Discovery of a New Type of Megalith in Sredna Gora Mountain, Bulgaria

Martin Konstantinov

Abstract
This publication aims to present a newly discovered megalithic structure near the village of Rozovets, Brezovo
municipality in Southern Bulgaria possessing a set of characteristics not described previously in the scientific
literature. To account for them, a new classification type of megalithic constructions is proposed a pair of
balanced monoliths with a subtype of a pair of balanced parallel orthostats. The paper also offers
arguments in favour of classing the 'Sredna Gora proto-dolmen' as a separate group of megalithic monuments
on the grounds of differing typology and chronology.

Key words: Megalithic monuments, Balanced rocks, Dolmens, Proto-dolmens, Menhirs, Sredna Gora

DESCRIPTION OF THE STRUCTURE

The megalith is located in the vicinity of the village of Rozovets in the Brezovo
municipality, Sarnena Sredna Gora Mountain (Sredna Gora Mountain is divided into three
distinct geographic areas Sarnena, Sashtinska and Ihtimanska from East to West). It was
photographed and published in the Internet for the first time by a group of researchers from
the city of Plovdiv on 01.11.2015.
n artificially levelled rock platform measuring approximately 5x5 meters is situated
among a rock cluster, consisting of several dozens of stone blocks. On top of the platform, a
pair of parallel vertical stone slabs (orthostats) rise at a distance of 80-90 cm apart. The
site is known as "Bratiata" (The Brothers), "Popova turla" (Priests pit) or "Izpravenite
kamani" (Standing stones) among the few locals who are familiar with it. Neither of the two
monoliths is connected to the base. They appear to be of the same type of rock as the base;
however a geological study would be needed to confirm this.
The passage formed between the two orthostats is oriented to the east-southeast and is
about four metres long. One orthostat is located north of the passage (hence we denote it as
the North Brother) while the other one is to the south (South Brother). The North Brother is
about six meters tall, 4.20 m wide and 0.9 m thick at the base. The base has a very small area
and the stone is wider mid-height in a distinctive spindle shape. The stone is visibly 'placed'
on the leveled rock platform. It does not rest on its entire basis but instead rests on just three

points with an extremely small area in relation to its colossal size. Its balance looks rather
precarious.
Figure 1: Bratiata - a view from the west

Figure 2: Bratiata - a view from the east

A few metres away from the North Brother, outside of the levelled site, two elongated
rough stone blocks stand on their narrow walls, sloping towards each other and forming a
rock shelter. They can be seen just to the right of the right hand-side orthostat on Fig. 3
below. At this stage it is not clear whether these stones belong to the megalithic complex, and
whether they have ever been vertically standing similarly to Bratiata.
On the eastern side of the megalith, 1.4 m below the main platform, there is another,
half-round enclosed levelled platform, composed of eroded rock and soil. It is shown on Fig.
3 below.
Figure 3: The rock complex from above (drone imagery)

The South Brother is about 5 metres high, 4.30 metres wide and has thickness at the
base of 1.5 metres. With an average granite rock density in the Sarnena Sredna Gora
Mountain of around 2.7 t/m3 the estimated weight of each of the blocks is no less than 60 t.
Both monoliths complement each other visually, forming a powerful stone duet the
North stone has a very narrow base and its width expands considerably in height, while the
South stone has a massive base, tapering upward. The site has an excellent location, providing
views to the east and south of the valley and surrounding peaks. Hence we believe that the
place is highly likely to have been known and worshipped in antiquity. Archeological
excavations would be needed to ascertain whether the site was worshiped in ancient times and
what was the possible nature of the rituals that might have been performed there.

Figure 4: Bratiata - a view from the east

DISCUSSION
THE QUESTION OF NATURAL VS. ARTIFICIAL ORIGIN
Scientific literature denotes objects similar to the North Brother as 'precariously
balanced rocks (PBRs). The latter are free-standing rocks or stones that qualify as
'precarious' or 'unstable', as they can be overturned by relatively little horizontal force (Brune
1996). Despite its considerable weight in the tens of tonnes, we assume the North Brother is
within the scope of that definition because of its height and tiny area of contact with the base.
The term PBRs most often refers to natural formations, like the so-called 'glacial erratics'.
These are moraines left to balance on a very small area in apparent challenge to the laws of
physics, after the retreat of the ice which transported them to their resting location. One could
consider a potential glacial origin of similar megalithic sites in areas with increased glacial

activity during the last glaciation of Europe, but not in Sredna Gora Mountain. For example,
moraines in Ulster, Northern Ireland were used as a source material for megaliths (Hayes,
2005). In traditional Bulgarian toponymy PBRs are aptly called 'weighing scales stones'.
The Bulgarian scientific literature has not explored the problem of balanced stones
from an archaeological point of view. Currently we are not aware of any research exploring
the topic from the point of view and with the methods of geology, either. To achieve
maximum results, it is imperative that future studies of this site also include geological
studies.
It is virtually impossible to prove whether a block of stone stands in a delicate
equilibrium position due to natural factors or after a human intervention. So in this case we
will use indirect factors to substantiate the thesis that the origin of Bratiata rock complex is
artificial:
1. The rock platform on which the two monoliths stand, bears traces of artificial
levelling and alignment, both on its horizontal surface and a vertical wall of its eastern part.
2. The two monoliths shape a passage about four metres long. Its artificial origin is
undoubted due to two reasons:
A / Both rocks bear traces of cutting, and
B / It is formed so that the two plates are parallel.
We believe it is highly unlikely for these circumstances to be simultaneously present
in a natural phenomenon. Therefore we accept that Bratiata is a man-made megalithic site that
has been constructed either by splitting a rock present on the platform and forming it in two
pillars, or by erecting, shaping and finely balancing the two orthostats.

BALANCED STONES AND SEISMIC ACTIVITY

Studies conducted on balanced stones located near seismic faults in the states of
California and Nevada, USA using rock-varnish microlamination and cosmogenic36 Cl
dating methods give surprising results. Each of those surveyed balanced stones (a total of 34
samples were taken) had been standing in their precariously balanced position for at least 10
000 years, and for some this age reaches 27 000 (Bell, et al., 1998). This is despite the fact
that balanced rocks can be pushed out of their delicate equilibrium with a relatively small
force of 0.2-0.3 g (Shi, et al., 1996). The Bratiata megalith would be a suitable site for
geologists interested in carrying out research using the cited methods.

FUNCTION AND MEANING

Given the eastsoutheast orientation of the passageway between the monoliths, we can
assume that the megalith was used for observing the winter solstice sunrise, or the sunrise and
sunset on a specific day (or days) in December. Archaeoastronomical measurements and
research will determine what other astronomical observations could be made using this
megalithic construction.
Another assumption is that the two orthostats represent the archetype (or are a
continuation of the most ancient megalithic tradition of creating such constructions) of the
two temple columns and pillars that flank the doors of most temples in ancient times. The
assumed astronomical and temple functions of the Rozovets megalith should be considered as
interrelated based on the documented use of the pair of pillars in a number of temples from
the Old World (the Balkans, Asia Minor, Egypt, Sumer, Assyria, Judea, etc.) for astronomic
observations and measurements. Their temple function is related to the notion of the divine
presence, and their astronomical one is the witness to, and expression of this presence.
Importantly, the archetypal value of these hypothetic primeval temple columns lies in the
metaphoric representation of doors to an immaterial temple. If we extend this hypothesis, we
could posit that the primordial sacred space of this temple at the Bratiata megalithic site is the
terrace-like enclosed platform on the steep slope just below the megalith on its eastern side
that could have been used as a ritual platform. Hence the name Popova turla (Priests pit),
that in all probability is a distant reminiscence of the religious uses of the platform still living
in local toponymy.
In the Balkans, the Spartans use the term (dokana) to denote the ancient
models of the Dioscuri twins the divine horsemen Castor and Pollux (Waites, 1919). The
latter are represented by two columns, connected by two lintels to highlight their dualism, and
their twinship. In the case of the Brothers megalith the very bedrock under the megalithic pair
played the role of the first lintel that emphasizes the one-day stay of the Divine twins in the
Underworld (Pollux with Castor). The sky the second lintel in this interpretation, highlights
their daylong residence in heaven (Castor with Pollux). The Dioscuri counterparts in Hindu
mythology are two Vedic gods, the divine twin horsemen in the Rigveda, the Ashvins who
are connected with the appearance of light at day-break, their golden bright
chariot, swift as thought moves in its course (vartis) around the heaven and earth in
one day (Oldenberg, 1988). The analogy between these solar deities and the Rozovets
megalith is borne out by both the latters very name the Brothers, and the fact that it
allows for sun observation.

ANALOGUES AND DEFINITION

Before searching for analogues to our research subject, it is necessary to clarify its
distinctive features:
1. The megalithic structure consists solely of two parallel orthostats. There was never
a third stone slab poised on top of the two vertical slabs (its fall would unbalance the vertical
orthostats, too). Hence, we conclude that this structure is not a trilithon or a dolmen. Instead it
is an ensemble of two vertical slabs forming a 'window', likely used to observe the sun and
possibly other celestial objects. There are megalithic monuments, consisting of two vertical,
upright slabs that are rooted in the ground, but almost always they are supplemented by
accompanying stones forming a joint complex. In this case there are only two rock slabs.
2. These vertical plates are not thrust into the ground.

Instead, they are finely

balanced on top of a rock platform.

At this stage, the only site that meets the above similarity criteria is the Momini gardi
(Maidens Breasts) megalith near the village of Starossel, Sashtinska Sredna Gora Mountain.
It also consists of two balanced vertical boulders. Additionally, functional similarity lies in
the fact that the Momini Gardi megalith is oriented to the west and therefore probably was
also used for sunset observation. However, there are two differences:
1. The Momini Gardi monoliths are not parallel to each other. Instead, they balance by
being propped onto one another;
2. While the Bratiata megalith boulders are balanced on an artificially levelled rock
platform, the Momini Gardi two rocks stand on a separate solid rock basis.

Figure 5: The Momini Gardi megalith

If we were to define Bratiata as two parallel menhirs we would be faced with a couple
of issues. A menhir is a "pillar-like block of stone stuck vertically in the ground" (Tsonev
2012). Apparently, taking this definition as a starting point, we can not classify the two
monoliths as menhirs. In English language literature the menhir is usually defined as a tall,
upright stone erected in prehistoric times. This definition, however, does not specify the
method of erection - whether it is thrust into the ground or simply balanced vertically.
Menhirs are single or grouped in a circle, forming 'lanes' or random configurations. There are
couples of menhirs arranged like Bratiata, but they usually are complemented by
accompanying menhirs surrounding the central couple.
Even in very rare cases of an ensemble of just two menhirs, as in the studied case, all
examples of couples of menhirs without exception are represented by monoliths thrust into
the ground rather than balanced ones. Thus, the definition of the recently discovered megalith
as a configuration of two menhirs in our opinion does not adequately account for the nature of
the monument.
Therefore we must acknowledge that currently the only close analogue of the
Rozovets megalith is the Momini Gardi megalithic structure. Based on their characteristics we
propose the classification of these so far only two monuments in a new type of megalithic
constructions "a pair of balanced monoliths". The Rozovets megalith, thus, represents a
subtype "a pair of balanced parallel orthostats".

CONTEXT AND DATING OF MEGALITHS IN SREDNA GORA MOUNTAIN. THE

"SREDNA GORA PROTO-DOLMEN"
Bratiata is far from being the only impressive megalithic site in Sredna Gora
Mountain. However, Bulgarian literature so far lacks systematic attempts at typology and
dating of the vast wealth of Sredna Gora megalithic structures. The latter should not only be
seen as tourism destinations, but also as a scientific challenge to the existing typology of
megalithic sites in other Bulgarian mountains - Strandzha, Sakar and the Eastern Rhodopes.
To the best of our knowledge, this paper is the first attempt at describing the main
characteristics that distinguish what we refer to as the "Sredna Gora proto-dolmen" (due to
the overwhelming concentration of such sites in this mountain) from the dolmens in the
above-mentioned areas. We also offer arguments in favour of classing it as a separate group
of megalithic monuments on the grounds of differing typology and chronology.
The most characteristic megalithic structure in Sredna Gora Mountain is the 'protodolmen'. It represents a stone block (or a slab) placed on two or more orthostats that are part

of the bedrock, most often without any additional working. The differences between the
Sredna Gora proto-dolmen and the dolmens, typical of Strandzha, Sakar and Eastern
Rhodopes are significant:
1. Unlike the dolmen which has all its components moved and placed by man, in
proto-dolmens it is only the roof slab that is placed on a bedrock support, most often on three
points;
2. The stone slabs used in the construction of dolmens are worked, while for building
of proto-dolmens rough stone blocks of varying shapes and sizes are used that rarely bear
traces of working;
3. For the above reasons, unlike dolmens that are clearly man-made, most protodolmens look like natural phenomena formed due to erosion, glacial or seismic activity.
However, we consider it impossible for the large number of megalithic sites of the protodolmen type to be the result of random natural factors, especially in view of the absence of
glacial activity in Sredna Gora Mountain during the last glaciation.
It is a noteworthy fact that there are no confirmed dolmens of the Strandzha and Sakar
type in Sredna Gora yet. Mikov (1933) and Deliradev (1955) provide information that such
existed but none has been found to this day. The only information so far of an intact dolmen
in Sredna Gora is that by G. Bonchev from 1933 who mentions a site in the vicinity of Turia
village, Pavel Banya municipality, consisting of four vertically placed rough stone blocks
covered with a horizontally placed slab (Bonchev, 1933). It is possible that the site is of the
proto-dolmen type, with which Sredna Gora abounds, or of a mixed type that has its orthostats
placed by the builders "as is", i.e. without any working. Unfortunately, our attempts to locate
the dolmen have so far failed.
The question of the dating of the Sredna Gora megaliths can not be adequately
addressed at this stage, prior to systematic archaeological excavationsbeing carried out.
However, drawing on the many Sredna Gora proto-dolmens we have visited we can make the
following remarks and working hypotheses:
1. Based on the ceramic material discovered during excavations in and around the
Strandzha, Sakar and Eastern Rhodopes dolmens, the current assumption in Bulgarian
archaeology is that they were constructed in the period XII - VII century BC (Venedikov et
al., 1976). This dating does not account for the possibility of the Thracian population using
earlier constructed dolmens for funeral and religious purposes. In this sense, we support
Tsonev (2012) in his critique of the unconvincing dating of Bulgarian dolmens as the world's
youngest based solely on contextual and stylistic analysis of the artifacts found. We also

support the researchers recognition of the need to introduce optically stimulated

luminescence (OSL) in Bulgaria as a more reliable modern method for dating of such sites.
The OSL method has already demonstrated its capabilities in dating of the Dragon houses
and a Cyclopean wall in Styra, Greece, among others (Liritzis, 2010; 2013).
2. Sredna Gora proto-dolmens are not tombs. We believe that it is unjustified to
assume a literal analogy with the dolmens of Strandzha and Sakar. Most proto-dolmens in
Sredna Gora are difficult to access, and many of them simply do not have the necessary
space for burial, unless it comes to cremation.
3. The Sredna Gora proto-dolmen has its analogues worldwide. The most primitive as
craftsmanship, these structures are chronologically the first dolmens. They are an expression
of the most ancient layer of cosmogonic ideas about the structure of the world, specifically
reflecting the primeval understanding of the the first manifested Trinitys three divine aspects
from which everything stems. In proto-dolmens this principle is represented by the three
support points of the roof slab.

Figure 6: Proto-dolmen Plochata (The Slab) near Zlatossel village, Sarnena Sredna Gora

5. In Bulgaria the proto-dolmen is disproportionately distributed - most sites are

located in Sarnena and Sashtinska Sredna Gora, but there are also proto-dolmens in other
mountains (Rhodopes, Stara Planina, Rila, Strandzha, etc.).
6. In future archaeological excavations only a small percentage of megalithic sites in
Sredna Gora will yield ceramic material, and even if such is found, it will most likely be the
result of a secondary use of the site in a much later age.

CONCLUSION
The Bratiata megalithic construction is a site that could provide fertile ground for
interdisciplinary

research

by

archaeologists,

archaeoastronomers,

geologists

and

seismologists. Set in the context of the wealth of megalithic sites built thousands of years ago
in Sredna Gora, Bratiata should not be studied as a separate and isolated phenomenon.
Instead, it is yet another testament to the wide variety of megalithic types characteristic of this
mountain. The proposed definitions for the constructions discussed above "Sredna Gora
proto-dolmen", "a pair of balanced monoliths" and "a pair of balanced parallel
orthostats" are not final. We expect them to undergo changes, additions and corrections
during future research on the topic. We are convinced that Sredna Gora Mountain can provide
answers to some of the questions the megalithic stage of social development of mankind
poses to modern science.

References
Bell, J., J. Brune, T. Liu, M. Zreda, and J. Yount, 1998. Dating precariously balanced rocks in
seismically active parts of California and Nevada, Geology, June, 495-498.
Bonchev, G., 1933. A dolmen in Sredna Gora (in Bulgarian), Bulgarian Historic Library, V, 19321933, 2.
Brune, J. N., 1996. Precariously balanced rocks and ground-motion maps for southern California,
Seismological Society ofAmerica Bulletin, 86, 4354.
Deliradev, P., 1955. Travels in Bulgaria, Vol. 5 (in Bulgarian), Balgarski pisatel, Sofia.
Hayes, T., 2005. Megalithic technology, Ulster Journal of Archaeology, 64, 174-175.
Liritzis, I., 2010. Surface luminescence dating of Dragon houses and Armena gate at Styra (Euboea,
Greece), Mediterranean Archaeology and Archaeometry, 10, 3, 6581.
Liritzis, I., 2013. Advances in surface luminescence dating: new data from selected monuments,
Mediterranean Archaeology and Archaeometry, 13, 3, 105-115.
Mikov, V., 1933. Prehistoric Settlements and Finds in Bulgaria (in Bulgarian), Darjavna Pechatnica,
Sofia.
Oldenberg, H., 1988. The Religion of the Veda, Motilal Barnasidass Publishers, Delhi.
Shi, B., R. A. Anooshehpoor, Y. Zeng, and J. N. Brune, 1996. Rocking and overturning of precariously
balanced rocks by earthquakes, Seismological Society of America Bulletin, 86, p. 13641371.
Tsonev, L. 2012. Megaliths in Bulgaria: availability, specifics, dating, tourist potential (in Bulgarian),
paper presented at the Third national conference in history, archaeology and cultural tourism Bulgaria
in world cultural heritage, Shumen, May 1719, 2012.
Venedikov, I., A. Fol (Eds.), 1976. Thracian Monuments, Vol. 1: The Megaliths in Thrace (in
Bulgarian), Nauka i Izkustvo, Sofia.
Waites, M. C., 1919. The Meaning of the "Dokana", American Journal of Archaeology, 23, 1, 1-18.

Martin Konstantinov
PhD candidate, Institute for the Study of Societies and Knowledge
Bulgarian Academy of Sciences, Sofia
E-mail: martin.konstantinov@gmail.com