Semih Güneri
i've been doing two things for years: history and material culture of the indo-european hittites in the near east and cultural history and archeology of the turkic speaking people in northern asia within the concept of steppe cultures. through on my own original archaeological projects
Phone: +90 232 301 94 01 (Tel); +90 232 301 94 02 (Faks)
Address: Center for Studies on Caucasian and Central Eurasian Archaeology, KAM
Dokuz Eylul University Kaynaklar Yerlesimi
Ogretim Uyeleri Binasi,
Rooms Nr:
Z05-Z06-Z07-Z08, 35160
Buca, Kaynaklar, Izmir, Turkiye
https://www.facebook.com/CenterforStudiesonCaucasianandCentralAsianArch
Phone: +90 232 301 94 01 (Tel); +90 232 301 94 02 (Faks)
Address: Center for Studies on Caucasian and Central Eurasian Archaeology, KAM
Dokuz Eylul University Kaynaklar Yerlesimi
Ogretim Uyeleri Binasi,
Rooms Nr:
Z05-Z06-Z07-Z08, 35160
Buca, Kaynaklar, Izmir, Turkiye
https://www.facebook.com/CenterforStudiesonCaucasianandCentralAsianArch
less
InterestsView All (38)
Uploads
Books by Semih Güneri
struggle of the Kuram with a series of Indo-European hypotheses. The Kuram has been raised on the three basic footing interrelated to each other. 1) The Runic inscriptions that we have called as ‘historical texts’ representing the Classical Turkic Period-2 in Altay, are the basic data set that make up the fi rst footing of the Kuram. 2) The historical texts, on the other hand, also identify a certain group of archaeological material. Actually such group of material, representing Classical Turkic Period-2, spread throughout the Sayan-Altay region, Mongolian territory, and Eurasian steppes. The rich archeological material that is inclined to run to the much earlier times, has enlightened the path of the Culture. 3) Described archaeological material that we can pursue towards the early stages of history led us to the Neolithic period of Yesnisey-Lena region where is the micro climatic isolated territory surrounded by the Angara river in the North, Lena river in the East, Baykal lake in the South and Yenisey river in the West. This living place was the Urheimat of the ancient Türks: Yenisey-Lena. The examination of the material made us access to the Urheimat. According to the Kuram, Turkic speaking people originated from Yenisey-Lena and they grown up in Altay region. At the end of the Late Upper Paleolithic Age (c. 12,000 BC), the Culture with the
identity of ‘Yenisy-Lena’, alredy spread to the World.
Papers by Semih Güneri
ortaya çıkartılan yazıtlı gümüş tası kendi bağlamı içinde, arkeolojik, antropolojik ve genetik araştırmaların
sonuçları temelinde değerlendirmek istiyoruz. Issık Kurganı, Alma-Ata’dan Minusinsk’e, Urallar’dan Baykal’a,
Berel’den Tarım havzasına uzanan geniş Altaylar kültür coğrafyasında yer alan Pazırık kültürü grubuna
dâhil önemli bir buluntu merkezidir. Pazırık kültürü grubunun etnik temelinin Altayların yerli Türk halkları
tarafından oluşturulduğunu arkeolojik, antropolojik ve genetik araştırmaların sonuçlarıyla yıllardır göstermeye
çalışıyoruz. Buna karşılık hiçbir bilimsel kanıt öne sürülmeden Batılı meslektaşlarımız tarafından inatla kültürün Hint-Avrupalı olduğu iddia ediliyor. Buradaki sorun, Pazırık kültürü grubu halklarının Türkçe mi,
Hint-Avrupaca mı konuştuğu değil, gümüş tasın kurganda yabancı bir obje olarak bulunup bulunmadığıdır. Issık
gümüş tası üzerine Eski Türk abecesi ile kazınmış runik yazıların geleneği Altaylar kültür coğrafyasına yabancı
değildir. Bu tür yazıt geleneğinin pek çok bakımdan ne İran kültürü grubuyla ne de zannedildiğinin tersine, Issık
Kurganı yazıtıyla ilgili son çalışmalardan birinde önerilmiş olan Pre-Proto-Mongolic ile ve Moğolcayla bir
ilgisi vardır. Issık tası tipolojik olarak Avrasya Demir Çağı bozkır kültürlerinin libasyon kaplarının vaz geçilmez
bir modelini yansıtıyor. Gümüş tas üzerindeki Türk runik abecesi ise Altaylar kültür coğrafyasında en az bin üç
yüz yılık bir tarihî arka plana sahiptir. Dolayısıyla Issık kabının Altaylar kültür coğrafyasına yabancı bir kültür
belgesi olmadığını ve Issık Kurganı konteksti içinde ithal bir obje olarak bulunmadığını bir kez de burada ısrarla
vurgulamak isteriz.
evaluate the inscribed silver bowl coming from Issyk kurgan excavations in its own context, on the basis of
the results of archaeological, anthropological and genetic researches. The Issyk kurgan is an important ancient
archaeological site belonging to the Pazyryk culture group, which is located in the vast Altay cultural zone
stretching Alma-Ata to the Minusinsk, Urals to the Baikal, and Berel to the Tarim basin. With the results of
archaeological, anthropological and genetic researches, we have been trying to show -for years- that the ethnic
basis of the Pazyryk culture group was formed by the indigenous Türkic people of Altay. On the other hand, it
has been stubbornly claimed by our Western colleagues that the culture belongs to the Indo-European speaking
communities, without convincing scientific evidence being put forward. The problem here is not whether the
peoples of the Pazyryk culture group spoke Türkic or Indo-European, but whether the silver bowl has been
found at the kurgan as an imported object. The tradition of runic inscriptions, engraved with the Old Türkic
alphabet on the Issyk’s silver bowl is not undefined practice to the Altay cultural zone. In many respects, this
type of inscription tradition has nothing to do with the Iranian cultural group, nor with the most particularly
the concept of the Pre-Proto-Mongolic and Mongolic, as proposed in one of the recent works concerning the
Issyk inscription. Typologically, the Issyk’s silver bowl reflects an indispensable model of the libation vessels
of the Eurasian Iron Age and Early Middle Age steppe cultures. The typical Türkic runic alphabet carved on
the silver bowl has a historical background of at least 1300 years in the Altay cultural zone. Therefore, we
would like to emphasize insistently here that the Issyk’s silver bowl is not an undefined cultural material to the
native communities of Altay cultural zone and is not found as an imported object within the context of the Issyk
Kurgan.
struggle of the Kuram with a series of Indo-European hypotheses. The Kuram has been raised on the three basic footing interrelated to each other. 1) The Runic inscriptions that we have called as ‘historical texts’ representing the Classical Turkic Period-2 in Altay, are the basic data set that make up the fi rst footing of the Kuram. 2) The historical texts, on the other hand, also identify a certain group of archaeological material. Actually such group of material, representing Classical Turkic Period-2, spread throughout the Sayan-Altay region, Mongolian territory, and Eurasian steppes. The rich archeological material that is inclined to run to the much earlier times, has enlightened the path of the Culture. 3) Described archaeological material that we can pursue towards the early stages of history led us to the Neolithic period of Yesnisey-Lena region where is the micro climatic isolated territory surrounded by the Angara river in the North, Lena river in the East, Baykal lake in the South and Yenisey river in the West. This living place was the Urheimat of the ancient Türks: Yenisey-Lena. The examination of the material made us access to the Urheimat. According to the Kuram, Turkic speaking people originated from Yenisey-Lena and they grown up in Altay region. At the end of the Late Upper Paleolithic Age (c. 12,000 BC), the Culture with the
identity of ‘Yenisy-Lena’, alredy spread to the World.
ortaya çıkartılan yazıtlı gümüş tası kendi bağlamı içinde, arkeolojik, antropolojik ve genetik araştırmaların
sonuçları temelinde değerlendirmek istiyoruz. Issık Kurganı, Alma-Ata’dan Minusinsk’e, Urallar’dan Baykal’a,
Berel’den Tarım havzasına uzanan geniş Altaylar kültür coğrafyasında yer alan Pazırık kültürü grubuna
dâhil önemli bir buluntu merkezidir. Pazırık kültürü grubunun etnik temelinin Altayların yerli Türk halkları
tarafından oluşturulduğunu arkeolojik, antropolojik ve genetik araştırmaların sonuçlarıyla yıllardır göstermeye
çalışıyoruz. Buna karşılık hiçbir bilimsel kanıt öne sürülmeden Batılı meslektaşlarımız tarafından inatla kültürün Hint-Avrupalı olduğu iddia ediliyor. Buradaki sorun, Pazırık kültürü grubu halklarının Türkçe mi,
Hint-Avrupaca mı konuştuğu değil, gümüş tasın kurganda yabancı bir obje olarak bulunup bulunmadığıdır. Issık
gümüş tası üzerine Eski Türk abecesi ile kazınmış runik yazıların geleneği Altaylar kültür coğrafyasına yabancı
değildir. Bu tür yazıt geleneğinin pek çok bakımdan ne İran kültürü grubuyla ne de zannedildiğinin tersine, Issık
Kurganı yazıtıyla ilgili son çalışmalardan birinde önerilmiş olan Pre-Proto-Mongolic ile ve Moğolcayla bir
ilgisi vardır. Issık tası tipolojik olarak Avrasya Demir Çağı bozkır kültürlerinin libasyon kaplarının vaz geçilmez
bir modelini yansıtıyor. Gümüş tas üzerindeki Türk runik abecesi ise Altaylar kültür coğrafyasında en az bin üç
yüz yılık bir tarihî arka plana sahiptir. Dolayısıyla Issık kabının Altaylar kültür coğrafyasına yabancı bir kültür
belgesi olmadığını ve Issık Kurganı konteksti içinde ithal bir obje olarak bulunmadığını bir kez de burada ısrarla
vurgulamak isteriz.
evaluate the inscribed silver bowl coming from Issyk kurgan excavations in its own context, on the basis of
the results of archaeological, anthropological and genetic researches. The Issyk kurgan is an important ancient
archaeological site belonging to the Pazyryk culture group, which is located in the vast Altay cultural zone
stretching Alma-Ata to the Minusinsk, Urals to the Baikal, and Berel to the Tarim basin. With the results of
archaeological, anthropological and genetic researches, we have been trying to show -for years- that the ethnic
basis of the Pazyryk culture group was formed by the indigenous Türkic people of Altay. On the other hand, it
has been stubbornly claimed by our Western colleagues that the culture belongs to the Indo-European speaking
communities, without convincing scientific evidence being put forward. The problem here is not whether the
peoples of the Pazyryk culture group spoke Türkic or Indo-European, but whether the silver bowl has been
found at the kurgan as an imported object. The tradition of runic inscriptions, engraved with the Old Türkic
alphabet on the Issyk’s silver bowl is not undefined practice to the Altay cultural zone. In many respects, this
type of inscription tradition has nothing to do with the Iranian cultural group, nor with the most particularly
the concept of the Pre-Proto-Mongolic and Mongolic, as proposed in one of the recent works concerning the
Issyk inscription. Typologically, the Issyk’s silver bowl reflects an indispensable model of the libation vessels
of the Eurasian Iron Age and Early Middle Age steppe cultures. The typical Türkic runic alphabet carved on
the silver bowl has a historical background of at least 1300 years in the Altay cultural zone. Therefore, we
would like to emphasize insistently here that the Issyk’s silver bowl is not an undefined cultural material to the
native communities of Altay cultural zone and is not found as an imported object within the context of the Issyk
Kurgan.
rock images were found on this valley. Main area in which the rock images densely found is the southern parts of the valley. Numerous rock images have been recorded on the several points of the valley so called Atbasty, Koibasty, Tamgalytas, Tamgalytai. Especially Atbasty point has many rock images. During nearly four weeks of our works period in this area, a large number of tombs and/or memorial places, stone stelae, taşbaba were recorded. All the finds have been recorded on computer, drawn and taken by digital and analog (coloured dia-positive and blackwhite) formats with their detailed descriptions and geographic locations. Our 2010 works were carried out on the slopes of Shiveet Khayrkhan mountain which is located in the westernmost side of the Bayan Ölgii Aymag. Shiveet Khayrkhan is situated 30 km far from the Tavn Bogd summits which lie on the intersection point of the three countries (Mongolia-China-Russian Federation) borders, is a little
mountain about 20 km in diameter and 3500 meters high above sea level. Tsagaan Salaa flowing from the North of the Sihveet Khayrkhan merges with the Khar Salaa, which flows from the South of the mountain, on the East corner of the Sihveet Khayrkhan. New branch of the two river flows to the eastern direction as “Tsagaan Gol”. We made two camps in the North and South of Shiveet. During our works of Altai Mountains region a group of kurgan complexes were recorded. Those complexes could easily be recognized with their tipical shapes and balbals or taşbaba/kamenniye baba ( Mn. khun chuluu). Its surely beyond doubt that any archaeologist could easily describe them. The situation is also same as to rock images. It’s possible to distinguish easily the old Turkic materials among them, according to their stylistic traits. V. Kubarev pointed out the importance of the Shiveet Khaykhan’s rock images with his valuable studies in the recent years. So indeed the region was the
one of the most important and richest rock art areas of Mongolia. There has been numerous and marvellous samples of rock images, especially on the Eastern and Southern slopes of the mountain and on the plains near Khar Salaa. Image samples on polished rock surfaces so called “rock tables” (Mn. Shiree), lasting from the East corner of the mountain slope to the end of the West side. There have been several lakes on the plain in East-West direction overlooking of the Southern slopes of the mountain. The biggest one of them is placed on the vast plain facing of the Western corner slopes of Shiveet Khayrkhan. After this points, towards the Northern side of the mountain, rock images have
distincly been decreased in number. Our works of 2011-2017 in Mongolian Altai Mountain region were done in three untouched area, except for Shiveet: Akköl (Tsagaan Nuur) at the North, Belçer (Altantsögts) at the East and Buyant at the South of Bayan Ölgii Aymag. Kharamandai of Akköl has rich rock images area. We recorded numerous images, few stone stelae and hirgisüür. Belçer region of Altansögs also has many rock images and stone stelae. We found a series of anthropomorfic rock images that can be earlier times in Buyant. According to the results of our 2009-2017 surveys in Mongolian Altai region, we can easily explain the following statements: We can easily distinguish Turkic archaeological style than those others in the region with their archaeological features and we can especially recognize the Turkic rock art style thanks to their special features such as Turkic grafitti, horses with three hair-tufts and a series of distinctive traits of the both horses and their riders.
was not as difficult as it seemed after his elaborate studies. During the excavations at Deriyvka, which had been a significant centre for horse burial, hundreds of animal bones were discovered in six different areas and most of them belonged to horses. Hundreds of bones belonging to some fifty horses were studied by V.I. Bibikova, while the rest was discarded due to lack of space and storing area, before creating a complete record [Drews, 2004, p. 13]. In the 1980s, these horse bone remains were studied by M. A. Levine twenty years later than they had been first found [Levine, 1990]. As a response to the view that a part of the bones assemblage found in Deriyvka belonged to domesticated horses, M.A. Levine made a list of the requirements to confirm a horse as ‘domesticated’ as: 1) The horse skeletons should be found completely among the horse remains that were revealed during excavation; 2) Old animals should not be found among them; 3) A vast majority should be consisted of mares. On the other hand, if remains belonging to old animals are found and if the data made a determination as equal existing of stallions and mares, there must be talking about the ‘wild population’. At every turn, M.A. Levine put forward that the teeth wear was the natural eroding occured through pathological malocclusion based on diet [Levine, 1990, p. 728], and accordingy she pointed out that these wears can be accepted as evidence to neither bit system nor the riding of these animals [Levine, 1999b, p. 11; Drews, 2004, p. 20]. However, though a very low possibility that is, she considers a few of the Deriyvka and Botay horses might have been domesticated, and she adds that, this ‘small proportion’ has no relation to the horses whose teeth wears were determined [Levine, 1999a, p. 29,74]. The earliest date of riding horse and when the horse was domesticated are intertwined, and it is almost impossible to evaluate them seperately. The fact that lack of the evidence of the bit system used to control the horse may demonstrate that the horse was not ridden. Nonetheless, within the same context, the identification of, for instance, remains of horse milk or kumys24 at the bottom of ware might make that horse a domesticated animal; besides despite the intensive existence of horse remains we couldn’t assert that horse were never domesticated and ridden there. That an archaeological site has a series of clear evidence concerning horse remains and horse breeding shows that the horse is theorically domesticated and ridden there. Interesting thing is, to keep horse requires inevitably riding horse. Because horse is fast, power and also timid animal and as a result the control of it requires mastery: It is a difficult task to catch a horse and gather them together just by foot. Accordingly it is possible for the horse breeder to domesticate a horse only if he could ride an animal as fast as a horse. Therefore, some of clear determinations of V.I. Bibikova concerning Sredniy Stog culture, the fact that horse milk or kumys as a milk product remains were found in the chemical analysis of residue from a ware belonging to North Kazakstan’s Botay culture, results of metacarpal metric analysis and the fact that numerous horse bones were found in both cultural deposites tell us that in both cultural regions horse was domesticated as livestock which stands as a solid evidence that horses were alredy used as riding animal. But still to claim that the horse was transportation
animal, requires clear archaeological evidence belonging to the bridle system such as more persuasive results of teeth wear analysis. However we could not state that the all sort of antler ‘cheek pieces’ were related to domesticated horse; I must emphasize that most of them were more likely not the part of horse bridle bit system. And finally I would like to express that first domestication of the horse is not directly connected with any certain ethnic group. As I mentioned above that there is not clear archaeological evidence which help us to establish a direct relation between Hittites and horse or horse drawn chariot.