Urartian Kingdom

İskitler, doğuda Çin Seddi’nden başlayarak batıda Tuna nehrine kadar, yaklaşık 7000 kilometreden fazla bir sahaya yayılmışlardır. Bunun sonucunda çeşitli kavimler tarafından tanınmışlar ve bunların yazılı belgelerinde adlarından bahsedilerek haklarında bilgiler verilmiştir1. İskitler (Sakalar), Atlı Kavimler Medeniyetinin önemli bir halkasını oluşturmaktadır. Onlar Bozkır kavimleri arasında gerek siyasi tarihleri, gerekse kültürleri bakımından önemli bir yere sahiptirler. Onlar, bozkırlarda Çin seddinden Tuna nehrine kadar çok geniş sahaya yayılmış olup bırakmış oldukları kültürel miras bakımından “Kurgan Kültürleri”nin temsilcileri arasında mühim bir yer tutmaktadırlar2. Urartu yerleşim bölgesinin sınırlarını, batıda Karasu-Fırat nehirleri, kuzeyde Kuzey Ermenistan Dağları, doğuda İran Azerbaycan’ındaki Savalan Dağları, güneyde ise Zağros Dağları ile birleşen Doğu Toroslar çevrelemekteydi3. VII-VI. yüzyıllara ait Asur-Babil kaynakları ve Yunan kaynakları İskitlerin Kafkas ötesi seferleriyle ilgili bilgileri ihtiva etmektedir. Bu kaynaklar, tarihi gerçeklik açısından önemli bir yer işgal etmektedir. İskitler, bir yüzyıldan daha fazla bir süre düzenledikleri akınlarla Asur, Urartu ve Medya sınırlarından içeri dalmak suretiyle bu yöne doğru atılmışlardır. İskitlerin bu akınlarını arkeolojik kalıntılardan da öğrenmekteyiz. Urartu coğrafyasında yürütülen kazı çalışmalarından anladığımız kadarıyla, başlıca Urartu kalelerinin (Ek 1: Harita) yıkılması, ayrıntılar belirgin olmamakla birlikte, İskitlerin işi olmalıdır. Belirli türde meteryal kanıtlarının bu atlı savaşçılarla sık sık eşitlenmesi kolay bir şekilde yapılmaktadır. Örneğin, M.Ö. VIII. Yüzyıl sonlarında tunçtan kovanlı yeni bir ok ucu ortaya çıkmıştır. Standart Urartu tipi demir ok uçlarından daha küçük ve daha hafif olan4İskit tipi ok uçları, kovanlı, genellikle tek nadiren çift mahmuzlu, bazen iki bazen de üç kanatlıdır5. Bu oklarda bir tane kanca bulunur. Bu tip ok uçlarının yüzlercesi Asya ve Avrupa’da antik İskitya’da bulunmuştur. Bu tarz ok uçları ayrıca Akdeniz Grek dünyasında da bulunmuştur. İskit tipi ok ucu, çoğunlukla tunçtan bazen de demirden yapılmış olan ve Demir Çağı’nda Anadolu ile Ön Asya’nın diğer bölgelerinde Avrasyalı atlı savaşçıların varlıklarına işaret eden ok uçlarını tanımlayan bir terimdir.

The following Presentation Article titled “Lake Sevan Underwater City – Pre-Neolithic (Telosolithic) Mystery or Missing Link of Historical Past” is based on materials presented at 10-th international Symposium on Underwater Research “Black Sea Archaeology” held at Ondokuz Mayis University, Samsun, Turkey on December 16, 2016. It is dedicated to sensational underwater finding deep beneath the water surface of lake Sevan, one of the largest lakes of Asia Minor (Anatolia) and the biggest lake in the Republic of Armenia. The team of underwater archaeologists of “Ayas” maritime club led by Rafayel Mkrtchyan accidentally found an underwater city at the bottom of lake Sevan, the clear indication that the mysterious Proto-historic settlement existed long time ago, i.e. before the time of origination of lake Sevan due to cataclysmic flooding, as a result of “Eternal Ice” melting that covered the earthly surface during the Ice Age period. The article itself consists from three parts – 1. Part I (Pre-Article), 2. Part II (Core Article), and, Part III (Post-Article – Conclusion and Hypothesis). In Part I (Pre-Article) – Systematical Review of Various Historical-Archaeological, Ethnographical and Linguistical Data Sources for Making the Comprehensive Overview on the Subject of Research of Lake Sevan’s Historical Past, the basic introduction to lake Sevan area and general information about lake Sevan is given – the location of the lake, its overall altitude, size, surface area, length, widths and depth. The description of nearby tributary rivers and adjacent water basins is provided, along with the description of main mountain ranges surrounding the lake. The big importance of lake Sevan as precious sources of drinking water is emphasized, according to data of UNESCO organization. Then the essential information about fishes, flora and fauna of Sevan basin is furnished, along with important data about Sevan as one of the best touristic destinations for rest, recreational and cultural activities. Next segment of Pre-Article is elucidating the details about the beginning of lake Sevan origination, its formation in the Late Quaternary period, some 20,000 to 15,000 years ago, active stage of its forming at the time when the Pleistocene or Last Glacial Period ended around 11,700 years ago and final period of lake Sevan’s creation in the Holocene Period that happened around 9,700 BC. Then the lake Sevan area is reviewed in historical-archaeological context, and the survey of ancient archaeological sites and monuments is provided, along with historical-linguistical analyses of their names’ origination in distant historical past. The major significance of ancient Lchashen city as the ancient center of mysterious ZU/ZULUM/ZULAL mythological bird that created Mankind, World and Universe is described. The translation of various ancient written sources is cited, including Urartian cuneiform inscriptions about lake Sevan conquest and its kingdoms and cities. Then the history of lake Sevan is investigated in historical-etymological context of various historical periods, words, expressions and etymologies of Sumerian, Hittite, Hurrian, Urartian, Assyrian, Latin, Armenian and other linguistic origin are carefully examined. Then, based on an historical-linguistical analyses of settlements, sites, villages and cities around lake Sevan, studied one after another in counter-clockwise direction the intriguing and breathtaking mythological story of lake Sevan birth is restored and revealed. After that the folklore stories and fairy tales of Sevan are put in review, including the remarkable Tsamakaberd village folk story about Good and Evil forces that dwell since prehistoric times in waters of lake Sevan. The given research continues with mythological analyses of deities related to folk stories, as well as various ancient accounts and literary sources about Deluge are brought to light. The historical facts of lake Sevan’s origination as the Real Deluge Event is given, based on eyewitnesses of the past, various archeological, historical, linguistic, mythological data, actual facts and factual parallels. Various historical written sources since the beginning of civilization till our modernity are provided, testifying the Realness of Flood or Great Deluge and its direct connection with lake Sevan Origination and ZUL Pre-Neolithic or Telosolithic city’s drowning and destruction by tidal waves of flooding catastrophe. In Part II (Core Article) – The Discovery of underwater ZUL city of lake Sevan – circumstances, activities, analyses, methodologies, observations, photo materials and objects of research,  the general information about “Ayas” maritime club is told, along with introduction to my close friend and colleague, captain of various ships, excellently skilled diver and experienced underwater archaeologist Rafayel Mkrtchyan. The remarkable story of finding of prehistoric Caucasian Bison’s remains, and the sensational and historically important discovery of Pre-Neolithic city that existed in Proto-Historical Times, before lake Sevan origination due to Deluge or Cataclysmic Flooding, i.e. before 12,000 year ago or 10,000 BC. The phenomenal proof of the existence of Proto-Historical societies with the evidence of extensive human activities in building very First Civilized forms of Existence is brought to light. Various stunning parallels of worshipped animals and creatures, artistic styles and mythological meanings with artifacts and architectural and artistic fragments of another Anatolian Proto-Historic settlement of Göbekli Tepe settlement are shown. The archeological-historical and religious-mythological affinities between Sevan underwater city and Göbekli Tepe civilizational traits, despite the significant distance of more than 1000 km, are serving as a scientific platform on newer approaches to the overall research of Earliest Civilizations’ Origin research. The detailed description of outstanding discovery of underwater city is revealed along with methodical explaining of the photographic material about the archaeological-historical ruins, erections, monuments, sculptural fragments, carvings, frescoes and pictures and their religious, worshipping, ritual, sacral and mythological context. Finally, in Part III (Post-Article – Conclusion and Hypothesis) – Great Flood or Deluge as the End of Proto-Civilization (Original Genesis of Civilization) and Beginning of Civilization, the fact that the very existence of territorially vast and culturally rich Anatolian Proto-Civilization is put at the center of research theme, with the major emphasis on the urgent need to focus archeological, historical, linguistical and mythological data research on thoughtful and meticulous elucidation of very interesting historical timeframe – the period between end of Last Stone Age or Telosolith (happened from 18,000 to 12,000 years ago or from 16,000 BC to 12,000 BC) and the beginning of Neolith – the first appropriation of civilized attributes, including the very beginning of metal usage by humans, beginning of wheel transportation, architecture and urban development, writing, art, mythology and religion. The definition of LIC (Land Isolate Communities) during Ice Age or Cold Age Periods as Sanctuary Places of Telosolithic Communities is given. The social, cultural and religious significance of Telosolithic Intellectual Revolutions is thoroughly explained, along with the various aspects of the life of Telosolithic people. Modernity. The historical components of ICE AGE or COLD AGE, GREAT FLOOD or DELUGE and POST-DELLUVIAL PERIOD are unfolded, with unconditional Timely Division of Mankind’s History on BEFORE and AFTER DELUGE. Mankind’s main four historical Time Span Definitions are given: 1. ICE AGE or COLD AGE Period; 2. PRE-NEOLITHIC or TELOSOLITHIC Period; 3. DELUGE or GREAT FLOOD Period; 4. POST-DELUGE or NEOLITHIC Period. The historical roles and significances of Telosolith versus Neolith is given – while, TELOSOLITH INAUGURATED A REVOLUTION IN HUMAN HISTORY, in its turn, NEOLITH MARKED THE BEGINNING OF EVOLUTION IN HUMAN HISTORY. 
  Appreciating the outstanding manifestations of Telosolithic Culture, Religion and Mythology, as well as the overwhelming significance of Telosolithic Revolutions, marking it as the DAWN OF MANKIND or PRE-ORIGINATION OF HUMAN CIVILIZATION provided. Also, name of PROTO-CIVILIZATION is provided, since Telosolithic Period provided all necessary Pre-Conditions before Conditions for certain Human Innovations, according to innovative principles of Revolutionary Innovativeness, as its preceded main law-governing principles of Evolutionary Development. Telosolith is the Measuring Time Span for Timescale of Evolutionary Development of Ingenious Human Inventions and Innovations, for each and every Human Invention and Innovation following to four Core Principles: 1. Discovery; 2. Initial Utilization; 3. Limited Use; 4. Widespread or Worldwide Usage. Telosolithic Civilization also can be remembered as CIVILIZATION OF PERMANENCE and PERMANENT SOCIAL-CULTURAL VALUES, NEVER CEASING TO EXIST FROM ITS VERY BEGINNING TO VERY END. Broad perspectives of further scientific investigation of lake Sevan’s ZUL underwater city are outlined, along with possibilities of exploring the Historical Period of Telosolith in Armenia, Asia Minor (Anatolia), Near East and Caucasus. The article is very illustrative with color photos of various relevant historical artifacts and wonderful findings of Sevan underwater city, something that will not only visually contribute to the unfolding of the story this most interesting and intriguing discovery, but also will spark the passionate scientific interest to the overall research of the most mysterious and unexplored period in the history of Mankind – the Dawn of Mankind, Appearance of Proto-Civilization and Birth of Global Civilization.

Due to its climatic and geological structure, Uratian, which has a very difficult geographical grandeur and institutional identity, has made important contributions to the Anatolian civilizations and has been in history. In this study, the development of the technical features used in the direction of static concerns with the main lines in Urartian architecture and the technical and static characteristics of the Ayanis tower architecture have been tried to be determined.
Ayanis Castle has an important place for the world of archeology. This significance attributed to Ayanis is due to the fact that the architectural and aesthetic understanding that has grown with the Rusa II, as well as the largely preserved architecture, has been presented with all its glory. The techniques used in Ayanis Castle architecture provide us with very important data about Urartian architecture in terms of land use and also in terms of static. In our work, we tried to present the techniques applied with statical anxiety in the architecture of the fortress of Ayanis, the architecture of the temple and the architecture of the east-facing hall.

In the Middle Iron Age, two kingdoms came into prominence in Eastern Anatolia and Mesopotamia respectively. The Urartian Kingdom had militaristic characteristics and performed advanced economic activities, including mining. The Assyrian Kingdom on the other hand had developed a statecraft tradition and capacities in mobilization and campaigning. The boundaries between the domination areas of the two kingdoms were set by the chain of mountains formed the boundaries between the areas under the domination of these two kingdoms. The kingdoms overcame these boundaries when they established direct contact. Furthermore, the two kingdoms managed their political relations through buffer states and nomadic tribes. The records as to these relations are partially inferred from texts on the tablets and annals that give information about the campaigns carried out by Urartian and Assyrian kings. However, the records are mostly propaganda. It is difficult to carry out an evaluation exclusively based on written documents. Consequently, the current study evaluates the political relations by taking into consideration the reliefs and stelae erected by the kingdoms during campaigns, archaeological finds and topography in addition to the written documents.
Orta Demir çağında, Doğu Anadolu ve Mezopotamya'da iki krallık ön plana çıkmaktadır. Bunlar savaşçı ve madenci karakterlere sahip Urartu Krallığı ile devlet geleneği, seferberlik ve fetih kapasitesine sahip Assur Krallığı'dır. İki krallığın hâkimiyet alanlarını yüksek dağ sıralarından oluşan doğal sınırlar ayırmaktadır. Krallıklar güçlü oldukları dönemlerde bu sınırları aşarak birbirleriyle direk temas kurmuşlardır. Ayrıca tampon devletler ve göçebe aşiretler üzerinden dolaylı siyasi ilişkiler gerçekleştirilmiştir. Bu ilişkilere dair kayıtlar kralların başarılı geçen seferlerinin sonuçlarından bahsettiği annallarda ve kısmen tabletlerde görülmektedir. Fakat kayıtlar daha çok propaganda amacı taşımaktır. Dolayısıyla siyasi ilişkiler hakkında sadece yazılı belgeler üzerinden değerlendirme yapmak zordur. Bu nedenle bu çalışmada siyasi ilişkiler yazılı kayıtların yanında kralların sefer sırasında diktirdikleri stel ve rölyeflerin dağılımı, arkeolojik maddi buluntular, topografya göz önüne alınarak değerlendirilmiştir.

In this study, the socioeconomic structure of the Urartian kingdom is examined by considering the archaeological and written evidence of the state's activities related to agriculture and animal husbandry. The state economy is based on agriculture and animal husbandry. Military campaign of Urartian kings also generated revenues in terms of booty and tribute for the state economy. Metallurgical and trade activities also made substantial contribution to the state economy. This study also proposed three different developmental stages for the socioeconomic and political development of the Urartian kingdom: an 'early expansionist', a 'crisis period' and a 'restructuring and reform' period.

MÖ 9 - 6. yüzyıllar arasında çekirdeğini Van Gölü ve çevresinin oluşturduğu Urartu Krallığı, batıda Fırat Nehri’nden doğuda İran Azerbaycan’ına, kuzeyde Gökçe Göl ile Aras vadisinden güneyde Toroslar ve Urmiye Gölü’nün güneyine kadar uzanan geniş bir coğrafyaya egemen olmuştur. İlk kez Assur yazılı kaynaklarında karşımıza çıkan, doğuya doğru gidildikçe yükseltilerin arttığı oldukça engebeli bir bölgede kurulan Urartu Krallığı MÖ I. binde Ön Asya’da kurulmuş en güçlü devletlerden birisidir. Sahip olduğu bu coğrafi yapı uzun süre varlığını sürdürmesini sağlamıştır ve yine çağdaşı olduğu diğer devletlere karşı kimi zaman
güçlü bir savunma ve kimi zaman da üstünlük kurmasına imkân sağlamıştır. Çalışmamız sırasında Urartu’nun güney ve doğuya yayılımı sırasında inşa ettiği yol güzergâhlarını inceledik. Çalışmamızda coğrafi şartların yol güzergâhlarının oluşumuna nasıl etki ettiğini, arkeolojik kanıtlar ve yazılı kaynaklara göre bunların tespitini ve önerilen güzergâhların harita üzerinde gösterilerek bu alanda var olan eksikliği gidermek amacı hedeflenmiştir.
Urartu Krallığı MÖ 9. yüzyılın ortalarında doğu ve güney bölgelerine yayılım göstererek, kuzeybatı İran’a komşu olmuştur. Bölgenin tarihi coğrafyası, yolları, geçitleri, dağları, nehirleri, kentleri, hakkındaki temel bilgileri Batı İran civarında ele geçen yazıtlar, steller ve krallara ait yıllıklarından öğrenmekteyiz. Urartu ordularının doğu’da Tebriz
üzerinden Hazar Denizi’ne yakın olan, Razlık ve Naşteban yazıtlarıyla işaretlenen alana kadar gittiği görülür. Ancak yazıtların dışında bölgede herhangi bir bulguya rastlamak mümkün olmamıştır1. Taştepe, Kelişin ve Kalatgah ve Topzava yazıtları ise güneye yapılan seferler sonucunda bölgede bırakılmış ve Urartu ordularının güneyde ulaştığı noktaları
gösteren yazıtlardır2. Urartu krallarından İşpuini, Menua, I. Argişti, II. Sarduri’nin yazıtları ve Assur kralı II. Sargon’un sekizinci seferini anlatan yıllıklarından ele geçen bilgiler bölge ve yol güzergâhları hakkında detaylı bilgi vermektedir.

The Urartians established the first central state structure in the most difficult highlands of the Eastern Anatolia Region. They ruled over nearly all of the region between 858/844-590 BC, and the region experienced a golden age during this period. We understand from the Palu inscription that the Urartian Kingdom had been trying to establish authority over Tunceli and its surroundings since the reign of Minua. This information is evident from the narration of the conquest of the Huzuna identified as Hozat and the conquest of the Şupa state identified as Tunceli. Mazgirt Kaleköy Rock Tomb with its inscription, which is a sophisticated art piece, confirms that Tunceli maintained its prominence until the time of Rusa II, the last great king of the Urartians.
The Urartians were able to reach the Elazig-Tunceli area through the high and rugged Bingol Mountains. For the Urartians, the Tunceli region must have been an appealing place especially in terms of mineral resources. The exploitation of animals and animal products other than mining may have also pushed them to go through this challenging route. It is understood that Kurmizak Fortress was an important base for safely transferring the taxes and resources obtained from Tunceli to other provincial centers in the east. When the splendor and distribution of the Urartian city walls are analyzed which have survived partially until today, it is assumed that the castle was a key stronghold. Wall foundation beds displaying Urartian cultural artifacts, open-air worship areas, monumental signs carved into the rocks, cascaded and round-mouthed cisterns, bright red slipped and fluted ceramics, Biainili pottery, embossed stone fragments and arrowheads indicate that it was a strategic fortress in its time.

In this article the fundamental aspects of the Urartian belt’s mythological iconography are discussed. The main purpose of the article is the detailed investigation of key figures, spiritual personages, sacred animals, fantastic creatures, as well as connected with them scenes, motives and decorations of Urartian belts. Those objects depicted many sacred symbols and images that were parts of religious beliefs and sacral values of ancient Urartians. Among excellently ornamented images of Sacred Tree, Winged Sun, holy plants, stars, planets, sacral signs, scenes of hunt, figures of horse riders, soldiers and priests, the most significant parts of presented iconography comprised the principally important key pictures of Sacred Animals and Fantastic Creatures. Their outlines and compositions with other main iconographic elements created the mythological content of Urartian belts, thus, making those objects sacred and having a special meaning and significance. As our investigation suggests, bronze belts were considered as sacred talismans or “mini-temples” serving the purpose of carrying Divine Forces and the images of Gods, Genies, Sacred Animals and Fantastic Creatures in one given amulet-object, that inspired Urartians in their war or piece activities, and, according to their beliefs, helped them to achieve the victory and success in all undertakings.

E.ə. IX əsr başlanğıcdan sonadək Yaxın Şərq regionun keçmişində hərbi-siyasi baxımdan ən gərgin yüzilliklərdən biri kimi tarixə düşmüşdür. Məhz bu dövrdə Yaxın Şərqi şimal və şərq istiqamətlərində yerləşən ölkələrlə, daha dəqiq desək Azərbaycan ərazisindəki qədim dövlətlərlə əlaqələndirən yeni bir dövlət tarix səhnəsinə çıxmışdır. Bu dövlət Şərqi Anadolunun ilk quldar və mərkəzləşdirilmiş dövləti olan Urartu çarlığı idi. Urartu çarlığı e.ə. IX əsrin ortalarında yaransa da, qısa müddət ərzində, yəni həmin əsrin sonlarından etibarən Yaxın Şərqin güclü dövlətlərindən birinə çevrilmişdir.

The Van Lake Basin has been inhabited throughout the history of humanity and has been
continuously settled as in other parts of Anatolia. However, the most intensive use of this process was
undoubtedly in the Iron Age. The beginning of the Iron Age in Eastern Anatolia, which is generally accepted
to start 1200 B.C.E in Anatolia, is being drawn slightly earlier. The beginning of the Iron Age of Van Lake
Basin, where we have obtained information from Assyrian inscriptions, goes back to the beginning of the
13th century. This situation is proved in terms of architecture and other art products of a culture that can be
considered homogeneous in the basin during this period. According to the information obtained from the
Assyrian inscriptions, the region societies were independent tribes, who that occupied the eastern Anatolian
plateau, in this period. In the Assyrian inscriptions, the rulers of these tribes were referred as the King. This
period which is generally called the Early Iron Age, is accepted by some researchers as Urartian Principalities
Period and defined by this name. The archaeological research and excavations conducted in the region
document the existence of a number of similarities between the early Iron Age culture and the culture of
the Urartian Kingdom in term of both architectural and material culture. It is possible to speak of a
continuous between the culture of period Principalities and Urartian culture. One of these areas where this
permanence can be seen most clearly is the underground stone-built tombs tradition. Muş and its
surroundings have been one of the most important centers of Eastern Anatolia during the Iron Ages.
Archaeological surveys carried out by us in the province of Muş showed important results in terms of the
detection of new chamber tombs built with underground stones as in many other respects. The fact that
these tombs have some differences in details but that they repeat the same plan as the master plan
documents that they are the products of the same culture. Excavations in some graves of these periods are
similar not only in terms of architecture but also in terms of burial forms and grave gifts. The tombs dated
to the Principalities Period and the Urartian Period indicates continuity between the tombs dated to the
period. In this article, this continuity has been tried to be evaluated in the light of Aşağı Marnuk, Belliahır
Mevkii, Civikan tombs, and Alyar, Adaksu, Sarıpınar, Göztepe ve Abo Höyük Tombs dating to the Urartian
Kingdom Period.

This particular article titled “The portrayals of horses, horse-related scenes and mythological creatures with elements of horse’s appearance in the artistic iconography of Urartian belts” is next one in series of monographic writings wholesomely devoted to animal personages appearing in the iconography of Urartian belts. Being entirely dedicated to horse as to the third most important animal in urartian society, the article continues series of studies aimed to uncover the roots behind the traditional, cultural and worshipping bonds of ancient urartians to their Sacred Animals, somewhat similar to what we recently went through on the most comprehensive investigation of iconographical images of lions and bulls in Urartian belts. Although this article dedicated to horse’s appearances in Urartian belts shares a lot in principle with previous ones, nevertheless, there are some principal and profound differences. From the archaeological point of view, we are entirely missing any evidence of material culture connected to lions and bulls, but, on the contrary, as it goes to the subject of horses, we have huge archeological material heritage from urartian past that makes the entire process of this investigative analyses peculiarly distinctive. That is a reason why we decided to deviate from traditional format of two previous animal personages’ study and included in the whole article the introductory mini-article part, wholly covering the archaeo-material implications of horse culture in Urartu. We called it – Part I – Archaeological material evidence of horse culture in Urartu (Pre-Article) and included in Part I the extraordinary and tangible evidence cases of horse’s utilization in urartian society during peaceful construction activities, throughout many wars and numerous military campaigns, providing some unique and most interesting samples of urartians’ distinctive horse culture. Urartian sources about horses other than Urartian belts include many factors: actual horse’s remains, writing sources about the role of horses, cavalry and war chariots in urartian wars and politics, archaeo-material and artifacts’ classification by material type and performing functions, list of horse-handling gear types, iconographical varieties of horse’s depiction in urartian artistic representations according to types of artifacts, weaponry types used from horses and chariots, typological implications of war chariots from engineering prospective, and, finally, included some brief summary of functional particularities of horses in ancient Urartian state. Part II – The Portrayals of horses, horse-related scenes and motives with mythological creatures with elements of horse’s appearance in the iconography of Urartian bronze belts (Core Article) got dedicated to Iconography of Urartian bronze belts -  symbolical implications of horse culture, crafty artistic representations of allegorical topics and emblematic presentations of horses in imagery, motives and scenes in iconography of Urartian bronze belts. Depictions of horse in Urartian belts as a common (non-mythological) animal are shown, including in that horses as common animals portrayed separately, horses as draft animals for horse-riders, horse as draft animals for war chariots, with plentiful varieties of iconographical scenes: Hunt Scenes with horses–including hunt scenes with horses as draft animals and horse-riders, hunt scenes with horses as draft animals for war chariots, as well as mixed hunt scenes with the avail of both horsemen and war chariots shown in mixed panoramic view; Battle Scenes with horses – including battle scenes with horses as draft animals and horse-riders,  battle scenes with horses as draft animals for war chariots, mixed battle scenes with the avail of both horsemen and war chariots. Then the description of horsemen portrayed with special artistic emphasis, out of ordinary standards and common clichés that portrays the horse-riders in parading outfit and festive mood concludes the overview of horse as common (non-mythological) animal in Urartian belts. After that follows the defining characterization of mythological (non-ordinary, composite) horse creatures, comprising from four main types: Winged Horses, Mythological horse creatures with human’s body and the head of the horse, Mythological horse creatures with horse’s body (partially or whole) and the head of the human, and, Horses as standing platforms for urartian gods and deities. The article is concluded with Conclusions part, where those studies are considered to be in continuum, i.e. not overwhelmed with finalization formulations and not finite in derivative conclusion points, yet, the rational core of the studies and analytical covering of above-presented data create some newer types of opportunities to continue those urartological studies with ostensible success and enrich the Urartology with essential elements of more deeper understanding of ancient urartian society’s core values and cherished principles of religious, sacral, mental and ideological nature.

This study aims to evaluate Anbar Fortress and its multi-roomed rock-cut tomb, located in the Tunceli region. It is a place rarely mentioned in archaeological literature. For the first time the plan of the rock-cut tomb of Anbar is presented here and accordingly the fortress' place in the Urartian administration system is evaluated. In addition, material culture residues from the site, such as wall foundations, mortared walls, rock steps, cisterns/storage spaces and a rock chapel were analysed and their connection to the tomb is explained. Traces of two different periods are detected in Anbar Fortress. While the wall foundations, multi-roomed rock-cut tomb, and a part of the rock steps can be associated with the Urartian period, the mortared walls, towers, rock steps, cisterns/storage spaces and rock chapel that is located in the southwest of the fortress is dated to the Medieval period.

Türkçe Özet
Tunceli-Anbar Kalesi ve Urartu Çok Odalı Kaya Mezarı
Bu çalışmadaki amacımız, Tunceli bölgesinde yer alan, kaynaklarda az bahsedilen, Anbar Kalesi’ni ve çok odalı kaya mezarını Urartu eyalet sistemi içinde değerlendirmektir. Çalışmamızda günümüze kadar planı hakkında bilgi olmayan kaya mezarından bahsedilerek, kaya mezarının ilişkili olduğu kale/eyalet merkezi hakkında bilgi verilecektir. Bu amaçla iki odalı olduğu anlaşılan kaya mezarının bir planı hazırlandı. Ayrıca kalede gördüğümüz sur temel yatakları, harçlı sur duvarları, kaya basamakları, sarnıç/depolama alanı ve kaya şapeli gibi maddi kültür kalıntıları ele alındı. Bu kalıntıların kaya mezarıyla ilişkisi açıklandı. Anbar Kalesi’nde en az iki döneme ait izler olduğu saptandı. Yapılan gözlemlerde sur temel yatakları, çok odalı kaya mezarı ve kaya basamaklarının bir bölümünün Urartu dönemine ait olduğu tespit edildi. Harçlı sur duvarları, kaya basamakları, sarnıç/depolama alanları ve kalenin güneybatısında bulunan kaya şapelinin Ortaçağ’a ait olduğu anlaşılır.

The following article titled “Ritual-Worshipping Scenes and Architectural Images in the Iconography of Urartian Belts” is a continuation of articles in series of monographic writings wholesomely devoted to detailed research of iconographical content of Urartian bronze belts, including the fundamental creative-constructive components and indispensable composite parts, thematical content, narrative scenes, realistic traditional reflections and mythological symbolism of iconographical images. The main thematic focus of this article is the detailed research of Urartian Ritual-Worshipping Belts, especially in the context of determining their content according to the imagery of ritual-worshipping and ceremonial-religious scenes, and architectural landscapes. The task of research included the finding of main bibliographical sources containing relevant images, data and explanatory statements about Urartian ritual-worshipping belts; creating a database of this particular belt types according to sources of publications and places of safekeeping, whether big or small museums or private collections; identification of main themes, narratives and scenery contents; assessment of the overall design and ways of fastening of those belt types; assessing the overall geometrical proportions of those belt types and the implications of the “narrowness” that resulted in their conditional definition as of Narrow Belts; classification and typological assessment of their main and secondary iconographic elements, including various human characters, different sacral objects of individual or collective use; special sacral objects of worship such as single or multiple layered Moon-Crescents and Sun-Disks; diverse human activities and occupations; various scenes of architectural landscapes, castles, fortifications and their details; images of common animals found only in this belt type; images of only imaginary animal type (fish) of Urartian belts; images of mythological (composite) winged beasts made of animal and abstract parts;  images of mythological (composite) creatures made of animal, abstract and human parts, as well as attributes of religious-mythological fashion; images of some other elements, not typical, but sometimes found in the iconography of ritual-worshipping belts, such as symbols of Sacred Tree and Winged Sun-Disk; images of musicians and dancers; images of various musical instruments; images of religious acts such as performing rituals ceremonies, libation, praying, worshipping and making wishes to souls of the deceased, spirits of real animal, mythological beasts and creatures, souls of divinities and gods. The key formula of the transfer of the urartian material culture into urartian spiritual culture is contended, affirmed on a base of the iconographical contexts and thematic narrative contents of the ritual-worshipped belts; as well as validated through law-governed principles of urartian traditional-religious approaches and major mythological-philosophical concepts that was a base of urartian mindset of symbolical meaningfulness. At the end of the article some hints about the possible nature of urartian artistic conceptuality is given in the context of the crucial role that the urartian culture played in the overall process of urartian nation’s formation. Finally, the overall significance of ritual-worshipping belts is assessed in the fundamental framework of Urartian bronze belts studies, and also the possible effects are predicted on how these newer, informatively significant implications of those scientific archeologic-historic inquiries could progressively and positively contribute to Urartological Studies or Urartology.