The artistic traces must be closely related with sociology since they are produced in a socio-cultural structure. Because “all artistic traces carries the marks of a cultural environment more then the personality of the artist of the sign it is having. That is to say art is expression of the common senses, thoughts, and taste of the society. This property explains while the traces in same cultural environment show similarities, as well as makes artistic traces a document which reflects the cultural environment to the art”. So, an artistic trace cannot be thought separated from its socio-cultural environment. We accept so, how we can explain the similarities, differences and sameness among them? Since this reason all artists are attached to the socio-cultural structure, he or she is living in and this relation cannot be denied. Thus while treating an artistic trace firstly; it is necessary to look in which socio-cultural structure, by whom, and in where it is made. Because the mind of an artist is cultivated in the socio-cultural environment, he or she is interacting with and under the conditions forming that environment. Artists, like a language education of an infant, learn knowledge about his/her art and encode them in his/her mind. It is like if an infant needs something then he/she cries or learns new words; an artist uses the information in his/her mind or tries to learn those languages. So, “language is to make voices in to story, art is to make external object into history”. But this transformation does not occur instantaneously, for example “…a painter cannot draw instantaneously as he/she takes paper and pencil to hand; this work formed in mind thanks to former experiences. Human mind is like an archive which contains the photographs of events and objects”. Consequently the materials and traces of art are important as much as the ones of science or philosophy. So there are strong relations between art and relegion, artists and sciences, and scientific knowledge. It is possible to find the former examples of mind of a social structure in traditional arts and folk literature. Because, these types of information, which have the least interaction with other socio-cultural environments. Plus, these are the most conservative aspects of cultures. Here, we hope the comparison of the photographs will be satisfactory for testing the idea proposed. For example, it cannot be coincidence that the similarities between the ram head figures on tombstones in Kazakhstan and the ones on the rugs weaved in Kars, Dogubeyazıt, Iğdır, Van, Ahlat, Bitlis, and Tunceli, or mountains of Altays, or carpets in Hakkari, Adana, Ayvacık, Bergama, Sındırgı, and Savaştepe. Shortly the relation between the art trace and the artist is the same as the one between art trace and socio-cultural structure. But this relation is generally ignored by the historians and so the art traces is supposed to the social groups having no relation with.
For example on a television channel, a historian, who had been presented to be specialist in the field, was saying that “when Seljuks came to Anatolia, since they had no architects or masters, they used Armenian oriented people to perform construction activities. And so they did the mosques and kümbets with theşr own styles. We may see this relation obviously at Akdamar Church and Ahlat kümbet graves.” At the first glance these seems truly since Akdamar had been constructed earlier than Ahlat kümbets. But if he had seen the region from Issık Göl to Mangışlak (the settlement area at mid-west shores of Caspian Sea) he would also see that the style dominated in this region is that of the kümbet style like Ahlat kümbets. So it must be known fairly the history and the directions of the migrations to Anatolia and a comparative study must be applied to reach sufficient information. For instance was there a migration from Anatolia to Altays? If not, the people in both sides can embroider the same stamps on their carpets, rugs, graves, and ethnographic traces, in spite of the distance among them? Or is not it necessary to answer the question “if there is migration from Anatolia to Altays, what about the density of it?”
 KARAMAĞARALI,H., Ibid, p.140
 READ, H., Sanatın Anlamı (trans. G. İnal-N. Asgari), Ankara,1960,p.268
 CASSIRER, E., İnsan Üstüne Bir Deneme (tran. N. Arat), İstanbul, 1997, p.167
 MÜLAYİM, S., ibid, s.17
 READ, H., ibid, p.8