A Comparison of Three Late Neolithic Pottery Assemblages
Total Page：16
File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb
UNDERSTANDING COMMUNITY: A COMPARISON OF THREE LATE NEOLITHIC POTTERY ASSEMBLAGES FROM WADI ZIQLAB, JORDAN by Kevin Timothy Gibbs A thesis submitted in conformity with the requirements for the degree of Doctor of Philosophy Graduate Department of Anthropology University of Toronto © Copyright by Kevin Timothy Gibbs 2008 Abstract Understanding Community: A Comparison of Three Late Neolithic Pottery Assemblages from Wadi Ziqlab, Jordan Kevin Timothy Gibbs Doctor of Philosophy Department of Anthropology University of Toronto 2008 This study presents the results of an analysis of three Late Neolithic pottery assemblages from Wadi Ziqlab, northern Jordan. These sites were occupied during the 6th millennium BC (calibrated) and are therefore contemporary with sites in other parts of the southern Levant that are attributed to the Wadi Rabah culture. The assemblages are analyzed from a stylistic perspective, broadly defined, which includes an examination of technological style in addition to a more traditional examination of vessel form and surface treatment. Different stages in the pottery production sequence are investigated using a range of analytical techniques, including thin-section petrography and xeroradiography. While there are some similarities between the assemblages, there are also some noticeable differences. The results of the pottery analysis are used to explore the nature of community in the context of the Late Neolithic. A critique of more traditional archaeological approaches to prehistoric communities leads to a re-conceptualization of community that combines interactional and ideational perspectives. Similarities in pottery among the sites, especially technological similarities, suggest that pottery producers may have comprised a dispersed community of practice. At the same time, pottery may have also been a symbolic marker of community boundaries. Differences in pottery among the sites, including surface treatment, may reflect the flexibility of these boundaries as different parts of the dispersed community negotiated their place in it. ii The presence of variation among contemporary pottery assemblages in a localized area suggests that social organization during the 6th millennium may have been more complex than is normally assumed for the Late Neolithic in the southern Levant. A dispersed community, with its members spread throughout the wadi, would require a sufficiently complex and flexible system of relationships to maintain it. Failing to acknowledge this has contributed to the difficulties archaeologists have encountered when trying to understand the culture-history of the 6th millennium BC in and east of the Jordan Valley. iii Acknowledgements I would like to thank everyone who provided assistance and encouragement while I was working on this dissertation. Firstly, I thank my supervisor, Ted Banning. Ted not only directed me towards this research topic and allowed me to work on the Wadi Ziqlab material, but he also provided encouragement, valuable insights, and comments at every stage of this research. I would also like to thank my other dissertation committee members, Michael Chazan and Heather Miller, for their encouragement and advice, especially during the final stages of this study when time was of the essence, and Gary Coupland and Reinhard Bernbeck for their valuable comments. A number of other people assisted at various stages of this research by sharing opinions, ideas, and publications on the Late Neolithic and pottery analysis, including Ruth Eyal, Yosef Garfinkel, Nimrod Getzov, Avi Gopher, Hamoudi Khalaily, Jaimie Lovell, Kostalena Michelaki, and Valentine Roux. I also thank Timothy Harrison and Robert Mason for allowing me to enrol in their classes in the Department of Near and Middle Eastern Civilizations and, along with Stanley Klassen, for assistance with the petrographic analysis. The xeroradiographic analysis was made possible through the very generous assistance of Pamela Vandiver and Blythe McCarthy. Viviene Cucevic and Kasia Harasiewicz assisted with the micro-CT analysis. I also thank the members of the various Wadi Ziqlab Project field crews for their diligent excavation of the material used in this dissertation, and the various lab volunteers who helped process it. Seiji Kadowaki generously shared data on the phasing of the sites. Of course, I thank my parents, family, and friends whose encouragement helped throughout the entire process of completing this study. Finally, and most importantly, Lisa Maher contributed to this project in innumerable ways, and I cannot thank her enough times. In addition to working on the excavations at al-Basatîn and iv sharing her expertise on the geoarchaeology of Wadi Ziqlab, Lisa read and commented on every chapter of this study. But more than anything else, her support, patience, and encouragement kept me going. Lisa, I couldn’t have done it without you. v Table of Contents Abstract ii Acknowledgements iv Table of Contents vi List of Tables vii List of Figures viii List of Appendices xi Chapter 1: Introduction 1 Chapter 2: Late Neolithic Wadi Ziqlab in Context 12 Chapter 3: Communities and Style 55 Chapter 4: Form and Surface Treatment 81 Chapter 5: Technology 198 Chapter 6: Communities in Late Neolithic Wadi Ziqlab 255 Chapter 7: Conclusion 301 Bibliography 310 vi List of Tables Table 1.1: Chronology of late prehistoric archaeological entities. 11 Table 2.1: List of Late Neolithic sites in Wadi Ziqlab and surrounding area. 32 Table 2.2: Radiocarbon determinations from Tabaqat al-Bûma. 35 Table 2.3: Radiocarbon determinations from al-Basatîn. 38 Table 4.1: Vessel segments represented by site. 94 Table 4.2: Forms represented by site. 96 Table 4.3: Forms represented by site, “indeterminate indeterminate” removed. 97 Table 4.4: Lip forms represented by site. 101 Table 4.5: Base forms represented by site. 102 Table 4.6: Handle forms represented by site. 102 Table 4.7: Surface treatments by site. 103 Table 5.1: Evidence for identifying primary forming techniques of pottery. 209 Table 5.2: Evidence for identifying secondary forming techniques of pottery. 210 Table 5.3. Frequency of surface colours of pottery. 232 Table 5.4.Frequency of core colours of pottery 234 Table 5.5: Observed changes in refired sherds. 236 Table 6.1: Petrofabric group by site. 259 Table 6.2: Fabric group by site. 261 Table 6.3: Primary forming methods identified by site. 267 Table 6.4: Other forming evidence. 268 Table D.1: XRGL range of five types of inclusion. 351 vii List of Figures Figure 1.1: Map of the southern Levant showing sites mentioned in text. 9 Figure 1.2: Map of Wadi Ziqlab showing location of Late Neolithic sites. 10 Figure 2.1: Map of southern Levant showing major geographical features. 44 Figure 2.2: Map showing soil distribution in Wadi Ziqlab. 45 Figure 2.3: View of Wadi Ziqlab showing location of Tabaqat al-Bûma. 46 Figure 2.4: Map of excavation areas at Tabaqat al-Bûma. 47 Figure 2.5: Plan of main architectural features at Tabaqat al-Bûma. 48 Figure 2.6: View of Wadi Ziqlab showing location of al-Basatîn. 49 Figure 2.7: Cluster diagram of pottery surface treatments and form. 50 Figure 2.8: Plan of excavation units at the lower terrace of al-Basatîn. 51 Figure 2.9: Plan of excavation units at the upper terrace of al-Basatîn. 52 Figure 2.10: Late Neolithic features at al-Basatîn. 53 Figure 2.11: Late Neolithic features at al-Basatîn. 54 Figure 4.1: Garfinkel’s typology of “Early Chalcolithic” pottery. 113 Figure 4.2: “Typological elements” used in Sadeh’s typology. 114 Figure 4.3: Sadeh’s master typology. 115 Figure 4.4: Pottery forms used in Blackhams UAM analysis. 116 Figure 4.5a and b: Types, base forms, and lip forms used in this dissertation. 117 Figure 4.6: Everted straight vessels from Tabaqat al-Bûma. 118 Figure 4.7: Everted straight vessels from Tabaqat al-Bûma. 120 Figure 4.8: Everted concave vessels from Tabaqat al-Bûma. 122 Figure 4.9: Everted convex vessels from Tabaqat al-Bûma. 124 Figure 4.10: Everted convex vessels from Tabaqat al-Bûma. 126 Figure 4.11: Vertical straight vessels from Tabaqat al-Bûma. 128 Figure 4.12: Inverted straight vessels from Tabaqat al-Bûma. 130 Figure 4.13: Inverted straight vessels from Tabaqat al-Bûma. 132 Figure 4.14: Inverted straight vessels from Tabaqat al-Bûma. 134 Figure 4.15: Inverted convex vessels from Tabaqat al-Bûma. 136 Figure 4.16: Inverted convex vessels from Tabaqat al-Bûma. 138 Figure 4.17: Necked everted vessels from Tabaqat al-Bûma. 140 Figure 4.18: Necked inverted vessels from Tabaqat al-Bûma. 142 Figure 4.19: Necked vertical straight and indeterminate from Tabaqat al-Bûma. 144 Figure 4.20: Flat bases from Tabaqat al-Bûma. 146 Figure 4.21: Other bases from Tabaqat al-Bûma. 148 Figure 4.22: Strap handles from Tabaqat al-Bûma. 150 Figure 4.23: Ledge handles from Tabaqat al-Bûma. 152 Figure 4.24: Everted straight vessels from al-Basatîn. 154 Figure 4.25: Everted concave vessels from al-Basatîn. 156 Figure 4.26: Everted convex vessels from al-Basatîn. 158 Figure 4.27: Vertical straight vessels from al-Basatîn. 160 Figure 4.28: Inverted vessels from al-Basatîn. 162 Figure 4.29: Necked vessels from al-Basatîn. 164 Figure 4.30: Flat bases from al-Basatîn. 166 Figure 4.31: Other bases from al-Basatîn. 168 Figure 4.32: Handles from al-Basatîn. 170 viii Figure 4.33: Everted straight vessels from al-‘Aqaba. 172 Figure 4.34: Everted concave vessels from al-‘Aqaba. 174 Figure 4.35: Everted convex vessels from al-‘Aqaba. 176 Figure 4.36: Vertical straight vessels from al-‘Aqaba. 178 Figure 4.37: Inverted straight vessels from al-‘Aqaba. 180 Figure 4.38: Inverted convex vessels from al-‘Aqaba. 182 Figure 4.39: Necked vessels from al-‘Aqaba. 184 Figure 4.40: Bases from al-‘Aqaba. 186 Figure 4.41: Handles from al-‘Aqaba.