385 INTRODUCTION The period following the end of the Hittite Empire in Anatolia and in Northern Syria presents a very variegat- ed horizon, characterized by both conti- nuity and/or change and innovation (see e.g. Yakar 2006; de Martino 2009; Ven- turi 2010) 1 . From a political point of view, evidence of innovation is still con- sidered very strong in Northern Syria and the Levant. The ‘new’ kingdom of Palistin, revealed in the last decade, seems to represent a new polity built by an élite of newcomers who re-interpret- ed and re-used local modi, symbols of power, and the Luwian Hieroglyphic script (e.g. Hawkins 2011; Kohlmeyer 2009). A similar process characterizes the organization of the ‘ethnic’ (Ara- maean) states, but evidence of change can also be found in the surviving terri- torial states 2 . Even though so many relevant new da- ta and results have shed more light on the ‘Dark Age’ which started in the 12 th Cen- tury, it still remains very difficult to detect and understand links and developments between the Late Bronze Age (LBA) and the Early Iron Age (EIA) across the dif- ferent areas. It is equally difficult to un- derstand the processes that led up to the XXXIV, 2012: 385-398 ORIGINI ABSTRACT – After the end of the Hittite Empire, Anatolia and Northern Syria split into different lo- cal horizons, each with its own developments. Some of them show strong continuity with the previous social organisation and with some aspects of the Hittite culture, especially Cappadocia, Karkemiš and the Upper Euphrates. The research conducted over the last 5 years in Southern Cappadocia supports this view and provides further elements to shed more light on the environment which produced this continuity. This paper suggests that local administration survived in the urban centres of Cappadocia after the disappearance of the central power and that later, concurrently with the expansion of the Neo- Assyrian Empire, secondary monarchies started to exist in the region. KEYWORDS – Central Anatolia, Dark Age, Early Iron Age, Archaeological survey. ANATOLIA AFTER THE END OF THE HITTITE EMPIRE. NEW EVIDENCE FROM SOUTHERN CAPPADOCIA Clelia Mora* - Lorenzo d’Alfonso** 1 The accent on continuity characterizes most of the latest scholarly contributions (see e.g. Rose 2008 on western Anatolia; Genz 2003 on central Anatolia; Liverani and Manuelli in this volume on the Upper Ephrates; and Venturi 2010 on the Northern Levant). 2 See, for example what Mario Liverani says about the new ways of social organization: “Lo stesso vale viceversa anche per i superstiti stati territoriali, che conservarono la maggior parte delle vecchie strutture ma ricevettero una nuova caratterizzazione dalla crescita della componente tribale nella popolazione. Penso in particolare ad una diversa ideologia sociale (basata sulla giustizia), al diverso ruolo dell’assemblea, ad un diverso equilibrio tra contadini e pastori” (Liverani 2002: 45).