The pottery of Ilipinar Phase VB (Ilipinar Vol. 3 (2008)

NEDERLANDS INSTITUUT VOOR HET NABIJE OOSTEN2008

Life and Death in a Prehistoric Settlement

in Northwest Anatolia

The Ilıpınar Excavations, Volume III

With contributions on Hacılartepe and Mente≥e

edited by

Jacob Roodenberg and Songül Alpaslan Roodenberg

0603-07_Roodenberg_vw 13-03-2008 15:02 Pagina III

Copyright 2008 byNederlands Instituut voor het Nabije Oosten

Witte Singel 25Postbus 9515

2300 RA Leiden, [email protected]

www.nino-leiden.nl

All rights reserved, including the rights to translate orto reproduce this book or parts thereof in any form

Life and Death in a Prehistoric Settlement in Northwest Anatolia. The Ilıpınar Excavations, Volume III.With contributions on Hacılartepe and Mente≥e, edited by Jacob Roodenberg and Songül Alpaslan Roodenberg.Uitgave: Nederlands Instituut voor het Nabije Oosten te Leiden(voorheen Uitgave van het Nederlands Historisch-Archeologisch Instituut te Istanbul. ISSN 0926-9568;110)

ISBN 978-90-6258-321-8

Printed in Belgium

0603-07_Roodenberg_vw 13-03-2008 15:02 Pagina IV

Chapter 4 THE POTTERY OF PHASE VB

Laurens Thissen1

SUMMARY

A sample of Ilıpınar Phase VB was studied in July 2007 in order to clarify some stratigraphic issues, to set up a categorisation structure, and to gauge the degree of continuity and change vis-à-vis previous Ilıpınar ceramic practice. The analysis depended on a large body of complete vessels deriving from a series of burnt dwellings from the southwest flank of the mound. The Ilıpınar VB pottery assemblage appears to continue the use of specific categories known first from preceding Phase VA. Simultaneously, important new categories are introduced, involving diverse ways of presentation, firing, decoration and manufacture. The VB ceramic corpus displays a mixture of two different ways of dealing with pottery: one rooted in a local as well as newly emerging South Anatolian tradition, the other pointing to Southeast European, more specifically Bulgarian Thrace concepts. Due to a reliable series of radiocarbon dates, the fire ending the Phase VB occupation at Ilıpınar most likely took place somewhere during the second half of the 56th Century BC.

ÖZET2007, Temmuz ayında Ilıpınar VB evresine ait malzeme bazı stratigrafik sorulara cevap bulmak;

yapısal sınıflandırmayı olu turmak; Ilıpınar’ın daha önceki dönemlerinden ele geçen kaplarla kar ıla tırıldı ında, de i ikliklerin ve devamlılı ın derecesini saptamak amacıyla incelendi. Çanak, çömleklerin analizi, höyü ün güneybatı tarafındaki bir dizi, yangın geçirmi yapı kalıntılarından ele geçen çok sayıda, tam kapları kapsamaktadır. Ilıpınar’ın VB evresine ait çanak çömlek buluntularından, ilk olarak, önceki VA evresinden bilinen belirli bir kategorinin devam etmi oldu uanla ılmaktadır. Bu evrede pi irme, bezeme ve üretim biçimleri bakımından çe itlilik gösteren, ezamanlı, önemli ve yeni tiplerin ortaya çıktı ını görmekteyiz. VB evresindeki seramik kaplarıngövdeleri, iki farklı çanak çömlek uygulamasının karı ımını sergilemektedir: biri yerli oldu u kadar, yeni ortaya çıkan Güney Anadolu’nun çanak çömlek gelene inden köken almakta; di eri ise, Güneydo u Avrupa, özellikle de Bulgaristan’ın Trakya kültürüne i aret etmektedir. Güvenilir Radyokarbon tarihlemelerine dayanarak, bir yangınla sona eren Ilıpınar VB evresinin, daha ziyade MÖ 56. Yüzyılın, ikinci yarısı civarında tarihlendirilmesi uygun olur.

INTRODUCTION

The Ilıpınar Phase VB pottery represents an exciting, apparently hybrid and in its totality, an unknown assemblage in prehistoric Turkey dating towards the middle of the 6th

millennium cal BC. Phase VB must be seen in the framework of an earlier emergence of Central- and SW Anatolian influences in the Northwest, both in ceramics and in architecture (e.g., Hacılar I- and Kuruçay level 7-type potteries in Ilıpınar Phase VA;

1 Thissen Archaeological Ceramics Bureau (TACB), Amsterdam (www.tacb-pottery.com). Upon the invitation of Jacob Roodenberg, TACB carried out a 2-week research on a selection of Phase VB pottery in July 2007, thus revisiting material first known to the author in 1987. Priority in analysis was on clarifying stratigraphic issues, in setting up a categorisation structure and in pottery technology, rather than on quantification or establishing discard and deposition patterns.

0603-07_Roodenberg_04crc 13-03-2008 15:16 Pagina 91

92 LAURENS THISSEN

agglutination in Phase VI, structural details such as wooden subflooring2 and rectangular ovens in Phase VI, cf. Gérard 2001: 199). But importantly, VB also fits within a Southeast European tradition (specific ceramic types and decoration methods, antler hammers, the steatopygous figurines of Phase VA). The Central and SW Anatolian influence is more widespread (though still little investigated) in the Northwest as evidenced by Canhasan 2B/2A- and Kuruçay 7-type of architecture on the currently excavated site of Aktopraklıknear Bursa, while its pottery links up to Ilıpınar Phase VA (Necmi Karul, p.c., July 2007).

Ilıpınar Phase VB initiated new ways of manufacturing pottery, firing and decorating it, and saw an unprecedented emphasis on display and presentation. Simultaneously, part of the assemblage is in clear continuation of what went on before on the site, and it is this mixture that is rarely so obvious within a single archaeological context.

The context

Phase VB remains were predominantly encountered on the SW flank of the mound (see Roodenberg 2001: 231ff. for architecture and lay-out), but pottery from that phase was also retrieved from a series of rubbish pits on the main mound, notably in squares U13 and V13, cutting Phase VA and VI structures. Most of the material discussed and illustrated here derives from a series of burnt structures in LM7-9 or else comes from contexts immediately overlying these structures or otherwise stratigraphically related to them. Stratigraphically, a distinction has been made between a ‘younger’ and ‘older’ sub phase and it has been surmised that notably the large everted dishes with thickened, ripple decorated rims (Figs. 7–8) were limited to the later stage since none of them were retrieved in complete form from the burnt structures representing the earlier stage (Roodenberg 2001: 231f.). Diagnostic sherds from such dishes are, however, constantly present also in contexts underlying the younger sub phase, while at least two similar but non-decorated dishes belong to the inventory of structure no. 9 (Figs. 6: 5; 7: 1). The absence of the ripple decorated dishes from the house inventories may rather be linked to the peculiar and possibly biased nature of these inventories in terms of representation, with a dominant emphasis on storage (see further below). Therefore, the stratigraphic distinction is not reflected in the material culture as far as the ceramics are concerned, and despite the strong diversity in categories, manufacturing methods, surface treatment and general appearance, specific elements and attributes hook into each other to create an image of consistency, albeit made complex through the cultural influences referred to above.

Fabrics

A technological study of the Phase VB pottery could not detect a correlation between the three main fabric groups discerned and the various ceramic categories (Van As et al. 2001: 156). Nonetheless, a fabric defined by fairly well sorted, rounded to subangular grains of mixed sand of brown/red, whitish and orangey colour, was typically used for manufacturing the large dishes.3 Whether or not such fabric is particularly suitable

2 Wooden beams underneath floors are known from Canhasan I, Layer 4 (French 1998: 25, 71 Fig. 38). 3 This fabric is probably ‘Fabric 3’ in Van As et al. 2001: 159.


THE POTTERY OF PHASE VB 93

for what I will argue are mould-made vessels (below), can only be determined through replication tests, which have not been carried out.

Additionally, a correlation exists between what may be called the standard fabric (medium to coarse sized mixed sands, including calcium carbonate often causing spalling of the surfaces, cf. Rye 1981: 114) and the two-handled pots and jars, as well as the large-sized vessels. Firing to a characteristic brown colour (7.5YR 4/2~4/3), this particular clay has obviously been taken from the same source as was in use on Ilıpınar from the outset: the problem of lime spalling was a recurrent phenomenon throughout the history of the site. Not coincidentally perhaps, the standard fabric was used for those vessel categories displaying the strongest proof of continuation of previous (Phase VA) forms.

Another fabric, comparable to ‘Fabric 2’ (Van As et al. 2001: 158), contains, next to mixed sands, a dense, angular, white calcite temper probably deliberately added, and in several examples this fabric is linked to shapes I will infer to represent cooking pots (below), implying the makers knew about the potentially beneficiary effects of calcite for vessels exposed to repeated heating and cooling (Rye 1981: 32). The fabric is also occasionally used for the manufacture of the two-handled jars, where a link between specific jars and heating/cooling may be suspected as well. Finally, a dense, but very fine powdery calcite/limestone fabric is almost exclusively used for making the ripple-decorated, gourd-shaped jars (Fig. 5).

There does seem to be a correlation between specific fabrics and categories or vessel types, which may have been urged by the manufacturing method or through the envisaged use of the specific vessel. Sophisticated knowledge of the pottery craft exemplified by being able to choose from a range of techniques and possibilities is also clear from the next steps in the operational chain.

Manufacturing methods

Pots, two-handled jars, and large-sized vessels were exclusively made by coiling, while the surplus clay was scraped away from exterior and interior walls (Van As et al. 2001: 156). Many of these vessels are irregular walled, with uneven rims and burnished with the individual strokes clearly visible. In a few contexts loamers have been found, being rounded sherds probably used for the scraping and/or burnishing of vessel surfaces. Loamers in Ilıpınar started to appear only in Phase VA (Thissen 2001: 76). The many strap- or loop handles linked to these categories are either applied ‘cold’ to the vessel walls, or else the dowel technique has been used, perforating the vessel wall and sealed on the inside (cf. Van As et al. 2001: 157, 167 Fig. 6: 2). Bases are generally flat or flattish, occasionally rounded. Ring- and pedestal bases are never noticed. For the bases usually clay slabs are used: from LM7-056, for instance, a (flat) base fragment is showing two superimposed slabs in section.

The few miniatures present in the material studied were simply pinched out of a piece of clay, and this method was probably used for the small sieves as well.

A third major manufacturing method is evidenced by many of the everted dishes. Here, moulds seem most likely to have been used. Wall sections of these large, often over 40cm diameter dishes often show signs of slabs being applied over each other (cf. Fig. 6: 3), while also the thinning out of the walls downwards would confirm mould manufacture.


94 LAURENS THISSEN

The exteriors of these dishes are often only roughly worked or slightly burnished at best, contrasting with the various sophisticated solutions for treating the insides.

Surface treatments

Apart from scraping surplus clay, smoothing and (lightly) burnishing the pots and two-handled jars, the finer or more elaborate vessel categories in terms of decoration, finish or general care and time spent on them are given various treatments including decoration before they were fired. Typical is the application of a diluted clay slip over the exterior of the fine handleless jars (Fig. 5) and over both the inside and outside of the decorated bowls (Fig. 8: 4–8). When a clay slip is applied, the surfaces originally were highly burnished, and it is only due to postdepositional phenomena that the lustre has gone for a good deal. Especially the incurving bowls with curvi- or rectilinear grooves still preserve this high lustre occasionally. Also the ripple decorated everted dishes (Figs. 7: 4–5; 8: 1–2) are usually covered with a diluted clay slip which is restricted to the insides, applied after the decoration was carried out.

Another way of emphasizing the insides of dishes was by covering them with a slip or wash of a different colour, preferably firing to a reddish or black shade, as is the case in the examples of Fig. 7: 3, 6 (black slip), and Figs. 6: 4 and 7: 1, 5 (red-brown). These surfaces were highly burnished after the slip was applied. Striking is the way in which the outsides of many of such dishes remain unworked or merely burnished, and the contrast between the shining insides and the dull brown outsides must have been much stronger when freshly made than it is even now. While this contrast surely was intentional, it may have been also a function of the manufacture method referred to above: the dishes were possibly finished while still sitting in their moulds, which would also explain the neat separation between slip and plain burnish visible on the rim tops.

In a way extending this decoration method is the procedure of creating a zoned pattern of parallel red/black bands on dish insides by means of selectively allowing reduced firing to form simple motifs. Van As et al. (2001: 157) surmise that for instance dung was used to prevent oxidation in places intended to be black (Fig. 8: 3, cf. also Roodenberg et al. 1989/1990, Fig. 17: 8–9).

Firing

The above example shows that the VB potters manipulated firing procedures and had an advanced knowledge of oxygen flows, although, as Van As et al. (2001: 157) argue, all pottery was fired in open bonfires. While most of the VB categories were fired in an oxidizing atmosphere, the black/grey-blackish bowls and dishes with rippled decorations on the insides were baked in a neutral to reducing atmosphere, ensuring uniform black colours inside and outside.

Categorisation

Instead of a detailed typology, I prefer to give the basic categorisation structure based on the material studied from the burnt dwelling complex (Table 1). While adopting common terms for specific shapes/basic-level categories, I have avoided using deterministic labels (e.g., cooking pots, storage jars), opting instead for salient attributes of



the subordinate categories to distinguish and name them (cf. Thissen 2001: 6ff. for general principles).

POTTERY

A. CLOSED FORMS (3) I. Pots a. one-handled b. medium sized c. large sized II. Large-sized vessels a. necked III. Jars a. two-handled b. handleless c. squat handleless, gourd-shaped B. OPEN FORMS (2) IV. Dishes a. hemispherical b. everted V. Bowls. a. medium sized C. SPECIAL FORMS (2) VI. Sieves VII. Miniatures

Table 1. Category structure of Ilıpınar Phase VB ceramic assemblage. Within the superordinate category of POTTERY the syntax is A. COVERT CATEGORY; I. Basic-level category; a. subordinate category.

PotsHole mouthed or open vessels with wide accessible mouths and about as deep as

wide and provided with a flat base and two opposing sturdy handles occur among the studied material only as sherds, apart from the large example depicted on Fig. 1: 4. Given the attributes mentioned, such vessels may have served for cooking, as may have medium-sized pots of similar proportions with similar handle sets (not illustrated).4 The large pots (Fig. 1: 3–4) with diameters ranging from 30–36 cm may hint at cooking in quantity, in conjunction with communal eating suggested by the numerous large dishes present in Phase VB. The ‘horns’ would certainly have enabled a better grip on such vessels while handling them heavy with food.5 The interior side of the complete pot was well-smoothed and medium burnished suggesting that such vessels in a way continue the tradition of

4 Two holemouth rims with diameters around 20 cm and displaying the beginning of a handle, and most likely belonging to the class of ‘cooking pots’ are published in Van As et al. 2001, Fig. 3, also Fig. 6: 1 (wrongly labeled as storage vessels). 5 At least one base was noted carrying soot traces on its interior side (LM8/9, lot 005), while another is blackened and attritioned inside, the blackening carrying through the walling as well (LM8/9, lot 092).


96 LAURENS THISSEN

carefully finished cooking pots’ interiors attested in previous Ilıpınar phases. Morphologically, the Phase VB pots fit in the trend started in Phase VA where the centre of gravity was shifted from the lower/centre body (as was the case during Ilıpınar Phases X throughout VI) towards the upper body: handle positions shifting from lower to upper regions and rims.

The two preserved, complete small-sized pots with one handle (Figs. 1: 1–2; 11) are linked to the bigger two-handled ones and form in fact a difficult blurred category between pots and deep bowls, and, due to the one handle, may even suggest a jug (pouring) function.

Large-sized vessels A few rims, but no complete profiles let alone whole vessels indicate the presence

in the assemblage of large necked jars or pots with voluminous, bulging bodies and short often everted necks, suggesting a storage function (Fig. 2: 1–2). Rim diameters are about 30 cm. Given the stress on storage in the preserved sample of pots in the burnt dwellings (see below), it is remarkable that large-sized vessels have not been found in situ; possibly they were located outdoors in the courtyards.

JarsJars are dominant among the complete vessels retrieved from the dwelling

structures (cf. Fig. 9), and signal the emphasis on storage at the moment the VB occupation went up in flames. With basically two subcategories, i.e. handled and non-handled jars, the globular or bag-shaped two handled subcategory is often ill-formed, sagging and asymmetrical in build, with uneven walls and rims – attributes which seem to point either to rapid manufacture or lack of skill (Figs. 12–14). While several two-handled jars were filled with cereals, a complete two-handled jar from structure 7 is smoke-blackened on the inside lower body and base, suggesting that also such jar-like vessels may have been involved in the preparation of food involving heat.6

Simple handleless jars are more carefully made than their two-handled counterparts, although they also are occasionally lopsided and out of balance (Fig. 4: 2 and Fig. 9, P.31). These are still coil made, unlike the next handleless subcategory.

A special class of jars differs from the rest by its manufacture and decoration (Figs. 5; 15–17). These jars are always thin walled (occasionally as thin as 2 mm) and scraped on the interior sides prior to the insertion of the necks which were are inserted separately, often causing a ridge on the interior join, and an offset on the outside (cf. Fig. 5: 2–4, 7). The general squat shape with the long neck and even the rippled decoration seem to have been inspired by gourds and/or figs. Non-decorated types occur also and some of them are quite large. Given the wall thickness and size it is unlikely these jars were coil-built, and I assume that a pinching method or the use of thinned clay slabs was used instead.

DishesDishes vary from hemispherical (Fig. 6: 1–2) to sloping sided (Fig. 6: 3–4) and

everted forms (Figs. 6: 5; 7; 8: 1–3), without there being a sharp distinction possible. The everted dishes tend to be very large, and diameters of up to 50 cm have been noted. (cf.

6 Vessel P.11 from LM7, not illustrated but very similar to Fig.4: 1, with a rim diameter of 17 cm. The jar is quite brittle due to the fire, and still needs to be restored.



Fig. 7: 1–4). They either have folded-over lips creating a bulge on the inside rim (e.g., Fig. 7: 4), or else surplus clay is rolled in and smoothed resulting in a more angular lip (Figs. 6: 3; 7: 1; 8: 3). To be emphasized is the ‘open’ character as opposed to the category of bowls (below), which are much smaller in size and proportion, and are of a more ‘closed’ aspect, tactically associated with single hand gestures. These large dishes, instead, imply handling and presentation with both hands. Dish bases are flat or rounded; vertically pierced knob handles (less often also solid knobs or tabs (Fig. 7: 2) below the rim, placed at opposite sides are very common. The dish on Fig. 6: 5 is exceptional in that the two handles are placed next to each other at one side of the vessel. Such rudimentary helps in gripping the vessel are decorative as well as practical for suspending them and storing them away. Given their often very large size and the care expended on their manufacture and decoration, these dishes were probably valuable items in the house inventory, and safe storage when not in use was obviously important. Often one or two holes were perforated below the rim, usually after firing of the vessel – as if upon second thoughts (Figs. 6: 4; 18). Such holes occur on all three decorated varieties. They were drilled from both sides creating a typical hourglass section.

BowlsBowls are a rare category in the VB assemblage, and limited to well made, groove-

decorated or rippled, closed or hemispherical bowls of medium size (diameters towards 20 cm) (Fig. 8: 4–7). Both categories are covered with a diluted clay slip often fired to black, which is highly burnished on both sides, making the grooves often appear as isolated ripples only visible when turned in the light. It’s this aspect which makes both varieties interrelated and also links them up to the rippled dishes and gourd-shaped jars discussed above. No complete examples are retrieved but I assume them to have flat bases.

Sieves/miniatures A few fragments of small, possibly conical-shaped sieves were recovered from the

areas studied, but none are complete. Perforations are densely spread all over and made from the outside, which is roughly smoothed, whereas the insides are irregular due to the perforations creating small rings of surplus clay. Small vessels quickly formed and with little attention to finish and surface, did belong to the VB assemblage as well, but only few fragments were present.

EVALUATION

The Ilıpınar Phase VB assemblage on the one hand represents a continuation of previous ceramic practice (more specifically Phase VA), and on the other hand includes new forms (gourd-shaped jars, everted dishes), decoration techniques (rippling, red/black patterning through firing manipulation), tempers (crushed calcite), and manufacture methods (slabs, mould making). Morphologically, the sets of pots, two-handled jars and the coil-made handleless jars link back to the pottery tradition evolved during preceding Phase VA. It was in Phase VA that jars were introduced in the Ilıpınar corpus (Thissen 2001: 79, 142 Fig. 67), as was also the concept of two opposing lug- or strap handles; even the handleless jars (of category IIIb type) are first present in Phase VA (Thissen 2001, Fig. 74: 6–7). By contrast, the gourd-shaped handleless jars and the large everted dishes with


98 LAURENS THISSEN

their new decoration systems are without precedent, and represent new types of table wares involving the presentation and short-term storage of food stuffs, the status of which is enhanced by carefully executed decorations involving discrete sets of techniques. It is these latter two groups, the dishes and gourd-shaped jars that are more often made in a fabric containing dense powdery calcite non plastics added to the mixed sand standard ware, from which the more traditional forms are mostly made.

The ceramic inventory of the dwellings themselves may not represent the full category system of VB pottery use. Even though bulk storage is not attested in the series of burnt dwellings, the general emphasis on storage is evident (Fig. 19): not only logical containers such as the two-handled jars were filled with cereals (Roodenberg 1999a, Fig. 14); even a few of the gourd-shaped jars contained charred grain and figs, and it is these two categories that make up most of the inventory of any VB structure (see Fig. 9 for a typical inventory). There is a disproportionate scarcity of dishes which are, by contrast, so dominant in the fragmented and disturbed contexts from the open spaces between and outside of the dwellings, or directly overlying them. Even two-handled (cooking?) pots are underrepresented. Both lacking from the house inventories and from the outdoors areas are vessels obviously usable for drinking, i.e. cups and beakers. Probably drinking gear was made of perishable materials. The rippled jars – apart from their current storage function – might alternatively or perhaps originally have been used for pouring liquids, the ripple décor reflecting what it was containing. In a way confirming this unbalanced representation of vessels per dwelling is the fact that out of the nine structures excavated only nos. 4 and 7 were not cramped with pots, while the rest was too full to move around. In view of what has been said, it is likely that most of the structures acted as a storage place at least at the time the fire broke out. It may be suggested that we have caught VB in a passing state, the burning freezing a particular moment in time.

DATING AND CORRESPONDENCES

Dating of Phase VB has been dealt with by Roodenberg/Schier 2001. Due to the new calibration curve IntCal04 (Reimer et al. 2004), the acquired results are slightly amended as follows (Fig. 10). Summing the 10 dates from VB (an 11th one, GrN–22043 has been left out since it is too old) gives a 1sigma time span of 5610–5590 cal BC (10.6%), 5565–5485 cal BC (57.6%). Given the wiggles in this particular point of the calibration curve, the 5610–5590 range is less likely, since it shows a dip downwards from an otherwise relatively smooth curve. The 5565–5485 cal BC range is therefore a plausible candidate for the point at which the settlement was burnt down, charring the plant remains inside their vessels. To use this evidence in a shortcut kind of way, one could say that Ilıpınar VB “happened” somewhere in the 56th C cal BC.

Comparing this secure dating evidence with potentially contemporaneous sites in the near and wider vicinity is not easy, given the scarceness of 14C dated locations. In Turkey itself, Mente e, due south of Ilıpınar, Orman Fidanlı ı near Eski ehir, Hoca Çe me I, Yarımburgaz and A a ı Pınar in Turkish Thrace are the only sites showing similarities with parts of the assemblage as described above. Of these, only A a ı Pınarhas a series of carbon dates. A a ı Pınar Phase 6 sums at 5720–5625 cal BC (1s) and is therefore just older than Ilıpınar VB and would conform better to Ilıpınar Phases VII–VI.



A a ı Pınar Phase 5 dates sum at 5465–5225 cal BC, peaking strongly at 5375–5290 cal BC, suggesting the 54th C cal BC as the most likely date for the A a ı Pınar 5 settlement. The gap with A a ı Pınar 6 of at least 250 years is striking, and on basis of the absolute dating evidence A a ı Pınar 5 clearly postdates Ilıpınar VB. While not sufficiently dated, the site of Yarımburgaz yields some parallels from layer 3 foremost for the highly burnished bowls with recti- and curvilinear grooves, and possibly for the handleless jars (cf. Özdo an et al. 1991, especially Fig. 7; Fig. 8, resp.).

From Orman Fidanlı ı some good parallels occur, unfortunately from mixed levels, but demonstrating that Phase VB was not limited to the Iznik area but stretched further inland to the south. (cf. Efe 2001, Figs. 7: 116; 8: 124 (level III); 11: 177, 180 (levels I–IV); 15: 248–253 (level V).7 Further south, Canhasan 1 probably just postdates VB (assuming the one 14C date as coming from level 1 (CANeW 2007)), and it is more likely Canhasan 2A which may be contemporaneous to Ilıpınar VB, although rather different in terms of pottery (cf. Thissen 2000: 95; CANeW 2007).8 From Mente e, everted dishes with ripple decoration derive from the upper part of stratum 1, which is otherwise contemporary to Ilıpınar Phase VA, probably representing a now eroded occupation level topping the VA deposit (Roodenberg 1999b, Fig. 10:3–5).

In Bulgaria, several sites show chronological overlaps with Ilıpınar VB, including Tell Karanovo, Tell Azmak, Kremenik and Dobrinište. Karanovo’s 14C evidence has a similar pattern as signalled for AP: Karanovo II data sum at 5730–5635 cal BC (1s) (NB this is exclusive of the three Bln-dates from Georgiev), while the ensuing burnt level of Karanovo III sums at 5485–5355 cal BC. Between the final Phase II level and the Karanovo III burnt level, three occupation levels intervene lacking of radiocarbon data, two of these dated to a newly defined ‘Karanovo II–III’ level (Nikolov 1997: 50f.), and one to Karanovo III (Hiller 1997: 29). Assuming site continuity, it is these non-dated levels that would – in terms of absolute dates – conform to Ilıpınar VB since fitting the gap between Karanovo II and Karanovo III burnt level. Where evidence at AP for a continuous tradition running from Phase 6 over 5 is meagre, it is clear at the Karanovo site. The critical occupation at Azmak possibly contemporary to VB would be at around level I:3 there, where ensuing level I:4 is fully congruent to Tell Karanovo’s burnt level III, in terms of absolute dates.

In southern Romania, the recently excavated site Teleor 003/Magura yields an extensive Dude ti occupation roughly dated between 5500–5300 cal BC (1s) (Bailey et al., in press), therefore contemporary to Karanovo III burnt level, and just post-dating VB. Stylistic and morphological resemblances in the Teleor 003 pottery are particularly strong with the North Bulgarian key site of Samovodene (levels B1–B2, cf. Stanev 2002). Samovodene A signifies an earlier stage not yet attested in Teleor 003, but is possibly contemporary to Karanovo II and might just fit Ilıpınar VB (and part of Ilıpınar Phase VA as well). The Dude ti pottery has only general correspondences with Ilıpınar VB – to which it is clearly later in time –, limited to the reduced firing technique, the method of

7 Vaguely similar ceramics stem from the site Kes Kaya, surveyed by Efe (Efe 1989/1990, Figs. 7–10), also near Eski ehir.8 The CANeW estimates for Hacılar I and Kuruçay 7 in the 58th C should probably be upped to the 57th C, in view of the architectural parallels with VA. Ilıpınar VA compares also with Mente e 1.


100 LAURENS THISSEN

rippling vessel surfaces, the occurrence of horn handles and of everted dishes with ripple decorated rims.

Indeed, the dishes with ripple decorated rims occur all over the Balkans starting with Karanovo II, as do the ‘horn handles’. Conceptually rather similar to the Ilıpınar gourd-shaped jars are some vessels from the site Karanovo, Phase II (Hiller/Nikolov 1997, Pls. 57: 16–18; 58: 1, the latter two with rippled decoration on the shoulders). A similar jar is known from Yasa Tepe near Plovdiv (Detev 1959. Fig. 22; Georgiev 1961, Pl. XII: 4), and more instances are attested in Bulgarian Thrace ranging in date from Karanovo Phase I to III and occurring in, e.g., Banjata, avdar and Tell Azmak.9 The particular shape seems developed from affiliated ones in the assemblages concerned, thus demonstrating at once a long local tradition and a tight integration in the morphological framework defining ‘Karanovo’ ceramic culture. Concluding, some of the new shapes (the gourd-shaped jars and the ripple decorated dishes) and decoration techniques (the ripple ornament) introduced in Ilıpınar Phase VB have their best counterparts in Bulgarian Thrace, with a best possible date of late Karanovo II, transitional III. These correspondences with late Karanovo II suggests that the 56th C date for VB established supra is convincing (opposed to the 55th C date gathered from the earlier 14C analyses still based on the IntCal93 curve). A moving away from a ‘Karanovo III’ concept toward a (late) Karanovo II is therefore acceptable.

In general, however, the Karanovo II, II/III, and III assemblages are a far cry from Ilıpınar VB: missing from the VB assemblage are typical Thracian storage vessel attributes such as appliqué strips, nail impresso on holemouth/cooking pots, the stress on open shapes such as dishes, deep bowls and so-called “Wannen” (small-sized flat-based cups), the characteristic ‘altars’ with encrusted décor, (high) legged vessels, or carinated dishes with ripple decorated, low shoulders. Important details such as the dominant occurrence at Karanovo of ring bases are absent at VB. Phase VB only partially fits in with the local Thracian pottery development as for instance visible in the Karanovo sequence, or at similar sites such as Azmak, Stara Zagora, Jasatepe, Kazanl k, or even the North Bulgarian contemporary site of tell Samovodene, despite the striking presence of horn handles and ripple decorated dishes.

Concluding, the picture given by the ceramics of Ilıpınar Phase VB is that part of the shapes demonstrates a Balkan, more specific, Bulgarian Thrace origin (e.g., the fig jars, the ripple decorated dishes, the ripple decorated bowls). Another part is developed locally directly out of Phase VA. Apparently, Ilıpınar was not entirely abandoned after the last village of Phase VA had fallen victim to a devastating fire. Local expertise and ceramic concepts were preserved during Phase VB, but juxtaposed to new form concepts, new manufacturing methods and some striking decoration patterns, having no precedent on the site.

9 For avdar, see Georgiev 1981, Pl. 32a–b; for Tell Azmak, Georgiev 1967a, Pl. 6d; Georgiev 1967b, Figs. 7–8; for Banjata, Detev 1950, Fig. 7 upper right.



REFERENCES

As, A. van, L. Jacobs & M.-H. Wijnen, 2001 – A technological study of the Chalcolithic pottery of Ilıpınar, Phase VB. In: J. Roodenberg & L. Thissen, (eds.). The Ilıpınar excavations II. Leiden: Nederlands Instituut voor het Nabije Oosten, 155–168.

Bailey, D., P. Mirea, L. Thissen, S. Mills and R. Andreescu, in press – On the early Neolithic in southern Romania: context, results, and agenda for research. Studia Praehistorica

CANeW 2007 – Central Anatolia and Cilicia chronological chart: 9th–5th millennia cal BC. http://www.canew.org/data.html (last update 16 March 2007).

Detev, P., 1950 – Selištnata mogila Banjata pri Kapitan Dimitrievo (Le tell Baniata près de Kapitan Dimitriévo). Godišnik Narodnija Archeologi eski Muzej Plovdiv 2, 1–23.

Detev, P., 1959 – Materiali za praistorijata na Plovdiv (Materiaux de la préhistoire de Plovdiv). Godišnik Narodnija Archeologi eski Muzej Plovdiv 3, 3–80.

Efe, T., 1989/1990 – Three early sites in the vicinity of Eski ehir: Asmainler, Kanlıta and Kes Kaya. Anatolica16, 31–60.

Efe, T. (ed.), 2001 – The salvage excavations at Orman Fidanlı ı. A Chalcolithic site in inland Northwestern Anatolia. Istanbul: TASK Vakfı.

French, D., 1998 – Canhasan sites 1: Canhasan I, structures and stratigraphy. London: The British Institute of Archaeology at Ankara.

Georgiev, G., 1961 – Kulturgruppen der Jungsteinzeit und der Kupferzeit in der Ebene von Thrazien (Südbulgarien). In: B. Soudský & E. Plesová (eds.). L’Europe à la fin de l’âge de la pierre. Prague, 45–100.

Georgiev, G., 1967a – Die Erforschung der neolithischen und bronzezeitlichen Siedlungshügel in Bulgarien. Zeitschrift für Archäologie 1, 139–159.

Georgiev, G., 1967b – Beiträge zur Erforschung des Neolithikums und der Bronzezeit in Südbulgarien. Archaeologia Austriaca 42, 90–144.

Georgiev, G., 1981 – Die neolithische Siedlung bei avdar, Bezirk Sofia. Izvestija na Arheologi eskaya Institut (Sofia) 36, 63–109.

Gérard, F., 2001 – Stratigraphy and architecture on the Southwest flank of Ilıpınar. In: J. Roodenberg & L. Thissen (eds.). The Ilıpınar excavations II. Leiden: Nederlands Instituut voor het Nabije Oosten, 177–221.

Hiller, S., 1997 – Forschungsziele. Grabungsverlauf. Stratigraphie. In: S. Hiller & V. Nikolov (eds.). Karanovo. Die Ausgrabungen im Südsektor 1984–1992. Horn/Wien: Verlag Ferdinand Berger & Söhne, 19–47.

Nikolov, V., 1997 – Die neolithische Keramik. In: S. Hiller & V. Nikolov (eds.). Karanovo. Die Ausgrabungen im Südsektor 1984–1992. Horn/Wien: Verlag Ferdinand Berger & Söhne, 105–146.

Özdo an, M., Y. Miyake and N. Özba aran Dede, 1991 – An interim report on excavations at Yarımburgaz and Toptepe, Eastern Thrace. Anatolica 17, 59–121.

Reimer P., M. Baillie, E. Bard, A. Bayliss, J. Beck, C. Bertrand, P. Blackwell, C. Buck, G. Burr, K. Cutler, P. Damon, R. Edwards, R. Fairbanks, M. Friedrich, T. Guilderson, A. Hogg, K. Hughen, B. Kromer, F. McCormac, S. Manning, C. Bronk Ramsey, R. Reimer, S. Remmele, J. Southon, M. Stuiver, S. Talamo, F. Taylor, J. van der Plicht and C. Weyhenmeyer, 2004 – IntCal04 terrestrial radiocarbon age calibration, 0–26 cal Kyr BP. Radiocarbon 46, 1029–1058.

Roodenberg, J., L. Thissen & H. Buitenhuis, 1989/1990 – Preliminary report on the archaeological investigations at Ilıpınar in NW Anatolia. Anatolica 16, 61–144.

Roodenberg, J., 1999a – Ilıpınar, an early farming village in the Iznik Lake basin. In: M. Özdo an & N. Ba gelen (eds.). Neolithic in Turkey, the cradle of civilization. New discoveries. Istanbul: Arkeoloji ve Sanat Yayınları, 193–202.

Roodenberg, J., 1999b – Investigations at Mente e Höyük in the Yeni ehir basin (1996–97). Anatolica 25, 21–36. Roodenberg, J. & W. Schier, 2001 – Radiocarbon determinations. In: J. Roodenberg & L. Thissen, (eds.).

The Ilıpınar excavations II. Leiden: Nederlands Instituut voor het Nabije Oosten, 257–278. Roodenberg, J., 2001 – Miscellaneous. In: J. Roodenberg & L. Thissen, (eds.). The Ilıpınar excavations II.

Leiden: Nederlands Instituut voor het Nabije Oosten, 223–255. Rye, O., 1981 – Pottery technology. Principles and reconstruction. Washington: Taraxacum.


102 LAURENS THISSEN

Stanev, P., 2002 – Samovodene. Neolitna Selishte Mogila. Veliko Târnovo. Thissen, L., 1993 – New insights in Balkan–Anatolian connections in the Late Chalcolithic: old evidence

from the Turkish Black Sea littoral. Anatolian Studies 43, 207–237. Thissen, L., 2002 – Time trajectories for the Neolithic of Central Anatolia. In: F. Gérard & L. Thissen (eds).

The Neolithic of Central Anatolia. Internal developments and external relations during the 9th–6th

millennia cal BC. Proceedings of the International CANeW Table Ronde, Istanbul, 23–24 November 2001. Istanbul: Ege Yayınları, 13–26.

Thissen, L., 2000 – Early village communities in Anatolia and the Balkans, 6500–5500 cal BC. Studies in chronology and culture contact. Unpublished PhD Dissertation, University of Leiden.

Thissen, L., 2001 – The pottery of Ilıpınar, phases X to VA. In: J. Roodenberg & L. Thissen, (eds.). The Ilıpınar excavations II. Leiden: Nederlands Instituut voor het Nabije Oosten, 3–154.

CATALOGUE OF ILLUSTRATED COMPLETE VESSELS

Fig. 1: 1 [= Fig. 11] – LM8/9, P.59 (structure 1). One handled small pot, S-shaped, flat base; one rudimentary horn handle. Coil made. Height 12 cm, diameter 12 cm. No further data available.

Fig. 1: 2 – LM7-071, P.21 (structure 9). One handled small pot, slightly S-shaped, low disk base, one handle not complete, possibly a rudimentary horn handle. Coil made. Exterior medium burnished, black; interior roughish, low burnished. Height 15 cm, diameter 18 cm

Fig. 1: 4 – LM7-071, P.20A (structure 9). Two-handled pot, slightly S-shaped, flat base; two opposing rudimentary horn handles. Coil made, irregular walled exterior, stroke burnished. Inside well-smoothed, medium burnished. Inside colour 7.5YR 5/4 ‘brown’, outside 7.5YR 5/6 ‘strong brown’. Height 23 cm, diameter 36 cm.

Fig. 2: 3 – LM8-071, P.38 (structure 2). Two-handled jar, two opposing, round-sectioned lug handles; short-necked, slightly everted rim, flat base. Coil made, irregular walled, uneven rim. Height 34 cm, diameter 25 cm. No further data available.

Fig. 3: 1 – M9-026, P.10 (structure 5). Two-handled jar, two opposing, round-sectioned lug handles, short everted neck, flat base. Height 37 cm, diameter 10 cm. No further data available. Slightly lopsided.

Fig. 3: 2 – M9-026, P.3 (structure 5). Two-handled jar, two opposing, round-sectioned lug handles, rounded base, slightly irregular walled. Height 49 cm, diameter 18 cm. No further data available. Slightly lopsided.

Fig. 4: 1 – LM8/9-008, P.33 (structure 3). Two-handled jar, two opposing strap handles, rounded base, slightly irregular walled, uneven rim. Height 29 cm, diameter 16 cm. No further data available.

Fig. 4: 2 – LM7-068, P.8 (structure 8). Handleless jar, long, slightly everted neck, flat base. Medium burnished exterior with three parallel grooves repeated three times on the shoulder. Height 25 cm, diameter 8 cm, height of neck 9 cm. Jar is lopsided.

Fig. 4: 3 – M9-026, P.8 (structure 5). Handleless jar, long neck with slightly pushed out lip, flat base, squat biconical body. Three parallel stripes of ‘white paint’ on shoulder repeated four times. Height 23 cm, diameter 9 cm. No further data available.



Fig. 5: 1 – LM8/9-008, P.26 (structure 3). Long-necked, handleless jar, base missing. Ripple decoration on shoulder. Preserved height 21 cm, diameter 8 cm. No further data available.

Fig. 5: 2 – LM8/9-008, P.30 (structure 3). Long-necked, handleless jar, flat base. Neck made separately from body, inserted. Slightly lopsided. Plain burnished. Height 25 cm, diameter 9 cm. No further data available.

Fig. 5: 3 [= Fig. 16] – LM8-084, P.50 (structure 2). Short-necked, handleless jar, flat, slightly concave base. Neck made separately from body, inserted. Exterior base use-wear traces. Exterior slipped and highly burnished, black colour. Ripple decoration on shoulder in interlocking and opposing directions. Height 13 cm, diameter 8 cm. No further data available.

Fig. 5: 4 – M9-026, P.1 (structure 5). Short-necked, handleless jar, rounded base. Neck made separately from body, inserted. Exterior base use-wear traces. Exterior slipped and highly burnished. Fine ripple decoration on shoulder. Height 12 cm, diameter 7 cm.

Fig. 5: 5 – M12. Short-necked, handleless jar, flat base. Ripple decoration on shoulder. Height 8 cm, diameter 6 cm. No further data available.

Fig. 5: 6 – LM7-060, P.9 (structure 7). Short-necked, handleless jar, flat base. Exterior clay slip, dark grey-brown to black, highly burnished; interior only neck medium burnished, rest scraped and lightly smoothed. Height 9 cm, diameter 8 cm.

Fig. 5: 7 [= Fig. 17] – LM8-084, P.54 (structure 2). Short-necked, handleless jar, flat base. Neck made separately from body, inserted. Fine ripple decoration on shoulder. Height 13 cm, diameter 11 cm. No further data available.

Fig. 6: 1 – M9-026, P.11 (structure 5). Deep dish, flat base, two opposing lug handles, vertically perforated. Height 15 cm, diameter 31 cm. Slightly lopsided. No further data available.

Fig. 6: 5 – LM7-071, P.17 (structure 9). Everted dish, plain rim, rounded base. Below rim two juxtaposed vertically-pierced knob handles. Interior well-smoothed, diluted clay slip, medium-high burnished, grey black colour, orangey-brown towards rim. Same colour separation on exterior but less pronounced. Exterior heavily scraped and pared down, haphazardly finished, still irregular walled. Height 8 cm, diameter 26 cm.

Fig. 7: 1 – LM7-071, P.19 (structure 9). Everted dish, flat base, two opposing vertically pierced knob handles. Thickened-inward lip. Interior reddish brown clay slip, medium-high burnished (5YR 4/4); exterior medium burnished, inclusive of base. Exterior colour 5YR 6/6~5/6 (reddish yellow). At places the interior is coloured dark grey due to the firing, possibly an attempt to obtain the red/black colour effect. Height 5 cm, diameter 26 cm.


104 LAURENS THISSEN

Fig. 1. Ilıpınar Phase VB – One- and two-handled pots. 1 LM8/9 P.59 (cluster or structure 1); 2 LM7 P.21(structure 9); 3 LM8-063; 4 LM7 P.20A (structure 9).

1

2

3

45 cm0



Fig. 2. Ilıpınar Phase VB – Large-sized vessels; two-handled jar. 1 LM7-071; 2 LM7-071; 3 LM8 P.38(structure 2).


106 LAURENS THISSEN

Fig.

3. I

lıpın

ar P

hase

VB

– T

wo-

hand

led

jars

. 1 P

.10;

2 P

.3 (

both

M9,

str

uctu

re 5

).



Fig. 4. Ilıpınar Phase VB – Two-handled jar and handleless jars. 1 LM8/9 P.33 (structure 3); 2 LM7 P.8(structure 8); 3 M9 P.8 (structure 5).


108 LAURENS THISSEN

Fig. 5. Ilıpınar Phase VB – Handleless jars. 1 LM8/9 P.26 (structure 3); 2. LM8/9 P.30 (structure 3); 3 LM8P.50 (structure 2); 4 M9 P.1 (structure 5); 5 M12; 6 LM7 P.9 (structure 7); 7 LM8 P.54 (structure 2).



Fig. 6. Ilıpınar Phase VB – Dishes. 1 M9 P.11 (structure 5); 2 LM8/9-014; 3 LM8/9-016; 4 LM7-071; 5LM7 P.17 (structure 9).

1

2

3

4

5

5 cm0


110 LAURENS THISSEN

Fig. 7. Ilıpınar Phase VB – Dishes. 1 LM7 P.19 (structure 9); 2 W13-082; 3 LM8/9-016; 4 V13-130+034;5 LM7-041; 6 LM7-071; 7 LM7-071.



Fig. 8. Ilıpınar Phase VB – Dishes (1–3) and Bowls (4–7). 1 LM8-098; 2 LM8/9-110; 3 LM8/9-095; 4 LM8/9-016; 5 LM8/9-016; 6 LM8/9-108; 7 S9-008.


112 LAURENS THISSEN

Figure 9. Ilıpınar Phase VB – Ceramic inventory of structure 3 (LM8/9).

5 cm0

P.31

P.33

P.26

P.30

P.25

P.34

P.27

P.29

P.32



Figure 10. Ilıpınar Phase VB – Summed calibrations on 10 dates (cf. Roodenberg/Schier 2001).

Figure 11. Ilıpınar Phase VB – One-handled pot, P.59(LM8/9, structure 1).

Figure 12. Ilıpınar Phase VB – Two-handled jar, P.34(LM8/9, structure 3).


114 LAURENS THISSEN

Figure 13. Ilıpınar Phase VB – Two-handled jar, P. 49 (LM8,structure 2).

Figure 14. Ilıpınar Phase VB – Two-handled jar, P. 19 (LM8/9, structure 6).

Figure 15. Ilıpınar Phase VB – Handleless jar, ripple-decorated, P. 29 (LM8/9, structure 3).

Figure 16. Ilıpınar Phase VB – Handleless jar, ripple-decorated, P. 50 (LM8, structure 2).



Figure 19. Ilıpınar Phase VB – Storage vessels in situ.

Figure 18. Ilıpınar Phase VB – Dish, P. 52 (LM8, structure 2).Figure 17. Ilıpınar Phase VB – Handleless jar, ripple-decorated, P. 54 (LM8, structure 2).


The pottery of Ilipinar Phase VB (Ilipinar Vol. 3 (2008)

Documents

Transcript of The pottery of Ilipinar Phase VB (Ilipinar Vol. 3 (2008)