EDITORIAL PREFACE

Excavations and field investigations at the fifth millennium BC settlement of Lıga and other Late Copper ˆ Age sites near Telish in Northern Bulgaria took place in 2000, 2001, and 2002. They were based on archaeological activities started already in the mid-1940s. Important excavations were in recent times also carried out by Vencislav Gergov of Telish Museum, the local collaborator and gracious co-director of the present project. However, only little information on earlier efforts has been published till date, not even maps of excavation. Maya Dimitrova (Museum of Lovech), Rumen Peykov (Veliko Tarnovo), and Petar Zidarov (Sofia and Tübingen universities) are a few of the many Bulgarian collaborators most valuable to the project. Thanks are also addressed to Svilen Makchev, Vania Ivanova, Asia Yordanova, Cvetelin Cvetkov, Nikolaj Kristanov, Radka Zlateva-Uzunova, and Yulij Stoyanov. Their dedication, insight and energy have been indispensable in carrying the huge burden of very hard fieldwork, including detailed recording in the field. Very many other Bulgarians participated, students, assistants, and local workers, lead by the indefatigable veteran of the campaigns, ‘‘Bai Ivan’’ (Ivan Ivanov, aged 74). Gratitude also goes to the ‘‘Sofia families’’ of the Danes, Petia & Emo Stoyanovs and Bogdana, Nikola & Mariana Zidarovs and the ‘‘Telish one’’ of the Todor & Rumiana Petkovs, all making stays most agreeable and helped solve many problems. From the Danish side, the undersigned accepted to act as director of the project and later on as executive editor of the publication. Funding was critical. The Munksgaard Foundation, Copenhagen provided crucial support, but heavy financial burdens of both excavation and post-excavation work were covered mainly privately by the Danish participants. V. Gergov accepted a honorarium, while the other participants worked for only a limited (Bulgarians) or no salary at all (Danes). Centre of World Archaeology (CWA, www.worldarchaeology.net), with Acta Archaeologica, provided the means of publication, supported by the Beckett-foundation, Copenhagen (with a late unquoted donation for Acta Archaeologica 75:1, 2004). The executive director of the project is Inga Merkyte, supported in particular by Søren Albek and Jesper Sørensen Østergård from the Danish side (all of the Archaeology division, SAXO-Institute, University of Copenhagen). Merkyte has also been in charge of – and herself undertaken – most of the Titanic postexcavation work, as well as several in depth technological and other analyses extending to extensive comparative studies, even ethnographical observations. A number of specialists, acknowledged in the text, have assisted in various analyses. Unless otherwise stated, the chapters of the publication are by Merkyte and adhere to the general bibliography at the end of the volume. For reasons of convenience, other contributions have bibliographies of their own. The Lıga Project was carried out by postgraduate ˆ and undergraduate students from a variety of academic fields. It demonstrates the international potential and engagement of an emerging generation of European archaeologists, willing to acquire new skills in languages, archaeological science, and organization, and having the audacity to put these to work in new fields. Lıga is also one of the most detailed settleˆ ment excavations ever in the Balkans. It has revealed stunning results in terms of household organization and social life in the Copper Age. The data are extremely plentiful and rich due to exceptional conditions of find. In almost all areas are important new observations, including a cemetery from the Copper Ageπ. A particular feature is individuality of taste, revealed between contemporary households. This fact alone is a challenge to traditional ceramic chronology – the latter tending to read ‘‘time’’ into diversity. Indeed, Lıga demonstrates the particular utility ˆ of digging well and having a wide perspective of things. It is hoped that Lıga will become a reference point ˆ in Balkan archaeological research; although a small site, and a limited excavation, it is of European significance, not least because of its location on the ‘‘Bridge to Europe’’ in the crucial fifth millennium BC. The Danes are very grateful for their Bulgarian link and collaboration, which incorporate many individuals and institutions, including the Institute of Ar-

6

Acta Archaeologica
the Bulgarian National Museum, sponsored by the Danish Foreign Ministry. Klavs Randsborg

chaeology, Sofia, and are reaching government levels, including the former Bulgarian minister of culture, Ivan Marazov, a friend. In 2000, the Queen of Denmark, Margrethe II opened an exibition on Lıga at ˆ

QF^_MF NA B[LDAQRKI FHIK/ SUMMARY IN BULGARIAN
K{rnovalkolisnoso rflizf c mfrsnorssa L{da rf namiqa na okolo 1 km rfcfqno os r. Sfliy, obzina Xfqcfn bqÄd, Plfcfnrka oblars (uid. I.1). Na 1.2 km gno os nfdo f qahpologfn eqtd obfks os r{ziÄ pfqioe, ihcfrsfn kaso SfliyQfetsisf. C nfdo ra pqfersacfni sqi rsqoisflni voqihonsa os valkolisa i fein os s. naq. “pqfvoefn” pfqioe mfget kamfnno-mfenasa i qannobqonhocasa fpovi. Ihrlfeocasflrkasa rsqasfdiÄ pqi hapoxcanfso na pqotxcaniÄsa c L{da eo dolÄma rsfpfn bfyf pqfeopqfeflfna os qfhtlsasisf os qahkopkisf na rflizfso c Qfetsisf, eop{lnfni r eanni os obfksisf Raeocfw-Dolfmanoco kalf i Pipqa. Sfhi eanni poqoeiva oxakcanfso, xf modas ea porltgas kaso eorsas{xno eobqa ornoca ha ihdqageanfso na moefl ha qahcisifso na porflizniÄ gicos c L{da, no kofso f ozf po-cagno i ha pqorlfeÄcanfso na ecigfnifso na voqa i iefi c qfdiona. Eorfda pqotxcaniÄsa na pqairsoqixfrki rfliza c Hapaena B{ldaqiÄ ra opircali pqfeimno iholiqani ÄclfniÄ, koqfliqani dlacno na bahasa na qahlixni sipocf navoeki. Mikqoqfdion{s na r. Sfliy pqfelada fena koqfnno qahlixna ristawiÄ, pqfeacaza po-wÄlorsna irsoqixfrka kaqsina, rqacnima r pohnasasa os cpfxaslÄcazisf rflizni modili c _gna B{ldaqiÄ. C sahi rcfslina ponÄsiÄ kaso pqorsqanrscfna oqdanihawiÄ, pqomfni c planiqockasa na rflizasa i rsqoisflnisf sfvnolodii, pqoe{lgisflnorssa na obisacanf, kakso i pqixinisf ha naptrkanfso im, biva modli ea b{eas porsacfni c fena po-yiqoka cqfmfca i dfodqaurka pfqrpfksica, qahkqicaza einamikasa na porflizniÄ gicos os k{rnasa kamfnno-mfena fpova. Obfks{s c mfrsnorssa L{da rf namiqa c kqaÄ na yiqoko plaso, ciroko 20 m i qahpologfno na 195 m naemoqrka ciroxina (uid. I.2 i I.3). Obfks{s c mfrsnorssa Qfetsisf f qahpologfn c{qvt r{zoso plaso. Na dohapae i rfcfqoihsok plasoso ima c{lnirs qflfu. Nor{s, na kojso f qahpologfno rflizfso c mfrsnorssa L{da f odqanixfn os rfcfq i d os efqfsasa na rfhonni posowi, a c poenogifso mt pqosixa malka qfka (s. naq. baqa), koÄso rfda havqanca rirsfma os sqi Ähociqa, ihcfrsni kaso Ähociq Doqni E{bnik. Qahkopkisf na rflizfso ra qahpologfni na obza ploz os 275 m2, bfh ea rf ckl xcas pqobnisf sqanyfi. E{lboxinasa na roneagisf caqiqa mfget 0.5-1.2 m. R{obqahno rsqasfdiÄsa na pqotxcanf ra poebqani opqfeflfni aqfali, c koiso aqvfolodixfrkiÄs konsfkrs f ihrlfecan wÄlorsno i c efsajl. Trsanoci rf, xf mÄrsoso f obisacano nfkolkokqasno. Naj-qannoso rflizf, naqfxfno L{da 1, easiqa os naxaloso na k{rniÄ valkolis. Rlfei os nfdo ra namfqfni ramo c oseflni xarsi os qahkopanasa ploz. C gniÄ kqaj na obfksa ra qfdirsqiqani orsanki os fena rdqaea, osnarÄza rf k{m p{qci voqihons. SÄ f imala maricna e{qcfna konrsqtkwiÄ i rsfni os plfs. E{lginasa j f 7.6 m, a giliznasa ploz obvcaza 39-40 m2. Oqifnsiqana f rfcfq- d. C doihsoxniÄ {d{l bfyf oskqisa xars os kamfnna narsilka, napqacfna os eobqf roqsiqan xak{l, r{e{qgaz pÄr{xnik i kauÄc kqfm{k r{r rlfei os coefn sqanrpoqs (uid. II.5). Kfqamixnisf r{eocf os gilizfso imas s{mna ihl{rkana poc{qvnors. NÄkoi os sÄv ra tkqarfni r dqauisna tkqara, kakso i r xfqcfn ili g{ls pidmfns (sablo 6:17), xqfh kofso cieimo rf oskqoÄcas os pqfeimno rcfslasa monovqomna kfqamika, vaqaksfqna ha rlfecazasa uaha. Nf bf namfqfno haeocolisflno obÄrnfnif ha pqixinisf ha naptrkanfso na rflizfso L{da 1. Nocoso rflizf – L{da 2 f ornocano okolo 4400 d. pq. Vq. (kalibqiqani easi). PoeqacnÄcanfso na sfqfna f pqfeihcikalo eop{lnisflni naqtyfniÄ na efrsqtkwiisf os pqfevoenasa uaha. Aqvfolodixfrkisf qahkopki bÄva r{rqfeosoxfni dlacno c{qvt masfqialnisf orsanki os soca rflizf. Nap{lno ra pqotxfni sqi giliza. SÄvnoso qahpohnacanf rf okaha lfrno, s{j

osqahÄcazi pqilogfnifso na sohi masfqial ha teoclfscoqÄcanfso. s{j kaso xarsixno qahkopanoso r{rfeno gilizf ima poeobna e{lgina (sablo 1). Os sohi pfqioe ra oskqisi mnogfrsco kfqamixni uqadmfnsi na poc{qvnorssa. Nfdocisf efrsqtkwii xarsixno hars{pcas ihsoxnasa dqaniwa na rflizfso L{da 2.0 m.d.3 m2. Vq. c feiniÄs.70 m. bÄva oskqicani hafeno c fenocqfmfnno r{zfrsctcazi giliza. Ihtxacanfso na navoekisf os kqfm{k (dl. oskqisi pqi qahkopkisf na L{da ra poelogfni na qfeiwa rpfwialihiqani ihrlfecaniÄ. II. Po crÄka cfqoÄsnors r{oq{gfnifso f sqÄbcalo ea hasqteni ecigfnifso po rklona. Hapaenasa xars na rflizfso nf f harsqofna.4¿6. So pokahca. Gilizasa ra oqifnsiqani rfcfq. saka i os rqacnisflno osealfxfni navoeiza. qahpologfno po-ciroko na plasoso. pokahca ihkl xisflno qahnoobqahif pqi nfjnoso pqoihcoersco i porsacÄ poe c{pqor r{zfrsctcazasa vqonolodiÄ. R{zoso cagi i ha nfmalobqojnisf kamfnni oq{eiÄ (dl. Po cqfmf na uahasa L{da 2. C{sqfynoso pqorsqanrsco obvcaza 37. pq. eoqi pqi liprasa na rlfei os opogaqfna mahilka. kolkoso sfhi os kqfm{k i kors. poltxfni xqfh R-14 i AMS ihrlfecaniÄ os Qfetsisf i L{da pqfepolada. Rflizfso L{da 2 f ihorsacfno rlfe pogaq. eo osqar{l r nap{lno ramorsoÄsflno hnaxfnif. hafeno r ihdoqflisf gilizni efrsqtkwii. f eorsidala 1900 m2 (uid. Pqotxcanfso na kfqamikasa (dl. Navoekisf. Rdqaea 3 f naj-e{lda os pqotxfnisf (sablo 1). a obisafmasa ploz f 34. Poeobna poeqfeba na kam{nisf Äcno oxfqsaca ornocisf na nÄkakca rdqaea. kakso bf trsanocfno xqfh opqobcaniÄ r q{xna ronea. a pfzsa – na rfcfqnasa. kakso na fgfenfcni ntgei. Qahmfqisf j ra 6. eoqi pocsaqÄ oqifnsawiÄsa na po-qannasa konrsqtkwiÄ (sablo 2). pqfrixaza rdqaea 3. pokahca fkrploasawiÄsa na rtqocini. IV i V). Rdqaea 1 eo dolÄma rsfpfn pqipokqica gilizfso os pqfeiynasa uaha. VII). Oskqiva rf i feinixni navoeki os K{rnasa ansixnors. C{nynisf qahmfqi na rdqaea 2 ra 7.90 m. R{porsacÄnfso na easisf. Xqfh opqobcanf r q{xni ronei bf trsanocfno.50¿5. Navoekisf os obqabosfna kors (dl. xf rkoqo rlfe naptrkanfso na rflizfso L{da 2 f porsqofno noco rflizf na Qfetsisf – Qfetsisf II. sqaeiwionno rc{qhcani r qahlixni uahi na kamfnno-mfenasa fpova. poeqfefni c poltkq{d ili ocal.8 m. Nfjnasa e{lgina f 8.1). pqoihvogeazi kakso os mfrsni. xf gilizasa os L{da 2 ra hafmali sfqisoqiÄ os 50 v 55 m.8 Acta Archaeologica gilizasa bÄva qahkqisi rfefm dqoba. a obisafmasa ploz hafma 28. kaso obzasa ploz na rflizfso.80 m2. pqotxcaniÄsa roxas. pq. Pqfh soca cqfmf gnasa mt xars f pqfc{qnasa c nfkqopol. pqfersacÄs wÄl rpfks{q os efjnorsi. kaso rlaboso osklonfnif na ihsok. koiso ihdlfgea ra bili r{zo solkoca cagni. IX). hadqaefni na 500-550 m2 nfobisacana sfqisoqiÄ. s{j kaso kfqamixni komplfkri. Ihdlfgea qahkopaniÄs aqfal popaea c pokqajninisf na rflizf os Qannasa Bqonhoca fpova.45 m. IhorsacÄnfso na obfksa c mfrsnorssa L{da f pqoe{lgilo eo okolo 4000 d. saka i na etvocni posqfbnorsi. VIII).5 m2. os koiso bÄva namfqfni orsanki os eca ineiciea. c rklonocfsf na c{hciyfnifso f ihkopan plis{k qoc r e{lboxina 0. Orobfno cagno ha qahbiqanfso na einamikasa na eqfcnoso rsopanrsco f ihrlfecanfso na gicosinrkisf korsi (dl. Nfporqferscfno eo . xf cvoe{s f bil qahpologfn na gnasa rsfna. Translation Petar Zidarov kaso soca rflizf f hadinalo os pogaq i xfqcfnasa doqÄla mahilka Ärno oxfqsacayf dqaniwisf na rsqtkstqisf. Vq. r{e{qga vaqaksfqni r{eocf ha ktlstqa Baraqabi os Qanno-gflÄhnasa fpova. kofso cfqoÄsno f rltgflo ha hazisa na eomayni gicosni. Sahi Äma rf easiqa okolo 875d. C rfcfqnasa xars na qahkopaniÄ sfqfn ra oskqisi mnodobqojni paqxfsa caqocik. V). a navoekisf os fena Äma r{r ridtqnors rf osnarÄs k{m qannobqonhocasa ktlstqa OqlÄ-Raeocfw. Rdqaea 2 cfqoÄsno mogf ea rf pqifmf ha rsaneaqsfn moefl. Eqtda Äma. R ihkl xfnif na rdqaea 1. xf qolÄsa na osdlfgeanfso na eqfbfn i na fe{q qodas eobis{k porsfpfnno pqfqarsca os efjnors r csoqorsfpfnno hnaxfnif ha pqfvqanasa. a yiqinasa c rqfenasa xars f 5.

Therefore. THE SITE LOCATION: GEOGRAPHY AND GEOLOGY Fig. Lack of finds and excavations. but artefacts. As a result. was one of the issues then discussed. or pastures) is situated about one kilometre north of the modern village of Telish in Cherven Briag Municipality. since the ‘‘Transitional period’’ in Bulgaria was also a transitional period in Danish prehistory – the transition from foragers to farmers. Tells are few in NW Bulgaria and studies of temporal change consequently less straightforward. did not help in finding an answer to the problems. J. becoming myths as we interpret them with our words. I. The aim was primarily to gather information for the Archaeological Map of Bulgaria. Pleven County (Fig. The site of Lıga is situated at the edge of a broad ˆ plateau. The first major archaeological investigation in the area was undertaken at the nearby Late Copper Age settlement of Redutite (‘‘Redoubts’’ – the Turkish army defending the area in 1877).2 km north of Redutite. In 1979. The archaeological site of Lıga (Bulgarian for ‘‘Grazˆ ing Fields’’. started the excavations in Redutite in 1977. indicating the presˆ ence of yet another Late Copper Age settlement. the Copper Age) and the Bronze Age.3). focus on a highly detailed excavation. The Turks constructed a lunette at Redutite. Northwestern Bulgaria (together with the Rhodopes) is considered to be the part of Bulgaria where Copper Age culture survived the longest. it is also the part of the country that has been ‘‘over- looked’’ in terms of larger Copper Age research projects. For a scholar with Scandinavian background this seemed to have an extra dimension. Interaction with Bulgarian archaeologists raised aspirations to seek solutions by taking action. which perhaps has seen the most substantial research in NW Bulgaria. rephrased. a site for excavation was chosen in a particular sub-area. The majority of settlement investigations in the region have produced a mass of isolated phenomena. which was at first acknowledged as an archaeological site during attempts to reconstruct the bastion in 1976 (Neikov 2001). which are historical events.1. V.D. and recreate the use of the landscape in the Copper Age as chains of large and small movements of people. Towards southwest and northeast the plateau has a wavy appearance. I. THE PROJECT The Lıga-project originated in 1999. he undertook several trenchsurveys in the area. the latter focusing on the classical tell areas. 20 m high and 195 m above sea level (Fig. Gergov.I. The Redutite site is located on the same plateau. 1. then of Pleven Regional Historical Museum. They are signifiers. are not. Bulgaria. INTRODUCTION History may be a myth. their ideas and actions. covering the gap between the Chalcolithic period (or. confusing C-14 dates. which can only be grouped with the help of one or another particular type of ceramic vessel. on the eastern fringes of Telish. The hillock chosen for the . etc. such as the Thracian plain or Northeastern Bulgaria. I. The idea was to piece all available evidence together.2 & I. The supposed ‘‘Transitional period’’. rather. Prown 1996:26. indeed from Ertebølle to Tragtbæger (TRB)/Funnel Beaker culture. he found rich graphite-painted pottery at Lıga. when the core ˆ Danish archaeologists of the project from the University of Copenhagen were guest students at Sofia’s State University. Geographical position of Telish in Bulgaria.1). Ironically.

I. Lıga site (↓). Lıga site.10 Acta Archaeologica Fig. view from SW.2. ˆ Fig.3. view from the North. ˆ . I.

However. The distance to the rivers is about 8 km. spring is coming early to the region (in mid-March the temperature of the soil is more than 5 æC 5–10 cm below surface. The edges of the plateaus have been favoured by settlers throughout prehistory. The Black Sea and especially the Mediterranean Sea have great water heat accumulation capacites (Issar 2003). It can be assumed that this area would have supported forest vegetation and been used for browsing and acquisition of winter fodder (Dennell & Webley 1975). summer temperatures are the highest in the country. 15 m long. open to chilly Continental winds/air streams from North and Northeast (Dimitrov 1979). which direct or block the movement of air masses. which encompasses heights between 30 and 200 m above sea level. The topography of the whole region is characterized by a series of plateaus.00 and 3. The site itself is situated on an area of the forest soils. and by the 10th of April – above 10 æC) (Dimitrov 1979). This process is still ongoing and has made a negative. indicate the site of a wedge. River Iskar also distinguishes itself by being a major access route through the Balkan Range. These have good water retention and humus contents ranging between 3. the villagers of Telish are noticing that wind directions are affecting the climate. generated by tectonic block fractures (Hansen 2000). determining the dynamics of the distribution of settlement. It is runnning in deeply cut valleys forming gorges. The area of Telish is also rich in subsurface springs. At the foot of the site there used to be stream. by the ranges of mountains.55%. moderately to intensely leached chernozems (characteristic of lower altitudes). had a higher sand component and were superbly suited for prehistoric crop cultivation. Autumn is also arriving at the same extended pace. occasionally. i. dark brown grey to grey forest soils (characteristic of higher altitudes. together with an easy route across the stream were critical in choosing the exact settlement site. the plateaus) and. ca. The remains of an old bridge. Compared with other regions in Bulgaria. By contrast. The seasonal erosion of the slopes at the riverbed made access to these clay deposits readily available. they are also framing the archaeological sites at Telish. Rivers Vit and Iskar are the two major tributaries of the Danube in the region. which even today are one of the few transport corridors of the North-South axis.. The immediate vicinity of the Lıga site is characterˆ ised by two types of soils. especially during the Late Copper Age. is making up the upper part of the plateau at Telish. with the creation of a local irrigation system. across the stream. Topographic features indicate that the stream was running towards the north and was part of the catchment area of the Vit. grey in colour. An 8–10 m thick layer of clay. which were created during seasonal runoff of water. though limited. CLIMATE The climate in Bulgaria is shaped by two adjacent major water basins – the Black Sea and the Mediterranean Sea – and. All this is suggesting that access to freshwater and clay. the main building materials. This enables the basins to act as temperature regulators of the overall region (Issar 2003). islands of degraded loess (Neikov 2001). discovered some 30 m south of the settlement.e. from 1960–1963 onwards. the mean temperature in January being around minus 1 æ (GHCN). impact on the preservation of the archaeological remains at the slopes. In terms of winds. The present variety of soil types in the surroundings of Telish is also encompassing small patches of alluvial soils. The soils to the West of the site. These are usually running from East to West.Lıga ˆ Lıga settlement is delimited by ravines in the south ˆ and north. The leached form of chernozems was most likely also easily accessible with prehistoric ploughing techniques. Due to the low altitude. the population has even created a local etymology to describe the cold western wind and the warm southern . but is cut off from these favourable effects by the range of the Balkan Mountains. they are basically considered highly fertile soils (Neikov 2001). Moderately leached 11 chernozems prevail. which are considered too heavy to till with prehistoric technology (Dennell & Webley 1975). Telish belongs to the Danubian hilly plain. The lowest winter temperatures are reaching minus 30–35 æC. the water of the stream is collected behind three dams in what is known as the Lake of Gorni Dabnik (Neikov 2001). the Danubian hilly plain is the coolest one. The North-South orientation of the regional river flows is also making an impact on settlement patterns.

seem to merge into as yet unsatisfactorily defined peripheral complexes’’ (Gaul 1948. this author argues in favour of use of the term ‘‘Chalcolithic’’ as opposed to ‘‘Late Neolithic’’ (Gaul 1948. In the summer. At the time. it can be demonstrated that the regions of Pleven and Vraca – with the largest concentration of sites of the Krivodol-Sal˘ cuta-Bubanj Hum Ia culture. Gaul was basing his arguments on the presence of natural copper in Bulgaria and on the plentiful copper implements in the Gumelnita culture (or ‘‘Bulgarian ¸ Mound Culture’’).12 Acta Archaeologica in a chain of events that caused the termination of the Copper Age culture. in 1938– 1939 (and published after his death in 1945. namely ª0. the term ‘‘Copper Age’’ seems a slightly more handy one and will be used here. reaching a maximum around 3500 BC. 105). Gaul was mentioning Okol Glava.g. one (Neikov 2001). he also became acquainted with finds from Bubanj. Todorova.. The regions have the lowest mean January temperatures in the country (only lowlands were considered. when shot by Germans as a prisoner of war). Gaul. Further to the south. at Sozopol and Ropotamo. The pattern was perhaps similar.H. where the mean January temperatures are above freezing. Still. By the end of the Copper Age (Phase Varna III). Mikov (Mikov 1948). In wintertime. Knowledge about the late Copper Age started to accumulate rapidly during the post-war period. In a publication of 1948 by J. 108). experienced by the early agricultural communities in the Balkans. winds are mostly blowing from the West or the North. The effect of the winds is more extreme on the plateau where the archaeological sites are situated than in the modern village. still on the coast. lying in the depressed plain. below 400 m in altitude). while the notion of Chalcolithic cultures is also accepted – semantics nonewithstanding. into environmental deterioration by droughts and floodings of the fertile plains (Todorova 1998). According to H. Such differences were. knowledge of sites which later became attributed to the western Krivodol culture was still limited. Bulgaria and Serbia. written after his research in the Balkans. Thus. but intuitively Gaul had grouped the representative finds in the same plate (Plate LXIV) of the publication. supposedly. the level of the Black Sea was lower than at present. During the late 1940s. to which Lıga belongs – ¸ ˆ are making up a veritable ‘‘depression of cold’’ in the winter. The eponymic site of Krivodol was partly excavated in 1946 by V.9 æC and ª1. western winds prevail. The development was paralleled in Romania. has become common in Bulgarian writings. and on the other. Gradual climatic warming transformed the favourable conditions. but the effects of generally warmer climatic conditions – peaking during the climatic optimum around 3800 BC – might have made the differences less perceptible (e. Staying in the Balkans. Todorova’s excavations in Durankulak at the Bulgarian coast have thus demonstrated that the water level there was 1 m lower than today. the highest water table compared to the present one is dated to the end of 5th millennium BC and later. respectively. H. material from these sites was treated as being part of the ‘‘Bulgarian Mound Culture’’. in terms of grazing potential during wintertime).0 æC. changing climate is seen as the first ‘‘Domino piece’’ THE COPPER AGE AND ITS CULTURAL AFFILIATIONS Use of the term ‘‘Chalcolithic’’ (rather than ‘‘Aeneolithic’’ or ‘‘Copper Age’’). mainly Bulgaria. when describing roughly the time-span between 5000 and 4000 BC. More dramatic to Copper Age peoples were the consequences of the Black Sea transgression (Todorova 1989). plotting temperature data collected during the period 1951–1990 (GHCN). related to tectonic movements caused by rapid melting of the Arctic ice (Todorova 1998). He recognised the presence of a Late Roman fortress . 79). The author rightly concluded that ‘‘the interrelations of our Mound Culture [ΩGumelnita] are swiftly observable ¸ on the one hand. Indeed. water tables were between 3 and 5 meters lower than today (Todorova 1998). stored at the museum in Nis and providing him with ˇ an opportunity to establish parallels between Okol Glava and Bubanj (Gaul 1948. northwest of the village of Gnilyane and finds from the caves of Morovica and Devetaki (Devetashkata). To what extent this information can be transferred to the Copper Age is too early to say. The situation only improves South of Sofia and East of Ruse/Osam.

. marks the end of the Copper Age.Y. The latter subdivided the discovered prehistoric cultural remains (of 2.2 m deep.Y. Each main settlement burned down. ˇ Georgiev (Bulgaria). Berciu established several layers at Salcuta. 1. A turning point in correlating available information and formulating future research directions occurred in 1959 at an international symposium in Czechoslovakia (Böhm & De Laet 1961). close to Nis. ˇ´ ˇ ´ The excavations continued from 1954 to 1958 (Garasanin 1957. on the left bank of Nisava. Two shallow moats. M. In 1947. subdivided into a. the composite name. but their findings were not mediated either. in 1916. which rises some 25 m above the surrounding valley.8 m in thickness) into 5 building horizons. and several others. Above this was found horizon II.Lıga ˆ (hence the local name of the site: ‘‘Tepeto’’ or ‘‘Kaleto’’) on top of thick debris formed during the Copper Age. who ¸ performed the first methodologically sound excavation in the country. Gimbutas (Lithuania/USA). The last. 1976). At the foot. The most import result was a subdiviˇ sion of the recognized building horizons into phases Ia (Late Copper Age). Mikov chose to put his excavation trenches in the western periphery of the site. His observations made on the characteristics of this cultural unit are still correct. more or less well defined ˘ ¸ phase is horizon IV. he discovered 8 or 9 building horizons.4 to 2. Garasanin started sysˇ ˇ tematic excavations of Bubanj after earlier trench surveys by A. The site is located on a tongue-like hillock. Due to natural landslide. These observations were later corrected by repeated excavation by B. The recovered evidence echoes the findings in Bubanj (Garasanin 1983).R. During the symposium. All the finds were taken to Berlin but never pub¸ lished. cf. In Serbia. were dug across the western land bridge during settlement phase IIb. together with the following horizon III. The cultural layers had a thickness ˇ of 2. Subdivision of the well-known Gumelnita Culture ¸ in Romania started in 1951 after the excavation of the hillock of Piscul Cornisorului close to Salcuta by ¸ ˘ ¸ D. all belonging to the Late Copper Age. and in 1919– 1920. S Romania (Oltenia. Ib and II (Early Bronze Age phases Baden-Kostolac and Cotofeni III) & III (Glina ¸ ´ III of the MBA) (1). Fig. b. I. Orsic-Slavetic in 1934 (Garasanin 1957). Garasanin (Serbia). The site is situated on a protruding ˇ tongue-like plateau. 195 m above sea level. Schuchhardt made a few trenches at Sal˘ cuta. thus ‘‘naturally fortified’’. this represents the early phase of the post-Chalcolithic period. Both Mikov and Nikolov mentioned the existence of fortifications (a stone wall supported by a frame of wooden poles) on the site in the Copper Age.5. the site attracted attention from a new team of Romanian archaeologists.0 m and 1. all knowledge about this important site is based on the four trenches made by Berciu. Concerned with the management of loose soils. Eastern Banat) and E Serbia (to Pelagonia and Skopje in the F. which is often used to denote affiliating cultural phenomena of the Late Copper Age in Eastern Serbia. River Botunya is running. The leading theme was the Neolithic (and ‘‘Aeneolithic’’) in Europe. the site was excavated by I. Andriesescu. G. but failed to publish the results. In 1917.50–3. Berciu defined the area of the KSB culture as NW Bulgaria. D. Bubanj-Hum Ia. The landscape at Krivodol is indeed dramatic. the chronological division accepted in Bulgaria is applied in the text. 1. and c sub-phases. Berciu (1961c). Materials from these layers define the Salcuta culture. N. So. Merpert (Russia). was excavated synchronously with Bubanj. a hill-top settlement. Nikolov (Nikolov 1984). Before him. Berciu (Romania). A western land bridge is connecting it with another hillock. This horizon. The only access is across a northern land bridge. ca. On top of layer I of the Early ˘ ¸ Neolithic Starcevo-Cris culture was the sterile layer ¸ ˇ of a hiatus. almost telegram-like statement by Berciu (1961b). Macedonia). Later surface finds at the site span from the end of the Early Bronze Age till 13 Medieval times. presented at the gathering in a short. Among 45 delegates from 17 different countries were scientists who today are justly recognised as the major developers of the present perceptions of cultural developments during the Neolithic-Eneolithic/ Copper Age in the Southeastern parts of Europe: M. Velika Humˇ ska Cuka. The steep hill where the site is located is practically unapproachable from three surrounding sides. C. ˇ Thus. This crucial event should thus be considered the birth of the notion of ‘‘Krivodol-Salcuta-Bubanj Culture’’ (here ˘ ¸ KSB). M. A neighbouring site. For the sake of uniformity.16 m and contained also Early Neolithic Stracevo finds.

but also known in a narrow strip of W Muntenia (the left bank of the . which primarily is recognized through cultural remains from NW Bulgaria. The valley of Struma.4. slightly modified. In Romania. albeit the latter region is also marked by other cultural impulses. The southernmost known site of the ˇ KSB culture in Bulgaria is Vaksevo-Skaleto (Cochadziev 2001). ˘ ¸ Bubanj and Gumelnita sites (1961a). Main Late Copper Age cultural complexes in Southeastern Europe. according to Todorova and Vajsov (Todorova & Vajsov 2001). this cultural group is mainly ˇ spread in Oltenia. in SW Bulgaria. is under the direct influence of KSB. Krivodol. Berciu also presented his attempts to make the first correlation of materials from the Salcuta. up to the river Olt. I.14 Acta Archaeologica Fig. ¸ PROFILE OF THE KSB CULTURE The KSB is considered a late Copper Age cultural group.

jars with two handles. the issue rests solely on special definitions and will be further discussed below. Intuition is often at help in the non-written world of semi-conscious filtering of overlapping cultural traits. bowls with inverted or thickened rim. highly polished. small squat cups and bowls with thickened and inverted rims. The characteristic shapes are cups. Tells are also the prevailing settlement type in the Kodzadermen-Gumelnita-Karanovo VI (KGK VI) ¸ ˇ culture. and made from micaseous clays (1976). the definitions are stricter. KSB is bordering towars the East on a big cultural complex termed Kodzadermenˇ Gumelnita-Karanovo VI (KGK VI). The earliest sub-phase is by this author named after the Brenitsa site. or. in caves. in Southwestern Romania. as well as voluminous amphoras (Garasanin 1976). there are no disˇ putes in considering the KSB as the successor of the Gradeshnitsa culture (Georgieva 1995b). Garasˇ anin defines the characteristic pottery of Bubanj-Hum as fine. The margins in E Serbia are rather wide. A rapid increase in the number of sites is seen during phases II–IV. incisions or pinched decoration. by ˇ contrast. and fire-vessels (cf. Generally. and the subsequent two after the Gradeshnitsa site (Nikolov 1992). In Yugoslavia. This is also the time when the cultural impact of this cul- . which are a rarity in the KGK VI complex. in case of bowls the whole interior is often 15 painted (Todorova 1986). pots and jars with narrowed neck and two or four handles. are two-handled cups. The middle Copper Age remains somewhat ephemeral. as well as in Macedonian Pelagonia (Tasic & Tasic 2003). In general. the temporal division suggested by B. were linked to multi-layered tell settlements. and the so-called plateau settlements in the KGK VI area (Todorova 1986). There are apparently no discussions as to the beginning of the Copper Age in Bulgaria (Fig. There have been several attempts to define some of the KSB settlements as tells (Todorova 1986. decoration includes graphite painting and colour incrustation (Berciu 1961c). The later development of the culture has recently become a subject of numerous discussions. where negative patterns overwhelmingly prevail (Todorova 1986). Thus. ¸ I.. Exceptions comprise settlements on pile platforms. according to ˘ ¸ Berciu. Nikolov has so far not been debated (Nikolov 1992). The surface is often roughened with the help of barbotine. below) (Todorova 1986). The settlers of the Vinca culture. Therefore. the priority when defining Bubanj-Hum sites was given to their topographic position. and Varna (Fig. biconic vessels. In Eastern Serbia the ´ ´ neighbour of KSB to the West is Vinca D.Lıga ˆ Olt and the southern part of Arges county) and in SE ¸ Banat (the county of Caras Severin). or. shortly.5). such as Negovantsi and Krainitsi. impressions. also rare in KGK VI. a site on top of Skopje hill is considered as the most western KSB outpost. ˇ Discussing pottery of the Krivodol culture in Bulgaria. The settlements were usually found on naturally protected elevations. with only Dyakovo site as representative in the Struma valley (Todorova ˇ 1986. in the KSB area. the description of KSB pottery is reflecting different scholarly attitudes towards variations and characteristics. the ceramic assemblage of KSB is defined by vessels with oppositely placed handles. Nikolova 1999). I. resulting in a variety of chronological schemes (e. Thus. and dominance of positive graphite decoration. the most plausible solution is to view KSB as undergoing four phases of development (Georgieva 1995b). KSB is spread in the Eastern part of Serbia but its influence is also identified in Kosovo. the earliest sites are known only in Bulgaria.g. Georgieva has demonstrated that in terms of macro-regional trends. Graphite paint is applied on vessel neck or shoulders. In Roˇ mania and Bulgaria. and beakers (so-called ‘‘kantharoi’’). while in Bulgaria. Among the distinctive forms of the Romanian Salcuta culture. Pottery styles and decorations are thought to be the most reliable trait in defining cultural regions. Todorova notes that the most conspicuous feature is the high amount of cups with double handles.4). where graphite painted pottery is prevailing from the coast to the Rila Mountains and beyond. Cohadziev 1997). What then is separating the KSB culture from the neighbouring cultural groups? In former Yugoslavia. and any shard with graphite paint would be considered as belonging to KSB. It is also believed that the KSB culture was formed in Western Bulgaria around the middle of the 5th millennium and then spread northwards and westwards (Georgieva 1995b). Thus. plugs for oven. Nikolova 1999).

The boundary is made between sites with painted pottery (graphite or white or red pigments) and those.6). there is still a lack of consensus on which phase should be seen as the earliest (Tasic ´ 1990. Lazic & Sladic ´ ´ ´ 1997).16 Acta Archaeologica Fig. represents the first or the second . which are lacking such decoration (Tasic 1990. I. Grey colour marks the period and sites with affiliation to the Krivodol-Salcuta-Bubanj Hum Ia complex (KSB).5. ˘ ¸ ture advances towards Eastern Serbia and Oltenia (Georgieva 1995b) (Fig. Eastern Serbia and the regions further west were the last to experience KSB impact. 1995. 1995. The stylistic analyses of pottery from the discovered KSB sites. have resulted in the definition of two main KSB phases. Apparently. creating some con´ ´ fusion as to whether Bubanj-Hum Ia. Chronological table with key sites discussed in the text and main cultural groupings. with graphite painted ceramics. I. Lazic & Sladic 1997). to some extent supported by stratigraphic data. This is indirectly confirmed by the lack of sites with more than one KSB occupation (as opposed to the multi-horizonal settlements in Bulgaria).

later joined by German and Austrian scholars. 67 – Vadastra. 59 – YakimovoMogilata. 63 – Slatina. 70 – Bubanj.6. 46 – Rakevo-Chuljov kamak. 11 – Mala Fucha. 42 – Okhoden. 71 – Rudna Glava. 15 – Pernik-Krakra. 32 – Sadovec-Ezero. 37 – Gabare-Dolnoto Kale. 14 – Radomir. 61 – Staliyska Makhala-Bagachina. 79 – Gadimilje. 23 – Lovech. 62 – Makresh. 27 – Kunino. 6 – Dragodan. 28 – Aglen-Ochilata cave. stage of KSB development in former Yugoslavia (Lazic & Sladic 1997). 58 – Sofronievo-Daneva Mogila. mentioned in the text. 38 – Telish-Redutite. 31 – Cherven Breg. REVIEW OF PREVIOUS RESEARCH The larger region of Telish first came into focus in 1934 with the excavations at Sadovec (Fig. 80 – Skopje. 3 – Drenovitsa. 60 – Miziya. 20 – RebarkovoMızhin grad. 43 – Georgi-Damyanovoˆ Markovo Kale. 50 – Montana. 25 – Gorna Kremena-Izvoro. ´ ´ especially those of former Yugoslavia. 49 – Okhrid. 34 – Sadovec-Golemanovo Kale. 21 – Rebarkovo-Dzhugera. 66 – Girla Mare. 10 – Kraynitsi. 1 – Kolarovo. 16 – Dushintsi. 12 – Izvor. 81 – Bakarno Gumno. 55 – Lekhchevo-Kostadin. 4 – Sandanski. 52 – Lesura-Gradishteto. will probably remain unresolved until a proper set of absolute dates is established.7). 22 – Mezdra. 57 – Krushovitsa-Borovanska Mogila. Distribution of investigated KSB Ia sites (dots). 13 – Negovantsi. Squares mark other contemporary sites in the region. ˆ 26 – Gorna Kremena-Zaminec. 35 – Pipra. 78 – Hisar. 5 – Kochan. At first. 74 – Kovilovo. 45 – Barkachevo-Kanov Vrakh. 17 – Gnilyane-Okol Glava. 68 – Salcuta. Bulgarian archaeologists. 73 – Smedovac. 40 – Telish-Lıga. 9 – Dolna Koznitsa. 51 – Lesura-Golata Mogila. 18 – Gulubovtsi-Pekliuk. I. 76 – Krivelj. 2 – Piperitsa. were investigating Late . 30 – Devetaki Cave. 24 – Staro Selo-Yordanovo Kale. 29 – Kameno Pole. 56 – Lipnitsa.Lıga ˆ 17 Fig. 75 – Zlotska Pecina. 8 – Yunatsite. 77 – Korbovo-Vajaga Pesak. 54 – Beli Bryag-Markov Kamak. 44 – Krivodol. The relation between KSB sites. 19 – Teteven-Morovitsa cave. 48 – BelotintsiKremenish. 47 – Galatin-Chukata. 7 – Vaksevo. I. 72 – Veljkovo-Kapu ¸ ˘ ¸ Djaluluj. 65 – Baile HerculaneHotilor Cave. 36 – Gabare-Marla. 64 – Ostrovul Corbului. 53 – Malorad. 69 – Humska Chuka. 33 – Sadovec-Kaleto. 41 – Bukovec-Zanogata. 39 – Banitsa-Milin Kamak.

as dated by coins) in a vicinity of Sadovec (Welkov 1935. Todorova Simeonova 1968. it was one of the fortified junctions to protect movement along the Roman road between Oescus (Gigen) and Stargosia (Pleven) (Neikov 2001). and Early Iron Age (Hallstatt material) (Todorova 1992. which later has been subdivided in Late Copper Age. Satellite map of the Telish region with distribution of known Copper Age sites (etc.18 Acta Archaeologica Fig. The site was occupying a rocky terrace steeply rising to more than 20 m above the riverbed of Vit. Pipra has been valued for its natural defensive features. Antiquity fortifications (6th century AD.). Another important archaeological landmark in Telish region is Pipra. Early (Orlea-Sadovec) and Middle (Glina III) Bronze Age. Alexandrov 1992). spread over an oblong hill of 65¿35 m. the location has also been valued due to abundant resources of flint in the lower part of the limestone terrace. comm. I. In prehistoric times. It has been established that besides Late Antiquity fortress buildings. Of these sites. situated 8 km south of the village. Like the site at Sadovec. in fact. Golemanovo Kale also contained prehistoric material. the site was briefly investigated (Gergov. pers. In the early 1970s. Later intensive pitting on the site by looters has also demonstrated that the central part holds at least five building horizons. there were traces of an Early Iron Age settlement.).7. The site was a natural stronghold accessible only from the north. Uentze 1992). which can be .

Sites of Ezero and Kaleto at Sadovec. which bear witness to significant episodes of abandonment. . The earliest settlement was founded in the Early Copper Age (Gradeshnitsa phase). all phases were interspaced by so-called hiatus layers. the research at Lıga was initially driven by the expectation ˆ to fill in these chronological gaps and to trace the dynamics of shifts in settlement in the micro-region. In fact. 61) (Fig. Despite the rescue character of this investigation. Significantly. No succession was recorded between the two Late Copper Age settlements. and is actually in two parts: a lower and older one named Sadovec-Ezero. and an upper and younger called Sadovec-Kaleto (Welkov 1935 (short note). attributed to the Copper Age.observation). SADOVEC-EZERO & SADOVEC-KALETO During the three fieldwork seasons at Lıga some enˆ ergy was invested in rescue work at a site. where excavations went on for nearly 20 years. primarily the earlier part of the KSB (pers. Note the rampart at Kaleto. Hence.2 km the two sites are not only geographically but also temporally related. 7 km southeast of Telish. Redutite turned out to be a well-preserved settlement with four temporal phases.8. The closest parallel to the settlement at Lıga is ˆ nearby Redutite. The site was discovered near Sadovec. Mitova-Dzonova 1979. which appeared to hold material from several Copper Age settlements. and the last one representing the initial phase of the so-called Transitional period (Gergov 1992a). Separated by the short distance of only 1. I. ˇ I. as seen from E.8).Lıga ˆ 19 Fig. all Copper Age settlements seem to have been burned down. while the two subsequent settlements were of late Copper Age.

without any significant interruption or dramatic material changes. The northern part of the hillock. The hillock. The two earliest occupation phases of Sadovec-Ezero site are dated to the beginning of the Copper Age.11). is higher than the southern one. This event took place during a period postdating the Copper Age and presumably before the Early Bronze Age proper. is approximately 173 m above the sea level. Thus. this site is truly exceptional. Due to the natural remoteness of the site. placed in prone position in a pit measuring just 65¿45 cm. forming a plateau. which is almost unnoticeable in the landscape since it runs deep down below the ranges. for the distance that had to be overcome between the two heights. surrounded by high and nearly 90 degrees steep ranges of limestone hills. aeolithic sand forming the occupation layers only accumulated on the southern part. Due to this natural form. It appeared that after the close of the Copper Age. I. abruptly separated by the river.20 Acta Archaeologica soil and vegetation. A narrow passage through the hills is cut by the river Belilka. the Kaleto settlement continued directly into the Early Bronze Age. the northern part remains uncovered by . Four of the settlement horizons had traces of conflagration while the remaining ones had been left to slow decomposition. was only 7 m. I. Among the most important finds was a burial of a woman.5–4. The Sadovec-Kaleto site was also heavily damaged by the looters. The trenches were actually ‘‘archaeological’’ in nature. the conditions of preservation were exceptional. spanning a full Copper Age sequence. The range of hills is rising over the site by 7 m on a northern side and by more than 15 m on the southern one.0 m thick. approximately 14 m above the river. their state of preservation was remarkable (Fig. Rescue work was therefore carried out there. Pottery of the so-called Transitional Fig. as well as several other trenches. at its highest and most northern point. I. The site on the hills is locally known as Sadovec-Kaleto.9). the site in the canyon was abandoned.10 & I. Apparently. and no traces of human activity have left any impact on its appearance. Western trench at Sadovec-Ezero. The looters had dug three main trenches reaching rock bottom through cultural deposits 3. encircling the hillock. Even in layers where clay items were not exposed to fire. too. Six building horizons were recorded in the largest trench. or less. In that sense. The investigation of the site was initiated during the summer of 2002 after reports on digs carried on by very active local looters. which could easily be cleaned and studied (Fig. a tributary of Vit. at that time. in particular Sadovec-Ezero yielded significant chronological and other information.9. with vertical profiles. Not long after the expansion. which will be presented in full in a future work. who had even used excavating machinery. During the Late Copper Age the settlers started to occupy also the edge of the northern range of hills. measuring 65¿40 m. the inhabitants must have started to use a kind of drawbridge. Traces of the earliest occupation were found on a saddle-like hillock. the settlement continuing on the more accessible plateau.

Period. Southern trench at Sadovec-Ezero. I. An interesting structure investigated at Kaleto was a semi-circular rampart surrounding the site from the accessible northern side and ending at the steep edges of the plateau. three times rebuilt. The rampart was constructed in two stone walls with compact layers of soil in between and a soil cover. Until now. Sadovec-Ezero. and adjacent storage bin. there are only a dozen of such Transitional sites known in the whole of Bulgaria. I. No doubt there has also been a palisade at the top. Remains of Late Copper Age oven.11.Lıga ˆ 21 Fig.10. the research objectives for Lıga and adˆ jacent sites were to a high degree dictated by the out- Fig. RESEARCH OBJECTIVES As implied. have been recognised in the collected material. as well as of the earliest Bronze Age (OrleaSadovec type). Storage bin of unbaked clay. The only archaeological finds recorded in connection with this unique structure were shards of the Early Bronze Age. .

etc. for instance. So far. As derives from the logics of these considerations. The main overall objective was to demonstrate the potential of integrated studies targeted to translate the cultural fingerprints of site and landscape into proper chronological sequences and cultural structures. come of the excavations at Redutite. hence to provide data for comˆ parative studies. supplemented with data on the so-called Transitional Period. producing case sensitive – or historical – results.22 Acta Archaeologica at a site as more important than the issues of cultural differentiation within each temporal episode. i. Thus. Presently. resembling those of the southern area of impressive tells. the chosen strategy is in contrast to both the usual Bulgarian excavation practice and the main trends within the Scandinavian archaeology. reflecting continuous spatial attachments: How can material data explain such differing subsistence strategies and. revealing the ‘‘dialectics’’ of a Late Copper Age settlement. changes in the ˆ planning of settlement and its architecture.. like the ones that could be experienced during the Communist era (e. most importantly. in the case of KSB. Scandinavian archaeology suffers from its own limitations: research projects have to give way to an administrative archaeology producing general models of house types. conscious efforts were invested at Lıga in ˆ identifying and disclosing all structures to their fullest extent. but to concentrate on few areas where the archaeological contexts could be investigated fully and at great detail. duration and causes of abandonment. Information on two Late Copper Age settlements. Therefore. could be set in a broader temporal and geographical perspective. The immediate eastern neighbour of the KSB – the KGK VI complex – is traditionally characterized by multi-layered settlement mounds. which have only been coupled up with the help of particular types of artefacts. tells. Complex approaches to the regional data enabled the perspective to be broadened in scope and to link a limited project to a much wider cultural-geographical setting. answers were also sought to explain the existence of seemingly opposed settlement modes in SE Europe. viewing the issues of temporal development . there are no big scale research initiatives.. followed by highly thorough documentation procedures. enabled us to study the excavated materials with an explicit focus on individual structures and activities. in Bulgaria.g. Todorova 1982). Most projects are designed to cover the depth rather than the width. This approach has. with an opportunity to produce and to piece together evidence into coherent historical sequences. observed through settlements with limited recurring use. settlements and land use but almost completely devoid of small-scale highly detailed information. The ambition in the present case was never to excavate the whole settlement. as at Redutite. less tangible mechanisms to sustain the social and spiritual equilibrium of society? With a full awareness of the fact that not all variables can be identified. for tracing movements of peoples and ideas. A different situation presented itself at Telish. issues such as the spatial organisation of the Lıga site. In this light. was considered a good starting point for building-up a local sequence of land-use and. several specialist studies were designed to produce a detailed cultural profile of the Lıga site. the majority of settlement investigations in Western Bulgaria have produced a mass of isolated phenomena. with limited funding for archaeological projects.e. The KSB culture is often defined by geographical fluctuation.

16–0.3). Despite sloping. such as flint chips and shards. were individually recorded in three dimensions with the Total Station. The excavated area at Lıga is 275 m2 (excluding ˆ survey trenches) (Fig. Digits and letters of the Greek alphabet were applied for labelling (Fig. it was obvious that this part of the hillock was never used for construction of any permanent structure. At the southern slopes the drillings revealed a thick layer of burned daub. ground stones. such as the floor area around a storage bin or an oven. an important task was to undertake rescue excavations at Sadovec-Ezero and Sadovec-Kaleto. The limits of the latter sondage were eventually expanded. a transect covering 2¿30 m was set along the topographically anticipated central axis of the site. This transect was orientated W-E. providing a prior understanding of the nature of deposits and soils. It covered one of the two minor survey trenches of 1979. all stones and flints. Bearing in mind. as a result. This made possible stratigraphic comparison between sondages and created a larger investigated area. the decision was taken to excavate only every second unit. Surface investigations at the site in 2000 did not reveal any specific concentration of finds. which undoubtedly had destroyed the pertaining structural cultural remains. II. flint or bone implements and their concentrations (e. still to be seen as depressions in the terrain (Fig. this trench was in turn subdivided into four sondages (nos. and burned daub. Other residues. To save time and man-power. In order to establish a sensitive stratified collection of finds.26 m thick) on top of a sterile layer of pebbles. intensive drillings were also undertaken.g. A dozen of shards were uncovered in a thin layer of humus (0. The re-opened survey trench. At the same time. In order to satisfy both the stratigraphic objectives and to catch the distribution of expected structural remains. THE ARCHAEOLOGICAL PROCESS METHODOLOGICAL CONSIDERATIONS & EXCAVATION TECHNIQUES The site of Lıga was excavated during three summer ˆ seasons from 2000 till 2002. laid across the old survey trench) and the neighbouring sondage (no. 1) did not reveal any evident traces of human activity. starting from the western limit of the plateau. 6A & 6B). All sondages were excavated in arbitrary layers of 5–10 cm. as well as particular samples. a strong indication of the presence of habitation structures. During the first season a special flotation plant was constructed.II. was intended as a control profile for the excavation of new trenches. becoming part of a large trench of 4¿10 m.1). All individual finds – diagnostic ceramic pieces. The said transect was subdivided into smaller units of 2¿5 m. containing one bucket. holding a local measurement pillar made of concrete at the top became the main reference point for mapping. A trench of 5¿5 m was opened for investigation (subdivided into sondages no. 8A and 8B). 5) contained substantial traces of habitation.8 m below the surface. During the third season. The bulk material was sorted and collected separately: pottery. that such a strategy would allow to establish only the western borders of the site. it appeared that both the control sondage (no. A Total Station was used in measuring. A nearby Thracian (presumably) tumulus. no. partly determined by the features of the landscape (rather abrupt slopes). After excavating a layer of humus 0.4 m thick. 7. 3. also gave limited results. 5. while during the second field-campaign a rather more efficient method was applied: The soil was collected into net bags with dense mesh. a new section was selected for excavation. II. Only a few potential palaeobotanical remains were collected as the result of these efforts. aimed at providing an overview of the entire area used for occupation. were also limited in number. 6A. The westernmost sondage (no. or soil excavated from the graves. which ensured a conversion of the relative measurements of the investigation to the absolute. this sondage was abandoned. 0. Soil for water sieving was collected from the areas of special interest. perhaps due to the already intensive attention given to such finds . and sieved holding the bags directly under a rapid water stream. but did not give the expected results. a heap of animal bones). Water sieving was persistently attempted during each season. animal bones.. II. The next sondage. Later drillings revealed the remains of structures in the easternmost part.2).

Albek.24 Acta Archaeologica Fig. EquidistanceΩ ˆ ˆ 0. All measurements were taken by S.5 m. Dense dashed line marks the extension of Lıga 4 (Early Bronze Age) settlement. II. a marks ˆ ˆ depression in the terrain made by earlier digs of 1979. Strong dashed line marks the area of the Lıga 2 settlement. Sondages in light grey were not completed. Weak dashed line marks the ˆ established borders of the Lıga 1 settlement.1. . Topographical map of Lıga with indication of the excavated areas and built structures of Lıga 2 (dark grey shading).

Sector 2 indicates a set of centrally lying trenches ˆ covering Houses 2 & 3 of Lıga 2. so that all sondages with the digit 9 are connected with House 1. Sample squares measuring 10¿10 m seemed to be optimal in responding to the requirements and aims of such survey. Plan of Lıga site with excavated sondages. Nevertheless. II. Sounding procedures by drilling revealed the northern and the eastern borders of the Copper Age occupation.. The new sondages were assigned a digit and a letter. to find the borders of the occupation. Distribution maps showed several concentrations. Dry sieving was also attempted.3). it can be stated that only limited information disappeared when water sieving was not applied. The immediate surroundings of the site were also investigated with the help of drillings with geological augers. view from E. A system of sections was also created (Fig. Sector 1 denotes a set of trenches lying on the southern slopes of the site and covering House 1 of Lıga 2. The surveys were based on field-walking. with digit 4 House 2. Generally. SURVEYS AND DRILLINGS Surveys around Lıga were conducted on several ocˆ casions with different degrees of intensity. Therefore. During the field campaign of 2001 the governing strategy was to uncover the total remains of the prehistoric houses. an area of approx. ˆ during the excavation. also with only limited results. II. Parallel alignments were set up with help of the Total Station and compasorientated N-S. The procedure entailed a team of 4–5 persons spaced at intervals of 20 m. compared with information gained by the drillings.3. All artefacts were collected per 10 m. but lumpiness and the severe dryness of the soil made this a very time-consuming task. Note depressions in the terrain – traces of earlier digs/survey trenches of 1979. Altogether. already investigated areas were surrounded by a new set of sondages according to predictions of the dimensions of the structures. Place of the central transect.e. This resulted in a higher awareness ˆ in sorting the excavated materials. The first field campaign partly uncovered the remains of three habitation structures. i. or to uncover possible rotations of settlement. though. the surveys helped to establish the existence of an Early Bronze Age settlement partly overlapping the Copper Age Lıga 2 settlement. then bagged and counted.Lıga ˆ 25 Fig. with a sieve mesh of 5¿5 mm. which appeared to be misleading. II. Large digits ˆ and letters indicate sondages excavated in 2000. the remaining – mainly in 2001 (additional work in 2002).4). makˆ ing the conditions of survey favourable. the transect alignment was dictated by the natural orientation of the field.2. 1500 m2 was intensively surveyed. The majority of the fields around Lıga were cultivated (especially in 2000). and with digit 10 House 3 (Fig. as well as for identifying new archaeological sites. These were aimed to establish the size of the settlement and its land-use. which also held Bronze Age finds. In some cases. Fig. The intensive surveys were focused on two prime . II.

Central part (Sector 2) of Lıga in the course of excavation. largely corresponding to the course of the past stream. leaving the highland for ritual activities and erection of tumuli. and the ˆ area around Lıga and the present-day dam. The mentioned stretch between the two sites did not provide a single archaeological artefact. the edges of the dam. The Neolithic and Early Copper Age settlements are found on relatively light soils. The people of the Early Iron age. while during later periods the higher lying and rather more dramatic plateau was favored for settlement. Differing traditions of settling are of great interest. moved back to the plains at the stream. despite repeated surveys. Different requirements for space and occupation are reflected in the settlement dynamics of the area. attracting settling and exploitation from Neolithic times onwards. as also those of the subsequent periods (data available until the 6th century AD). II. ˆ areas: the area between Redutite and Lıga. suitable for prehistoric tillage (cf. It apˆ peared that certain areas had experienced intense human attention throughout the past.4. since they demonstrate that continuous occupation is not needed to create spatial attachments. view from E. above). had evidently been a core-area. By contrast. Several shards of Late Copper Age date discovered in the earlier fields are clearly off-site .26 Acta Archaeologica Fig. Such areas were probably cleared long before the Late Copper Age occupation on the plateau. Cultural memories may take a general form and hence manifest themselves through recognition and identification of human alterations in a landscape. such as clearance activities or the presence of plants loaded with cultural significance. During the Neolithic and the Early Copper Age the lower lying areas on the left bank of the former stream were preferred. while others were completely ignored.

Periods of land cultivation have formed a thick layer of humus. it can be concluded that both humus-rich layers were formed after the 6th century AD. slightly acidic. Trenches dug for planting wines have caused much destruction of the archaeological remains. despite the absence of limestone.Lıga ˆ finds connected with the main Lıga occupation. indicating repeated clearance by fire – a practice which even today is widespread in the country. a shallow 0. The charcoal likely entered the debris after a fire clearing of vegetation at the time of establishment of the subsequent settlement. clay resources. Thus. they stripped the top of the hillock from soil. since the drillings did not produce any conclusive results regarding the area of occupation. Actually. the hillock was covered by a grey layer of sandy clay mixed with fine organic matter. The external length. At the end of the 19th century. which is closest to the stream. which was witnessing an attempt to expand the area of occupation. It is not known what caused the termination of the settlement.4 m in height. Nevertheless. The house in questions was orientated NS. The gravel is mixed with coarse and medium (grains 1–2 mm in size) yellow-reddish sand with carbonate inclusions. was not changed since this would have been inefficient. its extents have not been established. ˆ evidence indicates that the area on the left bank of the stream was heavily and continuously used for cultivation. which helped select particular areas as culturally suitable. Finally. The western slope. Based on stratigraphic observations. and the steepest. it is today uncultivated and used for grazing of communal herds of sheep and goat. long before becoming a nondescript plot of land. only some even areas. oc- . as could be measured from SITE FORMATION DYNAMICS The site of Lıga has been the scene of many activities ˆ in the past. as indicated by crushed pebbles and a darker colour created by accumulated organic matters between the pebbles. When the houses were built. The lower and darker one has a significant amount of charred remains. Clay was the main building material and a high content of organic matter in the destruction layer points towards the use of a wattle and daub technique.4 m. the settlers were not trying to create a level surface everywhere. differing 0. 3). soil types. whether the settlements were situated nearby or not. The northern slopes were not investigated. Two layers of humus-rich topsoil can be distinguished. exposing the pebble layer. The houses were more widely spaced than those of the subsequent settlement. they would appear to have been standing on low terraces. The layer of pebbles left around the houses would have been appreciated as natural pavements. Massive posts with a diameter of 25 cm were supporting the construction in some parts of the walls.3–0. including fragments of well-rounded quartzite and brown opaque flint. natural conditions (availability of water. This layer is highly calcareous. the western limits. The layer below is constituted by gravel and pebbles (up to 70 mm in size).45 m wide trench was dug prior to the erection of the wall. the site was made into a vineyard. The surplus soil was deposited down the southern slope. which generally was recognised as a grey unburned clayey layer rich in organic matters and small pieces of charcoal (1–2 mm in size). The settlers invested much energy in shaping the hillock and creating even terrain. the location experienced a series of differing human activities that inevitably changed its natural appearance (Pl. etc. Lıga 2. As the name (‘‘Grazing Fields’’) implies.) were no doubt at the base of any prehistoric acknowledgment of ‘‘tamed landscapes’’ (sensu Hodder 1990). partly. The most informative structural remains were discovered at the southern edge. 27 casionally used for knapping. The Lıga 1 settlement had a general orientation of ˆ SW to NE. In fact. Before anthropogenic impact. The thickness of the layer is 0.2–0. As the first settlers started to prepare the surface for construction of dwellings. recurring occupation at the same site – as during the Late Copper Age – seems to indicate the existence of certain cognitive templates. On the rather unstable southern side. Except for the southern and. The first settlement was ˆ only acknowledged in the southern and eastern parts of the investigated area. ˆ LIGA 1: FIRST COPPER AGE SETTLEMENT The first settlement at the site – Lıga 1 – was estabˆ lished during the earlier part of the Late Copper Age.

numerous limestones were discovered. was possibly also covering remains of a previous construction. The fact that the low house mounds comprised of unburned clay was appreciated. among which hammer stones were the most frequent. Sondage 8A).5). who used them as foundations for their own dwellings. ˆ LIGA 2: SECOND COPPER AGE SETTLEMENT Fig. even when lacking preserved burned daub. II. With a slight deviation towards the East it followed the orientation of the earlier construction (Pl. causing severe destruction of the debris of the previous occupational phase. the house mounds were clearly visible for the new settlers. Lıga 1.5. although the relationship between the two structures could not be established due to lack of more substan- . below). and reddish burned ˆ daub clearly outlined the structures. For how long the Lıga 1 settlement remained abanˆ doned before the new occupation is difficult to tell. was 7.6 m. 26:6). which displayed a semi-circular or oval pattern. II. Their identification was easy due to the fact that the settlement of Lıga 2 was burned down. The archaeological record concerning Lıga 1 is ˆ thus preserved the best at the southern slopes. Such layers make good floors. At the SE corner of the house was part of a regular stone pavement made of waterworn well-sorted cobbles of sandstone and brown flint reaching 10–12¿5–10 cm in size (Fig. One of the most spectacular finds comes from the area inside the house (sondage 9V. In the northern part of the excavated area. 2). thus preserving the grid of space-use established by the Lıga 1 settleˆ ment. animal bones and stone tools. Stones in such configurations are obviously structural features. in fact house foundations. terracing was more pronounced now and a more elaborate design of the settlement created. ˆ preserved postholes as well as the extent of destruction debris. on the southern slope. The floor inside the house was lime plastered (Pl. House 1 was discovered almost exactly on top of the house from the previous occupational horizon. remains of stone pavement. Around 4400 BC calibrated (cf. a new settlement – Lıga 2 – was established at the site. enabling the preservation of a coherent surface during the entire use-life of a dwelling. providing fine and easily formed foundations for the new dwellings. whitening of the walls are not adding more light to the internal space. Only one layer of floor could be recognised. Computer-aided lightsimulations reveal that whitening of floors is the most effective means to increase illumination of interiors as light is reflected off the floors (Larsen 2003). was a thick layer of discarded pottery. On a material scale – primarily pottery – the change is dramatic.28 Acta Archaeologica southern profile). Level ˆ terraces were created on the remains of the Lıga 1 ˆ dwellings. As a consequence. Three dwellings were fully investigated. 3. The archaeological investigation was mainly concentrated on the material vestiges of this settlement. By contrast. At any rate. It is a flat female bone figurine with good parallels at other Late Copper Age sites (Pl. as could be deduced from the occasional occurrence of large fragments of pottery. Beyond the outline of the house. House 2.

This trench was dug to create steeper slopes. 3. due to their distinctive ornamentation and contrasting bright red colour. No structures or features can be related to this period. The same sort of material was discovered at this very site in Lıga 1. Finally. The closest settlement of Early Copper Age date is situated just across the stream. rising higher than House 2. The Lıga 2 inhabitants also made modifications ˆ to the hillock.Lıga ˆ 29 Fig. The Redutite site also held evidence on a conflagrated Gradeshnitsa settlement. Only insignificant amounts of shards from the Lıga 2 ˆ settlement were discovered on the slopes and at the foot of the hillock. tial debris.7. II. dated to the Early Copper Age Gradeshnitsa culture were found (Fig.7).8 m deep. may now have encircled the entire hillock (Fig. food remains. so the most apparent explanation is that they were brought to the site by the Lıga 2 inhabitants. A posthole (15 cm in diameter) near the trench on the western slopes perhaps indicates that a fence was erected along the trench. The area ˆ below House 3 was not fully investigated. II. it should be noted that a handful of rather big and thick-walled shards. tentatively. according to the excavation profile (Pl. mere three shards. The survey trenches also proved that discard of waste was controlled. ˆ Fig. II. C–D). in particular towards the West. A–B). ˆ perhaps as exotica. but clear traces of previous occupation were established. The said shards all have traces of severe secondary burning. With the help of two survey trenches across the western and southern slopes.6). often with white lime incrustation. separating the latter from the settlement. was found in the waste area at House 1. The distribution of these shards at Lıga does not present any particular ˆ pattern. II. . even though it is marked by a dramatic change in pottery technology (see below). The area East of House 2 was used for discard of broken pottery. except that the highest number. Apart from that. be assumed that the gap between the two settlements was not of a significant length. it has been demonstrated that a shallow ditch or trench. 3. demonstrating that older structural remains were used to create a level terraced platform for a new dwelling. 1. Based on these observations it can.6 Survey trench dug across the Southern slope. there is only one more known Early Copper Age settlement in a vicinity of Telish (Gergov 1994). ornamented with deeply incised lines and pits. ca.5 m in width and 0. Pottery of Early Copper Age Gradeshnitsa culture found at Lıga. and especially ashes (Pl.

At that time.20¿1.8). In the same pit were other Early Bronze Age shards with exact parallels from the neighbouring sites at Sadovec. A 6 mm broad flattopped tool was applied for decoration. one grave holding remains of two individuals.50¿1. and a fine surface finish. The dark brown clay loam fill can be associated with domestic activities. which are either broad flat and ribbon-shaped or semi-oval and narrow. II. The proximity of C-14 and AMS dates available from Redutite and Lıga implies that soon after ˆ the abandonment of the Lıga 2 settlement a new ˆ settlement was established at Redutite. found mostly in Sector 2. Redutite II. II. This had an oval shape and was orientated SE-NW. ˆ Fig. The abandonment of Lıga site lasted until ca. This vessel differs much from the main body of Early Bronze Age shards discovered on the site. the dimensions being 1. Also. The rims are usually cranelated. In the excavated area alone. seven graves have been discovered. In most cases.8. II. The occupational debris of this was partly overlapping the eastern limits of the Lıga 2 settlement. which are organised in a herringbone pattern. since original slipped surfaces were rarely preserved (Fig. It is decorated with very shallow grooves resembling fluting rather than grooving (hence often called pseudo-flutes). partly intact at the time of deposition. at least 10 fragments of one distinctive vessel. including fragmented pottery. One of the shards discovered in the Early Bronze Age pit. and other organic material. 4000 ˆ BC. Early Bronze Age pottery from Lıga. the southern part of the site was selected for a cemetery with several burials. Comparative pottery is found at Sadovec- .30 Acta Archaeologica Fig. II. The full extent of the Bronze Age settlement was not determined. Besides scattered pottery shards. as has been established through ˆ drillings. but surface finds from the surrounding fields point to a considerable size. Incised decoration is found on the handles. and often with a row of perforations just below the lip. ˆ LIGA 4: EARLY BRONZE AGE During the Early Bronze Age the excavated area was part of a marginal activity zone for a settlement higher up on the plateau. both in terms of a very fine sand matrix. medium brown colour. were recorded from the upper layers of the pit (Fig. below. ˆ LIGA 3: COPER AGE CEMETERY The Lıga 2 settlement was abandoned after a conflaˆ gration. Such elements of decoration have a very broad spatial distribution and a rather long temporal duration.9. Early Bronze Age pottery could be separated easily from Copper Age pottery due to its medium to coarse sandy fabrics and rough feel. straight or everted. Such decoration is common during the Cotofeni I phase (Roman ¸ 1976). one pit is with certainty attributed to the EBA.9). Applied decoration is known as well.15 m. a few bones. This significant discovery is described in Chapter XI.

1995). Historical Museum of Lovech. LıGA 5: EARLY IRON AGE ˆ Around 875 BC (charcoal. soil from the lowest layers being thrown ‘‘back’’ into its original horizon. However. since the place chosen held thick debris of burned Copper Age daub belonging to the walls of House 3. 1. while urns with tall. and with 10 visible rings). in Southern Romania and Northern Bulgaria). The author is grateful to Claus Malmros. National Museum of Denmark. ` The cultural profile of the larger Telish region is not yet completed. Finally. Diagnostic flint artefacts support this date.97 m). BA on the basis of the pencil drawings by project participants to whom the authors are grateful. SadovecKaleto (unpublished.worldarchaeology. horizontally fluted necks are less common. All vessels held traces of severe secondary burning. all the drawings of the present publication are made by Izolda Maciukaite.e. Immediately after that. Today. A fine comparative material is displayed by the grave goods of the Sofronievo tumulus. It is generally believed that the Basarabi culture started around 800 BC and. All four vessels were identified by M. Todorova and V.12 m was dug and at least four vessels placed in it at the bottom (the area below profile baulk. Contact information: www. resembled the pottery of the Lıga 1 ˆ settlement. Close parallels are also found at more distant sites like Ezero (lower horizons. partly intersecting the pit. according to differing views. 1996). pers. Dimitrova. Probably.). recent reconsiderations of available. So far. were decorated with corded and cardium impressions. found on both banks of the Lower Danube (i. bearing in mind that from first sight the discovered fragments of urn-like vessels. it corresponds with the end of Cotofeni I as recorded in N-NW Romania ¸ (the Banat.90¿1. cf. 31 The cup was placed inside the bowl. Transylvania. which broke them. Excavations by H. MA for analysing the wood samples. organised in festoons. A big limestone was thrown on the urnlike vessels. with their black shiny surfaces. This actually caused some confusion in recognition of the extent and depth of the pit. A1) (Gerogiev et al. 0. 2725∫40 BP) a strange ritual was taking place in the central part of the hillock of Lıga. existed till the 6th or the 4th century BC (Hänsel 1976).net .26¿ ˆ 1. as being from deciduous oak (Quercus sp. Chronologically. 1996). Ua-20609. 1979). Roman of the existence of a distinct cultural unit termed OrleaSadovec culture (Todorova 1992)..10¿0.). Consequently.comm. this ˆ 2. Bowls with fluted rims as well as cups with tall handles are widely spread in this region throughout the whole of the Early Iron Age. Digging the pit was not an easy task. though limited data suggest that Orlea-Sadovec should in fact be viewed as a southern variant of Cotofeni I culture (Alexandrov ¸ 1992. the shallow one being used as the fireplace where the above vessels received their secondary burning. all temporal ordering of Basarabi material has been achieved through correlations with metal finds.90 m to the South of this pit was a circular shallow pit (dimensions of 1. and Mouselievo (Gergov 1979). the Bronze Age pottery from Lıga should also be dated to Early Bronze Age ˆ I. and N Oltenia) (Alexandrov 1992. was not investigated and possibly holds additional information) (Fig. 1992). Velkov in 1978 at Sadovec-Golemanovo Kale gave grounds to support the suggestion by P. II.10) (1). XVI–XII) (Katincarov et al. With few exceptions. and Dikili Tash (IIIa) (Seferiˇ ´´ ades 1996). Vraca region (Hänsel 1976). This contained flecks of charcoal and larger pieces of calcinated wood (up to 7 cm in diameter.Lıga ˆ Golemanovo Kale (Todorova 1968. Perhaps an attempt to expand the pit in direction of softer soils resulted in its oblong form. this inhumation grave was dated to the 7th century BC. Two samples of wood taken from the pit were recognized by C. Their provenance is unknown. Based on metal finds. Two urn-like vessels with tall necks. An oval deep pit of 1. Malmros (2). the two pits are associated. it should be mentioned that a few shards were found which might be attributed to the Late Bronze Age. above). A settlement of Early Iron Age date was identified at the foot of the plateau some 100 meters South of the Lıga hillock (Gergov. Yunatsite (lower horizons. horizontally fluted. including a bowl with fluted lip and a big cup with one handle going high above its rim. the pit was filled with the same soil as it was dug into. Bulgaria as representatives of the Basarabi culture.

the find is an important contribution to the study of the Early Iron Age. It appeared that a cup from a sealed Early Iron Age pit (Pit no. and some seeds of Trifolium sp.32 Acta Archaeologica Fig. settlements of this period. are known from both banks of the modern lake. It provided information on contemporary pottery as well as news on the dating of Basarabi vessels.6 m) was recorded on the southern slopes of . ˆ A large. as based on one rather precise AMS date. II. the contents are sealed by mud plaster. Vessels discovered in the Early Iron Age pit in Sector 2. At Telish. (sorrel). Material of the Early Iron Age is often found in pits without clear structural affiliations or even purposes (Georgieva 1991). (sedge). The content of the Lıga pit was not investigated ˆ palaeobotanically.5¿ 2. and most probably also a cemetery. A comparable situation has been palaeobotanically analyzed by M. Carex sp. (native clover) were also found.10. ˆ LIGA 6: LATE ANTIQUITY (6TH CENTURY AD) The period between the 4th century and the end of the 6th AD (in some studies. but the remains are rapidly disappearing due to digs and deep ploughing by the treasure hunters. Southeastern Bulgaria) contained a considerable amount of seeds of Lens culinaris (lentil). The end of Late Antiquity is represented at Lıga. nevertheless.7¿0. settlement is destroyed by the modern lake and only the occasional shard can be found on its banks. fruits of Rumex sp. 3) at the site of Cheshmata (Rogozinovo village. Lazarova and I. Stefanova (Lazarova and Stefanova 1997). the beginning of the 7th AD) is known in Bulgaria as Late Antiquity or Early Byzantine period. but shallow pit (max. Sometimes. dimensions: 4.

Possnert). including small fragments of pottery and animal bones. which are not covered by the C-14 sequence (Warren and Hankey 1989). the rims date to the 6th AD (Kuzmanov 1992. Following the suggested dating from Sadovec. it has been suggested that cultural invisibility of the period between the end of the Copper Age and the Early Bronze Age may stem from methodological limitations. ˇ Another problem is that C-14 dates between about 5500 and 4000 BC tend to cluster in certain periods. Altogether.5). 487 samples from 60 different Prehistoric sites have been dated (Görsdorf & Bojadziev 1996). to judge from the archaeological record (Görsdorf & Bojadziev 1996). much resembling that of a pit house. Pottery discovered in Late Antiquity pit in Sector 1. Very heterogeneous contents of the pit. All samples underwent standard laboratory procedures. The nearest Late Antiquity settlement was identified during surveys less than 200 m NW of Lıga. Therefore. suggest that the structure was used for secondary disposal of waste. 219). corresponding to the much-disputed Bulgarian Transitional period (Warren and Hankey 1989). since the pertaining calibration curve displays no significant ‘‘platforms’’ or the like. but eventually the initiative was given up. 33 Fig. This chronological peculiarity. All the discovered rim fragments represent kitchenware. Galatin. which seems to be repeated throughout SE Europe. this pavement hindered further digging of the pit.11. attempts were made to remove the stones. the Late Copper Age materials from the sites of Banyata (Kapitan Dimitrievo).Lıga ˆ the site. AMS DATING AND POSSIBLE ANOMALIES Most Bulgarian C-14 dates have been generated by the Berlin C-14 Laboratory. but its purpose is uncertain. Georgiev & H.12). Samples collected from Lıga were submitted to the ˆ Ångström Laboratory. It is a matter of local pottery. this is doubtlessly associated with the pit. Sweden and AMS dated by G. Division of Ion Physics. Quitta & G. Todorova). but more likely to the influence of regional natural phenomena (Bojadziev 1994). Such large body of inˇ formation is generally a reliable tool for solving the main issues of cultural development. At the same time. partially destroying Copper Age layers. Right at the southern edge of the pit was a shallow posthole with a diameter of 15 cm. grey in colour.11). Possnert. including pre-treatment with NaOH. Kohl) and the Bulgarian Institute of Archaeology (G. and Kolarovo (all clearly belonging to the KSB sphere of influence) have been made one thousand years too young. ˆ The pottery discovered in the pit finds exact parallels in the material known from Sadovec (Kuzmanov 1992). cannot be fully explained at present. These . Apparˆ ently. The pit had a rather regular. The most pronounced gap in C-14 dates lies between 5050 and 4550 BP.). II. At the southern edge of the pit was a pile of stones originating from a Lıga 1 pavement (Fig. made of well-prepared clay without any tempering inclusions or coating of the surface (Fig. Uppsala. II. The bottom of the pit thus follows the surface of the stones. II. the ˇ whole Copper Age has been dated to a span of time of only 500 years (4900/4800–4370/4330 BC cal. Firstly.) (Görsdorf & Bojadziev 1996). Within the framework of cooperation initiated in 1962 by the Laboratory (H. Studies made by Warˇ ren and Hankey in the Aegean have also demonstrated that radiocarbon dates tend to cluster and that there apparently are certain periods. but in this case certain peculiarities are revealed. seven samples were submitted: four of charcoal and three of bones (Fig. Perhaps it is due to as yet unknown physical factors. apparently rectangular layout (just one half of the pit was excavated). a phenomenon which is not related to calibration. II. One of the problems concerns the Copper Age. while relative chronology suggests a duration of the Copper Age of 800–900 years (4900/4800–4100/ 3900 BC cal. and the results were d 13C corrected (as reported by G.

34 Acta Archaeologica Fig. Fig. Table of all available Late Copper Age radiocarbon dated samples from Lıga and the core area of KSB Ia complex (cf.12. II. ˆ . II.13).

trees of three sizes were used by the house builders.12). The postholes indicate that.Lıga ˆ 35 Fig. II. the area of waste disposal. Conventional and calibrated radiocarbon ages of all available samples recovered from the core area of KSB Ia complex. AMS dating of this temporal ˆ episode being considered the highest priority. Ua-20610 – close to the oven of House 3). sorted by age (cf. Fig. the source of all three samples. Three selected samples were associated with each of the three excavated houses (Ua-20607 – outside the E wall of House 2.13. can be subdivided into several size/age categories. besides twigs. samples were selected from quite a significant number of samples based on their representativity. The big- . Architectural wood. Ua20608 – inside House 1. II. context and amount of charcoal in the sample. The attention was centered on Lıga 2.

A single sample of charcoal was recovered from the Early Iron Age pit (Ua-20609). even with grave goods. gest quantity was of trees 8–9 cm in diameter. three human bone samples were selected from the . and the third – the internal roof supporting posts – up to 25 cm in diameter. This settlement was only poorly preserved. Later on.13). possible occurrences of the last group were discarded in order to minimize the ‘‘old-tree’’ effect. In sorting the samples. Calibration plots of all available C-14/AMS dates from the core area of KSB Ia are presented in a separate table (Fig. raised important quesˆ tions regarding their date. while the third (Ua-21564) is marked by a significant divergence and therefore regarded as false.36 Acta Archaeologica same burial. Low probability margins do not give grounds to doubt its validity and makes it an important contribution to the regional chronological sequence. Two of the dates (Ua-21562 & Ua21563) show close temporal affinity. the next group being about 15 cm in diameter. Lıga ˆ 1. it was affected by the stabilizing chemical treatment exercised on some of the badly preserved principal bones. the debris was incorporated in the base of the subsequent Lıga 2 settlement. For the sake of consistency. It should be noted. that no charcoal samples were recovered from the earliest settlement horizon. since it was abandoned and left exposed to natural decomposition. ˆ The presence of graves within the settlement of Lıga 2. Likely. II. No charcoal samples could be associated with the Early Bronze Age remains at the site.

despite the limited area of reˆ search. which were scanned and processed accordingly. All measurements. Whether this was a palisade or merely a fence. . Perhaps this field indicates the direction of local movements and networks with no hostilities to be expected from the East (cf. As mentioned. below). The general layout must neverˆ theless have been quite similar in the two phases. The Lıga settlement with two occupation ˆ phases of Late Copper Age date is not an exception. which perhaps were less aggressive then due to generally warmer climatic conditions. the field of visibility extends longer. it had to cope with the severity of the western and northern winds. The estimated external length of the one uncovered. Neolithic occupations at Karanovo or Ovcharovo-Gorata (Todorova & Vajsov 1993). Such structural clustering is also advantageous in terms of protection from hostile attacks and creation of sheltered workshop places outside the buildings. the slopes were made steeper ˆ by a shallow ditch or trench (only 0. construction of the latter ˆ disturbing the remains of Lıga 1. the only possible source of mistake may be an inaccurate scale in published plans. Similar installations were not observed at the eastern edge of the settlement. But it is restricting in terms of rebuilding or expansion of old structures.III. being 7–8 km towards NW. The discovery of a posthole 15 cm in diameter on the eastern side of the trench perhaps indicates that a wooden construction was accompanying the trench. And often it had been fatal in promoting fast and unreversible destruction of settlements by fire. Among the best examples are Early Copper Age tells like Polyanitsa (NE Bulgaria) or. A uniform clustered pattern of house structures is also noted at Lıga. The idea of a settlement mode with a uniform and dense layout of house structures interchanging with axially orientated streets or paths is no doubt a reflection of contemporary templates of spatial organisation. The very edge of the plateau was left unbuilt. during Lıga 2.8 m deep). as clearly demonstrated by the N-S orientation of all structures on the site. if not stated otherwise. A modification of the latter idea is the likely existence of forested environments towards the East. the traces of the first Copper Age settlement (Lıga 1) are not so well preˆ served as those of Lıga 2. Nevertheless. the estimated internal space being 39–40 m2 (1). Visibility towards the East is limited by a raising terrain. The location of the structures in the settlement confirmed the observation that their distribution and orientation were predetermined by those of the first phase.1). Within the area of the KSB culture. THE COPPER AGE OCCUPATION ˆ AT LIGA USE OF SPACE WITHIN THE SETTLEMENT An upland position is common for the majority of KSB sites. One of the preventive responses was to create a dense configuration of houses within the settlement. Also if they once 1. partly preserved house of Lıga ˆ 1 is 7. even earlier. The hillock chosen for the Copper Age settlements – at the edge of a plateau – has only limited defensive properties. It is even possible to detect temporal changes in use of space by comparing the two Copper Age occupations. have been undertaken with the help of GIS. Located on an exposed plateau (Fig. III. such arrangement intended to inhibit movement both down and up the slopes. The dwellings of Lıga 1 ˆ ˆ were spatially more dispersed as well as larger in size than those of Lıga 2. 3 km towards W and 5–51⁄2 km towards SW. As mentioned. Here three building horizons were applying the same concept of use of space. Therefore. it can ˆ be concluded that the use of space in Lıga 1 was less ˆ constrained than in Lıga 2. A much deeper insight has been achieved about the use of space in the Lıga 2 settlement. such traditions of settlement organisation can be traced back to the related Early Copper Age.6 m. as demonstrated by the distribution of houses at Gradeshnitsa (Nikolov 1974). This area of 500–550 m2 was delimited by slopes in the West and rows of houses in eastern direction. Towards the West. Three ˆ houses were fully uncovered together with parts of another three houses. which originated in the densely occupied tell settlements.

there is a tendency for larger houses to be centrally located in the settlement. Lıga site. the total area 44. so that spaces between houses were ‘‘closed’’ by the walls of adjacent structures.3 m2 (Pl. They could not have been an effective protection against attacks.45 m long and 5. view from the West.38 Acta Archaeologica Fig.00 m wide and orientated E-W. the internal area being 34.45 m2. rectangular and orientated N-S. The external dimensions of House 2 are 7. House 1. was the smallest. 2). 1900 m2.80–3. it is safe to predict that the . similar enclosures at edges have been attested in other Late Copper Age settlements. ˆ 50¿55 m. be it a formal demarcation or enclosed spaces for livestock.1. House 2 is perhaps the one. located on the southern slope. the internally available area is 28. Perhaps. as mentioned. House 3 was 8. II. it was necessary to ensure protection of this. which applies the best to a supposed standard.70 m (total area 36. including the fortified settlements of Zaminets and Lesura (Golata Mogila). The streets or passages of the settlement were 2. All houses were.70– 3.00 m and erected in a chequer manner.54 m2). The total area with burned remains of buildings extended over ca. Note the survey trench across the western slope. the orientation of the eastern wall). they would have been made in response to interior demands. The topographical profile of the settlement also hints at a specialised use of the delimited edge area. ˆ existed here. House 3 was the longest among the investigated houses (Pl. the main communal commodity. below).0 m. As the value of livestock was growing in step with the supposed relative decline of ground-water based agriculture (Sherratt 1980). with warriors approaching through the likely forested higher lying environments of the plateau. Incidentally. since a partly excavated neighbouring house had a similar length (Pl. Sounding of the terrain also helped establish that the houses of Lıga 2 were occupying an area of ca. the most frequent form of Copper Age warfare was not larger attacks but small-scale ravaging raids aimed at steeling cattle. The internally available area was 37. III. achievement of parallel courses of the walls was hindered by the circumstance that the altitude along the eastern wall was higher than along the western one. the total area 48 m2.5 m2. The houses were spaced by intervals of 0. Thus. the external dimensions being 6. The latter might at any rate have come as a surprise.4¿6.50¿5. Based on the available data and assuming a uniform distribution of the structures. A somewhat irregular shape is likely a reflection of constrains due to the terrain (cf. Likely.80 m2. 1). Vratsa region (Nikolov 1975) (cf. 1).90 m wide in the middle part (external lengths). however (Fig.1).

Workshops ˆ were probably often relocated.7 and 3. and that some concentration was observed at the SE corner of House 2. intense and temporarily restricted events. Despite the fact that heaps of bones and broken pottery were discovered at the northern wall of House 1. ˆ Numbers correspond to the numbering system of the investigated structural remains. and other Late Copper Age sites. Movement across the settlement was not straightforward. No formal outdoor divisions could be recog- nized. III. maintenance. as well as in the area between Houses 2 and 3. which had formed between Houses 2 and 3. not being place dependant. The area varies between 2. Rather.2). pers. Suggested reconstruction of the Lıga 2 settlement. Light grey colour marks predicted houses. Procedures for handling of waste are not completely clear from the excavation. The layer. and cleaning of furnaces left an ashy blueprint with inclusions of carbon. III. Dark grey colour marks houses.). since the entire interstructural space was often filled with heaps of household refuse. we are seeing reflections of unambiguous. incorporating space surrounding the houses. Such estimation is strengthened by observations from nearby Redutite. In fact. which have been established through excavation. this probably only represents temporary disposals of refuse connected with household activities. Several activity areas have been identified in the excavated part of the Lıga 2 settlement. which have provided full-scale information on lay-outs of structures (Gergov. such nucleated settlements could have applied an expanded notion of ‘‘habitus’’ (sensu Hodder 1990).Lıga ˆ 39 Fig. but pots and implements placed outside were perhaps used to mark the territory of a particular household. is domestic in origin: cooking. One had to follow the streets and fixed paths. Some of the activities. comm. but generally it seems that the majority of chores was conducted outdoors.2. settlement contained 20–22 contemporary houses (Fig. almost totally excavated. were also carried out inside the houses. since the discovered remains do not support an idea of permanent taskspecific areas.0 m in width and could never hold .

Andreasen (2). 1975). and neither at fully excavated ˆ neighbouring Redutite. This prediction is based on the observation that no grain was found in the containers of Lıga 2. all within debris of daub tempered with chopped straws. op. III. Apart from the described pattern of disposal immediately outside the houses. which held evidence of land snails of the Helicidae family (as reported by N. and that the interstructural spaces used for refuse disposal held the same purpose during both phases. view from the East (cf. Snails of the Helix Pomatia species are also suitable for human consumption but their limited number and especially the presence of juvenile representatives do not support such an assumption. regardless of fine conditions of preservation ˆ and the application of soil flotation procedures. close to entrances. were no doubt used to devour organic refuse not suitable for human consumption. or did they mark the area of the last meal prior to the fire that terminated Lıga 2? The ˆ terminal phase of Lıga 2 is predicted to have belonged ˆ to the warmer part of the year. Indeed. Copenhagen & Cambridge universities. already dug to procure clay for buildings. apparently brought to the site from the neighbouring stream (Andreasen. Pl. Generally. Only three grains of Triticum diccocum. On the contrary. in 2001). Domestic animals. 1).). Were they placed there for cleaning or storage. Several investigators have reported that refˆ use was discarded in pits behind the houses. the streets. Fig. the total mass of refuse produced by one or two households over some time. Such pits. No such pits were discovered at Lıga.3). Their presence indicates a sufficient amount of organic debris present for scavenging. .3. like dogs and pigs. preferably into the all-concealing stream. where many outdoor activities were taking place were kept clean of refuse (Fig. as the two trenches across the slopes have revealed. In fact. this was not the case at Lıga. ‘‘Street area’’ between two rows of built structures. The support rests with repeated deposits of freshwater mussels of the Microcondylaea Compressa species. Shells of these mussels were employed for decorating vessels with so-called ‘‘nail incision’’ patterns. however.40 Acta Archaeologica vation that the structures of Lıga 2 were repeating ˆ the layout of the previous settlement.cit. No indications have been found of the common practice of disposal in Telish village – to push everything beyond the edge of the household area. were found. the overall handling of refuse remains unknown. although without distinct references to their contents. are said to have been found at Zaminets and Gradeshnitsa (Nikolov 1974. The few examples of animal bones recorded in street areas can be attributed to post-depositional transformation. it was the only part of the investigated area. for analyzing the malacological samples. most probably the second half of the summer where outdoor meals were likely common. III. The author is grateful to Niels Andreasen. The malacological data even confirms the obser2. recovered plant macrofossils are few. like ceramic vessels placed outside houses. At both sites clay for the structures was obtained from clay-rich deposits at the foot of the plateau. MA. Some of the activity traces are not straightforward to interpret. Malacological data also support an interpretation of this interstructural area as being used for refuse disposal.

Often such limited strategies have had disastrous consequences in a country. none of the grain bins contained any grains. considered terra supra for chronological and cultural ordering. Early Iron Age and Late Antiquity. like antler batons or hammers. Thus. Red deer antlers found in the ‘‘Street’’ area. House 2 also holds other evidence of flint handling. Gaul mentions that a famous tell. Nevertheless.4. one inside the house at the southern wall. Areas of production are more easily recognized. 8 km south of Lıga. 7. along the southern periphery of the eastern wall until the area of Grave No 2 of Lıga 3. the amount of available data on settlement patterns. For many years KSB settlements at3. a multitude of small chips was discovered both inside and outside this structure. The latter species ripens from August till the end of September and may thus indicate the period of settlement conflagration. At the site of Pipra. . The direcˆ tion of distribution of the flakes suggests that the flint knapper was sitting at the rear wall of House 2. but the site has since almost disappeared as the local looters have dotted it with deep and extensive trenches. Karg (3) of the National Museum of Denmark.4). the majority of samples were rejected by not being calcinated. the lack of publications on excavations is a severe hindrance when attempting to assess the archaeological sites of Bulgaria. since. tracted less attention than the tell settlements in the Thracian plain or in Northeastern Bulgaria. in fact. where looting of archaeological remains were – and indeed. Incidentally. which would reveal the stratigraphic position of pottery but not a fuller context of structures and features. several survey trenches were made in 1976. The author is grateful to Dr. sometimes even employing heavy excavation machinery. not far from the SE corner (and still within the zone of daylight coming from the door opening). are – more common than archaeology proper. III. National Museum of Denmark for analysing palaeobotanical samples. both collected from the waste area between Houses 2 & 3. despite flotation applied on their contens. Furthermore. III. and therefore regarded as unreliable. Sabine Karg. reviewed by S. USE OF SPACE AT OTHER KSB CULTURE SETTLEMEMNTS From the very first excavations at Okol Glava and Pekliuk. All flakes were identified as belonging to flint sources at Sadovec. Some 3–4 m West of the area with flint debitage two red deer antlers were found (Fig. another outside.). The tradition of research was not emphasizing the need for contextual data but was unilaterally orientated towards the collection of ceramic material. ˆ with rich remains from Copper Age. was excavated by treasure hunters already in 1911 (Gaul 1948).Lıga ˆ Other palaeobotanical samples. which eventually became recognised as KSB sites. the beginning of August would be most likely for this. and other arrangements within a settlement is still rather modest. ˆ 41 Fig. in front of House 5. perhaps prepared for production of bone tools or even flintknapping tools. A clear concentration of flakes and exhausted cores behind House 2 indicates that flint tools were produced here. use of space. Devebargan at the town of Marica. The results are still unpublished. There are several reasons for this. Two core areas of activity were identified. contained a few seeds of juniper (Juniperus specia) and Cornelian cherry dogwood (Cornus mas L. as noted above.3 km East of Lıga. nearly a century has passed (Gaul 1948). It was not unusual to make a few small trenches at a site.

but if the smaller second generation houses are added. In the first layout. No.0–1. but the distance grew bigger in the course of rebuilding. of more than 2500 m2. no doubt reflecting a diminishing family size. The area was occupied by structures extending over 3400 m2. The earliest.42 Acta Archaeologica new structure in place of an old one. The settlement was slightly displaced towards the South relative to the The site of Redutite site East of Telish (and close to Lıga) is the only KSB site that has been almost ˆ entirely excavated (excluding modern destruction at the eastern periphery and two or three houses left unexcavated at the N-NE fringes of the site). Despite a close stratigraphic relationship. Preliminarily available information allows the estimation that up to three generations of houses can be recognized in Redutite II. II of the Late Copper Age was found directly on earlier settlement debris. This settlement was probably rather short-lived compared to Redutite II. Redutite III. where also ran a stream fed by numerous springs in the area. The entrances of the houses were still located in the southern wall. Over time. orientated NS (with a slight deviation towards E) and separated by streets running E-W. appears to have been well preserved and provides valuable data on the spatial arrangement of a Copper Age settlement.00 m2.6 and 3. The site was investigated between 1977 and 1992 (Gergov 1987. 3. Redutite IV was discovered directly on the burned debris of the previous settlement. but the houses were now orientated E-W. which had suffered from subsequent levelling. was established on the top of a 0. The streets were about 3 m wide. or more. In both cases the new house usually occupied a smaller area than earlier.5 m. personal communication). also ending in a fire. When new houses were built in place of old ones the distance between houses could expand to 1. covering the burned remains of the previous occupation. 1996. 1992a.3 m.6 and 0. as compared with the Redutite II settlement. The houses were organized in 5 rows. As mentioned. Four building horizons have been recognised. and. The entrances were in the southern wall.20 m thick ‘‘hiatus layer’’. the eastern part also witnessing most of the construction and re-construction initiatives. held remains of the Early Copper Age with excised pottery of Gradeshnitsa type. a new area at the periphery of the settlement could be taken into use. The internal space would have been approximately 37–38 m2. The distance between the houses varies from 0.60 and 28.9 m. both in terms of pottery and in house orientation. I. but their size is smaller. but the ‘‘streets’’ are wider than previously. as many as 30–33 houses may have existed. ˆ the site is situated on one of the highest points of the plateau and has a far better field of visibility towards the West than Lıga. Gergov et al. 28–31 houses might have existed at one time. The settlement and its immediate activity zone ranged between 4700 and 4900 m2. only 34 m2 .3 m. orientated E-W. Three procedures for building a new structure in the already established settlement were observed: The house could be built as a truly . 1994. Redutite II.5–4. varying between 2. with entrances at the eastern side. The overall layout of settlement corresponds with the concepts discussed above. The site is considered the best testimony on changing organisation of settlement space during the Copper Age. or. the distance between the houses was only between 0. one of the walls of the old house could be incorporated into the novel structure. 1986. but during the final phase of the settlement only 23– 25 houses occupied the site. Traces of rebuilding are few.8 m. Redutite IV demonstrates a clear break with Late Copper Age traditions. The internal house space at Redutite II is 37 m2 on the average. Redutite III also had 5 rows of houses. The houses are reported to be 8–9 m long and 5–6 m wide. 1992b. Finally.5 to 0. the topographical location resembles that of neighbouring Lıga. The spatial arrangement of the settlement is not known (unpublished). Building horizon No. The settlement ceased to exist after a major fire. The modern village of Telish is ˆ lying at its foot. Despite a significant temporal difference. The houses preserved an N-S orientation with a slight deviation towards the E. But the results of excavation are still awaiting proper publication. a slight expansion of the settlement towards the East was noted. Delimited by plain and ravines. this phase also follows both the technological and the architectural trends of the previous one in terms off coherent concentration of houses as well as a fixed spatial division of the settlement. The average internal area ranges between 27. At one time. but the area occupied by buildings was somewhat displaced towards the South.

which correspond to the cultural development attested at Lıga 2. Results of conventional and calibrated ages of samples available from Lıga and Redutite. III. The presence of vessels of so-called ‘‘Scheibenhenkel’’ type is clearly placing this settlement in the Transitional Period between Late Copper Age and Early Bronze Age. which thus ˆ may be contemporary with the settlement of Redutite III occupational phase. the occuˆ pational phases of the two sites were clearly interlinked. and Redutite II and III. Detailed information is available on one house only (Gergov 1996).5). respectively. The hiatus layer between Redutite II and III is also observed in the calibrated radiocarbon dates.90 m wide.30 m with the apsidal end) and 4. Taken in conjunction with Lıga. 7. 300 years. marked ˆ with Roman numbers. This is apsidal. III. Two other C14 samples from Redutite were perhaps mistakenly attributed to Phase III instead of Phase II. Other Copper Age sites in a vicinity of Telish have not provided any conclusive information on the use of space within settlement. it is suggested to have lasted for ca. Dates obtained ˆ for Grave 1 demonstrate this grave’s contemporaneity with Redutite III. A quite different pattern is seen in a .30 m long (9. Little is known also on the regional scale. Redutite III corresponds to the dates obtained for Lıga Grave 1. There is a smooth transition between Lıga 2 ˆ and Redutite II. Redutite II occupational phase is re- liably dated through calcinated seeds. All dates cluster in three blocks. Seven C-14 dates are available from Redutite (Fig. four houses were even discovered in an area not used before. previous ones.5.Lıga ˆ 43 Fig.

70 m. all burned down. B & C. On the southern slopes. the available space being 35. The total area of the site is 2440 m2. Yordanova by permission from Historical Museum. The external length was ranging between 5. As at Telish.44 Acta Archaeologica ment by a fence. abrupt slopes. A system of trenches were also recorded at the eponymic Late Copper Age site of Krivodol to the west of Telish. Plan of Hotnitsa. 5 m in height. Makchev & A. Three Copper Age houses were ´ discovered. a series of postholes were discovered on the top of each wall. similar in structure to the open space near the slopes at Lıga. Of four square houses belonging to level B. indicating the presence of more palisades.5 m2. The settlement was enclosed by a palisade or fence. reaching 16 m in height. were traces of yet another parallel fence-like construction.6. The latest horizon. Possibly. Veliko Tarnovo (Central Bulgaria). which dates to the latest period of the Copper Age. was left not built on. almost in the middle. Courtesy: Historical Museum.70 m. held 22 (in the publication 21) houses (Angelov 1958.6). Veliko Tarnovo. Consequently. Three occupational phases of Late Copper Age date were attested here. as attested by postholes. measuring 40¿10 m. Hotnitsa is a tell settlement. The mean internal space is 25. and field reports). with entrances from the S. With such spacing. The site is located on a rocky hill. From all three occupation phases (A. the hillock slopes down gradually. latest settlement phase. 1961. The western end of the settlement site. W and S. the fault margin being about one quarter of a metre in both directions). elongated in N-S direction. the principal spatial elements had common origin. Veliko Tarnovo. the best comparative information on the use of space is from Hotnitsa. III.2 m2. all rectangular. A being the oldest) at Zaminets comes remains of 12 houses. while on the E side. In Eastern Serbia. The area is rich in springs. and arranged in a uniform manner with axially cutting streets. there is also evidence of rebuilt structures. The mean internal area of the structures is 30–31.4¿5. Looking even wider. up to 20–24 houses may have co-existed. the width between 4. and one deep and wide (up to 4 m) trench from the E (personal observations made upon inspection of the damage made by intense trenching by modern looters). the site is protected by steep. but the area used for building only comprises about 1750–1800 m2. the largest houses tend to be placed centrally (cf. below). running along the edges of the hill. Tasic 1995). partly published Late Copper Age settlement at Zaminets (Nikolov 1975). three were orientated E-W (entrances from E) and one N-S (entrance from S). From N. Horizon I.30 m2 (the scale of the published plan is unfortunately not precise. Two parallel narrow moats were enclosing the site from the N. 1959.50 and 6. III. in spite of the fact that the site is not related to the KSB culture (Fig. The houses were orientated N-S. These were distributed in a relatively dispersed pattern.5 m. The eastern land bridge was fortified by two parallel deep moats and earthen walls (towards the settlement) created by the excavated soil. with maximal dimensions of 70¿40 m.50 and 5. with distances ranging between 21⁄2 and 5 m. The spatial organisation is well attested and has parallels to the sites at Telish. The houses were orientated N-S and placed Fig. ˆ was separated from the remaining part of the settle- . The area used for building at Zaminets was around 2000 m2. One had the internal dimensions of 6. After MA theses of S. the only certain information on use of space at KSB sites is from Bubanj (Garasanin ˇ 1957. This space.

Regular settlement layout and the manner of settlement termination – like the sudden abandonment of Lıga 1 ˆ or the conflagration of Lıga 2 – indicate that settleˆ ments were constructed communally over a short period of time and shared common fates. it is important to emphasize that house and settlement are connected parts of the prehistoric perception of space. The foundations towards the slopes were stabilized. a central com- . flat terˆ races were created. Berciu reports that 16 ‘‘huts’’ were recorded ˘ ¸ in 1951 from the Late Copper Age layers. while adaptation can be noted in construction of smaller houses in inhibiting areas like close to slopes. The dimensions of the oven were 1. The postholes are likely delineating workshop spaces (or -platforms) rather than being house walls. the small size and irregularly rounded shape of these structures. Romanian data on the use of space is limited to Salcuta. The dominance of adult cattle in the bone sample confirms the significance of these beasts in labour and not merely in meat consumption (cf. When conditions of preservation are favourable. The entrances were from the S. However. moving from one plot to another. This evidence seems to conform to the Bulgarian sites. stones for foundation. A built structure. Abundant occurrence of burned wattle points towards a wattle and daub construction. was almost 4 km to the South of the site. Tasic ˇ ´ 1995). arrangements and contents.4 m. but in any case. as has been illustrated above. Some of the old surface soil was removed. ARCHITECTURE AND HOUSEHOLD ORGANIZATION HOUSE STRUCTURES Turning to the issues connected with architecture and the use of space within a built structure. it is believed that they reflect different levels of consciousness when actions were taken during primary as well as secondary constitutional processes. reed or straw for roofing in such an amount that it would satisfy the demands of the whole settlement would not have been unproblematic. The ‘‘huts’’ were organized along an E-W line. as can be seen from a clayey trench 45 cm wide (preserved depth 17 cm). Chapter X. one metre wide entrances being in the southern walls. its social organisation. It is known that each and every stone bigger than a fist was brought to the site. on animal bones). provides personified testimonies. as reconstructed from a number of preserved postholes alone. 12. which contradicts the suggested southern orientation of the entrance to the ‘‘hut’’. awareness.Lıga ˆ ‘‘rather close to each other’’ (Garasanin 1957. Both could be found at the foot of the Lıga site. and adaptation. Traditions dictate the general layout of settlement. Whether this or even further sources were used is unknown. The opening of the oven is towards the N. Awareness manifests itself in the position of larger houses – for special peoples or households – centrally in the settlement. Thick debris of porous unbaked grey clay was of course indicating the use of wattle and daub building techniques. As one team of Copper Age architects was sticking out the layout. resulting in exposure of a layer of pebbles. and even cosmology. Settlement planning is often used to extract understanding of society as a whole. Procuring of wood ˆ for timber frames and roof support. Reservation is strengthened by the remains of ovens. The maximum dimensions were 2. others would already be starting to procure building materials for the dwellings. primarily horizon IIc (Berciu 1961b). There was a need for involvement of every community member. these must have been among the dictating factors of the location of the settlements. Since the main building materials were clay and water. thus more than 2/3 of the presumed ‘‘hut’’. A rather well preserved lower part of an oven was found in ‘‘Hut’’ no. Prior to construction of the Lıga 1 houses. which was abundant enough to supply material for house foundations. Although the borders between categories are not strict. 45 ponent in any settlement. with a diameter of 20–25 cm. such task would have been very difficult to accomplish without the use of tracking oxen. Traces preserved of Lıga 1 houses at the southern ˆ slopes of the site bear witness to the use of robust poles for the walls. Both reflect tradition. It has also been established that the nearest source of limestone. It has been calculated that the excavated area alone held some 200 kg stones. observaˆ tions and interpretations at the household level are indeed possible. sets doubts as to whether these features were correctly interpreted.7 m. as at Lıga.5¿1.7 m times 1.

In the case of Houses 2 and 3. and provide floor isolation. In fact. shallow trenches were dug and filled with a compact layer of clay (Pl. The regular manner of exposure even led to early conclusions during the excavation that the pavement was man-made. where it was appreciated as a natural pavement.3 m. Some of that clay was also spread inside House 2 in order to even the floor level. II. In their attempt to even the terrain. 3). Built on the original surface of the hillock with limited levelling measures taken. House 3. as was the case with the partly excavated houses in the northern periphery of the investigated area. Wooden poles with pointed ends were set into foundation. Daub was only occasionally found here and only as a thin layer pointing to intensive post-depositional destruction. A thick layer of shards from the earliest occupation was spread in the southwestern periphery of House 1. Apparently. and a rather early AMS-date of Lıga 2 suggests that the ˆ temporal distance between the two settlements was not significant. preserved in a patchy pattern at the same level as the said pavement. the layer of shards helped to maintain a plain surface. Occasionally. The full extent of the pavement and its orientation are not known. the traces of the structural remains of the Lıga 1 occupation had not disappeared ˆ at the time of the foundation of Lıga 2. For example. The length of the period between the two occupations is. The majority of these were 8–9 cm in diameter. This part of the house was the weakest as it was lying very close to the rather steeply descending slope. But the house situated North of House 2. Thus. A small such patch was investigated in an area judged to be just outside the eastern wall of the excavated Lıga 1 house (Fig. thicker poles. The settlers were highly aware of this layer and tried to benefit by exposing it. ˆ which no doubt had the hilly appearance of old house mounds. and on the same longitudinal line. But both sets of pottery carry distinctive features of the KSB culture. the settlers also invested energy in creating stone pavements. stabilize the foundations.46 Acta Archaeologica the case of Houses 1 and 3. The foundation trenches varied from 0.5). Timber ˆ frames and poles could well have been visible (even re-used after the abandonment). so that the overall appearance of the new settlement would take the form of a series of low staircases. for instance in the northern periphery of the house. would have appeared to be lying higher than House 2 and at the same level as House 3. would have been 0.4 m in width. All traces of internal arrangement were disturbed by the subsequent settlers of Lıga 2. the difference in level between the foundations and floors of House 2 and its eastern neighbour. Several technical solutions could be observed in the prime case of Lıga ˆ 2. while unburned daub with organic temper would have made a very fertile ground for all sorts of bushy vegetation. This demonstrates that the state of preservation might even be predetermined by circumstances prior to the construction of a structure.3 to 0. with the diameter of 15 cm. Such sites acted as supreme agents when supporting local traditions and forming communal identities. Samples of calcinated wood collected in House 2 were determined by C. were used. limestones for foundations were used to a higher degree for the houses created in areas without structural debris from the previous occupation. Also. House mounds of unbacked clay could easily be transformed into flat platforms for new structures. these houses were protected by a thinner layer of soil than the fully excavated ones further in. actions were taken to stabilize the foundations. This material stayed together and has provided the largest amount of small finds dated to the earliest settlement. they pushed part of the cultural debris forward towards the edge of the southern slopes. The pavement was ˆ made of well-sorted and water-rounded stones reaching 10–12 cm in length. Foundations and especially the corner areas were further strengthened with the help of rubble of limestone. Once the level surfaces were formed. as mentioned. especially in the interstructural areas. In spite of its messy appearance and whatever sentiments nested in communal memory such a sight would awake. Pottery suggests that essential changes in ceramic traditions had taken place in the hiatus period. an old site had practical advantages too. These houses were only outlined by rows of limestones enclosing rather fragmented but compact concentrations of pottery. outside its northern wall. The technological knowledge of the Lıga 1 settlers ˆ is also manifested in compact lime-plastered floors inside the houses. The reuse of previous cultural debris was observed in . The creation of level surfaces led to differentiation in altitude. not known.

Since all lumps of burned daub were collected. thus protected from decay. No traces of colouring was ever found. bearing in mind the relative lightness of the timber frame. III. only two were found: one in House 1 and another in House 2.32 m. The thinner poles were grouped in pairs. It should be added that all pieces of daub were collected and studied. These were found abundantly in the destruction debris. In the case of House 2. 25 cm in diameter. House walls were reaching 0. it was possible to differentiate between various types of daub matrix in terms of composition. shaped to correspond with the rounded form of the post. as well as pieces of calcinated timbers found stratigraphically high in layers of daub. Identification of this core helped to establish the precise course of walls in places of thick accumulation of burned daub.2 m) was plastered with daub containing quartz grains 2–4 mm in size as the main tempering material. It has been calculated that a standard house in the Lıga ˆ 2 settlement would require between 9.6 and 11. Compact flakes of daub without any admixture point towards a clay coating of the walls. Generally. The author is grateful to Dr. since all pieces were recovered from the area close to the oven. with a slight 4. Investigation of the recovered lumps of daub have also provided evidence that freshly harvested straws were used for tempering. This observation is inferred from severely burned fragments of daub with imprints of parallel logs some 10 cm in diameter. pointing to the particular period of the year for house construction. which could be attributed to the roof supporting construction. most likely emmer. It is also safe to assume that houses had gabled roofs. placed directly on the floor and supported by stones. indicating that the structures appeared as grey boxes.6 m3 of non-organic building components. A highly informative collection of models was discovered at Kodzadermen (Fig. Karg. but it is uncertain whether hornbeam was used in house construction or as fire wood. the walls must have been less massive. It appeared that the core area of a wall. 47 Fig. Apart from that. who made a cast of the hole made by the ear. One of the lumps contained part of an ear with the grains still sitting in it at the time of daub tempering (Fig. A wintering ear would not be able to keep its grains due to low temperatures and humidity. Consequently.7. Koch (4).Lıga ˆ Malmros as steming from hornbeam (Carpinus betulus). Of actual postholes. assisted by E. but the presence of flat limestones inside the houses indicate that other posts were resting on such. both in the form of remains of massive poles. III. the discovered sandstone rocks were affected by the high temperatures of the final fire and had cracked. The roof was supported by internal posts. at least at the level of foundation (the preserved parts of walls did not exceed 0. Little is known about the roofs themselves. the post was supported by fragments of the same sandstone rock. III. except that clay-plastered wooden logs made up part of the interior construction. the distance between them being about 10–15 cm. Higher up. The clay deposits at Lıga appear as a homogeneous ˆ layer with occasional inclusions of red (haematite) or orange (goethite) ochre as well as other ferrous accumulations in the form of thin oxidised flakes. has established that the ear in question with all probability stems from emmer wheat (Triticum diccocum).40 m in thickness at the foundation level. S.35–0. as indicated by clay models. Lump of daub with impression of ear of wheat. daub with an admixture of 15–20% of chopped straw was applied. Reˇ . even though the intended thickness was not exceeding 0. The poles were interwoven with rods and twigs and plastered with daub. no other certain traces of internal posts were found. possibility of being einkorn (Triticum monococum).8) (Gaul 1948).7). Eva Koch for making a silicone cast of the cavities in the fragment of daub.

crafts. The usual reply is that in such a case one would feel the necessity to build a . Evidence from archaeological data has been much extended by experimental archaeology. Chapter VII. without use of nails. and even living conditions. Flat roofs would also be a serious limitation in terms of finding an effective solution to the issue of smoke circulation. amounting to approximately 1/5 of the total mass. below). living conditions. The clay for recent daubing was mixed with dung from herbivorous animals.8. Pleinerova 1986). where daubed houses are a common sight. but not collapse. Even a short inspection of a few of the houses in Telish will promote an understanding of the principles behind Copper Age dwellings substantially. ˆ The Brezno team demonstrated that daubing of ˇ wattle walls was one of the very last tasks in the constructional chaıne operatoire. In their use of basic ´ materials. Clay models of houses discovered in the Late Copper Age tell at Kodzadermen. Fig. ˇ gardless their makers. the age of these houses can be estimated to be at least 40 or 50 years (corresponding to the age of the informers).e. connected in the manner of ‘‘a matchstick-house’’. like organisation of labour. ‘‘New clay’’ will not adhere to the old surface in depressions. etc. reported that wattle or posts were being replaced during restoration. the ´ best parallels to the data from Lıga are found in reˆ cent Bulgarian villages. since direct contact with the floor would cause them to rot.48 Acta Archaeologica totally new structure. The inˆ spected houses nowadays serve as storage sheds. pitted surface: once a floor is tramped. Occasionally a new layer of daub was added to close the cracks in the walls. which actually are very numerous in the flint assemblage (cf. Animal dung was considered to be a better admixture than chaff. The present owners could not recall having seen the construction of the daubed houses in their possession and assumed that they were built by their parents or grandparents. Some ideas about house construction. but no one. which have an uneven. repetition of the same house form indicates that the models can be treated as a convincing and undistorted source of information on the general appearance of the structures. in particular concerning the nature of prehistoric architecture. but some of the constructional elements did seem to correspond very well with the uncovered traces at Lıga.. not just patches. It also required a parˆ ´ ticular pace. In case of an earthquake such a structure would shake. Thus. can also be grasped from the superb Brezno experiments deˇ signed to reconstruct semi-subterranean Slavic houses from Chechy (Pleinerova 1986). the informers said. Direct parallels were cautiously avoided. building techniques. I. a circumstance that indicates a high demand at Lıga for debarking tools. so levelling of a floor would require plastering of the whole area. when asked. since wattle work can only support a layer of a certain strength. Pleinerova notes that posts ´ with bark not integrated in daub walls would attract wood-eating insects. such as flint ˆ scrapers. The owners were usually complaining about tramped floors. it is impossible to even the surface effectively. use of tools. so their maintenance is less meticulous (and their use perhaps also less intense) than in the case of dwelling houses. This observation was actually used to interpret the presence of flat limestones within the houses of Lıga ˆ 2 and justified the limited number of postholes. The round posts had a diameter of approximately 15 cm and were supported by flat limestones. Nevertheless. III. these houses resemble the prehistoric wattle and daub constructions at Lıga. i. which has to dry somewhat before a new layer can be added. The recent gabled roofs were supported by a structure of posts and beams with the bark peeled off. which required additional preparation. After Gaul 1948. (Hansen 1961. consumption of building materials.

3–4 m3 clay. In terms of thermic features. At Lejre. Internal arrangements. the ˆ internal space was subdivided into specific task zones (Fig. aside from a few exceptions (e. The house models are rather taciturn on the issue of roofing. they rest upon the actual situation upon discovery. Steponaitis (5) INTERIORS All houses in Lıga were single-roomed. ´ Thick roof covers would provide better isolation. reach some 18 m3. Although the ´ experimental structure was semi-subterranean and therefore thermally somewhat protected. even impossible task to meet the demands of just one small settlement. Denmark in 1998–2003 confirm the findings from Brezno (N. III. 15 cm in diameter. thus creating a sheltered space outside it.Lıga ˆ The experiments also gave a hint on the consumption of materials. 1200 branches (1. The firewood used just for cooking would. thus. House 3 at Lıga contained evidence that the roof ˆ construction might have been extended to cover the entrance of the house. since the excavated sondages only disclosed the limits of house walls. Estimations were also made on amount of wood required for heating (Pleinerova 1986). intensive heating of a house of ca. A similar house roofed with rye straws also required harvesting of an area of 1000 m2 (present yields). Other houses were perhaps also porched.A. personal comm.0–3.8). A 4. At Brezno. The optimal solution seems to be the construction of apertures in the gables of the roof and relatively low-sitting windows. III. it was demonstrated that the heating effect of taking animals into a structure is limited.net .worldarchaeology.9). The assumption is based on the row of postholes. III. it was also estabˇ lished that two adults and three children would need 3. and supported by evidence recovered in House 1. the dimensions being 1. but their surroundings were not investigated. a layer of smoke will always accumulate under the roof. despite much ´ effort.90 m2) could provide internal temperatures of up to 7–14 æC.5¿4.5¿1.5 m3 wood.3 m (Fig. Both projects have demonstrated that the circula- 49 tion of smoke is an important problem. Copˇ enhagen university. Occasionally. Such estimations raise serious doubts about the traditional assumption of reed/straw roofing of Copper Age houses. Kodzadermen).). ´ A series of climate experiments carried out at the Lejre Experimental Centre.g.5 cm thick) of wattle. are individual for each house reconstruction.2 m wattle and daub house with 15 cm thick walls and a height of 3 m at the ridge point requires 2. Among the few immovable house installations was the oven. at most. on a yearly basis for one household. but the amount of CO gasses could be fatal for humans. Such segregation followed the accepted traditions at the time but was also adapted to the individual needs of each household.10). At Lejre. Møller. 1 m from the southern wall of the structure (Fig. The floor space behind the oven. It must have been a very laborious.5 m2 of space for their sleeping arrangements (Pleinerova 1986). the Brezno experiˇ ments demonstrated that roofing was the decisive factor in the time needed to heat a house as well as in the ability to sustain temperature (Pleinerova 1986). However. 42 m3 (by 0. Thus. The size of the oven corresponds to the size of the house. Contact information: www. so that the colder air stream might push up the smoke (Pleinerova 1986). it has been established that this actually is favourable for drying of food-stuffs or for hide smoking.8 m long and 1..11 & 12). The reconstructions are performed by Architect R. III. Only the floor of the oven could be discerned from 5. the amounts used for the experiment indicate that when the outside temperature was below zero. but. recorded ca. a relocation of activity zones was taking place.5–1. remained cold even when the fire was lit. where parallel traverse incisions on ˇ the roof might be interpreted as planks or beams (Fig. in turn. evidence being combined from both Houses 2 & 3.15 m. and 1000 m2 of harvested roofing reeds. A well-preserved smaller oven was discovered in House 2. the house reconstructions presented here rest on a complementary base. The author is grateful to Architect Rimas Steponaitis for hypothetical reconstructions of houses and their interiors. as well as types and distribution of pottery. increasing the room temperature with one degree. the largest structure (House 3) also had the largest oven with dimensions of 1. which was placed directly on the floor.083 m3 wood in a dome oven of 0.25¿1. However. also an excessive amount of fuel in case of a fire.

based on data recovered from House 3. III. Reconstruction of internal arrangements of pottery.9. . but complemented by evidence recorded in ˆ other houses. Suggested reconstruction of Lıga 2 house. types of pottery and other finds are presented according to excavated data. Steponaitis.50 Acta Archaeologica Fig. Reconstruction drawn by R.

. Suggested reconstruction of Lıga 2 house.Lıga ˆ 51 Fig. but complemented by evidence recorded in ˆ other houses.10. Steponaitis. III. Reconstruction drawn by R. based on data recovered from House 2. types of pottery and other finds are presented according to excavated data. Reconstruction of internal arrangement of pottery.

On one such occasion. In the better preserved Houses 2 and 3. In both cases the plugs were located ca. . The ovens were constructed on the floor by first erecting a slightly raised platform of some 15 cm. and an eastern entrance. This accessory set may be extended with clay tubes. likely indicating that fire was set at the time of the conflagration of the whole settlement. This must have improved the thermal properties of the oven. 1–1. The ovens were oval in shape and domed.13:1 & III. The clay used for the base of the oven was tempered with sand and quartz grains of 2–4 mm. the surrounding debris of burned daub in House 1.11. III. The ovens in Houses 2 and 3 underwent restoration. the opening is towards the room. it can be assumed that access from the South would have been complicated due to slopes. respectively 11 and 13 cm in diameter (Fig. a layer of shards was incapsulated in the dome by the new layer of clay lining. The only deviation was met in House 1. The oven was opposite of the entrance of the house situated in the southern wall. It was an accepted principle governing the use of internal space to place the oven at the rear end of the room. Such plugs were used for closing the oven holes at the top. and heaps of waste along the northern wall of the house was hardly indicative in terms of an entrance. 1 m away from the ovens. III.14). view from the East. where the oven was placed at the western wall.5 cm in diameter.52 Acta Archaeologica Fig. making the eastern wall. a clay plug was found at the ovens. the most likely suggestion. made to improve the draft. Also a fire-vessel (cf. in fact at the middle of the interior northern wall and up 1 m from it. prolonging the period of heat radiation. However. No evidence of the entrance has been discovered in this case. made of twigs ca. below) was found in close association with the ovens (Fig. indicating a prolonged used of the device. Linings suggest an about 1 cm thick layer of clay plaster covering the core of the oven walls. and its size cannot be established with certainty. House 3. the case of House 3. III. The clay held organic temper in smaller amounts than the daub used for walls.13:2. 3).

4 – fragment of a clay tube.13. Items related with handling of fire.12. House 3. III. 2.Lıga ˆ 53 Fig. . III. presumably used for bellows. 1 – fire-vessel. remains of the oven. Fig. 3 – oven plugs.

Perhaps its western end was supported by a massive.60 m long and presumably had a thickness of 0. Still. close to the eastern wall (Fig. III. III. i.15 m. Fire-vessel used to preserve fire by covering ember. It was placed at the eastern wall and surrounded by seven smaller vessels (Fig. A pragmatic interpretation would connect the ‘‘phalloi’’ with metallurgy. The pithos had an oval shape.15 m. 1 m in diameter enclosed towards the room by a 20 cm high and 5–8 cm thick wall (Fig. The platform was left open at the .70 m high.e. in the NW corner of the house was a permanent installation for grinding: a circular platform. even soil flotation did not produce any palaeobotanical residue. 1 m long and 0. III.15). III. the height being ca. running E-W. likely roof-supporting post. The storage containers in House 3 were found in the same part of the house as above. On the western side of the oven. In spite of high expectations (the pithos had a capacity 500 liters).. ca. 0.17). nettling many scholars (Todorova 1986. placing them in a humanized universe where a melting furnace is considered a female and the bellows a male element (e. A formal division of space was found in House1. nor how high this division originally was. i. Only one might have been dug into the soil. was ca. parallel to the northern wall of the house.e. but its purpose is not clear. internal daub walls. Fig. modern records on African traditional metallurgical practices.9). House 2 was equipped with a grain pithos. seeing them as parts of bellows. Two perpendicular daub walls created an enclosure in the northern part of the room in which three ceramic vessels – one deep bowl and two big poorly backed containers decorated with barbo- tine – were found (Fig. Part of the installation was covered by a thick layer of burned daub. The latter idea is supported by ethnographical observations and by smith-graves (Shilov 1975). the find of three copper items (see below) in House 1 may support a metallurgical link. De Barros 1997). III. which made up an important part of the immovable inventory. The shorter wall running N-S was at least 0.13:4).14. and beliefs also support a phallic meaning of clay tubes. The two walls were only preserved to a height of 0.g. House 1. House 2. which hampered a detailed study of the division. The remaining vessels in this cluster – at least 13 – were not arranged in a particular pattern. thus limiting supply of oxygen. Although the vessel was crushed by a fallen wall.. as its base was almost four times narrower than the opening. Nonetheless. III. which are often interpreted as phallos symbols and seen as counterparts to the common so-called ‘‘Mother Goddess’’ figurines.15.10 thick. 75 cm. suggesting that it may have belonged to a household bellows used to rekindle the fire from glowing cinders maintained with the help of fire-vessels (see below). Gergov 2000) (Fig. dimensions could be estimated from the preserved fragments.16 & III. III. The longer wall..18).80 m long and 0. The only find of a clay tube at Lıga was made close ˆ to the oven of House 1. magics.54 Acta Archaeologica Fig. ca.

tables. which allowed each individual household to subscribe to common norms and communal identities. such shelves were installed at the eastern wall. Within this enclosure was found a massive milling stone (lower part) with a deep usewear depression. as seen in the particular inventory of the individual house (see below). The house walls were also decorated with hanging bowls. Shelves were probably also installed between the posts supporting the roof construction.20). However. House 2. in the ‘‘street’’ area indicates that grinding was also carried out outdoors. III. point to the existence of some sort of shelves. stringed up through suspension holes in the item (Fig. but also a necessity to save limited space. The other houses did not produce any grinding installations and only held finds of hand stones. too weighty to reflect significant post-depositional transportation.19 & Pl.9. III. placed at the storage vessels. The shelves were perhaps intended as ‘‘exhibition cases’’ for display of the finest pottery. or the like. Two smaller milling stones (upper parts) were discovered close by. III. but in spite of the uniformity reflected in settlement layout and principles governing the location of household installations. The most favourable conditions of preservation were met in Houses 2 and 3. southern side. likely when eating (Fig. The simple Copper Age architecture was housing an inherited order. The main axis of the structures is the N-S line . Usually. But apart from this.2). remains of pithos with adjacent vessels. In House 2 were also two limestone rocks – a triangular flat one and a smaller rounded one – shaped to fit each other. Their association with the group of vessels at the entrance may indicate that they were meant to sit on.16. Investigations of artefact distributions. VI. as in Houses 3 and 4 (Fig.Lıga ˆ 55 Fig. All adaptations and relocations were undertaken within such framework. much like souvenir plates nowadays. including recordings of the angles of items. At least 15 vessels in House 3 must have been stacked on such shelves above the big storage containers. all other finds were found directly on the floor with no apparent use of platforms. but followed the same mental concepts on the use of space. These multi-functional buildings were structured somewhat differently internally. 5). Some of the stone implements were probably placed on these. A beam above the oven in House 2 must have been decorated with a clay anthropomorphic figurine. the presence of massive grinding stones. III. often reaching 40 cm in diameter (all perforated below the lip with a single hole and with traces of abrasions on the back side). there was also room for competition and rivalry.

House 2 was equipped with a hanging anthropomorphic figurine.21). Next to the figurine was a ‘‘bowl’’. Other vessels further along the western wall indicate that also this area was used for preparation of food. Were these the vestiges of a last meal? That eating was taking place in the southern end of the house.16 & 17). containing an egg-like object in clay. the most beautiful vessel found in House 2 was standing at the immovable grain pithos (Fig. Milling platform discovered in the Late Copper Age tell at Kodzadermen. a big open vessel. the finest vessel of this house was found at the pithos. containing 13 oblong. held an intact spoon (Fig. III.23). even thorough examination brought surprisingly modest results. fastened to one of the logs above and to the West of the oven. at the oven. The area west of the oven was connected with food preparation and short-term storage. The figurine was facing south. miraculously escaping recent agricultural trench digging by less than 5 cm (Pl. only the lower half of the figurine was discovered (Fig. Fig. it was evident that the houses also held religious elements. not far from the entrance. towards the presumed entrance. In few areas where parts of unburned floors were recognised (as a grey greenish clay). was an area assigned for long-term storage.22 & Pl. which displayed the finest pottery were discovered there. but its position within the structure as well as use-wear traces around a hole made in the area of the feet were convincing indications of the place of the figurine in the house. surrounded by bowls and pots. The situation exposed during excavation looked almost staged: surrounded by bowls and a closed vessel. one metre North of the body. In the NE part of the partly excavated House 4. The floors of the houses were kept clean. be it food-stuffs or the inedible valuables of the house. The same space in House 2 was occupied by three big open vessels and a smaller one. Along the eastern wall. House 2. which appeared to be the reversed lower part of the similar figurine. situated at opposite ends of the room.56 Acta Archaeologica Fig. III. 11:1). The display is no doubt original. Unfortunately. The grinding installation of House 3 was found here. III. is perhaps confirmed by the partially preserved pottery from House 3. in- cluding fragments of a big closed water jar found in four separate clusters (Fig. resembling a Late Medieval soup tureen. A well-preserved concentration of vessels was discovered at the southern wall of House 2. waterworn pebbles and a small biconic cup (see below). III. Thus. grain bins and shelves. Besides the utilitarian or potentially utilitarian inventory of the structures. the floor debris only comprised of a few pieces of flints not exceeding the size of a fingernail.17. likely soaking of cereals or the like. 5). a so-called ‘‘Sitting Goddess’’ (Fig. III. III.18. smoothly cut through the neck by ploughing.2). was a completely preserved figurine. Apart from the flint chips recorded in House 2. The head of the figurine was recovered ca. traced between the entrance and the oven. Behind it were five bi- . facing the oven. Notably. A similar one was found in House 3 (after ˇ Gaul 1948). VI.

small personal treasures like a collection of long blades. Vessels. Thus. as can be observed from the limited quantity and types of small finds recovered when compared with the other two structures. The exposed remains point to a sudden and unexpected start of the fire. Demark has demonstrated that the effects of a fire are much less tangible in wattle and daub houses if started from the floor level of a house (Hansen 1961). stone and bone tools. This was standing at the northern wall. Neighbouring Redutite may even have revealed permanent installations related to Copper Age rituals. masterly crafted figurines and toys – all were left behind (Fig. stacked one in the other (Fig. as can be judged from pieces of clay slag. See also Pl. conic cups. especially from House 1 – in fact indicating that fire must have started from the roof. had some time to collect their valuables. Note flint blade and end-scraper (with upward ventral side).19. sealed all inventory . interpreted as an alter (Gergov 1992b). together with the roof. These must have fallen from a shelf at the eastern wall.24). III. Close to the stacked cups were another two cups of the same type. The collapsed walls were decisive in preservation of artefacts. A set of five biconic cups fallen from a shelf-like installation at the E wall of House 4. where the utilitarian and the ritual spheres are integrated parts of the domus (sensu Hodder 1990). An experiment at Lejre. falling inwards. III.21 & III. III. kept together in a leather pouch. These seven cups may even point to the number of inhabitants in the house.19). Together with the cups were a flint blade and an end-scraper. The described displays are thus a reflection of the multifunctional nature of the Copper Age house. the eastern wall of House 1. reaching in some places temperatures up to 1500 degrees. The available data are of course limited to the three fully excavated and individually furnished houses with differing histories of preservation. above the figurine. But it seems that inhabitants of House 1.Lıga ˆ 57 Fig. 4. at the margins of the settlement. most probably somewhere close to the centre of settlement. The Lıga 2 settlement was abandoned as the result ˆ of a destruction caused by a great general fire. surrounded by apparent domestic pottery. All houses experienced the same degree of burning. One of the houses in Horizon III contained a clay stela.

58 Acta Archaeologica gration. It is also possible that a ritualised perception of settlement was common.20. III.viii. This wall covered the oven and the items adjacent to it. where conflagration was an instrument of control of space (Hvass 1985). some parts of the walls of House 2 remained standing after the fire faded and created sheltered areas for an accumulation of soil. Such practices were actually carried out at the Danish Iron Age village of Hodde (2nd century BC– 1st century AD). in Redutite all four (including both the Late Copper Age ones) (Gergov 1992a). At Lıga. 265). As regards tell settlements. ranging from hostile attacks to ritual acts.g. 1996. as demonstrated by examples at Opovo. cause the solid stucco to split’’ (Vitruvius. which are born and can die. just to mention a few of the Late Copper Age examples. The more it saves in time and gains in space. Thus. as cited by Rapp 2002. Therefore. in the eastern part of this structure. Two lime stones shaped to fit each other. together with a group of vessels. Favourable conditions were also created by the collapse of the western wall of House 3. for it is made to catch fire. in Sadovec-Ezero four out of six. He wrote. to spend on walls of burnt brick. Vitruvius. it makes cracks from the inside by the arrangement of its studs and girts. It was almost a rule rather than an exception that a Copper Age settlement was terminated by fire. seeing houses and objects as living organisms. Seemingly. It seems better. creating a cover for the refuse accumulated in the adjacent intrastructural space. pp. and be in danger. even create a line of heritage (Bailey 1990. on ferruginous soils which are influenced by heating above 500 æC (Canti & Linford 2001). However.20. Yugoslavia. e. And. Different explanations for great fires have been put forward. in a settlement were singled out to be put on fire. therefore. however. Chapman 2000). ‘‘As for ‘wattle and daub’ I could wish that it had never been invented. To support the claim that houses were burned individually (hence destroyed deliberately in a controlled fashion). like torches. It cannot be excluded that hostile attacks were a real threat in the Copper Age. the only certain way to sustain the idea of controlled conflagrations is to demonstrate that a house. clearing an area by burning decaying houses also seems to be the best choice in terms of Fig. which also filled the cavities of the said oven. and then contract as they dry. at least 80% of the well-studied KSB settlements ended up in flames. 57–58. the greater and the more general is the disaster that it may cause. recent experimental work on the effects of fire on soils have proved that thermal transformation only occurs in very rare cases. and be at expense. The eastern wall of House 2 collapsed in eastern direction. too. thus. and by their shrinking. The percentage is even lower in the earlier part of the period. The eastern part of the house was also covered in destruction debris. she refers to the lack of effect on soils in areas between houses. systematically investigated in the 1970s and -80s. some of it coming from the roof. For these swell with moisture as they are daubed. she is suggesting that conflagration should be regarded as a cultural trait among early agricultural communities (Stevanovic ´ 1997). found in House 2. considered such structures a cheap but dangerous substitute to adobe houses. in Zaminec all three (Nikolov 1975). than to save with ‘wattle and daub’. In other regions the percentage seems lower. in the stucco covering. Wattle and daub houses were also built by the Romans. studying conflagrated Neolithic ´ Vinca houses. one out of two settlements ended in conflaˆ . The Copper Age tells of NE Bulgaria. demonstrate that only 33% of the Late Copper Age settlement phases show traces of great fires (the available data mainly belongs to the earliest phase of KGK VI) (Todorova 1982). M. or a group of houses. is seeing these as expressions of pracˇ tices to assure continuity and visibility in the mnemonic domain of society. ‘‘De Architectura’’ II. the famous First century BC Roman engineer and architectural theorist. in Krivodol all five (Nikolov 1984). preserving to some extent the original shape of the dome. Stevanovic.

at the entrance. In fact. NE Bulgaria.g. Matsanova 2000. This indirectly contradicts Stevanovic’s adjunct suggestion that the amount of organic ´ material used in wattle and daub architecture was not large enough to serve as fuel to bake the clay to a reddened state (Stevanovic 1997). several such sites.Lıga ˆ 59 Fig. A group of vessels discovered inside House 2. These skel- etons were covered by Late Copper Age house debris. e. Traces of the last meal? time and energy spent. cannot be established.comm. a situation similar to the one recorded at the fully excavated Redutite settlement (Gergov 1992a). a ritual reason ˆ for the conflagration. which terminated the settlement. Rather. as demonstrated by the latest re-evaluation of the excavation results (Todorova 1986. Bearing in mind the high numbers of conflagration . such may have taken place without leaving traces of human victims. as is also supported by skeletal analyses (Matsanova 2000 & pers. Possibly. and possibly also Ruse. only at the tells of Hotnitsa (Angelov 1958) and Yunatsite. pointing towards a violent death. and observation). A spoon was found in a big vessel – a ‘‘soup terrine’’. hold evidence on partial burning. the Copper Age Ruse tell. of whatever nature (Bojadziev 2001. skeletons ˇ were found inside the burned structures. the evidence supports evacuation at the time of the breaking out of fire. Bojadziev 2001). But the total abandonment of KSB settlements in the wake of great fires calls for other explanations. III. Georgiev & Angelov 1957).21. Regarding hostile attacks. ´ Based on the observations at Lıga 2.. also ˇ the Ovcarovo VII settlement of Middle Copper Age ˇ date was partially burned (Todorova 1982). Indeed.

the fires should rather be regarded as accidents. or use other recently developed fire-resistant materials. Tripkovic 2003). especially during the summer when the house walls were dried of winter humidity. In fact. Hence. a household is taken to be a kin-based residential group (Tringham & Krstic ´ 1990). Although division of household activities is confined to a rather speculative level in archaeology. which inhabited the architectural spaces. At Lıga. each generation of the KSB culture was probably marked by such unhappy conflagration experiences. The integration is sustained by common housing. Water jar discovered in four separate clusters in House 3. comprising a nucleated or extended family (Tringham & Krstic 1990). involvement in daily activities. and in caring. Perhaps this explains why every wooden pole at Lıga. which would promote the spread of fire within a settlement. advertising their roofing services. a ritual activity of such a nature would point towards a self-destructive even suicidal psychology of society. but there were no signs of pragmatic actions to fetch or look for re-usable items. Sahlins 1972). as described by Vitruvius.60 Acta Archaeologica Fig. in this very particular case. these ´ numbers have been supported by an excavations at . Recently. but regular starts from scratch were probably perceived as a frightening perspective. Indeed. Rejuvenation acts might have been refreshing. feared and real. the internal installations and inventories at Lıga clearˆ ly indicate the autonomous nature of the social units. ˆ some of the house inventories stayed exposed and probably intact (many of the items were indeed unaffected or only modestly affected by fire). is that when a conflagrated settlement was abandoned. Acknowl´ edging the conceptual complexity of the term (cf. there was no looking back. as if taboo laws were protecting its contents. always start by naming their means of precaution against fire. Modern thatchers. III. in this study. Nucleated settlements situated on elevated sites have enjoyed fresh winds from the plains. cases. it is possible to employ house and household as synonyms.22. however. It has been generally accepted that the smallest socio-economic unit of early agricultural societies is the household. Estimations of household sizes vary between 3–5 persons (basic family) to 6–8 (extended family) (Chapman 1981. What remains puzzling. Some make a layer of gypsum. ˆ even in the roof. which integrates all members. Reconstruction is presented in Plate 11:1. Some estimation can also be made on human resources employed. which is unlikely. was plastered with clay: isolation measures that were also fire protecting. also the aged and the children.

Moreover. it provides evidence on the number of inhabitants attached to each house. destroyed by later trenches. skeletal remains of 41 individuals were found (Matsanova 2000. partly preserved remains. This remarkable discovery is the first well-documented testimony to inter-communal clashes in the prehistory of Bulgaria. usually pottery. Generally. including the Thracian plain. often on top of fragmented or intact ceramic vessels. The rest were either eroded to varying degrees. with the exception of NE Bulgaria (the famous Varna graves). Matsanova. This in itself is a significant statement about social behaviour of a Copper Age population. In layers belonging to the final Late Copper Age settlement (originally occupying ca.Lıga ˆ 61 Fig. and covered with burned architectural debris. indicating that the apparent lack of burials in the region. lying at slopes. One house contained skeletal remains of two individuals. the tell of Yunatsite.85 ha). there was a marked differentiation in house size. 28 persons were found lying on house floors. as stated by V. The scenario thus implies a return of the surviving part of the community. two houses of four. The skeletal finds between the burned houses. Several skeletons were found in unnatural postures. Six of the houses contained skeletal remains (although some were lacking a full set of bones. like skulls. 1. III. perhaps an indication of scavenging by wild animals after the abandonment of the settlement). Pazardjik (Matsanova 2000). are proper burials where the body was put into a hocker position and accompanied by grave goods.23. giving proper treatment to their dead members. although with the usual layout of E-W ‘‘streets’’ and structures orientated NS. should not be taken as negative evidence but rather as an archaeological problem. The houses were arranged in a rather dispersed pattern. ‘‘The Sitting Goddess’’ discovered in House 4. Fig. 0. One male had clear signs of head injuries. while the remaining three houses contained re- . some bearing traces of fire. or lying partly in the not yet investigated half of the settlement. Remains of nine houses were recorded. but only one was investigated fully. are included in this number).

62

Acta Archaeologica

Fig. III.24. Eight flint blades and part of a blade (proximal end) found together at the oven in House 3. These were most likely kept together in a pouch, perhaps made of leather or other perishable material. Note also the oven plug.

spectively five, six and seven individuals, including children. Bearing in mind the total number of individuals (41), divided among nine houses, the average household amounts to 41⁄2 individuals, plus the survivors. Probably the larger houses also held more people than the smaller ones. The mean available house space of a settlement can also be used to predict the size of the community. According to R. Naroll, one individual averages 10 m2 (external measures), including storage, stables etc. (Naroll 1962). The latter are not present at Lıga where each person, on the average, may ˆ have required only half this space or slightly more. The Lıga 2 houses, of 30–40 m2 internally and 40– ˆ 50 m2 externally, may thus have accommodated an extended family of about seven individuals. Accepting the size of the household as 5–7, it is expected that a whole settlement the size of Lıga 2, ˆ i.e., composed of 20–22 houses, had a population of

100–150 individuals. This is in accordance with implications from recent studies in brain development and social interaction – larger populations having difficulties in functioning as one. R. Dunbar has thus noticed a strong correlation between the social behaviour of primates and the size of their neocortex, suggesting that the need to increase group size, and hence social complexity, acted as a mechanism of selection in the evolvement of large neocortices (Dunbar 1995; 1996). Establishing a neocortex ratio to the rest of the brain as 1:4, he predicts that the most effectively functioning human group will consist of approximately 150 members (i.e., three times as many as chimpanzees). Apparently, such prediction of the optimum group size is supported by grouping patterns prevalent at different levels of human society, as exemplified by Dunbar’s research on modern and historic data. The main challenge of the Lıga project was to unˆ

Lıga ˆ
cover and study the structural remains in their full extent, attempting not only to look at the variations in pottery production but also to recognize the settings in which the pottery was used. Allowing a friendly irony towards local passion for pottery research (perfectly understandable in the light of the amount and apparent approachability of pottery as a source of information), efforts were made at Lıga to ˆ include other ‘‘tokens’’, with equal degree of attention, into the universe created by the pottery. The anthropology of technology offers an instrumental approach aiding in recognition of social groups through analyses of mundane products such as utilitarian pottery, tools, and architecture (Lemonnier 1992). It is believed that social information is stored in the steps and choices made during manufacture as well as use of material culture (Stark et al. 1995; with references). Such behavioural variation reflected in the material culture is determining what is named a technological style. Architecture is considered the most complex although also the most informative medium of technological style (Stark et al. 1995). Construction techniques, choice of materials, and use of domestic space are traits that demonstrate a particular resilience to change (as opposed to stylistic variation), and are often significant indicators of social boundaries (Stark et al. 1995). According to various definitions of culture, regardless of whether these are emphasizing behavioural patterns or recurring sets of material remains, technical style is part of the ‘‘package’’. Not all aspects of a cultural package are being transmitted from a given core area, however, making conglomerates such as the KSB culture less well defined. Thus, it is important to account not only for one trait such as the stylistics of pottery, but also for architecture and use of space, among many other things. Despite limitations in the architectural data from sites attributed to the KSB culture, it is possible to undertake several overall comparisons, adding to a better understanding of the KSB cultural profile. Seemingly, variation can be used as a temporal signature, especially in cases where information is obtained on the general layout of a settlement. A great potential in this respect is displayed by the Telish-Redutite site, which still awaits a detailed publication concerning the issue of use of space in domestic contexts.

63
Nevertheless, it is already now possible to state that the conceptual starting point for Redutite was the same as for Lıga. For instance, it has been revealed ˆ in discussions with the excavator that, among other similarities with Lıga, the houses at Redutite also had ˆ ovens installed at the middle of the northern wall, entrances in the southern one (cf. Gergov 1992a). Some confusion has been created in the terminology used to describe building techniques. For instance, V. Gergov, when discussing the findings at Redutite, mentions that a special building technique was applied to erect the houses (Gergov 1992a; 1994, 304). Without definition, and with a mere reference to the structures at various Tripolye sites excavated by T. Passek half a century ago, he applies the term ‘‘glinobitna’’ in Russian. At the same time, Gergov mentions the use of poles (7–12 cm in diameter) dug into foundation trenches at every 50–60 cm., and that the dwellings of each Redutite settlement were burned, hence the good preservation (Gergov 1992a; 1994, 304). ‘‘Glinobitna’’ in Russian should be translated as pise or terre pise (6). Therefore, H. Todorova, ´ ´ in her presentation of the prehistoric development of Bulgaria, writes that ‘‘the buildings excavated in Telish have thick clay-covered walls without posts or wattle’’ (Todorova 2003, 288). The early publications by Passek on the structures at Tripolye have also led others to perplexing conlusions, e.g., the use of ‘‘adobes’’ in construction of the houses (Lazarovici & Lazarovici 2003, 412). Pounded earth, or pise/terre pise, are terms ap´ ´ plied to describe earth compacted by ramming (Rapp 2002). This advantegeous technique is more complicated than e.g., wattle and daub. Pise walls do not ´ burn, and burning of a thatched or reed roof would have very limited thermal effects, not even causing a redening of the clay. The erection of pise walls is ´ dependent on a well-balanced composition of raw materials in order to prevent shrinkage. In fact, only a small amount of clay is needed and more than 30% clay results in rapid erosion (Rapp 2002). The rammed earth technique is known in Bulgaria

6. Cf. the Russian edition of ‘‘A Dictionary of Archaeology’’, W. Bray & D. Trump 1970 (not quoted in the General Bibliography).

64

Acta Archaeologica
exceptionality of the Telish-Redutite site is based on false premises (cf. Bailey 2000; Todorova 2003). Knowing that many other Late Copper Age sites in Bulgaria have houses with substantial wooden poles in their walls (diameter of 15–25 cm), it is probable that the light wall construction in the Telish region reflects environmental constrains. Even the houses of the Redutite IV building horizon of post-Copper Age date – demonstrating a general break with earlier stylistic and technological traditions – had a light frame constructed for daubing (Gergov 1996). The consumption of wood and possibly clearing too could well have been greater than the natural regeneration pace of the trees of the region. Looking at the broader picture, the available information on KSB houses is restricted. There are only a few cases of fully excavated architectural remains. Generally, the built structures comply with the described principles. Few exceptions, such as the stone houses at Galatin, NW Bulgaria (Georgieva 1995b) and Beligovo, E Serbia (Nikolic ´ 1998) erected on the top of stony hills may reflect an adaptation rather than changing architectural principles. Copper Age societies were not devoid of innovative potential, but the faithful subscription to constant patterns of settlement arrangement and house building may indicate that architecture was governed by less tangible ideas than the mere need for shelter. The settlement and the house can thus be viewed as an agent of communal identity.

ˇ in both the Neolithic and the Early Copper Age (Cochadziev 2003a). At the Neolithic site of Gulubnink, ˇ situated in the Struma Valley, the technique has correctly been described as a ‘‘beaten-clay’’ technique, when the building material ‘‘did not differ from that ˇ of the surrounding terrain’’ (Cochadziev 2003a). In ˇ the ethnographic record of Bulgaria, rammed earth techniques are also known, primarily in the northern part of the country, including the region of Pleven ˇ (Cochadziev 1997, 10; Georgieva 1983, 197). The ˇ walls of these houses are described as being 0.5–0.6 m thick, made of a clay mixed with chaff, which is shaped in a wooden frame outlining the house (Georgieva 1983, 197). The walls are built of layers 0.50 m high, the finished house composed of five such layers (Georgieva 1983, 197). Returning to the Tripolye houses, these have been described as ‘‘built of thick poles, joined by wickerwork and plastered over with clay’’ (Mongait 1959; but also Gimbutas 1956; Passek & Chernykh 1963; Stanko et al. 1997, 253, Figs. 64 & 65). The use of pounded earth is only found in connection with floors and grinding terraces (ibid.). Thus, it is not correct to apply the pounded earth term to Tripolye features. The architecture of the Tripolye culture and, to a certain extent, of the Gumelnita culture (as known in ¸ Moldavia and Ukraine, i.e., the areas of Lower Danube and Lower Prut) is characterized by so-called house platforms. The house platforms were created with the help of clay rolls tempered with plant matters laid tightly upon a wooden base und fired (in some cases the rolls were fired prior to their arrangement) (Chernysh 1965; Passek 1965, 8, as cited by Bejlekchi 1978, 61 & 67). Such a technical solution for making floors is more closely related to adobe than to the rammed earth technique. Walls, celings and ovens in Tripolje were made with the use of wattling and daub, however (Chernysh 1965; Passek 1965, 8, as cited by Bejlekchi 1978, 61 & 67). Bearing all this in mind, it is safe to conclude that the houses in Redutite were daub houses with a relatively light, but dense wattle construction. This is also indicated by the fragments of walls from Redutite of burned daub with a high content of clay exhibited at the Historical Museum of Pleven. The same construction technique was, as noted, recorded in adjacent Lıga. Hence, it can be demonstrated that the stated ˆ

TYPES OF SETTLEMENT SITES Regional and supra-regional perspectives have proved highly valuable for the understanding of Lıga and ˆ yielded a far more complex picture of a Late Copper Age settlement than hitherto assumed. The traditional idea is that the seemingly short-lived KSB settlements were mainly located at high altitudes, or in caves, in contrast to the long-lasting tell settlements of the KGK VI complex on the Thracian plain to the east of KSB (e.g., Todorova 1986). The simplistic assumption that tells always represent a permanent occupation has been challenged by investigations at the Podgoritsa tell in NE Bulgaria, demonstrating that repeated episodes of rising water tables forced settlers to abandon the tell and move to dry locations (Bailey

. but no defens- 65 ive measures. and the remains of the Late Copper Age settlement at Golemanovo Kale have been damaged by later occupation. following information from local residents.40 ha. Zaminets (Nikolov 1975). with a minimum of five (pers. such as Sadovec-Golemanovo Kale. These sites are naturally protected by steep slopes at three sides. were established at the edge of a plateau with a ˆ commanding view of the surroundings.2 ha. (C) Open-air plateau settlements. This is seen not only through reoccupation of the same space but also in rebuilding and extension activities. despite presence of built structures. the biggest. The occupational debris of Sadovec-Ezero can be subdivided in 6 building horizons with a total thickness of almost 4 m.075–0. Devetaki at Lovech. Other strongholds found elsewhere in the KSB area appear to have been additionally fortified by earth or even stone walls. 2001 & 2002). perceived to be pivotal in the geographical and cultural landscape. Krivodol (Nikolov 1984 and pers. I. they resemble the earlier settlements at Varna Lake on the Black Sea coast. None of the abovementioned sites are static but rather changing in function and purpose. By the end of the Copper Age a new type of settlement emerged in the KSB area. inspection of treasure hunter pits in 2000. a saddle-like hillock in a canyon below ranges of high rising hills. have suffered damage by modern use. The only example in the Telish region is Sadovec-Ezero. occupational debris has been discovered in ˆ the caves of Ochilata and Iglen. During the end of the Copper Age. such as Redutite and Lıga. The area useable for structures was 0. Okhoden Kaleto (Nikolov 1968). (E) Caves are common in the Telish-Sadovec area. and Pipra. The strongholds are usually oblong.2 ha were very many sherds of Late Copper Age pottery and milling stones. all these locations were later chosen for heavily fortified Late Antiquity strongholds. but the majority seems to be temporal shelters for herdsmen. with one occupation phase (Todorova 1992). the site also included part of the neighbouring Sado- . No indications of settlement could be found on the higher lying areas around.. which impart limitations on the settlement size. (F) pile dwellings. Late and post-Roman pottery was also present. The top of the terrace is marked by two presumable Thracian tumuli.g. thus only 8–10 house may have existed at one and the same time.18 and 0. The majority is also severely damaged by intensive cultivation and thus less attractive archaeologically than the high altitude sites. have produced evidence that KSB setˆ tlers felt a strong attachment to certain places. It is lying on the lower terrace by a stream. Unfortunately. Elsewhere in the KSB area. observations of treasure hunter trenches in 2001 and 2002). Unfortunately.. Despite the lack of topographic restrictions. the available area being around 0. at the time of its 4th settlement (out of 6). remains the finest example of cave settlements (Mikov & Dzambazov 1960). The area occupied by houses ranges between 0. 0. doubletrenches and palisades – e. such settlement sees a dense concentration of houses.2 ha with a maximum capacity of 20–23 houses.g. suitable for extensive occupation. found in wetland areas such as Negovatsi (Georgieva ˇ 1995a) and Krajnitsi close to Pernik (Cochadziev ˇ 2003a).7). the majority of sites are around 0. with between 20 and 35 houses.or ellipse-shaped hills. Not accidentally. e. especially during Redutite II (Gergov. excavations at Redutite. gradually sloping upwards towards the North. being only accessible by land bridges or less steep slopes. In a ploughed field and an area of ca. since no local name could be obtained. The site is marked as NN on the map (Fig. pers. (D) Open-air low-lying settlements were also established. thus. One such was recorded between Telish and Sadovec. In and around Telish (mainly to the east) there are at least five types of settlement. Pekliuk at Sofia (Petkov 1964). e. creating a sharp division between the built and the unbuilt space. Such lowlying settlements have been somewhat ignored and are merely noted in survey reports. refuge places are established on hilltops in remote areas. as well as human bones. next to Lıga. Cave settleˇ ments can be differentiated according to the intensity of occupation.comm.08 ha. (B) Minor sites with difficult access were established at obscure locations and hence tentatively interpreted as refuges.Lıga ˆ 1999).g. tongue. on the river Vit. Sadovec-Ezero stands out as the best example. Upstream. (A) Strongholds. On the other hand. production of feta-like cheeses.). Pipra has never been properly investigated. further away.

it can be assumed that at least two settlements coexisted. Lıga 1 ceramics shares features with ˆ pottery from the Sadovec sites. It is difficult to establish how many of the settlements in the Telish region were contemporary. vec-Kaleto locality. e. as well as in the Early and Late Bronze Age. Chapter VII. such considerations have little value. In the Early Bronze Age the site was fortified by a massive wall. below). Tentatively. Later on. and in Late Antiquity.66 Acta Archaeologica vec-Kaleto. The two-partite settlement was rejected in favour of Sadovec-Kaleto – with no restriction on settlement – during the time of the so-called Transitional period. Pottery from Golemanovo Kale has exact parallels in Sadovec-Ezero at the time of its expansion onto Sado- .g. Acknowledgement of the flint sources at Sadovec and Pipra indicates that the settlers at Lıga ˆ were familiar also with these localities (cf. However. an open-air settlement and a defended site in its hinterland (6–10 km away). as long as the full chrono-typological sensitivity of the pottery in question has not been established. the site was used as a Christian burial site.

the best-preserved remains were discovered under the road. according to litmus paper). the excavated part of the settlement – separated from the arable by a road – was not deep-ploughed. coded sorting of shards according to morphological traits and surface treatment. especially during the first season. The patination of flint artefacts is likewise progressed. it can be concluded. In fact. CERAMIC FINDS PRESERVATION Despite the relatively limited thickness of the cultural deposits at Lıga. the qualitative differentiation of pottery appeared to be limited to just two categories. detailed description of whole or reconstructable vessels or conspicuous vessel parts. Lıga 1. In the lowest layers. For all three processing procedures a standardised data sheet was designed corresponding to the entries of a pottery database. coarse and very coarse wares. with varying degrees of complexity: streamlined sorting of shards according to tempering. In the upper cultural horizon of Lıga 2.300 kg of pottery. allowing for closeˆ up investigation of a homogeneous data set. conditions of preservation vary sigˆ nificantly depending on depth. During the summer dry – as observed on location in 2000 – the soil sees cracks up to 0. This is particularly common for areas outside the houses where the pottery was not affected by secondary burning or protected by a less permeable layer of fallen structural debris. In fact. that the excavated part of the settlement was the better preserved one. The same was even more apparent in the case of occasional occurrences of shards from later periods. Almost all studies focused on the numerous and better preserved remains of Lıga 2. First of all. the investigators were faced with a huge amount of shards from disturbed or uncertain contexts. Recovery of whole vessels provided information on morphological features and substantiated shapeorientated recording. the surface of the pottery shards is ceˆ mented by the calcareous soils. Some shards appear with washed out or exfoliated surfaces. POTTERY: SORTING PROCEDURES Pottery processing at Lıga was dictated by realities ˆ already presenting themselves during the excavation. in some cases to such a degree that the original surface can hardly be recognised. Thus.5 m deep. Protected only by a thin layer of humus. Significant amount of pottery was also collected from Lıga 1 layers but discrete qualitative disˆ tinctions between the two sets of pottery allowed for an immediate separation of mixed materials. The combined actions of physical and chemical properties of the soil have thus resulted in relatively poor conditions of preservation for toplevel pottery. it became evident that the main body of pottery was related to the Lıga 2 episode at ˆ the site. The degree of fragmentation did not appear to be fluctuating in any pattern depending on the depth: indicating that the excavated area had undergone limited post-depositional disturbance. Eventually. As work progressed. the calcareous environment has ˆ created high pH values of the soil (8. the effects of which being clearly observable on pottery. none of the described factors had any noteworthy impact on bones. supposedly marked by an increasing use of organic and especially shell tempering (Georgieva . Secondly. Often the upper layer of a shard is flaking in thin scales making recognition of decoration and finishing a complicated task. and. methods for processing pottery were designed with reference to the material produced by the Lıga 2 ˆ settlement. The main excavated area of 275 m2 (excluding survey trenches) yielded almost 1. All attempts at this stage to differentiate between excavated shards did not produce categories that could be readily and unambiguously recognised. as based on fabric and surface treatment.IV. three processing procedures evolved. When all the land of Telish became intensively cultivated. the SORTING OF SHARDS: TEMPERING MATERIAL General crudeness of the pottery created the impression that it was related to the latest phase of the Copper Age. the pottery is further affected by moisture and fluctuations of temperature. Pottery fragmentation turned up to be low with an average of 20 g per shard (excluding whole vessels or pottery concentrations on house floors). Apparently.

642 shards weighting 248 kg. Acknowledging that different vessel types have different life-spans and varying patterns of fragmentation (Rice 1987. As noted. Within each group. or biconic cups). this sorting procedure was considered meaningful in establishing a general profile of the pottery production during the Lıga 2 settlement. as just mentioned. It was constructed in two steps. Furthermore. Then. handles/lugs/bosses. the rim diameter. varying in size but repetitive in terms of shape. IV. the sorting ˆ procedure did not include whole vessels or shard concentrations observed on house floors. but only 11 of these appeared to be statistically significant (Fig. IV.68 Acta Archaeologica counted. in places of waste deposition and in areas of particular outdoor activities. weighted and coded according to definitions on the data entry sheet. thickness of wall and vessel type (open/closed vessel) were noted as well. Orton et al. exhibiting general ideas on pottery production. 15 different tempering groups were established.B). When sorted. ˆ 1993). Table 9. decoration. 4. Information was entered into a database stemming from 230 bags or 575 kg of ceramic shards. In cases of rims. each group was subdivided into plain specimens and specimens with decoration or a particular surface treatment. a note was made on vessel size (big or small). all shards were counted and weighted. Therefore. pointing towards related post-depositional histories. milk strainers. graphic representation of contextual information (drawing Pl. The data entry sheet allowed one to reflect on relations between several shards or shards with several morphological attributes. that the degree of fragmentation was the same throughout the layers (again with exception of the pottery discovered on house floors). bases. all shards from the same excavation unit were sorted into rims. Albeit the numbers are not considered absolute. This included whole vessels as well as shard concentrations and single diagnostic or otherwise informative shards. Comments and drawings were made of rare and exceptional features of shape and decoration. Fig. As a result. The procedure involved sorting of shards from the same excavation unit into groups according to tempering materials.A). the frequency of appearance of formal attributes or surface treatment techniques was considered to be diagnostic. Field recording procedures included 3D measurement of individual pottery scatters as polygons or points mapped with Total Station (TS) (Pl. like pot-stands. inclusions were easily distinguished by fresh breaking with tongs. 1993). CODED SORTING OF SHARDS: MORPHOLOGICAL CHARACTERISTICS & SURFACE TREATMENT DETAILED DESCRIPTION OF VESSELS AND SHARD CONCENTRATIONS This sorting procedure was applied when significant evidence was collected on pottery shapes and surface treatment as based on finds of whole or nearly whole vessels. Thorough recording was undertaken both inside and outside the buildings. the initial sorting procedure based on non-plastic inclusions demonstrated. pottery types.1). Shards within each subgroup were Pottery recovered in closed and undisturbed contexts (in situ) was treated with special attention. and exceptional or noteworthy features. The total number was 12. with percentage of each in the Lıga 2 material. non-plastic inclusions became the most significant variable in shard sorting during the first season. Firstly.1. Table of defined tempering groups. body shards and fragments of ‘‘standard forms’’ (that is. shards were further subdivided according to morphological traits. 4.4. Shards of other periods than the Lıga 2 settlement were separated and treated acˆ cordingly. only rarely a hand lens was used. shoulders. photo documentation and immediate descrip- . In most cases. When possible.

Other impurities. but angular ones are also occurring. the basic technological prescriptions involved clay mixed with organic matter and strengthened with one or both of the hard-core elements – quartz/sand and chamotte. positions (rim/bottom position in relation to each other). Organic matter was the most common.. it was almost always present.g. Such may be fresh plant material (from very fine grasses leaving linear voids in a section to crude straws with corresponding somewhat angular voids). the daub contained bigger lumps of calcareous inclusions and ochre. of almost equal importance. The clay is light grey in colour and contains very fine plant material. Evidently. in both Lıga 1 and 2. and the decision was thus made to treat any considerable amount of quartz inclusions as . termed tempering groups. The upper layers of the clay deposits at the site contain finegrained sand. 1/3rd of the 300 vessels was only graphically reconstructed in part. and assigned individual numbers of Total Station measurement. intentional. based on the assumption that it reflects a technological choice. However. The Copper Age potters. easily crumbling into separate grains. Almost 300 whole or reconstructable vessels were discovered from primary contexts (and 100. The low level of impurities was appreciated by Late Antiquity potters settled in the area: these did not need levigation to refine the clays for high quality products. had to make proper choices of tempering material to achieve a balanced composition of paste suitable for prehistoric firing conditions. It can be coarsely (2–4 mm) or finely crushed (0. or. one reaching 22 cm in length. Quartz/sand is found in a range of sizes. The sorting of pottery shards according to nonplastic inclusions occurring in the fabric produced the above list of 15 different combinations.0 mm). The angular form and size of these grains correlate with the quartz inclusions found in the fabric of part of the shards. Soil from the vessels was also sampled. as occasionally lenses of sand or iron rich flakes. drawing. it usually dominates. etc. a small part of all shards (among these a few fragments of Late Antiquity pottery) contained very fine mica. by contrast. Several grainy sandstones. The main part of the chamotte originate from crushed pottery but fired clays are also noted (distinguished by a more pulverulent state).5 mm.Lıga ˆ tion of vessel types. discovered on the site were severely burned and brittle. chamotte was used for production of both coarse and fine wares. allowing the assumption that such stones could indeed have served as a source for quartz tempering. Such description was further expanded when shards/vessels were collected and bagged. when it appears in combination with other tempering materials. A rich deposit of sedimentary clays (likely 6–8 m in thickness) was discovered at the foot of the plateau where the site is situated. if needed. 69 proper tempering material. where seasonal re-deposition of clays was taking place. e. morphological. Like the other tempering materials. The use of calcareous inclusions was also import- POTTERY RAW MATERIALS AND FABRICS Initial information on raw materials used in pottery production at Lıga was gained through burned pieces ˆ of daub. directions of fall. at the stream. indicating that at least one other source of clay has been in use. The post-excavation procedures included careful cleaning. or animal dung. states of preservation. Chamotte (or grog) is appearing in great abundance. Four groups are represented by very small numbers and might in fact reflect experiments or foreign origins. it is also possible that another source of clay with such constituents was mined.5–1. In the case of coarse ˆ wares. tend to lump in separate layers. would be too time-consuming. Therefore. recovered from uncertain ones). usually in quite high frequencies. any modest occurrence of calcareous inclusions or ochre in pottery was considered natural. and metrical. due too high fragmentation or/and fragility. though most frequently in grains between 1–2 mm. Finally. predominantly smaller cups and bowls. and technological description. The inclusions are mostly rounded. Examination of the paste raised the known problem of when presence of aplastics in clays should be regarded as natural. Of course. since their reconstruction. mending and partial restoration. The focus is on fabric types containing quartz inclusions. Besides intentionally added aplastics. The second and third in importance is quartz and chamotte (grog). Fine pottery may contain quartz particles of only 0. indicating that these were occurring naturally in the clay deposits in question.

According to the Bulgarian tradition of description. Bulgaria for the opportunity to study materials from Hotnitsa at first hand. as the name is suggesting. curator at the Historical Museum of V. Tarnovo. ˆ ˆ Whereas the greatest proportion of non-organic inclusions in Lıga 2 pottery fall within the size interval ˆ 1–2 mm. Pottery found in the Lıga 2 settlement differs from ˆ the pottery of Lıga 1 not only in quality. which creates rough surfaces in no particular pattern. but with a slightly higher percentage in Lıga 2. seldom with chamotte. The amount of these non-plastic constituents was moderate in frequency and only when evenly distributed considered as intentionally added. which sees only six tempering groups. rustication of the surface is achieved by applying a thick layer of clay to a vessel in leather-hard state. The author is grateful to Nedko Elenski. however. but also in ˆ composition of the tempering constituents. Lıga 1 potters also produced pottery with ˆ ˆ tempering materials of Group V but were less in favour of calcareous clays than the potters of Lıga 2. Among the curiosities were several coarse pottery shards richly tempered with crushed flint (3–4 mm) and quartz/sand. . thick-walled and relatively well-fired vessels (at least two). DECORATION The frequency of decorated shards from Lıga 2 (inˆ cluding rims. Evenly burnished. Depending on the pattern of distribution of the applied clay. lustrous. MA. Although sometimes both types of rustication might be combined with other decorative elements and create a certain impression of exclusivity. Concerning tempering materials. in contrast with the coarse brown coloured pottery of Lıga 2 (see below). while some pottery is only tempered with organic matter. such surface treatment is mainly reserved for ‘‘dom1. is also a rough relief application. The discovery of a relatively high representation of organic matters led to the recognition that organic tempering is often overlooked in Copper Age pottery from Bulgaria. easily scratched with a nail. in kg. Fig. representing big.5 mm in the case of Lıga 1. 10YR-4/1. Group III occurs in ˆ ˆ both settlements. Calcareous inclusions dominate. The upper settlement of this tell is well investigated and dates to the Late Copper Age (Angelov 1958. 1959. ˆ Remarkably. barbotine is an application of thick slip. The size of inclusions is the other variable that differentiates Lıga 1 pottery from that of Lıga 2. the slip being distributed on the surface by trailing fingers so that parallel ridges are raised in a certain pattern. is. in fired state. only material from two houses was investigated. 10YR-5/2). The use of sand is very limited. the most frequent inclusion size lies around 0. Bulgarian scholars differentiate between ‘‘barbotine’’ and ‘‘finger trailing’’ (other archaeologists would call both forms barbotine surface treatment). the function of which has not been established. ant. Whereas Tempering Groups IV and IX (cf. a great uniformity in combination exists at Hotnitsa. studies were also undertaken on finds from the Hotnitsa Tell (History Museum of Veliko Tarnovo). The material. 10YR-3/1. and often extremely shiny surfaces add a further dimension to these ceramics. attributed to the KGK VI cultural complex. stemming ˆ from 21 houses. homogenous in size and with colours ranging from grey to black (Munsell Colour Chart. these appeared as white or yellowish soft inclusions. which are more often left undecorated than body shards) is high: 31%. While finger trailing. ˆ In an attempt to obtain comparative data. IV. the occurrence of Groups I and II is much higher in Lıga 1 than in Lıga 2. Due to the large quantity of finds.1) make up the preferred composition in both Copper Age settlements. ˆ Generally. no doubt intended to be functional. Other comparative studies suggest that the variation in tempering combinations during Lıga 2 is ˆ a reflection of social phenomena discussed in sections below. At least 1⁄4th of all shards contained some amount of calcium carbonates (lime or calcite. described and photographed (1). This is perhaps not surprising since the most common form of ‘‘decoration’’ is surface rustication. usually horizontal or vertical (reflecting the direction of trailing).70 Acta Archaeologica thus parallel in time to Lıga. virtually no pottery with organic constituents alone has been attributed to the Lıga 1 settleˆ ment. but never shells). Such tempering practice was attested on a handful of shards only. In general. the pottery of Lıga 1 is represented by ˆ fine wares made of well-sorted fabrics with moderate amounts of inclusions. often in combination with organic matter. 1961).

flutes. barrel shaped vessels. A common type of decoration is horizontal im- . implying that spiral ornamentation was created using two sticks – bound together with a cord (the distance between them could be regulated by rolling the cord) – which then could be used in the same way as modern callipers. IV. raised bosses. Patterns composed of incised spirals are often associated with 71 Fig. spiral or curvilinear patterns characteristic of graphite painted pottery have also been executed with the help of incisions. Big storage jar found in House 2 decorated with incised pattern of spirals. A combination of two (or three – 11 cases in all) decorative elements is found on 3% of the shards. impressed with sticks. but in very small quantities.Lıga ˆ estic ware’’. as can be seen from the collected fragments. IV. is limited to different combinations of the said fingernail and fingertip impressions. the latter raising certain demands on raw materials (graphite). incisions might be seen as a substitute for graphite painted decoration. allowing the assumption that pottery rustication must have been viewed as a functional. reinforcing vessels. and minimising abrasive impact. dots (Fig. also shell impressions and rounded or triangular punctates/pits. and biconic ‘‘soup/soaking tureens’’ (Type ‘‘G’’. see below). 60% was of finger trailing and 15% of barbotine proper. The repertoire of more elaborate decoration techniques. often on cordons. disregarding barbotine and finger trailing). that is. The proportion of rusticated ware is very high in the assemblage of Lıga 2. Excised and graphite painted decoration is also present. Thus. Incision is made with a sharp or blunted thin stick (up to 2 mm) moved in horizontal lines or in more complex patterns over the whole body. Note the dots. A horizontal band or a cordon of fingernail or/and -tip impressions often separates the smoothed rim/neck from the rusticated body. incised decoration. fabric and surface treatment (burnishing).2). There is a certain regularity observed in a distribution of dots. rather than as a decorative surface treatment technique. a frequency no doubt underrepresented to judge from whole vessels. The most frequent type of combination involves barbotine or finger trailing. Looking at the distribution of decoration types within 25% of the whole amount of fragmented decorated pottery (that is.2. decoration composed of more than one element is rare. big storage vessels. The functionality of such surface treatment can be appreciated in several ways: creating better gripping surfaces. Generally. ˆ Based on 126 kg of decorated shards. Complex patterns of joint lines organised in circular. The remaining types of decoration make up only 25%. the most common type of decoration is incised (26%). scratched and brushed surface decoration are seen.

Frequently. Incised decoration is also common. occasionally with white or red incrustation. Both types represented by a number of shards giving impression of complex patterns consisting of multiple lines. Painted decoration was mainly found on the upper part of vessels. Excised decoration is somewhat deeper than the incised. Sometimes the stick was stuck into the clay at an angle. Related to the type of decoration is a true relief decoration: an applied cordon with fingernail and/or fingertip impressions (20%). Such decoration is usually applied on the whole vessel surface in interchanging directions. rows of oval or narrow rectangular punctuates are horizon- . In both cases. or. Another type of raised decoration is small bosses organised in a single horizontal row or covering part of the vessel body (2%). Bowls are decorated around the lip and rim on the inside. the resulting pattern resembling triangular fingertip/nail impressions. with complex graphite patterns prevailing. This type of decoration can also be considered a rustication of the surface. It might also be used to terminate barbotine or finger trailing rustication. Applied cordons (occasionally with evenly spread fingertip impressions on top) could be used to create complex patterns organized in circles and spirals and oblique protuberances (5%). but less frequently. Ideally. Seemingly. pressions with fingernails and fingertips (25%). creating a honeycomb pattern. A relatively common type of decoration during the Copper Age is created with the help of punctates/ shallow pits. narrow rectangular tip (5%). The same decoration effect as fingertip impression could also be achieved with a stick with flattened tip. Sometimes rims were also ornamented from within. Andreasen.. As the previous. covering the whole surface. Pottery rustication techniques have also been applied by the potters of Lıga 1. Among the rare types are excised decoration (3%) and graphite (2%). which usually does not involve the neck. or double-directional (less common) and performed in a pinching manner. as the orientation of impressions was changing from row to row. 6). but is similar in groove width. 1. Frequently. impressions have a narrow crescent shape. as identified by N. occasionally. but in combination with red.5– 2. since often the whole vessel surface was treated in such manner. ˆ Fine-ware pottery such as biconic jars and bowls are frequently decorated with fluting techniques (6%). This type of decoration has not been discovered on whole vessels at Lıga. This type of decoration was applied in repeated rows and sometimes covered the whole surface. The last significantly represented decoration type (1%) is pottery with scratched or brushed surface. triangular. which can be unidirectional. this decoration type is reserved to more exclusive pottery types. this type of decoration is used to create a raised band intended to separate the neck from the remaining part of the body. which are produced with a small stick with either oval. from either side. painted pottery held a much greater proportion of the sherdage. Soft clay was brushed with a bundle of coarse grass stems or similar material. Inˆ stead. closed vessels. Copenhagen and Cambridge universities. this is also used to separate (e. Raised decoration was also used in a more elaborate manner. but the ones made with shell edges (most likely freshwater mussels of the Microcondylaea Compressa species.72 Acta Archaeologica tally separated with incised lines. Flutes can be arranged in concentric circles or oblique lines around the shoulder of bipartite. Impressions made with shells at right angles are often found on shoulders of biconic or other bipartite vessels (3%). in 2001) are significantly broader. this type of ornamentation was intended to create a pattern of vertical waves. Similar type of decoration can also be created with fingernails being pressed into clay at right angle (2%). sometimes a more regular pattern was created by brushing only selected patches of the surface. Graphite motives were usually made in combinations of line groups (3–5 lines. the most elaborate patterns being found in the interior of bowls. yellow and white paints (Pl.0 mm broad). but other elements such as hatched triangles or meanders are also present. the neck from the body) or to accentuate certain parts (usually the shoulders) of a vessel. Often graphite is combined with fluting.g.

which had a durable protective impact on pottery surfaces. that is. 24 as very coarse and only 2 as fine ware pottery. It is important to note. No painted ware has been discovered in this house. Based on the pottery. fired at low temperatures. In general. the area occupied by the house has suffered little damage due to subsequent activities than have the other houses. but was also applied to voluminous closed containers used for storage. House 1 (Pl. 11 whole or nearly whole graphite painted vessels were discovered (Pl. Out of 42 vessels. Clearly. there is a need to make a presentation of the dataset. and abundantly tempered (with organic matter and chamotte as the main constituents). this indicates vessels arranged on shelves. The prevailing decoration technique. after the full disclosure of House 3. except for barbotine and finger trailing. Mending of vessels concentrated on qualitatively outstanding pottery with well-burnished light surfaces. Even the biggest storage containers had only a moderate inclusion frequency and were better fired than the crude pottery from the first mentioned houses. these ideas were abolished. As informative the shard material is. 12). POTTERY AS SOURCE OF INFORMATION PRESENTATION OF DATA Prior to a discussion of the issues related to pottery production. The bulk part was found in a heap of shards at the eastern wall. rusticated or plain surface pottery.8 m2). 16 can be classified as coarse. this number is significantly lower than those of the remaining two houses. All three . House 3 was the biggest structure encountered at the site (internal space of 37. Such dating was in concordance with published information and furthermore confirmed by consultations with Bulgarian scholars. 8 & 9). the material of House 2 (internal space of 34. The manner of surface treatment and decoration is thus closer to the early part of the Copper Age than to its terminal phases. between Copper Age Redutite III and Redutite IV. the below considerations are based on complete or nearly complete specimens discovered in certain contexts. In fact. 10–12). The settlement of Lıga 2 was initially placed in ˆ between the last two settlements of Redutite. The pottery was distributed in a much more concentrated manner than in the other houses. Houses 1 & 2 were mainly investigated during the first field campaign (2000). H. The biggest containers (volumes reaching 250 litres) were standing on the floor. this is not the case. both structures were dated to the very end of the Copper Age. the latter phase attributed to the so-called Transitional Period (to the Early Bronze Age). primarily inside built structures. that graphite paint was not reserved for smaller vessels. this was the only house at Lıga 2 that contained graphite ˆ painted pottery. as well as partial disclosures of other built structures. Nevertheless. The number of shapes is limited to 9. visiting the site in 2001. Surface burnishing is applied on the interior of only a few bowls. decorated with painted or complex incised patterns. 51 reconstructable vessels were discovered (Pl.3 m2. In fact. smaller vessels were stacked in at least two levels. However. Despite the fact that rims of vessels in situ were in some places discovered just 15 cm below the surface. 2003). it can never disclose the full complexity.5 m2) is dominated by unsophisticated. The latter are thin-walled biconic jugs (wall thickness ranging between 3–5 mm). is fingernail/fingertip impressions (22 vessels). technological as ideational of the ceramic production: hence. Todorova. Some archaeologists have tried to explain the lack of graphite painted pottery on Copper Age sites with poor preservation (Todorova et al. according to the typological ordering systems set up in Bulgaria. while above.V. House 2 probably reveals the fullest information on an original collection of vessels (Pl. raised the issue whether this pottery should be dated to the Early Copper Age. often interpreted as food serving ones. found in an area of 28. which this study is based on. the dataset is important since it includes vessels with analogies in the other houses. 7) is represented by 30 complete or reconstructable ceramic vessels. decorated with fluting and small bosses on the shoulders. all falling within the formal repertoire of the KSB culture. At Lıga. since graphite ˆ painting was done prior to burnishing.

1 – pot stand.1. hopefully answered in the following: (1) As to the built structures: Can contemporary structures with qualitatively different contents be functionally equated? – The usual concern of an excavator is to assign different meaning to related but divergent sets of finds. Careful selection of tempering material was important in order to minimize the risk of cracking during firing. collectively stockbreeding or harvesting. So. Fig. The evidence on the pottery production at Lıga conforms to ˆ that of all better investigated sites. (2) As to the diversity of pottery production traditions and their temporal sensitivity: What are the cultural-chronological implications? – In many cases. mainly on big storage containers. this process was reversed. Thus. which can be considered as complementary to at least a partial reconstruction of the pottery technology. Such were gradually discarded. The production process of graphite painted pottery requires a proper surface treatment and graphite as a naturally found mineral. Less travel-keen masters tend to establish production centres.15 cm). closely following the mar- POTTERY PRODUCTION All three houses subjected to detailed investigation contain some evidence on pottery production. evolutionary explanations have been suggested to interpret prehistoric developments in the Balkans. not surprisingly.74 Acta Archaeologica ket and satisfying the demands of the wellinformed mainstream population. sharing and accepting each others ideas on the surrounding world. often with ill-founded explanations and expectations. ØΩ1. The usual Bulgarian practice: trench excavation in limited areas is creating false suppositions. trying to demonstrate the functional variability of structures. As has been noted above. knowing that his. as it appeared that exclusive graphite paint occurred on different types of utilitarian pottery. the existence of qualitatively divergent vessel assemblages stemming from contemporaneous structures poses several important questions. House 3 held the most sophisticated pottery. as much as the knowledge on the Copper Age is restricted. most likely products of the same potter. How then might it be explained that one woman from a particular house was carrying water from the stream at the foot of Lıga in a dull water jar. though. possibly a tournette. However. Items associated with production of pottery. V. Coarse particles could also complicate surface treatment. it is evident that only context-designed excavation and recording procedures can provide a reliable profile of a site. or her. 13).4 cm. The graphite painted pottery often has the character of mass production. Societies are presented as homogenous masses. such a simplified (and intentionally exaggerated) picture can hardly be true. houses were however temporally bound through their spatial relatedness as well as certain vessels with a high degree of resemblance. indicating that it was based on locally available knowledge. while her neighbour for ˆ the same purpose was using a well-burnished. temporally as well as culturally. preferably of Group III (sand and organic matter) and . 2 – cone of graphite (lengthΩ2. Anything extraordinary is explained with the existence of itinerant masters with an urge to travel and a good geographical knowledge. categories were not exclusive. graphite painted pottery is made of clays with moderate amounts of fine tempering constituents. contrasting the other two pottery sets to such a degree that external influences were considered among possible explanations (Pl. At Lıga. shiny graphite painted jar – if not in terms of individualism? (3) As to the implications for archaeological research strategies: Are we doing the right things? – Without going into deeper discussion. work will be appreciated. and an attempt ˆ was made to show that qualitative exclusiveness and find variety is not enough to ‘‘transform’’ a dwelling house into a sanctuary or a community house.

there are 5 oval and flat quartzite stones (2. V. A local origin of graphite painted pottery was also confirmed by the discovery of a graphite cone in House 3. 4 big quartzite balls (3.8 cm). V. Graphite painted motives may cover the upper part or the whole vessel. The item had a characteristic pointed tip (Fig. pers. Director of the Institute of Geology. As to shape and size. V.7–3.5 cm long). but it is most readily available in the mountain regions of Northern Bulgaria (N. Along with big storage jars placed to the West of the oven.2. Sofia for this and other information quoted in the text. Stones found in a spherical pot standing at the oven of House 2. which was broken across the perforated hole for suspension. Despite the enigmatic numeric order. the stones ought be connected with smoothing and burnishing. appearing in the schist layers of the Balkan and Rhodopi mountains. The latter can be grouped according to size.Lıga ˆ 75 Fig.1:1). a vessel of Type ‘‘J’’ (restricted spherical twopartite pot) was discovered. Their small size may indicate that such stones were associated in particular with production and surface treatment of the popular small biconic cups. This contained a small biconic cup with small knobs but without handles plus 14 water rolled stones (Fig. Fig. Nikola Zidarov. as can be deduced from the size of the burnishing strokes. shape. and 2 triangular quartzite pieces (4. Surfaces painted with graphite were better burnished than surfaces. The author is grateful to Dr. Cone of red ochre (ØΩ1. Several fragments of pot stands with flat top were also discovered at Lıga. two others (parts of the same artefact) from a refuse area .1:2). The main group is made up of quartzite with whitish or reddish tinge.0–4. An important find was made in House 2. 3 pieces (fragmented) are of brownish black siltstone.comm.8 cm long). nishing was carried out with stones and possibly bones with a narrow burnishing tip of 2–3 mm. Such consistency is no doubt significant in the light of the possible combinations attested at the site. The bur1. for the complexity of the motives implies that they were well planned before actual decoration.1 cm long).) occasionally Group VI (organic matter). Similar cones are known from Karanovo and other sites (Mikov 1966). its presence in Lıga attests to a considerable movement of ˆ people and/or objects – another important statement about Copper Age society and its mobility and/or network. Perhaps the motives were outlined as incised lines. One reconstructed fragment ˆ comes from House 3 (Ø 21 cm) (Fig. V. Graphite was kept in place by subsequent burnishing of the surface. which were left without it.) (1). Graphite is a quite common polymorph mineral. and stone type. Graphite painted pottery was accomplished through painting with graphite on a vessel’s surface in a leather hard state. which enhanced the vessel’s visual and functional properties.3. In any case.8–4.6 cm long). V. (One square of the background plate equals 1 cm. 3 oblong pointed siltstones (3. Zidarov.3).

2 – a Copper Age example from Lıga. Such conclusion is also confirmed by observations made in Western Africa. much too extensive for successfully compacting a surface. like the interior surface of the shoulders.0 cm thick. Abraded shards.0¿3. so that a vessel would not adhere to the surface.4:2). based on shard material.4:1). i.1–4. Sometimes. analyses of vessel surfaces confirm that scraping was used as one of shaping techniques. These are rounded or oval stone discs.5– 5. The surface was carefully smoothed and the thick walls were made to resist a significant weight. demonstrating that they were formed on flat surfaces.76 Acta Archaeologica Fig.6 cm and 0. but in terms of paste. Besides abraded pottery shards. The contact area of such a shard is around 4–5 cm in length. promoting the suggestion that special workshop areas were not needed for their production. The lower part of the body was in a leather hard state before being joined with the coil of a rim. it is likely that the stands were indeed used in pottery production. V. Concerning possible rotating devices. Such stands are also known from other Copper and Bronze Age sites (Mikov 1966. Figs. which involved repetitive streaking in one direction. the same way as bases are formed. These are often elongated rim shards with one or. edges smoothly abraded (Fig. excessive scraping was done in less visible areas. further refinement of the shape and thinning of the walls were carried out by scraping. Therefore. forming in the palm without using additional clay. 4. Although the functionality of such a device seems dubious in practice. ˆ at the northern wall of House 1. thinning out . colour (light grey) and general appearance closely resembled the first one. V. Several shards were interpreted as pottery burnishers.. while carinated vessels seemingly were built in two parts and joined at the shoulders. in some cases two. V. in kg). it is more likely that the abraded shards were used for scratching and smoothing of vessel surfaces. By contrast. Some bases also show a raised quantity of sand grains. All the investigated vessels with burnished surfaces had traces of long horizontal strokes. indicating that a layer of sand was separating the vessel from the modelling surface. Mikov has suggested that they should be considered hand-tournettes (a turntable device). another group of implements might also have also been employed in scraping. resulting in a more even distribution of the clay. A frequent find among the Lıga 2 material are reˆ cycled pottery shards. where shards with similar abrasion pattern have been seen in action by the author (Fig.8–1. 10–11).e. 1 – modern West African examples. placed on flat bases with the conic protuberance to set the stand on (Mikov 1966). when the basic shape was achieved. The latter was slightly smaller in diameter. the use of molds could not be demonstrated.4. their employment would have been more important for burnishing. These appear in different shapes and reflect distinct functions. Indeed. a part of the clay figurines have impressions of leaves of grass on their feet. At this stage. The main part of the vessels has simple flat bases (81%. V. Bowls were also made using coil techniques. Only tiny miniature vessels were occasionally made by hand molding. Closed containers were built starting from the base. The vessels of Lıga ˆ 2 were built using coiling techniques. The pattern of abrasion shows that they have been used in vertical direction.

A big storage container with a globular body was painted both with graphite and red ochre. their interpretation is not always clear-cut. However. Several big lumps were discovered in House 2. light red (2.Lıga ˆ towards the edges. So. red (2. Several shards with red and yellow (goethite) paint were discovered in layers dated to the Lıga 1 settlement. as on other types of firing installations. ca. This happened prior to firing. Yet other stone tools may also be related to pottery production.5YR-5/6).5).5YR-6/8). light brown (7. darker colours are automatically explained by firing in reduced atmospheres.5Y-8/3). it is predicted that firing would have been carried out at a more sheltered site below the .2). Such firing conditions were not impossible to achieve by the firing installations known from Lıga. Along with the light coloured pottery – presently partly discoloured due to weathering and other post depositional effects – was a small group of darker vessels: brown (10YR-5/3). 6/6). with a flat dorsal edge and ground surface on both sides along the flat edge are also interpreted as being used for pottery smoothing. since their presence in burned daub indicated that they were naturally occurring in local clay sources. present in the clay. the combustion of organic matter not always being concluded. Munsell ˆ Colour Chart: 2. but to ˆ sustain them over a longer period. 6¿9 cm. a potter would need a kiln (Gosselain 1992) (Fig. Stone discs presumably applied for pottery scraping in a leather hard state. This pigment has also been used as pottery paint. V. fired during a longer period. Besides the graphite cone used for pottery painting. V. making combustion control impossible. Evidence on firing – the most demanding part of the production cycle – has only been indirectly collected. The light colours of Lıga 2 vessels: pale yellow. pulverized haematite was applied to the surface of vessel in leather-hard state and then burnished.5YR-6/ 8. Evidence on pottery kilns is very sparse. 12:13). V. it is represented rather sparsely. only ˆ ˆ House 3 held some evidence of use of red pigments. For example. several lumps of haematite or red ochre were found. Graphite painted pottery seems to have been 77 Fig. are being affected over lengthy periods and at temperatures in excess of 850 æC (Gibson & Woods 1997). greyish brown (2. The pattern of abrasion bears witness that the haematite piece was rubbed against a hard. compared to other Late Copper Age sites. flat surface. since the core has the same colour as the surface. In another case. based on formal similarity with the abraded shards. Many vessels had traces of fire clouds – a result of the deposition of carbon during open firing. Investigations of vessel cores show that oxidation was not always complete. V.5Y-5/2) and even dark grey (10YR-4/1).5YR-6/4). and the pottery is generally harder. Even putting all security measures aside. Proper reduction occurs when iron oxides. Among these was a small hemispheric piece with abraded edges and a diameter of 1.6). reddish yellow (7. Such implements were discovered in Houses 1 & 2 (Fig. so that their presence at the site could be explained by decomposed daub. In such a case. partly due to ˆ space limitations but mostly to windy conditions at the top of the plateau.5. Since many archaeologists take colours as an indication of firing conditions. firing of pottery within the settlement at Lıga would not have been possible. and the like all point towards firing in oxidizing conditions. mainly to enhance the vertical loop handles (Pl. paint was applied after the vessel was fired.8 cm (Fig. But without microscopic studies such interpretations remain guesswork. All occurrences of haematite lumps were treated with caution. In Lıga 2. However. flat stones.

1997). 4 – pit firing with shards covering the pots. which also improves the surface resistance to abrasion (Skibo et al.78 Acta Archaeologica Fig. This area has experienced significant erosion and exploitation through its history.8). leaving minimal chances for discovery of a firing site. 2 – open firing with shards covering the pots. V. V. plateau. dark colour is achieved through smudging – a technique of depositing carbon immediately below the surface (Gibson & Woods 1997). namely representations in clay. another source of information. More readily even. An interesting find in this respect was made at SadovecEzero: a fragment of a rectangular table-like item with several perforations on the upper face was interpreted as a model of a subterranean up-draught kiln. but also Copper Age examples from the Romanian Cucuteni culture (Gheorghiu 2002. for example green leaves. 3 – pit firing. The earliest remains of a kiln in Bulgaria were found in the Jagodinska cave in the Rhodopi mountains and are dated to the Transitional Period (Avramova 1992). however. are placed near hot vessels still covered .).6. in David & Kramer 2001).7 & V. based on better-preserved historical (Fig. based on thermometric data. Such kilns would have been suitable for creating a reduced firing atmosphere. probably close to the stream (and the clay sources). 1 – open firing. Smudging is easily achieved in open firings. with refs. Temperature ranges for five kinds of firing. often found on Copper Age sites and acting as tokens of non-verbal communication. There is. when organic material. updraft kiln firing (after Gosselain 1992.

Another widespread surface-darkening technique is quenching (Carlton 2002). a different pattern emerges at the sites of Sadovec-Ezero and SadovecKaleto. Clay item discovered in Ezero and interpreted as a model of an up-draught kiln. needed to combust carbon from core areas. Interestingly. and as a result. only House 2 has dark ˆ surfaced vessels. and the same is the case at the multi-layered site of Pipra. It has been noted. an important pattern of pottery variation emerges. So. Smudging is considered a vessel improvement due to the glossy surface. Graphite painted pottery from Sadovec Golemanovo Kale has dark surfaces.7. True professionalism thus rests with the ability to sustain temperatures above 500 æC. with fuel (oxygen deficiency is needed). even though this procedure is very simple. Evidence on firing conditions is also gained indirectly from graphite painted pottery. flour mixed with water) immediately after firing. Houses 1 and 3 contained a light coloured representative. However. House 1 is somewhat underrepresented.Lıga ˆ 79 Fig. for example. creating a dark surface colour (Carlton 2002). individual skills. while House 2 had a dark coloured one. The trend at Telish is not clear. and perhaps even competition in stressing personal/household particularities – as expressed through material culture. that at Yunatsite (under influence of the KSB complex) and Sudievo Tells (under influence of the KGK VI complex) in the Thracian Plain ‘‘light-brown burnished pottery is not ornamented’’ (Todorova et al. the solid component of the solution carbonise. identically. Contrary to all assumptions about pyrotechnological advancements – including the idea of firing taking place at 750–950 æ (Todorova 1986) – it appears that graphite painted pottery only requires relatively low firing temperatures. while towards the latest phase of the Copper Age darker colours dominate. Still hot pots are being submerged in a soupy organic solution (e. while during Lıga 2. where there is no clear-cut division regarding background colour. Similar observations are made at other Late Copper Age sites.g.. Interestingly. graphite paint is ˆ only found on light coloured vessels. is decorated with fingernail impressions (pinching) on the main part of the body below the neck and equipped with two horizontal handles. based on technological traditions. despite the uniformity of shapes. A most striking case is that all three houses had at least one vessel of the pear-shaped Type ‘‘S’’. smudged vessels are being sold at 1/3 times higher prices than their oxidised equivalents (personal observations at potters’ workshops in Benin ´ and Ghana). it might be suggested that dark-coloured graphite painted pottery is earlier. In terms of evidence on pottery production. since graphite tends to burn out at temperatures above 700 æC (Milwaukee Archaeological Research Laboratory 2003). and below 700 æC. when comparing pottery of all three fully excavated houses at Lıga. which. Firing conditions along with post-firing treatment may hold cultural implications. In earlier Late Copper Age layers light colours prevail here. Hence. as it penetrates deeper and creates a more even layer than quenching. V. Hence. smudging must be regarded as the most probable reason for dark pottery colours. Perhaps the great amount of figurine parts and miniature vessels. It has been noted that the graphite painted pottery of Lıga 1 has a dark ˆ background. Redutite II and III have light-coloured surfaces. some . 2003).

which reflects the age of a male person consuming the meal (Bredwa-Mensah 2001).80 Acta Archaeologica but nevertheless opening new possibilities to get closer to the daily life of prehistoric communities. technological. however. which.9). as comprehended with a modern eye. Todorova et al.17). recognition of primal forms and not – as often misperceived – a detection of certain unique characteristics like lip variation. which [. of which can be regarded as experimental. Such arbitrary overclassification is producing a lot of behavioural ‘‘noise’’. for the purpose of revealing ‘‘the role of material entities as potentially active components of human behaviour’’ (Fletcher 1992). with little cultural significance (Arnold 1985). Fig. social. V. So far. At the same time. may indirectly indicate that clay was also a familiar medium for the residents of this house. B. MENTAL TEMPLATES AND TECHNOLOGY Most archaeologists starting to work in ceramics have the intrinsic belief that pots can tell us more than just exposing their material features or aesthetic values. Furthermore. III. Typology has become a justified goal in itself for many archaeologists working with the rich prehistoric material in Bulgaria (Todorova & Matsanova 2000. Ethnoarchaeological research presents a number of studies accounting. 2003. complicate the detection of fingerprints of individual potters. whether this information is by nature evolutionary. have little to offer in terms of wider perspectives. functional. for varieties in functional distinction among pottery types to a degree which is by no means accessible for archaeologists dealing with prehistoric materials. The strength of typological ordering as a tool is the search for repetitiveness. Roman up-draught kiln from the region of Hotnitsa. for instance. existing in the cognition of people who share . or other’’ (Hayden 1984. TYPOLOGY.8. there is also some evidence for exchange at the settlement level: The canonic approach to certain vessel types – the already mentioned pear-shaped vessel (Type ‘‘S’’). temporal. Hayden offers a useful definition of typology that ‘‘should properly refer to systems of categorisation. understood as the ideal form of an artefact. V. Several more examples can be given. food serving bowls with a distinct classificatory name can be subdivided into several subgroups depending on their size. found in Houses 2 and 3 (symbolic exchange?) (Fig. a jug from House 2 – an exact parallel is found in Redutite III – exhibits advanced ceramic skills in forming highly curved and only 4 mm thick walls. Thus. typology is being based on ‘‘mental templates’’ or ‘‘prototypes’’ (Kempton 1981). and thus stands out from the remaining part of the vessels of this house (Fig. 80).] reveal something about the nature of human behaviour in relation to artefacts. despite their thoroughness. based on comparisons and some speculation. The other two houses have undoubtedly produced pottery for their own needs. for example – may. certain evidence on exchange relates to two untypical biconic cups without the usual vertical handles. But often a great deal of studies only results in detailed and comprehensive typological lists.. in present day Ghana. Veliko Tarnovo (after Sultov 1969). Therefore.. Katsarov 2003 – just to name a few recent studies).

Knobs maybe applied below the turning point: Highly placed turning point.Lıga ˆ 81 Fig. since a formal reconstruction can often be performed on a single shard. Deep hemispherical bowls with marked inverted rim. Our own typological ordering is presented in a scheme (Pl. 14 & 15) (and below). and is comparatively rare at Lıga. Volumetrically. Biconic cups discovered in. bowls were often modified by adding handles or other attributes with the same functional property. confirming that the process of ‘‘cultural replication’’ during the late Copper Age was well progressed (cf. Geometrical shape is taken as the starting point for classification: The number of geometrical forms used determines the hierarchical order. But through mapping of basic attributes and subsequent seriation it is nevertheless possible to arrive at some basic shapes. respectively. which may not always correspond to the intended use but at least is easing verbal communication. which existed among the pottery users themselves. V. Dishes: a shallow vessel form with unrestricted orifice and a height being more than 1⁄3 of its maximum diameter. The turning point is marked with a pair of handles. E. Simple bowls. Fletcher 1992). BOWLS AND THEIR DERIVATIVES A. D. Everted rims are usually sharply carinated. Simple bowls is the most numerous category of the Lıga potˆ tery assemblage. Inverted or straight rims dominate. at Lıga it is usually reserved for bowls of better quality. B. Names given to typological categories encompass their supposed function. Volumetrically this group is uniform. only bowls represented by two or more shards are taken into present consideration. Lip thickening is also conˆ sidered a diagnostic feature of the late Copper Age. For this reason. as it occurs in great numbers at the Sadovec sites. Such an approach ˆ ´ is in the present case supported by pottery analyses from other KSB sites. Bowl variation manifests itself through orientation of rim and shape of lip. bowls are a highly varied group. the results produced within the framework of this theoretical category cannot be tested against the classification. tabs or knobs. which at least would have been recognised by the potter. diameter of the orifice being 11⁄2 times (and less) bigger than the bottom diameter. who thought not only in socially constructed concepts by also in terms of technological possibilities and a chaıne operatoire. Difference in colour and surface is due to different post-depositional effects. Of course. with heights varying between 1⁄ and 1⁄ of the maximum diameter and with a wall2 3 base angle ranging between 35 æ and 45 æ. A subcategory may have rounded base. unrestricted bowl (or a cone) being regarded as the simplest form. This category incorporates vessels of unrestricted cone shape. Dishes in Lıga have wide orifices with ˆ . Deep straight-sided bowls with thickened rim and height around 1⁄2 of the maximum diameter. ˆ Furthermore. C. House 2 and 3. the same culture. Carination might have a chronological significance.9. They also tend to be overrepresented in archaeological reports. Deep hemispherical bowls. wallbase angle ranging between 50 æ and 60 æ.

which can be placed either high or in the middle. Closely related to the previous group are biconic cups. They come with two or one vertical loop handle. the turning point is in the middle. primarily Redutite and Sadovec. patterns are displayed on the neck and shoulders. If decorated. As a rule. Spherical pots with marked necks. K. these pots might be similar to the ‘‘J’’ pots. the handles seem to be a strong typological attribute. symmetrical. This group is numerous and probably one of the most frequent members of a standard pottery set of a household. These are shallow vessels usually equipped with two opposing vertical loop handles connecting the shoulders with the rim. i. Bucket-shaped pot with a conical body and cylindrical neck. In general. Small biconic pots with marked straight rim. Biconic jars with rounded shoulders. J. the diameter of BICONIC VESSELS WITH CYLINDRICAL NECKS N. while the neck is smoothed and burnished. decorated with fingernail/ fingertip impressions or shell impressions. placed on or below the turning point. The orifice is twice larger than the bottom. these jars fall in two size categories: medium sized and very large containers. the lower part of the body is rusticated. Half the vessels is equipped with vertical handles.. Barrel shaped jars: two-partite vessels with the diameter of the orifice roughly equalling the height of the vessel. these thin-walled. this group is considered as typologically robust. H. Upright jars with highly placed. Volumetrically. This group is one of the most numerous within the pottery assemblage. A subgroup includes vessels with highly placed turning point. Generally. Vessels of this type are found in a variety of contexts and come in a variety of volumetric sizes. L. this group is uniform. since it is also widely represented at other KSB sites. it is a uniform group. Restricted spherical two-partite pots with inverted rim and the turning point being in the middle of the vessel’s body. The type is also widespread on contemporaneous sites. Usually. P. M. But representatives without such handles occasionally appear. Biconic jugs with slightly everted rim and two horizontal handles placed at the beginning of the neck (pearshaped). Although similar in shape. This group is closely related to Group ‘‘J’’. sharply angled shoulders and upright or (inverted) flaring necks. The interior is well smoothed. the shoulders. functionally. and thoroughly made vessels can be regarded as fine pottery. but highly placed turning point and a more globular appearance of the body. Similar to ‘‘P’’. represented by a single only partly preserved specimen. In this case. The turning point is exactly in the middle of the shape. The interior is well-smoothed. Knobs or tab handles are also found on this protrusion. As a rule. The shoulders can be marked with pseudo-winding cordons. The surface is rusticated. G. This group comprises voluminous closed vessels. but mainly in middle and small sizes. sometimes with small horizontally perforated knobs or tab handles.e. Massive vertical handles are placed on or below the turning point. but occasionally also higher up. the volumetric difference and the difference in pottery treatment (smooth versus rusticated surface) imply that. The interior is well-smoothed or burnished. straight or inverted cylindrical rims. Globular vessels drawn slightly down. as exactly the same shape with . Biconic jugs with cylindrical neck: This group is numerous and comes in a variety of different appearances in spite of the fact that they seem to be functionally akin. a diameter of 40 cm and beyond. closely related both to the ‘‘H’’ and ‘‘J’’ types.82 Acta Archaeologica the orifice equalling the diameter of the base. O. R. No parallels have been discovered so far. which indicates a well-defined and fixed function. Pairs of knobs or horizontally perforated tab handles (or a combination of both) are also placed on the shoulders. the jugs are decorated in the most protruding area. F. Functionally. A particular representative of this group is an amphoralike jug with highly placed shoulders and vertical loop handles connecting rim with shoulder. Big biconic jars with cylindrical or slightly everted neck. All have rusticated surfaces and are equipped with massive vertical handles or knobs either on or below the turning point. Volumetrically. placed either on the shoulders or below. I. Volumetrically. The transition between the low body and a relatively long straight rim is marked with a cordon. this group might have been heterogeneous. Another subgroup contains juglets without handles. S.

also appearing at other sites. V. however. To my best knowledge. Drawing by S. occasionally slightly inverted upper part. the abundant use of handles and to some extent also knobs within the KSB culture. They are also uneconomic in terms of space requirements. ethno-archaeological studies are silent on such matters. This marked statistical difference must have cultural explanations. Even when shifted into the stylistic domain (by incorporating handles into the general design of a vessel). A ˆ subgroup is fashioned in a similar way.Lıga ˆ the same type and position of the handles can be found at other sites. a functional significance is still preserved. knobs. characteristic for KGK VI are broad applied bands covering the shoulders of biconic vessels. the above list of Lıga pottery ˆ types – primarily based on vessel shapes – are squarely included in the general typological repertoire of the KSB. But most importantly. when vessels are being kept hanging rather than standing on floors or shelves. VESSEL SHAPES Without exclusion. Quite logically. cylindrical. This demonstrates that the source of origin is the same for both complexes and must go back to a period before the start of the Copper Age. for example. For example. morphological attributes like handles entering the formal repertoire of pottery making through functional considerations. U. Consequently. thus 37% of the Lıga 2 bowls and derivatives (knobs ˆ not included). Biconic storage containers can appear with a short everted rim or a long cylindrical neck: wide orifice. as well as in the KGK VI cultural complex. altering the profile curves.10. V. Where the difference between the two cultural complexes becomes visible is in application of secondary morphological attributes such as handles. handles increase the portability of a vessel. increased frequency in the use of handles advocates for an increased mobility of the population: a cultural phe- . making it more suitable for transportation. Their use must be connected with changing ideas on use of space and furniture. Example of a biconic vessel from Hotnitsa. 598). but the orifice is much wider as compared with the closed representatives of the main group. In Lıga this number is more than 70% in the ˆ group of closed biconic vessels with cylindrical necks. Globular storage containers with cylindrical neck: wide orifice.10). Makchev. A comparative analysis of the material from two houses of the Late Copper Age site of Hotnitsa. it has been stated that one of the main sources of technological change is ‘‘feedback from the context of use’’ (Schiffer & Skibo 1987. Bearing these arguments in mind. V. Storage containers with cone-shaped lower part and long. Hence. it becomes clear that handles must have a behavioural explanation. More puzzling is. unless placed below the turning point. Veliko Tarnovo (considered as belonging to the KGK VI sphere of influence) has showed that only 4% of the whole vessels were equipped with handles or perforated tabs. since they are bringing an extra complication into the process. Handles are disadvantageous in terms of production. is made by fingernail impressions on almost the entire surface. thus creating the visual effect of a cylindrical body element inserted between a cone-shaped lower and the upper parts of the vessel (Fig. What is even more striking is that bowls are also equipped with multiple and varied types of handles. Variation may only appear in the type of decoration. All three houses in Lıga contained this type of vessel. handles may reflect much deeper structures than simple stylistic experiments or borrowing under influence from other regions with different cultural affiliations. and supplemental thickening. The most frequent type of decoration. 83 Fig. a Late Copper Age tell settlement under influence of the KGK VI cultural complex. T.

Consciously. tempering. artefacts of the same form are also known from Hallstatt assemblages in Slovakia and Volhynia. based on the latter analogy. which for half a century has been known in SE Europe as a ‘‘milk jug’’ due to its form and ethnographic analogy. Lids for cooking pots would indicate a type of cuisine based on stewed meals. It has been noted. Effective resistance to thermal shock can be achieved through the use of organic tempering materials which create greater porosity of a vessel and thus arrests eventual cracks (Rye 1976. use and maintenance rely to a vessel’s performance characteristics (Schiffer & Skibo 1987). cooking pots are expected to withstand thermal shock during episodes of repeated heating. For example. Clay pans are interpreted as facilities for baking bread leaves. which could not be treated casually. 208). it always has cultural implications. which were regarded as Slavic. These have been identified on sites of the sixthseventh century AD. Clay pans would imply baking of wheat bread. in the case of cooking. it has recently been demonstrated that a vessel type. making chamotte tempered pottery resistant even to freezing temperatures. as a range of other factors may bias their selection. it has recently been suggested that clay pans should be regarded as lids for cooking pots (Curta 2002). where they were used as lids for urns (Curta 2002). Chamotte is also a suitable tempering material as it expands at the same rate as the clay matrix and will not cause cracking (Rye 1976. 295). But revealing such variables as form. temper and surface treatment reflect and are determined by function (Rice 1987. as it decreases the total weight of such. serving and recurrent cleaning actions – a potter had to consider additional constituents that will enhance the performance characteristics of such vessels. surface treatment techniques and decoration designs can be seen as cultural expressions with a clear functional aspect as regards the needs and requirements of the users. Organic tempering materials can be appreciated for a better workability of the clay and greater strength during forming processes (Schiffer & Skibo 1987). Arnold 1985). In the case of Lıga. By comparing longevity of vessel types one may establish some particularly robust types: culturally rooted and functionally stable. Most pottery researchers agree that form. This also means that the shrinkage rate is the same. Hence. Take for example the so-called early Slavic clay pans: clay disks with turned up edges. 2003). No argumentation has been provided as to why the last and not the first analogy is more reliable. which occasionally may or may not enter the symbolic domain. that is how the production (procurement of raw materials. appears to bear no traces of being used as a milk container (Craig et al. potters have achieved ˆ mitigation of friability through addition of chamotte or sand. A medium size vessel weighs 6–7 kg. A vessel is considered to be a utilitarian tool (Rice 1987. as well as some weaker types: interim phenomena reflecting the innovative potential of a society. The reasoning only ends with a suggestion and not conclusive statements. such interpretations may be tested against organic residue analyses. Such observations make the problems of functional interpretation of clay pans from Lıga and other prehistoric sites in Bulgaria (cf. Organic tempered vessels are appearing to be friable. so weight must have been considered as an issue. based on typological links with ethnographic data from the Balkans. Rice 1987). The variety of pottery shapes and sizes. that organic tempering is preferred for production of big vessels. or through thickening of the walls. which is not as yet fully acknowledged. consumption of fuel. ˆ . thatch or straws have a reinforcing effect on non-fired or low-fired dry storage containers. Arnold 1988). nomenon of the bearers of the KSB tradition.84 Acta Archaeologica below) highly acute. etc. temper and surface treatment cannot always be unambiguous. there is a growing body of evidence that selection of tempering materials is governed by pottery function (Steponaitis 1984. which may reach 300–500 æC. or through ‘‘try and error’’. Luckily. each artefact is evaluated according to its ‘‘performance matrix’’. However. In terms of tempering materials used in pottery production. where clay pans have been in use until recently (Curta 2002.). In terms of fiber use. FUNCTIONAL CONSIDERATIONS Perhaps the most important issue in pottery studies is function. In order to increase abrasion resistance – for instance. For example. not least the narrow analytical background of the investigator. But whatever interpretation is chosen. 208).

producing vernacular pottery in the Balkans. since such matters do not seem to occupy the minds of these potters (Carlton 2002). In fact. By stating this. which need an acidic environment to interact with alimentary products (Rehhof et al. Actually. CaCO3 starts to decompose (into calcium oxide and carbon dioxide). more simple and effective ones are chosen: ‘‘Use the hard rock types and stay healthy/alive’’. At Lıga it is used in rather moderˆ ate quantities. this is even proven by archaeological evidence at Franchthi. Hence. The variability of combinations of tempering materials might thus be explained in terms of existence of differing pottery traditions. ˆ Turning to the Lıga 1 material. technological reasons for favouring one or another element are not rejected. but the real reason may well be coated in different layers of folk beliefs or technological inertia: ‘‘this is how we do it’’. Observation must have led to similar conclusions in prehistoric times and then transmitted as a culturally enforced idiom. vessels tempered with calcite or storage containers plastered with lime or gypsum plasters are highly suitable for keeping grain and other dry foodstuffs. spreading the folk belief that the use of other types of rocks will cause heart diseases and death. the population of southern Benin is constrained to use ´ rock types. Pottery technicians are trying to understand why technologically complicated materials are chosen. The use of calcareous clays in any case excludes the use of firing kilns. observations). one may in this . which occurred when the settlement burned down. for in any case such diversity of technological traditions advocate for a significant movement of people and a wide breadth of communication networks of the settlers of Lıga 2. provide the plausible explanation: Calcareous materials create an alkaline environment and thus inhibits the growth of bacteria. with a chemical background. it would not be wrong to equate tempering groups with technological traditions.Lıga ˆ Less well understood is the use of calcareous components in the clay. 1990). Certain discoveries may lead to results which might be difficult to mediate directly. Which qualities exactly make calcite superior are not being formulated. pointing to the fact that their utilisation must have been limited. also consider calcareous materials (usually calcite) as the superior tempering material (Carlton 2002). The usual pattern that emerges from ethnorachaeological research is that ceramic traditions are transmitted through the female line of the family (Graves 1991. Modern potters. Instead of using complicated explanations. The same might be the case with the use of calcareous materials. At firing temperatures of 620–900 æC. for the message is meant to warn against soft rock types found in southern Benin. Many recovered vessels do have lime blows but these are believed to be the result of secondary burning. like Hotnitsa Tell at Veliko Turnovo. reflecting a range of mating network relying on patrilocal principles of residence. Potters simply believe that this tempering material is superior. male potters would not alter the outcome of this reasoning. instead a set of more understandable constrains are being put on community members. This is not an economic attempt to manipulate the population for the benefit of certain rock quarries. The existence of a high 11 Tempering Groups – which can be further subdivided according to prevailing constituents within a combination – shows that such are not accidental but practically tried and accepted combinations. David & Kramer 2001). The thermal expansion rates of calcareous materials (CaCO3) is close to the clay they are incorporated into (Rye 1976). For example. which can only be exploited in the northern part of the country. calcareous components make up the most important tempering constituent of the clay matrix (pers. in selecting milling stones. Greece (Vitelli 1993). An important issue in the case of Lıga is to explain ˆ the existence of several different combinations of tempering materials. Circumstantially. This leads to another area of understanding of the technological dimensions of tempering materials. while others. the issue is less dramatic. but still. namely that their selection (as also the selection of clays) may well be culturally biased. leading to spalling and desintegration (Rye 1976). its presence cannot be explained away as accidental. In other contemporary sites. which reflects a ˆ rather high uniformity in terms of pottery traditions (especially as to surface treatment). probably partly due to its natural occurrence in the clay sources. Hence. which easily pulverize and ´ 85 may cause dental or nutrition problems.

ˆ find a clarification of the issue of technological change. they need to be elaborated through a different approach to the already excavated material. In fact. especially minimizing the transition between the coils. Further implications of this reasoning would be a return to an earlier (and not very original) assumption. preferably fresh excavations. from adaptive to explorative.11). The qualitative differences between the two settlements signify a change of social focus. expressed through a combination of shape π secondary morphological attributes π decoration & zones of decoration. it is clearly distinctive as a separate layer reaching up to 1. Albeit pottery from the neighbouring site of Redutite is not available for closer investigation.11. A true slip achieved through coating with another layer of clay in order to change the colour or to reduce the permeability is very rare. burnishing reduces permeability and provides effective methods to fasten colour pigments. generally following a horizontal direction. above). the hiatus layer of 0. V. from passive to active. 1 – from Redutite III (after Gergov 1992a). but more than that.2 m between Redutite II and III need considerable time to be formed. I here employ the term ‘‘type’’ to indicate an end result. 2 – from Lıga. Biconic vessels. Despite such technological advantages. which occurred after the abandonment of the pertaining settlement. covering the entire surface. But interiors were not left untreated. Thus. The causes of this change deserve a separate discussion. a technique where the surface is being smoothed with a wet hand or cloth. The striations are usually 2 mm wide. whole vessels presented in publications or museum collections show a great affinity with the pottery of Lıga. Very ˆ close parallels are found both in Redutite II and in the temporarily more distant Redutite III (Fig.86 Acta Archaeologica tery function is surface treatment. burnishing was primarily valued for its visual qualities. It should be Fig. Besides surface smoothing this could also be used to better distribute the clay. but the most common type of Lıga 2 surface ˆ treatment is simple smoothing while the paste is still plastic. Surˆ face rustication with barbotine and finger-trailing have already been mentioned under decoration techniques. House 2. Quite often. Brushing was done with a tuft of fine twigs or other kinds of fibers. More often. traces of brushing are recorded on the interior of closed vessels. Their presence on big biconic jars with long narrow necks shows that this was a special surface compacting technique. much longer than suggested by the excavator: 60–120 years (Gergov 1992a) (cf. the interiors of closed vessels were mainly burnished in the area of the rim. A great variety of surface treatment techniques have been recorded from the Lıga 2 settlement. In many cases surface treatment alone is informative enough to help deducing the function of a vessel. As mentioned. This underlines two important points: the longevity of certain vessel types and a sense of territoriality. since regional data are still very weak on this account. carried out in the state when the vessel was leather-hard. besides usual finger smoothing. this indicates that genealogically connected people were constantly resettling the same territory during several hundreds years. sometimes. and the interiors of bowls had burnished surfaces.5 mm in thickness. bowls. made with a brush of relatively stiff stems or similar materials. When found. Thus. Accidental congruence of the three main variables is statistically improbable and can only be explained with a conscious handover of ‘‘production recipes’’. from self-centred to out-going. striations almost appear as deep grooves. which therefore are interpreted as liquid containers. thus concentrating the finest particles of the clay matrix as an outermost covering layer (Hodges 1965). the exteriors of jugs and graphite painted vessels. V. Therefore. Perhaps some of the water-worn quartz pebbles found were employed for that. The last variable to be considered in terms of pot- . The main surfaces of fine pottery. Sometimes the interiors have traces of deep striations. Mainly it occurs on the interior of closed vessels or. the automatism of ‘‘big vessel π surface rusticationΩstorage vessel’’ certainly holds true in many cases. In turn. namely that pottery functionality is type bound. self-slip occurs.

the above section dealing with production technology). socio. diet. tab handles perforated both horizontally and vertically. Following the functional categorisation suggested by P. fire-vessels. as it can be seen from the overview of main pottery shapes exemplified by whole vessels. ˆ Functional deductions are possible on two levels. The very strength of the research at Lıga is a fourth ˆ dimension or variable. processing. but probably not in connection with liquid foodstuffs. the widest part of a bowl). as the majority of the bowls has. Generally. is an important testimony to the use of such vessel.g. Slightly inverted rims.. the context. this may explain the need for handles or the like. and occasionally as halves of whole vessels. The position of a vessel within a house. an attempt is being made below to unveil the functional variability of the Lıga 2 vessels. and beyond that (usually around 40 cm) – may indicate personal versus group consumption. Vertical handles . The last category is a mixed one. Nevertheless. and surface treatment. making pouring from one container to another a complicated task.. stability may not only be seen as cultural inertia. temper. would prevent spillage but also be very unsuitable for pouring. So. or pierced rims are found on almost half the bowls. Clearly. They are traditionally connected with food serving. that functionality can be deduced from the available pottery sets. It is interesting to observe that the notion of luxury wares as objects visually standing out has also been recognized by the settlers of Lıga. or just below the lip if a bowl has a straight profile line. 87 intended and actual use (Skibo 1992). e. The last may be complicated to achieve without supplementary microscale analyses. Table 9. The use of bowls for storage of dry foodstuffs cannot be excluded. at least not in the case of the Lıga 2 material. as can be seen from vessels with formal and decorational affinity but volumetric and functional differences.and ideafunctions sensu Skibo (Skibo 1992) cannot be separated from technofunctions (Skibo 1992). but as a reflection of evolved functional pottery types corresponding to the needs of the people. In two cases. Moreover. in fact. like subsistence. is supported by the fact that despite technological variation. horizontally perforated tab handles were fashioned as an anthropomorphic face with protruding nose. Thus. transfer. The following considerations on functionality are therefore explored through the combination of the abovementioned variables: shape. There is a certain regularity in the way different types of handles are placed. pottery is treated in terms of storage. as well as its association with other vessels or artefacts. this issue can be elucidated through ethnoarchaeological work. Piercing is also made immediately below the lip. since such is connecting a range of complicated issues. Rounded ear handles. Rice (Rice 1987). simply because the size (usually shallow with wide orifices) and the shape of the bowls recorded at the ovens have practical limitations. Numerous bowls found around the ovens imply that such may also have been involved in food processing. but such wares were not excluded from the ˆ utilitarian sphere. Vertically perforated tab handles are placed on turning points/ shoulders if these are marked (i. encompassing pottery types with special or uncertain functions. Furthermore. has showed that the highest frequency among pottery fragments was held bowls and small cups. ˆ Bowls is the largest group of all pottery types. and other. there is a clear trend towards replication among the sets (cf. providing examples that potters may have great flexibility in their methods of production (Skibo 1992). there is a clear correlation between vessel shape and surface treatment. these were discovered in big fragments. The conviction. and even architecture and furniture. this indicates that such bowls were adapted for (horizontal) suspension. the context. Revealing pottery function is the optimal goal for any ceramic study. placed immediately below the turning point and yielding extra character to a recognized pot.Lıga ˆ stressed that vessel shape may also dictate the type and areas of decoration. interpreted as an immediate discard area of domestic waste. and as such experience the greatest stress and the shortest use-life (Rise 1987.e. such as residue analysis. Hence. Intended use may be too broad a category to be informative at all. Investigation of the refuse area between Houses 2 and 3. Two sizes of bowls – up to 25 cm in diameter. Part of the graphite painted ware has decoration rubbed off as a result of use.4). even though this would be uneconomic in terms of space. the exclusiveness was stated through active use and exposition and not as passive exhibition on shelves. and.

2) or graphite paint (Pl. Pleven (ØΩca.12. Like the well-known beakers of the TRB culture (Sherratt 1987). from Redutite II. and ‘‘I’’ (bucket shaped pot) are interpreted as short term (?) dry storage vessels through their association with each other and with the grain pithos in House 2. They can be perceived as static sculptures. making the equation between snakes and spiral ornamentation more convincing (Fig. jugs of Type ‘‘S’’ (pear-shaped) may be included in the same group. Long term storage containers are the most voluminous pottery type. and other ritual objects. signalising the wealth of the owner. decoration could have been used for protective purposes in the realm of magic. ‘‘H’’ (biconic jars with rounded shoulders). reflecting longevity of tradition. With few exceptions. and other menaces. rarely moved and attracting attention of eventual visitors.12). Little doubt can arise in relating vessels of Types ‘‘P’’ and ‘‘R’’ with liquids. Hence it was suggested that some bowls were hung vertically on the walls. as in the House 2. 12). Both types have biconic Fig. voluminous storage containers are decorated. or have smooth surfaces with incised patterns. especially on bowls. Spiral-snake patterns are numerous. Their closed orifices and long necks are suitable for pouring. All vessels of the group are so-called strong types. One of the jugs found in House 2 contained a small worked sheep/goat astragalus. stelae interpreted as altars. and is also applied to the group of storage containers. exhibited at the Regional Historical Museum. should ˆ also be seen as part of a serving set. All have rusticated surfaces and wide orifices but are volumetrically smaller than the following category of dry storage vessels. but cannot be used as time-sensi- . The reconstructed types include simple containers with coneshaped lower part and long. Abrasion marks found on the exterior of several pierced bowls (or their fragments) below the holes show that these were in repeated contact with hard surfaces. Biconic or globular shapes (Types ‘‘T’’ and ‘‘U’’) could also be chosen for such voluminous types as storage containers. Certainly.88 Acta Archaeologica tive diagnostic features. IV. juglets and biconic cups (Types ‘‘N’’ & ‘‘O’’). 40 cm). either in the form of incisions (Fig. cultural adherence and. V. Jugs. Bowl decorated with painted pattern of snakes. such vessels can be seen as tokens of social behaviour connected with common eating and drinking practices. through close parallels with the KGK VI pottery. Through association. affiliation with broader regional associations. Vessels of this group are acknowledged as the most distinct pottery of the Late Copper Age. abundantly represented in each house at Lıga. Vessels of Types ‘‘F’’ (barrel shaped jars). which can be rusticated and decorated with cordons and bands of fingertip impressions. V. demonstrating their portability. or horizontally perforated tab handles are found either above or below the turning point (and could also be used for suspension). This ornamentation is found on female figurines. cylindrical upper part (Type ‘‘V’’). All vessels of the group are equiped with handles or massive functional knobs. Their typological and stylistical variety is quite large and probably not fully represented since mending of big containers is a complicated task. where snake heads are added to the spirals. vessels holding the vital resources of a household needed this extra protection to withstand putridity and bacteria. Decoration seems to play a double role for these vessels. Rusticated surfaces provide firmer gripping and increase abrasion resistance. corresponding functionally to the permanently installed pithoi. At the same time. These are often found in association with bowls.

So. but usually due to appearing surface cracks). V. a narrow 89 base would enable to concentrate the main part of the food higher up. the section above of production technology). The relatively open orifice would enable handling of food more easily. Cooking pottery has a very low use-life. posing different requirements for cooking pottery. It is not unusual to carry manual loads of 60 kg in traditional societies. the total weight. being 60 kg. Within the present group. perhaps with a helper. These vessels are found in a number of sizes: from small cup-like specimens to medium ones of 3–4 litres. Their shape is also optimal for the function of cooking vessel. such jars are interpreted as being used for carrying water. The main division is whether the processing is made with heat or without heat (Rise 1987). Perhaps the discovery of a spoon inside such a jar in House 2 can be used as evidence that these vessels. while the slightly inverted neck would prevent ‘‘boiling over and reduce evaporation’’ (Rise 1987). The biggest one. When placed inside an oven. One such vessel was found at the pithos of House 2 with a corresponding flat lid. Most of the cooking vessels are not discarded immediately after being evaluated as no longer suitable for cooking (for various reasons. They are believed to be the functionally most universal vessel type. Another vessel of the same type was found close to the entrance of the same house. It was found close to the entrance of House 3. were connected with food processing. it has been estimated that upright jars with highly placed. there are two big pottery groups that can be ˆ associated with cooking and food processing without heat.g. Based on surface treatment of interiors (wellworked and compacted through smoothing or burnishing). However. the vessels are typologically related to other biconic specimens. such assumptions are not supported by scientifically collected ethnographic data from contemporary traditional societies. Other representatives of this group. nowadays in metal pots of similar biconic shapes. had a capacity of 44 litres. Examples of close affinities to the group in question can still be found in remote Russian villages. which would indicate that it had a higher mobility than a storage container. In Lıga. e. In terms of shape. where heating is most intense. Uniform in shape.Lıga ˆ shapes expanding to an almost globular appearance. where food preparation is made over an open fire-place. made centrally in the base (another base of a small vessel with similar per- . On the other hand. Secondary modifications are also observed on vessels of this type. resembling modern soup tureens. without handles and with rusticated surfaces. transfer and storage. but the origin could not be established with certainty.. The circumstance that many vessels of Lıga 2 were ˆ affected by secondary burning made it difficult to recognise eventual bands of soot caused by cooking. the lowest heating temperature would be at the base. Furthermore. where cooking continues to be made inside an oven. The last major functional issue to be discussed in this generalised presentation concerns food processing pottery. 1 cm in diameter. vessels with smoothed surfaces equipped with handles being seen as connected with transfer. it contained a still functional adze. observations. they enter another functional domain (pers. The use-expectancy is usually around one year. based on a common ethnographic analogy. sharply angled shoulders and upright or slightly inverted necks (Type ‘‘G’’) were suitable for holding liquids. but volumetrically they are much bigger. part of the jars did have traces of soot on the lower part of the body. higher than food serving pottery but much lower than for example pottery used for storage (Rise 1987). various ethnographic situations). One smaller representative had a perforation.13). 239). for soaking purposes. these types cover two functional categories. such as rounded bases (see Rice 1987. were used for storage. with well smoothed exterior and interior compacted by deep striations. These vessels were for example used for storage of tools. The relative depth would permit to conserve the heat (Rise 1987). Instead. when full. A vessel found west of the oven of House 2 contained a small biconic cup without handles. One of the pots of this group had indeed a band of soot over the lower part of the body (Fig. as observed from their reuse. which would be standing at the same level as the fuel. which was placed on top of water-worn pebbles used in pottery production (cf. the great number of Type ‘‘J’’ vessels (closely related to Types ‘‘K’’ and ‘‘L’’) may indirectly be used in stating their involvement in food preparation processes. ca. both hot and cold. and equipped with two massive handles.

that a process similar to quenching was taking place: boiling of wheat or any other flour soup/porridge. which makes them unsuitable to be used as cups. but in a way. which has also been noted on a previous group (vessels of Type ‘‘G’’). While some of the tiny vessels may be considered models or even toys.90 Acta Archaeologica Fig. The last category to be discussed is a category by MISCELLANEOUS MINIATURE AND VERY SMALL VESSELS This group includes a number of very small vessels which fall outside the usual functional categories discussed above. which is the usual practice in Bulgaria. Vessel (Type ‘‘J’’) discovered in House 2 bearing band of soot over the lower part of the body. This may suggest. These externally light coloured vessels. does not increase a vessel’s heating effectiveness (Skibo et al. Even though the search for external soot was a more or less vain task. Such exterior texturing.14). Two vessels attributed to the group had 2 . Deep exterior texture protects from spalls and reduces cracking produced by thermal shock (Skibo et al. 1997). volumetrically resembling each other (3–4 litres) were found with totally blackened interiors.13. V. since impact from secondary burning in most cases could not be ruled out (except for the one rather certain case above). In any case. both items are from House 1 and were probably intended as a funnels (Fig. which does not depend on the shape. This assumption is based on the observation that certain miniature vessel types occur as exact copies also at other sites: in the neighbouring Sadovec sites. like a lid. Other vessel types like simple or footed bowls are also represented. 16:13–14). Deliberately. Miniature vessels are less than 5 cm in height. but instead almost always equipped with two or four knobs placed on the shoulders. The function of small vessels the size of a coffee cup is not clear either and can in fact cover a range of different purposes (Pl. 16:15–19). The majority has inverted rim. the bigger representatives of this group may have been involved in cooking. V. comprised by miscellaneous vessel types or ceramic types one way or another related to vessels. contrary to some belief. until the edge of the rim. their shapes echo the shapes of the big vessels.14. but also in a remote site like Yunatsite (Todorova & Matsanova 2000) (Pl. foration is also known). exclusion. others appear to have a more regulated functional determination. Fig. and it can only remain a speculation whether charms or herbal medicine was kept in such vessels. V. Most of the items have a rather obvious function. several vessels were in fact discovered with another indication of possible use in food processing with heat. 1997). especially biconic jugs (Pl. usually by finger-trailing which is well-organised and has decoration effect. Their porous surfaces do not seem to be suitable to contain liquids. Vessels of this group are without handles. as for example hand molded ‘‘bowls’’ made of untempered clay and lowfired. The surface is rusticated. 16:1–12). Fragmented vessel with centrally placed bottom perforation. these items are not listed together with the pottery types.

Occasionally. a narrow one and a broad. 16:24). Tempering Group IV prevails. The size ranges between 15 and 20 cm in diameter. Ashes with ember could be covered by a fire-vessel. The existence of footed bowls. but the height was estimated to be 6 cm. 16:30–32). III. close to the oven. 16:26–28). just slightly curved. It is quite certain that this type of pottery was created to be exposed to high temperatures. They are often associated with bowls to provide extra stability if the base is narrow. PANS LIDS Fragments of lids (Pl. The difference between the last type and the footed bowls is that pot stands are supported by a broader and These two types of artefacts are similar in appearance but completely different in function. Firevessels have been a typical inventory of every household. but their proper identification is not always straightforward. which would then minimize the supply of air. The interpretation as lids (Curta 2001.13:1 & 14) (often rather misleadingly known as Rauchgefässe) have two orifices. Cosack (Cosack 1994). with slightly concave top and a plug-like circular protuberance that can be inserted into a container with the diameter of 4. they were too fragmented to be completely reconstructed. cf. The lid in question is circular. due to their massiveness and.2 cm (Pl. Each house contained 3–4 pot stands. 91 lower ring-foot. A single discovered rim shard might perhaps give some idea of the shape of such vessel (Pl. Quite often shards with perforated walls were . straight-sided bowls. but it cannot be ruled out that their use was connected with social aspirations rather than practicalities.16:29). They are of two types. Examples without wholes are also known. The use of such special clay devices has been comprehensively discussed by E. They have the shape of a bowl and are dotted with holes. The usual type has the shape of a low double-cone with an identical size of the orifices. The difference between them is that fire-vessels (Fig. which perhaps derive from the same aspirations. especially. None of the pot stands have traces of having been in contact with fire. they can be larger. a fragment of a similar shape with an upright handle has been discovered. FIRE-VESSELS AND STRAINERS POT STANDS AND FOOTED VESSELS Pot stands have been a constant member of the Copper Age house inventory (Pl. The fire-vessels were used to preserve fire during periods when the oven was not in use. to the fact that a variety of more elaborate lids are abundantly represented in the repertoire of Copper Age pottery. Such items are discovered at every KSB site. 16:25). typically at night. Or they can resemble rather deep. but their purpose can be deduced due to traces of secondary burning.Lıga ˆ cm long cylindrical spouts with a diameter of 0. One exceptional example allows reconstruction of a vessel type as yet unknown among the archaeological material. Abrasion marks inform about the standing surface. 16:20–24) were very often recovered. Another type resembles an egg-cup: a shallow ring-foot supports a deep bowl-like upper part. In layers attributed both to Lıga 1 and Lıga 2. above) is disputable. Such vessels are known to have been used from the Neolithic through the Migration Period. The diameters are 10–18 cm. similar to the earlier discussed ‘‘Slavic bread pans’’ (Pl. thick walled and with a narrow neck: a bottle-like vessel. The surfaces are either plain or decorated with incised spirals. Furthermore. at least (Cosack 1994). In the Lıga 2 settlement complete representaˆ tives were discovered in both House 2 and 3. None of the representatives of this group has decorated surface. flat ceˆ ˆ ramic discs with upturned edges have been found. 8 cm in diameter. up to 36 cm in diameter. The lids fall in two size categories: those with a diameter of 10–15 cm and those of 20–25 cm. They can have an appearance of flat discs. What can be disputed is whether such pans were used for bread baking or something else – like salt production.5 cm (‘‘feeding bottles’’). keeping the ember/coal glowing but not burning. Barrel-like in shape with slightly everted rim. Both were found in House 1. Footed bowls were rare in Lıga and are only represented as fragments ˆ (Pl. may be regarded as a kindred type.

Fire-vessels have far better smoothened outer surfacse than strainers. Pl. 17:2). probably intended for a wide orifice (height 16 cm. for example a sieve or a funnel. Bowl with antropomorphic tab handles. which could be fixed to hide bags or the like. the items have been interpreted as drums.16). 17:1). it was established that there are some repetitive differences helping to distinguish between fire-vessels and strainers (Pl. 11:5). An ox representation was also found in House 3. Through the discovery of fully preserved items.92 Acta Archaeologica Fig. The smoothly abraded central part – opposed to a rough rim and rounded bottom – indicates that strainers must have been used together with vessels with an orifice not exceeding 9. But other. Ø1: 18 cm.16. A fragment of a spherical thin-walled vessel (‘‘oil lamp’’?) had a triangular head . House 1 contained a vessel. It is equipped with four small vertical handles approximately in the middle. The inside surfaces are not worked in either. the oven and close to the milling platform. Three nearly complete strainers were found. Traditionally. V. The holes in strainers tend to get narrower from the centre towards the outer surface.5 cm. most probably resembling an ox (Pl. while firevessels keep the same size of the holes. found among the excavated material. They have a greatest diameter of 10 cm and a height of 6– 7 cm. V. their density is twice as great on strainers (35 pr 3 cm2 as compared with the fire-vessels’ 16 pr 3 cm2). more mundane functions are also possible.15.15. which was equipped with flattened bosses and small protruding zoomorphic heads. V. while the edge of fire-vessels has a band without perforations. Such objects are also known from other Copper Age and later sites. usually without handles or occasionally with small bosses on the edge of the rim. Holes on strainers are distributed from immediately below the edge. immediately West of ˆ One bowl discovered in House 2 was equipped with vertical tab handles horizontally perforated in such a way that a human face with protruding nose and incised eyes was created (Fig. Although the size of the perforations may be the same. VESSELS WITH ANTHROPOMORPHIC AND ZOOMORPHIC REPRESENTATIONS DOUBLE-CONIC CERAMIC ITEM An enigmatic double conic object with two orifices was found in House 3 of Lıga 2. Double-conic clay item discovered at the oven in House 3. V. Fig. Ø2: 8 cm) (Fig. It is considered enigmatic since several possible interpretations of its function can be suggested.

1995. the most important feature is shape. A spoon with flattened handle was found inside a vessel of Type ‘‘G’’ (Pl. but also. the following conclusions can be made regarding the Lıga ˆ 2 settlement. 17:4). mainly fragmented. Hence. with evidence on manufacture of utilitarian graphite painted pottery. which. usually combined with organic matter. due to coupling. a dewlap on the neck and incised almond-shaped eyes (Pl. reflecting different technological traditions or ‘‘technological styles’’. Active pottery display even in the most casual situations. The strength of the base lies not only in a very high degree of detailed information regarding material attributes. Firstly. or rather its idealised version. which has become a vital and as yet not exhausted tool for further studies. most importantly. This raises questions about the composition of the household. Answering the questions regarding pottery variability posed at the beginning of this chapter. This observation is reinforced by comparative studies of ceramics from Lıga 2 and Hotnitsa Tell at Veliko Tarnovo. Nearly every shard has been entered into the artefact database. all spoons contain some amount of sand in the clay matrix. often termed a mental template. Secondary morphological attributes such as handles are often integrated into the general perception of vessels but their place is not always determined. Exchange between the households was limited and probably exclusively symbolic in nature. The chief difference between plain and decorated pottery is the investment of time. There is a number of ethnographic examples of potters changing the repertoire of their production as they move to new places or when market demands change. like fetching water. have led to exchange of people through distant alliances and mating strategies. but generally the length of the spoons varies between 8 and 9 cm. The last group is slightly bigger in size. Temper. decoration. which apparently was reserved for the household itself. helping to determine social rather than cultural boundaries (cf. 17:3). Thus. burnished graphite painted pottery needed the longest period of manufacture. Another important observation is that the pottery production of Lıga 2 was organised on a household ˆ level. If each household required a more or less stable number of vessels per member. since cultural transmission operates in a hierarchical order. Surprisingly. Further studies may confirm the anticipation based on Lıga material. and method of manufacture also take a secondary significance in the broader cultural perspective. the latter ˆ showing a much greater uniformity. that such differences reˆ flect a general diachronic trend and perhaps can be considered as a diagnostic temporal marker.Lıga ˆ (representation of horns?). It has been proposed that these differences should be explained by a higher mobility and expanding networks of interaction. Detailed pottery analysis has also revealed that technological superiority cannot be assumed on the basis of pottery decoration and surface treatment. SUMMARY & PERSPECTIVES The body of ceramic data collected during the three field campaigns of 2000–2002 at Lıga is too large to ˆ be presented in its full extent. but was no technological necessity. can be seen as an instrumental non-verbal claim to maintain the social position of household members. in contextual information bridging the past with the present. assuming that women were responsible for the pottery. it is suggested that the technological variability of the pottery production of Lıga 2 mirrors a ˆ mixed composition of the occupants. Stark et al. while they preserve . 17:4–6). how can it be explained that some households could afford to invest three times or more energy in pottery production? The issue of human resources needs further clarification. have been discovered. 93 the original technology if no constrains of this kind are imposed (David & Kramer 2001). while the value of visually outstanding pottery as a medium of socially loaded messages remains beyond doubt. since two of the three fully investigated houses contained certain direct as well as circumstantial pieces of evidence about pottery production. They can be divided into two types: with a handle of circular. thus implying the existence of different patterns of social behaviour. with references). as they drift between demands of the practical and cultural constructs (which again can overlap). or with flattened cross-section. House 3 is the most striking example. SPOONS A number of spoons (Pl.

. and. Investigations of shard materials have resulted in two basic conclusions. The potters of Lıga were familiar with the mainˆ stream of pottery production. The Lıga invesˆ tigation has brought the individual Copper Age household. The presence of ceramic spoons – the most usual type of artefact rendered in bone or wood – underlines the assumption that pottery production has covered most of the needs in terms of containers etc. and its members. except for voluminous and light baskets. Quite remarkably. the distribution of their shapes and sizes (with the reservation that a sig- . Stylistic variation taken separately has a very coarse chronological sensitivity. But this did not exclude the manifestation of an individual fingerprint. not least. Cultural replication can be seen through the shapes and composition of vessels types recovered in each house. more coarse than is desired by archaeologists. there is apparently no niche left for organic tools. although withˇ out full acknowledgement of the excavator (Cochadziˇ ev 2001). telling about varying skills.94 Acta Archaeologica nificant part of the information may still be lacking). Looking at the numbers of vessels represented. motoric abilities. varying tastes and artistic talents. The wealth of pottery even allows us to question the widely accepted assumption that much prehistoric evidence – such as bone and in particular wooden items – has vanished and left a serious artefactual gap. Much archaeological fine-typology is simply household variation. What seems to ensure greater confidence in chronological sensitivity is the percentage of decoration styles and techniques represented. into historical focus. both locally and elsewhere. even superficial studies of Late Copper Age pottery from the Vaksevo tell in the Sruma valley has already produced evidence supporting this assumption.

Hence. There are. The tablet was found in the area of House 3. feet: 9. 98. Parts of the lines contained traces of light (whitish) paste. at the descending slopes. 14 items come from apparently undisturbed units and only two do not have a precise provenience. a communicative load is supposed. is that already in the Neolithic such objects. whether of stars or points ˆ in a landscape. 19:4251). This observation is only based on visual analysis with magnifier. which can be attributed to the Lıga 1 settlement was discovered below the SW part ˆ of House 1 of Lıga 2 (Fig. The most ˆ common part among the fragmented pieces are legs (incl. knees (Pl. At present. no convincing interpretation can be given. This house ˆ was constructed on remains of an earlier one. 18:9. 19:5043).1). The tablet has a round shape. Pl. VI. 19:4040) and rump (Pl. What is conspicuous. . with white incrusted incisions and dots (Gimbutas 1986. Two figurines are represented by their lower part of the body only (Pl. it provides enough information as to the form and pattern. 10–12 mm thick with flat and smoothed backside. although there is one wavy clay item with pointed end which could have been part of an arm (Pl. Single pieces account for hips (Pl. The dots are slightly deeper than the lines. son being a highly detailed investigation. 1993). Cochadziˇ ev 2003b. the SW part. 47 mm in diameter. being stabilized by occupational debris of the previous settlement (cf.20 m below the surface and therefore not attributed to any particular feature. in a disturbed top layer. Chapter II). 19:UN005/9A. VI. loaded with communicative value. possibly incrustation.VI. Two (nearly) complete pieces and 20 fragments were found. both legs – 2) and heads (6). Its original estimated weight is 35 g. including clay disk from Yunatsite (also known as Ploskata Mogila) discovered in the 1950s. Structurally. abundantly found at the site of Gradeshnitsa (Nikolov 1974).2 (7045). 19: 11 (9086) & Fig. however. Although simplistic. being accidental finds in loose soil (Pl. SMALLER OBJECTS OF CLAY TABLET Among the more exceptional finds from Lıga is a clay ˆ disc – a so-called clay tablet with incised lines and dots in a manner that is beyond the accidental. Incised lines were made with a wooden tool with a flat 2 mm wide nib. the Lıga tablet resembles a map. 9. 251. wellbaked (no traces of secondary burning) and made of clay tempered with fine sand (some amount of organic matter is also present). VI. Clay tablets remain an enigmatic type of objects. such as so-called stamp seals and bottoms with signs. the rea- Fig. Map 1. Although fragmented (with recent breakage traces). perhaps even a social chart. other finds. Todorova 1986.1. The remaining six pieces were discovered during the course of excavation. as in a letter (Fig. The tablet is light grey brown in colour. Fig. 2001/17). all but one attributed to the Lıga 2 settlement. but in redistributed fills. above. markedly outweighs the western part of Bulgaria compared with the far better investigated eastern part of the ˇ country (see Dzhanfezova 2003. the original position of the FIGURINES ANTHROPOMORPHIC FIGURINES The corpus of anthropomorphic figurines from Lıga ˆ is very large compared to the area excavated.3 (8099)). Part of a figurine. left leg – 3. 19:8099). Fragment of clay tablet (‘‘letter’’). 0. Torsos and arms are seemingly lacking.55). VI. right leg – 4. a feature shared with other – no doubt related – items.

evenly cut through the neck. hence the difference in color: the head being preserved in drier conditions and therefore light brown in color. Notably. This would certainly fall in line with observations made on the distribution of figurines in the subsequent Lıga 2 phase. Photo: R. 5 & 19). To the left of the figurine was placed a seeming bowl (Ø – 10 cm) with what appeared to be a clay egg in it (Fig. only partly excavated. VI. trench. VI. this find also serves as an example of shifting usage within the same – ritual – domain. this woman is clearly pregnant. Thus. The total height of the figurine is 18 cm. facing the presumable entrance in the South. The body stood somewhat deeper. A rather exceptional situation was uncovered in the area of House 4. VI.96 Acta Archaeologica Fig. VI. although the mixed and compact character of the layer of shards where the fragment was found may indicate that the materials were extracted from an area of regular waste. . one fragment was discovered between Houses 2 and 3 (Pl. The general outline and traces of the breakage at the narrower end suggest that. in all probability by a plough blade.4.2. 19:10061). Seven pieces with established ˆ provenience were found in waste areas. located at a humus rich Fig.3. originally. while the body.4 cm). Close to the eastern wall. Figurines were also present within the houses. had a much darker brown color. The head appeared 1 m North of the body. Pl. Photo: R. this clay ‘‘funnel’’ was in fact a skirt (fused with a stool) of a sitting figurine. fragmented figurine could not be established. Fragment of clay figurine of Lıga 1 settlement (TS 8099) ˆ (height – 8.4). The ‘‘bowl’’ was of the shape of a funnel narrowing to half of its upper diameter. an enstooled clay figurine was discovered. Kolev. Lower part of clay figurine (TS 7045) discovered in House 2 (height – 7 cm). mainly along the northern and eastern wall of House 1 (6 cases). commonly known as a ‘‘sitting goddess’’ (Fig. Kolev. similar to the discovered whole figurine.

However. VI. since their handling would be complicated by instability. Drawing of a ‘‘clay egg’’. Fig. VI. Finally. and most likely universal. that items with pointed bottoms and relatively closed form were used for crucibles.5 mm. 0. the confirmed crucibles found at Lıga are of a wholly differˆ ent open shape with flat bottoms (see below). Such items are known from other contemporary sites. The symbolism of an egg is rather straightforward.4. as their position implies. placed on the floor along with its accessories. 92).5. Gimbutas has noticed that many hollow figurines of the Cucuteni period contained within their hollow bellies one or two small clay ‘‘eggs’’. tentatively confirming their function (Bonev & Aleksandrov 1996. they are related through the same variation of brown colors.5). e. some vessels were placed higher. weight – 90 g). Ø max. The figurine. it remains puzzling. 49). perhaps on shelves installed at the eastern wall. England. that all three have identical clay fabric (see below).g. Therefore the allusion of an egg. The most numerous collection (at least 18) is held by the Bagachina site at Montana (Bonev & Aleksandrov 1996. Furthermore. Clay figurine. 91. and its accessories at the moment of discovery (height of the figurine – 18 cm). At the time of the conflagration.. part of the composite find centred on the sitting figurine (height – 65. 13:g). The coherence of the items is strengthened by the fact. in later times. where the ‘‘eggs’’ are interpreted as crucibles. 9. 5). Ca. Fig.55 m below surface). M. during the Roman period. VI.Lıga ˆ 97 Fig. held in the skirt of a figurine seems more convincing. 245. 44¿48 mm. 49. However. The authors mention that some of the items had vitrified surfaces.36 m below the surface (Pl. where their use was made possible by the use of metal tongs (Tylecote 1992. Fig. All were found on a greenish clayey layer interpreted as a stamped floor (the floor level being ca. Fig. or clay balls (Gimbutas 1986. and 5 cm from the figur- . Moreover. similar egg-shaped crucibles are known from other parts of Europe. it corresponds with the pregnant state of the woman in question. 2 m from the northern edge of the trench.40). was surrounded by vessels beginning to appear 0. The ‘‘clay egg’’ turned to be a hollow container with slightly inverted rim and pointed bottom (Fig. type known as ‘‘The sitting goddess’’.

ˆ especially when compared with other finds of the period. and. 1986. with the richest inventory of pottery. M. One of these – a clay rump discovered in the NW corner – may also represent a sitting figurine but of different kind than the above mentioned (Pl. Gimbutas’ work (1974. secondly. this find was made after the Danish party has departed from the excavation site. In the same area was also a clay stool. but what they fail to demonstrate is a multi-dimensional use of figurines within the same society. In this context. clay and wood. many observations put forward by Gimbutas are still valid and evoking. Another fragment discovered in House 2. nearly every scholar treating the issues of prehistory in Southern Europe has felt the urge to contribute to the interpretation of figurative art. The most clear cut manifestation is the ‘‘sitting goddess’’ with repeated minimalistic rendering of a bird-like face. approaches were few and supported mostly by personal convictions and ephemeral assumptions of psychoanalysis (1994). Regardless this uniformal approach. ˆ A rather high number of figurine fragments discovered in the waste area along the northern and eastern wall of House 1 indicates that clay figurines were in active use and that the domains of their use may have been several. This figurine of about 15 cm in height must have been fastened to one of the timbers above the oven (see Chapter III) through a hole of 1. the reclining obese females seated on a stool with the face pleasantly directed towards the sky first of all emanate a feeling of ‘‘good times’’. all material remains were swept away by later trenching probably in connection with establishing of a vineyard. First of all. e. 226). which ask for alternative explanations. the observation that the Lıga figurine is visˆ ibly pregnant is important. At the same time. like a happy Buddha.0¿0. it was not re- . 18:7 (9405)). this is seen in ˆ some crudely yet precisely captured details. and arms collected on the belly. VI. which is sufficient to state that the ritual and the profane were not formally segregated (see Chapter III). 18:4 (10654)). Talalay 1993). which could be intended for a sitting figurine. Such symbolically charged conventionalism can also be recognized in the Lıga material. there are also certain signs of individuality. perhaps the basic intention. the stool is not integrated with the body. the preserved information is limited to the NE corner of the house. Krısteva). and that only due to difficulties in recognizing them in a fragmented state. 19:5043). In Lıga. 226). House 1 contained a fragmented head (Pl. She stressed the conventionalism seen in the molding of figurines with little attention given to details of the human body. But as D. 18:2 (9427)) and a rolled clay lump furnished with anthropomorphic features (Pl. Unfortunately. but with much effort devoted to ‘‘proper placement of fortifying and appropriate symbols’’ (Gimbutas 1986. A find of a fragment with bent knees (Pl. Hence. thus. see Ucko 1968. the lower part of a flat standing figurine with collected legs and oversized hips (Fig. Ever since the classical work of P. Bailey has rightly noticed. To a modern observer.2). indicates that figurines also had an imovable position within the house. but the upper part was not recovered. House 2 also contained two pieces of figurines. 18:9 (4040)) outside the SW corner of House 5 may support the assumption that sitting figurines were a rather common attribute of any household inventory.g. 200). 1989) had the greatest impact on forming widely accepted interpretations of figurines as ‘‘sacred images of divine entities’’ (Gimbutas 1986. below).7 cm.98 Acta Archaeologica corded in line with other items (information based on sketches by T. the false image of their exclusiveness has been created (Todorova 1986. The position of the fragment is in concordance with the fall direction of the northern wall – from North towards South. slightly raised. very much alike the above mentioned one (cf. The same observation was made by V. Ucko in 1968 on figurines (Ucko 1968). House 3. like two cases of rendering of a hucklebone and toes. Ethnographic data provide a string of options (for summaries. The traces of breakage were fairly recent. it bears a rather naturalistic rendering of a human part which usually is not emphasized. shaped prior to firing and having traces of wear. contained the poorest evidence regarding figurines. Gergov on materials from the neighboring Redutite site (Gergov 2000). The head is interpreted as deriving from a figurine of the ‘‘sitting goddess’’ type. Just a single head was found in the southern part (Pl. emphasized hips. Examples are also lacking on co-existence of figurines made of different materials. Despite these limi- ine.

while a male figurine was fired together .6). ethnographic records still remain a source of inspiration. but this does not imply that adult observers would get the same impression. which looks like an asexual figurine without legs and holding something in its hands resembling bucranion. if read properly. Okoro. VI. microphones. girls stated that hair would burn during the firing process. one of the young potters reflected on this limitation and produced two figurines. mobile phones. a female with long hair was left unfired. they appeared as ‘‘standardized’’. Significantly. Following the work routines of local pottery producers. furniture.A. Clay items produced by an nine year old girl from East Gonja District. as they virtually disappear behind the scooter screen.6.Lıga ˆ 99 Fig. which occasionally could be sold to their playmates. tations. A good example is ‘‘cousin on a scooter’’. Massive legs.) (1). The items that girls were producing are: humans.comm. Figurines produced by different children had several common features. In a young potters mind this ‘‘boy of 21 years’’ is holding the handles of a wheel. the daughters of the potters were not attracted to the craft. In that way. University of Ghana. The author is grateful to Dr. these items are true images of real objects. A ritual performance? No.A. ‘‘The Salaga Research Project’’. John Ako Okoro. A valuable lesson can be gained from fieldwork in Northern Region of Ghana carried out by J. Incidentally. At the same time. were necessary to keep the humans upraised. burnished small vessels. the girls tried to come as close as possible in their rendering of the 1. the legs of the ‘‘cousin’’ being placed on the riding platform – hence they are not important. Note traditional devices such as grinding stones and mortar with pestle along with modern ones: a mobile phone and a microphone. all aged woman. Okoro (pers. later on. VI. objects. he discovered that their 8–10 year old granddaughters were using clay to produce toys. Courtesy J. for example. ‘‘cousin driving a scooter’’ and so on – everything that is surrounding the children in their daily life (Fig. Legon (Accra) for allowing to use unpublished data from his studies. grinding stones. However. Northern Region of Ghana. When asked about the lacking hair.

2001/127). although un´ connected with studies of figurines. children who lost their twin would be provided with a figurine representing the deceased twin. fasten to their waist to be used as lucky charm but also as a doll and as an actual person. These figurines were also in the ownership of the whole community. At least in five cases figurines were modeled from one and the same lump of clay (7045. This is seemingly also the case of the only figurine of the Lıga 1 settlement (8099). West Africa. where. or. VI. the figurines are coupled up with the deceased through special ceremonies.7. Processing of the flint material from Lıga has yielded ˆ some evidence. Although lacking individual features. different extended families would also ´ have a special box where several anthropomorphic wooden figurines were kept together. As the cult of twins is very powerful. During work in Benin. the possibility of identifying children as producers inspired to look more thoroughly at the way figurines were produced. nowadays. It was dug into a 10 cm high platform and literally surrounded by kitchen ware. First of all. VI. figurines could be seen both inside and outside houses. Without attempting any direct analogy. three ˆ of the one-lump-figurines were made of untempered clay (9405. two basic techniques were applied. Additional accessories or the position of a figurine could further strengthen the meaning. 9086. ´ with a bowl-like device which could be put on as its hair. Benin. At the village of Gekoli to the East of Abomey (the area of Fon) the main fetish was installed in the corner of a kitchen at the chief’s house. as well as .8). that local brownish flint.7). The members of a community could often decode the meaning of the figurines on the basis of just one single appropriate element. Outside the house. Individual ownership of figurines is often seen among the children. When discarded.100 Acta Archaeologica other fetishes of the village not taking human embodiment. 19). which commonly involve cut marks on arms or legs – a ritual destruction (though not affecting the value of the item as a commodity). Wooden figurine representing the Yoruban deity Baba. Figurines protecting the villages could be found at their limits. No tools have been made of this poor quality flint. it must have been attached to one of the timbers above the oven. The one two-dimensional figurine (7045) was discovered in House 2. 9405. only sexual ones. the figurines release their powers or spirits in a ceremonial way. confirmed to be a child – both said to represent Yorouban Abikou. A wooden figurine of a male with bent knees and emphasized phallos was said to represent Baba – a Yorouban deity protecting the whole village against illnesses (Fig. These represent deceased relatives. 9024. right at its western wall were two other figurines. but several knapped cores indicate the practice. was used as a medium of training. 9086. and they could have different levels of ownership. In Benin. as already mentioned. often being fed. there were several occasions to observe the function of figurines within different communities. except one. Incidentally. made for dead children and connecting the world of the living with the world of the spirits (Fig. For manufacturing of figurines. All discovered clay figurines. were three-dimensional (Pl. VI. the points presented here serve to underline the amplitude of levels on which figurines may circulate both mentally and contextually. Another technique in- Fig. found on the site. usually sold to tourist-minded merchants. 2001/ 127). a female and an apparently asexual being.

Thus. The more informative fragments inˆ dicate that solid limbs and head were attached to a hollow body. The remaining three fragments. the amount of unfired figurines will never be known. The cut marks were slightly smoothened with wet fingers. Importantly. broken off at the junction and found in the ‘‘street’’ area at the back of House 3 (10226). interpreted by L. which were broken off at junctions. Talalay as a kind of contractual devices or identifying tokens enchaining distant contractors. UN009/9B). They include a rolled clay lump with anthropomorphic features and shallow oblique incisions on the back. since they appear as exceptions in the total body of pottery products. All five pieces are somewhat special. Natural clay would also be used for ad hoc tasks. Plates 11 & 12). 8000) and legs/feet (9005). unknown provenience) made of a lump of clay – was carved in the manner of a wooden object. This can be seen from the majority of the figurine legs. the discovered fragments of five figurines made of untempered clay were fired. The body would be simply modeled with fingers. representing the Yoruban deity Abikou. In more demanding cases. The cut made in the middle of the figurine has apparently been controlled. Natural clay was readily available at the Lıga site. 9005). Greece were 101 Fig. At the same time. around which the figurine would be assembled.8. leaving a very plain surface of longitudinal breakage. holes after such sticks can be seen in both heads (4446. Wooden figurines outside Beninoise house. One of them – a head (2001/127. The third item is a leg of a short-legged figurine with oversized hucklebone (UN009/9B. This was the prevailing technique at Lıga 2. ˆ This availability could certainly inspire even unskilled members of the community to express their creativity. The shape and incision of a pubic triangle are made with nearly mathematic precision. 45–46. VI. Fragments of figurines made of untempered clay have attracted special attention. presumably holding the other half of the same figurine (Talalay 1993. Another fragment within this group is the right half of the lower part of a standing female figurine. applying well balanced fabric and surface treatment techniques and those manufactured in more rudimentary fashion. disturbed fill) – perhaps an attempt to imitate the details seen on masterly produced figurines (cf. Certain artistic signatures can be recognized when viewing all the small finds together. namely wooden artifacts. It has been mentioned that the sitting figurine found in House 4 together with its accessories was made of identical fabric – clay abundantly tempered with sand (quartz par- . a wooden stick of 4–5 mm in diameter was used as a core. Indeed. all fragments of figurines can be divided into those made by skillful masters. In two cases within this group the figurines were manufactured of untempered clay (10226. Carving of clay lumps can be seen as an attempt to transfer manufacturing techniques applied on wooden objects. deriving from untempered clay figurines might well have been produced by inexpert makers. it signalizes a group of items which has disappeared. The item was found in the lower layers of waste accumulated along the eastern wall of House 1. so these items were treated the same way as the others. that similar fragments of Middle Neolithic (5000–4500 BC) figurines at Franchthi. These suggestions do not exclude that other items made of tempered clay could have been produced by children. Another example is a rather crudely made leg. Small protrusions were made to attach the limbs. This was not a product of a novice. found in House 1 (9405). This figurine has also been produced of a single lump of clay. Without going into further considerations it can be mentioned. Of course.Lıga ˆ volved individual modeling of separate body parts and then assembling.

its femininity is revealed through a sharply incised pubic triangle (Pl. 18:9). The ‘‘sitting goddess’’ would still be perceived as ‘‘the sitting goddess’’ no matter if one views the elaborate examples found at Lıga and Redutite (Gergov 2000) ˆ or the unsophisticated creations from Zaminec (Nikolov 1975) and Okol Glava (Pernicheva 2002).2) could be linked with a tripod found in House 5 (Pl. Reliance on conventionalism probably explains why some of the sitting figurines were not equipped with sexual attributes (see Nikolov 1975) – perhaps the general shape was allusive enough to decode the meaning of such figurine. Clay figurine representing pig. As already mentioned. 25). the mentioned bell-shaped figurine along with a rolled lump figurine from House 1 are here considered ‘‘asexual’’. The lower part of the figurine discovered in House 2 (Fig VI. The conventionalism. Two massive legs (9014 & 9022) discovered in the waste area at House 1 were made of the same fabric.102 Acta Archaeologica quire special skills to achieve the wanted results. the fully preserved ˆ sitting figurine has both breasts and incised pubic triangle. The third Lıga 2 case ˆ ˆ where a sexual distinction could be made is the lower part of a figurine found at House 1. contrary to the finds from the same area). Fig. and in all. Pubic triangle was also seen on a fragment of a sitting figurine discovered in a ‘‘street’’ area (probably re-deposited later. 20:1) – both have received the same grooving of the surface and were made of the same fabric: abundant presence of organic matter and chamotte (0. 19:42026. 18:11). an emphasized belly was most likely a reference to pregnancy. The same fabric (with the same size and proportion of tempering components) was also identified in a skillfully made zoomorphic figurine rendering a pig (Fig. Incidentally. The one and only Lıga 1 figurine. Perhaps it can also be interpreted as an individual signature of a potter. Certain sexual determination within the Lıga maˆ terial can be made in four cases. indicating that this is a type of figurine having a wider regional and temporal distribution. VI.g. Turning to the Lıga 2 material. repetitiveness. On their soles were impressions of grass leaves. did not re- . ensuring that the work invested in production of these items would not be jeopardized during the firing process. although similar figurines from Redutite were equipped with breasts (Grancharov 1999. like. a similar leg was discovered at Ezero-Kaleto.. Within the pubic triangle it was richly decorated with incisions forming a double spiral (¬) and dots. Nevertheless. Produced of a single lump of clay with perforated arm stumps stretched out and seemingly raised and with a raised head. The legs could easily be taken as belonging to the same standing figurine if only they were not left legs both of them. this temper combination was considered as minimum risk temper.9). Pl. This band is perhaps replicating clothing. In fact. the bellshaped figurine discovered in the lower layers of waste East of House 1 (Pl. ˆ preserved only in half.5–3 mm) and moderate amount of sand (up to 1 mm). it is being seen as asexual. ticles being 1–2 mm) and organic matter. avoiding premature conclusions. this fragment was the only truly decorated figurine fragment at Lıga 2. Apparently. and dependence on rules of assembling the figurines. 18: 1). e. since it had traces of secondary burning. had incised pubic triangle and a hip belt. A double spiral motif on pubic triangles is a frequently applied element of Copper Age figurines. VI.9. had the same dark gray brown color and both were burnished in the same fashion. Fig. it is a matter of females. This could also be true about other types of figurines. The proportion of the legs suggests that such figurines would have been around 30 cm in height. A ribbon of linear incisions was running across the thighs (Pl. which is seen in stressing certain elements in figurines. pointing to the fact that their production took place in a not formalized working environment and during warmer part of the year. Also the back was covered with incisions.

as in the case of vessel bottoms. Eyes may be rendered as dots. The fully preserved sitting figurine was 18 cm in height.8 cm (9024). the lower left part of a figurine (9086). 11. naturalistic facial features can be deduced from the preserved heads. In terms of color. This also narrows the ownership to a household level. male figurines tend to have only two. a leg of a massive figurine (9014). Such figurine is estimated to be around 30 cm. Following these guidelines of separation. Such perforations were not reserved for female figurines only. a layer of sand was separating the feet from a flat surface. First of all. The most skillfully made item among the discovered pieces of figurines is considered to be a pair of legs/feet (9005) (Pl. Regular burnishing is observed on the surface of the head from House 3 (10654). one of which is preserved in its full extent. on the soles were many particles of sand. The Lıga material. The smallest fully preserved one was the bell-shaped figurine of 4. Todorova 1979. perceiving these as symbolic notations with specific meaning. It can be noted that similar figurines at Redutite range between 14 and 25 cm (Gergov 2000). 18:10). there are five fragments which can be linked to deliberate breaking. Such artistic puritanism was arguably a conscious choice or restriction in order to avoid blurring of the message. the group of deliberately broken items includes the left buttock of the Lıga 1 ˆ figurine (8099). Needless to repeat that no individual. Ears would only be marked as perforations. also provides ˆ some clues on ownership of the figurines. The particular location of a sitting figurine on a house floor at the rear end of the room and presumably close to the oven indicates that this was serving group demands. and a pair of legs/ feet (9005) – all found in a waste area at House 1 – plus a head discovered in House 3 (10654). 9022). which were made of untempered clay stand out by their light gray to gray brown color. Little can be said on organization of production of the figurines. The biggest are represented by two massive legs (9014. the fragment should not be broken at its juncture point. 62.Lıga ˆ It should also be mentioned that one of the heads can perhaps be interpreted as male due to a prominent chin. Some items. And. respectively. Looking at the patterns of breakage. The fragment was tempered with fine organic matter and chamotte. in order to avoid adhesion during the modeling. although limited. bear traces of burnishing. 9022). Two perforations on each side of the head mark the ears. this group might be bigger. but this is caused by recent ploughing. however. Surface treatment is usually limited to smoothing and evening. Naturally. head 10654). The criterion chosen to distinguish between deliberate breaking and ‘‘natural’’ relies on two observations. there are three basic color categories. 4040. also has an even cut. Fig. This not only received the best surface treatment in form of self-slip. In three cases the color is gray black (legs 9014 & 9022. 18:4). The same can be said about the figurine of which the lower part was discovered in House 2 and which was hung above the 2. There is. every house could have been equipped with such a sitting figurine. secondly. So. Pattern decoration using incisions was observed only in three cases (8099. . alluding beard (Pl. Those figurines. more stress should be put on the decoration designs of the figurines. perforations or protrusions. Protruding nose is usually considered sufficient in reproducing human images. which is unusual for Lıga 2 materials. The remaining would fall into groups: 7–12 and 14–20 cm. Mouth is reproduced as a depression or a series of dots. The remaining pieces range beˆ tween light yellow brown to medium brown color (occasionally. While female figurines are usually equipped with three or more perforations. like separating figurines into equal halves or creating plain cuts (2). with reddish patches). Fig. like the fragment attributed to Lıga 1 (8099) ˆ and legs from the waste area at House 1 (9014. The surface of the skillfully made pair of legs/feet (9005) was smoothed with the help of self- 103 slip. 1). the breakage should reflect a controlled action. As evidence from Lıga and Redutite sugˆ gests. Attempts were made to reconstruct the scale of figurines. since there are several examples of male figurines with ear perforations (Nikolov 1970. The head of the complete sitting figurine. 9405). but it also demonstrates an exceptional degree of artistic attention paid to such ‘‘small’’ details as toes and hucklebones. some evidence that at least part of the figurines was produced in the same setting as pottery. Accepting this view. 1 m away from the body. found in a higher layer.

104 Acta Archaeologica Lastly. The only anthropomorphic figurine found at Lıga (attributed to the ˆ Lıga 1 settlement) was decorated twice. the next time a new owner made a more forthright marking of the pubic triangle – but at knee height – seemingly unsatisfied with the allusiveness of the original markings (Pl. It is made in the best Gumelnita ¸ tradition. that settlement conflagration was not a planned act (cf. As a rule. Fig. with naturalistic. tempered with fine organic matter and chamotte. The body – length 13. accepting the special role of the sitting figurine. VI. Stevanovic 1997). it holds several details of identification. ZOOMORPHIC FIGURINES oven (Fig. 17:2. Manufacturing of bone figurines is also less straightforward and requires special skills compared with production of clay figurines. are thus not uncommon among grave gifts (see Chapter XI).10). Bone figurines are also presenting evidence about shifting ownership (see Chapter IX). This naturally sets some restrictions on the number of possible owners as well as putting such items into a different category of value. for instance in clothing. which are easy to carry. Accepting that part of the figurines could have been toys produced by children. In 1892. but a nasty surprise. A hump on the back is typical for oxen (Pl. clay figurines were seemingly designed to serve group demands. it should once again be stressed. The clay used to manufacture this figurine contained organic matter and abundant amounts of rather coarse sand. both attributed to the Lıga 2 ˆ settlement (Fig. 17:7). Thus. treated by P. also provide important points (Chapter IX). 17:8). VI. Although fragmented (part of the head and legs are missing). One proper zoomorphic figurine was discovered behind House 4.6 cm. Citing Gumelnita is not accidental. Anthropomorphic and zoomorphic protomes have been discussed in above sections related to the pottery. while bone figurines belonged to the more individualised sphere of use and ownership. Bone figurines. community idols can still be found among the ruins. when compared with other figurines of the time. it is possible to state that some specimens were individually owned. Zidarov. Ghana. maybe even ˆ three times. Such situation can perhaps be illuminated through comparison with historical events. in the ‘‘street’’ area. where the sitting figurine was discovered. It was made of a single clay lump. While the clay figurines seem to belong in the female sphere of pottery production.9 & Pl.10. in Ghana.2). it is not unlikely that the flat and portable bone specimens were male products.5 cm – bears characteristic features of a pig (Fig. .16 & Pl. Briefly it can be stated that only one anthropomorphic protome and two zoomorphic ones (resembling ox) were found. VI. The length is 6. The first time it received all the conventional markings of the period. VI. it is likely that the same person was responsible for the creation of both.3). forced the whole community of Krobo Hills to flee and abandon their belongings. which forced the ´ inhabitants to leave even their idols behind. the British. for the closest par¸ allels are from the KGK VI area. A pair of nubs between the back legs may indicate that it was a bull. The head of the figurine is missing as it was made using a less common ‘‘head-hole’’ insertion technique. the same combination and proportion as in the case of the fully preserved sitting human figurine. elaborate details not leaving space for speculations on what it was representing. This animal figurine was found in a top layer South of House 4. V. Hence. Bone figurines. house walls and broken vessels of this huge settlement (Fig. under threat of canon fire. 26:6). The second zoomorphic figurine can truly be considered an artwork. Clay figurine discovered in ruin of a house at the ancient main settlement of the Krobos.

One of the sides was decorated with graphite decoration. two of which were broken at or below their junction point. Photo: R. all but one specimen show manufacturing skills beyond the ordinary. it becomes matters of peripheral interest to determine whether the devices were oil-lamps or. which usually are denominated as altarpieces. Certainly. 9028. and hexagon pieces (2:8001. but also a functional amplitude of such items. Use of the self-constructed term ‘‘tablelike’’ is an attempt to avoid straightforward interpretations. As the only exception. 4625). Banffy 1997.Lıga ˆ SMALL TABLES AND SIMILAR DEVICES Among the rather peculiar finds at Lıga are fragments ˆ of small table-like devices. table-like devices were produced by skillful masters.4. caused by rough surfaces. In this light. Thirdly. Moreover. The find spot was beneath the western wall of House 1. One fragment was attributed to House 3 (10659). Firstly. VI. at the southern wall (Pl.11. Elster 1986. 20:1 (42026)). 9000. so strictly speaking it cannot be determined what they have been supporting. 9028). altarpieces. rectangular (3:2001/250. the device continued to . the issue will require more elaborate studies than observations under microscope (cf. other artefacts. One is derived from ˆ Lıga 1 materials. tempered with organic matter. namely that one geometric form is incorporated into another. 14000. Schwarzberg 2003). 2000/15). all shapes and types being represented. the one fragment attributed to the Lıga 1 settlement was not equipped with legs (2001/ ˆ 250) (Pl. rectangular or hexagonal shapes. 9000) were found in layers of waste accumulated at the NE corner of House 1. since only their legs are partly damaged (42026. The best preserved table-like item was found upside down in House 5. the range of original colors is limited to light brown and light reddish brown. 19–21). 4646. was made in a crude manner with no attention given to the surface finish (9028). which was stabilized by debris from the Lıga 1 settlement. A common feature for this group of items is an integration of a basin with legs supporting it. the remaining from Lıga 2 data. 303). all Lıga fragments share a very significant ˆ feature. Kolev. They bear traces of intense abrasions. Such formal antithesis had no doubt a symbolic meaning. may have overlapping use functions. both in terms of surface treatment and decoration. ˆ Three of the fragments attributed to the Lıga 2 ˆ settlement were found in uppermost layers. like small bowls or plates. and one was found in the ‘‘street’’ area at the SW corner of House 5 (4343). Model of oven discovered among debris attributed to the Lıga 1 settlement. 8–9. Eleven fragments of table-like devices have been discovered at Lıga (Pl. hence their provenience is unclear (4625. Three fragments (8001. 14000). 105 Fig. Two fragments can be associated with House 2 (4646. cult-tables. 10659). Only one example. This was rectangular in shape.4. The item wellburnished and brown in color. oil lamps and the like (Banffy 1997. Two speciemen may be considered as nearly complete. The round basin is thus incorporated into triangular. while the outline of a basin was rounded. thus elevating the table-like devices above the profane. 9028. The material provides a very mixed picture. Seemingly. Rather more fully preserved fragments show that legs of the table-like devices experienced the most stress. There are both tripods (4: 42026. ˆ ˆ Among the fragments are four legs. Secondly. Such variety in ´ characterization may not only reflect personal convictions of a describing observer. ˆ Despite formal variation there are several common characteristics. 20:3). 2000/15. 10659). more abstractly. Contrary to the figurines.

106

Acta Archaeologica
items also have traces of secondary burning, but of less regular nature (4625, 4343, 8001). Hence, manipulation of fire in relation with table-like devices cannot be excluded. In terms of fabric, the clay is abundantly tempered, the prevailing combination of tempering materials being organic matter, well-sorted sand and chamotte. Although these considerations have not clarified the function of the table-like devices, it has been demonstrated that the production required experienced potters, thus indicating that the context of their use was more restricted than that of the figurines.

Fig. VI.12. Fragment of crucible (4¿4.3 cm). Photo: R. Kolev.

be used after breaking of one or even two legs. This indicates, that table-like devices had a long duration of use. The smallest among the discovered pieces is the crude one (9028), its dimensions are only 6.5¿3.8¿3.8 cm, the diameter of the basin being 2 cm. Other pieces are twice as big, the length varying between 9–12 cm, while the diameter of the basin is 4 (10659), 5 (42026) and 6 (8001) cm, respectively. The greatest variation is seen in height, from 4.5 to 10–12 cm. Based on such variety of shapes and sizes, when practically there are no pieces repeating each other, it can be assumed that alter-like devices were objects used in exchange. In this sense they can indeed be considered as social ceramics, and not only due to their non-utilitarian purpose, as pointed out by E. Elster (1986, 303). The upper surface – the ‘‘visible’’ part – has received the most attention. Table-like devices can be slipped and burnished (8001), burnished (10659), covered with grooves (42026), incised in angular patterns (4343, 10659, 4625), or equipped with extra-modeled protrusions (14000, 2000/15). One of the pieces deserves extra attention (10659). Its outer surface is light reddish brown, while the basin is gray black due to even distribution of sooth. Besides, the basin is intensely burnished and virtually non-permeable. Other

MODEL OF OVEN Models of houses or ovens belong to a group of rarities in Copper Age sites. Only one such item was discovered at Lıga. It is an oven model with arched ˆ opening found beneath the SE part of House 1 of the Lıga 2 settlement (Fig. VI.11 & Pl. 17:9). As has ˆ been mentioned before, this slope area was stabilised with debris deriving from the Lıga 1 settlement, ˆ which thus was redistributed. The oven model was an integrated part of a larger item. The most plausible interpretation is that it was a part of a lid. It remains unclear, however, why a hole of ca. 1.5 cm in diameter was made in the bottom wall of the dome (for pouring?). The hole was made after firing. The ridge of the furnace was originally furnished with three protrusions, of which only two are intact. The surface of the dome is covered with 10 longitudinal, parallel incisions.

CRUCIBLES & METALLURGY The excavations at Lıga have also provided evidence ˆ for metallurgy. It was attested in both Copper Age settlements, as well as in Grave 1 (see Chapter XI). Incidentally, all items related to metallurgy were found in the same excavated area, at the southern slopes of the site. Two fragments of two crucibles were recovered beneath the SW part of House 1. They were in a dense layer of shards and other finds from Lıga 1, which ˆ was created after leveling and stabilizing the slope area prior to construction of House 1 of the Lıga 2 ˆ settlement. Both crucibles were rectangular in shape

Lıga ˆ
with rounded basin and flat bottom. Both were made of clay tempered with moderate amounts of well-sorted sand and were affected by secondary burning, although not vitrified. The bigger one was better preserved, and more crude than the smaller one (Fig. VI.12 & Pl. 17:10) Its estimated length was 7 cm, the width 4 cm, the total height 2.5 cm. One of the sides was equipped with two holes placed on the same level at the middle of the wall. The diameter of the holes is 0.5 cm. The holes were presumably used to fix a handle, two wooden sticks, for example. By using two sticks, a steady grip would be provided and spoiling of melted copper would be avoided. Copper deposit was discovered attached to the bottom of the crucible. The smaller crucible was more thoroughly manufactured with a smooth surface of the internal basin. The preserved fragment, a corner of the crucible, may only allow rather coarse estimations of external dimensions, which were not exceeding 4.5¿5 cm, the height 2.3 cm (Pl. 17:11). As the previous item, it was also equipped with two holes in the middle of the wall. But the holes were only half as big, around 0.25 cm, the diameter narrowing from outside towards the inside. Actual copper items were found in later layers, namely inside House 1 of the Lıga 2 settlement. The ˆ finds include one awl and two pins, lying encapsulated in burned layers of daub at the floor level but in different parts of the house. The awl (8597) was 7.1 cm long and 0.9 cm wide at its widest part. It was gradually narrowing towards one end, which was slightly bent (Fig. VI.13). However, due to corrosion it could not be established with certainty, which end was the working one. The awl had a quadrangular cross-section along its whole length and a pointed end. It was found just outside the dividing structure of House 1. The longer pin (9425) measured 4.1 cm in length and was 2.9 mm wide (Fig. VI.14). It had a quadrangular cross-section. Part of the surface was eroded away, but it could be deduced that the pin was tapering to a point. The pin was found together with the head of a presumably sitting figurine (Pl. 18:2 (9425)) in House 1. The shorter pin (9089), measuring just 2.4 cm in length and 2.5 mm in width, was found near the major concentration of storage and other vessels of

107

Fig. VI.13. Copper awl and pointed bone tools (length of the Cu awl – 7.1 cm). Photo: R. Kolev.

House 1. This pin also had a quadrangular cross-section. It is very well preserved and therefore gave grounds to think that it was made of bronze. The item was analyzed with X-ray flourescence by B. Gottlieb (3), National Museum of Denmark. It was
3. The author is grateful to Birthe Gottlieb, MA, for carrying out this analysis.

108

Acta Archaeologica
ing impressions of a presumably copper pin with quadrangular cross-section (Fig. VI.15). Metal could also be associated with the graves (see Chapter XI). Several copper beads, both wide cylindrical (ca. 1.5 cm in length) (Fig. VI.16) and narrow cylindrical (0.2–0.3 cm in length) were found in Grave 1, in the area of the breast of the body. Grave 1 was dug under the NW corner of House 1. The remains of the skeleton together with adjoining soils were moved to the Historical Museum of Pleven for more controlled investigation. As a result, more copper beads were discovered. The beads were made of rolled copper sheet with overlapping edges. The rolled cylinder was then cut into single pieces. The diameter of the beads was around 0.5 cm. The most exclusive item discovered at Lıga is a ˆ golden pendant (see Chapter XI) (Fig. VI.17). The circumstances of its discovery are unclear, as it was discovered in loose soil close to Grave 1. It was made of a narrow strip of golden sheet, 0.1 cm thick cut longitudinally until its approximate midpoint. The terminals were then rolled in opposite directions into spirals. The total length of the pendant is 4.3 cm. At the other end, a hole for hanging was made by cold hammering. The surplus/excessive metal was then recurved. Regardless its uncertain provenience, the golden pendant, likely a phallos (with testicles) can be attributed to the Late Copper Age. The best parallel, also in gold, is exhibited at the National Museum of Greece (Fig. VI.18). Although it is merely part of a bigger confiscated hoard of 70 golden items, the association with so-called ring-idols (Todorova, Vajsov 2001, Pl.22) places it securely in the period around the end of the fifth millennium BC. Copper pins with double spiral head are relatively common on Bulgarian Copper Age sites (Todorova & Vajsov 2001, Pl. 9). Such a pin was also discovered at the neighboring Redutite site (Gergov 1987), indicating that gold pendants as tokens was not foreign to the symbolic realm of the Copper Age at Telish.

Fig. VI.14. Copper pin (length – 4.1 cm).

Fig. VI.15. Bone handle with impression presumably of copper pin of quadrangular cross-section (Ø – 1 cm).

Fig. VI.16. Cylindrical copper bead found in Grave 1 (length – 1.2 cm). Photo: R. Kolev.

demonstrated that the pin was made of copper deriving from two different sources, a result perhaps achieved through remelting of different copper items. It should be mentioned that at the western wall of House 3 was found a bone socket (Pl. 27:6) still bear-

VARIOUS MINOR ITEMS
SPINDLE WHORLS

The number of spindle whorls is limited to six complete and one unfinished specimens, all in clay and

LOOM WEIGHTS Three loom weights were discovered at Lıga. Golden pendant (‘‘phallos’’) (height – 4. An impression ˆ of a Z-laid cord 0. All weighs are conical in shape with rounded base and horizontal perforation at the top (Fig.Lıga ˆ all from uncertain contexts. (b) Spherical. VI. VI.77 cm thick was found below the rim of the big pithos in House 3 (Fig. The rondel itself is 5. Four different shapes are represented in the Lıga material: ˆ (a) Biconical. Their height varies between 9–10 cm. the cord was used to withstand the pressure during drying of this huge container. It has the form of a flat perforated rondel. VI. 17:16). The dimensions of the whorls are indicated in Fig.21). Despite thorough investigations. One wheel-like object also deserves to be mentioned in this context (Fig. despite the fact that ˆ shapes of spindle whorls show limited temporal sensitivity.18.20). Apparently.17. VI. The function remains uncertain. represented by two items (Pl. Kolev.3 cm). 17:12. Table of spindle whorls. (c) Flat. 109 Fig. Golden pendant (height ca. but the hole is seemingly too small for the rod of a whorl. represented by one item (Pl. Such weights are interpreted as parts of warp-weighted looms. with a flat base. indicating that these were in repeated contact. One of these has truncated top and base (Pl. perhaps it is a miniature wheel due to the small hole. two lyˆ ing together outside the northern wall of House 4. due to their general appearance and clay matrix they can be attributed to the Lıga 2 settlement. In terms of temper. Unknown provenience. .5 mm. 17:15).19. VI. However. the diameter of the base being 7–8 cm. close to the surface and hence with uncertain provenience. 17:14).3 cm in diameter.19. 6 cm). made of recycled pottery shards.13). VI. VI.22). while the diameter of the perforation is just 3. The edges are well smoothed. there is an equal division into two groups – those produced of natural clay and those tempered with organic matter and coarse-grained sand. Photo: R. The Fig. Fig. represented by one finished and one unfinished whorl (Pl. represented by two of the whorls. traces of textiles were only found in one case at Lıga. (d) Conical. which were shaped into a rounded disc and pierced. exhibited at the National Museum of Greece.

despite flotation proˆ Three clay beads were discovered. All loom weights were made of untempered clay with single inclusions of larger sand grains (ca. unlike the pottery production. Two of the beads are spherical (10 and 20 mm in diameter). the lack of such evidence within three rather wellpreserved houses opens up for two options: (a) that weaving was carried out outside the houses. 3 mm). Perforated clay rondel. as recently at Karanovo or in the Drama valley. VI. The strikingly small number of loom weights is perhaps an indication that these artefacts were used unfired and thus disintegrated if not exposed to fire during settlement conflagration.20. both with secondary abrasions of the edges. In terms of fabric. VI. only two fish bones were collected from Lıga. Some meticulously carried-out fieldwork. accepting that the conflagration took place during the warm period of the year. Fig. Shard of storage container with impression of cord. one in front of House 2. However. by analogy. . which transforms the pieces into a category of tools/ worked bone. At the same time. very few fish bones would survive passing through dogs. pointing to relatively thick threads. two fish vertebrae were found. Traditionally. At Sadovec-Ezero. Two beads were found in a ‘‘street’’ area. they do not differ from clay used for daubing the upper layers of house walls. On the other hand. Bagachina have produced abundant numbers of weights (Bonev & Aleksandrov 1996). 386).21. The total absence of fish remains at most Copper Age sites cannot be explained merely by excavation procedures. such are associated with fishing nets. and certainly ruling out an assumption of unfavourable conditions of preservation. all attributed to Lıga 2 layers (Pl. cedures (see Chapter X). for instance. Traces of wear indicate that the latter was hung with the rounded side out. one discoidal (21 mm in diameter).110 Acta Archaeologica Fig. BEADS CYLINDRICAL WEIGHTS Two cylindrical clay weights were recorded from disturbed layers in the area of House 2 (Fig. occasional small pebbles and ochre. both items discovered at Lıga are made of poorly baked clay. VI. Some Late Copper Age sites. (b) that weaving was not as common as generally assumed. A common feature is that ˆ they are made of untempered clay. weight of each item is around 0. To add to the confusion. perhaps as a cloth weight. abundantly temˆ pered with organic matter and therefore seemingly unsuitable for lengthy periods in water.5 kg. have not produced fish bone material at all (Bökönyi & Bartosiewicz 1997. 17:17–19).23). and in fact narrowed to a limited number of specialists.

those ˆ with exact provenience came from areas outside the houses. Fig. 2 to 4 cm in diameter (Pl. Photo: R.Lıga ˆ 111 Fig.g.23. In most cases their secondary funcˆ tion could be deduced either through the shape (e. ca.4 cm). Cylindrical clay weights (length of the item to the left – 7.22. .. Clay loom weights (one square of the background plate equals 1 cm).. pottery burnishers). MODIFIED VESSEL SHARDS Recycling of pottery shards has been a wide-spread practice at Lıga. which do not provide any explicit clues as to their function. VI. There are no explicit traces of wear. VI. spindle whorls) or traces of wear (e. Kolev.g. 17: 20– 21). A handful of such items were recorded in Lıga 2 layers. But there is a group of modified shards. A suggestion is that they were gaming pieces. These are ceramic discs of nearly regular circular shape.

Some Hammerstones at Lıga are in flint (Pl.1). Items here classified as Scrapers are made from thick flakes.5– 3. Cores and Fragments of Cores comprises exhausted and non-exhausted cores. or ‘‘Unknown Tool’’. the width 1. Some items are cores or spalls. shape (morphology. 22: 2–3. The cross-section is triangular or trapezoid. the latter from making or rejuvenation of striking platforms. and fragments and flakes of cores.0 cm. the length 3. The tools are classified according to functional characteristics: primarily. Apart from a single oval specimen.5.VII. with items ranging from 1–10 cm. secondarily. Among the worked flints – almost all of good quality material – the percentage of tools is unusually high. recorded and studied. Flints. Debitage. all are spherical.1. blades & tool types (numbers). macroscopic use-wear marks. Blades are oblong flakes – length more than double the width – made in direct percussion technique.0 (Pl. which cannot be determined.0 cm long. VII. 24:1). End-scrapers make up a highly uniform group of tools: all made on long and well-shaped blades or flakes. often triangular in cross-section. Borers make up a heterogeneous group. VII.5–3. typically 5. VII. the scraping edge is less steep than at the above Scapers. . THE INDUSTRY Smaller flint tools and debitage are often overlooked in common excavations. after the short initial ˆ phase of the excavation. most tools were made in indirect percussion techniques. with clear crushing marks. the width 1. crushing-marks). although some items cannot be determined any closer than ‘‘Knife or Sickle-blade’’. The latter group comprises items made from blades or blade-like flakes.0.0 cm. difficult to determine due to limited size. gloss. washed. all flints. worked and unworked. Debitage makes up a very heterogeneous group. the length is 3. The length is 3. The finds are of a blade industry.0–6. the width being 2. others flakes large and small. Many specimens are broken (Fig. At Lıga. VII. the debitage is only making up some 30% of the worked flints items (Fig. Notably.5–8). the width 1. FLINTS by Søren Albek et al. 22:1. either because they are reworked or multipurpose in character.0–4. since bulbs.0– 2. ˆ All are of fist size or a little smaller.5–5. 23:6– 8). only a very few tools are made from cores (or flakes). Many pieces of very poor quality flint – washed out and brittle – were found. ripples and even scars are mising. were collected. drop-shaped in outline and with a steep scraping edge (Fig. the majority unworked.1). a number of macromorphological types have been established (Fig.0–7. Pl. Pl.2:2–5. Many have traces of hafting. VII.5–2.5. Artefact group Fig. The quality is generally high. including dressing and retouche). Many speciments are broken. However.0 cm. The measures below are of complete items. Accordingly. the former are often very small or fragmented specimens. all made on massive blades.2:1.4). work traces (traces of hafting.

which likely was longitudinal. ˆ Knives is a large group of retouched blades used for cutting. 23:16. 23:18). The variation in length is considerable. 23:2–5). Additional Tools comprises bifacial points (arrow heads) (Pl. either equilateral or oblique. there were seemingly two types of sickle. the long side used for cutting. 23:1). The fact that the points were seemingly made from cores (or flakes). Many sickle-blades are broken. Finally. like the above End-scrapers. Other weapons than the above ones in flint are unknown. 22:9–12. The length is 4. sometimes on both. which may have served as arrow heads (cf. and a heavy pointed oblong tool with secondary retouche on two sides (dagger blade or large borer?) (Pl. 23:17). were probably used for working in both wood. a fragment of a biface (likely a core axe). 23:10–14). Chapter IX) and. . Many specimens carry traces of hafting. a biface knife with fine pressure flaking of the surfaces (Pl. which also were tools (cf. Burins do not enter this assemblage. etc. VII. as is certainly their small number. They all have gloss on the one edge. Pl. only very rarely are these dented.5–3. The cross-section is usually trapezoid. the width 1. Chapter VIII). The first type had one (or more) blades attached at the one end directly to the shaft.Lıga ˆ 113 Fig. To judge from wear marks and gloss. bone and antler. a few of the flints might be (Early) Bronze Age in date. The cross-section is usually oblique trapezoid with the steep short side used for cutting. Kolev. likely during use.0–2.2. of course. Most of the sickleblades have smooth or only lightly retouched edges. the above End-scrapers. Sickle-blades are.0 cm.0–8.5. is perhaps surprising.0 cm.0 – no doubt a reflection of differential use (Pl. Photo: R. the width 2. except perhaps for some bone points. 18). not blades.0– 5. the stone axes. 4. including one of the arrow heads (Pl. Some of the scrapers of Lıga 2 settlement. the second type had blades inserted along the one side of a curved shaft or even into the middle piece of a handle. a very homogeneous group of tools made on mediumsized blades (Pl.

a sickleblade plus one to two blades. has provided valuable advice. To this comes some raw material. there is a high percentage of debitage only in local flint. likely temporary work-shops. Sofia. knives. a standard tool-kit seems to have consisted of an end-scraper. R. VII. VII. inclusions (including fossils). regional flints (10–30 km – return the next day). VII.5). and foreign flint sources (Fig.114 Acta Archaeologica Senon and Maastricht (Valev 1992) (Fig. only a tenth being foreign (Fig. flakes and flakes. From the table (Fig. regional. Much of the foreign flint – supposedly. Fig.I Nachev & I. Looking at the most common artefact types.4).24. VII. ˆ Fig. Pipra is c 8 km to the south of Lıga. Local flint is widely used and has delivered the majority of cores. VII. Numerically. with a short life span. Foci of the determination are colours.1). Interestingly. and the rest foreign. By contrast. Zlateva-Uzunova. There are virtually ˆ no weapons or hunting-related tools among the flints. borers and sickle-blades for crafts and agricultural work. are made from local Sadovec flint.3). Otherwise. Also an archaeologist.4). but only one third of the knives. 7). In House 3 at Lıga is a group or hoard of 9 ˆ blades (only the proximal end is preserved of one specimen) stemming from the same core (Fig. foreign flints ( 30 km. elsewhere in the publication. ˆ the locality comprising two flint-bearing formations. including a detailed table of reference for stone and flints. two thirds of the Sickle-blades. including Chapter XII). Visiting Bulgarian geologists assisted in the work. and selected tools. suggesting an import of fine blades. Fig. Nuˆ ´ merical/percental distribution of worked flint according to flint sources. the sample is dominated by scrapers.K. The foreign (and regional) flints – in particular the knives – probably reflect exchange systems. A general introduction to the problems is by C. III. A division has been made between local. ˆ including Sadovec and Pipra (0–10 km – return the same day). RAW MATERIALS The types of flint employed were mainly determined on the basis of known geological occurrences and only to a limited degree on data from other settlements. or multiples thereof. It should be added that flint was commonly found in spaces between structures.4. highly knowledgeable on flint in Bulgaria. flint is rare inside the structures. a knife. VII. grain size. Knives are often of foreign flints. perhaps articulated through sheep/goat transhumanence (cf. suggesting that non-local flint arrived mainly in finished or nearly finished form. The identified sources used at Lıga are the following: Local flints.6. Nachev (Nachev & Nachev 1986). Local sources were isolated and samples taken from two localities.3. Flint types.3). The End-scrapers are divided equally between local and regional flints. tools and debitage. Fig. CONCLUSIONS & COMPARISONS The following observations should be noted regarding the flints of Lıga (cf. Almost no parallel materials have so far been exca- . while animal bones mainly came from particular garbage areas. VII. Pipra flint is quite ˆ sturdy. of which even a fourth is of foreign flint (Fig. VII. mainly from far away. specific surface conditions (both cortex and fractures). Artefacts with a short life span (sicles) are mainly of local flints. chaıne operatoire. often to the South of the Balkan range – is of high quality. Table of percentage of flint items recovered at Lıga according to flint sources. VII. Sadovec is c 9 km East of Lıga. one third is regional. often much more – return after some days). no doubt a reflection of floors being regularly swept. it transpires that half the flint is local. Flint types.

Lıga ˆ

115

Fig. VII.5. Flint nodules at Sadovec. For scale: knife ca. 20 cm, left part of the photo.

Fig. VII.6. Eight flint blades and part of a blade (proximal end) found together at the oven in House 3.

vated and published in Bulgaria. However, what little data there are, seem to confirm findings of Lıga. From ˆ Neolithic-Copper Age Karanovo, Southern Bulgaria comes a rich sample of flints, but mainly from early phases (Gatsov & Kurcatov 1997). Blades and blades ˇ with various retouches dominate; some are sickles. From beyond Bulgaria, a few parallel data-sets have been published. With a few exceptions, no decent typology or numerical tables have been presented, though. In Serbia, the Neolithic material from Divostin (sixth millennium BC) has been studied by somewhat other methods than at Lıga (Tringham et ˆ al. 1988). Nevertheless, a dominance of blades/knives and end-scrapers is noted, while sickle-blades seem relatively few (correct identification?), as are also scrapers that are not end-scrapers; by contrast, borers are quite plentiful. From Neolitic Anza (late seventh-sixth millennium BC), former Yugoslav Macedonia, comes a sample studied by yet other methods (Elster 1976). Borers are rare, as are end-scrapers, while blades and knives are common. Sickle-blades are only identified as a subset of blades. A more recent study is on Neolithic Selevac (early fifth millennium BC) in Serbia (Voytek 1990). Here end-scapers are very common, and knives (including denticulated specimens), borers, and sickle-blades common. A somewhat atypical sample, however Copper Age in date, and Bulgarian, comes from Durankulak cemetery (Sirakov 2002). Here, according to N. Sirakov, is a clear dominance of blades (117), while knives (28), end-scrapers (16), and microliths/transverse arrow-

Fig. VII.7. Collectively found flint blades in House 3 refitted together.

heads (14) are relatively rare. In other words, the suggested ‘‘Lıga’’ tool-kit is present in a version with a ˆ high number of blades. Microliths have not been identified at Lıga. ˆ From the settlement of Hotnitsa-Vodopada, Northern Bulgaria, dated to the so-called Transitional Period (to the Bronze Age, cf. elsewhere in this publication), comes a sample dominated by ‘‘flakes’’, perhaps, indeed, flakes (65) (Sirakov & Tsonev 1995). There are some blades (18), as well as blades with various retouches, etc. (including knives) (19), and

116

Acta Archaeologica
Gatsov, I. 1993. Neolithic Chipped Stone Industries in Western Bulgaria. Varia CCCXIII. Krakow (Jagellonian University ´ Publications). – 1998. Technical and Typological Analysis of the Chipped Stone Assemblages from Troia. Studia Troica 8. 115ff. Gatsov, I. & V. Kurcatov. 1997. Neolitische Feuersteinartefakte. ˇ Mineralogische Untersuchung und technisch-typologische Charakteristik. Hiller & Nikolov 1997. 213ff. Gergov, V., I. Gatsov & S. Sirakova. 1985. Kremachni orudija ot praistoricheskoto selishte v m. Redutite pri s. Telish, Plevenski okrag. Izvestija na muzeite v Severozapadna Balgarija 10. 11ff. Gimbutas, M. (ed.). 1976. Neolithic Macedonia. As reflected by Excavation at Anza, Southeast Yugoslavia. Monumenta Archaeologica 1. Los Angeles (Institute of Archaeology, University of California). Hiller, S. & V. Nikolov. 1997. Karanovo. Die Ausgrabungen im Südsektor 1984–1992. Österreichischbulgarische Ausgrabungen und Forschungen in Karanovo Vol. 1;1–2 (Text & Tafel). Salzburg (Archäologisches Institut, Universität Salzburg)/ Horn, Wien (Ferdinand Berger) & Sofia (Archäologisches Institut, Bulgarische Akademie der Wissenschaften). McParron, A. & D. Srejovic (eds.). 1988. Divostin. And the Neo´ lithic of Central Serbia. Ethnology Monographs 10. Pittsburgh (Department of Anthropology, University of Pittsburgh). Nachev, C.I. & I.K. Nachev. 1986. Distribution and Evolution of the Siliceous Rocks in Bulgaria. Comptes rendus de l’Academie ´ bulgare des Sciences. 39;8. 81ff. Sirakov, N. 2002. Flint artifacts in prehistoric grave-good assemblages from the Durankulak necropolis. Todorova 2002/1. 213ff. Sirakov, N. & T. Tsonev. 1995. Chipped-Stone Assemblage of Hotnitsa-Vodopada (Eneolithic/Early Bronze Age Transition in Northern Bulgaria) and the Problem of the Earliest ‘‘Steppe Invasion’’ in Balkans. Prehistoire Europeenne 7. 241ff. ´ ´ Todorova, H. (ed.). 2002. Durankulak II. Die prähistorischen Gräberfelder 1–2. Berlin (Deutsches archäologisches Institut). Tringham, R. 2003. Flaked Stone. Elster & Renfrew 2003. 81ff. Tringham, R. & D. Krstic (eds.). 1990. Selevac. A Neolithic Village ´ in Yugoslavia. Monumenta Archaeologica 15. Los Angeles (Institute of Archaeology, University of California). Tringham, R.E., A. McParron, J. Gunn & G. Odell. 1988. The Flaked Stone Industry from Divostin and Banja. McPharron & Srejovic 1988. 203ff. ´ Uenze, S. (ed.). 1992. Die spätantiken Befestigungen von Sadovec (Bulgarien). Ergebnisse der Deutsch-Bulgarischen-Österreichischen Ausgrabungen 1934–1937. Münchner Beiträge zur Vorund Frühgeschichte 43. Text. Valev, P. 1992. Geologische und geographische Einführung. Uenze 1992. 23ff. Voytek, B. 1990. The Use of Stone Resources. Tringham & Krstic ´ 1990. 437ff.

end-scrapers (15). There are also various tools with gloss – including ‘‘truncations’’ – no doubt sickleblades (14), arrow heads (7), borers (4), plus other tools and demi-tools. It should be noted that also this classification is differing from the present one concerning Lıga. Nevertheless, some resemblance with ˆ Lıga is noted. ˆ The material from Sitagroi, northern Greece (sixth-third millennium BC) is of several different types of raw-material, even a very little obsidian (Tringham 2003). Also so-called honey-flint, which makes up a little more than half the material, was brought to the site seemingly from far way, possibly even northeastern Bulgaria (although other sources have also been suggested). Blade-tools dominate the sample, including 192 sickle-blades, 169 end-scrapers and 114 so-called truncated blades (knives). There are 47 so-called retouched blades (also knives), 17 small points (likely drills), 16 borers, 13 so-called denticulates (saw-blades), and a few other artefacts. Notably, only three arrowheads were found at Sitagroi. A certain resemblance to Lıga is noted. ˆ Incidentally, at (Early) Bronze Age Troy, with industries dominated by ‘‘flakes’’, there is a high number of ‘‘notched tools’’ (supposedly for smoothing rounded objects like arrows) (366), end-scapers (224), ‘‘truncations’’ (possibly sickle-blades) (195), and arrow-heads (170), while ‘‘retouched blades’’ (likely knives) are relatively rare (40) (Gatsov 1998). Also this study is following classifications of its own. Indeed, both the relatively high number of items found (652) and their detailed treatment and study makes the Lıga sample quite unique and a highly ˆ valuable reference base for the future.

BIBLIOGRAPHY
Elster, E.S. 1976. The Chipped Stone Industry. Gimbutas 1976. 257ff. Elster, E. & C. Renfrew. 2003. Prehistoric Sitagroi. Excavations in Northeast Greece, 1968–1970 Vol. 2. The Final Report. Monumenta Archaeologica 20. Los Angeles (Cotsen Institute of Archaeology, UCLA).

VIII. STONE TOOLS
(including contribution by Søren Albek)

INTRODUCTION Ground stone tools, despite their abundance on many prehistoric sites, are usually only listed by naming their assumed functional properties. There are few attempts to treat ground stone industries with methodological consistency (Kanchev 1970; Kanchev & Nikolov 1983). Therefore, besides general statements, as with the flints (Chapter VII), detailed comparisons are not possible. However, the present study is inspired by the methodology applied at the Neolithic site of Divostin in Serbia (Prinz 1988; Galdikas 1988). The excavations at Lıga have produced a considerˆ able amount of stone tools, indeed nearly 400 in all, reflecting the diversity of daily activities in the Copper Age. Every rock discovered was treated as a potential implement, since the geological environment of Lıga ˆ holds pebbles and small cobbles only (rarely reaching 8–9 cm). Thus, raw-materials for the larger stone implements, if not the tools themselves, must have been carried to the site from a distance. Micro-wear analysis has not been possible, so the present classification is based on morphology combined with functional assumptions, as reflected by macro-wear traces. The first and main set of definitions, mainly by I. Merkyte, is analytical and primarily broadly functional. The second set of definitions, by S. Albek, is primarily typological and relates to the numerical specifications of a table (Fig. VIII.6) (cf. below).

HAMMERSTONES, HAMMERS, POUNDERS, AND PESTLES Stone tools used for crushing and pounding/hammering make up the most numerous group. Although similar in function, the specimens reflect different applications. Hammerstones are regular, water rolled flint/chert rocks or, occasionally, sandstone balls with a diameter reaching 9–9.5 cm (Pl. 24:1). There are usually no preferences as to the surface used, since the hammerstone is rotated around its own axis. Some hammerstones are slightly flattened on the ventral

side. All except one of the crushing stones were found outside the houses. Pounders and hammers, on the other hand, were found in the houses. Some of these, lying close to the ovens, may be connected with food processing activities, while others, found on the floors, had likely fallen down from their storage places (as the hammers in the middle of House 2). Stone hammers are massive, frequently flat stones with an almost rectangular shape, and are often heavily flaked with stepped scars indicating striking blows on solid surfaces (Pl. 24:2– 4). The majority was produced of very hard, dense and smooth stone (like diabase and diorite porphyry, or other igneous rocks, but sandstones are not unusual either) and they are generally ground over the entire surface. In several cases both ends were used. Some hammers were reused broken large stone axes. The length varies between 8.5 and 10.0 cm. Pounders were also made of hard smooth stone bearing less heavy traces of macro-wear, such as chipping scars or flaking. The ends usually have a uniformly abraded or roughened surface. Pounders are elongated in shape, often cylindrical; the cross-section is rounded (Pl. 24:5,6). A few tools held multiple functions. A combination tool (16.6 cm long, 5.8 cm maximum width) made of diorite porphyry was used as a pestle (the circular flat end has grinding traces at the edges and roughened surface), as a hammer (the opposite bevel end witnessed heavy flaking), and, possibly, as a hand stone (the rounded sides reflecting mis-colouring) (Pl. 25:1). It should be mentioned that practically every stone found had some traces of use, often due to short periods of ad hoc working – like pecking and crushing – which leave traces which are not unambiguous macroscopically.

MILLING STONES (QUERNS) A dozen milling stones (querns), usually complete, were discovered at Lıga. The majority was found outˆ side the houses or in uncertain contexts. However, a

0 and 7. where axes have a symmetrical cross-section with the working edge located in the middle. often sandstones but also other types. Apart from the one mentioned as coming from House 3. A number of both intact and fragmented milling stones were discovered in ‘‘street areas’’ and at House 1. which has quartz components and a grainy structure. Some worn-out milling stones or querns with time became mortars with different ranges of application. while the working edge of adzes is skewed. Stone adze discovered outside northern wall of House 3.12). which are smaller. House no.e.5 kg. a fact supported by macro-wear analyses. All the discovered milling stones were flattened on one side and had a plano-convex cross-section. attention was paid to their shape. VIII. 1 (two specimens) and 2 (one). ADZES. The weight of the intact portable speciments is between 5. The usual shape is oval. were appreciated. Fig. which most likely was used as a hand stone together with the stationary milling stone. .e. In the vicinity was found a smaller milling stone with a flat surface. but the original context is uncertain (found outside the house next to the wall) (Fig. Colour pigments. One big square milling stone (39¿16¿14 cm) made of fine-grained sandstone was found along with limestone rocks in the wall basis of House 4 (i.. all four hand stones were found within houses.11). which resulted in deep troughs on the grinding surface.. Ethnoarchaeological analogies suggest that even soft foods could be processed on milling stones. Both types were found in House 1. The length varies between 27 and 37 cm with a maximum width of 20–25 cm. reused as a foundation stone).. Remarkably. Stone adze (serpentine). and smaller round ones (not exceeding 11 cm in diameter. respectively. while utilization as an axe (i. especially those fashioned of sandstone. The grinding surfaces are smooth and slightly concave. Excavations at Sadovec-Kaleto have demonstrated that utilization of milling stones was not limited to cereal processing. Some specimens. the thickness between 11 and 13 cm. only one found) to work in rotary motion. especially the crosssection of the cutting edge. chopping) is leaving striations diagonal to the cutting edge (Semenov 1964. chipping). three specimens were found at big storage containers in. coarse-grained) rocks. were fire-crazed.e. Prinz 1988). indicating their unifacial utilization. III. All were fashioned from medium-grained (in one case. only one specimen is rectangular. Only the stationary milling stone had traces of intensive use.118 Acta Archaeologica Fig. like granite. Attention was also paid to use-wear striations seen on the cutting edges.1. Milling stones dominate over hand stones (including mortars). Some milling stones showed traces of deliberate pecking to roughen the grinding face. Micro striations perpendicular to the cutting edge indicate the utilization as an adze (i. at the oven (Fig. could also be ground on such stones. A third milling stone also comes from this area. VIII. Two types can be distinguished: big flattened specimens with rounded sides to work with both hands in a back-and-forth motion. such as ochra.2. III. not exceeding 20 cm. walled grinding platform with a massive permanently installed milling stone (45¿40¿18 cm) was discovered in House 3. AND CHISELS In separating these three categories of implements. reaching a depth of 5–11 mm measured from surrounding edges. AXES.

were also used (Fig. VIII.3. The ´ . The lack of flakes on the cutting edge indicates a rather short uselife while the narrowing towards the edge suggests that such tools might have been used as chisels for working with hard materials. Often axes are broken. reaching perhaps 15 cm with a maximum width not extending beyond 5 cm. The prevailing rock type among the large axes is diorite porphyry. Such traces indicate that adzes were hafted perpendicularly to the shaft. The common feature for them all is heavy use-wear traces. Such implements were used to work on or to create rounded surfaces (Prinz 1988). Kolev.3 cm. 25:5). The function of this implement type is not certain. 4).0–4. Several implements had traces of hafting noted by opposite/diametrical depressions. Two chisels (1. 2. The butt end is rounded or straight.3. Fine-grained igneous rocks. 2) and axe (3) made of soft white stone.5 cm. 25:6. Precise identification of the rock type is not possible without specialist studies. Pl.Lıga ˆ The majority of adzes have a regular trapezoidal shape with the sides tapering towards the butt end (Fig. It is rectangular and symmetrical in shape while the convex working edge with perpendicular striations reflects utilization as an adze. Axes appear in a variety of sizes and shapes. being twice as thick as the above described types (Fig. but sometimes ellipsoidal.4. macroscopic chipping may be found on the edge. like serpentine. like basalt.0 and 6.5 cm. Pl. the sides tapering towards the cutting edge. 25:2). also rectangular in cross-section and with straight cutting edge. the discovered fragments indicate that it was rather long. butt ends are usually intact. Among the axes there is also a conspicuous specimen made of soft white stone (Fig. It was rectangular with a convex edge and flattened butt end. Fig. reaching 7. the maximum width being about 4.8 cm). Photo: R. 25:3.5 cm) is the highly ground axe. ca. The length varies between 5. VIII. Pl. and rounded flake removals on the butt end. The crosssection is rectangular and the working edge straight and symmetrical. The smaller axes (up to 9. The edge is symmetrical. while it is basalt among the smaller types.4:3. The third type is not known as a whole piece. it had a flat base and a straight cutting-edge. Another adze type has similarities with the chisels. VIII. were preferred but softer rocks.5 cm) are almost rectangular with slightly tapering sides towards the rounded butt end (Pl. being narrower than the first type. but with a more elaborate side curvature. VIII.8 cm.8¿4. bevelled. the angle from the side being 40 æ (Pl. which is the narrow part of the implement.0¿4.2). 25:8). Stone axe discovered in House 1 (length – 10. One of the discovered adzes was almost triangular in shape. despite the use of hard types of rock. Macroscopic flaking is often seen on the cutting edge. 1/3 from the butt end.1. VIII. The working edge is convex (only in some cases straight and oblique) with a characteristic adze asymmetry. since a variety of rocks resemble white compact chalk (Antonovic 1997). width ca. Some 119 Fig. 7). VIII. especially on the lower face. Another type (10. The cross-section is usually rectangular.

this was broken.2 cm long with end-diametres of 1. Two types of chisels have been identified. butt end of this axe has been broken in prehistory. with a heavily battered butt end (Fig. Stone chisel (basalt). The second type of chisel is a relatively long and narrow one. The cross section is rectangular (angular or rounded). different in form.35 cm. a fine-grained reddish flat sandstone was discovered.7 cm. RUBBING STONES AND POLISHERS Several items.5). The two cores show that two different perforation techniques were known. with bevelled curved edges and a triangular or rectangular crosssection. the discovery of two cylindrical cores from axe-hole drills indicates that this type of axes was also known and produced on the site. The chisels are almost rectangular and symmetrical. To the group should also be attributed a unique adze-like SHAFT-HOLE AXES: CORES Although no shaft-hole axes was found. Basalt is the preferred type of rock for these heavy duty chisels.8¿3. Other finds include a rounded quartzite pebble (5. One core was complete.5.8¿1. The other specimen was made of serpentinite with an overall diameter of 1.4¿3. Fig. Although macro-wear traces reveal that this soft axe was in active use.0 cm long double-conical pebbles with a round cross-section (Pl. The cross-section of the edge indicates that it might have been used as a digging implement (Pl. VIII. Flake removals over the surfaces and the direction of the flaking indicate that the flattened butt end had been exposed to blows. Within House 1. 24:8). Careful and fine grinding is noted on all the mentioned implements within this group of tools.6 cm (Fig. 23:20).9¿3.3 (maximum) cm.5 cm in width. in particular.3 cm) (Pl. VIII.6¿3. The cutting edge of both chisel-types is located in the middle. Two schist pebbles had a natural bowl form (4. It was made of schist with clear groves reflecting the rotating movement of the drilling tool. used both for stone and bone tools: firm conclusions not possible without micro-wear analysis. VIII. Pl. which could be identified as polisher. Presence of sling-stones supports the zoological analysis (Chapter X).6 cm. one piece was used on the rounded ‘‘bottom’’ side. 3. the maximum preserved length being 2.2 cm in length with the width varying between 1. 2. with a bevelled asymmetrically rounded edge and flattened butt end. 25:9). It has ellipsoidal cross-section and a rough surface. its utilization remains unclear. The first type is a rather massive implement up to 6. can be attributed to this group.75 cm. 24:7). reaching 4. demonstrating hunting of small animals. made of finegrained soft and porous sandstone. rectangular in shape (10¿12 cm).4:1.6¿3.2 and 1. The convex symmetrical edge was damaged during the excavation. 23:19). SLING-STONES A number of sling-stones was discovered. Despite the small size and the assumption that soft woods were worked with such chisels. The cross-section is ellipsoidal. mainly in the area of Sector 1/House 1.0 cm in length and 2. It should also be mentioned that some sling-stones were in clay (Pl. These are 3.0¿3.5–4. but the axe was used after that. The cutting edge often has traces of bilateral macroscopic flaking. The present dimensions are 4. Flattened shiny surfaces indicate that the tools were applied on organic materials like leather or wool.00 and 0. damage can be seen on both the cutting edge and the butt end. .0 cm). while the other had wear traces on the ‘‘edges’’.7 and 5.120 Acta Archaeologica implement of 8.

perhaps prepared for crushing and use as pottery tempering material. Two finds of heavily burned fragile coarse-grained sandstones should also be mentioned. An interesting find was made in House 2.0¿3. The oval sleeper is 35–50 cm in length. These are quite common. used in smoothing. Stone tools were no doubt also used in other. including both geological and thorough comparative studies. and a ground surface on both sides of the edge. Among the discovered implements such a tool seems to be lacking. It is a matter of rounded or oval stone discs. In spite of the remarkable numeric order of the stones.8–1.0–4.5 cm long). This had a round cross-secˆ tion.1 cm long). The shape was more significant than the rock type and hence tools of both sedimentary and metamorphic rocks were found. and adzes or flint scrapers for debarking. suggests broader demands and skills for more sophisticated tasks than construction. V.5). the siltstones being the only pointed ones. Some stones were used for their natural appearance.4).5–5. suggestions can only be made on the basis of the tools identified as relating to wood-working. Often.7–3. thinning out towards the edges. One medium size vessel contained a small biconical vessel and 14 water-rolled pebbles (Fig. stone tools were used for crushing.6 refers to the following typology of stone artefacts developed by S. pounding.1–4. The identification of their utilization is often problematic. four big quartzite balls (3. for evening of surfaces. such have not been possible in the present case. varying in size from 35 to less than 12 cm. it is often in . shape and stone type. as yet not fully acknowledged areas such as masonry.3). The shape of such tools resembles pottery shards. and two triangular quartzite pieces (4. three oblong pointed siltstones (3. The type is very common and no doubt had several functions. and so on.8–4. during the Copper Age. which are also used for pottery smoothing (Fig.0 cm thick.Lıga ˆ STONES CONNECTED WITH POTTERY PRODUCTION 121 plication of stone implements in food processing numerically far outweighs their use in wood-working. flat in cross-section. Albek. 2– 3 mm broad. V. especially those made of bones. The presence of finer tools. often found several together. Ball-shaped stones are small smooth quartz-stones. a natural hole through the middle of the stone made a use likely as loom-weight possible without further modifications. a cone of locally found flint/chert was recorded from Lıga. Another group of implements connected with pottery production is also found in structures (House 1 and 2). The main part is quartzite with whitish or reddish tinge while three pieces (fragmented) are of brown black siltstone. At any rate. 1– 2 cm in diameter. finding application in all spheres of daily life. the ap- ARCHAEOLOGICAL TYPES The table Fig. Rock types are quartzite and finely grained granite. As to shape and size. Prehistoric carpentry is a relatively unknown field. VIII. these are most likely tools connected with production and surface treatment (smoothing and burnishing) of tiny biconical cups. Quern-stones are of two parts: a sleeper and a runner.6 cm. and for scraping surplus clay away (Fig. since little evidence on the final products has survived. It is usually made of reddish and greyish granite or sandstone. and 0. ˆ A separate issue is identification of the sources of the raw-materials used. V. Analyses of burnished pottery have led to the identification of a tool with a pointed edge. The runner can be rectangular. Besides milling. smashing. with a flat dorsal edge. 4. Stone tools were also very important in pottery production.8 cm long). circular or oval. including extraction and fashioning of the lime slabs found at Lıga.6 cm long). SUMMARY Ground stone implements are a varied and important class of artefacts. there are five oval and one flat quartzite stone (2. hence. Wooden supports and split-logs used for construction of houses evidently demanded massive axes and chisels. These can be grouped according to their size. Pottery surfaces could also be smoothed with rather more massive stone implements. which deviates some from the above classification: Stones with facets are of fist size and with one or more facets. perhaps used in production of colours and medicines. probably explaining why these tools – perhaps apart from the wood-working ones – only have received limited attention in scientific publications.

respectively. Table of stone artefacts. or yellow-green with fine grains. Most are frag- COMPARISONS The best parallel to Lıga in terms of stone tools is the ˆ settlement of Sitagroi. there is much variation and both single and multiple hammering/crushing areas: no doubt both an ad-hoc and a specialized tool. and Presenters (symbols. Mortars are oblong. Hard materials were selected. nonlocal (67). often with sharpened or finely polished areas. The real number is higher. The determined raw materials used at Sitagroi are local (46 cases). like hammers and chisels. Some are re-used axes (without edge). These are quite common. 8. The material is coarse sandstone. VIII.). others made for hammers. Nevertheless. Stone chisels are finely made in diabase or basalt. flatly oval to ball-shaped or other. one or both sides with traces of sharpening.122 Acta Archaeologica ments. Stones with smooth areas do not form a type of tool per se. Stone axes & adzes are. less than 6–8 cm. the width 1–2 cm. above). including mace heads). and with mica. Many stones found had the surfaced systematically hammered away. the length is about 5 cm. red with coarse grains. The high number of non-local rock likely reflects high mobility. length 10– 15 cm. and several were found in situ. Northern Greece (sixth to third millennium BC). A few may well be sling-stones. adze blades. Hard granite but also some quartz and basalt were used. the whole surface of which is usually finely polished and shiny. and two cylindrical cores from shaft-hole axes (cf. 13. the original size being 5–15 cm. and smaller or larger areas were being polished. The pertaining artefact types are: axe blades. Tempering. 505 specimens in all. other. probably used in ceramic or textile production. diameter about 5 cm.6. The processors make up 307 specimens (61%). 143 specimens. some specimens are just a coarse piece of unworked rock. The specimens are flat. The primary tools comprise 171 specimens (or 34%). a drop-shaped flat limestone with very smooth surface. Two drilling cores were found but no shaft-hole axes (see Other). often polished to the like of metal. 7. Polishing stones are smaller stones. shaft-hole axes. Sitagroi also used much foreign flint (Chapter VII). The pertaining types comprise: oval grinders/ . of which one or two areas were used. Fig. Whetstones come in two types: finely grained sand stone and very hard amorphous rock. hard fine-grained stone. Other comprises a fragment of a mould for a likely copper axe with slightly protruding edges. about 8 cm in length. The shape varies from egg.). since some specimens not identified during excavation. Hammerstones are up to fist size and used for hammering or crushing. they have been used by man. finely made. slender stones with percussions at one or both hemispherical ends. likely to produce temper for ceramics. Some or all may originally be cobbles. Stone hammers and pounders are finely worked tools of very hard finely grained rock or diabase. hard rocks were used. and. crosssections are rectangular or square. mostly granite. and unknown (58). Processors (stationary and movable grinding stones etc. the latter probably specimens in near perfect ball shape. etc. Quartzite is used or other very hard finely grained rocks. a fragment of a possible mould for metal plate (both sandstone). the edges fine and sharp. The artefacts from Sitagroi were divided into Primary Tools (axes. one of the very few localities in the Balkans with published stone material from the Neolithic-Copper Age (Elster 2003).

and. IhcfrsiÄ na mthfisf c rfcfqohapaena B{ldaqiÄ.. Excavations in Northeast Greece. Karanovo. balls/pounders (37). 1970: Kamfnni oq{eiÄ os nfolisnoso rflizf kqai r. S. Srejovic (eds. 1988. 1988.ex. many hammerstones. at Sitagroi. Semenov. S.. And the Neo´ lithic of Central Serbia. McParron. This raises the number of ‘‘non-axe tools’’ at the Bulgarian site. Cqawa. 175ff. 4. & V. Divostin. University of Pittsburgh). saddle querns (39). Milling Stones. 1964. . hammer stones (29). Polished Edge-Tools. other (37). there are some chisels too. kn. in the main common ‘‘hammer stones’’ and ‘‘stones with facets’’ may. 8. AqvfolodiÄ. UCLA). Adams and Mackay. Prinz.). The reason for this is probably that all stones were collected and studied at Lıga. 2. mainly axes. The most marked difference to Lıga is the high ˆ number of primary tools. A. By contrast. Cory. D. B. polishers of arrowˆ shafts). McPherron & Srejovic 1988. Wien (Ferdinand Berger) & Sofia (Archäologisches Institut. Elster.1–2 (Text & Tafel). etc. McPherron & Srejovic 1988. Elster. Monumenta Archaeologica 20. B. as least in part. Hiller. & Nikoloc B. 1968–1970 Vol. BIBLIOGRAPHY 123 Antonovic. polishers (including round ones of quartzite) and stones with traces of polishing. and Other Stone Artifacts. At Karanovo there is a very high number of axes (mostly adzes) – about 2/3 of the tools collected. Oq{eiÄ na sqtea i rsopanrkiÄ gicos na rfliza os valkolisnasa fpova c{c Cqaxanrko. Xaceaq. Bulgarische Akademie der Wissenschaften). Die Ausgrabungen im Südsektor 1984–1992. Ethnology Monographs 10. 1983. 1988. Finally. Nikolov. Rouiirki okq{d. ´ 338ff. Prehistoric Sitagroi. K{nxfc K.. 2003. 1997. at Lıga some ‘‘worked stones’’. Renfrew. 255ff.Lıga ˆ rubbers (106). ‘‘common’’ stones have only been collected (and recorded) in the case of evident tools. including several types not found at Lıga (f. Pittsburgh (Department of Anthropology. supposˆ edly. 9ff. Los Angeles (Cotsen Institute of Archaeology. 1997. Prehistoric technology: An experimental study of the oldest tools and artefacts from traces of manufacture and wear. Österreichischbulgarische Ausgrabungen und Forschungen in Karanovo Vol. Universität Salzburg)/ Horn. have been cobble stones from the first phase (Lıga 1) re-used in ˆ Lıga 2. Elster & Renfrew 2003. The Final Report. E. The presenters make up 27 specimens (5%). ´ K{nxfc K. in spite of an Early Copper Age date. Use of Light White Stone in the Central Balk´ ans Neolithic. London. ˆ The stone artefacts from Karanovo. Salzburg (Archäologisches Institut. flat querns (61). since they evidently had come from some place ˆ else. make up the best comparative material to the Lıga sample (Hiller & Nikolov ˆ 1997). In addition were found: quernstones (sleepers and runners). Belgrade. & D. The Ground Stone Industry from Divostin. Galdikas. XXX. & C. E. 1. not just ‘‘somewhat worked’’ stones. 2003. at Sitagroi in relation to other worked stone. Rsaqinaq XLVIII. 33ff. Grindstones.

disregarding association with archaeological structures as well as the nature of the particular de- posits (Kanchev & Nikolov 1983). small finds. Dr. walls. G. V. Lıga 2 – three completely excaˆ vated buildings with adjacent inter-building spaces and waste areas. BONE ARTEFACTS by Petar Zidarov STATE OF RESEARCH The primary data under study here come from recent excavations at the settlement and cemetery of Lıga in ˆ Telish. and Krivodol. S. The stratiˆ graphic distribution of the bone tools is shown in Fig.IX. Hotnica. Ignatova (Museum of Pazardjik).2 km from Redutite. The majority of artefacts (72%) come from an intensively occupied area of Lıga 2. These are the tell settleˆ ments at Durankulak. Such studies are therefore considered irrelevant to the Lıga material ˆ and will not be considered here. Following the terminology developed for this publication. Since 1998. 1992b). located 1. Prof. in the present study it will only be possible to present an account of the observations from Lıga. 1992a. courtesy of the respective project directors and museum curators. and Lıga 3 – a cemetery. Mr. The site of Lıga. Yunatsite. Elenski (Museum of Veliko Turnovo). Krivodol (Nikolov 1984) and Zaminec (Nikolov 1975) in Bulgaria. Thus. Devetashka Peshtera (Mikov & Dzhambazov 1960. Ribarov & Boev 1997) or exhibited at the Historical Museum in Pleven. H.. Thus microscopic examinations of use-wear patterns will not be addressed here. It represents an ˆ . Pleven district. Georgieva (Sofia University). Redutite also has an important bone artefact assemblage. Ganecovski (Museum of Vratsa). Mr. leaving out ˆ possible discussions on diachronic processes. Matsanova and Mrs. ˆ a level greatly disturbed by activity in subsequent building horizons although recognizable as a distinctive unit on the basis of architectural elements (socalled House 0 – postholes. the latter being the only completely investigated Copper Age multi-layered settlement in the area of the Krivodol-Salcuta-Bubanj ˇ ¸ Hum Ia (KSB) cultural complex (Gergov 1985. The purpose of the present study is to offer a general presentation of the characteristic traits of the assemblage. they are described respectively as: Lıga 1 – the initial occupation. Slavchev (Museum of Varna). from subsequent phases of the Late Copper Age. is ˆ supposed to have been settled during periods when Redutite was not occupied. Dr. The only attempt to evaluate the role of bone tools – in comparison to chipped and polished stone tools from Copper Age sites in NW Bulgaria – is thus based on relative calculations of tools recovered from sounding trenches (of different dimensions) at various sites. as well as Salcuta in Romania (Berciu 1961) ˇ ¸ and Selevac in Serbia (Tringham & Krstic 1990). Northern Bulgaria. plastered floor). the worked bone finds from Redutite have not yet been made available with only a few single objects being published (Gergov 1987. In previous publications the site is referred to as Telish-Lıga. or ˆ simply. etc. N. Other archaeologically related sites are Sadovec-Golemanovo Kale (Todorova 1968. V. Todorova (Archaeological Institute and Museum at the Bulgarian Academy of Sciences). Kunchev 1973). IX. Lıga (Gergov 2001. ´ Only Selevac has furnished comparable material. P. the author has had the opportunity to study several unpublished bone artefact collections recovered during systematic excavations at various sites roughly synchronous to Lıga. etc. Unfortunately. Kableshkovo-Kozareva Mogila.1. 1992). THE SAMPLE The bone artefacts from Lıga belong to three distinct ˆ periods of human activity at the site. pottery. as well as the cemeteries at Durankulak and Varna.) to discern it from ˆ neighboring Telish-Redutite. Mrs. and Dr. all other sites having only been studied through test trenches aimed at establishing the stratigraphic sequence.

one antler haft (for a polished stone chisel?). and miscellaneous. a fragment of boar tusk with rounded edges that has undergone dramatic alteration due to extreme heat and subsequent weathering.2).2. ˆ are almost exclusively recovered from graves. 26:5). IX. Interestingly. one flat anthropomorphic figurine (Pl. bone artefacts constitute three main groups: tools. Hotnitsa or KableshkovoKozareva Mogila (Zidarov in print. ˆ LIGA 1: FIRST SETTLEMENT Seven bone artefacts can be attributed to the earliest occupational level at the site (Fig. ‘‘Miscel´ laneous’’ is the term used to group non-utilitarian objects such as figurines or flattened short bones. pendants and applique. Specifics about their distribution related to dwelling structures in Lıga 2 are provided in Fig. whereas the second bevel-edged tool is from cattle . 26:1. unpublished personal observations). IX. Fig. seemingly from pieces retrieved from kitchen refuse. area with the highest percentage of bone tools per household as compared to contemporary settlements at Durankulak. IX. Spatial distribution of functional classes of bone ˆ artefacts (count). 26:3). in order to distinguish them from body ornaments. unlike the tools from Lıga 2 discussed ˆ below.4). but which was likely employed as a scraping/ smoothing tool (Pl. unlike the other two categories. All tools from Lıga 1 are ˆ made in an expedient manner from long bones of large mammals. Fragments bearing traces of manufacture and/or use. occurring in habitation areas. Yunatsite. whereas the proportional ratio between utilitarian and nonutilitarian finds in Lıga 1 and Lıga 3 tends to match ˆ ˆ the expectation that there would be more tools found in a habitation area and more body ornaments and figurines in graves. followed by bevel-edged and spatulate implements. have held a metal awl to judge by contemporary examples from other contemporary sites. 26:6). presenting various adaptive challenges and resulting in economic specializations. The single point and one of the bevel-edged tools are most likely from cattle tibia splinters. as well as manufacturing waste. probably manufacture waste (Pl. Body ornaments at Lıga for instance. one point (Pl. IX.Lıga ˆ 125 Fig. 26:2) and finally. The said sites also differ significantly from Lıga in terms of methods of recovery and ˆ examination. However.1. are grouped as ‘‘other’’ (Fig. At Lıga. From a functional point of view. all referred to as ‘‘non-utilitarian’’ objects. Lıga is the only site where extensive ˆ screening was used during excavation and where all faunal remains were checked for traces of manufacture and wear. The single handle from sheep metacarpus may Fig. Lıga 2. To a great extent this division is mirrored in the archaeological context.1): two beveledged tools (Pl. it must be noted that all of the latter are at least 200–350 km from Lıga ˆ and located in different types of landscapes. Functional classes of bone artefacts: chronological distribution (count). ornaments.3. IX. Lıga 2 contained 55% non-utiliˆ tarian finds. figurines. Stratigraphic distribution of bone tools.or ground-stone tools. the most numerous tools are points. From a typological point of view. and flattened short bones. Typically for prehistoric sites. Ornaments comprise beads. one transversely sawn deer antler tine without signs of use.3. ˆ IX. one can divide the finds roughly into classes by identifying the tools and the handles for tools as critical objects. The category of tools is closely associated with bone and antler hafts. ˆ antler was used to fasten chipped.

15. the natural form of the pieces is basically preserved and only the active ends are elaborately shaped through rubbing against abrasive stone. 27:6).2 m NE of Grave no.13) and 2 copper pins (Fig. A rectangular bone plate decorated with diagonal rows of encircled dots (Pl. cf. Pl. Summary: bone artefacts and their spatial distriˆ bution (count).5. one of which was inserted into a wooden shaft. in spite of the co-existence of copper technology. ˆ LIGA 2: SECOND SETTLEMENT The finds of bone tools from Lıga 2 and their types. Another possible pars pro toto item from Lıga is the cattle ˆ horncore recovered in Grave no. 27. and Varna (Ivanov & Avramova 2000. this part is supposed to represent the head of the figurine. 4. Chapter VI. cf. The attention paid to various small bones in the Copper Age is discussed below. the cattle skulls (bucrania) recovered in cemetery of Durankulak (Todorova 2002). served as a socket for a tiny metal tool: a copper pin or drill (Fig. the working parts of all the tools are fully functional after minor sharpening. ˆ ˆ ˆ LIGA 3: CEMETERY Fig. in the area of the chest. The grave pit is dug into settlement debris. The third one. VI.4. In this particular case. The other was meant to hold a polished stone tool. made of sheep metacarpus. 28:1). for instance at the cemeteries of Durankulak (Todorova 2002). manufactured in a ˆ uniform way. XI. The distribution of the non-utilitarian finds also reveals a clear asymmetrical pattern with a significant concentration in House 1. it seems to have hung on a long string around the neck. possibly an adze (Pl. tools are relatively evenly distributed. the majority of the tools from Several graves held artefacts made of animal skeletal materials. revealed in by metal implements (Lıga 2) and crucibles (Lıga 1). To judge by other specimens with preserved copper earrings (Todorova & Vajsov 2001. Pl. cf. Such finds are specific for the Late Copper Age in Bulgaria and are usually interpreted as a particular kind of anthropomorphic figurine. Biehl 2003). The possible implications are discussed below. VI. With regards to context. 254ff. There were points only in House 2. IX. . having very close counterparts made in clay (cf. ulna. The large numbers of worked bone per household clearly demonstrates that as a category of artefacts they must have had a certain importance. In House 3 there was a concentration of bevel-ended tools while in House 1 five spatulate tools were found as well as 3 bone awls π 1 copper awl (Fig. Deposition of pars pro toto goods is often seen in Late Copper Age burials in Bulgaria. 28:2). 44). with an identical fragmentation pattern. Fol 1988. In possible association with Grave no. They are termed ‘‘prismatic figurines’’ (Comsa ¸ 1984). These belong to different types: one is an antler sleeve with two openings. VI. Generally speaking. Fol & Lichardus 1988). the proximal end is missing but the important distal end is seemingly intact..126 Acta Archaeologica Lıga 2 are very carefully planned.7–9). based on the outline. Although relatively worn from use. 5 (Fig.14). Pl. 28:11) was discovered in Grave no. 27:8). IX. while there is a tendency for further specialization in the others. Each of the houses yielded at least two pointed tools. 1 – a child of 6–7 years – a domestic pig metatarsus with a flattened distal articulation was found (Fig. 2 (Pl. It is made on the split rib of cattle or aurochs and has perforations on both short sides. Another prismatic figurine. IX. was discovered 1. under the bent left arm. or deposited in another way. mostly different combinations of bone and shell. As noted. emphasizing their biological origin (Chilingirov 1910). Recent damage on two tools prevents discussion on whether they were discarded when fully functional. making the association with the grave questionable. All hafts were concentrated in House 3.4. or ‘‘stupalni [foot] idoli’’ (in Bulgarian). and often reworked. ˆ are listed in Fig. Pl. In all three cases. Lıga 2.

Pl. Copenhagen & Cambridge universities. Andreasen. has a representative pair of such teeth. Kolev. 11⁄2 year old child. a canine. Pig metatarsus with flattened articulations of the distal epiphysis. IX. the canines are seen as signs of prestige or clan affiliation (Choyke 2001). Nevertheless. a working hypothesis was tested that the shells could be mined fossils. thus. A double necklace of altering dentalium and cardium shells ornamented the neck of the child (Fig. In Grave no. XI. in Grave no. Pl. Usually found in very rich graves. updated by Todorova (1995).). in the vicinity of Pleven (25 km from Lıga) fossil dentalium ˆ and possibly cardium shells have been collected on the surface at least until the 1970s (N. with very few exceptions. the wearing of red-deer canines as beads is a phenomenon characteristic for a timeline starting at the end of 6th and ending sometime in the 4th millennium BC. 6 and 7. it was recovered under the mandible and between the skull and the atlas of an 18–19 year old male. the necklace consisted of 8 cylindrical dentalium beads divided at the front by a bone imitation of a red deer canine (Fig. In the first case. this time complemented by cardium shells (Fig. The two shell families. 6.12. Another interesting issue is raised by the discovery of the imitation of a red deer ‘‘Grandel’’. Although the survey of the Lıga team in ˆ 2001 was not successful in obtaining reference samples. a double grave of an adult male (25–30 years) embracing a ca.11).15). a so-called prismatic idol. Its central position on a necklace of imported exotic shells suggests a particular value. Shell necklaces of different compositions were recovered in Graves nos. possibly reflecting a significant change in ideology towards warrior/hunter-related values mediated through symbolic display. a report by N. Zidarov. XI. thus showing that it either hung loosely from the neck or was a separately deposited grave gift. XI. The custom was widely spread throughout Europe only to be replaced by predators’ canines sometime in the early 3rd millennium BC. Dentalium and Cardium are marine species and their presence more than 300 km from the nearest seashore raises the question of their provenance.comm. In fact. 24) – are highly suggestive. 7. demonstrates that the Spondylus and Dentalium finds have their highest concentration in the area of the Varna culture but also spread gradually along the Danube and its tributaries North-Westwards to the Rhine Valley. National Historical museum. The . found in Grave 1. hanging around his neck. The composition of the necklaces requires particular attention. pers. Photo: R. 28:10). Sofia) and from Kirilovo (Todorova & Vajsov 2001. one of ˆ the principal southern tributaries of the Danube in Bulgaria conforms well with the general distribution pattern.5. likely due to the fact that only the adult red deer stag 127 Fig. Contemporary graves from Varna and Durankulak – with necklaces of dozens of real canines (Todorova & Vajsov 2001. the proximity of Lıga to the river Vit. Tab. discards the fossil interpretation. A study by Willms (1985). dentalium shells again dominate. 24).Lıga ˆ Similar specimens are known from the Varna cemetery (exhibition. During the Holocene. Thus. a single large dentalium bead was found below the scapula of the adult.

the reasons for the deposition of the item cannot be determined: it was found ca. thus imposing rather abstract signifiers for body parts and ornamental elements (costume?). such as phalanges. Popov published a flattened red-deer phalanx from Tell Kodzadermen. The two superimposed decoration patterns on the Lıga figurine show that it was decorated by two differˆ ent owners having differing ideas about the motif.). the metapodials are always classified as long bones. were never repaired or reused after breaking. This has been flat- phenomenon of hoarding larger amounts of rare and valuable items becomes clearly articulated towards the end of the Bulgarian Late Copper Age (Gaydarska et al. R. the Balkans and the Carpathian Basin since the Neolithic. etc. under the floor of House 1 of Lıga 2. that certain items might have been intentionally deposited under the floor of House 1 in a foundation ritual. the 1st and 2nd phalanges of medium-size ungulates. flat bones – mainly the bones of the cranium. it possibly designates an element of the costume that in this particular archaeological context might be associated with the round gold cloth appliques. ˆ .. the termination of certain body parts being marked with incised lines.128 Acta Archaeologica Hence. skeletal elements are divided into three principal classes: long bones – the tubular bones of the extremities that are roughly round in section at the diaphysis and have distinct epiphyses. the use-life of this kind of figurines was extended by reshaping after damage. ˆ 26:6) raises key questions regarding attitudes towards such objects in Copper Age society. To avoid confusion. The assigning of stylized anthropomorphic features to pig metapodial is documented repeatedly at Late Copper Age sites from the eastern parts of the Balkans. and short or irregular bones – mainly from elements of the vertebral column and the cubic bones of the extremities. with regards to past cognition and for the purposes of the present study. often with the assumption that the former were used as gaming pieces and the latter anthropomorphic idols. tibia. Strictly speaking. Particularly characteristic for the Lıga 2 assemˆ blage is the attention paid to the shaping of various kinds of short bones. but the important lower part was carefully preserved and furnished with a suspension hole. it cannot be excluded. NON-UTILITARIAN BONE FINDS Lıga assemblages are particularly interesting because ˆ of the number and variety of so-called ‘‘non-utilitarian’’ bone finds. mentioning that ˇ similar finds were discovered in his earlier excavations at Salmanovo and Madara (Popov 1918:91f. the pelvis and the ribs. 2004). departed completely from the nature of the female figure. by contrast. Close examination reveals at least two (if not three) superimposed patterns of incised decorations on both faces. The dotted decoration pattern on this piece (as well as numerous others) corresponds closely to the Lıga specimen in the organization of the motive. the adjective ‘‘short’’ applied to a bone in the following discussion will be used in a casual sense and thus somewhat incorrectly in terms of anatomy. As previously recognized. The second carver. The flattening of the lateral sides of the astragali is a characteristic trait for Anatolia. such as the femur. the two major cultural areas of Krivodol-Salcuta-Bubanj Hum Ia ˘ ¸ and Kodzadermen-Gumelnita-Karanovo VI. but in fact pig metapodials do. anatomical position. etc. to my knowledge. 28). The flat anthropomorphic figurine from Lıga 1 (Pl. That is why. Most of those interesting finds come from reliable archaeological contexts. Unfortunately. Another single find of a 2nd phalanx of sheep is known from Tell Kozareva Mogila near Kableshkovo. closely resemble phalanges and would probably be approached accordingly by anyone who is not aware of present day taxonomy. unlike the clay figurines which. Flattening of phalanges has only occasionally been reported. significantly changing the place of the pubic triangle. such as astragalus. In general. one metre from the outer southern wall of a house belonging to the Lıga ˆ 1 settlement. A classic case of novel use is a flat bone figurine from KableshkovoKozareva Mogila (Zidarov in press). and pig metapodials (Pl. as well in overall appearance. it was found appropriate not to separate these bones from the short bones. The first carver prepared a stylized outline with proportions closely following the natural ones. Both ¸ ˇ bones appear commonly in excavation reports. this was broken in two at the ‘‘waist’’. found ´ in great numbers in the Copper Age cemetery of Varna I. ˆ Thus. astragali. in the Burgas region (Zidarov in print). in size.

Lıga ˆ
tened on its palmar side, like the finds from Lıga, but ˆ also on the caudal one at the distal epiphysis where, additionally, a suspension hole was drilled. To my knowledge, the interpretative implications of these finds has never attracted particular scientific interest. They seem to be underrepresented in excavation reports as well. One of the reasons could be that faunal material was often sampled during recovery and such minor modifications would easily go unnoticed by non-specialists. It is noteworthy that the major part of the worked phalanges from Lıga were recovered only ˆ after a thorough search of the faunal remains (cf. Chapter X). Here an interpretative analysis of the possible utilization of various flattened short bones will be suggested, taking into account contextual data. Phalanges from the extinct Equus Hydruntinus were recovered in Copper Age graves at the cemtery of Durankulak (Todorova 2002). H. Todorova pays special attention to the strict association of these items with male graves rich in supposed ceremonial finds, and suggests their possible use in ritual practices. Along the same line of interpretation is the discovery of more than 200 phalanges and astragali intentionally deposited under the floor of a Late Copper Age building at Tell Hotnitsa in the Veliko Turnovo region (Chokhadzhiev & Elenski 2002:15). This assemblage, recovered within half a square meter, pertains to a wide range of wild and domesticated animals, including red-deer, cattle, aurochs, wild boar, sheep and goat; the find could be interpreted as a foundation deposit. These cases also give rise to the idea that unworked phalanges could have been associated with apotropaic powers over individuals and property. The identification of flattened pig metapodials as stylized anthropomorphic representations – prismatic figurines or ‘‘stupalni idoli’’ in Bulgarian – was the subject of one of the very first articles on worked bone artefacts in Bulgarian archaeological literature, the morphologically identical clay figurines being known already at that time (Chilingirov 1910). A century later, there are many publications of such finds, both in clay and bone, some allowing a better understanding of the stylized details encoded in the image. On some figurines, facial traits are marked and metal earrings attached to the articulations of the distal epiphysis, thus, identifying the head, whereas others have a

129
significant opening at the lower part. Flattened prismatic figurines are likely to be identified with femalerelated powers, whereas their modest size implies apotropaic use as personal talismans. Often it is hard to find contextual information in the excavation reports about these artefacts. Luckily, during the first excavation season at Lıga, one slightly worked pig ˆ metapodium was found in Grave no. 1 (Pl. 28:1), another might be associated with Grave no. 2 (Pl. 28:2), cf. Chapter XI. The flattened astragali are traditionally seen as gaming pieces due to their similarity to the ones used in the game of knucklebones. Varieties of this game have been recorded in written and pictorial sources from the Mediterranean ever since Homer (Iliad XXIII.88). The rapid decrease in popularity of the game seems to coincide with the industrialization of traditional societies. In the past, astragali were also intentionally deposited as votives in sacred places. This custom is frequently documented during Classical Antiquity but often overlooked by archaeologists dealing with prehistoric periods. Again, the limited attention paid in the early days of archaeology to the particular context of finds is not helpful when searching for the possible ritual use of flattened astragali. Nevertheless, a golden model of a sheep astragalus furnished with a suspension hole, was recovered from Grave 36 from the Copper Age cemetery of Varna I. Grave 36 is a symbolic grave (cenotaph) in which no human remains were found. Still, it is extremely rich in goods, among which gold and copper regalia, zoomorphic representations in gold and clay, as well as numerous cloth and body ornaments were mostly found arranged as if ornamenting a human figure (Ivanov 1998:196f.). The composition of this extraordinary find complex is certainly intended to reflect conceptual constructs, furnishing clear evidence that during the late 5th millennium BC laterally flattened astragali played a role in ritual activities. As indicated by the suspension hole, in this particular case, the golden astragalus must have been worn as an ornament, probably signaling a role in society not linked per se to a particular person but rather – as indicated by the symbolic grave – to the institution that the powers in question embodied. Thus, the various small bones with flattened sides – the prismatic figurines from pig metapodials and the laterally flattened astra-

130

Acta Archaeologica
wide variety of tool types, especially in the Lıga 2, is ˆ a testimony to the many craft activities practiced by inhabitants of the village. Of special interest is the abundance of non-utilitarian objects in the same phase. The association of flattened astragali and phalanges with other special finds, or their occasional occurrence in funeral contexts, suggest that these small bone items could have been possibly used for apotropaic purposes rather than as gaming pieces. Finally, body ornaments recovered in the graves help in the reconstruction of the personal ornaments of the period. The necklaces, mostly composed of marine shells, likely travelled several hundred kilometres, demonstrate the wider limits and the directions of contacts at Copper Age Lıga. ˆ

gali, even palmar-flattened phalanges, all seem to be associated with ritual practices. If one considers the particular archaeological situations in which various flattened short bone objects were recovered at Lıga, noteworthy patterns emerge ˆ (Fig. IX.4). The plotting of bone artefacts reveals a significantly high concentration of various kinds of objects in the interior and the area immediately outside House 1. Interestingly, this structure also displays a concentration of a wide spectrum of special finds, like ‘‘clay altars’’, ‘‘baby feeding bottles’’, copper artefacts, anthropomorphic figurines, in addition to the astragali, etc. (cf. Chapter VI). The latter come in two sizes (cattle and sheep), one, with a perforation, is also decorated (Pl. 28:5). This combination of finds having a presumably ritual use reveals some particular aspects of the life of the occupants, as well as a context for the use of flattened phalanges and astragali in ritual practices. By contrast, the occurrence of few astragali and phalanges in dwellings with mostly mundane inventories probably indicate their popularity as personal talismans, possibly also used in divination (rather than as a gaming piece). It should be mentioned, that one of side-flattened sheep astragalus was discovered inside a fine ware vessel in House 2 (Pl. 9:1).

BIBLIOGRAPHY
Berciu, D. 1961. Contributii la problemele neoliticului in Romania in lumina noilor cercetari. Bucuresti. Biehl, P. 2003 Studien zum Symbolgut des Neolithikums und der Kupferzeit in Südosteuropa. Saarbrücker Beiträge zur Altertumskunde 64. Bonn: Habelt. Choyke, A.M. 2001. Late Neolithic Red Deer Canine Beads and Their Imitations. In: Choyke & Bartosiewicz (eds.), Crafting Bone: Skeletal Technologies through Time and Space, 251ff. Proceedings of the 2nd meeting of the (ICAZ) Worked Bone Research Group, Budapest. BAR IS 937. Oxford: Archaeopress. Comsa E. 1984 Figurines d’os prismatique d’epoque Neolithique ¸ ´ en Roumanie. Pontica XVII: 15–23. Fol A., Lichardus, I. et al. 1988. Macht, Herrschaft und Gold. Saarbrücken. Gaydarska B., Chapman J., Angelova I., Gurova M., Yanev, S. 2004 Breaking, Making and Trading: the Omurtag Eneolithic Spondylus Hoard. Archaeologia Bulgarica VIII/2, 11–34. Georgieva, P. 1990. Periodization of the Krivodol-Salcuta-Bubanj ˘ ¸ Culture. In: Vinca and It’s World. 167–171. Beograd. Ivanov, I., Avramova, M. 2000. Varna Necropolis. The dawn of European civilization. Sofia: Agatho. Jovanovic, B. 1998. Salcuta IV, Krivodol and Bubanj: Similarities ˘ ¸ ´ and Differences in the Late Eneolithic of the Central Balkans. In: In the Steps of James Harvey Gaul, vol. I, 197–202. Sofia. Todorova Simeonova, H. 1968. Die vorgeschichtlichen Funde von Sadovec (Nordbulgarien). Jahrbuch des Römisch-Germanischen Zentralmuseums Mainz 15:15–63. Todorova, H. 1992. Bericht über die Kontrolgrabung von 1979 auf Golemanovo Kale und Neueauswertung des prähistorischen Fundgutes in die spätantiken Befestigungen von Sadovec (Bulgarien). Münchner Beitrage zur Vor- und Fruhgeschichte 43. München. Todorova, H. 1995. Bemerkungen zum fruhen Handelsverkehr ¨ wahrend des Neolithikums und des Chalkolithikums im ¨

SUMMARY The bone artefacts from Lıga are significant in several ˆ respects, in particular since their general contexts are known – occupation levels, houses, and graves, as well as differences in the composition of the documented assemblages. Interestingly, the Lıga 1 assemblage is ˆ characterised by expediency with regards to craft peoples’ attitude towards bone as a worked material. By contrast, a clearly attested tendency towards planning and careful execution of manufacture seems to have been customary in Lıga 2. ˆ The remarkable flat figurine reveals high workmanship skills compared to the less careful work on most Lıga 1 tools. The secondary decoration of the ˆ figurine testifies to development in decorative concepts through time (or across space, if imported) and the co-existence of different perceptions. Change of ownership is suggested by re-location of lines demarking body regions on the same figurine. The rather

Lıga ˆ
westlichen Schwarzmeerraum. Hansel, B., Hrsg., Handel, Tausch ¨ und Verkehr im bronze- und fruheisenzeitlichen Sudosteuropa. Prahist. ¨ ¨ ¨ Arch. Sudosteuropa 11: 53–66. Munchen, Berlin. ¨ ¨ Todorova H. 2000. Die Spondylus-Problematik heute. In S. Hiller and V. Nikolov (eds.), Karanovo III: Beiträge zum Neolithikum in Südosteuropa, 415–422. Wien. Todorova, H., 2002: Durankulak, Band II. Die prähistorischen Gräberfelder von Durankulak. Teil 1. Deutsches Archäologisches Insititut in Berlin. Sofia. Todorova, H., Vajsov, I., 2001. Die kupferzeitliche Schmuck Bulgariens. Stuttgart: Franz Steiner. Tringham, R., Krstic, D., 1990. Selevac: A Neolithic Village in ´ Yugoslavia. Monumenta Archaeologica 15. Los Angeles: University of California. Willms, C. 1985. Neolithischer Spondylusschmuck. Hundert Jahre Forschung. Germania 63: 331–343. Zidarov, P. In press. Worked Bone Collection from Tell Kozareva mogila, Southeastern Bulgaria. Proceedings of the 3rd Meeting of the (ICAZ) Worked Bone Research Group in Basel, Switzerland. Basel. Dfqdoc, C. 1985. Pairsoqixfrkoso rflizf c m. Qfetsisf pqi r. Sfliy. Mthfi i pamfsniwi na ktlstqasa XXV 1: 31-33. Dfqdoc, C. 1987. Mfeni navoeki os pqairsoqixfrkoso rflizf c m. Qfetsisf pqi Sfliy, Plfcfnrki okq. AqvfolodiÄ XXVIII 4: 44–48. RouiÄ. Dfqdoc, C. 1992a. MÄrsoso na rflizfso Sfliy-Qfetsisf c PqfvoeniÄ pfqioe k{m QBF. AqvfolodiÄ 2. RouiÄ. Dfqdoc, C. 1992b. Eoirsoqixfrkof porflfnif SfliyQfetsisf. Studia Preaehistorica 11–12: 347–357. RouiÄ. Dfqdoc, C. 2001. Aqvfolodixfrki qahkopki na pqairsoqixfrkoso rflizf c m. ‘‘L{da’’ pqi r. Sfliy, Plfcfnrka Oblars, pqfh 2000 d. Aqvfolodixfrki oskqisiÄ i qahkopki ha 1999–2000 d., c. 15–17. XL HAK. RouiÄ.

131
K{nxfc, K. 1973. Ha obqaboskasa i ihpolhcanfso na korssa pqfh nfolisa, fnfolisa i bqonhocasa fpova. AqvfolodiÄ XV, 2. K{nxfc, K., Nikoloc B. 1983. Oq{eiÄ na sqtea i rsopanrkiÄ gicos na rfliza os valkolisnasa fpova c{c Cqaxanrko. IhcfrsiÄ na mthfisf c rfcfqohapaena B{ldaqiÄ, 8: 9–35, Cqawa. Mikoc, C. 1934. Ieolnasa plarsika pqfh nocokamfnnasa fpova. IhcfrsiÄ na B{ldaqrki aqvfolodixfrki inrsists 8: 183–214, RouiÄ. Mikoc, C. 1948. Pqfeirsoqixfrkoso rflizf eo Kqicoeol, Cqaxanrko. Qahkopki i pqotxcaniÄ. 1: 26–56. RouiÄ. Mikoc, C., Egambahoc N. 1960. Efcfsaykasa pfzfqa. RouiÄ. Nikoloc, B. 1975. Haminfw, pqairsoqixfrkoso rflizf pqi r. Doqna Kqfmfna. RouiÄ. Nikoloc, B. 1984. Kqicoeol – eqfcni ktlstqi. RouiÄ. Popoc, Q. 1918. Koega-Efqmfnrkasa modila pqi dq. Ytmfn. IhcfrsiÄ na aqvfoloditfrkoso eqtgfrsco VI, 1916–18. RouiÄ. Qibaqoc, D., Bofc, H. 1997. Korsni orsanki os eici i eomayni gicosni os pqairsoqixfrkoso rflizf ‘‘SfliyQfetsisf’’ pqi r. Sfliy (Plfcfnrko). Historia naturalis bulgarica 7: 61–70. RouiÄ. Xilindiqoc, A. 1910. Rs{palni korsni ieoli. IhcfrsiÄ na aqvfolodixfrkoso eqtgrfrsco. RouiÄ. Xovaegifc, R., N. Flfnrki 2002. Aqvfolodixfrki pqotx˘ caniÄ c rfliznasa modila kqai rflo Vosniwa, Cflikos{qnocrko, pqfh 2001 d. XLI Nawionalna aqvfolodixfrka konufqfnwiÄ. Aqvfolodixfrki oskqisiÄ i qahkopki 2001: 15. RouiÄ.

Many bones suffering from drying and splintering were refitted. transportation.1. ribs. Amounts and percentages of animal bones distributed in the excavated sondages. Close instruction of the excavators raised the number of animal bone fragments recovered several times over. damage due to context. Flotation was carried out on important soil samples (in and around ovens. Dry sieving was not productive and was abolished.4). 4820 bone fragments (N) were identified and analyzed according to standard methods and procedures (Fig. drying. cattle amounts to Fig. Among the domesticated animals (164 MNI). and hips. X. An example is sondages 8A and 8B (refuse area). to excavation tools. . damage old. All data were entered into an Access database – point of departure for further studies as well as the present tables and statistics. recovery. X. are the weakest (large surface). it was not permitted to take the bones to Denmark for a period of comparative studies (for this reason. Also here notes on the state of preservation are helpful. X. cf. information was thereby obtained on the level of preservation of organic material in the different areas and levels of the excavation. especially when dry. with good preservation throughout. Fig.X. teeth and jaws were excluded when determining age of individuals). Some bone microfossils were probably lost. ANIMAL BONES by Jesper Sørensen Østergaard THE SAMPLE The animal bones from Lıga were studied already ˆ during excavation and analyzed in the field (Fig. Such time-consuming exercises are necessary to determine the degree of representation of a bone sample from different areas and layers in an excavation. The number of fragments may seem limited. such as shoulder blades. but not too many (for details of excatation techniques. which aided the procedure of work. but compared with the modest extension of excavated area (275 m2) (Fig. or to storage (in paper bags). II. A distinction was also made between natural damage. The rather more uncertain minimum number of individuals (MNI) was also established for each species (on the basis of paired bones).3. Such notes are quite useful since damage is much harder to classify after a period of storage (and drying). it is much higher than at other sites. In addition. The location of every specimen was mapped and the item individually classified according to degree of preservation: no damage. Unfortunately. X.1).2). These bones also tend to generate a lot of fragments when excavated. or damage recent (Fig. The thin bones. for example). as are words on the weather conditions during excavation (dryness generate more fragments). X.1). 716 of the fragments (N) could be identified as to species. see above).

Razgrad. Excavated by V. Bökönyi. Ninov. by looking at the stage of growth of the bones and joints. Tell 4. III–IV. Vaksevo. Fig. are included in the above species lists. Also age profiles were tentatively established. Bones (from upper level of settlement strata) studied by S.Lıga ˆ 36. Early Neolithic (Karanovo I & II). Fig. BULGARIA Karanovo. G. studied by H. Continuity Early NeolithicLate Copper Age.9 m high. and Early Bronze Age. S. Sofia-Slatina.5 cms are used for heavy tools (blows and stabs). and Early Bronze Age. the heavy duty tools came from old large animals. with large massive tick-walled bones. fragment numbers (N) were employed generally. Early Neolithic. Kjustendil. X.2). Varna. Poly- . are not added to the species list. Chapter IX on quality bone artefacts). in particular cattle. sheep/goat to 94.5).5 cms are used for light tools (awls. At River Elesnica feeding Struma. In the end. The ratio domesticated animals versus wild ones is. Fragments of bone tools and figurines. to determine the differing weight of the species (Fig. X. Uerpmann & L. Ovcharovo. Karanovo I–II. The smaller tools are likely from sheep/goat. bones with walls below 0. 2. Todorova at the beginning of the 1980s. Late Copper Age.I. 133 SECONDARILY IDENTIFIED TOOLS AND WEAR TRACES Some bones with traces of wear and work – even fragments of bone tools – were recovered during the detailed study of the bone sample. Bones with walls above 0. 850 m2 excavated. Georgiev & V. which may have been used for gaming pieces (or in rituals). Targoviste. Pig-phalanxes without wear. V & VI. pig to 17 and dog also to 17. 87 to 13% on basis of the limited MNI numbers of the present sample. and bones with marks of work and wear amount to 150 (cf. These fragments of tools. wild animals amount to 24 MNI. Tell 60 m across¿41⁄2 m.3). Nikolov 1988–2000. in percentages. State of preservation and patterns of use of/damage to the Lıga bone sample. a few are with certainty cervidae (dear antler) or bos (horn of cattle). etc. Largest Neolithic tell in Bulgaria. a thorough selection is noted with regards to hardness of the material – soft tissue being ignored and older animals preferred. worked bones etc. X. Sofia. including teeth. Excavated by H. Probably. Investigated by H. Todorova 1968–70. otherwise consisting of refuse from meals and work (cf. the bones of which are easily turned into awls. Among these bones. X. In Karanovo VI a cemetery of 31 inhumations in hocker. Ovcharovo-Gorata. Bones studied by G.). Mikov 1936. The Vaksevo sample is a collective one from neighbouring sites (two) at Studeno Voda and (one) at Skaleto. Nova Zagora. Nobis. Karanovo II. Tools were never made from casual fragments: quite the contrary. A correlation exists between the thickness of the wall of the bone and the type of tool. 250¿150¿121⁄2 m. Hiller & V. The techniques of manufacture and the function of tools were also studied. Fig. ˆ COMPARISONS SELECTED SETTLEMENTS WITH ANIMAL BONE SAMPLES The following settlements in the Balkans have yielded published animal bone samples of some size and interest to the current study (cf. Mikov 1947– 57. Golyamo-Delchevo.

Raduncheva. N – number of bones. Nova Zagora. Karanovo V. X. R. ˆ anica (Karanovo V) & Gumelnita-Kodzadermen-Ka¸ ˇ ranovo VI.3. Kar- anovo V. Excavated by H. Mikov. Karanovo III. Todorova 1971–1973. VI & Early Bronze Age. Tundza Valley. VI & Early Bronze Age/Ezero A-B. Yambol. Drama.J. Tell 55¿45¿5 m. Excavated by V. Merpert. Vinitsa. Katincarov & N. MNI – minimal number of individuals. IV. . by Bulgarian-Soviet team 1961–71 headed by V. V. At the site were 46 inhumations from Karanovo VI. Tell 160¿20 m. Ezero. Totally excavated 1965–69 by A. Sterile layer VI. Excavated by Bulgarian-German team 1983. Shumen. Tell 200¿145¿10 m. Mikov 1952–58. Lıga bone sample.134 Acta Archaeologica Fig.

Lıga ˆ 135 Fig. MACEDONIA Anza. Excavated in 1960. Cultural layers mainly from Early Neolithic to Copper Age. Thessaly. Renfrew. the plain where Telish village is situated. Ca. 45. Gimbutas & C.104 determined according to species. and. Front – area of Sector 2. Cultural layer of 101⁄2 m. X. above & .000 bones of which 19.000 bones from all layers. On Volos Bay near River Peneios. On River Axios. Bökönyi. back – area of Sector 1. Close similarities to the Balkan cultures in pottery and figurines. 15. Excavated at the end of the 1970s.779 bones studied by S. 776 bones studied by J. Excavated 1968–69 by international team headed by M. Platia Magoula Zarkou (P. 90. Neolithic to Early Bronze Age. Garasanin and M.613 animal bones studied by C. 35. Otzaki Magoula.185 could be identified as studied by S. Tell. Thessaly. On Volos Bay. Thessaly. In the background.M. Zarkou). Neolithic to Early Bronze Age. Neolithic to Early Bronze Age. Northeast of Thessaloniki. COMMENTS The data from Telish-Lıga have been compared to ˆ published samples from Bulgaria and Northern Greece. of which 926 Early Bronze Age. from Macedonia (cf. Gimbutˇ as. Boessneck Achillion. Tell. On Volos Bay near River Peneios. East of the mouth of Struma. Bökönyi.4. Ca. GREECE Sitagroi.000 bones studied by S. Between Skopje and Stip (Ovce Polje region). View from NE towards the excavated area. Tell. a tributary to the Vardar. Neolithic & Early Bronze Age. 11. 7. Macedonia. Ca. Early Bronze Age to Iron Age. near Nikolskaja. and 1969–70 by a joint Yugoslav-American campaign headed by M. Becker. Bökönyi. Thessaly. Kastanas. in a single case.

136 Acta Archaeologica .

A general trend is the decline of cattle in the Late Neolithic and the Copper Age. P. of individuals (MNI). Likely. Gradeshnitsa. Fig. A recent excavation at the Copper Age settlement of Magura ˘ (tell) Gorgana at Pietrele near the Danube has yielded a small animal bone sample seemingly with a lot of fish (76 fragments) (N. i. and wool. however. percentages of domesticated animals are calculated on the basis of the whole sum of species. EzeroΩGeorgiev & Merpert 1979. 28 of pig. YMCΩ(Former) Yugoslav Macedonia. Greece. has only yielded poor data (only the Early Bronze Age evidence is perhaps of some value. BAΩBronze Age. The number of pig is the same. but most were killed young in later times. as at Sfogea). Comparative table of studies other than Lıga of animal bones in Bulgaria. These comments on age do not transpire from the tables. MΩMiddle. Very uncertain samples are not included here. plus some deer. but also these individuals are older than before. This may also explain the high percentage of . Scholars use two approaches concerning statistical presentation. DramaΩBökönyi 1990. CAΩCopper Age. a more mobile system of husbandry was also introduced.e.Y. at Sfogea near Cuptoare in Southern Romania. NΩNeolithic. Adaptation to a particular environment is clear. unfortunately. Krivodol. ˆ list of species (Ribarov & Boev 1997). including transhumance (sheep/ goat). including 11 horse bones: early evidence of domesticated horse in the Balkans) (Bökönyi 1991).000 animal bones – were not collected stratigraphically and have only been published in terms of measures of certain bones. KaranovoΩHiller & Nikolov 1997. which also see more old individuals. like power (cattle). milk. there is substantial variation in the quality of study in the Balkans (and Greece). Wild animals are common ( 50 fragments. domesticates are calculated separately. or otherwise. Macedonia. SitagroiΩBökönyi 1986. Ovcharovo-GorataΩNobis 1988. In northwestern Bulgaria as a whole there are few published studies. The Copper Age settlement of Redutite near Lıga ˆ is particularly interesting. LΩLate. BGΩBulgaria. Site references: Sofia-SlatinaΩBökönyi 1992. X. in the Copper Age. Achillion & Otzaki MagulaΩBecker 1991. or calculated minimum nos. Other Yugoslav (or ex-Yugoslav) sites. A single KSB-cul¸ ture site. including the wild animals (marked here with grey colour). more stress was probably put on the socalled ‘‘secondary’’ products. Among the domesticated animals are 11 fragments of cattle. but the percentage rose in the Copper Age (sometimes very high percentages of hunted animals are seen. Apart from the fine work of Bökönyi. with older domestic animals. Thus. In these cases.5). EΩEarly. Karanovo: traditional settlement phases of Karanovo tell are applied here for the sake of temporal orientation (Roman numbersΩrespective phases). 5 fragments were of dog. but only 7 sheep/goat. X. and F. but.. plus a summary 1. the data – amost 6. KastanasΩBecker 1986. In most cases. has only 52% domestic animal bones – perhaps an indication of flexible economic strategies (1). like famous Bubanj in eastern Serbia. of bones (N). Ovcharovo & VinitsaΩVasilev 1978. In some cases. exceptions are Brenitsa. Sheep/goat is on the rise in the same periods. in particular concerning investigations before the mid1980s. VaksevoΩNinov 2001. Figures: either nos. as well as in the Early Bronze Age. Golyamo-DelchevoΩIvanov & Vasilev 1975. Boessneck & Driesch.5. mainly wild boar.M. AnzaΩBökönyi 1976. wild animal percentages must be added to the domesticated ones to give 100%. This sample is not entered in the tables. adding up to 100% without incorporating the wild animals. 1999. Zarkou.Lıga ˆ 137 Fig. GRΩ ˆ Greece. all in% under individual species. Brenitsa. 2004).R. Benecke in Hansen et al. Wild animals amount to about 10% or a little more in the Neolithic. Also the published Romanian data are of low quality (Comsa 1989). The high number of fish bones is raising questions about their rarity at Lıga. Gradeshnitsa and Krivodol (Vasilev 1978).

. M. Papers of the archaeozoological conference 1974. S. L. Band 5. and in forests too. ed. Boessneck J. von den. Prehistoric animal remains from Bubanj-Hum at Nis. Spiess. Le developpement socio-economique en territoire ¸ ´ ´ roumain pendant l’Eneolitique. Bökönyi. & Driesch. if numerous. Aus dem Institut für Paläoanatomie. The lower-lying meadows at Lıga ˆ (at the stream) would have been a fine and easily guarded area for cattle. Zu den Tierknochen aus Neolitischen Siedlungen Thessalien. Ausgrabungen in einem Siedlungshügel der Bronze. & Driesch. Los Angeles. Boessneck. Southeast Yugoslavia. Boessneck.. History of Domestic Mammals in Central and Eastern Europe. 1. vol. 1991. Prehistorica XV-XIV. København. Becker. Los Angeles. Belgrade.1. along streams. 1962. Driesch. London: Yale University Press. during the summer likely in the lush mountains to the South. BIBLIOGRAPHY Becker. The Middle Neolithic and The Platia Magoula Zarkou – a review of current archaeozoological research in Thessaly. 115–120. Müller. these are often. Prähistorische Zeitschrift. 1974. Bauhorizont I. Freiburg. von den. J. Archaeozoological studies. ˇ Clason. Comsa. Beiträge zur ur. Kühn-Archiv. 1981. Berichte der RömischGermanischen Kommission 70: 123–127. A. The Vertebrate Fauna from Anza.C. Academic Press. Boessneck. München. Die Tierreste aus der Agia Sofia-Magula in Thessalien. S.138 Acta Archaeologica la Pevkakia in Thessalien. 1979. G. Domestikationsforschung und Geschicthe der Tiermedicin der Universitet München. 1976. 1956. Harvard: Peabody Museum. Bökönyi. Aus dem Institut für Paläoanatomie. 1990. S. Berichte der Römisch-Germanischen Kommission 36: 1– 51. Berlin. 1976. Biegel. Bökönyi. Band 78.. Excavations at Sitagroi. M.und Eisenzeit Makedoniens 1975–1979. I.-H. 1986. München. eds. Inaugural-Dissertation zur Erlangung der tiermedizinischen Doktorwürde des Fachbereichs Tiermedizin der Ludwig-Maximilians-Universität München. Probably. C. The composition of a particular domestic animal population – even as seen from the dry bones of excavation – is usually a close reflection of the natural catchments of a settlement and its potential. Greece. 1975. 1964. while a high number of sheep/goat is a reflection of open landscapes.. C. 1989. A. Bökönyi. North Holland/ American Elsevier. M. D. 336– 340. indicators of nearby forests. Becker. Berlin. Bökönyi. Monumenta archaeologica 13: 63–132. Prähistorische Archäologie in Südosteuropa. Winn. Budapest. 1989. S. 1986.und frühgeschichtlichen Archäologie des Mittelmeer-Kulturraumes 15: 15–54. S. & Teichert. Berlin. 1976b. Peabody Museum Bulletin 1. S. Starinar XL–XLI. Das erste Gold der Menschheit – Die älteste Zivilisation in Europa. in fact the availability of water and fodder for the animals throughout the year. the latter also took place further away. Praha. Die Wiederkauer. 1999. Jagd und Rohstoffverwertung im neolithisch-bronzezeitlichen Thessalien. J.. 1979. Neolithic Macedonia: as reflected by excavation at Anza. cattle may be kept where water is plentiful. Monumenta archaeologica 1: 313–316. Osteologische Unterscheidungsmerkmale zwischen Schaf (Ovis aries Linne) ´ und Ziege (Capra hircus Linne).und Jagdtiere im vorgeschichtlichen Thessalien. A. Neue Tierknochenfunde aus der Magula Pevkakia in Thessalien. Boessneck. A. Prähistorische Zeitschrift 66/1: 14–78. Faunal Remains. wild animals. Leinen. Driesch. M og Fredskild. Die Tierknochenfunde von der Platia Magoula Zarkou – neue Untersuchungen zu Haustierhaltung. New York. making up for losses in meat. 1976a. Acta praehistorica et archaeologica 24: 245–247. In Gimbutas. von den. 1987. Berlin. The Archaeology of Animals. and anyway more available to mobile populations. 1986. InauguralDissertation zur Erlangung der tiermedizinischen Doktorwürde des Fachbereichs Tiermedizin der Ludwig-Maximilians-Universität München. Beiträge zur ur. ed. (ed. Biologiske Skrifter 17. S. A Guide to the Measurement of Animal Bones from Archaeological Sites. 62/1:1–21. Los Angeles. A. M. J. 1970. Heft 3/4. S. Open plains ˆ are optimal for sheep/goat herding. Driesch. II. Die Tierknochenfunde. 1989/1990. Ancient Men and Modern Myths. In: Gimbutas. A. Erster vorläufiger Bericht über Tierknochenfunde der Karanovo-V-Besiedlung in Drama.. In Renfrew. Shimabuku. 1987. 1989. Det Kongelige Danske Videnskabernes Selskab. Kastanas. J.J. Die Nichtwiederkäuer. H. Achilleion: a Neolithic settlement in Thessaly. Germania 36. including dry plains and mountains. 1991. Monumenta Archaeologica 14: 315–332. eds. As to pig. Animal Remains. Boessneck. held at the Biologisch. C..). ´ Ss. Binford.Archaeologisch Institute of the State University of Groningen..und frühgeschichtlichen Archäologie des Mittelmeer-Kulturraumes 2: 22–99. Bones.M. 6400–5600 BC. Bökönyi. Interna´ tionales Symposium. A.. 1–129. J. Neue Tierknochenfunde aus der Magu- . Davis. Die Tierreste aus der Argissa-Magula vom präkeramischen-neolitikum bis zur mittleren Bronzezeit. Eine vorläufige Mitteilung über die Tierknochenfunde von Sofia-Slatina. Gimbutas & E. 1992. Domestikationsforschung und Geschicthe der Tiermedicin der Universitet München. Degerbøl. 1960. The urus [Bos primigenius Bojanus] and Neolithic domesticated cattle [Bos taurus domesticus Linne] in ´ Denmark: With a revision of Bos-remains from the kitchen middens: Zoological and palynological investigations. such may also have grazed in the supposed light forest ‘‘behind’’ Lıga. Anthropozoologica 30: 3–22. B. Haus.T. Univerzita Karkova. Bökönyi.. Amsterdam. S. Elster 1986. E. Bonn. Zu den Tierknochenfunden aus der präkeramischen Schicht der Argissa-Magula.

H. G.. International Series 304. 1989. 1979.D.. 1979.] Grayson. Das Präkeramische Neolitikum sowie die Tier. H. Ivanov. Selishtnata mogila Golyamo Delchevo. Academic Press. B. 1975. V. Ninov. Die deutschen Ausgrabungen auf Magulen um ´ Larisa in Thessalien 1966: Agia Sofia-Magula. 1997. Grayson. Achilleion: a Neolithic settlement in Thessaly. G.R. Razkopki i Prouchvaniya 29.C. Band 13. 1979. Minneapolis. eds. 1986. Cambridge.B. The Institute of Archaeology The University of California. P. H. Veksevo. Cambridge Manuals in Archaeology. British Series 251. (eds. V. Wilson.. Ribarov. Grayson. Vaksevo – praistoricheski selishta.D. N.H. Todorova. Advances in Archaeological Method and Theory 2: 199–237.). Sravnitelnıe issledovaniya roli zhivotnovodstva i ˆ ohotı dlya praistoricheskih poselenij Bolgarii. eds. 1990. Selishtnata mogila Golyamo Delchevo. 1981. ed. Zoo-Archaeology in Greece: A Reader’s Guide. 1975. 1991. 1989. Supplementum Pulpudeva 3: 301–310. Payne.. Los Angeles. Veliko Turnovo ˇ Nobis.R. H. A. 1.. 1985. Zooarchaeology. Boessneck.A. 1.. Zhivotnite ot praistoricheskoto selishte kraj s. D. Bonn: Rudolf Habelt Verlag.. Oanta-Marghitu & A. Die Kupferzeit als historische Epoche. Razkopki i prouchvaniya V. L. S. M. Georgiev. K. Journal of Archaeological Science 8: 77–88..Beck München.. Saarbrucker Beiträge zur Altertumskunde 55. 6400–5600 BC. & Hopf. Sofia. Payne. I. American Antiquity 43:53–65. 1976. Prouchvane na zhivotinskiya kosten material ot praistoricheskata selishtna mogila pri s. M. Halstead. Merpert. Gimbutas. Sherratt. M.. Vasilev. Vol. Spatial Patterning among Animal Bones in Settlement Archaeology.. Bad year economics: cultural responses to risk and uncertainity.. In Halstead. The Effects on Sample Size on Some Derived Measures in Vertebrate Faunal Analysis. 1997. 1975. Contributions to Aegean Archaeology: Studies in Honor of William A. V. & Boev. 1988. 1 & 2. 1975. New York.11. Ezero: rannobronzovoto selishte. Sofia. Sofia.S. biotopat im i izrabotenite ot tekhnite ostanki artefakti. The Eneolithic Period in Bulgaria in the Fifth Millenium BC. 1985. Maritsa Project. V. The economy has a normal surplus: economic stability and social change among early farming communities of Thessaly. . Greece. N... [Schiffer. Eurasia 10.. Gimbutas. 1986. ed. Amsterdam.E. Kostni ostanki ot divi i domashni zhivotni ot praistoricheskoto selishte ‘‘Telish-Redutite’’ pri s. Vols. Los Angeles. Historia naturalis bulgarica.000 B. Advances in Archaeological Method and Theory 2: 199–237. Edinburgh: Edinburgh University Press. M. In: Todorova et al. Matsanova. F. Economy and society in prehistoric Europe: changing perspectives. Band 1. Greenfield. Golyamo Delchevo. An English regional exploration. Sofia. C. V. 1987. Reitz. Z. Payne. Materialien zur Allgemeinen und Vergleichenden Archäologie. Benecke. Kosteni idoli. Southeast Yugoslavia. S. In Clason.K. Beiträge zur ur. Zooarchaeologia. Shimabuku. A prehistoric village in Northeast Greece. The Institute of Archaeology The University of California. Faunal Change at Franchthi Cave from 20. Archaeozoological studies: 7–17. Bonn. Sofia. The Opovo Project: a Study of Socio-economic Change in the Balkan Neolithic. W. 61–70. 1962. Die deutschen Ausgrab´ 139 ungen auf der Argissa-Magula in Thessalien. Raduncheva. 1ff. Todorova. & Coulson. Cambridge University Press. Renfrew. & Elster. Karagyös-Magula. Telish (Plevensko).. eds. D. Greece. Salzburg und Sofia. S. Neolitno selishte do grad Rakitovo. Gatsov. E. 1999. Academic Press. 1975. ed. 2004.. E.. ed.C.und frühgeschichtlichen Archäologie des Mittelmeer-Kulturraumes 15.R. Neolithic Macedonia: as reflected by excavation at Anza. Amsterdam... Ovcarovo-Gorata (Fauna). (ed.J. Leshtakov. B. 1978. Hiller. Partial Recovery and Sample Bias. Hansen. 3 (1–2): 191–200. et al. The Institute of Archaeology The University of California. et al. Journal of Danish Archaeology 6: 7–26. M. Eurasien Abteilung. Monumenta Archaeologica 13. 1986. S. Paleoeconomy of the Central Balkans (Serbia): A Zooarchaeological Perspective on the Late Neolithic and Bronze Age (ca. S. D. Archaeozoological studies: 120–131. Razkopki i prouchvaniya V: 245–302. 1985. 1978. Kamenno-mednata Epoha v Bulgariya. Greenfield. Bunar Baschi. Berich über die ¸˘ Ausgrabungen in der kupferzeitlichen Tellsiedlung Magura ˘ Gorgana bei Pietrele in Muntenien/Rumänien im Jahre 2002. Wilkie. D. A.E. Los Angeles. Excavations at Sitagroi. N. Dragoman.1988. 1989. 1997. Gimbutas. S.A. In: Schiffer. Sofia. & Coulson. Teil 1 und 2.. W. Karanovo.. Todorova. 1997. Animal bones from boreholes and Early Neolithic settlement near village Kovacevo. Studia Praehistorica 10: 197– 200. N. Reingruber. 4500–1000 B. Klimscha. E.A. Symposium Saarbrücken und Otzenhausen 6. M. 1979. Tringham. 1975a. Noe-Nygaard. N. A. ˇ Cohadziev. eds. vol. Sofia. J. Görsdorf. & O’Shea J.. ed. New York. B.T.B. Winn. 1978. Milojcic. Verlag C. & Bruckner. S.K.. Dubuque. B. Lichardus.. H. Deutsches archäologisches Institut. Rescue archaeological Excavations along Maritsa Motorway in South Bulgaria. Minimum Numbers and Sample Size in Vertebrate Faunal Analysis. In Wilkie. G. J. Monumenta Archaeologica 14. Bonn: Rudolf Habelt Verlag.J. S. Zooarchaeology and Aspects of the Secondary Products Revolution: A Central Balkan Perspective. 1997. Iowa Minneapolis. B.–3000 B. McDonald: 211–44. & Nikolov. N.und Pflanzenreste. S. V.T...).C. L. 1985. 1996. S. 2001. Miljocic.–13.C. ed. Die Ausgrabungen in Südsektor 1984–1992. 2002.J.. & Wing. A.K. R.. Taphonomy in Archaeology with Special Emphasis on Man as a Biasing Factor. Todorova. Monumenta Archaeologica 1. 1975b. Thracia Praehistorˆ ica. P. Contributions to Aegean Archaeology: Studies in Honor of William A. H.Lıga ˆ Elenski.. J.. Sofia.C. 1982: Kupferzeitliche Siedlungen in Nordostbulgarien. On the Quantification of Vertebrate Archaeofaunas. International Series 49. Kendall Hunt Publishing Co. In Clason. 1989.). Ninov.. Studia Praehistorica 9: 37ff. Izvestiya na Istoricheskiya Muzei na Veliko Turnovo XII: 81–90. 7. Journal of Field Archaeology 12: 425–444. & Vasilev. McDonald. 1976. A. Cambridge. I.

During the cutting of the soil. 2 cm in diameter and with a hole in the middle reaching almost 1 cm in diameter was discovered below the right hip. the form and manner in which the pendant is produced can also be found in a group of copper pins known from Late Copper Age sites (Todorova & Vaisov 2002). VI. II. .2 & XI. The skeleton was orientated NS. INFANT I. respectively. Yordanov (2) of the Bulgarian Academy of Science. Yordan Yordanov.XI. the head being in the S with a slight eastern deviation (159 æ/360 æ N). Despite possible loss of information. the attention invested in the excavation of the grave and the fact that it was only superficially excavated before being taken out in the metal frame speaks against direct association with the gold find. the burial was only recognised when the top of the skull became visible. Unfortunately it was crushed in the process. Thus. II. The nasal bone of the child had a greenish discolouration indicating perhaps a vanished copper item. all males and children) were found in the southern half of the Lıga ˆ settlement (Fig.1 & Pl. intersecting the outer western wall of House 1. Calibrated. were discovered at the skull and at the feet. indicating a welldeveloped musculature. The graves were recorded together with Petar Zidarov. 2. 3) were determined by Y. The skeleton was exhibited in its frame at the National museum in Sofia in 2000 (in connection with GRAVE NO.16). this burial contained the richest grave goods as compared with the other burials. Pl. 7–8 YEARS This burial of a child was found 0. Grave no.5. All the soil around the skeleton in the demarcated area of 2¿2 m was being collected separately for flotation.12. perhaps representing cutting tools. this burial is dated to ca. IX. However. XI. The scanty grave goods also support a final Copper Age date.3). nised as human. the remaining in 2001. The legs were contracted on the left side and the arms collected on the abdomen.93¿0. XI. but also its uncertain and possibly late date. CEMETERY INTRODUCTION Seven graves (with eight bodies. The age and sex of the skeletal remains (except the poorly preserved Grave no. It was found in loose soil close to the grave but a few days after the burial was recognised. 1. the head lying on the left side facing WNW (Fig.72 m. and medium to strong relief. It remains a mystery whether the only gold find at the site – a pendant with rolled up terminals. 4000 BC (Fig. The dead child was placed on a naturally deposited layer of pebbles. VI. The grave pit was also only distinguished at its lower level. the higher lying fragmented bones of the underarm were not immediately recog1. Such a pin has been discovered in the neighbouring Redutite settlement (Gergov 1987).17). Unfortunately. a rounded shell ca. 29) (1). The body was placed in supine position with flexed legs. In the area of the chest was also found a zoomorphic bone idol made of pig metatarsus (Fig. In his report is noted that the adults have a medium to expressed massiveness of the post. Bone samples taken from Grave no. Reconstruction of the burial arrangements was complicated by the circumstance. and hence interpreted as a phallic symbol – can be associated with the grave (Fig. when the metal plate of the frame was pushed under the skeleton.and cranial bones.13 & III.65 m below the surface at the southern slopes of the site in an oval grave pit of 0. that all graves were intrusive in relation to earlier Copper Age debris with very rich material remains. 1 were AMS-dated by the Uppsala laboratory. these might also be associated with the burial.5). In the area of the chest were 5 tiny copper beads made of rolled-up copper sheet (Fig. The pendant has raised many speculations not only due to its uncertain association. 1 was discovered in 2000. Situated in an area with abundant remains of animal bones. 28:1). Two rather big flint blades. Institute of Experimental Morphology and Anthropology. Due to the presence of these beads it was decided to lift the grave in a metal frame with the intention of a more controlled excavation. The author is very grateful to Prof. Sofia for undertaking anthropological investigations of the recovered bone material from the graves.

comm.). Photo of graves during the excavation process.Lıga ˆ 141 Fig. On that occasion. Yordanov inspected the skeletal remains and concluded that the skull of the child was bearing traces of an artificial deformation made by a single ribbon bound behind the coronal suture (Yordanov. the official visit to the country by the Queen of Denmark).1. XI. . view from the West. pers.

with exposed dentine.32 m. The cranial walls were twice as thick as those of the other individuals. their buccal edges being abraded away.82 (E-W) m. on the right side and with the knees tightly contracted at the chest. the face was facing West. The skeleton ˆ seems to have been placed on top of a layer of rather large ceramic shards. the head orientated towards the N with a slight deviation towards the E (25 æ/360 æ N. The burial was found in an oval pit with maximum dimensions of 1. INFANT I. This burial was almost totally destroyed by ploughing as refelected by wavy depressions. according to the dentition of 6 years. just some 0. The biggest density of shards was observed below the head and the upper part of the body. The shards originate from different vessels (all could be recognized as stemming from Lıga 2 assemblages) and their even distribution ˆ underneath the skeleton points towards deliberate col- GRAVE NO. The grave was discovered 0.2.47 m below the present surface. However. one of which was exactly overlapping the skeleton. 134 mm. The same type of idol was discovered in Grave no. XI. The lower part of the skeleton is covered with soil containing pieces of burned daub. The upper part of the skull has been cut-off by ploughing. indicating production and re-sharpening of flint tools in the area during the time of the Lıga 2 settlement. ADULT MALE This person was buried in a flexed (hocker) position. These traces would indicate. 2. part of the right radius and three ribs) indicate a flexed position . Beyond the southern edge of the burial pit two postholes were seen. The burial is intrusive in relation to the Copper Age settlement and was placed in the area between two dwelling structures (Houses 2 and 3). following the main axis. Strong lines mark pottery shards stemming from house debris of Lıga 2. A large amount of flint chips was collected during the excavation. XI. the poor preservation of the cranial bones of the present grave does not allow any conclusion on this account. The postholes are quite shallow in relation to the burial. 28:2). its orientation being N-S. The traces of the other bones (a few fragments of skull and mandibula.8 cm. The position of the legs is not known. pulling and tracking while the molars were kept clenched. XI. however. GRAVE NO. A coherent nodule of burned ˆ wattle is marked with oblique striation. the size of the humerus. It should be noted that all teeth of the skeleton. reaching 0.49 m below the present surface (Fig. that the teeth were actively exploited as a tool for a purpose which demanded chewing.10 (N-S)¿0. show very heavy wear. The heaviest attrition is seen on the premolars and the molars of the mandibula. the distance between them being 0. corresponds to an individual of 3. each measuring 0.4). outlines of the right humerus. connecting the top of the skull with the middle point of the pelvis).16 m deep as measured from the level of the skull and therefore their temporal association with the grave is not certain.5 years (Bass 1987).5–4. 1 prior to its lifting in a metal frame.5). No recognizable grave-gifts were found in the grave. 3. Fig. including the frontal ones.20 m NE of the burial might be associated with this (Pl. although it might be assumed that a bone idol made of a pig metatarsal bone found 1.142 Acta Archaeologica lection and arrangement at the bottom of the grave pit. The skeletal remains were found 0.17 m in diameter. 1. Drawing of Grave no. as seen in the profile. Thickened cranial walls were one of the indications of an artificial cranial deformation in Grave no. the hands collected and placed under the head (Fig. The preservation of the bones is very poor with high fragility and surface erosion. 1. 4–6 YEARS The dead person is an Infant I.

3. Fig. XI. 2. . Grave no. 1. Grave no.4.Lıga ˆ 143 Fig. XI.

The body was lying in a flexed position..4¿3. the decorated face towards the ground.g. parts of the pelvis bones.6). . sometimes supplemented with anthropomorphic heads. The grave is intrusive in relation to cultural debris of the Lıga 2 ˆ settlement. Breast´ plates are also occasionally found in graves (Todorova & Vajsov 2002). are not unusual in Late Copper Age contexts and are recorded from Karanovo VI levels. the face was turned towards the West.60 (NNW-SSE) m.80 (NNE-SSW)¿ 0. the right hand under the head. Merdzumekiˇ ja at Drama.8 cm. Although the described type of punched decoration makes its wide appearance during the Bronze Age. with a slight eastern deviation (25 æ/ 360 æ N. XI. the left hand bent and placed over the right one.. with the right hand placed under the head. Similar bone plates. Grave no.53 m below the surface. connecting the top of the skull and the pelvis). 2 of the Lıga 2 settlement. The assumed orientation of the head is N-NW. INFANT I.25 cm) and decorated with evenly spaced dots surrounded by circles.e. The reconstructed corner holes indicate that it was used as a breast-plate. not taking into account the missing upper part of the skull. A bone plate was discovered as the only grave gift (Pl. The grave pit was dug through the outer wall of House no. It was rectangular in shape (measuring 7. The child was placed on the right side. 1–11⁄2 YEARS The skeletal remains of this child were discovered 0. The burial was found in an oval pit with maximum dimensions of 0.5. and ribs and feet. a pendant with similar decoration is known from Cucuteni (Schmidt 1932). e. The dead was orientated towards the N. following the main axis. i. 4. 28:11). and other sites (Sidera 1997).144 Acta Archaeologica Fig. GRAVE NO. XI. the thickness being 0. This was located beneath the left hand on the breast. the legs being bent and contracted at the front until the line of the pelvis (Fig. 3. placed upside down. ˆ The skeletal remains were fairly well preserved.

7).35 m below the surface. The horn was situated 7 cm to the N-NW of the skull.Lıga ˆ 145 Fig. GRAVE NO. The skeletal remains appeared at a depth of 0. 5. almost like bed-posts. The face was turned towards the West.09 m from the feet. The first set was found 0.8).5 cm long with a maximum width of 5.49 m E of the grave. Several ribs were eroded. with the pointed end towards the head.50 m from the skeleton. immediately beneath the ploughing layer. A single posthole was found 0. 24 æ/360 æ N. Grave no. The body was lying on the right side.48 m. both wrists turned towards the claviculae. were surrounding the area of the upper part of the body. Both the proximal and the distal end of the horn were framed by two vertically placed pottery shards.5 cm (Fig. with a small deviation towards the E (the head is towards the N). 8–9 YEARS The outline of this grave pit was visible 0. XI. The set at the head was just 11–12 cm North of this. 4.6. or displaced. The maximum dimensions of the oval pit was 1. both hands bent and pressed to the chest. 14. despite the shallow depth. 6–8 cm in diameter. most prob- . The dead child was placed in flexed position (tightly drawn-up hocker). XI. The orientation of the skeleton is N-S.62 (E-W) m. The only recognizable burial gift was a cattle horn. INFANT II. The skeleton was dug into cultural debris of the Lıga 2 settlement at the inter-strucˆ tural space between Houses 2 and 3. the legs being bent and fully contracted (to the chest) (Fig. A particular aspect is the presence of intrusive human bones in association with the grave.68 and 0.04 (N-S)¿0. The state of preservation of the main part of the bones was rather good. The western set of postholes was 0. The horn was otherwise following the orientation of the skeletal remains. like the upper part of the skull. The burial carried traces of special marking: three pairs of postholes. XI.

0. 5. the head towards N. 6. 40 æ/ 360 æ N. The orientation of the dead was N-S. XI. legs bent and contracted until the line of the pelvis.07–0. The only exception was the phalanges of the left hand and of the left foot.9). GRAVE NO. The body was placed in a flexed position. The face was turned towards the West. hands bent and collected below the sternum so that the underarm of the right hand was perpendicular to the axis of the spinal column. All bones were present and in anatomic order. None of the excavated adult specimens were lacking these bones.10 m from the maxilla.0¿1. 28:10). The pendant was in the middle of the row of dentalium shells. an occurrence of small particles of charcoal was observed around the bones and especially in the area around the sternum when compared with the surrounding soil. 18–19 YEARS These skeletal remains of a young man were discovered 0. which were detached from their original place due to post-depositional disturbances. XI. XI. connecting the top of the skull and the pelvis. the so-called Grandel (Pl. The body was laid to rest on the right side. was a left adult clavicula. with a slight eastern deviation. Grave no.11) in a row and a polished bone pendant (2. ably due to displacement by ploughing (Fig.76 m from the surface. The preservation of the bones was very good.10 m in northwestern direction from the right tibia was the proximal end of an adult radius with totally fused epiphysis.146 Acta Archaeologica Fig. The outline of the burial pit was not clear. albeit it could be recognised through a looser soil structure and a slightly darker coloration in the western periphery of the grave. 0. The burial deposits include 8 dentalium shells (Fig.5 cm) made as an imitation of a red deer tooth. Somewhat higher. . XI. in northwestern direction.10). JUVENILE MALE. following the main orientation line. while the left hand embraced the upper part of the right hand (Fig.7.

5. There is a seeming displacement of the bones of the left leg. The left arm was contracted and the hand placed on the manubrium (the top part of the sternum). child to a lesser degree those of the adult. calves and haunches forming and angle of some 45 æ with 0.80 m below the surface. The child was placed at the right side of the adult. XI. 5. which. which was the northernmost bone belonging to the skeleton of the child.13. 25–30 YEARS & INFANT I.14 m between the heels. The left leg was contracted till the line of the pelvis bones (forming a 90 æ angle with the spinal axis). while the right leg was slightly contracted. GRAVE NO. from below and above. forming a rather tight necklace (Fig. where the distance between the distal end of the femur and the proximal end of the tibia is 0. forming a 135 æ angle with the spinal axis. All bones were well preserved. The grave was discovered 0. One tooth was found close to the left hipbone. The hipbones were found 0. Post-depositional disturbances were also attested through the presence of one metatarsus and . the legs bent. was holding the head of the child. Drawing of Grave no. In a course of decay. XI. the upper part of the body lying on the chest. The legs were bent and originally the knees were pointing upwards.12). The displacement occurred in the process of decay.13–0. found scattered in the area of the mandible and the neck. The adult body was placed in a supine flexed position. XI. The right arm was contracted to the right shoulder. with specification of discovered bones. 14). which was also turned towards the West. 11⁄2 YEARS This is a double grave containing an adult male and a small child (Fig. All shells and the pendant were found under the mandible or between the mandible and atlas.25 m to the SW of the right hipbone. XI. The child was buried in a flexed position on its right side. Also the teeth carry signs of post-depositional disturbances.9. The head of the adult was laid on the right side.8. The hands of the child were placed under the head. the legs had fallen down to the right side. facing the child. when the vertically placed flexed legs had fallen to the right side. the sacrum 0.Lıga ˆ 147 Fig. and West. The bones of the child are disturbed.30 m from each other.15 m. All the principal bones of the skeleton of the adult were found in anatomical order. Cattle horn found in Grave no. 7A–7B. but the bones of the Fig. ADULT MALE.

a dozen shells of the Zebrina Detrita species (as reported by N. For the same adult.10. A massive cattle rib was crossing both the left human ulna and the radius in the medial area.148 Acta Archaeologica Fig. A part of these bones was close to the adult human bones. the majority being of Bos Taurus (Fig. a cattle calcaneaus at the bones of the right foot. 6.. XI. Under the right scapula of the adult. close to the right humerus. 0. in 2001) were collected from Graves nos. 6 and 7. was a dentalium shell. The layer was more compact in the area of the legs and feet of the adult.15). a pathology of the vertebral column was established. Copenhagen & Cambridge universities. At the 2nd lumbar vertebra of the adult. a strong attrition reaching the pulp chamber. on the southern side. which association with the burial is not certain. It is probable that these bones were part of the burial inventory. few phalanges belonging to another adult found close to the child’s right femur.02 m South of the right patella was a flint blade. where each pair of dentalium was separated from the subsequent one by a cardium shell (Fig. although mostly in .78 cm (after the formula of Pearson-Lee) and 174. 0. Yordanov estimates the height of the adult to be between 165. but the high concentration together with the fact that the shards belong to different vessels speak in favour of a built layer. Andreasen. XI. These shells were discovered everywhere in the excavated area. was a 5 cm long flint end-scraper with a retouch at the proximal end and utilisation traces on the lateral edge. 2. The atrition of the masticatory teeth of the adult is determined to be of 3rd degree.7 cm long. Finally. XI.e. Grave no.29 cm (the formula of Trotter-Gleser). The less ordered distribution of the shards does not indicate obvious intentionality. Several animal bones were found in the grave. however. The only burial gift of the child was a rather loose double necklace of shells. manifested in spondylosis and spondilo-chondrosis of the articular surfaces.13).04 m South of the neck vertebrae was a molar of young cattle. i. in fact a mat. Both skeletons were placed on a layer of shards.

namely the burials of the females. The regular distriˆ bution allows the area to be interpreted as a formal burial ground or cemetery.36 m. 6 behind the destroyed Grave no. ˆ observed in the Copper Age cemetery at Targoviste. A similar distance was observed between the Graves nos. 2 m. The humerus was the only bone of Grave no. 7 and 6B of the excavation. the distance between Graves no. Grave no. the graves were organized in both longitudinal and latitudinal rows. The said skeletal remains were presumably discovered in ‘‘Trench II’’ (‘‘Izkop II’’). 1. women being buried in a separate part of the Lıga cemetery. 4 and 5 were forming a frontal line of burials organized along an E-W axis. pers. ˆ and should not be considered as intentional depositions in the graves. 7 being behind Grave no. The distance between the burial pits of Graves nos.. four were . and Grave no. ˆ ˇ also in an old settlement (data. indicating that the western borders of the burial ground are probably somewhere in area of ‘‘Trench II’’. (Similar results are achieved by measuring the distance in a straight line from the humerus to the border of the next grave pit. then. Graves nos. During the reexcavation of this trench. of the double grave). as measured from the centres of the skulls (skull 7B. Thus. Gergov.40 m and 2. orientated E-W and confirming the latitudinal spatial organisation of the burials. 2. The distance between the rows was limited. 4 and 5. so that Grave no. Such interesting division is. and Grave no. 6 and 7 are forming the next row of burials. Angelova 1991). the explanation lies in regulation of burial space between the sexes. yet in a more westerly position than Grave no. made ever more acute since children were interred with adult men.).e. 1 the southernmost. where 11 graves were discovered. 3. 3 with a fully preserved outline). The protrusive position of Grave no. Measuring from the presumed centres of the skulls. These graves were remarkably evenly spaced. Among these. 2 and 5. 3 and 4 were marking the northern edge of the burial ground. 3. 4 and 7. child. 6 (upper row) and 7B (lower row). 2. belonging to the Lıga 1 settlement. 6. CONCLUSIONS All graves were discovered in the southern to southwestern part of the Lıga hillock. 5 was the easternmost grave. Graves nos. XI. The distance between Graves nos. with a predicted number of graves at 25. 4 and 5 was 2..comm. reconstruction of necklace. consciously chosen for the purpose. 2. Possibly. 4. two cranial bones of a child were discovered. 2 demonstrates that the burials were also organised in a longitudinal manner. it is possible to predict that the burial ground originally was occupying an area of 120 m2. following the N-S direction but par- tially staggered. Grave no. XI. One important question remains unsolved. skeletal remains of a child were found (V. the distance between Graves no. 6 and 7 was ca. Despite the fact that several fragments of human bones were discovered in sondages nos. Dentalium and cardium shells discovered in Graves Nos. 5 was slightly behind Grave no.11. The remaining burials were also organised in this manner. during sounding work at the site. 3 and 4 was 3 m. e.36 m was separating the grave pits of Graves nos. Graves nos. Fig. the lower layers. i. Grave no. Nobody realized the significance of the find. 2.g. Only 0. 3.20 m. Except for Grave no.22 m.12.Lıga ˆ 149 Fig. In 1979.

It is uncertain whether the two big postholes found at the rear end of Grave no.13. which temporarily separate the last Copper Age settlement and the establishment of the burial ground. Thus. while the association of the sets of smaller postholes with Grave no. The latter posts. identified as male and four as female. XI. Despite some 400 years. The children are likely of the same sex as the adults they are accompanying. together with neighbouring Graves nos. demonstrate that the place and position of the dead were held in respect. the burial pit of Grave no. thus the boys with men. The latter graves. 3 and 4 were intersecting the outer southern wall of House 2. 2 are related to the burial. the position of the graves was clearly influenced by the structural debris of Lıga ˆ 2. 2 and 5. than the family-groups evident in the highly individual households of this egalitarian society. 7A-B.150 Acta Archaeologica Fig. at Lıga. affiliation with a gender-defined laˆ bour group was more important to stress in death. had the smallest depth . 1 was dug through the outer western wall of House 1. grouped regularly around the skeleton.Graves nos. 5 is certain. lying in two separate clusters. Graves nos. Thus.

The present yearly precipitation in NW Bulgaria is 500–600 mm (as measured during 1950–1990 (GHCN)). 7A–B. Mikov notes that at the ˇ Kubrat (Balbunar) tell in NE Bulgaria. Hence. in the Oaxaca valley. Thus. Through field work in Southern Mexico and southwestern Iran. with 500–700 mm annual rainfall. not exceeding 0. which eventually formed house mounds.Lıga ˆ 151 Fig. where 25 skeletons were found. gender and age (Todorova 2002). Regardless of whether this number was higher or lower at the end of the Copper Age. below the present-day surface. the majority of the burials concentrated in the area with remains of destroyed houses . Kirkby have actually demonstrated that the disintegration process of mud houses has a certain pace and can even be used as a means of dating (Kirkby & Kirkby 1976). mainly the issue of intermural burials versus formal deposition sites (Bojadziev 2001). XI. which were selected for burials. Upper part of Graves nos. The terrain after the abandonment of the Lıga 2 ˆ settlement was sculptured by disintegrating walls of burned houses. house mounds formed of burned daub were distinguishable for several centuries. like Varna and Durankulak.14. & A. the house mounds survive with recognisable profiles for 500–800 years. that differentiation in depth was used to reflect status. V. it can be assumed that the collapsed house walls of the Lıga 2 settlement created prominent ˆ points in the terrain. Lower precipitation rates significantly prolong the period of survival.50 m. The above observations should perhaps be applied to other Copper Age sites where insufficient observations are limiting understanding of the proper relations between graves and dwellings. another factor was ˆ seemingly also playing a part. Thus. It is known from other Copper Age burial grounds. Later impact has levelled the terrain to its present state. M. Thus. the depths of the graves at Lıga bear witˆ ness to the level of the ancient surface and can hardly be considered a reflection of social differences among the dead. In the case of Lıga.

likely a replacement of the deer antlers of the Mesolithic as a most valued agent within the symbolic and ritual sphere (cf. Hodder 1984. Andreasen. Fig. Evidence of interrelatedness between realms of the living and the dead is thus found in SE Europe too. certain elements of the domestic inventory . Director of the Institute of Geology. In the region of Pleven are several outcrops with fossils of different geological periods (Grancharov 1999). it can be argued that the site was used as a formal burial ground and therefore should be separated in time from the settlement. while the dimensions of the dentalium shells found in the grave of the young adult are significantly bigger. bucrania. Based on the ˇ uniformity of the treatment the dead. The child of Grave no. 7B. The relative ages of the dentalium shells actually correspond to those of the accompanying humans: tiny. In the same grave was a cattle horn. where fossilized dentalium (of Miocene date) can be collected on the surface (as reported by N. is an important token in both houses and burials (Hodder 1990. proved a ˆ recent marine origin of the dentalium shells. indeed.. Malacological analysis has.g. 1990). a rudimentary upper canine (caninus) of the male red deer (Cervus elaphus). XI. Despite the temporal congruence between the settlement and the burials. Two graves at Lıga contained necklaces made of ˆ shells. which have been criticized. the red deer is not entirely removed from the symbolic repertoire. Copenhagen and Cambridge universities. a metaphoric house.152 Acta Archaeologica were also used in the graves. Nevertheless. cited by Bojadziev 2001). as seen through their architectural similarity. Connections between houses and burials have lately been attested at Durankulak. XI. Following this line of argument.11. Todorova 2002). 5 acted not only as a marking but also as an enclosure. which were not affected by a long process of fossilization (N. Besides echoing the orientation of the houses. The most readily available deposits are found at the village of Opanets (with a possible Copper Age settlement). which never erupts and thus preserves its pearlwhite colour (Todorova 2002. Zidarov. has also been cultivated in NW Europe for quite some time (Milisauskas 1978. for example. 15). In Grave no. Goodman (Brück & Goodman 1999). The idea of a conceptual affiliation between houses and burials. reaching 30¿9 mm. Both imitation and real teeth are here found in association with male burials (Todorova 2002). Dentalium shells are estimated to be a rather costly item in the graves of Durankulak and Varna (Todorova et al. In addition. 7A-B had a double necklace comprised of dentalium and cardium shells (Fig. 6 combined a bone pendant and dentalium shells (Fig. The burials should be seen as reflections of the same ideas that governed the spatial organisation of the settlement. The practice of imitation is well-known from the Late Copper Age Varna I burials (Todorova 2002). however. albeit in a rather circumstantial manner. They might be collected in the Mediterranean and probably the Black Sea close to Bosporus (Todorova 2002). it is natural to assume that the arrangement of wooden poles around Grave no. 2002. This source lies less than 25 km from Lıga. the cemetery arrives as a virtual Lıga 3 ‘‘settlement’’.11. Grave no. and in the uniform and regulated spacing patterns. XI. by J. similarity being observed in the matching N-S orientation of the dwellings and the burials.15. The tooth is a Grandel. Such translation of the principles ˆ applied for establishing settlements into the sepulchral sphere is challenging strictly functional interpretations of settlement organisation. not fully grown juvenile representatives with the child. 6 was a bone pendant in imitation of a red deer tooth. 187). Tilley 1996). reconstruction of necklace. The necklace of Grave no. Sofia). where the stone architecture of this multi-layered settlement was paralleled in graves covered or framed with stone slabs (Todorova 2002). (Mikov 1927. Brück and M. 185). e. an apparent link exists between the two. 12).

Okrazhna Bolnitsa in Stara Zagora (three skeletons) and Yunatsite at Pazardzik (Bojadziev 2001). Skull deformations in Bulgarian graves should probably also be seen as exceptions. have produced several thousands of graves.). as well as the artificial deformation of the skull. were juvenile (1. with . This is in stark contrast with NE Bulgaria. 186). It was the burial of a female. where large burial grounds. The relative proximity of the burials. Even the cardium shells included in the necklace of the child of Grave no. ˇ there are only two known burial sites. burials of four children were recorded. loosely attributed to the Copper Age (Boev 1959). conducted through the same one-ribbon method (Yordanov & Dimitrova 1989). dug into an area occupied by numerous Mesolithic and Early Neolithic burials. however. Whether of eastern or southern origin. The skeleton was found orientated N-S (163 degrees). If so. The distribution of the phenomenon is tightly clustered in the Near Eastern region. This type of marine shells is more widespread and might have been collected anywhere in the Black Sea and the Mediterranean (Todorova 2002. the practice is interpreted as the result of a need for ethnic markers in an expanding system of communication and exchange (Özbek 2001). The exclusiveness of the young dead person in Grave no.54–1. In Anatolia and other Near Eastern regions.4 cm). where artificial deformation is widespread in the Neolithic. the absence of ˆ burials in the area occupied by the KSB culture remains unresolved. together with the whole grave material. likely later date. The temporal position of the earliest skeletal find of 1926 – the body being placed in a flexed position – is not known with certainty (Gaul 1948). Bojadziev lists nine localities with regular ˇ burial grounds and two sites with possible intra-mural burials in the NE part (including the coastal areas) of Bulgaria (Bojadziev 2001).2¿1. comm. 1. densely dotted with tell settlements. 7A–B. was discovered in 1967 at Lepenski Vir (Letitsa 1972). ˇ ˇ In NW Bulgaria. no apparent differentiation can be noted. these shells are found at considerable distance from their natural source. 1 originated in Eastern Bulgaria. Y. both containing multiple Late Copper Age skeletal remains. Part of the umbo was intentionally ground away and a small hole created for threading. Further samples will be submitted for dating later. In terms of treatment of the dead. allows for a holistic view.56 m tall. so it is possible that the remaining graves (with another orientation) are of a different. graves associated with Copper Age remains were found in the Devetaki Cave.Lıga ˆ 2001). possibly the ‘‘Transional Period’’ (3). so far. 1 is stressed by the ‘‘reverse’’ southern orientation (the head still facing West. Repeated excavations in the cave in the 1990s have produced one more child burial. 3. Hence almost 11% (23) of all skulls studied (mostly fragmented) at Durankulak and attributed to the Middle and Late Copper Age have traces of morphological changes of the one-ribbon circular type (Yordanov & Dimitrova 2002). 14 of the 36 skulls discovered in the burials of the Grave-Pit culture in Bulgaria have traces of changes in the morphology of the skull. Skull deformations gain an even wider distribution in the Early Bronze Age: thus. though) and the comparative richness of the grave gifts. which may even have encompassed hereditary positions. In the Thracian plain. in casu the famous Varna graves. The only striking exception is Grave no. The Yugoslavian data on burials in the area of the KSB culture are even more penurious than in Bulgaria. During an excavation in 1952. the same can be said of the Thracian plain. even though the practice of deformation during the Copper Age was not unusual and commonly applied towards the end of the period (Yordanov & Dimitrova 2002). 40–60 years old and 1. which held pottery typical of the KSB culture (Gergov. which can be associated with the KSB culture. The two AMS-dates (based on bone collagen). as might have been expected from the data in NE Bulgaria. they are contemporary with the nearby Redutite IV settlement. 153 hence the separation of the child compared to the other dead persons discovered at Lıga: no doubt a ˆ testimony to a growing complexity of society. The only grave. pers. Perhaps the child of Grave no. giving a late Copper Age date. are both from this grave. along with smaller deposition sites at the settlements. BURIALS IN THE KSB CULTURE AND THE ‘‘TRANSITIONAL PERIOD’’ Despite the surprising Lıga discovery.

¸ ˜ 57 & 363). Vajsov) (Vajsov 2002. when compared to the sites of the inland (Todorova 1986. as well as Lıga – a northern orientation of the skeletons ˆ dominates. with backwardly crouched legs. Hence. a feature typical of Gumelnita burials. 57. The investigations at Durankulak have demonstrated that throughout the whole Copper Age a northern orientation was dominant. The Lepenski Vir grave was dated on the basis of four vessels characteristic of the KSB culture. Baile Herculane (Nikolova 1999. can be attributed to the latest phase of the culture. Devnya. was almost completely covering the legs. such rules of burial were recorded in the Copper Age burial grounds at Golyamo Delcevo. The . Ovcarovo. 58 & 359 ff. With some reservation. 4200 BC. 58 & 359 ff. as regionally specific elements of the KSB cultural package. the ritual behaviour recorded at Lıga ˆ poses interesting questions about cultural traditions. A flexed position on the right side is prevailing among female burials (Todorova 1986). In Lıga. Radingrad. and others. were even post-mortally bound in an extreme flexed position. 61ff). Or. three single child burials from as many sites. In this light. RELATIONS WITH THE COAST In general.). Similar rites ˆ were employed in the somewhat later burial ground of Draganesti-Olt. 57. as at Durankulak (Todorova 2002.). although the parallel to the East is evocative. The presently available material does not allow any conclusive generalisations concerning the rites of the KSB. 51 graves were discovered at Ostrovul Corbului. ¸ Records of the Romanian burial material related to the KSB culture is also very limited. of novel social groups during the so-called Transitional Period (termed ‘‘Proto-Bronze Age’’ by I. The governing principle in the inland ever since the Neolithic was to bury the dead in a flexed position on the left side. with 9 skeletons (Nikolova 1999.159 ff). with the knees pressed towards the breast. Vadastra. they can be viewed. 2 and 5). The presence of Bodrogkeresztur pottery among the grave goods dates these burials at least 100–200 years later than Grave 1 from Lıga (Forenbaher 1993). one of which was determined to be a male by Yordanov. a big bowl (destroyed prior to the deposition). Two of the bodies (Graves nos. and that the shift from a northern to an eastern orientation (in flexed position on the left side) only took place with the emergence. in flexed positions of varying degrees. even the arrival.154 Acta Archaeologica males are usually found in a stretched supine position (Todorov 1986). In all known burial grounds – Varna. the head orientated towards the East (Todorova & Vajsov 1993). dominantly with bodies in a flexed position on the left side and orientated towards the East (Nikolova 1999. The coastal areas of Bulgaria have been defined as divergent in terms of burial practices. ˜ and Orlea (Letitsa 1972). even though a right hocker has occasionally been applied. One of these vessels. the burials at Lıga might be seen as witnesses to the arˆ rival in the Northwest of people with affiliation to the coastal areas. neutrally. Ostrovul Corbului at the Iron Gates and Draganesti-Olt at Corboaica (Nikolova ¸ ˜ 1999. Almost without exception. 2002). Polyˇ anitsa. 55). The same can be said of two burial grounds. if preferred. despite a temporal difference: the last Copper Age burials in the East being dated to ca. The dead person lay in a prone position and on the face. and Durankulak. the Lıga graves demonstrate close ties with ˆ the burial traditions known in the coastal areas of Bulgaria. all bodies rested on ˆ the right side. all in the NE part of the country (Todorova 1986). the head towards the S.

excluding survey trenches. lies another famous site from the same period known as Redutite. created during seasonal runoff of water.4¿6.90 m wide in the middle part (external .1). etc. ˆ causing severe destruction of the debris of the previous occupational phase. it even followed the orientation of the earlier construction (Pl. which applies the best to a supposed standard. The site of Lıga is situated at the edge of a broad ˆ plateau. Their identification was uncomplicated due to the settlement was burned down.3). most importantly. resembling those of the southern area of Bulgaria (with the impressive tells). since a partly excavated neighbouring house had a similar length (Pl. often painted with graphite and occaionaly with red and yellow pigmens (Pl. The excavation strategy was aimed to concentrate on few areas where the archaeological contexts could be investigated fully and at great detail (Fig. XII.45 m long and 5.5 and 1. As a result. House 1 was discovered almost exactly on top of the house from the previous occupational phase. the estimated internal space being 39–40 m2. So far. Around 4400 BC (calibrated) a new settlement – Lıga 2 – was established at the site. the internally available area 28. 1). In this light. House 2 is perhaps the one. This contained three building horizons of the Copper Age and one of the so-called Transitional Period. It was 8. Level terraces ˆ were created on the remains of the Lıga 1 dwellings. ˆ for tracing movements of peoples and ideas. I. 1). Three dwellings were fully investigated. The archaeological excavations at Lıga were concentrated on the material ˆ vestiges of this settlement. Stones in such configurations obviously belong to structural features. The research objectives for Lıga were to a ˆ high degree dictated by the excavations at Redutite. At the SE corner of the house was part of a regular stone pavement made of water-worn well-sorted cobbles of sandstone and brown flint (Fig.70 m.XII. CONCLUSIONS FACTUAL SUMMARY The archaeological Late Copper age site of Lıga is ˆ situated about one kilometre north of the modern village of Telish in Cherven Briag Municipality. and reddish burned daub clearly outlined the structures. issues such as spatial organisation. displaying a semi-circular or oval pattern.5). 1. External dimensions of House 2 are 7. The orientation of the dwelling was N-S. the internal area being 34. 2). These data were considered a good starting point for building-up a local sequence of land-use at Lıga. I. Nearby. The pottery from the house had dark lustrous surfaces. A different situation presented itself around Telish. in this sharply contrasting the generally light pottery of the following phase. It was 7. At the foot of the site there used to be stream. numerous limestones were discovered.3 m2. The size was 6. The Redutite site is located on the same plateau.1).50¿5.2 m. 195 m above sea level (Fig. and. even when lacking preserved burned daub. the majority of settlement investigations in Western Bulgaria have produced a mass of isolated phenomena. Pleven County (Fig. in fact house foundations. II. supplemented by information from Sadovec-Golemanovo Kale and Pipra sites. 6:1–7). The earliest occupation – Lıga 1 – is datˆ ed to the beginning of the Late Copper Age. duration and causes of abandonment. presently a system of three dams known as the Lake of Gorni Dabnik. revealing the ‘‘dialectics’’ of a Late Copper Age settlement. it has been established that the site was in use several times until the present. Remains of one dwelling were recorded on the southern fringes of the site. This structure was supported by a wattle frame. House 3 was the longest among the investigated houses (Pl. coupled up merely with the help of particular types of artefacts. could be set in a broader temporal and geographical perspective. Traces of this settlement were only established in some parts of the excavated area. In all. The Lıga 1 settlement was abandoned for ˆ reasons as yet unknown. In the northern part of the excavated area.0 m. 20 m high. Towards southwest and northeast the plateau has a wavy appearance.2 km south of the site. with an opportunity to produce and to piece together evidence into coherent historical sequences. The depth of the excavated trenches varied between 0.2 & I. With a slight deviation towards the East. changes in the planning of settlement and its architecture.5 m2. 275 m2 were excavated.6 m long. resting on massive timbers. The hillock chosen for the Lıga ˆ settlement is deliminated by ravines in the south and north.

were found in contemporary houses. kept in the 500–550 m2 unoccupied area. while the oven of the house stood at the northern wall. During the Early Bronze Age. . seven graves have been discovered. questioning established chronology. Working at Lıga. 1900 m2 (Fig. II. view from the East. 50¿55 m. Pottery investigations (Chapters IV & V) demonstrated a great degree of individuality in pottery production. the excavated area was part of a marginal activity zone for a settlement higher up on the plateau.156 Acta Archaeologica Fig. Material recovered from the Lıga site was subjected ˆ to several specialist studies. ˆ lengths). The western part of the Lıga site was left unoccuˆ pied. according to traditional chronology. The ˆ total area with burned remains of buildings extended over ca. In the excavated area alone. found during the excavation. thus perhaps made to protect livestock. as has been established through ˆ drillings. The internally available area was 37. 4000 ˆ BC. the slopes of the hillock were ˆ made steeper by a shallow ditch or trench (0. XII. Another pit. Some materials from Lıga are attributed to the Late ˆ Antiquity.8 m deep). one grave holding remains of two individuals. an arrangement intended to inhibit movement up and down the slopes. At that time. This pit is dated to 875 BC. The abandonment of the Lıga site lasted until ca. The occupational debris of this was partly overlapping with the eastern limits of the Lıga 2 settlement. Sounding of the terrain established that the houses of Lıga 2 were occupying an area of ca. one pit is with certainty attributed to the EBA.1).80 m2. Besides scattered pottery shards. the southern part of the site was se- lected for a cemetery with several burials. Orlea-Sadovec culture. During Lıga 2. The Lıga 2 settlement was abandoned after the conˆ flagration. The houses were orientated N-S. intersecting House 3. Except for House 1. the uncovered remains indicate that usually the entrance was in southern wall. Ceramic sets from widely different periods of the Copper Age. contained vessels of Early Iron age Basarabi culture. The proximity of C-14 and AMS dates available from Redutite and Lıga implies that soon ˆ after the abandonment of the Lıga 2 settlement a new ˆ settlement was established at Redutite – Redutite II.1.

KGK – Kodzadermen˘ ¸ ˇ Gumelnita-Karanovo cultural complex. LN – Late Neolithic.2. this in order to create a historical perspective on a general cultural process. PERSPECTIVES The main challenge of the Lıga project has been to ˆ carry out highly detailed excavations producing a huge data-set. MN – Middle Neolithic. Finally. other fieldwork. Contrary to expectations. Research on ground stone tools (Chapter VIII) shows that these were as important as flint and bone tools. the animal bones (Chapter X) show a stress on sheep/goat but also cattle as being a vital source of subsistence. such a strategy has provided a new basis for understanding daily life in a Late Cop- . Through a context orientated research programme. XII. but powered to become a historical shortcut which – if it had been successful – would have created a totally different European development in the fourth millennium BC (Fig. new standards have been set for future projects in the area. But gradually it was acknowledged that the Copper Age proper held the key to an understanding: a period following upon the Neolithic. The excavations at Lıga were at first regarded as ˆ the crucial bit of evidence. TN – Early Neolithic. very may other studies in and out of Bulgaria were accomplished. In addition. XII. important in understanding past economies.2).Lıga ˆ 157 Fig. when pieced together with regional data – including the neighbouring site of Redutite – would provide data to bridge the ‘‘Gap’’. and studies of the available archaeological data from the Telish region in Northern Bulgaria during the Late Copper Age of the fifth millennium BC.3 tonnes of ceramic sherds were analyzed. ¸ Flint studies (Chapter VII) revealed reliance on both local but also regional sources of flint. Bone artifacts (Chapter IX) demonstrate the amplitude of concepts applied to bone as medium for answering both utilitarian and non-utilitarian demands. Lıga has instead ˆ become a cornerstone anchoring data and studies. not least the still unpublished material from Redutite. Although very time consuming (1. Comparative chronological table. the ephemeral period of transition to the Bronze Age. with maximum focus on details. FN – Final Neolithic. The original aspiration was to arrive at an understanding of the the ‘‘Copper Age Gap’’. for example). analyses. which. KSB Ia – the Krivodol-Salcuta-Bubanj Hum Ia cultural complex.

The high degree of mobility in the Lıga-societies ˆ can even be observed from the flint where a high 18% of the tools are from localities more than 30 km away. By contrast.158 Acta Archaeologica support of this are the few studies on paleoecology related to the Copper Age conducted in Bulgaria so far. instead the settlers were relying on a system of strongholds and refuge places and basing their networking on regionally remote alliances. recognised as the bearers of the KSB-complex (cf. which even encompassed five different types of settlements in the Telish area. around the Polyanitsa Tell in NE Bulgaria (Todorova 1982). also under influence from the KSB-complex. the patterns of settlement in areas dominated by tells. from fortresses to permanent open settlements like Lıga and caves ˆ used only temporarily. 1997). which possessed the operational instruments to organize its members into viable cooperative networks ensuring day-to-day survival. Telish. but the fullest account was achieved in the ˆ layers of Lıga 2. Analyses of 16 copper items from Redutite show that these come from 15 different sources (Pernicka et al. This dependence on fellow members is manifested by the uniform layout of the nucleated settlement. which has also been developed in the present study is that animal husbandry (mainly sheep/goat but also cattle) was increasing in importance over time. led along the Iskar River to the Oeskus (at Gigen. and settlement arrangements they exhibit and stem from a common background. Bigger houses reflect bigger households and are not openly aimed to undermine the communal equality. For instance. determined by passages across the Balkans. Emphasis on geographical setting is clearly demonstrated by the remains of Roman roads. By shifting from the easily tillable plains to exploitation of new and varied environments. to Montana in the West and to Storgozija (Pleven) in the East. In terms of social complexity. They were thus delineating a structure characteristic of much of Europe in the fourth millennium BC and later. for example by various forms of display of graphite painted pottery. palynological evidence collected from Pirin Mountains in South-western Bulgaria (belonging to the KSB area) points towards seasonal upland pasturage beginning in the Copper Age (Stefanova & Bozilova 1995). One of the awls is probably from the Majdanpek-region in Eastern Serbia. and with implications for. e. Animal husbandry would inevitable lead to increased mobility and. the economic orientation. This settlement provided testimony ˆ on a community. Several archaeological periods are represented at Lıga. Sherratt 1980). The contemporary KSB sites are not spaced that densely. sense of territoriality. per Age settlement and – through this – detected and explained the main currents of regional socio-economic development and thereby even larger processes. to a regular practice of transhumance. A point. wholly different requirements were set on these innovative and symbolically intelligent communities. Distribution maps of KSB sites show that these were located on routes of ancient communication. in Roman times (as also today). Higher mobility required a more complex settlement system. and from there on to mighty Philippopolis (Plovdiv) in the southeast (Neikov 2001). From the outside. all structures might well have looked the same: clay houses with dull grey walls likely undecorated. demonstrate close range networking between several coexisting settlements within a distance rarely exceeding five km. but as parallel in nature. resembling most of all the hutments of a military camp. which used the same localities to build their strongholds and road stations in order to protect traffic. Arenas for rivalry and competition – so to say – were created inside the houses.g. from being merely a supplement to agriculture to an equally vital source of subsistence. likely. where the Romans built a bridge across the Danube in 328 AD) in the North and to Serdica (Sofia) in the South. A main achievement of the present study is that such settlement strategies should not be viewed as excluding and opposing each other. was situated at a very cross-roads. which later on. based on. The traditional archaeological approach to the Copper Age in the Balkans views the Krivodol-Salcuta-Bubanj ˘ ¸ Hum (KSB) Ia-complex’s open settlements (in the West) in contrast to the tells in rich plains of the Kodzadermen-Gumelnita-Karanovo VI group (in the ¸ ˇ East). In . as attested through the remains of Late Roman strongholds at Sadovec and Pipra. It has been demonstrated that proliferation of technological variability in pottery production is a reflection of new modes of networking.

eventually also in metallurgy. while the ‘‘Copper Age Gap’’ signals a decline in SouthEastern Europe. Central Europe is seeing marked growth almost everywhere. . Sherratt 1980) was the one factor which first of all provided the higher flexibility of the bearers of the KSB-complex – the last of the Copper Age groups – thus preparing them for the changes that caused the termination of the Copper Age: Likely climatic worsening. likely towards the North. perhaps warfare 159 and even migration along the alliance routes. Significantly.Lıga ˆ Detachment from ground-water agriculture (cf. in the fourth millennium BC. decline in population.

animal bones and stones. Sector 2. 5 – Layer of charcoal. 1 – Layer of compact daub. L3 – Lıga 3 (CA). R – recent ˆ ˆ ˆ ˆ disturbance. . 4 – Mixed artefacts: shards. 3 – Layer with loose particles of daub. 2 – Layer of less compact daub. 6 – Traces of wattle. L2 – Lıga 2 (CA). L4 – Lıga 4 (EBA).PLATES Plate 1. L5 – Lıga 5 (EIA). Plan of archaeological remains.

p – posthole of undetermined date. L3 – Lıga 3 (Late Copper ˆ ˆ ˆ Age). 2 – Layer of less compact daub. later than L1 & L2. LA – Late Antiquity/Lıga 6. . animal bones and stones.Lıga ˆ 161 Plate 2. R – recent disturbance. L2 – Lıga 2 (Late Copper Age). Sector 1. Plan of archaeological remains. L1 – Lıga 1 (Late Copper Age). 6 – remains of oven. 5 – mixed artefacts: shards. 4 – traces of calcinated wood. 3 – Layer with loose particles of daub. 1 – Layer of compact ˆ daub.

5 – layer of grey clay. 12 – posthole. like 3. 18 – remains of lime plastering (floor level of Lıga ˆ 1 structure. post-Lıga 2 in date. 23 – pottery shards. firm. light grey. 6 – layer of compact burned daub. possibly traces of wooden beams. L4 – Bronze Age pit (Lıga 4). but without coarse sand. 9 – like 8. loose. 3 – layer of clay and coarse sand with moderate amounts of organic matter.. 17 – clay loam with high content of lime. including remains of a lime plastered floor destroyed by later construction. grey black. consisting of fill from layer no. 8 mixed with layer no. ˆ ˆ . i. burned daub. 15 – layer no 11 mixed with humus layer (layer no 1). 19 – lime rich layer. animal bones and shards: house debris (note the dashed line which marks the floor level). 13 – ˆ ˆ blackish spots. 2 – layer of naturally deposited pebbles.e. L5 – pit interpreted as ritual and attributed to the Early Iron Age (Lıga 5). 14 – sandy silt loam. grey (together with Layers 2 and 3Ωthe original surface). h2 – older humus layer containing ˆ charcoal. 4 – layer of clay mixed with gravel. light grey. 16– layer of burnt organic matter. Sondage 8A). 1 – humus layer. 7 – like 6. consisting of fill from layers nos. 11. transported clay for house foundations. grey yellow. 8 and 11 mixed with organic matter. but with higher contents of humus. Debris accumulated in this sondage held the most complete information on the earliest settlement. brown reddish. R – Recent disturbance. Profile drawings of the central area of Sector 2 and of the Southern wall of Sondage 8A. dark brown. with small (1–2 mm) particles of charcoal containing finds attributed to Lıga 1. 10 – layer of domestic waste with high contents of ashes. Lıga 1. 21 – layer (pit). brown black. grey whitish. 11 – clay-rich layer. clay rich with high content of organic matter. medium grey. post-Lıga 2 date (indicated ˆ by presence of particles of burnt daub). attributed to Lıga 1. but less compact. therefore interpreted as anthropogenically created. 20 – posthole. 8 – mixed layer of humus.Plate 3. ˆ ST – survey trench 1979. red to orange. medium to light grey. very compact (original surface of the plateau). dark grey. abundant organic matter and lime. 22 – stones. light grey.

and as hand drawing (B). Example of a section plan produced with Total Station (A). . 6A & 6B – mainly House 2. The area includes Sondages 5.Lıga ˆ 163 Plate 4. 7.

x – flint blade. . dashed line – profile balk. Floor level at the E part of House 4 (Sondage 4G). Signaturec: cross – bone.164 Acta Archaeologica Plate 5. right striation – limestone.

Examples of pottery from Lıga 1 settlement (1–7) and pottery recovered from Lıga 2 settlement (8–21). varying provenience. ˆ ˆ .Lıga ˆ 165 Plate 6.

Pottery from House 1.166 Acta Archaeologica Plate 7. .

Pottery from House 2.Lıga ˆ 167 Plate 8. .

Pottery from House 2.168 Acta Archaeologica Plate 9. .

Pottery from House 3.Lıga ˆ 169 Plate 10. .

.170 Acta Archaeologica Plate 11. Pottery from House 3.

1–3 – pottery with incised decoration. 4–17 – pottery with graphite painted decoration. Pottery from House 3.Lıga ˆ 171 Plate 12. .

Comparative arrangement of pottery from Houses 2 & 3. .172 Acta Archaeologica Plate 13.

Lıga ˆ 173 Plate 14. ˆ . Scheme of typological ordering of shapes of vessels discovered in Lıga 2 settlement. Bowls and their derivatives.

Biconic vessels with cylindrical necks.174 Acta Archaeologica Plate 15. ˆ . Scheme of typological ordering of shapes of vessels discovered in Lıga 2 settlement.

13–14 – miniature vessels from the Late Copper Age site at Sadovec-Golemanovo Kale (after Todorova 1992).Lıga ˆ 175 Plate 16. 1–19 – Small and miniature vessels from Lıga 2 settlement (7 – possibly a template for biconic cups. ˆ 26 – vessel rim. 26–29 – pot stands and a lower part of a footed vessel. 6:21). 20–24 – lids. see Pl. 30–32 – clay pans. .

.176 Acta Archaeologica Plate 17. 9 – model of oven. 1 – milk strainer. 12–16 – spindle whorls. 4–6 – clay spoons. 2–3 – vessels with zoomorphic representations. 17–19 – clay beads. 10 contained copper deposits at the bottom). 20–21 – abraded pottery shards. 10–11 fragments of crucibles (no. 7–8 – clay zoomorphic figurines.

.Lıga ˆ 177 Plate 18. ˆ ˆ given here for reference). 4 – 10654. 5 – 2001/127. 3 – 8000. 9 – 4040. 6 – UN005/9A. 12 – 9022. Fragments of anthropomorphic clay representations. all of Lıga 2 settlement. 7 – 9405. 1 – 9024 (internal numbering system of finds at Lıga. 10 – 9005. 11 – 9086. 8 – 2001/4. 2 – 9427.

a – scale applied for fragments. 3 – Late Copper Age houses. ˆ . and 2001/127 are of unknown or uncertain contexts. 5 – graves. their position is only specified as to sondage. 6 – destructions of post-Copper Age date. Distribution chart of fragments of anthropomorphic representations (1) and small table-like devices (2). Weak provenience has been established for items nos. Numbers in white correspond to house numbering. 4 – place of oven inside Lıga 2 houses. Numbering stems from the system applied during excavations. Fragments nos. 14000. 2000/15 & UN009/9B. b – scale applied for the background plan. UN005/9A. therefore.Plate 19.

nos.Lıga ˆ 179 Plate 20. 3 – 2001/250. 2 – 9001. 1 & 2 of Lıga 2 settlement. no. 3 – of Lıga 1 settlement. – No. 1 – ˆ ˆ 42026 (internal numbering system of finds at Lıga). Representations of table-like devices and fragments of such. ˆ .

Fragments of representations of table-like devices. 2 – 10659. 3 – 14000. – No. ˆ . 4 – 2000/15. 1 – 4625 (internal numbering system of finds at ˆ Lıga). all of Lıga 2 settlement.180 Acta Archaeologica Plate 21. 5 – 9028.

including scrapers (1–6. Flake and blade tools. knives (9. .Lıga ˆ 181 Plate 22. 8). 10–11) & retouched crested blade (knife?) (12). scraper with concave working edge (7).

Stone tools: digging implement (?) (19). . sickle-blades with gloss (2–5). exhausted core (9). Flint (1–18) and stone tools (19–20). and rubbing stone (20). borers (6–8). knives (10–14). including heavy pointed tool (a large borer?) (1). biface knife (17). part of a pointed biface (16).182 Acta Archaeologica Plate 23. and an arrow head (18). scraper (15).

. sling stone (7) and ‘‘sling stone’’ of clay (8). pounders (5–6).Lıga ˆ 183 Plate 24. stone hammers (2–4). Items of stone (1–6) and clay (8). including hammerstone (1).

adze (2). and chisel (9).184 Acta Archaeologica Plate 25. Some ground stone tools. . different types of axes (3–8). including combination tool (1).

unfinished object/debitage on antler tine ˆ (2). flat anthropomorphic figurine (6). and. Bevel-edged tools on long bone splinter (1) and cattle ulna (4). . pointed tool on long bone splinter (3).Lıga ˆ 185 Plate 26. side-scraping tool on boar’s tusk (5). Lıga 1 – Various objects.

Pointed tools on metapodium of small (1–2) and large ungulates (7. and. 5).186 Acta Archaeologica Plate 27. haft for metal tool on metatarsus of small ungulate (6). manufacture waste from production of pointed tool on metapodium of small ungulate (4). Lıga 2 – Various tools. pointed tools on long bone splinters ˆ (3. 9). . antler haft/sleeve (8).

palmar flattened phalanxes of small ungulates (6–8. side-flattened sheep (3–5). ˆ and. imitation of red-deer canine bead made on long bone splinter. Prismatic figurines of pig metapodium (1–2). Lıga 2 and 3 – Non-utilitarian finds and body ornaments. astragals with (3. . cattle (12). unidentified worked bone object. 4 (11). possibly manufacture waste from production of flat figurine (14). from Grave no. unworked incisivus of large ungulate (9). 6 (10). decorated pectoral on rib.Lıga ˆ 187 Plate 28. 5) or without (4. 12) incised decoration or stringing hole (3). from Grave no. 13).

Distribution of graves in Sector 2.Plate 29. .

University of Ghana. eds. W. C. ¨ ` ˆ Actes du Symposium consacre aux problemes du Neolithique europeen.. 240–247. Vq. R.. D.. Alexandrov. Bruck. Alfkraneqoc. M. `. s. Y. J. University of Cambridge.A. 1959: Palfoansqopolodixni pqotxcaniÄ c B{ldaqiÄ. UCL Press. 19–48. De Laet. Fire in Archaeology.. A. Bucuresti. J.E. 1961a: Chronologie relative du Neolithique du Bas ´ Danube. Arnold. Teil ¨ 1. World Archaeology... S.1988. Making Places in the Prehistoric World.. Thomas. pp. pp.. Avramova 1992/Acqamoca. Hiller. ´ ` ´ ´ Prague-Liblice-Brno 5–12 octobre 1959.GENERAL BIBLIOGRAPHY Alexandrov 1992/Alfkraneqoc. pp. Bailey. J. `. Angelova. 389–404.. doe... RouiÄ. ¨ eds. Bejlekchi 1978/Bfjlfkxi. 94–111. a la lumiere des nouvelles fouilles faites en Roumanie. 1991: A Chalcolithic Cemetry near the Town of Tarˆ goviste. 1990: The Living Houses: Signifying Continuity. Vosniwa. . ´ Connections and Interpretation.. Lichardus. 385– 395. AqvfolodiÄ.. 66. Rflizf os k{rnasa kamfnno-mfena fpova i sqakijrki ktlsoc wfns{q (III-I vilÄeolfsif pq.. M. D. Praha. D. 94: 2. Kiyinfc.. Themes in Settlement Archaeology. Papers from a session held at the European Association of Archaeologists. Praha. London: Routledge. Bailey. Cambridge University Press. 3rd edition. 11–12. pp.. D. A Laboratory and Field Manual. R.1 Text. ¸ ˘ Boev 1959/Bofc. Prehistory Press.. 1961c: Contributii la problemele neoliticului in Romin¸ ia in lumina noilor cercetari. M. 1990: The Later Aeneolithic in Southeastern Europe. Budapest. International Series 1089.. 1999: Introduction: themes for a critical ¨ archaeology of prehistoric settlement. Prague-Liblice-Brno 5–12 octobre 1959. B. pp. pp. Making Places in the Pre¨ historic World. 38–46. 1992: `doeinrkaÄ pfzfqa c Wfnsqal}n|v Qoeopav. M. H. Angelov 1958/Andfloc N. 249–254. Bonev & Aleksandrov 1996/Bonfc.J. Taylor & Francis Ltd. Bruck. Bokonyi. 174– 191. ed.R.. Berciu D. Prehistoric Bulgaria. pp.. 1999: What is a tell? Settlement in the fifth millennium Bulgaria. Monographs in World Archaeology No. vol. Saarbrucker Beitrage zur Altertumskunde 55. Sudia Praehistorica. I. pp. Darvill. Archaeolingua.. UCL Press. F. D. 1961: Qabosilniwa ha plorki korsni ieoli c rfliznasa modila pqi r. M.).. Studia Praehistorica. E. T. Linford. 1997: Tierknochenfunde. De Laet. Series Minor 7. Unpublished doctoral thesis.. pp.. Bailey.. 1–19. Sixth Annual Meeting in Lisbon 2000. 2000: Balkan prehistory: exclusion. incorporation and identity. Die Ausgrabungen im Sudsektor ¨ 1984–1992. 1–2. Bonn: Habelt..... L.. 1987: Human Osteology. I. Bruck.. D. N.. Oxford: Oxbow. 1985: Ceramic Theory and Social Process.. 1996: The life. AqvfolodiÄ. pp. ed. S{qnocrko. 1996: Badaxina. 3–4.. AqvfolodiÄ. Goodman. ¨ ¨ 101–105. D. 1961b: Les nouvelles fouilles de Salcuta (Roumanie) et ˘ ¸ le probleme des groupes Bubanj (Yougoslavie) et Krivodol (Bul` garie). pp. Monsana. pp.. Vosniwa. Winter. Bailey. 1994: Reading Prehistoric Figurines as Individuals. pp.G.. vol.. L’Europe a la fin de l’age de la pierre. eds.. 5–12 octobre 1959. V. The social Archaeology of Houses. Pqoblfmi.. times and works of House 59.. eds. 34–38.. L’Europe a la fin de l’age de la ¨ ` ˆ pierre.. Proceedings of the Prehistoric Society. ¨ ¨ Nikolov. Bohm. J. eds.. 3–4. P. XLII. Bailey. Bartosiewich. Actes du Symposium consacre aux problemes du Neolithique euro´ ` ´ peen.. pp. 1994: Abrol sna vqonolodiÄ ˇ i pfqioeihawiÄ na b{ldaqrkasa pqairsoqiÄ. pp. eds. Bojadziev 2001/BoÄegifc. Tell Ovcaˇ rovo. 2. E.A. 1996: The Early Bronze Age in Western Bulgaria: Periodization and Cultural Definition. Cambridge. 11-12. Angelov 1961/Andfloc N. 101–124. 1992: O ktl}stqnoj vaqaksfqirsikf komplfkra «OqlÄ – Raeocfw».11. Salzburg-Sofia. 1958: Rflizna modila pqi r.. 22. J.. Goodman. 385–405. I. J. 2001: Podqfbalna pqaksika ˇ intra muros pqfh nfolisa i valkolisa c b{ldaqrkisf hfmi: obixaj ili ihkl xfnif. kn.. Bojadziev 1994/BoÄegifc.W. Themes in Settlement Archaeology. pp. S. J. American Journal of Archaeology. 321– 331. De Laet. Bankoff.. 2001: Historical-Archaeological Investigations at the Frederiksgave Plantation. S. Neolithic houses in Northwest Europe and Beyond. pp. Bd. 358–361. ` ` Bohm.. 1959: Hlasno r{kqocizf os Vosniwa. Panayotov. Angelov 1959/Andfloc N. Edinburgh: Edinburgh University Press... Goodman. Missouri Archaeological Society.. D. Die Kupferzeit als historiche Epoche: ˇ Symposium Saarbrucken und Otzenhausen 6. Sofia. 1. J. D... D. pp. Bailey. eds. pp. Berciu. D. ed.. University of Cambridge.M.. eds. NBT. Columbia. 1997: Cult objects of the Neolithic Lengyel Culture. 253–270. Praha.. Carlton.. 63–81. S. Karanovo. Canti. R.A.. kn. pp. 2002: Some comments on the Technology of Prehistoric Pottery in the Western Balkans in the Light of Ethnoarchaeological Research. Rboqnik ihrlfecaniÄ c xfrs na akae. S. Gheorghiu. Legon. Samson. pp. 125– ´ 135.. Doeiynik na Efpaqsamfns AqvfolodiÄ. 1961: L’Europe a la fin de l’age de la ¨ ` ˆ pierre: Actes du Symposium consacre aux problemes du Neolithique euro´ ` ´ peen. 1978: Qannij ^nfolis nihoc}fc Pqtsa i EtnaÄ.Efxfc. 46–54.–13. Prague-Liblice-Brno. Berciu. Banffy. 16–24.. Bohm. S. AqvfolodiÄ. Ghana: A Study of Slavery and Plantation Life on a 19th Century Danish Plantation on the Gold Coast... Sofia. Bass. ´ Bredwa-Mensah. 25:3. RouiÄ. 143–156. 2001: The Effects of Fire on Archaeological Soils and Sediments: Temperature and Colour Relationships.

. 1986: Tripods. 41–129. pp. ed. Settlement patterns between the Alps and the Black Sea 5th to 2nd Millennium B. Qaeomiqrko. Garasanin. XXI. Gergov 1994/Dfqdoc C. FsnodqauiÄ na B{ldaqiÄ.. R. de Barros. 1997: Ironworking and its Cultural Context. G.. 109–115.n. Early symbolic systems of communication in Southeast Europe. 3.. ˇ Cochadziev.. Sofia. ed.. Fletcher. BAR S1139. Renfrew et al. Craig. 198–207. Masfqialna ktlstqa. RouiÄ. Collins. Q... Journal of Human Evolution 28. Georgieva 1995a/Dfoqdifca. Milano: Universita degli studi. pp. pp. pp. ed.. Topography. Nfdocanwi. 1987: Mfeni navoeki os pqairsoqixfrkoso rflizf c mfrsnorssa Qfetsisf pqi Sfliy.S... S. Dunbar. B{ldaqrka AkaefmiÄ na Natkisf... Doeiynik na ˘ RouiirkiÄ Tnicfqrisfs «Rc.pq. Nikolova. ca. Antiquity 67. Fortification and Building Techniques. S. 1979: Fhfqo. 154–166.. R.. pp. B. 303– 306. R.. 1. David. 36–55. Early Symbolic Systems of Communication in Southeast Europe.. Klimfns Ovqierki». Sudia Praehistorica. pp. E. Dzhanfezova. 1991: Obqfeni Ämi c SqakiÄ (kqaÄ na II–I vil. L.. Dunbar.190 Acta Archaeologica Forenbaher. 443-446. Archaeology. and the potential of archaeology. E. 18. Annales. M.H.). 500–700.. Jahrgang.A. Heft 3/4. Doeiynik na Efpaqsamfns AqvfolodiÄ.. ed. pp. Cqawa. 44–48.. The Fourth Millennium B.... B. E. 97–109.. ˇ Cochadziev. Pearce. AqvfolodiÄ. Cfliko S{qnaco. 1983: Sipocf giliza. ed. 251–265.. C. Proceedings of the International Symposium Nessebur. Georgiev & Angelov 1957/Dfoqdifc. Nis. N.. International Series 1139. Cambridge University Press. 1992a: Eoirsoqixfrkof porflfnif Sfliy – Qfetsisf.. 2003: ‘‘Milk jugs’’ and other myths of the Copper Age of Central Europe. ˇ Georgieva. ˇ Cochadziev. 11–12. Kramer. pp.. Qannobqonhocoso rflizsf. 2001/Xovaegifc... 1997: Rlasino – pqairˇ soqixfrki rfliza. 1976: Zur Chronologischen und Kulturellen Werˇ tung der Bubanj-Funde. N.. Georgiev et al. Dennell. Typology and Comments on their Ornamentation. pp.. R.. 1993: Radiocarbon dates and absolute chronology of the central European Early Bronze Age.C. R. . 1995b: The Settlement at Galatin-Cukata. Andfloc. Vogel. Harvard University Press.S. 1979: Pqairsoqixfrki navoeki os pfzfqasa pqi r. XXVIII: 4. IhcfrsiÄ na mthfisf os Rfcfqohapaena B{ldaqiÄ....W. Q. M. RouiÄ. AqvfolodiÄ. Mfqpfqs. J. M. 1992b: Dlinfn olsaq os pqairsoqixfrkoso rflizf pqi Sfliy. RouiÄ.. 1– 15. P. 1981: The Vinca culture of South-East Europe: studies in ˇ chronology. Verona: Museo cinico di storia naturale.. Encyclopaedia of Precolonial Africa. RouiÄ. R.. pp. Garasanin. pp.. s. Aspes. 2003a: Settlement Pattern During the Neolithic ˇ and Copper Age in Struma Valley. vol. 347– 358. vol 1. Archaologisches ¨ ¨ Korrespondenzblatt 24 (3). Georgieva.. 1979: Pqinor k{m opohnacanf cieociÄ r{rsac na pqacokqilasa uatna c qajona na Plfcfnrki okp{d. London Routledge. F. pp. Faber and Faber.. M. Oxford. 277–292. pp. Knapp. Mtrflifco. 1996: Grooming. Cambridge University Press. Plfcfnrki okq{d.. Eimisqoc. B. 2003b: Vorschriftliche Zeichen aus dem Fruhˇ ¨ chalkolithikum in Westbulgarien. Nocof c rocfsrkoj aqvfolodii... Georgieva. 26–31. 2001: Cakrfco – pqairˇ soqixfrki rfliza. Symposium. C. Cambridge World Archaeology. Jahr.. Garasanin. Georgieva 1983/Dfoqdifca. Early symbolic systems of communication in Southeast Europe. economy and society. pp. 1992: Time perspectivism. Cambridge. P. BAR S1139. Cqawa. P. European Journal of Archaeology. 3. M. 28–30 August 1992. Chernysh 1965/Xfqn|y.. 1965: Dlinobisn|f giliza ktl}stq| Dtmflniwa c nignfm Poetnac}f. RouiÄ. 84–86. Jahrbuch des Romisch-Germanischen Zen¨ tralmuseum Mainz. T. Dimitrov 1979/Eimisqoc. 2001: The Making of the Slavs. D. 235–256. Elster. 87–91.. 1994: Pqairsoqixfrkoso rflizf Sfliy – Qfetsisf i pqoblfma ha pqfvoea mfget fnfolisa i bqonhocasa fpova c B{ldaqiÄ. Gergov 1979/Dfqdoc C. Gergov 1992a/Dfqdoc C. ed. A.. P. J. Annnales. 6.. pp.. Germania. Verona – Lazise 1992. and ethnohistory. 26. 1948: The Neolithic period in Bulgaria. Nikolova. 1983: Les sites archeologiques Bubanj et Velika Humska ˇ ´ ˇ Cuka. pp. P. Chapman. Taylor. IhcfrsiÄ na AqvfolodixfrkiÄ inrsists. P. pp. Webley. 1957: Ausgrabungen in Bubanj bei Nis (Serbisches ˇ ˇ Moravagebiet). XXXIII: 1. pp. Chapman. Oxford: British Archaeological Reports.f. N. Plfcfnrki okq{d. 1993. J. L. 2001: Ethnoarchaeology in Action.. 1993: Galatin culture. 35. A.. ` pp. 86. Gaul. Figler. Cosack. 113–118. pp. Gergov 1992b/Dfqdoc C. History and Archaeology of the Lower Danube Region. Morkca.R. pp.. Gossip and the Evolution of Language. Oxford. ed. Chapman. 5–25.3. pp. 319–323. Higs. Catalogue.. II.. University Press. pp. NBT.. F. 1997/Xovaegifc. 1995: Neocortex size and group size in primates: a test of the hypothesis. Peabody Museum of Harvard University. Patay.. 1975: Prehistoric settlement and land use in southern Bulgaria. Gergov 1987/Dfqdoc C. 2003: Neolithic Pintaderas in Bulgaria.. Paleoeconomy.. 2000: Fragmentation in archaeology. Curta.. Walnut Creek. 1994: Vorgeschichtliche Feuerstulpen. S. Sofia. R. Nikolova. O. 193–211. vol 1. and Stands: A Fragmentary Collection of Social Ceramics. D.. ed. Kasinxaqoc..C. 218–220. IhcfrsiÄ na mthfisf os Rfcfqohapaena B{ldaqiÄ. ˇ Cochadziev. E. J. pp 303–344. pp. Cqawa. pp. IhcfrsiÄ na mthfisf os Rfcfqohapaena B{ldaqiÄ. 35– 148. 35–49. 287– 296. RouiÄ. 97–108. L. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. Plastic Vessels. 1986. D. 1995a: Pqairsoqixfrkoso rflizf pqi r. 1957: Qahkopki c rfliznasa modila eo Qtrf pqfh 1950-1953. ed. J. Georgieva 1991/Dfoqdifca.. Cfliko S{qnaco. 1979/Dfoqdifc.. R.

Univerisity of Michigan. H. ed. part 2..V. Lyngstrøm. Maritsa Project. Gorsdorf. 10. Gimbutas. pp. & Kirkby. Mikov 1966/Mikoc. Katincarov et al. W. C. _nawisf (Pahaqegiyko)..worldclimate. Oxford: Blackwell.A. G. Gergov 2000/Dfqdoc C. pp. 83–94. pp. A. Kuzmanov. Gosselain. 51–68. M. 1990: The Domestication of Europe: structure and contingency in Neolithic societies. L. Issar. 11–20. New York. pp. C. I. ¨ ¨ Mainz. Early Symbolic Systems for Communication in Southeast Europe. Transylvania and Moldavia. Hodges. 1992: Elements for an anthropology of technology. London: Hudson & Themes. Ann Arbor 88. Renfrew et al. Publications of the Archaeological Institute of Northern Greece. M. Lazarovici. 1. 1984: Are Emic Types Relevant to Archaeology? Ethnohistory 31(2).. H.. B{ldaqrka akaefmiÄ na natkisf. Graves. 1. ed. Balbtnaq. vol.. Hansen. RouiÄ. M. 1997: A Palaeobotanical Investigation in Harmanli Region.... Eurasia Antiqua. 1997: Prehistoric Pottery for the Archaeologist. B. C. vol.. Longacre.. 2. Qahkopki i pqotxcaniÄ.L... Grammenos. pp.. RouiÄ. 101–105. XXIX.. Belgrade. S.. 1. pp. M. Papers from a session held at the European Association of Archaeologists. 209–239. XXI. ¨ 191 Hvass. 2 bd. Duckworth. Berliner C-14 Datierungen von bulgarischen archaologischen Fundplatzen. 112–143. Geoarchaeology. Cambridge... ¨ 1992: Die spatantiken befestigungen von Sadovec (Bulgarien): ¨ Ergebnisse der deutsch-bulgarisch-osterreichischen Ausgrab¨ ungen 1934–1937. 1966: Sfvnika na kfqamixnoso pqoihcoersco pqfh pqairsoqixfrkasa fpova c B{ldaqiÄ.. IhcfrsiÄ na aqvfolodixfrkiÄ inrsists. 1995: Rflizna modila pqi r. Earth Science and the Past... Mikov 1948/Mikoc. Matsanova 2000/Mawanoca. Siˇ soc.. Bulgaria. Lazarova. Syna. Riqakoca. KUML.. 230–253. M. 1976: Beitrage zur regionalen und chronologischen Gliederung ¨ ¨ der alteren Hallstattzeit an der Unteren Donau. 1961: Ungdommelige oldtidshuse. 2nd edition. Specialer fra Vandkunsten 1999–2003. Sofia.. Recent Research in the Prehistory of the Balkans.. Nikolva. G. ed. 1985: Hodde. pp.. W. B.. SqakiÄ i r{rfenisf qajoni pqfh nfolisa i valkolisa. VII. Pottery firing temperatures in archaeology: What for? Journal of Archaeological Science. 1986.. 1976: Geomorphic processes and the surface survey of archaeological sites in semi-arid areas. Gimbutas. Shackley M. C. M. Reports of Prehistoric Research Projects. 201–219. ed.. 1.. O. 1992: Die lokale Gefasskeramik. D. 1986/Dfqdoc C. Symposium. Gheorghiu. Catalogue. C. J.. RouiÄ. Teil 1 (text) & 2. Mikov & Dzambazov 1960/Mikoc. nos. pp.. New York. ´ Archaeology of Eastern Serbia.. A. Pahaqegiyko..: Peabody Museum. D. Sofia. 1996: A dwelling of Telish IV. Davidson. B. Gimbutas.Lıga ˆ Gergov. Hodder. Hayden. 19:3. Kaqanocrki konufqfnwii ha pqairsoqiÄsa na Balkanisf... Egambahoc. vol. 3500–2000 BC.. Sfliy. V. pp. pp. L. 1992: Bonfire of the enquiries. 236–284. 2000: Insqamtqalni «podqfbfniÄ» os k{rniÄ valkolis c rfliznasa modila pqi _nawisf. Woods. pp. Ceramics and Man. 1991: Pottery Production and Distribution among the Kalinga: A Study of Household and Regional Organization and Differentiation. Ceramic Ethnoarchaeology. pp. Munchner Beitrage zur Vor. 211–221. København: Insttitut for Arkæologi og Etnologi. C. Ideology. Bonn. Early Bronze Age Settlement Patterns in the Balkans (ca. D. eds. I. pp.. 1995/Kasinxaqoc. 2003: Digital ReKonstruktion.. A.. Q. 1948: Pqfeirsoqixfrkoso rflizf eo Kqicoeol. Et vestjysk landsbysamfund fra ældre jernalder.A. S... Mass.. Uenze.. Cqaxanrko.S. Beograd. N. N. GHCN – www. pp.. pp. Lazic. 1965: Aspects of pottery in the temperate Europe before the Roman Empire.. C.. Kempton. Kirkby. Nr. women and men in the European Neolithic. Lazic & Sladic 1997/Lahiå.. Field-report.. houses. M. Sixth Annual Meeting in Lisbon 2000. RouiÄ... M. B. pp.. 1970. Academic Press. 1972: Dqob Ralktèa ktlstqf ra Lfpfnrkod Ciqa. 243–259. I. Munchen: Beck. RouiÄ. 1996: Zur Absolute Chronologie der ¨ ˇ bulgarischen Urgeschichte.. Stefanova.. 105–174. Aarhus. ¨ Larsen. 1974: The Gods and Goddesses of Old Europe: Myths and Cult Images. Gimbutas.. 1960: ˇ Efcfsaykasa pfzfqa. eds. 4. ed. N. F. Matson.. Storgaard.G. Vol. Thessaloniki. pp. M.. International Hydrology Series. Mikov 1927/Mikoc. P. Lfsiwa. Plfcfnrki okq{d. J. ¨ ¨ ¨ 43.. 309–322. Tucson: University of Arizona. Bojadziev. Gibson.. A. International Series 1089. 1981: The folk classification of ceramics: a study of cognitive prototypes. 117–126. 1926/1927. Cambridge. 114–123. Mawanoca. Grancharov. Miller. R. I.. 163–210. Starinar. International Series 1139. Adaso i Eior. 2003: Earlier Chalcolithic Decorated Pottery from Plovdiv-Yasa Tepe Tell. M.. 1997: Fnfolisrko ´ ´ narfäf t Ykoeqinom poät koe Kãagfcwa. Hansel. 1927: Rfliznasa modila pqi r. Power and Prehistory. M.R. Lemonnier. København.. H. Fire in Archaeology. pp.J. Arkæologiske Studier. eds. 225–301..com Gheorghiu. London: Thames & Hudson. B. 1... Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. Mfqpfqs.. Hodder. 2–4. A. Dawoc. Vol. ed. D. pp. E. Lazarovici. G.A. O. calibrated dates). 1999: Historical Museum – Pleven. 369-386. Aciloca. Gergov et al. IhcfrsiÄ na mthfisf os Rfcfqohapaena B{ldaqiÄ. 79–92. 2002: Fire and Air Draught: Experimenting the Chalcolithic Pyroinstruments.R. 2003: Climate Changes during the Holocene and their Impact on Hydrological systems.. pp. 1986: Kqfm{xni oq{eiÄ os pqairsoqixfrkoso rflizf c mfrsnorssa Qfetsisf pqi r. M. 1984: Burials. 1956: The Prehistory of Eastern Europe.. C. IhcfrsiÄ na BaldaqrkiÄ aqvfolodixfrki inrsists. ed. Tilley. 1986: Mythical Imagery of Sitagroi Society. 2000: Geological formation of the area around Telish. . Katsarov. Rlaeiå. 1989: The Language of the Goddess. I. D. London: Leicester University Press. SqakiÄ i r{rfenisf ˘ qaioni pqfh nfolisa i valkolisa. Anthropological Papers. 243–244. 35–44. 2003: The Neo-Eneolithic Architecture in Banat. Hansen. 2000: Kfqamixni rsastfski na rfeÄzi bodini os Sfliy – Qfetsisf. 3.M. pp. Letitsa 1972.und Fruhgeschichte.

B. pp. New York: Aldine de Gruyter. Kennard R. kn.. 313–330. Leonardsen. 1992: PfqioeihawiÄ na nfolisnisf ktlstqisf c Rfcfqna B{ldaqiÄ. J. Current Anthropology... 1.. 106–137.. 1962: Floor area and settlement population. vol. 105. S. Milwaukee Archaeological Research Laboratory. Plfcfn. 28:5. S. 2.. ¨ Schwarzberg.. M. 1978: European Prehistory. RocfsrkaÄ aqvfolodiÄ. Tyres. ed. Bukuresti. F.. Sherratt. Kqadtâfcaw. eds. AqvfolodiÄ. W. pp. A. P. I. ¸ ¸ Rye. 2–4.D. 1963: PamÄsniki ktl}stq| ltnfjno-lfnsoxnoj kfqamiki na sfqisoqii RRRQ.M.. M.. pp. 1997: Ceramic Surface Treatment and Abrasion Resistance: An Experimental Study. BAR International Series 791.html Mitova-Dzonova 1979/Misoca-Egonoca. BAR S1139. 1979: Aqvfoloˇ dixfrki pamfsniwi c Plfcfnrki okq{d. Nikolov 1968/Nikoloc. Nikolov 1970/Nikoloc. Sherratt. 5– 10. Naroll. Rapp. Renfrew. Oxford. 1975: Eca podqfbfniÄ lisfjzikocmfsalltqdoc. B. 2001: Pqfei 7000 doeini i rlfe soca – r. New York: Plenum. B. Kqaskif roobzfniÄ Inrsistsa aqvfolodii AN RRRQ. Paleorient: revue interdisciplinaire de prehistoire et de protohistoire ´ ´ de l’Asie du Sud-Ouest. Morkca. Gimbutas. pp. M. Early symbolic systems of communication in Southeast Europe. Butts.. Rumanien.. Vince. Nottingham... 1976: Keeping Your Temper Under Control: Materials and Manufacture of Papuan Pottery. Pasek 1965/Parfk. American Antiquity.. J.. Qae Eqadorlaca Rqfâocixa na irsqagicaãt pqairsoqiâf Wfnsqalnod Balkana. Thuesen. I. R. .. 18. 16:2. LXXVII. pp. 595–619. With contributions by Mazura... Stanko 1997/Rsanko et al. pp. Pernicka.. B1–11. Rehhoff. I. Nikolov 1961/Nikoloc. Skibo. 1993: Pottery in archaeology. A. Journal of Archaeological Science 24. S. 105–111. Berlin (Springer). Vol.. Periodization. ¨ 1996. Cqawa. 1996: Material/Culture: Can the Farmer and the Cowman Still Be Friends? Kingery.. M. 1984: Kqicoeol-eqfcni ktlstqi. Nikolov 1975/Nikoloc. 95–128. Bell Beakers of the Western Mediterranean.uwm. B. Akkermans P. Clark. Chronology and Cultural Development in the Final Copper and Early Bronza Age (Fourth and Third Millenia BC).C. P.. pp. J. Petkov 1964/Qfskoc. L. Nikolova. I. I. Chicago. M. 1968: Pqairsoqixfrkoso rflizf pqi r. Schiffer. Washington: Smithsonian Institution Press. vol. & Schuster.. Nikolov 1974/Nikoloc.. 1997: Prehistoric copper in Bulgaria. Anthropology and Physical Anthropolgy in Oceania 11(2). Begemann.D.. Parts 2–3.. M. 1980: Water. L. Dqaefyniwa... Seferiades. 1995. 1. Monumenta Archaeologica 13. 48–60. University of Wisconsin.. Moscow. 1959: Archaeology of the USSR. ed. H. Series 287. Sidera. Rice. Prehistory Foundation and Agatho Publishers. 112–119.. J.. F. 311–317.192 Acta Archaeologica Pleinerova. L... Mainz am Rhein. Cambridge. I. & Elster. B. ed. RouiÄ. T. AqvfolodiÄ. Early Bronze Age Settlement Patterns in the Balkans (ca. 56–67. E.. Ktàc. Morkca.G. C. pp. http:// www. 1987: Pottery Analysis: A Sourcebook. 4. Nos.. Pernicheva 2002/Pfqnixfca. Plfcfnrko. Orton. B. 1. H. M. 11–23. pp.S. Skibo. Kuleff. som 1... P. E. Elson. Milwaukee. Shilov 1975/Yiloc. c|p.. IhcfrsiÄ na mthfisf os Rfcfqohapaena B{ldaqiÄ. Schmitt-Strecker. 587–589.. Poulter. H. 1. 1987: Cups That Cheered: The Introduction of Alcohol to Prehistoric Europe. 1975: Haminfw. 2002: RfeÄzi gfnrki uidtqki os valkolisnoso rflizf Okol Dlaca (DnilÄnf). A Prehistoric Village in Northeast Greece. RouiÄ.... pp. Causes and Consequences of Milisauskas. ˘ Neikov. Todorova. 1974: Dqaefyniwa. S.. Waldren W. Paris. 1. RouiÄ.C.B. na sfqisoqii Moleacii. Nikolova. band 77. Rouijrki okq{d. 3.. pp.... AqvfolodiÄ.. AqvfolodiÄ. 1997: Rapport d’etude de l’assemblage osseux de Drama ´ ´ (Bulgarie). 19–27.. E.. 51–53.I. pp.edu/Dept/ArchLab/experimental/pitfiring_ 2003. Cambridge manuals in archaeology. Learning from Things: Method and Theory of Material Culture Studies. A. B. pp. pp. eds.. 2002: Archaeomineralogy. University of Chicago Press. 1983: The Eneolithic period in Bulgaria and its European Context.. New York: Academic Press. Eurasia Antiqua: Zeitschrift fur Archaologie. Its composition and provenance. ed. soil and seasonality in early cereal cultivation. Rcoe aqvfolodixfrkiv irsoxnikoc RRRQ. 1970: Ieolnasa plarsika os r. Sherratt. Rouijrko. bd.~. Nikolov 1984/Nikoloc. Skibo. D{l{bocwi. ¨ ¨ Mainz am Rhein. 2003: Pit Firing. C. N. Nikolov 1992/Nikoloc. 1997: EacniÄ ársoqiÄ Tkqaàni. 2003: On problems in identifying ritual pottery: the example of the so-called ‘‘cult-tables’’. RPRP Vol. Oxford.... calibrated cates). BAR International. 1961: Dq{nxaqrka pfz pqi r. Sahlins. ´ ´ Prown... N. Excavations at Sitagroi. Bericht der Romisch-Germanischen Kommission. A. pp. vol 1. RouiÄ.. Stark. E. 79–87. Doeiynik na aqvfolodixfrkiÄ inrsists i mthfj – BAN.. 1964: Dq{nxaqrka pfz os fnfolisnoso rflizf pqi r. 1992: Pottery Function. Ovoefn. Schiffer. Sflny. E. A. 1986. Alsimiq. 1987: Theory and Experiment in the Study of Technological Change. 3500–2000 BC. pp. 41–178. Roman. 1976: Cultura Cotofeni. L. 120–129. 4. O. C. Cqaxanrki okq{d. 1986: Brezno: Experiments with building old Slavic ˇ ´ houses and living in them.. Pamatky archeologicke. 65–75. pp. Early Iron Age Ceramic Project. Mongait.. H.. A Use-Alteration Perspective. Schmidt. 79–84. 1990: Plasters: Gypsum or Calcite? A preliminary case study of Syrian plasters. 1972: Stone Age economics. 2001/Nfikoc. Nikolic 1998/NikoliÉ. 1996: Deshayes’ Excavations at Dikili Tash: the ´´ ` Early Bronze Age levels. Ancient Bulgaria. Pasek & Chernysh 1963/Parfk. Nikolova. Milwaukee Archaeological Research Laboratory 2003. 1999: The Balkans in Later Prehistory. 1965: IrsoqiÄ plfmfn c V–III s|rÄxflfsii eo n. Los Angeles.. A... pp. 1998: Bflidoco – pqilod pqotx´ caãt fnfolisrkiv ktlstqa irsoxnf Rqbiâf. J. 1932: Cucuteni in der oberen Moldau. 27.S.. G. C. World Archaeology 11:3. Xfqn|y.

Excavations at Franchthi Cave. H. ¨ J. 4. RouiÄ. pp.. R. N. eds. Todorova. Publications of the Archaeological Institute of Northern Greece Nr. pp. 19. H. & Tasic. 257–228. Bel´ grade. 447–457.. pp.. Tilley. B. London. Todorova. International Series 1139. E. Munchen: Beck.. Todorova. 2 ¨ ¨ ¨ bd. Todorova. Early Symbolic Systems for Communication in Southeast Europe. dolls.. Materialien zur Allgemeinen und Vergleichenden Archaologie. 1968: Die vorgeschichtlichen Funde von Sadovec (Nordbulgarien). Vol. 1982/Todorova. Publications of the Archaeological Institute of Northern Greece. B. Tasic. Teil 1. 2002: Results of an anthropological study of human skeletal remains in the prehistoric necropolis in the vicinity of the village of Durankulak. Tringham. Karen D. 2 bd. 3–31. 334– 395. D.. pp. Anzeiger der romisch-germanischen komission des deutsches Ar¨ chaologischen Instituts. P.A.. Recent Research in the Prehistory of the Balkans.. Pritchard. pp. Todorova.. Bristol: Bristol Classical Press.R. Vitelli. Munchen. Early Symbolic Systems for Communication in Southeast Europe.. Ucko. Monumenta Archaeologica 15. 3. 1997: The age of clay: the social dynamics of house ´ construction. Stefanova. International Series 854. 12..J. 1990: Selevac: A Neolithic Village in ´ Yugoslavia. 1993: Noco-kamfnnasa fpova c B{ldaqiÄ. Verlag C.und ¨ ¨ Fruhgeschichte. Todorova.. & Bozilova. 1995: Studies on the Holocene History of Vegetation in the Northern Pirin Mts. pp. Sultov 1969/Rtlsoc. P. B. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. 14: 2. Nikolova. 241– 289. I. Los Angeles: University of California. B. Nikola. ¨ ¨ Internationales symposium. Die prahistorischen Graberfelder von Durankulak. Beck Munchen.. C. Band II. I.. Belgrade. 1998: Probleme der Umwelt der prahistorischen ¨ 193 Kulturen zwischen 7000 und 100 v.. Vosniwa os qimrkasa i rsaqob{ldaqrkasa fpova. 1996: An etnography of the Neolithic: early prehistoric societies in Southern Scandinavia. L. pp. V. 1982: Kupferzeitliche Siedlungen in Nordostbulgarien. ed. With a contribution on the Post-Neolithic Remains by James A. Nova Zagora District. 2003: Prehistory of Bulgaria. 1986: Kammfnno-mfenasa fpova c B{ldaqiÄ. pp.. Nansel. Steponaitis.. B. Germania. Sofia-Moscow. Uenze. H.. S. 1989: Aegean Bronze Age chronology... Grammenos. L. Vol. ¨ Todorova. bd. 2000: Late Chalcolithic Ceramic Style at Yunatsite Tell (Approach to Systematization of the Ceramics from the Newly Excavated Levels). Vajsov.. eds.. Munchner Beitrage zur Vor.. Tonkov. Vajsov. B. Recent Research in the Prehistory of the Balkans. pp. Praehistorica XV–XIV. 15–63. D.. Munchen: Beck. 2: The Later Neolithic Ceramic Phases 3 to 5. E. pp. 2003: Late Chalcolithic Pottery from Sudievo Tell. Todorova. 159–176. Stevanovic. Deutsches Archaologisches Insti¨ tut in Berlin. Bloomington: Indiana University Press.. 81–127. M.. ˘ ˘ Yordanov & Dimitrova 1989/Ioqeanoc. Stuttgart: Franz Steiner. Ceramics in archaeology and anthropology. Sudost¨ ¨ europa-Schriften. Grammenos. 2002: Das Grab 982 und die Protobonzezeit in Bulgarien. B.. Todorova & Vajsov 1993/Soeoqoca. Thessaloniki. Munchner Beitrage zur Vor. kn. I. Syna. Deutsches Archaologisches Institut in Berlin.Lıga ˆ Migration in the 13th Century Tonto Basin. 1995: Neolithic cultures of Central and West Balkans. 1969: Nocooskqis kfqamixfn wfns{q pqi r. 1992 (2nd edition): A History of Metallurgy.. 2003: A Dialogue between the Household and Com´ munity: A Case Study of Banjica. ed. V... Bozilova. Band II. Tasic. N. Hankey. I. Tripkovic. N. 1. ed. pp. H. Nikola. 9. XXI. and devices Neolithic figurines from Franchthi Cave. Indiana University Press. 12–24. Tasic. Van der Leeuw. Krstic. Praha. RouiÄ Pqfrr. I. Technology. pp. Contributions to the Innovations between the Alps and the Black Sea in Prehistory. Die prahistorischen Gra¨ ¨ berfelder von Durankulak. 1992: Die spatantiken befestigungen von Sadovec (Bulgarien): ¨ Ergebnisse der deutsch-bulgarisch-osterreichischen Ausgrabungen 1934¨ 1937.A. Matsanova. Advances in Holocene Paleoecology in Bulgaria. 1990: Cfhf Poetnacala i Pfladoniâf t fnfol´ isrkom pfqioet.R.A. L. Fascile 8 & 10: Excavations at Franchthi Cave. Jahrbuch des Romisch-Germanischen Zen¨ tralmuseums Mainz 15. H. Y. Greece... ed.. H. Uenze. H. 1989: Ein Korrelationsversuch zwischen Klimaanderungen und prahistorischen Angaben. 1993: Deities. 212–246.. bd.. 1984: Technological studies of prehistoric pottery from Alabama: physical properties and vessel function. Chr. 361–374. L.. N. London (The Institute of Materials).V. Journal of Anthropological Archaeology. V. Teil 1. RouiÄ. T. 1935: Eine Gotenfestung bei Sadowetz (Nordbulgarien).V.. 149–158. H.. Thessaloniki. A... 1979: ^nfolis Boldaqii. 1968: Anthropomorphic Figurines of Predynastic Egypt and Neolithic Crete with Comparative material from the Prehistoric Near East and Mainland Greece. ¨ Yordanov. P. 16.E. 1979/Soeoqoca. Cajroc. Sofia. Durankulak. Todorova.und Fruhgeschichte. V... Sofia. ed.. Nr. 5–23.. R. 3. V.. Greece. ¨ 325–353. S. Todorova.. pp. Leshtakov. H. Durankulak. Sofia. ¨ Talalay... Balcanica. Vol.. eds. 20. (South-western Bulgaria). pp. ed. I.. The many dimensions of pottery. 73–128. Nikolova. H. 1992: Die spatantiken befestigungen von ¨ Sadovec (Bulgarien): Ergebnisse der deutsch-bulgarisch-osterreichischen ¨ Ausgrabungen 1934–1937.. Journal of Anthropological Archaeology.R. Greece.. 2002: Durankulak. 1992: Bericht uber die Kontrollgrabung von 1979 ¨ auf Golemanovo Kale und Neuauswertung des prahistorischen ¨ Fundgutes.. Band II. .. Vol. Nikolva...F. 2001: Die kupferzeitliche Schmuck Bulgariens. pp. Kuncheva-Russeva. 43.H. V. ¨ ¨ Teil 1. pp. Deutsches Archaologisches Insititut in ¨ Berlin.. International Series 1139. Band 13.. D. Todorova Simeonova. 1: Classification and ceramic phases.. ¨ ¨ Todorova. Die prahistorischen Graberfel¨ ¨ der von Durankulak.. Tylecote. Warren. Eimisqoca. Machnik.. 43. 1993: Franchthi Neolithic Pottery.. Dengate. 331–362. AqvfolodiÄ. S. Todorova. 2. Welkov. Style and Society. 2003: Serbian Prehistoric Archaeology in the 1990s. Dimitrova. ¨ ¨ Todorova 1986/Soeoqoca. B.. Das Karpatenbecken und die Osteuropaische Steppe. Prahistorische Archaeologie in Sud¨ ¨ ¨ osteuropa. ed.

1989: Ansqopolodixfrki eanni ha podqfbanisf c modilnisf nfkqopoli os Rfcfqoihsoxna B{ldaqiÄ (Qanna Bqonhoca fpova).. Qahkopki i pqotxcaniÄ. pp. XXI. 2001: Cranial Deformation in a Subadult Sample from Degirmentepe (Chalcolithic. 175–190. 238–244. pp. . Turkey). RouiÄ. M.194 Acta Archaeologica ¨ Ozbek. American Journal of Physical ˇ Anthropology 115.

Sign up to vote on this title
UsefulNot useful