Ulucak Höyük> the Pottery Emergence in Western Anatolia

Documenta Praehistorica XLVII (2020) Ulucak Höyük> the pottery emergence in Western Anatolia Özlem Çevik, Osman Vuruskan Department of Archaeology, Trakya University, Edirne, TR [email protected] ABSTRACT – It has been increasingly clear that pottery was adopted as a continuous technology during the first quarter of the 7th millennium BC in a wide region, from Upper Mesopotamia through Central Anatolia and the Lakes District region. However, the absence of pottery in the basal level at Ulucak Höyük shows the presence of a pre-ceramic sequence in western Anatolia, before c. 6600/ 6500 cal BC. This article discusses the earliest pottery assemblage from Ulucak (6600/6500–6200 cal BC) and compares it with the later ceramic sequences at the site. Ultimately, the functional and typological developmental sequence of Neolithic pottery at Ulucak Höyük and its temporo-spatial relations with other Neolithic sites in Anatolia will be assessed. KEY WORDS – Ulucak Höyük; Neolithic; pottery; Western Anatolia; pre-ceramic Ulucak Höyük> pojav lon;enine v zahodni Anatoliji IZVLE∞EK – Vse bolj je jasno, da je bilo lon≠arstvo kot tehnologija sprejeto neprekinjeno v prvi ≠etr- tini 7. tiso≠letja pr. n. ∏t. na ∏irokem obmo≠ju od zgornje Mezopotamije do osrednje Anatolije in obmo≠ja jezer. Kljub temu odsotnost lon≠enine v najglobljih plasteh na najdi∏≠u Ulucak Höyük ka∫e na obstoj predkerami≠ne sekvence v zahodni Anatoliji, in sicer pred ok. 6600/6500 pr. n. ∏t. V ≠lanku razpravljamo o najzgodnej∏em zbiru lon≠enine iz Ulucaka (6600/6500–6200 pr. n. ∏t.) in ga primer- jamo s kasnej∏imi sekvencami keramike na tem najdi∏≠u. Na koncu ocenjujemo funkcionalno in tipolo∏ko razvojno sekvenco neolitske lon≠enine na najdi∏≠u Ulucak Höyük in njeno ≠asovno in pro- storsko povezavo z drugimi neolitskimi najdi∏≠i v Anatoliji. KLJU∞NE BESEDE – Ulucak Höyük; neolitik; lon≠enina; zahodna Anatolija; predkerami≠ni neolitik Introduction 7000 cal BC has generally been regarded as the di- braced by all Neolithic communities at the same viding line between the pre-pottery Neolithic and time in the East, such as those in the Southern Le- the pottery Neolithic in Southwest Asia. As Neolithic vant and Cyprus (Nieuwenhuyse, Campbell 2017. sites with a domestic economy in Western Anatolia 168). The basal levels of all Neolithic sites such as and further west were founded after 7000 cal BC, it Yesilova, Ege Gübre and Dedecik-Heybelitepe in has been premised that the Neolithic way of life in Western Anatolia founded after 6500 cal BC revealed these regions started with pottery as part of the Neo- pottery. However, the situation at a few sites in the lithic package. Therefore, declarations of the absence region which were founded in the first half of the of pottery in some Neolithic sites in the West are 7th millennium BC is a rather complex one. The basal met with widespread scepticism (Reingruber 2015), level of Çukuriçi Höyük (XIII) dating to 6680–6600 despite the fact that pottery technology was not em- cal BC yielded only a few ceramic sherds (Horejs 96 DOI> 10.4312\dp.47.6 Ulucak Höyük> the pottery emergence in Western Anatolia 2019.77), while none have been found in the basal level at Ulucak (VI), exposed in Trench L13 and partly in L12 and K13. Ulucak VI consists of at least three sub-phases and is dated to 6850–6500 cal BC by sixteen 14C dates (Çe- vik 2016; Çevik, Erdogu 2020). Nonetheless, a few ceramic sherds coming from a fill between Level V and the latest phase of Level VI may indicate that sporadic occur- rences of pottery at Ulucak can be dated to post-6600 cal BC. In fact, a similar situation is observ- Fig. 1. The Neolithic sites mentioned in the text. ed in the earliest level of Ugurlu (VI) on the island of Gökçeada (Imbros). The latest open vessels with vegetable temper, although some phase of Ugurlu VI, dated to 6600 cal BC, yielded sherds from Boncuklu also contain mineral inclu- a number of ceramic sherds, although the earlier sion. These early attempts of ceramic use, however, phase (6700 cal BC) is devoid of pottery (Erdogu cannot be followed in the subsequent periods or in 2017.79). What this indicates is that pottery techno- the wider region. Thus, it has been suggested that logy is yet unknown during the initial phase of Neo- pottery became an integral part of the material world lithic occupation (c. 6850–6600 cal BC) in Western after it was adopted as a continuous technology start- Anatolia and possibly also at Knossos on Crete (Ef- ing from the beginning of the 7th millennium BC, or stratiou et al. 2013). This technology was adopted even somewhat earlier (Nieuwenhuyse, Campbell by the Neolithic communities in the region at around 2017.172). 6600 cal BC, or slightly later. However, the term ‘Ini- tial Neolithic’ for this earliest occupational phase is Sites which have both PPNB levels and successive more appropriate, as the pre-ceramic sequence in levels with early ceramics suggest a strong continu- western Anatolia is represented by a full-fledged ag- ity in material culture between the two periods ricultural and herding system (Çakırlar 2012). (Nieuwenhuyse et al. 2010.76; Nishiaki, Le Miére 2005.57; Cruels et al. 2017.28). The earliest pottery The Neolithic pottery from the later phases of Ulu- horizon in Northern Mesopotamia and the Northern cak Höyük (Levels Vb through IV) has already been Levant is characterized by mineral tempered, bur- published (Çilingiroglu 2012). Thus, this paper pre- nished wares, dated to between 7000 and 6700 cal sents the earliest pottery assemblage (Vc-e) from BC (Campbell 2017). The nature of mineral temper Ulucak, dating to 6600/6500–6200 cal BC. A compa- shows intra-site variation and mainly consists of ba- rison with the later pottery sequence at the site is salt, calcite and carbonate. The surface colour is ge- then presented. Ultimately, the developmental se- nerally dark (grey, dark grey and black) although quence of the Neolithic pottery from Ulucak Höyük light colours (cream, buff, pinkish, pale and yello- will then be contextualized within the wider region, wish brown) also occur. Possibly in order to distin- including Anatolia and Northern Mesopotamia. guish them from the later mineral tempered wares (i.e. dark faced burnished wares, DFBW) the earliest The early ceramic sequence in Anatolia and ceramics have been labelled ‘early mineral ware’ in Northern Mesopotamia: an overview Tell Sabi Abyad (Nieuwenhuyse et al. 2010.75; Nieu- wenhuyse 2017.19), ‘early dark ware’ in Tell Seker The earliest pottery in Southwest Asia is dated from Al-Aheimar (Nishiaki, Le Miére 2005.61), ‘black se- the 9th millennium BC through the early 8th millen- ries’ in Akarçay Tepe and Tell Halula (Arimura et al. nium BC, seen at Boncuklu Höyük (c. 8300–7800 1999.239; Cruells et al. 2017.37), ‘Kerkh Ware‘ in cal BC) in Central Anatolia (Fig. 1) and Kfar Haho- Tell El-Kerkh 2 (Tsuneki, Miyake 1996.114), ‘mine- resh (c. 8750–7500 cal BC) in the Southern Levant ral tempered burnished ware’ in Salat Camii Yanı (Spataro et al. 2016; Fletcher et al. 2017; Biton et (Miyake 2017.56) and ‘sandy ware’ in Yumuktepe al. 2014). These earliest ceramics in PPNB contexts (Balossi-Restelli 2004.115; 2017.84–85). The aver- are not frequent and generally consist of thick-walled age thickness of the vessel walls of this period is 97 Özlem Çevik, Osman Vuruskan about 10mm, while the shapes are rather simple in- 2013). Although the variety of shapes and the cluding hole-mouth convex sided bowls and hemi- amount of ceramics increased after around 6700 spherical bowls with flat bases. Ledge handles and cal BC, the real quantitative increase in the pottery pierced knobs are also typical. Decoration do not assemblage appears to have taken place during the appear to have been characteristic during this early last quarter of the 7th millennium onwards (Nieu- stage of pottery production, although some painted wenhuyse, Akkerman 2019.112). It is in this later sherds were recorded in Tell Sabi Abyad and Tell Se- period that the shapes of the vessels are also diver- ker Al-Aheimar (Nieuwenhuyse et al. 2010.79–80; sified, including distinctively articulated necked jars, 2017.20–21; Nishiaki, Le Mière 2005.62). carinated bowls, plates and large storage jars which show utilitarian aspects of pottery use, from storage This earliest pottery horizon is replaced by plant tem- to food preparation and drinking (Akkerman et al. pered coarse ware in Upper Mesopotamia (Akker- 2006.147–148). ‘Red slipped/washed wares’ first ap- man et al. 2006; Nieuwenhuyse et al. 2018.12; Ari- peared in the Amuq B horizon, although they never mura et al. 2005.238–239; Özdogan 2009.30), while became an important component of the pottery as- ‘mineral tempered dark face burnished wares’ rep- semblage (Çilingiroglu 2009.204). With regard to resent the dominant ware type both in Cilicia and decoration, impressed wares are both seen in Cilicia the Northern Levant (Balossi-Restelli 2004; Odaka (Yumuktepe XXIX-XX) and Upper Mesopotamia after around 6700 cal BC, while painted decoration increasingly predominated starting from the last quarter of the 7th millennium BC onwards (Nieuwenhuy- se, Akkerman 2019.107; Tekin 2017.110; Arimura et al. 2000.237). Technological traits (mineral temper, closed shapes with handles, and burnishing) suggest that cooking may have been one of the functions of the earliest ceramics (Le Miére 2017.14; Nieuwenhuyse, Camp- bell 2017.181). However, their low frequency, re- stricted shapes and smaller capacity, suggest against their use in everyday commensality within the rou- tine domestic sphere (Nieuwenhuyse, Campbell 2017.182).

Load more