Masaryk University Faculty of Arts

Home , Halaf culture, Hassuna culture, Seton Lloyd, Tell Halula

Department of Archaeology and Museology

BACHELOR’S DIPLOMA THESIS

The Study of Halaf pottery from the Eastern Khabur Archaeological Survey (EHAS) in Iraqi Kurdistan

Brno 2017 Beáta Baluchová

Masaryk University Faculty of Arts

Department of Archaeology and Museology Centre of Prehistoric Archaeology of the Near East

Beáta Baluchová

Bachelor’s Diploma Thesis

Supervisor: Mgr. Mateiciucová, Inna Ph.D.

Consultant:

Prof. Dr. Pfälzner, Peter

Dr. Sconzo, Paola

Dr. Nieuwenhuyse Olivier

Brno 2017

DECLARATION

I declare that I have worked on this thesis independently,

Using only the primary and secondary sources listed in the bibliography.

I agree with storing this work in the library of the Prehistoric Archaeology of the Near East

At the Masaryk University in Brno and making it accessible for study purposes.

Brno 30.11.2017 ......

Signature

Abstract/Annotation

Title: The Study of Halaf pottery from the Eastern Khabur Archaeological Survey (EHAS) in Iraqi Kurdistan

Author: Beáta Baluchová

Department/Institute: Masaryk University, Faculty of Arts, Department of Archaeology and Museology, Centre of Prehistoric Archaeology of the Near East

Supervisor: Mgr. Mateiciucová Inna Ph.D.

Consultant: Prof. Dr. Pfälzner, Peter Dr. Sconzo, Paola Dr. Nieuwenhuyse Olivier

The study deals with the pottery, identified as Halaf, from the autonomous area of Kurdistan in Iraq. The material, which I analysed, originates from a surface collection carried out by the team of Tuebingen University from 2013. The work in field is lead under supervision of Prof. Dr. Peter Pfälzner and Dr. Paola Sconzo.

The thesis is a preliminary effort to present material and distinguish more precisely ceramic material from EHAS to the chronological order from Pre-Halaf/Proto-Hassuna, Proto-Halaf, Early Halaf, Middle Halaf, Late Halaf and Halaf-Ubaid Transitional. The Halaf pottery will be divided on ware bases according to the technological and morphological characteristics. To achieve more accurate outcomes I will compare this material with those known from continuously occupied sites, specifically at least one of sites, Tell Arpachiyah and Yarim Tepe, which are located in Iraq, and Tell Halula, Tell Sabi Abyad and Chagar Bazar, which are situated in Syria.

My research focuses on a description and analysis of material obtained from three different sites, which are located in diverse areas. These zones were divided in the EHAS project according to geographical and morphological attributes. They are the Tigris valley, the eastern Tigris valley plateau and the lower Zagros chains with Khabur basin. There will also be mention the amount of so called Halaf pottery, which have been found in each zone from the beginning of project in 2013 until the campaign 2016, including.

Keywords: the Late Neolithic pottery, Halaf, survey, Iraq, Kurdistan, comparison, the Tuebingen Eastern Khabur Archaeological Survey (EHAS)

Abstrakt/Anotacia

Názov práce: Štúdia Halafskej keramiky z Eastern Khabur Archaeological Survey (EHAS) v Iraku

Autor: Beáta Baluchová

Oddelenie/Inštitút: Masaryková Univerzita, Filozofická fakulta, Oddelenie Archeológie a Muzeológie, Centrum Pravekej Archeológie Predného Východu

Vedúci práce Mgr. Mateiciucová Inna, Ph.D.

Konzultant: Prof. Dr. Pfälzner, Peter Dr. Sconzo, Paola Dr. Nieuwenhuyse Olivier

Štúdia sa zaoberá Halafskou keramikou z autonómnej oblasti Kurdistan v Iraku. Materiál, ktorý som analyzovala pochádza z povrchového archeologického zberu, ktorý je organizovaný tímom z univerzity v Tuebingene od roku 2013. Práca v teréne je realizovaná pod vedením prof. Petra Pfälznera a Post. Doc Paoli Sconzo.

Bakalárska práca sa snaží o predbežné predstavenie keramického materiálu, ktorý bol v rámci archeologického prieskumu zaradený do Halafskej kultúry. Táto keramika bude zadelená do chronologického rámca od Pre- Halafskej, Proto-Halafskej, rannej, strednej a neskorej Halafskej keramiky až ku prechodu k Obejdskej kultúrnej tradícii.

Halafska keramika bude rozdelená na základe technologických a morfologických charakteristík do predchádzajúcimi výskumami zadefinovaných skupín. Na dosiahnutie presnejších výsledkov je materiál porovnávaný s tým, ktorý je vypublikovaný z výskumov vykonávaných na dlhodobejšie osídlených lokalitách. Jedná sa o osídlenie v Iraku a to Tell Arpachiyah a Yarim Tepe a sídliska Tell Sabi Abyad, Tell Arbid Abyad a Chagar Bazar, ktoré sú situované v Sýrii. Analyzovaná keramika je tiež porovnávaná s materiálom, ktorý bol získaný počas súčasných výskumov v irackom Kurdistane.

Práca sa zameriava na opis a analýzu materiálu získaného z troch odlišných lokalít, ktoré patria k rozdielnym zónam. Tieto zóny boli diferencované v EHAS projekte podľa geografických a morfologických vlastností krajiny. Jedná sa o údolie Tigrisu, východnú plošinu údolia Tigrisu a pohorie nízkeho Zagrosu s povodím rieky Khabur.

Kľúčové slová: neskoro neolitická keramika, Halaf, povrchový zber, Irak, Kurdistan, porovnanie, Tuebingen Eastern Khabur Archaeological Survey (EHAS)

Acknowledgement

First of all, I would like to express my thanks to my great family and close friends, for their love, support, understanding and concern not only during the writing of this thesis but also during the study.

In this place I would like to express my sincere gratitude to my supervisor Mgr. Inna

Mateiciucova Ph.D. for her guidance and help during the writing of this thesis.

I would like to express my thanks to the Prof. Dr. Peter Pfälzner and Dr. Paola Sconzo, who allowed me to be a member of a team in EHAS project. Without this possibility I could not write down this thesis and have learnt so much about the beauties of the Neolithic pottery. I am also very grateful to other members of “pottery team” who though me basic information also about their pottery-period.

And other enormous thanks go to the Dr. Olivier Nieuwenhuyse, who was very helpful and provided me with a lot of valuable information about the pottery.

Furthermore, I would like to point out in this acknowledgement the fact that I was working with the bibliography, either acquired on my own, or those, which was at disposal via Centre of Prehistoric Archaeology of the Near East. Therefore, I used unpublished version from 2006 by Nieuwenhuyse O. P., Plain and painted pottery. The rise of Late Neolithic Ceramic Styles on the Syrian and Northern Mesopotamian Plains, because published version (2007), was not in our centre at disposal.

List of abbreviations

a. s. l. above sea level ca. circa, around, about cm centimetre(s) etc. et cetera, so forth

EHAS Eastern Habur Archaeological Survey e.g. exampli gratia, for example et al. et alii, and others fig. figure(s) frag. fragment ha hectare(s) km kilometre(s)

LoNAP Land of Nineveh Archaeological Project m metre(s)

PPNB Pre-pottery Neolithic B

PN Pottery Neolithic unpub. unpublished

1 Introduction

The Halaf tradition is identified as culture, which is dated to the Late Neolithic period, specifically from 5 900 to 5 300 BC (Akkermans and Schwartz 2003: 115; Nieuwenhuyse 2013: 113). Periodization of the Late Neolithic is extremely complex, and it is not certain, what belonged to it and what not, especially in Iraqi Kurdistan due to lack of information. To the Late Neolithic in northern Syria is categorized Pre-Halaf, Proto-Halaf(Transitional), Early Halaf, Middle Halaf, Late Halaf and Halaf-Ubaid Transitional. In northern Iraq are classified Proto-Hassuna, Archaic Hassuna, Standard Hassuna, northern Samarra, Early Halaf, Middle Halaf, Late Halaf and Halaf-Ubaid Transitional so far (Lloyd et al 1945:257; Mallowan and Rose 1935: 43; Davidson 1977, 27; Nieuwenhuyse 2006). Periodization of the Halaf culture will be presented more precisely in the chapter Background of Halaf pottery, where I would like to summarize knowledge from the Iraq as well as Syria region.

The Late Neolithic period is without any written sources, therefore, it is decisive to pay attention to the physical remains (e. g pottery, lithic industry etc.) and subsequently to the comparison of these remains between sites (Frankel 1979:1). Furthermore, it is crucial to take into the consideration the regional variability. The understanding of the Halaf culture depends on the ability to fix the culture in spatial and chronological framework (Watkins and Campbell 1987:427). The Neolithic society was developing and trying to improve their daily life according to the set conditions. I would like to point a cooling ‘event between 8.25 and 8.14 kyr BP’ (Rohling and Pälike 2005:975), which reached a peak around 6 225 BC. This might have been “a trigger”, which led to consequently changes. In archaeological record might be seen some transformations in assemblages e.g. new architectural forms and construction techniques, internal settlement’s organization, material culture and social changes, which were reflected in stamp-seals, pottery production, variety of beads, amulets and figurines and an evidence of using metal (Akkermans and Le Mière 1992:1; Campbell 1992:182; Nieuwenhuyse 2000:151; Cruells and Nieuwenhuyse 2004:47; van der Plicht et al. 2011:231, 237).

I would like to highlight that pottery represents only one of the components of the Late Neolithic living, of human life, which could help us reconstruct life during this time. This reconstruction is possible owing to the large quantity and quality of found ceramic material (Frankel 1979: 2). Pottery was utilized in economic, social and ritual sphere of life (Nieuwenhuyse 2006), so consequently could reflect changes in development of earliest society. Anyway, it is important to focus not only on one subject, e.g. ceramic material, but to

see the subject as a part of a complex, which was influenced by diverse changes caused by human action.

Now we know, when Halaf culture started to appear, but what we do not know is the origin of Halaf culture, which still needs to be studied more precisely. More conducted examinations might provide more precise results and fill up gaps in knowledge. Studying of precede cultures in regions, where Halaf was identified, might help to identify origin of this transition (Davidson and McKerrell, 1976:52; Davidson 1997:97; Akkermans and Le Mière 1992:1, 21; Campbell 1992:182; Le Mière and Picon 2008:1). On the other hand, if we do not establish proper terminology to explain what exactly Halaf tradition is/is not, it might remain questionable, how well we might understand the preceding cultures.

This study is a preliminary effort to present ceramic material, which was categorized to Halaf period, from the Eastern Ḫabur Archaeological Survey. The Project started in 2013 and was conducting by University of Tuebingen in Autonomous Region Kurdistan in the Republic of Iraq. The field work of EHAS is conducted under leading Peter Pfälzner and Paola Sconzo (Pfälzner and Sconzo 2015:92; 2016:92). In this study will be analysed and described ceramic material from three sites among the surveyed regions with aim to compare material with well stratified sites and to present the Halaf ceramic material in the surveyed area.

The thesis is organized as follows:

Chapter 2 Research questions/additional aims introduces the main aims of this thesis and what the author of this study would like to prove. In this chapter will be mentioned also some additional questions, which investigating might be possible with regard on the long-term continuation of EHAS project that might bring more material for further analyses.

How knowledge was gained and how the author finds out about things crucial for this study is enlightened in chapter 3 Methodology. This chapter references to the process of obtaining information and explain using certain methods essential for this study.

Analysed material was collected during the archaeological survey. In chapter 4 Criticism of the sources and the ceramic material will be mentioned, criticism of the sources, from where the ceramic material come, which means archaeological survey as well as criticism of ceramic material itself.

Briefly introduction to the Halaf culture will provide the chapter 5 Background of Halaf pottery. In first section will be acknowledged the beginnings of the examination of so called

Halaf culture. The history of research and short introduction of crucial sites will be followed by next section, which deal with established periodization. The author of this thesis will divide material on the basis of technological attributes to the ware categories. Therefore, final section of this chapter will be focused on the characteristics and definitions of different types of ware and their definitions used on the Tell Arpachiyah and Yarim Tepe in Iraq and Tell Sabi Abyad, Chagar Bazar, Tell Halula and Tell Arbid Abyad, which are situated in the Syria.

The Late Neolithic period for an area of Iraqi Kurdistan might be considered as terra ignota. The history and current state of archaeological research in Iraqi Kurdistan will be introduced in chapter 6 State of research on Halaf pottery in Iraqi Kurdistan. Here will be mentioned survey as well as excavations projects.

Analysed material was collected during the EHAS in Iraqi Kurdistan, which is part of bigger project Resource Cultures. Sociocultural Dynamics and the Use of Resources, conducted by the Tuebingen University (Pfälzner and Sconzo 2015:92). In chapter 7 The Eastern Khabur Archaeological Survey (EHAS) will be shortly introduce survey, what the task of this project is and which methodology it is using. The area where this project is conducted will then be described.

For better understanding of the location of the Halaf sites in Iraqi Kurdistan it is important to look at environment, where were identified settlement’s pattern dated to this period. Chapter 8 Physical Environment of surveyed area will briefly introduce geomorphology, climate, hydrology, flora and fauna within the studied field. This chapter will deal with contemporary physical environment, which will be followed by conditions established during the Late Neolithic period within surveyed area.

Sites from the EHAS project, where were identified settlement’s pattern dated to the Halaf period, will be discuss in chapter 9 Sites with Halaf pottery in EHAS. In this description not only the survey site number will be included but also the site name, if it was possible to find out a Kurdish and/or an Arabic toponymal and ancient name. The location and access to each site will be described, its coordinates, means of discovery, type of site, its dimensions, such as shape, estimate measure, length, height, height above sea level, relation to environment and suggested period of occupation. Each site will in chart show the amount of collected ceramic material, which was dated to the various period. It will be demonstrated a photographical documentation of each site, as well as its spatial location within the Iraqi Kurdistan on the map.

Chapter 10 Description of ceramic material from EHAS will provide the description of the obtained ceramic material, which will be presented according to pre-defined characteristics. It will be mentioned a state of preservation, general characteristics, technology, decoration, types of rims and bases, types of vessels and discussion to each type of ware, where will be presented correspondence to the categories from literature. Pottery that was analysed came from three different sites, each one is in diverse zone. These zones were established on the base of geomorphological characteristics. Analysed sherds will be compared with material from excavations with an aim to define the possible Halaf occupation more precisely at particular site.

The final chapter 11 Conclusion will summarize results from analyses of a ceramic material. In this chapter will be made a comparison of type of ware that was reported in each zone. Furthermore, on the basis of analyses might be/might be not possible to assume in which sequence of the Halaf period these sites were occupied.

2 Research questions/ additional aims

This study is a preliminary effort to present the ceramic material from the EHAS project. Pottery, which is analysed, originates from a surface collection organized in Autonomous Region of Kurdistan in the Republic of Iraq. In a frame of this project is surveyed region divided into the zones according to geographical and morphological attributes. Thesis is focused on the ceramic material from three sites among three different zones with aim to present and to compare the Halaf ceramic material within the surveyed area. These sites, with the most representative material, are selected to show, what kind of material could be subsequently expected in particular zone. Each one could reflect regional variability, therefore one of the goals also in the future study is identifying the local material culture from the Late Neolithic and to compare it with different regions of Iraqi Kurdistan.

One of purposes of this study is to distinguish more precisely the Halaf pottery in the chronological order from Pre-Halaf/Proto-Hassuna, Proto-Halaf, Early Halaf, Middle Halaf, Late Halaf and Halaf-Ubaid Transitional.

The other additional aim, but not less important, is working toward a local chronology for the Halaf period, based on local material.

The Halaf pottery is divided on ware bases according to the technological and morphological characteristics. Terms applied in this study are all derived outside the Iraqi Kurdistan, therefore other objective is to investigate, whether these terms might be/might be not used in the studied region.

3 Methodology

I consider this chapter as an important part of the study because of clarification the process, which I was going through. The organisation of the database played a significant role when approaching methodology. The database, which I used, was partly based on the database from Tell Arbid Abyad and the pottery coding system used in EHAS project. Excavations on Tell Arbid Abyad, a site situated in the north-eastern Syria, were conducted under supervision of Inna Mateiciucová from Masaryk University, and they were using adapted classification and description system from Olivier Nieuwenhuyse (Vostrovská et al 2011:1, 5).

With the aim to build up a ware catalogue I am forced to be confronted with a lack of information about Halaf period in surveyed region. I am bound to do it in the surveyed area from nearly a scratch, using few knowledges about local material from literature and insights from neighbouring and closest region. For division to the categories, such as Standard Ware, Fine Painted Ware etc. serves primarily criteria and technological attributes according to Olivier Nieuwenhuyse (2006). It is crucial to remember that these terms originate from outside the Iraqi Kurdistan and therefore in this area might be reported not only slightly different but completely new types of ware.

For relevant information of ceramic material I considered site, sherd number, shape, rim shape and orientation, lip, handles, carination, base, base transition, rim, body and total height, thickness min./max., rim, shoulder, body and base diameter, the main and the minor inclusions as well the quantity of them, exterior and interior slip, surface treatment and condition, firing and firing hardness, traces of usage, matrix core, exterior and interior colour, decoration, paint lustre and design of decoration. The acquired information should allow me to construct a workable ware classification on the base of the local material.

After creating a database and studying literature, I attended campaigns of the Eastern Khabur Archaeological Survey (EHAS) in autonomous region Iraqi Kurdistan. Peter Pfälzner and Paola Sconzo gave me an opportunity to study the Late Neolithic pottery from a survey and

allowed me to analyse ceramic material. As a member of project, I had the possibility to get to know and to interact with material from this area.

First of all, I went through a relational database in Microsoft Access, which is used for the documentation of EHAS. In this database, by querying, I searched for sites, where potential Halaf occupation have been detected. I made a list of these sites with aim to present them in this study and show location of Halaf settlements reported in this region.

In this thesis I make a description of Halaf ceramics from three different sites, each site belonging to a different zone according to the geomorphological attributes. Zones, where the Halaf pottery was found, are described in the chapter Sites with Halaf pottery in EHAS. The analysed ceramic material was divided according to the technological attributes to ware. In each type of ware is mentioned general characteristics, technology, decoration, types of rims and bases, types of vessels and discussion to each type of ware according to the aforementioned categories. The gaining of drawings and photos of analysed material was also crucial.

This thesis goes towards a preliminary effort to present obtained material from EHAS, which have been dated to Halaf period, and compare it also with material, which is known from stratigraphic sequences of continuously occupied sites in the Iraq and well documented sites in Syria. Comparison of obtained material from survey was made according to the publications and results from the excavations at Tell Arpachiyah and Yarim Tepe in Iraq and Tell Sabi Abyad, Chagar Bazar, Tell Halula and Tell Arbid Abyad, which are located in Syria. The reason for choosing these sites is that they are mostly continuously occupied sites with a good stratigraphical sequence. Sites in Iraq were chosen because they are situated near the studied region and it might be possible to get similar material. Furthermore, cultures in the past were spreading also beyond the borders of current states, therefore for comparison were selected also sites in Syria. Additional reason for selecting Syrian sites is that there have been conducted long-term research on the Halaf period, which enable to bring more precise results suitable for comparison (Mallowan 1936; Hijara 1980; Akkermans 1989, Akkermans and Le Miére 1992; Akkermans 1993; Le Miére and Nieuwenhuyse 1996, Nieuwenhuyse 2006; Vostrovská et al 2011; Cruells et al 2013).

4 Criticism of the sources and the ceramic material

In this chapter I would like to focus on weaknesses both of the ceramic material and of where this ceramic material comes from, an archaeological survey.

Firstly, I would like to concentrate on archaeological survey and give examples, what might be seen as problematic also during the nowadays conducted surveys and their results. It might happen, that some archaeologists are conducted, what they consider as archaeological survey, meanwhile another ones might recognize their action just like sketchy inspection (King 1978:8). Survey should be accurate, the question remains, how accurate? For survey is crucial well recording and description, which might lead later to satisfying interpretation (Howard 2007:7-8).

Finding a new locality is determined by its visibility, which might be maintain through satellite images, different atlases or right in field. The Late Neolithic sites are usually small and this stand also for Halaf period (Davidson 1977:17), although during the late Halaf settlements became greater (Nieuwenhuyse and Wilkinson 2008:270). It might happen that these small sites might be also merged into the surrounding landscape due to the erosion and/or agricultural activities (Mateiciucová 2010:411). For a detection of prehistoric settlements in survey might be sufficient to separate a team into two groups, the first one would focus on the geoarchaeology, landscape and would conduct a small site survey, the second group would inspect tells and its surroundings (Nieuwenhuyse and Wilkinson 2008:271-272). Detection of Halaf occupation might be on tells harder, because their settlements might be buried beneath the layers of later occupations. Even if on tells was found a presence, it might be possible, that Neolithic occupation might precede tell and/or might have been subsumed within it (Nieuwenhuyse and Wilkinson 2008:285). Neolithic society might have preferred mobile way of life, so their occupation assemblages might not have had such a great impact on environment (Nieuwenhuyse and Wilkinson 2013:293). Furthermore, the Neolithic sites are dating to an early Holocene stage, which make their identification harder, because they might be buried by considerable amount of sediments (Altaweel et al. 2012:6).

Location of new sites in EHAS was based mostly on beforehand knowledge on their position (Pfälzner and Sconzo 2015:102, 108). Due to this and the fact that Halaf sites are mostly small size and require most precise off-site survey, I might assume that this might be a reason for a lack of Halaf sites in EHAS. Other reason might be that Halaf culture was not widespread in greater extent among studied region.

Collecting ceramic material in survey might lead to following questions: How many sherds is needed to create a representative sample from a surface site? How the interpretation might be based on the collected sherds? How we might know that the number of sherds represents casual visit, temporary use or the number of collected sherds, which are dated to the particular period are not significant? Does it make a critical difference using survey methods onsite such as gridding plan or discrete sampling, with further interpretation? (Bintliff 2011: XVII, XVIII).

In EHAS was each site mapped and described, then divided into collection units on the bases of topographic features (Pfälzner and Sconzo 2015:102, 108). If we conducted survey and set it into grid of fields, we might miss some periods in grid unit as well as the majority of those collections from one unit might be largely undiagnostic. On the other hand, survey with discrete sampling could provide scope of periods even though number of diagnostic sherds might belong to less well-known periods (Bintliff, 2013:198).

There are surveys which consider the Late Neolithic as a single period and they do not take into consideration changes within this period (Nieuwenhuyse and Wilkinson 2008:69). In EHAS has been the Late Neolithic period divided into Pre-Proto Hassuna, Proto-Hassuna, Hassuna and Halaf with no further division. In practice, the prehistoric ceramic material from surveys is less chronologic precise. For Halaf period is chronological division based mostly on decorative style and majority of sherds from surface collection might be too fragmented and/or eroded due to depositional processes and/or ploughing the land, to show the original motifs and design. The vessel shape typology of Halaf pottery should refer to complete shapes, what might not be obtained from surface collections. Furthermore, as a major complication might be seen number of samples, which are often too small (Nieuwenhuyse 2000:155; Nieuwenhuyse and Wilkinson 2008:273).

The main disadvantage of survey is, that it could not be directly followed stratigraphically sequences. Although if surveys are systematically done, they might give a reliable overview of material culture thought time in surveyed region. Furthermore, definitions and classifications of collected ceramic material could be made only on the bases of comparison. This gives an indication, that pottery should have followed exactly the same or similar path of development, what does not have to be necessarily truth. Therefore the local variability of ceramics assemblages in the region, which has not been examined well yet, has to be taken in to consideration.

For defining and comparison of a ceramic material I considered problematic disparate ceramic material from excavations in Iraqi Kurdistan and therefore also limited published publications, lack of quantitative data, radiocarbon sampling, which it partly caused by lack of continuity in occupation at most of Halaf sites (Bernbeck and Nieuwenhuyse 2013, 1). Also division inside the Halaf periods is still poorly understand, even if it is getting better.

Furthermore, I consider as a questionable the Halaf itself, its definition and terminology, e.g. distinction between Middle and Late Halaf (Campbell 1992: 72; Nieuwenhuyse 2000:156). For more exact information it is necessarily to work out terminology, which could suit also the new reveal material with possibility to compare it with already obtained material. This point might be solved progressively by commencement of new excavation and by re-examination of material from previous conducted excavations and surveys with the aim to fit it to pre-defined characteristics, regarding local variability. However, it is not always clear, what might be consider as local variability and what as completely new culture. And additionally, new excavations could reveal and bring new materials with a need to define new terminology. Nevertheless, it should be taken into consideration, that if there will be new terminology created it must be generally accepted firstly (Campbell 2007:106).

5 Background of Halaf pottery

5.1 Introduction

In this chapter I would like to shortly introduce Halaf culture horizon. At first, I would like to mention a site, where for the first time this type of ceramic material was found. This will be followed with subsequent excavations projects, which were purposely focused on Halaf occupation or Halaf layers were revealed during the examination process. More information about archaeological projects conducted only in region of Iraqi Kurdistan will be presented in chapter State of research on Halaf pottery in Iraqi Kurdistan. Additionally, there are already lists of sites, where were conducted examination of Halaf tradition (e.g. Hijara 1977:61-67), therefore in this chapter I would like to point out those, which I consider as crucial. This will be followed by the process of establishment of chronology in the Syria and in the Iraq. Background of Halaf pottery will end by pointing out types of wares. In this subchapter will be displayed short characteristic of each ware e.g. Standard Ware etc., from sites, specifically Tell Halula, Chagar Bazar, Tell Sabi Abyad, Tell Arpachiyah and Yarim Tepe, if possible. For each

ware will be mentioned a site, where for the first time was identified, by whom, which phase is typical for, further technological features such as temper, firing circumstances, surface treatment and conditions, decoration motifs, colour of paintings, if possible. In subsection of this ware category will be assort those, which have not been identified in an area of Iraqi Kurdistan so far, but their are consider as a part of Halaf culture.

Halaf type of pottery was for the first time detected by John Garstang at site Sakçe Gözü, which is situated in the Turkey. Report from this excavation was short, due to lack of material for comparison (Frankel 1979:2). The higher attention on the ceramic material was paid after the excavation at eponymous site Tell Halaf, the ancient site of Guzana, conducted by Max Freiherr von Oppenheim during 1899, 1911 to 1913, and later in 1929 (Frankel 1979: 2; Becker 2012:25; Grellert and Schmid 2015:2). More information about Halaf period brought excavations in Yunus led by Charles Leonard Woolley in 1913 (Wooley 1934: 146; Campbell 1992: 1; Becker 2015,6). In 1927 was conducted an examination and later until 1938 also excavation of Tepe Gawra by Ephraim Speiser, later by Charles Bach. Precise report about examination was written by Arthur J. Tobler (Tobler 1950:1; Rothman 2002: 20, 24, 26). These examinations of Tepe Gawra revealed late Halaf period, which continued into the Ubaid period (Davidson 1977: 72). Material detected during these excavations was mainly re- deposited and was without any well-preserved stratigraphical sequence (Bernbeck 2006: 714; Spataro and Fletcher 2010, 92). More precise results brought subsequent excavations, which were conducted in Syria and in the northern Iraq (Davidson 1977, 8).

During the excavation of a site Nineveh directed by Max Mallowan has been identified a layer Ninevite 2 phase, which revealed ceramic material like those from Tell Halaf (Frankel 1979, 3). Max Mallowan then in 1932 concentrated at site Tell Arpachiyah (Mallowan and Rose 1935, 1, 3). He divided ceramic material into painted and unpainted ware, incised pottery, incised and burnished ware, incised and painted ware and monochrome burnished ware (Mallowan and Rose 1935: 172-175). On behave of analyses of ceramic material, Max Mallowan identified stylistic differences, which might have served as indication for development, and he divided the Halaf period to the Early, Middle and Late Halaf (Mallowan and Rose 1935: 43; Davidson 1977, 27). This was the first attempt to work towards the Halaf chronology. Later was this site re-excavated by Ismail H. Hijara, whose divided ceramic assemblages further to the new types of ware (Hijara 1976, 131).

In Khabur region was conducted an archaeological survey during 1934. Subsequently in 1935 was a site Chagar Bazar choose for excavation (Mallowan 1936: 5; Davidson 1977: 90; Cruells 2006, 5) to present occupation during the main periods among this region. This examination was led by Max Mallowan. The importance of tell might be seen in its position. During the Late Neolithic lay on a frequented route, which connected other Halaf sites in this region with Jabal Sinjar and areas close to the Tigris River (Mallowan 1936, 1-2, 5, 7; Davidson 1977, 90). Since 1999 by Universitat Autònoma of Barcelona under leading of Walter Cruells, University of Liège, under coordination of Önhan Tunca and the General Direction of Antiquities and Museums of Syria with representation by Abd el-Masih Baghdo from the Antiquities Department of Hasseke, was conducted a project with aim for systematic investigation of prehistoric layers (Cruells 2006, 5; Cruells et al. 2013, 467). At Chagar Bazar have been detected Samarra as the early stages of Halaf culture. This shows the paths of first occurrence of Halaf tradition in the Khabur region, with its predecessor. Results from excavation enable establishing a chronology, which consists from Halaf A – Formative Stage and Halaf B or Developed Stage. These phases are then further subdivided (Cruells 2013: 467).

Another site, which is quite important also for studying Halaf period is Tell Hassuna. In 1942 was detected site Tell Hassuna by Fuad Safar. The site is located 30 km south of present site Mosul. In the following years 1943-1944 started an excavation under the supervision of Seton Lloyd, Fuad Safar and Robert John Braidwood. This examination provided knowledge about the earliest layers of a village from an Iraqi sequence (Braidwood and Howe 1960, 5) At Tell Hassuna were found remains not only of Halaf pottery, but also preceding Samarra and Hassuna cultures and following Ubaid culture. These excavations provided stratigraphical sequence from Proto-Hassuna to Ubaid culture (Lloyd et al. 1945: 290).

Another crucial site for better understanding of Halaf culture is Tell Sabi Abyad. Excavations started in 1986 under leading of Peter Akkermans with aim to clarified chronology of Halaf period in the Balikh valley (Akkermans 1987:23). This project continued for longer time-period and enable in great amount with Halaf terminology (Le Miere and Nieuwenhuyse 1996; Nieuwenhuyse 2006). The revealed layers were dated from PPNB to Early Halaf. The following ware categories, which are applied in this study were classified according to the examination of this site.

In Tell Halula were conducted excavations from 1989 by a team from the Autonomous University of Barcelona, directed by Miquel Molist. On this site have been identified continuous stratigraphical sequence layers from PPNB to PN , further subdivide into 7 main 14

phases (Pre-Halaf-Late Halaf) (Gómez et al. 2012:31;Molist et al. 2013:446; Gómez et al. 2014:1)

Another important site for establishing the Late Neolithic terminology is Tell Seker el Aheimar. This site was revealed during 1990-1991 survey, which was organized by French- Japanesse mission, under leading of Yoshihiro Nishiaki. Later from 2000 to 2005 was on this site conducted excavations, which brought results about the earliest pottery (Pre-Proto- Hassuna) in the northern Mesopotamia (Nishiaki 1992:97; Nishiaki and Le Miere 2005:54).

Through the history there are other sites, which were examined and brought information about the Late Neolithic period. To summarize information from these sites is not an aim of this thesis, although it might be one of the goals for the next study.

According to results from excavation we might assume that Halaf tradition was extend in area of northern Iraq, eastern Turkey, northern and coastal Syria and eastern Lebanon, Cilicia (Davidson 1977:ABSTRAKT, Campbell 1992:182; Bernbeck 2006:714). Despite information about extension of Halaf tradition, its origin remains unknown. As the origin area has been considered the northern Iraq, where Halaf culture was spreading from the Zagros Mountains further to the east to the Border of Anatolia (Hijara 1980: 259-264; Akkermans and Le Mière 1992, 1). On the other hand, clay analyses from the Tell Halaf and Chagar Bazar, which are situated in the Khabur region, suggest their production in close vicinity of these sites (Davidson and McKerrell, 1976, 52). Furthermore, the analyses of ceramic material from Syrian Jezirah resulted, that it was also made locally in this region (Akkermans and Le Mière 1992, 21). As the cause for spreading the Halaf pottery (influence) was suggested population movements, migration, emergence of ranked society or trade (Davidson 1977, 344-347, 371; Nieuwenhuyse 2000:153). It is feasible to state that the origin of Halaf culture might be locally in the preceding period (Nieuwenhuyse 2000:153; Le Mière and Picon 2008, 1).

5.2 Periodization

Although establishing of chronology depends on present sense of history, time and material similarity (Bernbeck 2008:712), it is crucial for work of archaeologists, because serves as framework within social changes (Campbell 2007, 103). Chronology of Halaf period is extremely complex (Cruells and Nieuwenhuyse 2004:49) and still is in process of

establishment. On the base of studied literature I would like to remark difficulties, which rise in the Halaf chronology and might be caused by

1) Focusing on the chronology suited only on one site 2) Local subdivisions 3) Misleading terminology 4) Less data for analyses (e.g. lack of sites with continuous stratigraphical sequence)

Towards the first attempt of establishment of chronology for Halaf period worked Max Mallowan during the examination of site Tell Arpachiyah. He proposed a division to the Early, Middle and Late Halaf. As I mentioned before Max Mallowan formed this periodization on the bases of stylistic differences (Mallowan and Rose 1935: 43; Davidson 1977, 27). To this chronology was on the base of the analyses of ceramic material from Tell Aqab, which was processed by Thomas E. Davidson, added the Transitional phase, between the Halaf and Ubaid culture (Davidson 1977:3, 149). On the basis of ceramic material from re-excavated site Tell Arpachiyah Ismail Hijara divide Halaf into new division to four phases (I-IV) (Hijara 1980: 286). This subdivision was later applied to the another sites., but some weakness of this division was pointed out, such as small sample, basis in quantity of various vessels forms and its suitability only on one site (Campbell 1992: 64-66). Number of sites, which established their own chronology started to increase (e.g. Tell Damishliyya, Tell Sabi Abyad, Chagar Bazar, Tell Halula, etc.) (Akkermans 1988: 19). It might make sense that at the beginning of research, scholars tried to establish chronology and due to the lack of examined site, they attempted to do it systematically at least on them examined localities. But this should have been avoided as more information have been obtained. Subsequently there were more studied sites and some researchers started to work towards not only on local, but also on transregional chronologies. A completely new proposal to bipartite division of the Halaf was introduced by Thomas Wilkinson and Stuart Campbell and further was enlarged to: Halaf Ia (earlier than original Early Halaf), Halaf Ib (the old Early Halaf), Halaf IIa (old Middle Halaf) and Halaf IIb (old Late Halaf) (Watkins and Campbell 1987: 430; Campbell 1992: 68-75). Excavations on Tell Sabi Abyad identified a new earlier phase of Halaf, called Transitional (Akkermans and Le Miére 1992, 3; Akkermans 1996:26), for which was subsequently proposed term Proto-Halaf (Cruells and Nieuwenhuyse 2004:48). This period was attested also on another sites such as Tell Halula, Chagar Bazar etc (e.g.Cruells 2017:19). Additionally, Walter Cruells suggested division of the Halaf period into Formative phase/Halaf A and Developed phase/Halaf B with 16

further subdivisions. Formative phase/Halaf A, which is preceed by Pre-Halaf/Hassuna, is further subdivided into Proto-Halaf and very Early Halaf. Developed phase/Halaf B includes Early, Middle and Late Halaf and is followed by Post Halaf/Ubaid (Cruells 2017:25) .

In the central and northern part of Iraq the preceders of Halaf culture are two major groups: Standard Hassuna and Samarra. Furthermore, there were identified distinctions between classic Samarra in central Iraq and northern Samarra in northern Iraq, which appeared during the later Standard Hassuna. In northern Iraq the predecessor of Standard Hassuna is Archaic Hassuna (Lloyd et al 1945:257). Before the whole Hassuna period (Archaic Hassuna, Standard Hassuna) was identified in north-east Syria and in Iraq Proto-Hassuna period, for which have been in Syria applied term Pre-Halaf (Akkermans 1993:4, 68; Nieuwenhuyse 2006; Nieuwenhuyse 2013:120). Hassuna ceramic material was subdivided into three parts: Hassuna I, which is defined by Archaic Hassuna (painted pottery) and it is ascertain only in the north Iraq, Hassuna II, characterized by incised Standard Hassuna and Hassuna III, for which is typical painted decoration (Campbell 1992b: 28-52). Further examinations, by Yoshihiro Nishiaki and Marie Le Miere revealed the oldest Pottery Neolithic phase Pre-Proto-Hassuna period, which was further developed into already aforementioned Proto-Hassuna (Nishiaki and Le Miere 2013:58).

But which periodization suit and should be applied in the studied region? Even thought in Iraq might be suggested slightly different terminology for periodization (Campbell 1992b: 28- 52), each chronological framework try to describe the Late Neolithic period. This is a reason, why among these terms might be found analogies, even though they were used in other geographical area. Here I would like to emphasise that it is crucial to work toward the terminology, which might be applied and generally accepted by researchers and it should not be constantly created another one. In Tab 5.1 is shown, how among various chronological frameworks might be found these parallels. For studied region I used periodization Pre-Halaf (Proto-Hassuna, Hassuna I-II), Proto-Halaf/Transitional (Hassuna III, Halaf Ia), Early Halaf(Halaf Ib), Middle Halaf (Halaf IIa), Late Halaf(Halaf IIb) and Halaf-Ubaid Transitional (Post-Halaf).(Campbell 1992; Akkermans 1993:4, 68; Nieuwenhuyse 2000:154- 155, 157; Nieuwenhuyse 2006; Nieuwenhuyse 2013:120; Cruells 2017:25)

I would like to emphasise that terms such as Pre-Halaf, Proto-Halaf etc. are establish on the basis of pottery style, whereas in the assemblages might be seen continuity (Nieuwenhuyse 2006)

Tab. 5.1 Relative chronology and cultural phase for Halaf period of the Near Eastern areas and specific sites (after Cruells 2017, 25)

5.2 Division of ware

5.2.1 Introduction

For better understanding of ceramic material should be considered as a relevant establishing of proper terminology. This terminology should characterise pottery remains in more precise way to enable description and comparison of material on completely different sites. As I already mention in chapter Methodology pottery acquired during EHAS project is divided on the base of ware. According to Rice ware is “ceramic material in the raw or fired state; a class of pottery whose members share similar technology, fabric and surface treatment” (Rice 1987:484)

In this subchapter I would like to present ware terminology of Halaf culture, which is based on ceramic-technological attributes. For each term will be mentioned by whom and where was this type of ware defined, for which Halaf phase is typical and the technological attributes such production process, temper, firing circumstances, surface treatment, decoration motifs, colour of paintings and type of vessels. This will be presented with aim to apply these definitions for analysed ceramic material from EHAS project. As a basis served definitions by Olivier Nieuwenhuyse (2006).

Most of definitions were precise described on behave of the examination of site Tell Sabi Abyad. (Nieuwenhuyse 2006). This site has been examined since 1986, and revealed at least 11 architectural levels from Neolithic occupation, which were divided into 3 main phases of occupation. Level 11 to level 8 were identified as Pre-Halaf phase, level 7 to level 4 as Transitional period (Proto-Halaf) and level 3 to level 1 as Early Halaf phase (Akkermans 1989, 6, 11; Nieuwenhuyse 2006). On Tell Sabi Abyad were identified layers only from Pre-Halaf, Proto-Halaf and Early Halaf, therefore for knowledge of Middle and Late Halaf must serve other sites with well-preserved stratigraphical sequence. The sequence of Proto-Halaf up to Late Halaf phase was detected in Chagar Bazar. (Cruells, et al 2013, 467, 469; Cruells and Nieuwenhuyse 2004, 53, 54; Cruells 2006, 677). Tell Halula is a site, which as well revealed sequence from Pre-Halaf to the Late Halaf, therefore some information from this site will be also applied in this thesis (Molist et al. 2013, 446; Gallet et al. 2015, 91).

The following lines will present definition of ceramic ware from the Syria to show what characteristic of each ware have been in Syria attested. This do not suggest that the same type of ware has to be documented also in Iraqi Kurdistan or even that particular type of ware has the same attributes. It serves as basis for a research question: whether these terms might be/might be not used in the studied region, to what degree is the well documented northern Syrian classification applicable to Iraqi Kurdistan, even if are in Iraqi Kurdistan in surveyed region find the same wares, which look the same as in northern Syria.

5.2.2 Standard Ware (SW)/Coarse Ware (CO)/Proto-Hassuna/the Bulk

The Standard Ware and the Coarse Ware are two different names for one type of ware, which has the same attributes. Term Coarse Ware was already used in pioneering work in Tell Hassuna by Seton Lloyd, Fuad Safar and Robert John Braidwood (Lloyd et al. 1945:276-278; Braidwood et al. 1983:651-665). This term was applied also in Tell Arpachiyah, Yarim Tepe, Tell Halula, Chagar Bazar as well as at the beginning of examination in Tell Sabi Abyad. (Hijara 1980: 186; Merpert and Munchaev 1987:10,29; Akkermans 1989:81;86 1993: 37; Cruells et al. 2013:473; Molist et al. 2013:447-448).

Term Standard ware was established later during the examination of ceramic material from Tell Sabi Abyad and defined as “not a homogenous ware, but rather variety of ceramics groups, which cannot be identified with certainty” (Le Miére and Nieuwenhuyse 1996: 129).

For sites Arpachiyah and Yarim Tepe was made a brief definition. In Tell Arpachiyah was this ware characterised by chaff, grain and gypsum temper. Its surface was rough with self- slipped and colour orange buff and/or reddish buff. Prevalent amount of this ware were identified as bowl fragments. It was used during I, II a III phase (Hijara 1980:186). In Yarim Tepe was this ware with a great amount of vegetable temper, usually dark brown colour. In this site were prevalent vessels thick-walled and flat based jars and bowls (Merpert, Munchaev 1987, 10, 29).

Coarse ware from Tell Halula shows mineral and vegetal inclusions. It was fired in an incompletely reduced atmosphere. Surface was mostly slipped and/or smoothed, burnished and/or brushed (Molist et al.2013:448). For Chagar Bazar was used similar definition, in addition was mentioned measurement of these inclusions, which were larger than 1 mm in diameter. This type was identified in Proto-Halaf and in Early Halaf layers. Among this group have been reported Red Slip wares, which were either plain, decorated or burnished, Simple Coarse wares and Burnished Coarse wares .In the Early Halaf came to decrease of this type of ware( Cruells et al. 2013:473).

More detailed description is known from Tell Sabi Abyad (Nieuwenhuyse 2006) Standard Ware/Coarse Ware was characterised by the use mainly of plant tempered clay fabric, which varies in amount and size, but also mineral inclusions might occur in temper and thus calcite, siltstone and iron-oxide siltstone. Analyses of material from Tell Sabi Abyad showed that this pottery might have been fired during a short interval. This have been suggested due to frequent dark grey to black cores, which is a result of incomplete burning out of plant inclusions. It seems that there is a relation between presence/absence of plant inclusions and wall thickness and rim diameter. Thickness of sherds, which do not have plant inclusions, is lower than those with them. Furthermore there is a link between presence and size of plant inclusions and surface treatment e.g. slipped pottery contain small size plant inclusions, burnished ceramic consist of height amount of small-plant inclusions etc. Smoothing and burnishing are more common in material without plant inclusions. (Le Mière, Nieuwenhuyse 1996, 131-132, Nieuwenhuyse 2006) Surface colour range from pink, reddish yellow, light red, pinkish grey, reddish brown, to light brown grey (Nieuwenhuyse 2006). Decoration techniques and surface treatment might be associated also with temper. Incision, impression, appliqué decoration and bitumen painting and roughtly smoothed surface, traces of scraping appeared on those sherds with coarse-plant temper, whereas red-slip, red-painting, red painting and impression bands decoration and carefully finished surfaces, well-smoothing and/or burnishing occurred on sherds with fine

plant temper (dung) (Nieuwenhuyse 2006). Standard Ware might be divided into categories according to ceramic technology, vessel shape and decorative style. According to the decorative style it is possible to determine various groups among Standard ware. They furthermore differ in ceramic technology and in shape and size of vessels. It is possible to identify Painted Standard Ware, Red-slipped Standard Ware, White-slipped Standard Ware, Red-painted Standard Ware, Incised Standard Ware, Impressed Standard Ware, Appliqué Standard Ware and Bitumen-painted Standard Ware. These techniques contained in name of these subgroups might be used also in combination and could give a name to further subgroups (Nieuwenhuyse 2006).

Standard ware vessels varied in height, rim and base diameter, wall thickness and orientation of the rim, which suggest their different functions. In Tell Sabi Abyad were identified (bowls with open shapes), jars (closed shapes, with neck),pots (closed shapes without neck), trays (low, with oval shapes), goblets (small shapes) (Nieuwenhuyse 2006)

There have been slightly differences among ware in various stages of Halaf period: In Tell Sabi Abyad was typical during Pre-Halaf smoothing of surface, pottery was lightly coloured and it occurred self-slip. Shapes of ceramic were simple and monotonous (Le Mière, Nieuwenhuyse 1996:135; Nieuwenhuyse 2006). For decoration were typical painting, appliqué, impression and incision. Colour of painting was red and design consists of triangles, organized in horizontal zones and sometimes lined by chevrons. Appliqué was limited only to blobs and crescents, which were horizontally fixed. Impressions are commonly used with painting and used for dotted lines, vertical or oblique bands of parallel, straight lines, horizontal wavy bands. Paintings and appliqué are found from level 11 forward, incision from level 10 forward and pattern-burnishing from level 8 onwards. (Le Mière and Nieuwenhuyse 1996, 138; Nieuwenhuyse 2006). During the later stages occurred Red-slipped Standard ware.

Transitional period/Proto Halaf at Tell Sabi Abyad showed increase of material with large plant inclusions and with large mineral inclusion. It has been detected decline of application of slip, red-slip, self-slip and burnishing, whereas amount of smoothened pottery increased in level 6, decrease in level 5 and again increase in level 4. It appeared pottery, which is mainly buff, pinkish-red and additionally cream and orange-red in colour. During this period have been reported also reduction in size of vessel. Generally pottery was less carefully finished. On the other hand, in earliest level of Transitional phase/Proto Halaf has been identified black pigment, which was ascertain in laboratory (Nieuwenhuyse 2006)

Techniques of decoration were painting, appliqué, incision, impression, pattern- burnishing and occasionally combination of them. The paint was mainly red and burnished, sometimes black and in the earliest level occur bitumen Design consist of triangles either plain, or crosshatched, parallel lines, chevrons and herringbones. Impressions have been made with comb to produce dotted lines, straight wavy bands and shallow lines. Incisions consist of chevrons, zigzags, lines, crosshatched triangles, group of linear incisions in zones. Plastic decorations contain blobs and horizontal crescents and was restricted only to level 6. (Le Mière, Nieuwenhuyse 1996, 144, 150, 156; Nieuwenhuyse 2006)

During the Early Halaf Period began reduction in morphological variability. The ceramic material were plain, coarsely made with roughly smoothed surface, sometimes appeared traces of finger-pressing and scraping. It have been reported stopping of using slip and Standard ware pottery was no longer decorated (Nieuwenhuyse 2006)

5.2.3 Standard Fine Ware/Standard Hassuna/Samarra Fine Ware/Samarra Standard Ware

Although scholars are using as well this terminology, there are more problems with its applying. The first problem rise from term Samarra pottery. It is still uncertain, whether it represents cultural tradition or separate technological tradition or only a style of pottery decoration. For a better understanding of this type of ware is important to examine pottery according technological criteria such as choice and preparation of raw material, shaping methods and firing techniques (Nieuwenhuyse et al 2001, 148, 149).

In Arpachiyah and Yarim Tepe has not been characterized type of ware with exactly this name, but in Yarim Tepe I were found kilns, which indicate that there might be produced this ware. Maybe re-examination of ceramic material from Yarim Tepe might show appearance of Standard Fine ware. These kilns enabled to control oxidation-reduction cycles, which was crucial during the production process to create dark paint on a light surface of this ware. This dark colour of decoration on a light-coloured background is one of crucial feature of Standard Fine ware feature (Merpert and Munchaev 1973:102; Streily 2000:71-72; Nieuwenhuyse 2006; Nieuwenhuyse 2009:85). Although most common colours were black, dark-grey or dark brown, there appeared also dark red, brown or orange paint colour with mat thickly applied paint (Nieuwenhuyse 2006)

In Tell Halula appeared Standard Fine ware in Proto-Halaf phase. The appearance of pottery suggests using kilns, where the oxidation process could be controlled. Potters used fine clay, well levigated clay with non-plastic and sometimes with small mineral inclusions. For surface treatment was applied smoothing, burnishing, and brushing and/or light slip on external surface. Decoration motifs were mostly geometric, in some cases occurred also dancing ladies motifs (Molist et al. 2013:447; Gómez et al. 2014:5)

Analyses of pottery from Tell Sabi Abyad showed that ceramic material, which is classified Standard Fine ware, was reported from the earliest so called Proto- Halaf/Transitional levels. Pottery was made of finely textured clay, which contained mainly mineral inclusions or even any inclusions were visible. Through this period appeared trend of using finer clay. In the earlier stages of Transitional was typical sandy clay, whereas during the later Transitional period appeared small lime particles. Ceramic remains were usually completely oxidized, or slightly reduced with the dark grey or black section, which appeared only with combination of plant inclusion. The colour has been reported buff, cream greenish, grey, red, brown or orange. Its surface has been in most cases carefully smoothed, burnished washed or self-slipped, but also scraping traces were found, predominantly in the interior side. Most of sherds were painted with black or brown colour in matt lustrous. The painting decoration might appear also with a combination of impression and incisions. In the early Transitional occurred interrupted pattern of decoration such as diagonal lines, vertical zigzags or chevrons. For this phase was typical free-floating manner, undulating lines, horizontal chevrons and/or wavy strikes, with one or two decorations zones. Later decorative style was created from continuously horizontal patterns and multiple zones, which is seen as crucial feature of ‘classic’ Samarra Fine ware. Crosshatched designs (vertical, horizontal, vertical- diagonal) appeared during the later Transitional.

Decoration slowly began appear not only in the exterior, but also in the interior, although much more simplifier and attached to the rim, or in floating manner. which was created boundaries between zones (Le Mière, Nieuwenhuyse 1996, 161-163; Nieuwenhuyse 2006).

5.2.4 Grey Black Ware/ Grey Burnished Ware

Term Grey Burnished Ware was for the first time used by Ismail Hijara on Tell Arpachiyah. According to Hijara Grey Burnished Ware was made of pure clay and grit temper, vessels had thick walls and the section showed carbonization. On the other hand this definition

made by Hijara correspond to the Mineral Coarse Ware from Tell Sabi Abyad (Nieuwenhuyse 2006). Hijara furthermore suggested utilization of the most of these vessels as cooking pots (Hijara 1978, 143). During excavation of Tell Sabi Abyad , in 1989 was established term Grey Black Ware (Akkermans 1989, 82, 93).

This ceramic ware resulted from combination of purposely reduced firing, as Dark- Faced Burnished ware, but for its better identification served other criteria that implied technological and stylistic aspects such as fabric, surface treatment, vessel size and decorative style (Nieuwenhuyse 2006).

In Tell Halula was detected this ware during the Midde and Late Pre-Halaf. During Proto-Halaf was reported in smaller amounts (Molist et al. 2013:446-447).

Report from Tell Sabi Abyad suggested that for production of Grey Black Ware was chosen fine clay, either plant inclusions of small size and small quantities or fine minerals such as dark-grey sand, calcite, limestone, siltstone, quartz or basalt. Section of this type of ware were often completely dark and due to end reduction appears so called sandwich effect. Fabric of ceramic material depend on the size and function of vessel. Sherds with coarser plant fabric had thickener walls and rim diameter, whereas small vessels with thinner walls were made of finer fabric and more often were decorated, mostly with incising and/or pattern burnishing. Generally, exterior surface was either burnished and/or smoothed, whereas in the interior side might be seen traces of smearing, scraping and finger-pressing and burnishing only bellow rim. Some bowls indicated that slipping might precede firing and during the firing process potters decided whether particular vessel will be Standard Ware or Grey-Black Ware. Surface had homogenous dark grey to black colour. Occasionally happened, that surface was even darker then core. If vessel contain larger quantities of vegetal inclusions, it might cause darker cores due to incomplete burning-out of plant composition and might appear double sandwich effect (Nieuwenhuyse 2006).

During Pre-Halaf occurred various decoration motifs. For decoration were used different techniques such as incising, impressing, appliqué and pattern-burnishing. Incising and impressing were most used techniques for decoration. Impressed motifs have been made during dying by sharply pointed tool. For impressing were used either sharply pointed tools to create short stabs or shell or comb, which were used for making rows of chevrons, diagonal lines and zigzags. Pattern-burnishing motifs constituted of diagonal cross-hatching. Amount of decorated pottery have been changing through time, during the Transitional period quantity of decorated

pottery decreased and in Early Halaf disappeared completely and vessels were left plain. (Nieuwenhuyse 2006).

5.2.5 Mineral Coarse Ware

Mineral Coarse Ware was introduced at Tell Sabi Abyad in 1996 report. (Le Mière, Nieuwenhuyse 1996, 128)

Mineral Coarse Ware represents small group during the Pre-Halaf and Proto- Halaf/Transitional period in site Tell Sabi Abyad. For this type of ware is typical coarse, granular fabric with large amount of crushed minerals and intentionally added crystalline calcite. Deliberately might have been added also shell, grog and basalt (Nieuwenhuyse 2006). On the base of analyses and their results have been demonstrated, according to inclusion and functional attributes might be this type of ware also divided into subgroups. One of them could be suitable and defined as ‘cooking ware’ (Nieuwenhuyse 2006). This ware is frequently burnished exterior as well as interior and furthermore also lugs, what might effect porosity of the vessels and reduced it (Nieuwenhuyse 2006). Any changes have been reported during the time so far, only in quantity. Limited amount have been reported in Pre-Halaf and progressive rise at the end of the Transitional Period. In Early Halaf have been noted growing of Mineral Coarse Ware and on the other hand decreasing of Dark Faced Burnished Ware (Nieuwenhuyse 2006). Colour of Mineral Coarse Ware varies from buff to grey and dark (Le Mière and Nieuwenhuyse 1996: 128).

5.2.6 Halaf Fine Ware

At Tell Sabi Abyad have been Halaf Fine Ware slowly evolved during the Proto- Halaf/Transitional from the Standard Fine Ware. As its name suggested, it had relatively soft fabric. In this type of ware the potter tried to remove any impurities and they tried to avoid plant and mineral inlcusions. This resulted in that during the Early Halaf might not be seen microscopically any inclusions and/or only small white particles. In terms of decoration have been during the Proto-Halaf/Transitional identified not only painting but also impressing and incising, which started to be disappearing and in Early Halaf was decoration restricted only to painting. Decoration became through time more complex, what is reflected in increasing amount of decoration zones. Early Halaf paint colour was predominantly black, dark grey or

dark, but also dark red, brown and orange occurred. Furthermore, these painting decorations started to be glossy. Dark, slightly glossy paint applied on a whitish surface was consider as the very best, what during the Early Halaf might be produced (Nieuwenhuyse 2006; 2009:86). In Tell Sab Abyad was detected that larger vessels were less decorated in comparison with smaller one during the Early Halaf. As decoration motifs appeared mostly geometric, non- representational designs, although small amount of representational such as plants, trees, animals, which were surrounded by dots and mostly in ‘unbounded’ way were also reported. Beside external decoration, it began to emerge more frequently also decoration of interior though in simpler way. On the base of decoration of Halaf Fine ware has been suggested using this type of ware for displaying in public, during serving and consumption of liquids (Nieuwenhuyse 2006).

At site Tell Arpachiyah Max Mallowan distinguish ceramic material on the bases of stylistic differences. Later Ismail Hijara tried to distinguish slightly more precisely Halaf pottery. He divided Halaf pottery to Halaf Fine Ware, Halaf Medium Ware and Halaf Soft Ware (Hijara 1976, 141). Halaf Fine Ware defined as a ceramic material, where some sherds are burnished and have chalky-white slip (Hijara 1997, 24, 67). Examination of ceramic material from Tell Arpachiyah by Thomas Davidson inform in more detail about characteristics of each phase of Halaf period. Analyses showed that ceramic material from these phases (Early, Middle and Late Halaf) displayed various chemical compositions, what means that pottery categorized to each one of them cannot be mixed up with another one (Davidson 1977:27). For Early Halaf was typical monochrome dark brown paint on buff colour surface, which might be/might not be slipped. Except buff colour of surface, it occurred also pink. The matrix showed that the prevalent firing was conducting in an oxidising atmosphere. The clay of pottery was fine, with an occurrence of calcite grains. The decorations were painted in colours from red to black, but predominantly in dark brown colour and sometimes it appeared ‘polytone’ effect. As a reason for this effect was not suggested intentional using of various paint colours, but poorly regulation of an atmosphere in kilns (Davidson 1977:27, 28). Decoration appeared in broad bands along the exterior rim and the base. Motifs were geometric, vertically oriented bucrania, dots, crosshatched lozenges, wavy lines, vertical lines, horizontal and vertical undulating lines. These motifs were applied on bowls in panels, separated by one or more bands of paint as continuous horizontal and vertical running motifs, whereas on the jars they occurred on the shoulders, what was sometimes expanded below the greatest diameter, then on exterior of the neck and the interior rim. (Davidson 1977:30, 34, 36). The following Middle Halaf showed with comparison

of Early Halaf some technological improvements. The colour of paint and the fabric of ceramic material suggested that the firing circumstances were controlled, even though large white mineral inclusions still occurred in some cases. This improved fabric might be caused either by using another type of clay and/or by refining of clay, before it was used by potters. During the Middle Halaf sometimes appeared white slip, which was applied also in preceding Early Halaf. As an important technological innovation of Middle Halaf was seen development of polychrome decoration, which might have been enabled by change of ceramic technology, including kiln design. Colours of decoration varied from red to brown to black. The typical way of decoration during the Early Halaf, the covering of the whole external surface, was not in use during the Middle Halaf in Tell Arpachiyah anymore. The typical new motifs, which were not observed in previous Early Halaf were e.g. concentric swags, cable motifs, chequeboards designs, concentric swags egg and dot, horizontal bucrania, which were arranged in continuous horizontal band. The decoration of exterior surface in comparison with previous phase was less covered with paint, although it continued to the rim and the main decorative zones were divided by painted vertical lines. The distinction between the Middle Halaf and Late Halaf was not precisely described, although the new technological feature was identified and thus occurrence of white paint on vessels, resp. an introduction of polychrome pottery with white stipple decoration Polychrome decoration was already known but more frequent became during the Late Halaf. There have been identified no other changes in decorative techniques (Davidson 1977:37-55). Late Halaf was identified also by variation of vessel shapes and presence of bichrome and polychrome decoration and ‘surface manipulation’ such as finger and fingernails impressions (Campbell 1992:63, 73). I would like to emphasise that the distinction between the Middle and Late Halaf was identified in introduction of polychrome painted pottery and Red ware.(Nieuwenhuyse 2000:156).

In Tell Halula the Halaf pottery was divided into 4 categories: fine Halaf unpained wares, fine Halaf painted wares, mineral and vegetal-tempered coarse ware. The Pottery displayed homogeneity with predominance of fine wares with mineral inclusions, which showed that their firing was conducted mostly in oxidizing atmosphere, whereas coarse wares in reduced atmosphere. On surface was applied sometimes slip, and/or was brushed, or burnished. Colour of monochrome painted vessels were black brown and red, whereas polychrome vessels showed combination of black and red, sometimes also white. The decorative motifs, such as geometric, floral, zoomorphic, horizontal bucrania were located in

the upper part of vessel, furthermore in the exterior and interior of the lip (Molist et al. 2013:448).

By this type of ware I would like to point out results from The Land of Nineveh Archaeological Project, which marks the southern boundaries of EHAS project. Among collected materials are prevalent those with fine and uniform fabric, and with no visible inclusions. Colours of sherds vary from yellow to orange to buff. For painted motifs are typical geometric, which are represent mostly by dots, chain, grids, herringbones, bands, concentric circles and lozenges. whereas figurative appears sporadically and from naturalistic appears flowers and birds.. The decorations occur on exterior and/or on interior of vessels. The paint is red-brown, black or purple. For most of the pottery dted to the Halaf period was applied term Painted ware and it was not provide further subdivision (Gavagnin et al. 2016: 122-124)

5.2.7 Other wares

In this subsection I would like to point out, that there have been identified and established other types of ware, Orange Fine ware and Dark-Faced Burnished ware, which I would like shortly introduce here.

Dark-Faced Burnished ware express group, which was exchanged over large areas, but its origin remains still unknown. It was identified during the examination of Amuq plain by Robert Braidwood. Theory of exchange is based on its inclusions and particularly amphibole mineral, which do not occur in northern Syria, but its source might have been in north-western Syria or Cilicia. Its presence has not been detected in the Iraqi Kurdistan so far. It might be caused either by not trading of this ware to the region or by lack of examination in studied area. But it should be taken in consideration that amphibole occurs also in the Zagros and Taurus mountains (Nieuwenhuyse 2006).

Orange Fine ware is known from numerous Late Neolithic sites in Syria, but for the first time has been defined at a site Tell Sabi Abyad (La Mière, Nieuwenhuyse 1996: 160). It seems to be restricted to the Balikh valley, northeaster-Syria, area along the Khabur River and south Syria along the Euphrates River. These sites have been dated to the Transitional period in the Balikh Valley, about 6 100- 5 900 BC, whereas in the north-eastern Syria sites have been dated to the Proto-Hassuna period. So far have not been identified in Iraqi Jezirah (Nieuwenhuyse 2006) .

6 State of research on Halaf pottery in Iraqi Kurdistan

In this chapter I would like to highlight important projects, which have been conducted in the area of Iraqi Kurdistan (Fig.6.1). At first, I would like to mention those, which might be labelled as pioneering work, but brought essential information. For these projects I will mention number of detected sites dated to the Halaf period. This will be followed by nowadays conducted projects, which are subdivided to the survey projects and excavation projects.

Fig.6.1 The Autonomous Region of Kurdistan1

The autonomous region of Kurdistan in Republic of Iraq has attracted archaeologists from all over the world due to increase of political stability and maybe also as a result of the civil war in Syria, where these days is not possible to conduct research. Until then, the attention to this region has not been paid in such as great depth and archaeological examination have

1 1 After https://www.veteranstoday.com/2017/08/22/referendum-puts-iraqi-kurdistan-region-stability-at-risk/ accesed in November 2017

been conducted only occasionally and was incoherent. This may be the reason why there is a gap in the literature and therefore also the Directorate of Antiquities of Kurdistan supports the foreign researches to explore Kurdish heritage (Kopanias et al 2015:1; Bonacossi and Iamoni 2015:9).

Furthermore, we might assume that most researchers were focused on larger sites, such as Nineveh or Khorsabad (Bonacossi and Iamoni 2015:10), where stratigraphical sequences might reveal “more spectacular assemblages” such as temples and/or palaces. In this point I would like to highlight that EHAS is considered as the first systematic archaeological project, which is conducted in studied region, except the Atlas of the Archaeological Sites in Iraq, which recorded sites. Closed to this region have been conducted projects Iraqi Jarmo Project, Saddam Dam Salvage Project and North Jazirah Project (Tab. 6.1) (Braidwood and Howe 1960: 33;Watson 1983:545; Wilkinson and Tucker 1995: 1; Pfälzner and Sconzo 2015:98-99).

Project Surveyed Excavated sites Director sites The Iraqi Jarmo Project Gird Banahilk Patty Jo Watson (1948, 1950, 1951, 1954 – 1955, 1959) Qalat Jarmo The Saddam Dam Abu Dhahir Warwick Ball Salvage Project (1984-1985) Tell Karrana Kharabeh Shattani Tell Der Hall Tell Jigan Tell Kutan Tell Shelgiyya The North Jezira Tell Rashied Mark Altaweel Project (1986-1990) Tony Wilkinson Stuart Campbell Khirbet Baguda NJS 153

Khirbet Garsour NJP 72

Tab. 6.1 The Iraqi Jarmo Project, the Saddam Dam Salvage Project and North Jazirah Project with examined sites (Braidwood and Howe 1960: 33;Watson 1983:545; Ball et al. 2003: 22; Altaweel 2006: 156)

Nowadays surveys, which are conducted in the region, play a crucial role to find not only potential excavations site, but also to record systematically the region with outlands roads, water sources, canals, standing architecture and rock reliefs. Projects, which are conducted, include survey’s projects as well as excavation’s project. Most of excavations projects are carried out as a part of survey project. Nowadays are in the Iraqi Kurdistan conducted at least 13 surveys, which in a frame of its examination revealed also sites, with Halaf ceramic material It goes about The Eastern Khabur Archaeological Survey, The Land of Nineveh Archaeological Project, The Upper Greater Zab Archaeological Reconnaissance, The Erbil Plain Archaeological Survey, The Italian Archaeological Expedition in Erbil Plain, The Upper Greater Zab Archaeological Reconnaissance, The Rowanduz Archaeological Program, The Central Zagros Archaeological Project, The North-western Sulaimaniyah Survey, The Rania Plain Survey, The Shahrizor Survey Project, The Upper Tanjaro Archaeological Survey and Sirwan (Upper Diyala) Regional Project (Kopanias et al. 2015, 1). (Tab. 6.2)

Governorate Directorate of Project (since) Director Antiquities

Governorate of Dohuk The Eastern Khabur Archaeological Peter Pfälzner Dohuk Survey (2013) Paola Sconzo The Land of Nineveh Daniele Morandi Archaeological Project (2012) Bonacossi The Upper Greater Zab Rafal Kolinski Archaeological Reconnaissance (2012)

Governorate of Erbil The Erbil Plain Archaeological Jason Ur Erbil Survey (2012) The Italian Archaeological Luca Peyronel Expedition in Erbil Plain (2013) The Upper Greater Zab Rafal Kolinski Archaeological Reconnaissance (2012) Soran The Rowanduz Archaeological Michael D. Danti Program (2013)

Governorate of Sulaimaniyah The Central Zagros Archaeological Roger Matthews Sulaimaniyah Project(2012) Wendy Matthews Kamal Rasheed Raheem The North-western Sulaimaniyah Margarete van Ess Survey (2011) Marta Luciani The Rania Plain Survey (2012) Jesper Eidem Tim B.B. Skuldøl The Shahrizor Survey Project Mark Altaweel (2009) Simone Mühl Olivier Nieuwenhuyse Karen The Upper Tanjaro Archaeological Christine Kepinski Survey (2011) Aline Tenu Rasheed Rahim Garmiyan Sirwan (Upper Diyala) Regional Tevfik Emre Şerifoğlu Project (2012) Claudia Glatz Jesse Casana

Tab. 6.2 List of surveys in the Iraqi Kurdistan with reported the Late Neolithic material (after Kopanias et al. 2015:13, 15, 16, 27, 29, 33 38, 39, 41, 43, 46, 51, 52)

During, or even as a results of previous conducted surveys projects, there have been organized also excavations projects on some sites, such as in Erbil citadel, Tell Lashkry, Helawa, Tell Nader, Banahilk/ Gird-I Banahilk, Tell Begum, Gurga Chiya, Tepe Marani, Jarmo, Qalat Said Ahmadan (Tab. 6.3)

Governorate Directorate Project (since) Site Director of Antiquities Governorate Erbil Erbil Citadel Archaeological Erbil citadel Dara Al-Yaqoobi of Erbil Investigation (2013) Abdullah Khorsheed Tell Lashkry: Late Tell Lashkry Miguel Molist Prehistory in the Erbil Montaña Region (2014) The Italian Archaeological Helawa Luca Peyronel Expedition in the Erbil Plain (MAIPE) (2013) Tell Nader Project (2011) Tell Nader Konstantinos Kopanias Soran Banahilk/ Gird-I Banahilk

Governorate Sulaimaniyah Shahrizor Survey Project Tell Begum Olivier of (2013) Nieuwenhuyse Sulaimaniyah Takahiro Odaka Akemi Kaneda Simone Mühl The Shahrizor Prehistory Gura Chiya David Wengrow Project (2013) Robert Carter Tepe Marani David Wengrow Robert Carter Jarmo Dorian Q Fuller Qalat Said Ahmadan: A Qalat Said Akira Tsuneki Study of Neolithization and Ahmadan Social Complexity in Prehistoric Kurdistan

Tab. 6.3 Excavations projects in Iraqi Kurdistan

7 The Eastern Khabur Archaeological Survey (EHAS)

Analysed ceramic material in this study have been detected during the survey by the University of Tuebingen. Although survey is a part of bigger project (Pfälzner and Sconzo 2015, 91-92), in this section will be shortly introduce only archaeological survey, its main aims, surveyed area, as well as applied methodology.

The commencement of The Eastern Khabur Archaeological Survey (EHAS) was in 2013 (Pfälzner and Sconzo 2015, 91). I would like to remind, that survey is led by Peter Pfälzner and Paola Sconzo.

EHAS has four major aims:

1) To determine the potential of the region to provide resources of cultural value 2) To identify changes in the settlement system of the region over time as result of external political impacts 3) To assess the role of the region in inter-regional exchange and communication 4) To study the social and cultural dynamics in the region as a consequence of external relations with lowland Mesopotamia (Pfälzner and Sconzo 2015, 93)

The surveyed region lies in the northeast part of the Dohuk Province in the autonomous region Kurdistan in Republic of Iraq. The core area is the valley of the Eastern Khabur, which

belongs to the main tributaries of the Tigris River. Khabur River flows into the Tigris River ca. 25 km from crossing of Hezil Su and near to the village Feş Khabur. The west border of survey constitutes by these rivers and created triangle and political boundaries of three countries Syria, Turkey and Iraq. Bounders of examined area in the northern part are created by Taurus/ Zagros chain. These mountains make also political boundaries between the Iraq Republic (Autonomous Region of Kurdistan) and the Turkey. The east part is limited by the valley of Great Zab. South boundaries are defined by another survey project Land of Nineveh Regional Project (LoNAP). (Pfälzner and Sconzo 2015, 93, 94, 98).

The studied area was divided into five zones, trying to follow geographical and morphological characteristics of area. It concerns: (Pfälzner and Sconzo 2015: 94-95, 98-99). Zone A: The Tigris valley Zone B: The Eastern Tigris Plateau Zone C: The Lower Zagros chain with the Khabur basin Zone D: The high Zagros chain Zone E: The Amadīya corridor (Fig.7.1) The precise description of zones A, B, C, where were found remains dated to the Late Neolithic period, will be mentioned in chapter Sites with Halaf pottery in EHAS.

Fig.7.1 Zones of EHAS project (after Pfälzner and Sconzo 2015:95)

Proceeding the first field campaign was set up a geo-database of settlement sites. This was created with making use of existing data from remote images sensing project such as CORONA, GeoEye, DigitalGlobe and cartography (Pfälzner and Sconzo 2015:106).

Archaeological survey is organized with vehicle and it is conducted on-site investigation as well as interweaving of local people. Site boundaries and elevation are marked with the help of a hand-held GPS (Pfälzner and Sconzo 2015: 107). From the 2014 for recording procedure started to be used an unmanned aerial vehicle (a drone), what improved and speed up the process of mapping and site documentation (Pfälzner and Sconzo 2016: 96).

On sites are collecting diagnostic sherds and other significant small artefacts. Heavy items such mortars, column bases are always recorded and sometimes left in situ. In an expedition house are collections from each site cleaned, sorted and afterwards processed. Individual pottery sherd is recorded, labelled, coded, drawn, photographed and entered in an Access database. For a determination of a settlement size and its chronology is calculated a surface ratio of diagnostic per hectare (Pfälzner and Sconzo 2015:108).

8 Physical Environment of surveyed area

8.1 Introduction

In this chapter will be paid an attention to the environment. in the surveyed region. This will be followed by description and available reconstruction of physical environment during the Late Neolithic period. I consider properly to mention nowadays conditions, because it might serve as basis for comparison with those established during the Late Neolithic period. Culture is linked with physical situation (Button 2009:15), accordingly the studying of natural environment is crucial for understanding the cultural landscape/social landscape. Therefore, for better understanding of Halaf culture is decisive to pay an attention to the environment of this tradition. Better understanding might provide in future easier identification of sites with Halaf occupation. If we would like to figure out, why culture decide to stay in particular region/ place, we should look at resources, such as water sources, plants, animals, raw materials and soils. Crucial might be seen climate (more/less precipitation), as well as landscapes features for creating of settlements (such as mountains, valleys etc). We might assume that each one might be intentionally demanded by people of Halaf tradition.

8.2 Geomorphology of the surveyed area

As title of survey indicates (Eastern Ḫabur Archaeological Survey), examined region is situated in the vicinity of the Eastern Ḫabur river as well as its wider region. Ḫabur River together with its largest tributary Hezil Su and the eastern bank of the Tigris River, create the western boundary of EHAS project. The Tigris valley extends from reaching point of the Eastern Ḫabur River and the Tigris River down to the Eski Mosul Lake. It is ca. 30 km stretch and mostly 1-3 km wide. From this valley towards the Zagros Mountains lies the Eastern Tigris plateau, which extends in 5-25 km in width. The Ğebel al-Abyad/Ğebel Biḫair/Şax-e Bixêr range raises from the Tigris plateau and creates boundaries with this plain and the lower Zagros chain. This chain led on the western side to the Zaxo/Cizre plain, which ran to the Upper Tigris valley and the basin the Sindya Plain. Through this plain, which is mostly hilly, flows Ḫabur river with tributaries Kaça and Rugerm rivers. To the north of Sindya Plain rise High Zagros mountains, which create north border of surveyed region. From Sindya Plain led to the east the Great Zab valley, which is bounded on the south side by the Qara Mountains/Zencîr-e Gara and on the northern side by Şax-e Sêr Amêdi Mountains. These mountains ranges create a valley, ‘Amadīya corridor’, with 5-9 km width. The eastern border is bounded by city Amēdi, which

is located only few kilometres of the Great Zab River. The south boundaries are limited by the survey project Land of Nineveh Archaeological Project, which is directed by Daniele Morandi Bonacossi (Pfälzner and Sconzo 2015: 94, 95, 98).

Fig. 8.1 Geographical map of the EHAS region in Dohuk province (after Pfälzner and Sconzo 2015:92)

8.3 Climate

The greater part of Iraqi country has an arid climate and areas of deserts. It belongs to the sub-tropical, continental climate area. The summer are usually dry and hot and on the other hand, winters are cooler with some rainfall and even more rainfall in the northern part of country, where is this survey conducted. In the autonomous region Kurdistan is rainfall influenced by the Zagros Mountain and therefore the amount of rainfall is variable each winter. Due to this rainfall is sufficient to support winter crops without additional irrigation (Fig. 8.2) Precipitation in northern part of surveyed region might reach 500 – 700 m. High pressure is typical for winter whereas low pressure for summer. Thanks to dry climate, dust storms are

quite common mainly during the early summer months, when the cold air from the north penetrates to the Syria and joins the warm, which creates an unstable mass resulted in dust storm, which could affect also the region of Kurdistan. The frost is very rare outside the autonomous region of Kurdistan in Iraq (Buringh 1960: 42; Pfälzner and Sconzo 2015:98).

Fig. 8.2 Rainfall in Greater Mesopotamia (Ur 2010)

Information about climate development at the beginning of the Holocene might be inadequate due to the low number of pollen diagrams, inappropriate knowledge from deposits of lakes. For this reason, must climate development based on the closest regions, such as Zagros mountains, Van Region, Ghab Valley in Syria and Dead Sea (Becker 2012: 3).

Between 8.25 and 8.14 kyr BP occurred an event, which might have been caused by releasing the meltwater into the North Atlantic (Rohling and Pälike 2005, 975). In Asia this cooling event is reflected in reduction of rainfall precipitation (Wiersma and. Renssen. 2006, 67), and later around 6 225 BC these conditions culminated, which might be seen also in archaeological context (Akkermans and Le Mière 1992: 1; Campbell 1992: 182; Cruells and Nieuwenhuyse 2004: 47; van der Plicht 2011 et al. 231, 237) During the presence of Halaf

culture in Mesopotamia, in a lot of areas of its occurrence, was enough the annual rainfall for farming without irrigation, except the driest years (Davidson 1977, 11; Campbell 1992, 184).

8.4 Hydrology

In the Iraq republic are two rivers crucial. The Tigris River, with the length of 1, 718 km and the Euphrates River with the length 2, 333km. The Tigris River rises in Aramenic Mountains in the Turkey. This region could reach the height of 4 000m and after snow melding the Rivers obtain a lot of water.

Among the surveyed area plays a fundamental role as Tigris River as the Eastern Ḫabur River. Eastern Ḫabur (Little Ḫabur) originates in Altındağlar chain in Turkey, from where flows to the south through Taurus/Zagros Mountains into Iraq. Then continues between Şax-e Kişan (in west) and the Zinar and the Haror Mountains (in east) down from Zagros Mountains with two major tributaries, Kaça River and Rugerm River. It flows further to the Zaxo/Silopi Plain, where Ḫabur River meets Hezil Su, its larger tributary, which marks the bounder lines between Iraq and Turkey. The Eastern Ḫabur River then flows further to the south and in the vicinity of a town Feş Ḫabur reaches the Tigris River (Pfälzner and Sconzo 2015: 93, 98).

The east of Amêdi reaches the Great Zab River, which originates in Turkey and continues further to the east. Furthermore, in Amadīya corridor flows Amadīya River (Pfälzner and Sconzo 2015:98).

Nowadays Iraq is not yet a developed industrial country, therefore it puts an emphasis on agriculture, what makes the role of the canal system very important. For the society and its development during different periods the canal system played also a crucial role. Additionally, in the Autonomous Region of Kurdistan are situated a lot of natural springs (Danecke 1958, 16), which might have existed back in time and provided local people with sufficient water surpluses.

8.5 Soils

Human actions, such as cultivation of a land for many thousands of years, shifting cultivation in the steppe region, grazing and overgrazing, using wood for fuel, charcoal burning and house construction, digging sub-shrubs for fuel, irrigation with additional salinization and

over-silting might cause a depravation of natural. Damage might be caused also by water and wind erosion, what eventually might be also a result of human action (Buringh 1960: 280-288; Cannon 1991:1). The nowadays conditions in the surveyed area might be caused by human action a it might started already during the Late Neolithic period.

The extension of Halaf culture relates also to the peculiar types of soils. Mostly its settlements occur on deep brown Mediterranean soils, or so called “self-renewing soils”, in the Upper Jezirah and on Tigris and Euphrates alluvial plains. This type of soils is typical for their high clay content, which enable to remedy the mineral needs for soil fertility. Due to the productivity of these soils as well as the river alluvial plains might be used for agriculture purposes for longer time. Although brown Mediterranean soils are more difficult to be worked with, in comparison with the lighter “non-self-renewing” types of soils, Halaf occupation prevalent on this type (Davidson 1977, 12-13, 15).

8.6 Flora and fauna

Due to the arid climate the vegetation in Iraq, as well as in in the surveyed area is quite scarce. The number of various species, which occur in the dessert and its margin is over 2 000. In the landscape prevalent grasses. The forest vegetation could be found only in the Kurdish mountains. Among vegetation might be found Mediterranean weeds (Danecke 1958, 32; Buringh 1960, 54, 55).

The productive land and accessible water source might enable agriculture also in this region. Among crops are prevalent wheat and barley, the other grown crops nowadays are rice, corn cotton, millet, sesame, green gram tobacco, lentils, chick peas, beans, vetch, linseed, alfalfa and potatoes. Each one might be grown either in winter or summer (Buringh 1960:68 which allows to take advantage of the land through the whole year. From fruit crops is possible to raise e.g. date palms, pomegranate, oranges, apricots, apples, sweet lemons, peaches, pears, walnuts, almonds and pistachio nuts. Among vegetable prevalent water melons, tomatoes, melons, cucumbers, egg plants. In the rivers and streams might be found over 40 different types of fish. In the mountains used to live bears, boars, hyenas, hares and ibexes (Buringh 1960: 69; Hann et al.2015:352).

For cultivation might be seen as crucial soils moisture (Buringh 1960: 23; Sherratt 1980:313, 315). On this basis and that the late Neolithic sites preferred places near the water

source, subsequently the first cultivation might begin. In the mountain valleys in Autonomous Region of Kurdistan started cultivation some 7 000 years ago (Buringh 1960:41). Archaeological excavations of site brought more information about the living species during the Late Neolithic also from paleobotanical and paleozoological material From sites have been reported emmer wheat, barley, einkorn (Mallowan 1935, 15; Hijara et al. 1976, 154; Davidson 1977, 13-14) The major wadi, rivers basins were forested with tamarisk, willow, poplar, reed beds, with fowl and molluscs (Wilkinson and Tucker 1995:40; Nieuwenhuyse 2006:). During excavation have been revealed also bone remains and thus of sheep, goat, pig and cattle in domestic area. Furthermore, there have been detected bones of gazelle, large canids, ass or onager (Davidson 1977, 14; Hijara et al. 1976, 152; Campbell, 1992, 184)

100

101

102

103

104

105

106

107

108

109

110

111

112

113

114

115

116

117

118

119

120

121

122

123

124

125

126

127

128

129

130

131

132

133

134

135

136

137

138

139

140

141

142

143

144

145

146

147

148

149

150

151

152

153

154

155

156

Bibliography

Ahmed, K. M., et al. (2012). The beginnings of ancient Kurdistan (c. 2500-1500 BC): a historical and cultural synthesis. 2012. PhD Thesis. TCMA-Assyriologie, Faculty of the Humanities, Leiden University.

Akkermans P.M.M. G (1988).The Soundings at Tell Damishliyya. In: Hammam et-Turman I. Report on the University of Amsterdam’s 1981-84 Excavations in Syria.Nederlands historisch-archeologish institute. Te Istanbul. 1988. Pp. 19.68.

Akkermans P. M. M. G. (1989) Excavations at Tell Sabi Abyad. Prehistoric investigations in the Balikh Valley, northern Syria. Balikh Valley Archaeological Project Monograph 1, BAR International Series 468. Oxford. Pp. 1-236.

Akkermans P. M. M. G, Le Miére M. (1992). The excavations at Tell Sabi Abyad, a Later Neolithic Village in Northern Syria. In: American Journal of Archaeology 96 (1992). Pp. 1- 22.

Akkermans P. M. M. G. (1993) Villages in the Steppe : Late Neolithic Settlement and Sub sistence in the Balikh Valley, Northern Syria. Michigan, Ann Arbor (International Monographs in Prehistory Archaeological Series.

Akkermans P. M. M. G., Schwartz G. M. (2003) The Archaeology of Syria. From Complex Hunter-Gatherers to Early Urban Societies (ca 16 000-300 ВС). Cambridge : Cambridge University Press.

Akkermans, P. M. M. G., van der Plicht, J., Nieuwenhuyse, O. P., Russell, A., Kaneda, A., & Buitenhuis, H. (2010). Weathering climate change in the Near East: dating and Neolithic adaptations 8200 years ago. Antiquity, 84, Pp. 71-85.

Altaweel M. (2006). Excavations in Iraq:The Ray Jazirah Project, First Report. In: Iraq, Vol.68 (2006). Pp 155-181.

Altaweel M., Marsh A., Mühl S., Nieuwenhuyse O., Radner K., Rasheed K., Saber S. (2012). New investigation in the Environment, Historz and Archaeologz of the Iraqi Hilly Flanks: Shahrizor Survey Project 2009-2011. In: Iraq, 74. Pp. 1-35.

157

Bader N.O. (1993). Tell Maghzaliyah: An early Neolithic site in northern Iraq. In: Early stages in the evolution of Mesopotamian civilization. Soviet Excavations in Northern Iraq. The University of Arizona Press. Tucson & London. Pp.7-41.

Ball.W. (2003). Halaf. In: Ancient Settlement in the Zammar region. Excavations bz the British Archaeological Expedition to Iraq in the Saddam Dam Salvage Project, 1985-1986. (BAR International Series 1096), Oxford. Pp. 22.

Becker J. (2012). Halaf und Obeid Zeit in Nordost Syrien. Ḥalaf- und ‘Obēd-Zeit in Nordost- Syrien am Beispiel von Tell Ṭawīla, Tell Ḥalaf und Wādī Ḥamar. Regionale Entwicklungen, Gemeinsamkeiten und Unterschiede. München.

Bernbeck R., Pollock S., Coursey Ch. (1999), The Halaf settlement at Kazane Hӧyük. Preliminarz Report on the 1996 and 1997 Season. In: ANATOLICA XXV, 1999. Pp. 109-147.

Bernbeck, R. (2006).Taming time and timing the tamed. In: Proceedings of the 5th International Congress on the Archaeology of the Ancient Near East. Centro Superior de Estudios sobre el Oriente Próximo y Egipto. Madrid. Pp. 709-729.

Bernbeck, R., & Nieuwenhuyse, O. P. (2013). Established paradigms, current disputes and emerging themes: the state of research on the Late Neolithic in Upper Mesopotamia. In: Interpreting the Late Neolithic of Upper Mesopotamia. Publications on Archaeology of the Leiden Museum of Archaeology (PALMA), Brepols pub.(Turnhout, Belgium). Pp. 17-37.

Bintliff, J. (2011), Problems of chronology and function in survey assemblages: the 1999 Hidden Landscape debate reviewed. In: Hidden Landscapes of Mediterranean Europe. Cultural and methodological biases in pre- and protohistoric landscape studies. Proceedings of the international meeting Siena,, Italy, May 25-27 2007. BAR International Series 2320 2011. Pp. XVII – XIX.

Bintliff, J. (2013). Intra-site Artefact Surveys. In: Good Practice in Archaeological Diagnostics: Non-invasive Survey of Complex Archaeological Sites. Springer International Publishing Switzerland 2013. Pp. 193-209.

Bonacossi D.M., Iamoni M. (2015). Landscape and settlement in the Eastern Upper Iraqi Tigris and Navkur plains:The Land of Nineveh arcahaaeological project, seasons 2012-2013. In: Iraq. (2015). 77 Pp. 9-39.

158

Braidwood R.J. (1940). Report on two sondages on te coast of Syria, south of Tartous. In: Syria. Tome 21 fascicule 2, 1940. Pp. 183-226.

Braidwood R. J., Braidwood L., Smith J. G., Leslie Ch. (1952). Matarrah: A southern Variant of the Hassunan Assemblage, excavated in 1948. In: Journal of Near Eastern Studies. Vol. 11. No. 1. Pp. 1-75.

Braidwood R. J., Howe B. (1960). The archaeological assemblages. In: Prehistoric investigations in Iraqi Kurdistan. The University of Chicago press. Chicago. Pp. 33 – 63.

Braidwood R., J., Ḉambel H., Redman CH.L., Watson P.J. (1971). Beginnings of Village- Farming Communities in Southeastern Turkey. In: Proc. Nat. Acad. Sci. USA. Vol. 68, No. 6. Pp. 1236-1240.

Braidwood L.S., Braidwood R.J., Howe B., (1983). Introduction. In: Prehistoric archeology along the Zagros flanks. The Oriental Institute of the University of Chicago. Chicago Illinois. Pp. 1-22.

British Institute for the Study of Iraq (1985). Excavations in Iraq. 1983-84. In Iraq, Vol. 47. Pp. 215-239.

Buringh P. (1960). Physiography and Agriculture. In Soils and soils conditions in Iraq. The ministry of Agriculture. Baghdad. Pp.34-75.

Button M. (2009). Cultural landscapes. In: Multiple ways of seeing one place: archaeological and cultural landscapes of the Sutter buttes, California. A Thesis presented to the Faculty of California State University, Chico. Pp. 14-28.

Campbell, S. (1992a). The Halaf Period in Iraq: Old Sites and New. In: Biblical Archaeologist, Vol. 55. No. 4 (December 1992). Pp. 182 -187.

Campbell, S. (1992b). Unpublished data. Culture, Chronology and Change in the Later Neolithic of North Mesopotamia. Phd Thesis. University of Edinburgh 1992. Pp. 1-325.

159

Campbell, S. (1998). Problems of definition: the origins of the Halaf in north Iraq. In: Lebeau, ed. About Subartu. Studies devoted to Upper Mesopotamia. Subartu IV, 1. Brussels, Brepols. Pp. 39-52.

Campbell S. (2007). Rethinking Halaf Chronologies. In: Paléorient, 2007, vol. 33, n°1. Pp. 103-136.

Cannon T. (1991). A Hazard Need not a Disaster Make: Rural Vulnerability and the Causes of Natural Disasters. In: At Risk:hazards. Vulnerability nd the causes of disasters. London. Pp. 1-15.

Coursey Ch., Bernbeck R., Pollock S. (1998). Excavations oft he Halaf Occupation at Kazane Hӧyük, 1998. In: Neo-lithics 3/98. Pp. 6-7.

Cruells W. (2003). The pottery. In: Tell Amarna (Syrie). La periode de Halaf. Liége. Pp.1-45.

Cruells W., Nieuwenhuyse O. (2004). The Proto-Halaf period in Syria. New sites, new data In: Paléorient. 2004, Vol. 30 N°1. pp. 47-68.

Cruells W. (2006). Les Sondages (Chantiers E-FI-F-K). In: Chagar Bazar (Syrie). Les sondages préhistoriques (1999-2001). Peeters. Louvain Paris Dudley (MA). Pp. 5-24.

Cruells W. (2006b). Chagar bazar préhistorique. Esquisse de la sequence d’évolution et la périodisation. In: Chagar Bazar (Syrie). Les sondages préhistoriques (1999-2001). Peeters. Louvain Paris Dudley (MA). Pp. 121-142.

Cruells W. (2008). The Proto-Halaf: Origins, definition, regional framework and chronology. In: Actas del V Congreso Internacional de Arqueología del Oriente Próximo Antiguo VOL. III. Centro Superior de Estudios sobre el Oriente Próximo y Egipt. Madrid. Pp. 671-689.

Cruells W., Gòmez A., Bouso M., Guerrero E., Tornero C., Saña M., Molist M., Buxó R., Baghdo A., Tunca Ö. (2013). Chagar Bazar in Northeastern Syria-.Recent work. In: Interpreting the Late Neolithic of Upper Mesopotamia. Turnhout. Brepols (PALMA Series 9), 2013. Pp.467-477.

Dabbagh, T. (1966). Halaf pottery. In: Sumer, 22. Pp.23-43.

160

Danecke D (1958). Flüsse und Wasserwirtschaft, Wasserbiologie und Wasserkrankheiten in Mesopotamien. Westschäftliche geographischen Studien. Geographischen Institut der Universität und der Geographischen Kommission für Westfallen. Pp. 7-29.

Danti M.D. (2014) The Rowanduz Archaeological Program 2013: First Report to the Kurdistan Regional Government.

Davidson, T. E., & McKerrell, H. (1976). Pottery analysis and Halaf period trade in the Khabur headwaters region. Iraq, 38(1). Pp. 45-56.

Davidson T. E. (1977). Regional variation within the Halaf ceramic tradition. Ph.D. Thesis University of Edinburg.

Frankel D. (1979). Archaeologists at work. Studies on Halaf pottery. London : British Museum Publications. Pp. 1-32.

Gallet Y., Molist M.M., Genevey A., Garcia X.C., Thébault E., Gómez Bach A., Le Goff M., Robert B., Nachasova I. (2015). New Late Neolithic (c. 7 000- 5 000BC) archeointensity data from Syria. Reconstructing 9 000 years of archeomagnetic field intensity variations in the Middle East. In: Physics of the Earth and Planetary Interios 238 (2015). Pp. 89-103.

Gessner A.G. (2008). The technology of learning:painting practices of early Mesopotamian communities of the 6th millennium, B.C. State University of New York. Binghamton.

Grellert M., Schmid J. (2015). Oriental Adventures – The excavations at Tell Halaf – Syria. A Virtual Reconstruction. In: Proceedings of the 19th International Conference on Cultural Heritage and New Technologies 2014 (CHNT 19, 2014). Vienna. Pp. 1-15.

Hann G., Dabrowska K., Greaves T.T (2015). Part Three. Iraqi Kurdistan. In: Iraq: The ancient sites and Iraqi Kurdistan. Bradt Travel Guides, 2015. Pp. 349-411.

Hijara I. and others (1978). Arpachiyah 1976.

Hijara I. H. (1980). The Halaf period in northern Mesopotamia. Department of Western Asiatic Archaeology Institute of Archaelogy. University of London.

161

Hijara I. (1997). The Halaf period in northern Mesopotamia.

Hole F., Johnson G.A. (1986-1987). Umm Qseir on the Khabur. Preliminary report on the 1986 excavation. In: Les Annales Archeologiques Arabes Syrienne 36-37. Pp. 172-220.

Howard P. (2007). The aims of archaeological survey. In: Archaeological surveying and mapping. Recording and depicting the landscape. Routledge. 2006. Pp. 7-12

Inizan M.L. (1985). Des indices acheuléens sur les bords du Tigre dans le Nord de l'Iraq. In Paléorient, Année 1985, Volume 11, Numéro 1. Pp. 101 – 102.

King, Thomas F. The Archaeological Survey: Its Methods and Uses. 1978.

Kirkbride D. (1973). Umm Dabaghiyah 1972: A Second Preliminary Report. In: Source: Iraq, Vol. 35, No. 1 (Spring, 1973). Pp. 1-7.

Kirkbride D. (1975). Umm Dabaghiyah 1974: A fourth Preliminary Report. In: Iraq, Vol. 37, No. 1 (Spring 1975). Pp. 3-10.

Kopanias K., MacGinnis J., Ur J. (eds.). (2015) Archaeological Projects in the Kurdistan Region in Iraq. The Directorate of Antiquities of Kurdistan. Pp.1-52.

Le Mière M., Nieuwenhuyse O. (1996). The Prehistoric pottery. In: Tell Sabi Abyad the Late Neolithic Settlement. Report on the excavations of the University of Amsterdam (1988) and the National Museum of Antiquities Leiden (1991 -1993) in Syria. Leiden, Pp. 119-284.

Le Mière M., Picon M. (2008). A contribution to the discussion on the origins of the Halaf culture from chemical analyses of pottery. Pp. 1-7

Lloyd S. (1940). Iraq Government Soundings at Sinjar. In Iraq, Vol. 7. Pp. 13-21.

Lloyd S., Safar F., Braidwood R. J. (1945). Tell Hassuna Excavations by the Iraq Government Directorate General of Antiquities in 1943 and 1944. In Journal of the Near Eastern Studies. Vol. 4, No. 4. Pp. 225-289.

162

Mallowan M. E. L., Rose J. C. (1935). Excavations at Tall Arpachiyah. In: Iraq Vol. 2, No. 1 (1935. Pp.1-178.

Mallowan, M. E. L. (1936). The excavations at Tall Chagar Bazar, and an archaeological survey of the Habur region, 1934-5. In: Iraq, 3(1), 1-85.

Merpert N. Y., Munchaev R. M. (1987). Early Agricultural Settlements in the Sinjar Plain, Northern Iraq. In: Iraq, Vol. 35, No. 2 (Autumn, 1973). Pp. 93-113.

Merpert N. Y., Munchaev R. M. (1987). The Earliest levels at Yarim Tepe I and Yarim Tepe II in Northern Iraq. In: Iraq, Vol. 49.(1987) Pp.1-36.

Matthews R., Mohammadifar Y, Matthews W., Motarjem A (2010) Investigating the Early Neolithic of western Iran: the Central Zagros Archaeological Project (CZAP). In: Antiquity Volume 84 Issue 323 March 2010.

Molist, M., Anfruns, J., Bofill, M., Borrell, F., Buxó, R., Clop, X., ... & Guerrero, E. (2013). Tell Halula (Euphrates valley, Syria): New data from the late Neolithic settlement. In: Interpreting the Late Neolithic of Upper Mesopotamia. Pp 443-453.

Nieuwenhuyse O.P, Jacobs L., van As B., Broekmans T., Adriaens M. (2001). Making Samarra Fine Ware –Technological Observations on Ceramic from Tell Baghouz (Syria). In: Paléorient, Vol. 27, No. 1 (2001). Pp. 147-165.

Nieuwenhuyse O. P., Cruells W. (2004). The Proto-Halaf period in Syria. New sites, new data. In Paleorient. 2004, Vol 30 N 1. Pp. 47-68.

Nieuwenhuyse O. P. (2006). Plain and painted pottery. The rise of Late Neolithic Ceramic Styles on the Syrian and Northern Mesopotamian Plains. Unpublished manuscript

Nieuwenhuyse, O. P., & Wilkinson, T. J. (2008). Late Neolithic settlement in the area of Tell Beydar (NE Syria). na. Pp. 268-303.

Nieuwenhuyse O.P., Akkermans P. M. M. G., van der Plicht J. (2010). Not so coarse, nor always plain – the earliest pottery of Syria. In: ANTIQUITY 84. Pp.71-85.

163

Nieuwenhuyse O.P., (2013). The Proto-Hassuna culture in the Khabur headwaters: A western neighbour’s view. In: Neolithic Archaeology in the Khabur Valley, Upper Mesopotamia and Beyoind. Studies in Early Near Eastern Production, Subsistence and Environment 15. Berlin, ex oriente. Pp. 110-138.

Nieuwenhuyse O. P., Odaka T., Mühl (2016). Halaf Settlement in the Iraqi Kurdistan: the Shahrizor Survey Project. In: The Archaeology of the Kurdistan region of Iraq and adjacent region. Archaeopress Publishing LTD. Oxford. Pp. 257 – 267.

Nieuwenhuyse O.P, Robert B. (2017). Shimshara Revisited. Hassuna-Samarra Interactions on the Rania Plain, Iraqi Kurdistan. Forthcoming, in Eidem, J. (ed.), ZAGROS. Proceedings of the NINO Jubilee Conference 2014 and other studies, PIHANS 130 (=ZaSt 1), Leiden 2017.

Pfälzner P., Sconzo P. (2015). First Results of the Eastern Ḫabur Archaeological Survey in the Dohuk Region of Iraqi Kurdistan. The Season of 2013. In Zeitschrift für Orient- Archäologie. Band 8. Pp.91-116.

Pfälzner P., Sconzo P. (2016). The Eastern Ḫabur Archaeological Survey in Iraqi Kurdistan. A Preliminary Report on the 2014 Season. In Zeitschrift für Orient-Archäologie. Band 9. Pp. 91-137.

Rice, P. M. (1987). Pottery analysis: A Sourcebook. University of Chicago Press, Chicago.

Rohling E. J.; Pälike, H. Centennial-scale climate cooling with a sudden cold event around 8,200 years ago. In: Nature, 2005, 434.7036. Pp. 975-979.

Rothman, M. S. (2002a). Excavation history. In: Tepe Gawra: The evolution of a small, prehistoric center in northern Iraq. UPenn Museum of Archaeology, 2002. Pp. 20-25

Rothman, M. S. (2002b). Site stratigraphy and chronology. In: Tepe Gawra: The evolution of a small, prehistoric center in northern Iraq. UPenn Museum of Archaeology, 2002. Pp. 20-25

Shaw I., Jameson R. (1999). A dictionary of archaeology. TCJ Press International, Padstow, Cornwall.

164

Shepard A. O. (1956). Ceramics for the archaeologist. Carnegie Institution of Washington. Washington D. C.

Spataro M., Fletcher A. (2010). Centralisation or Regional Identity in the Halaf Period? Examining Interactions within Fine Painted Ware Production. In: Paléorient, 2010, vol. 36, n°2. Pp. 91-116;

Speiser E. A. (1929). Some Prehistoric Antiquities from Mesopotamia. In: The Jewish Quarterly Review, New Series. Vol. 19, No. 4 (Apr. 1929). Pp. 345-354.

Speiser E. A. (1935). The Pottery by Dorothy Cross. In: Excavations at Tepe Gawra. Volume I. University of Pennsylvania press, Philadelphia. Pp. 38-61.

Speiser E. A. (1937). New discoveries at Tepe Gawra and Khafaje. In: American Journal of Archaeology. Vol. 41 No 2. Pp. 190-193.

Tobler A. J. (1950). Introduction. In: Excavations at Tepe Gawra. Volume II. University of Pennsylvania press, Philadelphia. Pp.1-5.

Tobler A. J. (1950). Pottery. In: Excavations at Tepe Gawra. Volume II. University of Pennsylvania press, Philadelphia. Pp.126 – 163.

Tsuneki A., Miyake Y. (1995). The earliest pottery sequence of the Levant:new data from Tell el Kerh 2, Northern Syria. In: In: Paléorient, 1996, vol. 22, n°1. Pp. 109-123.

Tsuneki A., Miyake Y. (1998). Excavations at Tell Um Qseir in Middle Khabur valley, north Syria. University of Tsukuba, Studies for West Asian Archaeology. Japan. Pp. 1-219.

Ur J. (2010). The physical environment and recent progress of landscape formation. In Urbanism and cultural landscapes in northeastern Syria. The Tell Hamoukar survey, 1999- 2001. The Oriental Institute, Chicago. Pp.5-16

165

Ur J. de Jong, L., Giraud J., Osborne J., MacGinnis J. (2013). Ancient cities and landscapes in the Kurdistan region of Iraq: The Erbil Plain. Archaeological Survey 2012 season. In: Iraq 75. Pp. 89-118.

Van As A., Jacobs L., Nieuwenhuyse O.P (1996/1997). The Transitional fine ware pottery of Tell Sabi Abyad, Syria. A pilot study. In: Newsletter. Department of Pottery Technology. Volume 14/15, Leiden University. Pp. 25-49.

Van der Plicht, J., Akkermans, P. M. M. G., Nieuwenhuyse, A., Kaneda, O. P., Russell. (2010). Tell Sabi Abyad, Syria: Radiocarbon Chronology, Cultural Change, And The 8.2 Ka Event. RADIOCARBON, Vol 53, Nr 2, 2011. Pp 229–243.

Vostrovska I., Filipová M., Mateiciucová I., Salvetová M., Sedláková R., Tóth P., Trávníčková Š., Uchytilová J., Zahrádková L. (2011). Late Neolithic Pottery from the Tell Arbid Abyad. Catalogue from seasons 2007-2008. Brno. Pp. 1-7.

Watkins, T., Campbell, S. (1987). The chronology of the Halaf culture. BAR International Series, 379, 427-464.

Watson P.J., Leblanc S. A. (1973). A Comparative Statistical Analysis of Painted Pottery from seen Halafian Sites. In: Paléorient 1973 Vol 1. Pp.117-133.

Watson P.J. (1983). In: Prehistoric archeology along the Zagros flanks. The Oriental Institute of the University of Chicago. Chicago. Illinois Pp. 545 -615.

Wengrow, D., Carter, R., Brereton, G., Shepperson, M., Hamarashi, S.J., Saber, S.A., Bevan, A., Fuller, D., Himmelman, H., Sosnowska, H. and Carretero, L.G. (2016). Gurga Chiya and Tepe Marani: new excavations in the Shahrizor Plain, Iraqi Kurdistan. In Iraq. Pp. 1–32.

Wiersma, A.P., H. Renssen. (2006). Model-data comparison for the 8.2ka BP event: confirmation of a forcing mechanism by catastrophic drainage of Laurentide lakes. Quaternary Science Reviews 25. Pp. 63–88.

Wilkinson, T. J., Tucker D. J. (1995). Introduction and Background to the Project. In Settlement Development in the North Jazira, Iraq: A study of the Archaelogical landscape. British school of Archaeology in Iraq and the Department of Antiquities & Heritage, Bagdad. Warminster. Pp.1-15.

166

Wilkinson T. J. (2003). Environmental context. In Archaeological Landscapes of the Near East. The University of Arizona Press, Tucson. Pp. 15-33.

Wilkinson T. J., Hritz C. (2013). Physical geography, environmental change and the role of water. In Models of Mesopotamian Landscapes. How small-scale processes contributed to the growth of early civilizations. Archaeopress. Oxford. Pp. 9-34.

Woolley L. C. (1934). The Prehistoric Pottery of Carchemish. In: Iraq. Vol. 1., No.2 (1934). Pp. 146-162.

Yener K.A, Wilkinson T.J. (1996-1997). Amuq valley regional project. The oriental institute 7 996 - 7 997 annual report. Pp.11-21.

167

168