excavations of Antique Period Jar Graves. Baku. kulturuli memkvidreobis ZeglebiPmilsadenebis derefanSi, warsuli da momavali 219 Orchosani (Georgia, KP 249) Baramidze, Malkhaz; Jibladze, Leri; Todua, Temur; Orjonikidze, Alexander. 2007. Comprehensive Technical Report on Archaeological Investigations at the Orchosani Site IV-323 KP 249. Tbilisi: Otar Lortkipanidze Archaeological Centre of the National Museum of Georgia. orWosani (saqarTvelo, KP 249) Baramidze, Malkhaz; Jibladze, Leri; Todua, Temur; Orjonikidze, Alexander. 2007. Comprehensive Technical Report on Archaeological Investigations at the Orchosani Site IV-323 KP 249. Tbilisi: Otar Lortkipanidze Archaeological Centre of the National Museum of Georgia. Baramidze, M.; Jibladze, L.; Todua, T.; Orjonikidze, Al. 2006. Orchosani Remnant of the Setlement and Necropolis. Tbilisi. Baramidze, M.; Jibladze, L.; Todua, T.; Orjonikidze, Al. 2006. Orchosani Remnant of the Setlement and Necropolis. Tbilisi. Baramidze, M.; Pkhakadze, G. 2004. Report of Akhaltsikhe Archaeological Works of 2003 (September-October). Tbilisi: Georgian Academy of Sciences. Baramidze, M.; Pkhakadze, G. 2004. Report of Akhaltsikhe Archaeological Works of 2003 (September-October). Tbilisi: Georgian Academy of Sciences. Poylu I & II (Azerbajan, KP 408.8/409.1/409.2) Müseyibli, Nəcəf. 2008. Poylu II Report: On Excavations of Poylu II Setlement at Kilometre Point 408.8 of Baku-Tbilisi-Ceyhan and South Caucasus pipelines Right Of Way. Baku. foilu (azerbaijani, KP 408.8/409.1/409.2) Müseyibli, Nəcəf. 2008. Poylu II Report: On Excavations of Poylu II Setlement at Kilometre Point 408.8 of Baku-Tbilisi-Ceyhan and South Caucasus pipelines Right Of Way. Baku. Najafov, Shamil. 2006. Poylu I Report: On Excavations of Multilayer Setlement at Kilometre Point 409.1 of Baku-Tbilisi-Ceyhan and South Caucasus pipelines Right Of Way. Baku. Najafov, Shamil. 2006. Poylu I Report: On Excavations of Multilayer Setlement at Kilometre Point 409.1 of Baku-Tbilisi-Ceyhan and South Caucasus pipelines Right Of Way. Baku. Müseyibli, Nəcəf. 2006. Poylu Report: On Excavations of Late Medieval Setlement at Kilometre Point 409.2 of Baku-Tbilisi-Ceyhan and South Caucasus pipelines Right Of Way. Baku. Müseyibli, Nəcəf. 2006. Poylu Report: On Excavations of Late Medieval Setlement at Kilometre Point 409.2 of Baku-Tbilisi-Ceyhan and South Caucasus pipelines Right Of Way. Baku. Sakire Fortress (Georgia, KP 199) Gambashidze, Irine; Gogochuri, Giorgi. 2007. Archaeological Investigations at Site IV-338, KP199, Sakire Village, Borjomi District. Tbilisi, Otar Lordkipanidze Centre of Archaeology of the Georgian National Museum sakire, (saqarTvelo, KP 199) Gambashidze, Irine; Gogochuri, Giorgi. 2007. Archaeological Investigations at Site IV-338, KP199, Sakire Village, Borjomi District. Tbilisi, Otar Lordkipanidze Centre of Archaeology of the Georgian National Museum Samedabad (Azerbajan, KP 233) Mustafayev, Mikayil. 2006. Samedabad: Excavations of an Antique Period Earth Grave. Baku. samedabadi (azerbaijani, KP 233) Mustafayev, Mikayil. 2006. Samedabad: Excavations of an Antique Period Earth Grave. Baku. Saphar-Kharaba (Georgia, KP 120) Narimanishvili, Goderdzi; Amiranashvili, Juansher; Davlianidze, Revaz; Murvanidze, Bidzina; Shanshashvili, Nino; Kvachadze, Marine. 2003. Report on Tsalka-Trialeti Archaeological Expedition Field Activities in September-November 2003. Tbilisi, Otar Lordkipanidze Centre of Archaeology of the Georgian National Museum. safar-xaraba (saqarTvelo, KP 120) Narimanishvili, Goderdzi; Amiranashvili, Juansher; Davlianidze, Revaz; Murvanidze, Bidzina; Shanshashvili, Nino; Kvachadze, Marine. 2003. Report on Tsalka-Trialeti Archaeological Expedition Field Activities in September-November 2003. Tbilisi, Otar Lordkipanidze Centre of Archaeology of the Georgian National Museum. Sazpegler (Turkey, KP 040) Tekinalp, Macit; Ekim, Yunus. 2005. Sazpegler: A Medieval Setlement in North Eastern Anatolia. Ankara: Gazi University Research Center for Archaeology. sazpegleri (TurqeTi, KP 040) Tekinalp, Macit; Ekim, Yunus. 2005. Sazpegler: A Medieval Setlement in North Eastern Anatolia. Ankara: Gazi University Research Center for Archaeology. 220 Past and Future Heritage in the Pipelines Corridor Seyidlar I & II (Azerbajan, KP 316/318) Huseynov, Muzafar; Agayev, Gahraman; Ashurov, Safar. 2006. Excavations of Seyidlar Setlement. Baku. seiidlar I & II (azerbaijani, KP 316/318) Huseynov, Muzafar; Agayev, Gahraman; Ashurov, Safar. 2006. Excavations of Seyidlar Setlement. Baku. Jalilov, Bakhtiyar. 2007. Excavations of Seyidlar II Antique Period Setlement. Baku. Jalilov, Bakhtiyar. 2007. Excavations of Seyidlar II Antique Period Setlement. Baku. Shamkirchai I & III (Azerbajan, KP 332.7/333) Museyibli, Najaf. 2008. Excavations of Shamkirchai Kurgans. Baku, Nata Press. SamkirCai I & III (azerbaijani, KP 332.7/333) Museyibli, Najaf. 2008. Excavations of Shamkirchai Kurgans. Baku. Museyibli, Najaf. 2008. Excavations of Shamkirchai Kurgans III. Baku. Museyibli, Najaf. 2008. Excavations of Shamkirchai Kurgans III. Baku, . Sinig Korpu (Azerbajan, KP 357.7) Huseynov, Fuad. 2007. Excavations of Sinig Korpu Kurgan Burial. Baku. Skhalta (Georgia, KP 080) Shatberashvili, Zebede; Nikolaishvili, Vakhtang ; Shatberashvili, Vakhtang. 2007. Report of the Tetritsqaro Archaeological Expedition in 2005. Tbilisi, Otar Lordkipanidze Centre of Archaeology of the Georgian National Museum. Soyuqbulaq (Azerbaijan, KP 432) Müseyibli, Nəcəf. 2008. Soyugbulaq Report: On Excavations of Soyugbulaq Kurgans at Kilometre Point 432 of Baku-Tbilisi-Ceyhan and South Caucasus pipelines Right Of Way. Baku. Tadzrisi (Georgia, KP 201) elizbarashvili, Irina; Bochoidze, Merab. Conservation and Restoration of the Church of St George at Tadzrisi Monastery. sinig korpu (azerbaijani, KP 357.7) Huseynov, Fuad. 2007. Excavations of Sinig Korpu Kurgan Burial. Baku. sxalTa (saqarTvelo, KP 080) Shatberashvili, Zebede; Nikolaishvili, Vakhtang ; Shatberashvili, Vakhtang. 2007. Report of the Tetritsqaro Archaeological Expedition in 2005. Tbilisi, Otar Lordkipanidze Centre of Archaeology of the Georgian National Museum. soiuqbulaqi (azerbaijani KP 432) Müseyibli, Nəcəf. 2008. Soyugbulaq Report: On Excavations of Soyugbulaq Kurgans at Kilometre Point 432 of Baku-Tbilisi-Ceyhan and South Caucasus pipelines Right Of Way. Baku. taZrisi (saqarTvelo, KP 201) elizbarashvili, Irina; Bochoidze, Merab. Conservation and Restoration of the Church of St George at Tadzrisi Monastery. Erkomaishvili, Nino. 2008. Tadzrisi Monastery Conservation Project. Erkomaishvili, Nino. 2008. Tadzrisi Monastery Conservation Project. Heritage Protection Department of Georgia. 2003. Study of the Monuments within Baku-Tbilisi-Ceyhan Pipeline Route Corridor: Phase III. Report. Tbilisi, Otar Lordkipanidze Centre of Archaeology of the Georgian National Museum. Tasmasor (Turkey, KP 299) Şenyurt, S. Yücel. 2005. Tasmasor: An Iron Age Setlement in Erzurum Plain. Ankara: Gazi University Research Center for Archaeology. Tetikom (Turkey, KP 292) Şenyurt, S.Yücel; Ekmen, Hamza. 2005. Tetikom: An Iron Age Setlement in Pasinler Plain. Ankara: Gazi University Research Center for Archaeology. Heritage Protection Department of Georgia. 2003. Study of the Monuments within Baku-Tbilisi-Ceyhan Pipeline Route Corridor: Phase III. Report. Tbilisi, Otar Lordkipanidze Centre of Archaeology of the Georgian National Museum. Tasmasori (TurqeTi, KP 299) Şenyurt, S. Yücel. 2005. Tasmasor: An Iron Age Setlement in Erzurum Plain. Ankara: Gazi University Research Center for Archaeology. tetikomi (TurqeTi, KP 292) Şenyurt, S.Yücel; Ekmen, Hamza. 2005. Tetikom: An Iron Age Setlement in Pasinler Plain. Ankara: Gazi University Research Center for Archaeology. kulturuli memkvidreobis ZeglebiPmilsadenebis derefanSi, warsuli da momavali 221 Tiselis Seri (Georgia, KP 203) Gogochuri, G. 2005. Archaeological Excavations at KP 203 – Tiselis Seri Kura-Araxes Site, Report. Tbilisi, Otar Lordkipanidze Centre of Archaeology of the Georgian National Museum. Tiselis seri (saqarTvelo, KP 203) Gogochuri, G. 2005. Archaeological Excavations at KP 203 – Tiselis Seri Kura-Araxes Site, Report. Tbilisi, Otar Lordkipanidze Centre of Archaeology of the Georgian National Museum. Gogochuri, George; Orjonikidze, Alexander. 2007. Comprehensive Technical Report on Archaeological Investigations at Site IV-293 Tiselis Seri KP 203. Tbilisi, Otar Lordkipanidze Centre of Archaeology of the Georgian National Museum. Gogochuri, George; Orjonikidze, Alexander. 2007. Comprehensive Technical Report on Archaeological Investigations at Site IV-293 Tiselis Seri KP 203. Tbilisi, Otar Lordkipanidze Centre of Archaeology of the Georgian National Museum. Tkemlara Kurgan (Georgia, KP 088) Shatberashvili, Z. 2003. Works of the Tetritsqaro Archaeological Expedition in November-December 2002, Report. Tbilisi, Otar Lordkipanidze Centre of Archaeology of the Georgian National Museum. tyemlaras yorRani (saqarTvelo, KP 088) Shatberashvili, Z. 2003. Works of the Tetritsqaro Archaeological Expedition in November-December 2002, Report. Tbilisi, Otar Lordkipanidze Centre of Archaeology of the Georgian National Museum. Shatberashvili, Z,; Amiranashvili, J.; Gogochuri, G.; Mindorashvili, D.; Grigolia, G.; Nikolaishvili, V. 2005. Works of the Tetritsqaro Archaeological Expedition in November-December 2003-2004. Tbilisi, Otar Lordkipanidze Centre of Archaeology of the Georgian National Museum. Tovuzchai Necropolis (Azerbaijan, KP 378) Müseyibli, Nəcəf; Agayev, Gahraman; Aşurov, Səfər; Aliyev, Idris; Huseynov, Muzaffar; Najafov, Shamil; Guliyev, Farhad. 2008. Tovuzchai Necropolis Report: On Excavations of Tovuzchai Necropolis At Kilometre Point 378 of Baku-Tbilisi-Ceyhan and South Caucasus pipelines Right Of Way. Baku. Yadili (Azerbajan, KP 241) Farhad, Guliyev; Gahraman, Agayev. 2008. Yaldili Report: On Excavations of Yaldili Jar Burial Site At Kilometre Point 241 of Baku-TbilisiCeyhan and South Caucasus Pipelines Right Of Way. Baku. Yevlakh (Azerbajan, KP 204/204.25) Mikayil, Mustafayev. 2008. Amirarkh Report: On Excavations of an Antique Period Jar Grave At Kilometre Point 204.25 of Baku-Tbilisi-Ceyhan and South Caucasus Pipelines Right Of Way. Baku. Yüceören (Turkey, KP 1069) Şenyurt, S.Yücel; Akçay, Atakan; Kamiş, Yalçin. 2005. Yüceören: A Hellenistic and Roman Necropolis in Eastern Kilikia. Ankara: Gazi University Research Center for Archaeology. Zayamchai Necropolis (Azerbajan, KP 355/356) Aşurov, Səfər. Zayamchay Report: On Excavations of a Catacomb Burial At Kilometre Point 355 of Baku-Tbilisi-Ceyhan and South Caucasus pipelines Right Of Way. Baku. 222 Past and Future Heritage in the Pipelines Corridor Shatberashvili, Z,; Amiranashvili, J.; Gogochuri, G.; Mindorashvili, D.; Grigolia, G.; Nikolaishvili, V. 2005. Works of the Tetritsqaro Archaeological Expedition in November-December 2003-2004. Tbilisi, Otar Lordkipanidze Centre of Archaeology of the Georgian National Museum. TovuzCai (azerbaijani, KP 378) Müseyibli, Nəcəf; Agayev, Gahraman; Aşurov, Səfər; Aliyev, Idris; Huseynov, Muzaffar; Najafov, Shamil; Guliyev, Farhad. 2008. Tovuzchai Necropolis Report: On Excavations of Tovuzchai Necropolis At Kilometre Point 378 of Baku-Tbilisi-Ceyhan and South Caucasus pipelines Right Of Way. Baku. iadili (azerbaijani, KP 241) Farhad, Guliyev; Gahraman, Agayev. 2008. Yaldili Report: On Excavations of Yaldili Jar Burial Site At Kilometre Point 241 of Baku-TbilisiCeyhan and South Caucasus Pipelines Right Of Way. Baku. evlaxi (azerbaijani, KP 204/204.25) Mikayil, Mustafayev. 2008. Amirarkh Report: On Excavations of an Antique Period Jar Grave At Kilometre Point 204.25 of Baku-Tbilisi-Ceyhan and South Caucasus Pipelines Right Of Way. Baku. ieqeroni (TurqeTi, KP 1069) Şenyurt, S.Yücel; Akçay, Atakan; Kamiş, Yalçin. 2005. Yüceören: A Hellenistic and Roman Necropolis in Eastern Kilikia. Ankara: Gazi University Research Center for Archaeology. zaiamCai (azerbaijani, KP 355/356) Aşurov, Səfər. Zayamchay Report: On Excavations of a Catacomb Burial At Kilometre Point 355 of Baku-Tbilisi-Ceyhan and South Caucasus pipelines Right Of Way. Baku. Müseyibli, Nəcəf; Kvachidze, Viktor. 2006. Zayamchay Cemetery Report: On Excavations of a Muslim Cemetery At Kilometre Point 356 of BakuTbilisi-Ceyhan and South Caucasus Pipelines Right Of Way. Baku. Müseyibli, Nəcəf; Kvachidze, Viktor. 2006. Zayamchay Cemetery Report: On Excavations of a Muslim Cemetery At Kilometre Point 356 of BakuTbilisi-Ceyhan and South Caucasus Pipelines Right Of Way. Baku. Ziyaretsuyu (Turkey, KP 714) Ortaç, Meral. 2005. Ziyaretsuyu: A Hellenistic Setlement in Upper Halys Valley. Ankara: Gazi University Research Center for Archaeology. ziaretsuiu (TurqeTi, KP 714) Ortaç, Meral. 2005. Ziyaretsuyu: A Hellenistic Setlement in Upper Halys Valley. Ankara: Gazi University Research Center for Archaeology. kulturuli memkvidreobis ZeglebiPmilsadenebis derefanSi, warsuli da momavali 223 Recommended Reading Азербайджанская Советская Энциклопедия. Баку,1976, стр.214. Abdushelishvili, Malkhas G. 1984. “Craniometry of the Caucasus in the Feudal Period.” Current Anthropology 25(4): 505-509. Abich, H. 1851. “The Climatology of the Caucasus. Remarks upon the Country between the Caspian and Black Seas.” Journal of the Royal Geographical Society of London 21: 1-12. Akazawa,Takeru; Kenichi Aoki; Ofer Bar-Yosef. (ed.) 1998. Neanderthals and Modern Humans in Western Asia. New York: Plenum Press. Akkieva, Svetlana. 2008. “The Caucasus: One or Many? A View from the Region.” Nationalities Papers 36(2): 253-273. Akurgal, Ekrem. 1978. Ancient Civilizations and Ruins of Turkey: From Prehistoric Times until the End of the Roman Empire [translated by John Whybrow and Mollie Emre]. Istanbul: Haşet Kitabevi. Algaze, Guillermo. 1989. “The Uruk Expansion: Cross-Cultural Exchange in Early Mesopotamian Civilization.” Current Anthropology 30: 571-608. Allen, W.E.D. 1927. “New Political Boundaries in the Caucasus.” The Geographical Journal 69(5): 430-441. Allen, W.E.D. 1929. “The March-Lands of Georgia.” The Geographical Journal 74(2): 135-156. Allen, W.E.D. 1942. “The Caucasian Borderland.” The Geographical Journal 99(5/6): 225-237. Allen, W.E.D.; Paul Muratof. 1953. Caucasian Batleields: A History of the Wars on the Turko-Caucasian Frontier (1828-1921). New York: Cambridge University Press. Allen, W.E.D. 1971. A History of the Georgian People. New York: Routledge & Kegan Paul. Allsen, Thomas T. 2001. Culture and Conquest in Mongol Eurasia. New York, NY: Cambridge University Press. Alpago-Novello, A.; V. Beridze; J. Lafontaine-Dosogne. 1980. Art and Architecture in Medieval Georgia. Louvain-la-Neuve. Altstadt, Audrey L. 1992. The Azerbajani Turks: Power and Identity under Russian Rule. Stanford: Hoover Institution Press. Akurgal, Ekrem. 1978. Ancient Civilizations and Ruins of Turkey: From Prehistoric Times until the End of the Roman Empire [trans. John Whybrow and Mollie Emre]. Istanbul: Haşet Kitabevi. Amichba, G. 1988. Abkhazja i Abkhazy v Srednevekovykh Gruzinskikh Povestvovatel›nykh Istochnikakh [Abkhazia and the Abkhazians in Georgian Narrative Sources of the Middle Ages]. Tbilisi. Amineh, Mehdi Parvizi; Henk Howeling (eds.) 2005. “Central Eurasia in Global Politics: Conlict, Security and Development (2nd Edition)”. International Studies in Sociology and Social Anthropology 92. Leiden: Brill. Amirkhanov, H. A.; M. V. Anikovitch; I. A. Borziak. 1993. “Problem of Transition from Mousterian to Upper Paleolithic on the Territory of Russian Plain and Caucasus.“ L’Anthropologie 97: 311-330. 224 Past and Future Heritage in the Pipelines Corridor Anderson, Andrew Runni. 1928. “Alexander at the Caspian Gates.” Transactions and Proceedings of the American Philological Association 59: 130-163. Anderson, J. G. C. 1922. “Pompey’s Campaign against Mithradets.” The Journal of Roman Studies, 12: 99-105. Apakidze, A.; G. Kipiani; V. Nikolaishvili. 2004. “A Rich Burial from Mtskheta (Caucasian Iberia).” Ancient West and East 3(1), (ed. G. Tsetskladze). Aruz, Joan; Ronald Wallenfels (eds.) 2003. Art of the First Cities: the Third Millennium B.C. from the Mediterranean to the Indus. New York: Metropolitan Museum of Art; New Haven: Yale University Press. Ascher, Iver; Alexandra Paten; Denise Monczewski (eds.) 2000. “State Building and the Reconstruction of Shatered Societies: 1999 Caucasus Conference Report.” Berkeley Program in Soviet and Post-Soviet Studies, Berkeley: UC Press, 1-51. Online: htp://repositories.cdlib.org/iseees/bps/2000 02-conf. Ash, Rhiannon. 1999. “An Exemplary Conlict: Tacitus’ Parthian Batle Narrative (‘Annals’ 6.34-35).” Phoenix 53(1/2): 114-135. Atıl, Esin. 1987. The Age of Sultan Süleyman the Magniicent. Washington: National Gallery of Art. Aydin, Mustafa. 2004. “Foucault’s Pendulum: Turkey in Central Asia and the Caucasus.” Turkish Studies 5(2): 1-22. Aydingun, Aysegul. 2002. “Creating, Recreating and Redeining Ethnic Identity: Ahıska/Meskhetian Turks in Soviet and Post-Soviet contexts.” Central Asian Survey 21(2): 185-197. Baddeley, John F. 1940. The Rugged Flanks of Caucasus (2 vols.). London: Humphrey Milford/Oxford University Press. Balat, Mustafa. 2006. “The Case of Baku-Tbilisi-Ceyhan Oil Pipeline System: A Review.” Energy Sources Part B (1): 117-126. Balci, Bayram; Raoul Motika. 2007. “Islam in Post-Soviet Georgia.” Central Asian Survey 26(3): 335-353. Bar-Yosef, Ofer; Anna Belfer-Cohen; Daniel S. Adler. 2006. “The Implications of the Middle-Upper Paleolithic Chronological Boundary in the Caucasus to eurasian Prehistory.” Anthropologie 19(1): 49-60. Bar-Yosef, Ofer. 2007. “The Archaeological Framework of the Upper Paleolithic Revolution.” Diogenes 214: 3-18. Barylski, Robert V. 1994. “The Russian Federation and Eurasia’s Islamic Crescent.” Europe-Asia Studies 46(3): 389-416. Basilov, Vladimir N. (ed.) 1989. Nomads of Eurasia [trans. By Dana Levy and Joel Sacket]. Los Angeles: Natural History Museum of Los Angeles County, in association with University of Washington Press. Basirov, Oric. 2001 “Evolution of the Zoroastrian Iconography and Temple Cults.” ANES 38: 160-177. Bates, Daniel G. 1973. Nomads and Farmers: A Study of the Yörük of Southeastern Turkey. Ann Arbor: University of Michigan. Belykov, Boris. 1999. “The Caucasus: Marginal Notes from a Diary.” Iran and the Caucasus 3(1999-2000): 367-374. Benet, Sula. 1974. Abkhasians: The Long-Living People of the Caucasus: Case Studies in General Anthropology. Stanford University; New York: Holt, Reinhart & Winston, Inc. kulturuli memkvidreobis ZeglebiPmilsadenebis derefanSi, warsuli da momavali 225 Bolukbasi, Suha. 1998. “The Controversy over the Caspian Sea Mineral Resources: Conlict Perceptions, Clashing Interests.” Europe-Asia Studies 50(3): 397-414. Bonner, Arthur. 2005. “Turkey, the European Union and Paradigm Shits.” Middle East Policy 12(1): 44-71. Bosworth, A.B. 1977. “Arrian and the Alani.” Harvard Studies in Classical Philology 81: 217-255. Boyle, Katie; Colin Renfrew; Marsha Levine (ed.) 2002. Ancient Interactions: East and West in Eurasia. Cambridge: Oxbow Books. Bram, Chen. 1999. “Circassian Re-immigration to the Caucasus.” in Weil, S. (ed.) Routes and Roots: Emigration in a Global Perspective. Jerusalem: Magnes: 205-222. Braud, David. 1994. Georgia in Antiquity: A History of Colchis and Transcaucasian Iberia, 550BC-562AD. Oxford: Clarendon Press. Braund, David. 2003. “Notes from the Black Sea and Caucasus: Arrian, Phlegon and Flavian Inscriptions.” Ancient Civilizations 9(3-4): 175-191. Bremmer, Jan N. 1998. “The Myth of the Golden Fleece.” Journal of Ancient and Near Eastern Religions (JANER) 6: 9-38. Brinton, Daniel G. 1895. “The Protohistoric Ethnography of Western Asia.” Proceedings of the American Philosophical Society 34(147): 71-102. Brodie, Neil. (ed.) 2006. Archaeology, Cultural Heritage, and the Antiquities Trade. Gainesville, FL: University Press of Florida. Brook, Stephen. 1992. Claws of the Crab: Georgia and Armenia in Crisis. London: Sinclair-Stevenson. Brown, Cameron S. 2002. “Observations from Azerbajan.” MERIA 6(4). Bryer, Antony. 1988. Peoples and Setlement in Anatolia and the Caucasus, 800-1900. Farnham, UK: Ashgate Publishing Co. Bullough, Vern L. 1963. “The Roman Empire vs. Persia, 363-502: A Study of Successful Deterrence.” Journal of Conlict Resolution 7(1): 55-68. Burney, C.A. 1958. “Eastern Anatolia in the Chalcolithic and Early Bronze Age.” Anatolian Studies 8(1958): 157-209. Burney, Charles; David Marshall Lang. 1971. The Peoples of the Hills: Ancient Ararat and the Caucasus. New York: Praeger. Burton-Brown, T. 1951. Excavations in Azarbajan, 1948. London: Murray. BTC Company Turkey; British Institute at Ankara; Gazi University-ARCED. 2007. A Pipeline through History. Ankara: Baku-Tbilisi-Ceyhan Pipeline Company. Burdet, A. L. (ed.) 1996. Caucasian Boundaries: Documents and Maps, 1802-1946. Slough, UK: Archive Editions. Catford, J.C. 1977. “Mountain of Tongues: The Languages of the Caucasus.” Annual Review of Anthropology 6: 283-314. 226 Past and Future Heritage in the Pipelines Corridor Chistyakov, D. A. 1985. The Mousterian cultures of the Black Sea coast (in Russian) [Dissertation (unpublished)]. St Petersburg. Chubinashvili, G. 1940. Sioni of Bilnisi (Investigation of History of Georgian Architecture). Tbilisi. Chubinashvili, T. 1965. Kura-Araxes Culture. Tbilisi. Christian, David. 1998. A History of Russia, Central Asia, and Mongolia. Malden, MA: Blackwell Publishers. Cohen, V. Y.; V. N. Stepanchu. 1999. “Late Middle and Early Upper Paleolithic Evidence from the East European Plain and Caucasus: A New Look at Variability, Interactions and Transitions.” Journal of World Prehistory 13(3): 265-319. Comneno, Maria Adelaide Lala. 1997 “Nestorianism in Central Asia during the First Millennium: Archaeological evidence.” Journal of the Assyrian Academic Society XI(1): 20-67. Cornell, Svante E.; S. Frederick Starr. 2006. “The Caucasus: A Challenge for Europe.” Silk Road Paper (June 2006): 1-87. Corzine, Robert; Susan Glendinning; Baku-Tbilisi-Ceyhan (BTC) Pipeline Company. 2006. BTC. Baku: Digilame Productions, “for the BTC Pipeline Company.” Crecelius, Daniel; Gotcha Djaparidze. 2002. “Relations of the Georgian Mamluks of Egypt with their Homeland in the Last Decades of the Eighteenth Century.” JESHO 45(3): 320-341. Cruz-Uribe, Eugene. 2003. “Qanats in the Achaemenid Period.” Bibliotheca Orientalis LX(5-6): 538-544. Curtis. Glen E. (ed.) 1995. Armenia, Azerbajan, and Georgia: Country Studies. Federal Research Division, Library of Congress. Washington, D.C.: Federal Research Division, Library of Congress. Dale, Catherine. 1995. “Georgia: Development and Implications of the Conlicts in Abkhazia and South Ossetia.” Conlicts in the Caucasus in Conference. Oslo: International Peace Research Institute. Davis-Kimball, Jeanine; Vladimir A. Bashilov; Leonid T. Yablonsky (eds.) 1995. Nomads of the Eurasian Steppes in the Early Bronze Age. Berkeley, CA: Zinat Press. Djaparidze, O. 2006. Kartveli eris etnogenezisis sataveebtan [At the beginning of Georgian ethnogenesis]. Tbilisi: Artanuji (in Georgian). Джафарзаде, И. М. Гобустан. Баку, 1973 Djobadze, W. 1992. Early Medieval Georgian Monasteries in Historic Tao, Klarjet’i and Šavšet’i. Stutgart. Doronichev, Vladimir B. 2008. “The Lower Paleolithic in Eastern Europe and the Caucasus: A Reappraisal of the Data and New Approaches.” Paleoanthropology 2008: 107-157. Dowset, C. J. F. 1957. “A Neglected Passage in the ‘History of the Caucasian Albanians.’” Bulletin of the School of Oriental and African Studies 19(3): 456-468. Dumas, Alexandre. 1895. Tales of the Caucasus: The Ball of Snow and Sultaneta. Boston: Litle, Brown, and Company. Dumitrescu, Vladimir. 1970. “The Chronological Relations between the Cultures of the Eneolithic Lower Danube and Anatolia and the Near East.” American Journal of Archaeology 74(1): 43-50. kulturuli memkvidreobis ZeglebiPmilsadenebis derefanSi, warsuli da momavali 227 Edens, Christopher. 1995. “Transcaucasia at the End of the Early Bronze Age,” Bulletin of the American Schools of Oriental Research 299/300, The Archaeology of Empire in Ancient Anatolia: 53-64. Edens, Christopher. 1997. Review of: Chataigner, Christine. La Transcaucasie au Néolithique et au Chalcolithique, Bulletin of the American Schools of Oriental Research. 306: 89-91. Edgar, Adrienne L. 2001. “Identities, Communities, and Nations in Central Asia: A Historical Perspective.” Presentation from “Central Asia and Russia: Responses to the ‘War on Terrorism.’” panel discussion held at the University of California, Berkeley on October 29, 2001, Institute of Slavic, East European, and Eurasian Studies; the Berkeley Program in Soviet and Post-Soviet Studies; the Caucasus and Central Asia Program; and the Institute of International Studies at UC Berkeley: 1-7. Эфендиев, O. Азербайджанское государство Сефевидов в начале XVI века, Баку, 1981. English, Patrick T. 1959. “Cushites, Colchians, and Khazars.” Journal of Near Eastern Studies 18(1): 49-53. Fərəcova, Məlahət N. [= Farajova, Malahat N.] and Azerbajan. Mədəniyyət vä Turizm Nazirliyi. 2009. Azərbaycan qayaüstü incəsənəti = Rock art of Azerbajan. Baku: Aspoliqraf. Ferguson, R. James. 2005. “Rome and Parthia: Power Politics and Diplomacy Across Cultural Frontiers.” Centre for east-West Cultural and economic Studies (CeWCeS) Research Paper(12), December 2005. Bond University, AU. htp://epublications.bond.edu.au/cewces papers/10 Foltz, Richard C. 2000. Religions of the Silk Road: Overland Trade and Cultural Exchange from Antiquity to the Fiteenth Century. New York: St. Martin’s Press. Frye, Richard N. 1972. “Byzantine and Sassanian Trade Relations with Northeastern Russia.” Dumbarton Oaks Papers 26: 263-269. Furlong, Pierce James. 2007. “Aspects of Ancient Near Eastern Chronology (c.1600-700 BC).” PhD Dissertation, University of Melbourne: 464. Gabunia, Leo; Vekua, Abesalom; Lordkipanidze, David. 2000. “The Environmental Contexts of Early Human Occupation of Georgia (Transcaucasia). Journal of Human Evolution 38: 785-802. Gagoshidze, I. 1979. Samadlo, Archaeological Excavations. Tbilisi. Gambashidze, I.; A. Hauptmann; R. Slota; U. Yalcin. 2001. Bochum, Georgien – Schätze aus dem Land des Goldenen Vlies (Katalog der Ausstellung des Deutschen Bergbau-Museums Bochum). Hrgs: 136-141. Gamqrelidze, G.; M. Pirkskhalava; G. Qipiani. 2005. Problems of the Military History of Ancient Georgia. Georgia. Gasanov, Magomed. 2001. “On Christianity in Dagestan.” Iran & the Caucasus 5: 79-84. Geiger, Bernhard; Tibor Halasi-Kun; Aert H. Kuipers; Karl H. Menges. Peoples and Languages of the Caucasus. A Synopsis. Mouton & Co.: Gravenhage, 1959. Georgian National Museum. Otar Lordkipanidze Centre of Archaeology. 2010. Bako-T‛bilisi-Jeihani Samxret‛ Kavkasiis Milsadeni da Ark‛eologia Sak‛art‛veloši = Rescue archaeology in Georgia: the Baku-Tbilisi-Ceyhan and South Caucasian Pipelines. Tbisili: Georgian National Museum. Giyasi, Jafar. 1994. Azerbajan: Fortresses – Castles. Baku: Interturan. 228 Past and Future Heritage in the Pipelines Corridor Glinika, Svetlana P.; Dorothy J. Rosenberg. 2003. “Social and Economic Decline as Factors in Conlict in the Caucasus.” Discussion Paper No. 2003/18, United Nations University, World Institute for Development Economics Research (WIDER): 1-36. Gobejishvili, G. 1981. Bedeni Kurgan Culture. Tbilisi. Gogadze, E. 1972. The Chronology and Genesis of the Trialeti Kurgan Culture. Tbilisi. Golovanova, L. V.; V. B. Doronichev. 2003. “The Middle Paleolithic of the Caucasus.” Journal of World Prehistory 17 (1): 71-140. Golubof, Sacha L.; Samira Karaeva. 2006. “Azerbajani Ethnography: Views from Inside and Outside.” Journal of the Society of the Anthropology of Europe 5(1): 15-21. Golubof, Sacha L. 2008. “Patriarchy through Lamentation in Azerbajan.” American Ethnologist 35(1): 81-94. Gorny, Ronald L. 1989. “Environment, Archaeology, and History in Hitite Anatolia.” The Biblical Archaeologist 52(2/3): 78-96. Grant, Bruce. 2004. “An Average Azeri Village (1930): Remembering Rebellion in the Caucasus Mountains.” Slavic Review 63(4): 705-731. Grant, Bruce. 2002. “The Good Russian Prisoner: Naturalizing Violence in the Caucasus Mountains.” Cultural Anthropology 20(1): 39-67. Greppin, John A. C. 1991. “The Survival of Ancient Anatolian and Mesopotamian Vocabulary until the Present.” Journal of Near Eastern Studies 50(3): 203-207. Гусейнов, М.М. Ранние стадии заселения человека в пещере Азых. Ученые записки Аз.Гос.Универ., сер. истории и философии, № 4. Баку, 1979. Гусейнов, М.М. Древний палеолит Азербайджана. Баку, 1985. Halliday, Fred; Maxine Molyneux. 1986. “Leter from Baku: Soviet Azerbajan in the 1980s.” MERIP Middle East Report No.138, Women and Politics in the Middle East (Jan-Feb.): 31-33. Harmata, Janos (ed.) 1998. History of Civilizations of Central Asia, Vol. II: The Development of sedentary and nomadic civilizations: 700B.C. to A.D. 250. Delhi: Motilal Banarsidass Publishers private Ltd. Harris, Alice. 1991. Indigenous Languages of the Caucasus (Anatolian and Caucasian Studies). Delmar, NY: Caravan Books. Harris, David R. (ed.) 1996. The Origins and Spread of Agriculture and Pastoralism in Eurasia. Washington, D.C.: Smithsonian Institution Press. Henze, Paul. B. 2001. “The Land of Many Crossroads: Turkey’s Caucasian Initiatives.” Orbis 45(1): 81-91. Herzig, Edmund. 1999. The New Caucasus: Armenia, Azerbajan and Georgia. London: Pinter. Herzog, Christoph; Raoul Motika. 1998. “Orientalism ‘Alla Turca’: Late 19th/ Early 20th Century Otoman Voyages into the Muslim ‘Outback.’” Die Welt des Islams, New Ser., 40(2): 139-195. Heyat, Farideh. 2006. “Globalization and Changing Gender Norms in Azerbajan.” International Feminist Journal of Politics 8(3): 394-412. kulturuli memkvidreobis ZeglebiPmilsadenebis derefanSi, warsuli da momavali 229 Heydar Aliyev Foundation. 2010. “The First Inhabitants of Azerbajan.” Baku: Heydar Aliyev Foundation. Accessed November 12, 2010. htp://www.azerbajan.az/portal/History/Ancient/ancient_e.html Hill, Fiona; Omer Taspinar. 2006. “Russia and Turkey in the Caucasus: Moving Together to Preserve the Status Quo?” Paris: IFRI research Programme Russia/CIS, Institut Français des Relations Internationales. Hofecker, John F. 2007. “Representation and Recursion in the Archaeological Record.” J. Archaeol. Method Theory 14: 359-387. Holmer, Arthur. 2002. “The Iberian-Caucasian Connection in a Typological Perspective.” Birgit & Gad Rausings Stitelse för humanistisk forskning: 1-35. Hoppál, Mihály. (ed.) 1984. Shamanism in Eurasia. Götingen: Edition Herodot. Horn, Cornelia B. 1998. “St. Nino and the Christianization of Pagan Georgia.” Medieval Encounters 4(3): 242-264. Hovey, Edmund Otis. 1904. “Southern Russia and the Caucasus Mountains.” Bulletin of the American Geographical Society 36(6): 327-341. Hunter, Shireen T. 2006. “Borders, Conlict, and Security in the Caucasus: The Legacy of the Past.” SAIS Review 26(1): 111-125. Hunter, Shireen T. 1994. The Transcaucasus in Transition: Nation-Building and Conlict. Washington, D.C.: Center for Strategic and International Studies. Husseinov, M.M. 2005. The Azykh Cave. Baku, The Academy of Science of the Azerbajan Soviet Socialist Republic. Idil, Vedat. 1987. Ankara: the Ancient Sites and Museums. English Version. Istanbul: Net Turistik Yayinlar A.S. Ismailov, Eldar; Vladimir Papava. 2006. The Central Caucasus: Essays on Geopolitical Economy. Stockholm: CA & CC Press. Ivanov, Vyacheslav, V. (n.d.) “Comparative Notes on Hurro-Urartian, Northern Caucasian and IndoEuropean.” unpublished manuscript: 1-116. Johanson, Lars. 1999. Discoveries on the Turkic Linguistic Map. Swedish research Institute in Istanbul, (SKRIFTER), Publication 5: Stockholm. Jones-Bley, Karlene; D.G. Zdanovich. (eds.). 2002. Complex societies of Central Eurasia from the 3rd to the 1st millennium BC: regional speciics in light of global models. Washington, D.C.: Institute for the Study of Man. Jones, Stephen F. 1987. “The Establishment of Soviet Power in Transcaucasia: the Case of Georgia 1921-1928.” Soviet Studies 40(4): 616-639. Jones, Stephen F. 1998. “Democracy from Below? Interest Groups in Georgian Society.” Slavic Review 59(1): 42-73. Kacharava, D.; G. Kvirvelia. 2008. Wine, Worship, and Sacriice: the Golden Graves of Ancient Vani. (With essays by A. Chqonia, N. Lordkipanidze, and M. Vickers. Institute for the Study of the Ancient World, in association with Princeton University Press. Касимова, P.M. Первые палеоаптропологические находки в Кобыстане Журн. “Вопросы антропологии” вып 46. Москва – 1974. 230 Past and Future Heritage in the Pipelines Corridor Kakhhidze, A.; M. Vickers. 2004. Pichvnari 1: Results of Excavations Conducted by the Joint British-Georgian Expedition, 1998-2002: Greeks and Colchians on the East Coast of the Black Sea. Oxford: Batumi. Karagiannis, Emmanuel. 2004. “The Turkish-Georgian partnership and the pipeline factor.” Journal of Southern Europe and the Balkans 6(1): 13-26. Kavtaradze, Giorgi L. 2004. “The Chronology of the Caucasus during the Early Metal Age: Observations from Central Trans-Caucasus.” In: Sagona, A. (ed.) A View from the Highlands: Archaeological Studies in Honour of Charles Burney (Ancient Near Eastern Studies Supplement 12). Leuven: Peeters. Kavtaradze, Giorgi L. 1999. The Importance of Metallurgical Data for the Formation of a Central Transcaucasian Chronology. In The Beginnings of Metallurgy: Proceedings of the International Conference. Bochum. Kazemzadeh, Firuz. 1951. The Struggle for Transcaucasia (1917-1921). New York: Philosophical Library. Keaveney, Arthur. 1982. “The King and the War-Lords: Romano-Parthian Relations Circa 64-53 B.C.” American Journal of Philology 103(4): 412-428. Kelly-Buccllati, Marilyn. 1974. “The Excavations at Korucutepe, Turkey, 1968-1970: Preliminary Report. Part V: The Early Bronze Age Potery and Its Ainities.” Journal of Near Eastern Studies 33(1): 44-54. Keun, Odete. 1924. In the Land of the Golden Fleece: Through Independent Menchevist Georgia. London: John Lane. Khimshiashvili, A. 1995-1996. “A Group of Iberian Fire Temples (4th Century BC – 2nd Century AD).” Archaeologische Miteilungen Aus Iran 28: 309-318. Khoshtaria, D. 2009. “Past and Present of the Georgian Sinai: A Survey of Architectural History and Current State of Monasteries in Klarjeti.” In P. Soustal (ed.), Heilige Berge und Wusten: Byzanz und sein Unfeld. Wien: 77-81. King, Charles. 2007. “Imagining Circassia: David Urquhart and the Making of North Caucasus Nationalism.” The Russian Review 66: 238-255. Kinross, Patrick Balfour. 1977. The Otoman Centuries: the Rise and Fall of the Turkish Empire. New York: Morrow. Kipiani, G. 2004. “Achaemenid Heritage in Ancient Georgian Architecture.” ANES 41: 167-191. Knaus, Florian. 2003. “Achaimeniden im Kaukasus.” Colloque L’archéologie de l’empire achéménide Paris, Collège de France, (21-22 Novembre 2003): 1-21. Knaus, Florian. 2006. “Ancient Persia and the Caucasus.” Iranica Antiqua 16: 79-118. Kohl, Philip L. 1989. “The Northern ‘Frontier’ of the Ancient Near East: Transcaucasia and central Asia Compared.” American Journal of Archaeology 92(4): 591-596. Kohl, Philip L. 1998. “Nationalism and Archaeology: On the Constructions of Nations and the Reconstructions of the Remote Past.” Annual review of Anthropology 27: 223-246. Kohl, Philip L. 2001. “Nation-Building and the Archaeological Record.” in Nation and National Ideology Past, Presents and Prospects. Proceedings of the International Symposium Held at the New europe College, Bucharest (April 6-7, 2001): 184-208. Kohl, Philip L. 2007. The Making of Bronze Age Eurasia. New York: Cambridge University Press. kulturuli memkvidreobis ZeglebiPmilsadenebis derefanSi, warsuli da momavali 231 Krainov, D. A. 1947. “New Mousterian sites in the Crimea and the Caucasus (in Russian).” Byulleten’ Komissii po Izucheniyu Chetvertichnogo Perioda 9: 23-35. Kroll, Stephan. 2005. “The Southern Urmia basin in the early Iron Age.” Iranica Antiqua 15: 65-85. Kutin, B. 1941. Archaeological Excavations in Trialeti. Tbilisi (in Russian) Kutin, B. 1948. Archaeological Excavations of 1947 in Tsalka Region. Tbilisi (in Russian) Kuhn, Steven L. “Paleolithic Archeology in Turkey.” Evolutionary Anthropology 11: 198-210. Kuipers, Aert H. 1960. Phoneme and Morpheme in Kabardian (Eastern Adyghe). ‘S-Gravenhage: Mouton & Co. Kuzio, Taras. 2002. “History, Memory and Nation Building in the Post-Soviet Colonial Space.” Nationalities Papers 30(2): 241-264. Lang, D. M. 1952. “Georgia and the Fall of the Safavi Dynasty.” Bulletin of the School of Oriental and African Studies 14(3): 523-539. Lang, D. M. 1955. “Georgia in the Reign of Giorgi the Brilliant (1314-1346).” Bulletin of the School of Oriental and African Studies 17(1): 74-91. Lang, David Marshall. 1966. The Georgians. London: Thames and Hudson. Lang, David Marshall. 1976. Lives and Legends of the Georgian Saints (revised edition). Crestwood, NY. Levi, Scot. 1999. “India, Russia and the Eighteenth-Century Transformation of the Central Asian Caravan Trade.” JESHO 42(2): 519-548. Licheli, V. 1999. “St. Andrew in Samtskhe: Archaeological Proof?” In T. Mgaloblishvili (ed.) Ancient Christianity in the Caucasus. Iberica Caucasica. London: 27-34. Licheli, Vakhtang. 2006. “New Archaeological Publications from Georgia.” Ancient Civilizations from Scythia to Siberia 12(3/4): 315-322. Liubin, V. P. 1974. “The Environment and Primitive Man in the Pleistocene of the Caucasus.” (in Russian) In Primitive Man, His Material Culture and the Environment in the Pleistocene and Holocene. Moscow, Nauka: 167177. Liubin, V. P. 1977. Mousterian Cultures of the Caucasus. (in Russian) Leningrad, NAUKA. Liubin, V. P. 1989. “The Palaeolithic of the Caucasus.” (in Russian) The Palaeolithic of the Caucasus and Northern Asia. Leningrad, Nauka. Lloyd, Seton. 1989. Ancient Turkey: A Traveller’s History of Anatolia. Berkeley: University of California Press. Lordkipanidze, M.; I. Katcharava. 1963. A Glimpse of Georgian History. Tbilisi. Lordkipanidze, O. (ed.) 1991. Archaeology of Georgia, Volume I. Tbilisi. (In Georgian) Lordkipanidze, O. (ed.) 1992. Archaeology of Georgia, Volume II. Tbilisi. (In Georgian) Lordkipanidze, O. 2000. Phasis, the River and City in Colchis. Stutgart: Steiner. Lordkipanidze, O. 2009. “Georgian Civilzation: Whence Does Its History Start?” Journal Iberia-Colchis 5: 126-133. 232 Past and Future Heritage in the Pipelines Corridor Ludwig, Nadine. 2005. “Die Kachetische Keramik des I. Jts. V. Chr.- eine Einfuhrung.” ANES 42: 211-230. Magnarella, Paul J.; Orhan Türkdoğan. 1976. “The Development of Turkish Social Anthropology.” Current Anthropology 17(2): 263-274. Mair, Victor H. (ed.) 2006. Contact and Exchange in the Ancient World. Honolulu: University of Hawai’i Press. Makharadze, Z. 2007. “Noufelles Donnees sur le Chalolithique en Gergie Orientole.” In B. Lyonnet (ed.) Les Cultures du Caucase (VI-III millenoires avant notre ere). Leurs relations avec le Proche-Orient, Paris: 123-132. Manning, Patrick. 2006. “Homo Sapiens Populates the Earth: A Provisional Synthesis, Privileging Linguistic evidence.” Journal of World History 17(2): 115-158. Manning, Sturt W.; Bernd Kromer; Peter Ian Kuniholm; Maryanne W. Newton. 2003. “Anatolian Tree Rings and a New Chronology for the east Mediterranean Bronze-Iron Ages.” Science 294: 2532-2535. Manning, Sturt W. 2003. “Conirmation of Near-Absolute Dating of East Mediterranean Bronze-Iron Dendrochronology.” Antiquity 77: 295. Manning, Sturt W. 2006. “Chronology for the Aegean Late Bronze Age 1700-1400 B.C.” Science 312: 565-569. Мансуров М. Палеолит Азербайджана. Международная научная конференция “Археология и этнология Кавказа”, Тбилиси, 2002. Mənsurоv, Mənsur. Qafqazda ilk paleоlit abidələri. Azərbaycan arхeоlоgiyası və etnоqraiyası jurnalı. № 2, 2003. Margarian, Hayrapet. 2001. “The Nomads and Ethnopolitical Realities of Transcaucasia in the 11-14th Centuries.” Iran & the Caucasus 5: 75-78. Mark, David E. 1996. “Eurasia Leter: Russia and the New Transcaucasus.” Foreign Policy 105 (Winter 19961997): 141-159. Mars, Gerald; Yochanan Altman. 1983. “The Cultural Bases of Soviet Georgia’s Second Economy.” Soviet Studies 35(4): 546-560. Marton, R.E.; E. Leorri; P. P. McLaughlin. 2007. “Holocene Sea Level and Climate Change in the Black Sea: Multiple Marine Incursions Related to Freshwater Discharge Events.” Quaternary International 167-168 (2007): 61-72. Mason, R.B.; L. Golombek. 2003. “The Petrography of Iranian Safavid Ceramics.” Journal of Archaeological Science 30: 251-261. McKay, John P. 1984. “Baku Oil and Transcaucasian Pipelines, 1883-1891: A Study in Tsarist Economic Policy.” Slavic Review 43(4): 604-623. Meeker, Michael E. 1971. “Black Sea Turks: Some Aspects of their Ethnic and Cultural Background.” International Journal of Middle East Studies 2(4): 318-345. Mellaart, James. 1958. “The End of the Early Bronze Age in Anatolia and the Aegean.” American Journal of Archaeology 62(1): 9-33. Merlin, M.D. 2002. “Archaeological Evidence for the Tradition of Psychoactive plant use in the Old World.” Economic Botany 57(3): 295-323. kulturuli memkvidreobis ZeglebiPmilsadenebis derefanSi, warsuli da momavali 233 Meskell, Lynn. 2002. “The Intersection of Identity and Politics in Archaeology.” Annual Review of Anthropology 31: 279-301. Metreveli, Roin. 1993. Georgia. Tbilisi: N. Solod Publishing House. Mikasa, Takahito (ed.) 1995. Essays on Ancient Anatolia and its Surrounding Civilizations. Wiesbaden: Harrassowitz Verlag. Minorsky, V. 1953. “Caucasica IV.” Bulletin of the School of Oriental and African Studies 15(3): 504-529. Moorey, P. R. S. 1986. “The Emergence of the Light, Horse-Drawn Chariot in the Near-East c. 2000-1500 B.C.” World Archaeology 18(2): 196-215. Morin, J. 2003. “Long-Term Cross-Cultural Relations and State-Formation in Transcaucasian Iberia: An Annaliste Perspective.” ANES 41: 108-119. Muehlfried, Florian. 2007. “Sharing the Same Blood-Culture and Cuisine in the Republic of Georgia.” Anthropology of Food S3 (Décembre 2007) Food Chains/Les chaines alimentaires: 1-15. Museyibli, Najaf. “Chalcolitic setlement Beyuk Kesik.” Baku, 2007. Museyibli, Najaf. “ethnocultural Connections between the Region of the Near east and the Caucasus in the IV millennium BC”. Azerbajan- Land between East and West. Berlin, 2009. Museyibli, Najaf. “Baku-Tbilisi-Ceyhan pipeline boosts Azerbajani Archaeology. Vision of Azerbajan summer”. 1 volume. Baku, 2007. Мусеибли, Наджаф. “Позднеэнеолитические курганы Акстафинского района”. Материалы международной научной конференции “Археология, этнология, фольклористика Кавказа”. Баку, 2005. Мусеибли, Наджаф. “Курган Гасансу эпохи средней бронзы”. Материалы международной научной конференции. “Археология, этнология, фольклористика Кавказа”. Тбилиси, 2007. Нариманов, И. Г. Культура древнейшего земледельческо-скотоводческого населения Азербайджана. Баку, 1987. Nanobashvili, Mariam. 2002. “The Development of Literary Contacts between the Georgians and the Arabic Speaking Christians in Palestine from the 8th to the 10th century.” ARAM 15: 269-274. Narimanishvili, G. K. 1990. Potery of Kartli in the 5th – 1st centuries BC. Tbilisi (in Russian). Narimanishvili, G. 2004. “Red-Painted Potery of the Achaemenid and Post-Achaemenid Periods from Caucasus (Iberia): Stylistic Analysis and Chronology.” ANES 41: 120-166. Narimanishvili, G. 2006. “Saphar-Kharaba Cemetery.” Dziebani 17-18: 92-126. Nasidze, I. 2001. “Alu Insertion Polymorphisms and the Genetic Structure of Human Populations from the Caucasus.” European Journal of Human Genetics 9: 267-272. Nazidze, I. 1998. “Genetic Evidence Concerning the Origins of South and North Ossetians.” Annals of Human Genetics 68: 588-599. Nasidze, Ivane; Mark Stoneking. 2001. “Mitochondrial DNA Variation and Language Replacements in the Caucasus.” Proc. R. Soc. Lond. B 268: 1197-1206. 234 Past and Future Heritage in the Pipelines Corridor Nasmyth, Peter. 1998. Georgia: In the Mountains of Poetry. New York: St. Martin’s Press. Nichols, Deborah L.; Rosemary A. Joyce; Susan D. Gillespie. 1997. “Is Archaeology Anthropology?” APa 13(1): 3-13. Nicholas, Johanna. 1997. “Modeling Ancient Population Structures and Movement in Linguistics.” Annual Reviews in Anthropology 26: 359-84. Norling, Nicklas; Niklas Swanstrom. 2007. “The Virtues and Potential Gains of Continental trade in Eurasia.” Asian Survey 17(3): 351-373. Nourzhanov, Kirill. 2006. “Caspian Oil: Geopolitical Dreams and Real Issues.” Australian Journal of International Afairs 60(1): 59-66. Ogden, Dennis. 1984. “Britain and Soviet Georgia, 1921-22.” Journal of Contemporary History 23(2), Bolshevism and the Socialist Let: 245-258. O’Laughlin, John; Vladimir Kolossov; Jean Radvanyi. 2007. “The Caucasus in a Time of Conlict, Demographic Transition, and Economic Change.” Eurasian Geography and Economics 48(2): 135-156. Olszewski, Devorah; Harold L. Dibble. (ed.) 1993. The Paleolithic Prehistory of the Zagros-Taurus. Philadelphia: University Museum of Pennsylvania. Ote, Marcel. 2007. “The Origins of Language: Material Sources.” Diogenes 214: 49-59. Özendes, Engin. 1987. Photography in the Otoman Empire, 1839-1919. Beyoğlu-Istanbul : Haşet Kitabevi. Ozirat, Aynur. 2007. “A Survey of Pre-Classical Sites in Eastern Turkey. Fourth Preliminary Report: The Eastern Shore of Lake Van.” ANES 44: 113-140. Ozturkmen, Arzu. 2005. “Rethinking Regionalism: Memory of Change in a Turkish Black Sea Town.” East European Quarterly 39(1): 47-62. Palumbi, Giulio. 2003. “Red-Black Potery: Eastern Anatolian and Transcaucasian Relationships around the Mid-Fourth Millenium BC.” ANES 40: 80-134. Parsons, J.W.R. 1982. “National Integration in Soviet Georgia.” Soviet Studies 34(4): 547-569. Pelkmans, Mathjis. 1998? “The Wounded Body: Relections on the Demise of the ‘Iron Curtain’ between Georgia and Turkey.” Amsterdam School of Social Science Research, unpublished manuscript: 1-13. Web link: htp://condor.depaul.edu/~rrotenbe/aeer/v17n1/Pelkmans.pdf Percovich, Luciana. 2004. “Europe’s First Peoples: Female Cosmogonies before the Arrival of the Indoeuropean Peoples.” Feminist Theology 13(1): 26-39. Peterkin, Gail Larsen; Harvey M. Bricker; Paul Mellars (eds.) 1993. Washington DC: American Anthropological Association. Peterson, Alexandros. 2002. “Integrating Azerbajan, Georgia and Turkey with the West: The Case of the EastWest Transport Corridor.” CSIS Commentary Sept.10, 2007: 1-20. Pitskhelauri, K. 1997. “Wafen der Bronzezeit aus Ost-Georgien.” Archaeologie in Eurasien. Gotingen: 4. Pogrebova, Maria. 2003. “The Emergence of Chariots and Riding in the South Caucasus.” Oxford Journal of Archaeology 22(4): 397-409. kulturuli memkvidreobis ZeglebiPmilsadenebis derefanSi, warsuli da momavali 235 Popjanevski, Johanna; Niklas Nilsson. 2006. “National Minorities and the State in Georgia.” Conference Report, Silk Road Studies Program, Johns Hopkins University, SAIS, Aug 2006: 1-32. Preucel, Robert W.; Ian Hodder (eds.) 1996. Contemporary Archaeology in Theory: A Reader. Cambridge, MA: Blackwell Publishers. Qajar, Chingiz. 2000. The Famous Sons of Ancient and Medieval Azerbajan. S. N.: Azerbajan Qaukhchishvili, S. (ed.) 1955. Kartlis Tskhovreba (Life of Georgia). Tbilisi. Raballand, Gael; Ferhat Esen. 2007. “Economics and Politics of Cross-Border Oil Pipelines: the Case of the Caspian Basin.” AEJ 5: 133-146. Radvanyi, Jean; Shakhmardan S. Muduyev. 2007. “Challenges Facing the Mountain Peoples of the Caucasus.” Eurasian Geography and Economics 48(2): 157-177. Ramezani, Elias; Mohammad R. Marvie Mohadjer; Hans-Dieter Knapp; Hassan Ahmadi; Hans Joosten. 2008. “The late-Holocene Vegetation History of the Central Caspian (Hyrcanian) Forests of Northern Iran.” The Holocene 18: 307-321. Rapp, Gregory. 2002. “The Conversion of K‘art‘li: the Shatberdi Variant, Kek.Inst.S-1141.” Le Museon 119(1-2): 169-229. Reinhold, Sabine. 2003. “Traditions in Transition: Some Thought on Late Bronze Age and Early Iron Age Burial Costumes from the Northern Caucasus.” European Journal of Archaeology 6(1): 25-54. Roberts, Elizabeth. 1992. Georgia, Armenia, and Azerbajan. Brookield, CT: Millbrook Press. Romer, F. E. 1979. “Gaius Caesar›s Military Diplomacy in the East.” Transactions of the American Philological Association 109: 199-214. Rosen, Roger. 1999. Georgia: A Sovereign Country of the Caucasus. Sheung Wan, Hong Kong: Odyssey Publications. Rosen, Roger. 1992. The Georgian Republic. Lincolnwood, IL: Passport Books. Roustaei, K. et al. 2004. “Recent Paleolithic Surveys in Luristan.” Current Anthropology 45(5): 692-707. Rubinson, K. S.; A. G. Sagona. 2008. Ceramics in Transitions: Chalcolithic through Iron Age in the Highlands of the Southern Caucasus and Anatolia. (Ancient Near Eastern Studies Series # 27) Oakville CT: David Brown (Oxbow). Sagona, Antoni; Claudia Sagona. 2000. “Excavations at Sos Hoyuk, 1998 to 2000: Fith Preliminary Report.” ANES 37: 56-127. Salia, Kalistrat. 1983. History of the Georgian Nation (trans. by Katharine Vivian). Paris: N. Salia. Sanikidze, Georgia; Edward W. Walker. 2004. “Islam and Islamic Practices in Georgia.” Berkeley Program in Soviet and Post-Soviet Studies Working Paper Series: 1-42. Scarce, Jennifer M. 1981. Middle Eastern Costume from the Tribes and Cities of Iran and Turkey. edinburgh: Royal Scotish Museum. Scheler, Thomas. 1998. “’Fertile Crescent’, ‘Orient’, ‘Middle East’: The Changing Mental Maps of Southwest Asia.” European Review of History 10(2): 253-272. 236 Past and Future Heritage in the Pipelines Corridor Secretariat of the President of the Republic of Azerbajan. 1999. NATO and Azerbajan: Mutually beneicial cooperation. A nkara, Turkey: Nurol Printing House. Şenyurt, S. Yücel; Atakan Akçay; Yalçin Kamiş. 2006. Yuceoren: Dogu Kilikya’da bir Helenistik-Roma nekropolu. Baku-Tbilisi-Ceyhan ham petrol boru hati projesi arkeolojik kurtarma kazilari yayinlari: 1 [A Hellenistic and Roman Necropolis in eastern Kilikia. Baku-Tbilisi-Ceyhan crude oil pipeline project publications of archaeological salvage excavations: 1]. Ankara: Gazi University Research Center for Archaeology. Seton, Lloyd. 1989. Ancient Turkey: a Traveler’s History of Anatolia. Berkeley: University of California Press. Shaw, Wendy M. K. 2003. Possessors and Possessed: Museums, Archaeology, and the Visualization of history in the Late Otoman Empire. Berkeley: University of California Press. Shnirelman, Victor. 2005. “The Politics of a Name: Between Consolidation and Separation in the Northern Caucasus.” Acta Slavica Iaponica 23: 37-73. Singer, Itamar. 2005. “On Luwians and Hitites.” Biblioteca Orientalis 62(5-6): 431-452. Sinitsyn, A.A.; J. F. Hofecker. 2006. “Radiocarbon Dating and Chronology of the Early Upper Paleolithic at Kostenki.” Quaternary International 152-153: 164-174. Silogava, Valery; Kakha Shengelia. 2007. History of Georgia: From the Ancient Times through the Rose Revolution. Tbilisi: Caucuses University Publishing House. Smeets, Rieks. 1994. The Indigenous Languages of the Caucasus. Delmar, NY: Caravan Books. Smith, Adam T.; Karen S. Robinson. 2003. Archaeology in the Borderlands: Investigations in Caucasia and Beyond. Monograph 47, Cotsen Institute of Archaeology, UCLA. Los Angeles: UC Press. Smith, Adam T. 1999. “The Making of an Urartian Landscape in Southern Transcaucasia: A Study of Political Architectonics.” American Journal of Archaeology 103(1): 45-71. Smith, Adam T. 2004. “The End of the Essential Archaeological Subject.” Archaeological Dialogues 11(1): 1-20. Smith, Adam T. 2005. “Prometheus Unbound: Southern Caucasia in Prehistory.” Journal of World Prehistory 19: 229-279. Soloviev, L. N. 1956. The Signiicance of the Archaeological Method for the Study of the Karst of the Northern Part of the Caucasian Black Sea Coast (in Russian). ‘Karst questions in the South of the European USSR’. Kiev, AN Ukrainian: 43-75. Souleimanov, Emil; Ondrej Ditrych. 2007. “Iran and Azerbajan: A Contested Neighborhood.” Middle East Policy 14(2): 101-116. Starr, Frederick S.; Svante E. Cornell. (eds.) 2005. The Baku-Tbilisi-Ceyhan Pipeline: Oil Window to the West. Washington, D.C.: Central Asia-Caucasus Institute, Johns Hopkins University, School of Advanced International Studies. Starr, Frederick S. (ed.) 2007. The New Silk Roads: Transport and Trade in Greater Central Asia. Washington, D.C.: Central Asia-Caucasus Institute, Johns Hopkins University, SAIS. Stephl, Marion. 2004. “A Cluster-Based Approach to Heritage Tourism in Georgia: Sustainable Tourism as a Strategy towards Export-Diversiication for an Economy in Transition.” Diplomarbeit zur Erlangung des Akademischen Grades Magistra (FH), FHS Kufstein Tirol, Studiengang Internationale Wirtschat Management: 1-148. kulturuli memkvidreobis ZeglebiPmilsadenebis derefanSi, warsuli da momavali 237 Stirling, Paul. (ed.) 1993. Culture and Economy: Changes in Turkish Villages. Huntingdon: eothen. Summers, G.D. 1993. “Archaeological Evidence for the Achaemenid Period in Eastern Turkey.” Anatolian Studies 43: 85-108. Summers, G.D. 1997. “The Identiication of the Iron Age City on Kerkenes Dag in Central Anatolia.” Journal of Near Eastern Studies 56(2): 81-94. Suny, Ronald Grigor. 2001. “Constructing Primordialisms: Old Histories for New Nations.” Journal of Modern History 73(4): 862-896. Suny, Ronald Grigor. 1999. “Provisional Stabilities: the Politics of Identities in Post-Soviet Eurasia.” International Security 24(3): 139-178. Suny, Ronald Grigor. 1994. The Making of the Georgian Nation. Bloomington: Indiana University Press. Suny, Ronald Grigor. (ed.) 1983. Transcaucasia: Nationalism and Social Change. Ann Arbor: University of Michigan Press. Swietochowski, Tadeusz. 1986. Soviet Azerbajan Today: The Problems of Group Identity. Occasional Paper Vol. 211. Washington, D.C.: Kennan Institute for Advanced Russian Studies. Swietochowski, Tadeusz. 1985. Russian Azerbajan, 1905-1920: The Shaping of National Identity in a Muslim Community. Soviet and East European Studies, New York: Cambridge University Press. Swietochowski, Tadeusz. 1995. Russia and Azerbajan: A Borderland in Transition. New York: Columbia University Press. Takahito, Mikasa. (ed.) 1995. Essays on Ancient Anatolia and its Surrounding Civilizations. Wiesbaden: Harrassowitz Verlag. Takaoglu, Turan. 2000. “Hearth Structures in the Religious Patern of Early Bronze Age Northeast Anatolia.” Anatolian Studies 50: 11-16. Taylor, Paul Michael; Christopher R. Polglase; Jared M. Koller; Troy A. Johnson. 2010. AGT: Ancient Heritage in the BTC-SCP Pipeline Corridor – Azerbajan, Georgia, Turkey. Washington, D.C.: Smithsonian Institution. [Online publication, at:] htp://www.agt.si.edu (Web design by Jared Koller and Michael Tutle.) Taylor, Paul Michael; David Maynard. 2011. Excavations on the BTC Pipeline, Azerbajan. Forthcoming in: Internet Archaeology. Tillier, Anne-Marie. 2007. “The Earliest Homo Sapiens (Sapiens): Biological, Chronological and Taxonomic Perspectives.” Diogenes 214: 110-121. Toumanof, C. 1963. Studies in Christian Caucasian History. Washington, DC. Tourovets, Alexandre. 2005. “Some Relexions about the Relation Between the Architecture of Northwestern Iran and Urartu: the Layout of the Central Temple of Nush-I Djan.” Iranica Antiqua 15: 359-370. Tretiakov, P. N.; A. L. Mongait. 1961. Contributions to the Ancient History of the U.S.S.R., with special reference to Transcaucasia. Selections from The Outline of the History of the U.S.S.R. Russian Translation Series of the Peabody Museum of Archaeology and Ethnology, Harvard University, 1(3). [Trans. Vladimir M. Maurin; edited by Henry Field and Paul Tolstoy]. Cambridge, MA: Peabody Museum. 238 Past and Future Heritage in the Pipelines Corridor Tsetskhladze, Gocha R. 1995. Review: Braund, D. Georgia in Antiquity. “A History of Colchis and Transcaucasian Iberia, 550 B. C.-A. D. 562.” In The Classical Review, New Series 45(2): 358-360. Tsetskhladze, Gocha R. 2005. “The Caucasus and the Iranian World in the Early Iron Age: Two Graves from Treli.” Iranica Antiqua 15: 437-446. Велиев, С. С.; М. М. Мансуров. К вопросу о возрасте древнейших слоев Азыхской пещерной стоянки. Доклады Академии Наук Азербайджана, 1999, № 3-4). Voultsiadou, Eleni; Apostolos Tatolas. 2005. “The Fauna of Greece and Adjacent Areas in the Age of Homer: Evidence from the First Writen Documents of Greek literature.” Journal of Biogeography 32: 1875-1882. Wells, R. Spencer et al. 2001. “The Eurasian Heartland: A Continental Perspective on Y-Chromosome Diversity.” Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America 98(18): 10244-10249. Wheeler, Everet L. 1993. “Methodological Limits and the Mirage of Roman Strategy: Part I.” Journal of Military History 57(1): 7-41. Whitock, Michael. 1959. “Ermolov-Proconsul of the Caucasus.” Russian Review 18(1): 53-60. Wilson, Annalie; Terry Knot; Mehmet Binay. BP Azerbajan SPU (Baku). 2006. The Shah Deniz Gas Story. Baku: BP Azerbajan SPU. Yakar, Jak. 2000. Prehistoric Anatolia: The Neolithic Transformation and the Early Chalcolithic Period. Monograph Series of the Institute of Archaeology, Tel Aviv University. Tel Aviv: University of Tel Aviv. Yakar, Jak. 2000. Ethnoarchaeology of Anatolia: rural Socio-Economy in the Bronze and Iron Ages. Tel Aviv University Institute for Archaeology Monograph Series (17). Tel Aviv, Israel. Yener, K. Aslihan. 1995. “The Archaeology of Empire in Anatolia: Comments.” Bulletin of the American Schools of Oriental Research 299/300: 117-121. Yener, K. Aslihan. 2000. The Domestication of Metals: The Rise of Complex Metal Industries in Anatolia. Boston: Brill. Zamyatnin, S. N. 1940. “The Navalishinskaya and Akhshtyrskaya Caves on the Black Sea Coast of the Caucasus (in Russian).” Byulleten’ Komissii po Izucheniyu Chetvertichnogo Perioda 6-7: 100-101. Zamyatnin, S. N. 1950. “The Study of the Palaeolithic Period in the Caucasus 1936-1948 (in Russian).” Materialy po chetvertichnomu periodu SSSR 2: 127-139. Zeder, Melinda A. 2000. “The Initial Domestication of Goats (Capra Hircus) in the Zagros Mountains 10,000 Years Ago.” Science 287: 2254-2257. Zimansky, Paul E. 1985. Ecology and Empire--The Structure of the Urartian State. Chicago, Ill.: Oriental Institute of the University of Chicago. Zimansky, Paul. 1995. “Urartian Material Culture as State Assemblage: An Anomaly in the Archaeology of empire.” Bulletin of the American Schools of Oriental Research 299/300: 103-115. kulturuli memkvidreobis ZeglebiPmilsadenebis derefanSi, warsuli da momavali 239

RELATED PAPERS

RELATED TOPICS

Log In

Past and Future Heritage in the Pipelines Corridor: Azerbaijan, Georgia, Turkey” – BTC/SCP. Asian Cultural History Program, Smithsonian Institution, 2011.

Past and Future Heritage in the Pipelines Corridor: Azerbaijan, Georgia, Turkey” – BTC/SCP. Asian Cultural History Program, Smithsonian Institution, 2011.