Ten Years After: The Neolithic of The Balkans, As Uncovered by The Last Decade of Research

TEN YEARS AFTER: THE NEOLITHIC OF THE BALKANS,
AS UNCOVERED BY THE LAST DECADE OF RESEARCH

MVSEVM BANATICVM
TEMESIENSE
BIBLIOTHECA HISTORICA
ET ARCHAEOLOGICA
BANATICA
XLIX
Edenda curavit
Dr. Florin Drasovean
TIMISOARA MMIX
THE MUSEUM OF BANAT
TEN YEARS AFTER:
THE NEOLITHIC OF THE BALKANS,
AS UNCOVERED
BY THE LAST DECADE OF RESEARCH
Proceedings of the Conference held at the
Museum of Banat on November 9
th
-10
th
, 2007
Edited by
Florin Drasovean, Dan Leopold Ciobotaru and Margaret Maddison
Editura Marineasa
Timisoara 2009
CUPRINS / CONTENTS
John Nandris, Foreword. Towards Another Decade of Endeavour .............................................. 7
John Nandris, Ethnoarchaeological Attitudes ........................................................................... 11
Malgorzata Kaczanowska, Janus K.Kozlowski, The Spread of the First Temperate Neolithic
across the Balkans as Seen from the Perspective of Macroblade Technologv .......................... 17
Ivan Gatsov, Petranka Nedelcheva, Rana zbal, Fokke Gerritsen, Prehistoric Barcin Hvk. 2007
Excavations and Chipped Stone Artifact Analvsis ..................................................................... 35
Stratis Papadopoulos, Questions about Neolithic Chronologv in Eastern Macedonia and Thrace,
Northern Greece ........................................................................................................................ 49
Alexander Chohadzhiev, The Hotnitsa Tell 50 Years Later. Eight Years of New Excavations
Some Results and Perspectives .................................................................................................. 67
Marcel Buric, Tihomila Tezak-Gregl, Bapska, a Late Neolithic Settlement in Eastern Croatia a
New Profect ................................................................................................................................ 85
Pal Raczky, Archaeological Data on Space Use at a Tell-Like Settlement of the Tis:a Culture
(New Results from OcsdKovashalom, Hungarv ................................................................... 101
Malgorzata Kaczanowsk, Janusz K. Kozlowski, Pal Smegi, Lithic Industries from the Ocsd
Kovashalom Tell-Like Settlement in Hungarv ......................................................................... 125
ZsoIia E. Kovacs, Erika Gal, Animal Remains from the Site OcsdKovashalom .................. 151
Ferenc Horvath, Comments on the Tells in the Carpathian Basin. Terminologv, Classification and
Formation ................................................................................................................................ 159
Renato Nisbet, New Evidence of Neolithic and Copper Age Agriculture and Wood Use in
Transvlvania and the Banat (Romania) ................................................................................... 167
Gheorghe Lazarovici, The Zau Culture ................................................................................... 179
WolIram Schier, Tell Formation and Architectural Sequence at Late Neolithic Uivar
(Romania) ................................................................................................................................ 219
Barbara Dammers, Ceramics and Cultural Identitv between the Balkans and Middle Europe. the
Jinca C Site of Uivar (Romanian Banat) ................................................................................. 235
Florin Drasovean, Cultural Relationships in the Late Neolithic of the Banat ......................... 259
D. Kiosak, The Flint Inventorv of the Sabatvnivka 1 Site (Trvpillia B1) ................................ 275
Svend Hansen, Meda Toderas, Agathe Reingruber, Pietrele. A Chalcolithic Settlement on the
Lower Danube River ................................................................................................................ 289
Yavor Boyadziev, Matrimonial Relations in the Chalcolithic Based on Data from Cemeteries
from Northeastern Bulgaria..................................................................................................... 311
Dragomir Nicolae Popovici, New Data Concerning the Gumelnita Culture to the North of the
Danube in the Light of Recent Research .................................................................................. 323
Dragos Diaconescu, Tis:apolgar Culture in Romania. The Present State of Research ........... 329
FOREWORD
Towards another Decade of Endeavour.
The Symposium which gathered in Timisoara in November 2007, to assess the outcome oI a
decade oI research into the Neolithic oI the Balkans, reIlected the truly international scope oI our
eIIorts to create a better understanding oI this crucial and Iormative aspect oI our common
European culture. The participants came not just Irom the host country Romania, but also Irom
Bulgaria, Croatia, Denmark, Hungary, Germany, Great Britain, Italy, Poland, Serbia, and the
Ukraine.
All the participants are indebted to the eIIorts oI the organizers, especially Paolo Biagi, Dan
Ciobotaru, Florin Drasovean and Michela Spataro. The international nature oI the Sponsorship is
conIirmed by the appreciation which is due to Venice University (Centro Interdipartimentale di
Studi Balcanici oI the Universita Ca` Foscar, and the Dipartimento di Scienze dellÀntichita e del
Vicino Oriente) ; the Centro Studi e Richerche Ligabue Venezia ; the Consolato Generale dÌtalia
a Timisoara ; Directia pentru Cultur, Culte si Patrimoniul Cultural National a judetului Timis;
Consiliul Judetean Timis and Muzeul Banatului Timisoara.
The outcome oI these eIIorts was both congenial and academically proIitable, in a city oI
broad Romanian hospitality and culture both old and new. This was aptly symbolized in the
gleaming steel monument by Paul Neagu in Piata Victoriei, standing between the Cathedral and
the rich collections Irom antiquity which are contained in the Museum oI the Banat. This cultural
dimension oI the city was given Iurther emphasis by a joint exhibition oI the drawings oI Paul
Neagu and Horia Bernea, which spoke to me personally, since I shared the same date oI birth with
these considerable artists, and we mourn them both as Iriends.
The meeting opened with a charming recital by young Romanian musicians, and culminated
in a cogent Iinal discussion. In every way the gathering was a demonstration that our
archaeological activities are not just a matter oI ticking boxes to satisIy bureaucratic exigency but
are, like every scientiIic endeavour, a collegiate social undertaking which reinIorces human
interaction and mutual understanding.
It is not necessary to summarize individual papers, since that is the remit oI this publication.
A Iew general observations on the outcome may however be in order, drawing especially on the
Iinal discussion as a statement oI our aspirations Ior the Iuture oI the topic. These unsystematic
reactions to points arising Irom the meeting in no way imply that other sites or papers not
mentioned by name are not oI equal importance.
For clarity I conIine myselI to listing Iive potential areas Ior Iuture research, which seemed to
me to emerge during the Iinal discussion. It may be that over the next ten years we can give an
additional push in these directions, while continuing work in progress. As desirable objectives
they do nothing to minimize the achievements outlined in these Proceedings, and I certainly hope
they are not exclusive oI other possibilities.
They are the study oI :
1. The First Temperate Neolithic ( FTN)
2. Comparative Ethnoarchaeology (EA) ; integrated with visual and experimental archaeology,
and replication. Material culture as social signals.
3. The Organic dimensions oI prehistoric culture.
4. Landscape Archaeology.
5. Environmental reconstruction ; together with with laboratory-based
studies, such as thin sectioning or advances in lithic technology.
It is clear that some oI these demand serious resources and Iacilities, Ior example
environmental reconstruction, or thin sectioning. Others are Iirst and Ioremost mental attitudes.
Several papers dealt with aspects oI the FTN, the Iirst Iully-Iormed Neolithic oI the temperate
zone, certainly within Europe and probably more widely. It is gratiIying to see this locally-
diIIerentiated but unitary phenomenon being given the attention it deserves. This may be one oI
the most heartening developments oI the last decade. Kozlowski`s presentation oI the lithic
material Irom the Tisza culture oI csd, along with the work oI Kaczanowska, placed the
discussion in a very much wider context, including the FTN whose lithics are when it comes to
TEN YEARS AFTER. THE NEOLITHIC OF THE BALKANS, AS UNCOJERED BY THE LAST DECADE OF RESEARCH,
TIMISOARA, 2009. Edited by Florin Drasovean, Dan Leopold Ciobotaru and Margaret Maddison
8
it a blade-and-trapeze industry. He has elsewhere outlined the long-term background oI the
Aegean and late Glacial, which were so signiIicant Ior the FTN. Biagi drew attention to the Iact
that the FTN has both Carpathian and Slovak obsidians, eg., Irom Silagiu and Seusa. Spataro gave
a cogent account Irom 78 samples, oI the thin-sectioning and dating, oI the important FTN site oI
Gura Baciului, where pottery production was stable Ior eight hundred years. Gatsov enlarged the
discussion oI the distinctive FTN oI Bulgaria with a welcome consideration oI eight or more
Anatolian sites, while Papadopoulos outlined the neolithic chronology oI the connective zones oI
eastern Macedonia and Thrace.
The study oI the FTN in short uniIies the eIIorts oI all the south-east European countries to
understand the emergence oI the Neolithic throughout the area. As an adaptive mediator between
Mediterranean and Temperate Europe, at a time oI increasing vegetational productivity, it is
crucial Ior the emergence oI the European Neolithic. Even better integration oI the phenomenon
oI the FTN should be one oI the archaeological objectives oI the next decade.
Comparative Ethnoarchaeology, always moving to and Iro between the past and the present,
goes a long way towards compensating both Ior deIiciencies oI the archaeological imagination,
and Ior poor organic preservation. It is an inexpensive Iield methodology which illuminates
aspects oI choice and behaviour inaccessible to conventional archaeology. Its most IruitIul
application has been in the Anglo-Romanian collaborations oI the Highland Zone
Ethnoarchaeology Project. The term 'comparative draws attention to the Iact that outwardly
insigniIicant sites acquire meaning when the evidence collected Irom them at Iirst hand is
integrated more widely. Experimental Archaeology and Replication, along with the Visual
Anthropology oI our photographic records over several decades, comprise valuable ancillary
techniques in EA.. Romania has also already set an example to Europe with its recording oI Oral
Testimony to a Time oI Sorrows, Memoriile Durerilor. None oI these techniques require immense
resources. In all oI Europe, Romania is outstandingly rich in ethnoarchaeological evidence, and
has led the way in incorporating this with the archaeology into its museum displays and university
teaching.
It has been emphasized by Nandris that the Sibylline Book oI Ethnoarchaeology is a Iading
resource, as changes and regulations intervene. The millennial practice oI the pastoral techno-
complex oI the Carpathians is gratuitously menaced by an un-comprehending and distant
European bureaucracy. The integrity oI the villages and customs oI the Maramures is ineluctably
eroded by modernity. The pastures and villages, especially oI the Highland Zone, remain
invaluable sources Ior our understanding oI our own past and Iuture. By accepting this Romanian
giIt to European selI-knowledge we may yet hoep to grasp the importance oI non-utilitarian
Iunctionality ; oI obedience to the unenIorceable limits oI social convention ; and oI the supra-
Iunctional dimensions oI material culture operating as social symbols. It is a matter oI some
urgency to pursue the Iurther study oI Romanian ethnoarchaeology at Iirst hand, beIore the traces
Iinally vanish. No study is more democratic than archaeology sensu lato, in giving credit to the
achievements oI the modest but eIIective people who shaped Europe.
The elusive organic dimension oI prehistoric culture represents a regrettable distortion oI our
view oI the Neolithic, which it would be well to rectiIy. CareIul excavation can produce hints,
such as the wattle, wooden beams and planks at Hotnica. The ground water which hindered the
excavation oI the lower levels oI Hotnica ought perhaps to be regarded as more oI an opportunity
than an impediment. Taken together there is already a substantial body oI evidence Ior organic
materials. Nisbet has made valuable archaeobotanical contributions, and ethnoarchaeology can
supplement the evidence Ior actual arteIacts. In his consideration oI gender relationships
Boyadziev makes the point that Iemale tools relating to such activities as weaving were usually
organic, and like the weaveries themselves have not survived. In general we need to make a
positive eIIort to Iind prehistoric sites oIIering the conditions Ior organic preservation.
Landscape archaeology takes sites out oI the bureau, oII the veranda, and into the real world.
It considers the placing oI sites in their environment, together with their resource zonations and
site catchment. It would include a better understanding oI 'tell settlements and 'hill Iorts (CI.
eg., Cucuteni, and the Hungarian cases studied by Horvath) including their Iormation, and the
symbolic value in social terms oI the contrasting landscape monuments oI eastern and western
Europe. These are arteIacts oI behaviour, and signiIiers oI European identity. Even the houses oI
the Neolithic posessed symbolic value not inIerior to a Japanese temple.
9
For Uivar, Schier presented an integrated and inIormative archaeological excavation oI what
must surely become a classic site. It relates to Vinca C, but with interesting outward reIerence,
such as the ramps leading out oI the site. These recall the Gumelnita oI Ovcarovo in Bulgaria and
may indicate some Iorm oI transport such as the sled or travois. As at Uivar ; Ovcarovo,
Poljanitsa, Delcevo, &cc., are small highly concentrated sites with closely aligned houses, and we
seek the social signiIicance oI this. There are also more upper Iloors in the Neolithic than we
might have supposed. At Pietrele, Hansen even has an oven on the second level.
Within a similar time Irame Lazarovici has been elucidating the late Neolithic oI the Banat,
and his reconstruction oI the symbolic site oI Parta Iorms a major Ieature oI the museum. Did the
cinnabar on the red-painted Banat Culture pottery, and/or at Uivar, come Irom Avala? - and what
social relationships were involved in its re-distribution ? Dammers has noted that potters were
producing quite discrete pottery styles at Uivar. This situation can be paralleled in the
ethnoarchaeology oI Romania, where occupational village potter was always male, and willing to
produce in the styles oI diIIerent customers, which casts doubt on some oI the more literalist lines
oI archaeological reasoning about pottery styles. But then the Iive burnishing pebbles Iound by
Schier and Drasovean at Uivar remind us that the potter buried in the Boian culture cemetery oI
Cernica, with her cherished burnishing pebble, was a woman. In this manner we continue to
engender IruitIul comparisons, and remind ourselves that the past may have been unimaginably
diIIerent.
John Nandris, FSA
ETHNOARCHAEOLOGICAL ATTITUDES
John Nandris
*
Keywords: Neolithic, Ethnoarchaeologv, pastoralism.
The international 2007 Timisoara Symposium covered an impressive range oI research into the
south-east European Neoithic during the last decade. Even to summarize the topics, let alone do
justice to the work oI individual contributors, would not be easy. The 2007 Symposium ended
with a general discussion oI ways Iorward Ior Neolithic studes in our area. I hope this paper may
be accepted as a brieI meditation on Ethnoarchaeology as an intrinsic component oI Iuture
research. It does no more than draw attention once more to the importance oI the Ethnoarchaeo-
logical Attitude in Prehistoric studies. It is not possible here to consider the detail oI site plans
and associated data Irom well over two decades oI Iieldwork in the highland zone.
The collaborative Iieldwork carried out over that period in Romania by the Highland Zone
Comparative Ethnoarchaeology Project |HZCEP| received only brieI mention at the Symposium.
I would have liked like to acknowledge Iully my chieI collaborators in the Iield, especially ProI
Gh Lazarovici, but in reality there is a long list which extends back to ProIessors Constantin and
Hadrian Daicoviciu, ProI Mihail Dncus, the organizers oI the Timisoara Symposium themselves,
and very many others. I can only beg their indulgence on grounds oI space. I must acknowledge
Iunding received Irom the sources including the British Academy, the Romanian Academy, the
Wenner-Gren Foundation, the Society oI Antiquaries, UCL, and the Central Research Fund oI
London University.
Among Iuture lines oI enquiry the 2007 Symposium saw the need ideally:
to exploit the rapidly-metamorphosing ethnoarchaeological evidence;
to seek to recover more oI the organic dimension oI our cultures;
to place sites in their context through environmental reconstruction, dating, site catchment
and resource zonation;
to explore the symbolic Iunctions oI 'tell settlement in the archaeology oI landscape;
to deIine the supra-Iunctional dimension oI material culture operating as social symbols;
and
to encourage experimental archaeology and the replication oI arteIacts and behaviour.
Comparative Ethnoarchaeologv
Rapid change and destruction oI evidence aIIects both the social and natural environments.
The rich material written in the Sibylline Book oI south-east European Comparative Ethnoarch-
aeology must be included among Iuture research objectives beIore the evidence disappears. We
will try to deIine the scope oI Comparative Ethnoarchaeology, which is independent oI any
American or other usage oI the term ethnoarchaeology, or oI what is termed ethnohistory.
Archaeology scrutinises the long-term processes oI change in environment, economy,
technology and the bio-social sphere through time and space which are documented by a
Iragmentary material record. Archaeologists must take pride in having developed methodologies
Ior dealing with imperIect data ; by contrast with attempts by the social sciences to make sense
*
OxIord, UK, nandriscantemir.u-net.com.
12
oI an over-abundance oI actual data. Archaeological data somewhat resembles time-lapse
photography oI a growing plant. The Irames oI the Iilm may be the data Irom an excavation ; but
we cannot even always be certain that we observe the same plant. ArteIacts and sites are the
outcome oI behaviour which we cannot observe directly. Contemporaneity oI sites even to within
a generation is rare, so that even the supposed patterns seen on most distribution maps are as
illusory as the constellations in the sky.
Ethnoarchaeology deals with evidence Ior the material outcome oI behaviour which can be
observed in existing traditional practice, and seeks to exploit this in the service oI scientiIic
archaeology. InIormation may sometimes be gained Irom documentary or oral sources, and the
basis oI ethnoarchaeology is Iirst-hand observation in the Iield. The techniques which we have
evolved are highly economical by comparison with eg., excavation.
Comparative Ethnoarchaeology elicits patterns oI interpretation Irom oIten small and
apparently insigniIicant sites by wider comparison. It includes one oI the Iew approximations to
experimental technique to be Iound in archaeology, namely the investigation oI deserted, even
buried, sites whose previous occupants are still available Ior interview. Comparison oI the
respective interpretations oI the archaeologist and the recollections oI the ex-occupants oIten
reveal that neither is inIallible. In this way interpretation is reIined. The recording in detail by the
HZCEP oI upland sites such as the Romanian stine |which are sheepIolds as components in a
hierarchy oI seasonal sites| yields interpretations which alternate between the present and the
prehistoric, in consideration oI diIIerent mechanisms Ior the seasonal exploitation oI highland
zone resources. An ethnoarchaeological site may be deIined as any site at which it is possible to
observe the material outcome oI behaviour in course oI Iormation, and to place this in an
explanatory Iramework. This is a more careIully considered process than the exploitation oI
ethnographic evidence Ior its comparative value, or what used to be reIerred to as 'ethnographic
parallels. We seek to understand the exigencies oI a mode oI behaviour, especially the
adaptations oI its social determinants, to long-term processes oI change.
Traditional practice never ceases to amaze and enlighten by revealing the ingenuity which
ensured that our ancestors Ieatured in the archaeological record. It conIirms the insuIIiciency oI
desk-bound interpretations which merely reIlect the researchers` own cultural parameters. It has
been said that a 'Conservative is simply a 'Liberal who has been assaulted by reality. An
Ethnoarchaeologist could be seen as an Archaeologist who has undergone a similar experience.
First-hand observation oI the Iormation oI the material outcome oI behaviour is an attribute oI
ethnoarchaeology which cannot be derived Irom other archaeological sources. Among the Iirst
lessons we learned was that the smallest and outwardly simplest oI sites, among Ior example the
stine oI the Carpathians, are highly complex. They oIten comprise a palimpsest oI re-utilisation and
transIormation, within a complex oI socio-economic relationships. Their social Iorms can not be
derived literally Irom their morphology, as archaeology oIten seeks to do ; but their morphology and
contents may well conIirm the known nature oI the sites, which gives hope to the archaeologist.
The technology and terminology oI the Romanian stina are spatio-temporally widespread
throughout south-east Europe, Irom the Aromni oI the Pindus to the Gorale oI the Polish
Carpathians, or the Morlachs oI Dalmatia. This constitutes a distinctively European mode oI
behaviour which, viewed in the broadest perspective, is related to the ancient near-eastern
pastoral technocomplexes; although we have to bear in mind that these last oIten represent the
uptake oI pastoralism by Iormerely settled societies. Paradoxically a more secure antecedent lies
with Palaeolithic Drive-Site techniques, and those experiments with man-animal relationships
which took place in the Near East during the early Holocene |eg., with Ga:ella and Dama|.
Central to these relationships was the Dog, the earliest domesticate, whose territorialty remains
central to behaviour at the stina.
Economic and social relationships, which ought to have supplied a context Ior our stina sites,
were so grossly and systematically distorted during the decades oI Soviet domination in eastern
Europe that it was not realistic to take them literally. The stina inhabited by a Iew old men and
boys does not represent the Ilourishing pastoralism which could be sustained by the extensive
pasture-lands created by the peneplanation |Borescu surIaces| oI the Carpathian summits. The re-
animation oI Romanian pastoralism is now Iurther threatened by petty regulations created by
European bureaucrats, apparently contemptuous oI tradition, and ignorant oI the reality oI a
successIul adaptation which goes back Ior millennia.
13
This interIerence conIirms that the highlands do not exist in dissociation Irom the macro-
economic and political context oI the lowlands ; and this was true even in the Palaeolithic. It
emphasizes the poverty and decline oI once-Ilourishing pastoral systems under the reactionary
Soviet Empire, whose exploitation oI its colonies stunted and isolated every aspect oI economy,
technology and society independent oI altitude. The highly-evolved technology oI pastoralism was
more succesIul when allowed to operate Ireely by the political context. The absence oI Irontiers
under the Ottoman Empire opened out the landscape to Aromn pastoralists, and encouraged
demand Ior meat and wool in Constantinople, under the patronage oI the Valide Sultan
!
.
Material evidence is the domain oI archaeology, but it is oI little value without an
understanding oI the social and behavioural context, and the importance oI the non-utilitarian
Iunctions in human society. The obiter dictum oI Terence, Humani nil a me alienum puto
2
, is the
best possible ethnoarchaeological motto. No dimension oI human social behaviour or belieI can
be ruled out in ethnoarchaeological work, because it is precisely here that the boundaries oI
archaeology may be enlarged.
Ethnoarchaeology reminds us that archaeology itselI is not exclusively about the past. Like all
scientiIic thinking it arises Irom an emergent consensus between its twentieth-Iirst century
practitioners as to validity and tenability. It must take account not only oI the observer but also
the inIormant. Questions to inIormants need to be Iormulated with an awareness not just oI
western anthropological methodology but oI local cultural preconceptions. Not all, perhaps Iew,
responses can be taken literally. For example during his Iieldwork in Kenya, Ian Hodder describes
how he was given inIormation about some pottery, and an estimate oI 80 years Ior its age. This
proved on subsequent visits to be untrue, the actual age being rarely more than 8 years
"
.
Ethnoarchaeology has be more than some Iorm oI human or economic geography or social
anthropology. It has to be kept in empirical contact with the special individuality oI archaeology,
which lies in constant re-integration oI the long-term into our knowledge oI change, using the
methods evolved by the subject Ior dealing with imperIect evidence.
The ethnography oI south-east European traditional societies is much more than a
maniIestation oI regional identity, strong though this may be. It has a more universal and
especially European importance. It represents patterns oI behaviour established in antiquity
which were Iormerly more widely distributed in Europe, not only throughout Mediaeval but in
even earlier times. We need only look to the paintings oI Breughel. Traditional culture has been
preserved in areas such as the Maramures or at the stina, not because it was backward, but
precisely because it was so highly-adapted.
Europe itselI has an ethnography, but just as leIt-wing intellectuals in the west contrived Ior
decades to ignore the truth about the backwardness oI authoritarian socialism, so many have been
equally ill-inIormed about the culture oI their eastern neighbours, in which this ethnographic
heritage was best exempliIied. The exploitation oI highland zone resources by pastoral societies,
and even by prehistoric hunters, was never detached in romantic isolation Irom macro-political
conditions in the lowlands. The ethno-political relationship was nowhere better represented than
in a country such as Romania. Endowed with great natural riches it suIIered repression and
poverty under authoritarian socialism. Paradoxically the highland zone preserved something oI
the riches oI vanished European historical traditions at partial remove Irom the socialist attempt
to control every aspect oI human behaviour.
In order to enhance archaeological explanation by post-diction into European prehistory it is
preIerable to look within European culture than too Iar outside it. It will be remembered that
Gordon Childe looked to the remote ethnography oI Malaysian societies Ior his model oI
Bandkeramik 'cyclic agriculture ; but the rapid exhaustion oI tropical laterite soils proved to be
a misleading analogy Ior temperate European conditions
#
.
The work oI the HZEP was predicated on the assumption that ethnoarchaeological explanation
derives Irom a relational analogy with behaviour, not just Irom Iormal analogies drawn between
1
J G Nandris 1994. The Enduring Identity, Social Being, and Material Culture oI south-easternEuropean Latinity.
Journal of the American-Romanian Academv of Arts and Sciences | Davis, CaliIornia | 19, 74-111
2
Heauton Timoroumenos 77
3
Ian Hodder, 1982. The Present Past. BatsIord Books, p.41
4
Cf., Modderman 1971. Bandkeramiker und Wanderbauerntum. Archologisches Korresponden:blatt, 1, 7-10
14
material objects. An understanding oI the role oI analogy is crucial in ethnoarchaeology, but it is
not possible to consider the literature on this here, which in any case dwelt too indulgently on
theoretical implications.
The question oI how to relate the experience to the data does raise theoretical problems. In
archaeological explanation, causality seems at times to be in its inIancy, with a too ready accept-
ance oI single-Iactor explanations and static models. The search Ior certainty led to dogmatic
theories about 'stages oI development, environmental or economic causation, or events like
'invasion. The intercalated dynamisms oI plant ecology and animal behaviour provide a more
appropriate Iramework consonant with established evolutionary theory. Archaeologists have to
take account oI the role oI the observer, and to be aware oI the impact oI their own values upon
their explanations. To state the theoretiocally obvious, there is no such thing as a Iact aside Irom
its interpretation.
What exactly constitutes the identity oI a human group is a question oI quite Iundamental
importance Ior archaeology. In it is implicated a re-examination oI the concept oI 'cultures. This
was explored by Nandris in relation to the Jebeliyeh Bedouin oI Sinai, who were sent by Justinian
to Sinai in the sixth century AD Irom 'The Land of Jlah`
5
.
Ethnoarchaeology conIirms that identity is not co-terminous with commonly understood
Iundamentals oI social deIinition, such as language, genetic inheritance, dress, appearance, or
religion ; and certainly not with the archaeological assemblages known as 'cultures. This vitiates
much archaeological explanation. The ramiIications oI ethnoarchaeological interpretation can
extend to discussion oI issues such as the nature and identity oI the early Indo-Europeans, Ior
which there is little archaeological evidence.
Eastern European archaeology has perpetuated the nineteenth-century assumption that cultures
|in eIIect usually based on pottery assemblages 'because thev are there`| can be equated with
human groups, envisaged on a quasi-tribal model. The ethnoarchaeological work oI Hodder in
Kenya, or the many studies oI Pueblo pottery, demonstrate how boundaries in pottery distribution
are aIIected by social relationships and interpenetrate with social deIinitions. They do not
invariably coincide with the limits oI social groups, and one must ask how Iar the situation was
diIIerent during the Neolithic.
We were aware oI the methodological diIIiculties when undertaking our Iieldwork, but we
could not allow ourselves to be paralysed by them, any more than we could be deterred by the
practical diIIiculties oI working under authoritarian socialist regimes. The ethnoarchaeological
evidence in all its Iragile variety is too important to await the deIinitive theoretical stance. The
evidence itselI is changing too rapidly, as are explanatory Iashions, and it is more urgent to save
the phenomena than to conIorm to the Iashions. Our stance is not dogmatic, and its impact will
become clear in time.
The mountains themselves were perceived to present a series oI Iascinating problems. While
most archaeology is lowland archaeology, the European highlands have nevertheless, since the
time at least oI the epi-palaeolithic ibex hunters onwards, been exploited by man. The mountains
were able to supply autonomous resources, usually seasonally available, and to complement
lowland sites. They Iunctioned Ior mankind not as a barrier but as an living environment and a
reIuge Irom stress, just as they did Ior plant and animal species. They have preserved certain
aspects oI human culture just long enough Ior us to gain an inkling oI these beIore they vanish
into the late twentieth-Iirst century.
Acute logistical and practical problems arise in studying the highland zone. The sites are oIten
ephemeral, and overwhelmingly based on organics. They are subject to processes oI erosion and
degradation which are more marked than those met with in lowland conditions, but change and
decay are themselves integral with our ethnoarchaeological subject-matter. The logistics oI
working in the mountains at altitudes up to 2500 metres are not simple; but they accurately reIlect
the rewards and perils which Iaced man at any period, when he chose to exploit the resources
oIIered by the highland zone. The interpretation oI the data Irom the man preserved in ice Irom
the third Mbc at the tztal-Similaun in the north Italian Alps is in this sense pure highland zone
5
Nandris J G 1990. The Jebeliyeh oI Mount Sinai and the Land oI Vlah. Quaderni di Studi Arabi - 8, 45-80.
Oriental Institute, Universita degli Studi, Venice.
15
ethnoarchaeology. The 2007 Timisoara Symposium has shown that the Ethnoarchaeology and
Prehistory oI Romania jointly have the potential to yield Iurther unexpected insights.
The humble agro-pastoralism still accessible to ethnoarchaeological study in the Romanian
village exempliIies something Iormerly much more widespread in Europe. 'The importance oI
the Neolithic village is that it eIIectively continued Irom its small-scale beginnings, and its quite
large-scale Climax Neolithic sites, through historical accretion and diIIerentiation across the
Middle Ages, to underpin European civilization. The demography, economy and technology oI its
settlements supplied a Iertile medium Ior the Ilowering oI European complexity. Its social
elaborations on the themes oI domesticity and domestication gave rise to some oI the most highly-
polished cultural and political Iorms on the planet, and have been widely emulated. This
evolutionary success cannot be dismissed as a Eurocentric` construct, since it created conditions
Ior the Iree expression oI individual potential to which much oI humanity aspires
$
.
6
J G Nandris. Adaptive Mediation in the FTN. Societa per la Preistoria e Protoistoria della Regione Friuli-
Jene:ia Giula, Quaderno 12. Eds. Spataro & Biagi, Trieste 2007, 11-23
THE SPREAD OF THE FIRST TEMPERATE NEOLITHIC ACROSS THE BALKANS
AS SEEN FROM THE PERSPECTIVE OF MACROBLADE TECHNOLOGY
Malgor:ata Kac:anowska and Janus K.Ko:lowski*
Keywords: Balkans, Earlv Neolithic, macroblade technologv.
I. INTRODUCTION
The appearance oI the Iirst groups oI Neolithic population in the Balkans has been the object oI
controversies revolving around the relations between the immigrants and local groups oI hunter-gath-
erers. These controversies also concern models oI the evolution oI material culture which accompanied
the introduction oI a Iarming-breeding economy. Among the disputed issues are:
1. the hypothetical existence oI the Pre-ceramic (Aceramic) phase in the Balkans and its rela-
tion to the Pre-ceramic Neolithic in the Near East,
2. the Iirst appearance oI ceramics in the Balkans, primarily the question oI the Monochrome
phase that preceded the phase with white-painted pottery,
3. the origin and diIIusion oI the Neolithic with white-painted ceramics, which is the Iirst uni-
Iorm FTN horizon in the Balkans.
These questions cannot be resolved unless we take into account lithic industries that besides
painted ceramics constitute one oI the markers oI the FTN in the territories Irom Greece as Iar as the
Danube, between the second halI oI the VIIIth and the second halI oI the VIth millenium B.C.
The problem oI the Pre-ceramic Neolithic in Greece was critically reviewed by C. Perles
(1989, 2001) who pointed out that the arguments in support oI the existence oI Pre-ceramic
(aceramic) layers in the tells oI Thessaly (Argissa, Gediki, Sesklo, SouIli Magoula) are question-
able: these layers, indeed, contained sherds, but the small areas explored in them were the reason
why, in comparison with the upper settlement levels, the quantity oI ceramics seemed small (Fig.
1). There are arguments, on the other hand, to conIirm the appearance, mainly on the Aegean Sea
islands, oI elements oI Neolithic economy (semi-domesticated suids and caprids, intensive plant
processing by grinding stone equipment) or even a Iull package oI Neolithic innovations in the
Pre-ceramic context in the period between the middle oI IXth and the Iirst halI oI the VIIth
millenium (Fig. 2). The lithic industries that accompanied those innovations were derived Irom
local Mesolithic traditions. This is the case at, Ior example, the Cyclope Cave on the island oI
Gioura (Sampson - Ko:lowski 1999), the site oI Maroulas on the island oI Kythnos (Sampson et
al. 2002), layer X Irom Knossos trenches A and X (Evans 1964, 1971), and mainland sites such
as phase X (Initial Neolithic) in the Franchthi Cave (Perles 1990, Hansen 1991). In the case oI
Maroulas a large settlement with about 30 round dwelling structures with stone Ioundations and
pavements has been identiIied accompanied by about 15 complete and partial graves (Fig. 4). At
none oI the sites, either in the Balkans or in the Aegean Sea basin, is evidence oI contacts with
the Pre-ceramic Neolithic oI the Near East registered in the technologies or typology oI lithic
industries (evidence such as: naviIorm cores, blade points shaped by surIace retouches etc.).
II. THE PROBLEM OF THE MONOCHROME PHASE
The problem oI the phase with Monochrome ceramics was reported, Iirst oI all, Irom Bulgaria
where two sites yielded stratigraphical sequences with Monochrome ceramics below the White-
painted pottery phase. These are the sites oI Koprivets in north-east Bulgaria (Popov 1994) and
Krainitsi in south-west Bulgaria (Stefanova 1996). Single-layer sites in northern Bulgaria such as
Polyanitsa Palato and Ohoden have also been assigned to the Monochrome phase. H. Todorova
*
Jagellonian University, Institute oI Archaeology, Krakow, Poland. fanus:.ko:lowskivf.edu.pl
18
(2003) believes them to represent the earliest Balkan Neolithic that embraced only some parts oI
the eastern Balkans, excluding Thrace and Dobrudza. However, in practical terms, to isolate the
Monochrome phase is problematic: only Iairly small areas oI those sites have been explored; the
presence oI monochrome sherds (just as the hypothetical lack oI ceramics in the lower layers oI
tells in Thessaly) could be the eIIect oI special activities carried out in the various sectors oI a site
and speciIic discard patterns. Nonetheless, there is one argument in Iavour oI existence oI the
Monochrome phase, as a discrete stage: this is the speciIic character oI lithic industries that oc-
cur in monochrome layers described by I. Gatsov (2000, 2001). At Koprivets these were Ilakes
and Ilake tools exclusively, mainly notched tools Irom local, poor quality raw materials, whereas
at Krainitsi these were only 'Iew pieces oI Ilakes. These assemblages are diIIerent Irom
macroblade industries concurrent with white painted ceramics.
The hypothetical Monochrome phase at the beginning oI the Neolithic in Bulgaria is believed
to have been related to the Early Neolithic oI north-west Turkey, notably to the archaic Fikirtepe
phase (O:dgan - Basgelen 1999). Similarly the Ilake industry Irom Bulgarian Monochrome sites
is considered to be similar to the industry Irom Hoa Cesme in Turkish Thrace, the industry that
was based also on local raw materials (Gatsov 2001). At Hoa Cesme macroblade arteIacts Irom
yellow Ilint imported Irom Bulgaria appear only in the penultimate phase (phase II).
The hypothetical migration oI Monochrome ceramics population groups Irom Turkish Thrace
and, possibly, Irom north-western Anatolia (associated with the archaic phase oI the Fikirtepe
culture) to the territory oI eastern Bulgaria could not have played an important role in the
neolithization oI the Balkans: there is no evidence whatsoever oI evolution in material culture
(ceramics, stone industry) in the interval between the Monochrome phase and the Neolithic with
white (or white-on-red) pottery.
It is believed that a monochromous phase, preceding the Protosesklo culture with white-painted
ceramics, could have existed in Greece, too. This hypothesis is based on the assumption that the pre-
ceramic layers in the tells oI Thessaly contained Iew unpainted sherds. For example at Argissa a total
oI 122 sherds were discovered (in spit XXXI and in the pits underneath the tell) that V. Milojcic (1962)
believed to be intrusive. Also at Sesklo Teocharis (1963) distinguished an 'Early Neolithic I horizon
that contained 'primitive crude, unIired or poorly Iired sherds. II this assumption is true which is
questioned by some researchers (e.g. Wijnen 1981), then this would mean that in the initial phase oI
the Neolithic in Greece we are concerned with experiments leading to the discovery oI ceramic ware.
The introduction oI pottery would then, however, have taken place in the context oI macroblade indus-
try known both Irom the 'Pre-ceramic levels and Irom the initial Neolithic in Thessalian tells
(Perles 1986), in the period between 7760+100 (the earliest date on charcoals Irom Argissa, apart Irom
two earlier dates oI 8100/7900 on bone) and 7755+97 and 7483+72 B.P. (Ior the end oI the 'pre-ce-
ramic phase at Sesklo Perles 2001).
Recently, the investigations in the Sarakenos Cave in Beotia have shed new light on the question oI
the Monochrome phase in central-eastern Greece (Fig. 3). The Early Neolithic layers in this cave, start-
ing Irom spit 17 to 27, in trench A revealed the occurrence oI red-on-white/cream painted ceramics;
lower down, in the layers dated at between 7560+50 (spit 31, trench A) and 7460+50 (spit 29) there are
exclusively Monochrome ceramics ( Fig. 5). This is, however, a Iairly thin-walled ceramic with
smooth, brown or red surIaces, occurring with some Iew macroblade arteIacts Irom extralocal yellow
Ilint or obsidian. The quality oI this ceramic, unlike the ceramics in the Thessalian tells, does not show
crude craItmanship despite the Iact that chronologically the layers in spits 2930 are almost contem-
poraneous with the end oI the 'Pre-ceramic phase at Thessaly.
The comparison oI chipped stone industries assigned to the hypothetical Monochrome phase in
Greece and in Bulgaria reveals an essential diIIerence between them: in Greece there is macroblade
technique and imported raw materials just like in the Neolithic with white-painted ceramics
(Protosesklo), in Bulgaria on the other hand there is Ilake technique and local raw materials.
The question oI the origins oI macroblade technology in Greece is still a puzzle. In the Iew
indisputably Late Mesolithic sites this technology is unknown; lithic production at Late
Mesolithic sites oI the mainland (Klisoura Cave 1, layers 3-5 Koumou:elis et al. 2003,
Franchthi phase IX Perles 1990, Sarakenos Cave spits 29-3 in trench A) and on Aegean islands
(Gioura, Cyclope Cave, Late Mesolithic Sampson et al. 2003) is based essentially on Ilake
debitage, rarely on bladelets production, nearly exclusively on local raw materials. It is only in
the 'Initial Neolithic more regular blades appear in the Franchthi Cave (phase X) (Perles 1990,
19
Fig. 24:1-9), associated with trapezes and transverse arrowheads. This could be the eIIect oI the
connections with the central and the western Mediterranean Castelnovian cultural zone (Fig. 6).
This tradition oI regular blades and trapezes could have played a role in the origin oI macroblade
technology in the 'Aceramic Phase (which is, in Iact, the equivalent oI the Monochrome Phase)
in Thessaly, such as Argissa Magula (pit ) (Tellenbach 1983, Perles 1987) ( Fig. 7).
III. WHITE-PAINTED POTTERY HORIZON
The wide diIIusion oI the Neolithic in the Balkans is related to the White-painted ceramics
horizon, represented in Greece by the 'Protosesklo phase. This phase spread in the central and
eastern Balkans along the Vardar and the Morava rivers, and along the Styrmen-Struma valleys
reaching the southern part oI the Great Hungarian Plain, Banat and central Transylvania. The
process oI diIIusion oI the white-painted ceramics was very Iast. The oldest sites oI this phase in
Greece are dated at 74007200 B.P., the sites in Bulgaria and Serbia on the other hand at be-
tween 72007000 B.P., whereas those in Rumania and southern Hungary are dated at 71006900
B.P. (Whittle et al. 2002, Domboroc:kv 2003)
The spread oI white-painted ceramics was associated with the simultaneous spread oI tech-
niques oI stone working that are diagnostic Ior this horizon, namely:
a) macroblade technique using single-platIorm cores with prepared Ilaking surIaces,
b) advanced technique oI blade detachment: by pressure or with a punch,
c) production based on extralocal raw materials,
d) import oI yellow Ilint mostly Irom the Pre-Balkan plateau. UnIortunately Early Neolithic
workshops have not been recorded in these regions,
e) limited discard oI cores and debitage products,
I) speciIic style oI tools shaped by means oI lateral retouch.
The production oI long blades with parallel lateral edges was determined by two Iactors:
1. the knapper`s skill
2. selection oI suitable raw material.
Blade detachment was preceded by a number oI operations that aimed to give the raw mate-
rial nodule its appropriate shape and to obtain the appropriate coring angle. Long blades with
parallel lateral edges were detached Irom single-platIorm cores with a careIully prepared plat-
Iorm which was, subsequently, rejuvenated by detaching a series oI Iine Ilakes. The pre-Ilaking
Iace oI single-platIorm cores was shaped by means oI a crest. Blades were split oII with the use
oI a soIt hammer or by means oI pressure technique. Both these techniques produced regular,
standardized blanks. The use oI such advanced technologies required that a knapper should be
highly skilled. This leads to the conclusion that lithic production belonged to a narrow group oI
skilled workers. This hypothesis has been conIirmed by the Iact that a Iull cycle oI lithic produc-
tion on-site is absent at FTN settlements. Usually, long blades or their Iragments and blade tools
are recorded in the settlements. In the Eastern Balkans blades were made, as a rule, Irom light
yellow, weakly transparent raw material reIerred to in literature as 'silex blond (honey-coloured
Ilint). So Iar, the presence oI outcrops oI this type oI Ilint in Greece has not been conIirmed un-
til now. Similar Ilint recorded in the Therma-Nigrita region in Macedonia (Kambouroglou -
Peristeri 2004) appears only in small nodules, unsuitable Ior macroblade production. At sites oI
the northern part oI the Balkans and in the Great Hungarian Plain arteIacts occur which are made
Irom similar Ilint with precipitations in the Iorm oI spots, which is described in literature as
'Balkan or 'Banat Ilint. It is likely that this is a variant oI the same raw material whose deposits
are situated in the territory oI the Pre-Balkan plateau.
Blades made Irom these raw materials are known Irom Early Neolithic sites in the
Peloponnese (Lerna Ko:lowski et al. 1996, and Dendra (Protontariou-Deilaki 1992), Irom
Thessaly (Argissa Perles 1987), and Irom the Neolithic layer in the Cave oI Cyclope on the is-
land oI Gioura, Northern Sporades (Ko:lowski - Kac:anowska, in press), Irom the sites in the
Struma valley (Kovachevo, Galabnik, Slatina Gatsov 1993), in the Thrace Basin (Karanovo
Gatsov, Kurcatov 1997). Yellow Ilint is known Irom Kros and Starcevo culture sites in the north-
ern Balkans |among others: Divostin, Golokut (Kac:anowska - Ko:lowski 1984-1985)|, Starcevo,
Donja Branjevina (Saric 2005) and Irom the Great Hungarian Plain. The northernmost sites that
yielded macroblades Irom yellow Ilint are Mehtelek (Starnini 1994) and Tiszaszls-Domahaza
20
in the Tisza basin. In all likelihood, most oI the blades were produced outside settlement areas,
possibly in specialized workshops in the vicinity oI extraction points - unidentiIied so Iar and,
subsequently, were traded as Iinished products. A small number oI Ilakes Irom settlements indi-
cate that occasionally cores were exploited on-site, probably in several episodes. Debitage Irom
rejuvenation stored in a vessel was discovered at the site oI Endrd 39 (Kac:anowska et al. 1986).
Core exploitation in several episodes consisted in detaching only individual blades as need arose.
Then, blades were shaped into tools mostly with marginal retouch.
In the territories Iurther away Irom the deposits oI 'silex blond or the so-called 'Banat Ilint,
where raw materials obtained by barter did not satisIy the demand Ior stone arteIacts, some tools
were made Irom deposits oI siliceous rocks, which were easily accessible in the vicinity oI settle-
ments. Sometimes local production used a technique similar to that used in the production oI
blades Irom exotic rocks (Szolnok Szanda-Tenyosziget). When the quality oI raw material was
poor or when the skill oI knappers was inadequate the standard oI produced blades was low.
When the system oI distribution oI raw materials is analysed two hypotheses should be taken
into consideration:
1. that arteIacts Irom 'Banat Ilint or 'silex blond were made by groups who inhabited areas
in the immediate vicinity oI the areas oI deposits and that through barter they reached wider ter-
ritories;
2. that these raw materials were accessible to many groups inhabiting territories Iurther away
Irom areas oI deposits. Flint was obtained by parties during trips in search oI raw materials.
The Iirst model assumes the existence oI some kind oI property rights to speciIic areas and
rudiments oI group specialization in the production oI bartered goods. The second model holds
that each community had its own specialist knappers. Among the various communities a system
oI inIormation transmission would have operated as to the location oI deposits oI raw materials,
while a common technological tradition would have existed. So Iar, investigations into lithic raw
materials distribution in the Early Neolithic support the Iormer oI the two models oI raw materi-
als procurement.
IJ. REGIONAL JARIANTS OF THE WHITE-PAINTED POTTERY HORIZON
Within the Iairly homogeneous horizon oI white-painted pottery several techno-typological
variants can be distinguished:
1. The Thrace Plain - the Karanovo Culture (Fig. 9)
The largest series oI lithic arteIacts comes Irom the tell at Karanovo. The oldest layer,
Karanovo I, yielded a series oI only 338 arteIacts (Gatsov - Kurcatov 1997). It should be borne
in mind, however, that at this site the area exposed was large, about 625 sq m. Three horizons
with architectural remains, namely seven dwellings, correspond to Karanovo I. Thus, the number
oI arteIacts made Irom siliceous rocks in proportion to the investigated area (0.6 arteIacts per sq
m.) is not important. It should be stressed however that in the younger layers oI the tell, as-
sociated with the phases Karanovo II, and especially with Karanovo IIIII and Karanovo III, the
number oI arteIacts drops markedly. Thus, we can tentatively put Iorward a hypothesis that the
settlement was set up by a group who brought with it a small store oI a Iew cores and blanks and/
or that this group maintained close contacts with other communities which supplied the newcom-
ers with completed products. In time, ties gradually loosened, as is documented by the drop in the
number oI arteIacts and more intensive exploitation oI tools in Karanovo II. The supply oI raw
materials breaks down aIter Karanovo phase II (i.e. aIter 57005500 B.C.). The lithic industry
Irom the site at Karanovo is consistent with the characteristic Ieatures oI the White-Painted Pot-
tery horizon:
1. the main body oI blanks, possibly also oI tools, was made oII-site,
2. the inventory is dominated by blades (31.9) with parallel edges and a straight or weakly
convex proIile and a single-blow platIorm. Most specimens are broken. The proportions oI whole,
relatively small, specimens indicate that their length could have been Irom 6.2 to 10.0 cm.
3. The proportion oI retouched tools is high (31.7); predominantly one and two-sided, some-
times convergent specimens.
21
4. Other tools such as perIorators or end-scrapers also oIten have retouched sides, or were
made on retouched blades.
2. The North-Central Balkans - the Starcevo Culture (Fig. 10)
At the sites oI the Starcevo Culture the presence oI a relatively small number oI chipped stone
arteIacts was recorded. Most oI them were made Irom yellow Ilint probably Irom the Pre-
Balkan plateau. In addition, it seems that the number oI arteIacts decreases at settlements oI later
phases oI the Starcevo culture. For example: while at Donja Branjevina the proportions are 0.6
arteIact per 1 sq m oI the explored area (Saric 2005), at Golokut, on the other hand, this index is
merely 0.02 (Kac:anowska - Ko:lowski 1984-1985). Providing these data are conIirmed by a
larger series oI sites, then we can assume that, just as in the case oI Karanovo, we are also deal-
ing at Starcevo with a break-down oI lithic production that took place in the younger developmen-
tal phases oI this culture. This collapse was probably related to the gradual decline oI workshops
situated close to outcrops and shiIting production to the household cluster, leading to the disin-
tegration oI the distribution network oI yellow Ilint existing until then.
All the Starcevo culture sites, even those with traces oI additional on-site production Irom lo-
cal raw materials (Donja Branjevina in Voivodina - Saric 2005), exhibit a distinctive inventory
structure with the domination oI blades over Ilakes and with a high tool index. In tool groups long
blades with lateral retouch are most Irequent, although other tools begin to appear more Ire-
quently. OI particular interest is the occurrence oI geometric microliths (trapezes) at a number oI
sites such as Donja Branjevina, Starcevo and at Cuina Turcului where these are most numerous
( Punescu 1970). It is likely, that the presence oI trapezes is related to hunting and Iishing activi-
ties rather than indicating the persistence oI Mesolithic tradition.
3. The Tisza basin - the Krs-Cris Culture (Fig.8)
The sites oI the Krs culture are distributed mainly in the Great Hungarian Plain i.e. the ter-
ritory without natural deposits oI Ilint siliceous rocks.Among Iinds Irom settlements there were
small series oI several up to a dozen or so discarded lithic arteIacts; oI particular interest is the
presence, among them, oI long blades and retouched blades Irom 'Balkan or 'Banat Ilint
(Starnini - S:akmanv 1998). The Krs culture population also Iound and exploited obsidian de-
posits at the northern boundaries oI AlIld. It was only the Szatmar group people who settled the
areas oI obsidian outcrops.
In recent years a number oI sites discovered on the Middle Tisza at the northern outskirts oI
the Krs cultures yielded small series oI chipped arteIacts (Rac:kv et al. in press). It seems that
alongside the continuation oI Balkan traditions, seen in the presence oI tools with lateral retouch
and arteIacts made Irom 'Banat or 'Balkan Ilint, there appear new tendencies that were prob-
ably inspired by transIormations in economy, adapting the Balkan model to local conditions.
Moreover, attempts were made at exploitation oI other raw materials Irom the deposits in the
upper Tisza basin such as limnoquartzites oI much poorer quality.
A similar process oI departure Irom the Balkan tradition can also be seen at the site oI Szarvas
situated south oI the lower Krs river where the inventory contained some elements related to
the Vinca culture and the LBK (Kac:anowska - Ko:lowski 2007).
J. CONCLUSIONS
The macroblade technology described in this work (Fig.11), that constituted an attribute oI the
FTN Irom the Peloponnese as Iar as the Carpathian Basin, is part oI the Iull Neolithic package
with no roots in local, pre-Neolithic technologies. Lithic industries oI the Monochrome horizon
providing such a horizon did exist did not provide a substratum Ior the development oI the
industries oI the White-Painted phase, possibly with the exception oI some sites in Greece.
The phenomenon oI macroblade technologies spread across an extensive territory (just like the
White-Painted Ceramics) in a relatively short time period. Despite some local variations this
phenomenon is Iairly uniIorm. At sites on the northern outskirts oI the FTN certain deviations
occur Irom these standard raw materials and Balkan technologies. Historically, a breakdown in
production and distribution is recorded at about the middle oI the VIth millenium BC cal.
22
FTN populations are characterized by highly advanced technologies that contrast both with the
Mesolithic as well as the Middle Neolithic. This advance can also be seen in social organization,
namely in group specialization and a stable network oI long-distance exchange. Exchange could
include various taxonomic units, but as the traded goods were a speciIic group oI products made
Irom speciIic raw materials this exchange could have been in its nature an exchange oI presti-
gious goods or be related to the ceremonial sphere. An analogy oIIers itselI with the ritual ex-
change in the Trobriand Islands described by B. Malinowski: 'this is, thus, an extensive, inter-
tribal social network, a huge institution embracing thousands oI people bound by a great common
passion which is the Kula exchange and by many minor links and interests (Malinowski 1967,
125).
Acknoledgements
Most oI the researches discussed in this paper have received support Irom the European spe-
ciIic targeted research project FEPRE (Foundation oI Europe: Prehistoric Population Dynamics
and the Roots oI Socio-Cultural Diversity).
BIBLIOGRAPHY
Domboroczky 2003,
Domboroczky, L., 2003. Radiocarbon data Irom neolithic archaeological sites in Heves County (Notrth-Eastern
Hungary). Agria XXXIX, (2003), 5 - 71
Evans 1964,
Evans, J., Excavations in the Neolithic settlement oI Knossos 1957-1964. Annual of the British School of Archae-
ologv at Athens 59, (1964), 132-240.
Evans 1971,
Evans, J., Neolithic Knossos; the growth oI a settlement. Proceeding of the Prehistoric Societv 37, (1971), 95-
117.
Gatsov 1993,
Gatsov, I., Neolithic chipped stone industries i Western Bulgaria. Krakow, (1993).
Gatsov 2000,
Gatsov, I.,Chipped Stone Assemblages Irom South Bulgaria and North-West Turkey (Epipaleolithic, Mesolithic
and Neolithic) in L. Nikolova (ed), Technologv, Stvle and Societv. Contributions to the Innovations between the Alps
and the Black Sea in Prehistorv, BAR International Series OxIord: British Archaeological Reports 1-28, (2000).
Gatsov 2001,
Gatsov, I., Epipaleolithic/ Mesolithic Neolithic Periods chipped stone assemblages from Southeastern Bulgaria
and North- West Turkev. Similarities and differences, Tba-Ar, (2001), 101-112.
Gatsov - Kurcatov 1997,
Gatsov, I., Kurcatov V., Neolithische FeuersteinarteIakte. In S. Hiller, V. Nikolov (eds), Karanovo. Die
Ausgrabungen im Sdsektor 1984-1992, Verlag Ferdinand Berger&Shne, Horn/Wien. Salzburg-SoIia, (1997), 213-
228
Hansen 1991,
Hansen, J. M.,. The Paleoethnobotany oI Franchthi Cave. (in) Excavations in Franchthi Cave, Greece, Iascile 7,
(1991), Bloomington, Indianapolis: Indiana University Press.
Kaczanowska - Kozlowski 1984-1985,
Kaczanowska, M., Kozlowski, J. K., Chipped stone Industry Irom Golokut. Rad Jofvodanskih Mu:efa 29, (1984-
1985), pp 27-31.
Kaczanowska - Kozlowski 2007,
Kaczanowska, M., Kozlowski, J. K., The lithic assemblages oI Szarvas 8/23, pits 3/3 1988 and 4/2 1988 (in)
J.Makkay, The Excavations of the Earlv Neolithic Sites of the Koros Culture in the Koros Jallev, Hungarv. The Fi-
nal Report. Societa per la Preistoria e Protostoria della Regione Fiuli-Venezia Giulia, (2001), pp.237-246.
23
Kambouroglou - Peristeri 2004,
Kambouroglou E., Peristeri K., Carrieres prehistoriques et sites de silex en Macedoine (in) To archaiologiko ergo
sti Makedonia kai sti Traki. Vol.18, (2004), 17-24.
Kozlowski Kaczanowska (in press),
Kozlowski, J. K.- Kaczanowska, M., Lithic assemblages (in) A.Sampson (ed), Cave of Cvclope at the Island of
Gioura, Academic Press, (in press).
Kaczanowska et alii 1986,
Kaczanowska M., Kozlowski, J. K., Makkay, J., Flint hoard Irom Endrd, site 39 (Krs Culture). Acta
Archaeologica Carpathica XXI, (1986), 105 118.
Koumouzelis et alii 2003,
Koumouzelis, M., Kozlowski, J. K., Ginter, B. Mesolithic Iinds Irom Cave I in the Klisoura Gorge, Argolid (in)
N Galanidou and C. Perles (ed) The Greek Mesolithic Problems and Perspectives, Brithish School at Athens, Studies
10, (2003), 113-123.
Kozlowski et alii 1996,
Kozlowski, J. K. Kaczanowska, M., Pawlikowski, M., Chipped Stone Industries Irom Neolithic Levels at Lerna.
Hesperia 65, (1996), 295-372.
Malinowski 1967,
Malinowski, B., Argonauci Zachodniego Pacvfiku (Argonauts oI the Western PaciIic). Warszawa, (1967).
Milojcic 1962,
Milojcic,V., Die prkeramische neolithische Siedlung von Argissa in Thessalien. In V. Milojcic (ed) Die deutschen
Ausgrabungen auI der Argissa-Magula in Thessalien I. Beitrge :ur ur und frhgeschichtlichen Archologiedes
Mittelmeer-Kulturraumes 2, (1962), Bonn, 1-25.
zdgan - Basgelen 1999,
zdgan, M., Basgelen N. (eds), Neolithic in Turkev- the cradle of civilisation. New discoveries. Istanbul, (1999).
Punescu 1970,
Punescu, A., Evolutia uneltelor si armelor de piatr cioplit descoperite pe teritoriul Romaniei, Bucuresti,
(1970).
Perles 1987,
Perles, C., Les industries du Neolithiqe 'preceramique de Grece: Nouvelles etudes, nouvelles interpretations (in)
J.K.Kozlowski, S.K.Kozlowski ed. Chipped Stone Industries of the Earlv Farimng Cultures in Europe. Archaeologia
Interregionalis, Warsaw, (1987), 19-39.
Perles 1988,
Perles, C., New ways with an Old Problem: Chipped stone assemblages as an index oI cultural discontinuity in
Early Greek Prehistory (in) E.B.French, K.A.Wardle, Problems in Greek Prehistorv, Bristol, (1988), 477-487.
Perles 1988,
Perles, C., New ways with an old problem: chipped stone assemblages as an index oI cultural discontuity in the
early Greek Prehistory in E.B. French and K. A. Wardle (eds) Problems in Greek Prehistorv. Papers presented at the
Centenarv Conference of British School of Archaeologv at Athens, Manchester, April 1986. 477-488. Bristol Classi-
cal Press, 1988.
Perles 1989,
Perles, C., La neolithisation de la Grece in O Aurenche and J Cauvin ( eds) Neolithisations: Proche et Moyen
Orient, Mediterranee orientale, Nord de lÀIrique, Europe meridionale, Chine, Amerique du Sud: 109-127. BAR
Intenational Series 516. OxIord: British Archaeological Reports, (1989).
Perles 1990,
Perles, C., Les industries lithiques taillees de Franchthi ( Argolide, Grece). Tome II: Les industries du
Mesolithique et du Neolithique initial. Excavations at Franchthi Cave, fascicle 5. Bloomington, (1990), Indianapolis:
Indiana University Press.
Perles 2001,
Perles, C., The Earlv Neolithic in Greece. Cambridge, (2001), Cambridge University Press.
Popov 1994,
Popov V., Proutchvanie na rannoneolitnoto selischtche Koprivets, obchtina Bfala. Archeologitcheski Odkritia I
Razkopki prez 1992. SoIia, (1994).
24
Protontariou-Delaki 1992,
Protontariou-Delaki E., Paratiriseis stin prokerameki (apo ti Thessalia sta Dendra tis Argolis (in) Diethnes
Svnedrio gia tin Archaia Thessalia sti Mnimi tou Dimitri P.Theocharis. Athens, (1992), 97-111.
Raczky et alii (in press),
Raczky P., Sumegi P., Bartosiewicz L., Gal E., Kaczanowska M., Kozlowski J.K., Anders A., Ecological barrier
versus mental marginal :one? Problems of northernmost Koros Culture settlements in the Great Hungarian Plain, (in
press).
Sampson - Kozlowski 1999,
Sampson, A., Kozlowski, J. K., The Cave oI Cyclope in the Northern Aegean: a specialized Iishing shelter oI the
Mesolithic and Neolithic periods. Neo-Lithics, 3/99, (1999), 5-7.
Sampson et alii 2002,
Sampson, A., Kozlowski , J. K., Kaczanowska, M., Gianouli, B., The Mesolithic settlement at Maroulas, Kythnos.
Mediterranean Archaeologv & Archaeometrv 2, (2002), 45-68.
Sampson et alii 2003,
Sampson, A., Kozlowski, J. K., Kaczanowska, M. Mesolithic chipped stone industries Irom the Cave oI Cyclope
on the island oI Youra (Northern Sporades). (in) N Galanidou and C. Perles (ed) The Greek Mesolithic Problems and
Perspectives, British School at Athens, Studies 10, (2003), 123-130.
Starnini 1994,
Starnini, E., Typological and technological analyses oI the Krs culture chipped, polished and ground stone as-
semblages oI Mehtelek-Nadas ( North-Eastern Hungary). Atti della Societa per la Preistoria e Protoistria della
regione Friuli-Jene:ia Giulia 8, (1994), 29- 95.
Starnini - Szakmany 1998,
Starnini E., Szakmany G., The lithic industry oI the Neolithic sites oI Szarvas and Endrod (souther-eastern Hun-
gary): techno-typological and archaeometrical aspects. Acta Archaeologica ASH, 50, (1998), 279-342.
SteIanova 1996,
SteIanova T., A comparative analysis oI pottery Irom Monochrome Early Neolithic Horizon and Karanovo I ho-
rizon and problems oI the Neolithization oI Bulgaria. Porocilo, 23, (1996), 15-38.
Saric 2005,
Saric, J., The chipped stone assemblage ( in) Karmanski, S. Donja Branjevina: A neolithic settlement near Deronje
in the Vojvodina (Serbia). Biaggi, P. (ed) Societa per la Preistoria e Protoistoria delle Regione Friuli-Jene:ia Giulia,
10, (2005), 57- 64
Tellenbach 1983,
Tellenbach, M., Materialien zum Prkeramischen Neolithikum in Sd Ost Europa. Bericht der Rmisch
Germanischen Kommision 64, (1983), 23-137.
Teocharis 1973,
Teocharis D., Neolithic Greece. National Bank oI Greece, Athens, (1973).
Todorova 2003,
Todorova H., Das Fruhneolithikum Nordbulgariens im Kontext des Ostbalkanisches Neolithikums. Tell Karanovo
und dans Balkan-Neolithikum. Internazionalen Kolloquium in Salzburg, (2003), 9-25.
Whittle et alii 2002,
Whittle, A., Bartosiewicz, L., Boric, D., Pettitt, P., and Richards, M., In the beginning: radiocarbon dates Irom
the Early Neolithic in northern Serbia and south-east Hungary. Antaeus 25, (2002), 63-117.
Wijnen 1981,
Wijnen, M. H. J. M. N., The Early Neolithic settlement at Sesklo; an early Iarming community in Thessaly,
Greece. Analecta Praehistorica Leidensia 14, (1981).
25
Fig.1. Map oI the Mesolithic (with incipient Iood producing economy) and Early Neolithic sites
(Monochrome and White Painted Phase) in the Balkans and middle Danube Basin.
26
Fig. 2. Table showing the elements oI incipient Iood producing economy in pre-Neolithic sites oI Greece.
Fig. 3. ProIile oI Sarakenos Cave (Beotia, Greece), trench A, with radiocarbon dates. Stratigraphic units:
1-3 Early Neolithic with painted pottery, 4 Early Neolithic with monochrome pottery,
5 latest Mesolithic layer, 6-8 Mesolithic layers, 9-10 Final Palaeolithic layers.
27
Fig. 4. Map oI the excavations at Maroulas (Kythnos) with stone structures (C1-27), graves (G1-11).
Trenches are marked by 'T. According to A. Sampson.
28
Fig. 5. Sarakenos (Beotia, Greece). Early Neolithic Macroblade industry and monochrome pottery.
29
Fig. 6. Franchthi Cave (Argolid, Greece). Lithic Iind Irom phase X: 1-5 regular blades, 6,7 transverse
arrowheads, 88-11 trapezes (and Iragments) on regular blades, 12-16 notched implements on Ilakes
(according to C.Perles).
30
Fig. 7. Argissa-Magula, Thessaly, Greece. Lithic Iinds Irom pit : 1-6 macroblades, 7-10 trapezes,
11 arched backed bladelet (according to M.Tellenbach).
Fig. 8. Lithic industries Irom FTN sites on the Great Hungarian Plain: 1-6; Endrd 119; 7,8 Endrd
35, 9 Szarvas 105; 10 Szarvas 158 (according to E. Starnini and G. Szakmany).
31
Fig. 9. Karanovo (Thrace, Bulgaria). Lithic Iinds Irom phase I: 1-3 blade cores,
4,6-10 retouched macroblades, 5 double end-scraper (according to I.Gatsov).
32
Fig. 10. Donja Branjevina (Voivodina, Serbia). 1-3 cores, 4 utilized Ilake, 5-11 blades,
12, 13 retouched blades, 14 double truncation, 15-18 trapezes (according to S. Karmanski).
33
Fig. 11. Map oI the most important FTN Macroblade industries in the eastern Balkans and in the Middle
Danube Basin.
PREHISTORIC BARCIN HYK:
2007 EXCAVATIONS AND CHIPPED STONE ARTIFACT ANALYSIS
Ivan Gatsov*, Petranka Nedelcheva*, Rana O:bal** and Fokke Gerritsen***
Keywords: Anatolia, prehistorv, chipped stone, obsidian, earlv farming societies.
I. INTRODUCTION. INITIAL RESULTS OF THE 2007 EXCAJATIONS
Rana O:bal and Fokke Gerritsen
The Netherlands Institute in Turkey (Istanbul) and the Netherlands Institute Ior the Near East
(Leiden) have conducted excavations in northwest Anatolia since 1987. Two major themes that
have driven the archaeological research agenda, and continue to the present day, are the spread
oI agriculture Irom the Near East to the Balkans, and the character and development oI early
Iarming communities in the region. Following excavations at Il!p!nar
1
and Mentese,
2
in 2005 the
research team selected the site oI Barc!n Hyk, located in the Yenisehir Plain (Fig. 1), Ior a new
stage oI this long-term regional research project.
Although deposits dating to the Byzantine, Early Bronze Age and Chalcolithic Periods are
present, the main attraction Ior selecting this mound lay in the Iact that initial surIace collections
indicated that the Neolithic levels appeared to be as early as, iI not earlier than, the oldest phases
excavated at Mentese and Il!p!nar. AIter two seasons (2005 and 2006) in which the Neolithic
levels were reached in a small deep sounding (along the eastern side oI trench M10), the 2007
excavations were able to reach the Neolithic levels in a larger area. The aim Ior the upcoming
seasons is to increase the exposures oI Neolithic deposits. Continued research in the deep
sounding indicates the presence oI a substantial deposit oI Neolithic layers (more than 1.5 meter).
Virgin soil has not yet been reached. II the deposits span a considerable length oI time, this could
potentially provide critical inIormation on the earliest phases oI settled liIe in the region.
Barc!n Hyk (or Yenisehir II as it is called in the older literature) lies 5 km west oI Yenisehir
along the road to Bursa. The main mound has a diameter oI ca. 100 meters and rises about 4
meters above the current level oI the plain, accompanied by a smaller and lower mound to the
west (Fig. 2). It was discovered by James Mellaart in the early 1950s and described as being one
oI the Iew Neolithic settlements in the area by David French in the 1960s.
3
Since then the mound
has witnessed intense agricultural activity and has lost its uppermost levels.
4
The 2005-2006 seasons at Barc!n Hyk took place under the direction oI J. J. Roodenberg.
During this time, a total oI eight 10 x 10 meter trenches were begun. Although intentions were to
explore the earliest levels oI the Neolithic, given the thick occupational levels dating to the Early
Bronze Age and especially the Chalcolithic, much time was spent excavating these later phases.
Excavations continued in 2007 under the direction oI Fokke Gerritsen.
In 2007, investigations continued the earlier work on the central part oI the main mound, with
work done in three previously opened trenches (M10, L11, L12) and one new trench (M11). This
yielded promising results especially Ior Trench L11 and M10, where excavations were able to
reach Neolithic levels some 2 meters and more below the mound surIace. The Iollowing section
describes the results oI the excavations by trench.
*
New Bulgarian University, Department oI Archaeology, 1618 SoIia, Montevideo Str.21, Bulgaria. NAIM-BAS,
SoIia 1000, Saborna Str. 2, Bulgaria, igatsovvahoo.com.
**
Bogazii University, 34342, Bebek, Istanbul, rana.o:balboun.edu.tr.
***
Netherlands Institute in Turkey, PO Box 132, 34431 Beyoglu, Istanbul, Turkey, fa.gerritsennit-istanbul.org.
1
Roodenberg 1995, 2000; Roodenberg-Thissen 2001; Roodenberg-Alpaslan-Roodenberg 2008.
2
Roodenberg et alii 2003; Roodenberg-Alpaslan-Roodenberg 2008.
3
Mellaart 1955; French 1967.
4
zdogan 1986, 13.
36
A. Trench L12
Although not particularly rich in lithic artiIacts, L12 is the trench with the latest deposits
excavated in 2007. 24 graves which yielded 27 burials dating to the Byzantine Period, probably
to the 9-11
th
centuries AD were excavated. The excavations yielded at least three phases oI
burials, indicating that the cemetery was used over a stretch oI time. Grave giIts were not
plentiIul but among the pieces Iound we can list a Iew metal crosses, beads and rings.
B. Trench L11
Trench L11 yielded a possible architectural structure dating to the Neolithic Period. The walls
oI this structure were made oI compacted mud slabs and were poorly preserved. Understanding
the construction was Iurther complicated by the large number oI Chalcolithic pits that cut the
structure and the associated surIaces. The structure yielded Iour burials (one adult and three
inIants) although the exact relationship between the architecture and the burials remains unclear.
The northern part oI the trench yielded a series oI Chalcolithic pits cutting one another. Given
processes oI bio-turbation and rodent activities, it has been diIIicult to make understand the
nature oI these deposits.
C. Trench M10
Most oI the deposits excavated in M10 in 2007 date to the Chalcolithic Period. The highest oI
these deposits were cut by Early Bronze Age pits with well preserved pottery. Several phases oI
the Chalcolithic were excavated. The most notable oI these yielded a ca. 3 meter wide ditch which
would have been used either to contain water or as a boundary between two areas oI the site, in
a similar Iashion to that documented in nearby and roughly contemporaneous Aktopraklk.
5
AIter
the ditch went out oI use and was partly Iilled, a rectangular pit structure containing a small oven
with a sherd-paved Iloor was dug into the side oI the ditch. In the eastern halI oI this trench a deep
sounding reaching Neolithic levels was begun in 2006. Over an area oI 1.5 by 2 meters, this
sounding was deepened in 2007, to reach a maximum depth oI 4.5 meters below the surIace level.
Virgin soil has not yet been reached. The sounding yielded traces oI various surIaces including
ones that were white and red plastered, as well as an inIant burial. Interestingly, the deepest levels
reached yielded Iew or no ceramics, but contained animal bone as well as awls, spatulas and other
worked bone tools.
D. Trench M11
The great majority oI the deposits excavated in Trench M11 in 2007 were Chalcolithic in date.
This trench was begun Irom the mound surIace and taken down to a depth oI over two meters. The
Chalcolithic deposits excavated were cut by pits dating to the Early Bronze Age. At least three
Chalcolithic use-phases were encountered. The uppermost level comprised oI a large oven with
a diameter oI 2.25 meters. Like the oven described above in Trench M10, this oven too had a
sherd-paved base. The mouth oI the oven was keyhole shaped. Possibly contemporaneous with
the oven is a mudbrick construction. Two walls Iorming the corner oI a room were discovered
here. The walls were preserved to a height oI no more than 15 cm and it is diIIicult to comment
about the enclosed space although the interior oI the room yielded Iewer artiIacts than the outer
surIaces which were high in animal bone and reIuse.
Beneath this phase excavations yielded an array oI postholes. Although it is diIIicult to assess
what types oI buildings these posts would have supported, the great range oI sizes and
construction techniques indicate that post constructions were an important architectural method
in this phase. This is not surprising as posthole phases are also known Irom Il!p!nar, although
Irom earlier phases.
6

5
Karul 2007.
6
Roodenberg 1995.
37
II. CHIPPED STONE ARTIFACTS FROM BARCIN HOYK
7
Ivan Gatsov and Petranka Nedelcheva
A collection oI chipped stone artiIacts Irom Barc!n Hyk was processed during the 2007
campaign. Given that excavations have only just begun in a limited part oI the site, clearly
interpreting the stratigraphic transition between the Neolithic, the Chalcolithic and the Early
Bronze Age levels has not yet been possible. ThereIore research grouped lithic Iinds Irom
ambiguous contexts into coarser categories oI Neolithic/Chalcolithic and Chalcolithic/Early
Bronze Age.
The analysis conducted and described here has largely Iocused on the technical and
typological analysis oI the chipped stone artiIacts but the results obtained were correlated with
typochronological attributions obtained through the analysis oI the pottery. To date, 652 lithic
artiIacts have been processed.
Graph 1. Distribution oI arteIacts by trenches

13,5%
20,71%
65,8%
M11
M10
L11
trenches
Graph 1 indicates which trenches they come Irom, while Table 1 shows how they are
distributed by raw material; Ilint vs. obsidian. A detailed shape-based distribution was conducted
Ior the Iormer category.
Table1. Distribution oI arteIacts by periods
Obsidian Flint Total
Neolithic period
32 311 343
Neolithic/Chalcolithic period
2 76 78
Chalcolithic period
12 181 193
Calcolithic/Early Bronze Age period
0 30 30
Early Bronze Age
0 8 8
Total
46 606 652

7
We would like to thank Dr. Fokke Gerritsen and Dr. Rana zbal Ior the opportunity to work on this material and Ior
their help and hospitality. Many thanks also go to Dr. Laurens Thissen Ior his database oI pottery which helped us in
our analyses.
38
There is an apparent decrease in the quantity oI lithic artiIacts through time. A great majority,
or more than halI oI the artiIacts, is Neolithic in date and comes Irom Trench L11, where
excavations reached the earliest levels. This Iollowed in number by Chalcolithic artiIacts and
those that may be Chalcolithic/Neolithic in date; with only a very small percentage dating to the
Early Bronze Age. The possible architectural structure excavated in Trench L11 and the
associated use surIaces may account Ior the high quantities oI lithic artiIacts recovered Irom this
trench although some oI these contexts also yielded mixed Chalcolithic and Neolithic deposits.
This report Iocuses on the artiIacts Ior which secure stratigraphic contexts could be established.
It is still too early, given the sample sizes and stratigraphic issues to identiIy spatial patterns.
From a technical point oI view analyses identiIied cores, cortical specimens, crested
specimens, debris, Ilakes, blades and retouched tools.
Table 2. Distribution oI technological groups by periods.

Neolithic
period
Neolithic/Chalcolithic
period
Chalcolithic
period
Calcolithic/
Early Bronze
Age period
Early
Bronze
Age Total
Cores
3 0 0 0 0 3
Cortical specimens
5 5 6 1 0 17
Crested specimens
6 3 11 0 0 20
Debris
118 27 52 5 1 203
Flakes
28 12 23 5 0 68
Blades
143 18 74 16 1 252
Retouched tools
42 12 28 1 6 89
Total
345 77 194 28 8 652
As indicated in Table 2 the Neolithic and Chalcolithic periods were highest in unretouched
blades, debris and retouched tools, while the later phases appear to lack this repertoire oI types.
A. THE NEOLITHIC PERIOD
Graph 2. Neolithic period. Distribution oI Ilint arteIacts.
P
e
r
c
e
n
t
100%
80%
60%
40%
20%
R
e
to
u
c
h
e
d
to
o
ls
B
la
d
e
s
F
la
k
e
s
D
e
b
r
is
C
re
s
te
d
s
p
e
c
im
e
n
s
C
o
rtic
a
l s
p
e
c
im
e
n
s
t
r
e
n
c
h
e
s
M11
M10
C
o
re
s
0%
L11
39
Flint Artifacts
Analyses oI the Ilint artiIacts Irom the Neolithic Levels yielded three cores. One core Iragment
(Fig. 3-1) Irom a single platIorm blade specimen is in the Iinal stage oI exploitation. This core can
be compared with those Iound in phases X and IX in Il!p!nar.
8
A second, small single platIorm
pyramidal blade and bladelet core with a crested back in the Iinal stage oI reduction was also
discovered. This core shows similarities with specimens Irom Mentese and Il!p!nar X.
9
The third
is a single platIorm conical blade core in its Iinal stage oI reduction. Graph 2.
Retouched tools
A large quantity oI the retouched specimens date to the Neolithic Period.
Table 3. Distribution oI retouched tools.
End-scraper on blade
3
Semi-circular end-scraper
1
End-scraper on Ilake
2
High end-scraper
8
PerIorator
4
Fragment oI end-scraper
1
Retouched blade
7
Truncation
1
Retouched Ilake
6
Blade with polish
8
Macro end scraper
1
Total
42

Among these tools one notes a collection oI end-scrapers, perIorators, retouched blades and
Ilakes as well as a single item oI truncation. The similarities between some oI the retouched tools
Irom Barc!n Hyk and those Irom Il!p!nar and Mentese are remarkable. The most notable
parallels are high-end scrapers (Fig. 5-4, 5; Fig. 4-1,4; Fig. 5-2-4,6) which include massive Ilakes
ranging between 15 to 24 mm and Ironts with irregularly shaped semi-circular retouches (Fig 3-
8; Fig. 4 2,7), macro-end scrapers (Fig 5-1), end scrapers on Ilakes (Fig. 4-8) and some
retouched Ilakes (Fig. 5-5) Table 3.
In addition to Il!p!nar and Mentese, the chipped stone assemblages oI Fikirtepe and Pendik
also show much overlap with that Irom Barc!n Hyk. Most striking is the parallelism with
semicircular and circular Ilat Ilake-end scrapers with some traces oI cortex on their dorsal sides
and ones that are totally covered by cortex. The correspondences between the high end scrapers
Irom these sites with those Irom the Barc!n Hyk Neolithic levels cannot be overlooked.
10
The analyses Irom Barc!n Hyk also include a Iew perIorators, single drill or alternated
perIorator (Fig. 5-7); a perIorator with a well shaped working part (Fig. 4-5); a Iragment oI an
atypical perIorator (Fig. 4-3) and a Iragment oI a perIorator with a notable marginal retouches on
its working edge (Fig 3-7). The Iirst three oI the above mentioned tools show parallels with the
Il!p!nar industry while the Iinal one is known Irom the Fikirtepe assemblage.
11
As with other categories, retouched blades, usually irregular blade specimens with partial
marginal retouches (Fig. 4-6) also show remarkable similarities with pieces Irom the earliest
levels oI Il!p!nar and Mentese.
The relatively high Irequency oI Iragmentized unretouched blades with polishing silica gloss
at both Barc!n and Il!p!nar is striking. It is very likely that these blades without secondary
modiIication were used as elements oI composite tools.
8
Gatsov, in press.
9
Gatsov-Nedelcheva 2007, Iig. 1-8; Gatsov, in press.
10
Gatsov-Nedelcheva, 2007, 7-20.
11
Gatsov, unpublished.
40
Overall, the main technological and typological Ieatures oI the Neolithic artiIacts Irom Barcin,
especially in terms oI core types, reduction techniques display strong similarities with those Irom
Il!p!nar, Mentese, Fikirtepe and Pendik. Most notable are the similar core types and reduction
techniques which show single platIorm blade cores with diligent preparation and blade/bladelet
oriented core reduction.
These assemblages are also characterized by uniIorm typological structures dominated by
end scrapers, retouched blades and perIorators, and a relatively large number oI retouched blades
with visible traces oI usage.
Obsidian Artifacts
Parallels with Il!p!nar, Mentese, Fikirtepe and Pendik are notable in the obsidian Irequencies
as well which are predominantly Iound in the Neolithic levels at Barc!n Hyk and Il!p!nar levels
X and IX. Among the obsidian artiIacts Irom Barc!n, the small, extremely narrow and thin blade
Iragments are connected with an advanced stage oI core reduction. To date, only one crested
specimen has been Iound. The presence oI two small retouched obsidian Ilakes (Fig. 3-2, 3) and
an end scraper (Fig. 3-6) are worth noting.
While some obsidian artiIacts Irom Barcin come Irom mixed Neolithic/Chalcolithic contexts,
given the high concentrations oI obsidian in Neolithic levels, it is very likely that these too belong
to the Neolithic Phase. UnIortunately, it is diIIicult to use typo-technological divisions to clariIy
this issue. Yet the lack oI obsidian Irom Chalcolithic and Early Bronze Age deposits may be
Iurther evidence strengthening the claim that the obsidian at Barc!n, Ior the most part dates to the
Neolithic Phase.
B. THE CHALCOLITHIC PERIOD
Graph 3. Chalcolithic period. Distribution oI technological groups by trenches.
P
e
r
c
e
n
t
70%
60%
50%
40%
30%
20%
10%
R
e
t
o
u
c
h
e
d

t
o
o
ls
B
la
d
e
s
F
la
k
e
s
D
e
b
r
is
C
r
e
s
t
e
d

s
p
e
c
im
e
n
s
t
r
e
n
c
h
e
s
M11
M10
C
o
r
t
ic
a
l
s
p
e
c
im
e
n
s
0%
L11
41
Retouched pieces, unretouched blade Iragments with silica gloss can be listed among the
artiIacts Irom this period. Very typical oI the Chalcolithic Period is an example oI the double end-
scraper on blade with slightly convex proIile and lateral cortex (Fig. 6-1), a blade end-scraper
with a rounded Iront (Fig. 6-3) and a Iragment oI a blade end-scraper (Fig. 6-4). Part oI a blade
with partial marginal retouches has also been recorded (Fig. 6-5). Moreover, a single tablet was
Iound among the artiIacts Iorm this period (Fig. 6-2). All oI the above-mentioned artiIacts are
typical oI Chalcolithic assemblages. Graph 3
C. THE EARLY BRONZE AGE
Graph 4. Early Bronze Age period. Distribution oI technological groups by trenches.
P
e
r
c
e
n
t
100%
80%
60%
40%
20%
Retouched tools
Blades
t
r
e
n
c
h
e
s
Debris
0%
M11
Only a Iew lithic artiIacts dating to this period have been recovered. Most typically, among the
artiIacts one Iinds denticulated blades, usually with denticulated retouch on one or both edges
(Fig. 7-1-6). As a rule the denticulated retouches are covered by traces oI polishing. This type oI
tool type is very common Ior all chipped stone assemblages belonging to the Early Bronze Age.
12
A single specimen oI blade truncation with denticulated retouch on the edges and polishing cannot
go without mention (Fig. 7-7). Graph 4
12
Gatsov-EIe 2005.
42
Conclusions
Overall, the Neolithic collection presented above probably dates to the end oI the seventh or
the very beginning oI the sixth millennium BC and chronologically and culturally corresponds to
the Mentese, Il!p!nar, Fikirtepe and Pendik techno-complex.
The assemblages Ior the other periods discussed are what one would typically expect Irom
these phases, i.e. blade tools Irom the Chalcolithic and denticulated tools Irom the Bronze Age.
BIBLIOGRAPHY
French 1967,
D. French, Prehistoric Sites in Northwest Anatolia: I. The Iznik Area. Anatolian Studies 17, (1967), 49-100.
Gatsov in print,
I. Gatsov, Chipped Stone Assemblages Irom the Prehistoric Site at Illpinar, South Marmara Region, Turkey. Part
I ( in print).
Gatsov unpublished,
I. Gatsov, Prehistorical chipped stone assemblages Irom Eastern Thrace and South Marmara region 7th and the
6th mill. B.C. (unpublished).
Gatsov-EIe 2005,
I. Gatsov - T. EIe, Some Observations on the EBII Chipped Stone ArtiIacts Irom Klloba (near Eskisehir) in
Inland Northwestern Anatolia. Anatolia Antiqua XIII, (2005), 111-118.
Gatsov-Nedelcheva 2007,
I. Gatsov - P. Nedelcheva, Chipped Stone Assemblages Irom Mentese and the Problem oI Earliest Occupation oI
South Marmara Region. (J. Kozlowski, M. Nowak), Mesolithic/Neolithic interactions in the Balkans and in the
Middle Danube Basin, OxIord, BAR International Series 1726, (2007), 7-20.
Karul 2007,
N. Karul, The 2006 Excavations at Aktopraklk (Paper presented at the 29
th
Annual Excavations Results
Symposium, Kocaeli), 28 May 2007.
Mellaart 1955,
J. Mellaart, Some Prehistoric Sites in North-Western Anatolia. Istanbuler Mitteilungen 6, (1955), 53-88.
zdoan 1986,
M. zdoan, 1984 Yl Trakya ve Dou Marmara Aratrmalar. Aratvrmala Sonularv Toplantvsv 3, (1986),
409-420.
Roodenberg 1995,
J. J. Roodenberg (ed.), The Il!p!nar Excavations I. Five Seasons of Fieldwork in NW Anatolia 1987-91. Leiden/
Istanbul, PIHANS 72, (1995).
Roodenberg 2000,
J. J. Roodenberg, Il!p!nar, an Early Farming Village in the znik Lake Basin. (M. zdoan, N. Basgelen), The
Neolithic of Turkev, Istanbul, (2000), 193-202.
Roodenberg-Alpaslan-Roodenberg 2008,
J. J. Roodenberg - S. Alpaslan-Roodenberg (eds), Life and Death in a Prehistoric Settlement in Northwest
Anatolia. The Il!p!nar Excavations III. With Contributions on Hacvlartepe and Mentee, Leiden/Istanbul, PIHANS
110, (2008).
Roodenberg-Thissen 2001,
J. J. Roodenberg - L. Thissen (eds), The Il!p!nar Excavations II, Leiden/Istanbul, PIHANS 93, (2001).
Roodenberg et alii 2003,
Roodenberg, J.J., A. van As, L. Jacobs and M.H. Wijnen 2003. Early Settlement in the Pain oI Yenisehir (NW
Anatolia): The Basal Occupational Layers at Mentese. Anatolica 29, (2003), 17-59.
43
Fig. 1. Barc!n Hyk in the Yenisehir Plain oI Northwest Anatolia.
Fig. 2. Plan oI Barc!n Hyk with the locations oI trenches excavated in 2007.
44
Fig. 3. 1- core Iragment; 2, 3 obsidian retouched Ilakes; 4, 5 high end-scrapers; 6- obsidian end scraper;
7- perIorator; 8- Iragment oI semicircular Ilat end scraper (1- L11, Loc.205, Lot 218; 2- L11- Loc.212, Lot
242 obsidian; 3 - L11 - Loc.212, Lot 243 - obsidian; 4- L11 - Loc.205, Lot 231; 5 - L11 - Loc.208, Lot 226;
6 - L11 - Loc.215, Lot 246 -obsidian; 7 - L11 - Loc.212, Lot 240; 8 - L11 - Loc-212, Lot - 240).
45
Fig. 4. 1, 4 - high end scraper; 2, 7 - semicircular end scraper; 3 atypical perIorator; 5-perIorator;
6 - retouched blade with silica gloss; 8-end scraper on Ilake. (1 -L11-Loc 205, Lot 218; 2, 4 - L11, Loc.205,
Lot 231; 3, 5 -L11, Loc.205, Lot 234 ; 6 - L11, Loc.205, Lot 202; 7, 8 - L11, Loc.201, Lot 202).
46
Fig. 5. 1- Iragment oI macro end scraper; 2 - 4, 6 - high end scrapers; 5 retouched Ilake; 7-alternated
perIorator (or drill). ( 1 - M10, Loc 63, Lot 234; 2- M10, Loc 63, Lot 241; 3- M10, Loc. 64, Lot 235; 4 -
M10 Loc 64 Lot 248; 5 - L11- Loc.205, Lot 212; 6 - M11, Loc.8, Lot 63; 7 -M10, Loc 64, Lot 244).
47
Fig. 6. 1 - double end scraper; 2 - tablet; 3- end scraper on blade; 4-Iragment oI retouched tool- end-
scraper; 5-retouched blade(1 - M10, Loc 64, Lot 235 ; 2 - M11, Loc 2, Lot 20; 3 - M10, Loc 56, Lot
223; 4- M11, Loc 2, Lot 22 ; 5 -L11, Loc 205, Lot 218 )
48
Fig. 7. 1-6- blade with denticulated retouches; 7- blade truncation (1, 2 - M11, Lot 28, Loc 5; 3 - M11,
Loc 2, Lot 3; 4 - M10, Loc 64, Lot 244; 5 -M11, Loc 5, Lot 31; 6 - M11, Loc.2, Lot 22; 7 - M11, Loc 2,
Lot 20 ).
49
QUESTIONS ABOUT NEOLITHIC CHRONOLOGY
IN EASTERN MACEDONIA AND THRACE, NORTHERN GREECE
Stratis Papadopoulos
*
Keywords: Paleolithic, Neolithic, Northern Greece, Aegean, chronologv, dating, 4
th
millenium, potterv
I. ABSTRACT
The scope oI this paper is twoIold: to evaluate recent data concerning the dating oI the
Neolithic era in Eastern Macedonia and Thrace, and to discuss the succession oI the archaeologi-
cal phases which are considered as being secure points oI reIerence. Our knowledge oI the
neolithisation` process is still an open issue in the early prehistory oI Northern Greece. The core
oI absolute values is estimated at the end oI the MN, namely the middle oI the 6
th
mill. BC. The
dates oI the Iirst phases in Sitagroi, Limenaria and Dikili Tash are earlier than those oI the MN
III in Thessaly and Bulgaria. The notable variety oI the painted wares oI the Drama basin appears
to be a novelty equivalent to the phase Tsangli in Thessaly. Towards the end oI the Neolithic era
the absence oI absolute values oI the 4
th
mill. BC has raised discussions attributing this Iact to the
stratigraphical hiatuses`. However, in Eastern Macedonia, the latest Neolithic layers in
Limenaria have given calibrated dates between 3969 and 3800 BC, supporting the existence oI
a Late Final Neolithic phase in the Northern Aegean. On the other hand, the excavation in Aghios
Ioannis brought in a series oI dates between 3600 and 3000 BC, a period which until now has not
been represented in absolute values anywhere south oI Rhodope.
II. INTRODUCTION THE END OF THE PLEISTOCENE
Our knowledge oI the Late Pleistocene and the transition` to the Holocene is an open issue
in the early prehistory oI Eastern Macedonia and Thrace, in Northern Greece. In the `80s, when
two survey projects - on Thassos Island and in the mountainous region oI the preIectures oI
Drama and Serres - provided the Iirst inIormation, the Paleolithic age was an obscure subject in
this area. Excavation in Tzines, on South Thassos, brought to light
1
ochre mines where extrac-
tion was conducted in horizontal underground tunnels, introducing a stage technologically more
advanced than the vertical tunnelling practiced in Europe during the Middle Paleolithic Age.
Typical species oI Pre-Neolithic Iauna, which are dated to a period when Thassos had not been
separated yet Irom the continent
2
, were traced in the site. The detection oI Saiga tatarica`, a
species that does not survive in Southern Europe aIter the end oI the Pleistocene
3
, has been con-
sidered to indicate that the mines were used beIore 10000 BC. Collagen oI a bone tool has oIIered
a calibrated date ca 20300 BP. A second date, around the middle oI the 7
th
mill. BC, will be dis-
cussed later
4
.
*
Faculty oI Classical Studies, Demokrition University oI Thrace, 18
th
Ephoreia oI Prehistoric and Classical Antiqui-
ties, Erythrou Stavrou 17 - 65110 Kavala, Grecee. strapapain.gr
1
Koukouli-Chrysanthaki et al. 1988, 241-244. Koukouli-Chryssanthaki and Weisgerber 1993, 541-558. Koukouli-
Chrysanthaki and Weisgerber 1997, 129-144.
2
Perissoratis et al. 1987, 209. Perissoratis and Mitropoulos 1989, 36. Perissoratis and Van Andel 1988, 53. KraIt
et al. 1982, 11.
3
Koukouli-Chryssanthaki and Weisgerber 1993, 550.
4
Ibid. 549-550.
50
A small number oI sites where possibly Pre-Neolithic chipped tool technology, based on ma-
terials broadly distributed in the Neolithic settlements oI Drama basin, were also used
5
, have
been recorded Irom the inland oI Eastern Macedonia. Archaeozoological studies were conducted
in the same area during the `60s
6
. The majority oI these sites were located in the mountainous
region oI Drama, in the basin oI Volakas and in the areas oI Chomatodexameni and Arkoudorema.
Related material has been collected Irom the Ioothills oI Northern Kerdylia
7
. Nevertheless, dat-
ing oI these Iinds in the Late Pleistocene is not very reliable and is, to a great degree, based on
Sickenberg`s timeworn observations about the Iaunal remains on the basin oI Volakas
8
.
The evidence which has been brought to light by the excavation at the Maara cave is even
more important
9
. It is the Iirst Middle Paleolithic site that has been located in Eastern Macedonia.
Although research was primarily Iocused on Iaunal remains, more secure inIormation was yielded
concerning the chipped tool industry oI Mousterian typology close to that known Irom Middle
Paleolithic sites such as Asprochaliko in Epirus and Theopetra in Thessaly. The Iirst absolute
dates
10
- dating the Iossilized stratum Irom which the bone remains oI mammals have derived -
are estimated a little aIter 30000 BP and oIIer a much more valid clue than the Iragile typologi-
cal relations among sites located Iar away
11
.
Paleolithic evidence Irom Western Thrace was not improved until 1990. Circumstantial reIer-
ences to the Paleolithic Iinds Irom Rizia, Pherae, and Keramos in the preIecture oI Evros and
Aghios Georgios oI Petrota in the preIecture oI Rhodope had been made in the works oI
Theocharis and Bakalakis without Iurther discussion
12
. Theocharis himselI had reluctantly Iaced
the challenge to introduce a local Mesolithic era based on the microlithic tradition oI Keramos.
Higgs, on the other hand, had mentioned a group oI sites in the area oI Pherae, which share a
blade type with a special retouch, a survey Iind that was never associated with pottery.
Stratigraphical evidence Ior the existence oI the Middle and Late Paleolithic Ages was indeed
Iound in Rizia. More sites oI the Middle Paleolithic were added by the Survey Program in the
region oI Krovyli-Petrota, in the 90s
13
. The discovery oI a Ilint quarry
14
, Irom which originated
the Mousterian` tools which were collected Irom a number oI sites near the river Makropotamos,
is truly oI special importance
15
.
Excavation at two caves in North-West Turkey, at the site oI Yarimburgaz
16
, has given evi-
dence oI the presence oI populations during the Paleolithic and Neolithic periods. Recent re-
search by the University oI Constantinople, near the shore oI Black Sea, in the sites oI Agacli,
Domali and Gumusdeve, has also signiIicantly enriched our knowledge concerning the Epi-
paleolithic material oI the 9
th
and 8
th
mill.
17
A stone industry oI blades and conical cores was
widespread and dominated in the Crimea and neighboring sites during that period, although it was
absent on the western shores oI the Black Sea and Danube. The reason that Turkish archaeologists
preIer to call this stone industry Epi-paleolithic, instead oI Pre-Neolithic, is that this phrasing
stresses both its descent Irom the Latest Paleolithic assemblages and its distinction Irom anything
we know concerning the stonework oI the Early Neolithic phases in the area oI Bosporus.
5
Kourtessi-Philippakis 1989a, 741.
6
Sickenberg 1967, 314-330. Sickenberg 1968, 33-54. KouIos 1981, 129-148.
7
Kourtessi-Philippakis 1989b, 55. Kourtessi-Philippakis 1990, 554.
8
Sickenberg, ibid.
9
Trandalidou 1989, 61-70. Trandalidou and Darlas 1992, 587-603. Trandalidou and Polydoropoulos 1998, 69-80.
10
The samples are measured with the technique oI phasmatoscopy (ESR)
11
For dates Irom the Maara Cave see Trandalidou and Polydoropoulos 1998, 75.
12
Theocharis 1971, 6-14. Bakalakis 1958.
13
EIstratiou 1992, 643-654.
14
EIstratiou 1998, 31-40.
15
EIstratiou 1993, 40.
16
Ozdogan and Koyunlu 1986, 15-17.
17
Ozdogan 1989, 202. Gatsov and Ozdogan 1994, 97-120.
51
III. THE BEGINNING OF THE HOLOCENE - THE EARLIEST NEOLITHIC PHASES
18
According to the evidence we have so Iar, the Neolithic economy with all its Ieatures already
in shape
19
, appears to be well established in Eastern Macedonia and Western Thrace in the 6th
mill. BC. Pre-pottery and Early Neolithic phases had been absent till now. For this reason, the
location oI Pre-Neolithic deposits with a microlithic stone industry on the border oI the settlement
in Macri, in the preIecture oI Evros, has rightly attracted much attention
20
. The Iact that Neolithic
layers are Iound in the same settlement under virgin` deposits brings up the question oI the
possible existence oI Early Neolithic layers which are covered by alluvial deposits in Northern
Greece
21
.
On the other hand, the discovery oI Pre-pottery Neolithic sites in Calca and Muslucesme, on
the southern shore oI the Marmaras Sea
22
adds an entirely new perspective to our understanding
oI the neolithisation process in the North-East Aegean. Early evidence shows various processes
oI adaptation in the Neolithic economy. In the sites oI Pendik and Fikir Tepe
23
, we can reIer to
the continuity oI local Epi-Paleolithic tradition with the incorporation oI Anatolian elements`.
In the case oI Hoca esme, even the idea oI colonization does not seem to be improbable. Al-
though these presumptions are mainly based on the changes in stone industries, diIIerences in
Early Neolithic societies concerning subjects such as livestock
24
and pottery
25
have been also
discussed.
The Early Neolithic period, as it has been traced in phases IX and VI in Ilipinar
26
, phase 5 at
Upper Cave oI Yarimburgaz
27
and also in Hoca esme and Asagininar layers
28
, is considered
contemporary to the Early Neolithic in the Balkans and Thessaly. This equivalence is, Iortunately,
not only supported by pottery typology but also by absolute dates in the second halI oI the 7
th
and
the Iirst halI oI the 6
th
mill.
29
A small number oI potsherds with red and white decoration Irom Toumba, in the preIecture oI
Serres
30
, were till recently considered the only material which could be attributed to the earliest
phases oI the Neolithic. Reappraisal oI this pottery ruled out the Iormer attribution to an Early
Neolithic phase
31
. Pottery in red and white is also reported in Makri I, the only phase which is
ascertained in Western Greece that may be dated beIore the end oI the MN. For the time being,
it has as a terminus antequem the radiocarbon values oI the layer that distinguishes Makri I Irom
Makri II
32
, namely around 5500 BC
33
.
In Eastern Macedonia, there are Iour dates Irom the second halI oI the 7
th
mill. BC. The earli-
est, around 6400 BC, which was mentioned above, is recorded Ior the hematite mines in Tzines
34
.
This value is considered as evidence that the exploitation oI the mines had not been interrupted
by the end oI Paleolithic. Besides, trenches near the entrance oI a mine have produced plenty oI
handmade pottery, whose chronological attribution has not been elucidated
35
. This Iind supports
the diachronic presence oI human activity on South-West Thassos concerned with a raw material,
ochre, which was signiIicant Ior the local population. The establishment oI the MN settlement at
18
I ought to thank Dr. Y. Maniatis, Director oI 14C Laboratory at N.C.S.R. Demokritos. In this article we use Cali-
brated Dates based on the Table oI Klein (67, CRD 1c B.C., HalI-liIe 5568 bp) in Ehrich 1992, 544-552. We in-
corporate in this debate the available dates Irom Eastern Macedonia not existing in Ehrich 1992, 210-211 and 349.
19
Treuil 1989, 129-144. Demoule 1993a, 1-5.
20
EIstratiou and Kallintzi 1996, 886.
21
EIstratiou and Kallintzi 1994, 17. Aslanis 1992, 226.
22
Ozdogan and Gatsov 1998, 214.
23
Ozdogan 1983, 409. Ozdogan 1995, 47.
24
Buitenhuis 1994, 141-144.
25
Ozdogan 1989, 203.
26
Roodenberg et al. 1989-90, 76.
27
Ozdogan and Koyunlu 1986, 15.
28
Ozdogan et al. 1997, 10.
29
Parzinger and Ozdogan 1996, 5-29
30
Grammenos - Fotiadis 1980, 20-23. Fotiadis 1985, 210.
31
Koukouli-Chryssanthaki 2007, 470.
32
Ourem-Kotsos and EIstratiou 1997, 620.
33
34
Koukouli-Chryssanthaki and Weisgerber 1993, 549.
35
Papadopoulos 2001, 157-194.
52
Limenaria in the same area is perhaps to be expected
36
. Aspects such as the Irequent occurrence
oI mineral bulks in the archaeological deposits oI the site are also explicable
37
.
Two other absolute values calibrated to the end oI the 7
th
mill., which are considered extremely
high, derive Irom Dimitra
38
, and there are also some dates close to 6000 Irom Limenaria
39
(Table
1). These dates are attributed to a phase that is called in Eastern Macedonia end oI the Middle
Neolithic`
40
or Middle Neolithic III`
41
. The above stage does not have common ground with the
MN in Thessaly; on the contrary, it reveals cultural aIIinity with the Larissa` phase, which is con-
sidered to be the earliest oI the Late Neolithic period in Thessaly. In the Northeastern Aegean,
this phase, which is represented by Sitagri I, Dimitra I, Limenaria I and Makri I, seems to cover
the interval Irom 5600/500 to 5300/200 BC, that is the MN III in Eastern Macedonia and Thrace,
and is nearly contemporary with the Iinal stage oI the MN in Thessaly. ThereIore, some oI the el-
ements oI the Larissa culture` emerge at least two centuries earlier than we had Iormerly be-
lieved. This Iact reminds us that there is a discussion about the spread oI these elements, as to
whether this expansion should be attributed to migration or to local development
42
.
Phase I in Sitagroi
43
, in section A, seems to cover a time span oI about three centuries. There
are two values between 431575 bc
44
and 4675170 bc, that could be ranged Irom 5700 to 5000
BC
45
, or between 5500 and 5200 BC, as has been suggested by the excavators
46
. In Dimitra,
phase I with two subphases, Ia and Ib, is considered to be equivalent chronologically to the
Sitagroi I phase and covers a span oI 200 years
47
. The paradox` is that both dates (747060 BP
and 718080 BP) come Irom Section II which is extended down to the natural soil and are cali-
brated at the end oI the 7
th
mill., and consequently are about halI a millennium earlier than the
conventional dates oI Sitagroi I. One inappropriate value Irom the earliest phase oI Sitagroi,
around 7800 BP, has been also considered by the laboratory oI Berlin as not worth Iurther discus-
sion, as the sample itselI was particularly limited
48
.
Some scholars recognize the earliness oI Sitagroi I in relation to the Larissa phase` and bring
into line the MN III in Eastern Macedonia with the phase Sesklo III in Thessaly
49
. Apart Irom the
excluded values Irom Dimitra, some dates in Limenaria and Dikili Tash are surely earlier than
these oI the MN in Bulgaria; that is the phases Karanovo II-III in Azmak, Ezero, Kazanluk,
Jasatepe and Karanovo itselI
50
. The dates Irom Eastern Macedonia appear to be compatible with
the calibrated ones oI the Early Neolithic in Azmak and Starazagora, although later than some oI
the same period in Cavdar
51
.
In Limenaria Iive subphases oI the MN last Irom 5850 to 5350 BC.
52
In Western Thrace, the
radiocarbon dates Irom Makri represent the point oI succession between the phases I and II. The
values that have been published up to now are identical and reIerred to an episode oI destruction
around 5450 BC. There are no absolute dates Irom Paradimi
53
and LaIrouda
54
. On the other hand,
the earliest phases in Mikro Vouni on the island oI Samothrace seem to belong in the middle oI
the 6
th
mill. BC
55
.
36
Papadopoulos 2005, 245.
37
38
The material Irom Dimitra has been proven to be doubtIul due to Iaulty sampling. The thermo-luminescence val-
ues are also unreliable (3166%320 B.C. and 1900%580 B.C). See: Grammenos 1997, 61-61, 266.
39
Maniatis and Fakorellis (Iorthcoming)
40
Aslanis 1992, 129.
41
Grammenos 1992, 91.
42
Jovanovic 1993, 63-74. Ozdogan 1993, 173-193.
43
RenIrew et al. 1986, 167.
44
BeIore calibration
45
Ehrich 1992, 210.
46
47
Grammenos 1997, 55.
48
49
Aslanis 1992, 265.
50
Boyadziev 1995, 181.
51
Ehrich 1992, vol. 2, 347.
52
Maniatis and Fakorelis (Iorthcoming).
53
Bakalakis and Sakkelariou 1981, 25.
54
Romiopoulou 1968, 461.
55
Matsas 1997.
53
The Ilipinar phase V and VI, equivalent to the MN Irom the Balkans, provides dates between
6650 BP and 6610 BP
56
, which are calibrated between 5650 and 5350 BC. It seems that the ex-
cavators recommend a lower chronology Ior the MN layers, so long as Iour phases oI EN are
compressed between 5900 and 5500 BC. In Yarimburgaze, phases 4 and 5 are considered to be
earlier than the MN in Northern Greece, since they are dated to the end oI the 7
th
mill. BC. Phase
3 gives dates much closer to those Irom Limenaria that are in the Iirst quarter oI the 6
th
mill. BC
57
.
The excavation in Hoca Cesme
58
provided dates oI three phases earlier than the MN period, par-
ticularly between 6500 and 5500 BC, while the MN phases Iollow. This rather low chronologi-
cal Iramework is just as present in Ilipinar as it is in Hoca Cesme. Besides, it is consistent with
the values we recognize so Iar Ior phases 2 and 3 in Toptepe, which are considered to be equiva-
lent to Vinca A-C and date Irom 5540 to 5000 BC
59
.
IJ. THE LATE AND FINAL NEOLITHIC AND THE EMBARRASSMENT OF THE 4
TH
MILL.
Sitagroi II sometimes diverges and sometimes converges with Sitagroi I, depending on the
researcher`s preIerence. The notable variety oI the painted pottery wares oI phase II appears to
be a novelty
60
equivalent to the Tsangli phase in Thessaly
61
. This pottery is absent Irom the Iirst
1,5m oI the deposit in Sitagroi, namely phase I
62
, and Irom 2,5m oI the deposit in the Iirst phase
at Limenaria
63
. It is also absent in sites oI Western Thrace, such as Paradimi and Makri. The
adoption oI these painted wares marks the beginning oI the Late Neolithic I in Eastern
Macedonia
64
.
This is another point where certain dating questions arise. In phase II in Sitagroi the absolute
dates support a duration oI 600 years that is Irom 5200 to 4700 BC.
65
Phase I in Dikili Tash
66
corresponds to a deposit oI 3,50m in Section II but oI 5m in Section I
67
. For this phase the pro-
posed span is about one millennium, Irom 6000 to 5000 BC, although the excavators suggest a
much shorter period, that is Irom 5450 to 5000 BC. The latter has been preIerred as it is compat-
ible with the values Irom Sitagroi and South Bulgaria
68
, but recent measurement by the thermolu-
minescence method has given early dates as well
69
.
With the evidence oI absolute dating, Dikili Tash I appears to be earlier than Sitagroi II, and
thus contemporary with the end oI the MN in Sitagroi and Limenaria. This probability would
mean, thereIore, that several painted pottery wares had already been produced in Dikili Tash a
Iew centuries beIore they appeared in Sitagroi, and this is something that archeological percep-
tion has diIIiculty in accepting without reservation. Consequently the idea oI excluding these
dates is considered to be the most preIerable. This necessary equivalence` in the case oI Dikili
Tash I, has to Iace up to two diIIiculties. The absolute dates which can be placed in the Iirst halI
oI the 6
th
mill. are more than three, and derive Irom the layers Ib and Ic which are not Irom the
earliest layers oI the LN I. On the other hand, the end oI this phase appears to derive Irom ear-
lier than phase II in Sitagroi by about 300 years. In Promahonas/Topolnitsa, phases II and III can
be placed at the end oI the 6
th
mill., since they have produced C14 dates between 5200 and 5000
BC
70
.
56
57
Ozdogan et al. 1991, 69-74.
58
Ozdogan et al. 1991, 81. Ozdogan 1993, 183-186.
59
Ozdogan and Dede 1990, 22-23. Ozdogan et al. 1991, 75-79.
60
Koukouli-Chryssanthaki 1996, 112.
61
Demoule et al. 1988, 50. Schneider et al. 1991, 26-32. Schneider et al. 1994, 67.
62
Keighley 1986, 345-392.
63
Papadopoulos and Malamidou 2008, 430.
64
Papadopoulos 2002, 221. Tsirtsoni 2000, 1-55.
65
Ehrich 1992, 210-211.
66
Treuil 1992, 21.
67
Koukouli-Chryssanthaki et al. 1996, 686.
68
Treuil 1992, 34.
69
R.Treuil : oral communication.
70
Boyadziev 1993, 91-96.
54
Although the beginning oI the LN period in Eastern Macedonia may be earlier than in
Thessaly, it is generally considered to be contemporary to the Larissa and Tsangli phases. Con-
sequently the later phases oI the LN are considered to be simultaneous to the phases Arapi and
Dimini I-II. Using strictly typological criteria, not only Dikili Tash I, but also the common hori-
zon Sitagri I, Dimitra I, Limenaria I, Paradimi I-II and Makri I-II should have been incorporated
in the NN I according to the Thessalian chronology`; so that the term Middle Neolithic` could
have been excluded Ior both Eastern Macedonia and Western Thrace.
At the beginning oI the 5
th
mill., Sitagroi III, Dikili Tash II
71
and Limenaria II succeed the
previous phases in Eastern Macedonia, and Late Dimini appears in Thessaly. In both areas
signiIicant painted and incised pottery traditions prevail, while the dark undecorated pottery
continues in Thrace
72
. Phase III in Sitagroi is considered to span more or less 1500 years, Irom
4800 to 3300 BC, although RenIrew had tried to control this broad time period by initiating the
LN II at 4600 BC - instead oI 4800 - and the Early Bronze Age at 3500 instead oI 3300 BC
73
.
Phase II in Dikili Tash, being LN II as well, although being represented by much thicker de-
posits than those in Sitagroi
74
, covers a span oI 700 years, namely Irom 4700 to 4000 BC
75
. These
radiocarbon dates seem to be conIirmed by a series oI thermoluminescence values, between 4500
and 4000 BC. In section VI, excavation research in the `90s has oIIered Iour LN buildings under
the layers oI the EBA
76
; these structures also do not seem to survive aIter 4000 BC.
The inconsistency` is the absence oI Black-on-Red pottery in this cluster oI buildings. This
popular pottery ware is widespread in Eastern Macedonia during the 5
th
mill., keeping step with
the pottery decorated on graphite
77
. The latter is well represented in the buildings mentioned
above. According to the excavators` view, the Black-on-Red pottery ends earlier than that oI the
graphite. However, it would be rather excessive to exclude the Black-on-Red pottery Irom the
second halI oI the 5
th
mill., since it is well represented in Sitagroi and Kryoneri during the same
period, even in its latest sub-phase
78
. Facing the issue oI the presence or absence oI Black-on-Red
pottery in Eastern Macedonia, as an index oI inter-communal behavior and not only as a strictly
chronological tool, might help to understand better its geographical distribution
79
.
According to the approach oI some archaeologists, reIerence to the hiatuses` in stratigraphy,
which is considered as evidence Ior the abandonment oI the site, could solve these irregularities
and restore certain typological sequences
80
. However, this attitude is in Iact weak in providing
serious criteria in order to interpret a hiatus in the sequence oI the layers oI a settlement. On the
other other hand it is not explicable why such a hiatus needs to be identiIied in destruction lay-
ers which could be associated with various accidental or planned events in the process oI a site.
The widely discussed hiatus between phases III and IV in Sitagroi is equivalent to a thin layer
oI carbonized material between horizons 32 and 31 in trench ZA. These layers are habitually ac-
companied by dispersed construction material, which is typical oI destruction deposit and may
relate to one building, a complex oI structures, or the entire settlement. Even in the last case, it
is not easy to understand why such a layer should entail the abandonment oI the site. In Sitagroi,
Sherratt has proposed hiatuses as tools to clariIy the absence oI some pottery categories
81
, while
RenIrew has not acceded to them as obstacles to the development oI the site
82
. In Makri excava-
tion has revealed the presence oI a destruction layer that seems to mark the end oI the Iirst
phase
83
. Although this layer is located in many spots on the site, it is not considered as an evi-
dence Ior the abandonment oI the settlement.
71
SeIeriades 1983, 635. Id. 1989, 277.
72
Papadopoulos 2004, 25. Yiouni 2001, 1-25.
73
74
Treuil 1992, 26.
75
The excavators propose a time span oI just two centuries, Irom 4230 to 4043 BC.: Ch.Koukouli-Chryssanthaki
1996a, 694.
76
Koukouli-Chryssanthaki et al. 1996a, 690, 693.
77
Malamidou 2005, Tsirtsoni et al. 2005.
78
Evans 1986, 400.
79
80
Aslanis 1989, 140. Todorova 1995, 90.
81
Sherratt 1986, 441.
82
83
55
Whereas the chronological issues above which are still in abeyance, do not appear to restrict
the constant discussions parcelling out the Neolithic era
84
, the rarity oI radiocarbon dates in the
4th mill. has given rise to various discussions
85
. This is a topic widely discussed not only in re-
lation to Eastern Macedonia and Western Thrace, but also to other parts oI Northern Greece
86
,
and even the broader Balkan areas
87
.
The character oI the FN period and a Transitional phase which is intermediate between the FN
and the Early Bronze Age has been discussed by Johnson, in an attempt to evaluate as a whole the
available evidence Irom the Aegean and the Southern Balkans. The primary reIerence point oI his
approach is the chronological association oI the Thessalian Chalcolithic era, particularly the
Rachmani` phase, with the FN and the beginning oI the Early Helladic period in South Greek
88
.
The absolute dates Irom PeIkakia along with some dates Irom Tharrounia in Euvoia
89
and Zas
Cave in Naxos
90
have raised this chronological discussion again. Phelps has deIined the FN in
Southern Greece based on the pottery wares
91
in a largely diIIerent way than RenIrew had done
several years earlier. Crusted wares along with pattern-burnished pottery have been considered as
the typical Ieature oI the early phases oI this period; bowls oI the Kum Tepe type have been con-
sidered as the typical Ieature oI the late phases. In the South-East Balkans, during the middle oI
the 5
th
mill., the widespread graphite pottery passes the torch to the crusted tradition, which seems
to prevail in the majority oI the sites on the Greek mainland
92
.
As the calibrated radiocarbon dates Irom PeIkakia Iit in with the middle oI the 5
th
mill. BC, that
is to say more than a millennium beIore the beginning oI the EH I period, it has been suggested that
the PeIkakia Iinds may represent only an early part oI the Chalcolithic ages in Thessaly and that the
Rachmani period as a whole may correspond to the southern Greek FN, a view that had already been
mentioned by some scholars too
93
. Phelps has also reIerred to possible errors in radiocarbon meth-
ods
94
, and has mentioned that long-lived samples represent earlier dates than the actual material
context, while short-lived samples may reIlect more precisely the true dating.
Johnson turns our attention to the Iact that absolute dates between 3800 and 3300 BP are very
rare in the Eastern Balkans and Greece, although this issue does not aIIect the North-West
Balkans, where layers oI the Boleraz and Classic Baden phases have provided values oI the 4
th
mill. This Iact makes him wonder whether this radiocarbon hiatus` reIlects problems oI the C14
technique or a real episode oI depopulation oI the Neolithic settlements. He concludes thus with
evidence that the FN lasted Irom 4500 to 3700 BC, while a Transitional phase till the beginning
oI the EBA ranged Irom 3700 to 3300 BC
95
.
Till recently, the only value Irom Eastern Macedonia, which had been estimated in the 4
th
mill., had come Irom phase III in Sitagroi. It is dated between 3960 and 3780 BC, and does not
actually derive Irom the latest Neolithic layers oI the site. We could add to this seven radiocar-
bon dates Irom phase IV in the same site, which may be calibrated a little aIter 3500 BC, one
value Irom the phase IIIA in Dikili Tash
96
, estimated between 3935 and 3660 BC, one Irom the
site oI Promachonas/Topolnitsa, estimated between 3880 and 3670 BC
97
, one Irom the site oI
Kryoneri
98
, and two values Irom the site oI Paradeisos
99
; the Iirst is dated between 4100 and 3895
BC and the second one between 3885 and 3760 BC.
84
85
Warren and Hankey 1989, 11, Boyadziev 1995, 173. Manning 1995, 94.
86
Kotsakis et al. 1989, 679. Maniatis and Kromer 1990, 149. Kalogirou 1994, 179.
87
88
Johnson 1999, 319.
89
Sampson 1993, 35.
90
Zachos 1996, 86.
91
Phelps, 1975.
92
Johnson 1999, 321. Johnson himselI makes the point that one needs to be extremely cautious when typological
parallels are used between isolated regions as strong evidence Ior comparison. It is not valid to try to date typologi-
cal characteristics within strict terms oI absolute chronology.
93
Andreou et al. 1996, 537-597.
94
Manning 1995, 94.
95
Johnson 1999, 330-333.
96
Treuil 1992, 33. Ehrich 1992, 213.
97
98
Unpublished, maybe estimated in the Iirst century oI the 4
th
mill. See Malamidou 2007, 301.
99
Hellstrom 1987, 135.
56
Recent excavation in the FN layers in Limenaria has given one more date calibrated to the Iirst
halI oI the 4
th
mill., speciIically between 3969 and 3800 BC.
100
The latter derives Irom a storage
pit and is accompanied by pottery which has been suggested as being dated, using typological
criteria as well, to the beginning oI the 4
th
mill.
101
: open biconical bowls having the lower part
covered with a purple coat and an upper one decorated with crusted whitish, yellow and pink
paint or with plain straight graphite motiIs (Fig. 1). Considering the dating evidence Irom the LN
layers oI Sitagroi and Dikili Tash in connection with their pottery material, one should accept that
we are rather ignorant oI the pottery wares that were used during the Iirst halI oI this millennium
in Eastern Macedonia. Final Neolithic pottery Irom Limenaria
102
(Fig. 2), which has been exam-
ined along with a group oI FN sherds Irom the site oI Kastri on the Thassos island
103
, come to
cover this lack, Iorcing us to accept the existence oI a FN phase in Northern Greece
104
. Recently,
a small number oI dates calibrated to the second halI oI the 4
th
mill., between 3340 and 3000 BC.,
have been provided Irom a cave that has been excavated in the preIecture oI Serres, at the site
Katarraktes Sidirokastrou`.
The radiocarbon dates oI the 4
th
mill. Irom Eastern Macedonia, though Iew, clariIy that the
missing link` is not this millennium as a whole, but a shorter time span between 3700 and 3300
BC. The rareness oI C14 samples which are dated around 3500 BC is observed even in the
broader area oI the Balkans and Western Anatolia, although dates oI the 4
th
mill. are not lacking.
A signiIicant number oI such dates, known Irom Bulgaria
105
have been provided either Irom the
Transition period or the Iirst phases oI the EBA. The earliest oI them derive Irom Orcharovo,
Hotnitsa, Yagodina and Haramijska Dupka, but in Iact there are no values later than 3700 BC. On
the other hand, over twenty dates oI the EBA period in Ezero are calibrated between 3350 and
3000 BC
106
.
Radiocarbon dates oI the Iirst halI oI the 4
th
mill. Irom North-West Turkey and Western
Anatolia are also known. Some oI them are estimated at the problematic time span between 3700
and 3400 BC. Dates Irom Demirchoyuk are calibrated between 3750 and 3420 BC, and dates
Irom the Late Chalcolithic layers in Ilipinar
107
are estimated around 3700 BC just a little beIore
the beginning oI the EBA
108
. These phases came to cover eIIectively the hiatus` between the
beginning oI the EBA, that is, Kumtepe Ib and Troia I, and the preceding Toptepe I/ Kumtepe Ia/
Besiktepe group
109
. In the broader area oI Anatolia, dates which are calibrated in the 4
th
mill., are
oIIered Irom more than a Iew sites: AIrodisias, Beycesultan, Tepecik Kurucan, Arslantepe
110
. On
the other hand, South Greece as Iar as its chronological picture is concerned, diIIers signiIicantly
Irom the Balkans and Anatolia. This area does not oIIer absolute dates apart Irom those Irom
Kephala
111
, Skoteini Cave
112
, Eutresis, Pyrgos and Vouliagmeni
113
.
During the last decade, the excavation project in Aghios Ioannis, on Southern Thassos
114
, has
brought to light an unexpected series oI dates which have been estimated at the second halI oI the
4
th
mill. BC
115
. The dates have been derived Irom a coastal transitional settlement, probably ori-
ented to Iishing and hunting. The pottery oI the site includes undecorated bowls, cooking pots and
egg-shaped jars decorated in relieI. Such vessels are spread out in a broad geographical area -
ranging Irom Kephala and Athenian Agora to the territory` oI the Bodrogkeresztur, Cernavoda I
and Salcutsa III cultures - during the FN/Transitional phase. But another pottery tradition coex-
ists. Its commonest ware is that oI vases decorated with a series oI cavities or impressions under
the rim or on the belly. Shallow channelling on the body, oIten combined with cavities, is present
100
Maniatis and Fakorelis (Iorthcoming)
101
Malamidou and Papadopoulos 1997, 585. Maniatis and Fakorelis (Iorthcoming)
102
103
Demoule, 1993b, 380.
104
Johnson 1999, 319.
105
Boyadziev 1995, 184 -185.
106
Ibid, 186.
107
Ozdogan 1989, 202.
108
109
Ozdogan and Dede 1990, 22-23. Ozdogan et al. 1991, 75-79.
110
Ehrich 1992, 176.
111
Coleman 1977, 110
112
Sampson 1993, 285.
113
Sampson 1993, 212.
57
as well. Conical bowls have a well- burnished surIace and are decorated with channelled patterns
oI groups oI semicircles under the rim. These elements are dated to the earliest phases oI the EBA
in North Aegean and Northern Greece
116
.
The absolute values Irom Aghios Ioannis date the site to the second halI oI the 4
th
mill. (Table
2), speciIically between 3600 and 3000 BC. What is worth noting however, in regard to the sig-
niIicant number oI absolute values which are available now Irom Thassos, is that such dates can
now be expected. We also need to carry out cautiously any discussion oI dramatic reduction oI
population or abandonment oI settlements, reckoning on the likelihood oI surprises that may
emerge Irom Iuture archaeological research.
BIBLIOGRAPHY
Ammerrman et alii 1999,
Ammerrman A.J., EIstratiou N. and Adam E., First evidence for the palaeolithic in Aegean Thrace. G.N.Bailey,
E.Adam, E.Panagopoulou, C.Perles and K.Zachos (eds) The palaeolithic archaeologv of Greece and the adfacent ar-
eas, Proceedings of the ICOPAG Conference, Ioannina, (1994). BSA Studies 3, 1999, 211-214.
Andreou et alii 1996,
Andreou S., Fotiadis M. and Kotsakis K., Review oI Aegean Prehistory V: The Neolithic and Bronze Age oI
Northern Greece, AJA 100, (1996), 537-597.
Andreou et alii 2001,
Andreou S., Fotiadis M. and Kotsakis K., Review of Aegean Prehistorv J. The Neolithic and Bron:e Age of North-
ern Greece. T.Cullen (ed) Aegean Prehistory: A review, AJA Suppl. I, (2001), 259-327.
Aslanis 1989,
Aslanis, I. H Xukoi0ikq acpiooo oto Bopciocuoiko epo. Hpoqutu uvuvepioq kui oiupkciu`,
Ancient Macedonia V, 1, Institute Ior Balkan Studies, Thessaloniki, (1989).
Aslanis 1992,
Aslanis, I., H Hpootopiu tq Mukcooviu: I. H Ncoi0ikq Eaoq, KEPA/Kupouitou, A0qvu, (1992).
Bakalakis 1958,
Bakalakis, G., Hpouvuokuikc cpcuvc otq Opukq, Ocoouovikq, (1958).
Bakalakis - Sakkelariou 1981,
Bakalakis, G. and Sakkelariou A., Paradimi, Verlag Ph. Von Zabern, Mainz am Rhein, (1981).
Boyadziev 1993,
Boyadziev Y.D., Absolute chronologie der Kultur AkropotamosTopolnitsa. V.Nikolov (ed), Prahistorische Funde
und Forschungen. Festschrift :um Gedenken an Prof.G.I.Georgiev, SoIia: Archaologisches Institut mit Museum -
Abteilung Vorgeschichte, (1993), 91-96.
Boyadziev 1995,
Boyadziev Y.D., Chronology oI prehistoric cultures in Bulgaria. D.W.Bailey and I.Panayotov (eds), Prehistoric
Bulgaria. Monographs in World Archaeology 22. Madison Wisconsin: Prehistory Press, (1995), 149-192.
Buitenhuis 1994,
Buitenhuis H., Note on archaeozoological research around the sea oI Marmara. Anatolica XX, (1994), 141-144.
Coleman 1997,
Coleman J.E. Keos I. Kephala. A Late Neolithic Settlement and Cemeterv, Princeton, New Jersey: Amer. School
oI Classical Studies, (1977).
Darcque et alii 2007,
Darcque P., Koukouli-Chryssanthaki Ch., Malamidou D., Treuil R. and Tsirtsoni Z.
Recent Researches at the Neolithic Settlement oI Dikili Tash, Eastern Macedonia, Greece: an Overview.
H.Todorova, M.SteIanovich and G.Ivanov (eds) Proceedings of the International Svmposium Strvmon
Praehistoricus, 27/9-1/10/2004, Gerda Henkel StiItung, SoIia, (2007), 247-256.
114
Papadopoulos et al. 2003, 55. Koukouli-Chryssanthaki and Papadopoulos (Iorthcoming)
115
Maniatis and Papadopoulos 2004.
116
Johnson 1999, 319-336. Sherratt 1986, 429-476.
58
Demoule 1993a,
Demoule J-P., Anatolie et Balkans: La logique evolutive du Neolithique Egeen. J.Roodenberg (ed), Anatolia and
the Balkans, Anatolica XIX, (1993), 1-17.
Demoule 1993b,
Demoule J-P. Neolithique et Chalcolithique de Macedoine: Un etat des questions, Apuiu Mukcooviu V, 1, Insti-
tute Ior Balkan Studies, Thessaloniki, (1993), 373-389.
Demoule 1994,
Demoule J-P., Problemes chrono-culturels du Neolithique de Grece du Nord. Ocoouiu. Ackuacvtc poviu
upuiooikq cpcuvu, 1975-1990. Aaotccoutu kui Hpooatikc, vol. A, YHHO, A0qvu, (1994), 79-90.
Demoule et alii 1988,
Demoule J-P., Gallis K. and Manolakakis L., Transition entre les cultures neolithiques de Sesklo et de Dimini: Les
categories ceramiques. BCH 112. I, (1988), 1-58.
EIstratiou 1992,
EIstratiou N., Hpovcoi0iku cupqutu uao tqv uiuiukq Opukq` AEMTh 6, (1992), 643-654.
EIstratiou 1993,
EIstratiou N., New prehistoric Iinds Irom Western Thrace, Greece. J.Roodenberg (ed), Anatolia and the Balkans,
Anatolica XIX, (1993), 36-40.
EIstratiou and Fotiadis 1999,
EIstratiou N. Fotiadis M., H 1pcuvu oc cvu apootopiko utocio aupitoi0ou otq Opukq. Tu apetu
uaotccoutu`, AEMTh 12 (1998), 31-40.
EIstratiou and Kallintzi 1994,
EIstratiou N. - Kallintzi N., Mukpq. Apuiooikc 1pcuvc 1988-1993. Vanias, Thessaloniki, (1994).
EIstratiou and Kallintzi 1997,
EIstratiou N. - Kallintzi N., Apuiooikc 1pcuvc otq Mukpq 1pou. Ektiqoci kui apoqutu`, AEMTh
10B, (1996), 882-916.
Ehrich 1992,
Ehrich R.W. (ed.), Chronologies in Old World Archaeologv. Chicago University, Vol.2, (1992).
Evans 1986,
Evans R., The Pottery oI Phase III. C.RenIrew, M.Gimbutas and E.Elster (eds) Excavations at Sitagroi. A
prehistoric village in Northeast Greece, vol. 1. Monumenta Archaeologica 13, Los Angeles, (1986).
Fotiadis 1985,
Fotiadis M., Economv, ecologv and settlement among subsistence farmers in the Serres basin, Northeastern
Greece. 5000-1000 B.C., Ph.D.Diss. University oI CaliIornia, Ann Arbor: Univ. MicroIilms International, (1985).
Gatsov and Ozdogan 1994,
Gatsov I.-Ozdogan M., Some Epi-paleolithic sites Irom NW Turkey. Agacli, Domali and Gumusdere. Anatolica
XX , 1994, 97-120.
Grammenos and Fotiadis 1980,
Grammenos D.- Fotiadis M., Aao tou apootopikou oikioou tq Avutoikq Mukcooviu`, Av0peaooiku
1, (1980), 20-23.
Grammenos 1991,
Grammenos D., Ncoi0ikc cpcuvc otqv Kcvtpikq kui Avutoikq Mukcooviu, Apuiooikq Etuipciu up. 117,
Athens, (1991).
Grammenos 1997,
Grammenos D., Ncoi0ikq Mukcooviu. Aqooicuutu tou Apuiooikou Actiou, up. 56, 1997.
Johnson 1999,
Johnson M., Chronology oI Greece and South-East Europe in the Final Neolithic and Early Bronze Age. PPS 65,
(1999), 319-336.
Jovanovic 1993,
Jovanovic B., Vinca and Larisa cultures: Migration or autochthone development. J.Roodenberg (ed) Anatolia and
the Balkans, Anatolica XIX, (1993), 63-74.
59
Hellstrom 1987,
Hellstrom P. (ed), Paradeisos, A Late Neolithic Settlement in Aegean Thrace, Medelhavsmuseet, Memoir n.7,
Stockholm, (1987).
Kalogirou 1994,
Kalogirou A., Production and consumption of potterv in Kitrini Limni, West Macedonia, Greece, 4500 B.C.-3500
B.C., Ph.D. Diss. Indiana University, Ann Arbor: University MicroIilms International, (1994).
Keighley 1986,
Keighley J.M. The Pottery oI Phases I and II. C.RenIrew, M.Gimbutas and E.Elster (eds), Excavations at Sitagroi.
A prehistoric village in Northeast Greece, vol. 1, Monumenta Archaeologica 13. Los Angeles, (1986), 345-392.
Kotsakis et alii 1989,
Kotsakis K., PapaeIthymiou-Papanthimou A., Pilali-Papasteriou A. and Savopoulou Th., Carbon-14 dates Irom
Mandalo, West Macedonia. Y.Maniatis (ed), Archaeometrv. Proceedings of the 25th International Svmposium.
Amsterdam: Elsevier, (1989), 679-685.
KouIos 1981,
KouIos G., A new Late Pleistocene (Wurmian) Mammal Locality Irom the basin oI Drama (Nothern Greece).
Eaiotqovikq Eactqpi 4uoikev kui Mu0qutikev Laouoev Huvcaiotqiou Ocoouovikq 21, (1981), 129-148.
Koukouli-Chryssanthaki 1996,
Koukouli-Chryssanthaki Ch., Kcpuikq: Mukcooviu-Opukq`, oto I.A.Huau0uvuooaouo (cai), Ncoi0iko
Hoitioo otqv Euou, Mouocio Kukuoikq Tcvq - 1opuu N.H.Iouuvopq, A0qvu, (1996), 112-117.
Koukouli-Chrysanthaki 2007,
Koukouli-Chrysanthaki Ch., The Neolithic and Bronze Age oI Eastern Macedonia: A review oI the recent archaeo-
logical research. Homage to Milutin Garaanin, (2007), 469-487.
Koukouli-Chrysanthaki et alii. 1988,
Koukouli-Chrysanthaki, Ch., Weisgerber G., Gialoglou G. and Vavelidis M. 1988, Prhistorischer und junger
Bergbau auI Eisenpigmente auI Thasos. G.A.Wagner and G.Weisgerber (eds), Antike Edel- und Buntmetall-gewinnung
auf Thasos, Der Anschnitt 6, (1988), 241-244.
Koukouli-Chryssanthaki et alii 1996a,
Koukouli-Chryssanthaki Ch., Treuil R. and Malamidou D., Hpootopiko Oikioo 4iiaaev Ntikii Tu`.
Acku poviu uvuokuikq cpcuvu`, AEMTh 10B, (1997), 681-704.
Koukouli-Chryssanthaki et alii 1996b ,
Koukouli-Chryssanthaki, Ch., Todorova H., Aslanis Y., Boyadziev J., Konstandopoulou F, Vajsov I. and Valla M.,
Hpouevu-Topolnica: Ncoi0iko oikioo cqvoouupikev ouvopev`, AEMth 10B, (1996b), 745-767.
Koukouli-Chryssanthaki et alii 2004,
Koukouli-Chryssanthaki Ch., Aslanis Y. and Valla M., Hpouevu-Topolnitsa`, AEMth 14 (2000), 2002, 87-98,
AEMth 15 (2001), 2003, 75-82, AEMth 17 (2003), 2004, 91-110.
Koukouli-Chryssanthaki and Papadopoulos (Iorthcoming),
Koukouli Ch. and Papadopoulos S., The island oI Thassos and the Aegean World, ASMOSIA VII ConIerence,
Thassos 15-20/8, (2003), Bulletin de Correspondence Hellenique Suppl. 51 (Iorthcoming).
Koukouli-Chryssanthaki and Weisgerber 1993,
Koukouli-Chryssanthaki Ch. Weisgerber G., Hpootopiku Opuciu Opu otq Ouoo`, AEMTh 7 (1993),
(1997), 541-558.
Koukouli-Chryssanthaki and Weisgerber 1997,
Koukouli-Chrysanthaki Ch. - Weisgerber G., Ochre Mines on Thasos. Ch.Koukouli-Chryssanthaki, A.Muller and
S.Papadopoulos (eds), Thasos. Matieres Premieres et Techonologie de la prehistoire a nos fours, 18
th
EPCA-EFA,
(1997), 129-144.
Kourtessi-Philippakis 1989a,
Kourtessi-Philippakis G., Hpootopikc i0otcvic uao tqv Avutoikq Mukcooviu. To aupuociu tq
Aqqtpu`, Apuiu Mukcooviu V, vol. 1, Institute Ior Balkan Studies 240, (1993), 737-752.
Kourtessi-Philippakis 1989b,
Kourtessi-Philippakis G., Ncu apootopiku cupqutu uao tqv acpioq tq Apuu` H Apuu kui q acpioq tq:
Iotopiu kui Hoitioo, Apuu-24/25-11- 1989, Aqo Apuu, (1992), 51-65.
60
Kourtessi-Philippakis 1990,
Kourtessi-Philippakis G., H oicpcuvqoq tq Huuioi0ikq kutoikqoq otqv Avutoikq Mukcooviu:
Hpokutupktikq ck0coq 1989-1990`, AEMTh 4 (1990), 1993, 553-559.
KraIt et alii 1982,
KraIt J.C, Kayan I. and Erol O., Geology and paleographic reconstructions oI the vicinity oI Troy. G.Rapp and
J.A.GiIIord (eds), Troy. The Archaeological Geologv. Suppl. Monogr., 4, Cincinati, (1982), 11-41.
Malamidou 1996,
Malamidou D., Lhabitat et larchitecture du Neolithique Moven en Macedoine Orientale. Le cas de Limenaria
(Thasos), Memoire de DEA-Universit& de Paris I, (1996).
Malamidou 2005,
Malamidou D., La ceramique a decor peint noir sur rouge du Neolithique Recent II en Grece du Nord. produc-
tion, distribution et utilisation, Ph.D., Universite Paris I, Pantheon-Sorbonne, (2005).
Malamidou 2007,
Malamidou D., Kryoneri: a Neolithic and Early Bronze Age Settlement in the Lower Strymon Valley. H.Todorova,
M.SteIanovich and G.Ivanov (eds) Proceedings of the International Svmposium Strvmon Praehistoricus, 27/9-1/10/
2004, Gerda Henkel StiItung, SoIia, (2007), 297-308.
Malamidou and Papadopoulos 1997,
Malamidou D. Papadopoulos S., Hpootopiko oikioo Aicvupiev: H Hpeiq Eaoq tou Xukou`, AEMTh
11 (1997), 1999, 585-596.
Maniatis and Fakorellis (Iorthcoming),
Maniatis Y. Fakorelis G., H povooqoq tev uocev tou oikioou tev Aicvupiev Ouoou c uv0puku 14`,
oto L.Huauooaouo kui A.Muuioou (cai) Acku Xpoviu Avuokuikq 1pcuvu otov Hpootopiko Oikioo
Aicvupiev Ouoou, 11-7, (2003), Ouoo, YHHO-IH` EHKA (Iorthcoming).
Maniatis and Kromer 1990,
Maniatis Y. Kromer B., Radiocarbon Dating oI the Neolithic - Early Bronze Age Site oI Mandalo, West
Macedonia. Radiocarbon 32, (1990), 2, 149-153.
Maniatis and Papadopoulos 2004,
Maniatis Y. Papadopoulos S., Is Thassos an exception to abandonment oI sites in the 4
th
mill. BC in North
Greece? The case oI Aghios Ioannis. 34th International Symposium on Archaeometry, 2-7 May 2004, Zaragoza, Spain
(poster).
Manning 1995,
Manning S.W., The Absolute Chronology oI the Aegean Early Bronze Age: Archaeology, Radiocarbon and His-
tory. Monographs in Mediterranean Archaeologv 1. SheIIield Academic Press, (1995).
Matsas 1997,
Matsas D., Oral participation in the Congress Poliochni, On smoke-shroud Lemnos. An Early Bronze Age Cen-
tre in the North Aegean. YH. AIIAIOY-YHHO-K EHKA-S.A.I.A., (1997).
Ourem-Kotsos and EIstratiou 1993,
Ourem-Kotsos N. EIstratiou N., H ouoq tq kcpuikq tuaooiu tq Mukpq otq cctq tq
apootopikq cciq otq Opukq`, AEMTh 7 (1993), 1997, 619-625.
Ozdogan 1983,
Ozdogan M., Pendik: A neolithic site oI Fikirtepe Culture in the Marmara region. R.M.Boehmer and H.Hauptman
(eds), Beitrage :ur Altertumskunde Kleinasiens. Festschrift fur K.Bittel, Verlag Philipp Von Zapern, Mainz, (1983),
401-411.
Ozdogan 1989,
Ozdogan M., Neolithic Cultures oI Northwestern Turkey. A general appraisal oI the evidence and some consid-
erations. S.Bokonyi (ed), Neolithic of Southeastern Europe and its Near Eastern Connections, Varia Archaeologica
Hungarica, vol. 2, Budapest, (1989), 201-215.
Ozdogan 1993,
Ozdogan M., Vinca and Anatolia: A new look at a very old problem or redeIining Vinca Culture Irom the perspec-
tive oI Near Eastern tradition. J.Roodenberg (ed), Anatolia and the Balkans, Anatolica XIX, (1993), 173-193.
Ozdogan et alii 1991,
Ozdogan M., Miyake Y. and Dede N.O., An interim report on excavations at Yarimburgaz and Toptepe in East-
ern Thrace. Anatolica XVII, (1991), 69-74.
61
Ozdogan et alii 1997,
Ozdogan M., Parzinger H. and Karul N., Excavations at prehistoric Kirklarelj-Thrace. Arkeolofi ve Sanat 77,
(1997), 2-11.
Ozdogan and Dede 1990,
Ozdogan M. Dede N.O., Excavations at Toptepe in Eastern Thrace. Arkeolofi ve Sanat 46/49, (1990), 3-23.
Ozdogan and Gatsov 1998,
Ozdogan M. Gatsov I., The Aceramic Neolithic period in Western Turkey and in the Aegean. Anatolica XXIV,
(1998), 209-225.
Ozdogan and Koyunlu 1986,
Ozdogan M. Koyunlu A., Yarimburgaz Cave. 1986. Excavations Preliminary Results and some considerations.
Arkeolofi ve Sanat 32/33, (1986), 15-17.
Papadopoulos 1992,
Papadopoulos S., Aao tq Ncotcpq Ncoi0ikq otqv Hpeiq Eaoq tou Xukou otov oikioo tou Ntikii Tu:
To apoqu tq kcpuikq oiuopoaoiqoq`, Aic0vc Luvcopio iu tqv Apuiu Ocoouiu. Mvqq A.P.Ocoupq,
Aqooicuutu Apuiooikou Actiou, up. 48, A0qvu, (1992), 249-256.
Papadopoulos 1998,
Papadopoulos S., To ai0uvo`, to uioo` kui to uveoto` kutu tq Ncoi0ikq acpiooo otqv Avutoikq
Mukcooviu kui tq Opukq`, H Hpootopikq 1pcuvu otqv Euou kui oi apooatikc tq: Ocepqtikoi kui
Mc0ooooikoi apoqutiooi, Hpuktiku Aic0vou Luaooiou otq Mvqq tou A.P.Ocoupq, Ocoouovikq/
Kuotopiu, 26-28/11/1998, YHHO, University Studio Press, Ocoouovikq, 255-264.
Papadopoulos 2002,
Papadopoulos S., H Mctuuoq uao tq Ncoi0ikq otqv Eaoq tou Xukou otqv Avutoikq Mukcooviu,
Aqooicuutu tou Apuiooikou Actiou, n. 82, (2002), A0qvu.
Papadopoulos 2004,
Papadopoulos S., Ncoi0ikc koivotqtc tq Notiu Bukuvikq: Hoitioikq cvotqtu kui toaikc aupuoooci`,
Hpuktiku A` Aic0vou Luvcopiou Bukuvikev Iotopikev Laouoev H Kuuu kui tu Bukuviu: uao tqv upuiotqtu
cpi oqcpu`, 20-23/9/2001, Kuuu, (2004), 25-40.
Papadopoulos 2005,
Papadopoulos S., The island oI Thasos beIore written sources: Recent investigations into the Palaeolithic,
Neolithic, and Bronze Ages. J.Bouzek and L.Domaradzka (eds) The Culture of Thracians and their Neighbours. Pro-
ceedings oI the International Symposium in Memory oI ProI. Mieczyslaw Domaradzki, with a Round Table 'Archaeo-
logical Map oI Bulgaria`, BAR S1350, (2005), 245-252.
Papadopoulos 2007,
Papadopoulos S., Decline oI the painted pottery in Eastern Macedonia and North Aegean at the end oI the
Chalcolithic period. H.Todorova, M.SteIanovich and G.Ivanov (eds) Proceedings of the International Svmposium
Strvmon Praehistoricus, 27/9-1/10/2004, Gerda Henkel StiItung, SoIia, (2007), 317-328.
Papadopoulos 2008,
Papadopoulos S., Silver and Copper Production Practices in the Prehistoric Settlement at Limenaria, Thasos.
I.Tzachili (ed) Aegean Metallurgv in the Bron:e Age, Proceedings oI an International Symposium held at the
University oI Crete, Rethymnon, Greece, 19-21/11/2004, Ta Pragmata Publications, 59-67.
Papadopoulos et alii 2003,
Papadopoulos S., Aristodimou G., Kouyioumtzoglou D. and Megaloudi F., H Tcikq Ncoi0ikq kui q Hpeiq
Eaoq tou Xukou otq Ouoo: H uvuokuikq cpcuvu oti 0coci Aio Ieuvvq kui Lkuu Letqpo`, AEMO 15
(2001), 2003, 55-65.
Papadopoulos and Malamidou 2008,
Papadopoulos S. and Malamidou D., Limenaria. A Neolithic and Early Bronze Age settlement at Thassos, North-
East Aegean. H.Erkanal, H.Hauptmann, V.Sahoglu and R.Tuncel (eds) The Aegean in the Neolithic, Chalcolithic and
the Earlv Bron:e Age, Proceedungs oI the International Symposium at Urla-Izmir Oct 13-19 1997, Ankara Univer-
sity: Research Center Ior Maritime Archaeology (Ankusam), Publ.No.1, (2008), 427-445.
Parzinger and Ozdogan 1996,
Parzinger V.H. Ozdogan M., Die Ausgrabungen in Kirklareli und ihre Bedeutung Iur die Kulturbeziehungen
zwischen Anatolien und dem Balkan vom Neolithikum bis zur Fruhbronzezeit. Bericht der Romisch-Germanischen
Kommission 76, (1996), 5-29.
62
Perissoratis et alii 1987,
Perissoratis C., Moorby S.A, Papavasiliou C., Cronan D.S., Angelopoulos F., Sakellariadou F. and Mitropoulos
D., The Geology and Geochemistry oI the SurIicial Sediments oI Thraki, Northern Greece. Marine Geologv 74,
(1987), 209-224.
Perissoratis and Mitropoulos 1989,
Perissoratis C. - Mitropoulos D., Late Quaternary Evolution oI the Northern Aegean ShelI. Quaternarv Research
32, (1989), 36-50.
Perissoratis and Van Andel 1988,
Perissoratis C. - Van Andel T.H., Late Pleistocene UnconIormity in the gulI oI Kavala, Northern Aegean, Greece.
Marine Geologv 81, (1988), 53-61.
Pernicheva 1995,
Pernicheva L. Prehistoric Cultures in the Middle Struma Valley: Neolithic and Eneolithic. D.W. Bailey and
I.Panayotov (eds), Prehistoric Bulgaria, Monographs in World Archaeology n.22, (1995), 99-140.
Phelps 1975,
Phelps W.W., The Neolithic Potterv Sequence in Southern Greece, Ph.D. Diss. London University, (1995).
RenIrew et alii 1986,
RenIrew C., Gimbutas M. and Elster E. (eds), Excavations at Sitagroi. A prehistoric village in Northeast Greece,
vol. 1, Monumenta Archaeologica 13, Los Angeles, (1986).
Romiopoulou 1968,
Romiopoulou A., Hpootopiko ouvoikioo Aupouou (N.Euv0q)`, AD 20 (1965), B3, 461-467.
Roodenberg et alii 1989-1990,
Roodenberg J., Thissen L. and Buitenhuis H., Preliminary report on the archaeological investigations at Ilipinar
in NW Anatolia. Anatolica XVI, (1989-1990), 61- 144.
Sampson 1993,
Sampson A., Skoteini Tharrounion. The Cave, the Settlement and the Cemeterv. Athens, Ephoreia oI
Palaeoanthropoly/Speleology, (1993).
Schneider et alii 1991,
Schneider G., Knoll H., Gallis K. and Demoule J-P., Transition entre les cultures neolithiques de Sesklo et de
Dimini: Recherches mineralogiques, chimiques et technologiques sur les ceramiques et les argiles. BCH 115, I,
(1991), 1-64.
Schneider et alii 1994,
Schneider G., Knoll H., Gallis K. and Demoule J-P., Production and circulation oI neolithic thessalian pottery:
Chemical and mineralogical analyses`, Ocoouiu. Ackuacvtc poviu upuiooikq cpcuvu, 1975-1990.
Aaotccoutu kui Hpooatikc, Yaoupcio Hoitioou, A0qvu, 61-70.
SeIeriades 1983,
SeIeriades M., Dikili Tash: Introduction a la Prehistoire de la Macedoine Orientale. BCH 107, (1983), 635-677.
SeIeriades 1989,
SeIeriades M., Deshayes` excavations at Dikili Tash: the neolithic Iinds. Neolithic of southeastern Europe and its
Near Eastern connections, Intern.ConIerence (1987), Szolnok-Szeged, Varia Archaeologica Hungarica II, 277-289.
Sherratt 1986,
Sherratt A., The Pottery oI Phases IV and V: The Early Bronze Age. C.RenIrew, M.Gimbutas and E.Elster (eds),
Excavations at Sitagroi. A prehistoric village in Northeast Greece, vol. 1, Monumenta Archaeologica 13, Los Ange-
les, (1986), 429-476.
Sickenberg 1967,
Sickenberg O., Die unterpleistozane Fauna von Volaks, eine neue GiraIIe aus dem unteren Pleistozan von
Griechenland. Ann.Geol.Pavs Hell. 18, (1967), 314-330.
Sickenberg 1968,
Sickenberg O., Die Pleistozanen Knochenbrekzien von Volax. Geologische Jahrbuch 85, (1968), 33-54.
Theocharis 1971,
Theocharis D., Prehistorv of Eastern Macedonia and Thrace, Ancient Greek Cities, vol. 9, (1971).
63
Todorova 1995,
Todorova H., The neolithic, eneolithic and transitional period in bulgarian prehistory. D.W.Bailey and I.Panayotov
(eds), Prehistoric Bulgaria. Monographs in World Archaeology n.22. Madison Wisconsin: Prehistory Press., (1995).
Trantalidou 1989,
Trandalidou K., H 0coq 'aqc tou Aitq (Muupu) otq Ackuvq tq Apuu: Acoocvu kui Hpooatikc`, AAA
22, (1989), 61-70.
Trantalidou and Darlas 1992,
Trandalidou K. Darlas A., 1pcuvc otu oaquiu tou Noou Apuu, 1992`, AEMth 6 (1992), 1995, 587-603.
Trantalidou and Polydoropoulos 1998,
Trandalidou K. Polydoropoulos P., Ltoiciu uao iu 0coq tq Mcoq Huuioi0ikq acpiooou otq outikq o0q
tou Aitq kui oi cpuoic ouvtqpqoq`, B` Eaiotqovikq Luvuvtqoq: H Apuu kui q acpioq tq- Iotopiu kui
Hoitioo. Apuu, 1, Apuu 1994, 1998, 69-80.
Treuil 1989,
Treuil R., La Neolithisation` dans les Balkans: Quelques reIlexions prematurees. O.Aurence and J.Cauvin (eds),
Neolithisations. Proche et Moven Orient, Mediterranee orientale, Nord de lAfrique, Europe meridionale, Chine,
Amerique du Sud. BAR Intern. Series 516, (1989), 129-144.
Treuil 1992,
Treuil R. (ed), Dikili Tash. Jillage prehistorique de Macedoine orientale, I. Fouilles de J. Deshaves, vol. 1, BCH-
Suppl. XXIV, (1992).
Treuil 2004,
Treuil R. (ed), Dikili Tash. Jillage prehistorique de Macedoine orientale, I. Fouilles de J.Deshaves (1961-1975),
vol. 2, BCH-Suppl. XXXVII, (2004).
Tsirtsoni 2000,
Tsirtsoni Z., Les poteries du debut du Neolithique Recent en Macedoine: I. Les types de recipients. BCH, 124.1,
(2000), 1-55.
Tsirtzoni et alii 2005,
Tsirtsoni Z., Malamidou D., Kilikoglou V., Karatasios I. and Lespez L., Black-on-red painted pottery production
and distribution in Late Neolithic Macedonia. Archaeometric and Archaeological Approaches to Ceramics, Papers
presented at EMAC05, 8
th
European Meeting on Ancient Ceramics, Lyon, (2005), 57-62.
Warren and Hankley 1989,
Warren P. Hankey V., Aegean Bron:e Age Chronologv, Bristol Classical Press, (1989).
Yiouni 2001,
Yiouni P., SurIace treatment oI Neolithic vessels Irom Macedonia and Thrace. BSA 96, (2001), 1-25.
Zachos 1996,
Zachos K.L., The Cyclades and the Northeastern Aegean Islands. G.A.Papathanassopoulos (ed.), Neolithic Cul-
ture in Greece, Athens, N. P. Goulandris Foundation-Museum oI Cycladic Art., 85-87.
64
Table 2. Aghios Ioannis C14 Dates
Table 1. Limenaria C14 Dates
65
Fig. 1. Limenaria FN pottery 1
Fig. 2. Limenaria FN pottery 2
66
Fig. 4. Aghios Ioannis pottery
Fig. 3. Aghios Ioannis pottery
67
THE HOTNITSA TELL - 50 YEARS LATER.
EIGHT YEARS OF NEW EXCAVATIONS - SOME RESULTS AND PERSPECTIVES
Alexander Chohad:hiev
*
Keywords: Hotnitsa, North Bulgaria, Chalcolithic, Kod:hadermenGumelnitaKaranovo JI
culture.
This paper describes the Hotnitsa tell site, which has been studied Ior more than 50 years, but
unIortunately is Iar less well-known than it deserves. As one oI the Iirst steps in this direction,
just a Iew results will be presented here, while more detailed analyses will be leIt Ior the series
oI monographs we are preparing.
The village oI Hotnitsa is situated in a small hollow some 14 km north-east Irom the city oI
Veliko Tarnovo (Map 1). The neighbourhood oI the village is a kind oI archaeological
phenomenon. Over 70 archaeological sites Irom prehistory, antiquity and the Middle Ages have
been registered. The prehistoric settlements are also impressive in number 6 Neolithic, 1
Chalcolithic tell, two thin layered Chalcolithic settlements and 12 sites Irom the Bronze and Iron
Ages
1
.
The Chalcolithic Hotnitsa tell is located at 1200 m and 40 northwards Irom the center oI the
village (Map 2). It is situated on the leIt bank oI Bohot River one oI the right tributaries oI
Rositsa River. Its altitude is 84.2 m. It has the shape oI a truncated cone with a diameter at the
base oI 110 m and at the top oI approximately 50 m and a height oI 5 m. The site was Iirst
recorded by Nikola Angelov in 1956 during his Iield surveys in the region.
Because oI some agricultural activities the cultural layer had been penetrated and that had Iorced
archaeological excavations. Angelov published some results in only three articles
2
. Here the results
Irom the old excavations will just be sketched; they are not well-known enough in the Ioreign
literature but in the last Iive years our team has been processing all oI the pottery and the artiIacts
Irom the old excavations and they will soon be published in a separate volume Hotnitsa I.
Excavations were conducted between 1956 and 1959. During that time Angelov revealed 21
houses all oI them burnt and in some oI them he reported skeletons. UnIortunately the
documentation is not Iully preserved so we do not have complete evidence.
The stratigraphic trench was 4x10 m in size and is situated in the southern periphery oI the
tell. There Angelov had established 14 building levels in three major layers he called Hotnitsa I,
II and III. He reIers them respectively to the Late Neolithic, Early and Late Chalcolithic (Fig.1).
(Here it must be remembered that Nikola Angelov had excavated the Russe tell together with
Georgi Georgiev and was already acquainted with his Karanovo periodization). According to
ProIessor H. Todorova
3
(Fig. 2) the artiIacts indicate a 3.9 m layer oI the late Chalcolithic
complex KodzhadermenGumelnitaKaranovo VI, where only phases II and III are represented.
The layer oI 1.20 m she reIers to the Early and Middle Chalcolithic culture Poljanitsa (phases II,
III, and IV). Her observations were made only on the artiIacts in the museum, so she had no direct
stratigraphic clues Ior such a periodization.
As has already been mentioned Angelov had unearthed 21 houses Irom the Iirst (the upper)
building level. All oI them were burned in a devastating Iire and some had skeletal remains
inside, which according to him is an indicator oI a sudden assault on the settlement.
The disposition oI the houses shows that they were certainly the subject oI planning. Four
'strips or quarters can be very clearly distinguished. Houses 1 and 8 can be shown to be
exceptions, as they had probably been built later because they were sticking out into the street.
*
Regional Museum oI History Veliko Tarnovo, Nikola Picolo 6 Str., Veliko Tarnovo, 5000, Bulgaria,
alcho2000vahoo.com.
1
Hnuena 2000, 17.
2
Anrenon 1958; Anrenon 1959; Anrenon 1961.
3
Toopona 1986, 78; ran. 30
68
Over the total area the houses can be divided into Iour groups (Fig. 4) less than 18 sq.m (2
houses - Fig. 4A); Irom 21 to 26.6 sq. m (7 houses- Fig. 4B); Irom 30 to 34 sq. m (5 houses- Fig.
4C) and Irom 39 to 57 sq. m (7 houses- Fig. 4D). It is obvious that the houses in the northern halI
oI the settlement are bigger ones. And houses with more than one room are only established there.
House N 4 can be pointed out as an exception which is comparatively small, with a diIIerent
orientation, almost square, and having an internal wall. No structures were discovered inside and
it was there that the Iamous Hotnitsa treasure was revealed
4
(Fig. 5).
The new excavations started in the year 2000. They were planned as summer practice Ior the
Iirst grade archaeology students oI the Veliko Tarnovo University 'St. Cyril and St. Methodius.
The excavations were led by SteIan Chohadzhiev Irom the University and by Nedko Elenski Irom
the Museum until 2003. AIter 2003 Alexander Chohadzhiev was appointed as the representative
oI Veliko Tarnovo museum.
When we Iirst arrived at the tell, it was a dense Iorest and it had been used Ior halI a century
as a junk-heap Ior the village. Our strategy was to clear trees Irom an area oI 250 sq. m. and to
excavate there
5
(Fig. 6).
Here it should be mentioned that the new excavations were done mainly with small tools and
the entire soil was screened beIore it was disposed oI, and all oI this made progress very slow.
AIter clearing the terrain we Iound that Angelov had excavated only the houses Irom the Iirst
level, but not the spaces between so there were huge pits in the terrain, and their walls had Iallen,
Iorming great unevenness (Fig. 7). In the Iirst three years we were able to Iollow our strategy to
excavate in the northern sector, having two major stratigraphic proIiles (Fig. 8). But at the
beginning oI the 2005 season we Iound some drastic interIerence by treasure hunters that had
destroyed our proIiles and Iorced us to change our strategy.
During our excavations we documented three more deIinite building levels.
The second building level is very poorly preserved. It is neither burned nor partially Iired, and
was almost destroyed by the Level I settlers. No intact structures were discovered. Only some
wall portions and levels oI pottery were in situ (Fig. 9). The second building level is very poor
in artiIacts, and most oI them are severely broken. UnIortunately we do not have clear
stratigraphic distinction between the remains oI Iirst and second levels because, as already
mentioned, Angelov had excavated all oI the houses Irom horizon I, but not the space between.
There are some clues that lead to the supposition that there is a direct continuity between II and
I building levels.
During the eight years oI the new excavations we were able to excavate parts oI 7 houses and
to establish the position and sizes oI three more houses belonging to the third horizon (Fig. 10).
Our initial plans were disrupted by the treasure hunters, but their activities had some positive
results because we were able to excavate in the squares 85-84-95-94-105, which were outside the
primary sector.
The destruction layers oI the houses are Irom 60 cm to 1 m thick. The Iire was Iierce and
devastating. Most oI the houses Irom the third building level are orientated on the cardinal points,
with the long side North-South. The orientation oI the houses had changed in the Iirst building
level the deviation is obvious when we compare both plans (Fig. 3 and Fig. 10).
We were able to study some wooden parts oI the rooI construction in house 1. Much
inIormation on the building techniques was acquired. The walls were comparatively thick at 30-
40-60 cm, built not in the classic wattle and daub technique, but in some sort oI mixed
construction. There were posts but they do not Iorm straight lines. The Ioundations oI the walls
were built mostly oI clay, and wood is used mainly Ior support. The walls had their both Iaces
smoothly plastered (Fig. 11). Possibly the ceiling areas oI the houses were constructed only oI
wood. We have enough evidence to assume that wooden planks were used Ior the Iloor covering.
In house N 4 we were Iortunate to reveal a sort oI building sacriIice
6
: the bones oI 25
individuals (Fig. 12) 16 cattle, 2 sheep/goat, 3 swine, 1 deer and 1 aurochs, and two deer horns
(Fig. 13) were put in a 10 cm shallow pit and then plastered Ior the Iloor.
4
Anrenon 1959.
5
uoxaxnen, Enencxn 2002
6
Chokhadzhiev, Chokhadzhiev 2005, 11, Iig. 6.
69
AIter we had removed the level III building destruction in squares 87 and 97, we were able to
study some very interesting remains Irom the building level IV. It was not burnt, but in this place
much is better preserved than in level II. There is a 'carpet oI pottery Iull oI restorable vessels,
artiIacts, stones and bones (Fig. 14). What is very interesting in this situation are the preserved
wood remains (Fig. 15). In one place even a Iine woven wattle is preserved (Fig. 16). Up to the
present we have established that this wattle covers more than 5 sq. meters. On the periphery oI
the house we were able to unearth some remains oI wooden beams and planks. It seems that this
house was abandoned by its inhabitants suddenly and leIt to be destroyed by time. The alternative
possibility oI Ilooding as the reason Ior its destruction must not be excluded.
In 2003 and 2004 we made some eIIorts to clean the stratigraphic trench. It was almost Iilled
with garbage and soil and densely covered with trees and bushes. What we revealed in the north
proIile is that there are no more burned levels aIter III and none until the Early Chalcolithic layer.
Clearly there are more than 14 building horizons in the entire tell. There are just a Iew late
Neolithic Iragments but these may result Irom the nearby site oI Orlovka, because the tell is on
the closest route Irom this settlement to the river. The excavations oI the lowest levels were made
more diIIicult by subterranean water.
In the eastern proIile oI the stratigraphic trench we excavated one stone structure and during
the two years oI excavations there we established that it is probably a part oI a deIensive wall -
perhaps a sort oI 'tower or a 'gate that belongs to the Late Chalcolithic levels (Fig. 17). For the
next campaigns we plan to reveal more oI the deIensive system on the southern periphery oI the
tell and to establish the connection between the houses and the Ience.
OI course the artiIacts discovered recently cannot be discussed in detail here over the 8 years
there were 6727 excluding the pottery. All oI them are prepared Ior publication in a separate
volume. So just a Iew will be mentioned here.
Probably the most attractive and interesting are the golden artiIacts discovered recently. They
are Iive oI them 3 pendants and 2 spirals (Fig. 18). The three pendants (a, b, c) and one spiral
(d) were discovered in the Iirst two years and do not have any speciIic context
7
. They may belong
to the Hotnica treasure Irom the Iirst building level but this cannot be claimed with certainty. The
other spiral (Fig. 18 e, Fig. 19) was discovered in 2006 and we are sure it belongs to horizon IV.
Unlike all the known golden spirals, this one is made not by stretching the golden wire, but by
Iorging. The chemical analysis (Iig. 20) shows that the quantity oI silver is too small in
comparison with the other golden objects Irom Hotnitsa and those Irom Varna (9-14). What is
interesting is that this spiral was deliberately pierced with a sharp instrument when the gold was
hot. The stratigraphic position, the rough Iabric and the comparatively heavy weight point to an
earlier stage in gold metallurgy.
Frequent discovery was made recently oI clay grain models (Fig. 21), mostly discovered in
deposits oI real grain. This probably has some sort oI ritual meaning.
One lower halI oI a marble Iigurine is surprising with its typical 'Gumelnita iconography
(Fig. 22), but it is made oI very Iine-grained white marble. Such marble is not typical oI the
interior parts oI the Balkans, but oI the islands in the Aegean.
One plate with red and white decoration (Fig. 23) is very interesting and rare. The red paint
Iilling Iills the motiIs and is very thin. In contrast the white paint, which is very thick, looks like
relieI decoration. But the most interesting are the two Iigures applied inside the bottom (Fig. 23a).
UnIortunately the upper parts are broken, but it seems they represent a mother, sitting in a chair
or 'throne and holding a child in her lap. Both oI the Iigurines are also painted in red and white
in the same technique as the entire plate.
Our attempts to Iind the necropolis oI the settlement were unsuccessIul. In the Iuture eIIorts
will be made in this direction.
In speaking oI Hotnitsa tell it is very important to note that it is one oI the most western tell-
type settlements in Northern Bulgaria. I hope that this paper will be the Iirst link in a chain oI
Iuture publications about Hotnitsa tell that will make this site a marker Ior the Kodzhadermen
GumelnitaKaranovo VI culture.
7
uoxaxnen, Enencxn 2002, 30-32, op. 5: 1, 2, 3; Chokhadzhiev, Chokhadzhiev 2005, 11, 11-12, Iig. 8, 9.
70
BIBLIOGRAPHY
Anrenon 1958,
H. Anrenon. Cennmna mornna npn c. Xornnna. Copnnx nscnenannx n uecr na axa. euen. Co]nx, (1958), 389
403
Anrenon 1959,
H. Anrenon. 3narnoro cxponnme or Xornnna. Apxeo.oeu,(1959), 1-2, 38 46.
Anrenon 1961,
H. Anrenon. Paornnnnna sa nnocxn xocrenn nonn n cennmnara mornna npn c. Xornnna, Tpnoncxo.
Apxeo.oeu,(1961), 2, 34-38.
Hnuena 2000,
B. Hnuena. Tpn eneonnrnn cennma n semnnmero na c. Xornnna, Bennxorpnoncxo. Kapauoecru rouqepeuuu sa
npaucmopuma ua Ba.rauume 1. Tparu u cceouume paouu npes ueo.uma u xa.ro.uma ( B. Huro.oe). Co]nx, (2000),
93-100.
Toopona 1986,
X. Toopona. Ka+euuo-+eouama enoxa e B.eapu (nemo xu.oo.emue npeou uoeama epa, Coqu, (1986).
uoxaxnen, Enencxn 2002,
Cr. uoxaxnen, H. Enencxn. Honn npoyunannx na cennmnara mornna npn c. Xornnna, Bennxorpnoncxa onacr
npes 2000 r. (Hpenapnrenno comenne). Pou.eeu coopuur e :ecm ua npoq. u+ump Oe:apoe (Xp. Xapumouoe
peo.). Bennxo Tpnono, (2002), 27-32
Chokhadzhiev, Chokhadzhiev 2005,
St. Chokhadzhiev, Al. Chokhadzhiev 2005. Some Results oI the Investigations oI Hotnitsa Tell in 2001. Prehistoric
Archaeologv & anthropological Theorv and Education. RPRP 6-7. Salt Lake City, (2005), 9-12.
71
Map. 1. The place oI the Hotnitsa tell in the Balkans and in the region oI Veliko Tarnovo.
Map. 2. Topographic map oI the vicinity oI the tell site.
72
Fig. 1. ProIile oI the stratigraphic trench oI Angelov`s excavations - Irom the personal archive oI N.
Angelov.
73
Fig. 2. Stratigraphic table according to ProIessor Henrieta Todorova aIter Tooopoea 1986, mao.. 30.
74
Fig. 3. Plan oI the houses Irom the Iirst building level oI Angelov`s excavations adapted plan Irom the
personal archive oI N. Angelov.
75
Fig. 4. Distribution oI the houses Irom the Iirst building level according to their surIace area.
Fig. 5. The golden Hotnitsa 'treasure.
76
Fig. 6. Present appearance oI the tell view Irom the East.
Fig. 7. The terrain aIter cleaning the vegetation beIore the start oI the new excavations.
77
Fig. 8. The original sector oI the new excavations, beIore the treasure-hunters` interventions and the
enlargement oI the excavated area view Irom the North.
Fig. 9. Example oI pottery in situ in the second building level.
78
Fig. 10. Plan oI the houses Irom the third building level.
Fig. 11. Northern parts oI houses 1 and 6 Irom the third building level and the narrow 'passage between,
Hotnitsa 2004 view Irom the South.
79
Fig. 12. A 'building sacriIice house 4 Irom the third building level bones in situ.
Fig. 13. The bones Irom the 'building sacriIice
80
Fig. 14. Plan oI the ruins oI house 12 Irom the Iourth building level (Hotnitsa 2006-2007).
Fig. 15. Wooden plank oI the Iloor covering house 12, building level IV.
81
Fig. 17. Stone structure and post holes Irom a deIensive structure in the eastern proIile oI the stratigraphic
trench view Irom the South and above.
82
Fig. 18. Golden objects Irom the new excavations.
Fig. 19. The golden spiral Irom building level IV (Fig. 19e).
83
Fig. 20. The chemical composition oI the golden spiral Irom building level IV (Fig. 20)
Chem. element Fe Cu Zn As Ag Sn Sb Au Pb Hg
weight 0,28 1,09 0,01 0,01 3,21 0,01 0,01 95,42 0,01 0,01

Fig. 21. DiIIerent types oI clay grain models.
Fig. 22. Lower halI oI marble Iigurine building level IV, house 12.
84
Fig. 23a. The sculptural group Irom the plate big Iigurine, sitting on a chair and holding the small one
across in the lap.
Fig. 23. Plate with white and red painted decoration and the sculptural group on the bottom building
level III.
85
BAPSKA, A LATE NEOLITHIC SETTLEMENT IN EASTERN CROATIA - A NEW
PRO1ECT
Marcel Buric and Tihomila Teak-Gregl
*
Keywords: Bapska, Late Neolithic, Jinca culture, Sopot culture.
Prompted by new rescue excavations and only partially published material Irom preceding
excavations at Bapska, this paper provides a history oI the research, published materials, and
insight into the vertical stratigraphy and chronology oI the site. When possible, data Irom new
excavations will be presented in order to present the current state oI knowledge about Bapska and
its position in the Balkan Late Neolithic.
The Bapska site has been present in the literature to a greater or lesser degree Ior many years,
but relatively little data about it has actually been published. Many archaeologists know about the
details oI the site Irom 'oral tradition, i.e. Irom personal contacts with S. Dimitrijevic (several
oI them said so themselves: N. Kalicz, G. Lazarovici, J. Chapman, B. Brukner, J. Maran), so great
deal oI knowledge on the materials, results, interpretations and dating Iall into the pers. comm.
category. V. Milojcic (1949) and S. Dimitrijevic (1968) have written the most about the site, but
both only wrote preliminary reports on a select portion oI the materials. As ill Iate would have it,
this preliminary level cannot be improved by re-examining the old Iinds, as this area was beset
by the whirlwind oI war in the Balkans, during which most oI the arteIacts discovered during
Dimitrijevic`s research were lost or destroyed. What remains is not suIIicient Ior quality analysis,
and since the site is threatened by Iarming activities, new rescue excavations commenced recently
to shed new light on this problem. The primary intent is to present the relevant data gathered by
Schmidt, Milojcic and Dimitrijevic to the greatest possible degree, and to highlight the similarities
and diIIerences in their stratigraphy and interpretations. As much as possible, this knowledge will
be supplemented with data Irom new excavations that have only just commenced.
The prehistoric settlement, situated slightly more than a kilometre Irom the present-day village
oI Bapska, is actually called Gradac, like hundreds oI other topographical sites in Croatia, but
also throughout the Central and Western Balkans (another widely-known Gradac in the immediate
vicinity is at Vucedol). In Croatian (as in Serbian, Slovenia, Bosnian, etc.), Gradac, Gradec,
Gradina, Gradisce, Grad and similar names denote an elevated settlement, or hillIort in the wider
sense oI its meaning. In 99 percent oI cases it is an archaeological site, usually prehistoric. The
same situation holds in Gradac at Bapska it is a late Neolithic tell situated on the initial western
slopes oI Fruka Gora Mountain in the area oI Srijem (Eastern Croatia and Western Serbia).
1
Gradac at Bapska, as an archaeological point in documents (archives in AMZ), has been
known since the 1870s. At that time, Eastern Croatia was populated with a high number oI ethnic
German Iamilies (the so-called 'Jolksdeutscher), who were settled there in the eighteenth
century to raise the quality oI local craItsmanship. Among these local ethnic Germans was Mato
Epner, a teacher in a village school who collected a certain number oI archaeological arteIacts
Irom the topsoil at Gradac. Just as it is today, at the time the site was covered with vineyards,
where constant cultivation kept producing 'Iresh discoveries. Epner reported these Iinds to the
National Museum in Zagreb (today the Archaeological Museum in Zagreb), and became the
museum`s oIIicial collaborator (Lfubic 1880, 25). Epner continued to collect surIace arteIacts
with his pupils until 1872, when he decided to open a small trench to see what lay below the
surIace. AIter these 'excavations, the material was sent to the Museum (Lfubic 1880, 25).
Naturally, there is no documentation and the notes have no scientiIic signiIicance with reIerence
to modern archaeology. Epner`s work triggered 'extensive surveys at Gradac, which are visible
*
Department oI Archaeology, Faculty oI Philosophy, University oI Zagreb, Ivana Lucica 3, HR 10000.
1
GPS position: N45 11 06.4 E19 15 38.3 (WGS 84 datum).
86
in today`s AMZ archives oI letters Irom various villagers who oIIered what they had Iound to
Museum director J. Brunmid (Schmidt 1945, 121). When it become apparent that Gradac was an
important archaeological site, the Museum took action and conducted the Iirst scientiIic
excavations in 1911. The report stated that 'although the settlement dates mostly to the Stone
Age, I have Iound some items Irom later prehistoric periods (Hoffiller 1928, 252), and nothing
more about this excavation was published. The third excavation at Gradac was conducted by a
German scholar R. R. Schmidt, better known Ior his work excavating another Gradac mentioned
in this text, the one at Vucedol. During the Vucedol excavation in 1939, he made a test trench in
Bapska, 10 x 6 metres wide. He was surprised by its depth oI Iive metres, so he Iinished it the
Iollowing year (Schmidt 1945, 121). A small part oI the material Irom Schmidt`s excavation in
Bapska is published in his monograph about Vucedol, but the quality and quantity oI the
published material is inadequate, since the monograph was dedicated to Vucedol. The Iirst
stratigraphic interpretation oI cultural deposits in Bapska was made in reIerence to the 1939
excavations.
Schmidt mentions Starcevo culture potsherds (Schmidt 1945, 121). An eye-witness and
excavation team member in Bapska was the young V. Milojcic, who later explained that the
cultural debris in Bapska was 5 metres, but just below the Iourth metre point they noticed the
appearance oI the Starcevo culture pottery. However, excavations never reached virgin soil
(Milofcic 1949, 83), a vital point that bears emphasis here. Based on descriptions by Schmidt and
Milojcic, the vertical stratigraphy oI Gradac was speciIied as Iollows:
0-2 m: Baden and subsequent layers
2-3 m: Sopot III and Baden
3-4 m: Sopot II and Vinca C
4-5 m: Sopot I and Starcevo
Dimitrijevic harshly criticized this rough breakdown into metres as unacceptable and entirely
superIicial, and he explicitly stated that he personally did not see any Baden and Vinca pottery
older than Vinca C, as well as painted pottery
2
(Dimitrijevic 1969: 14).
In the summer oI 1964, as a part oI his many years oI research at a considerable number oI
sites in Slavonia, Dimitrijevic came to Bapska, where he opened a test trench covering a surIace
oI 12 x 6 metres
3
. During this excavation, virgin soil was reached at a depth oI 4.5 metres. The
entire test trench was divided into several horizons (A-H), wherein Dimitrijevic divided the entire
stratigraphy oI the settlement into two principal cultural horizons:
A-D Sopot culture
E-H Vinca culture,
out oI which the C2 and D horizons oI liIe in Gradac show an intermingling with materials
Irom the Vinca phase C, i.e. imports Irom the Vinca cultural sphere. These data show that
Dimitrijevic did not mention the Starcevo Iinds, certainly Ior the simple reason that he did not
discover any, thereIore bringing into question the stratigraphy established by Schmidt
(Dimitrijevic 1968: 13). It is worthwhile mentioning that Dimitrijevic`s excavation lasted Ior a
month and that during this time a rather large test trench was excavated, so there is some question
as to how thoroughly the research was conducted. In any case, we have a situation in which two
diIIerent researchers (Dimitrijevic and Milojcic), digging at a relatively small distance Irom each
2
In this paper, Milojcic`s division oI the Vinca culture into phases A through D will be used, modiIied according to
Dimitrijevic in his publication oI the closed units Irom Bapska. The modiIication oI stages pertains to the transitional
stage toward the late developmental phase oI the culture, i.e. C2 or CD, as Milojcic indicated, into D1 and D2 based
on the Iinds made at Bapska. Namely, according to Milojcic the C2 period corresponds to a depth oI 4.5 metres at
Vinca, when light grey pottery appeared, but the typical dark coloured pottery was still present, while linear
decorations began to disappear, very oIten in the Vinca C phase. In a later phase, grey pottery was particularly
dominant over dark pottery, so that Dimitrijevic 'moved the appearance oI grey pottery out oI stage C, and
distinguished D1 (appearance oI grey pottery) Irom D2 (predominance oI grey pottery). Recent research in Bapska
still cannot conIirm nor reIute Dimitrijevic`s assertion, because the necessary depth oI excavation has not yet been
attained, but so Iar the shallowest layers indeed indicate a predominance oI grey pottery. The answer to this question
is one oI the priorities Ior new research in Bapska.
3
Due to technical diIIiculties pertaining to removal oI soil caused by the considerable depth oI the test trench, aIter
the second meter Dimitrijevic narrowed it to 6 x 6 meters.
87
other,
4
interpreted the initial layers oI liIe in Bapska diIIerently: Milojcic with Starcevo
components, and Dimitrijevic without. The material Irom Schmidt`s excavations can be Iound in
the Archaeological Museum in Zagreb, while Dimitrijevic`s material was also held in the City
Museum in Vukovar, where most oI it was destroyed during Croatia`s recent Homeland War.
What was leIt oI this material was rescued such that it was transIerred to a museum in Novi Sad
(Serbia). It is today being processed at the University oI Zagreb.
Based on research conducted in 1964, Dimitrijevic draIted a stratigraphic sketch diIIerent Irom
that oI Milojcic:
0-0.5 m: Vinca D2, Sopot III, coarse Baden and some medieval pottery
0.5-0.7 m: Vinca D2, Sopot III (one potsherd)
0.7-0.75 m: transition Irom Vinca D2 to D1, Sopot III
0.75-0.9 m: Vinca D1 and D2, Sopot III, Lengyel import
0.9-1.25 m: Vinca D1 and Sopot III
1.25-1.95 m: Vinca D1 and some Sopot III Iinds
1.95-2.05 m: Iinal Sopot II and one Vinca C potsherd
2.05-2.4 m: Sopot II, Vinca C and D1
2.4-2.5 m: Sopot II and one Vinca C potsherd
2.5-2.75 m: Sopot II
2.75-3.0 m: Sopot II and a Iew Vinca C Iinds
3.0-3.75 m: Sopot I and Vinca B2
3.75-4.1 m: prehistoric humus and Sopot I
4.1-4.3 m: mixed humus and sterile loess
4.3 m loess
(Dimitrijevic 1968)
Within these depths, he also distinguished several closed units in the Iorm oI dwelling
Iloors:
designation depth (m) cultural sphere
Dwelling 1A 0.5-0.7 Vinca D2
Sopot III
Dwelling 1B 0.75-0.9 Vinca D1/D2
Lengyel
Sopot III
Dwelling 1C 1.1-1.25 late Vinca D1
Dwelling 2A 1.45-1.55 Vinca D1
Dwellings 2B and 2C 1.60-1.95 Vinca D1
Dwelling 3A 2.05-2.3 late Sopot II
late Vinca C, D1
Dwelling 3B 2.40-2.5 Sopot II
Vinca C (one Iind)
Dwellings 4A, 4B, 4C 2.75-3.0 Sopot II
Vinca C (Iew Iinds)
(Dimitrifevic 1968)
The dwellings and their renewed Iloors, Iilled in with pottery Iinds, served Dimitrijevic as the
principal relative-chronological Ioundation Ior determining the stratigraphic picture oI Bapska,
5
so they will be described below and illustrated with drawings oI his excavations.
4
The distance between Schmidt`s and Dimitrijevic`s test trenches was roughly 70 meters, but both trenches are
located in today`s 'pate oI the settlement.
5
The numbers designate the number oI the dwelling (appearing Irom the excavation`s zero point the surIace), while
the letters indicate the sequence oI their renewal, which means that, e.g. Dwelling 4 underwent three restorations oI
its Iloor (A, B, C).
88
The Iirst dwelling (1 A, B, C), with its Iloor 1A, appeared at approximately 50 cm beneath the
recent humus. It contained materials oI the Vinca D and Sopot III horizons. Floor A was destroyed
in a Iire, and its Iinds belong to the Iinal (D-2) sector oI the Vinca culture, a very Iew Sopot III
imports, and the appearance oI red crusted painting (Dimitrifevic 1968, 19). An identical picture
oI Iinds is oIIered by dwelling 1/06 Irom recent research in Bapska (test trench B-G 06). Although
this dwelling appears at a somewhat shallower level due to erosion caused by land cultivation
(which corresponds to the diIIerence caused by 40 years oI ploughing between these two research
projects), the Iragmented Iinds show pottery Iorms identical to those Irom Iloor 1A Irom the
previous research, Fig. 1 and Fig. 2
6
(Dimitrijevic`s research), and those Irom Dwelling 106, Fig.
13 Irom the recent research. It should be noted here that this type oI literally and absolutely
identical pottery in terms oI manuIacture, colour, cross-section, Iorm, rendering and decoration
motiIs was discovered at Vinca itselI in new research being conducted by the University oI
Belgrade,
7
so it would not be excessive to hypothesize that this was a case oI direct importation
oI goods, meaning direct communication between the settlements in Bapska and Vinca, at least
during the time oI Vinca D
8
(Buric 2007, 34). The congruity oI Iinds Irom both dwellings (Irom
1964 and 2006) is also apparent in the discovery oI red crusted painting, Iire damage, and the
remains oI vessels with a Iooted bowl, which places them in parallel to the last sector oI liIe oI
the Vinca and Sopot cultures at Gradac. Dwelling 1 Irom the new test trench (B-G06), although
completely destroyed down to its Iloor by land cultivation, reIlects certain construction
indicators. It extends in a north-south direction Ior a minimum length oI ten metres,
9
while its
width was roughly Iour metres. There were almost no pottery Iinds in Iront oI the eastern section,
but a 'concentration oI Iishing gear was observed: several ceramic weights and one bone
harpoon. The dwelling`s Iloor is burnt, as are several charred accumulations on the opposite
(western) side, which indicate that during the Iire the dwelling collapsed toward the west and
burned out there. As oI the writing oI this text, research into the Iloor oI Dwelling 1 has not been
completed (Iloor A; research is scheduled to continue in the summer oI 2008), so it is not yet
known whether the dwelling will show signs oI renewal oI the Iloor, as was the case in the
previous research in 1964. Behind the house, at the level oI its partially renewed Iloor, in a
separate context, carbonized wheat grains
10
were Iound, with traces oI burnt wooden Iramework
around them. Based on the current status oI research into the dwelling, it can be assumed that the
Iramework was a part oI the dwelling, perhaps a Iood storage room, and that it belongs in the
same chronological horizon as the dwelling itselI, but since the research campaign has been
concluded, it is uncertain as to whether this is a case oI burial oI provisions in a pit or the wheat
was simply placed on the ground in a wicker basket or something similar. What is important is
that this sample oI wheat was Iorwarded Ior 14C analysis, which generated the Iollowing date:
Beta-241657 5690 /-40 BP -23.6 0/0 5710 /- 40 BP, cal. BC 4680 to 4460 (Cal BP 6630 to
6410). Although there is an absolute date, in this situation it is currently impossible to say
anything more. The annual campaign came to a close beIore the key mutual relationship between
the pit with grains, the surrounding charred accumulations and the layer in which the pit was
buried could be examined in detail or, stated simply, it is impossible to say here which item
intersected which. Without these data the date is worthless, except, oI course, that it absolutely
pinpoints the horizon Irom which it originates and corresponds to the dates oI sites with Vinca D
Iinds, as seen in the table below (graphic portrayal in chart 1):
6
The scales Ior old excavations drawings provided when available.
7
I would like to take this opportunity to once more thank Nenad N. Tasic and his research team Ior unselIishly
providing their most recent and unpublished materials Ior review, and Ior the limitless advice given during the most
recent research in Bapska.
8
The distance in a straight line between Vinca and Bapska is 114 kilometres.
9
The northern extension enters the trench`s proIile so its precise length is not known.
10
At the time oI this writing, the wheat Iind was being analysed at Aristotle University, Thessaloniki, Greece.
89
Site Lab ID BP BC cal
11

Grivac-Barice Bln-868 6070+100 5286-4727 (95,4)
Grivac-Barice Z-1507 5600+140 4786-4071 (95,4)
Valac Bln-436 5895+80 4958-4550 (95,4)
Vinca Hd-17374 5855+27 4795-4619 (95,4)
Vinca GrN-1537 5845+160 5205-4356 (95,4)
Bapska
12
Bln-348 5820+80 4881-4488 (95,4)
Bapska Beta-241657 5690+40 4680-4460 (95,4)
Banjica GrN-1542 5710+90 4767-4358 (95,4)
Banjica GrN-1536 5670+120 4793-4270 (95,4)

(based on Tasic, N. N. 1988; Lazarovici, C-M 2007: 292, Fig. 15, calibrated by Buric)
Floor 1B (0.75 m) contained an inventory oI Vinca D1D2 (Fig. 3), Sopot III (Fig. 4, 5, 6,
7
13
), and with such diverse cultural components it is one oI the most important closed,
chronological units Irom the research conducted in 1964 (Dimitrifevic 1968, 19).
Floor 1C (1.1 m) is attributed to the end oI Vinca phase D1, and there are no more details
on it (Dimitrijevic 1968: 18).
The next dwelling, no. 2, also contained three Iloor renewals (A, B, C). The Iinds Irom 1A
were dated to Vinca phase D1, which contained the most Iinds, and one Iragment each oI a Sopot
Iooted bowl and one Vinca C vessel (Dimitrijevic 1968: 18). Dwelling 2 had the shape oI a
megaron, templum in antis type, and it only remains recorded in a photograph Irom Dimitrijevic`s
research (Fig. 8). It has two rooms with pylons in Iront oI the entrance (Teak-Gregl 1998, 81).
Floors B and C contained six Iragments oI Iine pottery, oI which one belongs to Vinca C, three
to Vinca D1 and one to a Sopot vessel with a hole on its Ioot (Dimitrijevic 1968: 18).
Dwelling 3 consisted oI two Iloors, A and B. This dwelling, according to Dimitrijevic, belongs
to the settlement`s Sopot phase, i.e. the phase oI the Vinca import.
Floor 3A at a depth oI 2.05 metres provided the bulk oI the materials that are typologically and
culturally indeterminate, but which still show a high number oI Vinca Iinds Irom the late phase
C (Fig. 9). Here a particularly interesting Iind is a Iragment oI a small ceramic sacriIicial table,
and a damaged, very crudely rendered idol, with what are possibly signs oI wear as an apparel
item (Fig. 9 A, B). Floor B Irom Dwelling 3 ( 2.4 m) contained seven Iragments oI Iine pottery,
oI which one belongs to Vinca C, and the rest to Sopot II (Dimitrifevic 1968, 18).
Dwelling 4 (A, B, C), in its older (B) Iloor, generated Iinds oI phase II oI the Sopot culture. A
typical Vinca-Sopot linear decoration Iilled with punctures is present on one Iragment, which
together with a cup on an oval pierced Ioot is a typical Sopot phase II category. Particularly
important in this dwelling is the apsidal-ended architecture, and an exquisitely preserved hearth
(Fig. 10) (Dimitrifevic 1968, 17).
BrieIly, this is everything that is worthwhile emphasizing Irom the older research with
reIerence to stratigraphy and relative chronology oI the closed units.
Besides the dwellings, Dimitrijevic`s test trench also provided another closed context in the
Iorm oI pit no. 305.
14
Pit 305, or rather the items Iound in it, are all that remain oI the excavations
conducted in 1964. Thus, all aIorementioned Iinds and the Iramework oI the dwellings are today
lost, as already noted, and the only data on them can be Iound in the monograph Sopotsko-
lendelska kultura (The Sopot-Lengyel Culture) already cited in this paper. As seen today in the
drawing oI the 'northern proIile, the pit was a little less than one metre deep. The oldest Iloor
oI Dwelling 4 ended Iive centimetres above it, and this dwelling`s layout partially covered the pit
(Fig. 11). The elliptical Iorm measured 2.4 and 4.2 metres. It contained a total oI 115 Iragments
11
Calibrated with OxCal v 4.0
12
Excavation in 1964.
13
Fig. 7 characterized by Dimitrijevic as import Irom Langyel, is in Iact the Late Sopot shape Irom by inIluences
Irom classical Lengyel cultural sphere (Dimitrijevic 1968, 78, Iig. 154.
14
The designation oI the pit denotes the relative elevation at which it was Iound and not the number oI pits at the site.
90
oI Iine pottery, oI which only Iour belong to the Vinca culture (Vinca B2C), while the rest are
indeterminate or Iinds oI Sopot phase III (Fig. 12) (Dimitrifevic 1968, 13). Intermingling oI
Sopot and Vinca materials in this closed context point to the accuracy oI Dimitrijevic`s
interpretation oI the mingling oI Sopot and Vinca pottery in the layers as well, which is the
greatest importance oI pit 305.
Finally, based on the older research, this simpliIied stratigraphy Ior the site in Bapska
Iollows:

Starcevo culture?

Sopot culture
Vina culture
veriIied: Milojcic,
Dimitrijevic
hypothetical:
Milojcic
Assuming that there truly is a Starcevo layer, by all indications it should belong to the late
Starcevo culture, as is the case with both Starcevo sites in Srijem Ior which there are Iive absolute
dates, all dated to the very end oI the Starcevo culture. The dates at the sites oI which one is in
the immediate vicinity oI Bapska (Vizic, just under 16 km directly east) are as Iollows:
Kudo-ainci, OxA-8558
6770 + 60 BP (5773-5561 cal BC)
15
6520 + 50 BP (5610-5372 cal BC)
(Whittle et al. 2002: 45).
Golokut, OxA-8505; (Iragment oI human bone in the layer, test trench 25a),
6550 BP (5620BC-5464BC (88.3)
II this is truly the case, an early developmental phase oI the Sopot culture may be seen at
Bapska which emerged precisely in Srijem as a border area between the late Starcevo and early
Vinca cultures, which would be oI great importance to the beginning oI the Late Neolithic in this
region. However, at the moment this remains the subject oI speculation and conjecture.
Furthermore, the majority oI the layers in Bapska consist oI phases IB to III oI the Sopot culture,
meaning almost the entire sequence oI this culture. In this cultural layer there are sporadic Vinca
materials, but up to the late Sopot phase, the settlement belonged to the bearers oI Sopot culture.
The last layer oI liIe in Bapska belongs to the late Vinca culture, throughout its entire Iinal phase
(Vinca D). Thus, at the very end oI liIe in the Bapska settlement, it came into the possession oI a
Vinca population which was pushed westward Irom Banat and Vojvodina by the same mechanism
which led to the disappearance oI Vinca C in northern Banat (Drasovean 1996, 195). When the
cultural diversity oI the Bapska layers are viewed in their entirety, it is apparent (iI one ignores
the Starcevo layer on account oI the ambiguous reports and diIIerences in opinion between
Milojcic and Dimitrijevic) that the situation is slightly absurd: the Sopot culture which emerged
under the inIluence oI the Vinca culture is located beneath the Vinca in the stratigraphy. However,
this is only the late Vinca, which under the onslaught oI the Bubanj-Salkuta group, i.e. 'metal-
age groups, retreated westward and settled an area which it only bordered in preceding phases.
The advancement oI metallurgy increased production but also entailed the more rapid
consumption oI ore resources. Groups making metal products thus once more became mobile in
their search Ior new resources, prompting the aIorementioned migration. Evidence oI the
existence oI these Eneolithic components at Bapska is generally present only in traces and in
chance surIace discoveries. It is certain that the Eneolithic horizon was at the very least
minimally present in Bapska, but only in sporadic Iinds, although the intense ploughing
15
Calibrated by OxCal v 4.0
91
conducted at the site and its upper layers must not be Iorgotten, Ior this means that the
opportunity to acquire certain knowledge oI the genuine share oI Eneolithic components in
Gradac has been lost Iorever.
This situation is just another in a series oI illustrations oI the instability oI this region at the
end oI the Late Neolithic.
New research being conducted by the Archaeology Department oI the University oI Zagreb is
only in its initial stages, so the data on Dwelling 1/06 must be deemed preliminary, all the more
so since as noted previously in the text it has not been Iully analyzed. What can be said is that
this closed context, with the pottery materials Iound there so Iar, corresponds to what Dimitrijevic
discovered in his research at depths oI 0 to 2 metres. UnIortunately, his documentation contains
no data on absolute elevations, so it is impossible to know the relevant depth layer. Given the
most modern agricultural technology, in recent years Gradac has been ploughed deeper than ever
beIore, and almost a halI-century has passed between Dimitrijevic`s research and the most recent
research work, so without absolute points it is impossible to know how Iar the present initial
excavation point is below the 1964 level due to erosion caused by land cultivation. Since the new
research has only just begun (2006), there are still no closed units that could be used as analogies
to those Irom 1964, but we hope that even this will be possible soon.
BIBLIOGRAPHY
Buric 2007
M. Buric, Bapska Gradac. Hrvatski arheoloki godinfak (2007), 33 34.
Dimitrijevic 1969
S. Dimitrijevic, Sopotsko-lendelska kultura. Arheoloke monograIije I. Zagreb (1969).
Drasovean 1996
F. Drasovean, Cultura Jinca Tar:ie (Fa:a C) in Banat. Timisoara (1996).
HoIIiller 1928
V. HoIIiller, Idol od ilovace iz Dalja. JHAD XV, (1928), 249 255.
Lazarovici 2006
C. M. Lazarovici, Absolute Chronology oI the Late Vinca Culture in Romania and its Role in the Development
oI the Early Copper Age. In: (N. Tasic & C. Grozdanov), Homage to Milutin Garaanin. Belgrade (2006), 277 273.
Ljubic 1880
S. Ljubic, Odkrice iz predhistoricke dobe. JHAD II, (1880).
Schmidt 1945
R.R. Schmidt, Die Burg Jucedol, Zagreb (1945).
Tezak Gregl 1998
T. Tezak Gregl, Jincanska kultura, Prapovifest. (Dimitrijevic S; Tezak Gregl T; Majnaric Pandzic N.),
Zagreb (1998).
Whittle et alii 2002
A. Whittle, D. Boric, L. Bartosziewicz, P. Pettitt, M. Richards, In the beginning: new radiocarbon dates Ior the
Early Neolithic in northern Serbia and south-east Hungary. Antaeus 25. Budapest, (2002), 1-51.
92
Fig. 1. The Late Vinca Culture potsherd with politurmster decoration.
Fig. 2. The Late Vinca Culture potsherd with politurmster decoration.
93
Fig. 3. The Late Vinca Culture shape.
Fig. 4. The Late Sopot Culture shape. Fig. 5. The Late Sopot Culture shape.
Fig. 6. The Late Sopot Culture shape.
Fig. 7. The Late Sopot Culture shape,
inIluenced by classical Lengyel type.
94
Fig. 8. Excavations in Bapska in 1964. Dwelling 1.
95
Fig. 9. The Late Vinca phase, Dwelling 3.
96
Fig. 10. Drawing oI preserved hearth in dwelling 4.
Fig. 11. Drawing oI position oI pit 305 on stratigraphical sketch.
97
Fig. 12. Sopot I/II inventory in the pit 305.
98
Fig. 13. The Late Vinca potsherds Irom Dwelling 106 (new excavations).
99
Fig. 14. Graph oI the C14 dates Ior the Late Vinca period (Vinca D phase).
ARCHAEOLOGICAL DATA ON SPACE USE AT A TELL-LIKE SETTLEMENT OF
THE TISZA CULTURE
(New results from csd-Kovshalom, Hungary)
Pal Rac:kv
*
Keywords: Hungarv, Great Hungarian Plain, Neolithic, settlement structure, Tis:a culture,
burials
The site oI csdKovashalom is located on the northern bank oI a Iormer meander oI the
Krs river in the Tiszazug region. This settlement oI the Tisza culture occupies a transitional
position between the tell-type sites characteristic oI the southern section oI the Great Hungarian
Plain and the region oI single-layer settlements located in its northern section (Fig. 1)
1
. During
Iield walks carried out in the 1980s, the surIace distribution oI archaeological Iinds could be
observed over an area oI approximately 21 hectares (206,000 m
2
) (Fig. 2).
2
The actual habitation
area and general stratigraphic characteristics oI the neolithic settlement under the modern surIace
were clariIied by taking 188 bore samples.
On the basis oI soil boring and the analysis oI new data it became clear that this late Neolithic
site consisted oI three major and Iive smaller settlement units. Previously, only three smaller units
could be reconstructed in addition to the three major settlement spots.
3
The digital analysis oI
spatial data has been oI help in outlining additional details, thus Iive small units could be
diIIerentiated within the site. The sizes oI the thus reconstructed settlement clusters were 7,756
m
2
, 8,683 m
2
, 7,619 m
2
, as well as 4,695 m
2
, 4,949 m
2
, 3,292 m
2
, 3,466 m
2
and 5,108 m
2
,
respectively. The total area oI these modules adds up to 45,568 m
2
. These discoveries do not
Iundamentally inIluence our Iirst estimate oI the overall settlement size: the total area oI the
spatial units reconstructed thus could be estimated as 3 to 5 hectares. Considering the probability
oI these estimates, it must be noted that the low resolution oI soil-boring is not always suIIiciently
sensitive Ior picking up thin, single settlement layers in addition to strata oIten exceeding 20 cm
in thickness. All these observations will evidently have a bearing on the more precise estimation
oI the settlement`s extent.
This means that data gained by modern-day Iield surveys must be treated cautiously in the
Great Hungarian Plain, because recent conditions visible on the surIace depend to a great extent
on the type and intensity oI agricultural cultivation. Based on the results oI soil boring, one may
hypothesize that the settlement units Iound on the three major elevations at csdKovashalom
each Iormed a relatively permanent habitation, separated Irom the others by periodically
inundated, shallow depressions oI the marshy Iloodplain. The Iive settlement spots characterized
by less intensive habitation consisted oI houses or groups oI houses located in-between and
around the three major units. Bore samples showed that the thickness oI habitation layers varied
Irom 40 to 160 cm on the top oI the three elevations, while it reached only 30-50 cm in spots oI
peripheral position. The signs oI greatest settlement activity were observed on an elevation near
the waterIront (Fig. 3). The strata Iormed a 160 cm thick deposit here. ThereIore this tell-like
mound may well be considered the central portion oI the Neolithic settlement. These observations
reveal an entirely new perspective on the evaluation oI Tisza culture settlement structure.
Namely, at the site oI csdKovashalom one is neither dealing with large and contiguous
settlement, nor a single, Iarmstead-like structure. This site is rather a loose cluster oI distinct
settlement units.
4
On the basis oI summarized excavation reports, several authors assumed the
*
ELTE Institute oI Archaeological Sciences , H-1088 Budapest, Mzeum krt 4/B, rac:kvludens.elte.hu
1
Raczky et al. 1985; Raczky 1986; Raczky 1987; Raczky 1995, 80-84.
2
Raczky 1987, 63.
3
Raczky l987, 63.
4
Raczky 1987, 67-69.
102
existence oI a similar settlement structure at the site oI HdmezvasarhelyKkenydomb.
5
In
addition, stratigraphic data Irom csd indicate that the tell-like and single layer settlement units
co-existed and even represent structures complementary to each other. On the basis oI the latest
research summaries, a similar duality in settlement structure may be observed at the site oI
SzegvarTzkves.
6
In addition, a horizontal settlement oI 2-3 hectares in size, could be
identiIied around the tell at BerettyojIaluHerpaly,
7
surrounded by a circular ditch. In a broader
context it may be said that there is an increasing number oI tell sites in South-Eastern Europe,
where evidence Ior an external settlement turns up
8
as has also been illustrated by the examples
oI Sesklo,
9
Podgorica,
10
Pietrele
11
and Uivar
12
, to name just a Iew.
In our interpretation, the 'symbiosis between the multi-layer and horizontal habitation areas
shows a transitional example oI settlement integration at the beginning oI the Late Neolithic in
the Great Hungarian Plain, a process that was studied during the 1980s by J. Makkay, A. Sherratt,
N. Kalicz, P. Raczky and J. Chapman in great detail.
13
When seen in a single plane, the smaller
and larger groups oI habitations apparently did not Iorm a united, comprehensive system within
the settlement. In this case, they rather seem to represent small and loose sets oI households, a
pattern characteristic oI the preceding middle Neolithic tradition. The csd settlement may also
be considered a transitional structure Irom another point oI view: its vertical stratigraphic units
are complemented by horizontal habitation surIaces. It is suggested here that these settlement
characteristics represent an early synthesis between the uniIied horizontal settlement pattern and
a vertical perception oI space. These would develop into a complex, more sophisticated attitude
to space and time.
14
This possibility Ialls in line with the views oI 'landscape archaeology
developed on the basis oI numerous examples in Europe.
15
The most intensively inhabited area in csd the tell-like elevation located on the southern
waterIront oI the settlement complex was excavated between 1980 and 1985 (Fig. 3). The
culture-bearing deposit was 130-160 cm thick at the centre and Iormed 50-120 cm thick strata
even in the periphery. The excavations helped identiIying this slight elevation covering less than
a hectare as the Iormer centre oI the csd settlement. Six major levels could be distinguished
within this small unit, down to the ancient humus. Some oI these were present only in the Iorm
oI vague spots, others had been obliterated by heavy erosion. The lower, 6-4
th
levels oI the csd
stratigraphy were labelled Phase 'A oI the settlement, while the upper 3
rd
-1
st
strata were assigned
to Phase 'B. In essence, Phases 'A and 'B were represented by two main building horizons
16
(Fig. 4-5), established during the liIe oI the central settlement oI csd. Buildings in the upper
layers were either completely rebuilt upon the ruins oI the layers below or the Iloors were
renewed by plastering with Iresh layers oI clay, without essential changes in the superstructure
oI the original house. That is, Irom an architectural point oI view, a distinct continuity may be
observed between the houses oI the earlier and later phases. This stratigraphic position was
evident in the case oI Houses 1 and 4, Iound in a superposition at the southern edge oI the
settlement. In Iact, this meant the two superimposed Iloor levels oI the same building. In other
cases houses oI the upper 'B layer were reconstructed in such a way that by slightly shiIting
their ground plans a place was made Ior a Iourth, new building. Changing the arrangement oI
houses by such uniIorm patterns may be seen as evidence Ior comprehensive principles oI space
use, beyond the level oI individual household units.
5
Banner 1940, 34-35; Korek 1972; Korek 1984, 136, Fig. 6; Kalicz 1986, 129; Link 2006, 116-117.
6
Csalog 1959, 10; Kalicz 1986, 129-130; Korek 1987, 49-50; Kalicz/Raczky 1987a, 16; Raczky 1995, 82; Kalicz
2001, 154.
7
Kalicz/Raczky 1984, 91; Kalicz/Raczky 1987b, 105-106; Raczky/Anders in press.
8
Whittle 1996, 49-59; Chapman 1997, 146-163; Chapman 1998, 117-118; Bailey 2000, 173-177; Nanoglou 2001,
310-312; Schier 2005, 12-13; Link 2006, 56-62; Hansen et al. 2007, 44-46.
9
Kotsakis 1999, 66-70.
10
Bailey et al. 1998; Bailey 2000, 156-164.
11
Hansen et al. 2005, 341-346; Hansen et al. 2006, 1-8; Hansen et al. 2007, 46-47; Reingruber 2006, 84-88.
12
Schier/Drasovean 2004, 148-154; Gerling et al. 2005, 35-40; Schier 2005, 13; 2006, 325.
13
Makkay 1982, 104-163; Sherrat 1982, 15-19; Sherrat 1983, 193; Kalicz 1986; Raczky 1987, 68-70; Chapman 1989,
38-39.
14
Whittle 1996, 107-112; Chapman 1989, 38-39; Chapman 1994, 86-87; Chapman 1997, 140-163; Bailey 2000, 173-
174; Schier 2005, 12.
15
Roberts 1996; Darvill 1997; Chapman 1997; Zvelebil/Bene 1997; Bailey 1997.
16
Raczky 1986, 105-107, Raczky 1987, 64-67.
103
Parallel with this phenomenon the vessel Iorms and decorative motiIs observed in Phase 'A
have completely changed by Phase 'B. While ceramics in the earlier phase were dominated by
stylistic Ieatures oI the Szakalhat type,
17
(Fig. 13), classic Ieatures oI the Tisza culture gained
decisive importance in the pottery style oI the later period
18
(Fig. 16). Consequently, pottery
assemblages representing the two phases are indicative oI a clear stylistic change that is, a
discontinuity oI Iorms within the time span deIined by two Iloor renewals during the 'liIe oI
the same house (House 1, 4). It was this phenomenon that allowed the distinction between two
developmental phases (Tisza I and II) within the Tisza culture.
19
Meanwhile it became also
possible to outline a new chronological deIinition Ior this culture. Twenty-one
14
C measurements,
representing the joint time-span oI the two phases in csd, outlined a time interval oI 5110 and
4830 BC (1 sigma). This means that the liIe oI the settlement (Phase A and B together)
encompassed approximately 280 years. These old data unIortunately were gained Irom charcoal
that tends to present broad error margins.
20
Since then, the critical analysis oI archaeological
contexts has reduced the number oI previously available dates Irom 21 to 16. Consequently, it
became clear that these dates are not suitable Ior the high-resolution distinction between
settlement phases (Fig. 6), since they would date the Tisza I period to between 5210 and 5020 BC
(Fig. 7), while the Tisza II period would Iall between 4990 and 4850 BC (Fig. 8). These time
intervals would be Iar too broad considering that they represent two tightly connected
construction phases. The pooled calibration oI the remaining 16
14
C dates would result in absolute
dates between 5210 and 4850 BC, estimating the settlement`s liIe to 360 years (Fig. 9). Using the
combined calibration, however, the resulting dates will range between 5050 and 5000 BC (1
sigma), which also seems to be unrealistic (Fig. 10). Interestingly, the combined calibration oI the
same data (2 sigma) resulted in a 5200 to 4980 BC time interval (Fig. 10). This corresponds to a
rather likely 220 years liIe span Ior the csd settlement. This would mean a rather early date Ior
the initial phase oI the Tisza culture. Nevertheless a joint 200 years time interval applicable to the
two superposed building horizons oIIers a relatively acceptable estimate Ior the individual
construction phases, that is 100 years calculated Ior each. This seems a rather long time interval
in comparison with previous estimations oI Neolithic house use. Previously 50-60, then 25-30
years were calculated and a 15-25 years time span was estimated Ior the neolithic dwellings.
21
Recent investigations in the Rhine region, however, have come up with a 75-100 years long time
interval on the basis oI dendrochronological dating and investigating architectural history.
22
These data are congruent with the Iramework oI absolute chronology obtained Ior the houses at
csd. As is shown by ethnographic parallels buildings constructed on a comparable technical
level are known to last 100-120 and 150-200 years respectively.
23
A similar continuity in
architecture combined with discontinuity in pottery style was observed during the Neolithic oI
Southern Germany by J. Lning on the basis oI a house excavated at Schernau during the late
1970s.
24
That example also necessitated the re-thinking oI previous deIinitions oI culture, as also
became necessary in the case oI Tisza culture during the 1980s.
25
On the basis oI radiocarbon dating, the 220 years time interval calculated Ior Phases I and II
oI the Tisza culture at the site oI csd oIIers guidance in the analysis oI approximately parallel
Vinca B2 and Vinca C1 periods as well.
26
Excavations carried out in the central part oI the csd settlement also provided a moderately
clear picture oI the internal sub-division oI the core habitation in a tell-like settlement. This main
habitation unit oI oblong shape measured 35 x 42 m and was surrounded by a plank Iencing set
in a Ioundation ditch in Phase 'A (Fig. 3 and 4, Fig. 11. 1). This ditch was 30-40 cm wide and
17
Raczky 1987, 74-76; Raczky 1992, 164, 171-172 and Fig. 1; Lichardus/Lichardus-Itten 1997, Abb. 7, Link 2006,
Abb. 15.
18
Raczky 1987, 76-77; Raczky 1992, 165, 172 and Fig. 2-4, Fig. 6-7. Lichardus/Lichardus-Itten 1997, Abb. 8; Link
2006, Abb. 16.
19
Raczky 1986, 104-107, Raczky 1987, 72-77; Kalicz 1989, 104-107.
20
Hertelendi et al. 1998.
21
Startin 1978, 145; Lning 1997, 92; Schlichterle 1997, 92.
22
Schmidt et al. 2005,167.
23
Juhasz 1997, 192.
24
Lning 1979, 108-113.
25
Makkay 1982, 60; Raczky 1986, 106; Kalicz/Raczky 1987a, 25.
26
Kalicz/Raczky 1987a, 25-27, Chronological chart on page 30.
104
20-35 cm deep in relation to the virgin soil. Its bottom was Ilat, broadening into a tub-like cross-
section in some places. The entrance was oriented South-West. To date, no parallel to this Iencing
oI a rectangular outline has been recovered in the Tisza region, although numerous examples oI
round enclosures are known in the area.
27
It is perhaps the so-called Langweiler, a single ditch
type oI trapezoid shape typical oI the Linear Pottery culture (LBK) in central Europe, that is
closest in Iorm to the csd Ieature.
28
Rather distant, but suitable parallels may be Iound in
Bulgaria in the Iorm oI rectangular palisade-and-ditch systems.
29
Examples in that area also show
that rectangular ditch, timber and earth IortiIications were rebuilt into a round IortiIication in the
later phase oI the same settlement as is illustrated by the site oI Poljanitza.
During the early phase oI csd, the area within the rectangular timber structure was sub-
divided by another Ience oI arched ground-plan. This separated the northwestern section oI the
'settlement square Irom the block oI houses (Fig. 4). No additional data are available to aid the
interpretation oI this phenomenon. It may be said, however, that this new Iencing probably means
yet another sub-division oI the living space, adding to the complexity oI two- dimensional
settlement layout. The double Iencing oI Period A was evidently given up during Phase B at the
csd site (Fig.5). This may be best explained by the horizontal expansion oI the settlement.
Traces oI a ditch were detected in a test trench opened north oI the site, suggesting that perhaps
a ditch corresponding to that oI Phase A was also dug around the site in Phase B.
Houses oI oblong ground plans were built tightly within the 1470 m
2
area deIined by the Ience
system. These houses Iormed a uniIorm habitation block thereby showing the integration oI
previous middle Neolithic units. SpeciIically, only narrow alleys were leIt between the houses
without the longitudinal pits that typically accompany Linear Pottery culture houses.
30
According
to the observations, probably ca. 3 later 6 houses stood within this area at a time, each
representing an approximately Iour-generation time interval. Using an estimated 5-7 people per
house in each period, a population oI 15-21 souls in the early phase and 30-42 souls in the
younger phase is obtained Ior this study area calculated Ior each generation interval. ThereIore,
the combined three larger and Iive smaller habitation areas oI the csd settlement may represent
at most 24 houses and a total population oI 120-168 in the Tisza I phase. The estimated number
oI houses increased to 48 by the Tisza II phase that may correspond to 240-336 inhabitants. These
results are oI help in Iine-tuning earlier estimates, although their orders oI magnitude remain
comparable.
31
These results, however, are still radically diIIerent Irom the population oI 1177 souls
calculated Ior the SzegvarTzkves settlement.
32
Meanwhile it corresponds well to recent
estimates oI 300-360 people obtained at sites representing the heyday oI Linear Pottery culture
in Central Europe.
33
Nevertheless it is clear that population estimates are prone to a host oI
biasing Iactors, thereIore such inIormation must always be treated with a healthy sense oI
scepticism.
34
Traces oI both proIane and sacred activities could be detected in the houses excavated. For
example, the skull oI an aurochs was Iound on the Iloor oI House 4, the southernmost building
in Phase A (Fig. 11. 3). A special pit was dug inside the same house, that contained periodic
deposits oI vessels and animal remains (Fig. 12 and 13). This pit must have stood open during the
early period oI the house, as was also the case with the sacriIicial pit Iound in one oI the
dwellings at the site oI Gorzsa.
35
27
Among others PolgarCsszhalom, HajdbszrmnyPrdi-halom, PolgarBosnyakdomb, BerettyjIalu
Herpaly, HdmezvasarhelyGorzsa, HdmezvasarhelyKknydomb, TapLeb A, BerettyjIalu-Szilhalom,
SzentpterszegKovadomb. For a summary see: Raczky-Anders in press.
28
KauImann 1997, 67, Abb. 6. Naturally, we are aware oI the diIIerences in the internal arrangement and essential
diIIerences in the shape oI the surrounding ditch system.
29
These include: Tell Goljamo Delcevo, Tell Ovcarovo, Tell Poljanitza, Tell Radingrad, Tell Targoviste. For a
summary see: Todorova 1982, Abb. 114-115, Abb. 134-145, Abb. 159-174, Abb. 175-184, Abb. 185-188.
30
For example: Domboroczki 1997, 26 and Fig. 3, Domboroczki 2001, 73-78, Pl. 3-4, Domboroczki 2006, 476-479.
31
Raczky 1987, 68-69.
32
Makkay 1982, 132-133; Makkay 1991, 323.
33
Zimmermann 2003; Schmidt et al. 2005, 167.
34
Kalicz 2001.
35
Horvath 1987, 44-45.
105
The set oI buildings was surrounded by an open activity zone where, in addition to Iireplaces,
traces oI everyday liIe (evidence oI stone and bone manuIacturing) could be observed.
Meanwhile, peculiar Iind assemblages Irom the same zone are indicative oI the physical
concurrence oI proIane and sacred actions within the same space. Among others, the shards oI a
large, Iace-decorated vessel and a square-shaped vessel came to light in the well-deIined
surroundings oI House 5 in Phase A
36
(Fig. 14).
The majority oI the 49 burials, containing 47 contracted skeletons and 2 cremation graves,
were also recovered within this zone oI daily activity that surrounded the block oI houses (Fig.
15). Some oI these graves, however, were directly dug into the houses. The longitudinal axis oI
the houses and the orientation oI graves show a uniIied pattern: the SE-NW direction seems to
associate the burials to the houses. In the case oI contracted burials, there is a regular distinction
between placing the deceased on their leIt versus right sides. As with the example oI Polgar
Csszhalom there was a gender diIIerence in this regard at the beginning oI the Late Neolithic
Tisza culture.
37
Nevertheless the graves rather seem to Iollow the periphery oI the uniIied
habitation area, thereby looking slightly separated Irom the area covered by the houses. It is
evident, however, that the relatively modest inventory oI grave goods Iound in these burials may
be explained by their close relationship to the utilitarian objects and pieces oI attire known Irom
the living area. It is also clearly visible that the 49 graves recovered represent only a Iraction oI
the dead leIt behind by the population that once inhabited this area Ior an estimated time span oI
200 years. Within this almost 4-4 generations Ior each phase (Phase 'A and 'B) a total
population oI 180-252 people may have lived on the tell-like settlement unit at csd, while the
graves excavated represent only 26-19 oI this number. It may thereIore be concluded that those
buried around the houses were placed there by some special criteria. This also reIlects a
conscious use oI space, i. e. 'restricted access that Iollowed certain rules. The same hypothesis
has been supported by osteological investigations carried out by Zs. Kovacs and E. Gal, who
Iound quantities oI human bone (approximately 160 pieces) among the animal remains recovered
Irom various Ieatures oI the csd settlement. This seems to indicate that at least two rules had
been Iollowed in disposing oI the deceased. Some were accorded burials around the houses, while
others may have been treated diIIerently, resulting in the disarticulation oI their skeleton.
Sporadically occurring human bone Iormed part oI the settlement`s general cultural context along
with pot shards and animal remains that may have been oI symbolic signiIicance.
38
Large clay extraction pits (Fig. 11. 1) that originally had provided raw material Ior the
construction oI houses were Iound around the outer periphery oI the working area.
Subsequently they served as reIuse pits that were occasionally used Ior burial as well (Fig. 11. 4).
At the same time in the middle Neolithic very characteristic long ditches, which demarcated the
space oI the house entities, are missing in the case oI the houses in csd. On the basis oI these
complex sets oI structures it became clear that the space divided into three distinct areas by
Iencing corresponded to three Iunctional units: the houses, the working zone and the ring oI
reIuse pits. This spatial sub-division represents a certain level oI settlement integration at csd.
Moreover, constructing the tightly-placed houses must have also required a considerably high
level oI co-operation and consent among the inhabitants involved. At the end oI Phase 'A, two
houses were rebuilt in a co-ordinated Iashion by opening some space Ior a third house between
them. This resulted in the new settlement structure during Phase 'B (Fig. 5). Such relatively
large-scale reconstructions bear witness to a well-deIined concept in settlement construction. The
Iact that such action could be carried out suggests that it was possible to mobilize the settlement`s
broader population to perIorm such tasks. The ground plan oI the csd settlement shows the
planned Iormation oI space, which must have exceeded the working capacity oI a single
household or Iamily. One may presume that planned, co-operative action mobilized the major part
oI this community at the site.
A structural division similar to the phenomenon observed at csd could also be detected on
the ground plan oI the Tisza culture settlement at KiskreGat in the northern section oI the Great
36
Raczky 1987, Fig. 21; Raczky 2000, Fig. 1-3.
37
Raczky/Anders 2006, 27; Anders/Nagy 2007, 90-93; Raczky/Anders 2008, 48-49.
38
Chapman/Gaydarska 2007.
106
Hungarian Plain.
39
The same type oI integrated spatial sub-division was apparent within the tell
settlement at BerettyojIaluHerpaly.
40
On the basis oI these observations one may say that the
planned Iunctional organization oI habitation areas was a general phenomenon at late Neolithic
settlements in the Tisza region. Spatial principles maniIest in late Neolithic space division show
essential changes relative to settlement structures oI the middle Neolithic Linear Pottery culture.
Among others, the settlement oI FzesabonyGubakt represents a clear pattern within which
separate houses, as well as adjacent pits and graves can be unambiguously recognized.
41
This
Iorm oI space division, called 'Haus und Hof, was an important recognition in relation to the
settlements oI the central European Linear Pottery culture as well. Studying the space/time
relationships by 'house and household clusters as elementary settlement and social units has
also been Iundamental in discussions oI the dimensions oI social organization in later periods oI
the European Neolithic.
42
At the same time all these trends are indicative oI a general
development in the attitude toward space-time during the Neolithic in Europe,
43
probably as a
reIlection oI the emergence oI increasingly complex levels oI social organization in the
background. This concept was also supported on the base oI several Neolithic, Eneolithic
examples oI the Balkans.
44
Evidently, the settlement oI PolgarCsszhalom represents the Iinal
stage oI this process during the Late Neolithic oI the Tisza region. At that site, the central tell
mound, separated by a system oI circular ditches and palisades, and the surrounding horizontal
single layer settlement, represent the maniIestation oI two radically diIIerent perceptions oI time
and space.
45
Altogether, the settlement oI csdKovashalom shows a multi-layer picture oI the
late Neolithic settlement integration process in the Krs river region.
46
It represents an organic
Iusion between the horizontal and vertical concepts oI space-time use. These Ieatures Iall in line
with the known developmental tendencies at the sites oI coeval tell cultures in South-Eastern
Europe as well as the structural and immanent rules oI the 'early Balkan village.
47
BIBLIOGRAPHY
Anders/Nagy 2007
A. AndersE. Gy. Nagy, Late Neolithic burial rites at the site oI Polgar-Csszhalom-dl. In: J. K. KozlowskiP.
Raczky (eds.), The Lengvel, Polgar and related cultures in the Middle/Late Neolithic in Central Europe (Krakow
2007) 83-96.
Bailey 1997
D. W. Bailey, Impermanence and Flux in the landscape oI Early Agricultural South Eastern Europe. In J. Chapman
and P. Dolukhanov (eds.), Landscapes in Flux. Central and Eastern Europe in Antiquitv (OxIord 1997) 41-58.
Bailey 2000
D. W. Bailey, Balkan Prehistorv. Exclusion, Incorporation and Identitv (London 2000).
Bailey et al. 1998
D, W. BaileyR. E. TringhamJ. BassM. HamiltonH. NeumannM. StevanovicI. AngelovaA. Raduncheva,
Expanding the dimensions oI early agricultural tells: the Podgoritsa Archaeological Project, Bulgaria. Journal of
Field Archaeologv 25, 1998, 373-396.
Banner 1940
J. Banner, Reges:eti kutatasok Bekes megveben Archologische Forschungen in Komitat Bekes (Gyula 1940).
39
Korek 1986, Fig. 2; Korek 1989, Abb. 3; Chapman 2000, 46-48, Fig.1.
40
Kalicz 1995, 72-74, Abb.4; Kalicz 2001, 157-158, Abb. 6.
41
Domboroczki 1997, 26 and Fig. 3, Domboroczki 2001, 73-78, Pl. 3-4, Domboroczki 2006, 476-479.
42
Boelicke 1982; Lning 1991, 68-70, Lning 1997, 32; Pavl 2000, 240-246; Stuble 2005, 12-16; Halstead 1999;
Jongsma/GreenIield 2003, 21-22; Whittle 2003, 70-77.
43
Pearson/Richards 1994; Thomas 1996, 83-91; Chapman/Gaydarska 2007, 187-189.
44
Tringham/Krstic 1990, 567-616; Chapman 1998, 112; Kotsakis 1999; Kotsakis 2006; Nanoglou 2001; Evans 2005,
121-123; Schier 2005, 11-13; Hansen et al 2007, 45-46.
45
Raczky/Anders 2008, 49; Raczky/Anders in press.
46
Parkinson 2002, 403-418; Parkinson 2006, 123-144.
47
Chapman 1989.
107
Boelicke 1982
U. Boelicke, Gruben und Huser. Untersuchungen zur Struktur bandkeramischer HoIpltze. In: B. Chropovsk,
(Hrsg.), Siedlungen der Kultur mit Linearkeramik. Nitra 1982, 17-28.
Chapman 1989
J. Chapman, The early Balkan village. In: S. Bknyi (ed.), Neolithic oI Southeastern Europe and its Near Eastern
Connections. Jaria Archaeologica Hungarica 2 (Budapest 1989) 33-53.
Chapman 1994
J. Chapman, Social power in the early Iarming communities oI Eastern Hungary Perspectives Irom the Upper
Tisza region Tarsadalmi erIorras a kelet-magyarorszagi korai Ildmvel kzssgekben a Fels-Tisza-vidk
szemszgbl. Jsa Andras M:eum vknvve 36, 1994, 79-99.
Chapman 1997
J. Chapman, The origins oI tells in Eastern Hungary. In: P. Topping (ed.), Neolithic Landscapes (OxIord 1997)
139-187.
Chapman 1998
J. Chapman, ObjectiIication, embodiment and the value oI places and things. In: D. Bailey (ed.), The Archaeology
oI Value. Essays on prestige and the processses oI valuation. British Archaeological Reports International Series 730
(OxIord 1998) 106-130.
Chapman 2000
J. Chapman, Tensions at Funerals. Micro-Tradition Analvsis in Later Hungarian Prehistorv. Archaeolingua Seris
Minor (Budapest 2000).
Chapman/Gaydarska 2007
J. Chapman/B. Gaydarska, Parts and Wholes. Fragmentation in Prehistoric Context (OxIord 2007).
Csalog 1959
J. Csalog, Rejtlyes dsztsek jkkori idolokon. Csongradmegvei Tanulmanvok 1, 1959, 5-16.
Darvill 1997
T. Darwill, Neolithic Landscapes: Identity and deIinition. In: P. Topping 8ed.), Neolithic Landscapes. Neolithic
Studies Group Seminar Papers 2, Oxbow Monograph 86 (OxIord 1997) 1-13.
Domboroczki 1997
L. Domboroczki, Fzesabony-Gubakt. jkkori Ialu a Kr. e. VI. vezredbl Fzesabony-Gubakt. Neolithic
village Irom the 6
th
millennium B.C. In: P. Raczky/T. Kovacs/A. Anders (eds.), Utak a mltba`. A: M3-as autpalva
reges:eti leletmentesei. Paths into the Past`. Rescue Excavations on the M3 Motorwav. (Budapest 1997) 1927.
Domboroczki 2001
L. Domborczki, Teleplsszerkezeti sajatossagok a kzps neolitikum idszakabl, Heves megye terletrl
Characteristics oI Settlement Patterns in the Middle Phase oI the New Stone Age Irom the Area oI Heves County. In:
J. Dani et al. (eds.), MOMOE I. Fiatal skoros Kutatk I. sszejvetelnek konIerenciaktete. Debrecen, 1997.
november 10-13. (Debrecen 2001) 67-94.
Domboroczki 2006
L. Domboroczki, A Izesabony-gubakti teleplstrtneti modell. j eredmnyek a Tisza-vidki kzps
neolitikum teleplstrtneti kutatasa tern A Settlement History Model oI Fzesabony-Gubakt: Recent Research
Findings on Mid-Neolithic Settlement History int he Tisza Region. Agria 42, 2006,475-485.
Evans 2005
J. G. Evans, Memory and ordination: environmental archaeology in tells. In: D. Bailey/A. Whittle/V. Cummings
(eds), (un)settling the Neolithic. (OxIord 2005) 112-125.
Gerling et al. 2005
C. Gerling/M. RehIeld/M. Woidich, Grben, Gruben und Huser - Siedlungswesen und Architektur der spten
Vinca-Kultur im Banat. In: W. Schier (Hrsg.), Masken Menschen Rituale. Alltag und Kult vor 7 000 Jahren in der
prhistorischen Siedlung von Uivar, Rumnien (Wrzburg 2005) 35-40.
Halstead 1999
P. Halstead, Neighbours Irom Hell? The Household in Neolithic Greece. In: P. Halstead (ed.), Neolithic Society
in Greece. SheIIiel Studies in Aegean Archaeologv 2 (SheIIield 1999) 77-95.
Hansen et al. 2005
S. Hansen/A. Dragoman/A. Reingruber/I. Gatsov/J. GrsdorI/P. Nedelcheva/S. Oant-MarghituB. Song, Der
kupIerzeitliche Siedlungshgel Pietrele an der Unteren Donau. Bericht ber die Ausgrabung im Sommer 2004.
Eurasia Antiqua 11, 2005, 341-393.
108
Hansen et al. 2006
S. Hansen/A. Dragoman/A. Reingruber/N. Benecke/I. Gatsov/T. Hoppe/F. Klimscha/ P. Nedelcheva/B. Song/J.
Wahl/J. Wunderlich, Pietrele Eine kupIerzeitliche Siedlung an der Unteren Donau. Bericht ber die Ausgrabung im
Sommer 2005. Eurasia Antiqua 12, 2006, 1-62.
Hansen et al. 2007
S. HansenM. ToderasA. ReingruberI. GatsovC. GeorgescuJ. GrsdorIT. HoppeP. NedelchevaM. PrangeJ.
WahlJ. WunderlichP. Zidarov, Pietrele, Mgura Gorgana. Ergebnisse der Ausgrabungen im Sommer 2006. Eurasia
Antiqua 13, 2007, 1-70.
Hertelendi et al. 1998
E. Hertelendi/. Svingor/P. Raczky/F. Horvath/I. Futo/L. Bartosiewicz, Duration oI tell settlements at Iour
prehistoric sites in Hungary. Radiocarbon 40, 1998, 659-665.
Horvath 1987
F. Horvath, Hdmezvasarhely-Gorzsa. A settlement oI the Tisza culture. In: L. TalasP. Raczky (eds.), The Late
Neolithic of the Tis:a Region. A survey of recent excavations and their findings. Hodme:ovasarhely-Gor:sa, S:egvar-
Tu:kves, Ocsd-Kovashalom, Jes:to-Magor, Berettyouffalu-Herpaly (Budapest, Szolnok 1987) 31-46.
Jongsma/GreenIield 2003
T. Jongsma/H. J. GreenIield, The Household Cluster Concept in Archaeology: A BrieI review. In: L, Nikolova
(ed.), Early Symbolic Systems Ior Communications in Southeast Europe. British Archaeological Reports International
Series 1139 (OxIord 2003) 21-24.
Juhasz 1997
A. Juhasz, 1997: let a hazban. In: I. Balassa I. (ed.), Magvar Nepraf: IJ. letmod (Budapest 1997) 178-193.
Kalicz 1986
N. Kalicz, ber das sptneolithische Siedlungswesen in Ungarn. Beri Balogh dam M:eum vknvve 13, 1985,
127-138.
Kalicz 1989
N. Kalicz, Chronologische und terminologische probleme im Sptneolithikum des Theigebietes. In: S. Bknyi
(ed.), Neolithic oI Southeastern Europa and its Near Eastern Connections. Jaria Archaeologica Hungarica 2
(Budapest 1989) 103-122.
Kalicz 1995
N. Kalicz, Siedlungsstruktur der neolithischen Herpaly-Kultur in Ostungarn. In: In: A. Aspes (ed.), Symposium
Settlement Patterns between the Alps and the Black Sea 5
th
to 2
nd
millennium B.C., Verona-Lazice 1992. Memorie
del Museo Civico di Storia Naturale di Jerona II/4 (Verona 1995) 6775.
Kalicz 2001
N. Kalicz, Zusammenhnge zwischen dem Siedlungswesen und der Bevlkerungszahl whrend des
Sptneolithikums in Ungarn Connections between modes oI settlement and population size during the Late
Neolithic period in Hungary. In: A. Lippert/M. Schultz/St. Shennan/ M. Teschler-Nicola (Hrsg.), Mensch und Umwelt
whrend des Neolithikums und der Frhbron:e:eit in Mitteleuropa. Ergebnisse interdisciplinrer Zusammenarbeit
zwischen Archologie, Klimatologie, Biologie und Medizin (Rahden/WestI. 2001) 153-163.
Kalicz/Raczky 1984
N. Kalicz/P. Raczky, Preliminary Report on the 1977-82 Excavations at the Neolithic and Bronze Age Tell Settle-
ment at BerettyojIaluHerpaly. Part I. Neolithic. Acta Archaeologica Academiae Scientiarum Hungaricae 36, 1984,
85-136.
Kalicz/Raczky 1987a
N. Kalicz/P. Raczky, The Late Neolithic oI the Tisza Region: a survey oI recent archaeological research. In: L.
Talas/P. Raczky (eds.), The Late Neolithic of the Tis:a Region. A survev of recent excavations and their findings.
Hodme:ovasarhely-Gor:sa, S:egvar-Tu:kves, Ocsd-Kovashalom, Jes:to-Magor, Berettyouffalu-Herpaly
(Budapest, Szolnok 1987) 11-30.
Kalicz/Raczky 1987b
BerettyojIalu-Herpaly. A settlement oI the Herpaly culture. In: L. Talas/P. Raczky (eds.), The Late Neolithic of
the Tis:a Region. A survey of recent excavations and their findings. Hodme:ovasarhely-Gor:sa, S:egvar-Tu:kves,
Ocsd-Kovashalom, Jes:to-Magor, Berettyouffalu-Herpaly (Budapest, Szolnok 1987) 105-125.
KauImann 1997
D. KauImann, Zur Funktion linienbandkeramischer Erdwerke. In: K. Schmotz (Hrsg.), Vortrge 15.
Niederbaverischer Archologentag (DeggendorI 1997) 41-87.
109
Korek 1972
J. Korek, A Tis:ai kultra (Budapest 1972). (Manuscript).
Korek 1984
J. Korek, A honIoglalas eltti korok rgszeti emlkei. Az jkkortl az idszamtas kezdetig. In: I. NagyJ.
Szigeti (eds.), Hodme:ovasarhely trtenete I (Hdmezvasarhely 1984) 111-189.
Korek 1986
J. Korek, A tiszai kultra nehany kerdese szak-Magyarorszagon. In: P. Nemeth/J. Farkas (eds.), Regeszeti
tanulmanyok Kelet-Magyarorszagrol. Folklr es Etnografia 24, (Debrecen 1986) 45-59.
Korek 1987
J. Korek, Szegvar-Tzkves. A settlement oI the Tisza culture. In: L. TalasP. Raczky (eds.), The Late Neolithic
of the Tis:a Region. A survey of recent excavations and their findings. Hodme:ovasarhely-Gor:sa, S:egvar-Tu:kves,
Korek 1989
J. Korek, Die Thei-Kultur in der Mittleren und Nrdlichen Theigegend. Inventaria Praehistorica Hungariae 3
(Budapest 1989).
Kotsakis 1999
K. Kotsakis, What tells can tell: social space and settlement in the Greek Neolithic. In: P. Halstead (ed.), Neolithic
Societv in Greece (SheIIield 1999) 66-76.
Kotsakis 2006
K. Kotsakis, Settlement oI discord: Sesklo and the emerging household. In: N. TasicC. Grozdanov (eds.),
Homage to Milutin Garaanin (Belgrade 2006) 207-220.
Lichardus/Lichardus-Itten 1997
J. LichardusM. Lichardus-Itten, Sptneolithische Funde von Cicarovce (Ostslowakei) und das obere Theigebiet
an der Schwelle zur Irhen KupIerzeit. Saarbrcker Studien und Materialien :ur Altertumskunde 4-5, 1995-1996
(1997), 143-249.
Link 2006
Th. Link, Das Ende der neolithischen Tellsiedlungen. Ein kulturgeschichtliches Phnomen des 5. Jahrtausends v.
Chr. im Karpatenbecken. Universittsforschungen :ur prhistorischen Archologie 134 (Bonn 2006).
Lning 1979
J. Lning, ber den Stand der neolithischen StilIrage in Sdwestdeutschland. Jahrbuch des Rmisch-
Germanischen Zentralmuseums 26 (1979) 75-113.
Lning 1991
J. Lning, Frhe Bauern in Mitteleuropa im 6. und 5. Jahrtausend v. Chr. Jahrbuch des Rmisch-Germanischen
Zentralmuseums 35 (1991) 27-93.
Lning 1997
J. Lning, Wohin mit der Bandkeramik? Programmatische Bemerkungen zu einem allgemeinen Problem am
Beispiel Hessens. In: V. Becker et al. (Hrsg.), Xovo, Festschrift fr Bernhard Hnsel. Internationale Archologie
Studia honoraria (Espelkamp 1997) 23-57.
Makkay 1982
J. Makkay, A magyarors:agi neolitikum kutatasanak uf eredmenyei. A: idorend es a nepi a:onositas kerdesei
(Budapest 1982).
Makkay 1991
J. Makkay, Entstehung, Blte und Ende der Thei-Kultur. In: J. Lichardus (Hrsg.), Die KupIerzeit als historische
Epoche. Saarbrcker Beitrge :ur Altertumskunde 55 (Bonn 1991) 319-328.
Nanoglou 2001
Str. Nanoglou, Social and monumental space in Neolithic Thessaly, Greece. European Journal of Archaeologv 4,
2001, 303-322.
Pearson/Richards 1994
M. P. Pearson/C. Richards, Ordering the World: Perceptions oI architecture, space and time. In: M. P. Pearson/
C. Richards (eds.), Architecture and Order. Approaches to Social Space (London, New York 1994) 1-37.
110
Parkinson 2002
W. A. Parkinson, Integration, Interaction, and Tribal`Cycling`: The Transition to the Copper Age on the Great
Hungarian Plain. In: W. A. Parkinson (ed.), The Archaeologv of Tribal Societies. International Monographs in Pre-
historv, Archaeological Series 15 (Ann Arbor 2002) 391-438.
Parkinson 2006
W. A. Parkinson, The Social Organization oI Early Copper Age Tribes on the Great Hungarian Plain. British
Archaeological Reports International Series 1573 (OxIord 2006).
Pavl 2000
I. Pavl, Life on a Neolithic Site. Bvlanv Situational Analvsis of Artefacts (Praha 2000).
Raczky 1986
P. Raczky, The cultural and chronological relations oI the Tisza Region during the Middle and the Late Neolithic,
as reIlected by the excavations at csd-Kovashalom. Beri Balogh dam M:eum vknvve 13, 1986, 103-125.
Raczky 1987
P. Raczky, csd-Kovashalom. A settlement oI the Tisza culture. In: L. Talas/P. Raczky (eds.), The Late Neolithic
of the Tis:a Region. A survey of recent excavations and their findings. Hodme:ovasarhely-Gor:sa, S:egvar-Tu:kves,
Raczky 1992
P. Raczky, The Tisza Culture oI the Great Hungarian Plain. Studia Praehistorica 11-12. 1992, 162176.
Raczky 1995
P. Raczky, Late Neolithic Settlement Patterns in the Tisza Region oI Hungary. In: A. Aspes (ed.), Svmposium
`Settlement Patterns between the Alps and the Black Sea 5
th
to 2
nd
millennium B.C.`, Verona-Lazice 1992. Memorie
del Museo Civico di Storia Naturale di Verona II/4 (Verona 1995) 77-86.
Raczky 2000
P. Raczky, An unique Iace pot Irom the csd-Kovashalom settlement oI the Tisza culture. Acta Archaeologica
Academiae Scientiarum Hungaricae 51, 2000, 9-22.
Raczky/Anders 2006
P. Raczky/A. Anders, Social dimensions oI the Late Neolithic settlement oI Polgar-Csszhalom (eastern Hun-
gary). Acta Archaeologica Academiae Scientiarum Hungaricae 57, 2006, 17-33.
Raczky/Anders 2008
P. Raczky/A. Anders, Late Neolithic spatial diIIerentiation at Polgar-Csszhalom, eastern Hungary. In: D. W.
Bailey/A. Whittle/D. HoImann (eds.), Living Well Together? Settlement and materialitv in the Neolithic of south-east
and central Europe (OxIord 2008) 35-53.
Raczky/Anders in press
P. Raczky/A. Anders, Activity Loci and data Ior spatial division at a late Neolithic site-complex. (Polgar
Csszhalom: a case study). In: S. Hansen (ed.) Life on Tells as Social Practice. Proceedings oI a conIerence held at
the German Archaeological Institute Berlin, February 26-28, 2007 (Berlin in press).
Raczky et al. 1985
P. Raczky/M. Seleanu/G. Rozsa/Cs. Siklodi/G. Kalla/B. Csornay/H. Oravecz/M. Vicze/E. BanIIy/S. Bknyi/P.
Somogyi, csd-Kovashalom. The intensive topographical and archaeological investigation oI a Late Neolithic site.
Preliminary report. Mitteilungen des Archaologischen Instituts der Ungarischen Akademie der Wissenschaften 14,
1985, 251-278.
Reingruber 2006
A. Rengruber, Mobilitt an der Unteren Donau in der KupIerzeit: Pietrele im Netz des Warenverkehrs. Das
Altertum 52, 2007, 81-100.
Roberts1996
B. K. Roberts, Landscapes of Settlement. Prehistorv to the present (London, New York) 1996.
Schier 2005
W. Schier, EinIhrung. In: W. Schier (Hrsg.), Masken Menschen Rituale. Alltag und Kult vor 7,000 Jahren in der
Prhistorischen Siedlung von Uivar, Rumnien (Wrzburg 2005) 9-18.
Schier 2006
W. Schier, Neolithic house building and ritual in the late Vinca tell site oI Uivar, Romania. In: In: N. TasicC.
Grozdanov (eds.), Homage to Milutin Garaanin (Belgrade 2006).
111
SchierDrasovean 2004
W. SchierFl. Drasovean, Vorbericht ber die rumnisch-deutschen Prospektionen und Ausgrabungen in der
beIestigten Tellsiedlung von Uivar, jud. Timis, Rumnien (1998-2002). Prhistorische Zeitschrift 79, 2004, 145-230.
Schlichterle 1997
H. Schlichterle, Neolithische und bronzezeitliche Huser in den Feuchtbodensiedlungen Sdwestdeutschlands. In:
H. Beck/H. Steuer (Hrsg.), Haus und Hof in ur- und frhgeschichtlicher Zeit. Bericht ber zwei Kolloquien der
Komission Ir die Altertumskunde Mittel- und Nordeuropas vom 24. bis. 26. Mai 1990 und 20. bis 22. November
1991 (34. und 35. Arbeitstagung). (GedenkschriIt Ir Herbert Jankuhn). (Gttingen 1997) 86-113.
Schmidt et al. 2005
B. Schmidt/W. Gruhle/O. Rck/K. Freckmann, Zur DauerhaItigkeit bandkeramischen Huser im Rheinland (5300-
4950 v. Chr.) Eine Interpretation dendrokronologischer und bauhistorischer BeIunde. In: Klimavernderung und
Kulturwandel in neolithischen Gesellschaften Mitteleuropas, 6700-2200 v. Chr. Climate Jariabilitv and Culture
Change in Neolithic Societies of Central Europe, 6700-2200 cal BC. RGZM Tagungen 1 (Mainz 2005) 151-170.
Sherratt 1982
A. G. Sherratt, Mobile resources: settlement and exchange in early agricultural Europe. In: C. RenIrew/S. Shennan
(eds.), Ranking, Resource and Exchange. Aspects of the Archaeologv of Earlv European Societv.(Cambridge 1982)
13-26.
Sherratt 1983
A. G. Sherratt, The Eneolithic period in Bulgaria in its European context. In: A. G. Poulter (ed.), Ancient Bulgaria
(Nottingham 1983).
Startin 1978
W. Startin, Linear Pottery Culture Houses. Reconstuction and Manpower. Proceedings of the Prehistoric Societv
44, 1978, 143-159.
Stuble 2005
H. Stuble, Huser und absolute Datierung der ltesten Bandkeramik, UniversittsIorschungen zur
prhistorischen Archologie 117 (Bonn 2005).
Thomas 1996
J. Thomas, Time, culture and identitv. An interpretive archaeologv (London 1996).
Todorova 1982
H. Todorova, KupIerzeitliche Siedlungen in Nordostbulgarien. Materialien zur Allgemeinen und Jergleichenden
Archologie 13 (Mnchen 1982).
TringhamKrstic 1990
R. TringhamD. Krstic, Conclusion: Selevac in the Wider Context oI European Prehistory. In: TringhamKrstic
(eds.), Selevac: A Neolithic Village in Yugoslavia. Monumenta Archaeologica 15 (Los Angeles 1990) 567-616.
Whittle 1996
A. Whittle, Europe in the Neolithic. The Creation of New Worlds (Cambridge 1996).
Whittle 2003
A. Whittle, The Archaeologv of people. Dimensions of Neolithic Life (London 2003).
Zimmermann 2003
A. Zimmermann, LandschaItsarchologie I. Die Bandkeramik auI der Aldenhovener Platte. Bericht der Rmisch-
Germanischen Komission 83, 2002 (2003) 17-38.
Zvelebil/Bene 1997
M. Zvelebil/J. Bene, Theorising Landscapes: the Concept oI the Historical Interactive Landscape. In: J.
Chapman/ P. Dolukhanov (eds.), Landscapes in Flux. Central and Eastern Europe in Antiquity. Colloquia Pontica 3
(OxIord 1997) 23-40.
112
Fig. 1. The geographical location oI csdKovashalom and the settlement on a hydrographic map oI
the csd area in the 18
th
century.
113
Fig. 3. csdKovashalom. Settlement Ieatures on the main excavated surIace.
Fig. 2. csdKovashalom. The topography oI the Late Neolithic settlement with the eight settlement
loci and the investigated areas. The reconstruction is based on a combination oI Iield surveys and test
borings.
114
Fig. 4. csdKovashalom. Settlement Ieatures oI the Tisza I phase.
115
Fig. 5. csdKovashalom. Settlement Ieatures oI the Tisza II phase.
116
Fig. 6. csdKovashalom. Sequence calibration oI 16 radiocarbon dates
117
Fig. 7. csdKovashalom. Combined calibration oI 10 radiocarbon dates Ior the Tisza I phase.
Fig. 8. csdKovashalom. Combined calibration oI 6 radiocarbon dates Ior the Tisza II phase.
118
Fig. 10. csdKovashalom. Combined calibration oI 16 radiocarbon dates Ior the Tisza I and Tisza II
phases together.
Fig. 9. csdKovashalom. Calibration oI 16 pooled radiocarbon dates Ior the Tisza I and Tisza II phases.
119
Fig. 11. csdKovashalom. 1: Excavation photograph with settlement Ieatures oI the Tisza I phase, 2:
Ground plan oI the Ieatures oI the Tisza I phase, 3: The skull oI an aurochs Iound on the Iloor oI house
4, 4: Contracted skeleton grave in a pit oI the Tisza I phase.
120
Fig. 12. csdKovashalom. 1-4: SacriIical pit in house 4 oI the Tisza I phase.
121
Fig. 13. csdKovashalom. Vessels Irom the sacriIicial pit in house 4 oI the Tisza I phase.
122
Fig. 14. csdKovashalom. 1-2: In situ Iinds Irom a special area in house 5 oI the Tisza I phase,
3: Face pot with symbolic decoration reconstructed Irom the Iinds in the special area at house 5 oI the
Tisza I phase, 4: Quadrangular vessel reconstructed Irom the Iinds in the special area at house 5 oI the
Tisza I phase.
123
Fig. 15. csdKovashalom. Spatial distribution oI the 49 graves Iound in the main excavation area.
124
Fig. 16. csdKovashalom. Decorated vessels oI the Tisza II phase Irom pit 157.
125
LITHIC INDUSTRIES FROM THE CSD-KOVSHALOM TELL-LIKE SETTLE-
MENT IN HUNGARY
Malgor:ata Kac:anowska
*
, Janus: K. Ko:lowski
*
and

Pal Smegi
**
Keywords: Hungarv, Great Hungarian Plain, Neolithic, Tis:a Culture, chipped stone indus-
trv, flakes, blades, tools, raw material distribution, ground and polished stone implements.
This work is a preliminary report on the analysis oI lithic industries Irom the tell-like settle-
ment csdKovashalom.
1
The report deals only with the series oI arteIacts assigned to two
phases oI the Iunctioning oI the tell. The phases were distinguished on the basis oI stratigraphy.
The two phases together yielded a series oI 2 298 chipped and 178 ground stone arteIacts. The
entire analyzed material Irom csd numbered more than 6 000 arteIacts and will be dealt with
in a separate monograph. The objective oI this report is, Iirst oI all, to document multi-direc-
tional, inter-regional contacts oI the inhabitants oI the tell, to show the dynamics oI technologi-
cal, typological and Iunctional changes in lithic production in the two phases oI the Iunctioning
oI the site (radiometric chronology restricted this period to about two centuries), and to deIine the
place oI csd industry in the diIIerentiation oI Middle and Late Neolithic culture complexes.
The relation oI this industry to the Tisza complex in the Hungarian Plain, to the Lengyel complex
in the west (Transdanubia) and in the north (Slovakia, Moravia), to the Vinca Culture in the
South and South-East (Voivodina, Serbia, Banat, Transylvania), possibly also to Lumea Noua and
Precucuteni Iurther east, is discussed. The existence oI syncretic groups (Polgar-Csszhalom,
Cicarovce and others) at the outskirts oI the Tisza complex Iurther complicates these relations.
I. CHIPPED STONE INDUSTRY
1. Raw materials structure
A distinctive Ieature oI lithic inventories Irom csd is a great variety oI lithic raw materials.
They represent 14 petrographical categories viz.: limnoquartzites/hydroquartzites (14 types),
opals (17 types), jasper (7 types), quartzites (6 types), radiolarites (45 types), rhyolites (4 types),
meniliths (2 types), chalcedony (2 types), Ilint (at least 4 types), siliciIied diatomites (2 types)
and individual types oI such raw materials as: geiserite, obsidian, and Iossil wood. This diIIer-
entiation oI raw materials, identiIied by Dr. P. Smegi, is, thus, even greater than that proposed
by K. T. Biro
2
(1998). In a sample oI 999 arteIacts Irom csd K. T. Biro identiIies in her work
27 raw materials. The key to 18 other raw materials listed by K. T. Biro
3
(denoted by symbols
Irom 901 to 999) could not be Iound in her work.
The raw materials that occur with highest Irequency are limnoquartzites/hydroquartzites (57.5
early phase and 53.62 late phase), opals (20.4 early phase, 14.2 late phase) and jasper
(4.1 early phase, 5.4 late phase). As can be seen the two occupational phases do not show
important diIIerences in respect oI petrographic characteristics. Nearly all the enumerated raw ma-
terials are represented by all major technological categories (including unworked chunks).
Limnoquartzites represented in complete reduction sequences come, Iirst oI all, Irom the re-
gion oI the Tokaj and the Matra Mountains (e.g. types 1, 1a, 2, XX, XXV), possibly also Irom the
Szerencs Mountains (type 1b). However, types originating Irom Banat and southern Transylvania
also occur (e.g. Irom the Iossel region). Most opals, too, come Irom the region oI the Tokaj and
the Matra Mts. (types X, XLI, XLIV), the Szerencs Mts. (type XL), the Erdbenye region (type
XXXV), less oIten Irom the region oI southern Transylvania (type XXXIV). Jaspers, worked in
*
Jagellonian University, Institute oI Archaeology, Krakw, Poland
**
University oI Szeged, Department oI Geology and Paleontology, Hungary
1
Raczky 1986; Raczky et al. 1985; Raczky 1987.
2
T. Biro 1998.
3
T. Biro 1998.
126
the Iull reduction sequence come Irom the region oI Monok, Legyesbenye, Komloska, Szerencs,
possibly Irom the Tokaj and Szerencs Mts. regions. Andesites originate Irom the Matra Mts.
Other raw materials may also have north-east-Hungarian origins |such as geiserite (possibly Irom
the Botk/Sarospatak region), rhyolites (Irom the Tokaj Mts., Irom Barabas in the region oI the
Kaszonyi Mts.) and siliciIied diatomites (Irom ErdbenyeLigetmajor)|. Deposit areas oI
radiolarites, on the other hand, are located in Transdanubia |the proportion oI rktEpleny
radiolarite emphasized by K. T. Biro
4
is, however, smaller in our analysis, which may be
caused by the Iact that P. Smegi and K. T. Biro used diIIerent criteria to identiIy this raw mate-
rial|, and also in the Mecsek Mountains.
Besides the raw materials represented in the Iull reduction cycle there were raw materials
imported as Iinal products oI reduction namely: blades and retouched tools. Among them belong,
in the early settlement phase, limnoquartzites type XX (opaque, yellow-beige, rough- probably
Irom the Legyesbenye region) represented by individual tools; in the late phase types 11 and 14
(weathered hydroquartzites oI unknown origin) and type XX mentioned above represented
by only blades and retouched tools. In the early phase there are opals type XVIa (yellowish
opalite) and XVIII (violet hydrothermic opals/jasper) and type XXI (brownish, transluscent
hydrothermic opalite) represented by blades and tools only; their provenance is unknown. In the
late phase there are opals type 2a/IV (yellowish, Irom the Mecsek or the Tokaj regions), type
XXXVI (grey-beige opalite Irom the Matra or the Tokaj Mts), type VII (weathered hydrothermic
rock oI unknown provenance) and the above-mentioned type XVIa, all represented by only blades
and tools. The same situation i.e. import oI, exclusively, blades and/or tools, can be seen in the
case oI other raw materials. These are: some quartzites (types XXXVIII and E1 probably Irom
the Mecsek Mts., in the early phase, and types XXXVIII and XLIV in the late phase) and Ilints
|Irom the Dnester basin, 'chocolate and Jurassic Ilint Irom southern Poland, 'Banat yellowish
Ilint, Ilints type 11a and 16 oI unknown origin all occur in the early phase; in the late phase
'chocolate Ilint and Ilint types oI unknown provenance (beige Ilints varieties 18/19)|.
The main deposit area oI lithic raw materials, worked in Iull reduction sequence was north-
eastern Hungary. From this region unworked concretions were imported mainly oI
limnoquartzites/hydroquartzites and opals. Concretions were, as a rule, non-decorticated and
were used Ior on-site production oI Ilake and blade blanks. It is noteworthy that various quality
raw materials were collected in many diIIerent areas, probably randomly. Thus, the method oI
raw materials procurement was not systematic but, rather, accidental; it is likely that raw mate-
rials procurement was embedded in other economic activities.
The raw materials that come Irom Transdanubia, Banat and southern Transylvania, mainly
radiolarites, were more careIully selected. This may be the consequence oI the Iact that they were
imported by barter or as giIts. Individual Iinds oI blades or tools that come Irom both the 'clas-
sic procurement zone (the Matra, the Tokaj Mts., possibly also the Mecsek Mts.), Irom inner
Carpathian zone ('Banat Ilint), and Irom Transcarpathian territories (Senonian Ilint Irom the
Dnester basin, southern Polish Ilints: 'chocolate and Jurassic types) were also bartered or giIts.
2. The structure of major technological groups (Fig. 1)
From the early phase a series oI 1815 arteIacts was analyzed including 13.5 cores, splin-
tered pieces 5.4, Ilakes and chips 54.8, retouched tools 11.3 and Iunctional tools
(macroscopically identiIiable) 1.3. This structure is typical oI sites where mesolocal raw
materials were worked on-site whereas blanks and tools, made Irom meso- and extralocal raw
materials, were made oII-site and imported. In the late phase the number oI arteIacts drops con-
siderably (483). The proportion oI cores increases signiIicantly (26.1), whereas that oI Ilakes
and chips (41.8) and splintered pieces is smaller (0.3). The Irequency oI blades (14.9), re-
touched tools (14.2) and Iunctional tools (2.3) remains similar.
The exceptionally high proportion oI cores in the late phase can be accounted Ior by the Iact
that also unworked pieces (chunks and nodules with single scars) were assigned to cores. These
unworked pieces are more than 16 oI cores and Iragments. The Iact that the imported nodules
were oI low quality, randomly collected and not tested on collection could also inIluence the core
index. Another Iactor is the Iact that reduction oI some cores is weakly advanced.
4
T. Biro 1998.
127
We are inclined to explain the drastic drop in the proportion oI splintered pieces (Irom 5.4 to
0.3) by the change in technological tradition rather than by greater availability oI raw materi-
als and less thriIty economy.
3. Debitage technique
Cores and Iragments constitute 13.5 oI arteIacts in the early phase, whereas in the late phase
their proportion increases to 26.1. The high percentage oI cores indicates that unworked con-
cretions (1.8 oI the inventory early phase, 4.4 late phase) and a large quantity oI partially
decorticated concretions or even cores in various stages oI reduction were brought to the site.
Most cores were made Irom limnoquartzites (67.4 oI all cores and Iragments early phase,
30.5 late phase). Among arteIacts Irom limnoquartzites alone the number oI cores is compa-
rable to the Irequency oI all cores in the two assemblages (early phase 15.9, late phase
30.5). Next in number are cores Irom opals, jasper, andesite, and meniliths Iollowed by still
Iewer specimens Irom quartzite, radiolarite, geiserite, rhyolite, Iossil wood, diatomite and others.
It is noteworthy that no cores Irom obsidian were Iound; this raw material is represented by only
Ilakes and blades and tools.
In the chipped stone industry Irom csd several, diIIerent operational chains can be distin-
guished. The Iirst group are sequences oI blade reduction on single-platIorm cores (A). These
sequences are evidenced by the Iollowing core types:
A1. Cores with the Ilaking surIace on the narrow Iace oI a tabular concretion. Reduction
started by shaping the platIorm and consecutive detachment oI blades; the Ilaking surIace did not
extend beyond the narrow Iace; it was Iairly Ilat or weakly convex (Pl. I 1,2).
A.2. Cores with a Ilat and broad Ilaking surIace. Blades were detached Irom an unprepared
surIace aIter the platIorm had been shaped (Pl. I 39). In the advanced phase cores oI this type
became smaller while the Ilaking surIace gradually rounded until subdiscoidal (Pl. I 10,11) or
carenoidal (Pl. I 12) Iorms were obtained.
A3. Cuboid cores with a convex Ilaking surIace which was shaped on the unprepared surIace
oI a concretion (Pl. I 13, II 17).
A4. Besides blades some single-platIorm cores were used to detach some Ilakes. Such cores
show, sometimes, traces oI preparation oI the Ilaking surIace which suggests a pre-core phase (Pl.
II 810). In the advanced phase these cores could have had Ilat Ilaking surIaces, convex or even
around the entire circumIerence.
A separate, more advanced, reduction sequence is evidenced by blade cores with changed ori-
entation (90
o
cores type B). Some oI these cores may, in Iact, be more exhausted stage oI cores
Irom type A. Among change-oI-orientation cores belong:
B1. Cores with the second Ilaking surIace shaped on the platIorm oI the previous core (Pl. II
11, III 1.2).
B2. Cores whose second Ilaking surIace was installed on the opposite Iace oI a core; at the
same time the direction oI blade removals on this Ilaking Iace was perpendicular to the previous
Ilaking surIace (Pl. III 46).
B3. Cores whose Ilaking surIace was installed in the distal part (Pl. II 3).
A Iurther stage oI reduction oI these cores was to install the third Ilaking surIace (Pl. III 7)
and, then, to modiIy them into multi-platIorm shapes that, however, are very rare.
Typical double-platIorm cores, more oIten blade-Ilake ones, are rare (Pl. IV 1). Also cores on
Ilakes, Ior blade and Ilakes or Ior bladelets, occur sporadically.
The technique oI centripetal reduction was rarely used, more oIten in the residual phase.
The cores described here evidence the use oI the soIt-hammer or the punch techniques, only
exceptionally the use oI a hard hammer.
It is only among the Iinds Irom the early phase that single-platIorm blade cores sporadically
occur very regular, sub-discoidal or sub-cylindrical, with abraded platIorm edges indicating the
use oI pressure technique (Pl. IV 24). Four such cores were discovered in the early phase; in the
late phase they are absent.
In general, cores in initial phases oI reduction are predominantly Irom limnoquartzites (type
1, 1a, 1I, 1h), whereas among strongly exhausted cores specimens made Irom opals (type 11, IV)
and Irom limnoquartzite type 18 are most Irequent. Cores exploited using pressure technique are
also made Irom limnoquartzites (type 1 and 1 m) and geiserite (raw material type 9). These Iour
128
cores (Pl. IV 24) demonstrate that their reduction did not take place on-site but that they were
imported to the site Irom a territory with a diIIerent technological tradition: the nearest such ter-
ritory is the Bkk Culture territory. This is in agreement with raw materials (limnoquartzite also
the Boldogkvaralja type, geiserite) whose deposits were exploited by the Bkk Culture groups
in north-eastern Hungary.
The diIIerences between the two phases oI the site can be seen in core reduction methods. In
the early phase there are group A1 cores, blade-Ilake cores (group A4) with rounded Ilaking sur-
Iaces, and cores with three platIorms. As we have mentioned earlier, in the early phase there also
occur sub-cylindrical and subdiscoidal cores used Ior the production oI very regular blades split
by pressure oII technique.
A characteristic Ieature oI the late phase is, Iirst oI all, the occurrence oI type A3 cores
single-platIorm, polyhedral, blade specimens. Other core categories are recorded both in the early
and in the late phase. Pressure technique was not registered in the late phase.
In both phases the pre-core stage is evidenced in the reduction oI some cores (3 cores in the
early phase and 2 in the late phase), although the component oI debitage products Irom prelimi-
nary core preparation (crested Ilakes and blades etc) is relatively small and limited, principally,
to the early phase.
4. Debitage products: flakes
Flakes and chips together are 54.8 in the early phase and 41.8 in the late phase. Only a
small percentage oI Ilakes were without or with/partial cortex (in the early phase 11.4, in late
phase 11.7 cortical Ilakes or with 60 oI cortex). The dorsal pattern oI Ilakes points to Ire-
quent changes oI orientation on cores in various phases oI reduction (about a third oI all Ilakes,
in both phases, have perpendicular scars). Flake butts (Fig. 2) are predominantly single-blow
(45.2 early phase, 39.7 late phase), less oIten unprepared (24.1 early phase, 33.8
late phase). Sporadically butts are Iacetted or linear (up to 11).
Butt edges were not straight; they are as a rule unprepared, slightly denticulated (nearly halI
oI the specimens in each phase). Regularization (25.5 early phase, 35.2 late phase) is
more Irequent than butt edge abrasion (6.1 early phase, 5.8 late phase).
The nature oI bulbs shows that the hard hammer technique was used when Ilakes were de-
tached namely: the presence oI cones oI percussion (23.4 early phase, 25 late phase),
sometimes double; oIten on conspicuous bulbs.
The characteristic Ieatures that point to the use oI a soIt hammer and/or punch (e.g. the lip) are
rare, and even less Irequent are the Ieatures indicating the use oI pressure technique (e.g. the bulb
is demarcated by a Iine semicircular line).
Most Ilakes were not detached in the advanced phase oI blade core reduction, but come Irom
the preparation oI such cores or Irom speciIic cores meant Ior Ilake (or blade-Ilake) production.
This is conIirmed by the presence oI Ilake scars on the dorsal side oI majority oI Ilakes (65.1
early phase, 73.5 late phase).
Flake length oscillates in the interval Irom 12 to 92 mm in the early phase and Irom 13 to 70
mm in the late phase; the main mode is, however, between 2135/40 mm. Flake width is in the
interval Irom 11 to 90 mm in the early phase and Irom 14 to 69 mm in the late phase, although
most specimens are in the mode Irom 16 to 30 mm (in the late phase there are two maxima: 21
26 and 3140 mm). We can, thereIore, distinguish two Ilake groups: slender and broader ones.
The latter occur primarily in the late phase when Ilakes are thicker. Flake thickness is in the in-
terval Irom 2 to 23/25 mm.
5. Debitage products: blades
Blades are 13.5 oI all arteIacts in the early phase and 14.9 in the late phase. The majority
oI specimens are Iairly short, with the length in the range between 19 and 55 mm, although speci-
mens between 19 35 mm occur most Irequently. Blade width is in the interval Irom 6 to 24 mm
(the main mode is Irom 9 to 11 mm), and thickness is Irom 1 to 10 mm. There are no major mor-
phometric diIIerences between blades in the two phases.
In the early phase blades without cortex are 75 oI all blades, and 55.5 in the late phase.
The remaining specimens have lateral or distal cortex which indicates that Ilaking surIaces were,
as a rule, unprepared, cortical and extended onto cortical surIaces.
129
Blades were detached Irom single-platIorm cores or change-oI-orientation specimens; only a
Iew blades have opposite scars on the dorsal side.
Blades butts (Fig. 2) were, predominantly, single-blow (45.0 early phase, 50.0 late
phase), less oIten Iacetted (16.9 and 16.6 respectively); in the late phase punctiIorm butts are
more Irequent (11.1).
Blade bulbs are greatly varied; however, specimens with weakly distinguished (Ilat) bulbs,
with striations, or with a lip are most numerous. This evidences the use oI the soIt hammer and/
or punch technique, whereas specimens that would exhibit distinct Ieatures oI pressure technique
are absent.
The lateral sides oI blades are parallel (65.4 early phase, 69.4 late phase), although
some blades are Iairly irregular (5.6 early phase, 19.4 late phase). Triangular and trapezoi-
dal cross-sections are equal in number. ProIiles are straight or convex. Specimens with one ridge
and those with two ridges both straight and sinusoidal are, also, equal in number.
A conclusion can be drawn that Ilakes come mainly Irom early reduction phase and Irom spe-
ciIic Ilake oriented chaines operatoires. Most Ilakes were detached by means oI a hard hammer.
Blades, on the other hand, are the product oI blade-aimed reduction sequences where a soIt ham-
mer and/or a punch were used. Correlation between the various techniques oI blade production
and particular raw materials was not registered. Similarly, no such correlation occurs in the case
oI the raw materials that are represented by only blades or tools.
6. The problem of splintered technique
The interpretation oI splintered technique hesitates as always invariably between tech-
nique oI production oI microlithic blanks (splinters) and the use oI splintered pieces as tools
(chisel-like tools). Splintered pieces are present mainly in the early phase (5.4 oI all arteIacts),
whereas in the late phase their proportion is minimal (0.6). It is noteworthy that in the early
phase most splintered pieces were discovered in pit 11 (out oI a total oI 99 splintered pieces 92
come Irom pit 11). It should be added that most splintered pieces Irom the early phase were made
Irom opals (41.4 oI all splintered pieces in that phase). That splintered pieces Iunctioned as
cores is evidenced by the presence oI Ilakes resembling pseudo-burin spalls that were detached
Irom lateral sides oI splintered pieces (59 specimens in the early phase). Moreover, a large quan-
tity oI chips occurs in the early phase, but in the late phase their proportion drops drastically.
7. Tools
7.1. Retouched tools (Fig. 3)
Retouched tools account Ior 11.3 oI arteIacts in the early phase (206 specimens) and 14.2
in the late phase (60 specimens). In the early phase a little more than 50 oI retouched tools were
made on Ilakes, whereas in the late phase tools made on blades are slightly more numerous. In the
two phases very Iew tools were made on chunks or cores, or on technical waste (overpassed
blades, crested blades, subcrested blades).
In the early phase slightly broader blades were selected Ior tool production, although their
technical parameters (butts, edges) did not diIIer Irom those oI an average blank. In the late phase
too, broader blades were selected, sometimes also longer than average, but, in addition, these
blades oIten had Iacetted butts. We can, thus, assume that tools were more oIten made on blanks
imported to the site. The presence oI tools Irom raw materials that do not occur as cores or
debitage products conIirms this supposition.
In both phases the structure oI retouched tools is dominated by end-scrapers (Fig. 3): 62.1
early phase, 57.9 late phase. Also in both phases Ilakes were used as blanks to produce end-
scrapers; the ratio oI blade end-scrapers to Ilake specimens is 1:3.
In the group oI blade end-scrapers short (Pl. IV 58, 19), sometimes double specimens (Pl. IV
912), are more numerous than large items (Pl. IV 13, 14, 16). In all likelihood, Iront-rejuvena-
tion during use results in size reduction. This is conIirmed by comparison oI measurable at-
tributes oI blade end-scrapers with the attributes oI unmodiIied blades.
Flake end-scrapers, too, are predominantly microlithic (Pl. IV 19, V 1,2) or hypermicrolithic
(Pl. V 35). This is partially the eIIect oI Iront rejuvenation, and partially the consequence oI
intentional selection oI small blanks. Some Ilake end-scrapers are double (Pl. V 6, 7); just as
among blade end-scrapers (Pl. IV 15), among Ilake specimens lateral retouch is rare (Pl. V 8). In
130
both phases discoidal end-scrapers were recorded (Pl. V 1012). There were single examples oI
core-like carenoidal end-scrapers (Pl. V 13).
End-scrapers also occur in combination with retouched truncations, sporadically with burins
and perIorators. Some end-scrapers, just like retouched truncations, Iunctioned as sickle inserts
and were haIted obliquely (Pl. V 1416). The majority oI end-scrapers show use-wear suggest-
ing hide working. There is occasional linear use-wear oI lateral sides oI end-scrapers, probably
Irom working wood.
The next group although much less Irequent are retouched truncations: in the early phase
12.1, in the late phase 14.5. These are blade truncations with oblique (Pl. V 1723), con-
vex (Pl. V 24), straight (Pl. V 2628) or concave (Pl. VI 1) retouched edges. Double truncations
are rare (Pl. VI 2,3). Most specimens exhibit use-wear Irom Iunctioning as sickle inserts. Some
are without such wear but on the retouched edge show use-wear that indicate the use as tools Ior
hide treatment (Pl. V 22,23,25).
A Iurther place belongs to: retouched Ilakes (together with notched-denticulated tools they are
6.3 in the early phase; in the late phase they are absent), perIorators (early phase 5.3, late
phase 4.3 Pl. VI 49), blades with lateral retouch (1.9 early phase, 5.7 late phase
Pl. VI 10). Individual examples oI macrotools (macroside-scrapers Pl. VI 1113; Pl. VII 1) and
burins were recorded. In both phases there occur microlithis such as trapezes (Pl. VI 14,15; VII
25) and rhombs (3 specimens early phase, 4 specimens late phase), whereas backed blades
(4 specimens) with a convex, arched (Pl. VII 68) and angulated blunted back (Pl. VII 9) are
known only in the early phase. Use-wear analysis did not reveal wear on microliths.
7.2. Functional tools
We have assigned to the group oI Iunctional tools, Iirst oI all, all the specimens with sickle
gloss. RegretIully, as a high-power microscope was unavailable and our time limited, we were
unable to perIorm use-wear analyses and examine all the debitage products oI which some were
certainly utilized. On individual blades and Ilakes wear was macroscopically observable or at
small magniIications: this was, primarily, microscars and edge rounding and smoothing that evi-
denced the use Ior working wood.
In the early phase unretouched sickle inserts accounted Ior 1.3 oI all arteIacts (23 specimens
as compared to 206 retouched tools) whereas in the late phase they are 2.2 oI all arteIacts (11
specimens as compared to 69 retouched tools). In most cases, these inserts were obliquely haIted
(Pl. VII 1015). Sometimes, the inserts were turned in the haIts and turned two or three times (Pl.
VII 16); when the specimens have longitudinal working edges the insert was haIted straight (Pl.
VII 17,18).
8. Chipped stone industry from csd in comparison to other Middle/Late Neolithic in-
dustries of the Middle Danube Basin
The knowledge oI the chipped stone industry oI the Tisza Culture is still incomplete. We can,
principally, reIer to the results published by K. T. Biro
5
oI analyses oI part oI the materials Irom
the csd tell and several other tells Irom the Tisza basin: the SzegvarTzkves tell south oI the
Krs mouth and the SzolnokTzkves tell north oI the Krs mouth. K. T. Biro discusses, be-
sides sites Iurther south, in between the Krs mouth and the Maros mouth such as the
HdmezvasarhelyGorzsa and the TapeLeb tells.
In terms oI raw materials structure the csd tell industry resembles most closely accord-
ing to K. Biro
6
the Szegvar-Tzkves tell; this can be seen in the domination oI limnoquartzites,
Iollowed by transdanubian radiolarites; radiolarites Irom the Mecsek Mts are still Iewer and there
are small quantities oI obsidian. Further north the site oI Szolnok-Tzkves yielded even greater
quantity oI limnoquartzites, mainly Irom the Matra Mts., and small proportions oI Transdanubian
radiolarites and obsidians.
Tisza Culture sites that are situated Iurther to the south Irom the Szegvar-Tzkves tell show
diIIerent raw materials structure. At the site oI Gorzsa the proportion oI limnoquartzites drops
sharply; they are replaced by obsidian (Irom 3.7 to20.4 according the phase), radiolarites
5
T. Biro 1998.
6
T. Biro 1998.
131
Irom the Mecsek Mts. (respectively Irom 13.1 to 34.0) and Ilint Irom Banat (40.6 in early
phase and 25.0 in late phase); Transcarpathian Ilints are also recorded (Starnini et al. 2007).
The data Irom the Tape-Leb tell is based on a small series oI 52 arteIacts: Transdanubian
radiolarites predominate, also obsidian and Mecsek type radiolarite.
7
The diIIerences in the raw materials structure oI assemblages oI the Tisza Culture could reIlect
the Iact that the various sites represented various socio-political units which Iormed 'alliances
and maintained contacts with other populations groups. On the other hand, these dissimilarities
could express diachronic changeability oI interregional relations. There is evidence to show that
the early phase Irom csd corresponds to the early phase oI the Tisza Culture (i.e. Vinca B2),
whereas the late phase Irom the csd tell corresponds to the classic phase oI the Tisza Culture
(still Vinca B2 and the beginning oI Vinca C horizon)
8
. The SzegvarTzkves tell is synchro-
nous with the period Irom the Szakalhat/Tisza transition until the end oI the classic Tisza phase
(synchronous with Vinca C).
9
Occupation oI the Gorzsa tell, too, started at the beginning oI the
Tisza Culture and lasted until the late phase oI the Tisza Culture i.e. it spans the period Irom
Vinca C.
10
In this light we can assume that the diIIerences in the raw materials composition store
between the various Tisza Culture tells are not the eIIect oI diachronic diIIerences but were
caused by the hypothetical boundary between two inter-regional and inter-cultural 'orientations
that ran in the interIluve oI the Krs and the Maros rivers. This interpretation disqualiIies the
hypothesis put Iorward by J. Makkay
11
which claimed that the Szegvar-Tzkves tell was a cen-
tral settlement in a hierarchical settlement system oI the Tisza Culture.
The structure oI major technological groups at csd, also the considerable variety oI raw
materials at other sites oI the Tisza Culture situated beyond deposit areas (with the exception oI
Gorzsa tell and oI the small series Irom TapeLeb, the number oI types oI raw materials at other
sites is as many as 20 to 45) point to a Iairly random selection oI raw materials. Consequently,
this suggests absence or low level oI specialization in lithic production. Moreover, it is possible
that raw materials procurement Iirst oI all mesolocal was not a specialized activity but was
embedded in other economic activities. Some exceptions Irom these rules may suggest that socio-
economic organization was diIIerent in some population groups.
Such an interpretation calls into question Irequent claims oI advanced specialization as the
eIIect oI concentration oI population who set up large villages, building tells. We can assume that
concentration oI population was the consequence oI economic specialization, especially oI cattle
breeding. The consequences in the sphere oI lithic production are seen mostly at the end oI the
Neolithic and in the Eneolithic, but this process oI emerging specialization was not synchronous
in diIIerent villages.
The localization oI lithic production in the settlement at csd is evidence that almost all the
domestic units (households) were in some degree involved in the manuIacture oI lithics. In the
early phase the number oI arteIacts inside dwellings is smaller than in the pits around them. The
situation in the early phase is given below:
a) Dwelling 7: 80 arteIacts including 20 retouched tools. This is the biggest number oI
arteIacts; we should also bear in mind that this dwelling was only partially excavated. The pro-
portion oI tools (25) is twice as high as in the entire early phase (12.6). Because only one,
larger pit next to dwelling 7 was explored (pit 106 no chipped stone arteIacts were recorded)
we do not know whether other pits around dwelling 7 contained arteIacts.
b) Dwelling 5: 64 arteIacts including only 5 tools. The dwelling is surrounded by numerous
pits: on the east side (pits 72 and 77 that yielded 149 arteIacts together), and on the north (pit 72
144 arteIacts), and a complex oI 11 pits (979 arteIacts together). This situation suggests that in
dwelling 5 itselI chipped stone arteIacts were manuIactured; debitage products and worn tools
were removed to clay extraction pits next to the dwelling; partially these arteIacts have been
washed into the pits.
7
T. Biro 1998.
8
Raczky 1987.
9
Korek/Trogmayer 1991.
10
Horvath 1987.
11
Makkay 1982, 140-142.
132
c) Dwelling 4: 32 arteIacts including 6 tools. Pit 67 is situated directly at the entrance to the
dwelling. Inside the pit there were 88 arteIacts including 29 tools. Just as in the case oI dwelling
5, this situation can be interpreted as the eIIect oI intentional discard and action oI post-deposi-
tional agents.
The scatter pattern data provided above demonstrates that in the early phase zones where spe-
cialized lithic production took place did not exist. Lithic implements in the early phase were
manuIactured within households; the waste Irom production was discarded on the Iloor and re-
moved to clay pits outside dwellings.
In the late phase, too, dwellings yielded debitage products and tools: dwelling 1 (45 arteIacts
including 5 tools), dwelling 2 (172 arteIacts, including 10 tools), dwelling 3 (51 arteIacts includ-
ing 10 tools), and dwelling 6 (17 arteIacts including 5 tools). The organization oI production was,
thus, similar to that in the early phase. The only diIIerence is that the Iilling oI pits contained
Iewer arteIacts (22 38 arteIacts in pits 73, 79, 80, 81, and 109). The clearing oI Iloors in the
dwelling was, thus, less careIul (dwellings were quickly abandoned?) than in the early phase, and
the role oI post-depositional agents was, probably, smaller.
It is diIIicult to compare technological Ieatures oI lithic industries Irom csd with other as-
semblages oI the Tisza Culture because they have not been analysed in terms oI technology. On
the other hand, we can compare the csd industry with industries oI other cultures in the same
horizon oI the Middle Neolithic, i.e. with the Bkk Culture partially corresponding to the phase
Tisza I, to phase B2C oI the Vinca Culture (contemporaneous with Tisza I/II phase), to Lengyel
I (contemporaneous with the Tisza I/II and Tisza II phases), possibly also to the Stroke-Orna-
mented Pottery Culture (its beginning is synchronous with Tisza I). The chronological horizon in
question departs Irom the Early Neolithic model (FTN) in three respects:
a) the preIerence Ior one, usually extralocal, raw material vanished, replaced by the exploi-
tation oI a variety oI local raw materials (possibly mesolocal when local rocks are not available);
as a consequence specialized knappers disappear, and are replaced by local production on the
level oI household clusters,
b) very small on-site discard oI cores and debitage products was replaced by large on-site
processing and discard,
c) large blades cease to be produced and transition takes place to the production oI
'mediolithic (3 4/5 cm) blades,
d) the end oI the ascendancy oI tools with lateral retouch, which are replaced by, predomi-
nantly, tools with transversal retouch (end-scrapers, retouched truncations).
The departure Irom the Early Neolithic model is most apparent in the Linear Complex hori-
zon, both in the eastern groups (ALP, Szakalhat, possibly the Bkk Culture) as well as in the
western groups (LBK). The tendencies enumerated above are continued in Tisza I and II horizon,
in Lengyel I and in SBK.
In respect oI structure oI major typological groups the industry Irom csd diIIers Irom the
Vinca Culture where the proportion oI cores is small (at Vinca Level 89 m 2.9, at Gomolava,
phase B2 4.6)
12
whereas the proportion oI blades is much higher than at csd (Vinca:
63.3, Gomolava: 46.2). The structure oI major groups at csd suggests a smaller component
oI on-site production in Iavour oI import oI ready blanks.
The increase in the blade Irequency at csd results in a drop in the debitage Irequency
(debitage at csd is 4050 oI all assemblages, at Vinca it is only 21.4, and at Gomolava:
28.2). The Irequency oI tools at Vinca oscillates, but is comparable with the Irequency at csd
(Vinca: 12.3, Gomolava: 21.5).
It is important that the structure oI major typological groups (Fig. 4) in the Vinca Culture is
unstable. It is dominated by end-scrapers (at Vinca: 51.4, at Gomolava: 54.1); Iollowed by
retouched truncations (Vinca: 8.5, Gomolava: 18.8). Between Vinca and Gomolava the diI-
Ierence can be seen in a higher component oI blades with lateral retouch in Vinca (35.4), while
it is small at Gomolava (4.7), and a higher proportion oI burins at Gomolava (9.4). In this
aspect quantitative tool structure in csd late phase is closer to Vinca B2 phase.
12
Radovanovic et al. 1984; Kozlowski/Kaczanowska 1986.
133
When we compare major technological groups Irom csd with Lengyel I Culture, an inter-
esting analogy with the site oI Svodin is revealed
13
where the index oI cores is very high (31.4),
even higher than in the late phase at csd (26.1). However, the cause oI such a high propor-
tion oI cores at Svodin may be diIIerent than at csd: not so much the poor quality oI raw ma-
terial, untested at extraction points, but rather the storage oI only partially exhausted cores Ior the
purposes oI barter. The proportion oI Ilakes at Svodin (also 31.4) is lower than at csd (40
50), whereas the proportion oI blades and tools is higher and comparable with the same values
Irom csd.
When Irequency oI major typological groups is considered the sites oI the Lengyel Culture are
characterized by the domination oI end-scrapers among retouched tools, Iollowed just like in
the Tisza Culture by retouched truncations (Fig. 4).
In the late phase oI the Eastern Linear Culture (Bkk Culture) the Irequency oI major techno-
logical groups diIIers Irom that at csd in that the Irequency oI cores is lower (e.g. at Humenne:
3.04
14
), although at ariskie Michalany
15
the Irequency oI cores is comparable to that Irom the
early phase at csd (14.1). The ratio oI blades to Ilakes in the Bkk Culture is diIIerent to that
at csd (e.g. at Humenne Ilakes are 46.5 and blades 40.0, at ariskie Michalany: 26.2
and 39 respectively). These proportions are related to a more specialized blade production (par-
tially by pressure technique) in the Bkk Culture that exploited high quality raw material (mainly
obsidian) Irom constant sources. This resulted in a larger average length oI blades (more than
5.1 cm as compared to 34 cm in the Tisza Culture and 45 cm in Lengyel I Culture). In the Bkk
Culture blade and core depots appear that are not known in the Tisza and Lengyel.
The typological structure oI assemblages oI the Bkk Culture (Fig. 4) diIIers Irom the remain-
ing units oI the Middle Neolithic horizon in that the proportion oI end-scrapers is smaller (e.g. 16
at Sariskie Michalany), while retouched truncations are in ascendancy (29.9), and the proportion
oI blades with lateral retouch is Iairly high (13.4) which is typical oI the entire Eastern Linear
tradition.
16
The characteristic Ieatures common Ior this entire chronological horizon are a stable,
though small, component oI microliths (trapezes), sporadic occurrence oI burins, and the occurrence
oI perIorators (somewhat more Irequent at some sites oI the Late Vinca culture).
17
To show the speciIic character oI chipped stone industries oI the Late Neolithic horizon, no-
tably oI the Tisza Culture, requires the publication oI monographs oI sites in the Tisza basin. In
the present state oI knowledge, however, we can say that the Vinca-Tisza-Lengyel chronological
horizon shows common taxonomic Ieatures. Some post-LBK units show close similarity to units
oI this horizon, while post-Eastern Linear Pottery units, Iirst oI all the Bkk Culture, reveal more
diIIerences.
II. GROUND AND POLISHED STONE IMPLEMENTS
The early phase Irom csd provided 141 arteIacts oI this type (including 106 that can be
assigned to a speciIic type, others are Iragments oI such implements), and the late phase 61 speci-
mens. To the group oI ground stone implements belong:
a) lower grinding stones (Pl. VIII 3)
b) upper grinding stones (Pl. VIII 4)
c) hammerstones/grinders (Pl. VIII 1)
d) basin querns/mortars Pl. VIII 2)
e) elongated polishers.
The second group are polished stone tools such as:
a) axes (Pl. IX 35)
b) shoe last adzes (perIorated and unperIorated Pl. Pl. IX 6,7)
c) perIorated axes (Pl. IX 9)
d) chisel-like tools (Pl. IX 1,2).
13
KozlowskiKaczanowska 1991.
14
15
Kaczanowska et al. 1993.
16
Kozlowski 1997.
17
134
The early phase yielded 85 ground stone implements; the most numerous are small Iragments
oI lower or upper grinding stones (32); there were 10 lower grinding stones and 10 typical upper
grinding stones (plano-convex, with a slightly concave active lower surIace), all damaged, prob-
ably intentionally. Hammerstones/grinders are mainly spherical or ovaloid (17). Besides, there
were numerous thin stone plaquettes with polished surIaces (6), basin querns (mortars 3), and
elongated polishers (SchleiIwanne 7).
These arteIacts were most oIten made Irom sandstone (38 specimens), pyroxene/andesite (18),
micaschist (12), rhyolithic tuII (4), pyroxene/gabbro (1), amphibolite (2), quartzite (3), quartz (1),
dolomitized limestone (1). Outcrops oI these rocks demarcate, basically, a similar territory to that
oI rocks worked by chipping technique. Rocks originating Irom Transdanubia are best repre-
sented (acc. to P. Smegi: micaschist with garnets, some sandstones), and rocks Irom north-east-
ern Hungary igneous rocks, mainly andesites/pyroxene, rhyolithic tuII, some sandstones (Irom
the Matra Mts.). Less Irequent are rocks Irom, probably, Transylvania (micaschist with quartzite,
ultrabasic/pyroxene/gabbro type rocks, possibly also wherlite/peridotite).
The late phase yielded only 37 ground stone implements including: lower grinding stones and
Iragments (18 specimens), upper grinding stones (also plano-convex 5 specimens),
hammerstones/grinders (8), thin plaquettes with polished surIaces (1), elongated stone polishers
(SchleiIwanne 2). In the late phase there were, besides, pieces oI mineral dyes, and pebbles that
were used Ior crushing mineral dyes (7).
In the late phase sandstones (19 specimens) have dominance over other rocks (micaschist 8,
pyroxene/andesite 3, quartzites 2). Quartz pebbles were also used Ior grinders (4). The raw
materials procurement zone narrows, in the late phase, to Transdanubia and northern Hungary.
In the group oI polished stone tool perIorated shoe-last adzes (10) or unperIorated specimens
(2) are most Irequent in the early phase. In addition, 6 axes and 2 perIorated axes were discov-
ered. Some oI these tools were used as hammerstones, especially Ior crushing mineral dyes,
sometimes aIter prior intentional (?) breaking.
In the late phase there were simple axes (4), shoe-last adzes (3), and chisel-like implements
(3).
In the early phase numerous ground and polished stone implements occurred in pits: pit 11
as many as 29 specimens, pit 72 10 specimens, pit 77 23 specimens. A high Irequency oI these
tools was also registered inside dwellings (dwelling 5 16 specimens, dwelling 7 19 speci-
mens). In the late phase such arteIacts were registered within dwellings only (dwelling 2 26
specimens, dwelling 3 12 specimens).
It is noteworthy that all the ground stone implements and a large part oI the polished stone
implements have been preserved as Iragments, which seems to point to their intentional destruc-
tion.
18
The Iact that Iragments oI damaged grinding stones and axe-like implements were Iound
in the interior oI dwellings oI the late phase exclusively, indicates that the inhabitants oI these
dwellings curated the broken Iragments; some oI the Iragments Iunctioned as hammerstones or
anvils. The presence oI numerous Iragments oI ground and polished stone tools in the pits oI the
early phase may mean that some oI them got into the Iilling oI pits aIter the dwellings oI the early
phase had been abandoned, but beIore the dwellings oI the late phase were built. This hypothesis
may also account Ior the presence oI much more numerous ground and polished stone implements
discovered on the slopes oI the csd tell within the sediments re-worked by postdeposition.
ArteIacts Irom these sediments could not be assigned to speciIic phases.
III. CONCLUSIONS
The lithic assemblages Irom the csd tell represents a local variant oI the Tisza Culture in-
dustry. This industry evolved over a time span oI about 360 or 220 radiocarbon years. In the con-
sequence no major diIIerences have been registered between two occupational levels oI this site:
either in technology or in the morphology oI retouched tools.
The system oI lithic raw materials procurement was highly speciIic: the occurrence oI about
70 diIIerent rock types, macroscopically distinguished, has no parallel at other Tisza Culture
18
Chapman 2001, 376.
135
sites, nor at sites oI other units oI the Middle/Late Neolithic. These raw materials come Irom ter-
ritory extending along parallels oI latitude, Irom the Alpine Ioreland (the region oI Sopron) and
the Bakony Mts. as Iar as southern Transylvania. In the longitudinal direction deposit areas oI raw
materials concentrate in the Matra and Tokaj Mts. From these regions, along the Tisza River, the
majority oI mesolocal raw materials, principally most varieties oI limnoquartzites/
hydroquartzites, were supplied (Fig. 5).
The unique variability oI raw materials and their comparatively low quality suggest that they
were collected at random and were not obtained Irom workshops in the vicinity oI deposit areas.
Such raw materials procurement was embedded probably in other activities related to the subsis-
tence economy. Individual items oI raw materials that were imported as blades and/or tools, in
turn, could have been giIts exchanged on the occasion oI meetings between groups, possibly re-
lated to the socio-symbolic sphere, rather than obtained in systematic exchange.
When the system oI procurement oI lithic raw materials is interpreted the most puzzling ques-
tion is the low proportion oI obsidian in csd. It would be simple to explain this phenomenon
by the Iact that an ethno-cultural boundary separated the Tisza basin Irom Slovakian deposits oI
obsidian in the Zemplen upland. This obsidian (Carpathian II) was better suited Ior the produc-
tion oI 'mediolithic blanks than very small concretions oI Tokaj obsidian. However, an argument
against this explanation is the Iact that at the Gorzsa tell, situated Iurther south in the Tisza val-
ley, the proportion oI Slovakian obsidian is higher.
19
The same situation can be seen in the case
oI the 'Banat Ilint (most probably Irom the region oI Resita
20
), whose proportion at Gorzsa is
much higher than in csd. We can, thus, consider a possibility that the organization oI the pro-
duction oI chipped stone implements at Gorzsa was, perhaps, a responsibility oI specialized
craItsmen who ensured systematic supply oI selected rocks oI better quality. This assumption
would, in turn, suggest diIIerences in the social structure between various tell settlements oI the
Tisza Culture. The publication oI the monograph oI the Gorzsa tell will help to veriIy this hypoth-
esis.
In terms oI technology/typology the industry Irom csd is consistent with the parameters oI
the entire chronological MiddleLate Neolithic horizon. It exhibits most similarities to some Vinca
Culture and Lengyel assemblages, whereas dissimilarities are seen in comparison with the indus-
try oI post-Eastern Linear units. The latter comparison reIers mainly to the Bkk Culture. Because
we do not know the chipped stone industries oI the Szakalhat group which undoubtedly played
an important role in the origin oI the Tisza Culture we cannot estimate the signiIicance oI this
variant oI Eastern Linear (AVK) industry in the Iormation oI lithic traditions oI the Tisza Culture.
BIBLIOGRAPHY
T. Biro 1998
K. T. Biro, Lithic implements and the circulation of raw materials in the Great Hungarian Plain during the Late
Neolithic Period (Budapest 1998).
Crciumaru et al. 2007
M. Crciumaru/M. Anghelinu/A. C. Nitu/M. Cosac/G. Muratoreanu, Geo-archeologie du Paleolithique moven,
Paleolithique superieur, Epipaleolithique et Mesolithique en Roumanie (Tirgoviste 2007).
Chapman 2001
J. Chapman, Fragmentation analysis and social relations in later Balkan prehistory. In: B. Ginter et al. (eds.) Prob-
lems of the Stone Age in the Old World (Krakow 2001) 369-388.
Horvath 1987
F. Horvath, Hdmezvasarhely-Gorzsa. A settlement oI the Tisza culture. In: L. TalasP. Raczky (eds.), The Late
Neolithic of the Tis:a Region. A survey of recent excavations and their findings. Hodme:ovasarhely-Gor:sa, S:egvar-
Tu:kves, Ocsd-Kovashalom, Jes:to-Magor, Berettvffalu-Herpalv (BudapestSzolnok 1987) 31-46.
KaczanowskaKozlowski 1986
M. KaczanowskaJ. K. Kozlowski, Gomolava chipped stone industries of Jinca Culture (Krakow 1986).
19
Starnini et al. 2007.
20
Carciumaru et al. 2007.
136
KaczanowskaKozlowski 1991
M. KaczanowskaJ. K. Kozlowski, Spaltindustrie der Lengvel Kultur aus Svodin (Krakow1991).
Kaczanowska et al. 1997.
M. KaczanowskaJ. K. KozlowskiS. Sika,. Neolithic and Eneolithic chipped stone industries from Sariske
Michalanv, Eastern Slovakia (Krakow 1993).
Korek/Trogmayer 1991
J. Korek/O. Trogmayer, Szegvar-Tzkves. In: M. Jannet-Vallat/J.-P. Thevenot, (eds.), Les Agriculteurs de la
Grande Plaine Hongroise (4000-3500 av. J.-C.). Fouilles de Hodme:ovasarhely-Gor:sa, S:egvar-Tu:kves, Ocsd-
Kovashalom, Jes:to-Magor, Berettyouffalu-Herpaly et trouvailles (Dijon 1991), 51-67.
Kozlowski 1997
J. K. Kozlowski (ed.), Earlv Linear Potterv Culture in Eastern Slovakia (Krakow1997).
Makkay 1982
J. Makkay, A magyarors:agi neolitikum kutatasanak uf eredmenyei. A: idorend es a nepi a:onositas kerdesei
(Budapest 1982).
Raczky 1986
P. Raczky, The cultural and chronological relations oI the Tisza Region during the Middle and the Late Neolithic,
as reIlected by the excavations at csd-Kovashalom. Beri Balogh dam M:eum vknvve 13, 1986, 103-125.
Raczky 1987
P. Raczky, csd-Kovashalom. A settlement oI the Tisza culture. In: L. Talas/P. Raczky (eds.), The Late Neolithic
of the Tis:a Region. A survev of recent excavations and their findings. Hodme:ovasarhely-Gor:sa, S:egvar-Tu:kves,
Ocsd-Kovashalom, Jes:to-Magor, Berettyouffalu-Herpaly (Budapest, Szolnok 1987), 61-83.
Raczky et al. 1985
P. Raczky/M. Seleanu/G. Rozsa/Cs. Siklodi/G. Kalla/B. Csornay/H. Oravecz/M. Vicze/E. BanIIy/S. Bknyi/P.
Somogyi, csd-Kovashalom. The intensive topographical and archaeological investigation oI a Late Neolithic site.
Preliminary report. Mitteilungen des Archaologischen Instituts der Ungarischen Akademie der Wissenschaften 14,
1985, 251-278.
Radovanovic et al.
I. RadovanovicM. KaczanowskaJ. K. KozlowskiM. PawlikowskiB. Voytek, The chipped stone industry from
Jinca (Beograd 1984).
Starnini et al.
E. Starnini/B. Voytek/F. Horvath, Preliminary results oI the multidisciplinary study oI the chipped stone
assemblage Irom the Tisza Culture site oI Tell Gorzsa (Hunagry) In: J. K. KozlowskiP. Raczky (eds.), The
Lengvel, Polgar and related cultures in the Middle/Late Neolithic in Central Europe (Krakow 2007), 276-284.
137
Fig. 1. csdKovashalom. Major tool categories
(C: cores, F: Ilakes and chips, B: blades, T: tools, SP: splintered pieces)
138
Fig. 2. csdKovashalom. Butts oI Ilakes and blades
(C: cortical, SB: Iormed by single blow, D: dihedral, F: Iacetted, L: linear and punctiIorm)
139
Fig. 3. csdKovashalom. Major tool categories.
Fig. 4. Major tool categories in selected sites oI other Middle/Late Neolithic units.
140
Fig. 5. Geographical distribution oI the stone raw materials Iound at the site oI csd-Kovashalom.
1: Barabas, Kaszonyi hill, 2: Sarospatak, Botk hill, 3: Erdbnye Ligetmajor, 4: Boldogkvaralja, 5:
Ratka Mad, Koldu hill, 6: Legyesbenye Szerencs Monok, Szerencs Mts. within Ingvar hill, 7:
Gyngysoroszi, Matra Mts., 8: Mecsek Mts., 9: Epleny, 10: rkt, 11: Banat, 12: Sopron Mts.,
13: Prut, 14: Krakow/Poland Mid-Mountain Region
Key:
Limno- and hydroquartzite, quarzite Rhyolithe, andezite
Opal Flint
Jasper, Calcedony X Gneiss
Radiolarite white X Silicated diatomites, menilith
141
Pl. I. csdKovashalom. 1-13: cores.
142
Pl. II. csdKovashalom. 1-11: cores.
143
Pl. III. csdKovashalom. 1-7: cores.
144
Pl. IV. csdKovashalom. 1-4: cores, 5-20: end-scrapers.
145
Pl. V. csdKovashalom. 1-16: end scrapers, 17-28: retouched truncations.
146
Pl. VI. csdKovashalom. 1-3: retouched truncations, 4-9: perIorators and becs, 10: laterally re-
touched blade, 11-13: macro-side-scrapers, 14-15: trapezes.
147
Pl. VII. csdKovashalom. 1: macrotool, 2-5: trapezes, 6-9: backed implements, 10-18: unretouched
sickle inserts.
148
Pl. VIII. csdKovashalom. Ground stone implements 1: hammerstone/pestle, 2: basin quern, 3:
lower grinding stone, 4: upper grinding stone.
149
Pl. IX. csdKovashalom. 1-8: polished stone implements.
ANIMAL REMAINS FROM THE SITE CSD-KOVSHALOM
Zsfia E. Kovacs
*
and

Erika Gal
**
Keywords: Archaeo:oologv, Neolithic animal exploitation, Hungarv /Great Hungarian Plain,
wild fauna, disposal patterns.
I. INTRODUCTION
The Tisza culture animal bone assemblage Irom csdKovashalom represents the most abun-
dant zoological collection Irom this part oI the Great Hungarian Plain (South-eastern Hungary).
Altogether 21,094 hand-collected bone Iragments were recovered Irom the central part oI the
settlement. Approximately 10,000 Iragments were studied by the late Sandor Bknyi, while the
rest were identiIied by the authors oI this paper.
In addition to counting the number oI identiIied specimens (NISP), ageing domesticates (by
tooth-eruption and epiphyseal Iusion) were perIormed. It shows how people handled livestock
and may indicate secondary exploitation. The spatial distribution oI diIIerent taxa and body-parts
were also analyzed to see whether animals were butchered in diIIerent parts oI the settlement.
Results
Twenty-seven percent oI bones originate Irom pits, 6 Irom inside the houses, and 10 Irom
under and in between the houses. The rest (57) were not directly associated with Ieatures.
The material mostly consisted oI mammalian bones (n19,116). In addition, 1,349 Iish-, two
amphibian-, 109 reptile- and 99 bird remains were Iound (Table 1). The bones were highly Irag-
mented, the average size Ialling within the 75 mm interval. This pointed to a typical settlement
sample, mostly consisting oI Iood reIuse. ThereIore, the identiIication oI 5,569 Iragments to spe-
cies level was impossible, only size classiIication could be provided.
II. LIJESTOCK COMPOSITION
Remains oI domestic mammals dominated (NISP10,592, 78), in contrast to hunted animals
(NISP2,955, 22). Generally, domesticates dominate in the Tisza culture, showing well-devel-
oped animal husbandry.
1
However, the ratio oI hunted animals became higher as hunting became
more important by the Late Neolithic compared with the Middle Neolithic times,
2
as is expressed
well in this material.
The most Irequent domestic species was cattle with 62 oI the remains. Pig was the second
most Irequent species with 24 oI the bones, preceding sheep and goat (caprines) that yielded
12 oI the bones. Dog was rather under-represented by only 2 oI the bones (Fig. 1). This dis-
tribution is similar to other samples oI Tisza culture settlements Irom this region. The great domi-
nance oI caprines in the early Neolithic has changed to keeping cattle and pig by the Late
Neolithic. Since the marshy Iloodplains oIIered a more Iavorable environment to pigs than to
small ruminants, the ratio oI pigs became higher by the end oI the Neolithic.
3
Age estimates Ior cattle and caprines showed a clear dominance oI adult individuals (Fig. 2).
This kill-oII pattern raises the possibility oI secondary exploitation. Animals oI secondary usage
had to reach breeding age, while meat-purpose animals were slaughtered young.
4
This means that
*
ZsoIia E. Kovacs, Aquincum Museum, Budapest 1031, Szentendrei t 139, Hungary, kov:sofivahoo.com
**
Erika Gal, Archaeological Institute oI the Hungarian Academy oI Sciences, Budapest 1014, ri u., 49,
galerikavahoo.com
1
Vrs 2005.
2
Bartosiewicz 2005.
3
Bartosiewicz 2005.
4
Bknyi 1984.
152
milk production may have been an important part oI animal exploitation in this settlement. As it
has been recently demonstrated by detecting milk residues in ceramic vessels,
5
milking was es-
tablished already during the early Neolithic. In contrast to cattle and caprines, young animals
clearly dominated among the pigs slaughtered, indicative oI meat production as the objective oI
pig husbandry.
III. HUNTED ANIMALS
Large game dominated in contrast to smaller, Iur-bearing mammals; the main purpose oI hunt-
ing must have been meat provisioning. The most Irequent species was roe deer, Iollowed by wild
boar, red deer, and aurochs. This Irequency pattern diIIers Irom the samples oI other Tisza cul-
ture settlements in the region, where except Ior the Early Tisza culture settlement oI Battonya
Gdrsk
6
the main hunted animal was the aurochs.
7
Since environmental conditions must
have been similar in this region, the low Irequency oI aurochs could be the result oI diIIerent
hunting practices. Inhabitants oI csdKovashalom probably preIerred hunting oI roe deer
which is smaller in size, but easier to kill than the aurochs. Although Iur hunting seems to have
been less important, this site shows a very rich variety oI Iur-bearing animals not typical at other
Tisza settlements. Rare species such as brown bear and lynx were identiIied. This high species
richness may result Irom the relatively great importance oI hunting even relative to the unusually
large sample size (see Fig. 4). The most Irequent small game was brown hare, which also pro-
vided meat, supporting the assumption that complementary meat provisioning was the main pur-
pose oI hunting.
IJ. SPATIAL DISTRIBUTION
A comparison was made oI main Ieature types (houses, 'streets and pits on the periphery)
Irom the viewpoint oI the ratio between the small and large sized domesticates. The distribution
oI domestic taxa between these Ieatures showed heterogeneity (28.98; dI4; p0.0001): in
peripheral pits the proportion oI caprine remains was higher than the expected value, as shown
by the percentage distribution oI these species (Fig. 3). Pits served as reIuse deposits, and these
animals were probably butchered on the periphery oI the settlement.
The distribution oI hunted animals also showed heterogeneity (57.38; dI8; p0.0001).
The proportion oI brown hare was signiIicantly high, while wild boar was under-represented in-
side the houses. This probably means that both the processing and consumption oI hares took
place inside the houses, while large game such as wild boar were processed outside.
The body part distribution oI main domesticates was analyzed by body regions as Iollows
8
: head,
trunk, meaty limbs, dry limbs and terminal bones. These represent diIIerent nutritive values. The
distribution oI cattle body parts showed heterogeneity between the three Ieature types (53.54;
dI8; p0.0001). Bones Irom the trunk (with high nutritive values) were over-represented in the
samples Iound in houses, while the low- and medium utility elements were much more abundant in
pits. These patterns indicate that primary butchering and cooking-eating activities took place in diI-
Ierent parts oI the settlement. Cattle were butchered around the pits and Iurther Iood preparation was
carried out in the houses. Unlike the cattle, the body part distribution oI bones Irom smaller-bodied
pigs and caprines showed homogeneity in all three types oI Ieatures.
J. BIRD HUNTING
The 99 avian remains (0,5 oI the assemblage) Iound at csdKovashalom represent the
most abundant late Neolithic, and one oI the most abundant Neolithic bird bone assemblages Irom
the Great Hungarian Plain.
9
A quarter oI the remains were Iound in houses, while another quarter
5
Craig et al. 2005.
6
Bknyi 1984.
7
Vrs 2005.
8
Kretzoi 1968.
9
Gal 2007.
153
were recovered Irom pits. HalI the material could not be connected to archaeological Ieatures.
Contrary to the mammalian assemblage, no patterns could be observed in the spatial distribution
oI bird bones.
In spite oI the poor representation oI avian remains the taxonomic richness is noteworthy.
Twenty-one species could be identiIied (Table 1), representing two main ecotypes. Most oI these
species live in or near a reedy-swampy environment making their nest either on the ground in
thick vegetation or on shrubs and trees. Crane and great bustard represent the humid and dry
steppe environment, respectively. The latter two species were the most Irequent in the avian
assemblage. The calculated minimum number oI individuals, however, pointed to only two and
three individuals, respectively. It is likely, thereIore, that the apparent over-representation oI large
crane and great bustard is due to sampling bias resulting Irom hand-collection.
Since nothing indicates that any oI the identiIied species would have been especially targeted,
we may conclude that birds were equally exploited Ior their meat, eggs and plumage. Moreover,
a straight cut-mark observed on the shaIt oI the ulna Irom a large (but unidentiIiable) species
suggests that even bird bones were utilized by the inhabitants oI the site.
The majority oI identiIied birds are summer visitors in Hungary, spending only the breeding
period here, while a Iew are residents. White-Ironted goose and goosander are typical winter
visitors in Hungary Irom October to March.
10
Importantly, these seasonal characteristics would
indicate year-round activity at the settlement.
The habitat preIerences oI species conIirm that the settlement was located in a Ilood-plain
environment with smaller or larger water surIaces and Iorests. Periodically, however, wet and dry
open grasslands were also exploited by hunting, as was also demonstrated by certain hunted
mammals. According to the great number oI species linked to rather Iew individuals,
opportunistic Iowling was practiced throughout the year. This is typical oI the Neolithic period
in the Carpathian Basin,
11
contrary to the scarcity oI ducks at csd, and generally in the Great
Hungarian Plain during the Late Neolithic.
12
Changes in the environment (e.g. less open surIaces)
as well as in hunting habits (e.g. the increasing exploitation oI Iorests) may have equally led to
this result.
JI. CONCLUSIONS
The species composition and ranking oI domestic animals at this settlement is similar to those
oI other Tisza culture settlements in the region. The main domestic species were cattle and pig.
According to the age distribution oI domestic ruminants, milk production was established at the
settlement. As Ior the composition oI wild mammals, it diIIers Irom other Tisza culture settle-
ments and looks similar to earlier sites. The main game was roe deer while the aurochs took only
Iourth

place in contrast other Tisza culture materials in which aurochs remains dominated
among game.
The spatial distribution oI domestic taxa was heterogeneous, showing that butchering, pro-
cessing and garbage disposal Ior these species diIIered at this settlement. The remains oI caprines
as well as body parts oI less meat value Irom cattle were deposited in the periphery. On the other
hand, among the hunted animals, bones oI brown hare were mostly Iound in houses indicating
that this species was prepared inside in contrast to large game.
There was an outstandingly high diversity oI hunted animals (both mammals and birds), not
typical at other Tisza culture settlements. Figure 4 illustrates one oI the main characteristic Iea-
tures oI prehistoric vertebrate assemblages, namely that the number oI identiIied species in birds
increases more intensively with the number oI identiIied specimens than in mammals.
13
Evi-
dently, the uniquely large assemblage Irom csdKovashalom yielded a greater number oI spe-
cies than it would have been expected according to the observed trends.
10
Peterson et al. 1977.
11
Gal 2004.
12
Gal 2007 63.
13
Bartosiewicz/Gal 2007.
154
BIBILIOGRAPHY
Bartosiewicz 2005
Bartosiewicz, L., Plain talk: animals, environment and culture in the Neolithic oI the Carpathian Basin and adja-
cent areas. In: Bailey, D., Whittle, A., and Cummings, V. (eds), (un)settling the Neolithic. OxIord, (2005), 51-63.
Bartosiewicz-Gal 2007
Bartosiewicz, L. and Gal, E., Sample size and taxonomic richness in mammalian and bird bone assemblages Irom
archaeological sites. Archeometriai Muhely 2007/1, 37-44.
Bknyi 1984
Bknyi, S., Battonya-Gdrsk neolithikus gerinces Iaunaja. In: Goldman, Gy. (eds), Battonva-Gdrsk eine
neolitische Siedlung in Sdost-Ungarn. Bekescsaba, (1984), 119-169.
Craig et alii 2005
Craig, O. E., J. Chapman, C. Heron, L. H. Willis, L. Bartosiewicz, G. Taylor, A. Whittle and M. Collins, Did the
Iirst Iarmers oI central and eastern Europe produce dairy Ioods? Antiquitv 79 (2005), 882-894.
Gal 2004
Gal, E., The Neolithic aviIauna oI Hungary within the context oI the Carpathian Basin. Antaeus 27 (2004), 273-
286.
Gal 2007
Gal, E., Fowling in lowlands. Neolithic and Copper Age bird bone remains Irom the Great Hungarian Plain and
South-East Romania. Archaeolingua (Series Minor). Vol. 24 (2007), Budapest.
Kretzoi 1968
Kretzoi, M., La repartition anatomique du materiel osteologique selon les especes et les amas de dechets. In:V.
Gabori-Csank - M. Kretzoi: Zoologie archeologique. In: V. Gabori- Csank, La Station du paleolithique moven d rd-
Hongrie. Monumenta Historica Budapestinensia III. Budapest 1968, 230-244.
Peterson et alii 1977
Peterson, R. T., MountIort, G. and Hollom, P. A. D., Eurpa madarai, Budapest, Gondolat (1977).
Vrs 2005
Vrs, I., Neolitikus allattartas es vadaszat a Del-AlIldn. In: Bende. L.-Lrinczy G., Hetk:napok Jenus:ai,
Hdmezvasarhely (2005), 203-243.
155
Table 1. Summary oI the species and remains Irom vertebrates (the additional values by roe deer and red
deer indicate the number oI antler Iragments)

Common name Latin name NISP
Cattle Bos taurus 6557
Caprines Ovis/Capra 1108
Sheep Ovis aries 78
Goat Capra hircus 68
Domestic pig Sus domesticus 2577
Domestic dog Canis familiaris 204
Domestic mammals 10,592
Aurochs Bos primigenius 310
Red deer Cervus elaphus 480105
Roe deer Capreolus capreolus 1,14981
Wild boar Sus scrofa 637
Wild ass Asinus hvdruntinus 48
Equuidae indet. Equuidae indet. 26
Brown hare Lepus europaeus 157
Beaver Castor fiber 18
Brown bear Ursus arctos 1
Lynx Lvnx lvnx 1
WolI Canis lupus 6
Fox Julpes vulpes 66
Wild cat Felis svlvestris 7
Badger Meles meles 7
Martes sp. Martes sp. 2
Mustelidae indet. Mustelidae indet. 1
Hedhog Erinaceus concolor 2
Hamster Cricetus cricetus 23
Mole rat Nannospalax leucodon 1
unident. rodents Rodentia indet. 10
unindent. carnivores Carnivora indet. 3
Hunted mammals 2,955
White pelican Pelecanus onocrotalus 2
Little egret Egretta gar:etta 2
White egret Egretta alba 3
Night heron Nvcticorax nvcticorax 2
Purple heron Ardea purpurea 2
Grey heron Ardea cinerea 2
White stork Ciconia ciconia 1
Spoonbill Platalea leucorodia 2
UnidentiIiable swan Cvgnus sp. 2
White-Ironted goose Anser albifrons 4
Grey-lag goose Anser anser 9
UnidentiIiable goose Anser sp. 1
Goosander Mergus merganser 2
Mallard Anas platvrhvnchos 10
White-tailed eagle Haliaaetus albicilla 2
Lesser spotted eagle Aquila pomarina 1
Black grouse Tetrao tetrix 6
Coot Fulica atra 1
Great bustard Otis tarda 15
Crane Grus grus 14
Woodpigeon Columba palumbus 2
Crow Corvus corone 1
UnidentiIiable birds Aves indet. 13
unident. Irogs Anura indet. 2
Pike Esox lucius 10
CatIish Silurus glanis 4
Carp Cvprinus carpio 2
Cvprinidae indet. Cvprinidae indet. 3
unident. Iish Pisces indet. 1,331
European pond turtle Emvs orbicularis 109
Human Homo sapiens sapiens 232
large mammal Bos/Equus si:e group 3,262
medium-large mammal Sus/Cervus si:e group 87
medium mammal Sus/Ovis/Capra group 2,160
dog size mammal Canis/Castor group 21
hare size mammal Lepus si:e group 7
unidentiIied Iragments Indeterminent frag 32
Total animal bones 21,094
156
Fig. 1. Species composition oI domestic mammals (NISP10,592)
Fig. 2. Relative age distribution oI the main domestic animals (cattle N:339, caprines N:367, pig N:971)

0
1000
2000
3000
4000
5000
6000
7000
Cattle Caprines Pig Dog

0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100%
cattle
pig
caprines
juvenilis
subadultus
adultus
157
Fig. 3. Distribution oI the main domestic taxa between Ieature types (cattle N:1984, caprines N:492, pig
N:884)
Fig. 4. DiIIerences between prehistoric mammalian (continuous trend line; y 0,1736x 0,5684;
R
2
0,691) and avian assemblages (dotted trend line; y 0,5714x 0,0198; R
2
0,7501) Irom the
Carpathian Basin.
0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100%
C
a
t
t
I
e
P
i
g
C
a
p
r
i
n
e
s
houses
pits
"streets"
0,0
0,5
1,0
1,5
2,0
2,5
3,0
0,0 1,0 2,0 3,0 4,0 5,0
log10NISP
l
o
g
1
0
n
Birds
Mammals
csd birds
csd mammals
COMMENTS ON THE TELLS IN THE CARPATHIAN BASIN:
TERMINOLOGY, CLASSIFICATION AND FORMATION
Ferenc Horvath
*
Keywords: tells, Carpathian Basin, Bron:e Age, terminologv.
Similarities and relationships between the stratiIied sites in the Carpathian Basin and the
Northern Balkans with Near Eastern and Eastern Balkanic tells were Iirst recognized around the
`20s oI the last century.
Florin Gogltan and Thomas Link have reviewed most oI the theories born in connection with
the terminology, Iormation, classiIication and abandonment oI this settlement phenomenon in the
Carpathian Basin in the near past. Both oI them pose several questions that have remained open.
Let me quote Thomas Link:
'Entscheidender ist die Frage worin sich Siedlungshgel von einschichtigen Siedlungen (und
Siedlungen mit ':uflliger' Stratifi:ierung) unterscheiden, welche gemeinsamen Merkmale sie
besit:en und was dies ber ihre rolle innerhalb des Siedlungsgefges aussagt. Angesichts des breiten
Spektrums von Siedlungen gn:lich verschiedener Charakteristika, denen einige tellartige
Stratifi:ierung gemeinsam ist, muss auch die Frage gestellt werden, ob mit dem Begriff 'Tell` eine
eigenstndige Siedlungsform oder lediglich eine Spe:ielle Befundgattung erfasst wird, ob er also
kulturhistorischen oder lediglich archologisch-descriptiven Wert hat.` (Link, 2006, 8)
I. TERMINOLOGY
In their previous work both oI the authors have concluded that using the concepts and terms
oI tell` or tell cultures` is misleading in Carpathian Basin archaeology. They note at the same
time that in spite oI this consideration, since these terms have been in use Ior decades, their
revision would scarcely be Ieasible. Gogltan regards the term 'tell unreservedly as an 'Arabic
and archaeological neologism, causing more conIusion than advantage Ior archaeological
research (Gogltan 2002, 23; Link 2006, 8). Their arguments, however, contain elements which
are at the least debatable.
To begin with it may be noted that as regards Arabic neologism`, the word tell`
evidently only in word form was identical with the Arabic word in the archaeological literature
even in the 1960s. Since it was a simple adaptation of the word it could have been chosen Irom
any one oI several languages, iI archaeology had needed a word Ior speciIying precisely the
concept oI mound` i.e. simply the form of site. But instead, archaeology needed a word which
expressed precisely the concept oI a Near Eastern type oI settlement Iormation in prehistory. So
the loan word became an archaeological term by a common consent among prehistorians and has
been reserved strictlv for a certain settlement-historical process. It is another question how it is
used by the authors.
It goes without saying that toponvmic use oI the Arabic word Iorm itselI can hardly be
avoided. When it is used as an archaeological term it serves to speciIy both a form of site and a
form of settlement, however. DeIinitions used up to now only reIer mainly to the Iormer (Llovd
1963, 10; BravTrump 1970, 228; Demoule 1988, 1033; RenfrewBahn 1998, 546; Gogltan
2003, 224, etc). The problem is Iurther complicated by the Iact that deIinitions do not clearly
distinguish between the two categories. From this viewpoint, an explanation that does not
diIIerentiate cannot be really satisIactory.
The deIinitions mentioned above contain etymology in each oI the cases, and mainly external,
Iormal and physical criteria (conic shape, threshold oI height in metres and centimetres and/or
in number oI layers, inorganic remains oI disintegrated houses, etc). All these categories are
*
Mora Ferenc Museum, Szeget 6720, Roosevelt nr 1-3, Hungary, fhorvathmfm.u-s:eged.hu
160
merely the Ieatures that serve to realize, identiIy, and describe the tell phenomenon by
experimental approach. Secondary characteristics are needed to describe external conditions oI
the concept. So these components are Ieatures reIerring to the physical sense oI the term tell when
it is used as a form of site.
When using the term in this sense, stratiIication, and physical continuity oI the multiple
superimposed layers are primary criteria. All these mean a mere vertical accumulation continuum.
In this respect intermediate or superimposed - so called accidental` layers leIt by a short-term
sedentary population (Link 2006, 7) - can be neglected in classiIying a site as a tell. The cultural
components are oI secondary importance as well, since the tell as form of site is not dependent
on the Iact that its deep stratiIication was produced by one or more successive communities. From
this viewpoint height is not a determinant requirement when the site is a visible mound and aIter
exploration is proved to be deeply stratiIied and its layers, in one or more sections oI the
sequence, Iorm an identical phase oI settlement by superpositional relationship between them. A
tell, as form of site, as Andrew Sherratt noted very aptly and expressively, is nothing else but an
'accidental bv-product of a sedentarv communitv` (Sherratt 1994, 172).
During the past Iew decades, however, attention has been gradually turning towards the
climatic, environmental, ecological, socio-economical and cultural Iactors that led to the
emergence oI tell settlements.
These components oI the deIinitions reIer to more proIound essentials, conditions oI
Iormation oI this phenomenon, such as their areal distribution, settlement continuity i.e. long-
term Iull sedentism, the ratio oI built to unbuilt space, the concentration oI houses, the role oI
tradition and cult, etc. (Sherratt 1983, 192193; Chapman 1989, 35; Tringham 1992, 142143;
Par:inger 1992, 221228). These components, however, are already connected to the primary,
substantial, internal determinants oI the abstract sense oI the term tell when it is used as form of
settlement that means a theoretical approach.
Another problem is bound to recur: why do not we name as tells those deeply stratiIied sites
established Iollowing the Bronze Age in Europe? The explanation appears to be very simple. As
we have seen in the above paragraphs, archaeology needed a word to express precisely the
concept oI a Near Eastern type oI settlement Iormation in prehistory. But history is interested in
this question only until the appearance oI the Iirst pre-urban and early urban settlements. In
prehistoric Europe this process took a diIIerent pathway in the Early Copper Age and Ior a second
time in the Late Bronze Age. As concerns the Ages Iollowing the abandonment oI European tells,
the historical processes leading to the Iormation oI early villages and towns have been clariIied
already on the basis oI the Near Eastern examples. Anyway, due to the gradually increasing
number oI written sources, questions oI the Iormation oI later villages, towns and states, are
beyond the principal horizon oI theoretical archaeology. Tell has remained a concept strictly
reserved Ior the Neolithic and Bronze Age settlement-historical process.
In summary, tell in the sense oI Iorm oI settlement is a concept derived from the Arabic word
'mound` and designates those multi-stratified, fullv sedentarv settlements in the Neolithic and
Bron:e Age which carried the potential preconditions of pre-urban and urban development into
South Eastern Europe and whose development led to the earliest form of towns in the Near East.
So, because oI their underlying contents there is no need to be in doubt concerning the right
use either oI tell` nor tell cultures` as archaeological terms, least oI all to discard them Irom
archaeological terminology.
II. CLASSIFICATION OF TELLS
Another problem is the rather conIused classiIication oI settlement types. The idea oI
classiIying the Late Neolithic settlements oI the Tisza Region by their Iorm, layout, and layer
thickness (Kalic: 1965, 31; Kalic:Rac:kv 1987, 15) and areal extent has been turning toward
arbitrary, artiIicial categorization by layer thickness. Later on, this idea has been applied by
others and Iurther complicated (Meier-Arent 1991, 78; Gogltan 2002, 25). Drawing arbitrary
lines oI measurement instead oI analysing the underlying prehistoric processes, however, is but
a quantitative, metrical device. DiIIerentiating between qualities by an approach like this,
however, cannot really be a competent basis especially iI it is only a question oI a dividing line
oI a Iew centimetres between 'tell-like, 'genuine, and 'Ilat settlements.
161
Recently Thomas Link has argued against this approach surmising the proper course oI
the solution and has suggested a threshold oI at least two or more settlement phases Ior deIining
a tell-like settlement. At the same time, being sceptical until the outcome oI veriIication by layer-
accumulation, he has suggested that a higher criterion Ior qualiIication oI a site as a tell should
be laid down (Link 2006, 11). As a quality-based approximation Janos Makkav has ranged tells
as Iollows: tells oI one layer as tell-rudiments, settlement sequences without a long hiatus as
ideal-tells, and super ideal-tells when ethnical continuity has been added to the settlement-
continuity, noting that in reality such a case probably exists nowhere (Makkav 1982, 108). As Ior
tells oI one layer, John Chapman Iollowed the same logic saying rightly that every tell began as
a Ilat settlement (Chapman 1997, 142).
It is worth noting that problems oI classiIication have come partly Irom contradictary use oI
stratigraphic terminology. Archaeologists who have had long-term extensive practice in
excavation techniques must have learned that in most cases neither the so-called single-layered
settlements` nor the Ilat settlements` are really single-layered in the sense oI archaeological
stratigraphy. Thus, very oIten it is unclear what the authors mean by the term layer`. This term
is used by them to designate something more than a phase` i.e. period oI settlement. Similarly,
the terms layer, or level are oIten used as simple synonyms and oIten in sense oI phase or period,
preventing one Irom understanding the ideas oI the others.
Interpretations oI the prehistoric processes Irom pure physical, stratigraphic remnants in
themselves easily turn into non-historical, rigid approaches. But what is that 'higher quantitative
criterion, which meaningIully diIIerentiates between the single- phased rudimentary tells and
non-tell settlements? Without naming this, every argument soon becomes circular.
III. FORMATION OF TELLS IN THE SENS OF FORM OF SETTLEMENT
According to the identiIication scheme oI Andrew Sherratt there are three important elements
in tell Iormation, namely the intensive use oI mud brick, a high degree oI location stability and
the concentration oI the houses into a coherent unit (Sherratt 1983, 192193). Thomas Link has
rightly mentioned, however, that in the case oI tells no one oI these elements in itselI can be
regarded as the sole condition Ior layer Iormation (Link 2006, 10). John Chapman has Iound that
the ratio between built and unbuilt area, and minimum inter-building distance are also important
elements oI tells in comparison with Ilat-settlements (Chapman 1989, 3538). Janos Makkav has
clearly deduced the process oI settlement agglomeration in the Hungarian Great Plain through the
evidence oI detailed Iield surveys in County Bekes, noting, however, that it with the same
preconditions in the Iormation oI central settlements the same process had also been enacted in
the LPC-descendant Lengyel culture (Makkav 1982, 127).
These elements are important criteria, but they are henceIorward still only results oI a
precondition oI how tells could be established. A comparison between areal distribution and the
essential agrotechnology oI tell and non-tell settlements seems to be one oI the potential ways to
contribute to the question oI the essential roots oI tell Iormation.
To begin with the area oI distribution, there were no tells apparently in either Western or in
Central Europe. The lack oI archaeological evidence Ior Iully permanent i.e. multi-stratiIied
settlements oI the LPC has been repeatedly imputed to the climatic, environmental diIIerences
between the two areas and, more than anything else, to the eIIect oI erosion and precipitation
(Rosenstock 2005, 226229). Without underestimating the role oI these Iactors, the problem
becomes more complicated when explaining the similar lack oI tells in the central part oI the
Mediterranean coast. Here, the climate might not diIIer basically Irom that oI eastern areas and
oI the eastern Balkans. Finally, it might not diIIer in any way Irom that oI the contact-zones.
Moreover, north oI the Drava valley at the border oI the Sopot culture (in close relation with
Lengyel) tell-settlements stopped in a straight line, in spite oI identical Iactors oI climate,
precipitation and erosion existing in their northern surroundings.
A more relevant example is that oI the Great Hungarian Plain. There are no tells north oI the
valleys oI the Krs and Beretty rivers in the Late Neolithic with the exception oI Polgar-
Csszhalom (and perhaps Polgar-Bosnyak domb). This site lies some one hundred km north oI
the Krs valley. Since basically similar climate and precipitation to that oI the Southern Plain
characterise this region, the mere existence oI the Csszhalom site proves that the lack oI the tells
162
in this region can not be assigned simply to environmental Iactors. It should not be Iorgotten
either, that tells in the Bronze Age, in both oI the two areas - crossing the Drava and Danube lines
- extended Iar to the north too.
To continue with the subsistence economy oI the LPC, it was traditionally characterized as slash-
and-burn shiIting agriculture, in which the soil was quickly exhausted and settlements moved on
Irequently, perhaps once every generation (Clark 1952, 9596). This interpretation arose Irom the
apparently insubstantial nature oI LPC traces by comparison with the tells oI southeast Europe and the
relatively large number oI LPC sites (Thorpe 1996, 31), and the apparent gap in sequences at major
sites (Kln-Lindenthal, Bylany, Brzesk Kujavski).
However, since the 1970s there has been a tendency in Middle and Western European archaeology,
which denies the basic socio-economic diIIerence between the two type oI settlements and that oI the
communities they belonged to (Rowlev-Conwv 1981, Barker 1985, 167168; Bogucki 1988, 7992;
Rosenstock 2005, 229233; Link 2006, 1314). On some LPC settlements (Elsloo, Sittard, Stein)
intensive agriculture has been conjectured (Willerding 1980, 8182). The assumption that crop
cultivation was more important in LPC than animal husbandry is, however, based on largely theoretical
grounds (Whittle 1996, 160161). Similarly, the mere presence oI some biennials does not prove by any
means the introduction oI a more developed cultivation technique, rather than horticulture in gardens
situated close to the household. As Perles has aptly noted 'Permanent settlements do not necessarily
imply Iull sedentism. Year-round sedentism needs to be established independently, in particular
through archaeo-zoological archaeo-botanical studies. (Perles 2001, 153).
But in spite oI considerations concerning the intensive agriculture and Iull sedentary settlement-
system oI LPC cited above, there seems little doubt that there were no tells at any place or time during
the Neolithic either in Western or in Central Europe.
In this case the solution must be hidden within the underlying pattern oI subsistence, land-use, and
social organization oI the communities leaving tells to posterity. To summarize, the numerous
approaches and models concerning this topic are not easy to identiIy in qualitative or in quantitative
terms, at least in a short presentation. One essential element oI them is the problem oI land-use, or more
exactly the rudimentary Iorm oI Iield-rotation system.
In the literature there are reIerences to this system as early as in the 1960s, mainly in connection
with tell settlements (Pigott 1965, 48; Bna 1984, 17; Renfrew 1972, 276; Kosse 1977, 179) and
Iollowing that, sometimes in connection with LPC settlements too (Wislanski 1970, Barker 1985, 167
168; Whittle 1985, 88 and notes 61, 70). Renfrew, Perles, Dannel, Jones, Halstead and others have
proposed crop rotation and manuring in Neolithic Greece based on the grounds oI the presence oI
selected pulses in the archaeo-botanical remains (Perles 2001, 165). According to Amuretti, Jones and
Halstead 'this traditionally Mediterranean alternance was probably coupled with short term Iallow
and manuring the Iields by the grazing oI animals on stubble and Iallows (JonesHalstead 1995, 103
114).
In the Great Plain, beIore the regulation oI the rivers, two million hectares along the Tisza (i.e. two-
thirds oI the Great Plain) were temporarily or permanently under water (PecsiSomogvi 1971). The
percentage oI inundated land was calculated around each settlement within a 5 km square area (Kosse
1977, 87), but in the cases oI the southern Tisza culture settlements like Hdmezvasarhely-
Kknydomb, Gorzsa and Leb it might well be below this average, some 1 square km. In two houses
oI Kknydomb more than 700-700 litres oI grain was stored, calculated on the basis oI measures oI
large storage vessels (Korek 1973, 362). Such an amount oI grain in relation to the restricted Iield area
cannot be produced without adopting the crop-rotation system.
In the Early Tisza tell settlement Battonya-Parazstanya the number oI seeds oI about 4300 cereals
and 3000 pulses (Gyulai 2005, 194200) Iits the assumption oI the practice oI a two-course rotation
system. A similar ratio between cereals and pulses in Tap-Leb also supports this. In BerettyjIalu-
Herpaly the number oI pulses is also considerable. However, in the later part oI the Late Neolithic this
ratio, on the grounds oI evidence Irom Gorzsa and Csszhalom, seems to be clearly decreasing (Gyulai
2005, 194200). Parallel with this, the increasing importance oI stock breeding and hunting can be
perceived which ought to be a tendency related to the abandonment oI tells in the Iollowing period.
As a Iuture object oI research we badly need case studies involving more detailed analyses oI the
ratio oI cereals and pulses, determining traces oI Iield rotation that could be an essential condition oI
the Iull sedentary settlements. This approach would perhaps bring us nearer to Iinding the key to the
lock oI the underlying sources oI the tell phenomenon.
163
BIBLIOGRAPHY
Amouretti 1991,
Amouretti, M.-C.: Les rythmes agraires dans la Grece antique. In: Cauvin, M. C. (Ed): Rites et rvthmes agraires.
Lyon, (1991), 119116.
Barker 1985,
Barker, G.: Prehistoric farming in Europe. Cambridge, (1985).
Bogucki 1988,
Bogucki, P.: Forest farmers and stockherders. Cambridge, (1988).
Bona 1984,
Bona I.: A nemzetsegi es trzsi tarsadalom Magyarorszagon. 1. Az jkkor
(neolitikum). In: Szekely, Gy.Bartha, A. (Eds): Magvarors:ag trtenete. Elo:menyek es magyar trtenet 1242-
ig. Budapest, (1984).
BrayTrump 1976,
Bray, W.Trump, D.: The Penguin Dictionarv of Archaeologv. New York, (1976).
Chapman 1989,
Chapman, J. C.: The early Balkan Village. In: Bknyi, S. (Ed): Neolithic of Southeastern Europe and its Near
Eastern connections. Varia Archaeologica Hungarica (2), (1989), 3353.
Chapman 1997,
The Origins oI Tells in Eastern Hungary. In: Topping P. (Ed.): Neolithic Landscapes. Neolithic Studies Seminar
Papers 2, Oxbow Monograph 86 (1997) 139164, OxIord.
Childe 1929,
Childe, V. G.: The Danube in prehistorv. OxIord, (1929).
Clark 1952,
Clark, J. G. D.: Prehistoric Europe the Economic Basis. London, (1952).
Demoule 1988,
Demoule, J.-P.: Tell. In: Leroi-Gourhan (Ed): Dictionaire de la prehistoire. Paris, (1988).
Gogltan 2002,
Gogltan, F.: Die Tells der Bronzezeit im Karpatenbecken. Terminologische Fragen. In: Rostoiu, A.Ursutiu, A.
(Eds): Interregionale und kulturelle Be:iechungen im Karpatenraum (2. Jahrtausend v. Chr. 1. Jahrtausend n.
Chr.). Cluj, (2002), 1145.
Gogltan 2003,
Gogltan, F.: Die neolizhischen Tellsiedlungen im Karpatenbecken. Ein berblick. In: Jerem, E.Raczky, P.:
Morgenrot der Kulturen. Frhe Etappen der Menscheitsgeschichte in Mittel- und Sdosteuropa. FestschriIt Ir
Nandor Kalicz zum 75. Geburstag. Budapest, (2003) 223262.
Gyulai 2005,
Gyulai F.: Neolitikus nvnymaradvanyok az AlIldrl Neolithic plant remains oI the great Hungarian plain.
In: Bende L.Lrinczy G. (Eds): Hetk:napok venus:ai. Hdmezvasarhely, (2005), 203242.
Jones Halstead 1995,
Jones, G. Halstead, P.: Maslins, mixtures and monocrops: on the interpretation oI archaeobotanical crop samples
oI heterogeneous composition. Journal of Archaeological Science 22 (1995) 103114.
Kalicz 1965,
Kalicz, N.: Siedlungsgeschichtliche Probleme der Krs- und Theiss Kultur. Acta Antiqua et Archaeologia 8
(1965) 2740, Szeged.
KaliczRaczky 1987,
Kalicz, NRaczky, P.: The Late Neolithic oI the Tisza Region: A survey oI recent archaeological research. In:
Talas L.Raczky, P. (Eds): The Late Neolithic of the Tis:a Region. BudapestSzolnok, (1987).
Korek 1973,
Korek J.: A tis:ai kultra. Dissertation Ior candidat`s degree. Manuscript in the library oI the Hungarian Academy
oI Sciences. Budapest, (1973).
164
Kosse 19771979,
Kosse, K.: Settlement ecologv of the Earlv and Middle Neolithic Krs and Linear Potterv cultures in Hungarv.
Thesis submitted to the University oI London, Institute oI Archaeology Ior the degree oI Doctor oI Philosophy,
manuscript, 1977, and BAR International Series 64 (1979) OxIord.
Link 2006,
Link, T.: Das Ende der neolithischen Tellsiedlungen. Ein kulturgeschichtliches Phnomen des 5. Jahrtausends v.
Chr. im Karpatenbecken. Universittsforschungen :ur prhistorischen Archologie 134 (2006) Bonn.
Lloyd 1963,
Lloyd, S.: Mounds of the Near East. Ediburgh, (1963).
Makkay 1982,
Makkay J.: A magvarors:agi neolitikum kutatasanak f eredmenvei. Budapest, (1982).
Meier-Arent 1991,
Meier-Arent, W.: Zu Tells un tellartigen Siedlungen im Sptneolithikum Ost-Ungarns, Siebenbrgens und des
Banat: berlegungen zu Entstehung und Funktion. Banatica 11 (1991) 7785.
NemetiMolnar 1992,
Nemeti, J.Molnar, Zs.: A tell telepek elterfedese a Nagvkarolvi-sksagon es a: r vlgveben. Kolozsvar, (2002).
Parzinger 1992,
Parzinger, H.: Zentrale Orte Siedelverband und KultgemeischaIt im karpatenlndischen Neo- und
Aeneolithikum. In: Samardzic, R. (Ed): Hommage a Nikola Tasic a lòccasion de se soixante ans. Balcanica 23 (1992)
221230.
PecsiSomogyi 1971,
Pecsi, M.Somogyi, S.: The Hydrography oI Hungary In: Pecsi, M.Enyedi, Gy. (Eds): Hungary Geographical
Studies. Budapest, (1971), 85107.
Perles 2001,
Perles, C.: The Earlv Neolithic in Greece. The first farming communities in Europe. Cambridge, (1979).
Piggott 1987,
Piggott, S.: A: europai civili:acio ke:detei. A: oskori Europa a: elso fldmuveloktol a klass:ikus okorig.
Budapest, (1987).
RenIrew 1972,
RenIrew, C.: The Emergence of Civili:ation. the Cvclades and the Aegean in the Third Millenium B.C. London,
(1972).
RenIrewBahn 1996,
RenIrew, C.Bahn, P.: Archaeologv. Theories, Methods and Practice. New York, (1996).
Rosenstock 2005,
Rosenstock, E.: Hyk, Toumba and Mogila: a settlement Iorm in Anatolia and the Balkans and its ecological
determination 6500-5500 BC. In: Lichter, C. (Ed): How Did Farming Reach Europe? AnatolianEuropean relations
Irom the second halI oI the 7
th
through the Iirst halI oI the 6
th
millennium cal BC. BYZAS 2 (2005) 221237.
Rowley-Conwy 1981,
Rowley-Conwy, P.: Mesolithic Danish bacon. permanent and temporarv sites in the Danish Mesolithic. In:
Sheridan, A.Bailey, G. (Eds): Economic Archaeology. BAR 96 (1981) 51-55.
Sherratt 1983,
Sherratt, A.: The Eneolithic period in Bulgaria in its European context. In: Poulter, A. (Ed): Ancient Bulgaria. I.
Nottingham, (1983), 188198.
Sherratt 1994,
Sherratt, A.: The transIormation oI Early Agrarian Europe: The Later Neolithic and Copper Ages, 45002500 BC.
In: CunliIIe, B. (Ed): The Oxford Illustrated Prehistorv of Europe, OxIordNew York, (1994), 167201.
Thorpe 1996,
Thorpe, I. J.: The Origins of Agriculture in Europe. LondonNewYork, (1996).
Tringham 1992,
Tringham, R.: LiIe aIter Selevac: why and how a Neolithic settlement is abandoned. In: Samardzic, R. (Ed):
Hommage a Nikola Tasic a lòccasion de se soixante ans. Balcanica 23 (1992) 133145.
165
Whittle 1985,
Whittle, A.: Neolithic Europe. A survev. Cambridge, (1985).
Whittle 1996,
Whittle, A.: Europe in the Neolithic. the creation of new worlds. Cambridge, (1996).
Willerding 1980,
Willerding, U.: Zum Ackerbau der Bandkeramik. Materialhefte Ur- und Frhgeschichte Niedersachsen 16 (1980)
421456.
Wislanski 1970,
Wislanski, T.: The Neolithic in Poland. Wroclaw, (1970).
NEW EVIDENCE OF NEOLITHIC AND COPPER AGE AGRICULTURE AND WOOD
USE IN TRANSYLVANIA AND THE BANAT (ROMANIA)
Renato Nisbet
*
Keywords: archaeobotanv, Romania, earlv crops, charcoal analvsis.
I. INTRODUCTION
The aim oI this paper is to propose a reconstruction oI some aspects oI on-site vegetation as shown
by charcoal, charred Iruits and seeds, Irom some digs carried out in the last Iew years in Transylvania
and Romanian Banat
1
. These materials were collected by diIIerent teams Irom a Iew Neolithic and
Copper Age sites: Parta, Dudestii Vechi, Foeni-Cimitirul Ortodox and Snandrei, in the Banat,
Miercurea Sibiului-Petris and Pestera Ungureasc in Cheile Turzii Gorge, in Transylvania.
UnIortunately, the materials are abundant only Ior the last site and come Irom a large wet-
sieving sampling (at 1 mm). The other samples are small or even very small between 50 and 100
mL and mostly were handpicked (except Ior Miercurea Sibiului-Petris, which was also Iloated
and sieved at 1mm). Given this diIIerence in sampling in the diverse sites, we have thereIore only
a very preliminary indication on agriculture and wood use.
II. NEOLITHIC SITES
1. Miercurea Sibiului-!"#$%&
In our record, the only Early Neolithic evidence oI agriculture comes Irom Miercurea Sibiului-
Petris (Secaselor Plateau, Sibiu district) where extensive Ilotation oI sediment Irom several pits
belonging to the Starcevo-Cris culture led to the recovery oI barley and bread/club wheat, as
shown Irom Table 1.
"#$# Early Cri Vina A2
Triticum cI monococcum, einkorn 1 G20s2
Triticum dicoccum, emmer 4 G20s2
Triticum cI. dicoccum, emmer 3 G20s2
Triticum sp., wheat 1 Pit 35 6 Pit 18, G20s2
Triticum sp., wheat 1 G20s2
Hordeum vulgare, barley 1 Pit 35
Panicum miliaceum, broomcorn millet 4 Pit 18, G20s2
Cerealia, cereals undiII. 2 Pit 35 2 Pit 18, G20s2
Table 1. Miercurea Sibiului-Petris. Neolithic cereals.
These Iew data are presented here, in spite oI their obvious limits, because no agricultural
remains were previously known in spite oI the large extent oI the site, which until 2006 was
investigated over a surIace oI not less than 840 square metres
2
. The absence oI cereal chaII,
*
Viale Rimembranza, 7 10066 Torre Pellice, Italy, renisbettin.it
1
I would like to thank Drs D. Ciobotaru and F. Drasovean (Banat Museum, Timisoara) and ProI. S. A. Luca (Lucian
Blaga University, Sibiu) who provided part oI archaeobotanical materials. Thanks are due also to ProI. P. Biagi (Ca`
Foscari, Venice University), Ior support and Iunding and the organizers Ior the invitation to the Timisoara
Symposium.
2
Luca et alii 2007.
168
weeds and other agricultural indicators documents the high dispersion oI these remains, and
makes impossible to compare the local Iarming activity to other sites oI the Balkans. A single
emmer grain Irom Pit 18 (105 cm) was dated to an early Vinca phase, i.e. GrA-33127: 647540
uncal BP (Biagi et al., 2007).
However, other sites had already been studied Ior their archaeobotanical contents, like Parta,
where barley and both glume and Iree-threshing wheats in the Vinca B layers were Iound
3
, Foeni-
Slas, with einkorn, emmer, barley, oat, millet and lentil Irom early Cris layers
4
and Dudestii
Vechi, with Early Neolithic glume wheat
5
. The Iew data Irom Miercurea Sibiului thereIore Iit
well in this general Iramework oI with the presence oI barley and wheat since the seventh
millennium uncal BP (Early Cris).
In all these sites agriculture Iirst developed in a woody landscape with an homogeneous tree
cover, as shown in the Iollowing Table, where only a small number oI plants is represented in the
Cris hearths oI diIIerent sites.
Cri Banat
Culture IIC
Vina Radiocarbon Date
Miercurea
Sibiului-
Petri

Quercus,
Acer,
Fraxinus
Quercus, Acer,
Fraxinus, Prunus
sp. Carpinus,
Maloideae
GrN-28520:7050+70 BP
6
; GrN-29954:
7010+40 BP; GrN-28521: 6920 +70 BP;
GrN-33127:6475+40 BP; GrN-29503:6350
+139 BP; GrN-30500:6200+60BP; GrA-
26606:6180+40 BP
Parta Quercus, Ulmus,
Corvlus, Fraxinus

Snandrei Quercus,
Ulmus,
Fraxinus,
Acer,
Carpinus,
Maloideae
Foeni-
Cimitiriul
7

Quercus, Acer,
Fraxinus, Pr unus
sp, Carpinus
GrN-29015:5750+30 uncal BP; HD-22653:
5699+37 uncal BP; HD-22658: 5783+27
uncal BP
8

Dudestii
Vechi
Quercus,
Ulmus
GrA-28111:6990+50 BP
9
; GrA-28113:6930
+50 BP; GrA-24115: 6920+80BP; GrA-
26951:6845+40 BP; GrN-28876+70 BP
Table 2. Wood use in some Neolithic sites Irom the Romanian Banat.
Altogether these data show the presence in all sites oI a broad-leaved Oak. Ash wood is always
present, with the exception oI the scanty materials Irom Dudestii Vechi, and Elm wood was Iound
in 50 oI samples. The existence oI open woodland, or wood Iringe, where edible wild plants
could be collected, are shown by Hazel, some Prunus and Maloideae species, such as Crab
Apples, wild Pears, Hawthorns and Whitebeams.
At Miercurea Sibiului-Petris, in a hilly landscape, the Early Neolithic woodland was Iormed
by mixed-oak Iorest with Ash and Maple. Later on, trees Irom more open environments were
added to these species, such as elements oI the Maloideae subIamily and Prunus, but it is
impossible to relate this apparent change to men in the Iorm oI some kind oI agricultural or
pastoral activity. That the latter was Iundamental to the local Cris economy is well documented
3
Monah 1994.
4
Drasovean 2007; GreenIield and Jongsma 2008.
5
Fischer unpubl., in Fischer and Rsch 2004.
6
All uncalibrated radiocarbon dates Irom Biagi et alii 2005 and Biagi et alii 2007.
7
Medelet and Bugilan 1987.
8
Dates HD Irom Drasovean 2005.
9
All uncalibrated radiocarbon dates Irom Biagi et alii 2005 and Biagi et alii 2007.
169
by the presence oI cattle and caprovines
10
, so that some impact on the vegetation cannot be
discounted. Moreover, the occurrence oI Ilint and obsidian sickles in several Vinca pits
11
also
points to an increase oI Iarming activities and thereIore oI human pressure on the woodland.
On other sites diIIerent vegetation types occur, such as Querco-Ulmetum and Querco-
Carpinetum. Summing up, we observe Irom these Iew data that Iarming communities, at least since
the Vinca culture, had settled in a heterogeneous woody environment, Irom which they could draw
diIIerent kinds oI wood to be used as timber or Iirewood, with a strong bias towards Oak.
ReIerences to pollen analysis in the Banat and Transylvania, which may broaden our
knowledge oI middle Holocene Iorest vegetation as obtained by charcoal, point to a similar and
more detailed development oI the Iorest cover. In the Banat (Semenic, 1400 m asl)
12
the Holocene
vegetation history is dominated by Pinus in the Preboreal, by Corvlus and Mixed Oak Forest Irom
the Boreal to the Middle Atlantic, by Picea and Mixed Oak Forest in the Late Atlantic, by mainly
Carpinus in the Early Subboreal. Other work
13
carried out in the middle altitude Romanian
Carpathians, over 1,000 m asl, shows that the Iirst indications oI human activities are observed
during the second halI oI the seventh millennium uncal BP, Iollowing the spread oI Carpinus and
develop in the so-called Quercetum mixtum, with Elm, Ash and Lime. At a lower altitude in
Transylvania
14
middle/late Holocene vegetation is again dominated by Quercus and Ulmus,
Iollowed, beIore 5000 cal BP, by the spread oI Corylus.
2. Pestera Ungureasc, Copper Age
Greater evidence oI agriculture and wood use comes Irom Pestera Unguereasc. This cave
opens at an altitude oI about 800 m, some 100 m above the local base Ilow, and is located in a
narrow gorge some 3 km long. It can be reached only Irom the valley bottom, today crossed by
the Hsdatelor River. The gorge is carved through a variety oI habitats, up to the proximity oI the
cave; Iurther in the plain are wet environments with mires and probably peat Iavourable Ior oII-
site palaeobotanical investigations.
The material presented in this paper comes Irom the dig carried out in 2003-2004, directed by
P. Biagi and Gh. Lazarovici
15
, near the mouth oI the cave covering a surIace oI some 5 square
metres. All sediment was transported down to the river, where it was water-sieved with a 1 mm
grid. Altogether, 94 samples were processed obtaining a volume oI charred material oI 6.3 litres.
A. Charcoal analvses
This table shows the number oI charcoal Iragments Ior taxon and Ior culture.
In about 2,500 Iragments, 19 tree taxa were recognised. They represent some aspects oI the
Iorest cover in the surrounding areas Ior no more than Iour or Iive centuries oI the second halI oI
the sixth millennium uncal BP.
The radiocarbon dates Ior layers 2a-2b, Early/Middle Toarte Pastilate culture (TP)
16
span
between 5350 e 5100 uncal BP. The layer 3a2 has been dated as GrA-35701: 5275+35 uncal BP
(Petresti culture).
Most oI the charcoal Iragments are scattered in cave sediment, and could not be clearly related
to any particular context. Only a small part oI the charred material (both wood and seeds) comes
Irom close contexts, namely one pit, Iour Iireplaces and one oven.
The wood could have been brought inside the cave Ior heating, Ior cooking, Ior lighting, Ior
baking clay or Ior melting metals
17
. At least in part, it was also used as timber Ior building
speciIic structures, such as enclosures and hut walls, as possibly shown by one small 'man-made
structure delimited bv an alignment of verv small post-holes in the Early TP layers
18
. From these
10
El Susi 2007.
11
Biagi, oral comm. 2007.
12
Rsch and Fischer 2000.
13
Farcas et alii 1999; Tantau et alii 2003.
14
Feurdean et alii 2007.
15
The excavations were carried out with the Iinancial support oI the Italian Ministry Ior Foreign AIIairs (MAE), with
thanks.
16
Biagi and Voytek 2006.
17
Biagi and Voytek, ibid., 179 and 183.
18
Biagi and Voytek, ibid., 178.
170
Coofeni/TP Late TP Middle TP Early TP Petreti
Alnus sp. - -
Betula sp. -
Corvlus sp. -
Carpinus sp. -
Quercus sp.
Acer sp.
Ulmus sp. -
Fraxinus sp.
Maloideae - -
Prunoideae - - - -
Prunus cI. spinosa - -
Prunus sp. - -
Crataegus sp. -
Cornus mas
Jiburnum sp. -
Jiburnum opulus -
cI. Cotinus/Prunus -
Euonvmus europaeus -
Populus sp. -
Table 3. Charcoal Iragments Irom Pestera Ungureasc, Bronze and Copper Age. -: 10; : 1050; :
50100; : 100.
data some conclusions can be drawn (Fig. 1). Apart Irom the older Petresti period, where oak is
prevalent, in all layers the most Irequent wood is Ash, Iollowed by Oak, Maple and Cornelian
tree. However, the diagrams give an idea oI the broad spectrum oI habitats exploited Ior wood
collection.
Looking at the distribution oI taxa by cultural period, we appreciate remarkable diIIerences
(Fig. 2). In the Petresti layers we Iound 11 taxa; the number reduces to 7 in the Early TP layers,
increases to a maximum oI 16 in the Iollowing Middle TP period. During the Late TP the taxa are
9 eventually reaching the number oI 12 in the upper layers, the CotoIeniTP periods.
It is possible that these variations in number oI taxa, compressed in a short period oI Iew
centuries, do not necessarily reIlect changes in the local wood composition, but rather a change
in the use oI the trees, at least partially related to grazing or animal Ieeding.
Apart Irom the absolute values, there is an interesting trend with regard to Oak and Ash, two
oI the main trees whose Ioliage was (and still is) used as Iodder.
Oak prevails only in the lower, Petresti layers, aIterwards Ash becomes dominant. This may
suggest the selection oI Ash branches and leaves as Iodder, as has been demonstrated in other
Copper Age cave-sites in Europe. Oak and Ash particularly the latter are considered excellent
plants Ior Ieeding herbivores in autumn or winter, and it is possible that a store oI leaves was
made in the cave in late summer Ior later consumption. This case is strongly supported by the
Irequent presence, in all layers, oI very narrow tree rings over a span oI several years, particularly
on Fraxinus, Maloideae, Ulmus, Acer and Quercus, but mostly on Ash and Oak.
The charcoal assemblage gives us the opportunity to appreciate the past vegetation landscape
in the surroundings oI the cave (Fig. 3).
The Petresti layers show several kind oI vegetal associations. First is the mixed oak wood with
Ash, Maple and Whitebeam. Scatters oI thermophilous shrublands are indicated by the presence
oI Hazelnut, Wig-tree or Blackthorn and Cornelian tree, all extensively exploited in the diet oI the
local communities. Fringe wood elements are shown by the light-demanding Hazelnut, Maloideae
and Prunoideae, and along the riverbanks and on sandy and gravely terraces Alder and Ash could
be easily collected.
In the Iollowing periods the wood composition stays unchanged and we Iind at the bottom
(Petresti) and the top (CotoIeniTP) oI the sequence substantially the same taxa.
171
Open areas and degraded woodland with heliophilous vegetation may be represented in these
later periods oI occupation by a little charcoal oI Birch and perhaps, more consistently, oI the
White Oak, Quercus pubescens, the latter on the south-Iacing side oI the valley and even on the
cliIIs, where the soil conditions were more Iavourable. Mixed Oak Iorest is Iurther indicated by
Elm, and the wood Iringe shows the presence oI Jiburnum cI. opulus, the Guelder Rose.
The existence oI dry, open patches is suggested, apart Irom the previously mentioned species,
by Cotinus/Prunus bushes, while the Poplar was collected on the riverbanks.
B. Seeds and fruits
OI 94 samples, 49 yielded evidence oI seeds, cereal chaII and Iruits. These materials are
present in all periods, but mostly in the Middle TP period. Table 5 lists all the identiIied taxa.
Only a Iew remains can be associated with Iireplaces and ovens, usually they are randomly
dispersed at a low density. They are Irequently Iragmented or somewhat worn, probably due to
trampling or soliIluction. The same Ieature aIIects the shells Iound in the sediment
19
.
B1. Cereals
The most Irequent class oI remains consists oI cereals, 40 oI which are hulled wheats; 7
are both six-rowed and two-rowed barley (Hordeum vulgare and H. distichon) and only 4 are
bread/club wheat. About 50 are undetermined wheats and barley.
The main crop consisted oI emmer (Triticum dicoccum) (28 oI the total grains). Einkorn
(Triticum monococcum) is Iar less abundant (7) and very rare is the new glume wheat, represented
only by a Iew spikelet Iorks. In addition grains and chaII oI oat (Avena sp.) are present, probably as
weeds. The chaII consists mostly oI glume bases and spikelet Iorks Irom the hulled wheat.
In the Petresti layers, the cereals are not abundant, but all species are present. Excluding the
more problematic identiIications, but adding chaII remains to the grains, emmer is still the
commonest crop Iound in these layers, with 24 oI the total, Iollowed by einkorn (12), barley
(5) and Iree-threshing wheat (4) Only traces are present oI the new glume wheat (1). In the
interpretation oI these data, it must be considered that about 50 between grains and chaII are
not determined at a species level.
During the whole TP layers, the crop composition does not change in respect to the Petresti
period. Emmer is still most Irequent (21), einkorn is 9, the new glume wheat 5 and the Iree-
threshing wheat is least common, with 3 oI the total. Undetermined glume wheat reaches 11
and barley (both hulled and naked grains) 4. Undetermined barley and wheat grains attain 46.
In the upper layers, belonging to the CotoIeniTP cultures, with 13 samples, emmer stands
again as the commonest crop (23), and the other wheat species Iollow in the same order as
Iound previously. Only barley (two- and size-rowed Iiles) grows to 12.
II we take into consideration only the cereal grains, the distribution Ior cultural period is
shown in Fig. 4.
Here we should mention the presence oI Iew grains and some awns oI Oat (Avena sp.). The
rarity oI this species conIirms that it was not grown as a crop, but occurred in the cereal Iields as
a weed.
The relative presence oI chaII remains in all layers suggests that at least part oI the harvest,
namely hulled wheats, was stored in the cave as spikelets, and it was only dehusked later, then,
Ior whatever reason, coming in contact with heat. A distinctive Ieature is the low number oI chaII
remains, about 100, in comparison with a total oI more than 500 cereal grains. This gives the
impression that the excavated area was used Ior the Iinal treatment oI the crop, and the storage
surIace was somewhere else in the cave.
Because oI the local territory morphology, it seems that only the part oI these remains
belonging to wild plants came Irom the immediate surroundings, while the cereals were probably
grown on the valley Iloor, thereIore Iar Irom the cave.
In all cultural layers a small quantity oI bread/club wheat grains was Iound. Apart Irom the
typical ones, there are some very short and plump caryopses, which may be reIerred to Triticum
compactum.
19
Girod, pers. comm. 2007.
172
Archaeological Cultural Attribution C/TP LTP MTP ETP Pe
Samples 13 1 24 3 8 49

Cereal chaff
Triticum dicoccum, spikelet Iorks 1 1 6 1 1 10
Triticum dicoccum/NGW, spikelet Iorks 2 4 6
Triticum monococcum/NGW, spikelet Iorks 5 1 6
Triticum monococcum, spikelet Iorks 2 3 12 17
Triticum NGW, spikelet Iorks 3 2 12 17
Triticum sp., spikelet Iorks 6 7 13
Triticum dicoccum, glumes 2 1 6 1 10
Triticum dicoccum/NGW, glumes 2 1 3
Triticum monococcum, glumes 2 1 2 5
Triticum monococcum/dicoccum, glumes 1 1
Triticum monococcum/NGW, glumes 4 1 5
Triticum NGW, glumes 9 1 10
Cerealia, stem 5 5

Cereal grains
Hordeum vulgare hexastichum 1 1 2
Hordeum vulgare distichum 4 4
Hordeum vulgare 12 1 8 2 4 27
Hordeum vulgare, hulled 1 1
Hordeum vulgare nudum 2 2
Triticum aestivum/durum/compactum 6 1 12 3 22
Triticum dicoccum 29 10 66 2 16 123
Triticum cI. dicoccum 8 4 18 2 32
Triticum monococcum 7 2 21 1 7 38
Triticum sp. 35 65 3 38 141
Triticum/Hordeum (Iragms) 18 22 89 1 130
Cerealia undiII. 2 9 4 15
Table 4. Cereal remains Irom Pestera Ungureasc.
A Iew grains oI a species oI oat were recognised only in the Middle TP layers; some twisted
awns oI oat were Iound in a sample labelled as 'from the mouth of the oven. As no chaII oI this
plant has been Iound, it is not known whether the Iew caryopses derive Iorm the cultivated Avena
sativa or Irom Avena fatua, which occurs as a Iield weed.
Only one linseed (Linum usitatissimum) was Iound in a sample Irom Middle TP culture.
Whether it was grown Ior the oil-bearing seeds, Ior the Ilax Iibres or Ior both, is not known, and
this unique presence is not even suIIicient to establish its eIIective cultivation in the Iields.
173
Archaeological Cultural Attribution C/TP LTP MTP ETP Pe
Samples 13 1 24 3 8 49

Crop weeds - winter annuals
Avena sp., awn Irgms 15 15
Avena sp., grain 2 2
Bromus secalinus 2 2
Crop weeds - summer annuals
Galium aparine 1 1
Oil and fibre plants
Linum usitatissimum 1 1
Fruits/Nuts
Cornus mas 24 4 109 24 34 195
Corvlus avellana 22 3 49 36 10 120
Coriandrum sativum 1 1
Pvrus malus 5 5
Prunus spinosa 1 2 1 4
Prunus padus 1 1
Rubus fruticosus 3 4 10 17
Rubus idaeus 1 1
Sambucus ebulus 2 3 20 8 33
Sambucus nigra 1 6 7
Sambucus ebulus/nigra 1 1
Phvsalis alkekengi 1 1 8 2 2 14
Ruderal plants
Medicago lupulina 1 1
Polvgonum persicaria 3 3
Other wild taxa
Medicago sp. 1 1
Ranunculus sp. 1 1
Polvgonum sp. 1 1
Rumex sp. 1 1
Jicia sp. 2 2
Rumex sp. 1 1
Undetermined 4 2 12 3 21
Other
Coproliths (prob. Iield-mice) 6 8 1 15
Table 5. Weed and Iruits Irom Pestera Unguereasc.
B2. Wild fruits
A consistent quantity oI charred Iruits and seeds comes Irom a woodland environment and its
Iringe. Small seeds were probably eaten when collected, and their Iinal deposition in the cave
174
sediment could be due to men as well as birds. In Iact, many seeds Iound in the samples come
Irom berries, which are commonly eaten by birds, such as blackberries, raspberries, Dane-wort
and elder berries.
Men were certainly responsible Ior the presence oI the larger stones oI blackthorn, cornelian
cherry and hazelnuts, as well as small wild apples. These were Iound as charred Iragments only
in a sample Irom the Petresti layers.
As a rule, there is a little probability that this category oI Iinds undergoes carbonisation, and
in most cases this happens when they are scattered on the soil and casually enter into contact with
a Iire. For this reason they are normally under-represented in the presence lists.
The cornelian cherry is a small tree with a high productivity oI Iruits, which are eaten Iresh
or sun-dried, or Iermented to produce a sort oI cider. The stones are present in all layers, and are
the commonest Iruits collected in the surrounding woods. Also the hazelnuts were recently
gathered and then eaten in the cave. Both Iruits Iurnish evidence oI human presence in the cave
during the late summer or early autumn.
B3. Cultivated fields and ruderal plants.
We have little evidence oI wild plants belonging to synanthropic vegetations, in particular
plants, which grow on disturbed habitats such as Iields, roadsides and hedges.
Some weeds belong to the Polygonaceae Iamily, like Rumex and Polvgonum. These are currently
Iound in waste areas, in meadows and on moist soils. Some provide sour leaves which might have
been eaten in salad. Other species like Medicago lupulina, Black Medick, and the Ranunculaceae
Iamily, and some species oI the genus Jicia occur in meadows, pasture and arable lands.
III. CONCLUSIONS
The territory stretching Irom the Dalmatian coast and the Black Sea was the obligatory
corridor between Southeastern and Central Europe to be crossed by Neolithic Iarmers. What was
the role oI the Banat, in terms oI chronology and human adaptation, is still to be Iully established.
The archaeobotanical record Irom this area is now quite substantial, particularly aIter the recent
work at Ujvar tell, in the Romanian Banat, where a large documentation oI early Iarming, chieIly
Ior the Middle Neolithic (Vinca C), was Iound
20
.
The Iew data reIerring to Early Neolithic agriculture conIirm that Iree-threshing wheat and
barley were already present in the crop. The list oI cereals grown during the Early Neolithic oI
Southeastern and Central Europe is mainly Iormed by the glume wheats, einkorn and emmer,
which are absent at Miercurea Sibiului-Petris, certainly due to the small sample size.
Much evidence reIerring to Vinca C agriculture has recently come Irom the Uivar tell, where the
glume wheats are by Iar the commonest part oI the crop. Here, besides einkorn and emmer, a new
wheat glume species is present, identiIied possibly as Triticum timopheevii. The same species is
present also in Early Neolithic layers oI Dudestii Vechi and in Vinca C layers oI Parta. Free-threshing
wheats and barley are not Irequent, and oat, rye and broomcorn millet are very rare.
A somewhat similar trend is Iound in the later, Copper Age site at Cheile Turzii-Pestera
Ungureasc cave. The present indications Irom this site have a double interest. They positively
conIirm that during the IiIth millennium uncal BP the glume wheats, both hulled and naked barley
as well as Iree-threshing wheat were common part oI the crop. They also prove the possible
presence, to be better established by Iurther work, oI the new glume wheat. And Iinally they
conIirm the broad use oI the Iorest resources, as an integration oI the agricultural produce.
At the same time, it is oI interest to remark the absence oI some cereals currently grown since
the Neolithic in the whole Southeastern Europe, like spelt, millet and rye. Also noteworthy is the
absence oI pods, as legumes like horsebeans, peas and lentils were well-known elsewhere since
the Early Neolithic.
However, the archaeobotany oI this remarkable cave-site gives a Iirst insight into the Copper
Age land-use and nutrition oI this area. Basic questions however are still to be resolved, and the
solution will be Iound only in Iuture interdisciplinary work, linking the cave to the surrounding
territory with its whole geological and biological complexity.
20
Fischer and Rsch 2004, who provide much other research, partially unpublished.
175
BIBLIOGRAPHY
Biagi et alii 2005,
P. Biagi, S. Shennan, M. Spataro, Rapid Rivers and Slow Seas. New Data for the Radiocarbon Chronologv of the
Balkan Peninsula. Reports oI Prehistoric Research Projects, 6-7, (2005). 41-49. Salt Lake Citv-Karlovo.
Biagi et alii 2007,
P. Biagi, B. Gratu:e, S. Boucetta, New Data on the Archaeological Obsidian from the Banat and Transvlvania.
In M. Spataro and P. Biagi (eds) A Short Walk Through the Balkans: The First Farmers oI the Carpathian Basin and
Adjacent Regions. Societa per la Preistoria e Protostoria della Regione Friuli-Jene:ia Giulia, Quaderno 12, (2007),
129 148. Trieste.
Biagi, Voytek 2006,
P. Biagi, B. A. Jovtek, Excavations at Pestera Ungureasc (Caprelor) (Cheile Tur:ii, Petresti de Jos,
Transylvania) 2003-2004. A preliminarv report on the chipped stone assemblages from the Toarte Pastilate
(Bodrogkeres:tr) Chalcolithic lavers. Analele Banatului, XIJ (1), (2006), 177-202. Timisoara.
Drasovean 2005,
F. Drasovean, Zona thessalo-macedonean si Dunrea mijlocie la sIrsitul mileniului al VI-lea, Apulum, XLII,
11-26. Alba Iulia.
Drasovean 2007,
F. Drasovean, Regional aspects in the process oI Neolithisation oI the Banat (south-western Romania): the
settlement oI Foeni-Slas. In M. Spataro and P. Biagi (eds.), A Short Walk through the Balkans. the First Farmers in
the Carpathian Basin and Adfacent Regions. Societa per la Preistoria e Protostoria della Regione Friuli-Venezia
Giulia, Quaderno 12 (2008), 67-76. Trieste.
El Susi 2007,
G. El Susi, Archaeozoological records about domestic species Iarmed by early neolithical communities Irom Banat
and Transylvania. Acta Terrae Septemcastrensis, VI, (2007), 25-36. Sibiu.
Farcas et alii 1999,
S. Farcas, J.L. de Beaulieu, M. Reille, G. Coldea, B. Diaconeasa, C. Goeury, T. Goslar, T. Jull, First
14
C datings
Irom Romanian Carpathes. Comptes Rendus de lAcademie des Sciences de Paris, Science de la vie, 322 (1999), 799-
807, Elsevier SAS, Amsterdam.
Feurdean et alii 2007,
A. Feurdean, V. Mosbrugger, B. P. Onac, V. Polyak, D. Veres, Younger Dryas to mid-Holocene environmental
history oI the lowlands oI NW Transylvania, Romania. Quaternarv Research, 68 (2007), 364-378, Elsevier SAS,
Amsterdam.
Fischer, Rsch 2004,
E. Fischer, M. Rsch, Archobotanische Untersuchungen. In W. Schier, F. Drasovean (eds), Vorbericht ber die
rumnisch-deutschen Prospektionen und Ausgrabungen in der beIestigten Tellsiedlung von Ujvar; jud Timis,
Rumnien (1998-2002), Prhistorische Zeitschrift, 79 (2), (2004), 209-220. Berlin-New York.
GreenIield and Jongsma 2008,
H. J. GreenIield, T. Jongsma, Sedentary pastoral gatherers in the early Neolithic: architectural, botanical, and
zoological evidence Ior mobile economies Irom Foeni-Salas, south-west Romania. In D. W. Bailey, A. Whittle and
D. HoImann (eds), Living Well Together? Settlement and Materialitv in the Neolithic of South-East and Central
Europe, 108-130, Oxbow Books, OxIord.
Luca et alii 2007,
S. A Luca, D. Diaconescu, A. Georgescu, C. Suciu, Archaeological researches at Miercurea Sibiului-Petris (Sibiu
County, Romania). The campaigns Irom 1997 to 2005. Acta Terrae Septemcastrensis, VI, (2007), 7-23. Sibiu.
Medelet, Bugilan 1987,
F. Medelet, I. Bugilan, Contributii la problema si la repertoriul movilelor de pmint din Banat. Banatica, 9,
(1987), 87-198.
Monah 1994,
F. Monah, Determinri arhebotanice pentru statiunca neolitic de la Parta (comuna Sag, jud. Timis). Acta Musei
Napocensis 31, (1994), 81-85. Cluj.
Rsch and Fischer 2000,
M. Rsch, E. Fischer, A radiocarbon dated Holocene pollen proIile Irom the Banat Mountains (southschwestern
Carpathians, Romania). Flora 195 (3), (2000), 277-286. Jena.
Tantu et alii 2003,
I. Tantau, M. Reille, J.-L. de Beaulieu, S. Farcas, T. Goslar, M. Paterne, Vegetation history in the Eastern
Romanian Carpathians: pollen analysis oI two sequences Irom the Mohos crater. Jegetation Historv and
Archaeobotanv, 12 (2003), 113-125. Springer-International, Berlin.
176
Fig. 1(a-e). Frequency oI carbonised taxa Irom PesteraUngureasc, Copper Age.
0
5
10
15
20
25
30
35
A
ln
u
s
B
e
tu
la
C
o
r
y
lu
s
C
a
r
p
in
u
s
Q
u
e
r
c
u
s
A
c
e
r
U
lm
u
s
F
r
a
x
in
u
s
M
a
lo
id
e
a
e
P
r
u
n
o
id
e
a
e
P
r
u
n
u
s
c
f s
p
in
o
s
a
P
r
u
n
u
s
C
r
a
t
a
e
g
u
s
C
o
r
n
u
s
V
ib
u
r
n
u
m
V
ib
u
r
n
u
m
o
p
u
lu
s
c
f
C
o
t
in
u
s
/P
r
u
n
u
s
E
u
o
n
y
m
u
s
P
o
p
u
lu
s
%
a
Coofeni / TP - Iayer 1a
Late TP - Iayer 1b
0
5
10
15
20
25
30
35
A
ln
u
s
B
e
t
u
la
C
o
r
y
lu
s
C
a
r
p
in
u
s
Q
u
e
r
c
u
s
A
c
e
r
U
lm
u
s
F
r
a
x
in
u
s
M
a
lo
id
e
a
e
P
r
u
n
o
id
e
a
e
P
r
u
n
u
s
c
f s
p
in
o
s
a
P
r
u
n
u
s
C
r
a
ta
e
g
u
s
C
o
r
n
u
s
V
ib
u
r
n
u
m
V
ib
u
r
n
u
m
o
p
u
lu
s
c
f C
o
tin
u
s
/P
r
u
n
u
s
E
u
o
n
y
m
u
s
P
o
p
u
lu
s
%
b
0
5
10
15
20
25
30
35
40
A
ln
u
s
B
e
t
u
la
C
o
r
y
lu
s
C
a
r
p
in
u
s
Q
u
e
r
c
u
s
A
c
e
r
U
lm
u
s
F
r
a
x
in
u
s
M
a
lo
id
e
a
e
P
r
u
n
o
id
e
a
e
P
r
u
n
u
s
c
f
s
p
in
o
s
a
P
r
u
n
u
s
C
r
a
ta
e
g
u
s
C
o
r
n
u
s
V
ib
u
r
n
u
m
V
ib
u
r
n
u
m
f
o
p
u
lu
s
c
f
C
o
tin
u
s
/P
r
u
n
u
s
E
u
o
n
y
m
u
s
P
o
p
u
lu
s
%
e
Petreti
MiddIe TP - Iayers 2-2b1
0
5
10
15
20
25
30
35
40
A
ln
u
s
B
e
tu
la
C
o
r
y
lu
s
C
a
r
p
in
u
s
Q
u
e
r
c
u
s
A
c
e
r
U
lm
u
s
F
r
a
x
in
u
s
M
a
lo
id
e
a
e
P
r
u
n
o
id
e
a
e
P
r
u
n
u
s
c
f
s
p
in
o
s
a
P
r
u
n
u
s
C
r
a
t
a
e
g
u
s
C
o
r
n
u
s
V
ib
u
r
n
u
m
V
ib
u
r
n
u
m
o
p
u
lu
s
c
f
C
o
tin
u
s
/P
r
u
n
u
s
E
u
o
n
y
m
u
s
P
o
p
u
lu
s
%
c
EarIy TP - Iayer 2b2
0
5
10
15
20
25
30
35
40
A
ln
u
s
B
e
tu
la
C
o
r
y
lu
s
C
a
r
p
in
u
s
Q
u
e
r
c
u
s
A
c
e
r
U
lm
u
s
F
r
a
x
in
u
s
M
a
lo
id
e
a
e
P
r
u
n
o
id
e
a
e
P
r
u
n
u
s
c
f
s
p
in
o
s
a
P
r
u
n
u
s
C
r
a
t
a
e
g
u
s
C
o
r
n
u
s
V
ib
u
r
n
u
m
V
ib
u
r
n
u
m
o
p
u
lu
s
c
f
C
o
tin
u
s
/P
r
u
n
u
s
E
u
o
n
y
m
u
s
P
o
p
u
lu
s
%
d
N taxa / Iayer
0 2 4 6 8 10 12 14 16 18
Petreti
EarIy TP
MiddIe TP
Late TP
Coofeni/TP
Fig. 2. Variation in number oI taxa Ior cultural layer.
177
Fig. 3. Main sources oI wood as inIerred Irom charcoal.
Wood sources
0
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
Mixed oak forest Fringe vegetation Thermophilous trees River banks,
swamping lands
Open spaces, light
demanding trees
n
u
m
b
e
r

o
f

t
a
x
a
0
20
40
60
80
100
A B C D E
Triticum monococcum Triticum dicoccum
Triticum cf dicoccum Triticum aestivum/durum
Triticum undiff.
Fig. 4. Percentage oI the diIIerent wheat species as grains. A: Petresti; B: Early TP; C; Middle TP; D:
Late TP; E: CotoIeniTP.
THE ZAU CULTURE
Gh. La:arovici
*
Keywords: Neolithic, Transvlvania, Romania, Zau Culture
I. DENOMINATION
A civilisation oI the Developed Neolithic (its beginning, phase 1 lies in the Early Neolithic,
phase II lies in the Developed Neolithic and phase III lies in the Late Neolithic,) the Zau culture,
which we now deIine more clearly, has had diIIerent names over time as archeological research
progresses and as the older excavations get capitalised on. These names covered diIIerent real
Iacts known at that time. The older terms which reIerred to this civilisation were: Transvlvanian
painted potterv, West Transvlvanian painted potterv (in which the Petresti culture was included,
too), the complex Lumea Nou, painted Tisa, Tisa II and a Iew groups that deIined various
regional or chronological aspects such as the Iclod group, the Cluf-Pericei group , the Tulas
group (an aspect or painted category oI the Turdas group aIter Florin Drasovean and Luca Sabin:
Drasovean 1997, Luca S., A., et alii 2004, 2005), the Suplac group, the Cheile Tur:ii group,
Lumea Nou Cheile Tur:ii and others. The terms CCTLNI (Cluj-Cheile Turzii-Lumea Nou-
Iclod), CCTLNIS (Cluj-Cheile Turzii-Lumea Nou-Iclod-Suplac), CCTLNZIS (Cluj-Cheile
Turzii-Lumea Nou-Zau-Iclod-Suplac), standing Ior an abridged Iorm oI the above groups,
represent the outcome oI our search Ior deIining and covering this cultural phenomenon.
The above mentioned terms were not Iormal, did not lack grounds and were not superIicial
either, each one deIining regional phenomena over time and space at the time. The term the Zau
culture comes up in our studies (C.M. & Gh. La:arovici 2006, 404 seqq. and others).
The term the %&'()*$ &+ '()"* ,-(., which is rather general, but which would also cover
the group oI Cheile Turzii in some opinions (Berciu 1968, Berciu D., Berciu I., 1958, Berciu
1961) has a low percentage oI painted pottery, about 5-6 , as the Vinca materials oI phase B
prevail. For that matter, according to our knowledge so Iar, the Vinca culture did not extend to
the north oI Sntimbru, which lies a Iew kilometres north oI Alba Iulia.
The term the ,)-. /0&-( (La:arovici 1991, 101-102) comprised Turdas materials (later than
the Vinca ones, at level Vinca B2C-C1) and painted pottery, a term extended later to accomodate
also Suplac and Pericei, as there also cropped up Turdas materials and painted pottery (La:arovici
et alii 1991, M.C. & Gh. La:arovici 2006, 404 - 439 and bibliography).
In 2006, aIter we thoroughly reanalysed the statistical data, the C14 data and the
stratigraphical observations Irom Zau, we suggested the term CCTLNZIS or the Zau culture,
widely borne out by the C
14
data although at that time I had my reservations about this terminol-
ogy. (C.M.& Gh. La:arovici 2006, 404 sqq.). Our approach has been decissively Iacilitated by the
de deIintion provided by Florin Drasovean oI the chronological horizon oI the Foeni group as a
distinctive cultural entity and oI the relations between this and the Turdas group (Drasovean
1994, 1994a, 1997a, Drasovean et alii 1998, 1999, 2000, 2002). The deIinition oI the strati-
graphic postion oI these painted materials Irom the sites oI Zau and Lumea Nou (Drasovean
1996, 1996a, Gligor 2007a, 2007b) has also provided us with suIIicient evidence to deIine the
Zau culture chronologically, culturally and regionally.
The term the Zau culture covers the greatest part oI the above mentioned aspects iI we mention
that the early stage did not come into being at that station, but in other areas, maybe at Alba Iulia
Limba - Cluj, but the research is still rddled with inIoramtion gaps, Zau lying at an equal
distance Irom those (Paul et alii 1998, 1999, 2000, 2001, 2002, 2003, 2004, Gligor 2007a,
2007b). From this viewpoint the term Lumea Nou represents, we believe, a cultural blend
between two civilisations, the Vinca being the prevalent one at Lumea Nou.
*
EItimie Murgu University, Resita; ghla:arovicivahoo.com
180
II. ORIGINS AND BEGINNINGS
As most specialist have said, especially D. Berciu (1961), the origin oI this culture was in the
culture oI Starcevo Cris, which was logical on account oI the mixture oI chaII into the paste and
oI the diIIerent genres in painting. The best stratigraphical observations come Irom Zau, where
we have statistical data levelwise and complexwise (Iig. 4a, Tabel 5 and others below), and Irom
Lumea Nou (Berciu D., Berciu I., 1949, Iig. 1; Berciu 1968).
One oI the Ieatures that exists throughout all the phases (I through to IIIB) is the glaze or the
white engobe, which were necessary when the paste was mixed with chaII or mud. In the culture
oI Starcevo Cris Irom Gura Baciului there are about 500 Iragments which were convered in
engobe. At Zau, Irom the same category, there is a smaller batch oI about 200 engobe covered
Iragments, and oI these over 67 were associated with painting. OI these 10 belonged to the
early stages, 26 belonged to IIIA, and the the rest are in asscoiation with the Turdas, Foeni,
Iclod or Petresti group materials.
C
14
data Irom Limba bear out the early data Irom Zau, thus marking the Iirst stage oI the Zau
culture oI whih we believe that can be Iound at Limba. We do not know whether in the Iirst
painting horizon Irom Limba - Bordane there is white engobe as it crops up at the second level
Irom Jrar. In association with these, the presence oI Vinca A2 A3 Iorms at -Jrrie (Florescu
2007, cat. 13-17) and Bordane prompts a timeline contemporary to the spiral polychromy which
also has bitronconic shapes.
The area across which these phenomena come about is very wide. It spans over Transylvania
(without its SE part), Crisana (northern part), the land oI Oas, the bend oI Tisa and the Upper Tisa.
Atmospheric data Irom Stuiver et al. (1998); OxCal v3.5 Bronk Ramsey (2000); cub r:4 sd:12 prob usp|chron|
Cultura Zau timpurie si mijlocie
6000CalBC 5500CalBC 5000CalBC
Calibrated date
GBaciu SCIIIB Lv-2157 6400+90BP
Tartaria Lady A3B1 R 1630 6310+65BP
Parta CB II Lv 2141 6290+80BP
Limba GrN/28112 6290+50BP
Ciumesti Mantu 95 6280+100BP
Satchinez Vinca A 2 Deb 2579 6270+40BP
Carcea Vii Dud- Vin Bln 2008 6250+40BP
Parta CB I Lv 2142 6240+80BP
Zau A1 G59 L11 Ly-8934 6230+55BP
Tartaria BrdH1718 A3B1 6215+65BP
Zau A2 Gr.in P8a Ly-8932 6185+55BP
Liubcova Vinca B2 Bln 2133 6175+85BP
MiercS B9 n Ic SCIIIBIVA GrN-69053 6150+40BP
CTurc SCII H-17919 6105+51BP
Zau A3 G8 Ly-8933 6104+55BP
Carcea Vii Dud- Vin Bln 1980 6100+60BP
LN Gr Funerara P7 Su2 B1 Poz-19490 6090+50BP
Farcasu Dud II-III Bln 2285 6080+60BP
Fig.1. Absolute chronology and the neighbouring cultures Fig. 2. Lumea Nou, 1947
181
In NW Transylvania and northern Crisanei the Piscolt group comes into being, which is related
or dependent upon the the Zau culture (La:aroviciNemethi 1983) and on the AlIld group. In the
Depression oI Simleu and on the Upper Barcu, in the area oI SuplacPericei, the cultures oI
Piscolt and Zau blend in and co-exist, aIter which the Zau culture gains the upper hand as it is
more dynamic (Suplac in Ignat 1998, Cluj Pericei in Bcuet 2006).
III. THE SPREADING AREA (fig. 3)
The area across which the Zau culture extends itselI starts Irom southern Transylvania up to
the Ukrainian Carpathians and according to some clues it might even stretch beyond that. It is
certain that near the border on Transcarpathis, in historical Sighet/Sziget and in the upper basin
oI the Tisa there are stages oI this civilisation. The western edge stretches Irom the east
Pannonian Plain (AlIld) to the Apuseni Mountains, and to the east towards the Transylvanian
Plain and Plateau. In the East Carpathian area things are known only in the south, in the Upper
Olt basin (determined by Polychromy I SC IIIB at Let, to the north they are only Irom phase
IIIC according to the Iirst Foeni Petresti presence (Maxim 1999 s.v Archiud, Matei, Beclean
hemispherical lugs: Roska 1942, 39 ).
Fig. 3. Spread and imports
IJ. STRATIGRAPHY AND CHRONOLOGY (fig. 1, 4, 7-8, 33 table 5)
Stratigraphical observations oI the most eloquent ones stem Irom Zau and Lumea Nou (Iig.
4b)(Berciu D. - Berciu I. 1959, Berciu 1968, Paul 1992, Gligor 2005, 2006, 2007, 2007a) as
well as descriptions oI materials levelwise. Important observations oI compared stratigraphy and
typological analyses come Irom Suplac, too (Ignat 1998) and Port Coru III (Irom now on we
quote only Port-... and the complex: Bcuet 2006). At Zau-level 1a (Iig. 4a) (hovels, pits or
dwellings) the Zau culture appears as a Iully shaped civilisation.
A while ago I said that at the northern edge, in the group Piscolt I (La:arovici 1983/1984, Abb. 3;
La:arovici-Nemethv 1983), the Szatmar group respectively, the same kind oI engobe and painting
crops up with postive motiIs against a yellow or brown background, just like in the Polychromy, but a
direct link could not be established. Among the Zu materials, the assignments oI stage Piscolt I, there
182
some oI clearly Polychrome making (Maxim 1999, pl. VII3). Sanda Bcuiet presents a Iew painted
materials Irom diIIerent stations which show that the same process takes place in the Upper Barcu
basin, the Simleu basin (Bcuet 2006) and in the Middle and Lower Somes, similar to those in the
Somesul Mic basin and oI the Middle Mures, but which take shape against another cultural
background, less dynamic and with other components.
J. EJOLUTION (Table 5).
By means oI the stratigraphy Irom Zau, oI some data Irom Lumea Nou, oI other published
materials and oI the observations Irom Piscolt and oI Sandei Bcuet, today we can ascertain more
clearly the evolution oI this culture, some local syntheses, in the their late phases Irom the
Transylvanian Plain an the Cluj area..
In general we can establish Iour evolution stages marked with I-IV, which would at least partially
also cover the mentioned groups oI which we have now evidence that they also a chronological value
not only cultural. The stages oI Zau culture are: the first I, which belongs to the Early Neolithic, with
two substages: IA oI genesis and IB, oI consolidation; the second, IIA and IIB in the Middle Neolithic;
the third, in the Late Neolithic, IIIA and IIIB, maybe IIIC here and there and the fourth (IV) in which
some elements are preserved or local syntheses come take place. These syntheses take place in the early
Cooper Age (syntheses Iclod - Petresti) which is also the Iinal stage, being encountered only regionally.
Fig. 4. Zau de Cmpie Grdinit, surIace 4, (north proIile in the mirror)
For these reasons some groups lose their meaning or stay valid only Ior short periods oI time or Ior
the synthesis phenomena or with local evolution, e.g.: with Piscolt in stage IB at Suplac Pericei; with
Vinca at Trtria, Lumea Nou and maybe Limba; or with Turdas at Lumea Nou or Suplac, Pericei etc.
maybe these groups, when morematrials have been puglished, will lose their ethno-cutlural meaning
or will be better deIined, but this hang upon the accurate statistical and analytical publishing oI the
materials, Irom the older and newer research (Bcuet 2006, Gligor 2007a).
The Zau Iinds do not cover all the phenomena and Ior certain areas the notion oI a group in the
aIorementioned cases it may not be necessary over time and space, wherever the research is riddled
with inIormation gaps or the materials have been suIIiciently published. The synthesis processes
should not be deIined as grouips but as stages or local aspects oI this civilissation diIIerent Irom one
site to another, Irom one complex to another.
1. Phase I (5.350- 5.200 CAL BC) (Zau 4,65 - 3.30)
This belongs to the Early Neolithic, but it is a period oI genesis and consolidation. The things are
not clear, because the materials Iound so Iar have not been published complexwise.
Phase I has two stages IA and IB. Our timeline rests upon the Zau stratigraphy, on the quantitative
analyses and on the Zau complexes, as well as on the research Irom Limba, Lumea Nou (the older and
newer one), the excavations Irom Cluj and Irom the north-eastern areas oI Romania, in the research oI
D. Ignat (1998) and S. Bcuet (2006). Sometimes, Ior some stages, there are Iew stratigraphical
materials, the distances among stations are long and there are Iew analytical studies and works (Ignat
1998, 66-76; Bcuet 2006) and a Iew recent reports and publications (Gligor 2005, 2006a, 2006,
2007a1 Ciut, 2007).
183
Table 5 comparative, stratigraphical - statistical
Table 5
The Zau
culture
Vina
Schier
Lazarovici
Limba

Zau
Levels
Stratigraphy
from Zau
depths
Complexes
from Zau
Quantity
items and
5560 - 5480
CAL BC
5400 - 5300
SC ? -
Vina
A1/A2
Bordane
C14

Zau IA
5320 - 5200
CAL BC
Zau IB
5300-5200CAL
BC

BB Level
3
Vina A2

A3/A3

Bordane
GrN-
28112

lev. 1a

lev. 1b
Ly-
8934
4,64 - 3,65 m

-3,50
2 pits
G34 G59
2 levels, 1-
2
G57+P9
thin
4,5050
4,008 3,901
3,7059
3,6521

IC 5250 - 5150
5250-5050 CAL
BC
BB 4
A3 -9 -8m

Lumea
Noua Ia
?
Limba
Sesu
Orzii
2#
Ly-
8932
3,60 3,30 2 dwellings
P8a, P9
3,4512
3,45582
3,4015
IIA
5150 - 5050
B1BB 5a
5150-5000

Lumea
Nou IIa
2b

3,30 2,90 marks oI
habitation
P9

3,30-3,2 40
3,00 47

IIB 5050 - 5000
5000 -4950
BB 5b
B1/B2
B2

Lumea
Noua IIb
2% 2,90 2,80 P1-P3, P8,
P10
palisade
2,90 1554
2,8068

IIIA 5050 -
4950

5070-4930 CAL
BC

BB 6
C1
S

Turda I
Lumea
Nou IIc
3a

Ly-
8933
2,80 2,60 G5a
Pit 6
P8
P9, P11
2,6/275 3,60
133
3,23,3 bottom
2,75928
2,7030
IIIB
Turda+Zau

Iclod Ib 4950 -
4850
5030 - 4840
CAL BC

Vina C2
S

Turda II
Lumea
Nou
IIIa
3b

Ly-
8931
2,60 2,45 G4
Banchet
P10
L2.2-L3
2,9548 3,317
3,484
2,601939
61.5
2,451184
37,5
IIIC
Import Foeni
Foeni Petreti
A
4850 - 4750
Vina
C3
S

Turda III
Lumea
Noua
IIIc -
Foeni
3c
4 ?
2,30 / 2,00 L1a, L3
L3a, L1b

2,30644 47,3
2,15643 47,2
2,0575 5,5
IV
Foeni Petreti
A
4750 - 4650

4600-4500
4500-4450

Vina D1

C14
CAL BC
M4590-
4450
B4590-

4a
4b
4c

190 1,80

L2.1
L1.1
L3
transition
mixture
mixture
19056 2
185870 31,4
170630 22,8
155520 18,8
1501 0,3
140577 20,9
125111 4
184
This phase is contemporary to Vinca A2-A3 and Starcevo-Cris (SC) IVA-IVB.
Fig. 6. Limba - Bordane, a-b) phase IA-IB ; Fig. 7. Zau de Cmpie Grdinit lev.
AVK ZAU c)C14 5320 5200 CAL BC 1a phase IA
A. Stage IA (5350 5250 CAL BC).
From Zau - Grdinit there are Iew stratigraphical materials (-4,64 - 3,65 m with three pits),
some come Irom older excavations. At Limba Bordane (Iig. 6) at the painting horizon there are
materials similar to those at Zau and probably Irom other places. The C14 data (GrN-28.112)
converge towards the Zau ones (Iig. 8). The Vinca materials Irom Limba Bordane are at the
level oI phase Vinca A2, (Florescu 2007, p. 34, cat. 13). For that matter the data Irom Gura
Baciului P5 and Ciumesti (Iig. 8: it has 2 main curves, and at Ciumesti there also Piscolt II
materials)(Maxim 1999, 523; Mantu 1995), bears out with SC IVA as genetical role, and the
incisions Irom Ciumesti are contemporary to those Irom Piscolt IA (Iig. 8). In stage SC IVAB
there already appear linear elements (Bcuet 2006, pl. 97 associated also in L14 pl. 81/5-6). Also
early are the materials Irom L10. The mixture oI mud into the paste typiIies the Iirst two stages.
The materials Irom level Polychromy I Irom the Limba area are very early (SC IIIAB), but also
the painting oI stages SC IIIB IVA could have played a genetic part Ior the painting oI the Zau
group (the white glazing and the white engobe also appear at Gura Baciului IV ). From the
Polychromy may also stem the painted lines with wide wavy bands which are handed down to the
early levels oI Zuan (Iig. 8) or Suplac I- Coru I (Ignat 1998, Iig. 71/6). From Port - level II
(higher level) there were SC IVA materials , and in Port - level I (lower level) there were also
some SC IIIB materials (Bcuet 2006, pl. 75, 78-79, 86-89, 90-97).
Only in stage SC IVB do the beareres oI the Zau culture come down there in the area, but the
local background here is stronger. At Suplac Lapis, on the other bank oI the Barcu, there are
SC IIIB IVA materials . Also during our excavations Irom the area oI Coru Port we Iound a
pintadera and SC IVA materials overlaid by early Piscolt materials, and then Iollows level Suplac
I contemporary with stage Zau IC (Ignat 1998, 214, Iig. 71/6). Across the Eru and Somes plains
meanwhile the Piscolt group phase IA comes into being as there are also late Polychromy
materials (at Piscolt painted pottery represented 27 La:arovici-Nemethv 1983, 28).
To this stage the aIorementined materials would belong, in which the line painting prevails
with white space and red bands lined arches etc. (Iig. 9), motiIs which continue well into stage
IB. The early ones should still contain elements oI Polychromy and Vinca (already remote or
which belong to Polychromy II) as things happen in the Piscolt IA group.
In the south this stage is in Iull swing. It is contemporary to Vinca A3 Starcevo Cris IVB
en retard). To this stage belong the materials Irom Limba (undiscovered beIore, seen by us).
Coming Irom Lumea Nou some oI the Vinca tall, empty on the inside beakers, published by D.
and I. Berciu (1949a), (Iig. 2, 10b) might belong to the stage.
185
At Zau Grdinit 1b the level is strewn with later pits, but clear materials are Iewer. At the
depth oI materials -3,5 m there are two thin levels and two dwellings. For some oI these materials
one has studied the economy, pottery technology and the evolution dynamics levelwise and
complexwise. (Table 5)(Bindea 1996, La:arovici et alii, 2002, La:r 1995 s.v.; 1995a, 1998). A
general presentation oI the Zau stratigraphy is necessary (Tabel 5), as it underpins our
argumentation Ior the Zau culture and its synchronisms (La:arovici 2000, C. M. & Gh. La:arovici
2006, 404 sqq., 429 sqq.; C. M. La:arovici 2006).

AVK - gr.Piscolt I-II - c. Zau
6000CalBC 5500CalBC 5000CalBC
Calibrated date
GBaciu SCIIIB Lv-2157 6400+90BP
Tartaria Lady A3B1 R 1630 6310+65BP
Parta CB II Lv 2141 6290+80BP
Limba c ZauGrN/28112 6290+50BP
Ciumesti Mantu 95 6280+100BP
Tarnabod-T AVK Bln-123 6280+100BP
Satchinez Vinca A 2 Deb 2579 6270+40BP
Sonkad Lab ? cSzamos 6250+60BP
Zau G59 L11 Ly-8934 6230+55BP
Sonkad Lab ? cSzamos 6220+60BP
Tartaria BrdH1718 A3B1 6215+65BP
Zau Gr.in P8 Ly-8932 6185+55BP
Ostoros Tiszadob Bln-549 6180+100BP
Liubcova Vinca B2 Bln 2133 6175+85BP
Tarpesti NK Bln 800 6170+100BP
Fig. 8. C14 data Ior the Zau culture and its neighbours
B. Stage IB (5250 5200) (fig. 10)
The C
14
data show that this stage is contemporary to the end oI SC IIIBIVA - Vinca A23. The
staions oI this early stage are at Limba Bordane and -Jrar (a station stretchin out across tens
oI hectares where thaere are still Vinca A materials).
To this stage belong some oI the early materials Irom Vlaha Ulita mic (La:arovici -
Nemethi 1983, 18, n. 14). In the paste and engobe one remarks early Neolithic traditions oI the
Polychromy or Gura Baciului IJ kind. At Cheile Turzii, in various caves, but without
stratigraphic data, similar materials show up (Chapmann apud La:arovici 1986, Iig. 1).
For that matter, at Port Coru III in the alfa section along the Piscolt IA materials (Bcuet
2006, pl. 90-96, 974,6) there are SC IVA materials (Bcuet 2006, pl. 971,3,5). Materials oI
Polychromy II tradition exist in the inventory oI the burial Port-M5 (Bcuet 2006, Iig. 104/2-3),
but there are materials typical oI the Zau culture, too (Port-M5 and Port M-M16: Bcuet 2006
103/1, 104/2-4; 105/1, 106-108, 109/2), being also associated with Piscolt I and Lumea Nou
materials with S. Bcuet (Bcuet 2006, 112, pl. 106-109). When we speak oI Polychromy, we do
not ahve direct elements in the area (painting, Iorms) only the materials Irom stage SC IIIB Irom
Zau I which cannot be separated Irom Polychromy.
186
Fig. 9a. Zuan Dmbul Bisericii, group Zau Ia
Fig. 9b. Port-M5, Polychromy and Zau I
187
Fig. 10a. Zau -3,45 m
188
Fig. 10b. Zau -3,45 m
The elements connected to Polychromy would be: the wavy lines, the dots along the line such
as at Zau (Iig. 10a/310b/3), the clawed spirals and others (Iig. 8/b1; 9). Also early are the
materials Irom Zuan, those wih painted bands in thin stripes (Iig. 9a) and others Irom Suplac
(Coru I: Ignat 1998, Iig. 71/6). Some oI these motiIs (Iig. 10b/3) are not only in Polychromy but
Iind traditions and analogies Iurther to the south in Greece, in the culture oI Dimini -Tsangli, -
Larissa and Arapi (Milofcic 1960, 45, 15/1,5,7,9). They have been handed down to the Piscolt
Szatmar culture: at Piscolt pits 2, 1, II, 4, 5 : La:arovici-Nemetv 1983, 29, pl. III/2, 4, 7, V/5, VII/
6); Retkozberencs Paromdomb and Tiszacsege Sandgrube and others. (Kalic: - Makkav 1977,
Iig. 4, 7, 9-10, 14), but the mechanism and the route are not known Ior sure, but this probably
occurred through Polychromy. They are preserved later in the Devent cave (La:arovici Kalmar
1982, Iig. 1/4).
The Zau culture is Iully shaped at stage IB across almost the entire area oI Transylvania, NE
Crisana and the middle and lower basin oI the Somesul Mare and on the Somesul Mic. The
diIIerences are determined sometimes by pottery technology errors. Sometimes the colour peels
oII (black or red) and only the painting Iat stays on.
189
Towards the NW limit oI the area the pottery technology is not oI the same quality as in the
south. In the NW area (Irom Zuan) elements oI Polychromy get associated with Piscolt materials
(without stratigraIical observations)(Iig. 9a) (Maxim 1999, pl. VII) si Port (Iig. 9b2) (Bcuet
2006, pl. 1021, 3-4).
C. Stage IC (5200 - 5150).
Fig. 11. Zau Grdinit 1b (-3,45m)
This stage is contemporary to the end oI Piscolt IB/IIA, to the Szamos group (Iig. 8), a time
in which the inlaid AVK ornaments are preserved along the painting. Those oI Starcevo Cris
tradition become rarer but do not disappear both in our area and in NE Hungary (Kalic: Makkav
1977. Tolcsva-34 pl. 26) and Trascarpathian Ukraine (Poshutiak 2004, 68, Iig. 9a/101-105).
These take place across wide areas Irom Central Crisana up to Transcarpathia, at Zastavne - Mala
Hora, near Munkacevo and Rivne Kisme: (Potushniak 2004, 68-69, Iig. 9a-b especially 118 -
155). These discoveries Iollow in time the horizon with prismatic idols and incisions, thereIore
at level SC IVAB (Potushniak 2004, 69, Iig. 9b/90 98) associated with a painting typical oI
Piscolt I/II, II. The C14 data Irom Sonkad (Iig. 8) are contemporary to those Irom Zau I.
The diIIerences are not essential against the preceding period, the same elements are preserved
but the their percentage diIIers Irom one level to another and new elemnets appear. At Zau -
Gradinit 1b the lines made oI white dots, which show up in Polychromy and in Piscolt IB
Szatmar I (La:arovici - Nemetv 1983, pl. I5-9, III10 s.a.), are associated with wide bands against
a white background or gainst the vessel background (Iig. 11). Such materials, but oI a lesser
quality, can be Iound at Port-L16 (Bcuet 2006, pl. 110-111). In M 18 inventory Irom Port as well
190
as in the NW box there are Zau IC materials (Bcuet 2006, pl. 119-120). In Iact these materials
are considered to belong to the higher part oI the layer Irom Port-L15 si -L18 (Bcuet 2006, pl.
63). To this period and to the next period, we believe, belong the materials Irom the level with
hovels Irom Suplac I - Coru I (Ignat 1998, 214, Iig. 71/6).
Fig. 12. Port - Coru III SC IVA Zau IC or II B

A
B 9,
A
C 6,
M
J 5
F
C 5,
M
C 5
B
D 3,5

a b
Fig. 13. a) Zau -3,40 m; b) Port -M16 the Zau culture IC - II
Through its synchronisms with Polychromy and Starcevo Cris IV this stage is contemporary
to the Vinca A3b Iinds (Belo Brdo -9,00 8,00 m), phase 4 with W. Schier (1995). To the same
191
period we can slot some materials Irom Sesul Or:ii. It is possible Ior the habitation also to
commence at Lumea Nou, according to the aspect oI some Vinca materials.
The Zau pottery is oI very good quality. By means oI some tests run by gelologists the Iiring
temperature, in some categories was 900
0
C (samples 38, 40, 61, 69), and in those with chaII or
mud the Iiring temperature amounted to 600-700
0
C (samples 35, 40, 60, 62 La:arovici et alii
2002a). The material Irom Por(-M7 burial might be early, but the painted lines runing parallel to
the dish rim as the dish ornaments might point out to a somewhat later horizon, in phase Zau II
(Iig. 13c), the same goes Ior Suplac-M1.
c
Fig. 13. c) Suplac-M1 c Zau culture IC - II
In two oI the dwellings oI this horizon Irom Zau one has Iound about 600 pottery Iragments,
which shows the dynamism oI the station. The richest are in L8a (2/3 oI the layer material) and
Irom L11 with Iewer materials as the dwelling was rebuilt which led to the removal oI some
materials.
We are very keen on mentioning that Irom the old excavations Irom Zau, there are over 1200
Iragments in the data base but many are in a secondary position. In some oI squares thereoI there
is a mixture brought about by the deep Ioundations oI L1A and L3. These have wrecked a part oI
the researched surIace. The painting is made against a white background and the colours black
and red prevail.
OI the about 1200 Iragments 80 lacks ornaments, 20 have ornaments carried out by
various adorning techniques (especially painting, Iine arts ornaments) (many stem Irom
complexes L8a, L9, L11). The station is a main one, it is dynamic, the pottery categories reIelct
the Ieatures at best: 51,3 semi-Iine pottery, 32 Iine pottery and 16,7 usual pottery. From the
level oI the dwellings with a thin Iloor and pits excavations stem 61 oI the materials and 5,6
evince traces oI painting. ThereoI 20 have been painted with clear motiIs. The wide bands
which shoew up at this level, are a Ieature oI the next stages in many stations (Iig. 11; 15c-d). At
Suplac Coru I there exist materials oI stage Zau IC (Ignat 1998, 214, Iig. 71/6) in which
traditions oI Polychromy may be observed.
192

Fig. 14. Zau, level IC and IIA Fig. 15. Zau Grdinit 2a -3,20m
2. Phase II.
A. Stage IIA (5150 5050) (Zau 3,00/2,90 m) (Iig. 16, 21c).
Phase II belongs to the Middle Neolithic being contemporary to phases B1 oI the Vinca
culture. The synchronisms may be best observed at the station Irom Lumea Nou II, through the
arch motiIs, wide bands, etc. (Iig. 2b; 16 ), with analogies at Zau (Iig. 7d-e) and Limba - Bordane
(Iig. 16b). At Trtria there are several early Zau materials which crop up in Vinca B1 layers,
although desi I. Paul classiIies them as being later, though without arguments (Paul 2007). In this
phase at Zau-Grdinit there are three dwellings: L8a, L11, L9, (which have numerous pottery
Iragments), and two pits (G5 and G6) which start out Irom the lower part oI Zau 3 level.
Fig. 16. Cheile Turzii Irom the excavations by N. Vlassa
193
Fig. 17. Ustrium ? Pits 50a 50 b and G18
SuplacPort
Looking at the dwellings Irom this time we Iind that these have deep pits (Iig. 14) Ior the base
structure, sometimes being dug out in steps (in order to hollowed out more easily) at L9, L8a and
L11. In the next stage Iollow the dwellings with Ioundation ditches (L3 and L1A) like the entire
area, as it is the case at Port-'/01 !-$234/5)(Iig. 13b; 14b). We must mention that at Zau the
dwelliings are strung along in rows as they are at Suplac (Iig. 19), some oI the zau dwellings
belong to some potters as beside the large amounts oI painted pottery Iragments, next to each
dwelling or in their Iloor there have emerged pits with very Iine black-greyish clay they used
when they painted or moulded Iine pottery, which through Iiring turned black or grey, and when
they were painted they took on a red or bordeaux red colour. These conclusions lean on our
experiment with htis clay. The clay pits were sometines lined around with lime tree bark or with
animal hides.
In Cluj - Piata Unirii (Iig. 15a-b)(Iormer Piata Liberttii: Jlassa 1967, 1970, 1971, 1971a,
1976 s.a.; Maxim 1999, pl. VIII) we encounter the same motiIs, some more evolved, being
associated with possibly early incised Szakalhat pottery, iI we think oI the very thin and well Iired
walls and oI the absence oI the red and yellow crusted technique painting and which is not typical
oI the Zau culture, but which appears in early Szakalhat and Bucovt. The vessels in this stage
have sometimes three colour wide cross-like inwards and outwards painted bands (Iig. 11/1, 5;
15/2). This ornamentation type is Iound at Trtria (Jlassa 1963, C.M. - Gh. La:arovici 2006, Iig.
IIIe17), being considered by N. Vlassa as Tulas, although they are older. Some have red or black
edges and white interior space. (Cheile Turzii Iig. 16) with analogies to Zau (Iig. 14-15).
Among our excavations Irom Suplac Port - Coru III (unpublished) through a layer oI Ilood
debris coming down Irom the hill at whose Ioot the station lies, several pits have been Iound,
which were similar in shape but diIIerent Irom the Iill and materials point oI view. Some oI these
194
pits are ercatngualr with rounded edges, others are oval. They lay at the station edge and might
have served Ior cremating the dead signalled at levels Piscolt and Suplac I and II, both in Sanda
Bcuet`s excavations and in our excavations at Port (Suplac III). Such cremation pits or pottery
Iiring have been uncovered in Croatia (Minichreiter 2006) and at Balta Srat C.M.-Gh.
La:arovici 2006, 164, Iig. IIIa 49-50).
Doina Ignat has Iound three cremation graves at Suplac. in some there was also the pit were
the deceased were cremated, the case with M2 (Ignat 1985; 1998, p. 56-58). Sanda Bcuiet has
Iound cremation graves at diIIerent levels at Port (Suplac III) (Bcuet-Crisan 2004, 2004a).
During our excavations we Iound a cremation grave with the bones contained by an urn (un
published) (map squares G4-5, S2: C.M. & Gh. La:arovici 2006, 618, Fig. IVg/23c). Other
cremation graves have been Iound at Tsad (Chidiosan 1979, Ignat 1998, 56-57). The cremation
graves were oval, with sizes similar to the graves described by D. Ignat, with round edges oI
about 80-90 x 0,75 x 0,3 m (G50 a and 50b) with a yellowish-brown Iill, with a trough-like
bottom and with Iired walls.
In this stage the spiral-like ornament gets generalised with elegant motiIs. One should mention
the the inventory oI a cremation grave Irom Suplac - M1 (Iig. 13c) (Ignat 1998, Iig. 48 Irom level
I Irom Suplac Coru II). This stage is contemporary to phase II oI the Piscolt group, similar
materials having been Iound at Ciumesti Berea (unpublished materials in the Baia Mare
Museum), borne out by the C
14
data Irom Ciumesti.
The organisation model oI the station Irom Suplac - Coru 1 oIIers us data about the
architecture oI this civilisation. The hovels that belonged to the Iirst phase were grouped like the
Coru II level dwellings. A hovel (B6 according to our counting) was Iollowed by a semi-deep
dwelling which was then Iollowed by a surIace dwelling (level Suplac II), as the kiln (in the Iirst
phase built into the river bank) served as a hearth Ior the last two levels. This shows that
habitation spanned over at least three generations. For that matter, the dwelling overlapping and
their erection on the space location involves the preservation oI the Iamily dwelling space.
In hovel 6 all the materials were oI teh best Zau quality (paste, engobe, painting). The narrow
or wide, rectilinear or curved, inside or outside painted bands are similar to the spiral or
concentrical circles ornaments which have shown up in other complexes at the level oI Suplac I
(Iig. 13c).
B. Stage IIB (5050 5000) (Zau 2,80; 1200 Ir.).
It is contemporary to level 5b Irom Vinca Belo Brdo and to stage Vinca B1B2 Irom the
Banat which has another evolution Irom the one at Vinca, as well as Irom the Iirst part oI phase
Vinca B2 (Irom -7 to -6,5 m at Vinca). At -2,80 m at Zau the layer was wrecked. As we said above
oI several hovel pits Irom levels 3 some older complexes have been aIIected. On the dwellings
Iloors Irom this level adobe Iragments with beams marks have been Iound, which shows that the
walls were oI wood and the splits between the beams were Iilled with clay.
At Cheile Turzii the painted pottery Irom diIIerent caves seemd rich. The most interesting
materials stem Irom N. Vlassa`s excavations (reIerences to some oI the plates with Chapman
1981, Irom Binder cave).
From our excavations Irom 1994, about 1180 Iragments belonged to the Zau group (Iig. 18),
and Irom these 55 were painted, thereIore only 4.3, which radically cahnges the old opinions.
OI these only 4 Iragments were incised. OI the studied batch, there were 710 Iragments oI
semiIine pottery (41.2), 652 Iragments oI Iine pottery (37,8), and there were only 361
Iragments oI rough pottery (21). As we study the ornaments we observe that they mostly Iall
under stages II, and some have some links with the Tulas group (CG, CA, CB, CC), maybe
preceding it or contemporary to it. The prevailing degreaser contains sand and mica (28), sand
and shards over 40 and the rest range between 6,6 and 1,7 which leads us to the Tulas group,
only there is also Turdas incised pottery.
195
Fig. 18. Cheile Turzii, Pestera Ungureasc, the percentage oI the categories: rough, semi-Iine and Iine
depending on the mixture
To this stage belong the materials Irom levels Zau 2c, and namely Irom -3,05 2,9 m and the
complexes P1-P3, P8, P 10 and the palisade (oI which we do not know when it was built) but
which was observed on this horizon.

Fig. 19. Cheile Turzii, ornamental motiIs and painting
(Binder Cave, aIter N. Vlassa, Chapman Iig. 62).
The inner palisade prompts the existence oI a danger and the need oI inner deIences. We
believe that there is an even bigger on the outside deIence system, which has led to the buid-up
oI deposits oI over 3 m. The main station meausres over 7 ha, but around it revolve other 3 or 4
secondary settlements. At the end oI this stage dwellings P9, P10 si P8 got destroyed.
II we analyse the Ieatures oI this stage and oI the preceding one we notice that the Zau culture
plays an important part in the spread oI painting across North East and East Hungary, East
Slovakiaand Transcarpathian Ukraine, see the motiIs Irom table 23, Irom Zau (Iig. 20) with
similar motiIs Cluj - Piata Unirii and Vadu Crisului Pestera Devent and Cheile Turzii.

Cluj-
Piata Unirii -
5,5m
Zau
-3,2 - 2,85m
Zau -
2,9m
Zau -
2,6m
Zau -
2,6 m
Fig. 20. Ornamental painting motiIs
196
At Pericei - Keler tag one researched a greater number oI hovels some oI which cut across
each other and others overlapped thus aIIording stratigraphical observations. In hovel B3 (Bcuet
2006, 179-184), dug out in steps, there is painted pottery with wide hachured bands, with a wide
edge, others with spiral painting (Bcuet 2006, 180/ 2,4, 181/1) and some with a thick painting
which resembles the Zau one. Some oI the Zau Iragments clearly point out connections to the late
Piscolt II and ex-Gilu group (and the motiIs PF, PD, SH and others Irom Iig. 20).
In the pottery oI this stage some changes in technology can be observed. Next to old elements,
which get modiIied by saving the arches, there emerge hachured bands as these are the stage
motiI. The curved spaces, which beIore used to be Iull are now hachured (Iig. 21-22). The painted
motiIs oI the thin, parallel lines bands are ordered in angular, spiral-like or arch-like manner (Iig.
21).
Ever since the preceding stage there have been changes: painting is on the wane, the lines are
no longer so Iirmly drawn, the white background is more oxyded, the motiIs come out painted in
brownish or black hues that Iall away into blurred lines and sometimes into wavy outlined lines.
The ladder motiIs, which are original Irom the culture oI Zau, may be encountered in Piscolt
II group (La:arovici - Nemetv 1983, pl. XXI/1, XXIII/7) and Iurther on on the Upper Tisa at
Vel`ke Rakovce - Ob. 1 (Vizdal 1973, I/1). At Suplac Coru I, in phase II in dwellings 1 and
2 there are oval vessels similar to the Zau culture (Ignat 1998, 72/a 1-4, b2,6). AIter the paste
aspect the inventory M7 at Suplac would Iit in here. According to M. Gligor these painted ladder
bands last on till the time oI Foeni group.

Fig. 21. Lumea Nou, 1963 Fig. 22. Doh - Rturi
Materials similar to Zau are in Cluj: str. Brtianu (Roska 1943 s.a.), Arhive I (La:arovici
Kalmar 1982, 222; -Biblioteca Academiei I (cca 40 cm thick) (La:arovici 1977d, 23-24, 26, Iig.
1/1,2, 5; La:arovici 1986, 36, Iig. 1/10, 23, 31; La:arovici 1977e, Iig. 10; MNIT inv. P : 67.725,
66. 729. 66720, 61.454). Such painted materials also crop up in the Iclod burials, cemetery B
(La:arovici Kalmar 1982, 222; La:arovici 1977e, Iig. 10). At Iclod, too, in the centre oI the
station Iclod zone B phase Iclod I there is a ditch or a pit over 2 m deep: G 114. raport 1997,
with very early materials with a paste typical oI Zau Grdinit, nivel 2c, without painting de-
rived Irom the technique oI stage oI level 2a (Iig. 17c). The erection oI an inner Iortress shows
the troubled times. The inner palisades were erected at Zau, aga and Iclod.
At Vadul Crisului there are materials Irom stage IIA but also Irom IIB as well as some that
seem to be Piscolt II (Jlassa 1976, 24, Iig. 3; La:arovici Kalmar 1982, 235, 1-2; La:arovici
1995, 1/9). Other Iinds oI this stage are at : Gilu I excavations from 1944. A. Mozolics:
La:arovici Kalmar 1982, 223). The hachured bands or in anetwork Irom Zau are combined with
dots (Iig. 26/4, 7-8). all these elements beside the Turdas ones, underlie the stage Iclod I
(La:arovici 1986, Iig. 1-2). Within this period next to the old elements there emerges the arch
apinting made up oI 5-6 narrrow lines as well as the cross-shaped inside tha vessels alternating
with triangles adorned with hachred dots. All these motiIs are handed down to the Iollowing
197
stages at Iclod I except that painting emerges there only in burials and is kept more like a tradi-
tion, as in the settlement. It crops up sporadically, below 1.
To this period belong the earliest materials Irom Gilu I (materials Irom the exacvations done
by Amalia Mozolics) which belong to the Zau culture. There are also later ones, the so-called
6%7.( /0&-(, c oI which we believe that they are a later penetration oI some Piscolt III commu-
nities (Gilu Castru, Aiton, s.a: Kalmar 1982, 210; La:arovici 1995, 231; Maxim 1999, 97).
Fig. 23. Zau: 5) import Piscolt
Fig. 24. Cheile Turzii
These come Irom the valleys oI the rivers Almas, Crisul Repede and the Lower basin oI the
Somes, towards the area oI Cluj - Iclod (Kalmar 1982, 2/10; L 147, 2/31). In this area the same
retardation process takes place like at Zau (Iig. 23), but also at Piscolt at level II/III, as we deal
with regional retardation processes.
198
3. Phase III.
A. Stage IIIA Turdas I (5000 4950) (Iig. 30-35) (Zau -2,60m about 2000 Ir.).
a
b c
Fig. 25. Zau de Cmpie Grdinit: a,c) stratigraphy and complexes oI levels 2-4;
b) ritual pit B4
Phase III belongs to the Late Neolithic. During this period important population migrations
Irom the south take place. In the Danube region, these are associated with or known as the Vinca
C shock, as we actually deal with several population migrations.
The Iirst migrations yielded the Turdas culture as they came Irom the Serbian Banat
(La:arovici 1987, 1991 voci; 1994). In Hungary they contributed to the genesis oI the culture oI
Tisa I and towards west they contributed to the culture oI Lengyel, Sopot Lengyel (La:arovici
2001). The C14 data bear out the older datings. Stage IIIA is contemporary to Vinca - Belo Brdo
- level 6 (Vinca C1
s
apud

Schier 1995) and leads to the genesis oI culture Turdas I (the term Turdas
- Vinca Ior the Middle Neolithic is anachronical, see: Drasovean 1996).
199
Fig. 26. Cluj Napoca, Memorandisti (-5m): a) incisions; b) painting, 4-9) Tulas elements
Fig. 27. Pericei C68
200
At Zau to this period belong a series oI hovels pits B5a, B5 (Fig. 25), and especially B4 which
seems to be a ritual pit (Iig. 25b)(in it lies the remains oI 4-5 bovids, a deer, a pig, Iish: C. M.-
Gh. La:arovici 2006, chapter IIIe). At this level in pits B5 and B6 the most numerous deer antlers
have been Iound. The wild animals represented a mere 4 oI the total bone material Irom Zau.
The deer represented 33,33 oI the wild animals (Bindea 2005, chapter 6).
The inlaid pottery is scarce (Irom all the excavations we have got about 100 Iragments). Most
stem Irom the above-mentioned pits or Irom their excavation level. The pits start Irom -2,50 m
downwards. B5 and B4 are hovels having hearth marks down on the raised being redone several
times bottom. This involves a temporary adandonment oI the hovels. Pit 6 is later as it starts Irom
level Foeni - Petresti. At -2,5 m across the layer over 10 oI the Turdas incisions have been
Iound.
The earliest Turdas materials (Irom the pit bottom 5a) evince dotted bands or short cuts, and
this space between the bands was sometimes painted in red, yellow or black we Iind this back in
Cluj - Str. '22 Decembrie` (Iormer - Bd. Lenin) and -Memorandisti (Iig. 34a/5)(La:arovici 1986,
19, 2/2-4). At Zau inlaid pottery represents below 5 oI the level pottery, the rest being painted.
On account oI the paste technology the material Irom Cluj - Memorandisti Irom the earliest lev-
els and Irom teh dwellings L2, L3 Iits in between Zau 2,70 and 2,45). For these reasons and on
the basis oI the incisions we Iormerly set up the Cluj group where the painted pottery prevails
over the inlaid Turdas pottery as these co-existed and were not associated with Vinca materials
but with Turdas ones. The problem appears at Lumea Nou where the Turdas materials might
emerge Irom level II, too (at that time there are also Vinca C materials), but certainly Irom Lumea
Nou III. Next to these categories oI grey, red and coIIee-coloured paste painted with black or red
bands typical oI the Tulas aspect.

Fig. 28. Giurtelec Coasta lui Damian, Pit 4, rectangular vessel.
Such ornaments also emerge at Cheile Turzii being associated with wide painted bands and
Iields. At Cluj, Zau and Turdas there crops up a black kind oI pottery oI Vinca B2C origin, with-
out being decorated with Ilutings and without being Foeni; in Iact it is Turdas. Incisons and
stitches, Turdas elements show up at Pericei in semi-hovels (Sb) or hovels (B): B5 (Bcuet 2006
206/6); Sb6 (Bcuet 2006, 207/6; 208); in Sb7 a sem-hovel with troughs that descend to -2.2m
B68 like those at Zau (Bcuet 2006, 225; 239/3), these being characteric oI the Iollowing Zau
culture phase too.
All these lay the cultural and chronological Ioundation Ior level Iclod I, Suplac I/II (dwelling
L2: Ignat 1998, 195, Iig. 51). These emerge at the lower level at Turdas.
201
Fig. 29. Suplac II?, Turdas pottery -0,70 cm
Fig. 30. Port - Coru III
At Iclod - :one C the pottery eveinces a thick white, olve and red engobe at levels I/II
(La:arovici Kalmar 1982, 222: La:arovici 1986) which disappears in Iclod II. Suplac was in
the same cluster (1.2.1 as Cluj Stefan cel Mare, Iclod B and Zau -Cocoar and -Bufet and then
as Zau-Grdinit (separate cluster 1.2.2). The painted pottery allows us to synchronise Suplac
I with Tulas and Vadul Crisului, and Suplac II (Iig. 29). At Suplac II - Coru I the Turdas
materials appear (Ignat 1998, 73/3).
To the zau culture belong most materials oI the Suplac, Pericei group (Iig. 40) to which one
adds the local elements oI the Piscolt IIIII group. The evolution oI this area and the cultural
belonging are linked up with the Zau group. Late Piscolt II materials also exist at Port - Coru III,
next to the Zau materials among the inventory oI a hovel with a Port-52 burial (Bcuet 2006, pl.
85), overlaid by a burial oI the Zau culture, Port-51 (Ibidem, pl. 147-150) with beakers typical
oI Suplac I, diIIerent Irom the Iclod I/II ones, but with with S proIile vessels, ochre bowls,
amphorae as in Iclod I/II (La:arovici 1986).
202

Fig. 31. Halmeu Vam, complexul Cx4.
203
There were also beakers typical oI Suplac I, slightly diIIerent Irom the one Irom Iclod IIIII,
Suplac Coru II but they evince a painting typical oI the Zau culture (Ignat 1998, 229, 86). The
thick engobe Irom Port-M9 Iinds analogy with Iclod I-II. The road oI these communities runs over
the Meses Mountains, towards the Crasna Valley depression, towards Pericei. In semi-hovel 678
Irom Pericei there are painted, impressed and incised materials like those Irom Tulas (Bcuet
2006, 1893, 5; 1905-6, 1952-3, 1991). Other painted motiIs (Iig. 32) Irom Pericei (Ibidem, pl.
189) Iind analogy with Iclod I (Irom cemeteries A and B see sheets). At Pericei in 79, which
hovel cuts across older 78 (Ibidem, pl. 209), there is a Irequently encountered at Zau, Cluj, Iclod
and at Cheile Turzii (Iig. 35b).
Fig. 32. Pericei, L7b
Cultura Zau si vecinii, etapa tarzie
6000CalBC 5500CalBC 5000CalBC 4500CalBC 4000CalBC
Calibrated date
Uivar I 112Hd-22737 6036+22BP
Uivar I 106Hd-22735 6022+28BP
Uivar II 115Hd-22688 5947+41BP
Hodoni Vinca C1 deb 1963 5880+60BP
Hodoni Vinca C1 Deb 2018 5870+60BP
Uivar IV 052Hd-22759 5862+32BP
Foeni Gr. Foeni Deb 5771 5855+85BP
Foeni Gr. Foeni Deb 5725 5835+40BP
Orastie Turdas I B Deb 5762 5825+60BP
Orastie Turdas I B Deb 5775 5790+55BP
LN Gr Funerara P6 Su2 B1 Poz-19451 5700+50BP
LN Gr Funerara P9 Su3 G1 Poz-22521 5690+40BP
LN Gr Funerara P3 Su2 C1 Poz-19376 5670+40BP
Fig. 33. Chronology oI late stages
204
In the Simleu region, at Giurtelec Coasta lui Damian G4 beside painted pottery there is also
a rectangular vessel adorned with inlaid bands and deep alveolate Iorms (Iig. 28), (Bcuet 2006,
pl. 2802), like those Irom Turdas and Zau 3a. The beakers are painted with wide bands across
their rims, evince linear motiIs (Ibidem, pl. 281) or bands made up oI thin parallel or spiral lines
(Bcuet 2006, 281/8, 287/3). The Iootless beakers are amde oI Iine pste with thn wall , painted
with wide bands across their body (Ibidem, 287-288). They Iind analogy against a better kind a
paste, in Cluj Memorandisti at -5m (Iig. 26/4-7). All these point out to the cultural unity and the
swiItness with which novelty is disseminated, but also to the presence oI some local Ieatures.
They are the Ieatures oI the stage Iclod I. Some vessel shapes, incised ornaments typical oI stage
IIIA, maybe more certainly in stage IIIB, reach the northern edge oI the area at Halmeu Jam.
The lack oI the Foeni elements does not allow us to exactly pinpoint their chronological moment.
In the south and in the centre they are present. The presence oI ornaments oI thin arched lines
grouped into bands and the hachures would pelad Ior stage IIIB, but at the northern edge it is hard
to tell.
In the Cheile Turzii pottery the chaII degreaser, which was typical oI level phase Zau IIA (at
-2,90m a it reached its peak) is ever shrinking. On the contrary, the sand and micah degreaser
reached its peak at -2,40m in phase Zau IIIB.
The white background shrinks quantitatively (good engobe), but is oI better quality being thin-
ner. The ornamental motiIs next to the old ones (narrow spirals, bands made oI 5-6 narrow
straight or curved) emerge along with arches and spared rectangular spaces. The white engobe is
patially replaced by a cream-white or greyish-white engobe which makes up the background oI
the vessel on which one paints. The evolution that takes place on the Somes valley (Iclod) or on
the Crasna Valley (Pericei, Dirica), on the Barcu Valley (Suplac, Port) and others is similar to
the one in Cluj and Zau, with local diIIerences Irom one level to another, Irom one complex to
another. The rectanguar vessels Irom Suplac, with dotted or incised ornament, evince the same
motiIs as in Turdas or at Zau (Iig. 35), Giurtelec. The oval vessels (with one or two salt-cellar-
like` compartments are Irequent in this civilisation both at Zau and at Suplac.
Fig. 34. Turdas
205
In this Turdas - Zau movement both the incisions and the painting have led to this kind oI
uniIication. This movement pushes elements northwards which no longer appear at Zau (Ior
instance the cylindrical vessels with wide rim Irom Cluj - Iclod I), which shows the existence oI
regional temporary situations, which do not have similar evolutions. Across the wide station oI
Suplac, the Turdas decorated materials (Iig. 29) emerge along with the apar Suplac I/II painted
ones, in L2 (Ignat 1998, pl. 49/1-5, 7; 51/4,10), a complex in which Piscolt tradition materials
exist, too (Ignat 1998, 193, Iig.49/6). These Piscolt elements emerge at Zau earlier, at level 2b
(Iig. 23b). Another example: the small vessels Irom Iclod or the very wide-rimmed vessels oI
Iclod I level are identical to those at Halmeu Jam Iig. 31) All these tell oI the same civilisation
with tight ties. Painted materials oI this level emerge also at Suplac in dwelling 5 (Ignat 1998, pl.
51/10).
Now an obverse process takes place: communities like Iclod I, we reIer to cylindrical vessels
with wide out-turned rim, reach the Transcarpathian border, in Maramures at Halmeu Jam.
There they associate with clear Turdas motiIs but also with Zau IIIA painting (hachured bands,
bands made up oI lines, curved wide lines, in arches, parallel lines, etc as they emerge also in
Central and Northern Crisana. BeIore the genesis oI the Foeni group, at Turdas well-polished
vessels with black rim crop up.
Such vessels emerge at Zau and in cemetery A at Iclod, some S proIile and cylindrical vessels
have a well polished black inside as they all precede the Foeni group or are contemporary to it.
For that matter at Turdas, too cylindrical vessels crop up but they have not been chronologically
slotted. But there appear not out-turned rim ones as they appear in Cluj, at Iclod and Halmeu.
They plead Ior an extension oI the area, Irom Cluj-Iclod towards Halmeu, maybe on the Somes
Valley.
The processes are triggered oII by the immigration oI Turdas communities into the region as
they bring about momentous changes in Transylvania, Crisana and NE Hungary and even Iarther
away, in Transcarpathian (Munkacevo - Mala Hora only elements within the so-called Polgar
environment associated with Szakalhat Tisa ( Potushniak 1991, V/11-12, 3,5,8, 15-20) and Zau
III (Potushniak 1991, V/7,9). It is in Iact possible Ior such penetrations Irom the NW also to have
taken place in older stages. The vessel shapes Irom the 6%7.( /0&-( point out to their origin in
NW Romania, like those at Vrzari (Iig. 27: compare with Iig. 22a and b) or Piscolt II/III
(La:arovici - Nemetv 1983, 32) etc., but we encounter them also as imports at Iclod II/III levels
(Iig. 50)(in our excavations at Iclod: La:arovici 1986, Iig. 4-10; La:arovici - Kalmar - Maxim
1990-1993, Iig. 26).
A part oI the Turdas argumentation is also shared by the Tisa culture; Turdas was sometimes
considered as Tisa (Ignat 1998, Iig. 82), but their paste is diIIerent and so are the pottery styles.
All tehse groups with pottery and incisions were sometimes considered Tisa II or tisoid exactly
on account oI the paste (not only with D. Ignat), most oI them being early. The contemporary ones
belong in the stages oI Zau III. About this time, in NW regions NV Herpaly Salca communities
emerge.
B. Stage IIIB (4950-4850) (Zau -2,45m)
The stage is contemporary to Vinca C2
S
(C1 at Milojcic), Turdas - level II, Orstie level I,
Lumea Nou level III (excavations Irom the Romano-Catholic Iarm), with what has been deIined
as Suplac I/II and II, with Iclod I and I/II. The earliest C14 data stem Irom the the Turdas settle-
ment Irom Orstie, which are contemporary to the latest Zau 3B data (Iig. 1). In the blending oI
the paste the sand and micah mixture prevails approximately. 280 Ir. (in the data-base the value
is 13,9) a prevalent element at Cluj- Memorandisti at -5m, a time at which the painted materi-
als similar to those at Tulas crop up, being anterior to those at Foeni.
At Lumea Nou a large pit has been Iound with a great number oI cremated dead. As there are
no detalied reports or published materials it is not the case that we should dwell upon it. But the
series oI C14 datings Irom this complex leaves no room Ior doubt as to the late data Ior the late
Lumea Nou, Foeni and early Petresti (Iig. 33). Since this time at Zau there have been three large
complexes: hovel 4 the one with the banquet, dwelling 2.2, a complex with adobe remains Irom
-2,45m based at -2,60m (level oI excavation), a complex Irom which the C14 sample has been
taken. Dwelling 3 knew two redoing stages, being overlaid by another complex. In the dwelling
area, next to the north wall, a one year old child skeleton has been discovered.
206
Fig. 35. Zau - Grdinit, level -2,45-2,65m
207
Fig. 36. Zau level 3b 1-6) c. Zau; 7-10 Foeni I
In the layer there were about 3.000 de Iragmente, most oI them stem Irom the complexes and
the nearby areas. In G4 there are 486 Iragments oI which 25 were Turdas. Nine come Irom the
hovel and 16 Irom the hovel Irom section 3/1996.
The Foeni communities spread out now and later as Iar as the Transylvanian plain (Drasovean
1996, 1996a, 1997a, 2002, 2006). The C14 data Irom Zau (Iig. 1, 33) show that these arew par-
tially contemporary to Uivar and only with reduced likelihood also contemporary to early Foeni.
At Vrac At, Parta Tell 2 and other parts oI the Banat the Foeni communities and Vinca C2
S
horizons overlap (C1 Milojcic) (Drasovean 1994, 1994a, 1996, 1997a, 2002).
208
At Lumea Nou, at the Foeni levels, not the earliest levels according to the C14 data, there is
Lumea Nou pottery but also perIorated idols and Vinca C amulets (where Bicske or Zorlent type
amulets are in the hundreds: La:arovici 1979, Iig. 8 and pl. XXI-XXII and bibliography; 2000c,
Iig. 7) Gligor 2007, 2007a). In Transylvania there are numerous Foeni Iinds: Mintia (Drasovean
Luca 1990), Turdas (Drasovean 1996, 97; Luca 1996, 1997, 73), Pian, Noslac, Viisoara
(Drasovean 1997 and bibliography) Zau, Cluj, Archiud etc. (Drasovean 1996, La:arovici 2000b,
35-52 and bibliography; Maxim 1999, s.v.; Gligor 2007, 2007a).
In Cluj- Piata Stefan cel Mare next to Iclod I/II materials there are incised Turdas materials,
hachured rhombical bands, dotted bands like the Iclod ones in graves (La:arovici et alii 1984, Iig.
7-10).
In the NW Meses mountains there is a parallel evolution to the iclod group (regarding beakers,
they are tulip-shaped, big Iooted, Iormally identically) but they also belong to this stage and
phase. The Turdas elements Irom here shrink away, painting and pottery technology are on the
wane (pl. 260/1,3). There are common ornamental motiIs withthe iclod ones, but they have a lo-
cal, regional evolution. The decline is caused maybe by the southward and westward development
oI the Herpaly culture which will spread out atowards these areas (Carei, Zuan etc.) and which
is contemporary to Foeni and early Petresti on account oI the imports (Paul 1992, Drasovean
1996,1996a, 2006, La:arovici 2000c, Iig. 6).
At Pericei - Keler tag beside the incised Turdas pottery, one has Iound spoons with a whole on
their handle in several complexes. Some are Ieeding bottles (Maxim 1999, Iig. 100; 106:
La:arovici 2000c, Iig. 4) others have other uses. They allow the syncronisation oI stage Iclod I/
II in complexele : C68 (Bcuet 2006, 2281-3, 2381-2, 2393; 2394); C8 (Bcuet 2006, 240-
245), B49 (Ibidem, 246), C35 (Bcuet 2006, pl. 255), C48 (Bcuet 2006, pl. 256) also Irom the
layer (pl. 257).
Between Iclod II/III - III and Suplac II/III III there appear several common shapes: wide
beakers, semispherical on top and extremely high-Iooted (Ignat 1998, Iig. 86) with identical
shapes to those Irom Iclod II/III being common to others oI the time (Iclod: La:arovici 2000c, Iig.
1). Some perIorations Ioreshape the Tiszapolgar ones (La:arovici 1986, Iig. 9/1-3).
At Suplac, Pericei and Halmeu-Jam there appear several zoomorphical and
anthropomorphical idols with dotted decoration, typical oI this period and the NW area (Fig.
39)(Ignat 1998, Iig. 34, 2,6-8; 367-9; Bcuet 2006, 2701-2, 2711-3 ). Some idols are bow-
legged (Iig. 49 b) evincing analogy with Munkacevo Mala Hora II (Potushniak 1991, VI/1,3),
like the alter ones Irom the Cucuteni culture.
C. Stage IIIC (4850 4750) (Zau -2,30 m)
The stage is contemporary to Vinca C3
S
phase (C2 with Mijlocic), but such materials reach
only Oltenia and the Southern Banat at Liubcova, Cuvin/Temeskubin (La:arovici 1974a, Iig. 3),
being rarer in the north, at Borja (La:arovici 1994, Iig. 26, especially 26/5), their place being
taken by the Foeni communities (Drasovean 1996, 2002, 2006). At Lumea Nou there are con-
tacts oI the Foeni communities with idols oI the Zorlent type and Herpaly import pottery (Gligor
2007a), beside the Vinca C materials. A Iiner dating oI the Vinca C materials is not possible as
very Iew have been published. According to the C14 data reIerring to Foeni Irom Transylvania
(Iig. 33), the Iirst stage was set around 4650 CAL BC and the second around 4500 CAL BC
(Gligor 2007, 2007a). They are set aIter Hodoni and Foeni being contemporary to the beginning
oI the Slcuta culture (the evolution oI the Slcuta culture was set within the interval 4600/4500
- 4000 B.C. (Mantu 2000, table 2); the Foeni painting in white may have played an important part
there, too beside the southern and Vinca elements.
At Zau Grdinit nivel 3c at depths oI -2,3 2,15 m there are three dwellings rebuilt on the
same spot: L1a, L3a and L1b. The earthenware batch exceeds 1300 items oI which there are 375
Iragments at -2,30 m and more than 400 at -2,15 m. OI these there are about 1200 in the com-
plexes (see table 5). The Turdas-like materials evince very good craItmanship, Iine incisions, un-
like those Irom Turdas, Orstie, Cluj and Pericei which are on the wane. Such elements are kept
on, according to I. Paul (1981), in the Petresti culture.
Fine incisions (sometimes polished), are associated in other stations too with Foeni materi-
als, at Bernadea (unpublished beIore materials MNTI). At Zau running parallel to the eveolution
209
Irom the settlement at Grdinit there are materials at other locations too, most oI them chrono-
logically and culturally contemporary but unpublished beIore (La:r 1995, 1995a, 1998).
The Foeni materials are early, one can detect Vinca C1 elements in them, common to the Foeni
group too, but there are also elements Iound in Petresti A (Paul 1992/2-3, 5, 6, 9) or Foeni (Iig.
36/8-10). The same kind oI evolution takes place at Lumea Nou and Trtria. But the slotting oI
all the Lumea Nou materials into the Vinca B2 C level (Paul 2007) lacks arguments. Vinca C
materials can be Iound in Iclod Petresti stations, too.
Fig. 37. Zau level 3c ornaments oI the Zau culture, phase IIIC
The painted pottery is oI soItly manuIactured (blending oI chaII, mud, ground shards) but also
on account oI very good sandy paste, it has red, brown or black band motiIs with these bands
which are wide under the rim or run across the vessel. Now too one should mention the oval bowl
shapes which are the elements typical oI the period deemed to be Iclod II/III (see the Iclod sheet)
and Suplac II/III (Ignat 1998, pl. 55-57; 72-73).
The mud, chaII and ground shards pottery (the old background) amounts to about 30, the
sand one reaches about 30, and 40 represents common elements. A change into what later
becomes Petresti A is now under way, as I. Paul deIined it (Paul 1992). UnIortunately we have
Iew observations Irom other stations Ior this period. Such materials exist in Cluj Biblioteca
Academiei (the laver measures almost 0,40 m), - Arhive II according to craItsmanship and with
white engobe deemed to be Iclod I (La:arovici 1977, 23-25, Iig. 1; L 153, 37, 2/1, 13a-h, 20, 32-
36; 4/7; La:arovici Kalmar 1982, 222), materials that belong in this phase.
Towards NW the things evolve locally. In some stations an involution takes place (a part oI the
materials oI the complexes oI which some are in retardation at Pericei : C68, C8, C 49, C 3, C48
(also the above bibliography Ior phase Zau IIIB) and it may last till now, too. From the NW and
Irom the Cluj region the bearers oI the culture Hepaly Salca head oII to other stations or areas.
This seems to be a parallel group to levels IIIB, which came into being under the spell oI Piscolt
II Esztar. Herpaly materials show up on the Crisul Repede Valley in the past and now too and
then on the Somesul Mic all the way down to Cluj - Sf. Ion (La:arovici Kalmar 1982, pl. III: the
motiIs in white entail a dating to stage II a c. Herpaly).
At Cluj - Piata Unirii, among our excavations (Ba:in 4,3 - 4,8 m), there are late Zau materi-
als next to Foeni materials and a black kind oI pottery oI Foeni but also oI Iclod I and I/II type.
Like at Zau these point out to a contribution made by the Foeni group to the genesis oI the Iclod
group, in Iact it is the same process and the concept oI the Iclod group take on substance maybe
only Ior the late stages, oI involution or cultural syntheses (ex. Iclod Petresti). In the Turda area,
Irom Viisoara comes a bowl oI Iclod I paste but with the typical shape oI the Foeni group. Fot that
matter at Cheile Turzii too in the caves there are some shapes similar to the Foeni ones, only the
paste is diIIerent (unpublished materials).
D. Stage IJ Foeni - Petresti A (4750 4650 ) (Zau -2/1,90m).
According to C14 data, but also aIter the Foeni group evolution, this one is Iollowed in the
southern areas by Vinca D horizons. At Zau the materials are at levels 5a-c, the levels richest in
pottery (table 5). The genesis oI phase A oI the Petresti culture, as deIined by I. Paul, may be
observed at Zau too (Iig. 38), Cluj, Lumea Nou (Gligor 2007a, 2007b) as the materials are
spread across wider areas (e.g. at Beclean there are semispherical protuberances typical oI Foeni
or Petresti A, called Lengyel by us), but at that time they were not so obvious and the Foeni group
210
had not been yet deIined by F. Drasovean (1993, 1997, 2002, 2003). The Foeni pottery keeps
some elements (retracted rims allowing liquid Ilow and with Iine notches: a Ieature oI the Foeni
group which is kept until the early Petresti.

Fig. 38. Foeni - Petresti A; a) Zau Grdinit (-2m), b) Lumea Nou
Now too the wide painted triangles on vessels stands Irom Zau IV are made oI a Foeni Petresti
past. Such vessel stands crop up at Turdas at the Foeni level and then at the Petresti level. At the
same level there are some Iragments oI bitronconical beakers craIted according to the blacktoped
technique (Iig. 38/1-2), which evince analogy in the Banat sites: some are identical, sometines
wronly considered to be Vinca A. OI the same Foeni type are some bitronconical bowl rims with Iine
notches.
JI. ICLOD PETRESTI SYNTHESES (4650 4550/4500)
In the Cluj area and in the Transylvanian plain, in the area oI the Zau culture one has investi-
gated several stations and sometimes levels, especially at Iclod at higher levels (Iclod IIIII, aga
II) Foeni or Petresti A shapes made oI Iclod type paste, which mentioned the horizon on which
these took place. The same processes take place in the late Iclod and Petresti stations (Maxim
Kalmar 1991, 137-138). Such materials have been Iound at Vlaha (Iig. 39), Baciu Str. Nou,
Livada In spatele grii, at Matei in sat a large station.
Other materials are at Dedrad (La:r 1995, 68) and Saros, Cris - Ciornel (materials in MNIT,
col. Amlacher; Soroceanu et alii 1977), Doroltu (Maxim 1999, s.v.), Fizesu Gherlii Kis:sedem,
Bunesti, Rdaia, Suceagu, Vistea, Cmrasu Desert (Maxim 1999, s.v.; RepCf 1992, 74, 84 ). At
Dedrad there appear idols with Iine incisions like the ones at Petresti. In all these stations one
clearly observes the Foeni shapes; sometimes the paste is like the Iclod one or late Zau. When the
vessels are black on the inside, a Ieature oI the stage Iclod I (Cemetery A), this marks, we believe,
Foeni-Petresti inIluences. The diIIerence is that in the Petresti stations the blending and the Iir-
ing oI pottery are better than in the Iclod or late Zau ones. The Foeni shapes are obvious. In the
same place, Vlaha, without stratigraphical conditions, we observe several inlaid materials with
211
dotted band, incisions which stylewise remind us oI the Turdas or Vinca C ones, so that the be-
ginning oI Iclod Petresti process should occur at Zau IIIC level as there are shapes, decorations
and Iiring typical oI the late Zau culture.
Fig. 39. Vlaha, syntheses Iclod - Petresti
212
Here also one should remind us oI the spoon handle with a whole, a similar Iorm to the
Lengyel culture (Kalmar 1986, La:arovici 2000c, Iig. 4), similar artiIacts also show up at Suplac,
Pericei and other places. The use oI these artiIacts is diIIerent. At Iclod, in a complex their use
as Ieeding bottles has been demonstrated as one has discovered 9 spoons in hovel 14, exactly bibs
ranging Irom a suckling`s to a two year old`s. (Cucos 1974, Kalmar 1986, Iig. 3-4).
These may dsicharge diIIerent Iunctions on account oI their multiple shapes: spoon, bib, paint-
ing pot and one cannot rule out their use as melting pots Ior melting metal but Ior this one needs
special tests. In these stages, in each geographic area, the Zau culture ends its evolution in diIIer-
ent ways, which is natural as the dynamism oI the stations recedes and the deIences get aban-
doned. At Iclod and aga one can observe the erection oI constructions across the deIences, the
dwellings are more modest and the pottery is on the wane.
BIBLIOGRAPHY
Bcuet 2004,
Bcuet-Crisan S., Burial rites in the Neolithic in Northwest Romania. JAMvk, XLVI, Nyiregyhaza, (2004), p. 71
81.
Bcuet-Crisan 2004a,
Bcuet-Crisan S., Elemente de rit si ritual Iunerar n grupul Suplacu de Barcu. Carpatica, (2004), p. 87-91.
Bcuet-Crisan 2005,
Bcuet-Crisan S., Rituri si ritualuri Iunerare n neolithicul din nord-vestul Romniei (var. Rom.) Marmatia, 8.1,
(2005), p. 5-24.
Bcuet 2006,
Bcuet -Crisan S, Voci n Simleul Silvaniei. Monografie arheologic, Simleu, (2006).
Berciu - Berciu 1958,
Berciu D., Berciu I., Spturi si cercetri arheologice n anii 1944-1947. Apulum III (1947-1948), p. 1-43.
Berciu 1961,
Berciu D., Contributii la problemele neoliticului in Romania in lumina noilor cercetri, Bucuresti, (1961).
Berciu 1968,
Berciu I., Importanta complexului neolitic Lumea Nou n lumina noilor spturi (1961-1963). Apulum, VII,
(1968), p. 53-60.
Berciu et alii 1962,
Berciu D., Berciu I. - Popa, Al., Spturile de la Sntimbru. Materiale, 8, (1962), p. 267-270.
Bindea 1996,
Bindea D., Zau de Cmpie. CCAR, (1996), indice 439.
Bindea 2005,
Bindea D., Studiul anatomo-comparat al resturilor faunistice descoperite in siturile din Transilvania incepand
cu neoliticul si pan la formarea provinciei Dacia roman`, tez de doctorat, ms., Univ. 'Al. I. Cuza 'Iasi, (2005).
Chidiosan 1979,
Chidiosan N., Raport asupra spturilor arheologice ntreprinse n anul 1978 n satul Tsad. Materiale, Oradea,
(1979), p. 85-89.
Ciut 2007,
Ciut B., Complexul cultural Starcevo-Cris. Ceramica neolitic. O lectie de istorie, Ed. Aeternitas, Alba Iulia,
(2007), p. 20-29.
Cucos 1974,
Cucos St., Vase neolitice cu tub si semniIicatia lor. SCIJ, 25, (1974), 1, p. 125-130.
Drasovean 1991,
Drasovean Fl., voci n Cultura Jinca in Romania, Timisoara, (1991).
Drasovean 1994,
Drasovean, Fl., Cultura Petresti n Banat. SIB, 16, (1994), pp. 1-45.
213
Drasovean 1994a
Drasovean, Fl., The Petresti Culture in Banat. AnB, 5, (1994), pp. 139-170
Drasovean 1996,
Drasovean Fl., Cultura Jinca (fa:a C) in Banat, Timisoara Ed. Mirton, BHAB, I, (1996).
Drasovean 1996a,
Drasovean Fl., Relations oI Vinca Culture phase C with the Transylvanian region. The Jinca Culture, (1996),
p. 269-285.
Drasovean 1997,
Drasovean Fl., Some Remarks Concerning the Turdas and Tualas Groups. AnB (SN), 5, (1997), p. 7-10.
Drasovean 1997a
Drasovean, Fl, Die Petresti-Kultur im Banat. PZ, 72, 1 (1997), pp.54-80.
Drasovean Fl. 2002,
Drasovean Fl., Asezarea neolitic de la Hunedoara-Cimitirul reIormat si cteva problele ale neoliticului din sud-
vestul Transilvaniei, Apulum XL, (2002), pp. 22-46.
Drasovean 2003,
Drasovean Fl., Noi descoperiri arheologice pe teritoriul satului Cruceni (com. Foeni, jud. Timis). Patrimonium
Banaticum, II, (2003), pp. 55-67. (n colaborare cu Alexandru Fota)
Drasovean 2003,
Drasovean Fl., Zur einigen Praktiken der Schwar:e Magie :ur Zeit des Neolithikums im Banat. Masken,
Menschen, Rituale, Altag und Kult vor 7000Jahren in der prhistorischen Siedlung von Uivar, Rumnen, Wrzburg,
(2005), p. 26-30.
Drasovean 2006,
Drasovean Fl., Nordgriecheland und der Mittlere Donauraum zum Ende de 6. und Beginn des 5. Jahrtausends v.
Chr. Homage to Milutin Garaanin, Belgrad, (2006), p. 267-277.
Drasovean - Rotea 1986,
Drasovean Fl., Rotea M., Asezarea neolitic de la Soimus. Contributii la problemele neoliticului Iinal din sud-
vestul Transilvaniei. Apulum, XXII, (1986), p. 9-24.
Drasovean - Luca 1990
Drasovean Fl.,-Luca S. A., Consideratii preliminare asupra materialelor neo-eneolitice din asezarea de la
Mintia-Gerhat (com. Vetel, jud. Hunedoara). SCIJA, 41, (1990), 1, p. 71-76.
Drasovean et alii 1996,
Drasovean Fl., D. eicu, M. Muntean, Hodoni. Locuirile neolitice si necropola medieval timpurie, Resita,
(1996).
Drasovean Fl. , Ciobotaru D. L., Szentmiklosi A., Foieni. CCAR, CIMEC, (1996), indice 465.
Drasovean Fl., Cedic V., Ciobotaru D. L., Gogltan F., Foeni Cimitirul ortodox. CCAR, CIMEC, (1998),
indice 54.
Drasovean - Maris 1998
Drasovean Fl. -Maris T., Asezarea neolitic trzie de la Zlasti (jud. Hunedoara). AnB, 6, (1998), pp. 93-119.
Drasovean Fl., Cedic V., Ciubotaru D. L., Gogltan F., Foeni Cimitirul ortodox. CCAR, CIMEC (1999), indice
887.
Drasovean Fl., Ciobotaru D. L., Lazarovici Gh., Parta tell II. CCAR, CIMEC (2001), indice 1457.
Florescu 2007,
Florescu C., Cultura Vinca. Ceramica neolitic. O lectie de istorie, Alba Iulia, (2007), p. 30-41.
Gligor 2006
Gligor M., Consideratii privitoare la neoliticul tar:iu/eneoliticul timpuriu din S-J Transilvaniei. Materiale
ceramice de la Alba Iulia-Lumea Nou, Apulum, (2006).
214
Gligor 2007,
Gligor M., Cercetri arheologice preventive la Alba Iulia Lumea Nou. O descoperire apartinnd grupului
Foeni. Apulum, XLIJ, (2007), p.4-28.
Gligor 2007a
Gligor M., Grupul cultural Lumea Nou. Ceramica neolitic. O lectie de istorie. Catalog de expo:itie, Alba Iulia,
Ed. Eternitas (2007), p. 42-49.
Gligor 2007b,
Gligor M., Grupul cultural Foeni. Ceramica neolitic. O lectie de istorie. Catalog de expo:itie. Alba Iulia, Ed.
Eternitas, (2007), p. 50-63.
Gligor 2007c,
Gligor M., Grupul cultural Lumea Nou. Ceramica neolitic. O lectie de istorie. Catalog de expo:itie. Alba Iulia,
Ed. Eternitas, (2007), p. 42-49.
Gligor 2007d,
Gligor M., Alba Iulia Lumea Nou. Ceramica neolitic. O lectie de istorie. Catalog de expo:itie. Alba Iulia, Ed.
Eternitas, (2007), p. 13-14.
Gligor 2007e,
Gligor M., Ghirbom In Fat. Ceramica neolitic. O lectie de istorie. Catalog de expo:itie. Alba Iulia, (2007),
Ed. Eternitas.
Gligor 2007I,
Gligor M., Ase:area neo si eneolitic de la Alba Iulia Lumea Nou in lumina noilor cercetri, PhD, Alba Iulia,
(2007).
Ignat 1985,
Ignat D., Un mormnt de incineratie descoperit n asezarea neolitic de la Sulplacu de Barcu. Crisia, XV, (1985),
p. 275-278.
Ignat 1998,
Ignat D., Grupul cultural neolitic Suplacu de Barcu, seria BHAB, VI, Muzeul Banatului, Timisoara, (1998).
Kalicz - Makkay 1977,
Kalicz N., Makkay J., Die linienbandkeramik in der Grossen Ungarischen Tiefebene, Budapest, (1977).
Kalmar 1986,
Kalmar Z., Elemente ale culturii Lengyel n nord-vestul Romniei. ActaMP, X, (1986), p. 61-70.
Lazarovici 2006
Lazarovici C. M., Absolute Chronology oI the Late Vinca Culture in Romania and its Role in the Development
oI the Early Cooper Age in Romania, in Homage to Milutin Garaanin, Belgrad (2006), p. 277-294.
Lazarovici - Lazarovici 2006,
Lazarovici C.-M., Lazarovici Gh., Arhitectura neoliticului si epocii cuprului in Romania, Partea I. Neoliticul,
Iasi, (2006).
Lazarovici - Lazarovici 2007,
Lazarovici C.-M., Lazarovici Gh., Arhitectura neoliticului si epocii cuprului in Romania, Partea II. Epoca
cuprului, Iasi, (2007).
Lazarovici Gh. 1977,
Lazarovici Gh., SIrsitul culturii Vinca-Turdas n Cmpia Transilvaniei. Tibiscus, II, (1977), p. 211-230.
Lazarovici 1979,
Lazarovici Gh., Neoliticul Banatului. BMN, 4, (1979).
Lazarovici 1983/1984,
Lazarovici Gh., Die Vinca-Kultur und ihre Beziehungen zur Linianbandkeramik. Nachrichten aus Niedersachsens
Urgeschichte, Bd. 52, (1983/1984), S. 131-176.
Lazarovici 1986,
Lazarovici Gh., Neoliticul trziu din nord-vestul Romniei. Slajul, Clujul, Bihorul. ActaMP, 10, (1986), p. 15-46.
Lazarovici 1987,
Lazarovici Gh., Socul Vinca C n Transilvania. Acta MP, 11, (1987), p. 37-38.
215
Lazarovici 1991,
Lazarovici Gh., Cultura Jinca in Romania, Timisoara, (1991), 17-22, 27-28, 28-29, 31-40, 50-58, 81-84, 97-120.
Lazarovici et alii 1991,
Lazarovici Gh., Drasovean Fl., Tulbure V., Sanctuarul neolitic de la Parta, Timisoara, (1991), p. 1-21.
Lazarovici 1994,
Lazarovici Gh., Der Vinca C Schock im Banat. Relations Thrako Iliro Heleniques, Bucharest, (1994), p. 62-100.
Lazarovici 1995,
Lazarovici Gh., ber das Frhneolithikum im sud-Osten Europas (I. Rumnien). Kulturraum Mittlere und Untere
Donau. Traditionen und Perspektiven des Zusammenlebens (Spatiul cultural al Dunrii Miflocii si inferioare. Traditii
si perspective ale convietuirii), Resita, (1995), p. 33-55.
Lazarovici 2000,
Lazarovici Gh., The main Problems oI the cultural Complex CCTLNI. AnB, VII-VIII, (2000), p. 35-52.
Lazarovici 2000b,
Lazarovici Gh., Links between the Early Neolithic Irom Romania and Bulgaria. Karanovo III, Beitrge :um
Neolithikum in Sdosteuropa, Wien, Phoibos Verlag, (2000), p. 273-286.
Lazarovici 2000c,
Lazarovici Gh., Vinca Lengyel and Transylvania. ActaMN, 37.1, (2000), p. 7-20.
Lazarovici - Maxim 1994,
Lazarovici Gh., Maxim Z., Santierul arheologic Iclod. Campania din 1993. ActaMN, 31/1, (1994), p. 325-339.
Lazarovici - Nemeti 1983,
Lazarovici Gh., Nemeti I., Neoliticul dezvoltat din nord-vestul Romniei (Slajul, Stmarul si Clujul). ActaMP,
7, (1983), p. 17-60.
Lazarovici Gh., Kalmar Z., Ardevan R., Ase:area nolitic de la Cluf-Piata Stefan cel Mare. Marisia, III-IV,
Trgu Mures, (1984), p. 15-22.
Lazarovici, Gh., Ghergarii L., Ionescu C., ArteIacte ceramice din neoliticul mijlociu n Transilvania cultura
CCTLNI din statiunea Zau (jud. Mures). Angustia, 7, (2002), p. 7-17.
Lazr 1995,
Lazr V., 1995 Repertoriul arheologic al Judetului Mures, Trgu Mures, (1995), p. 68.
Lazr 1995a,
Lazr V., Zau de Cmpie- La Grdinit, (1998), n CCAR, indice 275.
Lazr 1998,
Lazr V., Zau de Campie - La grdinit, - La bufet, - Casa Cocoar, indice 1739.
Luca 1996,
Luca S.A., ncadrarea cronologic si cultural a asezrii neolitice de la Orstie-Dealul Pemilor, punct 2.
Corviniana, 2, (1996), p. 21-28.
Luca 1996b,
Luca S.A., Eine Rituelle Anlage in Turdas Lunc, (Kreis Hunedoara). Forscungen JL, 39, 1-2, Bucuresti, (1996),
p. 123-126.
Luca 1997,
Luca S.A., Asezri neolitice pe Valea Muresului (I). Habitatul turdsean de la Orstie-Dealul Pemilor (punct 2).
BMA, IV, Alba Iulia, (1997).
Luca et alii 2004,
Luca S. A., Roman C., Diaconescu D., Cercetri arheologice in Pestera Cauce, vol. I, seria Bibliotheca
Septemcastrensis, IV, Sibiu (2004), pag. 297.
Luca et alii 2005,
Luca S. A., Roman C., Diaconescu D., Ciugudean H., El Susi G., Beldiman C., Cercetri arheologice in Pestera
Cauce, vol. II, seria Bibliotheca Septemcastrensis, V, Sibiu (2005).
216
Mantu 1995,
Mantu C.-M., Cteva consideratii privind cronologia absolut a neo- eneoliticului din Romnia. SCIJA, 46,
(1995), 3-4, p. 213-235.
Mantu 1998c,
Mantu C.-M., Cronologia absolut a culturilor neolitice din Romnia si relatiile cu lumea egeo-anatolian.
Cercetri iostorice, Iasi, (1998), p. 83-100.
Maxim - Kalmar 1991a,
Maxim Z., Kalmar Z., Sinteze Iclod-Petresti. Cultura Jinca in Romania, Timisoara, (1991), p. 137-138.
Maxim 1999,
Maxim Z., Neo-eneoliticul din Transilvania, BMN, XIX, Cluj-Napoca, (1999).
Paul 1981,
Paul I., Die gegenwrtige Forschunggstand zur Petresti-Kultur. PZ, 56, (1981), heIt 2, S. 201-203.
Paul 1992,
Paul I., Cultura Petresti, Bucuresti, (1992).
Paul 2007,
Paul I., Enigma tblitelor de la Trtria, cuvantare de rspuns la Doctor Honoris Cau:a, Timisoara, (2007).
Paul et alii 1998,
Paul I., Ciut M., Limba Bordane. CCAR, (1998), indice 1642.
Paul et alii 1999,
Paul I., Ciut M., Mazre P., Florescu C., Breazu M., Daisa B., Limba. CCAR, (1999), cat. 80, p. 56.
Paul et alii 2000,
Paul I., Ciut M., Cstian M., Gligor A., Rustoiu G., Limba - Oarda de Jos - sesul Orzii; Vrarea. CCAR, (2000),
indice 107, s. v.
Paul et alii 2001,
Paul I., Ciout M., Cstian M., Gligor A., Rustoiu G., Limba, com. Ciugud, Oarda de Jos, com. suburb. Oarda,
mun. Alba Iulia, jud. Alba n CCAR, (2001), p. 133-136.
Paul et alii 2002,
Paul I., Ciut M., Florescu C., Mazre P., Gligor M., Daisa B., Breazu M., Limba, com. Ciugud, jud. Alba, Punct
Vrria. CCAR, (2002), p. 517- 518.
Paul et alii 2003,
Paul I., Gligor M., Florescu C., Breazu M., Borsan T., Suteu C., Rustoiu G., Limba, com. Ciugud, jud. Alba.
CCAR (2003).
Paul et alii 2004,
Paul I., Gligor M., Mazre P., Suteu C., Niculescu A., Haynes I., Panczel Sz., Bogdan D., Sicoe G., Ciausescu M.,
Oarda (Limba), mun. Alba Iulia. CCAR, (2004), indice 157.
RepCj 1992
Repertoriul arheologic al fudetului Cluf, red. I. H. Crisan, M. Brbulescu, E. Chiril, V. Vasiliev, I. Winkler,
BMN V, Cluj, (1992).
Roska 1942,
Roska M., Erdelv reges:eti repertoriuma, I, skor, Cluj (1942).
Roska 1943,
Roska M., Prhistorische Bemalte Keramik in Erdely. K:lemenvek III, (1943), p. 81-83.
Schier W., 1995
Jinca-Studien, Tradition und Innovation im Sptneolithikum des :entralen Balkanraumes am Beispil der
Gefsskeramik aus Jinca-Belo Brdo. UnverII. HabilitationsschriIt, vol. I, II, Heidelberg, (1995).
Vizdal 1973,
Vizdal J., Zemplen v Mladef dobe Kamennef, Kosice, (1973).
Potusniak 2004,
Potusniak M., Data to the question oI the Stracevo Krs Culture dwellings in the Upper Tisza Region. JAME,
XLVI, (2004), p. 53-69.
217
Vlassa 1963,
Vlassa N., Chronology oI the Neolithic in Transilvania in the Light oI the Trtria Settlement`s Stratigraphy.
Dacia, VII, (1963), p. 485-494.
Vlassa 1967,
Vlassa N., Unele probleme ale neoliticului Transilvaniei. ActaMN, IV, (1967), p. 403-423. p. 161-197.
Vlassa 1970,
Vlassa N., Kulturelle Beziehungen des Neolithikums Siebenbrgens zum Vorderen Orient. ActaMN, VII, (1970),
p. 3-39.
Vlassa 1971,
Vlassa N., Contributii la problema racordrii cronologiei relative a neoliticului Transilvaniei la Cronologia
absolut a Orientului Apropiat (Partea I-a). Apulum, IX, (1971), p. 21-61.
Vlassa 1976,
Vlassa N., Neoliticul Transilvaniei. Studii, articole, note. BMN, III, Cluj-Napoca (1976), p. 161-197.

Ten Years After: The Neolithic of The Balkans, As Uncovered by The Last Decade of Research

Uploaded by

Document Information

Original Title

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

Ten Years After: The Neolithic of The Balkans, As Uncovered by The Last Decade of Research

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

TEN YEARS AFTER: THE NEOLITHIC OF THE BALKANS,

AS UNCOVERED BY THE LAST DECADE OF RESEARCH

You might also like