The Late Neolithic Ceramics from Shir a First Assessment Olivier Nieuwenhuyse

Sonderdruck aus Zeitschrift für 2009 BAND 2 Orient-Archäologie

Deutsches Archäologisches Institut • Orient-Abteilung

Deutsches Archäologisches Institut Orient-Abteilung

Zeitschrift für Orient-Archäologie

Band 2 • 2009

Walter de Gruyter • Berlin • New York Herausgeber

Ricardo Eichmann • Margarete van Ess Deutsches Archäologisches Institut Orient-Abteilung Podbielskiallee 69–71 D-14195 Berlin www.dainst.org

Mitherausgeber

Karin Bartl, Außenstelle Damaskus • Iris Gerlach, Außenstelle Sanaa

Wissenschaftlicher Beirat

Reinhard Bernbeck, Berlin • Nicholas J. Conard, Tübingen • Eckart Frahm, New Haven • Andreas Hauptmann, Bochum • Michaela Konrad, Bamberg • Lorenz Korn, Bamberg • Daniel T. Potts, Sydney • Klaus Rheidt, Cottbus • Christian Robin, Paris • Thomas Schäfer, Tübingen • Aleksander Sedov, Moskau • Dieter Vieweger, Wuppertal

⑧ Gedruckt auf säurefreiem Papier, das die US-ANSI-Norm über Haltbarkeit erfüllt.

ISSN 1868-9078 ISBN 978-3-11-020898-6

Bibliografische Information der Deutschen Nationalbibliothek

Die Deutsche Nationalbibliothek verzeichnet diese Publikation in der Deutschen Nationalbibliografie; detaillierte bibliografische Daten sind im Internet über http://dnb.d-nb.de abrufbar.

Dieses Werk einschließlich aller seiner Teile ist urheberrechtlich geschützt. Jede Verwertung außerhalb der engen Grenzen des Urheberrechtes ist ohne Zustimmung des Verlages unzulässig und strafbar. Das gilt insbesondere für Vervielfältigungen, Übersetzungen, Mikroverfilmungen und die Einspeicherung und Verarbeitung in elektronischen Systemen.

Printed in Germany

Redaktion: Claudia Bührig, Susanne Kuprella (Deutsches Archäologisches Institut, Orient-Abteilung) Arabische Übersetzung: Hala Attoura, Tübingen • Laith Hussein, Marburg Standard-Layout und Umschlaggestaltung: Beyer foto.grafik, Berlin Titelvignette: Gadara/Jordanien (Claudia Bührig, Deutsches Archäologisches Institut, Orient-Abteilung) Aufmachergestaltung: Beyer foto.grafik, Berlin • Anja Altenburg, Susanne Kuprella (Deutsches Archäologisches Institut, Orient- Abteilung) • Markus Gschwind • Stefan R. Hauser, David J. Tucker Satz: Punkt.Satz, Zimmer und Partner, Berlin Druck und buchbinderische Verarbeitung: Druckhaus »Thomas Müntzer« GmbH, Bad Langensalza

Fig. 22 in diesem Beitrag. The Late Neolithic Ceramics from Shir A First Assessment Olivier Nieuwenhuyse

Abstract/Kurzfassung/

The Late Neolithic remains poorly understood in the Near East. The DAI excavations at Shir (Hama province, western Syria) offer unique data for this period. This report presents a first detailed assessment of the Late Neolithic pottery, ca. 7000–6400 cal. BC, which corresponds to the earliest stages of the Late Neolithic in Upper Mesopotamia.

Das späte Neolithikum im Vorderen Orient ist bisher wenig untersucht. Die Ausgrabungen des DAI in Shir (Provinz Hama, Westsyrien) erbrach- ten einzigartige Daten für diese Zeitstufe. Der Bericht legt eine erste detaillierte Untersuchung der spätneolithischen Keramik (ca. 7000–6400 v. Chr.) der nördlichen Levante dar, die dem frühesten Stadium des Spät- neolithikums in Obermesopotamien entspricht.

Introduction

While over the past two decades the study of Late Neolithic ceramic production and con- sumption has blossomed Syria · Late Neolithic · Pottery · Dark-Faced Burnished Ware · Material Analysis in northern Syria, south- Syrien · Spätneolithikum · Keramik · Dark-Faced Burnished Ware · Materialanalysis eastern Anatolia and northern Mesopotamia, we are still poorly in- formed on developments in the central Levant at this This report presents the results of two and one-half stage. Few Late Neolithic sites have been excavated campaigns of ceramic processing.2 Needless to to begin with, and many of these were investigated 1 a considerable time ago. A considerable number of 1 Bartl – Haidar 2008. key sites are known only from surveys or limited 2 Ceramic fieldwork was carried out each autumn in 2005, exposures. Furthermore, Levantine Late Neolithic 2006, and 2007. This report builds upon, and modifies, an archéologie à sondage earlier preliminary report (Nieuwenhuyse in: Bartl – Haidar archaeology is a veritable , 2008, 66–70). I wish to thank Dr. Karin Bartl for inviting as excavators in the past often put their money into me to participate at Shir and study the ceramics from this digging small, spatially restricted soundings. A seri- fascinating site. I am indebted to Dr. Gerwulf Schneider and Dr. Malgorzata Daszkiewicz for the ceramic-technological ous lack of reliable absolute dates makes inter-site investigations as well as for their hearty Bavarian cooking comparisons highly problematic, to say the least. The in their chemical lab. Dr. Gilian Vogelsang and Tineke Rooi- excavations at Shir are a welcome contribution to this jakkers enabled the identification of textile impressions. I am indebted to Dr. Takahiro Odaka and Dr. Yutaka Miyake, field. They offer the potential to study Late Neolithic experts on Levantine prehistoric ceramics, for their views ceramics contextually, on the basis of broad expo- and valuable observations. Dr. Thomas Urban was in charge sures and securely-dated stratigraphic contexts. The of the complex task of inserting the pottery database within the main Shir database. Dörte Rokitta-Krumnow has proved abundant ceramics comprise a fascinating mixture of her weight in gold by organizing the work in the house. The technologies and styles, pointing to a diverse range of complex drawing of the Shir Männchen was done by And- regional and supra-regional affiliations. rea Gubisch. Erica Dooijes digitalized the huge mass of pot-

ZOrA 2, 2009, 310–356 312 Olivier Nieuwenhuyse

Trench – campaign Sherds counted Diagnostic sherds Cal. BC

K12/N-O20 – spring 2007 3.067 210 >6450?

L7 – spring 2006 12.624 978 6500 – 6450

K-L7 – spring 2006 2.193 435 7000 – 6800

Table 1 Broad, successive excavated units distinguished in the occupation sequence at Shir used for diachronic ceramic comparisons in this report (after Bartl et al., this volume; for the locations of the trenches, see Bartl et al., this volume).

say, it is preliminary. Further work is planned to the production sequence (châine opératoire) needed complete the ceramic sequence. Further research will to produce vessels of a particular type.6 Recurrent bring estimates of sherd densities, essential to gain in- associations between production sequences lead to sight into the increasing intensity of ceramic produc- the archaeological recognition of technological tradition through time. A ceramic-technological study has tions.7 Importantly, in addition to raw materials, tools only just begun and merits much more consideration and the physical transformations of raw materials, than is possible here. Crucially, although a fine-tuned systems of technological knowledge and culturally stratigraphy has become available,3 this could not yet embedded conceptions of the desired end products be fully integrated with the ceramic data. In order to also form part of each ceramic tradition.8 Wares, in explore diachronic trends it shall be compared three other words, are not the same as series distinguished broad, successively excavated units that together on the basis of vessel shape or decoration style. Dec- cover the sequence of occupation (table 1 and 2): oration or surface treatments distinguish subgroups trench K-L7 excavated in the spring 2006 campaign within a ware. (ca. 7000–6650 cal. BC), trench L7 excavated in the In identifying wares at Shir, of course, we relied spring of 2006 (ca. 6500–6450 cal. BC) and trench as much as possible on the existing literature on Le- K12/N-O20 in the spring 2007 campaign (probably vantine Neolithic ceramics. In practice, this proved to younger than about 6400 cal. BC). On the basis of the be problematic. Immediately after the first exposures currently available radiocarbon dates, this sequence (2005 campaign, “trench A”), we attempted a first, overlaps with the earliest stages of the Pottery Neo- tentative categorization. We identified two broad lithic in the northern Levant and northern Syria.4 categories, which, following commonly accepted The report starts with the issue of ceramic clas- nomenclature,9 we termed Dark-Faced Burnished sification and categorization of wares. These are dis- Ware (from now on referred to as DFBW) and Coarse tinguished using the chain of operation concept, and Ware (CW).10 We distinguished a range of subcate- function as a basis for quantifying the composition of gories, on the basis of sometimes minute distinctions the ceramic assemblage. Then the main groups today in macroscopically observed raw materials (fabric). distinguished at Shir are discussed: so-called Dark- Dark-Faced Burnished Ware included varieties of Faced Burnished Ware, Coarse Unburnished Ware and exclusively mineral-tempered, small-sized, often Light-Faced Burnished Ware. For each of these shall thin-walled, burnished pottery. A major technologi- be briefly described their ceramic technology, vessel cal distinction was found in the firing: whereas some shape and decorative style. It will be briefly touched upon what is termed Soft Ware and the relationships tery figures. Ans Bulles kindly read the text for grammatical between ceramics and white ware. I shall finish with a errors. tentative relative chronology for the site. 3 Bartl et al., this volume. 4 Akkermans et al. 2006; Arimura et al. 2000; Faura 1996 a; Faura 1996 b; Faura – LeMière 1999; LeMière 1979; Miyake 2005; Miyake in press; Nieuwenhuyse 2000; The composition of the ceramic Nieuwenhuyse 2006; Nishiaki – LeMière 2006; Tsuneki – Miyake 1996; van As et al. 2004. assemblage 5 Rice 1987, 287. 484. 6 Franken – Kalsbeek 1975; Rye 1981; van As et al. 1998. The main ceramic categorization is that of a ware. 7 Rye 1981. For present purposes, a ceramic ware is a class of pot- 8 Lemonnier 1989; Lemonnier 1992. 9 Braidwood – Braidwood 1960. tery, whose members share similar technology, fabric 10 Bartl et al. 2006 a; Bartl et al. 2006 b, Nieuwenhuyse in: 5 and surface treatment. The definition emphasizes Bartl – Haidar 2008, 66–70.

ZOrA 2, 2009, 310–356 The Late Neolithic Ceramics from Shir 313

DFBW DFBW oxidised reduced CUW LFBW SW Total

K12/N-O20 – spring 2007 25 36 3.006 0 0 3.067

L7 – spring 2006 446 675 11.502 1 0 12.624

K-L7 – spring 2006 454 1.151 262 323 3 2.193

Total sherds counted 925 1.862 14.770 324 3 17.884

Table 2 Frequencies of the main wares in each of the time units distinguished in this report (Raw Counts): Dark-Faced Burnished Ware (DFBW), Coarse Unburnished Ware (CUW), Light-Faced Burnished Ware (LFBW) and Soft Ware (SW).

DFBW appeared to have been fired under oxidiz- present purposes we have decided to refrain from ing conditions, resulting in reddish-brown, orange presenting subjective subcategories in terms of raw or occasionally remarkably light-coloured surfaces, materials, and we shall discuss this pottery as a single others showed an even, dark-coloured surface and category of DFBW. Nevertheless, as the firing rep- core, and apparently were purposely reduced. Coarse resents a major stage in the chain of operations, we Ware was represented by several varieties of a coarse- have kept the distinction between DFBW-oxidized textured pottery, characterized by a coarse mineral and DFBW-reduced. Finally, one sample of a very and, occasionally, plant-tempered fabric composi- light-coloured variety proved to be sufficiently dis- tion. The sherds were virtually never burnished, but tinct in terms of raw material to warrant a separate had coarsely smoothed or scraped surfaces. category, for which we adopted the term Light-Faced Subsequent analyses and the start of a program Burnished Ware. In addition to these main categories, of ceramic-technological investigations at the Freie a few sherds characterized by a fragile, very porous, Universität Berlin by Dr. Gerwulf Schneider and Dr. plant-tempered fabric have been termed Soft Ware.15 Malgorzata Daszkiewicz have shown the picture to The composition of the ceramic assemblage was be much more complex.11 Although the basic distinc- rather dynamic through time (table 2, fig. 1). It is tion between CW and DFBW has survived relatively important to realize that different statistics for esti- unscathed, the groups distinguished initially in the mating ceramic proportions give somewhat different field do not neatly overlap with those observed in the outcomes; here we use Raw Counts and Estimated laboratory. Chemical analyses suggest the presence of at least two varieties of CW. A major distinction in 11 The Freie Universität Berlin has thus far analyzed a first this category is the presence/absence of plant temper. series of 17 sherds selected from the first campaign (2005). Whereas some of the coarse pottery sherds at Shir Three methods were employed to study the body composi- have plant temper in addition to coarse mineral in- tion and its individual plastic and non-plastic components: Chemical analysis revealed the geochemical characteristics clusions, others show mineral inclusions exclusively. of both the plastic and non-plastic components of a pottery The distinction appears to be gradual, and so far it fabric. Thin-section studies were used to specify the min- suggests varieties rather than distinct wares. In the eralogical-petrographic content and grain size distribution of the non-plastic components of the body. MGR-analysis literature, however, the term “Coarse Ware” expli- (Matrix Group by Refiring) was used to identify matrix citly refers to coarse plant-tempered pottery.12 The types, using differential colour and thermal behaviour dur- literature suggests a relationship instead between our ing refiring due to differences in clay composition. This technique also allowed the original firing temperatures to coarse pottery and the Levantine category known as be estimated. The results of the technological studies will “Dark-Faced Unburnished Ware”.13 At Shir, at least, be presented elsewhere. this term has the disadvantage that the pottery is not 12 Braidwood – Braidwood 1960, 47; Thuesen 1988, 23. 13 Braidwood – Braidwood 1960, 78; de Contenson 1977 a; de “dark” at all. At Hama, Thuesen coined the term Contenson 1977 b; de Contenson 1992; Riis – Thrane 1974, “Medium Plain Ware” for what may have been simi- pl. IIa. lar pottery.14 To avoid further confusion, and await- 14 Thuesen 1988, 23. 15 All the material observed so far in the trenches as well as ing comparative studies, we have adopted the term on the surface of the mound dates from the Late Neolithic Coarse Unburnished Ware (CUW). period. The only exceptions are six wheel-made, possibly The DFBW, too, includes different varieties, but medieval, sherds from the upper stratum of trench K12, and four thin-walled fine mineral-tempered sherds from these proved to be difficult to observe in the field with trench N-O20, of which the attribution is uncertain. the naked eye and a loupe. Awaiting further study, for 16 Orton 1993; Orton et al. 1993.

ZOrA 2, 2009, 310–356 314 Olivier Nieuwenhuyse

In the area covered by trenches K-L7 and L7, this early Phase is separated from subsequent occupation levels by a hiatus.18 The pottery from these later occupation levels, too, appears to be rather homogeneous. Huge amounts of pottery sherds were recovered from almost every excavated unit in trench L7.19 LFBW no longer appears. DFBW continues as a minority. The bulk of the material now consists of CUW (over 90 %). One major trend within the CUW is the gradual replace- ment of the “minerals-exclusively” variety by plant- tempered CUW (fig. 12). The small corpus studied from trenches K12 and N-O20 cannot be stratigraphically related to the L7 sequence. The properties of the ceramics, however, suggest that this pottery either corresponds to the final stage of the L7 sequence or, more likely, that it is somewhat younger (after 6400 cal. BC). The ceramic assemblages recovered from these two separate trenches are closely comparable in terms of composition, vessel shape and decoration, and shall be treated as a unity here. Given the limited exposures,20 remarkable quantities of ceramics were recovered. The assemblage almost entirely consists of CUW (98 % Fig. 1 Late Neolithic Shir. The composition of the ceramic in terms of raw counts), and almost all of this belongs assemblage through time (Raw Counts). Broad time-units to the plant-tempered variety. Such technological in- showing approximate absolute dates cal. BC. novations in the CUW, as well as changes in vessel shape and decorative style, are likely to result in a more fine-tuned ceramic phasing in future work. Estimates of ceramic fragmentation may give valuable information regarding the depositional and post-depositional contexts, from which the material Vessels Represented.16 Taking the evidence at face- was recovered.21 The ceramics studied so far at Shir value, and anticipating the integration of the pottery may be characterized as being highly fragmented data with the detailed level-framework designed for and dispersed. The studied pottery yielded hardly the site,17 it appears that two, perhaps three, broad ce- any complete vessels, and complete profiles rep- ramic Phases may presently be distinguished at Shir. resent a minute proportion (less than 0.5 % of all The earliest levels currently known from the site, sherds). Virtually no fits between different excavated dated to ca. 7000–6650 cal. BC, represent a homo- units were found, indicating a strong dispersal of geneous unit. The ceramics recovered from these the broken pottery. Fragmentation can be estimated earliest levels, excavated in spring 2006 in trench quantitatively by looking at the percentage of rim K-L7, almost entirely consist of DFBW, either in its preserved (radius).22 Excluding the occasional com- oxidized variety or, more common, in its purposely- plete vessel (n=1), the maximum radius observed was reduced variety (fig. 1). CUW represents a minority in this Phase, and perhaps is concentrated mainly in 17 Bartl et al., this volume. the upper levels of this Phase. Characteristic for the 18 Bartl et al., this volume. ceramic assemblage recovered from these levels is 19 Although the ceramics from trench L7 excavated in the autumn of 2006 were not included in this report, the analysis some 15 % of LFBW, a category that subsequently of this material in the autumn of 2007 suggests that they virtually disappears from the site. Tentatively, we closely resemble that of the upper levels excavated in the suggest that another characteristic element is a rela- spring of 2006. 20 Bartl et al., this volume. tively low sherd density. Comparatively few ceramic 21 Chapman – Gaydarska 2007; Orton 1993; Orton et al. vessels may have been around at any one point in 1993; Schiffer 1987. time between 7000–6650 cal. BC (future estimates of 22 A completely preserved rim measures 360º. A vessel of which exactly half is left has a radius of 180º, a radius of relative sherd densities should scrutinize this impres- 90º means that ¼ of the vessel has been preserved, and so sion). on.

ZOrA 2, 2009, 310–356 The Late Neolithic Ceramics from Shir 315

170 º, less than half of the rim; the average radius is insights have rarely been used to make technologi- about 30º. In ordinary language: on average no more cal distinctions. Surface colour has been largely ap- than one-twelfth of a rim survives. The pattern ob- proached from a descriptive perspective. Working in served at Shir is consistent with the one found at Tell northern Syria, however, Marie LeMière has made Sabi Abyad, interpreted as reflecting secondary and it clear that firing techniques do make a difference. tertiary contexts.23 Fragmentation estimates differ Whereas certain groups of mineral-tempered, bur- somewhat from trench to trench. Vessels from the nished Late Neolithic ceramics gained a dark colour lowest levels are more fragmented than those from because of the raw materials used, others were delib- upper levels. Some of this may have been caused by erately darkened during the firing. In northern Syria different preservation circumstances, but it is more these technological choices can be associated with likely that it results from differences in ceramic com- vessels of different shape, size and decoration.27 position and susceptibility to breakage of the differ- At Shir, it seems to be clear that at least a portion ent wares. In the lower levels the greater majority of of the DFBW was deliberately darkened. Awaiting the pottery consists of more fragile DFBW, whereas further study we shall use the term DFBW reduced for in the upper trench L7 the relatively durable CUW sherds showing an even, homogeneous dark surface comprises the bulk.24 Summarizing, we see that, as colour, often including the core. Whereas oxidized far as we can presently judge, the trenches investi- DFBW tends to have surface colours similar to CUW, gated thus far have yielded a mixture of secondary in the range of brown to reddish-brown or greyish- and tertiary contexts. brown (Munsell10YR 6/3–4/3), less often buff or red reduced DFBW shows surface colours in the range of dark-grey to black (5YR 2.5/1–3/1) (fig. 2). The oxi- The Dark-Faced Burnished Ware dized sherds frequently have dark, incompletely oxidized cores, but still show variable colours through Dark-Faced Burnished Ware sherds were distin- their sections. Reduced DFBW, on the other hand, is guished in the field by a combination of: a) a rela- mostly dark-grey to black throughout. The proportion tively fine texture, b) a granular fabric characterized of reduced DFBW is highest in the earliest levels at by a dense concentration of small to large mineral the site (K-L7, 72 % of all DFBW) and drops some- inclusions, c) the absence of chaff inclusions of any what thereafter (about 60 % in trench L7). kind, d) a carefully finished, usually burnished, sur- To be sure, in the field it is not always easy to dis- face, e) surface colours shading on the whole from tinguish between dark-coloured sherds that were pur- pitch-black or dark-grey to dark-brown or reddish posely reduced and those that were originally fired in brown, occasionally buff. oxidizing circumstances but at low temperatures, or Notwithstanding its name, it is important to real- became dark due to the raw material used, or even by ize that surface colour in itself does not constitute use or depositional processes. Even if the dark colour a sufficient criterion to distinguish DFBW. Dark- was deliberate, potters may have achieved this effect Faced Burnished Ware knows a surprisingly wide in a number of different ways. They may have used range of surface colours, and it is not always very clays naturally rich in organic material, which would different from CUW in this respect. Decoration has have remained dark with the short firings at low tem- thus far played no role in distinguishing subgroups of peratures, such as suggested by the Shir DFBW. In DFBW at Shir, but may certainly do so in the future. many instances, however, a ‘sandwich’ effect can Moreover, Levantine DFBW does not represent a be observed: Sherds have black surfaces and central singular category in terms of raw materials.25 Labo- core, but lighter (grey or greyish-brown) subsurfaces. ratory analysis at the Freie Universität Berlin has shown that the Shir DFBW was made from a calcare- 23 Nieuwenhuyse 2007. ous clay. Whereas most of the samples investigated 24 Different wares show different fragmentation. CUW is so far contain calcium carbonate (‘lime’) or calcite stronger pottery than DFBW. Although the differences are slight, CUW rim fragments are on average somewhat bet- inclusions in various amounts, one sample was tem- ter preserved than DFBW rims (average radius 34º versus pered with basalt. These distinctions have so far been 26º, respectively, difference statistically significant at the difficult to observe in the field, however, and will not .01 level). 25 Balossi 2004; Balossi 2006; Diebold 2000; Diebold 2004; be pursued in this report. Diebold forthcoming; LeMiere – Picon 1999; Tsuneki – Evidently, surface colour varies strongly with Miyake 1996; Miyake 2003. firing. Scholars have implicitly acknowledged, often 26 Hole 1959, 154; Matson, in: Braidwood – Braidwood 1960, 49. 73; de Contenson 1992, 148; Thuesen 1988, 23. casually, that Late Neolithic potters applied differ- 27 LeMière 2000; LeMière 2001; LeMière – Nieuwenhuyse ent firing techniques to DFBW.26 Surprisingly, these 1996.

ZOrA 2, 2009, 310–356 316 Olivier Nieuwenhuyse

finishing. Dark-Faced Burnished Ware vessels were made to be very regular. The vessels were significantly thinner than CUW (average wall thickness 7 mm). Some 93 % of all DFBW sherds were burnished, usually on both surfaces. If not burnished, the vessels were at least carefully smoothed. There is some evidence to suggest that the DFBW from the upper levels of trench L7 became a little less carefully finished, as seen in a somewhat reduced proportion of burnished sherds and a corresponding increase of smoothed or coarsely smoothed DFBW sherds. Dark-Faced Burnished Ware consists mainly of vessels of small size. Although most DFBW vessels Fig. 2 Different firing techniques producing different had plain simple rims, pointed, flat or bevelled rims surface colours for Dark-Faced Burnished Ware. Upper: a are fairly common. It is typical of DFBW for some random selection of oxidized DFBW body sherds. Lower: a vessels to have splayed flattened rims that thicken selection of reduced DFBW body sherds (photo: I. Wagner/ DAI Damascus). significantly near the rim. This type of rim occurs with DFBW across the northern Levant.29 At Shir it is strongly associated with closed, convex-sided bowls.

A similar effect was observed with DFBW deep down the Hama sounding: “A section of the sherd will show a dark core surrounded by a light layer at the surface, which again has a dark shade.”28 This suggests a deliberate smudging at the end of the firing process (“end reduction”). Fig. 3 DFBW closed convex-sided bowl with an elongated At Shir, these two technological varieties of “ear-shaped” lug (a: K-L7 unit 169:5; b: K-L7 unit 172:3; DFBW resemble each other closely in most other re- photo: I. Wagner/DAI Damascus). spects. At present we can observe no clear differences in fabric composition. However, there were subtle differences in surface finish, vessel shape and decoration. Reduced DFBW vessels, on average, gained a somewhat more careful surface finish. They were Appendages of various sorts occur. Characteristic are slightly more often burnished, and virtually never the so-called “ear-shaped” lugs (fig. 3). In some cases showed remnant traces of scraping, finger pressing or these were rather short, but in most cases they run smoothing. Although the two categories have over- along the vessel body for a considerable part. Some lapping typological repertoires, an oxidized firing is examples of isolated lugs show how they were made, associated with jars, while reduced DFBW far more using a doweled joint (fig. 4). The lug was given a often consists of bowls. Finally, DFBW fired in oxi- protruding part on the distal side. A hole of corre- dizing conditions appears to have been slightly more sponding size was made in the vessel wall. The lug often decorated than DFBW reduced. Even if they do was plugged into the hole, and the whole vessel was not yield neat discrete categories, these associations carefully burnished. This technique provided extra suggest that technological choices vis à vis the firing strength and its popularity suggests that DFBW ves- process were aimed at producing vessels that were sels were intended to be moved around vigorously. intended for different social practices and perhaps Dark-Faced Burnished Ware vessels mostly had flat carried different social meanings. bases. Presumably, DFBW vessels were shaped by coiling; smaller vessels will have been made by pinch- 28 Thuesen 1988, 21. ing. Traces of the primary shaping process have been 29 Balossi 2006; Braidwood – Braidwood 1960; Diebold all but obliterated, however, by the thorough surface 2000; Diebold 2004.

ZOrA 2, 2009, 310–356 The Late Neolithic Ceramics from Shir 317

K-L7 L7 K12/N-O20 Total 9 10 0 19 Everted convex-sided bowl 4,5 % 9,1 % – 5,8 % 49 20 1 70 Vertical convex-sided bowl 24,3 % 18,1 % 7,1 % 21,5 % 110 50 1 161 Closed convex-sided bowl 54,5 % 45,5 % 7,1 % 49,4 % 0 5 1 6 Everted convex-sided bowl with in-turned rim – 4,5 % 7,1 % 1,8 % 0 3 0 3 Straight-sided bowl – 2,7 % – 0,9 % 16 17 8 41 Small S-shaped jar (goblet) 7,9 % 15,5 % 57,1 % 12,6 % 18 5 3 26 Standard jar 8,9 % 4,5 % 21,4 % 8,0 % 202 110 14 326 Total 100,0 % 100,0 % 100,0 % 100,0 % Table 3 Dark-Faced Burnished Ware types by broad time-unit (based on EVR).

Fig. 4 The technique of doweled joints for attaching lugs and handles, showing three examples of isolated DFBW lugs (a: K-L7 unit 218:1; b: K-L7 unit 152:3; c: K-L7 unit 172:7; drawing: O. Nieuwenhuyse).

Dark-Faced Burnished Ware does not show a very more in height – ‘standard jars’ (pl. 7, 1–10) – and diverse range of vessel shapes. Only two main classes small, S-shaped jars with low, indistinct collars. The of DFBW shapes are distinguished: bowls and jars latter should perhaps more properly be called ‘gob- (table 3). Within these main categories typological lets’ (pl. 6, 4–19). In contrast to CUW jars, no tall- variation is minimal. Dark-Faced Burnished Ware necked or large jars have so far been attested (fig. 5). bowls mostly have convex-sided walls, the orientation DFBW jars and goblets most often seem to have of which varies widely from open to closed (pl. 1–3). had small, globular bodies, but carinated contours Two new bowl types that appear in the upper levels of are found as well (pl. 7, 11–14).30 A complete ex- trench L7 (spring 2006 campaign) are straight-sided ample of a DFBW S-shaped goblet was found at the bowls (pl. 6, 1–3) and bowls with in-turned rims (pl. surface of the mound (fig. 6). Here at last we could 5, 1–4). Similar shapes also start to appear in CUW in measure its volume, which appeared to be almost ex- these upper levels, so they may constitute a chronolo- actly 1/3 litre, the approximate standard volume of gically significant marker. a present-day bottle of lemonade.31 The stability of Dark-Faced Burnished Ware jars, if the term may be used, tend to be small and characterized by low necks (maximum neck height slightly over 4 cm). We 30 The small number of reconstructed DFBW jar body parts have maximum body diameters between 8–17 cm. may distinguish between a main group of DFBW jars 31 We measured the volume of the vessel by filling it with with more or less clearly distinct necks of 2 cm or water.

ZOrA 2, 2009, 310–356 318 Olivier Nieuwenhuyse

Fig. 5 Plot of height of the neck versus rim diameter of DFBW and CUW jar types. Left: DFBW jars. Right: CUW jars.

Fig. 6 A complete Dark-Faced Bur- nished Ware small jar or goblet, recovered from the surface of the mound (photo: I. Wagner/DAI Damascus; drawing: O. Nieuwenhuyse).

this goblet when completely filled qualified as better trench L7. So far, none of the DFBW from K12 or than excellent. Both from an aesthetical and from a N-O20 was decorated, but of course the small sample functional perspective, these small, portable vessels sizes here may be misleading. would have made the finest drinking vessels. What has been termed cord-impressed33 consti- In terms of raw counts, some 5 % of all DFBW tutes the most common DFBW decorative style (some sherds was decorated (table 4). However, the pro- 8–10 % of all DFBW sherds from trench L7). At Shir portion of decorated DFBW fluctuated with time. In cord-impressed sherds have thus far been recov- the earliest levels (trench K-L7) decorated DFBW ered only from the occupation levels documented in sherds comprised less than 1 %; in the subsequent trench L7; the chronological distribution of this style levels (trench L7) this statistic rose to between 12 and may tentatively be dated between ca. 6600 and 6400 14 %.32 Five different decorative techniques have cal. BC. The term refers to a category, homogeneous been attested so far: stabbing, nail-impressing, incising, comb-impressed and so-called “cord-impressed” decoration. The few examples of stabbed and nail- 32 We get the impression that many decorated DFBW sherds impressed sherds all come from trench K-L7. In from the lower trench K-L7 came from the upper strata of that trench. The earliest DFBW, then, may have been en- contrast, cord-impressed and comb-incised DFBW is tirely plain. virtually limited to the upper levels documented in 33 After Hole 1959.

ZOrA 2, 2009, 310–356 The Late Neolithic Ceramics from Shir 319

K-L7 L7 K12/N-O20 Total 1.591 985 61 2.637 Plain 99,1 % 87,9 % 100,0 % 94,6 % 1 0 0 1 Stabbed 0,1 % – – – 2 0 0 2 Nail-impressed 0,1 % – – 0,1 % 0 3 0 3 Incised – 0,3 % – 0,1 % 6 90 0 96 Cord-impressed 0,4 % 8,0 % - 3,4 % 2 42 0 44 Comb-incised 0,1 % 3,8 % – 1,6 % 3 1 0 4 Surface too eroded to say 0,2 % 0,1 % – 0,1 % 1.605 1.121 61 2.787 Total 100,0 % 100,0 % 100,0 % 100,0 % Table 4 Dark-Faced Burnished Ware decorative styles by broad time-unit (based on raw counts).

and easily identifiable at first sight, with what appears as Tabbat al-Hammam, Tell Hmaira, Labwe and Tell to be impressed decoration, mostly showing regular Nebi Mend.34 As a style, however, it appears to be parallel rows of impressions with coarsely edged less homogeneous than initially thought. Dr. Gili- boundaries. Occasionally these rows cover the entire an Vogelsang of the Textile Research Centre of the sherd, but most often different rows can be observed National Museum of Ethnology (Leiden) inspected running in alternating directions or in somewhat a selection of cord-impressed sherds from Shir.35 In overlapping fields. With rim sherds, where the rim her view two main categories are present in the sam- offers a guide for reconstructing the orientation, both ple: a) a group that showes the impressions of woven vertically oriented and diagonal rows are seen. This textile or rope of some sort, and b) a larger group intriguing style clearly appears to be closely associ- characterized by incised surface modifications. Some ated with one particular vessel shape: closed convex- sherds could not be attributed to either category with sided bowls, frequently with thickened, splayed rims certainty. Sherds that were identified as impressed (pl. 4, 1–10). with woven tissue provide valuable information on Interestingly, many cord-impressed sherds show weaving practices and textiles in the Late Neolithic. resemblances in clay fabric, firing and surface colour. They may represent the earliest solid evidence of On the whole they tend to be lighter in surface col- weaving in the area, together with a textile-impressed our than the bulk of DFBW, mostly shading into buff piece of wall plaster from the basal levels of the Hama (7.5YR 6/6). Most sherds seem to be rather homo- sounding.36 Vogelsang reconstructs at least two diffe- geneous in terms of fabric. In terms of firing, cord- rent varieties of rope impressions: Zz(s) (fig. 7 a–b) impressed decoration is associated largely with oxi- and perhaps Zzs3z(2s) (fig. 7 c).37 One sherd showes dizing conditions. Future laboratory analyses should the impression of a fine thread (fig. 7 d). Most inte- investigate if cord-impressed DFBW represents a restingly, two sherds may have been impressed not single category in terms of raw materials and ceramic with rope, but with a sort of mat instead (fig. 8). It technology, or, alternatively, if this was a surface treatment accorded to technologically different categories. It is not excluded that this ceramic category 34 Bartl – Chaaya 2002; Copeland 1999; Hole 1959; Kirkbride 1969; Müller-Neuhof 1998. was produced by a single workshop or by a series of 35 Gilian Vogelsang and her assistant Tineke Rooijakkers were closely interacting workshops. able to reach a considerable magnification of high-definition Good parallels for this decorative style come digital photographs of a selection of cord-impressed DFBW sherds (n=33). from the Syrian and northern Lebanese coast as well 36 Bender-Jørgensen 1988. as the Orontes basin due south of Shir at sites such 37 For terminology: Walton – Eastwood 1988.

ZOrA 2, 2009, 310–356 320 Olivier Nieuwenhuyse

Fig. 8 Dark-Faced Burnished Ware cord-impressed body sherd possibly showing the impression of a mat (L7 unit 49W- 3:6; identification G. Vogelsang and T. Rooijakkers; photo: I. Wagner/DAI Damascus).

Fig. 7 Dark-Faced Burnished Ware “cord-impressed” body sherds. a: The impression of a rope, Zz(s) (L7 unit 15-2:1); b: The impression of a rope, Zz(s) (L7 unit 5:19); c: The impression of a rope, possibly Zzs3z(zs) (L7 unit 31:5); d: The impression of a fine thread (L7 unit 40-1:8) (identification G. Vogel- sang and T. Rooijakkers; photo: I. Wagner/DAI Damascus).

Fig. 10 Dark-Faced Burnished Ware sherds described as “cord impressed” but possibly resulting from incising wet, gritty clay (a: L7 unit 44-1:2; b: L7 unit 8-3:4; c: L7 unit 24:6; d: L7-Ie unit 8-1:13; identification G. Vogelsang and T. Rooij- akkers; photo: I. Wagner/DAI Damascus).

Fig. 9 Dark-Faced Burnished Ware body sherds with possible cord impressions (a: L7 unit 35; b: L7 unit 35:12; c: L7 unit 9-1:4; d: L7 unit 25-1:4; identification G. Vogelsang and T. Rooijakkers; photo: I. Wagner/DAI Damascus).

Fig. 11 Dark-Faced Burnished Ware body sherds with comb- incised decoration (a: L7 unit 49w-3:7; b: L7 unit 2:8; photo: I. Wagner/ DAI Damascus).

ZOrA 2, 2009, 310–356 The Late Neolithic Ceramics from Shir 321

remains to be investigated what tools were used to relevant in distinguishing subgroups, as this category make the cord impressions. People may simply have was rarely ever decorated. The few decorated pieces pressed ropes against the surface, but it is doubtful do not seem to be different from the bulk in terms whether this would produce the typical, regular ef- of technology. Yet, the analysis suggests variation fect observed. Hole suggests that people used a flat in raw materials that may in the future lead to sub- paddle bound with cord.38 We may perhaps also think groups within CUW. The greater majority is descri- along the lines of Jomon pottery from Japan, marked bed as having a large, dense amount of white to light by rolling various types of twisted ropes over the still grey to occasionally varicoloured mineral inclusions plastic clay surface.39 that are clearly visible macroscopically. Thin sec- Cord-impressed sherds identified by Vogelsang tions show all CUW samples to be characterized by as “incised” also showed regular patterns of paral- calcium carbonate (“Kalk”) or calcite (“Kalkspat”) lel lines with coarse-edged boundaries (fig. 10). inclusions. In addition, micro-fossils (foramina), flint Upon close examination, however, these lines do and iron-rich lumps of mud rock (“Tongerölle”) are not suggest woven tissue. Rather, their coarse-edged observed as non-plastic inclusions. These may have boundaries resulted from the gritty clay fabric; the been present in the clay naturally, or they may have small mineral particles in the clay caused the sur- been purposely added as a temper. Obviously, the two face to ripple, when the potter made the incisions. possibilities are not mutually exclusive. The tools used may have been similar to those em- The main variation in terms of raw materials ap- ployed for comb-incised decoration (see below), the pears to be in the amount of plant inclusions.40 In difference merely being the stage in the production the field we distinguished between three varieties process when the incisions were made. Whereas the of CUW on the basis of the amount and densities of comb-incised lines seem to have been made while the (macroscopically observed) plant inclusions. The the vessels had already dried to a leather hard condi- varying proportions of these varieties show a trend tion, in the case of the cord-impressed incised lines towards an increased use of plant material as a tem- this was done while the clay was still plastic. In the pering material for the production of CUW (fig. 12). field, somewhat unfortunately, the net result is often In the earliest levels (trench K-L7), over half of all rather identical. CUW sherds shows no macroscopically visible plant Comb-incised sherds constitute the second larg- inclusions or only a small amount of plant inclusions est category of decorated DFBW at Shir (fig. 11; pl. 5, alongside the mineral particles. In the upper levels 5–19). A sharp-toothed, multi-pointed tool was used documented in trench L7 the proportion of CUW to scrape thin, parallel incisions into the leather-hard showing coarse plant inclusions has increased to clay surface. The precise tools used remain to be es- over 90 %. In trenches K12 and N-O20, the CUW tablished, but they may have been combs of wood virtually exclusively belongs to the variety tempered or bone, flint tools or even saw-toothed species of with coarse straw. The validity of this trend deserves shell. No clear design structures can be discerned; it careful further scrutiny, but the distinct possibility appears that the potters simply used the entire vessel emerges that eventually we shall be able to document surface for this surface modification. Parallel rows an evolution from mineral-tempered CUW into plant- of lines, occasionally wavy lines, are characteristic, tempered Levantine Coarse Ware. mostly running in alternating, sometimes overlapping When shaping the vessel, potters began with the directions. base. Bases were made by pressing a piece of clay onto a flat surface. With few exceptions CUW vessels were given a flat base. Occasionally they have a con- The Coarse Unburnished Ware cave base (pl. 15, 3–4).41 We identified a few examples of a low pedestal base (pl. 15, 13). Characteristic Coarse Unburnished Ware sherds were distinguished for Coarse Unburnished Ware is a distinct transition in the field by a combination of: a) a relatively rough from the lower body to the base, which often resulted texture, b) a granular fabric, occasionally containing in a low disc base (pl. 17, 6–10). Interestingly, potters chaff inclusions of various sizes and amounts, but virtually always containing a high density of vari- 38 Hole 1959, 157. coloured mineral inclusions, c) a rough, poorly finished 39 Kobayashi 2004, 24–26. surface, d) surface colours in the range of dark-brown 40 Nieuwenhuyse in: Bartl – Haidar 2008, 66–70. to reddish-brown, pink, orange, occasionally buff. 41 The concave shape of CUW bases may have been intended by the potters. A concave shape is more able to resist ten- Coarse Unburnished Ware thus far appears to be sions during drying and, hence, less often has cracks (L. remarkably homogeneous. Stylistic factors are hardly Jacobs, person. comm. March 2008).

ZOrA 2, 2009, 310–356 322 Olivier Nieuwenhuyse

Fig. 13 Example of the impression of a mat left at the exterior surface of a Coarse Unburnished Ware base (L7-IV unit 93:1; photo: I. Wagner/DAI Damascus).

After the primary shaping, the vessel wall thickness was reduced with some kind of tool. Frequently the traces of scraping can still be observed. When it comes to their surface finish, CUW vessels are coarse. Vessels have rough, often irregular surfaces Fig. 12 The increase of plant-temper in CUW at Late Neo- (fig. 14). As the Braidwoods eloquently put it, their lithic Shir. Shown are the proportions of three varieties of surfaces feel “like sandpaper”.43 Apparently potters fabric within CUW as a whole: 1) “minerals-only”, 2) small saw little need to invest much effort in a more in- amount of plant particles in addition to mineral inclusions, tensive surface finish. Many sherds still show traces and 3) large amount of coarse plant temper in addition to mineral inclusions (“Coarse Ware” variety). The data from the of the primary shaping stage, such as smearing and lower levels in trench L7 are from the 2007 pottery processing pressing the clay with the fingers. Most vessels were campaign; the results from this study campaign have not been given a rough smoothing, presumably, with a cloth, otherwise incorporated in this report. which left many traces in the form of fine striations. Burnishing was exceptional (only about 5 % of all CUW sherds). Interestingly, a small number of sherds even suggests that the surfaces were purposely roughened, by throwing wet clay onto it after the primary shaping, when the vessel was still leather-hard. The bulk of the Coarse Unburnished Ware was fired in an oxidizing environment, at low temperatures and during short intervals. Refiring tests show that all samples start to disintegrate at 700oC, which may have been the approximate original firing temperature. In occasionally used a woven surface such as a reed mat most cases the cores are dark-grey or black indicat- or a basket as a support. This left faint traces on the ing incomplete oxidation; completely oxidized cores exterior surface (fig. 13; pl. 15, 11–20). Similar mat- occur much less often. Surface colours range from impressed bases occur at Tell Sabi Abyad in the Early brown to orange-brown to buff (7.5YR 7/3–7/4, 5YR Pottery Neolithic levels.42 The main primary shap- 5/3–6/6, 2.5YR 5/3–6/6). Colours are on the whole ing method appears to have been coiling. The ridges rather even. No complicated firing installations are where individual coils were smeared over one another implicated for firing CUW. It seems less likely that can often still be observed on the interior surface. As pit firings were used, as this would probably have left coils generally form weak points in the vessel wall, the surface colour more variable. Simple up-draught drying cracks or breaks along the coils are frequently kilns may have been used. Alternatively, stacks of observed. The smallest vessels were in all likelihood dried vessels may have been covered with fuel, as is made by pinching a ball of clay between the fingers. The average wall thickness of CUW vessels is about 42 Akkermans et al. 2006. 11 mm. 43 Braidwood – Braidwood 1960, 78.

ZOrA 2, 2009, 310–356 The Late Neolithic Ceramics from Shir 323

Fig. 14 The rough textures of Coarse Unburnished Ware vessels. a–b: examples of traces left by the scraping and roughly smoothing the exterior surface; c–d: examples of a Coarse Unburnished Ware sherds with perhaps a deliberately roughened exterior surface (all from L7 unit 49E:10; photos: I. Wagner/DAI Damascus).

still done in parts of the Near East today to make low- Abyad.49 This practice may be seen within the con- fired ceramics.44 text of the increasing use of ceramic vessels for long- Occasionally the surfaces were coated with term bulk storage, as is also seen in the development a layer of lime or gypsum.45 The evidence at hand and gradual rise through time of vessels with clear, suggests that plastered CUW vessels were mostly distinct necks (jars).50 closed shapes, probably jars. Both surfaces could be Coarse Unburnished Ware vessel shape typology plastered, although there was a definite preference is much more diverse than that of DFBW. Five main for coating the exterior only (fig. 15). Presumably classes of CUW types are found: bowls, large basins, the plaster functioned to reduce the permeability and holemouth pots, trays and a heterogeneous category porosity of the vessel, making it more useful as a con- of jars (table 5). Jars clearly form the majority. CUW tainer for holding liquids. Similar plastering strate- vessels are characterized by plain rims, but frequently gies with Late Neolithic coarse pottery were found they were given a flat rim (about 25 % of all CUW across the Levant and northern Syria, for instance at vessels). Pointed and outwardly bevelled rims occur Hama,46 Tell Sukas,47 Tell el-Kerkh48 and Tell Sabi now and then. In contrast to DFBW, appendages are virtually absent. CUW bowls can be divided morphologically into bowls with a convex wall and bowls with a straight wall. The former are far more common (table 5). Convex-sided vessels have been subdivided into

44 A very small number of CUW sherds (n=15) suggests that they were purposely fired in reducing conditions. Consider- ing their very low number, these have thus far not been taken Fig. 15 Example of a Coarse Unburnished Ware sherd with a as a separate category. lime/gypsum plastered exterior (L7 unit 9:1; photo: I. Wagner/ 45 The nature of the material has not yet been tested, but analyses are currently planned. DAI Damascus). 46 Thuesen 1988, 21. 47 Riis – Thrane 1974, plate II E. 48 Miyake 2003, fig. 55, 4; 57, 17. 49 Akkermans et al. 2006. 50 Nieuwenhuyse 2006.

ZOrA 2, 2009, 310–356 324 Olivier Nieuwenhuyse

K-L7 L7 K12/N-O20 Total 5 27 11 43 Everted convex-sided bowl 26,3 % 9,4 % 11,6 % 10,8 % 4 47 8 59 Vertical convex-sided bowl 21,1 % 16,4 % 8,4 % 14,8 % 4 28 3 35 Closed convex-sided bowl 21,1 % 9,8 % 3,2 % 8,8 % Everted convex-sided bowl with 1 2 0 3 in-turned rim 5,3 % 0,7 % – 0,8 % 0 2 0 2 Oval convex-sided bowl – 0,7 % – 0,5 % 0 7 1 8 Large convex-sided bowl – 2,4 % 1,1 % 2,0 % 0 14 6 20 Straight-sided bowl – 4,9 % 6,3 % 5,0 % 1 4 1 6 Hole mouth pot 5,3 % 1,4 % 1,1 % 1,5 % 0 0 3 3 Husking trays – – 3,2 % 0,8 % 0 8 1 9 Large oval basin – 2,8 % 1,1 % 2,3 % 1 12 11 24 Small S-shaped jar (goblet) 5,3 % 4,2 % 11,6 % 6,0 % 0 10 13 23 Tall-necked jar – 3,5 % 13,8 % 5,8 % 0 3 0 3 Large jar – 1,0 % – 0,8 % 3 122 37 162 Standard jar 15,8 % 42,7 % 39,0 % 40,5 % 19 286 95 400 Total 100,0 % 100,0 % 100,0 % 100,0 % Table 5 Coarse Unburnished Ware types by broad time-unit (based on EVR).

Fig. 16 Coarse Unburnished Ware husking tray fragment showing broad incisions in the interior wall and deep semi-circular impressions in the base (M8, 2007 campaign; photo: I. Wagner/DAI Damascus; drawing: O. Nieuwenhuyse).

ZOrA 2, 2009, 310–356 The Late Neolithic Ceramics from Shir 325

different types on the basis of the orientation of the ble information on jar necks to build a typology. The vessel wall and size (pl. 8, 1–19; 9, 1–8; 10, 1–9).51 considerable variation in shape and size of CUW jar Some convex-sided bowls have an oval rim diameter. necks does not yield neat, clearly discrete categories. A distinct category shows a convex profile with a Taken together, CUW jars have low necks, with a ma- sharply in-turned rim (pl. 11, 8–10). We classified a ximum height of about 7 cm, and an average height series of tall vessels with large rim diameters as hole- of about 3 cm. The collars can be either concave or mouth pots rather than bowls (pl. 10, 10–12). straight, and the orientation of the neck varies inde- Interestingly, a few examples were found of a pendently from its shape. Plotting neck height versus vessel shape universally known as ‘husking tray’. rim diameter (fig. 5) shows that most CUW jars fall These are low, very thick-walled, oval trays with a within a large, heterogeneous bulk with diameters flat base and a modified interior. The precise way in between 5 and 27 cm and a height between 2 and 5 which the interior was modified varies; the exam- cm (standard jars: pl. 12, 4–11; 13, 1–3. 5–7). We set ples attested so far at Shir are incised or impressed apart a category of ‘tall-necked jars’ and a category on the interior wall and base. Husking trays across of small jars or goblets with low, indistinct, S-shaped the Near East always seem to have been made of a necks (pl. 13, 4. 8). A few exceptionally wide jars, coarse, straw-tempered fabric; the few examples at with diameters of over 30 cm, were termed ‘large Shir attested thus far all fall into the coarsely plant- jars’ (pl. 12, 1–3). These vessels may have been quite tempered variety of CUW. The purpose of these en- heavy; the collected sherds constituting the complete igmatic objects remains much debated. Earlier ideas tall-necked jar from N-O20 weighed almost 24 kg! that they functioned to separate the husks from the The Coarse Unburnished Ware at Shir was virtu- grains52 no longer appear to be very likely. They ally a plain tradition: hardly any vessel was decorated may have been portable ovens for baking bread, (table 6). It is difficult, however, to say precisely how or implements for processing soft foods such as insignificant the proportion of decorated pottery was, meat.53 For long, husking trays were seen as a key apart from stating that it was very low. If all CUW fossil to identify the Hassuna Culture of northern sherds are taken into account, the proportion of deco- Iraq. This vessel type has now been attested at Late rated sherds is less than one percent (it is 0.5 %, to be Neolithic sites covering a huge territory from the precise). However, this picture may be biased some- Levant across Upper Mesopotamia. At Shir their what because most of these decorative styles focus distribution is limited to the youngest occupation on the upper bodies of the vessels. If the statistic is levels attested thus far (trenches K12 and N-O20). based on EVRs, estimated on the basis of the extant A good example came from the uppermost levels of rim fragments, the proportion of decorated CUW trench M8, showing broad incisions in the interior rises slightly to about 2 %. In short, all we can say is wall and roughly circular impressions in the base that between 0.5 % and 2 % of all CUW vessels were (fig. 16).54 decorated. Eight different decorative techniques have A distinct group of open shapes is a series of very been attested, listed here in descending order of pop- fragmentarily preserved thick, heavy fragments of ularity: stabbing and nail-impressing, incising, appli- what appear to have been large, oval-shaped basins qué, red-slipping, comb-incising, finger-impressing, (pl. 11, 11–15).55 These represent the thickest Coarse and plastering-and-painting. Unburnished Ware shape attested thus far at the site. The most common way to decorate a CUW ves- In their complete state they must have been very heavy sel was to stab it with a blunt tool while the clay was and relatively immobile. CUW basins do not appear still plastic, producing deep cuts and stabs (fig. 17; in the lower levels covered by trench K-L7, and they pl. 13, 9–20). The impressions were made to look seem to have been a true innovation of the Phase represented by the upper levels of trench L7 and after- wards. This shape also occurs among the white ware 51 The distinction in wall orientation is purely formal and thus of Shir, and it is this shape that occasionally carries far suggests no discrete categories. The data show that wall orientation (measured in degrees) shows a normal distribu- plastered and painted decoration (see below). tion from very closed to very open, with an average wall So far the excavations have yielded only a single orientation of 91 degrees, approximately vertical. complete CUW jar, from trench N-O20 (pl. 18, 1). This 52 Lloyd – Safar 1945. 53 Kiliçbeyli 2005; Voigt 1983. does not help much in building a typology of CUW 54 Several additional examples were found during the excava- jars. The available data suggest that CUW jars mostly tion in spring 2008 in trench N-O20 (K. Bartl, pers. comm. had globular bodies, but significant morphological July 2008). 55 This jar from trench N-O20, while complete, was severely variation in this respect almost certainly remains in- fragmented, to the degree that the original shape could not visible to us. At this stage we can only use the availa- be reconstructed entirely.

ZOrA 2, 2009, 310–356 326 Olivier Nieuwenhuyse

K-L7 L7 K12/N-O20 Total 261 11.420 2990 14.671 Plain 99,6 % 99,5 % 99,5 % 99,5 % 0 16 4 20 Stabbed – 0,2 % 0,1 % 0,1 % 0 3 0 3 Nail-impressed – – – – 0 8 3 11 Incised – 0,1 % 0,1 % 0,1 % 0 8 3 11 Appliqué – 0,1 % 0,1 % 0,1 % 0 4 6 10 Red-slipped – – 0,2 % 0,1 % 0 3 0 3 Comb-incised – – – – 0 1 0 1 Finger-impressed – – – – 0 1 0 1 Plastered and painted – – – – 1 10 0 11 Surface too eroded to say 0,4 % 0,1 % – 0,1 % 262 11.474 3006 14.742 Total 100,0 % 100,0 % 100,0 % 100,0 % Table 6 Coarse Unburnished Ware decorative styles by broad time-unit (based on raw counts).

like short strokes rather than circular dots. This decorative style occurs almost exclusively on the upper part or shoulder of jars. Most common was a single row of horizontal stabs. Much less common were irregular stabs covering the whole of the upper body or horizontal chevrons. Two examples, so far unique, show a combination of small circular dots on the neck and vertical strokes on the shoulder, as well as parallel vertical stabs combined with an applied Fig. 17 Coarse Unburnished Ware sherds decorated with plastic band. A few sherds were perhaps stabbed by stabs (a: surface find; b: L7-IV unit 3-1:13; photo: I. Wagner/ using a fingernail as a tool (‘nail-impressed’, pl. 14, DAI Damascus). 11). Incising and appliqué constitute the second-most popular decorative techniques. Technically, the incisions resemble the stabs, but they were made with a more drawn-out movement of the tool, resulting in longer lines. Most incised vessels show parallel ver- on the shoulders of jars (fig. 18. 19; pl. 14, 1–7). The tical or diagonal lines, always placed on the upper motifs are on the whole entirely abstract and include body (pl. 14, 9–10). One large bowl shows a vertical circular and ovoid blobs, both solid and impressed, zigzag, bounded between horizontal lines (pl. 14, 8). either applied singularly or in horizontal rows. This In addition this group includes a few sherds with a decorative style finds excellent parallels in Late Neo- single, horizontal line, of which it is not entirely cer- lithic ceramic assemblages from Upper Mesopota- tain if it is decoration or part of the production proc- mia.56 A remarkable exception, thus far unique, is a ess instead. The appliqués, too, are found exclusively fragment of a relatively large, closed vessel display-

ZOrA 2, 2009, 310–356 The Late Neolithic Ceramics from Shir 327

Fig. 18 Coarse Unburnished Ware sherds decorated with appliqué (a: L7 unit 9-1:3; b: L7-II unit 1-2:13; photo: I. Wagner/ DAI Damascus).

Fig. 19 Coarse Un- burnished Ware sherds decorated with appliqué (surface finds; photo: I. Wagner/DAI Damas- cus).

Fig. 20 Surface-manipulated Coarse Unburnished Ware pottery: finger-impressed decoration (L7 unit 49W-1:21; photo: I. Wagner/DAI Damascus; see also plate 14,12).

ing an anthropomorphic figure. It shows a body in relatively fine texture, b) a ‘mineral’ fabric lacking frontal, a head with details of the face, extended arms plant inclusions but showing small, dark mineral in- and legs, and a vertical extension hanging between clusions, c) an even, usually burnished surface, and, the legs. We already discussed this find in detail else- in particular, d) a remarkably light colour of both sur- where.57 face and core. So-called Light-Faced Burnished Ware The remaining decorative techniques attested is virtually exclusively limited to the lower trench occur only sporadically. A few CUW sherds have a K-L7, where it includes some 14–15 % of the ceram- red slip (pl. 17, 11; 18, 5). Two sherds show comb- ic assemblage. Superficially similar-looking ceramics impressed wavy lines, a type of decoration more are reported from Ras Shamra VA59 and from periods common with DFBW. One unique fragment, presum- N-1 to N-3 at Tell Sukas.60 ably belonging to a closed vessel or jar, has a surface The preliminary work at the FU Berlin included covered with shallow finger impressions (fig. 20; one sample of LFBW. This piece was characterized pl. 14, 12). This intriguing decorative style perhaps by a fine marl containing few non-plastic inclusions, finds a parallel at Tell el-Kerkh 2.58

56 In Upper Mesopotamia, appliqué decoration occurs occa- The Light-Faced Burnished Ware sionally on the upper parts of large coarse jars during the Pre-Halaf, Proto-Hassuna and Proto-Halaf periods (Nieu- We set apart a clear category of early ceramics that for wenhuyse 2007). want of a better name we have provisionally termed 57 Bartl – Nieuwenhuyse 2008. 58 Miyake 2003, 122 fig. 55, 23. Light-Faced Burnished Ware (fig. 21). In the field this 59 De Contenson 1992, 151. group was identified through a combination of: a) a 60 Riis – Thrane 1974, 64. 74. 81.

ZOrA 2, 2009, 310–356 328 Olivier Nieuwenhuyse

Fig. 21 Contrasts in surface colours. Upper: DFBW oxidised (a) versus DFBW reduced (c–d); lower: LFBW (K-L7 units 158 and 163; photo: I. Wagner/DAI Damascus).

save for isolated pieces of calcium carbonate and ba- Total salt. The very light colour of both surface and core 4 Everted convex-sided bowl is distinctive, moving in the range of cream-buff or 10.8 % light grey (7.5YR 8/1, 10YR 7/1-8/1). With DFBW 11 Vertical convex-sided bowl the LFBW shares a very carefully finished surface. 29.7 The vessels were given a very regular, even wall pro- 15 file without angularities or irregularities. Most of the Closed convex-sided bowl 40.5 % vessels were burnished, on the exterior as well as on 1 the interior surfaces. LFBW is entirely undecorated. Straight-sided bowl This category is represented by simple shapes. No 2.7 % carinated shapes or vessels with distinct necks are 6 Small S-shaped jar or goblet present (pl. 16, 1–17). Typical are bowls with con- 16.2 % vex walls, which vary in orientation from everted to 37 Total vertical and closed. Small S-shaped jars, or goblets, 100.0 % are not uncommon (table 7). As with DFBW, vessels Tab. 7 Light-Faced Burnished Ware types (trench K-L7 only; were mostly small. Most of the vessels have plain, trenches L7 and K12/N-O20 yielded no identifiable LFBW simple rims, but occasionally rims are pointed, flat types). or bevelled. Appendages are rare with LFBW, but we came across two ‘ear-shaped’ lugs. All the vessels seem to have had flat bases.

The other ceramics are to be expected at Shir. Elsewhere in the Levant, What we have provisionally termed Soft Ware con- however, archaeologists have distinguished a class of sists of a handful of sherds, of which we are not containers termed céramique friable: at Ras Sham- even certain if it is really pottery. The brown sherds ra V,61 Ramad62 and Tell el-Kerkh.63 At this stage, (7.5YR 6/4) appear to be very lightly fired and have a however, we cannot determine whether or not these dark, incompletely oxidized core. The clay appears to terms refer to the same material. be densely tempered with small plant particles. Soft and fragile as it is, the surfaces are extremely eroded. So far no vessel shapes have been reconstructed. It is possible that these were the remains of containers 61 Courtois 1992; de Contenson 1977 a, 9–10; de Contenson made of unfired clay, accidentally preserved by fire. 1977 b, 12. 62 De Contenson 2000, 221–222; de Contenson – Van Liere As unfired clay containers are common in the early 1966, 169. stages of the Pottery Neolithic in the Near East, they 63 Miyake 2003, 124, 126.

ZOrA 2, 2009, 310–356 The Late Neolithic Ceramics from Shir 329

and depositional context of the material; and c) a lack of detailed technological or stylistic ceramic studies, leading to a considerable terminological confusion. Similar terms are used for what are likely to have been quite different ceramic traditions – the DFBW is a case in point – or different names refer to what may well have been comparable traditions. Evidently, an extended discussion is far beyond the scope of this report,67 but a brief discussion of some of the most relevant sites may be helpful in order to contribute towards building a regional framework and to place the ceramic sequence from Shir into a wider perspective (fig. 23. 24). Close to Shir is the mighty citadel of Hama.68 Fig. 22 Plastered-and-painted Coarse Unburnished Ware A narrow sounding excavated in 1933 revealed a (surface finds; photo: I. Wagner/DAI Damascus). lengthy sequence of prehistoric occupation. The basal levels, termed Period M, date from the Late Neo- lithic. Several DFBW-like wares were distinguished, while what was termed “Medium Plain Ware” may correspond to our CUW.69 Plant-tempered Coarse Vessels made from lime or gypsum, known as white Plain Ware was also common. On the whole Hama M ware or vaiselle blanche, are a very common find at seems to correspond to the lower trench K-L7 at Shir. Shir (Wittmann, pers. comm). Most interestingly, the- Shir may therefore provide the Hama sounding with se containers were occasionally painted with broad a more secure absolute date than was hitherto avail- stripes of red pigment. This particular style was not able, dating Period M to ca. 6900–6600 cal. BC. exclusively applied to white ware. We have a few ex- Moving to the Syrian coast, Ras Shamra, Tell amples of Coarse Unburnished Ware decorated with Sukas and Tabbat al-Hammam represent important similar designs, painted on a layer of white lime/gyp- type-sites. At Ras Shamra the earliest occupation sum plaster (fig. 22; pl. 14, 13–15). A rim fragment attested, Period V, is of relevance for Shir.70 Phases of a plastered-and-painted large bowl or basin was VA-B date from the Pottery Neolithic, Phase VC recovered from the upper levels in trench L7. A few from the Pre-Pottery Neolithic.71 Henry de Conten- additional sherds were picked up from the surface son distinguished three main ceramic categories: of the mound. As far as motifs can be identified, the “Dark-Faced Burnished Ware”, “Dark-Faced Un- vessels all appear to have been painted with thick, burnished Ware” and “Soft Ware” (poterie friable). diagonal parallel lines; one example shows a hori- Whereas DFBW dominates in both Phases, DFUW zontal herringbone. These finds are not unique for gained prominence in Phase VA. The DFBW from Shir: Rare instances of plastered-and-painted pottery Ras Shamra would appear to resemble that of Shir vessels have been reported from other sites in the Le- closely, both technologically and in terms of vessel vant, such as Tell Sukas,64 Ras Shamra65 and, more shape. This category includes a few ‘milky-white’ recently, from Tell Ain el-Kerkh.66 sherds from Phase VA-I, which perhaps correspond to our LFBW.72 The Ras Shamra DFUW generally seems to correspond to our CUW, but it probably Towards a regional ceramic includes a variety of fabrics and tempering strate- framework gies, and it may overlap with the northern Levantine

Presently there is little consensus on a regional ce- 64 Riis – Thrane 1974, 27. 77. ramic framework for the northern-central Levant. 65 De Contenson 1977 a, 12. When constructing such a framework we face a 66 Miyake 2003, 124, Tsuneki et al. 1998, 16–18; Tsuneki et al. number of obstacles, including: a) a lack of recently 1999, 6; Tsuneki et al. 2000, 10–11. 67 See Balossi 2006; Diebold forthcoming; Tsuneki – Miyake excavated sites; b) a traditionally strong emphasis in 1996. research on excavating narrow soundings from his- 68 Thuesen 1988. torical levels down into the underlying prehistoric 69 Thuesen 1988, 23. 70 De Contenson 1977 a; de Contenson 1977 b. levels, resulting in small sample sizes and a some- 71 De Contenson 1992: 147, 151–152. times poor understanding of the internal stratigraphy 72 De Contenson 1992, 151.

ZOrA 2, 2009, 310–356 330 Olivier Nieuwenhuyse

at Shir.77 The earliest levels (N-11 to N-4) are dominated by Dark-Faced Burnished Ware. This pottery closely resembles the DFBW at Shir, in particular that of the lower trench K-L7. Starting with level N-3 a number of changes begin to manifest themselves. DFBW gradually becomes less important and is replaced by “Dark-Faced Unburnished Ware”, which on the face of it resembles the CUW at Shir well.78 New shapes are introduced, including bowls with in-turned rims,79 jars with distinct necks80 and vessels with disc bases. New decorative designs include impressed decoration at the shoulder of jars and incised decoration. In sum, whereas levels N-11 to N-4 match our trench K-L7, levels N-3 to N-1 resemble trench L7. The Late Neolithic assemblage reported from the basal level at Tabbat al-Hammam, on the other hand, seems to represent a much shorter time span.81 Hole distinguished four main groups of Late Neolithic pottery at the site: “Dark-Faced Burnished Ware”, “Cord-impressed Ware”, “Coarse Ware” and “Comb- impressed Ware”. The DFBW resembles the Shir Fig. 23 The Central Levant and adjacent areas, showing the Dark-Faced Burnished Ware quite well, in particu- locations of Late Neolithic sites mentioned in the text; Neo- lar that from trench L7.82 Hole considered the cord- lithic sites: 1: Shir – 2: Hama – 3: Tell Sukas – 4: Tabbat al- impressed sherds to be a subgroup of the DFBW.83 Hammam – 5: Tell Hmaira – 6: Tell Nebi Mend – 7: Labweh – 8: Byblos – 9: Ramad – 10: Ras Shamra – 11: Tell el-Kerkh – The “Coarse Ware”, finally, would seem to resemble 12: Tell Dhahab – 13: Tell Judaidah – 14: Mersin-Yumuktepe the Shir CUW. It is described as not having any plant – 15: Mezraa Teleilat – 16: Akarçay Höyük – 17: Tell Halula – temper, showing a “medium concentration of varicol- 18: Tell Sabi Abyad (map: DAI 2008 using USGS/NASA 3-arc oured mineral inclusions”, with rough, wet-smoothed second SRTM data). surfaces.84 Typologically, the ceramics from Tabbat al-Hammam resemble those from the trench L7 at Shir. Moving further south, the Late Neolithic is well represented on the northern Lebanese coast, in the northern Beqaa valley and even inland, as attested by a number of sites detected in surveys and limited plant-tempered “Coarse Ware”.73 New vessel shapes soundings.85 The Late Neolithic pottery is repre- introduced in Phase VA include vessels with disc sented in this area by DFBW-like wares and cord- bases,74 jars with a prominent neck75 and bowls with impressed decoration. Detailed investigations of the carinated profiles;76 at Shir these shapes characterize the levels excavated in trench L7. In Phase VA-II the DFUW includes a few husking trays, a shape attested 73 Somewhat unfortunately, Courtois’ petrographic analysis in the upper levels at Shir. Typologically, at least, of sherds from Ras Shamra (Courtois 1992) did not include DFUW. Ras Shamra VB would match trench K-L7 at Shir. 74 De Contenson 1992, fig. 167, 4. The changes in the ceramic assemblage towards Ras 75 De Contenson 1992, 153. 155, fig. 166, 10–11; 170, 7–11. Shamra VA-I mirror the patterns seen at Shir to some 76 De Contenson 1992, 153 fig. 166, 3–5; 168, 8–9. 77 Riis 1962; Riis – Thrane 1974. extent, but precise correspondences between specific 78 See Riis – Thrane 1974, 73, pl. II A. pottery groups remain difficult to establish at this 79 Riis – Thrane 1974, fig. 162. 187–188. stage. Ras Shamra VA-II is tentatively synchronized 80 Riis – Thrane 1974, fig. 164. 171. 189. 197–198. 215. 81 Braidwood – Braidwood 1940; Hole 1959. with the upper levels of trench L7 and with trenches 82 Hole 1959, fig. 2. K12 and N-O20. 83 Hole 1959, 156. Not far south from Ras Shamra on the Syrian 84 Hole 1959, 158. 85 Copeland 1969; Copeland 1999; de Contenson 2000; Haidar- coast, the excavations at Tell Sukas have yielded a Boustani et al. 2007; Kirkbride 1969; Müller-Neuhof 1998; ceramic sequence that mirrors part of the sequence Bartl – Chayaa 2002.

ZOrA 2, 2009, 310–356 The Late Neolithic Ceramics from Shir 331

Fig. 24 Tentative relative chronology for the ceramic sequence excavated at Shir.

Late Neolithic in these areas have been intermittent, gy still used in the wider region is ultimately derived however, and it is difficult at this stage to move far from this project. For Shir the two relevant phases beyond noting typological similarities. Contrary are the two earliest ones, Amuq A and B.91 The ex- to earlier statements,86 we have so far failed to see cavators distinguished an array of ceramic wares, convincing parallels with one of the major type-sites several of which may be compared to Shir.92 The- of the central Levant, Byblos.87 Byblos may not be se include “Dark-Faced Burnished Ware”, “Coarse situated much farther away from Shir than most other Simple Ware” and “Dark-Faced Unburnished Ware”. sites discussed here, but the ceramics from the lowest Amuq DFBW bears close resemblance to the DFBW levels, néolithic ancien, most probably post-date the from Shir. However, it appears that the closest par- sequence excavated at Shir. They bear similarities to allels can be drawn with DFBW from trench L7, not the southern Levantine Yarmuk culture.88 One rare parallel consists of three sherds decorated with what may be cord-impressions.89 86 Nieuwenhuyse in: Bartl – Haidar 2008, 66–70. 87 Dunand 1973. Moving north from Shir, the culture-historical 88 Gophner – Gophna 1993. framework resulting from the University of Chicago 89 Dunand 1973, 44, pl. XIIX. excavations in the plain of Antioch has long been the 90 Braidwood – Braidwood 1960. 91 Braidwood – Braidwood 1960, 46, 68. only good reference for the prehistory of the nort- 92 Braidwood – Braidwood 1960, Matson, in: Braidwood – hern Levant.90 Much of the basic ceramic terminolo- Braidwood 1960, 49–50, 73.

ZOrA 2, 2009, 310–356 332 Olivier Nieuwenhuyse

with the earliest levels in K-L7. For instance, deco- Central Levantine pottery production and consump- ration was relatively frequent with DFBW already tion. This sequence makes a welcome contribution to in Phase A, and Phase A already yielded a small the rapidly developing field of Late Neolithic archae- proportion of jars with a distinct collar.93 Likewise, ology in the Near East. Based on carefully dated, well already in Phase A the ceramic assemblage includes stratified contexts it may offer a valuable comparative a proportion of plant-tempered Coarse Simple Ware. framework for much other work in the region. Both the Amuq DFUBW and Amuq CSW may find In this report we have presented ceramics from a counterpart in our CUW, in its ‘minerals only’ and three successive phases in the history of the site: ca. ‘plant-and-minerals’ varieties, respectively. Apart 7000–6650 (trench K-L7), ca. 6500–6450 (trench L7) from the presence/absence of plant inclusions, these and post-6400 (trenches K12 and N-O20). Through two categories appear to be very similar coarse pot- time there appear to have been increasing quanti- tery with rough surfaces.94 We tentatively suggest ties of pottery in daily use, alongside changes in the that the earliest ceramics from Shir predate Amuq composition of the ceramic assemblage, in ceramic A. Amuq A is correlated to the uppermost levels of technology, vessel shape and in the role of decorative trench K-L7 and, in particular, trench L7. Amuq B style. The earliest phase (7000–6650 BC) is domi- saw the introduction of elements that we may com- nated by Dark-Faced Burnished Ware, mostly in its pare with the upper levels of trench L7 and with K12 reduced variety. What we have termed Light-Faced and N-O20. Burnished Ware is an important part of this early Until the early 1990s the Amuq sequence of- assemblage. Decoration is largely absent, and ves- fered the only framework for the Late Neolithic of sel shapes are mostly small convex-sided bowls and the northern Levant. This has changed with the Japa- S-shaped goblets or small jars. A subsequent phase nese excavations at several sites in the Rouj basin, (6500–6450 BC) is dominated by Coarse Unburni- not too far north from Shir.95 The Rouj excavations shed Ware. A whole range of new vessel shapes was resulted in a useful regional sequence for the seventh introduced, including large oval basins, bowls with and sixth millennia BC.96 Significantly, the earliest in-turned rim, tall-necked jars, and vessels with a disc Pottery Neolithic stage, Rouj 2a, predates Amuq A. base. Decoration remaines rare, but definitely increa- The absolute dates available for the Rouj would syn- ses and included cord-impressed decoration with the chronize Rouj 2a with trench K-L7 and Rouj 2b with DFBW. During the final phase of occupation (after trench L7. This is supported by typological compari- 6450 BC) the assemblage almost entirely consisted of sons. For Phases Rouj 2a–b, three main ceramic cat- CUW, which technologically had gradually changed egories were distinguished: so-called “Kerkh Ware”, into coarse, plant-tempered pottery. The introduction “Dark-Faced Burnished Ware” and “Coarse Ware”. of husking trays occurred in this Phase. Whereas KW and DFBW were both mineral-temper- The picture presented in this report may perhaps ed and superficially resemble each other closely, CW be taken to suggest that there were strong leaps, was chaff-tempered, poorly fired pottery with rough, seemingly abrupt, from one phase to the next at Shir. unburnished surfaces and vessels of large size.97 This impression would be misleading, however, and KW and DFBW constituted the bulk of the ceramics will have to be re-evaluated in the wake of continuing from the earliest Phase Rouj 2a. During Rouj 2b, KW was replaced by DFBW, and the proportion of CW 93 Braidwood – Braidwood 1960, 50–51, fig. 24, 5–8. increased. There were also changes in vessel shape. 94 Braidwood – Braidwood 1960: 77–78, Matson in: Braid- 98 Shapes during Rouj 2a were simple and small. In wood – Braidwood 1960, 48. the Rouj 2b layers the earliest jars with real necks 95 Iwasaki et al. 1995; Tsuneki et al. 1997; Tsuneki et al. 1998; 99 Tsuneki et al. 1999; Tsuneki et al. 2000; Tsuneki – Miyake appeared. Husking trays were absent during Rouj 1996; Odaka 2003. 100 2a–b and first appeared in Rouj 2c. Decoration 96 Iwasaki et al. 1995; Miyake 2003. was largely absent in Rouj 2a, but increased mark- 97 Miyake 2003; Tsuneki et al. 2000. 101 98 Miyake 2003: 121. edly from Rouj 2b onwards. Rouj 2c is tentatively 99 Tsuneki – Miyake 1996, 116. correlated with the occupation levels documented in 100 Iwasaki et al. 1995, 174 fig. 12.16–17; Tsuneki et al. 1998, trenches K12 and N-O20.102 16; Tsuneki et al. 1999, 6 fig. 6, 22; Tsuneki et al. 2000, 11. 101 Miyake 2003, 124; Tsuneki – Miyake 1996, 116; Tsuneki et al. 1998, 12. 102 Miyake and Odaka do not quite agree with this proposal, Concluding remarks however. In their view the proportion of DFBW and its decorative styles cannot be used for comparative studies between the central and northern Levant. They would rather The excavations at Shir document a dynamic se- correlate Phase Rouj 2b with the stage documented at Shir in quence of 600 years or more of ceramic innovation in trench K-L7 (Miyake and Odaka, pers. comm. April 2008).

ZOrA 2, 2009, 310–356 The Late Neolithic Ceramics from Shir 333

field work. Presently it results largely from the lack of velopment towards irregularly-shaped and coarsely- stratigraphic continuity between the time-units con- finished plant-tempered ceramics.106 This subsequent sidered and the absence of a fine-tuned stratigraphy stage saw a strong increase in production output (in- for the K-L7 area. This stratigraphy has meanwhile creasing sherd densities) as well as the development become available.103 Further excavations within the of a more diverse range of shapes, including ves- areas covered by this report are planned. The ongoing sels of large size. Both in the Levant and in Upper work is very likely to fill some of the gaps and even- Mesopotamia the development of specialized pottery out some of the changes from one phase to the next. storage containers such as jars seems to have been a A firm grip on comparative issues is essential for drawn-out development. the understanding of the regional and inter-regional This subsequent stage also saw a growing inter- networks of communication, in which Levantine ce- dependence between ceramic production and plaster ramic traditions flourished. The present picture sug- technology. Voluminous, coarsely-tempered vessels gests that the early part of the seventh millennium were often plastered, presumably to reduce their por- BC was characterized by a highly fragmented mosaic osity. At Shir, the plastered CUW vessels seem to have of localized ceramic traditions and styles. Although been made to resemble their white ware counterparts we should be very careful not to reify into rigidly closely. They were, so to speak, “pottery turned white formalized culture-historical entities104 that which at ware”. Containers in these two categories may have first sight seems to be a pattern of regionally over- held similar functions.107 They were large, heavy, lapping ceramic traditions, it is perhaps possible to and relatively immobile, and should perhaps be seen identify several regionally distinct ceramic expres- as fixed, architectural features rather than as portable sions. Shir displays the closest affinities with other ‘vessels’. This bears on the issue of the origins of ‘central Levantine’ sites such as Hama, Sukas and pottery technology. Plaster technology has often been Tabbat al-Hammam. A somewhat different constella- seen as a direct precursor of true pottery production in tion is documented at ‘northern Levantine’ sites such the Near East, but the earliest ceramics seem to have as Ras Shamra, the Amuq and the Rouj Valley, while had very little to do with white ware. The various sites such as Mersin-Yumuktepe and Sakçegözü per- cross-connections between these two technologies haps embody a ‘Cilician’ approach. Farther east, few seem to have been part of a more developed stage of immediate comparisons can be drawn at present with pottery production and should perhaps be seen in the Early Pottery Neolithic sites on the Euphrates such context of an increasing reliance on ceramic contain- as Tell Halula and Mezraa Teleilat, or with Tell Sabi ers for long-term bulk storage. Abyad in the northern Syrian steppe. One particularly At the close of the seventh millennium, finally, eye-catching element of the central-Levantine ce- a more extensive inter-regional sharing of ceramic ramic assemblages at this stage is the so-called cord- traits appears to have begun, as seen in the far-flung impressed DFBW. The regional distribution of this distribution of certain Coarse Ware (CUW) decora- intriguing surface modification seems to have been tive styles, or the widespread of vessel shapes such confined to the Syrian and northern Lebanese coast, as the husking tray. Some of the slipped, painted or stretching inland to the central and southern Orontes appliqué-decorated CUW from the uppermost levels valley and into the northern Beqaa (fig. 23). at Shir would certainly not be out of place in Upper Notwithstanding such marked diversity, there are Mesopotamia during the so-called Pre-Halaf or Proto- also intimations of broad similarities in long-term ce- Hassuna stages. In Upper Mesopotamia such pottery ramic trajectories crossing regional boundaries. For formed part of a diverse complex of ceramic styles instance, across the Levant and Upper Mesopotamia with expanding regional distributions, setting the the earliest stage of the Pottery Neolithic appears stage for the development of the Halaf ceramic tradi- to be characterized by small quantities of vessels tion.108 Ceramic style gained a more overtly symbolic in daily use, reflected archaeologically in low sherd role at the close of the seventh millennium BC. The densities. Both in Upper Mesopotamia and in the Levant the earliest ceramics were carefully shaped, 103 Bart et al., this volume. frequently burnished and mineral tempered. The em- 104 Such as recently proposed by Aurenche and Kozlowski phasis seems to have been on producing vessels of 2005. 105 Nieuwenhuyse 2006; Arimura et al. 2000. small size that were visually conspicuous. Whereas 106 Faura 1996 a; Faura 1996 b; Miyake 2005; Nieuwenhuyse Levantine early potters created stark dark-light con- 2006; Nieuwenhuyse – Wilkinson 2007; Nishiaki – LeMière trasts in surface appearance (DFBW-reduced versus 2006; Özdoǧan 1999; Özdoǧan 2003. 107 Nilhamn 2003. LFBW), in northern Syria the earliest ceramics were 108 Akkermans 1993; Campbell 1992; Campbell 1998; Nieu- 105 occasionally painted. Subsequently there was a de- wenhuyse 2007.

ZOrA 2, 2009, 310–356 334 Olivier Nieuwenhuyse

Central Levant participated in these networks, albeit using broad, generalizing terms such as DFBW for perhaps marginally and in its own, regionally distinc- everything that is mineral-tempered, burnished and tive manner.109 Halaf “influences” certainly reached dark.110 The confusing heterogeneity that character- the immediate region of Shir, as seen in the Period izes Levantine ceramic terminology not only reflects L ceramics from the Hama sounding. Shir, however, ceramic traditions in the past, but to a degree also appears to have been abandoned before the onset of results from contemporary archaeological practices. the Halaf. Such issues can hardly be addressed on the basis of Concluding, we may say that, if one thing has the written descriptions available in the literature, nor become clear, it is that we are facing huge interpreta- are they likely to be solved by any one ceramic spe- tive challenges in comparing Early Pottery Neolithic cialist in particular. They call for mutual collaboration ceramics from Levantine sites that are often situated between specialists familiar with material from dif- at rather close distances from each other. Apart from ferent sites, and for detailed technological studies on stratigraphical complexities and the crucial issue the solid basis of the material itself. Several important of absolute dating, a lack of understanding ceramic studies have recently begun to focus on the Levantine technologies and decorative styles of each of the DFBW traditions. Studies like these should explore wares currently distinguished obstructs comparative the coarser, less attractive Levantine traditions such studies. Miyake quite appropriately warns against as the CUW from Shir as well.

Address Olivier Nieuwenhuyse Faculty of Archaeology Leiden University POB 9515 2300 RA, Leiden The Netherlands [email protected]

109 Odaka 2003. 110 Miyake 2003.

ZOrA 2, 2009, 310–356 The Late Neolithic Ceramics from Shir 335

Bibliography

Akkermans, P. M. M. G. Bartl, K. – Nieuwenhuyse, O. P. 1993 Villages in the Steppe – Later Neolithic 2008 Reliefverzierte Keramik des Neolithikums Settlement and Subsistence in the Balikh aus Shir/Westsyrien, in: D. Bonatz – R. M. Valley, Northern Syria (Michigan). Czichon – F. Janoscha-Kreppner (eds.), Fundstellen. Gesammelte Schriften zur Ar- Akkermans, P. M. M. G. – Cappers, R. – Cavallo, chäologie und Geschichte Altvorderasiens C. – Nieuwenhuyse, O. P. – Nilhamn, B. – ad honorem Hartmut Kühne (Wiesbaden) Otte, I. 9–16. 2006 Investigating the Early Pottery Neolithic of Northern Syria. New Evidence from Tell Bartl, K. – Haidar, A. – Nieuwenhuyse, O. P. Sabi Abyad, American Journal of Archae- 2006 a Shir: A Neolithic Site in the Middle Orontes ology 11/1, 123–156. Region, Syria, Neo–Lithics 1/06, 25–27.

Arimura, M. – Balkan-Atli, M. – Borell, F. – Bartl, K. – Hijazi, M. – Ammar H. Cruells, W. – Duru, G. – Erim–Özdoǧan, A.– 2006 b The Late Neolithic Site of Shir: Preliminary Ibanez, J. – Maede, O. – Miyake, Y. – Molist, M. – Report of the German-Syrian Cooperation Ozbasaran, M. Project 2006, Neo-Lithics 2/06, 15–18. 2000 A New Neolithic Settlement in the Urfa Region. Akarçay Tepe 1999, Anatolia An- Bender-Jørgensen, L. tiqua VIII, 227–255. 1988 An 8-Thousand-Year-Old Textile Impres- sion from Hama, in: I. Thuesen (ed.), Aurenche, O. – Kozlowski, S. K. Hama. Fouilles et Récherches de la Fonda- 2005 Territories, Boundaries and Cultures in the tion Carlsberg 1931–1938 (Copenhagen) Neolithic Near East (Oxford). 188. Balossi, F. 2004 New Data for the Definition of the DFBW Braidwood, R. – Braidwood, L. S. Horizon and its Internal Developments. 1940 Report on two Sondages on the Coast of The Earliest Phases of the Amuq Sequence Syria, South of Tartous, Syria, Syria 21, Revisited, Anatolica 30, 109–149. 183–226. 2006 The Development of “Cultural Regions” in the Neolithic of the Near East. The Dark Braidwood, R. – Braidwood, L. S. (eds.) Faced Burnished Ware Horizon (Oxford). 1960 Excavations in the Plain of Antioch (Chi- cago). Bartl, K. – Chaaya, A. 2002 Archäologische Untersuchungen der südli- Campbell, S. chen Akkar-Ebene, Nordlibanon. Vorläufige 1992 Campbell, Culture, Chronology and Ergebnisse einer Oberflächenprospektion, Change in the Later Neolithic of North in: R. Eichmann (ed.), Ausgrabungen und Mesopotamia (Dissertation University of Surveys im Vorderen Orient I (Berlin) 23– Edinburgh, Edinburgh 1992) 48. 1998 Problems of Definition: the Origins of the Halaf in North Iraq, in: M. Lebeau (ed.), Bartl, K – Haidar, A. About Subartu. Studies devoted to Upper 2008 Šīr – Ein neolithischer Fundplatz am mit- Mesopotamia (Subartu IV) (Turnhout) tleren Orontes. Vorläufiger Bericht über 39–52. die Ergebnisse der Testkampagne Herbst 2005 und Grabungskampagne Frühjahr Chapman, J. – Gaydarska, B. 2006, Zeitschrift für Orient-Archäologie 1, 2007 Parts and Wholes. Fragmentation in Pre- 54–88. historic Contexts (Oxford).

ZOrA 2, 2009, 310–356 336 Olivier Nieuwenhuyse

Copeland, L. Franken, H. J. – Kalsbeek, J. 1969 Neolithic Village Sites in the South Beqaʾa, 1975 Potters of a Medieval Village in the Jordan Lebanon, Mélanges de l’Université Saint Valley (Amsterdam). Joseph 45, 85–114. 1999 The Early Pottery Neolithic Lithics of Tell Faura, J. M. Nebi Mend (Qadesh), Syria, Neo-Lithics 1996 a Un conjunt ceràmic del VIII mil. leni B. P. 1/99, 10–12. a la vall de l’Eufrates: les produccions de Tell Halula (Síria) (MA Dissertation, Uni- Courtois, L. versity of Barcelona, Barcelona). 1992 Examen au microscope pétrographique de 1996 b La cerámica Pre–Halaf, in: M. Molist (ed.), poteries néolithiques de Ras Shamra V et Tell Halula (Siria). Un yacimiento neolíti- IV, in: H. DeContenson (ed.), Préhistoire co del valle medio del Éufrates. Campañas de Ras Shamra (Paris) 209–222. de 1991 y 1992 (Barcelona 1996) 91–97. de Contenson, H. Faura, J. M. – LeMière, M. 1977 a Le niveau de Ras Shamra. Rapport preli- 1999 La céramique néolithique du Haut Euphrate minaire des campagnes 1972–1976 dans syrien, in: G. del Olmo Lete – J. L. Montero le Sondage SH, Annales Archéologiques Fenolólos (eds.), Archaeology of the Upper Arabes Syriennes 27, 9–17. Syrian Euphrates. The Tishrin Dam Area 1977 b Le néolithique de Ras Shamra V d’après (Barcelona) 281–298. les campagnes 1972–76 dans le sondage SH, Syria 54, 1–23. Gophner, A. – Gophna, R. 1992 Préhistoire de Ras Shamra (Paris). 1993 Cultures of the Eight and Seventh Millen- 2000 Les céramiques, in: H. DeContenson (ed.), nia BP in the Southern Levant: A Review Ramad. Site néolithique en Damascène for the 1990s, Journal of World Prehistory (Syrie aux VIIIe et VIIe millénaires avant 7/3, 297–353. l’ere chrétienne (Beirut) 219–330. Haidar–Boustani, M. – Ibaňez, M. – al–Maqdissi, M. – Armendáriz, A. – Urquijo, G. –Teira, L. de Contenson, H. – van Liere, W. J. 2007 New Data on the Epipalaeolithic and Neo- 1966 Second campagne à Ramad, 1965, Anna- lithic of the Homs Gap: Three Campaigns les Archéologiques Arabes Syriennes 16, of Archaeological Survey (2004–2006), 167–174. Neo-Lithics 1/07, 3–9.

Diebold, B. Hole, F. 2000 Preliminary Report on the Ceramic As- 1959 A Reanalysis of Basal Tabbat al-Hammam, semblage at Tell Kurdu, in: K. A. Yener – Syria, Syria 36, 149–183. C. Edence – J. Casana – B. Diebold – H. Ekstom – M. Loyet – R. Özbal, Tell Kurdu Iwasaki, T. – Nishino, H. – Tsuneki, A. Excavations 1999, Anatolica 26, 58–65. 1995 The Prehistory of the Rouj Basin, North- 2004 Excavations at Tell Kurdu 2001: The Pot- west Syria. A Preliminary Report, Ana- tery, in: R. Özbal – F. Gerritsen – B. Die- tolica 21, 143–187. bold – E. Healey – N. Aydın – M. Loyet – F. Nardulli – D. Reese – H. Ekstom – S. Kiliçbeyli, B. Sholts – N. Mekel-Bobrov – B. Lahn, Tell 2005 Mezraa Teleilat Kazisi Verilerine Göre Kurdu Excavations 2001, Anatolica 30, Hassuna Kültürü Içinde ‘Husking Tray’ 52–55. Türü Kaplarin Deǧerlendirilmesi (MA Dis- Forthcoming Exchange and Interaction in the sertation, University of Istanbul, Istanbul). Late Neolithic of Northwestern Mesopo- tamia (provisional title; Dissertation Yale Kirkbride, D. University). 1969 Early Byblos and the Beqaʾa, Mélanges de l’Université Saint Joseph 45, 45–60. Dunand, M. 1973 Fouilles de Byblos tome V. L’architecture, Kobayashi, T. les tombes, le matériel domestique, des 2004 Jomon Reflections. Forager Life and Cul- origines néolithiques a l’avènement urbain ture in the Prehistoric Japanese Archipela- (Paris). go (Oxford).

ZOrA 2, 2009, 310–356 The Late Neolithic Ceramics from Shir 337

LeMière, M. Müller–Neuhof, B. 1979 La céramique préhistorique de Tell Assouad, 1998 A Preliminary Note on the Pottery Neolith- Djézirah, Syrie, Cahiers de l’Euphrate 2, ic at Tell Hmaira (Lebanon), Neo-Lithics 1979, 4–76. 3/98, 4–6. 2000 L’occupation Proto-Hassuna du Haut-Kha- bur occidental d’après la céramique, in: B. Nieuwenhuyse, O. P. Lyonnet (ed.), Prospection archéologique 2000 Early Pottery. The Ceramics from Level 1, Haut-Khabur occidental (Syrie du N.E.). in: M. Verhoeven – P. M. M. G. Akkermans Vol. I (Beirut) 127–149. (eds.), Tell Sabi Abyad II, The Pre–Pottery 2001 The Neolithic Pottery from Tell Kosak Neolithic B Settlement. Report on the Ex- Shamali, in: Y. Nishiaki – T. Matsutani cavations of the National Museum of An- (eds.), Tell Kosak Shamali Vol. I. The Ar- tiquities Leiden in the Balikh Valley, Syria chaeological Investigations on the Upper (Istanbul) 123–136. Euphrates, Syria. Chalcolithic Architec- 2006 The Earliest Ceramics from Tell Sabi ture and the Earlier Prehistoric Remains Abyad, Syria, Leiden Journal of Pottery (Tokyo) 179–211. Studies 22, 111–128. 2007 Plain and Painted Pottery. The Rise of Late LeMière, M. – Nieuwenhuyse, O. P. Neolithic Ceramic Styles on the Syrian and 1996 The Prehistoric Pottery, in: P. M. M. G. northern Mesopotamian Plains (Turnhout). Akkermans (ed.), Tell Sabi Abyad. The Late Neolithic Settlement (Istanbul) 119– Nieuwenhuyse, O. P. – Wilkinson, T. J. 284. 2007 Late Neolithic Settlement in the Area of Tell Beydar (NE Syria), in: M. Lebeau – A. LeMière, M. – Picon, M. Suleiman (eds.), Beydar Studies I (Turn- 1999 Les débuts de la céramique au Proche hout) 268–303. Orient, Paléorient 24/2, 5–26. Nishiaki, Y. – LeMière, M. LeMonnier, P. 2006 The Oldest Pottery Neolithic of Upper 1989 Bark Capes, Arrowheads and Concorde. Mesopotamia: New Evidence from Tell On Social Representations of Technol- Seker al–Aheimar, the Khabur, Northeast ogy, in: I. Hodder (ed.), The Meanings of Syria, Paléorient 31/2, 55–68. Things (London) 156–171. 1992 Elements for an Anthropology of Technol- Nilhamn, B. ogy (Michigan). 2003 Revealing Domesticity. White Ware as an Indicator of Change in Near Eastern Ar- Lloyd, S. – Safar, F. chaeology (Uppsala). 1945 Tell Hassuna. Excavations by the Iraq Gov- ernment General of Antiquities in 1943 and Odaka, T. 1944, Journal of Near Eastern Studies 4, 2003 Fine Painted Wares in the Neolithic North- 255–289. ern Levant: the Earliest Evidence from Tell ʿAin el-Kerkh, Rouj Basin, Orient Express Miyake, Y. 2003/3, 80–81. 2003 Pottery, in: T. Iwasaki – A. Tsuneki (eds.), Archaeology of the Rouj Basin. A Regional Orton, C. R. Study of the Transition from Village to City 1993 How Many Pots Make Five? An Historical in Northwest Syria. Vol. 1. Tell el-kerkh Review of Pottery Quantification, Archaeo- (Tsukuba) 119–141. metry 35/2, 169–184. 2005 Archaeological Survey at Salat Cami Yanı. A Pottery Neolithic Site in the Tigris Val- Orton, C. R. – Tyers, P. – Vince, A. ley, Southeast Turkey, Anatolica 31, 1–18. 1993 Pottery in Archaeology (Cambridge 1993). in press Salat Cami Yanı: A Pottery Neolithic Site in the Tigris Valley, in: M. Özdoǧan – N. Basgelen (eds.), Neolithic in Turkey (second edition) (Istanbul).

ZOrA 2, 2009, 310–356 338 Olivier Nieuwenhuyse

Özdoǧan, M. Tsuneki, A. –Hydar, J. –Miyake, Y.– Akahane, S. – 1999 Mezraa Teleilat: Preliminary Reconnais- Nakamurat, T. –Arimura, M. –Sekine, S. sance of a Neolithic Site in the Euphrates 1997 First Preliminary Report of the Excava- Basin, in: N. Tuna – J. Öztütk (eds.), Sal- tions at Tell el-Kerkh (1997), Northwestern vage Project of the Archaeological Herit- Syria, Bulletin of the Ancient Orient Mu- age of the Ilisu and Carchemish Dam Res- seum 18, 1–40. ervoirs in 1998 (Ankara) 11–17. Tsuneki, A. – Hydar, J. – Miyake, Y. – Akahane, S. – Özdoǧan, M. Arimura, M. – Nishiyama, S. – Shaʾbaan, H.– 2003 Mezraa Teleilat. Un site néolithique en bor- Anezaki T. – Yano, S. dure de l’Euphrate, Dossiers Archéologie 1998 Second Preliminary Report of the Excava- 281, 36–41. tions at Tell el-Kerkh (1998), Northwestern Syria, Bulletin of the Ancient Orient Mu- Rice, P. M. seum 19, 1–40. 1987 Pottery Analysis. A Sourcebook (Chica- Tsuneki, A. – Hydar, J. – Miyake, Y. – Hudson, M. – go). Arimura, M. – Maeda, O. – Odaka, T. – Yano, S. 1999 Third Preliminary Report of the Excava- Riis, P. J. tions at Tell el-Kerkh (1999), Northwestern 1962 L’activité de la mission archéologique Syria, Bulletin of the Ancient Orient Mu- danoise sur la cite phénicienne en 1960, seum 20, 1–32. Annales Archéologiqyes Arabes Syriennes 11/12, 135–136. Tsuneki, A. – Hydar, J. – Miyake, Y. – Maeda, O. – Odaka, T. – Tanno, K. – Hasegawa, A. Riis, P. J. – Thrane, H. 2000 Fourth Preliminary Report of the Excava- 1974 Sukas III. The Neolithic Periods (Copenha- tions at Tell el-Kerkh (2000), Northwestern gen 1974). Syria, Bulletin of the Ancient Orient Mu- seum 21, 1–36. Rye, O. S. 1981 Pottery Technology. Principles and Recon- van As, A. L. – Jacobs, L. – Nieuwenhuyse , O. P. struction (Washington 1981). 1998 The Transitional Fine Ware Pottery of Tell Sabi Abyad, Syria. A Pilot Study, Newslet- Schiffer, M. B. ter of the Department of Pottery Technol- 1987 Formation Processes of the Archaeological ogy 14/15, 25–47. Record (Albuquerque). 2004 Early Pottery from Late Neolithic Tell Sabi Abyad II, Syria, Leiden Journal of Pottery Thuesen, I. Studies 20, 97–110. 1988 Hama. Fouilles et Récherches de la Fonda- Voigt, M. M. tion Carlsberg 1931–1938 (Copenhagen). 1983 Hajji Firuz Tepe, Iran: The Neolithic Settle- ment (Philadelphia). Tsuneki, A. – Miyake, Y. 1996 The Earliest Pottery Sequence of the Le- Walton, P. – Eastwood, G. vant. New Data from Tell el-Kerkh 2, 1988 A Brief Guide to the Cataloguing of Northern Syria, Paléorient 22/1, 109–123. Archaeological Textiles (London).

ZOrA 2, 2009, 310–356 The Late Neolithic Ceramics from Shir Plate 1

Shir Dark-Faced Burnished Ware. Convex-sided bowls with everted walls (nos. 1–8) and with vertically oriented walls (nos. 9–22) (K-L7: nos. 1–4. 9–19; L7: nos. 5–8. 20–22; scale 1:4. Drawings: O. Nieuwenhuyse).

ZOrA 2, 2009, 310–356 Plate 2 Olivier Nieuwenhuyse

Shir Dark-Faced Burnished Ware. Convex-sided bowls with vertically oriented wall (no. 1) and with closed wall (nos. 2–10); plaster layer on no. 1 (K-L7: nos. 2–3. 6. 8–10; L7: nos. 1. 4. 5. 7; scale 1:4. Drawings: O. Nieuwenhuyse).

ZOrA 2, 2009, 310–356 The Late Neolithic Ceramics from Shir Plate 3

Shir Dark-Faced Burnished Ware. Convex-sided bowls with closed wall (K-L7: nos. 1–8. 10–18; L7: nos. 9. 19–21; scale 1:4. Drawings: O. Nieuwenhuyse).

ZOrA 2, 2009, 310–356 Plate 4 Olivier Nieuwenhuyse

Shir Dark-Faced Burnished Ware. Cord-impressed surface modification (L7: nos. 1–30; scale 1:4. Drawings: O. Nieuwenhuyse).

ZOrA 2, 2009, 310–356 The Late Neolithic Ceramics from Shir Plate 5

Shir Dark-Faced Burnished Ware. Convex-sided bowls with sharply inturned rim (nos, 1–4), comb-incised decoration (nos. 5–19) impressed decoration (no. 20), and possibly nail-impressed decoration (no. 21) (K-L7: nos. 20–21; L7: nos. 1–19; scale 1:4. Drawings: O. Nieuwenhuyse).

ZOrA 2, 2009, 310–356 Plate 6 Olivier Nieuwenhuyse

Shir Dark-Faced Burnished Ware. Bowls with everted straight wall (nos. 1–3) and goblets (nos. 4–19) (K-L7: nos. 4. 6. 9. 12. 14–16. 19; L7: nos. 1–3. 5. 7–8. 10–11. 13. 17–18; scale 1:4. Drawings: O. Nieuwenhuyse).

ZOrA 2, 2009, 310–356 The Late Neolithic Ceramics from Shir Plate 7

Shir Dark-Faced Burnished Ware. Standard jars (nos. 1-10), bodies of closed vessels (nos. 11–14) and bases (nos. 15–22). (K-L7: nos. 3–6. 8–18. 21–22; L7: nos. 1–2. 7. 19–20; scale 1:4. Drawings: O. Nieuwenhuyse).

ZOrA 2, 2009, 310–356 Plate 8 Olivier Nieuwenhuyse

Shir Coarse Unburnished Ware. Convex-sided bowls with everted wall (nos. 1–11) and with vertically oriented wall (nos. 12–19); plaster layer on nos. 4. 12 (K-L7: nos. 1. 10; L7: nos. 2–9, 11–19; scale 1:4. Drawings: O. Nieuwenhuyse).

ZOrA 2, 2009, 310–356 The Late Neolithic Ceramics from Shir Plate 9

Shir Coarse Unburnished Ware. Convex-sided bowls with vertically oriented wall (nos. 1-4) and very large convex- sided bowls (nos. 5–8); plaster layer on no. 7 (L7: nos. 1–8; scale 1:4. Drawings: O. Nieuwenhuyse).

ZOrA 2, 2009, 310–356 Plate 10 Olivier Nieuwenhuyse

Shir Coarse Unburnished Ware. Convex-sided bowls with closed wall (nos. 1-9), holemouth pots (nos. 10–12) and bowls with everted stright wall (nos. 13–14) (K-L7: nos. 7. 11; L7: nos. 1–6. 8–10. 12–14; scale 1:4. Drawings: O. Nieuwenhuyse).

ZOrA 2, 2009, 310–356 The Late Neolithic Ceramics from Shir Plate 11

Shir Coarse Unburnished Ware. Bowls with straight everted wall (nos. 1-7), convex-sided bowls with sharply inturned rim (nos. 8-10) and large oval “basins”; no. 12 with plaster layer (nos. 11–15) (K-L7: no. 8; L7: nos. 1–7. 9–15; scale 1:4. Drawings: O. Nieuwenhuyse).

ZOrA 2, 2009, 310–356 Plate 12 Olivier Nieuwenhuyse

Shir Coarse Unburnished Ware. Large jars (nos. 1-3) and standard jars (nos. 4–11); no. 7 has rim and base from the same vessel with missing intermediate part (L7: nos. 1–11; scale 1:4. Drawings: O. Nieuwenhuyse).

ZOrA 2, 2009, 310–356 The Late Neolithic Ceramics from Shir Plate 13

Shir Coarse Unburnished Ware. Standard jars (nos. 1–3, 5–7), small S-shaped jar (nos. 4, 8) and stabbed decoration (nos. 9–20) (L7: nos. 1–9. 11–15. 17–20; surface find: nos. 10. 16; scale 1:4. Drawings: O. Nieuwenhuyse).

ZOrA 2, 2009, 310–356 Plate 14 Olivier Nieuwenhuyse

Shir Coarse Unburnished Ware. Appliqué decoration (nos. 1–7), incised decoration (nos. 8-11), finger-impressed decoration (no. 12) and plastered-and-painted (nos. 13–15) (L7: 2. 4–12. 15; surface find: nos. 1. 3. 13–14; scale 1:4. Drawings: O. Nieuwenhuyse).

ZOrA 2, 2009, 310–356 The Late Neolithic Ceramics from Shir Plate 15

Shir Coarse Unburnished Ware. Base fragments; no. 2 with plaster layer; nos. 11–20 showing basketry impressions at the exterior (L7: nos. 1–20; scale 1:4. Drawings: O. Nieuwenhuyse).

ZOrA 2, 2009, 310–356 Plate 16 Olivier Nieuwenhuyse

Shir Light-Faced Burnished Ware. Convex-sided bowls with closed wall (nos. 1–9), with an everted wall (nos. 10–12), or with a vertically oriented wall (nos. 13–17), goblets (nos. 18–20) (K-L7: nos. 1–20; scale 1:4. Drawings: O. Nieuwenhuyse).

ZOrA 2, 2009, 310–356 The Late Neolithic Ceramics from Shir Plate 17

Shir Coarse Unburnished Ware from trenches K12/N-O20. Holemouth pot with appliqué cordon (no. 1), convex-sided bowls with everted wall (nos. 2–3. 9–11), with vertically oriented wall (no. 8), small jars or goblets (nos. 4–6), low bowl with vertical appliqué decoration (no. 12) and a pedestal base (no. 13) (K12: nos. 7–8. 10–11; N-O20: nos. 1–6. 9. 12–13; scale 1:4. Drawings: O. Nieuwenhuyse).

ZOrA 2, 2009, 310–356 Plate 18 Olivier Nieuwenhuyse

Shir Coarse Unburnished Ware from trenches K12/N-O20. Tall-necked jar, completely preserved but impossible to reconstruct without a professional restorer (no. 1), standard jars (nos. 2–13) (K12: nos. 4. 7–11; N-O20: nos. 1–3. 5–6. 12–13; scale 1:4. Drawings: O. Nieuwenhuyse).

ZOrA 2, 2009, 310–356 Inhaltsverzeichnis

Simona Bracci, Growth and Development of Ancient Near Eastern Towns of the Diyala Region. Some Topographical Considerations ...... 8

Tim Clayden, Eye-stones ...... 36

Abdulillah Fadhil, Qualifikationsarbeiten zum Magister oder Doktor phil. des Department of Archaeology der Universität Baghdad. Teil 5 ...... 88

Stefan R. Hauser – David J. Tucker, The Final Onslaught. The Sasanian Siege of Hatra ...... 106

KARIN BARTL – Majd Hijazi – jamal ramadan mit einem Beitrag von Reinder Neef, Die spätneolithische Siedlung Shir/Westsyrien. Vorläufiger Bericht über die Ergebnisse der Grabungskampagnen Herbst 2006 und Frühjahr 2007 ...... 140

Claudia Bührig, Das Theater-Tempel-Areal von Gadara/Umm Qais. Struktureller Wandel eines urbanen Raumes ...... 162

Matthias Grawehr – Jamal Ramadan – Majd Hijazi, Syrisch-deutsche Arbeiten in Shayzar/Larissa. Erster Vorbericht ...... 208

Markus Gschwind – Haytham Hasan – Andreas Grüner – Wolfgang Hübner, Raphaneae. Report on the 2005 and 2006 Survey ...... 234

Lothar Herling, Aqaba. From the Land. Ergebnisse des ASEYM-Surveys ...... 290

Olivier Nieuwenhuyse, The Late Neolithic Ceramics from Shir. A First Assessment . . . . 310

Said F. Al-Said, Eine neu entdeckte Erwähnung des Königs Nabonid in den thamudischen Inschriften ...... 358

Bruno Jacobs – Michael C. A. Macdonald, Felszeichnung eines Reiters aus der Umgebung von Taymāʾ ...... 364

Hinweise für Autoren ...... 377

ZOrA 2, 2009, 5–6 6 Inhaltsverzeichnis

ZOrA 2, 2009, 5–6