Version classiqueVersion mobile

The Human Face of Radiocarbon

 | 
Zoï Tsirtsoni

Rhodopes

Chapter 13. Investigations at the Chalcolithic settlement at Varhari

Yavor Boyadzhiev et Kamen Boyadzhiev
Traduction de Tatiana Stefanova

Texte intégral

Presentation of the site2

  • 2 Text translated from Bulgarian by Tatiana Stefanova.
  • 3 See also the map fig. 1, in chapter 12 (supra, p. 210).
  • 4 Geografia Bulgaria 1997.

1The site is located in the Eastern Rhodope Mountains, 10 km south of the town of Kardzhali, at the confluence of the Varbitsa and Diva Reka (or Chitak Dere) Rivers (41° 33’ 20” N, 25° 23’ 04” E; fig. 1)3. The Varbitsa River has its source near the modern Bulgarian-Greek state border, and is among the most torrential rivers in Bulgaria4. With its numerous tributaries it drains an area of almost 1000 km2. During the whole Sub-Atlantic period the Varbitsa River has belonged to the Continental Mediterranean climatic zone, characterized by high winter rainfall.

  • 5 Yavor Boyadzhiev was Director of the project and Kamen Boyadzhiev was a Deputy Director. Dessislava (...)

2The archaeological excavations at the site were induced by the construction of the road connecting the towns of Kardzhali (Bulgaria) and Komotini (Greece) [fig. 2]. Seven trenches were made in 2007; five of them were situated transversely to the road bed, and the rest (at the northern periphery) were parallel to it. The trenches were 2 m wide and 21.10 to 23.70 m long, according to the width of the road bed. Since cultural deposits were documented in all trenches, a six-month-long archaeological campaign was launched in 2009 on the entire area of the site within the frame of the road bed. The rescue excavations continued in 2010, and they were still not completed by the time this article was written (end of 2010)5.

  • 6 The ancient bed of the Varbitsa River is still visible.

3The site is situated at 236‑238 m above sea level on a low flood river terrace. It is almost flat, slightly slanting to the north towards the bed of the Diva Reka River (fig. 1‑3). The excavated area is 280 m long and 20 to 25 m wide. The road bed follows a N-NW/S-SE direction making a slight curve (fig. 2). The northern end of the site is marked by a deep artificial ditch, which probably followed the natural slope of the ancient surface. The southern periphery has not been excavated yet. The excavated area is 250 m long in a beeline (fig. 4). We were not able to define the actual width of the site. Most probably, it was ca 150‑200 m, reaching the ancient bank of the Varbitsa River to the east6 and a low rocky hill to the west (fig. 1; 3). The total area of the site was probably between 4 and 5 hectares.

The excavated features

  • 7 The geomorphological studies were carried out by Ass. Prof. Rositsa Kenderova and Prof. Alexander S (...)

4The site was destroyed by a fire. This fact is attested by numerous pieces of fired wall-plaster scattered throughout the entire area of the site. Many of the ceramic sherds are also secondarily fired. In addition, all assemblages yielded carbonized grains. The observations in the field, as well as the geomorphological studies, revealed that the debris of the site was flooded several times and stayed under water for a certain period of time. This is attested by the thin layers of pebbles and sand documented on the southern periphery of the site. They form a thin sandy layer separating the cultural deposits and the upper alluvial layer (fig. 5). The sandy layer was not documented over the entire area of the site, but in the southern part only. Temporary water mirrors with a peat or a peat-marshy regime were probable formed during and after the floods. The large amount of clay in the spot kept the water and prevented drainage7. The cultural deposit was found under a 0.50 m thick alluvial lighter coloured layer.

Fig. 1 – The Varhari site, topographic map of the region; scale 1/5000 (drawing: A. Kamenarov).

5The site consisted of a single layer. The concentration of archaeological artifacts was higher in the lower part of the dug-in features, near the bottom, although no thick cultural deposits, attesting a long period of use, were found on it (fig. 8, 13). Feature 18, cut 0.50 m into the ancient surface, was the only one that provided evidence for two periods of exploitation, whereas the archaeological situation documented in the dug-in feature 24 (fig. 6) suggested an even longer period in which artifacts and debris were deposited inside. The layer of debris deposited on the ancient soil surface was up to 0.30‑0.40 m thick, while in the features its thickness reached 0.70‑0.80 m.

Fig. 2 – Chart of the bed of road I‑5 connecting the town of Kardzhali and the Makaza Pass.

Fig. 3 – Sections (drawings: A. Kamenarov).

Fig. 4 – General plan of the excavated area (2009‑2010 seasons).

Fig. 5 – Alluvial layer of sand and pebbles on top of the cultural deposits.

Fig. 6 – Dug-in feature 24 during the excavation; southern border.

Fig. 7 – General view of the northern sector. Complex I and the space between complexes I and II.

  • 8 Tell Sedlare, inhabited in the second half of the Chalcolithic period (Raduncheva 1997), is situate (...)

6Several concentrations of Chalcolithic sherds, stones and fired pieces of wall plaster were found above the cultural deposit and the layer of sand and pebbles on the southern periphery of the site. However, they covered a small area, and were the result of short episodes taking place in the site’s area after it was abandoned and flooded, rather than from regular activity related to newly arrived settlers8.

  • 9 The bottom of the dug-in feature had still not been reached at a depth of 4 m from the surface.

7The site was densely built, but no traces were left in situ from the superstructure of the buildings. There is evidence that the walls were solidly built from clay; wooden beams and stones were also used. Only the foundations of the buildings are preserved; the majority of them are cut into the ancient surface at different depths, varying from 0.40‑0.50 m (features 1, 2, 3 in complex IX) to more than m (feature 24 in complex I9) [fig. 6]. But some of the buildings’ foundations are horizontal, at the level of the ancient soil surface. The building spots were also marked by concentrations of archaeological artifacts – fired house debris, ceramic sherds and numerous stones. The excavated foundations form large complexes, which include both above-the-ground and dug-in features (fig. 7; 10‑12).

8The following complexes were documented from north to south (fig. 4).

9Complex I. It comprises the dug-in features 23, 24, 25, 26, 28 and the ground parts connecting them. Traces of ground facilities were also documented at the eastern side of complexes 23 and 25 as well as the western part of complex 25. The entire complex measures ca 30 x 20 m (fig. 7).

  • 10 Initially three dug-in features were defined in the field record – features 17 (2009 season), 35 an (...)

10Complex II. Unlike the rest of the complexes it comprises only one dug-in feature (feature 35), which is extremely large10. Its southern and northern boundaries were defined: it measured ca 25 m in this direction. In the east-west direction, 22 m were excavated, but the feature expanded beyond the road bed in both directions, which means that its area exceeded 600 m2. The foundation of the northern wall was made from large stones (fig. 9). Its bottom was flat in contrast to the dug-in parts in the other complexes. The feature was cut into the surface to a depth of ca 1.80 m. Three built-in grain storage pits, slightly cut into the bottom of the feature, were unearthed (fig. 8).

11Complex III. It comprised the dug-in features 18, 19, 20 and a vast ground part (ca 15 m long, 5 m wide) situated to the east of features 19 and 20, and to the north of feature 18. The ground part was covered by numerous fired pieces of daub. An oven’s floor was partially preserved as well (fig. 10).

  • 11 The dug-in features 21 and 34, excavated during different field campaigns, were later united in a l (...)

12Complex IV. It comprised the dug-in features 31 and 21/3411, as well as the ground part at their eastern side. The entire complex extended to the west under the unexcavated area (fig. 11).

13Complex V. It comprised the dug-in features 32, 33 and 37, as well as the adjoining ground part (fig. 11). The features are comparatively shallow.

  • 12 The dug-in feature 14 extended to the east under the unexcavated area.

14Complex VI. It comprised the dug-in features 14 and 15. A vast ground area, ca 10 m wide, was documented to the north, extending along their entire length of 16 m12. The complex is more than 16 m long (east-west) and 16‑17 m wide (north-south).

15Complex VII. It comprised dug-in feature 30 and the adjoining ground parts. Feature 30 was larger than 20 x 15 m and extended to the west beyond the limits of the road bed. It was 1.70 m cut into the ancient surface.

  • 13 The eastern and northern ends lay under the unexcavated area.

16Complex VIII. It comprised dug-in features 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 9 and 12, enclosing a ground part in the middle. The complex was more than 20 m long (east-west) and more than 15 m wide (north-south)13 (fig. 12).

17Complex IX. It comprised the dug-in features 7 and 10, and the vast ground area to the north. The larger part of the complex extended beyond the road bed.

  • 14 The eastern and the southern borders were not defined.

18Complex X. It comprised the dug-in feature 8, 11 and 42, as well as the adjoining ground part. The assemblage is more than 22.m long (east-west) [fig. 13] and more than 20 m wide (north-south)14.

Fig. 8 – Complex II, grain storages at the bottom of dug-in feature 35.

Fig. 9 – Complex II, foundation of the northern wall.

Fig. 10 – Complex III, the ground part.

Fig. 11 – Plan of complexes IV and V.

Fig. 12 – Southern sector, complex VIII.

Fig. 13 – Complex X, the southern section along line 44 (squares C-G).

  • 15 In some of the complexes there was more than one associated ground area.

19In general, the ground area was either next to the dug-in features or was surrounded by them15. The dug-in features were accessible from the ground areas through a gentle slant, or through steps cut into the soil. Some of the features were connected (fig. 13), and others were just situated next to each other (fig. 12). Their exterior walls were almost vertical.

20Remains from hearths were found in the fill of the features. Since they were not discovered in situ, they probably fell from above. In some cases the platforms or the floors on which the hearths were constructed were at the same level as the ground area (e.g. feature 26), while in others it was not possible to determine the level at which they were constructed (e.g. feature 8). The hearths were also situated on the ground area next to the edge of some dug-in features (e.g. in complex IX next to feature 6, or in complex III next to feature 18). Large grinding stones were placed in the ground area, usually next to the edge of a dug-in feature (e.g. features 7 and 21). A layer of debris – fired pieces of daub, stones (about 0.10 m in size), as well as numerous ceramic sherds – was discovered both in the dug-in features and the ground areas. The position of the pottery sherds, especially the ones found with their bases upwards, clearly indicated that they fell from above, probably from shelves which were attached on the walls of the buildings, or even from a second floor.

21Apparently, most of the dug-in features were not used for residential purposes, but rather as cellars that were covered by floor constructions. Most probably, each feature marked a separate room. The rooms had specific functions indicated by the yielded archaeological artifacts, which differed in type and concentration. It seems that some of the shallower features had direct access to a ground area and were used as spaces for economic activities.

22A ca 20 m long area between complexes I and II, in which no building foundations were found, was excavated in the northern part of the site. In this area only hearths or ovens were discovered, probably made in the open, as well as pits that were relatively shallow and small in size (fig. 4; 7).

23The northern periphery of the site was enclosed by a ditch whose depth reached 3.5 m in some places (fig. 4). The ditch was excavated to a width of 15 m and its northern end was not found. It is difficult to define whether this was a completely artificial structure, or (more probably) if it used some characteristics of the ancient surface. Considering the extremely large dimensions of this feature, it can be suggested that it had not only a protective function, but was also used to control the water level of the two rivers flowing in the site’s vicinity during heavy rains and floods.

24An empty space, ca 15 m in diameter, was unearthed in the southern part of the excavated area; it yielded a very small amount of archaeological artifacts. It was surrounded by a complex consisting of interconnected dug-in features of various shapes (mainly elongated), which were comparatively small in size and shallow (1 m down from the ancient surface level), and which also yielded a scarce amount of artifacts (fig. 4). The function of this complex is not yet defined.

The mobile finds

25The numerous artifacts yielded by the entire excavated area made it possible to determine that the main activities of the inhabitants of the site were related to chipping stone, and thus the site was a chipped-stone tool production center. At least one room in each complex was used as a workshop for making chipped-stone artifacts. The enormous number of flint artifacts discovered – more than 50,000, the majority of them debris – indicates that the production was aimed predominantly at export. Although local raw materials – jasper, opal and tuff – predominated, tools made from high quality flint from present-day Northeast Bulgaria were also found. Two excavated stone bead workshops yielded stone beads in various stages of processing, as well as flint micro-borers for hole-making (fig. 14).

Fig. 14 – Stone beads in various stages of completion and flint micro-borers for hole-making.

Fig. 15 – Complex IV, dug-in feature 34b; concentration of carbonized grains.

  • 16 The archaeobotanical remains from the site were analyzed by Ass. Prof. Dr Tsvetana Popova (NIAM-BAS (...)

26One or two rooms in each complex yielded a large amount of carbonized seeds – mainly einkorn wheat and smaller amounts of vetch16. The grain was found in the soil in the more or less compact concentrations (fig. 15). Apparently, it was packed in containers made from perishable material, most probably sacks. Since the environment did not provide favourable conditions for agricultural activity, it can be suggested that the grain came from distant regions. Usually, close to the grain concentrations there were grinding stones, but in most cases they were not found in situ.

27The pottery is highly fragmented and badly preserved due to the fact that it was covered by water; the sherds found close to the bottom of the dug-in features are in a better state of preservation. Conical plates are the most common vessels. They usually have straight or slightly convex walls; the rim is straight (fig. 16: 1, 4, 15), sometimes with a single or a double (M‑shaped) projection rising above it; slightly curved (fig. 16: 7, 9) or carinated (fig. 16: 2, 6); thickened (fig. 16: 3, 5); vertical (fig. 16: 8) or S-shaped (fig. 16: 10‑14; 17: 7, 10). The bowls are biconical, rounded (fig. 17: 8; 18: 3, 12) or carinated (fig. 17: 11; 18: 7); cylindro-conical (fig. 17: 5); with a thickened band above the carination (fig. 18: 1, 11); hemispherical with a straight rim or a rim with a more complicated shape (fig. 17: 4; 18: 4), etc. Spouted bowls or jars are relatively common; the shape of the spout varies. There are also jugs with vertical handles (fig. 19: 4), or small horizontal lugs under the rim (fig. 19: 2, 6). It is worth mentioning the high pot-stands with a horizontal top (fig. 19: 12) sometimes decorated with projections (fig. 19: 11). There are vertical as well as horizontal handles and lugs on a large variety of pottery shapes: arch-shaped (strap- or handles with rounded sections) [fig. 17: 8], carinated (fig. 19: 3), vertical lugs (fig. 17: 10), trumpet lugs (fig. 19: 5, 8) and horizontal lugs (fig. 17: 13; 19: 2).

Fig. 16 – Ceramic vessels: plates (scale 1/4).

Fig. 17 – Ceramic vessels: plates and bowls (scale 1/4).

28Incised decoration is the most common (fig. 16: 13, 15; 19: 10‑12; 20: 2‑5). The variety both in terms of techniques (scratched lines, shallow or deep incisions, narrow or wide incised lines, grooves, various impressions, etc.) and in terms of motifs is wide. Graphite-painted pottery is also present (fig. 16: 7‑9, 14; 17: 1, 7, 9, 11; 18: 1, 3, 10; 19: 1, 4) although it is difficult to define its share in the pottery assemblage due to the fact that the surface of a great number of the sherds is damaged (especially the sherds yielded by the upper levels). Plastic knobs (fig. 16: 8, 11; 17: 4, 6) and plastic bands with finger imprints are also very common decorative elements. Some vessels (plates with straight rims mainly) are decorated with zoomorphic knobs, or in a few cases anthropomorphic (fig. 20: 8, 9; 21: 11).

Fig. 18 – Ceramic vessels: bowls and jars (scale 1/4).

  • 17 Leshtakov 1997.

29The pottery shapes and decorative patterns are dominated by those typical for the Early Chalcolithic. However, there are several which are considered typical for the Late Chalcolithic. At the present stage of the pottery study, it seems that the most numerous parallels can be found in the pottery assemblage of the end of the Early Chalcolithic and the transition to the Late Chalcolithic. The wide scope of parallels concerns not only the chronological range, but the territory as well. There are parallels to the Gradeshnitsa-Dikili Tash-Slatino cultures to the west, to Aegean Thrace in the south, and to the Thracian Plain – both the classic settlement mounds of the Karanovo V and VI cultures, and some of the settlements along the Middle Maritsa valley, e.g. Dervishov Odzhak, whose pottery assemblage is characterized by more specific elements17.

Fig. 19 – Ceramic vessels: jugs, potstands and other diagnostic sherds (scale 1/4).

30There is also a wide variety of anthropomorphic figurines. They find parallels in the artifacts from cultures that are very distant from one another – Vinča, Kodzhadermen-Gumelniţa, Precucuteni-Tripolye (fig. 21: 1‑9). There are “altars” most often decorated with incised patterns (fig. 20: 3, 7), as well as clay spoons (fig. 20: 6).

31The stone tool kit consists mainly of adzes and a smaller number of axes and chisels. The site yielded thirteen fragments of stone shaft-hole axes, as well as two clay models of such axes. Some of the stone tools were made from river pebbles by minimal reshaping.

Fig. 20 – Ceramic vessels, “altars” and other artifacts (scale 1/3).

Fig. 21 – Anthropomorphic figurines (scale 1/3).

The radiocarbon dates

32Two radiocarbon dates were obtained within the “Balkans 4000” project – Ly-14797: 5880 ± 35 BP and Ly-14798: 5865 ± 35 BP (table 1); they are the only dates available from the site so far. Both dates were obtained from charred wood taken during the first excavation season in 2007. The date Ly-14798 comes from the dug-in feature 18 (complex III, situated in the central part of the site), and the other one from the upper layer of the fill of a dug-in feature that was not completely excavated as its main part remains outside the road bed. The feature was situated in the northern part of the site and remained east of the space (area free of building foundations, supra) between the complexes I and II.

  • 18 Boyadzhiev 1995, p. 182‑183, fig. 10.
  • 19 Görsdorf & Boyadzhiev 1996, p. 144, 146, 151.

33The calibrated dates fall in the period between 4800 and 4700 cal BC, i.e. in the middle of the Early Chalcolithic. Given that the conventional (BP) values of both dates are very close, and higher than those of most Early Chalcolithic dates18, it can be suggested that the site dates back to the first half of the Early Chalcolithic. However, it has to be taken into consideration that sites dating back to the transition between the Early and the Late Chalcolithic (i.e. the so-called Middle Chalcolithic) yielded dates close to those from Varhari, or even earlier; e.g. the dates from Ovcharovo, building level 5 (Bln-1493: 5940 ± 80 BP), Golyamo Delchevo, building level 3 (Bln-925: 5940 ± 100 BP, Bln-924: 5840 ± 100 BP), Golyamata Peshtera, near Kyustendil (Bln-2112: 5900 ± 70 BP)19. The comparison between the dates from Varhari and the dates from the sites listed above is facilitated by the fact that all of them were obtained from the same kind of sample – charred wood.

Table 1 – Radiocarbon dates from Varhari.

  • 20 Boyadzhiev 1988; Boyadzhiev 1992; Boyadzhiev 1995.

34The analysis of the development of the series of the radiocarbon dates from multilayer sites in present-day Bulgaria, as well as from sites with reliable relative chronology, reveals that their conventional values for the end of the Early/the beginning of the Middle Chalcolithic tend to look older. As a result of this, the radiocarbon dates from this period overlap with the dates from the end of the Neolithic and the beginning of the Chalcolithic. But the dates from the Late Chalcolithic (the Karanovo VI-Kodzhadermen cultures) also coincide with the dates from the Early Chalcolithic20. Therefore, the definition of the absolute chronology of Varhari – whether it has to be dated back to the beginning or the end of the Early Chalcolithic depends not only on the value of the radiocarbon dates but on the relative chronology of the site as well. The cultural deposit on top of the ancient surface, as well as the filling with debris and artifacts in the dug-in features, are relatively thin and do not provide grounds to suggest a long-functioning site. Although coming from a single settlement layer, the yielded materials are varied. The pottery shapes and decorative patterns find parallels in sites dating back to the Early Chalcolithic, to the transition between the Early and Late Chalcolithic, as well as to the Late Chalcolithic. The fact that pottery shapes regarded as typical for various stages of the Chalcolithic were yielded by one and the same assemblage raises a number of questions, but this article is not aimed at suggesting possible answers. Taking into consideration the prevailing amount of pottery typical for the transition between the Early and Late Chalcolithic, as well as for the Late Chalcolithic, it is not very likely that the site was functioning in the beginning of the Early Chalcolithic. The considerably large number of fragmented shaft-hole axes, which were more typical for the end of the Early and the Late Chalcolithic, also favours a later date for the site.

  • 21 See chapter 12 in this volume.
  • 22 Boyadzhiev 1995, p. 171, 179.

35When analyzing the dates from Varhari, the dates from the neighbouring site of Orlitsa also have to be taken into consideration21. The conventional values of the latter follow the ones from Varhari. The Orlitsa pottery definitely dates back to the Late Chalcolithic, and the site also has to date to the same period. The pottery assemblages of both sites share a number of common features, but the Orlitsa pottery lacks pottery shapes and decorative patterns which are considered typical for the Early Chalcolithic. Therefore, all archaeological data available provide grounds to date the Varhari site back to the end of the Early Chalcolithic/the transition to the Late Chalcolithic (the so-called Middle Chalcolithic). It means that the true age of the site has to be later than the one indicated by the calibrated values of the two available dates (which overlap in the 4795‑4688 cal BC interval) and most probably falls into the time span between 4600 and 4500 BC22.

  • 23 Chapman et al. 2006; Higham et al. 2007; Higham et al. 2008; Reingruber & Thissen 2009; Borić 2009.
  • 24 See the articles concerning Tell Yunatsite (chapter 9), Tell Karnobat (chapter 8) and Tell Smyadovo (...)

36The dates from Varhari together with the available dates from other Late Chalcolithic sites (the Karanovo VI culture) provide additional proof that the radiocarbon dates from present-day Bulgaria (and the Balkan Peninsula in general) have experienced the influence of a local anomaly in the middle and the second half of the 5th millennium BC which was not reflected by the calibration curves. The same anomaly is responsible for the fact that the dates from the Varna cemetery appear to be earlier – a phenomenon which provoked vivid discussion among researchers23. Theageingof the Varna cemetery which perplexes the specialist has resulted not from an earlier existence compared to the rest of the sites and the cemeteries in present-day Central and Eastern Bulgaria (the Karanovo VI-Kodzhadermen and the Varna cultures), but from causes that led to theregional ageing” of the conventional values of the radiocarbon dates from the middle and the second half of the 5th millennium BC, and their calibration respectively. The conventional values of the Varna cemetery dates perfectly match all dates from the Late Chalcolithic Varna and Karanovo VI cultures available up to present, including those produced by the “Balkans 4000” project24.

37Before obtaining the radiocarbon dates from Varhari, it was accepted that the site had functioned in the Late Chalcolithic. This assumption was based on the principle that an event is dated by the latest artifacts available, and since some of the pottery shapes and decorative patterns were similar to those believed to be typical for the Late Chalcolithic, the site was dated back to that period. However, the radiocarbon dates disproved this statement, revealing that pottery shapes and decorative patterns, which were considered typical for the Late Chalcolithic in present-day South Bulgaria, were actually introduced much earlier – as early as the transition from the Middle to the Late Chalcolithic. The archaeological record – fragments of ceramic vessels believed to date back to various stages of the Chalcolithic which were discovered next to each other in one and the same complex – provides grounds to revise some of the traditional concepts of the role of pottery as a key element in the dating of a site, and the automatic transfer of the periodization based on the pottery sequence of one or two sites to larger areas. The available radiocarbon dates and the absolute chronology of the site based on these dates will allow the definition of the primary centers in which new pottery shapes and decorative patterns were introduced, as well as the routes and speed of distribution of the new trends, the period in which some pottery forms and decoration were in use, etc.

38The dates from Varhari reveal that as early as the end of the Early Chalcolithic there were large settlements in the Eastern Rhodope Mountains with numerous inhabitants who launched and carried out large-scale construction activities. They extracted and processed mineral raw materials, and developed a trade network over a vast territory of the Balkan Peninsula. The results from the archaeological excavations, as well as the radiocarbon dates provided by the “Balkan 4000” project, make it possible to revise our knowledge of the technical skills and the trade experience of the population which inhabited this part of the Balkans in the first half of the Copper Age.

Notes

2 Text translated from Bulgarian by Tatiana Stefanova.

3 See also the map fig. 1, in chapter 12 (supra, p. 210).

4 Geografia Bulgaria 1997.

5 Yavor Boyadzhiev was Director of the project and Kamen Boyadzhiev was a Deputy Director. Dessislava Takorova was a second Deputy Director in 2009.

6 The ancient bed of the Varbitsa River is still visible.

7 The geomorphological studies were carried out by Ass. Prof. Rositsa Kenderova and Prof. Alexander Sarafov, Sofia University.

8 Tell Sedlare, inhabited in the second half of the Chalcolithic period (Raduncheva 1997), is situated only 3 km to the south of the Varhari site and it seems possible that its inhabitants have visited the area of the site.

9 The bottom of the dug-in feature had still not been reached at a depth of 4 m from the surface.

10 Initially three dug-in features were defined in the field record – features 17 (2009 season), 35 and 36 – but as the excavations progressed they were united in one big П-shaped feature.

11 The dug-in features 21 and 34, excavated during different field campaigns, were later united in a larger assemblage.

12 The dug-in feature 14 extended to the east under the unexcavated area.

13 The eastern and northern ends lay under the unexcavated area.

14 The eastern and the southern borders were not defined.

15 In some of the complexes there was more than one associated ground area.

16 The archaeobotanical remains from the site were analyzed by Ass. Prof. Dr Tsvetana Popova (NIAM-BAS).

17 Leshtakov 1997.

18 Boyadzhiev 1995, p. 182‑183, fig. 10.

19 Görsdorf & Boyadzhiev 1996, p. 144, 146, 151.

20 Boyadzhiev 1988; Boyadzhiev 1992; Boyadzhiev 1995.

21 See chapter 12 in this volume.

22 Boyadzhiev 1995, p. 171, 179.

23 Chapman et al. 2006; Higham et al. 2007; Higham et al. 2008; Reingruber & Thissen 2009; Borić 2009.

24 See the articles concerning Tell Yunatsite (chapter 9), Tell Karnobat (chapter 8) and Tell Smyadovo (chapter 3) in this volume.

Table des illustrations

Légende Fig. 1 – The Varhari site, topographic map of the region; scale 1/5000 (drawing: A. Kamenarov).
URL http://books.openedition.org/momeditions/docannexe/image/521/img-1.jpg
Fichier image/jpeg, 192k
Légende Fig. 2 – Chart of the bed of road I‑5 connecting the town of Kardzhali and the Makaza Pass.
URL http://books.openedition.org/momeditions/docannexe/image/521/img-2.jpg
Fichier image/jpeg, 228k
Légende Fig. 3 – Sections (drawings: A. Kamenarov).
URL http://books.openedition.org/momeditions/docannexe/image/521/img-3.jpg
Fichier image/jpeg, 68k
Légende Fig. 4 – General plan of the excavated area (2009‑2010 seasons).
URL http://books.openedition.org/momeditions/docannexe/image/521/img-4.jpg
Fichier image/jpeg, 604k
Légende Fig. 5 – Alluvial layer of sand and pebbles on top of the cultural deposits.
URL http://books.openedition.org/momeditions/docannexe/image/521/img-5.jpg
Fichier image/jpeg, 52k
Légende Fig. 6 – Dug-in feature 24 during the excavation; southern border.
URL http://books.openedition.org/momeditions/docannexe/image/521/img-6.jpg
Fichier image/jpeg, 64k
Légende Fig. 7 – General view of the northern sector. Complex I and the space between complexes I and II.
URL http://books.openedition.org/momeditions/docannexe/image/521/img-7.jpg
Fichier image/jpeg, 124k
Légende Fig. 8 – Complex II, grain storages at the bottom of dug-in feature 35.
URL http://books.openedition.org/momeditions/docannexe/image/521/img-8.jpg
Fichier image/jpeg, 60k
Légende Fig. 9 – Complex II, foundation of the northern wall.
URL http://books.openedition.org/momeditions/docannexe/image/521/img-9.jpg
Fichier image/jpeg, 60k
Légende Fig. 10 – Complex III, the ground part.
URL http://books.openedition.org/momeditions/docannexe/image/521/img-10.jpg
Fichier image/jpeg, 56k
Légende Fig. 11 – Plan of complexes IV and V.
URL http://books.openedition.org/momeditions/docannexe/image/521/img-11.jpg
Fichier image/jpeg, 208k
Légende Fig. 12 – Southern sector, complex VIII.
URL http://books.openedition.org/momeditions/docannexe/image/521/img-12.jpg
Fichier image/jpeg, 116k
Légende Fig. 13 – Complex X, the southern section along line 44 (squares C-G).
URL http://books.openedition.org/momeditions/docannexe/image/521/img-13.jpg
Fichier image/jpeg, 92k
Légende Fig. 14 – Stone beads in various stages of completion and flint micro-borers for hole-making.
URL http://books.openedition.org/momeditions/docannexe/image/521/img-14.jpg
Fichier image/jpeg, 128k
Légende Fig. 15 – Complex IV, dug-in feature 34b; concentration of carbonized grains.
URL http://books.openedition.org/momeditions/docannexe/image/521/img-15.jpg
Fichier image/jpeg, 68k
Légende Fig. 16 – Ceramic vessels: plates (scale 1/4).
URL http://books.openedition.org/momeditions/docannexe/image/521/img-16.jpg
Fichier image/jpeg, 296k
Légende Fig. 17 – Ceramic vessels: plates and bowls (scale 1/4).
URL http://books.openedition.org/momeditions/docannexe/image/521/img-17.jpg
Fichier image/jpeg, 216k
Légende Fig. 18 – Ceramic vessels: bowls and jars (scale 1/4).
URL http://books.openedition.org/momeditions/docannexe/image/521/img-18.jpg
Fichier image/jpeg, 220k
Légende Fig. 19 – Ceramic vessels: jugs, potstands and other diagnostic sherds (scale 1/4).
URL http://books.openedition.org/momeditions/docannexe/image/521/img-19.jpg
Fichier image/jpeg, 272k
Légende Fig. 20 – Ceramic vessels, “altars” and other artifacts (scale 1/3).
URL http://books.openedition.org/momeditions/docannexe/image/521/img-20.jpg
Fichier image/jpeg, 324k
Légende Fig. 21 – Anthropomorphic figurines (scale 1/3).
URL http://books.openedition.org/momeditions/docannexe/image/521/img-21.jpg
Fichier image/jpeg, 384k
Légende Table 1 – Radiocarbon dates from Varhari.
URL http://books.openedition.org/momeditions/docannexe/image/521/img-22.jpg
Fichier image/jpeg, 113k
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