CENTRAL-WEST ANATOLIA AT THE END OF 7TH AND BEGINNING OF 6TH MILLENNIUM BCE IN THE LIGHT OF POTTERY FROM ULUCAK (İZMIR) Dissertation zur Erlangung des akademischen Grades Doktor der Philosophie der Fakultät für Kulturwissenschaften der Eberhard-Karls-Universität Tübingen vorgelegt von Çiler Çilingiroğlu aus Balıkesir (Türkei) 2009 Gedruckt mit Genehmigung der Fakultät für Kulturwissenschaften der Eberhard-Karls-Universität Tübingen Gutacher: Prof. Dr. Ernst Pernicka PD Dr. Barbara Helwing Tag der mündlichen Prüfung: 23.06.2009 Dekan: Prof. Dr. Jürgen Leonhardt Contents VOLUME I Contents i Foreword vii List of the plans xi List of the photo plates xi List of abbreviations xiii I. General Research Outline A. Theoretical framework and goals of research 1 B. Geographical framework 11 C. Temporal framework 14 II. History of Neolithic Research in Turkey and West Anatolia A. History of Neolithic research in Turkey 17 B. Neolithic studies in West Anatolia 21 C. What distinguishes Late Neolithic from Early Chalcolithic in Anatolia? 24 D. Is Ulucak IV a Neolithic or a Chalcolithic site? 29 III. Introducing Ulucak Höyük A. Geographical and ecological data 31 B. Status of research 37 C. Excavation techniques 39 D. Stratigraphy of the mound 40 E. Radiocarbon dates from Ulucak 44 F. General features of architecture at Ulucak 48 1. Level IV 48 2. Level V 50 G. Settlement organization at Ulucak 51 1. Level IV 52 1.1. Orientation and size of the buildings 52 1.2. Space between the structures 53 1.3. Evidence of communal activity areas 54 1.4. Communal storage facilities 56 1.5. Presence of buildings or areas for ritual activities 56 2. Level V 61 2.1. Orientation and size of the buildings 61 2.2. Space between the structures 62 2.3. Evidence of communal activity areas 63 2.4. Communal storage facilities 64 2.5. Presence of buildings or areas for ritual activities 64 H.The Neolithic assemblage 65 I. Subsistence 71 IV. Analysis of Ulucak IV and V Pottery A. Pottery analysis methods 77 1. Main bibliographic sources used in the study 77 2. Initial processing of the assemblage 78 3. Description of the fields in the databank 79 3.1. General information 79 3.2. Contextual information 80 3.3. Physical properties 80 3.4. Definition of the wares 86 3.5. Morphological information 90 3.6. Definitions of the vessel shapes 92 4. Illustration 94 B. Layer IVa 95 1. Description of the phase 95 2. Fabric 95 3. Morphology 98 C. Layer IVb 101 1. Description of the phase 101 2. Fabric 102 3. Morphology 105 4. Distribution of pottery in Level IVb buildings 108 D. Layer IVc 125 1. Description of the phase 125 2. Fabric 127 3. Morphology 129 E. Layer IVd 132 1. Description of the phase 132 2. Fabric 133 3. Morphology 134 F. Layer IVe 137 1. Description of the phase 137 2. Fabric 138 3. Morphology 139 G. Layer IVf 143 1. Description of the phase 143 2. Fabric 143 3. Morphology 145 H. Layer IVg 148 1. Description of the phase 148 ii 2. Fabric 149 3. Morphology 150 I. Layer IVh 154 1. Description of the phase 154 2. Fabric 155 3. Morphology 157 J. Layer IVi 161 1. Description of the phase 161 2. Fabric 162 3. Morphology 163 K. Layer IVk 167 1. Description of the phase 167 2. Fabric 168 3. Morphology 171 L. Layer Va 174 1. Description of the phase 174 2. Fabric 176 3. Morphology 178 M. Layer Vb 182 1. Description of the phase 182 2. Fabric 183 3. Morphology 184 N. Comparisons of pottery from levels V and IV 190 1. Fabric 191 2. Morphology 196 V. Pottery Technology, Function, and Organization of Ceramic Production at Ulucak 203 A. Procurement of raw materials 204 B. Preparation of raw materials 208 C. Forming the vessels 210 D. Pre-firing treatments 212 E. Firing 216 F. Post-firing treatments 221 G. Degree of specialization 221 H. Function of ceramic vessels 227 VOLUME II VI. Intraregional and Interregional Comparisons of Ulucak IV-V Pottery A. Central-West Anatolia 235 1. Yeşilova 236 2. Ege Gübre 238 iii 3. Çukuriçi Höyük 241 4. Dedecik-Heybelitepe 242 5. Agio Gala Lower and Upper Caves 243 6. General overview of the sites surveyed 245 7. Comparisons with Ulucak ceramics 246 B. Southwestern Anatolia (Muğla and Aydın Regions) 254 1. Aphrodisias-Pekmez 254 2. Latmos (Beşparmak) Mountain 255 3. General overview of the sites surveyed 255 C. Troas and Gökçeada 257 1. Coşkuntepe 258 2. Uğurlu 258 3. Comparisons with Ulucak ceramics 259 D. Lake District 261 1. Hacılar 263 1.1. General overview of the archaeological research 263 1.2. Ceramics 267 1.3. Comparing Hacılar with Ulucak 270 2. Kuruçay 279 2.1. General overview of the archaeological research 279 2.2. Ceramics 281 2.3. Relative dating of Kuruçay 284 3. Bademağacı 288 3.1. General overview of the archaeological research 288 3.2. Ceramics 290 3.3. Relative dating of Bademağacı 291 4. Höyücek 295 4.1. General overview of the archaeological research 295 4.2. Ceramics 297 4.3. Relative dating of Höyücek 299 5. Comparing Lake District sites to Central-West Anatolia 300 5.1 Fabric and wares 302 5.2 Morphology 307 E. Elmalı Plain 309 F. Beyşehir-Suğla Basin and Konya Plain 310 1. Suberde 311 2. Erbaba 312 3. Çatalhöyük East 313 4. Çatalhöyük West 318 5. Can Hasan 319 6. Pottery sequence of the region and comparisons with Central-West Anatolia 323 iv G. Melendiz and Bor Plains (Aksaray and Niğde Regions) 329 1. Musular 330 2. Tepecik-Çiftlik 333 3. Köşk Höyük 335 3.1. General overview of the archaeological research 335 3.2. Ceramics 337 3.3. Relative Dating of Köşk Höyük 338 4. Pottery sequence of the region and comparisons with Central-West Anatolia 340 H. Porsuk-Sakarya Basin (Eskişehir and Kütahya) 346 1. Demircihöyük 346 2. General overview of the sites surveyed 350 3. Comparisons with Central-West Anatolia 351 I. Eastern Marmara Region (İznik Basin and Istanbul) 354 1. Fikirtepe 356 2. Pendik 357 3. Yarımburgaz Cave 358 4. Ceramics of Yarımburgaz Layers 5 and 4 359 5. Fikirtepe and Pendik Ceramics 360 6. Ilıpınar 362 6.1 . Ceramics 364 6.2 . Comparing Ilıpınar with Ulucak 366 7. Menteşe Höyük 372 8. Barcın Höyük 375 9. Aktopraklık 377 10. Ceramic sequence of the region and comparisons with Central-West Anatolia 378 J. Thrace 386 1. Hoca Çeşme 389 1.1. Ceramics 392 1.2. Comparisons with Central-West Anatolia 394 2. Aşağı Pınar 399 2.1. Ceramics 401 2.2. Comparisons with Ulucak 402 3. Karanovo 403 3.1. Ceramics 404 3.2. Comparisons with Ulucak 406 4. Rakitovo 410 5. Ceramic Sequence of the Region and Comparisons with Central-West Anatolia 413 K. Northeast Bulgaria 415 1. Polyanitsa-Platoto 416 2. Koprivets 417 v 3. Comparisons with Ulucak and Anatolian sites 418 L. Struma River Valley and Sofia Basin 422 1. Kovačevo 423 1.1. Ceramics 425 1.2. Comparisons with Ulucak 426 2. Krainitsi I 428 2.1. Ceramics 429 2.2. Comparisons with Ulucak 430 3. Slatina-Sofia 432 4. Ceramic Sequence in the Region 435 M. Macedonia 437 1. Nea Nikomedeia 438 2. Yannitsa B 442 3. Anzabegova 443 4. Comparisons with Central-West Anatolia 445 N. Thessaly (Larissa and Karditsa Plains) 449 1. Sesklo 455 2. Argissa 459 3. Achilleion 462 4. Comparing Thessalian Ceramic Sequence with Central-West Anatolia 468 O. Final Remarks 478 Concluding Remarks and Future Prospects 484 Bibliography 493 List of the Ulucak Radiocarbon Dates 536 List of the Calibrated Ulucak Radiocarbon Dates 537 VOLUME III Map Chronological Table Photo Plates Plans Summary of Ceramic Morphology Catalogue of the Illustrated Ceramics Plates Tables concerning fabrics Tables concerning morphology vi Foreword The subject matter of this study is the analytical results of research conducted on the pottery from Ulucak IV-V, a prehistoric mound in the vicinity of İzmir in Central-West Turkey discovered by David French. The occupational levels IV and V at Ulucak, systematically excavated since 1995, correspond to 7-6th millennia cal. BCE, or more concretely, to the era of the early food-producing communities in the region. Until recently, there was virtually no problem-oriented research, neither surveys nor excavations, in the area which aimed to focus on the evidence of the early farming societies. Thus, long-term excavations at Ulucak functioned as a pioneering project aiming to expose large areas belonging to the Neolithic period. The lengthy depositional sequence of the mound enabled archaeologists to reveal the intra-site culture-historical sequence, as well as define local characteristics of the Neolithic material culture. Thanks to the research at Ulucak it has become possible to discuss the origins, relationships, and development of Neolithic culture in Western Anatolia. Subsequent excavations at other contemporary sites in the area surrounding Ulucak, namely at Ege Gübre, Yeşilova, Çukuriçi and Dedecik-Heybelitepe, turned Central-West Anatolia, specifically the İzmir Region, to one of the best researched regions in Turkey with respect to the Neolithic period. Besides, the material culture unearthed at these sites enabled the prehistorians to acknowledge the intra-regional homogeneity as well as diversity and led them to consider possibilities regarding the multiple origins and diverse social-cultural connections of early the food-producing groups in Central-West Anatolia. Most of the previous assumptions related to the cultural origins and relations of İzmir Region have been abandoned or re-formulated. Specifically the assumption that the earliest farmers arrived in the region as late as 6400 cal.