Settlement and economy in Neolithic Ukraine: a new chronology D.Ya. Telegin’, M. Lillie”, 1D. Potekhina! & M.M. Kovaliukh? ‘The authors use their revised chronology for the Mariupol-type cemeteries (presented in Antiquity 76: 356-63 (2002)) to offer a new sequence for Neolithic settlement and economy in Ukraine. They find that the transition to the Neolithic began about 6500 cal BC, but co-existed with Mesolithic communities for a further millennium. In about 4500 cal BC early copper age cultures appeared, which in turn coexisted with the Neolithic in neighbouring areas. Co-existent cultures are defined in terms of their artefacts, subsistence strategies, burial practice and physical types. The Mariupol-type cemeteries seem to have had their origins in the late Mesolithic and endured into the Copper Age, a period of more than two thousand years (c. 6500-4000 cal BC). Keywords: Neolithic, Ukraine, settlement, chronology. Defining the Neolithic The question of the origins and subsequent development of food-producing economies in Ukraine in the prehistoric period is comparatively well studied for many cultures such as the Linear pottery, Bug-Dniester, Surska and Dnieper-Donets cultures, among others. Numerous papers have been published relating to the timing of animal domestication and the species composition of food producing communities (Bibikova 1963; Formozov 1972; Krainov 1957; Tsalkin 1970; Telegin 1977), but the precise definition of the transition to agriculture remains to be established (of Zvelebil 1995). Faunal studies have shown that domesticated cattle and pigs were available to the Neolithic cultures in Ukraine and Moldova mentioned above, and in addition it appears that sheep/goat formed part of the Lincar pottery cultures resource base. In addition, sheep is listed amongst the faunal remains found in Neolithic horizons of Rakushechny Yar near the Don River (Belanovskaia 1995). Krizhevskaya (1998: 248) reports the presence of sheep/goat at the Matveev Kurgan settlements (I and II) which are located on the river Mius on the north side of the Azov Sea. The former of these sites is dated to 7180478 and 75054210 BP (St. Petersburg and Groningen lab.), which calibrate to 6220— 5890BC and 6600-6050BC respectively. 1 Institute of Archaeology of National Academy of Sciences of Ukraine, Geroiev Stalingrad street, 12, Kyit, Ukraine (Email: ira@iarb, Riew.ua) 2 Wetland Archacology & Environments Research Centre, Department of Geography, University of Hull, Hull HU6 7RX OK (Email: M.C.Lillie@prull.ac.uk) 3 State Scientific Center of Environmental Radiogeochemistry. National Academy of Sciences of Ukraine, Palladin au. 34a, Kyiv, Ukraine (Email: kyiv 1 4c@radgeo freenet.Riew.ua) Received: 10 May 2001 Revised: March 2003 Accepted: March 2003 456Settlement and economy in Neolithic Ukraine Cultures such as Bug-Dniester have their genesis in the preceding Mesolithic period, with the Soroki stage of this culture following on from the Grebeniki Mesolithic culture to the west of the Dnieper (Markevich 1974; Tringham 1969, 1971). Importantly, as with the Dnieper-Donets communities, the early stages of the Bug-Dniester ‘Neolithic’ economies included a large proportion of wild species such as red-deer, roe-deer, wild horse, aurochs, wild pig and wolf, and these groups are aceramic (cf; Dolukhanov & Khotinskiy 1984). ‘These early stages of the Dnieper-Donets and Bug-Dniester cultures fail to fulfil the traditional categorisation of ‘they have pots therefore they are Neolithic’. On the basis of this observation Dolukhanov (1979) and Zvelebil and Dolukhanov (1991) propose a division of Bug-Dniester into an aceramic phase dated ro 5500-4900 BC and a ceramic phase dated to 4900-4400 BC. In light of the new dating of the Dnieper-Donets sites presented here, it is apparent that the similarities in fabric, form and decoration of pottery between Dnieper-Doners and Bug-Dniester can no longer be considered incompatible on chronological grounds (Telegin er a/. 2002). In addition, it should be noted that the early, Figure 1. Location map showing key sites used in chronology building: 1 ~ Eeminka, 2— Goradik, 3~ Zavalovka, 4— Krainy Khutor, 5~Soficvka, 6 Chapaievka, 7 — Luka Vrublevetskaya, 8 — Okepi, 9 Voronovitsky, 10 — Korman, 11 ~ Molodovo, Polivanov Yar, 12 ~ Bernashovka, 13 ~ Brinzeni, 14 — Putineshti, 15 ~ Soraki, 16 ~ Timokovo, 17 ~ Varvarovka, 18 — Ruseshti, 19 Danka, 20—Gorodishche-Gorodnitsa, 21 — Usatovo, 22 ~ Maiaki, 23 ~ Klisheher, 24 — Krasnostavka, 25 — Shkearovka, 26 — Majdanetskoe, Grebeniukiv Yar, 27 ~ Sabatinovka, Sokol'sy I], 28 ~ Bazkov Island, 29 Grenovka, 30 ~ Saloncheny, 31 = Pechera, 32 — Zan'kovnsy, 33 ~ Gard, 34 —Savvan, 35 — Pugach, 36—Novorozanovka, 37—Dereivka, 38 ~ Osipovka, 39 ~ Surskoi Island, 40 — Nikol’ky, 41 — Vasilievka, 42— Maricvka, 43 Seril’cha Skelia, 44 — Semenovka, 45 —Kamennaia Mogila, 46 — Peerovskaia Balke, 47 — Rakushechny Yar. 457 ResearchD.Ya. Telegin, M. Lillie, I.D. Potekhina & M.M. Kovaliukh aceramic stages of both of these cultures would result in their categorisation, in western European convention, as ‘Mesolithic’ fisher-hunter-gatherer societies. The securely attribuced adoption of domesticates in the Bug-Dniester culture occurs in the later stages of its evolution. Along with domesticated animals, the Bug-Dniester and the subsequent Linear potcery culture, and also the later Dnieper-Donets communities, were all practising arable agriculture to differing degrees. The populations of these cultures cultivated several species of wheat and barley as well as millet, oats, vetch and rye (Yanushevich & Markevich 1970; Kulcaycka- Lieciejewiczowa 1979; Okhrimenko 1993). Recent research into the absolute age of these cultures in Ukraine has included work by M.M.Kovaliukh, the Head of Kiev Radiocarbon Laboratory, and archaeologists such as M.Yu.Videiko and N.B.Burdo among others, Over twenty dates have been obtained for the Bug-Dniester culture (Videiko & Kovaliukh 1998), eight dates for Surska monuments (Kovaliukh & Tuboltsey 1998) and about twenty dates for the Early Tripolie culture (Burdo & Kovaliukh 1998). Analyses relating to stages B and C of Tripolie, a number of monuments of Sredny Stog II culture, Kamenna Mohila multi-layered settlements near the Sea of Azov, and Rakushechny Yar near the Don River have been carried out at Kiev and other laboratories (Belanovskaia 1995). At present we have about 200 radiocarbon determinations for use in che dating and periodisation of the Neolithic and Eneolithic monuments of this region, and about 100 of these were obtained on samples from settlement sites (Figures 1 & 2 and Table 1) Periodisation of the Neolithic cultures of Ukraine ‘The analyses carried out in this paper, alongside the work of Movsha (1984), Telegin (1985), Burdo and Videiko (1998), and Chernysh (1982), enable a clarification of the chronology and periodisation of the later, and post-Mesolithic cultures in Ukraine (Figure 2). It now appears, on the basis of the artefactual inventories from settlement sites, that the transition from Mesolithic to Neolithic may exhibit some degree of heterogeneity, with the first appearance of traditionally Neolithic culeures in the southern part of Ukraine possibly attested as early as the mid seventh millennium BC. The period from the beginning of the second half of the seventh to the third millennia BC can subsequently be sub-divided, into two discrete cultural-historic periods, the Neolithic (Early Neolithic) and Neo-Eneolithic (Nen) periods. The latter, in turn, comprises three sub-periods or stages including, i) Nen-A — Early-Tripolie — Late-Mariupol, ii) Nen-B ~ Middle-Tripolie— Sredny Stog and iii) Nen-C Late-Tripolie — Lower-Mykhailivka (Figure 2). Information on the development of the associated material culture and periodic ethno- cultural shifts in their composition are used as the foundation for the regional chronological divisions and periodisation outlined above. As the names of the stages suggest, these divisions are based on the material culture of well-known Neolithic and Eneolithic groups, including Tripolie, Dnieper-Donets Community, Sredny Stog II and others, the settlements and cemeteries of which had been developing for in the region of a thousand years or more. The new outline is summarised below. 458