Version classiqueVersion mobile

The Human Face of Radiocarbon

 | 
Zoï Tsirtsoni

Rhodopes

Chapter 10. The Final Chalcolithic site in the “Gradishteto” locality near the village of Dolno Dryanovo, Southwest Bulgaria

Nadezhda Todorova
Traduction de Tatiana Stefanova

Texte intégral

Setting – previous investigations – cultural context2

  • 2 Translated from Bulgarian by Tatiana Stefanova.

1The site of Dolno Dryanovo-Gradishteto is situated in the westernmost part of the Rhodope Mountains, ca 7‑8 km away from the Mesta River valley, in a mountainous area with an altitude reaching 1000‑1200 m. The Mesta River valley has been a natural axis of communication connecting the Northern Aegean, Upper Thrace and Central Balkans through the ages, and thus was very important for the interrelations between the people inhabiting these areas (fig. 1).

  • 3 The first surveys were made by the team of the “Mesta Project” headed by Dr M. Domaradzki. In 1995 (...)
  • 4 Domaradzki et al. 1999, p. 9.
  • 5 Tsvetkova 2002, p. 42.
  • 6 Todorova 1986, p. 48.
  • 7 Grebska-Kulova & Kulov 2011. I am very indebted to my colleagues M. Grebska-Kulova and I. Kulov for (...)
  • 8 The present paper was submitted prior to the excavation of the site, which was carried out in 2011‑ (...)
  • 9 Grebska-Kulova & Kulov 2011, p. 204.
  • 10 Bozhkova & Todorova 2008.
  • 11 Grebska-Kulova 2002, p. 89, fig. 1.

2Systematic archaeological investigations in the region started as late as the 1970s. A number of sites dating back to the Chalcolithic were found during the archaeological surveys3. Most of them are clustered on the left bank of the Mesta River, in the first mountain zone of the Dabrash hills and the lower course of the Kanina River: Kovachevitsa, Kochan, Ognyanovo, Osina and Pletena4. This concentration of sites could be explained by the presence of hot mineral springs in this area. The only site known so far on the right bank of the Mesta River is Ilinden-Klisura situated in the foothills of the Slavyanka hills. The sites are located on relatively small and naturally protected rocky hills or river terraces with access to water sources5. The preference for naturally protected locations is typical of the settlement pattern in the entire territory of the Krivodol-Sălcuţa-Bubanj Hum (hereafter KSB) cultural complex in the later part of the Chalcolithic6. More precise dating of the materials collected during the surveys is possible only for two of the sites: Kovachevitsa-Livadite dates back to the Early Chalcolithic7, and Ilinden-Klisura to the Final Chalcolithic8. Limited scale excavations were carried at only two sites – Kochan-Zaimova Chuka9 and Dolno Dryanovo-Gradishteto10. When speaking about the Chalcolithic of the region, it is also worth mentioning that a Mezökerésztes type of copper axe and two ceramic vessels were discovered during the construction of the road between Kochan and Vaklinovo11.

Fig. 1 – Map of the area with the sites mentioned in the text.

The site and the excavations in the Gradishteto locality

  • 12 Ass. Prof. Anelia Bozhkova (NIAM-BAS) was Field Director of the archaeological excavations and Nade (...)

3The archaeological excavations in the Gradishteto locality were carried out during spring 200812. The site is situated ca 2 km to the east of the village of Dolno Dryanovo, Garmen municipality, on a chain of hills approximately 700 m long, oriented NNW-SSE. On top of an elevated area totalling ca 2 ha, there are three separate rocky hills with a maximum altitude of 879.80 m above sea level. The site is naturally protected and is accessible only from northwest, the other sides being surrounded by an impressive canyon. The slopes are very steep and in some places the cliffs are almost vertical, forming a 70‑80 m deep precipice at the east-northeast side. On the ridge of the elevation and at several spots, mainly on the southern slope, there are a number of relatively small naturally levelled terraces, enclosed by impressive denuded cliffs (fig. 2).

4A permanent running brook, a right tributary of the Bistritsa River, flows in the foothills of the steepest northeastern slope – the Momin Vir locality. The slopes of the elevation are covered with oak and pine forest, and single trees and bushes grow on the ridge and the higher parts. The soil is brown forest soil. On the southwestern slope lies a relatively easy forest track reaching the Bistritsa River valley that is deeply cut into the terrain.

Fig. 2 – Views of the site.
1: rocks in the northwest part of the small plateau where is established the settlement; 2: view from north-northwest to the Mesta valley; 3: southeast slope of the elevation; 4: northeast slope.

  • 13 The excavated structures consist of concentrations of stones of various sizes, and their function i (...)

5The archaeological excavations were focused on the northwestern part of the site. Seven trenches and two test ditches with a total area of 65 m2 were made. The size, the orientation and the shape of the trenches followed to a great extent the configuration of the natural rocks. Two of the trenches yielded artifacts and structures dated exclusively to the Late Iron Age (4th and early 3rd century BC)13. The trial trenches located in the northwestern foothills revealed no cultural layers. The natural rock was reached at a depth of 0.10‑0.25 m, immediately under the surface and the layer of brown forest soil. Late Chalcolithic sherds were found in the soil removed from fissures in the rock at the upper part of the southern slope and on the ridge of the hill, ca 4 m away from its highest point (trenches 1 and 5), together with LIA pottery.

The Final Chalcolithic materials and their context. Stratigraphy

6A Final Chalcolithic undisturbed layer was documented in three of the trenches situated on the southwestern slope: trenches 2, 4 and 6 (fig. 3). They were located in natural fissures in the rock (niches and shelters) whose width varies from 1 to 3.5 m.

Fig. 3 – Topographical map and plan of the trenches.

Fig. 4 – Plans and section of the main trenches. 1: trench 2; 2: trench 4.

Fig. 5 – 1: trench 2, view of the area before excavation; 2: trench 4, view from southeast.

7Despite the differences in details, trenches 4 and 6 provided analogous sequences (fig. 4: 2). The ca 0.15‑0.20 m thick surface layer was situated above a layer of brown, quite homogenous friable soil, whose thickness varied from 0.50 to 0.80 m. Chalcolithic and LIA sherds were found in this layer; the majority of the sherds had worn, badly preserved surfaces and were probably re-deposited. The next layer was situated immediately on top of the natural rock. It consisted of a compact, relatively fine, homogenous grey-black to black sandy-clayey soil with inclusions of small lumps of burnt clay and a small amount of charcoal. This layer, whose thickness varied from 0.20 to 0.50 m, yielded Late Chalcolithic materials only. Concentrations of potsherds, stones of various sizes and pieces of burnt debris covering parts of the excavated area, were unearthed in the undisturbed areas. The pottery was highly fragmented and only a few pottery shapes were restored. However, the sherds discovered in the black layer had nicely preserved surfaces, indicating that the rock fissures and niches had not been filled in by re-deposited materials. The amount of animal bones was very low. A thin layer comprising a high concentration of small pieces of eroded rock and materials dating back to the Final Chalcolithic was documented in the lowest part of the layer already described. No other well defined levels or thin layers indicating separate stages of occupation were documented within the Final Chalcolithic layer.

8Evidence about a slightly different situation is provided by the northern section of trench 2. Two different layers probably indicating two consecutive stages of filling in the rock fissure are clearly visible there (fig. 4: 1).

9Below are the details of the three trenches:

Trench 2

  • 14 The altitudes indicated on the plans are measured from a reference point. The absolute hypsometer o (...)
  • 15 Some of the pieces bore imprints of wooden posts (7‑8 cm in diameter) and rods. The clay was heavil (...)

10The trench was situated on the southwestern slope of the hill, ca 10 m from its ridge. In this spot there was a relatively small natural rocky “platform” located among a group of oblique large pieces of rock. Immediately to the southwest of this “platform”, the slope was rather steep; at some spots the eroded rocks were almost vertical and the terrain was difficult to cross (fig. 5: 1). After removing the soil covering the natural rocks, a fissure in the rocks appeared between the flat stone blocks. The fissure had an almost regular trapezoidal form elongated from northeast to southwest; it was 3‑3.20 m long, 1 m wide at its northeastern end, and 2.5 m wide at its southwestern end. A concentration of pieces of burnt wall debris, small stones and a few fragments of a hearth floor were unearthed at a depth of to 0.50‑0.70 m measured from the levelled surface of the rock (fig. 4: 1; 7.30‑7.50 m R214). The feature was lying in a layer of dark brown soil mixed with a great amount of highly fragmented burnt wall plaster. A higher concentration of larger pieces of burnt wall plaster was discovered along the vertical walls of the fissure15. The layer under this concentration and in the south-southeastern part of the rock fissure consisted of black soil with inclusions of small pieces of burnt wall plaster, charcoal and a large amount of sherds, predominantly fine ware. The same layer was documented down to the natural rock, i.e. the fissure bottom.

Trench 4

11The trench was situated ca 40 m to the south of trench 2 and ca 25 m down the slope of the hill. The excavated area was enclosed from the northwest, northeast and southeast by massive rocks rising up and forming a natural niche with a maximum width of ca 4 m whose entrance faces the southeast. In the northwestern part of the trench, in a space with a maximum width of 1.50 m enclosed by massive rocks, the Late Chalcolithic layer was reached at a depth of 0.70‑0.80 m from the modern surface (fig. 5: 2). In the rest of the trench, the natural rock was reached immediately after removing the surface soil and the layer of brown forest soil (fig. 4: 2).

Trench 6

12The trench was situated 8 m to the southeast of trench 4. It measured 3 x 1 m and was situated next to a rock confining from the southeast a natural niche. The niche had a maximum width of 5.5‑6 m, and its entrance faced the southwest, whereas the other sides were surrounded by almost vertical pieces of rock of various heights and configurations. The Late Chalcolithic layer in this trench was reached at a smaller depth (0.30‑0.40 m from the surface), which was probably due to the fact that the terrain was less steep in this sector and the soil had accumulated in a different way.

  • 16 No traces of tools intentionally used for modifying the rocky surface were documented. The present- (...)

13There is no clear evidence about the mechanism of formation of the Final Chalcolithic layer. Furthermore, the available information does not allow a reliable reconstruction of the ancient landscape. Beside the fact that these are limited scale excavations, it has to be pointed out that all over the ridge of the hill, and on the southwestern slope especially, there are large pieces of rock, which must have eroded over a long period of time. The fact that the slope is quite steep and the modern soil cover is irregular, as well as the dense vegetation, makes the task especially difficult. The available information does not provide grounds to suggest that the prehistoric inhabitants had performed activities aimed at levelling or cutting the rocky surface16.

  • 17 During the 2011 season, on the summit of the site only structures of LIA date were detected, most o (...)
  • 18 Raduncheva 2003, p. 101.

14The interpretation of the situation in which the Chalcolithic materials were found is quite problematic for the moment. Since the excavations were limited in scale, the available data was not sufficient for drawing reliable conclusions. Apparently, the limited area between the rocks on the southwestern slope of the hill did not provide enough space for building up a house of the usual construction and shape. However, it is possible that structures differing from the standard ones, such as shelters, sheds, huts or others, have existed there using the natural characteristics of the terrain. The artefacts (pieces of wall plaster, parts of permanent clay facilities, hearth floors, etc.) discovered in the excavated sectors provide grounds to suppose that relatively solid buildings have existed on the adjacent area17. The thin layer comprising tiny pieces of eroded rock (the same rock is documented beneath the cultural deposits), provides reason to believe that their accumulation was not a result of a single act but of a gradual process. Some authors connect a number of rock sites to the rituals performed by the Chalcolithic people inhabiting the region18. This hypothesis is worth taking into consideration when presenting the Dolno Dryanovo site, although such interpretation has to be based on unambiguous arguments.

Pottery and other ceramic finds

  • 19 The characteristics of the pottery assemblage presented here are based on the analysis of ca 2600 s (...)
  • 20 There are various definitions of the latest phases of development of the Balkan Chalcolithic and th (...)

15The most numerous archaeological artefacts yielded by the site are potsherds19. The shape and decoration of the vessels as well as their parallels date the main occupation layer back to the Final phase of the Late Chalcolithic20. The pottery discovered in the various trenches is similar, a fact supporting the hypothesis that the layer was accumulated in a comparatively short time span, and the materials discovered in these trenches are contemporary or chronologically very close.

16Most of the vessels were made from clay mixed with a relatively high amount of mineral temper – fine quartz sand and tiny quartz pebbles mainly. Mica and fine organic inclusions were also used. Inclusions of shells in the clay were not documented. Various shades and nuances of brown dominate the pottery colour range. Additional surface coatings, thick or fine slips, and self-slips are documented on almost three quarters of the sherds.

17In most of the cases the surface of the vessels is slightly uneven, matt burnished, without shine. The fine rustication – fine scratches on the exterior, the so-called Besenstrich (fig. 10: 3, 4, 8) – is very typical. The firing varies from very nice to poor; indeed ca 50% of the sherds are brittle and their surface is easy to scratch with a fingernail. Five main technological groups of wares are defined based on a number of criteria:

  • black and grey-black fine burnished ware: comprises about 10% of the total count of the sherds:

  • dark brown and dark grey semi coarse ware – ca 20%;

  • light brown and beige, spotted semi-fine ware – ca 5%;

  • brown and dark brown semi-coarse to coarse ware – ca 15%;

  • reddish-brown “soft” ware.

  • 21 After Munsell Colour Chart 7.5YR3/3, 7.5YR3/4, 5YR3/4, 5YR4/4, 5YR3/6, 5YR4/6, 5YR5/6.

18The last group is the most numerous group of all, since it comprises more than 50% of the total number of sherds. Besides their colour21, the vessels are characterized by a thicker slip, which is comparatively easy to peel off. The sections of the sherds are brittle, probably due to the low firing temperature. The surface is almost always soft to the touch, matt or finely rusticated. Two sub-groups can be divided: finer (thin walled) and coarser (thick walled) vessels, which, together, cover the whole shape inventory.

Fig. 6 – Dolno Dryanovo, Final Chalcolithic pottery. 1: from trench 2; 2, 4‑6: from trench 4; 3: from trench 6.

Fig. 7 – Dolno Dryanovo, Final Chalcolithic pottery. 1: from trench 4; 2: from trench 2; 3, 4: from trench 6.

Fig. 8 – Pottery with combination of graphite-painted and red-crusted decoration. 1: from trench 6; 2: from trench 2.

19The other significant group is the fine black and grey-black burnished ware (ca 10% of the total number of the sherds). These vessels are well made, with carefully finished surfaces and well fired. About 80% of this ware is graphite-painted.

20Pottery shapes include plates, bowls, jars, amphora-shaped vessels, cups, lids, stands, miniature vessels, and a few other rare shapes. Storage vessels are represented by sherds, which are difficult to attribute to a specific type; their percentage does not exceed 7‑8%.

  • 22 Draganov 1998, p. 207, fig. 2: 1, 2.
  • 23 Ganetsovski 2007, p. 120, fig. 39: 1.
  • 24 Ovcharov et al. 2008a, p. 40, fig. 6: 3.
  • 25 Chohadzhiev 1991, p. 33, fig. 9: 11, 14.

21The simple conical or hemispherical shapes, often with small vertical or horizontal handles under the rim, dominate the shape range of the plates. The plates of comparatively small size (D < 25 cm) with straight or slightly concave walls are typical for the pottery assemblage. The inner surface of most of the vessels is graphite-painted (fig. 6). The plates with straight or slightly convex walls and thickened rims are also common; almost one third of them have graphite-painted inner surfaces (fig. 7). Crusted decoration (using ochre pigments) is documented on a smaller number of sherds, as an independent technique or in combination with graphite-painted decoration. The preserved parts of the decorative themes usually include spiral-shaped motifs formed by sheaves of parallel graphite-painted lines, crust-painted wider bands, or a combination of the two (fig. 8; 12: 5). The latter have exact parallels in Sozopol22, Krivodol23, Tatul24 and Vaksevo-Skaleto25.

Fig. 9 – Rounded bowls, with and without graphite-painted decoration. 1: from trench 6; 2, 4‑7: from trench 2; 3: from trench 4.

  • 26 Ilcheva 2009, pl. 37: 6; 55: 4, 7; 56: 3; 57: 2‑5, etc.
  • 27 Hristov 2003, p. 423, fig. 3: 2, 3.
  • 28 Merkyte 2007, p. 75, pl. 11: 15, 16.
  • 29 Chapter 5 in this volume, p. 107, fig. 12: 5‑7. I am very indebted to my colleague M. Valentinova f (...)
  • 30 Valentinova 2008, p. 64, pl. 2.
  • 31 Avramova 1992, p. 245, fig. 5; and chapter 14 in this volume, p. 258, fig. 8.
  • 32 Trantalidou et al. 2005a, fig. 13.
  • 33 Papadopoulos & Malamidou 2008, p. 432, 435, fig. 14.
  • 34 Tsimpidis-Pentazos 1971, pl. 106γ.

22The bowls with rounded carination, hemispherical upper and conical lower parts and thickened rims are very common for the pottery assemblage. Almost all pieces are graphite-painted; the decoration consists of linear motifs – groups of oblique lines forming various patterns (fig. 9). Exact parallels of the shape and the decoration style occur in a number of sites dating back to the Final phases of the Chalcolithic and the so-called Transitional period – Hotnitsa-Vodopada and Klise bair26, Devetaki Cave27, Sadovets-Kale28, Bezhanovo-Banunya29, Dyado Nakovoto kale30, and Yagodina Cave31. Very close parallels can also be found in Maaras Cave-Angitis32, at Limenaria on Thasos33 and the “Cyclop’s Cave” near Maroneia34. It is worth mentioning that although very similar in shape, the pottery displays certain differences in the details. The vessels from Dolno Dryanovo, Klise bair and Devetaki Cave usually have larger diameters and thinner walls than the bowls from Yagodina Cave, whose walls are much thicker. Furthermore, the decoration on the vessels from sites in present-day North Bulgaria, is often complemented by shallow and wide channelling.

  • 35 Draganov 1998, p. 207, fig. 2: 6, 9, 12; Dimitrov 2007, p. 154.
  • 36 Georgieva 1994, p. 18‑19, fig. 7.
  • 37 Todorova & Avramova, chapter 14 in this volume, p. 259, fig. 9: 3, 5‑7, 10.
  • 38 Ganetsovksi 2007, p. 112, fig. 21, 22.

23The S-shaped vessels have a considerable share in the pottery assemblage. They comprise deep bowls and large mouth jars of various sizes and body proportions (fig. 10; 11: 3, 5, 8, 13). The upper part is inverted outwards, with a marked or smooth transition to the shoulders. Some of the vessels have a pair of vertical handles slightly protruding above the rim (fig. 10: 3, 6). The vessels are not decorated as a rule and the outer surface is rusticated (fig. 10: 3, 4, 8; 11: 5). The shape can be defined as especially typical for the pottery assemblages dated back to the Final Chalcolithic (Sozopol35, Rebarkovo36, Yagodina Cave37), and similarly to those mentioned above is not familiar of the “classic” phases of the Late Chalcolithic. Special attention has to be paid to the sherds of lavishly decorated vessels with asymmetrical bodies (they look like a four-leafed clover in plan, a tradition related to the Late Chalcolithic pottery of the Krivodol and Sălcuţa cultures38) and have a pair of vertical handles on the shoulders. The best-preserved sherds belong to jars with biconical bodies with rounded carination and a conical neck.

Fig. 10 – S-shaped vessels.
1: from trench 4; 2‑4, 7, 8: from trench 6; 5, 6: uncertain context.

Fig. 11 – S-shaped vessels.
1, 3, 7, 13: from trench 2; 4‑6, 8, 9: from trench 4; 2, 12: from trench 6; 10, 11: uncertain context.

  • 39 As far as the ornamentation technique is concerned, it is worth considering the hypothesis of S. Ch (...)
  • 40 Draganov 1998, p. 207, fig. 2: 3, 4.
  • 41 Georgieva 2005, p. 165, fig. 7: 1‑9.
  • 42 Garašanin & Simoska 1976, pl. VII, IX.
  • 43 Simoska et al. 1976, p. 75, pl. III.1

24The graphite-painted and crusted decoration is complemented by a specific technique known in the literature as “pseudo-corded” (Wickelschnur), or by a combination of fine incisions, stamped and pricked ornaments specifically arranged to create branches covered with thick leaves, organized in the so-called festoon-shaped ornament39. The free spaces are covered with thick red paint and in some cases are lined with yellow pigment (fig. 12: 1‑4, 6). The closest parallels are again found in Sozopol40. The ornamentation style and technique have also been found in Rebarkovo and Vaksevo-Skaleto41, as well as in Šuplevac42 and Crnobuki (the earlier layer)43.

  • 44 Hristov 2003, p. 425, fig. 5: 3.
  • 45 Andrieşescu 1924, p. 86, fig. 14; Kalchev 2005, p. 8.
  • 46 Georgieva 1994, p. 13, fig. 5: 14.

25The cups and amphora-shaped vessels are represented by single finds. The best-preserved cup comes from trench 2 (fig. 13: 1), and has exact parallels in the pottery from Devetaki Cave44. Lids belong to only one type, which is roughly hemispherical with two opposite oval openings (fig. 13: 2, 4, 5). There are parallels from the latest building levels of Tell Sultana, Stara Zagora Mineralni Bani, and others45; a conical lid with openings was also found in Rebarkovo46.

  • 47 The quality of the graphite-painted decoration varies probably due to the various technical methods (...)
  • 48 Georgieva 2005, p. 153.
  • 49 A possible explanation could be the longer duration of the Chalcolithic traditions (especially the (...)
  • 50 Georgieva 2005, p. 154.

26Decorated pottery has a comparatively large share in the Dolno Dryanovo pottery assemblage, the graphite-painted vessels being the most numerous (ca 70%)47. The graphite-painted ornamentation consists of linear geometric motifs – groups of oblique or vertical parallel lines – usually covering the upper parts of bowls and hole-mouth vessels (fig. 9: 1‑5; 11: 1, 2). The ornamentation on the inner surface of the bowls consists mostly of curvilinear motifs – spirals and groups of parallel lines, sometimes in combination with triangles with inscribed circles (fig. 6: 1, 3‑6; 7: 2, 4). The graphite-painted decoration cannot be used as a very reliable chronological indicator in this case, because it finds parallels on a large territory and within a long time span. Its abrupt decrease is believed to be one of the main typical features of the Final phases of the Chalcolithic48, but such a tendency is not categorically documented in Dolno Dryanovo49. However, the other characteristics of the assemblage unambiguously date the site back to the Final Chalcolithic or, according to the periodization proposed by P. Georgieva, to the final stages of the Late Chalcolithic cultures, i.e. the second, later chronological horizon, represented in Rebarkovo, Sozopol, Šuplevac and Sălcuţa III50.

Fig. 12 – Vessels with combination of graphite-painted, crusted and “pseudo-corded” decoration.
1, 2, 4: from trench 6; 3: from trench 4; 5: from trench 2; 6: uncertain context.

Fig. 13 – Cup, pedestal and base fragments, and lids.
1, 2: from trench 2; 3, 5, 6: from trench 4; 4: from trench 6.

Fig. 14 – Sherd with stamped decoration (“false-corded”) and wiped-off graphite lines; from trench 4.

  • 51 The sherd was found during the cleaning of the section in trench 4 and comes from a layer with mixe (...)
  • 52 Roman et al. 1992, pl. I; Manzura 2003, p. 325‑327, fig. 9a.
  • 53 Garašanin & Simoska 1976, p. 41, pl. 33.
  • 54 Simoska et al. 1976, pl. III.1.
  • 55 Roman et al. 1992, p. 47, with references; Manzura 1999, p. 145, with discussion.
  • 56 Manzura 1999, p. 144‑145, with references.

27In this context it is worth mentioning two sherds, whose decoration can be defined as a chronological marker. The first one51 is decorated with a short stamped ornament arranged in several vertical rows and almost wiped-off horizontal graphite-painted lines below (fig. 14). Formally, the imprints are reminiscent of the “false-corded” (so-called “caterpillar”) technique typical for Cernavoda I52. Vertical rows of imprints made by a short stamp were also found on a bowl from Šuplevac53, as well as on the handles of a cup from Crnobuki54. The connection between the “pseudo-corded” decoration from Pelagonia and Cernavoda I traditions is commented on in the publications55. Cernavoda I finds from Vădastra and Ostrovul Corbului yielded by assemblages related to Sălcuţa III56 provide evidence supporting the synchronization of these phenomena. The combination of the specific stamped and graphite-painted decoration on the sherd from Dolno Dryanovo can be considered as an example of interconnected decorative traditions, resulting from intensified contacts and cultural interactions in the final phases of the Chalcolithic.

Fig. 15 – Small objects from clay.
1: fragment of an anthropomorphic figurine (?); 2: loom-weight from trench 2; 3: loom-weight (stray find from the southeast slope).

  • 57 Valentinova, chapter 5 in this volume, p. 111, fig. 16: 16, 17.
  • 58 Valentinova 2008, p. 67, pl. XIV: 4.
  • 59 Grebska-Kulova & Kulov 2011, fig. 10: 11.
  • 60 Manzura 1999, p. 121; Bruyako et al. 2005, p. 28, fig. 12: 5, 10, 11, 12.
  • 61 Berciu 1961, p. 315, fig. 137: 11.

28The second sherd is a fragment from the base of a deep vessel decorated with shallow incised lines, applied by a comb-shaped tool (fig. 13: 6). The same technique (“combed smoothing”) was documented on the pottery from Bezhanovo-Banunya57, Bezhanovo-Chervenata Stena58 and Kochan-Zaimova Chuka59. A similar technique (decoration or surface treatment) is also found in Cernavoda I60 and Sălcuţa IV61.

  • 62 Valchanova 1982, p. 17. The figurine is unpublished. It is exhibited in the Smolyan Regional Histor (...)

29The small finds include a fragment of a clay object (fig. 15: 1), most probably an arm of an anthropomorphic figurine similar to the one discovered in Haramiiska Dupka cave62.

  • 63 The find is related to the first period of occupation; see Todorova & Avramova, chapter 14 in this (...)
  • 64 Adrymi-Sismani 2007, p. 77. The finds are not illustrated in the referenced article, but they are e (...)
  • 65 Papadopoulos et al. 2001, p. 58, 64, fig. 3.
  • 66 Ilcheva 2009, p. 137, fig. 21: b.

30A fragment of a clay loom-weight was found in trench 2 (fig. 15: 2). Another loom-weight was found in the southern foothills of the hill, but it did not come from a reliable context. The stray find (fig. 15: 3) has exact parallels in Yagodina Cave63, Mikrothives64, Agios Ioannis65, and Hotnitsa-Vodopada66.

Relative and absolute chronology. Synchronization

  • 67 For comments on the materials found at Tatul, see Leshtakov, Todorova and Petrova, chapter 11 in th (...)

31The preliminary results from the study of pottery – the shapes as well as the main features of the decoration – provide grounds to date the assemblage back to the final stages of the Late Chalcolithic. The pottery from Dolno Dryanovo may find its closest parallels in Sozopol, Rebarkovo, Vaksevo-Skaleto, as well as in the neighbouring Ilinden-Klisura and Kochan-Zaimova Chuka. Close parallels to a number of pottery shapes and ornamentation techniques can be found in the Rhodope Mountains (Yagodina Cave, Tatul, Perperikon, Pchelarovo67), the Pelagonian sites, as well as in present-day North Bulgaria (Klise Bair, Bezhanovo, Devetaki Cave, etc.).

  • 68 All samples were small, and have been measured with the AMS method. See supra, chapter 2.

32Samples from Dolno Dryanovo were analysed in the Radiocarbon Laboratory of UMR 5138 – Archaeology and Archaeometry at Lyon, France, within the framework of the “Balkans 4000” project68 and they provided three dates (table 1).

Table 1 – Radiocarbon dates from Dolno Dryanovo.

  • 69 Görsdorf & Boyadzhiev 1996, p. 152‑155.
  • 70 Boyadzhiev 1998, p. 354. I am obliged to Y. Boyadzhiev for the consultations and extremely fruitful (...)

33In general the dates presented correspond well to the conclusions about the relative chronology of the site based on the comparative analysis of the pottery. At the same time, it is noticeable that the dates from Dolno Dryanovo do not form a compact cluster. The two earlier dates (Lyon-6046 and Lyon-6047) are closer to those from Telish III, Haramiiska Dupka II and Krivodol69. The third date (Lyon-6048) is considerably later, and allows the suggestion that the site was inhabited for a longer period within the frame of the Final Chalcolithic. However, this proposition needs additional field evidence. Another equally possible scenario involves a single, probably relatively short period of occupation, within the time span around 4000‑3900 BC. Such a date seems completely acceptable taking into consideration the sharp jump established for the calibration curve during the same period, following which the conventional dates fall within a wide time span from 5300 to 4900 BP. In this case, the considerable discrepancy between the values of the dates from Dolno Dryanovo could be due to the fact that they fall in the beginning of this “anomaly”70.

  • 71 Ibid., p. 358‑359.
  • 72 See further details on the problems of the separation of phases based on absolute dates in Boyadzhi (...)

34Based on the presently known 14C dates, the phenomena studied in the Final Chalcolithic generally date back to between 4200/4100 and 3800/3750 cal BC71. The definition of separate phases within the latest stage of the development of the Balkan Chalcolithic cultures faces some objective difficulties. The known sites yielding materials dated to this period are still not numerous and are scattered over a vast territory. This makes conclusions on the relative chronology of the sites discussed unreliable and debatable, because the presence or the lack of certain marks can be a result of regional specificities as well as of chronological differences72.

  • 73 Boyadzhiev 1998; Georgieva 2005.

35Despite that, a more detailed relative chronology can be proposed, consisting of several consecutive “horizons” of synchronous phenomena, which are united by common typological and stylistic characteristics of the pottery and similar values of the radiocarbon dates (table 2, infra). In general, this scheme is in agreement with some of the synchronization schemes already proposed by others73 and does not contradict the conclusions already made.

  • 74 Georgieva 2005, p. 152‑154.
  • 75 For detailed comments, see Georgieva 2005, p. 153‑156; for specific information on the bone spoon d (...)
  • 76 Dates of similar values are separated by Y. Boyadzhiev in a chronologically later subgroup within t (...)
  • 77 Personal observations on the Telish III pottery in the exhibition rooms and the depot of the Pleven (...)

36The distinction between the first two chronological horizons is convincingly validated by P. Georgieva and is based on the analysis of the pottery from a number of sites dating back to the late stages of the Chalcolithic74. The formal and stylistic characteristics of the pottery from Dolno Dryanovo definitely relate the site to the later stage. This stage is especially distinctive because of the specific techniques and motifs (see the comments above on the so-called “pseudo-corded” ornamentation and festoon-shaped motifs) and the emergence of new shapes, documented over a vast territory. At least one part of the early burials with red ochre and the artefacts traditionally connected to them – the so-called zoomorphic sceptres – have to be related to the same chronological time span75. As for the absolute dates, the analyzed samples from Dolno Dryanovo support the chronological position of this group immediately after the end of the so-called “classic” phases of the Late Chalcolithic cultures. The published dates from Telish III fall within the same span of time76, but the typological and stylistic characteristics of the assemblage relate it to an earlier stage77.

  • 78 For comments on the dates from Yagodina I‑II, see Todorova & Avramova, chapter 14 in this volume.
  • 79 Although the finds and the pottery from the archaeological excavations made by Ch. Valchanova in th (...)
  • 80 Valentinova, chapter 5 in this volume.
  • 81 According to the scheme proposed by Y. Boyadzhiev, Yagodina Cave horizons I‑II, Haramiiska Dupka an (...)

37The next two chronological stages comprise a number of sites in the Rhodope Mountains and present-day Central Northern Bulgaria. Yagodina I78 and Haramiiska Dupka II are related to the earlier horizon; the radiocarbon dates from both caves are very similar and in general later that the ones from Dolno Dryanovo. The published finds and pottery from Maaras Cave-Angitis and the Cyclop’s Cave near Maroneia have very close parallels to the materials from Yagodina I and provide grounds to assume that the sites functioned in one and the same period79. The later chronological stage is established by the proven affinities between the pottery assemblages from Klise Bair and Bezhanovo on one hand80, and by the almost identical values of the radiocarbon dates from Bezhanovo-Banunya and Yagodina II on the other hand. Additional support is provided by the reliable sequence in the Yagodina Cave and the characteristics of the pottery assemblages from the two consecutive building levels in the cave81.

  • 82 Boyadzhiev 1998, p. 356.
  • 83 Ilcheva 2009; Valentinova, chapter 5 in this volume.
  • 84 The greater part of the Telish IV pottery is still unpublished and for that reason no certain concl (...)

38The radiocarbon dates from Hotnitsa-Vodopada are compactly grouped within the interval 5000‑4850 BP and fall within the next chronological period related to the Sălcuţa IV and Galatin82. In addition, the pottery assemblages from Klise Bair and Bezhanovo-Banunya are defined as earlier than Hotnitsa-Vodopada based on the typological comparison of the ceramic vessels83. It has to be pointed out that the latest dates from Yagodina II are very close to the earliest dates from Hotnitsa, a fact which can be considered an argument supporting the chronological proximity, and even a possible partial overlap of the two phenomena. The chronological position of Telish IV in this scheme is open for discussion, but an earlier date for the site seems acceptable in view of the sequence and the pottery assemblage of the site84.

39In conclusion, the comparative analysis of the materials and the absolute dates allows the following sequence in the late 5th and the early 4th millennium BC to be suggested.

Table 2 – Proposal of synchronization of the Late-Final Chalcolithic phenomena in the Southeast Balkans.

40The scheme presented above is preliminary, and will probably be revised accordingly with the accumulation of new information. These efforts should be aimed at developing a more precise and well-grounded sequence based on future research – both excavations and extensive analysis of the pottery assemblages at a regional and supra-regional level.

Notes

2 Translated from Bulgarian by Tatiana Stefanova.

3 The first surveys were made by the team of the “Mesta Project” headed by Dr M. Domaradzki. In 1995 surveys and limited scale archaeological excavations were made within the frames of the “Archaeological Investigations in the Nevrokop Basin Project” headed by Dr A. Bozhkova (NIAM-BAS); see Tsvetkova 2002, p. 41‑42 (with references).

4 Domaradzki et al. 1999, p. 9.

5 Tsvetkova 2002, p. 42.

6 Todorova 1986, p. 48.

7 Grebska-Kulova & Kulov 2011. I am very indebted to my colleagues M. Grebska-Kulova and I. Kulov for the stimulating discussions and the opportunity to use unpublished information.

8 The present paper was submitted prior to the excavation of the site, which was carried out in 2011‑2012; see Delev et al. 2011; Todorova 2014.

9 Grebska-Kulova & Kulov 2011, p. 204.

10 Bozhkova & Todorova 2008.

11 Grebska-Kulova 2002, p. 89, fig. 1.

12 Ass. Prof. Anelia Bozhkova (NIAM-BAS) was Field Director of the archaeological excavations and Nadezhda Todorova (Sofia University), author of the present article, was Deputy Field Director. The team included the following PhD students and undergraduate students from Sofia University: Georgi Katsarov, Lyubomir Alov and Yana Mutafchieva. The rescue excavations were provoked by the systematic activity of treasure hunters, which caused considerable damage to the cultural layers. The trenches of the treasure hunters were concentrated mainly on the south-southwest slope and on the elevated ridge on the rocky hills. A considerable number of stone pieces and slabs of various sizes, as well as Late Iron Age and Chalcolithic potsherds were found next to these trenches and in the excavated soil.

13 The excavated structures consist of concentrations of stones of various sizes, and their function is still unknown. They abut the massive rocks or incorporate a few larger pieces of rock. Similar concentrations were also found in free spaces between the rocks (fissures or natural niches), recorded at a number of spots along the hill ridge and the southwestern slope. Besides the numerous sherds and fragmented animal bones, it is worth mentioning the relatively high number of artifacts related to spinning and weaving – spindle whorls and loom-weights. Similar associations, documented at other systematically excavated Iron Age sites (Tonkova 2008), are interpreted as offering deposits.

14 The altitudes indicated on the plans are measured from a reference point. The absolute hypsometer of the reference point for trench 2 (R2) is 875.029 m asl, and for trench 4 (R4) 854.659 m.

15 Some of the pieces bore imprints of wooden posts (7‑8 cm in diameter) and rods. The clay was heavily tempered with organic materials. There were also big compact pieces made from clay mixed with a large amount of inorganic inclusions (tiny pebbles and sand). Some of them had nicely finished surfaces, including on both sides. These probably belonged to built clay facilities that we are not able to reconstruct. However, most of the burnt debris consisted of shapeless pieces, highly damaged, with chipped and/or rounded edges, as well as lumps of burnt clay of various size and shapes.

16 No traces of tools intentionally used for modifying the rocky surface were documented. The present-day pattern of the rocks in the investigated area was determined by the specific type of weathering of the natural rocks. This way many grooves and forms, which result from erosion, can be attributed to human activities. The rocks were represented by equigranular biotite to two mica granites with schistose structure obtained under the effect of deviatoric stress. Such texture favors the formation of rounded and plate-shaped weathering forms. I would like to thank Ass. Prof. Philip Machev (Department of Geology and Geography, Sofia University) for the provided expertise.

17 During the 2011 season, on the summit of the site only structures of LIA date were detected, most often directly over the rock, while Chalcolithic deposits were preserved only in natural fissures in the rock. Evidently, the summit space was utilized by the Chalcolithic people, but all habitation traces were almost completely obliterated by later activities, as well as by the action of natural elements and erosion.

18 Raduncheva 2003, p. 101.

19 The characteristics of the pottery assemblage presented here are based on the analysis of ca 2600 sherds, 500 of which are typologically identifiable.

20 There are various definitions of the latest phases of development of the Balkan Chalcolithic and the period prior to the beginning of the EBA (since 3300/3200 cal BC). The discussion of the problems of the periodization and the chronology of the 4th millennium BC cultures is an extensive one and in this article I am not going to focus on details of the various statements and terms. See discussion in Problemi; Todorova 1998; Boyadzhiev 1998; and especially Georgieva 2005. In this article the term “Final Chalcolithic” is used to define the period immediately following the so-called classic phases of the Kodzhadermen-Gumelniţa-Karanovo VI (KGK VI), Varna and KSB cultures, which as far as the absolute dates are concerned, comprises the time from the late 5th until the mid 4th millennium BC.

21 After Munsell Colour Chart 7.5YR3/3, 7.5YR3/4, 5YR3/4, 5YR4/4, 5YR3/6, 5YR4/6, 5YR5/6.

22 Draganov 1998, p. 207, fig. 2: 1, 2.

23 Ganetsovski 2007, p. 120, fig. 39: 1.

24 Ovcharov et al. 2008a, p. 40, fig. 6: 3.

25 Chohadzhiev 1991, p. 33, fig. 9: 11, 14.

26 Ilcheva 2009, pl. 37: 6; 55: 4, 7; 56: 3; 57: 2‑5, etc.

27 Hristov 2003, p. 423, fig. 3: 2, 3.

28 Merkyte 2007, p. 75, pl. 11: 15, 16.

29 Chapter 5 in this volume, p. 107, fig. 12: 5‑7. I am very indebted to my colleague M. Valentinova for the information about the finds and the pottery from the Bezhanovo-Banunya site and about the AMS dates provided by the “Balkans 4000” project.

30 Valentinova 2008, p. 64, pl. 2.

31 Avramova 1992, p. 245, fig. 5; and chapter 14 in this volume, p. 258, fig. 8.

32 Trantalidou et al. 2005a, fig. 13.

33 Papadopoulos & Malamidou 2008, p. 432, 435, fig. 14.

34 Tsimpidis-Pentazos 1971, pl. 106γ.

35 Draganov 1998, p. 207, fig. 2: 6, 9, 12; Dimitrov 2007, p. 154.

36 Georgieva 1994, p. 18‑19, fig. 7.

37 Todorova & Avramova, chapter 14 in this volume, p. 259, fig. 9: 3, 5‑7, 10.

38 Ganetsovksi 2007, p. 112, fig. 21, 22.

39 As far as the ornamentation technique is concerned, it is worth considering the hypothesis of S. Chohadzhiev (1991, p. 36): he thinks that the imprints into the wet clay were not made by a twisted cord, as suggested by Simoska et al. 1976, p. 48‑50, but by a thin copper wire twisted around a bracelet. The quality of the illustrations in the various publications differs considerably and does not provide enough information on the ornamentation technique. However, it becomes clear that different methods and probably different tools were used to achieve similar results. A similar technique was used during the latest stages of the KGK VI complex (phase IIIc or IV) at Tell Gyundiiska and Stara Zagora Mineralni Bani, but the decorative pattern on the pottery yielded by these sites always consists of horizontal lines covering the middle part of a type of amphora-shaped jars; see Kanchev 1983, fig. 20; Kalchev 2005 p. 28‑29).

40 Draganov 1998, p. 207, fig. 2: 3, 4.

41 Georgieva 2005, p. 165, fig. 7: 1‑9.

42 Garašanin & Simoska 1976, pl. VII, IX.

43 Simoska et al. 1976, p. 75, pl. III.1

44 Hristov 2003, p. 425, fig. 5: 3.

45 Andrieşescu 1924, p. 86, fig. 14; Kalchev 2005, p. 8.

46 Georgieva 1994, p. 13, fig. 5: 14.

47 The quality of the graphite-painted decoration varies probably due to the various technical methods used (cf. chapter 14, p. 259, n. 24 in this volume).

48 Georgieva 2005, p. 153.

49 A possible explanation could be the longer duration of the Chalcolithic traditions (especially the use of graphite-painted decoration) in the mountainous area of the Rhodope Mountains – a hypothesis already known in the literature (Todorova 1995, p. 90; Boyadzhiev 1998, p. 359). The pottery with graphite-painted and “pseudo-graphite” decoration from the earlier phase of Yagodina Cave comprises almost half of the decorated vessels yielded by the site (see Todorova & Avramova, chapter 14 in this volume). This seems quite normal considering the fact that graphite (i.e. the mineral) was found among the marble blocks in the cave (Avramova 1992, p. 244). Pottery lavishly ornamented with graphite was found in sites dating to the Final Chalcolithic in present-day North Bulgaria – Devetaki Cave and Toplya, Lovech region (Hristov 2003, p. 419‑420) – and the decorative style and patterns find very close parallels in phase I in Yagodina Cave. However, in a number of contemporary or chronologically very close assemblages (e.g. in Klise Bair), graphite-painted decoration is completely missing or is replaced by whitish-painted decoration. These regional differences related to the graphite-painted decoration are probably due to several factors – access to raw materials, preservation or a break in the supplying, traditional communication routes, etc.

50 Georgieva 2005, p. 154.

51 The sherd was found during the cleaning of the section in trench 4 and comes from a layer with mixed materials – Final Chalcolithic and Late Iron Age. As far as the technology is concerned, the pottery does not differ from the rest of the pottery from the site.

52 Roman et al. 1992, pl. I; Manzura 2003, p. 325‑327, fig. 9a.

53 Garašanin & Simoska 1976, p. 41, pl. 33.

54 Simoska et al. 1976, pl. III.1.

55 Roman et al. 1992, p. 47, with references; Manzura 1999, p. 145, with discussion.

56 Manzura 1999, p. 144‑145, with references.

57 Valentinova, chapter 5 in this volume, p. 111, fig. 16: 16, 17.

58 Valentinova 2008, p. 67, pl. XIV: 4.

59 Grebska-Kulova & Kulov 2011, fig. 10: 11.

60 Manzura 1999, p. 121; Bruyako et al. 2005, p. 28, fig. 12: 5, 10, 11, 12.

61 Berciu 1961, p. 315, fig. 137: 11.

62 Valchanova 1982, p. 17. The figurine is unpublished. It is exhibited in the Smolyan Regional Historical Museum.

63 The find is related to the first period of occupation; see Todorova & Avramova, chapter 14 in this volume, p. 265, fig. 13: 10.

64 Adrymi-Sismani 2007, p. 77. The finds are not illustrated in the referenced article, but they are exhibited in the Archaeological Museum in Volos.

65 Papadopoulos et al. 2001, p. 58, 64, fig. 3.

66 Ilcheva 2009, p. 137, fig. 21: b.

67 For comments on the materials found at Tatul, see Leshtakov, Todorova and Petrova, chapter 11 in this volume. The Chalcolithic pottery from Perperikon and Pchelarovo has not been published yet. I would like to express my gratitude to Prof. N. Ovcharov (NIAM-BAS), D. Kodzhamanova (Kardzhali Regional Historical Museum), as well as to Ass. Prof. K. Leshtakov (Sofia University), consultant of the excavations at Tatul and Perperikon, for the opportunity to study the materials found at these sites.

68 All samples were small, and have been measured with the AMS method. See supra, chapter 2.

69 Görsdorf & Boyadzhiev 1996, p. 152‑155.

70 Boyadzhiev 1998, p. 354. I am obliged to Y. Boyadzhiev for the consultations and extremely fruitful discussions.

71 Ibid., p. 358‑359.

72 See further details on the problems of the separation of phases based on absolute dates in Boyadzhiev 1998, p. 352‑353.

73 Boyadzhiev 1998; Georgieva 2005.

74 Georgieva 2005, p. 152‑154.

75 For detailed comments, see Georgieva 2005, p. 153‑156; for specific information on the bone spoon decorated with a stylized zoomorphic representation from Sozopol, see Dimitrov 2007.

76 Dates of similar values are separated by Y. Boyadzhiev in a chronologically later subgroup within the framework of a “second block” of dates (as defined by him), and are related to the final stage of the KSB complex. It is important to point out that dates of similar values, i.e. 5250/5200‑5150/5100 BP (e.g. Bln-3340, Bln-3341, Bln-3342, Bln-3343, Bln-3345, all from Haramiiska Dupka Cave), are typical of the following “block” as well, which according to Boyadzhiev represents a later stage with a view to its cultural development (Boyadzhiev 1998, p. 354). The similar values of the dates could result both from a partial synchronism of the discussed assemblages and from differences in the development of the different geographical regions.

77 Personal observations on the Telish III pottery in the exhibition rooms and the depot of the Pleven Regional Historical Museum. I would like to thank V. Gergov for the opportunity to study the unpublished pottery from the site.

78 For comments on the dates from Yagodina I‑II, see Todorova & Avramova, chapter 14 in this volume.

79 Although the finds and the pottery from the archaeological excavations made by Ch. Valchanova in the 1980s in Haramiiska Dupka Cave are not published, some authors have written about the close similarity to the pottery from Yagodina Cave (Boyadzhiev 1998, p. 355).

80 Valentinova, chapter 5 in this volume.

81 According to the scheme proposed by Y. Boyadzhiev, Yagodina Cave horizons I‑II, Haramiiska Dupka and Magura Cave (the earliest occupation level – building level 0) are grouped in one chronological stage and are united by radiocarbon dates around 5250/5200‑5000 BP. Y. Boyadzhiev notes as an interesting convergence in the fact that the three sites are cave dwellings (Boyadzhiev 1998, p. 354‑355). It seems that this is not a coincidence, since, besides Maaras Cave-Angitis and the Cyclop’s Cave near Maroneia (supra), which are probably related to the same chronological stage, evidence for occupation dated to the same period also exists from a number of caves in the Trigrad-Yagodina region (Avramova 2004, p. 182, and personal communication), as well as from caves in the region of the present-day North Bulgaria – Toplya, Devetaki, Emenska, etc. This picture corresponds well to the general tendency for an increase in the number of the inhabited caves in the Aegean and continental Greece, a problem discussed in detail in the archaeological literature; see among others Wickens 1986, p. 98, 119; Demoule & Perlès 1993, p. 399‑405; Zachos 1999; Tomkins 2009.

82 Boyadzhiev 1998, p. 356.

83 Ilcheva 2009; Valentinova, chapter 5 in this volume.

84 The greater part of the Telish IV pottery is still unpublished and for that reason no certain conclusions can be made at this stage of the research. An earlier date for Telish IV is suggested by the excavator of the site V. Gergov (personal communication). The same opinion is shared by P. Georgieva, to whom I am grateful for the stimulating and useful discussions concerning the problems presented in this article.

Table des illustrations

Légende Fig. 1 – Map of the area with the sites mentioned in the text.
URL http://books.openedition.org/momeditions/docannexe/image/516/img-1.jpg
Fichier image/jpeg, 144k
Légende Fig. 2 – Views of the site. 1: rocks in the northwest part of the small plateau where is established the settlement; 2: view from north-northwest to the Mesta valley; 3: southeast slope of the elevation; 4: northeast slope.
URL http://books.openedition.org/momeditions/docannexe/image/516/img-2.jpg
Fichier image/jpeg, 312k
Légende Fig. 3 – Topographical map and plan of the trenches.
URL http://books.openedition.org/momeditions/docannexe/image/516/img-3.jpg
Fichier image/jpeg, 192k
Légende Fig. 4 – Plans and section of the main trenches. 1: trench 2; 2: trench 4.
URL http://books.openedition.org/momeditions/docannexe/image/516/img-4.jpg
Fichier image/jpeg, 264k
Légende Fig. 5 – 1: trench 2, view of the area before excavation; 2: trench 4, view from southeast.
URL http://books.openedition.org/momeditions/docannexe/image/516/img-5.jpg
Fichier image/jpeg, 372k
Légende Fig. 6 – Dolno Dryanovo, Final Chalcolithic pottery. 1: from trench 2; 2, 4‑6: from trench 4; 3: from trench 6.
URL http://books.openedition.org/momeditions/docannexe/image/516/img-6.jpg
Fichier image/jpeg, 124k
Légende Fig. 7 – Dolno Dryanovo, Final Chalcolithic pottery. 1: from trench 4; 2: from trench 2; 3, 4: from trench 6.
URL http://books.openedition.org/momeditions/docannexe/image/516/img-7.jpg
Fichier image/jpeg, 132k
Légende Fig. 8 – Pottery with combination of graphite-painted and red-crusted decoration. 1: from trench 6; 2: from trench 2.
URL http://books.openedition.org/momeditions/docannexe/image/516/img-8.jpg
Fichier image/jpeg, 104k
Légende Fig. 9 – Rounded bowls, with and without graphite-painted decoration. 1: from trench 6; 2, 4‑7: from trench 2; 3: from trench 4.
URL http://books.openedition.org/momeditions/docannexe/image/516/img-9.jpg
Fichier image/jpeg, 100k
Légende Fig. 10 – S-shaped vessels. 1: from trench 4; 2‑4, 7, 8: from trench 6; 5, 6: uncertain context.
URL http://books.openedition.org/momeditions/docannexe/image/516/img-10.jpg
Fichier image/jpeg, 116k
Légende Fig. 11 – S-shaped vessels. 1, 3, 7, 13: from trench 2; 4‑6, 8, 9: from trench 4; 2, 12: from trench 6; 10, 11: uncertain context.
URL http://books.openedition.org/momeditions/docannexe/image/516/img-11.jpg
Fichier image/jpeg, 164k
Légende Fig. 12 – Vessels with combination of graphite-painted, crusted and “pseudo-corded” decoration. 1, 2, 4: from trench 6; 3: from trench 4; 5: from trench 2; 6: uncertain context.
URL http://books.openedition.org/momeditions/docannexe/image/516/img-12.jpg
Fichier image/jpeg, 120k
Légende Fig. 13 – Cup, pedestal and base fragments, and lids. 1, 2: from trench 2; 3, 5, 6: from trench 4; 4: from trench 6.
URL http://books.openedition.org/momeditions/docannexe/image/516/img-13.jpg
Fichier image/jpeg, 132k
Légende Fig. 14 – Sherd with stamped decoration (“false-corded”) and wiped-off graphite lines; from trench 4.
URL http://books.openedition.org/momeditions/docannexe/image/516/img-14.jpg
Fichier image/jpeg, 108k
Légende Fig. 15 – Small objects from clay. 1: fragment of an anthropomorphic figurine (?); 2: loom-weight from trench 2; 3: loom-weight (stray find from the southeast slope).
URL http://books.openedition.org/momeditions/docannexe/image/516/img-15.jpg
Fichier image/jpeg, 88k
Légende Table 1 – Radiocarbon dates from Dolno Dryanovo.
URL http://books.openedition.org/momeditions/docannexe/image/516/img-16.jpg
Fichier image/jpeg, 128k
Légende Table 2 – Proposal of synchronization of the Late-Final Chalcolithic phenomena in the Southeast Balkans.
URL http://books.openedition.org/momeditions/docannexe/image/516/img-17.jpg
Fichier image/jpeg, 71k
Cette publication numérique est issue d’un traitement automatique par reconnaissance optique de caractères.
Rechercher dans OpenEdition Search

Vous allez être redirigé vers OpenEdition Search