Journals / Arkeoloji Dergisi / 2021 / Cilt: 1 - Sayı: 26

Technological Marks On Pot Bases from Chalcolithic Gülpınar

Kalkolitik Gülpınar Çanak Çömlekleri Üzerindeki Teknolojik İzler

Pages
47–64
Publication Date
2021-05-06
DOI
—
🏛️Bibliographic metadata and full text access for this article are provided via DergiPark.
DergiPark Record ↗
✨

AI Summary & Key Takeaways

AI Insight
⚡ TL;DR(Too Long; Didn't Read)

The negative impressions of mats, baskets, cloth, or tree leaves on pot bases result from their use as primitive turntables.

📌 3 Key Takeaways

🎯
Objective & Hypothesis:This essay aims to examine the technological marks observed on the pot bases from the Chalcolithic site of Gülpınar in northwestern Anatolia.
📊
Key Findings & Data:These technological marks, which are mainly related to stage of the forming of the pots, represents the negative impressions of mats, baskets, cloth, and tree leaves, as well as finger prints.
💡
Conclusion & Impact:The negative impressions of mats, baskets, cloth, or tree leaves on pot bases result from their use as primitive turntables.
🔬Design:Research Article
📍Scope:Comprehensive Sample
⚙️Variables:Western Anatolia · Chalcolithic Period · Gülpınar

Abstract

This essay aims to examine the technological marks observed on the pot bases from the Chalcolithic site of Gülpınar in northwestern Anatolia. These technological marks, which are mainly related to stage of the forming of the pots, represents the negative impressions of mats, baskets, cloth, and tree leaves, as well as finger prints. These negative impressions on pot bases are characteristic of both Early Chalcolithic (phase II) and Middle Chalcolithic period (phase III) at Gülpınar and they appear almost on pot bases recovered from the site during excavations. Examination of these technological marks in the shape of negative impressions on pot bases from Gülpınar help us to obtain information on the techniques used to make the woollen cloth, mats, and baskets and what kind of raw materials were used in their production. The negative impressions of mats, baskets, cloth, or tree leaves on pot bases result from their use as primitive turntables.

Özet

Bu çalışma kuzey batı Anadolu da Kalkolitik dönem Gülpınar yerleşiminde çanak çömlek kaideleri üzerinde gözlemlenen teknolojik izleri incelemeyi amaçlar. Seramik üretimiyle ilişkilendirilen bu teknolojik izler daha çok seramiklerin şekillenmesi sürecinden kaynaklanan hasır, sepet, yün dokuma, ağaç yaprağı ve parmak izlerini kapsar. Söz konusu negatif izler Gülpınar’da hem Erken Kalkolitik tabaka (Evre II) hem de Orta Kalkolitik tabaka (Evre III) boyunca oldukça yaygındır ve neredeyse tüm seramik kaidelerinde karşımıza çıkar. Bu teknolojik izlerin incelenmesi dolaylı olarak bize Gülpınar’da ne tür hasır dokuma, yün dokuma ve sepet örme teknikleri kullanılmış olabileceği ve bunların üretimi sırasında ne tür ham maddelerin tercih edildiği konularında bilgiler sunar. Seramik kaideleri üzerinde görülen hasır, sepet, yün dokuma veya ağaç yaprağı izleri bunların bir tür ilkel çark olarak kullanılmasından kaynaklandığı anlaşılmaktadır.

🔖

Cite This Article

ÖZDEMİR, A., ÖZDEMİR, A. (2021). Technological Marks On Pot Bases from Chalcolithic Gülpınar. Arkeoloji Dergisi, Cilt: 1 - Sayı: 26, 47–64. https://ajindex.com/articles/145924

📄 Full Text PDF Viewer

📄

PDF görüntüleyici hazırlanıyor...

References (6)

  1. ADOVASIO and ILLINGWORTH 2003:
  2. M.J. Adovasio, J.S. Illingworth, “Basketry and Textile Impressions” In: E.S. Elster, C. Renfrew (Eds.) Prehistoric Sitagroi: Excavations in Northeast Greece, 1968-1970, vol. 2: The Final Report, Los Angeles, 252-257. CARRINGTON SMITH 1977: J. Carrington-Smith, “Cloth and Mat Impressions” In: J. Coleman, (Ed.) Keos I. Kephala: A Late Neolithic Settlement and Cemetry, Volume I, Princeton, 114-125. CARRINGTON SMITH 2000: J. Carrington-Smith, “The spinning and weaving implements” In: Ridley, C, K.A. Wardle, C. A. Mould (Eds.) Servia: Anglo-Hellenic Rescue Excavations 1971-73, (British School at Athens, Supplement 32), London, 207-263. CARTER et al. 2003:
  3. E. Carter, S. Campell, S. Gauld, “Elusive Complexity: New Data from Late Halaf Domuztepe in South Central Turkey”, Paleorient 29: 117-134. CROWFOOT 1934: G.M. Crowfoot, “The Mat Looms of Huleh, Palestine”, Palestine Exploration Quarterly 66: 195-198. ÇEVİK 2018: Ö. Çevik, “What follows the Late Neolithic occupation in central-western Anatolia? A view from Ulucak?” In: S. Dietz, F. Mavridis, Z. Tankosic, T. Takaoğlu (Eds.), Communities in Transition: The Circum-Aegean Later Neolithic Stage (ca. 5000/4800-3200/3000 BC, Oxford, 506-512. ÇİLİNGİROĞLU and ÇİLİNGİROĞLU 2007:
  4. A. Çilingiroğlu, Ç. Çilingiroğlu, “Ulucak” In: M. Özdoğan, N. Başgelen (Eds.) Türkiye’de Neolitik Dönem: Yeni Kazılar, Yeni Bulgular, İstanbul, 2007, 361-372. ÇİLİNGİROĞLU et al. 2012:
  5. A. Çilingiroğlu, Ö. Çevik, Ç. Çilingiroğlu, “Ulucak Höyük” In: M. Özdoğan, N. Başgelen, P. Kuniholm (Eds.) The Neolithic in Turkey. New Excavations & New Research, Volume 4. Western Turkey, İstanbul, 139-75. ERİM-ÖZDOĞAN 2012: A. Erim-Özdoğan, “Çayönü” In: M. Özdoğan, N. Başgelen, P. Kuniholm (Eds.) The Neolithic in Turkey. New Excavations & New Research, Volume 1. The Tigris Basin, İstanbul, 185-269. EVANS and RENFREW 1968:
  6. J.D. Evans, C. Renfrew, Excavations at Saliagos near Antiparos. London. FURNESS 1956: A. “Furness, Some early pottery of Samos, Kalimnos and Chios”, Proceedings of Prehistoric Society 9: 173-213. GABRIEL 2014: U. Gabriel, “Die keramik der troadischen Funorte Kumtepe IA, Beşik-Sivritepe und Çıplak Köyü im Kontext ihrer überregionalen Vergleichsfunde” In: E. Pernicka, C.B. Rose, P. Jablonka (Eds.) Studia Troica, Monography 5, Bonn, 990-1057. GÜNEL 2014: S. Günel, “New contributions regarding prehistoric cultures in the Meander region: Çine-Tepecik” In: B. Horejs, M. Mehofer (Eds) Western Anatolia Before Troy: Proto