The period from the XII th to the XIV th centuries is generally accepted to the period of the Turkish settlement in Anatolia. In which ever field they appear, the artistic products of this era should be evaluated in the light of various factors such as the social necessities, the diverse religious and cultural influences, the existing artistic traditions and the artists responsible for the works themselves.

It is known that, as a result of Anatolia's entrance to the written period, with the documents belonging to the Assyrians, new inforrnation about the eras political history has been obtained. The Assyrian merchants, who only deals with commerce, never mentioned about Anatolias political, historical and diplomatic events in their documents which doesn't interest and effect them. The correspandence between the Kanis and Mama kings, which have taken their historical place in the 2 nd Level, shows us Anatolia's Colony Period in a most clearly form. Only this document can also give us an idea about the agreements and the disputes between Anatolia's native kings from time to time.

Türk basını içinde özellikle Anadolu basını Güney'deki işgaller karşısında açık bir tavır takınmış ve yayınlarıyla kamuoyu oluşturmaya çalışmıştır. Bu yayınlar mitinglerde alman kararları ve yayınlanan bildirileri ihtiva ettiği kadar Özellikle işgali, Mondros Mütarekesi, Wilson Prensipleri ve milletlerarası hukuk açısından değerlendiren ve doğurduğu sonuçlan dile getiren başyazılar olarak karşımıza çıkmaktadır.

The first fragment (g/t 42) of the tablet (Kt. g/t 42+z/t 11), which is to be the subject of study here was found in the palace of Warsama during the excavations of 1955 at Kültepe. This fragment together with the other two tablets (g/t 36, h/t 330), found also at the same place, was published by E. Bilgiç in the Anatolia VIII (1965) under the title "Kültepe Hüyüğünde Çıkan Üç Tablet".

In recent years the Trojan War has continued to figure in the forefront of debate. One of the crucial questions still at issue is whether there was indeed a War at all. For the 'believers', the results of the American excavations between 1932 and 1938 and the authority of Carl Blegen did much to bolster their position. On one question, however, the Cincinnati Expedition did not seem to shed decisive light -the motivation for the War, although the results of those investigations have been exploited to this end in various ways. It is the object of this brief discussions to examine more closely one such attempt.

1919 yılı sonlarında Sivas'ta kurulan "Anadolu Kadınları Müdafaa-i Vatan Cemiyeti", Millî Mücadele'deki faaliyetleri arasında zaman zaman Padişah'a, Sadrazam'a, Dahiliye Nazırı'na ve bazı kuruluşlara telgraflar çekerek yurdumuza ve milletimize karşı yapılan haksızlıkların düzeltilmesi amacıyla gerekli girişimlerde bulunulmasını istemiş, bu arada yabancı devlet başkanlarına, İstanbul'daki itilâf Devletleri temsilcilerine de protestolar göndermiştir.

Between the years 1968 and 1970 when we were carrying out research toward the degree of Ph. D. at the Institute of Archaeology in the University of London, we were allowed to work at the Anadolu Medeniyetleri Müzesi (that time called Ankara Archaeological Museum), Afyon, Manisa, Konya, Kayseri Archaeological Museums and Private Koyunoğlu Museum in Konya and Private Collections of Mr. Hüseyin Kocabaş in Istanbul and Mr. Rıza Incel at Banaz near Uşak, where we came across some unstratified anthropomorphic representations. These objects, 14 in number, have features that can bring new suggestions to the Anatolian prehistoric art. Regarding these new observations we have decided without delaying anymore to publish these objects in this paper. We would like to thank to the relevant Museum Directors and staffs of that time and especially to the Director of the Anadolu Medeniyetleri Müzesi, Mr. Raci Temizer, for their kind assistance and to give permission to publish these anthropomorphic figures.