Türkiye Jeoloji Bülteni
Türkiye Jeoloji Bülteni

Türkiye Jeoloji Bülteni

2017 OCAK ISSN Cilt 60 Sayı 1
View as PDF
View as PDF
View as PDF
View as PDF
Cultural Geology and Geological Heritage; new initiatives for earthsciences
Nizamettin Kazanci Nazire Özgen Erdem Mehmet Korhan Erturaç
View as PDF

Abstract: Rapid urbanization, increase in population and unemployment has a great effect on society and as aconsequence seems to have caused unawareness to earth sciences. However, increasing demand on waterand energy, natural disasters, climate changes and sustainable development still keeps humankind dependon nature. This discrepancy can be avoided by utilizing new initiatives in both education and applications  to increase public attention to earth sciences. We hereby present Cultural Geology and Geological Heritageas new initiatives of earth sciences. Cultural Geology, aim to explain all natural phenomenon (such asclimate, geography, environment, landform, water and sea level changes and raw material sources) whichhave had effected human activity from the dawn of the species until recent. Briefly study the geologicalprocesses that drive the cultural development. It is proposed by Turkish Scientists, for the first time, as anew education and research topic. Geological Heritage, can be defined as artefacts of the evolution of theearth and a perfect example of geopark and geotourism applications, also can be regarded as valuableassets for nature protection and sustainable development. Turkey has a significant potential for bothCultural Geology and Geological Heritage.

  • Cultural geology

  • new initiatives for earth sciences

  • geological heritage

  • geosite

  • geoconservation


  • Altunel, E., 2012. Kültürel Jeoloji; jeolojinin insanoğlunun yaşamı üzerindeki etkileri. İç; N. Kazancı ve A. Gürbüz (Ed), Kuvaterner Bilimi, Ankara Üniversitesi Yayını, 350, 195-2014.

  • Arpat, E., 1976. İnsan ayağı iz fosilleri; yitirilen bir doğal anıt. Yeryuvarı ve İnsan, 1/4, 65-66.

  • Arpat, E. ve Güner, Y., 1976. Ağrı buz mağarası; ender bir doğal anıt. Yeryuvarı ve İnsan, 1/1, 95-96.

  • Burek, C.V. ve Prosser, C.D., 2008. The History of Geoconservation. Geological Society, Spec. Pub., London, 300, 312.

  • Callaway, E., 2016. Ancient genome delivers ‘Spirit Cave Mummy’ to US tribe; Sequencing proves Native American roots of 10,600-year-old skeleton. Nature, 540 (8 December 2016), 178- 179.

  • Doughty, P., 2008. How things began: the origin of geological conservation. In: The History of Geoconservation (Ed. Burek ve Prosser), Geol. Soc. Spec. Pub., London, 300, 7-16.

  • Dowling, R. ve Newsome, D., 2005. Geotourism. Elsevier Pub., Amsterdam. 205.

  • Erikstad, L. 2008. History of geoconservation in Europe. In: The History of Geoconservation (Ed. C.V. Burek ve C.D. Prosser), Geol. Soc. Spec. Pub., London, 300, 249-256.

  • Ergin, M., 2003. Orhun Abideleri. Hisar yayınları, İstanbul, 27, 192 s.

  • Garcia, T., Féraud, G., Falguères, C., de Lumley, H., Perrenoud, C., Lordkipanidze, D. (2010). Earliest human remains in Eurasia: New 40Ar/39Ar dating of the Dmanisi hominid-bearing levels, Georgia. Quaternary Geochronology, 5 (4), 443– 451.

  • Güleç, E., Howell, F.C. and White, T., (1999). Dursunlu – A New Lower Pleistocene Faunal and Artifact Bearing Locality in Southern Anatolia. Ulrich, H. (ed.), Hominid Evolution: Lifestyles and Survival Strategies, Archaea, 349-364.

  • ICOMOS (International Council on Monument and Cities), 2015. Cultural heritage of water in the Middle East and Maghrep. 1st edition. UNESCO World Heritage Convention, Charanton, France, 301.

  • Kappelmann, J., Alçiçek, M.C., Kazancı, N., Schultz, M., Özkul, M, Şen, Ş., 2008. Brief Communication: First Homo Erectus from Turkey and Implications for Migrations into Temperate Eurasia. American Journal of Physcial Anthropology, 135, 110-116.

  • Kazancı, N., 2005. Kültürel Jeoloji. Mavi Gezegen, 12, 4-5.

  • Kazancı, N. 2010. Jeolojik Koruma; Kavram ve Terimler. Jeolojik Mirası Koruma Derneği yayını, Ankara, 60.

  • Kazancı, N. ve Gürbüz, A., 2014. Jeolojik miras nitelikli Türkiye doğal taşları. Türkiye Jeoloji Bülteni 57, 19-44.

  • Kazancı, N., Şaroglu, F., Kırman, E., Uysal, F., 2005. Basic threats on geosites and geoheritages in Turkey. Proceedings of Second Conference on Geoheritage of Serbia, June 2004 Belgrade, Sebia-Montenegro,149-153.

  • Kazancı, N., Şaroğlu, F., Doğan, A., Mülazımoğlu, N., 2012. Geoconservation and geoheritage in Turkey. In: Geoheritage in Europe and its Conservation (Eds W.A.P. Wimbledon & S. Smith-Meyer), ProGeo Spec.Pub, Oslo, Norway, 366-377.

  • Kazancı, N., Şaroğlu, F., Suludere, Y., 2015. Türkiye Jeositleri Çatı Listesi. MTA Dergisi, 151, 261-270.

  • Ketin, İ., 1970. Türkiye’de önemli jeolojik aflormanların korunması. Türkiye Jeoloji Kurumu Bülteni, XI/2, 90-93.

  • Küçük, M. ve Ertürk, E., 2013. Biodiversity and protected areas in Turkey. Sains Malaysiana 42, 1455–1460.

  • Öngür, T., 1976. Doğal anıtların korunmasında yasal dayanaklar. Yeryuvarı ve İnsan, 1/4, 17-23.

  • Özdemir, U., Göncüoğlu, M.C., Tütüncü, G., Tanca, N., Tümer, A., 1986. Doğal Anıtlar. Ege Univ. Fen Fakültesi Dergisi, Ser. B, 8, 221-230.

  • Pederson, N., Hessl, A.E., Baatarbileg, N. , Anchukaitis, K.J. , Di Cosmo, N., 2014. Pluvials, droughts, the Mongol Empire, and modern Mongolia. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences - PNAS 111, 4375–4379.

  • ProGeo Group, 1998. A first attemt at a geosites framework for Europe -an lUGS initiative to support recognition of World heritage and European geodiversity. Geologica Balcanica 28, 5-32.

  • TUİK, 2015. Türkiye 2015 İstatistikleri. Türkiye İstatistik Kurumu, Ankara, Türkiye.

  • Wimbledon, W.A.P. 1996. National site election, a stop on the road to a European Geosite List. Geologica Balcanica 26, 15-27.

  • Wimbledon, W.A.P., Benton, M.A., Berins, R.E. 1995. The development of a methodology for the selection of British geological sites for conservation. Part I, ProGEO. Modern geology 20, 59-202.

  • Wimbledon, W.A.P., Smith-Meyers, S (eds). 2012. Geoheritage in Europe and Its Conservation. PeoGEO Spec. Pub., Oslo, Norway, 405.

  • Yasuda Y. (Ed), 2002. The Origins of Pottery and Agriculture. Roli Books, Lustre Press, Kyoto, Japan, 399.

  • Zorich, Z., 2016. New dates for the oldest cave printings. Arcaheology, 221 (Haziran sayısı), 45- 51.

  • Kazancı, N , Özgen Erdem, N , Erturaç, M . (2017). Kültürel Jeoloji ve Jeolojik Miras; Yerbilimlerinin Yeni Açılımları . Türkiye Jeoloji Bülteni , 60 (1) , 1-16 . DOI: 10.25288/tjb.297797

  • The cultural and geological heritage sites within the Göllüdağ Volcanic Complex
    Mehmet Korhan Erturaç Hilal Okur Batuhan Ersoy
    View as PDF

    Abstract: The morphology of Göllüdağ Volcanic Complex (Central Anatolia) and close surroundings has beenshaped with continuous volcanism from Miocene to Latest Pleistocene and following erosional processes.The site comprises numerous geosites formed of morphological elements (asidic domes, obsidian flow/dyke structures, scoria cones and maar) and also differentiated volcanic products (pyroclastites and lavaflows) which can be classified according to the framework list of Turkey. Göllüdağ has been subject todetailed geological investigation focusing on the properties of volcanism and also the chronology.Göllüdağ is also a well-known source of obsidian and was occupied by prehistoric activity.Göllüdağ obsidian had been widely exploited during Paleolithic and Neo-Chalcolithic for producingvarious chipped tools with increasing expertise. These tools were dispersed through the Middle Eastand Levant also even to the Cyprus especially during the Neo-Chalcolithic. Within the study area, a vastnumber of obsidian workshops accompany geological sites. For these reasons, Göllüdağ is protected asan archeological site of 1st and 3rd degrees, on the other hand, destruction related with the fast expansionand infrastructure construction within the recent settlements endanger these sites.In this study, we will focus on the relationships geological sites formed by volcanism and erosionalprocesses to reveal the significance of Göllüdağ as a geological/cultural heritage site and introducegeoroutes for recreational and scientific trips.

  • Georoute

  • Göllüdağ Volcanic Complex

  • Monogenetic Volcanism

  • Obsidian

  • Prehistory


  • Açıkgöz, F., Demir, F., Eryaman, M., Tektaş, M., 2009. Niğde İli Kültür Envanteri, 463 sf, T.C. Niğde İli Valiliği, İl Kültür ve Turizm Müdürlüğü, Niğde Müzesi yayınları.

  • Aydar, E., Gourgaud, A., Deniel, C., Lyberis, N., Gundogdu, N., 1995. Le volcanisme quaternaire d’Anatolie centrale (Turquie): association de magmatisme calco-alcalin et alcalin en domaine de convergence. Canadian Journal of Earth Sciences 32 (7), 1058–1069.

  • Aydar, E., Schmitt A.K., Çubukçu E., Akin L., Ersoy A., Şen E., Duncan, R.A., Atici, G., 2012. Correlation of ignimbrites in the central Anatolian volcanic province using zircon and plagioclase ages and zircon compositions. Journal of Volcanology and Geothermal Research 213-214. 83–97.

  • Balkan-Atlı, N. and Der Aprahamian, G., 1998. Les nucléus de Kaletepe et deux ateliers de taille en Cappadoce, In: Cauvin, M.-C., Gourgaud, A., Gratauze, B., Arnaud, N., Poupeau, G., Poidevin, J.-L., Chataigner, C. (Eds.), L’Obsidienne L’Obsidienne au Proche et Moyen Orient: Du Volcan à l’Outil. Maison de l’Orient Méditerranéen, BAR International Series 738. Archaeopress, Oxford, pp. 241–259.

  • Balkan-Atlı, N., Binder, D., Cauvin, M. -C. 1999. ‘Obsidian Sources, Workshops and Trade in Central Anatolia, in M. Özdoğan, and N. Başgelen eds., Neolithic in Turkey. Istanbul: Arkeoloji ve Sanat Yayınları, 133–145, figs. 104–115.

  • Bigazzi, G., Yeğingil, Z., Ercan,T., Oddone, M. and Özdogan M., 1993. Fission Track Dating Obsidians in Central and Northern Anatolia. Bulletin of Volcanology 55(8):588-595.

  • Binder, D., Gratuze, B., Mouralis, D., Balkan-Atlı, N., 2011. New investigations of the Göllüdağ obsidian lava flows system: a multi-disciplinary approach. Journal of Archaeological Science, 38 (12), pg. 3174-3184.

  • Chataigner, C., Poidevin, J.L., Arnaud, N.O., 1998. Turkish occurrences of obsidian and use by prehistoric peoples in the Near East from 14,000 to 6000 BP. Journal of Volcanology and Geothermal Research, Volume 85, p. 517-537.

  • Ercan, T., 1987. Orta Anadolu’daki Senozoyik Volkanizması. MTA Dergisi, 107, 119-140.

  • Erturaç, M.K., Astruc, L., Balkan-Atlı, N., Gratuze, B., Mouralis, D., Kuzucuoğlu, C., Dinçer, B., Kayacan, N., 2012. Göllüdağ Volkanik Kompleksi İçerisindeki Obsidiyen Kaynaklarının Özellikleri, I. Ulusal Coğrafya Sempozyumu, Bildiriler Kitabı, 28-30 Mayıs 2012 Erzurum.

  • Gevrek, A.İ. and Kazancı, N., 2000. A Pleistocene, pyroclastic-poor maar from central Anatolia, Turkey: influence of a local fault on a phreatomagmatic eruption. Journal of Volcanology and Geothermal Research, 95, 309-317.

  • Gürsoy, H., Piper, J.D.A., Tatar, O. and Mesci, B.L. 1998. Palaeomagnetic study of the Karaman and Karapınar volcanic complexes, central Turkey: neotectonic rotation in the south-central sector of the Anatolian Block. Tectonophysics, 299, p.191- 211.

  • Innocenti, F., Mazzuoli, R., Pasquarè, G., Radicati di Brozolo, F., Villari, L., 1975. The Neogene calc-alcaline volcanism of Central Anatolia: geochronological data on Kayseri– Nigde area. Geological Magazine 112, 349–360.

  • Kazancı, N., Şaroğlu, F., 2003. Annual report on the projection of geological heritage in Turkey. Progeo WG1 Annual Meeting, September 22-28, Bucharest, Romania.

  • Kazancı,N., 2010. Jeolojik Koruma Kavram ve Terimler. Jeolojik Mirası Koruma Derneği (JEMİRKO) yayınları, Ankara

  • Kazancı, N., Şaroğlu, F., Suludere, Y., 2015. Jelojik Miras ve Türkiye Jeositleri Çatı Listesi, MTA Dergisi , 151: 263-272.

  • Kuhn, S.L., Dincer, B., Balkan-Atli, N; Erturac, M. K., 2015. Paleolithic occupations of the Gollu Dag, Central Anatolia, Turkey, Journal of Field Archaeology Vol. 5, pp. 581-602.

  • Kuzucuoglu, C., Pastre, J-F., Black, S., Ercan, T., Fontugne, M., Guillou, H., Hatte, C., Karabıyıkoğlu, M., Orth P., Türkecan, A. 1998. Identification and Dating of Tephra Layers from Quaternarty Sedimentary Sequences of Inner Anatolia, Turkey. J. Volcanol. Geotherm. Res., 85, 153-172.

  • Kuzucuoğlu, C., Mouralis, D. and Türkecan, A. 2013. Geomorphological Mapping as an Illustration of Geomorphological Evolution Reconstruction: The Example of the Çiftlik Plain in Cappadocia (Niğde), in “Profesör Doktor İlhan Kayan’a Armağan”, Ed. Ertuğ Öner, Ege Üniversitesi Basımevi, 133-144.

  • Le Pennec, J.L., Bourdier, J.L., Froger, J.L., Temel, A., Camus, G., Gourgaud, A., 1994. Neogene Ignimbrites of the Nevşehir Plateau (Central Turkey): Stratigraphy, Distribution and Source Constraints. J. Volcanol. Geotherm. Res., 63, 59- 87.

  • Mouralis D., 2003.- Les complexes volcaniques quaternaires de Cappadoce (Göllüdağ et Acigöl - Turquie): évolutions morphodynamiques et implications environnementales. Thèse de doctorat, Université Paris XII.

  • Pasquarè, G., 1968. Geology of the Cenozoic volcanic area of central Anatolia. Atti Accademia Nazionale dei Lincei 9, 55–204.

  • Pasquare, G., Poli, S., Vezzoli, L., Zanch, A., 1988. Continental arc volcanism and tectonic setting in central Anatolia, Turkey, Tectonophysics 146, 217–230.

  • Renfrew, C. 1969. Trade and Culture Process in European Prehistory. Current Anthropology 10(2/3):151-169.

  • Roberts, N., Allcock, S.L., Arnaud, F., Dean, J.R., Eastwood, W.J., Jones, M.D., Leng, M.J., Metcalfe, S.E., Malet, S.E., Woodbridge, J., Yiğitbaşoğlu, H., 2016. Journal of Quaternary Science, 31, 348-362.

  • Schmitt, A.K., Danisik, M., Evans, N.J., Siebel, W., Kiemele, E., Aydın, F., Harvey, J., 2011. Petrol. 162:1215–1231.

  • Slimak, L., Kuhn, S., Helene, R., Mouralis, D., Bbuitehuis, H., Balkan-Atlı, N., Binder, D., Kuzucuoğlu, C., Guillou, H., 2008. Kaletepe Deresi 3 (Turkey): Archaeological evidence for early human settlement in Central Anatolia, Journal of Human Evolution 54, 99-111.

  • Şaroğlu, F., Kazancı, N., Boyraz, S., 2007. Examples of anthropogenic geosites from Turkey as evidences of active seismicty and paleohazards in Late Quaternary. The 12th Regional Conference on Geoconservation and ProGEO Working Group 1 Annual Meeting. 5-9 September, 2007. Ljubljana, Slovenia.

  • Türkecan, A., Kuzucuoğlu, C., Mouralis, D., Pastre, J-F., Atıcı, Y., Guillou, H., Fontugne, M., 2004. Upper Pleistocene Volcanism and Paleogeography in Cappadocia, Turkey. MTA-CNRS-TUBITAK joint project report. 190 pages.

  • Toprak, V., 1998. Vent distribution and its relation to regional tectonics, Cappadocian Volcanics, Turkey. Journal of Volcanology and Geothermal Research, 85. 55–67.

  • Erturaç, M , Okur, H , Ersoy, B . (2017). Göllüdağ Volkanik Kompleksi İçerisinde Kültürel ve Jeolojik Miras Öğeleri . Türkiye Jeoloji Bülteni , 60 (1) , 17-34 . DOI: 10.25288/tjb.297803

  • Hasankeyf (Batman) Site From Cultural Geological Perspective
    Derya Sinanoğlu Muzaffer Siyako Sabri Karadoğan Nazire Özgen Erdem
    View as PDF

    Abstract: Hasankeyf, a district of Batman, is positioned near Tigris river, assigned as protected area and consistshundreds of residents which are located in carved rocks. Although, Hasankeyf has lost its importancetoday, it was containing many civilizations, culture and knowledge in the region before. Hasankeyf isunique since, geologic and geomorphologic structure has been used wisely in accordance with today’sconditions. Firstly, defense of the premises had a crucial role while Hasankeyf had been shaped. Carvedrocks in there, sheltered thousands of people within a complex organization. Not only the geomorphologic structure, but also the characteristics of rocks have an effect on the generation of carved rock settlements.Hasankeyf should be considered as a cultural geologic heritage owing to, the magnificent appearanceof carved rock settlements, the richness of geologic-geomorphologic elements and their effects on thesettlement’s continuity.

  • Batman

  • Cultural Geology

  • Geomorphology

  • Hasankeyf


  • Bahtiyar, İ., Siyako, M. ve Kaya, M., 2015. Batman çevresi Geç Mestrihtiyen- Paleosen dönemi stratigrafisi. Türkiye 20. Uluslararası Petrol ve Doğalgaz Kongresi Özler ve Bildiriler Kitabı, 209-211.

  • Bolgi, T., 1961. V. Petrol Bölgesi seksiyon ölçmeleri AR/TPO/261 no’lu saha ile Reşan-Dodan arası batısındaki sahanın strüktürel etüdleri: TPAO Arama Grubu, Rapor no. 162, 52s.

  • Ergin Yıldırım, B., 2006. Hasankeyf İlçe Merkezinin Beşeri ve Ekonomik Coğrafyası, Fırat Üniversitesi, Sosyal Bilimler Enstitüsü, Coğrafya Anabilim Dalı, (Yayımlanmamış Yüksek Lisan Tezi), Elazığ.

  • Gabriel A., 1940. Voyages Archologiue Dans la Turquie Orientole, Paris, 55.

  • Karadoğan, S., Yıldırım, A., 2008. MardinMidyat Platosunun Ekoturizm Açısından değerlendirilmesi. Ankara üniversitesi Türkiye coğrafyası Araştırma ve uygulama Merkezi “V. Ulusal Coğrafya Sempozyumu 16-17 Ekim 2008” ANKARA.

  • Koaster, E. A., 1963. Petroleum geology of District V, Turkey with special reference to license no. 649 of Aladdin Middle East Ltd (AME Report): Petrol İşleri Genel Müdürlüğü Teknik Arşivi, Kutu no 125, Rapor no 4, 22 s.

  • Maxon, J.H., 1937. Reconnaissance geplogy, oil possibilites and mineral resources of Southeastern Turkey: MTA Derleme No: 680, 80 s.

  • Perinçek, D., 1978. V-VI-IX. Bölge (Güneydoğu Anadolu otokton allokton birimler) jeoloji sembolleri: TPAO Arama Grubu Rapor no. 6657.

  • Siyako, M., Bahtiyar, İ., Özdoğan, T., Açıkbaş, İ. ve Kaya, Ö.Ç., 2013. Batman çevresinde mostra veren birimlerin stratigrafisi. TPAO Arama Dairesi Başkanlığı Arşivi, yayınlanmamış teknik rapor, 5463, 152 s.

  • Siyako, M., Şeker, H., Bahtiyar, İ., Özdemir, İ., Kılınç, S.F., Arslan, D., Karaçay, A., Özsoy, S. ve İşdiken, B., 2015. Batman, Beşiri, Kurtalan, Raman ve Gercüş civarının jeolojisi ve hidrokarbon olanakları. TPAO Arama Dairesi Başkanlığı Arşivi, yayınlanmamış teknik rapor, 5546, 132 s.

  • Tonbul, S., Karadoğan, S., 2001. Dicle Havzasındaki Doğal Çevre ve Beşeri Özellikler İle Arkeolojik Değerlerin, Bölge Paleo-Coğrafik ve PaleoKültürel Koşulların Belirlenmesindeki Rolü ve Bugünkü Durum. Türkiye Anıt Çevre ve Turizm Vakfı 25. Yıl Armağan Kitabı, s.341-352.

  • Yıldırım, A., Karadoğan, S., 2005. Raman-Gercüş Antiklinalleri Arasında Dicle Vadisinin Jeomorfolojisi. Ulusal Coğrafya Kongresi, Türk Coğrafya Kurumu-İstanbul Üniv, 29-30 Eylül 2005, 421-432, İstanbul.

  • Yıldırım, A., Karadoğan S., 2011. Raman Dağları Güneyinde (Dicle Vadisi) Morfometrik ve Morfotektonik Analizler. D.Ü.Eğitim Fakültesi Dergisi, Sayı:16, S. 154-166, Diyarbakır

  • Sinanoğlu, D , Siyako, M , Karadoğan, S , Özgen Erdem, N . (2017). Kültürel Jeoloji Açısından Hasankeyf (Batman) Yerleşmesi . Türkiye Jeoloji Bülteni , 60 (1) , 35-48 . DOI: 10.25288/tjb.297815

  • The Importance of the Geomorphological and Volcanological Indicators in Determining Obsidian Source Areas
    Ebru Akköprü Damase Mouralis Anne-Kyria Robin Catherine Kuzucuoğlu Mehmet Korhan Erturaç
    View as PDF

    Abstract: As understood from the artifacts found in the archaeological excavation areas, the obsidian belongingto the volcanic areas of the Eastern Anatolian Region spread to a very wide area by being traded inprehistoric times. For this reason, it is important to carry out a study on obsidian diffusion and volcanicgeomorphological features in the Eastern Anatolia Region.In this study, the importance of volcanological and geomorphological indicators in thedetermination of obsidian sources is given by examplifying field studies with geomorphological andgeological approaches in the volcanic areas of Eastern Anatolia RegionThe basic characteristics of obsidian (color, texture, durability, hardness, etc.) presence, quantityand availability as raw materials are closely related with volcanic and geomorphological processes.For example; The chemical and physical properties of the obsidian appear largely under the control ofvolcanism. Magmatic processes play an important role in the spread of the obsidian surface areas andin the formation types (dom, dyke, flow, etc.). The presence of obsidian in a volcanic massif is the resultof volcanism, but at the same time, its continuation in the same area later also depends on the type andseverity of the entire erosion process. Namely, the next volcanic activity and or erosional processes in thevolcanic area may cause the obsidian to fossilize or be completely eroded and destroyed. In addition, thiskind of effect also changes the presence and proportion of obsidian in the colluvial and alluvial materialknown as secondary sources on the area.

  • Eastern Anatolia

  • Volcanism

  • Obsidian

  • Geomorphology


  • Arslan, M., 1994, Mineralogy, geochemistry, petrology and petrogenesis of the Meydan-Zilan (ErcişVan, Turkey) area volcanic rocks: Doktora Tezi, Glasgow Üniversitesi, 559s. (yayınlanmamış).

  • Astruc L., Gratuze B., Pelegrin J., Akkermans P., 2007. From production to use: a parcel of obsidian bladelets at Sabi Abyad II, in Astruc, Binder & Briois (ed.), Systèmes techniques et communautés du néolithiques précéramique au Proche-Orient. Actes du 5e colloque international, Fréjus, du 29 février au 5 mars 2004, Antibes: APDCA, 327- 341.

  • Bigazzi G., Yegingil Z., Ercan T., Oddone M., Özdogan M., 1997. Age determination of obsidian bearing volcanics in eastern Anatolia using the Fissiontrack dating method. Geological Bulletin of Turkey, 40 (2): 57-72.

  • Bigazzi G., Poupeau G., Yegingil Z., Bellot-Gurlet L.,1998. Provenance studies of obsidian artefacts in Anatolia using the fission-track dating method: an overview. In M.-C. Cauvin et al., (ed). L’Obsidienne au Proche et Moyen Orient. BAR. Oxford: Archeopress: 69-89.

  • Binder, D., Gratuze, B., Mouralis, D., Balkan-Atlı, N., 2011. New investigations of the Göllüdağ obsidian lava flows system: a multidisciplinary approach. Journal of Archaeological Science. 38 (12), 3174–3184.

  • Blackman, J., R. Badaljan, Z. Kikodze, and P.Kohl.,1998. Chemical characterization of Caucasian obsidian geological sources. In M.-C. Cauvin et al., (ed) L’Obsidienne au Proche et Moyen Orient. BAR. Oxford: Archeopress: 205-231.

  • Cann, J.R. and C. Renfrew. 1964. The Characterization of Obsidian and Its Application to the Mediterranean Region. Proceedings of the Prehistoric Society. 30: 111-131.

  • Cauvin M. -C, Gourgaud A., Gratuze B., Arnaud N., Poupeau G., Poidevin J-L., 1998.Chataigner C., (ed). L’Obsidienne au Proche et Moyen Orient. BAR. Oxford: Archeopress, 388.

  • Cauvin, M.-C., Chataigner, C., 1998. Distribution de l’obsidienne dans les sites archéologiques du Proche et Moyen Orient. In: Cauvin, M.-C. (Ed.), L’obsidienne au Proche et Moyen Orient ancien: du volcan à l’outil, Lyon, Maison de l’Orient Méditerranéen 738. B.A.R Inter. Ser., Oxford, pp. 325–350.

  • Chataigner C., Isikli M., Gratuze B. 2013. Obsidian sources in the regions of Erzurum and Kars (North-East Turkey): new data. Archaeometry. (DOI : 10.1111/arcm.12002). 1-24

  • Chataigner C., Gratuze B.. 2013a New data on the exploitation of the obsidian in the Southern Caucasus (Armenia, Georgia) and Eastern Turkey, Part 1 : Source characterization. Archaeometry.. (DOI :10.1111/arcm.12006).

  • Chataigner C., Gratuze B. 2013b. New data on the exploitation of the obsidian in the Southern Caucasus (Armenia, Georgia) and Eastern Turkey, Part 2 : Obsidian procurement from the Upper Palaeolithic to the Late Bronze Age. Archaeometry. (DOI:10.1111/arcm.12007).

  • Chataigner, C., 1994. Les propriétés géochimiques des obsidiennes et la distinction des sources de Bingöl et du Nemrut Dag. Paléorient 20 (2), 9–17.

  • Chataigner C, Poidevin J.L, Arnaud N., 1998. Turkish occurrences of obsidian and use by prehistoric peoples in the Near East from 14,000 to 6000 BP. Journal of Volcanology and Geothermal Research, 85 (1-4) (Octobre): 517-537.

  • Ercan, T., Şaroğlu, F., Kusçu, I., 1996. Features of obsidian beds formed by volcanic activity since 25 million years B.P. In: Dimirci, S., Özer, A.M., Summers, G.D. Eds. The Proceedings of the 29th International Symposium on Archaeometry, Ankara 1994. Tübitak, Ankara: 505–513.

  • Erturaç, K., Kuzucuoğlu, C., Mouralis, D., Astruc, L., Balkan-Atlı, N., 2010. The Göllüdağ complex: genesis of volcanoes and prehistoric societies. 1ères rencontres archéologiques de l`IFEA, Istanbul, 11–13 novembre 2010.

  • Frahm, E., 2012. Distinguishing Nemrut Dağ and Bingöl A obsidians: geochemical and landscape differences and the archeological implication. Journal of Archaeological Science. 39,1436–1444.

  • Gratuze, B.,1998. Les méthodes de caractérisation de l’obsidienne. In M.-C. Cauvin et al., (ed). L’Obsidienne au Proche et Moyen Orient. BAR. Oxford: Archeopress: 31-51.

  • Karaoğlu, Ö., Özdemir, Y., Tolluoğlu, A.Ü., Karabıyıkoğlu, M., Köse, O., Froger, J.-L., 2005. Stratigraphy of the volcanic products around Nemrut Caldera: implications for reconstruction of the caldera formation. Turk. Journal Earth Science. 14, 123–143.

  • Keller, J. et Seifried, C., 1990. The present status of obsidian source identification in Anatolia and the Near-East, PACT, 25: 57-87.

  • Khalidi, L., Gratuze B., Boucetta S., 2009. Provenance of obsidian excavated from late chalcolithic levels at the sites of Tell Hamoukar and Tell Brack. Archaeometry 51: 879-893.

  • Nomade, S., Gauthier, A., Guillou, H., J.F., P., 2010. 40Ar/39Ar temporal framework for the Alleret maar lacustrine sequence (French Massif-Central): volcanological and paleoclimatic implications. Quaternaire. Geochronology. 5, 20–27.

  • Oddone, M., Yeğinğil Z., Bigazzi G., Ercan T,. Özdoğan M., 1997. Chemical characterisations of Anatolian obsidians by instrumental and epithermal neutron activation analysis. Journal of Radioanalytical and Nuclear Chemistry. 224 (1-2) (octobre): 27-38.

  • Özdemir, Y., Karaoğlu, Ö., Tolluoğlu, A.U., Güleç, N., 2006. Volcanostratigraphy and petrogenesis of the Nemrut stratovolcano, East Anatolian High Plateau: the most recent post-collisional volcanism in Turkey. Chemical. Geology. 226, 189–211.

  • Özdoğan M., Başgelen N. 1999. Neolithic in Turkey. Arkeoloji ve Sanat Yayınları: 236.

  • Pearce J.A., Bender J.F., De Long S.E., Kidd W.S.F., Low P.J., Güner Y., Saroğlu F., Yilmaz Y., Moorbath S., Mitchell J.G. 1990. Genesis of collision volcanism in Eastern Anatolia, Turkey. Journal of Volcanology and Geothermal Research. 44 (1-2): 189-229.

  • Pearce J.A., Bender J.F., De Long S.E., Kidd W.S.F., Low P.J., Güner Y., Saroğlu F., Yilmaz Y., Moorbath S., Mitchell J.G. 1990. Genesis of collision volcanism in Eastern Anatolia, Turkey. Journal of Volcanology and Geothermal Research. 44 (1-2): 189-229.

  • Poidevin, J.L. 1998. Les gisements d’obsidienne de Turquie et de Transcaucasie: géologie, géochimie et chronométrie. In Cauvin et al. (ed.), L’Obsidienne au Proche et Moyen Orient. Du volcan à l’outil, BAR International Series 738. Oxford: Archeopress: 105-203.

  • Renfrew, C., Dixon, J.E., Cann, J.R., 1996. Obsidian and early cultural contact in the Near East. Proceedings of Prehistoric Society. 32: 30–72.

  • Robin, A.K., Mouralis, D., Akköprü, E., Gratuze B., , Kuzucuoğlu, C., Nomade, S., Pereira, A., Doğu, A.F., Erturaç, K., Khalidi, L., 2016. Identification and characterization of two new obsidian subsources in the Nemrut volcano (Eastern Anatolia, Turkey): The Sıcaksu and Kayacık obsidian. Journal of Archaeological Science: Reports, Volume 9, October 2016, Pages 705-717

  • Yegingil, Z., Boztug, D., Er, M., Oddone, M., Bigazzi, G., 2002. Timing of neotectonic fracturing by fission track dating of obsidian in-filling faults in the Ikizdere-Rize area, NE Black Sea region, Turkey. Terra Nova. 14: 169-174.

  • Yılmaz, Y., Güner, Y., Şaroğlu, F., 1998. Geology of the Quaternary volcanic centres of the east Anatolia. J. Volcanol. Geotherm. Res. 85, 173–210.

  • Akköprü, E , Mouralis, D , Robin, A , Kuzucuoğlu, C , Erturaç, M . (2017). Doğu Anadolu’daki Obsidiyen Kaynak Alanlarının Belirlenmesinde Jeomorfolojik ve Volkanolojik Göstergelerin Önemi . Türkiye Jeoloji Bülteni , 60 (1) , 49-62 . DOI: 10.25288/tjb.297818

  • The Hevsel Gardens and The River Tigris in Diyarbakır: Geomorphological Archives of Landscapes Changes
    Sabri Karadoğan Catherine Kuzucuoğlu
    View as PDF

    Abstract: Environment and environmental systems have memories which become heritages common to severalcivilizations. The river and valley systems at Diyarbakır are such a heritage, which is now part of theUNESCO List of Natural and Cultural World Heritage. This heritage now depends today; first on ourdecisions and deeds, but also on the history of the system Dynamics which impacts the dynamics of theriver whatever we do to it. This history is recorded in the terraces stretching along the river flood plain,and in the relationships between the river and the substratum that it incises. In 2014 and 2015, we investigated two areas related to the recent evolution of the river: (i) theHevsel gardens, which correspond to river terraces stepping at the foot of the city walls (right bank) and ofthe University (left bank); (ii) alluvial deposits downstream the Diyarbakır gorges, where right-bank fromthe Karacadağ converge towards the Tigris. Our first results provide new insights in the recent evolutionof the Tigris valley and River. Enlightening the impact of long-term dynamics onto the present evolutionof the landforms and onto the river’s future, they directly address the management and preservation of theHevsel Gardens and Tigris River valley in the Diyarbakır area.

  • Diyarbakır

  • Hevsel Gardens

  • Holocene

  • Terraces

  • Tigris


  • Altunel, E. 2012. Kültürel Jeoloji: Jeoloji’nin İnsanoğlunun Yaşamı Üzerindeki Etkileri. İç: Kuvaterner Bilimi (Ed.: Kazancı, N. ve Gürbüz, A.), Ankara: Ankara Üniversitesi Yayınları No: 350, s.: 195-214.

  • Bridgland D.R., Demir T., Seyrek A., Pringle M., Westaway R., Bieck A.R., et al., 2007. Dating quaternary volcanism and incision by the river Tigris at Diyarbakir, southeast Turkey. Journal Of Quaternary Science, vol.22, pp.387-393.

  • Doğan, U., 2005a. Land subsidence and caprock dolines caused by subsurface gypsum dissolution and the effect of subsidence on the fluvial system in the Upper Tigris Basin (Between Bismil–Batman, Turkey). Geomorphology 71, 389-401.

  • Doğan, U., 2005b. Holocene fluvial development of the Upper Tigris Valley (Southeastern Turkey) as documented by archaeological data. Quaternary International. c. 129. s. 1: 75-86.

  • Karadoğan, S., 2015. Yerleşmeye Etkileri Açısından Diyarbakır Kenti ve Yakın Çevresinin Doğal Peyzaj Unsurları. Diyarbakır Büyükşehir Belediyesi, Diyarbakır Kalesi ve Hevsel Bahçeleri Kültürel Peyzajı, Alan Yönetimi Başkanlığı Yayınları: 4, s:1-17,(Türkçe Kitap Bölümü)

  • Karadoğan, S., Kozbe, G., 2013. Yukarı Dicle Havzasının (Batman-Bismil Arası) Jeomorfolojik Özellikleri ve Arkeolojik Yerleşme/Buluntu Yerlerinin Dönemler Boyunca Mekan Etkileşimleri. Geomorphology of Holocene records in Turkey (İlhan Kayan için Armağan Yazılar). ed. Ertuğ Öner, Izmir Univ. Pub., Izmir. c. 181: 540-564.

  • Kazancı, N., 2005. Kültürel Jeoloji. Mavi Gezegen 12, 4-5.

  • Kuzucuoğlu, C., 2002. Preliminary observation on the Tigris Valley terraces between Bismil and Batman. Salvage Project of the Archaeological Heritage of the Ilısu-Carchemish Dam Reservoirs Activities in 2000. ed. Numan Tuna, Jale Velibeyoğlu, METU, Ankara: 759-771.

  • Perez, A., 2015. Hevsel Bahçeleri ve Cennet Bahçesi Efsanesi, Diyarbakır Kalesi ve Hevsel Bahçeleri Kültürel Peyzajı. ed. N. Soyukaya, Diyarbakır: Diyarbakır Kalesi ve Hevsel Bahçeleri Alan Yönetimi, 131-142

  • Westaway R., Guillou H., Seyrek A., Demir T., Bridgland D., Scaillet S., et al., 2009. Late Cenozoic surface uplift, basaltic volcanism, and incision by the River Tigris around Diyarbakir, SE Turkey, International Journal Of Earth Sciences, vol.98, pp.601-625.

  • Karadoğan, S , Kuzucuoğlu, C . (2017). Diyarbakır Hevsel Bahçeleri ve Dicle Nehri: Arazi Değişimlerinin Jeomorfolojik Kayıtları . Türkiye Jeoloji Bülteni , 60 (1) , 63-76 . DOI: 10.25288/tjb.297819

  • Geological-Geomorphological Elements of Başkale Region, Van
    Azad Sağlam Selçuk Halil Zorer
    View as PDF

    Abstract: Başkale region is located in the basin of Lake Van. The geology and geomorphology of the area are oneof the most important factors in controlling it settled in the region with many extinct civilization developerand ongoing activities of life. Advanced many different places as a result of geological processes inherited members can be apparent at Başkale Region. Some of these sites are formed by volcanic or tectonicprocesses where the most are of travertine formations. The fissure ridge and terrace type travertines areclearly observed in this region.Neogene-Quaternary volcanic rocks forming the Vanadocia Volcanic Complex (VVA) are locatedin the northeast of Başkale region. VVA is covers an area of 55 km2 and express a vast badland topographywith countless fairy chimneys.In this study, geology and stratigraphy within the Başkale region will be explained and relatedwith the geoheritage and cultural heritage sites of ancient civilizations.

  • Başkale region

  • geoheritage

  • travertine

  • volcanism


  • Acarlar, M., Türkecan, A., 1986. Başkale (Van) Batı ve Kuzeybatısının Jeolojisi. MTA Rapor No: 7913, 87s (yayınlanmamış).

  • Altunel, E. 1996. Pamukkale Travertenlerinin morfolojik özellikleri, yaşları ve neotektonik önemleri. MTA Dergisi, 118, 47-64.

  • Altunel, E., Hancock, P.L. 1993a. Active fissuring and Faulting in Quaternary travertines at Pamukkale, Western Turkey. Zeitschrift für Geomorphologie Supplement, 94, 285–302.

  • Altunel, E., Hancock, P.L. 1993b. Morphology and structural setting of Quaternary travertines at Pamukkale, Turkey. Geological Journal, 28, 335– 346.

  • Altunel, E., Hancock, P.L. 1996. Structural attributes of travertine filled extensional fissures in the Pamukkale Plateau, Western Turkey. International Geology Review, 38, 768–777.

  • Ateş, Ş., Mutlu, G., Özerk, O.Ç., Çiçek, İ., Karakaya Gülmez, F., Bulut Üstün, A., Karabıyıkoğlu, M., Çelebioğlu, R., Özata, A., & Aksoy, A., 2007. Van Bölgesinin yerbilimleri verileri. MTA Rapor No:10961, 152s (yayınlanmamış).

  • Bachmann, W., 1913. Churches and mosques in Armenia. 80 p. front. (map) illus., 71 pl. (2 double) incl. plans. 37 cm, Leipzig.

  • Bargar, K. E., 1978. Geology and thermal history of Mammoth Hot Springs, Yellowstone National Park, Wyoming. U.S. Geological Survey Bulletin, 1444, 1-55.

  • Chafetz, H.S., Folk, R.L. 1984. Travertines: Depositional morphology and the bacterially constructed constituents. Journal of Sedimentary Petrology, 54, 289–316.

  • Çakır, Z., 1999. Along-strike discontinuity of active normal Faults and its influence on Quaternary travertine deposition; examples from western Turkey. Turkish Journal of Earth Sciences, 8, 67- 80.

  • De Filippis, L., Faccenna, C., Billi, A., Anzalone, E., Brilli, M., Özkul, M., Villa, I. M. 2012. Growth of fissure ridge travertines from geothermal springs of Denizli basin, western Turkey. Geological Society of America Bulletin, 124, 1629–1645.

  • Dewey, J.F., Hempton, M.R., Kidd, W.S.F., Saroglu, F., Şengör, A.M.C., 1986. Shortening of continental lithosphere: The neotectonics of Eastern Anatolia - A young collision zone. Geological Society Special Publication, pp. 1-36.

  • Djamour, Y., Andrnant, P., Nankali, H.R., Tavakoli, F., 2011. NW Iran-eastern Turkey present-day kinematics: Results from the Iranian permanent GPS network. Earth and Planetary Science Letters, 307, 27-34.

  • Emre, Ö., Duman, T.Y., Özalp, S., Olgun, Ş. ve Elmacı, H., 2012. 1:250.000 ölçekli Türkiye diri fay haritaları serisi, Van (NJ38-5) Paftası, Seri No:52, Maden Tetkik ve Arama Genel Müdürlüğü, Ankara-Türkiye.

  • Erdoğan, T., 1975. Gölbaşı Civarının Jeolojisi. TPAO Raporu, 929, 18.

  • Göncüoğlu, M. C. ve Turhan. N. 1984. Geology of the Bitlis metamorphic belt. MTA yayınları (In: Tekeli, O. ve Göncüoğlu, M.C. (eds), 237-244.

  • Gürsoy, H., Tatar, O., Piper, J.D.A., Heimann, A., Koçbulut, F. and Mesci, B.L. 2009. Palaeomagnetic study of Tertiary volcanic domains in Southern Turkey and Neogene anticlockwise rotation of the Arabian Plate. Tectonophysics, 465, p.114-127.

  • Hancock, P.L., Chalmers, R.M.L., Altunel, E., Çakır, Z. 1999. Travitonics: using travertines in active Fault studies. Journal of Structural Geology, 21, 903–916.

  • İHA (İhlas Haber Ajansı), 2012. http://www.haberturk. com/ekonomi/turizm/haber/731542-vanadokyakapadokya-degil-galeri, 6 Nisan 2012.

  • Koçyiğit, A., Yılmaz, A., Adamia, S., Kuloshvili, S., 2001. Neotectonic of East Anatolian Plateau (Turkey) and Lesser Caucasus: Implication for transition from thrusting to strike-slip faulting. Geodinamica Acta, 14, 177-195.

  • Koçyiğit, A., 2005. Sütlüce (Hakkari) Depreminin Kaynaği: Başkale Fay Kuşağı, (GD Türkiye). Deprem Sempozyumu, Denizli, 1-2.

  • Reilinger, R., McClusky, S., Andrnant, P., Lawrence, S., Ergintav, S., Cakmak, R., Ozener, H., Kadirov, F., Guliev, I., Stepanyan, R., 2006. GPS constraints on continental deformation in the Africa- ArabiaEurasia continental collision zone and implications for the dynamics of plate interactions. Journal of Geophysical Research: Solid Earth (1978–2012) 111.

  • Ricou, L. 1971. Le croissant ophiolitique péri-arabe: Une ceinture de nappes mises en place au Crétacé supérieur.

  • Sümengen, M., 2008. Başkale-L52 paftası:Türkiye 1/100.000 ölçekli jeoloji haritaları serisi, MTA yayınları, Ankara.

  • Şaroğlu, F., Yılmaz, Y., 1986. Doğu Anadolu’da neotektonik dönemdeki jeolojik evrim and havza modelleri. Maden Tektik ve Arama Dergisi, 107, 73-94.

  • Şengör, A. M. C., ve Kidd, W. S. F., 1979. Postcollisional tectonics of the Turkish-Iranian plateau and a comparison with Tibet. Tectonophysics, 55(3-4), 361-376.

  • Şengör, A. M. C., ve Yılmaz, Y., 1981. Tethyan evolution of Turkey: A plate tectonic approach. Tectonophysics, 75(3-4), 181-190,193-199,203- 241.

  • Uysal, I.T., Feng, Y., Zhao, J.X., Isik, V., Nuriel, P., Golding, S.D., 2009. Hydrotermal CO2 degassing in seismically active zones during the Late Quaternary. Chemical Geology, 265, 442-454.

  • Yılmaz, Y., 1971. Etüde petrographicque et geochronologique de la region de Casa (Partie Meridionale du Masif de Bitlis, Turquie, These de doct 3 cycle). Univ. Sci.Med. Greonable, 230.

  • Yılmaz, Y., Şaroǧlu, F., Güner, Y., 1987. Initiation of the neomagmatism in East Anatolia. Tectonophysics 134, 177-199.

  • Yılmaz, O., 1975. Casas Bölgesi (Bitlis Masifi) kayaçlarının petrografik ve stratigrafik incelenmesi. Türkiye Jeoloji Bülteni, 18-1, 33-40.

  • Weed, W.H., 1889. Formation of travertine and siliceous sinter by the vegetation of hot springs. U.S. Geol. Surv. Annual Rep., 9, 613-676.

  • Sağlam Selçuk, A , Zorer, H . (2017). Başkale Bölgesi’nin (Van) Jeolojik ve Jeomorfolojik Öğeleri . Türkiye Jeoloji Bülteni , 60 (1) , 77-92 . DOI: 10.25288/tjb.297830

  • A Palaentological Geosite Example: Hasanağa Stream, Akçadağ, Malatya
    Sibel Kayğili Niyazi Avşar Ercan Aksoy
    View as PDF

    Abstract: Rock, mineral, fossil associations, structure, geological section, landforms or a part of land which theyrepresent current or former geological process, event or a specialty is defined geosite. Some geologicunits containing fossil associations and outcropping along Hasanağa Stream located in the northwest ofAkçadağ which is a settlement of Malatya city in Eastern Anatolia Region, is seen as a good example tothis definition.The age of the geological units that outcrop along Hasanağa Stream ranges from Mesozoic toQuaternary. Diversity of Tertiary sedimentary units along Hasanağa Stream is represented by Korgantepe,Yenice and Asartepe members of Eocene Darende Formation, Oligocene Muratlı Formation and LowerMiocene Alibonca Formation. The geological units constitute a regular sequence range from Lutetianto Oligocene in Hasanağa Stream. Their abundant larger benthic foraminifera such as Nummulites,Alveolina and Discocyclina are the subject of this study and they have been evaluated within the scope ofgeological heritage.Along the Hasanağa stream also, there are many caves having traces of life in some of them, onboth sides of the valley, in different sizes. Diversity of larger benthic foraminifera and karstic formationsincreases the scientific importance of the district.

  • Darende Formation

  • Geosite

  • Hasanağa Stream

  • arger benthic foraminifera

  • Malatya

  • Eastern Turkey


  • Akkuş, F. M., 1971. Darende-Balaban havzasındaki (Malatya, DGD anadolu) litostratigrafik birimler ve jipsli formasyonların yaşı hakkında yeni bilgiler. Maden Tetkik ve Arama (MTA) Dergisi, 75, 1-18.

  • Alan, B., 2011. Malatya Havzasındaki sığ denizel sedimanların Eosen (Orta- Geç Eosen) bentik foraminifer tanımlaması ve biyostratigrafisi. Ankara Üniversitesi Fen Bilimleri Enstitüsü, Ankara, Doktora Tezi, 249s (yayınlanmamış).

  • Bedi, Y., Yusufoğlu, H., Beyazpirinç, M., Usta, D., Özkan, M.K., Yıldız, H. 2009. Doğu torosların jeodinamik evrimi. MTA derleme No: 11150 (yayımlanmamış).

  • Çağlar, M., 2009. Benthic foraminiferal biostratigraphy of the tertiary sediments from the Elazig and Malatya Basins, Eastern Turkey. Journal of the Geological Society of India, 74, Issue 2, 209-222.

  • Dewey, J.F., Hempton, M.R., Kidd, W.S.F., Şaroğlu, F. and Şengör, A.M.C., 1986. Shorteninig of continental lithosphere: The tectonics of eastern Anatolia: A young collision zone. Collision tectonics, 19, 3-36.

  • Dinçer F. ve Avşar N, 2012. Darende Havzası (KB Malatya) Üst Lütesiyen- Bartoniyen birimlerinin bentik foraminifer biyostratigrafisi ve ortamsal yorumu. Haccettepe Üniversitesi Yerbilimleri Dergisi, 33, 31-58.

  • Gedik, F., 2010. Malatya havzasındaki sığ denizel sedimanların Oligo-Miyosen bentik foraminifer tanımlaması ve biyostratigrafisi, Ankara Üniversitesi, Fen Bilimleri Enstitüsü, Ankara, Doktora Tezi, 177s.

  • Gürbüz, K. ve Gül, M., 2005. “Evolution of and factors controlling Eocene sedimentation in the DarendeBalaban basin, Malatya (Eastern Turkey)”, Turkish Journal of Earth Sciences, 14, 311-335.

  • Karaman, T., Poyraz, N., Bakırhan, B., Alan, İ., Kadınkız, G., Yılmaz, H. ve Kılınç, F. 1993. Malatya-Doğanşehir-Çelikhan dolayının jeolojisi. MTA Raporu No: 958, Ankara (yayımlanmamış).

  • Kazancı, N., 2001. Jeolojik miras üzerine, Mavi Gezegen, 4, 4-9.

  • Kazancı, N., 2006. Jeoparklar ve nitelikleri: Geçmişten geleceğe yanık ülke. Kula Sempozyumu, 1-3 Eylül 2006 bildiriler, Kula, 78-81.

  • Kazancı, N., 2010. Jeolojik koruma kavram ve terimler. Jeolojik mirası koruma derneği yayını, 60s.

  • Kazancı, N., Şaroğlu, F. ve Suludere, Y., 2015. Jeolojik miras ve Türkiye jeositleri çatı listesi, 151, 263- 272.

  • McKenzie, D.P., 1970. Plate tectonics of the Mediterranean region, Nature, 220, 239-343.

  • McKenzie, D.P., 1972. Active tectonics of Mediterranean region, Geophys. J.R., Ast. Soc., 30, 109-185.

  • Örçen, S., 1984. Medik–Ebreme (KB Malatya) dolayının biyostratigrafisi ve paleontolojisi. İstanbul Üniversitesi Fen Fakültesi, İstanbul, Doktora Tezi, 68s.

  • Perinçek, D., 1979. The geology of Hazro-KorudağÇüngüş-Maden-Ergani-Hazar-Elazığ-Malatya area. Guide book, Türkiye Jeoloji Kurumu Yayını, 33s.

  • Perinçek, D. and Kozlu, H. 1984. Stratigraphy and structural relations of the units in the AfşinElbistan-Doğanşehir region (Eastern Taurus). Geology of Taurus Belt, O. Tekeli, M. C. Göncüoğlu (Eds), Türkiye Petrolleri Anonim Şirketi, Ankara, 181-198.

  • ProGeo Group, 1998. A first attempt at a geosites framework for Europe an IUGS initiative to support recognition of world heritage and European geodiversity. Geologica Balcanica, 28, 5-32.

  • Şengör, A.M.C., 1980. Fundamentals of neotectonics of Turkey: TJK Conference, Ser. 2, 40p.

  • Şengör, A.M.C. ve Yılmaz, Y., 1981. Tethyan evolution of Turkey; a plate tectonic approach. Tectonophysics, 75, 181-241.

  • Şengör, A.M.C. ve Yılmaz, Y., 1983. Türkiye’de Tetis’in evrimi: Levha Tektoniği açısından bir yaklaşım. Türkiye Jeoloji Kurultayı (TJK), Yerbilimleri özel dizisi, 1.

  • Solak, S. ve Ünlügenç, U.C, 2012. Levent (AkçadağMalatya Batısı) ve civarının tektono-stratigrafisi. Çukurova Üniversitesi Fen ve Mühendislik Bilimleri Dergisi, 27(4), 122-130.

  • Sungurlu, O., Perinçek, D., Kurt, G., Tuna, E., Dülger, S., Çelikdemir, E. ve Naz, H., 1985. ElazığHazar-Palu alanının jeolojisi. Petrol İşleri Genel Müdürlüğü Dergisi, 29, 83-191.

  • Türkmen, İ., İnceöz, M. ve Kerey, İ. E., 1999. Kırkgeçit Formasyonu (Orta Eosen-Oligosen) gelgit düzlüğü ve fırtınalı şelf kompleksine bir örnek (Elazığ KKB’sı), Yerbilimleri Bülteni, 21, 125-142.

  • Türkmen, İ., İnceöz, M., Aksoy, E. ve Kaya, M., 2001. Elazığ yöresinin Eosen stratigrafisi ve paleocoğrafyası ile ilgili yeni bulgular. Haccettepe Üniversitesi Yerbilimleri Bülteni, 24, 81-95.

  • Wimbledon, W. A. P., 1996. National site election, a stop on the road to a European geosite list, Geologica Balcanica, 26, 15-27.

  • Wimbledon, W. A. P., Smith-Meyers, S., 2012. Geoheritage in Europe and its conservation ProGEO special publications, Oslo, Norway, 405s.

  • Yazgan, E., and Chessex, R., 1991. Geology and tectonic evolution of the southeastern taurides in the region of Malatya. Türkiye Petrol Jeologları Derneği Bülteni, 3, 1-42.

  • Kayğılı, S , Avşar, N , Aksoy, E . (2017). Paleontolojik Bir Jeosit Örneği: Hasanağa Deresi, Akçadağ, Malatya . Türkiye Jeoloji Bülteni , 60 (1) , 93-106 . DOI: 10.25288/tjb.297840

  • Effects of the Present Primary and High School Education Programmes In Turkey On the Formation of Consciousness for Geoheritage and Geoparks With a View to Protecting Them
    Emine Günok
    View as PDF

    Abstract: As the core elements of geologic protection; Geological Heritage and Geoparks can be considered asthe practical ways for expressibility of the physical environment to people and community, on which theyhave been spending their life. The natural disasters are the most widespread consequence of unknownenvironment. On the other hand, structuring as the consequence of fast increasing population and thediversifying raw material consumption cause destruction of the nature and give rise to disappearance ofGeological Heritage which are reference legibility’s for the past of the Earth. The disappearance of these  wealth makes the understanding of the Earth extremely difficult. Dealing with geoparks and geologicalheritage involve partial education which has to be the adult people occupation. The awareness forprotection of the nature is practiced in the developed countries by commencing prior to school educationand taught in primary and high school levels, which is realistic and perdurable. The syllabus of lessonssuch as science, environment, life, biology, geography etc. are enriched in accordance with the objectiveand there are also specific lessons on these topics. In order to identify the status of our country with thisrespect, the lessons and their syllabus of primary and secondary schools are investigated. The conclusionsare far-off from being hopeful where the concepts of “geologic protection”, “geopark” and “GeologicalHeritage” do not exist even as vocabulary in the syllabus.

  • Geological Heritage

  • Geoparks

  • Primary and High School Education


  • Burek, C.V., Prosser, C. D. 2008. The History of Geoconservation. Geological Society, Spec. Pub. 300, London, 312 s.

  • MEB (Milli Eğitim Bakanlığı), (2006). İlköğretim Fen ve Tekonoloji Dersi, (6, 7 ve 8. Sınıflar) Öğretim Programı. Ankara: MEB Yayınevi

  • MEB, (2009). Sosyal Bilgiler Dersi, 4.-5. Sınıf Programı. Ankara: MEB Yayınevi

  • MEB, (2009). Sosyal Bilgiler Dersi, 6.-7. Sınıf Programı. Ankara: MEB Yayınevi

  • MEB, (2010). İlköğretim Kurumları Haftalık Ders Çizelgesi. Ankara: MEB Yayınevi

  • MEB, M. E. (2010). Ortaöğretim Kurumları Haftalık Ders Çizelgesi. Ankara: MEB Yayınevi

  • MEB, (2011). Ortaöğretim Coğrafya Dersi (9, 10, 11 ve 12. Sınıflar) Öğretim Programı. Ankara: MEB Yayınevi

  • MEB, (2011) Ortaokul Çevre Eğitimi Dersi Öğretim Programı. Ankara: MEB Yayınevi

  • MEB, (2015). İlkokul Hayat Bilgisi Dersi, (1, 2 ve 3. Sınıflar) Öğretim Programı.Ankara: MEB Yayınevi

  • Doughyt, P. 2008. How things began: the origin of geological conservation. İç: The History of Geoconservation (Ed. C.V. Burek ve C.D. Prosser), Geol. Soc.Spec.Pub. 300, London, s. 7-16

  • Demir, E., & Yalçın, H. (2014). Türkiye’de çevre eğitimi. Türk Bilimsel Derlemeler Dergisi, 7(2), 07-18.

  • Erikstad, L. 2008 History of geoconservation in Europe. İç: The History of Geoconservation (Ed. C.V. Burek ve C.D. Prosser), Geol. Soc.Spec.Pub. 300, London, s. 249-256

  • Kazancı, N. 2010. Jeolojik Koruma: Kavramlar ve Terimler, Jeolojik Mirası Koruma Derneği, Ankara, 60 s.

  • Kazancı, N., Şaroğlu, F., Suludere, F. 2015. Jeolojik Miras ve Türkiye Jeositleri Çatı Listesi, MTA Dergisi 151:263-272

  • Özgen Erdem, N.Ö. 2015. Jeoparklar ve Küresel Ağlar ile Bütünleşmenin Önemi, TMMOB Jeoloji Mühendisleri Odası, Haber Bülteni, 2015/2, Ankara, s.5

  • ProGeo Group. 1998. A first attempt at a geosites framework for Europe–an IUGS initiative to support recognition of World heritage and Europen geodiversity. Geologica Balcanica 28, 5-32

  • Wimbledon, W. A. P. 1996 National site election, a stop on the road to a European Geosite List. Geologica Balcanica 26, 15-27

  • Günok, E . (2017). Türkiye’de Mevcut İlk ve Orta Öğretim Programlarının Jeomiras ve Jeopark Bilincinin Oluşmasına Etkileri . Türkiye Jeoloji Bülteni , 60 (1) , 107-116 . DOI: 10.25288/tjb.297849

  • An Outdoor Classroom: The coasts of Kandıra (Kocaeli, Turkey)
    Ali Uzun
    View as PDF

    Abstract: The coasts of Turkey are losing their natural properties due to increasing anthropogenic pressure. Thecoasts of Kandıra district of Kocaeli province, which is the focus of this study, have protected its naturalbeauty from these processes until now. The study area is located between Pınarlı village on the west andBabalı village on the east, and its total longshore is 65 km together with the Kefken Island’s coasts. Themain aim of this study is to stress the educational tourism potantial of Kandıra coasts which have significantgeological and geomorphological properties and to protect them for next generations in accordance with  sustainable utilization principles. For this purpose, we detailed an undergraduate geography courseabout “coastal geomorphology” with selected forms from the study area. We realized the field works onthe summer months of 2014 and 2015, and examined the literature simultaneously during the study. Thereare many and different typical coastal forms in the study area. Some of these already have a high touristattraction. If the study area gains a protected status like a geopark, all of the coastal geosites will beprotected and the local residents will benefit more from this wealth through tourism.

  • Black Sea

  • Coast

  • Geomorphological heritage

  • Geopark

  • Kandıra

  • Kocaeli


  • Eder, F. W., & Patzak, M. 2004. Geoparks--geological attractions: A tool for public education, recreation and sustainable economic development. EpisodesNewsmagazine of the International Union of Geological Sciences, 23(3,), 162-164.

  • Ekinci, D. 2010. The noticeable geomorphosites of Turkey. International Journal of Arts and Sciences, 3(15), 303-321.

  • Ertek, T. A. (1992). Kocaeli Yarımadasının kuzeydoğu kesiminde jeomorfolojik araştırmaların sonuçları. İstanbul Üniversitesi Deniz Bilimleri ve Coğrafya Enstitüsü, Bülten, 9, 207-212.

  • Geremia, F., & Massoli-Noveli, R. 2005. Coastal geomorphosites of the isles of lipari and stromboli (aeolian islands, italy): New potential for geotourism. Il Quaternario, 18(1), 233-244.

  • İslam Ansiklopedisi 29: http://www.islamansiklopedisi. info/dia/ayrmetin.php?idno=290393; 16.06.2016.

  • İzbırak, R. 1975. Coğrafya terimleri sözlüğü, MÖM Yayınları, Ankara.

  • Jonasson, M. 2011. Framing learning conditions in geography excursions. International Education Studies, 4(1), 21-29.

  • Kent, M., Gilbertson, D. D., & Hunt, C. O. 1997. Fieldwork in geography teaching: A critical review of the literature and approaches. Journal of Geography in Higher Education, 21(3), 313- 332

  • Lock, R. (1998). Fieldwork in the life sciences. International Journal of Science Education, 20(6), 633-642.

  • May, V. (2008). Integrating the geomorphological environment, cultural heritage, tourism and coastal hazards in practice. Geogr. Fis. Dinam. Quat. 31, 187-194.

  • McEwan, L. 1996. Fieldwork in the undergraduate geography programme: Challenges and changes. Journal of Geography in Higher Education, 20(3), 379-384. doi:10.1080/03098269608709380

  • Moore, W. G. 1974. A dictionary of geograpy (Fifth edition ed.): Penguin Books.

  • Pereira, P., Pereira, D., & Alves, M. I. (2007). Geomorphosite assessment in montesinho natural park (Portugal).

  • Uzun, A. 1998. Weathering forms on sandstones directly exposed to sea effects in gelincikburnu and its surroundings (South coast of the Black Sea). Zeitschrift fur Geomorphologie, 42(2), 233- 244.

  • Uzun, A. 2015. Kandıra’nın (Kocaeli) kayalık kıyıları ve jeopark potansiyeli. 15-17 Ekim 2015, Ulusal Jeomorfoloji Sempozyumu, Samsun. Bildiriler Kitabı, 276-244.

  • Uzun, M. 2015. Kocaeli İli Karadeniz kıyılarının jeomorfoturizm özellikleri ve kıyı kullanımına etkisi açısından değerlendirilmesi. Marmara Coğrafya Dergisi, 32, 339-366.

  • Uzun, A . (2017). Bir Açık Alan Dersliği: Kandıra Kıyıları (Kocaeli, Türkiye) . Türkiye Jeoloji Bülteni , 60 (1) , 117-128 . DOI: 10.25288/tjb.297854

  • Geo Heritage of the Niksar (Tokat) Region
    Özlem Toprak Hüseyin Şahin
    View as PDF

    Abstract: Study area is located within the North Anatolian Fault Zone which has a length of 1200 kilometers andone of the most important active strike-slip fault zones in the world. This fact caused formation of naturallakes, morphotectonic structures, canyons and valleys as a result fault activity. Fault-controlled Niksarpull-apart basin, Efkerit valley, Luvi temple, Sisma cave, travertines, Dilimkaya canyon, Ayvaz mineralwater, fault-controlled young volcanic rocks, came in light to be suggested as geoheritage. In this study,these sites and nearby locations have been studied from geological point of view in detail and aimed todraw attention of the researchers and local authorities this region’s historical, cultural sides and alsocreate awareness to the geological heritage and bring these area as an alternative for geotourism.

  • Geoheritage

  • Geotourism

  • Niksar

  • Strike-slip fault


  • Akbulut, G. ve Ünsal, Ö., 2012. Levent Vadisi’nin (Malatya) Jeopark ve Jeoturizm Potansiyeli. I.Ulusal Coğrafya Sempozyumu 28-30 Mayıs 2012 Erzurum, s.535-546.

  • Akbulut, G. 2014. Önerilen Levent Vadisi Jeoparkı’nda Jeositler. CÜ Sosyal Bilimler Dergisi, Haziran 2014, Cilt: 38, Sayı: 1.

  • Aktimur, T. H., Ateş, Ş., Yurdakul, M. E., Tekirli, M. E. ve Keçer, M. 1992. Niksar-Erbaa ve Destek dolayının jeolojisi. MTA Dergisi 114, 25-36.

  • Akyazı, M. ve Tunç, M. 1992. Zile (Tokat) Yöresinin Stratigrafisi. TJK Bülteni, C. 35/2. s.36.

  • Barka AA, and Kadinsky-Cade K (1988). Strike-slip fault geometry in Turkey and its influence on earthquakes activity. Tectonics 7, 663–684.

  • Barka A., 1996, Slip distribution along the North Anatolian Fault associated with the large earthquakes of the period 1939 to 1967. Bull. Seismol. Soc. Am., 86, 1238–1254

  • Barka A, Akyüz H.S., Cohen H.A. ve Watchorn F. 2000. Tectonic evolution of the Niksar and Taşova-Erbaa pull-apart basins, North Anatolian Fault Zone: their significance for the motion of the Anatolian Block. Tectonophysics 322:243–64

  • Baykal, F. 1947. Zile-Tokat-Yıldızeli bölgesinin jeolojisi. İ.Ü. Fen Fakültesi Mecmuası, Seri B, c.XII, sayı: 3, s.19.

  • Blumenthal, M. 1950. Beitrage zur géologie der landschaften am miitelcren und unteren Yeşilırmak. MTA, yayınları seri. D. No. 4, s. 183.

  • İnan, N. ve Temiz, H., 1992. Niksar (Tokat) yöresinde Kretase-Tersiyer geçişinin litostratigraafik ve biyostratigrafk özellikleri. TJK Bülteni, C.35-1, s.39-47

  • İnan, N. ve Engin, M., 1995. Karaçam Yaylası (NiksarTokat), Simplorbites papyraceus (Boubee) örneklerinde anormal bir aseksüel çoğalma fazı. TJK Bülteni, s.10, s.25-33

  • İnan, N. 2008. Jeolojik Miras ve Doğa Tarihi Müzeleri, TÜBİTAK Bilim ve Teknik Dergisi, Sayı: 493, s.80-83.

  • Kazancı, N. 2010. Jeolojik Koruma Kavram ve Terimler, Ankara: TMMOB Jeoloji Mühendisleri Odası Yayınları.

  • Koçyiğit, A. 1979. Tekneli bölgesinin (Tokat güneyi) tektonik özelliği. Tübitak Proje no TBAG-262,63 s.

  • Okay, A. C. 1955. Sivas ile Tokat arasındaki bölgenin jeoloji etüdü: İ. Ü. Fen Fak. Mecmuası, Seri B, Cilt XX, Sayı: 2,95-108.

  • Seymen, İ., 1975, Kelkit vadisi kesiminde Kuzey Anadolu Fay Zonunun tektonik özelliği: İst. Teknik Üniv., doktora tezi, 192 s., İstanbul.

  • Şaroğlu, F., Emre, Ö., ve Boray, A., 1987, Türkiye’nin Diri Fayları ve Depremsellikleri. Maden Tetkik ve Arama Genel Müdürlüğü Jeoloji Etüdleri Dairesi Başkanlığı, Ankara, III.394 s.11 harita.

  • Şengör, A. M. C., Tüysüz, O., İmren, C., Sakınç, M., Eyidoğan, H., Görür, N., Le Pichon, X. ve Rangin, C. (2005). The North Anatolian Fault: A New Look. Annual Review of Earth and Planetary Sciences 33, 37-112.

  • Tatar O. 1996. Neotectonic structures indicating extensional and contractional strain within Pliocene deposits near the NW margin of the Niksar pull-apart basin, Turkey. Turk. J. Earth Sci. 5:81-90.

  • Tatar, O., Kavak, K.Ş., Polat, A., Gürsoy, H., Koçbulut, F., Sezen, T.F., Mesci, L., Akpınar, Z. ve Kiratik, L.O. 2006. Kuzey Anadolu Fay Zonu-1942 ErbaaNiksar depremi yüzey kırığı yeni gözlemler. ATAG10 - Aktif Tektonik Araştırma Grubu 10. Toplantısı.

  • Tatar, O., Yurtmen, S., Temiz, H., Gürsoy, H., Koçbulut, F., Mesci, B.L. and Guezou, J.C. 2007. Intracontinental Quaternary volcanism in the Niksar pull-apart basin, North Anatolian Fault Zone, Turkey. Turkish Journal of Earth Sciences, 16, p.417-440.

  • Terzioğlu, N., 1986. Doğu Karadeniz Bölgesinde Pliyosen Yaşlı Erdembaba Volkanitlerinin Petrolojisi Ve Kökensel Yorumu. Türkiye Jeoloji Kurumu Bülteni, C. 29,119-132.

  • Toprak, Ö., 2014. Batı-Orta Karadeniz de yüzeyleyen Jura-Kretase yaşlı kireçtaşlarının biyostratigrafisi. Cumhuriyet Üniversitesi. Doktora Tezi (yayımlanmamış).

  • Tutkun, S. Z., İnan, S., 1982. Niksar-Erbaa (Tokat) Yöresinin Jeolojisi. Karadeniz Üniversitesi Yerbilimleri Dergisi, Cilt 2, Sayı 1-2, S.51-57.

  • Yılmaz, A. 1981. Tokat ile Sivas arasındaki bölgede ofiyolitli karışığın iç yapısı ve yerleşme yaşı: TJK. Bült. 24/l,s.31-38.

  • Yılmaz, E. 2013. Jeolojik oluşumların kültür varlıkları açısından değerlendirilmesi ve turizme kazandırılması: Pamukkale Örneği. Kültür ve Turizm Bakanlığı Uzmanlık Tezi (Yayınlanmış)

  • Toprak, Ö , Şahin, H . (2017). Niksar (Tokat) Yöresinin Jeodeğerleri . Türkiye Jeoloji Bülteni , 60 (1) , 129-143 . DOI: 10.25288/tjb.297867

  • View as PDF