Masaryk University Faculty of Arts

Department of Archaeology and Museology

MASTER’S DIPLOMA THESIS

Brno 2017 Bc. Hana Koubková

Department of Archaeology and Museology

Center of Prehistoric Archaeology of the Near East Bc. Hana Koubková

Analysis of Fine Ware Third Millennium BC Pottery from Khabur Basin Project in the area of Jebel Abd al-Aziz and Khabur Basin Regions: as a complementary Source of Information on Settlement Distribution Pattern Master´s Diploma Thesis

Supervisor: Mgr. Inna Mateiciucová, PhD Instructor: Zuzanna Wygnańska, PhD

Brno 2017

DECLARATION

I declare that I have worked on this thesis independently only the primary and secondary sources listed in bibliography below. I agree with storing this thesis in the library of the Center of Prehistoric Archaeology of the Near East at Masaryk University in Brno, and with making it accessible for study purpose.

Brno 30th November 2017 ...... Signature ABSTRACT / ANNOTATION

Title: Analysis of Fine Ware Third Millennium BC Pottery from Khabur Basin Project in the area of Jebel Abd al-Aziz and Khabur Basin Regions: as a complementary Source of Information on Settlement Distribution Pattern Author: Hana Koubková, BA Department / Institute: Department of Archaeology and Museology/Prehistoric Archaeology of the Near East Supervisor: Mgr. Inna Mateiciucová, Ph.D.

Abstract: The hereby presented Master Thesis is focused on analyzing the fine ware pottery from a surface survey in the Khabur River Basin and Western Jezirah region in north-eastern Syria. Most of pottery studied in this thesis originated in the area surrounding Jebel Abd al-Aziz range. This material was collected by the Yale University research team as a part of the Khabur Basin Project in the 1980s and 1990s. The master thesis focuses on the pottery from the Early Bronze Age period (3000-2000 BC). More than 200 pottery fragments were analyzed and subsequently compared with the pottery which comes from well-known and well-published sites from Early Bronze Age in the area around Upper Khabur River.

Key words: Fine Ware Pottery, Metallic Ware, Khabur River Basin, Jebel Abd al-Aziz Region, Early Bronze Age, Khabur Basin Project ABSTRAKT / ANOTACE

Název: Analýza jemné keramiky ze třetího tisíciletí př. n. l. z Khabur Basin Project z oblasti pohoří Jebel Abd al-Aziz a povodí řeky Khabur: jako doplňující zdroj informací k distribuci osídlení Autor: Bc. Hana Koubková Ústav / Oddělení: Ústav archeologie a muzeologie/Oddělení Pravěké archeologie Předního Východu Vedoucí práce: Mgr. Inna Mateiciucová, Ph.D.

Anotace: Zde předkládáná diplomová práce věnuje analýze jemné keramiky z povrchového sběru v oblasti povodí řeky Khabur a Západní Jaziry v severovýchodní Sýrii. Většina studovaného materiálu pochází z oblasti kolem pohoří Jebel Abd al-Aziz. Tento material byl shromážděn týmem z Yaleovy university jako část tzv. Khabur Basin Project v 80. a 90. letech 20. století. Diplomová práce se soustředí na keramiku z časné doby bronzové (3000-2000 BC). Více než 200 fragmentů nádob bylo analyzováno a následně porovnáno s keramikou pocházející z archeologicky významných lokalit z daného období z oblasti horního toku řeky Khábur.

Klíčová slova: jemná keramika, keramika typu Metallic Ware, povodí řeky Khabur, oblast kolem Jebel Abd al-Aziz, časná doba bronzová

ACKNOWLEDGEMENT

First and foremost, I wish to express my greatest appreciation for the support, guidance, and mentorship of my primary supervisor, Mgr. Inna Mateiciucová, PhD. Heartfelt thanks go also to my second supervisor, Zuzanna Wygnańska, PhD.; particularly for her great help during the processing and sorting of pottery material. Her comments did much to significantly improve this thesis. Ideas, knowledge and data were also given to me by two important persons, Prof. Emeritus Frank Hole and Yukiko Tonoike, PhD. from Yale University who provided me with the pottery material during my study visits in 2014 and 2015 at Yale University. It is my pleasure to express my sincere gratitude to Stefan Smith PhD from Ghent University for his advice and many articles which have helped me a lot during the writing of my MA thesis. I would also like to express my appreciation for the support of and consultations with my university colleague and friend Bc. Anna Hanzelková, and also to all members of the study visit at Yale University: firstly to Dr. phil Maximilian Wilding, Beáta Baluchová, Veronika Struhárová, Mgr. Soňa Krollová, Mgr. Lenka Tkáčová, and Mgr. Denis Štefánisko. Finally, I would like to thank all my friends and my family and those who have supported me the most, Mum and Dad. I would like to dedicate this work to my grandma who gave me so much love, patience and support. If only, I could have spent more time with you when you needed me most.

OBSAH 1 INTRODUCTION ...... 12 2 KHABUR BASIN PROJECT ...... 14 2.1 METHODS OF THE KHABUR BASIN PROJECT ...... 15 3 METHODS FOR PROCESSING, SORTING AND ANALYZING THE POTTERY MATERIAL FROM KHABUR BASIN PROJECT ...... 17 4 CRITICISM OF THE SOURCES OF DATA ...... 24 4.1 CRITICISM OF THE POTTERY MATERIAL ...... 25 5 AREA OF INTEREST ...... 26 5.1 GEOGRAPHICAL RANGE OF THE STUDIED REGIONS ...... 26 5.1.1 WESTERN JEZIRAH – AREA AROUND JEBEL ABD AL-AZIZ ...... 27 5.1.2 UPPER KHABUR REGION ...... 28 5.1.3 MIDDLE KHABUR REGION ...... 28 5.2 ENVIRONMENT ...... 29 5.2.1 CLIMATE ...... 31 5.2.2 GEOLOGY ...... 32 5.2.3 GEOMORPHOLOGY ...... 33 5.2.4 HYDROLOGY ...... 35 5.2.5 FAUNA AND FLORA...... 37 5.3 HISTORICAL AND CULTURAL FRAME ...... 39 5.3.1 CHRONOLOGY AND PERIODIZATION ...... 41 5.4 HISTORY OF SURFACE SURVEYS BEFORE KHABUR BASIN PROJECT ...... 43 6 THIRD MILLENNIUM BC POTTERY WITHIN THE AREA OF INTEREST ...... 45 6.1 EJZ 0 POTTERY ...... 45 6.2 EJZ 1 POTTERY ...... 45 6.3 EJZ 2 POTTERY ...... 46 6.4 EJZ 3 POTTERY ...... 46 6.5 EJZ 4 POTTERY ...... 47 6.6 EJZ 5 POTTERY ...... 48 7 TYPES OF THIRD MILLENIUM BC FINE WARES WITHIN THE AREA OF INTEREST ...... 49 7.1 TECHNOLOGY OF FINE WARE IN GENERAL ...... 49 7.2 DECORATED FINE WARE (NINEVITE 5) ...... 50 7.2.1 DISTRIBUTION ...... 51 7.2.2 TECHNOLOGY OF FINE WARE NINEVITE 5 ...... 51 7.2.3 DECORATION ...... 51 7.2.4 VESSEL TYPES OF FINE WARE NINEVITE 5 ...... 51 7.2.4.1 BOWLS AND CUPS ...... 51 7.2.4.2 JARS ...... 52 7.2.4.3 POTS ...... 52 7.3 METALLIC WARE ...... 53 7.3.1 TECHNOLOGY OF METALLIC WARE ...... 53 7.3.2 VESSEL FORMS OF METALLIC WARE ...... 54 7.4 PLAIN (UNDECORATED) FINE WARE ...... 54 7.4.1 TECHNOLOGY OF PLAIN FINE WARE ...... 55 7.4.2 VESSEL TYPES OF PLAIN (UNDECORATED) FINE WARE ...... 55 7.5 OTHER FINE WARE CERAMIC TYPES ...... 56 7.5.1 JEZIRAH BURNISHED WARE ...... 56 7.5.1.1 TECHNOLOGY OF JEZIRAH BURNISHED WARE ...... 56 7.5.1.2 VESSEL TYPES OF JEZIRAH BURNISHED WARE ...... 56 7.5.2 JEZIRAH STONE WARE ...... 56 7.5.2.1 TECHNOLOGY OF JEZIRAH STONE WARE ...... 57 7.5.2.2 VESSEL TYPES OF JEZIRAH STONE WARE...... 57 7.5.3 JEZIRAH GREY WARE ...... 57 7.5.3.1 TECHNOLOGY OF JEZIRAH GREY WARE ...... 57 7.5.3.2 VESSEL TYPES OF JEZIRAH GREY WARE ...... 58 7.5.4 COMBEDWASH WARE ...... 58 7.5.4.1 TECHNOLOGY OF COMBED WASH WARE ...... 58 7.5.4.2 VESSEL TYPES OF COMBED WASH WARE ...... 58 7.5.5 COMBED-INCISED WARE ...... 59 7.5.5.1 TECHNOLOGY OF COMBED-INCISED WARE ...... 59 7.5.5.2 VESSEL TYPES OF COMBED-INCISED WARE ...... 59 8 ANALYSES OF FINE WARE POTTERY SHERDS FROM KHABUR BASIN PROJECT 60 8.1 DECORATED FINE WARE (NINEVITE 5) ...... 60 8.1.1 TECHNOLOGY OF DECORATED FINE WARE (NINEVITE 5) ...... 60 8.1.2 VESSEL TYPES OF DECORATED FINE WARE (NINEVITE 5) ...... 61 8.1.3 OCCURRENCE OF DECORATED FINE WARE AT SITES IN THE STUDY REGIONS ...... 61 8.2 METALLIC WARE ...... 62 8.2.1 TECHNOLOGY OF METALLIC WARE ...... 62 8.2.2 VESSEL TYPES OF ANALYZED METTALIC WARE...... 62 8.2.3 OCCURRENCE OF METALLIC WARE AT SITES IN THE STUDY REGIONS .... 62 8.3 PLAIN (UNDECORATED) FINE WARE ...... 63 8.3.1 TECHNOLOGY OF PLAIN (UNDECORATED) FINE WARE ...... 63 8.3.2 VESSEL TYPES OF PLAIN (UNDECORATED) FINE WARE ...... 64 8.3.3 OCCURRENCE OF PLAIN (UNDECORATED) WARE AT SITES IN THE STUDY REGIONS ...... 66 9 RESULTS OF POTTERY SHERDS ANALYSIS ...... 68 10 SITES WITH ANALYZED THIRD MILLENNIUM FINE WARE POTTERY FROM KHABUR BASIN PROJECT ...... 71 10.1 SITES IN THE AREA AROUND JEBEL ABD AL-AZIZ ...... 72 10.1.1 KHIRBET ED-DEEB ...... 73 10.1.2 TELL AKLEF (TELL AL-KHALIF) ...... 73 10.1.3 TELL AL-ÁRBIDI...... 73 10.1.4 TELL AL-MAGHR ...... 74 10.1.5 TELL BAROUD ...... 75 10.1.6 TELL BURQA ...... 75 10.1.7 TELL GHASRA ...... 75 10.1.8 TELL HAMMAM GHARBI ...... 76 10.1.9 TELL HAMMAM SHARKI ...... 77 10.1.10 TELL HARBA and TELL TROMBA ...... 77 10.1.11 TELL KHAZNEH ...... 78 10.1.12 TELL MABTUH SOUTH (MABTUÁ) ...... 78 10.1.13 TELL MABTUH GHARBI ...... 79 10.1.14 TELL MABTUH SHARQI ...... 80 10.1.15 TELL MAHRUM ...... 81 10.1.16 TELL MARTHYA ...... 82 10.1.17 TELL METYAHA ...... 82 10.1.18 TELL MUÁZZAR ...... 83 10.1.19 TELL TOKAL ...... 84 10.1.20 TELL TRAFAWI ...... 84 10.1.21 TELL TUENAN ...... 85 10.1.22 TULUL KHANZIR ...... 85 10.1.23 UMM KHAFEH ...... 86 10.1.24 UNKNOWN SITE K 189 ...... 86 10.1.25 UNKNOWN SITE K 190 ...... 87 10.2 UPPER KHABUR REGION ...... 88 10.2.1 AIN QOUBBA ...... 88 10.2.2 JOYS SPRING ...... 88 10.2.3 TELL BISARI ...... 89 10.2.4 TELL BRAK ...... 89 10.2.5 TELL CHAGAR BAZAR ...... 90 10.2.6 TELL KASHKASHOK III ...... 90 10.2.7 TELL QARA TEPE ...... 91 10.3 MIDDLE KHABUR REGION ...... 92 10.3.1 TELL ATIJ ...... 92 10.3.2 TELL BDERI ...... 93 10.3.3 TELL MASHNAQA ...... 93 10.3.4 TELL MENAKH ...... 94 10.3.5 TELL MULLA MATAR ...... 94 10.3.6 TELL ZIYADEH...... 95 11 OTHER THIRD MILLENNIUM BC SITES - WITHOUT ANALYZED POTTERY MATERIAL - SURVEYD BY KHABUR BASIN PROJECT...... 97 11.1.1 JEBEL ABD AL-AZIZ ...... 98 11.1.2 KHIRBET MALHAT ...... 99 11.1.3 RAS AL-BEDA ...... 100 11.1.4 TELL ALAMAN ...... 100 11.1.5 TELL KHANAIZIR (ABU KHANEZIR) ...... 100 11.1.6 TELL LAHARN ...... 101 11.1.7 TELL MADDANEH ...... 101 11.1.8 TELL MARAZA ...... 101 11.1.9 TELL RHARA ...... 102 11.1.10 TELL SALHA ...... 102 11.1.11 TELL SAMAD ...... 102 11.1.12 TELL SHAÍR ...... 103 11.1.13 TELL TUECHIL ...... 103 11.1.14 TELL ZAHAMAK ...... 104 11.1.15 TELL ZEYTER ...... 104 11.1.16 UNKNOWN SITE K 152 ...... 105 11.1.17 UNKNOWN SITE K 156 ...... 105 11.1.18 UNKNOWN SITE K 165 ...... 106 11.1.19 UNKNOWN SITE K 182 ...... 106 11.1.20 UNKNOWN SITE K 197 ...... 106 11.1.21 UNKNOWN SITE K 198 ...... 107 11.1.22 UNKNOWN SITE K 202 ...... 107 11.1.23 UNKNOWN SITE K 203 ...... 107 11.1.24 UNKNOWN SITE K 205 ...... 108 11.1.25 UNKNOWN SITE K 206 ...... 108 11.1.26 UNKNOWN SITE K 207 ...... 108 11.1.27 UNKNOWN SITE K 217 ...... 109 11.1.28 UNKNOWN SITE K 219 ...... 109 11.1.29 UNKNOWN SITE K 220 ...... 109 11.1.30 UNKNOWN SITE K 223 ...... 110 11.1.31 UNKNOWN SITE K 229 ...... 110 11.1.32 UNKNOWN SITE K 230 ...... 110 11.1.33 UNKNOWN SITE K 234 ...... 111 11.1.34 UNKNOWN SITE K 235 ...... 111 11.1.35 UNKNOWN SITE K 238 ...... 112 11.1.36 UNKNOWN SITE K 239 ...... 112 11.1.37 UNKNOWN SITE K 243 ...... 112 11.1.38 UNKNOWN SITE K 245 ...... 113 11.1.39 UNKNOWN SITE K 246 ...... 113 11.1.40 UNKNOWN SITE K 250 ...... 113 11.1.41 UNKNOWN SITE K 252 ...... 114 11.1.42 UNKNOWN SITE K 255 ...... 114 11.1.43 UNKNOWN SITE K 256 ...... 114 11.1.44 UNKNOWN SITE K 266 ...... 114 11.2 UPPER KHABUR REGION ...... 115 11.2.1 KHIRBET AS-SIHA ...... 115 11.2.2 TELL HAZNE ...... 115 11.2.3 TELL MARITE ...... 116 11.2.4 UNKNOWN SITE K 122 ...... 116 11.3 MIDDLE KHABUR REGION ...... 117 11.3.1 KHIRBET UMM QSEIR ...... 117 11.3.2 TELL KERMA ...... 117 12 SETTLEMENT PATTERNS (DISCUSSION) ...... 119 12.1 JEBEL ABD AL-AZIZ AREA ...... 120 12.2 UPPER KHABUR REGION ...... 122 12.3 MIDDLE KHABUR REGION ...... 124 13 CONCLUSIONS ...... 126 14 LIST OF ABBREVIATIONS ...... 128 15 LIST OF FIGURES AND TABLES ...... 129 16 BIBLIOGRAPHY ...... 131 17 APPENDIX 1 ...... 142 18 APPENDIX 2 ...... 146

1 INTRODUCTION

This Master Thesis deals with the processing of fine ware pottery sherds revealed by Khabur Basin Project in the 1980s and 1990s. The hereby presented MA thesis studies mainly the part of Western Jezirah, dominated by the Jebel Abd al-Aziz range. A less prominent part of the thesis is dedicated to the regions in the vicinity of Khabur River Basin. Study of Upper and Middle Khabur regions served to supplement the results derived from the settlement patterns of Western Jezirah in the third millennium BC. The following thesis also substantially draws from the author´s BA thesis published in 2015 (Koubková 2015). The area around Jebel Abd al-Aziz has been much neglected by the scholars of Near Eastern Archaeology so far. Only limited amount of articles deals with from the region located in Western Jezirah (Kouchoukos 1998; Hole and Kouchoukos 1995; 1996a; 1996b; Smith 2015; Koubková 2015; Koubková and Wygnańska in press). On the other hand, Upper and Middle Khabur region have been well-documented since early 20th century (Poidebard 1928; Mallowan 1936; 1937; 1947; von Oppenheim 1943; van Liere and Lauffray 1955; Moortgat 1959; Kühne 1974-1977; 1978-1979). The Khabur River Basin area is a large geographical zone in northeastern Syria. In the early third millennium this part of Syria saw a rapid change in urbanization patterns – many new sites appeared in the area around Jebel Abd al-Aziz (Tell Mabtuh Sharqi, Tell Mabtuh Gharbi, Tell Hammam Sharqi, Tell Hammam Gharbi, Tell Mu´azzar etc.) and Middle Khabur Region (Tell Kerma, Tell Bderi, Tell Ziyadeh, Tell Mashnaqa, Tell Mulla Matar etc.); settlements in Upper Khabur Basin grew from small villages into large urban centers (Tell Leilan, Tell Beydar, Tell Hamoukar, Tell Brak etc.) The urbanization reached its peak in 2500 BC, and after that all the large urban centers in the area around Jebel Abd al-Aziz and Middle Khabur region suddenly disappeared and sites in Upper Khabur region were abandoned or reduced in size.

The following MA thesis is concerned with the processing of unpublished pottery from a surface survey in northeast Syria – mainly from the area around Jebel Abd al-Aziz – located on the right bank of the Khabur River, few kilometers from Hassake. There is a lot of pottery preserved from the upper and Middle Khabur regions, too. However, to deal with the pottery from well-known third millennium sites in those two regions is not the main purose of this thesis. The dominant pottery prevailing in the whole area in early third millennium BC is Ninevite 5 horizon dated from 3100 to 2560 BC (Smith 2015, 60) alternated by Metallic Ware in the mid-third millennium BC and replaced by Akkadian pottery after the conquest of Upper Mesopotamia by the Akkadians. The pottery presented in this thesis came from a surface survey which was conducted by the Khabur Basin Project team from Yale University in the 80s and 90s in 20th century under the direction of Prof. Emer. Frank Hole. The artefacts found in this survey were transported into the United States to the Yale University and consequently examined and studied. The pottery was examined by the

12 author in 2014 and 2015, published in her BA thesis (Koubková 2015) and the hereby presented MA thesis. The main goal of this work is to publish the so far unpublished pottery from Khabur Basin Project and to date it into third millennium phases according to ARCANE periodization system (Lebeau 2011). Other goals of this thesis are:

 the periodization of analyzed pottery based on a comparison of literature from well-known and published third millennium BC sites in northeastern Syria  the description of settlement patterns in study area (Jebel Abd al-Aziz area and marginally areas in Upper and Middle Khabur Basin) based on analyzed pottery fragments and information from KBP unpublished documentation diary and other sources (Kouchoukos 1998; Smith 2015) and comparion of periododization  published third millennium pottery collection in catalogue

The MA thesis is divided into two parts. The first part is dedicated to general information about areas of study – the region around Jebel Abd al-Aziz and the Upper and Middle Khabur regions. The second part is concerned with the analysis of pottery sherds, which are published at the end of the thesis as an attached catalogue (see Appendix 2).

2 KHABUR BASIN PROJECT

In the 1980s and 1990s, Yale University conducted extensive surface survey in northeastern Syria. The team was under the leadership of prof. emeritus Frank Hole from the Department of Anthropology of Yale University. First, the project studied settlement distribution patterns and gathered botanical and faunal samples to gain the information about local adaptation. Second important aim was to investigate steppe around Jebel Abd al-Aziz and collected all material from all periods of occupation. Important part of a research should discovered nomadic camps and their history and presence in the studied areas of approximately 6000 km2 south and north of Jebel Abd al-Aziz (Hole 1991b, 17, Frank Hole – personal information, 17.11.2014). In 1984, the Khabur Basin Project started to focus on sites which were located in the area that would be flooded by the new reservoir. All work was based on previous surveys in the region which showed some surface indications. After the visiting some of them, Umm Qsair and Tell Ziyadeh were selected to be excavated. In 1986 the excavation of Umm Qsair continued. Next year, the archaeological excavation of Tell Ziyadeh was permitted. In 1988 the KBP team started the research of semi-arid steppe around the Khabur River. Main attention was dedicated to recovering the nomadic camps. Following year, the KBP started searching for new sites to be excavated with the Danish team, but in the end, no sites were chosen. In 1990, the KBP also surveyed sites located in the Upper and Middle Khabur region. The main attention, however, was still devoted to the area around Jebel Abd al- Aziz (Hole 1991, 41; Koubková 2015, 35). In this MA thesis, the published information about the area located in Western Jazirah is preferred to the studied material from well-known Upper and Middle Khabur sites also explored by the KBP: Tell Mashnaqa (K 116), Tell Bderi (K 117), Tell Atij, Tell Mulla Matar, Tell Chagar Bazar, Tell Brak and Tell Hazne (K 129). In addition to that, the KBP team also conducted few archaeological excavations in Middle Khabur region; they explored sites Tell Ziyadeh (K 135) and Umm Qsair (K 138) – both of them with third millennium occupation (Koubková 2015, 49-50; Hole and Tonoike 2016). In the same year they also conducted an archeobotanical and radiocarbon sampling of Tell Kuran, Tell Feyda and Tell Kashkashok II and IV. Next year, thesamplings continued on the sites: Tell Halaf, Tell Kuran, Kashkashok I, Brak Ditch and Mashnaqa. The botanical sampling of EBA sites Tell Gudeda, Tell Atij, Tell Kerma was also carried out in 1992. In 1994 and 1995 an extensive survey of semi-arid steppe around Jebel Abd al-Aziz was conducted. In 1996 and 1997 the excavation of Tell Ziyadeh finally started. A year later, the PhD thesis by Nicholas Kouchoukos, which summarized the result made by KBP team, was published (Kouchoukos 1998). In 1999, the research for other Ubaid and EBA sites started but no site was selected. A total station measurement of Tell Mabtuh Gharbi, which was selected for possible excavation, was conducted in 2001, however, the site has only been sampled by the KBP and never excavated (Hole and Tonoike 2016, 1-2).

271 sites dating into various periods were documented. All of these were added to a database, which also included previously documented sites: Tell Barqa, Tell Brak, Tell Chagar Bazar, Tell Mulla Matar, Tell Atij and Tell Aqab. So the total number of explored settlements reached the number of 279. Most of the Early Bronze Age sites were published in the PhD thesis of Nicholas Kouchoukos, one of the KBP member (Kouchoukos 1998). Only 57 sites can be mapped (Kouchoukos 1998, 365- 393) and 36 sites have been initially dated into 2700 to 24000 BC. Eleven sites have been identified as kranzhügel sites: Tell Mabtuh Gharbi (K 151), Tell Mabtuh Sharqi (K 128), Tell Mu´azzar (K 039), Tell Hammam Gharbi (K 162), Tell al-Maghr (K 155) (Hole 1997, 52-56), Tell Mahrum (K 180) and two unknown sites (K 156, K 234) (KBP notes) and other three sites are located in more marginal zone – Khirbet Malhat (K 280), Tell Sha´ir (K 281) and Tell Zahamak (K 282)1 (Hole and Kouchoukos 1995; Kouchoukos 1998, 386-387, 7; Smith 2015, 82-84).

2.1 METHODS OF THE KHABUR BASIN PROJECT

The surface survey was conducted with the help of jeep and satellite images of thestudied area. The KBP team searched for a few months per year around the area of interest, explored all thevisible tells and retrieved many artefactsfrom the ground– thousands of pottery sherds and chipped stone industries, more than 70 000 animal bones and 200 remains of plant (Hole 1994, 292; Koubková 2015, 35. The sites were measured by hand-held GPS machine and described in a documentation diary, the described items were:

 Site number  Site name  Date of visit  Period occupied  Location and access  Description o Shape o Surface condition o Special features o Condition of site o Dimensions . length/diameter . width . height

1 these sites were not probably surveyd by KBP, however are published with K number system in Kouchoukos 1998 and are attached into the overview of probably third millennium BC sites in Chapter 11

. area o Remarks . Relation to environment . physical description . Survey technique  Artifacts collected o Description and period o Disposition of artifacts

All finds from the surface survey and excavation were transported tothe United States, where they were stored and prepared for further study. More than twenty years later, a team from Masaryk University - under the direction of Mgr. Inna Mateiciucová PhD. and Dr. phil. Maximillian Wilding - studied the pottery unearthedby Khabur Basin Project.

3 METHODS FOR PROCESSING, SORTING AND ANALYZING THE POTTERY MATERIAL FROM KHABUR BASIN PROJECT

The initial step for processing the pottery material was done in 2014 during the study visit at Yale University. For further analysis was separated pottery material which is made from fine ware. In that year was processed 322 pottery sherds at Yale University in New Haven and following year were 35 of them published in author´s BA thesis (Koubková 2015). In November and December 2015 was held other study visit at American University because of the further studying of fine ware pottery sherds and revision of material processed in former year. In total of 498 pottery fragments were processed, which were documented by photos and drawings and consequently described into database. The main attention was dedicated to the type of the rims, pasta of the pottery, colour of the pasta and clay inclusions. The database items were created according to Glenn Schwartz´s PhD thesis from 1988 (Schwartz 1988). He published in his findings from the Operation 1 at Tell Leilan site, where the complete stratigraphy for third millennium BC, was excavated. The supplementing items for the database were gained from the Tell Arbid Abyad – Pottery Code Sheet Explanations (made according to Nieuwenhuyse 2006).

The database contains the following items:

 ID - number of item joined by Microsoft Excel  Sherd number  Site  Type of vessel  Shape  Material  Colour of material  Colour of clay  Carination  Temper  Firing  Exterior surface  Interior surface  Exterior general colour  Interior general colour  Munsell colour chart - exterior  Munsell colour chart – interior

 Surface treatment  Rim shape  Rim orientation  Base shape  Incision  Diameter  Thickness  Type  Periodization  Date  Note  Height  Length

Afterwards, the photos and the information from database were sorted and consulted with Dr. Zuzana Wygnańska from the Polish Center of Mediterranean Archaeology. The diagnostic pottery sherds which would be mot suitable for analysis were then selected (a total of 203 pottery fragments): all sherds with incised or excised decoration which could be determined as Ninevite 5 period, undecorated (plain) rim and base fragments, and also typical clinky Metallic Ware. Pottery sherds (35), which have been already processed in author´s BA thesis (Koubková 2015), were also included in the analysis to achieve more complex analysis results. Most of the analyzed sherds are rims (179 fragments) or bases (8 fragments); only a small number of body sherds (16 fragments) was included into the study due to their undiagnostic character. All 203 analyzed pottery sherds were divided according to their geographical areas of origin:  Area around Jebel Abd al-Aziz  Upper Khabur Region  Middle Khabur Region

These sherds come from 39 sites. Twenty-seven sites are located in the area around Jebel Abd al-Aziz in Western Jezirah; six sites are in the Upper Khabur region and six sites in the Middle Khabur region.

For the purposes of the analysis, the following features of the studied pottery have been traced: ware, type of inclusions, type of firing, surface treatment, type of vessel, type of rims and bases and decoration.

The ware is defined as a set of similar technology, fabric and suface treatment within a pottery class, while fabric is the composition of the fired ceramic which includes paste, inclusions and pores but which does not include decoration and surface treatment (Rice 1987, 287, 476). Three types of ware are attested according to Glenn Schwartz division into fine, medium and coarse ware (Schwartz 1988, 31). Fine ware tempering is defined as: grit inclusions less than 0.5 mm in diameter and straw parts less than 0.5 mm long. If the inclusions measure between 0.5 and 1 mm the material is determined as medium ware, and if the grit inclusions are bigger than 1 mm and straw inclusions longer than 1 mm, the material is reffered to as coarse ware. In this master thesis, the ware was attached to sherds according to the size of inclusions by visual inspection of the freshly broken part of a sherd. Following categories were assigned within the fine ware: if the inclusions are not visible, then the pottery fragments belong into the very fine ware category. A few sherds which had inclusions precisely 0.5 mm large were also located, because of which a, third category called fine to medium ware, was created (see following division):  fine ware  fine to medium ware  very fine ware

Fine ware is included in many pottery collections throughout the entire studied area, and several types of fine ware can be distinguished within the analyzed MA thesis pottery fragments: decorated fine ware (determined as Ninevite 5) (17 sherds), Metallic Ware (16 sherds) which is usually made from very fine ware and undecorated plain ware (170 sherds). Other types of fine ware pottery were also present: Jezirah Burnished Ware, Jezirah Stone Ware, Jezirah Grey Ware, Comb Wash Ware, Comb-incised Ware and finally Plain (undecorated) Ware which is dominated part of each pottery collection.

The inclusions were observed by visual examination of freshly broken part of sherd. The following inclusions were studied (based on Schwartz 1988, 31):  straw (vegetal)  grit (mineral – calcite or basalt)  shell

After that, the firing techniques were studied:

 completely oxidized (colour is light throughout)  completely reduce (colour is completely dark)  strongly reduce core (oxidized surfaces and dark core – black core reflects incompletely oxidation of organic parts occurring in clay, it means that the firing conditions were insufficient – probably low temperature, too little oxygen and short firing time)  end reduction (light core and dark surfaces)  slightly incompletely oxidized core (oxidized surfaces and light-grey core)  exterior reduced (dark) and interior incompletely oxidized (brown)

Following items of surface treatments were assigned (based on Schwartz 1988, 32):  slip  self-slip (wet smoothing)  incision

For the purposes of this MA thesis, four categories of vessel types were selected, as defined by Glenn Schwartz (1988, 35). Although Schwartz´s work is an older publication which deals with third millennium BC pottery at Tell Leilan; it was valuable for the present MA thesis due to its descriptions and definitions of vessel forms and vessel parts - such as rims, bases and decorations. The categories of vessel forms are:

 bowls – are define as: open form or closed form with a rim diameter 15 cm or more  cups – are define as: open form or closed slightly inverted form with a rim diameter less then 15 cm  jars – are define as: closed form with a neck  pots – are define as: closed form without a neck Due to the considerable fragmentarization of pottery sherds, it was not possible to determine precise morphological types of the vessel forms.

The rim fragments were also studied according to the following type (defined also by Glenn Schwartz 1988, 35):

 open simple rim  open beaded rim  open flat rim  open ledge rim  open collared rim  closed simple rim  closed slightly inverted simple rim  closed slightly inverted beaded rim  closed beaded rim  closed cocked rim  vertical simple rim  vertical beaded rim

At base fragments were also studied the type (defined also by Glenn Schwartz 1988, 36):  pointed  flat  ring  pedestal  rounded

After sorting the pottery material, the most important analysis – the determination of EJZ period – was conducted. The periodization of sherds was carried out through the comparison of the sherds with a catalogue of well-known sites with the settlements from third millennium BC, which were explored and described perfectly. The easiest to compare were the decorated sherds, which were dated based on their typical Ninevite 5 decoration, into the early third millennium BC. The second easiest were the Metallic Ware sherds, which were sorted according their dense fabric and typical clinky sound. The largest group of studied sherds consisted of plain fine ware sherds, which numbered a total of 170 pottery fragments. The comparison of pottery was carried out according to the comparison of the profile and rim of the sherds, inclusions in pasta and the colour of the clay used for the preparation of vessel. This analysis was used only for 203 diagnostic sherds (168 fragments are published in an attached catalogue at the end of the thesis (see Appendix 2), the remaining 35 sherds have been already published (Koubková 2015).

Pottery fragments have been periodized according to ARCANE chronological system based on six periods and subperiods of EJZ system (Lebeau 1993):

Tell Frühgazira EJ chronology EJZ periodization Tell Brak Leilan Tell Hazna Tell Chuera Tell Melebiya EJZ 0 phase period

(c. 3000-2950 BC) H 3 TCH IA

EJZ 1 (c. 2950-2750 BC) phase period TCH IA/IB Early 3rd IIIa 2 Millennium EJ I phase phase (Ninevite 5 peirod) EJZ 2 J IIIb (c. 2750-2650 BC) phase period period 4 IIIc 1 TCH IB alt

EJZ 2 final EJ II (c. 2650-2550 BC) phase (Post-Ninevite 5 period) IIId TCH IB jung

EJ IIIa EJZ3a (Metallic Ware) (c. 2550-2450 BC) phase phase period 3 K II a TCH IC Mid 3rd EJ IIIb EJZ 3b Millennium (Metallic Ware) (c. 2450-2350 BC) phase phase period 2 L II b

EJZ 4a TCH ID (c. 2350-2250 BC)

EJ IIIc EJZ 4b phase (Akkadian period) (c. 2250-2210 BC) M period 1 Late 3rd EJZ 4c Millennium

(c. 2210-2110 BC) TCH IE EJ IV EJZ 5

(Post-Akkadian period) (c. 2000-2110 BC) phase

N Tab. 1. Overview of sites which were used as a comparanda for pottery material presented in the MA thesis and their chronology with the comparison of EJZ periodization system (based on Schwartz 1988; Lebeau 1993; Pfälzner 1997; Kouchoukos 1998; Matthews 2003; Amirov 2010; Lebeau 2011; Hempelmann 2013 and Smith 2015).

The sites for determination of EJZ period were following (see Tab. 1. and Fig. 1.):

 Tell Brak (Oates 2001; Matthews 2003)  Tell Chuera (Kühne 1970)  Tell Leilan (Schwartz 1988)  Tell Hazne (Amirov 2010)  Tell Melebiya (Lebeau 1993)  other sites such as: Tell Mozan, Tell Mohammed Diyab, Tell Arbid, Tell Chagar Bazar, Tell Barri, Tell Beydar, Tell Kashkashok III, Tell Kneidij (Rova 2011)

Fig. 1. Map showing the third millenium sites which were used for sherds comparanda in attached catalogue of pottery fragments.

The pottery fragments are arranged by the studied areas (Jebel Abd al-Aziz area, Upper Khabur region and Middle Khabur region) in an alphabetical order. Within the sites, the sherds are listed in the following order: decorated sherds, Metallic Ware sherds, rim sherds oand finally base sherds

4 CRITICISM OF THE SOURCES OF DATA

The data for the settlement patterns come mainly from the documentation diary of the KBP team (which the authord gained access to during the study visit at Yale University in 2014 and 2015) and from the processed pottery material itself. It should also to be mentioned that the description of the sites was conducted directly on site into a documentation diary of the KBP members. Unfortunately, the items in this document were not properly filled in and therefore a lot of information was impossible to process. In particular, the periodization of sites made by the Khabur Basin Project team on the site itself was left without any commentary. Therefore it is one of the goals of this thesis to determine this periodization, at least for sites whose pottery material was analyzed. Although modern methods were usedon the KBP for the measurement of the sites, coordinated, many sites were left without any information, especially as to their location, description of settlement or surface condition. Unfortunately, many sites were also left without name. Much information about the KBP was published in a few articles written by the members of the project (Hole 1991a; 1991b; 1992; 1996a; 1996b; 1997; 1998, 1999, 2001; Hole and Kouchoukos 1995, 1996a; 1996b; Hole and Johnson 1986-1987; Zeder 1998a, 1998b, 1999; McCorriston 1992, 1998, 2007). At complete information about KBP is presented in the PhD thesis published by one of the KBP member in 1998 (Kouchoukos 1998). His thesis summarized information collected by the Khabur Basin Project during the surface survey in the Jebel Abd al-Aziz area. This thesis provided the most information, and serves as a basis for the hereby presented thesis and some results of his shall also be presented further in this thesis. It presents valuable information because of the participation of Nicholas Kouchoukos at the project. Moreover, it provides the basic information about the periodization of sites. For the periodization of sites, he used FrühJezirah system (Early Jezirah –EJ) and dated settlements only into two periods: EJ I-II and EJ III (Kouchoukos 1998, 374). However, the Kouchoukos thesis does not publish any of the ceramic material retrieved by KBP. In 2016, Frank Hole and Yukiko Tonoike published a book which focuses on the archaeological excavations of Tell Ziyadeh, Umm Qseir and sampling at Tell Mashnaqa, which also presented ceramic material from those sites (Hole and Tonoike 2016). Next important source of information is the PhD thesis published by Stefan Smith from Durham University. His work was partly focused on the area which is also the focus of study in this thesis. Smith´s publication is one of the best existing works concerned with the region around Jebel Abd al-Aziz and Khabur Basin Project surface survey (Smith 2015). Another valuable resource for this thesis is its author´s BA thesis from 2015 (Koubková 2015). Unfortunately, no scientific analyses were included, only the comparison with well-known sites with stratigraphical third millennium deposits. These chemical or C14 analyses should reveal more information about the periodization of pottery which was just compared on the basis of literature. Therefore, the hereby presented MA thesis does not aim to prove with certainty the precise period of

24 the analyzed sherds, but to show one of the methods which we can use for the periodization of unstratigraphical ceramic material from the surface survey.

4.1 CRITICISM OF THE POTTERY MATERIAL

As was mentioned in previous chapters the ceramic material comes from surface survey and therefore it is not easy to determine proper periodization, mainly at those fragments which are undecorated. Unfortunately, these less diagnostic plain sherds prevail in the analyzed fragments (170 pieces). Second problem was the considerable fragmentarization; the smallest pieces measured only 3 cm2 and the largest 94 cm2; and also the fact that the studied collection contains limited amount of well-diagnostic sherds (17 decorated sherds and 16 Metallic Ware fragments). There was also one problem with the determination of sherds in the catalogue, because many specialists and archaeologists do not include the information about the colour of pasta, inclusions and firing into their catalogue of pottery. Therefore the comparison is only significant for those sherds, which were compared with sherds that carried this information. Although the pottery from surface survey retrieved by the KBP from northeast Syria, since the pottery does not belong among the best examined, there is still space for further research.

5 AREA OF INTEREST

5.1 GEOGRAPHICAL RANGE OF THE STUDIED REGIONS

Fig. 2. Areas which are discussed in the thesis (created in Arc GIS 10.4).

The area examined in this MA thesis is a part of Northern Mesopotamia; it is included in the area called Fertile Crescent. Within Northern Mesopotamia lies the Western and Northern Jezirah, Jezirah means “an island” in Arabic. The area of Western Jezirah occupy a region which is bordered by the Euphrates and Khabur rivers to the south, west and east, and the southern foothills of the Taurus mountains to the north which today form the Turkish-Syrian border. On the other hand the Northern Jezirah covers the area located in the so called Khabur River triangle – area also known as the Upper Khabur region. The last area under consideration in this study is area of the Middle Khabur region. The area of interest is located in the region, where the annual precipitation is sufficient for rainfed agriculture. Well-drained soils are situated on either limestone bedrock or Quaternary alluvium and colluvium. It creates conditions for high potential in agriculture, limited by the availability of water sources. In addition to that, the region of interest includes a large area of flat semi-arid limestone plains; which cover the area south from the fertile lands of northern Syria and northwestern Iraq (Smith 2015, 31). To summarize, the area of interest comprises of three regions: the area around Jebel Abd al- Aziz in Western Jezirah where the KBP conducted surveys and samples in 1994 and 1995 (Hole and Kouchoukos 1995; 1996a; 1996b; Kouchoukos 1998) and marginally also the area of Upper Khabur region in Northern Jezirah and Middle Khabur region (Fig. 2).

5.1.1 WESTERN JEZIRAH – AREA AROUND JEBEL ABD AL-AZIZ

Western Jezirah is a large area of semi-arid steppe located between the Balikh and Khabur rivers. It is delimited by foothills of the Taurus Mountains in the north and by the Euphrates River in the south. This area is dominated by two large uplands: the Jebel Abd al-Aziz and Tual ´Abah. Jebel Abd al-Aziz creates a 60 km long east-west running anticline ridge. It measures only ca. 15 km across, reaching a maximum elevation of 900 meters above the seal level. This significant range is a major watershed with seasonal wadis flowing north and south from it (fig. 3) (Kouchoukos 1998, 346-348; Smith 2015, 32). Most of the region receives rainfall inadequate for dry-farming. It provides large grazing land during the winter and spring months. Until recently, there was a large population of wild animals. In the past, this area was inhabited by nomadic pastoralists who practiced dry-farming and limited irrigation along the rivers (Kouchoukos 1998, 399).

Fig. 3. Study area around Jebel Abd al-Aziz with wadis and Khabur River (modified after Smith 2015, 78).

5.1.2 UPPER KHABUR REGION

Upper Khabur region is a relatively open, flat area located north of the modern town of Hassake in the area of Khabur River triangle (fig. 2). The Khabur River has created a large fertile basin in the Upper Khabur Region which gets the plentiful rainfall favourable for dry-farming agriculture even without irrigation. The annual precipitation is between 400-650 mm (Lebeau 2011, 3). Today, the Upper Khabur region deal with with seasonal Mediterranean climate, the majority of rainfall occurs during the winter months. There has been dense human occupation in this region ever since prehistoric times, which has been proved by many archaeological excavations and surveys (Nishiaki 1992, 97).

5.1.3 MIDDLE KHABUR REGION

The Middle Khabur region is defined as an area stretching south of the modern town of Hassake to the confluence of the Khabur River with the Euphrates north of Tell Mari. It lies between Jebel Abd al-Aziz and Sinjar Mountain Range (fig. 2). The environment today changes due to higher precipitation in the north (more than 500 mm) where dry-farming is very productive, to less productive farming areas caused by the thin gypseous soils which flank the middle and southern valley of the Khabur River. Annual precipitations fall to the south of Hassake and are now less than 250 mm per year. Therefore the farmers have to depend on irrigation pumps and canals to water the alluvial silts in the Khabur valley. Archaeological excavations have revealed the human occupation present in the region since the sixth millennium BC. In early third millennium, the settlement around Khabur River reached its maximum. Many new settlements appeared on virgin soil (McCorriston 1998, 46).

5.2 ENVIRONMENT

The entire North Jezirah is part of the great Fertile Crescent of the southwest Asia. Annual rainfall is adequate for rainfed agriculture in this zone (Kouchoukos 1998, 321). On the other hand, the conditions in the west of the Khabur River changed abruptly. Well-watered alluvial plain shifted to a semi-arid steppe. The agriculture in this part of Jezirah is less productive than in its Northern counterpart due to lower annual annual rainfall, coarser soils, and rare surface water (Kouchoukos 1998, 338-339). The Middle Khabur region is an area with annual precipitation of about 200-250 mm, so this part of Khabur basin is classified as marginal zone (fig. 3) (Hole 2007, 196). People here used irrigation strategy, which means they utilized water from the Khabur River for agriculture possible on both sides of the river bank. Therefore, the settlement distribution is limited to 1-2 km distance from the river valley (Curvers and Schwartz 1990, 6). Archaeological surveys have provided evidence of significant occupation in the region during the 3rd millennium BC. The excavations and surface surveys documented a special type of circular and walled settlements called Kranzhügel with a size range from 5 to 65 ha wchich should be dated to a post-Ninevite 5 mid third millennium (Hole and Kouchoukos 1995, 1996a) (ca. 2650-2350 BC). The sites are distributed only in what we would today call marginal environments (Kouchoukos 1998, 338- 339).

Northern Mesopotamia can be divided into three distinct zones according to climate regions:  two moist zones of stable settlement lie to the north  a zone of aridity is located in the south (Smith et al. 2014, 154-159)

The zone of aridity includes an arid steppe, where even during the wettest years the agriculture is not sufficient for a sustained settlement. The practice of mobile pastoralism is the only choice there with the extensive use of grazing land (Wilkinson et al. 2014, 53-54). Between these two zones lies a zone of uncertainty (Wilkinson 2000b, 3-4) where rainfall is irregular. In this zone agro-pastoral strategies prevail and cultivation is very useful (Smith et al. 2014, 154-159). The zone of uncertainty used to be placed between the 180 and 250 mm annual precipitation isohyets, but Wilkinson enlarged the range of this zone to 180 to 300 mm according to five agro-ecological zones defined by the International Center for Agricultural Research in the Dry Areas (ICARDA) for the Syrian Jezirah (Wilkinson 2000b). More recently, the southern boundary of the zone of uncertainty has been defined less precisely between 180 and 200 mm of annual rainfall (Wilkinson et al. 2014, 53-54). Barley cultivation dominates up to the 325 mm isohyets; therefore this could be considered its northern boundary. The best assumption is that the area between the 200 and 300 mm isohyets can be marked as “uncertain”, whereas the the areas north and south of it can be considered transition zones. Using

29 this definition, this zone can be found on the majority of the Jezirah region, covering between 60 and 80 % of its area (Smith 2015, 46).

From an archaeological point of view, there have only been few and small settlements in the zone of uncertainty before the third millennium BC. On the other hand, the stable zone saw a long- term progression in pre-EBA (Smith et al. 2014, 155-157). There were mostly wet conditions attested during the early-mid third millennium BC but towards the end of the millennium, the aridity increased rapidly throughout the region. The scarce paleobotanical data, too, supports the theory of more humid conditions during the EBA. During that appearance of dense poplar and tamarisk forests is attested along the Balikh, Khabur and Euphrates rivers. Recent samples from Tell Mozan, Tell Leilan, and Tell Bderi have revealed open-park woodland across the northern half of Jezirah (ceasing south of the 250- 200 isohyet) during most of the early-mid EBA. It consisted mainly of pistachio and almond trees and some oak trees in the northern area (Deckers and Pessin 2011). The extensive aridity has already occured by the end of the 4th millennium BC and has been interpreted as a rapid climate change. The aridity affected annual precipitation and the environment. It led to several socio-political events including the collapse of the Uruk colonies in Northern Mesopotamia which speeded up the growth of local settlements in the early third millennium BC. More intensive aridity occurred around 2200 BC (probably caused by a massive volcanic eruption). It caused global social changes – many settlements collapsed at the end of the EBA (Weiss 2000; Smith 2015, 40-41).

Fig. 4. Map of modern rainfall isohyets across Northern Mesopotamia (modified after Smith 2015, 24).

5.2.1 CLIMATE

Throughout southwest Asia rainfall is brought by winter frontal cyclones created over the Atlantic Ocean or the Mediterranean Sea. It begins in October and the maximum of precipitation occurs in December and January. A marginal amount of precipitation emerges after May. But in the Northern Jezirah additional rainfall appears in the spring due to the moisture from the Persian Gulf region. This moisture causes rainfall across northern Syria and Iraq as well (Kouchoukos 1998, 321). Annual temperature is about 20°C with an annual range of 35-40°C (Hole 2000, 3). The Northern Jezirah is a well-productive dry-farming region with arable soils and well-distributed rainfall (Kouchoukos 1998, 321). Therefore, this region belongs to the zone of productive and stable dry- farming agriculture but to the west and south, it becomes more riskier a less productive because of the lower amount of annual precipitation and not so well arable soils (Kouchoukos 1998, 326).

Whole third millennium is marked by increasing aridity in the Upper Mesopotamian (Kuzucouği 2007, 474). In the last two centuries of the third millennium situation became even worse, the amount of rainfall decreased sharply. Other explanation for this climate change should be the impact of humas on the environment - huge deforestation of Upper Mesopotamia – oak woodlands became very rare during the millennium and the pistachio-almond woodland steppe disappeared from the Khabur region (Riehl and Deckers 2012, 20-21). At many sites the increasing usage of animal waste as a fuel for ovens and other fire installations has been observed for the third millennium, which should mark the lack of other fuels (woods) – this is the evidence for deforestation in the whole region (Miller 1997, 126; Pruss 2013, 144). The population of sites in the Western Jezirah was forced to change their economic strategies wchich effected the final disappearance of sites from the archaeological records. The populace also moved to other, more favourable parts of the region, or switched to pastoralism, or mixed parts of both these economic strategies (Pruss 2013, 144).

5.2.2 GEOLOGY

“The dominant structure in Western Jezirah is the Sinjar trough. It is a broad east-west depression located between the Mardin/Qamishli high to the north and the Khleisa/Rawda high to the south. The Mesozoic transgression caused two main depositional sequences: more than 2 km of carbonate and evaporite rock and up to 1 km of clastic, calcareous marls (known as the Shiranish formation). The middle of Mesozoic also saw the creation of the Euphrates depression, which caused the appearance of a thick Cretaceous sequence. After that, at the beginning of the Cenozoic, appeared a deposition of Paleogene carbonates and expanded across much of eastern Syria. The early Neogene is marked by higher sea levels, which shifted during the Upper Miocene-Pliocene when the final retreat of the sea from Syria happened. The dominant depositional sequences of this period are lagoonal gypsum-anhydrides of the Lower Fars formation which are encompassed by the terrestrial- lacustrine clays and gravels of the Upper Fars and later formation. During the Upper Pliocene- Pleistocene emerged the east-west anticlines called Jebel Abd al-Aziz and Jebel Sinjar. It divides the Sinjar Trough into two smaller depressions: the Jebel Abd al-Aziz depression and the North Euphrates Basin. Deep faults throughout eastern Syria and volcanism and basalt flows in some areas also appeared in the Pliocene-Pleistocene period” (Kouchoukos 1998, 340). “The Jebel Abd al-Aziz anticline is characterized by a south-dipping reverse fault. On the northern slope the anticlinal core dominated by bright white Cretaceous marls of the Shiranish formation, which contrasts with the darker rocks and soils of the region was exposed. The Cretaceous sequence also contains the blocks of exotic rocks of up to 240 m in length. The Jebel Abd al-Aziz anticline meets the limestone ridges of Jebelet al-Beidha (“little white mountain”) to the southwest. The asymmetry of the Jebel Abd al-Aziz range is characterized by different sedimentary basins to its north and south. To the north, the Abd al-Aziz depression is subdivided into the Hammar and Khabur basins. It is a narrow syncline located between Jebel Abd al-Aziz and the Qamishli/Mardin high. Much of the depression is filled with sand, gravel and conglomerates. The area between the Jebel Abd al-Aziz and the Khabur River is completed by margin sandstones, clays and siltstones of the Upper Fars formation” (Kouchoukos 1998, 342). The southern side of the Jebel consists of lower Miocene limestone and gypsum. In the Abd al-Aziz area three phases of Quaternary deposition are recognized: “Lower Quaternary colluvium consists of a coarse gypsum, limestone and clay which is distributed in a wide band bordering the Jebel. Middle Quaternary age is characterized by stony proluvial loams spread across most of the West Jezirah. Later Quaternary and recent loams, which have formed throughout most of the region but are best preserved along the basin margins. The depth of Quaternary deposition differs across the West Jezirah – varying between 5 and 100 meters across a distance of only 10 km. The effect of this phenomenon on agriculture and preservation of archaeological sites are numerous (Kouchoukos 1998, 348-346).

5.2.3 GEOMORPHOLOGY

Fig. 5. Map showing the geomorphology of the study area (after McCorriston 1997, 317; digitalized in Arc GIS 10.4).

The Western Jezirah soils have developed on a bedrock and Quaternary colluvium (see in preceding chapter). The soils display significant variability in basic characteristics and suitability for agriculture. The most dominant are: Typic Gypsiorthids and Calciorthids which are derived from the Neogene gypsums and limestones around Jebel Abd al-Aziz. These soils affect the potential for rainfed and irrigated agriculture. Both types of soils are less affected by gypsum or stone inclusions. The soils are suitable for dry-farming only if they are places in sufficient depth and coupled with an available water source. Typic Calciorthids can be found along the north and south piedmont of Jebel Abd al-Aziz in small basins created by gypsum bedrock – 50 km to the south of the Abd al-Aziz and between the Khabur and Euphrates rivers (Kouchoukos 1998, 350-354). The gypsiferous soils are surrounded by more typical Mediterranean soils to the south and north of the Jebel Abd al-Aziz (see fig. 5) (Kouchoukos 1998, 355).

The Northern Jezirah (Upper Khabur region) is an area created by Neogene limestone, marl and basalt leads, located between the Khabur River in northern Syria and the Tigris in northern Iraq. Its boundaries are delimited by the Taurus Mountains on the north and Jebel Sinjar on the south. The plain elevation is between 300 and 450 meters above sea level. The soils are chiefly the reddish brown Ochrepts (see fig. 5) which are typical for a Mediterranean climate. They have afine texture, are well drained and developed on bedrock or on Quaternary alluvium and colluvium (Kouchoukos 1998, 319).

In the Middle Khabur region the recent geomorphological studies have shown that at the beginning of the third millennium BC the bed of the Khabur River was placed 4-5 m above its present level. The studies along the 100 km stretch of the Khabur valley have provided evidence of an accumulation of more than 2-3 m of sand since 4000 BC and documented a change in the morphology of the Khabur channel. It was caused by intensive erosion across the Northern and Western Jezirah during the 4th millennium BC. The erosion increased the silt load of the Khabur River, and accelerated its shirt to a meandering channel and the aggradation of the floodplain. Blackburn and Fortin (1994) argue that the channel was much wider during the third millennium BC than today and therefore sites Atij and Tuneinir would have been midstream islands (Blackburn and Fortin 1994; Hole and Kouchoukos 1995, 8; Kouchoukos 1998, 400).

5.2.4 HYDROLOGY

Fig. 6. Map showing the hydrology of the study area (created in Arc GIS 10.4).

The Khabur River is the most important river in the studied region. It is the largest tributary of the Euphrates River. It starts as a seasonal watercourse flowing from Taurus foothills in the Viransehir region of southeast Turkey it crosses the Turkish-Syrian border at Ras al-Ayn and continues through Jebel Abd al-Aziz and Sinjar anticlines, until it reaches the vicinity of to the Syrian town of Busayrah where it joins to Euphrates River. In the Upper Khabur region many wadis creating the so-called “Khabur triangle”; the most important ones are: Wadi Radd, Wadi Khanzir, Wadi Jarrah, and Wadi Aweij. The Jaghjagh River also plays as an important role in the settlement pattern in Upper Khabur region (fig. 6). In summer, most of the small streams are dry but by the end of autumn, they start to bring a huge amount of water to the wadis (Zeder 1998a, 570). On the other hand, in Western Jezirah surface water is very scarce, as there are only perennial watercourses and small wadis in the region, and these only flow during the wet seasons. Even rainfall of the Jebel runs either into the Khabur River or into the Balikh River; the same situation is also in the south of the Jebel Abd al-Aziz. Ground water is relatively abundant but patchily distributed in Western Jezirah. “A hydrological study identified four aquifers: Cretaceous marls, Helvetian limestones, Miocene gypsum-anhydrite beds and gravel lenses within Pliocene and Quaternary deposits. Many springs arising from these aquifers lie at the base of the Cretaceous exposure to the north of the Jebel at the

35 villages of Gharrah and Alajah. Because of these deposits around Jebel Abd al-Aziz and better precipitation over it, a significant amount of precipitation is brought into the small springs around. And other significant source of groundwater is lenses of permeable gravels and sands in Pliocene and Quaternary strata, south of Jebel Abd al-Aziz” (Kouchoukos 1998, 346-350).

5.2.5 FAUNA AND FLORA

Judging by samples from Tell Bderi and Tell RaqaÍ, we can suppose that animal husbandry in the area was oriented towards the domestic animals; hunting, on the other hand, decreased. There probably specialized in the herding of livestock (Hole 1991a, 23). The analysis of middle Khabur animal has shown that the amount of wild animals and pigs decreased in the subsistence of people during the third millennium BC (Zeder 1998b, 60-64). In the later period (mid-late third millennium) – at the time of increas in population and irrigation-based farming communities – a shift toward animal- based subsistence occurred. According to Hole (1994) it was due to the economy not the environment (Hole 1994, 297). From Ziyadeh to Atij, Gudeda and Raqaí there are increasing of caprines assemblages (for example at Atij and Raqaí it was from 42% to 62 %). Through early to the mid-third millennium, there is a decrease of pig assemblages (Zeder 1998b, 60).

At the beginning of last century – and maybe during the third millennium BC as well – the area was covered by Achillea conferta, “a shrub with only marginal forage value”. In the area where the soils are deeper and the gypsum content is lower, there is the potential to produce ahigher amount of plants – “the depth of Quaternary deposition differes across the West Jezirah – varying between 5 and 100 meters across a distance of only 10 km”. The dominant plant within the steppe forest of Jebel Abd al-Aziz was probably Artemisia herba-alba – a deep-rooted composite shrub ubiquitous across the semi-arid region of southwest Asia (Kouchoukos 1998, 356-360). Jebel Abd al-Aziz was until recently, covered with a wild Pistachio also called butm tree (Pistachia Atlantica). The region has been famous for this plant at at least since the early second millennium BC. The butm trees bear small, bitter but edible fruit and have been used as construction material and for the manufacture of coffee mortars during the Roman period. Other trees with edible fruits or nuts, that are common in that area, are: Amygdalus orientalis (almond), Cretaegus aronia (Hawthorn), and Cerasus microcarpa (wild fig). Much of the forest has been destroyed since the European travelers first started to visit the region; therefore the Poidebard´s photographs show a much denser forest than is today. On the other hand, oak trees can still be found on the slopes of Jebel Sinjar even today (in 1990s) (Kouchoukos 1998, 358). Because of the environment, it was only possible to harvest once per year without irrigation. It was the reason why people needed to store their grain (Hole 1991a, 23). Rain-fed agriculture was possible in the Khabur region due to many factors. First, the region has very fertile soil and second, there precipitation here is sufficient to make this kind of agriculture possible (Hole 2007, 197). From the analysis of plant samples, we can recognize changes in plant species in the third millennium BC. People started to use the steppe to grow their subsistence. It seems that barley was preferred to the wheat threshing debris. Evidence shows domestic animals were

37 probably fed barley as well. These animals were grazed on the steppe for one part a year and on the dry-farming land for the other (McCorriston 1998, 50).

A new plant appeared in the third millennium BC (according to samples from Atij, Raqa´i and Kerma) – Carhamus. The plant was valued for its dye and oil. It was better to cultivate it in marginal zone than in the irrigation area.That means the Khabur region had to have a longer spring and an early summer with rainfall (McCorriston 1998, 50). According to archaeological evidence, oak and acorns trees were predominant in the Early Bronze Age. In the area around Tell Leilan, there was the deciduous Quercus (oak) tree as well (Deckers and Riehl 2008, 174). Other plants, which grew in the Upper Khabur Region, are pistacia (oriental terebinth) and Amygdalus (almond). From the Chagar Bazar emanated samples of Fraxinus (ash), Ulmus (elm), Platanus (plane) and Populus (poplar) (Deckers and Riehl 2008, 174-175). Legumes and wheat were not found at any third millennium sites south of Hassake (Hole 1994, 296). Based on the precipitation, in steppe sites should have provided good conditions for oak- pistachio woodlands – however, the analysis showed no oak charcoal at these sites. Many wood species are from mountain zones, for example: wild pistachio, oak, ash, cherry, hawthorn, wild pear and almond (Hole 2000, 14; McCorriston 2007, 516). According to Tell Bderi excavation, it seems that people there harvested palm (Phoenix dactylifera) and fig (Ficus carica) (Hole 2000, 14; McCorriston 2007, 516).

5.3 HISTORICAL AND CULTURAL FRAME

In the fourth millennium BC Northern Mesopotamia changed rapidly. Uruk colonies appeared around the Euphrates River; Upper Khabur region centers such as Tell Brak and Tell Leilan started to grow and sites around Middle Khabur basin started to emerge. But this occurrence of southern Mesopotamian material culture in Northern Mesopotamian and Uruk colonies did not last so long. At the end of the fourth millennium all Uruk colonies were abandoned without any violent destruction and a separate regionalized material culture evolved after the collapse of the Uruk expansion. Only small communities with almost no evidence of monumental architecture or writing have existed in Syria in the post-Uruk period (Akkermans and Schwartz 2003, 203-211). Later on, the appearance of Ninevite 5 cultural horizon in the Khabur drainage brought about to the new era of northern Syrian urbanization in the early third millennium BC. Limited evidence of Ninevite 5 social and political structures has been found. There is just little evidence of states or urbanism; however, the available data proves the existence of socio-political complexity. Unfortunately, no written sources have been attested in Ninevite 5 period, just the usage of cylinder seals and sealings. Also no monumental palaces or temples are attested, only large-scale public architecture dated to the end of the Ninevite 5 period was found at Tell Leilan. There were also single room mudbrick temples identified at Chagar Bazar, Kashkashok III, Raqa´i, and Tell Brak which were dated to the late late Ninevite 5 context (Akkermans and Schwartz 2003, 216-217). The largest sites with Ninevite 5 sequences in Upper Khabur are: Tell Leilan, Tell Arbid, Tell Mozan and Tell Brak and Tell Mari on the Euphrates. On the other hand, the available data from small “rural” sites provided us with rich and extensive information. The surface surveys, too indicate a rapid increase of sites e.g. Middle Khabur region (5 sites in the fourth millennium and 22 in the third millennium). These sites are: Tell Raqa´i, Tell Atij, Tell Tuneinir, Tell Bderi and Tell Melebiya. All of these confirm that the sites were occupied during the Ninevite 5 period. The excavations around the Middle Khabur region exposed economic specialization and interregional connections. Buildings specialized for storage and for processing of grain were found at the above mentioned (Akkermans and Schwartz 2003, 218). It is possible that the stored grain was not just for local inhabitants. The sites probably served as a repository for the surplus grain from the upper Khabur centers such as Tell Brak, because Tell Brak had a limited amount of precipitation due to its location in relatively dry southern fringes of the Upper Khabur region. Another possibility is that the grain surpluses served Mari on the Euphrates, where only irrigated agriculture was possible (Schwartz and Curvers, 1992, 1994b; Fortin 1997; 1999a; Akkermans and Schwartz 2003, 221-222). On the other hand, Frank Hole suggests that the grain stored served just the locals and hypothesized nomadic pastoralists in the region (Hole 1991a; 1999; Akkermans and Schwartz 2003, 222). There is also the option that the increase in the number of sites along the Middle Khabur and on dry slopes of the Jebel Abd al-Aziz was caused by climate change – the increase in precipitation. Although there are no visible urban or state societies in the Ninevite 5

39 period, there is evidence of the existence of economic specialization and institutions controlling economic and political power (Akkermans and Schwartz 2003, 223). For the Ninevite 5 period Schwartz suggested the complex chiefdom was the suitable social organization (Akkermans and Schwartz 2003, 224). In the mid-third millennium BC the whole area of interest saw an emergence of large cities and urban centers. It can be dated to c. 2600 (EJZ 2 period). Almost all capitals, and even small communal centers were fortified by an enclosure wall made from mudbricks. There were even settlements with walled upper and lower town called kranzhügel in the area between Balikh and Khabur River, in the western Khabur triangle and around Jebel Abd al-Aziz region. Yale Khabur Basin Project revealed that in Jebel Abd al-Aziz area these kranzhügels are dated into post-Ninevite 5 mid-third millennium period (Hole and Kouchoukos 1995). The largest kranzhügel is Tell Chuera with the size of 65 ha. Its large-scale urban center is dated into TCH IC (EJZ 3a) and was finally abandoned in TCH EI (EJZ 4 period). Another important kranzhügel in Upper Khabur region is Tell Beydar; where a large corpus of cuneiform tablets was discovered. The Upper Khabur region also showed signs of an urbanization process during the mid-third millennium. Sites such as Tell Leilan, Tell Brak and Tell Mozan extended rapidly. For example, Tell Leilan expanded from 15 to 100 ha in EJZ 2 (c. 2600 BC). Smaller sites in Middle Khabur region were not used for storing grain anymore and were abandoned in the third quarter of the millennium. On the other hand, sites like Tell Melebiya and Tell Bderi prospered and turned into large agglomerations (5-6 ha). The entire Middle Khabur region was deserted until 2200 BC (Akkermans and Schwartz 2003, 256-261). In pottery assemblages from the period an emphasis on mass production and standardization is apparent. The Ninevite 5 vessels were substituted by mass-produced, high-fired and undecorated pottery known as Metallic Ware (Akkermans and Schwartz 2003, 268-270). The urbanization of Northern Mesopotamia has been interrupted by the first emergence of an empire in the ancient Near East. In 2300 BC, the Akkadian state from Southern Mesopotamian had come to controll a large part of northeast Syria. The Akkadian empire was established by king Sargon in 2350 BC with a capital in the city of Akkad in Southern Mesopotamia, his grandson Naram-Sin also incorporated a large part of Syria into his empire and Tell Leilan (Shubat Enlil) became an important urban center in the Upper Khabur region. The pottery still retained local character with no widespread occurence of Southern Mesopotamian pottery style (Akkermans and Schwartz 2003, 277-282). At the end of the third millennium the society in Syria collapsed. Many sites in the Khabur region were abandoned around 2200 BC - Tell Leilan, Tell Chuera and Tell Beydar, only Tell Brak and Tell Mozan remained occupied. It was probably due to climate change which brought extensive aridity to the region. After the abandonment of the Khabur region and Western Jezirah at the end of the third millennium BC the Early Bronze Age period, too, ended and was succeeded by the Middle Bronze Age (Akkermans and Schwartz 2003, 282-288).

5.3.1 CHRONOLOGY AND PERIODIZATION

The Early Bronze Age in Northern and Western Jazirah can be classified by many periodization systems. First, Max Mallowan proposed to use the southern Mesopotamian “Early Dynastic” system to designate the pre-Naramsin sequences at Tell Brak (Mallowan 1947). After few decades, the “ED” system was substituted by “Frühjazira” (EJ) chronology first attempted by Peter Pfälzner (1997, 1998). After that, it was refined and the Jazira section within the “Associated Regional Chronologies for the Ancient Near East and the Eastern Mediterranean” (ARCANE), project which has created chronology for the region, based on objective observation of ceramic typologies (Lebeau 2011; Smith 2015, 109). The “EJ” chronology uses Roman numerals for the definition of specific periods while the “EJZ” chronological system uses Arabic numerals. ARCANE “Early Jezirah” chronological system is represented by six major phases – from EJZ 0 to EJZ 5 spanning the time of ca. 3100 (3000)-2000 BC which is subsequently divided into other subphases. All phases and subphases are: EJZ 0, EJZ 1, EJZ 2, Final EJZ 2, EJZ 3a, EJZ 3b, EJZ 4a, EJZ 4b, EJZ 4c and EJZ 5 (Smith 2015, 109-110).

EJZ 0 (ca. 3100/3000 – 2950/2900 BC): this period followed after the Uruk period. The phase can be divided into two sup-phases – “Terminal and Transitional Ninevite 5” but from Jezirah is ceramic material so limited that this division can be rather propose only for the area of northern Iraq. ARCANE chronology is based on late/post-Uruk and early Ninevite 5 morphological types. The stratified sequences are attested only at Tell Brak (Rova 2011, 52)

EJZ 1 (ca. 2950/2900 – 2775/2750 BC): painted and early incised ware was predominant in this period. This material has been attested more in eastern part of Jezirah, on the other hand in Western Jezirah it is not well-represented – there reserved slip ceramics and cyma-recta bowls still prevailed (Smith 2015, 111). In Upper and Middle Khabur region, these have been found at Tell Brak, Tell Leilan, Tell Chagar Bazar, Tell Kashkashok III, Tell Hazne I, Tell Beydar, Tell Raqa´i and Tell Kneidij (Rova 2011, 52). The fine ware is mineral-tempered and in the Khabur region usually dark grey, green or yellow-buff in colour (Grossman 2014, 89-90).

EJZ 2 (ca. 2775/2750 – 2650/2625 BC) and Final EJZ 2 (ca. 2650/2625 – 2575/2550 BC): during this period the Ninevite 5 culture reached its peak. The period is attested at almost all sites around the Khabur River Basin, many new sites also appeared and small sites expanded rapidly. The period is marked by incise-excised ware (Quenet 2011, 38; Koubková 2015, 31). At the end of Final EJZ 2.large city centers with hierarchical system and complex social structures emerged. It is at this time that the noncalcareous metallic ware is introduced. Western Jazirah also sees the appearance of new ceramic typologies: deep bowls, bevel-rimmed bowl, Jazirah Bichrome Ware (Smith 2015, 111),

Metallic ware, Jazirah Burnished Ware or straight-sided bowls (Smogorzewska 2016, 176). At the end of EJZ 2 period the vessels became more standardized and decoration almost disappeared. The most common decoration of this period is the step pattern of excision cross-hatched by diagonal incising, which is usually to be found on open and often carinated bowls, and impressed rocker pattern on fine ware jars with out-turned rims (Grossman 2014, 90-91).

EJZ 3a (ca. 2575/2550 – 2435/2425 BC) and EJZ 3b (ca. 2435/2425 – 2340 BC): in this phase,the urbanization throughout Jazirah reached its peak, it is also the time of general standardization of pottery vessels. In EJZ 3a period the Ninevite 5 disappeared and was completely substituted by metallic ware in the Western Jazirah and beyond. A large number of new morphological types emerged as well – variety of bowls, jars and cups. Remarkable is also the change in vessel base from pointed to flat (Smith 2015, 111). The shift towards standardization, mass production and degradation of decoration began during the last stage of Ninevite 5 period and was closely tied with the new economic and political organization which culminated with the reurbanization of the studied regions (Grossman 2014, 91).

EJZ 4a (ca. 2340-2275 BC), EJZ 4b (ca. 2275-2200 BC) and EJZ 4c (ca. 2200-2150/2110 BC): the period is characterized by the disappearance of noncalcareous metallic ware and the appearance of pottery of higher quality and density, such as combed wash ware. EJZ 4 period is marked by a hiatus, which has been continuous on many sites since the previous period. The first two subdivisions (EJZ 4a-4b) correspond with the Akkadian occupation of northern Mesopotamia. The last, EJZ 4c period, on the other hand, has been defined as post-Akkadian (Smith 2015, 112).

EJZ 5 (ca. 2150/2110 – 2000 BC): it seems that all settlements in Western Jazirah and regions beyond disappeared. The pottery typical of the period is tempered by straw inclusions. The pottery tradition continued from previous period, but declined rapidly, only to eventually be replaced by new high standardized forms – bowls, vats, jars and stands with mostly moulded decoration (Smith 2015, 112).

5.4 HISTORY OF SURFACE SURVEYS BEFORE KHABUR BASIN PROJECT

First archaeological observations in the area around Jebel Abd al-Aziz were conducted by Max Freiherr von Oppenheim in 1899, at the beginning of 20th century. He mapped many of the large mounds in this region and described them (Kouchoukos 1998, 365), with focus on the eight sites which should be “Kranzhügel”. According to him, this type of settlement is characterized by more or less circular or polygonal sites with large, still low mounds. He explored sites such as: Tell Chuera, Abu Shakhat, Tell Khanzir (K 173), Tell Mabtuh Sharqi (K 128), Tell al-Maghr (K 155), Tell Muázzar (K 039) and Khirbet Malhat (K 280). He recovered from those sites many sherds which could be divided into two pottery styles: yellowish-green to reddish-brown and grayish-black to red (Smith 2015, 50-51). After that, Piere Antoine Poidebard carried out his aerial surveys in the 1920s, which only covered a small part of Jebel Abd al-Aziz area. He also made large scale photographs of some mounds, including: Tell Muázzar (K 039), Khirbet Malhat (Malhat ed-Deru) (K280), Tell Metyaha (K 183), Tell Mabtuh Sharqi (K 128) and Tell Beydar (Kouchoukos 1998, 365; Smith 2015, 52-53). Max Mallowan, too, paidsome attention to the Western Jazirah archaeology, more specifically to thesites Tell Bogha, Abu Shakhat and Dakhliz to Tell Muázzar, Tell Beydar and Tell Bati, between whichhe characterized the similarities. The pottery sherds which he collected at the sites dated to the Middle Bonze Age (2000-1500 BC) rather than the Early Bronze Age (Smith 2015, 53). In 1950s, the soil scientist Van Liére and the archaeologist Lauffray conducted large investigation of northern Syria and identified so-called “hollow ways” 2 – archaeological footprints of often used ancient routes that lead from large sites to other sites or to livestock pastures (Wilkinson 1993, 560-561; Smith 2015, 54). All these site visits were the oldest type of archaeological surveys in the Western Jazirah, modern archaeological surveys started from mid-1970s. In 1975 and 1977, the University of Tübingen conducted survey in the Lower Khabur as a part of the geographical research project “Tübingen Atlas des vorderen Orients”. The survey engaged mainly in exploration of sites along the Khabur river basin (from the modern town of Hassake to the confluence with Euphrates River). The TAVO survey examined 129 tell sites. A large pottery collection comes from this survey. The members of the project also focused on sites located in Western Jazirah and in the vicinity of Jebel Abd al-Aziz in 1975. The surveyed sites were: Tell Muázzar (K 039), Tell Metyaha (K 183), Tell Marthiya (K 184) and Tell Baroud (K 049). But these sites were documented without proper topographical map or pottery collection. In 1977, the TAVO project recorded the sites of Tell Marthya (K 184) and Tell Muázzar (K 039) again, and investigated a new site, Tell Maraza (K 186), south of the Jebel Abd al-Aziz (Rölling and Kühne 1983, 192). Ceramics from the surveys were studied and published in the MA

2 For investigation of so-called „hollow ways“ see Wilkinson 1993, Wilkinson and Tucker 1995 and Ur 2003)

43 thesis written by Gertis Preuss from Tübingen University, whose work focuses on metallic ware pottery of the third millennium BC. The pottery was analyzed from four out of the five steppe sites: Tell Marthya (K 184), Tell Metyaha (K 183), Tell Mu´azzar (K 039) and Tell Baroud (K 049) (Preuss 1989, 9). In 1978, Hartmut Kühne also explored the sites located south of Jebel Abd al-Aziz as a director of The Sheikh Hamad Project. As a part of this project the “Kranzhügel” site Khirbet Malhat, located 50 km south of Jebel Abd a-Azizwas systematically investigated for the first time. Kühne also argued that the extreme location of the Khirbet Malhat could be related to the extensively used trade routes leading from Assur to the Assyrian trading settlement in Kanesh (Kühne 1983, 303). Other part of the Sheikh Hamad Project was the processing of the Northern Mesopotamian metallic ware, studied by Hartmut Kühne and Gerwulf Schneider with the co-operation of Peter Pfälzner and Heike Dohmann. Their analyses involved many sites in the Western Jazirah: Tell Mabtuh Gharbi (K 151), Tell Mabtuh Sharqi (K 128), Tell Mu´azzar (K 039), Tell al-Maghr (K 155), Ras al-Tell and Khirbet Malhat (K 280) (Smith 2015, 75-76). The next extensive survey in Western Jazirah was conducted during the summer months in 1988, 1994, 1995 and 1997 by the Yale Khabur Basin Project which focused on the refining of periodization of the already known sites and on discovering new, smaller settlements (Kouchoukos 1998, 365). The results of the research performed by the KBP are the backbone of this MA thesis.

The Upper Khabur region has been intensively studied ever since Mallowan’s excavation at Tell Chagar Bazar in the 1930s. Other third millennium sites in Northern Jazira were studied after that as well - Tell Brak, Tell Mozan, Tell Hamoukar, Tell Barri, Tell Arbid, Tell Kashkashok III, Tell Leilan and Tell Khazne (Koubková 2015, 25). In 1975 to 1977, Hartmut Kühne together with Rölling conducted surveys in the Middle Khabur region. After them Monchambert focused on third millennium sites in 1983. The Middle Khabur sites received most scholarly attention when a dam was to be built on Khabur river, 28 km south of Hassake on the Khabur River in the 1960s. Thanks to the flooding, sites like Tell Ziyadeh, Tell Melebiya, Tell Bderi, Tell Mashnaqa, Tell Raqa´i and Umm Qsair were intensively excavated inin the years that followed(Koubková 2015, 17; 24)3. In 1975 to 1977, Hartmut Kühne together with Wolfgang Rölling conducted surveys along the Middle Khabur region. After them Jean Yves Monchambert focused on third millennium sites in 1983. But the main attention of studying the Middle Khabur sites was made due to the built of dam 28 km south of Hassake on the Khabur River in the 1960s. Sites as Tell Ziyadeh, Tell Melebiya, Tell Bderi, Tell Mashnaqa, Tell Raqa´i and Umm Qseir were intensively excavated because of the flooding the following years (Curvers and Schwartz, 1990; Pfälzner 1990; Fortin 1989, 1998; Lebeau 1993; Hole and Johnson 1986-1987; Hole 1991a; Hole 1998; Hole 1999; Hole and Kouchoukos 1992; Hole and Tonoike 2016).

3 for more information about the history of research in the Upper and Middle Khabur regions, see Koubková 2015, 24-26

6 THIRD MILLENNIUM BC POTTERY WITHIN THE AREA OF INTEREST

6.1 EJZ 0 POTTERY

The stratigraphic material only comes from from Tell Brak4, where the morphological types of southern Uruk origin (beveled rim bowls, truncated conical bowl and beakers, jars with punctuated decoration, nose-lug jars with incised decoration, nose-lug jars with ribs and incised decoration) were found side by side with the locat post-Uruk ceramics (conical beakers, carinated bowls, ring-based carinated bowls, small spouted jars, small jars with pierced lugs, hole-mouth cooking pot with crescent-shaped lugs) (Rova 2011, 52, 66-67). The vessels are usually mineral-tempered (calcite, sand, occasionally mica), sometimes with vegetal inclusions (Rova 2011, 52).

6.2 EJZ 1 POTTERY

The evidence of occupation is very sparse in the Western Jezirah. Early Ninevite 5 types with painted or incised are not attested in this part of the studied area. Plain undecorated pottery (“cyma- recta bowls” together with Reserved Slip decoration) is predominant in the area (Rova 2011, 52). In Upper Khabur and Middle Khabur region, early Ninevite 5 ceramics are attested, and can be divided into two regional groups: on the east of the region predominates decorated fine ware Ninevite 5 (painted, corrugated and incised decoration) and plain fine ware (carinated beakers with pointed bases, hemispherical/ovoid beakers with pointed bases and inturned rims, large carinated bowls with pedestal base, large bowls with pedestal base with rounded profile, small wide-necked jars with biconical profile with pedestal bases, small wide-necked carinated jars with pointed bases and suspension lugs, small wide-necked ovoid jars with pointed bases). On the other hand, central Khabur region is characterized by cooking pots (hole-mouth cooking pots with crescent-shaped lugs and flat lids with handles) made from coarse ware, and a local type of painted pottery known as “Karababa” from Upper Euphrates with the west boundaries located west of Wadi Awaidj (Rova 2011, 52, 68-69). Decorated Ninevite 5 deals with many morphological types with pointed or pedestal base and round or sharp carination (Rova 2011, 52).

4 In northern Iraq prevail ceramic material dated into EJZ 0 and can be divided into two sub-phases – „Terminal and Transitional Ninevite 5“ (for more information see Rova and Weiss 2003)

6.3 EJZ 2 POTTERY

Western Jezirah and the area around Khabur River is characterized by an appearance of new wares: Metallic Ware and Jezirah Burnished Ware and morphological types which continued also into EJZ 3a phase (Metallic Ware beakers with corrugated exterior, carinated bowls with flat bases and outturned rims, with burnished surface, hemispherical/ovoid beakers with high ring bases, squat wide- mouthed jars with outturned horizontal rim, small wide-mouthed jars with pointed bases, small squat ovoid-shaped pots with rounded base and outturned, almost horizontal rims, cooking pots with horizontal lugs). Excised Ninevite 5 is only attested in very limited numbers in Western Jezirah (Rova 2011, 57, 68-69). The most remarkable feature of this phase is Ninevite 5 pottery with excised decoration, which at first appears together with incisions, and later with a “Late excised” variant. It is define for following morhplogical types: hemispherical/ovoid beakers with pointed bases and vertical rims, bowls with flat/flattened bases and outside-rounded-foulded rims, small carinated bowls/beakers with flat bases and large carinated bowls with flat bases). The rest of ceramic repertoire consists of fine ware decorated or plain types: carinated bowls with pointed bases and outturned rounded rims and shallow bowls with pointed bases and inturned rims; common ware and cooking pot wares (hole-mouth cooking pots with crescent-shaped lugs, wide- necked jars or pots with outturned, squared rims and flat lids with handle) (Rova 2011, 57, 68-69).

6.4 EJZ 3 POTTERY

It is the period of disappearance of Ninevite 5 excised decoration and decoration in general, but some morphological types of it remain in use (hemispherical/ovoid beakers with pointed bases and vertical rims, small carinated bowls/beakers with flat bases and small wide-mouthed jars with pointed base). The EJZ 3 period is characterized by many new morphological types which were made from fine ware, medium ware and coarse ware. The EJZ 3 pottery repertoire can be divided into two groups which prevail either in EJZ 3a or EJZ 3b period. In the EJZ 3a prevail the following vessel types: hemispherical bowl with rounded bases, low hemispherical bowls with high ring bases, pedestal bowls with spiral corrugated pedestal and wide-mouthed spoted pots). In EJZ 3b prevail the following vessel types: bell-shaped bowls with rounded bases, string-cut bases beakers, truncated conical bowls with flat bases, small globular pots with rounded base and single or double barrel-shaped suspension lugs, ovoid wide-mouthed spouted pots, wide-necked ovoid jars with rounded bases, small long- necked jars with rounded bases, globular or ovoid flasks/bottles, ovoid pointed or round-based flask/bottle, medium-sized or large jars with rounded or flat bases and outturned outside-folded concave rims, “decantation jars” with high pedestal bases and spout in the lower part of the body, conical lids with knob handles and bell-shaped lids with outside-folded horizontal rims (Rova 2011. 57, 71-73).

Fabric is usually mineral-tempered (vegetal inclusion is attested at medium and coarse wares). Most vessels are yellowish to beige or buff in colour and are fully oxidized often called “standard” or “common ware” (the exception is Metallic Ware) (Rova 2011, 57).

6.5 EJZ 4 POTTERY

The EJZ 4 period is characterized by Akkadian activities in the studied area (especially in the eastern part of Norhtern Jezirah). The study of ceramic repertoire is insufficient. The period is divided into three sub-periods: EJZ 4a (Early Akkadian), EJZ 4b (Late Akkadian) and EJZ 4c (Post- Akkadian). In general, the period is marked by a new standardization of pottery and by the appearance of new orange and greenish fine ware and by new morphological types: truncated conical bowls/beakers with flat base, beakers with vertical rim and flat – string-cut base, beakers with recess- beaded rim and flat concave base, small beakers with flat, incised cave pedestal base, shallow bowls with vertical recess-beaded rim and flat concave base, bowls with inturned recess-beaded rims and low disk or ring base, dark-rimmed orange bowls, bowl with rounded or thinned inturned rim and flat or concave base, bowls with inturned, inside round-folded rim and flat or flat concave base, bowls with s- shaped rim and flat or low ring base, large bowls with inturned outside-folded rim, large bowls with outside angular-folded rim, eleongated ovoid bottle with outside moulded rim and rounded base, small jars/bottles with extra-long neck and rounded or pointed base, double-necked jars/bottles with outturned rim and rounded base, small jars with rounded base and doubly carinated body, small two- handled jars with restricted neck, rounded base and outturned, thickened rim, wide-mouthed jars with “incised” (grooved) rims, ovoid jars with ring base and underlined junction between shoulder and neck, open pots with outturned or outside-folded rim and flat or flattened base, wide-necked carinated jars with ring-base, elongated open pots with outturned rim with incised/combed/impressed decoration, large bowls with vertical outfolded rim and relief band under the rim, wide-mouthed pots with multiple-ribbed rim; and decoration: corrugated jars sholder, orange-painted burnished bowls, incised naturalistic designs, relief animalistic decoration, incised triangles, combed decoration and combed and comb-impressed decoration. Also, some pottery types from the preceding period (EJZ 3b) appear: string-cut base beakers, small long-necked jars with rounded base, ovoid pointed or round-based flask/bottles, medium-sized or large jars with rounded or flat base and outturned outside- folded, concave rim, bell-shaped lid with outside-folded horizontal rim, Black Euphrates Ware – “Syrian bottles”) (Rova 2011, 63-64, 75-78).

6.6 EJZ 5 POTTERY

It is difficult to distinguish the EJZ 5 pottery types from the previous EJZ 4c phase, and some of them even continued from the EJZ 4c period: open pots with outturned or outside-folded rim and flat or flattened base, large bowls with vertical outfolded rim and relief band under the rim, wide- mouthed pots with multiple-ribbed rim, relief animalistic decoration, incised triangles, combed decoration, combed and comb-impressed decoration, relief bands with diagonal impressed slashes, radial-pattern burnished decoration, on different types of fine ware bowls - some of them prevail into early 2nd millennium BC as well (e.g. combed decoration). In this period the fabric of the ceramic is usually vegetal tempered and the surface treatment is usually represented by self-slip or light-coloured slip. New characteristic ceramic types are: shallow carinated bowls with flat base and vertical, concave rim, carinated bowl with flat base and vertical or slightly inturned thinned rim, vat with ring base and outturned “hammer”-moulded rim, wide-necked jars (shape class P) with flat or flattened base and outturned, generally outside-moulded rim, stand with concave profile and outside moulded rim, bitumen painted decoration, red-brown slipped decoration (Rova 2011, 64, 79).

7 TYPES OF THIRD MILLENIUM BC FINE WARES WITHIN THE AREA OF INTEREST

As was mentioned in chapter 3, this MA thesis deals with analysis of fine ware pottery material from the KBP from northeastern Syria. Therefore, this chapter defines the typical fine wares of the studied area although the pottery analyzed in this MA thesis is restricted only decorated fine ware (Ninevite 5 fine ware), Metallic Ware and plain (undecorated) ware. The Ninevite 5 fine ware dominates the whole early third millennium BC (3000-2550 BC) and it is subsequently substituted by Metallic Ware in the mid third millennium (2550-2350 BC) and Jezirah Grey Ware (2550-2000 BC) and also by the orange and greenish fine ware with combed decoration in the Akkadian period (2350- 2000 BC).

Fig. 7. Distribution o all fine ware ceramics mentioned in the following chapter (based on Rova 2014; Sconzo and Bianchi 2014; Falb, Portes and Pruss 2014 (created in Arc GIS 10.4).

7.1 TECHNOLOGY OF FINE WARE IN GENERAL

The fine ware is common wheel-made ceramics, which have been found across all third millennium sites. The temper is usually mineral and consists of sometimes visible calcite inclusions and rare fine black basalt grits. The smaller vessels usually little temper. On the other hand, the larger and heavier jars often have large and easily visible inclusions. Most vessels contain voids (pores) in the paste, which are the result of chaff inclusions burning out of the clay. The most common colour of

49 the paste varies from grey to light orange and light buff (in Munsell colour chart is 10YR7/3 to 10YR8/2). The surface was usually wet smoothed, in some cases slipped, and if it was well fired, the colour would be identical with the colour of the paste (Hole and Tonoike 2016, 161). The material for the fine ware was usually sieved or levigated before the potters used it to make the vessels. Sometimes the potters used coiling technique within the production of ceramics and the surface was afterwards finished with the use of rotary kinetic energy. This technique was often used to produce of small bowls and small jars which were less than 30 cm high. The standard ware vessels were probably produced by several potters or groups of potters who shared the same know- how (Babour 2014, 3-4). The fine ware ceramic material is also very thin in section (0.3 – 0.5 mm). Three stages of forming the vessels are: primary forming or roughing-out, shaping and finishing or surface treatments. A technique is recognized by physical parameters which form the raw material: these are the energy source (finger pressure with or without use of wheel), type of pressure (continuous or discontinuous) and the homogeneity or heterogeneity of the clay (Babour 2014, 2). The most important aspect for the appearance of vessel is the finishing (surface treatment) of the exterior walls. In this category belong various types of decoration (painting, incision, excision, ribbing), as well as the surface treatment produce on the undecorated fine ware. Undecorated surface treatments are most common for the third millennium collections. Fine ware and medium ware is often slipped or wet-smoothed. The term slip refers to a thin coat of clay applied on the surface of the sherd. This thin section has lighter colour in contrast to the colour of the sherd´s interior wall. It is often difficult to distinguish between a slip and a self-slip without microscopic techniques. A self-slip refers to similar colour or slightly lighter colour than the colour of the paste on the wall of sherd. All surface treatment technique were usually performed when the clay was still wet or leather-hard, with the most probable tools being pebbles, bones or horns (Smogorzewska 2007, 559).

7.2 DECORATED FINE WARE (NINEVITE 5)

The Ninevite 5 culture originated in the first half of the third millennium BC (EJZ 0 – final EJZ 2) (3000-2550 BC) in Northern Mesopotamia. It was the dominant ceramic style during its entire period of usage, at the time when northern Mesopotamia was changing its social, political and economic settings until it reached the “second urbanization” in mid third millennium BC (Grossman 2014, 83). It was first recognized and assigned by Max Mallowan within his excavation at Nineveh in 1931 and by Ephraim Speiser, who excavated the site Tell Billa, where he recovered Ninevite 5 fragments within a large grain silo sequence. In the following decades, the Ninevite 5 pottery has been found at many northern Mesopotamian sites such as: Tell Chagar Bazar, Tell Chuera, Tell Mari etc.). Since the early 1980s, many excavations began targeting especially the Ninevite 5 culture horizon in Khabur River Basin and in Northern Iraq as well (Schwartz 1988; Roaf and Killick 1987; Rova 1988; Grossman 2014, 83-85).

7.2.1 DISTRIBUTION

The distribution of the Ninevite 5 sites is restricted to the area of the Khabur triangle, Middle Khabur River basin, Western Jezirah – where it reaches its western border at Tell Chuera; and also it comprises the northern Iraq region where reaches its eastern border (see map of distribution of Ninevite 5 pottery – Fig. 7) (Grossman 2014, 84; Rova 2011, 51).

7.2.2 TECHNOLOGY OF FINE WARE NINEVITE 5

Fine ware Nienvite 5 shows either only limited amount of mineral or vegetal inclusions or no visible inclusions at all. The incised or plain fine ware is slightly mineral-tempered (calcite, sand, quartz sometimes mica is visible), while painted vessels are usually vegetal-tempered (Rova 2011, 52).

7.2.3 DECORATION

Decoration of early third millennium vessels is limited only to the exterior and was made before the firing. Usually, it is restricted to the area above the carination or the widest part of the body of bowls and cups. Painted decoration is most common at the EJZ 0-(1) period. The colour of the decorations is purple or dark red and always monochrome. The motifs are geometric or linear, with an occasional appearance of animal images. The paintings are usually geometric or linear, in some cases animal images arise. Some Ninevite 5 vessels are decorated with ribbing (horizontal grooving). It is typical for very fine and small cups and bowls and it is dated into the EJZ 1 period. A second widely used decoration is the incision, which is common for small bowls as well as cups, usually made from very fine ware. It generally appears above the carination of the vessel. Excised decoration is very typical for the EJZ 2 and the final EJZ 2 period. Removing part of the clay from the vessel surface is typical for this technique. It should be removed in vertical, horizontal or in zigzag lines. The combination of incision with excision is very common in the latest phase of Ninevite 5. The last decoration to be applied on the surface are the impressed patterns, which were made by a fingernail pushed back and forth through the wet clay (Grossman 2014, 86).

7.2.4 VESSEL TYPES OF FINE WARE NINEVITE 5

7.2.4.1 BOWLS AND CUPS

Carinated bowls are the dominance of the period. Also the small bowls with beaded rim and pointed or pedestal base are very common at the end of Ninevite 5 period (Grossman 2014, 85). Bowls have been probably used for eating small food, serving food staffs or for drinking (Smogorzewska 2016, 191).

Overview of fine ware bowls (based on ARCANE study (Rova 2011): carinated bowls/cups or beakers with flat base carinated bowls/cups or beakers with pointed bases S-shaped “cyma-recta” bowls shallow bowls with pointed bases and inturned rim round-sided (hemispherical/ovoid) bowls with pointed bases or round bases with vertical rim bowl with flat/flattened base and outside-rounded folded rim

The rims of the bowls are usually simple or beaded. Bases can be pointed, flat, rounded. The pasta of bowls differs chronologically. Early Ninevite 5 pottery was usually made from vegetal inclusions and later vessels were made from mineral-tempered clay or well-levigated (Grossman 2014, 85).

7.2.4.2 JARS

Overview of fine ware jars (based on ARCANE study (Rova 2011): small spouted jar small wide-necked carinated jar with pointed base and suspension lugs squat wide-mouth jar with outturned horizontal rim small wide-mouth jar with pointed base

Jars were very common in third millennium pottery assemblages. Smaller jars (less than 30 cm high) can be ovoid, globular, biconical or “heart-shaped” with pointed, rounded or flattened base. The neck should be short or tall, vertical or flaring, straight or curved. In earlier period they could be carinated sharply at the shoulder and should have two or four lugs at the point of carination. The larger jars were usually used for storing and could have decoration or lug handles. Body is common ovoid or globular with rounded base and short flared neck. These larger jars could be coil built and finished on slow wheel (Grossman 2014, 85).

7.2.4.3 POTS

Overview of fine ware pots (based on ARCANE study (Rova 2011): small globular pot with painted decoration of local (“karababa like” style) small squat ovoid-shaped pot with rounded base and outturned almost horizontal rim

7.3 METALLIC WARE

The origin of Metallic Ware spans into mid third millennium BC (final EJZ 2-EJZ 3b) (2550- 2350 BC). Many discussions led to the conclusion that Metallic Ware has appeared in the Khabur region later (EJZ 3a) than in Western Jezirah (EJZ 2) and that it disappears again before the beginning of the Akkadian period (Pruss 2000). This pottery was found by Max Mallowan in the 1930s within his excavation at Tell Brak and Tell Chagar Bazar at different sites. At first, he considered it to be Roman, but later he bagan to call it the “grey and black burnished pottery” and connected this pottery with Akkadian period in the Northern Mesopotamia (Mallowan 1947). Later in the 1970s, Kay Prag used name “Stone ware”, which is today regarded as Metallic Ware and after that David and Joan Oates borrowed the term for the fine, dense, grey ware from pottery at Tell Brak. In 1976, Hartmut Kühne published his PhD thesis from Tell Chuera, where he first introduced the term Metallic Ware (called so because of its copper-like appearance) (Kühne 1976). In 1988, Kühne and Gerwulf Schneider published a study which contained a Metallic Ware analysis from the chemical composition point of view (Kühne and Schneider 1988, 117-118). Mettalic ware was distributed on several Northern Mesopotamian sites but it never became the dominant ceramic material of its period. Metallic Ware was made in the area between thee foothills of the Taurus Mountains in South-East Turkey, and the region south of Jebel Abd al-Aziz. Its northwestern border is marked by the course of the Euphrates and on the east by Middle Khabur Basin and Tell Brak, which is the easternmost site with this pottery (see map of distribution of Metallic Ware pottery – Fig. 7) (Pruss 2000, 196; Falb, Porter, Pruss 2014, 173).

7.3.1 TECHNOLOGY OF METALLIC WARE

It is characterized by very hard and dense fabric with a typical clinky sound and highly shining surface caused by firing at a high temperature of approximately 1100 degrees Celsius. For such pure clay to be produced successfully, it needs to be free of any inclusions. Most of the vessel forms are grayish in colour, but the exact shade is dependent on whether it deals with an oxidizing or reducing atmosphere during the firing. The surface colours usually range from buff through reddish and brownish to gray to black colours, sometimes even a double-coloured surface is found (orange-grey). Burnishing or polishing or even slip is very rare types of surface treatment (Falb, Porter, Pruss 2014, 171-174). Chemical analyses of Metallic Ware showed that majority of sherds were made from special non-calcareous clay (less than 2 % of calcium oxide). On the other hand, calcareous Metallic Ware consists of up to 25 % of calcium oxide (Falb, Porter and Pruss 2014, 174). Both groups are observable only by special chemical analysis.

7.3.2 VESSEL FORMS OF METALLIC WARE

Metallic Ware deals with numerous morphological types of the vessels. Most of them also appear in Standard Ware (Falb, Porter, Pruss 2014, 179-180). Overview of Metallic Ware vessel forms (based on ARCANE study (Rova 2011)): beaker with corrugated exterior bell-shaped bowl with rounded base low hemispherical bowl with high ring base truncated conical bow/beaker with flat base small squat ovoid-shaped pot with rounded base and outturned, almost horizontal rim jar with globular/ovoid body, rounded base and horizontal outside-folded rim small globular pot with rounded base and single or double barrel-shaped and suspension lugs globular or ovoid flask/bottle small chalices small shallow and dome-shaped bowl

7.4 PLAIN (UNDECORATED) FINE WARE

In the previous chapter (Chapter 7), various types of fine ware which were made in the area of interest for this MA thesis during the third millennium BC were defined. These were: decorated Ninevite 5; Metallic Ware, which referred to very fine ware according to MA thesis division of wares; Jezirah Stone Ware which should be regarded as very fine ware as well; Jezirah Grey Ware which also consists of fine ware mineral tempered clay; Combed Wash Ware, which should be regarded as fine to medium ware, and finally Combed-Incised Ware, which usually rather as medium ware than fine ware. One type of ware, howeve, has not been mentioned in this thesis so far. It is the Plain (undecorated) Fine Ware which, also appears in the region analyzed by this MA thesis, alongside the decorated Ninevite 5 and the easily distinguished Metallic Ware. Moreover, this ware appears in most regions and periods (since the Neolithic) and constitutes the largest part of the pottery studied in this thesis. Unfortunately, the precise EJZ periodization was very difficult to determine due to the fact that the prevailing plain (undecorated) fine ware without any stratigraphical infomation. Nevertheless, it seems that the plain fine ware is restricted especially to the firth half of the third millennium BC, most plain fine ware types of the EJZ 4 and EJZ 5 seem to most likely be medium ware (see Rova 2011, catalogue of pottery 81-127).

7.4.1 TECHNOLOGY OF PLAIN FINE WARE

Plain fine ware is often mineral tempered with small parts of calcite, sand or quartz inclusions. It is wheel-made pottery with very easily visible traces left by the pottery wheel. The colour of the surface is usually yellowish to beige or buff and the vessels are fully oxidized with light colour throughout whole section (Rova 2011, 57).

7.4.2 VESSEL TYPES OF PLAIN (UNDECORATED) FINE WARE

Overview of plain (undecorated) fine ware vessel types (based on ARCANE study (Rova 2011): carinated bowl with flat or pointed base small spouted jar S-shaped “cyma recta” bowl shallow bowl with pointed base and inturned rim hemispherical/ovid beaker with high ring base or with pointed base small wide-mouth jar with pointed base hemispherical/ovoid beaker with pointed base and vertical rim small carinated bowl/beaker with flat base hemispherical bowl with rounded base bell-shaped bowl with rounded base low hemispherical bow with high ring base carinated bowl with falt base and outturned rim, with burnished surface string-cut base beaker truncated conical bowl with flat base large bowl with rounded/flattened flat base and exterior horizontal lugs wide necked ovoid jar with rounded base small long-necked jar with rounded base globular or ovoid flask/bottle “decantation jar” with high pedestal base and spout in the lower part of the body low pot stand with concave profile bell-shaped lid with outside-folded horizontal rim truncated conical beaker with flat base beaker (cup) with vertical rim and flat, string-cut base beaker (cup) with recess-beaded rim and flat concave base small beaker with pedestal base shallow bowls with vertical recess-beaded rim and flat concave base large bowl with inturned outside-folded rim

55 bowl with inturned recess-beaded rim and low disk or ring base bowl with s-shaped rim and flat or low ring base small jar/bottle with extra-long neck and rounded or pointed base double-necked jar/bottle

7.5 OTHER FINE WARE CERAMIC TYPES

7.5.1 JEZIRAH BURNISHED WARE

The Jezirah Burnished Ware was first defined by Stefan Valentini within the Tell Barri archaeological excavation (Valentini 2008b). Jezirah Burnished Ware is dated into the final EJZ 2 and EJZ 3a periods within the late Ninevite 5 context, which shows the cross-cultural connection between the Ninevite 5 culture and the Anatolian Transcaucasian tradition - which is regarded as the area of its origin. This ware has been recognized at small number of sites located in Upper Khabur region. These sites are: Tell Barri, Tell Arbid and Tell Leilan (Smogorzewska 2016, 205). But the presence of this pottery material in the Upper Khabur region can be regarded as a proof of the interregional relations between those regions, in order to exchange products such as metal or obsidian (Smogorzewska 2012, 131).

7.5.1.1 TECHNOLOGY OF JEZIRAH BURNISHED WARE

These ceramics are distinguishable by their burnished surface and also by the firing in reduced atmosphere with the usage of lower temperature, as well as by its colour, which is usually grey and orange. It is usually a mineral tempered fine ware with calcite or mica inclusions (Smogorzewska 2016, 205).

7.5.1.2 VESSEL TYPES OF JEZIRAH BURNISHED WARE

For the Jezirah burnished ware are typical grey burnished carinated bowls, orange burnished hemispherical bowls and burnished round-sided bowls with beaded rims (Smogorzewska 2016, 205).

7.5.2 JEZIRAH STONE WARE

Jezirah Stone ware appears first in the EJZ 3b levels also attested in the EJZ 4a-b levels, and remains present until the EJZ 5 period. At Tell Brak, the ware belongs among the so-called “calcareous Stone Ware” and is different from other fine wares in vessel typology, distribution and chronology. At Tell Leilan it is known as “Sila-bowl Ware” and is dated into IIb (EJZ 4a-b) period (Falb, Porter and Pruss 2014, 181).

It is distributed at sites in central and eastern Norhtern Jezirah such as: Tell Brak, Tell Leilan, Tell Hamoukar, Tell Mohammed Diyab and Tell Mozan. It is not attested in Western Jezirah at all (see map of distribution of Jezirah Stone Ware pottery – Fig. 7) (Falb, Porter and Pruss 2014, 181).

7.5.2.1 TECHNOLOGY OF JEZIRAH STONE WARE

Jezirah Stone ware is a wheel-made pottery, which has little to no visible mineral inclusions. The fabric is usually dense and clinky, with colours ranging between light to medium grey, yellowish- grey and the most frequently occurring olive green colour. This greenish colour is caused by a high firing temperature, which reached 900 °C or higher in the reduced atmosphere. The surface is usually very smooth.

7.5.2.2 VESSEL TYPES OF JEZIRAH STONE WARE

Jezirah Stone Ware occurs only as truncated conical bowls and should have three types of bases: flat, rounded or slightly concave; and two types of rims: simple and beaded. There are also wider and taller variant (Falb, Porter and Pruss 2014, 181-183).

7.5.3 JEZIRAH GREY WARE

The Jezirah Grey Ware is defined as one of the metallic-looking wares5 which are found in the EJZ 3b and EJZ 4 levels (sometimes, it was also found in an EJZ 5 context, but its production probably ended earlier that that) in Northern and Western Jezirah, and is regarded as an imitation of the “true non-calcareous Metallic Ware”. (Rova 2011, 75). It is distributed almost across the whole Jezirah, but that is due to the fact, that this ware was used for making “Syrian bottles” which were used as containers in long-distance trade, and therefore its area of distribution is larger than the area of its production. That area was restricted to the Central and Western Jezirah and into the Euphrates valley (see map of distribution of Jezirah Grey Ware pottery – Fig. 7) (Falb, Porter and Pruss 2014, 184-185).

7.5.3.1 TECHNOLOGY OF JEZIRAH GREY WARE

The Jezirah Grey Ware has a fine, mineral-tempered (calcite) paste. It is wheel-made and its colours are light to medium grey due to the firing in a reduced atmosphere, which does not reach 1000 °C. The surface was burnished by hand with the help of an instrument. This burnishing covers the

5 also Black Euphrates (Banded) Ware belongs to metallic-look ing wares, but it is not defined here due to the different area of occurance than is studied in the MA thesis (for more information about Black Euphrates Ware see Falb, Porter and Pruss 2014, 185-195; Rova 2011, 75).

57 whole exterior of the vessel. It was often usually applied on turning wheel (ring-burnishing). This is typical of the alabastron-shaped “Syrian bottles” (Falb, Porter and Pruss 2014, 184-185).

7.5.3.2 VESSEL TYPES OF JEZIRAH GREY WARE

Most typical vessel forms are: wide-mouthed globular pot with very shor neck outside-folded horizontal rim and double suspension lugs on the shoulder miniature vessels globular or slightly biconical “Syrian bottles” (also the alabastron- shaped elongated version) semi-globular bowls

7.5.4 COMBEDWASH WARE

Combed Wash Ware appears in the Jezirah region in the EJZ 3b period, and continues at least into the EJZ 4b period, which is defined as “Late Akkadian” (ca. 2210-2110 BC). The combed Wash Ware co-existed with Metallic Ware only for a short period of time (Rova 2014, 205). Its core distribution area is linked to the Western Khabur (only north of Jebel Abd al-Aziz) and Balikh basins in Upper Mesopotamia (see map of distribution of combed Wash Ware pottery – Fig. 7) (Rova 2014, 204). In this region also appear some Smeared Wash Ware imports which come from its production area closed to the Orontes river. At least one example appears at Tell Brak and Tell Beydar (for more information about Smeared Wash Ware (see Rova 2014, 205-208).

7.5.4.1 TECHNOLOGY OF COMBED WASH WARE

Combed Wash Ware is a wheel-made pottery from fine to medium ware. It is usually mineral tempered with calcite and sand inclusions. It is fired in a higher temperature. Its exterior colours vary from beige and reddish-yellow, with greenish or grayish tones occasionally appearing, too. Its surface treatment belongs to one diagnostic element. It belongs to the “reserved-slip” category - the exterior was first covered by a thin, dark “wash” (dark grey-black to reddish brown). After that, the slip/wash was scraped away with a comb-like tool. The comb motif is usually deep impressed, so the decoration looks like a comb incision. This decoration consists of simple horizontal bands or slightly wavy lines, which were made by rotating a vessel on a potter´s wheel (Rova 2014, 203).

7.5.4.2 VESSEL TYPES OF COMBED WASH WARE

Frequently occurred types are: bowls with thickened rims and bell-shaped beakers with slightly curved sides. Other common types are: globular pots with triangular rim and small or medium- sized globular jars with more or less restricted neck (Rova 2014, 203).

7.5.5 COMBED-INCISED WARE

The origin of the combed-incised ware spans into the last centuries of the third millennium BC. However, it seems that its first occurrence was at Tell Brak or Tell Mozan in the EJZ 3b (ca. 2450 BC). two examples of combed-incised sherds were found at Tell Brak, and few body sherds at Tell Mozan, all dated into the EJZ 3b. Yet this decoration was mainly common during the last quarter of the third millennium BC (Sconzo and Bianchi 2014, 383). Combed-incised ware is distributed across Northern Mesopotamia, but it is attested especially in the Tigridian region (Tell Hamoukar, Niniveh and Assur) and in Northern Jezirah, at sites such as: Tell Brak, Tell Chagar Bazar, Tell Mozan, Tell Arbid, Tell Barri, Tell Mohammed Diyab and in Middle Khabur region, where it is attested at Tell Bderi and Tell Melebiya. In Western Jezirah, which is the core area for this MA thesis, as well as in Middle Euphrates region, it only appears marginally towards the end of the third millennium (see map of distribution of Combed-Incised Ware pottery – Fig. 7) (Sconzo and Bianchi 2014, 382-383).

7.5.5.1 TECHNOLOGY OF COMBED-INCISED WARE

Combed-incised ware is characterized by its distinctive decoration, which was applied before the firing of the vessels. A comb-like instrument was used as a tool for the incisions (Pruss 2007, 474). Although, this decoration technique was used primarily on medium ware, it is worth a mention in this thesis due to its easiy chronological determination. The ware was mineral and vegetal tempered (Rova 2011, 78). Combed-incised decoration was applied to the leather-hard vessels by a comb which usually had three to eight teeth. The basic motifs for decoration are: a horizontal straight band, continuous wavy band, a zigzag band, a diagonally dot-impressed band, and short comb-made lunate strokes (Sconzo and Bianchi 2014, 380).

7.5.5.2 VESSEL TYPES OF COMBED-INCISED WARE

The combed-incised decoration was usually done on the shoulder and /or neck of a medium- sized to large, open and closed pot, but also on: short and long-necked jars and storage jars, squat open pots with out-turned rounded or vertical multiple-grooved rims, tall open pots, long-necked jars with out-turned rims and tall open pots with strongly bent off-set rims (Sconzo and Bianchi 2014, 381).

8 ANALYSES OF FINE WARE POTTERY SHERDS FROM KHABUR BASIN PROJECT

The previous chapter discussed general information about the third millennium BC fine wares in the studied area. The following chapter deals with the analysis of the fine ware fragments from the Khabur Basin Project.

8.1 DECORATED FINE WARE (NINEVITE 5)

Fourteen decorated sherds have been already published in the author´s BA thesis in 2015 (Koubková 2015) after the first study visit at Yale University. All of them have been determined as Ninevite 5 sherds, dated into the EJZ 1-final EJZ 2 (EJZ 3a) (Koubková 2015, 61). During the second study visit at Yale University three more decorated fine ware sherds were found (see No. 26; No. 159 and No. 156 in Appendix 2) and the total number of analyzed sherds reached to seventeen fragments.

8.1.1 TECHNOLOGY OF DECORATED FINE WARE (NINEVITE 5)

Each of the seventeen KBP decorated fine ware has parts of grit (mineral) inclusions less than 0.5 mm large and straw (vegetal) parts less than 0.5 mm long. Three cases deal with straw tempered pasta and four fragments are made from straw-grit temper with calcite and basalt inclusions. The rest of the decorated fine ware is grit tempered with the predominance of calcite inclusion (6 sherds) and basalt inclusion (3 sherds), and one calcite-basalt inclusion. The examined surface colours are: very pale brown (10YR7/3) and pale yellow (2.5Y7/3), and colours present only in a very limited amount such as: reddish yellow (7.5YR6/6) and grey colour (10YR5/1 or 2.5Y7/1). The dominant firing technique is complete oxidation represented by fifteen pottery fragments. Last firing technique which was examined is a slightly incompletely oxidized core, determined at two sherds. Decoration is the dominant surface treatment and was used for the determination of the EJZ period of ten body sherds, one base fragment and six rim sherds. Among the decorated fine ware appear the following motifs of decoration:  ribbing (EJZ 1) – horizontal ribbing motif (No. 1 (Koubková 2015, 79))  incised (EJZ 1) – multiple line chevron motif (No. 6 (Koubková 2015, 81)), slashed motif (No. 9, 10 (Koubková 2015, 83)), notched band and dotted wavy line motif (No.12 (Koubková 2015, 85))  excised (EJZ 2 – final EJZ 2) – grooved motif (No.3 (Koubková 2015, 80)), lined horizontal zigzag motif (No. 2, No. 4 (Koubková 2015, 79-80), No. 159))  incised-excised decoration (final EJZ 2) – grooved-slashed motif (No. 5, No. 7, No. 14 (Koubková 2015, 81-82,86), No. 26), panels with slash motif (No. 8 (Koubková 2015, 82),

lined-horizontal zigzag motif (No. 13 (Koubková 2015, 85), notched band and dotted line with multiple-line chevron (No. 15 (Koubková 2015, 86, Hole 2001, fig. 11/29)  rilled motif (EJZ 3a) (No. 156) No painted decoration (EJZ 0) has been studied within the Yale fine ware pottery collection (Koubková 2015, Koubková and Wygnanska in press).

8.1.2 VESSEL TYPES OF DECORATED FINE WARE (NINEVITE 5)

Eleven decorated body fragments are attested as body sherds, which made it impossible to determine their precise type of vessel form. The vessel form could be studied only in one flat base fragment (No. 10 (Koubková 2015, 83)) and five rim fragments. The flat base sherds were determined as bowls, together with four rim sherds with open beaded, vertical beaded, closed beaded and open beaded type of rims. Two fragments were found to be cups with vertical beaded and open simple rims.

8.1.3 OCCURRENCE OF DECORATED FINE WARE AT SITES IN THE STUDY REGIONS SIZE NUMBER SITE PERIOD OF OF ANALYZED NUMBER SITE STUDIED AREA OCCUPATION SITE SHERDS RIMS BASES BODIES K 001 Joys Spring Upper Khabur region X 0.13 ha 2 1 1

K 114 Tell Bisari Upper Khabur region X 7 ha 2 2

K 116 Tell Mashnaqa Middle Khabur region EJZ 1-3a 0.6 ha 2 1 1

K 133 Qara Tepe Upper Khabur region X 0.25 ha 2 1 1

K 135 Tell Ziyadeh Middle Khabur region EJZ 1-2 1 ha 1 1

K 178 Tell Harba Jebel Abd al-Aziz area EJZ 1-3b 2 ha 1 1

K 181 Tell Tuenan Jebel Abd al-Aziz area EJZ 1-3b 4 ha 1 1

K 216 Khirbet ed-Deeb Jebel Abd al-Aziz area EJZ 1-3b 4ha 1 1

BRAK Tell Brak Upper Khabur region EJZ 0-EJZ 5 10 ha 1 1

CB Tell Chagar Bazar Upper Khabur region EJZ 0-EJZ 5 12 ha 2 1 1

MM Tell Mulla Matar Middle Khabur region EJZ 1-3a 0.54 ha 2 2

Tab. 2. Overview of sites with analyzed decorated fine ware sherds.

There were recognized eleven sites with decorated fine ware (Ninevite 5 sherds) fragments in the studied regions and analyzed fine ware sherds (see Tab.2). Three of them are located in Middle Khabur region (Tell Ziyadeh, Tell Mulla Mater and Tell Mashnaqa), five sites are situated in Upper Khabur region (Tell Brak, Tell Chagar Bazar) and Tell Bisari, Qara Tepe and Joys Spring which should be regarded as “new” Ninevite 5 sites (all “new” sites are marked by grey background in Tab. 2). Fine ware (Ninevite 5) pottery sherds were also found at some sites in the area around Jebel Abd al-Aziz, that should be regarded as “new” sites with Ninevite 5 appearance. These sites are: Tell Harba, Tell Tuenan and Khirbet ed-Deeb (new third millennium sites recognized by KBP are marked by blue background in Tab.2).

8.2 METALLIC WARE

In the MA thesis were analyzed 16 Metallic Ware from KBP pottery collection (see No. 1; No. 5; No. 16; No. 25; No. 30; No. 63; No. 89; No. 91; No. 92; No. 93; No. 96; No. 101; No. 106; No. 132; No. 162; No. 163 in Appendix 2).

8.2.1 TECHNOLOGY OF METALLIC WARE

This type of fine ware is precisely made from very fine ware which does not contain any visible inclusions. But it worthy to mention that none of these fragments have been petrographically analyzed and therefore it can not be determine if the Metallic Ware is truly Metallic Ware calcareous or non-calcareous. The ware is typical for its dense fabric, clinky sound and completely reduced firing at all studied pottery fragments. The preveiling surface colour is grey to dark grey (10YR4/1 or 2.5Y5/2) attested at 13 analyzed sherds. Also other colours are presented: black colour (2.5Y2.5/1), grayish brown (2.5Y5/2), dark brown (7.5YR4/2).

8.2.2 VESSEL TYPES OF ANALYZED METTALIC WARE

Six body fragments are presented in analyzed Metallic Ware pottery with no specification of vessel form. Also ten rim fragments were studied. Five of them belong to bowl types (closed beaded rim and open simple rim). Three of them belong to cups with open simple rim. Also one pot with open simple rim and one jar fragment with ledge rim (see No. 162 in Appendix 2) were attested. Other division of vessel form was not possible due to the small fragments of all analyzed sherds.

8.2.3 OCCURRENCE OF METALLIC WARE AT SITES IN THE STUDY REGIONS

SIZE NUMBER SITE PERIOD OF OF OF NUMBER SITE STUDIED AREA OCCUPATION SITE SHERDS RIMS BASES BODIES K 039 Tell Mu´azzar Jebel Abd al-Aziz area EJZ 1-3b (possibly EJZ 5) 14 ha 4 1 3 K 049 Tell Baroud Jebel Abd al-Aziz area EJZ 3a-3b 3 ha 1 K 062 Tell Menakh Middle Khabur region EJZ 2-3b 2.2 ha 2 2 K 114 Tell Bisari Upper Khabur region X 7 ha 1 1 Tell Mabtuh K 151 Gharbi Jebel Abd al-Aziz area EJZ 1-3b 28 ha 1 1 K 168 Tell Ghasra Jebel Abd al-Aziz area X 4-5 ha 1 1 K 181 Tell Tuenan Jebel Abd al-Aziz area X 4 ha 1 1 K 189 unknown Jebel Abd al-Aziz area X 4-5 ha 1 1 1 Khirbet ed- K 216 Deeb Jebel Abd al-Aziz area X 4 ha 2 2 K 241 Tell Trafawi Jebel Abd al-Aziz area X 8-15 ha 1 1 BRAK Tell Brak Upper Khabur region EJZ 0-EJZ 5 10 ha 1 1 Tab. 3. Overview of sites with analyzed Metallic Ware sherds.

There were recognized eleven sites with Metallic Ware fragments within the study regions and analyzed fine ware sherds (see Tab.3). Two of them are located in Upper Khabur region (Tell Brak (Oates 2001) and Tell Bisari, which should be regarded as a “new” mid third millennium site in the studied region (marked by grey background in Tab. 3). Three sites with mid third millennium pottery material in the area around Jebel Abd al-Aziz had been known before the KBP surveyd the area, these sites are: Tell Mu´azzar (Kühne and Schneider 1988, Preuss 1989, Falb 2009, 273), Tell Mabtuh Gharbi (Kühne and Schneider 1988; Falb 2009, 348) and Tell Baroud (Preuss 1989). But also five “new” sites with mid third millennium BC levels can be attested by KBP: Tell Ghasra, Tell Tuenan, Khirbet ed-Deeb, Tell Trafawi and unknown K 189. Also at Tell Menakh, which is located in lower part of Middle Khabur region, was presented mid third millennium pottery (Kühne and Schneider 1988; Falb 2009, 349).

8.3 PLAIN (UNDECORATED) FINE WARE

Twenty-one plain (undecorated) sherds have already been analyzed and published in the author´s BA thesis in 2015 (Koubková 2015, No. 11, 16-35 in attached catalogue 84, 87-96). All of them have been determined as early to mid third millennium plain ware, which corresponded with the plain Ninevite 5 and post-Ninevite 5 period pottery traditions (EJZ (0)1- final EJZ 2), and the later plain ware assemblages (EJZ 3a-EJZ 3b), they were attested at following sites: Tell al-Arbidi, Tell Bisari, Tell Hammam Gharbi, Tell Harba, Khirbet ed-Deeb, Tell Mabtuh Sharqi, Tell Metyaha, Tell al-Maghr, Tell Burqa and Tell Trafawi (Jebel Abd al-Aziz area); Tell Chagar Bazar, Tell Brak, Joys Spring, Tell Kashkashok III and Qara Tepe (Upper Khabur region) and at Tell Mashnaqa (Middle Khabur region) (Koubková 2015, 66). In this MA thesis appear additional plain ware fragments (149) from the KBP study, which were added tothe total number of all analyzed plain fine ware (170) (see Appendix 2). 162 fragments are rim sherds and 8 fragments as base sherds.

8.3.1 TECHNOLOGY OF PLAIN (UNDECORATED) FINE WARE

All 170 analyzed fragments made from plain fine ware can be also divided within the fine ware division proposed for the purposes of the thesis (see Chapter 3, 19). 155 sherds fit the precise definition of fine ware, 5 of them have size inclusion of precisely 0.5 and therefore were called fine to medium (medium/fine ware) and 10 analyzed pottery sherds have no visible inclusions, and therefore can be marked as very fine ware (No. 21, No. 32, No. 34 (Koubková 2015), No. 7; No. 13, No. 19-20, No.53-54, No. 142, No. 144, No. 147, No. 161 in Appendix 2). Fine to medium ware (No. 11; No. 32, No. 62, No.104 and No. 136 in Appendix 2) has in one case basalt inclusions and straw-grit temper with calcite inclusions.The rest of the fine to medium ware deals with basalt and calcite inclusions. On the other hand, fine ware deals with grit inclusions in

142 cases, with calcite inclusions being the most frequent (82 sherds), followed bycalcite-basalt inclusions (36) and limited basalt inclusions (24). In eight cases,straw-grit temper is also presented (6 sherds with calcite inclusions and 2 sherds with both – basalt and calcite inclusions). One fragment appears also in straw (vegetal) temper (see No. 23 (Koubková 2015, 90)) and one sherd with shell inclusions (see No. 33 (Koubková 2015, 95). Pale yellow is predominant among the examined surface colors (2.5Y7/3, 2.5Y7/4, 2.5Y8/2 and 2.5Y8/3) at 99 fragments. Second frequently occurring color is very pale brown (10YR7/4, 10Y7/3) with49 sherds. Othersurface colors presented in the thesis are: light grey and other grayish tones (2.5Y7/2, 10YR3/2, 10YR4/1) at 9 fragments, pinkish color (7.5YR5/1) at 9 fragments and yellow to olive green color (2.5Y5/3) at 4 fragments. Most analyzed pottery fragments deal with complete oxidation, which is attested at 149 pottery fragments. Complete reduction occurred only at 10 analyzed sherds. Other techniques of firing which appeared only in a small number of analyzed sherds are: end reduction (5), exterior reduced and interior incompletely oxidized (2), slightly incompletely oxidized core (2) and strongly reduce core (2). All these limited firing techniqueswere foundinproper fine ware. Otherwise, the prevalent fine ware firing technique is complete oxidation, marked at 134 sherds. Complete reduction was attested only at 7 pieces of fine ware. Inall fine to medium sherds (5) appears complete oxidation. Very fine ware is also prevalently linked tocomplete oxidation (10) withonly limited occurrence of complete reduction (3). Among thesurface treatments dominated slip, which is represented in47 analyzed fragments (e.g. No. 16, No. 21, No. 24, No. 29, No. 34 and No. 35 (Koubková 2015, 87-96), No. 3, No. 35, No. 50, No. 112, No. 114, No. 124, No. 120, No. 140, No. 145, No. 152, No. 158 in Appendix 2). Self-slip is attested at 30 analyzed plain fine ware sherds (e.g. No. 18, No. 19, No. 20, No. 22, No. 26, No. 33 (Koubková 2015, 88-95), No. 117, No. 141, No. 143, No. 147, No. 166 in Appendix 2).

8.3.2 VESSEL TYPES OF PLAIN (UNDECORATED) FINE WARE

Aconsiderable numberof plain fine ware fragments were those, defined as bowl fragments (124): (No. 16-23, No. 25-31, No. 33-35 (Koubková 2015, 87-96), No. 1, No. 4-9, No. 11-13, No. 15- 18, No. 20-28, No. 30-38, No. 40, No. 42-43, No. No 45-46, No. 48, No. 51-55, No. 58-59, No. 63, no. No. 65-69, No. 71-80, No. 82-93, No. 95, No. 97, No. 99-105, No. 107-108, No. 115-117, No. 119- 127, No. 129-131, No. 133-138, No. 141-146, No. 148-149, No. 152-153, No. 155, No. 158-159, No. 164-165, No. 168 in Appendix 2). Only 17 sherds were determined to be cup fragments (No. 24 and 32 (Koubková 2015, 91, 95), No. 14, No. 29, No. 41, No. 44, No. 47, No. 49, No. 56, No. 60, No. 96, No. 106, No. 109-111, No. 128, No. 132, No. 147, No. 150-151, No. 154, No. 156-157 and No. 160 in Appendix 2) and 11 sherds were found to be pot fragments (No. 10, No. 19, No. 39, No. 61, No. 64, No. 70, No. 81, No. 98, No. 118, No. 139-140, No. 163 in Appendix 2). Only 12 sherds were

64 recognized as jar fragments (No.2-3, No. 50, No. 57, No. 62, No. 94, No. 112-114, No. 161-162 and No. 166 in Appendix 2). Due to the remarkable fragmentarization, it is impossible to accurately recognize the accurate morphological type of the vessels. Due to the undiagnostic character of plain (undecorated) body sherds, only rim and base fragmentswere analyzed. Plain fine ware rims (162) outnumber the base fragments (7). A single whole profile with an open simple rim and a flat base is attested (see No. 160 in Appendix 2). Three types of base fragments are attested:  flat bases (No. 14, No. 109 and No. 160 in Appendix 2)  pointed bases (No. 11 (Koubková 2015, 84) and No. 165 in Appendix 2)  ring bases (No. 35, No. 82 and 90 in Appendix 2) And twelve types of rim fragments were studied:  open simple rim (attested at 37 bowl fragments, 8 cup fragments, 9 pots and 4 jar fragments)  open beaded rim (attested at 10 bowl fragments, 2 cup fragments and 5 jar fragments)  open flat rim (attested only at one bowl fragment)  open ledge rim (attested at one jar fragment)  open collared rim (attested at one jar fragment)  closed simple rim (attested at 4 bowl fragments)  closed slightly inverted simple rim (attested at 17 bowl fragments and 2 pot fragments)  closed slightly inverted beaded rim (attested at 39 bowl fragments and 3 cup fragments)  closed beaded rim (attested at 8 bowl fragments)  closed cocked rim (attested at one bowl fragment)  vertical simple rim (attested at 4 bowl fragments and 2 cup fragments)  vertical beaded rim (attested at 2 bowl fragments and one cup fragment)  unidentified (one jar fragment)

8.3.3 OCCURRENCE OF PLAIN (UNDECORATED) WARE AT SITES IN THE STUDY REGIONS

NUMBER SITE EJZ PERIOD OF OF NUMBER SITE NAME STUDIED AREA OCCUPATION SIZE OF SITE SHERDS RIMS BASES PROFILES K 001 Joys Spring Upper khabur region X 0.13 ha 11 11

K 039 Tell Mu´azzar Jebel Abd al-Aziz area EJZ 1-3b, possibly EJZ 5 14 ha 10 8 2

K 049 Tell Baroud Jebel Abd al-Aziz area EJZ 3a-3b 3 ha 4 4

K 062 Tell Menakh Middle Khabur region EJZ 3a-3b 2.2 ha 4 2 1 1 K 075 Ain Qoubba Upper Khabur region X 3.1 ha 5 5

K 114 Tell Bisari Upper Khabur region X 7 ha 7 7

K 116 Tell Mashnaqa Middle Khabur region EJZ 1-3a 0.6 ha 7 7

K 117 Tell Bderi Middle Khabur region EJZ 1-4 5 ha 7 7

K 126 Tell Kashkashok III Upper Khabur region EJZ 0-3b 0.7 ha 5 5

K 128 Tell Mabtuh Sharqi Jebel Abd al-Aziz area EJZ 2-5 more than 40 ha 6 6

K 133 Qara Tepe Upper Khabur region X 0.25 ha 4 4

K 150 Tell al-Arbídi Jebel Abd al-Aziz area X 1.7 ha 1 1

K 151 Tell Mabtuh Gharbi Jebel Abd al-Aziz area EJZ 1-3b 28 ha 4 4

K 155 Tell al-Maghr Jebel Abd al-Aziz area EJZ 1-3b 13 ha 8 7 1

K 157 Tell Khazneh Jebel Abd al-Aziz area EJZ 1-3b 10 ha 8 8

K 158 Tell Aklef Jebel Abd al-Aziz area EJZ 1-3b 2 ha 2 2

K 161 Tell Hammam Sharqi Jebel Abd al-Aziz area EJZ 1-3b 16 ha 11 11

K 162 Tell Hammam Gharbi Jebel Abd al-Aziz area EJZ 1-3b 10 ha 6 5 1

K 168 Tell Ghasra Jebel Abd al-Aziz area EJZ 1-3b 4-5 ha 3 3

K 174 Tell Burqa Jebel Abd al-Aziz area EJZ 1-3b 1.5 ha 1 1

K 175 Tell Mabtuh South Jebel Abd al-Aziz area EJZ 1-3b 10 ha 3 3

K 178 Tell Harba Jebel Abd al-Aziz area EJZ 1-3b 2 ha 2 2

K 179 Tell Tromba Jebel Abd al-Aziz area EJZ 1-3b 2 ha 2 2

K 180 Tell Mahrum Jebel Abd al-Aziz area EJZ 3a-3b 8 ha 5 5

K 181 Tell Tuenan Jebel Abd al-Aziz area EJZ 1-3b 4 ha 1 1

K 183 Tell Metyaha Jebel Abd al-Aziz area EJZ 1-3b 2.6 ha 4 4

K 184 Tell Marthya Jebel Abd al-Aziz area EJZ 1-3b 2.6 ha 3 3

K 189 Unknown Jebel Abd al-Aziz area EJZ 2-3b 4-5 ha 5 4 1

K 190 Unknown Jebel Abd al-Aziz area EJZ 1-3b 0.5 ha 1 1

K 192 Tell Tokal Jebel Abd al-Aziz area EJZ 2-3b 4 ha 2 2

K 216 Khirbet ed-Deeb Jebel Abd al-Aziz area EJZ 1-3b 4 ha 4 4

K 240 Umm Khafekh Jebel Abd al-Aziz area EJZ 2-3b 0.1-3 ha 1 1

K 241 Tell Trafawi Jebel Abd al-Aziz area EJZ 1-3b 8-15 ha 2 2

K 242 Tulul Khanzir Jebel Abd al-Aziz area X 0.28 ha 1 1

Atij Tell Atij Middle Khabur region EJZ 2-3b 1.4 ha 4 4

BRAK Tell Brak Upper Khabur region EJZ 0-5 10 ha 5 5

CB Tell Chagar Bazar Upper Khabur region EJZ 0-5 12 ha 8 8

MM Tell Mulla Matar Middle Khabur region EJZ 1-3a 0.54 ha 3 3

Tab. 4. Overview of sites with analyzed plain fine ware

Plain (undecorated) fine ware is attested at all third millennium BC sites, and is usually the dominant part of every pottery collection (especially the surface survey). Thehereby analyzed plain fine ware fragments belong to the largest group of studied assemblages, too (see Tab.4). Plain fine ware waspresent at 5 Middle Khabur region sites (Tell Atij, Tell Bderi, Tell Mashnaqa, Tell Mulla Matar and Tell Menakh). All of them have been previously studied (Fortin 1999a, Pfälzner X, Kühne and Schneider 1988). The analyzed plain ware fragments also come from well-known third millennium BC sites in the Upper Khabur region: Kashkashok III, Tell Brak and Chagar Bazar. On the other hand, there are also sites which have third millennium pottery attested for the first time: Joys Spring, Qara Tepe, Tell Bisari and Ain Qoubba (marked by grey background in Tab. 4) and were only marked for the first time by the KBP. Most of the analyzed plain fine ware fragments from sites located in the Jebel Abd al-Aziz area. Most of them belonged to unknown sites before the KBP surface survey of this area: Tell Aklef, Tell Ghasra, Tell Burqa, Tell Harba, Tell Tromba, Tell Tuenan, Khirbet ed-Deeb, Umm Khafekh, Tell Trafawi, unknown sites K 189 and K 190. Tulul Khanzir and Tell al-Arbídi are two sites, which can be regarded as “new” sites with third millennium pottery in the area around Jebel Abd al-Aziz. Some known third-millennium BC sites from the Jebel Abd al-Aziz area also appear among theanalyzed pottery fragments. These are: Tell Mu´azzar (Kühne and Schneider 1988, Preuss 1989), Tell Baroud (Preuss 1989), Tell Mabtuh Sharqi (Kühne and Schneider 1988, Gernez and Souleiman 2013), Tell Mabtuh Gharbi (Kühne and Schneider 1988), Tell al-Maghr (Kühne and Schneider 1988), Tell Mahrum (Moortgat-Correns 1972), Tell Metyaha (Preuss 1989), Tell Marthya (Preuss 1989) and Tell Hammam Gharbi, Tell Hammam Sharqi, Tell Khazneh, Tell Mabtuh South and Tell Tokal6. Most plain fine ware fragments come from Joys Spring (11), Tell Mu´azar (10) and Tell HammaSharqi (11) (see Tab.4).

6 Sites Tell Hammam Gharbi, Tell Hammam Sharqi, Tell Khazneh and Tell Mabtuh South found on online ANE.kmz map (see on-line sources Chapter 16).

9 RESULTS OF POTTERY SHERDS ANALYSIS NUMBER DECORATED PLAIN SITE OF FINE WARE METALLIC (UNDECORATED) NUMBER SITE NAME STUDIED AREA SHERDS (NINEVITE 5) WARE FINE WARE K 039 Tell Mu´azzar Jebel Abd al-Aziz area 14 4 10 K 049 Tell Baroud Jebel Abd al-Aziz area 5 1 4 K 128 Tell Mabtuh Sharqi Jebel Abd al-Aziz area 6 6 K 150 Tell al-Arbídi Jebel Abd al-Aziz area 1 1 K 151 Tell Mabtuh Gharbi Jebel Abd al-Aziz area 5 1 4 K 155 Tell al-Maghr Jebel Abd al-Aziz area 8 8 K 157 Tell Khazneh Jebel Abd al-Aziz area 8 8 K 158 Tell Aklef Jebel Abd al-Aziz area 2 2 K 161 Tell Hammam Sharqi Jebel Abd al-Aziz area 11 11 K 162 Tell Hammam Gharbi Jebel Abd al-Aziz area 6 6 K 168 Tell Ghasra Jebel Abd al-Aziz area 4 1 3 K 174 Tell Burqa Jebel Abd al-Aziz area 1 1 K 175 Tell Mabtuh South Jebel Abd al-Aziz area 3 3 K 178 Tell Harba Jebel Abd al-Aziz area 3 1 2 K 179 Tell Tromba Jebel Abd al-Aziz area 2 2 K 180 Tell Mahrum Jebel Abd al-Aziz area 5 5 K 181 Tell Tuenan Jebel Abd al-Aziz area 3 1 1 1 K 183 Tell Metyaha Jebel Abd al-Aziz area 4 4 K 184 Tell Marthya Jebel Abd al-Aziz area 3 3 K 189 Unknown Jebel Abd al-Aziz area 6 1 5 K 190 Unknown Jebel Abd al-Aziz area 1 1 K 192 Tell Tokal Jebel Abd al-Aziz area 2 2 K 216 Khirbet ed-Deeb Jebel Abd al-Aziz area 7 1 2 4 K 240 Umm Khafekh Jebel Abd al-Aziz area 1 1 K 241 Tell Trafawi Jebel Abd al-Aziz area 3 1 2 K 242 Tulul Khanzir Jebel Abd al-Aziz area 1 1 K 062 Tell Menakh Middle Khabur region 6 2 4 K 116 Tell Mashnaqa Middle Khabur region 9 2 7 K 117 Tell Bderi Middle Khabur region 7 7 K 135 Tell Ziyadeh Middle Khabur region 1 1 Atij Tell Atij Middle Khabur region 4 4 MM Tell Mulla Matar Middle Khabur region 5 2 3 K 001 Joys Spring Upper khabur region 13 2 11 K 075 Ain Qoubba Upper Khabur region 5 5 K 114 Tell Bisari Upper Khabur region 10 2 1 7 K 126 Tell Kashkashok III Upper Khabur region 5 5 K 133 Qara Tepe Upper Khabur region 6 2 4 BRAK Tell Brak Upper Khabur region 7 1 1 5 CB Tell Chagar Bazar Upper Khabur region 10 2 8

Tab. 5. Overview of analyzed fine ware sherds with the quantity of fragments per site.

498 fine ware pottery fragments have been processed at Yale University but only 203 have been suitable for further analyses. Seventeen fragments were recognized as decorated fine ware, sixteen sherds as metallic ware made from very fine ware,and 170 fragments as plain fine ware with the division into very fine ware (10), fine ware (155) and medium-fine ware (5 sherds (see Tab. 5 for quantity in occurance of analyzed type of fine ware sherds per site). Most frequently occurring type of analyzed fine ware sherd were therim fragments (177). The second largest group constituted of body sherds (17) and the smallest group contained base fragments (9). Prevalent part of the analyzed fine ware sherds comprised offragments, which should be regarded as bowls (135), cups were present only in 22 cases. Less numerous among the analyzed fragments were pots (12) and jars (13). 21 sherds stayed without precise determination of the vessel form.

EJZ PHASES REPRESENTED EJZ PHASESS BY ANALYZED REFFERENCES: SITE OF POTTERY NUMBER SITE NAME STUDIED AREA OCCUPATION SHERDS EJZ 1-3b, possibly EJZ 1-3b, possibly Kühne and Schneider 1988, Preus 1989, K 039 Tell Mu´azzar Jebel Abd al-Aziz area EJZ 5 EJZ 4 Kouchoukos 1998, Smith 2015 K 049 Tell Baroud Jebel Abd al-Aziz area EJZ 3a-3b EJZ 2-3b Preuss 1989, Kouchoukos 1998, KBP notes Kühne and Schneider 1988, Kochoukos K 128 Tell Mabtuh Sharqi Jebel Abd al-Aziz area EJZ 2-5 EJZ (1) 2-3b 1998, Gernez and Souleiman 2013 K 150 Tell al-Arbídi Jebel Abd al-Aziz area X EJZ 2 KBP notes Kühne and Schneider 1988, Kochoukos K 151 Tell Mabtuh Gharbi Jebel Abd al-Aziz area EJZ 1-3b EJZ 2-3b 1998, KBP notes EJZ 1-3b, possibly Kühne and Schneider 1988, Kouchoukos K 155 Tell al-Maghr Jebel Abd al-Aziz area EJZ 1-3b EJZ 4 1998, KBP notes 7 K 157 Tell Khazneh Jebel Abd al-Aziz area EJZ 1-3b EJZ 1-3b KBP notes, Kochoukos 1998; ANE K 158 Tell Aklef Jebel Abd al-Aziz area EJZ 1-3b EJZ 1-3a KBP notes, Kochoukos 1998 Tell Hammam EJZ 3a-EJZ 3b, KBP notes, Kochoukos 1998; ANE K 161 Sharqi Jebel Abd al-Aziz area EJZ 1-3b possibly EJZ 4 Tell Hammam KBP notes, Kochoukos 1998; ANE K 162 Gharbi Jebel Abd al-Aziz area EJZ 1-3b EJZ 1-3b EJZ 2-3b, possibly KBP notes, Kochoukos 1998 K 168 Tell Ghasra Jebel Abd al-Aziz area EJZ 1-3b EJZ 4 K 174 Tell Burqa Jebel Abd al-Aziz area EJZ 1-3b EJZ 1 KBP notes, Kochoukos 1998 K 175 Tell Mabtuh South Jebel Abd al-Aziz area EJZ 1-3b EJZ 2-3a KBP notes, Kochoukos 1998; ANE K 178 Tell Harba Jebel Abd al-Aziz area EJZ 1-3b EJZ (1) 2-3a KBP notes, Kochoukos 1998 K 179 Tell Tromba Jebel Abd al-Aziz area EJZ 1-3b EJZ 1-3b KBP notes, Kochoukos 1998 Moortgat-Correns 1972, Kochoukos 1998, K 180 Tell Mahrum Jebel Abd al-Aziz area EJZ 3a-3b EJZ 3a-3b KBP notes K 181 Tell Tuenan Jebel Abd al-Aziz area EJZ 1-3b EJZ 2-3b KBP notes, Kochoukos 1998 K 183 Tell Metyaha Jebel Abd al-Aziz area EJZ 1-3b EJZ 2-3b Preuss 1989, Kochoukos 1998, KBP notes K 184 Tell Marthya Jebel Abd al-Aziz area EJZ 1-3b EJZ 2-3b Preuss 1989, Kochoukos 1998, KBP notes K 189 Unknown Jebel Abd al-Aziz area EJZ 2-3b EJZ 3b-4 KBP notes, Kochoukos 1998 K 190 Unknown Jebel Abd al-Aziz area EJZ 1-3b EJZ 1 KBP notes, Kochoukos 1998 K 192 Tell Tokal Jebel Abd al-Aziz area EJZ 2-3b EJZ 1-3b KBP notes, Kochoukos 1998; ANE EJZ 1-3b, possibly KBP notes, Kochoukos 1998 K 216 Khirbet ed-Deeb Jebel Abd al-Aziz area EJZ 1-3b EJZ 4 K 240 Umm Khafekh Jebel Abd al-Aziz area EJZ 2-3b EJZ 2-3b KBP notes, Kochoukos 1998 K 241 Tell Trafawi Jebel Abd al-Aziz area EJZ 1-3b EJZ 1-3b KBP notes, Kochoukos 1998 K 242 Tulul Khanzir Jebel Abd al-Aziz area X EJZ 3a KBP notes K 062 Tell Menakh Middle Khabur region EJZ 3a-3b EJZ 3a-3b Kühne and Schneider 1988, KBP notes K 116 Tell Mashnaqa Middle Khabur region EJZ 1-3a EJZ 1-3b KBP notes, Hole 2001 K 117 Tell Bderi Middle Khabur region EJZ 1-4 EJZ 3a-3b KBP notes, Pfälzner 1986-87 K 135 Tell Ziyadeh Middle Khabur region EJZ 1-2 EJZ 1-2 KBP notes, Kochoukos 1998 Atij Tell Atij Middle Khabur region EJZ 2-3b EJZ 1-3a Fortin 1999a MM Tell Mulla Matar Middle Khabur region EJZ 1-3a EJZ 2-3a Sürenhagen 1990 K 001 Joys Spring Upper khabur region X EJZ 2-EJZ 3b KBP notes K 075 Ain Qoubba Upper Khabur region X EJZ 2-EJZ 3b KBP notes K 114 Tell Bisari Upper Khabur region X EJZ 1-3b KBP notes K 126 Tell Kashkashok III Upper Khabur region EJZ 0-3b EJZ 2-3b Suleiman and Quenet 2003a K 133 Qara Tepe Upper Khabur region X EJZ 1-3a KBP notes BRAK Tell Brak Upper Khabur region EJZ 0-5 EJZ 1-3b Oates 2001, Matthews 2003, KBP notes Mallowann 1936; McMahon, Tuca and CB Tell Chagar Bazar Upper Khabur region EJZ 0-5 EJZ 1-3b Bagdo 2000, KBP notes

Tab. 6. Overview of sites and their EJZ periodization according to published data and according to MA thesis analyzed fine ware fragments.

7 see on-line sources in Chapter 16

The analyzed fine ware fragments stored at the Yale University are very limited per site (several sherds or even a single sherd (see Tab. 5)). Therefore, aquantitative analysis was not possible. Sixteen fragments were recognized as decorated fine ware.These can be dated into the EJZ 1 to final EJZ 2 period, which is parallel to theNinevite 5 culture horizon, especially in the Upper and Middle Khabur regions (as well as northern Iraq). TheJebel Abd al-Aziz area is characterized by “cyma-recta bowls” and reserved-slip assemblages, which werenot recognized within the analyzed pottery fragments. Nevertheless, incised/excised decoration of Ninevite 5 period appeared at Khirbet ed-Deeb, Tell Harba and Tell Tuenan, which are located in the Western Jezirahtothe south fromJebel Abd al-Aziz. In the Upper Khabur region, decorated sherds were attested at Tell Brak, Tell Chagar Bazar and at few sites initially surveyed by the KBP – QaraTepe, Tell Bisari, and Joys Spring. Incised/excised Ninevite 5 pottery was also retrieved from the sites along the Khabur River in the Middle Khabur region – Tell Ziyadeh and Tell Mulla Matar. Among theanalyzed pottery fragments also appeared sixteen Metallic Ware sherds, which were dated, based on a comparison with literature (especially Tell Chuera publication (Kühne 1976) and Tell Brak publication (Oates 2001, Matthews 2003), into mid third millennium EJZ phases - EJZ 3a-EJZ 3b (with some EJZ 4a exception (Tell Mu´azzar and Khirbet ed-Deeb). The largest part of the collection comprised ofundecorated fragments (170) of rim or base sherds. Especially at these fragments, an EJZ periodization is very arguable, due to the less diagnostic character of plain fine ware pottery and more options for their dating. EJZ periodswere attested (from EJZ 1 to EJZ 3b (possibly EJZ 4)) at 39 sites. Most of these sites are situated in the area around Jebel Abd al-Aziz (26 settlements). Onlyfew are located inthe Upper (7 settlements) and Middle Khabur (6 settlements) regions, where almost all these sites have been already known from well-documented excavations (Oates 2001; Matthews 2003; Pfälzner 1997, 1998, Amirov 2010; Ur 2003; Schwartz 1988). The periodization of sites has been determined based on the analysis of fine ware pottery (39 sites) and according toa comparisonwiththe periodization made by the KBP andof known publicationsdetailing thepreviously excavated sites (marked by white background in Tab. 6) (see. Tab. 6 for comparison of EJZ periodization made by KBP or by excavators of sites and EJZ periods which are represented by analyzed fine ware pottery). The following chapters deal with the description of the sites with analyzed fine ware pottery in the regions of Jebel Abd al-Aziz, Upper Khabur and Middle Khabur.

10 SITES WITH ANALYZED THIRD MILLENNIUM FINE WARE POTTERY FROM KHABUR BASIN PROJECT

Fig. 8. Map showing distribution of sites with analyzed sherds and their periodization8 (created in Arc GIS 10.4).

8 Site Tulul Khanzir (K 242) have unknown coordinates and therefore can not be depicted in the map

10.1 SITES IN THE AREA AROUND JEBEL ABD AL-AZIZ

SITE EJZ PERIOD OF NUMBER OF NUMBER NAME OF SITE OCCUPATION(proposed by KBP ANALYZED (blue) or site´s excavators or SHERDS previsous researches (white)) K 039 Tell Mu´azzar EJZ 1-3b, possibly EJZ 5 14 K 049 Tell Baroud EJZ 3a-3b 5 K 128 Tell Mabtuh Sharqi EJZ 1-3b 6 K 150 Tell al-Arbidi X 1 K 151 Tell Mabtuh Gharbi EJZ 1-3b 5 K 155 Tell al-Maghr EJZ 1-3b 8 K 157 Tell Khazneh EJZ 1-3b 8 K 158 Tell Aklef EJZ 1-3b 2 K 161 Tell Hammam Sharki EJZ 1-3b 11 K 162 Tell Hammam Gharbi EJZ 1-3b 6 K 168 Tell Ghasra EJZ 1-3b 4 K 174 Tell Burqa EJZ 1-3b 1 K 175 Tell Mabtu´a (Mabtuh South) EJZ 1-3b 3 K178 Tell Harba EJZ 1-3b 3 K 179 Tell Tromba EJZ 1-3b 2 K 180 Tell Mahrum EJZ 3a-3b 5 K 181 Tell Tueinan EJZ 1-3b 3 K 183 Tell Metyaha EJZ 1-3b 4 K 184 Tell Marthya EJZ 1-3b 3 K 189 Unknown (near Tell Tamar) EJZ 2-3b 6 K 190 Unknown EJZ 1-3b 1 K 192 Tell Tokal EJZ 2-3b 2 K 216 Khirbet ed-Deeb 7 EJZ 1-3b K 240 Umm Khafeh EJZ 2-3b 1 K 241 Tell Trafawi EJZ 1-3b 3 K 242 Tulul Khanzir X 1 Tab. 7. Overview of analyzed pottery fragments from the area of Jebel Abd al-Aziz with the periodization of sites propossed by KBP and revised by the thesis.

10.1.1 KHIRBET ED-DEEB

Site number: K216 Site size: 4 ha Period of occupation: third millennium (EJ I-IIIb) (Kouchoukos 1998) The site was surveyed in June 1995. A large wadi forms a boundary on the west side of the site with a lake that undercut leaving steep face. Many tamarisk trees were growing in the wadi; indicating arable soil and a high water table. Flat barley fields surrounded the site at the time of thesurvey. There was also a small village located on the site, despite a generally very sparse settlement in the region. Many third-millennium flint blades covered the site (Khabur Basin project notes; Koubková and Wygnańska in press). The KBP team retrieved seven fine ware sherds from the site,one of which had incised decoration dated into EJZ 1- EJZ 2 period (Koubková 2015, 81), and four plain fine ware rim fragments and two metallic ware sherds which were subsequently dated into alater part of the third millennium.

10.1.2 TELL AKLEF (TELL AL-KHALIF)

Site number: K 158 Site size: 2 ha Period of occupation: 3rd millennium BC (EJ I-IIIb) (Kouchoukos 1998) Tell Aklef is situated few kilometers west of Tell Khazneh (K 157). The site is 6 m high and in time of thesurvey was surrounded by avillage. It looks like a real tell from the east side, but it seems to have lasted only for a single chronological period. The lower town probably disappeared under the modern houses and had been located roughly 75-100 m away from themound. No graves were attached to the top of themodern mound. A small wadi river was documented in the vicinity of the settlementon the west side (KBP notes). Two plain fine ware analyzed sherds were found on the site, and were subsequently dated, based on a comparison with the published literature on the third- millenniumperiod, to the early to mid-third millennium BC.

10.1.3 TELL AL-´ARBIDI

Site number: K 150 Site size: 1.7 ha Period of occupation: Paleolithic/ Halaf/ Iron Age (KBP notes) Tell al-Arbidi is situated 2 km south-west of Tell Mabtuh Sharqi (K 128). The KBP surveyed the area in 1994. It measures 75 m in diameter and it is 4 to 5 m high. East of the tell is a small wadi which through the site. At the time of the survey by the KBP, the hill was surrounded by cultivated fields. Only few sherds were retrieved from the surface, including a pointed base dated into early third millennium BC (Koubková 2015, 84). According to the KBP team Tell al-Arbidi has had no third

73 millennium occupation. While it is not possible to certainly determine an EBA occupation based on a single sherd, it it good to be aware of such a possibility. Fourteen graves from an undefined period were documented on the top of the mound on the north-western slope of the hill (KBP notes; Koubková and Wygnańska in press).

10.1.4 TELL AL-MAGHR

Fig. 9. Kranzhügel type of settlement at Tell al-Maghr (created in Arc GIS 10.4).

Site number: K 155 Site size: 13 ha Period of occupation: third millennium BC (EJ I-IIIb) (Kühne and Schneider 1988; Kouchoukos 1998; Smith 2015) The site is located 13 km southwest of Tell Mabtuh Gharbi (K 151) and 3 km north of the foothills of the Jebel Abd al-Aziz. Initially, the site was recorded by Max von Oppenheim; who described both its central mound and its originally squareouter wall.On the CORONA imagery, however, it appears that the central mound is circular, with weathered-out gulleys on the northwest, where there is a cut visible in the mound. The outer wall ispentagonal and has visible gaps probably for thecity gates. Also, the hollow ways are very clearly visible and lead into all directions (Smith 2015, 212). The site was surveyed by the KBP in 1994.It is one of the largest Kranzhügel (Fig. 9) together with Tell Mabtuh Sharqi (more than 40 ha) and Tell Mabtuh Gharbi (28 ha) (Koubková and Wygnańska in press). Eight plain fine ware rim sherds have been analyzed. They were dated according to comparison with

74 literature into early to mid-third millennium, with the possibility of a later third-millennium occupation.

10.1.5 TELL BAROUD

Site number: K 049 Site size: 3 ha Period of occupation: third millennium (EJ IIIa-IIIb)/Roman/Byzantine/Islamic (Preuss 1989; Kouchoukos 1998; Smith 2015; KBP notes) Tell Baroud is located within the small Faidat depression (an elongate zone of interior drainage developed around a gypsum sink) on the east of Jebel Abd al-Aziz and 13 km west from the Khabur River. The surface of the tell is a little undulating. On the southern part of the tell is a visible square structure (Kouchoukos 1998, 368; Smith 2015, 218). In the notes of the KBP it is written that the site was easily visible from the asphalt road, and that the lake was nearby (KBP notes). Five plain fine ware sherds were analyzed within the MA thesis, one of them made from Metallic Ware all fragments have been dated into early to mid third millennium BC.

10.1.6 TELL BURQA

Site number: K 174 Site size: 1.5 ha Period of occupation: third millennium BC (EJ I-IIIb)/Byzantine/Roman/Islamic (Kouchoukos 1998, Smith 2015; KBP notes) The site is set south of the Jebel Abd al-Aziz. Deep wadi flowed on its eastern side at the time of the survey; the mound was also covered by mud and vegetation. On top of it there were multiple graves, several of which seemed to be robbed. The lower part of some graves intersected with deposits, which contained third millennim BC debric with third millennium BC debris (KBP notes). A single plain sherd dated into early third millennium was found in these deposits (Koubková 2015, 96). A single plain sherd dated into early third millennium was found in these deposits (Koubková 2015, 96).

10.1.7 TELL GHASRA

Site number: K 168 Site size: 4-5 ha Period of occupation: Paleolithic/third millennium BC (EJ I-IIIb)/Byzantine/Roman/Islamic (Kouchoukos 1998, Smith 2015; KBP notes) The tell is located about 2.5 km north-west of asphalt road to Tell Tamar (K 189),at the boundary of gypsiferous and alluvial soils. The site is 4-5 ha large and is partly covered by village, sheep flocks and cultivated fields. A wadi cut lays a few hundred meterssouth-west of the site, but it had no water

75 duration of surface survey. On the mound there is a preserved outer wall. The site was mostly covered by Halaf sherds, (Kouchoukos 1998, 378; KBP notes) there were also, however, three plain fine ware sherds and one Metallic Ware, which were analyzed in this thesis. The site was subsequently dated into early to mid third millennium BC with the possibbily of later occupation (EJZ 4).

10.1.8 TELL HAMMAM GHARBI

Fig. 10. Kranzhügel type of settlement at Tell Hammam Gharbi (created in Arc GIS 10.4).

Site number: K 162 Site size: 10 ha possibly up to 40 ha Period of occupation: third millennium (EJ I-IIIb) (Kouchoukos 1998; Smith 2015; KBP notes) Tell Hammam Gharbi is located 3.5 km northwest of Tell Hammam Sharqi (K 161) and 12 km from Tell Mabtu´a (K 175). It isnext to a large wadi system which runs from the base of Jebel Abd al-Aziz to the Khabur River, located just 7 km from it. There are located hollowed-out gulleys on the northern and eastern side of the mound. The tell is certainly a two-tiered settlement but without any fortified ramparts. Kouchoukos determined the tell was a tentative kranzhügel (Fig. 10). There are also still visible undulating parts which marked the maximum size of the settlement at 40 ha. Some parts of it are covered by a modern village. Hollow ways leading from site to the south were also identified (Smith 2015, 216). There were no other sites or a wadi visible from Tell Hammam Gharbi, according to KBP notes (KBP notes). In the present MA thesis six sherds rom this site have been analyzed - these were five rim sherds and one base fragment, which were probably dated to early-mid third millennium.

10.1.9 TELL HAMMAM SHARKI

Site number: K 161 Site size: 16 ha Period of occupation: third millennium (EJ II-IIIb) (Kouchoukos 1998, Smith 2015, KBP notes) Tell Hammam Sharqi is set 12 km from Tell Mabtu´a (K 175) and 7 km south-west of the Khabur River between two seasonal wadis. During the survey there was no water flowing in it according to KBP notes. The central mound is circular with many weathered-out gulleys visible. On the other hand, the outer wall is apparently pentagonal. It is not visible on the southeastern side due to erosion caused by thewatercourse. There are also hollow ways leading in all direction from this site (Kouchoukos 1998, 378; Smith 2015, 210; KBP notes). The site is dated into mid-third millennium, and this periodization is alsoconfirmed by the analyzed pottery material. Eleven plain fine ware rim sherds were studied in the thesis and compared with well-published third-millennium sites. It seems the period of occupation started in the final EJZ 2 and lasted till the EJZ 3b/EJZ 4 periods, so it can be dated into mid-third millennium.

10.1.10 TELL HARBA and TELL TROMBA

Site number: K 178 / K179 Site size: 2 ha / 2 ha Period of occupation: third millennium (EJ I-IIIb)/Iron Age – third millennium (EJ I- IIIb)/Roman/Byzantine/Islamic (Kouchoukos 1998, KBP notes) The Yale Khabur Basin project located sites K 282 and K 281 other third millennium BC settlements: Tell Harba and Tell Tromba, two small (2 ha) villages in the vicinity of kranzhügel.They are situated on the arable soils at the edge of Quaternary deposits. Sources of water and good soil were in their vicinity. However, the agricultural production in this region should not have been used without supplemented irrigation (Kouchoukos 1998, 386-387). At Tell Harba the KBP discovered a stone wall and two single-room structures on the surface; there were also identified pits of hollow red ceramic bricks (KBP notes). Team KBP was not sure where exactly these were located because the men from a local Bedu camp were not sure whether the name of the site was Harba or Tromba. A small boy told the team though, that Tromba is the site located directly south from Harba (KBP notes). Both sites were dated by Kochoukos to early to mid third millennium BC these also confirm analyzed fine ware material. Five rim sherds from the site, including one decorated rim fragment with incised/excised decoration, were studied (Koubková 2015, 80, 90).

10.1.11 TELL KHAZNEH

Site number: K 157; K 160 Site size: 10 ha Periods of occupation: Halaf/Ubaid/third millennium (EJ I-IIIb); second millennium (Kouchoukos 1998, Smith 2015; KBP notes) Tell Khazneh is situated approximately 3 km north of Jebel Abd al-Aziz adjacent to a seasonal wadi. The central mound is rectangular in shape and it is incised with weathering gulleys on the east-west side. Lower town has anundulating surface, which indicates a possible structure in the area, possibly also the ramparts (Kouchoukos 1998, 368; Smith 2015, 217). The KBP team walked east from K 160 and discovered one 4th millennium bowl sherd with grooved/beaded rim. It appeared that there was 3rd-millennium occupation and probably wall structure from the 2nd millennium BC. A large obsidian blade was also retrieved from the surface.From the pottery material on this eight plain fine ware rim fragments dated into early to mid third millennium with one morphological type which appears in EJZ 0 period (see No. 54 in catalogue of sherds) are analyzed in this MA thesis.

10.1.12 TELL MABTUH SOUTH (MABTU´A)

Site number: K 175 Site size: 10 ha Period of occupation: third millennium (EJ I-IIIb)/Roman/Byzantine/Islamic (Kouchoukos 1998, Smith 2015, KBP notes) The site is situated on a broad, rolling plains south and west of the Faidat depression. Because of to the soil, which is shallow, stony and has a high gypsum context, agriculture in the vicinity of this site would be difficult. On the top of the mound lies a small village and borrow pits revealed 10 m of stratified third millennium BC deposits but KBP notes documented that there was only a small amount of sherds on the surface. There was no water source at the time of the survey, so the villagers had to go for water by trucks (Kouchoukos 1998, 384; KBP notes). Three rim sherds from this site are analyzed in this MA thesis and have been preliminarily dated to the mid-third millennium BC. were analyzed (EJZ 2-3a) which corresponds with peridodization proposed by Nicholaus Kouchoukos (Kouchoukos 1998, 374).

10.1.13 TELL MABTUH GHARBI

Fig. 11. Kranzhügel type of settlement at Tell Mabtuh Gharbi (created in Arc GIS 10.4).

Site number: K 151 Site size: 28 ha Period of occupation: third millennium (EJ I-IIIb)/Iron Age (Kühne and Schneider 1988; Kochoukos 1998; Smith 2015, KBP notes) Tell Mabtuh Gharbi is located 4 km north of foothill of Jebel Abd al-Aziz and it is one of the largest sites there. Only a small seasonal watercourse is to be found in its vicinity. The settlement was documented by Max von Oppenheim and belongs to one of the Kranzhügel types of settlement (Fig. 11) with an upper town of sub-circular feature and a lower town with equally irregular shape (ellipse to the northeast and polygon to the southwest). The outer wall revealed evidence of numerous city gates with the hollow ways leading in the northern direction (Smith 2015, 208-209). There is one example of a basinin the vicinity of Tell Mabtuh Gharbi (basinsare common along the northern and southern piedmont of the Jebel and are almost always accompanied bythird millennium BC deposits) (Kouchoukos 1998, 388-389). Four plain fine ware pottery sherds and one Metallic Ware were from the site were analyzed in this MA thesis. EJZ occupation represented by analyzed sherds (EJZ 2-3b) corresponds with KBP project periodization.

10.1.14 TELL MABTUH SHARQI

Fig. 12. Kranzhügel type of settlement at Tell Mabtuh Sharqi (created in Arc GIS 10.4).

Site number: K 128 Site size: 40 ha Period of occupation: Ubaid/third millennium (EJ I-IIIb) /Roman / Byzantine/ Islamic (Kühne and Schneider 1988, Kochoukos 1998, Gernez and Souleiman 2013; Smith 2015; KBP notes) Tell Mabtuh Sharqi is situated 4 km north of Jebel Abd al-Aziz and with its 40 ha it is the largest Kranzhügel (Fig. 12) site in the area around Jebel Abd al-Aziz. The settlement was recorded by Max von Oppenheim and subsequently visited and documented by many archaeologists (Kouchoukos 1998, 378). In 1988 this Kranzhügel was visited by the KBP team, but in their documentation diary Tell Mabtuh Sharqi stayed without any comment (KBP notes). The site was lastly excavated under the leadership of prof. Antoine Suleiman. The excavation took place there during 2001 and 2010 and revealed large parts of the upper town and some parts of the lower town as well (Gernez and Suleiman 2013). Unfortunately, the excavation of this settlement has never been fully published due to the unexpected death of prof. Suleiman. Their excavation discovered a large stone structure, a city wall and a domestic architecture (Gernez and Suleiman 2013). The 9 ha large upper town is surrounded by a concentric lower town which makes the maximum size of settlement more than 40 ha (Gernez 2012). The Ninevite 5 pottery discovered in the upper town dates the occupation of thesite into EJZ 2 period. TheKBP team has also retrieved Ninevite 5 pottery which should be dated into EJZ 2 period there (KBP notes, Koubková and

Wygnańska in press). No specific ceramic assemblages were recovered however. The excavators also suppose that the site was inhabited in EJZ 3 with the continuous occupation till the EJZ 5 (ca. 2100- 2000 BC) at the end of EBA. More precisely, the main occupational phase spanned from the EJZ 4 onwards, with Temple N structure dated into EJZ 3/4a (ca. 2350 BC). Thesedata correlate with the pottery analysis of Metallic ware and Combed Wash Ware conducted by Christian Falb (2009, 348,392). After that, the Tell Mabtuh Sharqi was abandoned, along with the rest of the Western Jazirah settlements, with no evidence for occupation after EJZ 5 (Gernez and Suleiman 2013; Smith 2015, 69-70). CORONA imagery shows the evidence of theexistence of many hollow ways, which leadinto all directions from Tell Mabtuh Sharqi (Smith 2015, 207-208). The KBP team retrieved few pottery sherds which include six plain fine ware rim sherds which should be dated into early to mid-third millennium BC. It is apparent from the excavation (Gernez and Souleiman 2013) conducted at the site, however, the occupational level also continued in the late third millennium BC.

10.1.15 TELL MAHRUM

Fig. 13. Kranzhügel type of settlement at Tell Mahrun (created in Arc GIS 10.4).

Site number: K 180 Site size: 8 ha Period of occupation: Paleolithic/ third millennium (EJ II-IIIb) (Moortgat-Correns 1972; Kouchoukos 1998, KBP notes) Tell Mahrum is located in the small Faidat depression (an elongate zone of interior drainage developed around a gypsum sink) as well as Tell Baroud (Kouchoukos 1998, 383). The site sits east of Jebel Abd al-Aziz, about 15 km from Tell Tuenan (K 181). It is situated at the edge of a lake basin, alongside low, rocky hills with nuclear morphology and at the edge of a fertile terrace (Smith 2015, 222). Also, a modern village is situated there. The top is covered by graves. The KBP team dug a deep test trench

81 here, and revealed sherds, bricks, stone foundations, bones and ash (KBP notes; Koubková and Wygnańska in press). The site is a kranzhügel type of settlement with fortifications beyond the boundaries of the tell (Fig.13). CORONA imagery and Google Earth show small mound-like structures surrounding the central tell. These should be the remnants of a damaged outer wall; however, they are only clearly visible at thesouthern side. There is also the possibility that the structures are simply a natural mountainous terrain (Smith 2015, 222). In this MA thesis five plain fine ware sherds from this site, which were subsequently dated to the early to mid-third millennium BC, were analyzed.

10.1.16 TELL MARTHYA

Site number: K 184 Site size: 2.6 ha Period of occupation: third millennium (EJ I-IIIb) (Preuss 1989; Kouchoukos 1998; Smith 2015, KBP notes) Tell Marthya is located 13 km south of Jebel Abd al-Aziz, between Tell Tuenan (K 181) and Khirbet Ed-Deeb (K 216) which is close to the surface boundary between Lower and Upper Fars formation where many springs emerge (Kouchoukos 1998, 343). The site is situated on a seasonal watercourse. It is isolated in an arid part of the region with 250 mm annual precipitation (Smith 2015, 219). A natural hill next to the wadi has water from a small spring. The hill is ca. 6 m high, steep-sided and looking like a tell. It seems that the occupation hasbeen limited to some houses on the very top, where the sherds were scattered (KBP notes). Theree plain fine ware rim fragments from this site, dated into early to mid third millennium, were analyzed in this MA thesis.

10.1.17 TELL METYAHA

Site number: K 183 Site size: 2.6 ha Period of occupation: third millennium (EJ I-IIIb)/ Iron Age/ Roman/ Byzantine/ Islamic (Preuss 1989; Kochoukos 1998; Smith 2015; KBP notes) Tell Metyaha is located 13 km southeast of Tell Mu´azzar (K 039). It is also situated along the southern piedmont of Jebel Abd al-Aziz, close to the boundary between Lower and Upper Fars formation where numerous springscan be found, as well as K 173 and K 174. The site should, therefore, be reliant on water sources, yetall these sites are in poor agricultural zone. There are rather shallow, rocky, gypsum-laden soils and therefore the agriculture is very difficult and with limited productivity (Kouchoukos 1998, 385). The surface of the mound is very undulating so it is difficult to say if it contained a central depression. The upper town, which has an irregular shape, is next to theouter wall on the southeastern and eastern side.Many gaps are attested by the satellite imagery but it is unlikely, that there really were so many gates. It is more likely that they were caused by massive

82 erosion at the site itself. Hollow ways are primarily located south of Tell Metyaha (Smith 2015, 214). The mound was surveyed by the KBP in 1994 and only few sherds were recovered from the lower slope (KBP notes). In MA thesis were analyzed four plain fine ware rim fragments which were subsequently dated into early to mid third millennium BC.

10.1.18 TELL MU´AZZAR

Fig. 14. Kranzhügel type of settlement at Tell Mu´azzar (created in Arc GIS 10.4).

Site number: K 039 Site size: 14 ha Period of occupation: third millennium (EJ I-IIIb)/ Roman/ Byzantine/ Islamic (Kühne and Schneider 1988; Preuss 1989; Kouchoukos 1998; Smith 2015; KBP notes) Tell Mu´azzar is situated more than 13 km west of Tell Tuenan (K 181). It is one of the largest kranzhügel (according to Smith 2015 the ringwall settlement) south of Jebel Abd al-Aziz (Fig. 14). It is located at broad colluvial land with relatively fertile calcic soils. Dense vegetation grows along a large wadi on the east of the site. Small-scale irrigated cultivation has been observed on the southwest side where groundwater may be present, which lead tomore third millennium BC sitesbeing found, probably dated into EJ I-II period. To the north and west of Tell Mu´azzar the terrain becomes rougher and almost no agriculture is possible. Only few third millennium BC sites have been found in this area: K 173 – Tell Khanezir, K 174 – Tell Burqa, K 187 – Tell Samad, K 247 – Ras al-Beda. All these sites are probably temporary pastoral or hunting camps (Kouchoukos 1998, 384-385). The central mound is very circular in shape, with a flat top. The inner wall is a little visible, with three clear and two nearly invisible gaps (possibly city gates). Lower town is almost empty and an undulating surface

83 can be seen on the western side.The hollow ways are lead into all directions, but most notably to the south (Smith 2015, 213). The KBP team recovered few pottery fragments here. Four-teen of them were analyzed in this MA thesis, including eight plain fine ware rim fragments, two base fragments and one Metallic Ware rim sherd and three Metallic Ware body fragments. EJZ period represented by analyzed sherds (EJZ 1-4) corresponds with KBP project periodization. The site can be therefore dated into early to mid third millennium but with possibility of later occupation (Smith 2015, 213).

10.1.19 TELL TOKAL

Site number: K 192 Site size: 4 ha Period of occupation: Ubaid/ fourth millennium/ third millennium (EJ II-IIIb)/ Iron Age/ Byzantine/ Islamic (Kouchoukos 1998, Smith 2015, KBP notes) Tell Tokal is located on the northwestern edge of the area surveyed by KBP, almost 30 km from Jebel Abd al-Aziz and 80 km from Hassake. It is an area within Western Jazirah with high rainfall precipitation, which is still a part of a semi-arid area receiving over 300 mm annual precipitation. Tell Tokal has been occupied in the 4th millennium BC as well, which makes it one of the very few tells dating into this period in that area (Smith 2015, 220). In this MA thesis two plain fine ware rim fragments were analyzed, and dated into early to mid third millennium BC base on the comparison with literature.

10.1.20 TELL TRAFAWI

Site number: K 241 Site size: 8-15 ha Period of occupation: third millennium (EJ I-IIIb) (Kouchoukos 1998; Smith 2015; KBP notes) Tell Trafawi is located 8 km southwest of Tell Tuenan (K 181) and both of these sites count among the largest in that area. Almost one hundred long flint blades (sickles)were recovered at the site. Rocky bedrock surrounds the site now, so there is no agriculture possible. More productive plains are situated in distance of 1-3 km to the north and south of Tell Trafawi and other sites. It is possible that their settlers traveled some distance to their fields but still it is supposed that the agriculture was not the primary means of subsistence for the inhabitants of the sites in the vicinity of K 241: Tell Metyaha (K 183), Tell Marthya (K 185), Umm Khafek (K 240), Tell Laharn (K 240) and an unknown site (K 238) (Kouchoukos 1998, 385). Three of the pottery fragments retrieved by KBP team from the site were analyzed in this MA thesis, including two plain fine ware rim sherds and one Metallic Ware body sherd. After the comparison of the analyzed sherds with the already published third millennium sites, the site was dated into early to mid third millennium BC. EJZ period represented by analyzed sherds (EJZ 1-3b).

10.1.21 TELL TUENAN

Site number: K 181 Site size: > 10 ha Period of occupation: third millennium (EJ I-IIIb)/ Iron Age/ Roman/ Byzantine/ Islamic (Kouchoukos 1998; Smith 2015; KBP notes) Tell Tueinan is located 10 km west of Tell Mabtu´a (K 175) but in more hospitable environment – a large wadi cuts into the gypsum bedrock and flows at the base of the tell. This wadi also cut into the mound and exposed a thick third millennium sequence (5-10 m). Because of that, no outer wall has been discernable there. The stone foundation on southern side of mound and extensive sherds scatters indicate a large EJZ 3 period settlement. Today limited cultivation is practiced there ,it is not likely however, that the agriculture in the third millennium would have beenin the vicinity of the main tell. The site´s name means Tell of Fig Trees in Arabic, so it is possible that the mound was located in a steppe-forest (Kouchoukos 1998, 384; KBP notes; Koubková and Wygnańska in press). Three sherds were analyzed in this MA thesis– one plain fine ware rim fragment, one Metallic Ware body sherd and one decorated Ninevite 5 body sherd (Koubková 2015, 86). EJZ period represented by analyzed sherds (EJZ 2-3b) corresponds with KBP project periodization. The site can therefore be dated into early to mid third millennium BC.

10.1.22 TULUL KHANZIR

Site number: K 242 Site size: 0.28 ha Period of occupation: no information Tulul Khanzir is located in the area around Jebel Abd al-Aziz but its precise location is unknown. The site is composed oftwo separated mounds. These two settlements are divided by a 35-m wide strait. A small wadi has been located on the east side of site, and therefore all surrounded lands have been cultivated. It was very difficult to find any sherds in the grass vegetation on the top of the mounds (KBP notes). The thesis deals with one example of EJZ 3a plain fine ware rim sherd probably from a carinated bowl. The periodization of this site is impossible to determine based on a single sherd, but there is a possibility of mid third millennium occupation there and “new” third millennium settlement in the region.

10.1.23 UMM KHAFEH

Site number: K 240 Site size: 0.1 – 3 ha Period of occupation: third millennium (EJ II-IIIb) (Kouchoukos 1998) Umm Khafeh is located just a few kilometers west of Tell Trafawi (K 240) and Tell Metyaha (K 183). The KBP surveyed the site in June 1995. The mound is situated on gypsum bedrock and is 2 m high. This is a wadi terrace site, higher than the normal bank of a river. The wadi is broad, meandering ca. 7-8 m deep. The land surrounding the site was all cultivated when the KBP team surveyed it. Scattered sherdswere retrieved only along the terrace (KBP notes). Only a single plain fine ware sherd from this site weas analyzed in this thesis, and therefore the periodization of the site is impossible to determine precisely. However, in this case too, there is the possibility of early to mic third millennium occupation.

10.1.24 UNKNOWN SITE K 189

Site number: K 189 Site size: 4-5 ha Period of occupation: third millennium (EJ II-IIIb) (Kouchoukos 1998; Smith 2015; KBP notes) Site K 189 is located northwest of Tell Hammam Sharqi (K 161) and 6 km from the Khabur River on the Wadi Karghazz. It is situated at the boundary between gypsiferous and alluvial soils (Kouchoukos 1998, 378). It is visible from the road to Tell Tamar,and located about 0.5 km to the south, next to small village. Wadi lies incised on the southern side. The surrounding land is dotted with actual hills, one of which is under the village and lies 0.5 km southeast and has a building on a top. All surrounding fields were cultivated at the time of the KBP survey. The site may be composed of several natural hills. Overall, the site may be roughly 150 m in diameter, withthe center covered by graves (KBP notes). It was probably used throughout all periods. The central mound seems to be circular on CORONA imagery. The outer wall has an irregular shape – polygonal to the east and circular to the west. Hollow ways lead to the north and southeast (Smith 2015, 211). Six pottery fragments from this site were analyzed in the thesis. These include: five plain fine ware rim fragments and a plain fine ware base fragment. Based on the comparison of the sherds with the published catalogue of pottery from the known third millennium sites, the site can be dated into early to mid third millennium. EJZ period represented by analyzed sherds (EJZ 3b-4) corresponds with KBP project periodization but should be also continued into later period.

10.1.25 UNKNOWN SITE K 190

Site number: K 190 Site size: 0.5 ha Period of occupation: third millennium (EJ I-II)/ Roman/ Byzantine/ Islamic (Kouchoukos 1998; Smith 2015; KBP notes) K 190 is an unknown site located 1 km north from the road to Tell Tamar. It is a cone-shaped tell ca. 8 m high. The top has 20 m in diameter, and there are several graves to be found there. It has been surrounded by fields on the east side at the time of the KBP survey. A wadi incised 1 m west of 3-5 m wide bed. There is a turf cover on the mound. The KBP retrieved some lithics and little sherds (KBP notes). Out of these sherds one rim fragment was analyzed and subsequently dated into EJZ 1. Similarly to the cases of Umm Khafek and Tell Burqa, however, it is impossible to periodize a site based ona single sherd.

10.2 UPPER KHABUR REGION

SITE NUMBER NAME OF SITE EJZ PERIOD OF NUMBER OF OCCUPATION(proposed by KBP ANALYZED SHERDS (blue) or site´s excavators (white) K 075 Ain Qoubba X 5 K 1 až K10 Joys Spring X 13 K 114 Tell Bisari X 10 K 126 Kashkashok III EJZ 0-3b 5 K 133 Qara Tepe X 6 Tell Brak EJZ 0-5 7 Tell Chagar Bazar EJZ 0-5 10 Tab. 8. Overview of analyzed pottery fragments from Upper Khabur Region with the periodization of sites propossed by KBP and revised by the thesis.

10.2.1 AIN QOUBBA

Site number: K 075 Site size: 3.1 ha Period of occupation: no information The site is located few meters west of Al-Khatuniyah Lakeon first dirt road to El-Hol; “food factory” which has been visible on the southwest as a green rectangle across the wadi. It is situated on the left bank of a wadi, in the downstream direction, away from the spring. The site is eroding from soil covered slopes. Wadi bed now cuts a ledge in the gypsum. If the water level was higher, it would be possible to plant trees and reeds on the bank. Nowadays, water is brought to the village by trucks. The site was surveyed by KBP team in June 1988. No real concentration of buildings has been visible, only a scatter of flints. On top of the site were discovered looted modern graves at bottom of a spring (KBP unpublished notes). In this MA thesis five plain fine ware rim fragments from the site were analyzed. An early to mid third millennium occupation was determined. There had not been any information about the site before KBP. EJZ period represented by analyzed sherds is EJZ 2-3b which shows early to mid third millennium BC occupation. But it is impossible to determine “new”third millennium sites just according few pottery fragments.

10.2.2 JOYS SPRING

Site number: K 001-010 Site size: 0.13 ha Period of occupation: no information The site is located 34 km east of Hasseke, close to the road to El-Hol and the Al-Khatuniyah Lake. Ain Qoubba lies close by direction. North of the site is a small spring. The KBP team surveyed the small mound and its surroundings in June 1988. In the documentation diary of the survey members was the note “nothing to dig – seems to be all on surface”. The collected sherds seem to be mostly

Neolithic; however, few third millennium sherds were retrieved as well. Two of them with incised decoration were precisely dated into later part of Ninevite 5 horizon (EJZ 2-EJZ 3a) (Koubková 2015, 40). Another eleven plain fine ware sherds were also recovered, but their periodization is based only on comparison with literature. EJZ period represented by analyzed sherds is EJZ 2-3b, which shows early to mid third millennium BC occupation. But it is impossible to determine “new”third millennium sites just according few pottery fragments, as in the case of Ain Qoubba, Tell Bisari and Qara Tepe.

10.2.3 TELL BISARI

Site number: K 114 Site size: 7 ha Period of occupation according to KBP: Halaf/ Ubaid/ Uruk/ third millennium (EJ I-II)/ Khabur ware/ Nuzi ware/ Roman? (KBP notes) Tell Bisari is located about 2 kilometers away from town Safa. It is situated on the right bank of the Jaghjagh River. An asphalt road leads directly to site. At the time of the KBP survey, there was a sheep camp on top of it, as well as some modern graves.The northern side has deep erosion gulleys. The team from Yale University searched for 4th millennium occupation. In KBP notes appears information that it is an excellent site to dig (KBP notes). In this MA thesis ten fragments of pottery were analyzed. This includes seven plain fine ware rim fragments, one Metallic Ware rim sherd and two fine ware incised-excised decorated body sherds of Ninevite 5 horizon (see No. 26 in attached catalogue; Koubková 2015, 85).

10.2.4 TELL BRAK

Site number: no site number Site size: 40 ha Period of occupation: EJZ 0-EJZ 5 (Oates 2001; Matthews 2003) Tell Brak is situated about 3 km away fromthe Khabur River, on itsright bank. The main mound is set just at the suburb of the town Tell Brak in the Upper Khabur triangle. It is 40 m high and 40 square meters large. The site has long-lasting occupation levels from Ubaid to Islamic period. There are probably also some PPNB, Halaf and Samara levels,but these stayed unexcavated (Oates 2001, 30; Koubková 2015, 51). The occupation levels are well-attested and well-documented almost throughout the entire Tell Brak. Excavations have been conducted here since 1937 by Max Mallowan (Mallowan 1947), by David and Joan Oates (Oates 2001) from 1976, and by Roger Matthews from 1994 to 1996 (Matthews 2003). In last few years, the surroundings of the site were intensively surveyed by Jesper Eidem and David Warburton as part of the Tell Brak Survey (Grossman 2013, 33; Koubková 2015, 51). Roger Matthews, and David and Joan Oates recovered significant levels of third millennium BC

89 sequences. The occupation levels represented Ninevite 5 ceramics from early Ninevite 5 to Akkadians (Matthews 2003; Oates 2001; Koubková 2015, 51). The KBP team studied the site in 1989 as well, but in theirnotes, they have no information about it. Only few pottery examples were retrieved from the surface. Out of these samples seven were analyzed. Five are plain fine ware rim sherds, one Metallic Ware fragments and one is decorated fine ware sherds with incised-excised decoration typical for Ninevite 5 culture horizon. EJZ period represented by analyzed sherds (EJZ 1-3b) corresponds with published periodization of Tell Brak by its excavators (Oates 2001 and Matthews 2003).

10.2.5 TELL CHAGAR BAZAR

Site number: no site number Site size: 12 ha Period of occupation: EJZ 0-EJZ 5 (e.g. McMahon, Tunca and Baghdo 2001) Tell Chagar Bazar (modern Hettin) is located in the middle of the road from Hassake to Amuda, on the right bank of Wadi Dara, but on the left bank of the Khanzir River. The site consists of two mounds – a 5-ha large smaller mound, and a 7-ha large wider lower mound. Its first excavator was Max Mallowan in 1934 to 1937. In 1999, new excavationsstarted, conducted by Ö. Tunca and A. M. Baghdo from University of Liége and from SDGAM (McMahon, Tunca and Baghdo, 2001, 201; Koubková 2015, 53). The site has many occupational levels, from Neolithic halafian pottery and an continual occupation between the fifth and fourth millennium BC, to an important sequence of third millennium BC pottery. At the end of the third millennium there was a hiatus, which lasted into early second millennium BC (McMahon 2009, 17; Koubková 2015, 53). The KBP surveyed the site in June 1989. According to their notes, they collected from northwestern side where there was Halaf-Ubaid also some Ninevite 5 pottery– two decorated Ninevite 5 sherds (Koubková 2015, 53) and seven plain fine ware rim fragments were analyzed. Like Tell Brak, Tell Chagar Bazar is a well-known and well-published third millennium site, which is dated from EJZ 0 to EJZ 5 period (Lebeau 2011, 14).

10.2.6 TELL KASHKASHOK III

Site number: K 126 Site size: 0.7 ha Period of occupation: EJZ 0-3b (base on Lebeau 2011, 14) Tell Kashkashok III is one of the four mounds located on the right bank of the Aweidj River, which is one of the tributaries of the Khabur River in the western part of Upper Khabur Region. Tell Kashkashok III was excavated by Dr. Antoine Suleiman between 1986 and 1990. The site has occupational levels from Ubaid to EJZ 3 period. EJZ 0 is attested only in alimited fashion, and out of

90 context. The following EJZ periods are represented by architectural levels – a storage building called “Rounded Building” and a chamber tomb called “Headless Warriors” (Hole 1991, 2; Quenet 2011, 26- 27; Koubková 2015, 54). The KBP sampled the site too, but in their documentation diary there is no information about the Tell Kashkashok III, only afew collected pottery sherds stored at Yale University depository. Out of this collection, five fragments were analyzed, all of which are plain fine ware rim fragments.

10.2.7 TELL QARA TEPE

Site number: K 133 Site size: 0.25 ha Period of occupation: no information Qara Tepe is situated south of Sanjak Sardun on the east side of a road. It is the first tell on the road north of Chagar Bazar. On its east side is a small wadi. The mound is conical in shape, with the height of 6 m. The KBP team sampled the tell in June 1991, and recognized modern graves at the top of the site (KBP notes). Few sherds were recovered from the surface – two fine ware sherds with incised decoration typical for Nineivte 5 period (rim and base) (Koubková 2015, 83) and four plain fine ware sherds. The site was subsequently dated into early to mid third millennium (EJZ 1-3a). It seems that Tell Qara Tepe represented so far unknown third millennium BC site. But it is impossible to determine “new”third millennium settlements based only at few pottery fragments, more studies will be necessary to determine the periodization precisely.

10.3 MIDDLE KHABUR REGION

EJZ PERIOD OF SITE NAME OF SITE OCCUPATION(proposed by KBP NUMBER OF ANALYZED NUMBER (blue) or site´s excavators (white SHERDS Tell Atij EJZ 2 – EJZ 3b 4 K 117 Tell Bderi EJZ 3a – EJZ 3b 7 K 116 Tell Mashnaqa EJZ 1 – EJZ 3a 9 K 062 Tell Menakh EJZ 3a-EJZ 3b 6 Tell Mulla Matar EJZ 1 – EJZ 3a 5 K 135 Tell Ziyadeh EJZ 1 – EJZ 2 1 Tab. 9. Overview of analyzed pottery fragments from Middle Khabur Region with the periodization of sites propossed by KBP and revised by the thesis.

10.3.1 TELL ATIJ

Site number: no number Site size: 1.4 ha Period of occupation: EJZ 2-3b (base on Lebeau 2011, 14) Tell Atij is located between Tell Raqa´i and Tell Tuneinir on the right bank of Khabur River. The site was initially excavated by a Canadian team under the leadership of Martin Fortin, in 1986 and 1993. The mound is composed by two hills, which are separated by a 30 m wide range, which should have beenfilled by the riverin past. The first one is 0.6 ha large and second one is 0.8 ha large. The site belongs among the sites with storage grain facilities – six small semi-vaulted plaster silos have been discovered, together with rectangular room and large rooms with three storage jars. Due to the finds of administrative character (cylinder seals, numerical tablets and counters), it is supposed that the site served as redistributional center for other sites (Hole 1991b, 25; Koubková 2015, 38). It is also important to mention the four-meters-thick wall, which surrounded the settlement. The EJZ pottery is represented by late incised Ninevite 5 sherds, cooking pots and also Metallic ware – therefore the EJZ occupation is setting into 3000-2600 BC,with the site being abandoned after that (Fortin and Schwartz 2003, 223; Koubková 2015, 38). The second mound is covered by ten tombs dated also intothe Ninevite 5 period. Metal objects, jewelry and fine ware vessels were recovered there (Weiss 1991, 700; Koubková 2015, 38). The KBP team also documented this site, but without any notes in documentation diary, only few fine ware sherds were retvieved from the surface. Out of these, four plain fine ware rim fragments were in the MA thesis and subsequently dated into EJZ 1-3a, which moved the periodization of site into earlier EJZ period, but for this conclusion more study has to be done.

10.3.2 TELL BDERI

Site number: K 117 and K 127 Site size: 7 ha Period of occupation: EJZ 1-4 (based on Lebeau 2011, 14; Pfälzner 1990). Tell Bderi is situated on the right bank of the Khabur River, just a few kilometers from Tell Ziyadeh (K 135). The site was occupied in the third millennium. The base level there is 281 m below the flood (flood plain is now 285 m), which shows four meters of sediment accumulation from the foundation of the site (Hole and Tonoike 2016, 30). The KBP discovered a small concentration of fourth millennium material here(Late beveled rim bowls and kiln),which was with the help of a boy from the village, who had worked with Germans (KBP notes). The German excavation was led by Peter Pfälzner in 1985 and 1990 as a part of the Tell Sheikh Hamad project. They recovered some Halafian pottery on the surface,but the oldest stratified material comes from the Uruk period. The Early Bronze Age settlement is spanned between2800 and 2350 BC and continued in the subsequent Akkadian period in the Middle Bronze Age, and with a hiatus also in the Late Bronze Age. The last occupation level falls into the 12th Century BC (Pfälzner 1990, 66; Koubková 2015, 38). Seven pottery fragments were analyzed in this thesis. All of them are plain fine ware rim sherds. They were determined, based on the comparison with the catalogue of third millennium sites, to be mid third millennium sherds (EJZ 3a- 3b) pottery sherds. EJZ period represented by analyzed sherds (EJZ 3a-3b) corresponds with periodization proposed by the excavators (Pfälzner 1990).

10.3.3 TELL MASHNAQA

Site number: K 116 Site size: 0.6 ha Period of occupation: EJZ 1-3a (based on Lebeau 2011, 14); Halaf/ Ubaid/ Bronze Age (KBP notes) Tell Mashnaqa is located on the left bank of the Khabur River, few kilometers downstream of Tell Bderi. The site has aflat,cone shaped top (15-20 m). The excavators discovered grill-plan storage buildings (5 x 10 m) there (Hole 1999, 11; Koubková 2015, 42). In 1990 and 1991, the KBP was sampling the site as a part of their program for recovering botanical and zoological remains from sites along the Khabur River. The site is situated in adry steppe, and thus irrigation is practiced more than dry farming (Hole and Tonoike 2016, 363). At the time of the KBP sampling, the river was 300 m west of the site, but in the past, however, the river could reach as far as the base of the site .Ubaid period was eroded from the steep west side. It is hard to tell whether there are any earlier deposits there. The canal cut along the mound does not show any sherds, and so the Ubaid levels should probably be at the base of it. The siteiscut up by ditches and trenches on the northern and eastern sides, but no Uruk deposits were visible - only third millennium BC was recorded (KBP notes). A small KBP step trench consists of fine bedded sand and silt with redeposited sherds. That would suggest that

93 an intensive flood had appeared in the early Ubaid period. The post-Ubaid period ended abruptly and an Uruk period continues in occupation there. Some Middle Uruk ceramictypes were also found, and it seems that thehiatus that came after was followed by long-lasting abandonment, which lasted until the early third millennium (Hole and Tonoike 2016, 27). In this MA thesis there are nine sherds analyzed from the site. Seven of them are plain fine ware rim fragments and two of them are decorated fine waresherds – one body sherd (with grooved decoration) and one rim (with rilled decoration) sherd which do not belong into Ninevite 5 pottery repertoire but it is probably later one. Analyzed pottery fragments are dated from EJZ 1 to EJZ 3b period.

10.3.4 TELL MENAKH

Site number: K 062 Site size: 2.2 ha Period of occupation: third millennium (Kühne and Schneider 1988) (EJZ 3a-3b) The site was surveyed by the KBP in 1988. The team drove their car on a dirt track east from Tell Galal. The site is situated on the right side of the Khabur River, just 5 kilometers from Tell Shedade. On the surface of the site were modern houses and straw storage buildings. No prehistoric deposits have been found here by the Yale University team (KBP notes). The site was also noticed by the Tübingen University team, as a part of the TAVO survey (Kühne and Schneider 1988). The KBP team recovered few pottery fragments from the site, six of which were analyzed in this MA thesis. That includes four plain fine ware rim fragments, one plain fine ware base fragment and one plain fine ware profile of a cup. Based on comparison with well-known third millennium published sites, Tell Menakh should be dated into mid third millennium BC or later. It is a site which was firstly marked by TAVO survey (Kühne and Schneider 1988) and in KBP notes does not appear any information about the third millennium BC occupation.

10.3.5 TELL MULLA MATAR

Site number: no number Site size: 0.54 ha Period of occupation: EJZ 1-3a (based on Lebeau 2011) Tell Mulla Matar is located on the right bank of the Khabur River, just opposite of Tell Kerma and few kilometers from Tell Gudeda. The occupational levels span into Halaf, Ubaid and Uruk periods. After that – between 3200 and 2800 – the absence of earlier Ninevite 5 pottery type indicates a hiatus in settlement. An EJZ occupation is attested by later types of Ninevite 5 pottery and also by the finds of stone ware. Subsequent periods are not presentuntil the Roman and Islamic period (Weiss 1991, 715; Koubková 2015, 44). The KBP sampled the site in 1991 and two decorated fine ware sherds with

94 incised-excised motif, typical for Ninevite 5 pottery, were retrieved (Koubková 2015, 82). Three plain fine ware sherds were also analyzed in MA thesis. These are rim fragments made from fine ware, which are dated into EJZ 2-3a which corresponds with previously known third millennium occupational period.

10.3.6 TELL ZIYADEH

Site number: K 135 Site size: 1 ha Period of occupation: Halaf/ Ubaid/ third millennium (EJ I) (KBP notes) Tell Ziyadeh is located on the right bank of the Khabur River, few kilometers from Khirbet Umm Qsair. The site was first excavated by G. Buccellati in 1988, and Stephan Reimer of IIMAS in 1990. Reimer´s team opened the Area N and excavated eight 4 x 4 meter trenchesthere. He recovered a large mudbrick building with cooking vessels, but no diagnostic Ninevite 5 sherds were found there (Hole and Tonoike 2016, 109). The KBP excavated the site between 1995 and 1997. The sequence of human occupation falls into the fifth millennium (Ubaid and post-Ubaid) with a hiatus until the third millennium (EJZ 1-2) - the Ninevite 5 occupation was recorded. The KBP team discovered a basalt part of the building excavated by Reimer in 1990. The whole area consists of a large storage structure, a set of small rooms and a large open place. The area was enclosed by massive wall on the northern side. The area N was divided into three parts – N1, N2 and N3, which revealed the latest third millennium complex. N3 was consisted of a grill building with four 5 m wide walls, (6 m in length and height 2 m). Between the walls there were 60 cm wide corridors, maybe rooms, with arched openings in the center, which should have served as an access to the next room. The grill building probably served as the base for storage structure similar to the Ubaid period. Next to the grill building was situated a central structure with two or three rooms. The EJZ buildings suggesti that the site was used only for a short period of time – for approximately 100 years. The adjacent buildings are not domestic. At least limited domestic activities took place here though – it is validated by faunal remains and a tannur. It is also possible that domestic buildings are located elsewhere at the site, but still remain covered. The botanical and faunal remains imply the production was probably intended for local subsistence rather than for livestock (Hole and Tonoike 2016, 109-120). Tell Ziyadeh was one of the first early third millennium sites located in the Middle Khabur Basin and it is concurrent with those at Tell Raqa´i, Tell Gudeda, Tell Kneidij and Tell Atij (Hole 1998, 1-2; Hole 2001, 76-77; Koubková 2015, 50). The site was probably abandoned at the end of the EJZ 2 period (2600 BC) (Hole 1998, 3). A third millennium settlement was found at the northern half of the tell. Unfortunately, the site was flooded by the river in 2009 (Hole and Tonoike 2016, 2). Ubaid period was confined to lobe on river side. The lobe may have been partly cut recently. No more than 2 m of Ubaid sequence has been documented on side. The lobe covers a 20 x 35 m area. Some sherds suggest Halaf occupation, but probably belong into a later period, which means the Halaf deposits should be located under the center

95 of the present tell. Some flints in Ubaid style and one Bronze Age sickle were discovered, as well as obsidian chipping debris and blades. No cores have been found, however. Ubaid is similar to Mashnaqa, including pots with interior scratched (KBP notes). In this MA thesis, one fine ware decorated (incised) sherd, was analyzed (Hole 2001, 29; Koubková 2015, 86). But also other pottery fragments were retrieved from the surface and described in recently published book about KBP excavations at Tell Ziyadeh: and one jar sherd with wavy incision on the shoulder was found at Tell Ziyadeh, together with three more painted fine ware fragments, which appear to be the local variety of Ninevite 5. Also, a single sherd of Metallic ware has been recovered, which is very rare on the Khabur River (Hole and Tonoike 2016, 161).

11 OTHER THIRD MILLENNIUM BC SITES - WITHOUT ANALYZED POTTERY MATERIAL - SURVEYD BY KHABUR BASIN PROJECT

Fig. 15. Map showing distribution of other third millenium sites surveyed by KBP (without analyzed pottery fragments) (created in Arc GIS 10.4).

Following chapter deals with third millennium settlements at sites surveyd by KBP. Some of them have been already published in Nicholaus Kouchoukos PhD thesis (Kouchoukos 1998) and their periodization has been already determined in his work (Kouchoukos 1998, 374) but without any references to pottery assemblages (Fig. 15). But there are also sites which were surveyd by KBP and the information about third millennium occupation comes only from KBP documentation diary

(marked by blue background in Tab. 10). These sites are only preliminary dated into third millennium usually without any precise EJZ period.

11.1.1 JEBEL ABD AL-AZIZ EJZ PERIOD OF REFFERENCES: SITE NUMBER NAME OF SITE OCCUPATION(prop osed by KBP (blue) or site´s excavators or earlier surveys(white) K 280 Khirbet Malhat EJZ 1-3b Kühne and Schneider 1988; Kühne 1983; Quenet and Sultan 2014; Smith 2015; Kouchoukos 1998 K 247 Ras al-Beda EJZ 1-2 Kouchoukos 1998; KBP notes K 208 Tell Alaman 3rd millennium Kouchoukos 1998; KBP notes K 173 Tell Khanaizir EJZ 1-2 Kouchoukos 1998; Smith 2015 K 185 Tell Laharn EJZ 1-3b Kouchoukos 1998; KBP notes K 201 Tell Maddaneh EJZ 3a-3b Kouchoukos 1998; Smith 2015; KBP notes K 186 Tell Maraza EJZ 1-3b Kouchoukos 1998; Smith 2015 K 204 Tell Rhara = al-Gharah EJZ 1-2 Kouchoukos 1998; Smith 2015; KBP notes K 194 Tell Salha EJZ 3a – 3b Kouchoukos 1998; Smith 2015; KBP notes K 187 Tell Samad EJZ 1-2 Kouchoukos 1998; Smith 2015; KBP notes K 281 Tell Sha´ir 3rd millennium Musil 1927; Kouchoukos 1998 K 193 Tell Tuechil 3rd millennium Smith 2015; KBP notes K 282 Tell Zahamak at least EBA Moortgat-Correns 1972; Kouchoukos 1998; Smith 2015 K 099 Tell Zayeter EJZ 1-2 Kouchoukos 1998; Smith 2015 K 217 Unknown 3rd millennium KBP notes K 203 Unknown 3rd millennium KBP notes K 152 Unknown 3rd millennium Smith 2015; KBP notes K 156 Unknown EJZ 1-3b Kouchoukos 1998; Smith 2015 K 165 Unknown EJZ 1-3b Kouchoukos 1998; KBP notes K 182 Unknown EJZ 1-2 Kouchoukos 1998 K 197 Unknown EJZ 1 - 2 Kouchoukos 1998; Smith 2015; KBP notes K 198 Unknown 3rd millennium KBP notes; Smith 2015 (Roman-byzantine site) K 202 Unknown EJZ 1-3b Kouchoukos 1998 K 205 Unknown EJZ 1-2 Smith 2015; KBP notes K 206 Unknown EJZ 1-3b Kouchoukos 2015; KBP notes

K 207 Unknown EJZ 1-2 Kouchoukos 1998; Smith 2015; KBP notes K 219 Unknown EJZ 1-3b Kouchoukos 1998; KBP notes K 220 Unknown 3rd millennium KBP notes K 223 Unknown little 3rd mill. KBP notes K 229 Unknown 3rd millennium KBP notes K 230 Unknown 3rd millennium KBP notes K 234 Unknown EJZ 1-3b Kouchoukos 1998; KBP notes K 235 Unknown EJZ 2-3b Kouchoukos 1998; KBP notes K 238 Unknown EJZ 2-3b Kouchoukos 1998; KBP notes K 239 Unknown 3rd millennium KBP notes K 243 Unknown EJZ 0-1 KBP notes K 245 Unknown 3rd millennium KBP notes K 246 Unknown 3rd millennium KBP notes K 250 Unknown 3rd millennium KBP notes K 252 Unknown 3rd millennium KBP notes K 255 Unknown EJZ 1-2 Kouchoukos 1998 K 256 Unknown Bronze Age KBP notes K 266 Unknown 3rd millennium KBP notes Tab. 10. Overview of other third millenium sites surveyed by KBP in area around Jebel Abd al-Aziz (Kouchoukos 1998, 374; Smith 2015, 393-394, 406-407; KBP notes).

11.1.2 KHIRBET MALHAT

Fig. 16. Kranzhügel type of settlement at Khirbet Malhat (created in Arc GIS 10.4).

Site number: K280 Site size: 33 ha Period of occupation: EJZ 1-3b Khirbet Malhat or Malhat ed-Deru is large site located deep in the steppe of the lower part of Western Jazirah. Although the site has never been surveyed by the KBP, Nicholas Kouchoukos described the settlement in his PhD thesis with mark of KBP (K 280). The site represented a typical Kranzhügel

(Fig. 16). Its whole area is surrounded by a circular outer wall measuring 700 x 600 m. The citadel reaches 10-11m. There is impressive quality and access togroundwaterat the site. The site was first visited and described by the Czech missionary Alois Musil (Musil 1927; 87-89; Kouchoukos 1998, 386).

11.1.3 RAS AL-BEDA

Site number: K247 Site size: 0.1-3 ha Period of occupation: EJ I-II The site was surveyed by the KBP in June 1995. It is located on the top of the Jebelet al-Beidha. Max von Oppenheim, too, visited this region and described the site, where he found three large relief stelaeand one 2.5 to 3 m high stela. He subsequently interpreted the place as a religious site (Smith 2015, 52). The site is 30 m long in diameter. It took the members of the KBP 20 minutes to walk up from the base of K 246 (unknown name) to the site. It was probably nomad camp area. Thequality of soil is poor there, due to the gypsum and limestone bedrock, so the area has never been used for cultivation. The site is also the highest point of Jebel Abd al-Aziz (KBP notes).

11.1.4 TELL ALAMAN

Site number: K 208 Site size: 1 ha Period of occupation: 3rd millennium BC/Iron Age The mound is situated several kilometers west of Tell Mu´azzar (K 039). Adeep wadi (ca. 5m deep and 10 m wide) was located in the vicinity of the site. A A modern village covers the tell, which made it difficult to collect sherds, but the site is certainly dated to thethird millennium BC. In the project diary there was this note: “We drove about 3 km NW to the edge of deep wadi when people at 208 said: there were antiquities” (KBP notes).

11.1.5 TELL KHANAIZIR (ABU KHANEZIR)

Site number: K 173 Site size: 2 ha Period of occupation: third millennium (EJ I-II) Tell Khanaizir lies few kilometersaway from Tell Burqa (K 174). On the eastern edge is deep wadi. The mound should be a natural rock. Its top is covered by graves. The area in its vicinity is uncultivated on the southeastern side but fully cultivated on thenorth-western side. A modern village is situated ca. 2 km to the south. In the time of survey there was no water at thesite. The KBP team recovered sparse sherds and abundant lithics (few pieces made from obsidian). Nicholas Kouchoukos

100 found few sherds on thewest side of afifteen-meter deep gorge located in the vicinity of thesite (KBP notes).

11.1.6 TELL LAHARN

Site number: K 185 Site size: 3.5 ha Period of occupation: third millennium/Roman/Byzantine/Islamic The mound is about 4 m high and it is situated in the middle of dry area intermittently cut by wadis that are incised and form wide valleys, sometimes deeply incised 4-6 m. These wadis seem to appearevery 0.5 – 1 km and usually have vegetation (sometimes reeds) at the bottom. The tell is mostly natural and, at the time of survey, had about eight mud or stone buildings on the top. It was basically a sheep camp. The KBP team recovered third-millennium chip stone industries, as well as a typical sickle and some fine stone chipping from a later period (KBP notes).

11.1.7 TELL MADDANEH

Site number: K 201 Site size: 1.2 ha Period of occupation: Paleolithic/ third millennium (EJ II-IIIb) Tell Maddaneh is a conical mound around 10 m high. Small wadi was situated on thesouthernside of the KBP surface survey. The entire summit was covered by graves; the area measuring 40 x 30 m. The mound had dense vegetation which covered the top. During the survey, the site was surrounded by cultivated fields. Just 100 m north-east there was a couple of houses and a wall. This may have been a mostly natural hill. A large section of the southern edge of the site is cut into bedrock. This stone covers at least the lower part of the site and is solid rock, which opens into a chamber ca. 3 m down – it is probable that it is a cistern. On the surfacethe KBP retrieved some flints (KBP notes).

11.1.8 TELL MARAZA

Site number: K 186 Site size: 2.6 ha Period of occupation: Iron Age Tell Maraza is situated 15 km south of Jebel Abd al-Aziz. A TAVO survey also describedthe site and mentioned a large lower town next to the mounds on thenortheastern side (Kühne 1978-1979, 185). Kühne dated the site to the EBA with a continuous occupation into the Islamic era. On the other hand, the KBP dates the settlement just into Iron Age (KBP notes; Smith 2015, 221). Such continuation, however, is very unlikely, and it is therefore possible that it is only the tell itself which should be dated into EBA and also the Iron Age, whilethe adjacent square site can be set into later periods (Smith

101

2015, 221). Atthe time of the KBP survey, the site was surrounded by irrigated fields but no evidence of wadi was found, just two houses with pumps. No graves have been on the top. Very few sherds were retrieved from its surface (KBP notes).

11.1.9 TELL RHARA

Site number: K 204 Site size: 0.25 ha Period of occupation according to KBP: third millennium (EJ I-IIIb)/ Iron Age/ Roman/ Byzantine/ Islamic Period of occupation represented by analyzed material: no information Tell Rhara is situated few kilometers from Tell Khazneh in northern piedmont of Jebel Abd al-Aziz. The site was covered by vegetation and there were little villages near it to thenorth and south. The mound is 4 m high and has 50 m in diameter. There were probably first houses in third millennium BC, and a large lower town was possibly located on the north side. Approximately 300 m south-east there is a group of low mounds which the KBP wanted to survey next season (KBP notes).

11.1.10 TELL SALHA

Site number: K 194 – K 195 Site size: 3.9 ha Period of occupation according to KBP: Halaf/ Ubaid/fourth millennium/ third millennium (EJ II- IIIb)/ Iron/ Roman/ Byzantine/ Islamic The site is located next to Tell Tokal (K 192), K 197 and 1.5 km north of K 193 onthe northwestern side of the foothills of Jebel Abd al-Aziz. 200 m east from it are five blogs of hamlet, pumps and associated facilities and gardens. The mound has 50 m in diameter and is 2 m high. There was no visible wadi, but cultivated fields were present at the time of the KBP survey. The KBP retrieved sherds belonging to the Halaf, Ubaid, 4th millennium and 3rd millennium BC there (KBP notes).

11.1.11 TELL SAMAD

Site number: K 187 Site size: 0.6 ha Period of occupation according to KBP: third millennium (EJ I-II) Tell Samad is located around 10 kilometers east of Tell Mu´azzar (K 039). The hill is approximately 90 m long and 60 m wide, lying alongside a deeply incised wadi on the north and there are some 100 m to the south. On the top of it are modern graves. Bedrock is gypsum and surface is nearly

102 devoid of soil, except on the mound itself. The mound was covered by lithics but sherds were very limited (KBP notes).

11.1.12 TELL SHA´IR

Fig. 17. Kranzhügel type of settlement at Tell Sha´ir (created in Arc GIS 10.4).

Site number: K 281 Site size: 21 ha Period of occupation: third millennium Tell Sha´ir is located far from the area of Jebel Abd al-Aziz in the Western Jezirah. It is one of the kranzhügel sites (Fig. 17) which are situated at the edge of gypsum sink where arable soil allow limited cultivation. KBP did not survey this area of Western Jezirah Nicholas Kouchoukos mentioned the site in his PhD thesis with mark of KBP (K 281) (Kouchoukos 1998, 387).

11.1.13 TELL TUECHIL

Site number: K 193 Site size: 2.25 ha Period of occupation: third millennium/ Iron Age/ Roman/ Byzantine/ Islamic Tell Tuechil is located on the western edge of the studied region just next to Tell Salha (K 194). On top of the mound is now situated Kurdish village. There are two wells on sides of the settlement. Men said to the KBP team that they found a statue just hundred meters south of the main mound and also a large Byzantine slab with mark on it, and a large limestone on southern edge of the site. It seemed to be a small third millennium site based on the other stones and bricks found there. There was an irrigated garden on the eastern side of the site at the time of the survey (KBP notes).

103

11.1.14 TELL ZAHAMAK

Fig. 18. Kranzhügel type of settlement at Tell Zahamak (created in Arc GIS 10.4).

Site number: K 282 Site size: 5 ha maybe 10 ha or up to 50 ha Period of occupation: no information Tell Zahamak is located few kilometers from Tell Sha´ir (K 281) in the Western Jazirah, far from the Jebel Abd al-Aziz. It lies in the same zone as Malhat ed-Deru. The KBP did not survey this area of Western Jazirah but Nicholas Kouchoukos mentioned the site in his PhD thesis with mark of KBP (K 282) (Kouchoukos 1998, 387).

11.1.15 TELL ZEYTER

Site number: K 099 Site size: 3 ha Period of occupation: Ubaid/ Third millennium (/EJ I-IIIb)/ Roman/ Byzantine/ Islamic Tell Zayeter is located few kilometers from Tell Mabtuh Sharqi (K 128) and approximately 8 km west of Khabur River. The mound is 3 ha large and measures 6-8 m in height. It lies south of an asphalt road leading from Hassake to flat steppe. One hundred meters to the west lies a small wadi. The KBP retrieved few early third millennium sherds on the north side of the mound, and many obsidian blades on south-west side (KBP notes).

104

11.1.16 UNKNOWN SITE K 152

Site number: K 152 Site size: 21.8 ha Period of occupation: third millennium/ Iron Age/ Roman/ Byzantine/ Islamic K 152 is located in the vicinity of Tell Khazneh (K 157). TheKBP documentation diary does not contain any information about the site. The above mentioned notes come from the PhD thesis of Smith, who gathered the information from satellite imagery and Google Earth and other remote sensing data. He also noted that the K 152 is more likely to be a Neo-Assyrian site than a third millennium one (KBP notes; Smith 2015, 406).

11.1.17 UNKNOWN SITE K 156

Fig. 19. Kranzhügel type of settlement at site K 156 (created in Arc GIS 10.4).

Site number: K 156 Site size: 7.3 ha Period of occupation: third millennium Site K 156 is located between Tell Mabtuh Sharqi (K 128) and Tell al-Maghr (K 155) and 2.5 km west of Tell Khazneh (K 157). The KBP team described the tell as a kranzhügel type of settlement (Fig. 19) due to its two-tiered fortification but on the CORONA imagery the central mound seems to be square with a deep depression from east to west in the middle of the mound. It also seems to lack a clear surrounding wall. It appears, however, that an outer wall is visible in 60 m distance on north, northwest and west. This possible lower town is so narrow on CORONA imagery, that it is doubtful whether the population made some activity in this area or whether it was an empty place. Hollow ways probably lead from the site to the south (Smith 2015, 215).

105

11.1.18 UNKNOWN SITE K 165

Site number: K 165 Site size: 0.1 - 3 ha Period of occupation: third millennium (EJ I-IIIb) Site K 165 is located approximately 15 kilometers from Tell Mabtuh Gharbi (K 151) to the west. It is a 5-m high mound and its surrounding by other hills made line of hills. A small wadi has been in the vicinity of the tell at the time of the KBP survey. There were also some man-made holes (3 x 5 m) that look like trenches. On the top of the mound lies a tomb with a wall on the southern side (KBP notes).

11.1.19 UNKNOWN SITE K 182

Site number: K 182 Site size: 0.1 – 3 ha Period of occupation: third millennium (EJ I-II)/second millennium Site K 182 is situated 5 kilometers from Tell Trafawi (K 241) and Tell Metyaha (K 183) on southern foothills of Jebel Abd al-Aziz. The site is located on the edge of a wadi incised some 8 m into sediments. The site is on the east bank and it is visible from a distance as a slightelevation in terrain. Ruins of stone and mud buildings are on the top. 200 m downstream are three more buildings. This is a small hamlet, which probably used to be part of the garden with irrigated grain fields located above. There was also a pump. The wadi probably had enough water to do some irrigation via walls and pumps. The KBP found sparse scatterings of sherds here. Little gravel lumps along the way seem to contain sherds composed from second and third millennium stones (KBP notes).

11.1.20 UNKNOWN SITE K 197

Site number: K 197 Site size: 3.3 ha Period of occupation: third millennium (EJ I-II)/ Roman/ Byzantine/ Islamic K 197 is located few kilometers of Tell Salha (K 194). It has 75 m in diameter and it is 3-4 m high. The site was cultivated at the time of the KBP survey, and was covered by avery soft soil, which made it extremely difficult to find sherds on the surace. No surface features have been found there, just a few solitary rocks lying on the surface (KBP notes).

106

11.1.21 UNKNOWN SITE K 198

Site number: K 198 Site size: 2.1 ha Period of occupation: third millennium/ Roman/ Byzantine/ Islamic Site K 198 is situated just 150 m south of K 197. It is a single house mound, 1 m high, with 25 m in diameter. At the time of the KBP there were cultivated flat fields. No water source has been visible in its vicinity though (KBP notes).

11.1.22 UNKNOWN SITE K 202

Site number: K 202 Site size: 0.1 – 3 ha Period of occupation: third millennium (EJ I-IIIb)/ Roman/ Byzantine/ Islamic The site is located about 2 km west of Tell Maddaneh (K 201) in the northwestern part of Jebel Abd al-Aziz foothills. There are graves on the southern side and a hamlet on thewestern side. The summit is absolutely clear. The site is surrounded by irrigated fields and a canal just south of the site and large village 250 m west. The KBP only retrieved a small number of sherds from the surface (KBP notes).

11.1.23 UNKNOWN SITE K 203

Site number: K 203 Site size: 0.1 – 3 ha Period of occupation: Halaf/ Ubaid/ third millennium The mound is located few hundred meters west of Tell Ghasra (K 168). It is 6 m high and 50 m wide. Its top was covered by a high turf at the time of the KBP survey. Lots of small sherds and many flints were recovered from the survey. On the top of the mound are graves. A wadi is incised 1-1.5 km west of the tell (KBP notes).

107

11.1.24 UNKNOWN SITE K 205

Site number: K 205 Site size: 2 ha Period of occupation: third millennium/ Iron Age The site K 205 is located rightnext to Tell Rhara (K 204). The local surroundings were cultivated in the time of KBP survey. The site comprises of a group of four low mounds. Asmall wadi is situated 50 m to the east. On its top are four houses with a central clear area. The houses are probably from the third millennium BC with later occupation during the Islamic period. (KBP notes).

11.1.25 UNKNOWN SITE K 206

Site number: K 206 Site size: 0.1 - 3 ha Period of occupation: third millennium (EJ I-IIIb) K 206 is situated just next to Tell al-Maghr (K 155). It is a 2-m high mound with 50 m in diameter. There were many graves found on the top of it by the KBP survey, as well as many burned areas(possibly lime burned). There were places where ash has been scooped out of an area roughly 4 x 4 m and piled around the edges. There is no certain evidence of what was being burned (KBP notes).

11.1.26 UNKNOWN SITE K 207

Site number: K 207 Site size: 2.2 ha Period of occupation: third millennium (EJ I-II)/ Iron Age The site is situated between Tell Mabtuh Sharqi (K 128) and Tell Khazneh (K 157) on the east bank of a deeply incised wadi. The mound is 5 m high and the northern part of its top is covered by tombs.. Possible walls were visible atthe time of the KBP survey, but it may have been merely the rest of the camp. The KBP recovered few third millennium pottery sherds. A turf and an Islamic building covered the top. The surrounding area as far as 300 m from the tell has been examined, but nothing was found (KBP notes).

108

11.1.27 UNKNOWN SITE K 217

Site number: K 217 Site size: 0.5 ha Period of occupation: third millennium/ Neoassyrian/ early Islamic The site is situated between Tell Mabtuh Sharqi (K 128) and Tell Khazneh (K 157) on the east bank of a deeply incised wadi. The mound is 5 m high and the northern part of its top is covered by tombs.. Possible walls were visible atthe time of the KBP survey, but it may have been merely the rest of the camp. The KBP recovered few third millennium pottery sherds. A turf and an Islamic building covered the top. The surrounding area as far as 300 m from the tell has been examined, but nothing was found (KBP notes).

11.1.28 UNKNOWN SITE K 219

Site number: K 219 Site size: 1 ha Period of occupation: fourth millennium/ third millennium (EJ I-IIIb) The site K 219 is located 10 km south of Khirbet ed-Deeb (K 216) on the southern foothills of Jebel Abd al-Aziz. The KBP team surveyed the site in June 1995 and discovered grain silos and grain storage ca. 1 km from the mound. A wadi was been situated in close vicinity of the tell. It was 5 m wide and incised 2-3 m deep. Dry-farming agriculture has mostly been used there at the time of the KBP survey with only limited usage of pump irrigation. The KBP team recovered just a few sherds and lithics (KBP notes).

11.1.29 UNKNOWN SITE K 220

Site number: K 220 Site size: 0.9 ha Period of occupation: predominantly third millennium K 220 is situated on the northeastern edge of Jebel Abd al-Aziz foothills,right next to K 223. The KBP team followed a gravel road ca. 1 km across the road which leads to site. No major drainage was found in its vicinity, just small wadi - 100 m to the east. Two eroded room buildings were discovered on the top of the mound and only limited number of sherds has been retrieved (10exactly) (KBP notes).

109

11.1.30 UNKNOWN SITE K 223

Site number: K 223 Site size: 2.5 ha Period of occupation: third millennium/ first millennium K 223 is located next to K 220 on the northeastern part of Jebel Abd al-Aziz foothills. It has remained practically untouched by modern times. It wascovered by a small number of old graves (6). The mound is 3 m high and adjacent to a flat wadi on the west side. No village was located near the site at the time of KBP survey. Only a limited number of sherds and lithics was found on the site (KBP notes).

11.1.31 UNKNOWN SITE K 229

Site number: K 229 Site size: 2.2 ha Period of occupation: third millennium Site K 229 is located on an E-W road leading from Shedade near the the Khabur River. The mound is 2 m high and on the top of it are situated ruins of single-room building. Only small sherds were collected from the surface by the KBP members in 1995. The surrounding area is flat and cultivated. Only isolated buildings are scattered in the area – a village about 1 km to the south. Well water was found at the east end of the site. This is apparently a low spot in drainage. The KBP retrieved a limited number of sherds and abundant lithics, which seemed to be dated predominately to the third millennium BC, whereas the sherds appeared to be from the first millennium BC (KBP notes). Unfortunately, no pottery fragments from this sitewere analyzed in this MA theis.

11.1.32 UNKNOWN SITE K 230

Site number: K 230 Site size: 0.75 ha Period of occupation: third millennium/ Islamic Site K 230 is located on the main road leading west from Shedade, ca. 1 km to the right. On the top of it are two abandoned house compounds. Its west side is covered by grass and Artemisia. On the northwestern part ofthe mound is burned circle. The KBP retrieved scatteredbroken sherds and lithics and numerous of basalt fragments. The site was surrounded by flat and cultivated fields in the June 1995 when the KBP surveyed the mound (KBP notes).

110

11.1.33 UNKNOWN SITE K 234

Fig. 20. Kranzhügel type of settlement at site K 234 (created in Arc GIS 10.4).

Site number: K 234 Site size: 7 ha Period of occupation: third millennium (EJ I-IIIb) Site K 234 is situated only few kilometers from Tell Harba (K 178) and Tell Tromba (K 179). The road leads east-west from an old water tower and around abandoned houses just south of the site. A small wadi was situated on western edge of the water tower at the time of the survey. The mound was sampled by the KBP in June 1995. According to the KBP notes it is the kranzhügel type of settlement without central mound (Fig. 20) (KBP notes).

11.1.34 UNKNOWN SITE K 235

Site number: K 235 Site size: 0.1-3 ha Period of occupation according to KBP: third millennium (EJ II-IIIb) K 235 is located approximately 10 km northwest of Tell Mabtuh Gharbi (K 151). A modern village covered the top of the mound at the time of the KBP survey. The tell is large, natural hill with a third millennium veneer. Very few sherds and lithics were found. The areasurrounding the site was all cultivated in June 1995 and a small wadi was located to the west of it (KBP notes).

111

11.1.35 UNKNOWN SITE K 238

Site number: K 238 Site size: 0.1-3 ha Period of occupation: third millennium (EJ II-IIIb) Site K 238 is located north of Tell Harba (K 178) and few kilometersfrom K 182. The KBP surveyed the mound in June 1995.At that time,a small village was located ontop of the mound and a deep wadi lied on its east side. The tell itself is apparently a natural hill with scattered terrace remnantsfrom the third millennium BC on top of it. The few artifacts recovered from around the perimeter slopes do not indicate any possibility of an existence a lower town. Very few sherds were retrieved from the surface (KBP notes).

11.1.36 UNKNOWN SITE K 239

Site number: K 239 Site size: 0.4 ha Period of occupation: third millennium/ Islamic The precise location of the site is unknown, however, it should be situated somewhere in the area around Jebel Abd al-Aziz. The tell is situated next to broad, deep, V-shaped wadi, where all fields were cultivated at the time of KBP survey in June 1995. Also, some pump irrigation was used. The wadi was approximately 7 m deep. There are ruins of houses on top of the tell.. Most sherds were retrieved from the wadi rather than the site itself (KBP notes), andnone of them were analyzed in this MA thesis.

11.1.37 UNKNOWN SITE K 243

Site number: K 243 Site size: 0.25 ha Period of occupation: EJZ 0 ? The site is located just a few kilometersaway from the Jebel et-Beda, on the western part of the studied area. The KBP explored the region in June 1995. The mound has an elongate shape with the width of 50 meters and the height of 4 meters. The remains of mudbricks on the top suggest human occupation in the past. There was evidence of modern human occupation on the moundas well, but most of the houses were vacant. There was only a small number of pottery sherds on the surface. According to the KBP notes, an early Ninevite 5 painted pottery was recovered at the surface of the mound (KBP unpublished notes). The revision of the ceramic material at Yale University by the author of this MA thesis could not confirm this information, however.

112

11.1.38 UNKNOWN SITE K 245

Site number: K 245 Site size: 0.25 ha Period of occupation: third millennium Site K 245 is located few kilometersaway from the main dirt road east of Jebelet ed-Beda,right next to the unknown site K 243. There is also a deep wadi located between the road and the site. A deep wadi cuts into the gypsum with flat, sandy bottom. Some tamarisk trees grew along the bottom of the wadi. Steppe vegetation surrounded the mound. It is probably a natural hill, with occupation around. The top is covered by tombs. This is probablya favorite local burial site for nomads (the modern and probably also the ancient). The KBP team retrieved a large number of sherd scattersand local lithics there (KBP notes).

11.1.39 UNKNOWN SITE K 246

Site number: K 246 Site size: 0.3 - 1 ha Period of occupation: third millennium Unknown site K 246 is located few kilometersaway from Ras el-Beda (K 247). The KBP team drove to the closest village and then crossed country to the base of hill. They found astone walled “city” – a number of stone walled compounds widely separated by cisterns. There were lots of flints on the slope – “looks like chipping area in typical third millennium style”. There is an excellent view of the steppe and the Jebel from K 246 (KBP notes).

11.1.40 UNKNOWN SITE K 250

Site number: K 250 Site size: 0.15 ha Period of occupation: third millennium/ Islamic Site K 250 is located just north-east of Tell Mabtuh Sharqi (K 128). The KBP surveyed the site in June 1995 and found there a scatter of third millennium material. The shape of mound is more or less circular and in good condition (KBP notes).

113

11.1.41 UNKNOWN SITE K 252

Site number: K 252 Site size: 0.25 ha Period of occupation: third millennium Site K 252 is situated 2.5 km down a wadi from Tell Mabtuh Sharqi (K 128). The KBP team documented the site in June 1995 and found various third millennium sherds and sparse flints including one large bladethere. The site probably served for local short term settlement (KBP notes).

11.1.42 UNKNOWN SITE K 255

Site number: K 255 Site size: 0.1 – 3 ha Period of occupation: third millennium (EJ I-II) Site K 255 is located few kilometers away from Tell Mabtuh Gharbi (K 151). The KBP notes do not contain any information about this site. Only Nicholas Kouchoukos informs about the mound in his PhD thesis in the map of the settlement in Jebel Abd al-Aziz area (Kouchoukos 1998, 374).

11.1.43 UNKNOWN SITE K 256

Site number: K 256 Site size: 0.3 ha Period of occupation: Halaf/ Ubaid/ Bronze Age/ Iron Age Site K 256 is located in the western part of the studied region, just few kilometers south of the unknown site K 198.The KBP team surveyed the mound in June 1995. Few pottery sherds and some flints and blades were recovered there, unfortunately however, the notes made by members of the KBP regarding the site are illegible, and so it was impossible to gain any further information about it (KBP notes).

11.1.44 UNKNOWN SITE K 266

Site number: K 266 Site size: 0.9 ha Period of occupation: third millennium/ Islamic Site K 266 is located few kilometersfrom Tell Hammam Sharqi on the northern foothills of Jebel Abd al-Aziz. The site is situated 0.5 km from Tulul Khanzir on the edge of a wadi. In the KBP notes, the site is marked as Tell Khazna B. The KBP survey in 1995 recorded mostly plants, but also some architectural remains on the surface of the site. The surface structure includes a circular building with

114

two rooms. The shape of the mound is roughly circular and the KBP team recovered very few pottery fragments and some lithics – flint blades on its surface (KBP notes).

11.2 UPPER KHABUR REGION

SITE NUMBER NAME OF SITE EJZ PERIOD OF REFERENCES: OCCUPATION(proposed by KBP (blue) or site´s excavators or earlier surveys(white) K 153 Khirbet as-Siha 3rd millennium KBP notes K 129 Tell Khazne - EJZ 0-2 Amirov 2010; Ibragimova Hazne 2014; KBP notes K 113 Tell Marite 3rd millennium KBP notes K 122 Unknown 2300-2200 KBP notes

Tab. 11. Overview of other third millenium sites surveyed by KBP in Upper Khabur region (KBP notes).

11.2.1 KHIRBET AS-SIHA

Site number: K 153, K 154 Site size: 0.8 ha Period of occupation: third millennium/ Iron Age/ Roman/ Byzantine/ Islamic The site is located about 10 kilometers north of Khabur River and about 20 kilometers east of Tell Brak, in the proximity of one tributary of the Khabur River. The KBP team surveyed the site in 1989, but no other information could be found in their documentation diary (KBP notes).

11.2.2 TELL HAZNE

Site number: K 129 Site size: 2.5 ha Period of occupation: no information Tell Hazne is located 25 km northeast from Hassake, in the lower part of Wadi Khanzir River. The site consists of two mounds – Hazne I and Hazne II. The excavation was conducted by the Russian Academy of Sciences during the 1988-2010 seasons. The researchers dated the site into six consecutive chronological periods, from the Late Chalcolithic 3 to the Ninevite 5 period (Amirov 2010, 233; Ibragimova2014, 83). It is assumed that the site has a religious function within the rural district in the vicinity of site has religious character within a rural district (Amirov 2010). Monumental buildings circular in plan (with diameter about 80 m) were unearthed at the site, and the whole settlement was surrounded by a massive stone wall (2 m thick and 4 m height) (Amirov 2010, 405). The excavators found mass material distribution of chipped stone industry: 1477 items dated from all periods investigated by Elmira Ibragimova (Ibragimova 2014). Part of ceramic collection (11% of whole assemblages) was investigated by Shakhmardan Amirov (Amirov 2010) but a large number of

115 ceramic finds remained unstudied. .Period 1 (2800-2700 BC) was the latest occupational period after which the inhabitants left this settlement. It is marked by changes in the site structure and economic wealth (Ibragimova 2014, 89). The KBP notes do not contain any information about the site. There is just a brief note that it is a Russian site.

11.2.3 TELL MARITE

Site number: K 113 Site size: 0.4 ha Period of occupation: Halaf/ Ubaid/ third millennium The site is located just a few kilometers from Amuda, which is situated nearthe Turkish border, on the northern side of the Upper Khabur region. The KBP studied the site in March 1989, but no other information is mentioned in the documentation diary (KBP notes).

11.2.4 UNKNOWN SITE K 122

Site number: K 122 Site size: 1.2 ha Period of occupation: Early Bronze Age (2300-2000)/ Khabur The site K 122 is located 42 kilometers from Tell Kashkashok II (K 120). The tell is roughly oval with the width of 75 m, length 150 m and with the height of 1.5 m. The site is situated on the left bank of a wadi, which seems to meander across broad area here. A low hill, possibly partly natural, is surrounded by flat land. The KBP team surveyed the site in August 1990 and in their documentation diary is the note: “I doubt there is evidence of deposit to do much here”. Despite that, the KBP documented some sherds and plaster close to surface in one spot. An Islamic grave also disturbed the surface on southeast side (KBP notes).

116

11.3 MIDDLE KHABUR REGION

SITE NUMBER NAME OF SITE EBA OCCUPATION REFERENCES PERIOD K 138 Khirbet Umm Qseir 3rd millennium KBP notes; Hole and Johnson 1986-87; Hole and Tonoike 2016 K 077až082 Tell Kerma EJZ 1-2 Lebeau 2011, 14

Tab. 12. Overview of other third millenium sites surveyed by KBP in Middle Khabur Region (KBP notes and database).

11.3.1 KHIRBET UMM QSEIR

Site number: K 138 Site size: 7 ha Period of occupation: Halaf/ Ubaid/ Uruk/ Bronze Age The ruins of small palace Khirbet Umm Qsair are located on the left bank of the Khabur River, just opposite the Tell Ziyadeh site. It is the earliest known in situ settlement located in the Middle Khabur basin. Radiocarbon dates suggest an occupation until 5800-5200 BC (McCorriston 1998, 46). The mound has two sections - one is 2.4 ha in size and second one measure 6.6 ha. The east side is elongate, with a U-shaped room of gypsum ruins, which looks Islamic. The western part is a small dome. The site is cut in half by a pine trench and ditch. The bank is about two meters above water, with no water flow, only the bank being apparent. Gardens surrounded the site at the time of KBP survey, in June 1984. The KBP collected middle Halafian pottery, one incised sherd, some Bronze Age and obsidian blades (KBP notes). The layers at Umm Qsair consist of material dated into LC 4 (Middle Uruk) and pits below, which contain post-Ubaid sherds. No post-Ubaid structures were discovered however. A second millennium settlement, represented by buildings which destroyed the third millennium levels, was also discovered at the site (level 3)(Hole and Yukiko 2016, 26; Koubková 2015, 49).

11.3.2 TELL KERMA

Site number: K 074 – K 082 Site size: 0.3 ha Period of occupation: third millennium (EJ I-II) Tell Kerma is situated on the right bank of the Khabur River, few kilometers away from Tell Mulla Matar. The site was dated into the EJZ 1 – EJZ 2 thanks to charred grain in one room of the storage facilities (Hole 1999, 11; Hole 2001, 77; Koubková 2015, 41). The storage facilities at Tell Kerma were also defended by a massive wall (Fortin 1998, 21; Koubková 2015, 41). The KBP team surveyed the area around Tell Kerma in July 1988. A series of gravel hills was found north of Tell Kerma, with a mud brick blog on top of one of them, and just east of Tell Kerma, the team documentedtwo burial

117 tumuli (the hill is known as Sheikh Serrine), one of which had a basalt base. Only a limited amount of pottery sherds was retrieved from the Tell Kerma field walk. Flints and blades prevailed in the surface collection (KBP notes).

118

12 SETTLEMENT PATTERNS (DISCUSSION)

The following chapter deals with general information about the settlementpatternsin the studied areas, and presents the conclusions, which can be reached about the settlement distribution in the studied area, based on the analyzed fine ware pottery material (see Fig. 21).

Fig. 21. Map showing all sites mentioned in the MA thesis with analyzed pottery material ( circle) and without analyzed pottery fragments (square) (created in Arc GIS 10.4).

119

During the third millennium, the settlement patterns changed dramatically throughout the whole Northern Mesopotamia. After the Uruk collapse (3000 BC) many settlements changed from small villages into large urban centers – especially in the middle of the third millennium (2500 BC), the population in theseurban centers reached up to 10 000 – 15 000 people) (Kouchoukos 1998, 317). One example of these early urban centers is the “Kranzhügel” type of settlement, which started to appear around 2700 BC (Meyer 2014, 14-18). It consists of an elevated Upper town, which is surrounded by a Lower town. Whole city is encircled by a massive wall (looking like a rampart). Only a small number of settlements hasbeen intensively studied, these are: Tell Chuera, Tell Mabtuh Sharqi, Tell Beydar and Kharab Sayyar (Kühne 1976; Meyer 2000; Lebeau and Suleiman, 2005; Gernez and Souleiman 2013). According to study of aerial photographs made by Willem Van Liére and Jean Lauffray in the 1950s it seems that this type of settlement occurred just in the area of Western Jezirah. These sites are usually covered by typical ceramic assemblages – Metallic Ware (Meyer 2014, 14-18).

12.1 JEBEL ABD AL-AZIZ AREA

The KBP team surveyed 62 sites in the area around Jebel Abd al-Aziz, which were subsequently examined as third millennium BC sites. However, the analyzed pottery material comes from only 26 sites see Fig. 21.). The reconstruction of the settlement patterns in this area is therefore very difficult as well, due to thelackof well-studied pottery sequences from the third millennium BC in the region. The well published pottery assemblages from nearby sites such as Tell Melebiya, Tell Brak and Tell Chuera are good for the comparanda with the material from the KBP dated into later period, but for the material dated into an earlier period there are no good pottery sequences to compare with (Kouchoukos 1998, 367). The analyzed pottery material comes from eight sites, which had been known before the KBP survey9: Tell al-Maghr (K155); Tell Mu´azzar (K 039), Tell Baroud (K 049), Tell Mabtuh Sharqi (K 128), Tell Mahrum (K 180), Tell Metyaha (K 183), Tell Marthya (K 184) and Tell Mabtuh Gharbi (K 151). Four of these sites are also defined as kranzhügel: Tell al-Maghr, Tell Mu´azzar, Tell Mabtuh Sharqi, Tell Mahrum. Sixteen sites with third millennium occupation were determined for the first time: Tell Khazneh (K 157), Tell Aklef (K 158), Tell Hammam Sharqi (K 161), Tell Hammam Gharbi (K 162), Tell Ghasra (K 168), Tell Burqa (K 174), Tell Mabtuh South (K 175), Tell Harba (K 178), Tell Tromba (K 179), Tell Tuenan (K 181), Tell Tokal (K 192), Khirbet ed-Deeb (K 216), Umm Khafekh (K 240), Tell Trafawi (K 241) and two unknown sites (K 189 and K 190). The results of the analysis of the pottery material showed, that two other sites should be regarded as third millennium, too: Tell al-Arbidi (K 150) and Tulul Khanzir (K 242), but this determination is based only on the analysis of two fragments, and therefore the pottery from these sites still needs to be studied further. The majority of sites can be dated into early to mid third millennium BC, or the mid third millennium

9For referencesseeAppendix 1 – Tab. 1.

120

BC, which proves the theory about the declination of sites during the later part of the third millennium BC (Kouchoukos 1998, 436-437). The only exceptions are sites Tell Mu´azzar and Tell Mabtuh Sharqi. There is the possibility that the populacefrom other sites moved into these large kranzhügels, which are both situated within the Mediteranean brown soils context and with the water source in their vicinity (see Fig. 22). The populacecould also have moved to other large kranzhügels, such as: Tell Chuera - distant located Western Jezirah settlement or Malhat ed-Deru, located in more arid conditions in southern areaof the studiedregion, or to Tell Sha´ir or Tell Zahamak (these three sites wereprobably not surveyed by the KBP project, however, Nicholaus Kouchoukos marked these sites with KBP numbers and therefore they are also mentioned in the overview of sites without analyzed pottery material in Chapter 12).

Fig. 22. Map showing the sites with analyzed pottery material, geomorphological and hydrological condition of the study region.

The KBP also sampled other sites in the area of Jebel Abd al-Aziz, which were preliminary dated into the third millennium BC: Tell Khanaizir (K 173), Tell Laharn (K 185), Tell Maddaneh (K 201), Tell Maraza (K 186), Tell Rhara (K 204), Tell Salha (K 194), Tell Samad (K 187), Tell Tuechil (K 193), Tell Zayeter (K 099), and many sites without a specificname: K 152, K 156 (other kranzhügel

121 type of settlement), K 165, K 182, K 197, K 198, K 202, K 203, K 205, K 206, K 207, K 217, K 219, K 220, K 223, K 234 (according to the KBP team, it deals with the kranzhügel type of settlement, but an additional study will be necessary for a proper confirmation or invalidation of this claim), K 235, K 238, K 239, K 243, K 246, K 250, K 252, K 255, K 256 and K 266. To confirm third millennium occupation at those sites, more studies will be necessary, especially those focused on analysis of the ceramic material retrieved by the KBP from these sites. It seems that the inhabitants of the area around Jebel Abd al-Aziz mainly practiced mobile pastoralism in the earlier part of third millennium, and that they moved seasonally from one camp to another in the Jebel Abd al-Aziz area or along Khabur river basin. This is probably the reason for the limited amount of settlements from an earlier period of the third millennium. After the appearance ofkranzhügel sites, and of a more centralized power, the populace probably started to movetothesettlements in Western Jezirah – especially during themiddle part of the third millennium BC. At the end of the millennium (EJZ 4-5) almost all the settlementshave disappeared. That can be explained by the Akkadian conquest of many parts of Northern Mesopotamia, and especially by an abrupt climate change, which caused higher aridity in the region where there is not enough precipitation to make dry-farming possible (Kouchoukos 1998, 436-437).

12.2 UPPER KHABUR REGION

The Yale Khabur Basin Project team collected archaeological material onlyat several sites in the Upper Khabur region because it was not amongst its key goals to examine the settlement in an area with long archaeological tradition and from well-documented third millennium sites. Similarly, the aim of this MA thesis is not to studythe settlements in this region in greater detail, but rather to show that the KBP team also documented some sites in thisarea. The Upper Khabur settlement patterns differ much from those around the area of Jebel Abd al-Aziz. There weremuch better conditions for agriculture – no gypseous soils were there (see Fig. 22). The region lies in azone withanannual precipitationbetween 250-350 mm per year. And this is one of the most significant factors for large urban centers which appeared across the Upper Khabur region (see Fig. 23).

122

Fig. 23. Important third millenium BC sites and overview of analyzed KBP sites in the thesis created in Arc GIS 10.4).

Due to surveys and well excavated sites carried out across Upper Khabur river basin during the last few decades, we can now reconstruct the occupation of the Upper Khabur at least from theceramic Neolithic period onwards. The settlement remainedconsistent until the emergence of large urban centers starting at the beginning of the Late Chalcolithic, only to reach the peak of urbanization during the early to mid third millennium BC (Smith, Wilkinson, Lawrence 2014, 163). Around 2300 – 2200 BC, intensive aridification took placethroughout the entireJezirah, which lead to many settlements being abandoned. According to new research, however, many sites also stayed settled during the Akkadian occupation of Upper Mesopotamia. Sites such as: Tell Brak, Tell Mozan, Tell Beydar, Tell Arbid, Tell Barri, and Tell Chagar Bazar, and also the far located Tell Hamoukar stayed at least partiallyoccupied (Kolinski 2007, 7).

123

Two sites located south of Hasseke were also addedto the sites of Upper Khabur region; these are Joys Spring (K 0001) and Ain Qoubba (K075), which are documented by the KBP for the first time, and which are dated by the analyzed ceramic material into the early third millennium,more specifically to theearly to mid third millennium. A total ofseven sites with analyzed pottery material wassampled by the KBP team. Three sites belong among thewell-documented and well-studied settlements with third millennium stratigraphy: Tell Brak, Tell Chagar Bazar and Tell Kashkashok III (K 126). The KBPalso surveyed sites which couldbe determined as third millennium sites for thefirst time: Tell Bisari (K 114), Qara Tepe (K 133), Joys Spring (K001) and Ain Qoubba (K 075). All of them can be preliminary dated into the early to mid third millennium BC, but this conclusion is onlybased on the analysis of 56 fragments, and therefore more studies will be necessary to confirm this periodization. The KBP also surveyedother sites, which were,according to their observations, dated into the third millennium BC too: Tell Marite (K 113), unknown site K 122, Khirbet-as-Siha (K 153) – the third millennium occupation at these sites should be confirmed or refutedby more analyses, especially those processing the ceramic material retrieved from the sites by the KBP project. In the documentation diary of the KBP is also mentioned Tell Hazna (K 129), however, this site was excavated by the Russiansatthe time of the KBP survey, and certainly included early millennium deposits (EJZ 0-EJZ 2) (Amirov 2010).

12.3 MIDDLE KHABUR REGION

Similarly to the Upper Khabur region, the Middle Khabur was only surveyed by the KBP to a limited degree. They focused on the excavations at Tell Ziyadeh (K 135) and Umm Qseir (K 138). The KBP team also sampled some previously well-known third millennium sites: Tell Mashnaqa (K 116), Tel Bderi (K 117), Tell Atij and Tell Mulla Matar, with their analyzed fine ware fragments presented by this MA thesis, and also conducted extensive field walks around Tell Kerma (K 074) –no sherds from that survey have been analyzed so far. Out of the settlements surveyed by the KBP team, one site, which belongs more to the Lower Khabur region than to the Middle Khabur, was also added to this study: Tell Menakh (K 062) –with an early to mid third millennium occupation based on the analyzed pottery fragments. The Project also surveyed two more sites in Middle Khabur region, but these are without any analyzed pottery material: the unknown sites K 229 and K 230. To sum up the information about the settlement patterns in Middle Khabur region: the region is area where Northern and Western Jezirah meets. Mainly rescue excavations were conducted here, which have revealed rich archaeological remains of the EJZ 1 to EJZ 2 periods. The region deals with hospitable conditions for agriculture due to the Mediterranean brown arable soils along the Khabur river basin (see Fig. 22). The local farmers probably hadenough surpluses to exchangethem with mobile or semi-sedentary pastoralists.It seems, though, that in the EJZ 3 this exchange system collapsed and the settlements around river disappeared, while those in Western Jezirah grew rapidly

124

(Kouchoukos 1998, 396). No sites surveyed by the KBP in this area deal with occupation later than the EJZ 3b. The archaeological excavations conducted along the Khabur River revealed roughly 35 third millennium BC sites between Hassake and Shedade. At least ten were settled during the EJZ 2 period, only five were still occupied after 2600 BC, and there was only substantial occupation at two of these: Tell Bderi and Tell Melebiya. Therefore, the peak of the settlements in this area is set in the EJZ 2 period, with a decline in the subsequent EJZ 3 period (Kouchoukos 1998, 397), which can alsobe confirmed by the KBP surveys and excavations at two Middle Khabur basin sites - Tell Ziyadeh and Umm Qseir (Hole and Tonoike 2016). At Tell Atij and Tell Raqaí,the occupation also continued, but without any evidence of theusage of grain storage, and with the settlement only attested by infant burials. The settlement was small (domestic) and encircled alarge, thick-walled grain storage building (Schwartz and Curvers 1993, 1994). Almost all settlements along the Middle Khabur River were uniformly small – except for Tell Bderi (5 ha) (Lebeau 2011) and Umm Qseir (7 ha) (Hole and Tonoike 2016). The excavations revealed specialized buildings located especially along the Middle Khabur Valley. These weredoorless, typically vaulted rooms interpretedas storage facilities – grain silos. The buildings were recovered at Tell Atij, Tell Kerma, Tell Kneidij and Tell Raqaí and were alsostudied by the KBP at Tell Ziyadeh (Hole and Tonoike 2016). The sites were often enclosed by a massive wall; this is the case of Tell Kerma, Tell Atij and Tell Raqaí. Mud brick walls were also recovered at Rad Shaqrah and Tell Mulla Matar, but no storage facilities have, so far, been found there. Artifacts (tokens and seals) were found at Tell Raqaí, Tell Mulla Matar and Tell Atij, which lead to the presumption that the grain exchange and storage buildings were under bureaucratic control. Also, the dimension of silos at Tell RaqaÍ raises a question about the purpose of the surpluses (Schwartz and Curvers 1993, 1994). Aconundrum, which remains unanswered for the time being, is the link between the appearance of kranzhügel sites in Western Jezirah and the disappearance of Middle Khabur basin sites. The size of the kranzhügels and the relatively small size of Middle Khabur basin sites also begs further discussion. The scholars have also raised a question about the usage of storage grain facilities within the economies of large urban centers such as Tell Brak, Tell Chuera or Tell Mabtuh Sharqi, in the vicinity of Jebel Abd-al Aziz and in a relatively close distance to it (Hole and Tonoike 2016, 109).

125

13 CONCLUSIONS

The aims of this MA thesis were to analyzethe fine ware pottery material from third millennium sites in the studied area, to describe the settlement patterns in the studied area (Jebel Abd al-Aziz area and marginally areas in Upper and Middle Khabur Basin) based on the analyzed pottery fragments and on information from the KBP unpublished documentation diary, as well as from other sources (Kouchoukos 1998; Smith 2015), and finally to compare them with the results of the pottery analysis,and to publishthe pottery as an attached catalogue

The analyzed fine ware fragments retrieved by the Khabur Basin Project are very limited per site (several sherds or even a single sherd). Therefore, a quantitative analysis was not possible. A total of203 fine ware fragments was analyzed (out ofthe 498 processed fragments) – 17 fragments were decorated with incision/excision, which made their early third millennium periodization easily recognizable. Three of them come from sites located in the Jebel Abd-al Aziz area (Tell Harba (K 178), Tell Tuenan (K 181) and Khirbet ed-Deeb (K 216)); five analyzed fragments come from sites situated in the Middle Khabur region (Tell Mashnaqa (K 116), Tell Ziyadeh (K 135) and Tell Mulla Matar); and nine decorated fine ware fragments were retrieved fromthe Upper Khabur sites Tell Brak, Tell Chagar Bazar, Qara Tepe (K 133), Tell Bisari (K 114) and Joys Spring (K 001)). Second easily periodized group of analyzed fragments consisted of 16 metallic ware sherds. Twelve were found at Jebel Abd al-Aziz sites (Tell Mu´azzar (K 039), Tell Baroud (K 049), Tell Mabtuh Gharbi (K 151), Tell Ghasra (K 168), Tell Tuenan (K 181), Khirbet ed-Deeb (K 216), Tell Trafawi (K 241) and the unknown site K 189); two sherds were retrieved from Tell Menakh (K 062) – a site located in the lower Middle Khabur basin; one fragment of metallic ware was analyzed from Tell Bisari (K 114) and Tell Brak in the Upper Khabur region. The largest part of analyzed fragments comprisesofplain fine ware sherds. They were attested on all the sites (with the exception of Tell Ziyadeh, from which only one decorated sherdwas studied). 100 fragments come from sites in the Jebel Abd al-Aziz area; 45 plain fine ware sherds were analyzed from the Upper Khabur region, and 25 fragments come from sites in the Middle Khabur region (for overview of these sites, see Tab. 5). From the periodization point of view, no clear examples of the EJZ 0 period (the earliest Ninevite 5 phase) were documented. Most of the sites with analyzed fine ware pottery material can be dated into the early to mid third millennium (EJZ 1-EJZ 3b), and the most frequently occurringperiod within the determination of fragments of periodization was the EJZ 3a period (see Appendix 2 – catalogue of sherds). This period is marked by the disappearance of Ninevite 5 ceramics and by the appearance of metallic ware. It is the time, when many new third millennium sites aroseand some long-lasting settlements grewin size. The pottery becomes more standardized and mass manufactured, without any decoration, which also proved to be the case for the pottery collection under analysis in this thesis.The analyzed fine ware sherds originated from 39 sites located in the Jebel Abd al-Aziz area (26), Upper Khaubr region (7)

126 and Middle Khabur region (6). The periodization of sites, based on the analyzed pottery fragments, more or less corresponds with the conclusions madeby the KBP project (KBP notes, Kouchoukos 1998) (see. Tab. 6 in Chapter 9). The only exceptions are: Tell Tokal (K 192) whichshould be regarded as having had an earlier occupation (EJZ 1) together with Tell Baroud (K 049) (EJZ 2). At 5 sites, the third millennium settlement may have been of a later date (possibly into EJZ 4 period) than wasproposed by the KBP: Tell al-Maghr (K 155), Khirbet ed-Deeb (K 216), Tell Ghasra (K 168), Tell Hammam Sharqi (K 161) and K 189. At Tell Mashnaqathere appeared fragments, which should be regarded as belonging to a later period. A total of 6 sites can be regarded as “new”– The KBP did not consider them to be third millennium: Qara Tepe (K 133), Tell Bisari (K 114), Tell al-Arbídi (K 150), Joys Spring (K 001), Ain Qoubba (K 075) and Tulul Khanzir (K 242). But these observations are based only on the comparison of the sherds with published catalogues from well-known third millennium sites, therefore, more studies (as well as petrographical and C 14 analyses) will be necessary to determine the precise period of occupation at those sites. Moreover, another 44 sites surveyed by the KBP were described as third millennium sites. Only three sites, however, can be regarded as hundred percent third millennium BC sites (Tell Hazna (K 129), Umm Qseir (K 138) and Tell Kerma (K 077) (Amirov 2010, Hole and Johnson 1986-87, (Saghiem, M. 1991). The period of occupation at the rest of these sites (41) needs to be studied in more detail, especially by the analyses of the ceramic material. The last aim of this thesis was to process analyzed sherds into a catalogue of pottery fragments (see Appendix 2). It contains 168 sherds from the studied areas (see Tab. 13 in Appendix 1.). The sherds were studied from atechnological point of view (paste, inclusions and surface treatment) and from anchronological point of view (dating: comparanda). They were sorted in alphabetical order, with the rim fragments placed first, followed by base fragments or decorated body sherds.

The Khabur Basin Project surveyed large area of north-eastern Syria. This research provides much information about settlements during the whole human occupation phases in the area. This thesis studies pottery material only from small amount of these settlements occupied during the third millennium BC. More studies will be necessary to reconstruct whole dimension of the settlements during this period. This MA thesis offers preliminary conclusions about settlement patterns based on fine ware pottery examination from Jebel Abd al-Aziz area, and Khabur River basins. But more complex analyses from all these preliminary third millennium BC sites have to be done to conclude and confirm all results which are attested in this thesis as well as other publications made by Khabur Basin Project (KBP notes; Kouchoukos 1998).

127

14 LIST OF ABBREVIATIONS

ARCANE – Associated Regional Chronologies for an Ancient Near East and the Eastern Mediterranean EBA – Early Bronze Age EJZ – Early Jezirah FAO – Food and Agriculture Organization ICAANE – International Congress on the Archaeology of the Ancient Near East ICARDA – International Center for Agricultural Research in the Dry Areas IIMAS – The International Institute for Mesopotamian Area Studies KBP – Khabur Basin Project MA – Master Thesis MBA – Middle Bronze Age SDGAM – Syrian Directorate General of Antiquities and Museums TAVO – Tübinger Atlas des Vorderen Orients e.g. – exempli gratia (for example) etc. – et cetera (and so on) resp. – respectively

128

15 LIST OF FIGURES AND TABLES

Figures: Fig. 1. Map showing the third millenium sites which were used for sherds comparanda in attached catalogue of pottery fragments. Fig. 2. Areas which are discussed in the thesis (created in Arc GIS 10.4). Fig. 3. Study area around Jebel Abd al-Aziz with wadis and Khabur River (modified after Smith 2015, 78). Fig. 4. Map of modern rainfall isohyets across Northern Mesopotamia (modified after Smith 2015, 24). Fig. 5. Map showing the geomorphology of the study area (after McCorriston 1997, 317; digitalized in Arc GIS 10.4). Fig. 6. Map showing the hydrology of the study area (created in Arc GIS 10.4). Fig. 7. Distribution o all fine ware ceramics mentioned in the following chapter (based on Rova 2014; Sconzo and Bianchi 2014; Falb, Portes and Pruss 2014 (created in Arc GIS 10.4). Fig. 8. Map showing distribution of sites with analyzed sherds and their periodization (created in Arc GIS 10.4). Fig. 9. Kranzhügel type of settlement at Tell al-Maghr (created in Arc GIS 10.4). Fig. 10. Kranzhügel type of settlement at Tell Hammam Gharbi (created in Arc GIS 10.4). Fig. 11. Kranzhügel type of settlement at Tell Mabtuh Gharbi (created in Arc GIS 10.4). Fig. 12. Kranzhügel type of settlement at Tell Mabtuh Sharqi (created in Arc GIS 10.4). Fig. 13. Kranzhügel type of settlement at Tell Mahrun (created in Arc GIS 10.4). Fig. 14. Kranzhügel type of settlement at Tell Mu´azzar (created in Arc GIS 10.4). Fig. 15. Map showing distribution of other third millenium sites surveyed by KBP (without analyzed pottery fragments) (created in Arc GIS 10.4). Fig. 16. Kranzhügel type of settlement at Khirbet Malhat (created in Arc GIS 10.4). Fig. 17. Kranzhügel type of settlement at Tell Sha´ir (created in Arc GIS 10.4). Fig. 18. Kranzhügel type of settlement at Tell Zahamak (created in Arc GIS 10.4). Fig. 19. Kranzhügel type of settlement at site K 156 (created in Arc GIS 10.4). Fig. 20. Kranzhügel type of settlement at site K 234 (created in Arc GIS 10.4). Fig. 21. Map showing all sites mentioned in the MA thesis with analyzed pottery material ( circle) and without analyzed pottery fragments (square) (created in Arc GIS 10.4). Fig. 22. Map showing the sites with analyzed pottery material, geomorphological and hydrological condition of the study region. Fig. 23. Important third millenium BC sites and overview of analyzed KBP sites in the thesis created in Arc GIS 10.4).

129

Tables: Tab. 1. Overview of sites which were used as a comparanda for pottery material presented in the MA thesis and their chronology with the comparison of EJZ periodization system (based on Schwartz 1988; Lebeau 1993; Pfälzner 1997; Kouchoukos 1998; Matthews 2003; Amirov 2010; Lebeau 2011; Hempelmann 2013 and Smith 2015). Tab. 2. Overview of sites with analyzed decorated fine ware sherds. Tab. 3. Overview of sites with analyzed Metallic Ware sherds Tab. 4. Overview of sites with analyzed plain fine ware Tab. 5. Overview of analyzed fine ware sherds with the quantity of fragments per site. Tab. 6. Overview of sites and their EJZ periodization according to published data and according to MA thesis analyzed fine ware fragments. Tab. 7. Overview of analyzed pottery fragments from the area of Jebel Abd al-Aziz with the periodization of sites propossed by KBP and revised by the thesis. Tab. 9. Overview of analyzed pottery fragments from Upper Khabur Region with the periodization of sites propossed by KBP and revised by the thesis. Tab. 19. Overview of analyzed pottery fragments from Middle Khabur Region with the periodization of sites propossed by KBP and revised by the thesis. Tab. 10. Overview of other third millenium sites surveyed by KBP in area around Jebel Abd al-Aziz (Kouchoukos 1998, 374; Smith 2015, 393-394, 406-407; KBP notes and database). Tab. 11. Overview of other third millenium sites surveyed by KBP in Upper Khabur Region (KBP notes). Tab. 12. Overview of other third millenium sites surveyed by KBP in Middle Khabur Region (KBP notes and database).

Tab. 13. Overview of all sites surveyd by KBP and mentioned in the text (blue background = sites firstly surveyd by KBP; white background = already known sites before KBP; bold writing = sites with fine ware analyzed pottery)

130

16 BIBLIOGRAPHY

AKKERMANS, P. M. M. G. and SCHWARTZ, M. G. (2003) The Archaeology of Syria. From Complex Hunter-Gatherers to Early Urban Societies (ca. 16.000-300 BC). Cambridge. Cambridge University Press.

AMIROV, A.N. (2010) Habur steppe of Northern Mesopotamia in IV-First Half of the 3rd Millennium BC. Moscow.

BABOUR, T. (2014) The organization of pottery production at Tell Chuera: a technological approach, in: Bucellati, F., Hels, T., Tamm, A. (eds.), House and Household Economies in 3rd Millennium B.C.E. Syro-Mesopotamia, 2014, England. 1-8.

BIELINSKI, P. (1996) “Tell Rad Shaqrah – Excavations 1995,” Polish Archaeology in the Mediterranean 7: 160-70.

BLACKBURN, M. and FORTIN, M. (1994) Geomorphology of Tell Atij, Northern Syria. Geoarchaeology 9. 57-74.

BUCCELATTI, G. and BUCCELATI, M.-K. 1988. Mozan 1. The sounding of the first two seasons, Udena.

CURVERS, H. H. and SCHWARTZ, M. G. (1990) Excavation at Tell al-Raqa´i: A Small Rural Site of Early Urban Northern Mesopotamia. American Journal of Archaeology, Vol. 94. No. 1. Archaeological Institute of America 1990, 3-23.

DECKERS, K. and RIEHL. S. (2008) Resource Exploitation of the Upper Khabur Basin (NE Syria) During the third Millennium BC. Paléorient, vol. 34.2. CNRS Ěditions, 173-189.

DECKERS, K. and PESSIN. H. (2011) Vegetation development in relation to human occupation and climatic change in the Middle Euphrates and Upper Jezirah (Syria/Turkey) during the Bronze Age. In: K. Deckers (ed.) Holocene Landscape Through Time in the Fertile Crescent (Subartu 28): 33-48. Turnhout. Brepols.

ÉCHALLIER, J. C. (1984) Éléments de technologie céramique et d´analyse des terres cuites archéologiques (Documents d´archéologie méridionale, numéro special, Vol. 3). Lambese.

131

FALB, C. (2009)Untersuchnungen an Keramikwaren des dritten Jahrtausands v. Chr. aus Nordsyrien. Münster. Ugarit-Verlag.

FALB, CH., PORTER, A. and PRUSS, A. (2014) North-Mesopotamian Metallic Ware, Jezirah Stone Ware, North-Mesopotamian Grey Ware and Euphrates Banded Ware. In: M. Lebeau (eds.), ARCANE Interregional Volume I, Ceramics (Turnhout). 171-199.

FORTIN, M. (1989) Tell Atij and the Socio-economic development of the Ninevite 5 period on the Habur plains. Paper delivered at thy symposium “The Origins of North Mesopotamian Civilization: Ninevite 5 Chronology, Economy, Society”. Yale University, 1988.

FORTIN, M. (1997) Urbanisation et redistribution de surplus agricoles en Mésopotamie septentrionale (3000-2500 av. J.-C.). In: W. Aufrecht et al. (eds.) Aspects of Urbanism in Antiquity, Sheffield: Sheffield Academic Press, 50-81.

FORTIN, M. (1998) New Horizons in Ancient Syria: The View from Atij. Near Eastern Archaeology, Vol. 61. No. 1. The American Schools of Oriental Research. 1998. 15-24.

FORTIN, M. (1999a) Le facies archéologique du Moyen Khabour au IIIéme millénaire av. J.-C. In: G. del Olmo Lete and J.-L. Montero Fenollós (eds.) Archaeology of the Upper Syrian Euphrates: The Tishrin Dam Area, Barcelona: Editorial AUSA, 97-105.

FORTIN, M. and SCHWARTZ, M. G. (2003) The Middle Khabur in the Third Millennium B.C. In: E. Rova, H. Weiss (eds.) The Origins of North Mesopotamian Civilization: Ninevite 5 Chronology, Economy, Society.Subartu IX. Brepols, 221-248.

GERNEZ, G. (2012) Exceptional Metal Hoards Discovered at Tell Mabtouh (Syria). Paper presented at the 8th International Congress on the Archaeology of the Ancient Near East, Warsaw, 30 April – 4 May.

GERNEZ, G and SULEIMAN, A. (2013) Une exceptionnelle découverte á Tell Mabtouh Sharqi: les dépots d´armes et objets en metal du temple N. Étude préliminaire. In: M. al-Maqdissi, D. Parayre, M. Griesheimer and É. Ishaq (eds.) Un caeur syrien. Mélanges dédiés á la mémoire d´Antoine Souleiman (Studia Orontica 11): 41-59. Damascus. Direction Générale des Antiquités et des Musées de Syrie.

GROSSMAN, K. (2013) Early Bronze Age Hamoukar: A Settlement Biography. Unpublished PhD. University of Chicago, Department of Near Eastern Languages and Civilizations.

132

GROSSMAN, K. (2014) Ninevite 5 Ceramics. In: Lebeau, M. (ed.) Arcane Interregional I. Ceramics. Brepols. Turnhout. 83-94.

HEMPELMANN, R. (2013) Tell Chuera, Kharab Sayyar und die Urbanisierung der westlichen Gazira (VFMOS 2, IV). Wiesbaden. Harrassowitz Verlag.

HOLE, F. (1991a) Middle Khabur Settlement and Agriculture in the Ninevite 5 Period. Lecture delivered to the Society´s Symposium entitled “Lost Civilizations of the Desert: Recent Archaeological Research in Third Millennium North Syria”. Canadian Society for Mesopotamian Studies. Toronto 1991. 17-27.

HOLE, F. (1991b) Preliminary Report on the Joint American-Danish Archaeological Sampling of Sites in the Khabur Basin. Annales Archeologiques Arabes Syrienne, 1-25.

HOLE, F. (1994) Khabur Basin PPN and Early PN Industries. In: H. G. Gebel and S. K. Kozlowski (eds.) Neolithic Chipped Stone Industries of the Fertile Crescent (SENEPSE 1): 331-347. Berlin. Ex Oriente.

HOLE, F. (1997) Evidence for Mid-Holocene Environmental Change in the Western Khabur Drainage, Northeast Syria. In: H. N. Dalfest, G. Kukla and H. Weiss (eds.) Third Millennium BC Climate Change and Old World Collapse, Berlin: Springer, 39-66.

HOLE, F. (1998) Tell Ziyadeh on the Middle Khabur, Syria. 1st International Congress on the Archaeology of the Ancient Near East. Universita degli Studi di Roma “La Sapienza”. Rome May 18th, 1998. 1-10.

HOLE, F. (1999) Early Jezireh Storage Structures at Tell Ziyadeh, Syria. Journal of Field Archaeology, 1-43.

HOLE, F. (2000) Environmental History of the Khabur Basin – chapter two. In: Taphonomy. 1-40.

HOLE, F. (2001) A Radiocarbon Chronology for the Middle Khabur, Syria. Iraq. Vol. 63. 67-98.

HOLE, F. (2002-2003) Khabur Basin Project – 1986-2001, AAAS 45-46: 11-20.

HOLE, F. (2007) Agricultural sustainability in the semi-arid Near East. Climate of the Past 3, 195- 203.

133

HOLE, F. (unpublished) Khabur Basin Project notes. Properties of the Yale University. New Haven, USA.

HOLE, F. and JOHNSON, A. G. (1986-1987). Umm Qseir on the Khabur: preliminary report on the 1986 excavation. Les Annales Archeologigues Arabes Syrienne 36-37, 172-220.

HOLE, F. and KOUCHOUKOS. N. (1992) Stratigraphic Soundings at Tell Mashnaga on the Khabur river 1991. Annales Archeologiques Arabes Syrienne, 1-28.

HOLE, F. and KOUCHOUKOS. N. (1995) Preliminary Report on an Archaeological Survey in the Western Khabur Basin, 1994. In: F. Hole (ed.) Papers of the Yale University Khabur Basin Project 1986-1997. New Haven, CT. Yale University, Department of Anthropology.

HOLE, F. and KOUCHOUKOS. N. (1996a) Preliminary Report on an Archaeological Survey in the Western Khabur Basin, 1995. In: F. Hole (ed.) Papers of the Yale University Khabur Basin Project 1986-1997. New Haven, CT. Yale University, Department of Anthropology.

HOLE, F. and KOUCHOUKOS. N. (1996b) Supplemental Report on the Yale Jezirah Survey 1994- 1995.. In: F. Hole (ed.) Papers of the Yale University Khabur Basin Project 1986-1997. New Haven, CT. Yale University, Department of Anthropology.

HOLE, F. and TONOIKE. Y. (2016) Homesteads on the Khabur: Tell Ziyadeh and Other Settlements. BAR International Series 2827. 2016. Oxford.

IBRAGIMOVA, E. (2014) Spatial analysis of mass lithic and ceramic material: revealing the functional patterns of Tell Hazna I, in: Bucellati, F., Helms, T., Tamm, A. (eds.), House and Household Economies in 3rd Millennium B.C.E. Syro-Mesopotamia, 2014, England, 83-94.

KOLINSKI, R. (2007) The Upper Khabur Region in the Second Part of the Third Millennium BC. Altoriental Forsh, 34.

KOUBKOVÁ, H. (2015) Fine Ware Ninevite 5 from Khabur Basin Project. Bachelor diploma thesis. Brno. Masaryk University. Department of Archaeology and Museology.

KOUBKOVÁ, H. and WYGNAŃSKA. Z. (in press) Early third millennium BC settlement in the western Khabur Basin– preliminary results of the pottery analysis from the Khabur Basin Project surveys. Proceeding of the 10th International Congress of ICAANE, 25-29th April 2016. Vienna.

134

KOUCHOUKOS, N. (1998) Landscape and Social Change in Late Prehistoric Mesopotamia, Ph.D. dissertation. New Haven, CT. Yale University, Department of Anthropology.

KÜHNE, H. (1974-1977) Zur historischen Geographie am Unteren Habur. Vorläufiger Bericht über eine archäologische Geländebegehung, AfO 25: 249-255.

KÜHNE, H. (1976) Die Keramik vom Tell Chuera und ihre Beziehungen zu Funden aus Syrien- Pälastina, der Türkei und dem Iraq. Berlin. Gebrüder Mann Verlag. KÜHNE, H. (1978-1979) Zur historischen Geographie am Unteren Habur. Vorläufiger Bericht über eine archäologische Geländebegehung, AfO 26: 181-195.

KÜHNE, H. and SCHNEIDER. G. (1988) Neue Untersuchungen zur Metallischen Ware. Damaszener Mitteilungen 3. 83-139.

KUZUCUOĞLU, C. (2007) Climatic and Environmental Trends during the Third Millennium B.C in Upper Mesopotamia, in: Kuzucuoğlu, Marro 2007, 459-480.

LEBEAU, M. (1993) Tell Melebya: Cing campagnes de recherches sur le Moyen-Khabur (1984-1988) (Louvain : Peeters).

LEBEAU, M. (2000) Stratified archaeological evidence and compared periodizations in the Syrian Jezirah during the third millennium B.C. In: C. Marro and H. Hauptmann (eds.): 167-191.

LEBEAU, M. and SULEIMAN, A. (2005) report on the 13th season of excavation and the 4th season of architectural restoration at Tell Beydar (2008), Euro-Syrian Excavations at Tell Beydar 2005.

LEBEAU, M. (ed.) (2011) Jezirah (ARCANE vol. I.) Turnhout. Brepols.

MALLOWAN, M.E. L. (1936) The Excavations at Tall Chagar Bazar, and an Archaeological Survey of the Habur Region, 1934-5, Iraq 3 (1): 1-85.

MALLOWAN, M.E.L. (1937) The Excavations at Tall Chagar Bazar, and an Archaeological Survey of the Habur Region. Second Campaign, 1936, Iraq 4 (2): 91-177.

MALLOWAN, M.E.L. (1947) Excavations at Brak and Chagar Bazar, Iraq 9.

135

McCORRISTON, J. (1992) The Halaf Environment and Human Activities in the Khabur Drainage, Syria. Journal of Field Archaeology, Vol. 19. No. 3. Boston University, 315-317.

McCORRISTON, J. (1998) Landscape and Human-environment Interaction in the Middle Habur Drainage from the Neolithic Period to the Bronze Age. In: M. Fortin and O. Aurenche (eds.) Espace naturel, espace habité en Syrie du Nord (10e-2e millénaires av. J.-C.), Lyons: Maison de l´Orient (= Bulletin of the Canadian Society for Mesopotamian Studies 33), 43-53.

McCORRISTON, J. (2007) Cutural and Environmental History in Archaeological Charred Woods from the Khabur Drainage, Upper Mesopotamia. In: C. Kuzucuogliu and C. Marro (eds.) Varia Anatolica 19. (504-522).

McMAHON, A. (2014) Carinated, Ridged-Shoulder “Akkadian” jars. In: Lebeau, M. (ed.) ARCANE, Vol. IR-1, Ceramics. Brepols. 245-252.

MEYER, J.-W. (2010) Die zweite Grabungskampagne in Kharab Sayyar 1999, MDOG 132: 297-309.

MEYER, J.-W. (2014) The Round Cities: Foundation and Development a view from Tell Chuera, in: Margueron J. Cl. Mari, ni Est, ni Ouest (Vol. 1). Supplément Syria II, 13-25.

MILLER, N.F. (1997) Farming and Herding along the Euphrates: Environmental constraint and cultural choice (fourth to second millennium B.C.), in: R. L. Zettler (ed.), Subsistence and Settlement in a marginal Environment: Tell es-Sweyhat, 1989-1995. Preliminary Report (MASCA Research Papers in Science and Archaeology 14), Philadelphia, 123-132.

MOORTGAT, A. (1959) Archäologische Forschungen der Max Freiherr von Oppenheim-Stiftung im nördlichen Mesopotamien 1956. Köln. Westdeutscher Verlag.

MOORTGAT-CORRENS, U. (1972) Die Bildwerke vom Djebelet el Beda in ihrer räumlichen und zeitlichen Umwelt .Berlin. de Gruyter.

NIEUWENHUYSE O. P. (2006) Plain and Painted Pottery (PhD thesis). Leiden: Faculteit der Archeologie Universiteit Leiden. Supervisors(s) and Co-supervisor(s): Akkermans P. M. M. G.

NISHIAKI, Y. (1992) Preliminary Results of the Prehistoric Survey in the Khabur Basin, Syria: 1999- 91 Seasons. Paléorient, vol. 18/1. 97-102.

136

PFÄLZNER, P. (1986/1987) The Excavations at Tell Bderi 1986, Les Annales Archeologiques Arabes Syriennes 36/37, 292-303.

PFÄLZNER, P. (1990) Tell Bderi – the Development of a Bronze Age Town. In: Kermer, S. (ed.) The Near East in Antiquity. German contributions to the archaeology of Jordan, Palestine, Syria, Lebanon and Egypt, Amman, 63-79.

PFÄLZNER, P. (1997) Wandel und Kontinuität im Urbanisierungspozess des 3. Jahrtausends v. Ch. in Nordmesopotamien. In: G. Wilhelm (ed.) Die orientalische Stadt: Kontinuität, Wandel, Bruch: 239- 265. Saarbrücken. Saarbrücker Druckerei und Verlag.

PFÄLZNER, P. (1998) Eine Modifikation der Periodisierung Nordmesopotamiens im 3. Jtsd. v. Ch., MDOG 130: 69-71.

POIDEBARD, A. (1928) Mission archéologique en Haute Djezireh (automne 1927), Syria 9: 216-223.

PREUSS, G. (1989) Die Metallische Ware: Versuch einer Einordnun, M.A. dissertation. Tübingen. Eberhard-Karls-Universität, Altorientalisches Seminar.

PRUSS, A. (2000) The Metallic Ware of Upper Mesopotamia: Definition, Chronology and Distribution. In: C. Marro and H. Hauptmann (eds.): 193-201.

PRUSS, A. (2013) The last centurie sof the 3rd millenium in the Syrian Gezíra, in: W. Orthmann – M. al-Maqdisi – P. Matthiae (Hg.), Archeologie et Histoire de la Syrie 1 (Schriffen zur Vorderasiatischen Archäologie 1,1), Wiesbaden: 137-145.

QUENET, P. (2008) Tell Kashkashok III Inventories, Tell Abu Hujeira I. Tell Chagar Bazar Inventories. ARCANE atelier de Sienne. France.

QUENET, P. (2011) Stratigraphy. In: M. Lebeau (ed.) Associated regional chronologies for the ancient Near East and the Eastern Mediterranean (ARCANE). Vol. 1: Jezirah. Turnhout: Brepols, 19- 47.

RICE, M. P. (1987) Poterry Analysis: A Sourcebook.

137

RIEHL, S. and DECKERS, K. (2012) Environmental and Agricultural Dynamics in Northern Mesopotamia during the Early and the Middle Bronze Age. In: Lanieri, Pfälzner, Valentini 2012, 11- 24.

RÖLLING, W. and KÜHNE, H. (1983) The Lower Habur: Second Preliminary Report on a Survey in 1977, AAAS 33 (2): 187-199.

ROUTLEDGE, B. (1998) Making Nature Human: Small-Scale Production and Specialization at Tell Gudeda in the Middle Khabur Valley. In: M. Fortin and O. Aurenche (eds.) Espace naturel, Espace habité en Syrie du Nord 10e-2millénaires av. J.-C. Maison de l´Orient méditerranéen lien. Lyon, 243- 256.

ROUX, V. (1994) La technique du tournage: definition et reconnaissance par les macrotraces. In: D. Binder and J. Courtin (eds.), Terre cuite et société. La céramique, document technique, économique et cultured. XIVe Rencontres Internationales d´Archéologie et d´Histoire d´Antibes, 45-58. Juan-les- Pins.

ROVA, E. (2011) Ceramic. In: M. Lebeau (ed.) ARCANE, vol. 1. 49-127.

ROVE, E. (2014) Combed Wash and Smeared Wash Wares. In: M. Lebeau (ed.) ARCANE Vol I. Ceramics. Brepols.

SAGHIEM, M. (1991) The Lebanese University Recent Excavations at Tell Kerma: A Salvage Operation on the Middle Khabur, N-E Syria. Mesopotamian History and Environment, coll. “Occasional Publications” Vol. I: 171-184.

SALLABERGER, W. (2007) From Urban Culture to Nomadism: A History of Upper Mesopotamia in the Late Third Millennium, in: Kuzucuoğlu, Marro 2007, 417-456.

SCHNEIDER, G. and DASZKIEWICZ, M. (2002) Scherben, nichts als Scherben?, Alter Orient aktuell 3, 8-15.

SCHWARTZ, M. G. (1988) A Ceramic Chronology from Tell Leilan: Operation 1. Vol.1. Yale Tell Leilan Research. New Haven and London: Yale University Press.

138

SCHWARTZ, M. G. (1992) Tell al-Raqa´i 1989 and 1990: Further Investigations at a Small Rural Site of Early Urban Northern Mesopotamia. American Journal of Archaeology, Vol. 96, No 3. Archaeological Institute of America, 397-419.

SCHWARTZ, G.M. and CURVERS, H. (1993-4) Tell ar-Raqa´i 1986-1993. Archiv für Orientforschung 40/41. 246-257.

SCONZO, P. and BIANCHI, A. (2014) North Mesopotanian Comb-Incised and Comb-Impressed Pottery. In: M. Lebeau (ed.) ARCANE vol. I. Ceramics. Brepols.

SÜRENHAGEN, D. (1990) Ausgrabungen in Tall Mulla Matar 1989, Mitteilungen der Deutschen Orient Gesellschaft 122, 125-152.

SMITH, S. L., WILKINSON T. J. and LAWRENCE D. (2014) Agro-pastoral Landscapes in the Zone of Uncertainty. In: D. Morandi Bonacossi (ed.) Settlement Dynamics and Human-Landscape Interaction in the Dry Steppes of Syria (Studia Chaburensia 4): 151-172. Wiesbaden. Harrassowitz Verlag.

SMITH, L. S. (2015) Late Chalcolithic to Early Bronze Age Settlement Patterns in the Greater Western Jezirah: Trajectories of Sedentism in the Semi-Arid Syrian Steppe. PhD thesis. Durham University. 2015.

SMOGORZEWSKA, A. (2007) Technological marks on pottery vessels. Study of evidence from Tell Arbid, Tell Jassa el-Gharbi (Northeastern Syria). In: Polish Archaeology in the Mediterranean 19. 555-564.

SMOGORZEWSKA, A. (2012) Jazirah Burnished Ware from Tell Arbid and its Northern Affiliations. Anatolica 38: 129-47.

STEIN, G. J. and BLACKMAN, J. M. (1993) The Organizational Context of Specialized Craft Production in Early Mesopotamian States, Research in economic anthropology 14, 29-59.

SULEIMAN, A. and QUENET, P. (2003a) Trois Campagnes de Fouilles Syniennes à Tell Abu Hujeira I (1988-1990). Premiére partie. Le Chantier B: architecture et stratiugraphie. Documents d´ Archéologie Syrienne 3. Damascusi Ministére de la Culture; Direction Générale des Antiqvités et des Musées.

139

TITE, M. and KILIKOGLOU, V. (2002) Do we understand cooking pots and is there an ideal cooking pot? In: V. Kilikoglou, A. Hein and Y. Maniatis (eds.), Modern trends in scientific studies on ancient ceramics, Papers presented at the 5th European Meeting on Ancient Ceramics, Athens 1999 (British Archaeological Reports. International Series 1011), 1-8. Oxford.

UR, J. A. (2003) CORONA Satellite Photography and Ancient Road Networks: A Northern Mesopotamian Case Study. Antiquity 77 (295): 102-115.

VALENTINY, S. (2008) Ninivite 5Poterry from Tell Barri in Jezirah. In H. Kühne, R. M. Czichon, and F. J. Kreppner (eds.), Proceedings of the fouth International Congress on the Archaeology of the Ancient Near East (29 march-3 April 2004, Freie Universität Berlin), Volume 2: Social and Cultural Transformation: The Archaeology of Transitional Periods and Dark Ages. Excavation Reports. Wiesbaden:Harrasowitz Verlag 2008, 259-272.

VAN LIERE, W. J. and LAUFFRAY J. (1955) Nouvelle prospection archéologique dans la Haute Jezireh Syrienne, AAAS 5: 129-148.

VON OPPENHEIM, M. (1943) Meine Forschungsreisen in Obermesopotamien, Nachrichten aus dem Reichsvermessungsdienst Sonderheft 21/22.

WEISS, H. (1991) Archaeology in Syria. American Journal of Archaeology, Vol. 95 (4): 663-740.

WEISS, H. (2000) Beyond the Younger Dryas. Collapse as Adaptation to Abrupt Climate Change in Ancient West Asia and the Eastern Mediterranean. In: G. Bawden and R. M. Reycraft (eds.) Environmental Disaster and the Archaeology of Human Response (Maxwell Museum of Anthropology Anthropological Papers 7): 75-98. Albuquerque, NM. Maxwell Museum of Anthropology.

WILKINSON, T.J. (1993) Linear hollows in the Jazira, Upper Mesopotamia. Antiquity 67 (256): 548- 562.

WILKINSON, T.J. (1994) The Structure and Dynamics of Dry-Farming State in Upper Mesopotamia, Current Anthropology 35 (5): 483-520.

WILKINSON, T. J. (2000a) Regional Approaches to Mesopotamian Archaeology: The Contribution of Archaeological Surveys, Journal of Archaeological Research 8 (3): 219-267.

140

WILKINSON, T. J. (2000b) Settlement and Land Use in the Zone of Uncertainty in Upper Mesopotamia. In: R. Jas (ed.) Rainfall and Agriculture in Northern Mesopotamia (MOS Studies 3): 3- 35. Leiden. Nederlands Instituut voor het Nabije Oosten.

WILKINSON, T. J. and TUCKER D. J. (1995) Settlement Development in the North Jariza. Iraq. Warminster: Aris and Phillips, Ltd.

WILKINSON, T. J., PHILIP, G., BRADBURY, J., DUNFORD, R., DONOGHUE, D., GALIATSATOS, N., LAWRENCE, D., RICCI, A. and SMITH, L.S. (2014) Contextualizing Early Urbanizaion: Settlement Cores, Early States and Agropastoral Strategies in the Fertile Crescent During the Fourth and Third Millennium BC. Journal of World Prehistory 27 (1): 43-109.

ZEDER, M. (1998a) Regional Patterns of Animal Exploitation in the Khabur Basin, 7000-1500 BC. In: Anreiter, P., Bartoiewicz, L., Jerem, E. and Meid, W. (eds.). Man and the Animal World: Studies in Archaeozoology, Archaeology, Anthropology and Palaeolinguistics in Memoriam Sándor Bökönyi. Archaeolongua Alapítvány. Budapest, 569-580.

ZEDER, M. (1998b) Regional Patterns of Animal Exploitation in the Khabur Basin, 7000-1500 BC. In: P. Anreiter, L. Bartosiewicz, E. Jerem and W. Meid (eds.) Man and the Animal World: Studies in Archaeozoology, Archaeology, Anthropology and Palaeolinguistics in Memoriam Sándor Bökönyi. Archaeolingua Alapítvány. Budapest, 569-580.

ZEDER, M. (1999) The Role of Pastoralism in Developing Specialized Urban Economies in the Ancient Near East. Paper presented in the Symposium: Archaeology of Urban Sites: Beyond Central Places and Ceremony. Society for American Archaeology. Chicago, 1-22.

ONLINE SOURCES: Uppsala Universitet (on-line) [Retrieved: 2017_01_03]. From: http://www.uu.se (A preliminary set of placemarks (ANE.kmz) for Google Earth with alphabetic listing).

141

17 APPENDIX 1

142

EBA SITE NAME OF SITE STUDIED AREA OCCUPATION COORDINATES NOTES SITES REFFERENCES NO. PERIOD UTM K001 Joys Spring Upper Khabur Region EJZ 2-3a 682117 4031375 0.13 ha in size KBP notes K 039 Tell Mu´azzar Jebel Abd al-Aziz area EJZ 1-3b or EJZ 5 619896 4013344 14 ha in size, kranzhügel Kühne and Schneider 1988; Preuss 1989; Kouchoukos 1998; Smith 2015 K 049 Tell Baroud Jebel Abd al-Aziz area EJZ 3a-3b 649308 4031645 3 ha in size Preuss 1989; Kouchoukos 1998; Smith 2015 K 062 Tell Menakh Middle Khabur region EJZ 3a – EJZ 3b 662706 3990423 2.2 ha in size Kühne and Schneider 1988; KBP notes K 075 Ain Qoubba Upper Khabur region EJZ 1-2 or 3b 697171 4032943 3.1 ha in size KBP notes K 77až82 Tell Kerma Middle Khabur Basin EJZ 1-2 664628 4035091 0.3 ha in size Saghiem 1991; KBP notes K 099 Tell Zayeter Jebel Abd al-Aziz area EJZ 1-2 636020 4039981 small village; 3 ha in size Kouchoukos 1998; Smith 2015 K 113 Tell Marite Upper Khabur Basin 3rd millennium 671507 4107708 0.4 ha in size KBP notes K 114 Tell Bisari Upper Khabur Basin EJZ 1-3a 659777 4052078 7 ha in size KBP notes K 116 Tell Mashnaqa Middle Khabur Basin EJZ 1-3a 661066 4017668 0.6 ha in size KBP notes K 117 Tell Bderi Middle Khabur Basin EJZ 3a - 4 662661 4028456 5 ha in size Pfälzner 1990; KBP notes K 122 Unknown Upper Khabur Basin 2300-2200 645695 4057811 1.2 ha in size KBP notes K 126 Kashkashok III Upper Khabur Basin EJZ 0-3b 646766 4055822 0.7 ha in size KBP notes K 128 Tell Mabtuh Sharqi Jebel Abd al-Aziz area EJZ 2 – EJZ 5 630411 4041152 more than 40 ha in size, kranzhügel Kouchoukos 1998; Smith 2015 K 129 Tell Khazne - Hazne Upper Khabur Basin EJZ 0-2 669406 4058969 Russian site; 2.5 ha in size KBP notes; Amirov 2010; Ibragimova 2014 K 133 Qara Tepe Upper Khabur Basin EJZ 1 – 3a 672255 4085022 0.25 ha in size KBP notes K 135 Tell Ziyadeh Middle Khabur Basin EJZ 1-2 665327 4031127 1 ha in size KBP notes; Hole 1998, 1999; Hole and Tonoike 2016 K 138 Khirbet Umm Qseir Middle Khabur Basin 3rd millennium 665835 4030910 7 ha in size Hole and Johnson 1986-87; KBP notes K 150 Tell al-Arbidi Jebel Abd al-Aziz area EJZ 1-2 628953 4040345 1.7 ha in size KBP notes K 151 Tell Mabtuh Gharbi Jebel Abd al-Aziz area EJZ 1-3b 602304 4037474 28 ha in size Kühne and Schneider 1988; Kouchoukos 1998; Smith 2015; KBP notes K 152 Unknown Jebel Abd al-Aziz area 3rd millennium 625248 4038997 21.8 ha in size Smith 2015; KBP notes K 153 Khirbet as-Siha Upper Khabur basin 3rd millennium 709604 4067273 0.8 ha in size KBP notes K 155 Tell al-Maghr Jebel Abd al-Aziz area EJZ 1-3b 602706 4036830 13 ha in size; kranzhügel Kühne and Schneider 1988; Kouchoukos 1998; Smith 2015 K 156 Unknown Jebel Abd al-Aziz area EJZ 1-3b 623586 4037896 ringwall settlement; 7.3 ha in size Kouchoukos 1998; Smith 2015 K 157 Tell Khazneh Jebel Abd al-Aziz area EJZ 1-3b 618591 4039003 10 ha in size Kouchoukos 1998; Smith 2015; ANE K 158 Tell Aklef = al-Khalif Jebel Abd al-Aziz area EJZ 1-3b 623569 4038007 2 ha in size Kouchoukos 1998; Smith 2015; KBP notes K 161 Tell Hammam Sharqi Jebel Abd al-Aziz area EJZ 3a-3b 621595 4045812 16 ha in size Kouchoukos 1998; Smith 2015; KBP notes; ANE K 162 Tell Hammam Gharbi Jebel Abd al-Aziz area EJZ 1-3b 618557 4047769 10 ha maybe up to 40 ha, kranzhügel Kouchoukos 1998; Smith 2015; ANE K 165 Unknown Jebel Abd al-Aziz area EJZ 1-3b 587991 4038836 0.1 – 3 ha in size Kouchoukos 1998; KBP notes K 168 Tell Ghasra = Qashgha Jebel Abd al-Aziz area EJZ1-3b 591795 4054186 4-5 ha in size Kouchoukos 1998; KBP notes K 173 Tell Khanaizir Jebel Abd al-Aziz area EJZ 1-2 600279 4006431 temporary camp; 2 ha in size Kouchoukos 1998; Smith 2015 K 174 Tell Burqa Jebel Abd al-Aziz area EJZ 1-2 595378 4005677 temporary camp; 1.5 ha in size Kouchoukos 1998; Smith 2015; KBP notes K 175 Tell Mabtu´a Jebel Abd al-Aziz area EJZ 1-3b 642840 4020329 10 ha in size Kouchoukos 1998; Smith 2015; ANE K 178 Tell Harba Jebel Abd al-Aziz area EJZ 1-3b 624534 3997446 2 ha in size Kouchoukos 1998; KBP notes K 179 Tell Tromba Jebel Abd al-Aziz area EJZ 1-3b 627742 3995384 2 ha in size Kouchoukos 1998; Smith 2015; KBP notes K 180 Tell Mahrum Jebel Abd al-Aziz area EJZ 3a-3b 645706 4025059 8 ha in size, kranzhügel Moortgat-Correns 1972; Kouchoukos 1998; Smith 2015; KBP notes K 181 Tell Tuenan Jebel Abd al-Aziz area EJZ 1-3b 635113 4017131 > 10 ha in size, 4 ha ? Kouchoukos 1998; Smith 2015 K 182 Unknown Jebel Abd al-Aziz area EJZ 1-2 625014 4006029 0.1 – 3 ha in size Kouchoukos 1998 K 183 Tell Metyaha Jebel Abd al-Aziz area EJZ 1-3b 631085 4006041 2.6 ha in size Preuss 1989; Kouchoukos 1998; Smith 2015; KBP notes

143

K 184 Tell Marthya Jebel Abd al-Aziz area EJZ 1-3b 646420 4011977 2.6 ha in size Preuss 1989; Kouchoukos 1998; Smith 2015; KBP notes K 185 Tell Laharn Jebel Abd al-Aziz area EJZ 1-3b 651743 4012900 3.3 ha in size Kouchoukos 1998; KBP notes K 186 Tell Maraza Jebel Abd al-Aziz area EJZ 1-3b 610331 4013619 elliptical conical tell; 2.6 ha Kühne 1978-79; Kouchoukos 1998; Smith 2015 K 187 Tell Samad Jebel Abd al-Aziz area EJZ 1-2 610324 4013486 temporary camp; 0.6 ha in size Kouchoukos 1998; Smith 2015; KBP notes K 189 Near Tell Tamar Jebel Abd al-Aziz area EJZ 3a-3b/4 602611 4053033 4-5 ha Kouchoukos 1998; Smith 2015; KBP notes K 190 Unknown Jebel Abd al-Aziz area EJZ 1-2 595348 4059617 0.5 ha in size Kouchoukos 1998; Smith 2015; KBP notes K 192 Tell Tokal Jebel Abd al-Aziz area EJZ 3a-3b 587931 4052799 4 ha in size Kouchoukos 1998; Smith 2015; ANE K 193 Tell Tuechil Jebel Abd al-Aziz area 3rd millennium 578546 4054853 2.25 ha in size Smith 2015; KBP notes K 194 Tell Salha Jebel Abd al-Aziz area EJZ 3a – 3b 577689 4055777 3.9 ha in size Kouchoukos 1998; Smith 2015; KBP notes K 197 Unknown Jebel Abd al-Aziz area EJZ 1 - 2 582408 4058730 3.3 ha in size Kouchoukos 1998; Smith 2015; KBP notes K 198 Unknown Jebel Abd al-Aziz area 3rd millennium 582506 4058718 2.1 ha in size KBP notes – 3rd mill; Smith 2015 – byz.-rom occupation K 201 Tell Maddaneh Jebel Abd al-Aziz area EJZ 3a-3b 590764 4061175 small village; 1.2 ha in size Kouchoukos 1998; Smith 2015; KBP notes K 202 Unknown Jebel Abd al-Aziz area EJZ 1-3b 591566 4061461 0.1 – 3 ha in size Kouchoukos 1998 K 203 Unknown Jebel Abd a-Aziz area 3rd millennium 615812 4038443 0.1 – 3 ha in size KBP notes K 204 Tell Rhara = al-Gharah Jebel Abd al-Aziz area EJZ 1-2 615215 4038846 0.25 ha in size Kouchoukos 1998; Smith 2015; KBP notes K 205 Unknown Jebel Abd al-Aziz area EJZ 1-2 612768 4038259 2 ha in size Smith 2015; KBP notes K 206 Unknown Jebel Abd al-Aziz area EJZ 1-3b 625146 4038618 0.1 – 3 ha in size Kouchoukos 1998; KBP notes K 207 Unknown Jebel Abd al-Aziz area EJZ 1-2 615412 4010590 2.2 ha in size Kouchoukos 1998; Smith 2015; KBP notes K 208 Tell Alaman Jebel Abd al-Aziz area 3rd millennium 615404 4010523 1 ha in size Kouchoukos 1998; KBP notes K 216 Khirbet ed-Deeb Jebel Abd al-Aziz area EJZ 1 – 3b 642992 3998935 4 ha in size Kouchoukos 1998; KBP notes K 217 Unknown east of RR? 3rd millennium ? ? 0.5 ha in size KBP notes K 219 Unknown Jebel Abd al-Aziz area EJZ 1-3b 646376 3995811 1 ha in size Kouchoukos 1998; KBP notes K 220 Unknown Jebel Abd al-Aziz area 3rd millennium 649441 4040939 0.9 ha in size KBP notes K 223 Unknown Jebel Abd al-Aziz area little 3rd mill. 647741 4040731 2.5 ha in size KBP notes K 229 Unknown Jebel Abd al-Aziz area 3rd millennium 655312 3988075 2.2 ha in size KBP notes K 230 Unknown Jebel Abd al-Aziz area 3rd millennium 652650 3988549 0.75 ha in size KBP notes K 234 Unknown Jebel Abd al-Aziz area EJZ 1-3b 631714 3997361 7 ha in size; kranzhügel Kouchoukos 1998; KBP notes K 235 Unknown Jebel Abd al-Aziz area EJZ 2-3b 595769 4043420 0.1 – 3 ha in size Kouchoukos 1998; KBP notes K 238 Unknown Jebel Abd al-Aziz area EJZ 2-3b 618704 4003468 0.1 – 3 ha in size; conical mound Kouchoukos 1998; KBP notes K 239 Unknown Jebel Abd al-Aziz area 3rd millennium ? ? 0.4 ha in size KBP notes K 240 Umm Khafek Jebel Abd al-Aziz area EJZ 1 – EJZ 3a 627661 4003031 0.1 – 3 ha in size Kouchoukos 1998; KBP notes K 241 Tell Trafawi Jebel Abd al-Aziz area EJZ 1 – 3b 631138 4006127 8 – 15 ha in size Kouchoukos 1998; KBP notes K 242 Tulul Khanzir Jebel Abd al-Aziz area EJZ 3a-3b ? ? 0.28 ha in size KBP notes K 243 Unknown Jebel Abd al-Aziz area EJZ 0-1 ? 591560 4015025 0.25 ha KBP notes K 245 Unknown Jebel Abd al-Aziz area 3rd millennium 592264 4015184 0.25 ha in size KBP notes K 246 Unknown Jebel Abd al-Aziz area 3rd millennium 588064 4007570 unknown dimension KBP notes K 247 Ras al-Beda Jebel Abd al-Aziz area EJZ 1-2 588729 4008249 2.8 ha in size; ceremonial site KBP notes; Kouchoukos 1998 K 250 Unknown Jebel Abd al-Aziz area 3rd millennium 631036 4042155 0.15 ha in size; roughly circular mound KBP notes K 252 Unknown Jebel Abd al-Aziz area 3rd millennium 631386 4043549 0.25 ha in size KBP notes K 255 Unknown Jebel Abd al-Aziz area EJZ 1-2 592705 4035596 0.1 – 3 ha in size Kouchoukos 1998 K 256 Unknown Jebel Abd al-Aziz area Bronze Age 582344 4056115 0.3 ha in size KBP notes K 266 Unknown Jebel Abd al-Aziz area 3rd millennium 621701 4038401 0.9 ha in size KBP notes Tell Atij Middle Khabur Basin EJZ 2-EJZ 3b 667126 4033324 1.4 ha in size KBP notes; Fortin 1998; Weiss 1991; Fortin and Schwartz 2003 Tell Brak Upper Khabur Region EJZ 0-EJZ 5 684118 4059937 40 ha in size KBP notes; Oates 2001; Matthews 2003; Koubková 2015

144

Tell Chagar Bazar Upper Khabur Region EJZ 0 – EJZ 5 669118 4082820 12 ha in size Mallowan 1936, 1937; McMahon, Tunca and Baghdo 2001 Tell Mulla Matar Middle Khabur Basin EJZ 1-3a 664248 4035453 0.54 ha in size KBP notes

145

18 APPENDIX 2

146

AREA AROUND JEBEL ABD AL-AZIZ: SITE SHERD DESCRIPTION 1. Fragment of a bowl with open simple rim Khirbet ed- Deeb Pasta: very fine ware (Metallic Ware) K216MH1 Temper: no visible Surface: reddish yellow (7.5YR6/6); grey (2.5Y6/1) EARLY JEZIRAH DATING

EJZ 4a-b DATING: COMPARISON TELL BRAK: period M (Oates 2001 – fig. 70/405 – differences: dark grey fabric with dark grey, occasionally brown surface, sometimes red-streaked; surface often has vitreous quality; typically Munsell N4/ and N3/)

SITE SHERD DESCRIPTION 2. Fragment of a jar with open simple rim Khirbet ed- Deeb Pasta: fine ware K216NH5 Temper: grit (Ca) Surface: light grey (2.5Y7/2) EARLY JEZIRAH DATING

EJZ 3b DATING: COMPARISON TELL BRAK: period L (Oates 2001 – fig. 1513/531) TELL CHUERA: period ID (Kühne 1970 – fig. 225 – differences: light brown fabric, green to yellow slip)

147

SITE SHERD DESCRIPTION 3. Fragment of a jar with open simple rim Khirbet ed- Pasta: fine ware Deeb Temper: grit (basalt  Ca) K216NH8 Surface: pale yellow (2.5Y7/4); slip EARLY JEZIRAH DATING

EJZ 2/EJZ 3a DATING: COMPARISON TELL BRAK: period J (Oates 2001 – fig. 1781/559 – differences: incised decoration; fig. 1779/559)

SITE SHERD DESCRIPTION 4. Fragment of a bowl with open beaded Khirbet ed- rim Deeb Pasta: fine ware K216NH2 Temper: grit (Ca) Surface: pale yellow (2.5Y8/2); slip EARLY JEZIRAH DATING

EJZ 4a-b DATING: COMPARISON TELL BRAK: period M ( Oates 2001 – fig. 719/461) period M/N (Rova 2011 – fig. 19/107) TELL CHUERA: period IE (Kühne 1970 – fig. 128 – differences: brown to yellow surface)

SITE SHERD DESCRIPTION 5. Fragment of a bowl with closed beaded Khirbet ed- rim Deeb Pasta: very fine ware (Metallic Ware) K216MH2 Temper: no visible Surface: greyish brown (2.5Y5/2) EARLY JEZIRAH DATING

EJZ 4a-b DATING: COMPARISON TELL BRAK: period M (Oates 2001 – fig. 515/445) TELL CHAGAR BAZAR: EJ IVb (Rova 2011 – fig. 4/109 – differences: medium mineral and vegetal tempered fabric)

148

SITE SHERD DESCRIPTION 6. Fragment of a bowl with closed slightly inverted Tell Aklef beaded rim K158NH1 Pasta: fine ware Temper: grit (Ca) Surface: very pale brown (10YR7/4); slip EARLY JEZIRAH DATING

EJZ 1 DATING: COMPARISON TELL BRAK: period J (Matthews 2003 – fig. 10/137 – differences: vegetal temper)

SITE SHERD DESCRIPTION 7. Fragment of a bowl with closed slightly inverted Tell Aklef beaded rim K158NH2 Pasta: very fine ware Temper: no visible Surface: pale yellow (2.5Y8/3) EARLY JEZIRAH DATING

EJZ 3a/EJZ 3b DATING: COMPARISON TELL LEILAN: EJII/III (Rova 2011 – pl. 8/1) TELL MELEBIYA: period 2 (Lebeau 1993 – pl. 158/5 – differences: medium ware)

SITE SHERD DESCRIPTION 8. Fragment of a bowl with open simple rim Tell al- Maghr Pasta: fine ware K155NH2 Temper: grit (Ca) Surface: light brown (10YR7/4); light brown (7.5YR6/4); slip EARLY JEZIRAH DATING

EJZ 3b DATING: COMPARISON TELL BRAK: period L (Matthews 2003 – fig. 4/235 – differences: surface – 2.5Y7/4; vegetal inclusions also; fig. 15/235 – differences: surface – 2.5Y8/2; vegetal inclusions only; fig. 9/237 – differences: surface – buff, vegetal inclusions also) period L/M (Oates 2001 – fig. 1480/527 – differences: gritty buff) TELL BEYDAR: EJ IIIb (Rova 2011 – fig. 7/95 – differences: medium/fine mineral-(limestone, sand/quartz) and vegetal-tempered fabric)

149

SITE SHERD DESCRIPTION 9. Fragment of a bowl with open simple rim Tell al-Maghr Pasta: fine ware K155NH3 Temper: grit (Ca) Surface: pale yellow (2.5Y7/3); self-slip EARLY JEZIRAH DATING

EJZ 4a-b DATING: COMPARISON TELL BRAK: period M (Oates 2001 – fig. 879/477; fig. 430/439) TELL BEYDAR: EJ IVa (Rova 2011 – fig. 11; 14/107)

SITE SHERD DESCRIPTION 10. Fragment of pot with closed slightly inverted simple Tell al-Maghr rim K155NH7 Pasta: fine ware Temper: grit (basalt, Ca) Surface: light grey (2.5Y7/2) EARLY JEZIRAH DATING

EJZ 2/ EJZ 3a/ EJZ 3b DATING: COMPARISON TELL BRAK: period J (Matthews 2003 – fig. 18/149 – differences: surface – buff) period L (Oates 2001 – fig. 1485/527)

150

SITE SHERD DESCRIPTION 11. Fragment of a bowl with closed slightly inverted Tell al-Maghr beaded rim K155NH5 Pasta: fine to medium ware Temper: grit (basalt and Ca) Surface: pale yellow (2.5Y8/3) EARLY JEZIRAH DATING

EJZ 4a –b/ EJZ 5 DATING: COMPARISON TELL BRAK: period N (Oates 2001 – fig. 725/461) TELL CHAGAR BAZAR: EJ IVc (Rova 2011 – fig. 18/107)

SITE SHERD DESCRIPTION 12. Fragment of a bowl with closed beaded rim fragment Tell al-Maghr Pasta: fine ware K155NH6 Temper: grit (Ca > basalt) Surface: pale yellow; (2.5Y7/2) EARLY JEZIRAH DATING

EJZ 1/ EJZ 2/ EJZ 3a DATING: COMPARISON TELL BRAK: period J (Matthews 2003 – fig. 15/159 – differences: decoration – impressed);(Oates 2001 – fig. 1725; 1726/553 – differences: grey-green surface) period K (Matthews 2003 – fig. 14/153) TELL LEILAN: period IIIc (Schwartz 1988 – fig. 2/91 – differences: no visible temper) TELL KHAZNE: period 2 (Amirov 2010 – fig. 5/295 – no information about fabric)

151

SITE SHERD DESCRIPTION 13. Fragment of a bowl with closed Tell al-Maghr slightly inverted beaded rim K155NH4 Pasta: very fine ware Temper: no visible Surface: pale yellow (2.5Y8/3) EARLY JEZIRAH DATING

EJZ 2 DATING: COMPARISON TELL BRAK: period J (Oates 2001 – fig. 1718/553 – differences: fine greenish yellow fabric)

SITE SHERD 14. Tell al-Maghr K155MH3

PERIOD DESCRIPTION DATING: COMPARISON EJZ 4a-b Fragment of cup with flat base TELL BRAK: Pasta: fine ware period M (Oates 2001 – fig. 45/403 – differences: Munsell 5Y6/2 Temper: grit (basalt) „light olive grey“); (Oates 2001 – fig. 1113/493 – differences: gritty buff Surface: brown (10YR5/3) with some chaff or gritty salmon fabric, mica)

SITE SHERD DESCRIPTION 15. Fragment of a bowl with open simple rim Tell Baroud Pasta: fine ware K49NH4 Temper: grit (Ca) Surface: pale yellow (2.5YR7/4) EARLY JEZIRAH DATING

EJZ 2 – EJZ 3a/ EJZ 3b DATING: COMPARISON TELL BRAK: period J (Matthews 2003 – fig. 16/153 – differences: vegetal inclusions also, surface – buff – grey brown) period L (Oates 2001 – fig. 1503/529 – differences: light brown wash on exterior); (Oates 2001 – fig. 1483/527 – differences: some chaff)

152

SITE SHERD DESCRIPTION 16. Fragment of a bowl with open simple rim Tell Baroud Pasta: very fine ware (Metallic Ware) K49MH12 Temper: no visible Surface: yellowish red (5YR5/6); dark reddish grey (5YR4/2) EARLY JEZIRAH DATING

EJZ 3b DATING: COMPARISON TELL BRAK: period L (Matthews 2003 – fig. 7/239 – differences: vegetal and mineral inclusions, surface – 5YR6/6; fig. 6/235 – differences: mineral inclusions only; surface – 5Y6/3) ?; (Oates 2001 – fig. 106/407 – differences: dark grey on ridges, red in grooves) TELL CHUERA: period ID (Kühne 1970 – fig. 11 – differences: reddish fine hard fabric)

SITE SHERD DESCRIPTION 17. Fragment of a bowl with vertical simple rim Tell Baroud Pasta: fine ware K49NH5 Temper: grit (Ca) Surface: pale yellow (2.5Y7/4) EARLY JEZIRAH DATING

EJZ 2/ EJZ 3a/ EJZ 3b DATING: COMPARISON TELL BRAK: period J (Matthews 2003 – fig. 33/161 – differences: surface – pale yellow green, decoration – excised/incised) period L (Oates 2001 –fig. 1447/525) TELL ARBID: ED (Rova 2011 – fig. 4/89) TELL CHUERA: period IC (Kühne 1970 – fig. 93 – differences: buff to green fine fabric with grit inclusions with self- slip)

SITE SHERD DESCRIPTION 18. Fragment of a bowl with closed slightly inverted Tell Baroud simple rim K49NH1 Pasta: fine ware Temper: grit (Ca) Surface: very pale brown (10YR7/4) EARLY JEZIRAH DATING

EJZ 2/ EJZ 3a/ EJZ 3b DATING: COMPARISON TELL BRAK: period J (Matthews 2003 – fig. 25/143 – differences: surface – pale green) ; (Oates 2001 – fig. 1727/553 – differences: fine grey-green fabric) period L (Oates 2001 – fig. 52/403 – differences: common in gritty buff with some chaff ware)

153

SITE SHERD 19. Tell Baroud K49MH1

PERIOD DESCRIPTION DATING: COMPARISON EJZ 3b – Fragment of a pot with demaged undistinguishable rim TELL BRAK: EJZ 4a-b Pasta: very fine ware period M (Oates 2001 – fig. 260/419 – differences: gritty red to brown fabric, Temper: no visible sometimes grey with red slip) Surface: brown (7.5YR4/3), slip TELL CHUERA: period ID (Kühne 1970 – fig. 49 – differences: reddish to brown fine hard fabric)

SITE SHERD DESCRIPTION 20. Fragment of a bowl with open simple rim Tell Bisari Pasta: very fine ware K114MH7 Temper: no visible Surface: pale yellow (2.5Y7/3) to grey (10YR5/1) EARLY JEZIRAH DATING

EJZ 3b DATING: COMPARISON TELL BRAK: period L (Matthews 2003 – fig. 9/237 – differences: vegetal; fig. 20/235 – differences: surface – 5B5/1) TELL CHUERA: period ID (Kühne 1970 – fig. 399)

154

SITE SHERD DESCRIPTION 21. Fragment of a bowl with open simple rim Tell Bisari Pasta: fine ware K114NH1 Temper: grit (Ca) Surface: very pale brown (10YR8/3) – pink– (7.5YR8/4); slip EARLY JEZIRAH DATING

EJZ 3b DATING: COMPARISON TELL BRAK: period L (Matthews 2003 – fig. 22/235 – differences: vegetal inclusions only) TELL LEILAN: ? (Rova 2011 – fig. 15/93 – differences: buff fabric, cream slipped surface)

SITE SHERD DESCRIPTION 22. Fragment of a bowl with closed slightly inverted Tell Bisari beaded rim K114NH2 Pasta: fine ware Temper: grit (Ca) Surface: very pale brown (10YR7/4) EARLY JEZIRAH DATING

EJZ 2/ EJZ 3a DATING: COMPARISON TELL BRAK: period J (Matthews 2003 – fig. 1/147 – differences: vegetal inclusions also, surface – buff); (Oates 2001 – fig. 1726; 1718/553 – differences: fine greenish yellow fabric) period K (Oates 2001 – fig. 1719/553 – differences: gritty buff with some chaff)

SITE SHERD DESCRIPTION 23. Fragment of a bowl with closed beaded rim Tell Bisari Pasta: fine ware K114NH4 Temper: grit (Ca) Surface: very pale brown (10YR8/4) EARLY JEZIRAH DATING EJZ 2/ EJZ 3a DATING: COMPARISON TELL BRAK: period J (Oates 2001 – fig. 1768/559) period K (Matthews 2003 – fig. 5/173 – differences: surface – pale buff green, no visible temper)

155

SITE SHERD DESCRIPTION 24. Fragment of a bowl with open beaded Tell Bisari rim K114MH3 Pasta: fine ware Temper: grit (Ca) Surface: light grey (2.5Y7/2) EARLY JEZIRAH DATING

EJZ 3b DATING: COMPARISON TELL BRAK: period L (Oates 2001 – fig. 1464/525)

SITE SHERD DESCRIPTION 25. Fragment of a bowl with closed beaded Tell Bisari rim K114MH1 Pasta: very fine ware (Metallic Ware) Temper: no visible Surface: brown (7.5YR5/3) EARLY JEZIRAH DATING

EJZ 3b/ EJZ 4a-b DATING: COMPARISON TELL BRAK: period L (Matthews 2003 – fig. 21/231 – differences: surface – dark grey) period M (Oates 2001 – fig. 94/407 – differences: burnished exterior, light grayish brown. lighter brown interior and fabric)

156

SITE SHERD DESCRIPTION 26. Fragment of a decorated body sherd Tell Bisari Pasta: fine ware K114NH7 Temper: grit (Ca) Surface: pink (7.5Y8/3) Decoration: incised-excised EARLY JEZIRAH DATING

(EJZ 1)/ EJZ 2 – final EJZ 2 DATING: COMPARISON TELL BRAK: period J (Oates 2001 – fig. 1783; 1784/559 – differences: dense orange-brown fabric, some chaff) TELL ARBID: EJ II (Rova 2011 – fig. 12/89 – no information about pasta, fabric, surface) TELL LEILAN: period IIIc (Schwartz 1988 – fig. 1/85 – differences: no visible temper, light yellow buff) TELL KHAZNE: period 2 (Amirov 2010 – fig. 3/289 – no information about fabric)

SITE SHERD DESCRIPTION 27. Fragment of a bowl with vertical simple rim Tell Ghasra Pasta: fine ware K168NH2 Temper: grit (Ca) Surface: very pale brown (10YR8/4); self-slip EARLY JEZIRAH DATING

EJZ 4a-b DATING: COMPARISON TELL BRAK: period M (Oates 2001 – fig. 683/459) TELL BEYDAR: EJ IVa (Rova 2011 – fig. 11/107)

SITE SHERD DESCRIPTION 28. Fragment of a bowl with closed slightly inverted Tell Ghasra simple rim K168NH1 Pasta: fine ware Temper: grit (Ca) Surface: very pale brown (10YR7/3); pale yellow (7.5YR8/3); slip EARLY JEZIRAH DATING

EJZ 1/ EJZ 2 DATING: COMPARISON TELL BRAK: period J (Matthews 2003 – fig. 13/157 – differences: vegetal inclusions also) TELL KASHKASHOK 3: EJ II (Rova 2011 – fig. 2/89) TELL ARBID: period IIIc (Schwartz 1993 – fig. 1/89 – differences: no visible temper, light yellow buff) TELL KHAZNE: period 1 (Amirov 2010 – fig. 4/337 – no information about fabric) TELL CHUERA: period IB (Kühne 1970 – fig. 91; 92 – differences: yellow to green self-slip)

157

SITE SHERD DESCRIPTION 29. Fragment of a cup with open beaded rim Tell Ghasra Pasta: fine ware K168NH3 Temper: grit (Ca  basalt) Surface: very pale brown (10YR7/3); self-slip EARLY JEZIRAH DATING

EJZ 4a-b DATING: COMPARISON TELL BRAK: period M (Oates 2001 -fig. 719/461 – differences: surface – gritty buff) TELL BEYDAR: EJ IVa (Rova 2011 – fig. 17/107)

SITE SHERD DESCRIPTION 30. Fragment of a body sherd Tell Ghasra Pasta: very fine ware (Metallic Ware) K168MH1 Temper: no visible Surface: dark grey (2.5Y4/1) EARLY JEZIRAH DATING

EJZ 3b DATING: COMPARISON TELL BRAK: period L/M (Oates 2001 – fig. 106/407 – differences: dark grey fabric with dark grey occasionally brown surface, sometimes red-streaked, surface othern has vitreous quality, typically munsell N4/ and N3) TELL MOZAN: EJ IV (Rova 2011 – fig. 7/105 – differences: fine, mineral-and vegetal-tempered fabric) TELL CHUERA: period ID (Kühne 1970 – fig. 14)

158

SITE SHERD DESCRIPTION 31. Fragment of a bowl with open simple rim Tell Hammam Pasta: fine ware Gharbi Temper: gritt (Ca) K162NH3 Surface: pale yellow (2.5Y8/3) EARLY JEZIRAH DATING

EJZ 3b DATING: COMPARISON TELL BEYDAR: EJ IIIb (Rova 2011 - fig. 7/95 – differences: medium/fine mineral – (limestone, sand/quartz) and vegetal-tempered fabric)

SITE SHERD DESCRIPTION 32. Fragment of a bowl with open simple rim Tell Hammam Pasta: fine to medium ware Gharbi Temper: grit (basalt  Ca) K162NH4 Surface: pale yellow (2.5Y8/3) EARLY JEZIRAH DATING

EJZ 3a DATING: COMPARISON TELL BRAK: period K (Matthews 2003 – fig. 14/161)

159

SITE SHERD DESCRIPTION 33. Fragment of a bowl with closed slightly inverted Tell Hammam simple rim Gharbi Pasta: fine ware K162NH2 Temper: grit (Ca) Surface: very pale brown (10YR8/4); slip EARLY JEZIRAH DATING

EJZ 1/ EJZ2/ EJZ 3a DATING: COMPARISON TELL BRAK: period J (Matthews 2003 – fig. 13/157 – differences: vegetal inclusions also) TELL KASHKASHOK 3: EJ II (Rova 2011 – fig. 2/89) TELL LEILAN: period IIIc (Schwartz 1993 – fig. 7/89 – differences: no visible temper, light yellow buff) TELL KHAZNE: period 1 (Amirov 2010 – fig. 4/337 – no information about fabric) TELL CHUERA: period IB (Kühne 1970 – fig. 120 – differences: brown to grey fabric with grit inclusions)

SITE SHERD DESCRIPTION 34. Fragment of a bowl with closed slightly inverted Tell Hammam beaded rim Gharbi Pasta: fine ware K162NH5 Temper: grit (basalt) Surface: pale yellow (2.5Y7/4) EARLY JEZIRAH DATING

EJZ 2/ EJZ 3a DATING: COMPARISON TELL BRAK: period J (Matthews 2002 – fig. 1/147 – differences: vegetal inclusions also); period K (Oates 2001 – fig. 1721/553) TELL LEILAN: EJII/EJ IIIa (Rova 2011 – fig. 2/93 – differences: fine green buff fabric, no visible temper)

160

SITE SHERD DESCRIPTION 35. Fragment of a ring base Tell Hammam Pasta: fine ware Gharbi Temper: grit (Ca) K162NH7 Surface: very pale brown (10YR8/2); slip EARLY JEZIRAH DATING

EJZ 3b DATING: COMPARISON TELL BRAK: period L (Oates 2001 – fig. 1201/499 – differences: gritty buff)

SITE SHERD DESCRIPTION 36. Fragment of a bowl with open simpel rim Tell Hammam Pasta: fine ware Sharki Temper: grit (Ca) K161NH3 Surface: very pale brown (10YR7/4); self-slip EARLY JEZIRAH DATING

EJZ 4a-b DATING: COMPARISON TELL BRAK: period M (Oates 2001 – fig. 1166/497; 1167/497; fig. 1136/495) TELL BEYDAR: EJ IVa (Rova 2011 – fig. 15/107)

SITE SHERD DESCRIPTION 37. Fragment of a bowl with open simple rim Tell Hammam Pasta: fine ware Sharki Temper: grit (basalt) K161NH4 Surface: pale yellow (2.5Y7/4); slip EARLY JEZIRAH DATING

EJZ 3b/EJZ 4a-b DATING: COMPARISON TELL BRAK: period M (Oates 2001 – fig. 1162/497; fig. 998/485) TELL MELEBIYA: EJ IIIb (Rova 2011 – fig. 9/95 – differences: medium ware)

161

SITE SHERD DESCRIPTION 38. Fragment of a bowl with open simple rim Tell Hammam Pasta:fine ware Sharki Temper: grit (basalt > Ca) K161NH1 Surface: pale yellow; (2.5Y8/4) EARLY JEZIRAH DATING

EJZ 3a/ EJZ 3b DATING: COMPARISON TELL BRAK: period K (Matthews 2003 – fig. 9/159 – differences: decoration – neat grooves) period L (Oates 2001 – fig. 1479; 1480/527); (Rova 2011 – fig. 12/93)

SITE SHERD DESCRIPTION 39. Fragment of a pot with open simple rim Tel Hammam Pasta: fine ware Sharki Temper: grit (basalt) K161NH8 Surface: pale yellow (2.5Y7/4); self-slip EARLY JEZIRAH DATING

final EJZ 2/ EJZ 3a/ EJZ 3b DATING: COMPARISON TELL BRAK: period L (Oates 2001 – fig. 1518/531 – differences: little visible temper)? TELL MELEBIYA: period 4 (Lebeau 1993 – fig. 1/146 – differences: buff to orange surface)

SITE SHERD DESCRIPTION 40. Fragment of a bowl with simple rim Tell Hammam Pasta: fine ware Sharki Temper: grit (Ca) K161NH10 Surface: pale yellow (2.5Y8/2); slip EARLY JEZIRAH DATING

EJZ 3b DATING: COMPARISON TELL BRAK: period L (Oates 2001 – fig. 1447/525)

162

SITE SHERD DESCRIPTION 41. Fragment of a cup with vertical beaded Tell Hammam rim Sharki Pasta: fine ware K161NH6 Temper: grit (Ca) Surface: pale yellow; (2.5Y8/3) EARLY JEZIRAH DATING

EJZ 4a-b DATING: COMPARISON TELL BRAK: period M (Oates 2001 – fig. 876/477) TELL BEYDAR: EJ IVa (Rova 2011 – fig. 15/107)

SITE SHERD DESCRIPTION 42. Fragment of a bowl with open simple rim Tell Hammam Pasta: fine ware Sharki Temper: grit (basalt) K161MH3 Surface: light grey (2.5Y7/2) EARLY JEZIRAH DATING

EJZ 3a DATING: COMPARISON TELL BRAK: period K (Matthews 2003 – fig. 3/173 – differences: vegetal inclusions also) ?

SITE SHERD DESCRIPTION 43. Fragment of a bowl with closed slightly Tell Hammam inverted beaded rim Sharki Pasta: fine ware K161NH7 Temper: straw-grit (white > basalt) Surface: very pale brown; (10YR8/2) EARLY JEZIRAH DATING

EJZ 3a DATING: COMPARISON TELL BRAK: period K (Oates 2001 – fig. 1719/553 – differences: gritty buff with some chaff) TELL CHUERA: EJ IIIa (Rova 2011 – fig. 18/93 – differences: medium/fine mineral- tempered (sand/quartz) fabric)

163

SITE SHERD DESCRIPTION 44. Fragment of cup with closed slightly inverted beaded rim Tell Hammam Pasta: fine ware Sharki Temper: grit (Ca, basalt) K161NH2 Surface: pale yellow (2.5Y8/3) EARLY JEZIRAH DATING

EJZ 3a-b/ EJZ 4a-b DATING: COMPARISON TELL BRAK: period M (Oates 2001 – fig. 719/461) TELL BEYDAR: EJ IVa (Rova 2011 – fig. 15/107) TELL LEILAN: period II (Schwartz 1993 – fig. 4/81 differences: no visible temper)

SITE SHERD DESCRIPTION 45. Fragment of a bowl with closed slightly inverted beaded Tell Hammam rim Sharki Paste: fine ware K161NH9 Temper: grit (Ca) Surface: very pale brown (10YR8/3) EARLY JEZIRAH DATING

EJZ 4a-b DATING: COMPARISON TELL BRAK: period M (Oates 2001 – fig. 1010/485 – differences: buff surface)

SITE SHERD DESCRIPTION 46. Fragment of a bowl with open beaded rim Tell Hammam Pasta fine ware Sharki Temper: grit (Ca) K161NH5 Surface: pale yellow (2.5Y7/2); slip EARLY JEZIRAH DATING

EJZ 3b DATING: COMPARISON TELL BRAK: period L (Matthews 2003 – fig. 11/239) TELL CHUERA: period ID/IE (Rova 2011 – fig. 16/107 – differences: medium/fine ware)

164

SITE SHERD DESCRIPTION 47. Fragment of a cup with closed slightly inverted simple rim Tell Harba Pasta: fine ware K178NH2 Temper: grit (Ca) Surface: pale yellow (2.5Y7/4) EARLY JEZIRAH DATING

EJZ 2/ EJZ 3a DATING: COMPARISON TELL BRAK: period K (Oates 2001 – fig. 1719/553 – differences: gritty buff with some chaff) TELL LEILAN: EJII/EJ IIIa (Rova 2011 – fig. 2/93 – differences: fine green buff fabric, no visible temper) TELL KHAZNE: period 1 (Amirov 2010 – fig. 2/337 – no information about fabric)

SITE SHERD DESCRIPTION 48. Fragment of a bowl with open simple rim Tell Khazneh Pasta: fine ware KZNH1 Temper: grit (basalt > Ca) Surface: very pale brown (7.5YR8/4); self-slip EARLY JEZIRAH DATING

EJZ 1/ EJZ 2/ EJZ 3b DATING: COMPARISON TELL BRAK: period J (Matthews 2003 – fig. 14/161 – differences: surface – buff) period L (Rova 2011 – pl. 7/12 - information just about one: mineral-tempered fabric) TELL KHAZNE: period 2 (Amirov 2010 – fig. 9/331 – differences: no information about pasta) – EJZ 1-2 TELL CHUERA: period TCH IB (Kühne 1970 – fig. 105) TELL MELEBIYA: period 4 (Lebeau 1993 – pl. 153/2)

SITE SHERD DESCRIPTION 49. Fragment of a cup with vertical simle rim Tell Khazneh Pasta: fine ware KZNH2 Temper: grit (Ca) Surface: pale yellow (2.5Y8/3); self-slip EARLY JEZIRAH DATING EJZ 2/ EJZ 3a DATING: COMPARISON TELL BRAK: period K (Matthews 2003 – fig. 13/157 – differences: vegetal temper); (Matthews 2003 - fig. 25/171 – differences: vegetal temper) TELL CHUERA: period TCH IB-IC (Kühne 1970 – fig. 136) TELL MELEBIYA: Period 3 (Lebeau 1993 – pl. 170/5)

165

SITE SHERD DESCRIPTION 50. Fragment of a jar with open collared rim Tell Khazneh Pasta: fine ware KZNH7 Temper: grit (Ca) Surface: pale yellow (2.5Y7/4); slip EARLY JEZIRAH DATING

EJZ 1/ EJZ 2/ EJZ 3b DATING: COMPARISON TELL BRAK: period J ( Matthews 2003 - fig. 27/143) period L (Oates 2001 – fig. 1521/531) TELL KNEIDIJ: EJ IIIb (Rova 2011 – pl. 10/2 - differences: wet- smoothed surface)

SITE SHERD DESCRIPTION 51. Fragment of a bowl with vertical beaded rim Tell Khazneh Pasta: fine ware K157NH1 Temper: grit (Ca, basalt) Surface: pale yellow (2.5Y8/3); slip EARLY JEZIRAH DATING

EJZ 2/ EJZ 3a/ EJZ 3b DATING: COMPARISON TELL BRAK: period K (Matthews 2003 - fig. 18/169 – differences: grooved decoration) TELL KHAZNE: period 1 (Amirov 2010 – fig. 8/337 – differences: no information about pasta, profile sets completely) TELL MELEBIYA: Period 2 (Lebeau 1993 – pl. 170/15 – differences: medium ware) SITE SHERD DESCRIPTION 52. Fragment of a bowl with closed simple rim Tell Khazneh Pasta: fine ware KZNH3 Temper: grit (Ca) Surface: very pale brown (10YR8/3) EARLY JEZIRAH DATING

EJZ / EJZ 3a DATING: COMPARISON TELL BRAK: period K (Matthews 2003 – fig. 13/168 – differences: surface – 2.5Y8/2) TELL KHAZNE: period 1 (Amirov 2010 – fig. 3/351 – differences: no information about pasta, profile sits completely)

166

SITE SHERD DESCRIPTION 53. Fragment of a bowl with closed beaded rim Tell Khazneh Pasta: fine ware KZNH4 Temper: no visible Surface: pale yellow (2.5Y7/4) EARLY JEZIRAH DATING

EJZ 1/ EJZ 3a DATING: COMPARISON TELL BRAK: period K (Matthews 2003 – fig. 25/169 - differences: mineral temper, surface – buff colour; fig. 5/1723, differences: surface – pale buff green) TELL KHAZNE: period 2 (Amirov 2010 – fig. 4/293 – differences: no information about pasta, profile sits completely)

SITE SHERD DESCRIPTION 54. Fragment of a bowl with closed beaded rim (triangular rim) Tell Khazneh Pasta: fine ware KZNH6 Temper: no visible Surface: pale yellow (2.5Y8/2); self-slip EARLY JEZIRAH DATING (EJZ 0)/ EJZ 1 DATING: COMPARISON TELL BRAK: period H (Rova 2011 – pl. 1/5 – differences: medium/fine grey fabric, wet-smoothed and slightly burnished surface very slight ribbing on upper sides); TELL KHAZNE: period 4 (Amirov 2010 – fig. 1/293 – differences: no information about pasta, profile sits completely)

SITE SHERD DESCRIPTION 55. Fragment of a bowl with closed slightly inverted beaded rim Tell Khazneh Pasta: fine ware KZNH5 Temper: straw-grit temper (Ca) Surface: pale yellow (2.5Y7/4) EARLY JEZIRAH DATING

EJZ 3a DATING: COMPARISON TELL BRAK: period K (Matthews 2003 - (fig. 28/171 – differences: only mineral inclusions)

167

SITE SHERD DESCRIPTION 56. Fragment of a cup with open simple rim Tell Mabtu´a Pasta: fine ware K175NH3 Temper: grit (black  Ca) Surface: very pale brown (10YR7/3) EARLY JEZIRAH DATING

EJZ 4a-b DATING: COMPARISON TELL BRAK: period M (Oates 2001 – fig. 465/441 – differences: gritty salmon fabric, mica with some chaff; fig. 1202/499 – differences: gritty buff surface, mica with some chaff)

SITE SHERD DESCRIPTION 57. Fragment of a jar with open simple rim Tell Mabtu´a Pasta: fine ware K175NH2 Temper: grit (Ca, basalt) Surface: pale yellow (2.5Y8/3) EARLY JEZIRAH DATING

EJZ 3a DATING: COMPARISON TELL BRAK: period J (Matthews 2003 – fig. 26/143 – differences: vegetal inclusions also; Oates 2001 – fig. 1777/559) TELL BARRI: EJ II-EJ IIIa (Rova 2011 – fig. 5/91 – differences: medium/fine vegetal inclusions also, slipped surface)

SITE SHERD DESCRIPTION 58. Fragment of a bowl with closed slightly inverted Tell Mabtu´a simple rim K175NH1 Pasta: fine ware Temper: grit (basalt) Surface: pale yellow (2.5Y7/3) EARLY JEZIRAH DATING

EJZ 2 DATING: COMPARISON TELL BRAK: period J (Matthews 2003 – fig. 13/157 – differences: vegetal inclusions also) TELL KASHKASHOK 3: EJ II (Rova 2011 – fig. 2/89) TELL KHAZNE: period 1 (Amirov 2010 – fig. 4/337 – no information about fabric)

168

SITE SHERD DESCRIPTION 59. Fragment of a bowl with open simple rim Tell Mabtuh Pasta: fine ware Gharbi Temper: grit (Ca) K151NH2 Surface: pale yellow – pink (2.5Y8/3); (5.YR7/4) EARLY JEZIRAH DATING

EJZ 3a/ EJZ 3b DATING: COMPARISON TELL BRAK: period K (Matthews 2003 – fig. 14/161 – differences: surface – only pale yellow) period L (Oates 2001 – fig. 1443/525) TELL CHUERA: period IC (Kühne 1970 – fig. 111)

SITE SHERD DESCRIPTION 60. Fragment of a cup with open simple rim Tell Mabtuh Pasta: fine ware Gharbi Temper: grit (Ca, basalt) K151NH1 Surface: pale yellow (2.5Y8/4) - slightly corrugated surface EARLY JEZIRAH DATING

EJZ 4a-b DATING: COMPARISON TELL BEYDAR: EJ IVa (Rova 2011 – fig. 11/107)

SITE SHERD DESCRIPTION 61. Fragment of a pot with open simple rim Tell Mabtuh Pasta: fine ware Gharbi Temper: grit (basalt) K151MH2 Surface: reddish yellow (7.5YR7/6); self-slip EARLY JEZIRAH DATING

EJZ 3a DATING: COMPARISON TELL BRAK: period K (Matthews 2003 – fig. 8/171 – differences: surface – pale green) MOHAMMED DIYAB: EJ IIIa (Rova 2011 – fig. 3/91)

169

SITE SHERD DESCRIPTION 62. Fragment of a jar with open beaded rim Tell Mabtuh Pasta: fine to medium ware Gharbi Temper: grit (basalt) K151NH4 Surface: pale yellow (2.5Y8/2) EARLY JEZIRAH DATING

EJZ 2/ EJZ 3a/ EJZ 3b DATING: COMPARISON TELL BRAK: period J (Matthews 2003 – fig. 14/149) TELL MELEBIYA: Period 2 (Lebeau 1993 – fig. 22/141)

SITE SHERD DESCRIPTION 63. Fragment of a body sherd Tell Mabtuh Pasta: very fine ware (Metallic Ware) Gharbi Temper: no visible K151MH3 Surface: dark grey (10YR4/1); brown (7.5YR5/4) EARLY JEZIRAH DATING

EJZ 3b DATING: COMPARISON TELL BRAK: period L (Oates 2001 – fig. 36/403 – differences: dark grey fabric with dark grey, occasionally brown surface, sometimes red-streaked; surface often has vitreous quality; typically Munsell N4/ and N3/) TELL CHUERA: EJ IIIb (Rova 2011 -fig. 4/99 – differences: “Metallic Ware”, fine grey brown fabric)

SITE SHERD DESCRIPTION 64. Fragment of a pot with open simple rim Tell Mabtuh Pasta: fine ware Sharqi Temper: grit (basalt) MENH3 Surface: pale yellow (2.5Y8/4) EARLY JEZIRAH DATING

EJZ 2 DATING: COMPARISON TELL BRAK: period J (Matthews 2003 – fig. 26/143 – differences: vegetal inclusions also; Oates 2001 – fig. 1777/559) TELL KHAZNE: period 1 (Amirov 2010 – fig. 2/305 – no information about fabric)

170

SITE SHERD DESCRIPTION 65. Fragment of a bowl with vertical simple rim Tell Mabtuh Pasta: fine ware Sharqi Temper: grit (basalt, Ca) K128NH1 Surface: pale yellow; (2.5Y7/2) EARLY JEZIRAH DATING

EJZ 1/ EJZ 2/ EJZ 3a/ EJZ 3b DATING: COMPARISON TELL BRAK: period J (Matthews 2003 – fig. 25/171 – differences: vegetal inclusions also) period L (Oates 2001 – fig. 1436/525) TELL ARBID: ED (Rova 2011 – fig. 4/89) TELL LEILAN: period IIIc (Schwartz 1988 – fig. 6/89 – differences: no visible temper) TELL KHAZNE: period 1 (Amirov 2010 – fig. 6/293 – no information about fabric) TELL CHUERA: period IB (Kühne 1970 – fig. 136 – differences: brown to grey fine fabric) TELL MELEBIYA: Period 4 (Lebeau 1993 – fig. 2/153 – differences: buff to orange surface)

SITE SHERD DESCRIPTION 66. Fragment of a bowl with closed slightly Tell Mabtuh inverted simple rim Sharqi Pasta: fine ware K128NH3 Temper: straw-grit (Ca) Surface: very pale brown (10YR7/3) EARLY JEZIRAH DATING

EJZ 2/ EJZ 3a/ EJZ 3b DATING: COMPARISON TELL BRAK: period J (Matthews 2003 – fig. 13/157 – differences: surface – pale yellow) period L (Oates 2001 – fig. 1468/527) TELL KASHKASHOK III: EJ II (Rova 2011 – fig. 2/5) TELL KHAZNE: period 1 (Amirov 2010 – fig. 6/293; 4/33ý – no information about fabric) TELL CHUERA: period IB (Kühne 1970 – fig. 120 – differences: brown to grey fabric)

171

SITE SHERD DESCRIPTION 67. Fragment of a shallow bowl with open beaded rim Tell Mabtuh Pasta:fine ware Sharqi Temper: grit (Ca > black) MENH2 Surface: pale yellow (5Y7/4) EARLY JEZIRAH DATING

EJZ 1 DATING: COMPARISON TELL BRAK: period J (Matthews 2003 – fig. 2/139 – differences: surface – very pale brown)

SITE SHERD DESCRIPTION 68. Fragment of a bowl with open beaded rim Tell Mabtuh Pasta: fine ware Sharqi Temper: grit (Ca) K128NH5 Surface: pale yellow (2.5Y7/3) EARLY JEZIRAH DATING

EJZ 3a DATING: COMPARISON TELL BRAK: period K (Oates 2001 – fig. 1719/559) TELL CHUERA: period IC (Kühne 1970 – fig. 113 – differences: reddish to yellow fabric)

SITE SHERD DESCRIPTION 69. Fragment of a bowl with open simple rim Tell Mahrum Pasta: fine ware K180NH3 Temper: grit (Ca) Surface: very pale brown (10YR8/4); slip EARLY JEZIRAH DATING

EJZ 3a/ EJZ 3b DATING: COMPARISON TELL BRAK: period K (Matthews 2003 – fig. 27/171 – differences: surface – pale green yellow) period L (Matthews 2003 – fig. 9/237 – differences: vegetal inclusion also, buff surface; fig. 20/235 – differences: surface – 5B5/1) TELL MELEBIYA: EJ IIIb (Rova 2011 – fig. 9/95 – differences: medium)

172

SITE SHERD DESCRIPTION 70. Fragment of a pot with open simple rim Tell Mahrum Pasta: fine ware K180NH5 Temper: grit (Ca) Surface: very pale brown (10YR8/3); slip EARLY JEZIRAH DATING

EJZ 3b DATING: COMPARISON TELL BRAK: period L (Matthews 2003 – fig. 5/239 – differences: vegetal inclusions also; fig. 3/241 – differences: vegetal inclusions also, buff surface); (Oates 2001 – fig. 1518/531 – differences: little visible temper)

SITE SHERD DESCRIPTION 71. Fragment of a bowl with open inverted beaded rim Tell Mahrum Pasta: fine K180NH4 Temper: grit (Ca, basalt) Surface: pale yellow (2.5Y8/2) EARLY JEZIRAH DATING

EJZ 4a-b DATING: COMPARISON TELL BRAK: period M (Oates 2001 – fig. 910/479 – differences: mica with some chaff)

SITE SHERD DESCRIPTION 72. Fragment of a bowl with closed simple rim Tell Mahrum Pasta: fine ware K180NH1 Temper: grit (Ca) Surface: pale yellow (2.5Y8/3); slip EARLY JEZIRAH DATING

EJZ 1 DATING: COMPARISON TELL LEILAN: EJ 1 (Rova 2010 – fig. 4/83 – differences: light greenish yellow buff surface) TELL KHAZNE: period 2 (Amirov 2010 –fig. 2/343 – no information about fabric)

173

SITE SHERD DESCRIPTION 73. Fragment of a bowl with closed simple rim Tell Pasta: fine ware Mahrum Temper: grit (basalt, Ca) K180NH2 Surface: pale yellow (2.5Y8/3); slip EARLY JEZIRAH DATING

EJZ 3a/ EJZ 3b DATING: COMPARISON TELL BRAK: period L (Matthews 2003 – fig. 11/237 – differences: vegetal inclusions also, green surface) TELL CHUERA: period IC (Kühne 1970 – fig. 182)

SITE SHERD DESCRIPTION 74. Fragment of a bowl with open simple rim Tell Pasta: fine ware Marthya Temper: grit (basalt) K184NH1 Surface: very pale brown (10YR8/4); self-slip EARLY JEZIRAH DATING

EJZ 3b DATING: COMPARISON TELL BRAK: period L (Oates 2001 – fig. 1443/525 – differences: buff surface)

174

SITE SHERD DESCRIPTION 75. Fragment of a bowl with closed slightly inverted Tell Marthya simple rim K184NH2 Pasta: fine ware Temper: grit (Ca) Surface: pale yellow (2.5Y8/3) EARLY JEZIRAH DATING

EJZ 2/ EJZ 3a DATING: COMPARISON TELL BRAK: period J (Matthews 2003 – fig. 13/157 – differences: vegetal inclusions also) TELL KASHKASHOK III: EJ II (Rova 2011 – fig. 2/89) TELL LEILAN: period IIIc (Schwartz 1988 – fig. 7/89 – differences: no visible temper) TELL KHAZNE: period 1 (Amirov 2010 – fig. 5/337 – no information about fabric)

SITE SHERD DESCRIPTION 76. Fragment of a bowl with closed slightly inverted Tell Marthya simple rim K184NH3 Pasta: fine ware Temper: grit (basalt) Surface: very pale brown (10YR8/3); slip EARLY JEZIRAH DATING

EJZ 1/ EJZ 3b DATING: COMPARISON TELL BRAK: period J (Matthews 2003 – fig. 28/143) period L/M (Oates 2001 – fig. 1468/527) TELL KHAZNE: period 1 (Amirov 2010 – fig. 3/337 – no information about fabric)

175

SITE SHERD DESCRIPTION 77. Fragment of a bowl with open simple rim Tell Metyaha Pasta: fine ware K183NH2 Temper: grit (Ca, basalt) Surface: pale yellow (2.5Y7/3); self-slip EARLY JEZIRAH DATING

EJZ 3a/ EJZ 3b DATING: COMPARISON TELL BRAK: period L (Matthews 2003 – fig. 9/237 – differences: vegetal inclusions also; fig. 15/235 – differences: vegetal inclusions only; fig. 8/233); (Oates 2001 – fig. 1450/525 – differences: pale wash); period L/M (Oates 2001 – fig. 1479/527) TELL BEYDAR: EJ IIIa (Rova 2011 – fig. 10/93 – differences: medium/fine ware)

SITE SHERD DESCRIPTION 78. Fragment of a bowl with open simle rim Tell Metyaha Pasta: fine ware K183NH1 Temper: grit (basalt  Ca) Surface: pale yellow (2.5Y8/2) EARLY JEZIRAH DATING

EJZ 2/ EJZ 3a/ EJZ 3b DATING: COMPARISON TELL BRAK: period J (Matthews 2003 – fig. 10/149) period L (Oates 2001 – fig. 1439/525) period L/M (Oates 2001 – fig. 1471/527 – differences: some chaff also) TELL KHAZNE: period 1 (Amirov 2010 – fig. 2/333 – no information about fabric)

176

SITE SHERD DESCRIPTION 79. Fragment of a bowl with closed beaded rim Tell Metyaha Pasta: fine ware K183NH3 Temper: grit (Ca) Surface: light grey (2.5Y7/2); slip EARLY JEZIRAH DATING

(EJZ 0)/ EJZ 1 DATING: COMPARISON TELL BRAK: period H (Oates 2001 – fig. 1728/553) period J (Matthews 2003 – fig. 21/141 – differences: surface – pale yellow) TELL LEILAN: period IIIc (Schwartz 1988 – fig. 5/89 – differences: straw-tempered ware, light yellow buff)

SITE SHERD DESCRIPTION 80. Fragment of a bowl with open simple rim Tell Mu´azzar Pasta: fine ware K39NH1 Temper: grit (basalt, Ca) Surface: pale yellow (2.5Y7/3) EARLY JEZIRAH DATING

EJZ 3b DATING: COMPARISON TELL BRAK: period L (Matthews 2003 – fig. 10/235 – differences: vegetal inclusions only; fig. 9/245) period L/M (Oates 2001 – fig. 1479/527)

SITE SHERD DESCRIPTION 81. Fragment of a pot with open simple rim Tell Mu´azzar Pasta: fine ware MZNH4 Temper: grit (Ca > basalt) Surface: pale yellow (2.5Y8/3); slip EARLY JEZIRAH DATING

EJZ 3b DATING: COMPARISON TELL BRAK: period L (Oates 2001 – fig. 1516; 1518 /531) TELL LEILAN: period II (Schwarz 1988 – fig. 10/83 – differences: no visible temper) TELL CHUERA: period ID (Kühne 1970 – fig. 206 – differences: buff to green fabric)

177

SITE SHERD DESCRIPTION 82. Fragment of ring base Tell Mu´azzar Pasta: fine ware MZNH2 Temper: grit (Ca) Surface: very pale brown (10YR7/4) EARLY JEZIRAH DATING

EJZ 3a DATING: COMPARISON TELL BRAK: period K (Matthews 2003 – fig. 23/171 – differences: decoration, vegetal inclusions only) TELL LEILAN: period II (Schwartz 1988 – fig. 9/81 – differences: no visible temper, light yellow buff)

SITE SHERD DESCRIPTION 83. Fragment of a bowl with open beaded rim Tell Mu´azzar Pasta: fine ware K39NH4 Temper: grit (Ca) Surface: pale yellow (2.5Y7/4) EARLY JEZIRAH DATING

EJZ 3b DATING: COMPARISON TELL BRAK: period L (Matthews 2003 – fig. 15/239; fig. 11/239) TELL CHUERA: period IE (Kühne 1970 – fig. 97 – differences: buff to green fine fabric)

SITE SHERD DESCRIPTION 84. Fragment of a bowl with open beaded rim Tell Mu´azzar Pasta: fine ware MZNH1 Temper: grit (Ca) Surface: pink (7.5YR7/4); reddish yellow (5YR6/6) EARLY JEZIRAH DATING

EJZ 3a DATING: COMPARISON TELL BRAK: period K (Matthews 2003 – fig. 14/167 – differences: surface – white buff)

178

SITE SHERD DESCRIPTION 85. Fragment of a bowl with closed slightly inverted Tell Mu´azzar simple rim K39NH3 Pasta: fine ware Temper: grit (Ca) Surface: very pale brown – pink; (10YR7/4) – (7.5YR7/4); slip EARLY JEZIRAH DATING

EJZ 3b DATING: COMPARISON TELL BRAK: period L (Matthews 2003 – fig. 1/239) TELL CHUERA: period ID (Kühne 1970 – fig. 91)

SITE SHERD DESCRIPTION 86. Fragment of a bowl with closed slightly inverted Tell Mu´azzar simple rim K39NH6 Pasta: fine ware Temper: grit (basalt > Ca) Surface: pale yellow (2.5Y7/3) EARLY JEZIRAH DATING

EJZ 3b DATING: COMPARISON TELL BRAK: period L (Oates 2001 – fig. 1447/525)

179

SITE SHERD DESCRIPTION 87. Fragment of a bowl with closed slightly inverted beaded rim Tell Mu´azzar Pasta: fine ware K39NH2 Temper: grit (Ca) Surface: pale yellowish brown (2.5Y6/4); self-slip EARLY JEZIRAH DATING

EJZ 1/ EJZ 2 DATING: COMPARISON TELL BRAK: Period J (Oates 2001 – fig. 1725; 1726/553 – differences: grey-green fabric)

SITE SHERD DESCRIPTION 88. Fragment of a bowl with closed slightly iverted beaded rim Tell Mu´azzar Pasta: fine ware K39NH7 Temper: grit (basalt > Ca) Surface: pale yellow (2.5Y8/3); self-slip EARLY JEZIRAH DATING

EJZ 2/ EJZ 3a DATING: COMPARISON TELL BRAK: period J (Matthews 2003 – fig. 5/141 – differences: surface – green) period K (Matthews 2003 – fig. 14/167 – differences: surface – white buff); (Oates 2001 – fig. 1719/553 – differences: some chaff) TELL KHAZNE: period 1 (Amirov 2010 – fig. 2/337 – no information about fabric)

SITE SHERD DESCRIPTION 89. Fragment of a bowl with closed beaded rim Tell Mu´azzar Pasta: very fine ware (Metallic Ware) K39MH5 Temper: no visible Surface: dark grey (2.5Y4/1) EARLY JEZIRAH DATING

EJZ 4a-b DATING: COMPARISON TELL BRAK: period M (Oates 2001 – fig. 92/407) TELL CHUERA: period IE (Kühne 1970 – fig. 24)

180

SITE SHERD DESCRIPTION 90. Fragment of a ring base Tell Mu´azzar Pasta: fine ware MZNH3 Temper: grit (basalt and Ca) Surface: very pale brown (10YR8/4) EARLY JEZIRAH DATING

EJZ 1 DATING: COMPARISON TELL BRAK: period J (Matthews 2003 – fig. 9/141 – differences: vegetal inclusions also) ? TELL LEILAN: period IIIc (Schwartz 1988 - fig. 4/93 – differences: medium straw-tempered wheel-made ware, yellow buff, cream slip) TELL CHUERA: period IB (Kühne 1970 - fig. 283 – differences: red to buff fabric with grit inclusions, greenish self-slip) SITE SHERD DESCRIPTION 91. Fragment of a body sherd Tell Mu´azzar Pasta: very fine ware (Metallic Ware) K39MH6 Temper: no visible Surface: red (5YR5/6) EARLY JEZIRAH DATING

EJZ 3b DATING: COMPARISON TELL CHUERA: period ID (Kühne 1970 – fig. 23; 37 – differences: reddish to brown fine fabric, clinky)

SITE SHERD DESCRIPTION 92. Fragment of a body sherd Tell Mu´azzar Pasta: very fine ware (Metallic Ware) K39MH14 Temper: no visible Surface: black (2.5Y2.5/1) EARLY JEZIRAH DATING EJZ 3b/ EJZ 4a-b DATING: COMPARISON TELL BRAK: period M (Oates 2001 – fig 75/405 – differences: slight ribbing on interior); (Oates 2001 – fig. 114/407 – differences: heavy interior ribbing) TELL CHUERA: period ID (Kühne 1970 – fig. 48)

181

SITE SHERD DESCRIPTION 93. Fragment of a body sherd Tell Pasta: very fine ware (Metallic Mu´azzar Ware) K39MH15 Temper: no visible Surface: dark grey (10YR4/1) EARLY JEZIRAH DATING

EJZ 3b DATING: COMPARISON TELL BRAK: period L/M (Oates 2001 – fig. 106/407 – differences: dark grey on ridges, red in grooves); (Oates 2001 – fig. 124; 126; 130/409 – differences: polished surface, body black, rim and neck brown) TELL CHUERA: period ID (Kühne 1970 – fig. 48 – differences: grey to black fine hard fabric)

SITE SHERD DESCRIPTION 94. Fragment of a jar with open beaded Tell Tokal rim K192NH2 Pasta: fine ware Temper: grit (basalt) Surface: pale yellow (2.5Y7/3); slip EARLY JEZIRAH DATING

EJZ 1/ EJZ 3b DATING: COMPARISON TELL BRAK: period J (Matthews 2003 – fig. 27/143) period L (Oates 2001 – fig. 1526/531 – differences: salmon fabric)

182

SITE SHERD DESCRIPTION 95. Fragment of a bowl with closed slightly inverted simple rim Tell Tokal Pasta: fine ware K192NH1 Temper: grit (Ca) Surface: very pale brown (10YR7/4) EARLY JEZIRAH DATING

EJZ 1/ EJZ 2/ EJZ 3a DATING: COMPARISON TELL BRAK: period J (Matthews 2003 – fig. 13/157 – differences: surface- pale buff, vegetal inclusions also) TELL KASHKASHOK III: EJ II (Rova 2011 – fig. 2/89) TELL LEILAN: period IIIc (Schwartz 1988 – fig. 7/89 – differences: no visible temper, light yellow buff) TELL KHAZENE: period 1 (Amirov 2010 – fig. 6/293 – no information about fabric) TELL CHUERA: period IB (Kühne 1970 – fig. 136 – differences: brown to grey fine fabric)

SITE SHERD DESCRIPTION 96. Fragmento of a cup with open simple rim Tell Trafawi Pasta: very fine ware (Metallic Ware) K241MH2 Temper: no visible temper Surface: dark grey (7.5YR4/1), brown (7.5YR5/3) EARLY JEZIRAH DATING

EJZ 3b DATING: COMPARISON TELL BRAK: period L (Matthews 2003 – fig. 7/239 – differences: vegetal and mineral inclusions, surface – 5YR6/6; fig. 6/235 – differences: mineral inclusions only; surface – 5Y6/3); (Oates 2001 – fig. 106/407 – differences: dark grey on ridges, red in grooves) TELL CHUERA: period ID (Kühne 1970 – fig. 11 – differences: reddish fine hard fabric)

SITE SHERD DESCRIPTION 97. Fragment of a bowl with closed slightly inverted simple rim Tell Trafawi Pasta: fine ware K241NH1 Temper: grit temper (Ca) Surface: very pale brown (10YR8/3); pink (7.5YR7/4); slip EARLY JEZIRAH DATING

EJZ 1/ EJZ 2 DATING: COMPARISON ELL BRAK: period J (Matthews 2003 – fig. 13/157 – differences: vegetal inclusions also) TELL KASHKASHOK III: EJ II (Rova 2011 – fig. 2/89) TELL KHAZENE: period 1 (Amirov 2010 – fig. 6/293 – no information about fabric) TELL CHUERA: period IB (Kühne 1970 – fig. 136)

183

SITE SHERD DESCRIPTION 98. Fragment of a pot wit open simple rim Tell Tromba Pasta: fine ware K179NH2 Temper: grit (basalt) Surface: pale yellow (2.5Y8/3); self-slip EARLY JEZIRAH DATING EJZ 1/ EJZ 2 DATING: COMPARISON TELL BRAK: period J (Matthews 2003 – fig. 29/141 – differences: vegetal inclusions also?; Oates 2001 - fig. 1777/559) TELL KHAZNE: period 1 (Amirov 2010 – fig. 2/305 – no information about fabric)

SITE SHERD DESCRIPTION 99. Fragment of a bowl with open simple rim Tell Tromba Pasta: fine ware K179NH1 Temper: grit (Ca) Surface: very pale brown (10YR8/3) self-slip on interionr – pink (7.5Y7/4) EARLY JEZIRAH DATING

EJZ 3a/ EJZ 3b DATING: COMPARISON TELL BRAK: period L (Oates 2001 – fig. 1443/525) TELL CHUERA: period IC (Kühne 1970 – fig. 184) TELL MELEBIYA: ED III – EJZ 3a (Lebeau 1993 – fig. 7/145 – differences: buff surface)

SITE SHERD DESCRIPTION 100. Fragment of a bowl with open simple rim Tell Tuenan Pasta: fine ware K181NH1 Temper: grit (basalt) Surface: very pale brown (10YR7/4) EARLY JEZIRAH DATING

EJZ 4a-b DATING: COMPARISON TELL BRAK: period M (Oates 2001 – fig. 960/483 – differences: fine orange fabric)

184

SITE SHERD DESCRIPTION 101. Fragment of a body sherd Tell Tuenan Pasta: very fine ware (Metallic Ware) K181MH5 Temper: no visible Surface: dark grey brown (10YR4/2); red (5YR6/6) EARLY JEZIRAH DATING

EJZ 3b DATING: COMPARISON TELL BRAK: period L (Oates 2001 – fig. 120/409) TELL CHUERA: period ID (Kühne 1970 – fig. 23)

SITE SHERD DESCRIPTION 102. Fragment of a bowl with closed simple rim Tulul Khanzir Pasta: fine ware K242NH1 Temper: grit (basalt) Surface: pale yellow (2.5Y8/3) EARLY JEZIRAH DATING EJZ 3a DATING: COMPARISON TELL BRAK: period K (Matthews 2003 – fig. 13/169)

SITE SHERD 103. Umm Khafek K240NH1

DESCRIPTION PERIOD DATING: COMPARISON Fragment of a bowl with closed slightly inverted simple rim EJZ 2/ EJZ 3b TELL BRAK: Pasta: fine ware period J (Matthews 2003 – fig. 28/143) Temper: grit (basalt > Ca) period L/M (Oates 2001 – fig. 1468/527) Surface: Very pale brown (10YR8/3) TELL KHAZNE: period 1 (Amirov 2010 – fig. 3/337 – no information about fabric)

185

SITE SHERD DESCRIPTION 104. Fragment of a bowl with vertical simple rim Unknown site – Pasta: fine to medium ware near Tell Tamar Temper: grit (basalt  Ca) K189NH2 Surface: very pale brown (10YR7/4) EARLY JEZIRAH DATING

EJZ 4a-b DATING: COMPARISON TELL BRAK: period M (Oates 2001 – fig. 1094/491; fig. 685/459) TELL CHUERA: ID/IE (Rova 2011 – fig. 10/107)

SITE SHERD DESCRIPTION 105. Fragment of a bowl with open simple rim Unknown site – Pasta: fine ware near Tell Tamar Temper: grit (Ca) K189NH1 Surface: pink (5YR7/4); slip (light pink) EARLY JEZIRAH DATING

EJZ 4a-b DATING: COMPARISON TELL BRAK: period M (Oates 2001 – fig. 427/439 – differences: light red)

SITE SHERD DESCRIPTION 106. Fragment of a cup with open simple rim Unknown site – Pasta: very fine ware (Metallic Ware) near Tell Tamar Temper: no visible K189MH4 Surface: pink (7.5YR7/4); grey (7.5YR5/1) EARLY JEZIRAH DATING

EJZ 3b DATING: COMPARISON TELL BRAK: period L (Matthews 2003 – fig. 8/235 – differences: surface – 2.5YN3/)

186

SITE SHERD DESCRIPTION 107. Fragment of a bowl with closed slightly Unknown site inverted beaded rim – near Tell Pasta: fine ware Tamar Temper: grit (Ca) K189NH5 Surface: pale yellow (2.5Y7/3) EARLY JEZIRAH DATING

EJZ 4a-b DATING: COMPARISON TELL BRAK: period M (Oates 2001 – fig. 716/461) TELL BEYDAR: EJ IVb (Rova 2011 – fig. 17/107)

SITE SHERD DESCRIPTION 108. Fragment of a bowl with closed slightly Unknown site inverted beaded rim – near Tell Pasta: fine ware Tamar Temper: grit (basalt) K189NH4 Surface: very pale brown (10YR7/3) EARLY JEZIRAH DATING

EJZ 1 DATING: COMPARISON TELL BRAK: period J (Matthews 2003 – fig. 20/137 – differences: vegetal inclusions also)

187

SITE SHERD 109. Unknown site – near Tell Tamar K189NH3

PERIOD DESCRIPTION DATING: COMPARISON EJZ 3b Fragment of a cup with flat base TELL BRAK: Pasta: fine ware period L (Matthews 2003 – fig. 9/237 – differences: vegetal Temper: grit (Ca) inclusions; fig. 8/233); (Oates 2001 – fig. 1479/527) Surface: pale yellow (2.5Y7/4) TELL ARBID: ED (Rova 2011 – fig. 13/109 – differences: vegetal-tempered fabric also) SITE SHERD DESCRIPTION 110. Fragment of a cup with open simple rim Unknown Pasta: fine ware K190NH1 Temper: grit (Ca) Surface: very pale brown (10YR7/4); slip EARLY JEZIRAH DATING

(EJZ 0)/ EJZ 1 DATING: COMPARISON TELL BRAK: period H (Matthews 2003 – fig. 2/137 – differences: vegetal inclusions also); (Rova 2011 – fig. 4/81 – differences: medium ware) TELL KHAZNE: period 2 (Amirov 2010 – fig. 10/341 – no information about fabric)

188

UPPER KHABUR REGION: SITE SHERD DESCRIPTION 111. Fragment of a cup with open simple rim Ain Qoubba Pasta: fine ware K11NH1 Temper: grit (Basalt, Ca) Surface: pale yellow(2.5Y7/3); slip EARLY JEZIRAH DATING

EJZ 3a DATING: COMPARISON TELL CHUERA: EJ IIIa (Rova 2011 -fig. 6/93 – differences: medium ware)

SITE SHERD DESCRIPTION 112. Fragment of a jar with open simple rim Ain Qoubba Pasta: fine ware AQNH1 Temper: grit (basalt > Ca) Surface: pale yellow (2.5Y8/2); slip EARLY JEZIRAH DATING

EJZ 3a/ EJZ 3b DATING: COMPARISON TELL BRAK: period L (Oates 2001 – fig. 1531/533 – differences: surface – white (5Y8/2) TELL CHUERA: period IC (Kühne 1970 – fig. 169 – differences: brown fabric with yellow to green slip)

SITE SHERD DESCRIPTION 113. Fragment of a jar with open ledge rim Ain Qoubba Pasta: fine ware K11NH7 Temper: grit (Ca) Surface: pale yellow (2.5Y7/3) EARLY JEZIRAH DATING

EJZ 3a/ EJZ 3b DATING: COMPARISON TELL BRAK: period K (Matthews 2003 – fig. 29/149; fig. 3/161) period L (Oates 2001 – fig. 1514/531)

189

SITE SHERD DESCRIPTION 114. Fragment of a jar with open beaded rim Ain Pasta: fine Qoubba Temper: grit (Ca)f K11NH5 Surface: very pale brown (10YR7/4); slip EARLY JEZIRAH DATING

EJZ 3b DATING: COMPARISON TELL CHUERA: period ID (Kühne 1970 – fig. 373 – differences: red to yellow fabric with white to yellow slip)

SITE SHERD DESCRIPTION 115. Fragment of a bowl with closed beaded rim Ain Pasta: fine ware Qoubba Temper: grit (Ca) K11NH6 Surface: pale yellow (2.5Y7/4) EARLY JEZIRAH DATING

EJZ 1/ EJZ 2 DATING: COMPARISON TELL BRAK: period J (Matthews 2003 – fig. 8/151 – differences: surface- pale green) TELL LEILAN: EJ II (Rova 2011 – fig. 13/89 – differences: decoration on surface) TELL KHAZNE: period 2 (Amirov 2010 – fig. 3/347 – no information about fabric) SITE SHERD DESCRIPTION 116. Fragment of a bowl with open simple rim Joys Pasta: fine ware Spring Temper: grit (Ca) K1NH3 Surface: pale yellow (2.5Y8/3); self-slip EARLY JEZIRAH DATING

EJZ 3a/ EJZ 3b DATING: COMPARISON TELL BRAK: period K (Matthews 2003 – fig. 17,18/171)?; period L (Mathews 2003 - fig. 23/231); (Rova 2011 – pl. 7/12) TELL LEILAN: period II (Schwarz 1998 – fig. 28/4 – differences: fine clinky ware, no visible temper) TELL MELEBIYA: Period 3 (Lebeau 1993 – pl. 149/1; Lebeau 1993 – pl. 155/2)

190

SITE SHERD DESCRIPTION 117. Fragment of a bowl with open simple rim Joys Spring Pasta: fine ware K1NH2 Temper: grit (Ca ) Surface: pale yellow (2.5Y8/2); self-slip EARLY JEZIRAH DATING EJZ 3a DATING: COMPARISON TELL BRAK: period K (Matthews 2003 – fig. 19/167)

SITE SHERD DESCRIPTION 118. Fragment of a pot with open simple rim Joys Spring Pasta: fine ware K2NH14 Temper: grit (Ca ) Surface: pale yellow (2.5Y8/2); slip EARLY JEZIRAH DATING

EJZ 1/ EJZ 3b DATING: COMPARISON TELL BRAK: period J (Matthews 2003 – fig. 26/143 – differences: vegetal inclusions) period L (Matthews 2003 - fig. 3/241 – differences: vegetal inclusions); (Oates 2001 – fig. 1502/529); (Oates 2001 - fig. 1518/531); TELL MELEBIYA: Period 2 (Lebeau 1993 – pl. 172/13)

SITE SHERD DESCRIPTION 119. Fragment of a bowl with open simple rim Joys Spring Pasta: fine ware K1NH4 Temper: grit (Ca) Surface: pink (7.5YR7/4) EARLY JEZIRAH DATING

EJZ 4a-b DATING: COMPARISON TELL BRAK: period M (Oates 2001 – fig. 997/485)

191

SITE SHERD DESCRIPTION 120. Fragment of a bowl with closed slightly inverted Joys Spring beaded rim K2NH15 Pasta: fine ware Temper: grit (Ca) Surface: very dark greyish brown (10YR3/2); slip EARLY JEZIRAH DATING

EJZ 1/EJZ 2/ EJZ 3b DATING: COMPARISON TELL BRAK: period J (Matthews 2003 - fig. 19/137) period L (Matthews 2003 - fig. 7/235 – differences: surface – 2.5YN3); (Matthews 2003 - fig. 15/239 – differences: surface – buff) TELL LEILAN: period IIIb (Schwartz 1998 – fig. 42/6 – differences: surface – light brownish pink buff, cream slip); (fig. 42/4 – differences: no visible temper, light grayish yellow buff)

SITE SHERD DESCRIPTION 121. Fragment of a bowl with closed beaded rim Joys Spring Pasta: fine ware K2NH13 Temper: grit (Ca) Surface: very pale brown (10YR7/4) EARLY JEZIRAH DATING

EJZ 3a DATING: COMPARISON TELL BRAK: period K (Matthews 2003 – fig. 25/169) TELL MELEBIYA: Period 3 (Lebeau 1993 – pl. 172/11)

SITE SHERD DESCRIPTION 122. Fragment of a bowl with closed slightly inverted Joys Spring beaded rim K2NH11 Pasta: Fine ware Tempe: grit (basalt, Ca) Surface: pale yellow (2.5Y7/3); self-slip EARLY JEZIRAH DATING EJZ 3a DATING: COMPARISON TELL LEILAN: period IIIb (Schwartz 1998 – fig. 44/1 – differences: medium straw-tempered handmade ware, light pink to light yellow buff) TELL MELEBIYA: Period 3 (Lebeau 1993 – pl. 158/5)

192

SITE SHERD DESCRIPTION 123. Fragment of a bowl with closed slightly iverted Joys Spring beaded rim K2NH9 Pasta: fine ware Temper: grit (Ca, basalt) Surface: pale yellow with some greenish tone (2.5Y7/3) EARLY JEZIRAH DATING

EJZ 3a/ EJZ 3b DATING: COMPARISON TELL BRAK: period K (Matthews 2003 – fig. 11/161 – differences: surface – pale green) TELL CHUERA: period TCH IC (Kühne 1970 – fig. 193 – differences: grey-greenish surface)

SITE SHERD DESCRIPTION 124. Fragment of a bowl with closed slightly inverted Joys Spring beaded rim K1NH7 Pasta:fine ware Inclusions:grit temper (Ca) Surface: pale yellow (2.5Y7/4); slip EARLY JEZIRAH DATING

EJZ 2/ EJZ 3a/ EJZ 3b DATING: COMPARISON TELL BRAK: period J (Oates 2001 – fig. 1768/559) period L (Oates 2001 – fig. 1457/525) TELL LEILAN: period II (Schwarz 1998 – fig. 29/4 – differences: no visible temper)

SITE SHERD DESCRIPTION 125. Fragment of a bowl with open simple rim Qara Tepe Pasta: fine ware K133NH1 Temper: grit (basalt) Surface: pale yellow; (2.5Y8/2) EARLY JEZIRAH DATING

EJZ 2/ EJZ 3a/ EJZ 3b DATING: COMPARISON TELL BRAK: period J (Matthews 2003 – fig. 14/161) period L (Oates 2001 – fig. 1443/525) TELL LEILAN: period IIIc (Schwartz 1998 – fig. 33/7 – differences: no visible temper) TELL CHUERA: period TCH IB-IC (Kühne 1970 – fig. 92) TELL MELEBIYA: Period 3 (Lebeau 1993 – pl. 170/1;3)

193

SITE SHERD DESCRIPTION 126. Fragment of a bowl with closed beaded rim Qara Tepe Pasta: fine ware K133NH6 Temper: grit (Ca ) Surface: pale yellow (2.5Y8/3) EARLY JEZIRAH DATING

EJZ 3a DATING: COMPARISON TELL BRAK: period K (Matthews 2003 – fig. 5/173 – differences: no visible temper, surface pale buff green) period K (Matthews 2003 – fig. 25/169 – differences: perforation under the rim)

SITE SHERD DESCRIPTION 127. Fragment of a bowl with closed slightly inverted Qara Tepe beaded rim K133NH3 Pasta: fine ware Temper: grit (Ca) Surface: pale yellow (2.5Y8/3); self-slip EARLY JEZIRAH DATING

EJZ 2 DATING: COMPARISON TELL ARBID: ED (Rova 2011 – pl. 5/4)

SITE SHERD DESCRIPTION 128. Fragment of a cup with open simple rim Tell Brak Pasta: fine ware BRAKNH2 Temper: grit (Ca) Surface: pale yellow (2.5Y6/4); slip EARLY JEZIRAH DATING

EJZ 2/ EJZ 3a/ EJZ 3b DATING: COMPARISON TELL BRAK: period J (Matthews 2003 - fig. 14/161) period L (Matthews 2003 - fig. 14/235- differences: vegetal temper) TELL CHUERA: period TCH IC-ID (Kühne 1970 – fig. 125 – differences: surface – yellow to grey) TELL MELEBIYA: Period 2 (Lebeau 1993 – pl. 141/1)

194

SITE SHERD 129. Tell Brak BRAKNH1

DESCRIPTION EJZ DATING: DATING COMPARISON Fragment of a bowl with closed slightly EJZ 2/ EJZ 3a/ TELL BRAK: inverted simple rim EJZ 3b period L (Matthews 2003 – fig. 17/243 – differences: vegetal temper only); (Oates 2001 – Pasta: fine ware fig. 1437/525 – differences: surface – buff) Temper: straw-grit temper (Ca) period J (Matthews 2003 - fig. 28/143 – differences: surface – pale brown) Surface: reddish yellow (5YR7/6) TELL CHUERA: period TCH IB (Kühne 1970 – fig. 124 – differences: greenish surface) SITE SHERD 130. Tell Brak BRAKNH3

DESCRIPTION EJZ DATING: DATING COMPARISON Fragment of a bowl with closed slightly EJZ 2/ EJZ 3a/ TELL BRAK: inverted beaded rim EJZ 3b period J (fig, 14/159 – differences: surface – pale green-grey); (fig. 10/161) Pasta: fine ware period L (fig. 14/167) Temper: grit (Ca) TELL BARRI: Surface: very pale brown (10YR8/4); self-slip EJ II-IIIa (Rova 2011 – pl. 5/9) TELL MELEBIYA: Period 4 (Lebeau 1993 – pl. 172/11)

195

SITE SHERD DESCRIPTION 131. Fragment of a bowl with open flat Tell Brak Pasta: fine ware BRAKNH6 Temper: grit (Ca > basalt) Surface: pale yellow (2.5Y8/3); self-slip EARLY JEZIRAH DATING

EJZ 2/EJZ 3a DATING: COMPARISON TELL BRAK: period J (Matthews 2003 – fig. 20/141 – differences: surface – green brown, vegetal temper); period K (Matthews 2003 - fig. 4/169 – differences: vegetal temper)

SITE SHERD DESCRIPTION 132. Fragment of a cup with open simple rim Tell Brak Pasta: very fine ware (Metallic Ware) BRAKMH1 Temper: no visible Surface: grey (5Y5/1); corrugated inner part EARLY JEZIRAH DATING EJZ 3a/ EJZ 3b DATING: COMPARISON TELL BRAK: period L - M (Matthews 2003 – fig. 8/235 – differences: vegetal inclusions only, surface – pale yellow) period L (Rova 2011 – pl. 7/13 – differences: “stone ware”, olive grey fabric, hand-burnished surface); TELL CHUERA: period TCH IC (Kühne 1970 – fig. 84 – differences: bruch hell rötlich-braun, fein, au. und rand chwarz-brauner selbstüberz, sehr hart; profile more open)

SITE SHERD DESCRIPTION 133. Fragment of a bowl with open simple rim Tell Chagar Pasta: fine ware Bazar Temper: grit (Ca) CBNH1 Surface: yellow to olive green (2.5Y6/4) EARLY JEZIRAH DATING

EJZ 2/ EJZ 3a/ EJZ 3b DATING: COMPARISON TELL BRAK: period J (Matthews 2003 – fig. 24/142 – differences: vegetal temper) period L (Matthews 2003 - fig. 4/235 – differences: vegetal temper); (Rova 2011 – pl. 8/12 – differences: highly burnished outer surface – “Stone ware”) TELL ARBID: akkadian period (Rova 2011 – pl. 13/6)

196

SITE SHERD DESCRIPTION 134. Fragment of a bowl with open simple rim Tell Chagar Pasta: fine ware Bazar Temper: grit (Ca) CBMH1 Surface: light olive brown (2.5Y5/3) EARLY JEZIRAH DATING

EJZ 3a/ EJZ 3b DATING: COMPARISON TELL BRAK: period L-M (Matthews 2003 – fig. 4/241 – differences: mineral and vegetal inclusions) (fig. 3/235 – differences: mineral inclusions; Metallic Ware); (Oates 2001 – fig. 29, 30/403 – differences: olive grey) – near stone ware; (Oates 2001 – fig. 1180/497 – differences: pale green paste) period L (Rova 2011 – pl. 7/12) period K (Matthews 2003 - fig. 16/153 – differences: mineral and vegetal inclusions, surface – buff grey brown) TELL CHUERA: period TCH IC (Kühne 1970 – fig. 135)

SITE SHERD DESCRIPTION 135. Fragment of a bowl with open beaded rim fragment Tell Chagar Pasta: fine ware Bazar Temper: Grit (basalt, Ca) CBNH2 Surface: pale olive (5Y6/4) EARLY JEZIRAH DATING EJZ 2/ EJZ 3a DATING: COMPARISON TELL BRAK: period K (Matthews 2003 – fig. 11/169) TELL CHUERA: period TCH IB (Kühne 1970 – fig. 128- differences: profile does not sits completely, surface- yellow to brown)

SITE SHERD DESCRIPTION 136. Fragment of a bowl with closed slightly inverted Tell Chagar beaded rim Bazar Pasta: fine to medium ware CBNH19 Temper: straw-grit (Ca) Surface: very pale brown (10YR7/4) EARLY JEZIRAH DATING

EJZ 1 DATING: COMPARISON TELL BRAK: period J (Matthews 2003 – fig. 8/151 – differences: only mineral temper, surface – green buff); (fig. 7/155)

197

SITE SHERD DESCRIPTION 137. Fragment of a bowl with closed slightly inverted Tell Chagar beaded rim Bazar Pasta: fine ware CBNH4 Temper: grit (basalt) Surface: pale yellow (2.5Y7/4) EARLY JEZIRAH DATING EJZ 2/EJZ 3a/ EJZ 3b DATING: COMPARISON TELL BRAK: period J (Matthews 2003 – fig. 11/161 differences: surface – pale green; Matthews 2003 - fig. 19/157 differences: incised decoration, surface – 5Y8/3); period L (Matthews 2003 – fig. 13/233)

SITE SHERD DESCRIPTION 138. Fragment of a bowl with open simple rim Tell Kashkashok Pasta: fine ware III Temper: grit (Ca, basalt) K126NH4 Surface: pale yellow (2.5YR6/4) EARLY JEZIRAH DATING

EJZ 2/ EJZ 3a/ EJZ3b DATING: COMPARISON TELL BRAK: period J (Matthews 2003 – fig. 17/142); (Matthews 2003 - fig. 14/161) period K (Matthews 2003 - fig. 2/169 – differences: vegetal temper) period L (Matthews 2003 - fig. 14/235 – differences: vegetal temper) TELL CHUERA: period TCH IB (Kühne 1970 – fig. 179)

SITE SHERD DESCRIPTION 139. Fragment of a pot with open simple rim Tell Kashkashok Pasta: fine ware III Temper: grit (Ca) K126NH7 Surface: pale yellow (2.5Y7/4) EARLY JEZIRAH DATING EJZ 3a/ EJZ 3b DATING: COMPARISON TELL BRAK: period K (Matthews 2003 – fig. 23/153 – differences: vegetal inclusions only, surface – buff) TELL LEILAN: period II (Schwartz 1998 – fig. 30/10 – differences: no visible temper) TELL CHUERA: period TCH IB (Kühne 1970 – fig. 215 – differences: yellowish-grey surface) TELL MELEBIYA: Period 2 (Lebeau 1993 – pl. 151/3)

198

SITE SHERD DESCRIPTION 140. Fragment of a pot with open simple rim Tell Kashkashok Pasta: fine ware III Temper: grit (Ca > basalt) K126NH5 Surface: pale orange (7.5YR7/5); very pale brown (10YR8/3); orange slip EARLY JEZIRAH DATING

EJZ 3a DATING: COMPARISON TELL BRAK: period L (fig. 11/167 – differences: surface: white buff) period K (fig. 2/173 –differences: vegetal inclusions also, surface 10YR7/3)

SITE SHERD DESCRIPTION 141. Fragment of a bowl with open simple rim Tell Kashkashok Pasta: fine ware III Temper: grit (Ca) K126NH1 Surface: very pale brown (10YR7/4); self-slip EARLY JEZIRAH DATING

EJZ 3a DATING: COMPARISON TELL BRAK: period K (Matthews 2003 – fig. 17/169 – differences: vegetal inclusions and profile seems different – not so narrow on lower part)

199

MIDDLE KHABUR REGION: SITE SHERD 142. Tell Atij AtijNH1

DESCRIPTION PERIOD DATING: COMPARISON Fragment of a bowl with pointed base EJZ 1/ EJZ 2 TELL LEILAN: and with closed slightly inverted simple period IIIc (Schwartz 1988 – fig. 7/89) rim fragment TELL KHAZNE: Pasta: very fine ware period 1 (Amirov 2010 – fig. 5/337 – no information about paste) Temper: no visible temper TELL MELEBIYA: Surface: pale yellow (2.5Y8/2) period ED II-ED III (Lebeau 1993 – fig. 2/145) SITE SHERD 143. Tell Atij AtijNH3

DESCRIPTION PERIOD DATING: COMPARISON Fragment of a bowl with closed cocked rim EJZ 1 TELL BRAK: Pasta: fine ware period HF 3 (Matthews 2003 – fig. 4/165) Temper: grit (Ca) TELL CHAGAR BAZAR: Surface: pale yellow (2.5Y8/3); self-slip period Jemdet Nasr/ED (Rova 2011 – fig. 1/83)

200

SITE SHERD DESCRIPTION 144. Fragment of a bowl with closed slightly inverted Tell Atij simle rim AtijNH2 Pasta: very fine ware Temper: no visible Surface: pink (7.5Y7/4) EARLY JEZIRAH DATING EJZ 1/ EJZ 2 DATING: COMPARISON TELL KASHKASHOK 3: period EJ II (Rova 2011 – fig. 2/89 – differences: mineral inclusions) TELL LEILAN: period IIIc (Schwartz 1988 – fig. 7/89 – differences: light yellow buff) TELL KHAZNE: period 1 (Amirov 2010 – fig. 6/293 – no information about fabric) TELL KHUERA: period IB (Kühne 1976 – fig. 91 – differences: brown fabric)

SITE SHERD DESCRIPTION 145. Fragment of a bowl with closed beaded rim Tell Atij Pasta: fine ware AtijNH4 Temper: grit (basalt > Ca) Surface: pale yellow (2.5Y8/3); slip EARLY JEZIRAH DATING

EJZ 2/ EJZ 3a DATING: COMPARISON TELL BRAK: period J (Matthews 2003 – fig.25/169 – differences: no perforation) TELL LEILAN: period IIIc (Schwartz 1988 – fig. 6/97 – differences: no visible temper)

201

SITE SHERD DESCRIPTION 146. Fragment of a bowl with open simple rim fragment Tell Bderi Pasta: fine ware K127NH3 Temper: grit (Ca) Surface: pale yellow; (5Y8/2) EARLY JEZIRAH DATING

EJZ 3a/ EJZ 3b DATING: COMPARISON TELL BRAK: period L (Matthews 2003 – fig. 4/235 – differences: vegetal inclusions also, surface- 2.5Y7/4 – pale yellow); (Oates 2001 – fig. 1443/525) TELL LEILAN: period II (Schwartz 1988 – fig. 4/79 – differences: fine clinky ware, no visible temper) TELL MELEBIYA: Period 3 (Lebeau 1993 – fig. 9/156)

SITE SHERD DESCRIPTION 147. Fragment of a cup with open simple rim Tell Bderi Pasta: very fine ware K127NH1 Temper: no visible temper Surface: pale yellow – pink (2.5Y8/3) – (7.5YR7/4); self-slip EARLY JEZIRAH DATING

EJZ 3b DATING: COMPARISON TELL BRAK: period L (Rova 2011 – fig. 12/93 – differences: mineral tempered)

SITE SHERD DESCRIPTION 148. Fragment of a bowl with open simple rim Tell Bderi Pasta: fine ware K127NH4 Temper: grit (Ca) Surface: pale yellow (5Y7/3) EARLY JEZIRAH DATING

EJZ 3b DATING: COMPARISON TELL BRAK: period L (Matthews 2003 – fig. 13/241 – differences: vegetal inclusions also, surface colour sits absolutely)

202

SITE SHERD DESCRIPTION 149. Fragment of a bowl with open simple rim Tell Bderi Pasta: fine ware K127NH5 Temper: grit (basalt) Surface: pale yellow (5Y7/3) EARLY JEZIRAH DATING

EJZ 3b DATING: COMPARISON TELL BRAK: period L (Rova 2011 – fig. 12/93)

SITE SHERD DESCRIPTION 150. Fragment of a cup with open simple rim fragment Tell Bderi Pasta: fine ware K127NH2 Temper: grit (Ca) Surface: pale yellow (5YR7/3) EARLY JEZIRAH DATING

EJZ 2/ EJZ 3a/ EJZ 3b DATING: COMPARISON TELL BRAK: period J (Mathews 2003 – fig. 10/149) period K/L (Oates 2001 – fig. 1445/525) TELL KHUERA: period IB (Kühne 1976 – fig. 92 – differences: brown fabric)

SITE SHERD DESCRIPTION 151. Fragment of a cup with vertical simple rim Tell Bderi Pasta: fine ware K117NH1 Temper: grit (Ca, basalt) Surface: pale yellow – very pale brown (2.5Y8/3) – (10YR7/3) EARLY JEZIRAH DATING

EJZ 3a DATING: COMPARISON TELL CHUERA: period EJ IIIa (Rova 2011 – fig. 7/93) period IC (Kühne 1976 – fig. 95)

203

SITE SHERD DESCRIPTION 152. Fragment of a bowl with vertical simple Tell Bderi Pasta: fine ware K117NH2 Temper: grit (basalt) Surface: pink (7.5YR7/4); slip EARLY JEZIRAH DATING

EJZ 3a DATING: COMPARISON TELL CHUERA: period EJ IIIa (Rova 2011 – fig. 6/93 – differences: medium ware)

SITE SHERD DESCRIPTION 153. Fragment of a bowl with open simple rim Tell Mashnaqa Pasta: fine ware K116NH3 Temper: grit (Ca) Surface: pale yellow (5Y8/2) EARLY JEZIRAH DATING

EJZ 3a-b DATING: COMPARISON TELL BRAK: period L (Oates 2001 – fig. 1443/525) TELL MELEBIYA: period late ED III (Lebeau 1993 – fig. 1/150)

SITE SHERD DESCRIPTION 154. Fragment of a cup with open simple rim Tell Mashnaqa Pasta: fine ware K116NH6 Temper: grit (Ca) Surface: grey (7.5YR5/1) EARLY JEZIRAH DATING

EJZ 3b DATING: COMPARISON TELL BRAK: period L (Matthews 2003 – fig. 25/235 – differences: surface – 7.5YR7/2)

204

SITE SHERD 155. Tell Mashnaqa K116NH5

DESCRIPTION PERIOD DATING: COMPARISON Fragment of a bowl with open beaded rim EJZ 1 TELL KHAZNE: Pasta: fine ware period 2 (Amirov 2010 – fig. 4/333) Temper: grit (Ca > basalt) Surface: brown (7.5YR5/4) SITE SHERD DESCRIPTION 156. Fragment of a cup with open simple rim Tell Mashnaqa Pasta: fine ware K116NH9 Temper: straw-grit (basalt > Ca) Surface: reddish yellow (7.5YR6/6) Decoration: rilled EARLY JEZIRAH DATING

EJZ 3a DATING: COMPARISON TELL CHUERA: period IIIa (Rova 2011 – fig. 4/93 – differences: slipped and partially hand-burnished surface; Metallic Ware)

SITE SHERD DESCRIPTION 157. Fragment of a cup with closed slightly inverted beaded rim Tell Mashnaqa Pasta: fine ware K116NH7 Temper: grit (Ca) Surface: pale yellow (5Y7/3) EARLY JEZIRAH DATING

EJZ 3a DATING: COMPARISON TELL LEILAN: period II (Schwartz 1988 – fig. 1/81 – differences: no visible temper)

205

SITE SHERD DESCRIPTION 158. Fragment of a bowl with closed slightly inverted simple rim Tell Mashnaqa Pasta: fine ware K116NH1 Temper: grit (Ca) Surface: very pale brown (10YR7/4); reddish yellow (5YR6/6); slip EARLY JEZIRAH DATING

EJZ 3b/ EJZ 4a-b DATING: COMPARISON TELL BRAK: period M (Oates 2001 – fig. 921/479) TELL MELEBIYA: period late ED (Lebeau 1993 – fig. 21/145 – differences: vegetal inclusions also)

SITE SHERD DESCRIPTION 159. Fragment of decorated body sherd (bowl) Tell Mashnaqa Pasta: fine ware K116NH8 Temper: grit (Ca) Surface: pale yellow (2.5Y8/3) Decoration: grooved motif EARLY JEZIRAH DATING

final EJZ 2 DATING: COMPARISON TELL BRAK: period J (Rova 2011 – fig. 6/83 – differences: vegetal inclusions also)

206

SITE SHERD 160. Tell Menakh K62NH1

PERIOD DESCRIPTION DATING: COMPARISON EJZ 3a/ Incompletely preserved cup vessel, with completely section containing simple rim TELL BRAK: EJZ 3b and flat base period L (Matthews 2003 – fig. 1/239); (Oates 2001 – Pasta: fine ware fig. 1499?/529 – differences:, greenish, flaky fabric) Temper: grit (Ca) TELL CHUERA: Surface: body - pale yellow (2.5Y7/3); base – very pale brown (10YR7/4) period ID/IE (Kühne 1970 – fig. 104 – differences: yellow to green fabric) SITE SHERD DESCRIPTION 161. Fragment of a jar with open beaded rim Tell Pasta: very fine ware Menakh Temper: no visible K62MH3 Surface: yellowish red (5YR5/6), slip EARLY JEZIRAH DATING

EJZ 4a-b DATING: COMPARISON TELL BRAK: period M (Oates 2001 – fig. 266/419 – differences: yellowish red, mica, brown slip on both sides) TELL CHUERA: period ? (Kühne 1970 – fig. 219 – differences: reddish fabric with fine grit inclusions)

207

SITE SHERD 162. Tell Menakh K62MH2

PERIOD DESCRIPTION DATING: COMPARISON EJZ 3b Fragment of a jar open ledge rim TELL BRAK: Pasta: very fine ware (Metallic Ware) period L (Matthews 2003 – fig. 13/245 – differences: mica inclusions, Temper: no visible imitation of MW) Surface: dark grey (2.5Y4/1) TELL ARBID: EJ IV (Rova 2011 – fig. 8/111 – differences: fine, mineral-tempered fabric (“Metallic Ware”) with intentional reduction and oxidation) SITE SHERD DESCRIPTION 163. Fragment of a pot with open simple rim Tell Menakh Pasta: very fine ware (Metallic Ware) K62MH1 Temper: no visible Surface: dark grey (10YR4/1) EARLY JEZIRAH DATING

EJZ 3b DATING: COMPARISON TELL BRAK: period L (Matthews 2003 – fig. 11/243 – differences: mineral inclusions, grey surface) TELL ARBID: EJ IV (Rova 2011 – fig. 6/111 – differences: fine, mineral-tempered fabric (“Metallic Ware”) with intentional reduction and oxidation)

SITE SHERD DESCRIPTION 164. Fragment of a bowl with closed slightly inverted beaded rim Tell Menakh Pasta: fine ware K62NH3 Temper: grit (basalt) Surface: pale yellow (2.5Y7/3); slip EARLY JEZIRAH DATING

EJZ 3b DATING: COMPARISON TELL BRAK: period L (Oates 2001 – fig. 1458/525 – differences: light grey fabric)

208

SITE SHERD DESCRIPTION 165. Fragment of a pointed base Tell Menakh Pasta: fine ware K62NH2 Temper: grit (basalt) Surface: pale yellow (2.5Y7/3); slip EARLY JEZIRAH DATING

EJZ 2 DATING: COMPARISON TELL BRAK: period J (Matthews 2003 – fig. 29/161 –; fig. 20/159); (Oates 2001 – fig. 1717/553 – differences: pale brown surface) TELL ARBID: ED (Rova 2011 – fig. 4/89); (Schwartz 1988 – fig. 4; 5; 6; 7/97 – differences: no visible temper) TELL KHAZNE: period 1-2 (Amirov 2010 – fig. 6; 7; 9; 10; 11; 13; 14/293 – no information about fabric) SITE SHERD DESCRIPTION 166. Fragment of a jar with open beaded rim Mulla Matar Pasta: fine ware MMNH3 Temper: grit (Ca) Surface: pale yellow (2.5Y8/3); self-slip EARLY JEZIRAH DATING EJZ 4a-b DATING: COMPARISON TELL BRAK: period M (Rova 2011 – fig. 11/111)

SITE SHERD DESCRIPTION 167. Fragment of a bowl with closed slightly inverted simple rim Mulla Matar Pasta: fine ware MMNH2 Temper: grit (Ca) surface: pale yellow (2.5Y8/3) EARLY JEZIRAH DATING

EJZ 1/ EJZ 2 DATING: COMPARISON TELL BRAK: period J (Matthews 2003 – fig. 25/1?) TELL KASHKASHOK 3: period EJ II (Rova 2011 – fig. 2/89) TELL LEILAN: period IIIc (Schwartz 1988 – fig. 7/88 – differences: no visible temper) TELL KHAZNE: period 1 (Amirov 2010 – fig. 6/293 – no information about fabric) TELL KHUERA: period IB (Kühne 1976 – fig. 91; 92 – differences: brown fabric)

209

SITE SHERD 168. Mulla Matar MMNH1

DESCRIPTION EJZ DATING DATING:COMPARISON Fragment of a bowl with closed EJZ 4b-c TELL BRAK: slightly inverted beaded rim period M (Oates 2001 – fig. 89/407 – differences: dark grey surface) Pasta: fine ware Temper: grit (Ca) Surface: pink (7.5YR7/4)

210