CENTRAL AND EASTERN ANATOLIA LATE IRON AGE: Post-Urartu, Median and Achaemenid Empires

The 6th Century BC is an important turning point, not only for Central Anatolia butall of Near East as well. Persians united under the leadership of Cyrus II (Cyrus theGreat) ended the Median rule in the Iranian plateau and established one of the mightiestempires of Antiquity. In a period, in which the historical ideas and personalities thatboth the Eastern and Western civilizations take as role models become more visible,Central Anatolia became a stage of ongoing and intensifying conflict between these twocivilizations.To be able to control an entire trade network consisting both land and sea trade routes inthe Near East is a political and military objective that must be fulfilled by any rising power.The allied forces of the Babylonians and the Medes defeated the Assyrians at the end ofthe 7th Century BC and Neo-Assyrian Empire ceased to exist following that defeat. Thishistorical event, which created a power vacuum in the region, brought three contestantsfor the control of the trade network to prominence: The Medes, who wanted to extendtheir influence in northwestern Iran to west via Eastern Anatolia; the Babylonians,who took the former Assyrian centers in Southeastern Anatolia, and the Sardeis-basedLydians, who controled the Ancient Greek city states on the coasts of Western Anatolia.According to Ancient Greek oral tradition, the rival Eastern and Western civilizationscame face to face via their representatives i.e. the Medes and the Lydians at the beginningof the 6th Century BC in Central Anatolia; the conflict was inconclusive. Search for adiplomatic solution afterwards was fruitful; marriages arranged between the partiesacted as insurance for the treaty made. The treaty was short lived, however; and the finalsolution to the crisis was postponed to a later date. Other notable information relayedby the Ancient Greek oral tradition are: The Lydian-Median border was drawn by theKızılırmak River and the alleged existence of a Median Empire east of the river; whichwas sometimes directly mentioned, while others only hinted.Following Sancisi-Weerdenburg’s famous article, the term “Median Empire” becamea subject of debate. Sancisi-Weerdenburg, who investigated the problem from anarchaeological point of view, points out that there are no signs proving the existence of aMedian ideology and a Median tax collecting system. When the excavations undertakenboth in Northwest Iran and Central Anatolia in the last thirty years are taken into account,we don’t see any archaeological data that would change the aforementioned fundamentalapproach regarding the problem. It’s highly probable that the Median politico-culturalunion was destroyed by the Persians before it could reach to imperial level.The changes to pottery tradition that began at the end of the Middle Iron Age createdat least three cultural region in the Kızılırmak Bend at the beginning of the Late IronAge. While the group that could be said to be the successor to Alişar IV type potterywas prevalent throughout the Kızılırmak Bend, its range shrank considerably during theLate Iron Age and it lost its dominant position. There are mixed pottery groups whereAlişar IV and Ancient Greek ceramics are seen together without a clear distinction inthe Mountainous Black Sea belt that forms the northern section of the Bend. It seemsAlişar IV type pottery was replaced in the south and southwest of Delice River withpottery groups produced with the firing technique known from west of Kızılırmak. Thesechanges, especially those in the south of the Bend, should be direct evidences of Kingdomof Lydia’s attempts of expansion into Central Anatolia, mentioned in the Ancient Greekoral tradition. When these archaeological data is considered, the last stage of the sequenceof political and military events that said to brought Croesus and Cyrus the Great faceto face, Croesus’ traversing the river and pillaging Pteria, land of Leucosyrians, it seemsto took place north of Delice River, a tributary of Kızılırmak River. Regions south andsouthwest of Delice River must have come under the control of the Kingdom of Lydiaright before or the first years of the reign of Croesus. The pillaging is evidence of why thelocal people supported Persians in the Lydian-Persian conflict; the strong AchaemenidPersian culture tradition dating to the 5th-4th Centuries BC in Oluz Höyük located north ofDelice River is another evidence for the necessity that the region known as Pteria shouldbe search in Northern-Central Anatolia.The Achaemenid Persian Empire whose dominance expanded with the Battles of Pteriaand Thymbra must have started to apply new cultural and administrative practices inAnatolia in mid-6th Century BC. From the Central Anatolian point of view, archaeologicaldata do not confirm disputed historical records, which means that the Satrapy ofCappadocia was institutionalized at the end of the 6th Century BC. Architectural remainsand findings representing local beliefs discovered in settlements in the Kızılırmak Bendcontinue without interruption until the end of the 6th Century BC