Balossi_Marro2012

8/12/2019 Balossi_Marro2012

1/36

AFTER THE UBAID:INTERPRETING CHANGE FROM THE CAUCASUS

TO MESOPOTAMIA AT THE DAWNOF URBAN CIVILIZATION(4500-3500 BC)

OFFPRINT


2/36


3/36

VARIA ANATOLICA XXVII

AFTER THE UBAID:INTERPRETING CHANGE FROM THE CAUCASUS

TO MESOPOTAMIA AT THE DAWNOF URBAN CIVILIZATION

(4500-3500 BC)

Papers from

The Post-Ubaid Horizon in the Fertile Crescent and Beyond

International Workshop held at Fosseuse, 29thJune-1stJuly 2009

Edited by

Catherine Marro

INSTITUT FRANAIS DTUDES ANATOLIENNES GEORGES - DUMEZIL

CNRS USR 3131

DE BOCCARD dition - Diffusion

11, rue de Mdicis75006 Paris

2012


4/36

Photo de couverture : Antonia Pasquino. Mersin Yumuktepe, Coba bowlsdu niveau XV.

Comit scientifique :

Prof. Dr. Marcella Frangipane, University of Rome La Sapienza, Rome.

Prof. Dr. Harald Hauptman, Heidelberg Academy for the Humanities and Sciences, Heidelberg.

Ce volume a t compos par Zero Prodksiyon Ltd.

Abdullah sok. 17, 34433 Taksim-stanbul/Turquie.

La publication a pu en tre ralise grce au concours financier

du Ministre des Affaires Etrangres et du CNRS.

2012, Institut Franais dtudes Anatoliennes Georges - DumzilNuru Ziya sok. 22, 34433 Beyolu-stanbul/Turquie.

Secrtaire aux publications: Aksel Tibet

imprim par

BLTUR Basm Yayn ve Hizmet A..pnar Cd. Bulgurlu Mh. No: 89 K. amlca, skdar, stanbul - Trkiye

Tel: +90 216 444 44 03 www.bilnet.net.tr

numro de certificat: 15690

ISBN 978-2-36245-007-5


5/36

Ces transformations la fois quantitatives et qualitatives qui soprent

en quelques sicles prennent lallure dun bond en avant dont on peine

trouver dans le seul Obeid le substrat logique. Le dtonateur de cette brusque

volution est difficilement saisissable. Pour expliquer le changement culturel,

les archologues mobilisent en gnral des explications dordre interne et/

ou externe. Mais ici ce changement accuse une telle envergure quil fait sans

doute appel linteraction de plusieurs facteurs brutalement amplifis, sans

que ltincelle mme de cette rupture soit clairement identifiable.

Jean Guilaine Le Chalcolithique et la construction des ingalits,Ed. Errance, Paris, p. 9-10.

Cet ouvrage est ddi la mmoire de Jean-Daniel Forest,qui fut le collgue, lami ou le mentor et parfois les trois

la fois de nombreux contributeurs de ce volume.


6/36


7/36

Table of Contents

Avant-propos ................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................9

Introduction

Catherine Marro

Is there a Post-Ubaid culture? Reflections on the transition from the Ubaid to the

Uruk periods along the Fertile Crescent and beyond ...........................................................................................................................13

Marcella Frangipane

Transitions as an archaeological concept. Interpreting the final Ubaid - Late Chalcolithictransition in the northern periphery of Mesopotamia ...........................................................................................................................39

Section 1. The Khabur region in the Post-Ubaid period

Joan Oates

The Terminal Ubaid (LC 1) Level at Tell Brak ...........................................................................................................................................65

Khaled Abu Jayyab

A ceramic chronology from Tell Hamoukar's southern extension .......................................................................................87

Johnny Samuele Baldi

Tell Feres al-Sharqi in the LC 1-2 period. Serial production and regionalisation ofceramic traditions: a perspective from a small rural site .............................................................................................................129

Johnny Samuele Baldi and Khaled Abu Jayyab

A comparison of the ceramic assemblages from Tell Feres al-Sharqi and Hamoukar ..........................163

Section 2. The Euphrates and Orontes basins in the Post-Ubaid period

Yayoi Yamazaki

The Terminal Ubaid assemblage of Tell al-Abr and its identity ......................................................................................183

Barbara Helwing

The Oylum Hyk western terrace Post-Ubaid assemblage and its place within theLate Chalcolithic of Western Asia ............................................................................................................................................................................205


8/36

Francesca Balossi-Restelli

The beginning of the Late Chalcolithic occupation at Arslantepe, Malatya .......................................................235

Deborah Giannessi

Tell Afis and the northern Orontes region in the Post-Ubaid period ............................................................................261

Francesca Balossi-Restelli and Barbara Helwing

Traditions west of the Euphrates at the beginning of the Late Chalcolithic.Characteristics, definitions, and supra-regional correlations ..................................................................................................291

Section 3. Beyond the Fertile Crescent in the Post-Ubaid period:another world?

Sevil Glur and Catherine Marro

The view from the north: comparative analysis of the Chalcolithic pottery assemblages

from Noruntepe and Ovular Tepesi ...................................................................................................................................................................305Isabella Caneva, Giulio Palumbi and Antonia Pasquino

The Ubaid impact on the periphery: Mersin-Yumuktepe during the fifth millennium BC .............353

Section 4. Overviews

Johnny Samuele Baldi

Coba bowls, mass-production and social change in Post-Ubaid times .....................................................................393

Judith Thomalsky

Lithic industries of the Ubaid and Post-Ubaid period in northern Mesopotamia ........................................417


9/36

Avant-propos

Un atelier international intitul The Post-Ubaid Horizon in the Fertile Crescent andBeyond sest tenu au chteau de Fosseuse (Oise) du 29 juin au 1er juillet 2009, sous les aus -pices du Centre National de la Recherche Scientifique (CNRS).

Organis par Catherine Marro (UMR 5133 Archorient - Environnements et Socitsde lOrient Ancien), ce colloque a runi dix participants ; deux collgues nayant pu participer latelier mme ont cependant eu la gentillesse de contribuer ce volume en prsentant

une synthse de leurs donnes dans un article (voir Caneva et alii, ce volume; Giannessi,ce volume).

Cet atelier avait pour objectif premier de reprendre lanalyse dun ensemble dedonnes archologiques se rapportant lhorizon dit Post-Obeid, priode obscure dateselon la terminologie msopotamienne entre lObeid et lUruk ; et dont la dfinition commelinterprtation demeurent sujettes controverses. Cette initiative fait suite la multiplicationdes dcouvertes dartefacts identifis comme obeidiens ou post-obeidiens dans descontextes dAnatolie ou du Caucase, situs a prioribien loin du monde msopotamien. Tout enlaissant une large place la prsentation de donnes brutes, les contributeurs de ce volume sesont efforcs de rflchir la signification des dynamiques structurelles, dsormais manifestes,attestes au sein dune macro-rgion stendant du Caucase la Msopotamie mais aussi

lAnatolie centrale et la Cilicie.Cet atelier sest tenu grce une subvention accorde par le laboratoire Archorient

et des fonds privs. La publication de cet ouvrage a t assure par le financement de lInstitutFranais dEtudes Anatoliennes (Istanbul) et du laboratoire Archorient. Je souhaite remer-cier vivement toutes les personnes, qui, un titre ou un autre, ont permis ce colloque de sedrouler dans les meilleures conditions et cet ouvrage de voir le jour, en particulier : MmeNora eni, directrice de lInstitut Franais dEtudes Anatoliennes, M. Aksel Tibet, responsabledes publications lIFEA, M. Olivier Henry, pensionnaire scientifique de lIFEA, ainsi queMme Emmanuelle Vila, directrice dArchorient. Jadresse aussi mes remerciements toutparticuliers Mme Shirley Montgomery, pour son prcieux concours lors de lharmonisationdes textes en anglais.


10/36


11/36

Francesca BALOSSI-RESTELLI*

THE BEGINNING OF THE LATE CHALCOLITHIC OCCUPATION

AT ARSLANTEPE, MALATYA

Abstract

This article presents the preliminary results of the ongoing excavations of the Period VIII occupationlevels at Arslantepe, the only site so far known within the Oriental Taurus range to display extensive

architectural exposures dated to the initial Late Chalcolithic period (second half of the 5thmillennium BCE).

A classification of the ceramic assemblage is given, which aims at casting light on the cultural relations

of the Malatya plain with neighbouring regions, as well as at constructing a relative chronology for this

period. The occupation of Period VIII at Arslantepe so far appears to be mainly domestic in character,

with interesting activity areas, which are discussed below. The hallmark of the ceramic production during

Period VIII is the dark-coloured Scraped Ware, apparently linking Malatya to the southwest (Oylum

Hyk), while suggesting very limited contacts with the eastern neighbours of the Elaz region.

Rsum

Cet article prsente les rsultats prliminaires des fouilles, toujours en cours, des niveaux d'occupa-tion de la Priode VIII Arslantepe: il sagit actuellement du seul site du Taurus Oriental prsentant des

niveaux architecturaux du dbut du Chalcolithique Rcent dgags en extension (deuxime moiti du 5 eme

millnaire av. n.). Une classification de lassemblage cramique permet la fois danalyser les relations

entretenues par la plaine de Malatya avec les rgions environnantes, et de construire une chronologie

relative. Loccupation de la Priode VIII Arslantepe semble principalement de caractre domestique ;

elle prsente des zones dactivits intressantes qui sont analyses ci-dessous. La cramique emblmatique

de la Priode VIII est la Scraped Ware, de couleur fonce, qui permet de relier la rgion de Malatya au

Sud-ouest anatolien (Oylum Hyk) mais suggre des contacts trs limits avec la rgion, pourtant voisine,

dElaz.

*) University of Rome La Sapienza, Rome, Italy.


12/36

FRANCESCA BALOSSI-RESTELLI236

Introduction

The prehistoric settlement of Arslantepe, in the Malatya plain (eastern Turkey) is mostly known forits Late Chalcolithic 3-5 occupation levels1, which at Arslantepe correspond to Period VII (LC 3-4) andPeriod VIA (LC 5). Period VII is characterized by ceremonial and litestructures, which later developinto a public complex and a political, economic, and religious centre at the very beginning of the era ofState formation (Period VIA). These two periods, dated from 3900 to 3000 BC2, have been excavatedin different areas of the mound, over a surface of several thousand square metres3.

Period VII occupation levels have been excavated in different areas of the mound, to the west andto the northeast, two areas where the settlement layout differs greatly4. These areas, which are locatedfar apart from each other, suggest that Arslantepe probably reached its maximum expansion at thistime, covering a large area of the mound. Period VIA is more concentrated within the southwestern partof the mound, with a public building covering more than 2000 m, and possible litedwellings locatedimmediately to the northwest of this area.

In recent years, however, excavations have brought to light an earlier period of occupation, labelledPeriod VIII, which corresponds to Late Chalcolithic 1-2 in the Santa Fe chronology5. According to

radiocarbon dates, the latest phase of Period VIII should be dated to the 4300 to 4000 BC (cal.) timespan (table1). The length of this occupation is as yet unknown. Furthermore, an earlier occupation,dated to the Ubaid and Halaf periods, seemingly underlies the occupation phases of Period VIII, assuggested by the finding of diagnostic pottery.

The study of Period VIII is of particular interest, since these occupation phases, which follow theUbaid period, display increasing social complexity and put down the roots for the development of Statepolities in this region: Ubaid and the periods immediately following are indeed of central importancefor the study of hierarchical societies and early States.

The stratigraphy and excavations

Period VIII levels were brought to light in the western area of the mound6, just to the north andnorthwest of the extensively excavated levels from Period VII7.

Period VII in this area is seemingly characterised by a ceremonial building, storage areas, andmonumental structures, which possibly belonged to litefamilies. Period VII deposits in this area are3 m thick, indicating a very long occupation, with much rebuilding and evidence of change8.

1) Rothman (ed.) 2001.

2) di Nocera 2000.

3) Frangipane and Palmieri 1983; Frangipane 2001, 2002, 2004, 2009, 2010.

4) Palmieri 1978, Frangipane 1993, 2002.

5) Rothman (ed.) 2001. For a discussion on the absolute chronology of Arslantepe VIII, see Balossi-Restelli andHelwing, this volume.

6) Balossi-Restelli 2008.

7) Frangipane 1993, 2002.

8) Liberotti and Quaresima 2010.


13/36

THE BEGINNING OF THE LATE CHALCOLITHIC OCCUPATION AT ARSLANTEPE 237

In the northeastern area of the mound, Period VII is characterised by small domestic dwellings,composed of one or two rooms, which lie directly on the virgin soil, at a much lower level than themonumental structures of the western area of the mound9.

The 300 m trench in which Period VIII levels have been reached lies immediately to the northwestof the literesidences10. Here, towards the western flanks of the mound, a Hittite (Imperial period)fortification wall, cutting into some Middle Bronze Age structures, has been identified immediatelybelow the mound surface. Some occupation levels belonging to Period VII, characterized by apparentlyimposing architecture, are located immediately below: they cut in turn into Period VIII levels.

Various architectural levels dated to Period VIII have been identified in this area and, in contrast towhat appears in the following Period VII, they all are domestic in character.

The physical relationship between Period VIII levels and those of Period VII is particularly inter-esting. A series of at least four Period VII terraces have been identified in this trench: these are largeterrace walls belonging to seemingly monumental structures that cut into Period VIII deposits. Theseterraces follow the slope of the mound: each terrace covers up but also cuts into the preceding level,as the slope rises eastwards. This succession of terraces suggests that we have probably reached the

western edge of the hill as it appeared during Period VII.The house-floor levels belonging to Period VIII give a good idea of the angle of the slope in this

area. Floors belonging to the same architectural complex show a difference in height of 1 m, over adistance of 6 m: northern rooms are one meter below southern rooms, indicating that they must belocated at the very edge of the mound as it looked during Period VIII.

Architectural Remains and the Distribution of Material Culture: a Domestic Quarter

The latest identified level belonging to Period VIII (Phase 1) was badly destroyed by a later occu-pation level; it has been only partially preserved (Fig. 1). A possible kitchen with a round oven andvery small lateral rooms, which, judging by their size, may have been used as storage silos, have beenidentified. The western part of the building is cut by the last terrace wall dated to Period VII. In situ

material has been found in the central kitchen room (A974), which suggests food processing and pres-ervation (several necked jars). Among the pottery containers, storage vessels are very frequent. A largebowl may have been used for food serving or consumption. Interestingly, a reinforced hole was foundin the centre of the room (pot stand), with a large jar still on top.

The level of occupation underlying Phase 1 (Phase 2) is the best preserved (Fig. 2). It shows sev-eral phases of rebuilding and evidence of change. This phase is characterised by the presence of threekitchens with large round ovens, which may correspond to three distinct family units. All three ovensoccupy a large part of the room they are built in. We have not found the link yet between the twokitchens to the north and the surrounding rooms, that might allow us to interpret the whole domesticcomplex. The plan of the southern complex is probably more complete, since it displays a series ofrooms opening onto an open courtyard (A720-A721). In room A718, next to a large oven built rightagainst the back wall of the room, two other small hearths were found, that were probably used for

cooking and roasting. A small hole, paved with cobbles and located more or less in the centre of the

9) Palmieri 1978.

10) Frangipane 1993; Balossi-Restelli 2008.


14/36


room, probably served as a jar holder, exactly as in A974 (Phase 1). The ovens were built in mud brick;they were circular in plan and domed. These ovens were thickly covered with white plaster. Two of theoven domes and the mouth opening of the northern oven were found still partly standing. Under theplaster, the cooking floor was lined with stone slabs. A conical shaped clay andiron, with two holes that

were possibly used as handles, was found on the floor of the kitchen (Fig. 2).As might be expected, in situmaterial in the kitchens mostly comprises cooking pots, together

with pestles and mortars. The latter are particularly frequent in room A718, where two flat grindingslabs, three spherical grinding stones and three cylindrical pestles have been found in its northern area.Preservation and storage jars are rare; they are seemingly more frequent in the courtyard, together withserving and consumption vessels (bowls). In A718, substantial quantities of charred seeds have beenfound, especially in three corners located next to the oven opening, as well as in the northwest cornerof the room, which suggests the presence of sacks of cereals in these places (the botanical remains arestill under study).

A series of adjacent rooms were brought to light under this small domestic quarter; the northernpart of which is still unexcavated (Fig. 3). The rooms to the southeast do not have a clear stratigraphic

connection with those located to the west and northwest (Phase 3). Excavations in 2010 have broughtto hypothesise that the southeastern rooms are earlier, thus suggesting a greater stratigraphic complex-ity than was so far perceptible.

The function of these rooms was certainly domestic. The walls of the western rooms are much thin-ner than those of the later phase. At least nine distinct spaces have been uncovered, some of which areseparated by possible streets (A912), rooms and passageways. Only two rooms have distinct doorwaysleading to the external areas. There was no feature that could help clarify the function of these areas:only four hearths (simple burnt areas on the floor) have been identified, two of which were foundindoor and two in the street area. The partial plan of this little quarter does not allow precise compari-sons, but it appears to be rather different from the plan of the two later phases. Traces of wall paintingshave been identified over the walls of two rooms, while a possible mud column base is attested in roomA872.

The distribution of in situpottery in this level neither is of much help for interpreting the functionof these different areas. Room A872 seems to have been used as a kitchen or as an area for daily domes-tic activities: apart from the hearth, one bowl was found (possibly for food consumption) together witha storage jar, a funnel, and four small bottle-like containers for liquids. There was no complete cookingpot on the floor, although fragments do appear in the room filling-layer.

The presence of two infant urn-burials under the floor of room A872 should also be pointed out. Afew administrative artefacts (seals and cretulae) too were found in these levels.

It is evident from the above that the character of the settlement and the plans of the buildings dur-ing Period VIII are quite distinct, in this area of the mound, from those of the following Period VII,with its monumental character, the litestructures, and the wide overall dimensions of the settlement.At the same time, a few elements indicate some degree of continuity within the sites occupation, thus

suggesting a gradual development from VIII to VII. The presence of the possible column base in A872indubitably recalls those of the nearby Period VII litebuilding11. Domed mud brick-ovens continue

11) Frangipane 1993.


15/36


to be made in the same way in Period VII12. Another indication of continuity are the wall paintingsthat were found in the domestic structures of Period VIII and in domestic, lite,and public buildingsalike during Period VII. Lastly, typical of Period VII are intramural burials located below the floorsand, most interestingly, while pit burials are more common in the later phases of Period VII, the earlier

phases, thus those closer to Period VIII, have yielded either urn burials (mostly for infants), or pit buri-als in which the body or the head was covered by pots or potsherds.

Other sites in the same or neighbouring regions display similar elements, such as the domedoven in the earier (Ubaid) occupation eve of Deirmentepe13, in the Late Chalcolithic 1-2 levelsof Tintepe in the Ea pain14, and at Gawra15. As for wall paintings and pot burials, they are alsoatteted at Noruntepe16.

The Period VIII Ceramic Assemblage

The radical change that appears in the architectural layout and settlement organisation in spite ofsome elements of continuity is also visible in the ceramic production, even if the pottery of the twoperiods is linked by certain characteristics. It should be stressed that comparisons between Period VIII

and Period VII should be drawn with caution, since Period VII stretches over a long time span that cov-ers approximately 500 years; it is thus extremely probable that the pottery assemblage underwent somechanges throughout this long period. In this respect, it should be pointed out that most of the materialsstudied from Period VII belong to the latest occupation phases17, which display major differences withthe pottery from Period VIII. The study of the ceramics from the earliest, domestic occupation in thenortheastern area of the mound18, which is in progress, might partially change our views.

Ware Types

The paste categories from Period VIII display major differences than the later Period VII ceramics.The great majority (84%) of the pottery here presented from Period VIII, coming from floors and roomfills (more than 12 000 sherds have been registered to this day), has a mixed temper, with medium to

fine chaff inclusions and fine grits. White calcareous inclusions, even of larger dimension, are com-mon. Approximately 15% of the pottery is mass-produced19.

As in Period VII, the wall sections mostly indicate incomplete oxidisation, except in the case ofpots with a high content of coarse chaff temper, which are often completely oxidised. This is mostlythe case with mass-produced bowls. This is no indication, in my opinion, that the two kinds of pastesunderwent distinct firing; on the contrary, it may rather suggest that the vessels were all fired together:

12) Palmieri 1978.

13) Esin 1989.

14) Esin 1982.

15) Tobler 1950.

16) Hauptmann 1976.

17) Trufelli 1994, 1997; Frangipane 1993.

18) This area was excavated in the early 1970s by Prof. Puglisi and Prof. Palmieri; Paolo Guarino is studying the potteryfrom this area.

19) Small sherds being difficult to attribute, this percentage is approximate.


16/36


by the time finer mixed-tempered vessels were considered to have reached a sufficient atmosphereand temperature, the coarser pots would certainly have been completely oxidised. The thickness of thewalls varies greatly, mostly ranging between 9 and 20 mm, but thinner walls are also attested.

The rest of the pottery (15%) is grit-tempered. The paste has a medium to fine texture. The grit-tempered pots are generally fully oxidised, their thickness varying between 7 and 9 mm.

One of the most characteristic elements of a large part of the mixed-tempered assemblage is itssurface treatment: the whole body of the pot tends to be scraped (Fig. 4). This effect was probablyobtained by scraping the wet surface of the pot with a flint tool, as shown by a series of experiments. Asthe pots are hand made, this operation could help to even out the pots profile and ensure that the coilsadhere better. The scraping technique is probably linked to manufacturing traditions. Approximately60% of the non mass-produced pottery is treated in this way. As for the surface treatment of the rest ofthe non mass-produced pottery, less than 30% of the sherds were left plain (the majority of these aregrit-tempered), 8% are burnished, and 5% are slipped.

From the study of these technical attributes, five distinct classes of pottery have so far been identi-fied. Four are characterized by a mixed chaff-and-grit-temper, while the last is grit-tempered.

The first two classes belong to the Plain Ware group. Theyare light in colour, mostly buff, cream,light brown and more rarely brick red or pinkish. We have created two groups because part of thisassemblage is mass-produced (the larger group), while the other is non mass-produced. Otherwise, thepaste and the colour of the vessels are similar in both groups; they only differ in the manufacturingtechniques. The non mass-produced groupdisplays a medium to fine texture with a rather compactpaste, while the mass-produced groupis coarser, with larger chaff inclusions and a less compact texture.

The mass-produced group, as will be illustrated later, mostly concerns bowls, in general referredto as Coba bowls. This ceramic production is well known throughout the Ubaid Horizon from theend of the Ubaid until the early Late Chalcolithic period; it is attested on many sites from Mersin inthe west to Tepe Gawra in the east20.

Generally speaking, the term Coba is used to indicate the serial and mass production of bowls

that develops at the end of the Ubaid period21and spreads throughout vast areas of the Near East.However, these bowls are shaped very differently from site to site, and research has rarely concentratedon the distinction between the different regional attributes of these bowls. The term Coba has thusbeen used to indicate a great variety of bowls, from round-based to flat-based, from chaff-temperedto grit-tempered, but mostly with a scraped bottom22. Bowls displaying any one of these attributesare often unified under this single label and considered as diagnostic indicators of a single culturaldevelopment. This has created some confusion, but also criticism from a number of scholars and theterm Coba should be employed with caution23. At this stage of research, a thorough analysis of theseattributes and their distribution would certainly be extremely useful for a regional analysis of the Ubaidand Late Chalcolithic developments24.

20) Garstang 1953; Tobler 1950.21) The preence of round bo ith craped bottom at Deirmentepe, i a cear indicator of their appearance ince the

Late Ubaid phases, but there is still some confusion, in the literature, about the chronology of their appearance too.

22) du Plat Taylor et alii1950; Akkermans 1988: 304-5; Esin 1983 ; Thuesen 1989.

23) Yamazaki 2010: 325.

24) See Baldi, this volume (ed.), section 4.


17/36


The bowls with a scraped bottom from Period VIII have a round base with a rather open pro-file. The scraping is not always very visible, which suggests that at times it may have been partiallysmoothed out. This mass-produced group, which is not always easy to recognize in the case of smallsherds, when the surface is smoothed-out, does not occur with other varieties of surface treatment.

Plain Ware is usually characterized by its plain surfaces (in nearly 80% of the cases), but the ves-sels may sometimes show a light scraping. In 20% of the cases, when a specific surface treatment isattested, several variations occur: a wash or a very diluted slip, which is often whitish. This kind ofPlain Ware appears to be similar to what is classified as Standardwareat the site of Oylum Hykduring the LC 1-225.

Decorated pottery (painted, colour-slipped, incised or with a combination of these methods) in thePlain Ware group makes up less than 1% of the total assemblage: it appears almost as an oddity. Whenattested, painted decoration appears in red, orange or brown geometric motifs over a white slip or asmoothed plain surface. There are also cases of incised and impressed decoration over a smoothed ora painted surface. A thick red or orange slip is also occasionally attested.

A third class, here labelled Scraped Ware, is highly diagnostic for this period and region. The sur-

face, like the paste colour, is dark and invariably scraped (Fig. 4). The temper is also mixed, with agreater proportion of grit inclusions than in Plain Ware; its paste has a medium to coarse texture. Thewall sections are always dark and homogeneous throughout, which possibly indicates a reducing firingatmosphere. The paste colour ranges from dark brown to grey, violet and black. The wall thicknessusually varies between 8 and 10 mm. A tentative study of the chronological evolution of the scrapingintensity, the surface colour and the wall thickness shows that scraping was less intense in the earliestlevels but increases, together with more violet and purple colours, in the later phases. Five percent ofthis class bears impressed and/or incised decoration. As already stated, this is certainly the most diag-nostic pottery category for the Arslantepe VIII Period.

Interpreting this surface treatment is not easy. Its specificity suggests the existence of a specialsignificance, whether functional or aesthetic. What is more, there must be a relationship between thiskind of scraping and the tradition of scraped bases occurring on bowls during the later Arslantepe VII

period (3900-3400 BC). It is thus possible that scraping is somehow linked to the manufacturing tradi-tion, but it could have some functional meaning too. A similar class of pottery is described at OylumHyk as Standardkeramik mit aufgerauhter Oberflche.

The fourth category, here labelledBurnished Ware, is characterized by a mixed chaff and grit tem-per, with a distinctly finer paste; its surface is always burnished. The chaff is finer and less abundant;the same is true of the mineral inclusions. The surface colours vary from pinkish to buff, through red-dish, grey, brown or blackish, the most frequent being the lighter colours. At times, there appears to bea light whitish wash over the surface. The chronological distribution of this class is rather regular, justas are the surface colours, which do not seem to have a specific chronological distribution. This is theonly class, as we will show, that comes out in specific shapes. This category possibly corresponds toOylum Hyks graupolierte Keramik.

Lastly, the fifth category, Plain Grit Wareis characterized by its mineral temper. The paste is fairly

fine in texture; it usually has no specific surface treatment, but it may be burnished. The surface colouris generally buff, cream or reddish. Rarely, it appears with a coloured slip or painted decoration. Thiscategory seemingly corresponds to Oylum Hyks Feinkeramik.

25) zgen et alii1999.


18/36


The quantitative distribution of these classes shows that Scraped Ware is the most frequent cat-egory, amounting to nearly half of the whole bulk (Table 2). However, the apparent predominance ofScraped Waremay result from the functional specificity of the excavated contexts, since most of theseturned out to be cooking areas (Scraped Wareis in fact essentially used for cooking pots), and also from

the large dimensions of most of these vessels, which produce a higher number of sherds when broken.As already stated, the mass-produced ware corresponds to 15% of the pottery from the room fills

and the floors, while the rest of the Plain Wareamounts to 16% of the total assemblage. TheBurnishedWareis the less frequent (5%), while the Plain Grit Wareadds up to 15% of the total assemblage.

It is interesting to note the decrease of the Plain Grit Ware in the later phases of Period VIII:the greater proportion of grit-tempered ware in the earliest Post-Ubaid phases is probably not a coinci-dence, since it echoes the mainly mineral temper of the Ubaid pottery.

Shapes and Functional Categories

The shapes comprise beakers, bowls, basins, bottle-like containers, jars, and a fewpithoiand fun-

nels. There are no lugs or handles, and no footed vessels. The majority of the vessels are bowls, whichamount to approximately 65% of the total rim-sherds. When we leave out the mass-produced pottery,which essentially consists of bowls, the bowls still amount to 59% of the total shapes. This correspondsto what has been observed by various scholars in ethnographic domestic contexts: serving vessels aregenerally more frequent than other functional classes of pottery26. Since they are used more frequently,they display a higher breakage rate as they are moved about more frequently than other pots.

Ceramic classes (paste category) and morphological types do not exactly match, even though thereappears to be a preference for the use of specific classes in the case of specific functional shapes: forexample, theBurnished Wareand the Plain Grit Wareusually appear as bowls, while Scraped Wareismostly used for necked jars. Approximately 60% of the Plain Warecomes in bowls, but this ware classappears to be the most polyvalent, since many other shapes, such as bottle-like jars, funnels, whole-mouth jars, goblets etcare also made in Plain Ware.

The apparent relationship between paste categories (ware classes) and shapes, however, does notseem to be straightforward when we compare morphological types and paste categories, especially asconcerns specific shapes. The most simple shaped bowls, for example, may be made of any one ofthese four paste categories; this rule is valid for most bowl shapes (Fig. 5: a-e), with only a few excep-tions. Bowls with flat or slightly thickened rims are found in Plainand Scraped Ware(Fig. 5: f); thosewith in-turned rims are found in all classes except for Plain Grit Ware(Fig. 5: g). Flaring bowls withstraight profiles are also made of Plain Grit Ware(Fig. 5: h-i), but they never come in Scraped Ware.

Bowls with a slightly sinuous profile or a thickened rim may also come in many different classes ofpaste (Fig. 5: l-n). The mass-produced bowls from Arslantepe have a bevelled rim and an open profile(Fig 5: j-k).

Some bowls with particular shapes do appear exclusively in specific classes: this is the case with

the multiple groove bowls, which only come in Burnished Ware(Fig. 6: a-c); of the deep bowls without-turned lips and the bowls with out-turned thickened rims, which both only appear in Plain Ware(Fig. 6: d-e). As for the hemispherical bowls with out-turned, thickened-rims, they appear in Scraped

26) Mil ls 1989.


19/36


Ware(Fig 6: f). The multiple-grooved bowls made of Burnished Wareare, at Arslantepe, highly diag-nostic since there is nothing similar in the later Period VII. Comparable bowls are attested at OylumHykSptchalkolitischeand Hammam et-Turkman V, as well as at Sake Gz27. To my knowledge,no uch bo are atteted in the Ea region, nor at Tepe Gara.

Goblets (Fig. 6: g-i) are not very frequent; they appear in varying shapes, but none are similar tothe typical Arslantepe VII goblets.

Interesting is the variety in the dimension of the bowls. The dimensional range of the bowls doesnot seem to form any cluster: it ranges from a few hundred millilitres in capacity to more than sevenlitres. Even when the bowls are sorted by paste categories, they do not fall into significant dimensionalcategories.

The size distribution within specific morphological types on the other hand appears to be extremelyregular, as is shown by the occurrence of three or even four distinct dimensional categories for eachtype (Fig. 7). These might be interpreted as sets of plates, with different sizes corresponding to vari-ous users or various functions. The dimensional groups may represent different users, such as children,women, and men28, or different functions, such as drinking, individual eating, collective eating, or

serving. Thus, while there seems to be hardly any relationship between ceramic class (temper, paste)and shapes, there appears to be a strong link between shapes and size categories29. Shape and size maythus have, amongst others, a functional value.

Among the shapes with closed profiles, we find small globular jars with everted or straight rims(Fig. 8: a-f). These jars often bear impressed and incised decoration (Fig. 8: a-c). They are mostly madeof Scraped Ware, with a few exceptions, which come in Plain Ware. Decorated examples are alwaysattested in dark Scraped Ware. Cooking pots typically appear as globular jars with a fairly simple, shorteverted neck or collar; they always appear in Scraped Ware(Fig. 8: g-j). As one might expect in sucha case, there is a strong correlation between paste (class), shape and function. The capacity of thesecooking pots ranges from eight to twenty-two litres.

Other types of jars have a more or less globe-shaped body, mostly with a round base (Fig. 9: a);

a single flat-based jar has so far been identified in the whole Arslantepe VIII assemblage (Fig. 9: b).Small high-necked jars, like little globe-shaped flasks, are common in these levels (Fig. 9: c-d).

There are only two spouted jars and three fragments of double-rimmed jars that strongly recallexamples from Tepe Gawra (Fig. 9: e). Another group of short-necked jars display a more pear-shapedprofile (Fig. 9: f-g). Again, comparable examples are attested at the site of Oylum.

Lastly, a less frequent and fairly atypical group of necked jars are characterized by their moreelaborate, squared, thickened and out-turned rims (Fig. 9: h-j), which recall pottery types from the laterlevels of Arslantepe VII. It is on this type of jars that painted or incised decoration sometimes occurs:uch decoration i ao knon from ite in the Ea region30.

The dimensions of the vessels with closed profiles are very variable, ranging from one litre toapproximately sixteen. A single pithos has been identified so far; it remains incomplete with an

27) zgen et alii1999; Van Loon 1988; du Plat Taylor et alii1950.

28) Longacre 1992.

29) Balossi-Restelli and Guarino 2010.

30) van Loon 1978.


20/36


estimated volume of 113 litres. This pithosmust have been used for the conservation of staples andwas probably never moved from its standing point. Interestingly enough, these types appear to havefairly homogeneous dimensions in contrast to the bowls: they may be identified not only on the basisof their shape, but also of their capacity.

Another important element is the apparent correlation between ware classes and shapes. In the caseof jars for instance, round, short-collared jars (cooking pots) are seemingly always made in ScrapedWare; Plain Grit Wareis used for small, necked jars, whileBurnished Wareis never used for jars. Allthe other storage jars are made in Plain Ware. On the basis of these last two observations, I wouldsurmise that, in the case of jars, morphological types may have functional specificities; whereas thecase for bowls is not so clear.

These specificities are in keeping with the still domestic character of the pottery production atArslantepe during Period VIII; in fact, bowls, which are used for a variety of functions, are made ofdifferent pastes and shapes, while vessels that have more specific functions (cooking pots, storage jars)and thus need to respond to particular technical characteristics will have similar attributes in spite oftheir domestic mode of production. The only regular feature of the bowls is the existence of different

dimensional clusters for each type; this probably corresponds to a standard way of using them (quanti-ties of food, or collective meals).

Relationships of the Period VIII Ceramic Assemblage with the following LC 3-4periods (Period VII) at Arslantepe

As in the case of architectural traditions, interesting observations may be made when we comparethe ceramic assemblages of Period VIII and Period VII. At first glance, there appears to be a majordivision between the two periods, since in Period VII we are faced with a radical change in the tech-nology of the ceramic manufacture. The pottery of Period VII is chaff-faced, with a high percentage ofchaff inclusions and a minor quantity of grit. The texture is in general coarser than during Period VIII.The surface is usually red or orange-slipped. Essentially two classes may be distinguished, one being

slightly coarser than the other: the coarser class is used for jars, while the finer is used for bowls, fruitstands and goblets. Apart from these two classes, a mass-produced, coarse pottery is also attested: it ischaracterized by a plain surface and a light buff or cream colour; this kind of pottery mainly appearsas bowls. Apart from the surface treatment, these bowls display the same paste/texture as in the red-slipped ware31.

The only category that stands out by its distinct kind of ware is that of cooking pots, which aremainly grit-tempered and have a smoothed surface.

The use of the wheel, initially a slow wheel, is attested for the first time during this period. Thewheel was very frequently used to shape mass-produced bowls, and possibly to finish the necks incooking pots and jars32.

Another element that is fairly common in Period VII, but totally absent from Period VIII are pot-

ters marks, which at Arslantepe are typical of Period VII.

31) Frangipane 1993, Trufelli 1997.

32) Trufelli 1994.


21/36


Shape is the only element of continuity perceptible in cooking pots, since manufacture (both hand-made and wheel-thrown during Period VII, only hand-made during Period VIII), clay, colour (mainlybrown in Period VII and purple in Period VIII), and surface treatment (smoothed vs.scraped) displaynotable differences. The similarity in pot size during the two periods significantly suggests unchanged

quantities of cooked food and thus possibly a similar organisation of food processing.It should be stressed again however, that Period VII lasts for many centuries: the better-known

ceramics belong to the latest part of the period. According to the current research carried out by PaoloGuarino on the domestic contexts of the northeastern part of the mound, there seem to be in fact muchstronger similarities between the two periods than previously thought. Even from the latest liteorpublic contexts of Period VII, some elements of continuity with Period VIII are apparent in the potteryproduction. While manufacture displays sharp distinctions between the pottery assemblages of the twoperiods, shapes might indicate greater similarities.

A remarkable change may be noted in the evolution of the mass-produced bowls, which in PeriodVII become lower and wider, and often have a flat bottom (Fig.10: a-b). This evolution is gradual: inthe lower levels, bowls appear with round, flint-scraped bases; they are often hand-made or made on

the slow wheel, while in the later levels most bowls are truncated, with a conical shape and, at times,traces of a string cut33. These flat-based bowls are attested at many neighbouring sites, among whichNoruntepe and Tepe Gara, athough manufacturing technique var coniderab from region toregion and from site to site34.

Apart from these mass-produced vessels, carinated beakers (Fig. 10: c-d) and some rare fruit standsnumber among the shapes that have no equivalent in Period VIII. Elements of continuity are attested, asmentioned, in the more simple shaped bowls (Fig. 10: f), but the most diagnostic bowls of Period VIII(Fig. 6: a-c) have no equivalent in Period VII. It should be noted, moreover, that even when shapes aresimilar (Fig. 10: e), the bowls from Period VII are mostly red-slipped, which is rarely the case duringPeriod VIII.

Jars from Period VII mostly differ from their predecessors. Their profiles are less globe-shaped,while the vessels have higher shoulders, and the rims are more elaborate (Fig. 10: g-h). In ArslantepeVIII, there are some rare cases of similar vessels, from which they may have originated (Fig. 9: a). Assuggested by M. Frangipane, a possible continuity in some jar shapes from Period VIII to Period VIIis suggested by the jars with out-flaring rims, which are similar to those of Period VIII: they are veryfrequent in the lower and middle levels of Period VII but tend to disappear in the upper levels, as theyare replaced by jars with cylindrical necks35. The most typical jars from Period VIII are pear-shaped(Fig. 9: c, f, g); a few pots from Period VII bear some similarity with them (Fig. 10: i, k). Jars with awide mouth-opening are seemingly rarer in Period VIII (Fig. 9: i), but evidence similarities with somesherds from Period VII (Fig. 10: j).

From these rapid observations we may conclude that even though Period VII at Arslantepe marksindeed a major change with Period VIII, that is perceptible not only in the pottery, but also in the set-tlement layout and the architecture, a few specific attributes of the ceramic assemblage and the archi-

tecture nonetheless suggest a degree of continuity between the two periods.

33) Frangipane 1993; Trufelli 1994.

34) Gulur 2000; Hauptmann 1982; Tobler 1950.

35) Frangipane 1993.


22/36


Intersite Relationships: Regional Developments during Arslantepe Period VIII

Last but not least, I would like now to address the problem of cultural interactions and chronologi-cal relationships of Arslantepe Period VIII with the surrounding regions.

First of all, the presence of mass-produced bowls, together with out-of-context painted Late Ubaidvessels, suggest a phase relatively close to the end of the Ubaid period. The presence of the mass-produced bowls does not help much though as a cultural indicator. Such bowls are widely distributedand reflect a technological and social development rather than a cultural horizon, as is furtherdemonstrated by their high morphological and technical variability.

The hallmarks of Period VIII are the scraped, dark-coloured jars (Scraped-Ware cooking pots,Figs. 4 and 8) and the burnished, multiple-grooved-rimmed bowls (Burnished Ware, Fig. 6: a-c). Asfar as I know, these types, as well as most other ceramic categories typical of Arslantepe VIII, are alsoattested at Oylum Hyk.

Oylum Hyk is certainly the site that displays the closest links with the Arslantepe VIII assem-blage: at this site Scraped Wareis present (Standardkeramik mit aufgerauhter Oberflche), as well as

Burnished Ware(graupolierte Keramik) and Grit Ware(Feinkeramik). There are also many similarities

in the shapes and decoration types. In the Scraped Warecategory, one finds small jars with incised andimpressed decoration, which are also common at Arslantepe.

These similarities suggest preferential links between Arslantepe and the south-west: this hypothesisis also supported by the mass-produced bowls and a few incised and impressed sherds from SakeGz IVA that recall examples from Arslantepe VIII36. Multiple-grooved-rimmed bowls are present atHammam et-Turkman VB37, suggesting that this pottery horizon may include the Balikh region.

On the other hand, athough Arantepe i ver coe to the Ea pain, imiaritie ith thi regionare rare. Possible contacts are suggested by a handful of sherds, among which a painted fragment ofPlain Warefrom Korucutepe. A type of Scraped Wareis mentioned for Korucutepe Phase VB, but thereare no illustrations that could support any comparison38. Multiple-grooved-burnished bowls are alsoattested on this site, but we do not know in what quantities.

Comparisons with Gawra, in the Tigris region, are even scantier: they appear to be limited to singleand very specific vessels, such as the double-rimmed jars mentioned above. Typical decorations of theso-called Gawra XI-IX horizon, such as stamp-impressed ware and blob-painted ceramics, are totallyabsent from Arslantepe VIII.

Interestingly, CasserolesandHammerhead bowls, which are the hallmarks of the later LC 3 periodin the Middle Euphrates region, are attested at Oylum but not at Arslantepe VII. In spite of their closelinks during the earlier Late Chalcolithic period, the provinces of Malatya and Kilis thus seeminglyfollow separate paths during the following LC 3 period.

36) du Plat Taylor et alii1950: Fig. 17: 3-5.

37) zgen et alii1999; van Loon 1988: pl.106.

38) Brandt 1978.


23/36


Conclusions

The radiocarbon dates from the later levels of Arslantepe VIII indicate an occupation dated to theend of the 5thmillennium BCE. These results coincide with the old dates from Korucutepe B, but mostimportantly with those of Tell Zeidan LC 1-239. The pottery sequence confirms the existence of rela-tionships between Hammam VB and contemporary levels at Oylum Hyk. The pottery assemblagesuggests that this regional horizon includes the provinces of Malatya (Arslantepe), and Kilis (OylumHyk), the Amuq region, the Syrian Euphrates and possibly the Balikh basin.

On the other hand, the Ea region doe not appear to be part of thi province, in pite of a feink. The region of Ea ha important contact ith Gara XI-IX, a do the ite of the Khaburand its tributaries, such as Tell Brak, Hamoukar, and Tell Feres al-Sharqi. These sites, as evident fromthe other contributions in this volume, certainly form another autonomous regional development at thebeginning of the Late Chalcolithic period (LC 1-2), recognisable among other things, by the presenceof Sprig Ware, bowls with incised cross-hatched decoration, hole-mouth jars with flaring rims, spouted

jars, double-rimmed jars, and Stamp-Impressed Ware. At Arslantepe VIII, only a few sherds from threedouble-rimmed jars, two spouted jars and rare vessels with painted cross-hatched triangles are so far

attested.

39) Stein http://oi.uchicago.edu/pdf/08-09_Zeidan.pdf.


24/36


Bibliography

AKKERMANS, P.M.M.G.1988 The Period V pottery. In M.N. van Loon (ed.),Hammam et-Turkman I, Nederlands Historisch-

Archeologisch Instituut te Istanbul, Istanbul: 287-349.

BALOSSI-RESTELLI, F.2008 Post-Ubaid occupation on the Upper Euphrates: Late Chalcolithic 1-2 at Arslantepe (Malatya,

Turkey). In H. Khne, R. M. Czichon, F. J. Kreppner (eds.), Proceedings of the 4th InternationalCongress on the Archaeology of the Ancient Near-East, Berlin 29thMarch-3rdApril 2004:vol. 2,Harrasowitz Verlag, Berlin: 21-32.

BALOSSI-RESTELLI, F. and P. GUARINO2010 Domestic behaviour and cultural milieu north and south of the Taurus in the mid-4thmillennium

BC, as inferred from the pottery production and use at the sites of Arslantepe and Zeytinli Bahe. InP. Matthiae, F. Pinnock, L. Nigro, N. Marchetti (eds.), Proceedings of the 6thInternational Congresson the Archaeology of the Ancient Near East, May, 5th-10th2008, Rome, vol. 3, Harrassowitz Verlag,Wiesbaden: 491-502.

BRANDT, R. W.1978 The Chalcolithic pottery. In M.N. van Loon (ed.), Korucutepe, Vol. 2, North-Holland Publishing

Company, Amsterdam: 57-60.

EsN,U.1982 Tlintepe excavations, 1974, Keban Project 1974-1975 Activities, METU, Ankara: 127-136.

1983 Deirmentepe ka, Kaz Sonular Toplants5: 71-79.

1989 An early trading centre in eastern Anatolia. In K. Emre, M. Mellink, B. Hrouda and N. zg(eds.),Anatolia and the Ancient Near East,Trk Tarih Kurumu Bamevi, Ankara: 135-18.

FRANGIPANE, M.1993 Local components in the development of centralized societies in Syro-Anatolian regions. In

M. Frangipane, H. Hauptmann, M. Liverani, P. Matthiae, and M. Mellink (eds.), Between theRivers and over the Mountains. Alba Palmieri Dedicata Roma, Dipartimento di Scienza Storiche,

Archeologiche e Antropologiche dellAntichit, Universit di Roma La Sapienza, Rome: 133-61.

2001 Centralization processes in Greater Mesopotamia. Uruk expansion as the climax of systemic inter-actions among areas of the Greater Mesopotamian region. In M. S. Rothman (ed.),Uruk Mesopotamiaand its Neighbors. Cross-Cultural Interactions in the Era of State Formation , SAR, Santa Fe:307-347.

2002 Non-Uruk developments and Uruk-linked features on the northern borders of Greater Mesopotamia.In S. Campbell, N. Postgate (eds.),Artefacts of Complexity. Tracking the Uruk in the Near East, IraqArchaeological Reports-5, British School of Archaeology in Iraq, London: 123-148.

2009 Rise and collapse of the Late Uruk centres in Upper Mesopotamia and eastern Anatolia, ScienzedellAntichit 15: 15-31.

FRANGIPANE, M., (ed.)2004 Alle Origini del Potere. Arslantepe, la Collina dei Leoni. Mondadori/Electa, Milano.

2010 Economic Centralisation in Formative States. The Archaeological Reconstruction of the EconomicSystem in 4thMillennium Arslantepe.Studi di Preistoria Orientale 3, Sapienza University, Rome.

FRANGIPANE, M. and A. PALMIERI1983 Cultural developments at Arslantepe at the beginning of third millennium, OriginiXII/2: 523-574.


25/36


GARSTANG, J.1953 Prehistoric Mersin, Ymktepe in Southern Turkey. Clarendon Press, London.

GLUR, S.2000 Norun Tepe: die Chakoithiche Keramik. In C. Marro and H. Hauptmann(eds.), Chronologies

des pays du Caucase et de lEuphrate aux IVe-IIIemillnaires, IFEA, Varia Anatolica XI, DeBoccard, Paris: 375-418.

HAUPTMANN, H.1976 Die Grabungen auf dem Norun-Tepe, 1972, Keban Projesi 1972 alsmalar. Keban Project 1972

Activities,METU, Ankara: 71-90, pl. 29-62.

1982 Die Grabungen auf dem Norun-Tepe, 1974-1975, Keban Projesi 1974 almalar. Keban Project1974 Activities,METU, Ankara: 41-94, pl. 13-52.

LIBEROTTI G. and R. QUARESIMA2010 Building materials in the 4th and early 3rd millennium monumental architecture at Arslantepe:

Mudbricks and plaster. In M. Frangipane (ed.), Economic Centralisation in Formative States. TheArchaeological Reconstruction of the Economic System in 4th Millennium Arslantepe, Studi diPreistoria Or ientale 3, Sapienza University, Rome.

LONGACRE, W.A. (ed.)1992 Ceramic Ethnoarchaeology. The University of Arizona Press, Tucson.

van LOON, M.N. (ed.)1988 Hammam Et-Turkman I.Nederlands Historisch-Archeologisch Instituut te Istanbul, Istanbul.

1978 Korucutepe Vol. 2. North-Holland Publishing Company, Amsterdam.

MILLS, B.1989 Integrating functional analyses of vessels and sherds through models of ceramic assemblage forma-

tion, World Archaeology21/1: 133-147.

di NOCERA, G.M.2000 C-14 datings at Arslantepe and Bronze Age chronology in the Upper and Middle Euphrates. In P.

Matthiae, A. Enea, L. Peyronel, F. Pinnock (eds.), 1st International Congress on the Archaeologyof the Ancient Near East, May 18th-23rd 1998, Universit degli Studi di Roma La Sapienza,Dipartimento di Scienze Storiche, Archeologiche ed Antropologiche dellAntichit, Rome: 333-348.

zGEN, E., B. HElwING, A. ENGN, O. NIEwENHUysE, and R. SPOOR1999 Oylum Hyk 1997-1998. Die Sptchalkolitische Siedlung auf der Westterrasse, Anatolia

Antiqua 7: 19-67.

PALMIERI, A.1978 Scavi ad Arslantepe (Malatya), Quaderni de La Ricerca Scientifica100, CNR, Roma: 311-352.

du PLAT TAYLOR, J.D., M. SETON-WILLIAMS and J. WAECHTER1950 The excavations at Sake Gz,Iraq12/2: 53-138.

ROTHMAN, M.S. (ed.)2001 Uruk Mesopotamia & its Neighbors: Cross-Cultural Interactions in the Era of State Formation ,

SAR, Santa Fe.

THUESEN, I.1989 Diffusion of Ubaid pottery into western Syria. In E.F. Henriskson and I. Thuesen (eds.), Upon this

Foundation, Museum Tusculanum Press, Copenhagen: 418-437.


26/36


Sample Period Location 14Cdates, b.p. Delta +/- Cal. 1* B.C. Cal. 2* B.C. 1sigma A 1sigma B 2sigma A 2sigma B

Rome-465 VIII A724 5560 80 4464-4339 4542-4247 4464 4339 4542 4247

Rome-466 VIII A718 5440 80 4352-4170 4456-4045 4352 4170 4456 4045

Rome-462 VIII A718 5430 80 4349-4164 4454-4043 4349 4164 4454 4043

Rome-463 VIII A718 5420 80 4346-4159 4451-4010 4346 4159 4451 4010

Rome-464 VIII A718 5400 80 4340-4105 4435-4001 4340 4105 4435 4001

Rome-460 VIII A718 5330 80 4315-4006 4343-3973 4315 4006 4343 3973

Rome-461 VIII A718 5300 80 4238-3993 4334-3961 4238 3993 4334 3961

Rome-459 VIII A721 5270 80 4226-3981 4324-3949 4226 3981 4324 3949

Table 1: Radiocarbon dates from Arslantepe Period VIII.

mass produced plain ware dark scraped grit tempered burnished ware intrusive total

# 1815 2093 5969 1892 640 63 12472

% 14,55 16,78 47,86 15,17 5,13 0,51 100

Table 2: Arslantepe VIII - Sherd counts from room fills and floors.

TOBLER, A.J.1950 Excavations at Tepe Gawra. University of Pennsylvania, Philadelphia.

TRUFELLI, F.1994 Standardisation, mass production and potters marks in the Late Chalcolithic pottery of Arslantepe

(Malatya), Origini 18: 245-89.1997 Ceramic correlations and cultural relations in IVth Millennium eastern Anatolia and Syro-

Mesopotamia, Studi Micenei Ed Egeo-Anatolici 39/1: 5-33.

YAMAZAKI, Y.2010 An aspect of the Ubaid intrusion in the Syrian Upper Euphrates valley. In R. Carter and G. Philip

(eds.), Beyond the Ubaid. Transformation and Integration in the Late Prehistoric Societies in theMiddle East, SAOC 63, University of Chicago Press, Chicago: 311-328.


27/36


Fig. 1: Arslantepe. Domestic structure of the latest phase of Period VIII (phase 1).The wall in white dates to Period VII, cutting into the Period VIII level.


28/36


Fig. 2: Arslantepe. Domestic quarter dated to Period VIII (phase 2).The andiron found in kitchen A718 is shown in the upper left.


29/36


Fig. 3: Arslantepe. Structures belonging to an earlier phase of Period VIII.The two colours indicate two different architectural levels (phase 3 and earlier level).


30/36


Figure 4:

Arslantepe VIII.

Example of a cooking

pot in Scraped Ware.

Fig. 6: a-c) Multiple-Groove bowls in Burnished Ware from Arslantepe VIII (drawings # 302/07,

303/07, 85/03); d-e) example of a deep bowl with an out-turning lip (drawing # 316/07); e) example of a

bowl with an out-turned thickened rim (drawing # 414/06); f) example of a hemispherical bowl with an

outward thickened rim in Scraped Ware (drawing 370/06); g-i) goblets from Arslantepe VIII

(drawings # 436/06, 232/97, 196/07).


31/36


Fig. 5: Bowls from Arslantepe Period VIII. a-e) examples of profiles present in all four paste categories

(drawings # 417/06, 438/06, 416/06, 185/07, 182/07); f) example of a bowl with a flat and slightly

thickened rim (drawing # 173/97); g) example of a bowl with an inturning rim, found in all paste

categories except for the Plain Grit Ware (drawing # 424/06); h-i) bowls with wide, flaring profiles,

not known in dark Scraped Ware (drawing # 192/07, 306/07); j-l) examples of Mass-Produced Bowls

(drawings # 107/98, 194/07, 198/07); m-o) examples of bowls with a slightly everting or sinuous lip and

rim (drawings # 613/06, 175/07; 437/06).


32/36


Fig. 7: Plots of bowls belonging to types C1, C6 and C11.On the X-axis is indicated the capacity of the bowls, in litres; on the Y-axis the rim diameter is shown in cm.

Three or four dimensional clusters appear to be visible in all morphological types.


33/36


Fig. 8: Arslantepe Period VIII globular jars in Scraped Ware. a-c) have impressed decoration. Drawings

# 15/98, 19/98, 320/06, 117/97, 170/07, 371/06, 73/07, 75/93, 80/93, 212/92.


34/36


Fig. 9: Arslantepe Period VIII jars. a-d, f-g, i) plain ware (drawings # 153/97, 302/98, 29/98, 189/92,

75/03, 74/03, 208/93); e) coarse chaff-tempered (drawing # 27/04); h) grit-tempered with red/brown

painted decoration (drawing # 135/97); j) grit-tempered (drawing # 199/92).


35/36


Fig. 10: Arslantepe Period VII pottery. a-b) conical-shaped Mass-Produced Bowls. The first has clear

indications of wheel manufacture (string cut) (drawings # 95/03 and 2/04); c-d) carinated orange/red-

slipped and burnished beakers (drawings # 42/02, 43/02); e-f) bowls with mixed temper and shapes

resembling those of Period VIII (drawings # 22/04, 48/02); g-k) jars with mixed-temper and untreated

surface (drawings # 239/91, 238/91, luc.235, 251/93, 87/98).


36/36

Documents

Balossi_Marro2012