128
Documenta Praehistorica XLVI (2019)
Introduction
The emergence of ceramics in the eastern part of
Northern Mesopotamia (Jazira) and the Zagros Moun-
tains (Northern Iraq and Western Iran) is recorded
between the 8
th
and 7
th
millennia BC. However, the
origins of pottery technology in this region began
long before the emergence of fired vessels, and
went through several stages in its development. This
process can be traced at sites such as Ganj Dareh
(Smith 1974), Ali Kosh vessels (Hole et al. 1969),
Tepe Guran (Mortensen 2014) in the valleys of the
Zagros Mountains and Tell Magzalia in Eastern Jezi-
ra. For more than a millennium before the first fired
vessels of the Pottery Neolithic there is clear evi-
dence of vessels of both unfired clay and gypsum/
lime plaster. The wide distribution of fired ceramics
in the region occurred from the middle of 7
th
millen-
nium BC in Eastern Jazira in settlements related to
the Proto-Hassuna period. This paper explores the
technological traditions in which these vessels were
made.
The Zagros Mountains
Unfired clay vessels (the end of 9
th
to the 7
th
millennia BC)
The earliest examples of vessels in this region were
found in the Zagros Mountains of Western Iran in
the Ganj Dareh settlement (layers E and D). This
small, but very important mound not far from Ker-
manshah, dates from the end of 9
th
to the begin-
ning of the 8
th
millennia BC (Mellaart 1975.78; Da-
rabi 2015.P. 31; Bernbeck 2017.101). These large
The development of Neolithic pottery technology
in Eastern Jazira and the Zagros Mountains
Nataliya Yu. Petrova
State Historical museum, Moscow, RU
petrovanatalya7@mail.ru
ABSTRACT – The origins of pottery technology in Eastern Jazira and the Zagros Mountains can be
seen as a process of several stages, from unfired clay and plaster vessels to the fully ceramic tech-
nologies of the Proto-Hassuna period. This paper reviews this process and presents a technological
analysis of Proto-Hassuna ceramics to investigate the relationships between the pottery traditions at
sites in Eastern Jazira and the western part of the Zagros Mountains.
IZVLE∞EK – Izvor lon≠arske tehnologije na obmo≠ju vzhodne Jazire in gorovja Zagros lahko opazuje-
mo kot proces, ki je potekal v nekaj stopnjah, in sicer od ne∫gane gline in posod iz mavca do polno
razvite tehnologije keramike v obdobju Proto-Hassuna. V ≠lanku pregledamo te procese in predsta-
vimo tehnolo∏ko analizo proto-hassunske keramike, s katero preu≠ujemo tudi odnose med lon≠arski-
mi tradicijami na najdi∏≠ih na obmo≠ju vzhodne Jazire in zahodnega dela gorovja Zagros.
KEY WORDS – Neolithic pottery technology; Near East; Proto-Hassuna
KLJU∞NE BESEDE – neolitska lon≠arska tehnologija; Bli∫nji Vzhod; Proto-Hassuna
Razvoj neolitske lon;arske tehnologije
na obmo;ju vzhodne Jazire in gorovja Zagros
DOI> 10.4312\dp.46.8

The development of Neolithic pottery technology in Eastern Jazira and the Zagros Mountains
129
settlement in Northern Iraq, dated to the beginning
of the 7
th
millennium BC (Bader 1993a.61–62). The
use of these resources was regionally variable. For
example, only vessels of gypsum have been identi-
fied within the territory of Zagros (Choga Sefid and
Ali Kosh settlements) (Miyake 2016.120).
Although the tradition of making vessels from gyp-
sum was short-lived, during the Proto-Hassuna pe-
riod, the tradition of applying lime to clay vessels re-
mained. A similar coating both on one and on both
sides of the vessel is present on containers from the
Tell Sotto, Kultepe and Yarimtepe I settlements in
Northern Iraq. It was also noted in the settlements
of this period in Syria (Nieuwehuyse, Dooijes 2008.
162, 169) and on the ceramics of the Jarmo settle-
ment (Adams 1983.215). The use of gypsum as a
coating for baskets (for example, the settlement of
Umm Dabagiya) also continued into the Proto-Has-
suna period (Kirkbride 1972.4, Pl. VI).
The first fired vessels (around the turn of the
8
th
to 7
th
millennia BC)
There is no clear starting point for the appearance
of the first fired ceramic vessels at Ganj Dareh. Pos-
sibly it happened during the formation of level D at
the settlement, which dates no later than 7750 cal
BC (Bernbeck 2017.101). Early ceramics are also re-
corded at Tepe Guran, Ali Kosh and Tepe Mahtaj set-
vessels (80–100cm high) of unfired clay were often
built into the interior walls of the houses. Philip E.
L. Smith (1990) describes these as either storage ves-
sels or house construction details. One clay fragment
from a small vessel with impressions was found in
level E (Pre-Pottery Neolithic/PPNB) (Smith 1974.
207). The first fired vessels were associated with le-
vel D, but these were found only in burned houses
and represented by large unfired vessels (Smith
1974.207; 1990.332). We have little information
about the technology of unfired clay vessels, though
it is known that the vessels from Ganj Dareh level D
were made from ‘clay with plant inclusions’ (Mel-
laart 1975.78). Pamela Vandiver (1987.16) studied
these ceramics in particular, and noted the use of
slab construction.
Gypsum and lime vessels (around the turn of
the 7
th
millennium BC)
The calcination of gypsum or limestone to produce
a plastic mass with water and some admixtures re-
presents an alternative approach to container tech-
nology. Vessels made of gypsum and calcareous clay
were found in Ali Kosh settlement in Iran, where the
application of slab construction and the use of wick-
er basket moulds, which left imprints on the surface
of some gypsum and lime vessels, has been noted
(Kingery et al. 1988.219–227; Nilhamn, Koek 2013.
292). Such vessels were also found at the Magzalia
Map 1. Sites mentioned in the text: 1 Salat Cami Yani; 2 Sumaki Huyyuk; 3 Kashkashok; 4 Hazna II; 5
Seker al-Aheimar; 6 Magzalia; 7 Yarimtepe I; 8 Sotto; 9 Kultepe; 10 Ginnig; 11 Telul eth Thalathat; 12
Hassuna; 13 Umm Dabaghiyah; 14 Jarmo; 15 Sarab; 16 Ganj Dareh; 17 Guran; 18 Choga Sefid; 19 Ali
Kosh; 20 Qaleh Rostam; 21 Tal-e-Mushki.

Nataliya Yu. Petrova
130
tlements. The finds from Ali Kosh date to the last
third of the 8
th
to 7
th
millennia BC (Darabi 2012.
104). Plant inclusions were noted in the pottery of
Ali Kosh as the main temper added to these vessels
(Hole et al. 1969.109–115). However, the earliest
ceramics on Tepe Guran (7100–6800 cal BC) con-
tained no identifiable admixtures (Bernbeck 2017.
101; Mellaart 1975.86).
By the beginning of 7
th
millennium BC, ceramics
were already widespread in the Zagros Mountains,
at Tepe Guran (younger layers), Ganj Dareh (layer
B), Tepe Sarab, Qaleh Rostam (phases III and II), at
Tal-e-Mushki in Western Iran and at Jarmo in East-
ern Iraq (Bernbeck 2017.107–108; Braidwood, Ho-
we 1960.38–49; Mellaart 1975.86). Published ac-
counts of the ceramics of Tepe Guran and Tepe Sa-
rab note that these vessels were tempered with
coarse plant inclusions. James Mellart considered it
was a straw tempering (Bernbeck 2017.101; Mel-
laart 1975.86–87). Vandiver (1987.16, 18) noted the
use of slab construction in the ceramics of Ganj Da-
reh level B. However, nothing is known about its
fabric composition.
Jarmo pottery is divided into early and late phases.
Frederick Matson (1960.68) studied the Jarmo cera-
mics in detail. The technology of pottery was similar
in both phases and characterized by the presence
of dung as the primary temper. Matson identified
thin plant inclusions up to 5mm length and c. 1mm
wide with longitudinal lines and round holes with
grain prints in the ceramic body (Matson 1955.355;
1960.68). Pottery of the early phase has analogies in
Tepe Guran and Tepe Sarab. Later vessels are coar-
ser, having both organic and abundant lime mineral
inclusions of large size and high frequency. Accord-
ing to a number of researchers, this type of vessels
have close parallels in the Proto-Hassuna ceramics
of Northern Mesopotamia (Bader 1975.105–110;
Adam 1983.215; Bernbeck 2017.103, 105).
Ancient pottery of Northern Iraq
The evidence of transition from the Pre-Pottery Neo-
lithic to the Pottery Neolithic in Northern Iraq is clear
in the material from Tell Magzalia in Northern Iraq,
and can be dated the beginning of the 7
th
millenni-
um BC based on excavations carried out by Nikolay
Bader (1993) in the 1970s. Large unfired storage ves-
sels (65cm high, 45cm in diameter) were identified
in the first level of the settlement (720–780cm).
These vessels have a circular hole c. 10cm in diame-
ter at the bottom, and the author suggested they
were used for grain storage (Bader 1989.61–62, Fig.
18.2; 1993a.12–13). The first fired ceramics frag-
ments were recorded at a depth of 470cm. Unfortu-
nately, little is known about them. Moreover, large
heaps of raw, unprocessed clay were found in the
different levels of the tell (Bader 1989.61, 105, Pl.
41.13, 14, 20, 21;1993a.19, Fig. 2.12; Bader, Le
Mière 2013.515).
Pottery of the Proto-Hassuna period
The wide distribution of ceramics in the Northern
Mesopotamia region is associated with the Proto-
Hassuna period. These have been found at Tell Sot-
to, Kultepe, Yarimtepe I, Umm Dabaghiyah, Tell Has-
suna, Telul eth Thalathat, Ginnig, Shimshara in North-
ern Iraq; Tell Seker al-Aheimar, Tell Kashkashok II,
Tell Hazna II, Tell Bouqras in Easten Syria; Salat Ca-
mi Yani and Sumaki Huyyuk in the headwaters of
Euphrates in Turkey and a number of other sites
(Bader, Le Miere 2013.513; Le Mière 2000; Nieuwe-
huyse 2013.114)
1
.
There is no consensus regarding the origins of the
Proto-Hassuna culture. Various features of material
culture, including analogues in ceramic form and or-
namentation, were associated with the Jarmo settle-
ment (Zagross) (Bader 1993b.48). There is also the
opinion that Proto-Hassuna ceramics originated from
the ceramics of the Pre-Proto Hassuna period. This
is based on the successive occurrence of pottery bear-
ing layers from these periods at Tell Seker-al-Ahei-
mar in Eastern Syria. Researchers note that the cera-
mics of Pre-Proto-Hassuna period differ from those
of the Proto-Hassuna period in both forms and the
presence of a large amount of exclusive mineral in-
clusions (Bader, Le Mière 2013.520; Nishiaki, Le
Mière 2005.67).
Proto-Hassuna ceramics are usually defined by re-
searchers as ‘coarse ware’, with red paint, slip and
appliqué ornament. The technology used for making
the vessels is usually described as follows.
Raw material – it is generally agreed that the mate-
rial for production was clay with a small amount of
mineral inclusions (calcite and sand) (Bader et al.
1994; Campbell, Baird 1990.70; Kirkbride 1972.8).
The pottery paste contains a large amount of plant
1 Tell Sotto, Kultepe (Bader 1993); Yarimtepe I (Munchaev, Merpert 1993; Bashilov et al. 1980); Umm Dabaghiyah (Kirkbride
1972); Tell Hassuna (Lloyd, Safar 1945); Tell Ginnig (Campbell, Baird 1990); Tell Hazna II (Munchaev et al. 1993); Tell Kashka-
shok II (Matsutani 1991); Tell Seker al-Aheimar (Nishiaki, Le Mière 2005).

The development of Neolithic pottery technology in Eastern Jazira and the Zagros Mountains
131
inclusions (Telul eth Thalathat, Tell Seker al-Aheimar,
tell Sotto, Kultepe and Yarimtepe I (Bader 1989.
218; Bader, Le Mière 2013.516, 518; Nieuwehuyse
2013.120), which is sometimes called straw (Tell
Sotto, Tell Hassuna, Tell Kaskashok II (Bader 1989.
138; Lloyd, Safar 1945.276; Maeda 1991.20). Ves-
sels from Yarimtepe I, Umm Dabagiyah and Ginnig
smaller plant inclusions in addition to straw (Bashi-
lov et al. 1980.43–64; Campbell, Baird 1990.70;
Kirkbride 1972.8). Oliver Nieuwehuyse suggested
the possible presence of dung in the Proto-Hassuna
pottery paste (Nieuwehuyse 2013.125).
Construction – vessels were made with the coiling
(Campbell, Baird 1990.70; Kirkbride 1972.8) or
slab construction techniques (Campbell, Baird 1990.
70). Fuad Safar, who excavated the Tell Hassuna,
suggested that the bases of large vessels with ribs
were made in pits, and then built up from this
(Lloyd, Safar 1945.277). Surface treatment – ves-
sels were smoothed by grass (Kirkbride 1972.8),
and sometimes burnished (Campbell, Baird 1990.
70; Kirkbride 1972.8; Nieuwehuyse 2013.120). Fi-
ring – the vessels were fired at low temperature
(Campbell, Baird 1990.70; Bashilov et al. 1980.43–
66). During the excavations of Tell Sotto a large ves-
sel burned in a pit was identified (Bader 1989.140).
Pottery of Tell Sotto and Yarim Tepe I
Technological analysis according to the me-
thod of Alexander Bobrinsky
The settlements of Yarim Tepe I and Tell Sotto were
excavated by the Soviet archaeological expedition
in Northern Iraq under the authotity of Rauf M. Mun-
chayev, Nikolai Ya. Merpert and Otto N. Bader from
1969 to 1976 (Merpert 1993; Merpert, Munchaev
1993; Bader 1993b). Both settlements may be dated
to the second half of the 7
th
millennium BC. Recent
14
C dates obtained for the Proto-Hassuna period in
the lower level of the Yarim Tepe I settlement are
6220 to 6071 cal BC (7280 ± 30BP) (Yutsis-Akimo-
va et al. 2018.51).
The technology of ceramics of the Tell Sotto and Kul-
tepe settlements was first analysed by Bobrinsky,
who considered both the qualities of the raw mate-
rials and the pottery paste. As a result, several types
of medium and high plasticity clays with limestone
as a supplement to local clays were identified. The
main additive to the clay during production was
dried animal dung of goats, sheep and cows. This
was identified from the remains of very small orga-
nic inclusions up to 0.5mm long and 0.1–0.2mm
wide, with smooth rounded margins. The concentra-
tion of these remains and voids from them in the
ceramic fabric ranged from 40 to 70% (mostly 50 to
60%) (Bobrinsky 1989.327–334). Bobrinsky (2006.
415) noted that in addition to dung, straw and hay
were often added to the pottery paste. Firing is cha-
racterised by a rapid rise in temperature and short
duration, which corresponds to the conditions typi-
cal of pit firing (Bobrinsky 1989.334).
My technological analysis of Proto-Hassuna ceramics
based on materials from Yarim Tepe I (levels 12–11;
fragments from 149 vessels and one whole vessel)
and Tell Sotto (level 2; fragments from 40 vessels
and two whole vessels
2 2
) found dates earlier than
the Proto-Hassuna levels of Yarim Tepe I, and two
whole vessels from levels 3 and 5 (Fig. 1)
3 3
. Micro-
scopic
4 4
analysis of the surface and of cross-sections
Fig. 1. Proto-Hassuna vessels: 1 Tell Sotto, 1974, II-D-1, 220cm deep, level 3, I.2.a 491 KP-417962; 2 Tell
Sotto, 1973, 10-B-1, level 5, I.2.a 636 KP-418107; 3 Yarim Tepe I, level 12, I.2.a483 KP 417954.
2 Forty ceramics samples previously studied by Aleksandr Bobrinsky.
3 The ceramics collection of Yarim Tepe I and Tell Sotto is located in the Russian Institute of Archaeology. Three whole vessels stored
in the Pushkin State Museum of Fine Arts in Moscow (Yarim Tepe I - I.2.a483 KP 417954; Tell Sotto - I.2.a 491 KP-417962; I.2.a 636
KP-418107).
4 Binocular microscope MBS-10, stereo microscope Carl Zeiss 2000-C and metallographic microscope Olympus MX 51.

Nataliya Yu. Petrova
132
of ceramic samples from all stages of pottery pro-
duction was conducted according to the method of
Bobrinsky (1978; 1999; see also Tsetlin 2017). A
study of raw materials and pottery paste, methods
of construction, vessel surface treatment, and firing
was performed. During the study of clay selection
the degree of ferrugination as well as quantity and
composition of natural inclusions were determined.
The organic temper was classified according to its
type. The quantity and size of the mineral inclusions
influences the plasticity of clay, so this was taken
into account by potters when choosing clay. The me-
thods of temper processing and temper concentra-
tion were determined. Analysis of ceramics included
the re-firing of samples in a muffle furnace under
identical conditions (850°C) to determine the rela-
tive degree of clay ferrugination. At this temperature
clay ferrugination reaches its maximum level and
does not change with an increase in the firing tem-
perature.
Besides this, ceramics from excavations were com-
pared with experimental samples. A series of experi-
ments was carried out with different kinds of orga-
nic tempers containing the following plant residues:
fresh grass, hay, straw, and the dung of cows, sheep
and goats in different concentrations. In addition,
experiments with different types of construction and
surface treatment methods were performed (Petro-
va 2012; 2016).
The raw materials
The vessels from the Tell Sotto settlement were made
from ferruginous clay with limestone with a small
amount of rounded fine-medium sand: 0.1–0.25 and
0.25–0.5mm (for coarse vessels) and with average
quantity of mineral inclusions – rounded fine and
medium quartz sand (0.1–0.25 and 0.25–0.5mm),
white/light grey colour in a concentration of no
more than 1:5 (for thinner vessels) (Lopatina, Kaz-
dim 2010.47). The vessels from Yarim tepe I – main-
ly from moderately ferruginous clay with the addi-
tion of limestone and an average quantity of mine-
ral inclusions.
The pottery paste
Ceramics were divided into two groups. The first
group (90% of the collection) contains pottery with
a mixture of clay and dung. At Tell Sotto the concen-
tration of the dung in ceramics ranged from 40 to
70% of all pottery paste, and at Yarim Tepe I from
20 to 40%, depending on the type of vessel. The
dung is indicated with the presence of various types
of very small plant residues and voids with rounded
ends and some degree of disintegration (Fig. 2.2–4).
The coarser and larger vessels were made with the
addition of organic inclusions in a greater concentra-
tion. The presence of larger plant residues — hay,
dried or fresh grass combined with dung – was iden-
tified. The second group includes only thin-walled
bowls and does not contain dung in the pottery
paste, only clay without any specially added temper
(Fig. 2.1).
The construction methods
Vessels built out with coils and slabs. Spiral coils
were detected in from 40 to 60% of the studied ves-
sels and were used in the construction of various ves-
sel categories. In most cases, thick-walled (1cm or
more) vessels were made of coils (Fig. 3). The coil
height is from 1.5 to 3.5cm, depending on the size
of the vessel. In two cases it was possible to define
Fig. 2. The raw materials and pottery paste: 1 the
Proto-Hassuna ceramics without any specially ad-
ded temper; 2, 4 the presence of dung in Proto-Has-
suna ceramics: Microscopic photo – very small plant
residues with rounded ends and a degree of disin-
tegration – Yarim Tepe I, pit 73 in the virgin soil,
pocket 232 No. 10; Tell Sotto, 1974, Level 2; 3 the
presence of dung in Proto-Hassuna ceramics: var-
ious types of very small plant residues in pottery
paste in high concentration: Tell Sotto, 1974, II-B-
4, Level 2, P.75, N.2.

The development of Neolithic pottery technology in Eastern Jazira and the Zagros Mountains
133
the diameter of the coil as 2.6–2.8cm. Sometimes
the torsion introduced during the rolling of the coils
can be observed within the section. A single-layer
slab construction was used in both thick-walled (up
to 20% of cases) and thin-walled vessels of all cate-
gories (approx. 60–70% of all cases). The slab size is
approx. 1.5 x 3.5–4.5cm (Fig. 4). In some cases the
vessels’ external surfaces were knocked out with a
flat paddle. On the inner surface of some vessels
there were various static prints, probably from a
model or lining (Fig. 5). The use of coils and slabs
together (coils – in the lower part of the vessel, slabs
– in the upper part) was detected once at the Tell
Sotto settlement.
The surfaces
The surfacesof the vessels were first treated with
grass, and then sometimes with leather. In many
cases lime or plaster coating was applied. Sometimes
intentional burnishing is also apparent.
Firing
The middle layer of potsherds has a light grey or
slightly reddish colour. The transition between lay-
ers of potsherds with different degrees of firing of is
often indistinct. These features indicate that ceramic
products have reached temperatures of at least 650°
with a long dwell time at the highest temperature
and then a slow cooling rate. These conditions are
typical of pit firing but also of simple kitchen ovens,
which were found at Tell Sotto (Bader 1989.140).
Decoration
Various appliqué ornaments (mainly on storage ves-
sels and pots), red paint, obtained probably on the
basis of ochre, and the slip from less ferruginous clay
(for decorating bowls and, more rarely, pots) were
used.
Ceramics of other Proto-Hassuna sites
In addition to the samples from Yarim Tepe I and
Tell Sotto, ceramics samples from Umm Dabaghiyah,
Tell Hazna II, Tell Sekeral-Aheimar and Tell Kashka-
hok II were analysed. All of them contain dung in
different concentrations depending on the type of
vessel: thinner vessels (jugs and bowls), from 10–
20% to 20–30%, and more coarse vessels (pots and
griddles), from 30–40%.
It seems that in many cases, as mentioned above,
where the authors wrote about the presence of finer
inclusions than straw in the ceramics of the Proto-
Hassuna, it could actually have been dung temper
(Bashilov et al. 1980.43–64; Campbell, Baird 1990.
70; Kirkbride 1972.8). Indeed, based on the results
of ceramics technology studies (Bobrinsky 1998.
327–334, 2006.415; Petrova 2012; 2016), we can
conclude that the presence of dung was in fact the
main tradition of paste preparation for the produc-
tion of early ceramics in this region. With regard to
construction, two different traditions are observed:
coiling and mould-based slab building (evidence of
which is visible on the inner surfaces of only these
vessels).
Conclusion
As a result of studying all available sources (in both
the literature and directly by examining fragments of
ceramics), it is possible to make a conclusion about
the similarity of technological ceramic traditions be-
Fig. 3. The construction methods – spiral coils: 1
drawing of cross-sections of samples with spiral
coils, Yarim Tepe I, level 12; 2 photo of cross-sec-
tions of samples with spiral coils. Tell Sotto, 1975,
P. 62, N.1.

Nataliya Yu. Petrova
134
tween the settlements of the Proto-Hassuna period
located in the eastern part of Northern Mesopotamia
(Jazira) and settlements located in the western part
of the Zagros Mountains. The best example is the
Jarmo settlement, where both similar technological
traditions (the presence of dung as temper, applying
lime to clay vessels), and common features in the
morphology and ornamentation of vessels are docu-
mented.
The presence of dung in Jarmo ceramics from levels
situated lower than the Proto-Hassuna phase (Mat-
son 1955.355; 1960.68) is evidence of the deep
roots of this tradition in Zagros. The presence of
plant or organic matter (probable dung temper) was
commonly noted by a number of researchers at set-
tlements in Iran and Iraq (Bader 1989.218; Bader,
Le Miere 2013.516, 518; Bashilov et al. 1980.43–64;
Bernbeck 2017.101; Campbell, Baird 1990.70; Kirk-
bride 1972.8; Lloyd, Safar 1945.276; Maeda 1991.
20; Matson 1960.68; Mellaart 1975.86–87; Nieuwe-
huyse 2013.125).
It is also possible that there could have been a link
between the Proto-Hassuna ceramics originating
from Northern Mesopotamia and the organic-tem-
pered ceramics found at the Taurus Mountain set-
tlements. Further studies are needed to explore this
matter in detail. The link between the Proto-Hassuna
ceramics and the Pre-Proto-Hassuna ceramics from
the territory of Syria, however, looks doubtful, be-
cause of differences in morphology and in traditions
of ceramic technology, where the exclusive use of
mineral temper in high concentrations has been
found (Bader, Le Mière 2013.517).
Fig. 4. The construction methods – drawing of cross-
sections of samples with slabs construction.
Fig. 5. The static prints, probably from a model or
lining. Tell Sotto, 1974, II-D-1, 220cm deep, level 3,
N.I.2.a 491 KP 417962 (photo by D. A. Popova).
I am particularly grateful to the Institute of Archaeology of the Russian Academy of Sciences: to Prof. R. M. Mun-
chaev and Dr. Sh.A. Amirov for providing access to the ceramic material from Yarim Tepe I and Tell Sotto and
to documentation associated with their excavation; and Dr. Yu. B. Tsetlin, the chief of Laboratory “History of
Ceramics” for much advice and assistance in my work. I’m very thankful to the Pushkin State Museum of Fine
Arts: to Dr. G. Yu. Kolganova and Dr. B. I. Perlov for their assistance in the analysis of three additional vessels from
these sites; and D. A. Popova for help with photos. I’m very grateful to CNRS, Maison de l’Orient and Dr. M. Le
Mière (Laboratory of Ceramics) for the opportunity to study the ceramic material of the Umm Dabaghiyah, Tell
Hazna II, Tell Sekeral-Aheimar, and Tell Kashkahok II settlements, and for their help in consultations. I would
also like to thank my colleagues from the State Historical Museum: Dr. E. A. Kashina, A. A. Simonenko, A. A.
Strokov for help in my work.
ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS

The development of Neolithic pottery technology in Eastern Jazira and the Zagros Mountains
135
Adams R. McC. 1983. The Jarmo stone and pottery vessel
industries. In L. S. Braidwood, R. J. Braidwood, B. Howe,
Ch. A. Reed, and P. J. Watson (eds.), Prehistoric archaeo-
logy along the Zagros flanks. The Oriental Institute of the
University of Chicago. Chicago: 209–232.
Bader N. O. 1975. Rannezemledelcheskoe poselenie tell
Sotto (po raskopkam 1971, 1973–1974 gg.). Sovetskaya
Archeologia 4: 99–111. (in Russian)
1989. Drevneyshie zemledeltsi Severnoy Mesopota-
mii. Nauka. Moscow. (in Russian)
1993a. Tell Maghzaliyah: an early Neolithic site in North-
ern Iraq. In N. Yoffee, J. J. Clark (eds.), Early stages in
the evolution of Mesopotamian civilization. Soviet ex-
cavations in Northern Iraq. The University of Arizona
Press. Arizona: 7–40.
1993b. The early agricultural settlement of tell Sotto. In
N. Yoffee, J. J. Clark (eds.), Early stages in the evolution
of Mesopotamian civilization. Soviet excavations in
Northern Iraq. The University of Arizona Press. Arizo-
na: 41–54.
Bader N. O., Bashilov V. A., Le Mière M., and Picon M.
1994. Productions locales et importations de cèramique-
dans le Djebel Sinjar. Palèorient 20(1): 61–68.
Bader N., Le Mière M. 2013. From pre-pottery Neolithic
to pottery Neolithic in the Sinjar. In O. P. Nieuwenhuyse,
R. Bernbeck, P. M. M. G. Akkermans, and J. Rogasch (eds.),
Interpreting the late Neolithic of Upper Mesopotamia.
Brepols Publishers n.v. Turnhout: 513–520.
Bashilov V. A., Bolshakov O. G., and Kouza A. V. 1980.
The earliest strata of YarimTepe I. Sumer 36: 43–64.
Bernbeck R. 2017. Merging clay and fire: earliest evidence
from the Zagros Mountains. In A. Tsuneki, O. Nieuwen-
huyse, and S. Campbell (eds.), The Emergence of pottery
in West Asia. Oxbow Books. Oxford: 97–118.
Bobrinsky A. A. 1978. Goncharstvo Vostochnoy Evropi.
Istochniki i metodi izucheniya. Nauka. Moscow. (in Rus-
sian)
1989. Technologicheskie harakteristiki keremiki Tell
Sotto and Kűltepe. In N. O. Bader (ed.), Drevneyshie
zemledeltsi Severnoy Mesopotamii. Nauka. Moscow:
327–334. (in Russian)
1999. Goncharnaja technologiya kak ob’ekt istoriko-cul-
turnogo izuchenija. In A. A. Bobrinsky (ed.), Aktualnie
problemi izucheniya drevnego goncharstva. Samarskiy
Pedagogi≠eskij Universitet. Samara: 5–109. (in Russian)
2006. Dannie tehnologii o proishozdenii goncharstva.
In Voprosi arheologii Povolzhya 4. Samara: 413–421.
(in Russian)
Braidwood R. J., Howe B. 1960. Prehistoric investiga-
tions in Iraqi Kurdistan. The Oriental Institute of the
University of Chicago. Chicago.
Campbel S., Baird D. 1990. Excavation at Ginnig, the ace-
ramic to early ceramic sequence in North Iraq. Palèorient
16(2): 65–78.
Darabi H. 2012. Towards reassessing the Neolitization
process in Western Iran. Documenta Praehistorica 39:
103–110. https://doi.org/10.4312/dp.39.8
2015. An introduction to the Neolithic revolution of
the Central Zagros, Iran. British Archaeological Reports
IS 2746. Archaeopress. Oxford.
Kingery D. W., Vandiver P. B., and Prickett M. 1988. The
beginnings of pyrotechnology, part II: production and use
of lime and gypsum plaster in the pre-pottery Neolithic
Near East. Journal of field archaeology 15(2): 219–244.
Kirkbride D. 1972. Umm Dabaghiyah, 1971: a preliminary
report. Iraq 34(1): 3–15.
Hole F., Flannery K. V., and Neely J. A. 1969. Prehistory
and human ecology of the Deh Luran plain. An early
village sequence from Khuzistan, Iran. University of Mi-
chigan. Ann Arbor.
Nishiaki Y., Le Mière M. 2005. The oldest pottery Neolithic
of Upper Mesopotamia: new evidence from Seker al-Ahei-
mar, the Khabur, Northeast Syria. Palèorient 31(2): 55–
68. https://doi.org/10.3406/paleo.2005.5125
Lloyd S., Safar F. 1945. Tell Hassuna: Excavations by the
Iraq Government Directorate of Antiquities in 1943–44.
Journal of Near Eastern Studies 4: 255–331.
Lopatina O. A., Kazdym A. A. 2010. O estestvennoy pri-
mesi peska v drevney keramike (k obsujdeniu problemi).
In Drevnee goncharstvo: itogi I perspectivi izuchenia.
Institute of Archaeology, Russian Academy of Sciences.
Moscow: 46–57. (in Russian)
Maeda A. 1991. Pottery and small objects. In T. Matsutani
(ed.), Tell Kashkashok. The excavation at tell No. II. The
Institute of Oriental culture. The University of Tokio. To-
kio: 19–40.
Matson F. R. 1960. Specialized ceramic studies and radio-
active-carbon techniques. In R. J. Braidwood, B. Howe
(eds.), Prehistoric investigations in Iraqi Kurdistan. The
References

Nataliya Yu. Petrova
136
Oriental Institute of the University of Chicago. Chicago:
63–70.
Mellaart J. 1975. The Neolithic of the Near East. Thames
and Hudson Ltd. London.
Merpert N. Ya. 1993. The archaic phase of the Hassuna
culture. In N. Yoffee, J. J. Clark (eds.), Early stages in the
evolution of Mesopotamian civilization. Soviet excava-
tions in Northern Iraq. The University of Arizona Press.
Arizona: 115-127.
Merpert N. Ya., Munchaev R. M. 1993. Yarim Tepe I. In
N. Yoffee, J. J. Clark (eds.), Early stages in the evolution
of Mesopotamian civilization. Soviet excavations in
Northern Iraq. The University of Arizona. Press. Arizona:
73-114.
Miyake Y. 2016. Origins of pottery as technological inno-
vation in Southwest Asia. Der Anschitt 31: 115–124.
Mortensen P. 2014. Excavations at Tepe Guran. The Neo-
lithic period. Peeters. Leuven-Paris-Walpole.
Munchaev R. M., Merpert N. Ya. 1981. Rannezemledel-
cheskie poseleniya Severnoy Mesopotamii. Nauka. Mos-
cow. (in Russian)
Munchaev R. M., Merpert N. Ya., Bader N. O., and Amirov
Sh. N. 1993. Tell Hazna II. Rannezemledelcheskoe posele-
nie v Severo-vostochnoy Syrii. Rossiyskaya Archeologia
4: 25–42. (in Russian)
Munchaev R. M., Merpert N. Y. 1994. Da Hassuna a Accad.
Scavi della Missione Rusa Nella Regione di Hassake, Siria
di Nord-East, 1988–1992. Mesopotamia XXIX: 5–48.
Nieuwehuyse O. P. 2013. The Proto-Hassuna culture in
the Khabur headwaters: a western neighbor’s view. In Y.
Nishiaki, K. Kashima, and M. Verhoeven (eds.), Neolithic
archaeology in the Khabur valley, Upper Mesopotamia
and Beyond. Studies in Early Near Eastern production,
subsistence and environment. Berlin: 110–138.
Smith P. E. L. 1974. Ganj Dareh tepe. Paleorient 2(1):
207–209.
1990. Architectural innovation and experimentation at
Ganj Dareh, Iran. Word Archaeology 21(3): 323–335.
https://doi.org/10.1080/00438243.1990.9980111
Matsutani T. (ed.) 1991. Tell Kashkashok. The excava-
tion at tell No. II. The Institute of Oriental culture. The
University of Tokio. Tokio.
Petrova N. Yu. 2012. A technological study of Hassuna cul-
ture ceramics (Yarim Tepe I settlement). Documenta Pra-
ehistorica 39: 75–81. https://doi.org/10.4312/dp.39.5
2016. Tehnologicheskoe izuchenie keramiki poselenija
Yarim Tepe I (periodi Proto-Hassuni I Arhaicheskoy
Hassuni). Kratkie soobshenia Instituta Archeologii
242: 48–59.
Tauber H. 1970. Radiocarborn dating of potsheds from
Tell Shimshara. In Mortensen P., Tell Shimshara (eds.),
The Hassuna period. The Royal Danish Academy of Sci-
ence and Letters, Hist.- Filos. Skr., vol. 5.2. Copenhagen.
Tsetlin Yu. B. 2017. Ceramic investigations in Russia: Sci-
entific approaches, pottery productions structure, modern
possibilities and some research results. Journal of Nordic
Archaeological Science 17: 65–81. https://www.archaeo
logy.su.se/polopoly_fs/1.170046.1394454130!/menu/sta
ndard/file/JONAS_17_Tsetlin.pdf
Vandiver P. 1987. Sequential slab construction: a conser-
vative Southwest Asiatic ceramic tradition, ca. 7000–3000
B.C. Paleorient 13(2): 9–35.
Yutsis-Akimova S., Gallet Y., Petrova N., Nowak S., and Le
Goff M. 2018. Geomagnetic field in the Near East at the
beginning of the 6-
th
millennium BC: Evidence for alter-
nating weak and strong intensity variations. Physics of
Earth and Planetary Interiors 282: 49–59.
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.pepi.2018.07.002